[mistercrabs]

I know that very few casual tennis watchers in the UK have heard of Wilander because he never did anything at Wimbledon. I'm not sure how much of an effect that would have globally though.

 

[R]

I think the reasons why Wilander is more omitted compared to Edberg/ Becker/ McEnroe (similar slams tally) are

• his game wasn't as appealing
• he had a much shorter peak

I could be wrong of course.

I'm not sure about the peak part at least. Wasn't notably shorter compared to at least Edberg. Could be the style, considering that wasn't S&V (even more so if you do it as smoothly as Edberg) quite appreciated in general at that time...?

Wilander won his 1st GS in 1982 and his last (the 3 GS season) in 1988. 7 GSs in a span of 7 years.
Edberg: 1st GS in 1985 and last in 1992. 6 GSs in a span of 8 years. Edberg did also reach one more F the next year (1993).

Titles overall: Wilander 33. Edberg 42.

Edberg did also win the Tour Finals and the Olympics while Wilander didn't.

Wilander won 3 Davis Cups, Edberg 2.

The biggest difference favoring Edberg is weeks at #1. Edberg 72 and Wilander 20.

Edberg also reached the F at each GS. On this, I was thinking Edberg may have been more an all-surface player, but what actually caught me off-guard is how little he played and won on grass. Only 5 titles, 4 being GSs (2x AO and 2x Wimbledon). 1x Queen's. Those were pretty much the grass tournaments he participated in. Instead he excelled on HC (23 of his 42 titles) and carpet (11 titles). For Wilander, of course it was clay (20 of his 33 titles). After that HC (9 titles).

--

Becker's span between his 1st and last GS: 12 years. Notably longer.
McEnroe: Well... I'd regard him almost an entirely different case. You can't simply go based on his tennis prowess and results. Flamboyant, rock star esque. Legendary battles with Borg. But also that crazy 84 season.

 

[guitarra]

I'm not sure if was the peak part at least. Wasn't notably shorter compared to at least Edberg. Could be the style, considering that wasn't S&V (even more so if you do it as smoothly as Edberg) quite appreciated in general at that time...?

Wilander won his 1st GS in 1982 and his last (the 3 GS season) in 1988. 7 GSs in a span of 7 years.
Edberg: 1st GS in 1985 and last in 1992. 6 GSs in a span of 8 years. Edberg did also reach one more F the next year (1993).

Titles overall: Wilander 33. Edberg 42.

Edberg did also win the Tour Finals and the Olympics while Wilander didn't.

Wilander won 3 Davis Cups, Edberg 2.

The biggest difference favoring Edberg is weeks at #1. Edberg 72 and Wilander 20.

Edberg also reached the F at each GS. On this, I was thinking Edberg may have been more an all-surface player, but what actually caught me off-guard is how little he played and won on grass. Only 5 titles, 4 being GSs (2x AO and 2x Wimbledon). 1x Queen's. Those were pretty much the grass tournaments he participated in. Instead he excelled on HC (23 of his 42 titles) and carpet (11 titles). For Wilander, of course it was clay (20 of his 33 titles). After that HC (9 titles).

--

Becker's span between his 1st and last GS: 12 years. Notably longer.
McEnroe: Well... I'd regard him almost an entirely different case. You can't simply go based on his tennis prowess and results. Flamboyant, rock star esque. Legendary battles with Borg. But also that crazy 84 season.

Another theory that crossed my mind is maybe Wilander's personality wasn't as interesting for the fans? He wasn't as controversial as Mac or as classy as Edberg but rather withdrawn and not very outstanding.

 

[Henrik]

I would agree with many arguments that have been made, in particular, that one cannot take for granted that Sweden with a population of around 10 millions should have players at the top. Still, there is a rather important factor that may not be known to so many outside Sweden, so I will repeat myself from a previous thread on the same topic.

The sport of floorball (Floorball - Wikipedia) has grown very popular in Sweden in the last decades, and I think it absorbs a lot of talent. This is the main difference over time since all other popular sports were popular already 50 years ago. In my mind, although floorball is fun to play, this state of affairs is a pity because there are enough team sports anyway. The world doesn't need another one, and up to now, floorball is only taken seriously in Finland and Sweden.

 

[Boogalo]

The anomaly in swedish tennis history is the explosive national tennis enthusiasm triggered by super star Björn Borg, which lead to having an exceptionally high number of top players in the 1980's and 1990's.

Then the tennis talent level faded back to average.

I don't think socio-economic factors are really pertinent. Tennis is very accessible in most of Europe. It's an elite sport mainly in the heads of people, in that kids consider it uncool compared to football, basketball, etc. A sudden emergence of a tennis teenage idol can change that.

 

[ys]

Same happening in another former European tennis powerhouse - Czech Republic.

 

[galactic_surfer]

swedes became soft, too much democracy made them wimps.

 

[Iblis]

I am writing from my head and not using wikipedia, so maybe I forgot someone.

Borg, Edberg, Nystroem, Enqvist, Norman, T. Johansson, J. Johansson, Bjorkman, Soderling, even Vinciguerra (someone remembers him ?)

Sweden has always been a powerhouse, what has happened that they only have Ymer brothers right now (who are not soo good btw) ?

Yeah he was in a mediocre tennis game for the PS2, Slam Tennis or something.

 

[skaevola]

Remarkable how Sweden is historically zilch when it comes to woman tennis players.

 

[R]

Same happening in another former European tennis powerhouse - Czech Republic.

Interestingly the women's side is still flourishing. Wonder what's behind this difference. Similar to US (although US men's tennis is on the rise currently.

 

[ys]

Interestingly the women's side is still flourishing. Wonder what's behind this difference. Similar to US (although US men's tennis is on the rise currently.

I am not sure. I don't see anyone who would count as a Top 10 threat in US men. Tiafoe, Fritz, Brooksby are journeyman level at best and who else other than a couple of servebots..
Women still have several Slam champions in prime age.
In all western Europe only Italy and Spain do somewhat well.

 

[jorgimano]

Off topic: one could also ask, "what happened to Hungarian football?" They were the masters of the game in the 50s and then came that very long silence.

Seems like Sweden have their own silent phase to deal with.

As a Hungarian, I can deeply agree. The same thing happened to Hungarian football. The last time we took part at the world cup is 1986. Our last world cup goal was scored by Lajos Détári, popularly called as "the last Hungarian world class footballer", who will be 60 this year. Same story as with Swedish tennis. The once-upon-a-time greatness.

 

[Litotes]

Remarkable how Sweden is historically zilch when it comes to woman tennis players.

Indeed. I suppose you need role models. Borg set the ball running for Swedish males, and then his successors set it running for a generation even after that, but then it dried up. Nobody set it running for the females.

It's the same thing in table tennis, Swedes have done phenomenally well on the Men's side and basically nothing on the Female one.

 

[Break point Dom.]

The only time since 2001 that they made the Davis Cup SFs appears to be 2007, and Thomas Johansson and Jonas Bjorkman were still in the team then.

Surprising to me they last won Davis cup in 1998 and not much success in the 2000s.

During that decade the could call on Norman, Enqvist, Thomas Johansson who were all slam finalist of course in that period and Bjorkman was also a solid player in singles and world class in doubles so really strength in depth in that period.

Then Soderling and Joachim Johansson emerged in the mid 2000s so didn't seem an issue in those times.

Interested how many other countries in that time had three different players making the final of a slam in 2-3 year period aside from obvious ones in US and Australia.

 

[Litotes]

Surprising to me they last won Davis cup in 1998 and not much success in the 2000s.

During that decade the could call on Norman, Enqvist, Thomas Johansson who were all slam finalist of course in that period and Bjorkman was also a solid player in singles and world class in doubles so really strength in depth in that period.

Then Soderling and Joachim Johansson emerged in the mid 2000s so didn't seem an issue in those times.

Interested how many other countries in that time had three different players making the final of a slam in 2-3 year period aside from obvious ones in US and Australia.

Spain (Bruguera, Moya, Corretja 1997-98)
Argentina (Nalbandian, Gaudio, Coria, 1992-94)
France in the 1920-30s
Britain in the 1870s-90s

Noone else

 

[R]

Spain (Bruguera, Moya, Corretja 1997-98)
Argentina (Nalbandian, Gaudio, Coria, 1992-94)
France in the 1920-30s
Britain in the 1870s-90s

Noone else

Surely you meant Argentina 2002-2004?

 

[Litotes]

Surely you meant Argentina 2002-2004?

Yes, thanks for the correction. Not sure how my mind managed to find the wrong decade there.

 

[RGNCAJUN20]

Vinciguerra was one of my favs to watch. It’s too bad he retired so early

 

[Hypnotize]

I am not sure. I don't see anyone who would count as a Top 10 threat in US men. Tiafoe, Fritz, Brooksby are journeyman level at best and who else other than a couple of servebots..
Women still have several Slam champions in prime age.
In all western Europe only Italy and Spain do somewhat well.

Fritz is top 10 and won a Masters title last year. Whatever you think of the guy, it's stupid to call him a journeyman.

 

[Henrik]

All the young Swedish boys decided they wanted to be hockey players instead. After Swedes were permitted to enter the NHL, the numbers of those taking up tennis started to drop off.
Interestingly, many of the Swedish hockey pros seem to play a lot of tennis in the off season. I'd bet some of them are really good at it, too.

I think I have commented on that particular suggestion in some previous thread, but it was a few years ago, so the argument can be made once more. Yes, Sweden (like Canada) is a hockey nation, but that has been the case for a long time, it was true even at the height of Sweden's succes in tennis. What has changed during the last decades is that floorball (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floorball) has become popular, and it has absorbed a lot of talent. If I would point at one sport responsible for the decline in Swedish tennis, it would certainly be floorball. While it is a fun game to play, I'm not so much a fan of viewing the game, since it is far from a big sport globally. It is quite telling that Finland and Sweden has won every major tournament since the very beginning.