WORLD NO. 1 (by year)

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

  1. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,651
    Dan, Learn history! MacKay did not retire in 1962! F.i. he was one of the 6 players who participated in the 1963 tour. He won his last tournament as late as 1971!!
     
  2. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,651
    Limpin, You have got it. Hope also Dan will get it now!
     
  3. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    3,973
    Did it determine the number one? That is what we are debating here...I would not rate Rosewall number one that year.
     
  4. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    3,973
    He was fast winding down...and down...and down...
     
  5. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    3,973
    The world championship tours are what they are...a purported world championship.

    Now, you can always object that the best player did not always win the tour, and that may be true. I dispute the results for 1958.
    But winning the world championship represents a major achievement, and the top players give their best efforts for it.
     
    pc1 likes this.
  6. pc1

    pc1 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    11,960
    Location:
    Anywhere I can't be found.
    By the way Dan. To be clear. Buchholz said that there was NO World Championship Tour in 1964. Zero, none. That covers everything, don't you think?

    If the Tour wasn't a World Championship Tour Laver wins or at least ties in every metric.

    Laver won more pro majors-2 to 1.
    Laver won more tournaments.
    Laver had a better won-lost.
    Laver beat Rosewall the huge majority head to head. Around 15 to 4.
    Laver said that he won 7 important tournaments.
    Bobby said Rosewall won 7 important tournaments too but in examining the record I don't see where but I'll take Bobby's word for it. Fourteen important tournaments do seem a bit much.

    So the question is this, if the Tour wasn't a World Championship Tour, how does any logical person consider Rosewall tied for number one?
     
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2016
    Limpinhitter and Dan Lobb like this.
  7. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    3,973
    It's Laver for 1964.
     
    pc1 likes this.
  8. pc1

    pc1 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    11,960
    Location:
    Anywhere I can't be found.
    Why bother asking Buchholz who number one is if it wasn't a World Championship Tour? It's clear from the information. It's like asking who's richer, the billionaire or the millionaire? Why ask the obvious?
     
    Gary Duane and Dan Lobb like this.
  9. pc1

    pc1 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    11,960
    Location:
    Anywhere I can't be found.
    And that's why Pancho Gonzalez's seven World Championship Tour wins should not be minimized. Pancho put these tours as his top priority for the year. Win it and he was number one. Lose it and he could be a has been. That's the way it worked in those days. Gonzalez was lucky to get a second chance after getting crushed by Kramer.
     
    Gary Duane likes this.
  10. treblings

    treblings Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    Messages:
    2,771
    i agree...it reminds me more of boxing
     
    pc1 likes this.
  11. pc1

    pc1 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    11,960
    Location:
    Anywhere I can't be found.
    Traditionally that true. And that's the way I prefer it.
     
  12. pc1

    pc1 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    11,960
    Location:
    Anywhere I can't be found.
    So Treblings, which tennis player would be the best boxer? Gonzalez and Hoad come to mind. I heard Frank Shields was pretty good. Don't think it's Bitsy Grant. :)
     
    treblings likes this.
  13. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,651
    Dan, Yes the long tournament tour did determine the No.1, as krosero and I have written many times now. For the sake of truth and Buchholz's intention in 1964/1965 it's totally unimportant if YOU are rating or not rating Rosewall No.1 that year. All experts did and do know (respectively) that Rosewall was the official No.1 player and that this was determined by his winning tour. Buchholz has stated that five times in the article pc1 has provided us (thanks, pc1). In Butch's article there even was stated that Rosewall was the "unquestionable No.1 player". Furthermore even Ken's toughest rival that year, Rod Laver, stated as late as 1965 that he still was only No.2. Why don't you and your (few) friends trust the Rocket and the other sources provided by krosero???

    By the way, I could imagine that krosero is a bit upset that all his serious researching and argumentation has been distorted or ignored by a few posters till this day.
     
  14. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,651
    Dan, Has MacKay retired in 1962 or was he winding down? Please decide! And please don't distort tennis history. The more I read your posts the more I'm sure you are a big troll.
     
  15. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,651
    Dan, At least I'm satisfied that Limpinhitter is disagreeing with you at that point.

    Laver might have been as good as Rosewall in 1964 but the deciding point is that Rosewall won the determining tour and was acknowledged the No.1 player. So easy this case!
     
  16. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,651
    Dan, A player who misses the by far biggest goal of the year and the deciding tour's No.1 position cannot be (alone) the No.1. Rod failed in the tour he should have won to gain the No.1 position. You can be sorry for Rod but at least Laver has the satisfaction to be acknowledged the No.1 player in 1965, 1966, 1967, 1968, and 1969! He also won three Grand Slams. Why always pumping up him in this forum? The Rocket had God-like shots but he WAS NOT GOD (only a GOAT together with Rosewall and possibly Gonzalez)...
     
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2016
    treblings and krosero like this.
  17. Gary Duane

    Gary Duane Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2014
    Messages:
    7,040
    A better question for today: how did Rosewall win so much more after the age of 30 than any other player in the Open era?

    Who was #1 in 64 is really a small picture question. The Big Picture question: how close was Rosewall to Laver's level when you look at all of their careers. My answer: very close.
     
    treblings, krosero and pc1 like this.
  18. pc1

    pc1 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    11,960
    Location:
    Anywhere I can't be found.
    It was always an interesting rivalry. The rallies were fantastic because of the contrasting styles of both players. Both were very quick and excellent groundstrokes with a good variety of shots with excellent touch. Laver would hit an apparent winner but Rosewall would somehow retrieve it but not just retrieve it but hit it back at perhaps an unusually tough angle. Laver would reply with an even tougher angle and so on and so on. Rosewall could be beat but in order to beat him you usually had to work at it. Very few if any could blow Rosewall away except for Connors when Rosewall was over 39.

    As someone once said, it's not just the shots, but the shots off the shots that made the Laver and Rosewall matches so special.

    I actually enjoyed the Borg/Connors matches the same way.
     
  19. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,651
    Gary, Yes, very close. In (traditional) major clashes Rosewall had even the edge (10:7).

    Rosewall's feats after turning 30 are really stupendous. Even great oldies like Laver and Federer could (can) not cope with him. Only Gonzalez and Tilden are possibly equal with Muscles. But both of them did not reach the finals of Wimbledon and US Championships at 39 plus and beat at Wimbledon the world's No.1.

    The discussion about the 1964 rankings might be tiring and bothering but at least my goal is to show that Rosewall was NOT a player for a two years interregnum (as my opponents claim) but a top player in several or many years (either as clear No.1 or as tied No.1, the latter possibly in 1960, 1961, 1964, 1970 and 1971 at least) and that Muscles is a true GOAT candidate. My second goal is to plead for a reasonable consideration of the super players and darlings of the majority like Laver (and Federer for that matter).

    My third goal is to plead for a serious acknowledgemant of historican facts exemplarily at the question how the players and experts in 1964/1965 ranked the best pros. I just cannot stand (and find it a big shame) that a few posters here ignore historical facts and distort clear words from Buchholz in his article even after those "experts" have read the whole article. And I find several "arguments" from that side extremely strange and childish (see Dan's "argument" that Rosewall was rated No.1 at END-1964 and early 1965 because he had won the 1963 (sic) pro tour).
     
    treblings and krosero like this.
  20. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    11,502
    Tony "2 Ton" Trabert.
     
    treblings and pc1 like this.
  21. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    3,973
    Sure, Rosewall was number one as a result of the 1963 tour...1964 was different, obviously...you cannot see it still, in spite of all we have shown you?
     
    Limpinhitter likes this.
  22. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    3,973
    McKay was semi-retired, and played like he was already retired...is that clear now?
     
  23. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    3,973
    You avoid the point yet again...if it was not a world championship tour, players give less than their best, but when it is a world championship tour, they give their best.
     
  24. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    3,973
    Laver won the big events...case closed.
     
    Limpinhitter likes this.
  25. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    3,973
    I find it strange that you ignore Buchholz' recent comments which clarify the article beyond any doubt.
     
  26. treblings

    treblings Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    Messages:
    2,771
    Gonzales in a street fight. Or maybe Ion Tiriac:) if Dan´s vote goes to Hoad, i could support that as well.
    and of course there will always be Tony "2Ton" Trabert;)

    which tennis player was the best ice hockey player?
     
    pc1 likes this.
  27. Gary Duane

    Gary Duane Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2014
    Messages:
    7,040
    I don't follow your reasoning here. I don't know much about MacKay, but it appears the joined the pros in 61 and I see him making the QFs of the Wembley Pro in 61, 62, 67 and the French Pro in 61, 63 and 67. Did he retire around 64 and then come back again later? I really don't know and can't find info...

    (Corrected SF to QF...)
     
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2016
  28. Gary Duane

    Gary Duane Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2014
    Messages:
    7,040
    Gonzales reached the SF of RG in 68 at age 40, and since he had zero opportunity to play in ANY Open slam until age 40 other than theoretically to play at the AO in 68, it is absurd to compare his record at slams in the Open era to anyone younger, including Rosewall.

    Comparing Rosewall's slam record to Tilden is quite useless because Tilden turned pro in 1930.

    We need to stick to the Open era here and to players who were younger than Rosewall for slam comparisons.
     
    pc1 and NonP like this.
  29. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,651
    Dan, You really believe that Rosewall was acknowledged as No.1 player of 1964 (at the END of that year) because of his winning 1963 tour and after I have told you that logically and mathematically it is not possible, then you are the most curious troll ever posting in this forum...

    What have you and your (few) friends shown to me? Nothing that could convince me that Buchholz's article had wrong claims or statements!

    Get real finally!!
     
  30. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,651
    Dan, Again wrong: MacKay did play the whole 1963 6 man tour and finished ahead of Ayala. Is that clear now??
     
  31. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,651
    Dan, It's a shame that you insinuate the participants of the long and deciding tour did not give their best!
     
  32. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,651
    Dan, Case closed: Laver failed at the biggest event: At the long and deciding tournament tour! Thus he finished at very good second place in the 1964 rankings.
     
  33. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,651
    Dan, I find it a true scandal that you and your (few) friends ignore the essence of the 1964/1965 Buchholz article!!! There is NOTHING Buchholz has recently changed at his old opinions and convictions provided in his clear article!!. He did NOT recently say that Rosewall was not No.1 and that Ken did not win the deciding and determining tour!!!!!!

    I guess Butch did not make any comments recently. He probably just said the word "No" after being asked if the 130 day tour was a world championship tour...
     
  34. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,651
    treblings, Either Karel Kozeluh (he shot a deciding goal in a championship match) or Jaroslay Drobny who also played successfully for his country which gained bronze medal at the 1948 Olympics.
     
  35. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,651
    Gary, You are wrong that MacKay has reached those SFs. In fact it was the QFs every time you mentioned.

    Barry did not retire before open era.
     
    Dan Lobb likes this.
  36. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,651
    Gary, You are right that Tilden and Gonzalez did not have the chance to play at Wimbledon and the US Championships at 39. Nevertheless it's a fact that Rosewall did what he did. We also use to say that only Laver won two classical Grand Slams even though it could have been that Rosewall would also had achieved them if being allowed to compete at that age of life. Nevertheless it's not unfair to praise the Rocket for his two (or three) Grand Slams.

    So my statement is not absurd.

    By the way, there was no AO in 1968 at all.

    Gonzalez weas great to reach the French SF and the US QF at 40.

    I doubt that Tilden would have reached the 1932 Wimbledon and US finals but it's possible. At that age he lost the pro world championships to Martin Plaa (albeit on clay)...
     
  37. Gary Duane

    Gary Duane Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2014
    Messages:
    7,040
    I agree that Rosewall deserves praise for his accomplishments. I don't pay too much attention to Laver's first slam because he was not then the best player. He was not the best any more than Emerson was the best. The pros were the best players, and I think everyone here knows that.

    And of course Rosewall "did what he did". ;)
    Which makes it even clearer that Gonzales could not play slams as a pro until he was more than 40, right? But thank you for that correction.
    I think RG was especially impressive because clay would not have been his best surface.
    I don't talk about or think about the people before Kramer much. For me they are historical figures. I have only read about them. Gonzales is the oldest player I have actually seen play. For those players I have watched Gonzales and Rosewall impressed me the most at the end of their careers.

    Connors and Agassi were both amazing, but they did not have the same amazing achievements past the age of 35.
     
    Meles and pc1 like this.
  38. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    11,502
    They don't. Laver was the best player for 1964. Rosewall was #2.
     
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2016
  39. Gary Duane

    Gary Duane Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2014
    Messages:
    7,040
    Bobby, I mistyped, S for a Q. I was looking up the information, which was the only reason I got that far. I don't know anything about MacKay, which is why I asked the question.

    My main question was about his "semi-retirement".
     
  40. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,651
    Gary, Thanks. MacKay virtually did not retire or semi-retire prior to open era.
     
  41. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,651
    Gary, Thanks. I only don't understand your sentence about Emerson. I think you agree that Laver had outplayed Emmo significantly in 1962.

    The ATGs before Kramer and Gonzalez were pretty strong. Tilden, Vines, Perry, Budge, all were very good. Grandpa Tilden matched Budge and Riggs; Budge and Riggs matched Kramer.
     
  42. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,651
    Limpin, A player (alone) best player who failed in the only big tour of 1964. Rather strange...
     
  43. Gary Duane

    Gary Duane Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2014
    Messages:
    7,040
    He was not the best[,] any more than Emerson was the best= Emerson was not the best, and Laver was not the best for the same reason. Clear?
     
    Meles likes this.
  44. treblings

    treblings Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    Messages:
    2,771
    i know of these two. I believe Ion Tiriac played icehockey as well, and wasn´t the Austrian Fred Huber an icehockey player, or was it handball?
     
  45. pc1

    pc1 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    11,960
    Location:
    Anywhere I can't be found.
    No doubt Laver wasn't the best in 1962 although I am certain that if Open Tennis was around in his time Laver would have been among the best if not the best in 1962 because he would have face the top competition like Gonzalez earlier. I feel the same about Emerson.
     
    Dan Lobb and Limpinhitter like this.
  46. Gary Duane

    Gary Duane Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2014
    Messages:
    7,040
    I completely agree.
     
    Meles and pc1 like this.
  47. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    11,502
    I agree as to Laver and Emerson, two of the greatest athletes in tennis history.
     
  48. pc1

    pc1 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    11,960
    Location:
    Anywhere I can't be found.
    We all play to the level of our opposition. Laver to his credit wanted to play the top players like Rosewall and Hoad among others in the Pro and improved his game. I would guess that if he stayed an amateur he may have improved some but it's not the same as playing super competition. I would also venture to say if Gonzalez, Rosewall or Hoad never left the amateurs they also would not have ever reached the high levels of play they reached in the pros.

    I think since most of us have played tennis against others remember moments when we played opponents superior to us the first time. Often the feeling you get is that you are overwhelmed at first but after playing at that level for a while you improve (usually) and hopefully eventually play at their level and maybe above. So when you get to play your old opponents you often wonder how you could have problems with these players in the first place!

    Laver and Emerson were physically gifted individuals that could have improved their levels of play greatly from their amateur levels.

    A great example of improvement was Pancho Segura in the Pros. He used to have problems with Frank Parker who was a great player but after learning to improve in the Old Pro Tour he learned to harness his great forehand better. He improved other areas of his game and was dangerous against any player in the world, including Kramer and Gonzalez and Sedgman.
     
    Meles likes this.
  49. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    3,973
    Drobny and Bedard played a high level of ice hockey.
     
  50. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    3,973
    In a 3 round tournament, it is not hard to make the QF, right?
     

Share This Page