Originally Posted by Dan Lobb
Cas Fish in Tennis Today recounts the series between Hoad and Laver, stating that they were contracted to play a 13 match series (and we know from other sources that Rosewall and Laver also played a 13 match series).
Fish also states that Hoad won 39 straight sets sometime during the run.
These facts are consistent with the recollections of Laver himself (and players do not usually forget getting skunked in a series 13 to 0, you are grasping at straws here).
Bucholz was also playing the same tour, and was an interested observer, hardly likely to forget such an unusual outcome as 13 to 0 (his own recollection, probably backed by written data), which caused Bucholz himself to rate Hoad as number one all-time.
I never wrote that the 39 straight sets are correct but I pointed it out as simply an example of how memory can distort the facts over a period of years.
There is no grasping for straws. I find it ironic that you write that when you grasp for straws whenever Lew Hoad loses. Did Hoad ever lose when he was in good shape in your mind?
Again I will point out that I believe Hoad very well could be the best ever when "on" his game. He had every shot in the book plus shots that weren't in the book. He had immense talent but he did play a very high risk game which can backfire on him. Do I believe Hoad was the most consistent player of all time in terms of playing level? No I do not think so but I also believe that Hoad was a far superior player in the pros than he was as an amateur.
I don't need interviews. I need newspaper or magazine articles to discuss the wins. I would prefer the scores of the matches. Recollections of players partial or impartial are not facts but recollections
. It may point toward some possible results but it is far from definitive proof. I don't see your proof.