PDA

View Full Version : Why are most GOAT arguments about men only?


35ft6
05-18-2009, 06:49 PM
I'm watching a video from another thread posted in this forum of Margaret Court. That woman had two career Grand Slams and 24 slam titles, so why don't I hear about how she's GOAT or that she could have destroyed Serena, Henin, Davenport and Hingis?

And why is the argument never made that the women of the 70's are better than today's players, or the clay game in the 80's is better than the women on clay today, the women were just as strong as the girls today, etc?

I realize that in general, across all forums, we talk mostly about the men, but just saying, why do I rarely if ever hear about how the women were better 10, 20, 30, even 40 years ago the way you do with the men?

edit: I should have put more thought into the title of this thread

JRstriker12
05-18-2009, 07:12 PM
I'm watching a video from another thread posted in this forum of Margaret Court. That woman had two career Grand Slams and 24 slam titles, so why don't I hear about how she's GOAT or that she could have destroyed Serena, Henin, Davenport and Hingis?

And why is the argument never made that the women of the 70's are better than today's players, or the clay game in the 80's is better than the women on clay today, the women were just as strong as the girls today, etc?

I realize that in general, across all forums, we talk mostly about the men, but just saying, why do I rarely if ever hear about how the women were better 10, 20, 30, even 40 years ago the way you do with the men?

edit: I should have put more thought into the title of this thread

Overall - I'd put it down to lack of interest. Most tennis fans consider the men's game to big the big show, so they are not as passionate with the women's game, which some view as inferior.

Basically Men's GOAT > Women's Goat so why bother?

Just wondering, did Court ever play against Navratilova? IF you think the era of modern training brought in a bigger, better athlete, I'd have a hard time seeing Court hang in with today's WTA power players.

Maybe it's just me, but watching the older matches, it just seems like today's players hit harder and move faster. Even if you reversed the gender, I'd think you'd have a hard time saying the guys of the 80's or 90's are strong as they are today. Who's better.... that may be a different argument.

Also, another thing to consider - while men's role in sports has always been accepted - the role of women has been down-played, in spite of the long history of women in tennis. So I'm betting that even in the early days of pro tennis - the big names and big money were mostly on the guys side.

grafselesfan
05-18-2009, 07:20 PM
It is because none of the serious female GOAT candidates have played for quite awhile. The last one of those to retire was Graf in 1999. There isnt a real womens GOAT candidate still active like there is with Federer on the mens side (personally I dont think he is the mens GOAT at all or even close, but there are alot who do consider him a strong candidate) or even retired this very decade like Sampras. So there is less interest when all but 1 of the serious GOAT candidates played mostly in the 20s, 50s, 70s, or 80s than on the mens side where two significant ones to alot of people are the last two dominant players before Nadal. When you see the greatest players of the last decade have been complete none female GOAT candidates like Serena, Venus, Henin, Hingis, and Davenport, it makes it seem less interesting to discuss to many of the newer tennis fans.

Arafel
05-18-2009, 07:20 PM
It may also be that it's much not as arguable among the women. For the men, you've got Sampras, Laver, Federer, Borg, Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, Hoad, Rosewall and a bunch of others to discuss.

For the women, it's really only a discussion among 4 players, Graf, Evert, Navratilova and Court, and while I think you could make a case for any of those four, and mostly the first three, most would only argue between Graf and Navratilova.

35ft6
05-18-2009, 11:14 PM
Maybe it's just me, but watching the older matches, it just seems like today's players hit harder and move faster. Even if you reversed the gender, I'd think you'd have a hard time saying the guys of the 80's or 90's are strong as they are today.What I'm kind of getting at is that the fact the game has evolved a lot in the past 35 years is so obvious, just watch the video, and of the people who deny this, they usually only argue that the men of 1960's or 70's or 80's are as "good" as anybody playing today. Far as women go, seems like everybody pretty much agrees the WTA is way more athletic and hard hitting, "better", than the women's tour of the 70's and 80's, etc. Nobody is arguing Court could have destroyed peak Serena or Henin the way men might still argue Laver would beat today's guys.

ohlori
05-19-2009, 04:36 AM
http://www.tennisweek.com/features/fullstory.sps?inewsid=6615906

Conclusion of this long article:

"Originally I came to the conclusion that Martina Navratilova was by a fraction the best Womenís Player ever but I looked at the UNVERIFIED numbers that I found I realized that Courtís numbers were so overwhelming that I had to give it a second look. Itís hard to ignore the stunning numbers that Court put up in her career. About 190 tournaments won, unofficially the won, a 92 percent winning percentage, the most majors won and a Grand Slam. It seems about a toss up to me.
Maybe itís best I break it up into different periods since I donít have all the numbers. I would go with Lenglen over Wills for those players who played totally in the Pre-Open Era. I would go with Court over King for those players who spanned the Pre-Open Era and the Open Era. I would go with Martina Navratilova (barely) over Chris Evert and Steffi Graf for people who played in just the Open Era."

pc1
05-19-2009, 04:43 AM
I think the bottom line is that men are the ones generally more interested in sports so men will tend to watch men's sports more. Also when men argue about the GOAT in tennis, it is assumed the best male player is far better than the best female player so GOAT arguments aren't as common for the female tennis players and there aren't as many articles about female GOATS like the one Ohlori linked in the above post.

To be honest I find GOAT arguments for the females to be just as interesting as the GOAT arguments for males. There have been a number of excellent articles on the female GOATS which I enjoyed in the last year or so.

To tell you the truth, I'm not sure how Margaret Court would do today but she was about 5'10", with extremely long arms and world class speed and was very strong so I would think she could do well, especially considering that Justine Henin all of 5'51/2" was the best player in the world just recently.

Frank Silbermann
05-20-2009, 03:45 AM
Similarly, I haven't seen any discussions as to who was the greatest of all time junior in the 14-and-under division.

Winners or Errors
05-20-2009, 08:01 AM
Few people care. It's the same reason that men's matches are watched doggedly but finding a WTA match being followed like that in a spoiler thread is rare. Women's tennis is not up to the standard of men's. Talking of the women's GOAT is like talking about the 1,000th best player in history (behind many, many men...). It's not GMOAT or GWOAT. It's GOAT.

GS
05-20-2009, 08:44 AM
Okay, will someone finally tell me who's the greatest womens and mens player of all time? I've been waiting for those answers, for years.
In the meantime, sensible people might think, ah, it's the greatest player of their era! Few people mention Mo Connolly, the first woman to win the Grand Slam. Then there's Court, holder of the most Slam titles. Then, way later, there's Steffi and Martina.
How do you really compare em all? You can't. (But Steffi came close in Slam titles.)
Then there's comparing Tilden, Budge, Laver, Sampras, Federer, etc. etc. etc.
Personally, I would respect answers from one of the above mentioned players (like what Laver said awhile ago---oh, you don't remember?), rather than from an internet message board. The former greats know the real deal, since they played the game, and not just talked about it.

hoodjem
05-20-2009, 09:11 AM
Mo Connolly?

Were there women Pros before 1969?

urban
05-20-2009, 09:44 AM
I think, the problem with the women partly is, that some had ridiculous records and reigns at Nr.1. How do you measure absolute dominance against absolute dominance. On the mens side, one can always argue about missings links in the curricula, about uncomplete records due to the amateur-pro split etc. But its very hard to compare the absolute singles-doubles record of Lenglen 1920-26 against the absolute singles-doubles record of Navratilova 1983-85, or the complete all court dominance of Wills against the complete all court dominance of Graf. Or look at Little Mo: Connolly was never ever beaten in a big match, what can you do more?

Cesc Fabregas
05-20-2009, 09:48 AM
Because mens tennis is played at a higher level than womens.

grafselesfan
05-21-2009, 12:50 AM
Because mens tennis is played at a higher level than womens.

Although I am a huge fan of womens tennis as you can tell by my username this is very true. Just like urban said, the truly great women in history tend to be so much better than everyone else, other than maybe that one other truly great women in history they are playing with, that they dominate utterly and completely for years and post huge numbers and streaks at #1 that men cant duplicate since the competition is so much more.

grafselesfan
05-21-2009, 12:53 AM
It may also be that it's much not as arguable among the women. For the men, you've got Sampras, Laver, Federer, Borg, Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, Hoad, Rosewall and a bunch of others to discuss.

For the women, it's really only a discussion among 4 players, Graf, Evert, Navratilova and Court, and while I think you could make a case for any of those four, and mostly the first three, most would only argue between Graf and Navratilova.

I sort of see what you are saying but not all those men you mentioned are argued as the greatest ever.

Sampras, Laver, Federer, Borg, and even Rosewall could all be argued as the greatest ever I suppose, and all have been by some. Connors, McEnroe, and Lendl are all acknowledged as all time great players, but still I have never heard anyone argue Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, or Hoad as "the greatest ever". I have heard people who say Hoad at his best may have played the greatest tennis ever, but even then nobody argued him as the greatest ever with his career. Gonzales, Tilden, and Budge I suppose could be argued as the greatest ever. So that makes 8 men. Still alot more than 4 women though, and you are right most people will only argue Graf or Navratilova as the greatest ever, with a few Chris backers, and an even fewer few Court ones.

plasma
05-24-2009, 06:23 AM
as a prt coach I would rate Navratilova as one of the 5 greatest technical players ever, man or woman. Not even Sampras matched her timing and fluidity. Technically, she was superb!!!

GameSampras
05-24-2009, 09:26 AM
LOL...


Cause its obvious Graf is the women's GOAT. :)


There is nothing to argue there. Except maybe the Seles stabbing issue though Seles couldnt win Wimbeldon.

Liv3 For It
05-24-2009, 09:52 AM
because men are better...?

35ft6
05-24-2009, 10:40 AM
There is nothing to argue there. Except maybe the Seles stabbing issue though Seles couldnt win Wimbeldon.Seles getting stabbed is huge. From January 1991 through February 1993, Seles won 22 titles and reached 33 finals out of the 34 tournaments she played. She compiled a 159Ė12 win-loss record (92.9% winning percentage), including a 55Ė1 win-loss record in Grand Slam tournaments. In the broader context of her first four years on the circuit (1989Ė1992), Seles had a win-loss record of 231Ė25 (90.2% winning percentage) and collected 30 titles. Seles wins the Australian in 1993, is stabbed, and Graf goes on to sweep the final 3 Slams that year, two of which Seles was defending champion. She won 10 more Grand Slams after Seles stabbing/absence. Of course she would have won a few more anyways, even with Seles on the scene, but no doubt the attacker accomplished exactly what he had set out to do, to allow Graf to dominate again.

hoodjem
05-24-2009, 10:50 AM
There's men GOAT lists and debates, and women GOAT lists and debates; see above.

They don't play against each other, therefore there will be separate discussions.

35ft6
05-25-2009, 01:38 AM
^ Thank you, Captain Obvious. :)

hoodjem
05-25-2009, 04:47 AM
^ Thank you, Captain Obvious. :)
You're welcome. Someone had to say it.

35ft6
05-25-2009, 10:11 AM
^ But if you read my posts, this thread really isn't about that. I realize there are separate arguments. I started this thread after seeing a short thing about Margaret Court on TTC. She is about the most accomplished female player in history but I never hear people say she's female GOAT the way some guys still insist Laver is GOAT. They played around the same time, and whereas nobody really argues that the women's game hasn't evolved to the point championing Court as GOAT is kind of wack, on the men's side, some fans still insist the play in the 60 and 70's is actually superior to today's game.

AM28143
05-25-2009, 11:33 AM
Well, I believe – and I think you, 35ft6, will agree – that today’s top male tennis players (Federer, Nadal, Djokovic) are much better than the top male tennis players of earlier generations (Borg, Connors, McEnroe, Laver). Tennis players today train harder, smarter and from an earlier age. Moreover, more countries today have tennis programs than ever before. There is a larger pool of countries from which tennis players emerge. The ATP isn’t dominated by a few countries as it was before. And I think it is therefore absurb to argue that Laver, who faced mostly skinny white men from America, Australia and England, was better in his prime than Federer is today.

Women's tennis has evolved even more dramatically than men's tennis. The WTA is NOTHING like it was 30, 20 or even 10 years ago. Hingis, who dominated the sport merely a decade ago, would be – and was until she, along with Gasquet, quit tennis for cocaine – destroyed by today's competition. The same can't be said about Sampras, necessarily.

So, to answer your question, comparing generation of tennis players is absurd either way, but it is more obviously absurd with the WTA, and that is why GOAT arguments are mostly about men.

-Adam :)

grafselesfan
05-25-2009, 02:07 PM
^ But if you read my posts, this thread really isn't about that. I realize there are separate arguments. I started this thread after seeing a short thing about Margaret Court on TTC. She is about the most accomplished female player in history but I never hear people say she's female GOAT the way some guys still insist Laver is GOAT. They played around the same time, and whereas nobody really argues that the women's game hasn't evolved to the point championing Court as GOAT is kind of wack, on the men's side, some fans still insist the play in the 60 and 70's is actually superior to today's game.

I that is because most of Court's greatest records centre around so many Australian Open titles at a time it was a sparsely attended slam, not really viewed by players as a true slam event as it is today at all. She probably only played every year since she was Australian. The only other top players of the time to play regularly- Lesley Turner, Evonne Goolagong, and Kerry Melville, were also Australian.

CyBorg
05-25-2009, 06:13 PM
I don't like women's tennis, so I don't care enough to discuss it at great length.

From what I've seen players like Safina and Jankovic have nothing on past greats such as Navratilova and Evert.

flying24
05-25-2009, 06:42 PM
I don't like women's tennis, so I don't care enough to discuss it at great length.

From what I've seen players like Safina and Jankovic have nothing on past greats such as Navratilova and Evert.

That is for sure. There isnt a GOAT pretender to be amongst the current field of women. Serena, Venus, Henin, and a healthy Maria are by far the best of the recent slop that is now womens tennis.

Frank Silbermann
05-26-2009, 03:49 AM
Also, it's harder to define "greatest" when you're talking about women's tennis. With men it's simple -- which player is best at winning matches? With women's tennis you get conundrums such as what if you have two players, one who usually wins but the other is prettier. You cannot decide who is better without agreeing on a weighting factor.

:-)

Pirao
05-30-2009, 04:33 AM
Because the men would destroy the women if they played, so overall, the men GOATs are the greatest tennis players.

Joeyg
05-30-2009, 04:42 AM
Who cares?

AndrewD
05-30-2009, 04:54 AM
I realize that in general, across all forums, we talk mostly about the men, but just saying, why do I rarely if ever hear about how the women were better 10, 20, 30, even 40 years ago the way you do with the men?

Because most all of the posters who talk about the women are obsessive (decidedly creepy in several cases) fanboys, not people who are genuinely interested in the game and its history. They have no objectivity and only want to prattle on about the player they're obsessed with.

julesb
05-30-2009, 05:03 AM
Since there are no arguments about the female GOAT. It is Seles by far and everyone except the idiots realize this.

hoodjem
05-30-2009, 05:20 AM
Sometimes women's tennis is interesting (e.g. Evert vs. Navratilova), sometimes not.

Right now it's not. No big stars, just a bunch of baseline-basher wannabees . . . and then the Williams sisters, who are more interested in fashion design and personal brands.

grafselesfan
05-30-2009, 05:42 AM
Sometimes women's tennis is interesting (e.g. Evert vs. Navratilova), sometimes not.

Right now it's not. No big stars, just a bunch of baseline-basher wannabees . . . and then the Williams sisters, who are more interested in fashion design and personal brands.

There are only 4 or 5 potentially even secondary great players amongst the current generation and look what has happened to each:

Henin- retired. Biggest blow of all to the womens game.

Serena- not fully commited to tennis like she should be. Treats it like a part time hobby since 2003 (still wins some when Henin is away, telling of field).

Venus- cares about Wimbledon, 2 or 3 other events, and hibernates the rest of the year. Not determined to rise past her sisters slam count even as her underachieves, or even be a consistent enough player to be ranked #1.

Clijsters- due to combination of some unfortunate chokes, mental block vs Henin, unfortunate timing of missing a whole year with injury (slams won by Russians she would probably beat that year), and mental reirement at only 22 after U.S Open title somehow won only 1 slam title despite winning 34 titles and the WTA Championships twice at only 23. Rumoured comeback, hopefully she can make up for lost time somehow.

Sharapova- already a very consistent performer when healthy who has won 3 slams at only 21. Yet shoulder injuries have threatened to ruin her career, and she has not been completely healthy on a regular basis for over 2 years now.

35ft6
05-30-2009, 07:52 AM
Well, I believe – and I think you, 35ft6, will agree – that today’s top male tennis players (Federer, Nadal, Djokovic) are much better than the top male tennis players of earlier generations (Borg, Connors, McEnroe, Laver).I think they're better. "Much" better, not sure if I would say that, but better for sure. Reason I make that distinction because I've always said in these types of discussions that the very very best of each generation (lets say a generation is about 6 to 8 years) are roughly the same. The most striking improvements is from ranking spots 10 to 100 and beyond. Yes, the top is better, but the difference isn't as nearly as great as between the 50th and 100th ranked guys today compared to the 50th and 100th ranked guys of 1995, or 1985, or 1975. Today's tour is way deeper, tournaments are tougher.

They've been airing a lot of historical shows on TTC during the time ESPN 2 takes over the French Open broadcasts. Quite a bit of footage of guys from the 20's and 30's and 40's playing. Anyway, so a lot of guys say most of the "improvements" in the game can be attributed to newer rackets.

Okay, but tennis was played exclusively with wood rackets for about 80 years before metal rackets came on the scene. Did the game not evolve at all during that time? Because watching videos of the French musketeers playing, to me, they're not nearly as good as Laver and Borg with wood frames. I'm sure Borg's wooden racket was probably nicer than Borotra's but still...

AM28143
05-30-2009, 10:13 PM
Okay, but tennis was played exclusively with wood rackets for about 80 years before metal rackets came on the scene. Did the game not evolve at all during that time? Because watching videos of the French musketeers playing, to me, they're not nearly as good as Laver and Borg with wood frames. I'm sure Borg's wooden racket was probably nicer than Borotra's but still...

Yeah, I agree. I remember reading somewhere that Sampras could serve in excess of 120 mph with a wooden racquet. Pancho Gonzalezís fastest serve, in contrast, was only 110 mph. And his serve dominated the game back in the 50s. Technological improvements alone can't explain the superior level of competition today.

The same thing is happening in every sport. The 1926 Yankees would be destroyed by the worst team in the majors today. Football players are much bigger and much stronger (and steroids alone canít explain thischange). Basketball players are taller and more athletic. Lebron James is a lot more impressive than Larry Bird was.

Itíll be interesting to see if these improvements eventually level off. Will tennis players get that much better than Nadal and Federer? Or will improvemnts be minimal? Have we perfected the art of training a tennis star?

-Adam :)

helloworld
05-30-2009, 10:50 PM
Let me put it this way. The greatest female player of all time wouldn't even be able to beat a guy ranked over 1000.

avmoghe
05-31-2009, 07:56 PM
According to McEnroe, even the best college men's players can beat the best women's players.

I would assume the above held true for previous generations as well. What then is the point of discussing the female GOAT if she would've gotten destroyed by college level males from her generation?

Franz
06-01-2009, 09:22 AM
you know what would be just as undecided though? Hottest of All Time, lets start a thread

gogeta087
06-01-2009, 02:34 PM
Let me put it this way. The greatest female player of all time wouldn't even be able to beat a guy ranked over 1000.

This is perhaps the dumbest thing I've ever heard. The current world 1000 over Graf/Court/Evert/Seles/etc? Youre a few hundred off, though the premise is correct.

martini1
06-01-2009, 04:50 PM
1. Man GOAT WILL beat woman GOAT in modern tennis
2. The argument of who is better in women's game quickly turns into who has a better outfit, who is too loud, or who has better legs, even worse who has a richer boyfriend. And yes, the players themselves like to make cat fight comments as well.

So what's the point of figuring out a woman GOAT? If you are just looking at the record books we all know who is the best woman player already.

Arafel
06-01-2009, 05:27 PM
According to McEnroe, even the best college men's players can beat the best women's players.

I would assume the above held true for previous generations as well. What then is the point of discussing the female GOAT if she would've gotten destroyed by college level males from her generation?

Jeez, this is a great example of why I, as a woman, don't post here too often; too many sophomoric boys.

The point isn't to compare women athletes with male athletes; obviously men have physical strengths that make them better athletes.

The point is to appreciate the competition for what it is. I don't care who you are, if you are a true tennis fan who appreciates good competition, you would have been riveted by some of the Slam matches played out between Martina and Chris, Martina and Hana, and Hana and Chris, as well as Graf and Arantxa, Graf and Sabatini etc.

How about the Venus vs. Lindsay final a couple of years ago at Wimbledon that went 9-7 in the third?

Yes, I would agree the current crop of women don't cut it because too many of them are headcases, though their are some good matches still. I found the Jelena Dokic matches at the Australian this year to be some of the best matches I saw in the whole tournament.

tom_asdelonge182
06-01-2009, 06:50 PM
but isnt the goat discussion is about who is the best player? It doesn't matter about competition or what personality they had or what rivalries, if they are inferior players, they don't deserved to be mentioned in the goat debate.

Winners or Errors
06-01-2009, 07:02 PM
Like I said earlier, it's not GW(oman)OAT, it's GOAT. No woman makes the list. You'd have to go at least 1,000 deep in the men of all time to find a woman, and that's generous.

If we're talking about female GOAT, looking at women's tennis as a different sport entirely, which is, I believe, how most women would like it viewed, then it's a different matter. My vote for women's goat would likely be Graf for sheer dominance. I simply don't think anyone from previous generations could beat her consistently in her prime, and also don't think anyone from the current generation could.

As for GOAT, that's so debatable. I do think athletes get more physical, but the mental part of tennis is a big deal. I really do think the greatest of the Open Era are hard to rate. They didn't play one another. They played with different technology. Training techniques (or lack thereof) were different. Just too many variables to really compare. My GOAT list includes Laver, Borg, Connors, McEnroe (who is, in my opinion, the GY(ear)OAT), Lendl, Sampras, Federer, and probably Nadal. I can't choose between them.

avmoghe
06-02-2009, 08:52 AM
Jeez, this is a great example of why I, as a woman, don't post here too often; too many sophomoric boys.

The point isn't to compare women athletes with male athletes; obviously men have physical strengths that make them better athletes.

The point is to appreciate the competition for what it is. I don't care who you are, if you are a true tennis fan who appreciates good competition, you would have been riveted by some of the Slam matches played out between Martina and Chris, Martina and Hana, and Hana and Chris, as well as Graf and Arantxa, Graf and Sabatini etc.

How about the Venus vs. Lindsay final a couple of years ago at Wimbledon that went 9-7 in the third?

Yes, I would agree the current crop of women don't cut it because too many of them are headcases, though their are some good matches still. I found the Jelena Dokic matches at the Australian this year to be some of the best matches I saw in the whole tournament.

The point of the thread here was to explain why nobody cares about the women's GOAT. When discussing a "GOAT" of tennis, the athletic ability of males cannot be ignored.

Read my post carefully....

Nobody said anything about not appreciating the women's competition.. and nobody said women's tour doesn't provide riveting matches.

I mean, what the hell is next? Do you expect us to care about the wheelchair GOAT?

No. The highest level of tennis played is Men's singles tennis (though I could see an argument being made for men's doubles). And, as such, it is only natural that GOAT discussions focus on that version of the sport.

Swissv2
06-02-2009, 09:14 AM
There is no current "dominant" female player, thus there is not too much to talk about. If we had a present day Graf or Nav, then I assume the talks will be a bit more.

GOAT means the player that is able to beat any player in the world, whether man or woman, at the very TOP of the tennis ladder.

Graf & Nav do get credit as GWOAT (Greatest Women Of All Time).

35ft6
06-02-2009, 12:07 PM
Itíll be interesting to see if these improvements eventually level off. Will tennis players get that much better than Nadal and Federer? Or will improvemnts be minimal?Agassi seems to think things will keep improving. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BN5lc2Vu1Y) I'm sure every generation of fans must have thought they were watching the game at its highest potential. Laver fans must have thought that. I remember reading something about people living in ancient Rome, when the empire was at its peak, thinking they were living in the most technologically advanced times there ever was and would ever be.

Who could have anticipated the emergence of the straight arm forehand? Also, the incredible pronation on the forehand of some players, their rackets completely closed as they swing towards the ball. I'm sure technique will keep evolving but maybe the biggest improvement will come when better athletes start playing tennis at a younger age. Tennis has arguably never had an athlete that would be considered a sick athlete in the NBA or NFL.

scraps234
06-02-2009, 12:53 PM
most of the time mens tennis is played at a stronger lv...

35ft6
06-02-2009, 01:00 PM
most of the time mens tennis is played at a stronger lv...This thread is not about women versus men, therefor GOAT must always be a man.

If you must, it's about GWOAT, greatest woman of all time, and how nobody makes the argument that the women and the women's tour of the 60's and 70's are better than the women of today.

kiki
01-07-2011, 11:24 AM
http://www.tennisweek.com/features/fullstory.sps?inewsid=6615906

Conclusion of this long article:

"Originally I came to the conclusion that Martina Navratilova was by a fraction the best Womenís Player ever but I looked at the UNVERIFIED numbers that I found I realized that Courtís numbers were so overwhelming that I had to give it a second look. Itís hard to ignore the stunning numbers that Court put up in her career. About 190 tournaments won, unofficially the won, a 92 percent winning percentage, the most majors won and a Grand Slam. It seems about a toss up to me.
Maybe itís best I break it up into different periods since I donít have all the numbers. I would go with Lenglen over Wills for those players who played totally in the Pre-Open Era. I would go with Court over King for those players who spanned the Pre-Open Era and the Open Era. I would go with Martina Navratilova (barely) over Chris Evert and Steffi Graf for people who played in just the Open Era."

I agree.Court over King and Martina over Chrissie.Graf was much more one dimensional, but her super fit body, legs and that FH make her a legitimate contender.Hard to say; on clay Iīd pick Steffi, on grass Court or Navratilova, who also dominated indoors.