PDA

View Full Version : Greatest female tennis player ever


anointedone
04-24-2009, 04:06 PM
I decided to remake this poll as my poll options in the other thread were a bit poorly arranged with Lenglen/Wills sharing a category, etc.... Plus it makes no sense to have an "other" option as a vote for anyone other than these 10 would just be stupid anyway.

anointedone
04-24-2009, 05:08 PM
I voted for Margaret Court.

CEvertFan
04-24-2009, 06:07 PM
My vote goes to Navratilova.

GameSampras
04-24-2009, 06:12 PM
Graf without a doubt.

thalivest
04-24-2009, 06:31 PM
Graf without a doubt.

I guess you are a big fan of the 90s all around. :)

GameSampras
04-24-2009, 07:01 PM
I guess you are a big fan of the 90s all around. :)



Graf alone has more slams than the WS combined. LOL.. Thats Dominance right there my friend.

When you look at the slam count and overral results , no player can sniff Graf's skirt. Shes head and shoulders above the rest and its not really even debatable at least statistic wise. She is the GOAT among the GOATS

The-Champ
04-24-2009, 07:18 PM
Navratilova gets my vote for the women's GOAT.


If everyone plays at their potential with 100% dedication to the game and 100% healthy, Serena Williams with her mighty serve will destroy the legends.

Chelsea_Kiwi
04-24-2009, 07:24 PM
Seles would of been easily the GOAT had the stabbing not occured.

thalivest
04-24-2009, 07:37 PM
Graf alone has more slams than the WS combined. LOL.. Thats Dominance right there my friend.

When you look at the slam count and overral results , no player can sniff Graf's skirt. Shes head and shoulders above the rest and its not really even debatable at least statistic wise. She is the GOAT among the GOATS

That is why you didnt even vote for her. :twisted: Also Court, Graf, Navratilova, Evert, Wills Moody all have more slams than the WS combined. :)

flying24
04-24-2009, 08:41 PM
Seles would of been easily the GOAT had the stabbing not occured.

She would have needed atleast 2 Wimbledons to even be in contention for the GOAT. Even 1 would not have been enough, not in the womens game where the greatest players all win each major multiple times, something Graf herself had done even before the Seles stabbing as well.

BTURNER
04-24-2009, 08:53 PM
steffi Graf

boredone3456
04-24-2009, 09:01 PM
My vote goes to Navratilova.

She gets mine as well

BTURNER
04-24-2009, 09:10 PM
boredone, not to start a big problem, but I just don't get how someone with 2 RG titles, 1 Italian and no Germans gets GOAT over the likes of Graf, Court, and Wills. Her slow court credentials just don'tt cut it!

flying24
04-24-2009, 09:15 PM
I am mixed on Martina on clay. I think Martina was truly a great clay court player in her prime from 1982-1987. She was incredibly hard for even Graf and Evert to beat when they played her at the French, and the 2 years she won she was dominant. Before her prime though she wasnt even a particularly good clay courter, while on other surfaces she was already excellent even in the years before her prime.

boredone3456
04-24-2009, 09:18 PM
boredone, not to start a big problem, but I just don't get how someone with 2 RG titles, 1 Italian and no Germans gets GOAT over the likes of Graf, Court, and Wills. Her slow court credentials just don'tt cut it!

Hey man I have no problems, I respect your opinion, I just happen to have a different one is all, I don't feel insulted or anything. I give Navratilova a lot of credit for dethroning Evert (well maybe thats not exactly the best word, but Nav was the one who really halted Evert's dominance of the top spot). Plus with Evert around on clay it was hard, Navrtilova was the second best Clay Court player in 85 & 86 and had Evert not been around those years I feel Martina would have won both of those French Opens because Graf was not yet where she could be a threat, especialy since she thrashed Evert in 1984, had Evert retired that year, Martina probably wins the french in 1985 and 1986, bringing that total to 4.

But, I feel during Martina's best years she selectively chose a schedule that played to her strengths, so she focused on faster courts, know whether that was to avoid Evert or just to increase she chances of winning points or to make sure she could keep the number 1 spot or whatever, she didn't play a lot of clay court events.

At the end of the day, I still go with Martina, if you disagree, well then we just have a respectful difference of opinion since I have several posts by you on this subject, you have a very good base for your opinion, but I still have mine.

BTURNER
04-24-2009, 09:25 PM
Martina enjoyed playing on clay and she played a lot of clay tournaments. I saw absolutely inspiring tennis from her on dirt. She actually grew up playing on the stuff. Navratilova has some great victories to brag about. Nevertheless she has the worst record of any of the contenders for GOAT on clay excepting Connolly who career was cut so short.

thalivest
04-24-2009, 11:48 PM
Seles would of been easily the GOAT had the stabbing not occured.

We will never know, but I personally doubt it. Her grass court record would have been insufficient IMO, and her longevity I dont really feel would have been all that great given her rather uninspiring comeback attempt.

crabgrass
04-25-2009, 01:16 AM
are we gonna keep making these polls until eventually someone other than graf tops it?

julesb
04-25-2009, 01:37 AM
Monica Seles by far. She has the hardest hitting ever, the most determination, the biggest serving, the best movement.

Warriorroger
04-25-2009, 02:07 AM
are we gonna keep making these polls until eventually someone other than graf tops it?

You are spot on! Thanks.

AndrewD
04-25-2009, 02:28 AM
boredone, not to start a big problem, but I just don't get how someone with 2 RG titles, 1 Italian and no Germans gets GOAT over the likes of Graf, Court, and Wills. Her slow court credentials just don'tt cut it!

I agree and I would like to bring up one other point - dominating and being dominated.

Connelly was never dominated by another player
Court was never dominated by another player
Wills was never dominated by another player
Graf was never dominated by another player
Seles was never dominated by another player.

Yes, they lost to other players but no-one, at any time during their viable careers (Viable = not counting those years such as Court when she was playing part-time, Seles as a child and after her comeback, Navratilova when she was past her best mid-30's and her comeback at 40, Graf when she first joined the tour as a child, Evert when was 34, Austin after her back injury, etc) was able to dominate them. Graf and Seles pretty much split things, not counting their matches after Seles' comeback or in her first few matches as a 16 year old.

However,

Navratilova was dominated by Evert,
Evert was dominated by Navratilova (could argue also briefly by Austin)

The greatest players of all time are NEVER dominated by any other player. At the very worst they would have split their matches (win one, lose one) BUT they would never have gone through periods where another player was able to beat them every time they played, or close enough to it. That's why Evert doesn't rate with Court, Connolly, Graf or Wills. That's also why I don't believe that Navratilova deserves to be rated with them. Seles is the wildcard but I can't put Evert ahead of her.

Personally, I think that the best of all time is either Steffi Graf or Margaret Court. As an all-around player Court is streets ahead (Navratilova would be the only one to match her) but, as singles players, I wouldn't split them.

thalivest
04-25-2009, 02:37 AM
Lenglen was also never dominated by anyone.

julesb
04-25-2009, 02:57 AM
I agree with AndrewD. No player who is dominated by anyone in their primes can be a real candidate for greatest ever. I think the main candidates for greatest ever are the following women:

Monica Seles
Virginia Wade
Nancy Richey
Justine Henin

None of these 4 women was ever dominated by anyone in their primes. That is why they are the 4 main candidates for greatest ever for me.

Chelsea_Kiwi
04-25-2009, 03:57 AM
She would have needed atleast 2 Wimbledons to even be in contention for the GOAT. Even 1 would not have been enough, not in the womens game where the greatest players all win each major multiple times, something Graf herself had done even before the Seles stabbing as well. Well she would of won it because remember in 1992 Wimbledon (despite being wasted) she made the final and obviously she couldn't compete in the next one. I don't think she would of won tons of Wimbledons but maybe 1-3. Remember she won 8 GS by the age of 19 and in the womens game they often don't die out like in the mens game so I think an age comparison is more meaningful in terms of how she would of developed. Also remember many said Nadal would never win Wimbledon then said he would never win a HC Slam. I think she would of developed her game enough to win a few.

maximo
04-25-2009, 04:01 AM
Why no Justine Henin as a poll option??

gj011
04-25-2009, 04:04 AM
Graf without a doubt.

Graf is not the GOAT. Not even close. Did you forget Seles stabbing?
You can't be the GOAT when your competition is violently removed from the tennis court by your fans.

gj011
04-25-2009, 04:06 AM
Seles would of been easily the GOAT had the stabbing not occured.

Quoted for absolute truth.

Chelsea_Kiwi
04-25-2009, 04:08 AM
I agree with AndrewD. No player who is dominated by anyone in their primes can be a real candidate for greatest ever. I think the main candidates for greatest ever are the following women:

Monica Seles
Virginia Wade
Nancy Richey
Justine Henin

None of these 4 women was ever dominated by anyone in their primes. That is why they are the 4 main candidates for greatest ever for me. Tbh it could be said that Seles "prime" was more of a pre-prime considering she was only 18-19. Though obviously we couldn't tell if she was going to get better though I would say she probably would of given her age

gj011
04-25-2009, 07:41 AM
Tbh it could be said that Seles "prime" was more of a pre-prime considering she was only 18-19. Though obviously we couldn't tell if she was going to get better though I would say she probably would of given her age

Yes sadly we never saw Seles in her prime.

grafrules
04-25-2009, 10:59 AM
Well she would of won it because remember in 1992 Wimbledon (despite being wasted) she made the final and obviously she couldn't compete in the next one. I don't think she would of won tons of Wimbledons but maybe 1-3. Remember she won 8 GS by the age of 19 and in the womens game they often don't die out like in the mens game so I think an age comparison is more meaningful in terms of how she would of developed. Also remember many said Nadal would never win Wimbledon then said he would never win a HC Slam. I think she would of developed her game enough to win a few.

Nadal's greatest asset on grass by far is that he is just an amazing overall athlete. Seles is not this and never was this. None of Monica's many greatest strengths that made her such a great player are that effective or rewarded on grass other than possibly the return of serve. However she actually doesnt neccessarily return that well on grass (despite being possibly considered the greatest returner of serve ever on other surfaces) since opponents with a good slice serve can expose her two hands on the return like on no other surface. Luckily for her the only ones she played at Wimbledon 92 who can hit that serve were Graf in the final, and a way over the hill Navratilova in the semis. I am not even sure she would have made the Wimbledon final that year had Sabatini or Capriati been in her half instead of Graf's. Keep in mind both those players outperformed the aging Martina at Wimbledon 91 when all 3 were in the same half, and both played her very tough on other favorite surfaces at the time which were also Monica's favorites (Sabatini on clay, Capriati on hard courts). An aging Martina where she saw a target often and didnt have to hit alot of balls was a better matchup for her on grass than another top baseliner. I actually think serve-volleyers are her preferred matchup by far on grass, and as it turned out her 92 draw was almost all serve-volleyers until running into mostly baseliner/somewhat all courter Graf in the final.

As for reaching the Wimbledon final at 18, I believe Hana Mandlikova reached the Wimbledon final at only 18 as well but as you probably know she never won Wimbledon. While Seles is no doubt a superior player to Mandlikova, I am not so sure she is a superior grass court player at 18 or was going to be a superior grass court player to Hana period. Hana also beat a 24 year old Martina in the a 3 sets semi to reach that Wimbledon final, not a 35 year old in 3 sets as Monica did.

I still believe Seles would have reached more Wimbledon finals without the stabbing, not many more but atleast a couple more. Whether she would have won any I am not so sure. I would favor Graf, Novotna, or Hingis all over her in a Wimbledon final. I am not even going to mention Davenport, Venus, Serena whom I obviously would as well, as the idea of Monica still being a real contender on grass as late as 99-2002 is laughable.

gj011
04-25-2009, 11:15 AM
^^^^ What about Conchita Martinez over Seles in Wimbledon final? Interesting that you somehow "forgot" to mention her.

The fact that Martinez won Wimbledon during the time Seles was out, clearly goes for argument that Seles would have won Wimbledon.

DMan
04-25-2009, 11:33 AM
^^^^ What about Conchita Martinez over Seles in Wimbledon final? Interesting that you somehow "forgot" to mention her.

The fact that Martinez won Wimbledon during the time Seles was out, clearly goes for argument that Seles would have won Wimbledon.

I am *still* waiting for a comment by gj or Jules in which they don't use the words "would have" "could have" or "should have" when discussing what actually happened.

gj011
04-25-2009, 11:43 AM
I am *still* waiting for a comment by gj or Jules in which they don't use the words "would have" "could have" or "should have" when discussing what actually happened.

I have a news for you. Stabbing actually happened and it actually had a great effect on both Graf's and Seles' careers.

grafrules
04-25-2009, 11:43 AM
^^^^ What about Conchita Martinez over Seles in Wimbledon final? Interesting that you somehow "forgot" to mention her.

The fact that Martinez won Wimbledon during the time Seles was out, clearly goes for argument that Seles would have won Wimbledon.

Well if you are of the belief Seles would have still been ranked #1 going into Wimbledon 1994, and I am going to presume you are given my familiarity of your viewpoints on this already, then the draw of Wimbledon 1994 would have been completely different anyway. Graf if seeded #2 would have never been drawn to play Lori McNeil, and in that case probably just romps to the title like she does almost every other year. With the draw different someone like Jana Novotna may have been around for the final as well. Novotna was unlucky to run into an old Martina who is her idol and she basically could never get up to play, even when we reached the point in time Jana had become the better player in Martinas old age. There is no gaurantee it is only Conchita Martinez that Seles would have had to beat.

Also how do we really know how Seles would do vs Conchita Martinez on grass. The two have never played on grass. Yes Seles owns on non-grass surfaces, but playing Monica on grass is nothing like playing her on hard courts or clay. Just ask not only Steffi Graf, but Zina Garrison, Katerina Studenikova, and Natasha Zvereva.

DMan
04-25-2009, 12:02 PM
I have a news for you. Stabbing actually happened and it actually had a great effect on both Graf's and Seles' careers.

Darling, still bitter after all these years?!

My next pity party is all for you!

boredone3456
04-25-2009, 12:11 PM
I agree with AndrewD. No player who is dominated by anyone in their primes can be a real candidate for greatest ever. I think the main candidates for greatest ever are the following women:

Monica Seles
Virginia Wade
Nancy Richey
Justine Henin

None of these 4 women was ever dominated by anyone in their primes. That is why they are the 4 main candidates for greatest ever for me.

Monica- Never technically domianted by anyone, though trailed H2H with Graf, but cannot be given the GOAT based on a what if.

Wade- Wade was dominated H2H by quite a few people, such as Evert (Evert Lead 40-6), King (King Lead 22-9, counting open era numbers only), Navratilova (Nav lead 18-6) and Goolagong (Goolagong lead 30-10). those are 4 women who dominated Wade so she was domianted by several people during her prime. Plus Wade only has 3 slams, no where near enough for GOAT

Richey- only 2 slams, not good enough for GOAT, and lost 2 slam finals to far superior players of the 60's in straight sets, Bueno and Court. She beat Ann Haydon Jones and Lesley Turner Bowry for her two slams, tough opponents, but she lost to tougher ones.

Henin- only 7 slams, probably a good 3 or 4th tier all time great at best, had she stayed who knows, but as of now 7 slams and no career slam = not GOAT.

thalivest
04-25-2009, 01:40 PM
Wade- Wade was dominated H2H by quite a few people, such as Evert (Evert Lead 40-6), King (King Lead 22-9, counting open era numbers only), Navratilova (Nav lead 18-6) and Goolagong (Goolagong lead 30-10). those are 4 women who dominated Wade so she was domianted by several people during her prime. Plus Wade only has 3 slams, no where near enough for GOAT

You forgot Court. I am pretty sure her head to head vs Wade is dominant too. I would guess Bueno and Ann Jones too if Wade even played them enough.

xusu
04-25-2009, 02:00 PM
definitely,Serena Williams
Who can beat Serena?

flying24
04-25-2009, 02:08 PM
who can beat Serena?

In Grand Slams during her time period winning her thus far 10. Well among some of those would be Elena Likhovtseva, Jennifer Capriati (4 times in only 7 slam meetings from 2001-2004), 17 year old Maria Sharapova, Jill Craybas, Daniela Hantuchova, Justine Henin (3 for 3 on 3 different surfaces in 2007 slam meeting), Jelena Jankovic, and Katerina Srebtonik. That is even while missing alot of the slam events with injury.

Winners or Errors
04-25-2009, 06:36 PM
I agree and I would like to bring up one other point - dominating and being dominated.

Connelly was never dominated by another player
Court was never dominated by another player
Wills was never dominated by another player
Graf was never dominated by another player
Seles was never dominated by another player.

Yes, they lost to other players but no-one, at any time during their viable careers (Viable = not counting those years such as Court when she was playing part-time, Seles as a child and after her comeback, Navratilova when she was past her best mid-30's and her comeback at 40, Graf when she first joined the tour as a child, Evert when was 34, Austin after her back injury, etc) was able to dominate them. Graf and Seles pretty much split things, not counting their matches after Seles' comeback or in her first few matches as a 16 year old.

However,

Navratilova was dominated by Evert,
Evert was dominated by Navratilova (could argue also briefly by Austin)

The greatest players of all time are NEVER dominated by any other player. At the very worst they would have split their matches (win one, lose one) BUT they would never have gone through periods where another player was able to beat them every time they played, or close enough to it. That's why Evert doesn't rate with Court, Connolly, Graf or Wills. That's also why I don't believe that Navratilova deserves to be rated with them. Seles is the wildcard but I can't put Evert ahead of her.

Personally, I think that the best of all time is either Steffi Graf or Margaret Court. As an all-around player Court is streets ahead (Navratilova would be the only one to match her) but, as singles players, I wouldn't split them.

So having actual competition is a guarantee that you can't be the GOAT? Interesting perspective.

CANADIAN763
04-25-2009, 06:41 PM
Anyone but Serena Williams

tennis-hero
04-25-2009, 07:41 PM
http://chrisevert.net/CE-Navratilova.html



Over all, Navratilova held a 43-37 edge (a 3 match difference), but there, again, there are subtle factors in the composition of the matches, and the surfaces they were played on, that could have caused the win/loss ratio to go in other, equally closely contested, directions. Chris played Martina on Chris’ worst surface (Indoor Carpet) more than any other surface. Meanwhile, Martina only beat Chris on clay 3 times in 20 years, and that also represents a big part of the missing statistics: Navratilova skipped the whole clay-court tournament season year after year. Indeed, after two sound beatings on clay in 1975, Navratilova did not challenge Chris on European clay until her return to Paris in 1982. During this period, Navratilova also avoided the North American clay court season and did not play Evert again on American clay until her 6-0, 6-0 thumping in the final of Amelia Island in the spring of 1981. She wisely stayed clear of a rejuvinated Evert throughout 1985-1986 on clay except at the French Open, where Evert won both meetings. All in all, they played each other significantly more on grass and indoors (40 times) than on clay and Har-Tru clay (13 times), largely because Chris honored her responsibilities to play --as a major draw for womens tennis-- during every phase of the tennis season, irregardless of how the surface might benefit her or not. That said, it is impressive to note that outside of Martina's 5-0 dominance at Wimbledon, Evert kept steady with Navratilova on grass (5-5).



Martina cannot ever be considered GOAT imo


I used to think Seles was a glorifed joke who got way too much respect for being stabbed

however, looking back to her game, i see just how good it actually was... and i as long as you watch seles on mute you see a girl who definately coulda/woulda/shoulda been GOAT, and coulda/woulda/shoulda dominated Steffi

380pistol
04-25-2009, 10:37 PM
Monica Seles by far. She has the hardest hitting ever, the most determination, the biggest serving, the best movement.


It's nice to see the babbons are still running around here.


Seles would of been easily the GOAT had the stabbing not occured.
Quoted for absolute truth.

I guees it's true....

"Baboons don't die... they just multiply!!!!!"

LDVTennis
04-25-2009, 10:41 PM
The four contenders in my mind are Graf, Court, Navratilova, and Evert. I am going to base my choice on the total # of major titles, but not the absolute number which ranks them as follows:

Court 24
Graf 22
Navratilova 18
Evert 18

That number does not allow for a fair comparison. So, I am going to query the number as follows:

Query#1: Counting no more than 4 titles at their best major, this is how they rank:

Graf 19
Court 17
Evert 15
Navratilova 13

Query #2: Counting only as many titles at each major as the lowest number of titles won at any one major, this is how they rank:

Graf 16
Court 12
Evert 8*
Navratilova 8

*Evert's lowest number of major titles came at the AO. If we want to reflect the fact that she missed many AO titles over her career, we could base her total on the next lowest number of major wins. That would be Wimbledon at 3 titles. Thus, her total would be 11. We could do the same for Navratilova, but it would make no difference since her next lowest total is 2 major titles at the French Open, the same number of AO titles she won.

Now, let's take the major totals and break them down by surface. In historical order...

Court
5 Clay
19 Grass

Evert
10 Clay
5 Grass
3 DecoTurf

Navratilova
2 Clay
12 Grass
4 DecoTurf

Graf
4 Rebound Ace
6 Clay
7 Grass
5 DecoTurf

Because of surface changes at the US Open and AO, the only two surfaces common to all four are clay and grass.

Query #3: Thus, let's calculate the percentage of majors on each of these two surfaces and rank them according to how close those percentages are:

Graf 32% on grass and 27% on clay
Evert 28% on grass and 56% on clay
Navratilova 67% on grass and 11% on clay
Court 79% on grass and 21% on clay

The two majors that have never changed from one surface to another of a different kind are Wimbledon and the French.

Query #4: Therefore, let's count the number of titles at both of those events and rank them accordingly:

Graf 13
Navratilova 11
Evert 10
Court 8

Query #5: Finally, counting only as many titles at Wimbledon and the French as the lowest number of majors they won at any one of these two majors, this is how they rank:

Graf 12
Court 6
Evert 6
Navratilova 4

Each query was designed to correct for any random variations of a historical or situational nature in the absolute number. For instance, Query #5 was meant to demonstrate consistency across all majors whose surfaces were common to all four. The results of this query rank Graf first. In fact, Graf ranks first in all the queries, including the last three which are the most significant. Graf is the greatest female tennis player ever.

380pistol
04-25-2009, 10:49 PM
I am *still* waiting for a comment by gj or Jules in which they don't use the words "would have" "could have" or "should have" when discussing what actually happened.

I have a news for you. Stabbing actually happened and it actually had a great effect on both Graf's and Seles' careers.

But Graf getting Ruebella (German measles) ACTUALLY happened Graf having personal problems and facing jail time ACTUALLY happened. Steffi suffering from injuires Aduring 7 slam in 9 overall ACTUALLY happened. Seles going 1-3 vs Graf during a period where she won 6 of 7 slams she entered ACTUALLY happened.

Now are you are you going to address these things that ACTUALLY happened??? No, in your world AKA "the mind of a buffoon", omly things that ACTUALLY happened to Seles are allowed to be discussed.

So until you are ready to discuss EVERYTHING that ACTUALLY happeened.... close your mouth!!! Comprende!!!!

gj011
04-26-2009, 04:13 AM
But Graf getting Ruebella (German measles) ACTUALLY happened Graf having personal problems and facing jail time ACTUALLY happened. Steffi suffering from injuires Aduring 7 slam in 9 overall ACTUALLY happened. Seles going 1-3 vs Graf during a period where she won 6 of 7 slams she entered ACTUALLY happened.

Now are you are you going to address these things that ACTUALLY happened??? No, in your world AKA "the mind of a buffoon", omly things that ACTUALLY happened to Seles are allowed to be discussed.

So until you are ready to discuss EVERYTHING that ACTUALLY happeened.... close your mouth!!! Comprende!!!!

Wow. Comparing a mild disease that is cured in a week or two and Graf's and her father's tax cheating, to the act of extreme violence on THE TENNIS COURT BY GRAF'S SUPPORTER which ruined Seles career and handed Graf 5-8 slams on a plate is just silly and comical. Toolworthy.

Also "facing jail time" happened after stabbing, not before (in 1995-96 actually).

grafselesfan
04-26-2009, 04:33 PM
The four contenders in my mind are Graf, Court, Navratilova, and Evert. I am going to base my choice on the total # of major titles, but not the absolute number which ranks them as follows:

Court 24
Graf 22
Navratilova 18
Evert 18

That number does not allow for a fair comparison. So, I am going to query the number as follows:

Query#1: Counting no more than 4 titles at their best major, this is how they rank:

Graf 19
Court 17
Evert 15
Navratilova 13

Query #2: Counting only as many titles at each major as the lowest number of titles won at any one major, this is how they rank:

Graf 16
Court 12
Evert 8*
Navratilova 8

*Evert's lowest number of major titles came at the AO. If we want to reflect the fact that she missed many AO titles over her career, we could base her total on the next lowest number of major wins. That would be Wimbledon at 3 titles. Thus, her total would be 11. We could do the same for Navratilova, but it would make no difference since her next lowest total is 2 major titles at the French Open, the same number of AO titles she won.

Now, let's take the major totals and break them down by surface. In historical order...

Court
5 Clay
19 Grass

Evert
10 Clay
5 Grass
3 DecoTurf

Navratilova
2 Clay
12 Grass
4 DecoTurf

Graf
4 Rebound Ace
6 Clay
7 Grass
5 DecoTurf

Because of surface changes at the US Open and AO, the only two surfaces common to all four are clay and grass.

Query #3: Thus, let's calculate the percentage of majors on each of these two surfaces and rank them according to how close those percentages are:

Graf 32% on grass and 27% on clay
Evert 28% on grass and 56% on clay
Navratilova 67% on grass and 11% on clay
Court 79% on grass and 21% on clay

The two majors that have never changed from one surface to another of a different kind are Wimbledon and the French.

Query #4: Therefore, let's count the number of titles at both of those events and rank them accordingly:

Graf 13
Navratilova 11
Evert 10
Court 8

Query #5: Finally, counting only as many titles at Wimbledon and the French as the lowest number of majors they won at any one of these two majors, this is how they rank:

Graf 12
Court 6
Evert 6
Navratilova 4

Each query was designed to correct for any random variations of a historical or situational nature in the absolute number. For instance, Query #5 was meant to demonstrate consistency across all majors whose surfaces were common to all four. The results of this query rank Graf first. In fact, Graf ranks first in all the queries, including the last three which are the most significant. Graf is the greatest female tennis player ever.

That is an interesting query but it doesnt take into account some other possible factors such as dominant years, consistency of results, and longevity.

CEvertFan
04-26-2009, 05:39 PM
I agree and I would like to bring up one other point - dominating and being dominated.

Connelly was never dominated by another player
Court was never dominated by another player
Wills was never dominated by another player
Graf was never dominated by another player
Seles was never dominated by another player.

Yes, they lost to other players but no-one, at any time during their viable careers (Viable = not counting those years such as Court when she was playing part-time, Seles as a child and after her comeback, Navratilova when she was past her best mid-30's and her comeback at 40, Graf when she first joined the tour as a child, Evert when was 34, Austin after her back injury, etc) was able to dominate them. Graf and Seles pretty much split things, not counting their matches after Seles' comeback or in her first few matches as a 16 year old.

However,

Navratilova was dominated by Evert,
Evert was dominated by Navratilova (could argue also briefly by Austin)

The greatest players of all time are NEVER dominated by any other player. At the very worst they would have split their matches (win one, lose one) BUT they would never have gone through periods where another player was able to beat them every time they played, or close enough to it. That's why Evert doesn't rate with Court, Connolly, Graf or Wills. That's also why I don't believe that Navratilova deserves to be rated with them. Seles is the wildcard but I can't put Evert ahead of her.

Personally, I think that the best of all time is either Steffi Graf or Margaret Court. As an all-around player Court is streets ahead (Navratilova would be the only one to match her) but, as singles players, I wouldn't split them.

There's also never been another instance where two possible GOAT candidates played against one another in their primes for such a long period of time and that has to be taken into account. Lenglen and Wills had ZERO competition while they played, they hardly ever even lost a set or even three game in a set. They are great players but don't compare to the modern era.

grafselesfan
04-26-2009, 05:44 PM
I almost wonder if Lenglen quit after 1926 only because she didnt want a rivalry with Wills. I even read her father forbid her to play Wills. I guess it was a foreign idea for either women to play someone of actual comparable talent and ability to each other. At the time it was simply an unheard of concept for players as great as them. One reason I almost feel Wills should rank over Lenglen is it seems she wasnt scared of Wills. Wills purposely went to that event in France to seek out Lenglen in a tournament and play her, and apparently wanted to play her even before then. Apparently Lenglen was panicked about it too.

CEvertFan
04-26-2009, 05:53 PM
I almost wonder if Lenglen quit after 1926 only because she didnt want a rivalry with Wills. I even read her father forbid her to play Wills. I guess it was a foreign idea for either women to play someone of actual comparable talent and ability to each other. At the time it was simply an unheard of concept for players as great as them. One reason I almost feel Wills should rank over Lenglen is it seems she wasnt scared of Wills. Wills purposely went to that event in France to seek out Lenglen in a tournament and play her, and apparently wanted to play her even before then. Apparently Lenglen was panicked about it too.

I would put Wills over Lenglen myself, but they are far and away the best two players pre WWII. No one else even comes remotely close to ther type of domination but that's because there wasn't anyone who could. One can only play who's there though.

boredone3456
04-26-2009, 05:55 PM
I almost wonder if Lenglen quit after 1926 only because she didnt want a rivalry with Wills. I even read her father forbid her to play Wills. I guess it was a foreign idea for either women to play someone of actual comparable talent and ability to each other. At the time it was simply an unheard of concept for players as great as them. One reason I almost feel Wills should rank over Lenglen is it seems she wasnt scared of Wills. Wills purposely went to that event in France to seek out Lenglen in a tournament and play her, and apparently wanted to play her even before then. Apparently Lenglen was panicked about it too.

Lenglen wanted to make money. I have read that she felt it rather unfair that other athletes can get paid to play the sport they dedicate their lives to and that tennis players couldn't in her day unless they went pro and played exhibitition matches or a series of them, a quote From Lenglen on why she went pro:

"In the twelve years I have been champion I have earned literally millions of francs for tennis and have paid thousands of francs in entrance fees to be allowed to do so.... I have worked as hard at my career as any man or woman has worked at any career. And in my whole lifetime I have not earned $5,000 - not one cent of that by my specialty, my life study - tennis.... I am twenty-seven and not wealthy - should I embark on any other career and leave the one for which I have what people call genius? Or should I smile at the prospect of actual poverty and continue to earn a fortune - for whom?" As for the amateur tennis system, Lenglen said, "Under these absurd and antiquated amateur rulings, only a wealthy person can compete, and the fact of the matter is that only wealthy people do compete. Is that fair? Does it advance the sport? Does it make tennis more popular - or does it tend to suppress and hinder an enormous amount of tennis talent lying dormant in the bodies of young men and women whose names are not in the social register?"

I don't think Lenglen was afraid of Wills, She was defying her father in even playing Wills in the one match she did, that alone to me shows she was not afraid of her. Nervous of all the public pressure and the backlash from her father should she lose maybe, but not facing her, at least not in my opinion.

grafselesfan
04-26-2009, 05:57 PM
I would put Wills over Lenglen myself, but they are far and away the best two players pre WWII. No one else even comes remotely close to ther type of domination but that's because there wasn't anyone who could. One can only play who's there though.

I agree nobody comes close to them. The 3rd and 4th greatest players of pre WW11 would have to be Dorothy Douglas Chambers and Alice Marble too. It is too bad Chambers wasnt alot younger and Marble older. It would have been great to see Lenglen vs Chambers more often or Marble vs Wills. It is almost funny to read about for example people like Elizabeth Ryan who supposably was a hefty women who couldnt move and couldnt hit groundstrokes well as one of Lenglen's biggest rivals in singles and playing her in singles slam finals. Ryan was an amazing doubles player who dominated with Lenglen in doubles, but in singles it sounds like the current Serena but even heavier and more out of shape, far less athletic, with Brenda Schultz's groundstrokes instead of Serena's, and without Serena's serve. No wonder one of the greatest players ever was winning all her slam finals 6-2, 6-0 faced with that kind of opposition.

grafselesfan
04-26-2009, 06:05 PM
Lenglen wanted to make money. I have read that she felt it rather unfair that other athletes can get paid to play the sport they dedicate their lives to and that tennis players couldn't in her day unless they went pro and played exhibitition matches or a series of them, a quote From Lenglen on why she went pro:

"In the twelve years I have been champion I have earned literally millions of francs for tennis and have paid thousands of francs in entrance fees to be allowed to do so.... I have worked as hard at my career as any man or woman has worked at any career. And in my whole lifetime I have not earned $5,000 - not one cent of that by my specialty, my life study - tennis.... I am twenty-seven and not wealthy - should I embark on any other career and leave the one for which I have what people call genius? Or should I smile at the prospect of actual poverty and continue to earn a fortune - for whom?" As for the amateur tennis system, Lenglen said, "Under these absurd and antiquated amateur rulings, only a wealthy person can compete, and the fact of the matter is that only wealthy people do compete. Is that fair? Does it advance the sport? Does it make tennis more popular - or does it tend to suppress and hinder an enormous amount of tennis talent lying dormant in the bodies of young men and women whose names are not in the social register?"

I don't think Lenglen was afraid of Wills, She was defying her father in even playing Wills in the one match she did, that alone to me shows she was not afraid of her. Nervous of all the public pressure and the backlash from her father should she lose maybe, but not facing her, at least not in my opinion.

OK thanks for that information. It is good there was a reason Lenglen was quitting other than just Will's emergence as I had wondered.

CEvertFan
04-26-2009, 06:13 PM
I agree nobody comes close to them. The 3rd and 4th greatest players of pre WW11 would have to be Dorothy Douglas Chambers and Alice Marble too. It is too bad Chambers wasnt alot younger and Marble older. It would have been great to see Lenglen vs Chambers more often or Marble vs Wills. It is almost funny to read about for example people like Elizabeth Ryan who supposably was a hefty women who couldnt move and couldnt hit groundstrokes well as one of Lenglen's biggest rivals in singles and playing her in singles slam finals. Ryan was an amazing doubles player who dominated with Lenglen in doubles, but in singles it sounds like the current Serena but even heavier and more out of shape, far less athletic, with Brenda Schultz's groundstrokes instead of Serena's, and without Serena's serve. No wonder one of the greatest players ever was winning all her slam finals 6-2, 6-0 faced with that kind of opposition.

I would agree with your choices of Marble and Lambert-Chambers.

We're just agreeing a lot today aren't we? LOL

grafselesfan
04-26-2009, 06:17 PM
I would agree with your choices of Marble and Lambert-Chambers.

We're just agreeing a lot today aren't we? LOL

Hehe must just be a good day for both of us. :)

egn
04-26-2009, 06:30 PM
The four contenders in my mind are Graf, Court, Navratilova, and Evert. I am going to base my choice on the total # of major titles, but not the absolute number which ranks them as follows:

Court 24
Graf 22
Navratilova 18
Evert 18

That number does not allow for a fair comparison. So, I am going to query the number as follows:


This seemed interesting.


Query#1: Counting no more than 4 titles at their best major, this is how they rank:

Graf 19
Court 17
Evert 15
Navratilova 13


Well this is bias. Evert only played 6 Australian Open in her whole career of 19 years and Martina played only 10 Ausrtalian Opens and 13 French Opens, granted she probably would have won at most 1 more French but she could have easily won a few of the grass Australian Opens in the late 70s as she was clearly the best grass player on the tour but did not play them.


Query #2: Counting only as many titles at each major as the lowest number of titles won at any one major, this is how they rank:

Graf 16
Court 12
Evert 8*
Navratilova 8

*Evert's lowest number of major titles came at the AO. If we want to reflect the fact that she missed many AO titles over her career, we could base her total on the next lowest number of major wins. That would be Wimbledon at 3 titles. Thus, her total would be 11. We could do the same for Navratilova, but it would make no difference since her next lowest total is 2 major titles at the French Open, the same number of AO titles she won.


What on earth did that prove? I don't get how that is any sort of value what so ever..To say Martina has only 8 slams because she only won 2 French Opens..Martina won 3 Australian Open titles actually so French Open is her lowest.


Now, let's take the major totals and break them down by surface. In historical order...

Court
5 Clay
19 Grass

Evert
10 Clay
5 Grass
3 DecoTurf

Navratilova
2 Clay
12 Grass
4 DecoTurf

Graf
4 Rebound Ace
6 Clay
7 Grass
5 DecoTurf


This is useful.




Query #3: Thus, let's calculate the percentage of majors on each of these two surfaces and rank them according to how close those percentages are:

Graf 32% on grass and 27% on clay
Evert 28% on grass and 56% on clay
Navratilova 67% on grass and 11% on clay
Court 79% on grass and 21% on clay

The two majors that have never changed from one surface to another of a different kind are Wimbledon and the French.


Interesting again.


Query #4: Therefore, let's count the number of titles at both of those events and rank them accordingly:

Graf 13
Navratilova 11
Evert 10
Court 8


Like this one.


Query #5: Finally, counting only as many titles at Wimbledon and the French as the lowest number of majors they won at any one of these two majors, this is how they rank:

Graf 12
Court 6
Evert 6
Navratilova 4


Still bias

Each query was designed to correct for any random variations of a historical or situational nature in the absolute number. For instance, Query #5 was meant to demonstrate consistency across all majors whose surfaces were common to all four. The results of this query rank Graf first. In fact, Graf ranks first in all the queries, including the last three which are the most significant. Graf is the greatest female tennis player ever.

How is Graf first in Query #3? She was 3rd ranked in grass and 2nd on clay while Court was 1st on grass and 3rd on clay so wouldn't Graf had won Query #3? There is more than just slams they won. Some of your query's were interesting but other seemed horribly bias towards Graf. Also you have no account of dominance, consistency and longievity as mentioned. Let in fact rivals, competition faced etc.

flying24
04-26-2009, 07:10 PM
Well this is bias. Evert only played 6 Australian Open in her whole career of 19 years and Martina played only 10 Ausrtalian Opens and 13 French Opens, granted she probably would have won at most 1 more French but she could have easily won a few of the grass Australian Opens in the late 70s as she was clearly the best grass player on the tour but did not play them.

Martina clearly the best grass court player when she missed the Australian Open? Martina skipped the Australian Open in 1973, 1974, 1976, 1977, to be exact. Martina wasnt the best anything until 1978 atleast. Even in 1977 with a dream draw to the Wimbledon final (all the big guns in the other half) she couldnt beat a 31 year old Betty Stove in the quarters. In 1978 she won an incredibly close Wimbledon final with Evert, which Evert could have easily won by being just a bit more focused. By the end of 1978 Martina's form had dropped off and Chris's was surging again. 1979 was the only year she was dominant at Wimbledon and on grass. She would have probably won only 1 or 2 more Australians playing those years, more likely only 1 though.

In a hypothetical of everyone playing the Australian Open and French Opens all those years Chris clearly loses out much more than Martina. Chris was the better player during the 70s, and obviously by far better on clay. That being said Evonne Goolagong on grass in Australia from 74-77 would have been very hard (although not impossible) for Evert to beat, and virtually impossible for Navratilova at the time to beat. For the record both tried once during this time. Evert in her attempt took Goolagong to 3 sets in the 74 final but was fed a bagel in the final set. Navratilova in her attempt made the 75 final but was destroyed in straight sets by Goolagong. Had everyone played Australia those particular years though Goolagong, King, Evert, would have been the favorites to win with Wade an outside shot to win. An aged Court and a green Navratilova would been capable of an upset of someone but not winning the title those years. Goolagong still the slight favorite probably due to the home country factor and that she had the head to head edge on grass vs all those women during this time on grass with the exception of King.

Evert would have won more Frenchs for sure, but also would have had more competition with Richey playing in 74-75 and Austin in 79-80, the only women those years who could give her any competition on clay. Navratilova though was never going to win the French any of those years in the event everyone was playing, heck maybe not even with the joke fields that Barker, Ruzica, and Jausovec won against, as they all probably could beat the 70s Martina on clay.

If we went to do what ifs though wouldnt those also apply to Steffi Graf. Every negative what if is used for Graf of course. However she also almost certainly lost out on 2 more Calender Slams in 1995 and 1996 by missing the Australian Open as she won the other 6 slams those years and clearly unbeatable and dominant at the time. Graf also missed the 87 Australian Open she probably had a great shot of winning over Navratilova and Mandlikova on those slow hard courts. In all Graf only played 11 Australian Opens in her career due to ill timed injuries.

anointedone
04-27-2009, 03:36 PM
I am surprised Court does not have more votes. It seems like it is almost a two horse race in most peoples minds.

BTURNER
04-27-2009, 03:45 PM
Everyone sneers at her Australians as non-competitive. I think the top position is Graf's but a better case can be made for Court or Wills than Navratilova, but I'm in the minority.

anointedone
04-27-2009, 03:52 PM
Everyone sneers at her Australians as non-competitive. I think the top position is Graf's but a better case can be made for Court or Wills than Navratilova, but I'm in the minority.

They were non competitive to a degree but with the home country factor she probably still wins atleast 7 even if everyone had played, and still has atleast 20 slams. Wills traveled around the World and dominated everywhere, and for a long time span of over a decade. Her competition was already somewhat improving from when Lenglen played based on the scorelines too.

LDVTennis
04-27-2009, 10:57 PM
Well this is bias. Evert only played 6 Australian Open in her whole career of 19 years and Martina played only 10 Ausrtalian Opens and 13 French Opens, granted she probably would have won at most 1 more French but she could have easily won a few of the grass Australian Opens in the late 70s as she was clearly the best grass player on the tour but did not play them.

What on earth did that prove? I don't get how that is any sort of value what so ever..To say Martina has only 8 slams because she only won 2 French Opens..Martina won 3 Australian Open titles actually so French Open is her lowest.

How is Graf first in Query #3? She was 3rd ranked in grass and 2nd on clay while Court was 1st on grass and 3rd on clay so wouldn't Graf had won Query #3? There is more than just slams they won. Some of your query's were interesting but other seemed horribly bias towards Graf. Also you have no account of dominance, consistency and longievity as mentioned. Let in fact rivals, competition faced etc.

I tried to account for the number of AO's Evert missed by using her next lowest number of titles won at one of the majors. See the asterisk. In principle, I was trying to determine consistency across all the majors.

You weren't reading Query#3 right. The percentages reflect the proportion of their total majors won on clay or grass.

Graf won a smaller proportion of her majors on clay and grass for the obvious reason that each major in her era was played on a different surface. It would not have been fair to rank them on the percentages alone. I ranked them therefore on the basis of how close the percentages were to each other. That to me was evidence of consistency across all surfaces common to all of them.

Obviously, Court doesn't do well in this comparison. That probably has less to do with her consistency and more do with the fact that 3 out of the 4 majors were played on grass. On the other hand, Chris may actually do better in this comparison not so much because of her consistency, but because of the fact that 3 of the 6 US Opens she won were on clay.

It may seem like I am biased toward Graf because I place an emphasis on consistency across all majors and surfaces. But, even if I weren't a fan of Graf's, I would think that is important. In other words, I would still think that the greatest player would have to be the one whose major total was NOT weighted so heavily in favor of one major or one surface. That might make the player in question the greatest grass, clay, or hard court player, but not the greatest player ever.

As to the other things you mentioned, dominance and longevity, the evaluation of those things can be so subjective. I just wanted to keep things simple. Their major totals alone speak to how well they could play on all surfaces.

grafrules
05-08-2009, 04:39 PM
Seles would of been easily the GOAT had the stabbing not occured.

Sure. Failing to win the French Open is enough to keep Sampras or Federer from serious GOAT candidancy vs the likes of Laver and others even in the mens game where only 5 guys in history have won each slam even once. Yet in the womens game where the 7 greatest women ever have all either won each of the slams atleast twice or for all practical purposes would have done so if even attempted (eg- Lenglen, Wills, Connolly), yet the future womens GOAT is someone who couldnt even win Wimbledon. Thanks for the laughs. :lol:

capriatifanatic
07-05-2009, 11:39 AM
I agree and I would like to bring up one other point - dominating and being dominated.

Connelly was never dominated by another player
Court was never dominated by another player
Wills was never dominated by another player
Graf was never dominated by another player
Seles was never dominated by another player.

Yes, they lost to other players but no-one, at any time during their viable careers (Viable = not counting those years such as Court when she was playing part-time, Seles as a child and after her comeback, Navratilova when she was past her best mid-30's and her comeback at 40, Graf when she first joined the tour as a child, Evert when was 34, Austin after her back injury, etc) was able to dominate them. Graf and Seles pretty much split things, not counting their matches after Seles' comeback or in her first few matches as a 16 year old.

However,

Navratilova was dominated by Evert,
Evert was dominated by Navratilova (could argue also briefly by Austin)


Evert only dominated Navratilova when Martina wasnt in her prime yet, and Navratilova dominated Evert when she was aging and past her prime. Seles was dominated in even her early to mid 20s was dominated by a horde of players- Graf, Serena, Venus, Davenport, and Hingis. You forgot Lenglen, she was never dominated by another player.

Double bagel
07-05-2009, 02:35 PM
Justine Henin is the most technically sound female tennis player ever.

And I don't mean to incite a riot, but I'm fairly certain both Graf and Navratilova used and abused steroids.

My vote goes to Seles.

NadalandFedererfan
07-05-2009, 05:21 PM
LOL at Seles with twice the votes as Evert and the same as Court. What sheer lunacy. There is absolutely no rational argument for Seles being discussed as possibly the greatest ever. She doesnt even belong on the poll to be honest. Enough with the what if nonsense. She returned to tennis at 21 and had many years to set things right and didnt have the determination or ability to do so apparently. What some of you yahoos who want to think it is logical she would have won 20+ slams without the stabbing forget is when she returned people were raving about how she looked. When she first returned to tennis people were predicting she would dominate, or atleast share dominance with Graf again, would win many slams, etc....It turned out she didnt. So how on earth can it be predicted she would have won so many more, when she actually first returned people were not feeling her future career had been ruined by the stabbing at all, they were still predicting dominance and all these titles as if she had never been away, and didnt even come close because the first year and a half Graf was too strong, and then the next generation swatted her away like a pesky fly. She fell miles short of matching peoples expectations upon her early return, so why should someone assume she wuold have matched peoples expectations of the hypothetical time she missed either. Along with the fact she apparently couldnt be bothered to get back into shape, and was dealing with some injuries as she didnt have the unusually perfect luck to never get injured like she had the 2 and quarter months before the stabbing (luck that was never going to continue to such an extreme degree). Not to mention there is nothing that indicates she was likely to win Wimbledon once, let alone the 2+ minimum times required for any female GOAT contender to have won at every slam venue.