GOAT Discussions

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by hoodjem, Oct 28, 2012.

  1. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,579
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    http://www.crunchsports.com/categor...-Possibly-not-says-Boris-Becker-201211040015/

    See Becker's take on some of the modern players versus players from past eras.

     
  2. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    Mustard, you have ignored the actual results for the major venues, where Hoad led Gonzales 6 to 3.
    Further, the "amateurs" would not have existed, and would have matured sooner, so I think that Gonzales would have faced a mature Hoad from 1956. But don't let me spoil your fun.
    Dream on!
     
  3. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    Segura was tough on clay in the early fifties, another reason why it is doubtful that either Kramer or Gonzales could have won a calendar grand slam. Add to the great clay players of the era Drobny, Patty, and this makes it all the more difficult.
    Of course in the late fifties, you get Trabert (from 1953, when he matured), Rosewall (1953 champion at RG), Hoad, Davidson, Pietrangeli, and others.
    Sorry, I don't see Kramer or Gonzales winning the GS.
     
  4. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Hello Dreamer, You come to a 6:3 edge of Hoad against Gonzalez at majors. Why? Because you rate Forest Hills (doubtful) and even Kooyong(!) as pro majors and because you consider their 1967 Wimbledon match which was played when both players were over the hill. The latter is totally irrelevant for their 1950s strength.
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2012
  5. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, Davidson and Pietrangeli are irrevant for the early 1950s when Kramer and Gonzalez could have made the GS.

    Gonzalez was a great claycourter. He proved it with his 1959 Toronto win and with wins over Laver.
     
  6. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    No, because Forest Hills, Roland Garros, Wimbledon, and Kooyong is where OPEN MAJORS would be played in the fifties.
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2012
  7. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    Yes, he was good on clay. But the fields in the fifties were too tough on clay for him and Kramer to win the big one at RG.
    Just think. Drobny, Patty, Segura, Trabert (from 1953), Rosewall (from 1953), Hoad (from 1953, when he beat Rosewall and Bromwich at the Australian Hardcourt), Pietrangeli, all winning at RG, except Segura, who beat Gonzales on clay in the 1952 Cleveland final in five sets.
    Gonzales and Kramer did not play enough on clay to compete. Gonzales lost a hth series on clay in South America against Trabert in 1956.
    These are the cold, hard realities.
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2012
  8. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, You can't transfer venues of pro tournaments 1:1 to GS tournaments.

    Kooyong pro was never a pro major. Wimbledon 1967 result does not count for our 1950s discussion. That's as clear as water from high mountains...
     
  9. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, your arguments are too cold and too hard for me.

    I never heard that the 1952 Cleveland final was played on clay.

    It is reported that Gonzalez won a claycourt tour over Segura.

    You mix oranges with cold herrings. Pietrangeli was great at the end of the 1950s, not at the begin.

    After all the lessons you have got in this forum, you should finally accept that the pros were stronger than the amateurs, even on clay! Look at Ayala in 1961. He was one of the strongest amateurs that year but lost to 40 years old Segura at his pro debut.
     
  10. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    No, but the best measure we have of possible GS results in an open game is hth at the GS venues, which we do have; 6 to 3 for Hoad over Gonzales.
    If you want peak years only, 1958-59, the score is 5 to 2 for Hoad (2 to 2 at Kooyong, 2 to 0 at Forest Hills, 1 to 0 at Roland Garros).
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2012
  11. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    I read in several places that the 1952 Cleveland final was on clay (NY Times, for one).
    Yes, Pietrangeli was great about 1956 to 1964 at RG, but we are looking at Gonzales getting a possible GS during that period as well.
    Of course the pros were stronger in the fifties, but we are considering the possible results in an open game from about 1946 on, when even Drobny and Patty are pros.
     
  12. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    Unfortunately, we do not know the surface of many of the small European events of the 1960's. I had to remove some Rosewall wins from 1963 and 1964 because at Cannes it appears the surface was not clay, but indoor. Likewise, the Swiss tournaments. Perhaps the Italian.

    Here is what we know for sure were important clay matches;

    1) 1952 Australian Hardcourt final: Hoad def. Rosewall 2-6, 6-1, 1-6, 6-2, 11-9

    2) 1953 Australian Hardcourt semi-final: Hoad def. Rosewall 6-1, 2-6, 6-1, 6-8, 7-5 (Hoad def. Bromwich in final 7-5, 6-3, 2-6, 9-7)

    3) 1955 New South Wales Hardcourt final: Hoad def. Rosewall 6-3, 6-3

    4) 1957 The Hague final (outdoor red shale): Hoad def. Rosewall, five-set marathon (this event currently an ATP Challenger Tournament)

    5) 1957 Cairo final: Hoad def. Rosewall, five-set marathon

    6) 1958 Roland Garros final: Rosewall def. Hoad 3-6, 6-2, 6-4, 6-0 (Hoad injured during match)

    7) 1959 Roland Garros 3rd place: Hoad def. Rosewall 6-3, 4-6, 6-2

    8) 1960 Roland Garros final: Rosewall def. Hoad 6-2, 2-6, 6-2, 6-1

    9) 1960 Tokyo Pro final (first ever pro championship in Japan): Hoad def. Rosewall 6-2, 0-6, 3-6, 6-1, 13-11

    The totals are , let's see...... what?
    I make it Hoad over Rosewall, 7 wins against 2 losses.
    Not even close.

    Earlier, we saw that Hoad held a lifetime edge over Gonzales on grass, 14 to 10. (In peak years, 1958-59, 13 to 9.)
    What conclusions should we draw from these two facts?
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2012
  13. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, I must correct you: Kooyong was NOT always the venue of Australian Championships. Till 1971 the venues changed every year (Melbourne, Brisbane, Sydney, Adelaide).

    And, as always, you omit the US Pro in Cleveland because Hoad lost twice to Gonzalez there. That's biased account of history!
     
  14. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Pietrangeli was only a real force from 1959 onwards.

    Patty and Drobny never could have matched the best pros on clay.

    I gave Gonzalez a GS in 1954 and 1955, not later.
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2012
  15. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    That Hoad was a God and never lost...

    The Swiss tournaments were most probably on clay, the Italian ones mostly too!

    As usually, you "forgot" a tiny fact: That Rosewall and Hoad played many matches in 1961 and 1962 when Rosewall dominated...
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2012
  16. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,332
  17. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, you have 5:2 for Hoad, I have 2:1 for Gonzalez (2:0 at US Pro, 0:1 French Pro)...
     
  18. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    Kooyong is acknowledged as the pre-eminent Australian venue for tennis.
    No, the US Pro is not minor because of that. Because it was a minor event, not a major in any way.
     
  19. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    Not realistic in 1954 or 1955. By that time, Trabert and Rosewall and Hoad were hot on clay, hotter than Gonzales would ever be on clay. Gonzales would have to be ranked about fifth on clay that year.
    When you rate someone for a slam, you shouldn't claim that they are favoured when they have only an outside chance to win the RG.
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2012
  20. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    As usual, you have sidestepped the real issue, THE RECORD ON CLAY.
    We need some EVIDENCE of a clay surface. As of now, the score is 7 to 2 for Hoad.
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2012
  21. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    The US Open was never held in the Cleveland Arena, that is the point.
    It was held at Forest Hills.
    And it was played on grass, where Hoad had a 14 to 10 lifetime edge on Gonzales.
    The "US Pro"? About as much weight as the "British Pro" or "Australian Pro".
    A big title with no substance.
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2012
  22. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, I doubt that you will ever become a serious poster. Firstly you said that Kooyong would be the venue of an open major. Now, after I have disproved you (the venues of A. Champ.s have changed between 4 Aussie cities) you give us a new rabbit off your hat: Kooyong is acknowledged as the pre-eminent Australian venue for tennis. I doubt that this is undisputed. You just could say that NOW Melbourne is the main city of Australian tennis.

    You are unique among the tennis experts (and I do say you are an expert) that the US Pro in the 1950s was a minor event...
     
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2012
  23. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Gonzalez was hotter...
     
  24. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    He was not hot on clay. He lost to Segura in the 1952 Cleveland final on clay in five sets, and lost to Trabert in the 1956 RG final, and lost a clay TOUR to Trabert the same year. His hotness didn't give him an RG win against Hoad or Rosewall either, where he lost to both.
    That's your idea of hot?
     
  25. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    As long as we don't have the surface of the many 1960s matches between Hoad and Rosewall you can't claim that Hoad had the edge on clay overall.

    I strongly guess that among the 25 matches R and H have played in the early 1960s (Rosewall won about 20 of them) there were also some claycourt matches.

    You even omit Rosewall's 1962 Geneve victory!!!
     
  26. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    I strongly guess that most of the European scores were not on clay. We need some real evidence. When I looked at Cannes, it failed the test.
     
  27. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    "The US Open was never held in the Cleveland Arena". What do you want to tell us? The French Open was never played in the Coubertin hall. Was the Coubertin French Pro therefore not a pro major???
     
  28. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    I still doubt that the US Pro of 1952 was played on clay.

    Gonzalez won an European pro tour on clay against Segura.
     
  29. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    You seem to ignore that the usual surface in Europe was clay.

    I even am not sure if the 1964 Cannes indoor tournament was not on clay.

    For instance I do know that Rosewall beat Trabert in the 1959 Vienna INDOOR matches on CLAY.

    USA defeated Austria in the 1990 Davis Cup encounter in a soccer stadium on CLAY.
     
  30. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,047
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Segura won his 3 US Pro titles on 3 different surfaces, so the 1952 event certainly wasn't on clay.
     
  31. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    Not in my book.
     
  32. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    Lakewood, Cleveland was on clay.
    What year was this clay tour against Segura?
     
  33. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    No, but the pros looked for cheapest locales, that would mean indoor.
    The Cannes was indoor.
    Look at 1961. Here we have the Scandinavian Pro INDOOR. Is Scandinavia in Europe?
    The "Milan Pro", with Gonzales and Cooper in the final. Sounds like indoor.
    The Austrian Pro INDOOR, with Gonzales and MacKay in the final, MacKay beating Rosewall in the semifinal. Sounds like not clay.
    The Inter-Country Pro Challenge in Turin, with the usual indoor guys coming through. Sounds like indoor.
    Etc. etc.
    We need some hard evidence to show that a clay venue was rented (these cost more to rent than a cold, claustrophobic gym or arena).
    It still looks like 7 to 2 for Hoad over Rosewall on clay, in recognized major tournaments.
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2012
  34. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,047
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    The indoor clay court venue in Cleveland was at the Staking Club. That was the 1950 US Pro event, when Segura beat Kovacs in the final. Segura's 1951 US Pro title was won at Forest Hills on grass, and Segura's 1952 US Pro title was won in Lakewood, Cleveland, on indoor carpet. Segura won 3 US Pro titles on 3 different surfaces, like Segura would coach Connors to at the US Open in the 1970s.
     
  35. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    The Lakewood courts are described as "professional semi-clay", although when this happened is not clear.
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2012
  36. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,047
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Semi clay? Was that the Nadal vs. Federer battle of surfaces exhibition match from May 2007? :confused:

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2012
  37. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    Probably some new type of clay.
     
  38. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Mustard, Thanks for the information.
     
  39. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, I guess your book has some dirty pages...
     
  40. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,332
    It also shows the greatness of Segura.
     
  41. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    I have read it was in 1952 but I can err.
     
  42. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, I accept some of your points. Generally in summer months in Continental Europe the surface was usually clay, not in winter months.

    You again have omitted the 1958 4:1 clay balance of Rosewall against Hoad (Perrier Cup). This was not a minor event!

    1959 Rome (GP) was maybe played on clay. Rosewall d Hoad 5-7,6-4,6-1

    The same year in GP at Vienna Rosewall beat Hoad on clay 6-3,6-1.

    In the same event, by the way, Rosewall beat Trabert 3-6,6-0,6-2, that meaning a strong revenge for Trabert's clear win at the French Pro...

    Your 7:2 balance of Hoad vs. Rosewall is wrong!
     
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2012
  43. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    I also omitted the 1957 clay tour, which Hoad apparently won 6 to3.
    Neither this nor the 1958 Perrier are specified in any detail.
    "Maybe"'s do not count.
     
  44. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, The Perrier Trophy is yet specified in detail.

    As long as it was played on clay, Rosewall was 16:1 and Hoad was 3:14. (Tennis de France).

    Dan, It's still better to write "maybe" than to claim for sure "facts" which you cannot prove...
     
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2012
  45. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,960
    I only counted verified results. Guesses do not count.
     
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2012
  46. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,332
    Guys,

    Perhaps you both should continue this discussion in the Lew Hoad thread.
     
  47. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    pc1; Okay, I will switch to the Hoad thread. But I don't expect that Dan will change his style of discussion in any thread...
     
  48. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,579
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    Thanks PC1, glad you liked it!
     
  49. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,332
    Value of tournaments and matches and how they relate to GOAT


    Above is a discussion in the Alan Trengove on Rod Laver thread. I thought it would be interesting to quote some of the posts and put them in this thread.

    Essentially the discussion was about the changing value on what is important in tennis accomplishments during a tennis year and how it varies depending on the year or decade. For example the Australian while always technically a major was not really considering that important for a while in the seventies and eighties. Many top players skipped the tournament.

    One thing that has been not discussed is the head to head tours the top pros use to play for the World Championships. These were not technically tournaments but whoever won them was considered to be World Champion and it was really MORE IMPORTANT than any major. This adds to the resume of the great Pancho Gonzalez in that he won more of these tours than anyone in history. Most of them for the World title.

    Gonzalez defeated on tour greats like Trabert, Rosewall, Hoad, Segura, Gimeno, Cooper, Anderson. Some of them were beaten on several tours. You combine this with all his Pro Majors and his tournaments won and it is arguably a record without parallel.

    Do I personally think Gonzalez had the greatest record in the history of tennis? I think he's in the mix with greats like Laver, Rosewall, Tilden and Borg among others. But the tour record is incredible.
     
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2012
  50. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    pc1, I agree that the big world tours of Pancho Gonzalez and others were more important that the pro majors.

    Gonzalez also beat Sedgman in the 1954 tour thus beating all strong players from 1954 to 1961.

    Pancho is one of my top four players.
     

Share This Page