Lew Hoad-greatest imperfect player ever

[Limpinhitter]

He did not exactly say where or how Hoad was more powerful than Laver. Here is what he wrote, and I'm quoting treblings quote, "Rod Laver is a carbon copy of the original Hoad. Only lefthanded and without the full majesty. The mighty power".

We'll never know exactly what he meant by "full majesty" or "mighty power." I never saw Hoad play. But, I did see Laver play several times. I don't think anyone hit the ball as hard as Laver with a wood racquet, ever. And, no one on the tennis court was a better athlete than Laver, ever. That's JMO!

 

[embot]

We'll never know exactly what he meant by "full majesty" or "mighty power." I never saw Hoad play. But, I did see Laver play several times. I don't think anyone hit the ball as hard as Laver with a wood racquet, ever. And, no one on the tennis court was a better athlete than Laver, ever. That's JMO!

I've never seen Hoad play, and only saw Laver on TV. Growing up, I was a fan of Laver too. You'll get no arguments from me about Laver's power nor his athletic abilities. I'm just quoting Gordon Forbes' book. Mr. Forbes was a player who competed against Lew Hoad and Rod Laver. From my impressions of his writting, he seemed to admire both Hoad and Laver. Never saying that one was better than the other. Just that Hoad has a more powerful game.

 

[treblings]

Love that book too. Really enjoy his stories of that era of tennis, and his humor. "Too Soon to Panic" is next on my reading list. Looking forward to reading that book.

you´ll love it.
the title comes from a comment by Segal to Forbes in a daviscup tie against Germany i think. they are playing doubles and early on Forbes is nervous. Segal tells him, it´s too soon to panic and he should relax.
He, Segal, will tell him when it´s time to panic
A few hours later in the match they are facing matchpoint against them, Forbes is preparing to return and Segal comes up to him and whispers: ´Now it´s time to panic, Forbsey´

 

[treblings]

Hahaha! I've been in some wars in the tennis tips section about Fed's backhand. I can just see the jaws hitting the floor when I dare to criticize the great Federer, about anything.

IMO, his topspin backhand suffers from the same flaw Sampras' backhand suffered from - he swings too much from the elbow rather the shoulder, and doesn't get any where near the upper body rotation that Hoad, Laver, Ashe, Emerson, Edberg, Kuerten and a few of the other all time great topspin 1hb's got.

Look at Hoad's upper body, he gets almost 180 degrees of rotation. That's where his power, consistency and depth control came from. Notice that his arm doesn't move as much as his upper body does. He also gets great racquet acceleration from the pronation/suppination of his forearm as seen in the pictogram. Laver hit even harder with more topspin and perhaps a bit less depth control, a hazard of heavy topspin.

I know it's a different view, but, check out Laver's passing shot here. Laver is 38 in this video, but, I think his backhand is virtually identical to Hoad's, with a bit more top on it and a longer finish. You can stop the video at certain points, ie: the backswing with the open face, to compare.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-VeBIal8TU&feature=player_detailpage#t=91s

i can see how that discussion could get heated
you make an interesting and insightful point. i haven´t studied it enough
to decide on which side of the fence i am in this matter.

 

[embot]

you´ll love it.
the title comes from a comment by Segal to Forbes in a daviscup tie against Germany i think. they are playing doubles and early on Forbes is nervous. Segal tells him, it´s too soon to panic and he should relax.
He, Segal, will tell him when it´s time to panic
A few hours later in the match they are facing matchpoint against them, Forbes is preparing to return and Segal comes up to him and whispers: ´Now it´s time to panic, Forbsey´

Hahaha! You have to love Abe Segal, and for that matter most of the players described in his book/s. Mr. Forbes makes it seem that they were just a bunch of odd, but very "colorful" characters, touring the world and playing tennis.

 

[treblings]

Hahaha! You have to love Abe Segal, and for that matter most of the players described in his book/s. Mr. Forbes makes it seem that they were just a bunch of odd, but very "colorful" characters, touring the world and playing tennis.

i wouldn´t be at all surprised if that´s what they were he brings the human side out very well i think.
there´s a relatively new book out by Abe Segal called ´hey big boy´. have you heard about that?

 

[Frank Silbermann]

Hahaha! I've been in some wars in the tennis tips section about Fed's backhand. I can just see the jaws hitting the floor when I dare to criticize the great Federer, about anything.

IMO, his topspin backhand suffers from the same flaw Sampras' backhand suffered from - he swings too much from the elbow rather the shoulder, and doesn't get any where near the upper body rotation that Hoad, Laver, Ashe, Emerson, Edberg, Kuerten and a few of the other all time great topspin 1hb's got.

Look at Hoad's upper body, he gets almost 180 degrees of rotation. That's where his power, consistency and depth control came from. Notice that his arm doesn't move as much as his upper body does. He also gets great racquet acceleration from the pronation/suppination of his forearm as seen in the pictogram.

Everything is influenced by the grip. To hit topspin with a Continental grip you have to hit it more beside you rather than out in front. Since there's less back-swing on the back hand, you have to use everything you can such as elbow bend to wrap the arm and racket behind you, and a huge shoulder turn. In fact, you need a huge shoulder turn just to orient a flat racket face (as Rosewall did on his flat/slice shot).

When your grip becomes extreme Easter verging on western you're going to hit it much further out in front. Even if you turn your shoulders just as far, you've got to un-turn them before contact.

That's why Continental strokes are so much better looking.

 

[Limpinhitter]

Everything is influenced by the grip. To hit topspin with a Continental grip you have to hit it more beside you rather than out in front. Since there's less back-swing on the back hand, you have to use everything you can such as elbow bend to wrap the arm and racket behind you, and a huge shoulder turn. In fact, you need a huge shoulder turn just to orient a flat racket face (as Rosewall did on his flat/slice shot).

When your grip becomes extreme Easter verging on western you're going to hit it much further out in front. Even if you turn your shoulders just as far, you've got to un-turn them before contact.

That's why Continental strokes are so much better looking.

I disagree that there's a shorter backswing with a 1hb than a fh, if that's what you're saying. IMO, it's longer. In any event, I'm not saying that you shouldn't bend your arm in the backswing. I'm saying you shouldn't straighten it as part of your forward swing. Notice that Hoad's elbow is bent in the windup, but, straight at the beginning of the forward swing. Federer's bent elbow leads his forward swing.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Lew Hoad is for me the greatest enigma in tennis history. He is idolized by his fellow players of that era, who see in him the perfection of tennis. He was the one, who had it all: the game, the charisma, the looks; he was called the 'blond Adonis', the Robert Mitchum in shorts, a sort of Sampras and Agassi combined. But like in Schuberts 'Die Unvollendete', in his record the last step to immortality seems to be missing. Was he a tragical underachiever, hampered by back and other (alcohol) problems?
He came up as a junior together with his very different twin Rosewall. Early in their amatuer careers, Ken was the more solid. Lew had some surprising losses at big stages to Drobny or Patty, but also had big wins at Davis Cup, notably against Tony Trabert. In his great amateur year 1956, he won almost everything including the European clay triple - almost, because he lost the last match of a potential Grand Slam at Forest Hills to Rosewall (and a nasty wind). In the pro ranks, he looked like overtaking the king Gonzalez in their World series 1958, but eventually missed out this big chance. In 1959, he probably was the Nr. 1 pro, going by the internal results over the year, but overall King Pancho was still recognized as the true champ. You had to ko the world champ, you couldn't win on points in those years. Lew had great wins at Forest Hills in 1959, in some Australian tournaments, but also lost a lot of US pro, RG and Wembley finals, mostly now to the underrated, but ever improving 'Little Master'. When the new gun, Laver, turned pro, Lew trained himself into good fitness again, and trounced him 7-0 in January 1963 in a doubleheader changing with Rosewall. He was 28 at that time, not old, but after his great start of 1963 he could not get near Nr. 1 on the pro tour. OK, he had some back and toe troubles, but was quite rapidly overtaken by Laver and Rosewall. Afterwards he had some notable comebacks, at Wimbledon 1967, when he beat his old foe Gorgo in a tough 3 setter, or at Rome in 1970, when he excelled before the admiring crowd at the Foro Italico.
So what remains: Resultwise - you can turn it back and forth - Lew Hoad isn't in the short list of alltime greats, going by majors, pro championships or even the sum of Nr 1. positions. But yet, he made an unbelievable impression on the fellow players - with the power and style of his game and the charisma of his personality. An enigma indeed.

Part of the difficulty of assessing the old pro players is the inconsistency of the playing schedule. Some years there was a continuous schedule of play, other years virtually no significant play. The peak years were 1957 to 1959, when the American championship tour was extended by a large number of tournaments with strong fields.
The US Pro did not have official recognition between 1952 and 1962, according to the USPTA website. The promoter, Jack March, had lost a ton of money in the 1951 US Pro at Forest Hills, and he attempted to move to a less costly venue in Cleveland. The USPTA refused to sanction the event, and the US Pro, like the British Pro at Nottingham, and the Australian Pro in Adelaide, became a minor tournament.
In 1960, Gonzales withdrew from tournament play, and Hoad refused to play the championship tour. These two players had the drawing power to justify the major venues (Forest Hills, Kooyong, Roland Garros).
Hoad won a four-man tour in 1960 against Sedgman, Anderson, and Cooper, an Italian tour in 1962 against the major players, and a four-man tour in 1964 against Laver, Rosewall, and Anderson, beating the second-place Laver 3 matches to 1. A foot injury that year resulted in the loss of a big toe and reduced mobility, and he never beat Rosewall again.
Hoad had some success against Rosewall on clay, beating him at Roland Garros in 1959, and in the biggest clay court final of 1957 at the Hague, Netherlands, in a five set marathon.

 

[urban]

Agree, Dan, that the old pro tour was sometimes unstructured, and that the US pro not always was on a pro major level, but had rather lackluster fields begin 1960-1962. I personally believe, that Hoad was the Nr. 1 pro player in 1959, winning the lot of matches against Gonzalez (although it was close), winning Forest Hills over Gonzalez (but losing quite clear at US pro at Cleveland), and finishing first in the overall points race. In the 4 men world series Gonzalez, although losing out hth against Hoad, came on top, because he had better records against Anderson and Cooper.
I found some nice description of Hoad by Rex Bellamy in Thirty Love:
"Hoad had golden hair, piercing eyes, and a chest as solid as a wall - plus a gentle, laid-back air and a slow, infectious smile...His court presence was arresting, partly because of the kind of man he was and partly because of the explosively exciting way he explored his immense talent. Hoad was no giant, but he was awfully strong, notably in the wrist and forearm. His fierce, early ball drives were dispatched with wrist-whip and a dash of topsin. His service was a court bruiser, his footwork and reactions fast, his half-volleys exemplary, his volleys and overheads terminal. He had the temperament and the strength to play shots other men would not even think about. And he was always going for winners. No compromise. No prisoners. At his best, he could do anything. Hoad and Gonzalez each considered the other the best player he had ever met."

 

[Dan Lobb]

Agree, Dan, that the old pro tour was sometimes unstructured, and that the US pro not always was on a pro major level, but had rather lackluster fields begin 1960-1962. I personally believe, that Hoad was the Nr. 1 pro player in 1959, winning the lot of matches against Gonzalez (although it was close), winning Forest Hills over Gonzalez (but losing quite clear at US pro at Cleveland), and finishing first in the overall points race. In the 4 men world series Gonzalez, although losing out hth against Hoad, came on top, because he had better records against Anderson and Cooper.
I found some nice description of Hoad by Rex Bellamy in Thirty Love:
"Hoad had golden hair, piercing eyes, and a chest as solid as a wall - plus a gentle, laid-back air and a slow, infectious smile...His court presence was arresting, partly because of the kind of man he was and partly because of the explosively exciting way he explored his immense talent. Hoad was no giant, but he was awfully strong, notably in the wrist and forearm. His fierce, early ball drives were dispatched with wrist-whip and a dash of topsin. His service was a court bruiser, his footwork and reactions fast, his half-volleys exemplary, his volleys and overheads terminal. He had the temperament and the strength to play shots other men would not even think about. And he was always going for winners. No compromise. No prisoners. At his best, he could do anything. Hoad and Gonzalez each considered the other the best player he had ever met."

Gonzales further claimed that the best tennis he ever witnessed was in the 1959 championship tour against Hoad. Gonzales won the opening match in Los Angeles, and then Hoad went 15 to 2 against him. With the score at 15 to3, Hoad's back acted up, and he paced himself, losing the last ten matches of the tour to Gonzales for a 15 to 13 final score. Gonzales stated that he had "blisters under my blisters" from Hoad's power. Time magazine had a major write-up of their season, including the Forest Hills Pro final, which McCauley describes as Hoad "crossing the Rubicon" (when Julius Caesar took power in ancient Rome).
Kramer applied to the USTA after the match to have the Forest Hills Pro officially recognized as the US Pro, which was granted. The 1960 Forest Hills Pro was cancelled when Gonzales withdrew from tournament play.

 

[Limpinhitter]

Gonzales further claimed that the best tennis he ever witnessed was in the 1959 championship tour against Hoad. Gonzales won the opening match in Los Angeles, and then Hoad went 15 to 2 against him. With the score at 15 to3, Hoad's back acted up, and he paced himself, losing the last ten matches of the tour to Gonzales for a 15 to 13 final score. Gonzales stated that he had "blisters under my blisters" from Hoad's power. Time magazine had a major write-up of their season, including the Forest Hills Pro final, which McCauley describes as Hoad "crossing the Rubicon" (when Julius Caesar took power in ancient Rome).
Kramer applied to the USTA after the match to have the Forest Hills Pro officially recognized as the US Pro, which was granted. The 1960 Forest Hills Pro was cancelled when Gonzales withdrew from tournament play.

It would have been the USLTA at that time.

 

[urban]

It would be nice to know more about the politics of the great clubs and federations towards the old pro tour. Forest Hills was owned i think by a club, so they could open the venue to the pros. The 1948 US pro was played at Forest Hills, also the 1963 version. Since 1965-1967 a big pro round robin was played at Forest Hills. In 1965 even the holy ground of Newport, lead by Jimmy van Alen, made a pro round robin. Wimbledon opened the gate to the pros in 1967 under the direction of Herman David, to pave the way to open tennis. Roland Garros had the French pro in the late 50s and early 60s, and also in 1968. In Hoad's book edited together with his wife, he stated, that the Aussie federation tried to lock out the Kramer pros from the big tradtional venues at Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide, and the pros had to go to other places like Cricket grounds. Kramer was seen as a state-enemy by the Aussie federation, because he decimated their DC squads.

 

[Dan Lobb]

It would have been the USLTA at that time.

Actually, it was the USPLTA, until they changed the title to USPTA after Open tennis came along,

 

[Dan Lobb]

It would be nice to know more about the politics of the great clubs and federations towards the old pro tour. Forest Hills was owned i think by a club, so they could open the venue to the pros. The 1948 US pro was played at Forest Hills, also the 1963 version. Since 1965-1967 a big pro round robin was played at Forest Hills. In 1965 even the holy ground of Newport, lead by Jimmy van Alen, made a pro round robin. Wimbledon opened the gate to the pros in 1967 under the direction of Herman David, to pave the way to open tennis. Roland Garros had the French pro in the late 50s and early 60s, and also in 1968. In Hoad's book edited together with his wife, he stated, that the Aussie federation tried to lock out the Kramer pros from the big tradtional venues at Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide, and the pros had to go to other places like Cricket grounds. Kramer was seen as a state-enemy by the Aussie federation, because he decimated their DC squads.

The 1951 US Pro was also held there, but Jack March, the promoter, lost big money on the event, and tried to move it to Cleveland for 1952. The USPLTA refused to grant official recognition tothis event, and gave Kramer approval to name the Tournament of Champions at Forest Hills the US Pro in 1959. Kramer cancelled the 1960,1961, and 1962 Forest Hills US Pro's because he could get both Gonzales and Hoad to appear at the same time. The event was finally held in 1963 (March was still billing his Cleveland tournament the "US Pro" until 1964!), when Laver and Rosewall played the final to a largly empty stadium for no prize money.
The 1966 Forest Hills event used the whacky van Allen scoring system, and was also a money loser.
The most prestigious Australian venue was Kooyong Stadium, where the pros played in 1958, 1959, 1960 and 1962. Hoad won the 1958 and 1960 tournaments.

 

[Dan Lobb]

The 1951 US Pro was also held at Forest Hills, but Jack March, the promoter, lost big money on the event, and tried to move it to Cleveland for 1952. The USPLTA refused to grant official recognition tothis event, and gave Kramer approval to name the Tournament of Champions at Forest Hills the US Pro in 1959. Kramer cancelled the 1960,1961, and 1962 Forest Hills US Pro's because he could not get both Gonzales and Hoad to appear at the same time. The event was finally held in 1963 (March was still billing his Cleveland tournament the "US Pro" until 1964!), when Laver and Rosewall played the final to a largly empty stadium for no prize money.
The 1966 Forest Hills event used the whacky van Allen scoring system, and was also a money loser.
The most prestigious Australian venue was Kooyong Stadium, where the pros played in 1958, 1959, 1960 and 1962. Hoad won the 1958 and 1960 tournaments.

Sorry, I have made corrections above.

 

[Limpinhitter]

Actually, it was the USPLTA, until they changed the title to USPTA after Open tennis came along,

I was talking about your reference to the USTA. Before 1975 it was the USLTA. Similarly the ITF was the ILTF.

 

[Dan Lobb]

I was talking about your reference to the USTA. Before 1975 it was the USLTA. Similarly the ITF was the ILTF.

I should have stated USPLTA (later, and currently, USPTA), which was responsible for organizing and sanctioning the US Pro championship.
According to the historical review at the USPTA website, there was no US Pro during the later years of WWII, or between the years 1952 and 1961 (should be 1962).
The Jack March tournament in Cleveland was not the US Pro, although March continued to use that billing to attract interest. Only one or two of the better pros chose to play the Cleveland tournament, and like the "British Pro" and the "Australian Pro", it was really a minor event.
Jack Kramer obtained recognition for the the Forest Hills Pro to be the official US Pro in 1959, but he needed both Gonzales and Hoad to justify the Forest Hills venue. Thus, there was no Forest Hills/US Pro until 1963, when it was a financial disaster, with no prize money.
Laver and Rosewall, although the best players of their time, lacked the drawing power or charisma of Gonzales and Hoad.

 

[urban]

Maybe the selling and promoting of the pro product wasn't always perfect. Although Jack Kramer has great merits in running the pro game, not all of his moves were very clever. He underrated the worth of the new tv transmission imo, which made the Golf pro tour attractive. I agree that Hoad, if better managed, could have played a similar role as Arnold Palmer on the golf tour. If the pro game was sold in a better way to the public (as Lamer Hunt later did), even Laver and Rosewall drew very good crowds, see Wimbledon pro 1967 (which was a great success for the AELTC and for the BBC) or the WCT final 1972 (when 22 million people in the US watched on tv).

 

[pc1]

Maybe the selling and promoting of the pro product wasn't always perfect. Although Jack Kramer has great merits in running the pro game, not all of his moves were very clever. He underrated the worth of the new tv transmission imo, which made the Golf pro tour attractive. I agree that Hoad, if better managed, could have played a similar role as Arnold Palmer on the golf tour. If the pro game was sold in a better way to the public (as Lamer Hunt later did), even Laver and Rosewall drew very good crowds, see Wimbledon pro 1967 (which was a great success for the AELTC and for the BBC) or the WCT final 1972 (when 22 million people in the US watched on tv).

You wonder what would have happened if Kramer was able to get some people who were familar with marketing how the Pro Game would have fared. Perhaps Open tennis would have happen prior to 1968.

 

[urban]

Exactly, pc 1. Sometimes i think, that it wasn't the fault of the amateur badger federations alone (i don't want to defend them in any way), but that the pro promoting and marketing in itself wasn't effective. Maybe, looking in a longer term, the top pros of the 50s like Kramer and Gonzalez, who were quite egoistical in some ways, should have done more to solidify a structured tournament schedule of a greater group of pros, instead of looking for the fast money on the lucrative (for themselves) hth tours. Maybe a bit more compromise on Kramer's part towards the amateur game would have been more effective in behalf of open tennis. It's interesting, that the deciding impetus for open tennis came from the amateur side, especially Wimbledon and Herman David.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Exactly, pc 1. Sometimes i think, that it wasn't the fault of the amateur badger federations alone (i don't want to defend them in any way), but that the pro promoting and marketing in itself wasn't effective. Maybe, looking in a longer term, the top pros of the 50s like Kramer and Gonzalez, who were quite egoistical in some ways, should have done more to solidify a structured tournament schedule of a greater group of pros, instead of looking for the fast money on the lucrative (for themselves) hth tours. Maybe a bit more compromise on Kramer's part towards the amateur game would have been more effective in behalf of open tennis. It's interesting, that the deciding impetus for open tennis came from the amateur side, especially Wimbledon and Herman David.

The head to head tours had serious limitations. Many of them had no fixed length for the schedule, and were decided by one player getting injured. In 1939, Vines led Budge 13 to 12, but suffered a serious shoulder injury which left him serving side-arm, and losing 21 to 18.
In 1950, Gonzales looked good at times, winning 8 of 12 in the California portion of his tour against Kramer, but suffered a knee injury, resulting in a lop-sided win for Kramer. In 1953, Sedgman led Kramer 12 to 6, but pulled a shoulder muscle, ending up losing 51 to 41. In 1958, Hoad led Gonzales 21 to 10, but his back problem caused him to lose 51 to 36.
It is difficult to see what these results prove.
In 1959, the Kramer tour instituted a year-long series of tournaments in which all of the top ten pros played, and everyone won at least one tournament. There was a points system to decide who won a substantial bonus money pool (Hoad finished first, Gonzales second).
By 1964, everything was decided by tournament play, which allowed the best players to concentrate on the top tournaments.

 

[Limpinhitter]

I should have stated USPLTA (later, and currently, USPTA), which was responsible for organizing and sanctioning the US Pro championship.
According to the historical review at the USPTA website, there was no US Pro during the later years of WWII, or between the years 1952 and 1961 (should be 1962).
The Jack March tournament in Cleveland was not the US Pro, although March continued to use that billing to attract interest. Only one or two of the better pros chose to play the Cleveland tournament, and like the "British Pro" and the "Australian Pro", it was really a minor event.
Jack Kramer obtained recognition for the the Forest Hills Pro to be the official US Pro in 1959, but he needed both Gonzales and Hoad to justify the Forest Hills venue. Thus, there was no Forest Hills/US Pro until 1963, when it was a financial disaster, with no prize money.
Laver and Rosewall, although the best players of their time, lacked the drawing power or charisma of Gonzales and Hoad.

Thanks Dan! I didn't know that the USPTA was ever a sponsor of pro tour events.

 

[Edberg&Becker]

more pics from lew??

 

[Limpinhitter]

more pics from lew??

I might be able to dig up another pic or two over the weekend.

 

[kiki]

Hoad´s death shocked the whole tennis world.He was veyr muck liked by peers and opponents.Was such a funny and charming guy.I remember the so warm words Santana and Gimeno spoke off him and how much stunned Laver and, of course, Rosewall were.He was a man with such a bad luck in life, yet even the angry and egolatric Gonzales had even some warm feelings for him.

 

[accidental]

Short clip of Hoad Vs Gonzales

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XTR8z5kjWc

Hoad absolutely crushing a awkward looking smash at 0:52

 

[rajeshafrica]

Well Hoad did win the first three majors and losing in the final of the US open finals in four sets to Ken Rosewall in 1956. Not many people had done that. He turned Pro when only 24 years old. Probably would have won the US also if he ad remained an amateur for another couple of years.

 

[kiki]

Well Hoad did win the first three majors and losing in the final of the US open finals in four sets to Ken Rosewall in 1956. Not many people had done that. He turned Pro when only 24 years old. Probably would have won the US also if he ad remained an amateur for another couple of years.

Hoad overwhelmed Ashley Cooper in the 1957 W final...and Cooper was a Forest Hills champions, so figure it out.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Maybe the selling and promoting of the pro product wasn't always perfect. Although Jack Kramer has great merits in running the pro game, not all of his moves were very clever. He underrated the worth of the new tv transmission imo, which made the Golf pro tour attractive. I agree that Hoad, if better managed, could have played a similar role as Arnold Palmer on the golf tour. If the pro game was sold in a better way to the public (as Lamer Hunt later did), even Laver and Rosewall drew very good crowds, see Wimbledon pro 1967 (which was a great success for the AELTC and for the BBC) or the WCT final 1972 (when 22 million people in the US watched on tv).

Hoad and Gonzales were the best paid professional athletes in any sport in the late 1950's.

 

[hoodjem]

If you haven't seen this:

Take a gander at the forehand Nastase hits at 1:23.

Pretty amazing shot!

 

[Dan Lobb]

This photo reportedly shows the pros lighting their cigars with a $100 bill.....really only play money.

The point is, the pros made so much money, they could afford to burn it.

 

[KG1965]

Lew Hoad is for me the greatest enigma in tennis history. He is idolized by his fellow players of that era, who see in him the perfection of tennis. He was the one, who had it all: the game, the charisma, the looks; he was called the 'blond Adonis', the Robert Mitchum in shorts, a sort of Sampras and Agassi combined. But like in Schuberts 'Die Unvollendete', in his record the last step to immortality seems to be missing. Was he a tragical underachiever, hampered by back and other (alcohol) problems?
He came up as a junior together with his very different twin Rosewall. Early in their amatuer careers, Ken was the more solid. Lew had some surprising losses at big stages to Drobny or Patty, but also had big wins at Davis Cup, notably against Tony Trabert. In his great amateur year 1956, he won almost everything including the European clay triple - almost, because he lost the last match of a potential Grand Slam at Forest Hills to Rosewall (and a nasty wind). In the pro ranks, he looked like overtaking the king Gonzalez in their World series 1958, but eventually missed out this big chance. In 1959, he probably was the Nr. 1 pro, going by the internal results over the year, but overall King Pancho was still recognized as the true champ. You had to ko the world champ, you couldn't win on points in those years. Lew had great wins at Forest Hills in 1959, in some Australian tournaments, but also lost a lot of US pro, RG and Wembley finals, mostly now to the underrated, but ever improving 'Little Master'. When the new gun, Laver, turned pro, Lew trained himself into good fitness again, and trounced him 7-0 in January 1963 in a doubleheader changing with Rosewall. He was 28 at that time, not old, but after his great start of 1963 he could not get near Nr. 1 on the pro tour. OK, he had some back and toe troubles, but was quite rapidly overtaken by Laver and Rosewall. Afterwards he had some notable comebacks, at Wimbledon 1967, when he beat his old foe Gorgo in a tough 3 setter, or at Rome in 1970, when he excelled before the admiring crowd at the Foro Italico.
So what remains: Resultwise - you can turn it back and forth - Lew Hoad isn't in the short list of alltime greats, going by majors, pro championships or even the sum of Nr 1. positions. But yet, he made an unbelievable impression on the fellow players - with the power and style of his game and the charisma of his personality. An enigma indeed.

Urban, it's still an enigma for you, 6 years later?

 

[Dan Lobb]

Urban, it's still an enigma for you, 6 years later?

Hoad is still an enigma for the organizers of the Sport Australia Hall of Fame, the official Australian national sports pantheon, run by government.

Of course, many Australian tennis players are included in the HOF, including Sedgman, Rosewall, Laver, Emerson, Newcombe, Roche, Rafter.....others, such as

Court and Goolagong among the women.

BUT, no Lew Hoad.

However, they do have a mute recognition of Hoad's greatness as a player.....they do include Ashley Cooper, whom Hoad overwhelmed in the 1957

Wimbledon final, and beat 16 to 2 on the pro tour in 1959.

They also include Fred Stolle, and....well, you get the idea.

 

[KG1965]

Hoad is still an enigma for the organizers of the Sport Australia Hall of Fame, the official Australian national sports pantheon, run by government.

Of course, many Australian tennis players are included in the HOF, including Sedgman, Rosewall, Laver, Emerson, Newcombe, Roche, Rafter.....others, such as

Court and Goolagong among the women.

BUT, no Lew Hoad.

However, they do have a mute recognition of Hoad's greatness as a player.....they do include Ashley Cooper, whom Hoad overwhelmed in the 1957

Wimbledon final, and beat 16 to 2 on the pro tour in 1959.

They also include Fred Stolle, and....well, you get the idea.

I adore the anti-system-guys.

Hoad is still a bit enigmatic for me, but with the passing time (reading a few old threads of krosero and co. and witnessing your daily clash ... with Ivan I mean of course) I begin to understand its value.

This story of the Australia Sports Hall of Fame laughs bitterly...... : Sedgman, Emerson, Roche, Rafter, Stolle and Cooper yes... and Lew not? Hahahahah.
Pat Cash and John Alexander no? Mmmmh at least they were my idols.

 

[Dan Lobb]

I adore the anti-system-guys.

Hoad is still a bit enigmatic for me, but with the passing time (reading a few old threads of krosero and co. and witnessing your daily clash ... with Ivan I mean of course) I begin to understand its value.

This story of the Australia Sports Hall of Fame laughs bitterly...... : Sedgman, Emerson, Roche, Rafter, Stolle and Cooper yes... and Lew not? Hahahahah.
Pat Cash and John Alexander no? Mmmmh at least they were my idols.

They have a great sense of humour at the Aussie Sports Hall of Fame....but somehow, I do not get it.

 

[Dan Lobb]

I adore the anti-system-guys.

Hoad is still a bit enigmatic for me, but with the passing time (reading a few old threads of krosero and co. and witnessing your daily clash ... with Ivan I mean of course) I begin to understand its value.

This story of the Australia Sports Hall of Fame laughs bitterly...... : Sedgman, Emerson, Roche, Rafter, Stolle and Cooper yes... and Lew not? Hahahahah.
Pat Cash and John Alexander no? Mmmmh at least they were my idols.

My apologies.

I was relying on the list of members of the Aussie Sports HOF available on Wiki, which does not show Hoad's name. It apparently should be there.

I have just seen on the official Aussie Sports HOF website that Hoad was inducted as a member in 1985.

However, Hoad was not elevated to the elite "Legend" status, together with Court, Goolagong, Laver, Rosewall, and Newcombe.

These players all made an impact in the Open era, unlike Hoad, so that perhaps accounts for the difference.

Also, Hoad's greatest tennis achievements in the pro tennis world were not noted in the standard tennis histories, for reasons which are still not clear.

 

[KG1965]

My apologies.

I was relying on the list of members of the Aussie Sports HOF available on Wiki, which does not show Hoad's name. It apparently should be there.

I have just seen on the official Aussie Sports HOF website that Hoad was inducted as a member in 1985.

However, Hoad was not elevated to the elite "Legend" status, together with Court, Goolagong, Laver, Rosewall, and Newcombe.

These players all made an impact in the Open era, unlike Hoad, so that perhaps accounts for the difference.

Also, Hoad's greatest tennis achievements in the pro tennis world were not noted in the standard tennis histories, for reasons which are still not clear.

Ok, thanks for the clarification.
It is not part of the "legend" elite because Lew is an enigma.
You are (rightly) a great fan of his ... but you know that he is an enigma.
Slowly we try to describe it better. But it is difficult to describe the man.
Then, in my little one, at the end of the path I'll give you my opinion, of course. But it still takes a while. I think when I arrive at 1963.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Ok, thanks for the clarification.
It is not part of the "legend" elite because Lew is an enigma.
You are (rightly) a great fan of his ... but you know that he is an enigma.
Slowly we try to describe it better. But it is difficult to describe the man.
Then, in my little one, at the end of the path I'll give you my opinion, of course. But it still takes a while. I think when I arrive at 1963.

I think that much of the enigma surrounding Hoad is the lack of clarity surrounding his record in pro tennis, and the absence of Hoad's major wins from the standard pro tennis histories.

 

[KG1965]

I think that much of the enigma surrounding Hoad is the lack of clarity surrounding his record in pro tennis, and the absence of Hoad's major wins from the standard pro tennis histories.

The results of Hoad that you have reported you and Ivan are remarkable. The man did not last long but in the period 1957-61 he won a lot, but above all he was the main opponent of what I always thought was a GOAT contender.
And the more I gather information on the WORLD NUMBER ONE thread, the more it seems to me that he acquires the appearance of GOAT.
A man who was called: Ricardo Alonso González

 

[Dan Lobb]

The results of Hoad that you have reported you and Ivan are remarkable. The man did not last long but in the period 1957-61 he won a lot, but above all he was the main opponent of what I always thought was a GOAT contender.
And the more I gather information on the WORLD NUMBER ONE thread, the more it seems to me that he acquires the appearance of GOAT.
A man who was called: Ricardo Alonso González

It depends upon which criteria are used.

I use peak play in major events.

 

[KG1965]

It depends upon which criteria are used.

I use peak play in major events.

Of course, I've understood for quite some time. Everyone has his method, of course.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Ken Rosewall has an arena named after him. Lew Hoad is merely memorialised by a small municipal grass reserve (not even a park), his name inscribed on an even smaller plaque and ignored by its community. The fumes and pollution of thousands of passing cars daily have left it bitten by the dust and hub-bub of the city.

Lew Hoad Reserve
Wigram Rd
GLEBE NSW
AUSTRALIA

There is now a Lew Hoad Memorial Trophy given to the winner of the Kooyong tournament each year preceding the Australian Open.

I guess that there is now greater recognition of Hoad's achievements, some people must have been looking into Hoad's actual record.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Recently available footage of the old pro tour in 1964 at St. Austell and Carlyon Bay (the beach area at St. Austell).

 

[Dan Lobb]

At this same location at St. Austell there is a historic brewery from 1851 still operating just a nine minute drive from the tennis courts, perhaps the players took in a drink after this match.

Our family band often plays there.

 

[WCT]

Recently available footage of the old pro tour in 1964 at St. Austell and Carlyon Bay (the beach area at St. Austell).

Look at how far in Hoad stands to return Pancho's FIRST serve. Wow!

 

[thrust]

.However great Hoad was at his best, the fact IS that Rosewall was his superior from 1960 till Lew left the gaem. WINNING is what counts, not style of play.

 

[Dan Lobb]

.However great Hoad was at his best, the fact IS that Rosewall was his superior from 1960 till Lew left the gaem. WINNING is what counts, not style of play.

The quality of the pro events was always debatable.
The pros themselves always used quality of play as the criterion.

 

[Dan Lobb]

There is some documentation from the old pro tours, but it is not always accessible.

Here is the brochure which Kramer used for the 1959 world series. The original WCT series. Talk about strong fields, this one is among the best.

Jack Kramer presents World Championship Tennis​

Rozelle, N.S.W. : Standard Pub. House, 1959. Large octavo (240 x 170 mm), staple bound, 24 pp, photographic illustrations, advertisements, and profiles on the stars of American promoter Jack Kramer’s professional tour of Australia, including Ken Rosewall, Lew Hoad, Tony Trabert, Frank Sedgman and Pancho Gonzales.
Monash University Library; National Library of Australia

https://dsfb-wp.s3.ap-southeast-1.amazonaws.com/app/uploads/2019/11/18173919/2019_DSFB_6462-800x800.jpg

 

[Dan Lobb]

Here is the Kramer brochure for the world series tournament in Toronto in that 1959 tour.

O'Keefe International Tennis Tournament (1959, Jun)

Tournament magazine for the 1958 O'Keefe International Tennis Tournament; held at the Toronto Lawn Tennis Club, from June 17th-21st 1959; 28

www.the-racketeer.co.uk