Is Graf the best female player ever on all surfaces

[illusions30]

Nope. 24 > 22.

No, experts, tennis writers, former champions, peoples whose opinions actually matter rather than armchair dummies like yourself say Court's 24 slams are a joke, explain why repeteadly, and don't even regard it as worth anything. Why do you think NOBODY considers Court more than 4th or 5th best all time despite her 24 slams. Since everyone knows the Australian Open was a tier 4 event in the guise of a slam. Like I said during the U.S Open many slam leader tallies were shown indicating what Serena was chasing and they cut Court all together. Why is that if what I said isn't completely true.

Also so anyone who doesn't agree with you must be an obsessed fanatic, LOL! You are the pathetic one who should be seeking the mental help you request for others. I am not even a fan of either one, and liked atleast 7 players in her era far more than her- Pierce, Hingis, Novotna, Sabatini, Date, for starters. I am just stating things as they are, no matter how butthurt you are over them.

 

[illusions30]

I don't think that Court was before the Open Era is that big a deal. The status of the Australian Open and the astronomical amount of her slam titles that came there is why her so called record is a joke which nobody takes seriously. Had she been Open Era and achieved her 24 slams a more normal way nobody would question it. I don't think people question Wills Moody's 19 which in reality is also far more impressive than Court's 24. In her case she didn't even play the Australian Open, like most top 20 players didn't, and still managed. It was like having only 3 slams and still getting to 19. Compared to Court who managed only 11 vs Wills's 19 at the 3 real slams back then.

 

[BTURNER]

Graf is by far the female GOAT and by far the best all surface player ever, man or women. To whether she is the best ever on every individual surface? Not sure. By surface:

Hard courts- Yes for sure. Serena is too inconsistent to be over Graf without atleast another couple more hard court majors. She will probably surpass Graf as the hard court GOAT eventually though.

Grass- I would say yes. An earlier poster brought up a good point that Navratilova averaged only 6 grass majors vs Graf who has averaged 7. Anyway Graf for sure was breaking Martina's Wimbledon record had it not been for her virtually career ending knee surgery in 1997. Wimbledons 1997, 1998, and 1999 atleast were all hers otherwise.

Clay- I would say probably no. I do think prime to prime Graf would beat Evert more often than not on clay, but I also think Seles and Henin would have and I don't rate them over Evert on clay either. I do agree Graf had by far harder clay competition, and it is a large reason she didn't surpass Evert on clay, but it is what it is.

Evert simply has the longevity, consistency, achievements, and records too much on the surface to be put below anyone. Graf would have had to break Evert's French Open record to overcome things like Evert's 125 match clay win streak, her semifinal streak on clay, etc...and she didn't.


Carpet- Probably not. I would give Navratilova 1st there and Graf 2nd I think. Again I agree Graf faced a tougher carpet and indoor field but again numbers trumps all (other than extreme cases of obvious illegitimacy like Court's slam record).


So I would say Graf is best ever on hard courts, best ever on grass (although Navratilova and Williams have a case too), 2nd best behind Evert on clay, and 2nd best behind Navratilova on carpet. Easily the overall GOAT though.

I agree with most of this except I am not too impressed with this average 6 majors vs average 7 majors on grass stat. And I don't give Graf credit for Wimbledons she did not win but for injuries. I would have to take too many clay and hard court majors from Graf and hand them to Seles on the same theory. Navratilova is the best grasscourter IMO.

 

[BTURNER]

I don't think that Court was before the Open Era is that big a deal. The status of the Australian Open and the astronomical amount of her slam titles that came there is why her so called record is a joke which nobody takes seriously. Had she been Open Era and achieved her 24 slams a more normal way nobody would question it. I don't think people question Wills Moody's 19 which in reality is also far more impressive than Court's 24. In her case she didn't even play the Australian Open, like most top 20 players didn't, and still managed. It was like having only 3 slams and still getting to 19. Compared to Court who managed only 11 vs Wills's 19 at the 3 real slams back then.

Frankly, it would not have mattered that much if the whole world attended Australia every year. She had winning H to H on all of them even without home court advantage. Sooo throw half of those /Aussies in the sea and you still have a GOAT candidate. Give her 1/2 credit for each look at that record!

 

[illusions30]

I agree with most of this except I am not too impressed with this average 6 majors vs average 7 majors on grass stat. Navratilova is the best grasscourter IMO.

I have no problem with one picking Navratilova as best grass courter. IMO it is virtually a 3 way tie with her, Navratilova, or Wills Moody and could conceivably go to any of the 3. I dont really think Court is a strong choice given the 2 real grass slams of her time she won 3 and 5 at respectively.

Court, the 2 Williams sisters, Lenglen, Connolly, and King make up the remainder of the top 10 in some order on that surface IMO. Probably Serena and Court rounding out the top 5. 10th spot going to any of Chambers, Douglas, or Evert.

 

[illusions30]

Frankly, it would not have mattered that much if the whole world attended Australia every year. She had winning H to H on all of them even without home court advantage. Sooo throw half of those /Aussies in the sea and you still have a GOAT candidate. Give her 1/2 credit for each look at that record!

I dont think Court with about 18 slams would be a strong GOAT candidate as even Navratilova and Evert have many more/better records apart from their 18 slams than Court does. I agree it is conceivable Court could still have as many as 20 slams given the home court advantage, and that would still be an amazing record, and she is still one of the all time greats. However it is also true her slam record is not generally acknowledged by experts and greats, or at the very least is seen as less impressive than Graf's 22. I am not a Graf uber as the clueless Xavier implies, this is just reality. Anyone who follows tennis knows this is the strong perception of virtually everyone.

As I said if anyones slam record impresses me most it is Wills Moody who managed 19 slams despite never playing 1 of the 4. Contrast that to Court who could only manage 13 slams at the 3 Wills played. Looking at combined French/Wimbledon/U.S Opens:

Wills Moody 19
Graf 18
Evert 16
Navratilova 15
Court 13
Serena 12

Heck even Serena has almost caught Court outside the then bogus Australian Open.



Do I think there is anyway Court would still have 11 slams at the Austrlaian Open if it were a real slam then? Of course not. It doesnt matter if overall she has the edge on everyone, the field were still enough to hold her to 5 or less at the other 3 slams. Why would it have been any different had the Australian Open an actual Slam event to the players then. One player wouldnt beat Court most of the time, the others would have just combined to take about half away, like they did everywhere else.

 

[BTURNER]

I dont think Court with about 18 slams would be a strong GOAT candidate as even Navratilova and Evert have many more/better records apart from their 18 slams than Court does. I agree it is conceivable Court could still have as many as 20 slams given the home court advantage, and that would still be an amazing record, and she is still one of the all time greats. However it is also true her slam record is not generally acknowledged by experts and greats, or at the very least is seen as less impressive than Graf's 22. I am not a Graf uber as the clueless Xavier implies, this is just reality. Anyone who follows tennis knows this is the strong perception of virtually everyone.

As I said if anyones slam record impresses me most it is Wills Moody who managed 19 slams despite never playing 1 of the 4. Contrast that to Court who could only manage 13 slams at the 3 Wills played. Looking at combined French/Wimbledon/U.S Opens:


Wills Moody 19
Graf 18
Evert 16
Navratilova 15
Court 13
Serena 12

Heck even Serena has almost caught Court outside the then bogus Australian Open.



Do I think there is anyway Court would still have 11 slams at the Austrlaian Open if it were a real slam then? Of course not. It doesnt matter if overall she has the edge on everyone, the field were still enough to hold her to 5 or less at the other 3 slams. Why would it have been any different had the Australian Open an actual Slam event to the players then. One player wouldnt beat Court most of the time, the others would have just combined to take about half away, like they did everywhere else.

you seem very concerned with the competition Court faced at the Aussie. Ask yourself how much Wills faced anywhere. She never faced Lenglen at a major and other than Helen Jacobs, there weren't really stronger fields. You haven't established criteria by which you define 'acceptable competition pr bogus competition, beyond that the Aussie does not qualify. Let's find out a rule we can apply to those RG titles, those US nationals and see if some of the Aussies might squeak through.

 

[Moose Malloy]

deleted post

 

[suwanee4712]

Of all the greats, Graf and Evert changed their games the least to accomodate the surface. Whereas someone like Martina expanded her game by rolling her strokes with extra top, adjusting her court positioning, varied her approaches off the serve according to the surface. For that reason, if my house was on the line and I had to pick a player to play for me without knowing the surface, I would choose Graf. Although Evert would be a good call, as would Court.

However, if my life was on the line, I want BJK.

 

[illusions30]

you seem very concerned with the competition Court faced at the Aussie. Ask yourself how much Wills faced anywhere. She never faced Lenglen at a major and other than Helen Jacobs, there weren't really stronger fields. You haven't established criteria by which you define 'acceptable competition pr bogus competition, beyond that the Aussie does not qualify. Let's find out a rule we can apply to those RG titles, those US nationals and see if some of the Aussies might squeak through.

I agree Wills had weakish competition. Although for me that is negated by that she didnt even play every slam she could have, and without even playing Australia (not a real slam back then anyway as I will get further into) probably would have won like 40 otherwise, so in the end 19 at the big 3 slams then is probably about right.

Many great women have had weak competition over the years, and in fact most of them at one point. I am not sure I can think of a single one who didnt go through atleast one period of weaker competition during their time compiling large numbers of slams.

The big difference is that at the Australian Opens Court won it wasnt so much weak competition, as the competition didnt even play. Slam events are supposed to be all the best in the World at a given time, deathly weak field or all time strong one, barring injuries or a very good reason to miss. The Australian Open at that time was not this. It attracted less players than a typical tier 3 event would. I went through the draws in a slam history book one time of the late 70s (when rankings started) and often there were only 3 of the top 20 ranked at the time entered. You would see a World #17 or World #22 as the #3 or #4 seed. During Court's time when rankings were compiled by experts you would still have only 2 or 3 of the previous years top 10 expert ranked entered in the Australian Open. One year a player who ended her career with a 19-52 record was even able to win the Australian Open "slam" and this was in 1979, many years after Court finished, and when the Australian Open field was supposably improved. Sorry a joke, and an non legit slam before the 1980s, perhaps even 1990s.

That is different than just your generic weak field, which there have been many of. There is no player in history who won so many slams at such an obvious non slam. Not her fault of course, but it is acknowledged by all who evaluate her record and place in history. Navratilova, King, Shriver, Austin, McEnroe, Stolle (an Australian), Newcombe (again an Australian) are just a few experts who have remarked on this many times over, and as I said there is obviously a reason nobody regards official 24 slam winner Court as GOAT. That is obviously it. There is a huge difference between weak competition and the competition not even playing. Not comparable. As weak as Wills's competition was due to the early time for womens tennis, the best players who existed atleast always played Wimbledon and the U.S Open (or atleast as much as was the norm at the time, and consistent with all 3 slams she was a frequent participient of), and she always won over them. There was no red thumb in Wills's resume that stood out like Court's Australian Open titles count.

 

[iri10]

Hard courts- Yes for sure. Serena is too inconsistent to be over Graf without atleast another couple more hard court majors. She will probably surpass Graf as the hard court GOAT eventually though.

I would actually give it to Serena on hard courts; it's the one area that I think she's achieved GOAT status, even with the occasional inconsistency.

At the majors, Serena has already built a decent case for herself as the best on the surface, with her 10 hard court slams vs. Graf's 9.

If we look a level down, Serena also has more tier I (+modern equivalent) hard court titles. Overall, despite having barely more than half of Graf's total count of singles titles (56 vs. 107), she is only two titles behind Graf on hard courts (35 vs. 37). Of course, we can quibble about side details like the number of available hard court tournaments in the 21st century vs. the late 20th century, but...

 

[Graf1stClass]

I would actually give it to Serena on hard courts; it's the one area that I think she's achieved GOAT status, even with the occasional inconsistency.

At the majors, Serena has already built a decent case for herself as the best on the surface, with her 10 hard court slams vs. Graf's 9.

If we look a level down, Serena also has more tier I (+modern equivalent) hard court titles. Overall, despite having barely more than half of Graf's total count of singles titles (56 vs. 107), she is only two titles behind Graf on hard courts (35 vs. 37). Of course, we can quibble about side details like the number of available hard court tournaments in the 21st century vs. the late 20th century, but...

but what? why'd you trail? isn't that a valid excuse?

 

[Graf1stClass]

As for Seles vs Graf arguments I break their head to head down into 4 stages:

1989-1990: Prime #1 Graf vs young pre prime Seles. Graf leads 3-2

1991-early 1993: Peak #1 Seles vs mostly slumping Graf. Graf leads 3-2

1995-1996: Comeback from layoff/stabbing Seles vs prime dominating Graf. Graf leads 2-0

mid 20s Seles vs 30 year old post surgery/well past prime Graf. Graf leads 2-1

So basically they played in 2 phases Graf should have had the advantage (89-90 and 95-96). They played 2 others Seles should have (91-early 93 and 98-99). Graf was leading the head to head in all 4, and was doing better as far as results in 3 of the 4. Graf has produced about 4 years better than Seles's best ever- 1988, 1989, 1995, 1996, and has produced about 12 years better than Seles's 3rd or 4th best year ever. The what ifs of the stabbing aside there is no doubt who is the better player.

Seles deserves credit for being the best player in the World for 2 years. Good for her. During her best and 2nd best years ever she was better than Graf during her 11th and 12th best years ever. Justine Henin who has less slams than her was the best player in the World for 4 years.
Best for 2 years does not a GOAT make.

excellent post. i wish i could rep you for that.

 

[Xavier G]

No, experts, tennis writers, former champions, peoples whose opinions actually matter rather than armchair dummies like yourself say Court's 24 slams are a joke, explain why repeteadly, and don't even regard it as worth anything. Why do you think NOBODY considers Court more than 4th or 5th best all time despite her 24 slams. Since everyone knows the Australian Open was a tier 4 event in the guise of a slam. Like I said during the U.S Open many slam leader tallies were shown indicating what Serena was chasing and they cut Court all together. Why is that if what I said isn't completely true.

Also so anyone who doesn't agree with you must be an obsessed Graf fanatic, LOL! You are the pathetic one who should be seeking the mental help you request for others. I am not even a fan of Graf, and liked atleast 7 players in her era far more than her- Pierce, Hingis, Novotna, Sabatini, Date, for starters. I am just stating things as they are, no matter how butthurt you are over them.

I don't care what slam leader tallies were shown at the US Open. Court has 24 GS to Graf's 22. Look it up, you have the internet!
NOT a Graf fan, and yet nearly every post about Graf from a 'new user'.
Once again, tennis existed before Steffi Graf. 24 > 22 and Court won many MORE singles titles than Graf, so Steffi is not best ever on numbers overall even. It is VERY debateable who is the so-called 'GOAT'.
Once again, Court, Navratilova and Evert all won many more singles titles than Graf. These are all facts and Court completed an Open Era Calender Year Grand Slam in 1970. In fact, she won 6 GS singles titles in a row from 69-71. You can look that up too!!

Once again, so even you can understand:

Martina's 9 Wimbledon is greater than Steffi's 7
Chrissie's 7 French is greater than Steffi's 6
Serena's 5 Australian is greater than Steffi's 4.

Plus indoors:

Martina's 8 WTA Tour Championships is greater than Steffi's 5.

To answer the original discussion, Graf is NOT the greatest ever on each surface. Not even close.

And another thing, especially after the US Open, many former great tennis players, pundits, journalists are saying Serena is the 'GOAT' even now on 17 Grand Slam singles titles, so people say a lot of things. I don't necessarily agree with them, but they say it.

You're just a butthurt Graf fanatic who can't take it that other players might be more highly thought of than Steffi.

Steffi is certainly in the discussion for 'GOAT'. She is one of a select few...
Certainly NOT best on every surface.

 

[iri10]

but what? why'd you trail? isn't that a valid excuse?

But I didn't feel like making the post any more rambly than it is. The quibbles over the hardcourt tournament balance are interesting, but I don't feel they make up for Serena's current 1 hard court slam edge, in a similar number of attempts (Graf: 9 wins out of 23 tries; Serena: 10 wins out of 27 tries).

 

[Xavier G]

I don't think that Court was before the Open Era is that big a deal. The status of the Australian Open and the astronomical amount of her slam titles that came there is why her so called record is a joke which nobody takes seriously. Had she been Open Era and achieved her 24 slams a more normal way nobody would question it. I don't think people question Wills Moody's 19 which in reality is also far more impressive than Court's 24. In her case she didn't even play the Australian Open, like most top 20 players didn't, and still managed. It was like having only 3 slams and still getting to 19. Compared to Court who managed only 11 vs Wills's 19 at the 3 real slams back then.

Keep telling yourself this nonsense. You can justify it all to yourself.




By the way-

Court 24, Graf 22, Wills Moody 19...

 

[Xavier G]

I dont think Court with about 18 slams would be a strong GOAT candidate as even Navratilova and Evert have many more/better records apart from their 18 slams than Court does. I agree it is conceivable Court could still have as many as 20 slams given the home court advantage, and that would still be an amazing record, and she is still one of the all time greats. However it is also true her slam record is not generally acknowledged by experts and greats, or at the very least is seen as less impressive than Graf's 22. I am not a Graf uber as the clueless Xavier implies, this is just reality. Anyone who follows tennis knows this is the strong perception of virtually everyone.

As I said if anyones slam record impresses me most it is Wills Moody who managed 19 slams despite never playing 1 of the 4. Contrast that to Court who could only manage 13 slams at the 3 Wills played. Looking at combined French/Wimbledon/U.S Opens:

Wills Moody 19
Graf 18
Evert 16
Navratilova 15
Court 13
Serena 12

Heck even Serena has almost caught Court outside the then bogus Australian Open.



Do I think there is anyway Court would still have 11 slams at the Austrlaian Open if it were a real slam then? Of course not. It doesnt matter if overall she has the edge on everyone, the field were still enough to hold her to 5 or less at the other 3 slams. Why would it have been any different had the Australian Open an actual Slam event to the players then. One player wouldnt beat Court most of the time, the others would have just combined to take about half away, like they did everywhere else.

Nope, no revisionism to make Graf seem greater by denigrating past greats. Unreasonable blinkered Graf fanatics always do that. They belittle any rival to Steffi, from Court and Navratilova to Seles. Steffi always has to be number 1 in every category for them. It's not enough for you that Graf won 22 Grand Slam titles, you have to rubbish everyone else.
Court, Navratilova, Evert and Graf are all great. Not forgetting Wills Moody in her day.

You have a weird obsession with the Australian Open too...

 

[Graf1stClass]

Keep telling yourself this nonsense. You can justify it all to yourself.




By the way-

Court 24, Graf 22, Wills Moody 19...

"I have no idea how to respond to these facts....


...


Um, 24, 22, 19!"

 

[illusions30]

Court having 24 slams is a fact, but her 24 slams being considered the best slam mark, or any prelude to her being the best, given the context of them is not. Xavier G being clueless to womens tennis is the only one oblivious to this. I guess this out of touch with reality individual belives his opinion >>> Evert, Navratilova, Billie Jean King, McEnroe, Bud Collins, Tracy Austin, Shriver, Stolle, Drysdale, Newcombe, and countless other great champions who have said the exact same thing publicly a hundred times over when discussing the slam records.

 

[BTURNER]

Court having 24 slams is a fact, but her 24 slams being considered the best slam mark, or any prelude to her being the best, given the context of them is not. Xavier G being clueless to womens tennis is the only one oblivious to this. I guess this out of touch with reality individual belives his opinion >>> Evert, Navratilova, Billie Jean King, McEnroe, Bud Collins, Tracy Austin, Shriver, Stolle, Drysdale, Newcombe, and countless other great champions who have said the exact same thing publicly a hundred times over when discussing the slam records.[/QUOT

I absolutely understand the point you are making about the Aussie. I think it has some validity ans so do many historians. I guess I am looking for a way to give Court something more than zero credit, and something less than all credit for those for reasons as I mentioned before. so I arbitrarily throw a few away or give 'half points' to those Aussies I really doubt she would have lost more than two or three regardless of who did or didn't.

We know that they held the event too close to the Christmas season, and right smack in the middle of the end of the normal tennis calender. We know that it was an expensive trip without a ton of money below the final. But I have a sinking feeling that Court's inevitable presence was hardly a welcome mat to those in the top fifteen and on the fence about making the trip.

If you really needed a win in Paris in the '70's to make it worth while to travel, and Borg and Evert were sitting pretty every year. Its not an inviting prospect.

 

[Graf1stClass]

Court having 24 slams is a fact, but her 24 slams being considered the best slam mark, or any prelude to her being the best, given the context of them is not. Xavier G being clueless to womens tennis is the only one oblivious to this. I guess this out of touch with reality individual belives his opinion >>> Evert, Navratilova, Billie Jean King, McEnroe, Bud Collins, Tracy Austin, Shriver, Stolle, Drysdale, Newcombe, and countless other great champions who have said the exact same thing publicly a hundred times over when discussing the slam records.

I know it's a fact, but I know how unimportant court's slam total really is in the GOAT discussion (though it's not really a discussion...the GOAT is Steffi). xavier G isn't so much oblivious as unwilling to give Steffi her well-earned credit.

 

[kiki]

Steffi played a full more loaded calendar than Court since the 1980-1990 WTA tour was much bigger.That you have to consider.There were a Masters, which is almost a GS title when Graf played which did only exist at the very end of Maggie´s career.That, one must consider.

we should compare TMS equivalent events of both ( using the term of TMS in the current sense of the word).I mean, Italian Open, Hilton Head,Berlin, Amelia Island and all that stuff.

 

[kiki]

Court played 5 all time greats: Evert,King,Bueno,Goolagong and young Navratilova and 5 or 6 more big players such as Richey,Jones,Wade,Durr and Casals/Stove.

Graf played old Navy and old Evert, all time greats Seles,Hingis,Sanchez and for a brief period Hana Mandlikova and excellent one slam wonders such as Novotna, Davenport,Pierce,Martinez,Capriati and Sabatini.

Maybe the top rivals of Court looks a bit stronger in the quantity of super names in their prime, but the top 10 players each one has had to face in a whole career stand, was heavier for Graf to handle at any given time.Just my wo cents.

 

[CEvertFan]

Court played 5 all time greats: Evert,King,Bueno,Goolagong and young Navratilova and 5 or 6 more big players such as Richey,Jones,Wade,Durr and Casals/Stove.

Graf played old Navy and old Evert, all time greats Seles,Hingis,Sanchez and for a brief period Hana Mandlikova and excellent one slam wonders such as Novotna, Davenport,Pierce,Martinez,Capriati and Sabatini.

Maybe the top rivals of Court looks a bit stronger in the quantity of super names in their prime, but the top 10 players each one has had to face in a whole career stand, was heavier for Graf to handle at any given time.Just my wo cents.

Davenport is not a one slam wonder, nor is Capriati or Pierce.

Davenport - 3 majors
Pierce - 2 majors
Capriati - 3 majors

You did get Novotna, Martinez and Sabatini right though.

 

[hoodjem]

Court's record is somewhat like Emerson's.

 

[illusions30]

Court's record is somewhat like Emerson's.

A bit harsh. Court is more a #4-#6 all time, and half her slam record (the Australian Open half) is a total joke to everyone who knows tennis for reasons already explained, but the other half is legit. Emerson is more a #25-#30 all time and his entire slam record is a joke for reasons that dont need to be explained.

One thing they have in common is their slam records were never at any point taken seriously and neither was ever seriously considered as the possible GOAT.

 

[hoodjem]

A bit harsh. Court is more a #4-#6 all time, and half her slam record (the Australian Open half) is a total joke to everyone who knows tennis for reasons already explained, but the other half is legit. Emerson is more a #25-#30 all time and his entire slam record is a joke for reasons that dont need to be explained.

OK. That's why I wrote "somewhat."

One thing they have in common is their slam records were never at any point taken seriously and neither was ever seriously considered as the possible GOAT.

This part is exactly right on target.

 

[BTURNER]

Court's record is somewhat like Emerson's.

In a way, but at least Emerson could have joined a pro tour to gain access to pro competition. Court did almost everything anyone could possibly ask, met every opponent, had winning H to H records, won 5 RG and 6 US titles alongside those Aussies, won all those doubles and mixed doubles. Her only self administered blemish was those inconsistent Wimbledon results.

You know dominating three of four majors for long stretches isn't popcorn kernels at the bottom of the bag.

 

[kiki]

In a way, but at least Emerson could have joined a pro tour to gain access to pro competition. Court did almost everything anyone could possibly ask, met every opponent, had winning H to H records, won 5 RG and 6 US titles alongside those Aussies, won all those doubles and mixed doubles. Her only self administered blemish was those inconsistent Wimbledon results.

You know dominating three of four majors for long stretches isn't popcorn kernels at the bottom of the bag.

It is another sport now.all courts arethe same, all play the same, no need to improve yourself...how well would the williams, russians, belgians, and other specimens do back when there were different surfaces with different specialists with differnet rackets with different strings???

We cannot compare eras.Do make one ranking from 2003-2013 and ome from 1900 to 2002.That is the only truth, otherwise it is a joke.

 

[illusions30]

In a way, but at least Emerson could have joined a pro tour to gain access to pro competition. Court did almost everything anyone could possibly ask, met every opponent, had winning H to H records, won 5 RG and 6 US titles alongside those Aussies, won all those doubles and mixed doubles. Her only self administered blemish was those inconsistent Wimbledon results.

You know dominating three of four majors for long stretches isn't popcorn kernels at the bottom of the bag.

Like I said the 3 big majors you can accurately compare over time:

Wills Moody 19
Navratilova 16
Evert 15
Court 13
Serena 12 (and counting)
Lenglen 12 (despite not playing U.S Open)

 

[Willi62]

Court played 5 all time greats: Evert,King,Bueno,Goolagong and young Navratilova and 5 or 6 more big players such as Richey,Jones,Wade,Durr and Casals/Stove. ...

When Court made her last slam final (USO 1973) Navratilova was 16 years old and Evert 18. Court never played Navratilova in a slam final. Evert only once, before Chris won any slams.

So Court and Evert/Navratilova had almost no overlap.

 

[Willi62]

I can´t agree more.Graf never faced a true grass courter other than post prime Martina and post peak Mandlikova.Court played
Bueno,King,Goolagong,Wade and young Naratilova and the excellent Chris Evert of the 70´s.
...

Court made her last slam final in 1973 at age 31.
Bueno made her last slam final in 1966, Goolagong her first in 1971, Evert her first in 1973, Navratilova her first in 1975.
Bueno and King almost never played the AO (which Court won 11 times).

 

[BTURNER]

,

Court made her last slam final in 1973 at age 31.
Bueno made her last slam final in 1966, Goolagong her first in 1971, Evert her first in 1973, Navratilova her first in 1975.
Bueno and King almost never played the AO (which Court won 11 times).

It's a good thing that the only matches that count in majors are finals. Any matches played in semifinals or quarterfinals aren't officially recognised, any more than any matches played on the tour. Thank goodness for Margaret that the losses to King , Bueno, Goolagong, Evert and even Navratilova did not really happen. It's even more fortunate for them, because three of them had losing records otherwise. Head to head match-up stats can really be pared down a lot that way.

You play a lot of games in these posts of yours. Just post the head to head records of Margaret's vs these and other top players she met, and we'll all be the judges of whether she met great grass courters in her career.

 

[Vensai]

Best ever? She has a good case.
Best on all surfaces? Nah.

 

[BTURNER]

Best ever? She has a good case.
Best on all surfaces? Nah.

Graf is my pick for best ever because she is at least in the top three-five GOAT on all surfaces. I think she is GOAT on hard. She has no weak surface. Matter of fact you can barely tell whether the tournament is played on grass or clay from the way she played. In the end, Steffi usually won or at least made the final. Even as great as Steffi was, some fans have to push it too far.

 

[poofytail]

Graf is my pick for best ever because she is at least in the top three-five GOAT on all surfaces. I think she is GOAT on hard. She has no weak surface. Matter of fact you can barely tell whether the tournament is played on grass or clay from the way she played. In the end, Steffi usually won or at least made the final. Even as great as Steffi was, some fans have to push it too far.

I dont think she is neccessarily the greatest ever on all surface, but you could make a case for her being the greatest ever all time on each surface. The greatest player ever on each surface would be:

Hard Courts- between Graf and Serena, no other contenders
Clay- between Graf and Evert, no other contenders
Grass- between Graf and Navratilova, no other contenders
Carpet- between Graf and Navratilova, no other contenders

So while I am not saying Graf is the greatest ever on every surface, it isnt totally far fetched either.


Despite the title being best I assume by reading through this thread it is more about greatest than best. Best becomes even more subjective and someone like Serena might be the best ever on anything but clay for instance.

 

[Willi62]

I dont think she is neccessarily the greatest ever on all surface, but you could make a case for her being the greatest ever all time on each surface. The greatest player ever on each surface would be:

Hard Courts- between Graf and Serena, no other contenders
Clay- between Graf and Evert, no other contenders
Grass- between Graf and Navratilova, no other contenders
Carpet- between Graf and Navratilova, no other contenders

So while I am not saying Graf is the greatest ever on every surface, it isnt totally far fetched either.


Despite the title being best I assume by reading through this thread it is more about greatest than best. Best becomes even more subjective and someone like Serena might be the best ever on anything but clay for instance.

What has Serena done on carpet?
Except maybe dancing, I mean?

 

[Vensai]

I dont think she is neccessarily the greatest ever on all surface, but you could make a case for her being the greatest ever all time on each surface. The greatest player ever on each surface would be:

Hard Courts- between Graf and Serena, no other contenders
Clay- between Graf and Evert, no other contenders
Grass- between Graf and Navratilova, no other contenders
Carpet- between Graf and Navratilova, no other contenders

So while I am not saying Graf is the greatest ever on every surface, it isnt totally far fetched either.


Despite the title being best I assume by reading through this thread it is more about greatest than best. Best becomes even more subjective and someone like Serena might be the best ever on anything but clay for instance.

No other contenders? Seriously, there are others who could contest that claim.

 

[poofytail]

Note I said best, not greatest. Serena isnt in contention for greatest on any surface but hard courts. Not enough achievements, not enough consistency. However she could be the best on all but clay, meaning her sheer ability level is higher than anyone else even factoring in eras, equipment, chronology. Nobody can consistently completely not only beat, but demolish everyone from their era so easily on hard courts, grass, and when she wants to yes even indoors/carpet like Serena can.

 

[Willi62]

Note I said best, not greatest. Serena isnt in contention for greatest on any surface but hard courts. Not enough achievements, not enough consistency. However she could be the best on all but clay, meaning her sheer ability level is higher than anyone else even factoring in eras, equipment, chronology. Nobody can consistently completely not only beat, but demolish everyone from their era so easily on hard courts, grass, and when she wants to yes even indoors/carpet like Serena can.

Serena hasn't won a tournament on carpet since 2003 ...

 

[poofytail]

No other contenders? Seriously, there are others who could contest that claim.

Like who. Name them by surface.

Serena hasn't won a tournament on carpet since 2003 ...

Of course not. There arent even tournaments on carpet anymore so how could she. There might be a 250 or 500 WTA equivalent type event (which is of no use for Serena) and that is it. When was the last year Federer won an event on carpet.

 

[Vensai]

Off the top of my head, Monica Seles at her peak beat Graf at all four majors except Wimbledon on grass.

 

[Willi62]

Off the top of my head, Monica Seles at her peak beat Graf at all four majors except Wimbledon on grass.

Seles beat Graf at the USO?
When did that happen??

 

[poofytail]

Off the top of my head, Monica Seles at her peak beat Graf at all four majors except Wimbledon on grass.

Graf has beaten Seles at every slam except the Australian Open, but Seles has never beaten Graf at the U.S Open, WTA Championships, or Miami so the overall hard court edge would still be Graf. Yeah you can say maybe Seles would have beaten Graf had she made the final in 91 or 92 (I would say Graf would have won in 91 had Nav. not done her the favor of taking Graf out, but maybe Seles in 92) but one could also easily say Graf would have beaten Seles at the 90 and 94 Australian Opens had she played.

The only surface Seles has a case of being better than Graf overall (not just peak, whole career, comparing peak to peak anyway is comparing Graf of 88-89 or 95-96 to Seles of 91-92 and all the stats would say Graf is better everywhere in that case) is on clay, but even there it would be weak with 3 French titles to 6 for Graf, and a 2-2 record at RG, 3-3 on clay overall, and with 30 year old Graf beating 25 year old Seles their last ever meeting there. Who knows but for the stabbing, but who knows if Serena didn't have all the issues she had off court if she would already have 30 slams today. One thing about Serena is she comes back from adversity a lot stronger than Monica is able to, and I don't mean just the stabbing, I mean family illness, personal injury, anytime Seles has one of those problems in her career and Serena has something probably more extreme (again talking the things outside the stabbing) Serena comes back with far more force and vigor than Monica is able to.