chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

Hans-Joachim Federer
  
Number of games in database: 1
Years covered: 2001
Last FIDE rating: 2004
Highest rating achieved in database: 2043


Search Sacrifice Explorer for Hans-Joachim Federer
Search Google for Hans-Joachim Federer
FIDE player card for Hans-Joachim Federer


HANS-JOACHIM FEDERER
(born Oct-13-1950, 69 years old) Germany

[what is this?]

 page 1 of 1; one game  PGN Download 
Game  ResultMoves YearEvent/LocaleOpening
1. L Krizsany vs H J Federer 1-0242001Bad WoerishofenE73 King's Indian

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 198 OF 198 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Sep-15-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: What does "American negro" have to the discussion?

The fields at the Australian from 60 to 64 were weak. The other players had little success in other major tournaments.

From 61 through 64 Court lost only one set, in a quarterfinal. She won most sets by 6-1 or 6-2. She did that a lot in the other tournaments as well, but also had tough matches and even lost sometimes.

Sep-15-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: <saffuna: What does "American negro" have to the discussion?>

Far as Serena Williams' achievements go, as little as <....no such thing as racism....> has to do with reality, and the hypocrisy inherent in the above remarks causes one to doubt the objectivity of this, ah, commentator.

Sep-15-20  optimal play: <saffuna: What does "American negro" have to the discussion?>

Everything, according to <HeMateMe>

<The fields at the Australian from 60 to 64 were weak. The other players had little success in other major tournaments.>

Yes Jim, I understand your argument.

Despite the fact that Australia was the top tennis nation in the 50's & 60's and the ladies generally did not travel back then, we can completely discount the value of the Australian Open because Australia is a backwater and only the US Open should be taken seriously.

<From 61 through 64 Court lost only one set, in a quarterfinal. She won most sets by 6-1 or 6-2.>

A testament to her dominance.

<She did that a lot in the other tournaments as well, but also had tough matches and even lost sometimes.>

At least she traveled to the other side of the world to play, something which the northern girls were reluctant to do because they knew they would get beat by the Aussie girls down here.

<perfidious: ... blah blah blah ...>

Alan, as usual your comments are incomprehensible.

Now, what about Ty Cobb?

Sep-15-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: <Everything, according to <HeMateMe>>

But you were referring to <my> opinion. What does "American negro" have to do with my opinion?

<A testament to her dominance.>

But she could do that only at the Australian. Not at Wimbledon. Not at Forest Hills. Not at Roland Garros.

<...the ladies generally did not travel back then...>

Some did. Jan Lehane, Court's main rival in Australia for several years, did play the other majors, and never reached a semifinal.

<Australian Open
F (1960, 1961, 1962, 1963)
French Open
QF (1960, 1962, 1963, 1964)
Wimbledon
QF (1963)
US Open
QF (1960, 1961)>

Sep-15-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: Race and religious or political views always, always, always hold sway over cold reality for that, ah, poster: it is an exercise in utter futility trying to have a reasonable conversation with <suboptimal>.
Sep-16-20  optimal play: <saffuna: <Everything, according to <HeMateMe>>

But you were referring to <my> opinion.>

No I wasn't.

I was referring to <HeMateMe>'s opinion.

<What does "American negro" have to do with my opinion?>

Nothing, as far as I know.

My comment pertaining to "American negro" was directed to <HeMateMe>

<Matey, I understand that any sports competition that did not include American negroes is null and void, and therefore must be stricken from the record books. If an American negro wasn't playing, it doesn't count. Therefore a backwater like Australia which was devoid of negroes has no credibility.>

"Matey" is short for <HeMateMe>.

<<A testament to her dominance.>

But she could do that only at the Australian. Not at Wimbledon. Not at Forest Hills. Not at Roland Garros.>

She won at Wimbledon, Forest Hills and Roland Garros!

<<...the ladies generally did not travel back then...>

Some did. Jan Lehane, Court's main rival in Australia for several years, did play the other majors, and never reached a semifinal.>

So Jan Lehane played better at home than overseas?

Same with the American and European girls.

That's why the northern girls were reluctant to make the long trip to Australia knowing they would get beat by Margaret Court, not to mention the other Aussie girls.

<perfidious: ... blah blah ...>

Alan, what about Ty Cobb?

Did you view the five minute video I linked to?

You made a derogatory post about him, and when I checked up on it, discovered that you were wrong.

Alan, don't you think it would be better if you actually ascertained the facts before shooting off your mouth?

How many posts do you need to make before you realise your errors and have to embarrassingly self-correct?

Sep-16-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: <She won at Wimbledon, Forest Hills and Roland Garros!>

Not nearly as easily or as often as in Australia.

<So Jan Lehane played better at home than overseas?>

No, I suspect she played at the same level. That got her to finals in Australia and quarters in the others..

<That's why the northern girls were reluctant to make the long trip to Australia knowing they would get beat by Margaret Court, not to mention the other Aussie girls.>

Maria Bueno knew she would get beaten by Court? She of course is also southern hemisphere, but she was a serious rival.

Sep-16-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: I think the Australian Open was awarded Grand Slam major status because of the brilliance of it's men's player in the 50s and 60s. Ken Rosewall, Roy Emerson, Rod Laver, John Newcombe--they could hold their own with anyone. <optimal> is projecting this same talent level onto the Aussie women players, as a group, but it doesn't work because they simply weren't as talented against their own peers as the Aussie men were.
Sep-16-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: The majors were the championships of the four nations that had won the Davis Cup.
Sep-17-20  optimal play: 1960 & 1961 US Open champion Darlene Hard was beaten in the QF of the 1962 Australian Open.

1962 US Open champion was Margaret Court.

1963 & 1964 & 1966 US Open champion Maria Bueno was beaten in the QF of the 1960 Australian Open and the final of the 1965 Australia Open.

1965 US Open champion was Margaret Court.

As well as a two-time US Open champion, Darlene Hard was also the 1960 French Open champion, but was unsuccessful at her Australian Open appearance.

As well as a four-time US Open champion, Maria Bueno was also a three-time Wimbledon champion, but was unsuccessful at both of her Australian Open appearances.

Ann Jones was a two-time French Open champion and Wimbledon champion, but was unsuccessful at her 1965 Australian Open appearance.

As mentioned previously, Australian Lesley Turner twice won the French Open.

Head to head, Margaret Court and Billie Jean King faced each other 32 times, with Court winning 22. They no doubt would have met more often had Court not retired from tennis for two years before returning in 1968 at the age of 25. King and Court met in the finals of five Grand Slam events, two before Court's brief retirement and three after. King won only one of those five matches, the 1968 Australian Open soon after Court's return to competition.

No matter how you want to look at it, Margaret Court was head and shoulders above her competition, no matter where she played.

The women players from Europe, USA or even Brazil, knew the Australian conditions were tough, it was hot, a long way from home, still an amateur competition (as they all were), so no real monetary reward, and they had to face Margaret Court and the other Aussie women who they knew they couldn't beat on their home turf.

They generally chose not to show up.

But fifty years later Jim & Matey summarily dismiss the Australian Open and Margaret Court's achievements because they don't fit into their own criteria of "greatest of all time", which is always the most recent winner of the US Open, because that's the only tournament that counts.

Oh, and btw, the four majors were determined by the traditional tennis nations from which the Davis Cup developed.

Sep-17-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: <1963 & 1964 & 1966 US Open champion Maria Bueno was beaten in the QF of the 1960 Australian Open and the final of the 1965 Australia Open.>

And didn't play from 61 to 64.

She was the best player of her era. My only claim is that her 24 majors is inflated because of winning seven straight Australians, often with weak fields.

And the 24 majors are her claim to being the best ever.

Sep-17-20  optimal play: <saffuna: <1963 & 1964 & 1966 US Open champion Maria Bueno was beaten in the QF of the 1960 Australian Open and the final of the 1965 Australia Open.>

And didn't play from 61 to 64.>

For the reasons I explained.

<She was the best player of her era.>

And any era.

<My only claim is that her 24 majors is inflated because of winning seven straight Australians, often with weak fields.>

I've already refuted that false disparagement.

<And the 24 majors are her claim to being the best ever.>

Also only one of three women to have won THE calendar year Grand Slam.

Also her head to head with the best.

The overall evidence is compelling.

Sep-17-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: <But fifty years later Jim & Matey summarily dismiss the Australian Open and Margaret Court's achievements>

I don't dismiss the Australian Open at all. As an Open (starting in 1969) it has been a true international event, though it also had weak fields at times.

The fields at the amateur Australian championships oftend not include many of the best players.

Sep-17-20  optimal play: <saffuna: ... The fields at the amateur Australian championships oftend not include many of the best players.>

See above.

Sep-17-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: <Also only one of three women to have won THE calendar year Grand Slam.>

OK. One of the others is Steffi Graf. Why should Court rank above Graf?

Sep-17-20  optimal play: <saffuna: <Also only one of three women to have won THE calendar year Grand Slam.>

OK. One of the others is Steffi Graf. Why should Court rank above Graf?>

Other considerations, e.g. number of Grand Slam wins.

Sep-17-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: <Other considerations, e.g. number of Grand Slam wins.>

Which Court fattened up by dominating weaker fields in Australia in the 60s.

Just by the eye test, Graf would have crushed Court. But Graf used high&tech rackets and strings, while Court used wood and gut. Any top 30 player today could crush any player from the 60s, but that's due to the rackets.

Sep-17-20  optimal play: <saffuna: <Other considerations, e.g. number of Grand Slam wins.> Which Court fattened up by dominating weaker fields in Australia in the 60s.>

Nonsense.

See my comments above.

<Just by the eye test, Graf would have crushed Court.>

You need glasses, Jim.

<But Graf used high&tech rackets and strings, while Court used wood and gut. Any top 30 player today could crush any player from the 60s, but that's due to the rackets.>

Not just the racquets, but the professional training regime, coaches, etc.

But that's beside the point.

The test is in the comparison with their contemporaries, and that's where Margaret Court stands out.

Sep-17-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  nok: <basically nobody cared about AO back then. Sure Rod Laver's grand slam achievement is revered now, but in reality, the reason Rod Laver and Margaret Court hold the Grand Slam records is because they are Australian players who bothered to play>

https://www.reddit.com/r/tennis/com...

Sep-17-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: <basically nobody cared about AO back then. Sure Rod Laver's grand slam achievement is revered now, but in reality, the reason Rod Laver and Margaret Court hold the Grand Slam records is because they are Australian players who bothered to play>

In the 60s the best men players--the professionals--were barred from the Australian and all the other majors until 1968 and 1969. When Laver turned pro at the end of 1962 all the best players were pros with the exception of Roy Emerson.

In addition to Laver, Rosewall, Hoad, Gonzalez, Segura, etc. were all pros, barred from the majors we know.

In 1969, when Laver won the Grand Slam, most of the best players (except Ashe) played, though the Australians dominated.

Sep-17-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: <oprimal play><The test is in the comparison with their contemporaries, and that's where Margaret Court stands out.>

That's not my standard, and I don't think you've proposed that standard before. Applying it, Paavo Nurmi would be the greatest distance runner ever and Al Oerter would be the greatest discus thrower ever. Yet Oerter's best throw is now 176th best all-time, and Nurmi would be lapped by every elite distance runner today.

My standard is who would be the best player if they were all together playing under equal conditions (same quality rackets and strings).

<You need glasses, Jim.>

Look at the power, speed and consistency of Graf, Seles, etc. of the 90s vs. Court, King, Goolagong, etc. of the 60s and 70s. There is no comparison, though I believe that is largely because the wood rackets just didn't let players play the way later high-tech rackets did.

Sep-18-20  optimal play: <In 1969, when Laver won the Grand Slam, most of the best players (except Ashe) played, though the Australians dominated.>

Ashe?

Arthur Ashe won the 1970 Australian Open so I'm not sure why you consider him an exception?

He won three Grand Slam titles and as the first negro to do so, warranted America's pre-eminent tennis stadium being named in his honour in 1997.

Excluding Pete Sampras (who was still playing then) numerous Americans have won a lot more than 3 GS events, e.g. Bill Tilden (10) and Helen Wills Moody (19).

Nevertheless, the stadium was named after Ashe!?

<<The test is in the comparison with their contemporaries, and that's where Margaret Court stands out.>

That's not my standard>

That's your problem.

This is why you assume the greatest of all time is the most recent winner of the US Open.

Who do you think would win a tennis match between Molla Mallory and Naomi Osaka?

Molla Mallory won eight US Open singles titles between 1915 & 1926.

She used a wooden racquet and wore a long dress.

Probably even the no.100 women's player today would beat Mallory.

Do you see the fundamental flaw in your logic, Jim?

<Applying it, Paavo Nurmi would be the greatest distance runner ever and Al Oerter would be the greatest discus thrower ever. Yet Oerter's best throw is now 176th best all-time, and Nurmi would be lapped by every elite distance runner today.>

And that proves what?

<My standard is who would be the best player if they were all together playing under equal conditions (same quality rackets and strings).>

And that's why your standard is fundamentally flawed.

<Look at the power, speed and consistency of Graf, Seles, etc. of the 90s vs. Court, King, Goolagong, etc. of the 60s and 70s. There is no comparison, though I believe that is largely because the wood rackets just didn't let players play the way later high-tech rackets did.>

Ironically, your final point actually sheds some light on why your argument is fundamentally flawed.

The athletes today aren't super-human compared to those of previous years.

You're not comparing apples with apples, Jim.

Your standard is all wrong.

Sep-18-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: <Arthur Ashe won the 1970 Australian Open so I'm not sure why you consider him an exception?>

Because he didn't play in 1969. Maybe he was injured.

<This is why you assume the greatest of all time is the most recent winner of the US Open.>

As I said earlier, I believe Steffi Graf is the greatest player. If you had a tour with all the greats in their primes, I think Graf would win the most tournaments.

<Who do you think would win a tennis match between Molla Mallory and Naomi Osaka?

Molla Mallory won eight US Open singles titles between 1915 & 1926.

She used a wooden racquet and wore a long dress.

Probably even the no.100 women's player today would beat Mallory.

Do you see the fundamental flaw in your logic, Jim?>

I think you are making my point there.

<And that's why your standard is fundamentally flawed.>

Why? I am looking for the best player of all time. You appear to be looking for the player with the most championships.

Sep-18-20  optimal play: <<Who do you think would win a tennis match between Molla Mallory and Naomi Osaka?

Molla Mallory won eight US Open singles titles between 1915 & 1926.

She used a wooden racquet and wore a long dress.

Probably even the no.100 women's player today would beat Mallory.

Do you see the fundamental flaw in your logic, Jim?>

I think you are making my point there.>

Then you've misunderstood my meaning.

Unless you genuinely believe the no.100 women's player today is a greater tennis player than Molla Mallory?!

<<And that's why your standard is fundamentally flawed.>

Why? I am looking for the best player of all time. You appear to be looking for the player with the most championships.>

The most championships doesn't tell the whole story but it paints an accurate picture of a career and her level of ability in comparison with her contemporaries.

Steffi Graf retired over 20 years ago. In her prime, I wonder how she would go against Naomi Osaka?

Sep-18-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: Here, let's try another: two players have won the Main Event of the World Series of Poker three different times, with one of them (Johnny Moss) being voted winner by a ballot of the competitors the first time, while the other (Stuey Ungar) is considered by many authorities to have been the greatest no-limit hold'em player ever.

By the standard apparently implied, Moss and Ungar would be equally great.

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 198)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 198 OF 198 ·  Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.


NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific player only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!
Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2020, Chessgames Services LLC