Rankings of Greats by tennis experts

[urban]

One should not confuse languages with dialects and divide between written language and spoken word. At least since Martin Luthers Bible translation and the reform of charter language (German instead of Latin) , a standard German written language had been established. In the 18th Century, people like Lessing, Goethe or Schiller wrote the purest form of German, which is still the standard German of today (except some (lesser) grammatic and othrographic changes). Of course, Goethe, who was born and raised in Frankfurt, at home, may have spoken some "Hessisch" dialect (no audio tape exists), but at Weimar, where he was part of the government, he certainly spoke High German.
At the courts, the lingustic situation was quite international. French was the official diplomatic and courtly conversation language. Friedrich the Great wrote almost all his works in French, except a few German texts, and discussed things in French with Voltaire and other philosophers of the Enlightment. Same did Catherine the Great (from German (Anhalt) heritage) in Russia. I think, the unlucky Marie Antoinette spoke fluently French already at Schönbrunn, even before she arrived at Versailles. The famous Vienna Congress of 1815 was held in French. Mozart used a French text (Beaumarchais) for his Figaro opera (libretto in Italian). Mozart lived and studied in Italy for more than 3 years, and he spoke Italian fluently. Italian was the standard language for Operas, his Vienna rival Salieri was an Italian. He was firm in Latin, too. But his native language was German, maybe he used some Vienna or Salzburg dialect at home, again we have no audio tapes. His letters are written in Italian or high German.

 

[NonP]

One should not confuse languages with dialects and divide between written language and spoken word. At least since Martin Luthers Bible translation and the reform of charter language (German instead of Latin) , a standard German written language had been established. In the 18th Century, people like Lessing, Goethe or Schiller wrote the purest form of German, which is still the standard German of today (except some (lesser) grammatic and othrographic changes). Of course, Goethe, who was born and raised in Frankfurt, at home, may have spoken some "Hessisch" dialect (no audio tape exists), but at Weimar, where he was part of the government, he certainly spoke High German.
At the courts, the lingustic situation was quite international. French was the official diplomatic and courtly conversation language. Friedrich the Great wrote almost all his works in French, except a few German texts, and discussed things in French with Voltaire and other philosophers of the Enlightment. Same did Catherine the Great (from German (Anhalt) heritage) in Russia. I think, the unlucky Marie Antoinette spoke fluently French already at Schönbrunn, even before she arrived at Versailles. The famous Vienna Congress of 1815 was held in French. Mozart used a French text (Beaumarchais) for his Figaro opera (libretto in Italian). Mozart lived and studied in Italy for more than 3 years, and he spoke Italian fluently. Italian was the standard language for Operas, his Vienna rival Salieri was an Italian. He was firm in Latin, too. But his native language was German, maybe he used some Vienna or Salzburg dialect at home, again we have no audio tapes. His letters are written in Italian or high German.

It's been fun watching two of our resident man-clowns duke it out over whether the polar bear is actually white. Why you gotta rain on our parade like that?

 

[urban]

Maybe the polar bear will turn brown within the next years. They have changed their hunting habits already.

 

[R. Schweikart]

Admit that you don't know it and I'll tell you. When you don't know something just try to find it or ask. It's so simple.

I know what Mozart's native language was - German.
To say otherwise is just idiotic trolling.

 

[R. Schweikart]

No revision, Mr/Ms Schweikart! Personally I don't want to prove anything. I don't change the history. The history is just in the papers. The only thing is that this history has to be read. In details and analytically, from the proper sources.

I told you before. If you don't want to read properly without your own prejudices that's only your problem. If you want the real truth you can find it. Not so easy but it's possible. Or you can ask for facts. If you do believe in what you want to believe that's a different stuff.

We discussed several days this issue and you haven't responded to ANY of the facts I presented. And these facts, dear Mr/Ms Schweikart, are not mine. Neither they are Slavic, ha-ha! Your fantasies are endless. All these facts were researched by Austrian and German experts.

Repeat 1,000 times what you want. The truth is different. No matter you like it or not.

And again:
What is the meaning of the word "reddan"?
How many German-Prussian dictionaries (vocabularies) have been published in the 19th century?
If the Prussians spoke "German" why did they need dictionaries?????????????????????

You don't need to answer me. Bye-bye.

We were discussing

a) which was Mozart's native tongue (it was German)

b) what most people in Prussia spoke during that time (it was German)

c) where Prussia was located during that time (mostly in today's Poland and Lithuania).

You said no, no, no.
But couldn't cite an evidence for your BS.

 

[R. Schweikart]

One should not confuse languages with dialects and divide between written language and spoken word. ...

Mozart lived and studied in Italy for more than 3 years, and he spoke Italian fluently. Italian was the standard language for Operas, his Vienna rival Salieri was an Italian. He was firm in Latin, too. But his native language was German, maybe he used some Vienna or Salzburg dialect at home, again we have no audio tapes. His letters are written in Italian or high German.

This trolls wanted to tell me that people from Northern Germany wouldn't understand Bavarian people.
And that Mozart's spoke some previously unknown language called "Austrian".
What a clown!

 

[Ivan69]

Ivan, Ivan, Ivan again you manage to miss the point....the language used in both Serail and Zauberflote is German, in a Singspiel, a specifically German form of opera. Mozart and Schikaneder used this language in daily speech, it was the language of their Viennese audiences.

But of course, Danny. When you are going to work and live in France for example you need to learn and use French. Your English in France doesn't really matter. Mozart's native language was NOT German.

 

[R. Schweikart]

But of course, Danny. When you are going to work and live in France for example you need to learn and use French. Your English in France doesn't really matter. Mozart's native language was NOT German.

Enlighten us, which was Mozart's native language?

 

[Ivan69]

This trolls wanted to tell me that people from Northern Germany wouldn't understand Bavarian people.
And that Mozart's spoke some previously unknown language called "Austrian".
What a clown!

Insulting people goes on when a person has NO arguments. That was proven thousands times in this and other forums, I tried to be constructive and to present historical facts. I have to pleasure to know in person one of the people (an Austrian, not a Slavic ) have been worked and still working on the Mozart's life and Austrian history.

I don't intend to discuss the theme anymore when your behavior is offensive and dishonorable.

 

[R. Schweikart]

Insulting people goes on when a person has NO arguments. That was proven thousands times in this and other forums, I tried to be constructive and to present historical facts. I have to pleasure to know in person one of the people (an Austrian, not a Slavic ) have been worked and still working on the Mozart's life and Austrian history.

I don't intend to discuss the theme anymore when your behavior is offensive and dishonorable.

So you don't dare to reveal which Mozart's native language was?
Yes, because you know you would be laughed out of TTW...

 

[Dan Lobb]

But of course, Danny. When you are going to work and live in France for example you need to learn and use French. Your English in France doesn't really matter. Mozart's native language was NOT German.

Mozart contributed to the libretto for Zauberflote, it was not completely Schikaneder. It was a close collaboration.

 

[R. Schweikart]

Mozart contributed to the libretto for Zauberflote, it was not completely Schikaneder. It was a close collaboration.

Have you gleaned from this troll's weird posts what he thinks Mozart's native language was?
Latin maybe?

 

[Ivan69]

One should not confuse languages with dialects and divide between written language and spoken word. At least since Martin Luthers Bible translation and the reform of charter language (German instead of Latin) , a standard German written language had been established. In the 18th Century, people like Lessing, Goethe or Schiller wrote the purest form of German, which is still the standard German of today (except some (lesser) grammatic and othrographic changes). Of course, Goethe, who was born and raised in Frankfurt, at home, may have spoken some "Hessisch" dialect (no audio tape exists), but at Weimar, where he was part of the government, he certainly spoke High German.
At the courts, the lingustic situation was quite international. French was the official diplomatic and courtly conversation language. Friedrich the Great wrote almost all his works in French, except a few German texts, and discussed things in French with Voltaire and other philosophers of the Enlightment. Same did Catherine the Great (from German (Anhalt) heritage) in Russia. I think, the unlucky Marie Antoinette spoke fluently French already at Schönbrunn, even before she arrived at Versailles. The famous Vienna Congress of 1815 was held in French. Mozart used a French text (Beaumarchais) for his Figaro opera (libretto in Italian). Mozart lived and studied in Italy for more than 3 years, and he spoke Italian fluently. Italian was the standard language for Operas, his Vienna rival Salieri was an Italian. He was firm in Latin, too. But his native language was German, maybe he used some Vienna or Salzburg dialect at home, again we have no audio tapes. His letters are written in Italian or high German.

One should know at first side what is the meaning of the word "dialect". It comes from the Ancient Greek and means ... language.
The linguists since many years make a clear difference b/w a language and a dialect depending on syntactical structure, morphological structure and pronunciation. When they have close structures they are considered dialects. Typical example is the verb "sein" pronounced and written in some areas as "suin" or "zun".
The experts call it a different language when the structures of the words are different.
According to different linguists there were 15-20 different languages and a lot more of different dialects in the different territories of the past Germany area. The explanation is that from one side they lived there different tribes with a different culture and a different origin. From a second side, the mobility of people, groups or tribes in the 15th, 16th, 17th and 18th century was significant. From 3rd side, all the neighbor countries had an influence over the language - Netherlands, France, Poland, Scandinavia, Italy.
It's not a coincidence that UN protected 13 independent languages (not dialects) from past-Germany, 5 from Austria, 26 from France etc. The diversity of languages was enormous in those times.

In order to show this diversity let me show what is the meaning of the words "reddan", "babba", "Stuba". I doubt you know them. So did I. These were typical words from different German areas. Far far far from the German language.
Reddan means "falsch" in Prussian, "babba" means "kleben" in bairisch, "Stuba" means "die Hut" in Schwabisch.

Goethe is a different case. His native language was called south-hessisch or franko-hessisch which was a part of Hochdeutsch group of languages. And Hochdeutsch is considered by the experts as the more closest to the today's Deutsch. But I need to mention that Hochdeutsch had be spoken and written in about 1/4 of the country, mainly in the middle Germany. The other parts of the country had different languages.

The main theme was Mozart's native language not Goethe's. Some 600 km away from Frankfurt. The experts call Mozart's and his mother's language "ostmittelbairisch". It was active only in Salzburg and close village area. The wording was a bit close to the other bairisch languages but fully different to the other languages spoken and written in Northern and Middle Germany. His father's language was called "nordbairisch", a part of the group of bairisch languages. But ... Wolfgang refused to learn, speak and write in "nordbairisch". Obviously it was not so close to his mother's language.
Except the native ostmittelbairisch the experts say that he knew at least 10 languages.

A friend of mine from Austria just told me today that currently the Austrians call this language österreichisch-bairisch.

 

[Ivan69]

Mozart contributed to the libretto for Zauberflote, it was not completely Schikaneder. It was a close collaboration.

When you say something give some proof. I can give you several from the times saying it's Schikaneder ONLY. In one of the letters to his father Mozart says that he "loves Schikaneder's libretto".
Hier is a copy of the announcement for the premiere of the opera in the Schikaneder's theater. In the down part it is written - music Herr Wolfgang ..., libretto - Herr Schikaneder.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/63/Zauberfl%C3%B6te-Theaterzettel1791.jpg

 

[R. Schweikart]

One should know at first side what is the meaning of the word "dialect". It comes from the Ancient Greek and means ... language.
The linguists since many years make a clear difference b/w a language and a dialect depending on syntactical structure, morphological structure and pronunciation. When they have close structures they are considered dialects. Typical example is the verb "sein" pronounced and written in some areas as "suin" or "zun".
The experts call it a different language when the structures of the words are different.
According to different linguists there were 15-20 different languages and a lot more of different dialects in the different territories of the past Germany area. The explanation is that from one side they lived there different tribes with a different culture and a different origin. From a second side, the mobility of people, groups or tribes in the 15th, 16th, 17th and 18th century was significant. From 3rd side, all the neighbor countries had an influence over the language - Netherlands, France, Poland, Scandinavia, Italy.
It's not a coincidence that UN protected 13 independent languages (not dialects) from past-Germany, 5 from Austria, 26 from France etc. The diversity of languages was enormous in those times.

In order to show this diversity let me show what is the meaning of the words "reddan", "babba", "Stuba". I doubt you know them. So did I. These were typical words from different German areas. Far far far from the German language.
Reddan means "falsch" in Prussian, "babba" means "kleben" in bairisch, "Stuba" means "die Hut" in Schwabisch.

Goethe is a different case. His native language was called south-hessisch or franko-hessisch which was a part of Hochdeutsch group of languages. And Hochdeutsch is considered by the experts as the more closest to the today's Deutsch. But I need to mention that Hochdeutsch had be spoken and written in about 1/4 of the country, mainly in the middle Germany. The other parts of the country had different languages.

The main theme was Mozart's native language not Goethe's. Some 600 km away from Frankfurt. The experts call Mozart's and his mother's language "ostmittelbairisch". It was active only in Salzburg and close village area. The wording was a bit close to the other bairisch languages but fully different to the other languages spoken and written in Northern and Middle Germany. His father's language was called "nordbairisch", a part of the group of bairisch languages. But ... Wolfgang refused to learn, speak and write in "nordbairisch". Obviously it was not so close to his mother's language.
Except the native ostmittelbairisch the experts say that he knew at least 10 languages.

A friend of mine from Austria just told me today that currently the Austrians call this language österreichisch-bairisch.

German language - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Now give it a rest.
You were wrong because you confused languages and dialects.
People in Germany, Austria and big parts of Switzerland speak German. Live with it.

 

[Dan Lobb]

But of course, Danny. When you are going to work and live in France for example you need to learn and use French. Your English in France doesn't really matter. Mozart's native language was NOT German.

I think that you have had your say on this subject, such as it is. Best for you to be quiet and hope that this issue is forgotten, to preserve your good reputation.

 

[Dan Lobb]

When you say something give some proof. I can give you several from the times saying it's Schikaneder ONLY. In one of the letters to his father Mozart says that he "loves Schikaneder's libretto".
Hier is a copy of the announcement for the premiere of the opera in the Schikaneder's theater. In the down part it is written - music Herr Wolfgang ..., libretto - Herr Schikaneder.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/63/Zauberfl%C3%B6te-Theaterzettel1791.jpg

And Mozart made some alterations in the libretto with Schikaneder's agreement.
If you want to discuss Mozart, come over to the classical music threads in Odds and Ends, many brilliant contributors there.

 

[Ivan69]

And Mozart made some alterations in the libretto with Schikaneder's agreement.
If you want to discuss Mozart, come over to the classical music threads in Odds and Ends, many brilliant contributors there.

Give a proof, Dan! I already gave you. I don't want to read just somebody's statements. Present your proof that says mine is not right. It's simple when two people have different statements - presenting proofs.

 

[R. Schweikart]

Give a proof, Dan! I already gave you. I don't want to read just somebody's statements. Present your proof that says mine is not right. It's simple when two people have different statements - presenting proofs.

What is your comment on the Wikipedia map with the German-speaking regions in Europe?
Is that enough as "proof"?

 

[Ivan69]

I think that you have had your say on this subject, such as it is. Best for you to be quiet and hope that this issue is forgotten, to preserve your good reputation.

Danny, Danny! I can admit that you are very good in the trials of sliding somebody. As I know you very well, "the issue is forgotten" phrases are coming every time when you have been caught wrong. Yes, the issue is forgotten for me, don't worry. I don't think day and night about Mozart. I started the discussion constructive and have refuted some wrong statements of yours and one German who doesn't know his own country's history. And even more offending me. That's it.

Despite that, I admit that I like you as a person. My only advise to you would be to reassess your position if you want to oppose me almost every time "just for fun" or not. Because this derogates your good reputation.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Danny, Danny! I can admit that you are very good in the trials of sliding somebody. As I know you very well, "the issue is forgotten" phrases are coming every time when you have been caught wrong. Yes, the issue is forgotten for me, don't worry. I don't think day and night about Mozart. I started the discussion constructive and have refuted some wrong statements of yours and one German who doesn't know his own country's history. And even more offending me. That's it.

Despite that, I admit that I like you as a person. My only advise to you would be to reassess your position if you want to oppose me almost every time "just for fun" or not. Because this derogates your good reputation.

I am pleased to hear that you like me as a person. Now come on over to the classical music threads and we can discuss more interesting issues.

 

[Ivan69]

I am pleased to hear that you like me as a person. Now come on over to the classical music threads and we can discuss more interesting issues.

I have much more priorities in tennis. Recently found a lot of matches, maybe 500-600 new for me, from 1900s on and I have to describe them in my database from the papers.

 

[Dan Lobb]

I have much more priorities in tennis. Recently found a lot of matches, maybe 500-600 new for me, from 1900s on and I have to describe them in my database from the papers.

Let's hope that they are good ones.

 

[Ivan69]

Let's hope that they are good ones.

I haven't watched them but at least they are valuable for the history.

Something very very interesting. Tilden's total earnings at the end of 1933 were $983,477 !!! This means for 3 pro years. This amount is equal today to more than $20 million !!! Almost 100 years ago Mr. Tilden earned such money similar or more than today's players !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Without any big commercial contracts and big sponsorships.
The papers suggest that in 1931 he got about $200,000. For 1932 and 1933 I didn't find something specific but the amounts should be around $400,000 each year. Or even more for 1933.

The papers say that no other baseball player ever approached this mark. Even Babe Ruth.

 

[Dan Lobb]

I haven't watched them but at least they are valuable for the history.

Something very very interesting. Tilden's total earnings at the end of 1933 were $983,477 !!! This means for 3 pro years. This amount is equal today to more than $20 million !!! Almost 100 years ago Mr. Tilden earned such money similar or more than today's players !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Without any big commercial contracts and big sponsorships.
The papers suggest that in 1931 he got about $200,000. For 1932 and 1933 I didn't find something specific but the amounts should be around $400,000 each year. Or even more for 1933.

The papers say that no other baseball player ever approached this mark. Even Babe Ruth.

If those reports are true, it means that Tilden was a wise choice to play against Vines in 1934, even though Nusslein was the world champion pro in 1933 and ranked the No. 1 pro for that year. Normally, Nusslein would be the choice to play the tour against Vines, but Tilden obviously had greater box office drawing power.

 

[Ivan69]

If those reports are true, it means that Tilden was a wise choice to play against Vines in 1934, even though Nusslein was the world champion pro in 1933 and ranked the No. 1 pro for that year. Normally, Nusslein would be the choice to play the tour against Vines, but Tilden obviously had greater box office drawing power.

Nusslein admitted several times in 1933 that Tilden is still the better player. In the big US tour (wrongly called world tour) Tilden beat Nusslein with a big difference. Hans tried to challenge Tilden but did not succeed. Then he beat Tilden in Berlin tournament. Though Tilden was still widely considered the best pro player.
The next Tilden's challenger was Vines. When Vines decided to turn pro somewhere in the autumn of 1933 he announced that he will beat Tilden with the well-being of a Wimbledon and US champion in 1932. And he beat him in 1934.
Meanwhile Tilden invited Cochet, Crawford and some US players (Gledhill, Chapin, Lott) to turn pro. Cochet agreed in September 1933, Crawford denied. But the biggest contender for 1934 was considered Vines and the 1934 US tour was planned already in October 1933. Hansi was not counted.
To mention is also that the audience got bored by the multiple Tilden wins vs Nusslein, Barnes, Pare and Richards. The audience wanted more tough matches. And that was another reason for inviting Vines. And the 1934 tour proved that Tilden has chosen the right guy.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Nusslein admitted several times in 1933 that Tilden is still the better player. In the big US tour (wrongly called world tour) Tilden beat Nusslein with a big difference. Hans tried to challenge Tilden but did not succeed. Then he beat Tilden in Berlin tournament. Though Tilden was still widely considered the best pro player.
The next Tilden's challenger was Vines. When Vines decided to turn pro somewhere in the autumn of 1933 he announced that he will beat Tilden with the well-being of a Wimbledon and US champion in 1932. And he beat him in 1934.
Meanwhile Tilden invited Cochet, Crawford and some US players (Gledhill, Chapin, Lott) to turn pro. Cochet agreed in September 1933, Crawford denied. But the biggest contender for 1934 was considered Vines and the 1934 US tour was planned already in October 1933. Hansi was not counted.
To mention is also that the audience got bored by the multiple Tilden wins vs Nusslein, Barnes, Pare and Richards. The audience wanted more tough matches. And that was another reason for inviting Vines. And the 1934 tour proved that Tilden has chosen the right guy.

Nusslein was ranked world number one for the 1933 year by the experts of the day. Tilden himself acknowledged that Nusslein played the better tennis in 1933. But there is no doubt that pro tennis needed to field the top box office man in the game, so Tilden was the logical choice for the 1934 tour, regardless of the fact that Nusslein was the world champion and ranked number one in the expert rankings of the day. Money rules in professional tennis.

 

[Ivan69]

Nusslein was ranked world number one for the 1933 year by the experts of the day. Tilden himself acknowledged that Nusslein played the better tennis in 1933. But there is no doubt that pro tennis needed to field the top box office man in the game, so Tilden was the logical choice for the 1934 tour, regardless of the fact that Nusslein was the world champion and ranked number one in the expert rankings of the day. Money rules in professional tennis.

One by one.
1. Nusslein was ranked world number one for the 1933 by ... the International Tennis Association not by experts. Some European journalists repeated this. The American journalists considered Tilden No 1. ITA considered Nusslein based on the so called World Pro tournament in Berlin. It was a sanctioned tournament by ITA. The USA was not a member of ITA. Thus ITA did not sanction the US pro and US Pro Indoor. Neither was sanctioned the US tour b/w Tilden and Nusslein. So ITA says Nusslein, US says Tilden. But Nusslein went confident to the USA to ... dethrone the king. And he didn't succeed. World champion??? When he was smashed in the tour !!! Only in the small eyes of ITA.

2. Tilden appreciated Nusslein's game but never acknowledged that Nusslein is the better player. Tilden smashed Nusslein in 1933 and will acknowledge this !?!!? Many times Tilden said to reporters that "Nusllein is a very good player who improves his game more and more." And this is Tilden's statement at the end of the tour:
“Hans is one of the best players in the world. With the same game I played today I beat many of the so-called top notchers.”

3. Put your attention on what I have said. The audience got bored with Tilden's opponents. Hans was not such a big opponent and was replaced. Hans was very very angry when not included in the 1934 tour. But Tilden considered that Vines was the better opponent. And of course he was right.

 

[Dan Lobb]

One by one.
1. Nusslein was ranked world number one for the 1933 by ... the International Tennis Association not by experts. Some European journalists repeated this. The American journalists considered Tilden No 1. ITA considered Nusslein based on the so called World Pro tournament in Berlin. It was a sanctioned tournament by ITA. The USA was not a member of ITA. Thus ITA did not sanction the US pro and US Pro Indoor. Neither was sanctioned the US tour b/w Tilden and Nusslein. So ITA says Nusslein, US says Tilden. But Nusslein went confident to the USA to ... dethrone the king. And he didn't succeed. World champion??? When he was smashed in the tour !!! Only in the small eyes of ITA.

2. Tilden appreciated Nusslein's game but never acknowledged that Nusslein is the better player. Tilden smashed Nusslein in 1933 and will acknowledge this !?!!? Many times Tilden said to reporters that "Nusllein is a very good player who improves his game more and more." And this is Tilden's statement at the end of the tour:
“Hans is one of the best players in the world. With the same game I played today I beat many of the so-called top notchers.”

3. Put your attention on what I have said. The audience got bored with Tilden's opponents. Hans was not such a big opponent and was replaced. Hans was very very angry when not included in the 1934 tour. But Tilden considered that Vines was the better opponent. And of course he was right.

Of course, Vines was better than Nusslein, but Nusslein won the biggest pro events in 1933 and was ranked No. 1 ahead of Tilden by most experts. Albert Burke and Ray Bowers both ranked Nusslein ahead of Tilden, and only Viines ranked Tilden No. 1 pro, and that was a promotional ranking by Vines to help sell tickets for his upcoming tour against Tilden.
Here is Bowers' combined amateur/pro ranking list for 1933,
J. Crawford
F. Perry
H. Nüsslein
B. Tilden
K. Koželuh
J. Sato
B. Austin
E. Vines

 

[Ivan69]

Of course, Vines was better than Nusslein, but Nusslein won the biggest pro events in 1933 and was ranked No. 1 ahead of Tilden by most experts. Albert Burke and Ray Bowers both ranked Nusslein ahead of Tilden, and only Viines ranked Tilden No. 1 pro, and that was a promotional ranking by Vines to help sell tickets for his upcoming tour against Tilden.
Here is Bowers' combined amateur/pro ranking list for 1933,
J. Crawford
F. Perry
H. Nüsslein
B. Tilden
K. Koželuh
J. Sato
B. Austin
E. Vines

Ha-ha. Bowers' list is absolutely weird and amateurish. Both Burke and Bowers don't know nothing about the US tour. You can repeat what you want. Tilden was undoubtedly No 1. He smashed Nusslein and all pro players in 1933 - Richards, Barnes, Pare, Hunter.

Nusslein "won the biggest pro events" !!! Somebody lied to you. Nusslein won World pro. Richards won US pro. Tilden won US pro indoor.

Tell me the experts who ranked Nusslein n 1!

Better start analysing than only quoting somebody's inadequate opinion.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Ha-ha. Bowers' list is absolutely weird and amateurish. Both Burke and Bowers don't know nothing about the US tour. You can repeat what you want. Tilden was undoubtedly No 1. He smashed Nusslein and all pro players in 1933 - Richards, Barnes, Pare, Hunter.

Nusslein "won the biggest pro events" !!! Somebody lied to you. Nusslein won World pro. Richards won US pro. Tilden won US pro indoor.

Tell me the experts who ranked Nusslein n 1!

Better start analysing than only quoting somebody's inadequate opinion.

I gave you the expert opinion, you gave me nothing, as usual. Show me an expert ranking to back up your hot air.
What was "the U.S. tour"? There was no U.S. championship tour that year, just exhibition matches with no title at stake.
There was a recognized World Championship tournament that year of 1933, and Tilden acknowledged afterwards that Nusslein was the best player in the world for 1933....I do not know who feeds you all that false information.

Here is Bowers' account,

"The pros were back in Berlin for the World Pro Championships starting September 12 at the Blau-Weiss. Advancing to the four-player round-robin were favorites Tilden, Kozeluh, Nusslein, and Najuch. On Friday and Saturday, Tilden and Nusslein each defeated both Kozeluh and Najuch. All four matches were decided in straight sets. The stage was thus set for a Sunday meeting between Tilden and Nusslein to decide the tournament winner.

Writer Quentin Reynolds afterwards described the showdown, held under burning sun on the Blau-Weiss clay. For two sets Tilden’s racket was "tipped in magic," wrote Reynolds, while Nusslein looked like "an uninspired punching bag." The crowd seemed to favor neither player, offering polite silence to Tilden’s "ill-tempered" complaining. "There is no audience in the world as fair as a German sport public," wrote Reynolds. But Nusslein was better than he seemed, Reynolds continued, and little by little the young man began to blunt Tilden’s shot-making. With Tilden tiring, Nusslein pushed closer into court, sometimes trapping half-volleys at the service line and moving in, often behind drop shots. The German star gradually added pace and confidence, eventually dominating play and finally winning 1-6 6-4 7-5 6-3. Afterwards an exhausted Tilden spoke to Reynolds in the dressing room: "Fritz is awfully good. He is the greatest player in the world today. No one can beat him." (Reynolds explained that Nusslein’s name was Hans but that everyone called him Fritz.)

Kozeluh defeated Najuch for third place, Ramillon defeated Barnes for fifth, and in the doubles final Barnes-Tilden defeated Najuch-Nusslein 7-5 6-1 6-2. The Morgenpost writer concluded that it had been "a tournament that would long remain in memory."

 

[Ivan69]

I gave you the expert opinion, you gave me nothing, as usual. Show me an expert ranking to back up your hot air.
What was "the U.S. tour"? There was no U.S. championship tour that year, just exhibition matches with no title at stake.
There was a recognized World Championship tournament that year of 1933, and Tilden acknowledged afterwards that Nusslein was the best player in the world for 1933....I do not know who feeds you all that false information.

Here is Bowers' account,

"The pros were back in Berlin for the World Pro Championships starting September 12 at the Blau-Weiss. Advancing to the four-player round-robin were favorites Tilden, Kozeluh, Nusslein, and Najuch. On Friday and Saturday, Tilden and Nusslein each defeated both Kozeluh and Najuch. All four matches were decided in straight sets. The stage was thus set for a Sunday meeting between Tilden and Nusslein to decide the tournament winner.

Writer Quentin Reynolds afterwards described the showdown, held under burning sun on the Blau-Weiss clay. For two sets Tilden’s racket was "tipped in magic," wrote Reynolds, while Nusslein looked like "an uninspired punching bag." The crowd seemed to favor neither player, offering polite silence to Tilden’s "ill-tempered" complaining. "There is no audience in the world as fair as a German sport public," wrote Reynolds. But Nusslein was better than he seemed, Reynolds continued, and little by little the young man began to blunt Tilden’s shot-making. With Tilden tiring, Nusslein pushed closer into court, sometimes trapping half-volleys at the service line and moving in, often behind drop shots. The German star gradually added pace and confidence, eventually dominating play and finally winning 1-6 6-4 7-5 6-3. Afterwards an exhausted Tilden spoke to Reynolds in the dressing room: "Fritz is awfully good. He is the greatest player in the world today. No one can beat him." (Reynolds explained that Nusslein’s name was Hans but that everyone called him Fritz.)

Kozeluh defeated Najuch for third place, Ramillon defeated Barnes for fifth, and in the doubles final Barnes-Tilden defeated Najuch-Nusslein 7-5 6-1 6-2. The Morgenpost writer concluded that it had been "a tournament that would long remain in memory."

First of all, Tilden NEVER acknowledged that Nusslein was the best player in the world for 1933. NEVER!

Second, you are describing something already known for the tournament. But ... this tournament did not define the world title. There was NOT such title "world champion" in those years !!! No. The media was talking about "the best player". And the European media followed only the European events. Very very bad!

Third, World pro was recognized by ITA, US pro and US pro indoor were recognized by the USPTA. Everything was recognized. You are not the person to claim which tournament was decisive for any "world title" because there were no criteria announced by any federation.

So Dan, stop reading Bowers' and others' stupid inadequate opinions.

If Nusslein is your and your beloved experts' "world champion" for 1933 with 1 win in Berlin, so the TZAR had a comfortable balance vs the "world champion" of 63-29. VERY VERY comfortable balance, right? I go with the TZAR and his impressive balance. There you can see the best player. You can stay in the past with Bowers and company and with ... the win in Berlin.
Tilden and Richards were the only players who supported the idea of united pro-amateur tournament. In such a tournament the people would see who is the combined best. But ... this tournament failed. No amateur players supported the idea. Maybe fear???

By the way here is a statement by Paul Feret, a former pro and one of the "experts" before the US media:
"Paul Feret believes the two best amateurs would prevail over the two best pros in an open tournament. The black-thatched Frenchman selects as the two outstanding amateurs, Fred Perry, of England, holder of the U. S. singles title, and Jack Crawford, of Australia, winner of the 1933 Wimbledon and French championships. At the top of the pros he ranks William T. Tilden and second H. Ellsworth Vines."

Dan, such were the "experts". They did not analyse, they did not have an information, they just BELIEVED. Have you seen that Feret didn't put Nusslein in the counts? Simple, because nobody believed that Nusslein was the best player. Despite ITA's political actions just to oppose to the US.

 

[Dan Lobb]

First of all, Tilden NEVER acknowledged that Nusslein was the best player in the world for 1933. NEVER!

Second, you are describing something already known for the tournament. But ... this tournament did not define the world title. There was NOT such title "world champion" in those years !!! No. The media was talking about "the best player". And the European media followed only the European events. Very very bad!

Third, World pro was recognized by ITA, US pro and US pro indoor were recognized by the USPTA. Everything was recognized. You are not the person to claim which tournament was decisive for any "world title" because there were no criteria announced by any federation.

So Dan, stop reading Bowers' and others' stupid inadequate opinions.

If Nusslein is your and your beloved experts' "world champion" for 1933 with 1 win in Berlin, so the TZAR had a comfortable balance vs the "world champion" of 63-29. VERY VERY comfortable balance, right? I go with the TZAR and his impressive balance. There you can see the best player. You can stay in the past with Bowers and company and with ... the win in Berlin.
Tilden and Richards were the only players who supported the idea of united pro-amateur tournament. In such a tournament the people would see who is the combined best. But ... this tournament failed. No amateur players supported the idea. Maybe fear???

By the way here is a statement by Paul Feret, a former pro and one of the "experts" before the US media:
"Paul Feret believes the two best amateurs would prevail over the two best pros in an open tournament. The black-thatched Frenchman selects as the two outstanding amateurs, Fred Perry, of England, holder of the U. S. singles title, and Jack Crawford, of Australia, winner of the 1933 Wimbledon and French championships. At the top of the pros he ranks William T. Tilden and second H. Ellsworth Vines."

Dan, such were the "experts". They did not analyse, they did not have an information, they just BELIEVED. Have you seen that Feret didn't put Nusslein in the counts? Simple, because nobody believed that Nusslein was the best player. Despite ITA's political actions just to oppose to the US.

First of all, Tilden acknowledged that Nusslein was the best player in the world for 1933, as I showed you above.

"Afterwards an exhausted Tilden spoke to Reynolds in the dressing room: "Fritz is awfully good. He is the greatest player in the world today. No one can beat him." (Reynolds explained that Nusslein’s name was Hans but that everyone called him Fritz.)"

Second of all, the Berlin tournament was acknowledged to be a world championship tournament. This was not true of the American exhibition series, which conferred no title.

Third of all, the Berlin event was determinative of the best player because Tilden said that it was, and his word was definitive for that year.

Fourth of all, Bowers did valuable work in reporting these events, and you should be very grateful to him....so start apologizing.

Here is Albert Burke's ranking for 1933, Burke actually played against the top pros on the tennis court that year, he would certainly know better than a non-player.

H. Nüsslein
B. Tilden
K. Koželuh
M. Plaa
R. Ramillon
B. Barnes
R. Najuch
V. Richards
E. Pare
C. Wood

 

[Ivan69]

First of all, Tilden acknowledged that Nusslein was the best player in the world for 1933, as I showed you above.

Second of all, the Berlin tournament was acknowledged to be a world championship tournament. This was not true of the American exhibition series, which conferred no title.

Third of all, the Berlin event was determinative of the best player because Tilden said that it was, and his word was definitive for that year.

Fourth of all, Bowers did valuable work in reporting these events, and you should be very grateful to him....so start apologizing.

You still can't understand that Tilden expressed a lot of respect to Nusslein. You need to read b/w the lines. The words "No one can beat him" showed a nice courtesy from Tilden in the heart of Berlin while the results spoke more than enough.

Again I remind you of Tilden's nice words after the US tour: "Hans is ONE of the best pro players." But Big Bill did not invite Hansi for 1934 just because the audience wanted a BETTER player. The audience just got bored of the multiple easy Tilden's wins over Hansi. That was, Danny. The papers wrote it clearly. No matter you don't like it. No matter what ITA sanctioned or not. No matter what the European journalists said.

Anyway, no more comments from me. Keep with Bowers and the 1 precious win in Berlin. I go with the TZAR. Obviously you can't understand what a tally of 63-29 means. Or you understand it but refuse to accept it.

 

[Dan Lobb]

You still can't understand that Tilden expressed a lot of respect to Nusslein. You need to read b/w the lines. The words "No one can beat him" showed a nice courtesy from Tilden in the heart of Berlin while the results spoke more than enough.

Again I remind you of Tilden's nice words after the US tour: "Hans is ONE of the best pro players." But Big Bill did not invite Hansi for 1934 just because the audience wanted a BETTER player. The audience just got bored of the multiple easy Tilden's wins over Hansi. That was, Danny. The papers wrote it clearly. No matter you don't like it. No matter what ITA sanctioned or not. No matter what the European journalists said.

Anyway, no more comments from me. Keep with Bowers and the 1 precious win in Berlin. I go with the TZAR. Obviously you can't understand what a tally of 63-29 means. Or you understand it but refuse to accept it.

Again, your attempt to "read between the lines" is just a fictional escapade without any merit. Reynolds was an English speaking reporter, not German.

Read what I showed you above, Burke's expert ranking, Bowers' expert ranking, Tilden's own evaluation that Nusslein was the best player in the world for 1933.

Stop spinning your personal fantasies. Stick with the facts.
"Afterwards an exhausted Tilden spoke to Reynolds in the dressing room: "Fritz is awfully good. He is the greatest player in the world today. No one can beat him." (Reynolds explained that Nusslein’s name was Hans but that everyone called him Fritz.)"

Here is Albert Burke's ranking for 1933, Burke actually played against the top pros on the tennis court that year, he would certainly know better than a non-player.

H. Nüsslein
B. Tilden
K. Koželuh
M. Plaa
R. Ramillon
B. Barnes
R. Najuch
V. Richards
E. Pare
C. Wood

 

[Ivan69]

Burke actually played against the top pros on the tennis court that year, he would certainly know better than a non-player.

Danny, Danny, Danny! During your painful trials of opposing me "just for fun" you fall into more and more confused situations. And I am again sticking with the facts. Mr. Albert Burke DID NOT PLAY in 1933. That year he had only 1 match in Berlin and lost it vs a weak player. "He would certainly know better" as an active player seems to be only in your highly-developed fantasies.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Danny, Danny, Danny! During your painful trials of opposing me "just for fun" you fall into more and more confused situations. And I am again sticking with the facts. Mr. Albert Burke DID NOT PLAY in 1933. That year he had only 1 match in Berlin and lost it vs a weak player. "He would certainly know better" as an active player seems to be only in your highly-developed fantasies.

That makes one more match on the court, and who knows how much other play we do not know about, than you yourself ever managed for 1933. I would take the word of an eyewitness over your own fantasies any day of the week, Ivan. You owe Burke and Bowers an abject apology, I am waiting to hear you grovel.

 

[Ivan69]

That makes one more match on the court, and who knows how much other play we do not know about, than you yourself ever managed for 1933. I would take the word of an eyewitness over your own fantasies any day of the week, Ivan. You owe Burke and Bowers an abject apology, I am waiting to hear you grovel.

Ha-ha-ha. One more match! Ha-ha-ha. You gave me so much fun for the whole week.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Ha-ha-ha. One more match! Ha-ha-ha. You gave me so much fun for the whole week.

I am waiting for your apology to the real experts.

 

[Drob]

If those reports are true, it means that Tilden was a wise choice to play against Vines in 1934, even though Nusslein was the world champion pro in 1933 and ranked the No. 1 pro for that year. Normally, Nusslein would be the choice to play the tour against Vines, but Tilden obviously had greater box office drawing power.

Dan, do you happen to have any written sources on why Nusslein was left out in the cold after 1934, especially since he showed he was competitive w Vines when he came over to shore up the faltering 1935 tour?

I mean Lester freaking Stoefen in the headliner two consecutive years? The WCS practically died before it really got going

 

[Dan Lobb]

Dan, do you happen to have any written sources on why Nusslein was left out in the cold after 1934, especially since he showed he was competitive w Vines when he came over to shore up the faltering 1935 tour?

I mean Lester freaking Stoefen in the headliner two consecutive years? The WCS practically died before it really got going

Good question. I will look into it.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Good question. I will look into it.

Possibly Nusslein being German had something to do with it. International tensions were heating up at that time.
Even von Cramm took a hit by being excluded from Wimbledon in 1939, which he would probably have won otherwise.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Also in keeping with the title of this thread, rankings of experts, is this discovery of a ranking by Lance Tingay, who was the acknowledged expert ranking authority of the post-WWII era.

As follows, in a 1979 interview,

"Lew Hoad was the most virtuoso tennis player I ever saw, for sure....Hoad could do anything."(Mike Lupica, Daily News, 3 July 1979.)

In 1973 Tingay ranked Hoad all-time number 5 behind Tilden, Budge, Laver and Gonzales.

This assessment appears to be about talent rather than career achievements.

 

[Ivan69]

Also in keeping with the title of this thread, rankings of experts, is this discovery of a ranking by Lance Tingay, who was the acknowledged expert ranking authority of the post-WWII era.

As follows, in a 1979 interview,

"Lew Hoad was the most virtuoso tennis player I ever saw, for sure....Hoad could do anything."(Mike Lupica, Daily News, 3 July 1979.)

In 1973 Tingay ranked Hoad all-time number 5 behind Tilden, Budge, Laver and Gonzales.

This assessment appears to be about talent rather than career achievements.

The sport clearly showed/shows that talent doesn't mean success. We have thousands of examples that highly talented players recognized by experts and media were not able to develop their talent. Hoad had the bad luck to suffer from too many injuries.

 

[Dan Lobb]

The sport clearly showed/shows that talent doesn't mean success. We have thousands of examples that highly talented players recognized by experts and media were not able to develop their talent. Hoad had the bad luck to suffer from too many injuries.

Actually, he had a ten year career of good performances from about 1953 to 1963, including three years ranked as World No. 1, and a huge number of matches played. That is not a bad record, probably superior to Becker or other big names. (Becker never ranked World No. 1.) That was in spite of the injuries.

Ultimately, greatness is about quality of play, and in that metric Hoad is at or near the top.

"Achievements" are difficult to evaluate, strength of fields varies from one era to another and in the old split era events meant different things than today.

 

[Ivan69]

Actually, he had a ten year career of good performances from about 1953 to 1963, including three years ranked as World No. 1, and a huge number of matches played. That is not a bad record, probably superior to Becker or other big names. (Becker never ranked World No. 1.) That was in spite of the injuries.

Ultimately, greatness is about quality of play, and in that metric Hoad is at or near the top.

"Achievements" are difficult to evaluate, strength of fields varies from one era to another and in the old split era events meant different things than today.

Even if we don't compare pre-open era with today we definitely could say that Tilden, Vines, Budge, Riggs, Perry, Kramer, Gonzales, Segura, Rosewall, Laver had much more success than Hoad. With 17 big titles in the amateur and pro periods Hoad is not "near the top". But I don't want to talk about Hoad with you as you are too obsessed.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Even if we don't compare pre-open era with today we definitely could say that Tilden, Vines, Budge, Riggs, Perry, Kramer, Gonzales, Segura, Rosewall, Laver had much more success than Hoad. With 17 big titles in the amateur and pro periods Hoad is not "near the top". But I don't want to talk about Hoad with you as you are too obsessed.

I guess we have to deal with your obsessions again.

17 "big" titles is a rather nebulous reference, not sure what you mean there.
"Success" in what way? Rosewall and Hoad each had four years with a ranking as No. 1, so that does not indicate greater success.
Year No. 1 is a better indicator of success. not a collection of short tournaments.
One indicator which is significant is major tours with Hoad having the better record in world tours.

As stated above, Becker never had a year at No. 1, Edberg had only two years ranked No. 1. Nadal had four years at No. 1, just like Hoad and Rosewall.

 

[KingCarlitos]

People define ATG as 6+ slams but in my opinion It is more about defining your era, Even if someone walks along and wins 50 slams, Becker and Edberg will still be remembered despite only have 6 because they dominated their era.

 

[Ivan69]

I guess we have to deal with your obsessions again.

17 "big" titles is a rather nebulous reference, not sure what you mean there.
"Success" in what way? Rosewall and Hoad each had four years with a ranking as No. 1, so that does not indicate greater success.
Year No. 1 is a better indicator of success. not a collection of short tournaments.
One indicator which is significant is major tours with Hoad having the better record in world tours.

As stated above, Becker never had a year at No. 1, Edberg had only two years ranked No. 1. Nadal had four years at No. 1, just like Hoad and Rosewall.

Danny, you are a bit confused again. You said that you don't want to compare different eras !?!?! Now comparing Hoad with Becker and Edberg !?!?!

Anyway, for your information Becker had 33 big titles, Edberg - 27. Much more than 17. And yes, definitely Becker and Edberg had better careers than Hoad.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Danny, you are a bit confused again. You said that you don't want to compare different eras !?!?! Now comparing Hoad with Becker and Edberg !?!?!

Anyway, for your information Becker had 33 big titles, Edberg - 27. Much more than 17. And yes, definitely Becker and Edberg had better careers than Hoad.

Years at No. 1 is a good metric with which to overcome the era gaps, it remains the same today as in any era.

Of course, then you can look at the strength of the fields, but getting that No. 1 ranking is where you start. Without that, a player cannot even be in the conversation and can have no realistic claim at being the best ever, and that is unfortunate for Becker and Safin, neither of whom ever achieved a world No. 1 ranking.

So last time I counted, four years at No. 1 is better than zero years at No. 1. Consistency is important to get those No. 1 rankings.

No Becker, no Safin, .... Edberg gets two. Hoad, Rosewall four. Kramer, Sedgman three.