Grand Slam equivalents

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by urban

I think, amateur Ashe was in the US army at the time of his Forest Hills win 1968 and couldn't accept the prize money. I think, runner-up Okker, although not a contract pro, got the first prize.

I wonder if Ashe was the only Amature to win an open major. I think Stan Smith was still in the Army when he won the 1971 USO and 1972 Wimbledon titles. Was he an amateur as well?

[kiki]

Originally Posted by timnz

Just after viewing the video on the 1975 WCT finals and the comments in the video, that at the time it was viewed as a major and the Australian Open wasn't. (See commentry about 2 minutes from end where it says that the 1975 WCT finals was Arthur Ashe's first major win in 7 years. Note: Ashe won the 1968 US Open, the 1970 Australian Open before the 1975 WCT finals tournament).

This got me thinking that (And this has been confirmed by a number of places I have read in 1970's tennis publications) for all intents and purposes that we should treat the WCT finals as a Major and not consider the Australian Open a major during that time period. Certainly between 1972 and 1982 the Australian Open was certainly not really considered a major by the players. The years around the end one could debate. The WCT finals started in 1971, the same year the Australian Open had a deep field (which was the exception in those years). 1983 the top players started coming back to the Australian Open, but in losing the semi's in late 1985 Lendl commented that he didn't believe the Australian Open was a major really (might have just been hard feelings in losing... don't know.... he normally was a really straight talker though). Certainly by January 1988 when the Australian Open moved to Flinders Park on hard court it was a reconsidered a full major. The only question is the 1983 to 1987 period.

So looking at the careers of some players who until 1983 didn't take the Australian too seriously:

McEnroe - you could add at least 3 or 4 of his 5 WCT final wins to his 7 Grand Slam victories to have 10 or 11 equivalent majors.

Borg - you could add his 1 WCT final win to his 11 Grand Slams to have 12 equivalent majors.

Rosewall - I think he is the same - you take off the 1972 Australian Open but add on the 1972 WCT. The 1971 Australian Open win should stay on his resume because it was a deep field that year, hence you can't include his 1971 WCT finals win.

Lendl - you could add his 1982 and 1985 WCT final wins to have 10 equivalent majors.

Connors - you could take of his 1974 Australian and add on his two WCT finals wins to have an equivalent 9 majors.


Note: To those who say that the WCT finals had a much smaller field that a Grand Slam event... remember the qualification standard to get into the event was much higher than a Grand Slam ie players already had to qualify by being high up the WCT points system.

yeas, but you should also add the Masters.Orantes would have 2 majors (USO 75 and Masters 76), so would Gerulaitis ( AO 78 and WCT 7.Smith,Ashe,Nastase,Newcombe,Rosewall,Edberg,Be cker would also have more majors under their belt.

[hoodjem]

I agree with all of the posts above about majors: just accepting the four standard national titles for every single year as the four best or most significant tournaments (without considering the quality of competition, etc.) is overly simplistic and misleading.

[borg number one]

The Masters titles won by Borg in Jan. 1980 and Jan. 1981 could be added. That tourney was the 4th "biggest" during those years in my opinion, based on factors such as fan interest, prize money, and depth of draw. It was a BIG tournament played regularly before 10-20K folks at Madison Square Garden (about 19K for a Borg-McEnroe match in Jan. 1980). Players like Connors, Borg, McEnroe, Lendl, Gerulaitis, and Vilas squared off at the YEC and the AO was not even close to being as important and I would argue that neither was the WCT at that particular time (unlike earlier WCT finals that were a bit bigger). It was called the Volvo Grand Prix Masters at least in Jan. 1981 (see Borg vs. Lendl in the final below).


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyuiEzBb7hk

[timnz]

I just heard an interview with Ken Rosewall that was just conducted in the last week or so. He was asked what was his most special victory. He said, and this will surprise you, that the WCT finals victories of 1971 and 1972 were. I seem to also remember that Newcombe said that the 1974 WCT finals win was his most special victory.

[Tilden1893]

While prior to '68 you could (for the pros) add the US Pro Title, which was held from 1927, and amazingly was still being held until 1999, although the competition for this faded with the advent of open tennis. Also the French Pro, (1930-196 and the London Pro, (1934 to 196

[Tilden1893]

For the pros that were barred from the majors, you could use the US, London, and French Pro tournaments that were held from the 1930s [1927 in the US case) to 1968.

[Nadal_Power]

Originally Posted by timnz

I just heard an interview with Ken Rosewall that was just conducted in the last week or so. He was asked what was his most special victory. He said, and this will surprise you, that the WCT finals victories of 1971 and 1972 were. I seem to also remember that Newcombe said that the 1974 WCT finals win was his most special victory.

That match from 1972 was one of the best ever... I read there was almost 8000 people in the crowd and that other 21 million watched on TV

5th set tie break and fantastic points for sure worth of Major crown

[Tilden1893]

Originally Posted by Nadal_Power

That match from 1972 was one of the best ever... I read there was almost 8000 people in the crowd and that other 21 million watched on TV

5th set tie break and fantastic points for sure worth of Major crown

Oh, it was! A terrific match! Anyone here know where I could get it?

[hoodjem]

Originally Posted by Nadal_Power

That match [WCT Finals] from 1972 was one of the best ever... I read there was almost 8000 people in the crowd and that other 21 million watched on TV

5th set tie break and fantastic points for sure worth of Major crown

Yep! I agree wholeheartedly. I've often said it was the best match I've ever seen.

"Glued to my seat, holding my breath on every point I was."

[Carlo Giovanni Colussi]

Originally Posted by Limpinhitter

I think Ashe won the inaugural US Open in 1968 as an amateur. I wonder what happened to the $14,000?

Hello,

urban is right. Okker was the first registered player in tennis history in the summer of 1968 : I think in July just after Wimbledon but I'm not sure so he possibly earned his first official prize (not "under-the-table") in the Irish Open ended on July 7, 1968 but it is to be checked.
A registered player was a special amateur player (that is a player who must obey his national (and international) federation) who could take prize money in open events but wasn't allowed, as any other amateur, to enter in professional events (held by private professional promoters).

Therefore this is Okker, as a registered player in an open event, who earned the first prize money of $14,000 (Rosewall, though the best pro in this tournament, was beaten in the semis by Okker and so Ken took the second prize, possibly $7,000). Ashe received his expensive money (if I remember well something like $28 a day for a fortnight).
Ashe became independent pro circa the spring of 1969 : I think he took the runner-up prize money in the March 1969 Madison Square Garden invitational (to check too).

[Carlo Giovanni Colussi]

Originally Posted by Limpinhitter

I wonder if Ashe was the only Amature to win an open major. I think Stan Smith was still in the Army when he won the 1971 USO and 1972 Wimbledon titles. Was he an amateur as well?

Except from mid-December 1970 to early April 1971 when Smith was really in the Army the rest of the time it was an honorary position. It is possible that Smith gave some of his earnings to the Army but not all : he was an independent pro (as Nastase, Orantes and others ...).

[Carlo Giovanni Colussi]

Originally Posted by timnz

I just heard an interview with Ken Rosewall that was just conducted in the last week or so. He was asked what was his most special victory. He said, and this will surprise you, that the WCT finals victories of 1971 and 1972 were. I seem to also remember that Newcombe said that the 1974 WCT finals win was his most special victory.

When you read World of Tennis' 73 (about the 1972 season) or Rowley's biography of Ken "Twenty Years at the Top" it isn't surprising : these were his last major victories : the last times that he was, on a short period, the best player in the world. When he won the 1970 US Open he said at the time it was his biggest win ever. So when he won the 1972 WCT Finals he was so delighted to play so well at such an old age because he thought he wasn't able to reach such a level again : it was his very last major victory.

Newcombe has thought of retiring twice in his career :

- in early 1972 after suffering from many early losses since the 1971 USO (where he injured his knee in the doubles final). He told it to two Aussie mates who laughed at him saying he was something like a sissy so Newk changed his mind and when he won the 1972 WCT Las Vegas tourney he was mentally back in the game.

- after the 1973 boycotted Wimby this time his wife was the ear and she replied to Newk to think it twice. After some talking he was again motivated to really come back and decided to become the world #1 after the 1974 WCT finals. Before he wanted to win the 1973 US Open and Davis Cup. With a little luck Newcombe won the US Open : in the final Kodes was burnt. Both players had played the semis the day before but Newk had a 3-set win from Rosewall while Kodes had played after the Aussies and his match against Smith has ended around midnight. The Czech should have been granted the second set but the linesman made a very bad wrong call in the tie-breaker : Stan's shot was wrong by numerous inches though he was credited the sudden-death set point, in fact Kodes deserved a straight-set victory and not a 5-set win. So a few hours later he played his final against Newk completely out of form nevertheless he extended Newk to 5 sets.
And in the Davis Cup Laver was the great man of the team helping very much Newcombe to hold the trophy in the end.
In the 1974 WCT circuit Newcombe finished #1 ahead of Nastase and the Australian also won the WCT play-offs against Borg.
So if we consider the "July 1973 - June 1974" period
Newcombe won something like 9 tournaments including the 73 USO, the 74 WCT Finals and the 74 ATP tournament (in Tucson), he also beat Kodes, Smith and Gorman in Davis Cup (but lost to Hrebec) and he reached the semis of the 73 Masters : he was clearly the best player in the world if we consider this 12-month span and was thus rightly ATP #1 on June 3, 1974 : the 74 WCT finals held early in May 1974 were a sort of conclusion of his come-back. Later in the summer of 1974 he suffered from a let-down (2 big losses to old dinosaur Kenny at Wimby and the USO) which announced his future retirement. Originally he didn't want to play the 1974-1975 AO but when Connors has officially announced his intention to retain his Australian title, Newk decided to train very hard for the last time of his career and on Jan. 1, 1975, John beat Connors the world #1 then.

[pc1]

Originally Posted by Carlo Giovanni Colussi

When you read World of Tennis' 73 (about the 1972 season) or Rowley's biography of Ken "Twenty Years at the Top" it isn't surprising : these were his last major victories : the last times that he was, on a short period, the best player in the world. When he won the 1970 US Open he said at the time it was his biggest win ever. So when he won the 1972 WCT Finals he was so delighted to play so well at such an old age because he thought he wasn't able to reach such a level again : it was his very last major victory.

Newcombe has thought of retiring twice in his career :

- in early 1972 after suffering from many early losses since the 1971 USO (where he injured his knee in the doubles final). He told it to two Aussie mates who laughed at him saying he was something like a sissy so Newk changed his mind and when he won the 1972 WCT Las Vegas tourney he was mentally back in the game.

- after the 1973 boycotted Wimby this time his wife was the ear and she replied to Newk to think it twice. After some talking he was again motivated to really come back and decided to become the world #1 after the 1974 WCT finals. Before he wanted to win the 1973 US Open and Davis Cup. With a little luck Newcombe won the US Open : in the final Kodes was burnt. Both players had played the semis the day before but Newk had a 3-set win from Rosewall while Kodes had played after the Aussies and his match against Smith has ended around midnight. The Czech should have been granted the second set but the linesman made a very bad wrong call in the tie-breaker : Stan's shot was wrong by numerous inches though he was credited the sudden-death set point, in fact Kodes deserved a straight-set victory and not a 5-set win. So a few hours later he played his final against Newk completely out of form nevertheless he extended Newk to 5 sets.
And in the Davis Cup Laver was the great man of the team helping very much Newcombe to hold the trophy in the end.
In the 1974 WCT circuit Newcombe finished #1 ahead of Nastase and the Australian also won the WCT play-offs against Borg.
So if we consider the "July 1973 - June 1974" period
Newcombe won something like 9 tournaments including the 73 USO, the 74 WCT Finals and the 74 ATP tournament (in Tucson), he also beat Kodes, Smith and Gorman in Davis Cup (but lost to Hrebec) and he reached the semis of the 73 Masters : he was clearly the best player in the world if we consider this 12-month span and was thus rightly ATP #1 on June 3, 1974 : the 74 WCT finals held early in May 1974 were a sort of conclusion of his come-back. Later in the summer of 1974 he suffered from a let-down (2 big losses to old dinosaur Kenny at Wimby and the USO) which announced his future retirement. Originally he didn't want to play the 1974-1975 AO but when Connors has officially announced his intention to retain his Australian title, Newk decided to train very hard for the last time of his career and on Jan. 1, 1975, John beat Connors the world #1 then.

Just a few additional notes. While Newcombe did train hard for the 1975 Australian when he heard Connors was entered, he did not have a great deal of time to train. So he was not in nearly the shape that he should have been in. Also the five set match in the semi with Tony Roche took a lot out of Newcombe. It was truly amazing that he won the tournament over Connors in the final. Newcombe admitted that if Connors won the fourth set that Connors would have been in great position to win the match considering Newcombe's poor shape.

As I have written in the past, I was at the 1973 US Open for a number of the matches. Newcombe was in superb form during the tournament as evidenced by his straight set win over Connors earlier. Connors played superbly but was still beaten in straight sets in what was actually a very close match. Whether Kodes would have beaten Newcombe (which he has shown he was capable of) if he won the Smith match easily is debatable because I feel Newcombe is the type of big match player who can raise his game if his opponent was playing well. Bad calls were a part of tennis then (and now of course) and who knows, perhaps Kodes had the benefit of some bad calls against Smith. The old Aussis philosophy of letting the calls stand as the linesmen calls them to me works well because the player shouldn't keep thinking of the bad call you had in the past. What is done is done. Of course tell players like Ilie Nastase that.

[Carlo Giovanni Colussi]

Yes Newcombe had few time to train in late 1974
however he was not so out of form as he was in early 1972 or early 1973. In late 1974 Newcombe had won the Japan Open over Rosewall, the Australian Indoor Open, the Gunze tournament in Osaka. And above all he had played two weeks before the '75 AO, the Masters at Kooyong on the same site as the AO where he beat young Borg and Parun (but was beaten by Vilas and Nastase). So the situation was different from 72 and 73. Newcombe in late 1974 was near the top while in early 72 and early 73 he was an ordinary player beaten by every journeyman (except at the AO 73 but there he didn't meet any true great player). In late 74 Newk was still a top5 player (and in my mind the #2 for the whole year behind Connors and ahead of Borg and Rosewall). So his win over Connors at the 1975 AO was not so surprising. Until that AO 75 Newcombe had always beaten Connors : US 73, WTT 74 (July) and AO 75 : Connors's first win occurred only in the April 1975 Las Vegas Challenge Match.

About Kodes, of course no one can claim he would have won for sure however he was clearly at a disadvantage and Newk himself recognized that Jan had played unbelievably for two sets and besides Newcombe wasn't probably as strong in September 1973 as he was in early 1974
so Kodes could have a great chance in this final had he not been cheated on this very important point of the second set.
Apparently every witness except the linesman saw the ball clearly out. Yes it is possible that there were other bad calls in favour of Kodes however none hypothetical bad call was as important as that one given it enabled Smith to even the score (1 set all instead of 0 set to 2) which is hugely different.

I liked the Nastase example who effectively thought almost exclusively of bad calls during his matches.

[krosero]

Originally Posted by Carlo Giovanni Colussi

With a little luck Newcombe won the US Open : in the final Kodes was burnt. Both players had played the semis the day before but Newk had a 3-set win from Rosewall while Kodes had played after the Aussies and his match against Smith has ended around midnight.

Hi Carlo. The USO did not have night matches under lights until '75. The '73 semi ended in near-darkness, with everyone almost unable to see: http://news.google.com/newspapers?id...4806%2C2337908

Originally Posted by Carlo Giovanni Colussi

About Kodes, of course no one can claim he would have won for sure however he was clearly at a disadvantage and Newk himself recognized that Jan had played unbelievably for two sets and besides Newcombe wasn't probably as strong in September 1973 as he was in early 1974

For what it's worth Kodes said after the final that he had never seen Newk play better. I've seen the last half of the match, and it's high quality, very entertaining. All the reports I've read from the time also praise the quality on both sides. The New York Times said it was "considered by many who saw it to be one of the most brilliant ever played on the grass at the West Side Tennis Club." They noted how well Kodes was running and returning serve. Newk said that for the first three sets Kodes had an answer for everything he did.

Kodes was asked if he was tired and he said, "Not tired, but it is hard to play semis and finals on successive days."

[kiki]

Originally Posted by timnz

I guess I would have the WCT finals being a higher prestige event than the masters for at least from 1971 through to 1980 and maybe longer.

But that is merely my opinion. What is clear is the downgraded status of the australian open during that period.

My main point is that careers Borg, McEnroe and Connors tend to be judged by today's standards of primarily measuring wins in the 4 current majors. But is that really fair when 1 of those 4 wasn't held in high regard at the time and another event (whether it is WCT, masters or Philly) was the one then players wanted to win at the time. One should never judge by today's standards but rather by the standards present during the time.

That is so much true.Any top player in the 70´s would rather win Dallas or the Masters than the AO...except all those that got a bid at the Oz open because it was the rest of the food the really big ones left ( great but not supergreat guys like Vilas,Tanner and Gerulatis, later kriek won the Aussie Open when the big 3 did not play it)

[kiki]

Originally Posted by Limpinhitter

I wonder if Ashe was the only Amature to win an open major. I think Stan Smith was still in the Army when he won the 1971 USO and 1972 Wimbledon titles. Was he an amateur as well?

He was takingt
he money off the Gran Prix events, so it doesn´t look too amateur to me.Remember he got big money by winning the first Masters Tournament held in 1970 in Tokyo.

[Moose Malloy]

Yes it is possible that there were other bad calls in favour of Kodes however none hypothetical bad call was as important as that one given it enabled Smith to even the score (1 set all instead of 0 set to 2) which is hugely different.

so was the bad call the reason Kodes lost the 3rd set 6-1? Its a pretty big assumption to say Kodes would have won in 3 had he gone up 2 sets to love.

They noted how well Kodes was running and returning serve. Newk said that for the first three sets Kodes had an answer for everything he did.

was pretty surprised by the negative body language of Newcombe at the end of the 3rd set(throwing his hands up when Kodes hit winners. Kramer seemed pretty shocked, he thought those gestures were implying that Newk thought Kodes was hitting 'lucky shots.')

Kodes' groundies were very impressive, esp to those used to seeing primarily slice bh's by players of that time(if it was a groundie to groundie battle with Newk it would have been no contest)

Funny to see Court's first comments in that article directed to Riggs.

[Carlo Giovanni Colussi]

Originally Posted by krosero

Hi Carlo. The USO did not have night matches under lights until '75. The '73 semi ended in near-darkness, with everyone almost unable to see: http://news.google.com/newspapers?id...4806%2C2337908

For what it's worth Kodes said after the final that he had never seen Newk play better. I've seen the last half of the match, and it's high quality, very entertaining. All the reports I've read from the time also praise the quality on both sides. The New York Times said it was "considered by many who saw it to be one of the most brilliant ever played on the grass at the West Side Tennis Club." They noted how well Kodes was running and returning serve. Newk said that for the first three sets Kodes had an answer for everything he did.

Kodes was asked if he was tired and he said, "Not tired, but it is hard to play semis and finals on successive days."

Hello krosero,
yes you are right about the matches under light. I think that the first ever official match played under lights at the USO was the meeting between Smith and Onny Parun in 1975 (but my memory can be wrong).

I don't say that, in fair circumstances, Kodes would have necessarily won the '73 USO final.
But at a given page (of which the exact number I don't remember) in Kodes's biography,
the Czech claims that he was robbed of the '73 USO victory.
However further in this same book he sort of backs off
by only stating that every winner of the second semi-final in the USO Champs
is at a disadvantage when playing the final the very next day :
as many I think this is a very true statement.
This is why, in a selfish way, I enjoyed that the last two or three USO finals were played only on Mondays (for different reasons)
and allowed the second semifinal winner not to be at a disadvantage in the final match.