Female Number Ones by Year

[pc1]

Here's the Collins' Encyclopedia list of number one females since 1921.
1921 to 1926-Lenglen
1927 to 1933-Helen Wills
1934-Dorothy Round
1934-1936-Helen Wills
1937-Anita Lizana
1938-Helen Wills
1939-Alice Marble
Interruption by WWII
1946-Pauline Betz-Jack Kramer considers her to be the best he has seen next to Helen Wills. As usual with Kramer, she was a good friend of his. He always seems to rank his friends as all time greats.
1947-1950-Margaret Osborne DuPont
1951-Doris Hart
1952-1954-Maureen Connolly
1955-Louise Brough
1956-Shirley Fry
1957-1958-Althea Gibson
1959-1960-Maria Bueno
1961-Angela Mortimer
1962-1965-Margaret Smith (Court)
1966-196illie Jean King
1969-1970-Margaret Court
1971-1972-Billie Jean King
1973-Margaret Court
1974-Billie Jean King-This seems very odd to me because I think Chris Evert was number one with the French and Wimbledon.
1975-1977-Chris Evert
1978-1979-Martina Navratilova
1980-1981-Chris Evert
1982-1986-Martina Navratilova
1987-1990-Steffi Graf
1991-1992-Monica Seles
1993-1996-Steffi Graf
1997-Martina Hingis
1998-Lindsay Davenport
1999-2000-Martina Hingis
2001-Lindsay Davenport
2002-Serena Williams
2003-Justine Henin
2004-2005-Lindsay Davenport
2006-2007-Justine Henin

A lot of these rankings are odd because of the ATP computer. There is no way in some of these years that I consider Davenport better than the Williams, Henin or Clijsters for example but I guess she was officially number one.

This list can be a great starting point for a Female GOAT list.

Hoodjem suggested I start a Female tennis number one thread so here it is. The list of players that I listed were from the Collins encyclopedia. Some of the rankings there on that list is just weird. The year 1974 was clearly Evert's but they have King as number one.

Let's have some discussions and debates here.

 

[boredone3456]

A few quick thoughts off the top of my head to get the ball rolling.

Firstly it is almost a crime Venus was not the computer number one in either 2000 or 2001. In 2000 I can kind of see how Hingis may have edged her, 5 tier I titles and the YEC, as well as a slam final, whereas Venus really didn't completely get her act together until Wimbledon of that year. Venus was dominant from Wimbledon through the US Open, whereas Hingis was sort of a consistant Tier I/II performer and was a threat most everywhere throughout the year. Consistancy usually gets rewarded by the computer and Hingis had that, but Venus is very arguable as being above her, she won what could be argued at the time as the 3 biggest summer HC Tournaments (Acura, Bank of the West, and Pilot Pen), and for that time was utterly unstoppable.

In 2001 Sorry but that to me is clearly Venus's year, Capriati started the year very well...winningly (marginally), but after the French she completely fizzled and failed to win another title. Venus defended her 2 slams from the previous year meanwhile (no small feat defending one, let alone both), as well as defending at the acura and pilot pen, she almost won the ericsson open. Capriati won Charleston, the French and Australian...and nothing else. She may have had the best slam record, but her 2 slam losses were an arguably embarassing one to then primarily clay court specialist Henin and a thrashing from Venus despite neither playing well at all that day. As for Lindsay in 2001, she did win a couple of big events (Zurich, the Toray Pan Pacific), as well as five other titles (including Linz & The Porsche Tennis Grand Prix, but her results didn't start really coming till the last 3-4 months of the season, and she was not playing that well at the slams that year or many of the other Tier ones. I guess its arguable that Venus didn't win many new points, just defended the bulk of her pervious years, and that Jen wasn't a strong enough player all year, and that Lindsay sneaked it out in the end....but it still is a bit of a head scratcher. My top 3 for that year would go like this: Venus, Jen, Lindsay. Lindsay could possibly rank over Jen if only because of Jen's utter dropoff and arguable unbelievable luck in the first half of the year...but she still won 2 slams.

I could go into a little more depth on other years...but I'll let someone else do some posting....and besides...I don't want to write a novel.

 

[pc1]

A few quick thoughts off the top of my head to get the ball rolling.

Firstly it is almost a crime Venus was not the computer number one in either 2000 or 2001. In 2000 I can kind of see how Hingis may have edged her, 5 tier I titles and the YEC, as well as a slam final, whereas Venus really didn't completely get her act together until Wimbledon of that year. Venus was dominant from Wimbledon through the US Open, whereas Hingis was sort of a consistant Tier I/II performer and was a threat most everywhere throughout the year. Consistancy usually gets rewarded by the computer and Hingis had that, but Venus is very arguable as being above her, she won what could be argued at the time as the 3 biggest summer HC Tournaments (Acura, Bank of the West, and Pilot Pen), and for that time was utterly unstoppable.

In 2001 Sorry but that to me is clearly Venus's year, Capriati started the year very well...winningly (marginally), but after the French she completely fizzled and failed to win another title. Venus defended her 2 slams from the previous year meanwhile (no small feat defending one, let alone both), as well as defending at the acura and pilot pen, she almost won the ericsson open. Capriati won Charleston, the French and Australian...and nothing else. She may have had the best slam record, but her 2 slam losses were an arguably embarassing one to then primarily clay court specialist Henin and a thrashing from Venus despite neither playing well at all that day. As for Lindsay in 2001, she did win a couple of big events (Zurich, the Toray Pan Pacific), as well as five other titles (including Linz & The Porsche Tennis Grand Prix, but her results didn't start really coming till the last 3-4 months of the season, and she was not playing that well at the slams that year or many of the other Tier ones. I guess its arguable that Venus didn't win many new points, just defended the bulk of her pervious years, and that Jen wasn't a strong enough player all year, and that Lindsay sneaked it out in the end....but it still is a bit of a head scratcher. My top 3 for that year would go like this: Venus, Jen, Lindsay. Lindsay could possibly rank over Jen if only because of Jen's utter dropoff and arguable unbelievable luck in the first half of the year...but she still won 2 slams.

I could go into a little more depth on other years...but I'll let someone else do some posting....and besides...I don't want to write a novel.

Boredone3456,

Great post. I was hoping we would have more of a response here but I guess there is very little interest in the Female number ones. I appreciate the great input.

 

[boredone3456]

Boredone3456,

Great post. I was hoping we would have more of a response here but I guess there is very little interest in the Female number ones. I appreciate the great input.

Possibly because mens tennis always seems to generate more discussion on here, and also because for the men, many years are arguable. On the womens side, except in more recent years, its is quite clear who the number 1 was in most years. Whereas the men many times it was a lot closer.

 

[davey25]

I dont understand why Bueno would not be considered #1 for 1964. She won Wimbledon and the U.S Open that year, obviously the 2 biggest events (Court was in both and lost to Bueno at one, and lost before the final of the other). Also dating back to the 1963 U.S Open Bueno had won the last 3 Wimbledon and U.S Opens by the end of 1964, beating Court in the finals to win 2 or the 3. The funny thing is Collins in his book acknowledges Bueno as regaining the #1 status yet apparently lists differently.

Goolagong also should be #1 for 1971. She won the French Open, and won Wimbledon by thrashing King and Court in the semis and finals back to back. King won a default U.S Open with both Goolagong and Court out of the event, and this makes her #1 for the year? Please. She should be #3 behind both Goolagong and Court that year. Again Collins refers to Goolagong as the #1 player that year when speaking of 1971 in his book, so I dont understand why he then lists King as #1 for the year.

Sanchez Vicario was also the real #1 of the 1994, not Steffi Graf. 3 slam finals and 2 slam titles vs Graf's 2 slam finals and 1 slam title. Sanchez Vicario also went further than Graf in 3 of the 4 majors, including even Wimbledon. At the WTA Championships both did poorly. There is nothing that merits Graf as the #1 that year, not an enormous disparity in overall tournament results which was the case in Graf vs Navratilova in 87.

Now as for some recent years Venus is the true #1 of 2000 and 2001. Capriati won only 3 tournaments total in 2001, Venus I believe won 7 and went 3-0 vs Capriati, so this gives it to Venus. Davenport who ended that year #1, or Hingis who spent most of it at #1, are both laughable options given their lack of slam wins/finals. As for 2000 Venus's wins at Wimbledon, U.S Open and the Olympics pushes her over the top of both Davenport and Hingis.

Serena was the true #1 of 2002, 2008, and 2009. Henin was the true #1 of 2003, 2006, and 2007. I actually think Serena in truth was the best player in 2003 outside of clay, but injuries sidelining Serena at the end of the year alloweding Henin to dominate the second major hard court season of the year, combined with her clay court superiority over Serena earlier in the year, were enough to give her the cumulative results to merit being #1. Mauresmo won 2 slams to Henin's 1 in 2007 but Henin reaching all 4 slam finals and winning the WTA Championships I think is enough to push her over the top still.

2004 I have no idea who the true #1 is. You could pick any of Myskina, Sharapova, Davenport, Mauresmo, Henin, Kuznetsova, Dementieva, or Serena depending on your criteria. One of the most crazy open years ever for womens tennis. All those players in addition to Capriati and maybe Venus (though Venus was somehwat off form this year) had the real chance of winning 2 or more slams that year but nobody stepped up to take it. Henin was by far the best player that year when healthy but she was only healthy for a bit of that year, but still did win Australian Open, Indian Wells, and the Olympics. Clijsters could have even ended up being the dominant #1 of that year had she stayed healthy after Australia, the worst luck of her whole career was probably missing the next year with injuries while Myskina, Kuznetsova, and even a sluggish Serena won slams that could have been hers. Since Davenport ended there on the computer I will give her the benefit of the doubt I guess. Anyway Davenport would have won Wimbledon without the rain delay and the U.S Open without her injury. Usually I would never bring stuff like that up, but since I have no idea who to go with based on results I might as well just say that.

2005 the true #1 was a toss up between Davenport and Clijsters. I would have been fine with either.