PDA

View Full Version : Evert - Pretty Darn Good On Grass


tennus
04-13-2007, 03:41 AM
Much has been said about Martina Navratilova's grass game. For mine hers was the best of the modern era and as suspected.........checking the head to head stats on grass, Navratilova had a 10-5 advantage over Evert. I thought OK Navratilova was dominant on grass but to my surprise 13 of these 15 matches were 3 setters ! Everyone knows Evert was great on clay but these stats show she was just great. :)

Condoleezza
04-13-2007, 04:28 AM
Much has been said about Martina Navratilova's grass game. For mine hers was the best of the modern era and as suspected.........checking the head to head stats on grass, Navratilova had a 10-5 advantage over Evert. I thought OK Navratilova was dominant on grass but to my surprise 13 of these 15 matches were 3 setters ! Everyone knows Evert was great on clay but these stats show she was just great. :)

No, that shows that Navratilova's grass-court abilities are overrated.
Navi could win tons of Wimbledon trophies because she played in a clown era.
Clay-court specialist Evert was her only opponent.

Don't forget that Evert lost 2-6 1-6 to Graf at Wimbledon 1989.

Condi

tennus
04-13-2007, 05:21 AM
No, that shows that Navratilova's grass-court abilities are overrated.
Navi could win tons of Wimbledon trophies because she played in a clown era.
Clay-court specialist Evert was her only opponent.

Don't forget that Evert lost 2-6 1-6 to Graf at Wimbledon 1989.

Condi

While I don't agree with your clown era comment I do think your stat from 1989 is plain crazy. Evert was finished by 89, at 33 she played only 9 tournaments and won none of them. Graf on the other hand was in her prime..................but I guess you already know that. :)

Condoleezza
04-13-2007, 08:28 AM
While I don't agree with your clown era comment I do think your stat from 1989 is plain crazy. Evert was finished by 89, at 33 she played only 9 tournaments and won none of them. Graf on the other hand was in her prime..................but I guess you already know that. :)


But whom did Chrissy beat in Wimbledon when she won the tournament?
Morozova (74), 19-year-old fatty Navratilova (76) and Mandlikova (81).

Seles, Sabatini or Sanchez would have done this, too.

Condi

CEvertFan
04-13-2007, 06:53 PM
You don't make it to 10 Wimbledon finals without being a great grass court player. Martina just happened to be a better one.

CEvertFan
04-14-2007, 10:55 AM
No, that shows that Navratilova's grass-court abilities are overrated.
Navi could win tons of Wimbledon trophies because she played in a clown era.
Clay-court specialist Evert was her only opponent.

Don't forget that Evert lost 2-6 1-6 to Graf at Wimbledon 1989.

Condi

Evert was CLEARLY past her prime then and Graf was definitely in her prime so that score is misleading and even though Evert was clearly not playing her best "A game", there were many looooong rallies and lots of duece games in that match. I remember at the time thinking that if Evert could have summoned the resolve to play some of the big points better she would have had more of a chance to make a contest of it but she didn't because by this point the well was dry.

Also in '76, Evert beat Goolagong, not Navratilova, for the title 8-6 in the third set. Check your facts.

federerfanatic
04-14-2007, 11:23 AM
But whom did Chrissy beat in Wimbledon when she won the tournament?
Morozova (74), 19-year-old fatty Navratilova (76) and Mandlikova (81).

Seles, Sabatini or Sanchez would have done this, too.

Condi

Morozova was in her 2nd straight slam final of 1974, having just been in the French Open final. Morozova beat both Billie Jean King and Virgina Wade in back to back matches to make the 1974 Wimbledon final, pretty impressive. I suppose none of that matters to you though.

Chrissy beat Goolagong in the 1976 Wimbledon final, a 7-time slam winner, a player who won all the sports biggest events except the U.S Open-where she still reached the finals 4 times, a player who was the biggest rival to King and Court in the early 70s, the biggest rival to Evert in the mid 70s. Not to mention a player who won Wimbledon titles 9 years apart; beating Richey, King, and Court, all in a row, all in straight sets, to win in 1971 at only 19, and beating Austin and Evert back to back to win in 1980 at age 28. In addition a player who reached atleast the semis of Wimbledon all 9 times she played it from 1971-1980, and reached the finals of Wimbledon a whopping 5 times(1971, 1972, 1975, 1976, 1980). Hardly an easy opponent.

Chris beat Mandilikova in 1981? Mandilikova is a much better grass court player then Sanchez Vicario, Sabatini, or probably even early 90s Seles, so what is your point here? Do you think Mandilikova was just a clown. She won 4 slam titles at 3 different sites-the 1985 U.S Open by beating Evert and Navratilova back to back(and please dont show your ignorance by downplaying the difficulty of that), the 1987 Australian Open then on rebound ace over Navratilova in the final, the 1981 French Open beating Evert along the way, and another Australian Open title. Mandilikova beat Navratilova in the 1981 Wimbledon semis to make the final, and beat Evert in the 1986 Wimbledon semis to make the final, she simply couldnt quite do the double kill either time. She also reached the 1980 U.S Open final by beating Navratilova and then teen phenom Jaeger(before losing to Evert), and the 1982 U.S Open final beating Shriver who had just herself beaten Navratilova the previous round.

Mandilikova and Goolagong in fact are regarded by many players as 2 of the most gifted young women to ever pick up a raquet, who if they had stronger work ethic, better focus, were able to harness and utilize their talents properly, could have been 2 of the greatest ever. As it was they are looked on as underachievers but still compiled extremely impressive careers, and all the greatest players-Court, King, Navratilova, Evert, were wary of what they were capable of doing on any given day.

Also if you really think it is a cinch that Sanchez Vicario, Sabatini, and even perhaps early 90s Seles would have automaticaly beaten Goolagong or Mandilikova in a Wimbledon final you really know squat about those players.

Graf is a great player, those of us who dont think she is the best ever arent going to be converted by your ignorant and ill-informed putdowns of all the other greats and reference to any era other then the Graf era as a "clown" era. You really are starting to become pathetic.

federerfanatic
04-14-2007, 11:29 AM
Don't forget that Evert lost 2-6 1-6 to Graf at Wimbledon 1989.

Condi

Don't forget Evert was a 34 year old women retiring at seasons end. I wonder what would have happened to Graf is she played Wimbledon as a 32 year old in 2002, or as a 33 year old in 2003, and played Serena Williams in her prime. Ouch! Of course in that case you would have just said "she was 32 and 33 years old". :p

Of course speaking of a clown era what does it say about Graf's 2 most dominant years that her toughest competition was 30-something women:

1988 slams:

Australian Open-beat 33 year old Chris Evert in the final
French Open-beat 1-time ever slam finalist Natasha Zvereva in the final
Wimbledon-beat 31 year old Martina Navratilova in the final
U.S Open-beat Gabriela Sabatini in the final

1989 slams:

Australian Open-beat 0-time slam winner Helena Sukova in the final
Wimbledon-beat 32 year old Martina Navratilova in the final
U.S Open-beat 32 year old Martina Navratilova in the final

Yet Evert beating Goolagong or Mandilikova to win 2 of her 3 Wimbledons, while losing to Navratilova in finals is taking advantage of a clown era. ROTFL!!!

Rabbit
04-14-2007, 01:22 PM
Evert was CLEARLY past her prime then and Graf was definitely in her prime so that score is misleading and even though Evert was clearly not playing her best "A game", there were many looooong rallies and lots of duece games in that match. I remember at the time thinking that if Evert could have summoned the resolve to play some of the big points better she would have had more of a chance to make a contest of it but she didn't because by this point the well was dry.

Also in '76, Evert beat Goolagong, not Navratilova, for the title 8-6 in the third set. Check your facts.

Please don't confuse Condi with facts.

Evert was good, no great, on any surface she played on. She was a cerbral player while Navratilova was a physical player. They were perfect foils for one another and had probably the greatest rivalry women's tennis has ever seen. Evert had wins over King on grass which is no small feat.

Evert's clay court record will probably be unequaled. Her wins at the French and winning percentage on clay stands head and shoulders above the rest of the field. In my view, Evert was a great champion and a great competitor. She claims she was not an athlete and by Navratilova's standards, that's probably true. However, Evert couldn't have accomplished what she did without being a great athlete in her own right.

Condoleezza
04-14-2007, 01:24 PM
Evert was CLEARLY past her prime then and Graf was definitely in her prime so that score is misleading and even though Evert was clearly not playing her best "A game", there were many looooong rallies and lots of duece games in that match. I remember at the time thinking that if Evert could have summoned the resolve to play some of the big points better she would have had more of a chance to make a contest of it but she didn't because by this point the well was dry.

Also in '76, Evert beat Goolagong, not Navratilova, for the title 8-6 in the third set. Check your facts.


So Evert didn't beat Navi in a Wimbledon final even once, Chrissiefan?
Only Morozova, Goolagong and Mandlikova??

Condi

ATPballkid
04-14-2007, 01:39 PM
Navi could win tons of Wimbledon trophies because she played in a clown era.

Condi

Yeah ... also interesting that in the years 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993 until one of the jealous Graf fans decided to plant a sharp knife into the back of Monica Seles on a changeover in Germany, the head-to-head records vs. Steffi Graf for both Martina Navratilova and Monica Seles had Graf losing to both of these players -- and Navratilova was in her 18th, 19th, 20th and 21st years on the tour in those years.

ATPballkid
04-14-2007, 01:42 PM
No, that shows that Navratilova's grass-court abilities are overrated.

Condi

Seems that Navratilova was the only player to reach the final round of Wimbledon in the years 1985-1990.

Seems that Navratilova won Wimbledon in 1987 and 1990 and beat the player who had beaten Graf in the semis to win the 1990 singles title.

Seems that Navratilova was the only player in the Open Era to win Wimbledon 6 consecutive years (Graf never even was able to reach more than 3 consecutive finals at Wimbledon).

Seems that Navratilova was the only player in the Open Era to reach 9 consecutive Wimbledon finals (again, Graf managed to get to Wimbledon finals in 3 consecutive years).

Seems that Navratilova was the only player in the Open Era to reach the quarters or better at Wimbledon in a record 20 consecutive years (twice as many years as Graf).

There should be no question to any intelligent observer that Martina Navratilova is the best women's grass court player of the last 70 years.

There is nothing I can do for those that are less intelligent.

Condoleezza
04-14-2007, 01:43 PM
....
Mandilikova and Goolagong in fact are regarded by many players as 2 of the most gifted young women to ever pick up a raquet, who if they had stronger work ethic, better focus, were able to harness and utilize their talents properly, could have been 2 of the greatest ever. ...

If, if ....
If Graf had had Henin's topspin backhand she would have been unbeatable.

Mandlikova?
I only remember how Graf owned her.
Steffi beat her the first time at Hilton Head Island 1986 with 6-2 6-4 when she was only 16 years old, lost to her a few months later - while having a severe cold - in the FO 86 quarters (3 sets).
In 1987 Graf beat her 6-3 6-4, 6-4 6-1, 6-2 6-2.
In 1988 6-2 6-2.
In 1989 7-6 6-3, 6-3 6-4, 6-0 6-1.

So in 9 matches against a 16-20-year-old Graf a 24-27 years old Mandlikova won 1 match and 2 of 19 sets.

Hana was the main opponent of Evert & Navratilova in the 80ies, no?
A nice proof of how pathetic the opposition was before Graf came up in 1986/87.

Same with Shriver, the other main opponent of Chris and Martina.
Graf destroyed her twice in Wimbledon (6-0 6-2 and 6-2 6-1) when Pam was 25/26 years old.

Evert and Navratilova really dodged a bullet in the 80ies. If Graf had been born 5 or 10 years earlier Chris and Martina would have been stuck with 10 slams maximum ...


Condi

Condoleezza
04-14-2007, 01:46 PM
Yeah ... also interesting that in the years 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993 until one of the jealous Graf fans decided to plant a sharp knife into the back of Monica Seles on a changeover in Germany, the head-to-head records vs. Steffi Graf for both Martina Navratilova and Monica Seles had Graf losing to both of these players -

Graf was tied with Navi (9-9) and lead Seles (6-4) ....
Was 3-2 against #1 Seles pre-stabbing. In the same time 4-8 against Sabatini.

IMO, Seles would not have won even ONE match against Graf if Steffi had been in peak 88/89 form. She simply was too strong for Monica who didn't have the means to trouble Graf.


Condi

ATPballkid
04-14-2007, 01:47 PM
Much has been said about Martina Navratilova's grass game. For mine hers was the best of the modern era and as suspected.........checking the head to head stats on grass, Navratilova had a 10-5 advantage over Evert. I thought OK Navratilova was dominant on grass but to my surprise 13 of these 15 matches were 3 setters ! Everyone knows Evert was great on clay but these stats show she was just great. :)

Grass and indoors --- Navratilova.
Clay and slow hardcourts -- Evert.

Phenomenal domination for a 3 year period --- Navratilova.
Phenomenal consistence for a 14 year period -- Evert.

If there was a player who took their strengths and got rid of their weaknesses, she would be the greatest player of all time.

What a great era that was for women's tennis having 2 opposite all-time greats battling it out who were so opposite of each other as Evert and Navratilova were.

ATPballkid
04-14-2007, 01:48 PM
Evert and Navratilova really dodged a bullet in the 80ies. If Graf had been born 5 or 10 years earlier Chris and Martina would have been stuck with 10 slams maximum ...


Condi

You can say Navratilova was the all-time greatest champion in women's history in singles at Wimbledon ... and when it comes to grass court tennis in their lifetimes, that is probably the best singles measure of grass court supremacy -- and all-time record 9 for Navratilova.

Chris was the greatest on slow surfaces ..

Martina was greatest on fast surfaces ..

but Steffi was great on ALL surfaces as long as Monica Seles was stabbed in the back with a knife by a Graf fan.

Condoleezza
04-14-2007, 01:54 PM
Seems that Navratilova was the only player to reach the final round of Wimbledon in the years 1985-1990.
....

No, Evert (85), Mandlikova (86) and Graf (87, 88, 89) did it, too.

In 1987 Graf obviously was still maturing, didn't have a lot of grass court experience (hadn't played in Wimbledon the year before).
But in 1988 and 1989 she virtually destroyed Navratilova.
Especially the 1988 match was awesome. Graf broke Navratilova in her last 7 service games, hit 25 clean return winners. Martina was simply overwhelmed.

Navratilova and Seles were Graf's easiest Wimbledon finals victims.
Both players are vastly overrated, IMO, especially Seles of course (a Sanchez, Austin, Hingis type of player - nothing else).

Condi

ATPballkid
04-14-2007, 01:57 PM
Seles were Graf's easiest Wimbledon finals victims.
Condi

As long as a Graf fan had a knife deep into the back of Monica Seles.

ATPballkid
04-14-2007, 01:58 PM
especially Seles of course (a Sanchez, Austin, Hingis type of player - nothing else).

Condi

Funny how Steffi started winning those non-Wimbledon majors that Seles had owned for those previous years after Seles had been stabbed.

Condoleezza
04-14-2007, 02:01 PM
Grass and indoors --- Navratilova.
Clay and slow hardcourts -- Evert.

Phenomenal domination for a 3 year period --- Navratilova.
Phenomenal consistence for a 14 year period -- Evert.
...


What was Navi's best 3-year period?
Obviously 1982-84 when she won 8 slams.
But Graf did the same in 1987-89 - and won the Golden Grand Slam.
So Graf gets the nod.

Evert won 18 slams in 1974-1986. Nice consistence.
But Graf won 22 slams in 1987-99. More.
So Graf gets the nod here as well.

No, Graf was simply superior to Evert and Navratilova.
Golden Grand Slam.
Most slams in open era.
Each slam won at least 4 times.
Each of the blue-chip slams (FO, Wim, USO) won at least 5 times.
Most weeks as #1.
Most consecutive weeks as #1.
Most years as year-end #1.
Most money earned.
Highest slam-match winning percentage.

We should discuss whether Court, Evert or Navratilova is #2 in the GOAT race. On the #1 Graf has a lock ...


Condi

ATPballkid
04-14-2007, 02:03 PM
Was 3-2 against #1 Seles pre-stabbing.
Condi

Steffi just could not beat Seles at a major event other than Wimbledon during those years.

Condoleezza
04-14-2007, 02:04 PM
You can say Navratilova was the all-time greatest champion in women's history in singles at Wimbledon ... and when it comes to grass court tennis in their lifetimes, that is probably the best singles measure of grass court supremacy -- and all-time record 9 for Navratilova.
....

Graf has a higher match winning percentage in Wimbledon than Navratilova.
Had Graf been lesbian and therefore not decided to start a family in 1999 but played on until age 38 (as Navratilova did) she undoubtly would have won at least 3 additional Wimbledon singles titles.

Condi

Condoleezza
04-14-2007, 02:05 PM
As long as a Graf fan had a knife deep into the back of Monica Seles.

Seles already had a knife in her back during the 1992 Wimbledon final?
Also half an inch deep?

Wow ....



Condi

ATPballkid
04-14-2007, 02:09 PM
No, Graf was simply superior to Evert and Navratilova.

Condi



Navratilova won an all-time record 9 Wimbledon singles titles without a knife in the back of Evert or Graf.

Navratilova won an all-time record 8 WTA Tour Championships without a knife in the back of Evert or Graf.

Navratilova won an all-time record 167 WTA Tour singles titles without a knife in the back of Evert or Graf.

Navratilova won a record 6 Wimbledon singles titles -- she got to the final round of Wimbledon in 9 consecutive years vs. 3 years in a row for Graf -- she got to the quarters or better in 20 consecutive Wimbledons vs. 10 years in a row for Graf.

Navratilova had a tremendous career with some all-time records at some of the biggest events in the world and in both singles and doubles -- and she accomplished these without a knife in the back of Evert or Graf.

Condoleezza
04-14-2007, 02:10 PM
Steffi just could not beat Seles at a major event other than Wimbledon during those years.

Ah, those years.

Seles never ever beat Graf on

a) grass
b) indoors
c) fast HC

Only on slow courts.
Graf beat Seles on all surfaces, though.

I'm trying to visualize how Seles could have beaten Graf at USO. Doesn't work. Monica simply didn't have the means to threaten Graf there.


Condi

ATPballkid
04-14-2007, 02:10 PM
Wow ....



Condi

Just as she is now -- even though the stabbing of the true #1 of that era in the back with a knife by one of her fans certainly doesn't help her case any.

Condoleezza
04-14-2007, 02:14 PM
Navratilova won an all-time record 9 Wimbledon singles titles without a knife in the back of Evert or Graf.

Navratilova won an all-time record 8 WTA Tour Championships without a knife in the back of Evert or Graf.

Navratilova won an all-time record 167 WTA Tour singles titles without a knife in the back of Evert or Graf.

Navratilova won a record 6 Wimbledon singles titles -- she got to the final round of Wimbledon in 9 consecutive years vs. 3 years in a row for Graf -- she got to the quarters or better in 20 consecutive Wimbledons vs. 10 years in a row for Graf.

Navratilova had a tremendous career with some all-time records at some of the biggest events in the world and in both singles and doubles -- and she accomplished these without a knife in the back of Evert or Graf.


Graf won her 22 slams, too, without Navratilova, Seles, Evert, Hingis or Sanchez having a knife in their backs.

Seles, though, won 6 of her 9 slams with Graf either not playing or being distracted big-time by a nasty family scandal that took all motivation away.
Her FO and AO 93 wins against Graf however were legit. Well, slower surfaces where Monica had her chances against Steffi (comparable to Coetzer).

BTW, Coetzer - Graf has an eerily similar H2H against her and Seles (vs. Coetzer 11-4, vs. Seles 10-5) ......


Condi

ATPballkid
04-14-2007, 02:14 PM
Graf was tied with Navi (9-9)
Condi

Where were their biggest matches? Grand Slam events and the WTA Tour Championships.

Navratilova had the winning edge vs. Graf at Grand Slam events ... Navratilova also had the winning edge vs. Graf in the WTA Tour Championships.

Navratilova had a winning record vs. Graf where it counted most -- the biggest events in the world.


Well, let's COUNT them then:

GRAND SLAM EVENTS

First, we will start with the Grand Slam events --- let's limit the results to the Australian Open, French Open, Wimbledon and U.S. Open Championships --- since these actually are the Grand Slam events:

1985-08-26 U.S. Open Hardcourt SF Navratilova won 6-2 6-3
1986-08-25 U.S. Open Hardcourt SF Navratilova won 6-1 6-7 7-6
1987-05-25 French Open Clay F Steffi Graf won 6-4 4-6 8-6
1987-06-22 Wimbledon Grass F Navratilova won 7-5 6-3
1987-08-31 U.S. Open Hardcourt F Navratilova won 7-6 6-1
1988-06-22 Wimbledon Grass F Steffi Graf won 5-7 6-2 6-1
1989-06-26 Wimbledon Grass F Steffi Graf won 6-2 6-7 6-1
1989-08-28 U.S. Open Hardcourt F Steffi Graf won 3-6 7-5 6-1
1991-08-26 U.S. Open Hardcourt SF Navratilova won 7-6 6-7 6-4

Not only a winning record for Navratilova vs. Graf in the Grand Slam events ... Navratilova won their only matches at the Grand Slam events that were won in straight sets ... 3 of Navratilova's 5 match wins vs. Graf in Grand Slam events were won in straight sets ... Graf never beat Navratilova in straight sets in a Grand Slam event --- but then, Graf only won 4 matches against Navratilova in Grand Slam events to begin with.


TOUR CHAMPIONSHIPS

Next, we will look at the Tour Championships --- let's limit the results to the singles since Steffi Graf did not play doubles -- even with Gunther Parche.

1986-03-17 Virginia Slims Championships SF Navratilova won 6-2 6-2
1986-11-17 Virginia Slims Championships F Navratilova won 7-6 6-3 6-2
1989-11-13 Virginia Slims Championships F Steffi Graf won 6-4 7-5 2-6 6-2

Not only a winning record for Navratilova vs. Graf in the Tour Championships ... Navratilova won their only matches at the Tour Championships that were won in straight sets ... both of Navratilova's 2 match wins vs. Graf in the WTA Tour Championships were won in straight sets ... Graf never beat Navratilova in straight sets the WTA Tour Championships --- but then, Graf only won 1 match against Navratilova at the WTA Tour Championships to begin with.

ATPballkid
04-14-2007, 02:19 PM
Ah, those years.

Seles never ever beat Graf on

a) grass
b) indoors
c) fast HC


Condi

You mean Seles was 16, 17, 18 and 19 --- and Graf was 20, 21, 22 and 23 --- when Seles was the CLEAR #1 player in women's tennis in those years 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993?

CLEAR ??

Sure. CLEAR.

This clear:

---- MONICA SELES----------------STEFFI GRAF

1990 Tour Championships
1991 Australian Open
1991 French Open
----------------------------------- 1991 Wimbledon
1991 U.S. Open
1991 Tour Championships
1992 Australian Open
1992 French Open
----------------------------------- 1992 Wimbledon
1992 U.S. Open
1992 Tour Championships
1993 Australian Open

April 30 - Germany stabbing

CEvertFan
04-14-2007, 02:24 PM
So Evert didn't beat Navi in a Wimbledon final even once, Chrissiefan?
Only Morozova, Goolagong and Mandlikova??

Condi


Making it to 10 Wimbledon finals and winning 3 of them makes Chris Evert a great grass court player. Martina Navratilova just happened to be a better one. Evert did in fact beat Martina at Wimbledon in the 1980 semis when Martina was the two time defending champion and some of their finals were hard fought 3 setters. As a matter of fact the last time they played each other at Wimbledon was another 3 setter in the semis in 1988 with Martina barely winning 6-1, 4-6, 7-5. You all remember that questionable line call on match point?? Chris also beat Martina at the AO final in 1982 6-3, 2-6, 6-3 ON GRASS. Not too shabby for someone who is generally regarded as a clay court specialist, which she was not.

ATPballkid
04-14-2007, 02:24 PM
Graf lead Seles (6-4) ....

Condi

Graf ..... was ..... older ..... than ..... Seles .... just ..... as ...... Navratilova ..... was ..... older ..... than ..... Graf ..... and ..... Graf ..... never ..... had ..... a ..... winning ..... record ..... vs. ..... Navratilova.

Both ..... a ..... teenage ..... Seles ..... and ...... a ..... mid ...... 30s ..... Navratilova ..... had ..... winning ..... records ..... vs. ..... Graf ..... in ..... the ..... time ...... span ...... of ..... 1990 ..... through ..... 1993.

Condoleezza
04-14-2007, 03:16 PM
You mean Seles was 16, 17, 18 and 19 --- and Graf was 20, 21, 22 and 23 --- when Seles was the CLEAR #1 player in women's tennis in those years 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993?
....

16?

Seles was 17 years and 2 months old when she became #1 for the first time. She lost the top spot twice during summer 1991, which saw a tight fight between her, Graf and Sabatini for #1.
She secured the #1 spot with her USO 91 win in September when she was 17 years and 9 months old.

Seles held the #1 ranking until the stabbing in spring 1993 - just 1.5 years.
Her lead was never more than 58 points (end of 1991), most of the time only in the 25-40-points range. Just before the stabbing Graf had narrowed Seles's lead to a mere 21 points.

At the end of 1989 and again at the end of 1993 Graf had leads of about 130 points ahead of the #2 player. THAT is a clear #1.

As a matter of fact the years 1991/92 saw the closest lead a #1 player ever had in professional tennis.



Condi

CEvertFan
04-14-2007, 03:19 PM
Here's a link to a great Chris Evert site:

http://www.chrisevert.net/

Condoleezza
04-14-2007, 03:19 PM
Making it to 10 Wimbledon finals and winning 3 of them makes Chris Evert a great grass court player. Martina Navratilova just happened to be a better one. Evert did in fact beat Martina at Wimbledon in the 1980 semis when Martina was the two time defending champion and some of their finals were hard fought 3 setters. As a matter of fact the last time they played each other at Wimbledon was another 3 setter in the semis in 1988 with Martina barely winning 6-1, 4-6, 7-5. You all remember that questionable line call on match point?? Chris also beat Martina at the AO final in 1982 6-3, 2-6, 6-3 ON GRASS. Not too shabby for someone who is generally regarded as a clay court specialist, which she was not.


OK, you sound reasonable.
Evert was perhaps the 3rd-best grass courter of the last quarter of the 20th century. Maybe only 4th (behind Sanchez) ...


Condi

Condoleezza
04-14-2007, 03:23 PM
Graf ..... was ..... older ..... than ..... Seles .... just ..... as ...... Navratilova ..... was ..... older ..... than ..... Graf ..... and ..... Graf ..... never ..... had ..... a ..... winning ..... record ..... vs. ..... Navratilova.

Both ..... a ..... teenage ..... Seles ..... and ...... a ..... mid ...... 30s ..... Navratilova ..... had ..... winning ..... records ..... vs. ..... Graf ..... in ..... the ..... time ...... span ...... of ..... 1990 ..... through ..... 1993.


Graf doesn't have a losing record against any major opponent.

Seles however has losing records against

a) Graf
b) Hingis
c) Davenport
d) V. Williams
e) S. Williams

Condi

CEvertFan
04-14-2007, 03:25 PM
Evert was perhaps the 3rd-best grass courter of the last quarter of the 20th century. Maybe only 4th (behind Sanchez) ...


I love Arantxa but how many Wimbledons does she have?? I thought so...

Condoleezza
04-14-2007, 03:48 PM
I love Arantxa but how many Wimbledons does she have?? I thought so...

Well, she played during the Graf era.
Without her she would have 2 Wimbledons (1995 & 96).

Evert never would have been able to beat a Graf in a Wimbledon final.
Sanchez at least came close once (1995) ....


Condi

CEvertFan
04-14-2007, 04:01 PM
Well, she played during the Graf era.
Without her she would have 2 Wimbledons (1995 & 96).

Evert never would have been able to beat a Graf in a Wimbledon final.
Sanchez at least came close once (1995) ....


Condi

Well if you are going to argue semantics then I guess if Martina hadn't been playing then Chris would have won Wimbledon in '78, '79, '82, '84 and '85 which are all the years they squared off in the finals. The fact is though that Arantxa, although a great player, has NO Wimbledons and Chrissie has 3. Also Evert has 2 AOs on grass as well, including one over Martina.

Condoleezza
04-14-2007, 04:09 PM
Well if you are going to argue semantics then I guess if Martina hadn't been playing then Chris would have won Wimbledon in '78, '79, '82, '84 and '85 which are all the years they squared off in the finals. The fact is though that Arantxa, although a great player, has NO Wimbledons and Chrissie has 3. Also Evert has 2 AOs on grass as well, including one over Martina.

Well, maybe Evert is Wimbledon #3 after all.

I remember Chris only from her 8 losses in a row against Graf in 86-89 (when I was very young - Graf seemed to be so superior!). Maye I'm underestimating her because of that.


Condi

CEvertFan
04-14-2007, 04:15 PM
Well, maybe Evert is Wimbledon #3 after all.

I remember Chris only from her 8 losses in a row against Graf in 86-89 (when I was very young - Graf seemed to be so superior!). Maye I'm underestimating her because of that.


Condi

You are. It was a case of Chris being on her way out and Graf coming into her own. They never played one another while at their peaks. Too much of an age difference as Evert was already into her 30s by that time.

federerfanatic
04-14-2007, 06:07 PM
Well if you are going to argue semantics then I guess if Martina hadn't been playing then Chris would have won Wimbledon in '78, '79, '82, '84 and '85 which are all the years they squared off in the finals. The fact is though that Arantxa, although a great player, has NO Wimbledons and Chrissie has 3. Also Evert has 2 AOs on grass as well, including one over Martina.

Well to be fair it would be wrong to assume the final loser always would have won the final. There are probably some cases the semifinal, or even in rare cases quarterfinal loser, likely on the eventual winners half, maybe would have won a particular event.

1978-Does Evert win this year? Without Navratilova she would have probably played Goolagong in the final, who lost to Navratilova in 3 sets in the other semi. Evert has a decisive losing head to head with Evonne on grass, I believe her only ever win was in the 1976 Wimbledon final, 8-6 in the 3rd. I am not sure she wins it over Goolagong.

1979-Does Evert win this year? Without Navratilova she would probably have played Austin in the final, who lost to Navratilova in the other semi. Austin had a decisive edge over Evert from 1979-1981 in head to head, but grass was also her worst surface. This one is a tough call too.

1982-Yes almost certainly Evert win this year without Navratilova.

1984-Yes almost certainly again Evert wins this year without Navratilova, she spanked Mandilikova, by far the next biggest contender in the semis after all.

1985-Yes she almost certainly wins this one too without Navratilova.

So it may have been only 6 or 7 without Navratilova, not neccessarily 8.

federerfanatic
04-14-2007, 06:10 PM
You are. It was a case of Chris being on her way out and Graf coming into her own. They never played one another while at their peaks. Too much of an age difference as Evert was already into her 30s by that time.

That is true. Graf and Evert never played each other in their mutual primes. Evert had all 6 of her wins over Graf from 1985-before when Evert was in her prime and Graf was not. Graf won all 8 of their matches from 1986-beyond when Evert was starting her decline and Graf was coming into her prime. So nothing to tell either way from their head to head, no advantage to Evert apparent, no advantage to Graf apparent. All complete speculation as far as head to head matchup goes.

That is unlike the Navratilova-Graf head to head though where even an aging Navratilova managed her share of wins over prime Graf, and took sets off her virtualy every meeting.

federerfanatic
04-14-2007, 06:29 PM
If Graf had had Henin's topspin backhand she would have been unbeatable.

Who cares whether if Graf had one of the greatest backhands of the open era, instead of her wobbly little pokey slice for a backhand, she would have been unbeatable or not. She didnt end of story.

Mandlikova?
I only remember how Graf owned her.

So that is your simplistic analogy for her the quality of her as a player? Again showing your ignorance, and lack of knowledge of virtualy any players outside your beloved Graf and her absolute contemporaries.

Hana was the main opponent of Evert & Navratilova in the 80ies, no?
A nice proof of how pathetic the opposition was before Graf came up in 1986/87.

If you had actually watched tennis during the Graf-Navratilova era and seen Hana play you would you realize how ridiculous this sounds.

Same with Shriver, the other main opponent of Chris and Martina.
Graf destroyed her twice in Wimbledon (6-0 6-2 and 6-2 6-1) when Pam was 25/26 years old.

I agree here though. Pam wasnt that strong for a top 5 player. The 80s did not have the depth beyond the first 3 of the 70s. Do keep in mind Evert was the dominant player of alot of the 70s though, in the much deeper field that existed then compared to the 80s, and Navratilova proved herself generaly superior to the great Evert still in her prime in the first half of the 80s. That pretty much validates what either are capable of in a deeper field then the 80s one was. That plus with two all time greats like Evert and Navratilova, and a second tier great like Mandilikova at the very top, it ensured a very high level of competition, even if it lacked the depth and quality in the players ranked 4-10. Certainly that was still more competition then Graf had outside the period when Seles dominated her and the tour, an aging Navratilova, Evert, and Sabatini her 3 main rivals before that; then Sanchez Vicario as her #1 rival post-Seles stabbing.

Evert and Navratilova really dodged a bullet in the 80ies. If Graf had been born 5 or 10 years earlier Chris and Martina would have been stuck with 10 slams maximum ...

Is that why when Graf and Navratilova were both relatively close to the end or start of their primes(as close as they would be to an equal confrontation)
Navratilova went 3-1 vs Seles in slam meetings in 86-87, Graf only winning a tough 3 set French Open final on Navratilova's worst surface(the same way she needed grass to beat Seles in her prime, maybe she would have needed clay for Navratilova), and got walloped in the 87 Wimbledon and U.S Open finals? Is that why when Graf was still in her prime, and Navratilova was advancing into her 30s from 88-89, Navratilova still got the occasional win, and although she usually lost Navratilova almost always took a set off Graf?

Navratilova at her absolute peak became so scary for a stretch there was a period she was killing Chris Evert even. She won 2 slam straight slam finals vs Evert by scores of 6-3, 6-1. The 83 U.S Open final on hard courts, and the 84 French Open final on clay. There was a stretch during that time she won about 5 matches in a row by scores like that. So Navratilova at the absolute peak of her career in 83-84 was doing that to a fellow all time great like Evert in her prime. Graf by contract at the absolute peak of her career in 88-89 was taking 3 sets always to beat a 31 and 32 year old all time great like Navratilova in a bunch of slam finals. Graf in the second highest absolute peak of her career in 95-96 was taking 3 sets to beat Sanchez Vicario in almost all their slam finals.

CEvertFan
04-14-2007, 06:32 PM
Well to be fair it would be wrong to assume the final loser always would have won the final. There are probably some cases the semifinal, or even in rare cases quarterfinal loser, likely on the eventual winners half, maybe would have won a particular event.

1978-Does Evert win this year? Without Navratilova she would have probably played Goolagong in the final, who lost to Navratilova in 3 sets in the other semi. Evert has a decisive losing head to head with Evonne on grass, I believe her only ever win was in the 1976 Wimbledon final, 8-6 in the 3rd. I am not sure she wins it over Goolagong.

1979-Does Evert win this year? Without Navratilova she would probably have played Austin in the final, who lost to Navratilova in the other semi. Austin had a decisive edge over Evert from 1979-1981 in head to head, but grass was also her worst surface. This one is a tough call too.

1982-Yes almost certainly Evert win this year without Navratilova.

1984-Yes almost certainly again Evert wins this year without Navratilova, she spanked Mandilikova, by far the next biggest contender in the semis after all.

1985-Yes she almost certainly wins this one too without Navratilova.

So it may have been only 6 or 7 without Navratilova, not neccessarily 8.

Evert d. Goolagong 1979 Wimbledon semis 6-3, 6-2. There are probably a few more wins as well in smaller tournaments and I will have to do some research to see if there are any more Evert wins against Goolagong on grass. ;)

federerfanatic
04-14-2007, 06:57 PM
Evert d. Goolagong 1979 Wimbledon semis 6-3, 6-2. There are probably a few more wins as well in smaller tournaments and I will have to do some research to see if there are any more Evert wins against Goolagong on grass. ;)

Ok thanks, I did not remember that match. That brings their Wimbledon history even closer then I was aware of then, in fact it pretty much makes it tie at Wimbledon. Goolagong did come back to beat Evert in the 1980 Wimbledon final in straight sets( a big upset at the time since Goolagong was written off a potential slam winner by then, despite still being ranked quite high). Evert beat her in an amazing match in the 1976 final, and Goolagong won a tough 3 setter in the 72 semis.

I recall Goolagong beating Evert in their only meetings on grass at the Australian Open, and the U.S Open. So I thought that made their head to head at the 3 slams played on grass 4-1, but with this win you pointed out that makes it 4-2 overall. I am not sure of any meetings in smaller events on grass between the two. I do remember when watching old footage of the incredible 1976 Wimbledon final which Evert won over Goolagong(I was only born in 1979 so matches that far back I watch from tapes only)the commentator saying in the midst of that match Evert had lost all 3 of her career meetings with Goolagong on grass, which must have been their 3 slam meetings and no others at that point in time. Goolagong did not play Evert on grass again any of 1976, and barely played in 1977(and certainly did not play Evert in 1977)so any other meetings on grass would have had to be smaller events upon Goolagong's final return to tour from 1978-onward.

CEvertFan
04-14-2007, 07:10 PM
Ok thanks, I did not remember that match. That brings their Wimbledon history even closer then I was aware of then, in fact it pretty much makes it tie at Wimbledon. Goolagong did come back to beat Evert in the 1980 Wimbledon final in straight sets( a big upset at the time since Goolagong was written off a potential slam winner by then, despite still being ranked quite high). Evert beat her in an amazing match in the 1976 final, and Goolagong won a tough 3 setter in the 72 semis.

I recall Goolagong beating Evert in their only meetings on grass at the Australian Open, and the U.S Open. So I thought that made their head to head at the 3 slams played on grass 4-1, but with this win you pointed out that makes it 4-2 overall. I am not sure of any meetings in smaller events on grass between the two. I do remember when watching old footage of the incredible 1976 Wimbledon final which Evert won over Goolagong(I was only born in 1979 so matches that far back I watch from tapes only)the commentator saying in the midst of that match Evert had lost all 3 of her career meetings with Goolagong on grass, which must have been their 3 slam meetings and no others at that point in time. Goolagong did not play Evert on grass again any of 1976, and barely played in 1977(and certainly did not play Evert in 1977)so any other meetings on grass would have had to be smaller events upon Goolagong's final return to tour from 1978-onward.


So it would be 4-2 Goolagong on grass but 23-13 total for Evert. Definitely an interesting rivalry.

federerfanatic
04-14-2007, 07:18 PM
Actually I quite underestimated Evert's success vs Goolagong on grass. Their head to head on grass was an even 4-4.

1972 Wimbledon semis: Goolagong won 4-6, 6-3, 6-4
1974 Australian Open final: Goolagong won 7-6, 4-6, 6-0
1974 U.S Open semis: Goolagong won 6-0, 6-7, 3-6
1976 Wimbledon final: Evert won 6-3, 4-6, 8-6
1979 Wimbledon semis: Evert won 6-3, 6-2
1980 Chichester final: Evert won 6-3, 6-7, 7-5
1980 Wimbledon final: Goolagong won 7-6, 6-1
1981 Sydney quarters: Evert won 6-2, 6-0

The matches I did not know about was the semis of the 1979, and those 2 late career(for Goolagong)meetings in Chichester and Sydney.

So Evert won 4 of their final 5 matches on grass, yet lost that Wimbledon final by a convincing score in between those. Interesting indeed. With Evonne you never knew though, she and Hana were similar in that regard.

Evert having a 4-4 head to head with Goolagong on grass is very impressive though. Goolagong was a tough customer for anyone on grass.

federerfanatic
04-14-2007, 07:20 PM
So it would be 4-2 Goolagong on grass but 23-13 total for Evert. Definitely an interesting rivalry.

Yeah their rivalry was definitely an interesting one.

CEvertFan
04-14-2007, 07:28 PM
Actually I quite underestimated Evert's success vs Goolagong on grass. Their head to head on grass was an even 4-4.

1972 Wimbledon semis: Goolagong won 4-6, 6-3, 6-4
1974 Australian Open final: Goolagong won 7-6, 4-6, 6-0
1974 U.S Open semis: Goolagong won 6-0, 6-7, 3-6
1976 Wimbledon final: Evert won 6-3, 4-6, 8-6
1979 Wimbledon semis: Evert won 6-3, 6-2
1980 Chichester final: Evert won 6-3, 6-7, 7-5
1980 Wimbledon final: Goolagong won 7-6, 6-1
1981 Sydney quarters: Evert won 6-2, 6-0

The matches I did not know about was the semis of the 1979, and those 2 late career(for Goolagong)meetings in Chichester and Sydney.

So Evert won 4 of their final 5 matches on grass, yet lost that Wimbledon final by a convincing score in between those. Interesting indeed. With Evonne you never knew though, she and Hana were similar in that regard.

Evert having a 4-4 head to head with Goolagong on grass is very impressive though. Goolagong was a tough customer for anyone on grass.


Wow thanks for posting that. Nice to finally see the numbers and see how well Evert handled Goolagong on grass as most of their rivalry was before I got into tennis as well. Evonne was one of those players with tons of sublime natural talent who could on any given day beat anyone.

Condoleezza
04-14-2007, 09:35 PM
That is true. Graf and Evert never played each other in their mutual primes. Evert had all 6 of her wins over Graf from 1985-before when Evert was in her prime and Graf was not. Graf won all 8 of their matches from 1986-beyond when Evert was starting her decline and Graf was coming into her prime. ....

Evert was #1 still in November 1985. She won the FO 86 in convincing fashion against Navratilova and said herself that she never had been better than in those months of 1985/86.
Nevertheless Chris had her first loss to Graf in Hilton Head Island in April 1986 (clay, 2-setter) and never won another match (7 losses in the next 3 years with only 1 set won).

But is it a well-known miracle that all great players (Navi, Evert, Shriver, Mandlikova, Sabatini, Hingis, Venus, Seles) were either still maturing or already over-the-hill when they started their strings of losses against Steffi .... :D :D



Condi

Condoleezza
04-14-2007, 09:38 PM
Who cares whether if Graf had one of the greatest backhands of the open era, instead of her wobbly little pokey slice for a backhand, she would have been unbeatable or not. She didnt end of story. ...

Who cares whether if Mandlikova and Goolagong had stronger work ethic, better focus, were able to harness and utilize their talents properly, they would have been some of the greatest players.
They hadn't. End of story.


Condi

Condoleezza
04-14-2007, 09:42 PM
....
If you had actually watched tennis during the Graf-Navratilova era and seen Hana play you would you realize how ridiculous this sounds.
....

In 1986-89 a 24/27-year-old Mandlikova lost 7 consecutive matches against Graf. She won ZERO sets and managed to win only TWO games on average per set.
What is so difficult to understand here?

Condi

CEvertFan
04-14-2007, 10:32 PM
In 1986-89 a 24/27-year-old Mandlikova lost 7 consecutive matches against Graf. She won ZERO sets and managed to win only TWO games on average per set.
What is so difficult to understand here?

Condi


Clearly Graf was a better player than Hana, but Hana was one of those dangerous, unpredictable players that when she brought her best tennis could beat anyone. More often than not though she got spanked by Martina/Chris/Graf who all have winning records against her.

federerfanatic
04-15-2007, 01:05 AM
Wow thanks for posting that. Nice to finally see the numbers and see how well Evert handled Goolagong on grass as most of their rivalry was before I got into tennis as well. Evonne was one of those players with tons of sublime natural talent who could on any given day beat anyone.

Yeah it was a bit surprising to me that Evert had done so well vs Goolagong on grass. I knew she gave her good matches, and beat her at Wimbledon atleast once, but she did even better then I realized. You are right on Goolagong too, lots of natural talent and very fluid player. On her day she was had a chance vs anyone.

federerfanatic
04-15-2007, 01:19 AM
In 1986-89 a 24/27-year-old Mandlikova lost 7 consecutive matches against Graf. She won ZERO sets and managed to win only TWO games on average per set.
What is so difficult to understand here?

Condi

Of course Hana is not in the same league as Graf, Navratilova, or Evert. However she was a very talented and dangerous player. Navratilova and Evert usually beat her, often spanked her, but Hana had the potential to rise up and challenge them in some matches, and even occasionaly beat them in some of the biggest matches. I already posted some of her big wins over Evert and Navratilova, as well as Austin and others. She was not consistent but she was potentialy brilliant and extremely dangerous.

Also Hana was still an elite player in 86 and 87, but by 1988 and 1989 her career started seeing an extremely steep and quick dropoff. She retired in 1990 at only age 28, so she wasnt as much in her prime at a typical middle age as one might think.

Mandilikova was never higher then #3 in the World when either Navratilova or Evert were #1. So if you are going to compare her to Graf's competition you must compare her to the players who were #3 the years Graf was #1.

Here they are:

1987: World #3 was 32 year old Chris Evert
1988: World #3 was 33 year old Chris Evert
1989: World #3 was Gabriela Sabatini
1990: World #3 was 33 year old Martina Navratilova
1993: World #3 was 36 year old Martina Navratilova
1994: World #3 was Conchita Martinez
1995: World #3 was Conchita Martinez
1996: World #3 was Aranxta Sanchez Vicario

1 year you have Sanchez Vicario, a 4-time Slam Champion just like Manlikova. In 4 of the 8 years you have a 36 year old women, a 33 year old, a 33 year old, and a 32 year old, as World #3. In 2 other years you have Conchita Martinez, a career 1-time only slam winner as World #3. In 1 other you have Gabriela Sabatini, a career 1-time only slam winner as World #3.

Mandlikova as a perennial #3 of the Evert-Navratilova era compares quite favorably indeed to the Graf era competition of the same status.

Condoleezza
04-15-2007, 02:49 AM
Clearly Graf was a better player than Hana, but Hana was one of those dangerous, unpredictable players that when she brought her best tennis could beat anyone. More often than not though she got spanked by Martina/Chris/Graf who all have winning records against her.

But this Hana, who lost 2-6 2-6 seven times in 1986-89 against Graf, was Evert's and Navi's main opponent in the early/mid-80ies.
Clown era ...

Condi

Condoleezza
04-15-2007, 02:53 AM
Of course Hana is not in the same league as Graf, Navratilova, or Evert. However she was a very talented and dangerous player. Navratilova and Evert usually beat her, often spanked her, but Hana had the potential to rise up and challenge them in some matches, and even occasionaly beat them in some of the biggest matches. I already posted some of her big wins over Evert and Navratilova, as well as Austin and others. She was not consistent but she was potentialy brilliant and extremely dangerous.

Also Hana was still an elite player in 86 and 87, but by 1988 and 1989 her career started seeing an extremely steep and quick dropoff. ...

Because a new generation with better players like Graf, Sabatini, Sanchez, Novotna, Martinez, Seles pushed her aside.

Condi

CEvertFan
04-15-2007, 10:45 AM
Because a new generation with better players like Graf, Sabatini, Sanchez, Novotna, Martinez, Seles pushed her aside.

Condi

I wouldn't say that Novotna, Martinez or Sabatini were better than Mandlikova. ASV, Graf and Seles certainly, but not the others.

Condoleezza
04-15-2007, 11:28 AM
I wouldn't say that Novotna, Martinez or Sabatini were better than Mandlikova. ASV, Graf and Seles certainly, but not the others.

Sabatini beat Graf 11 times.
Mandlikova once. When Graf was 16. After that she lost 2-6 2-6 on average each time.

That sums up the difference between Hana and Gaby.


Condi

federerfanatic
04-15-2007, 12:23 PM
Sabatini beat Graf 11 times.
Mandlikova once. When Graf was 16. After that she lost 2-6 2-6 on average each time.

That sums up the difference between Hana and Gaby.


Condi

Graf and Mandlikova played 6 matches when Mandlikova was still an elite player in 1986 and 1987. Graf did lead 5-1. Sanchez Vicario and even Sabatini did have better winning ratios vs Graf then that but still winning only about a quarter of the time, so not as different as you seem to be making it out to be. Graf won her first ever 11 matches with Sabatini, and yet Sabatini was able to boost her winning % to around a 27%. So who knows what happens if they had more of their primes together and played more often. Mandlikova beating Graf 1 out of 6 matches while she was still an elite player, is much better then players like Novotna and Martinez who you mention as "better" players did win win ratio wise.

How a player does vs only one opponent, relative to another, is not a good sole deteriment of who is the better player at all. Blake and Berdych do much better vs Nadal then Federer, does that make them much better players? Tennis is all about matchups, perhaps Sabatini was a better matchup against Graf then Mandlikova was, it does not mean she is automaticaly the better player.

CEvertFan
04-15-2007, 12:28 PM
Sabatini beat Graf 11 times.
Mandlikova once. When Graf was 16. After that she lost 2-6 2-6 on average each time.

That sums up the difference between Hana and Gaby.


Condi

Mandlikova also beat both Evert and Navratilova while both were in their prime. Like Sabatini, she was very inconsistent though.

federerfanatic
04-15-2007, 12:37 PM
I actually have heard little about Mandlikova since Jana Novotna retired. I did read somewhere she had a falling out with Jana and they arent even friends anymore which is sad.

I remember when Jana won Wimbledon in 1998 it was wonderful to see not only for her, but also Hana as a coach it was so fitting as it was the only major she never won. It was a great moment to witness.

Does anyone know what Hana is even doing now? Does she still coach? I believe Jana Novotna was her only ever pro that she coached.

Condoleezza
04-15-2007, 12:48 PM
Graf and Mandlikova played 6 matches when Mandlikova was still an elite player in 1986 and 1987. Graf did lead 5-1. Sanchez Vicario and even Sabatini did have better winning ratios vs Graf then that but still winning only about a quarter of the time, so not as different as you seem to be making it out to be. Graf won her first ever 11 matches with Sabatini, and yet Sabatini was able to boost her winning % to around a 27%. ...

Mandlikova was only 25 years old at the end of 1987. Still she was already 1-5 H2H against a 16-18-year-old Steffi.
Hana was no elite player anymore afterwards because better younger players pushed her aside.

You can't always claim that 24/27-year-old Mandlikova, 24/26-year-old Shriver, 31/33-year-old Navratilova, 31/34-year-old Evert, 21/25-year-old Seles, 22/25-year-old Sabatini, 19-year-old Venus, 16-year-old Hingis, 18/19-year-old Davenport were already too old, not an elite player anymore, still maturing, suffering from post-traumatic stress syndrome, too young etc. when they started losing to Graf.
Maybe Graf was simply the better player?


Condi

federerfanatic
04-15-2007, 01:09 PM
Mandlikova was only 25 years old at the end of 1987. Still she was already 1-5 H2H against a 16-18-year-old Steffi.
Hana was no elite player anymore afterwards because better younger players pushed her aside.

You can't always claim that 24/27-year-old Mandlikova, 24/26-year-old Shriver, 31/33-year-old Navratilova, 31/34-year-old Evert, 21/25-year-old Seles, 22/25-year-old Sabatini, 19-year-old Venus, 16-year-old Hingis, 18/19-year-old Davenport were already too old, not an elite player anymore, still maturing, suffering from post-traumatic stress syndrome, too young etc. when they started losing to Graf.
Maybe Graf was simply the better player?


Condi

I NEVER said Mandlikova, Shriver, Sabatini, Venus, Davenport, or Hingis were better players then Graf. As for comparing Mandlikova or Shriver vs somebody like Sabatini, it is looking at where players like that fit into the Evert-Navratilova era, or the Graf era, and if it was comparable, and then comparing them as players. It was never about any of those players being better then Graf, Navratilova, or Evert, that is nonsense, and I think you are purposely looking to take this conversation off course to avoid something. Venus, Davenport, and Hingis are a different generation of players altogether, neither the Evert-Navratilova one, nor the Graf one, so why do they even come up in this particular topic?

As for the players you mentioned a 31/33-year-old women, as Navratilova was in the period you are referring to, or a 31/34 women, as Evert was in the period you are referring to, is indeed considered very old to be in your "prime". That is not making excuses, that is being fair and reasonable. The results of Navratilova in 88-90, or Evert in 87-89, even if you were excluding any of their matches with Graf, would make it fairly evident they were indeed not in their "primes" at that point. To give some added perspective Graf in 1997-1999, at only age 27-30, was struggling to keep up to anywhere near her old level; she was still a great player, won some tournaments, reached 2 slam finals, won a slam title, but she was still a shadow of her old self.

21/25-year-old Seles was returning from a post-traumatic experience that forever changed her life, which you brush off as if it were a broken fingernail. I never said Hingis is anywhere close to the player Graf is, but for the record prime Graf's dominance over a 15 year old Hingis in 1996 is hardly indicative or demonstrative of anything.

Graf held her own vs Venus and Davenport when they were already top ranked players, near the end of her own career. Good for her, I NEVER said Venus and Davenport were better players then Graf, that was your own pointless insinuation. Graf did extremely well vs mid 20s Shriver and Mandlikova? Again kudos to Graf, but I never suggested Mandlikova and Shriver were better players then Graf.

As for excuses you are the queen/king of them. Returning from being knifed in the back during a tennis tournament, and the psychological scars that will forever exist from that; or being women in you early 30s like Evert and Navratilova, after the grind and wear of well over a decade at the top of the tennis circuit; is supposably just an excuse to undermine Graf's extraordinariness or something. Yet your father, who everybody knew was a true nutcase anyway, dealing with his smorgasboard of off court issues that always seemed to pop up, is a valid excuse for any stretch of time Graf has a number of losses to an particular opponent/rival? Any injury Graf has, despite the fact she was always injury prone and dealt with injuries including in her most dominant years, serves as an excuse for any stretch of time Graf has trouble with any particular opponent/rival? You are such a hypocrite, it is not even funny.

Condoleezza
04-15-2007, 01:18 PM
...
As for the players you mentioned a 31/33-year-old women as Navratilova was in the period you are referring to, or a 31/34 women as Evert was in the period you are referring to is considered very old to be in your "prime". That is not making excuses, that is reality. The results of Navratilova in 88-90 ... would make it fairly evident. ....


Between April of 1989 and February of 1990 Navratilova won 67 of 70 matches.
Her losses were
a) the Wimbledon 1989 final against Graf
b) the USO 1989 final against Graf
c) the YEC 1989 final against Graf

Without Graf she would have had a 70-match winning streak.

So much about Navratilova not being in peak prime form in 1989/90 .... :D



Condi

Condoleezza
04-15-2007, 01:21 PM
... 21/25-year-old Seles was returning from a post-traumatic experience that forever changed her life, ....


You and Seles say so because that is a very convenient excuse for not winning very much at age 21-29.

Do you want to tell us that Seles lost at USO 96 or FO 99 against Graf because of a stabbing in April 93 .... ? :D


Condi

federerfanatic
04-15-2007, 01:39 PM
Between April of 1989 and February of 1990 Navratilova won 67 of 70 matches.
Her losses were
a) the Wimbledon 1989 final against Graf
b) the USO 1989 final against Graf
c) the YEC 1989 final against Graf

Without Graf she would have had a 70-match winning streak.

So much about Navratilova not being in peak prime form in 1989/90 .... :D

Condi

Lets take a look at how Navratilova did vs a couple of players in 1988 to put this "Navratilova in her prime" in 1988-1990 in perspective.

Navratilova vs Evert in 1988:

Australian Open semis- Evert beats Navratilova 6-2, 7-5
Virginia Slims of Houston final- Evert beats Navratilova 6-0, 6-4
Wimbledon semis- Navratilova beats Evert 6-1, 4-6, 7-5(had to save a match point)
Filderstadt final- Navratilova beats Evert 6-2, 6-3
Chicago final- Navratilova beats Evert 6-2, 6-2

So the 33 year old Evert, in her second last year before retirement, and with Evert herself saying she felt by then she was playing the worst tennis she had played since becoming a pro player, basicaly went tied with Navratilova that year. Two very one-sided straight set wins for Evert, two very one-sided straight set wins for Navratilova, and a cliffhanger which Navratilova won after saving match point in the 3rd set.


Navratilova vs Zvereva from June 1988-April 1989:

Virginia Slims of California-Navratilova beats Zvereva 6-0, 6-2
French Open round of 16- Zvereva beats Navratilova 6-3, 7-6(5)
Eastbourne final-Navratilova beats Zvereva 6-2, 6-2
Canadian Open quarters-Zvereva beats Navratilova 6-1, 6-4
Virginia Slims of New England final-Navratilova beats Zvereva 6-7(4), 6-4, 6-3
Hilton Head semis-Zvereva beats Navratilova 6-2 3-6 6-1

This one is even more obvious. Zvereva going 3-3 for a year vs Navratilova in her prime? Please.

Also funny how earlier you dismissed Graf being in her prime in 1987 when she lost only 2 matches the entire year, the U.S Open and Wimbledon finals to Navratilova in straight sets of course. Yet now you turn around and give the reason you do for Navratilova having to be "in her prime" still in 1989 and 1990? Hypocrite you are.

federerfanatic
04-15-2007, 01:43 PM
You and Seles say so because that is a very convenient excuse for not winning very much at age 21-29.

Do you want to tell us that Seles lost at USO 96 or FO 99 against Graf because of a stabbing in April 93 .... ? :D


Condi

I dont know whether or not Graf would have beaten Seles in those two matches had Seles not been stabbed. Maybe she would not have, maybe she would have. Nobody knows what the result of every single post-stabbing match Seles played the remainder of the decade would have been. The fact is your evaluation of Seles and her results upon her return from the stabbing, as if nothing had happened, and trying to use those as legit proof of something, is shallow and narrow-minded at best.

Condoleezza
04-15-2007, 01:49 PM
I dont know whether or not Graf would have beaten Seles in those two matches had Seles not been stabbed. Maybe she would not have, maybe she would have. Nobody knows what the result of every single post-stabbing match Seles played the remainder of the decade would have been. The fact is your evaluation of Seles and her results upon her return from the stabbing, as if nothing had happened, and trying to use those as legit proof of something, is shallow and narrow-minded at best.


I never said nothing happened.

My point is - and always was - that Seles profited at least as much from the 1990/1992 Graf blackmail scandal as Graf profited from the April 30th, 1993, Seles stabbing.


Condi

federerfanatic
04-15-2007, 01:55 PM
I never said nothing happened.

My point is - and always was - that Seles profited at least as much from the 1990/1992 Graf blackmail scandal as Graf profited from the April 30th, 1993, Seles stabbing.


Condi

How are the two similar though? Off court problems and injuries are both part of life and sport. An act of violence on an innocent player, who could have easily been killed, and randomly damages both a players career and life; is not the same as having to deal with off court problems with your family or personal life.

Condoleezza
04-15-2007, 01:59 PM
How are the two similar though? Off court problems and injuries are both part of life and sport. An act of violence on an innocent player, who could have easily been killed, and randomly damages both a players career and life; is not the same as having to deal with off court problems with your family or personal life.


Crime is a part of life.
An act of violence is of course worse than having to deal with family problems.

My point is that the act of violence was over on May 1st, 1993.
While Graf's family problems (in fact a media frenzy for almost 2 years) weren't over for, well, 2 years.

And no, the recollection of an act of violence (a minor stab wound) in the PAST is in no way worse than a media hunt in the PRESENT.


Condi

tennus
04-15-2007, 06:18 PM
Between April of 1989 and February of 1990 Navratilova won 67 of 70 matches.
Her losses were
a) the Wimbledon 1989 final against Graf
b) the USO 1989 final against Graf
c) the YEC 1989 final against Graf

Without Graf she would have had a 70-match winning streak.

So much about Navratilova not being in peak prime form in 1989/90 .... :D

Condi

Once again you try to manipulate statistics to argue crap. In the 3 years 88-90 incl Martina only won 1 slam total- Wimbledon. Compare this to 84-86 inc when she won 7 majors. In 1989 she was 73-7. In 1990 she was 52-7. Compare this to: 1983 - 86-1(1 major), 1984 78-2(3 majors), 1985 84-5( 2 majors) and 1986 89-3(2 majors). In 1987 despite winning 2 majors she was 56-8 and played the fewest tournaments in her then 15 years on tour. :)

Condoleezza
04-15-2007, 09:23 PM
Once again you try to manipulate statistics to argue crap. In the 3 years 88-90 incl Martina only won 1 slam total- Wimbledon. Compare this to 84-86 inc when she won 7 majors. ....

In 1989/90 she didn't play AO and FO out of fear to be destroyed by Graf on these slow surfaces. And she lost to Graf at Wimbledon 88 and 89 and at USO 89. 7 potential slam titles less because of Steffi Graf.
Graf was no threat in 1984-86, though.

See, a very simple explanation.


Condi

tennus
04-15-2007, 10:29 PM
In 1989/90 she didn't play AO and FO out of fear to be destroyed by Graf on these slow surfaces. And she lost to Graf at Wimbledon 88 and 89 and at USO 89. 7 potential slam titles less because of Steffi Graf.
Graf was no threat in 1984-86, though.

See, a very simple explanation.


Condi
Wow ! That's about as conceding as you get Condi, albeit with a simplistic explanation. ;) BTW Martina was a Q/F in the 89 AO and in 90 still managed to win Wimbledon for the last time, just short of her 34th birthday. Why you constantly try to suggest she was in her prime after 17 years on tour is more than a little strange. :)

federerfanatic
04-15-2007, 10:39 PM
In 1989/90 she didn't play AO and FO out of fear to be destroyed by Graf on these slow surfaces. And she lost to Graf at Wimbledon 88 and 89 and at USO 89. 7 potential slam titles less because of Steffi Graf.
Graf was no threat in 1984-86, though.

See, a very simple explanation.


Condi

That might make sense, except for the fact you did not say anything about her 3-3 head to head with a career 1-time slam finalist, and "sometimes" top 10 player, like Natasha Zvereva during that period of time. Can you honestly tell me it is at all realistic that Navratilova in her prime would struggle that much vs a player like Zvereva?

Also while you refuse to acknowledge Navratilova being past her prime by then, you did acknowledge I believe that Evert was past her prime by 1988. Yet in 1988 even Evert, who even you admit to being past her prime by then, played the supposably "prime" Navratilova absolutely equal as my head to head showed. In fact that was the most success she had vs Navratilova in head to head meetings in 7 years, all the way back to 1981. Would that not make it further evident that both were then past their primes by then?

Also in addition to all that Navratilova lost to Zina Garrison in the quarterfinals of the 1988 U.S Open. While Garrison was a very good player, who spend some time in the top 5 in the late 80s, Martina really had her number big time, as that was her only ever loss to Garrison in 27 career meetings. For such a loss to be even possible of taking place in a "grand slam" match, wouldnt that be yet another indication that Navratilova was indeed past her prime by that point. To make the point even more clear Garrison wasted a match point which would have given her a 6-4, 6-0 victory. That did not end up being the final score, but it would have been had Garrison converted her match point. Would it have been even possible to lose to a player you lose to only once in 27 career matchups with, by a 6-4, 6-0 score, in the quarterfinals of a grand slam, if you were in your "prime"?

I could see Navratilova winning only 1 slam those 2 years being attributed to Graf alone, IF it were not for all of these things I pointed out above. It was evident by Navratilova's overall level of play(just watching her play, although that is subjective and something you would never acknowledge so I wont even go there), practicaly speaking her age, and most hard to deny her unrealistic results in certain cases if she were still in her "prime".

CEvertFan
04-16-2007, 11:32 AM
I agree with you about Martina also being just a bit past her prime as well. She had many good days for a few years into the 90's but the bad days were creeping in there more often than when she was dominating in the 80's.

federerfanatic
04-16-2007, 01:34 PM
I agree with you about Martina also being just a bit past her prime as well. She had many good days for a few years into the 90's but the bad days were creeping in there more often than when she was dominating in the 80's.

That is what Evert said during the trophy presentation, after at the 1999 Wimbledon final between Graf and Davenport. Chris said, "well that is the thing about when you get older Dick, you do have great days, but you also have more off days too, and she said(Graf)that she felt flat today." "she is a perfectionist(Graf), if she cant play great all the time, then it may just be a bit too much for her at this point." That is exactly what Martina started going through atleast by 1988(maybe by 1987), and Evert as well starting in 1987 anyway(maybe even in 1986).

That is what you saw from Goolagong late in her career too. Winning Wimbledon by beating Austin and Evert back to back, yet mixed with alot of diminishing results and a big slide in her ranking downwards in her late years. Billie Jean King late in her career you saw that too.

zapvor
04-16-2007, 02:06 PM
hmm....yea she was pretty good on the grass...looking up :D

Condoleezza
04-16-2007, 03:14 PM
That might make sense, except for the fact you did not say anything about her 3-3 head to head with a career 1-time slam finalist, and "sometimes" top 10 player, like Natasha Zvereva during that period of time. ...

Graf was 1-2 H2H in 1992-95 against Lori McNeil.

Your point being?


Condi

Condoleezza
04-16-2007, 03:16 PM
I agree with you about Martina also being just a bit past her prime as well. She had many good days for a few years into the 90's but the bad days were creeping in there more often than when she was dominating in the 80's.

I don't agree.
In the mid-80ies Navi played Evert in Wimbledon finals.
In 1988/89 she hit a truck in those finals - named Graf.
That was the difference ...

Condi

Condoleezza
04-16-2007, 03:21 PM
That is what Evert said during the trophy presentation, after at the 1999 Wimbledon final between Graf and Davenport. Chris said, "well that is the thing about when you get older Dick, you do have great days, but you also have more off days too, and she said(Graf)that she felt flat today." "she is a perfectionist(Graf), if she cant play great all the time, then it may just be a bit too much for her at this point." ...

Maybe Graf had reconstructive knee surgery in 1997 and Evert hadn't anything like that in the end-80ies?
We must not forget that Graf reduced her exercising program to less than 50 % post-96. It was only recreational tennis for her in 1999 ...

Condi

CEvertFan
04-18-2007, 12:35 PM
Maybe Graf had reconstructive knee surgery in 1997 and Evert hadn't anything like that in the end-80ies?
We must not forget that Graf reduced her exercising program to less than 50 % post-96. It was only recreational tennis for her in 1999 ...

Condi


That's ludicrous. She won Roland Garros in 1999 over Hingis and made it to the Wimbledon final so for you to say it was only recreational tennis for her at that point is just ignorant. Steffi always seemed to be the type of player with a good work ethic who took tennis very seriously and clearly the surgery worked for her now didn't it? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Condoleezza
04-18-2007, 12:40 PM
That's ludicrous. She won Roland Garros in 1999 over Hingis and made it to the Wimbledon final so for you to say it was only recreational tennis for her at that point is just ignorant. Steffi always seemed to be the type of player with a good work ethic who took tennis very seriously and clearly the surgery worked for her now didn't it? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Her training regime was only 1-2 hours a day in 1998/99.
No top player did less.

Condi

tennus
04-18-2007, 03:05 PM
Her training regime was only 1-2 hours a day in 1998/99.
No top player did less.

Condi

Condi, why can't you concede you're wrong ? You have no real idea about how long Graf trained other than what was said in Graf fan pages and biographies. I'll admit it is likely that Graf trained less as she came toward the end of her career but how much of this was injury driven ? You also seem reluctant to admit this reduction in training time is likely with other great players such as Evert and Navratilova. The 2 most damning statement you have ever made is: "It was only recreational tennis for her in 1999" and "No top player did less". Just how the hell would you know ? :confused:

suwanee4712
04-18-2007, 11:04 PM
No, that shows that Navratilova's grass-court abilities are overrated.
Navi could win tons of Wimbledon trophies because she played in a clown era.
Clay-court specialist Evert was her only opponent.

Don't forget that Evert lost 2-6 1-6 to Graf at Wimbledon 1989.

Condi


Are you being serious? :shock:

suwanee4712
04-18-2007, 11:22 PM
If, if ....
If Graf had had Henin's topspin backhand she would have been unbeatable.

Mandlikova?
I only remember how Graf owned her.
Steffi beat her the first time at Hilton Head Island 1986 with 6-2 6-4 when she was only 16 years old, lost to her a few months later - while having a severe cold - in the FO 86 quarters (3 sets).
In 1987 Graf beat her 6-3 6-4, 6-4 6-1, 6-2 6-2.
In 1988 6-2 6-2.
In 1989 7-6 6-3, 6-3 6-4, 6-0 6-1.

So in 9 matches against a 16-20-year-old Graf a 24-27 years old Mandlikova won 1 match and 2 of 19 sets.

Hana was the main opponent of Evert & Navratilova in the 80ies, no?
A nice proof of how pathetic the opposition was before Graf came up in 1986/87.

Same with Shriver, the other main opponent of Chris and Martina.
Graf destroyed her twice in Wimbledon (6-0 6-2 and 6-2 6-1) when Pam was 25/26 years old.

Evert and Navratilova really dodged a bullet in the 80ies. If Graf had been born 5 or 10 years earlier Chris and Martina would have been stuck with 10 slams maximum ...


Condi


Yeah, Steffi was sooooooo sick when she lost to Hana. She was so sick that she and Gaby still made the doubles final that year FOUR days after she lost Hana in the singles. While it was reported that Graf had a head cold (when did she not?), given how she often defealuted doubles matches at the drop of a hat, she must not have been too bad off that day.

You used to post on the wtaworld boards. I guess since getting kicked out of there for being a troll you decided to come over here and change your name for a fresh start?

suwanee4712
04-18-2007, 11:36 PM
Chris' record on grass just reconfirms what a great champion that she was. I always felt that she was more athletic and had a more adaptable game than she was generally given credit for. But her consistency and powers of concentration were always her greatest strengths regardless of surface.

I've always thought it was odd that Chris thought she won her 3 Wimbledon titles at times when she maybe shouldn't have, yet missed out on other chances when she should have won it. At any rate, making at least the semis of all but one of her 17 or 18 trips to Wimbledon is a remarkable record for anyone, much less a baseliner who played through an era of great serve and volley players (Court, King, Goolagong, Wade, Navratilova, etc.).

Condoleezza
04-19-2007, 10:15 AM
Yeah, Steffi was sooooooo sick when she lost to Hana. ... While it was reported that Graf had a head cold ...

Yes, she had.

.... You used to post on the wtaworld boards. I guess since getting kicked out of there for being a troll you decided to come over here and change your name for a fresh start?

What is "wtaworld"?

Condi

suwanee4712
04-19-2007, 12:53 PM
Yes, she had.



What is "wtaworld"?

Condi


You know darn well what wtaworld.com is. Shall I link for the board your posting history on that site before you and your other screen names were banned for being disrespectful to players past and to posters, especially "Selesians (if you're trying to hide your past, you should've found yourself another term)."

Condoleezza
04-19-2007, 01:14 PM
You know darn well what wtaworld.com is. ....

No, what is it?

Condi

CEvertFan
04-19-2007, 01:20 PM
Back on topic. I am glad to see that others agree that Evert was in fact pretty darn good on grass. :grin:

Condoleezza
04-19-2007, 01:22 PM
Back on topic. I am glad to see that others agree that Evert was in fact pretty darn good on grass. :grin:

Some Americans.
So what?

Condi

CEvertFan
04-19-2007, 01:28 PM
Some Americans.
So what?

Condi

I believe that her record on grass speaks for itself.

Condoleezza
04-19-2007, 01:29 PM
I believe that her record on grass speaks for itself.

No, she was better on clay and on HCs.

Condi

CEvertFan
04-19-2007, 01:35 PM
No, she was better on clay and on HCs.

Condi


Agreed. But she happened to be a good grass court player as well.

Condoleezza
04-19-2007, 01:41 PM
Agreed. But she happened to be a good grass court player as well.

Yes, but not "darn" good.

Evert's legacy is tainted by losing 13 matches in a row against Navratilova ....

Condi

CEvertFan
04-19-2007, 02:02 PM
Yes, but not "darn" good.

Evert's legacy is tainted by losing 13 matches in a row against Navratilova ....

Condi

Those weren't 13 straight losses on GRASS and this thread happens to be about Evert's grass court record. I never claimed that Evert was superior to Navratilova on grass, because she wasn't but she was a darn good grass court player. Making it to at least the Wimbledon semis for 17 of 18 years and making it to 10 wimbledon finals puts her right up there with the very best.

suwanee4712
04-19-2007, 02:10 PM
Those weren't 13 straight losses on GRASS and this thread happens to be about Evert's grass court record. I never claimed that Evert was superior to Navratilova on grass, because she wasn't but she was a darn good grass court player. Making it to at least the Wimbledon semis for 17 of 18 years and making it to 10 wimbledon finals puts her right up there with the very best.

That's just one of his tactics he turns to as he so often gets caught up in arguments he can't win. Lie, distort, change the subject, and when all else fails make a ridiculous charge backed up by his "stats." He should go into politics.

Any "Dumbo" can look at Chris' Wimbledon record and see it for the excellence that it is. Well, maybe not every "dumbo..........."

Condoleezza
04-19-2007, 02:11 PM
Those weren't 13 straight losses on GRASS and this thread happens to be about Evert's grass court record. I never claimed that Evert was superior to Navratilova on grass, because she wasn't but she was a darn good grass court player. Making it to at least the Wimbledon semis for 17 of 18 years and making it to 10 wimbledon finals puts her right up there with the very best.

OK.

Condi

Condoleezza
04-19-2007, 02:12 PM
That's just one of his tactics he turns to as he so often gets caught up in arguments he can't win. Lie, distort, change the subject, and when all else fails make a ridiculous charge backed up by his "stats." He should go into politics.

Any "Dumbo" can look at Chris' Wimbledon record and see it for the excellence that it is. Well, maybe not every "dumbo..........."

But the fact remains that it was an era when Jaeger and Shriver types were #3 ...

Condi

CEvertFan
04-19-2007, 02:15 PM
That's just one of his tactics he turns to as he so often gets caught up in arguments he can't win. Lie, distort, change the subject, and when all else fails make a ridiculous charge backed up by his "stats." He should go into politics.

Any "Dumbo" can look at Chris' Wimbledon record and see it for the excellence that it is. Well, maybe not every "dumbo..........."



You seem to be holding some sort of personal grudge toward me. Why is that? Is it because I said that no elite players played the AO during Court's 11 wins there? I stand by that statement. To borrow a phrase from Condi, the AO draw during most of the years that Court won it was a "clown era" for that tournament.

suwanee4712
04-19-2007, 02:19 PM
But the fact remains that it was an era when Jaeger and Shriver types were #3 ...

Condi


For those who saw Jaeger and Shriver (you probably didn't), they'll know exactly how good those players were. King, Goolagong, Wade, Navratilova (at her peak), etc., Evert played all of them and beat them - more so than she even played Jaeger or Shriver at Wimbledon.

You can distort all that you want, but you can't change record books. And you can't fool people that had the priviledge of watching players from that era.

suwanee4712
04-19-2007, 02:20 PM
You seem to be holding some sort of personal grudge toward me. Why is that? Is it because I said that no elite players played the AO during Court's 11 wins there? I stand by that statement. To borrow a phrase from Condi, the AO draw during most of the years that Court won it was a "clown era" for that tournament.


Uhhhhh I've agreed with everything you've had to say. I'm on your side.

CEvertFan
04-19-2007, 02:23 PM
Uhhhhh I've agreed with everything you've had to say. I'm on your side.



LOL I misunderstood. Carry on then. :D

federerfanatic
04-19-2007, 04:09 PM
I do agree in a way the 80s field was a bit weak in terms of the quality of the 4-10 players compared to other decades. Certainly weaker then the 60, 70s, or even maybe the 90s. I do think Hana is alot better then people give her credit for, and she was your perennial #3 after Austin's career became decimated with injuries for a couple years before early retirement.

Pam Shriver as your most perennial World #4 is kind of weak I admit though, and I agree with those who say even players like Sabatini or Novotna are of higher caliber then her. Players like Jaeger and Hanika are kind of weak for players to reach the top 5 also IMO.

However I do believe the 70s had great depth of quality among all the top players, and throughout the top 10, and Evert was the dominant player alot of the 70s. Then Navratilova came around in the 80s and dominated all for awhile even Evert, before Evert had to re-invent herself to a degree to challenge and rival Navratilova again. Thus Evert's dominance of the very deep 70s, followed by Navratilova dominating for awhile a still prime Evert, more then validates both of their success vs the toughest competition, even if the 80s was not as strong as far as quality of depth of players.

I also agree the Australian Open during the 60s could be regarded a very soft slam. This wasnt because of the field of women in the game at the time, it was because of the the lack of full attendance of the players at that particular slam. The same could be said of the event in the 70s event. It wasnt until the 80s that you had the full fields that make it recognized as a full fledged slam. Sure in 60s and 70s you had some elite attend, but nearly enough with enough regularity. It was more like a tier 1 or even tier 2 event today, some players showing up, alot not, sometimes only 1 of the top 4 showing, etc...Except certain players who were Australian like Court and Goolagong went every year.

tennus
04-19-2007, 11:45 PM
Graf was 1-2 H2H in 1992-95 against Lori McNeil.
Your point being?


Condi

Nice one Condi, Here's one for the stats queen(or is it king ?) - head to head stats, percentages and isolated evaluations do not prove everything. Hana Mandlikova defeated Lori McNeil in each of their 4 grand slam matches including 6-0 6-0 in the 87 AO Q/F. Mandlikova at her best was one of the biggest threats going around ! :)

BTW Lori McNeil was a very good player in her own right reaching no9 in singles(1988-an injury stricken Mandlikova beat her 6-2 6-4 in 88 AO) and no 4 in doubles

federerfanatic
04-20-2007, 12:11 AM
Nice one Condi, Here's one for the stats queen(or is it king ?) - head to head stats, percentages and isolated evaluations do not prove everything. Hana Mandlikova defeated Lori McNeil in each of their 4 grand slam matches including 6-0 6-0 in the 87 AO Q/F. Mandlikova at her best was one of the biggest threats going around ! :)

BTW Lori McNeil was a very good player in her own right reaching no9 in singles(1988-an injury stricken Mandlikova beat her 6-2 6-4 in 88 AO) and no 4 in doubles

See, manipulating stats in the favor of the player you are trying to argue for, like Condoleezza does time and time again, isnt that hard. :p What do you have to say to that one Condi.

suwanee4712
04-20-2007, 10:28 AM
Just like with most any other sport, comparing scores between different players does little good. Because all sports are about matchups. Some lower ranked players trouble certain higher ranked players, whereas others do not. It's all about the different matchups of strengths and weaknesses.

For instance, Hana and Martina almost always beat Lori easily. Yet Lori often troubled Chris and Steffi. Yet, past the age of 16, Steffi was never again troubled by Claudia Khode Kilsch. And Chris never lost to Claudia in her entire career. But Claudia was a painful thorn in Hana's side, losing 4 of their 10 matches including 3 at grand slams.

Martina was absolutely bedevilled by Natasha Zvereva, losing to her 4 times. But aside from Natasha's lone win over Steffi in 1998, she didn't have a single win over any of the other top players of the late 80's or 90's.

Condoleezza
04-20-2007, 10:37 AM
Nice one Condi, Here's one for the stats queen(or is it king ?) - head to head stats, percentages and isolated evaluations do not prove everything. Hana Mandlikova defeated Lori McNeil in each of their 4 grand slam matches including 6-0 6-0 in the 87 AO Q/F. Mandlikova at her best was one of the biggest threats going around ! :)

BTW Lori McNeil was a very good player in her own right reaching no9 in singles(1988-an injury stricken Mandlikova beat her 6-2 6-4 in 88 AO) and no 4 in doubles

Paola Suarez was #9 in singles in 2004 and #1 in doubles.
Your point being?

Condi

tennus
04-20-2007, 10:48 AM
Paola Suarez was #9 in singles in 2004 and #1 in doubles.
Your point being?

Condi

I thought it was obvious, amd I don't think you're that ignorant. More like a pot stirrer who rattles the cage. Well, what's good for the goose.......;)

suwanee4712
04-20-2007, 10:54 AM
I do agree in a way the 80s field was a bit weak in terms of the quality of the 4-10 players compared to other decades. Certainly weaker then the 60, 70s, or even maybe the 90s. I do think Hana is alot better then people give her credit for, and she was your perennial #3 after Austin's career became decimated with injuries for a couple years before early retirement.

Pam Shriver as your most perennial World #4 is kind of weak I admit though, and I agree with those who say even players like Sabatini or Novotna are of higher caliber then her. Players like Jaeger and Hanika are kind of weak for players to reach the top 5 also IMO.

However I do believe the 70s had great depth of quality among all the top players, and throughout the top 10, and Evert was the dominant player alot of the 70s. Then Navratilova came around in the 80s and dominated all for awhile even Evert, before Evert had to re-invent herself to a degree to challenge and rival Navratilova again. Thus Evert's dominance of the very deep 70s, followed by Navratilova dominating for awhile a still prime Evert, more then validates both of their success vs the toughest competition, even if the 80s was not as strong as far as quality of depth of players.

I also agree the Australian Open during the 60s could be regarded a very soft slam. This wasnt because of the field of women in the game at the time, it was because of the the lack of full attendance of the players at that particular slam. The same could be said of the event in the 70s event. It wasnt until the 80s that you had the full fields that make it recognized as a full fledged slam. Sure in 60s and 70s you had some elite attend, but nearly enough with enough regularity. It was more like a tier 1 or even tier 2 event today, some players showing up, alot not, sometimes only 1 of the top 4 showing, etc...Except certain players who were Australian like Court and Goolagong went every year.

Even though I'm more of an 80's guy, I agree with you about the 70's. The depth of the womens game was phenomenal for most of that decade. That's perhaps the "golden age" of womens tennis.

I respectfully disagree about Shriver though. She was better than she's generally given credit for. Her game was very straight forward, serve and volley, not much variety to it at all. But what she did, she did well. And I would say that Pam was one of the best tacticians that I've seen play the game. Which is also why she was such a good doubles player.

I think Gaby is ultimately a higher calibur player than Pam. I'd also agree that Jana was better than Pam - but not by much. Pam didn't have the speed or movement that Jana did. But her serve was more formidable than Jana's was for most of her career. Shriver had a much more solid, confident overhead. And I'd rate their volleys even. Jana covered the net beautifully, but she couldn't hit a forehand volley down the line to save her life with that straight elbow. Both players were extremely limited on the backhand side. If you approached them, they generally tried to outposition you by lobbing or dinking the ball low. Which is why neither of them had great success against many of their fellow serve and volley players.

Sukova was a very strong, consistent player. Her movement wasn't as limited as Shrivers, but it was a weakness nevertheless. But she could play all of the top players on all surfaces very well. In 1986, she was within 4 points of defeating Martina in the French semis. And on red clay in Prague, she lost a tight 7-5, 7-6 match to Chris. From 1984-1988, she beat Martina and Chris on numerous occasions. It's a shame that she didn't win a grand slam, because she was capable of doing so.

Hanika wasn't grand slam worthy in my opinion. But she did beat all of the top players that she faced at least once. Kathy Jordan and Wendy Turnbull were similar in that way. They were tough and smart. Not capable of winning a slam necessarily, but they beat all of the top players they played at least once. Manuela Maleeva also was a solid top tenner in the 80's. Though her two grand slam semi appearances didn't happen until the 90's.

This is just my opinion, and there's plenty of room for disagreement and discussion on this, but since Jana won Wimbledon, the best players of the Open era to not win a grand slam title would include Clijsters, Shriver, Sukova, M.J. Fernandez, and Rosie Casals.

Helena was very unlucky to have to beat Martina at the 84 Aussie and then face Chris. The same thing happened in reverse when she beat Chris at the 86 US Open only to have to face Martina. Since Seles got stabbed, most of the contenders of the mid and latter 90's only had to beat one top 5 all time great. Had Sukova had that luxury, she probably would've won at least one grand slam.

Just my opinion though, so take that for what it's worth. :p

Condoleezza
04-20-2007, 11:16 AM
Even though I'm more of an 80's guy, I agree with you about the 70's. The depth of the womens game was phenomenal for most of that decade. That's perhaps the "golden age" of womens tennis ....

Yes, Sue Barker top 5 in 1976 & 1977.
33/34-year-old Virginia Wade #4 in 1977 & 1978.
34-year-old BJ King #2 in 1977, 35/36-year-old BJ King still #5 in 1978 & 1979.
Fat Navratilova winning slams.

:D :D

Morozova, Balestrat, Casals, Stove, Reid, Heldman, Durr, Turnbull, Gunter, Masthoff types in the top 10 for SEVERAL years.


Ohmigod ... :D


Condi

suwanee4712
04-20-2007, 11:39 AM
Yes, Sue Barker top 5 in 1976 & 1977.
33/34-year-old Virginia Wade #4 in 1977 & 1978.
34-year-old BJ King #2 in 1977, 35/36-year-old BJ King still #5 in 1978 & 1979.
Fat Navratilova winning slams.

:D :D

Morozova, Balestrat, Casals, Stove, Reid, Heldman, Durr, Turnbull, Gunter, Masthoff types in the top 10 for SEVERAL years.


Ohmigod ... :D


Condi

To you, tennis starts and ends with one player. For those of us who can appreciate the game overall, we can recognize that players like Sue Barker, Betty Stove, Kerry Reid, and Nancy Gunter Richey were all good players in their own right. While you're at it, you can include Virginia Ruzici and Mima Jausovec in that kind of company. None of those players ever reached the top. But at times in their careers, they made a good supporting cast, so to speak.

BJK is an all time great who could last well past the age of 30. She beat Martina when she was 37 years old and nearly beat Chris at Wimbledon that same year, after having already beaten Austin. I have each of those Wimbledon matches and treasure them for their outstanding quality of play.

For you to not recognize Virginia Wade, Frankie Durr, and Rosie Casals as greats of the 60's and 70's, that's surprising even for you. Virginia Wade is easily one of the best 20 female players of the Open era.....easily.

Condoleezza
04-20-2007, 11:56 AM
To you, tennis starts and ends with one player. For those of us who can appreciate the game overall, we can recognize that players like Sue Barker, Betty Stove, Kerry Reid, and Nancy Gunter Richey were all good players in their own right. While you're at it, you can include Virginia Ruzici and Mima Jausovec in that kind of company. None of those players ever reached the top. But at times in their careers, they made a good supporting cast, so to speak.

BJK is an all time great who could last well past the age of 30. She beat Martina when she was 37 years old and nearly beat Chris at Wimbledon that same year, after having already beaten Austin. I have each of those Wimbledon matches and treasure them for their outstanding quality of play.

For you to not recognize Virginia Wade, Frankie Durr, and Rosie Casals as greats of the 60's and 70's, that's surprising even for you. Virginia Wade is easily one of the best 20 female players of the Open era.....easily.

Ever heard of Helga Masthoff of Germany? She was a top-ten player in the early 70ies. Some years ago (late 90ies, IIRC) she was in a TV show and they showed footage of her Wimbledon matches. The show's audience laughed and she - a little bit embarrassed - said, well, it was a different time back then ... :D :D :D

Condi

Rabbit
04-20-2007, 11:56 AM
Wait...didn't a certain 50-year old just retire from the WTA? And wasn't she winning? Gee, that doesn't speak too well for Condi's argument about how much better the players are today seeing that a 50-year old was still schooling them in dubs. \

And, I think the same 50-year old went out a winner at the US Open. Oh wait, I know. She's a naturalized American citizen so it was a contrivance that got her the title. It was set up. She didn't have to play anyone. The USTA rigged the draw.

Still, a 50-year old winning on the WTA when it was supposed to be sooooo much better than the olden days..... But then again, the same player won in the olden days..... hmmmmmm....it's a poser for the ages, an enigma wrapped in a conundrum.

suwanee4712
04-20-2007, 12:01 PM
Ever heard of Helga Masthoff of Germany? She was a top-ten player in the early 70ies. Some years ago (late 90ies, IIRC) she was in a TV show and they showed footage of her Wimbledon matches. The show's audience laughed and she - a little bit embarrassed - said, well, it was a different time back then ... :D :D :D

Condi


Yes, Helga was quite a clay court player and also won the German Open if I remember correctly. I'm pretty sure that she beat Martina once. Watching a few highlights of selected matches (good or bad) is not a good way to judge an entire body of work as a career.

If people laughed at Helga, I'm sure it was in a different context than the one you are suggesting. Otherwise, its pretty ignorant to laugh at someone who was once one of the top best women in the world at what she did.

Condoleezza
04-20-2007, 12:02 PM
Wait...didn't a certain 50-year old just retire from the WTA? And wasn't she winning? Gee, that doesn't speak too well for Condi's argument about how much better the players are today seeing that a 50-year old was still schooling them in dubs. ...

Today's players are shyce.
Late 80ies and 90ies was the golden age of women's tennis.

BTW, what is "dubs"?
This funny sport where Liezel Hubers can be #1?


Condi

Condoleezza
04-20-2007, 12:05 PM
Yes, Helga was quite a clay court player and also won the German Open if I remember correctly. I'm pretty sure that she beat Martina once. Watching a few highlights of selected matches (good or bad) is not a good way to judge an entire body of work as a career.

If people laughed at Helga, I'm sure it was in a different context than the one you are suggesting. Otherwise, its pretty ignorant to laugh at someone who was once one of the top best women in the world at what she did.


In the early 70ies there were only about 50 women who played tennis seriously (that is not recreationally).
Court, King, Evert were quite good, even Goolagong maybe.
The rest would not have been top 20 today. A #50 player of 1975 would not be top 500 today.

Condi

suwanee4712
04-20-2007, 12:16 PM
The 90's the "golden age" of womens tennis? :rolleyes: 1991 was a great year. 1990, 1992-1993 were interesting years that showed a lot of promise. But those years don't make up for the rest of the decade which was devoid of even one other top 7 all time great, other than a dramatically different Seles.

Even when Hingis was at the top, it was largely in Graf's absence. Aranxta is the other big player of the 90's. But she's closer to being one of the 15 best players of the Open era than she is the top 10.

Condoleezza
04-20-2007, 12:23 PM
The 90's the "golden age" of womens tennis? :rolleyes: 1991 was a great year. 1990, 1992-1993 were interesting years that showed a lot of promise. But those years don't make up for the rest of the decade which was devoid of even one other top 7 all time great, other than a dramatically different Seles.
....


It is difficult to win slams when you play in the same era as the GOAT.
Seles could profit from Graf's blackmail scandal in the early 90ies. But what else should Seles, Sanchez et al. do against Graf?

Same with Federer.
Without him Roddick would be an "all-time great" ....

Condi

suwanee4712
04-20-2007, 12:28 PM
In the early 70ies there were only about 50 women who played tennis seriously (that is not recreationally).
Court, King, Evert were quite good, even Goolagong maybe.
The rest would not have been top 20 today. A #50 player of 1975 would not be top 500 today.

Condi

That might work with the newbies that are coming up today who don't have the historical knowledge or perspective that the rest of us do. But for those of us who have followed the game for a long time, silly statements like this won't work.

The women of that time were more than recreational players. They fought tooth and nail for every dime they could get. Unlike the players of the 80's through today, they needed to win every match that they could to make a living on the pro tour.

Technology has changed as has knowledge and the science of nutrition and training. As is the ability to travel with a full time coach and support team that does everything for you from making your tea to making your plane and hotel reservations.

The number 50 player of 1970 is as good as the number 50 player of today, the 1990's, or whatever comparison you would like to make. It's all a matter of context. If you give all players an equal opportunity with the same training, technology, etc., I would favor the players of the wood racquet era. They probably learned more skills and about the game itself than the average player of later eras that relied more on their advantages.

Condoleezza
04-20-2007, 12:32 PM
....
If you give all players an equal opportunity with the same training, technology, etc., I would favor the players of the wood racquet era. They probably learned more skills and about the game itself than the average player of later eras that relied more on their advantages.

But 1986-99 was the golden age of women's tennis .... :D

Condi

suwanee4712
04-20-2007, 12:37 PM
It is difficult to win slams when you play in the same era as the GOAT.
Seles could profit from Graf's blackmail scandal in the early 90ies. But what else should Seles, Sanchez et al. do against Graf?

Same with Federer.
Without him Roddick would be an "all-time great" ....

Condi


With all due respect to her, Aranxta isn't Martina, Chris, BJK, or Margaret. Steffi, after the 1993 Australian Open, never again faced one of the top 7 all time greats again. Unless you want to count Seles after her return. That's almost 7 full years. The other all time greats faced top players regularly throughout their careers.

It's not her fault because she worked hard and played hard in circumstances that weren't her fault. But Aranxta is below Goolagong and probably Mandlikova (Hana won 3 of the 4 slams on 3 different surfaces against 2 all time greats), neither of which ever reached the top spot in their eras. But then again, Aranxta wouldn't have either had she began her career 10 years earlier than she did. That is the ultimate damnation of the mid to latter 90's.

suwanee4712
04-20-2007, 12:41 PM
But 1986-99 was the golden age of women's tennis .... :D

Condi

I bet you could fill a phone booth with the people who hold that opinion. But whatever makes you happy..........

Rabbit
04-20-2007, 05:08 PM
I bet you could fill a phone booth with the people who hold that opinion. But whatever makes you happy..........

I think you're being generous.

Also, Condi, didn't Navratilova win a round at Wimbledon at age 48? She was also competitive in her second round match. This flies in the face of your estimation of the competition during that time. Your "assessments" are really amusing, but nowhere near accurate.

And, just for the record, Hana Mandlikova was the Marat Safin of her day. When on, she produced some of the most astounding tennis ever seen. In her US Open final against Martina Navratilova, Mandlikova has Navratilova shaking her head in disbelief of the shots she was hitting. Unlike you, I watched that match and was awed as well.

Condoleezza
04-20-2007, 10:54 PM
With all due respect to her, Aranxta isn't Martina, Chris, BJK, or Margaret. Steffi, after the 1993 Australian Open, never again faced one of the top 7 all time greats again. Unless you want to count Seles after her return. That's almost 7 full years. The other all time greats faced top players regularly throughout their careers.
....

Court was born in 1942 and over the hill post-1973 (never reached a slam final again). King was born in 1943 and over the hill post-1975 (never reached a slam final again).

Evert was born in 1954 and had to compete with Court & King for only 2 or so years. Navratilova was born in 1956 and made her first slam semis in 1975, won her first slam in 1978. Court and King never were a threat for her.

Pre-Evert Court and King had no opposition post-Bueno (= post-67).
Evert and Navi weren't threatened by anyone in 1976-86 but by teenage Austin who relegated them to #2 and #3 until she got injured.

Condi

Condoleezza
04-20-2007, 10:59 PM
I think you're being generous.

Also, Condi, didn't Navratilova win a round at Wimbledon at age 48? She was also competitive in her second round match. This flies in the face of your estimation of the competition during that time. Your "assessments" are really amusing, but nowhere near accurate.

And, just for the record, Hana Mandlikova was the Marat Safin of her day. When on, she produced some of the most astounding tennis ever seen. In her US Open final against Martina Navratilova, Mandlikova has Navratilova shaking her head in disbelief of the shots she was hitting. Unlike you, I watched that match and was awed as well.

Navratilova was a great player. Her 2002 singles Wimbledon matches were proof how women's tennis had gone down in the early 2000s. Same with Graf hopping off the couch in 2004 to play WTA #16 Likhovtseva in WTT and losing only in the tie-break of a one-set match.

Mandlikova beat Steffi exactly one, when Steffi was just 16. After that Steffi played her 7 times with Hana winning not even 1 set (the score being 2-6 2-6 on average). Hana was 24-27 years old, peak prime age for a tennis player.

Condi

suwanee4712
04-21-2007, 01:09 PM
Court was born in 1942 and over the hill post-1973 (never reached a slam final again). King was born in 1943 and over the hill post-1975 (never reached a slam final again).

Evert was born in 1954 and had to compete with Court & King for only 2 or so years. Navratilova was born in 1956 and made her first slam semis in 1975, won her first slam in 1978. Court and King never were a threat for her.

Pre-Evert Court and King had no opposition post-Bueno (= post-67).
Evert and Navi weren't threatened by anyone in 1976-86 but by teenage Austin who relegated them to #2 and #3 until she got injured.

Condi


Again, revisionist history from someone whose sole motivation is to put down other all time greats in an effort to make his all time great of choice look better. Either you know nothing about tennis pre 1986 or you willingly ignore it.

The thing is, Steffi's record speaks for itself. It doesn't need the help of your dishonest tactics and lack of respect of her peers. It's easily one of the top 3, if not the very best, record of any player in the history of the game. Yet you are too insecure to either acknowldge the truth about tennis pre 1986 or simply unwilling to do so.

As I've said before, you should go into politics.

suwanee4712
04-21-2007, 01:25 PM
Navratilova was a great player. Her 2002 singles Wimbledon matches were proof how women's tennis had gone down in the early 2000s. Same with Graf hopping off the couch in 2004 to play WTA #16 Likhovtseva in WTT and losing only in the tie-break of a one-set match.

Mandlikova beat Steffi exactly one, when Steffi was just 16. After that Steffi played her 7 times with Hana winning not even 1 set (the score being 2-6 2-6 on average). Hana was 24-27 years old, peak prime age for a tennis player.

Condi

You know about as much about Hana Mandlikova's career as I do about walking in outer space............

Since you like to talk about Steffi's youth, sickness, man-**** of a daddy, zits, anything to excuse her losses, you should know full well that Steffi probably only played Hana a maximum of 3 times while Hana was at the top of her game. After winning the Australian in 1987, Hana had a heel injury, quad strain, pulled stomach muscle, more problems with her recurring back problem, divorced her husband and had an abortion all before the year was out. She literally limped through the first half of 1988 with a severe hamstring pull that took 6 months of recuperation to get over. Yet, you continue to thump your chest over victories that if they had been losses for Steffi under those cirumstances, you wouldnt' even acknowledge.

You don't put down Hana for the sake of insulting her. You put her down to discredit Martina and Chris, so you can carry on with your "clown era" propaganda. And you don't overhype Aranxta, Gaby, and Jana for the sake of being admirers of their's. You do that to prop up the weak mid and late 90's where Steffi mostly ran roughshod through the field.

The sad part is, Steffi's record is outstanding. She doesn't need your brand of dishonest twisting of facts. She achieved what she did on her own. She didn't need you to write a fairy tale to prop her up.

Condoleezza
04-21-2007, 02:15 PM
Again, revisionist history from someone whose sole motivation is to put down other all time greats in an effort to make his all time great of choice look better. Either you know nothing about tennis pre 1986 or you willingly ignore it.

The thing is, Steffi's record speaks for itself. It doesn't need the help of your dishonest tactics and lack of respect of her peers. It's easily one of the top 3, if not the very best, record of any player in the history of the game. Yet you are too insecure to either acknowldge the truth about tennis pre 1986 or simply unwilling to do so.

As I've said before, you should go into politics.


Fact is that Navratilova had 3 major opponents.
1) Chris Evert. She owned Chrissie in the 80ies.
2) Tracy Austin. Tracy relegated her to #3 in the middle of her career.
3) Steffi Graf. Steffi ended her reign in 1987.

Navi never competed with Court or King. When Navi won her first slam Court was retired and King 35.

Condi

Condoleezza
04-21-2007, 02:19 PM
...
The sad part is, Steffi's record is outstanding. She doesn't need your brand of dishonest twisting of facts. She achieved what she did on her own. She didn't need you to write a fairy tale to prop her up.

Sometimes she needs the facts to be told.
Because revisionist history (mostly from some "patriotic" U.S. tennis fans)says that Navi's 18 slams plus tons of mixed doubles titles are better than 22 slams and a Golden Grand Slam. And says that Seles in her two great years (1991/92) was better than Graf ever was.

Condi

suwanee4712
04-21-2007, 11:11 PM
Sometimes she needs the facts to be told.
Because revisionist history (mostly from some "patriotic" U.S. tennis fans)says that Navi's 18 slams plus tons of mixed doubles titles are better than 22 slams and a Golden Grand Slam. And says that Seles in her two great years (1991/92) was better than Graf ever was.

Condi

I love how you interject your personal prejudices against nations you don't like and your politics into your arguments. You sound like a Peter Graf wannabe.

The fact is, Steffi, Martina, Margaret, and even Chris all have good cases for GOAT. Steffi's not threatened by that fact. And neither should you be. But if you're going to make a case for Steffi, you could at least state your opinions instead of trashing everybody in site and twisting facts.

suwanee4712
04-21-2007, 11:26 PM
Fact is that Navratilova had 3 major opponents.
1) Chris Evert. She owned Chrissie in the 80ies.
2) Tracy Austin. Tracy relegated her to #3 in the middle of her career.
3) Steffi Graf. Steffi ended her reign in 1987.

Navi never competed with Court or King. When Navi won her first slam Court was retired and King 35.

Condi

Calimero, you can't erase the record books. Martina most certainly played against Court and King while both were still very competitive - she lost quite a few matches to both, even if not at their peak. And I love how you keep overlooking Goolagong. Martina lost an Australian Open final to her. Had Steffi played Evonne, she would've been the 4th best player Steffi had ever played. Mandlikova and Wade would rank quite high as contemporaries of Martina as well.......despite your best efforts to ignore their records.

Anyone that won 3 of the 4 slams on 3 different surfaces and defeated the greatest grass court player (Martina) at Wimbledon and the greatest clay court player at the French (Chris) is top quality competition. Mandlikova did just that. Wade too won 3 of the 4 slams and defeated all of the top players she faced, including Chris at Wimbledon while she was ranked #1.

Martina played vs. many grand slam champions.......several more than Steffi did. That's not Steffi's fault and it doesn't necessarily diminish her achievements. After all, I'm willing to bet that 95% of all tennis fans would rank Steffi's record in the top 3 and close to 50% would rank it best of all time. But you can't step over other champions and rewrite history to suit your personal beliefs.

obanaghan
05-03-2007, 04:19 PM
The 1987 Aussie Open was played on GRASS just to set the record straight. This was the year Martina won ZERO titles until Wimbledon and Steffi was UNDEFEATED until the Wimbledon final. Martina redeemed herself the rest of the year.

Chris Evert was very good on grass which by the mid 1970s was pretty much a handful of tournaments; Wimbledon and its tune ups, Aussie Open until '87 and its tune ups. Chris beat Martina at Wimbledon in 76 and 80, Eastbourne 79, Sydney 81 and Aussie Open in 82.

It is impossible to compare different players from different eras. Likewise Graf's style of play would never have worked without a graphite and possibly only a midsize racket at that. The Williams, the Russians would not have been successful in 1960s tennis.

Evert beat Court when she was at the top having just won the Grand Slam weeks earlier. She was 5'2" and 90 lbs and took down the undisputed world champion in straight sets no less. A year later she blitzed BJK losing just one game.

10/18 Slams won by Evert were clay, 3/18 were hard and 5/13 were grass.

12/18 Slams won by Martina were grass, 2/18 were clay and 4/18 were hard.

The surface made a difference. Martina would have relegated Evert to the sidelines if they played in the 1950s or 60s where three of Slams were grass. Would Evert havce won the US Open in 1975-7 if it were on grass? She only won one Wimbledon in that timeframe.

How should the season be designed?

I think the Aussie Open should be indoor with an indoor carpet season leading up to it, French on clay, move Wmbledon and have a 2 month grass season and keep the Open series. Get rid of the year end tourneys all together to make it an off season from mid September through mid November.

I have read that most of Evert's losses were indoors. She last beat MN indoors in 1980.

CEvertFan
05-03-2007, 06:23 PM
Many people think that grass was Evert's worst surface but you got it right when you said indoor carpet. THAT was Evert's worst surface and where she sustained more losses than on any other surface. Most indoor carpet surfaces are even quicker than grass so I believe that's why she had more trouble with it.

suwanee4712
05-03-2007, 08:08 PM
Many people think that grass was Evert's worst surface but you got it right when you said indoor carpet. THAT was Evert's worst surface and where she sustained more losses than on any other surface. Most indoor carpet surfaces are even quicker than grass so I believe that's why she had more trouble with it.


From what I've read from Chris, she also hated indoors because she preferred to be out in the sun and in the natural elements. While Martina liked more for conditions to be as perfect as possible, Chris grew up on the Florida coast where wind, rain, and sun had to be dealt with sometimes all in one match.

I think there was a real difference in her attitude when she had to go indoors and play during the winter time. Maybe not at first, but by the middle of her career anyway.

CEvertFan
05-03-2007, 10:31 PM
From what I've read from Chris, she also hated indoors because she preferred to be out in the sun and in the natural elements. While Martina liked more for conditions to be as perfect as possible, Chris grew up on the Florida coast where wind, rain, and sun had to be dealt with sometimes all in one match.

I think there was a real difference in her attitude when she had to go indoors and play during the winter time. Maybe not at first, but by the middle of her career anyway.


Evert liked playing out in the elements because she knew she could adjust her game accordingly with more ease than her opponents. :D

Condoleezza
05-03-2007, 11:02 PM
I bet you could fill a phone booth with the people who hold that opinion. But whatever makes you happy..........


Well, in the USA real "patriots" saw it differently of course ....... :D :D :D

Condi

suwanee4712
05-04-2007, 06:17 AM
Well, in the USA real "patriots" saw it differently of course ....... :D :D :D

Condi


I see no correlation between patriotism and what happens in something as trivial as womens tennis. As many here keep reminding you, you're the only one around here who is that narrow minded in your thinking. The rest of us simply enjoy the sport and the people who played - regardless to where they are from.

CEvertFan
05-04-2007, 11:55 PM
No one here including CONDI can deny that Evert was indeed a pretty darn good grass court player. ;)

Condoleezza
05-05-2007, 12:18 AM
I see no correlation between patriotism and what happens in something as trivial as womens tennis. As many here keep reminding you, you're the only one around here who is that narrow minded in your thinking. The rest of us simply enjoy the sport and the people who played - regardless to where they are from.

Come on - do you really want to deny that it is only the USA (and maybe Australia) where Graf's role as GOAT is in question??? In Europe, in India, in China, in South America there is general consensus that Graf is #1. In the USA there is not. Because they just LOVE to have one of their own on top.

I don't criticize that! But to DENY that there is a HUGE anti-Graf and pro-Seles/Navi bias in America among fans and the media is ridiculous.
It was the same with Lendl, today is the same with Henin.
They are threats!

Condi

Condoleezza
05-05-2007, 12:20 AM
No one here including CONDI can deny that Evert was indeed a pretty darn good grass court player. ;)

OK, she was worse on indoor carpet.
But winning only 3 Wimbledons in a clown era is nothing to go ga-ga about ... ;)

Condi

obanaghan
05-05-2007, 08:16 AM
Condi, You can't just dismiss the 70s and early 80s as a "clown" era and move on. Athletes face the challenges and the opponents of their day.

I always found it interesting that Steffi Graf could pulverize Evert and her many clones by pounding inside out forehands behind them on their backhand side. Evert was constantly saying, "Yeah" as winner after winner flew past her. Maybe Steffi was the new ring leader in another "clown era" because the Maleevas etc. were no challenege to her at all. She got to play a bunch of pigeons and a couple of past their "clown prime days" old ladies.

To say that is stupid so please evaluate your ridiculous comments regarding the Evert-Navratilova hegemony. It is true that the natural injuries sustained by Austin and Jaeger had the same effect for CE and MN that the deliberate stabbing did for SG; it allowed them to dominate longer than they would have otherwise.

We will never know because we can't replay the past but what would have happened if Evert and Navratilova had played in Paris in either 1982 or 1983? The French in 1982 particularly would have favored Chris. She at that point had never lost to MN on clay so would she have exhibited more confidence and MN had not established her aura over CE. Even in 1983 while MN was clearly cruising, she stumbled and fell to Horvath. At that point she did not "own" Chris yet and not on clay. Martina was still a fragile opponent mentally at that point. In 1988 a commentator said that she lost to Zvereva in 1988 in Paris because she could not get over her demolition by Evert in Houston a few weeks earlier. A match to the number 4 player bothered her that much and after all the wins she had she let that effect her and lose to a lollipop queen.

Evert blew her chance in 1982(losing to Jaeger in the SF) to keep her mental edge and as she faced MN on faster surfaces MN steamrolled and built more and more confidence and CE lost more and more belief that she could win over MN. The mental edge was her weapon and without it she was pretty much defenseless. Perhaps if she had won over Martina on clay at Paris in either 82 or 83 she would had the belief to win the gamepoint for 4-0 at Wimbledon in 1984 or win the break back at the US Open in 1984 with Martina serving a short second serve at 15-40. You can't replay them but this points out that every encounter and every missed opportunity really matter and can be the grain of rice that tips the scale forever.

That was the interesting thing in the Rivals book was that the matches highlighted mostly showed MN holding the mental edges to win in the '78 Eastbourne and Wimbledon, 1981 US and 1981 Aussie Open matches. These were before the 1982-1986 run by MN. I would like to know what happend at the 1982 Aussie Open that CE prevailed. I know the grass bounced slower and higher there but still...

When Monica Seles came around Graf faced a mentally tougher opponent than herself and someone who could literally hit the hell out of the ball off BOTH sides. With her rather one dimensional game exposed Steffi stammered. Seles played the heavy game better than Graf. Steffi was great but clearly she benefited from the attack on Monica. I NEVER understood how Hingis owned Seles but the mobility probably allowed her to hang with Seles and draw an error that the Williams' would not give up.

Condoleezza
05-05-2007, 09:25 AM
....It is true that the natural injuries sustained by Austin and Jaeger had the same effect for CE and Mn that the deliberate stabbing did for SG; it allowed them to dominate longer than they would have otherwise. ....

The point is we DON'T know whether Navi/Evert/Graf would NOT have dominated as long as they did without the Austin injuries and the Seles stabbing.
For me ONE BIG difference is, though, that Austin wasn't able to compete but Seles was. SHE could have played again 6 weeks later; at least at the AO 94 she should have returned to the tour. It was a conscious decision to not do that.
The OTHER BIG difference is that Navi/Evert had no excuses in 79/80 for Austin overtaking them in the WTA rankings. Graf on the other hand went down in 90/91 due to a high-profile media scandal of a scale unprecedented in women's professional tennis until then. Don't forget that she didn't lose a single match against Seles for exactly TWO years after the FO 90 final loss!

...
When Monica Seles came around Graf faced a mentally tougher opponent than herself and someone who could literally hit the hell out of the ball off BOTH sides. With her rather one dimensional game exposed Steffi stammered. ...

Funny that even in her LOSING matches (at least FO 90, FO 92 and AO 93; don't know about Berlin 90) Steffi hit more winners than Monica. She dominated most rallies but Seles was extremely consistent, was able to hang in, to counter-punch now and then - and to wait for Graf making UEs. Which she did in those 3 slam finals. The Wimbledon 1992 and the San Antonio 1991 finals showed what Graf could do with Seles on faster courts - dominate almost every rally at will. In Hamburg 1991 (on clay) Graf was able to hold her UE percentage down as well beating Seles in 3 sets.

At the YEC 98 quarters and the FO 99 semis (both won by Graf) - and that is very interesting! - both made almost the same amount of UEs. Graf was visibly slower after her reconstructive knee surgery in 97 and played less aggressive than in earlier years - but more consistently.

Condi

ATPballkid
05-05-2007, 09:35 AM
Funny that even in her LOSING matches (at least FO 90, FO 92 and AO 93; don't know about Berlin 90) Steffi hit more winners than Monica. Condi

SOMEBODY had to be the #1 player in women's tennis in 1992, son ... it might as well be the player who won 4 of the 5 biggest events in women's tennis in 1991 and 1992 (3 of the 4 Slams and the Tour Championships in both years) ...

Name someone other than Monica Seles who won 10 of 12 consecutive tournaments at the 5 biggest events over a 26 month period (the 4 Grand Slam events and Tour Championships:

November 1990 WTA Tour Championships *
------------------------------------------------------
January 1991 Australian Open
June 1991 French Open
September 1991 U.S. Open
November 1991 WTA Tour Championships *
------------------------------------------------------
January 1992 Australian Open
June 1992 French Open
September 1992 U.S. Open
November 1992 WTA Tour Championships *
------------------------------------------------------
January 1993 Australian Open


* then called the Virginia Slims Championships.

ATPballkid
05-05-2007, 09:39 AM
The point is we DON'T know whether Graf would NOT have dominated as long as they did without the Austin injuries and the Seles stabbing.
Condi

__________________ GRAF______ SELES


1990 WTA Championships____ SEMIS___WON


1991 Australian_______ QUARTERS ___ WON
1991 French_________ SEMIS_______ WON
1991 Wimbledon______ WON________ DNP
1991 U.S. Open_______ SEMIS_______ WON
1991 WTA Championships _ QUARTERS__ WON


1992 Australian_______ DNP_________ WON
1992 French_________ FINAL________ WON
1992 Wimbledon______ WON_________ FINAL
1992 U.S. Open______QUARTERS______ WON
1992 WTA Championships _FIRST ROUND__ WON

1993 Australian________ FINAL________ WON

Interesting that the ONLY win that Graf had at a major event other than the 1992 Wimbledon was the ONLY event that Monica Seles did not play.



So ... what kind of an impact did the knife of Gunther Parche have?

How did Graf do in the next 5 major events AFTER the knife of Gunther Parche made sure that Monica Seles was no longer dominating women's tennis at the age of 19 years, 4 months after dominating in these earlier years?

___________________#2 GRAF_________#1 SELES

APRIL 1993 ------------------------------- STABBED

1993 French___________ WON*
1993 Wimbledon________ WON*
1993 U.S. Open_________ WON*
1993 WTA Championships__ WON*

1994 Australian__________ WON*


At what point in here were we supposed to have just forgotten that Monica Seles was stabbed by a jealous Graf fan?

Andres
05-05-2007, 03:25 PM
Condoleezza was banned!

CEvertFan
05-05-2007, 04:56 PM
Condoleezza was banned!


LOL I saw. Break out the champagne!

tennus
05-05-2007, 09:41 PM
Condoleezza was banned!

LOL ! Too much clowning about ?;)

CEvertFan
05-06-2007, 04:04 PM
Who would you consider to be better on grass? Evert, King or Court?


Evert's head to head on grass:

Evert vs Court 2-2
Evert vs King 4-3

Wingshellphelp
05-06-2007, 04:11 PM
Who would you consider to be better on grass? Evert, King or Court?


Evert's head to head on grass:

Evert vs Court 2-2
Evert vs King 4-3

Evert. Easily

tennus
05-07-2007, 02:35 AM
Who would you consider to be better on grass? Evert, King or Court?


Evert's head to head on grass:

Evert vs Court 2-2
Evert vs King 4-3

Interesting one. I'd have to say Court. Evert was 12 years younger than Court and is a little hard to line up against Court in her prime. Billy Jean is only 8 months younger than Court with Court dominating hd to hd on grass. Read an interesting ditto on Court in "The Rivals"; Court was identified as having 6" greater wingspan than what is normal for her height. Damn hard to pass at the net. :)

suwanee4712
05-07-2007, 07:38 AM
Who would you consider to be better on grass? Evert, King or Court?


Evert's head to head on grass:

Evert vs Court 2-2
Evert vs King 4-3

I love Chris' record on grass. It's proof positive of her greatness on even her weakest surface. Plus it always forced her to go for her shots a little more which made for some exciting tennis to say the least.

I think that both Evert and Court are actually better players than King overall. But on grass, I'd have to go with King. Her 6 Wimbledon singles titles is an awesome feat in a time when the game was dominated by serve and volleyers. Plus I think its so impressive that on grass King could remain so competitive into her late 30's.

Past her prime, she pushed Chris in the 1978 QF, beat a young, up and coming Hana on Center Court in the 3rd round in 1979, then pushed Tracy to 3 sets in the QF. Then there is that wonderful grudge match in the 1980 Wimbledon QF where she took Martina to something like 12-10 in the 3rd.

Her win over Tracy and her 3 set semifinal clash with Chris at Wimbledon in 1982 are two treasured matches for me. She really stretched Chris that day and was fighting to the bitter end with all kinds of break point chances. And like a tigress, Chris fought them all off - and looked so lovely in white with red trim while doing it. ;)

CEvertFan
05-07-2007, 10:30 AM
I love Chris' record on grass. It's proof positive of her greatness on even her weakest surface. Plus it always forced her to go for her shots a little more which made for some exciting tennis to say the least.

I think that both Evert and Court are actually better players than King overall. But on grass, I'd have to go with King. Her 6 Wimbledon singles titles is an awesome feat in a time when the game was dominated by serve and volleyers. Plus I think its so impressive that on grass King could remain so competitive into her late 30's.

Past her prime, she pushed Chris in the 1978 QF, beat a young, up and coming Hana on Center Court in the 3rd round in 1979, then pushed Tracy to 3 sets in the QF. Then there is that wonderful grudge match in the 1980 Wimbledon QF where she took Martina to something like 12-10 in the 3rd.

Her win over Tracy and her 3 set semifinal clash with Chris at Wimbledon in 1982 are two treasured matches for me. She really stretched Chris that day and was fighting to the bitter end with all kinds of break point chances. And like a tigress, Chris fought them all off - and looked so lovely in white with red trim while doing it. ;)

If you have those matches I'd REALLY be interested in getting them from you. Let me know what needs to be done in order to make that happen.

federerfanatic
05-07-2007, 04:48 PM
On grass I would go with:

1. Court
2. King
3. Evert


All 3 are great grass court players though. I dont believe Court or King would dominate Evert in her prime on grass to the extent Navratilova did by any means(and I am not forgetting Evert even gave Navratilova some great matches at Wimbledon BTW). Some may question my putting Court over King given she only has half the Wimbledon titles. However I take into account Court's record at all 3 grass court slams at the time, she has 1 more U.S Open the Court. Then also even considering the sometimes incomplete fields in Australia, her 11 titles there are worthy of benefit of doubt to somewhere from 5-7 perhaps although it is hard to say, and hard to say how many King would have won there too. Mainly though in head to head, Court had the edge in their biggest matches at Wimbledon and the U.S Open on grass. I honestly believe watching old clips that Court underperformed at Wimbledon for some reason. However that was just the way it was, and if Wimbledon was the only slam like it is today I would have no choice but to rate Court clearly below someone like King on grass. However back then there were more grass court events then just Wimbledon.

suwanee4712
05-07-2007, 08:48 PM
If you have those matches I'd REALLY be interested in getting them from you. Let me know what needs to be done in order to make that happen.

I sent you an email through this site. Haven't done that before, so hopefully it works. :)

CEvertFan
05-17-2007, 02:52 AM
That is true. Graf and Evert never played each other in their mutual primes. Evert had all 6 of her wins over Graf from 1985-before when Evert was in her prime and Graf was not. Graf won all 8 of their matches from 1986-beyond when Evert was starting her decline and Graf was coming into her prime. So nothing to tell either way from their head to head, no advantage to Evert apparent, no advantage to Graf apparent. All complete speculation as far as head to head matchup goes.

That is unlike the Navratilova-Graf head to head though where even an aging Navratilova managed her share of wins over prime Graf, and took sets off her virtualy every meeting.

Well, Chris did take the 1st set off Graf in '89 when they played in the VS of Florida early in the year, which was played on clay. The score was 4-6, 6-2, 6-3 for Graf.

BTURNER
07-27-2007, 03:41 PM
I love Chris' record on grass. It's proof positive of her greatness on even her weakest surface. Plus it always forced her to go for her shots a little more which made for some exciting tennis to say the least.

I think that both Evert and Court are actually better players than King overall. But on grass, I'd have to go with King. Her 6 Wimbledon singles titles is an awesome feat in a time when the game was dominated by serve and volleyers. Plus I think its so impressive that on grass King could remain so competitive into her late 30's.

Past her prime, she pushed Chris in the 1978 QF, beat a young, up and coming Hana on Center Court in the 3rd round in 1979, then pushed Tracy to 3 sets in the QF. Then there is that wonderful grudge match in the 1980 Wimbledon QF where she took Martina to something like 12-10 in the 3rd.

Her win over Tracy and her 3 set semifinal clash with Chris at Wimbledon in 1982 are two treasured matches for me. She really stretched Chris that day and was fighting to the bitter end with all kinds of break point chances. And like a tigress, Chris fought them all off - and looked so lovely in white with red trim while doing it. ;)
I always viewed Evert as the second best grass courter of her era virtually her entire career. Just behind King or Court at their best , or Gooolagong at her best, then Nav.at her best. Unfortunately the American public is not known for respecting and admiring consistency. She actually had fewer early round losses than ANY of these ladies on the grass courts of Australia, US open or Wimbledon. Very fine career.

BTURNER
07-27-2007, 03:45 PM
I always viewed Evert as the second best grass courter of her era virtually her entire career. Just behind King or Court at their best , or Gooolagong at her best, then Nav.at her best. Unfortunately the American public is not known for respecting and admiring consistency. She actually had fewer early round losses than ANY of these ladies on the grass courts of Australia, US open or Wimbledon. Very fine career.

When these ladies produced their very best and were in top shape, She'd loose, if they were a bit off, she'd win.

BTURNER
07-27-2007, 03:50 PM
1. Navratilova
2. graf
3.court
4 Evert
5. King
6. V Williams
7. Goolagong

BTURNER
07-27-2007, 03:57 PM
Come on - do you really want to deny that it is only the USA (and maybe Australia) where Graf's role as GOAT is in question??? In Europe, in India, in China, in South America there is general consensus that Graf is #1. In the USA there is not. Because they just LOVE to have one of their own on top.

I don't criticize that! But to DENY that there is a HUGE anti-Graf and pro-Seles/Navi bias in America among fans and the media is ridiculous.
It was the same with Lendl, today is the same with Henin.
They are threats!

Condi

1. GRAF, 2. WILLS, 3. LENGLEN, 4. COURT 5. NAV 6. EVERT 7. CONALLY 8 SERENA WILLIAMS 9 KING, 10 BROUGH

BTURNER
07-27-2007, 03:59 PM
How could I have forgotten Justin Henin!! I'll throw out Brough

BTURNER
07-28-2007, 09:17 AM
I always viewed Evert as the second best grass courter of her era virtually her entire career. Just behind King or Court at their best , or Gooolagong at her best, then Nav.at her best. Unfortunately the American public is not known for respecting and admiring consistency. She actually had fewer early round losses than ANY of these ladies on the grass courts of Australia, US open or Wimbledon. Very fine career.

SOURCE:Total Tennis: Counting only slams held on grass that these ladies entered. Court failed to make it to the semis 7 times in her career, King failed to reach the semis 18 times, Goolagong failed to get to the semifinals of a slam on grass 12 times, Navratilova came up short 7 times. Evert only the single infamous Kathy Jordan loss at wimbledon. She made the semis on each of 5 Australians she entered, each of the 4 US opens held on grass during her career and of course a phenominal 17 out of 18 Wimbledons.

BTURNER
07-28-2007, 09:41 AM
As for Graf she lost twice on Australian grass 83 & 84, then 4 times before the semis at Wimbledon including an unprecedented 1st round loss against McNeil

CEvertFan
07-28-2007, 03:02 PM
1. GRAF, 2. WILLS, 3. LENGLEN, 4. COURT 5. NAV 6. EVERT 7. CONALLY 8 SERENA WILLIAMS 9 KING, 10 BROUGH


Serena Williams over King?!?! You cannot be serious!!!! Sorry, I just had to throw that Mac quote in there... ;)

BTURNER
07-28-2007, 03:38 PM
It may be a stretch, but any GOAT ranking will be, Evertfan. The fact is King barely proved herself on clay and never proofed herself on hard courts to my satisfaction. I feel she was more of a grass court specialist, than a GOAT player. I suspect Serena will end up with about 10-12 slams by the end of her career.

BTURNER
07-28-2007, 03:42 PM
Evertfan, how 'bout your top ten GOAT list, and your grass list? You can throw in a top ten clay list for the heck of it.

BTURNER
07-28-2007, 03:55 PM
1. Evert 2. Graf 3 Wills, 4. Lenglen 5. Court 6. Henin 7. Seles 8 Connally, 9 Navratilova 10 Sanchez

BTURNER
07-28-2007, 04:06 PM
I just realized I never finished my grass list!
1. Navratilova 2. GRAF 3. COURT 4 EVERT 5. KING 6. CONNALLY 7 CHAMBERS 8 GOOLAGONG 9 MALLORY10 V WILLIAMS

BTURNER
07-28-2007, 04:25 PM
1. Graf 2. S Williams 3. Seles 4. Navratilova 5. Hingus, 6. Evert 7. V Williams 8 Capriati 9 Austin 10 Davenport

CEvertFan
07-29-2007, 10:11 PM
Here are my lists. I hope you like them. I don't just try to take into account the majors, but they are the most important criteria that I go by. Lindsey Davenport might be the only exception because even though she won only one US Open and one AO, I consider her to be one of the finest hard court players of all time as she was extremely comfortable on that surface as well as very difficult to beat and won most of her 51 singles titles on hard courts.



Top 10 GOAT list:

1. Navratilova
2. Evert
3. Graf
4. Court
5. Wills Moody
6. Lenglen
7. King
8. Seles
9. S. Williams
10. Connolly

Top 10 Clay list:

1. Evert
2. Graf
3. Lenglen
4. Wills Moody
5. Seles
6. Court
7. Henin
8. Sanchez-Vicario
9. Connolly
10. Navratilova


Top 10 Grass list:

1. Navratilova
2. Wills Moody
3. Graf
4. Evert
5. Lenglen
6. Court
7. King
8. V. Williams
9. Goolagong
10. Lambert-Chambers


Top 10 Hard Court list:

1. Graf
2. Evert
3. Navratilova
4. Seles
5. Davenport
6. Austin
7. S. Williams
8. V. Williams
9. Hingis
10. Henin

BTURNER
07-30-2007, 09:47 PM
1. GOAT list: Good list ! question why you put Nav, Evert above Graf ? What's the reasoning? I think you underestimate Moureen connolly at #10 That woman was unbeatable in virtually any slam for over 3 years! You've got below King or Williams. Just Don't agree there!
2. Clay: we are almost compatable!
3. Grass: LOL I'll admit to total stupidity for leaving Wills off mine. Don't know how I managed that. But you left off Connolly who owned ever grass tournament she entered for three years with nary the loss of a set!! How does V Williams get there and those two don't?
4. Hard: this is tricky because I don't know the records of a King or Court on hard courts because no slams were on hard courts. suspect they were better than we know! Evert has three US opens while Nav has 4 and two were beating Evert! I just was not impressed with Evert who won her last open in 82 with two times not even making the semis on the cement. Her worst showing in any slam!

BTURNER
07-30-2007, 09:49 PM
Thanks, Evertfan! Always good to get another perspective! You obviously know the subject well!!

BTURNER
07-30-2007, 09:56 PM
I agree about Davenport, too on hard courts. This was true of Sabatini as well. In many ways Gabby was much harder to beat on cement than on clay or grass. she beat them all on hard courts but only one slam? Sad waste of her talent in the biggest moments in Tennis.

CEvertFan
07-31-2007, 01:04 AM
1. GOAT list: Good list ! question why you put Nav, Evert above Graf ? What's the reasoning? I think you underestimate Moureen connolly at #10 That woman was unbeatable in virtually any slam for over 3 years! You've got below King or Williams. Just Don't agree there!
2. Clay: we are almost compatable!
3. Grass: LOL I'll admit to total stupidity for leaving Wills off mine. Don't know how I managed that. But you left off Connolly who owned ever grass tournament she entered for three years with nary the loss of a set!! How does V Williams get there and those two don't?
4. Hard: this is tricky because I don't know the records of a King or Court on hard courts because no slams were on hard courts. suspect they were better than we know! Evert has three US opens while Nav has 4 and two were beating Evert! I just was not impressed with Evert who won her last open in 82 with two times not even making the semis on the cement. Her worst showing in any slam!


I put Navratilova and Evert over Graf because they have both achieved more than Steffi. Majors count for a lot, yes but not for everything. You don't see many experts putting Margaret Court as the GOAT and she has more majors than Steffi does.

As for Connolly I ranked her lower because her career was unfortunately too short and longevity is a part of being great. I probably should have put her higher than 10 though because she was quite dominating in her time from what I have read about her.

I left Connolly off the grass list for the same reason but she probably should be on it as well, but then who would come off?

Evert was very consistent on all surfaces, not just clay. If anything Martina and Chris should swap places and Evert should go to 3rd. I also do not know how well Court or King did on hard courts and the only thing I could go by without doing some MAJOR research was to use the US Open as my primary criteria.

BTURNER
07-31-2007, 07:06 PM
Well, what criteria ARE you using to supplement the slams? Is weeks at #1, total tiles, money won? I am trying to imagine in what category Steffi slumps? Better be a pretty big downfall to justify voting against someone who has 22 slams dispersed with at least 4 of each slam, a golden slam and over 5 slams on each surface. Martina only managed two slams on clay, Evert only 3 on hard courts.

BTURNER
07-31-2007, 07:11 PM
I think there needs to be one heck of a good reason to displace that record. It's not like she did not win a share of master titles, lipton intl, german titles to supplement the slams. What hasn't she won enough?

Borat72
08-01-2007, 12:06 PM
Here are my lists. I hope you like them. I don't just try to take into account the majors, but they are the most important criteria that I go by. Lindsey Davenport might be the only exception because even though she won only one US Open and one AO, I consider her to be one of the finest hard court players of all time as she was extremely comfortable on that surface as well as very difficult to beat and won most of her 51 singles titles on hard courts.



Top 10 GOAT list:

1. Navratilova
2. Evert
3. Graf
4. Court
5. Wills Moody
6. Lenglen
7. King
8. Seles
9. S. Williams
10. Connolly

Top 10 Clay list:

1. Evert
2. Graf
3. Lenglen
4. Wills Moody
5. Seles
6. Court
7. Henin
8. Sanchez-Vicario
9. Connolly
10. Navratilova


Top 10 Grass list:

1. Navratilova
2. Wills Moody
3. Graf
4. Evert
5. Lenglen
6. Court
7. King
8. V. Williams
9. Goolagong
10. Lambert-Chambers


Top 10 Hard Court list:

1. Graf
2. Evert
3. Navratilova
4. Seles
5. Davenport
6. Austin
7. S. Williams
8. V. Williams
9. Hingis
10. Henin


Navratilova is #10 on clay, #1 on grass and #3 on hard courts.
Graf is #2 on clay, #3 on grass and #1 on hard courts.
Evert is #1 on clay, #4 (!) on grass and #2 on hard courts.

So Graf is better than Navratilova on two surfaces (on HC far better even). Same against Evert.
Why then is Steffi only #3 in total??

CEvertFan
08-01-2007, 04:34 PM
Navratilova is #10 on clay, #1 on grass and #3 on hard courts.
Graf is #2 on clay, #3 on grass and #1 on hard courts.
Evert is #1 on clay, #4 (!) on grass and #2 on hard courts.

So Graf is better than Navratilova on two surfaces (on HC far better even). Same against Evert.
Why then is Steffi only #3 in total??

Navratilova and Evert have far more singles titles, better longevity, and not having have had their major competition stabbed in the back so that they could win more majors.

BTURNER
08-01-2007, 08:38 PM
Evert & Nav. lucked out having both Jaeger & Austin 'disappear' early in their careers to injuries or burnout, particularly Evert. Should we take the '85 and '86 French titles from her, how many Italian or German opens , Liptons, Slims championships presuming at least some times Evert would have lost before the final to Austin or Jaeger. Doesn't seem fair to her does it. So lets honor ALL of Graf's slams as legitimate. Seles' stabbing is enough of a tragedy without tarnishing Graf too. The reason Graf deserves GOAT above Court, Nav. and Evert is not by virtue of number alone, impressive as 22 is. She is the only player who was consistent enough, not just to reach semis equally on any surface, against virtually any player, She won the titles equally on any surface. Evert won 10 of 18 on clay. Navratilova won 12 of 18 on grass. Court won 19 of 24 on grass. As for Steffi, just what was her best surface? Was it the clay with 6 in France, the grass at Wimbledon with 6, or the four in Australia + the 5 at the US open? Did not matter. That is my definition of GOAT. The 9 German titles, italian titles, 5 season ending championships on indoor carpet, the 4 Liptons, 3 Canadians, 4 hilton head Islands etc are supplements. OOPs I know why she does not deserve it. No EAstbournes!

BTURNER
08-01-2007, 08:42 PM
Note that her win /loss record is tenths of a percent less than Evert's, The difference between 0.90 and 0.895, That is just not enough of a distinction to throw away 3 slams. And the 0.90 of Evert depends on who's stats your looking at.

BTURNER
08-01-2007, 08:46 PM
As for "longevity" and"most matches won' If the carreers compared are of a normal, reasonable length, Does not matter if your percentage drops precipitously while grabbing another OKlahoma OPen

BTURNER
08-01-2007, 10:52 PM
BY THE WAY, Evertfan and I have posted our lists and taken our hits. How about you Borat?

BTURNER
09-01-2010, 12:02 PM
I revive to ask a question. Evert's early success in majors is astonishing considering she just walked on the tour and reached the semis or betters in 71 Open, 72 Wimbledon and Open, 73 Wimbledon and Open , and 74 Aussie, Wimbledon and Open all on fast grass, and before being truly and fully established as number 1 and mature on a tour full of S/v's with nothing but years of grass time. What I don't know is how much experience she would have had on grass before, say 72 or 73 in her junior tournaments. How much grass time might she have had before turning pro? There is little information on the on her earlier success. Just general bland stuff about her success an Orange bowl and noting her dominance in junior events. Anyone have any clues that might give context to this