View Single Post
Old 08-23-2012, 01:36 PM   #48
BobbyOne
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 7,773
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by urban View Post
I agree with Bobby One, that in sensible calculation Tilden would have won the most majors of all. Between 1920 and 1925, he was close to unbeatable, and the players who won Wimbledon, World Hard Court (RG wasn't open to foreigners) or Australia, which also had no foreign entries, like Patterson, Johnston or Borotra were not in his class. The musceteers Cochet and Lacoste began to challenge and overtake Tilden since 1926, but given 4 available majors per year, Tilden still would have sneaked in several titles, as he did in reality at Wim and Forest Hills.
Gonzalez would have much deeper competition in open tennis in the 50s: Kramer in the first years, who dominated him at first, Sedgman, who could do harm to Gorgo on grass in Australia and GB, Hoad, who excelled at Wim and grass courts, Trabert and Rosewall, who were clearly better clay court players, Segura, who was always a dangerous opponent. Given this sharp opposition, I don't see Gonzalez winning the same amount of majors and overall titles as Tilden. Rosewall had the longest career at the top, and was always very good at big events (he won Wembley as early as 1957) and especially at French venues. Laver had a shorter career, but was imo so technical sound, versatile and powerful, that he could sweep all available titles in some of his best years.
Perhaps you are right that I overrated Gonzalez a bit and that Rosewall would yet have won more open majors than Pancho, but remember that Gonzalez was clearly better than Kramer AFTER their long series and that Gonzalez was extremely strong till 1965 and very strong till 1970.
BobbyOne is offline   Reply With Quote