Evert vs. Navratilova in 1978

[Gizo]

The battle for tennis supremacy in 1978 between Evert and Navratilova was fascinating.

Navratilova was the year end no. 1 per the WTA ranking computer.

But Evert was named as the player of the year by Tennis Magazine and World Tennis, which were a bigger deal than the WTA ranking computer at the time. Evert was also named as the ITF World Champion, decided by the 3 woman panel of Margaret Court, Margaret Osborne duPont and Ann Jones, and also notably earned slightly greater prize money than Navratilova despite entering noticeably fewer tournaments.

The players split the Wimbledon and US Open titles between them, and also the Virginia Slims and Colgate Series Championship titles. Evert won 3 out of their 5 matches during the year. Of course Navratilova won the most important match, the Wimbledon final. But then again she lost to a 16 year old Shriver at the US Open thus failing to set up a re-match there, and Evert beat her in the Colgate Series Championships final in Palm Springs in straight sets. Had Navratilova won that then I think 1978 would clearly have been her year.

Navratilova won 11 titles compared to Evert's 7, and entered noticeably more tournaments (I think 20 compared to Evert's 11), with Evert taking the early part of the year off and only starting her season in mid-March. Both players missed the heavily depleted European clay court season. For perspective, the Family Circle Cup in Hilton Head had a prize money pool of USD 125k, compared to USD 35k at both the German and Italian Opens, and Evert earned greater prize money for winning the Family Circle Cup title, than Ruzici did for winning the RG title (not only a lesser major compared to Wimbledon and the USO for the women, but also less important compared to a few big money tournaments in the US at the time).

Navratilova started the year with a stunning 37 match winning streak during the US winter series, and up to and including Wimbledon had clearly been the best player in the world by a pretty large distance. But post-Wimbledon she only won 1 more title, while Evert ended the year in superb form.

It goes without saying that both players thought that they themselves were clearly the best in the world in 1978, and they both publicly made their cases !

Who do you think was the best in 1978?

 

[GrandSlam24]

Chris Evert

 

[sandy mayer]

I give the number 1 for 1978 to Navratilova. I believe Evert was still a better player than her, but they won the same number of slams with Navratilova winning 4 more titles. 4 more titles is a significant gap.

How much a player plays impacts their year and is part of the game. A player who wins more because they play more has had a better year than the player who plays less and wins less. If Evert had played more I am very confident 1978 would have clearly belonged to her but she didn't.

 

[Gizo]

Yes - the main knock against Evert is that she didn't play enough, only enterting 11 tournaments - she also played and won all 5 match of her matches in the Federation Cup in Kooyong as well, beating Wade and Turnbull.

Evert said at the end of the year that she didn't think that she should be penalised for not playing more tournaments, but that Navratilova shouldn't be penalised for her not entering those winter US tournaments.

At that time, there was more of a boxing mentality, with a lot of people thinking that in order for one player to establish themselves as the best in the world, they had to 'knockout' the previous title holder, and Navratilova's defeat to Shriver at the USO was really emphasised as a bad loss in the considerations for the player of the year crown.

Steve Flink (though no surprise there given that he was the biggest Evert fan around though his tennis knowledge has been encyclopedic), Rino Tommasi, John Barrett, Judith Elian and Joseph McCauley all went for Evert as the best player in 1978 , while Bud Collins, Lance Tingay and Pete Bodo went for Navratilova.

I believe that the major French and Australian tennis newspapers / magazines (alongside the US ones) went for Evert, while the Japanese tennis magazine went for Navratilova.

To me the most controversial thing about the WTA computer rankings for 1978, was that Ruzici was down at no. 12. Yes RG where she won the title had a heavily depleted field and offered paltry prize money (not just the Colgate and Virginia Slims Championships but numerous other tournaments in the US would rank ahead of RG at that time). But she reached the quarter-finals at both Wimbledon and the US Open, and won a good standard title at Brighton which had a strong field.

Goolagong struggling with left foot / calf injury problems all year was a huge shame. She played through the pain barrier to impressively beat Navratilova (who had won 40 out of her last 41 matches) and Evert back to back in Boston (she said if she'd didn't beat Navratilova in straight sets she didn't know if she could have played on in a 3rd set), and against Ruzici and Navratilova at Wimbledon (when she screamed in pain - everyone else including Navratilova was deeply concerned). Those injuries kept her out on the sidelines after Wimbledon, until she returned just before the end of the year.

 

[GrandSlam24]

Bud Collins? Evert or Martina?

 

[Gizo]

Bud Collins? Evert or Martina?

I think Bud Collins went for Navratilova, while Joseph McCauley went for Evert.

Another interesting year is 1981. For a long time, I thought that Evert was narrowly the player of the year ahead of Austin, but recently I've been more convinced by the case for Austin.

She enjoyed winning records against Evert (2-1 with the defeat coming in ultimately the least important of those 3 matches), Navratilova (4-2 including winning both of what were the 2 most important matches by far) and Mandlikova (2-0) that year. Evert had losing h2h records against both Austin (1-2) and Navratilova (2-3) that year.

Her beating Evert and Navratilova back to back to win what was arguably / probably the 3rd most important event of the year the Toyota Championships (as she also did earlier in the year to win the Canadian Open), was IMO hugely significant. For reference I think that the Toyota Championships was still more important than RG for the women at that time, and also ranked ahead of the Avon Championships, due to the stronger field (it had all 4 of Austin, Evert, Navratilova and Mandlikova in the field while the Avon Championships didn't have Austin or Evert), and greater prize money.

Evert won 9 titles compared to Austin's 8 in 1981, but Austin won 2 out of the biggest 3, compared to Evert winning 1 of the biggest 3 (albeit that was also the single biggest event at Wimbledon). Evert was more consistent and had fewer bad losses which was of course a big argument in her favour.

However due to the lack of depth in women's tennis at the time, I think that head to head records against direct rivals were comparatively (even) more important in women's tennis at the time compared to in men's tennis. Also whether or not big name players were present in tournament fields, was also comparatively far more important in women's tennis compared to men's - men's tennis had far more depth and a considerably stronger supporting cast behind / to fill in for the absence of its biggest stars.

 

[Gizo]

Back on the subject of 1978 and Navratilova vs. Evert, their Eastbourne final that year, with Navratilova saving 2 match points (I think) before prevailing 9-7 in the final set, was an absolute treat. I think that was the only time that Evert lost after holding match points along the way, in-between her Washington QF against Navratilova in early 1975 which came down to a sudden death point, and her R2 match against Mandlikova at Indian Wells in 1989.

Their re-match the following year in the 1979 Eastbourne final, which lasted for 3 hours, with Evert saving 3 match points (I think) before prevailing 13-11 in the final set, was even better.

 

[PDJ]

I go with quality over quantity.
And I've always valued consistency.
Evert.

A great thread with some very interesting posts. I especially liked reading about Ruzici and learning new facts.

 

[BTURNER]

Back on the subject of 1978 and Navratilova vs. Evert, their Eastbourne final that year, with Navratilova saving 2 match points (I think) before prevailing 9-7 in the final set, was an absolute treat. I think that was the only time that Evert lost after holding match points along the way, in-between her Washington QF against Navratilova in early 1975 which came down to a sudden death point, and her R2 match against Mandlikova at Indian Wells in 1989.

Their re-match the following year in the 1979 Eastbourne final, which lasted for 3 hours, with Evert saving 3 match points (I think) before prevailing 13-11 in the final set, was even better.

Those superlong matches, and all that practice returning that lefty hook of Martina's just weeks before Wimbledon, did her no good whatsoever. She lost 4 out of the 5 sets she played against her rival in those slam finals. But if anyone has not seen those Eastborne finals, you are missing some special tennis. the quality and drama were unmatched in their rivalry. Those matches were better than any of their slam finals. The only year that playing Eastborne did Chris any practical good in any specific match up at Wimbledon, was in 1988 when she lost to Sukova, then beat her in a nail-biter at Wimbledon in the QF.

 

[martinezownsclay]

I remember reading Martina was super upset about Chris being named ITF World Champion for the year. Her exact words were "Chris had 3 great months, I had 8".

 

[Gizo]

Those superlong matches, and all that practice returning that lefty hook of Martina's just weeks before Wimbledon, did her no good whatsoever. She lost 4 out of the 5 sets she played against her rival in those slam finals. But if anyone has not seen those Eastborne finals, you are missing some special tennis. the quality and drama were unmatched in their rivalry. Those matches were better than any of their slam finals. The only year that playing Eastborne did Chris any practical good in any specific match up at Wimbledon, was in 1988 when she lost to Sukova, then beat her in a nail-biter at Wimbledon in the QF.

I think that the much lower stakes and far more relaxing and less pressured environment compared to Wimbledon, definitely contributed to the greater standard of tennis at Eastbourne.

Factoring in the overall / average quality of tennis from both participants throughout, excitement, drama etc., that 1979 final might rank as one of the very best women's matches that I've ever seen.

Also in terms of tune-ups for grass courts majors, while it certainly doesn't measure up to those Eastbourne finals, their 1981 Sydney final ahead of the Australian Open was also enjoyable viewing IMO. I thought that Navratilova was very impressive as she won the 2nd set (serving and volleying impeccably), while Evert (especially with her laser-like crosscourt backhand and hitting with such precision and depth to keep Navratilova pinned to the baseline for much longer than she liked) was very impressive as she won the final set.

I remember reading Martina was super upset about Chris being named ITF World Champion for the year. Her exact words were "Chris had 3 great months, I had 8".

Clearly former legends have opinions just like the rest of us, and those opinions shouldn't be treated as gospel or anything. But the fact that it was Court, Jones and DuPont that decided the 1978 ITF World Champion, is still quite noteworthy IMO. I might be imagining this, but I'm sure read Jones explaining that they chose Evert due to her consistency and lack of bad losses. It's no surprise that Jones would highly value consistency.

Navratilova entering significantly more tournaments than Evert in 1978, but still earning less prize money that year than her (very marginally less but still), does stand out IMO. Then again she earned considerably greater prize money than both Evert and Austin in 1981, and was widely considered to the be the 3rd best player in the world behind both of them that year.

Another 'contentious' year which I might look into in more detail at some point, is Goolagong vs. King in 1971. I think most writers / publications went for Goolagong with the exception of Bud Collins who went for King, and Frank Rostron who deemed that the two of them were joint no. 1s. (I think he also did the same thing on the men's side that year with Newcombe and Smith).

 

[martinezownsclay]

I also take Navratilova's comments on anything with a grain of salt. She is what I would call very self biased, and biased towards her friends when comparing them to her non friends. It still was an interesting point and perspective she had though. I do think she is right that she ultimately better in more months of the year than Chris was better than her (aided by Chris not even playing some of those) but the margin in the months Chris was better was probably significantly larger, atleast more than any month Chris was playing.

 

[MissileBackHand99]

I just love learning new things about the great history of tennis that I didn't know, especially in the 70s and early 80s. I never knew the 3-woman panel of Court, Jones, and Osbourne-Dupont decided the ITF Player of the Year. That's very interesting and I'm sure Martina thought politicky in Chris's favor. Chris only entering 11 tournaments and still winning 7 of them (and was up 4-2 in the third set of their Wimby Final), is incredible to me. That's gotta be what, a 65% win clip?! Ridiculous. Evert also winning the Colgate Finals over Martina..possibly won the POY for her. We always seen to remember who finished the year with a bang more than who began it with one

Another interesting year is 1981. For a long time, I thought that Evert was narrowly the player of the year ahead of Austin, but recently I've been more convinced by the case for Austin.

She enjoyed winning records against Evert (2-1 with the defeat coming in ultimately the least important of those 3 matches), Navratilova (4-2 including winning both of what were the 2 most important matches by far) and Mandlikova (2-0) that year. Evert had losing h2h records against both Austin (1-2) and Navratilova (2-3) that year.

Her beating Evert and Navratilova back to back to win what was arguably / probably the 3rd most important event of the year the Toyota Championships (as she also did earlier in the year to win the Canadian Open), was IMO hugely significant. For reference I think that the Toyota Championships was still more important than RG for the women at that time, and also ranked ahead of the Avon Championships, due to the stronger field (it had all 4 of Austin, Evert, Navratilova and Mandlikova in the field while the Avon Championships didn't have Austin or Evert), and greater prize money.

Evert won 9 titles compared to Austin's 8 in 1981, but Austin won 2 out of the biggest 3, compared to Evert winning 1 of the biggest 3 (albeit that was also the single biggest event at Wimbledon). Evert was more consistent and had fewer bad losses which was of course a big argument in her favour.

However due to the lack of depth in women's tennis at the time, I think that head to head records against direct rivals were comparatively (even) more important in women's tennis at the time compared to in men's tennis. Also whether or not big name players were present in tournament fields, was also comparatively far more important in women's tennis compared to men's - men's tennis had far more depth and a considerably stronger supporting cast behind / to fill in for the absence of its biggest stars.

1981 for me is one of the most underrated years in women's tennis, and in sports in general IMO. Such fantastic tennis between those 3 ladies. 1981 was also the year Chris and Martina began to re-vitalize the Australian Open IMO by both going down there to play the first of their 3 classic Finals. Chris had beaten Martina in an underrated Final in Sydney (of which I just discovered a couple weeks ago). Their back to back Finals in '81 and '82 are what I think prompted the great male players to start going down there in '83 and '84

 

[Gizo]

I just love learning new things about the great history of tennis that I didn't know, especially in the 70s and early 80s. I never knew the 3-woman panel of Court, Jones, and Osbourne-Dupont decided the ITF Player of the Year. That's very interesting and I'm sure Martina thought politicky in Chris's favor. Chris only entering 11 tournaments and still winning 7 of them (and was up 4-2 in the third set of their Wimby Final), is incredible to me. That's gotta be what, a 65% win clip?! Ridiculous. Evert also winning the Colgate Finals over Martina..possibly won the POY for her. We always seen to remember who finished the year with a bang more than who began it with one


1981 for me is one of the most underrated years in women's tennis, and in sports in general IMO. Such fantastic tennis between those 3 ladies. 1981 was also the year Chris and Martina began to re-vitalize the Australian Open IMO by both going down there to play the first of their 3 classic Finals. Chris had beaten Martina in an underrated Final in Sydney (of which I just discovered a couple weeks ago). Their back to back Finals in '81 and '82 are what I think prompted the great male players to start going down there in '83 and '84

I agree 1981 is one of the most exciting years I've seen / in my lifetime, both looking at women's tennis alone, and looking at women's and men's tennis together. A thrilling season.

And I also agree that Evert comfortably beating Navratilova in the 1978 Colgate Championships final in Palm Springs (which had a prize money pool of 250k compared to 150k at the Virginia Slims Championships earlier in the year), is a strong factor in her favour.

A few other points:

- Bud Collins said a few times that he basically had no idea how the WTA computer rankings worked around that time.
- Ruzici never making the WTA computer ranking year end top 10 once during her career, seems utterly bizzare.
- She said that she lost her focus against an injured Goolagong in their 1978 Wimbledon QF, when she could see Evonne crying across the net, in a large amount of pain, deciding whether or not to play on etc.
- Kerry Reid was impressively consistent throughout 1978 continually reaching and losing in finals, semi-finals and quarter-finals. Thankfully she didn't end the year empty-handed, and won a title at Adelaide.
- Austin ending Navratilova's 37 match winning streak at the start of the year in Dallas was of course a very big deal, and she enjoyed another win against her in Tokyo at the end of year. They hadn't played each other yet, but Shriver referred to her as a 'little twerp', so a sign of things to come between the two of them.
- Navratilova publicly said that she thought was Austin was no. 1 in 1981, after the Toyota Championships.
- Clearly when there was a close contest between Evert and someone else for any 'player of the year' crown, World Tennis Magazine / Steve Flink was always going to be in her corner.
- Evert being the 'established queen', after her incredible run from 1974-1977, was also going to work in her favour. Unless another player 'convincingly' topped her in a particular season (again as per the boxing mentality), which Navratilova didn't do in 1978, it was likely that most tennis writers / publications would award the crown to her.
- However at least World Tennis Magazine / Flink acknowledged that Navratilova was the best player in 1979. Judith Elian / L'Equipe thought it was still Evert, which was crazy, as I thought that she came in 3rd place that year, also behind Austin who was IMO the 'real no. 2'.
- Part of this debate centres around whether it is viewed as better to not show up for certain tournaments and thus not lose in them, than show up and suffering a 'bad loss'. Navratilova entering far more tournaments than Evert, also meant that she was always more vulnerable to suffering more defeats and bad defeats. But of course regardless of how many tournaments that Evert entered, her consistency was insane and unmatched then.

 

[buscemi]

I don't know that it's dispositive, but I was pretty surprised to see this loss by Navratilova in 1978:

Hilton Head QF: Joanne Russell d. Navratilova, 6-2, 6-4​

According to Tennis Abstract, Russell was 13-16 in 1978, and Navratilova had beaten Russell in Charlotte in 1977, 6-1, 6-2.

That's a pretty bad, straight set loss for Martina. I wonder what happened.

 

[BTURNER]

This a broad point, but pretty relevant. Virtually all of our memories of Martina's game ( and that great rivalry come in the mid to late 80's0 after she started that graphite racket and the great training push. We tend to forget that her tactics were different, her body was different, so much was different. Seeing her play with a wood racket, you realise that without that graphite power and the muscular build, it was more complicated than ever to rush Chris because she was not overpowering her. Martina ran very well, but she also ran out of breath when Chris drove those shots from Los Angeles on one side, to Boston on the other side. Martina rarely came in on her own second serve, and she tended to stand further back on that baseline against Chris so it was just harder to get in. That often made for more entertaining rallies than we saw in the mid and late 80's.

 

[BTURNER]

I don't know that it's dispositive, but I was pretty surprised to see this loss by Navratilova in 1978:

Hilton Head QF: Joanne Russell d. Navratilova, 6-2, 6-4​

According to Tennis Abstract, Russell was 13-16 in 1978, and Navratilova had beaten Russell in Charlotte in 1977, 6-1, 6-2.

That's a pretty bad, straight set loss for Martina. I wonder what happened.

Just a wild guess, but maybe it was Navratilova's first clay event of the year and she simply had not prepared properly. The slide may be pretty automatic, but Martina needs to 'practice' her patience if she expects it to be there consistently in that first tournament. Maybe she drove to 'error city' instead of Hilton Head.

 

[Gizo]

I understand that due to rain delays, the R16 and QF matches at Hilton Head in 1978 all took place on the same day, and that Navratilova took to the court to face Russell, little over an hour after she had beaten Shriver. All 8 quarter-finalists had similar scheduling with 2 matches in one day, including Russell, so I wouldn't want to dwell on that as excuse.

But I believe it was the first time during her career that Navratilova played 2 matches in one day, which can be a new and different experience. Also she had played exclusively indoors for 3 months, winning 8 titles from 10 appearances under a roof, so then switching to outdoors and har-tru was a big change.

 

[martinezownsclay]

I don't know that it's dispositive, but I was pretty surprised to see this loss by Navratilova in 1978:

Hilton Head QF: Joanne Russell d. Navratilova, 6-2, 6-4​

According to Tennis Abstract, Russell was 13-16 in 1978, and Navratilova had beaten Russell in Charlotte in 1977, 6-1, 6-2.

That's a pretty bad, straight set loss for Martina. I wonder what happened.

Russell had a huge hate on for Martina. That was obvious in watching her commentary from 83-89. It didn't help that Russell was very good friends with Chris Evert, and also close friends and a mentor of sorts to a young Steffi Graf (they even played some doubles together). So when Martina was playing them she was way up both those girls asses, and dumping on Martina every shot she got. But even that aside it is pretty clear there was no love lost between those two. Given her Renee Richards comments were far more outspoken than anyone else at the time I wouldn't be stunned if she were possibly transphobic/homophobic too. All this said I imagine she got extra charged up for Martina like she did nobody else, and Martina had a really off day that day too.

Even today it is clear she dislikes Martina when in an interview I saw her give 6 years when asked if Martina was possibly a GOAT contender for women she practically screamed "NO WAY, it is clearly either Serena or Steffi Graf, and I would put Chris, Margaret, Billie Jean, Maureen, all aobve Martina too." Now granted there are probably more people who have Serena and Graf above Martina than don't today in general anyway (rightly or wrongly) but still I think you would agree this shows some bias/dislike of Martina too.

 

[martinezownsclay]

Watch some of Russell's commentary of the 88 Wimbledon final vs Graf

and the 86 French final vs Evert

Like I said easy to tell she would get extra charged up to play Martina more so than she would anyone else, as most competent players who outright can't stand someone are.

 

[EvonneFedererBorgster]

That was JoAnnes only win over Martina though? I always thought she seemed harsh towards Martina in her tv commentary. But not putting Martina right up with Serena and Steffi is outrageous. Nobody puts Chris, Billie Jean and Maureen above Martina in any GOAT debate.
Edit: I looked up their H2H and besides the single victory, JoRu only ever took Martina to a third set one other time…
Joanne Russell (US) - 10:1
1975 US Open 2R W 6-2 3-6 6-2
1977 Los Angeles, USA QF W 6-3 6-4
1977 Detroit, USA 1R W 7-6 6-3
1977 Charlotte, N.C., USA SF W 6-1 6-2
1978 Hilton Head Island, S.C. QF L 2-6 4-6
1978 Eastbourne, UK 3R W 6-1 6-4
1980 Richmond, Virg., USA 2R W 6-3 6-4
1981 Cincinnati, Ohio, USA SF W 6-1 6-3
1981 US Open 3R W 6-2 6-1
1982 Washington, D.C., USA 2R W 7-5 6-2
1982 Wimbledon QF W 6-3 6-4

 

[Gizo]

Russell teamed up with Ruzici to beat Navratilova / Shriver in doubles at Amelia Island in 1981 (so not a fun week for Naratilova considering what happened to her vs. Evert in singles), though Navratilova / Shriver were just getting started as a doubles pairing that year.

It was pretty funny that after Russell's clearly biased commentary towards Evert (who she had grown up with and known since they were very young kids) and against Navratilova, she was replaced at NBC by none other than Evert (though I think they brought her back in when Evert was on maternity leave).

Navratilova herself was pretty bitter in the mid-90s when commenting on Graf matches for HBO (and towards Graf in general at the time, who compared how gracious Evert was towards her in comparison). But it seems like Russell was even worse when commenting on Navratilova matches in the 80s. I gather that there were some very personal barbs against Navratilova as well, such as criticising her appearence when she started wearing glasses on the court. When Austin broke through and made big waves, Russell was also critical of her appearance.

On a side note Russell's QF run at Wimbledon in 1982 was lively, with constant rain delays adding to the drama. She was 2 points away from losing her R1 match against Susan Mascarin. In R2 she had to save 2 match points to beat Mima Jausovec. She was then worried she was going to be defaulted from her R3 match against Pam Casale after arriving on site nearly 2 hours after the scheduled start time (due to issues with transportation with her first car not arriving and then the replacement catching fire), but wasn't and won another 3 setter. In R4 she won a 4th consecutive 3 setter against the 9th seed Sylvia Hanika.

 

[PDJ]

Russell teamed up with Ruzici to beat Navratilova / Shriver in doubles at Amelia Island in 1981 (so not at week for Naratilova considering what happened to her vs. Evert in singles), though Navratilova / Shriver were just getting started as a doubles pairing that year.

It was pretty funny that after Russell's clearly biased commentary towards Evert (who she had grown up with and known since they were very young kids) and against Navratilova, she was replaced at NBC by none other than Evert (though I think they brought her back in when Evert was on maternity leave).

Navratilova herself was pretty bitter in the mid-90s when commenting on Graf matches for HBO (and towards Graf in general at the time, who compared how gracious Evert was towards her in comparison). But it seems like Russell was even worse when commenting on Navratilova matches in the 80s. I gather that there were some very personal barbs against Navratilova as well, such as criticising her appearence when she started wearing glasses on the court. When Austin broke through and made big waves, Russell was also critical of her appearance.

On a side note Russell's QF run at Wimbledon in 1982 was lively, with constant rain delays adding to the drama. She was 2 points away from losing her R1 match against Susan Mascarin. In R2 she had to save 2 match points to beat Mima Jausovec. She was then worried she was going to be defaulted from her R3 match against Pam Casale after arriving on site nearly 2 hours after the schedule started time (due to issues with transportation with her first car not arriving and then the replacement catching fire), but wasn't and won another 3 setter. In R4 she won a 4th consecutive 3 setter against the 9th seed Sylvia Hanika.

Evert's attitude towards her rivals towards the end of her career can be summed up by a press interview she gave in 85 after beating Navratilova (exhibition aside) for the first time since 1983 that she hoped the result made headlines but she wasn't driven by that "but don't get me wrong, l wouldn't want (press/fans) to push me out of the way to get to Gabriella Sabatini".
I've paraphrased, but that was the gist.

 

[martinezownsclay]

Russell teamed up with Ruzici to beat Navratilova / Shriver in doubles at Amelia Island in 1981 (so not a fun week for Naratilova considering what happened to her vs. Evert in singles), though Navratilova / Shriver were just getting started as a doubles pairing that year.

It was pretty funny that after Russell's clearly biased commentary towards Evert (who she had grown up with and known since they were very young kids) and against Navratilova, she was replaced at NBC by none other than Evert (though I think they brought her back in when Evert was on maternity leave).

Navratilova herself was pretty bitter in the mid-90s when commenting on Graf matches for HBO (and towards Graf in general at the time, who compared how gracious Evert was towards her in comparison). But it seems like Russell was even worse when commenting on Navratilova matches in the 80s. I gather that there were some very personal barbs against Navratilova as well, such as criticising her appearence when she started wearing glasses on the court. When Austin broke through and made big waves, Russell was also critical of her appearance.

On a side note Russell's QF run at Wimbledon in 1982 was lively, with constant rain delays adding to the drama. She was 2 points away from losing her R1 match against Susan Mascarin. In R2 she had to save 2 match points to beat Mima Jausovec. She was then worried she was going to be defaulted from her R3 match against Pam Casale after arriving on site nearly 2 hours after the scheduled start time (due to issues with transportation with her first car not arriving and then the replacement catching fire), but wasn't and won another 3 setter. In R4 she won a 4th consecutive 3 setter against the 9th seed Sylvia Hanika.

I am glad to see from some of the answers in this thread I am not the only one who noticed Russell's heavily biased commentary in favor of her good friends Chris (who as you mentioned she is a longtime friend with) and Graf (who obviously she did not grow up with, but became close with, and a personal mentor of sorts with, played some doubles with even though Graf rarely played doubles, so were obviously close) vs Navratilova, who she was visibly not fond of.

And yes thanks for pointing out the irony after years of visibly overkissing Chris's behind in the booth she is booted from the booth by.....Chris. Love it.

I actually like Joanne a lot, and biased commentary does not bother me, but just pointing out the obvious.

And yes Navratilova also had an obvious hate on for Graf in the booth, and extreme bias to her personal friend Monica Seles, especialy when she played Graf. Also obvious bias later when she commentated on Kuznetsova, Hingis, and Henin, people who she became good friends with, and against the Williams who she did not hide she was not fond of. But JoAnne was another level, Martina atleast made a poor but visible attempt at being subtle about her obvious biases and agendas, while Russell was very overt about it.