Originally Posted by suwanee4712
NadalAgassi, when you spell it out that way as an overall clay courter I would rank them : Sabatini, Martinez, Hingis, and Mandlikova.
But if you asked me to rank them on their French Open records it would go like this : Mandlikova, Hingis, Sabatini, Martinez.
If all of these players were in their prime and the top seeds at the French I would likely seed them Hingis, Mandlikova, Sabatini, and Martinez.
If I had to rank Hana's records at each of the slams based on # of quality finishes and consistency it would go like this: US Open, French Open, Australian Open, and Wimbledon
Maybe this exercise is the best proof to support BTurner's suggestion that Hana was not a great clay courter but capable of great things on clay?
Now if someone could make sense of Hana's Wimbledon record I would appreciate that.
Thanks for your answer. The way I see it would be:
Martinez- has a very good clay court game. Doesnt have a champions mentality though or quite a champions game in general.
Sabatini- Has a very good game and a great game for clay. Definitely the surface her game is best suited to, although when she became more a net rusher it became very well suited for faster courts too. Isnt super weak mentally but doesnt have the killer instinct to be totally clutch at the key moments. Maybe doesnt have the extra gear in her game to go to either.
Mandlikova- Super talented player whose game can translate to clay even though it isnt really her surface.
Hingis- the biggest mystery of Roland Garros history perhaps. Has both the game for clay, does have the champions mentality as all her time at #1 and all her big titles prove. Completely baffling she didnt win a French, still cant understand it. Probably should have won multiple. She seemed to be a chronic choker at Roland Garros.