Rosewall > Laver - Page 9

kiki · 01-26-2013, 07:17 AM

There´d be no doubts if Laver had just taken the last two points of their frentic Dallas final in 72.

hoodjem · 01-26-2013, 08:07 AM

^^^Then there'd be no debate, and where would we be?

(We would not be talking about the Little Thief.)

Phoenix1983 · 01-26-2013, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

Several posters do denigrate Rosewall without giving any arguments (or pseudo-arguments such as Rosewall not winning Wimbledon).

It's not a pseudo-argument.

When are you going to accept that a man who loses FIVE times in the final of the world's biggest tournament, when he was dominating and winning majors elsewhere, cannot possibly be GOAT?

It's like saying a football (soccer) team can be the greatest of all time when they keep losing World Cup finals. Or a baseball team keep losing the World Series final. Or an athlete keep winning all other races but then keep getting silver in the Olympic final.

kiki · 01-26-2013, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoodjem

^^^Then there'd be no debate, and where would we be?

(We would not be talking about the Little Thief.)

That is true.As I posted before, for myself it´s always been kind of " Whom do you love more, mom or dad?".

hoodjem · 01-26-2013, 05:26 PM

^^^Tilden.

CyBorg · 01-26-2013, 11:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenix1983

It's not a pseudo-argument.

When are you going to accept that a man who loses FIVE times in the final of the world's biggest tournament, when he was dominating and winning majors elsewhere, cannot possibly be GOAT?

It's like saying a football (soccer) team can be the greatest of all time when they keep losing World Cup finals. Or a baseball team keep losing the World Series final. Or an athlete keep winning all other races but then keep getting silver in the Olympic final.

It is very much a pseudo-argument, assuming a pseudo-argument is one that doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Your analogies are poor. Unlike Wimbledon, none of these stages were devalued by a pro/amateur split, in which certain players were banned from participating.

So either you are engaging in bad argumentation on purpose or out of ignorance.

Phoenix1983 · 01-27-2013, 02:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CyBorg

It is very much a pseudo-argument, assuming a pseudo-argument is one that doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Your analogies are poor. Unlike Wimbledon, none of these stages were devalued by a pro/amateur split, in which certain players were banned from participating.

So either you are engaging in bad argumentation on purpose or out of ignorance.

Er.....what?

You do realise that the pro-amateur split which existed when Rosewall reached his first 2 Wimbledon finals should have made it EASIER for him to win the title - as many of the top players, notably Gonzales, were not there. Yet he still couldn't get the job done.

The third and fourth times he reached the W final, the pro/am split didn't exist. It was the Open Era.

BobbyOne · 01-27-2013, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenix1983

Er.....what?

You do realise that the pro-amateur split which existed when Rosewall reached his first 2 Wimbledon finals should have made it EASIER for him to win the title - as many of the top players, notably Gonzales, were not there. Yet he still couldn't get the job done.

The third and fourth times he reached the W final, the pro/am split didn't exist. It was the Open Era.

Phoenix, You change from five to four Wimbledon failures. That's a little mistake. A greater one is your stubborness in blaming Rosewall without any reason.

kiki · 01-27-2013, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CyBorg

It is very much a pseudo-argument, assuming a pseudo-argument is one that doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Your analogies are poor. Unlike Wimbledon, none of these stages were devalued by a pro/amateur split, in which certain players were banned from participating.

So either you are engaging in bad argumentation on purpose or out of ignorance.

but who could have beaten the 1970-1971 John Newcombe on fast grass?

It was not Rosewall´s fault that Newk had SUCH peak

Phoenix1983 · 01-27-2013, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

Phoenix, You change from five to four Wimbledon failures. That's a little mistake. A greater one is your stubborness in blaming Rosewall without any reason.

I was being generous to Rosewall by ignoring the 1967 W Pro.

BobbyOne · 01-27-2013, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kiki

but who could have beaten the 1970-1971 John Newcombe on fast grass?

It was not Rosewall´s fault that Newk had SUCH peak

kiki, Rosewall did beat Newcombe on 1970 US Open fast grass

pc1 · 01-27-2013, 02:07 PM

Phoenix1983 and BobbyOne,

Frankly I don't think either of you are going to change your minds. It's getting rather boring because it's the same statements.

Honestly the key to a great player is the ability to win on all surfaces. Rosewall won on grass, clay, wood, indoor canvas etc.

Tilden technically did not win any of the current recognized clay court majors so technically he did not win by today's standards a clay major but he won so many US Claycourts and other great clay events that you couldn't deny his greatness. However he actually won a red clay major in the World Hardcourt which was the clay court championship of the world because the French was only Open to French people. Does a person deny the greatness of Tilden because he technically did not win a classic major? Just my two cents and considering inflation it's probably negative value.

Guys just switch to another topic. It's really not a discussion anymore because no one is giving in on any points.

Phoenix1983 · 01-27-2013, 02:34 PM

^ pc1, you are right, there is no point continuing this debate.

BobbyOne · 01-27-2013, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenix1983

^ pc1, you are right, there is no point continuing this debate.

Phoenix, I agree.

kiki · 01-28-2013, 04:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pc1

Phoenix1983 and BobbyOne,

Frankly I don't think either of you are going to change your minds. It's getting rather boring because it's the same statements.

Honestly the key to a great player is the ability to win on all surfaces. Rosewall won on grass, clay, wood, indoor canvas etc.

Tilden technically did not win any of the current recognized majors so technically he did not win by today's standards a clay major but he won so many US Claycourts and other great clay events that you couldn't deny his greatness. However he actually won a red clay major in the World Hardcourt which was the clay court championship of the world because the French was only Open to French people. Does a person deny the greatness of Tilden because he technically did not win a classic major? Just my two cents and considering inflation it's probably negative value.

Guys just switch to another topic. It's really not a discussion anymore because no one is giving in on any points.

Lets elaborate on Newcombe grass peak making him the alfa male in early 70

pc1 · 01-29-2013, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kiki

Lets elaborate on Newcombe grass peak making him the alfa male in early 70

I not sure if he was the alpha male but here's some highlights of the great Newk. I was privileged to see him during his best years.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sR2asq8ZrSk

kiki · 02-02-2013, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

kiki, Rosewall did beat Newcombe on 1970 US Open fast grass

Yes, but see what happened in 1971 W and 73 FH.

of course, Rosewall also beat Newk at the 1974 event, which was a well merited win for muscless.

BobbyOne · 02-02-2013, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kiki

Yes, but see what happened in 1971 W and 73 FH.

of course, Rosewall also beat Newk at the 1974 event, which was a well merited win for muscless.

kiki, Rosewall beat Newcombe in two 1974 events: in the two biggest of the year...

Mustard · 02-02-2013, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pc1

Tilden technically did not win any of the current recognized majors so technically he did not win by today's standards a clay major but he won so many US Claycourts and other great clay events that you couldn't deny his greatness. However he actually won a red clay major in the World Hardcourt which was the clay court championship of the world because the French was only Open to French people. Does a person deny the greatness of Tilden because he technically did not win a classic major? Just my two cents and considering inflation it's probably negative value.

Tilden won 3 Wimbledons and 7 US Championships. They are current recognised majors.

pc1 · 02-03-2013, 02:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mustard

Tilden won 3 Wimbledons and 7 US Championships. They are current recognised majors.

I meant clay majors. Thanks for correcting my stupid error. I'll change the wording on it.

01-26-2013, 07:17 AM	#161
kiki G.O.A.T. Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 10,519	There´d be no doubts if Laver had just taken the last two points of their frentic Dallas final in 72. __________________ " I have watched plenty of matches of the 70´s and 80´s" ABMK, the historian

01-26-2013, 08:07 AM	#162
hoodjem Legend Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Bierlandt Posts: 9,971	^^^Then there'd be no debate, and where would we be? (We would not be talking about the Little Thief.) __________________ The smart man thinks he knows a lot; the wise man is aware that he knows little.

01-26-2013, 05:26 PM	#165
hoodjem Legend Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Bierlandt Posts: 9,971	^^^Tilden. __________________ The smart man thinks he knows a lot; the wise man is aware that he knows little.

01-27-2013, 02:07 PM	#172
pc1 Legend Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 7,146	Phoenix1983 and BobbyOne, Frankly I don't think either of you are going to change your minds. It's getting rather boring because it's the same statements. Honestly the key to a great player is the ability to win on all surfaces. Rosewall won on grass, clay, wood, indoor canvas etc. Tilden technically did not win any of the current recognized clay court majors so technically he did not win by today's standards a clay major but he won so many US Claycourts and other great clay events that you couldn't deny his greatness. However he actually won a red clay major in the World Hardcourt which was the clay court championship of the world because the French was only Open to French people. Does a person deny the greatness of Tilden because he technically did not win a classic major? Just my two cents and considering inflation it's probably negative value. Guys just switch to another topic. It's really not a discussion anymore because no one is giving in on any points. Last edited by pc1 : 02-03-2013 at 02:58 AM.

01-27-2013, 02:34 PM	#173
Phoenix1983 Semi-Pro Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 733	^ pc1, you are right, there is no point continuing this debate. __________________ Oldest living male Grand Slam champs: Seixas, Patty, Falkenburg, Savitt, Sedgman, Rose, Trabert, Pietrangeli, Fraser, Rosewall.