Henin, Goolagong, Venus, Seles- who rates highest and lowest

[trownjeff]

By the way here is the "great" Goolagong at her absolute peak in 1975 losing a Wimbledon final 6-1, 6-0 to a 32 year old Billie Jean King:

Also here is the supposed "way way better than Henin" Seles at her absolute career peak losing a Wimbledon final 6-2, 6-1 to a badly slumping Steffi Graf (1-7 vs Gabriela Sabatini during this same period):

Not even a Justine Henin fan but never has Justine Henin been humiliated in a slam final like that, not even close. Not even by a Williams sister (her worst showing vs Serena or Venus in a slam final is a 3 set loss in fact). Let alone on the greatest stage in the world- Wimbledon. I think Henin's worst ever loss in a slam final in a match she finished was 6-4, 6-4 to Maria Sharapova in the 2006 U.S Open final with a bad shoulder injury that barely let her serve.

 

[PDJ]

Not a Henin fan but how on earth is Henin "nowhere near Seles"?

Henin is better on clay and grass, 2 of the 3 major surfaces. Seles only better on hard courts, 1 of the 3. And even there really only slow to medium hard courts, Henin is as good or better on medium to fast ones.

Henin was the World's best player 4 years- 2003, 2004, 2006, 2007. Seles was a mere 2 years, 1991 and 1992.

Henin faced a way tougher field. She faced the Williams, Clijsters, Davenport, Hingis, Sharapova, all at their best. Seles by contrast faced only Graf during her couple yeras on top, and Graf in a bad slump and barely even reaching Seles (although usually beating Seles when they did play). Wasn't a nearly 40 year old Navratilova the World #3 most of that period, LOL! Then when Seles returned and the field was tougher and the big hitters like the players I mentioned had emerged, Seles didn't win hardly anything. Just imagine what Henin at her peak would have done against a super weak field like Seles had in 91 and 92 where she playing Sanchez, Sabatini, Mary Joe Fernandez, Anke Huber and a grandma Navratilova in all her slam finals. Henin of 2003, 2006, 2007 replacing Seles and facing the same garbage field Seles did in 91 and 92 where she faced Mary Joe freaking Fernandez in about half the slams she won in the semis or finals, probably does atleast 1 Calendar Grand Slam which Seles still never managed. Like seriously do you think if Henin played Fernandez 20 times she would lose even once? Yet that was one of Seles's biggest rivals in 91 and 92 during her dominance.

Seles has 2 more slams, that is her biggest edge, hardly enough on its own to say nowhere near. Henin has the Olympic Gold, and both have multiple YEC titles. I put Henin ahead in time at #1, since she has 3 YE#1s (should be 4, since she was clearly the best in 2004 despite the rankings) vs 2 for Seles- 91 and 92. Seles technically has more weeks but given that she was given 60 free weeks by a stupid ranking provision in late 95-96 where it was ruled she would be "co #1" no matter her results the first over year of her comeback and in reality was never the best or would have been ranked #1 otherwise, and that Henin took herself off the computer by her own choice which cost her about another 15 weeks at #1 even while not playing based on all the points she had, Henin should be ahead even in that.

I could say Seles maybe ranking higher, but it would be just barely if she does.

Now if you said Goolagong being nowhere near Seles, Henin, or Venus, that would be an accurate statement. The 4 people who voted Goolagong best on this poll should be banned from the site for epic stupidity. I am an older tennis fan and not stupid like many of the youngings here (I am guessing the 4 people who voted Goolagong best are all 15 years old or younger and Australian and picked her by watching youtube highlights), and I know Goolagong while beautiful to watch and super talented, and a gem of a human being, was an inconsistent headcase who even when she played well was simply a perennial bridesmaid over and over again to Court, King, and a young Evert. And that her slam count was padded by the then illegitimate Australian Open, an even won by the world #111 Chris O Neill once, a player with a 19-52 career WTA record. Draw your own conclusions on the Australian Open worth back then. Never a dominant player like Venus, Seles, Henin all were by any stretch. Yes she might have a "prettier" game than those 3, and she might be a nicer person, but that is not what tennis greatness is about.

Epic stupidity would not be knowing that Goolagong-Cawley DID actually achieve no.1 ranking. Unlike your previous statement of 'fact'.
And also knowing that she rarely played the French at her peak because of internal politics.
Whilst I can see arguments less belligerent than yours to place any of the other candidates at the top of this list, it doesn't make any one else's opinion less valid.
That said, I have less time for your opinion as it's ridiculously aggressive and mean-spirited.

 

[PDJ]

By the way here is the "great" Goolagong at her absolute peak in 1975 losing a Wimbledon final 6-1, 6-0 to a 32 year old Billie Jean King:

Also here is the supposed "way way better than Henin" Seles at her absolute career peak losing a Wimbledon final 6-2, 6-1 to a badly slumping Steffi Graf (1-7 vs Gabriela Sabatini during this same period):

Not even a Justine Henin fan but never has Justine Henin been humiliated in a slam final like that, not even close. Not even by a Williams sister (her worst showing vs Serena or Venus in a slam final is a 3 set loss in fact). Let alone on the greatest stage in the world- Wimbledon. I think Henin's worst ever loss in a slam final in a match she finished was 6-4, 6-4 to Maria Sharapova in the 2006 U.S Open final with a bad shoulder injury that barely let her serve.

Henin's worst loss in a major is the one she denied Mauresmo an outright victory in Australia.
I can see why you like Henin....

 

[trownjeff]

Henin's worst loss in a major is the one she denied Mauresmo an outright victory in Australia.
I can see why you like Henin....

I don't like Henin. What pray tell are your indications I like Henin? That I rate her as a greater player than Goolagong, which just puts me in line with 99% of tennis fans or experts. That I don't think Seles is "far over her" as one poster said, which again just puts me in line with most people; I did not even neccessarily say she is over Seles, just not far beneath as one poster said. I have said absolutely nothing that even implies I am a Henin fan. I in fact am a Williams fanboy, and if you know anything about tennis you would know there are practically no Williams fanboys who are Henin fans.

As for the Australian final, that is why I specifically said in a match one was able to finish. If Seles or Goolagong retired down 6-1, 2-0 in a slam final with a serious injury/illness I would not even mention that match, even if it was against Mary Joe Fernandez or Kerry Melville. The matches I mentioned there was no physical ailment of any kind, they just got destroyed by a badly slumping Graf and a granny ancient Billie Jean King well into her 30s and already on bad knees. Henin was sick and could not even finish that particular slam final, rendering it meaningless to the discussion.

 

[trownjeff]

Epic stupidity would not be knowing that Goolagong-Cawley DID actually achieve no.1 ranking. Unlike your previous statement of 'fact'.
And also knowing that she rarely played the French at her peak because of internal politics.
Whilst I can see arguments less belligerent than yours to place any of the other candidates at the top of this list, it doesn't make any one else's opinion less valid.
That said, I have less time for your opinion as it's ridiculously aggressive and mean-spirited.

OK I just looked it up, she was given a belated (40 years after the fact) 2 weeks at #1 in 76. Heaven forbid I did not know that, something most people wouldn't have known anyway. The fact is while she played she never once experienced being ranked #1, only a mere 2 weeks of being found by mathematical errors 40 years after the fact, LOL!

Goolagong won 1 French Open. Considering her clay head to head vs Evert is something like 2-12, and she also had a very bad losing clay head to head with Court and Richey both, that is probably about right for her clay level. Yeah she didn't play the French every year, but if she had she would have been capitilizing on the depleted fields there similar to how she did in Australia. She even lost a French Open final in straight sets to Billie Jean King who hates clay, so I wouldn't say she is some robbed RG goddess. The fact is her best surface by far is grass, yet in the 2 real grass slams at one she won 2 titles a whopping 9 years apart, and the other she failed to win a single title (granted surface was changed to clay and then later to hard courts at one point, but she had several years in her prime to try and win it on grass before that).

 

[PDJ]

I don't like Henin. What pray tell are your indications I like Henin? That I rate her as a greater player than Goolagong, which just puts me in line with 99% of tennis fans or experts. That I don't think Seles is "far over her" as one poster said, which again just puts me in line with most people; I did not even neccessarily say she is over Seles, just not far beneath as one poster said. I have said absolutely nothing that even implies I am a Henin fan. I in fact am a Williams fanboy, and if you know anything about tennis you would know there are practically no Williams fanboys who are Henin fans.

As for the Australian final, that is why I specifically said in a match one was able to finish. If Seles or Goolagong retired down 6-1, 2-0 in a slam final with a serious injury/illness I would not even mention that match, even if it was against Mary Joe Fernandez or Kerry Melville. The matches I mentioned there was no physical ailment of any kind, they just got destroyed by a badly slumping Graf and a granny ancient Billie Jean King well into her 30s and already on bad knees. Henin was sick and could not even finish that particular slam final, rendering it meaningless to the discussion.

Ah, ok.... "A Williams fanboy". Enough said...

 

[NaomiKonjuhPotapova]

Doesn't mean his argument less valid.

Seles is way higher because she dominate the tour for years before stabbing occured.

Henin also dominate during Serena's dip. Venus never did dominate the tour, but she own Henin.

 

[trownjeff]

Doesn't mean his argument less valid.

Seles is way higher because she dominate the tour for years before stabbing occured.

Henin also dominate during Serena's dip. Venus never did dominate the tour, but she own Henin.

Seles only dominated for 2 years.

Henin also dominated for 2 or 3 years (most of 2003, early 2004 until her illness problems, all of 2007, to a lesser degree 2006).

The competition was way higher when Henin dominated. She faced both Williams, Hingis, Henin, Clijsters, Davenpiort, Sharapova, by the way those being a bunch of people- Davenport, Hingis, both Williams, who OWN Seles in head to head, so Seles probably would have never dominated in some of the years Henin did. Seles faced Graf, that is it, there was literally nobody else back then except for a mid 30s Navratilova and 14/15 year old Capriati, and she barely even played Graf who was struggling badly for a couple of those years and losing regularly to Sabatini. Graf and Seles played a grand total of 4 matches between July 1990-December 1992 (and those were a 6-2, 6-1 win for Graf, 6-4, 6-3 win for Graf, 3 set win for Graf, and 10-8 in the 3rd set loss for Graf). Seles played Mary Joe Fernandez in the semis or finals of half (4) of the 8 slams she won from 90-early 93. I am sure you agree that if Henin was playing someone as poor as Mary Joe Fernandez in the semis and finals of slams regularly she would have dominated for probably 7 straight years from 2002-2008.

You are 100% right Henin dominated mostly just during Serena's dip, but that is no different than Seles dominating during Graf's dip, so it is basically the same thing in comparing them. And you could also say Serena dominated again only after Henin retired early and the tour got a lot weaker, and Graf dominated again after Seles got stabbed, and Venus only dominated for a bit before Serena and Henin emerged, and Graf only dominated when Navratilova/Evert got old, and Hingis only did well after Graf/Seles got old/injured and before the Williams emerged. Those arguments could go on forever.

And the Venus-Henin head to head means nothing. 8 of their 9 matches were before Henin won her first slam, and Venus was at all her all time peak in the early 2000s. They also only played 2 matches on clay, they played more matches on grass than clay which is comical when the grass season lasts only 3 weeks these days. Obviously Henin, especialy once she matured, would win every single match on clay, even vs a peak Venus, the same way prime Venus would win every single match on grass probably, so more clay meetings and more meetings with a prime Henin and the head to head changes drastically and is a lot closer. I agree Venus should rate over Henin, especialy factoring in doubles, but it has nothing to do with head to head. If you say Venus is way better than Henin due to the head to head, then you have to say she is also way better than Seles due to the head to head (9-1 which is utterly pathetic even taking into account the stabbing and Seles's old age), and that Jo Durie is better than Steffi Graf since she has a winning (4-3) head to head, and Tracy Austin is better than Chris Evert since she retired with a winning head to head even with matches in 1977 when she was only 14 and matches in 82 when she was physically done.

 

[NaomiKonjuhPotapova]

think Henin's worst ever loss in a slam final in a match

This would be she chickened out vs Mauresmo at AO.

 

[PDJ]

Doesn't mean his argument less valid.

Seles is way higher because she dominate the tour for years before stabbing occured.

Henin also dominate during Serena's dip. Venus never did dominate the tour, but she own Henin.

True. As explained.
However, does explain the aggressive nature of her posts. Pity, as lots of great information spoilt by some petty, mean swipes.

 

[NaomiKonjuhPotapova]

True. As explained.
However, does explain the aggressive nature of her posts. Pity, as lots of great information spoilt by some petty, mean swipes.

True, but I hope you don't associate a player behavior with their fans. Some people just love the way how they play etc.
I mean I will not associate Sharapova and Henin fan with having a cheating behavior

 

[PDJ]

True, but I hope you don't associate a player behavior with their fans. Some people just love the way how they play etc.
I mean I will not associate Sharapova and Henin fan with having a cheating behavior

Actually I do associate some posters with their rabid fanatic posts for their favourite players. Subjectivity goes out the window for bias, but if said player is aggressive and prone to meltdowns and said poster posts in a similar vein, then yes, I see comparisons.

 

[clout]

1. Seles
2. Henin
3. Venus
4. Goolagong

I’d honestly rank Goolagong below Hingis and maybe even Sharapova tbh

 

[trownjeff]

Actually I do associate some posters with their rabid fanatic posts for their favourite players. Subjectivity goes out the window for bias, but if said player is aggressive and prone to meltdowns and said poster posts in a similar vein, then yes, I see comparisons.

I am not rabid about any of these players. The only one I am really a fan of is Venus but while for sure a fan and partial to her more than the other three I am not a total uber of even her. That is Serena, Navratilova, or Andreescu for instance, not Venus. And I am consistent in my criteria for factoring in doubles, I do not just do that for Venus or Serena, since on the other thread you will notice I said I might have Navratilova over Graf which I never would if I were just evaluating singles. That is obviously due to her doubles added to her great singles career.

I am mean and agressive simply since that is my personality, it has nothing to do with what players are being discussed.

You say I am inconsistent, but if I am others are even more. For instance people who like Navratilova and Court and Serena saying their doubles pulls them well ahead of Graf and Evert, yet are the same people ranking Venus 3rd in here. Which would be fine if it were only singles, but if you the former, you then can't say Venus is behind Henin or probably even Seles which obviously completely ignores doubles like it doesn't exist. Either the former is valid, or the latter can't be true, it can't be both. I know how to include doubles is subjective but either way you have to make a choice, you either give it consideration or you don't, one can't just for the people who like and ignore if for the the people they don't.

 

[trownjeff]

I do think people don't realize just how much more Venus would have won without Serena. And even if you removed Serena, Venus would still have faced a really strong field that is stronger overall than what Seles faced, and stronger than Henin faces in the context Henin wins most of her titles on clay where everyone of her era including the Williams, Sharapova, Davenport, are not exactly super great and find it their worst surface. And yeah I know Maria has 2 RG titles, only 1 at the other 3 slams, and I still say it is her worst surface in playing level hands down, that just proves my point how weak the clay field was. Even though Seles's overall competition was poorer than both Henin and Venus, the clay field Seles faced was actually much better than Henin. Atleast all the top players then- Graf, Sanchez, Sabatini, Martinez, Pierce, their best surface was clay or it was close to their best surface, nothing like when Henin played and all her rivals hated clay giving her a huge edge on all of them having clay as her best surface. It is no surprise she won more of her slams at RG (4) than the other 3 slams combined (3).

Now I do stand by my original stance that the overall competition level for both Graf and Seles in the Graf/Seles era was pretty weak. Even more when they barely had anytime playing their best together (maybe mid 92-early 93, that is it) meaning they barely even had much of a rivalry that got built with each other, and nobody else who could compete with them. But the one thing you can't question about the Graf/Seles era is the clay field, the 90s probably the strongest womens clay field in tennis history. While Henin vultured a weak clay field, having the great fortune of her best surface being clay and Venus, Serena, Davenport, Clijsters, Sharapova all their worst surface being clay, so no surprise she regularly beat them all on clay and padded her slam count with fairly easy RG titles, while mostly struggling to beat the big hitters consistently to win on hard courts and especialy on grass.

And while I have been hard on Goolagong one thing I guess that we need to consider is she had to consistently face both prime Court and prime King on grass, where 3 of the 4 slams were held back then. Two of the very best grass players in tennis history. Making the slam wins outside of the often depleted Australian Opens hard to come by. And on clay at the French and U.S Open from 75-77 she had the clay GOAT Evert in her way, and even Evert in her way at Wimbledon from 76 onwards when she now was pretty darn good on grass too. So that compensates some for the weak barely attended Australian Open if we consider competition. And even at the Australian before 74 she had Court there every year as a gigantic roadblock, since Court being Australian too was never missing that.

 

[PDJ]

Yeah Henin vultured a very weak clay era. That is also true. Who else has the good fortune for their own best surface to be the worst surface of all their biggest rivals. Ooops I just remembered someone else who has that same fortune:

Venus and Seles and even Goolagong excellened and won mostly on surfaces their rivals also loved. Venus's resume is super grass heavy but many of her biggest rivals loved grass- Serena of course, Davenport, Sharapova early on, Hingis, Mauresmo. Seles has a lot of her wins on clay which was a beloved surface for nearly the entire WTA top 10 back then, and a lot on hard courts which the woman mostly also enjoyed, only lacking on grass which hardly anyone back then besides Graf and Novotna liked playing on anyway.

I'm a tad confused: Davenport, Hingis, Sharapova and Mauresmo may have loved grass but it didn't really translate in to brilliant results. A lone Wimbledon each. I would have thought all of them preferred hard courts? They all have greater success on this surface. Admittedly, there are a lot more hard court tournaments.
Of this group, only Sharapova also has a French title to her name. Credit to her, but Hingis really should have. She blew her oppourtunities. Sharapova didn't.

 

[PDJ]

I find it more interesting that surface specialists could challenge 'greats' on their preferred surface.
Evert challenged grass court greats such as King, Navratilova at al on grass.
Navratilova versus Evert on clay, was ok, but not exceptional.
Goolagong-Cawley perhaps had it roughest: arguably equally good on clay and grass (one of the very few, Court would be another) but had to deal with those that were just a tad better on said surface. Also, I'm not convinced that winning meant everything to her as it did those ranked amongst the very best ever.
That said, Goolagong-Cawley probably came from the most difficult background and, therefore, her triumphs must have meant more to some.

 

[PDJ]

Yeah Goolagong had it rough. She was great on grass but Court and King were both just a bit better there. She was excellent on clay, but Evert consistently ahd the edge there even though Evonne often took her to 3 sets (got drubbed a few times too) almost always came up just short. So she didn't have many places to go for big wins, so winning 7 slams, even with the weak Australian Open, was pretty good considering.

I also agree she wasn't as driven to win and dominate the way people like Court, King, Evert, and Navratilova were. She was the complete opposite of someone like Virginia Wade whose biggest weakness, along with probably not being as gifted overall as those others, was wanting it too badly that it impeded her performance with nerves and tension. Goolagong was the exact opposite of that.

Also if circumstances had been different, I'm pretty sure Goolagong-Cawley would have picked up at least one more French title in the mid 70s. Evert, not playing, would have removed this obstacle.

 

[thrust]

YE at #1 Henin- 3, Venus- 0
Weeks at #1, Henin- 117, Venus- 12
YE Championships, Henin-2, Venus-1
Slams, Henin 7 at 3 different slams, 4 on clay, 3 on hard
Venus 7 at 2 slams, 5 grass, 2 on hard.

 

[forehandblast]

Since the question is best, not most achieved the correct order is Venus > Henin > Seles > Goolagong

The only questions I have are Henin vs Seles. To me that is a toss up. There is no doubt in my mind Venus is the best player and Goolagong the weakest player.

 

[quirotkicks]

Prime Venus wins everytime except on clay and maybe slow hard courts.

 

[quirotkicks]

Strangely and sadly, IMO, one of the reasons Justine burnt out in 08 was due to family problems. Having been estranged from her family for several years she reunited with them in 07. Her brothers were arrested or charged with some sort of crime in Belgium into which Justine was dragged into, probably for financial help. Shortly before the YEC in Madrid, her younger sister had a miscarriage which was emotionally draining for Justine. She was so mentally and physically drained from tennis and family problems, that she nearly did not compete in Madrid in 07. It seems she was wise to stay away from her somewhat dysfunctional family in order to have a successful tennis career.

I never knew these things hapened. It is a shame if her career was cut short by her family issues. She did not look the same player in early 2008 at all.

Many forget at that point most were predicting her to wind up as the best player of this era and not Serena. At that point she had 7 majors to 8 for Serena, but Henin had won 7 since 2003 to only 4 for Serena. How quickly things change.

 

[quirotkicks]

By the way here is the "great" Goolagong at her absolute peak in 1975 losing a Wimbledon final 6-1, 6-0 to a 32 year old Billie Jean King:

Also here is the supposed "way way better than Henin" Seles at her absolute career peak losing a Wimbledon final 6-2, 6-1 to a badly slumping Steffi Graf (1-7 vs Gabriela Sabatini during this same period):

Not even a Justine Henin fan but never has Justine Henin been humiliated in a slam final like that, not even close. Not even by a Williams sister (her worst showing vs Serena or Venus in a slam final is a 3 set loss in fact). Let alone on the greatest stage in the world- Wimbledon. I think Henin's worst ever loss in a slam final in a match she finished was 6-4, 6-4 to Maria Sharapova in the 2006 U.S Open final with a bad shoulder injury that barely let her serve.

Yeah I love Goolagong but she is not even in the same league of the other 3. Baffled why anyone would include her in this poll.

 

[forehandblast]

I am amazed 5 people voted Goolagong as the best of these 4. Must have been Australians. She was easily the most pleasing to watch of these 4, and maybe the most talented, but by no measure (achievements, playing level, dominance, anything) was she the best or probably not clearly the weakest of this quartet of players. Must be a whole bunch of Australian posters on this site.