WORLD NO. 1 (by year)

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by hoodjem, Oct 30, 2009.

  1. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Good list.I thought of Kodes in 73 but Nasty and Newk are a bit ahead ...and for 71, well, it really is a Rosewall vs Smith contest.Newcombe, even if he took his third Wimbledon title, did not perform as good at the other majors..

    and in 1970, as much a die hard Laver fan as I am, Rocket felt behind Rosewall and Newk at majors, even if he was the best at second rate tourneys

    that is what definitely makes Rod the greatest ever.His fans, plainly that.His fans are able to recognize the achievements of his main opponents.I wish all other fans were also able to...
     
  2. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    well, majors or not, that would also be my ranking.

    Very close in the post Laver kingdom and pre Borg kingdom, you know.Even if we set Connors 74 year apart, from 1970 to 1973 it was really even, with 7 top class guys going for the majors.I think , and I have gone through other eras, the funniest tennis festival, with the greatest talent ever fighting for the big spots, you know what I mean?
     
  3. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    kiki, You are so right...
     
  4. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Hell, baby, as I posted years ago....

    in 6 yrs after 68 ( the year that changed everything ), we had a big big turmoil in the tennis world.Not just Borg,Vilas and Connors but other guys like Tanner,Panatta,Ramirez,Orantes,Stockton,Dibbs,Solomon,Gottfried took over and tennis was never the same as it had been from 70 to 73 ( which were so great years whatsoever)

    74 is, with the big topspin of Vilas and Borg and the two handed BH of Connors and Borg, the year that revolution took over tennis.
     
  5. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    ... and Jan Kodes with 3 major titles from 1970 to 1973.And you forgot Artie Ashe, too,
    as I posted before, a line up of Laver,Rosewall,Newk,Smith,Ashe,Kodes,Nastase and guys like Panatta,Roche,Orantes,Richey,Lutz,Gorman,Gimeno,Pilic,Franulovic,Riessen,Okker,Barthes,Jauffret,Gisbert,Fillol, young Connors,Borg,Vilas,Ramirez,Gottfried and Amritraj is the closest we will ever get to paradise...
     
  6. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    kiki, Hope to not causing a turmoil, but I would like to contribute a bit about these 28 great or excellent players you mention: It might be of interest and could be surprising that grandpa Rosewall played against 26 of these players (he did never meet Jauffret nor himself ;-) ) and beat 25 of them in his career at least once!
    He only lost their single meeting against Borg in a very tough match. Rather astonishing...
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2013
  7. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    it is.

    AMOF I would have loved seeing top form Rosewall vs new kid in town Borg around 73,74 and maybe 75...what a great potential match¡¡¡
     
  8. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    kiki, Yes, a 1962 Rosewall against a 1974 or even 1979 Borg on clay would be a fine match-up. They actually met in 1973 when Muscles was out of practice (his own claim). After the match both players got standing ovations.

    Maybe I should add to my recent post that Rosewall defeated some of these 25 players rather often: Pilic 7 times (against zero losses), Richey 7 times (2 losses) , Riessen 18 times (7 losses).
     
  9. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    good to know.I don´t think he lost often t an inferior player...and that means he could only be beaten by 4-5 guys...
     
  10. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Yes. In this respect Rosewall seems similary to Federer. Laver maybe was a bit less consistent than these two (but still very consistent).
     
  11. Xavier G

    Xavier G Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    516
    I'm a Connors fan who judges clearly and objectively.

    Do you even read what I wrote, Kiki? I thought you were smarter, man.
    Connors won 12 titles, (double Bjorn's), beat Borg 3-0 in official meetings and had a clearly superior match record win-loss ratio for the year than Borg did. Look at 1976's results again if you have time.p
    WCT? Borg won that. Is that why you give Bjorn top spot? Connors wasn't there. Bjorn still won it, but Jimmy won double the titles Borg did in 76 and had a better win-loss record. Think about it clearly, Kiki.
     
  12. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    same speech as Vilas in 77...why shal, I go through it again?

    You are entitled to think whatever, you are a knowledgeable poster...but I still see Vilas 77 in Borg´s 76 body and I still see Borg 77 in Connors 76 body.Sorry, not bad disagreeing here and there...
     
  13. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,668
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    Very interesting. You're right, that's quite a lineup Kiki! That was the period of time a bit before I first picked up a racquet and started watching pro tennis. Yet, even in the late 1970's, names like Smith and Newcombe were still huge in tennis circles. Back then, Wimbledon seemed to dominate the tennis landscape, though the U.S. Open was also a really big major. It's just that the winner of Wimbledon back then truly won THE tournament of the year.

    I do recall seeing Bob Lutz live. He was so strong and just looked massive to me back then. He made a quick visit to my tennis club here in Houston. Real nice guy. Also, I've had the pleasure of meeting Vijay Amritraj on a couple of occasions and he was such a gentleman. You're right though, no doubt. That's a stellar group, even if there wasn't someone dominating so to speak during that period. The circumstances and the rich landscape of players must have been very special because you had another big wave of diverse, talented players that followed right on their heels, including many names you know well such as Connors, Borg, Vilas, Gerulaitis, and later McEnroe and Lendl.

    I submit that not only did we see great two handed backhands and more topspin, but also slightly less net play (weren't players going to net at a slightly lower rate by the late 1970's versus even the early 1970's, in general?) Perhaps increased topspin and also the rise of the two hander made winning points at net a somewhat trickier proposition than before. I have to think that two handed backhands and more topspin impacted style of play in many respects. Would you agree? Having watched tennis a lot in say 1970-1974, did you notice this shift in style of play, though it was perhaps subtle? Also, thanks for the nice words regarding the avatar with Borg's forehand! Glad you like it.
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2013
  14. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,668
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    Yes, I'm sure they were still excellent in 1974, but 30+ is just different with tennis than being 20-25, of course. I was thinking the same thing in terms of a changing of the guard. The Connors and Rosewall finals were significant. At that time, who would have thought that Australia would have only one more #1 from between the early 1970's until 2013? I'm sure the top players were thinking, who does this Connors guy think he is? Also, how is this kid named Bjorn Borg from Sweden getting up there? You were talking about two all time greats though and not just two average up and comers.
     
  15. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Definitely Borg n 1, net play, while huge, went a bit down in late 70 as compared to early 70 due to develop of top spin that Borg, Vilas and others imposef
    HoweverMcEnroe would regainS&V preeminence in 1980 which others like Cash,Becker and Edberg continued later
     
  16. Flash O'Groove

    Flash O'Groove Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 28, 2012
    Messages:
    2,156
    From what I know of both Rosewall and Laver, it's not the kind of thought they could have had. I don't think these guy were taking anything for granted.
     
  17. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Yes 1974 was the year of the revolution whose leaders were mainly Connord,Borg and Vilas
     
  18. Flash O'Groove

    Flash O'Groove Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 28, 2012
    Messages:
    2,156
    To the old guys who watched the early 70's live, how did you appreciated these years at the moment? Were you aware of the richness of this diversity, or were you considering these players like "weaklings" unable to dominate like Laver and Rosewall did?

    I ask this because I wonder if the perspective on an era change with time. Maybe the early 2000's which are disliked by many will be seen as great years in a few year? With the old guard of Agassi and Sampras, younger players like Safin, Hewitt, Kuerten, Roddick, Ferrero, Federer?
     
  19. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    When I mean rich era I mean
    All round: Laver, Mac,Nastase,Ashe,Gerulaitis,Rosewall,Gimeno,Kriek
    Baseline: Connors,Kodes,Orantes,Borg,Vilas,Lendl,Wilander,Mecir,Gomez
    Serve and Volley:Newcombe,Smith,Roche,Tanner and Panatta and also Kriek,Cash,Edberg ,Becker and Noah
    And touch players that are included in one of those styleslike Orantes,Nasty,Mac,Panatta,Laver,Rosewall,Mecir
     
  20. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    kiki, good analysis. At baseline we could add Drysdale, Solomon and Dibbs.
     
  21. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,668
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    That's what I suspected, but I didn't want to assume that. McEnroe was a very special server and volleyer. After him, I agree, Becker and Edberg carried the torch (along with Sampras)..and then came the slowing of courts and also poly strings and even lighter frames (severely altering swing path, etc..). Net platy can still be prominent, but you just can't take the net with near abandon the way you could before. Thanks for verifying that shift in dynamics.
     
  22. Xavier G

    Xavier G Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    516
    Kiki, no problem. We will always disagree on 1976, I fear. I like your 'individualistic' view on things and I think you are USUALLY knowledgeable too! USUALLY.

    :)
     
  23. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Thanks and I respect your passion on Jimmy who also became one of my favs
    I miss a lot the drama and excitement he brought and the great contrasts of Borg-Connors,BComnors, Lendl-Connors or Connors-Mac
     
  24. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,772
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    I agree with you both.

    I award Laver the no. 1 spot in 1970 because he won the most titles (13) of anyone, most especially the Sydney Dunlop Open without a single loss. And because he had a dominant H2H against his only contenders: 3–0 record against Newcombe (Wimbledon champ), and a 5–0 record against Rosewall (USO champ) that year.
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2013
  25. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    hoodjem, I already have mentioned Tingay, Collins and Kramer who ranked Newcombe and Rosewall as No.1 and No.2. Rosewall was awarded Player of the Year (Martini and Rossi award).

    I guess that The Rocket himself would not claim of being undisputed No.1 in 1970.
     
  26. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,772
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    Of course not, but that would be because his innate modesty would not allow him to.

    About his 1969, he has said that it was "a pretty good year."
     
  27. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    hoodjem, I had meant he probably would not even THINK so.

    It's hard to put a player as an undisputed No.1 when he fails significantly at the two biggest events (the only two big tournaments of the year),

    If the standard tournaments (the non-majors) would be so important, Federer would be only a medium player as he has won much less events than a Laver or Tilden. In fact Roger is a great player because he has done so well at the majors (17 wins, 34 SFs).
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2013
  28. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,387
    All the years that wasn't under computer ranking are unofficial, which is subject to many interpretation. The official one that really count.
     
  29. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    TMF, The many years before 1973 count equally. Was there not a best player in the earlier days? There was.
     
  30. veco

    veco New User

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2013
    Messages:
    41
    updated my list :twisted:

    1919—Johnston
    1920—Tilden
    1921—Tilden
    1922—Tilden
    1923—Tilden
    1924—Tilden
    1925—Tilden
    1926—Lacoste
    1927—Lacoste
    1928—Cochet
    1929—Cochet
    1930—Cochet
    1931—Tilden
    1932—Vines
    1933—Crawford
    1934—Perry
    1935—Vines
    1936—Perry
    1937—Budge/Perry/Vines
    1938—Budge
    1939—Budge
    1940—Budge
    1941—Perry
    1942—Budge
    1946—Riggs
    1947—Kramer
    1948—Kramer
    1949—Kramer
    1950—Kramer
    1951—Kramer
    1952—Gonzales
    1953—Kramer
    1954—Gonzales
    1955—Gonzales
    1956—Gonzales
    1957—Gonzales
    1958—Gonzales/Sedgman
    1959—Hoad
    1960—Gonzales
    1961—Gonzales/Rosewall
    1962—Rosewall
    1963—Rosewall
    1964—Laver
    1965—Laver
    1966—Laver
    1967—Laver
    1968—Laver
    1969—Laver
    1970—Laver/Rosewall
    1971—Rosewall/Smith
    1972—Smith
    1973—Nastase
    1974—Connors
    1975—Ashe
    1976—Connors
    1977—Vilas
    1978—Borg
    1979—Borg
    1980—Borg
    1981—McEnroe
    1982—Connors
    1983—McEnroe
    1984—McEnroe
    1985—Lendl
    1986—Lendl
    1987—Lendl
    1988—Wilander
    1989—Becker
    1990—Edberg
    1991—Edberg
    1992—Courier
    1993—Sampras
    1994—Sampras
    1995—Sampras
    1996—Sampras
    1997—Sampras
    1998—Sampras
    1999—Agassi
    2000—Kuerten
    2001—Hewitt
    2002—Hewitt
    2003—Roddick
    2004—Federer
    2005—Federer
    2006—Federer
    2007—Federer
    2008—Nadal
    2009—Federer
    2010—Nadal
    2011—Djokovic
    2012—Djokovic
     
  31. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    veco, It's really not the worst list. Well done!
     
  32. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    On what basis is Connors n#1 in 76?
     
  33. veco

    veco New User

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2013
    Messages:
    41
    wasn't impressed by the WCT draw at all in 76..
     
  34. urban

    urban Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    4,381
    In 1971, most people had Newcombe as Nr. 1, and i would agree. Its a difficult year for ranking, because of the split between the more pominent WCT and and the non-contract ILTF Grand Prix tour. Newcombe won Wim over Smith and Rosewall, and did well on the WCT tour, winning 4 events, including Philly on carpet and Montreal on clay, and was leading the WCT points race until autumn, when he fell out with an injury. His bad loss came to Kodes in the 1rst round at Forest Hills, but Kodes went on to the final. Overall Newcombe did better on the regular pro tour than 1970.
    Rosewall won the AO, but this event was integrated in the 20 tournament WCT series, and he won 3 other WCT events, finishing 3rd in the points race, plus the 8 men finals. Laver was the by far leading money winner, won all of his 13 challenge matches at the Legends series, and he won the WCT points race after 20 tournaments, ahead of Okker and Rosewall. He was 2-1 on Newcombe, 3-2 on Rosewall and 1-0 on Smith. Smith played mostly on the Grand Prix tour, he played however Rome and Berkeley on the better WCT tour, without much success. He reached the Wim final and won Forest Hills over Okker and Kodes. A very uneven year, but i would give the nod to Newcombe. In 1973, i have Nastase, despite his bad losses at Wim and Forest Hills, in a close race ahead of Newcombe, who had some bad losses on the European spring tour. The decider was imo the Masters Cup at Boston.
     
  35. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Not credible
    In his book Rocket said his 69 goal was the Big Thing
    Well maybe he wrotte it later because it may have sound too bold
     
  36. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Urban
    1971 is the magic yr in tennis and music
    Stairways, Have you ever heard the rain, Paranoid, Smoke on the water, Baba O Riley and Black Sugar on one hand
    Laver,Ashe,Newk,Nasty,Muscles,Kodes and Godzile on the other
    WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED IN 71?
     
  37. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    As I said many times 1971 is the year that tennis, even morached its pinnaclee than 59, 81 and 85 reached its pinnacle
    Rome: Laver vs Kodes
    Philadelphia:Newk vs Rocket
    Melbourne:Rosewall vs Ashe
    Paris: Kodes vs Nastase
    London: Newcombe vs Smith
    New York: Smith vs Kodes
    Dallas: Rosewall vs Laver
    Masters:Nasty vs Smith
    If you love both Rock,Blues@Jazz music as well as tennis no yr can dream of getting close to 71
    Of course there are a few also worth bringing to table
     
  38. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    Do you mean "Brown Sugar" by the Rolling Stones? :)
     
  39. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,772
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    Such a compliment.
     
  40. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,772
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    Your English eludes me.
     
  41. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,772
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    Plus he has also done well in Masters 1000 events (Fed has 21 titles).

    Of course the non-majors are important, and the majors have occasionally been not-so-important (e.g. Australian Open 1976-82).

     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2013
  42. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,387
    But there's a difference...computer ranking is official, it's written in stone. However, unofficial are open to debate. That's why experts have Sampras as the record holder of 6 years end #1.
     
  43. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

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

    I disagree. I don't think that Newcombe was a clear No. 1 in 1971. Smith had those two big achievements. Rosewall won two out of the four true biggest events plus reached Wimbledon SFs. That year for me is a typical case for a split No.1, this time three players tied.

    The Masters then was not called Masters Cup. The latter only since 2000.
     
  44. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    TMF, Also the ATP rankings are sometimes open to debate...
     
  45. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,668
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    A core problem with the ATP computer rankings is that for years, they did not include Masters events and Davis Cup results. Some of the results in the 70's make little sense when you look at all the actual tournament results.
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2013
  46. Xavier G

    Xavier G Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    516
    Well, apart from Connors winning double the amount of titles Borg won, beating Borg in all their head to head meetings with 8 sets out of 9 and probably the biggest showdown of the year in the US Open final, having a markedly superior win-loss match record and heading the official ATP rankings from Jan 1 to Dec 31, yeah, not much basis, Kiki!!




    :)
     
  47. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,668
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    As for 1976, Borg took two big titles by winning the WCT finals and Wimbledon though, with Panatta winning the French Open and Connors the US Open. Whereas his head to head with Connors works against him in '76, he did go 5-1 versus Connors and Vilas in 1977. So, if we're going to use that h2h against Borg in 1976, we'd have to use it in his favor in 1977. If we focus on the big titles of Vilas in 1977, we have to do the same for Borg in 1976 to be consistent. Ideally, all the above is considered, but then how do you weigh each? The ATP rankings do not contemplate Masters tourneys or the Davis Cup.
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2013
  48. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    I was going to answer exactly what Borgnumberone posted below...
     
  49. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    In fact, Rosewall could be a slighty favoured in 1970, since both won 1 major but Rosewall also reached a Wimbledon final, while Newcombe didn´t play any other major final.

    In 71, Rosewall had two big wins but Newcombe defeated Laver at Philadelphia and , again, Rosewall ( and Smith) at Wimbledon.So, let´s give one year to each one and we will be fair.any year awarded is OK.
     
  50. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    ...and they didn´t include the WCT finals.Borg, never forget, had a very good record at WCT, playing 4 finals and winning a title.WCT Finals was one of the biggest events in the world.
     

Share This Page