We have a GOAT - Pancho Gonzales

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by jrs, Mar 16, 2013.

  1. Feather

    Feather Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,520
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    As a matter of fact, we have a thread about backhand in this section. The list was selected by historians and they have made a list. So in that, they have concluded that Roger's backhand is better than Rafa's backhand. Roger's backhand is there in the list but not Rafa's. None of the Federer admirers had any say in that list. So you might as well ask this question to the historians. They will answer you..

    http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=250869&page=99

    It's not Federer admirers who made that list :wink:

    Lastly, he didn't struggle against three. He struggled mainly against Rafa that too on clay mainly. ATP has done the honours of slowing down all courts and made almost all surfaces like clay. Rafa didn't make it to the finals on Roger's surfaces when Roger was in his prime. So the head to head was skewed.

    Djokovic got the upper hand against Federer after 2010 and Murray recently. Murray's first victory against Federer in a slam was this year.

    Federer is really good that he is still making SF and Finals after crossing age 30. It's indeed an achievement in this era which is a grinders era
     
  2. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,704
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    If you could name some matches and years that would be beneficial.

    Where did he criticize it? An article available to read? Or perhaps it's just that Nadal doesn't do much with his backhand that's worthy of being put in a highlight reel...There are plenty of fanatical Nadal fans Bobby.

    Federer's percentage is alot higher for both hardcourt and grass, Nadal just has an insane winning percentage on clay which boosts his up majorly. Do some background reading before making a point. Nadal was also an early bloomer while Federer was a late bloomer. Federer had 3 consecutive seasons far higher than anything Nadal has ever mustered.
     
  3. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    The silly and clueless Bobby never said that Henman was more successful than Federer useing serve and volley.
     
  4. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    I thought that hoodjem has made that list.

    There are much more Federer admirers among the historians than Nadal admirers. This does not mean that Federer is better. Experts have often erred, see the ugly Tennis Channel list or see Hopman who ranked weak Emerson ahead of strong Rosewall...
     
  5. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Regarding return percentages Nadal is better than Federer also on hardcourt.
     
  6. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,704
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    I assume that's all time? Where did you find this stat?
     
  7. the green god

    the green god Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Messages:
    450
    Gonazalez played them all(from Tilden to Connors) and beat them all. In 1948 he was the top American and can make a claim for being to top American player in 1968. If he was beating the best in the world when 38-40, what would he have done to them when he was 23-28?
     
  8. the green god

    the green god Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Messages:
    450
    Neither did Henri Leconte:)
     
  9. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    the green god, a justified question.
     
  10. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    NatF, a friend of mine gave it to me. I trust him that he has researched correctly. I'm not that familiar with modern statistics...

    Yes, it's lifetime percentage.
     
  11. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,704
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    I find it unlikely that the top 4 of today would be the top 4 overall, seems too much of a coincidence. I don't doubt the integrity of your friend, but if I can't see the actual results myself I won't debate it.

    As for your point which is that Federer is an inferior baseliner to the other 3? Might be true although the slower surfaces help retrievers like Nadal, Djokovic and Murray rather than players who prefer to go for winners. Djokovic especially as his best is perhaps the greatests all round baseliner ever. He's very quick, flexible and his backhand and forehand are both very good. Murray's backhand is much the same, though he's not as flexible he seems faster flatout. His forehand is improving too.

    As for Nadal he's exceptionally quick, IMO one of the top 2 or 3 all round movers ever. Which combined with his fantastic lefty forehand means he's very good at getting to the backhand of other players. His backhand is stable but has rarely been a weapon.

    Considering the relative careers on hardcourts for Nadal, Federer, Murray and Djokovic. I do find it hard to believe Federer would be bellow all 3 of them for return games won. I say this knowing Federer has the record win percentage on hards. Although that could be a product of his usually far superior hold game so who knows.
     
  12. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    I forgot that article: google "Roger Federer Twilight of a Champion Peter Bodo"
     
  13. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,704
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    He basically both hurts and helps your cause. He claims Federer may be the greatest and states age has hurt him. He also claims that Nadal simply matches up well against Federer, Nadal's forehand is better than Federer's backhand no denying that. At worst he calls Federer's backhand not particularly threatening, but then again he says it's versatile. I can probably accept that.

    If Federer is essentially the reverse of Rosewall who forgive me if I'm wrong didn't have a particularly strong forehand but had an exceptional backhand, why is it more of a blemish for Federer than Rosewall? You can say Rosewall has better volley's but Federer has a better serve. Seems like you only see the not so great in Federer.
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2013
  14. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    NatF, As I always say: Federer's backhand is too defensive, at least against Nadal. It's just no weapon.

    By the way, I still claim that Federer had his three or four top years partly because there was rather weak opposition: baby Nadal, Blake, Hewitt Baghdatis, inconsistent Nalbandian. Rosewall and others had tougher competition...
     
  15. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,704
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    Nadal recording his highest win percentage in 2005, he wasn't a baby really. No one who wins masters on hardcourt can be called a bad player. He wasn't peak but he was still good. Baghdatis was never a rival and he played fantastically at the AO in 06, he has beaten Nadal in his best ever career year 2010. He also gave peak Murray a tough match at the Wimbledon this year. That's depth that a player who is lower ranked can play so well and make deep runs.

    Safin, Hewitt, Roddick all had different styles and were very good players. Agassi was also still there although past his prime. Djokovic was a top 3 player from the second half of 2007. Players like Davydenko who Federer met in slam semi's on many occasions has a winning head to head with Nadal and a dominant one on hard (even against Peak Nadal). Even well past his prime a guy like Davydenko took Ferrer to the cleaners this year. Roddick has a winning head to head with strong era player Djokovic. At their peak these guys were very good.

    It's not right to belittle these players.

    Federer's backhand isn't a weapon against Nadal no, atleast not on high bouncing slow surfaces. At the WTF it is a weapon for example. You refuse to acknowledge how conditions affect tennis matches.
     
  16. W.P. Mayhew

    W.P. Mayhew Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2012
    Messages:
    620
    What a rude thing to say to someone who is trying to reason with you. Probably one the most presumptuous and arrogant expressions you can utter in a civilized discussion; a last resort.
     
  17. Benhur

    Benhur Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,562
    I finally went to that Pat Cash website and read what he wrote about Gonzalez. One bit I didn't know that impressed me was this:

    If this isn’t impressive enough, he also beat in head-to-head pro tours, all of the best amateurs who turned pro. This included every Wimbledon champion for 10 years in a row!
    http://www.patcash.co.uk/2012/11/greatest-tennis-player-of-all-time-part-5/

    That, together with the summary Mustard made in this post upthread:
    http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=7282562&postcount=24

    Leads me to the conclusion that Pancho Gonzalez has the most solid case I've seen so far to be considered second to none.
     
  18. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    W.P. Mayhew: You err: forzamilan, as ARFED and others, uses to insult me ("ass man", "stupid old man" and so on). The Federer fanatics don't want a civilized discussion. They scream when somebody finds a negative point of the GOAT. My friend, Bud Collins, once called me The Vienna Visionary. I'm too old now for letting a youngster insult me who pretty little seems to know about tennis history...

    I don't blame forzamilan90 for his youth. I only hate his ignorance and insults.
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2013
  19. Feather

    Feather Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,520
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    Can you tell me one other player who succeeded by targeting Federer's backhand? Nalbandian used to do that before Federer became Federer. After Roger became what he is, only Nadal was able to do that.

    Reason is, Nadals forehand is stronger than Roger's backhand.
     
  20. Feather

    Feather Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,520
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    He refused to accept conditions because it doesn't suit him. He accepts conditions when it suits him. He downplays Federer's victories at Wimbledon saying it wasn't fast grass.

    Conditions have chnaged, Wimbledon became slower, US Open became slower, all these help Nadal more. In the 90s the attacking players like sampras had a big advantage due to fast courts. It's not the same anymore. The game is heavily in favor of baseliners.

    I am sure Federer will do well against Nadal and Djokovic even at this age on fast courts. The hard court king was bageled last year in Cincinnati. If the US open was as fast as in 90s, if Roger had the luxury of Pete to serve to wins in late 30s, he would have added more titles at Flushing Meadows..

    Tennis has changed, it's a grinders era.
     
  21. Feather

    Feather Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,520
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
  22. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,738
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    Certainly a put-down, but in the grand scheme of things, it is not all that rude.

    I would interpret it as a condescending, but euphemistic way of saying, "You are ignorant; you don't know very much; you should learn history, youngster."

    Maybe stating the last portion is a little less rude than the first two portions. But maybe Mr. Mayhew already was aware of all this, and was simply being ironic. I cannot tell.:???:

    I would regard this as more rude on a scale of rudeness. (I was reared to not use such words in polite company, unless I deliberately intended to be rude and insulting.)

    This statement is similar, in my opinion, to saying "learn history, youngster." IMO, in intent it resembles "You are ignorant; you don't know very much."




    Whereas I disagree somewhat with some of ForzaMilan's stated positions, I believe that there is some basis for holding them. I don't believe that he is ignorant or unaware of history.
     
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2013
  23. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,516
    Hoodjem, difference being I actually read and try to learn when you guys talk about history or previous players, as opposed to him has closed the door entirely on accepting or evaluating facts about current era despite him admitingly saying he barely even follows it, yet making such vehement defiant statements. I am nowhere near as stubborn, and yet again senior members of this site are playing it neutral.

    Just once I'd like to see one of the more experienced guys that is not a "Federer fanatic" call him on him out on his b.s. But that just doesn't happen if I say something bad about Laver or Rosewall I'd get destroyed, if he says factually incorrect things and doesn't consider facts and still keeps putting down some players where everything points to to the fact he is wrong nobody from the senior members calls him out, and the ones that do "need to learn history, stop being fanatics, stop worshipping Gods." Whatever, I've heard enough from that guy. His entire persona seems stuck in an alternate realm and hypocritical to me. Not only the one, but at least kiki has flair.

    Bobby if you don't like any of the above, do yourself a favor and add me to your ignore list. Makes things a lot easier, you won't have to see my posts again.
     
  24. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,738
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    I plead guilty. Maybe too often I'll read one of the "historian's" posts and roll my eyes, muttering "you are going to get creamed for this."

    So I do not call him/her out. I figure why add insult to injury? You young-timers seem to do a pretty good job of it. I just navigate away. I am consciously trying, in general, to get caught up in fewer battles or shouting matches that one never seems to win. No one seems to change anyone's mind on here. It seems that the best that can be done is to plant a seed of questioning or doubt about previously held premises or conclusions.

    As someone very wise once taught me: you have to pick your battles. You can't right every wrong.
     
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2013
  25. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Thanks for your words
    I think Bobbyone is digging in his own hole and really does not know how to get out
    But he has done some good to this forum since Rosewall certainly needs a hard to die defender here - a bit as I do with Kodes who is not one of my top faves- and if not for him we certainly would not know as much about Nusslein, Von Cramm, the great pro era of late 50 and some facts about Tilden
    He also portrays Gimeno, who was a great player
     
  26. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    BobbyOne can be reasonable and interesting when talking about most aspects of tennis (the declining importance of doubles, the overrating of Hoad, players' strengths and weaknesses etc.) but he is incredibly stubborn and uses quite frankly silly arguments to put Rosewall on a pedestal and to deny Federer his rightful place in history.

    Oh and calling himself 'The Vienna Visionary' smacks of a little arrogance.
     
  27. W.P. Mayhew

    W.P. Mayhew Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2012
    Messages:
    620
    I was just a annoyed by the expression I quoted, not the Bobby himself, although I agree with the sentiment of stubbornness regarding some subjects. I didn't mean to insult him and imply that he doesn't get his share of unpleasantries from other posters, but those insults seem derived from the exasperation of not having their message heard or (try to be) understood -- he certainly doesn't have to agree with them! It's just a matter of attitude towards discussion, I think, which you don't feel from other regular posters who sound a bit more open.

    And Mr. Mayhew was my father! After stealing a name from a fictional character, I'm not really sure which father I'm talking about.
     
  28. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    ARFED, I promised to not anymore answering you. But this your new post needs an adequate answer.

    A few weeks ago you wrote that I should be glad that I live far away from you. A clear threat. I'm sure also that a judge would value it as a threat.

    A few days ago you wrote in the Clay Court thread:" I guess that you don't have enough brain cells to have a reasonable argument". You also wrote about my "boring posts"... At least the former is a clear insult. Also your new insult about my being born in the wrong place at the wrong times.

    Thus: Not I am a liar (it's the next insult). YOU ARE A LIAR ! (in at least these three cases).

    Good bye.
     
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2013
  29. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Because he is a Sir and you are not...
     
  30. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    MIGHTY FEDERER, You not only are very intelligent but also a true democrate!
     
  31. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Feather. Do you mean me? I never wrote about fast or slow grass at Wimbledon. Do you dream?
     
  32. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,112
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Oh? What rightful place is that?
     
  33. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Low third tier
     
  34. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    hoodjem, Thanks for your fairness!
     
  35. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    To be, at the very least, a contender for GOAT.

    BobbyOne consistently states that he only accepts four GOAT candidates (Tilden, Gonzales, Rosewall and Laver) - he never gives any credit to Open Era greats and barely has Federer scraping into his top 5. At times I have seen Federer as low as 7th on his lists!
     
  36. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    kiki, Thanks for your friendly words. But it's NOT my fault that I am in a hole now (if I am at all): Read the newest and recent posts of the Federer armada and you will realize that there is only hate and aggression against me.

    The key problem in this thread (and even more in the General PPD thread) is: The majority of posters are Federer fanatics or fans. Now, if somebody is bold enough to critisize any little aspect of Federer's game, the armada gets angry and sreaming and insulting.

    I would say that Federer is wordwidely valued as the GOAT or even GOD by about 90 %. He does not need unreasonable help from the Fed posters at all.

    Unlike to this, there are still many players who are underrated significantly: Nüsslein (also by yourself), Vines, Kovacs, Segura, Rosewall, Gimeno, Roche...

    I find it much more satisfying and justified to support these players than the overrated Federer.

    If I stop to post (maybe I will do so at least for a certain time; I hear already the many BRAVOS!) the Federer fanatics can thus the more pursue their agenda in the Federer soup...
     
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2013
  37. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,112
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    I agree that Federer is a GOAT contender.

    My list is greater than 4 names. Tennis history is extremely complex, more than most sports.
     
  38. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Phoenix: Please tell me and us a single silly argument of mine to put Rosewall on a pedestal!!!

    Not I have called me T.V.V.. I mentioned it to show some ignorants that I'm not an idiot but rated by Bud Collins as a true expert!
     
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2013
  39. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    W.P. Mayhew, I use to consider the arguments of any posters.
     
  40. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Mustard, D'accord with your question.

    Different people have different opinions about things and also about Federer's place in history.

    F. i. Bud Collins says that Federer cannot beat Nadal. Rosewall rates him as No 4. I rank Roger at fifth place regarding achievements.

    We still don't have a dictatorsip where all people must praise the "Führer" or the "GOAT". Thanks heaven!
     
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2013
  41. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,738
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    "You cannot be serious!":roll: (We need a McEnroe smiley-face.)



    Sorry, but I guess I disagree. I place Fed in the first tier.
     
  42. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    - You ignore his 0-5 record in Wimbledon/Wimbledon pro finals.
    - You believe that he holds many true records i.e. 23 majors, most consecutive major semi-finals, when you know that the tournaments pre-Open Era do not hold the same weight as Open Era slams.
    - You called him the greatest doubles player of all time as well as the greatest singles player!
    - You base your view of his peak play on your imagination, and then state that this level was so high he would undoubtedly have won several Wimbledons, dominated Laver/Hoad/Gonzales etc.
    - You state that Federer lacks variety in his play.

    No-one knows that Bud Collins called you such a thing. And even if he did, there is no need to brag about it on this forum. If you were a true expert, posters here would be able to perceive this from your posts. I agree that you are a long-time tennis viewer and know many things about the sport, but you are just as biased towards your favourites (Rosewall, and by extension the players from his era like Gimeno) as people like TMF are towards Federer.

    Why don't you just admit that you are biased towards Rosewall?
     
  43. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Vines is overrated here, and no player has been more belittlered than Kodes ( even by you)
     
  44. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    That's true, but we must (IMHO) still try to rank the greats as best we can, rather than being ultra-diplomatic or flip-floppy (not sure if that's a word!?) and saying things like "there are many GOAT contenders, from Tilden to Federer, any one of them could be GOAT, tennis history is really complex, it's impossible to say who is really GOAT".
     
  45. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,738
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    Sorry, if that was insulting.

    W.P Mayhew is all I have to go on. (I had thought that Mister was a title bestowing respect. Perhaps I was incorrect.)
     
  46. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    as somebody could describe it: " There are tough eras, regular eras and Groucho Marx eras"

    Federer dominated a very marxian era...
     
  47. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,738
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    I read one of these posts and roll my eyes :roll:, muttering "you are going to get creamed for this."
     
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2013
  48. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    hoodjem: Surprise: Me too!
     
  49. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Then, imagine if I had written " Marxist" instead of " Marxian":)

    The Holy Fedinquisition would burn me into flames¡¡¡
     
  50. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Phoenix, Claiming that Rosewall's failure at Wimbledon does not exclude him from the GOAT discussion is NOT a silly argument. There are several experts, including serious Carlo Colussi, who think like me. At this question I'm really not alone.

    Your other points: Again NOT a single silly argument.

    Do you believe I'm a liar (Collins' calling me)??? Thanks for your opinion about me.

    It's common sense among the experts (I guess almost all of them) that Rosewall would have won at Wimbledon. It's not a bias my young friend...

    That I'm an expert several posters have already perceived: krosero, pc1, urban, borg number one, kiki, Carlo Colussi, hoodjem, Mustard,treblings,timnz among others. It's your turn to join them...
     
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2013

Share This Page