Most important pre-Open Era pro tournament

[chaognosis]

I have read different opinions about whether Wembley or the US Pro should be considered the most important pro event before the Open Era. Al Laney (1968 ) and Bud Collins (2003) claim that the US Pro was the most important event, and it was the oldest of the major pro tournaments. However, the official USLTA encyclopedia (1972) claims that Wembley was more important, and I recall Urban and perhaps a few others saying the same thing here. I know that the prestige of these events was not very great, or particularly stable, and that the quality of the draw changed a lot from year to year. Nevertheless, I would like to determine which of these two, all in all, had the greater tradition and would have been generally considered more valuable in its day. If you could not only give your answer, but explain why you think so--and point me toward any other relevant sources which I may not know--I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks!

 

[urban]

Chaog, the US pro was older and had more continuity, while Wembley had some breaks, for example between 1953/54. On the other hand, in the late 50s and early 60s, the US pro, then played indoors at Cleveland had a slump, with some of the best Aussies not competing. Buchholtz' win in 1962 wasn't regarded as major win, even not by himself. It was revived in 1964, when it went to Boston, Chestnut Hill, by the promoting of banker Ed Hickey. Then it got on level with Wembley again. In a book The Art of Tennis by Alan Trengove, 1963/64, all great pros wrote some articles about their best shots (Gonzales on serve, Rosewall on bh, Gimeno on fh, Hoad on volley, Laver on lefthanded play, Sedgman on fitness, Segura on strategy, Budge on the older player). All remarked, that Wembley was the most prominent event, a sort of pro World Championships. The one tournament, that probably was regarded as even bigger, was the singular Wimbledon pro, staged in August 1967.

 

[chaognosis]

Thanks, Urban.

 

[SgtJohn]

Hi Chaog,

I agree with Urban. Wembley had some breaks, but every single time it was played it was one of the very biggest events of the year, except maybe in 1950, the only depleted field I know of for this tournament.
As it was pointed out, the US Pro, with its many changes of venues, experienced 'slumps', so a look at the big picture designates Wembley as a clear winner...

Jonathan

 

[chaognosis]

Hi Chaog,

I agree with Urban. Wembley had some breaks, but every single time it was played it was one of the very biggest events of the year, except maybe in 1950, the only depleted field I know of for this tournament.
As it was pointed out, the US Pro, with its many changes of venues, experienced 'slumps', so a look at the big picture designates Wembley as a clear winner...

Jonathan

Great. I'm sold.

 

[Q&M son]

Wembley, at least from what I read in some arg tennis books.

 

[urban]

The two most important pro tournaments of all time probably were the US pro of 1948, played at Forest Hills with a big field (i think 128) and new king Kramer coming up against Budge and Riggs. And the Wimbledon pro of 1967, only an eight men event, but broadly televized (in colour) and paving the way for open tennis. I think, Baltzell has the complete draw of the 1947 US pro.

Greatest matches on these pro majors probably were:
Gonzales-Kramer, Wembley 1952 (or 51), afterwards after a close five setter, the very tough Kramer cried;
Gonzales-Sedgman, Wembley 1956, wonderful 4 setter, many Londoners had to go home on their feet in the night, because the tube was closed, many British commentators ranked it as one of the best all time matches.
Gonzales-Hoad, US pro Cleveland 1958,
Hoad-Gonzales, Forest Hills 1959, Hoad butchered Gorgo in the last 3 sets, it was called the Rubicon of Hoad's career,
Rosewall-Hoad, Wembley 1962,
Rosewall-Laver, Coubertin 1963, wonderful match with Kenny coming back after Laver lead 4-1 in the fifth,
Laver-Rosewall, Wembley 1964, which Laver won 8-6 in the fifth,
Laver-Rosewall, Boston US pro 1966 on grass. Eye witness Bud Collins called it superior to the famous WCT final of 1972.

 

[Q&M son]

Thanks urban.

 

[superstition]

What about during Tilden's era?

 

[chaognosis]

What about during Tilden's era?

There was no professional circuit to speak of prior to 1926. The most important singles tournaments during Tilden's dominant years (1920-1925) were Wimbledon and the US Championships, but the most important and prestigious event by far was the Davis Cup. The French Championships were not opened to international competition until 1925; before that the biggest clay-court titles were the World Hard Court Championships at St. Cloud (1920-1921, 1923) and Brussels (1922), and the Paris Olympics (1924). Tilden won all three of the biggest singles tournaments in 1921, as well as the Davis Cup, which was probably as good a year as the Grand Slams of Budge and Laver in 1938 and 1962, respectively... in some ways it is even more impressive, given that those two Slams were won against amateur fields that had been significantly depleted by the pro tours.

 

[Tennis old man]

1)Wembley 2) US Pro 3) French Pro.