1968 - TennisForum.com
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 14 (permalink) Old Aug 18th, 2004, 05:37 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,551
                     
1968

Send your input. Let's make a top ten players list for 1968. We can do other years when we finish this one. List who you think should've been the top ten and then defend your position. After several days, I'll compile the lists and come up with a BFTP top ten from 1968. Go for it!
preacherfan is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 14 (permalink) Old Aug 18th, 2004, 07:36 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: England
Posts: 1,667
                     
Isn't there a "World of Tennis" or "Tennis Magazine" ranking which is more or less official? If so, I'd like to know the rankings for 68 to 74.
Robert1 is offline  
post #3 of 14 (permalink) Old Aug 19th, 2004, 04:15 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 474
 
68-74

These are the rankings from World of Tennis by Lance Tingay between 1968-1974

1968
1. King
2. Wade
3. Richey
4. Bueno
5. Court
6. Jones
7. Tegart
8. du Plooy
9. Bowrey
10. Casals

1969
1. Court
2. Jones
3. King
4. Richey
5. Heldman
6. Casals
7. Melville
8. Bartkowicz
9. Wade
10. Bowrey

1970
1. Court
2. King
3. Casals
4. Niessen
5. Wade
6. Jones
7. Melville
8. Krantzcke
9. Heldman
10. Durr

1971
1. Goolagong
2. Court
3. King
4. Casals
5. Melville
6. Dalton
7. Durr
8. Wade
9. Masthoff
10. Evert

1972
1. King
2. Goolagong
3. Evert
4. Court
5. Melville
6. Wade
7. Casals
8. Gunter
9. Durr
10. Tuero

1973
1. Court
2. King
3. Evert
4. Goolagong
5. Melville
6. Wade
7. Casals
8. Masthoff
9. Morozova
10. Stove

1974
1. Evert
2. King
3. Goolagong
4. Morozova
5. Melville
6. Casals
7. Wade
8. Masthoff
9. Heldman
10. Richey Gunter
AndrewTas is offline  
 
post #4 of 14 (permalink) Old Aug 19th, 2004, 09:22 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,619
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewTas
These are the rankings from World of Tennis by Lance Tingay between 1968-1974

1968
1. King
2. Wade
3. Richey
4. Bueno
5. Court
6. Jones
7. Tegart
8. du Plooy
9. Bowrey
10. Casals

1969
1. Court
2. Jones
3. King
4. Richey
5. Heldman
6. Casals
7. Melville
8. Bartkowicz
9. Wade
10. Bowrey

1970
1. Court
2. King
3. Casals
4. Niessen
5. Wade
6. Jones
7. Melville
8. Krantzcke
9. Heldman
10. Durr

1971
1. Goolagong
2. Court
3. King
4. Casals
5. Melville
6. Dalton
7. Durr
8. Wade
9. Masthoff
10. Evert

1972
1. King
2. Goolagong
3. Evert
4. Court
5. Melville
6. Wade
7. Casals
8. Gunter
9. Durr
10. Tuero

1973
1. Court
2. King
3. Evert
4. Goolagong
5. Melville
6. Wade
7. Casals
8. Masthoff
9. Morozova
10. Stove

1974
1. Evert
2. King
3. Goolagong
4. Morozova
5. Melville
6. Casals
7. Wade
8. Masthoff
9. Heldman
10. Richey Gunter

There were no official rankings in those days and many correspondents made up their own. However the Lance Tingay ones now seem to be most widely quoted and are almost regarded as "semi-official".

You need go no further than 1968 to see how his lists can be open to question. Bueno's ranking at #4 is a nonsense.
chris whiteside is offline  
post #5 of 14 (permalink) Old Aug 19th, 2004, 02:54 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,619
                     
1968

I really would find it hard to disagree with the Seagram panel made up of 15 tennis correspondents.

The percentage figures are total matches won/lost which I worked out and are remarkably consistent with the rankings.
1 King 88.37%
2 Richey 94.00%
3 Court 83.33%
4 Wade 78.57%
5 Jones 76.31%
6 Tegart 71.01%
7 Bueno 75.86%
8 du Plooy 66.67%
9 Bowrey 54.00%
10 Casals 57.50%

Withe the small group of professional women you just have to judge fron the tournaments they played although they did compete at RG, Wimby and Forest Hills and enough elsewhere.

I don't believe anyone would go against King as the No. 1 , Wimbledon and Australian Champion plus US finallist and French semi. She was down 0-2 to Nancy Richey but lost only 3 other matches all year one to Wade in the USO final.

The next three places could be argued any way depending on the importance you attach to any one event. Court, Richey and Wade. Does winning the USO automatically entitle you to No. 2 spot despite losing the first round at Wimbledon, and with 15 defeats for the year? What about a consistent off record but so-so in the Slams.

Nancy Richey would be no. 2 because she won the French, reached the Wimbledon semi, didn't play the US but altogether won 9 tournaments and only lost 3 matches all year - to Wade in the Wightman Cup and twice to Tegart including the Wimbledon semi final but against that she had 4 victories plus an advantage over BJK.

How do you assesss Virginia Wade? Brilliant at the USO, a bummer at Wimby where she loses 1st round to Sandberg and a host of losses to many lesser players but also winning her sole matches against King and Richey although losing 5 times out of 6 to Court. Court lost the Aussie final to King but won the South African title beating Wade. The only player she had a losing record against was BJK but she also managed to win the US amateur so allied to Wade's 1st round loss at Wimbledon is probably just worth the No.3 although I wouldn't argue with Wade 3 and Court 4.

Jones and Tegart are the next two. Jones is clearly below the top 4 with losing records against them all but aside from that she only lost to Casals at the Pacific SW and once to Tegart balanced by a win. She was French finallist plus semi-finallist at Wimbleon and USO. Fewer tournaments than normal because of the Professional Tour so performance in the Majors where they all met assumes greater significance. She had 9 defeats. Judy Tegart was a great Wimbledon finallist and also made the German final but the only other top tenner she had a winning record against was Casals although she won 2 matches against Court. She was a semi-finallist at the Australian and reached the quarters of the US but had a host of losses to lesser players. She won 8 out of 23 matches against the other top 10 players.

Bueno didn't play until the French Open and reached the quarters there, at Wimbledon and the semi at the US and won 2 tournaments out of 9 beating Court twice at Essex and the US Nationals.

Annette du Plooy won the German plus several smaller events, Lesley Turner the Italian and many small very weak field tourneys in Europe but had 23 defeats to du Plooy's 14. Turner reached the semis at the Australian but had really no-one to beat to get there and the Wimbledon quarters but importantly the Italian beating Court in the final.

The fight for the last place was between Casals, Heldman and Sherriff. Sherriff reached the quarters at Rome and RG and won a host of small tournaments but beat no-one in the top 10 except Bowrey. Heldman also won several smaller tournaments but only beat Casals of the top 10. Casas also had an up and down season but beat Court twice including the quarters of the Pacific SW where she then beat Jones and Bueno in order to win the title which gets her the 10th spot.
chris whiteside is offline  
post #6 of 14 (permalink) Old Aug 23rd, 2004, 12:23 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Under Carlos Moya
Posts: 4,918
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris whiteside
1968

I really would find it hard to disagree with the Seagram panel made up of 15 tennis correspondents.

The percentage figures are total matches won/lost which I worked out and are remarkably consistent with the rankings.
1 King 88.37%
2 Richey 94.00%
3 Court 83.33%
4 Wade 78.57%
5 Jones 76.31%
6 Tegart 71.01%
7 Bueno 75.86%
8 du Plooy 66.67%
9 Bowrey 54.00%
10 Casals 57.50%

Withe the small group of professional women you just have to judge fron the tournaments they played although they did compete at RG, Wimby and Forest Hills and enough elsewhere.

I don't believe anyone would go against King as the No. 1 , Wimbledon and Australian Champion plus US finallist and French semi. She was down 0-2 to Nancy Richey but lost only 3 other matches all year one to Wade in the USO final.

The next three places could be argued any way depending on the importance you attach to any one event. Court, Richey and Wade. Does winning the USO automatically entitle you to No. 2 spot despite losing the first round at Wimbledon, and with 15 defeats for the year? What about a consistent off record but so-so in the Slams.

Nancy Richey would be no. 2 because she won the French, reached the Wimbledon semi, didn't play the US but altogether won 9 tournaments and only lost 3 matches all year - to Wade in the Wightman Cup and twice to Tegart including the Wimbledon semi final but against that she had 4 victories plus an advantage over BJK.

How do you assesss Virginia Wade? Brilliant at the USO, a bummer at Wimby where she loses 1st round to Sandberg and a host of losses to many lesser players but also winning her sole matches against King and Richey although losing 5 times out of 6 to Court. Court lost the Aussie final to King but won the South African title beating Wade. The only player she had a losing record against was BJK but she also managed to win the US amateur so allied to Wade's 1st round loss at Wimbledon is probably just worth the No.3 although I wouldn't argue with Wade 3 and Court 4.

Jones and Tegart are the next two. Jones is clearly below the top 4 with losing records against them all but aside from that she only lost to Casals at the Pacific SW and once to Tegart balanced by a win. She was French finallist plus semi-finallist at Wimbleon and USO. Fewer tournaments than normal because of the Professional Tour so performance in the Majors where they all met assumes greater significance. She had 9 defeats. Judy Tegart was a great Wimbledon finallist and also made the German final but the only other top tenner she had a winning record against was Casals although she won 2 matches against Court. She was a semi-finallist at the Australian and reached the quarters of the US but had a host of losses to lesser players. She won 8 out of 23 matches against the other top 10 players.

Bueno didn't play until the French Open and reached the quarters there, at Wimbledon and the semi at the US and won 2 tournaments out of 9 beating Court twice at Essex and the US Nationals.

Annette du Plooy won the German plus several smaller events, Lesley Turner the Italian and many small very weak field tourneys in Europe but had 23 defeats to du Plooy's 14. Turner reached the semis at the Australian but had really no-one to beat to get there and the Wimbledon quarters but importantly the Italian beating Court in the final.

The fight for the last place was between Casals, Heldman and Sherriff. Sherriff reached the quarters at Rome and RG and won a host of small tournaments but beat no-one in the top 10 except Bowrey. Heldman also won several smaller tournaments but only beat Casals of the top 10. Casas also had an up and down season but beat Court twice including the quarters of the Pacific SW where she then beat Jones and Bueno in order to win the title which gets her the 10th spot.
Just for you Chris!

Mrs King cleaerly deserves the top spot, with her brace of majors (Wimbledon-Australian) and a final at Forest Hills. While clearly the best overall, she was not the leader on clay, that honour going to Nancy Richey who beat BJK en route to the French Open and won titles at Barranquilla, St Petersburg, Puerto Rico, Curaçao, Houston, Cinnati and the US Clay Courts. For that, a semi final finish at Wimbledon in her only other slam of the year, her 2-0 h2h record over BJK and an excellent w/l record over the year, she deserves the #2 spot.
Had she played the US and won it, she would have had a good claim to the #1 spot for the year, imo...

Court's superior w/l percentage, her 12 titles to Wade's 7 and her h2h lead are hard to argue against yet Court's failure to win a major (even though she did reach the final in Oz and won the South African title) is troublesome. Then there's Wade's stunning US Open, where she took out Tegart (the Wimbledon finalist), Ann Jones (RG finalist) and King (Wimbledon and Aussie Champ) in successive matches. How do you balance flashes of brilliance against consistency? I'm going to hedge my bets and rank them equal third.

Jones, Tegart and Bueno are also pretty close in my opinion. The first two could boast second place in a major, Bueno made it to the US amateur/nationals final. In their other majors, Jones had two semis, Bueno two quarters and a semi and Tegart, a semi in Australia and a quarter at Forest Hills. Jones beat Bueno at Eastbourne and had a win over Court at Queens and beat Tegart once to square their h2h. Bueno could boast two wins over Court, one at the US Open, a win over Wade and one over Tegart. Tegart had a win over Court in Oz at the beginning of the year and a second at Wimbledon but lost to her on clay at Hilversum and on cement at Berkeley, plus a win over Jones. Jones won the bigger titles - Caracas, Queens and the South American - on grass and clay, so I think she deserves the #5 place most. As for the other two, I think I'd have to go with Bueno at 6 by a whisker and give Tegart the #7 rank.

There are several candidates for the last few places and I don't think i've got all the info on them so it's harder to judge. Of the leading candidates, Van Zyl-du Plooy won 5+ titles, the German Open over Niessen, Wade and Tegart being the most significant, Turner won the Italian Championships over Krantzcke, Gourlay and Court and Casals lifted the Pacific SW over Court, Jones and Bueno. Sherriff won 10 titles, though none of them was very significant, Heldman and Krantzcke 4 but none had any big wins to speak of. I think I'd plump for the Seagrove panel's order here but they're very close.

Below them would come (in no partcular order) Niessen-Masthoff (3 titles, all on clay) Eisel, Melville, and Gourlay.
Voilà. I'm wavering re Bueno-Tegart but...

Last edited by Andy T; Aug 23rd, 2004 at 01:43 PM.
Andy T is offline  
post #7 of 14 (permalink) Old Aug 23rd, 2004, 01:26 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,619
                     
Nice one, Andy.

We more or less agree on this one. I can see your reasoning on Tegart and Bueno. I entually gave the edge to Tegart for her Wimbledon final. Generally you don't see world lists where players are ranked equally (except maybe a joint #10) . Rollo has posted one for this year from a German correspondent Kaiser who has Jones and Richey at 3=. This is another of those mysteries. There is no way Jones was anywhere near a par with Richey in 1968.

However, my initial instincts on Wade/Court were 50/50 so a joint ranking of #3 sounds spot on. As I just could not decide I went with the panel's order.
chris whiteside is offline  
post #8 of 14 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2004, 06:02 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,619
                     
World Tennis is quoting an h2h of BJK v Judy Tegart of 4-2 for 1968. I know the season runs from October to September. Judy won in The South Australian Championships but does anyone know what her other victory was?
chris whiteside is offline  
post #9 of 14 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2004, 07:09 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Under Carlos Moya
Posts: 4,918
                     
Found it!
She lost QF NSW/Sydney to Tegart 63 79 60 in December 1967. That made two defeats on the Aussie circuit. This brings us back to the problem of the season vs the year. Should we be taking into account tournaments played in December 1967 for a 1968 ranking or should it be strictly calendar year?
Andy T is offline  
post #10 of 14 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2004, 07:26 AM
Moderator - BFTP
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 24,846
                     
I like the calendar year approach Andy-with rare exceptions, such as when the Aussie split the calendar or 1979/1980, when the Colgate started in early January.
Rollo is offline  
post #11 of 14 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2004, 09:00 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Under Carlos Moya
Posts: 4,918
                     
Incredible though it may seem to us now, the first year in tennis history where there was one women's tour within a calendar year which incorporated all the major tournaments and ended in a tour championships was 1987! Previous to that, there are a whole host of problems to settle when deciding when one "season" ended and the next began.
Andy T is offline  
post #12 of 14 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2004, 10:57 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,619
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy T
Found it!
She lost QF NSW/Sydney to Tegart 63 79 60 in December 1967. That made two defeats on the Aussie circuit. This brings us back to the problem of the season vs the year. Should we be taking into account tournaments played in December 1967 for a 1968 ranking or should it be strictly calendar year?
Personally I would agree with Rollo on preferring the calendar year approach. However I don't believe you can change the goalposts after the event.

Until the WTA came into existence it was accepted that the ranking year ran from October to September. I am not 100% sure of the reason but it is probably to do with the start of the Australian season.

So, if we are going to compare rankings it is only fair that we should use the same criteria and cover the same period as they did at the time.

World Tennis explained in 1960 that they selected the top 50 women in the world based on their 1959 records up to the end of September. If anyone made a spectacular entry during the year they could be added. "At the close of the Pacific Coast Tournament on October 2 (the last event counted in our calculations) the fifty candidates were reduced to fifteen. Then the process of weighing each woman's pereformance against all their rivals was begun". This would also suggest that events outside the Slams were also pretty important in their calculations.

Good for you in finding the missing Tegart result, Andy My mags don't cover it.
chris whiteside is offline  
post #13 of 14 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2004, 11:21 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Under Carlos Moya
Posts: 4,918
                     
An Oct-Sept/Oct approach would hold good until 1974 (with the Slims finale replacing the Pacific Coast) but the waters are so muddy during the 70s, aren't they? Personally, I wish they'd kept the Oct-Oct approach until 87, as Martina would have a "regular slam" Oct 83- Oct 84 ;-) (though she'd have lost the #1 spot for Oct 84-Oct 85 to Chrissie in most eyes).
Andy T is offline  
post #14 of 14 (permalink) Old Sep 1st, 2004, 01:07 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,551
                     
My 1968 list:
1- King (won in Oz and at Wimbledon)
2- Smith Court (best record outside the Slams)
3- Richey (French winner)
4- Wade (USO winner, not a lot to back that up)
5- Tegart Dalton (Wim r/u, consistent throughout year)
6- Haydon Jones (FO r/u, good Slam results)
7- Bueno (late start to year costs her)
8- Turner (Italian)
9- Van Zyl DuPlooy (German)
10 - Casals
Honorable mention: Sherriff (number of wins in smaller European tournaments)
preacherfan is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TennisForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome