Can you believe its been 31 years!!!

I also remember it being a child!!! it was amazing, and inspiring... From that day, I made a fan of the little Great Michael Chang...

me too

@Felix Peiper Just shows you the best players in the world are human.

​@Victoria Films 33 years now. Chang's Era was so fun to watch.

that image is what this player still reminds me of ,even when sometimes I tray the same shot.

chinese products are always fake and low quality

I'm of a different opinion. I do agree Lendl's mind was all over the place. He was complaining about the court conditions, irritated that Chang challenged a call early on and also took a long bathroom break, and maybe a bit at the fans for jeering. I just can't help to wonder if Lendl felt sorry for Michael and took it easy on him when Michael came down with the lengthy cramps in the 4th and 5th set. Michael was in a lot of pain and could only moonball the ball back, yet Lendl didn't use that opportunity to pounce on it for easy winners. Instead, Lendl gently loft the ball back to him each and every time. In the 5th set, Michael also cost Lendl a game or two by using the time between Lendl's serves to drink a gallon of water and stretching. Lendl had to wait for him even though he's the one serving. I feel that Michael owed Lendl one. If a player is injured or is hurting, the expectation is that in good faith, he should retire from the match.. because It's not fair to the opponent to play when you're hurt. Michael was young here, being only 17 years old and inexperienced at the time, so can't blame him either for wanting to play and pursue his first slam. Nice to see Lendl being a good sport and the umpire too for letting Michael use as much time he needed to reset for each play. After this match, Lendl was a class act. Instead of whining about Michael's continuance on playing, he took the high road and told the press that Michael showed him a lot of courage out there and he understood how tough it was for Michael to play through cramps. Had that been McEnroe or Connors instead of Michael, Lendl wouldn't be as considerate.

​@@jcpenny3606i agree. Despite the Western Media public opinion, Lendl is a very humane human being

Not in a good way though

@@mikkokarkkainen2807 in a great way

damn!Change's a phuqn genius!!!

only if you have a real short memory

ICONIC!!

The final I would have loved to see was Lendl-Leconte in 1986. Leconte was firmly on his way towards victory when he suddenly lost his thread in that semi against Pernfors!

Tough summer for Edberg, losing both the French and Wimbledon final that year but he did win 6 majors. I still wonder how confident Edberg would have been if he played Lendl in that 1989 French final. He won the 2nd and 3rd set again chang, having played a 5 set semi with nine other than Boris Becker.

True on both counts. I'm not a Kyrgios fan at all, but I absolutely believe the dropshot or underhand serve is totally legit. If you stand 30' behind the baseline for a tactical advantage, you can't complain when someone counters it. Also, I'm pretty sure Lendl did it to McEnroe in the early 80's.

Underhand serve is like throwing free throws underhand. It's just not popular and doesn't look pretty but perfectly legit. I rather call it a winning with everything you got.

Lendl had the chance in the fifth set to make the 4:3, but he missed a relatively simple forehand.

Most players would have folded long before the fifth set began. Despite appearing totally dehydrated and cramping, Michael stayed calm, used his intelligence , wisdom, and skill to defeat Lendl.- 99% of the time players in this condition are not able to think straight, let alone hold a racket and move. This says a whole lot about Michael Chang. "winning beautifully!"

Roger is coming in when the server looks up at tossing the ball. its not really the same thing

Well, so good...Some experts afterwards called it "unfair" tactics used by Chang.

What can be "unfair" in stepping up a little bit more into the field...that's laughable. Lendl had all the freedom to make a safe second service. It were only his faults all the way, because he was nearly as exhausted as Chang.

@@happyherbert1984 Well, it was not me calling Chang's tactics (moonballing, underarm-service at a crucial point, stepping up at match point into the field, etc.) unfair, but I have read that there were some tennis experts then who called it that way.

@@MultiStar83 well they shouldn’t be tennis “experts”

That's amazing! Better still, he found strength from something that doesn't even exist. The power of placebo is amazing......

@@danguee1 Amazing that you seem to know for sure. People have been wondering for quite some time..

What Lord? Lord Rayden? Lord of the Rings? Lorde from Southpark?

@saigonbond amazing.. this is what we call as Borg vs McEnroe 2.5

@@elsrdick Lord of the Rings

Now I know never to ask Aggssi for an autograph, thanks for the tip. That's why I’d never ask any public figure for such a favour.

Your right Chang is a real nice guy, I have my own "God loves you" autograph from Mike!

Moi 17 ans .

13 ans à l'époque et étant d'origine asiatique " CHANG" était mon surnom au collège ;=)

Martin Hermann mmmmm Lendl more interesting than Borg and Connors?

@@tennislegendsonlineretrotennis And Um, McEnroe and Gerulaitis?

​@johanna dam He's american.

@@jkjkjk100 Chinese american.

Michael Kießling no just american

@Ike Exeter Some do.

Probably the ugliest match I have watched in some while

Must see Chang SAMPRAS atp

He was a badminton 🏸 player

Very high class, too!

I guess you stopped watching tennis in the 80's then lol

懷念的張德培

C'est plutôt lamentable 👎🏾 c'est de l'anti-jeux ! C'est uniquement pour énerver Lendel . Ce connard de ricain a chercher à énervé Lendel tout au long du 5 eme set , à faire de l'antijeux

@@a.a1898 Ahah, tu l'as trop mauvaise, ça se sent! 🤭 Peu importe ce que tu baves, les connaisseurs apprécient et saluent le "courage" et "l'exploit" de Mickael Chang. Deux mots qui ne te disent probablement rien.. Bisous le rageux 🤣

@@Francois-C compare les deux palmares, il y a pas photo....Lendl est une légende de ce sport.

Du culot, oui, mais je vois pas le rapport avec la maturité.

On a clay court, yes.

@@chrisjohn1284 Ashe-Connors Wimbledon 75, Wilander Lendl 88 US open. Both examples of how intelligent players beat seemingly superior opponents.

Lendl missed an easy forehand in his service game at 3:3 in the fifth set. That forehand would have been a 4:3 for him.

@Lydon Mika I am always playing a single-handed backhand with topspin. This particular shot is not very effective on clay. I think, that Lendl lost his patience and began to think, that he could lose against that kid. Edberg had also not much success with his topspin backhand in the final.

@Lydon Mika Well, I don't know. What I know is, that Vilas also played a very high topspin on his backhand side. Vilas had not much success in 1982 against Wilander. He ran out of gas. And Lendl looked exhausted.

​@Lydon Mika But he played top spin on his backhand all the time, watch the video. He mixed it up with some slices, but most of the time it was top spin. I think the OP pretty much summed it up: Lendl did nothing to win. He was the player with more powerful ground strokes, but when you watch the 5th set, he was merely pushing the ball over the net, rarely finishing a rally with a powerful stroke. Remarkably, that's what the supposedly weaker Chang did - he had a 14-6 edge over Lendl in terms of winners in that 5th set! Edberg played a simlarly dismal 5th set in the final, amassing 24 UEs out of his 62 in the entire match (twice as many as Chang, and six times as many as Chang in the 5th set). So it was an incredible effort by Chang, but his opponents also helped him a lot.

Prior to this match, Lendl had played against Chang in an exhibition in '88. Lendl basically told Chang that he couldn't hurt him from anywhere on the court, even though he could run. Chang took that to heart. And then he hurt him.

@@imightbebiased9311 As a matter of fact, Chang beat Lendl a couple of weeks before this match (63 26 61 in Atlanta if I remember correctly).

@@imightbebiased9311 Lendl had a habit of bullying opponents in the locker room. Sometimes it backfired.

Today also they can handle moonballs, Lendl could not very efficiently. This was exploited by Chang and Wilander at times.

Topspin moonballs are actually much harder to drive without hitting it out for a one hander backhand.

Has nothing to do with beeing a genius or not, but i enjoyed it yea.

lol, you think he invented those? every serious junior must slog through every abusive tactic in the book in every generation.

Michael..for relief, 99% of 17 yrs old boy don't usually achieve anything. All I could think of was making in an honor society at 17.

I was 17 me too, when i saw this match, i was incredulous, it was a strange but epic match.

But poor Chang was not able to duplicate this FO effort for the rest of his career. I mean winning GS events.

You can say the same thing for: roddick, sabatini, novotna and all those one slam wonder.

@@slumnote Poor Andy. He ran into Roger and Rafa, 2 of the 3 best tennis players from his era. But he actually did well against Novak.

1989 was a really long time ago. Soviet Union still existed back then. Chang's family is from Taiwan so Tiananmen had nothing to do with him really.

@@jasonleetaiwan It was something that was on the front page of every diaspora Chinese newspaper in the world, including Taiwanese, Singaporean, Malaysian, etc. Michael himself mentioned it in his victory speech.

that's the difference between Kyrgios and 98%+ of ALL current tour players...

Most famous players are better than Chang who was never number 1 and only won one grand slam tournament in his career, but he was still so darn good. One of the best number 2 players ever if you can say such a thing.

I disagree. This was a changing og the guard. Lendl's technique and racket were antiquated. Chang, with more modern equipment, basically plays what would become modern claycourt tennis, except for the moon balls. Playing with topspin, Taking the ball early, finishing points off at the net when possible.

Boring?