Who are your top 15 men and women all time.

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by capriatifanatic, Feb 23, 2007.

  1. capriatifanatic

    capriatifanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    Messages:
    645
    Who do you rate as the top 15 players of all time in order at this moment. Mine are like this:

    Men:

    1. Laver
    2. Gonzelez
    3. Budge
    4. Sampras
    5. Federer
    6. Tilden
    7. Borg
    8. Rosewall
    9. Connors
    10. Lendl
    11. Kramer
    12. McEnroe
    13. Agassi
    14. Perry
    15. Wilander or Newcombe


    Women:

    1. Evert
    2. Navratilova
    3. Court
    4. Lenglen
    5. Wills Moody
    6. Jean King
    7. Graf
    8. Connoly
    9. Seles
    10. Serena Williams
    11. Evonne Goolagong
    12. Maria Bueno
    13. Doris Hart
    14. Louise Brough
    15. Jennifer Capriati or Althea Gibson
     
    #1
  2. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    1. Rod Laver
    2. Pancho Gonzalez
    3. Pete Sampras
    4. Bjorn Borg
    5. Roger Federer
    6. Jimmy Connors
    7. John McEnroe
    8. Bill Tilden
    9. Ivan Lendl
    10. Ken Rosewall
    11. Don Budge
    12. Andre Agassi
    13. Boris Becker
    14. Stefan Edberg
    15. Mats Wilander


    Women:

    1. Steffi Graf
    2. Martina Navratilova
    3. Margaret Court
    4. Chris Evert
    5. Billie Jean King
    6. Monica Seles
    7. Mo Connoly
    8. Suzanne Lenglen
    9. Helen Wills Moody
    10. Serena Williams
    11. Venus Williams
    12. Molla Mallorey(most us opens ever)
    13. Maria Bueno
    14. Althea Gibson
    15. Justine Henin
     
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2007
    #2
  3. Phil

    Phil Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    3,874
    Location:
    In a tent, along the Silk Road
    Yawnnn....zzzzzzzzzzzz...
     
    #3
  4. BeckerFan

    BeckerFan Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Messages:
    120
    I'm not sure how you can 'rank' Tilden like that.

    What equation could possibly lead you to place him behind Federer but ahead of Borg? Seems so arbitrary. The game he played was so different ... and yet nobody has come even remotely close to how dominant he was 1920-1925, and how he changed the way the game of tennis was played AND perceived.

    As far as I'm concerned, you either have to rank Tilden first or not rank him at all.

    'G.O.A.T.' can only mean Greatest One After Tilden.
     
    #4
  5. drakulie

    drakulie Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    24,482
    Location:
    FT. Lauderdale, Florida
    Graf # 7?

    More like # 1.
     
    #5
  6. scineram

    scineram Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Messages:
    1,234
    Location:
    Hellhole Hungary
    Very good one.
     
    #6
  7. jaggy

    jaggy G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    13,526
    Location:
    Chapel Hill, NC
    1. Federer Navratilova
    2. Laver Court
    3. Sampras Graf
    4. Borg King
    5. Gonzalez Evert
    6. Tilden Seles
    7. Lendl Connoly
    8. Budge Lenglen
    9. McEnroe S. Williams
    10. Kramer Wills Moody
    11. Rosewall Goolagong
    12. Perry Gibson
    13. Connors V. Williams
    14. Agassi Bueno
    15. Wilander Wade
     
    #7
  8. lambielspins

    lambielspins Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,715
    Federer has done nothing to deserve #1 yet. He holds no real records except now the most consecutive weeks at #1. He is somewhere from 5-10 right now.
     
    #8
  9. lambielspins

    lambielspins Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,715
    He dominated 1920-1925 when there were was how big a world population, how many people playing registered tennis? Also most of those years there were hardly any tournaments and he either played just the U.S Open or both Wimbledon and the U.S Open, won them and that was it.

    He wasnt nearly as dominant as Lenglen and Wills Moody on the womens side during the same time, they crushed all their opponents, hardly ever losing sets unlike him losing many sets and having many struggles, and they didnt ever really lose their dominance while they still played, while Tilden certainly did when the young French players began to take over from him.

    Ranking him 6th or 7th is probably generous enough as it is.
     
    #9
  10. BeckerFan

    BeckerFan Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Messages:
    120
    The top women's players have always been much more dominant than their male counterparts. It's as unfair to compare Tilden and Lenglen as it is to compare Sampras and Graf or Navratilova. By those standards, the achievements of most of the top men are really quite small.

    And my argument is exactly THAT ... that it's impossible to compare. You rightly acknowledge that Tilden played a very different game from the one that's played today, which I also acknowledged in my post. It seems silly then to sandwich him between guys like Federer and Borg, or McEnroe and Lendl. The guy didn't lose an important match for six years! Either you accept him as THE all-time legend of tennis, or you put him in something of a separate category altogether. Anything else seems illogical.

    My own take is that you have to look at players relative to their times. There's no way to settle a 'who would beat whom' debate, and you can't simply compare achievements ... because the relative importance of various achievements (e.g., number of Grand Slam titles) changes over time. What you can do is look at a guy and assess how far he distanced himself from the pack in his own time, how much he brought tennis to a new level. Tilden stood higher above his peers than any other player ever has, and he brought tennis to a new level in a way Sampras, Borg, or even Laver could never even dream of reaching. Tennis was fundamentally different before and after Tilden, which is why I think any discussion of 'G.O.A.T.' needs to accept Tilden as its unassailable starting point.

    BTW, there were many more tournaments in those days than you think. Though the records are incomplete, Tilden probably won around 150 titles. That's more than anyone but Laver ... far more than Lendl or Connors, who holds the 'official' ATP record.
     
    #10
  11. Warriorroger

    Warriorroger Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,602
    01 Roger Federer & Steffi Graf
    02 Pete Sampras & Martina Navratilova
    03 Rod Laver & Margaret Court
    04 Bjorn Borg & Chris Evert
    05 Andre Agassi & Serena Williams
    06 Ivan Lendl & Monica Seles
    07 Boris Becker & Maureen O connoly
    08 John McenRoe & Martina Hingis
    09 Don Budge & Venus Williams
    10 Stefan Edberg & Suzanne Lenglen.
    11 Jimmy Connors & Billy Jean King.

    I'll think of the rest.
     
    #11
  12. Condoleezza

    Condoleezza Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,418
    :D :D :D
    Obviously Jenny fans are as intellectually challenged as their fave ....

    Condi
     
    #12
  13. Nick Irons

    Nick Irons Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2007
    Messages:
    577
    Location:
    Cape Fear
    I like the manner in which she put her run together; being out of tennis, being knocked down and written off. I like the comeback, I like her Gold Medal of Graf, I like the story. She proved she really is a Champion in spite of the implosion as a teenager.

    I like her beating a then Number 1 Hingis is straight sets at the Aussie and beating Clijsters in a sick 3rd Set (12 -10) tiebreak and I especially like her spanking Serena on the bigs stage.

    JCap proved she is the real deal.
     
    #13
  14. Condoleezza

    Condoleezza Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,418
    Indeed she is.
    Capriatifanatic isn't, though ...

    Condi
     
    #14
  15. ne1410is

    ne1410is Guest

    lol she got clowned on serena's mtv show. that was funny. i mean she is a very type a personality. she would complain about the smallest things during matches, like someone's cell phone going off on court 14 when she was on center court.
     
    #15
  16. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,883
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    GRAF....GRAF??? #7???? No offense, but your list is a joke. Unless you are 85-100 years old you cannot rate players like Tilden and Budge....YOU NEVER SAW THEM PLAY. Who the he!! is Doris Hart?? Graf would have destroyed Evert. Who is Doris Hart again?

    C'mon. Maybe you were just being nastalgic..if that's the case I forgive you. Don't take my reply too harshly, but seriuosly unless you have seen these players play or watched extensive footage then you cannot possibly rate Don Budge over Roger Federer. ;)

    Pancho....Pancho????? Did'nt he invent something? He's more known for that and I can't even remember what he invented.
     
    #16
  17. chaognosis

    chaognosis Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2005
    Messages:
    694
    Location:
    Chicago
    Has Federer won the Grand Slam? Seems pretty reasonable to me.
     
    #17
  18. caulcano

    caulcano Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Messages:
    1,636
    I can't think of 15 so here's my 5....

    Men:
    1. Federer (so much natural talent)
    2. Agassi (style & comeback kid)
    3. Sampras (7 Wimbs and killer 1st serve)
    4. Borg (the first genuine baseliner)
    5. Ivanisevic (maniac, unpredictable & emotional)


    Women:

    1. Graf (golden GS with sublime technique)
    2. Seles (first grunting women player with attitude)
    3. Navratilova (XX GS, longevity)
    4. Sanchez-Vicario (never-say-die attitude)
    5. Henin (a lot of talent in a small package)


    yeah, I'm youngish.
     
    #18
  19. federmann

    federmann Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    Messages:
    190
    Location:
    Wels, Austria, Europe
    men:

    1) Pete Sampras
    2)
    3)
    4) Rod Laver
    5) Björn Borg
    6)
    7) Jimmy Connors
    8)
    9) John McEnroe
    10) Andre Agassi
    11) Boris Becker
    12) Stefan Edberg
    13) Roger Federer (ok, he deserves some credit :mrgreen: )
    14)
    15)

    the spaces are because of the lack of other good, or actually unforgetable players.

    women:

    1) Steffi Graf
    2) Martina Navratilova
    3) Chris Evert
    4) Billy Jean King
    5) Justine Henin
    6)
    7)
    8)
    9)
    10)
    11)
    12)
    13)
    14)
    15)
     
    #19
  20. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,883
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    Do you really want me to answer that??? I guess so...Budge won the Grand Slam..yes, but 3 of the surfaces were the same (grass). If that were the case for modern players, Sampras would have won 25 slams. Also...I believe Budge played amateur tennis at the time?? Not sure about my last statement. I thought that players before 1968 that were allowed in the Grand Slams had to be amateurs.

    I am not taking anything away from the old-timers, but tennis was way, way different. Budge did not dominate his peers like Fed has.
     
    #20
  21. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,883
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    Nice picks...I appreciate you being honest (about your age and lack of experience) and letting us know you are too young to remember some of the players from years past and not try to rank them when you only saw a handfull of clips. :)
     
    #21
  22. BeckerFan

    BeckerFan Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Messages:
    120
    I disagree. Sampras played in an era when grass had become something of a specialist's surface ... he had only a handful of consistent threats to worry about on grass. In Budge's time, EVERYONE was the equivalent of a 'grass-court specialist.' A good case can be made that Sampras would have been LESS dominant back then, b/c he would have stood out less on his best surface.

    True, but that doesn't take away from the difficulty of the achievement. Only two players achieved the Grand Slam in the entire history of amateur tennis: Budge and Laver. Even as an amateur, Budge was pretty clearly the best player in the world in 1938. He proved it in 1939 by turning pro and beating both of the reigning pro champions (Vines and Perry) in extended tours.

    Actually, this is quite wrong ... Federer does not dominate his peers anywhere NEAR the level that Budge did! In the late 1930s, Budge won on EVERY surface ... he won in singles, doubles and mixed doubles ... and he won the Davis Cup. He had a 92-match winning streak, far more than double Federer's current (and longest) streak. He was a much more complete champion, even winning the 'Wimbledon Slam' (the singles, doubles, and mixed titles in the same tournament) in two consecutive years. Do you think Federer will even come close to hitting some of these marks?

    At least until Federer wins the Grand Slam, he is not even in the same league as Budge.
     
    #22
  23. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    If Federer has to win the Grand Slam to even be in the same league as Budge, even winning more slam titles which of course he will, then Sampras and Borg are not in Budge's league either unless you are applying some sort of double standard. Borg has never won the U.S Open and only has 1 more slam title then Federer now, Sampras never even made the final of the French or won more then 2 slams in the same year.

    If you believe Federer has to win the Grand Slam before he is even in Budge's league you sure as heck better not consider Sampras or Borg in Budge's league either.
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2007
    #23
  24. chaognosis

    chaognosis Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2005
    Messages:
    694
    Location:
    Chicago
    Sampras and Borg are not in Budge's league. Only Laver is, and maybe Tilden. The French wasn't an open tournament when Tilden was number one in the early '20s, so the Grand Slam was not possible. Nevertheless, Tilden was a true all-court, all-surface champion--and more dominant than any modern pro.
     
    #24
  25. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    OK I can accept if you feel the all surface excellence of those 3 put them in their own league based on your criteria. I admit I dont know as much about the old timers. However it annoys me if somebody is going to say Federer has to win a calender slam atleast once before being up with them, if Borg and Sampras are going to be rated up with them. Federer has already a more balanced record among different surfaces then Sampras, winning 1 more Australian on slow hard court, and reaching a French final, and he is only 25; and Borg never won a U.S Open himself, either on hard courts, or on the other surfaces it was on. However you are also saying Borg and Sampras are not in their league so I can accept your criteria in that case.
     
    #25
  26. lambielspins

    lambielspins Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,715
    1. Laver
    2. Sampras
    3. Federer
    4. Borg
    5. Gonzalez
    6. Rosewall
    7. Tilden
    8. Connors
    9. Budge
    10. Lendl
    11. McEnroe
    12. Cochet
    13. LaCoste
    14. Agassi
    15. Perry or Kramer

    1. Graf
    2. Navratilova
    3. Evert
    4. Court
    5. King
    6. Lenglen
    7. Wills
    8. Serena Williams
    9. Seles
    10. Connoly
    11. Goolagong
    12. Bueno
    13. Henin
    14. Gibson
    15. Marble
     
    #26
  27. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,883
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    Hey...good arguements. Its not always someone can back up his opinion. Thanks for the lesson. I really did not know much about Budge other than the grand slam. I have to say though that Budge did not face the competition Connors, Borg, Mac, Lendl, Agassi, Sampras, Fed faced. Back then Tennis was not a big sport...it was like golf...for the rich and snobby. Tennis hit a boom in the 70's. I just think 90% of the people on this board would disagree with you that Budge is so much better than Fed. Its actually a little amusing. Baseball might be the only sport you can compare generations. The sport has not changed...yes the ball is livelier and the mound is not as high...but the true nature of the sport has not changed much. Tennis on the other hand has completely changed.....the racquet and balls are not the same. Baseball is still leather gloves, leather ball (that has changed a bit I agree) and wooden bat. You needed to be able to hit a ball 90 mph in the 30's just like today. Willie Mays, Babe Ruth and Joe DiMaggio would be great players today. Give Don Budge a Babolat and Fed will nearly kill him regardless. The game today is vastly superior. Remember...this is only my opinion...just like yours.:)
     
    #27
  28. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,883
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    I honestly believe that Tilden would have his arm fall off after Roddick serves him a little yellow fuzzy ball. Tilden played in an era of beautiful tennis. Like soccer, 75 years ago the sports are much different than today. When we talk about ranking we ned to consider how they would fare against each other and yes how they dominated their peers. But tennis, golf and football were not a popular sport in those days. Baseball was king. Rich sissy kids (hence the perfect example...Tilden) played tennis.
     
    #28
  29. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,883
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    He FF...I am in agreeance with you, but don't waste your time with logic (I have seem to). Some people don't get it. I think there are some Fed haters here.;)
     
    #29
  30. jktennis59

    jktennis59 New User

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2006
    Messages:
    82
    Location:
    Caracas, Venezuela
    Only players that I've seen in action:

    1. Sampras
    2. Federer
    3. Agassi
    4. Borg
    5. McEnroe
    6. Connors
    7. Lendl
    8. Vilas
    9. Becker
    10. Edberg
    11. Moya
    12. Kuerten
    13. Ivanisevic
    14. Rafter
    15. Nastase

    1. Navratilova
    2. Graff
    3. Seles
    4. Sanchez V.
    5. Henin
    6. Evert
    7. Clijsters
    8. Serena W.
    9. Venus W.
    10. Novotna
    11. Hingis
    12. Davenport
    13. Sharapova
    14. Sabatini
    15. Mauresmo

    The order doesn't matter.
     
    #30
  31. ne1410is

    ne1410is Guest

    MY list. lol

    Men

    1. Michael Chang
    2. John Newcombe
    3. Rod Laver
    4. Arthur Ashe
    5. Pete Sampras
    6. Jaime Yzaga
    7. John McEnroe
    8. Bill Tilden
    9. Vince Van Patten
    10. Andre Agassi
    11. Stefan Edberg
    12. Pancho Gonzalez
    13. Fred Stolle
    14. Fred Perry
    15. Jimmy Connors

    Women

    1. Monica Seles
    2. Mary Pierce
    3. Anna Kournikova
    4. Gabriela Sabatini
    5. Kimiko Date
    6. Althea Gibson
    7. Irina Spirlea
    8. Venus Williams
    9. Serena Williams
    10. Jana Novotna
    11. Arantxa Sanchez Vicario
    12. Martina Navratilova
    13. Billie Jean King
    14. Steffi Graf
    15. Suzanne Lenglen
     
    #31
  32. Phil

    Phil Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    3,874
    Location:
    In a tent, along the Silk Road
    How do you know? Did you see Tilden play? I think you're just parroting something you've read.
     
    #32
  33. ne1410is

    ne1410is Guest

    does the name rhyme with mud ball-in's?
     
    #33
  34. caulcano

    caulcano Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Messages:
    1,636
    It would be nice to find out how many rounds there were when they played in the 1920's.

    I'm sure there was less 'players' dedicated to the game than there are today, which means there was 'less' competition.
     
    #34
  35. bluetrain4

    bluetrain4 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    9,097
    I agree with Seles at No. 5 or 6, but it just pains me even ranking her. I was a huge Seles fan and it just kills me what happened to her and how it reduced her place in tennis history.

    Granted, she would not have won every major for the years she missed, but she definitely would have won more. She was at the absolute peak of her career when she got stabbed. And, even when she returned, missing all that time had to affect her.

    Graf ended with 22 Slams, Seles with 9. Absent the stabbing, I think it is fair to say that Seles wins 12-14 and Graf ends with 16-19.
     
    #35
  36. larlarbd

    larlarbd Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2007
    Messages:
    595
    Location:
    Canada
    I agree , to prove your point I'll wait till the end of 2007 .
    We will see the the FEDEX plane disappear & FED will appear as Tom Hanks in castaway - yes , he will survive but by then the world has buried him .
     
    #36
  37. Condoleezza

    Condoleezza Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,418

    Seles would not have won all of her 8 slams pre-stabbing without Graf being distracted big-time by a nasty blackmail scandal between spring 1990 and winter 1992. In that time Seles won 5 slams.
    And Graf had to undergo reconstructive knee surgery in 1997 when she was just 27 and more dominant than ever (that surgery virtually ended her career).

    Absent the scandal and the surgery, I think it is fair to say that Seles wins 4-5 and Graf ends with 25-29.

    Condi
     
    #37
  38. ne1410is

    ne1410is Guest

    I am sad for Seles that she had to endure such a horrible situation. But I wonder if that opened the door for Mary Pierce to win her first slam in 95 at Australia which made it easier for her to win RG in 2000 with the experience. I love both.
     
    #38
  39. chaognosis

    chaognosis Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2005
    Messages:
    694
    Location:
    Chicago
    Of course I never saw Tilden play. Very few living have seen him, much less seen him at his prime. But I find it pretty sad to think one isn't allowed to talk about something one hasn't witnessed firsthand. Am I not allowed to think Liszt was a great pianist, or Ruth a great baseball player? History is about working with sources--READING, which you seem to think is a bad thing--and making one's own informed conclusions based on the available evidence. I've put in the work to be able to say something about pre-war tennis. Please let me at least try to keep the memory of these great players alive, in spite of people like yourself (and most of this forum) who want to pretend that tennis only began the day you first started watching it on TV.
     
    #39
  40. Condoleezza

    Condoleezza Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,418

    IMO, the 95 AO win made Pierce complacent. Otherwise she would have won more slams in the end-90ies most certainly.

    Condi
     
    #40
  41. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    12-14 is much too low an estimate for Seles. Even if you are the most stingy to her as possible Seles won 3 slams in both 91 and 92, and had already won the first slam of 93. Graf was #1 in 93, 94, 95, and 96 with Seles out, and Seles won 3 slams in both 91 and 92 with Graf #2 and Graf was 4 years older then her by this point. Seles had 7 slams before 1993, 8 with the first slam of 1993. Even if she dropped down to 2 slams per year from 93-96, which is a huge 1 slam per year drop off, and is being probably mean to Seles considering Graf was 4 years older, and was clearly on top after the Seles stabbing, and wasnt able to stop Seles from winning 3 each of the 2 years before that, Seles would still win another 8 slams in 93-96 and 7 more from the time she was stabbed. She is already now up to 15. Hingis in 97 was dominant, and Hingis has shown she cant handle top power players, wouldnt Seles at worst have won 2 of the 4 slams that year? She would already be up to 17. She still has another 5 years of tennis probably from start 98-end of 2002. The level was such that even Capriati, who could win no slams during the Seles era took 3 slams in 2001-2002. Why couldnt she atleast win another 3 slams those 5 years and end up with 20. I would say 20 is the absolute worst unless there are unforseen problems with injury or unknown potholes.

    As for Graf, the absolute most she could have won is 20 as well I believe. Being as generous as possable would have her and Seles splitting the 16 slams in 93-96, and for the reasons I described with Seles this is being super generous to Graf. Graf had 11 before the stabbing, so giving her the most generous total of 8 more those 4 years she is up to 19. Graf was too injured to win slams her final 3 years mostly of 97-99 but won a French in 99, and came close at Wimbledon. If she somehow manages to win 1 of those 2 with Seles not enduring tragedy, she would end up with 20 as well.

    So 20 is the absolute lowest most stingy estimate for Seles. While 20 is the most generous leanient estimate for Graf.
     
    #41
  42. bluetrain4

    bluetrain4 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    9,097
    I defintely don't agree with Condoleeza's assessment regarding Seles. Obviously, you like Graf a lot, and no doubt she is a great champion and even with Seles around, very well may have won more Slams than Seles. But, Seles at 4-5 and Graf near 30 Slams seems ridiculous.

    I agree with federerfanatic that Seles could have won 20 or more slams, but I think that you may be overstating your position. You mention Hingis and how she can't handle power. But, Hingis had a winning record against Seles and caused problems for Seles. Also, although Graf and Seles probably would have won most of the Slams between them while Seles was out, it doesn't mean that someone else such as Aranxta S-V or Pierce wouldn't have won one.

    My only point is that Seles was a really good player and would have won more Slams had she not been stabbed.
     
    #42
  43. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    You could be right but Hingis did very well vs Seles when Seles was not the same player post-stabbing. Also remember I just said it seemed safe and very conservative for me to believe Seles wins atleast 2 slams in 97, so that does not neccessarily say it would then be impossible for Hingis to even have won 2 that year. The only genuinely great players among the power hitters that Hingis played alot later were Davenport, Venus, and Serena, and maybe Capriati. Hingis went 4-7 vs Serena starting in 99, 5-8 vs Venus starting in 99, 6-11 vs Davenport starting in 98. She still had her share of wins over them and wasnt totally uncompetitive but lost more then she won. Without going into an extensive drawn out comparision Davenport and the Williams all have much more dominating serves then Seles did, but Davenport doesnt move nearly as well as Seles did, and the Williams make many more unforced errors. Hingis even went 0-4 vs Capriati in 2001-2002, or if you count 2000 when Capriati returned to playing decently enough to be a top 15 player again it would be 2-4 during that time. Capriati is just a lesser version of Seles always IMO.

    As for Sanchez Vicario or Pierce winning a slam I honestly dont believe Sanchez Vicario or Pierce would have won a slam with both Graf and Seles in their primes together, and both so dominantly on top of all other players during those years at the same time. Their chances to win a slam probably even improves a bit later with the youngsters coming in and softening up the Graf-Seles dominance and opening up the field of contenders. Sanchez Vicario won the 94 U.S Open with Graf dominating the first half of the final and aggravating her injured back in the middle of the 2nd set, moving and bending very stiffly the whole second half of the 2nd set and entire 3rd set, in hindsight clearly the only way Sanchez Vicario was able to win that particular match. Pierce won the 95 Australian Open with neither Graf (injury)or Seles(stabbing layoff)there. Sanchez Vicario did not have to play either Graf(upset by Pierce in semis)or Seles(stabbing layoff)to win the 94 French Open. Martinez winning Wimbledon in 94 did not play Graf(upset by McNeil in 1st round), Seles(stabbing layoff), Sanchez Vicario(upset by Garrison in 4th round), or Pierce(did not play). Remember Seles was 20-3 vs Sanchez Vicario, and pre-stabbing won all 6 sets she played vs Sanchez in grand slams; and 20-1 vs Martinez. Pierce held her own vs Seles, 5-4 overall, Seles going 3-0 vs Pierce pre-stabbing when Pierce was nowhere near the player she was later when Seles would return, post-stabbing Seles went 2-4 vs the improved Pierce although clearly not the same Seles either now. Pierce maybe had the best chance to have won a slam from 93-96 had Seles not been stabbed, Sanchez not so much chance, Martinez almost none. So maybe I am wrongfully discounting the possability of Pierce winning 1 or even 2slams during that period, but honestly still dont see Sanchez as explained above, and certainly not Martinez.
     
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2007
    #43
  44. ne1410is

    ne1410is Guest

    i think hingis had and has seles' number. she beat seles like 2 and 3 or something bad in the bank of the west classic in 97. she did the same 1 and 2 or something at the lipton later on. hingis was honing her game when seles was number 1. seles even says she remembers meeting hingis when hingis was a junior. i have no doubt that melanie molitor would have specifically spent a LOT of time figuring out a game plan that would work against seles because the assumption would be that seles would still be a dominant player by the time hingis became a pro. the slip up at the french when seles beat hingis was largely due to hingis' rebelliousness and total lack of preparation which shocked even melanie molitor. the night before her match with seles, i think she was riding the elevators up and down after failing to figure out something to do with her boyfriend at the time. in her practice beforehand she was just hitting crazy shots for fun and giggling. hingis wasn't serious. its sad because i really like seles much more as a person than hingis.
     
    #44
  45. caulcano

    caulcano Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Messages:
    1,636
    Was the blackmail scandal you refer to, about her father?

    Anyway, take out Gunther, blackmail scandal & knee surgery & it would have been a great rivalry. I think Graf would still have ended up with 20+ & Seles 15+. They both would have dominated the women's tour together. The #1 would have changed hands SO many times.
     
    #45
  46. Warriorroger

    Warriorroger Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,602
    Hinigis to me is proof that Graf was the better player than Seles. Hinigs owned Seles, but Graf owned Hingis. No sane person would deny the fact that Seles would have gotten more titles had she not been stabbed. She was young when she returned and Graf still won when she was in the very last part of her career. I think Graf's run at the 1999 RG served as proof that Graf was a better player. As a 29 yeard old she beat the top 3 to win a GS title on clay! Her game was better matched against all generations and her last two finals made up for the grand slam titles she won in 1993.
     
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2007
    #46
  47. The Grand Slam

    The Grand Slam Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,780
    Location:
    the earth..?
    Screw skill... I'll just name my top 15 FAVOURITES. :) In no particular order:

    Roger Federer.
    John McEnroe.
    Benjamin Becker.
    Marat Safin.
    Gustavo Kuerten.
    Lleyton Hewitt.
    Gaston Gaudio
    Juan Martin del Potro.
    Chris Guccione.
    Marcos Baghdatis.
    Pete Sampras.
    Pat Rafter.
    Fernando Gonzalez.
    Andy Murray.
    Amelie Mauresmo.


    Martina Hingis.
    Maria Sharapova.
    Jelena Jankovic.
    Justine Henin.
    Alicia Molik.
    Samantha Stosur.
    Melanie South.
    Shahar Peer.
    Tatiana Golovin.
    Maria Kirilenko.
    Vasilisa Bardina.
    Sophie Ferguson.
    Casey Dellacqua.
    Daniela Hantuchova.
    Monica Seles.
     
    #47
  48. justineheninhoogenbandfan

    justineheninhoogenbandfan Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    898
    Yeah I will do the same thing as The Grand Slam:

    Women-

    Helen Kelesi
    Carling Basset
    Patricia Hy
    Jana Novotna
    Hana Mandilikova
    Kimiko Date
    Conchita Martinez
    Kim Clijsters
    Justine Henin
    Lindsay Davenport
    Elena Dementieva
    Evonne Goolagong
    Maria Bueno
    Nancy Richey
    Virgina Wade

    and Men-

    Roger Federer
    Tommy Haas
    Fernando Gonzalez
    Carlos Moya
    Ivan Lendl
    Thomas Enqvist
    Fernando Verdasco
    Thomas Berdych
    Novak Djokovic
    Richard Krajicek
    Henri Cochet
    Jan Michael Gambill
    Tom Okker
     
    #48
  49. The Grand Slam

    The Grand Slam Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,780
    Location:
    the earth..?
    Mauresmo is one of my favourite men. :[
     
    #49
  50. krprunitennis2

    krprunitennis2 Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2006
    Messages:
    803
    Location:
    United States

    =,( No Hingis?
     
    #50

Share This Page