Sweet Old Laver...
Patrick Kehoe
Australian Open for a fourth major title in a row, it would be "a
great effort" -- but not a Grand Slam.
In a telephone interview with The Associated Press, Laver says: "He's
got three under his belt, and he's playing well. There's a good chance
he could pull it off. But it's not a Grand Slam, certainly."
Nadal is seeded No. 1 at the Australian Open, which begins Monday.
The Spaniard's consecutive championships at the French Open, Wimbledon
and U.S. Open came in 2010, so if he wins in Australia, his 4 for 4
would stretch over two seasons.
Laver was the last man to win tennis' four top tournaments
consecutively, and he did it in a calendar year -- a true Grand Slam
-- in 1962 and 1969.
[source AP via espn.go.com]
TT
Laver calls it "mini-slam". Senile fedfucker...
Patrick Kehoe
>
> - Show quoted text -
Well... he's always been guarded about HIS historical ranking
actually... he just sort of eases into half compliments... he's cagey
and seldom as forth coming in praise as recognition of current tennis/
stars as say Rosewall/Newcome/Borg/McEnroe/Becker/Lendl/Agassi/Pete
are... what Rafa is attempting is historic, no question... it would be
a career marker of the first order to hold all the majors at the same
time... he sounds petty at times actually and NEVER gets called on
it...
P
felangey
it....<
Oh puhlease. A gent of the highest order. One of the true greats of the game
and a proud champion. "Petty"?. Pffft!
Patrick Kehoe
When it comes to anything EXCEPT HIS records I agree with you... it's
like PULLING TEETH to get him to praise anyone and THEN get to HIS
records and he sort of freezes... that doesn't cancell him out as a
great old gentleman... he's OLD and defensive about his legacy... it
happens to people... even people who are very nice... nothing odd
about it...
P
undecided
Laver? I 've never heard a petty word from his mouth. He is the
ultimate in humbleness.
reilloc
He's right and everybody knows it. It wouldn't be called a Grand Slam
and wouldn't even have an asterisk beside it. We call having all four
majors but not in the same calendar year a career grand slam because
that's what it is and that what this'll be, only, arguably, slightly
better.
Granted, it's no small feat but it's not what that other thing is until
the Pope or whoever's got the authority to do so these days changes the
calendar and says the year starts in May.
LNC
ocean
ZZZZZZZZZZ. If it was Fed, Laver would be calling it a possible Grand
Slam. Laveris a fedfucker.
SliceAndDice
Where did you get this from? Laver is the ultimate gentleman. Never
seen a humbler champion.
TT
Rosewall? Nadal?
Ted S.
> Tennis great Rod Laver says that if Rafael Nadal wins this month's
> Australian Open for a fourth major title in a row, it would be "a
> great effort" -- but not a Grand Slam.
I don't remember this question coming up when Navratilova won six in a
row. She didn't win all four in one calendar year, so nobody thought
she won a Grand Slam.
--
Ted Schuerzinger
tedstennis at myrealbox dot com
If you're afraid of the ball, don't sit in the front row. --Anastasia
Rodionova
TT
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2011 10:05:37 -0800 (PST), Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>
>> Tennis great Rod Laver says that if Rafael Nadal wins this month's
>> Australian Open for a fourth major title in a row, it would be "a
>> great effort" -- but not a Grand Slam.
> I don't remember this question coming up when Navratilova won six in a
> row. She didn't win all four in one calendar year, so nobody thought
> she won a Grand Slam.
>
Serena?
Sakari Lund
When Serena won four in a row, the question around the tennis world
was: This is not a Grand Slam, so what it is? And it became known as
"Serena Slam".
SliceAndDice
I am not very fond of Nadal's on-court behavior and borderline
gamesmanship. Off-court, yes.
SliceAndDice
Like I read somewhere, Steffi won the Serena slam in 1993-94 and did
not even know about it :)
Viper
What a load of self serving garbage. You cannot point to one interview,
one sentence or one circumstance, over a period of 50 years, where Laver
has appeared anything other than magnanimous, humble and decent. I've
never known a sportman who is less inclined to talk about himself.
A Grand Slam is a Grand Slam, no matter how many times Gen Y try and
re-interpret and re-invent it. Laver's stating a fucking fact, how is
that being defensive?
Viper
Inglourious Basterd
Agreed. Laver is downplaying Nadal's chance of winning 4 in a row as
he wants his CYGS's to be seen a superior.
Viper
Absolute nonsense. You just can't figure how people arrive at such
fanciful conclusions in the absence of any conceit or self promotion by
the individual being slandered
Go back to Basketball or NFL matey, you'll find all the ego, self
promotion and narcissism you can handle there. It a compulsory requirement
Viper
Patrick Kehoe
>
> - Show quoted text -
You don't read much on tennis, eh?
:))
Laver's a great old gent... but he's ALWAYS been guarded about his
records and era... he barely made comment when asked about Pete's run
to the major's record... and he was asked... he didn't even like to
talk about Borg in the late 1970s... always found that odd...
P
Whisper
er, he just recognizes the calendar slam as the pinnacle in tennis.
Laver knows he wouldn't have been credited with the 'Grand Slam' if he
won it over 2 seasons, & he knows Navratilova/Serena are not considered
Grand Slammers like he, Budge, Connolly, Court & Graf.
There needs to be a compelling argument to dilute it to any 4 over 2
years. That's a lesser achievement as you don't have a defined starting
& finishing point. As I said you only get about 10 opportunities to win
a calendar slam in your career v 37 for NCYGS.
The reason we pick this particular 4 slam sequence over the others?
Because they all fall in the calendar/tennis year. That makes it
different to the other combinations, which all span 2 years.
While this may not be a compelling reason for some, for most it is.
Like I said earlier if we took a world wide poll over which 4 slam
sequence players/fans/experts would prefer, the results would be;
AO FO Wim USO - 100%
FO Wim USO AO - 0%
Wim USO AO FO - 0%
USO AO FO Wim - 0%
Hopefully this will kill further debate on this isuue? Except for TT
who just seems a little thick on this subject.
Whisper
>>
>> Well... he's always been guarded about HIS historical ranking
>> actually... he just sort of eases into half compliments... he's cagey
>> and seldom as forth coming in praise as recognition of current tennis/
>> stars as say Rosewall/Newcome/Borg/McEnroe/Becker/Lendl/Agassi/Pete
>> are... what Rafa is attempting is historic, no question... it would be
>> a career marker of the first order to hold all the majors at the same
>> time... he sounds petty at times actually and NEVER gets called on
>> it...
>>
>> P
>
> Laver? I 've never heard a petty word from his mouth. He is the
> ultimate in humbleness.
Correct. He gives praise when it's warranted (no starfucking/ceibs
nonsense), & is diplomatic when it's not.
Whisper
>> What a load of self serving garbage. You cannot point to one interview,
>> one sentence or one circumstance, over a period of 50 years, where Laver
>> has appeared anything other than magnanimous, humble and decent. I've
>> never known a sportman who is less inclined to talk about himself.
>>
>> A Grand Slam is a Grand Slam, no matter how many times Gen Y try and
>> re-interpret and re-invent it. Laver's stating a fucking fact, how is
>> that being defensive?
>>
>> Viper- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> You don't read much on tennis, eh?
>
> :))
>
> Laver's a great old gent... but he's ALWAYS been guarded about his
> records and era... he barely made comment when asked about Pete's run
> to the major's record... and he was asked... he didn't even like to
> talk about Borg in the late 1970s... always found that odd...
>
> P
Laver calls it like it is. That seems to offend a small minority of
nincompoops.
MBDunc
Based on "Tiger slam" from golf (99 PGA - 00 The Open)
.mikko
pltr...@xhost.org
<pke...@telus.net> wrote:
>... it's
>like PULLING TEETH to get him to praise anyone and THEN get to HIS
>records and he sort of freezes.... he's OLD and defensive about his legacy...
Boy, you aren't hearing the same Rod Laver interviews I always hear.
-- Larry
pltr...@xhost.org
<mich...@mail.suomi.net> wrote:
>Based on "Tiger slam" from golf (99 PGA - 00 The Open)
No -- not based on anything from golf at all.
-- Larry
Pedro Dias
Laver, Rosewall is in there somewhere, Nadal (and Federer) not even
close. No knock on the youngsters, but those old-school Australian
players had humility bred so deep in their bones it was virtually
second nature. In fact, what some are describing as false modesty I
believe is simply an absolutely genuine revulsion at the prospect of
talking about oneself.
TennisGuy
> Tennis great Rod Laver says that if Rafael Nadal wins this month's
> Australian Open for a fourth major title in a row, it would be "a
>
Why spend all this time fretting and worrying about its significance
and what to call it, before it has happened?
Can you imagine if Nadal does not win the A.O. this year?
Just think about all the time that will have been wasted hypothesizing
on the subject?
Better to not talk about it now. Do other constructive things with
your time and then if it should come to pass, just give ol' Laver a
buzz and see what he has to say. OK, you can call Mac too if you need
to.
Iceberg
you should banned from watching tennis for a year for calling a guy
like Laver 'petty'.
Patrick Kehoe
>
> - Show quoted text -
IN FACT... Rosewall was FAMOUS for his wisecracks right when trophies
were handed out!... but in the 1960s the press just laughed about
it... fit the times... today he's be PILE DRIVEN for some of the
comments he used to make... I loved Rosewall but he had a comment for
everything... if you are old enough to remember...
P
Patrick Kehoe
>
> - Show quoted text -
Do you even remember these guys or what they were like when they were
young?... Laver had a real attitude about him, a chip on his
shoulder... don't confuse the old retired gent with the youthful
Laver... of course I'm talking about things you may not have witnessed/
saw, so that's OK... Rosewall too... he was quite the wisecracker with
his comments... it was fine in the 60s... today it would be headline
news some of the remarks he made... take off the rose coloured glasses
before commenting... it helps!
P
topspin
>
> - Show quoted text -
You are right of course. Laver and Rosewall didn't achieve what they
did without being tough as teak, and having attitudes to match. I have
always maintained that they have learned to act humble because they
have learned it gives them an easy life, and unlike McEnroe they don't
particularly like the limelight. Also they were brought up to act with
courtesy. I expect Sampras to end up 'humble' as well. Borg is sort of
getting there. I have no doubt that deep down they all believe they
would give Federer and Nadal a run for their money. And they are
right.
However in this case I do believe that Laver is mainly arguing for the
'purity' of the Grand Slam being 4 major in a single calendar year,
and nothing else. These guys are traditionalists.
After all, if you stretch the definition to include 4 consecutive
slams in any time period, Navratilova actually achieved 3 different
Grand Slams when she won 6 in a row!!
Manco
Manco
still competitive in that sense and I don't begrudge him that. Leave
the old man alone Patrick!
Manco
Viper
You're really hanging your hat on an assumption that no one in this
group would have seen Laver/Rosewall et al play, let alone have been
familiar with their opinions.
I'd say with absolute confidence that I've seen more of those players
than you would have and been exposed to more of their thoughts in all
forms of the media.
You are talking utter rubbish and it seems that view is shared by the
majority in this thread. 'Wisecracking' Rosewall, ' 'A real attitude'
from Laver. Fuck me mate, have a good look at yourself.
Viper
Pedro Dias
Hmmmm.... Well, I'm old enough to have caught the tail end of their
careers, and to have seen quite a bit of them in the sports media in
the immediate aftermath. I must say I have no such recollection: they
were both cheerful enough guys, as I recall, but not braggarts, and
very competitive, but in a thoroughly self-directed, internalized way.
Our memories are not necessarily incompatible in every way, but the
notion of Rosewall saying something inappropriate by today's standards
does ring very false, sorry.
Patrick Kehoe
>
> - Show quoted text -
Viper indeed... you seem to think this is a terrible attack or
something; and both guys are saints from a perfect never neverland of
a bye gone era... ok then...
P