1963 World Series

Topspin1985

New User
The 1963 World Series of Tennis was a pro tour with the most valuable tennis of the world: Ken Rosewall, Rod Laver, Andres Gimeno, Butch Buchholz, Luis Ayala, Barry Mackay. The total prize money was $112,500, $50,000 for the winner. The first stage was a round robin consisted by 40 matches, the top 2, Laver and Rosewall contented the first prize with a 18 matches series. Rosewall won the World Series defeating Laver 14-4 in the final series.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boston (8 feb)
Mackay-Laver 9-7
Gimeno-Rosewall 8-6
Buchholz-Ayala 8-3

Philadelphia (9 feb)
Mackay-Laver 10-8
Gimeno-Rosewall 8-6
Ayala-Buchholz 8-6

New York (10 feb)
Rosewall-Laver 12-10
Buchholz-Gimeno 10-8
Mackay-Ayala 8-1

Springfield (11 feb)
Laver-Ayala 8-5
Mackay-Gimeno 8-6
Rosewall-Buchholz 12-10

Standings: Mackay 4-0, Gimeno/Rosewall/Buchholz 2-2, Ayala/Laver 1-3

College Park (14 feb)
Rosewall-Laver 8-5
Gimeno-Buchholz 8-6
Ayala-MacKay 8-6

Standings: Mackay 4-1, Rosewall/Gimeno 3-2, Buchholz/Ayala 2-3, Laver 1-4

Richmond (15 feb)
Rosewall-Ayala 8-2
Buchholz-Mackay 8-3
Laver-Gimeno 8-5

Standings: Mackay/Rosewall 4-2, Gimeno/Buchholz 3-3, Laver 2-4, Ayala 1-5

Baltimore (17 feb)
Rosewall-Laver 8-4
Mackay-Ayala 8-4
Buchholz-Gimeno 8-6

Ithaca (18 feb)
Rosewall-Ayala 8-3
Buchholz-Mackay 11-9
Laver-Gimeno 8-5

Standings: Rosewall 6-2, Buchholz/Mackay 5-3, Laver/Gimeno 3-5, Ayala 2-6

Albany (20 feb)
Rosewall-Buchholz 8-6
Laver-Ayala 8-4
Gimeno-Mackay 12-10

Montreal (22 feb)
Rosewall-Laver 8-6


Toronto (24 feb)
Rosewall-Mackay 8-5
Buchholz-Laver 8-3
Ayala-Gimeno 8-6

Standings: Rosewall 9-2, Buchholz 7-4, Mackay 6-5, Laver/Gimeno 4-7, Ayala 3-8

Toronto (25 feb)
Rosewall-Buchholz 8-3
Mackay-Gimeno 8-5
Laver-Ayala 8-3

Standings: Rosewall 10-2, Buchholz/Mackay 7-5, Laver 5-7, Gimeno 4-8, Ayala 3-9

Detroit (26 feb)
Laver-Buchholz 8-5
Rosewall-MacKay 8-5
Ayala-Gimeno

Standings: Rosewall 11-2, Buchholz/Mackay 7-6, Laver 6-7, Gimeno 4-9, Ayala 4-9

Charleston (28 feb)
Ayala-Rosewall 8-3
Laver-Gimeno 12-10
Buchholz-Mackay 8-4

Standings: Rosewall 11-3, Buchholz 8-6, Laver/Mackay 7-7, Gimeno 5-9, Ayala 4-10

Davidson (4 mar)
Rosewall-Buchholz 8-5
Laver-Ayala 8-3
Gimeno-Mackay 8-5

Standings: Rosewall 12-3, Buchholz/Laver 8-7, MacKay 7-8, Gimeno 6-9, Ayala 4-11

Indianapolis (7 mar)
Rosewall-Mackay 8-4
Buchholz-Laver 8-1
Gimeno-Ayala 8-4

Standings: Rosewall 13-3, Buchholz 9-7, Laver 8-8, MacKay/Gimeno 7-9, Ayala 4-12

Oklahoma City (12 mar)
Buchholz-Laver 8-6
Rosewall-Mackay 8-5
Ayala-Gimeno 8-6

Standings: Rosewall 14-3, Buchholz 10-7, Laver 8-9, MacKay 7-10, Gimeno 7-10, Ayala 5-12


Wichita (13 mar)
Rosewall-Buchholz 11-9
Laver-Ayala 8-4
Gimeno-Mackay 8-6

Standings: Rosewall 15-3, Buchholz 10-8, Laver 9-9, Gimeno 8-10, MacKay 7-11, Ayala 5-13
--------------------
Blank
--------------------
San Antonio (Canvas Covered Court)
Standings: Rosewall 16-3, Buchholz 11-8, Laver 9-10, Gimeno 8-11, MacKay 7-12, Ayala 6-13


Houston (17 mar) (clay)
Ayala-Rosewall 10-8
Gimeno-Laver 8-3
Buchholz-Mackay 8-3

Standings: Rosewall 16-4, Buchholz 12-8, Laver 10-10, Gimeno 9-11, MacKay 7-13, Ayala 6-14

Corpus Christi (19 mar)
Rosewall-MacKay 8-3
Laver-Buchholz 8-6
Gimeno-Ayala

Standings: Rosewall 17-4, Buchholz 12-9, Laver 11-10, Gimeno 10-11, MacKay 7-14, Ayala 6-15

San Antonio (20 mar)
Rosewall-Buchholz 8-5
Laver-Ayala 8-6
MacKay-Gimeno 9-7

Standings: Rosewall 18-4, Buchholz/Laver 12-10, Gimeno 10-12, MacKay 8-14, Ayala 6-16

Waco (21 mar)
Rosewall-Gimeno 8-4
Laver-MacKay 8-3
Buchholz-Ayala 8-5

Standings: Rosewall 19-4, Buchholz/Laver 13-10, Gimeno 10-13, MacKay 8-15, Ayala 6-17

Shreveport (22 mar)
Buchholz-Rosewall 9-7
Laver-Ayala 8-1
Gimeno-MacKay 8-5

Standings: Rosewall 19-5, Buchholz/Laver 14-10, Gimeno 11-13, MacKay 8-16, Ayala 6-18

Fort Worth (23 mar)

Standings: Rosewall 20-5, Buchholz 15-10, Laver 14-11, Gimeno 12-13?, MacKay 8-17, Ayala 6-19

Little Rock (24 mar)
Rosewall-Ayala 8-5
Buchholz-MacKay 8-5
Laver-Gimeno 11-9

Standings: Rosewall 21-5, Buchholz 16-10, Laver 15-11, Gimeno 13-13, MacKay 8-18, Ayala 6-20

Kansas City (29 mar)
Rosewall-Laver 12-10
Gimeno-Buchholz 15-13
MacKay-Ayala 8-4

Standings: Rosewall 22-5, Buchholz 16-11, Laver 15-12, Gimeno 14-13, MacKay 8-19, Ayala 6-21

St. Louis (30 marzo)
Buchholz-Laver 8-4
Rosewall-MacKay 8-6

Standings: Rosewall 23-5, Buchholz 16-12, Laver 15-13, Gimeno 14-14, MacKay 8-20, Ayala 6-22

New Castle (3 apr)
Laver-MacKay 19-17
Rosewall-Gimeno 8-6
Buchholz-Ayala 8-2

Standings: Rosewall 24-5, Buchholz 18-11, Laver 16-13, Gimeno 14-15, MacKay 8-21, Ayala 6-23

--------------------
Blank
--------------------
Louisville (7 apr)
Laver-Rosewall 8-3
Buchholz-Gimeno 9-7
Ayala-MacKay 8-5

Standings: Rosewall 25-6, Buchholz 20-11, Laver 18-13, Gimeno 14-17, MacKay 9-22, Ayala 8-23

Nashville (8 apr)
MacKay-Laver 8-4
Gimeno-Rosewall 8-6
Ayala-Buchholz 8-6

Standings: Rosewall 25-7, Buchholz 20-12, Laver 18-14, Gimeno 15-17, MacKay 10-22, Ayala 8-24

Carbondale (9 apr)
Laver-Buchholz 8-6
Rosewall-MacKay 8-6
Gimeno-Ayala 8-6

Standings: Rosewall 26-7, Buchholz 20-13, Laver 19-14, Gimeno 16-17, MacKay 10-23, Ayala 8-25

Wheaton (10 apr)
Laver-Rosewall 8-6
Ayala-MacKay 10-8
Gimeno-Buchholz 8-6

Standings: Rosewall 26-8, Buchholz 20-14, Laver 20-14, Gimeno 17-17, MacKay 10-24, Ayala 9-25

King Point (11 apr)
Laver-Gimeno 8-4
MacKay-Buchholz 8-4
Rosewall-Ayala 8-3

Standings: Rosewall 27-8, Laver 21-14, Buchholz 20-15, Gimeno 17-18, MacKay 11-24, Ayala 9-26

Bermuda (13 apr) (clay)
Laver-MacKay 8-2
Gimeno-Rosewall 9-7
Ayala-Buchholz 8-4

Standings: Rosewall 27-9, Laver 22-14, Buchholz 20-16, Gimeno 18-18, MacKay 11-25, Ayala 10-26

Hamilton (14 apr)
Laver-Rosewall 10-8
Buchholz-Gimeno 10-8
Ayala-MacKay 10-8

Standings: Rosewall 27-10, Laver 23-14, Buchholz 21-16, Gimeno 18-19, MacKay 11-25, Ayala 11-26

White Plains (16 apr)
Rosewall-MacKay 8-6
Laver-Buchholz 8-6
Gimeno-Ayala 8-3

Standings: Rosewall 28-10, Laver 24-14, Buchholz 21-17, Gimeno 19-19, MacKay 11-27, Ayala 11-27

Tretorn

East Orange (19 apr)
Laver-Ayala 8-6
Rosewall-Buchholz 8-5
Gimeno-MacKay 8-5

Standings: Rosewall 30-10, Laver 25-15, Buchholz 22-18, Gimeno 20-20, MacKay 12-28, Ayala 11-29

El Paso (23 apr)
Rosewall-Olmedo 8-6
Gimeno-Laver 8-4
Buchholz-MacKay 8-5

Final standings: Rosewall 31-10, Laver 25-16, Buchholz 23-18, Gimeno 21-20, MacKay 12-29, Ayala 11-29
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Play-off stage

San Francisco (25 apr)
Laver-Rosewall 3-6 6-3 6-4
Gimeno-Buchholz 8-5

Los Angeles (26 apr)
Rosewall-Laver 10-8 7-5
Gimeno-Buchholz 22-20

Salt Lake City (28 apr)
Rosewall-Laver 6-4 16-18 6-4
Buchholz-Gimeno 9-7

Denver (29 apr)
Laver-Rosewall 6-3 6-2
Buchholz-Gimeno 8-3

Standings: Laver 2, Rosewall 2

--------------------
Blank
--------------------
Hershey (10 mag)
Rosewall-Laver 7-5 4-6 9-7
Gimeno-Buchholz 8-6

Standings: Rosewall 5, Laver 3
Gimeno 6, Buchholz 2
--------------------
Blank
--------------------
New Heaven (12 mag)
Rosewall-Laver 14-12 9-7
Gimeno-Buchholz 8-6

Standings: Rosewall 7, Laver 3
Gimeno 7, Buchholz 3

New York (16 mag)
Laver-Rosewall 6-0 6-3
Buchholz-Gimeno 8-3

Standings: Rosewall 7, Laver 4
Gimeno 7, Buchholz 4

Corvallis (17 mag)
Rosewall-Laver 10-8 7-5
Gimeno-Buchholz 8-3

Standings: Rosewall 8, Laver 4
Gimeno 8, Buchholz 4

Portland (19 mag)
Rosewall-Laver 8-6 6-2
Gimeno-Buchholz 8-6

Standings: Rosewall 9, Laver 4
Gimeno 8, Buchholz 5

Medford (20 mag)
Rosewall-Laver 6-1 6-3
Buchholz-Gimeno 11-9

Standings:Rosewall 10, Laver 4
Gimeno 8, Buchholz 6

Eugene (21 mag)
Rosewall-Laver 6-2 6-2
Gimeno-Buchholz 8-4

Standings:Rosewall 11, Laver 4
Gimeno 9, Buchholz 6

Seattle (23 mag)
Rosewall-Laver 6-2 3-6 6-3

Standings: Rosewall 12, Laver 4

Vancouver (24 mag)
Rosewall-Laver 6-3 6-4

Standings: Rosewall 13, Laver 4

Final standings: Rosewall 14, Laver 4
Gimeno 11, Buchholz 7


I wanna share this information with you, in this forum there are many good tennis experts. I hope they appreciate my contribute and could help me (us) to fill the blanks. Thank you, bye.
 

KG1965

Legend
Great stat.
Gonzales , Trabert , Sedgman , Segura did not participate ?
It was the only tour ? I do not think , this was the American circuit , right?

Rosewall >> Laver in 1963
 

urban

Legend
This is correct. But Keep in mind, that the fresh pro Laver never had played indoors as an Amateur (except US Amateur indoors 1962), and that he was not accostumed to the one set Format and the whole series concept from City to City, from hall to hall. You can clearly see, that he struggled at the outset of the series, losing almost all matches to anybody at the pros, before he played better since April in the last phase of the original series, climbed to the second place and could close in a bit on leader Rosewall. In the hth phase Laver held it quite close (winning two matches at 3 and 2 and 3 and 0), until Rosewall won the series at 7-4, and then Laver gave away the remaining, not really counting rubbers.
 

Topspin1985

New User
Great stat.
Gonzales , Trabert , Sedgman , Segura did not participate ?
It was the only tour ? I do not think , this was the American circuit , right?

Rosewall >> Laver in 1963

Hi KG1965. Gonzales was semi-retired from pro tennis, he returned only for the U.S. Pro in june at Forest Hills. Trabert was a little old to partecipate, just like Sedgman and Segura, however they returned for the greatest pro tournaments of the season. The most significant absence was the Lew Hoad one who had defeated Rod Laver 8-0 in the Australasian Tour, but the organizer prefered to exclude him because there would be many aussies in the tour (Laver, Rosewall). The others pro tour of pro season were:
1) Australasian Pro Tour in january with Lew Hoad, Rod Laver, Rosewall (plus a little serie between Andres Gimeno and Luis Ayala)
2) The World Series
3) The Trofeo Facis: an italian pro tour with: Laver, MacKay, Gimeno, Buchholz, Mike Davies, Malcolm Anderson, Alex Olmedo and Luis Ayala (according to McCauley's book).

The World Series were played only in the USA and Canada.

Finally. Yes, Rosewall >> Laver both in Pro tour and Pro Slams. In this year Rosewall completed a Pro Grand Slam winning: French Pro, U.S. Pro and Wembley Pro.
 

pc1

G.O.A.T.
Undoubtedly, yes. This was Laver's first year on the pro tour. It took him a while to raise his game.

But by the end of 1963, I would say he was the no. 2 pro.

No doubt. By the end of 1964 he was the number one pro.

It's always took soon time to adapt to the pros. It was the daily grind of tennis, traveling from place to place, often with different type surfaces and of course adapting to playing new more powerful opponents.
 
Last edited:

KG1965

Legend
Topspin ciao,

Laver was 0% to make Grand Slam with the pros in 1962 .

The number one of 1963 was Rosewall ?

The number one of 1962 ?

It can be assumed a ranking of 1963 , excluding the majors ( why are worth little ) , and including the World Series American , Australasian , Facis and other main interesting tournaments ( Wembley ... ) ?
 

Topspin1985

New User
Topspin ciao,

Laver was 0% to make Grand Slam with the pros in 1962 .

The number one of 1963 was Rosewall ?

The number one of 1962 ?

It can be assumed a ranking of 1963 , excluding the majors ( why are worth little ) , and including the World Series American , Australasian , Facis and other main interesting tournaments ( Wembley ... ) ?

During the 1962 season Rod Laver had 0% possibility to make Grand Slam. The best pros tennis players were most strong than Rocket Man: Rosewall, Gonzales, Hoad, Gimeno for example. But the Grand Slams were played in the grass court (3/4) and clay court (French Open) instead the pro tennis player competed in parquet/canvas courts during all season with a little portion of season played in clay or grass (i.e. Australasian Tour). There is a different but imho the pros player would not have problems to play in different surfaces.
The number one in 1963 is Rosewall, if we exclude the Pro Slams remaining the World Series played in first half of season (winning by Rosewall). The other pro tours didn't assign a trophy to the winner, they are just an "exhibition". The results are:
-Australasian Tour:
Rosewall-Laver 11-2
Hoad-Laver 8-0
Gimeno-Ayala 5-2
-Trofeo Facis:
Gimeno d. MacKay 8-4
Buchholz d. Ayala 8-6
Laver d. Davies 8-5

Davies d. MacKay 8-6
Olmedo d. Ayala 10-8
Anderson d. Buchholz 8-5
Gimeno d. Laver 10-8

According to McCauley's book.

In 1963 there were "medium" tournaments like: Kitzbuhel, Cannes, Dutch Pro, Johannesburg, Salisbury won by Laver, Poertschach, San Diego (4-men), Geneva won by Gimeno, and others. But the Kenny's trophy are most important than other. A big event was played on hard court at Los Angeles: The Adler Tournament won always by Muscle. Imho Rosewall is always the ranking number one considering all the possible variables.

In the 1962 the domination of Rosewall is bigger than 1962. There aren't World Series, only two small pro tours in Australia and New Zealand. Kenny won 7 of 8 best pro tournaments of the world, losing only in Zurich where Hoad takes the trophy. He didn't take part at the U.S. Pro in Cleveland but this isn't a "Major" but a little pros tournament without Kenny, Pancho, Laver and Hoad.
 

pc1

G.O.A.T.
During the 1962 season Rod Laver had 0% possibility to make Grand Slam. The best pros tennis players were most strong than Rocket Man: Rosewall, Gonzales, Hoad, Gimeno for example. But the Grand Slams were played in the grass court (3/4) and clay court (French Open) instead the pro tennis player competed in parquet/canvas courts during all season with a little portion of season played in clay or grass (i.e. Australasian Tour). There is a different but imho the pros player would not have problems to play in different surfaces.
The number one in 1963 is Rosewall, if we exclude the Pro Slams remaining the World Series played in first half of season (winning by Rosewall). The other pro tours didn't assign a trophy to the winner, they are just an "exhibition". The results are:
-Australasian Tour:
Rosewall-Laver 11-2
Hoad-Laver 8-0
Gimeno-Ayala 5-2
-Trofeo Facis:
Gimeno d. MacKay 8-4
Buchholz d. Ayala 8-6
Laver d. Davies 8-5

Davies d. MacKay 8-6
Olmedo d. Ayala 10-8
Anderson d. Buchholz 8-5
Gimeno d. Laver 10-8

According to McCauley's book.

In 1963 there were "medium" tournaments like: Kitzbuhel, Cannes, Dutch Pro, Johannesburg, Salisbury won by Laver, Poertschach, San Diego (4-men), Geneva won by Gimeno, and others. But the Kenny's trophy are most important than other. A big event was played on hard court at Los Angeles: The Adler Tournament won always by Muscle. Imho Rosewall is always the ranking number one considering all the possible variables.

In the 1962 the domination of Rosewall is bigger than 1962. There aren't World Series, only two small pro tours in Australia and New Zealand. Kenny won 7 of 8 best pro tournaments of the world, losing only in Zurich where Hoad takes the trophy. He didn't take part at the U.S. Pro in Cleveland but this isn't a "Major" but a little pros tournament without Kenny, Pancho, Laver and Hoad.

Nice and logical points but I would say that it wasn't an even playing field in this case. That is of course the situation with any new pro versus an experienced pro.

What I mean is this, Rosewall turned pro in 1957 at the age of 22 (to be 23 later in the year) and was a seasoned pro by the time Laver who was 24 (to turn 25 later in August that year) in 1963 when he turned pro. So Rosewall had six years of pro experience on the tour and was adjusted to playing on the tour. Rosewall adjusted to the higher pro playing level and the daily grind of the tour. Laver wasn't use to this and was beaten soundly by Hoad and Rosewall at the very beginning of his pro career in 1963. Yet despite this very poor beginning Laver was number two in the pros by the end of 1963 and became number one by the end of 1964 as written by the Rocket in his latest biography.

So let's say Laver was the same age as Rosewall and turned pro in 1957 and played a clone of Pancho Gonzalez as Rosewall did. Well I would guess that Laver, like Rosewall was, would be beaten soundly by Gonzalez in their head to head World Championship Tour. At the same time Laver would be gaining huge experience and would adapt very quickly to the pro tour as he did in real life in the early 1960s.

Would Rosewall have ever become number one if Laver was the same age as Rosewall? Or perhaps Rosewall would have stopped Laver from being number one in the pros. I would tend to think the former since Laver had the best year in 1964 when Rosewall was 29 most of the year. Laver defeated Rosewall 15 of 19 that year and continued his control of the rivalry through most of rest of their career.

I would venture to guess that if Open Tennis was always around that Laver would have won his share of majors prior to 1963 since Laver would have known how to play the tour during the time of Open Tennis.

Now in the former scenario Laver wouldn't have won the Grand Slam in 1962 because he was a pro already. So Laver would have only won 6 majors in total plus an Open Grand Slam. Yet at the same time Laver would have been a better player for a longer time considering that he turned pro two years earlier. His level of play overall over the years would have been of a higher level (most likely) and yet if you look at his record superficially you would think Laver was below the level by far of Pete Sampras or Agassi or Djokovic.

Yet this version of Laver may have played better tennis for longer years and therefore may have had in actuality a superior level of play over the Laver in real life.

Now the likelihood is that Laver would have won a lot of Pro Majors to compensate but the general tennis public wouldn't realize that and Laver, who may be the GOAT wouldn't be realized as being even close to that because of his lack of classic majors.

This is the case with Pancho Gonzalez. People don't realize how dominant he was and therefore rank him below Roy Emerson who won more classic majors.
 
Last edited:

KG1965

Legend
During the 1962 season Rod Laver had 0% possibility to make Grand Slam. The best pros tennis players were most strong than Rocket Man: Rosewall, Gonzales, Hoad, Gimeno for example. But the Grand Slams were played in the grass court (3/4) and clay court (French Open) instead the pro tennis player competed in parquet/canvas courts during all season with a little portion of season played in clay or grass (i.e. Australasian Tour). There is a different but imho the pros player would not have problems to play in different surfaces.
The number one in 1963 is Rosewall, if we exclude the Pro Slams remaining the World Series played in first half of season (winning by Rosewall). The other pro tours didn't assign a trophy to the winner, they are just an "exhibition". The results are:
-Australasian Tour:
Rosewall-Laver 11-2
Hoad-Laver 8-0
Gimeno-Ayala 5-2
-Trofeo Facis:
Gimeno d. MacKay 8-4
Buchholz d. Ayala 8-6
Laver d. Davies 8-5

Davies d. MacKay 8-6
Olmedo d. Ayala 10-8
Anderson d. Buchholz 8-5
Gimeno d. Laver 10-8

According to McCauley's book.

In 1963 there were "medium" tournaments like: Kitzbuhel, Cannes, Dutch Pro, Johannesburg, Salisbury won by Laver, Poertschach, San Diego (4-men), Geneva won by Gimeno, and others. But the Kenny's trophy are most important than other. A big event was played on hard court at Los Angeles: The Adler Tournament won always by Muscle. Imho Rosewall is always the ranking number one considering all the possible variables.

In the 1962 the domination of Rosewall is bigger than 1962. There aren't World Series, only two small pro tours in Australia and New Zealand. Kenny won 7 of 8 best pro tournaments of the world, losing only in Zurich where Hoad takes the trophy. He didn't take part at the U.S. Pro in Cleveland but this isn't a "Major" but a little pros tournament without Kenny, Pancho, Laver and Hoad.

I continue to ask you questions.
Considering that you wanted answers, you're free to continue not to answer ...

1) that scores are 11-2, 8-1, 9-4, why not, 6-4 or 6-3?

2) the circuit Pro was composed of how many players? 10? 12?

My comments:
1) Grand Slams played in the grass court (3/4) and clay court and Pro Parquet / canvas courts during all season looks a bit like the 70s where slam were on earth and grass, and other important tournaments of hc and carpet
2) The number one in 1962 is Rosewall.
3) The number one in 1963 is Rosewall.
4) Rosewall-Laver 11-2
Hoad-Laver 8-0
Gimeno d. Laver 10-8
Laver seems to be behind Hoad and perhaps Gimeno.
5) Kenny in 1962 won 7 of 8 best pro tournaments of the world, losing only in Zurich where Hoad takes the trophy .... seems a superhuman.
6) Hoad was still very strong in 1962.
7) From 1976 to 1986 I read all the numbers of all the magazines possible but no one ever taught me what I learned today of Rosewall.
8) The system begins to give me the impression that he had deleted Rosewall.
9) Rosewall seems increasingly a MONSTER.
10) I still believe that compare the current champions in the Open Era is feasible, difficult but doable. It is absolutely not possible to compare 1962 with 2015.
 

KG1965

Legend
Additional considerations :
The Grand Slam titles until 1968 count as zero . Does not count for little , count Z E R O.
They must be removed to Laver , Rosewall , and others. They have no value .

But compare the palmares of Rosewall with Federer , Nadal , sampras is a nonsense , a joke , an absurdity .

It 'a shame that "critics" (aaarghhh!!!!) of the tennis , Bud Collins and all others , indicate 11 Slam Laver , Rosewall to 8 , 2 to Pancho . Shameful .

They should apologize to write rubbish and split history into two pieces .

Of Rosewall should write articles like the thread of Topspin , or ... not indicate Rosewall .

Indicate Rosewall 8 slam as a parameter of comparison is a crime against the tennis.
 

kiki

Banned
Rosewall won about 20 major championships and we all know, or at least should know in this section, that the pro slams were more important and hard to achieve than the amateur slams.

But the amateur slams had their value as well.Santana and Emerson, and of course, 1967 Newcombe were as good as the pros.
 

Topspin1985

New User
I continue to ask you questions.
Considering that you wanted answers, you're free to continue not to answer ...

1) that scores are 11-2, 8-1, 9-4, why not, 6-4 or 6-3?

2) the circuit Pro was composed of how many players? 10? 12?.

1) This scores don't concern to a single match but to H2H in the Australasian Pro Tour.

2) The pros player in the circuit are more than 10 or 12, but there are many tipologies of pros players: there are the potential GOAT like: Laver, Gonzalez and Rosewall, the champions: Trabert, Segura, Sedgman, Hoad, Gimeno, excellent tennis players: Malcolm Anderson, Ashley Cooper, Mervyn Rose, Butch Buchholz, Luis Ayala, Barry MacKay, Alex Olmedo, Robert Haillet, Mike Davies and many other pros of "second level": Paul Remy, John Melhuish, Bill Moss, Roger Becker, Peter Cawthorn, Jean-Claude Molinari Sam Giammalva, Alan Quay, Warren Woodcock, Jason Morton etc. etc.

I don't understand when KG1965 asks me:"Considering that you wanted answers, you're free to continue not to answer ...", Why does he say this? It seems that I had answer to your questions.
Just like I wrote in my first post I would fill the blanks in the 1963 World Series stats. There are many people in this forum can help me using the newspapers or almanacks. I often read the Krosero's posts...so his help could be very precious.

I don't wanna compare the Rosewall's Slams to today's Slams. It isn't my purpose.
 

krosero

Legend
Nice work, topspin. I have a list of this tour's results from Andrew Tas. It's a list of Rosewall's matches only; and it's incomplete; but in the spaces you've marked as blank he has these results:

19th Match (of tour)
March 15
Dallas TX
Defeated Gimeno

5th Match (of playoff)
May 1
Winnipeg
Defeated Laver unknown score

Note: May 12 was in New Haven, CT
 

Topspin1985

New User
Nice work, topspin. I have a list of this tour's results from Andrew Tas. It's a list of Rosewall's matches only; and it's incomplete; but in the spaces you've marked as blank he has these results:

19th Match (of tour)
March 15
Dallas TX
Defeated Gimeno

5th Match (of playoff)
May 1
Winnipeg
Defeated Laver unknown score

Note: May 12 was in New Haven, CT

Thank you Krosero, I admire your knowledge and your shared work about the tennis history. It seems impossble to fill the blanks of this pro tour. I tried in many newsparpers and almanacks but there aren't there results. The missing results could be:

1) 2 stages between New Castle (apr 3) and Louisville (apr 7)
2) All results of Tretorn stage
3) 2 results of Monteal stage
4) 4 stages between Denver (apr 29) and Hershey (may 10), (one of this is Winnipeg)
5) 1 stage from Hershey (may 10) and New Heaven, CT (may 12)
6) Some results from the last stages about the Gimeno-Buchholz H2H and the last stage of the play-off phase.
 

KG1965

Legend
1) This scores don't concern to a single match but to H2H in the Australasian Pro Tour.

2) The pros player in the circuit are more than 10 or 12, but there are many tipologies of pros players: there are the potential GOAT like: Laver, Gonzalez and Rosewall, the champions: Trabert, Segura, Sedgman, Hoad, Gimeno, excellent tennis players: Malcolm Anderson, Ashley Cooper, Mervyn Rose, Butch Buchholz, Luis Ayala, Barry MacKay, Alex Olmedo, Robert Haillet, Mike Davies and many other pros of "second level": Paul Remy, John Melhuish, Bill Moss, Roger Becker, Peter Cawthorn, Jean-Claude Molinari Sam Giammalva, Alan Quay, Warren Woodcock, Jason Morton etc. etc.

I don't understand when KG1965 asks me:"Considering that you wanted answers, you're free to continue not to answer ...", Why does he say this? It seems that I had answer to your questions.
Just like I wrote in my first post I would fill the blanks in the 1963 World Series stats. There are many people in this forum can help me using the newspapers or almanacks. I often read the Krosero's posts...so his help could be very precious.

I don't wanna compare the Rosewall's Slams to today's Slams. It isn't my purpose.

Topspin excuse I translated badly , I wanted to write that you expected answers ... and I will let you questions ...
My fault.
Thanks to all the stats and clarifications .
 

urban

Legend
Of couse, Rosewall was the nr. 1 pro in 1963 in all fields. He was 89-26 for the year, while Laver was 81-66. Thats a clear margin. But if you count the tournament play stats, to which the pros turned since June 1963, it gets a lot closer. Rosewall was 30-10, while Laver was 40-12 for the second part of the year 1963. It shows that Laver improved a lot on the courts in Europe and South Africa, a development, that both Trabert and Sedgman, who were running the tour remarked.
 
From the Chicago Tribune on May 6, 1963:
Laver defeated Rosewall 6-4, 7-5…..yesterday to even their series for the professional tennis championship at four matches apiece.
Gimeno defeated Buchholz 8-6 in a match to their series for third place on the tour.
Laver and Rosewall beat Gimeno and Buchholz in doubles 8-6
 

urban

Legend
Nice find. Seems to be one more match win for Laver in his hth with Rosewall, than previously known. And it seems, that the play off series in 1963 indeed was quite close until May.
 

NonP

Legend
From the Chicago Tribune on May 6, 1963:
Laver defeated Rosewall 6-4, 7-5…..yesterday to even their series for the professional tennis championship at four matches apiece.
Gimeno defeated Buchholz 8-6 in a match to their series for third place on the tour.
Laver and Rosewall beat Gimeno and Buchholz in doubles 8-6

Nice find. Seems to be one more match win for Laver in his hth with Rosewall, than previously known. And it seems, that the play off series in 1963 indeed was quite close until May.

For the record I have Andrew Tas' tally of Laver's career matches thanks to @pc1 and it does include this particular match in its 4-14 Laver-Rosewall H2H, just not the match score itself which indeed is nice to have (the final scores of the 6th and 7th matches of the series are still missing). Any idea where this happened?
 

urban

Legend
The newspaper report of the Chicago Tribune indicates, that by May 6 the score of the play off was 4-4. Later on May 16, Laver won a match at New York MSG 6-0, 6-3, which is covered by a match peport of Allison Danzig in Lavers first book with Jack Pollard.
 
There was a short article in the Baltimore Sun dated 4/17/63:

Ken Rosewall Clinches First Place in Tennis
White Plains NY April 16
AP
Ken Rosewall of Australia clinched first place in the professional tennis series tonight at the Westchester County Center by beating Barry MacKay of Dayton, Ohio, 8-6.
With Rosewall having an overall record of 28-10, it is now impossible for second-place Rod Laver to overtake him in the remaining three matches. The pros play at Trenton, NJ tomorrow,
East Orange, NJ Thursday and El Paso, Texas next Tuesday.

---

That would have made:
Trenton NJ on Wednesday 4/17
East Orange NJ on Thursday 4/18
El Paso TX on Tuesday 4/23
 

NonP

Legend
The Chicago Tribune article states that the match was held at the Chicago Coliseum.

Thanks. So that's one less gap for the Rosewall-Laver series. Here's where we stand now:

Match #1
April 25
San Francisco
Laver won 3-6, 6-3, 6-4

#2
April 26
Los Angeles
Rosewall won 10-8, 7-5

#3
April 28
Salt Lake City
Laver won 6-4, 16-18, 6-4

#4
April 29
Denver
Rosewall won 6-3, 6-2

#5
May 1
Winnepeg
Rosewall won (score unknown)

Rosewall and Laver split matches 6 and 7 (date, location & score unknown)

#8
May 5
Chicago Coliseum
Laver won 6-4, 7-5

#9
May 11
Hershey, PA
Rosewall won (score unknown)

#10
May 12
New Haven
Rosewall won 14-12, 9-7

#11
May 16
Madison Square Gardens, New York
Laver won 6-0, 6-3

#12
May 17
Corvallis, OR
Rosewall won 10-8, 7-5

#13
Rosewall won (date, location & score unknown)

#14
May 20
Medford, OR (city misspelled as Mudford in Andrew Tas' list)
Rosewall won 6-1, 6-3

#15
May 21
Eugene, OR
Rosewall won 6-2, 6-2

#16
May 23
Seattle (state misidentified as Oregon in Andrew's list)
Rosewall won 6-2, 3-6, 6-3

#17
May 24
Vancouver
Rosewall won 6-3, 6-4

#18
Rosewall won (date, location & score unknown)

So Rosewall won this 2nd stage of the WS 14-4. For those keeping score we still need the following info:
  • Score for #5 and 9
  • Date, location & score for #6, 7, 13 & 18
Hopefully we can fill in the remaining gaps as well.
 

urban

Legend
If the Chicago Tribune report (which is a contemporary source) is right, that the score was 4 all by May 6, than the score would be at least 14-5. I think, the 14-4 is a projective number by McCauley, which Andrew Tas is following. Those numbers are almost always incomplete. It would make imo more sense, if the planned overall tally of matches in the Play off would be 19 instead of 18, because it exludes a virtual draw.
 

krosero

Legend
Topspin1985 does have the score of the match in Hershey, in the original post; and he has the correct date, May 10.

Possibly on May 11 yet another match took place, with Rosewall winning it, because Rosewall's victory in New Haven on May 12 was reported in several newspapers as his third straight win over Laver; reportedly it left Ken with a 7-3 edge.

The match in Winnipeg never took place. It was scheduled for May 2 but three days earlier in Denver, Laver had hurt his back. The troupe still played in Winnipeg but without Laver. Winnipeg Press has these results:

Gimeno d. Buchholz 11-9
Rosewall d. MacKay 8-5
Gimeno d. Rosewall 8-4
Rosewall/Gimeno defeated Buchholz/MacKay 8-5

All of this was termed an "exhibition," which is an ironic term because technically all pro tennis matches were exhibitions. All it meant here is that the matches were not part of the World Series playoff. The troupe was merely, as the article stated, "marking time" in Winnipeg while Laver recovered.

Topspin already documented match #13 in Portland, in his original post.

Rosewall's win in the next match, in Medford, reportedly "clinched at least a tie for the pro tennis championship... in their 20-match series" with an edge of 10-4 (Laver could still tie by taking the remaining 6 matches). The next day in Eugene, Rosewall clinched "the 20-match tour" with an edge of 11-4.

After they played match #17 in Vancouver, they were reportedly scheduled to play three more matches:

May 30 - Santa Barbara
June 1- San Diego
June 2 - San Diego

However I'm guessing that the San Diego matches were changed into a tournament at the last minute. Andrew has a San Diego Pro on June 1-2, with Gimeno beating Rosewall on Saturday in the semis then beating Laver in the final; I saw all of that reported as well in the newspapers.

So it looks like only 18 matches were played for this Laver/Rosewall playoff, with Rosewall leading 14-4, as McCauley has -- though I didn't find anything confirming that match #18 in Santa Barbara took place.

[Edited to correct date of Winnipeg match -- May 2]
 
Last edited:

Dan Lobb

G.O.A.T.
I do not wish to downgrade the importance of this series, but it was not the only show in town in 1963. There were important tournaments with best-of-five finals, and an Australian tour in January which captured most of the attention that year.
 

krosero

Legend
Topspin, here's a little more missing info.

I had not noticed that you listed Fort Worth without any results; Andrew has the following results for Laver and Rosewall; I found Buchholz/MacKay in a newspaper report.

25th Match
March 23
Fort Worth TX
Rosewall d. Ayala 9-7
Buchholz d. MacKay 15-13
Gimeno d. Laver 8-6

And I gave you Rosewall's result in Dallas but I have the score now; here also is Andrew's result for Laver.

19th Match
March 15
Dallas TX
Rosewall d. Gimeno 8-6 (Rosewall reported now to be at 16-3, his first win over Gimeno)
Buchholz d. Ayala 8-6
Laver d. MacKay 8-6

White Plains (16 apr)
Rosewall-MacKay 8-6
Laver-Buchholz 8-6
Gimeno-Ayala 8-3

Standings: Rosewall 28-10, Laver 24-14, Buchholz 21-17, Gimeno 19-19, MacKay 11-27, Ayala 11-27

Tretorn

East Orange (19 apr)
Laver-Ayala 8-6
Rosewall-Buchholz 8-5
Gimeno-MacKay 8-5

Standings: Rosewall 30-10, Laver 25-15, Buchholz 22-18, Gimeno 20-20, MacKay 12-28, Ayala 11-29

El Paso (23 apr)
Rosewall-Olmedo 8-6
Gimeno-Laver 8-4
Buchholz-MacKay 8-5

Final standings: Rosewall 31-10, Laver 25-16, Buchholz 23-18, Gimeno 21-20, MacKay 12-29, Ayala 11-29
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think here you mean Trenton (as Scott_Tennis found on Apr 17). I couldn't find any results for it, though. Very strange how some matches are difficult to find even when they were held in places where you'd expect good media coverage (ie, northeastern U.S.)

I don't know if the day-by-day standings in your post are published counts, or your own calculations (or a mix). But going by the standings you give before and after Trenton, the results in Trenton would be:

- wins by Rosewall, Buchholz and MacKay
- losses by Laver, Gimeno and Ayala

We don't know the matchups but it's possible there was a Rosewall-Laver meeting here.

Somewhere I am sure I have seen a H2H tally for Rosewall/Laver, covering all their pro matches up to some point later in '63. If we could find it, I think we could infer backwards what the missing result(s) are.

A couple of other things I've found.

- the Salt Lake City stand was outdoors, on a Sunday. Originally Salt Lake was to host matches on both Saturday and Sunday, but Saturday's matches were entirely rained out. I think it could have been the only outdoor stand of the entire tour (I can't recall seeing another report of an outdoor match, though I have not made a formal count).

- the playoff series, when it started, was referred to as a 25-match series. As the tour progressed it was referred to variously as 21 matches, 20, then finally 18. I think the number went down due to cancellations like Salt Lake; and Laver sitting out the Winnipeg stand. Such changes could have prompted mistakes in the H2H counts given in the press. But like Urban posted, it makes sense that the series started with an odd number of matches (25).

- this is not a new piece of information, but with almost everything documented now it's easy to make a count: Rosewall won 12 straight matches from Laver, starting in New Zealand, ending in Cleveland.
 

urban

Legend
Thanks for the clarifications. It shows how difficult it is, to get exact scores. You have conflicting newspaper reports, which may be prompted - as Krosero writes - by cancellations. The record keeping of the pros themselves was very bad, and in memoirs you have even more conflicting numbers. Like in the other thread about the WSeries, we see all the problems here of the day by day barnstorming tours: no precise plan, hidden or open injury problems, concellations, and so on. While the odd number of originally planned matches would make sense, some of the tours ended at 50, others at 51, others at 96, for the winner. For surfaces: i read in the book of Betty laver, that a Bermuda stop of the first phase 1963 was payed outdoors on a Hotel ground.
Interesting are the dynamics of the Play Offs: It seems that Laver, who came to life in the second period of the first phase, held it close for a while. You have very close scores in the matches themselves or even some clear Laver wins. Since the New York match to go 4-7, he lost 7 straight matches, and the scores get more clearer. I have no idea, why Laver broke in somewhat in the later part, but it could be a pattern. In the tag team series with Rosewall (and Hoad) in January it was similar. In the Australian part, the tally was imo 3-2 or 4-2 for Rosewall (even with ome clear wins for Laver), before he ran away with 7 or 8 straight matches. Maybe in New Zealand the indoor surface played a role.
 

Dan Lobb

G.O.A.T.
Of couse, Rosewall was the nr. 1 pro in 1963 in all fields. He was 89-26 for the year, while Laver was 81-66. Thats a clear margin. But if you count the tournament play stats, to which the pros turned since June 1963, it gets a lot closer. Rosewall was 30-10, while Laver was 40-12 for the second part of the year 1963. It shows that Laver improved a lot on the courts in Europe and South Africa, a development, that both Trabert and Sedgman, who were running the tour remarked.
If you look at five-set matches for the year, Laver looks better.

For example, in the Australian tour in January the five-set results were as follows,

Sydney
Hoad df. Laver 6-8, 6-4, 6-3, 8-6

Rosewall df. Laver 6-3, 6-3, 6-3

Brisbane
Hoad df. Laver 6-4, 6-2, 8-6

Rosewall df. Laver 3-6, 10-8, 6-2, 6-3

Melbourne
Hoad df. Laver 6-4, 6-2, 3-6, 2-6, 6-3

Laver df. Rosewall 6-3, 3-6, 7-5, 6-2

Adelaide
Hoad df. Laver 6-4, 6-3, 9-11, 4-6, 6-2

Laver df. Rosewall 6-1, 6-2, 6-2

This shows a rapid improvement. With Laver's dominance appearing at this point, Rosewall appears to have dropped off of the Australian tour after the drubbing in Adelaide.
 
Last edited:

krosero

Legend
I've been able to find three of the missing Rosewall/Laver meetings in the play-off phase of the World Series.

We knew already that Rosewall won these three meetings, but we didn't have any details about them, including the precise dates. I have the dates now, and I've been able to piece together the sequence of matches from May 2-9 (a sequence that had been a bit of a puzzle).

The meetings I found were in Minneapolis; Muncie, ID; and Haddonfield, NJ.


4th Stand
April 29
Denver
Rosewall d. Laver 63 62 (now 2-2)


May 2
Winnipeg
Gimeno d. Buchholz 11-9
Rosewall d. MacKay 8-5
Gimeno d. Rosewall 8-4
Rosewall/Gimeno defeated Buchholz/MacKay 8-5
(Laver was injured here and did not play, so this stand did not count toward the World Series)


5th Stand
May 3
Minneapolis
Rosewall d. Laver 6-3, 3-6, 6-1 (reported now as 3-2 edge for Rosewall)
Gimeno d. Buchholz 15-13 (also reported as 3-2 edge for Gimeno)


6th Stand
May 5
Chicago Coliseum
Gimeno d. Buchholz 8-6 (no H2H given in Chicago Tribune)
Laver d. Rosewall 6-4, 7-5 (Chicago Tribune reported them now tied at 4-4 but must be 3-3; the confusion no doubt stems from the fact that Rosewall’s personal record in all matches was 4-4, including his two matches in Winnipeg, where Laver did not play)


7th Stand
May 7
Muncie, Indiana
Rosewall d. Laver 6-2, 6-4
Gimeno d. Buchholz 8-6
Rosewall/Laver beat Gimeno/Buchholz 8-5

Rosewall-Laver now reported as 4-3, Gimeno-Buchholz as 5-2


8th Stand
May 10
Hershey PA
Rosewall d. Laver 7-5, 4-6, 9-7 (now reported 5-3)
Gimeno d. Buchholz 8-6 (now 6-2)


9th Stand
May 11
Haddonfield, NJ
Delaware Valley Garden on a green canvas court (now reported 6-3)
Rosewall d. Laver 7-5, 6-2


10th Stand
May 12
New Haven
Rosewall d. Laver 14-12, 9-7 (now reported as 7-3 and as third straight win)


11th Stand
May 16
Madison Square Garden New York
Buchholz d. Gimeno 8-3
Laver d. Rosewall 6-0, 6-3 (now 7-4, reported as snapping a four-match win streak)

New York Times:

The victory was Laver’s fourth in 11 meetings with Rosewall in their playoff series of 20 matches for first-prize money of $35,000 following a cross-country, six-man tour. Rosewall had been the winner of their four previous engagements….

Earl Buchholz of St. Louis defeated Andres Gimeno of Spain in the opening match, 8-3. It was limited to one pro set. They are playing off for third-prize money of $20,000. Gimeno leads by seven matches to four.​
 
Last edited:

krosero

Legend
I also found a Laver win over Rosewall, entirely unknown, in a one-night stand in Brighton, on the day after the Wembley Pro final.

Sept. 22, 1963
Brighton, England
Laver d. Rosewall 6-3, 6-4
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
I also found a Laver win over Rosewall, entirely unknown, in a one-night stand in Brighton, on the day after the Wembley Pro final.

Sept. 22, 1963
Brighton, England
Laver d. Rosewall 6-3, 6-4

Where are you digging out the information? Is it from newspaper archives and such?
 

krosero

Legend
At that site I learned that Rosewall, Laver, Gonzalez and Olmedo played 4 stands in Great Britain in July 1964 (apart from the big Golden Racquet tourney at Wembley). The Daily Mirror reported the cities and the dates, unfortunately without results.

However an Irish newspaper reported that Rosewall defeated Gonzalez twice during the week in Britain. So putting it all together with what we already know from McCauley and Andrew, this is what I have:


July 15
Edinburgh
Rosewall d. Gonzalez, unknown score
Laver vs. Olmedo, unknown result


July 16
Scarborough
Gonzalez d. Laver 6-4, 6-2
Rosewall d. Olmedo 6-4, 6-3
Gonzalez/Laver beat Rosewall/Olmedo 6-2, 4-6, 6-4


July 17
Eastbourne
Rosewall d. Gonzalez, unknown score
Laver vs. Olmedo, unknown result


July 20
Nottingham
Laver d. Rosewall 6-2, 6-3
Gonzalez d. Olmedo 7-5, 6-3
Rosewall/Laver beat Gonzalez/Olmedo 10-8, 6-0


July 21
Golden Racquet Pro Champs Wembley
SF Hoad d. Rosewall 8-1
SF Gonzalez d. Laver 8-5
F Gonzalez d. Hoad 0-6, 6-4, 9-7
 

krosero

Legend
I found more of Laver's activity in late '64


November 3-5 (Tuesday-Thursday)
Nairobi, Kenya
All matches outdoors at Nairobi Club under new floodlights
Probably the same surface used in ’57 troupe visit, murram, or gravel, similar to red clay

Day 1:
Gimeno d. Buchholz 10-7
Laver d. Olmedo 10-4
Buchholz/Olmedo beat Laver/Gimeno 6-2, 4-6, 6-4

Day 2:
Buchholz d. Olmedo 10-3
Gimeno d. Laver 6-1, 6-3
Gimeno/Olmedo beat Laver/Buchholz 6-2, 9-7

Day 3:
Gimeno d. Olmedo 6-2, 6-4
Laver d. Buchholz 7-5, 7-5
Doubles was played but result unreported


November 14 (Saturday afternoon)
Beirut
“Third International Professional Tennis Festival”
Alumni Club
Gimeno d. Olmedo 6-4, 6-2
Laver d. Buchholz 10-6
 

krosero

Legend
I mentioned in my Gonzalez career thread that I'd pieced together a fuller picture of the Munich and Hannover tourneys in '64. Below is everything I could gather; most is from McCauley, but slightly different from his results in a number of places.


Bavarian Pro Champs Munich
September 7 final
(Sept. 20-24 are McCauley’s dates but they are incorrect)

QF presumably Sedgman played and lost
QF presumably Hoad played and lost
QF presumably Olmedo played and lost
SF Rosewall d. Buchholz 6-2, 8-6 (score per TB; McCauley had none)
SF Gimeno d. Laver 4-6, 6-4, 6-3 (score per Tennis Base; McCauley had none)
MF Gimeno d. Rosewall 62 63 (score per Andrew and Barcelona newspaper, but 6-2, 6-4 per McCauley)

No.3 Laver d. Buchholz 6-2 6-3

DF Hoad/Rosewall beat Olmedo/Sedgman 5-7 6-4 6-4

__________________________________________

Hannover Pro Champs
Sept. 25-28
1R presumably Sedgman played and lost (either to Laver or Gimeno)
1R Rosewall d. Ayala 11-9, 7-5
1R Buchholz d. Olmedo unknown score
SF Rosewall d. Gimeno 13-11, 4-6, 6-3
SF Buchholz d. Laver unknown score
MF Rosewall d. Buchholz 3-6, 6-3, 6-3

3rd place Laver d. Gimeno 8-6, 6-3 (per Dutch newspaper)

Laver/Buchholz defeated Sedgman/Olmedo in doubles final, 6-3, 6-3

McCauley does not have the doubles match, or the 3rd place match; he has Buchholz beating Laver in the first round and Olmedo in the semis when in fact Buchholz eliminated Alex first and then Rod.

__________________________________________

So for the entire year '64 I currently have:

Rosewall 75-32
Laver 85-30
Gonzalez 43-30
 

Dan Lobb

G.O.A.T.
I mentioned in my Gonzalez career thread that I'd pieced together a fuller picture of the Munich and Hannover tourneys in '64. Below is everything I could gather; most is from McCauley, but slightly different from his results in a number of places.


Bavarian Pro Champs Munich
September 7 final
(Sept. 20-24 are McCauley’s dates but they are incorrect)

QF presumably Sedgman played and lost
QF presumably Hoad played and lost
QF presumably Olmedo played and lost
SF Rosewall d. Buchholz 6-2, 8-6 (score per TB; McCauley had none)
SF Gimeno d. Laver 4-6, 6-4, 6-3 (score per Tennis Base; McCauley had none)
MF Gimeno d. Rosewall 62 63 (score per Andrew and Barcelona newspaper, but 6-2, 6-4 per McCauley)

No.3 Laver d. Buchholz 6-2 6-3

DF Hoad/Rosewall beat Olmedo/Sedgman 5-7 6-4 6-4

__________________________________________

Hannover Pro Champs
Sept. 25-28
1R presumably Sedgman played and lost (either to Laver or Gimeno)
1R Rosewall d. Ayala 11-9, 7-5
1R Buchholz d. Olmedo unknown score
SF Rosewall d. Gimeno 13-11, 4-6, 6-3
SF Buchholz d. Laver unknown score
MF Rosewall d. Buchholz 3-6, 6-3, 6-3

3rd place Laver d. Gimeno 8-6, 6-3 (per Dutch newspaper)

Laver/Buchholz defeated Sedgman/Olmedo in doubles final, 6-3, 6-3

McCauley does not have the doubles match, or the 3rd place match; he has Buchholz beating Laver in the first round and Olmedo in the semis when in fact Buchholz eliminated Alex first and then Rod.

__________________________________________

So for the entire year '64 I currently have:

Rosewall 75-32
Laver 85-30
Gonzalez 43-30
Based on these entire year numbers, it seems that Laver had the better year.
 

BobbyOne

G.O.A.T.
I also found a Laver win over Rosewall, entirely unknown, in a one-night stand in Brighton, on the day after the Wembley Pro final.

Sept. 22, 1963
Brighton, England
Laver d. Rosewall 6-3, 6-4

krosero, Thanks. You are unique in finding unknown results.
 

KG1965

Legend
I mentioned in my Gonzalez career thread that I'd pieced together a fuller picture of the Munich and Hannover tourneys in '64. Below is everything I could gather; most is from McCauley, but slightly different from his results in a number of places.


Bavarian Pro Champs Munich
September 7 final
(Sept. 20-24 are McCauley’s dates but they are incorrect)

QF presumably Sedgman played and lost
QF presumably Hoad played and lost
QF presumably Olmedo played and lost
SF Rosewall d. Buchholz 6-2, 8-6 (score per TB; McCauley had none)
SF Gimeno d. Laver 4-6, 6-4, 6-3 (score per Tennis Base; McCauley had none)
MF Gimeno d. Rosewall 62 63 (score per Andrew and Barcelona newspaper, but 6-2, 6-4 per McCauley)

No.3 Laver d. Buchholz 6-2 6-3

DF Hoad/Rosewall beat Olmedo/Sedgman 5-7 6-4 6-4

__________________________________________

Hannover Pro Champs
Sept. 25-28
1R presumably Sedgman played and lost (either to Laver or Gimeno)
1R Rosewall d. Ayala 11-9, 7-5
1R Buchholz d. Olmedo unknown score
SF Rosewall d. Gimeno 13-11, 4-6, 6-3
SF Buchholz d. Laver unknown score
MF Rosewall d. Buchholz 3-6, 6-3, 6-3

3rd place Laver d. Gimeno 8-6, 6-3 (per Dutch newspaper)

Laver/Buchholz defeated Sedgman/Olmedo in doubles final, 6-3, 6-3

McCauley does not have the doubles match, or the 3rd place match; he has Buchholz beating Laver in the first round and Olmedo in the semis when in fact Buchholz eliminated Alex first and then Rod.

__________________________________________

So for the entire year '64 I currently have:

Rosewall 75-32
Laver 85-30
Gonzalez 43-30
Krosero,
1) you think are correct the Tours won from Rosewall and reported on Wikipedia?
Australian Pro Tour 1957
Perrier Trophy Pro Tour 1958
South African Pro Tour 1958
New Zealand Pro Tour 1962
Australasian Pro Tour 1962
World Pro Tour 1963
Italian Pro Tour 1964

2) World Series 1963 = World Tour Pro 1963 ?

3) Who won the World Series in 1962? oops... topspin wrote that did not take place.

4) 1963 was the last year of the World Series (or World Pro Tour ?)?

I thank you in advance.
 
Last edited:

BobbyOne

G.O.A.T.
Krosero,
1) you think are correct the Tours won from Rosewall and reported on Wikipedia?
Australian Pro Tour 1957
Perrier Trophy Pro Tour 1958
South African Pro Tour 1958
New Zealand Pro Tour 1962
Australasian Pro Tour 1962
World Pro Tour 1963
Italian Pro Tour 1964

2) World Series 1963 = World Tour Pro 1963 ?

3) Who won the World Series in 1962? oops... topspin wrote that did not take place.

4) 1963 was the last year of the World Series (or World Pro Tour ?)?

I thank you in advance.

KG, The Rosewall tours of Wikipedia are correct.

The 1963 series (two parts) were the World Series and World Pro Tour.

In 1962 Rosewall was the clear No.1 winning ten tournaments. Hoad won only Zürich and Trofeo Facis.

1963 was the last classic world series.
 
Last edited:

Dan Lobb

G.O.A.T.
Krosero,
1) you think are correct the Tours won from Rosewall and reported on Wikipedia?
Australian Pro Tour 1957
Perrier Trophy Pro Tour 1958
South African Pro Tour 1958
New Zealand Pro Tour 1962
Australasian Pro Tour 1962
World Pro Tour 1963
Italian Pro Tour 1964

2) World Series 1963 = World Tour Pro 1963 ?

3) Who won the World Series in 1962? oops... topspin wrote that did not take place.

4) 1963 was the last year of the World Series (or World Pro Tour ?)?

I thank you in advance.
That's right, there was no pro tour in 1962, apart from the Facis Tour won by Hoad.
 

krosero

Legend
Krosero,
1) you think are correct the Tours won from Rosewall and reported on Wikipedia?
Australian Pro Tour 1957
Perrier Trophy Pro Tour 1958
South African Pro Tour 1958
New Zealand Pro Tour 1962
Australasian Pro Tour 1962
World Pro Tour 1963
Italian Pro Tour 1964

2) World Series 1963 = World Tour Pro 1963 ?

3) Who won the World Series in 1962? oops... topspin wrote that did not take place.

4) 1963 was the last year of the World Series (or World Pro Tour ?)?

I thank you in advance.
KG, he also won the South Africa tours in 1957 and 1959.

I have the '57 tour documented in full here: https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...ewall-hoad-kramer-segura.506986/#post-8930837

The winner of that tour was not decided until the very last stand in Johannesburg, in which Rosewall beat Hoad 6-1, 6-2. Coming into that stand, Ken and Lew each had a win/loss record of 9-8, so it was fitting that the winner was decided by a direct meeting between the two. But the interesting thing is that the press reports that Ken "challenged" Hoad to play on that last night. They were not scheduled to meet; Rosewall would have normally played Segura or Kramer on that night; but it seems that he chose to play Hoad.

The others on the list look correct, I guess the Italy tour of '64 is the Facis Trophy.
 

KG1965

Legend
KG, he also won the South Africa tours in 1957 and 1959.

I have the '57 tour documented in full here: https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...ewall-hoad-kramer-segura.506986/#post-8930837

The winner of that tour was not decided until the very last stand in Johannesburg, in which Rosewall beat Hoad 6-1, 6-2. Coming into that stand, Ken and Lew each had a win/loss record of 9-8, so it was fitting that the winner was decided by a direct meeting between the two. But the interesting thing is that the press reports that Ken "challenged" Hoad to play on that last night. They were not scheduled to meet; Rosewall would have normally played Segura or Kramer on that night; but it seems that he chose to play Hoad.

The others on the list look correct, I guess the Italy tour of '64 is the Facis Trophy.
So Laver never won the World Pro Tour?
 
Top