View Single Post
Old 11-11-2012, 07:02 AM   #50
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 7,773

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?
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.

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.
You should care about tennis history.
BobbyOne is offline   Reply With Quote