Stats for 1970 Wimb final (Newcombe-Rosewall)

K

krosero

Legend
Newcombe d. Rosewall 5-7, 6-3, 6-2, 3-6, 6-1

Newcombe was 26, Rosewall 35.

Rosewall had lost two previous Wimbledon finals, to Drobny and Hoad. In the Open Era he had so far made two Slam finals, both at the French Open with Laver.

Rosewall was staying back generally on second serves. Kramer thought he should come in because Newcombe was taking it to come in himself.


The following are my own counts.

Newcombe won 158 points overall, Rosewall 143.

SERVICE

Newcombe won 100 of 158 points on his serve (or 63%).
Rosewall won 85 of 143 points on his serve (or 59%).

It’s just a coincidence that each man served as many points as he won in the match overall; that’s how the numbers worked out.


Newcombe served at 54%, making 85 of 158 first serves.
Rosewall served at 61%, making 87 of 143 first serves.

(Another instance of the winner serving more points than the loser).

Newcombe had 6 aces [one on a 2nd serve] and 7 double-faults.
Rosewall had 2 aces and 11 double-faults.

Newcombe served 28 other unreturned serves, of which I judged 3 as service winners.
Rosewall served 28 other unreturned serves, of which I judged none as a service winner.


Newcombe converted 6 of 14 break points (43%).
Rosewall converted 3 of 18 break points (17%).

Newcombe made his first serve on 11 of 18 break points (61%).
Rosewall made his first serve on 8 of 14 break points (57%).

Newcombe won 100 of 158 points on his serve (or 63%).
Rosewall won 85 of 143 points on his serve (or 59%).

Newcombe won 158 points overall, Rosewall 143.


WINNERS

Newcombe hit 56 clean winners apart from service: 9 FH, 6 BH, 16 FHV, 12 BHV, 13 overheads.

Rosewall hit 38 clean winners apart from service: 5 FH, 12 BH, 6 FHV, 9 BHV, 6 overheads.

Newcombe’s rate of winners over the course of the 45 games is not far below Laver’s in the 1969 final. He has a lot of volley/smash winners, in fact close to a rate of 1 per game, not far behind Gerulaitis and McEnroe against Borg in 1977 and 1981, respectively (at Wimbledon).

Rosewall, in terms of winners, had a similar performance in his five-set loss earlier in 1970 to Laver in Sydney.

Newcombe hit 7 service return winners (two when Rosewall misjudged them). Six were passes. In addition he hit 6 passing shots, three from each side.

Rosewall hit 9 service return winners, all passes. In addition he hit 8 passing shots – five from the backhand.

Neither man hit a lob winner.


ERRORS (forced and unforced)

Subtracting the aces and clean winners from the total points won:

Newcombe made 103 total errors. Of those I counted 28 return erros and 7 double-faults. That leaves him making 68 errors in points that had at least a successful return, that is, in rallies.

Rosewall made 96 total errors. Of those I counted 28 return errors and 11 double-faults. That leaves him making 57 errors in rallies.
 
Last edited:
A very good Wimbledon final, I think it was the last GS final to be played by 2 of the greatest Australian players of any time.Obviously, Rafter and Philipousis played the last one, but none of them can compete with Newcombe and Rosewall.

Two contrasting styles, but Newcombe in 1970 was clearly peaking and more confident in his weapons than Rosewall ( who would beat Roche in the same year´s US Open,tough).

At the end, a battle between Newk´s serve and Ken´s return of serve.In 71, Newcombe defeated easily Rosewall in the semifinals, in what might have been Ken´s last real chance to win that elusive title he never won.
 
Additional stats

I've gotten new stats, and made slight corrections to the opening post.

I did a couple of things I hadn’t done before. I counted how many times Rosewall stayed back on his serve; and I recorded where Newcombe was directing his serves.


Rosewall did not directly follow his serve to net on 35 points (6 of them first serves).

He lost 17 of these 35 points. But at one stretch late in the match he won 12 of 13.

By then he seemed, on these points, to be making an approach shot early in the rally and not letting John make the first approach.


In the third and fourth sets Rosewall made all of his FH returns. In fact after making a FH return error early in the second set, he didn’t make another until early in the fifth: a streak of 16 successful FH returns.

During that streak Rosewall took 63 serves on the BH, and out of those he was forced into 15 return errors.

Overall in the match Rosewall made more return errors on his stronger wing: 24 on the BH, 4 on the FH. That's almost entirely due to the fact that most serves were being directed to his BH.

Vines wrote in his book that you should always approach to your opponent’s backhand even if that is his stronger stroke. The theory there is that the BH is always more attackable than the FH, even in the case of a player whose backhand is regarded as his stronger side.

Rosewall even ran around his BH a few times during his stretch of successful FH returns.


ALL RETURN ERRORS

Breaking down the 28 return errors that Newcombe drew:

– 17 first serves, 11 second serves
– 4 FH, 24 BH
- all were forced errors


Breaking down the 28 return errors that Rosewall drew:

– 21 first serves, 7 second serves
– 10 FH, 18 BH
– 4 errors were unforced, all on second serves (Rosewall did not SV on these points)



SUCCESS ON SERVE

Newcombe won 58 of 85 points on 1st serve (68%) and 42 of 73 on 2nd (58%).

Rosewall won 61 of 87 points on 1st serve (70%) and 24 of 56 on 2nd (43%).


Success on serve just looking at points on which the serve was successfully returned:

Newcombe 57% on 1st serve (36/63) and 56% on 2nd (30/54).
Rosewall 59% on 1st serve (38/64) and 45% on 2nd (17/38 ).


So in this match, the server always had the advantage, except when Rosewall was down to his second serve.
 
Newcombe was approaching his prime in 1970, Ken was 35 already. It's harder to prevail at an older age against the very best and Newcombe had the big serve. Rosewall is one of the players I admire most in tennis history and he would surely have won a couple of Wimbledon titles in his prime if everyone had been allowed to compete. Boycott years didn't help either. If Open tennis had come about in 1960 for instance, that would have suited Ken.
 
Sports Illustrated's Walter Bingham
(all the stats are confirmed in my count)

Pity Ken Rosewall. Sixteen years ago he stood on Wimbledon's center court in the finals against Jaroslav Drobny, a 19-year-old boy against a Wimbledon favorite. Drobny won, a popular decision, and little sympathy was wasted on Rosewall. Surely he would have other opportunities. Two years later Rosewall reached the finals again and this time he lost to his doubles partner, Lew Hoad. When Rosewall turned pro, he became ineligible for Wimbledon and by the time open tennis arrived, Rod Laver had supplanted him as the best player in the world.

And yet last week, on a damp, humid afternoon, there was Ken Rosewall, now 35, back on center court and in the finals, back for perhaps his last try at the one major title he had never won. Across the net was John Newcombe, another Australian—this was the 10th All-Australian final in the last 15 years—a big, strong, good-looking 26-year-old with a crashing serve and volley and the stamina to run all day. It would be pleasant to report that little Ken, with his lightning backhand and delicate touch, cut the bigger man down, as almost everyone in London wanted him to do. In truth Newcombe won and it was not really close, that is if you can call a five-set match not close.

Rosewall won the first set by breaking Newcombe's big serve in the 11th game and then holding his own.

But for the next hour it was all Newcombe. Whenever Rosewall missed with his first serve, Newcombe would take the weak second one on his forehand, perhaps the strongest in tennis, and pin Rosewall back on his heels. Newcombe won the second and third sets 6-3, 6-2 and when he immediately broke Rosewall to start the fourth set, the rout appeared to be on. Rosewall looked exhausted, and he would seize the brief rest periods to sit at the base of the umpire chair, waiting until Newcombe took his position on the court before rising.

Losing 1-3, Rosewall fell behind love-30 on his serve and it seemed certain that Newcombe was about to apply the crusher. There then occurred one of the most remarkable reversals in Wimbledon history. Rosewall won four straight points to make it 2-3. He won four more on Newcombe's serve to even the set. Four more made it 12 straight points and 4-3 Rosewall. Again Rosewall broke Newcombe, held his own serve and won the set 6-3. From that black moment in the fifth game he had won 20 out of 23 points.

The applause around the stadium was, by Wimbledon's standards, enormous—but it was applause for a dying man. Newcombe may be young, but he does not shake up easily. Leading 2-1 in the fifth set, he broke Rosewall's serve and rattled off four more games in a row for the match. For Newcombe it was his second Wimbledon title—he won in 1967—while Rosewall had only the sad distinction of the most years between losses in the finals.​
 
Rosewall was still able to beat Newcombe in 3 sets later in the year at the US Open.

Their other important meetings:
1-1 in 1971 (Newcombe won at Wimbledon, Rosewall at the WCT Finals)
no crucial matches in 1972
1-0 in 1973 (Newcombe won the US Open semifinal)
0-2 in 1974 (Rosewall won at both Wimbledon and US Open)

I think this clearly demonstrates Rosewall greatness, he leads 4-3 against a top player that he faced when he was 35-39 years old...
 
I don´t there there has been a crowd´s favourite ( specially at the All England) as the Sydney´s Master.
 
Newcombe served on 158 points and 34 serves did not come back: 21.5%
Rosewall served on 143 points and 30 serves did not come back: 21.0%
 
krosero said:
Newcombe converted 6 of 14 break points (43%).
Rosewall converted 3 of 18 break points (17%).

Newcombe made his first serve on 11 of 18 break points (61%).
Rosewall made his first serve on 8 of 14 break points (57%).
Click to expand...
Success on 1st and 2nd serve when facing break point:

Newcombe won 11 of 11 points on first serve (100%) and 4 of 7 on second (57%).
Rosewall won 5 of 8 points on first serve (63%) and 3 of 6 on second (50%).

Great stat for Newk on first serve (Lendl would win 12 of 12 in the 1989 semis here against Becker).
 
The match was close while Rosewall held up against Newcombe' s serve
But what happened next year?
 
BobbyOne said:
krosero, Surprising high Rosewall percentage.
Click to expand...
It's surprising and I think it shows the quality of Rosewall's return. Newcombe clearly had the better serve (Rosewall's 11 df's in particular hurt him). But Rosewall's superiority on return was just about the same as Newk's superiority on serve, you could say, since they ended up nearly even in unreturned serves.

Another sign of Rosewall's return quality is that he could string together 12 straight points in the fourth set. To produce such a streak on grass is noteworthy because it's difficult to break serve. Even when a player is broken he might easily win a point during the game, ruining any possible streak of points by the opponent. But Rosewall managed to break Newcombe's serve at love, on grass, which obviously doesn't happen every day.

And Rosewall missed no FH returns at all in the third and fourth sets, another sign of his return quality.

NatF said:
I was thinking about buying this match, is it worth it?
Click to expand...
I would think so; there are a couple of Wimbledon finals from the era ('71-'72) that are even better but this one was between two alltime greats. It gives a good sense of Newcombe's quality in particular.
 
kiki said:
The match was close while Rosewall held up against Newcombe' s serve
But what happened next year?
Click to expand...

kiki, One of the greatest Wimbledon matches when Muscles beat Richey in a very long five-setter after losing the first two sets. In SF Rosewall was done.

Edit: The epic match was 6-8,5-7,6-4,9-7, 7-5 in Rosewall's favour.
 
Last edited:
krosero said:
It's surprising and I think it shows the quality of Rosewall's return. Newcombe clearly had the better serve (Rosewall's 11 df's in particular hurt him). But Rosewall's superiority on return was just about the same as Newk's superiority on serve, you could say, since they ended up nearly even in unreturned serves.

Another sign of Rosewall's return quality is that he could string together 12 straight points in the fourth set. To produce such a streak on grass is noteworthy because it's difficult to break serve. Even when a player is broken he might easily win a point during the game, ruining any possible streak of points by the opponent. But Rosewall managed to break Newcombe's serve at love, on grass, which obviously doesn't happen every day.

And Rosewall missed no FH returns at all in the third and fourth sets, another sign of his return quality.

I would think so; there are a couple of Wimbledon finals from the era ('71-'72) that are even better but this one was between two alltime greats. It gives a good sense of Newcombe's quality in particular.
Click to expand...

krosero, It might be of interest that even a tired Rosewall was able to keep the "clear" fifth set rather "open": No easy game for Newcombe.
 
Rosewall has 2 loses and 1 win at W
Newk 2 loses and 1 USO win
6 major grass matches and both guys tied up
A really underrated but great rivalry
 
bobbyone, to a serious and knowledgeable poster like you, it certainly will raise some suspictions that Newcombe lost to Rosewall in 74 the way he really did...Are the rumours of pseudo tanking true?

I resisted to believe that such a sportsman would do an ugly thing, even if that was motivated by the best intention to give his old nemesis a last chance...Newk had a big heart but..that much?
 
kiki said:
bobbyone, to a serious and knowledgeable poster like you, it certainly will raise some suspictions that Newcombe lost to Rosewall in 74 the way he really did...Are the rumours of pseudo tanking true?

I resisted to believe that such a sportsman would do an ugly thing, even if that was motivated by the best intention to give his old nemesis a last chance...Newk had a big heart but..that much?
Click to expand...

kiki, You were 97, now you have crossed the 100 years mark. Have you forgotten that another poster (I believe krosero) has blamed you for that nasty assumption? It is nasty for Newk as a sportsman and it's nasty for Rosewall that the latter was not able to defeat a healthy and willing Newcombe!!!

Get real and accept that Rosewall was a much greater player than Newcombe and that he was stronger than Newk even at 39 in the two most important events of the year.

As much as you worship Newcombe, Fraser and Emerson, you at the same time belittle Rosewall, Roche and Gimeno.

Thought you have studied history without any bias...
 
BobbyOne said:
kiki, You were 97, now you have crossed the 100 years mark. Have you forgotten that another poster (I believe krosero) has blamed you for that nasty assumption? It is nasty for Newk as a sportsman and it's nasty for Rosewall that the latter was not able to defeat a healthy and willing Newcombe!!!

Get real and accept that Rosewall was a much greater player than Newcombe and that he was stronger than Newk even at 39 in the two most important events of the year.

As much as you worship Newcombe, Fraser and Emerson, you at the same time belittle Rosewall, Roche and Gimeno.

Thought you have studied history without any bias...
Click to expand...

Well, in the Masters players like Borg,Vilas,Mc Enroe and Lendl did tank

Anyway, I don´t for one second think that was possible and specially from an australian player because they were all real sportsmen.

Of course, Rosewall could beat anybody anytime anywhere.He was greater than Newk to some extent, of course ( but not that far as you imagine)
 
kiki said:
Well, in the Masters players like Borg,Vilas,Mc Enroe and Lendl did tank

Anyway, I don´t for one second think that was possible and specially from an australian player because they were all real sportsmen.

Of course, Rosewall could beat anybody anytime anywhere.He was greater than Newk to some extent, of course ( but not that far as you imagine)
Click to expand...

kiki, I'm glad for this serious post.

The Masters was a round robin with a tendence of tanking.

Is n't it a shame that peak Newcombe had a negative balance against a grandpa player like Rosewall who was 33 to 43 when they met??? Imagine Muscles and Newk of same age....
 
Last edited:
He is top 5 in some things and top ten in some others...but I haven´t made a serious list whatsoever.Too many around here.
 
kiki said:
He is top 5 in some things and top ten in some others...but I haven´t made a serious list whatsoever.Too many around here.
Click to expand...

kiki, I doubt that you are a Rosewall admirer: 7 or 8 for an arguable GOAT!!!!!

Muscles is No.1 in several categories: backhand, backhand volley, return, footwork...
 
Too many all timers with comparable careers
One place up and down means absolutely nothing
It depends on very small detailed
Budge,Kramer,Perry,Hoad,Sedgie may be top ten or maybe top 20
Too many players with very comparable careers
Rosewall is second tier
 
kiki said:
Too many all timers with comparable careers
One place up and down means absolutely nothing
It depends on very small detailed
Budge,Kramer,Perry,Hoad,Sedgie may be top ten or maybe top 20
Too many players with very comparable careers
Rosewall is second tier
Click to expand...

kiki, Rosewall second tier? Then you never have watched this genius player and you never had a look at his resume..........
 
The problem is I looked at other resumees as well...
Second tier is enormous
It would be comparable to. say, Verdi or Liszt if we talked about music or Rubens or Rembrandt if we talked about painting
Do you think it is not enough?
 
kiki said:
I don´t there there has been a crowd´s favourite ( specially at the All England) as the Sydney´s Master.
Click to expand...

I think, ironically, Drobny was equally the crowd favourite when he beat Rosewall, for exactly the same reason.

Over my watching lifetime there have been four such crowd favourite situations at Wimbledon - Drobny, Rosewall, Ashe and Ivanisevic.
 
DMP said:
I think, ironically, Drobny was equally the crowd favourite when he beat Rosewall, for exactly the same reason.

Over my watching lifetime there have been four such crowd favourite situations at Wimbledon - Drobny, Rosewall, Ashe and Ivanisevic.
Click to expand...

You are right.Rosewall himself aknowledged later on that irony.

Drobny and Patty were longtime rivals and friends.Classy guys and classy characters.
 
kiki said:
The problem is I looked at other resumees as well...
Second tier is enormous
It would be comparable to. say, Verdi or Liszt if we talked about music or Rubens or Rembrandt if we talked about painting
Do you think it is not enough?
Click to expand...

kiki, No clue reg. tennis and no clue reg classic music (You prefer music a la Led Z.).

Liszt was a weak composer.

Rosewall can be compared with Bach, or Mozart, or Beethoven, or Schubert, together with Tilden, Gonzalez and Laver!

Second tier is "blashemic". Which player has a better resume???
 
DMP said:
I think, ironically, Drobny was equally the crowd favourite when he beat Rosewall, for exactly the same reason.

Over my watching lifetime there have been four such crowd favourite situations at Wimbledon - Drobny, Rosewall, Ashe and Ivanisevic.
Click to expand...

DMP, I Rosewall's case it was not just "a situation". The Wimbledon crowd (as others toolike the Wembley crowd) just loved the Little Master for many years.
 
BobbyOne said:
kiki, No clue reg. tennis and no clue reg classic music (You prefer music a la Led Z.).

Liszt was a weak composer.

Rosewall can be compared with Bach, or Mozart, or Beethoven, or Schubert, together with Tilden, Gonzalez and Laver!

Second tier is "blashemic". Which player has a better resume???
Click to expand...
Ok maybe Chopin,Tchaikovsky, Brahmms,Haydyn?
 
So I am correct
Anyway we should have a preopen and a postopen ranking because mixing so different eras is stupid
 
Last edited:
PRE OPEN
Gonzales
Laver
Tilden
Rosewall
Budge
Kramer/Hoad
Perry
Cochet/Lacoste
Wilding/Vines
Crawford
Sedgie
Trabert
Emerson
Parker
Borotra
Doherty
Von Cramm
Would be my top 20
OPEN
Borg
Sampras
Federer
Laver
Lendl/Connors/Mc Enroe/Nadal
Agassi
Becker
Newk/Wilander/Djokovic/Edberg
Rosewall/Nastase.
Vilas/Courier/Kuerten
Kodes/Murray/Ashe/Smith
would be my top 20
in case you want to place Laver and Rosewall out of open era the two entering should be Hewitt and Bruguera
 
All time girls top 20
Navratilova
Graf
Connolly
Court
Williams
Lenglen
Wills
Evert
King
Lambert
Bueno/Williams
Seles/Marble
Brought/Henin/Hingis
Hart
Sànchez/Davenport/clijsters/Dupont/Osborne/Hard/Gibson
 
Federer's 5-game surge to force a fifth set yesterday reminded me of Rosewall's similar surge of 6 games vs. Newk. The two matches progressed somewhat in the same way; Rosewall and Federer both won the first set but found themselves a break down in the fourth and nearly finished.

Federer is getting a bit into Rosewall territory. A month short of 33, he would have been the oldest Wimbledon champion of the OE if he'd won yesterday. Rosewall was 35 years 8 months when he lost to Newk, and would easily still be the oldest Wimbledon champion of the OE.

Ashe was a few days shy of 32 when he won in '75.
 
No possible comparison between old grass and current grass

Thus, no possible comparison between Newcombe and Djokovic
 
kiki said:
A very good Wimbledon final, I think it was the last GS final to be played by 2 of the greatest Australian players of any time.Obviously, Rafter and Philipousis played the last one, but none of them can compete with Newcombe and Rosewall.

Two contrasting styles, but Newcombe in 1970 was clearly peaking and more confident in his weapons than Rosewall ( who would beat Roche in the same year´s US Open,tough).

At the end, a battle between Newk´s serve and Ken´s return of serve.In 71, Newcombe defeated easily Rosewall in the semifinals, in what might have been Ken´s last real chance to win that elusive title he never won.
Click to expand...
Ken also beat Newcombe in three sets at the 70 USO in the semi finals, then Roche in the final.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
Stats for 1974 Wimb SF (Rosewall-Smith)
Replies
14
Views
4K
krosero
K
K
Stats for 1971 Wimbledon final (Newcombe-Smith)
Replies
16
Views
6K
krosero
K
K
Stats for 1970 Dunlop International final (Laver-Rosewall)
2
Replies
66
Views
34K
Dan Lobb
D
M
Stats for 1974 W Final(Connors-Rosewall)
Replies
7
Views
2K
WCT
W
M
Stats for 1970 USO Final (Rosewall-Roche)
Replies
48
Views
6K
abmk
abmk
Back
Top