Back to an earlier question from one poster on Conchita Martinez winning a French in the Evert era I would put it this year.
I do not believe Martinez would win a French in a year Evert played. Why? She has failed to ever produce a win that big in any slam, including on her beloved clay. She has never beaten Graf, Seles, Hingis, or a Williams in a slam. Her only win over Sanchez Vicario in a slam was in 2000 when both were far past their prime, so is nothing like if she had done it in 1991-1996 period. Her biggest wins in a slam are probably:
-37 year old Navratilova in the Wimbledon final
-slamless Davenport (but already ranked #3) in the 98 Australian Open semis
-15 year old Capriati in the round of 16 of the 91 French Open
-as mentioned fading Sanchez in the 2000 French Open semis
-Pierce in the 2nd round of the 99 French
Nothing that amazing really. She isnt mentally tough enough or fit enough to beat Evert in a slam, nor does she have enough of a game plan. She isnt willing to use her big forehand consistently which is the only thing she can hurt top players with. I could see her possibly beating Evert in some tier 1 clay court events, but not at the French Open. Even that isnt certain though as she has never beaten Graf or Seles on clay period (she has beaten everyone else of her era on clay). Maybe in a year that Evert lost before she played her she could have won. She seemed to play well vs Navratilova for whatever odd reason, even though all her matches were when Martina was well past her prime, a 4-1 head to head is still impressive. Or in a year like when Hana won in 81. However in a year Martina was in top form (she would not win the French in a year she wasnt) or the year Hana was playing well enough to beat Chris, I am pretty sure they would have enough to withstand a mentally weak and overly defensive player like Conchita.
I do think however if she played the French in the years Chris won it in 74, 75, 79, 80 with the same draws she could have won any of those. Or more specifically in the years Chris wasnt there in 76, 77, and 78. She wouldnt have won them all but she would have a pretty good shot in any of them IF Chris wasnt playing. However her wins would be viewed differently than Chris. Chris was considered the best on clay by far so nobody cared that the fields were depleted those years. In the case of Martinez winning those years people probably would have asked what if Goolagong had played from 74-77, what if an aging Richey had played those years, what if Austin or Goolagong had played in 79 or 80. Although she is a better clay courter than people like Barker and Ruzici who won during that period, unlike Chris, her wins would still come under question without a fully attended field. That is even with Navratilova not really a top clay courter yet, and Mandlikova not really on the scene that much yet in the 74-80 period.
Conchita also wouldnt have been playing more than maybe 1 of the years Chris didnt play since in her prime even with her boring game she is good enough she would always be a top 10 player probably, and back then top players wanted to play things like WTT for the money and it was more important than the French Open. Most likely she would have just played it once to snare it without Chris there , and then go back to WTT to make money and play fun exhibitions rather than play the then only partially important French Open like the rest of the top players.
