Top 10 women players of all time at this point- where would you place Serena

[kiki]

which is the toughest decade for women´s play?

I´d say from 1971 till 1981 was great and so were the whole 90´s.

For earlier years, I think the competition was very good from late 40´s till late 50´s, but vanished a bit later on.

[TMF]

Originally Posted by kiki

which is the toughest decade for women´s play?

I´d say from 1971 till 1981 was great and so were the whole 90´s.

For earlier years, I think the competition was very good from late 40´s till late 50´s, but vanished a bit later on.

Hingis won all of her slams in the 90s.
I suppose you believe Kodes era was also very tough.

Haha !

[kiki]

Originally Posted by TMF

Hingis won all of her slams in the 90s.
I suppose you believe Kodes era was also very tough.

Haha !

Yes, Martina is one of the best representatives of the toughest women´s era.

and Kodes is one of the best of the men´s toughest era at top level, with a top 15 that would give goosebumps to any other era.

[TMF]

Originally Posted by kiki

Yes, Martina is one of the best representatives of the toughest women´s era.

and Kodes is one of the best of the men´s toughest era at top level, with a top 15 that would give goosebumps to any other era.

Favorite players doesn't equate tough competitiion. I know there's a few exception like youself who believe otherwise.

To many, Kodes is a footnote of his era. His Wimbledon title was from a very weak draw. I know you're aware of it but refuses to admit.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by TMF

Favorite players doesn't equate tough competitiion. I know there's a few exception like youself who believe otherwise.

To many, Kodes is a footnote of his era. His Wimbledon title was from a very weak draw. I know you're aware of it but refuses to admit.

Kodes era was so extremely tough that even a champion like him is a footnote
Even a guy winning Wimbledon against Nastase, Connors and Borg is a footnote
I wonder how many majors he may win in 2003 or 2004!!!

[kiki]

Kodes; 2 FO 1 W 2 USO F 1 W SF 2 IO F
Rivals: Laver, Rosewall,Nasty,Roche, Newk, Ashe,Smith,Okker,Gimeno,Tanner,Orantes,Panatta,Amr itrJ,Borg,Jimbo

[TMF]

Originally Posted by kiki

Kodes era was so extremely tough that even a champion like him is a footnote
Even a guy winning Wimbledon against Nastase, Connors and Borg is a footnote
I wonder how many majors he may win in 2003 or 2004!!!

It's is not extremely tough when 13 of the 16 top players didn't play Wimbledon. Had that weak draw ever exist in a slam during the 90s and today, many journeyman like Santoro would have won a slam.

Kodes wouldn't win anything in 2003 and 2004. His best chance is the minor event like an ATP250.

[TMF]

Originally Posted by kiki

Kodes; 2 FO 1 W 2 USO F 1 W SF 2 IO F
Rivals: Laver, Rosewall,Nasty,Roche, Newk, Ashe,Smith,Okker,Gimeno,Tanner,Orantes,Panatta,Amr itrJ,Borg,Jimbo

Naming players is pointless when he doesn't have to play them. He met Roger Taylor in the semi and Alex Metreveli in the final, that's a complete joke. Kodes was very lucky to win Wimbledon.

[kiki]

Borg, Connors and Nastase.Much harder field than any 1970´s AO

[abmk]

Originally Posted by kiki

Borg, Connors and Nastase.Much harder field than any 1970´s AO

borg was a full 3 years from his grass court prime(76 onwards) in 73 and connors was yet to hit his peak ( next year ) ... nastase bombed out ...given his inconsistent self, not that surprising ...

70 AO - had ashe,newcombe,okker,ashe,smith
71 AO - had laver,rosewall,ashe,okker,roche,emerson,newk


the other AOs were pretty weak .... its a measure of desperation that you have to compare to that standard to defend wimbledon 73 ... again weakest wimbledon by far in the open era without a shadow of doubt ....

13 out of 16 seeds missing, 81 players missing ...

[abmk]

Originally Posted by kiki

I wonder how many majors he may win in 2003 or 2004!!!

he'd get beaten by agassi/nalbandian/roddick/el ayanoui @ AO 2003
he'd get beaten by ferrero/coria/verkerk/gonzales @ FO 2003
he'd get beaten by federer/roddick/phillippoussis/agassi @ wimbledon 2003
he'd get beaten by roddick/nalbandian/ferrero/agassi/hewitt/federer @ USO 2003


he'd get beaten by federer/safin/agassi/ferrero/nalbandian/hewitt @ AO 2004
he'd get beaten by gaudio/coria/nalbandian/kuerten & maybe even henman@ FO 2004
he'd get beaten by federer/roddick/ancic @ wimbledon 2004
he'd get beaten by federer/agassi/hewitt/johansson/roddick/henman @ USO 2004


so yeah, very clear : ZERO majors ...

every one of these majors >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in strength than any of the majors than kodes won ....

[abmk]

anyways going off track in this thread ... I'm going to stop about that topic in this thread .. maybe in some other thread ....

[kiki]

Originally Posted by abmk

he'd get beaten by agassi/nalbandian/roddick/el ayanoui @ AO 2003
he'd get beaten by ferrero/coria/verkerk/gonzales @ FO 2003
he'd get beaten by federer/roddick/phillippoussis/agassi @ wimbledon 2003
he'd get beaten by roddick/nalbandian/ferrero/agassi/hewitt/federer @ USO 2003


he'd get beaten by federer/safin/agassi/ferrero/nalbandian/hewitt @ AO 2004
he'd get beaten by gaudio/coria/nalbandian/kuerten & maybe even henman@ FO 2004
he'd get beaten by federer/roddick/ancic @ wimbledon 2004
he'd get beaten by federer/agassi/hewitt/johansson/roddick/henman @ USO 2004


so yeah, very clear : ZERO majors ...

every one of these majors >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in strength than any of the majors than kodes won ....

I know you enjoy journeyman like Coria, ancicn,nalbandian,johansson,henman...Your post is so laughable.

Kodes won MORE titles than Roddick and Hewitt assembled.Sorry.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by abmk

borg was a full 3 years from his grass court prime(76 onwards) in 73 and connors was yet to hit his peak ( next year ) ... nastase bombed out ...given his inconsistent self, not that surprising ...

70 AO - had ashe,newcombe,okker,ashe,smith
71 AO - had laver,rosewall,ashe,okker,roche,emerson,newk


the other AOs were pretty weak .... its a measure of desperation that you have to compare to that standard to defend wimbledon 73 ... again weakest wimbledon by far in the open era without a shadow of doubt ....

13 out of 16 seeds missing, 81 players missing ...

He reached two USO finals, beating the world´s nº1 player in each.He also beat a Nastase to be world nº 1 in their FO final, back in 71....Kodes was insanely great¡¡¡