Points won by each set: [ 18-28, 19-28, 34-22, 35-22, 27-17 ]
Points won directly behind the serve:
44 % Stich – 53 of 118
30 % Edberg – 40 of 132

It was a two-faced Edberg [5] – first better, then worse than his ’93 standards. Until 3:2* for him in the 3rd set he was playing a dream-like tennis, some reminiscence of his best performances of the years 1990-91 when he established himself as the best player in the world. I’d say that in the first 60 minutes of the 2-hour 38-minute encounter he was even serving better than ever (as many as 9 aces in the first two sets, including a total rarity in his case – he opened the game at 5:2 in the 1st set with three aces in a row to convert the set point with a service winner!). At 3-all in the 3rd set Edberg began the game unnecessarily running to [2] Stich’s lob. He wasted energy, was broken (at ‘deuce’) for the first time, and from that moment to the end of the semifinal, the Swede displayed his “second face”, unknown at the time, but characteristic for his very poor 1995 year which caused his decision about the retirement: sluggish on return, serving almost more double faults than service winners, erratic at volleys. The final scoreline is really bizarre: two serve-and-volleyers on a fast court, yet neither set concluded with ‘6-4’ at least…

Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply