PDA

View Full Version : Could a player like Mauresmo be #1 in the 80ies or 90ies?


Michael Haller
06-05-2006, 02:05 AM
I don't think so.

Momo is inconsistent and mentally fragile. Has no great weapons.
She can thank her Lord that Henin caught a stomach-ache in the AO final. Otherwise she never would have won a slam title.

Max G.
06-05-2006, 04:16 AM
Nah, Mauresmo can beat Henin. Mauresmo always gives Henin trouble, even when she's at her best.

And no, she wouldn't be #1 in the 90s. In the 80s and 90s there was always one or two amazing great players at the top.

She would have gotten to #2 though. And being #2 behind someone like Graf isn't bad at all.

Warriorroger
06-05-2006, 04:24 AM
Disagree about the lack of weapons. In this era she gets more chances, because most women on the tour these days are mental titanics. When on she is a great player, but put her in with the likes of killer-instincts Graf, Seles, Navratilova or Evert and she becomes a modern Mandlikova.

armand
06-05-2006, 05:35 AM
Yeah, but even for a masculine looking lesbian, she would still get far more media attention because she's that much better looking than Graf. Zing!

*Leaves thread to never return again*

artworks
06-05-2006, 05:35 AM
I don't think so.

Momo is inconsistent and mentally fragile. Has no great weapons.
She can thank her Lord that Henin caught a stomach-ache in the AO final. Otherwise she never would have won a slam title.

Dream!

!Tym
06-05-2006, 05:48 AM
She's the french poodle wielding, female version of Cedric Pioline in my opinion. Like both players, but I actually think Pioline's strokes were more fluid and enjoyable to watch whereas Mauresmo's are more aesthetically choppy. Both weak mentally, and choker's at the moment of truth in my opinion. Both can play like Superman/Wonderwoman when "on;" and be virtually unbeatable by anybody on these days. Mauresmo's point-in, point-out concentration/energy level, however, are light years, miles ahead of the laconic Frenchman who perpetually looked like he was "high" on sleeping pills--drowsed, dazed, and confused...yet somehow also never quite out for the count. Because of this, this accounts for why Mauresmo's achieved much higher highs rankings wise than Pioline ever did, simply because Pioline wasn't the day-in, day-out performer Mauresmo is. I.e. Pioline's five-setter with Burgsmuller at the US Open a few years ago was pathetic. He owned him whenever he decided to get his head on straight and snap out of whatever "funk" or "purple haze" he was in at the time, he was like a chronic sufferer of sleep walking against such lowly carcusses. In the end, both have the wondrous, all-court games and a great facility in every area, but not necessarily overwhelming in any one area. Why I think they tended to choke on the biggest of occasions, because they needed everything to be clicking and flowing and POP-n'-LOCKING together magically fo sho...for them to get into their superman mode and style of attire.

baseliner
06-05-2006, 05:51 AM
No for all the above reasons. There was a dominant (oops can I say that in a thread about Mauresmo?) player in the 80's and 90s'. Mauresmo can beat anyone on the proverbial given day, but mentally she does not show up for finals in grand slams. Think she has all the slams she will get. Now to the more interesting question. Who wins FO? Clijsters or THe Hand?

federerhoogenbandfan
06-05-2006, 06:21 AM
Nah, Mauresmo can beat Henin. Mauresmo always gives Henin trouble, even when she's at her best.

And no, she wouldn't be #1 in the 90s. In the 80s and 90s there was always one or two amazing great players at the top.

She would have gotten to #2 though. And being #2 behind someone like Graf isn't bad at all.

I have to disagree there. I have never seen Mauresmo take down Henin close to her very best. She deserved the Australian Open title, she was outplaying Henin badly even if she hadnt been sick, but that match would not serve as an example of that either.

Condoleezza
06-06-2006, 02:02 PM
I don't think so.

Momo is inconsistent and mentally fragile. Has no great weapons.
She can thank her Lord that Henin caught a stomach-ache in the AO final. Otherwise she never would have won a slam title.


As much as I like Momo's style - no, she wouldn't have even been top 3 in those years.
Problem is that today's top players, Henin, Clijsters, Venus, Serena, Pierce, are injured almost all the time. So Momo is the last woman standing.

federerhoogenbandfan
06-06-2006, 03:08 PM
Except for Capriati, I dont think I have ever seen Mauresmo win even one match in a "grand slam" vs one of the big guns playing reasonably well for their standards. Except for Capriati, I have also seen her loses many matches to the bigs guns playing a very "off" match, while she was extremely sharp. Also on many occasions that one of the big guns has had a very good day she has been embarassed in big matches. The best I have seen her do on occasion is play a big gun playing very well, and give them a very tough match(2004 Wimbledon semis with Serena which was high quality I suppose)but still lose. That is the best showing she puts on vs a big gun considering how they are playing, except for Capriati. I put the "except for Capriati" part in since it is one top player she seemed to match up with, but the only one quite frankly.

She lost the 2001 U.S Open semis to Venus while having a "great" day and Venus having a very off day. That was after being thumped 6-2, 6-1 by Serena Williams in the Wimbledon semis when Serena was very in form that day. Two other times she played Serena Williams on very good days for Serena she was also spanked; 6-2, 6-1 in the 2003 French Open quarters; and 6-2, 6-2 in the 2005 Australian Open quarters.

She also is not good enough usually to take advantage of open draws with no major roadblock to potential titles, and still she cant do it on many of those occasions. Remember the 2004 French Open, she had Dementieva, Saurez, and one of Myskina/Capriati, remembering she does well vs Capriati, to win the title, and blew it losing to Dementieva in easy straights. Then at the 2004 U.S Open, again a great draw opened to her in hindsight for the title, Dementieva again in the quarters, Capriati who she pretty much owned head to head by then in the semis, and Kuznetsova in the final. Again she cant beat Dementieva, twice losing opportunities to win slams in the same year at the hands to a Dementieva, a very good player mind you, but one with a pitiful serve who Mauresmo often beats in non-slam events; oh to both Dementieva had a major thigh injury that day as well.

Her success vs other top players, and her abiilty to more often perhaps beat one on a somehwat in form day, or not be embarassed by them on a really hot their for her opponent, is stronger in smaller events then it is in Grand Slams; a sign of a very good, but not great player, relatively speaking.

Sorry those are just some of my two cents on Mauresmo. She is a very good player obviously but I find her vurnerable and soft compared to the other big guns. A second tier power hitter probably plays her thinking they should win the match if they play very well; and unseeded players feel atleast somewhat comfortable they can hang in there, and wont ever be overwhelmed or surgicaly dissected on court with her in a totally different way then they would feel playing Venus, Serena(semi fit), Henin, Clijsters, Davenport, or even Hingis.

The tennis guy
06-06-2006, 03:40 PM
Why not? If Sanchez Vicario could get to No. 1 in 90s, Tracy Austin could get to No. 1 in 80s, then why Mauresmo couldn't?

People have short memories. Probably all you remember is Navratilova, Graf, Seles in 80s and 90s.

federerhoogenbandfan
06-06-2006, 03:51 PM
Tracy Austin was scary good for a bit, she had Chris Evert going through a mental breakdown of sorts in 1979 and 1980. Chris Evert considered beating Austin in the 1980 U.S Open semis a watershed victory for her, she admitted to starting to feel a sense of hopelessness when playing Austin at that point. Had Austin played the French Open, or even the Australian Open(although it was on grass her worst surface, it was slower grass, and she as probably close to winning Wimbledon in 1980)she would have won more then 2 slam titles in 79-81 and probably ended 1980 #1 in the World. Had her career not begun to be derailed by back spasms in 1981 she would have won alot more then 2 slam titles likely.

Sanchez Vicario is not as clearly superior to Mauresmo, but her defensive game was absolutely spectacular, and her mental toughness and tenacity were on another planet from Mauresmo's.

The tennis guy
06-06-2006, 08:56 PM
Tracy Austin was scary good for a bit, she had Chris Evert going through a mental breakdown of sorts in 1979 and 1980. Chris Evert considered beating Austin in the 1980 U.S Open semis a watershed victory for her, she admitted to starting to feel a sense of hopelessness when playing Austin at that point. Had Austin played the French Open, or even the Australian Open(although it was on grass her worst surface, it was slower grass, and she as probably close to winning Wimbledon in 1980)she would have won more then 2 slam titles in 79-81 and probably ended 1980 #1 in the World. Had her career not begun to be derailed by back spasms in 1981 she would have won alot more then 2 slam titles likely.

Sanchez Vicario is not as clearly superior to Mauresmo, but her defensive game was absolutely spectacular, and her mental toughness and tenacity were on another planet from Mauresmo's.

It's all your subjective view. All you pointed out about Tracy Austin was could've this and that. Tennis game wise, I don't see why she is superior than Mauresmo.

federerhoogenbandfan
06-06-2006, 09:09 PM
It's all your subjective view. All you pointed out about Tracy Austin was could've this and that. Tennis game wise, I don't see why she is superior than Mauresmo.

Ok you are right it is my subjective view, and alot of my comments about the early burnout, and if she had played the French were subjective, so ignore those freely if you wish. However tennis wise you would have to compare them in their own eras, as opposed to each other directly given how much the game has changed since then, especialy the womens game, wouldnt you? You do know she had a 5-match winning streak with the great Chris Evert, and ended up with a 9-8 winning head to head with the great Chris Evert, despite losing to her in 3 meetings in 77 and 78 as a 14/15 year old part time player on tour. That definitely impresses me.

The tennis guy
06-06-2006, 09:18 PM
However tennis wise you would have to compare them in their own eras, as opposed to each other directly given how much the game has changed since then, especialy the womens game, wouldnt you? You do know she had a 5-match winning streak with the great Chris Evert, and ended up with a 9-8 winning head to head with the great Chris Evert, despite losing to her in 3 meetings in 77 and 78 as a 14/15 year old part time player on tour. That definitely impresses me.

When I compare players from different era, I am more comparing tennis and physical talent wise myself because I don't know how else you can compare. I always assume talent can transend time. I watched Tracy Austin play in her era, I couldn't tell she was more talented than Mausemo from both tennis talent wise and physical talent wise. The knock on Mauresmo is she isn't mentally tough. Of course she isn't, if she were she probably would have won many more slam titles. Now she won one, I can't see why she isn't a worthy one.

federerhoogenbandfan
06-06-2006, 09:42 PM
When I compare players from different era, I am more comparing tennis and physical talent wise myself because I don't know how else you can compare. I always assume talent can transend time. I watched Tracy Austin play in her era, I couldn't tell she was more talented than Mausemo from both tennis talent wise and physical talent wise. The knock on Mauresmo is she isn't mentally tough. Of course she isn't, if she were she probably would have won many more slam titles. Now she won one, I can't see why she isn't a worthy one.

Fair enough. Mauresmo definitely would have won more slams with more genuine self belief, and a more steely pysche to handle pressure points, pressure situations. Even winning 1 or 2 points in those "so close to breakthrough" matches she lost, like the 02 U.S Open semi with Venus, the 03 Wimbledon semi with Serena, those matches might have unleashed the real Mauresmo sooner(except at the French perhaps where she still could well find it her).

Austin was one of the toughest and most determined players, with the strongest concentration and desperate hunger to win, especialy as a teenager, that has been seen on a tennis court according to Chris herself and others who played against her and watch tennis today. That was probably a biggger byproduct of her success then technical, physical, or tactical talent she possessed.

ATXtennisaddict
06-06-2006, 09:45 PM
Mauresmo sucks, after watching her game more closely.