View Single Post
Old 02-01-2013, 10:56 PM   #236
Hall Of Fame
Goosehead's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: A bloke in Brighton, England.
Posts: 3,430

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi View Post
I am not saying Wade isnt a great player, or that even losing to 33 year old Wade at Wimbledon is a horrible loss. You are completely missing my point. My point is obviously she is a much lesser player to Evert, and even prime to prime would lose the vast majority of matches, and in fact even did in her own prime when Evert was far from hers. So that being said the very fact it is possible for Wade at 33 to still post numerous wins over prime Evert, including at a major event like Wimbledon, shows that being past your prime and "old" isnt that huge a disadvantage for an all time great still in top health and top ranking form; and even past your prime is not sufficient excuse for Evert to have done so poorly vs Graf for instance as she did, winning only 1 set in 7 matches from the time Steffi got her first win at only 16, having won 0 of her eventual 107 pro titles at that point, and Evert only 31 at that point, onwards (their final matches when Evert was 34). Her record vs Navratilova at Navratilova's peak is even more damning to her being rated as the possible GOAT, or even top 2 or 3 all time, and it might be why some even have Serena over her, as one cant imagine Serena ever doing that poorly vs a fellow all time at any period in time (which they would be right on). I agree if one values only stats Evert has Serena well beat at this point, even with Serenas vastly superior doubles record, but under a more subjective evaluation, it is easy to see how some in this thread could think Serena is a "better" player than Evert, even for their respective times.
wade wasnt 33yrs in 1977 wimbledon,

...she was 31yrs old.
Goosehead is offline   Reply With Quote