Joined
·
2,850 Posts
I remember in 1986 where Lendl had an incredibly dominant year...almost like Fed's...He won the French and Wimbledon, was in the finals of Wimbledon, and the semis of the Australian...
Becker won Wimbledon over Lendl, and had beaten him two of three times..
Both won a huge number of tourneys, and at the year end championships, Bud Collins stated that while Lendl ended the year at #1, if Becker beat him in the finals, he would BECOME #1...
What if Nadal and Fed both make it to the finals of the year-end championships, and Nadal beat Fed...would the same arguement apply? Any opinions?
Becker won Wimbledon over Lendl, and had beaten him two of three times..
Both won a huge number of tourneys, and at the year end championships, Bud Collins stated that while Lendl ended the year at #1, if Becker beat him in the finals, he would BECOME #1...
What if Nadal and Fed both make it to the finals of the year-end championships, and Nadal beat Fed...would the same arguement apply? Any opinions?