|
|||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
11-10-2012, 04:36 AM
|
#1 |
|
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 148
|
Pre-open era was a immature stage of tennis history
First, I am sorry for my bad English.
I read too many threads and too many posts here about how great Pre-open era and players of that period were. It is becoming ridiculous for many reasons. I will tell you why. 1) Everthing in pre-open era is like a myth. Nothing real about it. For example: Pancho Gonzales and Laver are called "co-number 1" with other players for many years. It is REALLY ridiculous and can only happen in an immature stage of tennis history. This year Murray and Federer and Djokovic are very close in term of winning big titles, but in the end Novak Djokovic is THE world number 1. If this scenario happened in the past, they would be treated like co-number 1. 2) Pre-open era can not be compared with open era, especially with the era from 90's to now. Why? Because pre-open era' standard was too low. Tennis was not a global sport back then. We have a small pool of tennis players whom played against other regularly. And some of them won more than others. It was meaningless, or at least not meaning much. How many of tournament they won have only 8 men, 10 men, 14 men? Or even less? And we are counting those tournaments as the same with tournaments today? Grand Slam in the past as the same with grand slam today? No way in h e l l. 3) There are too much changes in tennis from 19th century to today. In a better way, I must say. From the beginning to 1968, it was like a childish-period. There were too many errors in the system and it made player look greater than they actually were. From 1968 to the end of 80's tennis world was organized better but there were still many holes in that system. 90's till now is good. Of course the system is not flawless. But we have no myth anymore. I dont say players in the past were not great. Of course they were great. But like TMF points out, in the forum like this players like Hoad, Gonzales, Laver are in the fix position compared to Federer. Federer can win 5 more slams and they are still in the fix position. The biggest weapon old timer use to defend Gonzales or Laver is "IF bla bla...". If = myth = meaningless. Pre-open era is immature stage of tennis history. And anything achieved in that stage can not be treated as the same with today's achievement. Period. Last edited by NGM : 11-10-2012 at 05:32 AM. |
|
|
|
11-10-2012, 05:59 AM
|
#2 | |
|
Hall Of Fame
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,307
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-10-2012, 06:02 AM
|
#3 |
|
Professional
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,298
|
NGM, such talk is blasphemy and you will surely be cast into the lake of fire. May the church of the pre-open era have mercy on your soul.
|
|
|
|
|
11-10-2012, 07:28 AM
|
#4 |
|
G.O.A.T.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bristol, England
Posts: 18,448
|
When has Federer been the best player in the world for 8 years like Gonzales?
Oh, and I can pick who I believe to be the best players of each year without co-ranking players. See below: Best amateur players per year in the pre-open era 1877: Spencer Gore 1878: Frank Hadow 1879: John Hartley 1880: John Hartley 1881: William Renshaw 1882: William Renshaw 1883: William Renshaw 1884: William Renshaw 1885: William Renshaw 1886: William Renshaw 1887: Herbert Lawford 1888: Ernest Renshaw 1889: William Renshaw 1890: Willoughby Hamilton 1891: Wilfred Baddeley 1892: Wilfred Baddeley 1893: Joshua Pim 1894: Joshua Pim 1895: Joshua Pim 1896: Wilfred Baddeley 1897: Reggie Doherty 1898: Reggie Doherty 1899: Reggie Doherty 1900: Reggie Doherty 1901: Arthur Gore 1902: Laurie Doherty 1903: Laurie Doherty 1904: Laurie Doherty 1905: Laurie Doherty 1906: Laurie Doherty 1907: Norman Brookes 1908: William Larned 1909: William Larned 1910: Tony Wilding 1911: Tony Wilding 1912: Tony Wilding 1913: Tony Wilding 1914: Tony Wilding 1915: Bill Johnston 1916: Richard Norris Williams 1917: Lindley Murray 1918: Lindley Murray 1919: Bill Johnston 1920: Bill Tilden 1921: Bill Tilden 1922: Bill Tilden 1923: Bill Tilden 1924: Bill Tilden 1925: Bill Tilden 1926: Rene Lacoste 1927: Rene Lacoste 1928: Henri Cochet 1929: Henri Cochet 1930: Henri Cochet 1931: Ellsworth Vines 1932: Ellsworth Vines 1933: Jack Crawford 1934: Fred Perry 1935: Fred Perry 1936: Fred Perry 1937: Don Budge 1938: Don Budge 1939: Bobby Riggs 1940: Don McNeill 1941: Bobby Riggs 1942: Ted Schroeder 1943: Joseph Hunt 1944: Frank Parker 1945: Frank Parker 1946: Jack Kramer 1947: Jack Kramer 1948: John Bromwich 1949: Pancho Gonzales 1950: Budge Patty 1951: Frank Sedgman 1952: Frank Sedgman 1953: Tony Trabert 1954: Jaroslav Drobny 1955: Tony Trabert 1956: Lew Hoad 1957: Lew Hoad 1958: Ashley Cooper 1959: Alex Olmedo 1960: Neale Fraser 1961: Roy Emerson 1962: Rod Laver 1963: Roy Emerson 1964: Roy Emerson 1965: Roy Emerson 1966: Fred Stolle 1967: John Newcombe Best professional players per year in the pre-open era 1927: Vinny Richards 1928: Vinny Richards 1929: Karel Kozeluh 1930: Karel Kozeluh 1931: Bill Tilden 1932: Bill Tilden 1933: Bill Tilden 1934: Ellsworth Vines 1935: Ellsworth Vines 1936: Ellsworth Vines 1937: Ellsworth Vines 1938: Ellsworth Vines 1939: Don Budge 1940: Don Budge 1941: Fred Perry 1942: Don Budge 1943: ??? 1944: Bobby Riggs 1945: Bobby Riggs 1946: Bobby Riggs 1947: Bobby Riggs 1948: Jack Kramer 1949: Jack Kramer 1950: Jack Kramer 1951: Jack Kramer 1952: Pancho Segura 1953: Jack Kramer 1954: Pancho Gonzales 1955: Pancho Gonzales 1956: Pancho Gonzales 1957: Pancho Gonzales 1958: Pancho Gonzales 1959: Pancho Gonzales 1960: Pancho Gonzales 1961: Pancho Gonzales 1962: Ken Rosewall 1963: Ken Rosewall 1964: Rod Laver 1965: Rod Laver 1966: Rod Laver 1967: Rod Laver Best players per year in the open era 1968: Rod Laver 1969: Rod Laver 1970: Rod Laver 1971: John Newcombe 1972: Stan Smith 1973: Ilie Nastase 1974: Jimmy Connors 1975: Arthur Ashe 1976: Jimmy Connors 1977: Guillermo Vilas 1978: Bjorn Borg 1979: Bjorn Borg 1980: Bjorn Borg 1981: John McEnroe 1982: Jimmy Connors 1983: John McEnroe 1984: John McEnroe 1985: Ivan Lendl 1986: Ivan Lendl 1987: Ivan Lendl 1988: Mats Wilander 1989: Boris Becker 1990: Stefan Edberg 1991: Stefan Edberg 1992: Jim Courier 1993: Pete Sampras 1994: Pete Sampras 1995: Pete Sampras 1996: Pete Sampras 1997: Pete Sampras 1998: Pete Sampras 1999: Andre Agassi 2000: Gustavo Kuerten 2001: Lleyton Hewitt 2002: Lleyton Hewitt 2003: Andy Roddick 2004: Roger Federer 2005: Roger Federer 2006: Roger Federer 2007: Roger Federer 2008: Rafael Nadal 2009: Roger Federer 2010: Rafael Nadal 2011: Novak Djokovic 2012: Novak Djokovic Last edited by Mustard : 11-10-2012 at 07:34 AM. |
|
|
|
|
11-10-2012, 07:32 AM
|
#5 | |
|
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 148
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-10-2012, 07:46 AM
|
#6 |
|
Hall Of Fame
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 4,418
|
Another history lesson from a 19 year old here? Yes, there were too many changes before the open era, when we went from wood racquets in the nineteenth century to wood racquets in pre-open 1967. In the open era we've gone from wood to metal to fiberglass laminate to ceramic to boron-reinforced graphite to graphite-fiberglass to graphite-kevlar to....what's next? Pre-open wasn't international? Huh? Roster of players from the 50s and 60s includes prominent players from every continent except Antarctica, including notable players from India, South Africa, South America, Eastern Europe, and of course Europe, Austalia and the U.S.
__________________
Angell 105 WC Silverstring |
|
|
|
|
11-10-2012, 07:51 AM
|
#7 |
|
Professional
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,424
|
Agree pre-open era = immature players.
__________________
I am not the mind, nor the intellect nor the ego nor the reflection of inner self |
|
|
|
|
11-10-2012, 07:57 AM
|
#8 | |
|
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 148
|
Quote:
2) Like I said above, he was undisputed world number one in a few years, and co-number 1 in the others. Co-number 1 is a ridiculous word. It can only happen in an immature stage of tennis history. Too many thing about Gonzales are myths, like his serve's speed. We do not know for sure. So, because too many things about Gonzales are myth, he lives in a cloud that protects him from other modern greats. That also happens with every pre-open players. They are living in the cloud. Wow, they won too many tournaments (Laver won 199, I guess) while Federer can not pass 90 mark. Wow, they won too many majors (Laver 19, Rosewall 23, I guess). For the God's sake, how many of them are mickey mouse with very few participant? Should we count 1 pro slam in 1967 equal a today's slam? I guess NOT. |
|
|
|
|
|
11-10-2012, 08:09 AM
|
#9 | |
|
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 148
|
Quote:
Last edited by NGM : 11-10-2012 at 08:12 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
11-10-2012, 08:21 AM
|
#10 | |
|
G.O.A.T.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 13,613
|
Quote:
It's true that Roger's continue to add more to his legacy, some people bump up players in the pre-open(i.e. Laver) era so they can stay "fix" with Roger, but players in the open-era has to stay further behind. It makes no sense at all. Player's resume can't be change unless you're an active player like Roger. No past retired player can't get any worse(or better) just because Roger breaks/set tennis records. People should leave out Federer when they want to compare players in the open era to players in the pre-open era.
__________________
NadalAgassi: I think Serena's final slam tally will be something from 18-27. My best guess is 24 or 25 though; Nole(2010) will never win Wimbledon |
|
|
|
|
|
11-10-2012, 08:28 AM
|
#11 |
|
Hall Of Fame
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,735
|
As immature as the Greek Culture pre Christ, the Renaissance, or the era of Enlightment.
|
|
|
|
|
11-10-2012, 08:29 AM
|
#12 | |
|
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 148
|
Quote:
You guys always say that Federer is the best player of the open era but not tennis history as a whole, because there were too many greats like Gonzales, Laver in the pre-open era. And now I tell you pre-open era was immature period that can not compared with open era. Stop using myths to argue with facts. |
|
|
|
|
|
11-10-2012, 08:37 AM
|
#13 | |
|
Hall Of Fame
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: london
Posts: 1,676
|
Quote:
The idea that a 5 foot 10 Laver could compete with today's players even if he was born in this era is ridiculous. His career would be slightly better than Ferrer's because he has the advantage of being a lefty. Would not win a slam GAURANTEED
__________________
Roger's failures on clay eclipse the totality of Pete's career on clay | Federer, the nephew uncle Toni never had | TTW's official ******* trollhunter Last edited by sonicare : 11-10-2012 at 08:39 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
11-10-2012, 08:39 AM
|
#14 | |
|
G.O.A.T.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 13,613
|
Quote:
You also double counting with 2 players/per year earning the best player. Had the open-era had two tours and 2 players gets to be number one in the world, Fed/Nadal would earn more year at #1. Nadal would have 6 years end #1(with would include 2005, 06, 07, 09, 11) had Fed and Nole was playing in a separate tour. You see how much of a factor when there's a two separate field competing? And please don't try to hide negative facts. It's not going go work.
__________________
NadalAgassi: I think Serena's final slam tally will be something from 18-27. My best guess is 24 or 25 though; Nole(2010) will never win Wimbledon |
|
|
|
|
|
11-10-2012, 08:43 AM
|
#15 | |
|
Hall Of Fame
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: london
Posts: 1,676
|
Quote:
I will ask again If you are comfortable with having 2 tours and not conceding that it makes it easier to compete in 2 tours, then please do tell how many 3.5 tournaments can one win today to equal to a grandslam on the ATP tour? I gaurantee Mustard willnot answer this question because he is a hypocrite on this issue. he is a GOD when it comes to stats and I respect him but on this issue, he is FOS.
__________________
Roger's failures on clay eclipse the totality of Pete's career on clay | Federer, the nephew uncle Toni never had | TTW's official ******* trollhunter |
|
|
|
|
|
11-10-2012, 08:58 AM
|
#16 | |
|
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 148
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-10-2012, 09:03 AM
|
#17 | |
|
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 148
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-10-2012, 09:48 AM
|
#18 | |
|
Legend
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,232
|
Quote:
If some were so sure of Federer's alleged status, there would no need to launch threads like this over and over and over again. Last edited by THUNDERVOLLEY : 11-10-2012 at 09:51 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
11-10-2012, 10:17 AM
|
#19 | |
|
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,823
|
Quote:
Last edited by diredesire : 11-11-2012 at 03:28 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
11-10-2012, 10:18 AM
|
#20 | |
|
G.O.A.T.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 10,501
|
Quote:
__________________
" I have watched plenty of matches of the 70´s and 80´s" ABMK, the historian |
|
|
|
|
|
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
|
||||||
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
|
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:58 AM.