Lew Hoad-A discussion on his career

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by pc1, Sep 17, 2012.

  1. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    Rosewall was 21 near the end of 1955, and I think hit his maturity as a player in 1956, when he took the clay months off the tour, went to Australia, and learned how to serve with Sedgman.
     
  2. Virginia

    Virginia Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    1,537
    Location:
    Auckland, New Zealand
    In my copy, it's not on page 86 - you must have the page number wrong.

    I don't know if there was more than one edition of this book - mine just has the copyright 1976 listed - not any publication dates.
     
  3. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Virginia, My copy has also the 1976 copyright. And it's on page 86, line twelve. I doubt that there was more than one publication. Please have another look.
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2012
  4. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, It's more than speculation. I cannot prove that there were some clay matches and you cannot disprove it. Both ways are possible.

    We do know that H&R played about 25 matches in those years but we need the specification.

    You only can claim a balance is a "lifetime balance" if you have the exact numbers. For instance Laver vs Rosewall: we don't have a sure lifetime balance yet. We have counted 75:62 or so matches. But it's possible that Old Man is right with his 99:83 balance. Maybe Old Man can say more about it. The 75:62 balance we should value as a provisional balance, not the sure lifetime balance.

    You can't ignore that Rosewall gave that about 20:5 balance for 1961 to early 1963. It's worth to be detected...

    Regarding the old pro scene we seldom have the exact hth balance of two players. See Nüsslein: we only know that he was 10:0 against Cochet but we only can estimate his balance against Tilden (possibly about 200:180) or against Vines (possibly about 25:45).

    A serious writer would always add: "It's an approximate number, a rough hth".
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2012
  5. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    All experts say that Rosewall improved as a pro and that he needed a few years to get in his prime.
     
  6. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    And Rosewall beat Nastase in the Tokyo final in 1975 on clay. Good thing Rosewall didn't play the French Open in 1973, and humiliate Nastase again.
    This makes Hoad's incredible clay record against Rosewall even more remarkable.

    The point about Hoad is that after 1960, his conditioning was suspect and he would tire in long matches (the exception being when he trained for eight weeks prior to the Laver series in early 1963 and won five-setters against Laver). The smoke at Wembley made the situation that much worse, and Hoad's high-energy style of play required more oxygen than Rosewall's energy-efficient approach.
     
  7. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    No one needed "a few years" to adjust to the pro game, only a few weeks. Rosewall wasn't that slow a learner. Give the man some credit.

    Laver developed into a mature player at 23, rather slower than most.
    Gonzales: 21
    Connors: 21
    Hoad: 21
    Cooper: 21
    Vines: 20
    Budge: 21
    Kramer: 22
    Trabert: 22
    Borg: 21
    Sampras: 21
    Federer: 21
    Becker: 20
    Edberg: 21
    Schroeder: 21
    Riggs: 21

    It seems like 21 is a good tennis number.
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2012
  8. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    You have not answered PC1's question. Let me try.
    The question is not about domination, but PEAK LEVEL. You keep reverting to some other measure to avoid answering this question.
    Bobby Riggs is not my idea of an expert. He gave the opinion that he was really close to Kramer in their 1948 tour, and only a shoulder injury did him in.
    We do not know what Riggs thought of Hoad's performance in the 1959 Forest Hills final, so that there is no point in speculating or "doubting". We KNOW what Gonzales, Rosewall, Sedgman, and Laver thought of it. I am more impressed with their opinions than Riggs'. You should be too.
    Oh, yes, and Hoad's combined record against Rosewall in the two championship tours of 1958 and 1959, when both players were at prime, was 7 wins, 5 losses.
     
  9. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    We can give provisional lifetime numbers based upon results available in McCauley and others. That is what I did above, and it shows a substantial edge for Hoad against Rosewall on both clay and grass until after 1960, when Hoad's game declined.
     
  10. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,409
    I meant for one match by the way.

    I am surprised when you wrote greats like Tilden, Vines and Borg didn't have the extra gear. Actually Borg and Tilden were well known for have an extra gear. That's how people explained it when Borg often rallied from two sets down in some matches. He have the extra gear, same with Tilden who was able to do the same thing.

    Anyway that doesn't matter, thanks for your choices.
     
  11. krosero

    krosero Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2006
    Messages:
    5,622
    Pancho Gonzalez was 21-25 in 1949-53, but you have never said his peak was in those years. I recall in one thread you said he never played better than when he faced Hoad in 1958-59. Or maybe you said that this was Pancho's own claim, I'm not 100% sure. Either way, what's your opinion? Was 1958-59 his best tennis? He turned 30 in May '58.
     
  12. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    Tilden showed an extra gear against Johnston, but seemed to lack it on clay or grass against Lacoste. Cochet and Lacoste appeared to be as brilliant shotmakers as Tilden. Richard Williams also had great brilliance in the 1914 to 1916 period, perhaps a mtch for the later Tilden.
     
  13. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    Gonzales' game in 1949-53 is underrated.
    On his first tour, he beat Kramer and won a big tournament in Philadelphia, and won at Wembley. He took 8 out of the 12 matches in the California segment of the pro championship tour against Kramer, and both men were Californians. A subsequent knee injury prevented Gonzales from pulling closer to Kramer on that tour.
    His famous Wembley win over Kramer in 1952 was probably the best gauge of relative ability between the two.
    Hoad claimed that 1958-59 was Gonzales' best period, when he was forced to raise his game even higher than usual to play against Hoad. Gonzales still looked young and fresh, aged 29-31 years old.
    I accept Hoad's claim. Their best match ever, according to both players, was in January 1958 at Kooyong, 4-6, 9-7, 11-9 18-16 for Hoad.
     
  14. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,113
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    I think their best match was the 3-6, 4-6, 14-12, 6-1, 6-4 win for Gonzales in the 1958 US Pro final in Cleveland. A brilliant Hoad against a Gonzales who delivered when it mattered under huge pressure.
     
  15. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, Rosewall did not beat Nastase in the Tokyo final in 1975.

    Please refuse to bring that smoke argument!
     
  16. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, your list is only correct for the players since Borg and even Borg reached his peak only at 22, not 21.
     
  17. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, you are again pretty unfair: You take Laver's rankings as a statement from an expert but deny Riggs' statement the status of seriosity. Only in order to belittle Rosewall. Dan, I give you the first price in the "tournament of the best who disparage Ken Rosewall"!

    My opinion about the expert Dan: He is first class regarding his knowledge about tennis but rather weak and faulty regarding the proper valuation of the facts.

    Rosewall was not in his prime in 1958 and almost surely not in 1959.

    Hoad fared very well against Rosewall but at the big affairs he failed: Rosewall leads Hoad by 11:3 (or 11:4 in your counting) at majors. Please accept the facts.
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2012
  18. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, watching your lists I see that Rosewall and Hoad were pretty even on grass even before 1960.

    Thanks that you accept that your lists are only provisional. Or don't you still accept it?
     
  19. krosero

    krosero Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2006
    Messages:
    5,622
    If you accept Hoad's claim that Pancho played his best at the age of 30 and 31, then why would you restrict Rosewall's best tennis to a biological peak of 21-25 years of age?
     
  20. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Tilden was past his prime when losing to Cochet and Lacoste...
     
  21. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, Laver reached his peak at 26, Sedgman reached his peak at 26, Newcombe reached his peak at 26, Roche at 23 or 24 Emerson at 25 or later, Kramer at 25, Connors at 22 (not 21), Riggs much later than you write. Gonzalez at 21 is a bad joke.

    If you believe it or not, Segura reached his prime at 29...

    Learn history!!
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2012
  22. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    krosero, logic seems to be a foreign word for Dan, at least sometimes...
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2012
  23. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Hello operator!

    I think that Limpinhitter should again be allowed to post. I'm sure he would not insult me or others anymore.
     
  24. timnz

    timnz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    4,546
    Laver peak

    Laver in 1967 was his absolute peak - he was 28/29 that year. 1962/1963 was Rosewalls peak he was 27-28. Newcombes peak could be argued as being late 1973 early 1974 - he was 29 (he won the Us open, was one game away from making the masters final when injury felled him, won wct finals) Seems a lot of these guys hit their peak in their very late 20s.
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2012
  25. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    timnz, Even if their prime began a bit earlier, I can agree regarding the absolute peak.
     
  26. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    Hoad was playing with a pulled thigh muscle in that match, so it did not represent the best overall level of play these guys could reach.
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2012
  27. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    Do I prefer Laver's intelligence to Riggs? Yes. Laver gives a much more comprehensive overview, more detailed.
    Rosewall reached his prime in 1957-59, when he faced his toughest competition by far.
    It seems you have a very subjective evaluation of what constitutes a "major".
    I am more interested in hth results in peak years for both players, which favours Hoad.
     
  28. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    No, I think Hoad leads on both clay and grass through 1960.
    I think that every list is provisional, but I doubt that anything substantive of important has been omitted, perhaps only some unrecorded exhibition matches.
     
  29. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    Because Rosewall, like Gonzales and Hoad in those same years, faced the toughest pro competition ever assembled. The early sixties saw much less pro tennis played, and a lesser level of play. Rosewall maintained his level of play past 1960 until about 1964, but the competition was weaker.
    Rosewall nearly won at Forest Hills, the most important pro tournament, in both 1958 and 1959. Only a hair's breadth between him and Hoad and Gonzales.
    Gonzales was only 29 in early 1958.
     
  30. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    We are not talking about PEAK, but about MATURITY. There is a difference.
    Rosewall faced a tougher field in the late fifties, so reached a higher level of play.
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2012
  31. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    Bobby, let's see if we can set a good example for him.
     
  32. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    Again, there is a difference between PEAK and MATURITY.
    All these guys were mature players in their early twenties, and won majors then.
     
  33. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, ranking the players along their intelligence is very subjective and Lobb-like.

    The valuation of (pro) majors is pretty clear for the majority of tennis exeperts. The only doubtful events are Forest Hills and Wimbledon 1967.

    Rod Laver writes that Rosewall is the most underrated player in history. He wrote this even though he did not know you and your constant attitude of belittleing Rosewall.

    I have realized that you never admit that I or other posters have disproved you. I never read a "Sorry"...
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2012
  34. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, I hate your attitude to call all pro matches "exhibitions" where your darling lost!

    25 pro matches of Rosewall and Hoad not substantive? It's your secret...
     
  35. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, I enjoy these your words but I must confess that I rather would like to discuss with a "new" Limpinhitter than with you because you are so stubborn and have sometimes casual "arguments".
     
  36. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Wrong. Most players did not win majors in their early twenties or only amateur ones.

    But I appreciate your new opinion that the peak of most players (from Tilden to Newcombe) came later.
     
  37. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    Sorry, Bobby, but I must disagree again.
    Laver rates Hoad ahead of Rosewall (did you notice this?).
    The valuation of pro majors leaves much to be desired.
     
  38. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    Have no idea what you mean here.
    If no one bothered to record the match, or its results, I doubt that it was a major event. Is that better?
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2012
  39. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    "Casual" or "causal"?
     
  40. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, I never doubted that Laver ranked Hoad ahead of Rosewall (regarding peak play).
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2012
  41. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    It's not my fault when you don't have an idea what I meant with my clear words.

    Those about 25 pro matches of R&H were most probably tour matches as they were played often in the old pro scene. Maybe there even were a few small tournaments included. I never wrote that they were majors.

    I forgot to mention in an older post that Hoad needed half a year to adapt his game to the pro standard. As you know Kramer pampered Lew by giving him the opportunity to play in ther four man tour in order to strengthen him for the 1958 world tour. Gonzalez got furious because of that...

    Rosewall had to learn at the pros to volley more and to shorten his backswing on his forehand.

    Thus meaning: all the great amateurs who turned pros needed surely more than "just a few weeks" to be ready for the best pros. Some of them never did it at all (Cooper, Olmedo).
     
  42. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Ladies and gentlemen: Another trick from Dan Lobb! Firstly, if I remember well, he wrote that the peak of the great players came at 21,22. Now, after some contradiction from krosero, pc1, timnz and myself, he puts the next rabbit out of his hat and writes about maturity vs. peak. I don't remember that the discussion went about maturity. It went about peak or prime years that usually came at 25, 26 and lasted till 29 or 30 as Tilden, Kramer, Gonzalez, Rosewall, Emerson, Sedgman, Trabert, Newcombe, Roche and others have proved.

    Dan, I'm really tired to answer you so often and to contradict your sometimes strange statements. Maybe it's better for me to make a pause in our discussion.

    Bobby
     
  43. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    Hoad was winning within one month.
     
  44. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    I have just checked what I wrote. Originally, I wrote that MATURITY came in the early twenties for most players. Then, that Rosewall PEAKED in 1958-60.
    No contradiction there. Some others misunderstood and substituted "peak" for "maturity".
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2012
  45. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    I stand corrected.
    Rosewall won in Tokyo against Newcombe in 1975, and against Nastase in 1977, both on carpet.
    He beat Nastase at Hong Kong in 1976 on "hardcourt".
     
  46. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

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

    I can give you now the final result of the Rosewall vs. Hoad (Bobby vs Dan) encounter.

    Rosewall won 6-3, 4-6, 6-2, 0-6, 7-6 (13-11) in a match played in a hall without any smoke or other adversities...

    Hope that Dan will survive this shock result!
     
  47. krosero

    krosero Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2006
    Messages:
    5,622
    A whole set of contradictions here. At first you used biological age to define Rosewall's peak, and you set it at 21-25. Presumably you see some decline beginning at 25, or else you would have specified a higher age.

    But then you contradicted this definition by claiming that Pancho Gonzalez played his best at the age of 30-31, in 1958-59, when he faced Hoad. That's not a small contradiction. Pancho should have had 5 years of biological decline already, according to you. But somehow he reverses the biological process and plays, over the course of two seasons, the best tennis he's ever played? Just because he faced Hoad then?

    And now in your last post you've stopped talking about how Rosewall played his best due to biological reasons. You could have kept to that reasoning, and simply made an exception for Gonzalez (as unconvincing as that exception is). But instead you drop the biological angle and return to the competition angle: Rosewall, according to you, played his best at the age of 25 (the 1959 season), not for biological reasons, but because he was facing the toughest competition of his career.

    So really the only consistent guiding principle here is that a player, according to you, reaches his peak when he faces the toughest competition of his career. And specifically, Pancho and Kenny were at their peak levels when they faced Lew. THAT is the only consistent thread in your reasoning -- if you can call it reasoning at all. It really is more like hero worship: all players, and their careers, revolve around Lew Hoad's peak.

    And there's also a little bit of mythologizing about the past in general, because what you're claiming is that 3 of the greatest champions we've ever had simultaneously reached their peaks in two glorious seasons (1958-59).
     
  48. krosero

    krosero Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2006
    Messages:
    5,622
    No smoke? Ouch! Such a creative excuse given for a champion's losses, and it goes right out the window!

    But there are many more.

    Maybe Lew had a bad back.

    Maybe the encounter was not sponsored by Ampol, so Lew just couldn't get motivated for it....

    Maybe Kenny was best man at Hoad's wedding, and Lew wanted to go easy on him....

    Etcetera etcetera
     
  49. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,743
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    When was this match?
     
  50. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    It was played on November 25, 2o12 in an imagination of Bobby's...
     

Share This Page