Rosewall is SO UNDERRATED. People talk about Laver missing 6 years of playing in the Slams....Rosewall missed ELEVEN--and still came into the Open Era winning Slams. He also won 15 Pro Slams, and won the WCT Finals in '71 and '72 (a tournament that was basically a Grand Slam at that time). His longevity is UNMATCHED, and he has way more than just the 8 Slams he's credited with
Ken Rosewall deserves every single word said by these tennis people. To watch him play was like watching the best artist painting the best oil painting you could ever se. His,perfect timing hitting the ball,always in the center of his,racket. My absolute favourite playe together with Hoad and of course todays superstar Roger Federer
I once had the honour of playing against Ken Rosewall in a tennis pro am. Ken was 70 at the time, I was 39, I was a handy player with a decent first serve at around 180kmph Of all the pros in that tournament the one that gave me the most trouble was Ken. He just knew exactly where I was going to hit the ball every single time and would put away the sweetest volleys, his backhand would come over a mere inch above the net and I recall one time when I sent down my biggest flat serve down the tee he took it early and missed his return by less than an inch, "Damn "I heard him say, " I took it too early!" His dear wife Wilma was such a lovely person and you could tell how much they loved each other, I worry how Ken is getting along without her now that she has sadly passed.
I was lucky enough to see Ken Rosewall beat the American Richey in the quarter finals in 1971 at Wimbledon. I've just watched some footage of it now .... still exciting even though we are used to the faster, modern game of baseline play. When you think they had wooden raquets, very basic equipment, no cyclops or camera replay if there was a controversial call .....they didn't even sit during the match .. wow! No wonder I was blown away by watching him grace the court. Great lawn tennis with lots of superb strokes we sadly don't see played so much nowadays.
Saw Ken and Rod in a 1976 exhibition in Binghamton, NY - great thrill. I think, as a side note, that Rafa has now joined Ken's "3 different decades" Club.
Rosewall won AO titles 19 years apart. He also had only 7 chances to win a major in the 1960s. If you include pro majors, Rosewall is top of the list for majors won with 23.
If Rosewall, and the other pros, had been allowed to play in the major tournaments for those 12 years, who knows how many slams he could have won. Instead of 8, he could have had 18 or 20. One of the interesting 'what ifs'.
There have been attempts to estimate the number of 'adjusted majors' Rosewall won in his career. For example, on the Tennis Warehouse forum, one historian estimated the top-4 events going back to the 19th century. And by that person's count, Rosewall won 21 "adjusted majors." Rosewall may have been the most decorated player in history. P.S. Other calculations included 19 majors for Pancho Gonzales and 18 for Rod Laver.
@@JD-jc8gp that's Interesting!! Rosewall Couldn't Easily Been The Greatest Player of All Time and To Me He also Could've Join Rod in Winning a Whole Calendar Grand Slam in One Year Maybe 1966-1967 would've Been Great Peak Years for "Muscles"
Rosewall : 14 years between US Open wins, 15 years between French Open wins and 19 years between Australian Open wins. So, he did it across THREE separate tournaments. Nadal has him done on the French with 17 years between wins. For the Australian Open [ which wasn't worth a cracker in Rosewall's time and for a decade thereafter ] it is 14 years between wins for Federer and 13 years respectively for Nadal and Djokovic. So that it is going to take some doing by someone to clean sweep Rosewall on the longevity.
Ken Rosewall is a legend, and he's sometimes overlooked I believe, he was arguably the most versatile player of his era, being great both on clay and on grass. Now, Rafa and Novak join him in the list of male players to win slams on three different decades.
People talk about the 1939 Grand Slam by Don Budge and the 1962, 1969 GS's by Rod Laver, but I would rank Rosewall at that level because he won the Pro Slam of 1963 which is all 3 pro slams (the US Pro, Wembly Pro and French Pro Championships) of that year (there was no Australian Pro tournament)
I think they're talking in terms of a players age, meaning like, age 19, 29 and 39. I think Djokovic was 20 when he won the Australian open. Because it looks like Rosewall was either 18 or 19 when he won the french and australian, at 27 he won the french open and then and then at 37 he won the Australian open, so that's got to be what they mean. Although that doesn't make sense because Nadal was 19 when he won the French Open, obviously he's won numerous times in his 20's and with his latest wins at the French he was in his 30's, so this thing is wrong no matter what. They must have made this a few years ago. And they can't be talking 30 years apart because at most it would have been 29 for Rosewall
They are talking about decades. It shows 50s, 60s, 70s. Djokovic is now the second to do so as he has won in the 2000s 2010s and 2020s. Federer and Nadal have the opportunity to do it if they win this year or after .
Same with Novak but only RAFA has won at least 3 GS in 3 separate decades. That would be another record that could never be broken. 6 in the 2000s, 13 in the 2010s and so far 3 in 2020s.
What they're missing here, is Rosewall changed from a wood to a metal racket in his late 30s, and it drastically improved his game. Also, his game was crafty and effortless. He could give guys like Newcombe fits, but a guy like Connors who hit the ball hard and flat, prevented him from getting into any kind of rhythm.
@@alanchong7513 One can use one's donger to return the tennis ball into the opponent's court if that would work for one, but one might well discover that a standard issue tennis racquet held in either or both hands might more amply facilitate such a task.
Well yes the big three of present day are truly great players however Rosewall(so far) has covered a greater range of years and eras.......Roger, if he keeps going, is the only one likely to come near to him in that regard.
List didn't even have Murray (this was made the year before he won his first slam, even then I still knew he was one of the best, top 10 or just outside of it), list had all generations & both genders so it was a mess, as will be the next list eventually
Rosewall is SO UNDERRATED. People talk about Laver missing 6 years of playing in the Slams....Rosewall missed ELEVEN--and still came into the Open Era winning Slams. He also won 15 Pro Slams, and won the WCT Finals in '71 and '72 (a tournament that was basically a Grand Slam at that time). His longevity is UNMATCHED, and he has way more than just the 8 Slams he's credited with
Ken Rosewall deserves every single word said by these tennis people.
To watch him play was like watching the best artist painting the best oil painting you could ever se.
His,perfect timing hitting the ball,always in the center of his,racket.
My absolute favourite playe together with Hoad and of course todays superstar Roger Federer
The fact that Rosewall is both the youngest (18) and the oldest (37) player to have won the men's singles at the Australian Open is a great fact.
I once had the honour of playing against Ken Rosewall in a tennis pro am. Ken was 70 at the time, I was 39, I was a handy player with a decent first serve at around 180kmph Of all the pros in that tournament the one that gave me the most trouble was Ken. He just knew exactly where I was going to hit the ball every single time and would put away the sweetest volleys, his backhand would come over a mere inch above the net and I recall one time when I sent down my biggest flat serve down the tee he took it early and missed his return by less than an inch, "Damn "I heard him say, " I took it too early!" His dear wife Wilma was such a lovely person and you could tell how much they loved each other, I worry how Ken is getting along without her now that she has sadly passed.
Great story. What other pro's were playing?
I was lucky enough to see Ken Rosewall beat the American Richey in the quarter finals in 1971 at Wimbledon. I've just watched some footage of it now .... still exciting even though we are used to the faster, modern game of baseline play. When you think they had wooden raquets, very basic equipment, no cyclops or camera replay if there was a controversial call .....they didn't even sit during the match .. wow! No wonder I was blown away by watching him grace the court. Great lawn tennis with lots of superb strokes we sadly don't see played so much nowadays.
Saw Ken and Rod in a 1976 exhibition in Binghamton, NY - great thrill. I think, as a side note, that Rafa has now joined Ken's "3 different decades" Club.
He and Laver were my idols when I was a kid. As a short guy, he gave me inspiration to play.
Novak djokovic has won grand slams in three separate decades aswell though
Rosewall won AO titles 19 years apart. He also had only 7 chances to win a major in the 1960s. If you include pro majors, Rosewall is top of the list for majors won with 23.
this footage seems old. just look at rod laver he speaks faster then nowdays and looks younger.
Serena as well.
the list was made in 2010 ish i think
Martina too.
If Rosewall, and the other pros, had been allowed to play in the major tournaments for those 12 years, who knows how many slams he could have won. Instead of 8, he could have had 18 or 20. One of the interesting 'what ifs'.
There have been attempts to estimate the number of 'adjusted majors' Rosewall won in his career. For example, on the Tennis Warehouse forum, one historian estimated the top-4 events going back to the 19th century. And by that person's count, Rosewall won 21 "adjusted majors." Rosewall may have been the most decorated player in history. P.S. Other calculations included 19 majors for Pancho Gonzales and 18 for Rod Laver.
@@JD-jc8gp that's Interesting!! Rosewall Couldn't Easily Been The Greatest Player of All Time and To Me He also Could've Join Rod in Winning a Whole Calendar Grand Slam in One Year Maybe 1966-1967 would've Been Great Peak Years for "Muscles"
@@purplebondsaiyan2987 According to the calculations I've seen, peak Rosewall years were 1962-63.
@@JD-jc8gp Wow Even Moreso So Interesting And Cool!!!
Rosewall's fitness and dedication was also legendary
Ken Rosewall was the equivalent of Evonne Goolagong on the men's side. So graceful and purely athletic.
always my favorite player most beautiful tennis on the court I have ever seen
Novak djokovic, ever heard of that one?
Who?
@@willnill7946 The other guy who won in 3 different decades
@@nickfox9669 one of the other guys, Nadal has as well
Rosewall : 14 years between US Open wins, 15 years between French Open wins and 19 years between Australian Open wins. So, he did it across THREE separate tournaments. Nadal has him done on the French with 17 years between wins. For the Australian Open [ which wasn't worth a cracker in Rosewall's time and for a decade thereafter ] it is 14 years between wins for Federer and 13 years respectively for Nadal and Djokovic. So that it is going to take some doing by someone to clean sweep Rosewall on the longevity.
Ken Rosewall is a legend, and he's sometimes overlooked I believe, he was arguably the most versatile player of his era, being great both on clay and on grass. Now, Rafa and Novak join him in the list of male players to win slams on three different decades.
People talk about the 1939 Grand Slam by Don Budge and the 1962, 1969 GS's by Rod Laver, but I would rank Rosewall at that level because he won the Pro Slam of 1963 which is all 3 pro slams (the US Pro, Wembly Pro and French Pro Championships) of that year (there was no Australian Pro tournament)
Didn't he also win them like 3 years in a row?
Nvm...he didn't play US Pro in 1960, 1961 and 1962...
His footwork always looked so good.
He beat the greatest player of his times, Lew Hoad, fairly often. And the American big names like Seixas and others. The perfect classic game.
I think they're talking in terms of a players age, meaning like, age 19, 29 and 39. I think Djokovic was 20 when he won the Australian open. Because it looks like Rosewall was either 18 or 19 when he won the french and australian, at 27 he won the french open and then and then at 37 he won the Australian open, so that's got to be what they mean. Although that doesn't make sense because Nadal was 19 when he won the French Open, obviously he's won numerous times in his 20's and with his latest wins at the French he was in his 30's, so this thing is wrong no matter what. They must have made this a few years ago. And they can't be talking 30 years apart because at most it would have been 29 for Rosewall
This was made in 2012.
They are talking about decades. It shows 50s, 60s, 70s. Djokovic is now the second to do so as he has won in the 2000s 2010s and 2020s. Federer and Nadal have the opportunity to do it if they win this year or after
.
I loved his game.
Kenny is my all time favorite...
Same with Novak but only RAFA has won at least 3 GS in 3 separate decades. That would be another record that could never be broken. 6 in the 2000s, 13 in the 2010s and so far 3 in 2020s.
Haha wait until Novak wins them double digits in two separate decades, now THAT will never be broken! Lol
What they're missing here, is Rosewall changed from a wood to a metal racket in his late 30s, and it drastically improved his game. Also, his game was crafty and effortless. He could give guys like Newcombe fits, but a guy like Connors who hit the ball hard and flat, prevented him from getting into any kind of rhythm.
If Connors is not permitted to use a DHB, he might not have even won a damn thing! DHB....great way to 'cheat' your way to the top.
@@alanchong7513 One can use one's donger to return the tennis ball into the opponent's court if that would work for one, but one might well discover that a standard issue tennis racquet held in either or both hands might more amply facilitate such a task.
That backhand, with zero topspin, ever, might still be the most deadly ever.
Rafa and Rosewall now have that in common, along with playing tennis with their non-dominant arm.
Are you sure you didn't forget someone else? Some serbian guy?…
Well yes the big three of present day are truly great players however Rosewall(so far) has covered a greater range of years and eras.......Roger, if he keeps going, is the only one likely to come near to him in that regard.
At this point it's Djokovic...
@@Summon256 And he's got more in him most probably, 25 26 27 28.............we'll see
Novak won 2008, 2015 and 2020 AO ??
I think Nadal, Federer AND the Joker have all won majors in 3 decades.
Federer hasn't.
@@tanmaywadhwa211 You're correct! I'd forgotten his last major was AO in 2018. Of the three, only Nadal has won majors in his teens, 20's and 30's.
Among the big 3,only Djokovic did it..2008,2011... and the third decade began in 2021..maybe Nadal can catch up..
As of Feb 2022, Nadal has indeed won in 3 decades...
@@davidcunningham7330 Yes,now we can say that.Bravo for him!
What a resemblance with Novak Djokovic, on so many levels..
Both boring robots.
"The only male player to win a major in three separate decades" - Well not anymore...lmao
Djokovic won in 3 separate decades. And Nadal.
Novak Djokovic has won slams in three different decades and this channel doesn't know it, come one......
So has Serena.
This was made years ago I’m pretty sure
These rankings were from almost a decade back and you don't know it, come on......
11 year span satisfies that claim.
List didn't even have Murray (this was made the year before he won his first slam, even then I still knew he was one of the best, top 10 or just outside of it), list had all generations & both genders so it was a mess, as will be the next list eventually