Talk Tennis

Talk Tennis (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php)
-   Former Pro Player Talk (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/forumdisplay.php?f=37)
-   -   Navratilova's losses in the 80ies (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=131000)

Condoleezza 05-01-2007 09:15 AM

Navratilova's losses in the 80ies
 
Quite interesting against whom Martina Navratilova lost during her prime in the 1980ies.

80: Turnbull (2), King, Austin (2), Stove, Evert (2), Mandlikova (2), Jaeger, Shriver
81: Jaeger (3), Kohde, Evert (2), Hanika, Nagelsen, Mandlikova, Austin (4)

82: Hanika, Shriver, Evert
83: Horvath
84: Mandlikova, Sukova
85: Evert (2), Mandlikova (2), Kohde
86: Jordan, Graf, Evert

87: Mandlikova, Graf (2), Evert (2), Sabatini (2), Sukova
88: Evert (2), Zvereva (2), Graf, Garrison, Sukova
89: Sukova, Neiland, Zvereva, Sabatini, Graf (3)

In 1980 Stove was 35, King 36, Austin 17 and Jaeger 15.
In the mid-80ies these old-timers and these wunderkinds were gone.
Navratilova had some easy 5 years until ....
... the new crop (Graf, Sabatini and - at least on slow courts - Zvereva) took over.

When we exclude Steffi, Gaby and Natasha Navratilova had only 4, 4 and 2 losses in the years 1987-89. That is an average of 3.3 losses per year. During her alleged "peak years" (1982-86) she had 2.8 losses on average.
No big difference.

Obviously Naratilova had luck that Stove & King were to old in the mid-80ies, that Austin & Jaeger burnt out with injuries and that Graf & Sabatini weren't born 5 years earlier. Kudos to her that she was able to use the window of opportunity.

Condi

suwanee4712 05-01-2007 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Condoleezza (Post 1415118)
Quite interesting against whom Martina Navratilova lost during her prime in the 1980ies.

80: Turnbull (2), King, Austin (2), Stove, Evert (2), Mandlikova (2), Jaeger, Shriver
81: Jaeger (3), Kohde, Evert (2), Hanika, Nagelsen, Mandlikova, Austin (4)

82: Hanika, Shriver, Evert
83: Horvath
84: Mandlikova, Sukova
85: Evert (2), Mandlikova (2), Kohde
86: Jordan, Graf, Evert

87: Mandlikova, Graf (2), Evert (2), Sabatini (2), Sukova
88: Evert (2), Zvereva (2), Graf, Garrison, Sukova
89: Sukova, Neiland, Zvereva, Sabatini, Graf (3)

In 1980 Stove was 35, King 36, Austin 17 and Jaeger 15.
In the mid-80ies these old-timers and these wunderkinds were gone.
Navratilova had some easy 5 years until ....
... the new crop (Graf, Sabatini and - at least on slow courts - Zvereva) took over.

When we exclude Steffi, Gaby and Natasha Navratilova had only 4, 4 and 2 losses in the years 1987-89. That is an average of 3.3 losses per year. During her alleged "peak years" (1982-86) she had 2.8 losses on average.
No big difference.

Obviously Naratilova had luck that Stove & King were to old in the mid-80ies, that Austin & Jaeger burnt out with injuries and that Graf & Sabatini weren't born 5 years earlier. Kudos to her that she was able to use the window of opportunity.

Condi


Yet another big pile of elephant dung from the master dung shoveller himself - who, I might say, hinds behind a woman's personna........... But I will thank you for making a case for Martina's era to be quite strong. She faced a lot of good serve and volley players that were able to challenge her. I'm surprised you chose to remind people of that, considering you call this the "clown era."

Any idiot can look at Martina's record and tell which years were her peak years. You say that Martina was lucky that Gaby was young and wasn't born 5 years earlier? Ms. Sabatini won ONE grand slam in her entire career. She's not even a top 20 female player of the Open era. I think Martina's trophy case as well as her (15-5) head to head record tells anyone all they need to know about the threat Gaby posed to Martina as someone who would've stopped her from winning slams.

You make such a big deal about BJK being a contender into her late 30's. Martina beat Steffi AND Monica when she was 37 years old. How can this be? If BJK isn't supposed to be beating top players at age 37, what's the difference when Martina did it to BOTH top players in 1993?

Condoleezza 05-01-2007 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by suwanee4712 (Post 1415294)
Yet another big pile of elephant dung from the master dung shoveller himself - who, I might say, hinds behind a woman's personna........... But I will thank you for making a case for Martina's era to be quite strong. She faced a lot of good serve and volley players that were able to challenge her. I'm surprised you chose to remind people of that, considering you call this the "clown era."

Any idiot can look at Martina's record and tell which years were her peak years. You say that Martina was lucky that Gaby was young and wasn't born 5 years earlier? Ms. Sabatini won ONE grand slam in her entire career. She's not even a top 20 female player of the Open era. I think Martina's trophy case as well as her (15-5) head to head record tells anyone all they need to know about the threat Gaby posed to Martina as someone who would've stopped her from winning slams.

You make such a big deal about BJK being a contender into her late 30's. Martina beat Steffi AND Monica when she was 37 years old. How can this be? If BJK isn't supposed to be beating top players at age 37, what's the difference when Martina did it to BOTH top players in 1993?


What about

"In 1982-86 Navratilova had only Evert, Mandlikova and SHRIVER (:D :D ) as opposition."

didn't make it to your screen?


Condi

suwanee4712 05-01-2007 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Condoleezza (Post 1415304)
What about

"In 1982-86 Navratilova had only Evert, Mandlikova and SHRIVER (:D :D ) as opposition."

didn't make it to your screen?


Condi

Then why did you bring up Martina's losses to players like Sukova, Jordan, Kohde Kilsch? You can't have it both ways. Either she was a great player who had competition outside of the top 4 or she didn't. You proved that she did.

Condoleezza 05-01-2007 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by suwanee4712 (Post 1415309)
Then why did you bring up Martina's losses to players like Sukova, Jordan, Kohde Kilsch? You can't have it both ways. Either she was a great player who had competition outside of the top 4 or she didn't. You proved that she did.

Someone said Navratilova only lost to journeywomen in 1987-89 (trying to prove Navi being over-the-hill), conveniently forgetting Navi's losses to Kohde, Hanika, Jordan, Horvath types in the mid-80ies.
The difference is that in 80/81 and in 87/89 she had some really good opposition as well. So she lost more than her occasional match here and there against Evert and a against journeywomen.

Condi

suwanee4712 05-01-2007 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Condoleezza (Post 1415315)
Someone said Navratilova only lost to journeywomen in 1987-89 (trying to prove Navi being over-the-hill), conveniently forgetting Navi's losses to Kohde, Hanika, Jordan, Horvath types in the mid-80ies.
The difference is that in 80/81 and in 87/89 she had some really good opposition as well. So she lost more than her occasional match here and there against Evert and a against journeywomen.

Condi

Meanwhile, you forget that Martina revolutionized the game beginning in 1982 with her commitment to cross training, fitness, and nutrition? The players that beat her in 1981 were still around for the most part in 1986. However, she lost to them fewer times because she was a much better player from 1982 through 1986 than she was in 1981. From 1987 through 1991, Martina was often in turmoil with injuries and all sort of off the court issues - thing you regularly use to excuse Steffi's losses.

Condoleezza 05-01-2007 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by suwanee4712 (Post 1415309)
Then why did you bring up Martina's losses to players like Sukova, Jordan, Kohde Kilsch? You can't have it both ways. Either she was a great player who had competition outside of the top 4 or she didn't. You proved that she did.


Top players almost always lose to journeywomen like Nagelsen, Hanika (Navi in 80/81) Jordan, Horvath, Jordan, Kohde (Navi in 82-86) Neiland, Garrison, Zvereva (Navi in 87-89), deSwardt, Coetzer (Graf in 93-96) now and then.

Why did Navi lose more tennis matches in 87-89 and 80/81 compared to 82-86?
Because in 80/81 (King, Austin, Jaeger) and 87-89 (Graf, Sabatini) she had also considerable NON-journeywoman opposition which she didn't have in 82-86.

Again for the intellectually challenged:

1980/81: losses to
a) Evert
b) King, Austin, Jaeger
c) some journeywomen

1982-86: losses to
a) Evert
b) some journeywomen

1987-89: losses to
a) Evert
b) Graf, Sabatini
c) some journeywomen

In 82-86 there were no Kings, Austins, Jaegers, Grafs, Sabatinis.
So Navi had less losses. And not because those years were her peak and in 87-89 she was over-the-hill.


Condi

Condoleezza 05-01-2007 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by suwanee4712 (Post 1415339)
Meanwhile, you forget that Martina revolutionized the game beginning in 1982 with her commitment to cross training, fitness, and nutrition? The players that beat her in 1981 were still around for the most part in 1986. ....

You are misinformed - and simply lying.
Navratilova had 7 of 12 losses that year against Austin and Jaeger.
Both didn't play anymore in 1986.


Quote:

Originally Posted by suwanee4712 (Post 1415339)
....From 1987 through 1991, Martina was often in turmoil with injuries and all sort of off the court issues - thing you regularly use to excuse Steffi's losses.

Don't be ridiculous.
Navratilova's court issues never were daily front-page headline stuff as the Graf Blackmail Scandal of 1990-92. This scandal had exactly 37 front-page headline stories in Germany's biggest tabloid. To compare that with Navi's duress is simply idiotic.

Condi

suwanee4712 05-01-2007 12:11 PM

Speaking of intellectually challenged............

Mandlikova, Sukova, Kohde Kilsch, and Jordan were not "journeymen" tennis players from 1982 through 1986. They were top players during that time period. One won 4 grand slam titles, another appeared in 4 grand slam finals, another made one grand slam final, and the other was a regular grand slam quarterfinalist with a few semis.

So when you list Martina's losses for that period, its not just a) Evert and b) some journeywomen as you suggest.

The fact that you would list Mandlikova as a journeywoman tennis player and not Sabatini just proves further that you're an idiot.

Condoleezza 05-01-2007 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by suwanee4712 (Post 1415410)
Speaking of intellectually challenged............

Mandlikova, Sukova, Kohde Kilsch, and Jordan were not "journeymen" tennis players from 1982 through 1986. They were top players during that time period. One won 4 grand slam titles, another appeared in 4 grand slam finals, another made one grand slam final, and the other was a regular grand slam quarterfinalist with a few semis.

So when you list Martina's losses for that period, its not just a) Evert and b) some journeywomen as you suggest.

The fact that you would list Mandlikova as a journeywoman tennis player and not Sabatini just proves further that you're an idiot.



It is a fact that Mandlikova and Shriver were Navi's main opposition (with Evert) in the mid-80ies.
When Graf took over in 1987 she regularily beat Hana and Pam (both still in their mid-20ies) to pulp. Same with Evert. Chris lost her first match to a 16-year-old Graf in April 1986 and never won a match again against the German. She had to suffer a lot of 2-6 1-6 style humiliations. So much about Navi's competition in the mid-80ies ....


Condi

suwanee4712 05-01-2007 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Condoleezza (Post 1415400)
You are misinformed - and simply lying.
Navratilova had 7 of 12 losses that year against Austin and Jaeger.
Both didn't play anymore in 1986.




Don't be ridiculous.
Navratilova's court issues never were daily front-page headline stuff as the Graf Blackmail Scandal of 1990-92. This scandal had exactly 37 front-page headline stories in Germany's biggest tabloid. To compare that with Navi's duress is simply idiotic.

Condi

Lying? Martina played Tracy and Andrea into 1983. Not that you would know it because you never saw Andrea play, but Martina beat her in the 1983 Wimbledon final. So yes, she did play most of those players during this time period.

As far as Martina goes, I can't believe you think anyone is stupid enough to think that Martina didn't have off court issues that attracted a lot of publicity. The difference is that Martina still beat Steffi in the 1991 US Open SF the WEEK BEFORE she was to have a palimony suit tried in front of a WORLDWIDE audience. No excuses necessary - dumbass.

Condoleezza 05-01-2007 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by suwanee4712 (Post 1415424)
Lying? Martina played Tracy and Andrea into 1983. Not that you would know it because you never saw Andrea play, but Martina beat her in the 1983 Wimbledon final. So yes, she did play most of those players during this time period. ...

We were talking of 1986, not 1983, son ....


Quote:

Originally Posted by suwanee4712 (Post 1415424)
.... As far as Martina goes, I can't believe you think anyone is stupid enough to think that Martina didn't have off court issues that attracted a lot of publicity. The difference is that Martina still beat Steffi in the 1991 US Open SF the WEEK BEFORE she was to have a palimony suit tried in front of a WORLDWIDE audience. No excuses necessary - dumbass.


:D :D
A "world-wide" audience! She wasn't even front-page tabloid stuff in the US with that.

Condi

suwanee4712 05-01-2007 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Condoleezza (Post 1415419)
It is a fact that Mandlikova and Shriver were Navi's main opposition (with Evert) in the mid-80ies.
When Graf took over in 1987 she regularily beat Hana and Pam (both still in their mid-20ies) to pulp. Same with Evert. Chris lost her first match to a 16-year-old Graf in April 1986 and never won a match again against the German. She had to suffer a lot of 2-6 1-6 style humiliations. So much about Navi's competition in the mid-80ies ....


Condi


It's also a fact that Steffi only played Hana when she was healthy TWICE. Get it? TWICE, and they split the matches. Hana's win came AFTER Steffi had already beaten Martina and Chris and had won 4 tournaments in a row on clay.

No one would ever suggest that Hana was as great a player as Steffi was. But she is one of the all time greats of the game with 4 grand slam titles and the only player that could repeatedly defeat Navratilova and Evert during their peak years.

And guess what? Mandlikova repeatedly beat down Sabatini (5-2), even on clay (3-0). Gaby's one convincing win was win Hana was ready to retire. So if you're going to use head to heads, then don't just use the ones that suit you. If Gaby was quality competition, then Hana certainly surpasses that standard.

Again, why do you keep harping on Shriver when you say she's just a clown? And why do you not mention the FACT that Shriver beat Steffi during her grand slam year and had a match point against in another match?

grizzly4life 05-01-2007 12:38 PM

good lord, how old was martina when steffi started beating her?

martina set the standard and made future players work alot harder.

martina is hands-down #1 women's player of all-time. no debate whatsoever!

Condoleezza 05-01-2007 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grizzly4life (Post 1415486)
good lord, how old was martina when steffi started beating her? .... martina is hands-down #1 women's player of all-time. no debate whatsoever!

Martina was 29 and Steffi 16.

In the USA (and Australia because of Court) there is obviously still some debate whether Graf really is GOAT. In the rest of the world this has been settled long ago.

22 slams in the open era, each blue-chip slam won at least 5 times, one Golden Grand Slam and 8 years as #1 simply can't be beaten.

Condi

Andres 05-01-2007 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Condoleezza (Post 1415548)
Martina was 29 and Steffi 16.

In the USA (and Australia because of Court) there is obviously still some debate whether Graf really is GOAT. In the rest of the world this has been settled long ago.

22 slams in the open era, each blue-chip slam won at least 5 times, one Golden Grand Slam and 8 years as #1 simply can't be beaten.

Condi

345 WTA titles (345!!!!) and 1442 wins can't be eaten.

Condoleezza 05-01-2007 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andres Guazzelli (Post 1415590)
345 WTA titles (345!!!!) and 1442 wins can't be eaten.


Court has more titles.

It's not about quantity but quality in the GOAT race.

22 slams in open era, a Golden Grand Slam (plus a non-calendar-year GS), a record 8 year-end #1's, each blue-chip slam (FO, wim, USO) won at least 5 times ....


Condi

Andres 05-01-2007 01:26 PM

If you talk about the Open Era (as you do, cause you keep saying 22 GS in Open Era, cause Court has more GS than Graf), then no, Court doesn't have more titles.

And 18 GS compared to 22 is not that far away. What about the doubles slams? Or they don't matter to you at all? 31 DOUBLES SLAMS! That's almost one and a half the total Slams Graf has.

And 10 mixed doubles.

18 + 31 + 10 = 59

59 slam titles. In my opinion, that beats Graf's slam achievements.

Condoleezza 05-01-2007 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andres Guazzelli (Post 1415603)
If you talk about the Open Era (as you do, cause you keep saying 22 GS in Open Era, cause Court has more GS than Graf), then no, Court doesn't have more titles.

And 18 GS compared to 22 is not that far away. ...

It's 4 slams.
The same difference as between Majoli and V.Williams, between Myskina and Hingis.

Condi

Condoleezza 05-01-2007 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andres Guazzelli (Post 1415603)
.... What about the doubles slams? Or they don't matter to you at all? 31 DOUBLES SLAMS! That's almost one and a half the total Slams Graf has.

And 10 mixed doubles.

18 + 31 + 10 = 59

59 slam titles. In my opinion, that beats Graf's slam achievements.

Pam Shriver has 13 doubles slams.
Jana Novotna has one singles slam.

What would you prefer?


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:38 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2006 - Tennis Warehouse