Rod Laver- need a little help

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by TheModernEra, Aug 25, 2007.

?

Have you seen Laver play?

  1. Yes

    19 vote(s)
    37.3%
  2. No

    32 vote(s)
    62.7%
  1. TheModernEra

    TheModernEra Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Messages:
    110
    While doing a little research on GOATS, I checked out oft mentioned Rod Laver. His last title was reportedly in 1976. Wikipedia states he has over 180 singles titles....

    2 questions:
    1. Given all the hype surrounding Laver, how many posters in this forum have actually seen him play (live or on video/DVD/etc)? I'm just trying to get a feel for how much first hand experience people on this forum have of Laver.

    2. Why doesn't Laver get props for his 180 singles titles? Doesn't Connors have the record?
     
    #1
  2. WillAlwaysLoveYouTennis

    WillAlwaysLoveYouTennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 11, 2006
    Messages:
    1,735
    Location:
    Deutschland
    This should have been posted under the 'former pro players', not on 'general pro player discussion'.
     
    #2
  3. saram

    saram Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    5,371
    #3
  4. urban

    urban Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    4,377
    Yes i saw him play live. Once in 1971 at a Cologne WCT tournament against Phil Dent, the father of Taylor Dent, and later in 78, in an exhibition against Bjorn Borg. There are some matches on websides of internet sellers lately, including the Wim title match of 69 against Newcombe, and the Sydney final of 1970 against Rosewall. Yes, Laver's count is over 185 titles. That is not fiction, but the tally given in 'Total Tennis' by Bud Collins. Raymond Lee made an article about these records on Tennis week in 2006. Even if you subtract ca. 15 titles as 4 man events in the pro era, you get circa 170 titles. Laver has the record of titles won in one year for each era, the amateur, pro and open era, in quality and quantity: He won 21 titles in 1962 as an amateur, including Grand Slam plus Italian an and German (145 to 14 matches), 18 titles as a pro in 1967,including all 3 pro majors (US, British and French) plus Wimbledon pro, and 18 titles in open era in 1969, including Grand Slam and the most important hard and indoor tournaments.
     
    #4
  5. joe sch

    joe sch Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    4,773
    Location:
    Hotel CA
    I have seen Laver play only on video matches and have several good ones. I really dont think you can compare pre-open and open level players and believe the best comparison is by decade or by head to head and common match results. My pick for GOAT is Laver since he has 2 grand slams and almost 200 singles titles. Rod also played preopen tennis so his slam total would be higher if his whole career was played in the open era. Like many of the all time greats in the metal and wood era, Rod played alot of doubles and played many long matches before the TieBreaker was introduced.
     
    #5
  6. Marius_Hancu

    Marius_Hancu G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2004
    Messages:
    17,844
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    I saw him live in Montreal playing doubles when he was probably 55, in a Legends series.

    Still very impressive S-V, very firm, decisive, all the shots, drop-volleys, etc.

    That strong arm was able to do everything. Strong legs, body. Very athletical even at that age. There was no hesitation in what he was doing, reading the play very quickly and acting upon it. Was coming at the net all over the opponents.

    My GOAT.
     
    #6
  7. scineram

    scineram Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Messages:
    1,234
    Location:
    Hellhole Hungary
    I am convinced.
     
    #7
  8. Eviscerator

    Eviscerator Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,709
    Location:
    S. Florida
    Although that is one of the few video clips that seem to be around on Laver, people need to realize he was pretty old in 1977 at the end of his career. Even so you get to see some of his abilities against a player like Borg.

    As to the OP's questions, I've only seen Laver a few matches when I was a small kid, and have seen videos of him from a tennis library source. He was just amazing how he could hit just about any shot, and his net game was deadly.

    As to why he does not get credit for the most tourney wins, it may have to do with the whole amateur/professional/open era professional silliness. Regardless of the reasons, he won the tourneys and should be giver credit. Heck had he been able to compete for more slams he'd most likely have more than Sampras currently does, but who knows.

    As I see the GOAT issue, Laver is it, and will remain so unless Federer is able to win the Grand Slam twice.
     
    #8
  9. hyrulemaster

    hyrulemaster Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2007
    Messages:
    110
    WOW thanks Laurie!! I'm convinced that this guy is pretty good, and not some old overrated hag, like a lot of us young'uns do :D .

    That's an amazing clip right there. So proficient with everything! That forehand dropshot he played from the baseline crosscourt?? amazing! All of those shots. How entertaining tennis was back then, if it was anything like that clip posted above.

    Wow...
     
    #9
  10. JW10S

    JW10S Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,896
    I also saw Laver play while he was still on tour. He was one of the few players of his era who could hit topspin off both wings, could S&V, could stay back, was very quick (hence the nickname 'Rocket') and was cool under pressure. He won a calender year Grand Slam as an amateur then was barred from playing the Slams when he turned pro for 5 or 6 years. When Open tennis came into being he again won the calender year Grand Slam in Open tennis' 1st full year in 1969. One can only imagine how many GS titles he would have won had he not been barred from playing them. I agree that Rod Laver is the GOAT...
     
    #10
  11. VikingSamurai

    VikingSamurai Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2006
    Messages:
    3,498
    Location:
    F ukuoka Japan, via Atlanta GA, originally Brisban
    He was well into his 30's in that clip above, but it just showed that even though the game was changing (I guess he started the topspin modern game) he could still compete with the best of them.. It is scary to think what he could have achieved if he was able to compete in the years he couldn't.

    Also you notice that he never held his raquet with both hands until he prepared for a shot.. He was always on the move, and shows the strength of the guy to just run around with his arms down at his sides when waiting for the next shot.. I see alot of Laver in Martina Navratilova when you look at the old matches of her playing. She does the exact same thing as Laver with arms down to the side, and her serve is almost identicle.. You can tell who influenced her, and to great success..

    As a fellow Queenslander, he was the shining light to a State that has such a rich Tennis history.. My sister and her family live in his home town of Rockhampton, and if you have ever been there. It is hard to believe that such a great tennis player (The greatest) could originate from such humble and country beginnings!
     
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2007
    #11
  12. hyrulemaster

    hyrulemaster Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2007
    Messages:
    110
    What racket does that guy use? I think I'm gonna go buy 3 or 4 :D
     
    #12
  13. st.brees

    st.brees Guest

    For a while Sampras was considered almost unanimously the GOAT, now Federer is coming, his haters or Sampras lovers (e.g. american media) suddenly turn to crown Laver? It's really funny.
     
    #13
  14. st.brees

    st.brees Guest

    Talk about grand slams. I believe Laver won 9 of his 11 total slams on grass, 2 on clay. Today's GS are so different. For Federer to win 3 a year for 3 straght years, it's nothing less a GS in Laver's days.
     
    #14
  15. JW10S

    JW10S Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,896
    That Sampras was 'almost unamimously' considered the GOAT is news to me. Those who say that always point to his record number of Grand Slam titles. The funny thing is that the player who held the record for more than 30 years before Sampras broke it was Roy Emerson and nobody, I mean nobody, ever called Emerson the GOAT during all that time. Grand Slam titles is not the sole criteria for one being considered the GOAT.
     
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2007
    #15
  16. Moose Malloy

    Moose Malloy Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,916
    That clip certainly makes it clear that Laver was very fit & strong(can you believe those forearms? and very strong legs. davydenko looks like a girly man in comparison)

    Read Laver's book, he worked out a lot & was very careful about what he ate, again proving the 19 year olds here who think pro players of 30 years ago sat around & drank beer, smoked, etc, & weren't professional to be complete dumbasses. Laver was the consumate pro, he took his livlehood very seriously. Esp in comparison to someone like Nalbandian, Bagdhatis, Safin, etc. I wonder who spent more time clubbing?

    I wonder why tennis is the only sport where fans are only willing to give credit to players they've seen. Many haven't seen Wilt, Willie Mays, Mohamed Ali, etc, etc, yet they are still regarded as gods today. Wonder if any fans speculate about their 'hype' the way so many tennis fan do about Laver?

    and really there is no excuse for anyone who wants to know more not to seek out the many Laver matches available for sale on line.

    I recommend '69 W Laver vs Ashe. I don't think I've ever seen as many clean winners hit with wood racquets as I have in that match. That includes Mac & Borg. the crowd was gasping. dan maskell, who had seen it all, said he never saw shot-making like that at wimbledon.

    tennis dvds dot net has that match & couple other Laver matches for like only $5, which is ridiculous considering how hard it must have been to find them. and many borg, mac matches so you can compare the level of play of players from different generations. you can see from their matches that borg & mac were not clearly better than laver, which is/was a very popular opinion(that the next generation is always better, etc)

    I think the only way anyone can begin to judge laver's ability is to see at least one match with him in its entirety(preferably one from 1969), not just clips on youtube.

    No one should vote 'yes' on this poll just based on clips.

    really? by whom? all those in the know, tennis historians, etc pick Laver. Maybe guys like Chris Fowler pick Sampras?

    You would think after all the uproar after Wimbledon's "new" grass in recent years, people would begin to understand that not all grass court events play the same. Just look up the different players that did well in Australia(which was grass until 1987) that didn't do well at Wimbledon those years. And vice versa. Just look up Wilander & Becker's record at those 2 events & telll me all grass is the same. Or Navratilova, widely considered the best grasscourt player of alltime, yet she lost to Evert & Sukova on grass in Australia, while basically demolishing everyone at Wimbledon for years.

    and one other thing, have a look at the amount of grasscourt events other than the slams in laver's time, there were hardly any. there was no grasscourt season, they weren't playing on grass year round like many seem to imply when mentioning that 3 slams were on grass. the majority of the tour was on clay & indoors. there weren't any grasscourt warmups prior to the us open those days. imagine if there were none prior to wimbledon today, don't you think it would be problematic for players?

    btw I have nothing against Federer or anyone who considers him the best ever. he's certainly done enough for that label. but I have a problem with those trying to undervalue the achievements of others, it seems rather petty & small.
     
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2007
    #16
  17. saram

    saram Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    5,371
    I watched that clilp, looked at the year, looked who Laver was playing, and realized just how damn good Laver had to have been in his prime. He was playing 5 time Bjorg in that clip on grass and surely holding his own--and even breaking Bjorg. Laver won on all surfaces including clay.

    Until seeing that clip, I thought Laver was like everyone else and just pushing and finessing the ball arouond. I was wrong. He hit with spin off both wings, massive and powerful legs, great speed, great agility, and just blew me away.

    I always thought Roger was the GOAT. Now, after just that short clip and understanding Laver more, I realize just how dominant he must have been. Two calendar slams, the titles, the tenure on tour, to hang with Bjorg at an older age in Bjorg's backyard...just amazing...

    I may have to call Laver the GOAT now. After all, Hank Aaron will always be my home run king!
     
    #17
  18. Eviscerator

    Eviscerator Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,709
    Location:
    S. Florida
    :roll:


    [​IMG]
     
    #18
  19. Moose Malloy

    Moose Malloy Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,916
    That was green clay, not grass. It was an 4 man invitational event after Laver was basically retired.

    Laver actually beat Borg on clay a month before Borg won his first FO(also there is an 18 year difference)
     
    #19
  20. tennispro11

    tennispro11 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,586
    Location:
    Kansas
    After watching him battle it out with Borg in that clip made me realize as well just how good he must have been in his prime. I wouldn't even want to think how many slams if he would have had had they not done the whole amateur/pro thing. If it was set up the way it is now back then, man he would've owned every single record there is for men's tennis.
     
    #20
  21. Moose Malloy

    Moose Malloy Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,916
    Not just that, but many aren't aware of the politics in the early years of the Open Era. In 1970, the year after Laver won the Grand Slam, he wasn't allowed to defend his AO or FO titles due to a dispute between WCT players & the ITF.

    That year he won the Italian Open, over a field involving all the top players. He beat Jan Kodes in the final. That same Jan Kodes won the French over a sub-par field later that year.
     
    #21
  22. tennispro11

    tennispro11 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,586
    Location:
    Kansas
    Man, you sure know your stuff. All of this was before my time. I do know a little bit about what went on. How many slams do you think Laver would've won had they not had the amateur/pro thing?
     
    #22
  23. VikingSamurai

    VikingSamurai Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2006
    Messages:
    3,498
    Location:
    F ukuoka Japan, via Atlanta GA, originally Brisban
    Seriously.. I don't think 15 or more would be stretching it?
     
    #23
  24. FarFed

    FarFed Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Messages:
    290
    I guess it clear now why this happened:

    [​IMG]
     
    #24
  25. VikingSamurai

    VikingSamurai Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2006
    Messages:
    3,498
    Location:
    F ukuoka Japan, via Atlanta GA, originally Brisban
    I am not sure the meaning for your comment. But if it is regarding Roger crying at the Australian, then you must know that he has a strong love for the Australian players of yester-year, so much so that he strives to play the game in the same spirit as these guys did, and is why he has become as humble as he has.. To recieve the trophy from the GOAT (Laver) is something that someone that could be forgiven for being jaded, actually understood and appreciated.. Just shows why Federer is miles ahead of the rest.. He actually "gets" it!...
     
    #25
  26. TheModernEra

    TheModernEra Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Messages:
    110
    Hey Moose,

    Thanks for your insightful response....The whole purpose of this thread (which should have been posted in the retired/former players forum- sorry- I'm a new fan of this site), is to draw interest in Laver. I have read more about him in the past 3 weeks than anytime in the past. I think all those entertaining arguments of GOATS/BOATS/etc. should do the same. Do your homework. Study the game, both past and present.

    I have to say, that seeing players play is far more revealing than reading about them. How could one accurately describe Federer's play over the past 3 years? There are many clips of past basketball and boxing greats shown time and time again on TV. Tennis, as a second tier sport in US, does not show any such clips of prior greats.......I will order up some old school videos, and discover the past....others should too....IMO.....
     
    #26
  27. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,606
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    Moose, great post.

    The first tournament I remember watching Laver win was over Newk. The tournament was on Rubico and Laver won $1000 and a Ford Pinto. It's laughable now, imagine giving Federer a Civic for beating Nads in the finals of a Master's Series event. I remember it distinctly because when they gave Laver the keys, he said "Thanks and I guess Ford really does have a better idea."

    It's also true that the Grand Slams didn't dictate the schedule like they do now. If a Grand Slam changes surfaces now, all the tournaments leading up to that Grand Slam change their surface to match. Back in Laver's day, the "warm ups" didn't do that. It wasn't until the great US clay court circuit started that the preceding tournaments matched their surface to the Grand Slam. IMO, Grand Slam tournaments have much more importance in the schedule now than they did then with relation to the surrounding tournaments.

    When I was in high school, that series came on. I watched it religiously every Sunday. Pancho Gonzalez and Chris Schenkel called the matches. One match ended way before the alotted time, so Gonzalez gave Schenkel an impromptu tennis lesson. The first tip he gave Schenkel was his shoes. Schenkel came on court wearing his Pat Boone's (white dress shoes for you younger posters).

    Laver was the match of not only Borg, but Nastase, Newcombe, Stan Smith, and Arthur Ashe. I can't remember if he was still involved in it when Tanner and Gerualaitis played it. But nobody ran over Laver, that was for sure. His tactics and court usage were second to none, and I can still see his volleys in my mind's eye. Solid as a rock.

    Laver's serve wasn't as big a weapon, but it should be noted that the rules of the game when he played didn't allow for players to jump in the air when they served. At least one foot had to be in contact with the ground or it was called a foot fault.
     
    #27
  28. Moose Malloy

    Moose Malloy Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,916
    also I recommend reading laver's book(with bud collins) The Education of a Tennis Player, 1971. you can probably find it for 50 cents on amazon.

    It shows a different side of Laver than all we get today(the only time we see/hear him is when he's talking about Fed) & shows that he had an edge, was very competitive, not just a James Blake guy who goes around hugging everyone & reminding everyone that he's a good guy(Laver was a great sportsman, but he didn't like taking BS either, guy was tough)
    He sounds offended when Ashe said around 1969 that the 'new generation' was ready to take over from him & Rosewall. Like Fed or Sampras, he wanted to show that he was still boss.
    and he talks a lot about equipment, technique etc.

    Also he goes into great details about surfaces, so people can finally get it into their heads that not all grass is the same.

    And the pressure on him to win the Grand Slam in 1969 was enormous, he knew that it would guarantee him 100s of thousands in endorsements, so you can see that the pressures were a bit different back then. Plus his wife was pregnant & due any minute, so it was hard to stay focused on the moment during the US Open that year.

    and you can learn more about how the pro tour was structured back then(very different, it was a mess really, there was no structure like there is today)
    and you can see that matches that would be considered exos today, were very important then(there were non atp 'winner take all' matches that were a pretty big deal to the players. laver swept everyone in this series in '71)
     
    #28
  29. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,606
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    alright, Moose, I ordered Laver's book off Amazon yesterday. It was more the .50 cents though....
     
    #29
  30. urban

    urban Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    4,377
    If someone is interested in tennis history of the later 20 th century, i recommend also the brilliant written book about the style and career of the 30 best players from the 60s to the 90s by Rex Bellamy, Love Thirty, London 1991. Bellamy was the Tennis Correspondent of The Times, and is one of the best tennis writers ever.
     
    #30
  31. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,832
    Location:
    New York City
    Laver is the real deal. For those who think his game isn't modern enough to compete, keep in mind that McEnroe's game is arguably less "modern" than Laver's, and McEnroe to this day gives current pros trouble.

    Also yes, the service rule of that time truly did alter the mechanics available to those players. The fact that a near retired Laver can keep up with Borg on clay is incredible. Borg's idol was always Rod Laver even though their styles differed so much.

    I have Laver/Newcombe Wimbledon final 1969. It's pretty much a clinic.
     
    #31
  32. dima

    dima Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    727
    I love how people say Laver is the GOAT unless Federer wins the GrandSlam twice, without putting into account all of Federer's record, it seems like only Laver's records count. Even though the game is that much more competitive.
     
    #32
  33. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,832
    Location:
    New York City
    I don't understand your argument one bit.
     
    #33
  34. Gizo

    Gizo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,699
    As Urban pointed out:
    The most dominant season in the history of the amateur era - Laver in 1962
    The most dominant season in the history of the professional tour - Laver in 1967
    The most dominant season in the history of the open era - Laver in 1969

    He regularly won the biggest titles available to him on grass, carpet, hard and clay, and doesn't have a single blemish on his CV. He is the clear winner in the GOAT debate in my opinion.
     
    #34
  35. martinross

    martinross New User

    Joined:
    May 10, 2006
    Messages:
    39
    I saw Laver when I was 13

    I saw Laver play when tyennis first when Open in 1969 and 1970 - he wasn't a big guy but he played big and his forearm looked like Walter Payton's almost. Great all around game and probably nobody will ever clearly be better but does ther have to be a GOAT (what is the obsession?) - if there has to be one however it is undoubtably Laver at least for now....
     
    #35
  36. chaognosis

    chaognosis Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2005
    Messages:
    694
    Location:
    Chicago
    I feel like I'm pointing out the obvious here, but this is not the case at all. Even during the 1990s, Laver topped a majority of polls--perhaps the most significant being that 1999 AP ranking selected by a six-member expert panel. Sampras often came in second, but not by large margins over players like Borg and Tilden.
     
    #36
  37. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,832
    Location:
    New York City
    I saw a European poll that had Borg, not that it's a big surprise.
     
    #37
  38. superman1

    superman1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    5,243
    As good as I'm sure he was, no one is better than Federer. Did you see Fed today at the Open? He's just f'ing incredible. Moves like a gazelle and swings his racquet like a whip. It's normal to appreciate the present more than the past, and it's kind of pathetic to be one of those old guys who tries to get the young'ins to appreciate his generation. Laver was great, okay, move on. One day we'll all be forgetting about Federer and harping on about the new guy.

    This coming from a huge Beatles fan who thinks that music sucks today. Some things were better in the past. Tennis was not.
     
    #38
  39. Moose Malloy

    Moose Malloy Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,916
    Ginepri said he was sore after hitting for just 10 minutes with a wood racquet earlier this year. And he's as ripped as can be. Do the math. Federer would look very different with wood, you could say goodbye to the highlight reel shots every other game, they simply aren't possible with wood. Trying playing with one, your opinion will change. That said, going strictly by results Federer has a great case for best ever. No one's ever been this dominant for this long.

    Of course tennis was not better in the past, they were playing with very challenging equipment, in which unforced errors were unavoidable. Look at Mac with wood & Mac with graphite. He couldn't make a return vs Borg with wood, with graphite he started returning like Agassi.
     
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2007
    #39
  40. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,606
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    To add just a little to Moose's post, I would imagine in 5 years, posters on these boards will be saying things like "Federer didn't have the competition that <insert new greatest ever> does now". It didn't take long for those type comments to surface regarding Sampras.

    Let me say that the tennis world was every bit, if not more, as awed at Laver when he was in his prime as they are today with Federer. Laver was the undisputed biggest stick in the playground when he was on top. To say Federer is better than Laver is proof that you never saw Laver play.
     
    #40
  41. GS

    GS Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,313
    Location:
    Oakland
    JEEZ! Doesn't anyone remember, about 10 or 12 years ago, when TW had a ProKennex clinic featuring Rod, down in San Luis Obipso, where anyone could hit with the legend for a few minutes? I'm disappointed all you old-timers don't remember that....
     
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2007
    #41
  42. Moose Malloy

    Moose Malloy Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,916
    Yeah Rabbit, what I've learned most about Laver(he was before my time) was not just watching his matches & seeing his talent, but from reading some books by some of the greats & their impressions of him.

    Putting aside results, Laver wowed them all in his time, he was shotmaker. Some of the 'oldtimers' in his day(meaning Budge, Vines, Kramer) sound like they can't even comprehend what they were seeing, all these winners hit from almost anywhere with unheard of topspin, etc.
    And all his contempraries (Ashe, Newcombe etc) say he was the one player all the other players wanted to watch.
    Sound familar?

    Well, tell us more!
     
    #42
  43. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,606
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    Moose - speaking of Ashe, he was so in awe of Laver that in 1968 on his way to court to play Laver in the US Open, he became physically ill and vomited courtside. Now that's what I call nerves.

    I think the only player who wasn't really awed was his closest competitor, Rosewall.
     
    #43
  44. urban

    urban Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    4,377
    Ashe was a powerhitter, whose strengths worked into Laver's strengths. His serve and backhand return were as explosive as tnt. In the mid 70s he slowed his shots down a bit, and played more save. The 1969 Wimbledon semifinal with Laver must have been one of Ashe's most famous matches. David Gray has written a very nice description of this match. Ashe tried to overrun Laver and won the first set 6-2 with blistering backhand returns. Then, with his left arm getting warm, Laver got into the groove, and blitzed Ashe 6-2,9-7, and 6-0. I just ordered the match on dvd, thanks for the tip, Moose.
     
    #44
  45. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,606
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    Laver suffered from a bad arm, courtesy of the good folks at Chemold. He would up finishing that endorsement with a Dunlop painted gold to sorta resemble the metal Chemold he had been paid to use. But once he got it warmed up, it was a killing machine. :)
     
    #45
  46. VikingSamurai

    VikingSamurai Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2006
    Messages:
    3,498
    Location:
    F ukuoka Japan, via Atlanta GA, originally Brisban
    I am proud to be an Aussie, and proud to be a Queenslander like Laver! :)
     
    #46
  47. urban

    urban Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    4,377
    Rabbit rightfully wrote about Chemold and referred to a more bizzare theme of the early open era. Since 1970, Laver played with different rackets in different continents, not only different in logos, but in material. He played with a aluminium frame by Chemold in the US and a wooden frame by Donnay in Europe. Some experts like John Barrett explain his relative decline since 1970 with the abandoning of his old Maxply, which Barrett called his 'stradivari'. The aluminium Chemold often fell apart, and in 1972 Laver threw these rackets into a lake. Its weird under modern circumstances, that a top pro changes his racket (and the material) constantly, but it was the time of the first real "big" money, which poured into the game. Laver was the first tennis client of Mark McCormack, who had promoted golf stars like Palmer and Nicklaus before. At first McCormack didn't want to cooperate with Laver, because he didn't believe in the tennis market. Only shortly before Laver's Grand Slam of 1969, McCormack signed a contract with him. Laver was the first tennis player who made real money with prize money and endorsements. Ashe, then Newcombe (with his mustache image) and later Borg followed the path. Under the tutelage of McCormack Borg, too, played with Bancroft in the US and Donnay in Europe, but in this case they were at least all out of the same material, wood with some fiberglas ingredients.
     
    #47
  48. VikingSamurai

    VikingSamurai Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2006
    Messages:
    3,498
    Location:
    F ukuoka Japan, via Atlanta GA, originally Brisban
    Urban, your research is excellent.. I can assume you are an Aussie? I can listen and read about the old guys all day.. I personally have alot of old matches such as the 69 Wimbledon final, and also the 74 Wimbledon Final aswell..
     
    #48
  49. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,606
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    I believe it was after the Chemold contract expired that Dunlop welcomed Laver back "into the fold" as it were. From that point forward, until his retirement, he didn't even look at another frame. If I'm not mistaken, Dunlop issued a special cosmetic for Laver. If you watch some of the Hilton Head series, you can see it. It had a dark brown, amost chocolate colored piece on the throat in place of where the white is on the Fort.

    I can still remember going into OTASCO (Oklahoma Tire and Supply Company) and looking at the Rawlings Newk Autograph and the Chemold. Sadly (then), as a sophomore in high school I could afford neither. I do remember wanting the Chemold because Laver used it. I think it was $25.00 at the time, prestrung of course.

    I now have a couple of mint Seamco Rosewall Autographs. Those babies were only sold, around here at least, in a country club pro shop.

    Them was the days, boys....them was the days.
     
    #49
  50. AndrewD

    AndrewD Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    6,581
    You'll find out very quickly that the book should have been titled 'Bud Collins writes at length and with as much colour as is humanly possible about a few things Rod Laver told him' LOL. It is an interesting book due to the subject matter but you do need to bear in mind that the main voice is Collins, not Laver.

    The most interesting part of the book is the chapter devoted to Pancho Gonzales. Not just for what it tells you about Gonzalez but also what it tells you about the critical perception (from the US media and audiences) they had to suffer through.
     
    #50

Share This Page