Originally Posted by suwanee4712
NadalAgassi, I personally would rank Austin over Hana based on what I know. She was tough as nails and was able to beat Martina and nearly run Chris out of the game. Should Hana have beaten Tracy more often than she did? I believe so given Hana's ability to take leads over her. But Tracy was so mentally tough. And when she was #1 I respected her as such.
However, I am convinced that had Tracy remained in the game she would've had to change a lot to stay in the top echalon with M and C. Physically, I don't know if she could've kept up with them. She might've been relegated to fighting Hana for third. With Steffi on the way Tracy would be in a tough position in terms of trying to get back to #1.
Interesting. You could be right but 4 majors to only 2 is a big difference for me. I know I am thinking more in the context of todays game than the game back then though, events like the Avon and Toyota Championships were to many people bigger than the Australian or even the French for awhile. Tracy did get to #1 and Hana never got higher than #3 though, that is also a big difference.
I often wondered if Tracy's decline in results in 1982 and 1983 was all her own physical decline or if it also was part that she was not being able to keep up with athletic progress in the game spurred by Navratilova and Mandilikova.
I do think people exagerrate the career she would have had if she stayed healthy though. Personally I think the 79-81 patch would have probably been the part of her career. I do think she could have reached 5 or 6 major titles, but I dont know if she would have ever got back to #1 ever again, and I certainly dont think she would have ever dominated the game.