Greatest Players of the Decade

[ATPballkid]

1880s Renshaw / Sears -- Bingley Hillyard
1890s R. Doherty / Wrenn -- Dod / Atkinson
1900s L. Doherty / Larned -- Douglass Chambers
1910s Wilding -- Douglass Chambers / Mallory
1920s Tilden -- Lenglen
1930s Budge -- Wills Moody
1940s Kramer -- Brough
1950s Gonzales -- Connolly
1960s Rosewall -- Court
1970s Borg -- Evert
1980s Lendl -- Navratilova
1990s Sampras -- Seles until she was stabbed
2000s Federer -- Serena Williams

Tennis was not so much an international sport before the 1920s and 1930s (really became an international sport in 1925). Therefore, it is harder to have a best player of the sport for those earlier years -- except you have to go with Wilding in the 1910s.

There are some very good players --- Cochet, Lacoste, Perry, Vines, Crawford, Hoad, Laver, Newcombe, Connors, McEnroe, Edberg, Becker, Wilander and Agassi among the men and Jacobs, Marble, du Pont, Hart, Fry, Hard, Gibson, Bueno, King, Goolagong, Graf, Hingis and Henin among the women --- who just were not quite good enough to be considered the best players of their decades.

 

[Joe Pike]

1880s Renshaw / Sears -- Bingley Hillyard
1890s R. Doherty / Wrenn -- Dod / Atkinson
1900s L. Doherty / Larned -- Douglass Chambers
1910s Wilding -- Douglass Chambers / Mallory
1920s Tilden -- Lenglen
1930s Budge -- Wills Moody
1940s Kramer -- Brough
1950s Gonzales -- Connolly
1960s Rosewall -- Court
1970s Borg -- Evert
1980s Lendl -- Navratilova
1990s Sampras -- Seles until she was stabbed
2000s Federer -- Serena Williams

Tennis was not so much an international sport before the 1920s and 1930s (really became an international sport in 1925). Therefore, it is harder to have a best player of the sport for those earlier years -- except you have to go with Wilding in the 1910s.

There are some very good players --- Cochet, Lacoste, Perry, Vines, Crawford, Hoad, Laver, Newcombe, Connors, McEnroe, Edberg, Becker, Wilander and Agassi among the men and Jacobs, Marble, du Pont, Hart, Fry, Hard, Gibson, Bueno, King, Goolagong, Graf, Hingis and Henin among the women --- who just were not quite good enough to be considered the best players of their decades.

Not bad.
I would change some names in the women's list:

1980s: Graf (golden grand slam, 4-2 in slam finals against Navratilova)
1990s: Graf (14 slams)
2000s: Henin (after she reached her peak and until she retired)

 

[ATPballkid]

Not bad.
I would change some names in the women's list:

1980s: Graf (golden grand slam, 4-2 in slam finals against Navratilova)
1990s: Graf (14 slams)

Of course, Navratilova was the female player of the decade for the 1980s ... Monica Seles was well on her way to being the female player of the 1990s until a Graf fan stabbed Seles in the back with a knife.

 

[Joe Pike]

Of course, Navratilova was the female player of the decade for the 1980s ... Monica Seles was well on her way to being the female player of the 1990s until a Graf fan stabbed Seles in the back with a knife.

I don't think so.
1993-96 Graf simply was too strong.
Same with Hingis after that - Seles didn't have the means to trouble Hingis.

Hey, even when she was #1 for more than one year in the early 90ies Seles lost most of her matches against a badly slumping Graf!

 

[grafselesfan]

1920- Tilden and Lenglen
1930s- Perry and Wills Moody
1940s- Kramer and Betz
1950s- Gonzales and Connolly
1960s- Laver and Court
1970s- Borg and Evert
1980s- Lendl and Navratilova
1990s- Sampras and Graf
2000s- Federer and Serena Williams

 

[FedSampras]

I don't think so.
1993-96 Graf simply was too strong.

What could possibly be more obvious and decisive than the fact that Graff immediately won 3 different slams that she hadn't won in between 3.5 to 5 *years* as soon as the player who had been *dominating them* left the scene....:lol:

 

[FedSampras]

I Hey, even when she was #1 for more than one year in the early 90ies Seles lost most of her matches against a badly slumping Graf!

condi is that you...........? LMAO

seles dominates the Aussie, French, US Open from spring 90 to spring '93, winning 8 of the 9 contested during that time. Graff wins *none* of those. Zilch .

seles then is stabbed by a germ grafan who despairs steffi ever winning those slams again, and voila, suddenly, with Seles out of the way, graff wins them by the bushel! She wins the first 3 contested right after Seles leaves, and then wins a total of 7 of them over the next 3 years.

Anyone who wants to doubt a causal connection between the two events has a mountain of beggaring-belief to overcome.


:lol:

 

[FedSampras]

against a badly slumping Graf!

are we supposed to believe that graff barely clinging on to wimbledon while teen seles was winning all the other slams was merely due to a graff slump. what happened to her motivation there? oh i forgot of course "the slump" is covered by other excuses.

and of course there seemed to be no problems with motivation from 30th April 1993 onwards. it was postively indecent the way *SLUMPING NON PRIME* graff immediately started showing up in slam finals again once the prospect of a drubbing off seles disappeared.:lol::lol:

 

[Joe Pike]

condi is that you...........? LMAO

seles dominates the Aussie, French, US Open from spring 90 to spring '93, winning 8 of the 9 contested during that time. ...

Tell that to Graf, Navratilova and Sabatini ...

 

[Joe Pike]

are we supposed to believe that graff barely clinging on to wimbledon ...

"Rag-dolling the #1 player with 6-2 6-1 in the Wimbledon final" means "barely clinging on to Wimbledon" to you ... ?

 

[FedSampras]

"Rag-dolling the #1 player with 6-2 6-1 in the Wimbledon final" means "barely clinging on to Wimbledon" to you ... ?

anyone who denies the obvious impact of the stabbing on slam results - graff hadn't won AO, or FO or USO since the late 80s (dawn of the 90s with the AO) and then suddenly started winning all of them as soon as Seles left - is a grafanatic or a nincompoop..........:lol:

 

[FedSampras]

Tell that to Graf,

remember, graff faced far weaker competition. during her first golden run, from 87-90, her best competition was 32+ years old. from 93-96 a germ grafan cleared the field of her best competition, allowing her to mop up pathetic fields at the slams.

 

[lambielspins]

remember, graff faced far weaker competition. during her first golden run, from 87-90, her best competition was 32+ years old. from 93-96 a germ grafan cleared the field of her best competition, allowing her to mop up pathetic fields at the slams.

Some reality perspective here.

The very late blooming Navratilova from age 25-33 won 15 of her 18 total slams, and reached 27 of her 31 slam finals. This was Navratilova in her prime. The early 20s Navratilova who was still fat and losing to Wendy Turnbull, Betty Stove, Sylvia Hanika, Pam Shriver, in nearly every big event she played would have been pulverized by late 80s Graf even worse.

The rest of the 87-90 field included Sabatini, the best player in history to win only 1 slam (blame Graf for that), Shriver and Sukova the two best players in history to win no slams (blame Graf and Navratilova both for that), as well as Sanchez Vicario, Seles, and Evert, not in their primes but all still formidable players even then.

As for 93-96 the field Graf dominated was basically the same field Seles faced during her dominance in the early 90s. So I guess according to you Monica's achievements dont mean much, other than the overrated and lucky Graf who was in a big slump and hardly facing Monica in any finals until just before the stabbing, she faced the so called pathetic field Graf did from 93-96 in people like Sanchez Vicario, Sabatini, Martinez, Novotna, Fernandez, and Huber. She didnt even face Pierce, Hingis, and Davenport who had emerged after the Seles stabbing, and in addition she faced an even older Navratilova than the so called warped one Graf faced in the late 80s and the overrated Capriati. Wow some field! Actually Seles to win 5 of her 9 slams faced:

-Novotna on slow hard courts, her worst surface (she usually didnt even bother playing the Australian Open). Still took her 3 sets to win.

-Anke Huber, who is a combined 0-20 or something vs Seles and Graf.

-Sanchez Vicario on fast hard courts before her prime, and who is Monica's pigeon anyway.

-a nearly 35 year old Navratilova.

-Mary Joe Fernandez.

Some killer competition that is, LOL!

 

[FedSampras]

Some reality perspective here.

The very late blooming Navratilova from age 25-33 won 15 of her 18 total slams, and reached 27 of her 31 slam finals.

yes martina went toe-to-toe with another all-time great (evert) and still came out with 18 slams. graff was blown away by seles until gunther intervened.

makes me wonder how many slams martina woulda won if evert had been stabbed.

 

[Joe Pike]

yes martina went toe-to-toe with another all-time great (evert) and still came out with 18 slams. graff was blown away by seles until gunther intervened.

makes me wonder how many slams martina woulda won if evert had been stabbed.

Evert was over-the-hill post-1981. No wonder Navi won 15 slams in 1982-87.

Graf was "blown away" by Seles by losing 4 of 10 matches against her ...

Navratilova would have won 18 or 19 slams if Evert had been stabbed.

 

[Joe Pike]

The point is that grafan dummies like yourself should keep in mind that Graff's slam total was inflated due to the Seles stabbing.

Without the Seles stabbing Graf most probably would not have lost motivation in 1994/95 - which cost her 1 or 2 slams.

 

[hoodjem]

1920- Tilden and Lenglen
1930s- Perry and Wills Moody
1940s- Kramer and Betz
1950s- Gonzales and Connolly
1960s- Laver and Court
1970s- Borg and Evert
1980s- Lendl and Navratilova
1990s- Sampras and Graf
2000s- Federer and Serena Williams

Yep. Better list.

 

[joe sch]

1920- Tilden and Lenglen
1930s- Budge and Wills Moody
1940s- Kramer and Betz
1950s- Gonzales and Connolly
1960s- Laver and Court
1970s- Borg and Evert
1980s- McEnroe and Navratilova
1990s- Sampras and Graf
2000s- Federer and Serena Williams

I changed Budge for Perry, Laver for Rosewall, McEnroe for Lendl.
A grand slam or two is part of this change and I give the edge to Mac since all his various championships including DC

 

[borg number one]

I'd agree with putting in Laver for the 1960's, instead of Rosewall, and having McEnroe edge out Lendl barely for the 1980's.

This is an interesting way to look at great players by the OP, ATPBALLKID!

 

[Ripper014]

1920- Tilden and Lenglen
1930s- Budge and Wills Moody
1940s- Kramer and Betz
1950s- Gonzales and Connolly
1960s- Laver and Court
1970s- Borg and Evert
1980s- McEnroe and Navratilova
1990s- Sampras and Graf
2000s- Federer and Serena Williams

I changed Budge for Perry, Laver for Rosewall, McEnroe for Lendl.
A grand slam or two is part of this change and I give the edge to Mac since all his various championships including DC

Hard to argue with the names on the list... but it is surprising Connors does not fit in anywhere. And for body of work I would take Henin over Serena but that is just IMHO.

 

[flying24]

These are the ones I could see debating somewhat:

-Budge vs Perry for mens player of the 1930s
-Wills Moody vs Marble for womens player of the 1930s
-Betz vs Brough vs Osborne Du Pont for womens player of the 1950s
-Laver vs Rosewall for mens player of the 1960s
-McEnroe vs Lendl for mens player of the 1980s
-Connors vs Borg for mens player of the 1970s
-Evert vs Court vs King for womens player of the 1970s
-Graf vs Seles for womens player of the 1990s
-Serena vs Henin for womens player of the 2000s

In those cases though I would have Budge, Wills Moody, Betz, Laver, Evert, Graf, and Serena as my clear choices. The only one I have a hard time deciding is maybe Lendl vs McEnroe in the 80s, and Borg vs Connors in the 70s.

 

[joe sch]

I'd agree with putting in Laver for the 1960's, instead of Rosewall, and having McEnroe edge out Lendl barely for the 1980's.

This is an interesting way to look at great players by the OP, ATPBALLKID!

It would also be interesting to see how it might change haveing the decades starting at midpoints, ie 1975 .. 1985

It would also be interesting to see the half-decade choices and see how many of the greats actually dominated for a complete decade or near 10 year span.

 

[borg number one]

Absolutely, that could be done Joe Sch. By doing a comparison at mid-points in decades, I think you'd quickly move to a year to year comparison as well though.

By using mid-points of decades, you'd in essence still look at "5 year periods" as well, and then progress down to year to year comparisons probably.

Looking at 1975-1985, you'd have Connors, Borg, and then McEnroe dominating.

Neither Borg nor McEnroe dominated over that entire ten-year period, but Connors did not either. Borg definitely dominated the 1975-1980 period, while winning the French Open in 1981, reaching 2 other slam finals, and winning the 1981 Masters.

One could argue that McEnroe was the top player of 1981-1985. So you have Borg, then McEnroe.

Connors was second to Borg, and then second to McEnroe. But he was near the top for all ten years. So, he has longevity on his side, but he NEVER dominated.

What does one emphasize then, peak vs. longevity/span of top-flight tennis? Still, looking at career accomplishments/record, I'd rate Borg over McEnroe though as well, so I'd be comfortable with saying Borg was the top player, overall, during even the 1975-1985 period. Looking at it in terms of Slams, McEnroe won 3 Wimbledons and 4 US Opens during that time frame, vs. Borg's 5 Wimbledons and 6 French Opens.

 

[borg number one]

In Connors' defense, I will say that it was impressive that he had early success vs. Borg circa 1975-1976, and then had later success vs. McEnroe (especially Wimbledon 1982). He does have 2 Wimbledon titles, and a remarkable 5 US Opens during 1975-1985.

As far as body of work in total, he is about equal to McEnroe then, in my opinion. Where McEnroe and Connors fall a bit shy of Borg, in my opinion, is versatility on all surfaces. Neither could REALLY PLAY on red clay. Yet, Borg was VERY DANGEROUS on every surface he was on. Every year folks thought that Borg COULD win the US Open, and he did reach 4 finals there. The same cannot be said for either McEnroe or Connors at the French Open, which is the ultimate clay court test.

 

[jimbo333]

Hard to argue with the names on the list... but it is surprising Connors does not fit in anywhere.

Yes arguably Connors and McEnroe aren't there, but would still make it into almost everyones top15 of all-time!

 

[jimbo333]

The only one I have a hard time deciding is maybe Lendl vs McEnroe in the 80s, and Borg vs Connors in the 70s.

I'd have to go with Borg in 70's and Lendl in 80's, but it is close!

 

[jimbo333]

And just realised Rosewall wouldn't be there either, as I'd have to go with Laver in the 60's!

So Rosewall, Connors and McEnroe all missing here, interesting!

 

[pc1]

And just realised Rosewall wouldn't be there either, as I'd have to go with Laver in the 60's!

So Rosewall, Connors and McEnroe all missing here, interesting!

You can make an excellent argument Rosewall is the player of the 1960's. I'm not saying I agree but if you put Rosewall as co-1960's with Laver it is quite reasonable.

Lendl probably belongs ahead of McEnroe for player of the 1980's since he won one more major and more overall tournaments. McEnroe has arguably the best year of all time in 1984 however.

Borg, Lendl, Connors and McEnroe was four unbelievable players all playing around the same time. I think all of them for a five year span won over 90% of their matches at one point.

A lot of all time greats never won 90% of their matches for one year!

The 1950's is clearly Gonzalez. I don't even think anyone is close.

1920's-Tilden and Lenglen

1930's-Vines and Wills
I picked Vines because he was great earlier in the decade and really dominated the pro ranks until Budge. He was perhaps better than Budge just a few years earlier and he did defeat Perry on tour. This is very close and all three top men can win. Tilden was still pretty great earlier in the decade.


To be fair in the 1930's Fred Perry played often on clay and on outside courts in which he did very well against Budge. It's quite possible, everything being equal Fred Perry was the player of the 1930's. The three top players (Vines, Perry and Budge) were all extremely close.

1940's-Kramer and Betz
This is tough also between the very underrated Riggs, Budge and Kramer.

1950's-Gonzalez and Connolly

1960's-Laver and Rosewall-I don't want to chose one over the other. Both Laver and Rosewall had unparalleled records.
Court for the women easily.

1970's-Borg and Evert
Amazing how a great player like Connors finished second. Connors was fantastic.

1980's-Lendl and Navratilova
The early 1980's still had Borg, McEnroe, Connors, Lendl and Vilas all in pretty good form. Very strong at the top. Like I wrote earlier McEnroe had the best individual year of the 1980's with his 82-3 record in 1984 with Wimbledon and US Open titles plus being in the French final. McEnroe has a decent argument for player of the 1980's. Amazing that McEnroe doesn't seem to be the top player of the decade.

1990's-Sampras and Graf
No brainer for this decade. Seles would have been a contender but you can't count what if. For a little while you would have thought Hingis would have been the top for this decade. I would suppose if Agassi liked tennis he may have done better.

2000's-Federer and Serena Williams
Henin is a contender also for the women and of course Venus. I'd have to examine her record for the decade as opposed to Serena's. It'll be interesting how Henin does next time. It'll be nice to have both Clijsters and Henin back for the full year. Federer is an easy choice.

 

[jimbo333]

^^^^^Great Summary as usual

 

[MuseFan]

Hard to argue with the names on the list... but it is surprising Connors does not fit in anywhere. And for body of work I would take Henin over Serena but that is just IMHO.

Connors was 2nd best of the 70s and maybe 5th best of 80s.

 

[Henry Kaspar]

1920- Tilden and Lenglen
1930s- Perry and Wills Moody
1940s- Kramer and Betz
1950s- Gonzales and Connolly
1960s- Laver and Court
1970s- Borg and Evert
1980s- Lendl and Navratilova
1990s- Sampras and Graf
2000s- Federer and Serena Williams

This looks right.

 

[britbox]

"Rag-dolling the #1 player with 6-2 6-1 in the Wimbledon final" means "barely clinging on to Wimbledon" to you ... ?

Exactly. ATPkid posts the same garbage on every forum I've been on. It's his life work.

Graf was 3-1 vs Seles during Monica's reign as #1. Also at no point during any stage of her career - before or after the stabbing did Graf have a losing record to Monica Seles.

When Seles came back, she got to 3 slam finals - 2 USOs and an AO. She lost the USOs to Graf and won the AO. Better not mention that Graf was absent at the AO. They all count.

What nobody can explain to me is how Seles drop-off 1996 is in anyway attributed to the stabbing. She'd already come back and won a slam.

The fact is it wasn't. She had her own off court problems with her father/coach having cancer and ate herself out of shape. This would have happened regardless of the stabbing. Graf's slump in form was primarily due to off-court problems and injuries - there are no excuses for that and neither should there be for Seles post 1996.

Some Seles fanatics seem to make an assumption that Monica would have won 3 slams a year for the next 10 years after 1993 and beaten Graf in every single grand slam final. Based on a losing H2H?? Go figure.

The stabbing act was despicable - but you'd think Graf herself was responsible listening to some of the commentary on here. Physically, Seles could have been back on court within a few weeks. Nobody begrudges her that but remember Guys like Greg Lemond (shot - nearly died) and Lance Armstrong (cancer - given low odds of survival) came back and won the Tour de France in less time.

Personally, I think Monica would have been good for some additional slams and possibly a couple at Steffi's expense. I don't think it would have changed the bigger picture though - Graf would likely still be sitting on around 20 slams and still regarded as #1 or #2 by most in the all time lists.

Grand Slam titles are won on the court, not as figments of peoples imagination. If John McEnroe had been stabbed at the end of 1984 or Mats Wilander at the end of 1988 how many mythical slams would they have been awarded? History shows assumptions don't hold much weight.

 

[Datacipher]

Personally, I think Monica would have been good for some additional slams and possibly a couple at Steffi's expense. I don't think it would have changed the bigger picture though - Graf would likely still be sitting on around 20 slams and still regarded as #1 or #2 by most in the all time lists.

Grand Slam titles are won on the court, not as figments of peoples imagination. If John McEnroe had been stabbed at the end of 1984 or Mats Wilander at the end of 1988 how many mythical slams would they have been awarded? History shows assumptions don't hold much weight.

UGH! The pain! The pain of too much stupidity/irony.....killing...me.....

History does show assumptions don't hold much weight, so don't make wild ones like "Graf would likely still be sitting on around 20 slams". An even more tenuous stretch than the ones that Seles' supporters are making. UGH. THINK PEOPLE...THINK. Don't berate others for mistakes and thinking while simulatanously commiting THE SAME ONES!
z

 

[Joe Pike]

UGH! The pain! The pain of too much stupidity/irony.....killing...me.....

History does show assumptions don't hold much weight, so don't make wild ones like "Graf would likely still be sitting on around 20 slams". An even more tenuous stretch than the ones that Seles' supporters are making. UGH. THINK PEOPLE...THINK. Don't berate others for mistakes and thinking while simulatanously commiting THE SAME ONES!
z

It's always the Seles fans who start "what if" discussions.
Not the Graf fans.
Big difference.

Although I would have liked Graf to have a career without her dad almost ruining her career on two occasions and without 50+ injuries in the 90ies ...

 

[britbox]

UGH! The pain! The pain of too much stupidity/irony.....killing...me.....

History does show assumptions don't hold much weight, so don't make wild ones like "Graf would likely still be sitting on around 20 slams". An even more tenuous stretch than the ones that Seles' supporters are making. UGH. THINK PEOPLE...THINK. Don't berate others for mistakes and thinking while simulatanously commiting THE SAME ONES!
z

I was putting myself on the same wavelength briefly. Thank you for pointing out the cardinal sin your highness.

Agreed, history shows assumptions don't hold much weight and statements relating to Graf "only" winning 11 of her 22 slam titles due to the knife of Gunther Parche are rather silly. Slams aren't won and lost on messageboards.

 

[scootad.]

Of course, slams are won on the court. And of course, Graf went out and earned those slams from April 1993 onward.

But to deny that the stabbing changed the arc of women's tennis in that period is not living in reality.

Sure Steffi had the edge on Seles head to head - she also had the edge in age, experience and years on tour. Seles was 19 and Graf was 23 (a couple months from 24). Graf had lead 6-4 prior to Gunther Parsche with 3 of those wins when Seles was 15 and first year on the circuit. The rivalry was definitely evening out and Seles had won 7 of the 9 most recent slams before the knife incident. She was also the undisputed #1 player.

We were all robbed of some amazing tennis and I think they both would have split the majority of the slams contested from 93 onward.

I also think that it is impossible to underestimate how the stabbing changed Monica mentally. She never really approached the level of intensity and focus she had prior to it which is understandable. I'm not sure I'd be able to focus the same if I had to return the job at which I was almost murdered.

 

[Joe Pike]

Of course, slams are won on the court. And of course, Graf went out and earned those slams from April 1993 onward.

But to deny that the stabbing changed the arc of women's tennis in that period is not living in reality.

Sure Steffi had the edge on Seles head to head - she also had the edge in age, experience and years on tour. Seles was 19 and Graf was 23 (a couple months from 24). Graf had lead 6-4 prior to Gunther Parsche with 3 of those wins when Seles was 15 and first year on the circuit. The rivalry was definitely evening out and Seles had won 7 of the 9 most recent slams before the knife incident. She was also the undisputed #1 player.

We were all robbed of some amazing tennis and I think they both would have split the majority of the slams contested from 93 onward.

I also think that it is impossible to underestimate how the stabbing changed Monica mentally. She never really approached the level of intensity and focus she had prior to it which is understandable. I'm not sure I'd be able to focus the same if I had to return the job at which I was almost murdered.

Steffi's knee surgery in spring of 1997 changed the arc of women's tennis at least as much. Or maybe even Steffi's family being blackmailed in 1990.
Or Monica's father being diagnosed with cancer in 1993 and dying from it in 1998.
But tennis injuries, crime and death are a part of life.
Even if Steffi and Monica weren't responsible.

 

[scootad.]

Most people aren't physcially attacked at their workplace.

 

[anointedone]

Steffi Graf only reached 3 slam finals out of the 9 slams events from start of 91-93 Australian Open. In 6 of those she was taken out by the group of players she normally dominates- an aging Navratilova, Sanchez Vicario, Novotna, Sabatini, Fernandez. That is telling to her form at the time. Not to take anything away from Monica but her dominance was also aided by Graf's slump those 2 or 3 years as evidenced by her struggles with so many of the regular top women she normally doesnt struggle with. Yet even in this mediocre form for her standards Graf still managed to go 3-2 vs Seles those 2 1/4 years, pulverized Monica their only meeting on a truly fast court, beat her quite easily their only meeting on a medium speed court, and in their 3 slow court meetings Graf won 1 with Monica winning 2, all very tough 3 setters. For her part Monica was also able to stay completely injury free, have every close match go her way (alot of that her mental toughness but some luck involved too), have no personal problems. In no way do I see Monica continuing her 3 slam a year streak for another 3-4 years had she not been stabbed, absolutely no way.

It is worth noting too when Monica first came back the predictions of what she would do were alot loftier. After they didnt pan out some make it out to be given what she went through that her not doing any better than she did in her comeback is easily understandable and was to be expected. Some people have short memories. No doubt she was affected in a negative way but the reality is she also never dominated Graf head to head the way she did the overall womens game, even during her reign, and the top 5-6 players outside of Graf back then were great matchups for her style wise, which players like Hingis, Venus, Serena, Davenport, Pierce, and Novotna (who came into her own in the mid 90s) are not. So with Graf making every final more per the norm unlike the early 90s, and a different set of top players apart from Graf who were either better or tougher matchups for Seles, it was unlikely she was ever going to come close to her early 90s dominance anyway. Monica was still dominating the players she used to dominate when she came back from the stabbing. She crushed and destroyed Sanchez Vicario, Martinez, Sabatini, Huber, Fernandez, old Navratilova (in exhibition play) pretty much everytime. The difference is those were not the only players she was facing anymore, other than Graf once in awhile (and once in awhile is all she played slumping Graf in the early 90s). Plus the fact she now had injuries and personal problems, which is more normal for a player, as opposed to the completely clean slate on both counts she had during her charmed life for 2+ years prior to the stabbing.

 

[scootad.]

The difference is those were not the only players she was facing anymore, other than Graf once in awhile (and once in awhile is all she played slumping Graf in the early 90s). Plus the fact she now had injuries and personal problems, which is more normal for a player, as opposed to the completely clean slate on both counts she had during her charmed life for 2+ years prior to the stabbing.

Good points but you forgot to mention she was also a shell of herself mentally than she had been before the attack

 

[anointedone]

Good points but you forgot to mention she was also a shell of herself mentally than she had been before the attack

I agree with that. I do think without the stabbing she would have been alot more intense and tougher mindset which would have helped her. I just dont think she was ever going to dominate Davenport, Venus, Serena, Hingis, and even Pierce and Novotna, the same way she dominated Sanchez, Martinez, Sabatini, Fernandez, Huber, and an old Navratilova. She may have done better but in no way would she have dominated that group of players like the early 90s group. Davenport, Venus, Serena, and on occasion Pierce (only her best days) can outpower Seles from all parts of the court, and that is the worst kind of matchup for Seles. Huber, Majoli, and Maleeva for example are power players who cant beat Seles at their mutual game so she loves playing them. Sanchez, Martinez, and Sabatini are spin artists and Monica doesnt have problems with that kind of player like many even of the power players do as the timing on her groundstrokes is arguably the best of any women in recent memory. They are also amazing retrievers who make you hit extra balls, especialy Sanchez, and Monica is a very consistent power player who doesnt mind having to hit multiple winners, as long as she is in control of points (which she is not vs Davenport, Williams, and sometimes Pierce and Graf) she is happy. Hingis is a master of taking the ball early, controlling the centre of the court, and jerking her opponents around, and that is why she is a bad matchup for Seles. Novotna stays back and comes to net, she hits some spinny shots, but also some very hard forehands and serves, and that is why Monica does not like playing against her as she gets no rythym. An old Navratilova attacked constantly and Monica was able to get in a groove with her returns and passing shots, and plus old Martina had slower reflexes and a step slower by then which made her less able to cope with Monica's power and precision than if she were younger. Fernandez hits a nice clean ball without even that much power, so she is a dream matchup for Seles. Graf can overpower Seles off the forehand side and with her serve, which is why even in the early 90s Seles did not ever directly dominate her the way she did the other top 5-6 players. However Graf definitely cant overpower Seles from all parts of the game like Serena, Venus, and Davenport so they are even harder opponents for her than Graf (and Graf even in the early 90s was never an easy opponent for Seles by any stretch inspite of her overall dominance). Capriati is more powerful than Huber and Majoli, but considerably less powerful than Davenport and the Williams sisters, and yet even she with that playing style was clearly Seles's 2nd toughest opponent after Graf before the stabbing, even though overall she was only about the 8th best player in the World during the early 90s. As well Capriati was virtually equal with Monica (as far as head to head play only I mean) on anything but clay back then.

 

[scootad.]

Again you make good points.

But we have to remember that Hingis, Serena, Venus and Davenport really only came to prominence from '97 onward. Seles would still have had '93-'97 where she would have faced mostly the same competition she did so well against before being attacked. We also have to remember in the overall grand slam scheme of things, 2 of the 4 slams were played on slow surfaces - surfaces at which Seles excelled. Rebound ace (well before the conversion to the faster hard court surface now in place) and red clay. It would tough to argue against Seles winning at least 1 of those 2 slams each year till '97 even with Graf holding her own on those surfaces. As the 2 time defending champ at USO I would also not be surprised if she snuck out at least another USO before '97.

As a conservative estimate I'd say w/o the stabbing Seles would have had 4-5 additional slams.
As a less conservative estimate she would have had 7-8 additional slams.

Of course we will never know.

 

[anointedone]

Again you make good points.

But we have to remember that Hingis, Serena, Venus and Davenport really only came to prominence from '97 onward. Seles would still have had '93-'97 where she would have faced mostly the same competition she did so well against before being attacked. We also have to remember in the overall grand slam scheme of things, 2 of the 4 slams were played on slow surfaces - surfaces at which Seles excelled. Rebound ace (well before the conversion to the faster hard court surface now in place) and red clay. It would tough to argue against Seles winning at least 1 of those 2 slams each year till '97 even with Graf holding her own on those surfaces. As the 2 time defending champ at USO I would also not be surprised if she snuck out at least another USO before '97.

I agree with that. Dont get me wrong, I do see Seles quite possibly winning atleast 1 slam each year from 93-98, and 2 slams in some of those years. I could see her with atleast 15 slams without the stabbing. I just dont see her continuing her 91-early 93 level of dominance year in and year out as some do. Also not all the slams she won would have been ones Graf won, she is most certain to win those won by people like Sanchez (her pigeon and many ways an even bigger beneficiary of the stabbing than Graf IMO as the difference between a 4 slam winner respect and a 1 or 2 is huge), Martinez, Majoli, maybe Pierce. Some people act like each additional slam she wins are ones Graf won, and those others somehow all keep theirs, which is laughable as Graf is a far more challenging opponent to Seles than any of the other women who won slams until Hingis emerged. Then you add to those already substantial additions by taking away from those, probably some additional ones won by Graf and Hingis, but she wouldnt have been taking away all the slams those players won like she would say a Sanchez. All in all I dont think we are that far apart in our views though.

 

[Datacipher]

It's always the Seles fans who start "what if" discussions.
Not the Graf fans.
Big difference.
...

That may well be! (I'm neither) But what you can't rationally do is berate them for doing that, point out how unfounded such conclusions are and that they shouldn't be made...then in the next sentence do the exact same thing in the opposite direction, stating it as a given!

If you do, you deserve a verbal slap!

 

[kiki]

1880s Renshaw / Sears -- Bingley Hillyard
1890s R. Doherty / Wrenn -- Dod / Atkinson
1900s L. Doherty / Larned -- Douglass Chambers
1910s Wilding -- Douglass Chambers / Mallory
1920s Tilden -- Lenglen
1930s Budge -- Wills Moody
1940s Kramer -- Brough
1950s Gonzales -- Connolly
1960s Rosewall -- Court
1970s Borg -- Evert
1980s Lendl -- Navratilova
1990s Sampras -- Seles until she was stabbed
2000s Federer -- Serena Williams

Tennis was not so much an international sport before the 1920s and 1930s (really became an international sport in 1925). Therefore, it is harder to have a best player of the sport for those earlier years -- except you have to go with Wilding in the 1910s.

There are some very good players --- Cochet, Lacoste, Perry, Vines, Crawford, Hoad, Laver, Newcombe, Connors, McEnroe, Edberg, Becker, Wilander and Agassi among the men and Jacobs, Marble, du Pont, Hart, Fry, Hard, Gibson, Bueno, King, Goolagong, Graf, Hingis and Henin among the women --- who just were not quite good enough to be considered the best players of their decades.

Yes, specially Laver.He was not good enough... other than 3 grand Slams (amateur,pro,open) in the same decade, what did the guy do in his whole life?

 

[BobbyOne]

1880s Renshaw / Sears -- Bingley Hillyard
1890s R. Doherty / Wrenn -- Dod / Atkinson
1900s L. Doherty / Larned -- Douglass Chambers
1910s Wilding -- Douglass Chambers / Mallory
1920s Tilden -- Lenglen
1930s Budge -- Wills Moody
1940s Kramer -- Brough
1950s Gonzales -- Connolly
1960s Rosewall -- Court
1970s Borg -- Evert
1980s Lendl -- Navratilova
1990s Sampras -- Seles until she was stabbed
2000s Federer -- Serena Williams

Tennis was not so much an international sport before the 1920s and 1930s (really became an international sport in 1925). Therefore, it is harder to have a best player of the sport for those earlier years -- except you have to go with Wilding in the 1910s.

There are some very good players --- Cochet, Lacoste, Perry, Vines, Crawford, Hoad, Laver, Newcombe, Connors, McEnroe, Edberg, Becker, Wilander and Agassi among the men and Jacobs, Marble, du Pont, Hart, Fry, Hard, Gibson, Bueno, King, Goolagong, Graf, Hingis and Henin among the women --- who just were not quite good enough to be considered the best players of their decades.

Even as a Rosewall admirer I would go with other posters and put Laver as best of the 1960s. But Rosewall was unique in being among the three best players in 1950s, the two best in 1960s, and among the five best in the 1970s.

I would put Vines instead of Perry or Budge for the 1930s.

 

[Limpinhitter]

Even as a Rosewall admirer I would go with other posters and put Laver as best of the 1960s. But Rosewall was unique in being among the three best players in 1950s, the two best in 1960s, and among the five best in the 1970s.

I would put Vines instead of Perry or Budge for the 1930s.

Rosewall's greatness was in his consistency and longevity. To my calculation, Rosewall was a top 5 player for at least 17 years, and top 2-3 most of that time, not to mention at least 2 years at #1. But, IMO, Laver was clearly the dominant player of the 1960's, and Rosewall his closest rival.

 

[pc1]

Rosewall's greatness was in his consistency and longevity. To my calculation, Rosewall was a top 5 player for at least 17 years, and top 2-3 most of that time, not to mention at least 2 years at #1. But, IMO, Laver was clearly the dominant player of the 1960's, and Rosewall his closest rival.

I have to agree with that. Considering how great Laver was in the 1960's it is amazing a player could be so close to the Rocket like Rosewall was.

What a great rivalry with a great contrast in styles.

 

[BobbyOne]

Rosewall's greatness was in his consistency and longevity. To my calculation, Rosewall was a top 5 player for at least 17 years, and top 2-3 most of that time, not to mention at least 2 years at #1. But, IMO, Laver was clearly the dominant player of the 1960's, and Rosewall his closest rival.

I agree totally. Good analysis!

 

[pc1]

Rosewall's greatness was in his consistency and longevity. To my calculation, Rosewall was a top 5 player for at least 17 years, and top 2-3 most of that time, not to mention at least 2 years at #1. But, IMO, Laver was clearly the dominant player of the 1960's, and Rosewall his closest rival.

Limpinhitter,

Do you have any particularly Laver matches or shots that enjoyed? The shot I remember was the Davis Cup double with Newcombe in when Laver hit a backhand return off a Stan Smith serve at "warp speed" as John Newcombe described it. If you blinked the point was over. Van Dillen was totally stunned and the match was basically over by the second point.