Mats Wilander on Yannick Noah epic at 1983 French Open: 'I lost a final, but I won a friend' - Legends' Voice

When Mats Wilander met Yannick Noah on 5 June 1983 to face the local hero and the whole of France in the final of the French Open, he seemed the logical favourite. At least that's how he saw himself.

As the defending champion, winner of 36 of his last 37 matches on clay, the Swede could not see himself as anything but a winner.

But he didn't see what was coming. Attacked and tactically dominated, a first for him - especially on clay - Wilander lost in three sets.

Forty years later, he looks back on a day he has not forgotten.

To me, Yannick was a complete stranger in 1983. I knew Ivan Lendl because we met in 1978 in Czechoslovakia where he won the under-18s and I won the under-14s. Of course, I also saw him play the final against Bjorn Borg in 1981 in Roland-Garros. So, he was around and I played him enough to know him. Yannick was totally unfamiliar to me as a tennis player. He didn't play any juniors, he played very differently, too. Everything about him was different.

Yannick was even more unfamiliar as a private person because I'd never ever said a word to him. It did loosen up a little bit for me when we played in Lisbon (April 1983, in the final). Because Yannick was there with his girlfriend at the time. I don't think he had a coach with him. So, she's in the stands. I kind of thought it was pretty cool – for some reason, cool was very important for me in those days – we're here, fighting, playing a tough match and his girlfriend is sunbathing in the stands. I think she even had a bathing suit on. I remember her clapping a little bit and hanging on. I thought 'my god, this is so relaxed'. So I learned a little bit from him there but, no, I had really no idea who Yannick really was.

Before the French Open final, it wasn't really good news for me that Yannick beat Lendl because early on, when I played Lendl on clay, I honestly didn't have those Lendl fears in those days. We played in the 4th round in 1982 in Roland-Garros and I won in 5 sets, then we played in Barcelona the same year after the US Open and I think I won in two sets. I don't know, I thought that he wasn't trying that hard. He was a little bit intimidated, or afraid, or something, of me keeping the ball in play.

But I didn't really mind Yannick either because when we played in Lisbon in the final, it was very hot and dry and the court was pretty fast. He had match points but I managed to win so it was a big boost in confidence. He beat me in Hamburg, but it was so heavy and it was such a bad surface for me against Yannick because his slice doesn't bounce at all. So I was like 'OK, Lisbon is more like the French Open than Hamburg and I won in Lisbon'. And then, in Paris, it's five sets. I'm not going to get tired. Yannick will at some point because he's gonna have to work a lot by coming to the net, slicing, running and whatever. So, I felt very, very much like the favourite.

So I didn't really have any thoughts that I wasn't going to win this match. Of course, you know there's always a chance. But it never entered my mind. I thought 'whatever he does, I have an answer', and we're playing five sets. And I think that was my problem. I didn't have a solution until the problem arose. Yannick played differently, in front of 15,000 fans rooting for him. I did not have any solutions in the first hour and by the time I found them, it was too late.

We have to remember that when I played tennis on clay, especially in five sets in Roland-Garros, a lot of points looked exactly the same. It was trying to hit a high forehand to the backhand. Either the opponent would hit a slice, try to come in or sort of defending, then I go to their forehand, make them run a little bit and then back again: backhand, forehand. I'm gonna repeat the same pattern, over and over. I had the key to the match, always. That's what I felt with Yannick. But only for a very, very short time.

I don't remember exactly when I felt 'Oh my god, I don't know what to do', but he never used to do that. He was playing differently, his forehand was somewhat better, he was hitting it and coming to the net after. I thought he was going to play it deep, but he wasn't, he was hitting it short on the service line. So early on, he threw a lot of different looks at me and I couldn't come up with a solution that made sense to me. I was simply not ready.

What made me the most confused, is that he wasn't only looking to hit the slice with his backhand and come to the net. No, he also made serve-volley, or came to the net after a high forehand. So, the combination of all these different ways of winning points for him, they happened so quickly in the match that it wasn't one problem, there were five or six tactical problems before I even knew what hit me. Then you put on the top of that the crowd. Already in the warmup, for what I remember, it was going 'OUUUUUUUII' as soon as Yannick hit the ball. Man, what is going on there? Is it Davis Cup or something? There were too many elements of surprises I was not prepared to solve.

I was definitely overconfident. We're playing on a clay court in 1983. The player that would come to the net often doesn't exist. The person that is going to hit slice backhands and high forehands and come to the net against me, was not even born. But I realised, too late, that Yannick was different because he was athletic. The players who tried to come to the net on a slow court were not athletic. Yannick was. Super athletic.

So, the lob was not a shot you could count on. The passing shot had to be so precise and very hard because he was so big and flexible. And then he had good hands when the ball was far away from him, whereas lots of players had good hands only when the ball was close to them, like John McEnroe. But Yannick did great when he was stretched. So anything I did well, he had an answer to physically. And that never happened to me before.

I wonder why I didn't realise that earlier. There had been Lisbon and Hamburg, sure, but I told myself, 'that was the conditions, the three sets'. So yes, I was way overconfident. But I wouldn't say it was because of that. I would say that Yannick's level was so much higher than I had ever seen him play before and, I mean, maybe since then, even if he played a lot of great matches after that of course. And honestly, once I figured out the solution, I became a spectator, just happy to finally give him a match. I never felt I was better than him in the final. I felt that he was way better than me in the beginning. That was a very uncomfortable feeling.

During the match, I wasn't disappointed that I was not winning. I was more confused that I couldn't come up with an answer. Normally, when I was playing big matches, I would come up with an answer. It doesn't mean I would win the match, but I was able to find some kind of an answer. For example, against McEnroe, I would try to come to the net a little more and a little bit sooner so that he doesn't always come to the net before me. Same with Stefan Edberg. I always relied on my ability to find solutions to feel somewhat more comfortable.

But not against Yannick, that day. I couldn't understand when he was going deep, when he was going short, when he was going for the drop shot. It was very confusing. He could play five consecutive points and propose five different options. And in those days, no one played like that. It was new to me, especially on a clay court.

Yannick once said that if he hadn't won in three sets, he would have lost in five. But I don't know about that. It's very difficult to hypothetically say it of course. Let's say Yannick was feeling tired. He needs 15 or 20 minutes of doing nothing. So suddenly I win the 4th set 6-1. It's two sets all.

But now he's fresh again and I'm going to be more nervous because I've come back and I've always felt if you come back from two sets to love the pressure is on you. Most probably the fifth set would have looked more like the second, which was close. But knowing myself, I would have probably played once again a little bit more not to lose than trying to win because it's worked for so many tournaments for me. And I have the feeling the same picture would have been painted by Yannick. So, he most probably wins in five.

The handshake with Yannick is most probably the worst I've ever had on a tennis court. We come up to the net and Yannick - as he's shaking my hand or just touching it - starts climbing over the net, climbing over to my side, and his eyes are not on me, he's not really paying attention to me…. They're past me. And I'm like, it doesn't matter.

Afterwards, I realised I heard a thump behind me, and I wasn't sure what it was. It was Yannick's father that had jumped and fell onto the court. That was the thump. He apologised to me about the handshake. I'm like, 'I don't even remember Yannick'!

Anyway, he hugs his father, and normally at a Grand Slam event, or any event that you've seen on TV, there's only the player. There are no fans jumping onto the court. But here the fans jumped on the court. So there were, I don't know, literally 50 people around Yannick. To me, it was just 'Oh, my God, I can't believe what I'm witnessing. This is too cool'.

Of course, I'd already won it the year before, so the defeat didn't hurt at all at that moment, and I ended up finding out where Yannick was celebrating this win. Because I wanted to go and see what he was doing and what he looked like. So I end up going to the bar, where I knew they were going eventually. The only problem was they only came about 3:00 or 4:00 in the morning. I was there for a while waiting, and eventually they came ... And then I just sort of stared a little bit, because I was intimidated, impressed by Yannick Noah and the whole situation.

But I've never, ever been upset about that loss. Not during, not after, not now. And I'm very happy to be part of the celebration that happens when Yannick Noah celebrations come around. It's 20 years ago, 30 years ago, 40 years ago, I don't care. I'm always the first person to be there.

Yannick's victory was a great moment, but it wasn't a big surprise to me and probably to most of the other players. Remember that Lendl had not won a Grand Slam at that time. He won his first in 1984 at the French Open. Yes, Ivan played the final in Paris in 1981 and also at the US Open in '82. But for me, they were the same. They were four years older than me which for me meant I had a lot of respect [for them] even if they were my opponents. I was trying to play my forehand like Lendl and my slice backhand like Yannick Noah. And then the next day, I'm playing against them! It was kind of weird.

So they were like heroes, idols, people I looked up to. And they really were at the same level. In '83, there was no difference between Lendl and Noah. It was only afterwards we realised that Lendl became quite a lot better on different surfaces than Yannick. But it took a few years before we understood. In '83, we thought Yannick could be the next No. 1 in the world and there is no reason why he couldn't have been. At the time, it was McEnroe and Connors, the two of them, and then it was the three of us; Yannick, Ivan and I. We were the big five. So, it wasn't weird to see Yannick crowned in the French Open.

His career and his life changed after he won the French Open. I think, at least that's what I've always heard, that the upheaval was such that he had to leave France and move to New York. He decided to leave because it became impossible for him to continue living normally in Paris. Yannick loved New York, but maybe he wanted to escape from something too.

But what you have to understand is that Yannick didn't win a Grand Slam. He won the French Open. That's very different. It's an absolute dream, there can be nothing above that for a French player. For me, winning the French Open had never been a goal. Not even to win a Grand Slam. My only ambition was to become a professional and to survive, have enough results to have enough money to continue my career and travel the world doing this sport that I loved so much. That was my dream. When I won my first Grand Slam, it didn't fundamentally change my approach. But I didn't triumph in Sweden, in front of my audience, with a whole country behind me.

But I experienced the same phenomenon as Yannick, when I set myself a concrete goal for the only time in my life and achieved it. For me, it was the world No. 1 spot. The day I reached it, I found myself empty, just like Yannick in 1983. I never managed to find a new form of motivation to keep training so hard. I never won Wimbledon, so that could have been a source of motivation, but no, I was so focused on becoming No. 1 that nothing else could motivate me after that.

That was my big mistake; making the ranking my goal before the quest for Wimbledon. If I had to do it again, I would change that. When you have such a goal, which captures all your attention, it's like a balloon; when it explodes, there's nothing left. So I can fully understand how Yannick felt when he won the French Open. It's like an Olympic title at home. Yannick had reached the top of the mountain. From there, there was only one place he could go and that was down.

That day, I lost a final but more than anything, I won a friend. That's for sure. I didn't realise immediately that we were going to be friends going forward. At the time, I won an experience. If I win that match, there is no way I would have changed my game style as much as I did for the next 4-5 years. Why should I? I won another slam by never coming to the net, by just keeping the ball in play, no slice backhand.

I realised how boring my style on clay was...even to me. Yannick was so fun. I didn't have to hit the ball harder, I just had to come to the net at the right time, make some serve and volley. He literally kind of showed me 'hey, you can play like this too'. Because of that, I had so much more fun I believe in the next 4-5 years. Did I win the US Open final against Lendl with 1200 backhand slices thanks to the final with Yannick? 100 per cent yes. So there are so many positive things I took from that match.

But of course, winning a friend is much more important than learning about tennis. It turned out that we have quite a lot of things in common. Some of this is talking. Just talking. Having discussions. I felt it was fun to talk with Yannick. Going out for a beer. In the end, we had so much fun over the years. I know Yannick has had a lot of fun with a lot of people, and so have I, but not more than with Yannick to be honest.

It's not like I was going out every week to Studio 54, but anytime I was at the same place as Yannick and we had an opportunity, we had a lot of nice evenings and jam sessions at the player's party. I don't want to go home, he doesn't want to quit, until it's like 'Yannick you know, no one's really here anymore' and he answered 'Come on, let's play one more song, let's go!'

I know music became his life, it hasn't been mine, but with Yannick, it always felt very natural to do something I was really uncomfortable with, which is playing guitar and singing in front of people. But never next to Yannick, because he would always cover for me. If I was singing a song and I didn't remember the lyrics, I knew he was going to be there, he would cover me and give me a chance to kind of hide away a little bit by taking the microphone and be the centre of attention again, because he was so comfortable, and I was not. But suddenly, I was gaining some confidence with him.

He made you feel so relaxed in the limelight, in the spotlight. And I never felt like that by playing music with John McEnroe or Pat Cash. With Yannick, it was always a team. You always felt like you were doing it together. He didn't give a sh*t about what people thought. He didn't care at all. He was just having a good time and he made me feel like, you know, this is so much fun, I would do this even if I was alone. It was just so relaxing being with Yannick.

- - -

Stream the 2023 French Open live on discovery+, the Eurosport app and at eurosport.com