how can it be called a GOAT-worthy season if you lose 16 times in it? (1969)

U

urban

Legend
Simple. If you win 106 matches, 18 tournaments, including all 4 majors to complete the Grand Slam plus 4-5 Super nine events. The match count includes exhibitions, one night stands and third place playoffs. Mac's ratio is nice, but he played almost 40 matches less, and lost two of the biggest of the year, RG final and DC final. In Federer's match counts his one night stand losses to Roddick or Sampras ar not counted. Connors ratio is very good, but he pulled middle out of tournaments (look at his tournament count and the difference to his match losses), and in 3 majors he won, he played top tenners just 3 times: Rosewall twice and Tanner once.
 
Last edited:
pc1

pc1

G.O.A.T.
urban said:
Simple. If you win 106 matches, 18 tournaments, including all majors to complete the Garnd Slam plus 4-5 Super nine events. The match count includes exhibitions, one night stands and third place playoffs. Mac's ratio is nice, but he played almost 30 matches less, and lost two of the biggest of the year, RG final and DC final.
Click to expand...

Laver won 106 of 122 for 86.88% and as you mentioned Urban, the Grand Slam and Super Nine events.

Sampras in his BEST year won two majors and was 77-12 for a 86.51%. That's a lesser winning percentage than Laver in 1969 with far less activity and tournaments won.

You take into account Laver was the dominant player in the old pro tours for most of his time there and that he won the Pro Grand Slam in 1967 against the best players in the world and you have someone way overqualified at least to be considered for the GOAT.

I could argue that Laver played better overall tennis in other years in the pros. I think Laver, from 1964 to 1967 was a superior player to the Laver of 1969, who dominated Open Tennis. Laver was to turn 31 in August of 1969.

Check this youtube video of a 36 about to be 37 that year Laver against Connors and tell me if this old man isn't bad. Picture this same man at 27 and it's very scary how good he was. Laver volleys better at 36 than Federer does now!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SptdffCeVmM
 
Last edited:
B

BTURNER

Legend
the outstretched half volley forehand dropper over the highest part of the net told me something. Genius in 30 seconds.
 
hoodjem

hoodjem

G.O.A.T.
pc1 said:
Check this youtube video of a 36 about to be 37 that year Laver against Connors and tell me if this old man isn't bad. Picture this same man at 27 and it's very scary how good he was. Laver volleys better at 36 than Federer does now!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SptdffCeVmM
Click to expand...
Watch the replay at 2:33: Laver has micro-second quick relexes. Only Edberg or McEnroe could match this level of volleying.
 
Last edited:
CyBorg

CyBorg

Legend
Problematic article, precisely because of the winning percentage part.

Yeah, that benefits Connors quite a bit. Did not play on red clay. Won a lot of mickey mouse events. Won the poorly attended Australian Open (counted as major in that formula).

Looks like a perfect year, but it isn't.
 
jimbo333

jimbo333

Hall of Fame
Connors only ever lost 1 match in the Australian Open in the whole of his career!!!

Can any other all-time great match that?
 
pc1

pc1

G.O.A.T.
CyBorg said:
Problematic article, precisely because of the winning percentage part.

Yeah, that benefits Connors quite a bit. Did not play on red clay. Won a lot of mickey mouse events. Won the poorly attended Australian Open (counted as major in that formula).

Looks like a perfect year, but it isn't.
Click to expand...

Admittedly Connors played often on the weak Bill Riordan circuit but he did win a lot of top tournaments aside from his three majors in 1974. He won the U.S. Clay Courts over Orantes and Borg, the South Africa Open over Solomon and Ashe and a tournament in London in which he defeated Solomon, Okker and Gottfried in consecutive rounds.

I actually think that Connors may have had overall better years later when he was playing the strongest circuit but it's hard to equal three majors out of three in one year. And in the mid to late 1970's he had players like Borg, McEnroe, Ashe, Vilas and Nastase (although Nastase did play the Riordan circuit at times) to content with.

I
 
CyBorg

CyBorg

Legend
pc1 said:
Admittedly Connors played often on the weak Bill Riordan circuit but he did win a lot of top tournaments aside from his three majors in 1974. He won the U.S. Clay Courts over Orantes and Borg, the South Africa Open over Solomon and Ashe and a tournament in London in which he defeated Solomon, Okker and Gottfried in consecutive rounds.

I actually think that Connors may have had overall better years later when he was playing the strongest circuit but it's hard to equal three majors out of three in one year. And in the mid to late 1970's he had players like Borg, McEnroe, Ashe, Vilas and Nastase (although Nastase did play the Riordan circuit at times) to content with.

I
Click to expand...

Okay, it was still a good year. I'm just challenging the ranking and particularly the formula that decides the ranking.

Secondly, it's not really three of three majors. The Australian was far from a 'major'. I mean, Phil Dent - seriously?
 
Q&M son

Q&M son

Professional
urban said:
Simple. If you win 106 matches, 18 tournaments, including all 4 majors to complete the Grand Slam plus 4-5 Super nine events. The match count includes exhibitions, one night stands and third place playoffs. Mac's ratio is nice, but he played almost 40 matches less, and lost two of the biggest of the year, RG final and DC final. In Federer's match counts his one night stand losses to Roddick or Sampras ar not counted. Connors ratio is very good, but he pulled middle out of tournaments (look at his tournament count and the difference to his match losses), and in 3 majors he won, he played top tenners just 3 times: Rosewall twice and Tanner once.
Click to expand...

Fully agree.
Making a joke, if somebody lost 40 matches but played 290...
 
pc1

pc1

G.O.A.T.
CyBorg said:
Okay, it was still a good year. I'm just challenging the ranking and particularly the formula that decides the ranking.

Secondly, it's not really three of three majors. The Australian was far from a 'major'. I mean, Phil Dent - seriously?
Click to expand...

Good point.
 
U

urban

Legend
Connors - besides the Riordan tour -played also WTT matches in 1974. I never found out, what his match record was there. I once read, that he lost a one set match to Newcombe.
 
pc1

pc1

G.O.A.T.
urban said:
Connors - besides the Riordan tour -played also WTT matches in 1974. I never found out, what his match record was there. I once read, that he lost a one set match to Newcombe.
Click to expand...
I think Connors lost 7-6 to John Newcombe in that match.

According to a website about WTT, Connors was the scoring leader that year but they don't have his won-lost record.
 
NatF

NatF

Bionic Poster
How can it not be a GOAT worthy season when you win ALL the major championships? When you play as many matches in a season as Laver did in 1969 you're bound to have some more losses too. Not to mention Laver was 30 years old!
 
kiki

kiki

Banned
Laver took any risk at the biggest risk taker known (Connors)

What sets Laver apart of anybody else is that he is/was the supreme risk taker.

That is the deal
 
90's Clay

90's Clay

Banned
..... Because you win all 4 grand slams in a calendar year? :shock::shock::shock:

When has it been done since?? Pete is my favorite ever, but he doesn't have ONE season that can hold a candle to Laver's GOAT 1969 season.

Nor does anyone else. The Calendar Slam is the holy grail of tennis and the most DIFFICULT to attain. A big reason which keeps Laver at the top of the heap as greatest ever (Among other achievements of course like his 200 Career titles. Something that will never be matched as well)
 
Last edited:
kiki

kiki

Banned
urban said:
Connors - besides the Riordan tour -played also WTT matches in 1974. I never found out, what his match record was there. I once read, that he lost a one set match to Newcombe.
Click to expand...

Well, the Riordan show not only had Jimbo.Nastase,Gerulaitis,Amritraj and some other good folks like Sandy Mayer and Karl Meiler used to be addicts to it.

Sandy was a 1973 W SF and Karl a 73 AO semifinalist as well.
 
B

BobbyOne

G.O.A.T.
urban said:
Connors - besides the Riordan tour -played also WTT matches in 1974. I never found out, what his match record was there. I once read, that he lost a one set match to Newcombe.
Click to expand...

urban, Connors won a match on WTT against Rosewall only by 5-7.

Edit: I meant 7-5...
 
Last edited:
Vensai

Vensai

Professional
As was mentioned, Laver was not exactly in his prime when that happened, and he played quite a few matches.
 
Vensai

Vensai

Professional
It doesn't really matter how much you lose, as long as you win more and in the big moments at slams in my opinion. Players who could raise their level on the big stage tended to succeed.
 
B

BobbyOne

G.O.A.T.
Vensai said:
It doesn't really matter how much you lose, as long as you win more and in the big moments at slams in my opinion. Players who could raise their level on the big stage tended to succeed.
Click to expand...

Vensai, It's not the same if you lose 1-6, 0-6, 1-6 or 5-7 as a 39 years old against the world champion...
 
M

monfed

Guest
Yup it's just luck, all things fell into place for him to win his 4 slams. Overhyped season.
 
kiki

kiki

Banned
monfed said:
Yup it's just luck, all things fell into place for him to win his 4 slams. Overhyped season.
Click to expand...

Yes, Mercure and Uranus just got aligned in 1969.

Then man stepped onto the moon

So the logical conclusion is that it had to be the Rocket´s year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
A GOAT list giving each era its due
2 3
Replies
115
Views
11K
pc1
pc1
King_olaf_the_hairy
A GOAT list with a difference
Replies
16
Views
551
King_olaf_the_hairy
King_olaf_the_hairy
noeledmonds
Why Federer has to Win the FO to be a GOAT contender
Replies
37
Views
2K
jhhachamp
J
C
Federer's 2004, '05 & '06: the best three-year performance in tennis history?
Replies
23
Views
3K
Jet Rink
J
littlelleyton
  • Poll
Greatest NFL Footballers Ever Part1
Replies
16
Views
1K
littlelleyton
littlelleyton
Top