Vines ended up winning the match in Oakland and even bageling Budge, 3-6, 6-0, 7-5, reducing the gap to 18-12.
I didn't find much on the match, and the LA Times had only this:
Vines started slowly, but in the second set he got control of his serve.
This highlights the problem with those old long hth tours...they were often decided by injuries, as Kramer himself admitted. They were basically a series of extended exhibition tours.I've been able to pinpoint the date that Vines pulled his stomach muscle during the North American tour with Budge. It happened in stand #9, in Kansas City, with the series tied 4-4.
This is a report from the St. Louis Dispatch (their archives were recently put online) about the tenth stand, in St. Louis:
ERRORS ENABLE DON TO WIN BY 6-3, 6-3 SCORE
Crowd of 3500 Spectators Sees Professional Rivals in Tame Match at Field House
By Robert Morrison
Ellsworth Vines is a swell person and Don Budge a great player, but if that was red-hot rivalry for the world’s professional tennis supremacy between them last night at the Washington University Field House, then we’ll take croquet.
And so, it seemed, would many in the crowd of approximately 3500 who saw Budge gain his sixth victory in 10 matches over Vines. The scores were 6-3, 6-3.
This is not the first time on their tour that this reaction has been evident. Reports from New York indicated the crowd there felt the same way about it when the tour opened two weeks ago.
Vines kicked away the match last night with errors. He looked tired, so tired that sometimes it seemed he couldn’t get the power needed to lift a backhand shot over the net.
Makes Numerous Errors.
The net caught many of Vines’ shots—37 by an unofficial count—and he had 29 outs. Some were the ultimate result of Budge’s smooth, brilliantly mechanical play, very difficult to return. But some were—well, it seemed at times Vines wasn’t trying very hard.
Most of the play was in the backcourts and occasionally the spectators caught a glimpse of Budge’s great backhand that he developed in early youth by left-handed swinging at a baseball plate.
But mostly it was very tame. One wag among the courtside spectators murmured something about sleepy people. Wag No. 2 came back with: “You mean the players or the spectators?”
Explanation was forthcoming later. In the dressing quarters, Vines was asked if he was tired. Evidently not wishing to make excuses, he said he wasn’t, but Budge broke in:
“He pulled a stomach muscle last night at Kansas City. That’s what was wrong with him.”
That’s the Way He Plays.
And then you saw, as Vines disrobed, the tape that bound his mid-section. Still he insisted he wasn’t tired.
“That’s the way I play sometimes. I make two or three good shots, then I miss a couple.”
He described it accurately and it exasperated you sometimes when he couldn’t pull out a game.
In the first set they were even after four games. Then Budge took his own service and broke Vines’ in the sixth. Budge won the seventh, forced Vines to put on steam to take the eighth, then captured the ninth and the set. Last three of Budge’s points in the ninth game were scored when Vines’ shots went outside the court.
Vines ran Budge a little in this set, but the redhead was much too consistent.
Spectators took more interest in the second set. They gave Budge a hand when one of his backhand shots caught Vines flat-footed at the net and won the first game.
They saw another great backhand from an awkward position drop neatly just inside the baseline in the second game, but Vines took this one.
Budge won the next three games, breaking Vines’ service twice. Vines threw the fifth away on several errors but won the sixth and seventh. Then Budge ran out the set in the eighth and ninth, gaining match point on another of Vines’ net shots.
The crowd appeared to get the most enjoyment out of the doubles match, in which Vines and Budge defeated Bruce Barnes and Dick Skeen, Texas professionals, 6-1, 6-2. There was more variety in the shots and the crowd thought it was great stuff when Barnes and Skeen could show up their big name rivals.
The excellence of Budge’s tennis is beyond question, but when he said playing Vines on tour is like playing the finals at Wimbledon every day, he must have been thinking about two other tournaments.
They were much more than that, though they did have problems, one of which was injuries.This highlights the problem with those old long hth tours...they were often decided by injuries, as Kramer himself admitted. They were basically a series of extended exhibition tours.
Interesting. In another tour, Hoad recalled that in the 1959 US tour, he led Gonzales 15 to 3 before his back injury slowed him down.They were much more than that, though they did have problems, one of which was injuries.
I was glad to get the date of this injury because there's been so much uncertainty about the sequence of events. Vines never held a lead in this series but in later years many people recalled that he had a lead when he got injured. Kramer said that Vines led 4-2 (not too far off).
Vines recalled leading 13-12 when it happened. That is so far off that I wondered if his memory was mixing up numbers from some other tour.
But now that I look at the list again, I've just noticed, Vines did have a 13-12 edge in the LAST 25 matches of the tour. From the time that he broke the losing streak -- from the time he fell into a 4-10 hole -- he won 13 and lost 12.
Vines' figure of 13-12 would leave him, after injury, losing 10 and winning only 4.
That's actually what happened at the very beginning of the tour, not the end: he lost 10 and won only 4.
That's right, Hoad's lead over Gonzalez in the '59 tour has been reported as 15-3 (I think in Pollard), but it was actually 13-5.Interesting. In another tour, Hoad recalled that in the 1959 US tour, he led Gonzales 15 to 3 before his back injury slowed him down.
As you have shown elsewhere, that did not happen in 1959, but apparently Hoad did go on a 15 to 3 streak against Gonzales in the 1958 series, before his back stiffened.
Funny how the memories of these players is a little off.
That is right, 11 to 2...obviously off a bit.Dan this might explain a remark that Hoad made in '85. You said that he told Tennis magazine that he was leading Gonzalez 11 to 2 when his back seized up.
Well 11 to 2 could be based on that stretch during the '58 tour where he won 9 of 11.
That's the thing about decades old memories. When it comes to recall of stats, they're rarely accurate, but often what looks like a completely random error of memory ends up being based on something.
Hoad started his hot streak from the second Kooyong match, trailing 4 to 5, he eventually reached 18 to 9, a string of 14 to 4. If the tournament events are included, this could be 15 to 4...pretty close to 15 to 3.That's right, Hoad's lead over Gonzalez in the '59 tour has been reported as 15-3 (I think in Pollard), but it was actually 13-5.
But 13-5 only includes the WS matches. Hoad had a smaller lead if all matches are counted. During that time period in which Hoad won 13 and lost 5, he and Pancho played in 5 other matches that eventually did not count as part of the WS; and they played in the Cleveland final in that time period as well. In all matches during the 13-5 stretch, Hoad's lead was only 15-9. Still hugely impressive.
The 15-3 edge is impossible in the '58 series as well. I've started documenting the matches and I'm nowhere near finished, but I've found most of the early matches, during which Hoad got the early lead. This is the running tally, with Gonzalez's number first:
1-0
1-1
1-2
2-2
2-3
3-3
3-4
4-4
5-4
5-5
5-6
5-7
5-8
5-9
6-9
7-9
7-14
7-15 (McCauley reports 6 straight wins by Hoad)
9-18
11-18
16-20
22-21
From 7-9 to 9-18, Gonzalez won only 2 and lost 9. But that was Hoad's best stretch; after that his back acted up and Pancho began catching up.
You're totally right Dan. Starting from 5-4 he did have a stretch of 14 wins and 4 losses. He had two more wins in tournaments during that stretch (they both took place at the 5-8 mark).Hoad started his hot streak from the second Kooyong match, trailing 4 to 5, he eventually reached 18 to 9, a string of 14 to 4. If the tournament events are included, this could be 15 to 4...pretty close to 15 to 3.
It looks pretty clear that Hoad was thinking of 1958 when he commented on his win streak, not 1959.You're totally right Dan. Starting from 5-4 he did have a stretch of 14 wins and 4 losses. He had two more wins in tournaments during that stretch (they both took place at the 5-8 mark).
And there was actually a stretch of 11 wins and 2 losses, from 4-5 to 15-7.