PDA

View Full Version : Just wanted to say Steffi Graf is in no way the best ever!


davey25
10-28-2004, 05:46 AM
I just want to say Steffi Graf is definetely not the best ever and it annoys the heck of me when I here she is. Here are some obvious reasons:

1)She does not have the most slams record, Court has it
2)She does not have the most Wimbledon record, Navratilova has it, in fact Graf is only 3rd
3)She does not have the most French record, Evert has it
4)She has neither the most U.S opens or most Australians record
5)She does not have the most tournament wins record, she is 3rd behind Navratilova and Evert, a distant third
6)She would not have the most weeks straight at #1 record if there were rankings when Lenglen and Wills played
7)She does not have the record for most consecutive years winning a slam, Evert does at 13 to Graf's 10
8)The year she and Navratilova and Graf were both closest to being in their primes together, 87, Navratilova owned her in big matches, smoking her in the Wimbledon and U.S open finals, and narrowly losing in the French final, the surface that most favors Steffi against Martina
9)When she and Seles were both in their primes Seles dominated winning 7 of 9 slams, her only two coming at Wimbledon, again the surface that most favored Steffi against Monica
10)She set no significant records even with her chief rival stabbed prior to half of her slams being won. Hello, her chief rival was stabbed halfway through her eventual slam wins and she still couldnt break a single significant record even with that

HeavyBall
10-28-2004, 06:13 AM
Hey! It's good to see some enthusiastic women participating in the TW forums!

At least I assume you are. How else could you care so much about something like this?

drakulie
10-28-2004, 06:17 AM
Graf is the greatest. Live with it!

chad shaver
10-28-2004, 07:28 AM
Just wanted to say that you have way too much free time on your hands....

rhubarb
10-28-2004, 07:40 AM
Hey! It's good to see some enthusiastic women participating in the TW forums!

At least I assume you are. How else could you care so much about something like this?

Interesting...why would a woman care about this, and a man not care? Just curious ;)

Kevin Patrick
10-28-2004, 09:40 AM
HeavyBall,
good to see chauvinism alive & well. Are your women allowed to vote in Fort Worth, TX yet?

Davey,
I think you're stretching a little on some of your points. Yes Court has the Slam record(24) but half of them were at the Australian Open which throughout the 60s & 70s didn't have very good fields, they were almost exclusively played just by Australians. I have many old tennis magazines, the Australian Open was not considered an important event by the media of the time.
Virtually no respected tennis journalist(Steve Flink, Bud Collins, etc) would rank Court above Graf, Navratilova, or Evert.

You think Steffi was closest to her prime in '87 when she was 17? That's like saying Federer was in his prime in '03 as opposed to '04.
Check out Steffi's records against Martina in '88 & '89.

Graf doesn't have any significant records?She became one of only 3 women in history to win the Calendar Grand Slam in '88 & is one of only 2 players to win every Slam event & the Olympics. She is the only female player to currently hold all 4 GS titles twice(she won all 4 from '93 to '94, in addition to her Slam year of '88)Graf made 13 straight GS finals from '87 to'90, winning 9 of them.
Her most impressive achievement IMO, is to be the only player, male or female, to win every slam 4 times. Nobody has won every slam even 3 times.

I agree Graf would not have won as many slams if Seles hadn't been stabbed but as it stands, Graf has some amazing records(some of them pre-stabbing).

Camilio Pascual
10-28-2004, 09:50 AM
Just out of curiousity, Davey25, who do you think was the greatest woman player and why?

@wright
10-28-2004, 10:10 AM
She won the golden grand slam! Whether she is the greatest female player or not, she is better than you! Steffi Graf = many, many slams & you = no slams or records.

HeavyBall
10-28-2004, 10:29 AM
rhubarb is right. I stand corrected. Women shouldn't care about this topic any more than men.

Dedans Penthouse
10-28-2004, 11:42 AM
Seles IN HER PRIME (not the post-stabbing cow she's unfortunatly remembered as) was imho the best. A fearless, relentless competitor, she was as much a groundstroking machine with a KILLER mindset. She not only had the weapons to knock the other girls off the court, but she also had that rare Tracy Austin "I ain't scared of anyone" killer instinct upstairs, a "mental weapon" that spooked the likes of Martina Navratilova whose "game" including intimidating her opponents--but that "intimidation" factor did not include (when healthy) one Tracy Austin. And Monica Seles was cut from the same fearless/killer mold as Austin, albeit with a bigger, much bigger game. my 2c.

Graf on the other hand (or, rather on the other feet), had the best "pins."

crosscourt
10-28-2004, 11:54 AM
I agree with Sean. When she was in her prime, Seles was absoulutely dominant, and Graf was one of the players she dominated. Seles was the best I ever saw.

davey25
10-28-2004, 02:25 PM
I would choose Navratilova the best ever. However I would also recognize Lenglen, Wills, Connoly, or Court could be chosen as the best ever. Evert, Graf, Seles(because of the stabbing likely), and King are among the best ever, in order words they are in the group of "all-time greats" but could not be seriously considered as the best ever.

How can one diminish Court's Australian Open record, yet dismiss Graf winning 10 out of 15 slams directly in the period after Seles was stabbed. Hello, any equality in standards here. Court missed having any chief rival from about 5 of her 11 Aussie wins, Graf missed having her former dominant rival present or the same as before in 10 of 10 93-96 Slam wins. I fail to see how Court had it easier of the two. I certainly do not get the impression reading Bud Collin's book he rates Graf above Court, Navratilova, or Connoly, among others. Her greatest direct compliment of Graf is "she and Navratilova are the best players from Europe since Lenglen". Rather tame I think.

Graf does have the record as only player to win each slam four times. The more each, ifs, ands, withs you add in though the less principle the record is though. Anyway had slams been valued the same way back in the 20s and 30s Wills and Lenglen would have almost certainly done so with ease, albeit with weaker competition. Also what are the odds of her winning the French and U.S open twice more each between 93-96(or still winning an additional French in 99) had Seles not been stabbed. As for her Golden Slam record there was no Olympics in 53 or 70, in fact no Olympics any year during that period. Thus that as a basis for her superiority is irrelevant. The only player to hold all 4 slams twice? Do you think there is any way on gods green earth she would have managed to win "four straight" slams in the year directly after Seles stabbing had it not occured, for her second time of the feat. Regardless how you think the Graf-Seles matchup would have unfolded you surely cant think that. Anyway only calander slams are recognized to most people.

If Graf wasnt in the start of the perimetres of her extended prime in 87 she wouldnt have been able to only lose 2 matches the whole year. Federer did not do that in 2003. Navratilova in her prime in 88 or 89? I hardly think Navratilova in her prime would lose twice in the same year to Zvereva in straight sets, or get clobbered by Zina Garrison 6-0, 6-4 in a U.S open quarterfinal, or almost lose to Fairbank-Nidiffer at Wimbledon. Ok maybe 1 or 2 matches like that a year, like her loss to Horvath at the 83 French, but not that many for a year she was in her prime. So I think 87 was the definetely the closest you could get Navratilova and Graf to being in their primes together.

Lastly Seles absolutely did dominate Graf in 91-93. 7 slams to Graf's 2. I dont know why the media hyped their rivalry, it was no rivalry; just as Graf had no rival when Seles left, Graf was no rival to Seles when she was there. Even Federer-Roddick is more of a rivalry, with Roddick ending the year, albeit undeservedly at #1 in 2003. One cannot simply dismiss the Seles stabbing when judging Graf's numbers. Especially when it means Graf spent only 3 years of her clustered years of slams 87-96, which she won 21 of 22, with a fellow all-time great in her prime. Court, King, Navratilova, Evert, all had more than that. Seles had it for the entire period of her clustered slams win, 91-early 93 when she won 8 of her 9. Her post-stabbing wins are certainly tainted.

gmlasam
10-28-2004, 03:54 PM
I just want to say Steffi Graf is definetely not the best ever and it annoys the heck of me when I here she is. Here are some obvious reasons:

1)She does not have the most slams record, Court has it
2)She does not have the most Wimbledon record, Navratilova has it, in fact Graf is only 3rd
3)She does not have the most French record, Evert has it
4)She has neither the most U.S opens or most Australians record
5)She does not have the most tournament wins record, she is 3rd behind Navratilova and Evert, a distant third
6)She would not have the most weeks straight at #1 record if there were rankings when Lenglen and Wills played
7)She does not have the record for most consecutive years winning a slam, Evert does at 13 to Graf's 10
8)The year she and Navratilova and Graf were both closest to being in their primes together, 87, Navratilova owned her in big matches, smoking her in the Wimbledon and U.S open finals, and narrowly losing in the French final, the surface that most favors Steffi against Martina
9)When she and Seles were both in their primes Seles dominated winning 7 of 9 slams, her only two coming at Wimbledon, again the surface that most favored Steffi against Monica
10)She set no significant records even with her chief rival stabbed prior to half of her slams being won. Hello, her chief rival was stabbed halfway through her eventual slam wins and she still couldnt break a single significant record even with that

In 1988, Graf won the "Golden Slam". That means in the same year she won the Australian, French, Wimbledon, U.S.Open, and won gold in the 1988 Olympics. What Male or Female has done that since??? I think she is the greatest indeed.

Phil
10-28-2004, 04:58 PM
Have to go with Sean on this one. Seles won 8 slams before her 20th b'day-barring injury (and her attempted murder)-she would have probably won another 10 or 15...really. Graff was a fantastic competitor, but she won most of her slams during a period when women's tennis was as WEAK as it ever was (and that's REALLY weak)-Navritalova and Evert were ready to retire and, really, there was NO ONE ELSE. The rest of the women basically conceeded the match to her before hitting the first ball. That is until that freight train of a groundstroker Monica came along-the Monica Express ABUSED Graff and anyone else who had the nerve to face her.

NoBadMojo
10-28-2004, 05:57 PM
i dont think so..seles with those really technically unsound groundstrokes and cumbersome footwork would have become injured (most likely) anyay, just as she has been when she came back after the stabbing. she was the first of the women to hit it really hard from both wings though. not that much different than roddick really....she had a killer forehand and killer backhand and roddick has a killer serve and killer forehand....now roddick seems to have a variety of malady;s too. you put it out there at 100% on every point and chances are you arent talkin longevity. my .o2

BiGGieStuFF
10-28-2004, 08:16 PM
For those who say monica seles dominated graf. Both were great players but Graf does own seles 10-5 in head to head matches, with Graf winning the last 7 of 10 I like both players and each has their strengths but to me it's too close to call actually. You guys could argue forever but I lean towards graf because of them legs :drool: Plus I got an autograph from her which was awesome. Had to fight and scratch but I got it. Too bad my roomate took the hat I got the autograph on :(

Phil
10-28-2004, 08:20 PM
BiGGieStuFF - I haven't bothered to look-up the head-to-head records, but how many of Graff's victories over Monica were post-stabbing? How many of Monica's victories were in GS finals or semi-finals? Someone who comes out of nowhere and, on Steffi's turf wins 8 Slams in less than three years...you have to admit, that's domination, regardless of head-to-head records.

BiGGieStuFF
10-28-2004, 08:41 PM
BiGGieStuFF - I haven't bothered to look-up the head-to-head records, but how many of Graff's victories over Monica were post-stabbing? How many of Monica's victories were in GS finals or semi-finals? Someone who comes out of nowhere and, on Steffi's turf wins 8 Slams in less than three years...you have to admit, that's domination, regardless of head-to-head records.

Seles got stabbed in 93. Before that they played head to head 10 times. Graf winning 6 out of 10.

1989 Roland Garros (Paris) Semifinal 6-3, 3-6, 6-3 Steffi Graf
1989 Wimbledon (London) 4th round 6-0, 6-1 Steffi Graf
1989 Brighton International (Brighton) Final 7-5, 6-4 Steffi Graf
1990 Lufthansa Cup (Berlin) Final 6-4, 6-3 Monica Seles
1990 Roland Garros (Paris) Final 7-6, 6-4 Monica Seles
1991 Women's Hardcourt Champs (San Antonio) Final 6-4, 6-3 Steffi Graf
1991 Citizen Cup (Hambourg) Final 7-5, 6-7(4), 6-3 Steffi Graf
1992 Roland Garros (Paris) Final 6-2, 3-6, 10-8 Monica Seles
1992 Wimbledon (London) Final 6-2, 6-1 Steffi Graf
1993 Australian Open (Melbourne) Final 4-6, 6-3, 6-2 Monica Seles
1995 US Open (New York) Final 7-6 (8-6), 0-6, 6-3 Steffi Graf
1996 US Open (New York) Final 7-5, 6-4 Steffi Graf
1998 Chase Championships (New York) Quarterfinal 1-6, 6-4, 6-4 Steffi Graf
1999 Australian Open (Melbourne) Quarterfinal 7-5, 6-1 Monica Seles
1999 Roland Garros (Paris) Semifinal 6-7(2), 6-3, 6-4 Steffi Graf

crosscourt
10-29-2004, 12:30 AM
The point that I am making is no more than that in her prime, Seles dominated Graff.

Phil
10-29-2004, 01:06 AM
Seles got stabbed in 93. Before that they played head to head 10 times. Graf winning 6 out of 10.

1989 Roland Garros (Paris) Semifinal 6-3, 3-6, 6-3 Steffi Graf
1989 Wimbledon (London) 4th round 6-0, 6-1 Steffi Graf
1989 Brighton International (Brighton) Final 7-5, 6-4 Steffi Graf
1990 Lufthansa Cup (Berlin) Final 6-4, 6-3 Monica Seles
1990 Roland Garros (Paris) Final 7-6, 6-4 Monica Seles
1991 Women's Hardcourt Champs (San Antonio) Final 6-4, 6-3 Steffi Graf
1991 Citizen Cup (Hambourg) Final 7-5, 6-7(4), 6-3 Steffi Graf
1992 Roland Garros (Paris) Final 6-2, 3-6, 10-8 Monica Seles
1992 Wimbledon (London) Final 6-2, 6-1 Steffi Graf
1993 Australian Open (Melbourne) Final 4-6, 6-3, 6-2 Monica Seles
1995 US Open (New York) Final 7-6 (8-6), 0-6, 6-3 Steffi Graf
1996 US Open (New York) Final 7-5, 6-4 Steffi Graf
1998 Chase Championships (New York) Quarterfinal 1-6, 6-4, 6-4 Steffi Graf
1999 Australian Open (Melbourne) Quarterfinal 7-5, 6-1 Monica Seles
1999 Roland Garros (Paris) Semifinal 6-7(2), 6-3, 6-4 Steffi Graf

Look at it this way-of Seles' 4 wins pre-stabbing, THREE of those were SLAM FINALS, while Graff beat Seles in tournaments such as the Women's Harcourt Champs and the Citizen Cup, and the HIGHLY PRESTIGIOUS Brighton Cup-and a couple Wimbledons, which Seles NEVER won-against anyone-like a female Ivan Lendl.

Camilio Pascual
10-29-2004, 03:24 AM
If we are talking about in their prime, I'll have to go with L'il Mo as the best ever with basically the same arguments used for Seles as best in her prime. Check out her record in the Majors before her tragic horseriding/car accident.

davey25
10-29-2004, 05:37 AM
Graf won only 1 slam per year when there was an all-time great in her prime, Navratilova in 87, and Seles in 91 and 92. So had Seles not been stabbed she probably would have 15 slam titles now, only #6 all-time including behind where Seles would be.
She had 11 pre-stabbing.

Seles did not dominate Graf as far as ever killing her in matches. She just dominated her as far as being the last one standing in big events much more often, and winning the final point of most of their big matches no matter how close they may have been. Of course Seles did not destroy Graf in their matches, Graf is an all-time great herself. She just won the vast majority when it mattered.

BiGGieStuFF
10-29-2004, 08:37 AM
You can speculate how many slams monica would have had all you want but it didn't happen so you can only imagine how great she would have been. With steffi making the finals consistently in those years monica was out. Graf was in 11 out of 15 grand slam finals after the incident, winning 10 of them. Being Graf and monica would have been 1 and number 2 seeds and Graf having a good record against monica and even if you conceded half of those matches grand slams to monica, graf would still be on top in the GS count. It would still be to close to call who would be on top. Remeber Graf had 9 grand slams even before monica had her 1st one. Granted she came onto the scene later but as any new prime time player who comes surging onto the scene they are going to win some while the current champion is going to struggle a bit but eventually she found her groove again and I have no doubts that graf would have continued to win more than half their meetings. I'm being diplomatic here. Both were great players and you can argue until you're blue in the face but both were great players and either one deserves to have the tag of best woman's tennis player but unfortunately the edge will have to go to Graf because she does have hardware to show for it even though seles did have that unfortunate incident.

JohnThomas1
11-01-2004, 03:38 AM
Stefie is my fave female player ever, but i have to agree that Monica was dominating her at the time of the stabbing. Graf was in a bit of a flat patch as well, she had lots of distractions at the time and would have come back and gave Seles a good rivalry if not for the stabbing. Davey is looking in all the wrong area's for better players than Graf apart from Monica. He needs to go forward not back, i believe there is no doubt that Graf ended up a better player than both Martina and Evert if you pitted them thru their primes.

BiGGieStuFF
11-01-2004, 06:45 AM
Monica was dominating the field but not dominating Graf. Graf did have distractions and faltered before she could get to the finals against Monica. Graf cleaned that up though but unfortunately Monica's incident occurred when Graf was back in her groove so we'll never know how it would have turned out but Graf had the winning head to head overall and also won 6 out of 10 before the incident from monica. It was pretty even.

German Tennis Instructor
11-01-2004, 08:45 AM
well but obviously graf has done a great job (if not the best of all players) by trying to make women's tennis more popular. face it, the best thing that happened to women's tennis was graf playing against.....who was this guy?.....jimmy connors??? i am not sure but i think that's the one.

maybe without steffie women's tennis would not be seen as an equal to men's tennis in these days....

but honestly i think it is really not a good thing to name a person the "best". there will always be new stars coming out, especially from russia (if u knew under what conditions russian girls even want to hit the ball, than u would agree :-)

paulfreda
11-01-2004, 07:52 PM
Well Graf has the recordbook in her favor, but Monica
had an unbeatable game in her prime. I agree that had
that maniac not stabbed her, she would have won 20
majors and Graf would have had maybe 15.
Monica's groundie angles on both sides had never
before or since been seen by anyone and her record
would have been limited only by her desire to keep
going like Martina did.
A match with both players in their prime, Monica would have beaten King, Graf, Evert, Mo, Wills, Court and Martina.
JMHO

JohnThomas1
11-02-2004, 03:34 AM
Graf and Connors? I remember Martina playing Connors, he got one serve and she got one alley but it hardly made a ripple publicity wise.

davey25
11-03-2004, 07:40 AM
Graf led Monica head to head 6-4. Yes, but who cares. 5 of those matches were before Monica's domination, 2 of 5 which she won anyway. 2 of their 5 matches during her dominance where in non-slam tournaments, both which Graf won. All that matters is that in slam finals Monica led Graf 2-1 during her domination. Also given that Graf was always more vurnerable to losing to other top players before finals, after 89, Sanchez, Pierce, Novotna, etc...Graf would have done well to keep winning 1 slam a year, while Seles continuing to hog 3 a year.

Graf did struggle with her tennis in 90-91, no doubt. She began playing better in 92, still Seles managed to win 3 of the 4 slams, winning 2 of 3 finals with Steffi, and clobbering her in the last two sets of the 93 Aussie Open final.

Graf better than Evert or Navratilova? Navratilova at age 30
won 2 of 3 slam finals from Steffi in 87, in Steffi's first year of dominance on the regular tour(those were her only two losses that year). Even with Evert and Mandilikova to rival her Navratilova staked claim to the Wimbledon record of 9, while Graf with weaker grass rivals managed only 7. Navratilova took a potential record-tying, in retrospect, title at Wimbledon at 33 during Graf's reign atop womens tennis. Navratilova also owns a 4-1 U.S open head to head with Graf. Two of those matches are win in her prime over an undeveloped Graf. However one of them is a win by 34-year old Navratilova over Graf in 91.

Evert? Chris owns the French Open record of 7 despite the additional titles Steffi won due to the Seles stabbing(Seles was 2-0 against Graf pre-stabbing and Graf managed 4 titles in 6 appearances after the incident). Chris also had to deal with Navratilova at Wimbledon, the only one of the big three majors she owns less titles; and owns one more U.S open despite the beneficial circumstances for Graf. Both Navratilova and Evert own many more tournament titles, greater longevity, and comparable slam totals overall despite facing another all-time great for many years.

The only records Graf held before Seles was stabbed were consecutive weeks at #1, and the Golden Slam. The Golden Slam was not possable for Court or Connoly thus invalid. Rankings were not instituted when Wills and Lenglen, who both went over 5 years undefeated played. They no doubt, given their unbeaten streaks, would have eclipsed Graf's 186 week record had there been rankings.

On another note I think Seles in her prime is the second best player against all others in their prime. Second to Connoly who played Seles's game even better, considering her timeframe. Neither are the best ever though, but the two best when both were at their peak IMO.

JohnThomas1
11-04-2004, 02:17 AM
No worries Davey but i was just speaking head to head, no records taken into consideration. I have no doubt that Graf would have beaten Evert in a head to head series on various surfaces and i feel she would have pipped Martina too.

davey25
11-04-2004, 08:03 AM
Well I agree on Evert. I personally think any of the all-time greats playing their best overpower Evert; Graf, Navratilova, Connoly, Wills, Lenglen, Seles, King, and Court; and even a few non all-time greats like the Williams. However her records are there, and she did face Navratilova in her prime for 2/3 of her span of big wins. As for Navratilova I dont agree. Watching them play in 87, when I personally feel anyway, Graf had already matured, and seeing Martina give Graf fits constantly even in her older age I see Martina being big problems for Steffi in their primes together.
Here are a number of factors:

1)Graf's return of serve while very good, isnt one of her best assets, nor one of the top few in the game. She is always late on serves with any power. Thus she would have trouble returning Martina's big lefty serve

2)She doesnt like playing serve and volleyers especially on fast surfaces. Jana was spooked by Steffi and stayed back all the time.
McNeil and Garrison have both beaten her at Wimbledon, you would never have expected that, and both won more sets from her than you would expect especially McNeil.

3)Graf always passes at the same spots. Martina would read those.

4)Graf has a very established game pattern. Martina who had so many tactical coaches would have come up with a plan to dissect it and Graf would not have adjusted well enough.

TheFifthSet
07-17-2010, 10:29 PM
Well this thread is a little extreme, I'd say Graf has a legitimate case for female GOAT, but hey, to each his own. I think you're being a little unfair to Graf though.

dannythomas
07-18-2010, 04:46 AM
I agree it is debatable whether Graf is best of all time but she does have the most balanced record across all the slams.
To bring in people like Lenglen, Wills Moody, Connolly is pointless because it was a completely different game in those days.
I dismiss Seles as a contender because of her non existent grass court performances . Also she was eclipsed by the power hitters in the second part of her career. If you really want to include Court remember that Ausopen was played on grass in those days - lucky for Seles they changed it. But you cannot ignore that nobody showed up to play in Australia in those days
including Court's main rival Billie Jean King.
I don't see how Serena can be left out of any discussion on GOAT. She overcame adversity in her life in a way that Seles did not and her all round game including the best ever serve in the women's game is on a par with anyone and far better than Seles.
I like the way that people belittle Steffi by saying she was owned by Seles and Martina. The records show otherwise. Graf had a losing record against NONE of her rivals. It is also the sign of a great champion that they know when to retire . Sampras went out after winning the US Open. Graf's last 2 slams were winning the French and getting to the Wimbledon final.
For me there only 3 contenders - Graf, Navratilova and Serena. I can accept the argument that Martina should be given some credit for all her doubles wins ( Serena is likely to win a few more too ! ) So while I would probably still give it to Graf Martina has a strong case too. Serena's distractors say she has not won enough titles outside of slams. But who is going to remember that ? Just compare Serena to so called former number 1's Safina and Jankovic who nobody seriously believes could claim that position !

davey25
07-18-2010, 04:48 AM
I don't see how Serena can be left out of any discussion on GOAT.

I agree but a non white player as the GOAT is an impossible concept to many, hence why Serena does not get the due consideration she deserves.

MotherMarjorie
07-18-2010, 04:52 AM
I agree but a non white player as the GOAT is an impossible concept to many, hence why Serena does not get the due consideration she deserves.
Serena doesn't get "due consideration" because her on-court results do not reflect GOAT standards...end of discussion.

Joe Pike
07-18-2010, 04:54 AM
I agree but a non white player as the GOAT is an impossible concept to many, hence why Serena does not get the due consideration she deserves.


A player with less than 40 titles but losses to all-time greats like Testud (twice), Likhovtseva, Suarez, Shaughnessy, Schnyder (4 times), Rubin, Petrova (3 times), Zvonareva (twice), Jidkova, Farina Elia, Schiavone (twice), Craybas, Sun, Hantuchova, Bammer (twice), Chan, Chakvetadse, Srebotnik, Wozniak, Na Li, Azarenka, Zakopalova, Stosur in her 12 peak years is not even a 2nd-tier great.
Whether she is white or non-white.

davey25
07-18-2010, 04:59 AM
I dont mean that Serena should be considered the greatest ever now. However if she reaches 20+ slams she should be and I have a feeling there will be many who dismiss her as even being a candidate. Yeah some stats she will still be inferior, but modern day womens tennis is far more competitive than ever before.

Joe Pike
07-18-2010, 05:14 AM
I dont mean that Serena should be considered the greatest ever now. However if she reaches 20+ slams she should be and I have a feeling there will be many who dismiss her as even being a candidate. Yeah some stats she will still be inferior, but modern day womens tennis is far more competitive than ever before.


You mean so competitive that players like Jankovic, Ivanovic, Safina can get to #1?

drakulie
07-18-2010, 05:17 AM
6 year old thread, and it is as dumb today as it was 6 years ago.

THUNDERVOLLEY
07-18-2010, 05:59 AM
I dont mean that Serena should be considered the greatest ever now. However if she reaches 20+ slams she should be and I have a feeling there will be many who dismiss her as even being a candidate.

True. That is the central motive behind the endless threads attacking SW: any mind truly cognizant of how the players/sport is judged for historical purposes understands that player value/standing (whether in tennis or sports history overall) is based on slam count--the very reason when so-called "GOAT" lists are formed, the first and last consideration are the slams won during a career--not the endless, meaningless sideline events. History, the players and the majority of those (with sense) making such judgments consider the slams the pinnacle of tennis achievement.

When Sampras or Federer were moving forwrd in their respective careers and added to the discussion of possible "GOAT," it was based on their slam victories--not (ultimately) the irrelevant minutiae of sideline stats never whispered in the same breath as the slam total conversation.

The ususal suspects know this all too well, and reveal their fear of SW being strong enough to add more slams to her record--and with that, they will not be able to weather or control the tennis/sports/general media's evaluation of her with every additional slam won. It is happening already, and unlike some of the usual suspect's tennis gods, SW appears strong enough to still play slam contender tennis no matter the age, or (in most cases) the competition faced, as seen in two of the 3 slams played this year.

Fear is in the air, davey, so expect more trolling, pointless, minor stat threads and the common, morally bankrupt BS posts as Serena wins the most important events, no matter when slam 14 arrives to keep this particular train rolling.

Warriorroger
07-18-2010, 06:40 AM
I agree but a non white player as the GOAT is an impossible concept to many, hence why Serena does not get the due consideration she deserves.

After so many posts you finally show your true colours. Man/woman, one should feel sorry for you and angry that you have so much time to have so many posts here. (many/some) people don't like Serena, not because she is black (and note, black is my favorite colour and Graf's) , but because she's a self-centred cow doing nothing for the sport tennis itself. Tennis is to serve her. Graf was not a Saint, neither was Navratilova or Evert or even non- GOAT Seles, but they showed up the whole year, to play the sport they loved, to compete at grand tournaments and less grand tournaments, so that all fans were able to see them. Neither sister gives a sh it about you or the other fans, and pull out of tournaments whenever they feel like it. You can spend your life belittling Graf's achievements. We, her fans loved her for her great way of playing tennis, playing through pain and controversy and today we still love her. We don't need to open endless debates about how other players were lucky or overrated, just to feel less insecure.

If Serena were white, I would find her a white self centred cow!

PSNELKE
07-18-2010, 06:54 AM
Davey is a fool though I have to agree with him.
IMO Graf isn´t the best ever.

thejoe
07-18-2010, 06:56 AM
I agree but a non white player as the GOAT is an impossible concept to many, hence why Serena does not get the due consideration she deserves.

You're clinically insane.

rovex
07-18-2010, 06:58 AM
I agree but a non white player as the GOAT is an impossible concept to many, hence why Serena does not get the due consideration she deserves.

My eyes burn reading this.

Warriorroger
07-18-2010, 07:00 AM
After so many posts you finally show your true colours. Man/woman, one should feel sorry for you and angry that you have so much time to have so many posts here. (many/some) people don't like Serena, not because she is black (and note, black is my favorite colour and Graf's) , but because she's a self-centred cow doing nothing for the sport tennis itself. Tennis is to serve her. Graf was not a Saint, neither was Navratilova or Evert or even non- GOAT Seles, but they showed up the whole year, to play the sport they loved, to compete at grand tournaments and less grand tournaments, so that all fans were able to see them. Neither sister gives a sh it about you or the other fans, and pull out of tournaments whenever they feel like it. You can spend your life belittling Graf's achievements. We, her fans loved her for her great way of playing tennis, playing through pain and controversy and today we still love her. We don't need to open endless debates about how other players were lucky or overrated, just to feel less insecure.

If Serena were white, I would find her a white self centred cow!

I second this!

Gorecki
07-18-2010, 07:04 AM
you wanted to say graf is not the best ever, you could have said it and skipped the posting\writing part... that was unnecessary!

TMF
07-18-2010, 07:25 AM
I don't see how Serena can be left out of any discussion on GOAT.

I agree but a non white player as the GOAT is an impossible concept to many, hence why Serena does not get the due consideration she deserves.

It has nothing to do with the color of their skin. Players earn their status for what they have done on court. Simple as that.

Most GS titles
player total
1 Steffi Graf 22
2 Martina Navratilova 18
2 Chris Evert 18
4 Serena Williams 13
5 Margaret Court 11
6 Monica Seles 9
7 Billie Jean King 8
8 Justine Henin 7
8 Evonne Goolagong Cawley 7
8 Venus Williams 7

Most GS finals
Rank Name Total
1 Chris Evert 34 (18 )
2 Martina Navrátilová 32 (18 )
3 Steffi Graf 31 (22)
4 Evonne Goolagong 18 (7)
5 Serena Williams 15 (12)
6 Venus Williams 14 (7)
7 Monica Seles 13 (9)
8 Margaret Court 12 (11)
8 Martina Hingis 12 (5)
8 Billie Jean Moffitt 12 (8 )

Most single titles
Rank Player Singles
1 Martina Navratilova 167
2 Chris Evert 157
3 Steffi Graf 107
4 Margaret Court 92
5 Evonne Goolagong Cawley 68
6 Billie Jean King 67
7 Lindsay Davenport 55
8 Virginia Wade 55
9 Monica Seles 53
10 Hingis 45

Most weeks at #1
Rank Player weeks
1 Steffi Graf 377
2 Martina Navratilova 332
3 Chris Evert 260
4 Martina Hingis 209
5 Monica Seles 178
6 Justine Henin * 117
7 Lindsay Davenport 98
8 Serena Williams * 111
9 Amélie Mauresmo 39
10 Dinara Safina * 26

Consecutive weeks at #1
1 Steffi Graf (1) 186
2 Martina Navratilova (1) 156
3 Chris Evert (1) 113
4 Steffi Graf (2) 94
5 Monica Seles (1) 91
6 Martina Navratilova (2) 90
7 Steffi Graf (3) 87
8 Martina Hingis (1) 80
9 Chris Evert (2) 76
10 Martina Hingis (2) 73

Year end No. 1 players
player year
Steffi Graf 8
Martina Navratilova 7
Chris Evert 5
Lindsay Davenport 4
Justine Henin 3
Martina Hingis
Monica Seles
Serena Williams 2
Jelena Jankovic 1

All surface single winning percentage
Rank Player Wins Losses Win %
1 Margaret Court 593 56 91.37
2 Chris Evert 1309 146 89.97
3 Steffi Graf 902 115 88.69
4 Martina Navratilova 1442 219 86.82
5 Monica Seles 595 122 82.98
6 Serena Williams*[1] 462 98 82.5
7 Justine Henin* 503 109 82.18
8 Billie Jean King 695 155 81.76
9 Evonne Goolagong Cawley 704 165 81.01

Clay court singles career winning percentage
Rank Player Wins Losses Win %
1 Chris Evert 316 20 94.05
2 Steffi Graf 273 30 90.1
3 Justine Henin* 122 19 86.52
4 Monica Seles 142 25 85.03
5 Martina Hingis 109 25 81.34
6 Martina Navratilova 202 47 81.12
7 Gabriela Sabatini 196 49 80
8 Venus Williams* 127 35 78.4
9 Lindsay Davenport 120 35 77.42
10 Conchita Martinez 294 88 76.96

Hard court singles career winning percentage
Rank Player Wins Losses Win %
1 Steffi Graf 335 36 90.3
2 Chris Evert 304 37 89.15
3 Martina Navratilova 340 48 87.63
4 Monica Seles 311 59 84.05
5 Serena Williams* 294 57 83.76
6 Justine Henin* 243 53 82.09
7 Kim Clijsters* 256 56 82.05
8 Maria Sharapova* 197 45 81.01
9 Venus Williams* 320 76 80.81
10 Lindsay Davenport 472 115 80.41

Grass court singles career winning percentage
Rank Player Wins Losses Win %
1 Martina Navratilova 305 39 88.66
2 Chris Evert 184 25 88.04
3 Venus Williams* 68 10 87.18
4 Serena Williams* 52 8 86.67
5 Steffi Graf 85 15 85
6 Maria Sharapova* 52 10 83.87
7 Justine Henin* 45 10 81.82
8 Jana Novotna 79 21 79
9 Kim Clijsters* 40 11 78.43
10 Tracy Austin 43 12 78.18

Carpet court singles career winning percentage
Rank Player Wins Losses Win %
1 Martina Navratilova 516 58 89.9
2 Steffi Graf 189 23 89.2
3 Chris Evert 209 39 84.3
4 Serena Williams* 34 7 82.93
5 Martina Hingis 97 23 80.83
6 Kim Clijsters* 50 13 79.37
= Monica Seles 98 26 79.03
8 Lindsay Davenport 93 27 77.5
9 Tracy Austin 85 25 77.27
10 Venus Williams* 50 17 74.63

Most singles matches won
Player Wins
1 Martina Navratilova 1442
2 Chris Evert 1309
3 Steffi Graf 902
4 Virginia Wade 839
5 Arantxa Sánchez Vicario 759
6 Lindsay Davenport 753
7 Conchita Martínez 739
8 Evonne Goolagong Cawley[5] 704
9 Billie Jean King 695
10 Gabriela Sabatini 632

Most match winning streak(all surfaces)
Rank Player Matches
1 Martina Navratilova 74
2 Steffi Graf 66
3 Martina Navratilova 58
4 Margaret Court 57
5 Chris Evert 55
6 Martina Navratilova 54
7 Steffi Graf 46
8 Steffi Graf 45
9 Steffi Graf 44
10 Martina Navratilova 41

Most consecutive singles titles
1. 13 - Martina Navratilova (1984)
2. 12 - Margaret Court (1972-1973)
3. 11 - Steffi Graf (1989-1990)
4. 10 - Chris Evert (1974)
5. 9 - Martina Navratilova (1986)
5. 9 - Margaret Court (1970)
7. 8 - Steffi Graf (1988 )
7. 8 - Martina Navratilova (1983)

Best annual singles winning percentage
1 Martina Navratilova 98.9
2 Steffi Graf 97.7
3 Martina Navratilova 97.5
4 Steffi Graf 97.4
5 Martina Navratilova 96.8
6 Martina Navratilova 96.7
7 Steffi Graf 96
8 Margaret Court 95.3
9 Chris Evert 94.9
10 Margaret Court 94.8



Most consecutive years winning at least one singles title
1. 21 - Martina Navratilova (1974-1994)
2. 18 - Chris Evert (1971-1988 )
3. 14 - Steffi Graf (1986-1999)
4. 11 - Evonne Goolagong Cawley (1970-1980)
4. 11 - Virginia Wade (1968-1978 )
6. 9 - Sandra Cecchini (1984-1992)
6. 9 - Margaret Court (1968-1976)
6. 9 - Lindsay Davenport (1993-2001)
6. 9 - Conchita Martinez (1988-1996)
6. 9 - Arantxa Sanchez Vicario (1988-1996)

Most singles titles won in a year
1. 21 - Margaret Court (1970)
2. 18 - Margaret Court (1969, 1973)
3. 17 - Billie Jean King (1971)
4. 16 - Chris Evert (1974, 1975)
4. 16 - Martina Navratilova (1983)
6. 15 - Evonne Goolagong Cawley (1970)
6. 15 - Martina Navratilova (1982)
8. 14 - Margaret Court (1968 )
8. 14 - Steffi Graf (1989)
8. 14 - Martina Navratilova (1986)
11. 13 - Martina Navratilova (1984)
12. 12 - Chris Evert (1973, 1976)
12. 12 - Evonne Goolagong Cawley (1971)
12. 12 - Martina Navratilova (1985)
15. 11 - Tracy Austin (1980)
15. 11 - Chris Evert (1977)
15. 11 - Steffi Graf (1987, 1988 )
15. 11 - Martina Navratilova (1978, 1979)

THUNDERVOLLEY
07-18-2010, 07:31 AM
After so many posts you finally show your true colours. Man/woman, one should feel sorry for you and angry that you have so much time to have so many posts here. (many/some) people don't like Serena, not because she is black

You are rather naive (perhaps deliberately) to attempt to make the blanket suggestion that her race has nothing to do with at least some of the socially bottom scraping crap posted about her on this board. Certain TT members (in consideration of their posts) containing such references as "gorilla," "ghetto," "food stamps," "Haitian voodoo princess" etc.--ended up on the moderators' radar, which the mods saw fit to delete--ask yourself...no, ask the moderators "why?".

You will quickly find there will be no debating their view on the nature of the content.

THUNDERVOLLEY
07-18-2010, 07:32 AM
...when one line smokes out so many about one subject...it says much.

Warriorroger
07-18-2010, 09:02 AM
You are rather naive (perhaps deliberately) to attempt to make the blanket suggestion that her race has nothing to do with at least some of the socially bottom scraping crap posted about her on this board. Certain TT members (in consideration of their posts) containing such references as "gorilla," "ghetto," "food stamps," "Haitian voodoo princess" etc.--ended up on the moderators' radar, which the mods saw fit to delete--ask yourself...no, ask the moderators "why?".

You will quickly find there will be no debating their view on the nature of the content.

You can think whatever you like, I used the word some and many. IMO she is not a likeable (black) person. The OP brougt up race and thereby suggested that all who dislike or just don't care for Serena are racists. If Graf were black, wore a tusk through her (big) nose and married a guy named Marlon, she would still be my favorite athlete.

THUNDERVOLLEY
07-18-2010, 10:46 AM
You can think whatever you like, I used the word some and many. IMO she is not a likeable (black) person. The OP brougt up race and thereby suggested that all who dislike or just don't care for Serena are racists. If Graf were black, wore a tusk through her (big) nose and married a guy named Marlon, she would still be my favorite athlete.

..as i've said earlier, you can test your little thoery against the moderators' history of actions on this board regarding my examples. A moment later, there will be no debate on that matter.

Joe Pike
07-18-2010, 11:42 AM
True. That is the central motive behind the endless threads attacking SW: any mind truly cognizant of how the players/sport is judged for historical purposes understands that player value/standing (whether in tennis or sports history overall) is based on slam count ....


Then why is Davenport considered greater than Capriati?
Both have 3 slams.

And why is Sabatini considered greater than Majoli?
Both have one slam.


BTW, "best" and "great" are not the same.
Example: To suggest someone with a character and behaviour like Serena is "great" would be ridiculous. But no one can deny that she is one of the 5 or so "best" players of all time.

Warriorroger
07-18-2010, 12:13 PM
..as i've said earlier, you can test your little thoery against the moderators' history of actions on this board regarding my examples. A moment later, there will be no debate on that matter.

The sooner the better..

britbox
07-18-2010, 12:35 PM
BTW, "best" and "great" are not the same.
Example: To suggest someone with a character and behaviour like Serena is "great" would be ridiculous. But no one can deny that she is one of the 5 or so "best" players of all time.

Precisely... Greatness is largely built on achievement. I'd differ on your angle on Serena though... Her character is irrelevant to her tennis achievements.

britbox
07-18-2010, 12:41 PM
It has nothing to do with the color of their skin. Players earn their status for what they have done on court. Simple as that.

Most GS titles
player total
1 Steffi Graf 22
2 Martina Navratilova 18
2 Chris Evert 18
4 Serena Williams 13
5 Margaret Court 11
6 Monica Seles 9
7 Billie Jean King 8
8 Justine Henin 7
8 Evonne Goolagong Cawley 7
8 Venus Williams 7

Most GS finals
Rank Name Total
1 Chris Evert 34 (18 )
2 Martina Navrátilová 32 (18 )
3 Steffi Graf 31 (22)
4 Evonne Goolagong 18 (7)
5 Serena Williams 15 (12)
6 Venus Williams 14 (7)
7 Monica Seles 13 (9)
8 Margaret Court 12 (11)
8 Martina Hingis 12 (5)
8 Billie Jean Moffitt 12 (8 )

Most single titles
Rank Player Singles
1 Martina Navratilova 167
2 Chris Evert 157
3 Steffi Graf 107
4 Margaret Court 92
5 Evonne Goolagong Cawley 68
6 Billie Jean King 67
7 Lindsay Davenport 55
8 Virginia Wade 55
9 Monica Seles 53
10 Hingis 45

Most weeks at #1
Rank Player weeks
1 Steffi Graf 377
2 Martina Navratilova 332
3 Chris Evert 260
4 Martina Hingis 209
5 Monica Seles 178
6 Justine Henin * 117
7 Lindsay Davenport 98
8 Serena Williams * 111
9 Amélie Mauresmo 39
10 Dinara Safina * 26

Consecutive weeks at #1
1 Steffi Graf (1) 186
2 Martina Navratilova (1) 156
3 Chris Evert (1) 113
4 Steffi Graf (2) 94
5 Monica Seles (1) 91
6 Martina Navratilova (2) 90
7 Steffi Graf (3) 87
8 Martina Hingis (1) 80
9 Chris Evert (2) 76
10 Martina Hingis (2) 73

Year end No. 1 players
player year
Steffi Graf 8
Martina Navratilova 7
Chris Evert 5
Lindsay Davenport 4
Justine Henin 3
Martina Hingis
Monica Seles
Serena Williams 2
Jelena Jankovic 1

All surface single winning percentage
Rank Player Wins Losses Win %
1 Margaret Court 593 56 91.37
2 Chris Evert 1309 146 89.97
3 Steffi Graf 902 115 88.69
4 Martina Navratilova 1442 219 86.82
5 Monica Seles 595 122 82.98
6 Serena Williams*[1] 462 98 82.5
7 Justine Henin* 503 109 82.18
8 Billie Jean King 695 155 81.76
9 Evonne Goolagong Cawley 704 165 81.01

Clay court singles career winning percentage
Rank Player Wins Losses Win %
1 Chris Evert 316 20 94.05
2 Steffi Graf 273 30 90.1
3 Justine Henin* 122 19 86.52
4 Monica Seles 142 25 85.03
5 Martina Hingis 109 25 81.34
6 Martina Navratilova 202 47 81.12
7 Gabriela Sabatini 196 49 80
8 Venus Williams* 127 35 78.4
9 Lindsay Davenport 120 35 77.42
10 Conchita Martinez 294 88 76.96

Hard court singles career winning percentage
Rank Player Wins Losses Win %
1 Steffi Graf 335 36 90.3
2 Chris Evert 304 37 89.15
3 Martina Navratilova 340 48 87.63
4 Monica Seles 311 59 84.05
5 Serena Williams* 294 57 83.76
6 Justine Henin* 243 53 82.09
7 Kim Clijsters* 256 56 82.05
8 Maria Sharapova* 197 45 81.01
9 Venus Williams* 320 76 80.81
10 Lindsay Davenport 472 115 80.41

Grass court singles career winning percentage
Rank Player Wins Losses Win %
1 Martina Navratilova 305 39 88.66
2 Chris Evert 184 25 88.04
3 Venus Williams* 68 10 87.18
4 Serena Williams* 52 8 86.67
5 Steffi Graf 85 15 85
6 Maria Sharapova* 52 10 83.87
7 Justine Henin* 45 10 81.82
8 Jana Novotna 79 21 79
9 Kim Clijsters* 40 11 78.43
10 Tracy Austin 43 12 78.18

Carpet court singles career winning percentage
Rank Player Wins Losses Win %
1 Martina Navratilova 516 58 89.9
2 Steffi Graf 189 23 89.2
3 Chris Evert 209 39 84.3
4 Serena Williams* 34 7 82.93
5 Martina Hingis 97 23 80.83
6 Kim Clijsters* 50 13 79.37
= Monica Seles 98 26 79.03
8 Lindsay Davenport 93 27 77.5
9 Tracy Austin 85 25 77.27
10 Venus Williams* 50 17 74.63

Most singles matches won
Player Wins
1 Martina Navratilova 1442
2 Chris Evert 1309
3 Steffi Graf 902
4 Virginia Wade 839
5 Arantxa Sánchez Vicario 759
6 Lindsay Davenport 753
7 Conchita Martínez 739
8 Evonne Goolagong Cawley[5] 704
9 Billie Jean King 695
10 Gabriela Sabatini 632

Most match winning streak(all surfaces)
Rank Player Matches
1 Martina Navratilova 74
2 Steffi Graf 66
3 Martina Navratilova 58
4 Margaret Court 57
5 Chris Evert 55
6 Martina Navratilova 54
7 Steffi Graf 46
8 Steffi Graf 45
9 Steffi Graf 44
10 Martina Navratilova 41

Most consecutive singles titles
1. 13 - Martina Navratilova (1984)
2. 12 - Margaret Court (1972-1973)
3. 11 - Steffi Graf (1989-1990)
4. 10 - Chris Evert (1974)
5. 9 - Martina Navratilova (1986)
5. 9 - Margaret Court (1970)
7. 8 - Steffi Graf (1988 )
7. 8 - Martina Navratilova (1983)

Best annual singles winning percentage
1 Martina Navratilova 98.9
2 Steffi Graf 97.7
3 Martina Navratilova 97.5
4 Steffi Graf 97.4
5 Martina Navratilova 96.8
6 Martina Navratilova 96.7
7 Steffi Graf 96
8 Margaret Court 95.3
9 Chris Evert 94.9
10 Margaret Court 94.8



Most consecutive years winning at least one singles title
1. 21 - Martina Navratilova (1974-1994)
2. 18 - Chris Evert (1971-1988 )
3. 14 - Steffi Graf (1986-1999)
4. 11 - Evonne Goolagong Cawley (1970-1980)
4. 11 - Virginia Wade (1968-1978 )
6. 9 - Sandra Cecchini (1984-1992)
6. 9 - Margaret Court (1968-1976)
6. 9 - Lindsay Davenport (1993-2001)
6. 9 - Conchita Martinez (1988-1996)
6. 9 - Arantxa Sanchez Vicario (1988-1996)

Most singles titles won in a year
1. 21 - Margaret Court (1970)
2. 18 - Margaret Court (1969, 1973)
3. 17 - Billie Jean King (1971)
4. 16 - Chris Evert (1974, 1975)
4. 16 - Martina Navratilova (1983)
6. 15 - Evonne Goolagong Cawley (1970)
6. 15 - Martina Navratilova (1982)
8. 14 - Margaret Court (1968 )
8. 14 - Steffi Graf (1989)
8. 14 - Martina Navratilova (1986)
11. 13 - Martina Navratilova (1984)
12. 12 - Chris Evert (1973, 1976)
12. 12 - Evonne Goolagong Cawley (1971)
12. 12 - Martina Navratilova (1985)
15. 11 - Tracy Austin (1980)
15. 11 - Chris Evert (1977)
15. 11 - Steffi Graf (1987, 1988 )
15. 11 - Martina Navratilova (1978, 1979)

Are these open-era only? Court won 24 singles majors in total.

THUNDERVOLLEY
07-18-2010, 07:13 PM
Then why is Davenport considered greater than Capriati?
Both have 3 slams.

Supposition; there's debate favoring Capriati, due to her coming back for a 2nd act, doing better than her early career to quickly win 3 slams in the space of 2 years, while Davenport required 3 years--and unlike Capriati at the AO--Davenport never defended any of her titles.

BTW, "best" and "great" are not the same.
Example: To suggest someone with a character and behaviour like Serena is "great" would be ridiculous.

No one--that is, the real world of historical consideration--cares, otherwise John McEnroe's long years of (what some consider) bad - to- horrible behavior (Drysdale once accused him of behaving like an "animal") would have prevented him from being considered one of the sport's greatest champions (and this is not about his post-pro life/efforts).

Joe Pike
07-18-2010, 07:32 PM
Supposition; there's debate favoring Capriati, ...

No, there isn't any.

... due to her coming back for a 2nd act, doing better than her early career to quickly win 3 slams in the space of 2 years, while Davenport required 3 years- ...

Davenport required 18 months, not 2 years.


...
No one--that is, the real world of historical consideration--cares, otherwise John McEnroe's long years of (what some consider) bad - to- horrible behavior (Drysdale once accused him of behaving like an "animal") would have prevented him from being considered one of the sport's greatest champions (and this is not about his post-pro life/efforts).


His behaviour and mean character diminish his "greatness". Same with Connors. At least in Europe.
With Arthur Ashe it is the other way round. His behaviour, character boost his greatness.

Or take Mike Tyson, the boxer. I have never heard someone call him "great". Despite his achievements.

davey25
07-18-2010, 07:41 PM
I am no Capriati fan but she I dont know why some pass her off as if she is a clown who couldnt play tennis. In the early 2000s she was the only one who could hang with the Williams and win slams while they were dominating the game. Something Hingis, Davenport, up and coming Henin, Seles, all failed to so. That in itself is impressive. Joe Pike continues to say Capriati doing well means the womens field sucks, when Capriati at only 15 was a real contender in the womens field when his beloved Graf and Seles were on top.

Yes you can debate her vs Davenport. I would go with Davenport since her career stats are all equal or better, and she does own Capriati head to head. However it would be silly to say you could not even debate the two.

The thing about Capriati is she can atleast say that despite all her life problems she hit rock bottom then came back and took a wasted career of early promise fizzled to almost nothing and turned it into something meanginful. She deserves respect for that, even though I am not a huge advocate of her game in general. She also can say even if she did waste some of her potential best years when she was focusing on tennis she did give it her all mentally every time out there and she was a tough lady who didnt back down. That cant be said for Davenport who yes was probably a slightly superior player stroke for stroke, but was more easily defeated mentally and did not have the street fighter mentality Capriati did out there. Movement wise Capriati is also far superior to Davenport. That cant be said for Pierce, Hingis, Mauresmo, and many of the other mental midgets of that era.

THUNDERVOLLEY
07-19-2010, 06:57 AM
No, there isn't any.

Posting absolutes again. Capriati's slam run--and her abiltiy to defend one of her titles is not dropped to a lower rung compared to Davenport, who did not show the potential to be dominant at any slam, hence the existence of a debate on the matter.


His behaviour and mean character diminish his "greatness". Same with Connors. At least in Europe.

History does not see it that way; both were considered great no matter what direction their behavior took. Even today, no one damns them for something as insignificant as harmless on-court emotion.

Or take Mike Tyson, the boxer. I have never heard someone call him "great". Despite his achievements.

Some believe he's one of the top 5 or 10 greatest boxers of all time--others do not, but he's made "greatest" lists and is part of the debate. If anything about his behavior would remove mim from that list, it would be the nature and degree of his acts, which makes Tyson (for the purposes of this tennis issue) inapplicable, since his acts--whether in the ring (the ear) or out of it (r@pe, jail, etc.) makes everything ever said or gestured by McEnroe, Serena, Nastase and Connors appear to be the behavior of glowing cherubs by comparison.

mandy01
07-19-2010, 07:03 AM
delete post.

abmk
07-19-2010, 07:07 AM
I thought the OP was a graf fan and pretty much disliked Seles :?

I'm surprised at you. Don't you know the support of davey25 and his avatars changes season by season ( whatever the definition of season in his book ) ?

mandy01
07-19-2010, 07:09 AM
I'm surprised at you. Don't you know the support of davey25 and his avatars changes season by season ( whatever the definition of season in his book ) ?
Yeah well..I deleted my post thinking it could be something like that.
or maybe I confused Graf with Serena :-?

davey25
07-19-2010, 07:12 AM
I already said this on a thread in the main forum but thinking Graf probably gained a couple additional slams which could have aided her GOAT claims considering how close she, Navratilova, and possibly Court are is totally different than saying Seles Mrs. "cant win Wimbledon" is the would be GOAT which is what the blind Selestards were claiming in the other threads.

Seles could have denied Graf on occasion at the French or U.S Open (I dont say the Australian since she only won it once after the stabbing and was on fire that year anyway) which would have hurt her GOAT claims considering they are mostly based on favoring her amazing versatility. I never suggested in this thread Seles was ever on her way to being the GOAT herself or remotedly close to it, or anywhere near Graf's position in history for that matter. How could that be the case for a player with no longevity, who was overrun by the next generation of women, and who almost certainly would have never won even a single Wimbledon. It doesnt mean she couldnt have done some degree of damage to Graf's career though.

mandy01
07-19-2010, 07:14 AM
I already said this on a thread in the main forum but thinking Graf probably gained a couple additional slams which could have aided her GOAT claims considering how close she, Navratilova, and possibly Court are is totally different than saying Seles Mrs. "cant win Wimbledon" is the would be GOAT which is what the blind Selestards were claiming in the other threads.
Fair enough.I actually thought you were among those who thought of Graf as the GOAT(if such a concept is to be really believed in)-again,looks like it was a bit of misunderstanding,confusion or both on my part. :wink:

Big Dave
07-19-2010, 07:57 AM
you guys are delusional if you think Seles was better than Graf. This isn't even debateable.

davey25
07-19-2010, 08:22 AM
Of course Seles is nowhere near Graf. That is not debateable. Seles place in history is clear, fighting to even be #10 all time. Whether Graf is the greatest ever over Navratilova and Court is debateable. I would add Evert but it seems I am one of the only ones who thinks she deserves consideration.

Joe Pike
07-19-2010, 11:12 AM
I already said this on a thread in the main forum but thinking Graf probably gained a couple additional slams which could have aided her GOAT claims considering how close she, Navratilova, and possibly Court are is totally different than saying Seles Mrs. "cant win Wimbledon" is the would be GOAT which is what the blind Selestards were claiming in the other threads.

Seles could have denied Graf on occasion at the French or U.S Open (I dont say the Australian since she only won it once after the stabbing and was on fire that year anyway) which would have hurt her GOAT claims considering they are mostly based on favoring her amazing versatility. I never suggested in this thread Seles was ever on her way to being the GOAT herself or remotedly close to it, or anywhere near Graf's position in history for that matter. How could that be the case for a player with no longevity, who was overrun by the next generation of women, and who almost certainly would have never won even a single Wimbledon. It doesnt mean she couldnt have done some degree of damage to Graf's career though.


Even if Seles had denied Graf 3 or 4 slams (although I don't know how) Graf would be GOAT.

egn
07-19-2010, 12:37 PM
Even if Seles had denied Graf 3 or 4 slams (although I don't know how) Graf would be GOAT.

Seles denies Graf 4 slams she slips down to 18 majors...you tell me who else has 18 majors? This is possible as well as Seles most likely would have won 93 French, 93 US, 94 Aussie and I'm sure she could stole one more from Graf. If Graf finishes with 18...and say Seles finishes with 18 along with Navratilova and Evert all at 18. Now there is an interesting GOAT discussion.

Joe Pike
07-19-2010, 01:45 PM
Seles denies Graf 4 slams she slips down to 18 majors...you tell me who else has 18 majors? This is possible as well as Seles most likely would have won 93 French, 93 US, 94 Aussie and I'm sure she could stole one more from Graf. ...


What makes you think Seles would have made the finals of FO 93, USO 93 and AO 94?
And do you really think she would have beaten Graf? A player who was in no way worse than her on clay? Who lost only 8-10 in the third set at FO 92? And who beat her on clay in Hamburg 1991?
And how would Seles have beaten Graf at USO 93? Graf, who was on a 81-2 win/loss streak? A player whom Seles never ever beat on a fast surface like USO? A player who has the highest winning percentage on fast HC in the open era? A player who played simply great at this USO?
And how would Seles have beaten Graf at the AO 94? Graf, who thrashed Sanchez in the finals with 60 62? Although Steffi had struggled against Sanchez in the year before at the AO?

And how THE HELL do you think Seles would have made 18 (!) slams????

federerhoogenbandfan
07-19-2010, 03:22 PM
Seles denies Graf 4 slams she slips down to 18 majors...you tell me who else has 18 majors? This is possible as well as Seles most likely would have won 93 French, 93 US, 94 Aussie and I'm sure she could stole one more from Graf. If Graf finishes with 18...and say Seles finishes with 18 along with Navratilova and Evert all at 18. Now there is an interesting GOAT discussion.

Seles would not likely have won the 93 U.S Open. She has never beaten Graf on a fast court, and Graf was in very good form at the U.S Open that year too.

Nor would she likely have beaten Graf at the 94 Australian Open. Graf beat Sanchez Vicario who is a tough opponent for her 6-2, 6-0 in the final. There was no stopping her there.

Who knows about the 93 French. Seles was ill some that spring, looked so so in her return event at Hamburg, and no player had ever won 4 in a row so she would have had a challenge ahead of her.


Lastly it is funny how everyone ignores Court has 24 majors. If she were an American or evne European I bet she would get alot more GOAT consideration.

federerhoogenbandfan
07-19-2010, 03:24 PM
And how THE HELL do you think Seles would have made 18 (!) slams????

Seles was never going to reach 18 slams. She would have been lucky to reach 15, but I doubt she manages even that high. She was never destined for longevity at the top level, did not have the game to win Wimbledon, had not proven she could not dominate vs Graf facing her in frequent finals, showed nothing vs the next gaurd, etc...

selesian
07-20-2010, 12:12 PM
What makes you think Seles would have made the finals of FO 93, USO 93 and AO 94?

Do you honestly believe that someone who had reached the final of the previous 8 slams she entered (and won 7) would've suddenly stopped making slam finals?

And do you really think she would have beaten Graf? A player who was in no way worse than her on clay? Who lost only 8-10 in the third set at FO 92? And who beat her on clay in Hamburg 1991?

Monica was definitely better on clay than Steffi. Roland Garros 1990 & 1992 is proof.

And how would Seles have beaten Graf at USO 93? Graf, who was on a 81-2 win/loss streak? A player whom Seles never ever beat on a fast surface like USO? A player who has the highest winning percentage on fast HC in the open era? A player who played simply great at this USO?

Can I just remind you that the reason Graf was on a winning streak was because the number 1 player was not around.

And how would Seles have beaten Graf at the AO 94? Graf, who thrashed Sanchez in the finals with 60 62? Although Steffi had struggled against Sanchez in the year before at the AO?

Um, the same way as Seles beat her at the AO '93. Steffi came out all guns blazing, but it still wasn't enough to beat Monica.

And how THE HELL do you think Seles would have made 18 (!) slams????

Easily -- if it wasn't for an evil german called Gunther Parsche.

dannythomas
07-20-2010, 03:42 PM
There are as most people agree only 4 contenders for GOAT. Graf, Navratilova, Evert and Court with Serena at 5. Seles is not in any way a contender. Imaginary slams don't count.

selesian
07-20-2010, 04:25 PM
There are as most people agree only 4 contenders for GOAT. Graf, Navratilova, Evert and Court with Serena at 5. Seles is not in any way a contender. Imaginary slams don't count.

Navratilova, Evert and Court as GOAT contenders, yes, but I will not accept Graf in that group. She won most of her slams in weak periods when both Navratilova and Evert were well past their peak and then in the 90s after the void left by the removal of the number one player.

Seles is not a GOAT contender, but she very well could've been. Sad, but that's life I guess.

federerhoogenbandfan
07-20-2010, 05:25 PM
Navratilova, Evert and Court as GOAT contenders, yes, but I will not accept Graf in that group.

Too bad nobody cares what you choose to "accept". :) The GOAT candidates by 95% of the tennis viewing population are Graf and Navratilova. Evert and Court are battling for 3rd place.

Seles is not a GOAT contender

Heck no, she is barely top 10, if even that.

federerhoogenbandfan
07-20-2010, 05:31 PM
Do you honestly believe that someone who had reached the final of the previous 8 slams she entered (and won 7) would've suddenly stopped making slam finals?

She wouldnt have continued to make every slam final. Greater players than Seles never keep up more than a 2-3 year pace at a certain level, and the final 8 years of Seles's career all excuses aside make it clear she wasnt destined to either.

Monica was definitely better on clay than Steffi. Roland Garros 1990 & 1992 is proof.Lifetime head to head on clay: 3-3. Lifetime head to head at Roland Garros: 2-2, and as for primes their last match was when Graf was an injury warped 30 year old nearly retired player, much further past her prime than Seles and still won. Their final match on clay before the stabbing 10-8 in the 3rd set for Seles despite 66 unforced errors by Graf that day.

Contrast that to grass where Seles averages 1 game vs Graf's 6.

Can I just remind you that the reason Graf was on a winning streak was because the number 1 player was not around.Even if you take away Graf, Seles does not post a record like that in 91 or 92. She in fact had losses to every player in the WTA top 6 those two years.

Um, the same way as Seles beat her at the AO '93. Steffi came out all guns blazing, but it still wasn't enough to beat Monica.Graf was playing far better at the 94 event than 93. She lost 9 games to Sanchez in 93 and only 2 games to her in 94. That isnt to say she wasnt playing well in 93, but she was in unbeatable form at the 94 edition.

Easily -- if it wasn't for an evil german called Gunther Parsche.

Yes not only did he stab Seles but he didnt stab Graf, Novotna, Hingis, Davenport, Venus, so Seles would have a chance to win Wimbledon in the future.

OnceWas
07-20-2010, 06:28 PM
I like Steffi for one year with her Golden Slam. However I would rank Martina Navratilova, with her longevity, singles and doubles as the GOAT.

federerhoogenbandfan
07-20-2010, 06:53 PM
I think Navratilova is GOAT too, even over Steffi. How many combined tournament titles does she have in singles, doubles, and mixed. I wouldnt be surprised if it is over 400. Mixed is debateable in its true value, but even just singles and doubles might be around 300. I have no idea what her final tally in doubles titles is, but I am just guessing, I would be surprised if she doesnt have over 100 in womens doubles alone.

Evert and Graf dont even play doubles hardly ever. Graf did a bit and won one slam in dobules. That is one reason I am surprised more people dont rate Court higher, possibly even over Graf. Serena is proficient in doubles too. Lenglen, Wills, Connolly, and King all were great doubles players.

dannythomas
07-20-2010, 07:22 PM
I don't think you can say a player is not GOAT because they don't play doubles. Sampras, Federer, Nadal for instance. Maybe there is a case for making doubles a deciding factor when the players are difficult to separate. So for Graf v Navratilova yes because you cant split them you can edge it to Martina butthese 2 remain 1 and 2 in arguable order.

federerhoogenbandfan
07-20-2010, 08:12 PM
Doubles still is tennis though. I am one who values a complete career. Not just the slams, not just singles, but everything. It is amazing Martina and also Margaret Court did everything. So many tournament titles, so many doubles titles.

It is amazing the lengths some will go to in order to argue their favorite is the best. For example:

Seles fanatic- only the slams count. Her many more losses at her peak than Navratilova and Graf had at theirs dont matter. Only winning matters too, not how do impressively you do it, so all the sets lost and close calls in slams compared to past dominant champions dont matter. Oh and not winning Wimbledon which means even looking ONLY at winning slams and nothing else she is still inferior to said people doesnt matter either, there are excuses for that.

Serena fanatic- only the slams counts. she isnt as dominant since her competition was harder and because she had injuries.

Henin fanatic- she is really the best. She only isnt going to win 20 slams since she retired.
Only the French Open matters. Wimbledon is a clown slam.

selesian
07-21-2010, 07:56 AM
Too bad nobody cares what you choose to "accept". :) The GOAT candidates by 95% of the tennis viewing population are Graf and Navratilova. Evert and Court are battling for 3rd place.

Many respected tennis pundits and greats such as Navratilova, Evert and McEnroe have suggested that Seles would have won many more slams if it had not been for the stabbing -- indirectly saying that Graf's total would have been less, therefore reducing her GOAT candidacy.

davey25
07-21-2010, 08:04 AM
Many respected tennis pundits and greats such as Navratilova, Evert and McEnroe have suggested that Seles would have won many more slams if it had not been for the stabbing -- indirectly saying that Graf's total would have been less, therefore reducing her GOAT candidacy.

Navratilova and Evert are Grafs competitors for the GOAT title (especialy Navratilova). What would you expect, LOL! Not to mention Navratilova has always hated Graf. The only person she possibly hates more are the Williams sisters whom she has ridden like a horse since they first came on the scene.

selesian
07-21-2010, 08:14 AM
She wouldnt have continued to make every slam final. Greater players than Seles never keep up more than a 2-3 year pace at a certain level, and the final 8 years of Seles's career all excuses aside make it clear she wasnt destined to either.

I never implied that Seles would've made every slam final if she wasn't stabbed, but judging by what she had already achieved, she was definitely on her way to winning many more slams.

Lifetime head to head on clay: 3-3. Lifetime head to head at Roland Garros: 2-2, and as for primes their last match was when Graf was an injury warped 30 year old nearly retired player, much further past her prime than Seles and still won. Their final match on clay before the stabbing 10-8 in the 3rd set for Seles despite 66 unforced errors by Graf that day.

Contrast that to grass where Seles averages 1 game vs Graf's 6.

Pre-stabbing Seles had the edge over Graf on clay and would've won many more French titles. Monica didn't exactly play that great either in the 1992 French final, but eked out the win through sheer determination.

The two times they met on grass were not under "normal" circumstances. In '89 Monica was only 15 and very inexperienced on grass -- and in the '92 final, the furore over her grunting took it's toll...she looked subdued and was clearly focusing more on keeping her grunt in check rather than concentrating on the match itself.


Even if you take away Graf, Seles does not post a record like that in 91 or 92. She in fact had losses to every player in the WTA top 6 those two years.

Monica was only 17/18 in those years and hadn't yet reached her peak. She was still growing and getting stronger and would've added even more power to her already dominant game. Monica admitted that she didn't feel comfortable being number 1 in those years and only felt settled in the position after beating Graf in AO '93 -- it was the first time she had come back to win against her after losing the first set.

Graf was playing far better at the 94 event than 93. She lost 9 games to Sanchez in 93 and only 2 games to her in 94. That isnt to say she wasnt playing well in 93, but she was in unbeatable form at the 94 edition.

Without the best player around to challenge her, she simply steamrolled the weak opposition and went into AO '94 supremely confident.

Yes not only did he stab Seles but he didnt stab Graf, Novotna, Hingis, Davenport, Venus, so Seles would have a chance to win Wimbledon in the future.

Seles only played Wimbledon 3 times before the stabbing -- and each time she was getting closer and closer. I have no doubt that she would've won it at least a couple of times.

davey25
07-21-2010, 08:22 AM
I have no doubt that she would've won it at least a couple of times.

The same way Henin fans had no doubt she would win Wimbledon a couple times.

selesian
07-21-2010, 08:26 AM
Navratilova and Evert are Grafs competitors for the GOAT title (especialy Navratilova). What would you expect, LOL! Not to mention Navratilova has always hated Graf. The only person she possibly hates more are the Williams sisters whom she has ridden like a horse since they first came on the scene.

What was McEnroe's reason? Surely he didn't hate Graf too.

davey25
07-21-2010, 08:28 AM
What was McEnroe's reason? Surely he didn't hate Graf too.

I wouldnt know, I never actually heard him say that (I rarely heard him comment on womens tennis period before 1999 when he began doing the matches for the first time). The elder McEnroe contradicts himself alot anyway though, two years ago Nadal was the new GOAT, last year it was Federer, now it is Nadal again.

selesian
07-21-2010, 08:39 AM
The same way Henin fans had no doubt she would win Wimbledon a couple times.

Henin is a mental midget compared to pre-stabbing Seles...

It's laughable that you started this thread almost pooh-poohing Graf's achievements, and almost sounding pro-Seles -- and now you have done a complete turnaround.

Just proves you change your tune more often than a jukebox LOL

MotherMarjorie
07-21-2010, 08:41 AM
What was McEnroe's reason? Surely he didn't hate Graf too.
Mother Marjorie thinks that perhaps J. McEnroe is still stinging from Graf's withdrawl of their 1999 Wimbledon mixed doubles match?

He doesn't dislike Steffi Graf, but I think he felt she could have played that match.

selesian
07-21-2010, 08:49 AM
Mother Marjorie thinks that perhaps J. McEnroe is still stinging from Graf's withdrawl of their 1999 Wimbledon mixed doubles match?

He doesn't dislike Steffi Graf, but I think he felt she could have played that match.

:lol:

.....................

davey25
07-21-2010, 08:58 AM
Henin is a mental midget compared to pre-stabbing Seles...

It's laughable that you started this thread almost pooh-poohing Graf's achievements, and almost sounding pro-Seles -- and now you have done a complete turnaround.

Just proves you change your tune more often than a jukebox LOL

I was never pro Seles. Seles (and for that matter Graf) fanatics seem to have such a close minded concept of how things are. They honestly believe everyone either feels Graf is the undisputed GOAT, or that Graf isnt the GOAT because of the stabbing and thus that Seles was the true GOAT to be. When in reality there are many people who believe neither is true. It seems fan parties of both only care about the existence of these players and think that the minds of all WTA fans revolve around those two and only those two which is far from the case.

I do think the Seles stabbing probably gained Graf a few slams which helps her GOAT claims considering how close she is with a couple others as it is. That doesnt mean I think Seles herself was ever on her way to becoming the greatest ever herself, far from it.

And mental midget that she may be Henin is still better than Seles on grass. She moves far betters, volleys better, has a more adaptable backhand she can either come over or slice for the grass, and is much more adapt at handling the low balls and unpredictable bounces of grass.

Joe Pike
07-21-2010, 10:29 AM
Do you honestly believe that someone who had reached the final of the previous 8 slams she entered (and won 7) would've suddenly stopped making slam finals? ....

No.
But what makes you think she would have made ALL those finals in 1993-95?



...
Monica was definitely better on clay than Steffi. Roland Garros 1990 & 1992 is proof. ...

In the Roland Garros 1990 final Seles made 74 points, Steffi 73.
In the Hamburg 1991 final Graf won in 3 sets.
And in the RG 1992 final Seles won the last set 10-8.
Steffi had a higher winning percentage on clay in 1987-89 than Seles in 1990-92.
They were about even on clay.




...
Can I just remind you that the reason Graf was on a winning streak was because the number 1 player was not around. ....


Wrong.
In 1991 Graf was 65-8 win/loss - with 2-0 H2H against Seles.
In the 12 months after the stabbing she was 81-2 win/loss - with 0-0 H2H against Seles.
Clearly a major improvement - not influenced by Seles not being around.



...
Um, the same way as Seles beat her at the AO '93. Steffi came out all guns blazing, but it still wasn't enough to beat Monica. ...

Steffi had a pulled stomach muscle with hampered her serve in the last 2 sets. And AOs slow ReboundAce was - as everybody knows - Seles's favourite and Steffi's least favourite surface.


So again a Selesian fails ...

Joe Pike
07-21-2010, 10:36 AM
Doubles still is tennis though. I am one who values a complete career. Not just the slams, not just singles, but everything. It is amazing Martina and also Margaret Court did everything. So many tournament titles, so many doubles titles. ...

Navratilova needed the money in the early 70, so she played doubles.
And stayed with it. As it was a good exercise.

Steffi prefered to exercise with male hitting partners.


Doubles are not relevant.
Or would you rate Shriver with her 12 doubles slams higher than Sabatini with 1 singles slam?

Joe Pike
07-21-2010, 10:38 AM
Many respected tennis pundits and greats such as Navratilova, Evert and McEnroe have suggested that Seles would have won many more slams ...


Navratilova (USA), Evert (USA), McEnroe (USA) on Seles (USA) vs. Graf (Germany).

Do you really want to look stupid here ... ?

Joe Pike
07-21-2010, 10:42 AM
...
Pre-stabbing Seles had the edge over Graf on clay and would've won many more French titles. Monica didn't exactly play that great either in the 1992 French final, but eked out the win through sheer determination....

Ask every Seletard - those two close slam final wins against Steffi on slow surfaces (FO 92, AO 93) were Seles's greatest wins by far career-wise.

Seles's only wins against Steffi from summer 1990 until end of 1998, BTW.

dannythomas
07-21-2010, 10:59 AM
Many respected tennis pundits and greats such as Navratilova, Evert and McEnroe have suggested that Seles would have won many more slams if it had not been for the stabbing -- indirectly saying that Graf's total would have been less, therefore reducing her GOAT candidacy.

If Seles HAD won more slams in the 10 years after she came back on tour at the age of 22 ( when anyone else would be coming into their prime ) then Graf's record would have been diminished. But she didn't so Graf's record stands. In fact Seles ( not Henin ) was the "mental miidget" you referred to in your other post as witnessed by her second tennis career. She was more interested in collecting candy bars than more slams though she didn't mind collecting the prize money for her top 10 ranking she held over most of that time. So she was too traumatised to beat the people too good for her ( Davenport, Graf, Hingis, Venus, Serena ) but not too traumatised to beat the others. She was also obviously more of a mental midget than Venus or Serena who had to cope with their sister being murdered and still came back.

As for there being no comparison between Henin and Seles I agree entirely. Henin has far more talent and an all court game whereas Monica was one dimensional and simply not good enough . Henin is not a contender for GOAT but no less so than Seles.

Reverting to the title of the thread Steffi Graf is definitely a contender for GOAT. To say she is not is laughable. To the best of my knowledge she did not initiate the stabwound in Monica's shoulder unless you have evidence to the contrary. So stop being bitter and get over it.

Ripper014
07-21-2010, 01:28 PM
For 4 years between 87 - 90 Graf was in the finals of every slam save 2... If you need the numbers she was in the finals of 14 of 16 consecutive grand slam events, winning 9... and a streak where she won 8 of 9.

From '87 thru '99 when she retired... she won at least 1 slam every year save 2... I would say these numbers would give her consideration for GOAT.

Joe Pike
07-21-2010, 01:54 PM
For 4 years between 87 - 90 Graf was in the finals of every slam save 2... If you need the numbers she was in the finals of 14 of 16 consecutive grand slam events, winning 9... and a streak where she won 8 of 9. ...


From FO 87 until FO 90 she was in 13 consecutive (!) slam finals.
A record that never will be broken.

davey25
07-21-2010, 02:13 PM
As for there being no comparison between Henin and Seles I agree entirely. Henin has far more talent and an all court game whereas Monica was one dimensional and simply not good enough . Henin is not a contender for GOAT but no less so than Seles.

Not you are being hard on Seles. Seles is far superior to Henin. Henin is the superior grass courter, though neither are great, and that is it. Everywhere else Seles is easily superior. Including clay, the 90s clay court field was probably the strongest ever so to win 3 in a row on clay before the stabbing is far more impressive than Henin winning only 4 vs one of the worst clay court fields imaginable.

davey25
07-21-2010, 02:15 PM
Steffi had a pulled stomach muscle with hampered her serve in the last 2 sets.

LOL do you have an excuse for every match Graf loses.

britbox
07-21-2010, 02:33 PM
It would seem it's taken Seles fanbase longer to get over the stabbing than the girl herself. These people will be blaming the stabbing on their own personal failures next....

"I didn't get the job honey... I was up until the early hours arguing about Monica Seles fictional majors.. and turned up too late to be interviewed..." If it hadn't been for Gunther Parche, half of these Seles fans would have been running Microsoft no doubt.

dannythomas
07-21-2010, 03:09 PM
Not you are being hard on Seles. Seles is far superior to Henin. Henin is the superior grass courter, though neither are great, and that is it. Everywhere else Seles is easily superior. Including clay, the 90s clay court field was probably the strongest ever so to win 3 in a row on clay before the stabbing is far more impressive than Henin winning only 4 vs one of the worst clay court fields imaginable.

Not really. Henin has superior movement, better variation, better volleys, better tactical brain. Her one handed backhand is one of the best ever. Seles hit the ball harder, had a better serve - nothing else is better.

THUNDERVOLLEY
07-21-2010, 04:07 PM
It would seem it's taken Seles fanbase longer to get over the stabbing than the girl herself. These people will be blaming the stabbing on their own personal failures next....

Oh, they were doing that in many of the Seles threads. In their eyes, she's not responsible for failing to be fit, eating issues, failure to handle the generation after her own...just about anything one can imagine, and she's not responsible for it.

Ultra2HolyGrail
07-21-2010, 09:32 PM
I just want to say Steffi Graf is definetely not the best ever and it annoys the heck of me when I here she is. Here are some obvious reasons:

1)She does not have the most slams record, Court has it
2)She does not have the most Wimbledon record, Navratilova has it, in fact Graf is only 3rd
3)She does not have the most French record, Evert has it
4)She has neither the most U.S opens or most Australians record
5)She does not have the most tournament wins record, she is 3rd behind Navratilova and Evert, a distant third
6)She would not have the most weeks straight at #1 record if there were rankings when Lenglen and Wills played
7


Don't you see what a complete utter **** you are? Court, Lenglyn, Wills?

Face it daisy, you are completely clueless. I imagine you don't even play tennis. And just study records. What a complete joke.

davey25
07-22-2010, 02:09 AM
Don't you see what a complete utter **** you are? Court, Lenglyn, Wills?

Face it daisy, you are completely clueless. I imagine you don't even play tennis. And just study records. What a complete joke.

Sorry you are right. Wozniacki and Dementieva and their 60 mph 2nd serves would just pummble Court in her prime right. :lol:

federerhoogenbandfan
07-22-2010, 03:49 AM
I never implied that Seles would've made every slam final if she wasn't stabbed, but judging by what she had already achieved, she was definitely on her way to winning many more slams.

Based on a 2 year pattern? Tennis history shows up 2 year patters rarely hold for any players. I agree she would have won a few more majors without the stabbing, but beyond that is anothers guess.

Pre-stabbing Seles had the edge over Graf on clay and would've won many more French titles. Monica didn't exactly play that great either in the 1992 French final, but eked out the win through sheer determination.

Seles had many incredibly close calls both years she won the French in 1990 and 1992. She also had other noteable defeats on clay like the one sided Rome finals she lost to Sabatini. I dont think she was unbeatable on clay by any stretch despite her 3 straight titles. She almost certainly would have won at the French atleast once more without the stabbing, but many more of them is purely speculation. She didnt exactly make an open and shut case for herself by failing to make a single French Open final in many years upon her return.

The two times they met on grass were not under "normal" circumstances. In '89 Monica was only 15 and very inexperienced on grass -- and in the '92 final, the furore over her grunting took it's toll...she looked subdued and was clearly focusing more on keeping her grunt in check rather than concentrating on the match itself.

I agree but I think Graf was more likely to challenge and beat Seles on clay than Seles was to beat Graf on grass. You are free to disagree of course, but the stats and evidence at hand would seem to go along with what I said as well.

Without the best player around to challenge her, she simply steamrolled the weak opposition and went into AO '94 supremely confident.


Just to remind you the competition Graf would face after the Seles stabbing was the same Seles herself faced while #1 in addition to the apparently overrated and not so great Graf. Sabatini, Sanchez, a very old Martina, a very young Jennifer. So if Graf steamrolled weak opposition the same would be true of Seles. Just saying.

Lionheart392
07-22-2010, 05:31 AM
Based on a 2 year pattern? Tennis history shows up 2 year patters rarely hold for any players. I agree she would have won a few more majors without the stabbing, but beyond that is anothers guess.



Seles had many incredibly close calls both years she won the French in 1990 and 1992. She also had other noteable defeats on clay like the one sided Rome finals she lost to Sabatini. I dont think she was unbeatable on clay by any stretch despite her 3 straight titles. She almost certainly would have won at the French atleast once more without the stabbing, but many more of them is purely speculation. She didnt exactly make an open and shut case for herself by failing to make a single French Open final in many years upon her return.



I agree but I think Graf was more likely to challenge and beat Seles on clay than Seles was to beat Graf on grass. You are free to disagree of course, but the stats and evidence at hand would seem to go along with what I said as well.



Just to remind you the competition Graf would face after the Seles stabbing was the same Seles herself faced while #1 in addition to the apparently overrated and not so great Graf. Sabatini, Sanchez, a very old Martina, a very young Jennifer. So if Graf steamrolled weak opposition the same would be true of Seles. Just saying.

Good post, although she did make the final in 1998.

egn
07-22-2010, 07:22 AM
Seles would not likely have won the 93 U.S Open. She has never beaten Graf on a fast court, and Graf was in very good form at the U.S Open that year too.

Seles coming off missing the tour for two years managed to serve up Graf a bagel...you mean to tell me a prime Seles playing every week would not have been able to take her down.


Nor would she likely have beaten Graf at the 94 Australian Open. Graf beat Sanchez Vicario who is a tough opponent for her 6-2, 6-0 in the final. There was no stopping her there.


In 1993 Seles had beaten Graf with not too much trouble and lets not forget she put down a beating on Sabatini 6-2, 6-1...another tough opponent. Seles and Graf were so far ahead that they put almost regular beatings on their fellow top 10 players you can't call Graf unstoppable there just look at what Vicario did to her at the French and the US Open that year. Not to mention if Vicario could beat Graf on a fast surface I don't think it is hard to say Seles could as well who managed to win 3 World Championships on an even faster surface beating Navratilova. Seles was a lot better on slow hardcourts than most think.


Who knows about the 93 French. Seles was ill some that spring, looked so so in her return event at Hamburg, and no player had ever won 4 in a row so she would have had a challenge ahead of her.


She was more than likely going to win it and thats not even to be mean but the French Open clay seemed to just be perfect for Seles. She didn't do as well on other clay courts but in France she was just perfect.


Lastly it is funny how everyone ignores Court has 24 majors. If she were an American or evne European I bet she would get alot more GOAT consideration.

Nobody ignores Court most just kind of feel had she had more competition showing up in Australia she would have had a few less majors. With King, Bueno, Wade and a handful of others never showing up there to play it was a bit odd. Not to mention many years when she would win the Aussie she didn't do as well in either of the other two grass court majors at the time. 1970 was a truly amazing year but most will agree that the Australian Open count is a bit bloated as it usually had a field of lackluster talent compared to Wimbledon and The Us Open during that time and the French as well.

federerhoogenbandfan
07-22-2010, 11:51 AM
Seles coming off missing the tour for two years managed to serve up Graf a bagel...you mean to tell me a prime Seles playing every week would not have been able to take her down.

She still lost the match like all 7 matches she has played vs Graf on a medium or faster surface, and a year later she had been back on tour over a year and she lost much easier. Graf had all the pressure on her in that 95 U.S Open final, for Monica she was treated as a heroine in her comeback and everything was gravy and once that phase wore off her results got alot worse, and Graf was also dealing with her dads recent jailing at the time. She was playing far better at the 93 U.S Open than the 95 edition, heck she was playing better in 94 with a major injury when she lost to Sanchez Vicario in the final than the 95 edition. Remember she had lost to Amanda freaking Coetzer just before that U.S Open and nearly lost to her again in the 1st round there.

In 1993 Seles had beaten Graf with not too much trouble

So 3 sets is not much trouble, LOL!

and lets not forget she put down a beating on Sabatini 6-2, 6-1...another tough opponent.

Sabatini was already clearly on way down by that point. Prime Sanchez Vicario >>> past her prime Sabatini. Like I said Sabatini is WAY overrated anyway.

Seles and Graf were so far ahead that they put almost regular beatings on their fellow top 10 players you can't call Graf unstoppable there just look at what Vicario did to her at the French and the US Open that year.

Vicario didnt even play her at the French that year. Did you even follow tennis around then? And what does the U.S Open have to do with the Australian Open.

Sanchez Vicario was never an easy opponent for Graf. She was a very bad matchup for Graf so for Graf to beat her for the loss of only 2 games showed she was in rare form.

Not to mention if Vicario could beat Graf on a fast surface I don't think it is hard to say Seles could as well who managed to win 3 World Championships on an even faster surface beating Navratilova. Seles was a lot better on slow hardcourts than most think.

If she could have why didnt she do it in 7 tries? Like I already said Sanchez Vicario was a bad matchup for Graf.

She was more than likely going to win it

Even Chris Evert couldnt win 4 French Opens in a row. I wouldnt assume it would be an automatic for Seles at all.

Joe Pike
07-22-2010, 11:52 AM
Seles coming off missing the tour for two years managed to serve up Graf a bagel...


So did Sabine Hack in 1993.

Your point being?


BTW, at the time of the Hack match Pa Graf was not in the slammer and Steffi had not to x-ray her foot the day before the match.

federerhoogenbandfan
07-22-2010, 11:56 AM
And what is impressive about a bagel when you still LOSE the match.

egn
07-22-2010, 04:42 PM
She still lost the match like all 7 matches she has played vs Graf on a medium or faster surface, and a year later she had been back on tour over a year and she lost much easier. Graf had all the pressure on her in that 95 U.S Open final, for Monica she was treated as a heroine in her comeback and everything was gravy and once that phase wore off her results got alot worse, and Graf was also dealing with her dads recent jailing at the time. She was playing far better at the 93 U.S Open than the 95 edition, heck she was playing better in 94 with a major injury when she lost to Sanchez Vicario in the final than the 95 edition. Remember she had lost to Amanda freaking Coetzer just before that U.S Open and nearly lost to her again in the 1st round there.


Seles was also playing far far better in 90-92 unless of course you want to say Seles just coming back on tour was in much better condition then graf.




So 3 sets is not much trouble, LOL!


I said not too much trouble first of all include all the words. Second of all after the first set Seles was in obvious control watch it.



Sabatini was already clearly on way down by that point. Prime Sanchez Vicario >>> past her prime Sabatini. Like I said Sabatini is WAY overrated anyway.


Sabatini beat your savior in a US Open final.



Vicario didnt even play her at the French that year. Did you even follow tennis around then? And what does the U.S Open have to do with the Australian Open.


Sorry I lost Pierce in the sentence it was supposed to read look what Pierce and Vicario did to her at the respective slams. The US Open was a hard court surface and my point about Vicario was on the comment of Seles being unable to win a US Open. Seles could beat Vicario down all the time and if Vicario found a way to beat Graf whats to say Seles might have not been able to. She was only two time defending champion. Note I did follow tennis.


Sanchez Vicario was never an easy opponent for Graf. She was a very bad matchup for Graf so for Graf to beat her for the loss of only 2 games showed she was in rare form.


If she could have why didnt she do it in 7 tries? Like I already said Sanchez Vicario was a bad matchup for Graf.


Really? I can pull up at least 5 Vicario Graf matches where Vicario didn't win more than 3 games and a handful more where it was not close at all.

1990 Tokyo Graf def. Vicario 6-1, 6-2
1990 Ameila Island Graf dev. Vicario 6-1, 6-0
1990 US Open Graf def. Vicario 6-1, 6-2
1990 Leipzig Graf def. Vicario 6-1, 6-1
1994 San Diegio Graf def. Vicario 6-0, 6-2

I'll give you in 1993 Vicario started to pose a decent threat and in 1994 Vicario became a bad match up for Graf but outside of that one year, the year Vicario won 2 majors the year Seles who owned the head to head with Vicario her whole career pre and post stabbing was missing. However prior to 1993 Vicario couldn't even beat Graf on her best surface clay other than the French Open final of 1989 in which I am still not sure how she won it but hey she managed it.


Even Chris Evert couldnt win 4 French Opens in a row. I wouldnt assume it would be an automatic for Seles at all.

Did you watch tennis back then? Cause in Chris Evert's prime she opted out of 3 French Opens giving players like Ruzici free slams. Evert would have easily won 4 straight had in her best years she played 4 straight so don't even make that comparison. It has no weight whatsoever tennis changed really quickly and back when Evert played she obviously did not see the French Open as important as World Team Tennis which is what she chose over it. However Evert easily would have won 4 straight had she played 76 and 77. Although she might have lost it in 78 but I find it highly unlikely she could have had 7 straight...Again this is all speculation. However why does how many you win in a row matter? Nobody had ever won 5 US Opens when Fed did it? Nobody had ever won 6 Wimbledons but Navra did it? Winning one previously has nothing to do with winning the next one. Each tournament is unrelated to the next. Just cause you won 3 doesn't mean you are less likely to win a fourth especially if you are 19, still number 1 in the world and still one of the best players on clay.


And what is impressive about a bagel when you still LOSE the match.

Okay then justification for Graf being able to beat Seles in 93 at France better not be going 10-8 in the third, what's impressive.


So did Sabine Hack in 1993.

Your point being?


BTW, at the time of the Hack match Pa Graf was not in the slammer and Steffi had not to x-ray her foot the day before the match.


Point simply being Seles not near her best was able to dominate Graf for a point in time during a match had Seles been closer to top form..I mean it's just a thought.

What I find more funny is although I agree some Seles fanatics are crazy is you all simply believe that in 93-95 SELES WOULD HAVE STOLEN NOTHING FROM GRAF. She had had only won 3 majors two years running and been number 1, yet SELES WOULD HAVE MANAGED NONE of the majors GRAF won and still had what at max 12 majors. If you HONESTLY believe that...okay. However I think it would have been more like Seles 15 Graf 18..but if you believe otherwise FINE.

federerhoogenbandfan
07-22-2010, 09:31 PM
Seles was also playing far far better in 90-92 unless of course you want to say Seles just coming back on tour was in much better condition then graf.

Playing far better in 1990 than in her initial return in 1995? The year she lost to Linda Ferrando at the U.S Open vs the year she thrashed everyone at both the Canada and U.S Opens other than Graf.

Did I say Seles was in better condition than Graf when she first came back. Heck Seles was NEVER in better condition than Graf. All I said was when she first came back she was treated like a glorified heroine upon her return and of all the top players she was the only one with no pressure at her at all at that point, the pressure was on the other top players especialy Graf, Sanchez, Martinez, Novotna, and Sabatini to perform vs a player who had missed 28 months (and very strangely chose to return as a fat *** with tendonitis) to mantain their reputations. She had also seen them play for years while out, they hadnt seen her in 2 and a half years and had to get an idea of her game all over again. Hence why Seles's best results of her entire comeback were her first 3-4 tournaments, especialy her first 2, and dwindled backwards from there once she returned to life as a more regular tour player.

I said not too much trouble first of all include all the words. Second of all after the first set Seles was in obvious control watch it.


I did watch it. Graf controled the 1st set, Seles the 2nd, and the 3rd set was very hard fought with 5 deuce games but Seles won all the important points. It was a very competitive match and on Seles's best surface and Graf's worst. Seles would normally beat Graf on rebound ace but Graf played far too well in 1994 to lose to anyone.

Sabatini beat your savior in a US Open final.

LOL remind me who my savior is. My all time favorite players are Evonne Goolagong, Kim Clijsters, Serena Williams, and Lindsay Davenport, but even none of those would I refer to as my savior. Sabatini has never beaten any of those people in a U.S Open final.

My only point is Sabatini is a much worse player than Sanchez Vicario. 4 slams to 1 speaks for itself, regardless all the excessive overpraise Sabatini seems to get on this forum. And Sabatini had the benefit of the Seles stabbing, just as Sanchez did, Sanchez was atleast good enough to take advantage and clean up the scraps when Graf was upset or injured (and give her some amazing matches otherwise), Sabatini was not. Sabatini seems to be praised by certain posters here as superior to nearly all 2 or 3 slam winners, and comparable to a 4 slam winner like Sanchez, and she has done nothing to deserve that praise. And it is funny some credit Sabatini as being a Graf rival but wont consider Sanchez. What a joke, compare their performances in slams vs Graf and it is easy to see who is more of a rival pending any definition. Sabatini should not be put on a level wit Sanchez, but instead on a level with people like Novotna and Martinez who arent that far from her age, played in the same era, and have similar career achievements in virtually everyway- not only 1 slam but in other stats as well.

Sorry I lost Pierce in the sentence it was supposed to read look what Pierce and Vicario did to her at the respective slams. The US Open was a hard court surface and my point about Vicario was on the comment of Seles being unable to win a US Open. Seles could beat Vicario down all the time and if Vicario found a way to beat Graf whats to say Seles might have not been able to. She was only two time defending champion. Note I did follow tennis.


The thing is you chose 1993 which was strange as Graf was actually in top form that year, along with 1996. Seles was far more likely to beat Graf at the U.S Open in either 1995 (not in top form at the time of the Open) or 1994 (injured in final which is only reason she lost final to Sanchez if you actually watched the match) if she did.


Really? I can pull up at least 5 Vicario Graf matches where Vicario didn't win more than 3 games and a handful more where it was not close at all.

1990 Tokyo Graf def. Vicario 6-1, 6-2
1990 Ameila Island Graf dev. Vicario 6-1, 6-0
1990 US Open Graf def. Vicario 6-1, 6-2
1990 Leipzig Graf def. Vicario 6-1, 6-1
1994 San Diegio Graf def. Vicario 6-0, 6-2

I'll give you in 1993 Vicario started to pose a decent threat and in 1994 Vicario became a bad match up for Graf but outside of that one year, the year Vicario won 2 majors the year Seles who owned the head to head with Vicario her whole career pre and post stabbing was missing. However prior to 1993 Vicario couldn't even beat Graf on her best surface clay other than the French Open final of 1989 in which I am still not sure how she won it but hey she managed it.


1. Sanchez beat Graf about a quarter of the times they played overall, but 4 times total in slams. She did fare better vs Graf (especialy in slams) than even post stabbing Seles, a mid 30s Navratilova, and than Martina Hingis. Are Seles, an aging Navratilova, or Hingis better players than Graf? Yes Sanchez was a bad matchup for Graf.

2. Notice almost all of the blowout matches you posted were in 1990. Yeah exactly.

Did you watch tennis back then? Cause in Chris Evert's prime she opted out of 3 French Opens giving players like Ruzici free slams. Evert would have easily won 4 straight had in her best years she played 4 straight so don't even make that comparison.

Probably but who knows. Had everyone played from 1976 to 1978 she might have lost in 1 of 76 or 77 to say Evonne Goolagong in an upset (the only one giving her close matches on clay) and thus not ever reached 4 in a row. The likes of Ruzici and Barker benefited not only from the absence of Evert but nearly everyone else. Unlike Seles fans I prefer to deal in fact than speculation, and the fact is nobody has won 4 in a row there and while it is possible I think it is far from certain the obviously non GOAT caliber Seles would have been the one to do it.

It has no weight whatsoever tennis changed really quickly and back when Evert played she obviously did not see the French Open as important as World Team Tennis which is what she chose over it. However Evert easily would have won 4 straight had she played 76 and 77. Although she might have lost it in 78 but I find it highly unlikely she could have had 7 straight...

Why was she more likely to lose in 1978. If anything had everyone played the French her toughest competition would have been Goolagong in 75 or 76, Austin in 79 and 1980. Navratilova pre 1982 was zero threat whatsoever to Evert on clay, heck she wasnt even a threat to her on grass until 1978.

Again this is all speculation. However why does how many you win in a row matter? Nobody had ever won 5 US Opens when Fed did it? Nobody had ever won 6 Wimbledons but Navra did it? Winning one previously has nothing to do with winning the next one. Each tournament is unrelated to the next. Just cause you won 3 doesn't mean you are less likely to win a fourth especially if you are 19, still number 1 in the world and still one of the best players on clay.

Federer and Navratilova > Seles

Okay then justification for Graf being able to beat Seles in 93 at France better not be going 10-8 in the third, what's impressive.

Graf vs Seles on clay: 3-3. Graf vs Seles on faster hard courts: 4-0 (1-0 on carpet, 2-0 on grass)

Point simply being Seles not near her best was able to dominate Graf for a point in time during a match had Seles been closer to top form..I mean it's just a thought.


What I find more funny is although I agree some Seles fanatics are crazy is you all simply believe that in 93-95 SELES WOULD HAVE STOLEN NOTHING FROM GRAF. She had had only won 3 majors two years running and been number 1, yet SELES WOULD HAVE MANAGED NONE of the majors GRAF won and still had what at max 12 majors. If you HONESTLY believe that...okay. However I think it would have been more like Seles 15 Graf 18..but if you believe otherwise FINE.

I questioned some of the specific slams you chose. That is all. I think slams like the 95 French Open and 95 U.S Open were far more likely than the 93 U.S Open or 94 Australian Open. But that is just me. I couldnt care much about either Graf or Seles on a personal level but enjoy mocking how overrated Seles is by many people.

namui
07-22-2010, 09:40 PM
I just want to say Steffi Graf is definetely not the best ever and it annoys the heck of me when I here she is. Here are some obvious reasons:

1)She does not have the most slams record, Court has it
2)She does not have the most Wimbledon record, Navratilova has it, in fact Graf is only 3rd
3)She does not have the most French record, Evert has it
4)She has neither the most U.S opens or most Australians record
5)She does not have the most tournament wins record, she is 3rd behind Navratilova and Evert, a distant third
6)She would not have the most weeks straight at #1 record if there were rankings when Lenglen and Wills played
7)She does not have the record for most consecutive years winning a slam, Evert does at 13 to Graf's 10


The funny thing about these reasons is it has to take a combination of those great players to beat Graf's achievement. From this list, Every appears three times, Navratilova two times, and the rest once each.

Joe Pike
07-22-2010, 10:11 PM
...
What I find more funny is although I agree some Seles fanatics are crazy is you all simply believe that in 93-95 SELES WOULD HAVE STOLEN NOTHING FROM GRAF. She had had only won 3 majors two years running and been number 1, yet SELES WOULD HAVE MANAGED NONE of the majors GRAF won and still had what at max 12 majors. If you HONESTLY believe that...okay. However I think it would have been more like Seles 15 Graf 18..but if you believe otherwise FINE.

Graf only 18?
Which 4 (!) slams would Graf not have been able to win?


BTW, how many slams did Seles win or had an opportunity to win them because Steffi was injured or ill? Steffi didn't play AO 92, AO 95, AO 96, Wim 97, USO 97, AO 98, FO 98, USO 99.
Not even talking about Seles's slam wins in the early 90s when Steffi was down due a nasty blackmail scandal for almost 2 years.

DMan
07-22-2010, 10:49 PM
Winning one previously has nothing to do with winning the next one. Each tournament is unrelated to the next.


EXACTLY......so why do so many Selestials INSIST that it was a given that just because Seles had won majors in the past meant it was an automatic she would win them again?

I am still waiting for someone to explain the meaning of the term domination.....as in "Seles dominated Graf."

I mean how do you "dominate" someone you have a losing H2H record against?

How do you dominate someone you beat a grand total of 5 times in a 10 year period?

How do "dominate" someone who on just one occasion.....and it occurred in a period of one month......did you beat more than one time in a row?

I mean beating a rival twice in a row on one occasion = domination?

I mean just how is that possible?

HOW?

HOW????

egn
07-22-2010, 11:24 PM
Graf only 18?
Which 4 (!) slams would Graf not have been able to win?


BTW, how many slams did Seles win or had an opportunity to win them because Steffi was injured or ill? Steffi didn't play AO 92, AO 95, AO 96, Wim 97, USO 97, AO 98, FO 98, USO 99.
Not even talking about Seles's slam wins in the early 90s when Steffi was down due a nasty blackmail scandal for almost 2 years.

93 French
94 Aussie
95 US are 3 I feel would have been Seles had she not been stabbed.

With chances at 95 French and 93 US. Are these hard to believe Seles could have won? Given the fact that at the time of the stabbing she was easily the best clay courter at the moment and the best all around hardcourt player as Graf was in a nasty slump still, Vicario was not in her prime and was Seles whipping girl and Navra/Saby were falling out of their respective prime. Those are 3 of Graf's slams I feel Seles could have easily had taken. It does not seem unreasonable to say the number 1 player in the world who was dominating the tour would have continued to do so if not stabbed? Am I right?

egn
07-22-2010, 11:48 PM
My only point is Sabatini is a much worse player than Sanchez Vicario. 4 slams to 1 speaks for itself, regardless all the excessive overpraise Sabatini seems to get on this forum. And Sabatini had the benefit of the Seles stabbing, just as Sanchez did, Sanchez was atleast good enough to take advantage and clean up the scraps when Graf was upset or injured (and give her some amazing matches otherwise), Sabatini was not. Sabatini seems to be praised by certain posters here as superior to nearly all 2 or 3 slam winners, and comparable to a 4 slam winner like Sanchez, and she has done nothing to deserve that praise. And it is funny some credit Sabatini as being a Graf rival but wont consider Sanchez. What a joke, compare their performances in slams vs Graf and it is easy to see who is more of a rival pending any definition. Sabatini should not be put on a level wit Sanchez, but instead on a level with people like Novotna and Martinez who arnt that far from her age, played in the same era, and have similar career achievements in virtually everyway- not only 1 slam but in other stats as well.


What's funny is this whole paragrpah is just completel bull. Sabatini was definitely a tougher match for Graf than Vicario was first of all and probably a tougher one than Seles. She has a better head to head against the both of them. I agree she should not be put on the level of Sanchez but people put her on the level of say Mauresmo because she was definitely better than Novotna and Martinez. She owned Graf in 1991 won 4 straight on a multitude of different surfaces. I'm sorry but beating Sabatini in a blow out is just as impressive as beating Vicario in a blow out as Sabtini was a dangerous player to the top players. I mean just as Vicario how good was Sabatini who oddly enough leads there clay court head to head 10-4...


The thing is you chose 1993 which was strange as Graf was actually in top form that year, along with 1996. Seles was far more likely to beat Graf at the U.S Open in either 1995 (not in top form at the time of the Open) or 1994 (injured in final which is only reason she lost final to Sanchez if you actually watched the match) if she did.

Well I did not choose 1995 because people would complain she technically was in it and 1994 does not count becuase Graf did not win it so how is she stealing it away from Graf?



1. Sanchez beat Graf about a quarter of the times they played overall, but 4 times total in slams. She did fare better vs Graf (especialy in slams) than even post stabbing Seles, a mid 30s Navratilova, and than Martina Hingis. Are Seles, an aging Navratilova, or Hingis better players than Graf? Yes Sanchez was a bad matchup for Graf.

2. Notice almost all of the blowout matches you posted were in 1990. Yeah exactly.


You said "Sanchez was never an easy opponent for Graf.." I disagreed and said outside of the year 1993-94 Graf whopped Sanchez.. You then also discredit Sabatini as being a worthy win like that of Sanchez when both Seles and Graf struggled more against Sabatini. Look at the head to heads and the overall head to heads. Graf rarely got a 14 straight set wins off Gabby while she got 17 straight set wins off Vicario. She lost 3 times more to Gabby at one point lost 5 straight to Gabby and Gabby has 4 straight set victories compared to Vicario's two. (Also in general I'm pretty sure Gabby has the better win percentage.)



Probably but who knows. Had everyone played from 1976 to 1978 she might have lost in 1 of 76 or 77 to say Evonne Goolagong in an upset (the only one giving her close matches on clay) and thus not ever reached 4 in a row. The likes of Ruzici and Barker benefited not only from the absence of Evert but nearly everyone else. Unlike Seles fans I prefer to deal in fact than speculation, and the fact is nobody has won 4 in a row there and while it is possible I think it is far from certain the obviously non GOAT caliber Seles would have been the one to do it.

Why was she more likely to lose in 1978. If anything had everyone played the French her toughest competition would have been Goolagong in 75 or 76, Austin in 79 and 1980. Navratilova pre 1982 was zero threat whatsoever to Evert on clay, heck she wasnt even a threat to her on grass until 1978.

I just chose 78 because it seemed like potential to have the deepest field. Not as if it would really have mattered as Evert lost no matches on clay in any of those years I'm pretty sure.




I questioned some of the specific slams you chose. That is all. I think slams like the 95 French Open and 95 U.S Open were far more likely than the 93 U.S Open or 94 Australian Open. But that is just me. I couldnt care much about either Graf or Seles on a personal level but enjoy mocking how overrated Seles is by many people.

I see what you mean. Personally I don't think Seles is close to GOAT but I think her being stabbed hurts Graf's case and hell well never know anyway on which slams she would have won or would not have won.

federerhoogenbandfan
07-23-2010, 01:22 AM
What's funny is this whole paragrpah is just completel bull. Sabatini was definitely a tougher match for Graf than Vicario was first of all and probably a tougher one than Seles. She has a better head to head against the both of them. I agree she should not be put on the level of Sanchez but people put her on the level of say Mauresmo because she was definitely better than Novotna and Martinez. She owned Graf in 1991 won 4 straight on a multitude of different surfaces.

NO, NO, NO, no, no, no to all of this. This paragraph is only further evidence of how insanely overrated Sabatini seems to be on TW. Lets break down what you said:

Sabatini was definitely a tougher match for Graf than Vicario was first of all and probably a tougher one than Seles. She has a better head to head against the both of them.

This is simply not true. Sabatini's 11-29 overall head to head with Graf is worse than Seles's 5-10, though better than Sanchez's 8-28. However most important in the slams when it matters most it is:

Seles 4-6 vs Graf
Sanchez 4-9 vs Graf
Sabatini 1-11 vs Graf

Of the three Sabatini is by far and away the easiest of the 3 for Graf to beat when it mattered most.

Well I did not choose 1995 because people would complain she technically won it and 1994 does not count becuase Graf did not win it so how is she stealing it away from Graf?

I agree she should not be put on the level of Sanchez but people put her on the level of say Mauresmo because she was definitely better than Novotna and Martinez.

It is funny you say that for a few reasons. First of all I dont consider Mauresmo any better than even say Novotna. Mauresmo isnt one of the better even 2 slam winners. She is probably the 4th weakest #1 ever although a big distance behind (or better) than the 3some of Ivanovic, Jankovic, and Safina.

Now back to Sabatini it is funny how you and others say she was so much better than Novotna and Martinez when she played in the same era and her career achievements are very similar to theirs. And she is almost the same age as either too, she is less than 2 years younger than Jana and less than 2 years older than Conchita. Here are some career stats of the three:

Sabatini- 1 slam singles title, 3 slam finals, 27 singles titles, 2 WTA Championship titles, 16 tier 1 or tier 2 titles, highest rank- #3

Martinez- 1 slam singles title, 3 slam finals, 33 singles titles, 16 tier 1 or tier 2 titles, highest rank- #2

Novotna- 1 slam singles title, 4 slam finals, 1 WTA Championship title, 24 singles titles, 13 tier 1 or tier 2 titles, highest rank- #2

Sabatini is probably the best of that trio but it is by nowhere near the margin as potrayed by some. And Novotna at her best is clearly better on grass and arguably better indoors (inspite of Gaby's 2 WTA titles), while Conchita at her best is probably better on clay and similar on grass.

She owned Graf in 1991 won 4 straight on a multitude of different surfaces.

This fact is actually the first thing brought up to reference how poorly Graf was playing for her standards, and how badly she was slumping, during this period of time; rather then this as an example how amazing Sabatini was during this period. Funny how outside this period of extreme sucess Sabatini had vs a slumping Graf when she won 7 of 8, her overall career head to head was otherwise 4-28. So basically since you like breaking down periods for Sanchez, outside of a less than 2 year period Graf completely owned Sabatini.

I mean just as Vicario how good was Sabatini who oddly enough leads there clay court head to head 10-4...

I am sure Sabatini would rather have 3 French Open titles as opposed to 0 than the 10-4 head to head lead on clay. And they never played at the French where most likely the mentally tougher Sanchez Vicario would have prevailed.

I'm sorry but beating Sabatini in a blow out is just as impressive as beating Vicario in a blow out as Sabtini was a dangerous player to the top players.

Like I mentioned Sabatini was clearly already on the way down by the time of the 93 Australian Open, which if you followed womens tennis closely at the time you would realize. In case you dont believe me though here are some examples of this:

-Sabatini won ZERO titles between May 1992- November 1994. This a player who won 27 career WTA titles, going 2.5 years without one

-the Australian Open would be Sabatini's only slam semifinal of 1993. And she reached that only after surviving match point on a controversial line call to a pre prime/Jim Pierce stage Mary Pierce in the quarters

-as you trumpet Sabatini's supposed success vs Graf, her final ever win would be April 1992, as she rode a 4+ year losing streak to Graf into retirement

So no the smackdown wasnt that amazing as Sabatini's career was clearly already on the downslope at that point. She certainly wasnt the kind of threat Sanchez Vicario in 94 was, or particularly the kind of threat to Seles in slams (even if she werent on decline) as Sanchez is to Graf.


You said "Sanchez was never an easy opponent for Graf.." I disagreed and said outside of the year 1993-94 Graf whopped Sanchez.. This is simply not true. Other than the huge upset in the French Open final a prime Graf was whopping on an extremely pre prime Sanchez from 87-1990. From 1991 onwards Sanchez was never an easy opponent for Graf. Lets look at their head to head history more closely:

1991- Sanchez whoops Graf 6-0, 6-2 in the French Open semis, arguably the most humiliating slam defeat of Graf's career. In fact they played only 2 matches this year and Graf won the other one 7-6 in the 3rd set in the Berlin final.

1992- Sanchez only beats Graf once in 7 meetings this year but boy that is a big meeting- the U.S Open quarters where Sanchez beats Graf in straight sets, costing Graf any chance of overtaking Seles as top player of 1992. By now she has already tripled Sabatini's career total of slam wins over Graf. And in their 7 matches this year in 5 of 7 Sanchez either won or lost in 3 sets (as I presume you are giving Sabatini credit for 3 setters with Graf, as it certainly isnt based much on wins, especialy important ones).

1993- Sanchez beats Graf in 2 finals this year- the Miami final (the biggest non slam along with the WTA Championships) and Hamburg. The year ends with Graf topping Sanchez in an exciting 4 set final in the WTA Championships.

1994- Needles to say Sanchez did serious damage to Graf this year but you already conceded that.

1995 and 1996- They only played 4 times, all in slam finals, but produced 2 of the all time classic WTA finals at Wimbledon 95 and French Open 96.

In fairness to Sabatini she was a mild threat to Graf in 1988-1989 too. She was the only person to beat Graf more than once in this span, in fact giving her 3 of her 5 defeats however still losing all their important matches- losing to Graf in 4 slam semis or finals, the Olympic final of 88, and the 89 WTA Championships; thus still relegating her to a lesser showing against Graf than FO and U.S Open conquerer of Graf of 91 and 92 Sanchez Vicario (and if you want to point out how poorly Graf was playing then compared to her 88-89 standard well what will that say about the majority of Sabatini's career 11 wins over Graf or Seles's dominance during this period for that matter). Sanchez in fact was more of a threat to Steffi from 1991 to 1993 as Sabatini was anytime to Graf outside of the late 1990-early 1992 period. And Sanchez likewise did more damage and threat to Graf in big matches in 94-96 as Sabatini did to Graf even the 1990-1992 period. And even outside of his 6 year period she still managed a slam final win over Graf, matching what Sabatini managed vs Graf her whole career (and in Gaby's case achieved vs a far lesser version of Graf than the 89 one).

A simple rule to remember too. Threat = beats in SLAMS.

And read up earlier to what I already mentioned. If you want to cherry pick, Sabatini was a joke opponent for Graf outside the period from the 1990 U.S Open to 1992 clay court court season where Graf was in for her what was a huge slump and Sabatini was playing the tennis of her life. Only 3 or 4 wins remaining out of 30+ matches.


You then also discredit Sabatini as being a worthy win like that of Sanchez when both Seles and Graf struggled more against Sabatini. No Graf did not struggle more against Sabatini. This is where your perception of reality is badly skewed. Yes Seles did struggle more against Sabatini. As I already mentioned Seles was a nightmare matchup for Sanchez Vicario, while Sanchez was a much tougher one for Graf, which is why you cant draw exact parallels using Graf's matches with Sanchez Vicario.

Look at the head to heads and the overall head to heads. Graf rarely got a 14 straight set wins off Gabby while she got 17 straight set wins off Vicario.ROTFL where the heck are you getting your stats from. Graf's longest ever win streak over Sanchez was a 7 match win streak of a prime Graf vs an up and coming Sanchez. Graf began her so called rivalry with Sabatini with a 11 match win streak when both were highly touted up and comers almost the same age. Sabatini ended it with yet another losing streak, this time of 8 matches.

nat75
07-23-2010, 07:57 AM
Graf VS Sabatini-Sanchez

28-8

29-11 (with a run of five consecutive wins).

Enough said

selesian
07-23-2010, 08:24 AM
No.
But what makes you think she would have made ALL those finals in 1993-95?

Where in my post did I say I expected her to make ALL the slam finals in 1993-95? I simply stated that she had made the finals of the previous eight slams, and there was no reason to doubt that her appearances in finals would've suddenly dried up without the stabbing.

In the Roland Garros 1990 final Seles made 74 points, Steffi 73.
In the Hamburg 1991 final Graf won in 3 sets.
And in the RG 1992 final Seles won the last set 10-8.
Steffi had a higher winning percentage on clay in 1987-89 than Seles in 1990-92.
They were about even on clay.

Pre stabbing Monica won the ones that mattered most on clay, therefore she had the edge.

Wrong.
In 1991 Graf was 65-8 win/loss - with 2-0 H2H against Seles.
In the 12 months after the stabbing she was 81-2 win/loss - with 0-0 H2H against Seles.
Clearly a major improvement - not influenced by Seles not being around.

Their head-to-head in 1991 has no bearing on what could have happened in 1993. Sure, Graf had better results, but it simply means they would've met in more finals than before.

Monica had won 3 of the 4 slam finals they contested, so I would say she had the mental edge in the big occasions --- especially if it got real close.

Steffi had a pulled stomach muscle with hampered her serve in the last 2 sets. And AOs slow ReboundAce was - as everybody knows - Seles's favourite and Steffi's least favourite surface.

LMAO

So again a Selesian fails ...

Erm...no.

selesian
07-23-2010, 08:28 AM
Navratilova (USA), Evert (USA), McEnroe (USA) on Seles (USA) vs. Graf (Germany).

Do you really want to look stupid here ... ?

Poor little german Shteffi being discriminated against by those bigotted Americans. LOL.

selesian
07-23-2010, 08:34 AM
Ask every Seletard - those two close slam final wins against Steffi on slow surfaces (FO 92, AO 93) were Seles's greatest wins by far career-wise.

Seles's only wins against Steffi from summer 1990 until end of 1998, BTW.

Those wins came within a short space of time -- and there would've been more in the coming years had it not been for the stabbing.

It was developing into a great rivalry. Tennis fans were robbed of some classic matches between the two.

selesian
07-23-2010, 08:40 AM
If Seles HAD won more slams in the 10 years after she came back on tour at the age of 22 ( when anyone else would be coming into their prime ) then Graf's record would have been diminished. But she didn't so Graf's record stands. In fact Seles ( not Henin ) was the "mental miidget" you referred to in your other post as witnessed by her second tennis career. She was more interested in collecting candy bars than more slams though she didn't mind collecting the prize money for her top 10 ranking she held over most of that time. So she was too traumatised to beat the people too good for her ( Davenport, Graf, Hingis, Venus, Serena ) but not too traumatised to beat the others. She was also obviously more of a mental midget than Venus or Serena who had to cope with their sister being murdered and still came back.

As for there being no comparison between Henin and Seles I agree entirely. Henin has far more talent and an all court game whereas Monica was one dimensional and simply not good enough . Henin is not a contender for GOAT but no less so than Seles.

Reverting to the title of the thread Steffi Graf is definitely a contender for GOAT. To say she is not is laughable. To the best of my knowledge she did not initiate the stabwound in Monica's shoulder unless you have evidence to the contrary. So stop being bitter and get over it.

Seles wasn't only losing to top players, though. She had quite a few bad losses to unheralded players -- Foretz, Lucic, Studenikova, Bedanova etc.

And as tragic as it is, there's no comparison between the death of a family member and trauma caused by a murder attempt on oneself, especially to a teenager -- not even close.

Whilst I agree that Henin had a more all round game, that alone doesn't guarantee success -- underachiever Mauresmo (a more naturally gifted player) is proof of that.

Graf was a one dimensional player too. She had an awful overhead and would fluff easy volleys. She only had her serve, forehand and athleticism going for her.

selesian
07-23-2010, 08:41 AM
From FO 87 until FO 90 she was in 13 consecutive (!) slam finals.
A record that never will be broken.

A very weak period in women's tennis.

davey25
07-23-2010, 08:51 AM
A very weak period in women's tennis.

Indeed, after all the exact same group of women Seles was also winning (though less dominant) against.

davey25
07-23-2010, 08:58 AM
Seles wasn't only losing to top players, though. She had quite a few bad losses to unheralded players -- Foretz, Lucic, Studenikova, Bedanova etc.

She was down 4-1 and 2 breaks to Akiko Kijimuta at the 1992 French, and would have lost if Kijimuta didnt badly choke at the end. Those kind of "bad" losses were going to happen eventually, they do for everyone. Especialy as Monica was eventually past her prime at a certain point, irregardless of the stabbing. 2 of those losses you mentioned were at Wimbledon which is the first significant place they would come. Foretz was in some minor event and it is while Seles was dealing with an illness of some kind.

Lucic shouldnt even be included anyway. She went on to reach the semis beating the previous years finalist as well, and then nearly beating Graf in the semis. If she was playing well enough to make the semis and nearly beat Graf, she was playing well enough to beat Seles on grass.

selesian
07-23-2010, 08:59 AM
And what is impressive about a bagel when you still LOSE the match.

Wish they had Hawk-Eye back then. It's quite possible that Monica could've wrapped up that match in straights.

selesian
07-23-2010, 09:10 AM
Graf only 18?
Which 4 (!) slams would Graf not have been able to win?

And Graf fans have the cheek to call Seles fans deluded, lol

BTW, how many slams did Seles win or had an opportunity to win them because Steffi was injured or ill? Steffi didn't play AO 92, AO 95, AO 96, Wim 97, USO 97, AO 98, FO 98, USO 99.
Not even talking about Seles's slam wins in the early 90s when Steffi was down due a nasty blackmail scandal for almost 2 years.

Oh well, that voids everything that Seles won during those two years then. :rolleyes:

selesian
07-23-2010, 09:21 AM
Indeed, after all the exact same group of women Seles was also winning (though less dominant) against.

Not the same. Graf didn't have Seles to deal with during that period, whereas Seles had Graf during her time at the top.

davey25
07-23-2010, 09:41 AM
Not the same. Graf didn't have Seles to deal with during that period, whereas Seles had Graf during her time at the top.

Since Graf is an overrated lucky chump according to you that hardly is a huge booster to her competition. So basically Seles faced the vastly overrated Graf, an ancient Navratilova who was somehow still active when 99.99% of pros are retired, and the same clown brigade that made up the rest of the WTA elite back then you refer to. And it is not like she was playing Graf that often anyway, only 5 times and 3 times in slams in the 34 months before the stabbing.

I would agree on one thing. The field back then wasnt that strong. Neither Seles or Graf even faced the kind of field Serena did from 1999-2005 which Serena dominated and won over half her current slams against.

Joe Pike
07-23-2010, 10:30 AM
93 French
94 Aussie
95 US are 3 I feel would have been Seles had she not been stabbed.
...

FO 93?
Are you sure Seles would have made the finals? In 1992 she won only with 6-4 in the 4th round against Kijimuta. And trailed Sabatini 2-4 in the 3rd set in the semis. Fair chance that she wouldn't even have made the final.
And when Seles was #1 pre-stabbing she and Steffi played 2 clay-court matches. Seles lost in Hamburg 91 and beat Steffi only with 10-8 in the 3rd set in the FO 92 final. So even IF Seles had made the final there was a 50/50 chance that Seles would have lost.


AO 94?
In 1993 Steffi struggled against Sanchez in the AO semis, won only with 75 64. And one week later she lost the Tokyo final to Navratilova.
Fast-forward to winter 1994. Steffi destroyed Sanchez in the AO final with 60 62. And beat Navratilova easily one week later in Tokyo with 64 62.
Steffi was clearly better, no?
Considering that Seles beat Steffi narrowly in the AO 93 final (86-78 on points played) is it reasonable that a vastly superior AO 94 Steffi would have beaten Seles. Provided Seles had made the final. Which we don't know.


USO 95?
Graf beat Seles in the final. Although she was under extreme pressure.
Against a fanatical crowd.

Joe Pike
07-23-2010, 10:34 AM
...
Pre stabbing Monica won the ones that mattered most on clay, therefore she had the edge ...

So?
You think Seles would have continued to beat Graf with 74-73 on points played or with 10-8 in the 3rd set in FO finals? But continued to lose non-slam clay matches against her?

Don't be silly.

Joe Pike
07-23-2010, 10:39 AM
Seles wasn't only losing to top players, though. She had quite a few bad losses to unheralded players -- Foretz, Lucic, Studenikova, Bedanova etc.

And as tragic as it is, there's no comparison between the death of a family member and trauma caused by a murder attempt on oneself, especially to a teenager -- not even close.

Whilst I agree that Henin had a more all round game, that alone doesn't guarantee success -- underachiever Mauresmo (a more naturally gifted player) is proof of that.

Graf was a one dimensional player too. She had an awful overhead and would fluff easy volleys. She only had her serve, forehand and athleticism going for her.


Steffi had an excellent overhead, one of the best of her time.
She had a decent volley, better than almost all of today's top players.
She had the best slice BH of all time.
And by far the best footwork.
Her stops were excellent, especially on clay.
Yes, not even talking of her forehand and serve.


BTW, what is this "murder attempt" all you Selestards keep fantasizing about?

Joe Pike
07-23-2010, 10:40 AM
A very weak period in women's tennis.

Yes, only with Evert, Navratilova, Mandlikova, Sabatini, Sanchez and Seles in the mix ...

davey25
07-23-2010, 10:42 AM
Yes, only with Evert, Navratilova, Mandlikova, Sabatini, Sanchez and Seles in the mix ...

Almost none of those players were in their primes. Martina was maybe at the tail end of her prime. Evert was at the tail end of her career, she was 32-34 years old and well past her prime. Mandlikova was never the same after early 1987. Sanchez Vicario and Seles were in diapers back then. That leaves Martina and Sabatini, a 1 time slam Champion, as her closest rivals.

Joe Pike
07-23-2010, 10:43 AM
...
Oh well, that voids everything that Seles won during those two years then. :rolleyes:


No, Seles's wins in 1990-92 were as legit as Steffi's wins in 1993-95.
Making excuses is selesian.
I'm not selesian.

Joe Pike
07-23-2010, 10:45 AM
Not the same. Graf didn't have Seles to deal with during that period, whereas Seles had Graf during her time at the top.

:):):)
A Graf who lost 5 matches in a row to Sabatini.
And 3 matches within 13 months against Novotna.
Please ...

federerhoogenbandfan
07-23-2010, 10:46 AM
Graf VS Sabatini-Sanchez

28-8

29-11 (with a run of five consecutive wins).

Enough said

Graf vs Sabatini- Sanchez.

Grand Slam head to head:

Sanchez FOUR wins in 13 meetings.
Sabatini ONE win in 12 meetings.

Nuff said.

Joe Pike
07-23-2010, 10:47 AM
...

I would agree on one thing. The field back then wasnt that strong. Neither Seles or Graf even faced the kind of field Serena did from 1999-2005 which Serena dominated and won over half her current slams against.

1999-2005?
Wasn't that the time when a certain Jennifer Capriati managed to win 3 slams?

What do you think - in which period between 1960 and 1999 would a player like her have been able to win 3 slams?:):):)

Joe Pike
07-23-2010, 10:53 AM
Almost none of those players were in their primes. Martina was maybe at the tail end of her prime. Evert was at the tail end of her career, she was 32-34 years old and well past her prime. Mandlikova was never the same after early 1987. Sanchez Vicario and Seles were in diapers back then. That leaves Martina and Sabatini, a 1 time slam Champion, as her closest rivals.

Navratilova had won 2 slams in 1985, in 1986 and 1987. And she had a 67-3 win/loss streak in 1989/90 with those 3 defeats coming at the hands of Steffi.

1987 was the 4th-best year for Mandlikova ever (was 50-13 win/loss).

Sabatini was a great player who would have won many slams if it weren't for Graf.

davey25
07-23-2010, 10:55 AM
1999-2005?
Wasn't that the time when a certain Jennifer Capriati managed to win 3 slams?

What do you think - in which period between 1960 and 1999 would a player like her have been able to win 3 slams?:):):)

What are you saying, that Capriati sucks. Capriati was an excellent talent who set many youngest ever records (though not for winning slams or being #1 but many things leading up to that). Her career got badly sidetracked by pressure and personal problems but eventually she returned to form better than ever and fulfilled her long held potential by winning 3 slams.

Capriati defeated Hingis 3 times, Davenport, Seles, Clijsters twice, Serena, Mauresmo, on to way to these 3 slam titles.

So Capriati wouldnt have been able to win 3 slams in the 60s when Lesley Turner and Nancy Richey each won 2? Or how do you know someone like Virginia Wade who won 3 slams in the 70s (well her first slam in the late 60s but she was mostly a 70s player) who was owned by the entire top 5 of her generation was any better than Capriati.

If clay court only great Conchita Martinez can reach 2 slam finals not on clay, I dont think it is impossible for Capriati to have won 3.

Joe Pike
07-23-2010, 12:32 PM
What are you saying, that Capriati sucks. ...

Exactly.

I can't imagine any other era in which she could have won 3 (!) slams.

davey25
07-23-2010, 12:37 PM
Exactly.

I can't imagine any other era in which she could have won 3 (!) slams.

Yeah she was so bad she beat Graf in the Olympic final soon after Graf destroyed Seles in the Wimbledon final, and gave Graf a bagel set in 1993. She was so bad she very nearly won the U.S Open at age 15, and beat Navratilova at Wimbledon and the great (according to you) Sabatini at the U.S Open at age 15.

Joe Pike
07-23-2010, 01:11 PM
Yeah she was so bad she beat Graf in the Olympic final soon after Graf destroyed Seles in the Wimbledon final, and gave Graf a bagel set in 1993. She was so bad she very nearly won the U.S Open at age 15, and beat Navratilova at Wimbledon and the great (according to you) Sabatini at the U.S Open at age 15.


Capriati was a full-grown woman at age 15.

Who lost 06 16 against Graf two months after her surprise win at the Olympics.

And who lost 06 16 against Graf again in 1999. When Graf was over-the-hill and Capriati in her prime (won her 3 slams in the next 3 years).

davey25
07-23-2010, 08:14 PM
Capriati was a full-grown woman at age 15.

Who lost 06 16 against Graf two months after her surprise win at the Olympics.

And who lost 06 16 against Graf again in 1999. When Graf was over-the-hill and Capriati in her prime (won her 3 slams in the next 3 years).

Look I am not saying Capriati is an all time great but she isnt this hopeless player you seem to think she is. And what kind of player is a "full grown women" at age 15, is that some kind of joke. And 1999 was not Capriati's prime. Her prime was definitely 2001-2003, and the closest thing she had to a prime other than that was 1991-1993 (where yes Graf owned her, nobody is saying Capriati was a good as Graf except an idiot like Ultra2Grail).

Do you really think Capriati at her best (early 2000s) isnt better than Turner and Richey who won 2 slams each in the 60s. Or how is she much worse than Sanchez Vicario who won 4 slams, their head to head is nearly tired despite that Sanchez was playing Capriati mostly at age 15 (I think on occasion at 14 and 16 too), and Capriati is clearly a more gifted ball striker than Sanchez although obviously inferior in other respects. Davenport is a better ball striker than Capriati, but much weaker in movement, defense, and mental toughness. Kind of the reverse of Sanchez vs Capriati. So when you compare the 3 they all beat and lose to the other in key areas and each has 3 or 4 slams.

DMan
07-23-2010, 09:09 PM
EXACTLY......so why do so many Selestials INSIST that it was a given that just because Seles had won majors in the past meant it was an automatic she would win them again?

I am still waiting for someone to explain the meaning of the term domination.....as in "Seles dominated Graf."

I mean how do you "dominate" someone you have a losing H2H record against?

How do you dominate someone you beat a grand total of 5 times in a 10 year period?

How do "dominate" someone who on just one occasion.....and it occurred in a period of one month......did you beat more than one time in a row?

I mean beating a rival twice in a row on one occasion = domination?

I mean just how is that possible?

HOW?

HOW????

Selestials.....Unite...... and answer the questions....please darlings?!

Thanks loves:twisted:

egn
07-23-2010, 09:41 PM
Capriati was a full-grown woman at age 15.

Who lost 06 16 against Graf two months after her surprise win at the Olympics.

And who lost 06 16 against Graf again in 1999. When Graf was over-the-hill and Capriati in her prime (won her 3 slams in the next 3 years).

According to law in America she is not a full grown woman to 17 or 18 depending on the states...

davey25
07-23-2010, 09:53 PM
According to law in America she is not a full grown woman to 17 or 18 depending on the states...

If a 13 year old lost 10 times in a row to Graf they would already be prime according to Joe Pike.

Joe Pike
07-23-2010, 10:32 PM
According to law in America she is not a full grown woman to 17 or 18 depending on the states...

Then Capriati should have been fined.
Because at age 15 she had the body of a grown-up woman.

No comparison with 15-year-old Navratilova, Graf or Henin.

So Capriati reaching #6 in the rankings at that age was no surprise. She had some talent, no question. But her winning 3 slams in the early 00s shows what a weak era that was between Graf's retirement and Henin's rise.

davey25
07-23-2010, 10:33 PM
Or maybe it shows Capriati was actually a really good player. Imagine that.

Capriati beat Martina Hingis in the finals of 2 of her slam wins and the semis of the other. Are you going to say Hingis sucks too. Capriati also beat Clijsters twice, Davenport, Seles, Mauresmo, and Serena as well in the quarters, semis, or finals of her 3 slam wins.

Are you saying Capriati in her mid 20s once she got herself back on track wasnt a better player than at 15.

egn
07-23-2010, 10:38 PM
Then Capriati should have been fined.
Because at age 15 she had the body of a grown-up woman.

No comparison with 15-year-old Navratilova, Graf or Henin.

So Capriati reaching #6 in the rankings at that age was no surprise. She had some talent, no question. But her winning 3 slams in the early 00s shows what a weak era that was between Graf's retirement and Henin's rise.

Didn't Seles make a French Open semi at 15 and what about Evert's success at 15. Capriati's family pushed the poor girl way too much when she was young. Taking cheap shots at her is unnecessary.

I'm pretty sure she was not in as weak of an era as people think I mean sure Serena wasn't at her peak yet but Venus/Davenport/Hingis are still quite great players.

Joe Pike
07-23-2010, 10:43 PM
Or maybe it shows Capriati was actually a really good player. Imagine that.

Capriati beat Martina Hingis in the finals of 2 of her slam wins and the semis of the other. Are you going to say Hingis sucks too. Capriati also beat Clijsters twice, Davenport, Seles, Mauresmo, and Serena as well in the quarters, semis, or finals of her 3 slam wins.

Are you saying Capriati in her mid 20s once she got herself back on track wasnt a better player than at 15.


She was a good player. Mary Jo Fernandez and Helena Sukova also were good players. Capriati won slams in her mid-20s because it was a weak era then.

davey25
07-23-2010, 10:46 PM
The late 90s, early 2000s, and mid 2000s had:

-Serena as a huge threat from 1999 onwards. Even the 99-2001 Serena who won only 1 slam was a great player and extremely scary for any women on tour. She won quite a few tier 1 and tier 2 titles during those years too I believe, and was always a threat to win any slam she entered outside maybe the French.

-Venus as a huge threat from 1998 onwards.

-Hingis as a huge threat from 1997-2002 Australia Open (she was injured most of the rest of that year then retired after a slow comeback)

-Davenport as a huge threat from 1997 or 1998 onwards

-Capriati as a huge threat from 2001 to 2004

-Sharapova emerging as a threat in 2004

-Clijsters and Henin as threats from 2001 onwards, entering their primes in 2003

-Mauresmo as a threat from 1999 onwards

-Pierce as a real contender

-Seles still a contender except her her final year in 2003

-Kuznetsova and Dementieva arguably at their peaks in the mid 2000s and major threats, even more than they are in recent years

I would say this was easily the deepest womens field ever

davey25
07-23-2010, 10:47 PM
She was a good player. Mary Jo Fernandez and Helena Sukova also were good players. Capriati won slams in her mid-20s because it was a weak era then.

Capriati only played Fernandez once. And she killed her in that match at only 14. Sukova was an excellent player, maybe the best to never win a slam. Still you cant seriously tell me Capriati isnt a much better player than Fernandez or Sukova.

Joe Pike
07-23-2010, 10:53 PM
The late 90s, early 2000s, and mid 2000s had:

-Serena as a huge threat from 1999 onwards. Even the 99-2001 Serena who won only 1 slam was a great player and extremely scary for any women on tour. She won quite a few tier 1 and tier 2 titles during those years too I believe, and was always a threat to win any slam she entered outside maybe the French.

-Venus as a huge threat from 1998 onwards.

-Hingis as a huge threat from 1997-2002 Australia Open (she was injured most of the rest of that year then retired after a slow comeback)

-Davenport as a huge threat from 1997 or 1998 onwards

-Capriati as a huge threat from 2001 to 2004

-Sharapova emerging as a threat in 2004

-Clijsters and Henin as threats from 2001 onwards, entering their primes in 2003

-Mauresmo as a threat from 1999 onwards

-Pierce as a real contender

-Seles still a contender except her her final year in 2003

-Kuznetsova and Dementieva arguably at their peaks in the mid 2000s and major threats, even more than they are in recent years

I would say this was easily the deepest womens field ever


Without Navratilova and Evert about 20 women would have been a huge threat in 1983-86. So we had the deepest women's field ever PLUS Martina and Chris back then.

Joe Pike
07-23-2010, 10:56 PM
Capriati only played Fernandez once. And she killed her in that match at only 14. Sukova was an excellent player, maybe the best to never win a slam. Still you cant seriously tell me Capriati isnt a much better player than Fernandez or Sukova.

Capriati would not have won 3 slams in the open era from 1968 to 1999.
Only with no real great player around in the early 00s she was able to win them.

davey25
07-23-2010, 10:57 PM
Without Navratilova and Evert about 20 women would have been a huge threat in 1983-86. So we had the deepest women's field ever PLUS Martina and Chris back then.

No without Martina and Chris you would have had Hana and Pam (and brief 1 or 2 year periods Jaeger, an almost 40 year old King and 14, 15 and 16 year old Graf and Sabatini) win all the slams from 82-86. And if Hana and Martina werent around either then a 40 year old King, 30 something Turnbull, and Andrea Jeager would have played the slam finals until Graf and Sabatini began playing in them regularly at age 15; with now the clown brigade of the 80s top 10 such as Bettina Bunge, Claudia Kohde Kilsch, and Sylvia Hanika maybe being in the finals or winning the odd one. There was no depth in womens tennis then.

davey25
07-23-2010, 10:57 PM
Capriati would not have won 3 slams in the open era from 1968 to 1999.
Only with no real great player around in the early 00s she was able to win them.

Yeah the Williams sisters, Henin, Hingis, Davenport, Clijsters, and Mauresmo are all ungreat.

davey25
07-23-2010, 11:17 PM
I would say comparing the decades as far as depth one way is the list the number of what I call legit threats who lasted more than just a year or two as a genuine threat.

60s legit threats- Court, King, Wade, Bueno, Turnbull, Richey, Jones, Hard. EIGHT

70s legit threats- Court, King, Evert, Navratilova, Wade, Goolagong, Austin. SEVEN.

80s legit threats- Navratilova, Evert, Graf, Mandlikova, Sabatini. FIVE

90s legit threats- Graf, Seles, Sabatini, Novotna, Pierce, Hingis, Davenport, Martinez, Navratilova, Sanchez Vicario. TEN

2000s legit threats- Serena, Venus, Davenport, Capriati, Clijsters,
Mauresmo, Henin, Sharapova, Kuznetsova, Dementieva. TEN

I counted Austin in the 70s as I think she was making her greatest impact in 1979 and 1980, before the injuries all hit. In 1981 she was a threat on an erratic basis, missing much of the year injured. In 82 and 83 she was already injured and completely washed up, just delaying the inevitable need to retire due to a battered body.

The 80s were the most shallow period for womens tennis ever IMO. The 2000s I still say overall is the deepest even with the fade at the end of the decade.

1970CRBase
07-23-2010, 11:30 PM
90s legit threats- Graf, Seles, Sabatini, Novotna, Pierce, Hingis, Davenport, Martinez, Navratilova. NINE

^^^ Why have you left out Sanchez in the 90's? She is at least 4th best in that period.

If Navratilova was a contender even in 90's then Ivanovic wasn't a legit contender in the 2000s? I guess poor Safina can't be considered.

davey25
07-23-2010, 11:32 PM
^^^ Why have you left out Sanchez in the 90's? Ivanovic wasn't a legit contender in the 2000s?

Sorry I missed Sanchez Vicario by accident. No I would not include Ivanovic as she was only a threat for a year and half.

1970CRBase
07-24-2010, 01:02 AM
Insofar as depth of competition by decade goes, I can understand leaving out ppl like Ivanovic, Myskina, Jankovic, poor Safina in the 2000s. But in relative comparison to those players in their decade, Sabatini surely had far less impact on competition in the 80s (Jan 1st 1980 - Dec 31st 1989). No Navratilova, no Evert from 1985 onwards, how many Slams could conceivably have gone Sabatini's way?? In fact, where would those Slams Evert/Nav won have ended up?

Sabatini as a contender in the 80s is very borderline. You have the Three, and sort of a fourth.

davey25
07-24-2010, 02:23 AM
Insofar as depth of competition by decade goes, I can understand leaving out ppl like Ivanovic, Myskina, Jankovic, poor Safina in the 2000s. But in relative comparison to those players in their decade, Sabatini surely had far less impact on competition in the 80s (Jan 1st 1980 - Dec 31st 1989). No Navratilova, no Evert from 1985 onwards, how many Slams could conceivably have gone Sabatini's way?? In fact, where would those Slams Evert/Nav won have ended up?

Sabatini as a contender in the 80s is very borderline. You have the Three, and sort of a fourth.

Actually I think removing Evert and Navratilova would just show how shallow the 80s were. If forced to go through each this is where I think each would have ended up possibly

1980 French Open- Mandlikova
1980 Wimbledon- Goolagong (as was)
1980 U.S Open- Austin (or Mandlikova)
1980 Australian Open- Mandlikova (as was)
1981 French Open- Mandlikova (as was)
1981 Wimbledon- Mandlikova
1981 U.S Open- Austin (as was)
1981 Australian Open- Mandlikova (or Shriver or Turnbull)
1982 French Open- Jaeger
1982 Wimbledon- Billie Jean King (38 years old)
1982 U.S Open- Mandlikova
1983 French Open- Mandlikova
1983 Wimbledon- Jaeger
1983 U.S Open- Shriver
1983 Australian Open- Jo Durie (or Shriver)
1984 French Open- Mandlikova
1984 Wimbledon- Mandlikova (or Jordan)
1984 U.S Open- Turnbull (or Basset)
1985 French Open- 14 year old Sabatini, 15 year old Graf, or Kohde Kilsch (I am going to guess Graf)
1985 Wimbledon- Garrison
1985 U.S Open- Mandlikova (as was)
1985 Australian Open- Mandlikova
1986 French Open- Graf (or Mandlikova or 15 year old Sabatini)
1986 Wimbledon- Mandlikova (or Sukova)
1986 U.S Open- Graf
1987 Australian Open- Mandlikova (as was)
1987 French Open- Graf (as was)
1987 Wimbledon- Graf
1987 U.S Open- Graf
1988 Australian Open- Graf (as was)
1988 French Open- Graf (as was)
1988 Wimbledon- Graf (as was)
1988 U.S Open- Graf (as was)
1989 Australian Open- Graf (as was)
1989 French Open- Sanchez Vicario (as was)
1989 Wimbledon- Graf (as was)
1989 U.S Open- Graf (as well)

So by my estimation that is about 13 slams for Mandlikova who was very talented but a huge mental flake who often lost to nobodies in the early rounds of slams. A 15 year old probably would have won a slam at some point, be that Graf or Sabatini. Overall it is just a really weak group of players as a whole after Navratilova and Evert. Austin was finished at the top after 1981, playing out the final couple years of her career as a complete shadow of her old self. Sabatini and Graf did not really begin to emerge until later in the decade. Shriver, Sukova, Turnbull, Jaeger, Garisson, Maleeva, were all not especialy impressive, and Jaeger didnt last very long either. The rest like Hanika, Bunge, Kilsch, Potter, Jordan, Durie, Basset, Rinaldi, were very feeble excuses of even top 10 players.

I dont think Sabatini would have been helped much though. Graf had her number from Day 1 when they first started playing with the except of that stretch in and around 1991. She may have snuck out an additional slam but probably not because of Graf.

I did list Sabatini as a contender of the 80s though since she was the only person to beat Graf 3 times in 1988 and 1989. She did reach some big finals in semis. She was really the 3rd best player in the World behind Graf and Navratilova from 87-89 (arguably 2nd best in 1988 ).

I think if you removed Graf and Seles from the 90s or removed Serena and Venus or Henin (depending who you consider the 2nd best of the 2000s) from the 2000s the list of winners would still far eclipse what would have been seen in the early to mid 80s without Martina and Chris.

Joe Pike
07-24-2010, 03:06 AM
I would say comparing the decades as far as depth one way is the list the number of what I call legit threats who lasted more than just a year or two as a genuine threat.

60s legit threats- Court, King, Wade, Bueno, Turnbull, Richey, Jones, Hard. EIGHT

70s legit threats- Court, King, Evert, Navratilova, Wade, Goolagong, Austin. SEVEN.

80s legit threats- Navratilova, Evert, Graf, Mandlikova, Sabatini. FIVE

90s legit threats- Graf, Seles, Sabatini, Novotna, Pierce, Hingis, Davenport, Martinez, Navratilova, Sanchez Vicario. TEN

2000s legit threats- Serena, Venus, Davenport, Capriati, Clijsters,
Mauresmo, Henin, Sharapova, Kuznetsova, Dementieva. TEN

...

You don't get it ...

Evert, Navratilova and Graf were so good that Kuznetsova, Mauresmo, Capriati types were not "threat" to them.
S. Williams is not as good. So those types are a threat.
Got it now?

And in what way is Demented a "threat" ... ?

TMF
07-24-2010, 11:56 PM
Davey25 got banned. I was wondering where he is b/c he's been quiet for awhile.

LDVTennis
07-25-2010, 10:43 AM
Davey25 got banned. I was wondering where he is b/c he's been quiet for awhile.

What finally did it?

dmt
07-25-2010, 11:07 AM
why was davey banned?

pmerk34
07-25-2010, 11:33 AM
Davey25 got banned. I was wondering where he is b/c he's been quiet for awhile.

why do people get banned?

TMF
07-25-2010, 02:50 PM
^
These are all good questions and I really don't know. I've read some posts from banned posters and still trying to figure out what "trigger" the banning process.

Datacipher
07-26-2010, 02:59 AM
^
These are all good questions and I really don't know. I've read some posts from banned posters and still trying to figure out what "trigger" the banning process.

Given Davey25's long history of legitimate posts here, it's hard for me to believe he would have done something so egregious in any single post that it would warrant banning! A warning about something...OK...but....banning? Definitely seems troubling...

If a person has had THAT many posts without a problem, no matte what rule he may have broken, it should be taken as a one-time offense unless done repeatedly...

abmk
07-26-2010, 03:05 AM
^
These are all good questions and I really don't know. I've read some posts from banned posters and still trying to figure out what "trigger" the banning process.

one of them is creating multiple IDs ....

mandy01
07-26-2010, 03:14 AM
Is it a permanent ban?
:shock:
That would be surprising because as far as I know they do have temporary banning .But I guess they know best.

1970CRBase
07-26-2010, 04:17 AM
Is it a permanent ban?
:shock:
That would be surprising because as far as I know they do have temporary banning .But I guess they know best.

Seems like if an account is removed from the member list, it's permanent.

I don't think it's because of anything he wrote. He made many good posts and it's a pity because it's always a great benefit to read another well reasoned point of view, whether or not you agree with him.

You can also look at this thread and note which accounts got permanently struck off and form your own conclusion as to why.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=333345

None of my business though. :D

hoodjem
07-26-2010, 07:03 AM
For me, it's either Graf or Navratilova (and maybe Court sneaking in there).

THUNDERVOLLEY
07-26-2010, 03:34 PM
I often wonder if in a generation or two, will we see a player so incredible, that she will make every previous slam winner (the usual suspects of the top 10 GOAT lists) seem...average?

With each generation comes advances in technology, training, and general human evolution...if someone had some uncanny talent, would it be possible for some new force to simply re-write every most valued record with ease?

Datacipher
07-26-2010, 03:40 PM
I often wonder if in a generation or two, will we see a player so incredible, that she will make every previous slam winner (the usual suspects of the top 10 GOAT lists) seem...average?

With each generation comes advances in technology, training, and general human evolution...if someone had some uncanny talent, would it be possible for some new force to simply re-write every most valued record with ease?

God, I hope this is a joke.

Having said that, for the first time in human history, we do stand on the possible brink. Steroids and doping has changed all professional sports including tennis, new advances, genetic engineering (which many think is the future of athletics) possibly using even animal genes may make this possible.

As of now, no, humans are humans, and the best athletes have been about the same.

THUNDERVOLLEY
07-26-2010, 06:19 PM
God, I hope this is a joke.

Having said that, for the first time in human history, we do stand on the possible brink. Steroids and doping has changed all professional sports including tennis, new advances, genetic engineering (which many think is the future of athletics) possibly using even animal genes may make this possible.

As of now, no, humans are humans, and the best athletes have been about the same.

Humans evolve; its not just a matter of better training or PEDs, as Olympians prove over the generations, which is why people often think the players of today (removing the talent factor) are simply better athletes than those of just one generation before. One has to wonder if the feats of Court--or for this thread's purposes, Graf--will be just another record rendered not so amazing in the years ahead.

thalivest
07-26-2010, 11:15 PM
Humans evolve; its not just a matter of better training or PEDs, as Olympians prove over the generations, which is why people often think the players of today (removing the talent factor) are simply better athletes than those of just one generation before. One has to wonder if the feats of Court--or for this thread's purposes, Graf--will be just another record rendered not so amazing in the years ahead.

That is a good point. Even if track stars and swimmers didnt have the fancy swimsuits and advanced coaching they would still be going so much faster than the people of 40 years ago. One funny thing though is in womens track almost all the World records are still from the 80s, but that is mostly since the 80s (and 70s) were the height of the womens doping craze with various culprits from East Germany, Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia, and even the U.S. With Germany and Soviet Union splitting and unifying it is not nearly as bad now, though doping still exists no doubt.

Datacipher
07-27-2010, 12:29 AM
Humans evolve; its not just a matter of better training or PEDs, as Olympians prove

ROFL! OK...this is a joke. If you actually believe this, then there is nothing for us to discuss.
1.The olympics have been completely doped for over 40 years now (tennis has had doping for nearly the same length of time, since there were at least some doping cases in the early 70's)
2.humans haven't "evolved". Evolution of that nature doesn't even occur over that kind of generational time span in humans.

MurrayisBEAST
07-27-2010, 08:11 PM
I would say she was like the 10th best lady of all time.

THUNDERVOLLEY
07-28-2010, 03:06 PM
2.humans haven't "evolved". Evolution of that nature doesn't even occur over that kind of generational time span in humans.

If you actually believe this, then you also think the average human being of 2010 has the same physical structure, general strength, height and other factors of one living in 1910...and there's no evidence that such a belief would be true.

MotherMarjorie
07-28-2010, 03:28 PM
Humans evolve; its not just a matter of better training or PEDs, as Olympians prove over the generations, which is why people often think the players of today (removing the talent factor) are simply better athletes than those of just one generation before. One has to wonder if the feats of Court--or for this thread's purposes, Graf--will be just another record rendered not so amazing in the years ahead.
I think that with all sports having been tainted with doping for decades, we all pretty much can understand why some "evolutions" have occured and its not been "natural." Using Olympic sports as an example of improving athlete's throughout generations is a very poor example considering the repeated doping abuses. No one truly knows how many of these generational Olympic records were steroid-aided. Its a situation similar to Bonds-McGuire in major league baseball.

In reference to Graf/Court's all-time records, they will continue to stand until someone surpasses them and revered as historic. Helen Wills Moody hasn't been forgotten the past eighty years because of her Grand Slam excellence. Only on-court performance can change tennis history. The bar Court/Graf have set will always be a measure of greatness historically. Nothing will change that.

:-)

Mother Marjorie

Datacipher
07-28-2010, 04:09 PM
If you actually believe this, then you also think the average human being of 2010 has the same physical structure, general strength, height and other factors of one living in 1910...and there's no evidence that such a belief would be true.

HOLY.....

Just when you think you've read it all. You're either a little kid....or a nutbar!

WOW.

Humans DO have the same physical structure, WE DO HAVE ABSOLUTE EVIDENCE of this. WOW. What in the heck...LOL! This guy thinks we're changing like viruses....

Height has increased on average in industrial countries, NOT by evolution...good lord....

Datacipher
07-28-2010, 04:12 PM
I think that with all sports having been tainted with doping for decades, we all pretty much can understand why some "evolutions" have occured and its not been "natural." Using Olympic sports as an example of improving athlete's throughout generations is a very poor example considering the repeated doping abuses. No one truly knows how many of these generational Olympic records were steroid-aided. Its a situation similar to Bonds-McGuire in major league baseball.

In reference to Graf/Court's all-time records, they will continue to stand until someone surpasses them and revered as historic. Helen Wills Moody hasn't been forgotten the past eighty years because of her Grand Slam excellence. Only on-court performance can change tennis history. The bar Court/Graf have set will always be a measure of greatness historically. Nothing will change that.

:-)

Mother Marjorie

However, Marjorie, even a Graf must be questioned. She would have been a prime candidate for doping, AND, doping does not affect everyone equally...not by any means. Even if every one of her opponents had exactly the same doping usage, the performance increases would not be equal. As a result, to be frank, every single Olympic and pro record today, is...invalid. Some people who do realize how widespread doping is will still argue that if they are all using, the "best" person will still win. This simply isn't so....and that's sad. The real best will never be known, due to doping.

THUNDERVOLLEY
07-28-2010, 05:38 PM
HOLY.....

Just when you think you've read it all. You're either a little kid....or a nutbar!

WOW.

Humans DO have the same physical structure, WE DO HAVE ABSOLUTE EVIDENCE of this. WOW. What in the heck...LOL! This guy thinks we're changing like viruses....

Height has increased on average in industrial countries, NOT by evolution...good lord....

You need a few classes in....everything, since you believe human beings are the same today (sans training/doping, etc.) as a century ago. To even hint of such a thing is not only inaccurate in the extreme, but is not supported by a majority of research.

Oh, well, some kids will believe just about anything.

thalivest
07-28-2010, 06:28 PM
Well for starters the increase in population over the last century makes finding superior quality best athletes more likely. After all the more people there are, the more likely the best ones are more talented. It is just like in countries were more play a sport, those countries are more likely to find top talents, though there are rare exceptions.

I remember browing one time and the guy that won the Olympics in swimming in 1896 won with a time I could have even done at that distance no problems even in a cold lake (I used to be a swimmer though not an amazing one by any means). So while that is an extreme example obviously people do evolve over time even with all the other factors that develop all the time and the probably rampant steroid use of many elites today.

LDVTennis
07-28-2010, 09:06 PM
However, Marjorie, even a Graf must be questioned. She would have been a prime candidate for doping, AND, doping does not affect everyone equally...not by any means.

Graf, a prime candidate for doping? And, you know this for a fact or are you simply speculating?

To quote you (I think), "[y]ou're either a little kid....or a nutbar!"

thalivest
07-28-2010, 10:31 PM
Steffi Graf grew up as an athletic prodigy in the 80s as a West German at the time before the Berlin Wall came down. To me that makes it especialy unlikely she was doping. The West prided themselves on being seperated from the Eastern influence in that sort of thing, which was one of the reasons they produced far less successful athletes than the East as well.

dannythomas
07-29-2010, 03:58 AM
However, Marjorie, even a Graf must be questioned. She would have been a prime candidate for doping, AND, doping does not affect everyone equally...not by any means. Even if every one of her opponents had exactly the same doping usage, the performance increases would not be equal. As a result, to be frank, every single Olympic and pro record today, is...invalid. Some people who do realize how widespread doping is will still argue that if they are all using, the "best" person will still win. This simply isn't so....and that's sad. The real best will never be known, due to doping.

It's amazing how some people want to do anything they can to discredit Steffi.
She is one of the greatest players of all time . Whether she is the best ever is just a question of opinion.
This thread has become totally pointless.

thalivest
07-29-2010, 04:22 AM
It's amazing how some people want to do anything they can to discredit Steffi.
She is one of the greatest players of all time . Whether she is the best ever is just a question of opinion.
This thread has become totally pointless.

It was always going to be a pointless thread at this point. A certain troll chose to bring up a 6 year old thread for no apparent reason.

Datacipher
07-29-2010, 04:22 AM
It's amazing how some people want to do anything they can to discredit Steffi.
She is one of the greatest players of all time . Whether she is the best ever is just a question of opinion.
This thread has become totally pointless.

THE DIMBULBS Have spoken!!! Even though I made my views on doping (which are EXTREMELY informed, both in theory, media, and personal experience) CLEAR. And ignoring the fact, that as a poster for YEARS, I've made it VERY clear I don't give a ____ about the "greatness" of Graf, or ANY OTHER woman's player.

HERE. LET ME SPELL IT OUT....SELES, MARTINA (both), HENIN, PIERCE, MJ FERNANDEZ, SABATINI, ALL THE women out there now...most of who's names I don't even know. THEY ARE ALL PRIME CANDIDATES for DOPING. EVERY PROFESSIONAL athlete has a better chance of being doped than not. LET ME REPEAT, MOST pro sports are NEAR 100 percent DOPED now, and tennis, if not 100% has WIDESPREAD doping, which began, at the latest, in the 60's, as mentioned by none other than Billy Jean King.

Goodbye now, women's dimbulbs. LOL!

PS. Why in the heck would I care about women's tennis???! Go back to your whatever current feud you're having now...Graf vs ______.

Tina
07-29-2010, 06:08 AM
^^^^^
Interesting reasoning, Uncle Data!!!

LDVTennis
07-29-2010, 07:16 AM
THE DIMBULBS Have spoken!!! Even though I made my views on doping (which are EXTREMELY informed, both in theory, media, and personal experience) CLEAR. And ignoring the fact, that as a poster for YEARS, I've made it VERY clear I don't give a ____ about the "greatness" of Graf, or ANY OTHER woman's player.

HERE. LET ME SPELL IT OUT....SELES, MARTINA (both), HENIN, PIERCE, MJ FERNANDEZ, SABATINI, ALL THE women out there now...most of who's names I don't even know. THEY ARE ALL PRIME CANDIDATES for DOPING. EVERY PROFESSIONAL athlete has a better chance of being doped than not. LET ME REPEAT, MOST pro sports are NEAR 100 percent DOPED now, and tennis, if not 100% has WIDESPREAD doping, which began, at the latest, in the 60's, as mentioned by none other than Billy Jean King.

Goodbye now, women's dimbulbs. LOL!

PS. Why in the heck would I care about women's tennis???! Go back to your whatever current feud you're having now...Graf vs ______.

Yeah, we are the "dimbulbs" for questioning your theory that every female tennis player since the 60's has most likely been doping.

Got any evidence for your theory other than the fact that steroids existed since the 60's?

You know what. Cake has been around much longer than steroids. Do you also have a theory about every female tennis player eating cake?

You're the dimbulb. You're just too dim to recognize it. LOL.

thalivest
07-29-2010, 07:20 AM
You know what. Cake has been around much longer than steroids. Do you also have a theory about every female tennis player eating cake?

Someone whose favorite 2 players are Serena Williams and Monica Seles could easily be fooled to believe this. :twisted:

TMF
07-29-2010, 07:24 AM
LOL, first it all started with hating Seles, now it is Graf's turn. I wonder who will be next.

Joe Pike
07-29-2010, 09:09 AM
THE DIMBULBS Have spoken!!! Even though I made my views on doping (which are EXTREMELY informed, both in theory, media, and personal experience) CLEAR. And ignoring the fact, that as a poster for YEARS, I've made it VERY clear I don't give a ____ about the "greatness" of Graf, or ANY OTHER woman's player.

HERE. LET ME SPELL IT OUT....SELES, MARTINA (both), HENIN, PIERCE, MJ FERNANDEZ, SABATINI, ALL THE women out there now...most of who's names I don't even know. THEY ARE ALL PRIME CANDIDATES for DOPING. EVERY PROFESSIONAL athlete has a better chance of being doped than not. LET ME REPEAT, MOST pro sports are NEAR 100 percent DOPED now, ...


It is always the same - when you think you have seen it all in the internet some nutter comes up and tries to be even nuttier ...

rolandg
07-29-2010, 09:11 AM
THE DIMBULBS Have spoken!!! Even though I made my views on doping (which are EXTREMELY informed, both in theory, media, and personal experience) CLEAR. And ignoring the fact, that as a poster for YEARS, I've made it VERY clear I don't give a ____ about the "greatness" of Graf, or ANY OTHER woman's player.

HERE. LET ME SPELL IT OUT....SELES, MARTINA (both), HENIN, PIERCE, MJ FERNANDEZ, SABATINI, ALL THE women out there now...most of who's names I don't even know. THEY ARE ALL PRIME CANDIDATES for DOPING. EVERY PROFESSIONAL athlete has a better chance of being doped than not. LET ME REPEAT, MOST pro sports are NEAR 100 percent DOPED now, and tennis, if not 100% has WIDESPREAD doping, which began, at the latest, in the 60's, as mentioned by none other than Billy Jean King.

Goodbye now, women's dimbulbs. LOL!

PS. Why in the heck would I care about women's tennis???! Go back to your whatever current feud you're having now...Graf vs ______.

Completely agree. Doping is so deeply entrenched in every professional sport, I don't believe any professional athlete is clean, especially in tennis, which has some of the highest prize money and endorsement possibilities.

LDVTennis
07-29-2010, 05:46 PM
Completely agree. Doping is so deeply entrenched in every professional sport, I don't believe any professional athlete is clean, especially in tennis, which has some of the highest prize money and endorsement possibilities.

Here is an interesting ideal for a poll.

Who is crazier the person who first opined that every female tennis player since the 60's was doping or the person who agrees with that insane theory?

Cast your votes.

TMF
07-29-2010, 05:55 PM
^
You can make a poll by asking each members in here whether they would use drug if they were a pro tennis player. That will give what the % of all the players on the tour using drug.
Don’t use anonymous poll.

Datacipher
07-29-2010, 07:39 PM
Completely agree. Doping is so deeply entrenched in every professional sport, I don't believe any professional athlete is clean, especially in tennis, which has some of the highest prize money and endorsement possibilities.

Well of course. You'd have to be completely ignorant not to realize this. With over 37 cases of Nandrolone alone in one year on the ATP tour, and with entire teams being disqualified out the tour de france, baseballs biggest stars having to reveal they doped, track and field olympic athletes and coaches now confessing that they all doped....seriously, as I've written before many times, it's understandable. What are you going to do? Give up your dream of ever being a pro cyclist, or just do what every other competitor is doing? Inside the sport, it doesn't even seem wrong....and besides, the general public AND the administration of the sport don't REALLY want to know the truth.

As to tennis...sure...it was ONLY Korda, Coria, Rusedksi, Mcenroe, etc etc etc......lol.

Datacipher
07-29-2010, 07:45 PM
Yeah, we are the "dimbulbs" for questioning your theory that every female tennis player since the 60's has most likely been doping.

WHAT AN IDIOT. I wrote that every sport "NOW" has WIDESPREAD doping. I did not write that "EVERY" female player since the 60's has most likely been doping. You have to love? hysterics like this, who can't even read simple sentences.

I said it "BEGAN' in the 60's, Billy Jean King said so, if you don't like that, argue with her.


You're the dimbulb. You're just too dim to recognize it. LOL.

LOL! LOVE IT! You are right, I AM the dimbulb! There is no way to fight such a witty and elegant line! Oh wait...I got one...you're to dumb to know you're dumb! YES! GOTCHA! OWNED! I will be laughing about that line...as I'm sure every tw poster is right now...for weeks!

Datacipher
07-29-2010, 07:49 PM
^
You can make a poll by asking each members in here whether they would use drug if they were a pro tennis player. That will give what the % of all the players on the tour using drug.
Don’t use anonymous poll.

That doesn't make any sense at all....obviously. Naturally, nobody can put themselves in that position reliably, and more importantly, TW posters are not reflective whatsoever in character, experience, background, or mindset to pro players.

However, I would say that were millions of dollars, my chosen career/dream, that I have worked for since childhood, and my future on the line, I would be severely tempted to use, when knowing full-well that many of my opponents do.

I think most people, were they honest, would sympathize with that. There IS a reason why doping is widespread, and no, it's not because they are all jerks. You might well do the same thing.

BUT save your sympathy for the poor schmucks who decided they wanted to sprint naturally, or become the world's first Mr. O naturally, or fight professionally without drugs, or set world swimming records without EPO....a few lucky ones got college scholarships....on the other hand, they should be proud when they look in the mirror.

LDVTennis
07-29-2010, 10:15 PM
WHAT AN IDIOT. I wrote that every sport "NOW" has WIDESPREAD doping. I did not write that "EVERY" female player since the 60's has most likely been doping. You have to love? hysterics like this, who can't even read simple sentences.

I said it "BEGAN' in the 60's, Billy Jean King said so, if you don't like that, argue with her.


First of all, document that BJK said that. I want to see the direct quotation. I do not believe she said that. You're saying she did has no credibility with the rest of us. Prove it or shut up.

As to what you said, here is the direct quote: "HERE. LET ME SPELL IT OUT....SELES, MARTINA (both), HENIN, PIERCE, MJ FERNANDEZ, SABATINI, ALL THE women out there now...most of who's names I don't even know. THEY ARE ALL PRIME CANDIDATES for DOPING. EVERY PROFESSIONAL athlete has a better chance of being doped than not. LET ME REPEAT, MOST pro sports are NEAR 100 percent DOPED now, and tennis, if not 100% has WIDESPREAD doping, which began, at the latest, in the 60's, as mentioned by none other than Billy Jean King." See link http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=4904909&postcount=190.

By calling every female tennis player a "prime candidate for doping," you pretty much implicated everyone. I did not draw the wrong conclusion. In fact, the fool (rolandg) who agreed with you summed up your argument as follows: "Completely agree. Doping is so deeply entrenched in every professional sport, I don't believe any professional athlete is clean, especially in tennis, which has some of the highest prize money and endorsement possibilities." See link http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=4905461&postcount=196 This fool knew what you were saying, just like the rest of us. What made him a fool is that he agreed with you. If he was wrong to draw this conclusion from your post, why did you not point this out in your reply to his post? See link http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=4906738&postcount=199. Instead, you said this: "Well of course. You'd have to be completely ignorant not to realize this."

The fact remains that you have presented no proof for your wild theory. The only thing you've proven is that there are truly stupid people in this world.

thalivest
07-29-2010, 10:16 PM
I think doping is much more prevelant amongst females than males too. Most doping are basically male hormones type drugs, they aid women far more than men. I am not saying there arent men that dont dope, there are many I am sure, but cheating is much more widespread amongst the women I think. This is proven by the 70s and 80s when the East German women were cleaning up in certain sports where the men were not a factor. They had a sophisticated doping program for women and they knew that the men would not gain the same effect. And the Chinese women in various sports in the 90s as well. Russian women in cross country skiing for many years, etc....

Datacipher
07-29-2010, 11:03 PM
First of all, document that BJK said that. I want to see the direct quotation. I do not believe she said that. You're saying she did has no credibility with the rest of us. Prove it or shut up.

As to what you said, here is the direct quote: "HERE. LET ME SPELL IT OUT....SELES, MARTINA (both), HENIN, PIERCE, MJ FERNANDEZ, SABATINI, ALL THE women out there now...most of who's names I don't even know. THEY ARE ALL PRIME CANDIDATES for DOPING. EVERY PROFESSIONAL athlete has a better chance of being doped than not. LET ME REPEAT, MOST pro sports are NEAR 100 percent DOPED now, and tennis, if not 100% has WIDESPREAD doping, which began, at the latest, in the 60's, as mentioned by none other than Billy Jean King." See link http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=4904909&postcount=190.

By calling every female tennis player a "prime candidate for doping," you pretty much implicated everyone. I did not draw the wrong conclusion. In fact, the fool (rolandg) who agreed with you summed up your argument as follows: "Completely agree. Doping is so deeply entrenched in every professional sport, I don't believe any professional athlete is clean, especially in tennis, which has some of the highest prize money and endorsement possibilities." See link http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=4905461&postcount=196 This fool knew what you were saying, just like the rest of us. What made him a fool is that he agreed with you. If he was wrong to draw this conclusion from your post, why did you not point this out in your reply to his post? See link http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=4906738&postcount=199. Instead, you said this: "Well of course. You'd have to be completely ignorant not to realize this."

The fact remains that you have presented no proof for your wild theory. The only thing you've proven is that there are truly stupid people in this world.

THE ****** is now actually trying to present my argument as being RolandG's statement.

AND THE ****** adds that by calling everyone a "candidate", I have "pretty much" implicated everyone. WHAT A DOORKNOB!

Datacipher
07-29-2010, 11:05 PM
I think doping is much more prevelant amongst females than males too. Most doping are basically male hormones type drugs, they aid women far more than men. I am not saying there arent men that dont dope, there are many I am sure, but cheating is much more widespread amongst the women I think. This is proven by the 70s and 80s when the East German women were cleaning up in certain sports where the men were not a factor. They had a sophisticated doping program for women and they knew that the men would not gain the same effect. And the Chinese women in various sports in the 90s as well. Russian women in cross country skiing for many years, etc....

An interesting proposition....they are sure as heck have a dramatic effect on males as well (see Mr. O contenders ;-), but do they help females relatively more? No way to measure, but it seems plausible.

thalivest
07-30-2010, 12:14 AM
An interesting proposition....they are sure as heck have a dramatic effect on males as well (see Mr. O contenders ;-), but do they help females relatively more? No way to measure, but it seems plausible.

I think they do for the simple reason nearly all performance enhancers contain some form of male hormones, the really strong ones quite a bit. So the biggest things that differentiate men from women are negated somewhat and bring the women who take these substances closer to being a man in a sense, rather than just being an even stronger men like the men who take it. But the real thing that convinced me is the 70s and 80s East German sprinters, swimmers, even speed skaters. During the period everyone now knows they were heavily doped the women were doing extraordinary and the men were doing virtually nothing. Then when the Berlin Wall came down the womens results went back drastically and are now almost on par with the men. There is no way this is coincidence. That plus the Chinese female swimmers in many meets in the 90s, yet the men doing nothing. Extremely small chance that this is just coincidence.

Of course that isnt to say that there isnt alot of doping in all mens sports (just look at baseball and cycling, LOL) and that the men benefit a great deal from it as well. The newer drugs are also more sophisticated so perhaps athletes of the last century arent the best reference in a sense either.

Datacipher
07-30-2010, 03:45 AM
I think they do for the simple reason nearly all performance enhancers contain some form of male hormones, the really strong ones quite a bit. So the biggest things that differentiate men from women are negated somewhat and bring the women who take these substances closer to being a man in a sense, rather than just being an even stronger men like the men who take it. But the real thing that convinced me is the 70s and 80s East German sprinters, swimmers, even speed skaters. During the period everyone now knows they were heavily doped the women were doing extraordinary and the men were doing virtually nothing. Then when the Berlin Wall came down the womens results went back drastically and are now almost on par with the men. There is no way this is coincidence. That plus the Chinese female swimmers in many meets in the 90s, yet the men doing nothing. Extremely small chance that this is just coincidence.

Of course that isnt to say that there isnt alot of doping in all mens sports (just look at baseball and cycling, LOL) and that the men benefit a great deal from it as well. The newer drugs are also more sophisticated so perhaps athletes of the last century arent the best reference in a sense either.

Yes, it is a bit hard to compare as the drugs, and stacks of drugs are constantly changing.

I do agree with the rest. As I said, it certainly seems plausible. Undoubtedly, there is a point at which the levels of given hormone would have all the effect they are ever going to have; and indeed, women begin at a totally different starting point. Of course, a bit hard to know, as I said, unfortunately, the drugs seem to have very mixed results on even those of the same gender....some respond like.....gangbusters, some seem to get a much more moderated affect.

One could make up another theory like: men have more receptors and better capacity to use the additional hormones, and with their differences in muscle and bone structure, are better able to utilize increases in strength/stamina etc. BUT, I do tend to suspect that women probably do get more relative benefit than men!

Limpinhitter
07-30-2010, 05:15 AM
An interesting proposition....they are sure as heck have a dramatic effect on males as well (see Mr. O contenders ;-), but do they help females relatively more? No way to measure, but it seems plausible.

I saw a live match between Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova back in the late 80's. They walked right by me on my way into the stands. Two things struck me about these two: (1) Evert was taller than I expected, about the same height as Navratilova, and (2) Navratilova's muscularity was beyond any female I've ever seen, ever. The bulk and muscularity of her legs were scary looking. The muscularity and vascularity of her arms were scary looking. And I'm a former competitive power lifter. I've seen some stong dudes. She made Serena look dainty.

Was she juiced? I can't say for certain, but, it wouldn't surprise me.

Datacipher
07-30-2010, 10:29 AM
I saw a live match between Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova back in the late 80's. They walked right by me on my way into the stands. Two things struck me about these two: (1) Evert was taller than I expected, about the same height as Navratilova, and (2) Navratilova's muscularity was beyond any female I've ever seen, ever. The bulk and muscularity of her legs were scary looking. The muscularity and vascularity of her arms were scary looking. And I'm a former competitive power lifter. I've seen some stong dudes. She made Serena look dainty.

Was she juiced? I can't say for certain, but, it wouldn't surprise me.

You're the first person I've seen who also noted the vascularity. I too noticed this, and I too have spent time with bodybuilders, powerlifters etc. The thing that used to strike me is the vascularity in her arms, sometimes DURING heavy, prolonged cardiovascular exercise! Are you kidding me!? lol. I'd wonder...uh...what does she look like then when pumped??

MotherMarjorie
07-30-2010, 12:43 PM
However, Marjorie, even a Graf must be questioned. She would have been a prime candidate for doping, AND, doping does not affect everyone equally...not by any means. Even if every one of her opponents had exactly the same doping usage, the performance increases would not be equal. As a result, to be frank, every single Olympic and pro record today, is...invalid. Some people who do realize how widespread doping is will still argue that if they are all using, the "best" person will still win. This simply isn't so....and that's sad. The real best will never be known, due to doping.
Mother Marjorie doesn't think that the sport of tennis is as affected by "doping" as other sports. She says this because while tennis requires endurance, it requires great skill and mental attributes to excel in the sport.

Steffi Graf never possessed the physical characteristics of an athlete who "doped." A case might be made for other tennis players who looked uncharacteristically muscular, but "doping" would better benefit athetes in other sports.

Given the character Graf had shown throughout her career, it wouldn't seem appropriate or logical to label her as a "doper."

FYI, questioning Graf's character just cost you 5 Mother Marjorie princess points. You have been warned.

Mother Marjorie Ann

Lionheart392
07-30-2010, 01:22 PM
Mother Marjorie doesn't think that the sport of tennis is as affected by "doping" as other sports. She says this because while tennis requires endurance, it requires great skill and mental attributes to excel in the sport.

Steffi Graf never possessed the physical characteristics of an athlete who "doped." A case might be made for other tennis players who looked uncharacteristically muscular, but "doping" would better benefit athetes in other sports.

Given the character Graf had shown throughout her career, it wouldn't seem appropriate or logical to label her as a "doper."

FYI, questioning Graf's character just cost you 5 Mother Marjorie princess points. You have been warned.

Mother Marjorie Ann

Mother Marjorie shows her wisdom once again :)

MotherMarjorie
07-30-2010, 01:44 PM
Mother Marjorie shows her wisdom once again :)
Thank You, Lionheart. Mother Marjorie appreciates you.

Mother Marjorie Ann

Datacipher
07-30-2010, 02:51 PM
Mother Marjorie doesn't think that the sport of tennis is as affected by "doping" as other sports. She says this because while tennis requires endurance, it requires great skill and mental attributes to excel in the sport.

Steffi Graf never possessed the physical characteristics of an athlete who "doped." A case might be made for other tennis players who looked uncharacteristically muscular, but "doping" would better benefit athetes in other sports.

Given the character Graf had shown throughout her career, it wouldn't seem appropriate or logical to label her as a "doper."


Stick to mothering you mother. How lovely when people who obviously know absolutely nothing about doping think they should spout their ignorance.

All of us hope, and I have frequently written, that the high skill level required for tennis may insulate us somewhat from the 100% doped sport. However, ANYONE who has played at a high level knows JUST how important sheer physicality is. Let's see:

Ability to recover between points
Ability to recover between matches
Enhance endurance
Enhance strength
enhance speed
Enhance confidence (and yes, some argue, "focus", athletes are using drugs for this to)
drop weight
gain muscle

Yes, why in the heck would tennis players want that? I am sure they just abide by a gentleman's agreement not to!! (oh except all the ones already caught...but the REST....)


Paragraph 2 says it all: uncharacteristically muscular. There is no more simple-minded and ignorant belief than that. Sure...Graf was not brute like Coria or Korda, or 86 Mcenroe when he got super skinny, and LOST weight. We can all tell. Not everyone can be friggin huge like Lance armstrong after all! So wrong on so many levels.....doping doesn't equal steroids, steroids don't equal muscle mass, good lord. Ignorance...

struggle
07-30-2010, 03:17 PM
given that the list of "doping" procedures/drugs goes up every year
it is not unreasonable to think that some of the players in the past may
have been using things that are now illegal.

so what?

Joe Pike
07-30-2010, 03:17 PM
Stick to mothering you mother. How lovely when people who obviously know absolutely nothing about doping think they should spout their ignorance.

All of us hope, and I have frequently written, that the high skill level required for tennis may insulate us somewhat from the 100% doped sport. However, ANYONE who has played at a high level knows JUST how ...


Stop trolling.

Datacipher
07-30-2010, 04:31 PM
given that the list of "doping" procedures/drugs goes up every year
it is not unreasonable to think that some of the players in the past may
have been using things that are now illegal.

so what?

I'd go much further tbuggle! Put it this way. In my life, I trained athletes for a long time, and became personally aware of just how commonplace this stuff is, not just for pros, but for amateurs, and frankly, those who simply want to look "good". It becomes a bit of an inside joke at some point....there are those who simply think they got that way by working out "hard", or with "dedication", and there are those who know what's really going on...

But I don't expect people to know this...and in my experience, most don't even want to know it. Twenty years ago, when I'd tell people, Arnie or Sly were juiced to the hilt? I'd get evicerated by rabid fans. Fifteen years ago, when I'd tell people that steroids and EPO were in tennis, I"d get evicerated by rabid fans.....

after all that time, I'd HOPE that awareness has been raised a bit more...but STILL, people don't want to know. I mean...you can make it OBVIOUS eg. baseball, Ben Johson etc...and people will still deny it, and get angry at you just for talking about it....

But in regards to tennis and your point, put it this way, one may disagree on how widespread it is, but you would have to be ******** to not know that yes, it's in tennis, and that some players ARE and HAVE used. Why?

Well....Mac hid it for 2 decades, but turns out he used in the 80's. BJK says a woman was using in her day! Coria, Rusedski, Korda, Ulirach, and others have been caught....37 cases of Nandrolone alone. It isn't hard to find out how silly drug testing is...how easily bypassed it is, at this point, it's mostly for image purposes, and this has been acknowledged by experts. So....

1.we know for a fact that "some" players have been using for decades now
2.we know for a fact how widespread it is in some other sports
3.we know for a fact that drug testing is largely ineffective, and it's really to the point where only the most stupid get caught
4.we know for a fact that other pro players have hinted at it in tennis, and a couple have even stated it outright...one going so far as to say it's "widespread"
5.we know for a fact that tennis is a hugely demanding sport physically

So...what is more plausible:
1.all other players, besides the ones caught, have been, on their own honor, deciding not to use

OR

2.some percentage of players are doping (now and in the past)

Yes, I'd say it is not just "reasonable" to assume players of the past and present have used...I'd say it is a bizarre fantasy to believe none did (AGAIN OTHER than the ones already caught...a pretty darn large number)

And, yes, add to that, steroids weren't even illegal at times in the past!

rolandg
07-31-2010, 01:22 AM
I'd go much further tbuggle! Put it this way. In my life, I trained athletes for a long time, and became personally aware of just how commonplace this stuff is, not just for pros, but for amateurs, and frankly, those who simply want to look "good". It becomes a bit of an inside joke at some point....there are those who simply think they got that way by working out "hard", or with "dedication", and there are those who know what's really going on...

But I don't expect people to know this...and in my experience, most don't even want to know it. Twenty years ago, when I'd tell people, Arnie or Sly were juiced to the hilt? I'd get evicerated by rabid fans. Fifteen years ago, when I'd tell people that steroids and EPO were in tennis, I"d get evicerated by rabid fans.....

after all that time, I'd HOPE that awareness has been raised a bit more...but STILL, people don't want to know. I mean...you can make it OBVIOUS eg. baseball, Ben Johson etc...and people will still deny it, and get angry at you just for talking about it....

But in regards to tennis and your point, put it this way, one may disagree on how widespread it is, but you would have to be ******** to not know that yes, it's in tennis, and that some players ARE and HAVE used. Why?

Well....Mac hid it for 2 decades, but turns out he used in the 80's. BJK says a woman was using in her day! Coria, Rusedski, Korda, Ulirach, and others have been caught....37 cases of Nandrolone alone. It isn't hard to find out how silly drug testing is...how easily bypassed it is, at this point, it's mostly for image purposes, and this has been acknowledged by experts. So....

1.we know for a fact that "some" players have been using for decades now
2.we know for a fact how widespread it is in some other sports
3.we know for a fact that drug testing is largely ineffective, and it's really to the point where only the most stupid get caught
4.we know for a fact that other pro players have hinted at it in tennis, and a couple have even stated it outright...one going so far as to say it's "widespread"
5.we know for a fact that tennis is a hugely demanding sport physically

So...what is more plausible:
1.all other players, besides the ones caught, have been, on their own honor, deciding not to use

OR

2.some percentage of players are doping (now and in the past)

Yes, I'd say it is not just "reasonable" to assume players of the past and present have used...I'd say it is a bizarre fantasy to believe none did (AGAIN OTHER than the ones already caught...a pretty darn large number)

And, yes, add to that, steroids weren't even illegal at times in the past!

Again, completely true. I know from experience that teenagers at junior and school athletic championships during the 90's in the UK were using PED's you could order on the internet, and, before that, via post, and this was just to impress senior selectors or parents. And people still seriously believe that people aren't juicing when there are millions of dollars and worldwide fame up for grabs? You find people's morals and ethics quickly go out the window when personal glory is involved.

And it's true, people still have this 80's believe that the only people juicing are either really muscular or have deep voices and facial hair.

jerriy
07-31-2010, 02:40 AM
Default Just wanted to say Steffi Graf is in no way the best ever! davey25
Banned
Good riddance.

Given Davey25's long history of legitimate posts here, it's hard for me to believe he would have done something so egregious in any single post that it would warrant banning! A warning about something...OK...but....banning? Definitely seems troubling...

If a person has had THAT many posts without a problem, no matte what rule he may have broken, it should be taken as a one-time offense unless done repeatedly...Garbage.

Maybe that's precisely what that got him banned. He thought that his "long history" as you put it gave him a false illusion that he was permitted to misbehave.

In other words he was practically begging to be banned. The fact that he may have been more civilized in the previous years is irrelevant. In fact it should count against him. Longtime posters are usually becoming wiser as they get older - but with a minority of posters it seems to go in the opposite direction: they become more juvenile and trollish as they get older... maybe, perhaps because of a sense of false security that comes as a result of "escaping" bans through the years

Cuz quite frankly I was getting tired of his never ending Seles-v-Graf/Serena-v-Henin/etc-v-etc brawls all over this forum (opening countless flame-threads and now just as I was thinking his fights with Selestards was over, he turned his trollguns against Steffi.

thalivest
07-31-2010, 03:04 AM
There is nothing about this thread that appears to be anti Graf. It is merely pointing out things that could keep Graf from being considered the greatest ever. She still is certainly a greater player than Seles, but Seles is not the standard for the greatest ever, not even close.

jerriy
07-31-2010, 03:21 AM
^ Who then? Navratilova presumably? Well, let's see then, what was her claim to fame? That's right, her discipline and athleticism which helped raise her tennis level above her peers. But then let's look at the underreported athleticism of Graf, shall we?

Guess what? Graf was the best, not only because of her tennis talents and her variety game and shot-making abilities, but ALSO because she was (arguably) the greatest athlete that ever appeared on a tennis court. Among tennis players no one is her equal (among the men only Borg and Nadal are her peers in terms of being a gifted athlete). All three of them Borg, Graf and Nadal are such phenomenal athletes that they would have had an excellent career in a different sport. I remember the young Graf was so quick that they measured her and she would have qualified for the 800-meters at Seoul Olympics! You got that? That's world class athleticism - that's "cream of the crop" stuff we're talking about here.

Name one other tennis player who would have qualified for the Olympics in any other sport? That's right, there is none. Ergo, even by that "disciplined athlete" measure Graf really was the best
.

Datacipher
07-31-2010, 05:18 AM
Good riddance.

Garbage.

Maybe that's precisely what that got him banned. He thought that his "long history" as you put it gave him a false illusion that he was permitted to misbehave.

In other words he was practically begging to be banned. The fact that he may have been more civilized in the previous years is irrelevant. In fact it should count against him. Longtime posters are usually becoming wiser as they get older - but with a minority of posters it seems to go in the opposite direction: they become more juvenile and trollish as they get older... maybe, perhaps because of a sense of false security that comes as a result of "escaping" bans through the years

Cuz quite frankly I was getting tired of his never ending Seles-v-Graf/Serena-v-Henin/etc-v-etc brawls all over this forum (opening countless flame-threads and now just as I was thinking his fights with Selestards was over, he turned his trollguns against Steffi.

Misbehave? In what way? That is what we wondered. You say he was asking to be banned, but then reference arguments over women's players....um...yeah....if making threads like that were cause for banning, most of this board would be gone. Be more specific, if you think there was legit reason for him to be banned!

Datacipher
07-31-2010, 05:22 AM
^ Who then? Navratilova presumably? Well, let's see then, what was her claim to fame? That's right, her discipline and athleticism which helped raise her tennis level above her peers. But then let's look at the underreported athleticism of Graf, shall we?

Guess what? Graf was the best, not only because of her tennis talents and her variety game and shot-making abilities, but ALSO because she was (arguably) the greatest athlete that ever appeared on a tennis court. Among tennis players no one is her equal (among the men only Borg and Nadal are her peers in terms of being a gifted athlete). All three of them Borg, Graf and Nadal are such phenomenal athletes that they would have had an excellent career in a different sport. I remember the young Graf was so quick that they measured her and she would have qualified for the 800-meters at Seoul Olympics! You got that? That's world class athleticism - that's "cream of the crop" stuff we're talking about here.

Name one other tennis player who would have qualified for the Olympics in any other sport? That's right, there is none. Ergo, even by that "disciplined athlete" measure Graf really was the best
.

OK...here we go. Only a troll would claim to be tired of such threads and then a second later post rhetorical tripe like this.

PS. Since when did she have times qualifying her for Seoul? Did you make this up, or are you repeating urban legend?

I am genuinely curious, because originally, her coaches simply said that her times as a PRETEEN were so good, that they were interested in recruiting her into the track program instead of the tennis program. Is there new info? (I don't follow the women), or is this YET AGAIN more TW fanboy embellishment?

thalivest
07-31-2010, 05:39 AM
^ Who then? Navratilova presumably? Well, let's see then, what was her claim to fame?

Well lets see:

-a record 9 Wimbledon titles in singles
-a record 8 WTA Championship titles
-a tie for the overall record Wimbledon titles at 20
-a record 167 tournament singles titles (Graf didnt even reach 100 with mostly only singles to focus on)
-was a key player of 3 different decades- 70s, 80s, 90s
-a record 6 consecutive slam wins
-a record 74 match winning streak in singles
-a record 31 womens doubles Slam titles
-an 86-1 record in her best ever year

Yeah though only a troll could even argue Martina as the greatest ever. :rolleyes:

jerriy
07-31-2010, 06:16 AM
if making threads like that were cause for banning, most of this board would be gone. Be more specificYou being a banned troll-fanboy are clearly incapable of just clicking the link on davy's profile and finding out all the recent "mega-troll-fest" threads that s/he and only s/he started and actively participated in:


Just wanted to say Steffi Graf is in no way the best ever!
Washed up Henin will never win another slam.
Poll: Seles vs Serena- who rates higher
Henin should have never returned
Serena vs Seles- how is it even a question
The obsession of Seles fans with Graf is mind boggling
Serena Williams to win more slam titles than Federer
It will be an all Williams final at Roland Garros this year
How on earth can Monica Seles be considered the greatest ever by some people?
Graf dominates biggest rivals on their best surfaces
Poll: How many slams would Seles have won without the stabbing.
The highlighted one is my favorite :mrgreen: what irony!

OK...here we go. Only a troll would claim to be tired of such threads and then a second later post rhetorical tripe like this.

PS. Since when did she have times qualifying her for Seoul? Did you make this up, or are you repeating urban legend?

I am genuinely curious, because originally, her coaches simply said that her times as a PRETEEN were so good, that they were interested in recruiting her into the track program instead of the tennis program...No. There is a different between PROactively fighting with opponents, in fact INITIATING many/most of those fights (by opening the threads) and between merely "setting the record straight".

or is this YET AGAIN more TW fanboy embellishment?You're accusing me of what I'm not: a fanboy of a tennis legend.

What is worse is your predicament: you are a fanboy of a troll

jerriy
07-31-2010, 06:39 AM
Well lets see:

-a record 9 Wimbledon titles in singles
-a record 8 WTA Championship titles
-a tie for the overall record Wimbledon titles at 20
-a record 167 tournament singles titles (Graf didnt even reach 100 with mostly only singles to focus on)
-was a key player of 3 different decades- 70s, 80s, 90s
-a record 6 consecutive slam wins
-a record 74 match winning streak in singles
-a record 31 womens doubles Slam titles
-an 86-1 record in her best ever yearTennis is A LOT more than rushing to the net at every opportunity and flicking a volley over the net... and doing that again and again and again, from childhood until past menopause.

I'm not saying that those records aren't impressive, because they are, in a big way. It's just that there ought to to be more to "GOAT tennis" than mere "consistency on grass". That's why Navratilova's 1984 winning streak (regardless that they were against mug opponents except Chrissy) is to me more impressive than her deliberate (and successful) quest to collect as many Wimby and doubles trophies as possible.

thalivest
07-31-2010, 06:50 AM
Tennis is A LOT more than rushing to the net at every opportunity and flicking a volley over the net... and doing that again and again and again, from childhood until past menopause.

I'm not saying that those records aren't impressive, because they are, in a big way. It's just that there ought to to be more to "GOAT tennis" than mere "consistency on grass". That's why Navratilova's 1984 winning streak (regardless that they were against mug opponents except Chrissy) is to me more impressive than her deliberate (and successful) quest to collect as many Wimby and doubles trophies as possible.

Well considering how many titles she won from 1987 onwards when the grass court season consisted of Wimbledon and a couple weeks of smallish grass tournaments which players generally play 1 or 0 of a year, I would imagine her success in winning so many tournaments and doubles titles goes beyond just her grass expertise.

And Martina was a complete player. Evert and Graf had a hard time hitting clean winners against from the baseline since she was so quick and her groundstrokes were alot better than realized. She was a nightmare opponent all around when she was anywhere near her prime. Even in old age it took great efforts to beat her.

Would you say Graf is the most ultimately completely player? Almost never hits anything but a slice backhand, doesnt come to net much, return of serve suspect. Martina the net rusher was more comfortable hitting a topspin backhand than Graf the baseliner.

jerriy
07-31-2010, 07:40 AM
thalivest, I do agree with you that prime Navratilova was superior on practically all surfaces. But once she went over her prime, it seemed that she became even more focused on serve/volley... that seemed to be her strategy. Going back to the "mother surface" where it all begun for her.

Here is why Graf was the greatest tennis player, i.e. greater than Evert and yes, even Navratilova. Here is a page from the New Yorker that makes my point - it dates from 1987 (i.e. way before she achieved GOAT status by sweeping all the slams and and even doing it in one year, so you have no excuse):

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4128/4846075887_79f4b703e1_b.jpg

thalivest
07-31-2010, 09:41 AM
Interesting that back in 1987 Evert says there were no chinks in Graf's armor. Apparently there was at this point considering Martina destroyed her in the Wimbledon and U.S Open finals both that year.

Polaris
07-31-2010, 10:10 AM
Given Davey25's long history of legitimate posts here, it's hard for me to believe he would have done something so egregious in any single post that it would warrant banning! A warning about something...OK...but....banning? Definitely seems troubling...

If a person has had THAT many posts without a problem, no matte what rule he may have broken, it should be taken as a one-time offense unless done repeatedly...

Data, the banning of davey25 is not unexpected. The guy has several alternate usernames (this has been proven for some usernames and strongly suspected for others). His posts are legitimate in that they don't break any forum rules, but taken over a period of time, you'll see that they are attention-seeking and manipulative. Observe the stark contrast between this thread ("Graf is not the best") and his more recent exhortations about "Graf is the best." It is possible for people to change opinions, but this guy changes them diametrically about all players all the time using multiple IDs to do so. We aren't taking 2 or 3 IDs here. The number is most likely in the double digits :) ! He has been doing this over the past 5 years.

Most likely, that is what got him banned.

jerriy
07-31-2010, 12:45 PM
Interesting that back in 1987 Evert says there were no chinks in Graf's armor. Apparently there was at this point considering Martina destroyed her in the Wimbledon and U.S Open finals both that year.Graf had a flu during that US Open final. But that's not even that much relevant in this case. Meaning, I don't pretend to know what "destroyed" means to you, but to me and, allow me to dare say everyone else, "destroying" does NOT include winning two matches with the help of tie-breaks.

LDVTennis
07-31-2010, 01:15 PM
THE ****** is now actually trying to present my argument as being RolandG's statement.

AND THE ****** adds that by calling everyone a "candidate", I have "pretty much" implicated everyone. WHAT A DOORKNOB!

Still, waiting on that quote from BJK where she said something to the effect that steroids have been prevalent on the women's tour since the 60's.

In the meantime, here is something else BJK recently said: Datacipher is an idiot.

I'll provide a source for this quote as soon as you produce a source for the other BJK quote. :p

Datacipher
07-31-2010, 04:15 PM
Data, the banning of davey25 is not unexpected. The guy has several alternate usernames (this has been proven for some usernames and strongly suspected for others). His posts are legitimate in that they don't break any forum rules, but taken over a period of time, you'll see that they are attention-seeking and manipulative. Observe the stark contrast between this thread ("Graf is not the best") and his more recent exhortations about "Graf is the best." It is possible for people to change opinions, but this guy changes them diametrically about all players all the time using multiple IDs to do so. We aren't taking 2 or 3 IDs here. The number is most likely in the double digits :) ! He has been doing this over the past 5 years.

Most likely, that is what got him banned.

Polaris, I don't defend multiple ID's....though...we've got several trolls doing that right now. If indeed, Davy was doing that, then that is legit reason for a ban!

The attention-seeking...well again...I'd say the posts in that category outnumber the thoughtful, sincere posts (posters) here....

Chopin
07-31-2010, 09:42 PM
I fully support the TW moderators and encourage them to exercise additional bans on other posters who threaten the integrity of the Boards.

Thank You,
Chopin

Warriorroger
08-07-2010, 11:39 PM
He could (the rightfully-so-banned OP) be reading all of our messages right now and respond under a different ID, it feels like a Hitcock movie.

Polaris
08-10-2010, 05:34 AM
He could (the rightfully-so-banned OP) be reading all of our messages right now and respond under a different ID, it feels like a Hitcock movie.

It isn't like a Hitchcock because there is no mystery. This dude with a dozen identities also goes by the name of thalivest. He has stalked these forums under various identities and manipulated its members for the better part of 5 years. You can bet that he is reading our messages.

I hope he abandons other IDs and settles on one. From past experience, however, my hopes are low. When his opinion changes, he generates a new ID.