If slams were played on clay, grass AND hard-court in Laver's time?

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by 6-1 6-3 6-0, Jan 1, 2013.

  1. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    urban, great list. Laver is really underrated on clay. I agree with pc1 that Laver was stronger on clay than Federer.

    Laver lost to Rosewall at Houston in 1976.

    I do know (thanks to Ray Bowers) that Rosewall defeated Laver in the 1965 Reston tournament on clay (probably green clay).
     
    #51
  2. zagor

    zagor Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    26,042
    Location:
    Weak era
    Yes, but the main difference between Fed and Guga vs Nadal match-up on clay is that Nadal's bread and butter tactic works against Fed but wouldn't work against Guga (which means Nadal would have to outgrind him to win or outplay him on big points).

    Guga's BH is better overall shot than Fed's but by a smaller margin than his BH being better for handling high balls off that side.

    With Nadal's main tactic being nullified (to a degree anyway), Guga's advantage in power (though it's slight IMO, Nadal's FH is a monster) and serve would be more pronounced IMO than in Fed's match-up against Nadal on clay.
     
    #52
  3. Feather

    Feather Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,520
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    I was surprised at your asking that question to me. No offence meant but I thought you would have known that I don't know much about Laver's play.

    Since Laver was left handed, he wouldn't have had the disadvantage that Roger had. I don't think Roger is as bad a clay courter as his results against Rafa prove it to be. I mean he beat Djokovic in RG when Rafa failed to beat Djokovic twice on clay in 2011. Rafa is a terrible match up for Roger especially on clay
     
    #53
  4. The-Champ

    The-Champ Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    6,541
    Location:
    Sweden
    Guga had à slightly better bh but fed's fh is out of this world. Don't forget fed moves à lot better as well.
     
    #54
  5. urban

    urban Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    4,374
    Yes Bobby One, the Houston match was 1976, corrected it. On the clay matches of the old pro tour, i did some research, and i can tell its awfully difficult to reconstruct them. The Brits called all non- lawn events hard courts, and i went back to tennis club books in the Netherlands or Germany or even some event programs like Geneva, one could buy on the internet. We can assume, that the summer pro events in Continental Europe, in France, Belgium, Holland, Switzerland, Germany, Italy, Spain or Austria were mostly on clay, but we cannot be sure in all aspects. In France, the pros also played a lot indoors, at the Cannes Palais du sport for instance. There were also very late autumn events, like Rome in 1963, where we only can speculate, if it was outdoor clay or indoor. Yet a bigger problem are the US events, i would assume that some in Florida or California or on the Caribian tour were played on clay. It could well be, that Reston was on clay, i have had credible information (by Jeffrey Neave), that Oklahoma was on clay, too. I am glad for all further informations, i can get.
     
    #55
  6. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    urban, I agree that usually the European summer events were played on clay even though Dan is refusing this...

    It also could be that a few indoor tournaments were yet played on clay as it was true with the 1959 Vienna indoor event.

    In Florida there were many claycourt events.

    Rosewall once told me that the Oklahoma tourney was played on har-tru which is green clay, as far as I know.

    Thanks for your research!
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2013
    #56
  7. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,916
    Location:
    U.S
    yeah, I know, which is why I said that bar borg, kuerten would provide the most challenge for nadal in the open era ... just saying only power wouldn't be enough vs nadal on clay ....
     
    #57
  8. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,743
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    Laver may have been better than Fed on clay, but beating post-2005 Nadal at RG is still a very tough order for anyone.

    Laver wrote about beating Rosewall in the finals of the 1969 FO: "He had his shot at me in the final of the French, but I played the clay court match of my life and avoided the treatment he gave Lew [at Forest Hills in 1956]."

    In 1969 Laver played a great all-court match, taking the net and being aggressive whenever possible. Rosewall was very fast, but so is Nadal. This strategy may shock Nadal for a while, but I'm not sure that taking the net on clay is a great strategy with present racquets and strings.
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2013
    #58
  9. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,411
    It would be tough and that is why I would favor Nadal against Laver on red clay. I could see Laver getting Nadal out of position and you know he would feel that he would have to make sure the volleys are very penetrating at least to hurt Nadal. The pressure to make the perfect volley would probably lead to more errors.
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2013
    #59
  10. President

    President Legend

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    7,002
    Location:
    Philadelphia
    Nadal's forehand is a HUUUGE shot, one of the biggest forehands of all time (and IMO the best, even better than peak Federer) in terms of the energy put into it. Remember that spin is a form of power as well. It's not easy to get that many RPM's and still get decent pace on the ball. Federer is not capable of that. When Nadal hits even a little less spin he is capable of consistently hitting more pace than anyone else in the current mens top 4. Nadal would not be getting overpowered by Kuerten on clay IMO.
     
    #60
  11. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,743
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    Sorry, I did not mean to put you on the spot.

    I have enough problems trying to figure out what I know, much less what anyone else knows or does not know.
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2013
    #61
  12. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    I denied that the Cannes Palais de Sport could be indoor clay, because it was a multi-sport venue. They cannot roll out the clay and lay down a track.
    This puts Hoad ahead of Rosewall lifetime on clay, by the way, a great achievement.
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2013
    #62
  13. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, to your information: In 1991 a claycourt ways laid over the grass in the Vienna football stadium for the Davis Cup encounter Austria vs. USA.

    It's still too early to give Hoad the claycourt edge as we miss those early 1960s matches.
     
    #63
  14. Feather

    Feather Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,520
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    Oh please, no need of sorry. I was just pointing that out to you.
     
    #64
  15. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    I doubt that this technology was available in 1963 and 1964.
    Those early 1960's matches, as I thought we agreed, fail to qualify, as they were unrecorded as to place, date, score.
    If all we have are vague, off-hand references (like "he won all thirteen of those matches" or "he beat me in 14 straight matches") without any documentation beyond this, they should not be included as official matches for any tally. They probably refer to unrecorded exhibition matches.
    For all recorded matches, even if we give the benefit of the doubt as to surface to Rosewall, Hoad has an edge.
    It comes out either 15 to 14 (including Cannes), or 15 to 12 (excluding Cannes). As I say, if there were more, we need to know where and when.
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2013
    #65
  16. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, I see you are the Old Dan. We never agreed about those early 1960s matches. If we would be honest we should say that the clay Hoad/Rosewall tally is unknown for the moment. But I concede that without them Hoad could have the edge.
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2013
    #66
  17. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

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

    In 1959 a claycourt was laid over the Vienna Townhall indoor surface and it worked: Rosewall beat both Hoad and Trabert....
     
    #67
  18. FedericRoma83

    FedericRoma83 Rookie

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    185
    French Pro from 1963 to 1967 was played on wood, I remember an interview where Kenny said that. It was different from the Wembley surface anyway, because one of the two was painted with some substance, which slowed the ball a little, while the other was simply wood.
    Unfortunately I can't remember which was the painted one...
     
    #68
  19. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Federic, It's a pity you cannot remember which one was painted. I always have thought (but maybe wrongly) that both were wood. But still I would say that both were rather fast surfaces.
     
    #69
  20. FedericRoma83

    FedericRoma83 Rookie

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    185
    They surely were, I just think that one was fast and the other was faaaaast :D
     
    #70
  21. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,411
    Rosewall writes in one of his books that the ideal indoor court to his mind was wood when it is treated with paint to slow the ball a little. He later writes in the paragraph that the courts at Wembley when they were wood was an ideal pace. So the assumption would be that the courts at Wembley were painted.
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2013
    #71
  22. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Thanks, pc1, for explaining the matter. It's a shame I did not know it.
     
    #72
  23. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    I understood that you agreed with me that such vague references as we have for the 1963 Hoad/Laver series and the vague references of Rosewall regarding his matches with Hoad should not be given official status.
     
    #73
  24. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    What is your source for that? Not listed in McCauley.
     
    #74
  25. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, I read about it in an Austrian newspaper of that time ("Kurier").
     
    #75
  26. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,349
    What racket would Nadal and Laver be playing with against each other on clay?

    Both a product of their own times. Nadal wouldn't be able to generate the topspin, pace and placement with earlier racket technology.

    So its quite possible, Laver DESTROYS Nadal on clay

    Now if its today's racket technology with the lux string etc.. thats a different story
     
    #76
  27. piece

    piece Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,403
    Laver's forehand was more solid than Federer's?
     
    #77
  28. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    piece, It might be that Federer's forehand is more spectacular than Laver's but Laver's forehand more consistent. Who knows?
     
    #78
  29. Flash O'Groove

    Flash O'Groove Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 28, 2012
    Messages:
    2,156
    Hum...Everybody?
     
    #79
  30. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,411
    No I didn't mean that. I mean more balance on both sides as far as the overall strokes. Laver and Federer both had explosive forehand weapons that can hit winners from anyone. Federer's forehand may very well be better than Laver's. It probably is. However I do think that Laver's backhand is probably better than Federer's so I think he's more solid on both sides, meaning forehand and backhand. Laver's backhand was almost the equivalent of forehand because of his huge left wrist and arm. He was known for using backhand flicks almost like ping pong and hitting it for winners. Federer tends to run around his backhand often.

    I think Federer's forehand is by a decent margin stronger than his solid backhand. I think Laver's backhand and forehand were about equal. That's what I mean. I think Krosero has charted matches in which Laver's backhand winners surpass his forehand winners. I don't know if that was the norm or not.
     
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2013
    #80
  31. piece

    piece Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,403
    Fair enough, I thought this is what you might have meant.
     
    #81
  32. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    If the GS of 69 also included the biggest hard court event (SA Open) and indoor event on wood or carpet (MSG), still Laver would have won it.it is a pitty it did not include them.

    No other player has ever had a similar season.At least in the male ranks.
     
    #82

Share This Page