View Single Post
Old 07-29-2012, 06:19 PM   #48
Dan Lobb
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,955
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyOne View Post
Dan Lobb,

I don't want to annoy you. I would like to not calling you stubborn but you don't make it easy for me to not calling you so.

You seem to have a trauma with Wembley and a visionary view on Kooyong as a major event.

Wembley had always a strong field even in the end-1950s. 1957: Gonzalez, Rosewall, Segura and Hoad. 1958: Gonzalez, Segura, Rosewall, Trabert, Sedgman; Hoad was in the draw but was defaulted due to injury. A weak field???
1959: Hoad, Segura, Trabert, Rosewall, Sedgman, Anderson, Cooper. A weak field??? I concede that Forest Hills had a slightly better participation.

I also concede that Kooyong had mostly a very strong field. But it did not have the prestige of Wembley.

Sedgman is not the only source for calling Wembley the top pro event or at least one of the tree top events. I have also read this in other sources including the big Collins encyclopedia.

The 14:14 balance of Rosewall and Hoad is not undocumented. Why should McCauley make a fake? But a few of your claims are undocumented (16:7 for Hoad; 13 wins of Hoad against Laver).
Where was Gonzales in the 1959 Wembley?
The point is that the big guys do not show up in the Wembley finals.
Kooyong showed the big guys playing their best.
McCauley gives no details? Why not?
Hoad against Laver in 1963 is strongly documented, even by Laver himself in a 1997 audio recording, "In 1963 when I turned pro, Hoad beat me in 14 straight matches, and this was at a time when he was supposedly no longer interested in tennis"
Had enough? If not, I can give you more.

Last edited by Dan Lobb : 07-29-2012 at 06:23 PM.
Dan Lobb is offline   Reply With Quote