Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by urban, Sep 12, 2008.
So, you're saying there's more variety in today's game than say, 20+ years ago?
No, I am not. I'm saying its not only nadal/djokovic style of tennis out there ......if you actually bothered to watch !
Almost all of the top 100 players in the World today play the same variety of tennis. The few that are somewhat diversified are not threats to win majors or Masters level events. Don't get me wrong, I like modern tennis as much as the "big game," but, there is definitely a dearth of players who could remotely be called all court players today. Philipp Petzschner comes to mind.
What makes you think I don't watch?
His Volleys, specially FH side rank among the best ever.
I was referring to kiki.
I don't think delpo/tsonga/fish/berdych/tipsarevic play close to how ferrer/murray/nadal/djokovic play ......
There's federer also of course ....
tsonga/fish/federer approach the net quite a bit more than the others as well ...
Also when talking when about variety, I mentioned tomic/dolgopolov for a very good reason. As kiki admitted he hasn't even heard of them, let alone seen them play ....
Keep living on Fantasyland, with new charachters like Tipsochhio, Fishgoofy and Dumbtsonga...
and you can continue to live in that era where drysdale and ralston are great players .......:lol:
At least I mentioned the players I did in terms of variety , not in terms of greatness ......
Hurts to have your ignorance exposed time and again ???? :lol:
well guess not, since you never stop showing your ignorance repeatedly ......
I doubt, if variety was just in front of your face, you could ever distinguish it...again, it is not your fault that you never watched Golden Era tennis, so, as Human nature is, you believe your era is the best ever...
clueless Kiki, didn't I already say to you before that I believe mid80s to 1990 was the Golden era of tennis and not the present era .....
Guess memory isn't one of your strong points . Well , nothing actually is from what I've seen ....
Since it is Easter, time for worshipping and forgiving, keep on worshipping and I´ll keep on forgiving...
thoughts of a delusional......
Come back when you can find a decent description/watched some matches involving tomic/dolgo ( or even the likes of tsonga ) before whining about lack of variety in this era ....
00[145-+5-1QUOTE=abmk;6452974]thoughts of a delusional......
A generation takes 15 years.Why not divide tennis history by generations?.After some thought, here goes my particular opinion
1900-1914: From Doherty to Wilding.tennis first steps, a commonwealth dominion (Doherty,Brookes,Wilding) with some great americans confined in US borders (Mc laughlin,Richards,Sears).WWI breaks the progress
Match of the generation: Wilding vs Brookes
1915-1929: from Wilding to Tilden.tennis goes international after WWI, but it is a US vs France contest.The first GOAT candidate shows up: Big Bil Tilden, whose knowledge will make him the first intelectual and whose personality, along Lenglen´s will give the sport a first bang.Tilden and Wills vs the Mousketeers and Lenglen.
Match of the generation: Tilden vs Lacoste, Lenglen vs Wills
1930-1944:From Tilden to Kramer.Tennis is already an international sport and pro tennis starts seriously, although having a bad reputation that lasts till 1950´s.Europe has Perry,Von Cramm,Nusslein , Australia has Crawford but US is the powerhorse with Budge,Vines and Riggs.WWII stops progress
Match of the Generation:Budge vs Perry
1945-1959:from Kramer to Laver, with Gonzales,Hoad,Rosewall,Trabert,Sedgman in the middle.6 all time greats ( 3 US and 3 Oz ) in a tennis world dominated by the 2 superpowers.US dominates women´s tennis with Marble,Betz,Connolly,Hart,Gibson and Fry.Pro tennis starts having its own life with those great stars and becomes the " real tennis".Possibly, the highest quality ever at the top 6.
And latins have Olmedo and Segura, plus other aussies like Anderson and Cooper, Europe has Pietrangeli and Drobny...
Match of the Generation:Hoad vs Pancho Gonzales
1960-1974: from Laver to Borg.dawn of Open era.jets era increases tennis business while pros and amateurs still divided.1968 will change tennis ( as it changes the rest of human activities).Laver and Rosewall, with some unconsistent but brilliant showings from Gonzales and Hoad dominate the pro tennis.Emerson and then Newcombe,Ashe and Roche dominate the amateurs.Kodes and Nastase get in the middle of a condominium US-Australia.1974 marks the satrt of the Golden Era with great technichal and environtmental changes (TV,WTT,WCT): the era of true professionalism and the golden era spoilt by mass media.
1974 also marks the end of Australian supremacy and the start of US dominance
This generation has 3 queens: Court,Bueno and King that start the women´s lib movement that will benefit the new generation
Match of the Generation: Laver vs Rosewall / Court vs Bueno/King
1975-1989: From Borg to Sampras.Golden Era.Borg and Connors ( with Evert ) are the first 2 HBH, Vilas anc Connors are lefties, Vilas and Borg, start the dominance of top spin.Those 3 are followed by mc Enroe and Lendl and those 2 by Wilander,Becker and Edberg.great variety of styles, wood ceases its dominance and starts the graphite era.
This golden era opens with the last major title of a preopen era player (Newcombe at Kooyong) and ends up with the first major win of a post golden era player (Chang at RG).It couldn´t be more perfectly fit...
The ladies have also a memorable foursome, they are already ultraprofessionalized:Evert and Cawley first, Navratilova and Graf, next.Evert and Goolagong rivalize at the beginning, with the last champions of the preopen era (King and Court), while Navy and Graf with those two frustrated hopes called Austin and Mandlikova.
Match of the Generation: Borg vs Connors and Lendl vs Mc Enroe/ Evert vs Cawley and Navratilova vs Graf.Borg vs Mc Enroe and Evert vs Navi are probably the greatest rivalries in modern tennis and give the sport an unprecedented lift, that will never be matched.tennis reaches its historic peak
This era ends up witht he arrival of the first true big hitting, graphite and poly generation represented by Agassi and Sampras.After European domination, Us takes again the leadership
1990-2004 From Sampras to Federer.As said, tennis has already peaked and will, slowly, go down in interest and variety, although the end of the cold war internationalizes the sport because of new nations ( plus the emergents).But classical powerhorses will slump.
The big serving and big baseline bashing is the trademark.Sampras,Agassi,Courier represent the US dominance in men, while the 2 Williams and Davenport the US edge in women´s, after a first half dominated by europeans Graf,Seles,Hingis.US leads but Australia has Rafter and Hewitt, Spain begins to show great potential with Burguera,Moya,Costa and Ferrerro, and the eastern bloc, leaded by Russia is apowerhorse.So is Switzerland with 2 all time greats:Hingis and Federer.The era ends up with Sampras retired and Federer dominating...
Match of the Generation:Sampras vs Agassi.Seles vs Graf
2005-2019.We are now in the middle of the boring generation with same surfaces, styles, rackets and strings.Russians and Belgians dominate ladies tennis with the 2 Williams on the edge of retirement.Federer dominates for a while but Nadal first and Djokovic later break his strenghold.This era starts with the beginning of the intesne Fed-Nadal rivalry.
match of the Generation:Nadal vs Fed, Serena vs Sharapova
This post is dedicated to those great lovers of tennis hsitory,specially its past ( fedrulz,abmk,apmerk,TMF,Novaktowin,Monfed...)
This is my Easter present to you.I hope you´ll be a bit less clueless after that.No need to say I didn´t for once check anything at wiki...I just knew it before coming to TT
must admit, for once, a decent job well done by you ...... Copy pasting from some reference ......
Now let's see you do the same for the achievements of Vines alone and then try to read it ....
Ditto for the styles of play of dolgopolov/tomic ....
Good sense of humour, Dolgolopov and Tomic.Maybe some day, they´l look like Starsky&Hutchinson, so much for names...
was Sedgman still recovering from surgery in the first half of 1956? cause he didn't tour with the best and didn't play the World (US) Pro.
Sedgman did not play the tour because the headliners were Trabert and Gonzales.
There was no tour in 1955, due to lack of an audience.
Sedgman played the tournaments after the championship tour, and was rusty.
kiki, great overview!
Thanks as you see me mentioned Vines and Nusslein
kiki, I am glad about that.
By the way, Nüsslein never played in Davis Cup but he was an excellent coach: He coached the teams of the USA (1934,1935), Germany, Netherlands, India and Sweden.
In the mid-1960s he even coached the DC teams of Germany and Sweden at the same time!
The Australian Empire was started by Frank Sedgman and ended up by John Newcombe.Edmondoson in the 70´s, Cash in the 80´s, Rafter in the 90´s and Hewitt in 2000´s were mere reminiscences
This led me to the true and undisputable sixteen seeded men based on their influence on each of the eight generations.
2 commonwealth, 4 american, 2 european
3 commonwealth, 3 american, 2 european
5 from the commonwealth: 2 brittons,3 aussies ( wilding played for australassia)
4 european: 2 from the south and 2 from the north
Mixing up from the oldest/best to the youngest/seconds the draw:
Wilding vs Nadal
Tilden vs Agassi
Budge vs Mc Enroe
Gonzales vs Rosewall
Laver vs Kramer
Borg vs Perry
Sampras vs Lacoste
Federer vs Doherty
You have omitted the greatest player of all for a major event!
Sedgman, the subject of this thread, is also left out.
This was not about peak play
Hoad vs Kodes can´t be disputed as the most glorious of any possible final.
The result of Hoad vs. Kodes?
In Hoad's phrase, "Good night, nurse"!
if Kodes beat Newk, he certainly can beat Hoad, who has less important wins than Newk
Newk greater than Hoad?
That's a novel view.
Newk lacked the range of shots and power of Hoad, among other things.
Hoad would gladly have Newk´s record
Hoad could not beat Rosewall at FYH...Newk did it so brutally
kiki, Rosewall beat Newcombe even more brutally at FH than Newk did with Muscles...
One of Hoad's most important wins was at Forest Hills over Rosewall in the 1959 semifinal, 5-7, 6-4, 7-5, 6-4.
That same season, Hoad defeated Rosewall at Kooyong, the Australian Pro, L.A. Masters, Forest Hills, Roland Garros.
Dan, Rosewall and Hoad were about even that year but you are right that Lew won the more important matches.
Hoad was 6 to 2 over Rosewall on the championship tour, but Rosewall won his greatest tournament ever at Brisbane, beating both Hoad and Gonzales in best-of-five set matches.
You "forget" that Rosewall dominated in the Grand Prix: either 6:3 or 7:2...
You mean the Grand Prix de Europe, a lesser tour in 1959 won by Sedgman.
Hoad rather coasted on the European tour that year, as only the Roland Garros event was included in the world tournament championship.
There are three players from the 50s who are (generally) underrated/not spoken about enough - Sedgman, Segura, and Trabert.
You guys are are like tweedle-dum and tweedle-dee: I can't tell the difference between you.
One champions Hoad, one champions Rosewall.?!!!
Dan-Bobby, Bobby-Dan, Dan-Bobby, Bobby-Dan. Twins! Or an old married couple!
On and on the squabbling goes . . . .
hoodjem, There is a tiny difference between Dan and me: While I have some arguments for Rosewall being a GOAT candidate Dan has no arguments that Hoad is a GOAT candidate. Dan only has the absurd "argument" for his thesis that some former players have praised Lew's playing strength (when he was on).
I'm sorry that I'm boring you. I just hope that Dan will realize his wrong point.
No, you're not boring, just repetitively confusing.
Thanks for the info:
Yes, truth is sometimes confusing...
When I started to post here, there were not many posters who had Rosewall as a GOAT candidate. Currently I see that yet several posters rank him that high.
Maybe my efforts to explain Muscles' greatness have something to do with it...
By the way, Bobby is not only Muscles, he is also Rocket and others (Little Nut Nüsslein, Segura, Gimeno, Roche).
Segura I don´t agree, he is far overrated here.Sedgman and Trabert, two true champions, I do agree.Sedgman was a complete player with an amazing doubles record.He was probably the first real modern tennis athlete in the sense we commonly use now.
Trabert was a great fighter and a complete player, too.Maybe he has got to much overexposure as a commentator and people thinks of him more of a commentator than as a great player.he was also a DC captain for the USA
kiki, Segura was No.1 or 2, Trabert was only No. 4....
Segura was nº 2 when there was one true great player in the pros, Kramer or Gonzales.When it became competitive, Segura was placed where he belonged...
Segura´s place is an inbetween all time greats like Kramer,Rosewall,Hoad and Gonzales and secondary players like the Van Horns, Giammalvas and Ayalas of this wolrld...
No, Bobby the arguments for Hoad are abundant.
Laver, Gonzales, Rosewall and the rest did not merely praise Hoad's strength, but his variety of shots, the widest variety of all.
you belong to those who neglect tennis history.
I rank Segura No.2 also for 1954 and 1955 when there were Gonzalez and Sedgman even though he was 33, 34 then. When being 40 and 41 he was No5 and 4 respectively in a great pro field. In 1966 (!) Segoo was strong enough to beat Rosewall in a pro tournament...
kiki has decided to never learn history!
Most all-time greats are inbetween Kramer, Rosewall and van Horn, Ayala. You just try to put down the great Segura who arguably had a better forehand than Rosewall's backhand.
That could be but that's not our discussion.
The real test was in 1958, when Trabert defeated Segura in a long head-to-head tour of the USA.
It was close, but Trabert won.
Segura was 37, Trabert was 28...
Here are some stats that help to support the case that Rosewall is a strong GOAT contender:
Rosewall’s Pro Slams/Slam Equivalents
WCT Finals Rosewall (21) (Laver)
RG Gimeno (Proisy)
PSW Los Angeles Smith (Tanner)
USO Nastase (Ashe)
AO Rosewall (20) (Ashe)
Rome Laver (Kodes)
Wim Newcombe (Smith)
USO Smith (Kodes)
Sydney Laver (Rosewall)
Wim Newcombe (Rosewall)
USO Rosewall (19) (Roche)
Barcelone Santana (Laver)
AO Laver (Gimeno)
RG Laver (Rosewall)
Wim Laver (Newcombe)
USO Laver (Roche)
RG Rosewall (18 ) (Laver)
Wimbledon Laver (Roche)
PSW Los Angeles Laver (Rosewall)
USO Ashe (Okker)
Wembley Laver (Rosewall)
World Pro Laver (Rosewall)
Wimbledon Pro Laver (Rosewall)
US Pro Laver (Gimeno)
Wembley Laver (Rosewall)
Barcelona Gimeno (Rosewall)
New York MSG Pro Rosewall (17) (Laver)
US Pro Laver (Rosewall)
French Pro Rosewall (16) (Laver)
Milan Pro Gimeno (Rosewall)
Wembley Laver (Gimeno)
US Pro Rosewall (15) (Laver)
Noordwijk Pro Gimeno (Rosewall)
French Pro Rosewall (14) (Laver)
Wembley Laver (Rosewall)
US Pro Laver (Gonzales)
French Pro Rosewall (13) (Laver)
Wembley Rosewall (12) (Hoad)
US Pro Rosewall (11) (Laver)
Italian Pro Rosewall (10) (Laver)
French Pro Rosewall (9) (Gimeno)
Wembley Rosewall (8 ) (Hoad)
Stockholm Pro Rosewall (7) (Gimeno)
Wimbledon Laver (Mulligan)
Geneva Pro Gonzales (Rosewall)
Copenhagen Pro Gonzales (Olmedo)
French Pro Rosewall (6) (Gonzales)
Wembley Rosewall (5) (Hoad)
Victorian Pro Hoad (Rosewall)
World Cham’p Tour Gonzales (Rosewall)
French Pro Rosewall (4) (Hoad)
Wembley Rosewall (3) (Segura)
Melbourne Pro Sedgman (Gonzales)
French Pro Trabert (Sedgman)
Los Angeles Pro RR Gonzales (Hoad)
Tourn. Of Champ. Hoad (Gonzales)
Australian Pro Sedgman (Trabert)
French Pro Rosewall (2) (Hoad)
Wembley Sedgman (Trabert)
Tourn. Of Champ. Gonzales (Rosewall)
Australian Pro Segura (Sedgman)
Wembley Rosewall (1) (Segura)
Tourn. Of Champ. Gonzales (Sedgman)
RG Davidson (Flam)
Separate names with a comma.