PDA

View Full Version : 1985 womens year end #1 battle going into Australia?


flying24
05-23-2009, 01:13 PM
I know Martina and Chris both had a mathematical shot at the year end #1 ranking in 1985 going into the Australian Open. Did Hana also have a shot if she won the event? I know if she won the event she would have had 2 slams for the year vs Martina and Chris's #1 each but not sure if she had any mathematical shot at the computer #1 or not. Thanks.

BTURNER
05-23-2009, 03:50 PM
Interesting question? Never thought about it. Of course she would have been awful far down in points from those two, considering how few tourneys she won compared to them. But thats the computor talking, not history.

Bud
05-23-2009, 03:57 PM
I know Martina and Chris both had a mathematical shot at the year end #1 ranking in 1985 going into the Australian Open. Did Hana also have a shot if she won the event? I know if she won the event she would have had 2 slams for the year vs Martina and Chris's #1 each but not sure if she had any mathematical shot at the computer #1 or not. Thanks.

Mandlikova?

I recall when she came onto the scene... seemed to hit harder than many of the other women. She had issues with consistency, however.

Used to love watching her play when I was a kid.

tennis-hero
05-23-2009, 05:05 PM
Mandlikova?

I recall when she came onto the scene... seemed to hit harder than many of the other women. She had issues with consistency, however.

Used to love watching her play when I was a kid.

is her name pronouced how i think it is :roll:

suwanee4712
05-23-2009, 05:45 PM
I know Martina and Chris both had a mathematical shot at the year end #1 ranking in 1985 going into the Australian Open. Did Hana also have a shot if she won the event? I know if she won the event she would have had 2 slams for the year vs Martina and Chris's #1 each but not sure if she had any mathematical shot at the computer #1 or not. Thanks.

Nah. Hana played well early in 1985 and then later as well. But all of the training that she did in The Netherlands before the French really caught up with her. She wasn't used to working that hard and didn't play well at the French or Wimbledon. So she didn't have enough points to threaten for #1. But then again, Hana was never destined to be #1 as inconsistent as she was. The only thing she was consistent at was being inconsistent. :)

But it would've made for a nice feather in her cap, that's for sure. I never saw the SF loss in Australia to Martina, but it was only by one break in the 3rd set.

The time when Hana had a real beef about the rankings was in 1981 when she made 4 slam finals in a row, winning 2, and beating Martina and Chris at their respective strongest slams to boot. I don't think she ranked above #5 that summer.

Then there was the weird ranking snafu that put Hana down at #5 in the spring of 1986. Hana was carrying points from 3 tournament wins, including the US Open, a grand slam SF, and 2 other r/u finishes. Somehow or another, Kohde with w slam SF's and one tournament win in L.A. jumped up to #4. This caused Hana to have to play Steffi in the French QF.

flying24
05-23-2009, 05:54 PM
Thanks all for your answers. I guess she wasnt in contention for the year end #1. I didnt think she was as I didnt remember her results being strong enough to realistically have a shot, but I also remember hearing something about it at the time, but I must have misinterpreted what was meant. I wonder if Hana had won the Australian Open if she might have been named player of the year by any of the major publications even if she had no chance of the computer #1.

CEvertFan
05-23-2009, 09:08 PM
Evert needed to win the AO to be the year end #1 for '85. Evert won 10 tournaments that year including the French and was RU at Wimbledon and a semifinalist at the US Open. It really was her last GREAT year on the tour even though she won the French again in '86.

Mandlikova (properly pronounced Mand-LEEK-ova over the incorrect Mand-lic-KOVA) was never truly in contention for the #1 ranking ever in her career. Her highest ranking ever was #3 in '84. Her inconsistency throughout the entire season is what always did her in, even though she sometimes performed well at the majors.

anointedone
05-23-2009, 09:24 PM
Amazing to think Hana's pupil Jana Novotna was much closer to reaching the #1 ranking than she ever got. In fact if Jana had won the 1998 U.S Open, no easy task mind you, she would have taken the #1 ranking. A little easier to reach #1 with Hingis, a past her prime overweight Seles, a maturing pre-prime Venus, and Davenport as your main competition as opposed to prime Martina, prime Chris, and young Graf though. Not that that along with Jana was a bad field, I would still take it over todays anyday.