Q: You put Ivan Lendl among your top five ever. That will surprise some people.

A: I look at sort of the best player in your generation. To say one guy's better or the best of all time, I don't think you could really say. (Rod) Laver did it in the '60s. (Bjorn) Borg had it sort of in the '70s, late '70s. Lendl had it in the '80s, I had it in the '90s, and Roger (Federer) has it today. …

I think Lendl doesn't obviously get his due because of his public image, but he sort of transcended the sport. He brought in power, he brought in fitness. He was No. 1 for 250 weeks. He's won every major except Wimbledon, and got to the finals there.


http://www.usatoday.com/sports/tennis/2008...rs_N.htm?csp=34

how about top 7 ;) ;)

Yep, i'ld put Lendl in the top five-assuming we only go back say 45 years.
i'ld go
1 Sampras
2 Fed (as things currently stand)
3 Borg
4 Laver
5 Lendl
The of antithesis of a player like McEnroe-and while i prefer McEnroe, a top five has to be about achievements and not aesthetics.
Didn't Lendl reach the most slam finals-was it 18? more even than Sampras, though of course he never won most of them.

He is oft forgotten about.
There was a post about Lendl yesterday and I was thinking, well I don't quite know what Lendl achieved or what he was like as a player.
Ignorance on my part I imagine but he definitely would not be in my top 5.
I would put Agassi up there above Lendl just in terms of achievements.

This extract from Sampras is one of the key points about Lendl. He probably has more individual influence on the way that most pro's play today than any other player.

To be the pioneer of much of the modern style, as well as to have achieved so much as a player has got to put him right up there. You get the feel with Lendl that he wrung more out of his natural talent than most others and that he showed his successors the way to do it. Imagine what Agassi could have achieved had he been a genuine stayer like Lendl (assuming of course that his body could have hacked it).

The one thing, however, that you cannot help wondering about Lendl is that he was not infrequently found wanting on the really big occasions - it took him many years to win his first Slam (he had won 40 or so lesser tournaments and lost 4 slam finals) and he lost 11 of the 19 Slam finals he reached. Was it a lack of nerve, or being slightly less than a truly supreme talent that made him lose so often to Wilander, Connors, and Becker in Slam finals - or is that record testament to his ability to make the best of himself so that he got there in the first place?

I always liked him, and hated the press he got (much of it from the stupid UK press that is not aware of a world outside Wimbledon), so I am delighted to see Sampras giving him the credit I think he deserves.

Indeed Lendl played in 19 finals, more than Sampras who played in 18.

I believe Lendl lost his first 4 slam finals, Agassi lost his first 3 slam finals. Sampras was 1:1 after his first two finals. So they all did pretty well in the end!

Well Sampras talks about how Lendl brought in new aspects to the game in the 1980s, like Becker did. Sampras himself was a cross between Lendl and Becker. Had the big serve like Becker, Lendl had a big serve but Sampras' was bigger. Had the running forehand like Lendl and had the athleticism and volleying of Becker. Sampras and Lendl trained for a month at Lendl's estate in 1990. Just a few months later that year, Sampras beat Lendl in 5 sets in the US Open quarterfinal! Up to that match Lendl had been in eight straight finals from 1982 to 1989! So Lendl must have regretted inviting Sampras for training! That's the year Sampras beat McEnroe in the semi and Agassi in the final at the age of 19 and less than one month!

There are key areas of the modern game which Lendl passed on to Sampras, Agassi and Courier:

One is the inside out forehand, these four players really took this shot to where it is today. Lendl was the master of it, stretching the opponent and demoralising them in the process, footwork was key - Agassi and Courier were hardworkers, although Agassi had natural hand eye co-ordination, Sampras had more natural footwork, so his forehand was more famous over time. Players like Wilander used it but not in the same devastating way as Lendl then Agassi, Courier and Sampras. Players like Edberg never really had that play, or McEnroe.

The down the line forehand - this was another classic Lendl shot. A brilliant shot. This was really the shot that Sampras really took from Lendl, running around the backhand to hit the forehand down the line, in my opinion both Sampras' and Lendl's best shot throughout their careers. That really is the shot that separates the very good from the very best. Again players like McEnroe and Edberg in the late 1980s never really had a shot like that.

The running forehand crosscourt - again Sampras is most famous for this, and Lendl's running forehand was probably just as good. Not a shot that Jim Courier had for instance.

Lendl also had a fantastic backhand. Apparently I read it wasn't very good at first but he worked hard to improve. Lendl had an excellent backhand down the line and sliced it as well, he had a one hand backhand for those who don't know. Sampras said that his backhand down the line was a crucial shot against Agassi and players of that level. Sampras did have a great backhand down the line throughout his career. he lost some movement towards the end but in the 2002 US Open final, that shot came back with a vengence, Agassi was clearly shocked.

So you can see from what I describe how Lendl's game is so similar to how players play today. And I think he hit the ball as hard as anyone today as well, he really crushed it, and wasn't afraid to hit opponents! there's a youtube clip where he flawed McEnroe, I'll try to find it.

Also, you can see how many similarities Lendl's game had to Sampras as well.

Here it is, this will make you lot laugh.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xAPwx3z950

Lendl so infamous for this.

Macs face makes me laugh everytime.

Go Ivan! :bow:

What a rude bugger..

Well, he (Lendl) reached the US Opens finals for 8 years in a row. That is an achievement!

Lendl actually raised his racquet in apology but McEnroe decided to milk the crowd and the situation.

It's quite common for players to get hit even today. Maybe McEnroe and Lizel Huber should get together as they are both drama queens

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbkuorwIKh4

interesting tidbits laurie. I don't remember Ivan L as acting like a jerk. :shrug: BTW didn't McEnroe once call Lendl a "f**king Communist a-hole?" or was that some other Czech player?

McEnroe didn't like Lendl but maybe he felt intimidated by him. He allso claimed in his book called Serious (which i read) that Lendl didn't have much talent - which is a total nonsensical claim. he didn't have as much natural talent as McEnroe, but there were thngs Lendl could do on a Tennis court which McEnroe couldn't, which might explain why Lendl lasted longer at the top even though they are the same age and played eachother in the juniors.

By the way, Lendl was no angel either and did some bad things.

I think that's one of the reasons why that era was so good, there was a lot of rivalry and at times bad blood between many players back then. It made the Tennis better because players didn't like losing to eachother for one reason or another.

cool. Thanks Laurie :)

LOL LOL LOL LOL :ok: :ok: :ok:

:lol: I am with you - I do like Mac but I loved lendl..

like the naive person I was, I thought such things were genuine accidents but someone said to me that the players are so aware of where the other player is on court, that more often or not, it was quite deliberate... naughty Lendl :devil:

Its lendls face I love more though - he just looks like he wants to say 'get up you big wuss' - just love him!