The younger generation may not know much about the iceberg that is Bjorn Borg in the Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic era. The Greatest of All Time (GOAT) is typically solely discussed among current players, primarily based on statistics; hence, historical greats like Borg and Laver are rarely taken into consideration.
In order to give Borg the respect he so clearly deserves, I want to place his career statistics in the proper context in this piece without debating whether the greatest player ever was.
Let’s examine Borg’s statistics just based on grand slam figures:
Grand slam career: 1973–1981 = 9 years
27 competitions were grand slams (he only made one appearance at the Australian Open in these nine years).
Grand Slam finals: sixteen (59.3%) of the twenty-seven events
Grand slam victories as a percentage of finals: eleven out of sixteen (68.8%)
Grand slam victories as a proportion of tournament participation: 11 out of 27 (40.7%) (To put these numbers in proper context, the matching figures for Federer and Nadal are 19/71, or 26.8% and 16/50, or 32%, respectively.)
Grand slam victories as a proportion of tournament participation: 11 out of 27 (40.7%) (To put these numbers in proper context, the matching figures for Federer and Nadal are 19/71, or 26.8% and 16/50, or 32%, respectively.)
Grand slam win/loss percentage: 89.81% (For the purpose of comparison, Federer’s win/loss percentage in seven slams is 86%, while Nadal’s is 87%.)
In terms of percentages, all of the aforementioned are the greatest ever.
In the open era, just four men have won both the French and Wimbledon crowns in the same year—possibly the hardest feat in tennis. During his nine-year career, Borg has accomplished this three times.
Who knows what his stats would have been had he continued to play grand slams after retiring at age 26. Although he was the runner-up at Wimbledon in 1982, no one urged him to resign so early. For the record, he ceased competing in grand slams after regimental Wimbledon officials requested him to qualify through qualifying rounds. What he perceived as an insult to him caused the iceberg to melt.
I’m not claiming that Borg was the best player ever, by any means. beyond all, winning grand slams only gets harder beyond the age of 25. There wasn’t much of a difference between these greats; Borg had won his 11th grand slam at the age of 25 years and 1 day, while Federer had won it in 25 years and 324 days and Nadal in 26 years and 8 days. I also acknowledge that Borg’s percentage-based statistics appear to be somewhat better than those of the current greats, presumably because he quit early while the latter are still playing.
Nevertheless, the figures above unequivocally show that Borg had the most influential career in the open.
My only goal in doing this was to properly frame the numbers so that Borg is accorded the same respect as the modern greats. Borg, after all, was the one who introduced me to tennis when I had never even laid eyes on a court until he claimed his eighth grand slam. My way of saying thank you and honoring this gentle giant is through this article.
