Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by StanTheMan, Jul 3, 2016.
Fed paid tribute to Rosewall today right after the match at 2:20:
A couple of years ago Ken was receiving an award in Italy, when he had a mild stroke. At that time the stroke was blamed on the long trip from Australia to Italy in a short period of time. Glad to hear Ken is at Wimbledon this year, they always show Laver on ESPN, especially when McEnroe is announcing.
Very nice Roger! Thanks for posting the video.
70sHollywood, I also had thought that Rosewall would not travel to England anymore. Good to know he still does.
You err totally: I yet can justify my "hype" for Rosewall as I have done so often since exactly five years. You must have overlooked all my hundreds serious arguments that prove that Muscles is a GOAT candidate. He has a resume second to NONE! Please tell us the "facts" which prove the contrary! Thanks.
"Lots of fellow Aussies" is a weak argument because Australia has produced dozens of great champions and Rosewall has beaten them very often, from Crawford to Newcombe, from Sedgman to Roche...
Don't blame Australia that it was by far the strongest tennis nation from 1950 to 1975!
I agree regarding Dan's claims about Hoad.
Dan Lobb, There never was a long list of 4-man tournaments.
Dan Lobb, 1950 Wimbledon for Pancho is very strange. If you give Rosewall 1963, why not 1962 when Laver was weaker than in 1963?
I have read that Rosewall and Margret Court had serious allergy problems which affected their play that time of year at Wimbledon. Court did win three Wimbledon's but she was not banned for 11 years. I, and most other experts are pretty sure that Ken and Pancho would have won a few Wimbledon's had they been able to play compete there, in their peak years.
BeatlesFan, Thanks for providing this video.
I would give Gonzales the Wimbledon singles titles in 1950, 1952, 1954, 1955, and Rosewall the Wimbledon singles titles in 1963 and 1965.
I would pencil in other great players for the other years.
thrust, Yes, Rosewall was handicapped at the 1969 Wimbledon. But I don't think there was a problem in most other years. Otherwise Rosewall would not have won so many matches against top players from Seixas to Smith including several five-set matches.
I would "give" Rosewall four Wimbledons and Gonzalez even 5 to 7.
You really should quit regurgitating every single real and perceived slight from your past in this forum. It's tiresome as hell to just about everyone not directly involved in your melodrama.
And in case you haven't noticed Limpin has no interest whatsoever in interacting with you. It's well past time for you to accept that. Nobody can be liked by everyone. That's a simple fact of life.
Here, something that should be a better use of your time:
Just got the CD this week and while not convinced by all of it (especially the D. 935 set which suffers from occasional reticence) still think it's the best Schubert Impromptus since Perahia's (though it's a close call between this and Pires' or Lupu's among modern versions). Give it a shot. I'm checking out Endres' other Schubert recordings as we speak.
I will include a comprehensive "open" tennis list for Wimbledon champs...a work in progress.
I wouldn't characterize it as giving titles to anyone. But, on an open tour, assuming no hiatuses, in my view, Gonzalez would be favored to win Wimbledon from about 1950 through 61.
NonP, I don't listen to a man (or woman) who is not able to recognize Beethoven's Jazz variation in his opus 111 even when he/she has played it several times!
Thanks for your insulting words. Thus you almost reach Limpinhitter's level...
I'm optimistic and I use to have the hope that even bad characters like Limpin are able to improve and to apologize for their lies one day. That's why I remind him/her of his/her worst lie and ask him/her to apologize.
Wrong: From 1947 till 1973 (Pancho's playing years).
I think that in an exercise of this sort, you have to look at what actually happened in the years in question, then extrapolate to a mythical open Wimbledon.
Thus, Gonzales would not get every year in that era.
Hard to say. Clearly Gonzalez would be at worst one of the favorites to win and I believe Jack Kramer said if you are the favorite and I would guess it would hold true if you are one of the top favorite that Wimbledon is the easiest major to win. It's quite possible that Gonzalez would be top seed from 1950 to 1961 although I do think Kramer may have been top seed for a few years in the early 1950s.
Gonzales and Rosewall, would, from what I see in actuality, underperform at Wimbledon, so I would not give them as many Wimbledon titles as most commentators.
Gonzales appeared to lose interest in Europe after that 1956 Wembley final against Sedgman, and Rosewall played below form in four of the five Wimbledon finals he reached, so I give them a limited success there.
I will provide a comprehensive list of Wimbledon champions in a mythical open world in my thread, "Tennis in the Second Golden Age of Sports".
I'm not sure if you could say that because Gonzalez was a little young when he played Wimbledon the first time and too old later. You could say the same about Rosewall. In their primes I think they'd play at a top level. Whether it would have won the tournament is debatable but I think they would have been okay.
They both seemed to be more "up " for Forest Hills.
Gonzales played well at age 21, when he defended at Forest Hills successfully, but played off form at Wimbledon. After 1967, Gonzales looked better at Forest Hills. I think that his showing at the 1969 Wimbledon is somewhat overrated.
Rosewall played some good matches at Wimbledon, he was a mature 21 when runnerup in 1956, and still at prime in 1967, played well below form at 1968 and 1969 Wimbledon, much better at Forest Hills in 1970 than at Wimbledon.
Dan Lobb, Mature at 21? Maybe for driving a car but not at highest level in tennis! Rosewall declined between 1966 and 1967.
He did not play much better at FH than at Wimbledon. I have posted the huge difference in the schedules but obviously you have not read it as I'm maybe on your ignore list.
This guy's Backhand is BEST and GOAT of all time in Everything .........
Except at Wimbledon, right?
I never associated Beethoven with jazz variations before.
Well facts are facts
Dan Lobb, WHY?
BTURNER, Please listen to Beethoven's piano sonata opus 111 (his last), second movement, third variation: Pure Jazz! Astounding as the sonata was composed already in 1822.
Allergies, due to heavy foliage, certain years. Most players have a weak slam. Two finals by 22, another 2 between 33-39, is not that bad.
He just can't help it, and he knows it drives us crazy-LOL!
thrust, I would even say, very good balance.
thrust, What drives me crazy is Dan's stubborness. As so many others in this forum he underrates Rosewall.
Separate names with a comma.