Navratilova's losses in the 80ies

Condoleezza · May 1, 2007

Quite interesting against whom Martina Navratilova lost during her prime in the 1980ies.

80: Turnbull (2), King, Austin (2), Stove, Evert (2), Mandlikova (2), Jaeger, Shriver
81: Jaeger (3), Kohde, Evert (2), Hanika, Nagelsen, Mandlikova, Austin (4)

82: Hanika, Shriver, Evert
83: Horvath
84: Mandlikova, Sukova
85: Evert (2), Mandlikova (2), Kohde
86: Jordan, Graf, Evert

87: Mandlikova, Graf (2), Evert (2), Sabatini (2), Sukova
88: Evert (2), Zvereva (2), Graf, Garrison, Sukova
89: Sukova, Neiland, Zvereva, Sabatini, Graf (3)

In 1980 Stove was 35, King 36, Austin 17 and Jaeger 15.
In the mid-80ies these old-timers and these wunderkinds were gone.
Navratilova had some easy 5 years until ....
... the new crop (Graf, Sabatini and - at least on slow courts - Zvereva) took over.

When we exclude Steffi, Gaby and Natasha Navratilova had only 4, 4 and 2 losses in the years 1987-89. That is an average of 3.3 losses per year. During her alleged "peak years" (1982-86) she had 2.8 losses on average.
No big difference.

Obviously Naratilova had luck that Stove & King were to old in the mid-80ies, that Austin & Jaeger burnt out with injuries and that Graf & Sabatini weren't born 5 years earlier. Kudos to her that she was able to use the window of opportunity.

Condi

suwanee4712 · May 1, 2007

Condoleezza said:
Quite interesting against whom Martina Navratilova lost during her prime in the 1980ies.

80: Turnbull (2), King, Austin (2), Stove, Evert (2), Mandlikova (2), Jaeger, Shriver
81: Jaeger (3), Kohde, Evert (2), Hanika, Nagelsen, Mandlikova, Austin (4)

82: Hanika, Shriver, Evert
83: Horvath
84: Mandlikova, Sukova
85: Evert (2), Mandlikova (2), Kohde
86: Jordan, Graf, Evert

87: Mandlikova, Graf (2), Evert (2), Sabatini (2), Sukova
88: Evert (2), Zvereva (2), Graf, Garrison, Sukova
89: Sukova, Neiland, Zvereva, Sabatini, Graf (3)

In 1980 Stove was 35, King 36, Austin 17 and Jaeger 15.
In the mid-80ies these old-timers and these wunderkinds were gone.
Navratilova had some easy 5 years until ....
... the new crop (Graf, Sabatini and - at least on slow courts - Zvereva) took over.

When we exclude Steffi, Gaby and Natasha Navratilova had only 4, 4 and 2 losses in the years 1987-89. That is an average of 3.3 losses per year. During her alleged "peak years" (1982-86) she had 2.8 losses on average.
No big difference.

Obviously Naratilova had luck that Stove & King were to old in the mid-80ies, that Austin & Jaeger burnt out with injuries and that Graf & Sabatini weren't born 5 years earlier. Kudos to her that she was able to use the window of opportunity.

Condi

Yet another big pile of elephant dung from the master dung shoveller himself - who, I might say, hinds behind a woman's personna........... But I will thank you for making a case for Martina's era to be quite strong. She faced a lot of good serve and volley players that were able to challenge her. I'm surprised you chose to remind people of that, considering you call this the "clown era."

Any idiot can look at Martina's record and tell which years were her peak years. You say that Martina was lucky that Gaby was young and wasn't born 5 years earlier? Ms. Sabatini won ONE grand slam in her entire career. She's not even a top 20 female player of the Open era. I think Martina's trophy case as well as her (15-5) head to head record tells anyone all they need to know about the threat Gaby posed to Martina as someone who would've stopped her from winning slams.

You make such a big deal about BJK being a contender into her late 30's. Martina beat Steffi AND Monica when she was 37 years old. How can this be? If BJK isn't supposed to be beating top players at age 37, what's the difference when Martina did it to BOTH top players in 1993?

Condoleezza · May 1, 2007

suwanee4712 said:
Yet another big pile of elephant dung from the master dung shoveller himself - who, I might say, hinds behind a woman's personna........... But I will thank you for making a case for Martina's era to be quite strong. She faced a lot of good serve and volley players that were able to challenge her. I'm surprised you chose to remind people of that, considering you call this the "clown era."

Any idiot can look at Martina's record and tell which years were her peak years. You say that Martina was lucky that Gaby was young and wasn't born 5 years earlier? Ms. Sabatini won ONE grand slam in her entire career. She's not even a top 20 female player of the Open era. I think Martina's trophy case as well as her (15-5) head to head record tells anyone all they need to know about the threat Gaby posed to Martina as someone who would've stopped her from winning slams.

You make such a big deal about BJK being a contender into her late 30's. Martina beat Steffi AND Monica when she was 37 years old. How can this be? If BJK isn't supposed to be beating top players at age 37, what's the difference when Martina did it to BOTH top players in 1993?

What about

"In 1982-86 Navratilova had only Evert, Mandlikova and SHRIVER

D

) as opposition."

didn't make it to your screen?

Condi

suwanee4712 · May 1, 2007

Condoleezza said:
What about

"In 1982-86 Navratilova had only Evert, Mandlikova and SHRIVER D ) as opposition."

didn't make it to your screen?

Condi

Then why did you bring up Martina's losses to players like Sukova, Jordan, Kohde Kilsch? You can't have it both ways. Either she was a great player who had competition outside of the top 4 or she didn't. You proved that she did.

Condoleezza · May 1, 2007

suwanee4712 said:
Then why did you bring up Martina's losses to players like Sukova, Jordan, Kohde Kilsch? You can't have it both ways. Either she was a great player who had competition outside of the top 4 or she didn't. You proved that she did.

Someone said Navratilova only lost to journeywomen in 1987-89 (trying to prove Navi being over-the-hill), conveniently forgetting Navi's losses to Kohde, Hanika, Jordan, Horvath types in the mid-80ies.
The difference is that in 80/81 and in 87/89 she had some really good opposition as well. So she lost more than her occasional match here and there against Evert and a against journeywomen.

Condi

suwanee4712 · May 1, 2007

Condoleezza said:
Someone said Navratilova only lost to journeywomen in 1987-89 (trying to prove Navi being over-the-hill), conveniently forgetting Navi's losses to Kohde, Hanika, Jordan, Horvath types in the mid-80ies.
The difference is that in 80/81 and in 87/89 she had some really good opposition as well. So she lost more than her occasional match here and there against Evert and a against journeywomen.

Condi

Meanwhile, you forget that Martina revolutionized the game beginning in 1982 with her commitment to cross training, fitness, and nutrition? The players that beat her in 1981 were still around for the most part in 1986. However, she lost to them fewer times because she was a much better player from 1982 through 1986 than she was in 1981. From 1987 through 1991, Martina was often in turmoil with injuries and all sort of off the court issues - thing you regularly use to excuse Steffi's losses.

Condoleezza · May 1, 2007

suwanee4712 said:
Then why did you bring up Martina's losses to players like Sukova, Jordan, Kohde Kilsch? You can't have it both ways. Either she was a great player who had competition outside of the top 4 or she didn't. You proved that she did.

Top players almost always lose to journeywomen like Nagelsen, Hanika (Navi in 80/81) Jordan, Horvath, Jordan, Kohde (Navi in 82-86) Neiland, Garrison, Zvereva (Navi in 87-89), deSwardt, Coetzer (Graf in 93-96) now and then.

Why did Navi lose more tennis matches in 87-89 and 80/81 compared to 82-86?
Because in 80/81 (King, Austin, Jaeger) and 87-89 (Graf, Sabatini) she had also considerable NON-journeywoman opposition which she didn't have in 82-86.

Again for the intellectually challenged:

1980/81: losses to
a) Evert
b) King, Austin, Jaeger
c) some journeywomen

1982-86: losses to
a) Evert
b) some journeywomen

1987-89: losses to
a) Evert
b) Graf, Sabatini
c) some journeywomen

In 82-86 there were no Kings, Austins, Jaegers, Grafs, Sabatinis.
So Navi had less losses. And not because those years were her peak and in 87-89 she was over-the-hill.

Condi

Condoleezza · May 1, 2007

suwanee4712 said:
Meanwhile, you forget that Martina revolutionized the game beginning in 1982 with her commitment to cross training, fitness, and nutrition? The players that beat her in 1981 were still around for the most part in 1986. ....

You are misinformed - and simply lying.
Navratilova had 7 of 12 losses that year against Austin and Jaeger.
Both didn't play anymore in 1986.

suwanee4712 said:
....From 1987 through 1991, Martina was often in turmoil with injuries and all sort of off the court issues - thing you regularly use to excuse Steffi's losses.

Don't be ridiculous.
Navratilova's court issues never were daily front-page headline stuff as the Graf Blackmail Scandal of 1990-92. This scandal had exactly 37 front-page headline stories in Germany's biggest tabloid. To compare that with Navi's duress is simply idiotic.

Condi

suwanee4712 · May 1, 2007

Speaking of intellectually challenged............

Mandlikova, Sukova, Kohde Kilsch, and Jordan were not "journeymen" tennis players from 1982 through 1986. They were top players during that time period. One won 4 grand slam titles, another appeared in 4 grand slam finals, another made one grand slam final, and the other was a regular grand slam quarterfinalist with a few semis.

So when you list Martina's losses for that period, its not just a) Evert and b) some journeywomen as you suggest.

The fact that you would list Mandlikova as a journeywoman tennis player and not Sabatini just proves further that you're an idiot.

Condoleezza · May 1, 2007

suwanee4712 said:
Speaking of intellectually challenged............

Mandlikova, Sukova, Kohde Kilsch, and Jordan were not "journeymen" tennis players from 1982 through 1986. They were top players during that time period. One won 4 grand slam titles, another appeared in 4 grand slam finals, another made one grand slam final, and the other was a regular grand slam quarterfinalist with a few semis.

So when you list Martina's losses for that period, its not just a) Evert and b) some journeywomen as you suggest.

The fact that you would list Mandlikova as a journeywoman tennis player and not Sabatini just proves further that you're an idiot.

It is a fact that Mandlikova and Shriver were Navi's main opposition (with Evert) in the mid-80ies.
When Graf took over in 1987 she regularily beat Hana and Pam (both still in their mid-20ies) to pulp. Same with Evert. Chris lost her first match to a 16-year-old Graf in April 1986 and never won a match again against the German. She had to suffer a lot of 2-6 1-6 style humiliations. So much about Navi's competition in the mid-80ies ....

Condi

suwanee4712 · May 1, 2007

Condoleezza said:
You are misinformed - and simply lying.
Navratilova had 7 of 12 losses that year against Austin and Jaeger.
Both didn't play anymore in 1986.

Don't be ridiculous.
Navratilova's court issues never were daily front-page headline stuff as the Graf Blackmail Scandal of 1990-92. This scandal had exactly 37 front-page headline stories in Germany's biggest tabloid. To compare that with Navi's duress is simply idiotic.

Condi

Lying? Martina played Tracy and Andrea into 1983. Not that you would know it because you never saw Andrea play, but Martina beat her in the 1983 Wimbledon final. So yes, she did play most of those players during this time period.

As far as Martina goes, I can't believe you think anyone is stupid enough to think that Martina didn't have off court issues that attracted a lot of publicity. The difference is that Martina still beat Steffi in the 1991 US Open SF the WEEK BEFORE she was to have a palimony suit tried in front of a WORLDWIDE audience. No excuses necessary - dumbass.

Condoleezza · May 1, 2007

suwanee4712 said:
Lying? Martina played Tracy and Andrea into 1983. Not that you would know it because you never saw Andrea play, but Martina beat her in the 1983 Wimbledon final. So yes, she did play most of those players during this time period. ...

We were talking of 1986, not 1983, son ....

suwanee4712 said:
.... As far as Martina goes, I can't believe you think anyone is stupid enough to think that Martina didn't have off court issues that attracted a lot of publicity. The difference is that Martina still beat Steffi in the 1991 US Open SF the WEEK BEFORE she was to have a palimony suit tried in front of a WORLDWIDE audience. No excuses necessary - dumbass.

A "world-wide" audience! She wasn't even front-page tabloid stuff in the US with that.

Condi

suwanee4712 · May 1, 2007

Condoleezza said:
It is a fact that Mandlikova and Shriver were Navi's main opposition (with Evert) in the mid-80ies.
When Graf took over in 1987 she regularily beat Hana and Pam (both still in their mid-20ies) to pulp. Same with Evert. Chris lost her first match to a 16-year-old Graf in April 1986 and never won a match again against the German. She had to suffer a lot of 2-6 1-6 style humiliations. So much about Navi's competition in the mid-80ies ....

Condi

It's also a fact that Steffi only played Hana when she was healthy TWICE. Get it? TWICE, and they split the matches. Hana's win came AFTER Steffi had already beaten Martina and Chris and had won 4 tournaments in a row on clay.

No one would ever suggest that Hana was as great a player as Steffi was. But she is one of the all time greats of the game with 4 grand slam titles and the only player that could repeatedly defeat Navratilova and Evert during their peak years.

And guess what? Mandlikova repeatedly beat down Sabatini (5-2), even on clay (3-0). Gaby's one convincing win was win Hana was ready to retire. So if you're going to use head to heads, then don't just use the ones that suit you. If Gaby was quality competition, then Hana certainly surpasses that standard.

Again, why do you keep harping on Shriver when you say she's just a clown? And why do you not mention the FACT that Shriver beat Steffi during her grand slam year and had a match point against in another match?

grizzly4life · May 1, 2007

good lord, how old was martina when steffi started beating her?

martina set the standard and made future players work alot harder.

martina is hands-down #1 women's player of all-time. no debate whatsoever!

Condoleezza · May 1, 2007

grizzly4life said:
good lord, how old was martina when steffi started beating her? .... martina is hands-down #1 women's player of all-time. no debate whatsoever!

Martina was 29 and Steffi 16.

In the USA (and Australia because of Court) there is obviously still some debate whether Graf really is GOAT. In the rest of the world this has been settled long ago.

22 slams in the open era, each blue-chip slam won at least 5 times, one Golden Grand Slam and 8 years as #1 simply can't be beaten.

Condi

Andres · May 1, 2007

Condoleezza said:
Martina was 29 and Steffi 16.

In the USA (and Australia because of Court) there is obviously still some debate whether Graf really is GOAT. In the rest of the world this has been settled long ago.

22 slams in the open era, each blue-chip slam won at least 5 times, one Golden Grand Slam and 8 years as #1 simply can't be beaten.

Condi

345 WTA titles (345!!!!) and 1442 wins can't be eaten.

Condoleezza · May 1, 2007

Andres Guazzelli said:
345 WTA titles (345!!!!) and 1442 wins can't be eaten.

Court has more titles.

It's not about quantity but quality in the GOAT race.

22 slams in open era, a Golden Grand Slam (plus a non-calendar-year GS), a record 8 year-end #1's, each blue-chip slam (FO, wim, USO) won at least 5 times ....

Condi

Andres · May 1, 2007

If you talk about the Open Era (as you do, cause you keep saying 22 GS in Open Era, cause Court has more GS than Graf), then no, Court doesn't have more titles.

And 18 GS compared to 22 is not that far away. What about the doubles slams? Or they don't matter to you at all? 31 DOUBLES SLAMS! That's almost one and a half the total Slams Graf has.

And 10 mixed doubles.

18 + 31 + 10 = 59

59 slam titles. In my opinion, that beats Graf's slam achievements.

Condoleezza · May 1, 2007

Andres Guazzelli said:
If you talk about the Open Era (as you do, cause you keep saying 22 GS in Open Era, cause Court has more GS than Graf), then no, Court doesn't have more titles.

And 18 GS compared to 22 is not that far away. ...

It's 4 slams.
The same difference as between Majoli and V.Williams, between Myskina and Hingis.

Condi

Condoleezza · May 1, 2007

Andres Guazzelli said:
.... What about the doubles slams? Or they don't matter to you at all? 31 DOUBLES SLAMS! That's almost one and a half the total Slams Graf has.

And 10 mixed doubles.

18 + 31 + 10 = 59

59 slam titles. In my opinion, that beats Graf's slam achievements.

Pam Shriver has 13 doubles slams.
Jana Novotna has one singles slam.

What would you prefer?

Andres · May 1, 2007

Condoleezza said:
It's 4 slams.
The same difference as between Majoli and V.Williams, between Myskina and Hingis.

Condi

I know what the difference is, thanks. I didn't ask for the answer. In fact, I didn't even make a question about it.
59 slams ... are pretty much a little more than DOUBLE the ammount of slams Graf has.

Condoleezza · May 1, 2007

Andres Guazzelli said:
I know what the difference is, thanks. I didn't ask for a reply.
59 slams ... are pretty much a little more than DOUBLE the ammount of slams Graf has.

Liezel Huber has doubles slams ....

Next question?

Condi

Andres · May 1, 2007

Condoleezza said:
Liezel Huber has doubles slams ....

Next question?

Condi

Steffi has only one. So?

Graf has achieved much more than Seles. In my opinion, Graf was better than Seles. But achievements-wise, you seem to be taking all credit from Navratilova's. 59 slams and 345 titles! Come on!!

It's not that wacky of an idea to believe Martina was the GOAT!

Condoleezza · May 1, 2007

Andres Guazzelli said:
Steffi only has only one. So?

Graf has achieved much more than Seles. In my opinion, Graf was better than Seles. But achievements-wise, you seem to be taking all credit from Navratilova's. 59 slams and 345 titles! Come on!!

It's not that wacky of an idea to believe Martina was the GOAT!

Of course it is not wacky.
Most fans and experts think Graf is GOAT, though.

You know that you are in big trouble in the GOAT race when your fans resort to bringing up your mixed doubles records ....

Condi

Andres · May 1, 2007

Condoleezza said:
Of course it is not wacky.
Most fans and experts think Graf is GOAT, though.

You know that you are in big trouble in the GOAT race when your fans resort to bringing up your mixed doubles records ....

Condi

Without the mixed doubles records, Martina still out-titles Steffi in a ratio of around 2.5:1

Steffi is your GOAT, Martina is mine.
We're all happy now with our own opinions

Andy

Condoleezza · May 1, 2007

Andres Guazzelli said:
Without the mixed doubles records, Martina still out-titles Steffi in a ratio of around 2.5:1

Steffi is your GOAT, Martina is mine.
We're all happy now with our own opinions

Andy

Let's say Steffi is my and most tennis experts' and fans' GOAT, Martina is yours.
Nothing wrong with that.

Condi

Andres · May 1, 2007

Condoleezza said:
Let's say Steffi is my and most tennis experts' and fans' GOAT, Martina is yours.
Nothing wrong with that.

Condi

I don't have a problem with that.
Whatever other people say won't change my mind about it.

And for the record, MOST experts is not the most accurate way to put it. I'll say it's more like a 50-50.

And certainly is not most fan's, as you can already see by yourself reading these boards.

CEvertFan · May 1, 2007

Condoleezza said:
What about

"In 1982-86 Navratilova had only Evert, Mandlikova and SHRIVER D ) as opposition."

didn't make it to your screen?

Condi

I would rather take Sabatini as the main competition than Evert or even Mandlikova anyday. Shriver I would put in the same category as Gaby.

Andres · May 1, 2007

When asked who was the greatest player ever, Graf replied, “For me, she [Navratilova] is the uncontested No. 1; she has left a mark on the sport like no one else.”

As much as Navratilova might yearn for the unofficial “greatest ever” accolade, in ‘96 she conceded, “Steffi is the best all-around player of all time, regardless of the surface.”

None of them is going to say "Of course, I'M the greatest ever" , but it's good to have THEIR insights about it.

Condoleezza · May 1, 2007

CEvertFan said:
I would rather take Sabatini as the main competition than Evert or even Mandlikova anyday. Shriver I would put in the same category as Gaby.

Pammy?
You cannot be serious ...

Condi

suwanee4712 · May 1, 2007

Condoleezza said:
Court has more titles.

It's not about quantity but quality in the GOAT race.

22 slams in open era, a Golden Grand Slam (plus a non-calendar-year GS), a record 8 year-end #1's, each blue-chip slam (FO, wim, USO) won at least 5 times ....

Condi

Yes, quality does matter. If you're going to discount Court's slams, then you might as well disregard anything Steffi won past Wimbledon 1992. Because anything after that was against a field void of Steffi's peer group of all time greats. The best players she beat were Hingis and Aranxta, neither of which were top 10 all time. Court, Evert, and Navratilova all had to face top 5 all time greats every single year of their careers, along with 2nd and 3rd tier great that are superior to or the equal of Hingis, Sanchez, Sabatini, and Novotna..

Condoleezza · May 1, 2007

suwanee4712 said:
.... Court, Evert, and Navratilova all had to face top 5 all time greats every single year of their careers, along with 2nd and 3rd tier great that are superior to or the equal of Hingis, Sanchez, Sabatini, and Novotna..

Which 2nd and 3rd tier greats did Navi play every single year of her career which were superior to Hingis, Sanchez, Sabatini??

Condi

suwanee4712 · May 1, 2007

Condoleezza said:
Which 2nd and 3rd tier greats did Navi play every single year of her career which were superior to Hingis, Sanchez, Sabatini??

Condi

Goolagong and Austin are at least equal to Hingis. In fact, considering the competition each of those players faced, its more than fair to rank Gooly higher. Wade is superior to Gaby (3 slams to 1), and Mandlikova is equal to or superior than Sanchez (take Mandlikova out of C&M's prime and put her in Sanchez's era and see what happens). She also had to deal with Court, King, and Evert as well as Seles and Graf. And she won the vast majority of her matches (even in her late 30's) against the likes of Novotna, Sanchez, and Gaby.

Graf played Martina, Evert, Mandlikova, Sabatini, Seles, Sanchez, Hingis, Pierce, Majoli, Davenport, Williams, and Novotna.

That's not even a contest. Martina played far more all time greats than Steffi did. And she played more top tier all time greats by far.

Arafel · May 1, 2007

Condoleezza said:
Top players almost always lose to journeywomen like Nagelsen, Hanika (Navi in 80/81) Jordan, Horvath, Jordan, Kohde (Navi in 82-86) Neiland, Garrison, Zvereva (Navi in 87-89), deSwardt, Coetzer (Graf in 93-96) now and then.

Why did Navi lose more tennis matches in 87-89 and 80/81 compared to 82-86?
Because in 80/81 (King, Austin, Jaeger) and 87-89 (Graf, Sabatini) she had also considerable NON-journeywoman opposition which she didn't have in 82-86.

Again for the intellectually challenged:

1980/81: losses to
a) Evert
b) King, Austin, Jaeger
c) some journeywomen

1982-86: losses to
a) Evert
b) some journeywomen

1987-89: losses to
a) Evert
b) Graf, Sabatini
c) some journeywomen

In 82-86 there were no Kings, Austins, Jaegers, Grafs, Sabatinis.
So Navi had less losses. And not because those years were her peak and in 87-89 she was over-the-hill.

Condi

Well, the simple explanation is that she lost more matches in 80/81 because she was still not pushing herself as a player. In the book The Rivals, a Navratilova "practice" in 81 is described as Martina going out, hitting a few balls, saying hi to people, and walking around the tournament grounds. Nancy Lieberman was horrified. It wasn't until 82 that Navratilova made a concerted effort to reach her potential. That explains a lot of the losses in those yeras.

As for 87-89, if you can't acknowledge that Martina was, by that time, fading physically as a player, there really isn't much worth discussing.

Condoleezza · May 1, 2007

suwanee4712 said:
... Wade is superior to Gaby (3 slams to 1), ...

Wade won her slams mostly against recreational players. Only a handful of serious competition back then.

Sabatini had to cope with Navratilova, Graf, Sanchez, Seles.
Take her back in time to the 70ies and she would have won 8+ slams for sure.

Condi

Condoleezza · May 1, 2007

Arafel said:
Well, the simple explanation is that she lost more matches in 80/81 because she was still not pushing herself as a player. In the book The Rivals, a Navratilova "practice" in 81 is described as Martina going out, hitting a few balls, saying hi to people, and walking around the tournament grounds. Nancy Lieberman was horrified. It wasn't until 82 that Navratilova made a concerted effort to reach her potential. That explains a lot of the losses in those yeras.

As for 87-89, if you can't acknowledge that Martina was, by that time, fading physically as a player, there really isn't much worth discussing.

So do I get this right:
Before 1982 (when King, Stove, Austin, Jaeger were still around) Navi "wasn't pushing herself as a player"?
And after 1986 (when Graf took over women's tennis) she was "fading physically as a player"? Although she had a 67-3 winning streak in 1989/90 with those 3 losses all coming against Graf?

How convenient ....

Condi

CEvertFan · May 1, 2007

Condoleezza said:
Wade won her slams mostly against recreational players. Only a handful of serious competition back then.

Sabatini had to cope with Navratilova, Graf, Sanchez, Seles.
Take her back in time to the 70ies and she would have won 8+ slams for sure.

Condi

You're not serious, are you?

lambielspins · May 1, 2007

Condoleezza said:
Wade won her slams mostly against recreational players. Only a handful of serious competition back then.

Sabatini had to cope with Navratilova, Graf, Sanchez, Seles.
Take her back in time to the 70ies and she would have won 8+ slams for sure.

Condi

Are you crazy? Wade won her U.S Open title over a women named Billie Jean King in the final. Ever heard of her? 12 slam singles titles, including 6 Wimbledon singles titles. 20 total Wimbledon titles counting doubles, tied with Navratilova for most. 3 of the 4 slams in 1972, only missing the Australian Open. Yeah she was pretty good.

Wade won Wimbledon beating some gal named Chris Evert in the semis. Y know #2 all time in matches and tournaments won behind Navratilova, most U.S Opens in Open era, most French Opens in history, 18 singles slams. Yeah she was pretty good too.

Wade won the Australian Open over someone named Evonne Goolagong in the final. You know the Evonne that won the French Open and Wimbledon at age 19, ripping the #1 ranking away from Court and King at that tender age. The Evonne who won Wimbledon 9 years apart, 1971 at 19 and 1980 at 28. The Evonne who reached 4 straight U.S Open finals. The Evonne who most formidable in Australia where she won 4 straight titles, the place Wade took her down in the final to win this particular slam.

No player who won only 1 slam title in any era would have won 8 in another, to argue so on any player is ridiculous. You can debate various competition levels and such but to some point you either have it or you dont. Players like Sabatini, Sukova, Novotna, Martinez, Shriver, Jaeger, end up as either 1 time or best players not to win slam titles for a reason. They are good but they just dont quite have what it takes.

If Shriver and Jaeger were good enough they would have beaten Navratilova and Evert to win some slams If Sabatini and Novotna were good enough they would have beaten Graf and Seles to win multiple slams. They didnt, they just arent quite good enough. There is no arguing them winning a truckload of slams in another era, maybe arguing them winning 1 or 2 more depending on your view, but to argue 8 or more is nonsense.

travlerajm · May 1, 2007

Navratilova is the female GOAT, period. No stats can convince me otherwise.
At age 49 in her last slam, she still looked to me like the best female doubles player in the world. That's awesome. And I even believe that she could still have been a top-20 player at age 50 if she still practiced singles fulltime. She's that good.

Condoleezza · May 2, 2007

lambielspins said:
Are you crazy? Wade won her U.S Open title over a women named Billie Jean King in the final. Ever heard of her? 12 slam singles titles, including 6 Wimbledon singles titles. ...

Sabatini won her U.S. Open title over a woman named Steffi Graf in the final. Ever heard of her? 22 slam singles titles, including 7 Wimbledon singles titles.

Your point being?

Condi

lambielspins · May 2, 2007

Condoleezza said:
Sabatini won her U.S. Open title over a woman named Steffi Graf in the final. Ever heard of her? 22 slam singles titles, including 7 Wimbledon singles titles.

Your point being?

Condi

Read your own statement again:

Wade won her slams mostly against recreational players.

So now that I proved you were full of it, and had no clue what you were talking about, you bring up Sabatini winning her only slam by beating Graf. That has nothing to do with your claim Wade won her slams vs recreational players.

Wade won all her slams beating atleast one great player, and multiple other tough opponents. Yeah Sabatini did too, good for her since it was her ONLY slam, while Wade won 3 of them.

Condoleezza · May 2, 2007

lambielspins said:
Read your own statement again:

Wade won her slams mostly against recreational players.

So now that I proved you were full of it, and had no clue what you were talking about, you bring up Sabatini winning her only slam by beating Graf. That has nothing to do with your claim Wade won slams vs recreational players.

Wade won all her slams beating atleast one great player, and multiple other tough opponents. Yeah Sabatini did too, good for her since it was her ONLY slam, while Wade won 3 of them.

I didn't mean that her final opponents were recreational players.
Of course there were some very good players even back then. But only 5 or 10. The rest of the slam fields consisted of recreational players. Today there are 128 pros.

Condi

lambielspins · May 2, 2007

Condoleezza said:
I didn't mean that her final opponents were recreational players.
Of course there were some very good players even back then. But only 5 or 10. The rest of the slam fields consisted of recreational players. Today there are 128 pros.

Condi

Ok so you are saying the fields and draws players like Graf, and recent players like Sabatini and others, are more full of all true professionals and competitive players. Much more depth throughout a field of 100+. In that case I can see that. You are probably right. Back then the top 8 or so had nothing to worry from the rest of the field. These days even girls ranked outside the top 50 can have a huge serve, or a huge forehand, or be really have wheels and chase everything done, or have something that makes them really dangerous.

Tennis wasnt big money then the way it is now. So only the top group were even making a real living off it. Today many journeywomen pros that make up the majority of the regulars on the pro tour make a living off it, even those fighting to just be ranked in the top 100 and get straight into events. So it is likely the players as you go down the ranks are more "pro" then they were back then, giving the game more depth and tougher competition overall.

suwanee4712 · May 2, 2007

Condoleezza said:
Wade won her slams mostly against recreational players. Only a handful of serious competition back then.

Sabatini had to cope with Navratilova, Graf, Sanchez, Seles.
Take her back in time to the 70ies and she would have won 8+ slams for sure.

Condi

Funny, I don't recall Gaby having to play Martina, Aranxta, or Monica to win her ONE grand slam title. However I do recall that Wade had to defeat King, Goolagong, and Evert to win her THREE slams.

Besides with all of Steffi's "distractions" that you harp on constantly to excuse her losses, I would think that you are less than impressed with Gaby's win.

If this were a debate about Steffi and Gaby, you would surely be trying to illegitimize Gaby's win talking about a stupid "blackmail scandal" that hardly made news outside of Germany. Which is why she chose to live in the United States - you know, that country you constantly stereotype with your blind hate.

Condoleezza · May 2, 2007

suwanee4712 said:
Funny, I don't recall Gaby having to play Martina, Aranxta, or Monica to win her ONE grand slam title. However I do recall that Wade had to defeat King, Goolagong, and Evert to win her THREE slams. ...

Sabatini lost 2 slam finals and 10 (!) slam semis against Graf.
This although she was table to beat Graf in 11 of 40 matches.

I don't think Wade types would have been able to beat a Graf 11 times ....

Condi

lambielspins · May 2, 2007

suwanee4712 said:
Funny, I don't recall Gaby having to play Martina, Aranxta, or Monica to win her ONE grand slam title.

Well Martina, Aranxta, and Monica were all in the event, even though she did not end up playing them, along with of course Graf who she played and beat. So doesnt being in the same event when you win it count?

suwanee4712 · May 2, 2007

lambielspins said:
Well Martina, Aranxta, and Monica were all in the event, even though she did not end up playing them, along with of course Graf who she played and beat. So doesnt being in the same event when you win it count?

Of course it counts. I'm just using Condi's own standard against him.

Condoleezza · May 3, 2007

suwanee4712 said:
Of course it counts. I'm just using Condi's own standard against him.

Ah, back-pedaling again, this alleged "Graf fan" ....

Condi

slack hack · May 3, 2007

suwanee4712 said:
And guess what? Mandlikova repeatedly beat down Sabatini (5-2), even on clay (3-0). Gaby's one convincing win was win Hana was ready to retire. So if you're going to use head to heads, then don't just use the ones that suit you. If Gaby was quality competition, then Hana certainly surpasses that standard.

Gaby was about 14 and 15 during those losses and already playing Hana in the quarters and semis.
The wta site says Gaby won 27 titles Hana 6.
That doesn't sound correct. I thought Hana won more.

Either way I think they're two of the most gifted ever.
Few players will ever have as many shots in their respective bags as those two.

Here's a link to their head to head
http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/...sp?PlayerID=130007&x=11&y=14&Player1ID=190001

suwanee4712 · May 3, 2007

slack hack said:
Gaby was about 14 and 15 during those losses and already playing Hana in the quarters and semis.
The wta site says Gaby won 27 titles Hana 6.
That doesn't sound correct. I thought Hana won more.

Either way I think they're two of the most gifted ever.
Few players will ever have as many shots in their respective bags as those two.

Here's a link to their head to head
http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/...sp?PlayerID=130007&x=11&y=14&Player1ID=190001

I'm not sure if you've been reading the thread or not, but Condi contends that Sabatini was a better player than Hana, which is ludicrous. As far as Hana playing her when she was 16, so what? Gaby was already pushing the top players. Heck, she won a 6-1 set against Chris at the French in 1986 and then was easily beaten by Hana at Fed Cup on clay.

Yes, I think Sabatini was a great player. But she was not as great as Hana as their records show.

BTW, they each won 27 singles titles. More importantly, Hana won 4 grand slams to Gaby's 1. The wta site is incorrect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hana_Mandlikova

Navratilova's losses in the 80ies

Banned

Professional

Banned

Professional

Banned

Professional

Banned

Banned

Professional

Banned

Professional

Banned

Professional

Professional

Banned

G.O.A.T.

Banned

G.O.A.T.

Banned

Banned

G.O.A.T.

Banned

G.O.A.T.

Banned

G.O.A.T.

Banned

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Banned

Professional

Banned

Professional

Professional

Banned

Banned

Hall of Fame

Banned

Talk Tennis Guru

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Professional

Banned

Banned

Professional

Banned

Rookie

Professional

Similar threads