I recall reading several articles from the aussie greats of the 50s and 60s regularly mentioning Poncho Gonzales as one of the toughest guys to play. Also mentioned frequently how ge had the fastest serve many of them had faced. The aussie greats back then had alot of respect for Gonzales.
Gonzales will never go away to those who have seen him play. I've seen him play since 1955, at age 7, and our family watched him into the 70s. Why is he not talked about? Gonzales won 2 National Singles titles and all his Davis Cup matches. Turning pro, he did not tour continuously, waiting some years for Kramer to come up with a rival because Kramer was his only rival from the 40s. He and his brother drag raced in those off-seasons, allowing Segura to take a Pro title once. He possessed the fastest clocked serve (112 mph) and shared with Tilden the ability to set down youngsters into his 40s. He stands alone as the 8-time Professional Champion. Tennis today is driven by statistics that deceive us from the fact that there is no one like Gonzales and our players are fodder to others when we knew the game better than the rest. Our tennis leaders bought the Agassi/Evert play, in my view, a disaster for American tennis. Kramer, Gonzales, Smith and Federer should be the model to duplicate at all levels. Art Larsen would not say a thing about Gonzales. Why? He was shamed twice in 5 sets on grass in the semis by Gonzales as the son of a police man would be. Larsen would tout the power of Hoad's serve and say nothing about Gonzales. Tilden and Gonzales are 'from the other side of the tracks' as far as Establishment goes. However, his long rival, Jack Kramer paid Gonzales the highest compliment in his memoir, coded in a fantasy tourney of greats in the back of his book that shows how he truly felt about Gonzales: in greatness, he places Gonzales above all.
Some many modern day tennis fans know so little about the rich history of the sport. I saw Gonzalez on television when he did ABC tennis. Stories of him beating a young Borg or Connors while he was in his 40's was amazing. His dominate style and legend me think of him as being one of the first "Ali", in so much as a non Northern European who dominated , innovated and became bigger than his sport.
Odd that whenever the voiceover says Gonzales played during the wood racquet era, and, that Gonzales had a powerful despite using a wood racket, he's actually pictured using an aluminum racquet!
Married and divorced 6 times with 9 children. NOT a nice guy. But then, if I had 6 ex-wives and children turned against me I'd be cranky too. Only a sports culture like America gives the exceptional athlete a pass when he's an asshole. Pass to McEnroe, pass to Connors, pass to Becker, pass to Nastase, pass to Kyrgios, and others.
Here we can take a look of Pancho González sport career. His personal life was only his. Seem that you're at least as asshole and grinch or more to judge others life even when you don't know the whole and truth history. For sure you are the one who find the hair on the soup
- People talk about Gonzales, Laver and Tilden as the best ever but it just isn’t so. - The Open Era brought a lot more players and tournaments. - The best started then: Connors, Borg, McEnroe, Lendl, Sampras and Agassi. - However, the very best then became the three greatest players of all-time for the past 20 years: Federer, Nadal and Djokovic.
Overall very good but there are a few mistakes here. Ted Schroeder is mispronounced. Big hitting goes back to at least Vines and Tilden. Topspin goes back to 1878 (if not 1485;-)) and was not invented by Gonzales. His serve has significant differences from modern practice: landing on the right foot, horizontal takeaway, ... In both respects I think his practice is better. Hoad, Rosewall, and Laver all did the same thing, also Newk and various other Aussies, also Kramer, Budge, ... Kramer states that Gonzales was world no. 1 for ten years, and top 10 for twenty. It is a shame and disgrace that match records of the pro tours are so hard to come by.
Gonzales won world championship tours in 1954, 1956, 1957, 1958, 1959, 1960, 1961. Plus, he was probably the best player of 1952. However, those tours, except for 1954, were usually two-man contests, sometimes with lesser players as an opening act, not comprehensive pro field championships. All-time he is probably one or two.
Calling Richard Gonzalez Pancho was a disgrace. How about Fritz Kramer, or Mick McEnroe or Paddy Connors? Not too many 6'2" Mexican tennis players that are smart and coordinated. Though I have found that some of the best athletes I have played against were latino. Jack Kramer in mexico under the same circumstances would have received the same hard time from Mexicans maybe even from Richard. It's the way people are.
I seriously doubt that it was the insult it is today. People were more relaxed back in the day. It wasn't unusual to say, "Hey, Mick," if your friend was Irish, for example. There was Pancho Segura and Pancho Gonzales, and neither seemed to take much offense with the moniker. Gonzales was a very proud man who took offense easily, and liked to called Richard, but Pat Summerall, his fellow tennis TV commentator, used to call him Pancho on the air. The other pro's used to call him "Gordo," short for gorgonzola cheese.
Gonzales didn't hit his peak until he was on the pro tour for a couple of years. After Laver won his first grand slam in 1962, he turned pro. As a pro, he played Gonzales on the tour and had a losing record against him. When open tennis came back, Gonzales was in his forties and past his prime. Laver was a great player, but I think he is overrated. At various times, Tilden, Budge, Vines, Hoad, Gonzales, Kramer, Rosewall, Segura, and Gonzales were ranked #1 in the pros, and were therefor the best player in the world. Gonzales, however, was ranked #1 the longest.
@@shanelawson5072 After Laver won the amateur slam at the age of 24 he turned pro and as a 25 year old was Crushed by Rosewall who won all 3 pro slams in 1963 as well as Hoad and 35 year old Pancho played him even. Pancho won the US amateur championships as a 19 and 20 year old than turned pro and could not play in a grand slam till 1968 when he was 40. He still amazingly won 6 tournamounts in his 40s as did Rosewall.
![[#2024MAMA] BIGBANG (빅뱅) - 뱅뱅뱅 (BANG BANG BANG) + FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EQsYfiPR9uM/mqdefault.jpg)
I recall reading several articles from the aussie greats of the 50s and 60s regularly mentioning Poncho Gonzales as one of the toughest guys to play. Also mentioned frequently how ge had the fastest serve many of them had faced. The aussie greats back then had alot of respect for Gonzales.
They also, in their understated politeness, called him an
"unpleasant" opponent. Any psyche job for an edge. Not a sport.
I though he made the best broadcast commentator I've seen. Smartest analysis of any of them.
Pancho beat the best. In his time he was the best.
Gonzales will never go away to those who have seen him play. I've seen him play since 1955, at age 7, and our family watched him into the 70s. Why is he not talked about? Gonzales won 2 National Singles titles and all his Davis Cup matches. Turning pro, he did not tour continuously, waiting some years for Kramer to come up with a rival because Kramer was his only rival from the 40s. He and his brother drag raced in those off-seasons, allowing Segura to take a Pro title once. He possessed the fastest clocked serve (112 mph) and shared with Tilden the ability to set down youngsters into his 40s. He stands alone as the 8-time Professional Champion. Tennis today is driven by statistics that deceive us from the fact that there is no one like Gonzales and our players are fodder to others when we knew the game better than the rest. Our tennis leaders bought the Agassi/Evert play, in my view, a disaster for American tennis. Kramer, Gonzales, Smith and Federer should be the model to duplicate at all levels. Art Larsen would not say a thing about Gonzales. Why? He was shamed twice in 5 sets on grass in the semis by Gonzales as the son of a police man would be. Larsen would tout the power of Hoad's serve and say nothing about Gonzales. Tilden and Gonzales are 'from the other side of the tracks' as far as Establishment goes. However, his long rival, Jack Kramer paid Gonzales the highest compliment in his memoir, coded in a fantasy tourney of greats in the back of his book that shows how he truly felt about Gonzales: in greatness, he places Gonzales above all.
Some many modern day tennis fans know so little about the rich history of the sport. I saw Gonzalez on television when he did ABC tennis. Stories of him beating a young Borg or Connors while he was in his 40's was amazing. His dominate style and legend me think of him as being one of the first "Ali", in so much as a non Northern European who dominated , innovated and became bigger than his sport.
Odd that whenever the voiceover says Gonzales played during the wood racquet era, and, that Gonzales had a powerful despite using a wood racket, he's actually pictured using an aluminum racquet!
The GOAT period-and all American.
Married and divorced 6 times with 9 children. NOT a nice guy. But then, if I had 6 ex-wives and children turned against me I'd be cranky too. Only a sports culture like America gives the exceptional athlete a pass when he's an asshole. Pass to McEnroe, pass to Connors, pass to Becker, pass to Nastase, pass to Kyrgios, and others.
Here we can take a look of Pancho González sport career. His personal life was only his. Seem that you're at least as asshole and grinch or more to judge others life even when you don't know the whole and truth history. For sure you are the one who find the hair on the soup
Pancho González ex Andre Agassi's brother in law; I recall him lighing a cigarette after a tennis match.
Hey... Is that Robert Redford @ 0:11
No, it's Warren Beatty...no, it's it's John Wayne...no, it's Ernest Borgnine...no it's Faye Dunaway...no, damn it!...Who the hell is that?
- People talk about Gonzales, Laver and Tilden as the best ever but it just isn’t so.
- The Open Era brought a lot more players and tournaments.
- The best started then: Connors, Borg, McEnroe, Lendl, Sampras and Agassi.
- However, the very best then became the three greatest players of all-time for the past 20 years: Federer, Nadal and Djokovic.
Overall very good but there are a few mistakes here. Ted Schroeder is mispronounced. Big hitting goes back to at least Vines and Tilden. Topspin goes back to 1878 (if not 1485;-)) and was not invented by Gonzales. His serve has significant differences from modern practice: landing on the right foot, horizontal takeaway, ... In both respects I think his practice is better. Hoad, Rosewall, and Laver all did the same thing, also Newk and various other Aussies, also Kramer, Budge, ... Kramer states that Gonzales was world no. 1 for ten years, and top 10 for twenty. It is a shame and disgrace that match records of the pro tours are so hard to come by.
Gonzales won world championship tours in 1954, 1956, 1957, 1958, 1959, 1960, 1961. Plus, he was probably the best player of 1952. However, those tours, except for 1954, were usually two-man contests, sometimes with lesser players as an opening act, not comprehensive pro field championships. All-time he is probably one or two.
Show me proof that topspin goes back to 1878.
@@HalJurgensen Topspin almost certainly goes back to the 16th century, the time they started using racquets.
Calling Richard Gonzalez Pancho was a disgrace. How about Fritz Kramer, or Mick McEnroe or Paddy Connors? Not too many 6'2" Mexican tennis players that are smart and coordinated. Though I have found that some of the best athletes I have played against were latino. Jack Kramer in mexico under the same circumstances would have received the same hard time from Mexicans maybe even from Richard. It's the way people are.
I seriously doubt that it was the insult it is today. People were more relaxed back in the day. It wasn't unusual to say, "Hey, Mick," if your friend was Irish, for example. There was Pancho Segura and Pancho Gonzales, and neither seemed to take much offense with the moniker. Gonzales was a very proud man who took offense easily, and liked to called Richard, but Pat Summerall, his fellow tennis TV commentator, used to call him Pancho on the air. The other pro's used to call him "Gordo," short for gorgonzola cheese.
Not better than Laver -- based on seeing films of both playing and the fact that Laver won 2 Grand Slams -- hard to argue with that.
Pro players like Gonzales were not allowed to play Grand Slam events.
@@mparento neither was Laver between his 1962 Grand Slam & 1969 Grand Slam... The best years of his career ❗
@@shanelawson5072 - I know. Grand Slam results don't mean much when comparing the careers of Pancho Gonzales and Rod Laver.
Gonzales didn't hit his peak until he was on the pro tour for a couple of years. After Laver won his first grand slam in 1962, he turned pro. As a pro, he played Gonzales on the tour and had a losing record against him. When open tennis came back, Gonzales was in his forties and past his prime. Laver was a great player, but I think he is overrated. At various times, Tilden, Budge, Vines, Hoad, Gonzales, Kramer, Rosewall, Segura, and Gonzales were ranked #1 in the pros, and were therefor the best player in the world. Gonzales, however, was ranked #1 the longest.
@@shanelawson5072 After Laver won the amateur slam at the age of 24 he turned pro and as a 25 year old was
Crushed by Rosewall who won all 3 pro slams in 1963 as well as Hoad and 35 year old Pancho played him even. Pancho won the US amateur championships as a 19 and 20 year old than turned pro and could not play in a grand slam till 1968 when he was 40. He still amazingly won 6 tournamounts in his 40s as did Rosewall.