PDA

View Full Version : Stats for 1970 Dunlop International final (Laver-Rosewall)


krosero
01-14-2008, 10:54 PM
This five-set final in March 1970 has a higher rate of winners per game, by Laver, than we have found in three other matches (all in 1969). It also gives us our first stats for Rosewall in a competitive match.

Laver d. Rosewall 3-6, 6-2, 3-6, 6-2, 6-3

I don't know why this match is not listed on the ATP site’s page for their head-to-head.

Laver was 31, Rosewall 35.

The tournament was held in the White City, Sydney. The announcers mentioned that Rosewall had won his first Australian Championships on the same court in 1953.

Laver walked onto the court as the titleholder at all the Slams except the Australian Open, which he (and Ken) had skipped a few months earlier.


All of the following are my own stats/data. Note that my DVD is missing the end of one point, won by Rosewall at 2-all, 30-love in the fifth.

Rosewall had two break points for a 4-2 lead in the fifth set but failed to return Laver's serve each time (once on a second serve). He had 40-15 on his own serve at 3-all but made an unforced error at the baseline, got lobbed on the next point, and made another unforced error trying to get into net; he was broken when a Laver passing shot jumped off the netcord. Ken had made 7 of 8 first serves in that game.

Again Rosewall stood at 40-15 on his serve in the last game of the match, but he made an unforced error at net and then got passed. In that game he made all 8 of his first serves.



Laver served 3 clean aces, 6 service winners, and 16 double faults, including a double on the last point of the third set.

Rosewall served 2 clean aces, 2 service winners, and 4 doubles.

Laver won 162 points, Rosewall 147.

Laver won 90 of 158 points on his service, Rosewall 79 of 151.

Laver won 9 of 16 break points, Rosewall 6 of 15.

Laver got his first serve into play on 6 of 15 break points (or 40%), Rosewall on 11 of 16 (or 69%).


Laver’s service percentage was 51% (or 81 of 158 first serves). By set:

41% (9 of 22)
46% (17 of 37)
48% (15 of 31)
69% (22 of 32)
50% (18 of 36)

Rosewall’s service percentage was 57% (86 of 151 first serves). By set:

63% (27 of 43)
48% (12 of 25)
61% (11 of 18 )
33% (11 of 33)
78% (25 of 32)

Laver served at 69% in the fourth set with only 2 doubles. It turns out that in the same set he also hit 17 winners over the course of just 8 games.


Laver hit 58 clean winners: 9 FH, 18 BH, 14 FHV, 7 BHV, 10 overheads.

Rosewall hit 36 clean winners: 3 FH, 8 BH, 10 FHV, 6 BHV, 9 overheads.

Laver’s rate of winners per game is 1.35 – higher than his rates against Ashe and Newcombe at Wimbledon eight months earlier. (With aces included his rate comes to 1.42, lower than his 1.48 against Newk). However this match had an average of 7.2 points per game, compared to 6.2 in the Wimbledon final; so Laver’s rate of winners when that is taken into account is higher in that match than it was against Rosewall.

Laver’s winners by set: 6, 11, 10, 17, 14
Rosewall’s winners by set: 7, 7, 4, 10, 8

It’s curious how in the fifth set each man managed a personal high for the match in ground-stroke winners – but all their groundstroke winners in that set were from the backhand. Laver had 9 fifth-set winners off that side, Rosewall 4.

Laver again is nicely balanced in his winners, with 31 from volleys/smashes and 27 from ground strokes.

Laver returned Rosewall’s first serve three times with clean winners from the BH. He also got a FH winner off Rosewall’s second serve. The backhands were passes.

In addition, Laver had one BH lob winner and 20 other passing shots: 7 FH’s and 13 BH’s (including the lucky netcord BH mentioned above).

Laver made the only baseline-to-baseline winner that I noticed in the match, a BH in the fifth set.

Rosewall returned Laver's first serve for clean winners twice with his BH and once with his FH; the numbers were identical on Laver's second serve. That's a total of 6 winners, all passes.

In addition, Rosewall had one BH lob winner and only 3 other passing shots (all BH's).

BeHappy
01-14-2008, 11:10 PM
wow!

could you please upload just one of your rosewall/laver match ups?, when you're not busy with something else of course.

urban
01-15-2008, 10:11 AM
I have given my impressions on the match some months ago in another thread. Two stats stand out imo: the numbers of double faults, Laver made. Partly due to back trouble, Laver's serve went a bit off in the 70s, resulting in doubles. The second is the number of backhand winners. It shows imo, that Laver's topspin and slice backhand in his prime could topple even the famous Rosewall backhand. Maybe Muscle's backhand was more consistent and accurate over a long period, but Laver's probably was more deadly and deceiving, because Laver could hide the direction until the last moment of impact.

Moose Malloy
01-16-2008, 09:45 AM
Here's what Newcombe said about Laver in a 1974 issue of Sports Illustrated:

"He's lost confidence in his serve. Once he lost confidence in his first serve, that put so much pressure on his second, he lost confidence there, too. The Americans understood that before we did, because Rocket was one of us & we respected him so. Riessen, Smith, Lutz- all those guys were attcking him off his serve before we understood. Rocket looks in pain now when he has to serve. And you can see the jealousy in his eyes out there, because he was No. 1, and that was very important to him- much more than it is to me- and we took that thing away from him."

hoodjem
01-16-2008, 03:09 PM
It shows imo, that Laver's topspin and slice backhand in his prime could topple even the famous Rosewall backhand.

This is saying something, considering that Rosewall's backhand is one of the most fabled shots in tennis history.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think Muscles ever hit a topspin backhand. My recollection is that it was mostly a skidding slice and occasionally flat, but never topspin.

What does this match show?

krosero
01-16-2008, 03:46 PM
This is saying something, considering that Rosewall's backhand is one of the most fabled shots in tennis history.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think Muscles ever hit a topspin backhand. My recollection is that it was mostly a skidding slice and occasionally flat, but never topspin.

What does this match show?It's not something I was looking for, and since I've never seen him play before I'm not sure exactly what to look for. I don't recall any topspin backhand. His backhand looks subtle; it's not an obvious slice like Graf's. Sometimes with his follow-through it looks almost like a flat shot, but again, I wasn't looking at it carefully.

krosero
01-16-2008, 03:53 PM
It shows imo, that Laver's topspin and slice backhand in his prime could topple even the famous Rosewall backhand. Maybe Muscle's backhand was more consistent and accurate over a long period, but Laver's probably was more deadly and deceiving, because Laver could hide the direction until the last moment of impact.With his strong wrist he seems to have been able to pull the shot crosscourt at the last moment.

And yes, his BH produced more winners in the match than any other shot between the two men. He had half of his backhand winners in the fifth set (as did Rosewall).

krosero
01-16-2008, 04:21 PM
Partly due to back trouble, Laver's serve went a bit off in the 70s, resulting in doubles. What I wonder is when this back trouble might have begun -- and what might have been other contributing factors to the decline in his play (apart from age). After this match he does mention having a five-month newborn, and that he's looking ahead to cutting back his schedule.

I wonder if anything was going on with him generally, or with his back and serve specifically, when he lost that five-set exhibition match to Gonzales at Madison Square Garden, eight weeks before the Rosewall match.

And I hope someday that match turns up somewhere, so we can look at the stats.

urban
01-17-2008, 12:23 AM
There were some reasons, why Laver lost his grip on the majors in the early 70s. After his Grand Slam, he didn't really focus on the majors, he played only 6 overall 1970 to 74, partly due to promotional troubles between ITF and WCT. Now in his thirties, he went for the money, which was now real money, and played way too much, over 100-125 singles matches from 69 to 71. Going by todays points race standards, he remained the leading player in 70 and even in 71.
For the dollar, he also played with 3 different rackets in Europe, USA and Australia. Since 1971, his back trouble begun, and since 1972 he reduced his schedule to half or 2 thirds of a season. His problems with the serve are also mentioned by Newcombe in his autobiography.

hoodjem
04-12-2008, 08:25 AM
For the dollar, he also played with 3 different rackets in Europe, USA and Australia.

Can anyone comment on this?

I'd heard that he played with a Chemold metal racquet, that hurt his game because it was a piece of junk.

urban
04-12-2008, 10:33 AM
Hoodjem, as far as i know, Laver played in the US with a golden Chemold aluminium racket since 1970/71. I seemed to be quite fragile and could break into pieces, as even Borg stated in his book (with Gene Scott). Stolle tells a story, that Laver threw his alu rackets into a lake in 1972.In Europe, Laver played with a wooden Donnay racket. Since late 1971 he returned to his old Dunlop Maxplys, which he painted over. It was McCormack, who forced these contracts. John Barrett wrote, that Laver gave up his Stradivari, when he gave up his Maxply for the Dollar. Borg played with different rackets, too (Donnay in Europe, Bancroft in the US), but at least they were all wooden.

CyBorg
04-12-2008, 02:04 PM
Thanks Krosero. May I ask where you acquired the match?

krosero
04-12-2008, 05:25 PM
Thanks Krosero. May I ask where you acquired the match?I don't think a link will stay but you can Google Rick Sasha.

jeffreyneave
04-13-2008, 08:45 AM
I thought laver used his metal chelmford racket in Europe in 1970/71. Pictures I have seen of him showing playing with the Chelmford at Wimbledon. Barrett and Grey partly blamed his poor Wimbledon loss to Taylor on his new metal racket. I've also read by late '71 he was playing with his old wooden racket and painting it over with the chelmford markings. From 1972 onwards he seem to always play with a wooden racket.


jeffrey

urban
04-13-2008, 09:50 AM
Yes Jeffrey, from pictures i think in 1971 he played with the alu racket at Wimbedon, which he used in the US, but in 1970 he played with a white and black Donnay wood racket at Wimbledon. There is a good book by John McPhee on Wimbledon (with pictures of the famous Life photographer Eisenstaedt). The text covers the 1970 Wimbledon, but in the pictures the 1971 version (there you see Laver with a metal racket).

hoodjem
04-13-2008, 10:24 AM
Was it Chemold or Chelmford?

Borg played with different rackets, too (Donnay in Europe, Bancroft in the US), but at least they were all wooden.

It would seem that Borg has much better success with his two wooden racquets. At least with Bancroft and Donnay, there is a tradition of quality, and they know how to make decent racquets.

krosero
10-31-2009, 09:07 PM
I've made a highlight clip of this match for YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8IJ0F01IiU.

I tried to make the ball show up as crisply as possible, though the original source goes faint around 4 minutes into the clip.

And I had a problem with my file around the beginning of the fifth set, so I was unable to include one point where Laver falls on his knees and stabs at a backhand (winning the point).

pc1
11-01-2009, 04:04 AM
I've made a highlight clip of this match for YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8IJ0F01IiU.

I tried to make the ball show up as crisply as possible, though the original source goes faint around 4 minutes into the clip.

And I had a problem with my file around the beginning of the fifth set, so I was unable to include one point where Laver falls on his knees and stabs at a backhand (winning the point).

Krosero,

Wow, I always wanted to see some of this match. Fantastic rallies. Thanks for putting it on.

Was it Chemold or Chelmford?


I believe it was Chemold. I had the racket and it's the worst racket of all time. If Laver's the GOAT, this racket is the WOAT (Worst of All Time.) It's probably one of the reasons Laver started to have some more losses in the 1970's, aside from the fact obviously that he was getting older and was declining.

http://woodtennis.ecrater.com/product.php?pid=3559872

What I wonder is when this back trouble might have begun -- and what might have been other contributing factors to the decline in his play (apart from age). After this match he does mention having a five-month newborn, and that he's looking ahead to cutting back his schedule.

I wonder if anything was going on with him generally, or with his back and serve specifically, when he lost that five-set exhibition match to Gonzales at Madison Square Garden, eight weeks before the Rosewall match.

And I hope someday that match turns up somewhere, so we can look at the stats.

It was clearly in the early 1970's when Laver had the back problems. When Laver was dominated by Stan Smith (very odd to write that Laver was dominated by anyone) in 1973 during the WCT tour one of the major reasons I believe was the back problems Laver was having.

Laver got his revenge on Smith later that year during the Davis Cup in which Laver was magnificent and destroyed Smith in four sets. While the Aussies won that Davis Cup final easily by 5-0 the competition was very memorable for a number of matches. The matches started off with an unbelievable match between Newcombe and Smith which Newcombe, as he always seemed to defeated Smith in five sets. Also if memory serves, the doubles match of the new team of Laver and Newcombe against Smith and Van Dillen had the Aussie team crushing the excellent American pair in three sets. That wasn't a big deal but what stands out for me in that match was the awe I felt in watching the Aussies play. I felt at the time that the doubles play of Laver and Newcombe was the finest I had ever seen. Newcombe in his book mentioned that he told Laver to really go for it on his backhand return against Stan Smith, who was serving. According to Newcombe he could barely see the blur when Laver returned the ball on the backhand side. It was the best backhand return Newcombe had ever seen and it also perhaps demoralized Van Dillen and Smith.

I hope someone finds the video of those matches.

urban
11-01-2009, 04:43 AM
Thanks Krosero for putting this on you tube, although i have some trouble on my computer, to get the film running, especially the part after 4 minutes. I bought the video a couple of years ago from a British seller. It completely different to the Laver-Roche match from 1969 on you tube, when there were only short points on the fast grass. Here we have exceptional long rallies, with both players covering all parts and every inch of the court. That's real all court tennis. Under the impression of Laver's strong backhand returns, Rosewall stayed back often on his second serve, sometimes even on his first serve. Its nice to see the clever maneouvering of Rosewall, who often plays to the wrong foot, not into the open court, but into the area, where the opponent is coming from.
As far as i know, Laver's back problems began in the early 70s. I know, that he was rushed to a hospital during the WCT event at Chicago in spring 1971, because he had back spasms and was unable to walk or run, and he had to cancel taht and some other events. It got worse in the autumn season in 1972. Yes, pc 1, i remember Newcombe's comment on that doubles match in 1973. I think, it was only the second point in the whole match, when Laver's backhand cracker stunned the Americans. Laver had beaten his nemesis Tom Gorman in the second singles after a 1-2 deficit in sets, winning the last two 3 and 1.

krosero
11-01-2009, 11:35 AM
Thanks Krosero for putting this on you tube, although i have some trouble on my computer, to get the film running, especially the part after 4 minutes. I bought the video a couple of years ago from a British seller. It completely different to the Laver-Roche match from 1969 on you tube, when there were only short points on the fast grass. Here we have exceptional long rallies, with both players covering all parts and every inch of the court. That's real all court tennis. Under the impression of Laver's strong backhand returns, Rosewall stayed back often on his second serve, sometimes even on his first serve. Its nice to see the clever maneouvering of Rosewall, who often plays to the wrong foot, not into the open court, but into the area, where the opponent is coming from. You're right the two matches do look different, whether from Rosewall's style, or from different camera angles, or the speed of the court. When it's said that Australia had fast grass courts, well that Laver/Roche court does look incredibly fast: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHaN2h21ANs.

krosero
11-01-2009, 11:50 AM
Thanks Krosero for putting this on you tube, although i have some trouble on my computer, to get the film running, especially the part after 4 minutes. I bought the video a couple of years ago from a British seller. It completely different to the Laver-Roche match from 1969 on you tube, when there were only short points on the fast grass. Here we have exceptional long rallies, with both players covering all parts and every inch of the court. That's real all court tennis. Under the impression of Laver's strong backhand returns, Rosewall stayed back often on his second serve, sometimes even on his first serve. Its nice to see the clever maneouvering of Rosewall, who often plays to the wrong foot, not into the open court, but into the area, where the opponent is coming from. I'm not sure why YouTube clips sometimes load slowly, but it's happened to me too. I'm running Vista and my browser is Firefox. Sometimes when I use Internet Explorer (on Windows XP) I have a little more trouble, though it's hard to compare. I've heard a really fast browser is Google's Chrome.

When a video doesn't load smoothly, I usually just start over. I close the browser, go back to the clip, pause it as soon as it starts, and wait until it loads completely before watching it.

Some friends have told me to upload short clips because longer ones are hard to load. This clip happens to be 2 GB, right at the maximum of what YouTube allows for regular users. But I've found movie-length clips of an hour and half or more that I can play just fine. And sometimes really short clips will stall anyway. So whether the size of clips have anything to do with poor playback, I don't know.

pc1
11-01-2009, 05:04 PM
I'm not sure why YouTube clips sometimes load slowly, but it's happened to me too. I'm running Vista and my browser is Firefox. Sometimes when I use Internet Explorer (on Windows XP) I have a little more trouble, though it's hard to compare. I've heard a really fast browser is Google's Chrome.

When a video doesn't load smoothly, I usually just start over. I close the browser, go back to the clip, pause it as soon as it starts, and wait until it loads completely before watching it.

Some friends have told me to upload short clips because longer ones are hard to load. This clip happens to be 2 GB, right at the maximum of what YouTube allows for regular users. But I've found movie-length clips of an hour and half or more that I can play just fine. And sometimes really short clips will stall anyway. So whether the size of clips have anything to do with poor playback, I don't know.

Krosero,

Thanks again for that new Laver-Rosewall clip. That's another new video for me to watch while I'm working on paperwork.

hoodjem
02-11-2010, 05:47 PM
Does anyone know the draw for this tournament?

Did Ashe play?

pc1
02-11-2010, 05:50 PM
Does anyone know the draw for this tournament?

Did Ashe play?

Laver was top seed. Here are some of the players, Nastase, Okker, Dibley, Taylor, Lutz, Arthur Ashe, Rosewall, Sedgman, Stan Smith, Riessen, Gonzalez, Emerson, Anderson, Ralston,Gimeno, Newcombe.

That is an awesome field.

http://www.itftennis.com/mens/tournaments/drawsheetbyround.asp?tournament=1010003294&event=

hoodjem
02-11-2010, 05:57 PM
That is an awesome field.

http://www.itftennis.com/mens/tournaments/drawsheetbyround.asp?tournament=1010003294&event=

Wow!!! You are right.
Laver
Ashe
Rosewall
Gimeno
Nastase
Pancho
Emmo
Sedgman (holy cow?)
Newcombe
Ralston
Stan Smith
Tiriac
Stolle
Okker

This is a ferocious field!

pc1
02-11-2010, 06:02 PM
Wow!!! You are right.
Laver
Ashe
Rosewall
Gimeno
Nastase
Pancho
Emmo
Sedgman (holy cow?)
Newcombe
Ralston
Stan Smith
Tiriac
Stolle
Okker

This is a ferocious field!

If any one of them won the tournament, that person would be a worthy champion.

In the Old Pro Tour, Laver used to have to defeat greats virtually every week to try to win a tournament, so I don't understand how some people can put down Laver winning these tournaments and discounting the tournament victories.

hoodjem
02-11-2010, 06:12 PM
If any one of them won the tournament, that person would be a worthy champion.

In the Old Pro Tour, Laver used to have to defeat greats virtually every week to try to win a tournament, so I don't understand how some people can put down Laver winning these tournaments and discounting the tournament victories.
I see at least three GOATs there. Throw in Nastase, Newcombe, and Smith and you have a terrific draw.

This is a great tournament.

pc1
02-11-2010, 06:19 PM
I'm not sure why YouTube clips sometimes load slowly, but it's happened to me too. I'm running Vista and my browser is Firefox. Sometimes when I use Internet Explorer (on Windows XP) I have a little more trouble, though it's hard to compare. I've heard a really fast browser is Google's Chrome.

When a video doesn't load smoothly, I usually just start over. I close the browser, go back to the clip, pause it as soon as it starts, and wait until it loads completely before watching it.

Some friends have told me to upload short clips because longer ones are hard to load. This clip happens to be 2 GB, right at the maximum of what YouTube allows for regular users. But I've found movie-length clips of an hour and half or more that I can play just fine. And sometimes really short clips will stall anyway. So whether the size of clips have anything to do with poor playback, I don't know.

Krosero,

I understand the fastest browser is Opera.

krosero
12-08-2011, 02:01 PM
Laver won 56 of 81 points on 1st serve (69%) and 34 of 77 on 2nd serve (44%).

Rosewall won 50 of 86 points on 1st serve (58%) and 29 of 65 on 2nd serve (45%). He dropped to 44% success on 1st serve points in the final set, and in that set his success on second serve was actually higher (57%). At the end of the match he seemed tentative with his serve.


Success on serve in rallies of 2 or more good shots (that is, whenever the service returns were good):

Laver 55% on first serve (31/56) and 44% on second (21/48 ).
Rosewall 48% on first serve (33/69) and 44% on second (25/57).

So the only serve that remained an advantage when it was returned was Laver’s first serve.


Laver missed 19 service returns (15 on 1st serves): 10 FH and 9 BH. He missed 8 returns in the 1st set but immediately cut that down; he missed only 1 return in the second set.

Rosewall missed 35 service returns (22 on 1st serves): 15 FH and 20 BH


Laver served on 158 points and 38 serves did not come back: 24.1%
Rosewall served on 151 points and 21 serves did not come back: 13.9%

Limpinhitter
12-08-2011, 03:32 PM
Excellent! I hadn't seen this! Amazing match and fantastic win for Laver over a still brutally competitive and talented Rosewall.

A question for me is, how fast was the court compared to other grass courts? From the video, it seems very fast. Some shots that don't seem to be hit particularly hard just fly off the court into the backstop. On the other hand, they both stay back more than you would expect on a fast grass court.

timnz
12-08-2011, 04:00 PM
In my view it was the true australian open that year. No one can say the australian open had anywhere near the field of the dunlop. And ashe the winner of it played the dunlop.

Question for you? If laver had lost this but played and won the australian open that year, would anyone be questioning his number 1 status for 1970? after all he would have won a grand slam tournament! But as you have seen winning the dunlop was a far greater achievement than winning the australian open that year.

pc1
12-08-2011, 04:35 PM
In my view it was the true australian open that year. No one can say the australian open had anywhere near the field of the dunlop. And ashe the winner of it played the dunlop.

Question for you? If laver had lost this but played and won the australian open that year, would anyone be questioning his number 1 status for 1970? after all he would have won a grand slam tournament! But as you have seen winning the dunlop was a far greater achievement than winning the australian open that year.

You make an excellent argument for Laver being number one for 1970.

Incidentally I love watching the highlights of this match. Thanks Krosero.

Moose Malloy
12-08-2011, 04:38 PM
In my view it was the true australian open that year. No one can say the australian open had anywhere near the field of the dunlop. And ashe the winner of it played the dunlop.

Question for you? If laver had lost this but played and won the australian open that year, would anyone be questioning his number 1 status for 1970? after all he would have won a grand slam tournament! But as you have seen winning the dunlop was a far greater achievement than winning the australian open that year.


I believe he wasn't allowed to play the Australian Open in 1970, due to being under contract with the NTL(which included many other Australian players)

Pro tennis was incredibly ****ed through much of the early to mid 70s.

To quote Newcombe, how can you call yourself a major if you ban players from playing it?

And Laver wasn't allowed to play the French either in '70(WCT)

So he couldn't defend 2 of the majors he won in '69.

So much for the 'Open Era' that most fans today are led to believe started in '68.

krosero
12-08-2011, 07:20 PM
A question for me is, how fast was the court compared to other grass courts? From the video, it seems very fast. Some shots that don't seem to be hit particularly hard just fly off the court into the backstop. On the other hand, they both stay back more than you would expect on a fast grass court.During Laver's marathon win over Roche at the '69 AO, the Australian commentators talked about the various AO sites. The '69 AO was played at the Milton Courts in Brisbane. The commentators said that those courts always played slower than the Kooyong, Adelaide and White City venues. (The Dunlop was at White City.) They said this allowed the players at Milton Courts to play groundstrokes with more freedom.