This is based on whatever the videos are posted on Internet including Youtube.
I saw Rosewall's game.hindisght. And i still cant comprehend how can he win so much with such a limited game. He had a Okayish Serve. Didnt have a forehand and backhand really. It was more like a WTA Slice. Yeah i can get he used to volley somewhat good. But whats the big deal about those guys Rosewall,Tilden And Gonzales.
And when Connors arrived at the scene he set the records straight, whooped Rosewall 6-0 6-0 6-0 in the Wimbeldon Final. Can you imagine anybody playing that badly in the Wimbeldon final. Our Guy Nalbandian played better in the final against Hewitt.
Its shocking Really how much easy those guys had it.
It's shocking and laughable, how close this thread is to being unworthy of response.
, please get your facts straight, or don't publish them!!
year old Jimmy Connors (born Sep. 2, 1952) beat 39
year old Ken Rosewall (born 2nd Nov, 1934) at the 1974 Wimbledon Finals 6-1, 6-1, 6-4 (Rosewall was clearly tired having had to defeat John Newcombe in 4 sets, followed by Stan Smith in the semifinals in a grueling 5 sets), and at the US Open 6-1, 6-0, 6-1 during Jimmy Connors greatest year where Jimmy went 99-4.
Mr. Rosewall won his final 2 Slams at the Australian Open in 1971 (against a strong field - sponsored by Dunlop WCT players were allowed to compete) and 1972 ( a very depleted field) at the age of 37 and 38.
, the times were so different, you can't compare the eras.
Look, the players you mentioned had it very easy...
Playing with state of the art equipment of the day, they traveled using the best imaginable transportation systems available, and played for the love of the sport and fantastic, exorbitant cash contracts and exhibitions. They were swimming in luxury. They had it so good, they only needed to play a match every other day on average, though to be fair, they did play day after day in some of their mano-a-mano events.
, I'll provide an example from one of the players mentioned:
The best the 42 year old
Richard Alonso Gonzalez (born May 9, 1928), known as Pancho Gonzales could manage to do in 1970
was to beat Rod Laver (who had just won the Grand Slam the year before) at Madison Square Garden in a huge $10,000 winner-take-all contest 7-5, 3-6, 2-6, 6-3, 6-2. He repeated that accomplishment later at the lucrative Howard Hughes Open beating Laver 6-1, 7-5, 5-7, 6-3. The year before, a younger Gonzalez, at age 41
, somehow managed to squeak by, in succession, four Hall of Famers-to-be, John Newcombe, 6-1, 6-2, Ken Rosewall, 6-4, 1-6, 6-3, Stan Smith, 8-6, 7-9, 6-4, and Arthure Ashe, 6-0, 6-2, 6-4 to win the $50,000 Howard Hughes Open at Las Vegas, and the $12,500 first prize, which was second highest payout at the time(only the U.S. Open prize was higher).
I won't mention his earlier play, as during his peak years, where he was considered #1 for 8 years running, his serve was blamed as being too overpowering (he was around 1.9 meters, 6'2 or 3), so much so they changed the rules for a time to not allow serve and volley (the return had to hit the ground first). Probably one of the highest compliments paid to Gonzalez was by journalist and commentator Bud Collins (who has seen and reported on a lot of tennis during his 82 years). Collins said as recently in an August 2006
article for MSNBC.com
: "If I had to choose someone to play for my life, it would be Pancho Gonzalez."