Rod Laver captured Grand Slams because he had no weakness. Laver's return was as good as Agassi's, and more versatile. Clay? He could win from the baseline. Grass? - one of the most efficient serve and volleyers ever. Doubles? One of the greatest doubles players of all time too. Finally, heart. Laver was down 2 sets to love twice during his 1962 Grand Slam journey, and fought back to win. He won over 20 tourneys that year, and was still winning as a pro a dozen years later.
@bassidol I'll go you one better mate.The 69 grand slam he was down match point at some point in each of the four Majors.So in effect and for fact George Rodney Laver won the slam from match point down.
Sure, I respect Laver for dominating his era, but winning slams back then is nothing like winning slams now. The game has evolved to the point that it is laughable to say this 5'7" man was the best of all times when compared to guys like Federer, Sampras, Nadal, and Borg.
@DWaq32 Laver's taller than 5-7, Wiki's wrong on that one. Both Sampras and Borg have cited Laver as an idol (Borg after having played him at age 35!). No player ever hit a topspin backhand drive or offensive volley with more authority using the famous Dunlop Maxply than Rod Laver except Lew Hoad. No player ever outpowered Laver on a tennis court - not Gimeno, Gonzales, Newcombe, Smith or Ashe (all over 6'). If players today used wood racquets and Laver could come back, he'd be a giant today.
@JJLOB What do you get out of defending the memory of someone who nobody recognizes as the greatest player in spite of accomplishing the so called Grand Slam TWICE? Do you get a commission? Don't be a stupid fuck.
@DWaq32 PS. Winning a calendar Grand Slam has NEVER been easy, from Tilden to Djokovic today. In 99 years, only ONE other player besides Laver, Don Budge has accomplished that in 1938. If it was so easy, others would have done it too in all those years. That Laver did it TWICE, as an amateur and as a pro in the Open era, seven years apart is remarkable. Federer came close two times, much to his credit but there was Nadal. Nadal has similiar potential but now there is Djokovic. And it goes on...
@DWaq32 The game has evolved mainly due to the technology used in modern racquets , which allows for more power-driven tennis. Give the guys playing today a wooden racquet, and you will see they just can't play the same way, not even close to it, and all of a sudden, those old time tennis videos of Rod Laver at his best won't look so laughable any more. Comparing players of different eras is never a good idea, as well as comparing players based on how many slams they have won.
@DWaq32 I'm pretty certain Rod Laver could more than hold his own against the players you name, of course not with his wooden racquet against their respective era's racquets, but with the level playing field.I'm basing this on the videos i watched of him playing, and knowing how difficult the shots he makes are to make with the wooden racquet, because i've had the pleasure of playing with one. Yes, there is way more competition today and the overall quality is higher, but he was special.
Rod is the best of all times. Probably if he was allowed to play the grand slams between 1963 to 1967.... can you imagine how many slams he could have in his titles???..... sure more than 11
@rlladser Same goes for Sampras, imagine how many more GS he would have won in Laver era - when AO (till 1987), Wim and USO (till 1974) were played on grass.
@NoMoreMrNiceGuyBitch Have some respect! This man, Laver was the #1 player in the world for 7 straight years and won 2 calender GRAND SLAMS - a feat unmatched to this day. As aplayer possibly the GOAT. Here he is 2-1/2 years after a stroke at age 63 hitting balls with Lleyton Hewit. (He had to re-learn both speech and movement) Think about that and wish him well.
Wow man, how old was The Rocket here? The best Aussie of the 60's & 70's, (possibly of all-time) vs. the best Aussie of 2000+. I was a big Pat Cash fan growing up, and loved watching the Australian Opens, especially when the Swedes would paint their faces, watching the final with Wilander & Edberg vs Cash. Hewitt has spoken about this as well, saying these matches are what motivated him to becoming Australias greates modern-day player. Come-onnnnn!!!!
from 0:43 there's no more laver-hewitt... then why is it in the video? I think I hate that part :(
iosonodella2i 3 months ago
Rod Laver captured Grand Slams because he had no weakness. Laver's return was as good as Agassi's, and more versatile. Clay? He could win from the baseline. Grass? - one of the most efficient serve and volleyers ever. Doubles? One of the greatest doubles players of all time too. Finally, heart. Laver was down 2 sets to love twice during his 1962 Grand Slam journey, and fought back to win. He won over 20 tourneys that year, and was still winning as a pro a dozen years later.
bassidol 4 months ago
@bassidol I'll go you one better mate.The 69 grand slam he was down match point at some point in each of the four Majors.So in effect and for fact George Rodney Laver won the slam from match point down.
The Roehampton Rocket the greatest.
Cervicconstruction 1 week ago
Lleyton looks like A. Dolgopolov on this video. heheheh
lancezabala 5 months ago
@lancezabala
hey u black boy, u liek 2 make a fhotni 2 de everhwhyers./
mjsupafly 4 months ago
@mjsupafly im not black. :D
lancezabala 4 months ago
@lancezabala
shut up u kkk bich, u makke a munky shavings
mjsupafly 4 months ago
@mjsupafly why? what did i do? im saying it in a nice way. and u dont need to talk like that
lancezabala 4 months ago
@lancezabala
u make a dirty thing 2 a animlas, it sidcusting
mjsupafly 4 months ago
'Rocket' Rod Laver - what a legend! Only very few people have gone close to making a calendar grand slam, but Rod's done it before.. Twice! :D
Hitclubpenguin 5 months ago
He also won 4 grand slams in a year twice, both in 1962 and 1969 i believe
Gokubleach09 5 months ago
the humble champion
cain2335 5 months ago
tennis is a combination of technique, speed, endurance, mental focus and sheer love of the game. Laver has no equal when combining these attributes.
cindygirlification 5 months ago
Rod is almost as fast as in his prime. This was not a compliment.
I can't stand people who think Rod should be anywhere near the list of all time greats.
MrIStillDontCare 6 months ago
@MrIStillDontCare You obviously know nothing about tennis.
xrt199 6 months ago
Sure, I respect Laver for dominating his era, but winning slams back then is nothing like winning slams now. The game has evolved to the point that it is laughable to say this 5'7" man was the best of all times when compared to guys like Federer, Sampras, Nadal, and Borg.
DWaq32 8 months ago
@DWaq32 Laver's taller than 5-7, Wiki's wrong on that one. Both Sampras and Borg have cited Laver as an idol (Borg after having played him at age 35!). No player ever hit a topspin backhand drive or offensive volley with more authority using the famous Dunlop Maxply than Rod Laver except Lew Hoad. No player ever outpowered Laver on a tennis court - not Gimeno, Gonzales, Newcombe, Smith or Ashe (all over 6'). If players today used wood racquets and Laver could come back, he'd be a giant today.
JJLOB 7 months ago
@JJLOB What do you get out of defending the memory of someone who nobody recognizes as the greatest player in spite of accomplishing the so called Grand Slam TWICE? Do you get a commission? Don't be a stupid fuck.
DWaq32 7 months ago
@DWaq32 You're right, you are a 'nobody' - and ignorant too.
JJLOB 7 months ago
@JJLOB I hope you are not one of those sad "never made it" tennis players. Your strokes suck.
DWaq32 7 months ago
@DWaq32 PS. Winning a calendar Grand Slam has NEVER been easy, from Tilden to Djokovic today. In 99 years, only ONE other player besides Laver, Don Budge has accomplished that in 1938. If it was so easy, others would have done it too in all those years. That Laver did it TWICE, as an amateur and as a pro in the Open era, seven years apart is remarkable. Federer came close two times, much to his credit but there was Nadal. Nadal has similiar potential but now there is Djokovic. And it goes on...
JJLOB 7 months ago
@DWaq32 The game has evolved mainly due to the technology used in modern racquets , which allows for more power-driven tennis. Give the guys playing today a wooden racquet, and you will see they just can't play the same way, not even close to it, and all of a sudden, those old time tennis videos of Rod Laver at his best won't look so laughable any more. Comparing players of different eras is never a good idea, as well as comparing players based on how many slams they have won.
fdsfjsdfjjl 7 months ago 2
@DWaq32 I'm pretty certain Rod Laver could more than hold his own against the players you name, of course not with his wooden racquet against their respective era's racquets, but with the level playing field.I'm basing this on the videos i watched of him playing, and knowing how difficult the shots he makes are to make with the wooden racquet, because i've had the pleasure of playing with one. Yes, there is way more competition today and the overall quality is higher, but he was special.
fdsfjsdfjjl 7 months ago
When men were men and hit their backhands with 1 hand.
sultanabran1 8 months ago
Laver is a living God.
fmvgomes 10 months ago
Comment removed
nugzyss 1 year ago
Rod is the best of all times. Probably if he was allowed to play the grand slams between 1963 to 1967.... can you imagine how many slams he could have in his titles???..... sure more than 11
rlladser 1 year ago
@rlladser Same goes for Sampras, imagine how many more GS he would have won in Laver era - when AO (till 1987), Wim and USO (till 1974) were played on grass.
cammpinno 1 year ago
Rod is the man !
ulizinho 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Someone take this old fart off the court!
NoMoreMrNiceGuyBitch 1 year ago
Comment removed
whattubeaccount 1 year ago
@NoMoreMrNiceGuyBitch Have some respect! This man, Laver was the #1 player in the world for 7 straight years and won 2 calender GRAND SLAMS - a feat unmatched to this day. As aplayer possibly the GOAT. Here he is 2-1/2 years after a stroke at age 63 hitting balls with Lleyton Hewit. (He had to re-learn both speech and movement) Think about that and wish him well.
JJLOB 1 year ago 35
@JJLOB remember that back then, all the courts were pretty much all the same surface.
Mopzboy 6 months ago
@JJLOB
u shut ur face bich
i make a shits on ur car
mjsupafly 4 months ago
@mjsupafly Stop trolling fucker
Eternalover78 3 months ago
@mjsupafly You're not funny and you sound like a 3 year old
explodingpimp 1 week ago
@explodingpimp
fuk 2 u!!!
pice of shit!!!!!
sun of bich!!!
wy ur prrfile pic has a hamstah on it?
mjsupafly 1 week ago
@NoMoreMrNiceGuyBitch ur bad at trollingg
dondaraper 1 year ago
@NoMoreMrNiceGuyBitch lmao
Eternalover78 3 months ago
Wow man, how old was The Rocket here? The best Aussie of the 60's & 70's, (possibly of all-time) vs. the best Aussie of 2000+. I was a big Pat Cash fan growing up, and loved watching the Australian Opens, especially when the Swedes would paint their faces, watching the final with Wilander & Edberg vs Cash. Hewitt has spoken about this as well, saying these matches are what motivated him to becoming Australias greates modern-day player. Come-onnnnn!!!!
theatlantean2 1 year ago
@theatlantean2
Laver was born in 1938, so he is 63 here.
y11971alex 1 year ago
@theatlantean2
Rod made tennis into art!
1825perh 1 year ago 9
@theatlantean2 Rod Laver made tennis into art and is the greatest of all.
1825perh 1 year ago