kiki
Banned
They are about the same level.Roche had a more complete game but was weak menthally.
Rosewall and Gonzales Careers Official Thread
- Thread starter forzamilan90
- Start date
They are about the same level.Roche had a more complete game but was weak menthally.
NonP
Legend
Gonzales arguably spent more time as the world's no. 1 than anyone else in the history of tennis. That alone is enough to put him in the GOAT equation.
As for Rosewall it depends on how much stock you put in longevity and how you calibrate the majors or their equivalents. Incidentally Pancho is probably his only serious challenger (apart from Tilden) in the former respect.
It's safe to say they both will always be in the discussion.
As for Rosewall it depends on how much stock you put in longevity and how you calibrate the majors or their equivalents. Incidentally Pancho is probably his only serious challenger (apart from Tilden) in the former respect.
It's safe to say they both will always be in the discussion.
Last edited:
kiki, Roche was 20, long before his prime.
When writing about 22: At that time Rosewall won already his fourth major title.
Last edited:
veco, Geneva (winner Gonzalez), French Pro (Rosewall), Wembley (Rosewall), Copenhagen (Gonzalez), Milan (Gonzalez), Vienna (Gonzalez) Pro Challenge Turin (Gonzalez had two wins, Rosewall one win)
veco, I rank Rosewall and Gonzalez equal No.1 for 1961. Gonzalez won the great world tour and won more tournaments, Rosewall won the two biggest events.
veco, I agree. Thus Rosewall won the best claycourt, wood and grasscourt tournament of that year. Not too bad...
yeah,61 is a tough call..i personally give it to gonzales cause i can't help the feeling that he would own rosewall all over again if they went touring head to head that year..
to me 60 and 61 are practically the same.it's interesting cause rosewall did the ''major'' thing both years and somehow he is no1 in 61 cause he dodged the tour in the first half of the year and then basically repeated the 1960 sucess (when most saw him as no2).
1960 - gonzales crushes rosewall hth,then retires and rosewall wins it all
and people still mostly agreed gonzales was no1
1961 - gonzales wins the tour without rosewall,then rosewall wins majors and gonzales wins the rest.and rosewall is no1..hmm that's thin.
in conclusion as you said.joint no1 seems like a fair deal.
veco, There is a significant difference between 1960 and 1961: In the latter year Gonzalez entered the two biggest events and lost (to Hoad and Rosewall).
Flash O'Groove
Hall of Fame
Who were the participants in the pro tours of 1960 and 1961?
Flash,
World series:
1960: Gonzalez, Rosewall, Segura, Olmedo (final order)
1961: Gonzalez, Gimeno, Hoad/Trabert, MacKay, Olmedo, Buchholz (final order)
Other pros in these years participating were Sedgman, Anderson, Copper, Mike Davies, Robert Haillet (two strong Davis Cuppers).
Last edited:
seems 1959 by far..
veco, In Joe McCauley's book "The History of Professional Tennis" there are a few matches (January 9 to February 1) listed. No final standings are given, alas.
Benalla: Gonzalez d Ayre 9-7,6-3; Sedgman d Segura 4-6,6-3,6-4
Stawell: Gonzalez d Sedgman 18-16,6-2; Segura d Ayre 6-3,5-7,7-5
Kooyong: Sedgman d Gonzalez 6-2, 7-5; Segura d Ayre 6-4,6-1
kiki, Clearly 1959. But Kramer did not play singles in 1959. He did play till 1958.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Wasn't Kramer having small tours against Hoad and Rosewall in 1957? Hoad had just turned professional after winning his second Wimbledon title in a row.
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
1959 Rosewall > 1971 Rosewall
Laver > Hoad
Nastase = Segura
Kramer > Smith
Pancho > Ashe
Trabert = Kodes
Newcombe > Sedgman
I say 1959 slightly.
Mustard, Yes Kramer was playing much in 1957. In the European tour he finished third, behind Rosewall and Hoad (equal) and AHEAD of strong Segura! He often beat Hoad there!
Last edited:
kiki
Banned
It would be extremely close, but yes, 59 looks a bit better.Nastase was better than Segura and Trabert a bit better than Kodes.Hoad could beat Laver any day and Sedgnam could beat anybody, including Newcombe any time...
Now, if he add Olmedo, Cooper and Anderson we will have the remaining top ten members of 1959 and if we had Gimeno,Okker and Roche, the remaining top tenners of 1971.IMO, Olmedo beats Gimeno, Okker and Anderson are more or less equivalent and who knwos between Cooper and Roche?
kiki: I know that Roche was stronger than Cooper: Cooper No.5 at his best, Roche No.2 (only behind Laver). Olmedo never beats Gimeno: Olmedo's best ranking was No.6 and that only once (in my rankings) while Gimeno was No.3 for several years (behind only Laver and Rosewall). Don't distort history!
kiki
Banned
Maybe you are fine but Olmedo,Anderson and Cooper did much better at am slams than slamless Okker and one timers Gimeno and Roche
Learn history!!!
kiki, You don't tell me news.
The difference is: Roche, Okker and Gimeno had to play against peak Laver, Rosewall, Newcombe. The other three had to deal only with amateurs.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll
- Nathaniel_Near
- Former Pro Player Talk
