Head to Heads - Hoad/Laver, Newcombe/Laver, Newcombe/Emerson
- Thread starter timnz
- Start date
pc1
G.O.A.T.
I don't think Laver or Rosewall kept records of that information. The careers of these greats were very long and they played all over the world. Do you remember what you did ten years ago? Tennis records weren't kept well in those days and it's only recently some of these records have come to light.
Its astounding, how bad the detail living memory of players is, even of recent players. I think, we discussed in another thread, that many details in the Sampras-Bodo book are factually wrong. The records on the old pro tour were badly kept and are still incomplete. This gave room for many tales, very perspective opinions and exaggerations by Kramer, Gonzalez, his family (i remember an internet article by a guy named Hernandez, who told wild legends on Gonzalez' career). Sometimes players hear those stories and transport them. Since McCauley and Sutter we have more solid ground. McCauley used the World Tennis archive, Michel Sutter the archive of L'Equipe, both laid the groundwork for exact recollection. In Laver's case it would be better to write to his sister Betty in Queensland, who sampled all newspapers accounts and wrote a book on his career. She has the same numbers as Laver/Pollard in the early book of 1963/64.
Laver's live testimony, preserved on video, is evidence in any court.
For the New Zealand tour, consult Andrew Tas, who has a complete record, showing Hoad and Laver finishing at 7 and 5, Hoad getting first with a 3 to 1 edge on Laver.
Andrew Tas consulted (not "sampled") newspaper reports of the 1964 New Zealand tour. Hoad finished 7 and 5, beating Laver 3 to 1.
Last edited:
Again, this sounds like Mr. Bud Collins of Boston, who also repeated the 8 to 0 result in his 1971 book about Laver.
Perhaps Collins is the source of the misunderstanding, not Laver.
In 1997, Laver stated in his own voice in a videoed interview, now available on DVD, that he lost his first 14 matches to Hoad.
This is the last word, from the man himself.
The evidence is very concrete.
Peter Bodo is a reputable reporter, and would likely have worked from audio taping of Bucholz statements. This is admissable in court as evidence (I have been involved in legal actions, both as litigant and defendent, and successfully both times).
Laver's testimony was live and videoed, also admissable in court as evidence.
I do not see the objection here.
As I made clear in the my earlier post, I was not saying that Laver's testimony is not evidence: I referred to your statement that he would never forget the drubbing. An argument that Laver would never forget a 13-0 drubbing is NOT evidence that the 13-0 drubbing occurred.
You're talking about 1964, I asked about 1963 -- which you should know because I gave the names of the participants that McCauley listed.
You think BUD COLLINS, of all people, is responsible for the 8-0 scoreline that Harold Kaese mentioned to Rosewall on Feb. 6, 1963???????
The press reports of these matches very often refer to the match "last night", so presumably these would have been indoors. But I recall at least one match specified to be in the afternoon. There's a banner advertisement on this page for the first two matches, Laver facing Hoad at 8pm on Saturday, then facing Rosewall at 1:45 the next day: http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AAIBAJ&dq=laver rosewall hoad&pg=3144,6531890
This page has a schedule of Laver's matches through January 26, and again the matches are generally referred to as night matches: http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AAAIBAJ&dq=laver rosewall hoad&pg=4486,938040, with another advertisement in this column: http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AAAIBAJ&dq=laver rosewall hoad&pg=4410,934158
Rosewall said more about indoor play in that Boston Globe interview:
Of Laver, who last year matched Don Budge’s 1938 slam by winning the French, British, Australian and American amateur titles and was guaranteed $110,000 over three years to turn pro, Rosewall had this to say:
“He’s found it tougher than he expected, but once he adjusts to conditions, he’ll be good. He has to learn to play indoors, which is all offense, in small arenas where the ball is deader than in big places, in all kinds of lighting.
“Laver has no outstanding weakness, but needs experience. He’s more powerful than I am, but I have more feeling of what I’m trying to do. I’m thinking ahead, keeping the ball in play, cutting down errors.
“I’m more consistent. MacKay and Buchholz are in and out. So is Hoad. On a good night they can beat anyone. But they’re inconsistent. Although I’ve improved 25 percent as a pro, I’m still better outdoors.
“Indoors the ball’s too quick. It helps others, limits me. I can’t win indoors staying back. I’ve got to go in.”
“He’s found it tougher than he expected, but once he adjusts to conditions, he’ll be good. He has to learn to play indoors, which is all offense, in small arenas where the ball is deader than in big places, in all kinds of lighting.
“Laver has no outstanding weakness, but needs experience. He’s more powerful than I am, but I have more feeling of what I’m trying to do. I’m thinking ahead, keeping the ball in play, cutting down errors.
“I’m more consistent. MacKay and Buchholz are in and out. So is Hoad. On a good night they can beat anyone. But they’re inconsistent. Although I’ve improved 25 percent as a pro, I’m still better outdoors.
“Indoors the ball’s too quick. It helps others, limits me. I can’t win indoors staying back. I’ve got to go in.”
All these dates do confirm the Laver/Pollard book of 1963/64. At the first pro meeting at Sydney begin 1963, Laver faced Hoad in a night match, and Rosewall the next afternoon. He wrote, that he played well against Hoad, but had nothing left against Rosewall. Laver made his pro debut, coming fresh from the Davis Cup challenge round vs. India. In those years, they began with night matches under light in Australia, even outdoors on grass. Also in the amateur championships.
borg number one
Legend
Very interesting article Krosero, thanks. It's fascinating reading that account of Laver's first pro matches versus Rosewall and Hoad. I love that quote, "Our reputations as professionals are at stake and our bunch is on pins and needles until we get a go at him." The paper also mentions Tony Roche winning the 18 and under junior title at the Orange Bowl.
Now that you mention it, Daley's article from Paris, in September, talked about lights being rented:
Big Stadium Has Drawbacks
Roland Garros holds nearly 15,000 persons, but a big staff and a big rental fee must be paid and lights must be rented. Bad weather can murder you. The Stade Coubertin holds only 4,000, but it has been half-full all week for preliminary rounds. It was virtually packed today.
Basically, the Stade Coubertin is a small square arena with a glass roof. The basketball court, which fills the floor, has been painted over in green.
The result is an intimate kind of tennis. All spectators are close to the action. The ball bounces low and fast, and the noises -- especially the solid thunk of the serves -- is exaggeratedly loud.
Roland Garros holds nearly 15,000 persons, but a big staff and a big rental fee must be paid and lights must be rented. Bad weather can murder you. The Stade Coubertin holds only 4,000, but it has been half-full all week for preliminary rounds. It was virtually packed today.
Basically, the Stade Coubertin is a small square arena with a glass roof. The basketball court, which fills the floor, has been painted over in green.
The result is an intimate kind of tennis. All spectators are close to the action. The ball bounces low and fast, and the noises -- especially the solid thunk of the serves -- is exaggeratedly loud.
And the tours were designed to show "in the most graphic way possible the difference between amateur and pro tennis", as the NY Times put it later in the year. But if that was the intention, they stacked the deck in favor of the pros, by requiring Laver to play two nights per stand while his opponents only played one.
I think that's something to keep in mind when we debate just how much better the pros were than the amateurs. Sure Laver took a beating, but he was working twice as hard as his opponents, and getting half the rest. It puts some context on his collapse in the last 7 matches of the tour, in NZ, where he won only one set.
Sorry for blaming Collins, I thought that he worked for the Globe also.
In any event, neither Kaese nor Collins (who also quoted 8 to 0 for the 1963 Hoad/Laver tour) was actually accompanying the tour, unlike Laver and Bucholz, who attended every match (obviously true for Laver, and Bucholz was apparently assigned to accompany Hoad and see that he got to bed at night). Both Laver and Bucholz mention the 13 to 0 number, Laver actually saying that he lost his first 14 matches to Hoad. Laver was not quoted as a source for the 8 to 0 number, which Kaese may have calculated himself from the reported scores, only eight of which have survived.
The New Zealand tour of 1964 was a four-man event with Hoad and Laver tying at 7 to 5, but Hoad awarded first place on a 3 to 1 record against Laver, Rosewall finishing third, and Anderson fourth.
The numbers were compiled by Andrew Tas in a 2007 blog.
Thus, Hoad could claim to have won two tours against Laver, with a hard-nosed 13 to 0 shellacking in 1963, followed by a four-man win in 1964.
Not bad for a player who was supposedly no longer interested in tennis.
Last edited:
Hoad and Emerson go back to 1954, when a 17-year old Emmo upset a recovering Hoad, who suffered a near fatal infection early in the year.
At Wimbledon in 1957, they played a great, three-set match, with Emmo's court speed providing an exciting contest, although one-sided.
By 1968, when they met again, Hoad was well past prime, and Emmo won easily.
Yes, the point is that Laver was and is a very objective evaluator of tennis talent and the players he faced. Laver would not confidently state that he lost the first 14 matches to Hoad unless he had a clear recollection of it, and I can assure you that if I lost 14 straight to someone, it would be something that would never leave my memory.
Bucholz was also on the tour, apparently to see that Hoad got to bed at nights, and his article with Peter Bodo has the ring of truth also. Bucholz cites the 13 to 0 score as the reason he rates Hoad the best ever.
One fact which players do remember is "streaks" against some player.
It is hard to put together a 13 to 0 beating of any good tennis player, and Rosewall lost the biggest match of his 1963 tour against Laver in a televised four-set slugfest from Kooyong, even though Rosewall won the series 11 to 2.
Laver went further than 13 to 0, and actually claimed that he lost his first 14 matches to Hoad, presumably adding in a tournament match.
pc1
G.O.A.T.
Please prove it. I don't want to get into this again.
I've clarified this twice already and I don't know why you keep replying with information about the 1964 tour -- which I have never asked about. Once again: in the 1963 tour against Laver, did Hoad play in the New Zealand part of the tour?
pc1
G.O.A.T.
Yes I've read recollections of some tennis players and they are human. Humans tend to forget exact details. I could name a lot of mistakes in recollection by great players but I won't mention them so the players will not look back. Nothing against the great Laver but I would ask even a memory expert to show proof.
Yes please answer that.
Yes, please answer how both Laver and Bucholz could come up with the same recollection, or rather with substantially the same recollection (for Bucholz, the score was 13 to 0 for Hoad over Laver, for Laver, he lost the first 14 matches against Hoad). These recollections are consistent with one another, and no one else on the tour comes up with something like 8 to 0, only the efforts of sports reporters to find something in newspapers. When two recollections coincide, it gives added weight to the result.
This is the difference between primary and secondary source material, a distinction which I presume you know about, or should know about.
The location of most of the Hoad/Laver matches on the 1963 tour is not known to me, but there was a 1964 four-man tour of New Zealand, which Hoad apparently won against Laver, Rosewall, and Anderson.
Last edited:
I keep replying because it is an important piece of information.
pc1
G.O.A.T.
So basically you are relying on the memories of Laver. So please look against at the post of Krosero below.
So who has a better memory, Rosewall or Laver? Why does the press have a different number? I've noticed you don't make much mention of Krosero's post although I'm fairly certain you're read it.
So Rosewall has a different number than Laver. Who do we go with?
Last edited:
Laver's own statement back in 1963
Laver said himself to the Boston Globe, right after the '63 tour, that he played 21 matches against Hoad and Rosewall. We know from many other sources that he played 13 matches against Rosewall (12 are documented with locations and scores).
So it's impossible for Laver to have played Hoad 13 times.
I have just found this report, excerpt below.
Laver said himself to the Boston Globe, right after the '63 tour, that he played 21 matches against Hoad and Rosewall. We know from many other sources that he played 13 matches against Rosewall (12 are documented with locations and scores).
So it's impossible for Laver to have played Hoad 13 times.
I have just found this report, excerpt below.
February 8, 1963
Boston Globe
Herb Ralby
Rod Laver has found the opposition in the professional tennis ranks a bit tougher than he anticipated.
The red-headed Australian, 1962 Grand Slam winner, who makes his United States pro debut to night at 8 o’clock at the Garden, had figured he’d know after three or four matches just what his chances of annexing the pro title were.
Laver tonight plays his 22d match as a pro and he confesses right now, he has no idea how he will do.
The left-handed wizard of the amateur courts in recent years heads the pro troupe which invades the Garden for the first time in two years. His opponent on the first step of the cross-country tour is Barry MacKay, former U.S. Davis Cup star.
Other members of the cast include Ken Rosewall, current pro titlist, and his opponent of the night, Andres Gimeno, Spanish champion; Luis Ayala, Chilean champ, and Earl Buchholz, former U.S. star, third match adversaries.
There will also be a one-set doubles match between Rosewall and MacKay and Laver and Gimeno.
In town Thursday for a press conference at the Garden Club, Laver confessed he’s found out he’ll have to push a little harder against better players he meets in the pro ranks.
“Playing Lew Hoad and Rosewall in those 21 matches in Australia and New Zealand taught me plenty,” he admitted. “Those fellows are smart. They don’t try to put away every point as a winner and thereby miss a dozen. They play percentage, wait for that opportunity and make the point.”
Boston Globe
Herb Ralby
Rod Laver has found the opposition in the professional tennis ranks a bit tougher than he anticipated.
The red-headed Australian, 1962 Grand Slam winner, who makes his United States pro debut to night at 8 o’clock at the Garden, had figured he’d know after three or four matches just what his chances of annexing the pro title were.
Laver tonight plays his 22d match as a pro and he confesses right now, he has no idea how he will do.
The left-handed wizard of the amateur courts in recent years heads the pro troupe which invades the Garden for the first time in two years. His opponent on the first step of the cross-country tour is Barry MacKay, former U.S. Davis Cup star.
Other members of the cast include Ken Rosewall, current pro titlist, and his opponent of the night, Andres Gimeno, Spanish champion; Luis Ayala, Chilean champ, and Earl Buchholz, former U.S. star, third match adversaries.
There will also be a one-set doubles match between Rosewall and MacKay and Laver and Gimeno.
In town Thursday for a press conference at the Garden Club, Laver confessed he’s found out he’ll have to push a little harder against better players he meets in the pro ranks.
“Playing Lew Hoad and Rosewall in those 21 matches in Australia and New Zealand taught me plenty,” he admitted. “Those fellows are smart. They don’t try to put away every point as a winner and thereby miss a dozen. They play percentage, wait for that opportunity and make the point.”
Here's Sports Illustrated, April 8, 1963
LAVER'S PROGRESS
When Rod Laver turned from amateur tennis to the professional game last January he was, to the surprise of some, clobbered by the likes of Lew Hoad and Ken Rosewall. Playing in Australia and New Zealand, he dropped eight out of eight to Hoad and 11 of 13 to Rosewall, who looks to be the next world's professional champion. He didn't do much better in the U.S., where he arrived in February and lost the first three matches of his American tour and had only two wins after eight matches.
But now, at about the halfway point of the tour, Laver has begun to achieve professional form and has 15 victories against 13 defeats, which means that he has won 13 of his last 20 matches. He is, in fact, in third place on the tour, though well behind Rosewall, who has beaten him five times in five matches. But Earl Buchholz, in second place, was only two games ahead of Laver last week as the newest pro, the second man ever to achieve tennis' Grand Slam, sprawled on a Kansas City hotel bed and estimated his prospects.
"I think that just now I am coming up to my Forest Hills form of last September," Laver said. "What many people overlook is that just before I turned professional I had been playing very badly in Australia as an amateur."
Laver grants that, playing Hoad and Rosewall, he often was discouraged by the discovery that they hit the ball harder than amateurs, never missed an easy shot and often hit "fantastic" shots ("but to them they were not fantastic"). Now he feels he has a better chance against such opposition.
Rosewall does not agree that Laver was off form at the start of his pro career. "What those who expected him to sweep the pro ranks didn't realize," Rosewall said, not too diplomatically, "is that lots of amateurs have fake reputations. If they were thrown into open competition the truth would come out."
When Rod Laver turned from amateur tennis to the professional game last January he was, to the surprise of some, clobbered by the likes of Lew Hoad and Ken Rosewall. Playing in Australia and New Zealand, he dropped eight out of eight to Hoad and 11 of 13 to Rosewall, who looks to be the next world's professional champion. He didn't do much better in the U.S., where he arrived in February and lost the first three matches of his American tour and had only two wins after eight matches.
But now, at about the halfway point of the tour, Laver has begun to achieve professional form and has 15 victories against 13 defeats, which means that he has won 13 of his last 20 matches. He is, in fact, in third place on the tour, though well behind Rosewall, who has beaten him five times in five matches. But Earl Buchholz, in second place, was only two games ahead of Laver last week as the newest pro, the second man ever to achieve tennis' Grand Slam, sprawled on a Kansas City hotel bed and estimated his prospects.
"I think that just now I am coming up to my Forest Hills form of last September," Laver said. "What many people overlook is that just before I turned professional I had been playing very badly in Australia as an amateur."
Laver grants that, playing Hoad and Rosewall, he often was discouraged by the discovery that they hit the ball harder than amateurs, never missed an easy shot and often hit "fantastic" shots ("but to them they were not fantastic"). Now he feels he has a better chance against such opposition.
Rosewall does not agree that Laver was off form at the start of his pro career. "What those who expected him to sweep the pro ranks didn't realize," Rosewall said, not too diplomatically, "is that lots of amateurs have fake reputations. If they were thrown into open competition the truth would come out."
I've put together a list of the Hoad-Laver-Rosewall series, checking McCauley, AndrewTas, the London Times, the Los Angeles Times, Sports Illustrated and various newspapers Down Under.
AUSTRALIA
Jan. 5 (Saturday), Hoad d. Laver in Sydney, 6-8, 6-4, 6-3, 8-6
Jan. 6 (Sunday), Rosewall d. Laver in Sydney, 6-3, 6-3, 6-4
Jan. 11 (Friday), Hoad d. Laver in Brisbane, 6-4, 6-2, 8-6
reported as Laver’s 3rd match
Jan. 12 (Saturday), Rosewall d. Laver in Brisbane, 3-6, 10-8, 6-2, 6-3
reported in the LA Times as Laver’s 4th defeat
Jan. 14 (Monday), Hoad d. Laver in Burnie, Tasmania, 6-2, 6-3
Jan. 15 (Tuesday), Hoad d. Laver in Hobart, Tasmania, 6-4, 1-6, 6-1
Jan. 18 (Friday), Hoad d. Laver in Melbourne, 6-4, 6-2, 3-6, 2-6, 6-3
Jan. 19 (Saturday), Laver d. Rosewall in Melbourne, 6-3, 3-6, 7-5, 6-2,
reported in SI and the LA Times as Laver’s first win; in the London Times as his first win, after 8 losses; in The Age as his first win, after 7 losses
Jan. 21 (Monday), Rosewall d. Laver in Canberra, 10-8, 6-3
Jan. 24 (Thursday), Hoad d. Laver in Adelaide, 6-4, 6-3, 9-11, 4-6, 6-2
Jan. 25 (Friday), Laver d. Rosewall in Adelaide, 6-1, 6-2, 6-2
NEW ZEALAND
Jan. 28 (Monday), Rosewall d. Laver in Auckland, 6-4, 6-4
Jan. 29 (Tuesday), Rosewall d. Laver in Dunedin, 10-8, 6-4
Jan. 30 (Wednesday), Rosewall d. Laver in Palmerston North, 7-9, 6-3, 6-4
Jan. 31 (Thursday), Rosewall d. Laver in Napier, 6-1, 6-3
Feb. 1 (Friday), Rosewall d. Laver in Masterton, 6-2, 6-3
Feb. 2 (Saturday), Rosewall d. Laver in Wellington, 6-3, 6-3
Feb. 3 (Sunday), Rosewall d. Laver in Hamilton, 6-3, 7-5
6 of Hoad's 8 victories over Laver are documented. So are 12 of the 13 matches that Laver played against Rosewall.
Laver and Hoad did not meet again until June 15 in the semis at Los Angeles, with Laver winning 6-4, 6-3, 6-4.
AUSTRALIA
Jan. 5 (Saturday), Hoad d. Laver in Sydney, 6-8, 6-4, 6-3, 8-6
Jan. 6 (Sunday), Rosewall d. Laver in Sydney, 6-3, 6-3, 6-4
Jan. 11 (Friday), Hoad d. Laver in Brisbane, 6-4, 6-2, 8-6
reported as Laver’s 3rd match
Jan. 12 (Saturday), Rosewall d. Laver in Brisbane, 3-6, 10-8, 6-2, 6-3
reported in the LA Times as Laver’s 4th defeat
Jan. 14 (Monday), Hoad d. Laver in Burnie, Tasmania, 6-2, 6-3
Jan. 15 (Tuesday), Hoad d. Laver in Hobart, Tasmania, 6-4, 1-6, 6-1
Jan. 18 (Friday), Hoad d. Laver in Melbourne, 6-4, 6-2, 3-6, 2-6, 6-3
Jan. 19 (Saturday), Laver d. Rosewall in Melbourne, 6-3, 3-6, 7-5, 6-2,
reported in SI and the LA Times as Laver’s first win; in the London Times as his first win, after 8 losses; in The Age as his first win, after 7 losses
Jan. 21 (Monday), Rosewall d. Laver in Canberra, 10-8, 6-3
Jan. 24 (Thursday), Hoad d. Laver in Adelaide, 6-4, 6-3, 9-11, 4-6, 6-2
Jan. 25 (Friday), Laver d. Rosewall in Adelaide, 6-1, 6-2, 6-2
NEW ZEALAND
Jan. 28 (Monday), Rosewall d. Laver in Auckland, 6-4, 6-4
Jan. 29 (Tuesday), Rosewall d. Laver in Dunedin, 10-8, 6-4
Jan. 30 (Wednesday), Rosewall d. Laver in Palmerston North, 7-9, 6-3, 6-4
Jan. 31 (Thursday), Rosewall d. Laver in Napier, 6-1, 6-3
Feb. 1 (Friday), Rosewall d. Laver in Masterton, 6-2, 6-3
Feb. 2 (Saturday), Rosewall d. Laver in Wellington, 6-3, 6-3
Feb. 3 (Sunday), Rosewall d. Laver in Hamilton, 6-3, 7-5
6 of Hoad's 8 victories over Laver are documented. So are 12 of the 13 matches that Laver played against Rosewall.
Laver and Hoad did not meet again until June 15 in the semis at Los Angeles, with Laver winning 6-4, 6-3, 6-4.
The "memories" of Rosewall and Laver in these 1963 interviews (Rosewall does not actually offer a number for the Hoad/Laver matches, how did this escape your attention?) are apparently prompted by the interviewer, who is in turn relying on press reports, from reporters who did not accompany the tour.
I would rather rely on individuals who actually were present on the tour, namely Laver and Bucholz.
Again, top reporters did not accompany the pro tennis tours into every little cowtown in the outback, where Hoad claims that much of the 1963 tour was routed. No, they avoid these places like the plague.
So, how do they come up with 8 to 0? From the available press reports about matches in the larger cities.
pc1
G.O.A.T.
Did you read post 77 yet?
That was a memory of Laver's right after the tour. I think he's a pretty good source.
Last edited:
Laver's first victory over Hoad
Laver got his first win over Hoad in June '63, in Los Angeles. This was in the LA Times:
Laver got his first win over Hoad in June '63, in Los Angeles. This was in the LA Times:
June 16, 1963
Jamie Curran
Rod Laver beat Lew Hoad for the first time in his life Saturday at the Los Angeles Tennis Club and moved into the final round of the $10,000 Adler invitational professional tennis championships.
And he did it in 1 hr. and 6 min., 6-4, 6-3, 6-4, before a crowd of 1,500....
Laver never let up against Hoad. And his serve, although a bit erratic at times, pulled him out of trouble time and again. He dropped his serve only once in the match.
"That serve was too good for me," said Hoad. "But, actually, I didn't move well. I haven't played competitive tennis for 4 or 5 months and when you lay off that long you have to think about things that used to be automatic. I was thinking all the time. I wasn't reacting instinctively."
"My serve is a lot better," commented Laver, "and I was fortunate that it came through for me when I needed it. I'm hitting it harder now with more kick. But Lew was rusty," Laver added, "he hasn't had the competition I've been having."
Jamie Curran
Rod Laver beat Lew Hoad for the first time in his life Saturday at the Los Angeles Tennis Club and moved into the final round of the $10,000 Adler invitational professional tennis championships.
And he did it in 1 hr. and 6 min., 6-4, 6-3, 6-4, before a crowd of 1,500....
Laver never let up against Hoad. And his serve, although a bit erratic at times, pulled him out of trouble time and again. He dropped his serve only once in the match.
"That serve was too good for me," said Hoad. "But, actually, I didn't move well. I haven't played competitive tennis for 4 or 5 months and when you lay off that long you have to think about things that used to be automatic. I was thinking all the time. I wasn't reacting instinctively."
"My serve is a lot better," commented Laver, "and I was fortunate that it came through for me when I needed it. I'm hitting it harder now with more kick. But Lew was rusty," Laver added, "he hasn't had the competition I've been having."
Dan, if you think that Laver lost to Hoad 13 times but was “prompted” to say that he only played him 8 times, then according to you he was prompted into speaking a lie.
And yet throughout this “debate” you’ve been arguing that Laver was honest, objective, with a clear recollection of events.
Here is your earlier post:
So I get it. Laver is “a very objective evaluator” when he says – 34 years after the fact – that he lost 14 matches to Hoad. But when he says, back in ’63, only days after the tour had ended, that he lost only 8 matches to Hoad, now suddenly he’s the kind of person who can be “prompted” by an interviewer into speaking a lie.
Surely Laver would have known, right after the tour ended, what the correct number of matches was. You're not going to tell me that his recollection was unclear -- especially when you stated above that 34 years later Laver still “had a clear recollection” of the exact number.
So according to you Laver knew perfectly well when he sat down with that interviewer in February 1963, that he really lost 13 or 14 matches to Hoad, but he was willing to go along with an inaccurate number.
You had no problem with Laver’s statement in ’97. But now suddenly when Laver disagrees with you, his word can no longer be trusted.
Got it.
Last edited:
Hoad lost in the first round of the '63 US Pro to Buchholz, on June 28. The press reported that he "had been out for four months with a shoulder injury and returned to action two weeks ago": http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...BAJ&dq=gonzalez fails comeback&pg=596,4662889
Combined with Hoad's statement (posted above) that he had been out for 4 or 5 months, it looks like a shoulder injury sustained right around the time that the January tour Down Under ended, or soon thereafter.
And it appears that the Los Angeles tournament, where he lost to Laver on June 16, was where he made his return.
Combined with Hoad's statement (posted above) that he had been out for 4 or 5 months, it looks like a shoulder injury sustained right around the time that the January tour Down Under ended, or soon thereafter.
And it appears that the Los Angeles tournament, where he lost to Laver on June 16, was where he made his return.
My friend, I have been interviewed myself by a newspaper reporter, and the published version contained much that I did not recognize, and some clear embellishments for dramatic effect by the reporter.
I trust Laver speaking in his own voice, as in the 1997 taped interview, available on DVD.
You said it yourself, only 6 of the Hoad/Laver matches were mentioned in the press, by anyone's reckoning this was not the total. What happened to the other two? Where were they played, and why not reported?
Probably because they were in the outback, where no brave reporter dared to venture.
Or were there seven unreported matches? No one seems to know, other than Laver and Bucholz, who actually were present on the tour.
From reported matches, it appears that Hoad dropped off the tour about Jan. 25 to 28, and did not make the trip to New Zealand.
However, there was room in the schedule to allow for 13 matches with Hoad in January (including the early days of January). There are only three reported matches for the first two and a half weeks in January!
Something is missing!
Last edited:
pc1
G.O.A.T.
That's interesting, I've been interviewed by newspapers and magazines myself. I've found that what I've meant to convey comes through, generally speaking.
By the way, do you realize that they often discuss what they are going to talk about prior to the interview? By your logic they can be prompted before the interview started so how do we know what Laver said in a 1997 interview (34 years later) is accurate?
There is no evidence of Laver being "prompted" in 1963.
pc1
G.O.A.T.
And some newspaper reporters are accurate too.
You do realize that video interviews can be edited also or set up so they know what the person being interviewed will say beforehand.
I'd rather go with a 1963 interview where the player's memory is fresh than a 1997 interview. Do you remember what you were doing in 1963? Do you remember what happened in 1978, 34 years ago?
Last edited:
I would suggest that you watch the Laver interview...very convincing, and no hesitation about the numbers.
This is better than getting something filtered through someone else's mind and purposes.
And there is something strange about the "gaps" in the Hoad/Laver schedule in early January, 1963. And a six-day gap from the 18th to the 24th. Plenty of time for a full 13 matches.
Last edited:
Moose Malloy
G.O.A.T.
In a tv interview in 2006 Pete Sampras said he broke the all time grand slam record in 1999. I have it on tape, no hesitation in his voice. I will take his word over any evidence to the contrary, all those news reports that say it was 2000 must be wrong(not to mention the actual match footage)
He also said he didn't enter the French Open in 2002 in his book. Again, who are we to accept any evidence to the contrary to what the players say? footage of his first round loss at the 2002 French Open must be part of some elaborate plan by aliens.
If you go down the page further Jan Michael Gambill said he only played Rios twice. ATP website says they played 4 times. Another conspiracy. Players have photographic memories, I'm sure Laver knows what he had for breakfast in 1963 as well. These guys should have used all that superior brain power for other endeavors.
Ivan Lendl says the 1987 USO final was scheduled at night. But I have it on tape, it started at 1 pm? that sneaky media, they must have manipulated the footage to make it look like it was daytime. like the landing on the moon.
Bjorn Borg - hmm, where do I begin? doesn't matter, we know why the footage contradicts his memory(like him saying in a TV interview that he hadn't returned to Roland Garros after 1981 until 2008. even though there's a guy that looks like his twin presenting the trophy to Guga in '97)
He also said he didn't enter the French Open in 2002 in his book. Again, who are we to accept any evidence to the contrary to what the players say? footage of his first round loss at the 2002 French Open must be part of some elaborate plan by aliens.
If you go down the page further Jan Michael Gambill said he only played Rios twice. ATP website says they played 4 times. Another conspiracy. Players have photographic memories, I'm sure Laver knows what he had for breakfast in 1963 as well. These guys should have used all that superior brain power for other endeavors.
Ivan Lendl says the 1987 USO final was scheduled at night. But I have it on tape, it started at 1 pm? that sneaky media, they must have manipulated the footage to make it look like it was daytime. like the landing on the moon.
Bjorn Borg - hmm, where do I begin? doesn't matter, we know why the footage contradicts his memory(like him saying in a TV interview that he hadn't returned to Roland Garros after 1981 until 2008. even though there's a guy that looks like his twin presenting the trophy to Guga in '97)
If these players were supported by testimonies from other players who were present with them,as Laver was by Bucholz about the 1963 Hoad series, it would have been more weighty.
Also, we are talking about a winning streak of one great player against another, something that sticks in the memory (and the gut) more strongly than the time of day a match was held, or even how many tournaments were entered into.
You and I might not remember how many times in a row we lost to a regular playing partner, but these two guys, playing in front of thousands and on television, remember them, and keep the notches etched in their minds for good.
I can remember key matches and tournaments from the 1960's.
In 1961, when I was ten, our team won the regional baseball championship. I got the winning hit in the final game, which I still remember, being thrown out at third base, after hesitating around second. I was more disappointed at the out than I was happy at knocking in two runs, which gave us the lead in a 5 to 2 win (we won the best of three series 2 to 1).
In the London, Ontario city school tennis tournament of 1965, I won my first two round matches, which gave me the privilege of playing the national champion for our age group, and lost 6-0, 6-0 (easy to remember the score).
In 1969, I played doubles for our high school team, and lost to the provincial champions 6-2, 6-3 (I believe the play was closer than the score, almost every game was deuce).
I could continue, but I think that you get the point.
Last edited:
pc1
G.O.A.T.
Point is also that you are probably not clear on every score nor can you be 100% certain of all scores despite what you seem to recall. I know many people far younger than Laver who barely remember what happened yesterday.
Laver has played an incredible amount of matches and while Laver is perhaps the greatest player of all time I don't recall him being renown as a memory expert. This is not to put down Laver but anyone but the greatest memory expert would have some problems recalling things in detail from 34 years ago.
Lot of gaps in years there by the way in your post. I recall many things from the 1960's in detail but I've forgotten most things.
Let's see, the Met's beat the Orioles in five games in the 1969 World Series. Don Buford hit a home run for the Orioles off Tom Seaver leading off the first game which I believe the Orioles won 4-1. The Mets won the next four games completing their miracle season. Yes I remember things from that time too but ask me about many things in 1969 and I could guess but I wouldn't be sure.
Last edited:
NonP
Legend
You cannot be serious.... Look, the main point everyone has been trying to make was that human memory can be unreliable. Seriously, how hard is it to acknowledge this? Also did you even try to understand what krosero was getting at?
pc1
G.O.A.T.
Last edited:
