How good were the early players really?

[gzhpcu]

When I watch this match between Tilden and Lacoste, I tend to think they are over-rated...

http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=15373

[TheMagicianOfPrecision]

They are, but thats natural since they are such a huge part of the tennis-history and they were some of the first greats and since we all know tennis is very conservative-theyll cherish them forever.
Level-wise? They are very over-rated but still good thinking of what they played with.

[Borgforever]

Regarding the fact that this is only three points -- i. e. much too brief to base as any kind of evidence beyond reasonable doubt so anyone who does that based on this doesn't use their grey cells very actively.

We need to see AT LEAST a full great match from this era (rather five to ten ful matches with sound to even build a solid case for a decisive judgement PLUS that we don't know at all the tactics and the stage of the match these glimpses were taken from, it lacks sound (extremely important for a sound judgment -- pun intended).

If we just took three random points from the Del Petro vs Federer USO 2009 F and Federer shanks a weak second serve, Del Potro DFs and then after a brief, uninspired rally Federer fires a forced error from the BH in the corridor -- many matches are filled with patches of errors and weaker rallies, even the best of them -- so if we saw some long distance, jerky shots without sound for those shots people in a century from now would go "Aw, they suck! Overrated! Total bs, yadda, yadda, yadda!" Same BS different day...

Tennis, which is sad, takes some time to really grasp and understand the size and variations of. It also takes quite an effort even to be decent on court. Try explain the point system and the intricacies for non-tennis-fans.

It sounds absolutely, grotesquely baroque in it's weirdness. Break-points, tie-break, love, 40-15, 5th deuce, all the detailed tactics.

Crap -- it's a science. Takes half a life-time one is always a student...

That said -- I do think Tilden throws a mean second serve in the first point in the deuce-court which Lacoste (or is it Tilden -- I just looked twice -- I am busy but will study a bit more) thunders almost a clean, bombing cross-court FH-on.

Next point Tilden throws a nastily nice BH-slice in a great angle that Lacoste cannot dig up...

No really great or marvelous Federer-hitting between the legs point or the most nuclear serve or the most sickening passing-shot or the most dizzyingly fantastic volley-work on display here which would shock me if the footage here did include. That would mean that they would've needed to record the entire match, select the most typical and greatest and most important shots, rallies and big point-moments.

Something that just didn't happen really before TV in the 1950s sadly...

Still I love this footage Gzhpcu -- thanks, you're a trooper yet again!

And reserve judgment until we know. We just might dig up some serious evidence.

My Doherty-footage is very promising indeed. It's marvelous, with sound, right speed -- it's a lot of work. Man it takes a lot out of me.

But -- I am indeed doing the world's first highlight-reel with sound from the Eastbourne-final of 1900 with many rallies both from the singles and doubles-match!

With the immortal R. F. too around his peak. Too good to be true...

Nuts! A shock to the system...

[timnz]

I liked the cross court backhand that Tilden hit - made Lacoste stretch!

[timnz]

I think this match between Tilden and Vines gives a better view of what they were capable of. Vines creates a net point that looks not out of place in modern tennis.

http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=4863

The last serve of the match seems to be of considerable pace and also a serve by Tilden about 1/2 way through the video seems to be very heavy (Vines returned it out).

Tilden is the one with the rolled up sleeves and Vines is the one with a short sleeve shirt.

Recommend you go to full screen.

[tennisdad65]

Originally Posted by timnz

I think this match between Tilden and Vines gives a better view of what they were capable of. Vines creates a net point that looks not out of place in modern tennis.

http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=4863

.

competitive with 5.5 today. These guys play with their wooden racquets and the 5.5 plays with modern racquets.

I will personally come over and slap you, if you say a modern 4.5 will beat these guys.

[aphex]

Originally Posted by tennisdad65

competitive with 5.5 today. These guys play with their wooden racquets and the 5.5 plays with modern racquets.

I will personally come over and slap you, if you say a modern 4.5 will beat these guys.

don't bother---some people will never understand the intricacies and tactics in tennis...

[Borgforever]

Originally Posted by timnz

I think this match between Tilden and Vines gives a better view of what they were capable of. Vines creates a net point that looks not out of place in modern tennis.

http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=4863

The last serve of the match seems to be of considerable pace and also a serve by Tilden about 1/2 way through the video seems to be very heavy (Vines returned it out).

Tilden is the one with the rolled up sleeves and Vines is the one with a short sleeve shirt.

Recommend you go to full screen.

Great stuff. Look at Tilden's Tanneresque service, WA-BANG and Vines is smooth and deadly. This is great play. These racquets hardly had any serious grips on them, was thicker and heavier than if you held a cut-down redwood tree in your hands...

Well, not maybe not exactly the size of a redwood-tree -- but they were nothing like ones today so heavy they were directly clumsy to wield -- disguise was also of extreme importance back then and to appear to be doing something while doing something else was an art-form. Today it's just about -- well, almost -- power -- and if the precision missiles are off by a couple of fractions of an inch -- the tennis know-how ends -- and the player, as we witness way too often, just becomes a sitting duck and yawn-inducing cannon-fodder for the guy with a just a bit more daily form.

That's the sad part of todays game. The finer tactical maneuvers are usually only seen around the top ten, if that, nowadays...

The way Vines deals aggressively creating the opportunity at the net and killing the shot is text-book and has all the hallmarks of truly superior talent.

Big Bill's serve is a beaut. And he punishes the match-point with panache. Man I wish I saw the whole deal. I dislike the world and it's limitations

[some6uy008]

Originally Posted by aphex

don't bother---some people will never understand the intricacies and tactics in tennis...

And often don't factor in the fact that each generation builds up on the previous generations

[Borgforever]

This has got nothing to do with the OP, I know, just adding to what I was saying about tactics above:

Worst example I've seen this year, the awful Söderling at RG against Roger. Note I don't have an asterisk on Roger's victory mainly because of his Madrid-Rafa-destruction (even if Rafa was tired after a 4-hour SF and probably by the ropes form-wise) and his Haas and Del Potro-clutch-kills --

-- And that he played The Sod like a champ. Slicing, not giving Robin any target for his power-game -- playing disciplined all the way through and deserved the title. Sad thing was, well, I was happy Sod lost, but from a tennis-perspective it would've been more interesting if Söderling had something in store for that tactic, which was predictable -- he hadn't. With brilliance and one tactical-move Roger took it.

Söderling didn't change a losing game. Incompetent. Absolutely. Boring.

The 1969 Wimby-final, Newk started chipping his returns low to Laver's first volley and then started lobbing away, surpising the champ with such a weird tactic that it threw the momentum in John's way. Trouble was, Laver was no dummy when it came to HQ-work and started -- lobbing back, maneuvered himself into the match, adapted, as was characteristic and then unleashed teh tidal-wave again...

Elder players, even the lower ranked ones, were muuuuuuuch more wily and a lot of aces up their sleeves.

Today's tech allows players to hit balls giving a way higher sound on the dB-range -- yesterday's tech allowed player's to it their balls with a vastly higher IQ-range...

[gzhpcu]

Yet look at their footwork. Don't see much of the athletic stance...

IMHO, it begins to really look good starting with Kramer, Gonzales, Segura...

[timnz]

http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=22806

There is a serve late in the match that has quite a bit of pace on it. It shows what the old timers were capable of.

[borg number one]

See Laver vs. Roche
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHaN2...om=PL&index=11
1969 Australian Open Semifinal

Even the players of today would have difficulty playing at this level, given the wood racquets. These guys are moving beautifully, with perfect footwork, and excellent preparation always. They are also generating a lot of pace.

[Bjorkman & Johnny Mac]

Sometimes its difficult to take it seriously when they are playing in cotton docker khakis

[Clintspin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9SmGflhMq8

Watch Helen Woods Moody take a big cut with a wrap around finish and in the end a really nice topspin backhand. She was on the female side of this era and it doesn't look too bad to me. Tilden had to be hitting the ball much harder.

The old films always make things look funny. Does Charlie Chaplin look like he is moving the same way people do in movies today?

[Ripper014]

It is hard to compare any athlete from another era... but it is obvious they were skill tennis players. The thing they could not have taken advantage of is the technology of today, plus the players of today are true professionals... they cross-train and are at the highest levels of fitness. Back then I am sure they went and had a beer after the match.

So were the good... they were very very good. Could they have been better with todays technology and training...absolutely.

[joe sch]

Originally Posted by tennisdad65

competitive with 5.5 today. These guys play with their wooden racquets and the 5.5 plays with modern racquets.

I will personally come over and slap you, if you say a modern 4.5 will beat these guys.

Even this is not a fair comparison, you really cant compare diff era's. These guys were the best athletes in the world and the most skilled tennis players using the equipment of the time. 5.5 players today are not open players and surely not world class players because of these skills that make players "world class". The way that Tilden, Budge, Vines and these other great players shown on these old videos hit the balls with those 14oz wood rackets with 65" heads on tricky fast grass wearing pants and vintage sneakers is exceptional. Most modern fans and players can just not appreciate these conditions.

[VGP]

.....not to mention pressureless balls that came out of a box.

[hoodjem]

Originally Posted by gzhpcu

When I watch this match between Tilden and Lacoste, I tend to think they are over-rated...

http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=15373

It is extremely hard to judge by this snippet.

[hoodjem]

Originally Posted by Clintspin

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9SmGflhMq8

Watch Helen Woods Moody take a big cut with a wrap around finish and in the end a really nice topspin backhand. She was on the female side of this era and it doesn't look too bad to me. Tilden had to be hitting the ball much harder.

The old films always make things look funny. Does Charlie Chaplin look like he is moving the same way people do in movies today?

If you watch the video at around 0:57 you see the player hitting several almost Almagro-like backhands, and the ball is hit with lots of pace--immediately gone, out of the camera range.

One factor that must be taken into account is the film-speed: standard silent movie film-speed was 18 frames per second; standard sound film-speed is 24 frames per second Much video footage is 32-36 frames per second. 18 frames per second results in a quick but jerky set of motions a la Charlie Chaplin (particularly when played back on modern projectors, which have only one playback speed, that is 24 frames per second).