Did 1 point each save Chris Evert's French Open record and Navratilova's Wimbledon record from both going to Steffi Graf instead

[insideoutforehanders]

In the quarter final of the 86 French, Hana saved match point en route to beating Steffi Graf. Had Graf converted match point, she plays Chris in the semis. While Chris was closer to her prime than Graf at this point, Graf had already begun her 8 match permanent win streak over Chris months earlier, on a match on clay. Then if Steffi wins, Martina in the final. Whom she clobbered on clay in Hamburg weeks earlier. This would swap Graf to 7 French Opens and Chris to 6. Unless the confidence at RG Graf gains from this also.prevents some of her layer close defeats in 89, 90, 92 as well, possibly even leading to more than 7, but it is moot. The RG record has already swapped in this case.

At Wimbledon 90 Garrison was down match point to Seles in the quarters but saved it and won. Then pulled off the biggest upset by far of her career over Graf in the semis, before coming back to reality and losing to Navratilova in an easy final. Had Seles coverted match point, obviously Graf easily beats Seles in the semis, having only lost 4 games in 4 career grass sets to her, and being by a gigantic margin the superior grass court player. That leads us to an automatic Graf vs Navratilova final. Graf won decisively in both 88 and 89, despite losing a set. But Martina was playing a bit better this year and Graf worse. This is close to a 50-50 but would still slightly favor Graf. Martina had 0 wins over Graf anywhere between late 87 and late 91. This would lead to Graf atleast being tied at 8 but likely she gets to 9 now.

 

[buscemi]

I don't know that Graf was ready to take down Evert at the French Open at that point. You noted Graf's win over Evert at Hilton Head (6-4, 7-5), and that came on the heels of beating Mandlikova, 6-2, 6-4. Hana was able to reverse that result at the French Open, which was the only time she won a match, or even a set, against Graf. And Hana won while picking up the same injury that would hinder her against Evert in the SF.

Given this, I just don't think Graf was ready to win the French yet, especially with the tall task of having to take down Evert, who was the defending champion who had smoked Graf on the way to that title.

As far as Wimbledon, I agree with the roughly 50/50 estimate, with the odds slightly favoring Graf if she gets by Garrison.

 

[insideoutforehanders]

I don't know that Graf was ready to take down Evert at the French Open at that point. You noted Graf's win over Evert at Hilton Head (6-4, 7-5), and that came on the heels of beating Mandlikova, 6-2, 6-4. Hana was able to reverse that result at the French Open, which was the only time she won a match, or even a set, against Graf. And Hana won while picking up the same injury that would hinder her against Evert in the SF.

Given this, I just don't think Graf was ready to win the French yet, especially with the tall task of having to take down Evert, who was the defending champion who had smoked Graf on the way to that title.

As far as Wimbledon, I agree with the roughly 50/50 estimate, with the odds slightly favoring Graf if she gets by Garrison.

I think Graf was over confident against Hana, and would be laser focused and super hungry against Evert. I still think it is a tough call, especialy as she never lost to Evert again, and only lost 1 more set from 86 Hilton Head on. Your points all make sense though.

I don't think the 85 French result is relevant though. I know it is only a year earlier but 85 is acknowledged by nearly all as Chris's all time peak year level wise, due to pushing herself so hard to catch Martina, and Graf was a nobody then and much further from the start of her prime then even early/mid 86. While Chris was already starting to slowly age out of her prime in 86, a process which would continue each year until her retirement; after reaching her all time apex level wise in 85.

 

[BTURNER]

I think Graf was over confident against Hana, and would be laser focused and super hungry against Evert. I still think it is a tough call, especialy as she never lost to Evert again, and only lost 1 more set from 86 Hilton Head on. Your points all make sense though.

I don't think the 85 French result is relevant though. I know it is only a year earlier but 85 is acknowledged by nearly all as Chris's all time peak year level wise, due to pushing herself so hard to catch Martina, and Graf was a nobody then and much further from the start of her prime then even early/mid 86. While Chris was already starting to slowly age out of her prime in 86, a process which would continue each year until her retirement; after reaching her all time apex level wise in 85.

If you watch the 85 RG final, and then the 86 RG final, then turn around and watch the 1985 Wimbledon final, and then the 1987 Wimbledon semifinal, Martina is the same Martina, but Evert is a very different player and that does not translate into 'worse'.

You will see that she does have more trouble getting motivated in the first set, and she is less patient, makes more errors and double faults more. But more of her errors are 'positive errors' than before, and more of those faults are because she is consciously trying to serve harder. Chris is on the cusp of her final adjustment to that graphite racket. She is now standing closer the the baseline, completely ditching her old closed stance forehand, and putting a lot more pace and topspin on her forehand.

1985, she is a better athlete and she is more confident than before, but she is still mostly playing reactive tennis off the ground. Martina is still pushing her around with her forehand, but in 1986, Evert is doing all most as much with hers as Martina is. The topspin is pushing Martina further back and Evert is able to get in earlier. Of course more agression will also lead to more errors which people notice,, but the net effect, is she is playing worse in those first sets, and actually bolder tennis in those second and thirds.

Of Course her big problem is that everyone else on the tour ( Graf, Sabatini, Maleeva) is also hitting off the ground a lot and playing bolder tennis.

I suspect Graf is not quite ready to beat Evert twice in a row, or take her first slam in 1986. Remember that Hilton Head title was actually her very first.

 

[insideoutforehanders]

If you watch the 85 RG final, and then the 86 RG final, then turn around and watch the 1985 Wimbledon final, and then the 1987 Wimbledon semifinal, Martina is the same Martina, but Evert is a very different player and that does not translate into 'worse'.

You will see that she does have more trouble getting motivated in the first set, and she is less patient, makes more errors and double faults more. But more of her errors are 'positive errors' than before, and more of those faults are because she is consciously trying to serve harder. Chris is on the cusp of her final adjustment to that graphite racket. She is now standing closer the the baseline, completely ditching her old closed stance forehand, and putting a lot more pace and topspin on her forehand.

1985, she is a better athlete and she is more confident than before, but she is still mostly playing reactive tennis off the ground. Martina is still pushing her around with her forehand, but in 1986, Evert is doing all most as much with hers as Martina is. The topspin is pushing Martina further back and Evert is able to get in earlier. Of course more agression will also lead to more errors which people notice,, but the net effect, is she is playing worse in those first sets, and actually bolder tennis in those second and thirds.

Of Course her big problem is that everyone else on the tour ( Graf, Sabatini, Maleeva) is also hitting off the ground a lot and playing bolder tennis.

I suspect Graf is not quite ready to beat Evert twice in a row, or take her first slam in 1986. Remember that Hilton Head title was actually her very first.

So you don't think she was starting to decline slightly in 86? And a bit more still in 87. Kind of the natural progression of age. Even if the aspects she worked so hard to improve in response to the Martina obstacle were still in existence.

 

[BTURNER]

So you don't think she was starting to decline slightly in 86? And a bit more still in 87. Kind of the natural progression of age. Even if the aspects she worked so hard to improve in response to the Martina obstacle were still in existence.

Parts of her game were still improving while other parts were declining. She was much more capable of hitting forcing shots from further back than before and she was more comfortable at net, her lob just kept getting better and better, and so did her forehand because of that topspin. But her concentration lapses were more frequent, and her drive to win was less intense. Yes her serve had more power, but she also began to feel nervous at that line. I also her footspeed was less consistent.

In the end, I think her grass game was still improving ( her drive to win one more Wimbledon was what I think kept her going. She put every ounce of what was left of her desire into those Wimbledons ) but her clay carpet,and hard court game had declined a bit,. But I really do feel everyone else was just getting so much better and stronger, that they were better able to take advantage of lapses they would not have a year or two ago. By 1987, the good days were slipping in numbers.

In 1985 she won 10 tournaments with a match record of 81-8 or 91% of her matches. She reached the finals of 16 of the 18 she played (two of these she only played two rounds, one was the semif and one was the final!). She lost one sf to Hana and one first round match to Kathy Jordon (indoor carpet)

In 1986 she won 6 tournaments with a match record of 59-7 or 89.4% of her matches. She reached the finals of 9 of the 13 tournaments she entered. She lost in the Semifinals to Hana twice and once to Helena. Nothing earlier. After the US Open she had to quit the rest of the season due to knee problems so its not a perfect comparison. Its actually a big deal in this context because in the same post- Open time frame in 1985, she won everything she entered throughout the year except the Aussie where she reached the final. A lot of people speculate that the knee was troubling her during that US 1986 OPen and played a role her **** poor Open performance in that SF. Of course, Evert denies it.

 

[Gizo]

Re Garrison, it was interesting that she prevented:

- A Graf-Navratilova final at the 1988 US Open, though if Navratilova had beaten Garrison she’d then have to get past Sabatini - it’s no certainty she wins that given her form and injury issues that summer.
- A Navratilova-Evert semi-final at the 1989 US Open, just before Evert's retirement (after the Federation Cup a month later).
- A Graf-Seles semi-final at Wimbledon in 1990, and a quick re-match following on from their RG final.
- Graf-Navratilova from facing each other in a 4th consecutive Wimbledon final at that same tournament.

I also don't think that Graf was quite ready to win a major / take down Evert at RG in 1986. Now in 1987 it was a different story - I would have backed her to have beaten Evert at any major, whether it was RG, Wimbledon or the US Open, that year. On a side note it notable that the Navratilova-Evert RG semi-final in 1987 lasted only 73 minutes - Navratilova also had match points at 6-2 5-0 and her looped topspin forehands were praised while Evert's groundstrokes and approach shots were erratic to say the least. Then a month later, their classic and hugely entertaining Wimbledon semi-final lasted 123 minutes - despite ultimately losing Evert was rightly proud of her performance that day.

 

[BTURNER]

Re Garrison, it was interesting that she prevented:

- A Graf-Navratilova final at the 1988 US Open, though if Navratilova had beaten Garrison she’d then have to get past Sabatini - it’s no certainty she wins that given her form and injury issues that summer.
- A Navratilova-Evert semi-final at the 1989 US Open, just before Evert's retirement (after the Federation Cup a month later).
- A Graf-Seles semi-final at Wimbledon in 1990, and a quick re-match following on from their RG final.
- Graf-Navratilova from facing each other in a 4th consecutive Wimbledon final at that same tournament.

I also don't think that Graf was quite ready to win a major / take down Evert at RG in 1986. Now in 1987 it was a different story - I would have backed her to have beaten Evert at any major, whether it was RG, Wimbledon or the US Open, that year. On a side note it notable that the Navratilova-Evert RG semi-final in 1987 lasted only 73 minutes - Navratilova also had match points at 6-2 5-0 and her looped topspin forehands were praised while Evert's groundstrokes and approach shots were erratic to say the least. Then a month later, their classic and hugely entertaining Wimbledon semi-final lasted 123 minutes - despite ultimately losing Evert was rightly proud of her performance that day.

If Evert is going to beat Graf in 1987, its actually going to be at Wimbledon. She happened to be peaking at the perfect time having beaten #8 Kohde Kilch 6-1,6-3 right before that superb Navratilova SF. Graf was peaking at the perfect time as well, having killed Shriver in semis, and come back from being down a set to beat Sabatini.

It would have been a fascinating test for Graf to play Evert. Graf had all the tools and athleticsm to win by then, except the experience and a confident backhand passing shot. Playing Evert on grass from the baseline was historically a uniquely fruitless affair. You know those losses Chris acquired against baseliners like Austin, Jaeger, Maleeva, Sabatini, Nancy Richey? They do not exist in the record on grass courts and you can go back as far as you want.

Three reasons:
1. Those baseliners if they are seeded, rarely make to Evert. They kept losing in the 4th RD, or QF to players like King, Shriver, Sukova or Goolagong.
2. Evert attended the Harvard School of Grass tennis before they left the junior circuit, playing the Creme de la Creme at Forest Hills, Wimbledon, Fed cup, Wightman Cup, or Downunder with Bonnie Bell cup or the Aussie when she was still in a ponytail. That impeccable footwork, pitch perfect balance, the infamous anticipation served her well on slick grass.
3. Her strokes were better than theirs for grass, That hard flat backhand, and the underspin/sidespin forehand were especially effective on turf, and their typically topspin shots were well...not and Chris was definitely a better volleyer than they were. Only Graf's ground strokes were ever better suited (that cutting penetrating slice, and that huge forehand)

Was Graf was really ready to win her first Wimbledon so soon in her career. Would her nerves hold up on Centre Court, because Evert was definitely ready to win her last. I give Graf slightly better odds at winning that potential final because her footspeed and power, but not by much! Once Steffi wins that first Wimbledon, Evert's chances drop down below the center of the Earth. 1987, Evert needs Graf to have a case of Centre Court nerves when things get tight in sets. That's normally when Graf's forehand starts missing and her own errors undo her.

 

[insideoutforehanders]

I think Graf would have likely won the 87 Wimbledon final since her biggest problem in the final vs Navratilova was an inability to consistently pass off the backhand side. Needless to say that would have been little worry against Evert.

Also it is true Evert has almost no losses to a baseline at Wimbledon. However

a)there are no baseliners in Evert's era, minus maybe Austin at a stretch and Austin was done after 81 and never played Chris at Wimbledon, even in the same stratosphere as Graf. I mean who was the best actual baseliner of Evert's era besides the few years of Austin, who she never played at Wimbledon, and every aspect of Austin is far less suited to a grass court than Graf anyhow. Sue Barker? Kathy Rinaldi? Diane Fromholtz? Bettina Bunge? Manuela Maleeva? LOL you get the idea.

B)Of course Evert was not 32 years old. The age she would be in the 87 Wimbledon final.

I do agree Evert had better chances vs Graf at Wimbledon in 87 than the French or US for sure. Still doubt her winning though.

 

[BTURNER]

I think Graf would have likely won the 87 Wimbledon final since her biggest problem in the final vs Navratilova was an inability to consistently pass off the backhand side. Needless to say that would have been little worry against Evert.

Also it is true Evert has almost no losses to a baseline at Wimbledon. However

a)there are no baseliners in Evert's era, minus maybe Austin at a stretch and Austin was done after 81 and never played Chris at Wimbledon, even in the same stratosphere as Graf. I mean who was the best actual baseliner of Evert's era besides the few years of Austin, who she never played at Wimbledon, and every aspect of Austin is far less suited to a grass court than Graf anyhow. Sue Barker? Kathy Rinaldi? Diane Fromholtz? Bettina Bunge? Manuela Maleeva? LOL you get the idea.

B)Of course Evert was not 32 years old. The age she would be in the 87 Wimbledon final.

I do agree Evert had better chances vs Graf at Wimbledon in 87 than the French or US for sure. Still doubt her winning though.

It wasn't just Wimbledon, it was anywhere Chris played a grass venue. Richey, Durr, Fromholtz and Barker, all had plenty of experience trying to tweak their baseline games to grass because they existed in that grass dominated world of the 70's and all to decidedly mixed success.

Fromholtz reached the finals of 9 tournaments on grass and won Chichester, Beckenham, Sydney x3, and lost in Newport, Adelaide, South Orange, Sydney and The Aussie but she wasn't beating the best and brightest to accomplish this.

Durr was a perennial Quarterfinalist at all grass slams in the mid sixties, got two the semis of Wimbledon and US National each once in the 70's. Won British grass championships and Perth in 66, and beat King to win New Zealand in71!

Barker played in 12 grass finals in the mid 70's and lost the 6 with the top players, and won the 6 with the tier 2 sort. She got to 3 relevant semis at slams.

Richey reached the final in 66 and withdrew to Court, won the Aussie of 67 over Turner. Thereafter she was a perennial QFist and reached to semis of relevant slams. Can't find a breakdown on her 73 singles titles offhand.

 

[insideoutforehanders]

It wasn't just Wimbledon, it was anywhere Chris played a grass venue. Richey, Durr, Fromholtz and Barker, all had plenty of experience trying to tweak their baseline games to grass because they existed in that grass dominated world of the 70's and all to decidedly mixed success.

Fromholtz reached the finals of 9 tournaments on grass and won Chichester, Beckenham, Sydney x3, and lost in Newport, Adelaide, South Orange, Sydney and The Aussie but she wasn't beating the best and brightest to accomplish this.

Durr was a perennial Quarterfinalist at all grass slams in the mid sixties, got two the semis of Wimbledon and US National each once in the 70's. Won British grass championships and Perth in 66, and beat King to win New Zealand in71!

Barker played in 12 grass finals in the mid 70's and lost the 6 with the top players, and won the 6 with the tier 2 sort. She got to 3 relevant semis at slams.

Richey reached the final in 66 and withdrew to Court, won the Aussie of 67 over Turner. Thereafter she was a perennial QFist and reached to semis of relevant slams. Can't find a breakdown on her 73 singles titles offhand.

Still none of those players are Graf, or even close. Comparing Barker to Graf is like comparing say Fernandez to Evert. The best of those I guess is Richey who was a mini nemesis of younger version Evert, but not a true contemporary with the large age gap, and never a contender at Wimbledon really vs the other 3 slams as her results show, where she has atleast a Final atleast at all others but 0 times past the quarters at Wimbledon.

And the same is true of Graf. She lost to exactly 0 baseliners at Wimbledon from before 87 sometime until her very final ever Wimbledon match in 1999 when she lost to Davenport in the final. Her only few defeats were a serve and volleyer only. And there were a lot more good baseliners in Graf's day than Evert's as i am sure you already know the lean was to serve and volley or all court most if the 80s and even more in the 70s. While in the 90s nearly the entire top 20 were baseliners. Graf was super unlucky to experience something like drawing one of the only good serve volley players still in existence on a blustery day 1st round of Wimbledon once.

And of course again Evert was 32, Graf 18. Despite some impressive improvements Evert made in some areas late in her career the truth of a gradual, slight decline in power, speed, focus all hold true. Vs a player immature a bit still, and very unexperienced on grass but coming into her prime and in contast to a 32 year old seeing the gradual, slight continued uptick in speed, power, and focus.

 

[BTURNER]

Still none of those players are Graf, or even close. Comparing Barker to Graf is like comparing say Fernandez to Evert. The best of those I guess is Richey who was a mini nemesis of younger version Evert, but not a true contemporary with the large age gap, and never a contender at Wimbledon really vs the other 3 slams as her results show, where she has atleast a Final atleast at all others but 0 times past the quarters at Wimbledon.

And the same is true of Graf. She lost to exactly 0 baseliners at Wimbledon from before 87 sometime until her very final ever Wimbledon match in 1999 when she lost to Davenport in the final. Her only few defeats were a serve and volleyer only. And there were a lot more good baseliners in Graf's day than Evert's as i am sure you already know the lean was to serve and volley or all court most if the 80s and even more in the 70s. While in the 90s nearly the entire top 20 were baseliners. Graf was super unlucky to experience something like drawing one of the only good serve volley players still in existence on a blustery day 1st round of Wimbledon once.

And of course again Evert was 32, Graf 18. Despite some impressive improvements Evert made in some areas late in her career the truth of a gradual, slight decline in power, speed, focus all hold true. Vs a player immature a bit still, and very unexperienced on grass but coming into her prime and in contast to a 32 year old seeing the gradual, slight continued uptick in speed, power, and focus.

1. We agree that Graf wins this match, if she does not get nervous and start making errors at an inopportune time. Its her match to lose, so you can stop selling what we agree on.
2. I am not as impressed with what Graf against baseliners in the slams you looked at. She played a total of 100 matches everywhere throughout her career and won 85-15 which is 85% and I gather that is her lowest figure on any surface. Its not her fault, but its all British grass except for 1983-4 at Australian Open, and its the baseliners, and you are only looking at those slam matches and the sample size is getting understandably small. Evert had the luxury of playing 277 matches across three continents over 19 years and winning 242 of them against a broader swathe of opponents of all styles for 87.36%.

By the way did you note that Zvereva beat Graf in Rd 3 of the 1998 Wimbledon, and I don't recall her as anything other than a baseliner in singles? I found this Youtube video showing the same Zvereva playing Tauziat at Eastbourne a year later and did a spot check through the video to see if she dramatically changed tactics on grass. What I am seeing is a pretty strict baseliner willing to approach on a short ball, who in this match wasn't playing very well. Wouldn't this count as loss to a baseliner before 1999? Here take a look.

 

[insideoutforehanders]

I never considered Zvereva a baseliner. Maybe an all courter like Sukova or Mandlikova, but definitely not a baseliner. She isn't someone I followed closely though.

Against Tauziat she may have constantly been back as groundstroke-less Natalie would be more desperate to be at the net than her. Similar to Hana or Helena when playing Pam Shriver.

 

[Mustard]

That was some run that Zvereva had to winning the title at 1999 Eastbourne. Beat Snyder 6-3, 6-3, beat Lucic 7-5, 6-1, beat Kremer (who had beaten Seles) 6-0, 6-1, and then Zvereva had 2 marathon wins in beating Coetzer 6-7, 7-6, 10-8 and beating Tauziat 0-6, 7-5, 6-3.

That win over Tauziat was a little bit of payback for their 1998 Wimbledon semi final, when Tauziat beat Zvereva 1-6, 7-6, 6-3, after Zvereva had beaten both Graf and Seles earlier on in the 1998 Wimbledon tournament. 1998 Wimbledon was the only time when Zvereva managed to beat either Graf or Seles.

 

[BTURNER]

I never considered Zvereva a baseliner. Maybe an all courter like Sukova or Mandlikova, but definitely not a baseliner. She isn't someone I followed closely though.

Against Tauziat she may have constantly been back as groundstroke-less Natalie would be more desperate to be at the net than her. Similar to Hana or Helena when playing Pam Shriver.

Both Hana and Helena consistently followed their first serves into the net on grass, regardless of who they played including Shriver. that is definitely not a baseliner behavior. I am spot checking through the video to see if she changes tactics, I am not seeing Zvereva follow her first serve or second serve into the net here . She is coming into the net with the frequency of Evert , not Hana or Helena. Even Sabatini s/v half the time on grass on first serve. I certainly define this as a 'baseliner' even if she uses s/v as a mix-up occasionally, which I did not happen to see.

 

[insideoutforehanders]

That was some run that Zvereva had to winning the title at 1999 Eastbourne. Beat Snyder 6-3, 6-3, beat Lucic 7-5, 6-1, beat Kremer (who had beaten Seles) 6-0, 6-1, and then Zvereva had 2 marathon wins in beating Coetzer 6-7, 7-6, 10-8 and beating Tauziat 0-6, 7-5, 6-3.

That win over Tauziat was a little bit of payback for their 1998 Wimbledon semi final, when Tauziat beat Zvereva 1-6, 7-6, 6-3, after Zvereva had beaten both Graf and Seles earlier on in the 1998 Wimbledon tournament. 1998 Wimbledon was only time when Zvereva managed to beat either Graf or Seles.

I hated the 98 Wimbledon semi final result. I was devastated for Zvereva, wanted her to atleast reach the final so much. She was so sad at the press conference for probably the only time ever as she always casually went about her still very good singles career as an afterthought to her legendary doubles career, barely caring much. But she very much cared about losing that match and it was obvious. And I absolutely hate Tauziat, always have. She is now defending her ex coach who is a convicted pedo.

 

[insideoutforehanders]

Both Hana and Helena consistently followed their first serves into the net on grass, regardless of who they played including Shriver. that is definitely not a baseliner behavior. I am spot checking through the video to see if she changes tactics, I am not seeing Zvereva follow her first serve or second serve into the net here . She is coming into the net with the frequency of Evert , not Hana or Helena. Even Sabatini s/v half the time on grass on first serve. I certainly define this as a 'baseliner' even if she uses s/v as a mix-up occasionally, which I did not happen to see.

Like I said I did not follow her that much, but I don't recall thinking she was a pure baseliner, watching her play often in years like 88, 89, 84, 95, when she was a top 10 player.

I also recall Sukova staying back initially off serve in the 90s quite often, but maybe did less in her prime. She in fact came in more behind many of her opponents serves in the 90s than her own. Maybe this is an indication of 90s playing conditions too, and maybe in 90s conditions it is unrealistic for anything but a hard-core serve and volleyer to come in consistently right behind the serve. I remember even Navratilova, the most dedicated serve and volleyer ever, having to stay back off her serve after the 1st set of the 92 Wimbledon semi final with Seles, as she was passed left and right in the 1st set, and the change allowed her to get into the match in the 2nd and 3rd sets.

Either way even if you consider Zvereva a baseliner which is never a thought I had until today, Graf would not have lost to a baseliner at Wimbledon from some point before 87 to 98, so sonething well over 11 yesrs, and 98 it was a considerably weakened version.

 

[Gizo]

I agree that Evert stands a better chance of toppling Graf at Wimbledon in 1987, than at RG or the USO.

At Wimbledon I'd make Graf at least the 60-40 favourite or so. The fact that she won a whopping 118 consecutive matches against opponents not named Navratilova between her defeat to Mandlikova at RG in May / June 1986 and to Sabatini at Boca Raton in March 1988, including 8 sets out of 8 against Evert during that period, is a pretty overwhelming factor in her favour.

Not having to worry about Navratilova's big lefty serve to her backhand, drawing sliced returns and easy putaways at the net, would be a welcome relief. Then again Evert would be very relieved to face anyone other than Navratilova at Wimbledon as well.

 

[BTURNER]

Like I said I did not follow her that much, but I don't recall thinking she was a pure baseliner, watching her play often in years like 88, 89, 84, 95, when she was a top 10 player.

I also recall Sukova staying back initially off serve in the 90s quite often, but maybe did less in her prime. She in fact came in more behind many of her opponents serves in the 90s than her own. Maybe this is an indication of 90s playing conditions too, and maybe in 90s conditions it is unrealistic for anything but a hard-core serve and volleyer to come in consistently right behind the serve. I remember even Navratilova, the most dedicated serve and volleyer ever, having to stay back off her serve after the 1st set of the 92 Wimbledon semi final with Seles, as she was passed left and right in the 1st set, and the change allowed her to get into the match in the 2nd and 3rd sets.

Either way even if you consider Zvereva a baseliner which is never a thought I had until today, Graf would not have lost to a baseliner at Wimbledon from some point before 87 to 98, so sonething well over 11 yesrs, and 98 it was a considerably weakened version.

A lot of this is surface driven, and it's also about the changing nature of the return of serve as the 80's become the 90's and the 90 get closer to the 2000's. Sukova was undoubtedly a lot less eager to come in on hard courts or clay and a lot less eager to come in when serving to Graf, or Seles etc. today's grass plays more like a fast hard court than any blade covered surface of the 1970's 0r 1980's.

 

[insideoutforehanders]

A lot of this is surface driven, and it's also about the changing nature of the return of serve as the 80's become the 90's and the 90 get closer to the 2000's. Sukova was undoubtedly a lot less eager to come in on hard courts or clay and a lot less eager to come in when serving to Graf, or Seles etc. today's grass plays more like a fast hard court than any blade covered surface of the 1970's 0r 1980's.

Yes. I hate how the conditions beginning in the 90s led to the death of serve and volley tennis. Federer enjoyed coming in often and playing some serve and volley coming up, and even into 2003, but once he became the dominant player stayed almost glued to the baseline to protect from risk and possible losses.

 

[jrepac]

If you watch the 85 RG final, and then the 86 RG final, then turn around and watch the 1985 Wimbledon final, and then the 1987 Wimbledon semifinal, Martina is the same Martina, but Evert is a very different player and that does not translate into 'worse'.

You will see that she does have more trouble getting motivated in the first set, and she is less patient, makes more errors and double faults more. But more of her errors are 'positive errors' than before, and more of those faults are because she is consciously trying to serve harder. Chris is on the cusp of her final adjustment to that graphite racket. She is now standing closer the the baseline, completely ditching her old closed stance forehand, and putting a lot more pace and topspin on her forehand.

1985, she is a better athlete and she is more confident than before, but she is still mostly playing reactive tennis off the ground. Martina is still pushing her around with her forehand, but in 1986, Evert is doing all most as much with hers as Martina is. The topspin is pushing Martina further back and Evert is able to get in earlier. Of course more agression will also lead to more errors which people notice,, but the net effect, is she is playing worse in those first sets, and actually bolder tennis in those second and thirds.

Of Course her big problem is that everyone else on the tour ( Graf, Sabatini, Maleeva) is also hitting off the ground a lot and playing bolder tennis.

I suspect Graf is not quite ready to beat Evert twice in a row, or take her first slam in 1986. Remember that Hilton Head title was actually her very first.

I felt Chris played better in the '86 final than in '85...even if the earlier one was more dramatic/exciting. Towards the end of the '86 final, she was controlling the rallies. MN was at her mercy. Graf in the semis would have been tough, but not a lock for Steffi by any means.

 

[Rochester]

I enjoy reading the speculation as most, but so many matches btw the top players come down to the day they play. Who could have foreseen that evert would lose in the third round all those years ago to lesser player or the same was true of Navratilova to shriver in 81? And to use one example, if Evert had won a fourth Wimbledon, then the conversation about her in these pages would automatically change.

 

[jrepac]

I enjoy reading the speculation as most, but so many matches btw the top players come down to the day they play. Who could have foreseen that evert would lose in the third round all those years ago to lesser player or the same was true of Navratilova to shriver in 81? And to use one example, if Evert had won a fourth Wimbledon, then the conversation about her in these pages would automatically change.

Very true.

 

[BTURNER]

I agree that Evert stands a better chance of toppling Graf at Wimbledon in 1987, than at RG or the USO.

At Wimbledon I'd make Graf at least the 60-40 favourite or so. The fact that she won a whopping 118 consecutive matches against opponents not named Navratilova between her defeat to Mandlikova at RG in May / June 1986 and to Sabatini at Boca Raton in March 1988, including 8 sets out of 8 against Evert during that period, is a pretty overwhelming factor in her favour.

Not having to worry about Navratilova's big lefty serve to her backhand, drawing sliced returns and easy putaways at the net, would be a welcome relief. Then again Evert would be very relieved to face anyone other than Navratilova at Wimbledon as well.

Evert's baseline game benefits from grass, but Graf's game does so even more and it is a bad match-up for Evert. I just have to wonder if the girl who has never won Wimbledon, never won a single grass tournament at all, has the self belief, and the nerves to do it in 1987. If you are going to show any weakness,or fragility, Evert is NOT the player to do it against. She came back from 5-1 lead to haul Graf into a tiebreaker in the Aussie 8 months later because Graf showed just such a weakness. She grabbed the first set off Graf in 1989 Boca Raton over a year later when Graf began to throw in some errors, the first set Graf lost in ages.

Evert needs the timing of the forehand to slip just enough, and it has to happen in the later stages of first set.

 

[Hard Court]

yeah this is sometimes fun, but you could do this with literally every tournament that was ever played.

As for this case, at that particular moment in time, Evert was still the best clay court player. She would start to decline. Graf had shown that she would probably be the next big thing, but she had yet to do it on a big stage. I remember watching Mandlikova-Graf. Mandlikova looked terrible early on, than gradually upped her game. Graf plaed poorly in the last set. It was obvious that Graf was not quite there yet.
If anyone watched Mandlikova-Graf, and then the Mandlikova-Evert semifinal, Evert was still clearly the better player, at least on clay.

Graf-Navratilova is a different story. Graf had already proven herself and had experience. More importantly, Navratilova was further past her best than Evert was at the French open in 1986. Nvaratilova was still dangerous (especially at Wimbledon) but I don't know if I would have bet on her to beat Graf at that time.

 

[insideoutforehanders]

Evert's baseline game benefits from grass, but Graf's game does so even more and it is a bad match-up for Evert. I just have to wonder if the girl who has never won Wimbledon, never won a single grass tournament at all, has the self belief, and the nerves to do it in 1987. If you are going to show any weakness,or fragility, Evert is NOT the player to do it against. She came back from 5-1 lead to haul Graf into a tiebreaker in the Aussie 8 months later because Graf showed just such a weakness. She grabbed the first set off Graf in 1989 Boca Raton over a year later when Graf began to throw in some errors, the first set Graf lost in ages.

Evert needs the timing of the forehand to slip just enough, and it has to happen in the later stages of first set.

Granted Graf had never won the French or anything important before the French, but she did have the experience and confidence of winning a whole bunch of clay tournaments, which is probably why she was ready for the moment in 87 (and arguably 86, which is the topic, but for sure ready in 87). Grass she had barely any experience on at that point.

 

[EvonneFedererBorgster]

I was shocked at Graf’s loss to Hana at the 1986 FO. Was Steffi feeling the illness already that would prevent her from playing Wimbledon a few weeks later? I had definitely expected her to win the 1986 FO. I also thought she was the front runner for the USO title in ‘86. So little did I know. Had Chris beaten Martina in the 1987 Wimbledon semis, I think the final could have been a classic if Steffi got nervous. Otherwise it could have been a blowout like the Miami, Fed Cup and LA ‘87 encounters. Shades of the 1989 semi perhaps.

 

[Gizo]

Evert's baseline game benefits from grass, but Graf's game does so even more and it is a bad match-up for Evert. I just have to wonder if the girl who has never won Wimbledon, never won a single grass tournament at all, has the self belief, and the nerves to do it in 1987. If you are going to show any weakness,or fragility, Evert is NOT the player to do it against. She came back from 5-1 lead to haul Graf into a tiebreaker in the Aussie 8 months later because Graf showed just such a weakness. She grabbed the first set off Graf in 1989 Boca Raton over a year later when Graf began to throw in some errors, the first set Graf lost in ages.

Evert needs the timing of the forehand to slip just enough, and it has to happen in the later stages of first set.

Yes Graf's lack of experience on grass in general by that stage is the main factor against her Wimbledon in 1987.

I just think that is overriden by the fact that there is literally zero evidence of her losing a single match against anyone not named Navratilova, during that period which lasted for the best part of 21 months or so. Navratilova had specific technical weapons to hurt her, that no-one else on the tour including Evert had at the time. Sabatini was winning sets against her and was close to beating her at RG, but she was pretty much beating the rest of the tour without a great deal of trouble at the time.

And I would imagine that her RG title win just before, fighting back against both Sabatini and Navratilova, would at least be a confidence booster that she could handle the big stage. But I agree that in her first appearance in a Wimbledon final (with Wimbledon still widely regarded as a bigger deal and stage than RG at the time), there would be nerves, and how she dealt with them would be crucial.

I'd actually argue that the 2nd set of the 1988 AO final, is a factor in Graf's favour and not Evert's here. Ultimately, despite that torrid run of games for her as her 5-1 lead vanished, she still won the set anyway (a 5th consecutive straight sets win in their h2h), so Evert's fightback was futile and she didn't have anything tangible to show for it (in terms of not being able to force a deciding set). On a side note, I don't think Evert, with her ultra-high standards and competitiveness, would particularly want credit for 'rallying' in a set that she ultimately failed to win.

 

[insideoutforehanders]

One tendency is it seems a younger player usually takes awhile to match their tournament break outs in the slams. Based on her out of slam performances you would expect Graf to win atleast 1 slam in 86 and probably 3 in 87, but she won 0 and 1. Based on her regular tour performance you would expect Evert to win a slam in 72 (she was 3-1 vs King, that years dominant player) and probably 1 or 2 in 73 but she won 0 and 0. Based on her regular tour performance Navratilova was looking ready to win a slam in 77, but didn't even reach a final, and based on her regular tour performances should have won more than just 2 slams in 77-80. The one big exception to that is Monica Seles of course.

 

[buscemi]

I'd actually argue that the 2nd set of the 1988 AO final, is a factor in Graf's favour and not Evert's here. Ultimately, despite that torrid run of games for her as her 5-1 lead vanished, she still won the set anyway (a 5th consecutive straight sets win in their h2h), so Evert's fightback was futile and she didn't have anything tangible to show for it (in terms of not being able to force a deciding set). On a side note, I don't think Evert, with her ultra-high standards and competitiveness, would particularly want credit for 'rallying' in a set that she ultimately failed to win.

I can see that argument, but I'd also say that Graf at the Majors in 1988 >> Graf in the Majors in 1987. As one example, I don't see 1988 Graf having to fight back from the brink of defeat to take down Sabatini in the French SF like she did in 1987.

 

[insideoutforehanders]

deleted

 

[boredone3456]

Graf could have lost Wimbledon in 1991 to Sabatini, she arguably benefited from a massive choke from Novotna in 1993, and she also had to rally from a set down and struggled in the 3rd set against Vicario in 1995. So while certain points hurt her potentially holding the Wimbledon record, she in same ways had some lucky breaks to get close to the record at all in the first place.

Same at the French, she struggled in the 1995 final against Vicario, needed 3 sets to beat Fernandez in 1993, and arguably could have lost the 1987 final to Navratilova ( or she could have just as easily lost the SF to Sabatini)...all without even talking about 1999.

Sure, had things broken different she could have had both records, she also could have had things break differently and been significantly further away from both records as well.

 

[jrepac]

I was shocked at Graf’s loss to Hana at the 1986 FO. Was Steffi feeling the illness already that would prevent her from playing Wimbledon a few weeks later? I had definitely expected her to win the 1986 FO. I also thought she was the front runner for the USO title in ‘86. So little did I know. Had Chris beaten Martina in the 1987 Wimbledon semis, I think the final could have been a classic if Steffi got nervous. Otherwise it could have been a blowout like the Miami, Fed Cup and LA ‘87 encounters. Shades of the 1989 semi perhaps.

why so shocking ? she was the reigning USO champ. Not exactly chopped liver. Chris got robbed in that '87 semi...still, I would have favored Graf in an '87 final.

 

[Moose Malloy]

why so shocking ? she was the reigning USO champ. Not exactly chopped liver. Chris got robbed in that '87 semi...still, I would have favored Graf in an '87 final.

Graf was on a 23 match win streak, and won 4 straight tournaments won going into that QF match, including a recent 62, 64 win over Hana. Doubt many were picking Hana to win that match (ESPN commentators certainly weren't)

 

[Moose Malloy]

Both Hana and Helena consistently followed their first serves into the net on grass, regardless of who they played including Shriver. that is definitely not a baseliner behavior. I am spot checking through the video to see if she changes tactics, I am not seeing Zvereva follow her first serve or second serve into the net here . She is coming into the net with the frequency of Evert , not Hana or Helena. Even Sabatini s/v half the time on grass on first serve. I certainly define this as a 'baseliner' even if she uses s/v as a mix-up occasionally, which I did not happen to see.

You should do the complete stats, not just spot check, our impressions from just watching don't often reflect the reality as I've discovered many times when doing stats. Zvereva was considered an all court player not a baseliner. Yeah they played in different eras, but I'm fairly certain she came into the net more frequently than Evert, and she was considered one of the most talented players of her time by historians like Rino Tomassi. She had all the shots, she wasn't Arantxa Sanchez or something. Even for arguments sake, I go with Zveeva as a baseliner - she was baseliner with incredible variety who was unlike pretty much any baseliner that Graf played like 90% of the time. But yeah 70s and 80s S&V/net play was very different than 90s S&V(ex. Novotna S&Ved a lot less than Hana/Sukova), probably due to tech etc. You couldn't just come in on anything in the 90s like you could in the 70s.

 

[BTURNER]

Granted Graf had never won the French or anything important before the French, but she did have the experience and confidence of winning a whole bunch of clay tournaments, which is probably why she was ready for the moment in 87 (and arguably 86, which is the topic, but for sure ready in 87). Grass she had barely any experience on at that point.

You should do the complete stats, not just spot check, our impressions from just watching don't often reflect the reality as I've discovered many times when doing stats.

You should do the complete stats, not just spot check, our impressions from just watching don't often reflect the reality as I've discovered many times when doing stats. Zvereva was considered an all court player not a baseliner. Yeah they played in different eras, but I'm fairly certain she came into the net more frequently than Evert, and she was considered one of the most talented players of her time by historians like Rino Tomassi. She had all the shots, she wasn't Arantxa Sanchez or something. Even for arguments sake, I go with Zveeva as a baseliner - she was baseliner with incredible variety who was unlike pretty much any baseliner that Graf played like 90% of the time. But yeah 70s and 80s S&V/net play was very different than 90s S&V(ex. Novotna S&Ved a lot less than Hana/Sukova), probably due to tech etc. You couldn't just come in on anything in the 90s like you could in the 70s.

Yeah they played in different eras, but I'm fairly certain she came into the net more frequently than Evert, and she was considered one of the most talented players of her time by historians like Rino Tomassi. She had all the shots, she wasn't Arantxa Sanchez or something. Even for arguments sake, I go with Zveeva as a baseliner - she was baseliner with incredible variety who was unlike pretty much any baseliner that Graf played like 90% of the time. But yeah 70s and 80s S&V/net play was very different than 90s S&V(ex. Novotna S&Ved a lot less than Hana/Sukova), probably due to tech etc. You couldn't just come in on anything in the 90s like you could in the 70s.

Could you prove this assertion? You got some evidence for this? I suspect You and I may have different definitions of the term 'all court player' and baseliner. Maybe mine is 'dated' because if I am not seeing Serve/volley as a part of the arsenal in singles, it suggests that a player is not comfortable doing it. And grass is where I would mostly likely see it. I would be interested if you have some players, or commentators from that era, who labeled her as an all court courter or maybe you have done some stats that shows she was comfortable following that serve to net as more than just a surprise tactic. Sabatini is closer to meeting my definition than Zvereva.

 

[jrepac]

Graf was on a 23 match win streak, and won 4 straight tournaments won going into that QF match, including a recent 62, 64 win over Hana. Doubt many were picking Hana to win that match (ESPN commentators certainly weren't)

I did not see it...but was only mildly surprised, knowing what Hana was capable of. I had forgotten that Steffi had been on a roll that season.

 

[insideoutforehanders]

Could you prove this assertion? You got some evidence for this? I suspect You and I may have different definitions of the term 'all court player' and baseliner. Maybe mine is 'dated' because if I am not seeing Serve/volley as a part of the arsenal in singles, it suggests that a player is not comfortable doing it. And grass is where I would mostly likely see it. I would be interested if you have some players, or commentators from that era, who labeled her as an all court courter or maybe you have done some stats that shows she was comfortable following that serve to net as more than just a surprise tactic. Sabatini is closer to meeting my definition than Zvereva.

Even though she wasn't one of the players I followed most at the time, I did see her play a lot of matches, particularly in the years she was a top tenner, and she came into the net quite a bit, a lot more than most players that era. I should have clarified I put players in 3 categories when it comes to baseliner or not, serve and volleyer, all court player, or baseliner. I counted Zvereva as an al court player, as she comes in way too much to be strictly a baseliner. I was not neccessarily implying she was a true serve and volleyer in singles, in that she came in behind her serve that often (although she does some which is already very unusual for that era).

I consider Graf a baseliner, not an all courter, and even she comes in much more than the average top player of that era. Sanchez Vicario as well. For that era's standards Zvereva has to be counted as all courter IMO.

 

[buscemi]

Graf was on a 23 match win streak, and won 4 straight tournaments won going into that QF match, including a recent 62, 64 win over Hana. Doubt many were picking Hana to win that match (ESPN commentators certainly weren't)

I'm a bit surprised by this. Hana had won the most recent Major, beating Evert and Navratilova back-to-back to take the title at the 1985 U.S. Open. She also had a French Open title under her belt, beating Evert along the way to taking the title. And, while her results were spotty going into the 1986 French Open, when weren't they (including in the run up to her 1985 U.S. Open title)?

Meanwhile, while Graf showed significant promise in the lead up to the 1986 French Open, she was still just 16, had never made the second week at the French Open, and only had one good prior result at a Major, sneaking by Shriver in a three tiebreaker match before getting smoked by Navratilova in the SF at the 1985 U.S. Open.

If I were watching tennis back then, I imagine I would have thought both that (1) good Hana or bad Hana could easily show up; and (2) this could be Graf's coming out party, or the occasion might be too big to her. I definitely don't think it would have felt like a foregone conclusion that Graf would win.

 

[insideoutforehanders]

Clay was Hana's weakest surface, even though she can play on it, winning the 81 French by beating peak Evert en route. I think there was already evidence Graf was a bad match up for Hana as well and Hana had not been off to a very good start to 86, hence her ranking dropping and being outside a top 4 seed, and now ranked behind Kohde Kilsh who was a top 4 seed. So I 100% expected Graf to win the match with Hana at the 86 French, and was 50/50 on her chances vs Evert in a hypothetical semi final. I don't know if I was to the point of being shocked Hana managed to win, but I was definitely very surprised, especialy with Graf going way up in the match, then losing.

I imagine the bookes, usually the best indicator, had Graf as the clear favorite going into that match. Although it was still the closest and best of the 4 quarter finals probably as well, as I imagine the Sukova vs Fernandez, Navratilova vs Rinaldi, Evert vs Bassett all had even longer odds for the underdog than Hana vs Graf.

 

[jrepac]

I'm a bit surprised by this. Hana had won the most recent Major, beating Evert and Navratilova back-to-back to take the title at the 1985 U.S. Open. She also had a French Open title under her belt, beating Evert along the way to taking the title. And, while her results were spotty going into the 1986 French Open, when weren't they (including in the run up to her 1985 U.S. Open title)?

Meanwhile, while Graf showed significant promise in the lead up to the 1986 French Open, she was still just 16, had never made the second week at the French Open, and only had one good prior result at a Major, sneaking by Shriver in a three tiebreaker match before getting smoked by Navratilova in the SF at the 1985 U.S. Open.

If I were watching tennis back then, I imagine I would have thought both that (1) good Hana or bad Hana could easily show up; and (2) this could be Graf's coming out party, or the occasion might be too big to her. I definitely don't think it would have felt like a foregone conclusion that Graf would win.

She also lost to Evert at the FO in '85, no? The "joy" of watching Hana was never knowing which version would show up on a given day!

 

[insideoutforehanders]

She also lost to Evert at the FO in '85, no? The "joy" of watching Hana was never knowing which version would show up on a given day!

She reminds me of Goolagong that way. Interestingly Evert considers Hana a better player than Goolagong, even though Evonne was more successful. She said one reason is she finds her groundstrokes were much more powerful (they were, although that alone wouldn't neccessarily make her a better player). Both had the Jekyl and Hyde syndrome though were they morphed between playing nearly unplayable, to someone who could lose to a random nobody or barely win games if against a big gun. Mary Pierce in the 90s and 2000s was like that too, but obviously a totally different playing style than the artistic, graceful, and fluid Evonne or Hana.

 

[buscemi]

She reminds me of Goolagong that way. Interestingly Evert considers Hana a better player than Goolagong, even though Evonne was more successful. She said one reason is she finds her groundstrokes were much more powerful (they were, although that alone wouldn't neccessarily make her a better player). Both had the Jekyl and Hyde syndrome though were they morphed between playing nearly unplayable, to someone who could lose to a random nobody or barely win games if against a big gun. Mary Pierce in the 90s and 2000s was like that too, but obviously a totally different playing style than the artistic, graceful, and fluid Evonne or Hana.

Evert's comment was made at Wimbledon in 1981, right? If so, I wonder whether she ever made similar comments down the road. That comment was made right after Hana had straight setted her on the way to the French title. It was Hana's second Major in a row after triumphing on the grass at the Australian Open, with Hana taking those titles at age 18/19.

I can see Evert thinking at that point that Hana would be a much bigger problem for her than Evonne ever was.

Of course, we know what happened next: Mandlikova wouldn't win another Major for 4+ years (1985 U.S. Open), with Evert winning 11 straight matches against her from 1981-1984.

I'm guessing that, at Wimbledon in 1981, Chris thought that the Hana of the past two Majors would be what we would get for the rest of the career, not realizing that there would be many ebbs and flows over the next decade (with injuries, of course, playing some part).

 

[Hard Court]

Evert was probably going off of her talent that Mandlikova had showed. She seemed to be able to do almost everything well. Of course, Hana was for whatever reason(s) inconsistent and lost way too often to players far beneath her in early rounds. Goolagong on the other hand, was consistent and rarely lost in the early rounds.

 

[insideoutforehanders]

Evert's comment was made at Wimbledon in 1981, right? If so, I wonder whether she ever made similar comments down the road. That comment was made right after Hana had straight setted her on the way to the French title. It was Hana's second Major in a row after triumphing on the grass at the Australian Open, with Hana taking those titles at age 18/19.

I can see Evert thinking at that point that Hana would be a much bigger problem for her than Evonne ever was.

Of course, we know what happened next: Mandlikova wouldn't win another Major for 4+ years (1985 U.S. Open), with Evert winning 11 straight matches against her from 1981-1984.

I'm guessing that, at Wimbledon in 1981, Chris thought that the Hana of the past two Majors would be what we would get for the rest of the career, not realizing that there would be many ebbs and flows over the next decade (with injuries, of course, playing some part).

Yes I think at that point she was projecting Hana to quite possibly have a better career than Evonne, and be a tougher personal opponent for her. Neither which really happened, but made total sense to predict at that point. If you said then Hana would wind up with only 4 majors and never reach #1 it would be a huge dissapointment and mist wouldn't believe it. Might you by end if 84 most were predicting her to end at only 2 majors, and she had a resurgence and wound up with the 4 atleast.

 

[Gizo]

I can see that argument, but I'd also say that Graf at the Majors in 1988 >> Graf in the Majors in 1987. As one example, I don't see 1988 Graf having to fight back from the brink of defeat to take down Sabatini in the French SF like she did in 1987.

Graf was better in 1988 than in 1987, and then I thought she was better in 1989 than in 1988 - her general competition was far tougher in 1989 including Navratilova producing a better standard of tennis that year compared to in 1988.

I think Graf fighting back from the brink of a defeat against Sabatini at RG in 1987 was a big plus point and positive thing in her favour. She showed that she could win such an important, tough match when well below her best at least for large parts of it, and that she could also win in a wide variety of ways. Then repeating the trick in coming down from 3-5 down in the final set against Navratilova, in what I thought was a very high quality and hugely entertaining match, also was clearly a huge break through.

Regarding the 1987 Wimbledon final itself, it was a very high quality match IMO, with 70% plus 1st serve percentages for both players as shown by the stats thread below.

M

Thread 'Stats for 1987 W Final (Navratilova-Graf)'

Jun 5, 2008

Navratilova d Graf 7-5, 6-3

This was Navratilova's 6th straight Wimbledon title, 8th overall.

Graf was undefeated for the year going into this match, while Martina had no titles for the year up to that point.

Martina had 21 non service winners: 1fh, 2 bh, 8 fhv, 9 bhv, 1 ov
Graf had 24: 12 fh, 9 bh, 1 fhv, 2 ov

Winners by set:
Martina - 15, 6
Graf - 11, 13

Graf had 15 passing shot winners(1 lob), 6 return winners.
Martina had 1 passing shot winner, 1 return winner.

Graf had 5 aces, 1 double
Martina had 1 ace, 1 double

Martina was 2 of 9(8 of these were in the 1st...

• Moose Malloy
• Replies: 10
• Forum: Former Pro Player Talk

I think that was one of the best performances of Navratilova's career, especially given the high stakes, against an opponent that was literally unbeaten for the season going in. She produced amongst the best serving I'd ever seen from any female player, especially in such a big match, and especially in the ad court, until Serena at Wimbledon in 2010 (which she then bettered herself in 2012).

Graf only faced 1 break point in the 2nd set (I think) and hit a healthy supply of winners throughout. I do think that her level that day would have been more than good enough to dispatch anyone else in the field at the time, including Evert. That's not to say that I'd expect Evert to completely roll over and fail to at least cause her some problems. But crucially neither she nor any other possible opponent around possessed the serving firepower that Navratilova had, which specifically caused Graf problems.

 

[EvonneFedererBorgster]

I highly doubt Chris would say that Hana was a better player than Evonne today. Evonne was a true rival with more wins over Chris, including love sets and six one sets in slams, than anyone except Martina. Hana was obviously a rival, but only truly in four years, 1980/81 and then again 1985/86. Hana never beat Chris for very long stretches during her prime years 1980-87. She didn’t score a single victory after the 1981 French until 1985. After Wimbledon 1986 I don’t think she ever beat Chris again until her retirement year of 1989. Hana was only 27 then, and wellpast her prime. Evonne beat Chris consistently and more than any other player 1972-78. Those were prime/peak Evert years and Evonne was always her most dangerous foe, including on clay. Hana never beat Chris in a slam final. It was always in semis. Evonne was just so much more consistent than Hana, unfortunately. Hana should have been pressuring both Chris and Martina for the top spot the entirety of the 1980s, but sadly she never even got to number two at any point, even though we all know she was the true world number one summer 1981, until the USO.

 

[insideoutforehanders]

I highly doubt Chris would say that Hana was a better player than Evonne today. Evonne was a true rival with more wins over Chris, including love sets and six one sets in slams, than anyone except Martina. Hana was obviously a rival, but only truly in four years, 1980/81 and then again 1985/86. Hana never beat Chris for very long stretches during her prime years 1980-87. She didn’t score a single victory after the 1981 French until 1985. After Wimbledon 1986 I don’t think she ever beat Chris again until her retirement year of 1989. Hana was only 27 then, and wellpast her prime. Evonne beat Chris consistently and more than any other player 1972-78. Those were prime/peak Evert years and Evonne was always her most dangerous foe, including on clay. Hana never beat Chris in a slam final. It was always in semis. Evonne was just so much more consistent than Hana, unfortunately. Hana should have been pressuring both Chris and Martina for the top spot the entirety of the 1980s, but sadly she never even got to number two at any point, even though we all know she was the true world number one summer 1981, until the USO.

Agree with all of that, but in fairness Hana beat Chris on clay at the 81 French en route to the title, and Evonne never beat Chris again on clay after 73. So not sure Evonne was a tougher opponent on clay for Chris than Hana was. Yes I agree with you she was Chris's toughest opponent on clay in the mid to late 70s, which Hana definitely was not for Chris in the 80s (which was obviously by far Martina, and later Graf, and even possibly someone like Jaeger was above Hana), but that is mainly by default as there were almost no really good clay courters in the 70s besides Chris and Evonne, once Court and Richey were basically done post 73. On any surface other than clay though, yes Evonne was a much tougher opponent for Chris than Hana was in the end, even if it made sense it didn't look that way moving forward for Chris by mid 81 where Hana looked far more threatening than she wound up being, and quite possibly likely to be more threatening than Evonne but ultimately didn't come close overall to that.