Hello
Phoenix1983,
there is one hypothesis which is wrong in your argument : Wimbledon has not been the greatest tennis event year in year out as you suggest.
Wimbledon has been the greatest tennis event most of the end of the XIXth century, with the Irish amateur Championships as a great contender.
Then almost at its inception the Davis Cup became the greatest tennis event far above anything else. I recall that this is the Davis Cup which gave birth to the Slam tourneys and not the reverse. As soon as circa 1903-1905 it became more important than Wimbledon. In the early 1920's not only the Davis Cup but also the USLTA amateur Champs were more important than Wimbledon even though the latter was pompously entitled as the World (amateur) Grass Court Championships by the ILTF which I must recall the USLTA had not joined. In the early 1920's the two best players in the world, Tilden and Johnston, were both in the same Davis Cup team so couldn't face each other in this event to decide who was the #1. Therefore the only very great event which could rate both men was the USLTA amateur men's singles championships held at the Germantown Cricket Club in Philadelphia (from 1920 to 1923). Johnston was always inconsolable not to have definitely won the USLTA Cup in 1922, which would have been his, had he won for the 3rd time the title (Tilden in this match took it from Johnston) and though Johnston won Wimby in 1923 (without many great Americans including Tilden), this latter success never made up for his successive losses in the US Champs from 1922 to the end of his career.
I return to the greatest tennis event. The Davis Cup stayed the greatest tennis competition until 1930 without any single doubt. From the 1930's to the 1950's the Davis Cup was still the greatest amateur event, ahead of Forest Hills or Wimbledon. Even Forest Hills was as important as Wimbledon though the latter was much better organized. I recall that during these 30 years the amateur #1 was most of the time the US amateur winner and less often the Wimbledon winner because most of the time the US amateur Champs field was superior to that of Wimby.
Besides in the 1930's-1940's-1950's the true greatest tennis events were not the Davis Cup, Forest Hills or Wimbledon but, depending on the years, the US Pro Champs or the London Indoor Pro Champs at Wembley or the Pro Tournament of Champions at Forest Hills or the French Pro Champs at Roland Garros or the World Pro head-to-head tour, etc ... See for instance my "I recognize subjective" list of the greatest events of the last sixty years in
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=2840980&postcount=45, or the more complete list proposed by SgtJohn in
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=3098710&postcount=42,
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=3098711&postcount=43,
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=3098712&postcount=44. Of course these lists are debatable but give a good view of tennis competition history.
Only in the 1960's, Wimbledon truly became a) more important than Forest Hills, and b) as important as the Davis Cup
(until 1959 almost every amateur player considered the Davis Cup as clearly more important than Wimby while from 1960 to 1967 the opinions varied among players : for instance Emerson and Stolle put the Davis Cup clearly ahead of Wimby while Laver or Newcombe placed Wimby just above).
However, as since the 1930's, the greatest pro competitions were superior events to the Davis Cup or Wimby or US amateur Champs. In other words Laver's win at 1966 Wembley pro is much more significant than Santana's success at 1966 Wimby : in 1966 Laver was clearly better than Santana.
At the Open arrival, the Davis Cup collapsed because the ILTF officials prevented contract pros to enter this event whereas Wimby, Forest Hills, Garros allowed these players to enter.
Then Wimby clearly became the TRUE greatest tennis venue if we except the 1972-1973 editions where the contract pros were barred and the ATP pros boycotted.
So now let's talk about Rosewall's case.
a) From 1949 to 1956 when Ken was an amateur, Wimbledon not only was not the greatest tennis event but even not the greatest amateur competition, the Davis Cup being the true greatest amateur event which Rosewall won 3 times including twice when he was undefeated in singles.
b) From 1957 to 1967, a period which includes most of Kenny's greatest years, Rosewall won, according to me, 4 times the greatest event (pro & amateur combined) : Wembley Pro in 1961, 1962, 1963 and the Madison Square Garden Pro event in 1966, I don't include in this subjective list for instance Ken's victories at Wembley 1957 or 1960. In the following old post of mine,
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=2981040&postcount=600, I considered Wembley 1960 as the greatest event but since I have slightly changed my mind. However if this old post should be slightly changed the background stays the same that is that Rosewall's domination of the world tennis between late 1960 and early 1964 was so great, so important, that he can't be excluded from any GOAT discussion.
c) Since 1968 Kenny has never won in my opinion, in any single year, the greatest tennis event.
So in conclusion Rosewall was barred from Wimbledon for 10 SUCCESSIVE YEARS, 1957 to 1966 (in 1967 he entered a Wimbledon pro tournament, the second one in history after a 1931 edition restricted to domestic players) when Rosewall was at his peak.
Imagine all the Open Wimbledon champions, Laver, Newcombe, Smith, Connors, Borg, Ashe, McEnroe, Becker, Cash, Edberg, Stich, Agassi, Sampras, Krajicek, Ivanisevic, Hewitt (Lleyton), Federer, Nadal, Djokovic forbidden to enter Wimbledon in their 10 best years as Rosewall had to suffer :
none of them would have won a single Wimbledon tourney in his whole career. In particular if I consider your reasoning, Laver, Borg, Sampras, Federer and eventually Nadal wouldn't be considered in any GOAT discussion : it would be a huge nonsense.
Given your logic, Richard Alonso Gonzales is not included in any GOAT discussion : he played 5 times the tournament (1949, 1968, 1969, 1971, 1972) and never won the singles event.
Come on !!!
Not including Rosewall or Gonzales in a GOAT discussion is a complete proof of tennis history ignorance.
Do you think that Kareem Abdul-Jabbar should be excluded from any basket-ball GOAT discussion because he never played the Olympic Games ?
Don't tell me that the NBA is nowadays the greatest basket-ball competition, the Olympics now are.
But in
the 1960's-1970's the NBA competition was more important than the amateur Olympics
as the great pro tennis events were superior to the amateur Davis Cup, Forest Hills and Wimbledon events
before the open era.
I don't claim that Kenny or Pancho is the GOAT.
I just say that considering Kenny or Pancho is not the GOAT because he didn't win Wimby is AN ENORMOUS ERROR.
Contrary to what you claim Rosewall rised to the biggest occasions at least three times when he won Wembley in 1961, 1962, 1963 (and perhaps four or five times if we consider Wembley 1960 and the 1966 Pro MSG tournament). These years the Wimbledon amateur tournament was a second class event and not the biggest venue.
So Rosewall is eligible in any GOAT discussion.
Have a look, jsut below, at that 4-year-old post of SgtJohn :
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=3087013&postcount=214
