Bobby After the War: Part 2

[johnyandell]

Let's discuss Tom LeCompte's article, "Bobby After the War: Part 2"

[johnyandell]

Hey maybe nobody else finds this interesting but for me this series really clarifies the history of the game and the true relationship between amateur and professional tennis before and after World War II. I am asking myself for more. And my answer is yes there will be!

[stotty]

Seems strange that Budge lost so easily to Bobby at Forest Hills. I wonder if there is a story behind Bobby's easy victory. There often is when you get behind these stories and look at it from the other person's standpoint. Or it could that Bobby had a game that truly frustrated Budge. It's just when you consider Budge's standing in the game and the incredible achievements he accomplished, such a heavy loss seems strange, unfathomable. It would be like Federer losing to Kyrgios 6-3 6-1 6-1....just never going to happen.

[stotty]

I've always been one to explore things which don't seem quite right. It's my nature. It annoys my wife because I cannot let things alone until I get to the bottom of things.

I see that Budge tore his shoulder in 1943. The tear never healed properly and was further complicated by scar tissue which had formed around the injured area. It would seem Budge spent the rest of his career trying to play round the injury but his serve and overhead were forever impaired. Riggs employed to tactic of lobbing Budge to death whenever he came to the net. Budge no longer had the potency in his overhead and Riggs was skilful enough to ensure he could deliver a style of play Budge wouldn't like one little bit.

It seems Don Budge's career was impaired from around the age of 27.

A similar thing happened to Lew Hoad with a back injury.

These days both Hoad and Budge would have had corrective surgery to resolve their injuries in a relatively short period of time. Time's change. don't they?

[don_budge]

I've always been one to explore things which don't seem quite right. It's my nature. It annoys my wife because I cannot let things alone until I get to the bottom of things.

I see that Budge tore his shoulder in 1943. The tear never healed properly and was further complicated by scar tissue which had formed around the injured area. It would seem Budge spent the rest of his career trying to play round the injury but his serve and overhead were forever impaired. Riggs employed to tactic of lobbing Budge to death whenever he came to the net. Budge no longer had the potency in his overhead and Riggs was skilful enough to ensure he could deliver a style of play Budge wouldn't like one little bit.

It seems Don Budge's career was impaired from around the age of 27.

A similar thing happened to Lew Hoad with a back injury.

These days both Hoad and Budge would have had corrective surgery to resolve their injuries in a relatively short period of time. Time's change. don't they?

I remember Don Budge talking to me about his shoulder. He said that in those days they didn't have the surgical acumen to repair it like it could have been even in 1972. It's a shame. He told me that it really cut his playing career at the top of the game short. He probably would have dominated for many years. Right up to Richard Gonzales or Jack Kramer. Connecting the dots...right up to Federer. I don't think Budge liked Riggs a whole bunch. He sure seems to be annoyed with him in the video we have circulated on the forum from time to time. Riggs sort of reminds me of a character from "The Little Rascals" with Butch Mahoney and Satch and the rest of the crew.

Riggs sure was cagey on the tennis court though. I'm sure he factored in Budge's shoulder plenty in his tactics. Surely Riggs was probably one of the greatest lobbers to ever play the game. I am certain he could drop that ball on the baseline time and time again. Perfectly gaging the reach of Budge to put it just out of reach.

[johnyandell]

Interesting issue of the injury. I think Tom C. may have underplayed it based on what you guys are saying. I can't say that through all of this I find Bobby very likable. But the fascinating thing is his story really tells the story of a couple of decades plus of tennis history with a detail that was often new to me. 2 more parts to go.