PDA

View Full Version : Pancho Segura shares his thoughts!


dirkgnuf
04-18-2009, 02:17 PM
Not quite sure where to post this, but a fascinating interview with Pancho from tennisweek.

His insights into his rivals of the day, as well as his thoughts towards the current state of tennis is interesting.
Have a look!


http://blog.tennisweek.com/?p=487#more-487

BTURNER
04-18-2009, 04:41 PM
when you are posting an in depth interview with Pancho like this one , you can post it anywhere you bloody please! Thanks

pc1
04-18-2009, 04:59 PM
I saw this a couple of days ago. Great interview. Great that you posted it. I ordered the book. It's not available in any local store near me.

hoodjem
04-18-2009, 05:14 PM
Segura is a brilliant tactician. One of the great tennis minds.

The-Champ
04-18-2009, 08:00 PM
Segura is a brilliant tactician. One of the great tennis minds.


he said, Venus and Serena are better than Navratilova. Do you agree with him?

dirkgnuf
04-18-2009, 08:12 PM
His credentials as a tactician and great tennis minds isn't up for debate because that's bee well established.

Take his Quote in CONTEXT:

Tennis Week: Who was the best woman player you saw?

Pancho Segura: Martina Navratilova was the best, but Venus and Serena are better than Navratilova. They are the best athletes among the women.

Sounds to me like he's conceding that while he feels Navratilova is the best he ever saw, he realizes tat Venus and Serena are in an athletic class of their own when it comes to Women's tennis, which makes them quite good.

If his answer had been,
Venus and Serena are the best, Navratilova can't compare,
then this would be a different context from what he really answered.
Read into the questions.

The-Champ
04-18-2009, 08:40 PM
His credentials as a tactician and great tennis minds isn't up for debate because that's bee well established.

Take his Quote in CONTEXT:

Tennis Week: Who was the best woman player you saw?

Pancho Segura: Martina Navratilova was the best, but Venus and Serena are better than Navratilova. They are the best athletes among the women.

Sounds to me like he's conceding that while he feels Navratilova is the best he ever saw, he realizes tat Venus and Serena are in an athletic class of their own when it comes to Women's tennis, which makes them quite good.

If his answer had been,
Venus and Serena are the best, Navratilova can't compare,
then this would be a different context from what he really answered.
Read into the questions.

Or maybe he meant that Venus and Serena are better than Navratilova because they are more athletic than her?


You can basically twist it any way you want. This is clearly a question of pragmatics.

AndrewD
04-19-2009, 04:32 AM
when you are posting an in depth interview with Pancho like this one , you can post it anywhere you bloody please! Thanks

Only if you read his comments with a very, very critical eye. Pancho knows tennis inside and out BUT only Riggs, Gonzalez and Kramer were less reliable witnesses.

pc1
04-19-2009, 06:26 AM
Or maybe he meant that Venus and Serena are better than Navratilova because they are more athletic than her?


You can basically twist it any way you want. This is clearly a question of pragmatics.

I can tell you for a fact he meant that Venus and Serena at their best is better than Martina. He didn't mean for a career.

hoodjem
04-19-2009, 03:19 PM
he said, Venus and Serena are better than Navratilova. Do you agree with him?
Maybe he meant Venus and Serena both together are better than Navratilova.

In that case I am forced to agree.

But otherwise, no, I think Martina is one of the utimate great of women's tennis--much better than the Williams sisters . . . separately.

pc1
04-19-2009, 05:40 PM
Maybe he meant Venus and Serena both together are better than Navratilova.

In that case I am forced to agree.

But otherwise, no, I think Martina is one of the utimate great of women's tennis--much better than the Williams sisters . . . separately.

I think if you combine the Williams sisters total tournament victories and majors, I don't think that equals Navratilova's yet. lol.

The-Champ
04-19-2009, 05:47 PM
I can tell you for a fact he meant that Venus and Serena at their best is better than Martina. He didn't mean for a career.


That's exactly how I understood it. At their best, the sisters are better.

Frank Silbermann
04-21-2009, 04:02 AM
It meant that Martina had the best tennis skills, but would have lost to the Williams sisters due to their pure physicality. It's like comparing a top-ranked 5'8" professional basketball player from 1945 with a 7 foot tall high school player. Or like comparing an ex-pro tennis player at age seventy with a middling 20-year old college player.

Or like comparing anyone of his era with Pancho Gonzales (whose combination of being both big and fast could not be taught).

joe sch
04-21-2009, 05:23 AM
Not quite sure where to post this, but a fascinating interview with Pancho from tennisweek.

His insights into his rivals of the day, as well as his thoughts towards the current state of tennis is interesting.
Have a look!


http://blog.tennisweek.com/?p=487#more-487

Excellent article/inteview. Sequra never hid the truth like soo many of the past greats that did not want to give a true comparison of the skills of the past greats to todays players. I like his candid comparison of Kramer to Gonzales, two of the greatest ever that Segura played regular.

I really like the below quote which points out the weakness with todays game and all the coaches developing todays players.

"People talk about the equipment, about the surfaces being slower, but there is no reason why you canít attack the second serve, why you canít serve and volley at times. You attack a short ball near mid court so why canít you attack the second serve?"

This is what Roche was unsuccessful with in trying to improve Federer's game, and Connors with Roddick. The greatest tennis coaches are mostly idle now in retirement and many will soon be gone, like Kramer and Sequra. I hope they both live to 100 !

Joe

pc1
04-21-2009, 05:26 AM
According to Amazon I should be getting the book today. After I read it I may give a review of it. I am looking forward to it.

Carlo Giovanni Colussi
04-23-2009, 05:26 AM
According to Amazon I should be getting the book today. After I read it I may give a review of it. I am looking forward to it.

Ah ah:). I've just bought in on Abebooks.com

pc1
04-23-2009, 05:32 AM
Ah ah:). I've just bought in on Abebooks.com

I've glanced at it and it's very interesting. At least from what I've seen. We'll compare notes on it. I hope you enjoy the book.

WARPWOODIE
04-23-2009, 06:36 AM
Great article...very inspiring! Thanks for the link!

larry10s
04-24-2009, 06:03 AM
great article to get inside the head of a legend . thanks for the thread

mikeler
04-24-2009, 07:18 AM
Thanks for that. I enjoy reading articles that discuss the tactics of tennis.

gzhpcu
05-08-2009, 12:27 PM
Just ordered the book. Anyone know if there is any video of Pancho Segura playing? Tried Youtube but found nothing...:(

joe sch
05-08-2009, 05:36 PM
Just ordered the book. Anyone know if there is any video of Pancho Segura playing? Tried Youtube but found nothing...:(

I would also love to see some video of Sequra. He was one of the best players in the world for several decades but seems like no public video action of Pancho. Sorta ironic that he was a commentator on the Court Kings video talking about the 10 greatest players ever upto Lavers era but he was not even shown as an opponent of any these GOATS that he played and sometimes beat.

joe sch
05-08-2009, 05:40 PM
I've glanced at it and it's very interesting. At least from what I've seen. We'll compare notes on it. I hope you enjoy the book.

pc1 and Carlo,

What did you think of the book ?

mikeler
05-08-2009, 05:47 PM
He played at a tournament at my local club almost 45 years ago:

http://www.cityoforlando.net/fpr/net/t_ParkRec.aspx?park=287_3&page=2

gzhpcu
05-08-2009, 09:26 PM
My Dad used to see Pancho Segura practicing with Pancho Gonzales at the Beverly Hills tennis club. Sadly, I never saw any video of him playing, just the usual famous photos of him hitting his famous two-handed forehand.

I started reading the book, and I think it promises to be a great read. Shame that there isn't any similar good biography of Pancho Gonzales.

joe sch
05-09-2009, 06:30 AM
My Dad used to see Pancho Segura practicing with Pancho Gonzales at the Beverly Hills tennis club. Sadly, I never saw any video of him playing, just the usual famous photos of him hitting his famous two-handed forehand.

I started reading the book, and I think it promises to be a great read. Shame that there isn't any similar good biography of Pancho Gonzales.

Pancho Gonzales book "Man with a Racket" is an excellent read. If you read Jack Kramer's "The Game" you must read Pancho's book to get a balanced view of that interesting era leading into open tennis. Im looking forward to Segura's book, as it should be a fair middle grounds between the 2 books mentioned above

Joe

gzhpcu
05-09-2009, 07:36 AM
Joe,
I find the Little Pancho book very good. Really sets you in the mood. Good description of the tough times professional tennis went through. Pancho Segura had a happy-go-lucky nature, which helped him cope with the prejudice that he was confronted with, but defused with his charm, as opposed to the resentful attitude Pancho Gonzales had. Little Pancho and Big Pancho were good friends. Thanks for the Man with the Racket tip. Will order it.

urban
05-09-2009, 08:19 AM
Seems that books of or about players from the 50s and 60s have something of a renaissance. Just saw on tennis gallery, that a new book on Australian doubles expert Ken Fletcher is out. Last year, Abe Segal and Tom Brown edited autobiographies and a new book on John Bromwich was edited. I find this trend nice and asthonishing. Maybe the past greats are more interesting than the new generation.

pc1
05-09-2009, 08:25 AM
Seems that books of or about players from the 50s and 60s have something of a renaissance. Just saw on tennis gallery, that a new book on Australian doubles expert Ken Fletcher is out. Last year, Abe Segal and Tom Brown edited autobiographies and a new book on John Bromwich was edited. I find this trend nice and asthonishing. Maybe the past greats are more interesting than the new generation.

These players are part of the history of tennis and it's interesting to know the little things that happened and why they happened. So much of tennis history is lost and forgotten.

I have to get that new book on Bromwich.

gzhpcu
05-09-2009, 08:37 AM
I read My Life with Lew, the Lew Hoad biography written by his wife, which I enjoyed. A Handful of Summers by Gordon Forbes is also a good 50's nostalgia book. Also the Bobby Riggs autobiography Court Hustler. Not quite as good as the others though IMHO.

joe sch
05-09-2009, 12:22 PM
I read My Life with Lew, the Lew Hoad biography written by his wife, which I enjoyed. A Handful of Summers by Gordon Forbes is also a good 50's nostalgia book. Also the Bobby Riggs autobiography Court Hustler. Not quite as good as the others though IMHO.

I forgot about A Handful of Summers, which is an very interesting read. I did also enjoy Riggs' Court Hustler, especially his boyhood days.

Carlo Giovanni Colussi
05-11-2009, 10:33 PM
pc1 and Carlo,

What did you think of the book ?

Hi,
I haven't much time at this very right moment to post some quotes in that forum so I'll be quick.
I haven't read the book either but I've just cast a glance at it.
I'm a little disappointed because I hoped to discover some new pro results but apparently apart from a match in California that Segura lost 8-6 to Kramer I haven't found any hidden result.
All the tennis results and rankings seem to come from McCauley's book : in particular the author considers the 1953 Paris tournament as a French Pro (as suggested with precaution by McCauley) but in "Tennis de France Janvier 1954" report, this tournament is never referred as the French Pro. That November 1953 event was a 4-man competition exactly similar to the 4-man event held in January 1950 at the same venue, Paris, Palais des Sports, but it wasn't apparently a French Pro.
There is also a confusion in the book because it states that Segura beat Kramer in the 1952 Wembley final though it was in reality Gonzales.
So in terms of tennis results there is no novelty.
But perhaps I will learn some of Segura's thoughts but I'm not very sure because it isn't an autobiography and there are many short summaries of other players' careers.
So wait and see (beforehand I have many other books to read).