Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by urban, Oct 2, 2017.
Just a few questions...
What is the date of the last item, about the Forest Hills TOC on television? Which year?
Were all 3 Forest Hills TOC televised?
Also, the TOC moniker was also applied by Kramer to the Sydney White City event in 1957, 1958, 1959.....
Thanks for discovering the McCauley error in applying the TOC name to the 1956 L.A. event, which was really the first Masters.
You have really shaken the tennis world on that one...Wikipedia will have to fix their item on tennis pro majors to reflect that 1956 error.
I have caught McCauley on some errors, too.
Oh sorry, I forgot the date.
21 Jul 1957.
But it was televised all tournament long.
What is moniker?
And SOME errors on McCauley?
It's not Christmas yet.
It's like ATP website
A moniker is a label....the TOC label was applied by Kramer to both Forest Hills and White City in the late fifties.
I caught McCauley giving the wrong dates to the 1959 Kooyong tournament.
I wonder if the 1958 and 1959 Forest Hills TOC were televised.
Ah, I got what you mean.
I would not focus a lot on the names in those tournaments.
In many of them there was no tradition to keep the name on.
Actually Sydney 1957 was called Tournament of Champions, Sydney 1958 was called The Masters and in 1959 there was only the name of the sponsor (Ampol).
TOC and Masters were both televised in 1958 for sure.
Not sure for 1959, I honestly have never checked it (for 1957 and 1958 I remembered they were when I read your posts).
And about McCauley...
Many many MANY errors, not just a few.
And some of them big and bad.
I don't really care if he missed some dates here and there, I understand that.
But the Masters/TOC is a big one, with both tournaments having big covering on the press of the fifties.
And NY and LA are not two cities in Uganda....
The 1959 White City was clearly labelled TOC, according to our friend McCauley.
And, yes, would like to see about television and the 1959 Forest Hills, tournament of the year.
I thought at the February Sydney.
The December one was called TOC.
I suspect that 1958 was also TOC.
On The Sydney Morning Herald there is the adv saying:
"Jack Kramer presents the SECOND ANNUAL AMPOL GBP 7,500 MASTERS PROFESSIONAL TENNIS TOURNAMENT at White City"
The part in bold is in bold in the article, I'm not screaming
treblings, Nüsslein used to play (and win) practice matches against the whole US Davis Cup squad.
Well, then the first annual must have been 1957, which was clearly labelled as TOC...so this was also TOC, if it was like the first.
And the 1959 must have been TOC, as McCauley claimed.
It looks like the 1957 and 1958 Ampol tournaments in Sydney had the highest prize money (at least for the winner) in those years.
2000 GBP (around 5600 USD) in 1957, and probably the same as well in 1958 (the total prize money remained 7500 GBP). I found no prize money data for Sydney in 1959.
In 1957 the winners of the Los Angeles Masters and New York ToC only got 2500 USD. In 1958 and 1959 they got 3000 USD in each case, a bit more then at Wembley (1000 GBP, around 2800 USD).
Let's talk in dollars and set 1 GBP = 2,800 USD.
Sydney 1957 was $21,000 - $5,600
Sydney 1958 was $21,000 - $5,600
But the real big one was Melbourne 1958 : $28,000 - $7,000.
This tournament stood as a money record in the pro world til the CBS Classic in Dallas 1965, with $25,000 - $8,000 (this total prize money is all for the singles, not like in Melbourne where there was a share for the doubles).
Less rich the tournaments in 1959.
Melbourne and Sydney were $18,000 - $3,000
Perth, Brisbane and Adelaide were $14,500 - $2,250
Melbourne and Sydney $16,800 and $2,800
The findings correspond with that, what Segura stated in the Book The Art of Tennis, edited by Alan Trengove, 1964. It samples articles by the leading pros like Gonzalez on serve, Rosewall on bh, Hoad on volley, Laver on lefties, Gimeno on fh, Sedgman on fitness, Segura on older players, and Budge on senior players. In his article, Segura singles out as his most important tournament wins, not the Cleveland wins, but Sydney 1957, when he beat Sedgman, and LA Masters 1958, when he went undefeated through the round robin. I have seen film clips from that Sydney final 1957 somewhere here, must have been a really big event. In the other articles of the Trengove book, only Wembley is mentioned as an important pro tournament, and this by Hoad, who talks about his semi with Buchholz 1962.
There was a website like one year ago with many clips of the old pro tournaments (that's why I don't understand all the statements of the pro tennis not being televised, many of them were...).
It was called itnsource.com, but it doesn't work anymore
Hoad was writing in 1964, and Hoad had been runner-up at Wembley in 1961-61-63, his best showing at important tournaments in those years.
There was no Forest Hills in 1960-61-62-64, although I think that Hoad would have rated FH above Wembley.
In the late fifties, Forest Hills was the premier event in pro tennis.
Did you find any reference to Forest Hills TOC being broadcast in 1958 and 1959, as it was in 1957?
That was the big one in those days.
The clips we find, are often film clips of newsreel films (Pathe, INA and others), imo not television excerpts. There must be BBC television coverage of Wembley, but i only have seen excerpts on later Wembley matches of Laver-Pilic or Nastase -Laver from 1971. It seems that many tv clips, which are recently put on the internet, are stemming from Argentina. Recently i saw clips with interviews from one Buenos Aires Pro event in 1968.
There was, indeed, daily BBC coverage of "highlights" from Wembley, and usually the final was televised complete and live.
In 1956, viewers complained that the great Gonzales/Sedgman final was so long, it kept them awake on a night before a working day.
We linked to Youtube posts of Wembley clips from 1959 and 1961 in this forum.
Logically, there should be private kinescopes of the great Forest Hills events from the late fifties.
NoMercy, great discoveries.
Here is another one.
Above you quote the L.A. Times in July 5, 1958 as saying that "the last time Hoad and Gonzales played before cameras they put on one of the most sensational displays of tennis that I can remember."
I think I know which match that was, almost certainly the final day match at Forest Hills TOC on June 24 between Hoad and Gonzales, won by Hoad at 13-15, 6-3, 6-4.
Allison Danzig in the N.Y. Times gave it a huge review and evaluation.
Apparently, the national television broadcast on CBS made this match available across the U.S.A.
There should be kinescopes available somewhere, or perhaps CBS has still kept this in the archives.
One of the greatest Hoad/Gonzales matches ever.
Kramer scheduled these two players for the final day, regardless of the RR score, for good reason, it was the marquee match.
But it could be referred to other times (TOC was played like one week before that article...).
It can be about the 5-setters in Cleveland.
Cleveland was a local broadcast, not a national, not to L.A.
The Forest Hills was national, on CBS.
If it was a recent broadcast, that would explain the reviewer's excitement.
As a matter of fact, I am excited just thinking about the possibility of a copy still out there somewhere.
Not sure about that.
I'm not American so I don't know that broadcast.
Cleveland awarded the same total prize money than TOC and Masters, with a slightly better first prize
CBS is a national network in the U.S.A., while the Cleveland station was strictly local.
This shows the different stature of these two tournaments, with Forest Hills of national scope, Cleveland Arena merely local.
Kramer pointed out that it took about $40,000 to rent Forest Hills, difficult to break even, although a national broadcast revenue would certainly help.
I wonder if the pros got a national broadcast in 1963 at Forest Hills, they lost a ton of money on that fiasco.
An answer and some questions.
Riggs and Kramer got along great. Riggs took over at Kramer's suggestion. Riggs wasn't terrible, but he would book gigs without sufficient heed to logistics, make too many hasty deals, and generally made things more hectic and confused than necessary. There is a good biography of Riggs which I have and if you are interested I will send you the information on it.
Questions: I thought it was the other way round. I thought T.O.C. (if you'll permit me to use that) was 1956-59 and Masters RR 1957-59, per McCauley. You guys seem to be saying that is all wrong. But what is your source. Can you be more clear. And if Gorgo did not win 3 of 4 T.O.C.s and two of three Masters, what did happen?
And does anyone know where the film footage is if their was TV coverage? Thanks.
there not their
TOC 3 editions
Masters 8 editions
McCauley lost few of them, like always
"Lew Hoad threw an unbreakable service at Alex Olmedo last night to win the feature match of Jack Kramer's fifth annual Masters round robin professional tennis championships at the Los Angeles Tennis Club"
Los Angeles Times, 22 Jun 1960
So, it looks like in 1960 it was the fifth edition (of course McCauley didn't know about that, I'm not surprised).
If the fifth annual is 1960, when is the first annual?
I guess if you want to know more about that you have to ask me.
Life is cruel sometimes.....
I know about seven editions of the Masters in Los Angeles: 1956-1960, and 1964-1965.
When did the missing eighth edition take place?
Was it the Adler Pro in June 1963? As opposed to the other editions, it did not have a round-robin stage.
The 1956 L.A. tournament was not the TOC, but the Masters, as NoMercy stated.
The label TOC was used for Forest Hills in 1957, 1958, 1959, and also for Sydney White City in 1957, 1958, 1959.
No where else, only those 6 tournaments.
McCauley is often confused, and Wikipedia appears to have followed McCauley.
Only Forest Hills TOC received national television coverage on the CBS network.
There should be a vault somewhere. Ask CBS.
At least, also the Masters was on CBS.
And probably more tournaments.
There is nothing that can place the TOC above the Masters, they were like twin tournaments, with the second having more editions
Do you by any chance know Siegfried Kueblers "Book of tennis racquets"?
It is any racquet collectors bible and guide.
and yet you wouldn´t believe how many errors and omissions Mr Kuebler made.
it comes with the territory i guess, to write a book from scratch spanning 100+ years of racquet building.
you´re bound to make errors. but i can´t tell you how glad i am that Kuebler made the effort to write that book.
My feelings towards McCauleys "History of Professional Tennis" are roughly the same. He was the first one
to write extensively about the pros in the pre-open era.
I don´t know how many copies he sold, but probably not nearly as much as the book would deserve.
yes, he missed many results.
He didn´t benefit from internet archives. His book came out in 2000 and he died shortly afterwards.
I´m grateful that he made the effort to write this book and that he found the courage to get it published.
hardly a bestseller
@NoMercy , i appreciate that you share your information and knowledge with all of us. mille grazie
I´ve told @krosero the same thing often about his contributions.
I haven´t had the pleasure to meet Joe McCauley, but i´m sure he would have appreciated your corrections
McCauley did a great job, but some mistakes are really big, with available sources.
Actually most of the corrections I have are found in local libraries.
So the only thing he needed for finding what I found was a telephone.
have you ever thought of publishing what you have in book form?
No please, I hate writing.
And I'm not a patient person, so I guess it's not for me
NoMercy, You seem to be too harsh toward Joe McCauley and his fundamental book.
I looked again at some tennis books in my basement, and i found the book Total Tennis, edited by Bud Collins, one of his many editions of his tennis History. But this one has two things, which the other don't have: and appendix with stats, which is sadly forgettable, to put it mild, but what is good, are some old articles of a now defunct old US sportspaper Sport. In one from September 1958, Dick Schaap writes an interesting piece on Gonzalez and his World Series vs. Hoad. It is titled The Lone Wolf of Tennis. Schaap describes Gonzalez as having a chip on his strong shoulders from his youth, when "wounds born by insult and prejustice left him a brooding figure, who found little comfort in his fame". "It has shaped Gonzalez into the lone wolf of tennis, a dark, brooding figure silhouetted against a rococo backdrop of fame, fortune and talent".
At length a match of Gonzalez vs. Hoad and the circumstances are described at Corning, an industrial town on the southern tier of upstate New York. In a modern gymnasium, Gonzalez and Hoad played the 67th match of their series, Gorgo won it 18-16, 7-5 to lead the series 36-31. "He (Gonzalez) did not travel with Hoad, Trabert and Segura in the spacious station wagons provided by promoter Jack Kramer. He drove alone in his own car, a souped-up Ford Thunderbird, picking his own routes and his own way stations. When the rest of the troupe checked in at one hotel, he generally stayed at another. Usually he ate by himself, away from the bright lights and the noise. He rarely attended social functions."
Gonzalez had a contract with Kramer until 1960."Under his contract, Gonzalez earns 20 per cent of the gross receipts, an income of close to $ 75000 a year. Hoad this year recieved 25 per cent of the receipts plus a five per cent bonus each night he won. Under a similar setup two years ago, Gonzalez was guaranteed $ 15000 and his opponent, Trabert, $75000."
Some more citations on Gonzalez. "The picture of Gonzalez in action is unforgettable. For pure artistry, he rates with Musial, coiled and ready to strike; Cousy, flipping a backhanded pass; Snead, at the height of his backswing; and Arcaro, whipping a horse through the stretch. When he serves, Gonzalez strains, rears back and fires. Despite his size, he rushes catlike to the net, defying an opponent to return serve. His long, light strides carry him to shots that lesser men never reach. On an overhead slam, he kicks up and follows through with frightening force. His nevrvous energy is never wasted. It is stacked up into a huge pile until the sheer weight of Pancho's ability falls upon an opponent, startling him at fisrt, then beweildering him and, finally, crushing him."
But the setup of the old tour wasn't anything but easy. After his next match with Hoad, a 2-6, 6-3,6-1 win at Watkins Glen, Gonzalez drove into the night for the next match scheduled 400 miles away at New Castle. Pa. Schaap writes: "Alone in the small car, away from the crowds, the dark night enveloping him, Richard Gonzalez (Schaap writes indeed Gonzalez, because Pancho has spelt his name so) looked like a traveling salesman, a Willie Loman without samples".
Your reference did not claim that the L.A. Masters was broadcast nationally on CBS, only in L.A ("channel 2", a local television station in L.A.)...unless you have some other information.
Only one local station was mentioned, that being in L.A.
Forest Hills was broadcast nationally on CBS television network.
Good if one knows his strengths and weaknesses
I had the same impression. But not everybody can be a diplomat
I am not a diplomat.
I love Gonzales.
I want so badly one like him in the modern tennis.
PS is that book the one where Bud Collins wrote about Kramer having lost only one match in 1947?
I grew up with Collins repeating that BS every single slam..
And of course, it's not true
Channel 2 was part of CBS.
TOC was not better than the Masters.
Actually TOC was a big loss for Kramer every single year, thats why he closed it after 3 editions.
Sure, part of CBS, but not CBS period.
If it had been a national broadcast, the article would have said "CBS", as the article did for Forest Hills.
"Better"? No, I am saying that Forest Hills was definitely more significant and more important given the national broadcast, and anyone who claims that L.A. Tennis Club is equal in stature to Forst HIlls is just plain wrong.
Of course, Kramer had to pay $400,000 in rent for Forest Hills, presumably the national broadcast could help offset that expense, plus the box office power of Hoad, which prompted the Forest Hills TOC to get started in 1957.
In 1963, the pros took a financial beating on Forest Hills, but I guess that they had no national broadcast to help defray expenses, it was a financial fiasco, with Laver and Rosewall playing each other in the final for "a handshake", as Laver stated.
It's you that you are wrong.
Kramer needed $40,000 to break even in 1957, how could he be paying $400,000 for the rent?????
The handshake was worth $1,400 to Rosewall and $1,100 to Laver.
Not huge, but not bad
Separate names with a comma.