At their best, who would win?

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by Graphiteking, Dec 26, 2012.

  1. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,472
    Laver won the Italian on clay I believe in 1971 over Kodes. The Italian was the second biggest clay tournament. It shows that it's very possible that Laver would have been a big factor at the French that year. Looking in hindsight on what Laver and Rosewall did after 1971 it is possible that they may have been the two best on clay in 1971. Not saying that they definitely were the two best but they certainly were up there with anyone.
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2013
  2. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    2,011
    When both were in their late teens. (I am referring to Dan Lobb, the former pro tennis player and current British television star, possibly a fourth or fifth cousin of mine.)
     
  3. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,472
  4. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    2,011
    Yes, indeed. He is currently a hot television star.
    I showed his online photos to my wife, and she claims that I am more handsome than he is, in spite of the fact that he is twenty-one years younger, a compliment I can live with. (excuse the pun)
     
  5. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Federic, You might be right about top ten players.

    Laver and Rosewall were surely the best claycourters 1970 to 1972.

    Re 1971: Laver won the Italian Open with a clear win against Kodes. Rosewall won the top tournament of Washington with wins against Laver, Smith and Riessen. Both were awesome also in 1970 and 1972.
     
  6. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    2,011
    Nastase also did not have to play Rosewall at RG in 1973, and faced a weak field.
     
  7. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,472
    I'll try to do some analysis on it. In the meantime here's some of the head to heads of Nadal against Roddick and Hewitt and Djokovic against the same two players.

    http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=R485&oId=N409 7-3 in favor of Nadal against Roddick

    http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=N409&oId=H432 6-4 in favor of Nadal against Hewitt. First three won by Hewitt and one won by Hewitt when Nadal retired.

    http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=N409&oId=H432 6-1 in favor of Djokovic against Hewitt. Hewitt won the first match which Djokovic was younger.

    http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=D643&oId=R485 5-4 in favor of Roddick. Roddick actually won four in a row against Djokovic at one point. Since late 2010 when Djokovic I guess straightened out his serve Djokovic has won the last two. In this case I would venture a guess that Roddick declined and Djokovic improved tremendously in the last two matches between the two.

    Try to do more work on it later.
     
  8. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,472
    Good post Kiki. Newcombe was some player under pressure. Don't know if I would bet my money on Newcombe even on grass against the Borg of 1978 and 1979 but I'm sure Borg would fear Newcombe at his peak. On a grass court when Newcombe was in shape he could beat any player in history.

    And everything you wrote here about Kodes is true. He wasn't the most talented but I think he still was very talented. He really was a top player who was fun to watch.
     
  9. krosero

    krosero Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2006
    Messages:
    5,645
    My own post on the H2H records between those five men was here: http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=7091660#post7091660.

    I'd be interested in hearing your take on it. But even more than the H2H records, it's my question about the yearly win/loss records that I was interested in getting you to address (not sure if I made that distinction clear).

    I first posted the data here: http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=7085240#post7085240.

    2003: 75-16
    2004: 74-6
    2005: 81-4
    2006: 92-5
    2007: 68-9
    2008: 66-15
    2009: 61-12
    2010: 65-13
    2011: 64-12
    2012: 71-12

    Upthread you wrote, who really knows whether Federer has left his best tennis behind -- a statement I can't agree with at all, for many reasons. So my question has to do with these W/L records. We usually let them guide us if we want to identify when young players reached their peak playing level.

    That being the case, shouldn't we let Federer's declining win/loss records guide us in the same way if we want to identify when he began declining from his peak playing level?

    That was a question for both you and BobbyOne. I know you both have done a lot of research and work with yearly win/loss records going well back through tennis history.
     
  10. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    What´s talent? Kodes knew how to take advantage of his ability and that is talent.He had great courage, he gained respect of all of his peers and had he played in a weaker era, his major wins would have probably doubled.

    All in all, he honoured one of the funniest eras ever played, and he has gotten the right to be talked about in the same sentence as those great players that represented the great tennis era of the early to middle 70´s.

    Newcombe-Borg is, IMo, the best match that could have been played on a Wimbledon final during that decade, provided both players were at their peak.Newcombe dominated the first half and Borg the second with Connors fitting in in 1974 and 1975.Of course, Borg lost to guys named Ashe and Amritraj and Connors bowed to Ashe and Tanner.Newcombe himself was beaten at Forest Hills by Kodes and Rosewall but I think both were the most dominat grass court players of the 70´s.Laver was at their level for a given match, but his record was clearly below them, at least from 1970 to 1979.
     
  11. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    yes, that is why Roddick´s record at Wimbledon is just as great as Stolle´s...oh¡ wait, you enhance him so to boost your crush federer.I got you, liar.
     
  12. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    yes, no doubt about that.Laver´s 71 IO win was really his last great win and he showed how dominant he was when highly motivated.
     
  13. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Did you ever introduce Lew Hoad to your wife?

    I am sure you are smart enough not to do so...
     
  14. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Rosewall, as good a clay courter as he had been, never showed again that on clay.He was old and he economized ( he was clever indeed) so in the 70´s his record on fast surfaces like indoors and grass was great but not so his cc record.
     
  15. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Nothing could stop 1973 Nastase on clay...well, except Ilie himself.He also won Barcelona with two sensational wins over Kodes and Orantes who were playing their best tennis.
     
  16. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    kiki, I must correct you: Rosewall's record on clay in the 1970s was still great. For instance he won the 1970 Cincinnati tournament where most top players of the French Open participated. In 1971 he won Washington. In 1972 he lost to Laver in the Houston final and won Charlotte. In 1973 he won Houston and Charlotte plus won Tokyo against your darling Newcombe. In 1974 he lost the final of Tokyo to Newk. In 1975 he won Houston and Gstaad. In the latter event Vilas participated. In 1976 he reached the Houston final and beat Solomon at Charlotte 6-2,6-1. As late as 1978 (at 43 plus) he won a set against Dibbs (No.4 cc player) by 6-0. Please reflect once more about old Rosewall as cc player!
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2013
  17. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    He fared not well enough at clay court majors.Not that he didn´t win a prestigious WCT event like Houston or North Conway.

    My " darling" Newcombe beat Rosewall i one sided matches at the 1971 Wimbleodn semi and 1973 US semi.Please, reflect on Newcombe a bit more.
     
  18. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    2,011
    I have not shown any Hoad photos to my wife, who is younger and even more attractive than I am.
     
  19. chandler bing

    chandler bing Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2011
    Messages:
    178
    Men
    Hard Court: Connors
    Grass: Sampras
    Clay: Borg
    Carpet: McEnroe

    Women
    Hard Court: S.Williams
    Grass: Navratilova
    Clay: Evert and Henin (can't separate them)
    Carpet: Navratilova
     
  20. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,981
    Location:
    U.S
    what the hell are you on about ? roddick made finals in full fields , stolle in amateur fields that didn't have the best players, the pros ......he was getting beaten up by emerson who wasn't close to federer's level ....
     
  21. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Would Roddick fare any better tham Roscoe Tanner if he played in the 70-80 with Roscoe' s equipment? We all know the answer is a damn big NO
     
  22. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Hewitt +Roddick : Kodes
    Learn to live with that
     
  23. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,472
    I like the way you separate the courts. The choices are reasonable too.
     
  24. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,472
    I actually don't think Newcombe gets enough attention on these forums. While he wasn't for his career as great as some all time greats I believe at his best he was superior to many great players. He was one of the greatest pressure players I've ever seen and he could play on all surfaces. If he was in shape and at his peak he could defeat any player in history.
     
  25. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Of course.I always thought that about him.Even if he is from the first stages of opene ra, there seems to be much more admiration for guys like Ashe,Roche,Nastase and others.Newcombe crushes them all in records and dominance for the course of an event.I don´t think there´s been a tougher competitior in the 70´s except Borg and maybe, Connors.But he beat both of them in major finals.He had a very complete all round game, not a great BH, sure, but a terrific first serve ( probably the most complete first and secon serves of the decade ) and one of the greatest FH shots of history.He was an extraordinary athlete, able to get drunk and play a great match hours later.He was extremely charismatic, and the guy you´d always want for a friend.He was the last Australian Emperor and nobody else could fill that inmmense role with such grace.
     
  26. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,472
    I agree with everything you wrote here. Incidentally I think the great Newcombe forehand gets forgotten when it comes to discussing the greatest forehands of all time. It was a fantastic shot on all surfaces.
     
  27. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Ashe himself said that he always feared when Newcombe went to the left alley to return serve and moved to the corner so to let maximum space for his FH ROS...and ashe had one of the finest first serves that I have seen.
     
  28. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    kiki, You are a world class cynic: Rosewall fared not well enough at clay court majors? He did not enter them!!! He only played the 1977 US Open when he was almost 43.

    1971 was onesided because Rosewall had a fantastic QF match against Richey in five long sets. 1973 was not onesided.

    Rosewall, yes Grandpa Rosewall, leads 14:9 against peak Newcombe and 4:3 against Newk in big events. It's a shame for Newcombe that he trails that way against a 34 to 40 years old.

    Please reflect on Rosewall a bit more. You still underrate him despite of the information you got and get!
     
  29. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    pc1, I contradict: Newcombe was never an undisputed No.1 even though he was at his peak. He was not able to dominate very old Rosewall. I rate Roche as stronger than him. Newcombe is not underrated here and generally.

    Rosewall and Roche are still underrated.
     
  30. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    I never underated Rosewall, specially after having seen him play.I have said many times that, if I could choice a teacher for my tennis, it would always be Rosewall.

    But you should be fair to Newcombe.The guy was a great champion and, along Borg and Connors, the true dominant figure of the 70´s.He beat Rosewall, very deservedly when he had to beat him, specially in their 1970 Wimbledon final.I think you really dislike Newcombe.I don´t know why.

    In fact, the only australian player I dislike ( as a player, not as a person) is Hewitt...and that is becasue his game is the aberration for an ausie.
     
  31. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Roche and Newcombe had the toughest rivalry of the late 60´s- early 70´s, alomg laver-Rosewall and Nastase-Smith ( such wonderful ones), but even if Roche won some, Newcombe won some others.Newcombe crushes Roche in termso of winning record.another proof of your rather astonishing disliking of Newcombe.If there´s been a guy in tennis you just cannot dislike...it is Newk¡¡¡
     
  32. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    kiki, I don't dislike Newcombe. I just want to put him in perspective. Rosewall deserves a place among the top five all-time, Newcombe does not deserve a place among the top ten. That's it.
     
  33. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Newcombe can be a top ten player.He has 7 GS titles+ 1 WCT as opposed to Rosewall 10 big titles.I am not saying newcombe is top ten but he could get there.
     
  34. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Roche outclassed Newcombe clearly in 1968 and 1969 before he got severe arm troubles. He was acknowledged as Laver's heir. Then Newcombe came at the top but NEVER clearly: In 1970 Rosewall had the better balance. In 1971 Smith was a t least as strong, in 1973 Nastase was at least equal. In 1974, at "world's best", he lost terribly to greatgrandpa Rosewall in the two big tournaments

    I don't have ressentiments against Newk as a person.
     
  35. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    kiki, when discussing with other posters including yourself I assume a certain niveau! Rosewall has 10 big titles??? Learn history!!!
     
  36. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    2,011
    Please list the "big events". I have been disappointed with your choice of "big" events in other posts.
     
  37. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, as you are an expert, you easily will discover which big events they are!
     
  38. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    2,011
    I hope there are no indoor pro extravaganzas in this list.
    No excuse for that after open tennis arrived.
     
  39. chandler bing

    chandler bing Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2011
    Messages:
    178
    Aw, thanks!
     
  40. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, WCT finals are not pro extravaganzas. kiki himself has counted Newk's WCT title as a major.

    Even without Dallas Rosewall and Newcombe are equal in GS clashes even though Muscles was a grandfather then...
     
  41. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,472
    Arthur Ashe for example was named number one in 1975 due to his winning two big titles Wimbledon and the 1975 WCT Championship.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5sBBFQfcNU

    Check at about 4:25 in the video above. The commentator called the WCT Championship this years first major.

    Also check the 10:20 mark which shows highlights of the great Laver/Borg match in that tournament.
     
  42. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    2,011
    The "commentator"? Who paid his salary?
    Of course, the network would hype the event.

    The status of the WCT is an iffy judgment call.
    Some years we call it a major, some years we don't. It all depends on who won, whether or not we like the guy who won.
    Worthless.
     
  43. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,472
    Dan,

    Ashe was number one in 1975 due mainly to winning Wimbledon and the WCT finals as I pointed out in the post. The commentator was Charlton Heston who really didn't need to be paid for it. He was rather rich.

    My point was that tennis people considered the WCT Championship to be a very important title.
     
  44. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    2,011
    The point is, we should be consistent if we want to include the WCT as a major, and include it every year, or not at all.
     
  45. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, Worthless are only some of your statements...
     
  46. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    2,011
    Your favourite analyst is Chuck Heston?
     
  47. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,472
    Dan,

    As you well know, the value of the best tournaments often vary by era. Nowadays it is very consistent, with the four majors as the top tournaments but in the early Open Era often prestige was associated top money and certainly the WCT tour and Championship gave the players both. The Australian became almost a minor major at one point. Top players often skipped it to enjoy the holidays. They wouldn't do that now.
     
  48. FedericRoma83

    FedericRoma83 Rookie

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    185
    Don't try to explain that to Dan, he would not listen to you at all :D
     
  49. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    2,011
    True, the value of EVERY tournament varies with the year and the era. Some eras are weak for all tournaments.
    But the Grand Slam events have a special meaning.
    Historically, the Australian, French, British, and American national titles represented the four premier tennis-playing nations.
    Then it evolved that Australia and the USA became the two dominant tennis nations, and the French title became the world clay championship and Wimbledon the unofficial world championship.
    There was a natural progression of prestige for these four events, which remains to the present day.
    Some of the great pro events, such as Forest Hills Tournament of Champions, Wembley, the Longwood US Pro, or the WCT Dallas final had great prestige, but for a relatively short period.
    Because they did not last, they must be considered second-tier compared to the elite four.
    The elite four have sometimes been compromised by the pro/amateur split, professional boycotts, lack of interest, but over time they have maintained their special status.
    The Grand Slam still exists as defined in 1933, probably the first time that someone set out to win it. The Australian kept its place in 1935, when Perry tried the Grand Slam circuit but was stopped by Crawford.
     
  50. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, I cannot agree that the big pro events must be considered second tier compared to the elite four.

    Wembley, the WCT finals and so on should be ranked ahead of the amateur GS tournaments at least.
     

Share This Page