2 Responses to dallas89lendl_hlasek

1. Voo de Mar says:

   December 17, 2023 at 10:22 am

   Stats without the first two sets; number of aces, double faults and break points are correct for the entire contest

   Points won by each set: | X, X, 39-34, 46-52^, 44-45 |
   Points won directly behind the serve (the last three sets only):
   29 % Lendl – 36 of 122
   29 % Hlasek – 41 of 138

   # An extraordinary match of contrasting styles (serve-and-volleyer vs offensive baseliner) concluded after midnight, only 1 of 4 five-setters in history with four tie-breaks, including one of them in the decider. It was a great opportunity for Hlasek [9] to get the biggest title of his career. He came to Dallas as the hottest player on the tour, who was winning more matches indoors than anyone else (32-7 record under the roof within five months). He had no reasons to afraid Lendl [1] because he began to play tennis of his life at the US Open ’88 where he lost to Lendl 4-6, 7-5, 2-6, 4-6 in the three-hour fourth round (Hlasek trailed 1:4* in the 2nd set), and defeated the best player in the world a few months later at “Masters” in New York 4-6, 6-3, 7-5 after 2 hours 32 minutes (trailing 2:4* and 4:5 in the decider).
   In the Dallas opener Lendl squandered a break point at 2:0, then saved a set point at *4:5 forcing an error. In the 2nd set he didn’t try at all after he being broken for the second time at 1:3. In the 3rd set he wasted a break point at 4:2, then led 5:3* (30/0) only to be three points away from losing the set in the tie-break. ^ The 4th set almost led to Lendl being defaulted: he got the first warning at 2-all in the opener, at 4:5 (0/15) in that set he received a point penalty, so when he verbally offended a lines-woman leading 2:1 (deuce) in the 4th set, the umpire Richard Ings had to give him a game penalty. For another two hours of play Lendl was still nervous, spat a few times on the court, but he refrained from being too aggressive towards the umpire and lines-people. At 6:5* he wasted a match point netting his forehand at his favorite passing-shot down the line, and somehow lost his focus, ten points in succession. In the decider they both were tired, and their serves weren’t acute anymore – there were break points in as many as eight games, six breaks, at 5-all Hlasek withstood a double mini-match point, in the following game he had a match point (earlier leading 30/15 lost an incredible rally), only to send his forehand long on the run. In the tie-break the Swiss improved from 3:5 to 5-all, but couldn’t keep his return inside the court, and at *5:6 attacked the net behind his second serve (he didn’t do this on a regular basis) to see Lendl’s BH passing-shot winner DTL.
   It lasted 4 hours 37 minutes (Hlasek won nine points more in total), the longest match in tournament’s history, but Lendl didn’t show any emotions. For Hlasek that defeat meant the end of his amazing form. On clay in 1989 he wasn’t similarly efficient, and his excessive participation in week-by-week events ultimately led to an injury (he had to skip the US Open ’89) – after a two-month break his indoor form were far from that a year before. At the end of 1989 he won just four matches under the roof, losing five. The loss to Lendl also initiated his inability to deal well with tight moments at the end of matches, and within twelve months, he lost six encounters blowing match points.

   Log in to Reply
2. Voo de Mar says:

   December 17, 2023 at 10:58 am

   # Four five-setters with four tie-breaks, and a tie-break in the decider:

   US Open ’83: J.Kriek d. R.Tanner 6-7(5), 3-6, 7-6(4), 7-6(3), 7-6(2)
   US Open ’86: Tom Gullikson d. G.Holmes 7-6(1), 7-6(2), 6-7(8), 0-6, 7-6(6)
   Dallas ’89: I.Lendl d. J.Hlasek 7-6(5), 1-6, 7-6(4), 6-7(0), 7-6(5)
   Aussie Open ’20: N.Kyrgios d. K.Khachanov 6-2, 7-6(5), 6-7(6), 6-7(7), 7-6[8]

   Log in to Reply