Gonzales VS Rosewall: The Ultimate Battle Fight 2 - More Impressive Career?

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by Nathaniel_Near, Jul 22, 2012.

?

So, who is overall greater? Who had the more impressive career...

  1. Ricardo Alonso ''Pancho'' González

    61.5%
  2. Kenneth Robert ''Ken'' Rosewall aka, Muscles

    38.5%
  1. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan Lobb,

    You have written that the Wembley tournament was the only significant event of the pro calendar.

    I also must contradict here. There of course was the traditional US Pro. You are wrong that the official records of US Pro for 1952 to 1961 were wrong. I have gotten the official list of the winners of every year from USPLTA. I know there is another list with "giants" like Bartzen and Giammalva but that's not the proper US Pro.
     
    #51
  2. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    And the mighty Anderson beat Segura in the final! Numbers eight and seven in the rankings! Wow!
     
    #52
  3. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan Lobb,

    Wembley 1959 was a tournament where the top pros had a weaker day. That happens from time to time. No reason for your zynism.

    You underrate both Anderson and Segura. In my rankings Anderson was No 7 and Segura was No 5, tied with Trabert in 1959.

    Remember that Little Pancho at 41 had match point against world champion Rosewall at Wembley in 1962 and that Anderson, also a first class player, had two matchpoints against Jimmy Connors in Jimbo's best year, 1974 when being 39...

    You find the 1959 Wembley had a rather weak field. Then why did your darling not win but lose to old Segura who later lost to Anderson??
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2012
    #53
  4. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,065
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    So what? Agassi beat Ivanisevic at 1992 Wimbledon, when Agassi was the number 12 seed and Ivanisevic was the number 8 seed. Mal Anderson had the tournament of his life when he won the 1959 Wembley Pro.
     
    #54
  5. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Mustard,

    Excellent argument. Yes, from time to time even top players fail.
     
    #55
  6. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan Lobb,

    Mal Anderson is severely underrated because of his second career in the small pro group where he had to play against giants like Gonzalez, yes Hoad, Rosewall and Laver.

    He won the US Championships, he reached final at the US Champ., he reached final in the Australian Open after a win against John Newcombe, he beat Rosewall at least 13 times, he beat Laver a few times...

    Lew Hoad, as great as he is, never won a pro major, not even in his peak years 1958 to 1960...
     
    #56
  7. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    Bobby, what are you wearing for eyeglasses these days?
    I have just consulted the official USPTA historical site, and it still says that the US Pro was not held between 1952 and 1961. I recommend that you read it. That is the official record.
    The 1962 final between Tut Bartzen and Sammy Giammalva was indeed the offical US Pro tournament, and the Cleveland event was never sanctioned by the USPTA. It was merely a commercial title invented by the promoter Jack March. The official title had been awarded to Jack Kramer in 1959 following his application (referred to by Allison Danzig in the New York Times in his account of the Forest Hills Pro), but not implemented until 1963 by the touring pros.
    The split occurred in 1952 when March, who had lost a ton of money from the 1951 event at Forest Hills, attempted to change the venue to Cleveland where costs were lower. The USPLTA refused to sanction the move, and stripped March of his title. March ignored the reality and continued to use the "US Pro" billing for the Cleveland event. Kramer corrected the situation by gaining the official title for his group in 1959.
    Are we clear on this? Does the English language still work in our time?
     
    #57
  8. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,065
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Segura never the Wembley Pro, despite being runner-up 4 times, losing to Gonzales in 1951, Rosewall in 1957 and 1960, and Anderson in 1959.
     
    #58
  9. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,065
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    The US Pro was held at Cleveland from 1952 to 1962. The draw started to weaken around 1958 with Sedgman and Rosewall staying away, got weaker and smaller in 1960, and crashed in 1962. The 1962 US Pro had very few top players, with only Buchholz, Arkinstall, Segura and MacKay taking part. This tournament is the recognised US Pro, even though it regularly went under the title of "World Professional Championships".
     
    #59
  10. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    Now we get to the crux of it.
    Hoad had been touring all season against Gonzales, and was clearly tired (evidenced by his loss in the Slazenger final to Cooper).
    Gonzales was also tired, and didn't even make the trip to Britain.
    The two top guys saved their best efforts for each other. Sure, the big guys have off days. In the LESS IMPORTANT TOURNAMENTS.
    In the most important tournament of the year, Forest Hills, the top two players faced each other in the final. Surprise, surprise!
    "Your" rankings do not agree with the final official rankings based on the money list, so, I am sorry to say, they do not bear any credibility with me.
     
    #60
  11. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,065
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Hoad lost to Segura in the 1959 Wembley Pro, hardly a disgrace. Segura is, in my opinion, the second best player of the 1950s behind Gonzales. I have Segura as a top 3 player from 1949-1957. Also, have you forgotten that Anderson, who won the 1959 Wembley Pro, was also on that tour with Gonzales and Hoad, as well as Cooper?

    The final standings of the 1959 World Pro Tour involving the 4 of them were:

    1. Pancho Gonzales 47-15
    2. Lew Hoad 42-20
    3. Ashley Cooper 21-40
    4. Mal Anderson 13-48

    All 15 of Gonzales' losses were to Hoad, as he beat Cooper and Anderson every time during the tour.
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2012
    #61
  12. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    Just for the record, Hoad won three pro majors.
    1958 Kooyong, defeating Gonzales in the deciding match
    1959 Forest Hills, defeating Gonzales in the final
    1960 Kooyong, defeating Rosewall in the final
    He also won tours against the top players in 1959 (a 23 to 21 edge against Gonzales on the pro championship tour, and first place on the 1959 money list), 1960 ( the New Zealand tour against Sedgman, Anderson, Cooper), 1962 (a clay tour of Italy against the top pros), 1963 (a 13 to 0 win against Laver), and 1964 (a four-man tour of New Zealand against Laver, Rosewall, and Anderson).
    Not bad for a crippled, beer-happy part-timer.
     
    #62
  13. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    No disgrace if you are not half awake and tired from touring.
     
    #63
  14. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    The reason it switched to "World" is that no one could believe the "US Pro" nonsense. This is a laugher!
    Again, please check the official history at the USPTA website.
     
    #64
  15. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,065
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    In case you missed my edit, do you realise that Anderson, the 1959 Wembley Pro champion, was also on that 1959 world pro tour with Gonzales and Hoad, as well as Cooper?

    I thought it was 15-13 to Hoad? However, it wasn't just a Gonzales vs. Hoad tour like in 1958, as Cooper and Anderson were also on the tour. Hoad lost a total of 7 matches on that tour to either Cooper or Anderson, whereas Gonzales was undefeated against Cooper and Anderson on that tour.
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2012
    #65
  16. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,065
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Hoad won the 1959 Tournament of Champions at Forest Hills, beating Gonzales 6-1, 5-7, 6-2, 6-1 in the final. That was probably Hoad's finest moment. I count the Tournament of Champions from 1956-1959 as a pro major, as well as the Wimbledon Pro tournament of 1967.
     
    #66
  17. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan Lobb,

    Please explain me why USPLTA years ago sent me the official list of US Pro without having that strange list of the TEACHING pros.

    You contradict yourself when once writing the US Pro was renewed only in 1963 and once when writing that Kramer captured the title in 1959.

    I possess several tennis books and all have the standard list of US Pro winners from 1951 to 1962 (without those Bartzen & Co.). Bud Collins' Encyclopedia is well acknowledged, f.i.

    You are -in one point- in the community with Limpinhitter who also claims that the prize money list of the pros was the actual pros' rankings. You two are the only persons who believe that...

    But you are really unique in giving Kooyong a major status!

    In a newspaper of 1960 there is written that the overall balance of Hoad agaainst Gonzalez in 1959 was 23:23.

    Regarding their hth in their 1959 4man tour I have counted (in World Tennis)
    a 13:15 balance of Hoad against Gonzalez which contradicts the official 15:13 balance. I don't know what I should believe to be correct.

    The 1964 New Zealand tour was won by both Hoad AND Laver.

    Lew Hoad was a great player but he does not need exaggerated praise.
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2012
    #67
  18. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Mustard,

    It's pretty hard to argue against Dan Lobb because he seems to have his own "facts".

    I agree with your Segura rankings. I only disagree regarding 1949. For that year I rank Kramer, Riggs, Budge, Kovacs, Gonzalez and Schroeder ahead of Segoo.

    I believe Little Pancho's breakthrough happened rather late: at 29 in 1950.
     
    #68
  19. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Mustard,

    It's difficult to decide if Forest Hills Pro was a major or now. If yes, we also could rank the 1957 and 1958 Masters (L.A., with all the top players ) also as a major.

    If we rate Wimbledon 1967 a pro major we also could regard the WCT finals as a major. I think Forest Hills and Wimb. 1967 had too few years of playing to be regarded as a major.

    As a Rosewall admirer I can live with both versions because Muscles would have won still 23 majors, Laver 20 and Gonzalez 16...
     
    #69
  20. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,065
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Yes, you're probably right. Segura was a top 3 professional in 1949, in my opinion, but Gonzales and Schroeder (amateurs) were probably better that year.
     
    #70
  21. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,347
    I don't know if you can regard them as majors but it's clear these tournaments you mentioned were considered important tournaments. Laver winning the first Pro Wimbledon is probably of the same prestige level as a Pro Major but I can't regard it as a major. However you can possibly write it was perhaps the most important tournament in Pro history up to that point. It was Wimbledon and Wimbledon essentially announced by having that tournament that being a pro was no longer taboo.

    The idea that Mr. Lobb gave that Segura in a final versus Anderson lowered the prestige of the tournament is absurd. Segura himself was a big name and Anderson wasn't bad either. And the field was obviously very strong.

    Segura was one of the top professionals during that era and I do believe he won several US Pros in a row. So by Lobb's logic any tournament Segura won or was in the final wasn't of great prestige.

    Segura, as BobbyOne wrote improved greatly later in his pro career. Some attributed it to his deciding to approach the net more. Segura was a fantastic volleyer. Greats like Ellsworth Vines believe that he was just below the skill level of Rosewall at the net. That combined with his forehand, which is arguably the greatest forehand in history was one of the many reasons Segura was a great player. It's very possible Segura defeated Hoad most often than Hoad defeated Segura. I expect Mr. Lobb to dispute this very quickly. I believe Kramer was of the opinion (and yes I have found Kramer to be incorrect at times) that only Gonzalez and Kramer had the edge over Segura in the pros. Now I do believe that's wrong because I believe Rosewall had the edge over Segura but I'm not sure Hoad did.
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2012
    #71
  22. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    pc1,

    Very good description of Segura's game.

    I believe that Rosewall had a better net game than Segoo having maybe the best backhand volley and a very tough forehand volley. I think that Segura was great only on forehand volley and good at backhand volley.

    I have counted a 71:32 balance of Rosewall against Segura but I'm sure several results are still missing.
     
    #72
  23. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Mustard and Dan Lobb,

    I see that you both and me have discussed for 26 posts in a row without other posters - until pc1, whom by the way I rate as a true expert, has "disturbed" our trio...
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2012
    #73
  24. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    Of course, as an amateur champion, he had that right. But he finished the year in seventh place on the money list. (He gave Hoad a great match in the first round at Forest Hills, his best showing of the year.)
    Gonzales only made reference to the 15 to 13 result in his interview with NY Times in 1969 with Dave Anderson, claiming it was the only time he lost a hth tour (he obviously downgraded the 1949-50 tour with Kramer).
    The London Times reported after the 1959 Forest Hills final between Hoad and Gonzales that "Hoad now leads 21 to 20 in his series of matches with Gonzales this year". At the end of the season, it was 23 to 21 for Hoad.
    Hoad himself considered the 15 to 13 result the key measure of the year.
     
    #74
  25. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,065
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Pancho Segura won 3 US Pro titles in 3 consecutive years from 1950 to 1952, all of them on different surfaces. The 1950 US Pro was on indoor clay in the Staking Club in Cleveland, the 1951 US Pro was on the grass-courts of Forest Hills, and the 1952 US Pro was back in Cleveland on indoor carpet at Lakewood. In the latter two finals, he had big wins over Pancho Gonzales.

    Ironically, over 20 years later, Segura would coach Jimmy Connors to 3 US Open titles on 3 different surfaces in 1974, 1976 and 1978.

    Madness, if he thinks that. And Anderson was on that 1959 world pro tour with Gonzales and Hoad, so this "oh, Hoad was knackered and Gonzales didn't travel" stuff is even more discredited.

    Yes, Kramer said that Segura only really struggled with Kramer, and Gonzales (after initially having some success against Gonzales between 1950-1952). Kramer said Segura had the edge over Rosewall, and if that's the case, it must have been before 1960.

    Segura should have won the Wembley Pro, though, but lost all 4 finals he played in.
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2012
    #75
  26. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    Bobby, Bobby, one at a time, please!
    The list without 1952-61 is not a list of "teaching pro" tourneys, but the usual list of US Pros, in which teaching pros were allowed to compete.
    Have you followed my advice and looked up the historical article on the USPTA website? I cannot take you seriously until you do.
    Kramer was granted the right to organize the US Pro following the 1959 Forest Hills T of C, but he refused to hold the event until 1963, as first Gonzales and then Hoad could not compete.
    The London Times reports 21 to 20 for Hoad following Forest Hills, and McCauley reports 2 to 1 for Hoad following that. Add them up.
    No one reports anything but 15 to 13 on the 1959 tour, and Gonzales was actually present on the tour. (Yes, indeed!)
    Hoad and Laver finished 7 and 5 on the 1964 tour, but Hoad was given first place on a 3 to 1 edge on the Rocket. The full results were,

    Hoad 7 and 5
    Laver 7 and 5
    Rosewall 6 and 6
    Anderson 4 and 8
    Read 'em and weep, my friend.
     
    #76
  27. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    In 1959, Segura finished the year in eighth place on the money list. Enough said.
     
    #77
  28. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,065
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Winning the 1959 Wembley Pro was a far greater achievement for Anderson than losing in the first round of the 1959 Tournament of Champions, even if a peak Lew Hoad was his opponent. Winning the 1959 Wembley Pro was Anderson's best career achievement.

    But it was a 4-man tour. Hoad lost 7 times to either Cooper or Anderson, while Gonzales didn't lose a match to either Cooper or Anderson. Had it been a 2-man tour like in 1958 with even more Gonzales vs. Hoad matches, I'm sure Gonzales would have found a way to win again. He was just too consistent day-in, day-out over several months, even if Gonzales did fear a peak Hoad.
     
    #78
  29. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,065
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Considering that the pro tours were still more important than tournaments back then, and Gonzales, Hoad, Cooper and Anderson were on the big pro tour, Segura couldn't be higher than fifth on a money list anyway. It wouldn't surprise me if Anderson or Cooper was top, considering how the best amateur players were in the best position to demand high fees for turning professional.
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2012
    #79
  30. urban

    urban Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    4,355
    The main factor with the rating of Gonzalez in regard to Rosewall, is how much weight you put on the head to head World Series. Gonzalez became after his rough baptism on the first Kramer tour in1950, a kind of specialist for this format. His legendary status was primarily built on his big series win over Trabert, Rosewall and Hoad. He had however some factors going in his favor: Much more experience with format and surface, a psychological advantage of the old pro over the new pro etc. McCauley describes the Gonzalez-Trabert series of 1956 as the first really big event on the pro tour. Gonzalez won it with a one-sided score, but almost all matches were played indoors, which favored Gonzalez' serve, and denigrated Trabert's strenghts on hard court (where he grew up in Cincinnati) and clay (where he was probably the best in the 50s). I personally find Gonzalez big wins in the round robins against very tough opposition, at Forest Hills and LA in 1957 and 1958 more impressive than his World Series wins over new pros.
    I also think, that Gonzalez takes both advantage and disadvantage from the fact, that virtually very few, if any living people saw him playing in his prime, and not much of his game is transported on (longer) videos. This had negative impact, because his memory is hurt by the media situation (see the Tennis Channle ranking). It has however an advantage, because his status grew in oral memory by contemporaries to mythical heights. That he had a great, maybe the greatest serve ever, no doubt, but what about his backhand, which was only sliced? In the 50s, Trabert or Hoad already could hit drives from the backhand. What about his forehand (in comparison to Kramer or Hoad), which was his major weapon hin his early career, but became somewhat inconsistent in his later career (according to sources like Rosewall)? His volley style seemed to be more a touch game (according to the videos i have see from his Pasarell match in 1969). It think, all this makes the evaluation of Gonzalez' game, and the separation of reality and myth quite tough.
     
    #80
  31. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan Lobb,

    Firstly I admit that you are right regarding the 1964 New Zealand tour.

    At the other points raised by you: Why should I weep?. If at all I could almost weep about your stubborness.

    As Mustard rightly says Anderson's best showing in 1959 and in his whole career was his win at Wembley.

    I respect you for having much knowledge of tennis but you sometimes don't value the fact rightly!

    23:21 or 23:23? I have read the latter both in British Lawn Tennis and in an American newspaper of that time.

    A 15:13 balance of Gonzalez against Hoad you easily can find if you count all matches of the two in their 1959 tour in World Tennis. I don't know who made a mistake. Was it Kramer or was it the reporter from World tennis...

    Bartzen, Giammalva &Co were just teaching pros after their amateur careers.

    Regarding prize money: Are you aware that also doubles achievements are included in a player's money list? You should.
     
    #81
  32. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    Gonzales considered it a two-man event. "The only time I lost a head to head tour was in 1959, 15 to 13 to Hoad." NY Times 1969
    Hoad also looked on it as hth, and the London Times reported 21 to 20 after Forest Hills.
     
    #82
  33. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan Lobb,

    I trust you with the 21:20 balance of Hoad against Gonzalez after Forest Hills,
    then you have added the matches in Joe's book but you also know that Joe's records are not complete. Thus British Lawn tennis and the American newspaper could be easily right with their 23:23 balance. It's just newspaper versus magazine and newspaper.
     
    #83
  34. TomT

    TomT Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    1,954
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale, FL
    I've been reading through this thread. Informative and interesting comments. Great thread. Motivates me to try to find some more videos of Rosewall and Gonzalez in their primes.
     
    #84
  35. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    Was Gonzales himself part of the conspiracy? He reported 15 to 13 for Hoad in a 1969 New York Times interview, and said that it was the only time he lost a head to head tour. (He obviously downgraded the 1949-50 Kramer tour, where Gonzales had a knee injury.)
    Hoad claimed that he led 15 to 3 before deciding to coast and rest his back, the hth result already decided early.
    Your claim doesn't seem to stand up to the players' own statements.
    The 1962 US Pro featured Tut Bartzen and Sammy Giammalva in the final, and Giammalva had a lengthy career playing pro tournaments against the top players throughout the 1950's. (I don't see any quotes for your information, please give us some.) The Kramer/Trabert group did not participate in the 1962 event in DC, but exercised their option to stage the 1963 US Pro at Forest Hills, a financial disaster.
    Doubles achievements were included in the 1959 bonus money pool calculations? Every player had a chance, but in singles Hoad led the pack with six tournament victories, to Gonzales' five (which included the "US Pro", not a part of the calculations), Rosewall with two, Sedgman and Trabert with one each, also Anderson and Cooper with one each, Segura with a win at Tel Aviv, the strongest year of pro tennis ever.
     
    #85
  36. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    Bobby, give us more specifics, because I do not see any possibility of more Hoad/Gonzales matches other than the ones reported by McCauley after Forest Hills.
     
    #86
  37. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan Lobb,

    The 15:13 balance of Gonzalez against Rosewall is not my claim. I just reported that the results of the World Tennis reords are reading so. Surely no conspiracy of course.

    You are wrong that Giammalva played much against top pros in the 1950s. In fact he stayed amateur through 1958 and there are no reports in the McCauley book about such matches for 1959 and 1960. I repeat: he was a teaching pro. It's not my turn to prove my words (such as statements as "Giammalva was not a touring pro"). It's YOUR turn to prove the opposite!

    I cannot understand that you can rule out the possibility that Joe has missed some results. I say this as a friend of Joe's. No book is perfect!
    I just reported that two sources do have a 23:23 record.
     
    #87
  38. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    What are you talking about, Bobby? We were discussing Gonzales/Hoad, not Gonzales/Rosewall, and everyone agrees that it was 15 to 13 for Hoad in 1959. Are we on the same planet?
    Giammalva was runnerup to Gonzales in a 1960 pro tournament, and Giammalva also competed in the biggest pro event of 1959, the Forest Hills Tournament of Champions.
    Bobby, where are you getting this stuff from?
    Give more details about these two sources.
     
    #88
  39. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan Lobb,

    I can assure you: I'm still on the same planet as you are depite of my mistake in confusing Hoad and Rosewall (maybe a Freudian slip because I admire both Rosewall and Hoad).

    I say it for the third time: Giammalva was a teaching pro . I know that the teaching pros had one or even a few pro tournamenst every year but those were second or third class events.

    Tuscaloosa 1960 was also a tournament of teaching pros plus a Pancho Gonzalez who was in quarrel with Jack Kramer and after that tournament was ruled out of the regular pro tournaments for a while.

    In that tournament Giammalva beat both Jim Evert and Armando Vieira...

    In the Forest Hills 1959 event he lost to giant Cooper 1-6,3-6.

    Really a (touring) pro career in participating in one regulary pro tournament in two years!!
     
    #89
  40. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan Lobb,

    I can assure you: I'm still on the same planet as you are depite of my mistake in confusing Hoad and Rosewall (maybe a Freudian slip because I admire both Rosewall and Hoad).

    I say it for the third time: Giammalva was a teaching pro . I know that the teaching pros had one or even a few pro tournamenst every year but those were second or third class events.

    Tuscaloosa 1960 was also a tournament of teaching pros plus a Pancho Gonzalez who was in quarrel with Jack Kramer and after that tournament was ruled out of the regular pro tournaments for a while.

    In that tournament Giammalva beat both Jim Evert and Armando Vieira...

    In the Forest Hills 1959 event he lost to giant Cooper 1-6,3-6.

    Really a (touring) pro career in participating in one regulary pro tournament in two years!!
     
    #90
  41. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan Lobb,

    My sources for 23:23:

    First British Lawn Tennis. I don't know the issue. I have read and written down that result in the 1970s in the library of ITF even though I missed to write down the special issue of that famous magazine. Please trust me that I wrote it correctly.

    Second I have found now in my many papers the clipping of that American newspaper. Unfortunately Greg Gonzalez, nephew of Pancho's, did not give me the name of the newspaper. He sent me many clippings without mentioning the name of the newspaper...

    But I can cite something:

    Tired of Traveling- Pancho Gonzales Plans to Pass Up Fortune by Quitting Tennis. That's the title of the article by Jeane Hoffman.

    The deciding passage:

    Kramer's business is also fine: he has Lew Hoad, WHO TIED PANCHO 23-ALL last year...

    It's also written that Pancho retired from the game July 1.

    I only can hope that you use your logical understanding...
     
    #91
  42. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    Jimmy Evert was the Canadian champion one year.
    Forest Hills 1959 was the biggest pro tournament of 1959. Would they let you or I play in it? Not likely.
     
    #92
  43. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    Every source on the planet, except these unmentionable ones, cites 15 to 13 for Hoad. And that includes Hoad and Gonzales, and Sports Illustrated, and New York Times, and London Times, etc., etc.,...you get the picture.
    How much credibility do I give to these two unmentionable sources?
    How about something less than zero.
    Also, if Pancho retired on July 1, what was he doing playing the Australian tour in November and December?
    Remember, as of July 1, Hoad led 21 to 20 (London Times). Then Gonzales does not play again until the Australian tour in November and December, where he loses twice to Hoad before winning at Sydney. Then, Gonzales quits tournament play before the final event at Kooyong, because Hoad withdraws from the 1960 pro championship tour.
    So that gives us 23 to 21, and if someone makes an adding mistake, I cannot alter the reality on that account.
    Are you sure that you and I are really on the same planet?
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2012
    #93
  44. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan Lobb,

    I usually like to discuss with people who have a different view than me but I feel we come now to the end of our "fight" because you are rather ignorant towards facts.

    JImmy Evert was a "nothing" in 1960 even though he was Canadian Champ many years before.

    To call my sources "unmentionable sources" is an impertinence!.

    I believe my newspaper clipping is of 1960, NOT 1959, see: "...who tied Pancho LAST year"!

    I have two reasonable sources you have only won. Furthermore you have only a partly standing (21:20) and a few , probably not all, additional results from a McCauley book which has some gaps for every year (I don't blame Joe because he has brought more pro results than all other experts together!!!).

    To specify World Tennis: Also W.T. has reported a 15:13 balance of the tour for Hoad. I hear you saying:Haha,that's it. But wait, my friend: The pages before that final standings give all Gonzalez-Hoad matches of that 4 man tour plus of course all other matches (Cooper etc) and if you read and count those matches you yet come to a 15:13 balance for PANCHO against Hoad. It is embarrassing and I never said the one or the other version is right. I only hint to that discrepancy.

    Good bye my friend and please try to become more objective!
     
    #94
  45. krosero

    krosero Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2006
    Messages:
    5,579
    If Hoad said that, his memory is off. The New York Times had Hoad leading 10-5 on April 16. The Deseret News reported Hoad leading 13-6 on May 5, which you can read here.

    When did Hoad make that claim?

    That's all an exact quote from an LA Times story, by Jeane Hoffman, dated Jan. 12, 1960.
     
    #95
  46. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,065
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Gonzales hardly played any tournaments in 1960, although he did play a full schedule in 1961 before retiring at the end of the year. The retirement only lasted 18 months.
     
    #96
  47. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    Hello, my friend, and let's get real.
    The London Times is a more credible source than someone (Jeannie Hoffman?) writing some six or more months after the London Times report.
    Could you give some further reference to the World Tennis source?
    As of now, we only have your word to go on, and while I am not calling you "ignorant", it is possible that you calculated differently than Gonzales, Hoad, Kramer, Cooper, Anderson, Sports Illustrated, New York Times, London Times, etc., all of whom came up with 15 to 13 for Hoad, AND money was paid to the players on the basis of 15 to 13 for Hoad.
    Can you see Gonzales settling for less pay than he was entitled to? No, I can't either.
    Or repeating in the New York Times in a 1969 interview that the only head to head tour he lost was in 1959 to Hoad? No, that doesn't add up either.
    Something smells funny here.
     
    #97
  48. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,963
    Hoad stated that he led 11 to 2 when his back started to act up, (TENNIS magazine, interview in 1985), and Pollard stated in his biography of Hoad that he ran up a 15 to 3 stretch and nearly caught up to the two-year score (which would have been 56 to 54 for Gonzales).
    Perhaps the newspaper reporters included tournament matches from Australia.
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2012
    #98
  49. krosero

    krosero Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2006
    Messages:
    5,579
    The reporters did not include any of Pancho's wins in Australia. You can read here that Pancho got his first 4 victories in in San Francisco; Washington, D.C.; Houston, Texas; and Palm Beach, Florida. They report Hoad leading 7-4 at that point, in the American series, which shows that Hoad was mistaken in recalling that he took an 11-2 lead.

    The next day Pancho won his fifth victory, in Jacksonville (his third straight win over Hoad on clay courts).

    That cut Hoad's lead to 7-5. Really a very different picture from the 11-2 lead that Hoad claimed.

    That's not to cast blame on Hoad, because after all he was speaking 26 years after the tour in question!

    From Jacksonville to the end of the tour, Hoad could have won 8 of the last 16 matches, if he finished 15-13. I don't know how to square that with Pollard, whose book I don't have (so I can't analyze what he wrote). Hoad did win 6 straight matches over Pancho to pull up to 13-5. But obviously that is not even close to 15 victories in 18 matches, mentioned in Pollard's book.
     
    #99
  50. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    krosero,

    Thanks for the newspaper detail. It's great that you have got the clipping of L.A. Times.
     

Share This Page