Originally Posted by suwanee4712
Well said. Hana was supremely gifted and later in her career became better at following a gameplan than she was ever given credit for. But her talent was both her strength and her weakness because she didn't know how to harness it. She lacked the focus and tunnel vision that Martina, Steffi, and Chris possessed. The pressure that comes with being such a wanted figure was something she did not handle well.
Maybe most of all, Hana sometimes found losing acceptable. To be an upper level great you have to hate losing with every fiber of your being. This was also what prevented Evonne from doing better but maybe for a different reason.
She didn't enjoy the weekly grind of the tour and it showed in her record at non-slam events. She lived for the slams and thats where 8 of her 15 wins vs. Martina, Chris, and Steffi came. I don't know of another player with that many wins vs. the best of the best without being a fellow member of that group.
I fully agree.In fact, only a megatalented player like her could beat AT MAJORS the trio of Evert,Navratilova and Graf, possibly the greatest trio for consecutive years that womenīs tennis has ever seen ( although Bueno,Court,King are just almost as good IMO)
Some have compared her to Sabatini.Well, Hana and gabriela had the same menthal weakness, which I think comes from pressure (Mandlikova) and complex against Graf (Sabatini).Both curiously won their USO title playing S&V, and Sabatini showed will and maturity to come to the net as often as she did to beat Steffi when she was never expected to do so, and using a tactic she was never familiar with.
Hana could play S&V with the best (King,Navy,Court,Marble) for a whole year and, of course, is much more talented than the Argentinian.There is no possible comparison on the talent side.