Who do you rank higher between Pancho Gonzalez? Ken Rosewall? Novak Djokovic

Greater Player between 3: Nole, Gonzalez, Rosewall


  • Total voters
    64

xFedal

Legend
Djokovic - 16 Slams..... 270 Weeks at No.1 ....Winning h2h with Federer/Nadal.

Pancho Gonzalez - 8 Years No.1....7 World Tours won.

Rosewall Incredible Pro Slam Career and Longevity.

Discuss......
 

The Blond Blur

Professional
Those guys are from completely different eras so it's almost impossible to compare their careers. It's also a big reason why I'm not a fan of the GOAT debate. However, I still went with Novak for the simple reason that like all sports tennis evolves and gets better with time. I don't see how tennis gets more advanced from this point on, and Novak is firmly in 3rd place behind 2 other GOAT candidates in Fedal.
 
Djokovic ranks highest of the three for me.

Gonzalez is a strange case in that he's absurdly underrated by most (many have never heard of him, and even those who have don't appreciate his career), but by a hard core of posters/historians on this site, he's considered the GOAT - which overrates him.

Rosewall? An ATG for sure, but I think Djokovic has surpassed him by now.
 

xFedal

Legend
Djokovic ranks highest of the three for me.

Gonzalez is a strange case in that he's absurdly underrated by most (many have never heard of him, and even those who have don't appreciate his career), but by a hard core of posters/historians on this site, he's considered the GOAT - which overrates him.

Rosewall? An ATG for sure, but I think Djokovic has surpassed him by now.
If historians are saying his GOAT then it just shows you how important it is to spend a long @SS time as No.1 as it can make you GOAT in some peoples eyes.
 

DSH

Hall of Fame
Djokovic ranks highest of the three for me.

Gonzalez is a strange case in that he's absurdly underrated by most (many have never heard of him, and even those who have don't appreciate his career), but by a hard core of posters/historians on this site, he's considered the GOAT - which overrates him.

Rosewall? An ATG for sure, but I think Djokovic has surpassed him by now.

which is your top ten male tennis players of all time?
 

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
Haha yes..... Gary are your reasons the same for ranking Pancho above the 2 due to more YE#1 ?
I don't really rate one above the other, because it gets into the whole GOAT thing. I just voted for one so I could see the results. ;)

But I think Pancho was the best of his era, hands down. What he did in the Open era, over the age of 40, is downright scary. Also, in his time he was the equivalent of 6'4" or 6'5" today, because for those born in 1928 being over 6 feet tall was much more of an anomaly. He really was a freak talent. He was much more self-taught than another other champion, I think.
 

xFedal

Legend
I don't really rate one above the other, because it gets into the whole GOAT thing. I just voted for one so I could see the results. ;)

But I think Pancho was the best of his era, hands down. What he did in the Open era, over the age of 40, is downright scary. Also, in his time he was the equivalent of 6'4" or 6'5" today, because for those born in 1928 being over 6 feet tall was much more of an anomaly. He really was a freak talent. He was much more self-taught than another other champion, I think.
I think Pancho was 6'2 and same height as Jack Krammer.
 

mightyrick

Legend
PS: The correct spelling is Gonzales.
No, that is the Americanized named. His proper given family name is González.

Many Hispanics and other non-Anglo immigrant families did that back in the day to help Americans with pronunciation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DSH

hipolymer

Professional
Pancho was the very first servebot, so that automatically brings him down to second tier great. Without his serve he wouldn't be nearly as great. Similar to Sampras.
 

timnz

Legend
I would have appreciated it if you had voted....

@NatF you have voted either.
Just to elaborate

How can you win the biggest prizes when they don't exist? There were no French Pro's on clay until 1956 in his tennis life time (1950 and 1953 were on cement). Still in his prime but it meant that he missed being able to compete in it a lot of times.

These were the years that Pancho Gonzales did not get the opportunity to compete in the French Pro on clay (either because there was no tournament or it was not on clay):

1950, 1951, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1955, 1957, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1967

The US pro in 1950 was on clay however. I don’t know if he competed in it
 

DSH

Hall of Fame
No, that is the Americanized named. His proper given family name is González.

Many Hispanics and other non-Anglo immigrant families did that back in the day to help Americans with pronunciation.
Thanks for the clarification.
;)
 

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
I think Pancho was 6'2 and same height as Jack Krammer.
There is some controversy about his height. If you look at old video of him shaking hands at the net, he looks like a giant because most other players then were so much shorter.
 
What about Krammer? Also what does Djokovic have to do for you to rank him above Laver who is 2nd on your ranking.
Kramer's just outside the top 10 for me, along with the likes of Lendl and Connors. However, he could feasibly be ranked inside someone else's top 10 and it wouldn't be a daft choice.

Djokovic finishing this year as No 1 and winning another 2 slams will probably put him 2nd for me.
 

DSH

Hall of Fame
Kramer's just outside the top 10 for me, along with the likes of Lendl and Connors. However, he could feasibly be ranked inside someone else's top 10 and it wouldn't be a daft choice.

Djokovic finishing this year as No 1 and winning another 2 slams will probably put him 2nd for me.
what about Nadal, does he has to win 2 more Majors to surpass Laver?
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
How many Majors on clay did "Pancho" won?

PS: The correct spelling is Gonzales.
Someone who knows the family spells it Gonzalez so that's what I use.

How many opportunities did Pancho get to play clay majors in his prime?
 

DSH

Hall of Fame
Yeah, although it's not ideal that he keeps winning so many FOs as opposed to other majors, and spending an awful lot of time as No 2, rather than No 1.
If he win one more RG and another on a different surface, is that enough for him to surpass "Rocket"?
 

DSH

Hall of Fame
Someone who knows the family spells it Gonzalez so that's what I use.

How many opportunities did Pancho get to play clay majors in his prime?
That's what I want to know.
Rosewall was a finalist for Wimbledon at 19 and 21 before moving on to professionalism.
Why do some penalize the Australian for not winning in the ALL England Club?
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
That's what I want to know.
Rosewall was a finalist for Wimbledon at 19 and 21 before moving on to professionalism.
Why do some penalize the Australian for not winning in the ALL England Club?
I don't penalise Rosewall for not winning Wimbledon so take that up with someone else ;)
 

TennisDawg

Professional
Djokovic ranks highest of the three for me.

Gonzalez is a strange case in that he's absurdly underrated by most (many have never heard of him, and even those who have don't appreciate his career), but by a hard core of posters/historians on this site, he's considered the GOAT - which overrates him.

Rosewall? An ATG for sure, but I think Djokovic has surpassed him by now.
As I understand it Pancho didn’t play the Slams in his prime because he was a professional and only amateurs were allowed the Slams.
 

DSH

Hall of Fame
I don't penalise Rosewall for not winning Wimbledon so take that up with someone else ;)
I was not referring to someone specific, but some criticize Rosewall for not winning at Wimbledon.
He remains the oldest finalist in the All England Club.
 

mightyrick

Legend
how good was Gonzales on clay?
Do you think he could have won in RG if he had not gone over to professionalism?
Gonzalez was great on all surfaces. Let's put it this way, even though Rosewall had the edge in their clay matchups, Gonzalez still beat Rosewall 10 times on clay and Rosewall was 6 years younger.

Gonzalez would have beaten any size field on all surfaces at his peak and certainly during his prime. It really didn't matter who you put in front of him.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
I was not referring to someone specific, but some criticize Rosewall for not winning at Wimbledon.
He remains the oldest finalist in the All England Club.
Some do that's right but if you know the context of Rosewall's career then you should know better. He would have surely won Wimbledon if he had been able to compete during his prime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DSH
1. Federer
2. Laver
3= Djokovic and Nadal
5= Gonzales and Sampras
7 Rosewall
8 Borg
9 Tilden
10 Budge
Nice list, I'd have the same top 9, but with a different order. I prefer doing a top 9 than top 10, because I think there is a clear drop after 9 and Budge, Kramer, Vines, Connors, Lendl are all pretty close in the 10-14 range, so feels weird just picking one. I'd probably go with Kramer though.

As for the topic, I have Djokovic above Rosewall, but below Gonzales atm.
 
Top