The all time greats...Who and How?

[Hopp Roger]

Of course, we all know about Connors, Borg, McEnroe, Lendl, Becker, Edberg, Wilander, Agassi, Sampras and now Federer...but who are considered the absolutely great players of the old days? How do they compare to the guys from the early open era? I've heard some of the names: Rod Laver, Ken Rosewall, Bill Tilden, Lew Hoad, Tony Trabert, Pancho Gonzales, Jack Kramer, Bobby Riggs, Donald Budge. I have had shirts from Fred Perry and Rene Lacoste (still do). I have seen old wooden racquets with the names and faces of Pancho Gonzales and Jack Kramer. How the hell did the greats play with those heavy little things? Are there any stories of inter-generational practice sessions? Laver/Becker or something interesting like that?
I've heard John MCEnroe still competes hard with current pros in exhibition matches.

[marius hancu]

You might want to read this on Pancho Gonzalez:

http://www.inficad.com/~1stbooks/PG_.htm

perhaps a little bit biased, but it gives you an idea on the man.

Also, try to get the books by Bud Collins, he has a good feeling and knowledge of tennis history.

[tproxfd]

Golden Age champions vs Sampras

I grew up watching the latter part of the golden age greats but certainly don't accept the criticism of Sampras. Pete's serve stands up against any in history. First of all there are many videos of his toss showing it is well into the court, although somewhat more to the left than the older guys and for 2 reasons, 1) with the newer technology rackets the ball is hit much harder and more topspin is needed to keep it in the court; and 2) for more disguise.
Why did he often have to volley from further back? Speed of serve getting there much sooner than a serve of similar ability with a wooden racket, and much faster returns (if it came back) for the same reason. I don't really think the comparisons are valid because the conditions and the athletes themselves are so different - one only needs to look at videos of the older players to see the vastly increased pace in todays game. Based on that alone, Sampras would have destoyed the older players. However, I don't think you need the comparisons to learn some of the lessons of the past when tennis may have truly been more pure and exciting.

[Segoo]

all-time greats

It has been said that Laver and Santana were forerunners of today's game. We can add Pancho Segura to that list. Two handed....took a lot of groundis on the rise...brilliant tactician against any style of game...not to mention the classic undersized underdog angle.
Even today, the guy is a force in the tennis world.

I just love Allen Fox's articles about the old dudes.
Atkinson, too.

[vaculik]

The Great Gonzales

Marius' link to the Gonzales article brought back memories of a pro match at Wembley between him and Hoad. (I still have the program book.) Hoad came out in a ZONE and for the first set all Pancho did was shake his head in disbelief at Lew's shots. But then he slowly worked his way into the match and eventually won. Those pro matches were a delight to watch because I believe to pull the crowds in they entertained as well with a lot of finesse shots.

Let's not forget Rafael Osuna, a great touch player during the Laver era at Wimbledon where they played an exciting five-set semi-final. His career was tragically cut short in an Aero Mexico plane crash.

[GimpyGrumpy]

There were a lot of great Mexican and South American players back in the day who had amazing touch and variety--before the power sticks took it all away... They used to come to a small amateur clay court (har tru) tournament at my club when I was growing up. Vincent Zarazua, Humphrey Jose. Names that disappeared into time, but to me dazzling as a child. They battled it out with players like Zan Guerry and Ham Richardson. Great feel, explosive, a lot of intensity and warmth. Seemless all court play. We would watch from 10 feet away in my dad's box--very exclusive. Gonzales is one I wish I had seen...

[JoeTennis]

Gimpy Grumpy, cool club you grew up at. Was that in Tennessee? Georgia?
I remember some of those names. I played one of Zan Guerry's sons in college, too.

[GimpyGrumpy]

Well, it's gone now, as I am from there...was Zan's son as rough as his dad?

[snowrasteh]

Ed Atkinson/Ken Rosewall

Thanks for the great article on Ken Rosewall. I do feel strongly that he was a better player than Bobby Riggs or Frank Sedgeman and should have been in the top ten of your video " Ten Greatest Players". His longevity has been greater than Conners or Agassi. Like Gonzales, he missed many years of his prime as a pro in the pre-Open era otherwise, he would have won Wimbledon several times. He did achieve Grand Slam titles 20 years apart!

Saeed Nowrasteh
Madison, WI

[johnyandell]

Saeed,

I'm glad you liked the article. I was thrilled to actually document that backhand--what a beautiful slice--a great model for the average playe today!

I'll pass your thoughts on to Ed! Think a lot of people would have to agree with you. Ed just loves Frank S.!

Regards,
John Yandell

[moderntennis]

Sampras would look the same as Pancho if he played with a wood racquet and had to keep one foot on the ground while serving - I've recently seen Alex Olmedo play competititive sets against Vince Spadea, ranked 76 in the world and Olmedo is 69 years old. Pancho would not have been destroyed by anyone including Federer - it would have been close had they played at their best.

[lukman41985]

Could you post some details and observations about that match between Olmedo and Spadea? How did the 69-year-old combat the youth, speed, power, and spin of Spadea.

[moderntennis]

Could you post some details and observations about that match between Olmedo and Spadea? How did the 69-year-old combat the youth, speed, power, and spin of Spadea.

There is some relevant detail in the McEnroe link in the interview Spadea gave Tennis Week when he discusses playing McEnroe and the 21 game Vince played John. At the top it mentions Spadea working with Olmedo for the coming season. Olmedo does the same thing that McEnroe did against Spadea in the excerpt- change of pace from the baseline, short angle shots and drop shots from the baseline and net, approaching very short as well as deep to force hitting up and not getting rattled by the opponent's numerous groundstroke winners. He was trying to convince Spadea to maximize his strengths (consistency and foot speed) rather than try to "out-do" his younger more powerful opponents.

[mntlblok]

Roy Emerson

Just read and enjoyed Allen Fox's article on Emmo. We had the pleasure of having "Blue" here at our club last year for a "Legends" weekend. He was absolutely one of the most fun individuals I've ever been around. If you ever get a chance to enjoy him, jump on it. He even teased me about having eyebrows like Rosewall. :-)

Kevin

[moderntennis]

I grew up watching the latter part of the golden age greats but certainly don't accept the criticism of Sampras. Pete's serve stands up against any in history. First of all there are many videos of his toss showing it is well into the court, although somewhat more to the left than the older guys and for 2 reasons, 1) with the newer technology rackets the ball is hit much harder and more topspin is needed to keep it in the court; and 2) for more disguise.
Why did he often have to volley from further back? Speed of serve getting there much sooner than a serve of similar ability with a wooden racket, and much faster returns (if it came back) for the same reason. I don't really think the comparisons are valid because the conditions and the athletes themselves are so different - one only needs to look at videos of the older players to see the vastly increased pace in todays game. Based on that alone, Sampras would have destoyed the older players. However, I don't think you need the comparisons to learn some of the lessons of the past when tennis may have truly been more pure and exciting.

Just another reason, taken from the baseball analyst Bill James, at how claims that the old days were far inferior can be disproven. If tennis in 2002 were vastly superior than 1962, did it happen in a single year? No, the top 10 was never completely replaced by new players the following year. If it happened at a rate of 2.5% per year that would mean top players at the age of 20-25 in a given year would not be able to compete 10 years later. Laver was still a top 10 player in 72 as in 62, Connors was top 10 in 82 like 72,
McEnroe was in the semis at Wimby in 92, Agasssi in 2002 from 92. In the NBA circa 1960 you do see a revolution in the game - new rules (goaltending, 3 seconds in the key) to deal with Wilt and Russell, former star players marginalized. In tennis, the rule changes regarding serving and the new equipment created a faster paced game, but JMac for example although no where near the player he was in 1980 can still nearly beat top 20 player Ancic(match available from Tennis Nexus, no connection to me but a great site for tennis DVDs).