Whats your top 10 of all time right now?

[Dan Lobb]

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

Dan, as an expert you should know that Bromwich was not a veteran in 1947.

How old was Buchholz in 1968?

[Dan Lobb]

Originally Posted by krosero

That's right, esp. considering how depleted Rosewall was by the time he got to the final round at Wimbledon and USO, only one year later. Seven rounds on clay in best of 5 matches is only going to be harder on someone that age.

Rosewall was more formidable on clay than on grass at this time.
It is a mystery to me why he did not play RG after 1969.

[Goosehead]

Originally Posted by pc1

I think you read my post incorrectly. I don't think Serena is ahead of Evert, Graf and Navratilova.

oop soz..i was looking at terrastars18 list.

[NadalAgassi]

Originally Posted by Goosehead

i see so you are awarding serena some extra majors/ big tourney wins that she didnt actually win because she was 'injured' or because she preferred to go shopping..hmm ok then.

also martina and evert were on the same level..they took majors off each other for about 11 yrs, so why is one of them lower dodgy list you got there..not based in reality.

Peak Martina was much better than Evert. She beat Evert 13 times in a row at one point. She was far more dominant at her peak, losing only 1 or 2 matches a year. Evert didnt even deny Martina many majors, only 3 or 4, Martina by contrast denied Evert about 8-10.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by pc1

As great as Rosewall was, he was going to be 39 in 1973 and that would be very tough to beat a Nastase who would be 27 in 1973. Nastase in 1973 would be a big major for anyone on clay and he was absolutely at his peak then. The person I think would have had the best chance to defeat Nastase would have been Manuel Orantes but he was upset earlier in the tournament.

I fully agree with you, but Nastase deefated Orantes easily for two consecutive years Orantes in Barcelona (73 and 74) and if memory serves, I think he also handled hin at the 1973 IO.

[kiki]

1973 Nastase was almost unbeatable on clay.You can never count Rosewall out but Nastase would be the favourite, anyhow.

[Dan Lobb]

Originally Posted by kiki

1973 Nastase was almost unbeatable on clay.You can never count Rosewall out but Nastase would be the favourite, anyhow.

Nastase was not at all unbeatable on clay.
In the 1972 French Open, he lost in the first round, giving Gimeno an easy path to victory.
In the 1975 Canadian Open final on clay, he lost in straight sets to Orantes, the key being a close line-call in the first set tiebreaker which went against Nastase (rightfully) and upset his concentration, and he made no effort to play after that, letting routine shots go by him. He was fined by the Tennis Council after the season for lack of effort.
In the 1973 French Open, Nastase did not face a tough match in the tournament.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by Dan Lobb

Nastase was not at all unbeatable on clay.
In the 1972 French Open, he lost in the first round, giving Gimeno an easy path to victory.
In the 1975 Canadian Open final on clay, he lost in straight sets to Orantes, the key being a close line-call in the first set tiebreaker which went against Nastase (rightfully) and upset his concentration, and he made no effort to play after that, letting routine shots go by him. He was fined by the Tennis Council after the season for lack of effort.
In the 1973 French Open, Nastase did not face a tough match in the tournament.

orantes would beat any player on clay if he was on, so no shame to Ilie.

I mentioned 1973, when he was on zone for the first half of the year.he just threw away his chances at Wimbledon because he was the only guy ( Kodes came second) to have a lock on that tournament.And, when being a favourite, Nasatse seldom delivered.Like in the 1972 Wimbledon final.

[Dan Lobb]

Originally Posted by kiki

orantes would beat any player on clay if he was on, so no shame to Ilie.

I mentioned 1973, when he was on zone for the first half of the year.he just threw away his chances at Wimbledon because he was the only guy ( Kodes came second) to have a lock on that tournament.And, when being a favourite, Nasatse seldom delivered.Like in the 1972 Wimbledon final.

This is very strange. Nastase was much more comfortable in the season-ending events, where, frankly, there was, and is, LESS pressure than at Wimbledon or Forest Hills, the two premiere events in the game.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by Dan Lobb

This is very strange. Nastase was much more comfortable in the season-ending events, where, frankly, there was, and is, LESS pressure than at Wimbledon or Forest Hills, the two premiere events in the game.

Right, played 5 consecutive Masters finals ( so did Lendl, who also won a couple of Dallas titles), and he only lost one, over 5 sets.

I still recall that famous 1972 final at London .

[Goosehead]

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

Peak Martina was much better than Evert. She beat Evert 13 times in a row at one point. She was far more dominant at her peak, losing only 1 or 2 matches a year. Evert didnt even deny Martina many majors, only 3 or 4, Martina by contrast denied Evert about 8-10.

they both won 18 majors..

Evert beat Navratilova 8 times at the buisiness end of majors..(4F, 4SF).

[pc1]

Originally Posted by kiki

I fully agree with you, but Nastase deefated Orantes easily for two consecutive years Orantes in Barcelona (73 and 74) and if memory serves, I think he also handled hin at the 1973 IO.

I guess we both agree that Orantes at that point would have been Nastase's toughest competition although Nastase would have been favored. Orantes defeated Nastase in four sets at the 1975 US Open in a match I was privileged to see in person. Nastase played well imo in that match but Orantes I believe was playing the best tennis of the tournament. Two of the greatest touch players in the history of tennis. I don't recall Nastase acting up in that match.

[pc1]

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

Peak Martina was much better than Evert. She beat Evert 13 times in a row at one point. She was far more dominant at her peak, losing only 1 or 2 matches a year. Evert didnt even deny Martina many majors, only 3 or 4, Martina by contrast denied Evert about 8-10.

Originally Posted by Goosehead

they both won 18 majors..

Evert beat Navratilova 8 times at the buisiness end of majors..(4F, 4SF).

NadalAgassi, I agree that peak Navratilova was better than peak Evert but it may not have been as one sided as you may think. A good friend of mine pointed out that Navratilova was using the new racquets during most of those 13 straight matches that Navratilova won while Evert stuck to a wood racquet. After Evert switched to the new racquets of the time the matches were closer and Evert was able to defeat Navratilova.

My friend really knows tennis and I do think he has a decent argument.

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by billnepill

It's interesting since you trump the weak era card - who was the competition of Rosewall during those years? Where were Gonzales and Laver? Luckily Gonzales retired and his retirement is widely considered as clearing the path for Rosewall as the former was smashing the competition in 1960

billnepill, Rosewall beat Laver, Gonzalez, Segura, Sedgman, Trabert, Hoad, Anderson, Cooper, Olmedo in his sensational nine majors winning streak. I would say that was a field not too bad...

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by Dan Lobb

Newk was there?

Dan, Newcombe was NOT a top ten claycourter in 1973. For instance he lost to Rosewall clearly at the Japanese Open.

Newcombe WAS there as he lost to Milan Holecek 5-7,1-6 in the first round...

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by Dan Lobb

How old was Buchholz in 1968?

28 and a top player (winning 5 WCT tournaments, beating Roche several times).

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by Dan Lobb

Rosewall was more formidable on clay than on grass at this time.
It is a mystery to me why he did not play RG after 1969.

Dan, I again contradict: Rosewall seems to having been stronger on grass those years, see his runs in 1974.

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by kiki

1973 Nastase was almost unbeatable on clay.You can never count Rosewall out but Nastase would be the favourite, anyhow.

kiki, thanks that you teached Dan tennis history!

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by Dan Lobb

Nastase was not at all unbeatable on clay.
In the 1972 French Open, he lost in the first round, giving Gimeno an easy path to victory.
In the 1975 Canadian Open final on clay, he lost in straight sets to Orantes, the key being a close line-call in the first set tiebreaker which went against Nastase (rightfully) and upset his concentration, and he made no effort to play after that, letting routine shots go by him. He was fined by the Tennis Council after the season for lack of effort.
In the 1973 French Open, Nastase did not face a tough match in the tournament.

because he was awesome...

[pc1]

Originally Posted by Dan Lobb

Newk was there?

Yes Newcombe was there. As was Kodes (that was for you Kiki), Panatta, Okker, Dibbs, Vilas, Metrevelli, Proisy, Connors, Ramirez, Orantes, Cox, Solomon, Ashe, Stan Smith, Borg, Richey Gimeno, Pilic, Taylor. Some of these players were not in their primes yet or past their primes but still excellent players. Borg for example beat the 9th seeded Richey in the first round. A sign of things to come I suppose.

I think it was an extremely strong field. To be honest while Laver and Rosewall could have won this tournament, it's very doubtful at their advanced ages. Laver was having some physical problems also.

I would think that Nastase won an impressive victory.

And of course Nastase was not unbeatable on clay but he was at his peak in 1973 and was a great clay court player.