View Single Post
Old 11-10-2012, 07:07 PM   #48
Mustard
Talk Tennis Guru
 
Mustard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bristol, England
Posts: 22,414
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NGM View Post
And now Mr Laver. You ignore my claim that Laver won so many tournament because so many of them are small tournaments. It is the only reasonable way to describe why he won so many titles. Yes he won big tournaments, but how many of them? ATP claim that Laver had won only 42 titles, maybe they have reason to do it?
How have I ignored it? As I've said, Laver won tournaments of all sizes, from small tournaments to the biggest tournaments, and 200 in all. Laver's 42 titles you mention, are ATP titles. Like how the ATP says that Connors won 109 titles, when it's really 149 once you include non-ATP titles. The ATP was formed in September 1972, by the way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NGM View Post
Players in the past can play to 40s for many reason, including things you said. But one important reason is the pressure back to that day was not that big compared to today. You win or you lose nobody care, except die hard fan and sport jounalists. Today you win a slam and you are in news headlines around the world. Pressure much bigger. You need to word harder and be challenged much more.
The pressure was in keeping your pay packets and your livelihoods, having to play injured if there was a match, driving around yourselves and staying in gyms and cheap motels. I'd like to see how today's multi-millionaire players would cope with this pressure. Oh, and then there's the no sitting down at the change of ends. Sitting down at the change of ends didn't happen until 1973-1974.

And I've already said that today's players have it harder with media pressure. The old pros of the past wanted more media attention than what they were getting, because it would mean more money in the pro game and help the sport as a whole.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NGM View Post
I will come back to Rod Laver be the best player in 7 years later. But Gonzales' thing is a myth which can not be proved in a clear way, just by your opinion. For example, your statement is opposite with tennis experts, it show how objective your claim is and also how objective THEIR claim are. Laver won 200 tournament, many of them were mickey mouse are true fact. Rosewall, well, I dont care.
It is not a myth at all. Look at the world pro tours that Gonzales won, as well as the big pro tournaments that he won. Even Kramer, who wasn't exactly the best friend of Gonzales, always rooting for Gonzales' opponents, said that Gonzales was the best player who walked on the court from 1954 to 1961. Some people even make a case for Gonzales being the best player of 1952, although I give that year narrowly to Segura.

Last edited by Mustard : 11-10-2012 at 07:10 PM.
Mustard is offline   Reply With Quote