Is Ken Rosewall resentful of the GOAT?

#8
"If anyone deserves to beat the record, Roger does.Like many people I'm a fan. "

“I’d like to be compared to Roger,” Rosewall said with a laugh.

“I’m like millions of others. I admire Roger so much,” Rosewall told Reuters
Yeah, he clearly likes Fedr, probably he cheers for him, but doesn't mention that he is the Goat.
 

BeatlesFan

Talk Tennis Guru
#19
“I’m like millions of others. I admire Roger so much, but I have to admit Djokovic is the greatest player ever” Rosewall told Reuters
When this quote is Googled nothing comes up. And since it contradicts everything Rosewall feels about the GOAT race, it's completely invented. It never fails to amaze that people are stupid enough to invent quotes that comfort them, when any simpleton can prove the quote was invented.
 

alexio88

Professional
#23
When this quote is Googled nothing comes up. And since it contradicts everything Rosewall feels about the GOAT race, it's completely invented. It never fails to amaze that people are stupid enough to invent quotes that comfort them, when any simpleton can prove the quote was invented.
of course it was invented, i didn't expect someone would take it seriously , but:)
 
#24
Whose name gets listed first when there is a tie ? The guy who got there first.

With a little nuance we can agree that a guy setting a target is better than a guy working for that target.
Why would the first man to do it be better than the second man to do it?

Nothing changes. The GOAT remains the GOAT.
They would be co-GOATs, I think, in the hypothetical escenario of both being in 20.
 
#25
not really, it's not his fault he was born later than another candidate, in tennis another factors will be considered to decide what needs to
Whose name gets listed first when there is a tie ? The guy who got there first.

With a little nuance we can agree that a guy setting a target is better than a guy working for that target.
Why would the first man to do it be better than the second man to do it?


They would be co-GOATs, I think, in the hypothetical escenario of both being in 20.
You are all getting it slightly wrong.

There will always come along new record holders every other generation or so, this is not so interesting. These records are after all largely the products of the strides made by the pioneering athletes who came before them. Today, man runs 400 metres in 43.03 seconds; tomorrow someone else will do it in less than 43 seconds. And so on. Does that mean that we get a new goat in all these sports every other week, every time someone barely squeezes a record past the sometimes thunderous strides made by former greats? No. The impressive part is not to match or barely surpass a bar that someone has set for you. The most important feats are to drastically raise the bar for your sport, which then allows and forces those who come after you to aim for a different stratosphere altogether. To make the unimaginable imaginable.

Federer raised the open era record from 14 majors all the way to 20. An increase of six whopping majors. Djokovic can show that he has the same ability as Federer to lift the bar for tennis into uncharted territory. 26 majors would give him an excellent bid in the goat debate.

It's a tough ask, but he is young and has many many prime years ahead of him. I think he can do it.
 
#26
Why would the first man to do it be better than the second man to do it?
The first to reach works in a vacuum . Second has a set target .

. The first person needs to not just plan his tournaments , schedules that gives him optimal results but also needs to guess what could be a reasonable target for the future players . The second player has everything set in stone and just need to plan his journey towards the same . If Djokovic knows 20 is the target he need not play when he is slightly off form or injured . Fed did not have that luxury since Wimb 09
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
#27
How embarrassing has it been for the experts as well as everyone here when people actually agreed with this? We must have been quite desperate to be a part of tennis history to elevate Pete to GOAT status; esp. without even a FO Final on his resume! He not only was demoted from GOAT-dom within 10 years of the designation, he's begun to fall back to the pack; of course elevating Laver with his record 2 CYGS! :rolleyes::p:)
 
#28
How embarrassing has it been for the experts as well as everyone here when people actually agreed with this? We must have been quite desperate to be a part of tennis history to elevate Pete to GOAT status; esp. without even a FO Final on his resume! He not only was demoted from GOAT-dom within 10 years of the designation, he's begun to fall back to the pack; of course elevating Laver with his record 2 CYGS! :rolleyes::p:)
Pete is easily second in the goat debate at worst.

Credible sources have been known to make compelling arguments suggesting that he might actually still be goat.
 

Imperator

Professional
#29
If both end up with 20 GS, I think we’ll have to look at other records to decide the GOAT :

- weeks at number 1
- year end number 1
- number of WTF titles
- number of M1000
- number of Olympic Gold Medals

I think if Djokovic happens to reach Federer’s record, he will probably become the GOAT.
 

King No1e

Hall of Fame
#30
Ken Rosewall is the GOAT. 23 Majors (15 Pro Slams + 8 Grand Slams).

You think there is someone else? Prove it.
Rod Laver. 19 Majors, won 3 calendar Slams, 1 on regular tour, 1 on pro tour, 1 in open era. 200 total career titles to Rosewall''s 133
-Laver
-Federer
-Rosewall
-Djokovic
-Nadal
-The rest (sampras, connors, borg, etc)

But of course we have differing criteria to determine GOAT. You put Slam count above all else, I rate sustained dominance and all-court mastery more highly.
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
#32
Pete is easily second in the goat debate at worst.

Credible sources have been known to make compelling arguments suggesting that he might actually still be goat.
SO you've totally dismissed 2 players (Rafa/Nole) that own Federer now H2H, but Pete with less majors supplants them as #2 all time? :sneaky: :unsure: :cautious: :(
 
#33
SO you've totally dismissed 2 players (Rafa/Nole) that own Federer now H2H, but Pete with less majors supplants them as #2 all time? :sneaky::unsure::cautious::(
You cannot make direct like-to-like comparisons between different eras as the conditions under which they operate are different. You can only really see who is the best of a particular era.

Pete was the best of his era, and clearly lifted the bar of the sport to another level.

Nadal and Djokovic are currently fighting for the runners-up trophy in this era, at least for now. So it's hard to see any reasonable argument to mention them in the same breath as PETE.
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
#34
And suddenly the thread turns into yet another Fed v Djoko GOAT debate
Mainly due to people not knowing or caring about a player they never saw in action! I only caught Rosewall at the end when it was embarrassing watching him flounder at '74 Wimbledon and USO Finals to Connors in straight sets! He really hung on too long; esp. with the coming technology in rackets! He seemed to hold on and save his reputation by beating 2 of his best rivals most at the time; Laver and Nastase! He had their number when it counted thru '77! :unsure: :rolleyes: ;)
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
#41
If you are the best in your era , you get to be the GOAT .. Hence Laver , Borg , Pete and Fed would always be in the conversation
I understand how you're thinking, but historians aren't going to see it that way! You'd need to go back and give GOAT-dom to the likes of Tilden, Budge, & Kramer who were the best in their respective eras! That's a lot of GOATS! Basketball and other sports would need to do the same rewriting commentary for all time! :rolleyes: :unsure: :cautious: :confused:
 
#42
I understand how you're thinking, but historians aren't going to see it that way! You'd need to go back and give GOAT-dom to the likes of Tilden, Budge, & Kramer who were the best in their respective eras! That's a lot of GOATS! Basketball and other sports would need to do the same rewriting commentary for all time! :rolleyes: :unsure: :cautious: :confused:
We cannot compare team sport and individual sport

The players I mentioned are just open era . Sports does improve over time but there is not much Borg cannot do that Nadal or Djokovic does
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
#43
We cannot compare team sport and individual sport

The players I mentioned are just open era . Sports does improve over time but there is not much Borg cannot do that Nadal or Djokovic does
I've been arguing the numbers online for almost 2 decades! Numbers are my life and I excelled in math and statistics in school! I saw very early on how "numbers" can be manipulated to suit the user! Who was it that coined the phrase, "there are lies, damned lies, and then there's statistics?" ITA about ERA Goats; giving due reverence to Laver, Borg, Sampras, then Federer in short order! The problem is GOAT-dom has OTOH dramatically shorten cycles! Laver regarded the best until Sampras! That was a fairly long reign of 30 years maybe! Borg & Sampras took over 10 years later respectively! Federer smashed all the numbers in less than 10 years, but Rafa and Nole are on his arse just waiting for him to retire with equal chances to overtake him within 2 or 3 years of him leaving the game! That's just THE #'S IMO just OTOH! :unsure::cautious::rolleyes::)
 
#46
Ken Rosewall is the GOAT. 23 Majors (15 Pro Slams + 8 Grand Slams).

You think there is someone else? Prove it.
You have to examine the strength of those fields.....You can't just assume pro slam = pro slam = pro slam = pro slam = pro slam............


In those days the fields varied wildly in strength from one day to the next.
 
#50
I love that whenever some Nadal or Djokovic fans talk about the slam record they say things like "21 versus 20 ends the debate." Because one slam difference is so massive that people shouldn't even talk about Fed being GOAT but a 3 or 5 slam difference in Roger's favour and he's "maybe the GOAT for now but it's arguable."

You're either bonafide morons with single digit IQs, or you're just unbelievably sad people being so negatively predisposed to someone you don't know. If it's the latter you genuinely have my sympathy, clearly things could be going better in your life and I hope they do.
 
Top