Career omisson - whose is the most painful?

[Mustard]

Originally Posted by kiki

Rosewall´s 4 lost finals at the All England.History can be very cruel and this is the most cruel case in tennis history.

Yes, it was bad for Rosewall not to win Wimbledon, and being unable to play in the mainstream majors for nearly 12 years. Gonzales had it even worse, being banned from the mainstream majors for well over 18 years, from age 21 to age 40.

[krosero]

Originally Posted by Mustard

Yes, you're perfectly right. Budge and Laver are the only players to have won all the majors in the amateur and professional games.

I just think it's a nice distinction for those two. No one will ever do it again.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by krosero

I just think it's a nice distinction for those two. No one will ever do it again.

Oh¡ but that doesn´t mean anything to *******s like TMF or ABMK.The Olimpic Gold medal is more important for them.

BTW, " never" is a strong word.Graf won it 25 years ago and others have been very close.

What I doubt, however, is that there will ever be such a strong field as 1969, with a top 10 loaded with all time great names.

[krosero]

Originally Posted by kiki

Oh¡ but that doesn´t mean anything to *******s like TMF or ABMK.The Olimpic Gold medal is more important for them.

BTW, " never" is a strong word.Graf won it 25 years ago and others have been very close.

What I doubt, however, is that there will ever be such a strong field as 1969, with a top 10 loaded with all time great names.

Please read the discussion again. I was not talking about the Grand Slam. A Grand Slam, calendar or non-calendar, can definitely happen again.

And please if you want to call people *******s don't include me as if I agreed.

[jaggy]

Rosewall no wimbly gets my vote

[BobbyOne]

Limpinhitter, krosero,

The big difference between Rosewall and Borg (plus McEnroe, Lendl, Connors, Sampras) is the fact that Borg and the others did participate in the championships in their prime while Rosewall (like Gonzalez) lost their deciding years to the pro ranks. Rosewall was absent for 11 years and Gonzalez even for18 years.

[BobbyOne]

pc1, Mustard,

I apologize for having overlooked your posts where you say about the same as I do...

[BobbyOne]

Mustard,

Even though it was not too easy to reamateurize, it yet happened form time to time: Jan Kozeluh, Noel Brown ,Cochet. Cochet was even winning tournaments after his reamateurizing after WW2.

Nüsslein who never played as amateur prior to his pro career, was never allowed to play as amateur again after being pro.

Don Budge once wrote to me that a Davis Cup team of vonCramm and Nüsslein would have been a great obstacle for the USA...

[pc1]

I think a lot of this stuff about career omission is overrated. Greatness is proof you can win on all surfaces. Certainly Rosewall and Gonzalez could win a high percentage of the time on any grass surface and I am almost certain they would have won many Wimbledon titles if they were allowed to.

Borg was a great fast hard court player and I'm sure he would have won a few US Opens if not for some bad luck and retiring early. It doesn't take away from the fact he could also win a great percentage of the time on any type of hard court.

Laver was a great indoor player and not winning WCT is not a negative in my book against him.

Most of these greats could win a very high percentage of the time on any surface. There are some exceptions of course but I think we all know them.

[BobbyOne]

pc1,

I agree of course that both Gonzalez and Rosewall would have won several Wimbledon titles.

It's a more delicate question if Pancho would have won a French Open title. On one hand clay was his weakest surface, on the other hand he reached SFs of Roland Garros in 1949 and 1968 (when he was 40) and had some fine clay wins as a pro. He beat Cooper, Trabert and Sedgman in the 1959 Toronto tournament, he had wins against Laver on clay at Knokke in 1964 and in Hollywood, Florida, in 1966.

In the 1950s Pancho would have tough opponents on clay: Segura, Rosewall,Trabert, Hoad, Sven Davidson, Drobny, Patty, Cooper, Ayala and in the 1960s Rosewall, Segura, Hoad, Cooper, Ayala, Pietrangeli, Santana, Emerson...

I speculate that Gonzalez would have won at least one French title.

[Mustard]

A lack of a French major is the one real knock against Gonzales.

If Gonzales had won the 1956 French Pro final (he lost in 5 sets to Trabert), I think it would have been arguably the greatest year for a player in the history of tennis. Gonzales thrashed Trabert 74-27 on their 1956 world pro tour, and won the Wembley Pro, US Pro and the Tournament of Champions. This was Gonzales at his absolute peak, certainly in terms of results.

[hoodjem]

Originally Posted by krosero

Can anyone think of significant titles missing for Perry, Budge or Emerson?

Budge had six slams in a row. Still a record.

I know: no WCT title. No gold medal.

[pc1]

Originally Posted by krosero

Can anyone think of significant titles missing for Perry, Budge or Emerson?

Budge actually won all three Pro Majors besides the Amateur Majors so you can actually say he won the full Career Slam (I dislike that term by the way) and one Rod Laver can also claim that.

Emerson won all the classic majors but as we all know it is devalued somewhat because he didn't play against all the top players. I doubt if he would have won all four of the classic majors if Rosewall, Laver, Gimeno, Hoad, Sedgman and Gonzalez were playing in those years during his prime.

[BobbyOne]

hoodjem,

Yes, Budge with six Grand Slam titles has the record but only if we omit pro majors.

If we include the latters we come to 9 majors in a row of Rosewall (where he participated). Tilden has won 8 majors where he participated.

[pc1]

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

hoodjem,

Yes, Budge with six Grand Slam titles has the record but only if we omit pro majors.

If we include the latters we come to 9 majors in a row of Rosewall (where he participated). Tilden has won 8 majors where he participated.

I think Connolly may have matched Rosewall with the women with nine majors in a row in which she participated.

[krosero]

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

hoodjem,

Yes, Budge with six Grand Slam titles has the record but only if we omit pro majors.

If we include the latters we come to 9 majors in a row of Rosewall (where he participated). Tilden has won 8 majors where he participated.

Tilden's 8 were all Grand Slam titles (from 1920-25). He has that over Budge; no pro majors needed.

However Budge was the victor in 6 consecutive Grand Slam events, which is still the record in the classic majors (Tilden's maximum was two in a row, the Wimby/US double).

What is the longest streak in the pro majors, without skipping any?

By the way, who stopped Rosewall's streak of 9 majors won in which he participated?

[Mustard]

Originally Posted by krosero

By the way, who stopped Rosewall's streak of 9 majors won in which he participated?

I believe the US Pro was the first pro major of 1964 in chronological order. If that is the case, then Rod Laver beat Ken Rosewall in the semi finals, and then beat Pancho Gonzales in the final.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by Mustard

A lack of a French major is the one real knock against Gonzales.

If Gonzales had won the 1956 French Pro final (he lost in 5 sets to Trabert), I think it would have been arguably the greatest year for a player in the history of tennis. Gonzales thrashed Trabert 74-27 on their 1956 world pro tour, and won the Wembley Pro, US Pro and the Tournament of Champions. This was Gonzales at his absolute peak, certainly in terms of results.

In 1956, Lew Hoad won 3 out of 4 majors, and lost in the final of the last one, Forest Hills, to Rosewall.

[Bobby Jr]

Originally Posted by Mustard

Wasn't Agassi's failed drug test in 1997, when he was at his lowest ebb? And it was for crystal meth, so not a "drug cheat" at all.

Amphetamines are on the banned substances list because they can be used for all manner of performance enhancing uses - even for tennis (for example, the ramp up training intensity in hot conditions). Whether or not they're traditionally associated with some aspect of training or match-play which could benefit a tennis player is somewhat irrelevant.

The timing however I get people point out the different years. But, considering how the whole thing was covered up in the first instance by the authorities, Agassi plain lying about it and then admitting it in a book over a decade later, I'd say the dates shouldn't be taken as gospel at all.

[BobbyOne]

krosero,

I think that Rosewall also was best regarding winning pro majors in a row:five titles from French Pro 1962 to Wembley 1963.

By the way, Rosewall was handicapped by food poisoning in his match against Laver in the 1964 US Pro.