Height of Lew Hoad

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by kiki

I am amazed at how important height is for the newcomers to tennis.Babies, Lew Hoad is one of the greatest talents that ever played this game and his record was just hampered by terrible injuries.And that has nothing to see with his height.

All I can say is that his ***** was enormous, as he proved.Even the GOAT Rod Laver paid his tribute to Hoad, as did the greatest pro player of the pre open era, a ertain Pancho Gonzales.Happy?

It's pretty well known that Laver modeled his game after Hoad. Tribute enough I'd say.

[pc1]

From everything I've read Lew Hoad was about 5'11". Ellsworth Vines thought he was about 5'11".

[Datacipher]

Originally Posted by TMF

^
Well anyone who said Chang is 5'9" is reasonable will likely to exaggerate another player's height.

That topic is of course irrelevant. However, do not lie to people who did not read that thread:

YOU declared as an unmitigated (and eventually unsubstantiated) fact that Chang was 5'6.

This brought about objection from some posters, and I replied to one of them that when I stood beside Chang he appeared to be about "5'8" to me, but that 5'9 would be "generous but reasonable".

I followed up with photos highlighting the absurdity of a 5'6 Chang, while you simply continually accused me of exaggerating.

All posters can decide for themselves who was exaggerating.

PS. IF you dispute any of this, let's excerpt all of our posts from that thread, and repost that discussion in it's entirety verbatim.

[Ronaldo]

Originally Posted by Bjorn99

If Hoad didn't drink a barrel of beer every hour of the day, he would have been the greatest of all time. Heck, he jockingly told the story of how he drank all night before the US Open final, and watched boxing movies all night long with a complete stranger and lost in four sets to Rosewall the next day.

That was no stranger, it was Ken Rosewall. Hoad did not recognize him.

[Datacipher]

Originally Posted by Limpinhitter

So you've actually met TMF in person!

I've seen people for whom that shape of forehead is normal:

[kiki]

Originally Posted by Limpinhitter

It's pretty well known that Laver modeled his game after Hoad. Tribute enough I'd say.

Yes, I wouldn´t been more honoured if someone had said somethng about my game.

If Hoad had been not injuried in the early 60´s and Pancho just 3-4 years younger, the Laver-Hoad-Rosewall-Gonzales combination would have produced the most unbelievable tennis ever seen.Even better than Borg-Comnnors-Mc-Lendl, Becker-Edberg-Lendl-Wilander ,Sampras-Agassi-Kurten-Rafter or today´s famous Fed-Djokovic-Nadal-Murray.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by Datacipher

That topic is of course irrelevant. However, do not lie to people who did not read that thread:

YOU declared as an unmitigated (and eventually unsubstantiated) fact that Chang was 5'6.

This brought about objection from some posters, and I replied to one of them that when I stood beside Chang he appeared to be about "5'8" to me, but that 5'9 would be "generous but reasonable".

I followed up with photos highlighting the absurdity of a 5'6 Chang, while you simply continually accused me of exaggerating.

All posters can decide for themselves who was exaggerating.

PS. IF you dispute any of this, let's excerpt all of our posts from that thread, and repost that discussion in it's entirety verbatim.

People who measurizes the talent by the body´s height have probably a big problem with sizes between their left and right ear and what is in between.

[MAXXply]

Originally Posted by pc1

From everything I've read Lew Hoad was about 5'11". Ellsworth Vines thought he was about 5'11".

Yeah I agree. Same height and fair-haired complexion as Lleyton Hewitt (thereabouts) but a lot more barrel-chested.

[TMF]

Originally Posted by Datacipher

That topic is of course irrelevant. However, do not lie to people who did not read that thread:

YOU declared as an unmitigated (and eventually unsubstantiated) fact that Chang was 5'6.

This brought about objection from some posters, and I replied to one of them that when I stood beside Chang he appeared to be about "5'8" to me, but that 5'9 would be "generous but reasonable".

I followed up with photos highlighting the absurdity of a 5'6 Chang, while you simply continually accused me of exaggerating.

All posters can decide for themselves who was exaggerating.

PS. IF you dispute any of this, let's excerpt all of our posts from that thread, and repost that discussion in it's entirety verbatim.

That doesn't take away from you exaggerating Chang's height. Anyone knows he's not 5'9" but you are the only one who bought it up. Why didn't you say he's 5'6" is generous but reasonable ? No b/c that doesn't look good for Chang...LOL

Just b/c you see Chang is listed at 5'9" from other sources doesn't means that's correct. And I've already told you athletes are not honest about their height, they claimed a little taller than their actual height. Not only height, some even exaggerated their weight(eg Charles Barkley) to look intimidating. But I don't expect you to know this b/c you don't watch other sports like I do.

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by TMF

That doesn't take away from you exaggerating Chang's height. Anyone knows he's not 5'9" but you are the only one who bought it up. Why didn't you say he's 5'6" is generous but reasonable ? No b/c that doesn't look good for Chang...LOL

Just b/c you see Chang is listed at 5'9" from other sources doesn't means that's correct. And I've already told you athletes are not honest about their height, they claimed a little taller than their actual height. Not only height, some even exaggerated their weight(eg Charles Barkley) to look intimidating. But I don't expect you to know this b/c you don't watch other sports like I do.

Having stood next to Sir Charles at the airport, I'm gonna go with he didn't have to exaggerate anything to look intimidating. He was a big boy, about 6'5" and at least 260 at that time. And, his elbows looked like he spent time crushing cinder blocks with them. I certainly wouldn't want to be standing nearby when he came down for a rebound.

[Datacipher]

Originally Posted by TMF

That doesn't take away from you exaggerating Chang's height. Anyone knows he's not 5'9" but you are the only one who bought it up.

That's a lie. You brought it up, by stating unequivocally that he was 5'6. You were called on that by other posters, and having stood next to Chang, I replied to one of them. (PC1 I believe)

Originally Posted by TMF

Why didn't you say he's 5'6" is generous but reasonable ? No b/c that doesn't look good for Chang...LOL

It's neither generous nor reasonable.

Originally Posted by TMF

Just b/c you see Chang is listed at 5'9" from other sources doesn't means that's correct. And I've already told you athletes are not honest about their height, they claimed a little taller than their actual height. Not only height, some even exaggerated their weight(eg Charles Barkley) to look intimidating. But I don't expect you to know this b/c you don't watch other sports like I do.

06-03-2004, 08:03 AM

Originally Posted by Datacipher

Thomas, I'm certain some of the heights of pros are incorrect and many of those exaggerated. But something is really really off about some of your figures. I've also stood near Agassi, and he certainly wasn't 5'8! It's tough for me to buy Sampras at 5'11....

....and you started watching tennis in 2009....OOPS. I have written about height exaggeration in tennis and in the NBA long before you even began watching tennis.

[TMF]

Originally Posted by Datacipher

That's a lie. You brought it up, by stating unequivocally that he was 5'6. You were called on that by other posters, and having stood next to Chang, I replied to one of them. (PC1 I believe)

Obviously you can't read. I said you brought up about Chang's 5'9", no one else !

Originally Posted by Datacipher

It's neither generous nor reasonable.

According to you, 5'9" is reasonable but 5'6" is not(and you know he's not 5'9"). Thanks for proving my point. Oh, you don't like me using the word exaggeration, then I'll just use biased.

Originally Posted by Datacipher

06-03-2004, 08:03 AM


....and you started watching tennis in 2009....OOPS. I have written about height exaggeration in tennis and in the NBA long before you even began watching tennis.

ROFL!

Just b/c I joined 2009 you assumed I started watching that year. If a 90 yrs old elder fan join this thread this year you assumed he's just start watching tennis in 2011.

BTW, Bodo has written about tennis for years, and look at how many criticisms he gets from the fans.

[Datacipher]

Originally Posted by TMF

Obviously you can't read. I said you brought up about Chang's 5'9", no one else !

No. That's yet another lie. As I already mentioned twice, you brought up Chang's height, and I replied to another poster who addressed the issue. I did initiate either a 5'6 or 5'9 height claim.

Here is the correct sequence:
__________________________________________________ ____________

Originally Posted by TMF

Chang is a baseliner. He’s playing right in the hand of the players today that are built to play this style. How many player at 5’6” today that enjoy huge success? There isn’t. Had they did exist, then I wouldn’t doubt Chang. This is not to take anything away from Chang in his heyday, he deserve all of his accomplishments, but let be realistic here, the game today demands more...power, defense, offense, consistent, fitness, athleticism and size. You lack either one of those, you’re in trouble. Ask Davydenko, he’ll tell you !

Originally Posted by pc1

He's not 5'6". Officially I think he's 5'9" tall but I would tend to think he's a bit shorter.

in direct, quoted reply to PC1]

Originally Posted by Datacipher

He's was 5'8 at minimum when I stood next to him PC. 5'9 may be generous but it's reasonable. 5'6 just shows how truly ignorant TMF is. We both know he just didn't know, but if we pretend he did it on purpose, then it's a completely unwarranted derogatory lie about Chang, and it's as foolish as somebody saying Roger is only 5'10, he can't be a big server!

Note that the average height of players when Chang played was 6'2.

__________________________________________________ ______________


Fortunately, you later admitted to me that you don't believe ANY of the players from Chang's generation could be as successful today, revealing that height really wasn't the issue. It was just an easy criticism of Chang you latched onto, which was quite disingenuous of you, and thus, trying to exaggerate Chang's height even further was in your benefit, though doing so insulted the knowledge and intelligence of all of us on this board.

Originally Posted by TMF

ROFL!

Just b/c I joined 2009 you assumed I started watching that year. If a 90 yrs old elder fan join this thread this year you assumed he's just start watching tennis in 2011.

Incorrect. Many posters remember that you specifically admitted in an early post that you had just started watching tennis (and did not see 2008 Wimbledon because you had not started watching yet), and that you went back and edited the post to remove this information when you were called on it.

Originally Posted by TMF

BTW, Bodo has written about tennis for years, and look at how many criticisms he gets from the fans.

The logic in this statement is child-like. It does not change that I was writing about height exaggerations 5+ years before you started watching tennis, and thus disproves your lie: that I did not know. Further, the validity of Peter Bodo's views bear no relationship to mine. Nor do the validity of his views hinge on how much criticism he gets from "fans".

However, I would note that Bodo has been watching tennis, and been very close to the tennis players for a very long time. I'll also mention that having seen Bodo in person, he is not 5'6 either, he is quite tall. So don't try that tactic again. LOL!

[TMF]

Originally Posted by Datacipher

Incorrect. Many posters remember that you specifically admitted in an early post that you had just started watching tennis (and did not see 2008 Wimbledon because you had not started watching yet), and that you went back and edited the post to remove this information when you were called on it.

I've never said I started watching tennis 2008. It sure easy to expose your hypocrisy after you keep calling someone a liar when you fabricate something that I've never said.

Oh, and 5'6" is NOT generous/reasonable but 5'9" is, thanks for playing.

[pc1]

Can someone tell me the height of Kareen Abdul Jabbar? Is he shorter because he played in the 1960's? I guess Shaq is much taller than him.

Frankly these height discussions bore me. It's quality of play that interests me.

Like I've written in the past, by the logic of height, Maria Sharapova is clearly better than Rosewall, Federer, Laver, Newcombe, Nastase, Nadal among others. So I guess she should play on the Men's tour and beat everyone. I would guess she would crush Michael Chang. However I may bet my life savings that Chang right now would beat Sharapova on any surface. Chang can also give Maria a handicap of one point per game. I still would think Chang would win easily.

Back to Lew Hoad. Hoad at just under six feet is arguably the most talented player ever. The man was a monster who could do anyone with his racquet and legendary in his beer drinking as I guess many of the old Aussies would be.

[Datacipher]

Originally Posted by pc1

Can someone tell me the height of Kareen Abdul Jabbar? Is he shorter because he played in the 1960's? I guess Shaq is much taller than him.

Frankly these height discussions bore me. It's quality of play that interests me.
.

LOL. I agree completely PC1, but TMF's obsession with literally belittling players of the past leads him to spew out verifiably wrong information.

The only height issue I ever found compelling on my own was the height in relations to serve speed (and/or power off the ground). Suffice it to say that while the larger player has a power advantage in general due to his height, we see that is a fairly rough correlation, and that, in some of the more extreme exceptions, very small players are among the hardest hitters of all.

[Datacipher]

Originally Posted by TMF

Oh, and 5'6" is NOT generous/reasonable but 5'9" is, thanks for playing.

Correct. Finally you got it. Please, don't start more lies. I did not say it was "generous/reasonable", I said it was "generous BUT reasonable" after specifying that he looked about 5'8 when I stood near him.

To state as a fact, that he is 5'6 is neither generous, nor reasonable.

[hoodjem]

Originally Posted by kiki

People who measurizes the talent by the body´s height have probably a big problem with sizes between their left and right ear and what is in between.

"measurize"

I like it.

(It reminds me of another favorite: "burglarize".)

[kiki]

Originally Posted by hoodjem

"measurize"

I like it.

(It reminds me of another favorite: "burglarize".)

Who´s teaching who? creative mind is key for survival in today´s jungle...