Evert vs Shriver: the rivalry that never was.

[Moose Malloy]

I'd hardly say Graf "lost badly" at 1987 Wimbledon. Navratilova was #1, was a 7 time Wimbledon champ, Graf was playing in her first Wimbledon final. And she lost 7-5,6-3 - one service break per set

Yeah, the stats show that it was a pretty high quality 2 sets. I do stats on a lot of matches, and women's matches with only 2 breaks of serve(let alone a major final) are incredibly rare. Graf only faced one break point in the 2nd set, not sure she could have done much better on her serve than she did that day. Both players served over 70%.

here are some other stats(looks like Graf had quite a few passing shot winners as well that day). And finished with more winners than Martina. Not a lot of errors by either player. on paper it sounds like an old school men's grasscourt match.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=201786

 

[BTURNER]

Yeah, the stats show that it was a pretty high quality 2 sets. I do stats on a lot of matches, and women's matches with only 2 breaks of serve(let a lone a major final) are incredibly rare. Graf only faced one break point in the 2nd set, not sure she could have done much better on her serve than she did that day. Both players served over 70% that day.

here are some other stats(looks like Graf had quite a few passing shot winners as well that day). And finished with more winners than Martina. Not a lot of errors by either player. on paper it sounds like an old school men's grasscourt match.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=201786

"Martina had 20 unreturned serves, of which I judged 1 to be a service winner."

"in the last game of the match, Dick Enberg said that Martina had won 25 of the 30 service points she served in the ad court."


This are not far off what what I remember and I think they show exactly the problems I describe in Graf's tactical play its just that I felt it was a routine predictable match. I said Graf needed to learn to hit an offensive lob (only one lob winner) and needed to return that lefty hook serve better. I just didn't remember it being that clean a match. If Martina is dictating her service games with her serve and volley, and Graf is dictating with a serve and that forehand, I can understand why there aren't going to be a lot of breaks.


Winners by set:
Martina - 15, 6
Graf - 11, 13
Am I reading this correctly that Martina won the second set 6-3 with only about a third of the the winners she hit in the first set? 15 winners in set one and only 6 winners in set two? Moose, surely that is supposed to be 16 winners in set 2.

 

[Moose Malloy]

Am I reading this correctly that Martina won the second set 6-3 with only about a third of the the winners she hit in the first set? 15 winners in set one and only 6 winners in set two? Moose, surely that is supposed to be 16 winners in set 2.

Uh no, its not. I've done stats for many Martina matches, she didn't really hit that many winners(no woman pre Graf really did)
But forced errors are just as good as winners (missed passing shots get counted as forced errors, not many 'force' errors as much as a net rusher like Martina)

Also, the first set was rather long(12 games) so 15 winners isn't a particularly high number for that set. The equivalent of that in set 2 would be 11 winners. And its not uncommon for a player's rate of winners to vary set to set even in winning sets, so I don't see anything unusual in this. You should try doing your own stats sometime, I think it gives the viewer more insight into how matches were won that just watching alone(and listening to commentators who often lead the viewers incorrectly with their opinions - see Dman talking about Evert)

 

[Rosewall]

I have always maintained that Evert played far better grass court tennis from 84-87 than at any time in her career. But for Martina, who stopped her in 84,85,87 , she would have to be odds on to win several more Wimbledons.

What I noticed was how low those passes stayed across the net. There was virtually no margin for error in any direction and she produced those off some very difficult approaches and pitted grass courts. To get underneath those dying heavily sliced balls and create pace and angle sufficient to get them past a volleyer of Pam's reach and ability time and time and time again, reflects incredible hand/eye coordination, and timing. Shriver is forced to crowd the net to reach the severest of angles, and then the lobs come....

There were Wimbledons where Evert THRASHED her draw all the way to the final, losing 2, 3, or 4 games for an entire match only to be stopped by Martina or Graf.

I agree about Evert's hand/eye coordination and timing. And it capitalizes on flawless footwork and technique (not taking the ball back too far to deal with skidding balls). And when I say she seemed to always play the right shot, look at those flat passing shots where she is taken wide and you will see she cuts the ball off and takes the ball early before Shriver can close all the way to the net. Or if Shriver follows a deep approach down the middle to cut off passing angles, BOOM comes the lob. She did the same thing to BJK. The game was slow for Chrissie. Except when playing Martina who had too much juice.

 

[Rosewall]

Shriver's strength is that she knows what she is and what she isn't better than almost any other player. It's not like she doesn't have weapons. She's also not a walking serve like Goran or Isner. She can volley decisively and lob you silly. But her absolute strength was forcing you into giving her a predictable response that allowed her to control the outcome of a point. Whether its hitting behind you or crowding you into hitting up so she can smash away, she'll figure out how to put you into a position that you don't want to be in.

I wish all of those that don't take Shriver and her accomplishments seriously could take the court against her. Seeing is believinv when you're dealing with such a heavy game and court smarts.

While we are on the subject of these two, I think that Evert was Shriver's nightmare opponent. More than any other player, against Evert, every single inch of the court is important. Against Chris, Pam simply couldn't cover it well enough consistently. I think Pam would take a date on Center Court vs. Martina or Steffi any day over a match with Chris.

Agree 100% with everything you said about Shriver. I don't agree with people calling her a second tier player. She has strong credentials as a singles player. Her forehand cut shot was really tough for women players of the day to deal with -- especially on carpet. Her slice just didn't have the pace and depth to bother Evert the same way Martina's did. But Shriver was great at the net and one of the smartest players in tennis history.

 

[blarvitread]

But many who don't know or who don't remember just don't get how beating Chris was like climbing a mountain. She took your weaknesses and brandished them in your face until you forced her to stop.

Have an error prone backhand? She'll make you hit 1000 of them. Is your footwork a little sloppy? If so, prepare to be moved up and back, side to side until you yield the error from you that she wants every bit as much as a shark wants its prey. Whatever you lack as a person or as a player, Evert will find it and exploit it over and over.

While I agree overall with you Navratilova, Graf, and Austin all had atleast one obvious weakness (Austin had many in fact). This didn't stop Navratilova from going on a 13 match win streak, Graf winning her final 8 matches vs Evert for the last of just 1 set, and Austin going on a 5 match win streak and winning 9 of their 13 matches during Austin's brief prime of 79-81 (ending with a final winning record despite numerous matches aged 14-15, and a shadow of her old self post 81). Just saying. I imagine if you are good enough you can hit through and overcome this. Evert didn't play well there was a lot of depth so there were very few opponents of this caliber. Shriver with all due respect not only has weakness but is not an upper echelon singles player, so no surprise Chris successfully picked her apart.

Shriver's strength is that she knows what she is and what she isn't better than almost any other player. It's not like she doesn't have weapons. She's also not a walking serve like Goran or Isner. She can volley decisively and lob you silly. But her absolute strength was forcing you into giving her a predictable response that allowed her to control the outcome of a point. Whether its hitting behind you or crowding you into hitting up so she can smash away, she'll figure out how to put you into a position that you don't want to be in.

This I agree with, and is how she maintained a top 5 singles ranking so long over players who seemingly had much more impressive and technically sound games.

I wish all of those that don't take Shriver and her accomplishments seriously could take the court against her.

I think her accomplishments are taken seriously. Her singles achievements just aren't all that immense. Only 1 slam final. Never ending a year ranked higher than #4. Less than 20 career singles titles in an era the all time greats typically won 160-200 (vs the more customary 60-80 today). I do think she gets credit in line with those type of achievements. She is 3rd in the best slamless player poll currently.

I think Pam would take a date on Center Court vs. Martina or Steffi any day over a match with Chris.

Frankly given that Shriver at her peak lost to Graf 6-2, 6-0 and 6-2, 6-1 in successive years, the first not even against prime Graf; and that Shriver herself p-ssed Chris off by saying she wished she were playing Chris more rather than peak Martina in 82-84 and Martina >>> Chris on grass, I highly doubt that. Although if someone Shriver at her peak was averaging 1 game per set against on Centre Court isn't even her toughest opponent to face according to you, well that doesn't speak great about her vs the games true elite then does it.

 

[blarvitread]

It is also wrong to call Goran a walking serve. Goran actually has pretty good return of serve and grass and a very dangerous one. Top opponents like Sampras, Becker, and Agassi all say so themselves. Goran has quite good groundstrokes as well, and is a very good (and underrated) mover and athlete. He is vastly superior to Shriver in all of those areas. His passing shots are also way better. Shriver has much better volleys for a women than Ivanisevic does for a man, and is a much stronger mental game in almost every respect, but that is about all she has over Goran. Overheads are about a tie.

Goran's serve is no better than Karlovic's. If he were a walking serve he would not have achieved what he did.

 

[Djokovic2011]

^^^ Hello again NadalAgassi, I mean 'blarvitread'! :lol: 12 posts in and he's already back in the Former Pro Player section - he doesn't even bother trying to hide who he really is anymore! Mods, you know what to do.

 

[kiki]

Shriver actually overachieved.Jordan was a far more talented, athletic, well rounded S&V player but she underachieved.Pam learned a lot from playing alongside with Navratilova.She also happened to be overpressed since she reached that USO final in 78, when she was barely 16 yrs old.

 

[BTURNER]

Shriver actually overachieved.Jordan was a far more talented, athletic, well rounded S&V player but she underachieved.Pam learned a lot from playing alongside with Navratilova.She also happened to be overpressed since she reached that USO final in 78, when she was barely 16 yrs old.

Both had unconventional groundstrokes and neither could hit a topspin backhand to save their mother's life.

 

[kiki]

Kathy was athletic, Pam was gigantic.

 

[Verbal Volley]

Shriver was strictly a 2nd tier player at best. She was owned by all the greats- Navratilova, Graf, even Austin who isn't a huge great owned her badly.

And, according to her autobiography, she cold never beat BJK.

 

[EvonneFedererBorgster]

I do not recall any Sukova loss before the USO 1986, and certainly not in 1984!

 

[Verbal Volley]

And, according to her autobiography, she cold never beat BJK.

True. She said that she never played Billie Jean at her prime and when they did square off against each other, she always lost to her in three set matches each time they played against each other.

 

[EvonneFedererBorgster]

Pammmy NEVER beat ancient BJK? Ever?

 

[insideoutforehanders]

Pammmy NEVER beat ancient BJK? Ever?

Ancient BJK was a tough out for anyone but Evert. She even absolutely spanked Navratilova in 2 80/81 matches on her favorite surfaces of grass and carpet, and very nearly beat her at Wimbledon 80.

 

[EvonneFedererBorgster]

So zero wins for Spam? For Martina it seemed mostly mental. She respected + revered La King and acted like her lap dog at time. BUT her last loss to King was in February 1980. Martina was the #1 ranked player + Wimbledon champion and she lost like a dog to a 36 year old with bad knees. I think that loss was still lingering when they met at Wimbledon that summer. But Martina never lost a set to King afterwards. Evonne was THE WORST when it came to King. Except for the lone Chichester final in 1979, she NEVER beat King after the fall 1974 Slims YEC. And Evonne lost like a dog many times. The strangest loss for me was the late summer 1976 Fed Cup final during Evonne most consistent year. It was much closer than the usual blowout snoozer and Evonne was pregnant. But she had only lost to one person all year, Evert, and leading into the USO they were neck and neck for the #1 ranking. Obviously Evonne got blasted out of the USO final, or rather played horribly, but she should not have lost to a retired King who had not played on tour in 14 months since the 1975 Wimbledon blowout (save for WTT each summer).

But late teen/early twenties Spam? I am surprised she didn’t score at least one win over The Ye Olde Lady

 

[insideoutforehanders]

So zero wins for Spam? For Martina it seemed mostly mental. She respected + revered La King and acted like her lap dog at time. BUT her last loss to King was in February 1980. Martina was the #1 ranked player + Wimbledon champion and she lost like a dog to a 36 year old with bad knees. I think that loss was still lingering when they met at Wimbledon that summer. But Martina never lost a set to King afterwards. Evonne was THE WORST when it came to King. Except for the lone Chichester final in 1979, she NEVER beat King after the fall 1974 Slims YEC. And Evonne lost like a dog many times. The strangest loss for me was the late summer 1976 Fed Cup final during Evonne most consistent year. It was much closer than the usual blowout snoozer and Evonne was pregnant. But she had only lost to one person all year, Evert, and leading into the USO they were neck and neck for the #1 ranking. Obviously Evonne got blasted out of the USO final, or rather played horribly, but she should not have lost to a retired King who had not played on tour in 14 months since the 1975 Wimbledon blowout (save for WTT each summer).

But late teen/early twenties Spam? I am surprised she didn’t score at least one win over The Ye Olde Lady

Another interesting thing is King won all her matches vs Wade in 77. That genuinely surprised me as that was one of Wade's best years ever. And she was almost as old as King, but fully healthy and not making a comeback unlike King. I know King owned Wade throught their careers, but I certainly wouldn't expect Wade to go winless in 4 matches with her in 77. In 72 it does not surprise me one bit, but 77? I wonder if Wade is lucky Evert took out King for her at Wimbledon 77.

Yeah pretty surprised Pam with her big serve and volley game which ironically might have been at its all time height in 78-81 before her shoulder problems, could not beat a butchered kneed, aging King even once.

I agree on why Martina struggled playing King often. I do love the mutual respect they had for each other.

 

[EvonneFedererBorgster]

Once BJK got rolling after her Kerry Reid cuckoo meltdown at the 1977 USO, she went on a wonderful roll. Her fall results catapulted her to the world #2 ranking above Wade somehow. Martina was #3, again above Wade somehow. But I don’t recall King beating Wade more than twice that fall. Are you sure they played FOUR times that year, or does that include exhibitions?

 

[insideoutforehanders]

Once BJK got rolling after her Kerry Reid cuckoo meltdown at the 1977 USO, she went on a wonderful roll. Her fall results catapulted her to the world #2 ranking above Wade somehow. Martina was #3, again above Wade somehow. But I don’t recall King beating Wade more than twice that fall. Are you sure they played FOUR times that year, or does that include exhibitions?

I don't recall all their meetings either, but Bud Collins encyclopedia mentioned her going 4-0 vs Wade for 77, so that is what I am going by.

It is interesting and surprising Wade was ranked #4 at years end, as she felt like the #2 that year, despite her record vs King. The WTA also picked her as Player of the Year over Evert, which is equally as baffling however.

 

[EvonneFedererBorgster]

Yeah I totally understand Wimbledon 1980 winner Evonne at #5 year end ranking. She only played two events after winning Wimbledon, besides the obligatory pregnancy paid appearance at the December Aussie Open, losing first round to Mima.

But Wade played the entire season in 1977 and did quite well. I think she only won one or two(?) more titles that year, but she made several finals and had two wins over world #1 Evert. Surely she should be ranked above King, who just had a great fall but was a quarter finalist at Wimbledon and a runner up at the Family Circle Cup. Was it the runner up finish at the Colgate YEC that pushed her past Wade + Martina to #2?

She was on fire that fall, but her year end ranking seemed outrageous to my 7 year old self!

 

[Verbal Volley]

Pammmy NEVER beat ancient BJK? Ever?

Nope. BJK was a master tactician capable of changing her entire game plan at the spur of the moment.

 

[Verbal Volley]

Yeah I totally understand Wimbledon 1980 winner Evonne at #5 year end ranking. She only played two events after winning Wimbledon, besides the obligatory pregnancy paid appearance at the December Aussie Open, losing first round to Mima.

But Wade played the entire season in 1977 and did quite well. I think she only won one or two(?) more titles that year, but she made several finals and had two wins over world #1 Evert. Surely she should be ranked above King, who just had a great fall but was a quarter finalist at Wimbledon and a runner up at the Family Circle Cup. Was it the runner up finish at the Colgate YEC that pushed her past Wade + Martina to #2?

She was on fire that fall, but her year end ranking seemed outrageous to my 7 year old self!

Billie Jean "unofficially" won 9 tournaments in 1977 (6 of which were "sanctioned"). She won 3 tournaments that were sponsored by Lionel in March-May 1977 but not recognized by the USTA because of the participation of Renee Richards in those events (Richards was banned from "sanctioned" tournaments until around June of 1977....she played at the US Open that year after a court ruling that she could participate in the WTA tournaments), and three consecutive tournaments over Navratilova, Wade, etc... in the fall of 1977. She then won 3 matches at the YEC, before falling to Chrissie in the final. She finished the year by winning her last three tournaments, with wins over the likes of Wade and Navratilova.. She was "on fire" as you said, and only Chrissie could douse the flame. King was 0/4 v/Evert, but 5/0 v/Martina. Her only other losses in 1977 were to Michelle Tyler in Florida and to Diane Fromholtz in Atlanta.

 

[EvonneFedererBorgster]

Did the rankings change format between 1975 and 1977? I thought they were using a new divisor, but maybe that was a few years later? Wade was #2 in 1975, but somehow #4 in 1977!

 

[Verbal Volley]

Did the rankings change format between 1975 and 1977? I thought they were using a new divisor, but maybe that was a few years later? Wade was #2 in 1975, but somehow #4 in 1977!

King was #2 in the computer rankings in 1975. I specifically remember this because I remember reading an open letter/article published in either "World Tennis" or "Tennis Magazine" (I miss them both so much) by Bud Collins lambasting the USTA 1975 ranking of Billie Jean as, "World 2, USA 0" because she while was recognized as #2 in the world computer rankings, she was "unranked due to insufficient data" by the USTA. Billie participated in six tournaments in 1975, with 26-4 record. She won 2 of the 6 tournaments she entered (including Wimbledon, where she beat both Evert and Goolagong) she entered, was R/U in 3 and a semi-finalist in 1. Her head to head record that year was was 2-2 v/Evert, and 1/2 v/Wade. No one else was able to defeat her in 1975 (including Goolagong). PS: The computer rankings system was changed so many times over the course of the past fifty + years that I have lost count.

 

[EvonneFedererBorgster]

BJK was actually #4 on the year end WTA rankings (see links below). You might be misremembering since many experts placed her at #2 in their lists. World Tennis Magazine asked Chris to make a list of the top ten for 1975 and I believe she put Billie Jean at #2 and Evonne at #3, which made more sense to my childhood self. Billie Jean absolutely would have been ranked #2 had she just played a few more events, but isn’t retiring after a marvelous and unexpected Wimbledon win a dream way to go out (the first time)! Evonne with one slam and two finals also made more sense than semi + quarterfinalist Wade. Martina also made sense at #3, but not Wade.

Don’t even get me started on Davenport as world #1 in 2001 + 2004!

Scala Tennis Rankings: Women Year 1975

The Women GOAT tennis ranking for year 1975.

scalatennisrankings.com

The day the first ever WTA rankings were released

On this day in 1975, American Chris Evert became the first player ever to sit on top of the WTA computer rankings.

www.tennismajors.com

1975 WTA Tour - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[insideoutforehanders]

When I do all time ranking lists one reason I never know what to do with Davenport is those 4 YE#1s. That is extremely impressive, that is the same number as King (66, 67, 68, 72), more than Seles, more than Henin. On paper a super impressive feat, but some of those were arguably bogus, heck not even a single of the 4 was clear cut, in that there is a strong argument Hingis deserved it for 98, 2001 was just total BS I won't even bother with, 2004 there is a good case for a bunch of people and she is just one of many, 2005 there is a good case it should have been Clijsters. So it leaves me unclear what to do, I tend to be generous and give her credit for the 3 of the 4 you could make an argument for, even though I don't think she even deserved it all of those 3- 98, 2004, 2005, while completely dismissing 2001 entirely. Breaking down each year.

1998- I think Davenport was best player this year, but on paper Hingis still had the better record. Clearly the slightly better slam results with an additional final and semis or better of all 4. The YEC title (beating Davenport) which is a huge edge here. Similar number of tournament wins. Davenport has some other edges, but I think Hingis had the better overall year. Still sort of glad Davenport was YE#1 as I think she was really the best player this year, but Hingis probably was the one who merited it on record, even though the computer points obviously went Davenport's way.

2001- LOL not even going to bother. Venus and Capriati were both tons more deserving, heck even probably Serena was.

2004- She didn't even reach a slam final so this seems wrong, but there is no obvious one who should have it. Henin probably had the best year even in a year she 60% missed or was very ill for, with Olympics, Australian Open, Indian Wells amongst her 5 titles, but I get how she didn't wind up there on the computer with not playing enough. Dementieva with 2 slam finals, Serena with Wimbledon final, 3 slam quarters, YEC runner up, Kuznetsova, Myskina, and Sharapova with a Wimbledon and YEC title were arguably all more deserving, but I can also see how none of those winded up there on the computer. Very strange year. I would probably give Player of Year to Henin or Sharapova.

2005- This is between her and Clijsters really, and it is a toss up. Clijsters didn't even get past the round of 16 of a slam outside her US Open title, partly since Davenport herself beat her in the round of 16 of both the French and Wimbledon, so that gives Davenport a good argument, despite being slamless. Had Davenport won the Wimbledon final vs Venus it would easily be her, but she didn't. This is similar to 98 in reverse, I strongly feel Clijsters was "best player" this year, but Davenport in some ways had the best overall record, despite going slamless again, but atleast she had 2 slam finals this time.

 

[Verbal Volley]

Thanks for all the links.
I think Evert got in to Shriver's head early....and never really left
There was also the brief period (c.85) when things were a little tense......
That said, Evert fared very well against the tall s&v players. Sukova had the odd win, but I'm sure the h2h weighed heavily in Evert's favour. Decent players like Claudia Kohde Kiltch (sp?) & Jo Durie never scored a win.
Evert's variety of spin, passing shots, drops, lob would invariably cause uncertainty and doubt.
As an aside, Shriver and Evert seem to get on really well, having a similar sense of humour, and a deep sense of loyalty to the WTA.

Read Shriver's autobiography, entitled "Passing Shots". She and Evert had periods where they did not get along at all.

 

[jrepac]

Ancient BJK was a tough out for anyone but Evert. She even absolutely spanked Navratilova in 2 80/81 matches on her favorite surfaces of grass and carpet, and very nearly beat her at Wimbledon 80.

she was one crafty old lady....

 

[jrepac]

Read Shriver's autobiography, entitled "Passing Shots". She and Evert had periods where they did not get along at all.

I need to track that down....Pam just didn't have enough in her arsenal to really trouble Chris

 

[BTURNER]

I need to track that down....Pam just didn't have enough in her arsenal to really trouble Chris

It was a bad match-up for Pam. People talk about her unorthodox forehand, but her biggest problem turned out to be a lack of mobility. Evert just makes you run and run both foreward and back and side to side, and if your footwork is poor, or you don't change directions well, you will not be balanced and in proper position for those groundstrokes and trapped into half volleys. Those turn into unforced errors. And then you also have to toy with the baseline to make the approach perfect enough... more unforced errors. How many winning volleys and service winners can Pam be expected to hit?

If you cannot cover court efficiently and effectively, you are not going to have a good afternoon playing Chris.

 

[insideoutforehanders]

It was a bad match-up for Pam. People talk about her unorthodox forehand, but her biggest problem turned out to be a lack of mobility. Evert just makes you run and run both foreward and back and side to side, and if your footwork is poor, or you don't change directions well, you will not be balanced and in proper position for those groundstrokes and trapped into half volleys. Those turn into unforced errors. And then you also have to toy with the baseline to make the approach perfect enough... more unforced errors. How many winning volleys and service winners can Pam be expected to hit?

If you cannot cover court efficiently and effectively, you are not going to have a good afternoon playing Chris.

Obviously Martina is a better player than Pam, and probably superior in every aspect of the game (even in volleys and first serve where Pam is excellent Martina is almost surely ahead) but I often wondered how Martina with her big serve and volley game was such a nightmare for Chris once she got fully fit, and Pam was such a cakewalk, couldn't even make a small dent. I think this explains it though, Martina movement being on another planet from Pam's, either at the net, at the baseline, or transitioning between the two, is the biggest difference of all.

 

[BTURNER]

Obviously Martina is a better player than Pam, and probably superior in every aspect of the game (even in volleys and first serve where Pam is excellent Martina is almost surely ahead) but I often wondered how Martina with her big serve and volley game was such a nightmare for Chris once she got fully fit, and Pam was such a cakewalk, couldn't even make a small dent. I think this explains it though, Martina movement being on another planet from Pam's, either at the net, at the baseline, or transitioning between the two, is the biggest difference of all.

That, the left-handed hook serve, and those powerful arms, legs and wrists. Remember physical strength = balanced at point of contact and follow through. Pam and Helena and Claudia could reach more of Evert's passing shots and that was enough for many baseliners who's anticipation and footwork were not as consistent as Evert's, but Martina could make those fully outstretched volleys actually talk. Martina's outstretched or low volleys could go anywhere because she was still in control of them when nobody else was. There really was no such thing as a purely defensive/desperation Martina volley.

 

[Verbal Volley]

BJK was actually #4 on the year end WTA rankings (see links below). You might be misremembering since many experts placed her at #2 in their lists. World Tennis Magazine asked Chris to make a list of the top ten for 1975 and I believe she put Billie Jean at #2 and Evonne at #3, which made more sense to my childhood self. Billie Jean absolutely would have been ranked #2 had she just played a few more events, but isn’t retiring after a marvelous and unexpected Wimbledon win a dream way to go out (the first time)! Evonne with one slam and two finals also made more sense than semi + quarterfinalist Wade. Martina also made sense at #3, but not Wade.

Don’t even get me started on Davenport as world #1 in 2001 + 2004!

Scala Tennis Rankings: Women Year 1975

The Women GOAT tennis ranking for year 1975.

scalatennisrankings.com

The day the first ever WTA rankings were released

On this day in 1975, American Chris Evert became the first player ever to sit on top of the WTA computer rankings.

www.tennismajors.com

1975 WTA Tour - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Both World Tennis and Tennis Magazine rated Billie Jean at #2 in 1975, as did Lance Tingay, who was the "unofficial official" of ranking players before the advent of computer rankings. Billie played in six tournaments, winning two, being runner-up in 3 and a semi-finalist in 1. Her match record was 26-4. She was 2-2 vs. Chrissie, 2-0 was Evonne, 2-0 vs Morozova, 1-0 vs Durr, 1-0 vs Heldman, 1-2 vs. Wade. Interestingly, while she was world ranked on the computer, the USTA did not rank her at all, due to "Insufficient Data". The USTA was not very fond of Billie because of all the battles she had with them. Perhaps there was some prejudice in this regard.