PDA

View Full Version : Serena's ommision from female GOAT discussions in part due to racism?


Pages : [1] 2

cuddles26
11-10-2009, 11:19 AM
When people talk about the greatest female tennis player of all time they mention Navratilova or Graf mostly. On occasion you hear the names Evert, Court, Wills, Lenglen, and Connolly brought up. And for those whiny "what if" babies only Seles on occasion. While many acknowledge Serena as a top 10 player all time nobody discusses her as even a candidate for the greatest female tennis player ever. To me this is simply ridiculous. I dont expect everyone to agree she is the greatest ever, but she should atleast be in the discussion and considered for that title. It is clear to me racism has alot to do with her constant ommision from the greatest female player ever discussions.

Navratilova or Graf the greatest ever? Navratilova won half her slams at one slam, and Graf won half of them after her main rival was stabbed.

Chadwixx
11-10-2009, 11:22 AM
If you cant dominate your current field you shouldnt be compared to the legends of the game. Serena has only finished #1 one time in her career. Goats dominate number 1 for many years in womens tennis.

T1000
11-10-2009, 11:23 AM
Hey Kenny, I know I said your thread was the worst this year. I was wrong

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-10-2009, 11:26 AM
cuddles, before the hooded types off-road their way into this thread, you should know that the Serena=GOAT conversation takes may turns depending on the person talking; some think she's easily on the GOAT list, while others do not, so there is no sweeping rejection of her likely status.

But let's be honest: racial hatred has followed the Williams (independent of Richard's behavior or comments) since they emerged on the pro circuit (you will soon read some of the racially based comments in this thread), however, there are others who simply judged SW for her abilities, competition and effects on the overall sport.

In any case, more than anyone since Graf's generation, no one is more deserving of being in the GOAT discussions and HoF entry than Serena.

Blinkism
11-10-2009, 11:28 AM
Nothing to do with race.

Is Safina ridiculed because she's white?

I don't think so.

Is Jankovic ridiculed because she's a horse?

Perhaps.

Serendipitous
11-10-2009, 11:33 AM
I wouldn't call Serena a GOAT because she hits every shot off balance and the ground shakes when she walks.


In addition, she considers tennis balls an appropriate food source, even offering to shove them down people's throats.

longst
11-10-2009, 11:35 AM
I think they are probably the greatest part time champions ever. I mean that in the good sense. Anyone that can go on a pro tour year after year win what at least 1 slam a year or something like that. While doing that they open up businesses completely removed from tennis (clothing line, interior design, jewelry line, acting in major sit-coms etc) in their 20's?? NO ONE else has done that. And for all of those reasons I think they stand out as unique. Thats a lot of grace.

Now if I was gonna put money on them to win a 250 tourney, I wouldn't. And I don't blame them for that either.

GustafsonFanatic
11-10-2009, 11:45 AM
Yes, that.... and also the fact that she's miles away from being the GOAT.

soyizgood
11-10-2009, 11:47 AM
Serena only shows up for slams, well 3 of them. She doesn't have the endurance to dominate the tour throughout an entire year. Look at this decade.

Years ended as #1:
Davenport 3
Henin 3
Serena 2

She flat out doesn't care for non-slam events (excluding Miami) and even if she did she often doesn't have the endurance of playing 4-5 days in a row. She's been injury-prone on-and-off the past 6 years while her fitness has been an issue as well.

That said, she's one of the best ever. But not anywhere near the Evert/Graf/Navratilova/Court level. Serena's talent arguably dwarfs those GOAT contenders, but her attitude/fitness/motivation knocks her down.

Blinkism
11-10-2009, 11:52 AM
Depicting black people as animals is a common form of racism. When people attempt to insult Federer, they don't do it by referring to him as an animal. Anyway, I think she is obviously a great tennis player, but her commitment to the game will be a bit problematic to her legacy. All of that GOAT stuff is nonsense though. If you like her game, enjoy watching it while she still plays. If not, don't watch her.

BS

people use animal depictions on other players who are not black

Like Nadal; People say he is a topspin monkey or runs around like a rabbit, also he's sometimes called a bull! Jankovic is a horse, for example.

Racism has nothing to do with hating on Serena Williams. Notice that she is hated on MUCH more than Venus? Yeah, but they're both black. Right?

It's not a race issue, it's a personality issue, mostly. Well, atleast on TW I think it is. Can't speak for the common casual tennis fans.

Obviously there are people with prejudices who will cheer against certain people regardless of the person's personality or likeability.

Serena has a low level of likeability.

raiden031
11-10-2009, 11:53 AM
It is clear to me racism has alot to do with her constant ommision from the greatest female player ever discussions.

On what basis did you come up with this opinion?

Navatilova won 59 GS titles total (18 singles), Serena has won 23 (11 singles). Certainly race MUST be the deciding factor!

People like you are whats wrong with the civil rights movement.

Grampy
11-10-2009, 12:03 PM
And if your American, you have no choice but to watch her since they broadcast all her matches regardless of whoever else is playing.

Back on topic.
I'm fed up with this racism stuff. We are so politically correct anymore that even mentioning race can get you labeled as a racist. Serena is not considered a GOAT because she doesn't have the record to back it up. You can argue hypotheticals all you want, but you either have the record, or don't. She doesn't. No GOAT for her.

raiden031
11-10-2009, 12:05 PM
And if your American, you have no choice but to watch her since they show all her matches regardless of whoever else is playing.

Back on topic.
I'm fed up with this racism stuff. We are so politically correct anymore that even mentioning race can get you labeled as a racist. Serena is not considered a GOAT because she doesn't have the record to back it up. You can argue hypotheticals all you want, but you either have the record, or don't. She doesn't. No GOAT for her.

I'm tired of 90% or more of accusations of racism being completely meritless. Absolutely no shred of evidence whatsoever to back up the claim...

If everyone was so racist against the Williams', then why do they take up all the TV coverage and always play on the stadium courts???

msc886
11-10-2009, 12:10 PM
Looks like GJ011 has branched off and spread. We now have a Serena version.

Ronaldo
11-10-2009, 12:11 PM
Serena only shows up for slams, well 3 of them. She doesn't have the endurance to dominate the tour throughout an entire year. Look at this decade.

Years ended as #1:
Davenport 3
Henin 3
Serena 2

She flat out doesn't care for non-slam events (excluding Miami) and even if she did she often doesn't have the endurance of playing 4-5 days in a row. She's been injury-prone on-and-off the past 6 years while her fitness has been an issue as well.

That said, she's one of the best ever. But not anywhere near the Evert/Graf/Navratilova/Court level. Serena's talent arguably dwarfs those GOAT contenders, but her attitude/fitness/motivation knocks her down.

Good for Serena the WTA has few tourneys set up like the ATP 1000. If the WTA did it would be easy to see who has the juice.

ZhengJieisagoddess
11-10-2009, 12:18 PM
When people talk about the greatest female tennis player of all time they mention Navratilova or Graf mostly. On occasion you hear the names Evert, Court, Wills, Lenglen, and Connolly brought up. And for those whiny "what if" babies only Seles on occasion. While many acknowledge Serena as a top 10 player all time nobody discusses her as even a candidate for the greatest female tennis player ever. To me this is simply ridiculous. I dont expect everyone to agree she is the greatest ever, but she should atleast be in the discussion and considered for that title. It is clear to me racism has alot to do with her constant ommision from the greatest female player ever discussions.

Navratilova or Graf the greatest ever? Navratilova won half her slams at one slam, and Graf won half of them after her main rival was stabbed.

I've thought about this; and think you're wrong. Serena is just too inconsistent to be a GOAT contender. If she had made a career decision to focus solely on tennis, I think her consistency would be much much better and she would be mentioned with Graff and Navratilova and Court. because one of these three is the GOAT, no question about it.
Some people DO dislike Serena because of racisim. It's definitely there. But I really do not think that that is why she is left out of these discussions.

jamesblakefan#1
11-10-2009, 12:21 PM
@ the OP:

Umm....no.

fed_rulz
11-10-2009, 12:21 PM
and sharapova's "ommision" from female GOAT discussions is due to reverse-racism.. or is it? :confused:


Navratilova or Graf the greatest ever? Navratilova won half her slams at one slam, and Graf won half of them after her main rival was stabbed.

And serena won more than half (6 to be precise) of her grandslams against her sister -- may the results were all "fixed" ?

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-10-2009, 12:31 PM
BS

people use animal depictions on other players who are not black

Please study history. Whether in Europe, Japan, Mexico, or the United States (as well as other lands) the ape/monkey slur in writing or illustration has been used extensively against black people for centuries, where few other groups ever found themselves targeted by this specific animal group. How can you not know this?

Racism has nothing to do with hating on Serena Williams. Notice that she is hated on MUCH more than Venus? Yeah, but they're both black. Right?

...yet the "monkey," "baboon," "gorilla," or "ape" slurs have been used against SW (and oft-times her sister) for years by the likes of some of the creatures posting on this board. Mere coincidence? Hm?


Serena has a low level of likeability.

That USO finals ratings chart for the past 10 years proves you wrong. Fans are watching her for a reason, hence the reaon any final with her (or her sister) easily topped the non-WS-participating ratings for other players (including some of the men's finals as well).

As if on time, other seem to recognize SW's as someone other than the pariah certain people would wish her to be...

http://www.glamour.com/women-of-the-year/2009/serena-williams

Joe Pike
11-10-2009, 12:31 PM
...
Navratilova or Graf the greatest ever? Navratilova won half her slams at one slam, and Graf won half of them after her main rival was stabbed.


Serena won all of her slams when no other all-time great was playing (Graf retired in August 1999).

In her best season ever (2003) Serena had a winning percentage of 92.68. Graf had six and Navrativa five seasons with a winning percentage of 93 of better.

Serena had 11 losses to non-top-30 players after her 16th birthday.
Graf only 2.

Serena has won each slam at least once.
Graf has won each slam at least four times.

Graf has a higher winning percentage than Serena on each surface - clay, grass, HC and indoor carpet.

Navratilova has 167 singles titles, Graf 107 and Serena 35.

Joe Pike
11-10-2009, 12:34 PM
I think they are probably the greatest part time champions ever. I mean that in the good sense. Anyone that can go on a pro tour year after year win what at least 1 slam a year or something like that. While doing that they open up businesses completely removed from tennis (clothing line, interior design, jewelry line, acting in major sit-coms etc) in their 20's?? ...


Yes, this jewelry designing is a really time-absorbing job ...
:lol::lol::lol:

LDVTennis
11-10-2009, 04:58 PM
Serena won all of her slams when no other all-time great was playing (Graf retired in August 1999).

In her best season ever (2003) Serena had a winning percentage of 92.68. Graf had six and Navrativa five seasons with a winning percentage of 93 of better.

Serena had 11 losses to non-top-30 players after her 16th birthday.
Graf only 2.

Serena has won each slam at least once.
Graf has won each slam at least four times.

Graf has a higher winning percentage than Serena on each surface - clay, grass, HC and indoor carpet.

Navratilova has 167 singles titles, Graf 107 and Serena 35.

What he said!!!

JeMar
11-10-2009, 05:07 PM
She's definitely the GOAT if you consider her effort/reward ratio.

Blinkism
11-10-2009, 05:09 PM
She's definitely the GOAT if you consider her effort/reward ratio.

By this metric, Safin should be high on the GOAT list

JeMar
11-10-2009, 05:11 PM
By this metric, Safin should be high on the GOAT list

Yeah, he'd definitely be up there, but I really think Serena takes the cake. And the cookies. And the ice cream.

At least Safin shows up to matches in shape. Serena has often shown up to tournaments looking like she spent the previous week in an R.V. camped outside of Golden Corral.

boredone3456
11-10-2009, 05:12 PM
The reason Serena is not in the discussion as the GOAT with Court, Graf, Evert, Nav, and if you want to stretch it out Moody and Lenglen is because she has not dominated the game with the longevity with which they did. And no dominating 4 tournaments a year (the slams) does not count. Serena has a good chance of ending her career with not even 50 singles titles overall, and yet you want to even try to argue she deserves to be discussed equally with people like Martina and Chris both of whom have at least 150 singles titles? Sorry that does not compute. Graf won at least 4 of every major and a slew of other titles, Court has won 2 calender slams and a ton of non slam titles otherwise.

Nothing Serena has achieved in her career has come anything close to those achievements. Sorry, but thats the way it is, she could have, but she didn't. It seems to me that you are just bringing this out because none of your other arguments regarding Serena in the other threads you have started convinced anyone so you just think this will convince people or either scare people into keeping quiet so you can claim a victory. Yes, Serena has been treated unfairly because of her race, based on some posts on this board in the past and things I have heard people say about her yes, that is something that has impacted her. But to generalize that to say its a qualifying factor against her being the GOAT is a step that you are taking, very dangerously, and considering Serena doesn't have the achievements to be put up there with them anyway, makes little sense.

raiden031
11-10-2009, 05:19 PM
What he said!!!

According to the OP, having dark skin is worth AT LEAST 100 singles titles!

Cyan
11-10-2009, 05:22 PM
Damn, I'm going to sound like a glory hunting ******* :oops: BUT

22 is TWICE 11


Yeah. :shock:

Serena is nothing compared with the great Graf :oops: Nothing....

grafselesfan
11-11-2009, 02:59 AM
Yes and no. I do not believe she has yet achieved enough for even serious consideration for GOAT status, she has to add to her already extraordinary achievements for that. I do believe tennis and game wise she already might be the greatest ever, and started another thread about that, but still her already great career needs to be futher bolstered to be in any kind of consideration for that actual title.

That said there is some obvious racial bias against Serena Williams all the same IMHO. While people are within their rights to not like her or things about her personality, playing style, whatever, the over the top hatred she seems to garner from many corners, and many of the references made towards her and even her sister seem to stray towards racial implications.

borg number one
11-11-2009, 03:56 AM
As Blinkism in the post above has touched on, as well some other posters, I do think that it's more personality and inconsistent/inferior tennis VERY frequently, including the Majors that hurts Serena Williams in this analysis. Just think how she would be judged differently if she carried herself like so many other great players, like Laver, Borg, Sampras, Evert, Blake, etc, etc...She REALLY hurts her reputation by being quite difficult in many respects. She rarely IF EVER credits her opponent, if it's not Venus on the other side.

Now, just imagine if she was the female version of Arthur Ashe, or even much more like Venus!

Yet, I think unquestionably, she has faced SOME if not A LOT of racism both growing up and as a pro. I'm sure she has faced NUMEROUS occasions, in the U.S. and elsewhere, where people have tried to use race against her, often very subtly, and at times, not so subtly.

Arthur Ashe and Althea Gibson, both of whom faced far WORSE racism than she has overall were wonderful role models for her, but she has not followed their stellar examples of how best to deal with the racism she has encountered. That's not easy to pull off though. It requires incredible strength of character, poise, and grace.

Let's face it, tennis STILL in many circles, ALL OVER THE WORLD, tends to still be a primarily white and affluent game, often played at high levels in "country club" environments, which do PURPOSEFULLY exclude Black players to this very day. Just go around the U.S. and the World and you'll find PLENTY of private clubs that STILL do not admit black members, and other "minority" members. That has to have an impact on those that grow up within such environments and people tend to carry around certain prejudices because of it. I think that's very sad but true. I do think things are changing though at a fairly rapid rate, thankfully.

crash1929
11-11-2009, 04:36 AM
my gut says if i need someone to play for my life; give me an angry/hungry serena over anyone else.

Gorecki
11-11-2009, 04:50 AM
Graf won half of them after her main rival was stabbed.

it would still be better than Serena... so yes... i see why you imagine it's racism why people dont compare her to Graf!

big bang
11-11-2009, 04:53 AM
not again, stop this racial BS
she will never be anywhere close to GOAT

cuddles26
11-11-2009, 05:14 AM
it would still be better than Serena... so yes... i see why you imagine it's racism why people dont compare her to Graf!

Actually before the horrific Seles stabbing Graf had 11 slams, same as Serena now. So no you dont know if Graf would still have more, let alone if she would have been able to get more than Serena might end up with.

cuddles26
11-11-2009, 05:17 AM
cuddles, before the hooded types off-road their way into this thread, you should know that the Serena=GOAT conversation takes may turns depending on the person talking; some think she's easily on the GOAT list, while others do not, so there is no sweeping rejection of her likely status.

But let's be honest: racial hatred has followed the Williams (independent of Richard's behavior or comments) since they emerged on the pro circuit (you will soon read some of the racially based comments in this thread), however, there are others who simply judged SW for her abilities, competition and effects on the overall sport.

In any case, more than anyone since Graf's generation, no one is more deserving of being in the GOAT discussions and HoF entry than Serena.

Thanks for your refreshing and well thought out comments. You are right that for me to generalize completely isnt entirely fair. There are some that do give Serena her due and recognize she is possibly in the discussions with the very greatest women players in history (as she should be). Those who have reasonable and objective arguments who dont feel that way are welcomed, but it is a shame that there are many who take off their hoods and expose a certain racial hatred whenever Serena's name comes up as you said. Definitely since the retirement of Graf, Serena is the one who has shown herself to be next in line in the chain of the very greatest players in history.

Gorecki
11-11-2009, 05:18 AM
Actually before the horrific Seles stabbing Graf had 11 slams, same as Serena now. So no you dont know if Graf would still have more, let alone if she would have been able to get more than Serena might end up with.

if you think Seles was going to upset Graf at Wimbledon stabbing or not, i have a nice Beach house in Mars i could sell you for 20000$

Gorecki
11-11-2009, 05:19 AM
Serena Williams is the greatest female player in history. Yes even greater than Graf, Navratilova, and Evert. Deal with it losers.

my oh my... isnt that a bit racist... :)

cuddles26
11-11-2009, 05:30 AM
if you think Seles was going to upset Graf at Wimbledon stabbing or not, i have a nice Beach house in Mars i could sell you for 20000$

What Seles might or might not have achieved in her own career we will never know. It is obviously sad a player who had GOAT potential as she did was robbed of that chance by an obsessed criminal, yet at the same time I agree one cant ever be certain. I even mentioned earlier in this thread those "what if" Seles worshippers who try to argue her as the female GOAT based on a what if dont have much to back up their claims. However on the other hand while what Seles might have lost she can never get back, ALL of Graf's accomplishments post stabbing should be properly devalued due to this incident as Seles's extreme dominance of the womens game and success vs Graf leading up to the stabbing is too severe to not taint Graf's post stabbing achievements. Sadly the Seles stabbing ultimately diminishes both Seles and Graf. We will never know what Seles might have achieved, nor do we know how real half of what Graf achieved is either. Both are of course great players and ambassodors for the game, but ultimately neither IMO is a fitting choice for the female GOAT title for the reasons I just stated.

Now as for Seles never beating Graf at Wimbledon here is some food for thought:

-Seles at only 16 lost to the same player Graf lost to at Wimbledon- Zina Garrison. However Seles's loss to Garrison was closer than Graf's, giving indication Graf might have even lost to Seles in the semis that year.

-Seles had to miss Wimbledon at age 17.

-Seles at 18 reached the Wimbledon final, at the same age Graf did. Whereas Graf at 18 was spanked by an aging 30-something Navratilova, Seles beat her in the semis.

Yes Graf did very easily beat Seles in her first Wimbledon final. However while Seles was unlikely to beat an on fire Graf in that match regardless the grunting controversy, there is little doubt it impacted her performance and made the match more one sided than it would have been. When it comes to the future it is silly to think an 18 year old girl would not improve alot on grass in the future. Look at how much Graf improved on grass from her first Wimbledon final at 18 where an aging Navratilova bullied her around the court. Why would one not assume Seles to make drastic improvements on grass past the age of 18 as well. Furthermore Graf does not play as well in every Wimbledon final as she did in the 92 final vs Seles. In fact she played more perfectly in that final than nearly all her Wimbledon finals.

Graf in the 93 Wimbledon final won only 2 out of 12 games in the last 2 sets vs Novotna before Jana's embarassing choke. Graf lost at Wimbledon 94 to Lori McNeil. Graf in the 95 Wimbledon barely beat clay court specialist Sanchez Vicario in the final, 7-5 in the 3rd set. Yet she was a lock to keep beating a maturing Seles there somehow? Nice fanatical viewpoint but doesnt make it more truthful.

Even if Graf did win another 1 or 2 Wimbledons it is quite possible that is all she would have won. The younger Seles had won every French, Australian, and U.S Open the 3 years before the stabbing, minus the 90 U.S Open which Graf still didnt win. Graf's last non Wimbledon prior to the stabbing was the 1990 Australian Open. Seles was over 4 years younger and had more improvement ahead than Graf, yet Graf was already reduced to only having chances to win Wimbledon. Dont kid yourself to believing Graf's grossly inflated slam tally and consensus GOAT status amongst many was not greatly aided by the criminal act of a lunatic fan of hers.

cuddles26
11-11-2009, 05:42 AM
Speaking of Graf here is something interesting to peak at, particularly in a thread about Serena:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gE6aKcK_TyE&feature=PlayList&p=A0EE23CA2669164A&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=27
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NA8A7yE74Qk&feature=PlayList&p=A0EE23CA2669164A&index=28
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ezBuQs4a3A&feature=PlayList&p=A0EE23CA2669164A&index=29
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YTz4kZ7fz8&feature=PlayList&p=A0EE23CA2669164A&index=35
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFDHvi7moVs&feature=related

While it was a very close win for Serena, Graf often looked like a rag doll vs all of Serena's power. She was completely forced on the defensive and needing help from a horde of Serena's errors to even hang close. The match was out of her hands, it was pretty much all up to Serena. If some of you Graf fanatics peak at those clips I posted you will see exactly what I mean, for those who dont remember this match well. Granted while this was not prime Graf, it was not prime Serena either, and Graf was certainly closer to her prime than Serena was hers.

Graf's timing was perfect. She came into her prime just around the same point Navratilova and Evert were aging out of theirs. Then in the middle of her career Seles came and Gunther conveniently removed her. Then she piled up a bunch more slams before going down with age and injuries just as players like Venus, Serena, Davenport, and Hingis emerged. She never truly faced great oppostion, her best opponents were people like Sanchez Vicario who probably is only a 1 slam winner without the Seles stabbing, and Pierce.

Navratilova likewise also had great timing. She came into her own and won nearly all her slams after Court and King were already retired, well in King's case playing at nearly 40 on butchered knees, and when Goolagong and Evert were already past her prime, and when Graf and Sabatini were pre pubescent teenagers not close to their primes yet.

raiden031
11-11-2009, 05:51 AM
Cuddles, why even debate this if you are going to ignore the facts. There are SIX women who have more slam singles titles than Serena. How in the hell does that make her the GOAT? Racism? Please! You are the biggest racist on this board.

cuddles26
11-11-2009, 06:01 AM
Cuddles, why even debate this if you are going to ignore the facts. There are SIX women who have more slam singles titles than Serena. How in the hell does that make her the GOAT? Racism? Please! You are the biggest racist on this board.

First of all I white, so how on earth would I be racist towards Serena. I just happen to give Serena her due and look past shallow things like the color of her skin which some are unable to do. I never said she had to be the undisputed GOAT. I just said it is unfair she is not even brought up in discussions about the female GOAT or given serious enough consideration for the title. As for the slams titles one needs to look at the forest around the trees. I already explained some but lets go through each:

Court (24 slams)- 11 of her 24 slams came at the then joke Australian Open which none of the top players apart from the Austrailans even played. Her slam count is quite obviously heavily inflated by this as she failed to win more than 5 slams at any of the 3 fully attended slam venues. Furthermore at the biggest event on her her best surface- grass, she won only 3 Wimbledons, not exactly a strong GOAT promotion.

Graf (22 slams)- as already mentioned she won 11 of those 22 after her biggest rival, who was dominating womens tennis completely winning 7 of the last 9 slams, and was 4 years younger than Graf, was taken out of the game by a criminal stabbing act.

Evert (18 slams)- as far as record goes she probably has the greatest claim to being the greatest ever. The thing that works against her though is her powerless and incomplete game, and the fact when still near her best she was so thoroughly dominated by Navratilova.

Navratilova (18 slams)- Well for starters even though Wimbledon is the greatest event in the World, that she won half of her 18 slams at Wimbledon is a mark against her versatility and worthiness to be the greatest ever if we are talking beyond just grass. It doesnt reflect well on her completeness to have managed only the same # of slams at 3 combined slams played on red clay, green clay/mostly fast hard courts, and slow grass/slow hard courts as just 1 slam played on fast grass. Relativel speaking her abilities to win across all surfaces look rather limited for someone who would be the greatest ever.

Lenglen and Wills Moody- Both great players but lets face it there was hardly any legitimate competition for them back then. The game was another universe from today, even for those who think the current field is weak.

Jean King- She has 12 slams but she isnt a serious greatest ever candidate. She was overshadowed by both Court early on and Evert later on in her career.

Seles and Connolly- less slams than Serena already anyway.

Not to mention the fact Serena's career is clearly not over and she likely has more slams to come.

soyizgood
11-11-2009, 06:33 AM
First of all I white, so how on earth would I be racist towards Serena. I just happen to give Serena her due and look past shallow things like the color of her skin which some are unable to do. I never said she had to be the undisputed GOAT. I just said it is unfair she is not even brought up in discussions about the female GOAT or given serious enough consideration for the title. As for the slams titles one needs to look at the forest around the trees. I already explained some but lets go through each:

Court (24 slams)- 11 of her 24 slams came at the then joke Australian Open which none of the top players apart from the Austrailans even played. Her slam count is quite obviously heavily inflated by this as she failed to win more than 5 slams at any of the 3 fully attended slam venues. Furthermore at the biggest event on her her best surface- grass, she won only 3 Wimbledons, not exactly a strong GOAT promotion.

Graf (22 slams)- as already mentioned she won 11 of those 22 after her biggest rival, who was dominating womens tennis completely winning 7 of the last 9 slams, and was 4 years younger than Graf, was taken out of the game by a criminal stabbing act.

Evert (18 slams)- as far as record goes she probably has the greatest claim to being the greatest ever. The thing that works against her though is her powerless and incomplete game, and the fact when still near her best she was so thoroughly dominated by Navratilova.

Navratilova (18 slams)- Well for starters even though Wimbledon is the greatest event in the World, that she won half of her 18 slams at Wimbledon is a mark against her versatility and worthiness to be the greatest ever if we are talking beyond just grass. It doesnt reflect well on her completeness to have managed only the same # of slams at 3 combined slams played on red clay, green clay/mostly fast hard courts, and slow grass/slow hard courts as just 1 slam played on fast grass. Relativel speaking her abilities to win across all surfaces look rather limited for someone who would be the greatest ever.

Lenglen and Wills Moody- Both great players but lets face it there was hardly any legitimate competition for them back then. The game was another universe from today, even for those who think the current field is weak.

Jean King- She has 12 slams but she isnt a serious greatest ever candidate. She was overshadowed by both Court early on and Evert later on in her career.

Seles and Connolly- less slams than Serena already anyway.

Not to mention the fact Serena's career is clearly not over and she likely has more slams to come.

Let's see. You knock Court for only winning 3 Wimbledons, but what? Serena only has 3 herself. Oh and Serena has no more than 4 majors at any particular venue (oh yes, that oh-so prestigious AO) even when playing in such a weak era... hmmm

Evert's incomplete game? Evert actually won over 50% of the events she played in. A 90% winning record and oh she actually put full effort in all of her tournaments, unlike Serena. Evert won a major for 13 straight years. Serena didn't win any in 2004 (yet Russians won 3 of them) or 2006 (yet Mauresmo won 2 of them) which would normally be peak years for her.

Navratilova's fitness and endurance level puts Serena to shame. She actually made the most of her talents, could play a complete season year after year without breaking down, was going deep at majors even at 40.

I don't particularly like Serena, but I've given her praise along with criticism. You are a ********** struggling to find any real logic for your argument.

fed_rulz
11-11-2009, 06:50 AM
First of all I white, so how on earth would I be racist towards Serena. I just happen to give Serena her due and look past shallow things like the color of her skin which some are unable to do. I never said she had to be the undisputed GOAT. I just said it is unfair she is not even brought up in discussions about the female GOAT or given serious enough consideration for the title. As for the slams titles one needs to look at the forest around the trees. I already explained some but lets go through each:

Court (24 slams)- 11 of her 24 slams came at the then joke Australian Open which none of the top players apart from the Austrailans even played. Her slam count is quite obviously heavily inflated by this as she failed to win more than 5 slams at any of the 3 fully attended slam venues. Furthermore at the biggest event on her her best surface- grass, she won only 3 Wimbledons, not exactly a strong GOAT promotion.

Graf (22 slams)- as already mentioned she won 11 of those 22 after her biggest rival, who was dominating womens tennis completely winning 7 of the last 9 slams, and was 4 years younger than Graf, was taken out of the game by a criminal stabbing act.

Evert (18 slams)- as far as record goes she probably has the greatest claim to being the greatest ever. The thing that works against her though is her powerless and incomplete game, and the fact when still near her best she was so thoroughly dominated by Navratilova.

Navratilova (18 slams)- Well for starters even though Wimbledon is the greatest event in the World, that she won half of her 18 slams at Wimbledon is a mark against her versatility and worthiness to be the greatest ever if we are talking beyond just grass. It doesnt reflect well on her completeness to have managed only the same # of slams at 3 combined slams played on red clay, green clay/mostly fast hard courts, and slow grass/slow hard courts as just 1 slam played on fast grass. Relativel speaking her abilities to win across all surfaces look rather limited for someone who would be the greatest ever.

Lenglen and Wills Moody- Both great players but lets face it there was hardly any legitimate competition for them back then. The game was another universe from today, even for those who think the current field is weak.

Jean King- She has 12 slams but she isnt a serious greatest ever candidate. She was overshadowed by both Court early on and Evert later on in her career.

Seles and Connolly- less slams than Serena already anyway.

Not to mention the fact Serena's career is clearly not over and she likely has more slams to come.

by extension of your logic:

Serena: won more than 50% of her slams against her sibling.. fixed matches don't count

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-11-2009, 07:04 AM
Serena: won more than 50% of her slams against her sibling.. fixed matches don't count

Provide verifiable evidence of these alleged "fixed" matches, otherwise, it is more biased BS.

fed_rulz
11-11-2009, 07:16 AM
Provide verifiable evidence of these alleged "fixed" matches, otherwise, it is more biased BS.

more biased than:
- discounting all of graf's grandslams post-seles stabbing?
- dismissing martina because she won more than 50% of her slams at wimbledon?

i was just extending the OP's moronic logic to demonstrate how stupid it sounded..

we should be talking about racism only if (and when) serena wins 18+ slams, and she still then is not part of the GOAT discussion. Her accomplishments, as they stand today, are not GOAT-worthy. Until then all this "racism" talk is biased BS.

grafselesfan
11-11-2009, 07:16 AM
Let's see. You knock Court for only winning 3 Wimbledons, but what? Serena only has 3 herself.

Court's career is over. Serena's is not. Hence the difference. Only the delusional think Serena will end up with only 3 Wimbledons. That said Court is greater than Serena for now, but I could see Serena being up with her eventually.

cuddles26
11-11-2009, 07:29 AM
You knock Court for only winning 3 Wimbledons, but what? Serena only has 3 herself.

Grass is Court's best surface. Hard courts is Serena's. Yet Serena has already matched the # of Wimbledon titles that Court won in her career with more to come.

Oh and Serena has no more than 4 majors at any particular venue (oh yes, that oh-so prestigious AO) even when playing in such a weak era... hmmm

EVERYONE plays at the Australian Open these days, which wasnt the case at all when Court played, not even close. Serena has not always faced a weak field. The field from 1999-2005 when she won 8 of her current 11 slams was one of the strongest ever. With Henin and Clijsters back, and Maria getting healthy again, it will be hard for anyone to bring up the weak era argument anymore, and Serena will just infuriate the haters that much more if she keeps winning vs those 3 back on tour and as her main competition.

Evert's incomplete game? Evert actually won over 50% of the events she played in. A 90% winning record and oh she actually put full effort in all of her tournaments, unlike Serena. Evert won a major for 13 straight years. Serena didn't win any in 2004 (yet Russians won 3 of them) or 2006 (yet Mauresmo won 2 of them) which would normally be peak years for her.

Learn to read properly. I acknowledged that it was hard to knock Evert's record or anything about the circumstances it was achieved under. I even stated as far as achievements go she probably has the best claim of anyone to being the greatest ever. What I being incomplete was her game. She had a nothing serve, not a good volley, a very weak overhead, she wasnt a phenomenal athlete, she did not hit with enormous power off the ground ever for her own time, and she didnt slice that well. She won with absolutely peerless precision and consistency from the baseline, as well as incredible mental strength. Her achievements cant really be questioned. However the actual quality of her overall game compared to other greats can be. That along with the fact that Navratilova completely dominated her when she was still near her best makes it hard to seriously argue her as the greatest player ever.

Navratilova's fitness and endurance level puts Serena to shame. She actually made the most of her talents, could play a complete season year after year without breaking down, was going deep at majors even at 40.

Navratilova was not always the fitness queen. She wasted away most of her talent until she was age 25. She won only 2 slams before her 25th birthday despite flooring someone like Evert as far as overall talent and athletic ability. Of course Martina somehow gets a free pass for wasting the entire first half of her career and Serena gets all the slack for at times underachieving.

I don't particularly like Serena, but I've given her praise along with criticism. You are a ********** struggling to find any real logic for your argument.

You are a Safinatard, and that puts everything to shame.

NamRanger
11-11-2009, 07:33 AM
Seles would only consistently beat Graf at the AO and the FO (even then it would be fairly close matches). Graf would definitely beat her at Wimbledon and probably have a good shot at taking her out at the USO.



Even with no stabbing, it's not a given Seles beats Graf every time they meet in a slam.

r2473
11-11-2009, 07:36 AM
'If I could, I'd take this phukin thread and shove it down your phukin throat'

drakulie
11-11-2009, 07:40 AM
Serena is racist towards Asian line Umps.

Ronaldo
11-11-2009, 07:48 AM
According to the OP, having dark skin is worth AT LEAST 100 singles titles!

Or at least 65 HR in a season? http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2009/11/11/alg_sosa_sammy_sonia.jpg

samster
11-11-2009, 07:48 AM
Serena is racist towards Asian line Umps.

That could be a possibility.

Mick
11-11-2009, 07:49 AM
sure racism exists but it's not to the degree that the OP suggests (we elected Obama)

secondly, serena is already among the goat. the fact that people recognize her name by her first name, speaks volume.

raiden031
11-11-2009, 08:02 AM
First of all I white, so how on earth would I be racist towards Serena. I just happen to give Serena her due and look past shallow things like the color of her skin which some are unable to do.

Here's why you are racist. You are making a meritless accusation that "people" are racially bias against Serena because she is not discussed as a GOAT contender. Here is what I can deduct from this statement. The majority of people involved in pro tennis, whether it be sports commentators, governing body members, former players, etc. are white. You are basically generalizing these people as a whole as being racist.

You are basically generalizing a group of people of a certain race (white) with having some negative attribute (being racist). Therefore you are exhibiting racism against these people, and hence are racist. Even if you are the same race as them, it doesn't matter.

drakulie
11-11-2009, 08:16 AM
I just happen to give Serena her due and look past shallow things like the color of her skin which some are unable to do.

Serena shouldnt be banned. She was the one robbed of a possible U.S Open title by a racist little line judge.

Hmmm. Interesting.

raiden031
11-11-2009, 08:26 AM
Hmmm. Interesting.

Wow I didn't catch that...even the line judge is racist?

TMF
11-11-2009, 08:55 AM
The OP is just being insecure b/c there’s nothing about the unfairness to Serena. The fact is her achievement is vastly inferior to the past great players. If Serena ever wins 18GS, and all of her stats proximate them, but doesn’t get the same recognition as the other greats, then the OP has a point. However, there no way Serena can ever match them and that’s why the OP is quickly to make it as a racist excuse. It doesn’t matter if Serena is black or white, she is worthy to be consider a Tier II great, not up there with Martina, Graf, Chris or Court. Far from it.

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-11-2009, 09:24 AM
more biased than:
- discounting all of graf's grandslams post-seles stabbing?

Don't be obtuse; Seles effectively being taken out like a light at the height of her powers certainly helped the remainder of Graf's career. There is no real way to underestimate how much of a history-changer Seles' stabbing was for the women's game and Graf on a personal level at that time.


we should be talking about racism only if (and when) serena wins 18+ slams, and she still then is not part of the GOAT discussion. Her accomplishments, as they stand today, are not GOAT-worthy.

Cuddles may have called her a contender for overall GOAT, but i'm saying she is--without question--one of the greatest women ever to play the game, and part of a rare "club." Anyone else--male of female--with 11 slams is routinely considered one of the GOAT, so for all of the breathless attempts to rob SW of this oft-used distinction carries the (predicted) stench of bias, if not flat-out racism--especially with the history of racists posts on this board.



Until then all this "racism" talk is biased BS.

Only one with eyes shut would attempt to dismiss the glaring racism SW has faced over the years--which is omnipresent on the TT boards.

Chadwixx
11-11-2009, 09:37 AM
Serena is the womens all time money leader, you gotta be pretty stupid to think there is racism.

NamRanger
11-11-2009, 09:46 AM
Don't be obtuse; Seles effectively being taken out like a light at the height of her powers certainly helped the remainder of Graf's career. There is no real way to underestimate how much of a history-changer Seles' stabbing was for the women's game and Graf on a personal level at that time.




Cuddles may have called her a contender for overall GOAT, but i'm saying she is--without question--one of the greatest women ever to play the game, and part of a rare "club." Anyone else--male of female--with 11 slams is routinely considered one of the GOAT, so for all of the breathless attempts to rob SW of this oft-used distinction carries the (predicted) stench of bias, if not flat-out racism--especially with the history of racists posts on this board.





Only one with eyes shut would attempt to dismiss the glaring racism SW has faced over the years--which is omnipresent on the TT boards.




Prove that racism against Serena Williams exist on this forum (actual racism, not trolling).

drakulie
11-11-2009, 09:59 AM
Don't be obtuse; Seles effectively being taken out like a light at the height of her powers certainly helped the remainder of Graf's career. There is no real way to underestimate how much of a history-changer Seles' stabbing was for the women's game and Graf on a personal level at that time.

so what?? Graf still had to win those slams. They weren't handed to her.

Cuddles may have called her a contender for overall GOAT, but i'm saying she is--without question--one of the greatest women ever to play the game, and part of a rare "club." Anyone else--male of female--with 11 slams is routinely considered one of the GOAT,

agreed.

so for all of the breathless attempts to rob SW of this oft-used distinction carries the (predicted) stench of bias, if not flat-out racism--especially with the history of racists posts on this board.

Hmmm, so anyone who says "fed isn't the GOAT", even though he has more slams than anyone in the History of the ATP is racist??

Nice. real nice. :roll:


Only one with eyes shut would attempt to dismiss the glaring racism SW has faced over the years--which is omnipresent on the TT boards.

I didn't realize facing racism, resulted in being a GOAT. In that case, Althea Gibson is the GOAT, and Serena is a spoiled little baby who has it way better than any of use white folks on the board, or any of the past great black champions (and non-champions) who paved the way for her sorry ***.

fed_rulz
11-11-2009, 10:07 AM
Don't be obtuse; Seles effectively being taken out like a light at the height of her powers certainly helped the remainder of Graf's career. There is no real way to underestimate how much of a history-changer Seles' stabbing was for the women's game and Graf on a personal level at that time.

that's not a reason to discount her slam wins because they were not against Seles. Graf was still leading the h2h over seles when seles was taken out. suppose seles was not stabbed, and graf/seles ended up splitting the 11 GS graf won after the stabbign incident as 6-5, you still have graf with 16 and seles with 15. Wayyyy ahead of SW - so again, SW does not warrant a mention in the GOAT discussion AS THINGS STAND TODAY.


Cuddles may have called her a contender for overall GOAT, but i'm saying she is--without question--one of the greatest women ever to play the game, and part of a rare "club." Anyone else--male of female--with 11 slams is routinely considered one of the GOAT, so for all of the breathless attempts to rob SW of this oft-used distinction carries the (predicted) stench of bias, if not flat-out racism--especially with the history of racists posts on this board.

Only one with eyes shut would attempt to dismiss the glaring racism SW has faced over the years--which is omnipresent on the TT boards.See, this is the problem I have with race-related discussions on this board. We are not debating if SW has ever faced racism or not; it's about whether SW has been excluded from the GOAT discussions due to her race. BIG DIFFERENCE. Please do not deviate from the original discussion.

SW might have been a victim of racism, but that has no bearing on the GOAT discussions. As of today, she does not deserve a place among the GOAT candidates.

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-11-2009, 10:49 AM
Prove that racism against Serena Williams exist on this forum (actual racism, not trolling).

Don't try to erase racism by calling some of it "trolling." Anyone--no matter the motive--posting crap like posts seen from Chadwixx and others (paraphrasing overt comments from some about "you can take the person out of the ghetto, but not the ghetto out of the person," etc.) is racism, as no sane, moral person would post such crap. Do not play games.

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-11-2009, 10:58 AM
that's not a reason to discount her slam wins because they were not against Seles.

Oh, really? Because the last time I checked, many SW-hatrers on this board routinely try to lessen the value of many of SW's slams due to a selective criticism of her opponents. If it applies to one, it applies to all in this regard, so the absence of Seles opened a mile-wide door of opportunity for Graf, as the remainder of the competiton surely was not in Seles' class as a Graf-challenger/beater.

Graf was still leading the h2h over seles when seles was taken out. suppose seles was not stabbed, and graf/seles ended up splitting the 11 GS graf won after the stabbign incident as 6-5, you still have graf with 16 and seles with 15. Wayyyy ahead of SW - so again, SW does not warrant a mention in the GOAT discussion AS THINGS STAND TODAY.

"Wayyy ahead?" Hardly. She's at 11 right now, and I can see her winning slams at least for another 3 (or 4 years), which would close and pass that gap if she maintains current (2009) slam form. Who can bet against, since she's not as injury-wracked as (for one example) her sister.

See, this is the problem I have with race-related discussions on this board. We are not debating if SW has ever faced racism or not; it's about whether SW has been excluded from the GOAT discussions due to her race. BIG DIFFERENCE. Please do not deviate from the original discussion.

Race has been a part of that--as I pointed out yesterday.

SW might have been a victim of racism, but that has no bearing on the GOAT discussions.

...depending on the perosn you're thinking of.

drakulie
11-11-2009, 11:12 AM
"Wayyy ahead?" Hardly. She's at 11 right now,


OK, so she is not even close. Come back in 3-4 years and if she is closer or ahead, then you have a claim she is GOAT.

fed_rulz
11-11-2009, 11:14 AM
Oh, really? Because the last time I checked, many SW-hatrers on this board routinely try to lessen the value of many of SW's slams due to a selective criticism of her opponents. If it applies to one, it applies to all in this regard, so the absence of Seles opened a mile-wide door of opportunity for Graf, as the remainder of the competiton surely was not in Seles' class as a Graf-challenger/beater.

show me posts which discounts SW's slam wins


"Wayyy ahead?" Hardly. She's at 11 right now, and I can see her winning slams at least for another 3 (or 4 years), which would close and pass that gap if she maintains current (2009) slam form. Who can bet against, since she's not as injury-wracked as (for one example) her sister.

5 or 6 slams is "wayy ahead". And if (& when) she wins slams for the next few years, then we can have this discussion. until then she does not deserve to be in the GOAT mix. racism has nothing to do with her exclusion.


Race has been a part of that--as I pointed out yesterday.

...depending on the perosn you're thinking of.

no in this case it does NOT.

NamRanger
11-11-2009, 11:15 AM
Don't try to erase racism by calling some of it "trolling." Anyone--no matter the motive--posting crap like posts seen from Chadwixx and others (paraphrasing overt comments from some about "you can take the person out of the ghetto, but not the ghetto out of the person," etc.) is racism, as no sane, moral person would post such crap. Do not play games.



So you stereotype this whole forum by the posts of a few, who are in the minority? Sounds like a hypocrite to me.



A. You don't even know what racism is as evidence to the example you just used.

B. Serena Williams may have faced discrimination, but I highly doubt she has received full blown racism that you seem to think she receives. You want racism? Try looking through a history book sometime.

C. Serena Williams is not a contender for the title of the greatest of all time because her career is not over yet. It has nothing to do with race, discrimination, etc.



By the way, what you just posted from Chad is just stereotyping and at worst discrimination, not racism. In no way did Chad make any direct reference to Serena's race. You just inferred that "ghetto" is linked to Serena's race. Ghetto does not have to refer to race; it can be used as a reference towards attitude and behaviors of a person. At worst Chad was discriminating against "ghetto" people (which can include Blacks, Whites, Asians, Hispanics, Middle Eastern, etc). Examples of non-black "ghetto" people include Johnny Dang, Paul Wall, and Eminem.



Before you start trying to accuse people on this forum of racism, why don't you actually learn what racism is before you start trying to go on an Al Sharpton crusade on these forums.

r2473
11-11-2009, 11:15 AM
The Boy Who Cried Wolf, also known as The Shepherd Boy and the Wolf, is a fable attributed to Aesop (210 in Perry's numbering system.[1]) The protagonist of the fable is a bored shepherd boy who entertained himself by calling out "Wolf!" Nearby villagers who came to his rescue found that the alarms were false and that they had wasted their time. When the boy was actually confronted by a wolf, the villagers did not believe his cries for help and the wolf ate the flock (and in some versions the boy). The moral is stated at the end of the fable as:

Even when liars tell the truth, they are never believed. The liar will lie once, twice, and then perish when he tells the truth.

grafselesfan
11-11-2009, 11:23 AM
and graf/seles ended up splitting the 11 GS graf won after the stabbign incident as 6-5, you still have graf with 16 and seles with 15.

This is a dumb way to look at it since there were a few slams that other players won after the Seles stabbing. These were even bigger certainties for Seles than the ones Graf won. Or another way of looking at it would anyone win a slam other than Graf or Seles with both playing from 93-96? Probably not, or 1 for someone at most. So if you want to split then give each of them 7 (leaving 1 for Sanchez or Pierce maybe) and at the end of 96 Graf would have 18 and Seles 15. Graf though contended for slams again in 99 and Seles would have for another few years so most likely both end up with around 18-19 as opposed to 15-16.

drakulie
11-11-2009, 11:23 AM
show me posts which discounts SW's slam wins



5 or 6 slams is "wayy ahead". And if (& when) she wins slams for the next few years, then we can have this discussion. until then she does not deserve to be in the GOAT mix. racism has nothing to do with her exclusion.



no in this case it does NOT.


actually, Myskina is the GOAT. She is young, and may come back to tennis, so she could possibly catch up. Therefore, she is GOAT, and anyone who disagrees is being racist.

fed_rulz
11-11-2009, 11:39 AM
actually, Myskina is the GOAT. She is young, and may come back to tennis, so she could possibly catch up. Therefore, she is GOAT, and anyone who disagrees is being racist.

LOL.. agreed :)

Dave M
11-11-2009, 11:40 AM
Grass is Court's best surface. Hard courts is Serena's. Yet Serena has already matched the # of Wimbledon titles that Court won in her career with more to come.


With Henin and Clijsters back, and Maria getting healthy again, it will be hard for anyone to bring up the weak era argument anymore, and Serena will just infuriate the haters that much more if she keeps winning vs those 3 back on tour and as her main competition.[QUOTE=cuddles26;4096932]

Grass and hard courts were very diferent back then,(to each other) you had to have a different skill set to win on them.

It'll be good to see 3 more ex champs back as so far she played one returning not match fit champ and lost.(no don't bring up the foot fault it was a single point penalty she was loosing anyway)I honestly hope that for the sake of the WTA all 4 get fit healthy and playing.We'll see at the end of their careers who is judged to be the best of this generation then irrespective of race/colour etc.
I met SW at Wimbledon this year, spoke briefly she was polite friendly to my family and I,only a couple of hours before the womens final too. seemed somehow different to what i expected "in the flesh" as it were.

[QUOTE=Chadwixx;4097548]Serena is the womens all time money leader, you gotta be pretty stupid to think there is racism.

I do find myself wondering if Graf and Navratalova had won their titles in equal prize money era how they'd compare to current stars in that respect.

Serendipitous
11-11-2009, 11:42 AM
Omission, not ommision...

Steffi-forever
11-11-2009, 03:48 PM
November 11, 2009
Actually before the horrific Seles stabbing Graf had 11 slams, same as Serena now. So no you dont know if Graf would still have more, let alone if she would have been able to get more than Serena might end up with.
It is obviously sad a player who had GOAT potential...

September 21, 2009
Seles is one of the most overrated players of all time. She got super lucky to peak during a bigtime Graf slump, that Sanchez Vicario has a mental block vs her and plays to about 20% of her potential when they play, that Sabatini always choked in the slams vs Monica, that Capriati was a baby back then, that Martina was ancient by then, that Conchita Martinez sucks, and that Novotna and Pierce werent in her primes and seriously contending yet. Venus, Serena, Hingis, (and even turtle slow Davenport) all exposed her limited and mediocre skill set for what it really was upon her return. Seles actually was hitting the ball much harder and had a much better serve after the stabbing than before. She was a bit more out of shape but overall was better but the others were just alot better by then.

Serena Williams is really a better clay courter than Henin. Serena right now should have 4 French Opens and Henin only 1. Lets break it down:

2002 French- Serena won

2003 French- Justine won only by cheating. Serena is the real French Open winner of 2003.

2005 French- Kuznetsova choked away a match point in the 4th round. Henin should have been gone and 1 of Kuznetsova, Sharapova, or Petrova winning that years French over choking Pierce in final.

2006- Justine legitimately won

2007 French- Justine only won since Serena had an off day in the quarters. Serena and Justine both playing their best Serena would always win even on clay.

2009 French- Serena should have won. She choked in the 3rd set vs Kuznetsova

September 20 about the greatest female Belgium player of all time
Like I said most accomplished does not have to equal the greatest. If it does to many that is fine and I understand it. However there are many factors that go into achievements- level of competition, matchups, the conditions at the time suited to your style, and the vagarities of time, place, and chance.

I have watched all 4 play and I rate them as far as actual playing ability:

1. Van Roost
2. Henin
3. Appelmans
4. Clijsters

Great posts/threads!!!

BTW, Serena is not a GOAT contender because of her ranking history (spends overall only 2 years in the top 2 on the WTA ranking), because she didn't win enough titles yet and because of all those awful loss against non top 10 players. Graf spends 10 years and 3 months STRAIGHT in the top 2 , Navi and Evert are close to 10 years overall too. It doesn't matter if she is black or white. I don't care anyway.

This is the same thing I posted for you in an another thread. I hope you understand this time :

Chris Evert :
18 Grand Slam singles titles
7 Roland Garros
158 titles
34 Grand Slam finals
52 Grand Slam semifinals
125 consecutive wins on clay

Martina Navratilova
18 Grand Slam singles titles
9 Wimbledon
167 titles
Won 74 consecutive matches
19 consecutive Grand Slam semifinals
6 consecutive Grand Slam titles

Steffi Graf
22 Grand Slam singles titles
The most Hardcourt Slams
8 Year-end at #1 and most weeks at #1
13 consecutive Grand Slam finals
Won every Grand Slam title 4 times each
Golden Slam

Serena Williams
11 Grand Slam titles
4 Australian Open titles (Tie with Court, Goolagong, Graf and Seles)
Unseeded Grand Slam Winner (Australian Open 2007) (Tie with O'Neil)
Highest Career earning
Highest Single Year Earning
Highest streak of consecutive initial Grand Slam finals won (Doubles) (10)

cuddles26
11-11-2009, 03:54 PM
Steffi-forever is a worthless troll and should be banned.

LDVTennis
11-11-2009, 04:04 PM
Speaking of Graf here is something interesting to peak at, particularly in a thread about Serena:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gE6aKcK_TyE&feature=PlayList&p=A0EE23CA2669164A&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=27

While it was a very close win for Serena, Graf often looked like a rag doll vs all of Serena's power...

Graf's timing was perfect. She came into her prime just around the same point Navratilova and Evert were aging out of theirs...

Navratilova likewise also had great timing. She came into her own and won nearly all her slams after Court and King were already retired, well in King's case playing at nearly 40 on butchered knees, and when Goolagong and Evert were already past her prime, and when Graf and Sabatini were pre pubescent teenagers not close to their primes yet.

Please make it stop. It is hurting my head. Can anyone be this stupid?

By the way, I was at the 1999 IW Final. Steffi did not play well. She was so tentative and yet in a testament to her greatness she won the second set and was up a break in the third. I really thought she was going to serve it out, but then her confidence dipped again and the rest is history.

I do have a funny story about the tournament. It is a bit off-topic, but seeing as it has something to do with Serena not by much.

The first time I saw Serena she was practicing with her sister and her father at the primary practice court at the Hyatt Grand Champions. That was the site of the tournament before it moved down the road. Those who remember the old tournament site will remember that the practice court was across the main pathway from the stadium, adjacent to the main snack bar. I miss the intimacy of that venue.

But, back to the story. I sat down in the metal bleachers on the side of the court. Serena was wearing these black stretch, form-fitting shorts. I remember thinking to myself--- That's one big (fat) girl, with quite a behind.

About 10 minutes later, this man in his 20's shows up with a buddy of his and sits down above me. He's there for about 2 minutes before he exclaims at a volume we could all here. "Man, she has an enormous butt." Everyone in the stands started to laugh. Obviously, we had all been thinking the same thing.

Serena must have heard him too because she stared with this sneer on her face over at where I was sitting. Today, I guess I feel quite fortunate that she didn't come over to where we were sitting and threaten to shove a ball down our throats. :p

JankovicFan
11-11-2009, 04:15 PM
<> It is clear to me racism has alot to do with her constant ommision from the greatest female player ever discussions.

False conclusion. You stated no evidence whatsoever, only your conclusion. You told us what you already think but not why. One could reasonably assume you have a racial bias for even bringing it up. The issue is spurious anyway, because we obviously will not be allowed to discuss it candidly, everyone needing to dance around the real issues and be politically correct. We can't even use the formal names of races on this website. I politely tried, and my post went poof!

LDVTennis
11-11-2009, 04:23 PM
Steffi-forever is a worthless troll and should be banned.

Seems to me like Steffi-forever proved you were the troll. So do us all a favor and ban yourself.

TMF
11-11-2009, 04:27 PM
Steffi-forever is a worthless troll and should be banned.

Steffi-lover gave you a nice outline of each player’s career numbers. Why don’t you counter his argument instead of just calling him a troll.

Kenny022593
11-11-2009, 04:32 PM
Hey Kenny, I know I said your thread was the worst this year. I was wrong

This means so much to me lol

Kenny022593
11-11-2009, 04:36 PM
If you like this thread check out this one

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=297079

raiden031
11-11-2009, 04:37 PM
False conclusion. You stated no evidence whatsoever, only your conclusion. You told us what you already think but not why. One could reasonably assume you have a racial bias for even bringing it up. The issue is spurious anyway, because we obviously will not be allowed to discuss it candidly, everyone needing to dance around the real issues and be politically correct. We can't even use the formal names of races on this website. I politely tried, and my post went poof!

I guess the reasoning provided is that all 6 players who have won more singles slam titles than Serena deserve an asterisk next to their achievements, unlike Serena who is has the 'real' achievements.

nereis
11-11-2009, 05:13 PM
Arthur Ashe isn't mentioned as a GOAT because his achievements on-court do not warrant it. Michael Chang likewise isn't mentioned because his career is overshadowed by others better than him. Williams:11, Graf:22, 22>11. The Grand Slam: Williams=0, Graf=1, 1>0. Year end no.1, don't even get me started. Williams is the best player of this decade, but not of all time.

AndrewD
11-11-2009, 06:10 PM
Navratilova or Graf the greatest ever? Navratilova won half her slams at one slam, and Graf won half of them after her main rival was stabbed.

and, out of Serena's total of 11 majors, 4 were won before Justin Henin emerged on the scene and 3 were won after she retired. When Henin was at her best, Williams just picked up the scraps.

jamesblakefan#1
11-11-2009, 06:34 PM
and, out of Serena's total of 11 majors, 4 were won before Justin Henin emerged on the scene and 3 were won after she retired. When Henin was at her best, Williams just picked up the scraps.

True, but let's not be mistaken. Serena's best >>>>> Henin's best.

TheFifthSet
11-11-2009, 07:57 PM
Navratilova (18 slams)- Well for starters even though Wimbledon is the greatest event in the World, that she won half of her 18 slams at Wimbledon is a mark against her versatility and worthiness to be the greatest ever if we are talking beyond just grass. It doesnt reflect well on her completeness to have managed only the same # of slams at 3 combined slams played on red clay, green clay/mostly fast hard courts, and slow grass/slow hard courts as just 1 slam played on fast grass. Relativel speaking her abilities to win across all surfaces look rather limited for someone who would be the greatest ever.


Navratilova won 9 slams outside of Wimbledon. Serena thus far has 8 slams outside of Wimbledon. Pretty simple. Navratilova dominated at Wimbledon and was a force at the other slams. Serena is a force at all slams but hasn't dominated any one slam.

By your logic, Navratilova would've been better had she won less Wimbledons: she still would have been on par with Serena slam-wise even if she only won three of them, but would also have 5x the amount of singles titles, and would have been just as 'versatile.'

Oh and you're delusional if you think Graf would have ended up with 11 slams.

LafayetteHitter
11-11-2009, 07:59 PM
When people talk about the greatest female tennis player of all time they mention Navratilova or Graf mostly. On occasion you hear the names Evert, Court, Wills, Lenglen, and Connolly brought up. And for those whiny "what if" babies only Seles on occasion. While many acknowledge Serena as a top 10 player all time nobody discusses her as even a candidate for the greatest female tennis player ever. To me this is simply ridiculous. I dont expect everyone to agree she is the greatest ever, but she should atleast be in the discussion and considered for that title. It is clear to me racism has alot to do with her constant ommision from the greatest female player ever discussions.

Navratilova or Graf the greatest ever? Navratilova won half her slams at one slam, and Graf won half of them after her main rival was stabbed.

Nah we just don't like her because she is disgusting and a sad excuse for a role model unless poor sportsmanship is the goal.

soyizgood
11-11-2009, 08:27 PM
In 2004-2008, Serena's ideal prime years, she only won 3 majors. For a supposed GOAT contender, that's not impressive. Not only that, that's the same number of slams Venus won in that time frame. Adding insult to injury, Henin's 5 slams in that period further proves Serena couldn't dominate during her ideal years. Being eliminated in the QFs of 3 consecutive majors by Henin in 2007 is just icing.

Serena won 2 slams in 2009 in a field where Safina/Kuznetsova/Dementieva were her biggest threats with Venus for Wimbledon only. Considering the H2H she has over them and the resumes of those three Russians (all with <=.500 records in finals), that's not much for quality competition. Venus has not made the finals of a non-Wimby slam since AO 2003, so she's not bringing up the competition level much.

Sad thing is, Serena doesn't give a damn about anything other than 4 or 5 events a year. TRUE GOATS carry themselves as the best and back it up from beginning to end. Federer/Sampras/Borg/Laver/etc. would be mocked to no end if they walked over/forefited, tanked, skipped out, and was out-of-shape as much as Serena has been.

ZhengJieisagoddess
11-11-2009, 08:54 PM
There is NO ONE who is even a contender for the GOAT who acted like Serena did...
"You don't know me..."
But yes, we do. Unfortunately, all too well...

Chopin
11-11-2009, 09:05 PM
Serena is certainly an all-time great. If you don't think so, you don't really know tennis.

For the record, I dislike Serena's behavior and post-match comments and am no fan.

Chopin
11-11-2009, 09:12 PM
There is NO ONE who is even a contender for the GOAT who acted like Serena did...
"You don't know me..."
But yes, we do. Unfortunately, all too well...

I don't want to open a can of worms here, but being a GOAT candidate and being a great person don't go hand in hand.

Personally I think Court's repulsive comments on homosexuality are just as bad as anything Serena ever said.

"Homosexuality is an abomination to the Lord!"--Court

Steffi-forever
11-12-2009, 02:37 AM
Serena is certainly an all-time great. If you don't think so, you don't really know tennis.

For the record, I dislike Serena's behavior and post-match comments and am no fan.

Only Court, Evert, Navratilova, and Graf are ahead of her in the Open Era.

flying24
11-12-2009, 02:46 AM
True, but let's not be mistaken. Serena's best >>>>> Henin's best.

That is your opinion. Actually if that were true why was Serena only picking up scraps during Henin's prime playing period as AndrewD mentioned? Did she just mysteriously never reach her best when prime Henin was around, but always find it when she wasnt. At their best IMO:

Henin's best >>> Serena's best on clay (despite the declaration of the two bimbo Marys to the contrary)

Serena's best >>> Henin's best on grass (but actually less of a difference than on clay)

On various hard courts or even indoors it could go either way if both were at their best. They only played 2 times on hard courts since after 2002 and both won once easily, and it is not like both were at their best in either. Serena though was actually much closer to her best in their 07 U.S Open match, than Henin in the 08 Miami match. Serena actually played decently in the U.S Open match, not her best, but she was also completely outplayed by Henin that day. The Miami match was Henin playing completely awful, Serena won most of her points just by Henin's mistakees that day.

Henin though actually plays a lower risk game and it is much easier for her to play closer to her best than it is for Serena to boot.

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-12-2009, 03:05 AM
so what?? Graf still had to win those slams. They weren't handed to her.

Serena still had to win hers, yet when she's the subject, in comes the questions of competition value, when the very same criteria has to be used for Graf's post-Seles stabbing.

See how it works?



Hmmm, so anyone who says "fed isn't the GOAT", even though he has more slams than anyone in the History of the ATP is racist??


Are you thick? SW is the issue, and how there is a clear double-standard applied when she is the person up for consideration. ...and considering the torrential flood of morally bankrupt comments posted about her for some time at TT, the rational mind concludes the motive centers on one thing.

I didn't realize facing racism, resulted in being a GOAT. In that case, Althea Gibson is the GOAT

What the hell are you babbling about? No one said "facing racism makes one a GOAT." The point is that racism where SW is concerned does exist, and it is both intellectually and morally bankrupt to deny it.

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-12-2009, 03:14 AM
show me posts which discounts SW's slam wins

Nice try, but active threads still exist where every cooked-up nonsense in the world is used (Chadwixx, et al) to imply SW is either no great player, or that her competition was of some poor quality--enough to reduce the impact of her wins. Then there's the equally routine attempts to blast her actual ability (see grafselesfan's recent thread and LDV's endless rants), thus in any conceivable manner, some will try to kick SW to the level of someone like Martinez, Clijsters, or worse.



5 or 6 slams is "wayy ahead". And if (& when) she wins slams for the next few years, then we can have this discussion. until then she does not deserve to be in the GOAT mix. racism has nothing to do with her exclusion.

Sorry, but that is not "wayyy ahead." Considering her ability to win at least 2 slams a year, and her skills appears to eclipse that of most of her opponents when she's at her best, can you doubt she will close that gap (removing threats of injury, retirement, etc.)?

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-12-2009, 03:34 AM
So you stereotype this whole forum by the posts of a few, who are in the minority?

Clearly, no one said the "entire" forum, but make no mistake: TT is home to many with race issues in this forum, Rants and Raves, etc.

Try to deny this.


You don't even know what racism is as evidence to the example you just used.

Learn your history, then get back to me, because your failing to get the racism of the paraphrases quote screams, "I have no idea what racism is when I see it." The state of the nation, if not the world: denial or ignorance.

Oh, and for the record, racism comes in more than one form, chuckles. I should not even have to explain this.....


Serena Williams is not a contender for the title of the greatest of all time because her career is not over yet. It has nothing to do with race, discrimination, etc.

Go back and read....I say and will always say she's easily one of the greatest players of all time. You are referring to cuddles' stand. Get that straight, already.


By the way, what you just posted from Chad is just stereotyping and at worst discrimination, not racism. In no way did Chad make any direct reference to Serena's race.

Ahh. ignorance reigns supreme. The "stereotype" (as you label it) is born of racism, as blacks--more than anyone else--have been associated with living in, and having some racially & socially negative state of being deemed to be "ghetto," despite the original use of the term. The only minds attempting to spin this are those who wish to take the disgusting yoke of racism off of the idiots who have clear motives for that which they say or write.

PLEASE learn basic sociological development in relation to race, race relations and etymology of this slur in North Amercia before you spout off a defense of something that cannot be defended.

raiden031
11-12-2009, 03:38 AM
Are you thick? SW is the issue, and how there is a clear double-standard applied when she is the person up for consideration. ...and considering the torrential flood of morally bankrupt comments posted about her for some time at TT, the rational mind concludes the motive centers on one thing.


What the hell are you babbling about? No one said "facing racism makes one a GOAT." The point is that racism where SW is concerned does exist, and it is both intellectually and morally bankrupt to deny it.

Did Serena not threaten to shove a ball down a line judge's throat?

Did Serena not self-proclaim herself as the real #1 even though Safina was in the rankings?

Does Serena ever give her opponents credit for a win against her?

You really think people don't like simply because of her race? You are a fool and the only evidence of racism you've shown is maybe a handful of TT posters, which still doesn't account for the facts that 1) Serena is not a very nice person, and 2) that she has not lived up to the achievements of others before her.

cuddles26
11-12-2009, 03:43 AM
Serena still had to win hers, yet when she's the subject, in comes the questions of competition value, when the very same criteria has to be used for Graf's post-Seles stabbing.

See how it works?


Exacty. Regardless what Graf would have or wouldnt have won without the Seles stabbing, the fact is the overall field she won 10 of her 22 slams from 93-96 completely sucked. Seles taken out by stabbing, Navratilova who still blossomed in all age falling badly off in her final couple years, Sabatini a shadow of herself from 93 onwards. So that left Sanchez Vicario and on occasion Pierce and Novotna as her only legitimate competition, nobody else. Conchita Martinez was on average ranked #3 in the World from 93-96, ROTFL!!!

Now lets say we concede the field Serena has won 3 or 4 of her last slams against has also been extremely weak, which in fairness it has been. That is still a lower ratio of her 11 thus far than the 93-96 field is of Graf's. So if one brings up the weak competition argument for Serena, it applies to Graf atleast as much.

Navratilova also faced a weak field from 82-87 where she won 15 of her 18 slams. Evert was her biggest competition by far but was already a bit past her prime by then. Mandlikova was some competition. That is it. Austin was done by injuries by then, Goolagong was completely washed up, King was nearly 40 playing her final years on grandma knees, Graf and Sabatini were pre pubescent teenagers who hadnt even physically matured yet, Jaeger was an overrated clown even before she burnt out. Pam Shriver was the World #4 almost that whole time period, a clumsy player with no ground game, no athletic ability, no movement other than at the net a bit. Wendy Turnbull an aging player in her early 30s who way back in her prime didnt win a single slam was the World #5 most of that period. So that would apply to Martina also, yet you hardly hear it brought up for her like you do Serena.

fed_rulz
11-12-2009, 04:02 AM
Nice try, but active threads still exist where every cooked-up nonsense in the world is used (Chadwixx, et al) to imply SW is either no great player, or that her competition was of some poor quality--enough to reduce the impact of her wins. Then there's the equally routine attempts to blast her actual ability (see grafselesfan's recent thread and LDV's endless rants), thus in any conceivable manner, some will try to kick SW to the level of someone like Martinez, Clijsters, or worse

Sorry, but that is not "wayyy ahead." Considering her ability to win at least 2 slams a year, and her skills appears to eclipse that of most of her opponents when she's at her best, can you doubt she will close that gap (removing threats of injury, retirement, etc.)?

Sorry, but it is "wayyy ahead" - 5-6 slams is 50% of her total wins. Do you have reading comprehension problems? I think you do. What part of "she does not belong in the GOAT discussion CURRENTLY; we'll have this discussion when she freaking wins the slams and closes the gap" do you not get? "ability to win" does not hand you slams. actually winning it does.

could she? of course she could.. would she? we don't know that yet.

flying24
11-12-2009, 04:04 AM
Where does the 5-6 slams away figure come from anyway. Serena has 7-11 slams less than Graf, Navratilova, and Evert, not 5-6. As for how many slams Serena will likely end up with, if one were being extremely generous maybe an estimate of 14-15, still clearly behind the greatest players of all time.

zagor
11-12-2009, 04:10 AM
It's hard to estimate how many more slams will Serena win,some of it depends if Henin will return to her best or close her best form but Serena focusing exclusively on the slams and giving very little to zero effor in other tourneys seems to have improved her longevity.

drakulie
11-12-2009, 04:59 AM
Serena still had to win hers, yet when she's the subject, in comes the questions of competition value, when the very same criteria has to be used for Graf's post-Seles stabbing.

See how it works?

Unfortunately, for you, it doesn't work that way. **YOU** are the one alluding that Graf benefited from Seles' stabbing, and therefore her numbers are padded.

**I** stated she still had to win the slams she did after the stabbing. In any case, her numbers blow Serena's out of the stratotosphere.


Are you thick? SW is the issue, and how there is a clear double-standard applied when she is the person up for consideration. ...

you are correct>> there is a "double standard".

Standard # 1: Serena's numbers.

Standard # 2: Other players numbers.

Conclusion: other players records blow Serena's out of the stratotosphere.


What the hell are you babbling about? No one said "facing racism makes one a GOAT." The point is that racism where SW is concerned does exist, and it is both intellectually and morally bankrupt to deny it.c

And how does this apply to her numbers compared to the others?

Gorecki
11-12-2009, 05:41 AM
Seles taken out by stabbing, Navratilova who still blossomed in all age falling badly off in her final couple years, Sabatini a shadow of herself from 93 onwards. So that left Sanchez Vicario and on occasion Pierce and Novotna as her only legitimate competition, nobody else. Conchita Martinez was on average ranked #3 in the World from 93-96, ROTFL!!!


nothing like fierce competitors like Kuznetsova, Schnyder, Jankovic, Ivanovic, Mauresmo, Bartoli, Myskina, Dementieva....

cuddles26
11-12-2009, 05:45 AM
nothing like fierce competitors like Kuznetsova, Schnyder, Jankovic, Ivanovic, Mauresmo, Bartoli, Myskina, Dementieva....

Kuznetsova, Ivanovic, Jankovic, Dementieva, Safina, are all much better players than clowns like Martinez, Fernandez, Date, Huber, Coetzer, Maggie Maleeva, Rubin, Schultz McCarthy, Majoli, Spirlea, way past their primes Zvereva and Sukova, 14 and 15 year old diapered Hingis, and early U haul version of Davenport.

Gorecki
11-12-2009, 05:47 AM
Kuznetsova, Ivanovic, Jankovic, Dementieva, Safina, are all much better players than clowns like Martinez, Fernandez, Date, Huber, Coetzer, Maggie Maleeva, Rubin, Schultz McCarthy, Majoli, Spirlea, way past their primes Zvereva and Sukova, 14 and 15 year old diapered Hingis, and early U haul version of Davenport.

so i gather that you think your opinions are facts... :-?

drakulie
11-12-2009, 05:49 AM
Kuznetsova, Ivanovic, Jankovic, Dementieva, Safina, are all much better players than clowns like Martinez, Fernandez, Date, Huber, Coetzer, Maggie Maleeva, Rubin, Schultz McCarthy, Majoli, Spirlea, way past their primes Zvereva and Sukova, 14 and 15 year old diapered Hingis, and early U haul version of Davenport.


muahahahahahaha, lmaoa!!!

Seriously, why do you even post, when it is clear you don't even play tennis.

Gorecki
11-12-2009, 05:51 AM
oh.. Cudlles... btw... dismissing Rubin is a bit racist wouldn't you say?

NamRanger
11-12-2009, 05:52 AM
Clearly, no one said the "entire" forum, but make no mistake: TT is home to many with race issues in this forum, Rants and Raves, etc.

Try to deny this.




Learn your history, then get back to me, because your failing to get the racism of the paraphrases quote screams, "I have no idea what racism is when I see it." The state of the nation, if not the world: denial or ignorance.

Oh, and for the record, racism comes in more than one form, chuckles. I should not even have to explain this.....




Go back and read....I say and will always say she's easily one of the greatest players of all time. You are referring to cuddles' stand. Get that straight, already.




Ahh. ignorance reigns supreme. The "stereotype" (as you label it) is born of racism, as blacks--more than anyone else--have been associated with living in, and having some racially & socially negative state of being deemed to be "ghetto," despite the original use of the term. The only minds attempting to spin this are those who wish to take the disgusting yoke of racism off of the idiots who have clear motives for that which they say or write.

PLEASE learn basic sociological development in relation to race, race relations and etymology of this slur in North Amercia before you spout off a defense of something that cannot be defended.





That's pretty funny, because I'm pretty sure the term "ghetto" today is used as a term to refer to people who have a certain set of behavior / attitudes. Do they have to be black to be "ghetto"? No, they don't. Like I said, it can refer to hispanics, asians, whites, etc.



BTW, I do know where the term "ghetto" comes from. I know the history behind the word, and I know the history of how it came to North America. And in fact, the term "ghetto" has been associated with non-blacks (Jews, Irish immigrants, Italians, Poles, etc.) far longer than it has been associated with blacks in America.



But hey, you're the one who's stereotyping Black Americans with the term "ghetto." So who's being racist now? I'm the ignorant one? I'm not the one who solely associates an entire race to a word that you deem negative. Like I said, what Chad did was NOT racially motivated. It was based on the attitudes and behaviors displayed by Serena Williams. And that, is at worst, discrimination based on those attitudes and behaviors, and not her race.



The basis of your argument is that ghetto somehow only refers to black people. I dare you to go outside and tell that to a black person and see if they become offended. Ghetto does not only refer to black people; it can refer to any race. For someone who wants to be the Al Sharpton of Tennis-Warehouse, you sure do stereotype alot.

cuddles26
11-12-2009, 05:57 AM
so i gather that you think your opinions are facts... :-?

OK what are your opinions of the players I mentioned. Most of them were regular round of 16 loser in slams who couldnt score even a single win over Graf or Seles if their life depended on it. Do you really think those players are better than the second tier top players of today like the Serbian girls and the various Russian challengers apart from Sharapova.

Gorecki
11-12-2009, 05:58 AM
in fact, if anyone should feel insulted by the use of the word Ghetto, are the Jewish... as the word was carved to describe the Borghetto, the italian jewish boroughs.

cuddles26
11-12-2009, 05:59 AM
oh.. Cudlles... btw... dismissing Rubin is a bit racist wouldn't you say?

No Rubin is a mediocre era filler full of them in the empty Graf post-stabbing era. That she is black or white is irrelevant to that fact, Huber and Majoli and youngest Maleeva and Coetzer are white, but they are basically the same non relevant nobody that the 93-96 era Graf won nearly half her slams against composed of. Pigeons for Graf to devour, little snacks she popped in the microwave and casually enjoyed for dinner with a smile. Just as whether Serena is black or white should be irrelevant to her immense greatness, other than maybe as in addition being a trailblazer for other black women in a predominantly white sport which is all the more impressive.

Gorecki
11-12-2009, 06:00 AM
OK what are your opinions of the players I mentioned. Most of them were regular round of 16 loser in slams who couldnt score even a single win over Graf or Seles if their life depended on it. Do you really think those players are better than the second tier top players of today like the Serbian girls and the various Russian challengers apart from Sharapova.

no. to me they are pretty much the same level as tier 2 players back in the graf days. you are the one dismissing Grafs Competition. you are the one making judgments. you are the one resorting to generalizations...

so i see the logic in your arguments...

NamRanger
11-12-2009, 06:01 AM
in fact, if anyone should feel insulted by the use of the word Ghetto, are the Jewish... as the word was carved to describe the Borghetto, the italian jewish boroughs.




Lies that word belongs to blacks according to Thunder Al Sharpton II

TheMagicianOfPrecision
11-12-2009, 06:02 AM
Lies that word belongs to blacks according to Thunder Al Sharpton II
No, Gorecki is right. Although i sense you are being sarcastic.

NamRanger
11-12-2009, 06:03 AM
No Rubin is a mediocre era filler full of them in the empty Graf post-stabbing era. That she is black or white is irrelevant to that fact, Huber and Majoli and youngest Maleeva and Coetzer are white, but they are basically the same non relevant nobody that the 93-96 era Graf won nearly half her slams against composed of. Pigeons for Graf to devour, little snacks she popped in the microwave and casually enjoyed for dinner with a smile. Just as whether Serena is black or white should be irrelevant to her immense greatness, other than maybe as in addition being a trailblazer for other black women in a predominantly white sport which is all the more impressive.






LOL HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.............. ................





I'm pretty sure Althea Gibson was 10000000000000000000000000x more of a trailblazer than Serena Williams could ever hope to be. Or are you going to say her era was weak?

NamRanger
11-12-2009, 06:04 AM
No, Gorecki is right. Although i sense you are being sarcastic.




You don't know who Al Sharpton is, but in America, he is a black preacher who is constantly trying to bring up racism in situations that.... well.... basically he's doing "reverse racism" half the time, attempting to make any crime or action against blacks appear to be racially motivated when it really wasn't.

Gorecki
11-12-2009, 06:05 AM
No Rubin is a mediocre era filler full of them in the empty Graf post-stabbing era. That she is black or white is irrelevant to that fact, Huber and Majoli and youngest Maleeva and Coetzer are white, but they are basically the same non relevant nobody that the 93-96 era Graf won nearly half her slams against composed of. Pigeons for Graf to devour, little snacks she popped in the microwave and casually enjoyed for dinner with a smile. Just as whether Serena is black or white should be irrelevant to her immense greatness, other than maybe as in addition being a trailblazer for other black women in a predominantly white sport which is all the more impressive.


so it's all about serena. Right? she started it all... all the great Black tennis champions from the past, like Ashe and Noah, Garrison and Mcneil are fireworks to entertain the racist tennis world... :-?

what can i say...:confused:

NamRanger
11-12-2009, 06:06 AM
so it's all about serena. Right? she started it all... all the great Black tennis champions from the past, like Ashe and Noah, Garrison and Mcneil are fireworks to entertain the racist tennis world... :-?

what can i say...:confused:



They don't count. Their era was weak remember.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
11-12-2009, 06:06 AM
You don't know who Al Sharpton is, but in America, he is a black preacher who is constantly trying to bring up racism in situations that.... well.... basically he's doing "reverse racism" half the time, attempting to make any crime or action against blacks appeared to be racially motivated when it really wasn't.

Yes I do, a reverant who held a great speech at MJ:s tribute in Staples Center.

Ghettos were present at lots of places before it was even recognized in USA.

USA has no history compared to some places in Europe and the Middle east etc

Gorecki
11-12-2009, 06:08 AM
No, Gorecki is right. Although i sense you are being sarcastic.

No Sweat Tmop. he was being sarcastic...

90% if the time Nam and me are in agreement. :).

dropshot winner
11-12-2009, 06:10 AM
Yes I do, a reverant who held a great speech at MJ:s tribute in Staples Center.

Ghettos were present at lots of places before it was even recognized in USA.

USA has no history compared to some places in Europe and the Middle east etc

True, I was just talking about that with my brother yesterday.

Some pavements I use daily in Zurich are older than every (non-Indian) historic object in the states. Kind of funny when you think about it.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
11-12-2009, 06:14 AM
True, I was just talking about that with my brother yesterday.

Some pavements I use daily in Zurich are older than every (non-Indian) historic object in the states. Kind of funny when you think about it.

Absolutely. I can imagine :)
USA is a very young nation where things have happened really fast in a short period of time.

dropshot winner
11-12-2009, 06:25 AM
Absolutely. I can imagine :)
USA is a very young nation where things have happened really fast in a short period of time.

There's nothing wrong with beeing a young nation, but when I hear some americans talk (mostly politicians) you almost get the feeling that they think that the states are as old as the Roman Republic, when in fact it was mostly Buffalos at a time when other nations already had a national identidy.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
11-12-2009, 06:27 AM
There's nothing wrong with beeing a young nation, but when I hear some americans talk (mostly politicians) you almost get the feeling that they think that the states are as old as the Roman Republic, when in fact it was mostly Buffalos at a time when other nations already had a national identidy.

Totally agree.
Very good post !

Talker
11-12-2009, 07:14 AM
Serena has no stats to argue with in a GOAT discussion, we all know that.

As far as racism, it can take two forms, taking away credit when it's deserved or giving credit when it isn't deserved because of race.

In this case the discussion is giving credit to Serena (including her in the GOAT discussion) when it isn't deserved, it is illogical given all the data and it would point to either racism to the person arguing that Serena should be in the discussion or the person arguing for Serena is biased in some other way.

In any case, if you were to look at the numbers without knowing anything about race, Serena is lacking in many areas.

Another reason could be that Serena acts like a spoiled 16 yr old.

Wolland
11-12-2009, 07:15 AM
Yeah, blame it on the racism!

drakulie
11-12-2009, 07:21 AM
Serena is the GOAT of excuses.

Cuddles, you happy now??

elquien
11-12-2009, 09:28 AM
its b1tchism

jamesblakefan#1
11-12-2009, 10:32 AM
That is your opinion. Actually if that were true why was Serena only picking up scraps during Henin's prime playing period as AndrewD mentioned? Did she just mysteriously never reach her best when prime Henin was around, but always find it when she wasnt. At their best IMO:

Henin's best >>> Serena's best on clay (despite the declaration of the two bimbo Marys to the contrary)

Serena's best >>> Henin's best on grass (but actually less of a difference than on clay)

On various hard courts or even indoors it could go either way if both were at their best. They only played 2 times on hard courts since after 2002 and both won once easily, and it is not like both were at their best in either. Serena though was actually much closer to her best in their 07 U.S Open match, than Henin in the 08 Miami match. Serena actually played decently in the U.S Open match, not her best, but she was also completely outplayed by Henin that day. The Miami match was Henin playing completely awful, Serena won most of her points just by Henin's mistakees that day.

Henin though actually plays a lower risk game and it is much easier for her to play closer to her best than it is for Serena to boot.

Once Henin was at her best in 06-07, Serena was well past her best, yet Henin still needed great performances to take her out. And you forgot about the 07 Miami final, where Serena played horribly yet still somehow won in 3.

Serena 02-03 would take down Henin on HC 7 times out of 10.

cuddles26
11-12-2009, 10:33 AM
so it's all about serena. Right? she started it all... all the great Black tennis champions from the past, like Ashe and Noah, Garrison and Mcneil are fireworks to entertain the racist tennis world... :-?

what can i say...:confused:

You definitely have a point about Ashe, and NamRanger about Gibson. However McNeil and Garrison cant be counted as true trailblazers. Garrison despite being a top 5 player for several years never won a slam title, and had embarassing head to heads like 1-27 vs Navratilova, and something similar to that vs Evert, Graf, and Seles, so simply wasnt a championship calibre player, even to a small degree. Furthermore she did nothing as far as off court influence other than whine and complain alot. She was not interesting, captivating, or personable like the Williams sisters.

McNeil was even far less accomplished a player than Garrison. She never made a slam final, and I am not sure if she even ever won a singles title. If it wasnt for her career moment upset of Graf at Wimbledon 94 nobody would even know her name. She was simply not an important enough fixture to make any impact, even if she had a more influential personality than the abrasive Garrison.

The Williams sisters are the next true trailblazers for their race in this sport in the wake of Gibson and Ashe.

NamRanger
11-12-2009, 11:12 AM
You definitely have a point about Ashe, and NamRanger about Gibson. However McNeil and Garrison cant be counted as true trailblazers. Garrison despite being a top 5 player for several years never won a slam title, and had embarassing head to heads like 1-27 vs Navratilova, and something similar to that vs Evert, Graf, and Seles, so simply wasnt a championship calibre player, even to a small degree. Furthermore she did nothing as far as off court influence other than whine and complain alot. She was not interesting, captivating, or personable like the Williams sisters.

McNeil was even far less accomplished a player than Garrison. She never made a slam final, and I am not sure if she even ever won a singles title. If it wasnt for her career moment upset of Graf at Wimbledon 94 nobody would even know her name. She was simply not an important enough fixture to make any impact, even if she had a more influential personality than the abrasive Garrison.

The Williams sisters are the next true trailblazers for their race in this sport in the wake of Gibson and Ashe.



I didn't know racism was still alive in tennis.

Kenny022593
11-12-2009, 11:34 AM
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=297079

this thread is still better

Joe Pike
11-12-2009, 11:49 AM
She's definitely the GOAT if you consider her effort/reward ratio.



Serena's game never seems effortless to me ...

Joe Pike
11-12-2009, 11:53 AM
my gut says if i need someone to play for my life; give me an angry/hungry serena over anyone else.


Would be risky if Serena had to play Testud, Likhovtseva, Suarez, Shaughnessy, Schnyder, Rubin, Petrova, Zvonareva, Jidkova, Farina Elia, Schiavone, Craybas, Sun, Hantuchova, Bammer, Chan, Chakvetadse, Srebotnik, Wozniak, Na Li, Azarenka, Zakopalova or Stosur.
She might lose ...

LafayetteHitter
11-12-2009, 11:55 AM
I didn't know racism was still alive in tennis.

Obama was voted President, there is no such thing as racism.

Joe Pike
11-12-2009, 11:55 AM
What Seles might or might not have achieved in her own career we will never know. It is obviously sad a player who had GOAT potential as she did was robbed of that chance ...


Don't play dumb - Seles was stabbed with 19 and returned to the game at 21.
Same age Navratilova won the first of her 18 slams.

Joe Pike
11-12-2009, 12:02 PM
Serena is certainly an all-time great. If you don't think so, you don't really know tennis.

For the record, I dislike Serena's behavior and post-match comments and am no fan.



A person who behaves like Serena is not "great" per definitionem.

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-12-2009, 12:44 PM
Unfortunately, for you, it doesn't work that way. **YOU** are the one alluding that Graf benefited from Seles' stabbing, and therefore her numbers are padded.

**I** stated she still had to win the slams she did after the stabbing. In any case, her numbers blow Serena's out of the stratotosphere.

...you still avoid admitting Seles' fate had no bearing on Graf's post-stabbing victories against players not on Seles' level. If they are inferior to Seles, then cough it up, as the anti-Serena crowd are quick to do about her competition.

Further, you need to address how others with as many slams are routinely considered among the all-time greatest, yet when SW is mentioned as sharing that status, such virulent rants against Serena occur often?

Chadwixx
11-12-2009, 01:01 PM
Further, you need to address how others with as many slams are routinely considered among the all-time greatest, yet when SW is mentioned as sharing that status, such virulent rants against Serena occur often?

Who is reguarded as a goat that has the same number of titles as serena?

fed_rulz
11-12-2009, 01:03 PM
...you still avoid admitting Seles' fate had no bearing on Graf's post-stabbing victories against players not on Seles' level. If they are inferior to Seles, then cough it up, as the anti-Serena crowd are quick to do about her competition.

Further, you need to address how others with as many slams are routinely considered among the all-time greatest, yet when SW is mentioned as sharing that status, such virulent rants against Serena occur often?

who are the "others" that you're referring to?

boredone3456
11-12-2009, 01:08 PM
...you still avoid admitting Seles' fate had no bearing on Graf's post-stabbing victories against players not on Seles' level. If they are inferior to Seles, then cough it up, as the anti-Serena crowd are quick to do about her competition.

Further, you need to address how others with as many slams are routinely considered among the all-time greatest, yet when SW is mentioned as sharing that status, such virulent rants against Serena occur often?

No one is denying Serena is a top 10 all time great. The thing people are arguing is that she is a candidate at this point to be the actual greatest player of all time. Judging by the overwhelming response to the OP, you are the only one that really seems to think Serena right now deserves to be on equal level with the 4 who are most always hailed as the greatest. Serena does not have the numbers, that is why most people rant whenever anyone calls her anything close to the actual greatest of all time.

Also, to address an earlier post you made about how people are so critical of Serena and so much more so than the other 4 women. Firstly, Graf is always criticized for the results of the stabbing, granted the most vehement critics have pretty much been banned on this board she has been criticized. Nav has been downgraded for her results being in what some perceive as a weak era and Court's Australians are at least cut in half by most everybody because of weak fields. Evert is detracted for the blown H2H advantage and beatings handed her by Martina. However the reason that those people are routinely called the absolute greatest is because once they hit their strides they dominated the game for years at a time and cared everywhere, both at the slams and outside them, and got bountiful results to prove that. Serena has not done that, she has not matched Nav, Graf, Evert and Court in this respect, which I think has been explicitly stated several times in this thread and other threads about Serena. Even if she somehow gets the same number of slams as them (highly doubtful but lets give her the possibility), he non slam numbers and seeming general lack of accomplishment in that area will always hold her back. A player who may not even end her career with 50 singles titles be called the absolute greatest player of all time when there are players who won 2 or 3 times as much?Sorry, but I really don't understand how you cannot see why this makes some people angry and leads them to question the intelligence of people saying she deserves equal status to those women despite having nothing on her resume that comes close?

The reason Serena gets it so much more is because she is the current player who is going to end up highest on the GOAT list unless Henin somehow pulls a miracle in her comeback. Most people on here are not old enough to accurately discuss anyone beyond graf because the majority of posters, unless I am mistaken, are 25 or younger around here it seems. people jump on Serena because she is the current player, its the same reason that there are so many Fed is lucky Nadal is lucky threads and you don't see that many similar threads about past players like Borg, Laver, Lendl and the like. Current players always get more attention and usuualy criticism then past ones, thats how things usually work.

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-12-2009, 01:11 PM
That's pretty funny, because I'm pretty sure the term "ghetto" today is used as a term to refer to people who have a certain set of behavior / attitudes. Do they have to be black to be "ghetto"? No, they don't. Like I said, it can refer to hispanics, asians, whites, etc.

Learn, because your comment shows a complete ignorance of the evolution of the slur in relation to race in North America's development, the displacement/disparity of blacks in said regions, and the phenomenon of propaganda generated to equate a race with a negative state of being.



BTW, I do know where the term "ghetto" comes from. I know the history behind the word, and I know the history of how it came to North America. And in fact, the term "ghetto" has been associated with non-blacks (Jews, Irish immigrants, Italians, Poles, etc.) far longer than it has been associated with blacks in America.

Briefly, if you truly knew the etymology related to its North American usage, then you would know to avoid stating something as incorrect, since the early and post Ellis Island immigrants heavily associated with the term died fairly early as they were eventually able to assmimilate in ways the PTB would not allow for blacks. As migrating blacks lived in areas (temporarily sharing, then) abandoned by the EI-ers, society would only see the black populations explode in said areas from the early decades of the 20th century to the present day, with the popular propaganda being used against blacks longer than you could possibly realize. It became the standard slur used for decades for everyone from the man on the street, to politicians and the media--all selling and linking this region/condition as a unified, wholly negative, racially based way of being.



Like I said, what Chad did was NOT racially motivated. It was based on the attitudes and behaviors displayed by Serena Williams. And that, is at worst, discrimination based on those attitudes and behaviors, and not her race.

Dreaming is nice, but eventually, one must wake up.



I dare you to go outside and tell that to a black person and see if they become offended.

Do you even know any black people? Have you ever spent real time with black people? ...and I do not mean at work, or school, or passing by a few at Wal-Mart, but really know them--and from different economic, ideological and political backgrounds? I do, sonny-boy, and have for a good portion of my years, and innmerable friends (no matter the background) have decried the ghetto stereotype for all of the reasons stated here.

Go tell them all how wrong they are.

CCNM
11-12-2009, 01:19 PM
Serena is the GDOAT-greatest diva of all time!!!!

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-12-2009, 01:30 PM
No one is denying Serena is a top 10 all time great.

You are kidding, right?

The thing people are arguing is that she is a candidate at this point to be the actual greatest player of all time. Judging by the overwhelming response to the OP, you are the only one that really seems to think Serena right now deserves to be on equal level with the 4 who are most always hailed as the greatest. Serena does not have the numbers, that is why most people rant whenever anyone calls her anything close to the actual greatest of all time.

11 slams and counting is generally considered one of the greats in most estimations, but as this thread proves, ONE person is not so great achieving the same thing. Remember, this is the same board where certain members have tried to argue Henin being the greatest of this generation above SW--when SW had more slams. Figure that one out.

Also, to address an earlier post you made about how people are so critical of Serena and so much more so than the other 4 women. Firstly, Graf is always criticized for the results of the stabbing, granted the most vehement critics have pretty much been banned on this board she has been criticized.

A couple of members offered that theory, but the majority defend Graf in one way or another, and have yet to take a critical look at her opponents post-stabbing to apply the same criteria of "real opponent" that is used with SW's competition.



Nav has been downgraded for her results being in what some perceive as a weak era

Who among the TT-ers really do this, save less than a handfull? In the media, she's still hailed as one of the greatest if not the greatest in the views of some. Criticism barely gains ground with Martina.



...and Court's Australians are at least cut in half by most everybody because of weak fields. Evert is detracted for the blown H2H advantage and beatings handed her by Martina.

That's not the meida's general impression, nor the majority view in the Former Pros forum.


Even if she somehow gets the same number of slams as them (highly doubtful but lets give her the possibility), he non slam numbers and seeming general lack of accomplishment in that area will always hold her back. A player who may not even end her career with 50 singles titles be called the absolute greatest player of all time when there are players who won 2 or 3 times as much?

Funny. Players who lucked their way into winning a single slam--but do not have some record-making number of match wins overall will likely get into the HoF, which will include Ivanovic, Martinez, Myskina and others. In the event they get in, will you criticize the nominating board for essentially elevating these players to a great status? Because HoF inductees--no matter the sport--are seen as being...great. So if the day should come, and Ivanovic takes her dizzy *** up to the stand to accept entry, will you (or anyone else) say she does not belong there? If so, why?


Most people on here are not old enough to accurately discuss anyone beyond graf because the majority of posters, unless I am mistaken, are 25 or younger around here it seems.

That speaks volumes...for other reasons.

Joe Pike
11-12-2009, 02:15 PM
...

A couple of members offered that theory, but the majority defend Graf in one way or another, and have yet to take a critical look at her opponents post-stabbing to apply the same criteria of "real opponent" that is used with SW's competition. ....


Graf didn't beat her own sister in most of her slam finals.
But Sanchez (5 times), Navratilova (4 times), Seles (3 times), Evert (once) and Hingis (once) among others.

Chadwixx
11-12-2009, 02:43 PM
Cuddles/blundervolley are allowed to post stupid things, why am i not allowed? Discrimination, you will hear from the aclu!!!!

NamRanger
11-12-2009, 02:45 PM
Learn, because your comment shows a complete ignorance of the evolution of the slur in relation to race in North America's development, the displacement/disparity of blacks in said regions, and the phenomenon of propaganda generated to equate a race with a negative state of being.





Briefly, if you truly knew the etymology related to its North American usage, then you would know to avoid stating something as incorrect, since the early and post Ellis Island immigrants heavily associated with the term died fairly early as they were eventually able to assmimilate in ways the PTB would not allow for blacks. As migrating blacks lived in areas (temporarily sharing, then) abandoned by the EI-ers, society would only see the black populations explode in said areas from the early decades of the 20th century to the present day, with the popular propaganda being used against blacks longer than you could possibly realize. It became the standard slur used for decades for everyone from the man on the street, to politicians and the media--all selling and linking this region/condition as a unified, wholly negative, racially based way of being.





Dreaming is nice, but eventually, one must wake up.





Do you even know any black people? Have you ever spent real time with black people? ...and I do not mean at work, or school, or passing by a few at Wal-Mart, but really know them--and from different economic, ideological and political backgrounds? I do, sonny-boy, and have for a good portion of my years, and innmerable friends (no matter the background) have decried the ghetto stereotype for all of the reasons stated here.

Go tell them all how wrong they are.



Do I know black people? Try growing up in the 3rd Ward of Houston, a neighborhood / area that is predominantly black and hispanic. You don't know anything about my background, so how bout you go and take a nice cup of STFU.




All this fancy schmancy talk and you are still making the same claim which is false, that ghetto somehow only refers to black Americans. This is false, and any half respecting black person would be totally offended that you are making the claim that using the term "ghetto" is a racist remark and that it only refers to black people. In fact, I'm beginning to think the only racist person here is you. The term "ghetto" has been by Americans TODAY (read : TODAY) as a term to describe people who come from a lower economic status and have a certain set of behaviors and attitudes. Blacks do fit this category, as well as hispanics, whites, asians, middle easterns, etc.




The worst part is it is very obvious that you actually have an education, but you are so blinded by your infatuation with Serena Williams that you can't even concede that the other side may actually be right. That only goes to show how pathetic you actually are.

NamRanger
11-12-2009, 02:53 PM
Cuddles/blundervolley are allowed to post stupid things, why am i not allowed? Discrimination, you will hear from the aclu!!!!



The sad part is Al Sharpton the II is incapable of telling the difference between discrimination and racism, even with an education which he obviously received based on the grammar and structure of his posts.

Cup8489
11-12-2009, 03:08 PM
No Rubin is a mediocre era filler full of them in the empty Graf post-stabbing era. That she is black or white is irrelevant to that fact, Huber and Majoli and youngest Maleeva and Coetzer are white, but they are basically the same non relevant nobody that the 93-96 era Graf won nearly half her slams against composed of. Pigeons for Graf to devour, little snacks she popped in the microwave and casually enjoyed for dinner with a smile. Just as whether Serena is black or white should be irrelevant to her immense greatness, other than maybe as in addition being a trailblazer for other black women in a predominantly white sport which is all the more impressive.

i like how you're complaining that Graf's era was weak, and she won 22 majors, but half against supposedly mediocre opponents. so you're saying she won 11 against quality opponents, the same number serena has TOTAL?

by your own logic you just proved why Serena is NOT the GOAT. or rather, by your fallacious statements, because it's certainly not logical to say that Serena is the GOAT based on what you said here.

Lionheart392
11-12-2009, 03:19 PM
i like how you're complaining that Graf's era was weak, and she won 22 majors, but half against supposedly mediocre opponents. so you're saying she won 11 against quality opponents, the same number serena has TOTAL?

by your own logic you just proved why Serena is NOT the GOAT. or rather, by your fallacious statements, because it's certainly not logical to say that Serena is the GOAT based on what you said here.

This is total pwnage.

drakulie
11-12-2009, 04:42 PM
...you still avoid admitting Seles' fate had no bearing on Graf's post-stabbing victories against players not on Seles' level. If they are inferior to Seles, then cough it up, as the anti-Serena crowd are quick to do about her competition.

You are not very good at logic are you?

How does Graf winning slams in the absence of Seles, equate to Serena deserving having larger numbers than she already has???


Further, you need to address how others with as many slams are routinely considered among the all-time greatest, yet when SW is mentioned as sharing that status, such virulent rants against Serena occur often?

Apparently you were absent from school the day they taught math.

Graf has 22 grand slam titles, SW has 11. (22 is greater than 11)
Graf, 107 singles titles, SW 35 (107 is greater than 35)

Graf was # 1 for 377 weeks. Let me know when SW comes close.

LDVTennis
11-12-2009, 06:27 PM
You are not very good at logic are you?

How does Graf winning slams in the absence of Seles, equate to Serena deserving having larger numbers than she already has???

BlunderVolley is also not very good at providing evidence for his claims.

In another thread, he claimed that Serena had better technique on her volleys than Graf. I provided visual evidence showing that Graf's volley technique was excellent.

When I asked him to provide evidence showing that Serena had better technique, he asserted that I was the one who should provide evidence that Serena didn't have great technique on her volley. To no one but BlunderVolley would that seem logical.

So, good luck trying to get him to understand reason.

Chopin
11-12-2009, 06:51 PM
Only Court, Evert, Navratilova, and Graf are ahead of her in the Open Era.

I'd place Serena ahead of Court in the Open Era.

NamRanger
11-12-2009, 06:54 PM
I'd place Serena ahead of Court in the Open Era.



I disagree, however I can see how you can come to that conclusion. No one disagrees that Serena Williams is one of the greatest players of her generation (if not the greatest), but she isn't at a legendary status of Evert, Graf, or Navratilova yet.

Cup8489
11-12-2009, 07:17 PM
You are not very good at logic are you?

How does Graf winning slams in the absence of Seles, equate to Serena deserving having larger numbers than she already has???




Apparently you were absent from school the day they taught math.

Graf has 22 grand slam titles, SW has 11. (22 is greater than 11)
Graf, 107 singles titles, SW 35 (107 is greater than 35)

Graf was # 1 for 377 weeks. Let me know when SW comes close.

I think it's a losing effort to try to convince them with numbers and facts why SW isn't the GOAT, they seem to have lost touch with logic and reality.

Good evidence for your claim, though :)

Gorecki
11-13-2009, 04:00 AM
I think it's a losing effort to try to convince them with numbers and facts why SW isn't the GOAT, they seem to have lost touch with logic and reality.

Good evidence for your claim, though :)

i read something about him (thunder retentive). he said he thought having sand in the head and never being to school, but since im not a native english speaker, i didn't really understand... :)

:)

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-13-2009, 04:12 AM
Do I know black people? Try growing up in the 3rd Ward of Houston, a neighborhood / area that is predominantly black and hispanic. You don't know anything about my background, so how bout you go and take a nice cup of STFU.

Take your own advice, Shirley-gal, and if you had a logical, fact-based point from the start, there would be no need for your 11th hour BS as seen above. Try a little harder next time.


All this fancy schmancy talk and you are still making the same claim which is false, that ghetto somehow only refers to black Americans. This is false, and any half respecting black person would be totally offended that you are making the claim that using the term "ghetto" is a racist remark and that it only refers to black people.

More BS which translates as: "I was called out on my ignorance (the 'fancy schmancy' line), and when called out on what the perceptions of many were on the subject, I cannot answer--other than resorting to the same nonsense shattered time and time again."

Must be painful to go that route so often.

In fact, I'm beginning to think the only racist person here is you. The term "ghetto" has been by Americans TODAY (read : TODAY) as a term to describe people who come from a lower economic status and have a certain set of behaviors and attitudes. Blacks do fit this category, as well as hispanics, whites, asians, middle easterns, etc.

Please refer to the "fancy schmancy" passage, because you are still drowning in the River Clueless.


The worst part is it is very obvious that you actually have an education, but you are so blinded by your infatuation with Serena Williams that you can't even concede that the other side may actually be right. That only goes to show how pathetic you actually are.

I know double standards and/or racism when I see it..unlike your disturbed ***--with the need to desperately defend those with clear issues. After all, your apparent lack of moral clarity--under no circumstances--should be abated by truth..reasoning......

grafselesfan
11-13-2009, 04:14 AM
I rate Serena as the 5th greatest women player of the Open Era behind only Graf, Navratilova, Court, and Evert. The power is within her to move even higher. The next few years will tell the tale though. I do think game and ability wise though she is probably already the greatest women player ever. I started a thread breaking down the games of the various greats in comparision to bear out why I thought that. Her already outstanding achievements need to be further increased to be the female GOAT, but ability wise she is right up there already.

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-13-2009, 04:17 AM
i read something about him (thunder retentive). he said he thought having sand in the head and never being to school, but since im not a native english speaker, i didn't really understand... :)

:)

^ Mountains of evidence....

It should not be so easy....

grafselesfan
11-13-2009, 04:21 AM
I'd place Serena ahead of Court in the Open Era.

I think Court is underrated by many people. Her slam tally is inflated by the Aussie Open status then (as is Graf's likely some by the Seles stabbing) but with home court advantage she still probably wins 5-7 instead of 11 and has 18-20 slams now. Still keeping up here up with Graf and Navratilova.

It is hard to compare players from that far back game wise to more recent players. However even a young Evert held her own vs a prime Court, a near prime Evert was dominated by Navratilova, a near prime Navratilova was dominated by a young Graf, and Serena game wise looks to be good enough to go up against Graf or Navratilova if all were at their best. So I suspect ability wise Serena could do well vs Court, though her achievements need to be further boosted as I said, which she is certainly capable of.

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-13-2009, 04:31 AM
I rate Serena as the 5th greatest women player of the Open Era behind only Graf, Navratilova, Court, and Evert. The power is within her to move even higher. The next few years will tell the tale though. I do think game and ability wise though she is probably already the greatest women player ever. I started a thread breaking down the games of the various greats in comparision to bear out why I thought that. Her already outstanding achievements need to be further increased to be the female GOAT, but ability wise she is right up there already.

I have said the much of the same thing: SW is one of the GOAT without question, but when it comes to ability--as seen in your thread--some will try to blast your assessment, no matter how structured and fact-based it happens to be.

grafselesfan
11-13-2009, 04:36 AM
I have said the much of the same thing: SW is one of the GOAT without question, but when it comes to ability--as seen in your thread--some will try to blast your assessment, no matter how structured and fact-based it happens to be.

Yeah I was surprised to see some of the responses. I love Graf obviously but arguing a backhand that is only ever hit with slice (other than the very odd topspin backhand which those rare times she hit very well) is superior to a powerful explosive weapon of a backhand was kind of laughable. Or some of the other things people were trying to argue. I didnt expect everyone to complete agree with my breakdown, but some of the comments being made were almost unbelievable. It seems alot dont want to admit Serena's game and abilities are as extremely high as they are.

grafselesfan
11-13-2009, 05:53 AM
LOL like past champions werent also arrogant. Navratilova publicly lowballs Graf and Evert and their games or competition in various ways. She trumpets herself publicly as the best ever many years after retiring by repeatedly stating it in exact words as it if were fact rather than arguable opinion. During her playing days she attributed any loss she had to her having a really off day, and always said her opponents played the match of their lives on a day they beat her, even if it were Chris or Hana. She whined about Graf being ranked #1 over her in 1987 even though both had won only 1 slam that year and she had won no other tournaments yet that year (Graf had won like 8 already at the time). Then in 88 when Graf had won 3 of the last 5 slams she still whined about not being ranked #1 and calling herself the real #1 regardless what the computer said.

NamRanger
11-13-2009, 05:57 AM
LOL like past champions werent also arrogant. Navratilova publicly lowballs Graf and Evert and their games or competition in various ways. She trumpets herself publicly as the best ever many years after retiring by repeatedly stating it in exact words as it if were fact rather than arguable opinion. During her playing days she attributed any loss she had to her having a really off day, and always said her opponents played the match of their lives on a day they beat her, even if it were Chris or Hana. She whined about Graf being ranked #1 over her in 1987 even though both had won only 1 slam that year and she had won no other tournaments yet that year (Graf had won like 8 already at the time). Then in 88 when Graf had won 3 of the last 5 slams she still whined about not being ranked #1 and calling herself the real #1 regardless what the computer said.




Yes but their arrogance cannot possibly be in the ball park of Serena Williams. She is at a totally different level.

Joe Pike
11-13-2009, 07:10 AM
Yeah I was surprised to see some of the responses. I love Graf obviously but arguing a backhand that is only ever hit with slice (other than the very odd topspin backhand which those rare times she hit very well) is superior to a powerful explosive weapon of a backhand was kind of laughable. Or some of the other things people were trying to argue. I didnt expect everyone to complete agree with my breakdown, but some of the comments being made were almost unbelievable. It seems alot dont want to admit Serena's game and abilities are as extremely high as they are.


If you were to add up Graf's backhand winners AND her points won due to her opponent's "unforced" errors in response to a Graf backhand - and then do the same with Serena's backhands you would be in for a nice surprise ...

LDVTennis
11-13-2009, 07:57 AM
I rate Serena as the 5th greatest women player of the Open Era behind only Graf, Navratilova, Court, and Evert. The power is within her to move even higher. The next few years will tell the tale though. I do think game and ability wise though she is probably already the greatest women player ever. I started a thread breaking down the games of the various greats in comparision to bear out why I thought that. Her already outstanding achievements need to be further increased to be the female GOAT, but ability wise she is right up there already.

You also DID NOT provide ANY EVIDENCE for this claim. Your thoughts on the subject consisted of a series of declarations.

When I asked you to provide evidence, you disappeared from the thread. I won't now call you what you call others when they refuse to provide you with evidence for their claims, but you know what we are all thinking.

I've yet to read a post from you that convinces me that you know anything about tennis technique or strategy. So, your declaration about Serena here and elsewhere means nothing.

Chadwixx
11-13-2009, 07:58 AM
Yeah I was surprised to see some of the responses. I love Graf obviously but arguing a backhand that is only ever hit with slice (other than the very odd topspin backhand which those rare times she hit very well) is superior to a powerful explosive weapon of a backhand was kind of laughable.

Because serena handles low balls so well, LOL. If you actually played tennis you would know how effective the slice is, especially against a fat player with a 2handed backhand.

Serena cannot hit through the low ball, she rolls it back putting her on defense. At least now (since she lost the widebody racket) she can actually hit them in.

Kegzz
11-13-2009, 08:26 AM
A GOAT is dedicated fully to the sport, giving their all throughout the year. Serena isn't that. Yes, Serena is one the best of this generation based on Grand Slams, but all round, there are better candidates.

Ripper014
11-13-2009, 08:50 AM
I have said the much of the same thing: SW is one of the GOAT without question, but when it comes to ability--as seen in your thread--some will try to blast your assessment, no matter how structured and fact-based it happens to be.

I can't consider any of the current players GOATs, in order to be able to even be considered a GOAT you have to maintain a level of EXCELLENCE over an extended period of time. You need not only to win but dominate on a consistant basis and no one in the current womans game has been able to achieve that. Back in the golden days of tennis... the reason that either Evert, Navratilova or both were in a final was that it was seldom you could beat both these greats in back to back matches. Not only were they GREAT players... but they proved it every single time they stepped on the court. Beating one in a semi's was just the start... of a very difficult road.

GOATs should not be handed out lightly... GREATEST OF ALL TIME, if there are more than a handful of them... what would great mean anymore. Its like all these diluted Hall of Fames you do not need to have inductions every year, it has gotten to the point were it means less and less now.

Serena Williams
35 Titles
Record of 442-96 or 82.7%

Chris Evert
157 Titles
Record of 1309-146 or 90.0%

Martina Navratilova
167 Titles
Record of 1442-219 or 86.8%

Stefi Graf
107 Titles
Record of 900-115 or 88.7%

As you can see Serena's numbers are are low compared too these three and that does not include the fact that these three were more consistant winners over a much longer period of time.

Serena and Venus may be a blip on the tennis time-line but in no way would I consider them GOATs.

Ripper014
11-13-2009, 08:59 AM
Race has nothing to do with how Serena Williams is talked about on these forums. It has to do with her poor sportsmanship, her lack of dedication, and her arrogance.

Hmmm... I wish I could have said this... but I was afraid I would be banned from the forums. It is nice to see that I am not alone it how I feel about certain people in the world.

I do not see why the tennis is catering to her... I personally feel that she should have been suspended from at least one if not for a year of Grand Slam events. There needs to be enough incentive to prevent this sort of behaviour.

I understand how they feel she is a drawing card... but someone always seems to step into the spotlight when someone steps out. As we lost the Billie Jean Kings and Margaret Courts... we had Evonne Goolagong and Chris Evert... then Stefi Graf and Gabby... no one player is bigger than the game.

Not even Michael Jordan... or Tiger Woods...

Camilio Pascual
11-13-2009, 09:32 AM
It is clear to me racism has alot to do with her constant ommision from the greatest female player ever discussions.
She was certainly treated horribly at Indian Wells years ago, people who were there tell me there was a racist component to it and I don't doubt it.
But, no, I don't agree.
She is quite a few GS titles away from Graf, Navratilova, Evert, and Court. These things don't happen automatically. I think there will be an argument for Serena if/when she has ~14 GS titles. Then, there will be a good argument that the depth in women's tennis was deeper than from the 60-s - 90's, making 14 about equivalent to 18 or so.
Another good argument that can be made for her is that she now has 10 GS doubles titles. How many does Steffi Graf have?
In baseball, there are plenty of dubious Hall of Fame players who were clearly not as good as many who were left out. For somebody to be a GOAT or Hall of Famer, there has to be publicity and people pushing for them. That's where you can help.
As far as racism goes, keep fighting the good fight!

lambielspins
11-13-2009, 09:45 AM
These things don't happen automatically. I think there will be an argument for Serena if/when she has ~14 GS titles. Then, there will be a good argument that the depth in women's tennis was deeper than from the 60-s - 90's, making 14 about equivalent to 18 or so.

LOL NO! The competition Serena faces is crap, this is currently the worst womens field in history. Serena wont even be in the conversation for female GOAT unless she were to win atleast 25 slams to compensate for the horrible competition today. Of course she wont ever even come close to that.

Camilio Pascual
11-13-2009, 10:35 AM
The competition Serena faces is crap, this is currently the worst womens field in history.
You should have read my post more carefully, I said the depth is deeper, NOT that the quality of the field is better.
It is very easy to prove that depth was not much in the past because the standard deviation of results was much higher then. For example, if there are x number of women players and one of them wins all of the tournaments, then there is little depth. If 12 of them win all of the tournaments, then the standard deviation and the depth is smaller.
Anyway, I'd like to hear your arguments that the competition is worse now than during the time of Navratilova, Graf, Court, and Evert. I would guess that the quality improved because of the money of the Open Era, but I could be wrong. It just seems that most everybody can travel and compete at Oz nowadays, whereas in the past, somebody in the men's or women's game who could afford to get there faced considerably less competition than at the other Slams.

lambielspins
11-13-2009, 10:41 AM
You should have read my post more carefully, I said the depth is deeper, NOT that the quality of the field is better.
It is very easy to prove that depth was not much in the past because the standard deviation of results was much higher then. For example, if there are x number of women players and one of them wins all of the tournaments, then there is little depth. If 12 of them win all of the tournaments, then the standard deviation and the depth is smaller.
Anyway, I'd like to hear your arguments that the competition is worse now than during the time of Navratilova, Graf, Court, and Evert. I would guess that the quality improved because of the money of the Open Era, but I could be wrong. It just seems that most everybody can travel and compete at Oz nowadays, whereas in the past, somebody in the men's or women's game who could afford to get there faced considerably less competition than at the other Slams.

More people winning does not mean improved quality. It just could mean there is no strong enough form at the top. Like right now since Henin's retirement we have been left with a half commited Serena who is clearly not in shape and tanks nearly all events outside the slams, Venus who is no longer a threat on any surface except grass, and a bunch of women incapable of winning when it matters.

I would say a certain order suggest better strength of competition as it means atleast certain players are good enough to uphold their positions and keep some order. The way it is now is not showing more depth, it is simply a collection of women not worthy to even mantain the number of positions available, not atleast 3 legit top 3 worthy women, not atleast 5 legit top 5 worthy, not a single clay courter worthy of winning the French since Henin retired, etc.....As for why the competition was better then, well you would never see Jankovic or Safina anywhere near #1 in the World, so that alone says enough.

Serena would have to win atleast 25 slams to even be in the discussion with Graf or Navratilova given that she plays in the worst womens field in history.

Joe Pike
11-13-2009, 11:01 AM
You should have read my post more carefully, I said the depth is deeper, NOT that the quality of the field is better.
It is very easy to prove that depth was not much in the past because the standard deviation of results was much higher then. ...


So if Serena had denied Sharapova, Kuznetsova, Ivanovic and Clijsters some more slams the field would have been less deep?

Camilio Pascual
11-13-2009, 12:57 PM
So if Serena had denied Sharapova, Kuznetsova, Ivanovic and Clijsters some more slams the field would have been less deep?
That is correct.
Which was exactly the case during the Evert-Navratilova Era. Check out the results for the top 16 seeds during the years they won Slams and compare it to afterwards, many more upsets since then.
Once again, more depth doesn't necessarily indicate better or less "quality" in the field.
As far as Serena not being considered as the GOAT, she does not compare well even to Evert, though she has time to improve on that:
GS titles Evert 18 Serena 11
GS finals Evert 34 Serena 14
GS SF's Evert 52 Serena 17 (this is the mismatch)
GS entry Evert 56 Serena 40
The huge semifinals appearances difference shows how "thin" Serena's results are compared to Evert's. It also indicates more depth (competetiveness as Bill James would call it) in the women's field than before.

lambielspins
11-13-2009, 01:00 PM
Serena's less regular results have absolutely nothing to do with depth, they are all to do with her. If she trained and commited like she did in 2002-2003 she would be in the semis or better of every single slam the last 8 years combined probably, and win 2+ slams every year. She is that good talent wise, and this era in womens tennis other than Henin, Venus on fast surfaces only, and occasionaly Sharapova and Clijsters is that bad. Likewise Graf or Navratilova facing the same field Serena has in 2008 and 2009 for example would be even more dominant than ever, probably each losing 0 or 1matches both years combined (possibly a loss to Venus at Wimbledon). Serena of 2002-2003 herself would probably have lost 0 or 1 matches in 2008-2009 combined vs the thrash womens field of the last 2 years.

Serena simply doesnt have the work ethic or commitment of other all time greats, and that is why her results are far more irregular, and her achievements sum and period of dominance far less. She has the raw talent, which she showed in 2002-2003 when she actually trained the way such a great champoin should, but she didnt carry it through.

Camilio Pascual
11-13-2009, 01:02 PM
More people winning does not mean improved quality.
Exactly.
Many people will argue that it does, but it only indicates the level of the competitiveness, not the quality.
I would agree with people who say more depth is more likely than not to indicate higher quality, but it is not necessarily so.

lambielspins
11-13-2009, 01:04 PM
Exactly.
Many people will argue that it does, but it only indicates the level of the competitiveness, not the quality.
I would agree with people who say more depth is more likely than not to indicate higher quality, but it is not necessarily so.

So based on what would Serena need only 14 slams to be in womens GOAT discussions according to you? That is far less than say Graf's 22, and Navratilova and Evert's 18 is really more than that considering the additional slams they lost out in the 70s due to the status of the Australian and French Opens at the time. You are conceding there is nothing that indicates Serena faced a better "quality" field regardless of its depth criteria.

DRII
11-13-2009, 04:56 PM
November 11, 2009


September 21, 2009




September 20 about the greatest female Belgium player of all time


Great posts/threads!!!

BTW, Serena is not a GOAT contender because of her ranking history (spends overall only 2 years in the top 2 on the WTA ranking), because she didn't win enough titles yet and because of all those awful loss against non top 10 players. Graf spends 10 years and 3 months STRAIGHT in the top 2 , Navi and Evert are close to 10 years overall too. It doesn't matter if she is black or white. I don't care anyway.

This is the same thing I posted for you in an another thread. I hope you understand this time :

Chris Evert :
18 Grand Slam singles titles
7 Roland Garros
158 titles
34 Grand Slam finals
52 Grand Slam semifinals
125 consecutive wins on clay

Martina Navratilova
18 Grand Slam singles titles
9 Wimbledon
167 titles
Won 74 consecutive matches
19 consecutive Grand Slam semifinals
6 consecutive Grand Slam titles

Steffi Graf
22 Grand Slam singles titles
The most Hardcourt Slams
8 Year-end at #1 and most weeks at #1
13 consecutive Grand Slam finals
Won every Grand Slam title 4 times each
Golden Slam

Serena Williams
11 Grand Slam titles
4 Australian Open titles (Tie with Court, Goolagong, Graf and Seles)
Unseeded Grand Slam Winner (Australian Open 2007) (Tie with O'Neil)
Highest Career earning
Highest Single Year Earning
Highest streak of consecutive initial Grand Slam finals won (Doubles) (10)

Great post Steffi-forever (not that I necessarily agree, but you disproved cuddles quite well).

Don't worry, when you prove cuddles wrong (or atleast present an argument he/she can't plausibly refute) he/she calls you a troll! Its happened to me as well.

Who else feels cuddles and jamesblakefan are a little too similar...

Coincidental? I doubt it!

DRII
11-13-2009, 05:17 PM
Yes I do, a reverant who held a great speech at MJ:s tribute in Staples Center.

Ghettos were present at lots of places before it was even recognized in USA.

USA has no history compared to some places in Europe and the Middle east etc

And your point? How is the historical lineage of the word ghetto really relevant?

Obviously, in the context it is being discussed in this thread, it refers to the modern day 'American' context of what ghetto is or means.

Which BTW, I feel can refer to any color of people, yet is mostly associated with black Americans. White, Latinos, Native Americans have 'their' own pejoratives most commonly linked to them: Trailer park, Vato, Reservation, etc...

DRII
11-13-2009, 05:25 PM
There's nothing wrong with beeing a young nation, but when I hear some americans talk (mostly politicians) you almost get the feeling that they think that the states are as old as the Roman Republic, when in fact it was mostly Buffalos at a time when other nations already had a national identidy.

Jealous?

I would expect most politicians to cater to their constituents, including in Europe. How or why that bothers you is quite bewildering.

And as we all know; age and influence are not always linked. Please do not begrudge Americans because of the 'power' of America.

Although, I do sometimes wish more Americans realized the influence America, and our policies, have on the rest of the world!

DRII
11-13-2009, 06:12 PM
Yeah I was surprised to see some of the responses. I love Graf obviously but arguing a backhand that is only ever hit with slice (other than the very odd topspin backhand which those rare times she hit very well) is superior to a powerful explosive weapon of a backhand was kind of laughable. Or some of the other things people were trying to argue. I didnt expect everyone to complete agree with my breakdown, but some of the comments being made were almost unbelievable. It seems alot dont want to admit Serena's game and abilities are as extremely high as they are.

How about many, including myself, disagreed with you. And I seem to remember you being very dismissive of my and others opinion.

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-14-2009, 03:28 AM
I can't consider any of the current players GOATs, in order to be able to even be considered a GOAT you have to maintain a level of EXCELLENCE over an extended period of time. You need not only to win but dominate on a consistant basis and no one in the current womans game has been able to achieve that.

The essential problem with your theory is that--to reiterate--other players (female or male) are considered as part of the GOAT group based almost exclusively on slam wins (since it is beyond argument that winning the sport's defining prize is the ultimate goal of a professional tennis player). Then, we have the case of a person such as Agassi: we already have some claiming he is among the GOAT, yet he could hardly be considered consistent in his slam wins, and never dominated any slam in his pockmarked career, other than an strained argument made for the Australian Open. Yet from his slam results alone, some consider him one of the greats.

See the double-standard? If 8 elevates one to this catagory, certainly 11 can without so much as a subconscious moment of hesitation, so the reasons for the typical fiery anti-SW rants seen around here (not referring to you), they are anything except legitimate.

GOATs should not be handed out lightly... GREATEST OF ALL TIME, if there are more than a handful of them... what would great mean anymore. Its like all these diluted Hall of Fames you do not need to have inductions every year, it has gotten to the point were it means less and less now.

I posed this HoF question the other day, but the nominating board sees fit to elevate 1-slam winners to the level of the greatest of all time....so what does that mean for the serious slam winners such as Serena?

Joe Pike
11-14-2009, 05:25 AM
The essential problem with your theory is that--to reiterate--other players (female or male) are considered as part of the GOAT group based almost exclusively on slam wins (since it is beyond argument that winning the sport's defining prize is the ultimate goal of a professional tennis player). Then, we have the case of a person such as Agassi: we already have some claiming he is among the GOAT, ...


I have never heard someone claim that Agassi might be the GOAT.
Laver, Borg, Sampras and Federer are discussed - on no one else.
Most certainly not Agassi.

Camilio Pascual
11-14-2009, 06:34 AM
Serena's less regular results have absolutely nothing to do with depth,...
And they might have everything to do with depth.
Cutting down the number of tournaments and concentrating more on the Slams could be a smarter strategy in a field with more depth as opposed to one with less depth. Especially if one is frequently injured.
As far as 14 Slams go, I think the depth and quality arguments would convince me to place her above Court who has 24, but certainly not past Evert, Navratilova, and Graf.
Amongst players since WWII, I rate Serena no higher than 6th, just above Seles and below Connolly. She has had a more successful career than Venus, Henin, and Clijsters, but quality wise, I would rate these players as pretty much equal when each is playing her best.

Anaconda
11-14-2009, 07:54 AM
When people talk about the greatest female tennis player of all time they mention Navratilova or Graf mostly. On occasion you hear the names Evert, Court, Wills, Lenglen, and Connolly brought up. And for those whiny "what if" babies only Seles on occasion. While many acknowledge Serena as a top 10 player all time nobody discusses her as even a candidate for the greatest female tennis player ever. To me this is simply ridiculous. I dont expect everyone to agree she is the greatest ever, but she should atleast be in the discussion and considered for that title. It is clear to me racism has alot to do with her constant ommision from the greatest female player ever discussions.

Navratilova or Graf the greatest ever? Navratilova won half her slams at one slam, and Graf won half of them after her main rival was stabbed.


I actually dispise people like you. Firstly........

have you got proof that people you are talking about are racial towards serena williams and other black people. You should be careful out in the real world or you could get in trouble for slander.

It's only fanboys like you who play the racist card. Even serena doesn't go that low on herself.......

I expect that you have nothing to prove that serena is the GOAT and come up with inexplicable reasoning for this.

TMF
11-14-2009, 08:24 AM
I have never heard someone claim that Agassi might be the GOAT.
Laver, Borg, Sampras and Federer are discussed - on no one else.
Most certainly not Agassi.

I'm with you on this one. Like Serena, Andre would be placed in tier 2 great at best. They are vastly behind the others players and not even close to be in goat discussion.

Camilio Pascual
11-14-2009, 08:46 AM
I have never heard someone claim that Agassi might be the GOAT.
This was discussed before your time.
The major argument for Agassi at the time was that he had a career Slam, Sampras doesn't. Sampras winning his last US Open slammed the door shut for good on Agassi GOAT talk, imo.

fruitytennis1
11-14-2009, 08:49 AM
Honestly i dont think she really cares about being number one. She went away to do fashion as such nonsense and now all she plays is GS.

fruitytennis1
11-14-2009, 08:56 AM
Hmm originally i thought goat stood for god of all tennis.

Joe Pike
11-14-2009, 11:53 AM
This was discussed before your time.
The major argument for Agassi at the time was that he had a career Slam ...


Laver has TWO REAL grand slams.

Federer has a "career grand slam" as well, BTW.
And 15 slams.

cbegap
11-14-2009, 03:25 PM
Racism is a convenient crutch that is played all too often. Why can't Serena just be disliked because she's kind of a jerk? Her talent is undeniable, but her mouth just gets in the way. People are so afraid of calling it like it is because everything is so PC these days. There's no money in equality or taking personal responsibility for one's own actions. It's never Serena's fault is it? Racism claims will never go away.

DRII
11-14-2009, 05:07 PM
Racism is a convenient crutch that is played all too often. Why can't Serena just be disliked because she's kind of a jerk? Her talent is undeniable, but her mouth just gets in the way. People are so afraid of calling it like it is because everything is so PC these days. There's no money in equality or taking personal responsibility for one's own actions. It's never Serena's fault is it? Racism claims will never go away.

Uhm... is P.C. the new conservative mantra now? Ever since the Ft Hood killings, this is all I hear of late.

Perhaps some just have opinions that others disagree with. No need to blame all misguided (as you see it) views on Political Correctness!

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-15-2009, 02:26 AM
I have never heard someone claim that Agassi might be the GOAT.
Laver, Borg, Sampras and Federer are discussed - on no one else.
Most certainly not Agassi.

Are you serious?

halalula1234
11-15-2009, 02:52 AM
if she has a few more slams then this might happend but on my llist shes already up there

schap02
11-15-2009, 03:03 AM
cuddles, before the hooded types off-road their way into this thread, you should know that the Serena=GOAT conversation takes may turns depending on the person talking; some think she's easily on the GOAT list, while others do not, so there is no sweeping rejection of her likely status.

But let's be honest: racial hatred has followed the Williams (independent of Richard's behavior or comments) since they emerged on the pro circuit (you will soon read some of the racially based comments in this thread), however, there are others who simply judged SW for her abilities, competition and effects on the overall sport.

In any case, more than anyone since Graf's generation, no one is more deserving of being in the GOAT discussions and HoF entry than Serena.


Just wanted to chime in here for a second - first off I never get involved in the GOAAT discussions for male or female but this one was worth just a few words from me - I don't feel like Serena really embraces the game - she comes to the slams, mostly wins them and that's about it, she doesn't travel a rigorous schedule, she doesn't play many tournaments, I don't see her as an ambassador to the game, yet.

That being said - I do think she is one of the best, if not the best (see: GRAF) ever to play the game - I just think she gets left out sometimes bc she acts like tennis doesn't matter to her.

Ripper014
11-15-2009, 03:24 AM
I have never heard someone claim that Agassi might be the GOAT.
Laver, Borg, Sampras and Federer are discussed - on no one else.
Most certainly not Agassi.

I would never consider Agassi a GOAT... I thought early in his career he was all about image and flash... it was not till later he started winning majors and even then I feel he is over-rated by the media. Unlike his wife who I feel has a lot more humility and has stayed out of the lime light... something some athletes find difficult to do.

Ripper014
11-15-2009, 03:41 AM
There are many gifted players to have played the game of tennis as well as other sports. Just because you are the most gifted player does not instantly make you a GOAT... It is about being able to win... to win in Majors, to be able to win anytime you walk on the court.

If you cannot bring your game to a non-major tourney should you be considered a GOAT? Maybe you just deal with the pressure better than your opponents... in majors.

This is not a race issue... if you want to be a GOAT... then "Just Win Baby........"

I guess I would have to consider her if you changed it to... "Grand Slam GOATs", but even then... I would have her on a second tier, and at 28 I would expect she is on the downward side of her career.

And as deep as the womens field is... there does not seem to be a young heir apparent (yes that would be sarcasim). The best women players in the world are going to be mothers or retiree's.

Joe Pike
11-15-2009, 04:44 AM
if she has a few more slams then this might happend but on my llist shes already up there


That's OK.
Sharapova fans feel the same about Maria.

Joe Pike
11-15-2009, 04:46 AM
Just wanted to chime in here for a second - first off I never get involved in the GOAAT discussions for male or female but this one was worth just a few words from me - I don't feel like Serena really embraces the game - she comes to the slams, mostly wins them and that's about it, ...


Mostly wins them???

She has won only 5 of the last 25 slams ...

Camilio Pascual
11-16-2009, 07:01 AM
Laver has TWO REAL grand slams.

Funny you should say that, the first one is an indication that he was NOT playing against the best tennis players in the world that year. The second one is.
I've always thought it bizarre of people to cite his first Grand Slam as proof that he was GOAT. It is more like holding the minor league record for home runs in a season than anything else.

Camilio Pascual
11-16-2009, 07:30 AM
Anyway, back to Serena.
I'm a fan of hers, but I could understand that many will not like to talk of her as GOAT because of her conduct this year. I wouldn't be surprised or offended if she is not voted in the HOF the first time she is eligible.
She is clearly the greatest women's player of this past decade and will be a top tier Hall of Famer.

soyizgood
11-16-2009, 09:33 AM
Anyway, back to Serena.
I'm a fan of hers, but I could understand that many will not like to talk of her as GOAT because of her conduct this year. I wouldn't be surprised or offended if she is not voted in the HOF the first time she is eligible.
She is clearly the greatest women's player of this past decade and will be a top tier Hall of Famer.

Serena is a shoe-in for HoF. As is Henin, Venus, Clijsters and Sharapova. The tennis HoF is too easy to get in compared to the NBA, MLB, and NFL. Just win a slam and/or being top 5 for a bit and you're in.

rommil
11-16-2009, 09:40 AM
actually, Myskina is the GOAT. She is young, and may come back to tennis, so she could possibly catch up. Therefore, she is GOAT, and anyone who disagrees is being racist.

How can you overlook Iva Majoli? C'mon now, let's be sensible here....

rommil
11-16-2009, 09:42 AM
When people talk about the greatest female tennis player of all time they mention Navratilova or Graf mostly. On occasion you hear the names Evert, Court, Wills, Lenglen, and Connolly brought up. And for those whiny "what if" babies only Seles on occasion. While many acknowledge Serena as a top 10 player all time nobody discusses her as even a candidate for the greatest female tennis player ever. To me this is simply ridiculous. I dont expect everyone to agree she is the greatest ever, but she should atleast be in the discussion and considered for that title. It is clear to me racism has alot to do with her constant ommision from the greatest female player ever discussions.

Navratilova or Graf the greatest ever? Navratilova won half her slams at one slam, and Graf won half of them after her main rival was stabbed.


It IS about race. Serena is a bit behind the RACE for her to be talked about. She would have been way ahead in the marathon if she didn't stop at the McDonald's drive through for Quarter Pounders.

el sergento
11-16-2009, 10:14 AM
I agree she is the GOAT

http://www.uhsecho.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/serena-williams-foot-fault-outrage.jpg

GREATEST OF ALL THREATS!:twisted:

JoshDragon
11-16-2009, 10:30 AM
When people talk about the greatest female tennis player of all time they mention Navratilova or Graf mostly. On occasion you hear the names Evert, Court, Wills, Lenglen, and Connolly brought up. And for those whiny "what if" babies only Seles on occasion. While many acknowledge Serena as a top 10 player all time nobody discusses her as even a candidate for the greatest female tennis player ever. To me this is simply ridiculous. I dont expect everyone to agree she is the greatest ever, but she should atleast be in the discussion and considered for that title. It is clear to me racism has alot to do with her constant ommision from the greatest female player ever discussions.

Navratilova or Graf the greatest ever? Navratilova won half her slams at one slam, and Graf won half of them after her main rival was stabbed.

Why do you assume racism? Did you ever assume that Serena may not have been as good a player as those other people that you mentioned? Or maybe she isn't as committed to the game as they were? Or maybe some people just don't like her because of her arrogant attitude?

NamRanger
11-16-2009, 10:37 AM
Race has nothing to do with it. Anyone who thinks so is just biased towards Serena Williams and has an agenda. Serena Williams is not the GOAT due to lack of numbers, dedication, poor sportsmanship, and her inability to dominate one of the greatest rivals of her generation (Justine Henin) on the surfaces that Serena dominates (Wimbledon and HCs).



People have a hard time distinguishing between racism and discrimination. People discriminate against Serena Williams based on her attitude and her behavior. Ever wonder why there is nothing negative posted about Venus Williams on this forum? Because Venus Williams knows how to behave in public.

cuddles26
11-16-2009, 10:47 AM
Race has nothing to do with it. Anyone who thinks so is just biased towards Serena Williams and has an agenda. Serena Williams is not the GOAT due to lack of numbers, dedication, poor sportsmanship, and her inability to dominate one of the greatest rivals of her generation (Justine Henin) on the surfaces that Serena dominates (Wimbledon and HCs).

Sportsmanship has nothing to do with your tennis greatness. It is another category altogether. Your comments on Henin are just wrong. The only year Henin has beaten Serena on a grass or a hard court is 2007. That is it. That is the best year of tennis of Henin's career so far of course. So only in Henin's best year ever did she have any success vs Serena on any surface except clay thus far.

EKnee08
11-16-2009, 10:58 AM
When people talk about the greatest female tennis player of all time they mention Navratilova or Graf mostly. On occasion you hear the names Evert, Court, Wills, Lenglen, and Connolly brought up. And for those whiny "what if" babies only Seles on occasion. While many acknowledge Serena as a top 10 player all time nobody discusses her as even a candidate for the greatest female tennis player ever. To me this is simply ridiculous. I dont expect everyone to agree she is the greatest ever, but she should atleast be in the discussion and considered for that title. It is clear to me racism has alot to do with her constant ommision from the greatest female player ever discussions.

Navratilova or Graf the greatest ever? Navratilova won half her slams at one slam, and Graf won half of them after her main rival was stabbed.

Along these lines, couldn't one argue that Navratilova suffered from prejudice because of her sexual orientation? Its never been an issue regarding a discussion of Martina's abilities as a tennis player. It did affect her marketability-endorsements, however.
That is not the case with Serena who is with Nike, Wilson, etc. Perhaps if Serena dedicated herself more fully to tennis like Nav, Evert, Graf, etc. she would be in the discussion.
You do have to tip your hat to her though for being such a well-rounded person, having interests off the court and still being among the top in the game year after year.
I don't think its about race at this point. The prejudice though, was apparent when she and Venus first came up, although they did have a bit of a chip on their shoulders, perhaps understandably.

Ripper014
11-16-2009, 10:59 AM
She is clearly the greatest women's player of this past decade and will be a top tier Hall of Famer.

If you want to base it on numbers and computers do not discriminate, she has only finished No.1 twice since 2000 and that includes this year. Henin and Davenport finished No.1 three times each... and I believe Henin left the game as No.1... she could have been No. 1 the last two years which would have make it 5 years for her... and only 1 for Serena.

Serena the best player of the decade... the numbers say different.

Chadwixx
11-16-2009, 11:00 AM
Serena is tier2, just the way it is. She had alot of potential but didnt live up to it.

NamRanger
11-16-2009, 11:01 AM
Sportsmanship has nothing to do with your tennis greatness. It is another category altogether. Your comments on Henin are just wrong. The only year Henin has beaten Serena on a grass or a hard court is 2007. That is it. That is the best year of tennis of Henin's career so far of course. So only in Henin's best year ever did she have any success vs Serena on any surface except clay thus far.




Their H2H is 6-7 with the large majority of Serena's wins coming early in Henin's career. Once both players were at their respective "primes" (Henin's was 2007, while Serena was playing very well in 2007), Henin dominated Serena at the slams.



Like I said, Henin is one of Serena's greatest rivals, who Serena was unable to beat consistently.

Ripper014
11-16-2009, 11:06 AM
The prejudice though, was apparent when she and Venus first came up, although they did have a bit of a chip on their shoulders, perhaps understandably.


I don't believe this is a race issue... you are allowed to dislike people regardless of the color of their skin. Some of the reasons they may have had issues on their way up was their attitudes and their belief they were better than others. Serena still appears to have this attitude... that some how she is entitled... I wonder what will happen when the cameras go away and no one cares what she has to say, cause right now... I personally have no interest in anything that comes out of her mouth.

I hope Henin comes back and reclaims her crown so we can end this debate.

EKnee08
11-16-2009, 11:22 AM
I don't believe this is a race issue... you are allowed to dislike people regardless of the color of their skin. Some of the reasons they may have had issues on their way up was their attitudes and their belief they were better than others. Serena still appears to have this attitude... that some how she is entitled... I wonder what will happen when the cameras go away and no one cares what she has to say, cause right now... I personally have no interest in anything that comes out of her mouth.

I hope Henin comes back and reclaims her crown so we can end this debate.
I don't believe this is a race issue either as to why she is not in the GOAT discussion. See the first part of my response.

cuddles26
11-16-2009, 11:35 AM
Their H2H is 6-7 with the large majority of Serena's wins coming early in Henin's career. Once both players were at their respective "primes" (Henin's was 2007, while Serena was playing very well in 2007), Henin dominated Serena at the slams.



Like I said, Henin is one of Serena's greatest rivals, who Serena was unable to beat consistently.

2003-2008 was when both women were in their primes. On hard courts Serena went 2-1 vs Henin and won 4 hard court slams in that time vs Henin's 3. On grass they played twice and Serena destroyed Henin once, and Henin beat Serena in 3 tough sets in the other. Serena in that span won Wimbledon 2 times and Henin 0 times. So outside of clay where one would have to concede Henin is superior (no shame in that given that it is Serena's worst surface and Henin is one of the greatest clay courters in history), Serena has had the clear overall upper hand vs Henin even during the Henin prime on the other surfaces.

NamRanger
11-16-2009, 11:56 AM
2003-2008 was when both women were in their primes. On hard courts Serena went 2-1 vs Henin and won 4 hard court slams in that time vs Henin's 3. On grass they played twice and Serena destroyed Henin once, and Henin beat Serena in 3 tough sets in the other. Serena in that span won Wimbledon 2 times and Henin 0 times. So outside of clay where one would have to concede Henin is superior (no shame in that given that it is Serena's worst surface and Henin is one of the greatest clay courters in history), Serena has had the clear overall upper hand vs Henin even during the Henin prime on the other surfaces.




And Henin got the last laugh in 2007 dominating Serena in every slam that year with the exception of Wimbledon.



2003 was not Henin's prime. That's laughable at best. Henin's prime sits somewhere around 2004(5ish)-2007.



Serena does not have the clear upperhand. Henin didn't really hit the peak of her prime until somewhere around 2006-2007, and then began dominating Serena in slams. Without Henin in the way, I'd say Serena had a good shot at winning all 4 slams in 2007.

jamesblakefan#1
11-16-2009, 11:59 AM
And Henin got the last laugh in 2007 dominating Serena in every slam that year with the exception of Wimbledon.

2003-2004 was not Henin's prime. That's laughable at best. Henin's prime sits somewhere around 2006-2007.

If you say that 2003 was not prime Henin, you certainly must concede that 2007 Serena was not even close to the player she was in 2002-2003. Yet she still split HC meetings w/ Henin in 2007, lost on one leg at Wimbledon...the point is, I'd take a prime Serena on grass and HC vs Prime Henin 7 of 10.

NamRanger
11-16-2009, 12:04 PM
If you say that 2003 was not prime Henin, you certainly must concede that 2007 Serena was not even close to the player she was in 2002-2003. Yet she still split HC meetings w/ Henin in 2007, lost on one leg at Wimbledon...the point is, I'd take a prime Serena on grass and HC vs Prime Henin 7 of 10.



Of course, but Henin has a much better chance of beating Serena on grass than Serena has a chance of beating Henin on clay. On HCs, it's a very, very, very close match with neither player having any significant advantage over the other.



Serena of course was not the player of 2003, but she certainly was playing some great tennis in 2007. The only player that could stop her was Henin consistently time and time again. Who was going to stop her in 2007 other than Henin? Venus maybe at Wimbledon. I honestly don't think anyone was going to stop her at RG (who was in the final, Ana Ivanovic I think), nor at the USO (possibly Venus, definitely not Kutznetsova).



Basically what I'm saying is that Henin basically destroys Serena on clay, has a pretty good shot at beating Serena on grass, and has a very good chance of beating her on HCs. More times then not I think Henin comes out on top too, because Henin is simply not a good match-up for Serena Williams. She is capable of exchanging groundstrokes with Serena, and has the game to totally disrupt Serena's rhythm.





The argument I present is legitimate however. Henin has posted a significant amount of wins over Serena on every surface to justify that Serena is possibly not even the best of her generation, let alone someone who should be considered the GOAT.

cuddles26
11-16-2009, 12:16 PM
2003 was not Henin's prime. That's laughable at best. Henin's prime sits somewhere around 2004(5ish)-2007.

2003 was Henin's 2nd best year ever thus far so it is stupid at the moment to say that wasnt her prime, unless you are saying 2007 was her only prime. 2003 was Henin's 2nd best year of tennis ever, and you say it wasnt her prime. Yet 2007 was only Serena's 4th best year of tennis ever after 1999, 2002, 2003, so by your logic she was even less in her real prime.

cuddles26
11-16-2009, 12:18 PM
Of course, but Henin has a much better chance of beating Serena on grass than Serena has a chance of beating Henin on clay.

Whether that is true or not all people will remember right now is Serena has won a French Open, while Henin has never won Wimbledon. That is the bottom line. Serena has won the biggest title on her worst surface, and Henin has not. Serena also won 4 in a row, the non calender slam, while Henin of course with her failure to ever win Wimbledon up to now doesnt even yet have a career slam. If Henin wins Wimbledon next year or a year in her comeback we can talk more seriously who has had the better career, but right now that is how it is like it or not.

NamRanger
11-16-2009, 12:23 PM
2003 was Henin's 2nd best year ever thus far so it is stupid at the moment to say that wasnt her prime, unless you are saying 2007 was her only prime. 2003 was Henin's 2nd best year of tennis ever, and you say it wasnt her prime. Yet 2007 was Serena's 4th best year of tennis ever after 1999, 2002, 2003, so by your logic that must not be her prime either.




Remove Henin from 2007 and all of a sudden 2007 starts to look like Serena's best year. Remember, Henin stopped Serena at nearly every major. There was really no one else that could have stopped her.



2003 was Henin just entering her prime. However, to say that Henin in 2003 is the same player as the years later is ridiculous logic. She won 87% of her matches in 2003, yet she either maintained or had a better percentage in 2004 (90%), 2006 (88%), and 2007 (94%). In 2006, she made 3 finals and won a slam. In 2007 she won 2 slams and made a SF. Henin in 2003 wasn't even considered a force outside of clay; she was still considered a claycourt specialist.



Henin's best years were easily from 2006-2007, where she dominated the entire field (including the sisters). Her prime would have been earlier had she not been sick from 2004-2005.

NamRanger
11-16-2009, 12:25 PM
Whether that is true or not all people will remember right now is Serena has won a French Open, while Henin has never won Wimbledon. That is the bottom line. Serena has won the biggest title on her worst surface, and Henin has not. Serena also won 4 in a row, the non calender slam, while Henin of course with her failure to ever win Wimbledon up to now doesnt even yet have a career slam. If Henin wins Wimbledon next year or a year in her comeback we can talk more seriously who has had the better career, but right now that is how it is like it or not.



That is the bottom line? Like I said, I cannot even consider Serena Williams the greatest of her generation when Henin has owned her in their last meetings at slams. And let me remind you, Henin in 2007 went 3-0 against Serena in the slams.



With Serena in the downhill and Henin coming back, it looks like Henin will probably have a winning H2H against Serena soon.

Anaconda
11-16-2009, 12:31 PM
That is the bottom line? Like I said, I cannot even consider Serena Williams the greatest of her generation when Henin has owned her in their last meetings at slams. And let me remind you, Henin in 2007 went 3-0 against Serena in the slams.



With Serena in the downhill and Henin coming back, it looks like Henin will probably have a winning H2H against Serena soon.



Henin might have 'owned' Serena Williams because it could just be a bad matchup - like Federer and Nadal. Federer can be considered the greatest of all time though he has a poor record over Nadal in the grand slams.

cuddles26
11-16-2009, 12:36 PM
Remove Henin from 2007 and all of a sudden 2007 starts to look like Serena's best year. Remember, Henin stopped Serena at nearly every major. There was really no one else that could have stopped her.

I already factored in how much Henin playing great hurt Serena in 2007 by calling it her 4th best year of tennis. If it were just results I would have put it behind 2008 and 2009, but you notice I didnt. Even just tennis wise she was better 2002, 2003, and probably 1999. You would have to be blind to not notice how much fitter she was those years for starter, and how much sharper her strokes were.

You are also totally wrong if you are implying Serena would have won every slam that year. The French there are always people who can beat her, not just Henin. Wimbledon she was injured, so she would have absolutely no chance vs Venus that year. U.S Open Venus was in better form so would likely have beaten her for the title that year without Henin. If she were lucky she might have won 1 more slam that year without Henin.


2003 was Henin just entering her prime. However, to say that Henin in 2003 is the same player as the years later is ridiculous logic.

Just like it is ridiculous to say 2007 Serena is the same as 2002-2003. Are we talking about primes or peaks here. If it is primes 2003 was just as much prime Henin, as 2007 was prime Serena. If were were talking about peaks than in 2007 only Henin was at her absolute peak, not Serena.

She won 87% of her matches in 2003, yet she either maintained or had a better percentage in 2004 (90%), 2006 (88%), and 2007 (94%). In 2006, she made 3 finals and won a slam. In 2007 she won 2 slams and made a SF.

So if Serena has benefited from the weakened competition lately as you all keep claiming, then maybe Henin is also benefiting from the competition being easier thus helping her do even better than her first great years in 2003-2004 also. After all even you yourself seem to be saying other than Serena, Henin had no real competition in 2007. Or are we applying double standards here. Is the late 2000s field only weak when it is Serena, and not weaker when it is Henin?

Henin in 2003 wasn't even considered a force outside of clay; she was still considered a claycourt specialist.

ROTFL that is why she won the U.S Open, having one of the greatest ever slam matches with Capriati in the semis on the way to doing it, was in the finals of 5 straight slams, won the Australian Open to start 2004 too to make her the holder of 3 of the 4 slams- thus far the only time in her career she has managed this. She also probably would have beaten Clijsters and an injured Venus to win Wimbledon in 2003 without being stopped by a charged up Serena who was ultra motivated/p#ssed from Henin's cheating at the French a month earlier, and then would have completed her own career slam. Yet she was just a clay court specialist, LOL!

Henin's best years were easily from 2006-2007, where she dominated the entire field (including the sisters). Her prime would have been earlier had she not been sick from 2004-2005.

If we want to play what ifs what about all the injuries Serena has had over the years too. What about all the injuries Davenport had after 2000-2001 that contributed to her from ever winning another slam, and all the injuries Maria has had since the start of 2007. You make it sound like Henin is the only one who has been stopped from maybe winning more by health. 2006 she was probably the worthy #1 of the year overall, but she did not dominate like you claim. She was in 4 slam finals and lost 3 of the 4, and they werent even to a Williams. 2 of the 4 slam finals she lost to Mauresmo, the only 2 slams Mauresmo ever won. That is impressive domination according to you, hahah!

cuddles26
11-16-2009, 12:38 PM
With Serena in the downhill and Henin coming back, it looks like Henin will probably have a winning H2H against Serena soon.

Do you want to make a sig bet? If Henin wins atleast 2 slams next year then I have to wear a sig for a whole year after next years U.S Open that says "cuddles is a mindless Serena addictive troll who knows squat about tennis. NamRanger schooled that fool again and again." Yet if Henin only wins 1 slam next year (the FO is obviously in the bag probably), and Serena does win 2 slams next year, you then have to wear a sig that says "I am a biased hater when it comes to Serena, but I now confess the truth. Serena >>> Henin."

Anaconda
11-16-2009, 12:42 PM
Do you want to make a sig bet? If Henin wins atleast 2 slams next year then I have to wear a sig for a whole year after next years U.S Open that says "cuddles is a mindless Serena addictive troll who knows squat about tennis. NamRanger schooled that fool again and again." Yet if Henin only wins 1 slam next year (the FO is obviously in the bag probably), and Serena does win 2 slams next year, you then have to wear a sig that says "I am a biased hater when it comes to Serena, but I now confess the truth. Serena >>> Henin."




Henin is better than Serena (not because of the H2H in slams though). Henin even made serena cry things got so bad for serena. I assure you that if henin was active for the last few years - she would be ahead of serena in slams.

cuddles26
11-16-2009, 12:44 PM
Henin is better than Serena (not because of the H2H in slams though). Henin even made serena cry things got so bad for serena. I assure you that if henin was active for the last few years - she would be ahead of serena in slams.

Who cares if she would have been or wouldnt have been. She quit, so she cut down on her own greatness by quitting in the middle of her prime just because she was off her game for a few months and didnt want to fight through a mini slump since she apparently isnt enough of a fighter to do that. That is not the attitude of someone who should be the greatest player of her generation.

split-step
11-16-2009, 02:31 PM
If you want to base it on numbers and computers do not discriminate, she has only finished No.1 twice since 2000 and that includes this year. Henin and Davenport finished No.1 three times each... and I believe Henin left the game as No.1... she could have been No. 1 the last two years which would have make it 5 years for her... and only 1 for Serena.

Serena the best player of the decade... the numbers say different.

Give me a break pls. Davenport???

Serena is clearly the best player of this decade. She is more accomplished in terms of singles and doubles accomplishments than any other player of her generation.

split-step
11-16-2009, 02:33 PM
Henin is better than Serena

Based on what??
Losing H2H?
No Doubles achievements??
Fewer singles titles??
Fewer Grand Slams???
Hasn't won slams on ALL surfaces????

You may not like Serena's brand of tennis. I prefer Henin's, but Serena is a ever-so-slightly better player. It's just the truth. Face it.

split-step
11-16-2009, 03:00 PM
2003 was not Henin's prime. That's laughable at best. Henin's prime sits somewhere around 2004(5ish)-2007.

It's laughable... if you don't know what you are talking about.
Henin's best year. Her absolute best performance came in 2007. Outside of that 2003 was her 2nd best year. For you to say that 2004/2005 when she was struggling with her serve and health are part of her prime years means you aren't a Henin fan and don't really know what you are talking about.

Get a clue.



Serena does not have the clear upperhand.

This I agree with. As far as their matchup with each other is concerned, there is no clear favourite. I take Serena on grass and Henin on clay. Anything else is a toss up.

However, Serena and Henin are not even in the same discussion when discussing greatest of the decade.
Henin is in Venus league for that discussion (and Venus has the edge IMO). Serena is ahead of both.

flying24
11-16-2009, 03:41 PM
Henin is in Venus league for that discussion (and Venus has the edge IMO). Serena is ahead of both.

LOL Venus does not have the edge on Henin in career greatness. They both have 7 slams. Venus is nearly 30 now yet has been unable to ever again surpass the # of singles slams Henin has despite Henin's retiring at 25 and having not yet begun her return. Henin however has by far the more balanced record having won 3 of the 4 slams, and having multiple finals and additional semis of all 4 slams. Venus has a pathetic record relatively speaking in Australia and the French Opens, with only 1 time past the quarters of the French (a runner up) and only 1 final and 1 semi at the Australian Open. Henin's versatility across all the surfaces far surpasses Venus who only specializes on fast surfaces. Henin has ended the year ranked #1, a legit #1, three different times in her career. Venus has never once ended a year ranked #1, and has spent only a short duration there. Henin sustained a consistent and standard for a nearly 5 year span from spring 2003-end of 2007 which Venus has never come close to matching for that long a time period. From 2003 to early 2007 she won atleast 1 slam every year, including semis or better the first year she won the FO and US in 2003, reaching all 4 slam finals in 2006, and winning 2 of the 3 slams she played in 2007 (and beating Serena in all 3 she played). If we count the Olympics and WTA Championships as major events she won atleast 2 major events every year from 2003-2007 except for 2005. They both have 41 singles titles. The head to head is meaningless given that all matches except 1 were at Venus's absolute career peak from late 2000-early 2003, and when Henin was clearly nowhere near the player she was from spring 2003 onwards.

There is absolutely no way unless you are a blind Williams fanatic that Venus has the career edge on Henin, atleast in singles.

flying24
11-16-2009, 03:45 PM
Based on what??
Losing H2H?
No Doubles achievements??
Fewer singles titles??
Fewer Grand Slams???
Hasn't won slams on ALL surfaces????


I agree Serena (definitely not Venus) should rank over Henin at this point. However the bolded part is wrong. Henin has 41 singles titles, Serena only has 35. Serena in fact has fewer singles titles than Henin, Venus, Davenport, and Clijsters. While I concur she still should rank over all of this at this moment and be for now regarded as the greatest of her generation (unless Henin surpasses her in the future), this is a blotch on her greatness when talking about all time greatest players. An 11 slam winner should not be trailing women with so many fewer slams like Clijsters and Davenport in tournament titles.

NamRanger
11-16-2009, 03:53 PM
It's laughable... if you don't know what you are talking about.
Henin's best year. Her absolute best performance came in 2007. Outside of that 2003 was her 2nd best year. For you to say that 2004/2005 when she was struggling with her serve and health are part of her prime years means you aren't a Henin fan and don't really know what you are talking about.

Get a clue.





This I agree with. As far as their matchup with each other is concerned, there is no clear favourite. I take Serena on grass and Henin on clay. Anything else is a toss up.

However, Serena and Henin are not even in the same discussion when discussing greatest of the decade.
Henin is in Venus league for that discussion (and Venus has the edge IMO). Serena is ahead of both.



Her prime would have set in somewhere around 2004-2005 if she was not sick. She hit her stride again in 2006 though. 2003 may have been her 2nd year, but it was only the beginning of Justine Henin. 2006-2007 is really what Justine Henin is capable of.



Serena is only ahead by achievements so far, but if Justine Henin plays up to anywhere near her 2007 level, she's gonna rack up a few more slams and wins against Serena before all is said and done.

flying24
11-16-2009, 03:57 PM
Her prime would have set in somewhere around 2004-2005 if she was not sick. She hit her stride again in 2006 though. 2003 may have been her 2nd year, but it was only the beginning of Justine Henin. 2006-2007 is really what Justine Henin is capable of.



Serena is only ahead by achievements so far, but if Justine Henin plays up to anywhere near her 2007 level, she's gonna rack up a few more slams and wins against Serena before all is said and done.

I am not sure if Justine can ever catch or pass Serena in slam wins at this point though. Serena now has 11 and Justine 7. However even if she doesnt catch/surpass Serena in slam wins, if Justine can win Wimbledon, and get within 2 slams of Serena, people including experts on the game will still then wonder which was the better player, particularly since Justine missed out on some slams during her 2 year retirement (and Serena possibly gained 1 or 2 more as well from it).

People say Justine was lucky and Serena unlucky that Serena was injured and had to miss the 03 U.S Open and 2004 Australian Open. That may be true, but people forget how very unlucky Justine was to get ill around March of 2004. She was setting up for complete domination of that year and the forseeable future, before the illness hit. Serena returned to health and the tour but wasnt even able to win a single slam in 2004 (and only a somewhat lucky AO in 2005 as any slams from 04-06). Nobody did anything that year that indicates Justine would not have ended that year 3 or possibly all 4 slams had she not gone done with the illness. 2005 also would have been alot better for her, although in fairness her form that year outside of clay was lacking, even considering the health setbacks. That she fought back from a major virus that hampered her career for 2 years to become the overall top player of 2006 and the dominant player of 2007 is testement to her strength and what she might have achieved had she stayed healthy.

Futhermore while I am sure some will bring up again that Justine won 2 slams in Serena's absence that Serena might have won- 2003 U.S Open and 2004 Australian Open, Serena won 2 others in Justine's absence that a healthy Justine might have won instead- 2005 Australian and 2007 Australian Open which already evens that hypothetical. That is before even talking about the slams Serena won during Justine's temporary retirement. Particularly the 2009 Australian Open which is one of those events she won struggling so much with form that it emphasized a certain amount of the ridicule of the current womens game, and where it seems unlikely her form was up to beating even a so so Justine. While overall I wouldnt consider Serean the luckiest player (that would be Capriati by far) I cant really think of a venue one great player has had as much luck as Serena at the Australian Open, an event she easily could have won 0 or 1 time yet has by some miracle won 4 times which is the biggest booster to her overall slam total.

Ripper014
11-16-2009, 05:26 PM
Give me a break pls. Davenport???

Serena is clearly the best player of this decade. She is more accomplished in terms of singles and doubles accomplishments than any other player of her generation.

I was going by the numbers, and if Serena is the best player of her decade then she should finish in the No.1 spot at the end of the year more than any other player. Obviously she did not dominate the decade... my point was that others finished at the No.1 more than she did (ie. Davenport).

And lets not dis.. Davenport... she is a winner of 3 of the 4 majors in singles and doubles (missing the French in singles and Australian in doubles)... she also has an Olympic Gold... and 55 single career titles a few more than the 35 or so of Serena's.

And since 1975 she is only one of 4 women to finish the year at No.1 in the world 4 times or more. The others... Stefi Graf, Martina Navratilova and Chris Evert, I would say that is some pretty elite company.

This is all even off topic... my point is that Serena is much closer to a tier 2 player than any sort of GOAT. And as far as her doubles titles... how would she have done without the help of her little sister...

I guess it is easy to miss the accomplishment of a Lindsay Davenport... she was a quiet, humble, hard working competitor, compared to the ego maniac we have threatening lines women.

DRII
11-17-2009, 06:23 AM
I was going by the numbers, and if Serena is the best player of her decade then she should finish in the No.1 spot at the end of the year more than any other player. Obviously she did not dominate the decade... my point was that others finished at the No.1 more than she did (ie. Davenport).

And lets not dis.. Davenport... she is a winner of 3 of the 4 majors in singles and doubles (missing the French in singles and Australian in doubles)... she also has an Olympic Gold... and 55 single career titles a few more than the 35 or so of Serena's.

And since 1975 she is only one of 4 women to finish the year at No.1 in the world 4 times or more. The others... Stefi Graf, Martina Navratilova and Chris Evert, I would say that is some pretty elite company.

This is all even off topic... my point is that Serena is much closer to a tier 2 player than any sort of GOAT. And as far as her doubles titles... how would she have done without the help of her little sister...

I guess it is easy to miss the accomplishment of a Lindsay Davenport... she was a quiet, humble, hard working competitor, compared to the ego maniac we have threatening lines women.

Good Post Ripper!

Those on this board who are clearly obsessed with Serena (Hi Cuddles) need to stop being two faced hypocrites when it comes to a quantitative vs qualitative analysis when assessing Serena as a tennis player. They choose which ever method that favors her at different times:

If its vs Henin or Venus - then its the quantitative argument: Serena has more slams and thus must be superior.

If its vs Graf (or any other player with a better record) - then its a hypothetical qualitative argument: Serena is just better despite her poorer results.

Its becoming a little ridiculous, at least stay consistent!

I personally don't think Serena is GOAT by either standard, although she is clearly up there.

Quantitative, there is no question Graf or Navratilova is far ahead of Serena.

Qualitative (players at peak form) varies depending on your opinion. I think Serena has GOAT as far as serve overall. Although I would take Venus' first serve over Serena's if both are playing their best.

Return: Davenport or Seles.

Power and pace: Venus has my vote. Davenport second

Movement: Venus has it again. Clijsters somewhat close second.

Footwork: Graf or Henin.

Volley: Navratilova

Backhand: toss up between Henin, Davenport, or Venus. Seles with a very high honorable mention.

Forehand: Graf with Serena close second.

Improvization: Venus

Defense: Venus with Clijsters second.

Mental stregnth: Serena with Graf and Seles close second.

Craftiness/touch: Graf or Henin

Athleticism/Explosiveness: Venus hands down!

Camilio Pascual
11-17-2009, 06:50 AM
Serena is a shoe-in for HoF. As is Henin, Venus, Clijsters and Sharapova. Just win a slam and/or being top 5 for a bit and you're in.
Personally, I wouldn't vote for Clijsters or Sharapova unless they win more Slams. I consider 4 Slam titles a HOF pushbutton.
I believe anybody would agree that a career Grand Slam is an automatic for HOF. Which brings up a very interesting candidate who should, but never will, get in the HOF.

DRII
11-17-2009, 07:10 AM
Oh and I forgot:

GOAT of unsportsman-like or is it unsportsperson-like, sometimes despicable, behavior...

Serena has it hands down!

Camilio Pascual
11-17-2009, 07:10 AM
If you want to base it on numbers and computers do not discriminate, she has only finished No.1 twice since 2000 and that includes this year. Henin and Davenport finished No.1 three times each...Serena the best player of the decade... the numbers say different.
True, the program discriminates (as it Should), not the computer. My program gives zero weight to end of the year finishes. Yours does give it weight, so I'm sure your numbers are accurate.
I and many others could care less who finished the year at No. 1. Davenport would trade her career results and finishing the year at No. 1 one more time than Serena for Serena's Slam titles alone in a heartbeat.
I'm willing to defend my HOF or best player of the decade choices on Slam titles. Are you really sure you want to base your choices on end of year ranking (see:Jankovic)?

split-step
11-17-2009, 08:16 AM
I was going by the numbers, and if Serena is the best player of her decade then she should finish in the No.1 spot at the end of the year more than any other player.


Says who? You?

Ask the retired tennis pros, they say it all the time, Serena at her best is unplayable. Serena has the 11 slams. Held all 4 slams consecutively, won all surfaces, has won Olympics gold in doubles, won almost all 4 slams in womens doubles and mixed doubles. Has a slam winning career spanning a decade (Won her first slam in 1999 and her most recent in 2009) and she is still playing

You cannot compare that with Davenport who finished a year #1 without winning a slam. (That year Serena bagelled her in the Australian Open final)

I can't even believe you brought Davenport up. No disrespect to her but come on.


I guess it is easy to miss the accomplishment of a Lindsay Davenport... she was a quiet, humble, hard working competitor, compared to the ego maniac we have threatening lines women.

Yes she was humble and hard working, but her movement was a major liability as was her mentality. Serena has the mentality of a champion, whether you like her attitude or not. Her ego helps her win matches she should otherwise lose.
Some of the greatest sportsmen have had HUGE egos.
Her record speaks for itself. She is the greatest of her generation (until Henin repeats her 2007 season, while winning Wimbledon :))

Chadwixx
11-17-2009, 08:18 AM
"Serena at her best is unplayable" LOL

Do you understand how rankings work?

TMF
11-17-2009, 08:55 AM
If Serena is the best player, then she should of spent most of the time ranked #1. However she’s behind other players at number of weeks at #1, and number of years end in #1 in this era. She’s also behind in number of titles. Plus, she played a full 10 years in this decade where no other players(except Venus) have done it. There’s no way she can be the best player given that she’s an opportunist but fell short against players who played much LESS years.

Ripper014
11-17-2009, 09:43 AM
My point is this... in a decade where I do not believe is as deep in talent at the top of the pool... (no doubt the level of play is much deeper and of higher quality overall), Serena could not dominate.

In the 90's it was dominated by Graf... I am not sure anyone would disagree... in the 80's Navratilova... and the 70's Evert.

The rankings I believe are based on a players best 16 results over 52 the last weeks (by the way... your GOAT lost 3 straight tournies in the first round in a row this year, and did not win anything other than her 2 slams). Since we are talking about GOATs here... IMHO you have to show consistency to be considered a GOAT, and the to ability to win day in and day out.

Serena has been able to win in on the big stage... but she has also been lucky, and as I mentioned... the draws have not been very deep in the womens game for a decade. Case in point... Kim Clijsters after a 2 year layoff (and a baby which she has in tow), wins the US Open after only her 3rd tournament back. Now don't get me wrong I have always thought Kim was a very good player... but to be handicapped with this how could you beat a potential GOAT... and not only beat her but embarass her into showing her true colors to a national audience. By the way I think that was Kim's first Slam title.

As far as Jelena Janković finishing No.1, I have no problems with that... it shows that she was more consistant than any other player over her best 16 results over the last year. In other words... on any given day... she would be the best player on the court, Serena over this time... could win the Grand Slam or be out in the 1st round.

Ripper014
11-17-2009, 09:48 AM
True, the program discriminates (as it Should), not the computer. My program gives zero weight to end of the year finishes. Yours does give it weight, so I'm sure your numbers are accurate.
I and many others could care less who finished the year at No. 1. Davenport would trade her career results and finishing the year at No. 1 one more time than Serena for Serena's Slam titles alone in a heartbeat.
I'm willing to defend my HOF or best player of the decade choices on Slam titles. Are you really sure you want to base your choices on end of year ranking (see:Jankovic)?

I don't think I said that I would consider Davenport a GOAT... which is what this thread is discussing. HOF... I am sure they will both be admitted. But as I have already stated... at this point Serena IMHO would be in a second tier discussion regarding GOAT status.

boredone3456
11-17-2009, 09:50 AM
Says who? You?

Ask the retired tennis pros, they say it all the time, Serena at her best is unplayable. Serena has the 11 slams. Held all 4 slams consecutively, won all surfaces, has won Olympics gold in doubles, won almost all 4 slams in womens doubles and mixed doubles. Has a slam winning career spanning a decade (Won her first slam in 1999 and her most recent in 2009) and she is still playing

Olympic gold in doubles, considering we seem to be talking greatest singles player of the decade, along with the doubles and mixed doubles stats, shouldn't even be in the dicussion as judging by the tone we are talking singles.

You cannot compare that with Davenport who finished a year #1 without winning a slam. (That year Serena bagelled her in the Australian Open final)

Davenport finishing the year number 1 without winning a slam by some is a big deal, especially in 2004. In 2005 Davenport had the most consistantly slam performance record, was the only player to get to at least the quarters of every major, and was dominating Serena Williams at the onset of that Australian Open final and likely would have won had she made some better decisions (dropped out of doubles mainly), and not completely sputtered down and ran out of gas. Wimbledon, Davenport looked freakish in the final, problem was so did venus, and Venus being a way better mover used that to her advantage near the end and wore Lindsay down, the way Davenport played that final, if it had been Serena, Serena likely would not have beaten her.

I can't even believe you brought Davenport up. No disrespect to her but come on.

The reason Davenport was brought up I believe is because of the fact her year end number 1 finishes make Serena look incredibly bad in comparison. Serena only seems to care about the slams, whereas Davenport being number 1 at years end 4 times and for near 100 weeks shows Davenport was an all season player, which Serena, especially now, quite clearly is not. You want to dismiss Davenport, how about the fact that Henin has more weeks number 1 than Serena with the possibility of maybe getting more depending on what she does in her comeback?


Yes she was humble and hard working, but her movement was a major liability as was her mentality. Serena has the mentality of a champion, whether you like her attitude or not. Her ego helps her win matches she should otherwise lose.
Some of the greatest sportsmen have had HUGE egos.


Davenports biggest liability in her career was not her mentality, it was her movements and her own body. In comparison to other players her movement and footwork are pretty terrible, which given her height is not completely her own fault but she could have worked to make it. Injuries arguably kept her from slams to (2004 US Open comes to mind), as well as terrible luck (2004 Wimbledon). Her mentality was a drawback, but when she was on she could steamroll a draw, every slam she won she won without dropping a set, including straight setting Graf at Wimbledon in 1999. You could say that Graf was worn down, and much older, but even a broken down Graf is still a daunting opponent on grass. In terms of the ego winning matches, that is partially true, but lately its more like her opponents can't keep it together to finish her off, she wins 2 slams this year and yet loses outside of them to journeywomen, some of whom have done nothing this year at all.


Her record speaks for itself. She is the greatest of her generation (until Henin repeats her 2007 season, while winning Wimbledon :))

Yes I will agree Serena is the best player of her generation, but this was not always a lock for her. Until Sharapova beat up Henin at the Australian in 2008 there were many who felt Henin was on the road to that title. Henin likely won't catch up, although there is the possibility she could. She could also win Wimbledon, Venus is turning 30 and father time is catching up, and Apart from Serena who is all the competition to keep her from winning Wimbledon? Mauresmo is gone, Sharapova is still a question mark...Venus is still good there but is getting older and its showing, thats about it really. She has beaten Serena there before, it was injured Serena but seeing as Serena got past Hantuchova while seemingly hopping on one foot, its still a pretty big win for Henin. Henin could well repeat aspects of her 2007 season, although I don't see her going undefeated post Wimbledon again, the French is very real a chance, and she could take the US Open to, if clijsters could do it after 3 tournaments (beating both Williams en route), Henin could do it if fit and dedicated after more court time.

Serena is the best player of her generation, but she is not the dominant force you make her out to be, she has huge gaps in achievement during the past decade, both at the slams and outside of them (especially outside of them). Its pretty sad that as the best player of her generation, she is also one of the biggest underachievers ever. She is the best, but she has not been as lights out dominant the entire time as you are making her out to be. She has had quite a bit of luck, which has helped her numbers immensely. Everyone has luck, but for Serena it stands out because her numbers outside those slams you hold so high are not there as much as many feel they should and probably would be if she cared more.

HellBunni
11-17-2009, 10:02 AM
yea the argument is bogus.

it's like Safin isn't in the GOAT discussion because he is white.

when he is on, he is "unplayable"

Ripper014
11-17-2009, 10:04 AM
If Serena is the best player, then she should of spent most of the time ranked #1. However she’s behind other players at number of weeks at #1, and number of years end in #1 in this era. She’s also behind in number of titles. Plus, she played a full 10 years in this decade where no other players(except Venus) have done it. There’s no way she can be the best player given that she’s an opportunist but fell short against players who played much LESS years.

Good post... I did not consider that side of the argument.

TMF
11-17-2009, 10:16 AM
Good post... I did not consider that side of the argument.

Can't wait til Cuddles26 has to say.:grin: