Originally Posted by krosero
But Rosewall's number here is not correct. He made the semis in 8 of 10 majors in that time period, losing in the second round at the '72 USO and '73 AO.
On the overall subject, I think Laver's commitment to his family was one of the key issues. Here's something in the NY Times in May '74, which explains why he missed all the Slam events that year:
He won't play again until August, passing up Wimbledon and other tournaments while concentrating on his tennis camps and his family.
At 35, Laver said, a time comes when a man must make choices.
"I feel fine and I think I'm playing as well as ever, now that I've got my timing back," he said, "but other things become more important than playing in every possible tournament."
This statement by Laver just proves he played selectively in the early 70's as he had done it all the previous decade. He made a choice to make as much as could with what little time he had left on the tour.
Originally Posted by BobbyOne
I find it-with all my respect for the Rocket- a bit naiv or arrogant that Laver claimed he was playing as well as ever. A player at 36 is surely not as strong as in his peak years and Laver declined already after 1969, at least after 1970.
Whatever man. No competitive player wants to admit out loud to his peers that he's past it. That's why he said he's 'playing as well as ever'.
I remember Sampras not liking to talk about his Thalassemia Minor affiliation. He felt it made him look weak to rest of the tour.