Laver-Rosewall stats that will blow your mind!(Srsly!)

[Gaelle Caplier]

I am pretty sure that 99% of us wouldn't have ever seen players as old as Laver play in their times.
But still,every person over here says how Laver is the GOAT or top 3 all-time.Now,let me tell you few things:
STATS:
1. Laver won 6 GS as an Amateur,5 in Open Era which totals to 11.Plus,he has 9 GS titles in Professional Era.TOTAL=20

2. Rosewall won 4 as an Amateur,4 in Open Era which totals to 8.Plus,he has 15 in Professional Era.TOTAL=23

3. Laver leads the H2H 80-64.

OBSERVATIONS:
1. Rosewall turned pro when he was 22 while Laver turned pro when he was 24

2. Laver played professional career for 5 years due to which he couldn't add to his 11 GS titles(Slams in Pro Career aren't counted in the stats we see now),while Rosewall
played Pro Career for 11 years!!

3. The main reason Laver is considered as GOAT is the fact that he has 2 CYGS.But,but,but hang on!In the year 1962,when Laver won his 1st CYGS,Rosewall was competing in Pro Career and guess what,Rosewall won all the GS titles he played in pro career from 1960 to 1963!(winning 9 GS titles in a row!!).There was no AO in Pro Career.So,isn't Rosewall's 3 GS titles in 1963 equivalent to CYGS??

4. Now,lets come to the H2H.They played their 1st match in 1963 and the last in 1976.
Rosewall was 28 years old in 1963 already and declining whereas Laver was 24 years old.

5.NOW,THE STAT THAT WILL BLOW YOUR MIND:
In 1962,Laver completed CYGS as an amateur and Rosewall won 2/2 majors he played in.The very next year in 1963,Rosewall defeated Laver a whopping 34 times!! (and lost 12 times).This moreover proves that had Rosewall not been competing in Pro Career in 1962,he would have won CYGS instead of Laver.

6. Rosewall's most successful surface was Clay where he won 7 consecutive titles as a pro(total-8 as pro,1 as amateur and 1 in open era) i.e total 10 titles at French Open(even more than Rafa)

7. They ONLY played 8 out of 144 matches on Rosewall's favourite clay(hence H2H supporting Laver even more!)

So,don't you think history has been unfair to Rosewall??He still has more total GS(23) compared to Laver(20)

 

[Chadillac]

Rosewall won grand slams 17 years apart, a true sign of talent. 1953 aus open and 1970 us open is impressive but never winning wimbledon hurts. Especially in that era.

 

[Meles]

Rosewall won grand slams 17 years apart, a true sign of talent. 1953 aus open and 1970 us open is impressive but never winning wimbledon hurts. Especially in that era.

LOL. He would have won plenty of Wimbys in an Open era.

 

[Meles]

I am pretty sure that 99% of us wouldn't have ever seen players as old as Laver play in their times.
But still,every person over here says how Laver is the GOAT or top 3 all-time.Now,let me tell you few things:
STATS:
1.Laver won 6 GS as an Amateur,5 in Open Era which totals to 11.Plus,he has 9 GS titles in Professional Era.TOTAL=20
2.Rosewall won 4 as an Amateur,4 in Open Era which totals to 8.Plus,he has 15 in Professional Era.
TOTAL=23
3.Laver leads the H2H 80-64.

OBSERVATIONS:
1.Rosewall turned pro when he was 22 while Laver turned pro when he was 24
2.Laver played professional career for 5 years due to which he couldn't add to his 11 GS titles(Slams in Pro Career aren't counted in the stats we see now),while Rosewall played Pro Career for 11 years!!
3.The main reason Laver is considered as GOAT is the fact that he has 2 CYGS.But,but,but hang on!In the year 1962,when Laver won his 1st CYGS,Rosewall was competing in Pro Career and guess what,Rosewall won all the GS titles he played in pro career from 1960 to 1964!(winning 9 GS titles in a row!!).There was no AO in Pro Career.So,isn't Rosewall's 3 GS titles in 1963 equivalent to CYGS??
4.Now,lets come to the H2H.They played their 1st match in 1963 and the last in 1976.
Rosewall was 28 years old in 1963 already and declining whereas Laver was 24 years old.
5.NOW,THE STAT THAT WILL BLOW YOUR MIND:
In 1962,Laver completed CYGS as an amateur and Rosewall won 2/2 majors he played in.
The very next year in 1963,Rosewall defeated Laver a whopping 34 times!!(and lost 12 times)
This moreover proves that had Rosewall not been competing in Pro Career in 1962,he would have won CYGS instead of Laver.
6.Rosewall's most successful surface was Clay where he won 7 consecutive titles as a pro(total-8 as pro,1 as amateur and 1 in open era) i.e total 10 titles at French Open(even more than Rafa)
7.They ONLY played 8 out of 144 matches on Rosewall's favourite clay(hence H2H supporting Laver even more!)

So,don't you think history has been unfair to Rosewall??He still has more total GS(23) compared to Laver(20)

Muscles; the master of the five set format.

 

[Chadillac]

I still feel lavers game would translate better today, rosewall tempted people to hit up the line on the pass with his cross court approaches, wouldnt work today.

55sec to 1:03 explains it. Laver hits a mid cross court slice return and resets, rosewall hits a decent crosscourt approach but left the line open.

 

[Russeljones]

I am pretty sure that 99% of us wouldn't have ever seen players as old as Laver play in their times.
But still,every person over here says how Laver is the GOAT or top 3 all-time.Now,let me tell you few things:
STATS:
1.Laver won 6 GS as an Amateur,5 in Open Era which totals to 11.Plus,he has 9 GS titles in Professional Era.TOTAL=20
2.Rosewall won 4 as an Amateur,4 in Open Era which totals to 8.Plus,he has 15 in Professional Era.
TOTAL=23
3.Laver leads the H2H 80-64.

OBSERVATIONS:
1.Rosewall turned pro when he was 22 while Laver turned pro when he was 24
2.Laver played professional career for 5 years due to which he couldn't add to his 11 GS titles(Slams in Pro Career aren't counted in the stats we see now),while Rosewall played Pro Career for 11 years!!
3.The main reason Laver is considered as GOAT is the fact that he has 2 CYGS.But,but,but hang on!In the year 1962,when Laver won his 1st CYGS,Rosewall was competing in Pro Career and guess what,Rosewall won all the GS titles he played in pro career from 1960 to 1964!(winning 9 GS titles in a row!!).There was no AO in Pro Career.So,isn't Rosewall's 3 GS titles in 1963 equivalent to CYGS??
4.Now,lets come to the H2H.They played their 1st match in 1963 and the last in 1976.
Rosewall was 28 years old in 1963 already and declining whereas Laver was 24 years old.
5.NOW,THE STAT THAT WILL BLOW YOUR MIND:
In 1962,Laver completed CYGS as an amateur and Rosewall won 2/2 majors he played in.
The very next year in 1963,Rosewall defeated Laver a whopping 34 times!!(and lost 12 times)
This moreover proves that had Rosewall not been competing in Pro Career in 1962,he would have won CYGS instead of Laver.
6.Rosewall's most successful surface was Clay where he won 7 consecutive titles as a pro(total-8 as pro,1 as amateur and 1 in open era) i.e total 10 titles at French Open(even more than Rafa)
7.They ONLY played 8 out of 144 matches on Rosewall's favourite clay(hence H2H supporting Laver even more!)

So,don't you think history has been unfair to Rosewall??He still has more total GS(23) compared to Laver(20)

I think most Djokovic fans just learned about the existence of a player named Rosewall.

 

[Sartorius]

I still feel lavers game would translate better today, rosewall tempted people to hit up the line on the pass with his cross court approaches, wouldnt work today.

55sec to 1:03 explains it. Laver hits a mid cross court slice return and resets, rosewall hits a decent crosscourt approach but left the line open.

A whole lot of amazing points. Look at the finesse. Amount of net play in that match alone probably equals to what you get from an entire season now.

Also 4:22.

 

[Flash O'Groove]

Rosewall won grand slams 17 years apart, a true sign of talent. 1953 aus open and 1970 us open is impressive but never winning wimbledon hurts. Especially in that era.

How many Wimbledon would have Sampras or Federer won if they had been banned to play during all their prime?

 

[Phoenix1983]

How many Wimbledon would have Sampras or Federer won if they had been banned to play during all their prime?

Federer won Wimbledon when well past his best, in 2012.

Rosewall reached five Wimbledon finals, in the amateur, pro and Open eras, and lost them all - to five different opponents.

Such a man can never be GOAT.

 

[kramer woodie]

Lucky Me!!! I got to see Laver, Rosewall, Segura, Gonzales and others play in their prime plus 40 year old Laver and Gonzales still winning against
25 year old players. Might also say on some occasions they made their wins look easy. Wish todays top players could last as long. Glad it's now
grass court time...get to see some serve and volley!!!

Aloha

 

[Russeljones]

Lucky Me!!! I got to see Laver, Rosewall, Segura, Gonzales and others play in their prime plus 40 year old Laver and Gonzales still winning against
25 year old players. Might also say on some occasions they made their wins look easy. Wish todays top players could last as long. Glad it's now
grass court time...get to see some serve and volley!!!

Aloha

I am envious. There was no AIDS back then. Good on you with the tennis part, of course.

 

[OhYes]

I think most Djokovic fans just learned about the existence of a player named Rosewall.

I think most of fans can thank Djokovic's 4 in a row for revoking Laver and Rosewall stories.

Oh, and one more thing:
Zivojinovic,
Prpic,
Ivanisevic,
Seles,
Zimonjic,
Dokic,
Tipsarevic,
Jankovic,
Djokovic,
Troicki,
Ivanovic

So keep your voice down "tennis expert". Things are not always like they appear in your pressed mind.

 

[Russeljones]

I think most of fans can thank Djokovic's 4 in a row for revoking Laver and Rosewall stories.

Oh, and one more thing:
Zivojinovic,
Prpic,
Ivanisevic,
Seles,
Zimonjic,
Dokic,
Tipsarevic,
Jankovic,
Djokovic,
Troicki,
Ivanovic

So keep your voice down "tennis expert". Things are not always like they appear in your pressed mind.

Something terribly wrong with your list.

 

[OhYes]

Something terribly wrong with your list.

Nothing is wrong with it, they were players that we watched. But I'll give it to you - we didn't watch Rosewall for sure.

 

[tennis_pro]

I still feel lavers game would translate better today, rosewall tempted people to hit up the line on the pass with his cross court approaches, wouldnt work today.

55sec to 1:03 explains it. Laver hits a mid cross court slice return and resets, rosewall hits a decent crosscourt approach but left the line open.

How can anyone say Djokovic has the most complete game of all time after watching this clip? Now THAT'S called variety, Laver and Rosewall could play every single shot.

 

[Russeljones]

Nothing is wrong with it, they were players that we watched. But I'll give it to you - we didn't watch Rosewall for sure.

No, you wouldn't have. Please list some more Serbian and Yugoslavian players, the names of whom prove that your mob knows who Rosewall was.

 

[OhYes]

No, you wouldn't have. Please list some more Serbian and Yugoslavian players, the names of whom prove that your mob knows who Rosewall was.

Those names prove that we watched tennis while you were just a child (who would later grow into very judging and stereotypic man).

 

[Nadalgaenger]

Neither was near 6'O in height.

 

[timnz]

Neither was near 6'O in height.

So? They played and beat many times players who were 6ft and over.

 

[BobbyOne]

I am pretty sure that 99% of us wouldn't have ever seen players as old as Laver play in their times.
But still,every person over here says how Laver is the GOAT or top 3 all-time.Now,let me tell you few things:
STATS:
1.Laver won 6 GS as an Amateur,5 in Open Era which totals to 11.Plus,he has 9 GS titles in Professional Era.TOTAL=20
2.Rosewall won 4 as an Amateur,4 in Open Era which totals to 8.Plus,he has 15 in Professional Era.
TOTAL=23
3.Laver leads the H2H 80-64.

OBSERVATIONS:
1.Rosewall turned pro when he was 22 while Laver turned pro when he was 24
2.Laver played professional career for 5 years due to which he couldn't add to his 11 GS titles(Slams in Pro Career aren't counted in the stats we see now),while Rosewall played Pro Career for 11 years!!
3.The main reason Laver is considered as GOAT is the fact that he has 2 CYGS.But,but,but hang on!In the year 1962,when Laver won his 1st CYGS,Rosewall was competing in Pro Career and guess what,Rosewall won all the GS titles he played in pro career from 1960 to 1964!(winning 9 GS titles in a row!!).There was no AO in Pro Career.So,isn't Rosewall's 3 GS titles in 1963 equivalent to CYGS??
4.Now,lets come to the H2H.They played their 1st match in 1963 and the last in 1976.
Rosewall was 28 years old in 1963 already and declining whereas Laver was 24 years old.
5.NOW,THE STAT THAT WILL BLOW YOUR MIND:
In 1962,Laver completed CYGS as an amateur and Rosewall won 2/2 majors he played in.
The very next year in 1963,Rosewall defeated Laver a whopping 34 times!!(and lost 12 times)
This moreover proves that had Rosewall not been competing in Pro Career in 1962,he would have won CYGS instead of Laver.
6.Rosewall's most successful surface was Clay where he won 7 consecutive titles as a pro(total-8 as pro,1 as amateur and 1 in open era) i.e total 10 titles at French Open(even more than Rafa)
7.They ONLY played 8 out of 144 matches on Rosewall's favourite clay(hence H2H supporting Laver even more!)

So,don't you think history has been unfair to Rosewall??He still has more total GS(23) compared to Laver(20)

Gaelle Caplier, Yes, history has been unfair to Rosewall. Muscles is still under-rated significantly, f.i. by many posters here.

I must correct you: Rosewall won all pro majors he entered from 1960 to 1963 (not 1964), i. e. 9 majors which is record.

Rosewall won only three consecutive Paris titles on clay. From 1963 to 1966 he won on indoor wood. (Salle de Coubertin).

 

[BobbyOne]

Rosewall won grand slams 17 years apart, a true sign of talent. 1953 aus open and 1970 us open is impressive but never winning wimbledon hurts. Especially in that era.

Chadillac, Rosewall won Grand Slam tournaments 19 years apart (1953; 1972 AO). Not winning Wimbledon does not hurt as Rosewall was not allowed to play at Wimbledon from 1957 to 1967 (1967 was not a true Wimbledon) and 1972/1973.

 

[BobbyOne]

LOL. He would have won plenty of Wimbys in an Open era.

Meles, Nice to see you coming back.

I guess Rosewall would have won three to five Wimbledons. Even when being slightly after his peak he was able to beat Gonzalez and Laver at the 1965 US Pro on grass clearly.

 

[BobbyOne]

Muscles; the master of the five set format.

Meles, Yes, Muscles did especially well at majors in best-of-five sets matches. He reached the SFs of GS tournaments 25 times even though he could not participate for 11 years.

 

[BobbyOne]

I think most Djokovic fans just learned about the existence of a player named Rosewall.

Russeljones, Yes, sad enough...

 

[Limpinhitter]

I am pretty sure that 99% of us wouldn't have ever seen players as old as Laver play in their times.
But still,every person over here says how Laver is the GOAT or top 3 all-time.Now,let me tell you few things:
STATS:
1.Laver won 6 GS as an Amateur,5 in Open Era which totals to 11.Plus,he has 9 GS titles in Professional Era.TOTAL=20
2.Rosewall won 4 as an Amateur,4 in Open Era which totals to 8.Plus,he has 15 in Professional Era.
TOTAL=23
3.Laver leads the H2H 80-64.

OBSERVATIONS:
1.Rosewall turned pro when he was 22 while Laver turned pro when he was 24
2.Laver played professional career for 5 years due to which he couldn't add to his 11 GS titles(Slams in Pro Career aren't counted in the stats we see now),while Rosewall played Pro Career for 11 years!!
3.The main reason Laver is considered as GOAT is the fact that he has 2 CYGS.But,but,but hang on!In the year 1962,when Laver won his 1st CYGS,Rosewall was competing in Pro Career and guess what,Rosewall won all the GS titles he played in pro career from 1960 to 1964!(winning 9 GS titles in a row!!).There was no AO in Pro Career.So,isn't Rosewall's 3 GS titles in 1963 equivalent to CYGS??
4.Now,lets come to the H2H.They played their 1st match in 1963 and the last in 1976.
Rosewall was 28 years old in 1963 already and declining whereas Laver was 24 years old.
5.NOW,THE STAT THAT WILL BLOW YOUR MIND:
In 1962,Laver completed CYGS as an amateur and Rosewall won 2/2 majors he played in.
The very next year in 1963,Rosewall defeated Laver a whopping 34 times!!(and lost 12 times)
This moreover proves that had Rosewall not been competing in Pro Career in 1962,he would have won CYGS instead of Laver.
6.Rosewall's most successful surface was Clay where he won 7 consecutive titles as a pro(total-8 as pro,1 as amateur and 1 in open era) i.e total 10 titles at French Open(even more than Rafa)
7.They ONLY played 8 out of 144 matches on Rosewall's favourite clay(hence H2H supporting Laver even more!)

So,don't you think history has been unfair to Rosewall??He still has more total GS(23) compared to Laver(20)

I've seen them both play numerous times. Laver is a GOAT candidate. Rosewall is not.

 

[BobbyOne]

How many Wimbledon would have Sampras or Federer won if they had been banned to play during all their prime?

Flash, Sampras would have won none; Federer would have won one or two.

 

[BobbyOne]

Federer won Wimbledon when well past his best, in 2012.

Rosewall reached five Wimbledon finals, in the amateur, pro and Open eras, and lost them all - to five different opponents.

Such a man can never be GOAT.

Phoenix1983, Federer in 2012 was 30- plus, an age when Rosewall could not participate. Rosewall was very young and was old (partly very old) when reaching these finals (by the way, five fine achievements). He was much better at his peak and most probably would have won several Wimbledons. By the way, Muscles was handicapped by several circumstances at four of his five losses. Such a man can truly be the GOAT.

 

[BobbyOne]

Lucky Me!!! I got to see Laver, Rosewall, Segura, Gonzales and others play in their prime plus 40 year old Laver and Gonzales still winning against
25 year old players. Might also say on some occasions they made their wins look easy. Wish todays top players could last as long. Glad it's now
grass court time...get to see some serve and volley!!!

Aloha

kramer woodie, I envy you but I don't think that 40 years old Laver beat 25 years old players that much. But 43 years old Rosewall beat 23 years old Gerulaitis (then the No.3 in the world). You must be rather old when having watched prime Segura (1950 to about 1957).

 

[BobbyOne]

I've seen them both play numerous times. Laver is a GOAT candidate. Rosewall is not.

Limpin, I have read hundreds of your anti-Rosewall posts. They all have only one purpose: to belittle Rosewall. If you have watched Rosewall and have not been extremely expressed by his game, then there is something wrong at your perception. How, do you think, has Rosewall won more majors than Laver if he does not be a GOAT candidate??

Limpin, When will you apologize for your absurd lie (I would have given 40 open era majors to Rosewall)???? I'm waiting...

 

[Meles]

Meles, Nice to see you coming back.

I guess Rosewall would have won three to five Wimbledons. Even when being slightly after his peak he was able to beat Gonzalez and Laver at the 1965 US Pro on grass clearly.

I'm over in the Pro Match Results section ad nauseum. You should join the Thiem. Muscles upon muscles and glides around on the grass with incredible variety the likes of which have hardly been seen before. If Fed is the Maestro, Thiem is Amadeus.

 

[Meles]

I still feel lavers game would translate better today, rosewall tempted people to hit up the line on the pass with his cross court approaches, wouldnt work today.

55sec to 1:03 explains it. Laver hits a mid cross court slice return and resets, rosewall hits a decent crosscourt approach but left the line open.

What a great video. Mesmerized by Rosewall and his play. The recent development in the modern game that trumps everything else is strings. The new strings make it easier to hit with topspin and if you don't have good topspin shots its very hard to win. This also homogonizes the court play as top spin gets by players on all surfaces about the same from a variety of counteracting factors.

With the dominance of topspin their has been less net play (and the current top 2 players certainly can pass), but things may be changing. These same strings help with spin of all kinds. Power kicks serves seems like more of the same, but slice serves and slice approaches and backhands seem to be coming back into the game. Fedberg (Federer with new racket and tactics courtesy of Edberg) has been a throw back of sorts. Raonic is now a volleybot with McEnroe at the helm for the grass court season. Even hacks like Steve Johnson have dumped their two handers and hit 95% slices in rallies. Thiem is doing it all on grass and even seems to be making a stretched slice forehand work well (something that generally is the beginning of the end in a rally.) Variety is coming back and I think Thiem may turn out to be a real throwback player on some surfaces with a twist, the kick serve and volley on occaision. Tennis may be changing back for the better and Rosewall may suddenly be a touchstone for these changes. Conservatives rejoice; Lavers pioneering strokes are being tempered with more Rosewall wizardry in the modern game.

 

[Gary Duane]

What a great video. Mesmerized by Rosewall and his play. The recent development in the modern game that trumps everything else is strings. The new strings make it easier to hit with topspin and if you don't have good topspin shots its very hard to win. This also homogonizes the court play as top spin gets by players on all surfaces about the same from a variety of counteracting factors.

With the dominance of topspin their has been less net play (and the current top 2 players certainly can pass), but things may be changing. These same strings help with spin of all kinds. Power kicks serves seems like more of the same, but slice serves and slice approaches and backhands seem to be coming back into the game. Fedberg (Federer with new racket and tactics courtesy of Edberg) has been a throw back of sorts. Raonic is now a volleybot with McEnroe at the helm for the grass court season. Even hacks like Steve Johnson have dumped their two handers and hit 95% slices in rallies. Thiem is doing it all on grass and even seems to be making a stretched slice forehand work well (something that generally is the beginning of the end in a rally.) Variety is coming back and I think Thiem may turn out to be a real throwback player on some surfaces with a twist, the kick serve and volley on occaision. Tennis may be changing back for the better and Rosewall may suddenly be a touchstone for these changes. Conservatives rejoice; Lavers pioneering strokes are being tempered with more Rosewall wizardry in the modern game.

You can never quite separate looking backward from looking forward. If you have watched enough tennis then most everything seems to come back around. Think only back as far as Connors/Borg. It looked like the death of the 1HBH. Then along came JMac and for quite some time the 2HBH was a rare thing in the men's game.

These things all go in cycles. It's still a fact that the most dominant players of the past 25 years or so have been Sampras, Agassi, Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. Add up the slams for all those guys, count how many have been won with players using a 1HBH. At the moment 2HBH wins - Agassi + Nadal + Novak, then throw in slams for Murray and DelPo. But that could change quickly if the next couple of dominant players have 1HBHs.

The crazy spin and speed of modern rackets make SnV as in the old days highly unlikely - probably impossible. But the present Murray/Djokovic model won't necessarily rule the day for the rest of tennis history.

 

[kramer woodie]

kramer woodie, I envy you but I don't think that 40 years old Laver beat 25 years old players that much. But 43 years old Rosewall beat 23 years old Gerulaitis (then the No.3 in the world). You must be rather old when having watched prime Segura (1950 to about 1957).

@BobbyOne

A 39 and one half year old Laver beat someone you probably have not heard of Roy Barth age 27 in I believe 1978-1979 and how about Gonzales
age 40-41 verses and defeats Charlie Pasarell age 25 in 5 set being down the first two sets 22-24 and 1-6, comes back the next day and wins 3 sets.

40 year olds beat 25 year olds. And yes I am 70 and can still win a few. Plus, two years ago was asked to help teach (by an ex-ATP Pro) his students
because I know S & V and still play an aggressive style game. Definitely wish my legs were 50 years younger though.

Aloha

 

[kramer woodie]

@BobbyOne

A 39 and one half year old Laver beat someone you probably have not heard of Roy Barth age 27 in I believe 1978-1979 and how about Gonzales
age 40-41 verses and defeats Charlie Pasarell age 25 in 5 set being down the first two sets 22-24 and 1-6, comes back the next day and wins 3 sets.

40 year olds beat 25 year olds. And yes I am 70 and can still win a few. Plus, two years ago was asked to help teach (by an ex-ATP Pro) his students
because I know S & V and still play an aggressive style game. Definitely wish my legs were 50 years younger though.

Aloha

And a short P.S. to the above posters. Yes the we are equal throw the bra away crowd was fun...fun...fun and the Disco one night stand crowd
even more fun!!!!

And to some of you who were not even an itch in your father's jock strap: do you really want me to think you know?

Aloha

 

[hoodjem]

I am pretty sure that 99% of us wouldn't have ever seen players as old as Laver play in their times.
But still,every person over here says how Laver is the GOAT or top 3 all-time.Now,let me tell you few things:
STATS:
1.Laver won 6 GS as an Amateur,5 in Open Era which totals to 11.Plus,he has 9 GS titles in Professional Era.TOTAL=20
2.Rosewall won 4 as an Amateur,4 in Open Era which totals to 8.Plus,he has 15 in Professional Era.
TOTAL=23
3.Laver leads the H2H 80-64.

OBSERVATIONS:
1.Rosewall turned pro when he was 22 while Laver turned pro when he was 24
2.Laver played professional career for 5 years due to which he couldn't add to his 11 GS titles(Slams in Pro Career aren't counted in the stats we see now),while Rosewall played Pro Career for 11 years!!
3.The main reason Laver is considered as GOAT is the fact that he has 2 CYGS.But,but,but hang on!In the year 1962,when Laver won his 1st CYGS,Rosewall was competing in Pro Career and guess what,Rosewall won all the GS titles he played in pro career from 1960 to 1963!(winning 9 GS titles in a row!!).There was no AO in Pro Career.So,isn't Rosewall's 3 GS titles in 1963 equivalent to CYGS??
4.Now,lets come to the H2H.They played their 1st match in 1963 and the last in 1976.
Rosewall was 28 years old in 1963 already and declining whereas Laver was 24 years old.
5.NOW,THE STAT THAT WILL BLOW YOUR MIND:
In 1962,Laver completed CYGS as an amateur and Rosewall won 2/2 majors he played in.
The very next year in 1963,Rosewall defeated Laver a whopping 34 times!!(and lost 12 times)
This moreover proves that had Rosewall not been competing in Pro Career in 1962,he would have won CYGS instead of Laver.
6.Rosewall's most successful surface was Clay where he won 7 consecutive titles as a pro(total-8 as pro,1 as amateur and 1 in open era) i.e total 10 titles at French Open(even more than Rafa)
7.They ONLY played 8 out of 144 matches on Rosewall's favourite clay(hence H2H supporting Laver even more!)

So,don't you think history has been unfair to Rosewall??He still has more total GS(23) compared to Laver(20)

You are speaking to the old farts on TT.

We already know all these facts.

We have discussed what might have happened if tennis had been open in the 50s and 60s.

In point no. 5 what you meant to say was that in 1962 if Rosewall had not been competing in the pros, this suggests that he would have won the CYGS. (But then again, if Muscles was competing then so would have been all the pros.)

P.S. Do you have a prejudice against using spaces in your prose? (Yes, over here we do care about grammar.)

 

[dante1976]

Typical butthurt Fedalistas
Hey, this "dude" did something that our favorites didn't so let's put Laver and Rosewall on a table What's next... Budge??? Renshaw??? Some other blokes from 19th century maybe??? I'm sure they had a "mind blowing" stats too

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

 

[BobbyOne]

@BobbyOne

A 39 and one half year old Laver beat someone you probably have not heard of Roy Barth age 27 in I believe 1978-1979 and how about Gonzales
age 40-41 verses and defeats Charlie Pasarell age 25 in 5 set being down the first two sets 22-24 and 1-6, comes back the next day and wins 3 sets.

40 year olds beat 25 year olds. And yes I am 70 and can still win a few. Plus, two years ago was asked to help teach (by an ex-ATP Pro) his students
because I know S & V and still play an aggressive style game. Definitely wish my legs were 50 years younger though.

Aloha

kramer woodie, Good that you still are playing well.

Yes, Gonzalez was very tough at 40 and even later. His victory over Pasarell was great but even greater were his wins over Laver, Rosewall, Newcombe, Ashe and so on at that age.

I have heard of Roy Barth but he was a rather weak player. Laver did better in 1978 against a few other and better players.

 

[BobbyOne]

Typical butthurt Fedalistas
Hey, this "dude" did something that our favorites didn't so let's put Laver and Rosewall on a table What's next... Budge??? Renshaw??? Some other blokes from 19th century maybe??? I'm sure they had a "mind blowing" stats too

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

If your name is "Dante" you should have more respect for the oldies...

 

[BobbyOne]

I'm over in the Pro Match Results section ad nauseum. You should join the Thiem. Muscles upon muscles and glides around on the grass with incredible variety the likes of which have hardly been seen before. If Fed is the Maestro, Thiem is Amadeus.

Meles, Thanks for your "likes".

Yes, Thiem is a great talent. I think he will become a top five player. Thanks for the pictures.

 

[BobbyOne]

How can anyone say Djokovic has the most complete game of all time after watching this clip? Now THAT'S called variety, Laver and Rosewall could play every single shot.

tennis_pro, I agree. Great video. Both players also are moving so well. Not an old-fashioned game at all.

 

[Limpinhitter]

Rosewall won grand slams 17 years apart, a true sign of talent. 1953 aus open and 1970 us open is impressive but never winning wimbledon hurts. Especially in that era.

No he didn't. Rosewall has won "zero" Grand Slams. He won 4 amateur majors, 4 open majors, and several (depending on which ones you count), so called pro majors.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Meles, Nice to see you coming back.

I guess Rosewall would have won three to five Wimbledons. Even when being slightly after his peak he was able to beat Gonzalez and Laver at the 1965 US Pro on grass clearly.

Rosewall would be lucky to win one or two Wimbledon's in a mythical open era.

 

[BobbyOne]

Rosewall would be lucky to win one or two Wimbledon's in a mythical open era.

Dan, Tell that to Jack Kramer (even if Jake is in heaven or in hell)...

 

[Phoenix1983]

Dan, Tell that to Jack Kramer (even if Jake is in heaven or in hell)...

Who is Jake?

I value precision in language.

 

[BobbyOne]

Who is Jake?

I value precision in language.

Phoenix, "Jake" was the nickname of Kramer.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Phoenix, "Jake" was the nickname of Kramer.

"Jake" was a term used by Kramer's friends...you knew him?
As far as I know, Kramer never witnessed Rosewall winning a Wimbledon championship.

 

[Dan Lobb]

"Jake" was a term used by Kramer's friends...you knew him?
As far as I know, Kramer never witnessed Rosewall winning a Wimbledon championship.

Your buddy "Jake" was eager to sign Hoad to a pro contract and tour against himself in 1953...years before he had any interest in Rosewall.

 

[dante1976]

If your name is "Dante" you should have more respect for the oldies...

I respect the oldies no question about it, they marked their times and kudos for all of them for doing it.

Anyhow, this thread is a pure jealousy towards Novak from we all know who because he just did what their idols didn't and that's a fact

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

 

[Limpinhitter]

Rosewall would be lucky to win one or two Wimbledon's in a mythical open era.

I previously wrote that, in a mythical open circuit throughout Rosewall's career, he probably would have won 10-12 major titles because he played at or near his best for so long. Whether he would have won any Wimbledon titles is too speculative for me to venture a guess.

 

[BobbyOne]

"Jake" was a term used by Kramer's friends...you knew him?
As far as I know, Kramer never witnessed Rosewall winning a Wimbledon championship.

Dan, "Jake" was a common nickname for Kramer.

I did not say that Kramer witnessed a Rosewall Wimbledon championship. Your logic is a s fine as always. I wrote that Kramer gave Muscles 4 (=four) Wimbledon titles if open era came earlier.