Lendl vs. McEnroe 1984 French Open Final | Part 1

I did not make this video, and I do not take credit for it. Enjoy this classic final which really kickstarted Lendl's career, and was the closest McEnroe ever got to winning the French Open. The first half of the match saw McEnroe dominating Lendl with his net play.

[@michaelbarlow6610]

That sharply angled, crosscourt stop volley McEnroe hit to win set point in the first set of the 1984 French Open final against Lendl is a shot you never saw Sampras, Edberg or Becker hit in a match and never see Federer even attempt in his matches!

[@joemarshall4226]

Mac could make some wonderful volleys...he could also miss some sitters. His groundstrokes were bizarre, but very effective...he had a great topspin lob, too. Radek Stepanek had a great stop volley...Mac was also amazing at going back for overheads....quick as a cat, and could power them away, even when they seemed to be too far behind him....NAdal's overhead is very similar.

[@seteetlemonde7656]

John mcenroe without training or ever a coach was the GOAT FOR 5 MAGIC YEARS!

[@gmnboss]

Myth of no training

[@fundhund62]

I have yet to see a better tennis match than this! Some came close (Borg-Connors Wimbledon 81, Leconte-Becker FO 88), but the combination of drama, personal tension and extraordinary level of play throughout was truly unique.

[@jasonbrooks6562]

fundhund62 absolutely agree,though the mcenroe/connors us open semi final later in the same year runs it close. I always get a little sad watching this as we know what transpires and that a wonderful player like mcenroe never won the french.

[@fundhund62]

Jason Brooks Couldn't agree more. This and the '84 US Open semi to me are the two best tennis matches of the open era. They showed a level of artistry that is no longer seen in today's game.

[@jasonbrooks6562]

fundhund62 ln 84,these two were involved in other great(if not,quite classic matches) French open s/f Mac &connors,Wimbledon s/f connors Lendl and us open s/f cash v lendl.,oh, and dont forget mcenroes destruction of lendl at the us open final.

[@qzrnuiqntp]

The Lendl destruction of Mcenroe at the US open final one year later was also a great moment :) The 1985 RG final was a great match, but the intensity of the 1986 final was absolutely terrific!

[@purveyoroffinefoodslaszlo9955]

@@qzrnuiqntp Okay, but let's not forget the Mac destruction of Lendl a few months later in '84 in Flushing Meadows, plasted him, 3,6,1 in about an hour and 30 minutes. Could be seen as pay back for this match. Here's a link. And if you think Mac's aggressive in this French Open, watch him rush the net with abandon here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/p6SuooOGhcqkobc Had no interest in indulging Lendl's ground strokes. He simply embarrasses him in this match,

[@hangarby10]

I wanted one of those Lendl shirts - classic!

[@kort1344]

Mac has the best hands around the net I have ever seen. He also has the best instincts too up at net. He just reads where the ball is going before it gets there.

[@henrybrowne7248]

Yeah, Mac's hands are what I notice in this match: eye-hand coordination. He looks like he gets too wound up when things don't go his way, though--can self-destruct. Also, not much net game nowadays.

[@mrbala8095]

Le tennis cest extraordinaire mais le genie cest mcenroe.

[@stevearnott7753]

Mac’s speed is very underestimated. He was so damn fast getting to net and attacking.

[@PhilippeMarchand-xw1zp]

Over the first two sets McEnroe played the best clay tennis ever.

[@joemarshall4226]

Until Nadal came along...

[@michaelbarlow6610]

@@joemarshall4226 . Nadal is just a boring, one-dimensional, baseline grinder/retriever with none of the brilliant diversity of shotmaking skills that John McEnroe possessed at the peak of his ability in 1984! Those first two sets of the 1984 French Open Men's final versus Lendl constitute the greatest display of tennis ever seen on a clay court in the history of the game! Not even the great Henri Cochet, as great as his take the ball on-the-rise style of play could equal the shotmaking genius of John McEnroe. Lew Hoad or Ellsworth Vines probably come the closest to McEnroe's level in that regard!

[@joemarshall4226]

@@michaelbarlow6610 The first part of your statement is so ridiculous, it's hard to imagine that you've watched any tennis since 2007. Rafa boring? Rafa one dimensional? Johnny Mac would laugh you out of the room. Rafa has one of the best volleys in the game right now, one of the best overheads, ..backhand and forehand, the best running forehand passing shot in history......better even than Sampras, one of the best second serves ever, especially on clay, and an unmatched (except for Djokovic) ability to change the height of balls in rallies. He is the king of clay because he has absolutely no weaknesses. He can beat you with offense, defense, brain power, creativity, and hustle......Jimmy Connorsis his biggest fan. Johnny Mac called him the greatest player ever at one point. (Rafa won twice as many hardcourt slams as Mac). Mac's abilities were out of this world in '84, but of course, he lost the final you mention to Lendl in five sets, let's not forget. Vines and the others did not compare athletically to the modern players....they were great in their time, but it was a different game. Funny thing was, Vines, in his 1970s book said the reason that Connors and Borg were dominating the game was that the other players of that time had become so enamored of the serve and volley game, that they had forgotten the basics of the backcourt game, and were vulnerable to players who could play well from the base line. He said that serve and volley never should have become the only kind of offense....only Jack Kramer had a good enough second serve to pull it off. The all-court game was the most powerful in Ellsworth's mind. Modern day technology has made the true serve and volley game more difficult, by making passing shots much easier, but many players, including Rafa, mix it in now and then

[@michaelbarlow6610]

@@joemarshall4226 . I'm still rolling over with hysterical laughter at your exceedingly uninformed , utterly worthless response comment! First, Ivan Lendl would laugh his ass off at your assertion that Nadal has the greatest running forehand passing shot in the history of the game! You very conveniently neglect to mention Ivan Lendl's magnificent running, down-the-line forehand passing shot! Second, Nadal IS a boring, one dimensional baseline grinder, retriever! Third, Nadal rarely comes to the net except to shake hands with his opponents at the end of matches because today's tennis, which you obviously have failed to notice, is almost all baseline play! Serve-and-volley and chip-and-charge-to-the-net have all but vanished from the game of tennis because of the regrettable changes in the game including, the creation and utilization of copolyestor lubricated strings which have cheapened the game by allowing players to hit the ball with 20% more spin than regular, non-lubricated strings, the adoption of the larger Type3 tennis ball which is utilized in some pro tournaments which makes it significantly easier to avoid making unforced errors including double faults, and the slowed down courts on the men's pro tour including the unwise change in the composition of the grass courts at Wimbledon in 2001 from the traditional composition of 70% rye grass/30% Red Creeping Fescue (which resulted in a lower bouncing, lightening fast, skidding and sometimes erratic bounce of the tennis ball) to100% rye grass (which is a more durable and more impact resistant surface that causes a higher rebounding, truer, but slightly slower bounce of the tennis ball)! Fourth, McEnroe's opinion as to which male player is the GOAT in tennis history is absolutely worthless because he changes his opinion on that subject as frequently as people change their underwear! First he said that Laver was the GOAT. Then when Federer was dominating the men's game, he said that Federer was the GOAT. Then when Nadal started dominating Federer, he changed his opinion and said that Nadal might be the GOAT. Then when Djokovic started to accumulate major singles titles, McEnroe once again changed his opinion stating that Djokovic may be the GOAT. So McEnroe changes his opinion on that subject with the proverbial "prevailing wind"! So you can, as the old expression goes, take McEnroe's opinion on that topic "with a grain of salt"! Fifth, Ellsworth Vines should have known better that net play, including serve-and-volley play, will always have the advantage over baseline play as long as the dimensions of the tennis court - which favor net play over baseline play because of the sharper, wider angles at the net compared with those at the baseline - remain unaltered! The regrettable changes in the current game such as the changes cited above, have unquestionably made it much harder for serve-and-volleyers to succeed on the men's pro tennis tour. But if the game ever wisely decides to speed up the courts to the speed they were from the 1970's through the 1990's ( including reinstituting indoor tournament play on the lightening fast supreme court carpet surface), ban the larger Type3 tennis ball and the copolyestor, lubricated strings and downsize the rackets by instituting a rule restricting the dimensions of the tennis racket to (1) no larger in head size than 75 square inches, (2) no longer in overall length than 27 inches ( standard length) and (3) no wider than 18 mm. wide above the racket handle, then a diversity of playing styles which the game so desperately needs in order to be a compelling spectacle to watch, will come back into the game and make it once again a beautiful game to play and watch!

[@joemarshall4226]

@@michaelbarlow6610 I used to play at Lendl's country club in Connecticut and I met him a couple of times. He knows that he could not match Rafa's athleticism (Or Sampras's), and that Rafa's running forehand was more impressive than his, because Rafa could reach balls that he could not. This is no knock on Lendl. He was great and played a different style form Rafa. I am no particular fan of Rafa, but I give credit where it is due. His first victory against Federer in the Wimbledon final was considered the most exciting match ever played by many. You can't have the most exciting match ever played when one player is boring. And what is your obsession with giving every nuance of technological change? I said that I understand that the technology has changed, making serve and volley more difficult. That's the reason Rafa stays back. But I thin the modern game is much more entertaining than the era when EVERYONE served and volleyed 50s-early 70s. most of the time....That was more boring. In the late 70s through 80s, we had a lot more variety, with top players baselining, serve and volleying or counter-punching. But players do serve and volley today. In fact, the most successful serve and volleyer in history, in terms of percentage of games won while serving, is Ivo Karlovic, who serves and volleys on almost every point, first and second serve. Someone knocked Federer out of Wimbledon a few years ago with a serve and volley strategy, also. What the new technology has made difficult is the chip and charge game, so players don't spend as much time on their net rushing as they did in the past. But the net skills have improved dramatically in the last ten years, and all top players have very good volleys. In fact, I saw a higher percentage of blown volleys in the old days than I do now. For the last point, use your powers of analysis. McEnroe's opinion on the GOAT makes perfect sense. It is BASED ON RESULTS, which is the only fair way to do it. The reason he kept changing his opinion is because THE RESULTS KEPT CHANGING. When Rafa's stats kept climbing, passing Federer and Laver in many departments, he made the logical decision to change his opinion on the GOAT debate, as did everyone else who is objective and not stuck in a past dream word. To keep saying that someone in the past is the GOAT when someone else is breaking all his records in a more competitive environment, just doesn't make sense.. There is a good argument for any of the current top 3 to be considered the GOAT. Their total wins, total tournaments, total slam count, general Masters wins, and winning percentage is better than anyone's, at a time when tennis is more competitive than it ever has been.

[@TennisConditioningTV]

pretty nice!

[@raf1980]

Big Mac la pate de l'expert 👍

[@michaelbarlow6610]

@ Joe Marshall. I agree that McEnroe even at his best, could miss some ridiculously easy volleys! I also agree that he had a great topspin forehand lob that he demonstrated, for examples, in his 1989 Wimbledon match against Edberg and in his 1981 U.S.Open final against Borg.

[@allenwalker6312]

McEnroe tennis is logical and smart

[@mthebone]

Where is Part 2 ?

[@NicoMKDC]

Would it be possible to have the full match uploaded? It exists in equal quality on YT but no with these French commentaries that I used to like very much. Thanks!

[@doctornov7]

Unfortunately I don't have the full match :( have you tried looking on other sites? Like DailyMotion or Vimeo.

[@destroythebody]

You don't show the image when John shout "shut up"? You cannot be serious! ;-)))) Thanks for the vid though

[@NisseOhlsen]

McEnroe would have beaten any of todays players on grass courts. I am a Fed fan, but look how close a match he has against a competent S&Ver like M Zverev. McEnroe was a whole class above Zverev. Fed would have gotten beaten.

[@GOATAli]

Utter nonsense. Fed would blow Mac off any court....far too versatile and strong.

[@fundhund62]

Niels Ohlsen I wouldn't limit that to grass courts. Federer would find it tough against Mac in his prime on any surface, including clay.

[@happinin]

a good player can kick anyones ass hard court or soft court. I used to have a problem with neither when i played. Federer is a calm controlled player and like serena, Mac will just break his racket. Mac is a raving spoiled fucking baby. He wouldnt have a chance of beating fed.

[@boraxsopanic2670]

happinin Just because you say so? The entire game of tennis has been reduced. Federer moves like an old man.

[@joemarshall4226]

You make a good point. Roger had a losing record against Tim Henman, who took him out of Wimbledon in straight sets, the year Roger beat Pete Sampras, 8-6 in the fifth. Roger was also 0-3 vs Pat Rafter, so he was vulnerable to serve and volley players. Of course, Roger could serve and volley, too. The difference if prime Mac played prime Roger on fast grass would be return of serve. Mac's aggressive returns might be the difference, if he could get a read on Roger's serves, which is not an easy task.

[@Head318Hunter]

Back in the day when Tennis had STRATEGY. Back before racket technology destroyed the game. In 100 years They'll be shooting sniper rifles at each other and it'll be .... ACE, ACE, DOUBLE FAULT, ACE, ACE, ACE, ACE, DF, ACE, DF, ACE, ACE, ACE, ACE, ACE, ACE, DF, ACE, ACE ... Yay FUN. 😑🤮🤮🤮

[@henrybrowne7248]

🤣

[@rspcawestdorsetbranchtaylo949]

Hey Billie Jean if we went by your rules John would have won in 2 sets the French Open ?- equal money etc?

[@joemarshall4226]

In fairness to the women, Billie Jean said that the WTA offered to play five sets when this point came up in negotiations, but the idea was turned down, and not by the women. My own feeling is that they should shorten the matches for the men until the semifinals (or perhaps, quarterfinals) then go to the five set format. The women should do the same...three sets until the semis, then five sets for both tours. If the three set format doesn't work, then play no-ad scoring until the semis...You could even experiment with 4 games wins a set, or five games. But the players get two beat up playing seven five set matches with normal scoring. it's fun in the semis or the finals, but it's just not necessary before that. This idea was tried once before. In the late 60s or 70s, I'm not sure.

[@sama4978]

MCENROE 186 TITRES THE BEST

[@eronedalessandria5914]

Best match on grass everytime.

[@francescomasella8634]

*clay

[@greenhope6491]

La y avait un public qui regarde toute la partie. Par comme ces jours ci tout le monde les yeux fixes sur le iphone .

[@michaelbarlow6610]

It almost makes you sick to your stomach how McEnroe absolutely screwed up a certain win against Lendl in that 1984 French Open final after dominating Lendl so decisively in the first two sets of that match! The odds are overwhelming, albeit not definitive, that had he won that match, McEnroe probably would have won the 1984 Australian Open in December of that year to complete the Grand Slam for the first time in men's tennis history since Laver achieved it in 1969, and without any question whatsoever, been regarded, and rightfully so, as the greatest men's tennis player of all-time!

[@amongsamsung9656]

Again: Mc Enroe didnt screw up anything as Lendl - the better player on court that day (he won and who wins always plays better than the opponent- performances are composed by technical ability attacking at the net, technical ability playing from the baseline, stamina and will to win and not only by technical ability attacking the net ) Lrndl was also a better player overall than McEnroe on clay ( FO statistics for both of them are speaking loud) . Majors are 3 on 5 sets and not 2 on 3 and on clay , to play serve and volley is not the same as to play serve and volley on grass or on hard court where points and games are quicker and where a non perfect volley can become a winner . Constant attacking game / constant coming to the net on clay for 5 sets against a clay specialist who knows how to properly slide side by side is an enormous, almost impossible task - Sampras, McEnroe and even Edberg didnt know how to properly slide on clay, you clearly notice it .

[@michaelbarlow6610]

@@amongsamsung9656 . Although Lendl was without question a much better clay court player than McEnroe, you are wrong when you erroneously state that McEnroe didn't know how to slide on clay! ALL of the tournaments that McEnroe won as a junior player were on clay courts - McEnroe pointed out that fact to Lendl, Becker and Wilander during their roundtable discussion of tennis at the 2019 U.S. Open! McEnroe grew up playing and winning on clay, but when he started playing on fast courts he realized that he preferred to play an aggressive serve-and-volley style! In addition, Mats Wilander was a much better clay court player than Yannick Noah and yet Noah DEFEATED Wilander in straight sets in the 1983 French Open final serve-and-volleying throughout the tournament! So all of Wilander's superiority on clay didn't help him at all against Noah in that major final did it?! Answer: NO! The reality is, and McEnroe admits this, that he flat-out choked against Lendl in that 1984 French Open final! And Edberg screwed-up his French Open final in 1989 up 2 sets to 1 against Chang when, as the match wore on, he absurdly started waiting until the 3rd, 4th, and sometimes 5th short ball during baseline rallies in that match from Chang to hit an approach shot to get to the net! I rewatched that match many years ago and wrote down on a note pad the number of times Edberg foolishly waited that long to get into the net off of short balls from Chang! It was incredible the number of blown chances Edberg had to move into the net and shorten the points to (1) keep the pressure on Chang and (2) to avoid wearing himself out physically by engaging in long, fatiguing baseline rallies! If you are a serve-and-volley player playing against a baseline specialist on clay, you do not wait until the 3rd, 4th or 5th short ball from your opponent to get to the net behind an approach shot! You get into the net no later than the 2nd short ball and preferably on the first short ball from your opponent! And Sampras made the colossal mistake of never attempting to get experience on clay courts by playing at least 2 or 3 clay court tournaments prior to the start of the French Open to get his game acclimated to the clay surface. Year after year, Sampras foolishly and stupidly went into the French Open with little or no preparation at all, failing to play enough tune-up tournaments on clay to adjust his game to the slower clay surface! That to a large extent explains why out of his 13 appearances at Roland Garros, Sampras lost in the 3rd round or earlier 9 times which is abysmal, ridiculous and inexcusable for such an all-time great player!

[@amongsamsung9656]

@@michaelbarlow6610 noah won against wilander just because of his personality and charisma and because of his physicality at the net. Noah was playing a final in Paris , he was the brand new idol of the french and like Panatta against Borg( the only player able to win against Borg in Paris and twice) an extrovert , charismatic extrovert who was fully comfortable around 30.000 people. Wilander was playing against a charismatic french a final in Paris( compare noah and leconte- compare the final issues of their 2 french finals against Wilander....I ived in Paris for 3 and half years and can tell you that the French were supporting Noah but not Leconte , even if Leconte is french and was playing a final) .Wilander , a quite, very quite personality, played Noah in a final in Paris and he was still 18 - 19 2 months later and he certainly was not comfortable at the beginning playing a final with the french public 'against him' and against the extrovert, favourite player of the French...for this reason Noah won ....Noah new he had this psychological advantage and he knew he had to avoid to play 5 sets against Wilander. A more mature Wilander , a more experienced Wilander won in Paris against Noah 2 years later. For the same reasons ,psychological reasons , Psbatta was able to win twice (1973, 1976) against Borg on Paris , then Borg got more experience, became a more mature player and for Panatta it was the end

[@amongsamsung9656]

@@michaelbarlow6610 mc enroe didnt grow up on red clay ; panatta and noah grew on red clay and red clay was their favourite surface and their serve and volley was also naturally adjusted for red clay- not coming to the net every time like mc enroe or edberg but following a flat first serve , rarely a second serve ( I saw noah playing on red clay and on hard court ) or attacking with a backhand slice , the ' old way' . Completely wrong : Lendl won and fully deserved to win the 1984 final as he was the better plsyet on court that day and he was much more a red clay player than Mc Enroe. On clay Mc Enfoe could have played 20 times that final against Lendl and he would have lost 20 times against Lendl on clay : impossible for him to keep 100% consistency at the net for 5 set against Lendl on a final on clay

[@michaelbarlow6610]

@@amongsamsung9656 .Wrong again! Noah's win over Wilander in the 1983 French Open final had nothing to do with Noah's charisma and personality, and had everything to do with the brilliant serve-and-volley play Noah demonstrated at that tournament that year! And Wilander was not intimidated by the fact that the French Open crowd was rooting for Noah! Wilander throughout his pro tennis career was renowned as one of the most mentally tough players on the men's pro tour! Noah won because Noah played brilliant serve-and volley tennis throughout that French Open tournament and deservedly won it! Pure and simple! And Wilander's youth was not a negative factor against his chances to win that 1983 French Open at all because Wilander did not have the enormous pressure of never before having won a major like the pressure Lendl had going into the 1984 French Open final against McEnroe! Wilander had the experience of having won the French Open in 1982 over the all-time great clay court specialist Guillermo Vilas. And the reason Adriano Panatta defeated Borg at the French Open twice wasn't just because Borg had not yet become the dominant player he became a number of years later, but because Panatta's game gave Borg fits! A perfect example is the tough 5-set match Borg won against Panatta in the finals of the 1978 Italian Open at the Foro Italico stadium in Rome. Granted, Borg's attempt to win that match was severely hindered not only by bad line calls from the pro-Panatta linesmen, but also by the disgraceful behavior of some pro-Panatta Italian fans in the spectator stands throwing coins at Borg to try to throw off his concentration. In fact at one point in that match, Borg picked up a coin that landed near his feet and walked up to the chair umpire and told the chair umpire that if the crowd continued to throw any more coins at Borg he would quit the match. Fortunately he decided not to quit the match and went on to win that match. A bee sting Borg experienced above his eye during that match also did not help his concentration during that match. That said, Panatta's beautiful game gave many players fits on the men's pro tennis tour including Jimmy Connors, such as when Panatta's game gave Jimmy Connors fits in their 5-set match at the 1978 U.S. Open on the fast Decoturf2 hard court surface that favored Connors' game over Panatta's game! The pro-American U.S. Open crowd was rooting for Connors and yet Panatta forced him to go the 5-set distance in that match in order to win that match!

[@moester75]

This match hurt me almost as much as it hurt Johnny Mac. That was his career Slam. I have always held a severe grudge against Ivan Lendl ever since that day and I was so happy when Michael Change avenged Johnny Mac in that Roland Garros Semi Final.

[@th8257]

He never won the Australian open, so it wouldn't have been a career slam for him.

[@bobmalack481]

Michael CHANGE?!..uh, urh, O.k?!

[@Fessla]

7:30

[@mrbungle7586]

Bet Mac still has nightmares about this match. Should have won but didn't. Made lendl look 2nd rate on clay for lots of the match. Dam shame.

[@joemarshall4226]

He admitted he did have nightmares still....about five years ago or so.

[@amongsamsung9656]

But majors are 3 on 5 and not 2 on 3 and Lendl at the end was the better player on court that day and for this reason he won- the better player ALWAYS win ; and overall Lendl was a better player than McEnroe on clay, it is enough to compare their palmares at the french open- numbers never lie!

[@mrbungle7586]

@@amongsamsung9656 GS are best of 5, stating the obvious. Lendl was ready to go to the showers. It was Mac who played sublime tennis on his least favourite surface and made IL look silly. It was Macs own undoing, carrying on worrying about other things. Yeah Lendl ended up hanging in there and got the win, Mac of course went on to demolish Connors in the Wimbledon final that year and demolish Lendl at the US Open and the Masters completing the best win loss record in history. 👍

[@amongsamsung9656]

@@mrbungle7586 Lendl was not ready to go to the showers, not at all and he knew that the match was not over . Lendl won because he was the better player on court that day ( playing serve and volley doesn't mean that you are playing better than your opponent , not at all - borg, vilas, wilander and nadal are the best proof of it) and because he was a clay specialist who knew how to play on clay (powerful and longer rallies from the baseline and stamina) and how to slide on clay (mc enroe , edberg and sampras , all of them didnt know how to slide properly on clay , you could see it ). Playing serve and volley on clay is a different job and a different task than playing serve and volley on grass or on hard court where points are quicker and z non perfect volley can become a winner. Again , the palmares of the two at the french open (h2h matches included) speak loud- numbers never lie!

[@mrbungle7586]

@@amongsamsung9656 nope he was done half way through the 3rd. Had previously folded in GS finals and this was no different. Never said playing server and volley, I said sublime tennis from anywhere on the court. You enjoy stating the obvious but know little about this match, except for who won in the end which again is obvious.