Rod Laver vs. Jimmy Connors

[@Madeves]

I had never seen him Mr. Laver play and all I can say is "WOW"! I can see why he was a champion and was called "the Rocket". I know he is loved and highly respected by many, and because of all his accomplishments, the "Laver Cup" was created and was very successful which just tells us all what a true and great champion Rod Laver was! I thank who ever put this video up - it was totally awesome to watch!

[@donna25871]

M. P. Laver’s nickname ‘Rocket’ came from his early days in Rockhampton - his coach would complain about his speed around the court and how slow he was. So the nickname was a bit of a joke (from Australian Story)

[@kennethbrady]

This is the first time for me seeing Laver in action. His court coverage (among other things!) is amazing and recalls what Gretsky once said "I don't skate to where the puck IS, I skate to where it WILL BE." Same with Laver, he never seems to be chasing a shot, but rather, anticipating it on the run. Sick.

[@broscosmoline]

re-watched after reading this and agree 100%. It's especially evident when he's at the net.

[@curlymyhero]

I'm a BIG fan of both of these 2. Watched Laver in the '80's play Team tennis live in Newport Bch., and Connors in Palm Springs. These guys got me hooked and I'm still playing singles 30 yrs later! Lucky me!

[@broscosmoline]

i love the backcourt, slightly-above-ground-level POV of the camera! some of the old wooden racquet era games can look relatively anemic when the footage was shot from the typical crow's next camera position, but get close to the court & you really get a sense of how incredibly fast the pro game is, even then. also, at that level the camera operator has to pan to follow the ball, and even zooms in when laver or conners goes to the net - it's so kinetic. nowadays the default camera position is fixed & high up, and court level shots are mostly reserved for slow-mo replays. what we see here is imho so much more exciting.

[@gvivo2120]

That it is exactly what I miss with the older telecasts: the view and angle relative to the tennis court and how you FREQUENTLY get almost the linesman's perspective even for at least a few seconds of active play.

[@broscosmoline]

@StuMarston the playing surface ("supreme court", which was popular for indoor events at the time) was extremely fast. As someone notes below, laver is anticipating the location of connor's shots extremely well, esp at the net. an aside: standing courtside, i got to watch laver warm up with ilie nastase on a practice court once (~1975). For the wood raquet era, his topspin one-handed backhand was a thing of beauty. he hit it *very* hard, usually as a passing shot. good example at 4:42 in this clip.

[@surfshack2]

First time seeing Laver play. I understand now why he's considered the greatest tennis player of all time. An absolute pleasure to watch.

[@davidforbes2795]

Watch Pancho Gonzales!

[@jonglewongle3438]

Laver has those two CALENDER Grand Slams. But it was too close to call between Laver and Rosewall head to head. Federer, Djokovic, and Nadal are the three actually greatest players of all time.

[@lloydkline1518]

Rod laver is my old sports books ❤️ watchinh him play tennis

[@stevencoardvenice]

Yeah I grew up in the 90s. Laver is like perfect fundamentals. That crosscourt backhand passing shot was insane. Dude is a computer

[@noahbody9782]

Amazing to watch. Probably not factually true, but it's like he was never coached and it all just came naturally.

[@vicentesala9115]

Like King Roger, an all over the court player, a true Boss. It was my childhood dream to watch Rod and Ken Rosewall hitting the ball. Great to see them now in KZbin.

[@lakipacino]

Novak is the King.

[@caldwellkelley3084]

Much as I've loved (on film) watch Rosewall and Laver, my guy is still Lew Hoad! Both he and Laver were cat like quick!

[@ensembleSon]

⁠ä på å på på öl

[@mddistribution30]

This really surprised me. Laver was a bit before my time and I've never really watched him play. I really surprised at the pace and the power of the tennis in this footage. And this was when Laver was near the end of his career as well. One thing's for certain, if he'd had the benefit of today's equipment Laver would have definitely been just as successful in today's game.

[@erikthehalfabee6234]

Actually you can not be sure. Tennis is a much broader sport nowadays, so Laver might just be a top 50 player. Also he would need to change to become a baseline player, everybody is nowadays.

[@chrisk8187]

Erik, ALL the players were serve and volley baseline players back then. I think that "style" of tennis is more exciting to watch instead of the long baseline rallies that most of the points are played.

[@Alexander-dt2eq]

he could win lots of doubles slams though. The quality of his volleys shows tremendous feel, but you have to take into account that racquets were much heavier back then giving you more stability also. So maybe for volleys current tech does not help, for groundstrokes and spin though current racquets are the best

[@hadesdescent6664]

Every point is played at the net. And max 5-7 shot rallies! How would Laver last long from the base line, with rare occasions of coming to the net? Nowadays he would be among top 30, but winning the Grand Slam, hardly and rarely!

[@johnoneill7947]

@@erikthehalfabee6234 Laver beat Ashe who beat Connors who beat Lendl wo beat Aggasi who beat Federer, etc

[@FuentesJoaquin]

What an elegance and accuracy in ever Laver's stroke (forehand, backhand, volley, pasing shot) ; there were strong reasons because Mr. Laver won 2 times all four grand slam tournaments in the same year (62 and 69) !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@visibilitypointcorp]

Holy cow! Rod Laver was magnificent.

[@crsantin]

Fantastic stuff. Connors really hit those hard flat shots when he was young. Great returns here. Laver is unbelievable. I wish I could have seen him play.

[@jackkitchen737]

As great as Connors was, and one can easily see how his power was so effective against anybody at this time...WOW it's so evident that Laver, even a couple years past his prime, could compete against anybody in the world. He had every shot in the book and in my opinion, was the greatest player that ever lived. Not just by winning two grand slams 8 years apart, but then being able to compete at this level against the terrifying Connors at this stage of his career. Incredible.

[@SuperHammaren]

+Jack Kitchen Well Connors could compete at the highest level also at higher age, 39 in US-Open 91.. in 90 he beat Edberg in the Open, World 2 at the time. But hat off for Lavers grandslams.

[@alanchong7513]

SuperHammaren So who is better? Connors or Laver? Or in the words of Yoda..." There is another.."

[@SuperHammaren]

Alan Chong Hard that one, perhaps Laver anyway because of his best years, not the ones after 30. He was not allowed to play Slams between 63-68(I think). I think he would have done good there. But it is indeed close. Both are legends for sure.

[@alanchong7513]

SuperHammaren I reckon this is the best matchup in history! Can anyone name a matchup with bigger names than these two legends combined? I can only suggest Federer vs Nadal or Federer vs Sampras.

[@alanchong7513]

+Alan Chong McEnroe vs Borg is right up there too, on reflection.

[@arnoldjr200040]

You can see here that even well pass his prime why many still consider Rod Laver to be the greatest male tennis play ever. The fact that at this age he can hang with a young Connors is incredible.

[@alanchong7513]

You are right on! The best of 1962 & 1969 hanging with the best of 1974!

[@mothertree]

yep he is still grinning about it today cause everyone knows...yet he was always humble...true talent shines..thanks mr laver

[@pantherablaxxx9930]

Arnold Stephenson Right! I asked myself, "Is it me, or Rod Laver's serve was pretty powerful, and he could still measure up against youngsters???"Simply amazing!

[@arnoldjr200040]

Stephanie St-Elien Yeah. With a wooden racquet no doubt.

[@pantherablaxxx9930]

Arnold Stephenson Is There a difference? Please tell me.

[@arqjavierobregon]

My god!!! I’ve never could imagine Rod Laver been a serve and volley master. What an elegant way to play tennis. So impressive!!!!

[@alanfrost75]

Holy crap... some of those volleys Laver pulled off were absolutely world class (by any standard... let alone using 70s racquets). As much as I admire Connors and regard him among the best of the best, I think a young Laver would have beaten him.

[@stevencoardvenice]

It's incredible Thanks to youtube for seeing this

[@hodell82]

Alan Frost I agree. A young Laver would have smoked Connors. He's doing this at 36, which is pretty incredible.

[@alanfrost75]

***** Pretty much every pro gets worse and worse after hitting 30, and certainly by the mid-30s. This particularly holds true in tennis. I doubt very much Laver is anywhere near his best here.

[@alanfrost75]

***** I meant in overall ability as a tennis player, taking everything into account. I cannot speak specifically for Laver, but I think there is a reason almost all tennis players are done by 30-35. He is ancient here by tennis standards.

[@GinDubonnet]

+Alan Frost Yeah. I agree with your assessment of the relative abilities of Connors and Laver. Laver in his prime is too fast, too good with the racquet head. Here, he still has some of the touch he would have had in his youth, but not as much of the foot speed. That would equalize for Connors's harder groundstrokes. Laver's net game puts him over the top, especially on a slightly faster surface (like this one).

[@circuitdesign]

Totally agree! You can see in this video just how good Laver's technique is, not to mention his athleticism. If he had grown up in today's world, he would definitely be a top player, given all the training improvements we have since his time.

[@Gregoryt700]

Can't believe how quick Laver is here in his mid-30s. Wow

[@jesusmorenopostigo197]

The Rocket

[@subrahmanyambhogaraju9029]

This is the first time I am watching Rod laver in action.Thank you so much for the post.

[@kylie-mareebaldwin4672]

Now I understand the ovation for our Rod Laver. Greetings from Australia😊❤

[@Avicenna10]

Any youngsters out there who think the old guys can't measure up to today's talent need to watch this video. Lave is already well passed is his prime, and he's still hanging in there with the world's then #1 player, Jimmy Connors. You transport Rod Laver in his prime to 2019 and give him a few months to get used to the new racquets, strings, etc., and I guarantee you he would be in the top 10 players in the world within a year, and most likely back to number 1 with a year or so after that. I got to meet him and see him play in person once in Charlotte, North Carolina around the same time as this video was made, and he was still amazing. And...he was a perfect gentleman, something the game had lost until Federer brought back to "cool factor" of being a good sport.

[@billzbub]

I think the pace at which they are hitting the ball is amazing. It makes you wonder how well both of them would day today with unbelievably better equipment.

[@brunoampm1]

Very fast game, better than most players nowadays, and with that mediocre rackets, they did miracles each point!

[@gzzimmer4575]

Laver was 37 years old and hadn't played a pro match in almost 6 months. He only played for the $50,000 payday and he more than carried his own. What is evident is his mastery of almost every shot in the tennis vocabulary.

[@Surcoufful]

it makes you admire Gonzales for beating him in New York!! [laver]

[@joemarshall4226]

Connors was 25, at the height of his powers.

[@MichaelElias-q2z]

​@joemarshall4226 Actually, Conners was 23 at the height of his powers

[@newton296]

laver was awesome! never seen video before thanks for posting!

[@liner011f7]

Did Connors throw one set, to make it more respectable?

[@opencurtin]

Pete Sampras said that Rod Laver was his hero and he modeled his game on him.

[@jameskwan5008]

Pete Sampras and Roger both know that Laver is the true GOAT

[@fritzlange7934]

McEnroe too, although his game actually looked quite different.

[@thomashumphrey7395]

Great post. This is incredible footage of two of the all-time greats' careers merging (however briefly it did). They are both killing the ball and yet playing with unbelievable deftness, dexterity, and control. They are both playing at a very high level, but particularly, this may be the best I have ever seen Laver play. As great and dominant as Laver was in the 1960's, I'm not sure he didn't get better with age into the mid to late 70's. Just great stuff by both players.

[@SXS78]

Rosewall is another amazing legend, though he often gets overlooked because he failed to win Wimbledon. In terms of playing career Ken`s was certainly the longest.. He won his 1st AO in 1953 & last in 1972 [19-years apart].. Even at 43yrs in 1978 he was still good enough to be winning some smaller titles & made the semi-finals at the Australian Open!!

[@stevenmac9158]

When he was 39 he made US Open and Wimbledon finals, both against Conners. 6-1,6-0,6-1 (shortest final in US Open history at 1 hr 18 min but Conners was 22?) and 6-1,6-4,6-1 (Wimbledon).. In 1975 at 40 he was seeded 2 at Wimbledon and lost in 4th round. He turned pro in 1957 and was ineligible to play the 4 slams 45 times until 1968. That's insane. The middle of his prime. He won 15 pro slams and 8 grand slams. 23 combined! He won his last slam at 37 years old.

[@michaelprobert7820]

.....and the WCT final in which he beat Laver 7-6 in the final set is still remembered by us older tennis fans as one of the greatest ever matches.

[@vicentesala9115]

The best tennis clip in the net, camera close to the players. Rod and Jimmy, impressive lefty players. I love how Rod hit low volleys.

[@opencurtin]

It would be interesting how Laver would fair in the modern game ..

[@eselsdistel]

With today's gear and training methods he would probably beat the hell out of everyone, Federer included. If with Roger you always have the impression he always has something elegant for every situation no matter how hard up his sleeve, Laver gave me an even stronger impression of superiority. Not as fast or strong as his opponent, and with perfect positioning, perfect timing, wonderful technique and a lot of brains he still schooled in so many points. I'm really impressed with Laver.

[@chriswoodford4331]

I’d forgotten how good Laver was. He could live with Djokovic and Federer given the advances in equipment and fitness. This video shows the ball better than some modern ones.

[@ixsachi]

Tennis is timeless. This still gives Excitement.

[@jupytr1]

You can really see Lavers looping heavy topspin continental forehand with a short backswing

[@Enganox]

What impresses me most about Laver is his speed, the guy has good defensive foot work, and especially as a 36 year old in this video. His slice also has very impressive pace I would say. If only fantasies could be fulfilled, and we could see all the greats of tennis play with each other in their primes.

[@rc-darkangel774]

And just think ...Pacho Gonzalez beat Laver, Conners and Borg .....and he was older than the Rocket! We are slaves to our own time.

[@ChristianPaul75]

Awesome footage. A Jimmy Connors in his prime has to produce his best Tennis to fend off a semi-retired, almost 37 years old Rod Laver. Jimmy, known as one of the physically fittest players on tour almost looks like a beanstalk compared to Rod The Rocket! It´s amazing how well Laver covered the court and the net. He did not seem to have any weak spots in his game and that backhand is just sweet.

[@seruppadi]

Damn! Laver had some pop on that serve. And those fast reflex volleys? Ok, he really is a genuine GOAT contender.

[@jameskwan5008]

Laver is not the GOAT contender - he is the GOAT

[@albertoartuso80]

Much better Rosewall. Here connors won easily

[@johnyeung7643]

Really nice pop and spin on that serve for a 5’8 guy. And his groundstrokes are amazing. Can slice, topspin, hit flat. Amazing angle and drop shots. Like John McEnroe with Alcaraz groundstrokes. Amazing

[@charles6762]

most folks don't realize how great Connors was he still holds the record for most matches won and would be higher if more of the established pros would have not avoided playing him. Also he was ahead of his time in equipment and basically invented the two hand backhand

[@charles6762]

Was not aware of that will have to check it out thanks@@robertmangano353

[@charles6762]

@@yann664 I misspoke he did not invent he popularized the two handed backhand

[@pratapbalakrishna3036]

Pancho Segura, authored , the double fisted backhand.

[@PaoloPalarini]

He also holds the much more important record of tournament won!!!

[@MrMarko2410]

I've never seen anything like those backhand passing shots by Laver! Breathtaking

[@jmadratz]

I never knew how good Laver was until I saw this video. This is Laver at the end of his career and Conners at his beginning. Laver had such amazing court presence and shot making ability. He had all the shots and a great touch. Not one unforced error in this short clip. I truly believe a player with the skills of Laver today would dominate tennis just like Laver did in the 1960s.

[@elvisparker4691]

2 Incredible Players. Two of the Greatest Ever. 🎾🎾

[@davidedwards4720]

Please refer to this video any young players who stupidly state that nobody hit it hard "back then". Players under forty commonly assume classic era players played slow methodical game with no power. Quite the contrary. Also, court surfaces then were often incredibly fast compared to the homogenized, all surfaces must bounce the same monotony of the modern game. Connors and Laver were hitting the cover off the ball and straight line flat bullets skidding off a fast surface take away much more time from the opponent than loopy high bouncing topspin shots. These two were incredible players who would do fine in today's era.

[@alexbowie6316]

I loved them both. Rod is the bigger name, player and legend I think. Jimmy brought a power to the game. At the time, they said no one had hit harder and for longer than Jimmy. Then Becker Agassi and now the big hitting larger framed super athlete players are hitting harder than ever. The gasps that Laver's passing shots brought, were because at the time, they were really something. Now, they all hit wonder shots every game from everywhere on the court. When Laver was winning his Slams, hardly any other player had a topspin backhand. Only Lew Hoad previously had used it. I loved the game in Emerson and Laver days and I have loved it every era through. It is still fantastic and we are blessed with the present era indeed

[@davidm2688]

Laver was one of a kind. Amazing player!

[@johnholmes912]

he wasn't one of a kind. there were a lot of great players in his era, which is why it is regarded as the golden era

[@charles6762]

LAVER AVOIDED PLAYING HIM FOR YEARS

[@vidhead85]

The way tennis coverage looks has changed, but the ever familiar sound of that racket string hitting the ball....that wil never change!

[@opencurtin]

At about 2.33 a guy in the crowd chomping on a Cigar how times have changed .lol

[@Bignewshound60]

I sat next to Rod Laver at Wimbledon two year ago. It was a real honour. We were watching Sinner v Djokovic. I asked him what he thought they'd be like if they were playing with wooden racquets. He said he'd give them a run for their money in his prime but their fitness was on another level. Connors was arguably the first of the truly fit modern era players. At 37 Laver was 14 years older than Connors when this game was played. Often matches of this era seem slow when we watch them on the screen. Not this one. These two were two of the greats. I don't think they'd have stood a chance against Novak or Roger. But we will never know.

[@jamesfeldman4234]

Ah, Dunlop Fort vs. Wilson T2000. I remember those long-gone days. And such terrific tennis, with two of the best at the time. Rod Laver's reflexes, especially at the net, were simply awesome and Jimmy Connors's power and precision were staggering.

[@alessandroalessandro6771]

I read Rod Laver's biography many years ago, I learned how he was born in Queensland, how he loved to fish in the barrier reef, how was tennis in Australia and then with that bunch of professionals playing all over the map for a few dollars. He said he had a contract with a tennis shoes maker and sometimes he received cheques of 7 dollars. It was very interesting to learn so many things about the sport and the old champions like Pancho González, and then the Open era arrived when he was 30, and yet he could win a second Grand Slam in 1969. You could see how he was humble and a true sportsman. I only had the chance to see him in tv, he was amazing, small, but very fast and strong, his technique far superior to todays players, perhaps with the only exception of Federer

[@RobertHurleyJr]

Laver vs Bjorg footage is also entertaining. More entertaining than most modern matches.

[@spitfire4sergi]

This really gave me a perspective for these guys. From most of the old footage, it seemed like the pace of tennis back then was SOOOO slow, but these guys HIT!

[@alanfrost75]

Absolutely... and if you consider what it is they are hitting with it is even more impressive. Those racquets had sweet spots the size of an acorn.

[@spiritxfly]

Alan Frost It's really remarkable! Not only they hit, how they run it's unbelievable! No steroids then nothing fishy!

[@shanilmisra]

This is the first time I have seen Laver properly, and apart from all his other assets, I think he has the most poetic, fluid backhand I have ever seen. When he times that thing he just smokes it. I remember he knocked around with Sampras at Wimbledon in the 90's and was still hitting those supreme backhands.

[@Gregoryt700]

It's true, but it's also fun comparing eras. Newcombe once said Vilas had an even better backhand than Laver (after Vilas won the 74 Masters on grass beating Newcombe, Borg and Nastase)

[@opencurtin]

A magician ...

[@RobertKekuna]

If you tried to hit a backhand like Vilas your arm would fall off. Laver's backhand is more economical.

[@thomasmedeiros5722]

I have been fortunate to have seen Laver play Ken Rosewall on clay. I also saw Connors play Rosewall on clay. At that time no one hit the ball harder consistently as Jimmy Connors. Jimmy would “pound from the ground “. He hit the ball hard and flat with low net clearance. Connors was an “ all court player who would follow in his devastating shots and hit a volley to close the point. His racquet The Wilson T 2000 was a metal frame with a unique string system. It produced a lot of pace if you could control it like Connors. I got to watch Connors play live quite a few times and learned to apply his style of play and court coverage. Check KZbin for the Connors match at the US Open when Connors was 38 years old if you like to see an old guy hustle and stay in a point as Jimmy use to say.

[@gopher3737]

Wow Laver was a phenomenal volleyer. Only guy that I can think of that might compare as a volleyer is Sampras. His serve is so quick, reminds me of Dolgopolov style. He was also really athletic. Now I see why he is among the best of all time with Fed and Sampras

[@garymorris1856]

I remember watching this very match in about March of 1975, and I was rooting for my favorite player, Rod laver.

[@goofydog2]

Rocket was a genius! His shot selection, placement, reaction times were phenomenal! No wonder he's the only player to win two full grand slams in one calender year. Put a small racquet in any modern player (federer included) and Rod would have given them a lesson or three. In my opinion, he is the greatest player ever.

[@toastyregent1448]

Federer goat now

[@joshuagoldstein8170]

Rod Laver simply has no equal and never will. But rarely do we ever actually see footage of him playing. What's fascinating to me is his insane volley skills.

[@davidslott]

Wow. Shows you how great Laver was. Cat quick at age 36 and every shot in the book. But Connors was too young and strong.

[@alanchong7513]

I saw this match live on TV back in 1975. But missed the ending as I had to catch a bus. Heard the result on the bus radio. This is a match all tennis fans should watch for it's historical significance!

[@RSimoes10]

This level of tennis is insane, especially at the net.

[@guylamson6555]

I was a kid during this time and had no interest in tennis but started playing in the early 80's so I only heard about RL. Thanks to you tube I am like what the fuck this guy could play now and be champ 30 years from now and be champ. I get how when its era you think only your players are the best, but that's bullshit. Connors could play now and be champ because of his heart. I can't wait until all these old school videos are cleaned up and brought into modern times.

[@HankFinkle11]

Love the sound of the old wood frames and gut strings.

[@casheasy]

This is great stuff. Thanks for posting it. I had heard of these "winer take all" matches when I was like 6 years old, but don't remember watching it. awesome.

[@vicentesala9115]

I think it is not about how Rod would hit the ball nowadays, it is about how current players would perform with wood rackets. What RodL, Ken Rosewall, Pancho G and some others did is the best tennis w those tools, with impressive skills.

[@eselsdistel]

I find Laver's technique even more elegant than Federer's... Long, elegant movements, perfect pacing, a lot of power considering he played with wooden rackets... Textbook tennis.

[@bobjones9596]

eselsdistel Federer's technique is a lot more elegant than Rod Laver's

[@appualliyanaa]

Federer is the only player to excel with a wooden racket on todays top 10

[@boraxsopanic2670]

Federer like many others have elegant shots, but few players today are very challenging.

[@mrbobevans]

The backhand of Laver is the most beautiful shot of all time and the greatest of all time. Connors conducted himself in this match with class. He knew he was facing the GOAT. Borg once said he never gets tired watching Laver hit the ball. The ultimate compliment.

[@krosero]

According to the NY Times, Connors was in control for the first two sets but then Laver started serving better, losing only 3 service pts in the 3rd. After the match Connors left the building with leg cramps, while Laver walked off fine. He'd trained very hard for the match -- later that spring he pushed Borg to five sets on the same surface (nearly beating him in four). So it seems that this four-set match between Connors and Laver fairly represents their abilities in '75.

[@SXS78]

Laver`s last truly big win was the 1971 Rome final

[@rikiwoods6987]

It seems aussie battler laver is giving a young jimmy connors a tennis lesson rod laver is truly the master of serve and volley

[@aaronanderson1118]

JIMMY throttled Rod...if that was the Aussie giving the lesson, nobody told Connors.

[@casheasy]

Thank you so much for posting this. The shot making was unbelievable between these two. Great stuff.

[@ohmandamp]

I love how hard yet effortless Laver hits his serves. He's only 5'8, using wooden rackets, yet he's blasting them at a buck 20. That the doesn't leap for the ball but keeps one leg on the ground, allowing him to gain extra leverage is a big reason for his speed.

[@MrPernell27]

Laver never hit a serve anywhere near 120mph. Never! Secondly he doesn't leap off the ground because up until about 1972 it was against the rules for your front foot to leave the ground on your serve. Leaping off the ground would give you a higher elevation,which gives more power.

[@andrewelo]

Connors played like a warrior, full of ferocious drive and spirit. There's never been any player I've supported as much as him.

[@dalymc]

Laver was SO good at the net! :o

[@Haikoon]

that backhand at 4:30 O_o

[@carlosanjust6393]

saw Laver in 1968 rome tournament....live! never seen anybody like Him.

[@jokim0731]

Wow these guys were sooo good... they would definitely still be on top even if they played now with today's technology

[@turdferguson2]

From all the clips I've seen of Laver, he appears to be one of the fastest players I've ever seen...any generation

[@vb14086]

Actually, that's why he got the nickname 'Rocket'. Contrary to what some think, it was for his legendary speed on the court (not to discount that he had every shot in the book, and then some).

[@chriswatson7965]

Connors is 22, Laver is 36 and playing with rackets he didn't grow up with. He might have lost the match, but balancing things out, he must have been the better player at his peak by far. Knew his game inside out, beautiful timing of the ball, and no wasted effort. Many of the points he loses are to shots from Connors that he just isn't expecting because they wouldn't have been possible with the rackets he learnt his game with. The game today has evolved even more so with the types of rackets and the heights and strengths of the average players. Laver losing to Connors here reminds me of when Hingis stopped being able to win and women's tennis became a power game only.

[@whatubeaccount1]

no way was laver better than connors by far @ a peak point...laver and connors are both world-beaters...understand that that means they are the best of the best...their shared class is the best class...the unbelievably dominant and elite class...the class of champions' champions...connors at his best was a force of nature...the rocket was certainly no less an astounding force...and they were actually pretty evenly matched here...despite the age difference...the key point being that the connors' reach alone (which was undeniably greater than laver's wingspan) was enough to neutralize the laver serve (ever dangerous out-of-doors and especially on grass) over long periods on slower/consistent surfaces (clay and hard courts), ...i have the remnants of the original footage myself...despite the appearance given by this selected footage (which features laver's most brilliant play), laver was on the back foot the whole way thru...connors was brilliant and had an all-court game that simply blocked out the sun (metaphorically speaking)...you had to be bigger than connors to naturally nullify his advantage on the return (ashe, newcombe, mcenroe) or you had to be one hell of a grinder (like orantes...who was pretty much the same size if not bigger than j.c. anyhey)

[@chriswatson7965]

whatubeaccount1 I'm sorry, what you have posted makes no sense. At one stage you claim that they were evenly matched in this video, at another that the footage is biased. Yet I never claimed that the match was anything other than one sided. So despite you claiming (I think) that Laver had a better run in the match than I did, you came to the conclusion that he was the weaker player, despite my argument that concluded in him being the stronger of the two when compared at their respective peaks. It seems that the only point in your argument is that Connors had a greater reach than Laver. Both were short men - Connors 1.77m and Laver 1.73. By your logic Laver should not have been able to win many matches at all because of his height. You did not address a single point in my argument.

[@RobertKekuna]

At his prime Laver could beat anyone on any surface at any time. He was a power player but he won 2 French Opens on clay. He could serve and volley as well as guys like Newcombe or Stan Smith or Ashe who had bigger wingspans. Connors was like Nadal, players who were much more comfortable from the baseline but could win Wimbledon, so Connors is pretty remarkable, too, and was still competitive at 40. The big difference is doubles - check out Laver's doubles titles. He had no weakness.

[@akalaam2752]

People tend to romanticize past greats, Federer and Nadal are the greatest and they are of the same era. They took the sport to new heights and publicized and globalized it exponentially.

[@HankFinkle11]

A Kalaam no. Realistically, Laver, Connors, etc would have been as competitive today. It's people like you who don't understand the impact that racquet technology has had on the game. Stick Fed with a wood racquet and have him play Laver in 1968. He'd lose.

[@fritzlange7934]

We’re so fortunate to have footage of Laver playing both Connors and Borg (and giving both of them a run for their money at 37).

[@walliegirl2]

Watching this video, I can only say that Laver is the greatest of all time. Had he played the GS in his career he could have won 20.

[@maksimkempe3425]

Well, there's another man who achieved that 10 years after your comment.

[@digitadigita3578]

@@maksimkempe3425 There's another who's only 1 away from 20. And another with 16 who can get passed 20.

[@davidcoburn8545]

As I recall, Laver had retired from the game. Connors issued a challenge to Laver to play in a so-called heavyweight match at LV. Laver took 3 months to prepare. It was a good outcome for all to see.

[@gordonipock6404]

Amazing tennis from two all-time greats playing with archaic racquets. Connors was the Mike Tyson of men's tennis at this time taking on the man who had dominated the sport over the past 15 years.

[@samking4179]

so great! thank you for posting this!

[@9991revilo]

Laver's volleys puts the current top 10 to shame. Amazingly firm wrist with those planks

[@alanchong7513]

Pity we only have 8 mins here. I would love to watch this in its entirety. I view this match quite significantly in tennis history. One of the few chances to see Rod up against another all-time-great! Laver vs Borg would be another significant matchup to watch!

[@Baskerville22]

+Alan Chong There is a clip of about 15 minutes on KZbin of a Borg/Laver encounter in 1976. So, Laver was 38 and Borg 20 or thereabouts.

[@alanchong7513]

I have seen that clip! It's on some kind of clay / sand based court. How would Laver vs Borg play out if both were in their prime? That would be a hell of a match. Depends on whether Rod can get to the net for volleys because I don't think Rod can beat Bjorn from the baseline.

[@Baskerville22]

Alan Chong From what is shown in the Borg/Laver clip, it was pretty close. I think that if they were both at their best, i'd favour Laver.

[@alanchong7513]

Really? Laver over Borg? That's fair enough as McEnroe is like Laver and McEnroe eventually got the better of Bjorn. Imagine Laver, Connors, Borg and McEnroe all in their prime at the same time. How unreal would tennis be! They would be dividing up all the tournaments between themselves. Borg (clay), ? (grass), ? (hardcourts). What's your view who would prevail?

[@Baskerville22]

+Alan Chong I'm no tennis expert; just a watcher. Borg on clay; Laver on grass would be safest bets. Hardcourts? Dunno'.

[@teflonmagnet]

usually you watch a legend and aren't as impressed as the hype would've lead you to believe...not true for laver. the rocket was all that and had an irrepressible game. thanks for the post and i hope to see more, more, MORE!

[@patzeram]

You can see in this video the complete game of Laver. There is no doubt in his prime he is at worst one of the greatest of all time. Laver had a much more varied game than Federer and with his huge left arm more power also, especially with the rackets of today. No shot was beyond his ability.

[@gumballrally427]

Laver = GOAT. He was 38 in this match against a 23 year old Connors. Laver is still the only player to complete the Grand Slam for men's singles. And he did it twice!

[@zebez20]

laver was 36 in this match

[@stevencoardvenice]

I thought roger was goat but these youtube clips make me think twice

[@EJP286CRSKW]

Donald Budge did in 1937. Jack Crawford missed it by one set in 1934.

[@TimwongTimwong]

Hard to believe an old short man with ancient small racquet could play tremendous serve and volley

[@smithcm14]

I love these camera angles, makes everything look so face paced.

[@datacipher]

I am not one who believes wood racquets are a terrible disadvantage....I can serve over 120mph with both wood and graphite, and tennis pros can hit the sweetspot with just about anything, but you're right. Fed sometimes has a shankfest with his backhand, it would be BRUTAL on those days were he trying to use one of these racquets. His Backhand would have been picked on mercilessly (as they try to now), and with wood, it would probably break down fairly often.

[@absoluteb22]

Laver was semi retired for a few years by this time which just goes to show how good he was. Imagine if he competed at the slams (being banned like Rosewall) through the mid 60's in his prime?

[@driger888]

it a shame a video of the entire match isn't available. very entertaining. billed as the heavyweight championship of tennis. they made all those great shots with those tiny racket heads.

[@buxaderas1]

Certainly, Laver is the best combination of talent, variety,risk and spctacularity ever to play tennis

[@rondunn4336]

Never forget,Connors was at his peak and Laver was the aging player at the end of his career.

[@GufusRufus]

AMAZING Laver!!! Always the right thing at the right time! What an incredible footwork, and what a hand!

[@turdferguson2]

I am amazed with how hard and EARLY Connors is hitting the ball. this to me is proof that the game has changed far LESS than people think it has in the past 30-or-so years. and I'd say the rosewall 69 R.G looks 'leisurely' because A) rosewall hit with no pace on his backhand and B) it was on slow clay.

[@joeschmoe8264]

First time seeing Laver’s volleys with an image that I can see...wow... He was playing with a totally inferior racquet but his hands were insane. I might say his volleys were one half percent better than my all time favorite McEnroe.

[@loriamendolara5596]

It's odd that some say Laver wouldn't keep up with today's game because he'd have trained in today's circumstances if he were playing today, and so his game would be just as successful as he was in his day.

[@Saperlipopette777]

Même chose pour moi, première fois que je vois Rod Laver jouer. Je suis très impressionné : ça va vite, les détentes au filet sont dingues; ce gars aurait définitivement fait un carton aujourd'hui!

[@mrbobevans]

I agree their games are the most well-rounded in the history of tennis. Laver was mentally tougher than Federer; he was a true warrior. Laver's backhand is the most beautiful shot ever seen on a tennis court - breathtaking.

[@krosero]

Actually I have seen those two finals over Lendl, and studied them closely. I've taken stats for those matches and many others, and I've been a fan of Connors for as long as I've been into tennis. I watched his victories in '91 with the same thrills everyone else did.

[@gomezaddams4347]

Laver was 36 going on 37 at this time, and he gave Connors a good run for his money. Laver has always been the most complete player I’ve ever seen, with the possible exception of McEnroe in ‘84 and Federer at his peak. I wish everyone who blathers about how slow and dull “old” tennis was would watch this clip. To me, this is far more interesting than most modern matches because it’s a contest of positioning, more so than just power.

[@goofydog2]

@ 2:40 the slow motion has Laver lunging to his right to get one of Jimmy's back-hands. It's not the only time, but Rocket really has GREAT court coverage!

[@mrbobevans]

Lendl was supposed to be the godfather of conditioning. BS., look at Borg, Rosewall and Laver. Laver is 38 in this video and is in better shape than 95% of the guys on the current tour. Laver's backhand is the most beautiful looking tennis shot of all time - amazing.