View Single Post
Old 01-21-2013, 12:27 PM   #179
Hall Of Fame
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,557

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi View Post

The Seles stabbing should be a much bigger asterix than the Australian Open fields of the 60s. I did a breakdown once and estimated Court would have probably won roughly 9 of her 11 Australian Opens even if everyone played. You cant say anyone would have been favored over her on her home court, on her favorite speed of grass, early in the year when she was always fresh and ready to go (her slam tallies at Wimbledon and U.S Open suffered as she sometimes had a baby or took temporary retirement starting mid year).
Oh so because you did a breakdown, that means it is true?

People always throw out these hypotheticals and rank players based on what they think would have happened - even if these things sometimes contradict each other (i.e. saying that Borg is GOAT because he would have won all the AOs played in the 70s but then also saying Connors would have won all four slams if he'd played in the French in 1974 and would have taken more French titles off Borg throughout the 1970s - which would of course negate Borg's place as GOAT).

In any case I'm getting off the point, which is that the pre-Open Era (and yes I'm aware there was no pro-am split as in the men's, but the level of play and competition was still lower than in the professional era where women knew they were getting paid and thus dedicated themselves more to their sport, skill, fitness etc.) was weaker than the Open Era. Especially the AO.

Plus I love how you assume that Seles would have continued dominating after 1993 when we don't know that is the case. Let's assume McEnroe had been stabbed at the end of 1984 and had to retire, but everything else played out as it actually did. Lendl still ended up dominating the late 80s. In your world, Lendl could not possibly have done this if Mac hadn't been stabbed - but we all know he did anyway.

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi View Post
Of course when it comes to competition Serena had by far the hardest of all time from 1999-2007 when she won most of her current slams.
1999-2003, certainly - a golden age of womens' tennis.

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi View Post
Even the womens game today which people diss has far more depth than anytime before the late 90s. Anyone in the top 50 almost has potential to beat any great player on their day. That was never the case in the womens game in the past.
I don't especially rate the womens' tour today but that is a matter of personal opinion.
Sloane Stephens and Laura Robson: future WTA world No 1 and 2.
Phoenix1983 is offline   Reply With Quote