Originally Posted by BobbyOne
Dan, my goal was to show which players would have been the favourites for "open" majors. For instance I wanted to show that the famous amateurs like Emerson would not have won a single major...
I did not know that Kramer was injured in 1951.
I gave Hoad and Sedgman some credit. Over the long run , Pancho was simply stronger than both.
You underrate Gonzalez on clay. Don't forget that he reached SFs at Roland Garros at 21 and at 40 and that he won several clay tournaments.
Dan, It's not that Laver, Rosewall and Gonzalez are shown that good because I admire them. It's just the reverse: because they are so great, I admire them and must give them their due places in history.
If anybody, only Hoad could have won a GS in the 50īs ( and he was the guy closer to).He was by far more complete than Gonzales on slow courts and much more powerful than Rosewall on clay.Hoad just one title? donīt make me laugh.
"Esther,Evonne,Hana,Martina: was it a fairy stick or a tennis racket?"