This is so true it hurts. It's one thing to have the raw physical ability to hit the numbers (100 mph pitch, 120 mph serve, etc). It's another to do what the pros do, which involves not only physical talents but deep training that goes beyond what any of us will know.
How would a modern 4.5 player fare against Evert in her prime?
- Thread starter Claudius
- Start date
This is so true it hurts. It's one thing to have the raw physical ability to hit the numbers (100 mph pitch, 120 mph serve, etc). It's another to do what the pros do, which involves not only physical talents but deep training that goes beyond what any of us will know.
He loses 3 games to a 5.0? Remember I'm saying a 4.5 might win games against female pro, not male pro. I think you are proving my point.
When you get to the 5.0 level, you're a pretty good player and even for a pro, it would be impossible to bagel a 5.5 player every time you played them. It is possible for them to do it more time than not but not every time because no one plays 100% all the time. If Odesnick wanted to, he could've try to go 0 and 0 against all those guys and has a good chance of doing it, but there's no incentive to bagel someone in open level USTA match, he can't get bumped up so as long as he wins, that's all that matters.
4.0 should have an easier time double bageling a 2.5 than a pro vs 5.5.
aphex
Banned
He loses 3 games to a 5.0? Remember I'm saying a 4.5 might win games against female pro, not male pro. I think you are proving my point.
lol...nice effort to twist his point...
he's talking about a 40 y.o. ex-pro whose best ranking was 175...
not a 18 time slam winner in her prime...
good effort though
drakulie
Talk Tennis Guru
He loses 3 games to a 5.0? Remember I'm saying a 4.5 might win games against female pro, not male pro. I think you are proving my point.
NO 4.5 or 5.0 player is going to show Evert, a 18 time grand slam champion, who had the BEST coaching in the world, ate, drank, and slept tennis for over 20 years, and who competed against some of the BEST TENNIS PLAYERS THAT HAVE WALKED THE FACE OF THIS EARTH, something she hasn't seen a million times.
Don't confuse me with the OP. I didn't say a 4.5 would beat Evert. I said that a 4.5 might win a few games off a WTA pro.
mtommer
Hall of Fame
Now if only one could tap their heels three times for everyone to get this.
------------------------
When Michael Chang came into town for the Nats exbo I got to see him demolish his top junior (I believe now it was Domijan) hitting partner. In a couple of sets. Now, you see, this junior was hitting harder than Chang but he wasn't hitting better. You have to remember that at this level these guys are 5.5 - 6.0 level. Chang put on a clinic on how to hit a dime sitting in the corner time and time again. He was THAT good. His hitting parnter didn't stand a chance and he barely won any points, much less a game. I cannot emphasize enough just how good pros are at placement WITH pace. If you want some idea, go throw fifty CONSECUTIVE bulls-eyes on a dart board from sixty feet away.
And women pros? Just as good, just not the same pace or speed to balls which is still better than any 4.5 guy out there. It sounds like some people here need to play some women pros so they can get a reality check on their egos.
Statements like this show just how much you are exaggerating the skills of a pro. Seriously someone who would say such a statement cannot be taken seriously.
Ok every single point I make is twisted into something unrecognizable, and then I am insulted on top of it.
He loses 3 games to a 5.0? Remember I'm saying a 4.5 might win games against female pro, not male pro. I think you are proving my point.
It depends on who the female pro is. Against top players, definitely not, against low end female pros, probably not to maybe and it's a small maybe but I would lean towards no. Of course, this is if both players are playing at the top of their game. 4.5 players ain't that good.
drakulie
Talk Tennis Guru
Evert is/was a WTA Pro. However, what exactly do you mean when you say WTA Pro? The number 1 player (safina), or the 1000 ranked player?
I could tell you this, I know a girl who is curently ranked just inside the top 300, and no 4.5 is getting a game off her, unless they hit 4 consecutive aces she can't get her racquet on. She routinely beats the snot out of juniors who hit well over 120, and have better serves than a weekend 4.5.
I think a solid 4.5 male player with offensive weapons (for a 4.5 player) could win 1 or 2 games off a top 200 female player.
I know by this time tomorrow I will be known as the guy who claims that a 4.5 can beat Safina though.
5263
G.O.A.T.
Very good post. Folks love to create gods.
Has anyone brought up the Bobby Riggs thing?
how old was he in that match??
He sure didn't have a lot of tennis left in the tank at that point.
The fact that he played even close in that match tell me everything I need to know about womens tennis. How the world saw that as a victory is beyond me.
Cindysphinx
G.O.A.T.
I think a more interesting question is whether Everet in her prime with today's racket could take a game off of Serena Williams in her prime.
I think Serena would kill Everet. I think today's players are much stronger and faster, and that would be the difference.
But maybe I had better save that for another thread . . .
I think Serena would kill Everet. I think today's players are much stronger and faster, and that would be the difference.
But maybe I had better save that for another thread . . .
Bobby Riggs? You're joking, right? He was a former world #1. Jack Kramer said that he was one of the greatest players ever. We're not talking about a 4.5 player here.
Riggs, at 70+ years old, would still have beaten a 5.0 pretty handily.
mtommer
Hall of Fame
No, I'm not and that's the point. I watched Chang hit pretty much the same spot ball after ball after ball. Left corner, right corner and back and forth and back and forth. It didn't matter what the other guy hit at him. It was an :shock: experience. If you secured a tennis can lid in a corner and fed Chang fifty balls I bet he would hit the lid 40 - 45 times out of fifty, solid shots with pace too. Yes raiden, pros are THAT good.
drakulie
Talk Tennis Guru
OK, so now Bobby Riggs (one of the greatest male payers in this game) is only as good as a 4.5. :roll:
I got news for everyone here. 4.5/5.0 players might be the best players in their little club with 20 members, but they ain't **** in the grand scheme of things.
There is another BIGGER CLUB, known as, THE EARTH, and in this earth, the Top Dogs are the ATP/WTA pros.
I think a more interesting question is whether Everet in her prime with today's racket could take a game off of Serena Williams in her prime.
I think Serena would kill Everet. I think today's players are much stronger and faster, and that would be the difference.
But maybe I had better save that for another thread . . .
Can Serena in her prime with a wooden racquet beat Everet in her prime with a wooden racquet?
But if what you say is true, then Jelena Krechenko from the year 2023 would kill Serena because tomorrow's players will be much stronger and faster! In tennis, sometimes brains are better than brawn.
According to USTA Experienced player guidelines, Riggs was a 5.0 at that time.
Actually Riggs became a 4.5 at age 61.
I know you're being fascetious, but there is no realy provision for someone who was a #1 player in the world. It'd be akin to saying that Rod Laver would be competitive against a 5.0, where I would bet that Laver would (even now) be able to handle a 5.0 pretty well.
I think you may be exaggerating a bit there. In the US Open kids day or it could've been Arthur Ashe day, they had a contest where pros were fed balls and they had to hit these targets on the other side of the court. You would think they were 3.5s because they couldn't even hit 50% of the balls into these huge targets. As for hitting a tennis lid in a corner, I bet $2.50 that no pro, not even Federer can even hit 25 balls out of 50 on the lid! I'll even make it 20 balls and that $2.50 would be in my pocket in about 5 minutes.
5263
G.O.A.T.
Oh yea?? Then why was Borg, who was way better than Riggs and not even 40 yet, losing to jrs at a training academy for months when he attempted his comeback before he got some specific help from a certain coach?
Z-Man
Professional
I think a more interesting question is whether Everet in her prime with today's racket could take a game off of Serena Williams in her prime.
I think Serena would kill Everet. I think today's players are much stronger and faster, and that would be the difference.
But maybe I had better save that for another thread . . .
Head-to-Head:
Hingis 6 / S.Williams 7
Hingis 11 / V. Williams 10
Do you think Hingis was better than Evert in any way?
5263
G.O.A.T.
Not even close. He is old and it shows.
mtommer
Hall of Fame
I think you may be exaggerating a bit there. In the US Open kids day or it could've been Arthur Ashe day, they had a contest where pros were fed balls and they had to hit these targets on the other side of the court. You would think they were 3.5s because they couldn't even hit 50% of the balls into these huge targets. As for hitting a tennis lid in a corner, I bet $2.50 that no pro, not even Federer can even hit 25 balls out of 50 on the lid! I'll even make it 20 balls and that $2.50 would be in my pocket in about 5 minutes.
Maybe, and prior to seeing Chang play I would agree with you. However, having seen the pinpoint accuracy Chang displayed, I would take that bet and happily give you $2.50 if I lost. I'd wager that part of kid's day is to create suspense for the crowds, but no, I don't know that for certain of course.
I've seen other pros hit before but I've never seen them hit seriously, with intent. I think this is the difference.
5263
G.O.A.T.
Every way maybe, but how do you compare eras??
So, exactly, how old are you?
I've hit with guys in their 60's who never played on the tour, and yet didn't flinch when hitting with me (not that I'm anything special, but I can hit with plenty of pace). Someone like Laver, who has seen it all, likely wouldn't be phased by a 5.0's weapons.
gsquicksilver
Semi-Pro
this thread is hilarious.
CLAUDIUS, post a video of your strokes for everyone to see.
CLAUDIUS, post a video of your strokes for everyone to see.
5263
G.O.A.T.
I got to hit with him about 4 years ago and he has had a tough recovery from the last stroke.
Cindysphinx
G.O.A.T.
Honestly? Perhaps. I think Hingis was quicker, but otherwise they were similar. It would be close, as they were both the same style of player.
Regarding Hingis v. the Williams sisters, they were rising as she was already on top. I think had she not retired precisely because she couldn't hang with them, they would have dominated her as they reached their prime.
I'm sorry, but it is hard for me to wrap my mind around the push-stroke that people of Evert's generation used. I watched a bit of the Everet/Austin US Open and it was just a different beast. And they both looked so slow!
That's why I was willing to give Evert the latest in rackets so she'd stand a chance against Serena.
Cindysphinx
G.O.A.T.
Fun data point for Raiden:
I have not watched many pro mixed doubles matches. When I do get a glimpse, I do not see the male pro acing the female opponent on every serve. Which means these top WTA players can return the serve of a top ATP player. And the WTA player can return it with the precision needed in doubles.
If I am correct about this -- that WTA players can return the serves of 7.0 male doubles players a decent amount of the time -- why on earth would a WTA player have trouble with the serve of a 4.5 player such that he could hold his serve?
I have not watched many pro mixed doubles matches. When I do get a glimpse, I do not see the male pro acing the female opponent on every serve. Which means these top WTA players can return the serve of a top ATP player. And the WTA player can return it with the precision needed in doubles.
If I am correct about this -- that WTA players can return the serves of 7.0 male doubles players a decent amount of the time -- why on earth would a WTA player have trouble with the serve of a 4.5 player such that he could hold his serve?
r2473
G.O.A.T.
Honestly? Perhaps. I think Hingis was quicker, but otherwise they were similar. It would be close, as they were both the same style of player.
Regarding Hingis v. the Williams sisters, they were rising as she was already on top. I think had she not retired precisely because she couldn't hang with them, they would have dominated her as they reached their prime.
I'm sorry, but it is hard for me to wrap my mind around the push-stroke that people of Evert's generation used. I watched a bit of the Everet/Austin US Open and it was just a different beast. And they both looked so slow!
That's why I was willing to give Evert the latest in rackets so she'd stand a chance against Serena.
Evert was WAY more mentally strong than Hingis ever was. Evert wouldn't have collapsed in a French final and left the court in tears the way Hingis did.
On your other point, you may think she wasn't hitting hard, but she was. I have the 81 Austin-Martina final on DVD. Martina hit her serves in the 100s.
Cindysphinx
G.O.A.T.
Let's not get carried away here. Martina Hingis was plenty mentally strong. You do not get to be No. 1 in the world and winning slams at such a young age without being as tough as nails. One meltdown, spectacular though it may have been, does not mean a person is mentally weak.
I lost you on your other point. Tracey Austin v. Martina Navratilova. What does that have to do with the speed of Chris Everett's serve?
Cindy -- who never liked Martina Hingis and still feels slightly guilty that she rather enjoyed that particular meltdown
Chris played and beat those two during that time period, with wood racquets. She wouldn't have been able to do that if she couldn't handle the pace. I just wanted to give you an idea of how hard her contemporaries hit with wood racquets.
Heck, Chris beat Martina using a wood racquet in the 82 AO final when Martina had switched to graphite.
Heck, Chris beat Martina using a wood racquet in the 82 AO final when Martina had switched to graphite.
I'm sorry but is one of the silliest questions ever. Evert would probably win 6-1 6-1. You have no idea how good a player of this caliber can place the ball. I've played a former ATP player who wasn't even in the top thousand, who stopped playing for many years. Came out and placed the ball very deep and very near the lines.
See when people get beat they think they played bad. No it's the better player that makes you play bad, they move you around a little more, they hit a bit deeper, they punish any short or midcourt ball, they give you a few less milliseconds to react which is huge. And even if they are out of shape they still know the angles and how to cover the court. Ever played a pro who was fast, the court hasn't changed dimensions but it will feel like it's 25% smaller hitting area.
See when people get beat they think they played bad. No it's the better player that makes you play bad, they move you around a little more, they hit a bit deeper, they punish any short or midcourt ball, they give you a few less milliseconds to react which is huge. And even if they are out of shape they still know the angles and how to cover the court. Ever played a pro who was fast, the court hasn't changed dimensions but it will feel like it's 25% smaller hitting area.
boredone3456
G.O.A.T.
Hingis was number 1 in the world for so long because she was so good at winning smaller events and tier ones. But on the big stages she gagged up plenty of times, twice in slam finals against Davenport, twice against Capriati at the Australian and famously against Graf at the french in 99. Hingis won a ton of small events and made slam finals and got her points that way, but it was all also during the worst 2 years the 90's ever saw in 97 and 98 when Graf was out, Vicario was practically done, Sabatini, Fernandez and Date had retired, Monica no longer at her best, and then you had grass court specialist Novotna. 3 of Hingis's 5 titles were in 1997 when the field was, well, terrible in comparison to the early 90's. She has over 200 weeks at number one in the world, but outside of Australia after 1997 she couldn't win a slam title...sorry but that doesn't say much except she couldn't completely keep up when the game started to evolve around her again on all the big stages.
Bring in a young player with no fear and a style many didn't do well against at first and of course she is going to win against a depleted field. But when the Field improved, outside of australia Hingis was not able to maintain her dominance at the slams. Evert was mentally tougher and consistantly a dominant contender for way longer, Evert would not have choked against Capriati twice and would not have gagged against Graf the way Hingis did either. The mental difference is huge and Evert could probably drive Serena nuts by making her run all over the court chasing lobs and drop shots.
Last edited:
Let me put it like this: a male 4.5 would get bageled by a top female college player. Now let's consider that we're not talking about a college player, we're talking about arguably one of the top 5 players, male or female to EVER play the sport. Do you realize just how stupid it is to ask this question?
goober
Legend
Don't ask me I can't believe this thread is still going on
Chris Evert is top 5 all time for female tennis players. 4.5 club player is nothing special from a tennis standpoint.Chris Evert is top 5 all time for ALL tennis players: Sampras, Federer, Graf, Navratilova, Evert, in no order. She has over a 90% winning percentage and that's playing against the best names in womens tennis.Don't ask me I can't believe this thread is still going on
JoshDragon
Hall of Fame
Evert would win against a 4.5. Even with the crappy 70s technology she would still win. But she would lose to a male 5.5 or a 6.0.
ZPTennis
Semi-Pro
haha. well thats not true b/c I've beaten 2 D1 girls in straight sets. They weren't the best d1 girls but they were still d1.
You really can't compare 20-30+ year ago tennis to current day tennis.
Look at Martina Navratilova. If she played Herself back then with the game and equipment she has now, she would have no trouble beating her younger self even at the age she is now.
So many people just don't realize how much better the game has become just through technology of the racquets. You can only do so much with a wood racquet. Topspin was minimal even among the men back then compared to today's standards.
Claudius
Professional
Welcome to the club.
jasoncho92
Professional
No way a 4.5 can beat Evert. My coach was a national 4.5 champ and HIS female students (not even close to 7.0 womens), were close to beating him.
A 5.0 would probably get a few games or get close, and a 5.5 would most like win.
A 5.0 would probably get a few games or get close, and a 5.5 would most like win.
Bhagi Katbamna
Legend
I agree with the incredible spin and consistancy. Watching the doubles teams practice, those guys could hit the same spot on the fence(on the corner post) after one bounce at head level height time after time. It was just amazing to see them practice this. Each serve would land in the corner and bounce wide to the corner post at head level. It made me glad that I didn't have to return those serves.
Evert would kill a 4.5 player.
Datacipher
Banned
You called that. I made a video for the kid once, and HE STILL couldn't acknowledge even the most basic facts about what he was seeing. Sad.
Similar threads
