Originally Posted by suwanee4712
Evert is underated on grass. Several of her strengths lend themselves beautifully on grass. Combine her strengths with hard flat strokes and you have a big problem on your hands.
Her game was extremely efficient and grass rewards efficiency. Her strokes were economical - no big backswings, nothing excessive. Her movement was efficient - each step purposeful and rarely caught out of position.
Her anticipation partially diluted the speed of the court. Evert wasn't as fast as Graf but no one was quicket to recognize where the ball was going.
And then there was her mental toughness that counteracted the bad bounces. If she's getting bad bounces then so is her opponent. Evert didn't like it, but she refused to show it. Her body language suggests to her opponent "I can deal with this, Can you?"
Australian grass set Evert up beautifully with its higher bounces. Remember, she never once failed to reach a final there.
The one true weakness Chris had on grass was an attackable serve. But so few could actually make her pay.
Don't put me in a hospital for saying this, but I think this is the one surface on which her game continued to improve through the late stages of her career, say '84- 88. After that 83' loss to Jordan, she was not really upset on grass courts at all until the day she retired. She lost two semis to someone lower seeded. One to Mandlikova in Wimbledon 86, and to Sukova in Eastborne in '88. Neither is properly viewed as an upset on grass. If you view it that way, she did better on grass than hard courts, carpet or clay!
Physically she got faster and stronger. She got more pop on her serve and any net shyness from her early and mid career wore off. Her relative lack of patience for long rallies with younger baseliners, made her more bold off the ground. It did not necessarily show itself in results, because she kept meeting that damn Czeck girl. but really, her game fit grass better and better until 88-89 than it did when she was winning Wimbledon.