The Case for Bjorn Borg as GOAT

The case for Bjorn Borg

 

The case for Bjorn Borg as GOAT will always be interesting because the last half or third of his career didn’t happen.  But what he accomplished in the short time he played was remarkable. 

 

He became the youngest man ever to win a grand slam title (to that time) when he did it within days of his 18^th birthday at the French Open in 1974.  No man has won more pro matches, titles, or grand slams by age 24 than he did.  He also has the best match winning percentage at the slams, with Nadal and Federer a distant 2^nd and 3^rd.

 

In addition to 5 consecutive Wimbledon titles, he only ever lost twice at the French Open, winning there 6 times, 4 times consecutively, and 3 times consecutively he followed up his French victory with the Wimbledon title 4 weeks later – the French-Wimbledon double.  No one else has done that. 

 

His head to head record is top notch.  In the pool of all men who have won a grand slam title in the open era, he has a losing record against only one other slam champion (Newcombe):  a record no one else can match.  Sampras has a losing record against 3 other slam champions, Federer against 3, Lendl against 4, Laver against 2, McEnroe against 5.  Only Nadal may challenge Borg – with a losing record against no other GS champs so far.  But Nadal’s career is not over yet, and the trend has been for players to be dominated eventually by their younger rivals.

 

The computer ranking program used by the ATP in the 1970’s was not as refined as the one now and many people did not trust its results.  A number of journalists and organizations continued to provide end of the year rankings or player of the year picks.  The combined picks from most sources show that Borg was year end #1 for 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980[1] – with 1977 being the most controversial year when Vilas and Connors also vied for the title.  That 4 year consecutive reign as yearend #1 has been bested only by Sampras in the Open era, and equalled by Federer.

 

The aura Borg created was awe-inspiring.  He seemed utterly unflappable and could completely unnerve opponents just through his sheer concentration, refusal to make errors, and ability to run down almost any shot.  Sampras could show that concentration at times and Nadal does as well.  When Nadal makes up his mind he is not losing, heaven and earth cannot prevail against him.  He grinds out matches that he seems to have had no business winning.  Yet both Sampras and Nadal did not to do this as consistently as Borg did.  Borg logged 5 consecutive years with less than 10 losses per year.  Sampras accomplished that only once and Nadal has never done it. 

 

Years with less than 10 losses (at least 50 matches played)

 

Borg             5

Federer        4

Lendl            4

Connors        3

McEnroe       2

Sampras       1

 

So what are the reasons NOT to consider Borg the GOAT?  The US Open and his early retirement spring immediately to mind.

 

Borg walked away from the game just after the 1981 US Open, just 3 months after his 25^th birthday.  It seemed he had another good 5 years left, judging by other player’s careers, maybe more.  The general consensus was that the flame of his genius had burned too hotly at a young age and he was burned out.

 

Rumblings also began that John McEnroe had chased him out of the game.  McEnroe had finally wrested the Wimbledon title away from him in Borg’s 6^th consecutive appearance in the final.  Additionally, when 1981 ended Borg had lost 4 times in the USO final, the last two years to McEnroe.  McEnroe was 3 years younger than Borg and it was easy to think that Borg saw the writing on the wall, realized McEnroe had youth on his side and, already tired of the tour grind, he just picked up and walked away.

 

But the story is not that simple.  There were, unfortunately, political forces at work that thwarted Borg’s comeback.  In 1981, Borg had only played 2 tournaments before the French Open.  In 1982, he played only one.  So his run up to the grand slam season was not much different than the year before – but overall he had played less tournaments in 1981 than in past years.  He tried to get into Wimbledon in 1982 but was prevented because of a rule that he had not played the minimum number of tournaments required in the last year to be in good standing.  He was faced with the prospect of qualifying and refused.  Nowadays, he would likely have just received a wildcard and given a hero’s welcome.  Had it not been for the draconian rule at that time, Borg might have been able to play the reduced scheduled he desired.  Had he been allowed to do that it might have staved off the burnout he was feeling.  Instead he was virtually forced to retire from the game instead of continuing at a pace he considered unsustainable.

 

No one has matched Borg’s accomplishments by age 25, which makes him a candidate for the GOAT.  And one wonders what he might have accomplished if he had kept playing.  But the truth of the matter is that he did not keep playing.  Maybe his superhuman powers of concentration effectively condensed his career – or maybe he could have won many more titles had he kept going.  We’ll never know.  Borg’s records are unsurpassed for his age but his failure at the US Open and his lack of longevity mean he cannot be considered the GOAT when others have overcome those shortfalls.

---

[1] Borg was also picked as #1 in 1976 by an assemblage of journalists in what has become the ATP player of the year award, but the majority opinion in 1976 was for Connors as #1