Greatest Single Tournament of all time?

[timnz]

Hello,

Was there any one single tournament that was tougher to win than the Tennis Champions Classic of 1971. 13 Rounds, best of 5 every round. But note this - instead of relatively easy opponents the first 4 rounds (as is the case in many slams today), you play all time greats every round. Imagine facing Ken Rosewall first round, Newcombe second round, Roche third round, Emerson 4th round, Ashe 5th Round, Okker 6th round and on and on. Each round was on average 4 to 5 days apart.

Laver's opponents:

New York: Rosewall 6-3,6-4,7-5.
Rochester: Newcombe 6-4,6-2,4-6,5-7,6-4.
Boston: Roche 7-5,4-6,3-6,7-5,6-1.
Philadelphia: Emerson, 6-2,6-3,7-5.
New York: Ashe 7-5,6-4,7-5.
Detroit: Okker 5-7,5-7,6-2,6-2,6-2.
New York: Ashe 3-6,6-3,6-3,6-4.
Inglewood: Taylor 6-3,7-5,6-2.
New York:Okker 6-1,6-4,6-3.
New York: Ralston 3-6,6-1,6-4,6-3.
New Haven: Emerson 6-3,5-7,6-3,3-6,6-3.

To decide the semifinal line-up outside the Laver-matches, the following matches were played:
Ralston bt. Roche. Ralston bt. Ashe. Ashe bt. Rosewall, Okker bt- Newcombe. Emerson bt. Taylor.

Semifinals, New York:
Laver-Ralston 6-3,6-4,7-5.
Okker-Emerson 6-4,2-6,4.6,6-3,6-4.

Final, New York:
Laver-Okker 7-5,6-2,6-1.

Does the Tennis Champions Classic 1971 get the gong for being the toughest tournament of all time.

In my view it is worth at least 2 slams (possibly more since every round was against great players).

 

[NEW_BORN]

It's impressive but honestly if you get 4-5 days rest in between, you take the fatigue factor out of the equation which makes this a little less impressive.

 

[Russeljones]

The rest is the deciding factor then.

Legendary lineup; slightly daft format.

 

[Phoenix1983]

I'm not sure if it's the single greatest tournament win of all time. As others have said, the format is a bit bizarre.

What it does prove though is that Laver was probably still the best player in the world in the early 1970s; he just dedicated himself to the big money events, rather than the slams.

 

[pc1]

I'm not sure if it's the single greatest tournament win of all time. As others have said, the format is a bit bizarre.

What it does prove though is that Laver was probably still the best player in the world in the early 1970s; he just dedicated himself to the big money events, rather than the slams.

It was a different time. The top tennis pros and amateurs of the late 1960s weren't rich. They need money to put food on the table. Open Tennis allowed all of them (most of the top amateurs turned pro) to make huge sums of money so many focused on big money events. Laver won $160,000 alone if I recall correctly in that tournament! Tournaments like the 1969 Howard Hughes drew a big field because of the price money. In that way big money tournaments were valued higher than majors. Another example of this was in the 1970s when World Team Tennis players preferred the money of WTT knowing they wouldn't be able to play tournaments like the French Open. Bjorn Borg couldn't play the 1977 French because he played WTT.

Yes I agree that Laver was clearly the best player in 1971 and arguably could be called number one. The tennis experts giving their opinions on who was number one didn't understand the changing atmosphere.

 

[Xavier G]

Looks like it would have been a big ask to win that tournament. There were some different tennis formats back in the 70's alright with TV challenge matches, widespread exhibtions, WTT etc. Tough level of competition Laver beat over five sets every match, even if there was more rest in between matches than in a GS. Must have been one of his best ever wins, no doubt.

 

[uliks]

Wimbledon 1993 was GOAT tournament, IMO. USO 1992 is up there, also...

 

[noobforehand20]

4-5 days apart for each match surely takes out the physical factor in an era that was not as tough on the body as it is today, but still facing a top player is facing a top player especially in BO5, impressive nonetheless and would be interesting to have something like that on the present, like a month long world tour finals with BO1 matches every two days contemplating a match in each of the 3 surfaces, so each player would play every player on every surface

 

[buscemi]

Wimbledon 1993 was GOAT tournament, IMO. USO 1992 is up there, also...

Wimbledon 1993 is definitely up there, but it might be trumped by Wimbledon 1992. Quarterfinalists were:

-McEnroe (1981, 1983, 1984 champion)
-Becker (1985, 1986, 1989 champion)
-Agassi (1992 champion)
-Sampras (1993-1995 and 1997-2000 champion)
-Stich (1991 champion)
-Ivanišević (2001 champion)
-Edberg (1988 and 1990 champion)
-Forget (also a QF in 1991 and 1994; DNP in 1993)​

Pat Cash, the 1987 champion, lost to McEnroe in 5 sets in the 2nd round.

 

[r2473]

US Open, 2016

 

[Sartorius]

Cincinnati, every year.

 

[DreddyTennis45]

Us Open 2014

 

[Phoenix1983]

The 1969 US Open, where Laver completed his CYGS, had an incredibly strong quarter-final line up;

- Rod Laver
- Roy Emerson
- Arthur Ashe
- Ken Rosewall
- Butch Buchholz
- Tony Roche
- Fred Stolle
- John Newcombe

Also losing in the R16 were Manuel Santana, Ilie Nastase, Andres Gimeno and Pancho Gonzales.

 

[thrust]

WCT Championship 72. Top 8 players playing 3 of 5 whole tournament, ending with an all time great final match with two of the greatest all time great players.

 

[buscemi]

WCT Championship 72. Top 8 players playing 3 of 5 whole tournament, ending with an all time great final match with two of the greatest all time great players.

The problem I have with this tournament is that it didn't have the two best players in 1972: Nastase and Stan Smith.

 

[buscemi]

Wimbledon 1993 was GOAT tournament, IMO. USO 1992 is up there, also...

1992 U.S. Open is strong. QF:

#1 Courier
#2 Edberg
#3 Sampras
#4 Chang
#8 Agassi
#9 Lendl
#12 Ferreira
Volkov​

You also had some really solid R16 matches:

Courier beat #16 McEnroe
Sampras beat #13 Forget in 5 sets
Chang beat #14 Washington in 5 sets
Lendl beat #7 Becker in 5 sets
Edberg beat #15 Krajicek in 5 sets​

 

[Deleted member 716271]

brad gilbert winning cincinatti in 1989. took out becker. one of the strongest eras of all time at the real slam and gilbert wins it. Gilbert is GOAT.

 

[buscemi]

brad gilbert winning cincinatti in 1989. took out becker. one of the strongest eras of all time at the real slam and gilbert wins it. Gilbert is GOAT.

Pretty great run by Gilbert there, beating Sampras/Chang/Becker/Edberg to win the title, but it would be tough to rank it as the greatest tournament of all time when the world #1 -- Lendl -- didn't play it.

 

[BobbyOne]

Hello,

Was there any one single tournament that was tougher to win than the Tennis Champions Classic of 1971. 13 Rounds, best of 5 every round. But note this - instead of relatively easy opponents the first 4 rounds (as is the case in many slams today), you play all time greats every round. Imagine facing Ken Rosewall first round, Newcombe second round, Roche third round, Emerson 4th round, Ashe 5th Round, Okker 6th round and on and on. Each round was on average 4 to 5 days apart.

Laver's opponents:

New York: Rosewall 6-3,6-4,7-5.
Rochester: Newcombe 6-4,6-2,4-6,5-7,6-4.
Boston: Roche 7-5,4-6,3-6,7-5,6-1.
Philadelphia: Emerson, 6-2,6-3,7-5.
New York: Ashe 7-5,6-4,7-5.
Detroit: Okker 5-7,5-7,6-2,6-2,6-2.
New York: Ashe 3-6,6-3,6-3,6-4.
Inglewood: Taylor 6-3,7-5,6-2.
New York:Okker 6-1,6-4,6-3.
New York: Ralston 3-6,6-1,6-4,6-3.
New Haven: Emerson 6-3,5-7,6-3,3-6,6-3.

To decide the semifinal line-up outside the Laver-matches, the following matches were played:
Ralston bt. Roche. Ralston bt. Ashe. Ashe bt. Rosewall, Okker bt- Newcombe. Emerson bt. Taylor.

Semifinals, New York:
Laver-Ralston 6-3,6-4,7-5.
Okker-Emerson 6-4,2-6,4.6,6-3,6-4.

Final, New York:
Laver-Okker 7-5,6-2,6-1.

Does the Tennis Champions Classic 1971 get the gong for being the toughest tournament of all time.

In my view it is worth at least 2 slams (possibly more since every round was against great players).

timnz, No it was not the greatest. Was it a regulary tournament at all? There were long gaps between the matches.

The TCC did not have the huge reputation a Grand Slam tournament or the Dallas WCT championships had.

I rate it as one major but not more than that.

The greatest tournament could be the first open Wimbledon where for the first time the best pros and the best amateurs came together.

 

[BobbyOne]

It's impressive but honestly if you get 4-5 days rest in between, you take the fatigue factor out of the equation which makes this a little less impressive.

NEW_BORN, I agree.

 

[Tennisanity]

Probably 1984 USO Lendl-Cash, Chris-Martina, Mac-Connors.

 

[tennisenthusiast]

AUS OPEN 2017

 

[BobbyOne]

WCT Championship 72. Top 8 players playing 3 of 5 whole tournament, ending with an all time great final match with two of the greatest all time great players.

thrust, Good choice. Bud Collins in 1988 ranked that final as the best match of open era. I rate Laver and Rosewall as the two GOATs...

 

[BobbyOne]

The problem I have with this tournament is that it didn't have the two best players in 1972: Nastase and Stan Smith.

buscemi, It's not clear at all that Smith and Nastase were the two best players in May, 1972, when the Dallas event was played. Both players got their leading 1972 ranking only after May by winning Wimbledon and US Open respectively.

I doubt that either Smith or Nastase could have played better than Laver and Rosewall did at Dallas.

 

[Gizo]

I really liked the 1980 Masters field (played in January 1981):

Group A: John McEnroe, Bjorn Borg, Gene Mayer, Jose-Luis Clerc
Group B: Ivan Lendl, Jimmy Connors, Harold Solomon, Guillermo Vilas

What a line-up of players, and also what a diverse range of playing styles, with serve-volleyers, all-courters, attacking/power baseliners, defensive grinders, counter-punchers, plus Mayer's double handed forehand, all in one draw.

 

[buscemi]

buscemi, It's not clear at all that Smith and Nastase were the two best players in May, 1972, when the Dallas event was played. Both players got their leading 1972 ranking only after May by winning Wimbledon and US Open respectively.

I doubt that either Smith or Nastase could have played better than Laver and Rosewall did at Dallas.

I don't know exactly who would have been #1 in May 1972, but (1) Smith made the 1971 Wimbledon final, won the 1971 U.S. Open, and made the 1971 WTF final; and (2) Nastase made the 1971 French Open final and won that 1971 WTF final against Smith. They were clearly two of the top players in the game and absent from the 1972 WCT event, as were Kodes (1971 French Open champion) and Gimeno (1972 French Open champion).

 

[Shaolin]

1987 Stratton Mountain

 

[BobbyOne]

I don't know exactly who would have been #1 in May 1972, but (1) Smith made the 1971 Wimbledon final, won the 1971 U.S. Open, and made the 1971 WTF final; and (2) Nastase made the 1971 French Open final and won that 1971 WTF final against Smith. They were clearly two of the top players in the game and absent from the 1972 WCT event, as were Kodes (1971 French Open champion) and Gimeno (1972 French Open champion).

buscemi, Smith won the 1971 US Open in the absence of Laver and Rosewall, also the 1971 Masters. Nastase made the 1971 French Open final in the absence of Laver and Rosewall and won the 1971 Masters in the absence of Laver and Rosewall. Kodes won the 1971 French Open in the absence of Laver and Rosewall. Gimeno was over the hill in 1972 and won the 1972 French Open in the absence of Laver and Rosewall.

Rosewall was the best player in the world (regarding big events) in the 1970 to early 1972 period when he won 5 majors and was runner-up once and reached the 1971 Wimbledon SF.

 

[buscemi]

buscemi, Smith won the 1971 US Open in the absence of Laver and Rosewall, also the 1971 Masters. Nastase made the 1971 French Open final in the absence of Laver and Rosewall and won the 1971 Masters in the absence of Laver and Rosewall. Kodes won the 1971 French Open in the absence of Laver and Rosewall. Gimeno was over the hill in 1972 and won the 1972 French Open in the absence of Laver and Rosewall.

Rosewall was the best player in the world (regarding big events) in the 1970 to early 1972 period when he won 5 majors and was runner-up once and reached the 1971 Wimbledon SF.

Again, I don't have a huge problem if you have Rosewall ahead of Smith and/or Nastase. My point is just that, at worst, two of the top 4 players in the world weren't present for the 1972 WCT final. Given that, I have a tough time considering it the greatest tournament of all time.

 

[bigserving]

I will go with any US Open.