Is Martina Navratilova the overall tennis greatest ever ??

[CyBorg]

Graf is overall GOAT and it is undisputed. 22 Slams and a Golden Calendar Slam. Its not even close.

It's in fact very close, but the golden slam is a fine feather in Graf's cap.

The thing is, Evert would have had a pretty good shot at a grand slam in 1976. But she played only two majors that year, winning both of them (Wimbledon and US Open). Different times.

Here's a cool number to chew on. Career w-l record in majors: Evert 299-37 (89%); Graf 278-32 (89.7%). That's very close, with a slight edge to Graf.

But... Graf retired at 30. Chris at 34, which means Graf bailed before the big downturn started, while Chris hung around for a while. Yeah, it's close.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

He means how many were slams where she only won 4 matches

Thank you for clarifying this to that user I have blocked. Was obvious what was meant in my post but apparently they wanted to be rude (guess that’s why they’re blocked!).

 

[Aussie Darcy]

Court won 13 non-AO slams so she is competitive but I do agree that her AO count is inflated. (Now don’t get me started on Steffi Graf).

I would vote for Navratilova, closely followed by Evert. Serena Williams is up there but her overall body of work needed to be deeper.

Maureen Connolly and Monica Seles are the two great what ifs of women’s tennis.

She’s competitive and among the list. Ok but I would definitely put Graf, Evert and Navratilova ahead of her with Serena marginally behind.

If people start bringing doubles into the fray which I don’t think it should, then Graf would really start to fall behind the others.

 

[Mark-Touch]

I would add also Hingis to this what ifs list.

Why would you add Hingis?
Did anything in particular hold her back, similar to Connolly and Seles, like a career altering injury?

 

[AM75]

Why would you add Hingis?
Did anything in particular hold her back, similar to Connolly and Seles, like a career altering injury?

She had a career altering foot injury.

 

[Enceladus]

Martina is my personal favorite women's player of all time.

However IMO overall GOAT is between the two that own the biggest historical record that this game is built on, the slams. The two at the top of the mountain are Court and Djokovic, the two most decorated champions of all time. 24 slams speaks volumes. Those two have the greatest trophy cabinets and winning is everything. Either Djokovic breaks the tie to become the overall GOAT, or a new player rises up and surpasses them both.

The record for the number of Grand Slam titles is the primary metric, but assuming that the record holder has achieved full-fledged triumphs. Court achieved most of her GS wins in the pre-Open era, when the male and female Grand Slams had to be amateurs. The amateur status of the game limited its competitiveness, for both sexes.

In various female tennis GOAT rankings, Court regularly ranks behind the trio of Navratilova, Graf, Serena, sometimes even behind Evert. It is not a coincidence.

 

[Enceladus]

Court has more slams than her, both in singles and overall.

Martina has all grand slams in full-fledged, won in professional competition, Court not.

 

[King_olaf_the_hairy]

Margaret Court is 60–3 in Australia in singles, as follows:

• 1959: 32-player draw. Aged 16, she loses in R2 to eventual champ Reitano. (Win–loss record of 1–1)
• 1960: 32-player draw. Beats top seed, Wimbledon champ, and future Hall-of-Famer Maria Bueno in QF, then avenges her previous defeat by knocking out defending champ Reitano in SF. Wins her first title aged 17. (6–1)
• 1961: 44-player draw of Australians. Retains title. (11–1)
• 1962: 48-player draw of mostly Australians. Retains title. (16–1)
• 1963: 39-player draw of mostly Australians. Retains title. (21–1)
• 1964: 27-player draw of mostly Australians. Retains title. (25–1)
• 1965. 52-player international draw. She beats future Hall-of-Famers Durr in QF, Billie Jean Moffit in SF, and Bueno in the final to retain title. (30–1)
• 1966: 48-player draw of mostly Australians. Retains title. (35–1)
• 1967: Retired, dnp
• 1968: 62-player international draw. Fifth tournament back after coming out of retirement in November '67. Beats young future Hall-of-Famer Goolagong in R3, and third seeded future Hall-of-Famer Rosie Casals in QF, loses to Billie Jean King in the final. Win streak at the event ends at 38. (39–2)
• 1969: 32-player international draw. BJK was playing well enough to beat young Goolagong and future Hall-of-Famer Ann Jones, but Court still routs her in the final to avenge the previous year and regain the title. (44–2)
• 1970: 43-player draw of mostly Australians. Beats Goolagong. Retains title. (49–2)
• 1971: 30-player draw of mostly Australians. Beats Goolagong in the final. Retains title. (53–2)
• 1972: Pregnant, dnp.
• 1973: 48-player international draw. Beats Goolagong. Regains title. (58–2)
• 1974: Pregnant again, dnp
• 1975: 56-player international draw. Beats Turnbull but loses in QF to future Hall-of-Famer Navratilova. (60–3)

Overall Court is 2–1 vs BJK, 5–0 vs Goolagong, 2–0 vs Bueno, and a combined 10–2 versus all Hall-of-Fame inductees. Martina is the only player who she has lost to (when aged 32 and a mother-of-two) where she did not later avenge her defeat. Her three losses were to the eventual champion (2x) and the eventual runner-up (1x).

You could make every Aussie event a 128-player draw with all the top women in the 1960s present, and Court is still winning the majority of them.

Ok, maybe Court has a stronger case than I realized.

Court has 62 major titles in singles, doubles, and mixed. If you take away every Australian title she won (21), she's left with 41. That still keeps her #2 on the all-time list, behind only Martina and ahead of both Serena and BJK.

She played all four slams in eight of the eleven seasons where she was the Aussie champ, and won at least one other major in seven of them.

Only three women in all of history have a Boxed Set (career slam in singles/doubles/mixed). Doris Hart — who likely benefited from the enforced absences of Pauline Betz, Mo Connolly, and Althea Gibson in the 1950s — was the first. Martina Navratilova also did it, although it took until 2004 to complete hers. Court did it once in the amateur era (at Wimbledon '64, aged 22), and then completed a second one purely within the Open Era as well. She also completed the career slam in singles at Wimbledon '63, just before she turned 21.

Winners of the most slams (all disciplines) in a single season:

• Nine..... Court (1965)
• Eight..... Budge (1938), Sedgman (1951), Sedgman (1952), Court (1963), Court (1969)
• Seven..... Hart (1951), Hart (1952), Court (1964), King (1967), Court (1970), Navratilova (1984), Navratilova (1985)

Edit: She also shares the record for the most Triple Crowns (singles/doubles/mixed at the same slam) with Lenglen — they have five each — and is the outright holder of the Open Era record, being the only player to have done it twice.


Hope this helps.

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

Margaret Court is 60–3 in Australia in singles, as follows:

• 1959: 32-player draw. Aged 16, she loses in R2 to eventual champ Reitano. (Win–loss record of 1–1)
• 1960: 32-player draw. Beats top seed, Wimbledon champ, and future Hall-of-Famer Maria Bueno in QF, then avenges her previous defeat by knocking out defending champ Reitano in SF. Wins her first title aged 17. (6–1)
• 1961: 44-player draw of Australians. Retains title. (11–1)
• 1962: 48-player draw of mostly Australians. Retains title. (16–1)
• 1963: 39-player draw of mostly Australians. Retains title. (21–1)
• 1964: 27-player draw of mostly Australians. Retains title. (25–1)
• 1965. 52-player international draw. She beats future Hall-of-Famers Durr in QF, Billie Jean Moffit in SF, and Bueno in the final to retain title. (30–1)
• 1966: 48-player draw of mostly Australians. Retains title. (35–1)
• 1967: Retired, dnp
• 1968: 62-player international draw. Fifth tournament back after coming out of retirement in November '67. Beats young future Hall-of-Famer Goolagong in R3, and third seeded future Hall-of-Famer Rosie Casals in QF, loses to Billie Jean King in the final. Win streak at the event ends at 38. (39–2)
• 1969: 32-player international draw. BJK was playing well enough to beat young Goolagong, former Wimbledon champ Krantzcke, and future Hall-of-Famer Ann Jones in succession, but Court still routs her in the final to avenge the previous year and regain the title. (44–2)
• 1970: 43-player draw of mostly Australians. Beats Goolagong and Krantzcke. Retains title. (49–2)
• 1971: 30-player draw of mostly Australians. Beats Goolangong in the final. Retains title. (53–2)
• 1972: Pregnant, dnp.
• 1973: 48-player international field. Beats Krantzcke and Goolagong. Regains title. (58–2)
• 1974: Pregnant again, dnp
• 1975: 56-player international draw. Beats Turnbull but loses in QF to future Hall-of-Famer Navratilova. (60–3)

Overall Court is 2–1 vs BJK, 5–0 vs Goolagong, 2–0 vs Bueno, and a combined 10–2 versus all Hall-of-Fame inductees. Martina is the only player who she has lost to (when aged 32 and a mother-of-two) where she did not later avenge her defeat. Her three losses were to the eventual champion (2x) and the eventual runner-up (1x).

You could make every Aussie event a 128-player draw with all the top woman in the 1960s present, and Court is still winning the majority of them.




Court has 62 major titles in singles, doubles, and mixed. If you take away every Australian title she won (21), she's left with 41. That still keeps her #2 on the all-time list, behind only Martina and still ahead of both Serena and BJK.

She played all four slams in eight of the eleven seasons where she was the Aussie champ, and won at least one of the others in seven of them.

Only three women in all of history have a Boxed Set (career slam in singles/doubles/mixed). Doris Hart — who likely benefited from the enforced absences of Pauline Betz, Mo Connolly, and Althea Gibson in the 1950s — was the first. Martina Navratilova also did it, although it took until 2004 to complete hers. Court did it once in the amateur era (at Wimbledon '64, aged 22), and then completed a second one purely within the Open Era as well. She also completed the career slam in singles at Wimbledon '63, just before she turned 21.

Winners of the most slams (all disciplines) in a single season:

• Nine..... Court (1965)
• Eight..... Budge (1938), Sedgman (1951), Sedgman (1952), Court (1963), Court (1969)
• Seven..... Hart (1951), Hart (1952), Court (1964), King (1967), Court (1970), Navratilova (1984), Navratilova (1985)

Hope this helps.

Great post. Hard to believe that there are still people trying to deny Court’s greatness on the grounds off the alleged amateur era (which never existed on the women’s side). She is totally on par with Steffi and Nav.
One thing to add which was also already mentioned here: she won her doubles and mixed doubles during a time where it was common for the best single players to participate in those events as well. During Nav’s time that was already not completely the case anymore but still very legit wins. Serena’s wins at doubles are as relevant as Kygios’ AO slam.

 

[RS]

Crazy dominating both singles and doubles at the same time. That takes a lot of physical toll.

 

[Debraj]

Great post. Hard to believe that there are still people trying to deny Court’s greatness on the grounds off the alleged amateur era (which never existed on the women’s side). She is totally on par with Steffi and Nav.
One thing to add which was also already mentioned here: she won her doubles and mixed doubles during a time where it was common for the best single players to participate in those events as well. During Nav’s time that was already not completely the case anymore but still very legit wins. Serena’s wins at doubles are as relevant as Kygios’ AO slam.

Oh i thought, regardless of your gender,if you were professional back then(even if rumoured), you were prohibited to play slams,never know that one particular gender was privileged , sorry for any grammatical mistake and any misunderstanding

 

[King_olaf_the_hairy]

Oh i thought, regardless of your gender,if you were professional back then(even if rumoured), you were prohibited to play slams,never know that one particular gender was privileged , sorry for any grammatical mistake and any misunderstanding

The schism did indeed exist for both genders, at least in theory. However, the difference is that on the men's side there were many paid tournaments and head-to-head tours being organized by Jack Kramer et al. These had the effect of draining the amateur talent pool, so that male slam winners in the 1960s were never facing the best professionals. You won a Wimbledon championship or two, and then you vanished into professional exile. There was nothing like that available for the best women, so the winners of the ladies' amateur slams in the 1960s really were the undisputed top players. It's why, after the Open Era began in 1968, those same women continued to dominate without interruption. There are no female equivalents to Rosewall, Laver, Hoad, Trabert, Sedgman, Gonzales, etc, unless you go away back to the late 1940s and early 1950s.

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

Martina has all grand slams in full-fledged, won in professional competition, Court not.

That was discussed (and refuted) x times here already so no need for a rehash. But I have both Nav and Court on par as legit GWOAT contenders anyways (alongside Graf). The case for Nav however is not some doubles or OE/pre-OE one but the fact that she had to play alongside Evert basically her whole career and once she got the better of her she had to fight off young Graf and (to a lesser extent) Seles. The competition she faced was overall way harder than both Graf’s and Court’s.

 

[Pheasant]

Margaret Court is 60–3 in Australia in singles, as follows:

• 1959: 32-player draw. Aged 16, she loses in R2 to eventual champ Reitano. (Win–loss record of 1–1)
• 1960: 32-player draw. Beats top seed, Wimbledon champ, and future Hall-of-Famer Maria Bueno in QF, then avenges her previous defeat by knocking out defending champ Reitano in SF. Wins her first title aged 17. (6–1)
• 1961: 44-player draw of Australians. Retains title. (11–1)
• 1962: 48-player draw of mostly Australians. Retains title. (16–1)
• 1963: 39-player draw of mostly Australians. Retains title. (21–1)
• 1964: 27-player draw of mostly Australians. Retains title. (25–1)
• 1965. 52-player international draw. She beats future Hall-of-Famers Durr in QF, Billie Jean Moffit in SF, and Bueno in the final to retain title. (30–1)
• 1966: 48-player draw of mostly Australians. Retains title. (35–1)
• 1967: Retired, dnp
• 1968: 62-player international draw. Fifth tournament back after coming out of retirement in November '67. Beats young future Hall-of-Famer Goolagong in R3, and third seeded future Hall-of-Famer Rosie Casals in QF, loses to Billie Jean King in the final. Win streak at the event ends at 38. (39–2)
• 1969: 32-player international draw. BJK was playing well enough to beat young Goolagong, former Wimbledon champ Krantzcke, and future Hall-of-Famer Ann Jones in succession, but Court still routs her in the final to avenge the previous year and regain the title. (44–2)
• 1970: 43-player draw of mostly Australians. Beats Goolagong and Krantzcke. Retains title. (49–2)
• 1971: 30-player draw of mostly Australians. Beats Goolangong in the final. Retains title. (53–2)
• 1972: Pregnant, dnp.
• 1973: 48-player international field. Beats Krantzcke and Goolagong. Regains title. (58–2)
• 1974: Pregnant again, dnp
• 1975: 56-player international draw. Beats Turnbull but loses in QF to future Hall-of-Famer Navratilova. (60–3)

Overall Court is 2–1 vs BJK, 5–0 vs Goolagong, 2–0 vs Bueno, and a combined 10–2 versus all Hall-of-Fame inductees. Martina is the only player who she has lost to (when aged 32 and a mother-of-two) where she did not later avenge her defeat. Her three losses were to the eventual champion (2x) and the eventual runner-up (1x).

You could make every Aussie event a 128-player draw with all the top woman in the 1960s present, and Court is still winning the majority of them.




Court has 62 major titles in singles, doubles, and mixed. If you take away every Australian title she won (21), she's left with 41. That still keeps her #2 on the all-time list, behind only Martina and ahead of both Serena and BJK.

She played all four slams in eight of the eleven seasons where she was the Aussie champ, and won at least one other major in seven of them.

Only three women in all of history have a Boxed Set (career slam in singles/doubles/mixed). Doris Hart — who likely benefited from the enforced absences of Pauline Betz, Mo Connolly, and Althea Gibson in the 1950s — was the first. Martina Navratilova also did it, although it took until 2004 to complete hers. Court did it once in the amateur era (at Wimbledon '64, aged 22), and then completed a second one purely within the Open Era as well. She also completed the career slam in singles at Wimbledon '63, just before she turned 21.

Winners of the most slams (all disciplines) in a single season:

• Nine..... Court (1965)
• Eight..... Budge (1938), Sedgman (1951), Sedgman (1952), Court (1963), Court (1969)
• Seven..... Hart (1951), Hart (1952), Court (1964), King (1967), Court (1970), Navratilova (1984), Navratilova (1985)

Edit: She also shares the record for the most Triple Crowns (singles/doubles/mixed at the same slam) with Lenglen — they have five each — and is the outright holder of the Open Era record, being the only player to have done it twice.


Hope this helps.

Good stuff, as always amigo. This helps open my eyes further.

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

Margaret Court is 60–3 in Australia in singles, as follows:

• 1959: 32-player draw. Aged 16, she loses in R2 to eventual champ Reitano. (Win–loss record of 1–1)
• 1960: 32-player draw. Beats top seed, Wimbledon champ, and future Hall-of-Famer Maria Bueno in QF, then avenges her previous defeat by knocking out defending champ Reitano in SF. Wins her first title aged 17. (6–1)
• 1961: 44-player draw of Australians. Retains title. (11–1)
• 1962: 48-player draw of mostly Australians. Retains title. (16–1)
• 1963: 39-player draw of mostly Australians. Retains title. (21–1)
• 1964: 27-player draw of mostly Australians. Retains title. (25–1)
• 1965. 52-player international draw. She beats future Hall-of-Famers Durr in QF, Billie Jean Moffit in SF, and Bueno in the final to retain title. (30–1)
• 1966: 48-player draw of mostly Australians. Retains title. (35–1)
• 1967: Retired, dnp
• 1968: 62-player international draw. Fifth tournament back after coming out of retirement in November '67. Beats young future Hall-of-Famer Goolagong in R3, and third seeded future Hall-of-Famer Rosie Casals in QF, loses to Billie Jean King in the final. Win streak at the event ends at 38. (39–2)
• 1969: 32-player international draw. BJK was playing well enough to beat young Goolagong, former Wimbledon champ Krantzcke, and future Hall-of-Famer Ann Jones in succession, but Court still routs her in the final to avenge the previous year and regain the title. (44–2)
• 1970: 43-player draw of mostly Australians. Beats Goolagong and Krantzcke. Retains title. (49–2)
• 1971: 30-player draw of mostly Australians. Beats Goolangong in the final. Retains title. (53–2)
• 1972: Pregnant, dnp.
• 1973: 48-player international field. Beats Krantzcke and Goolagong. Regains title. (58–2)
• 1974: Pregnant again, dnp
• 1975: 56-player international draw. Beats Turnbull but loses in QF to future Hall-of-Famer Navratilova. (60–3)

Overall Court is 2–1 vs BJK, 5–0 vs Goolagong, 2–0 vs Bueno, and a combined 10–2 versus all Hall-of-Fame inductees. Martina is the only player who she has lost to (when aged 32 and a mother-of-two) where she did not later avenge her defeat. Her three losses were to the eventual champion (2x) and the eventual runner-up (1x).

You could make every Aussie event a 128-player draw with all the top woman in the 1960s present, and Court is still winning the majority of them.




Court has 62 major titles in singles, doubles, and mixed. If you take away every Australian title she won (21), she's left with 41. That still keeps her #2 on the all-time list, behind only Martina and ahead of both Serena and BJK.

She played all four slams in eight of the eleven seasons where she was the Aussie champ, and won at least one other major in seven of them.

Only three women in all of history have a Boxed Set (career slam in singles/doubles/mixed). Doris Hart — who likely benefited from the enforced absences of Pauline Betz, Mo Connolly, and Althea Gibson in the 1950s — was the first. Martina Navratilova also did it, although it took until 2004 to complete hers. Court did it once in the amateur era (at Wimbledon '64, aged 22), and then completed a second one purely within the Open Era as well. She also completed the career slam in singles at Wimbledon '63, just before she turned 21.

Winners of the most slams (all disciplines) in a single season:

• Nine..... Court (1965)
• Eight..... Budge (1938), Sedgman (1951), Sedgman (1952), Court (1963), Court (1969)
• Seven..... Hart (1951), Hart (1952), Court (1964), King (1967), Court (1970), Navratilova (1984), Navratilova (1985)

Edit: She also shares the record for the most Triple Crowns (singles/doubles/mixed at the same slam) with Lenglen — they have five each — and is the outright holder of the Open Era record, being the only player to have done it twice.


Hope this helps.

@Aussie Darcy a great post to educate yourself.

 

[droliver]

The doubles titles are very much part of the sport and hence somebody to say only singles should be considered for GOAT of the sport is silly

Doubles is essentially a different sport with different rules, court size, etc.....

 

[bigbadboaz]

If you're trying to say that should disqualify the doubles element, think again. It actually amplifies how much of an expanded skill set those greats with BOTH extensive singles and doubles resumes had..

 

[grandefrankie]

That was discussed (and refuted) x times here already so no need for a rehash. But I have both Nav and Court on par as legit GWOAT contenders anyways (alongside Graf). The case for Nav however is not some doubles or OE/pre-OE one but the fact that she had to play alongside Evert basically her whole career and once she got the better of her she had to fight off young Graf and (to a lesser extent) Seles. The competition she faced was overall way harder than both Graf’s and Court’s.

I don't agree on the last part. The field Navratilova dominated in 82-86 was the worst ever, especialy at the height of her dominance in 82-84. Even with Evert, who wasn't playing well those years except the end of 84 anyway. Navratilova even ran out of a press conference crying at the 83 US Open, since the press were hounding her about the terrible field. Graf, Court, and Serena never had that happen.

Graf herself proved this as a 17 year old, who wasn't even a young phenom who hit her peak as early as people like Hingis, Seles, Austin all did, and who wasn't yet in her prime (her prime really began in 88) she totally dominated and lost only 2 matches in 87, while playing a big level lower than 88. Destroying all the Navratilova era players like Shriver, Mandlikova, the group of West German top tenners pre Graf, routinely over and over with the only one who was past her prime being Evert, and maybe Navatilova and Mandlikova to a lesser degree. There might be some points in her career Martina had strong competition, but sure as heck not while she dominated.

As for Court she faced peak King, peak Bueno, Richey, up and coming Goolagong, Hard, Wade, young Evert, Ann Jones, great clay specialist Turner, overall a much tougher field. Over half of those atleast were better than the 3rd best player of the Navratilova era, whoever you think that is (probably Mandlikova or Austin), and every single one of those was far better than the next best (probably Shriver).

 

[grandefrankie]

To the question considering Navratilova isn't even the womens GOAT which is one of Graf, Serena, Court obviously my answer is no.

And the overall GOAT is for sure a man. Sorry WTA lovers. The all time garbage field Djokovic is facing today aside when you have 3 dudes reach 20+ slams, there is no way any women with the much lower level of competition in the womens game can compare unless they reach 30 which none of them chicks got anywhere near. Imagine an 18 slam winner in the WTA being better than 20+ slam winners in the oceans more competitive ATP.

 

[Gizo]

When it come to Court's Australian Championships / Open titles, I've always thought that the size of the draws themselves was largely irrelevant. Women's tennis had no serious depth (by depth I mean in the top 100 and certainly well beyond the top 10) until we were into the 21st century. There clearly wasn't close to enough depth to properly fill 128 player draws at majors. When 128 draws became the norm and established for the women there was then a lot of talk about how they were too big given the very low standard of early round matches, and the fact that things usually only properly started from the QF stage onwards. So the requirement to come through 5, 6 or 7 matches to win a major wasn't a big deal at all IMO, when the difference was essentially run of the mill early round matches, that were likely to be no more physically exerting than practice session.

Also given that she won both the French Championships / Open and US National Championships / Open 5 times apiece, had the Australian Championships / Open had full draws and all the best players year after year, I find it very difficult to envisage her still not winning her home major more often than that and enough to still cross the 20 major threshold. That's before we get to the fact that she only entered 47 singles majors during her career, had lengthy absences due to a hiatus and then her pregnancies etc.

IMO what was far more of 'negative mark' in comparison to other all-time legends, was the fact that she 'only' won Wimbledon 3 times, the same number of times as Evert, a third as often as Navratilova, and less than half as often as Graf and Serena. It goes without saying that considering their respecive styles of play, Evert winning Wimbledon 3 times was considerably more impressive than Court doing so. Sure she only entered Wimbledon 12 times during her career, but Evert won her 3rd Wimbledon title during her 10th appearance there. Also it was clear that Wimbledon was the no. 1 major during the span of her career (and for a while longer after she retired, with the US National Championships / Open in 2nd place and a large gulf between that and RG (again which remained the case for while longer after Court retired). The individual Wimbledon title count was clearly far more important than the overall majors count. And when it comes to combined Wimbledon & US National Championships / Open titles, with 8 she trails each of those other 4 all-time legends as well. It seemed like she disliked the pompous and stuffy environment at Wimbledon, and despite having a game stylistically suited to grass didn't enjoy playing at the site.

 

[buscemi]

I don't agree on the last part. The field Navratilova dominated in 82-86 was the worst ever, especialy at the height of her dominance in 82-84. Even with Evert, who wasn't playing well those years except the end of 84 anyway. Navratilova even ran out of a press conference crying at the 83 US Open, since the press were hounding her about the terrible field. Graf, Court, and Serena never had that happen.

I feel like you're maybe being too harsh on Evert from 1982-1984. She won two Majors in 1982 (beating Navratilova at the Australian Open), one Major in 1983, and one Major in 1984. And Evert also extended Navratilova to three sets in the 1982 Wimbledon final and the 1984 U.S. Open final. This wasn't Evert at her best, but she was still a formidable opponent and better, IMO, than anyone Graf faced in the aftermath of the Seles stabbing from 1993 to mid-1995.

 

[grandefrankie]

I feel like you're maybe being too harsh on Evert from 1982-1984. She won two Majors in 1982 (beating Navratilova at the Australian Open), one Major in 1983, and one Major in 1984. And Evert also extended Navratilova to three sets in the 1982 Wimbledon final and the 1984 U.S. Open final. This wasn't Evert at her best, but she was still a formidable opponent and better, IMO, than anyone Graf faced in the aftermath of the Seles stabbing from 1993 to mid-1995.

Graf had two periods of dominance though. I don't think Evert in 82-84, as you just admited clearly not her best, was any better than the so called aging Navratilova of 87-89 that Graf faced. In fact on most surfaces- grass, carpet, medium to fast hard courts, Navratilova would be better. And the rest of the field is definitely worse. Also I never said Graf had the best competition ever either. Serena by far had the best, and probably followed by Court which just gets overwhelmed due to the Australian Open factor, and peoples hatred of her.

Anyway Martina still aint my female GOAT, she isn't most peoples as Serena and Graf are far ahead of her on every poll you see with hundreds of thousands of voters, and aint no female is the overall GOAT anyway unless they win 30+ slams in the far less competitive WTA. Which nobody has come close to, when that happens talk to me about some chick as overall tennis GOAT.

 

[Hard Court]

Some of court's Australin Open titles were against weak competition. some were not. Maybe we should do the Guillermo Vilas thing and not count some of them.
Of course, the last several of Serena Williams would not count either. Doubt many people are willing to go that far.

 

[grandefrankie]

People don't like Court due to her political views. So her tennis and career is not properly evaluated.

Navratilova is the opposite. A lesbian, a so called feminist, a social justice lobbyist on a bunch of issues, so if anything she is a bit overrated for the same reasons. Still an amazing player of course but people go out of their way to be generous in assessing her and go the other way for Court.

 

[TheGoldenEra1990’s]

Graf is the goat of goats for all genders. Even aliens

- Only player in history to win the Golden Slam - Only player in history to win each Slam 4 times - Only player in history to win 6 Slams on all surfaces - Only player in history with 377 weeks at #1 - Only player in history with 8 Year-End #1 - Only player in history to win at least 3 Slams in a season FIVE times - Only player in history to win the Channel Slam 4 times (RG+Wimbledon) - Won 21 Slams before the age of 27 and 22 by the time she was 30 - Won 22/54 Slams she ever played - Won 48% of tournaments she ever played

She’s the epitome of excellence and perfection. She set the bar. No one has touched it. Most likely no one ever will. Man or woman

 

[grandefrankie]

Graf, Navratilova, Serena, Court are all amazing but all flawed so it is hard to pick any 1 for GOAT

Navratilova- only 18 slams, and unlike Evert who would have won about 25 slams if the Australian and French were all played then, Martina still has only 19 slams or so if everyone plays the Australian and French every year (winning an Australian in 78 or 79). Weaker record at 3 of the 4 slams than most of the other GOATs. And while her longevity of playing on tour is amazing, 15 of her 18 slams were over only a 5 year period (82-87). Also that is a period that was very weak overall competition wise, meaning 82-87, especialy 82-84.

Graf- Her dominance in the late 80s was when her biggest rivals were some chick with a 3-15 slam semi final record and a roughly 31 year old. Her next period of dominance was after the Seles stabbing and before Hingis emerged. Her periods of peak play always seemed to coincide when the competition was not there and when the competition was (Seles in 90-92, Hingis and Davenport in 97-99) was mostly when she was struggling badly with her own form or injuries, minus 99 a bit, so she never really got tested in her own good periods during strong competition. Almost no doubles.

Court- Australian Open of course. Breaking it down she has fewer weaknesses than all the others probably.

Serena- Smallish number of regular tournament titles compared to the others. Did not really have a long period of total dominance, but dominant years, mixed with strong but not dominant years, over a long period of time, with a couple major slumps.

One thing for sure, none is the overall GOAT. A woman would have to be the hands down GOAT in their gender in the much weaker female game to have a case for overall GOAT. I had been thinking Graf or Serena was female GOAT but breaking down their drawbacks, I think I am changing my mind, it should be Court.

 

[Pheasant]

I will admit that I have some bias, due to watching the most amount of tennis during the 1980s. I was a teenager throughout most of that decade, which means I had tons of free time. Also, we are more impressionable at that age. Everybody loved Chrissie, including myself. But when Martina changed the game with her insane workout routine, it changed everything. I remember her with a vein popping out of her arm while wrecking the tour with a ton of straight set blowouts. That kind of stuff just burns a bad memory into your brain. Rocky 4 with Ivan Drago came out sometime in the middle of that run of hers. So did Terminator. That was Martina. Poor Chrissie didn’t seem to have a chance. Well, that’s what it felt like, even Chrissie did win some matches against Martina from 1982-1986.
So yeah, Chrissie was my favorite of all time. I still want to argue in her favor. But my gut picks Martina. To be fair, I am now learning more about Court. The veterans here are having an impact with their knowledge on Court. I know that I have drastically underrated Court. To be fair, I didn’t get to see her play. But her records are incredible.

 

[grandefrankie]

I will admit that I have some bias, due to watching the most amount of tennis during the 1980s. I was a teenager throughout most of that decade, which means I had tons of free time. Also, we are more impressionable at that age. Everybody loved Chrissie, including myself. But when Martina changed the game with her insane workout routine, it changed everything. I remember her with a vein popping out of her arm while wrecking the tour with a ton of straight set blowouts. That kind of stuff just burns a bad memory into your brain. Rocky 4 with Ivan Drago came out sometime in the middle of that run of hers. So did Terminator. That was Martina. Poor Chrissie didn’t seem to have a chance. Well, that’s what it felt like, even Chrissie did win some matches against Martina from 1982-1986.
So yeah, Chrissie was my favorite of all time. I still want to argue in her favor. But my gut picks Martina. To be fair, I am now learning more about Court. The veterans here are having an impact with their knowledge on Court. I know that I have drastically underrated Court. To be fair, I didn’t get to see her play. But her records are incredible.

That is what I argued about Chris in the other thread. Unfortunately it is hard to ever even possibly pick Chris as GOAT. You could rank her anywhere from 2nd to 6th or 7th depending on your opinion, but never #1. And 2nd only being possible if you have Martina at #1. Unfortunately she is just about the only of the top tier all time greats you can't make a case for being #1 either for one specific reason. Since Martina made it pretty clear Chris was #2 in only her own era, thus not possible to be #1 of all time. Court, Serena, Graf, Wills, Connolly, Lenglen, are very subjective comparing to each other and to Chris and Martina, by different records and numbers as there is no prime to prime head to head play, even if Graf and Martina, Evert and Court, had careers that overlapped a bit. Martina vs Chris was ended by the 13 match win streak while Chris was still sort of in her prime basically.

And unfortunately for Chris that means you have to personally rank Martina, which varies by person, before you can even rank Chris. Since the best Chris can ever be is 1 spot directly behind Martina.

 

[AM75]

Doubles is essentially a different sport with different rules, court size, etc.....

Different rules??? Did I miss something?

 

[Gizo]

In terms of Navratilova, while of course I'm not denying her longevity was incredible any way you look at it, I've always had doubts about the conclusion that her longevity was automatically unparalleled and far superior to that of some of the other all-time legends, based on the fact that she had a relatively slower start compared to them.

She won her her first singles major title at Wimbledon in 1978 at the approximate age of 21 years and 9 months, her 23rd career title overall.

By comparison at that same age:

- Graf had already won 9 majors and 54 titles overall.
- Evert 6 majors and 64 titles overall.
- Serena 5 majors and 22 titles overall (including the YEC, Indian Wells x 2, Miami x 2, Rome, Canada, plus numerous Tier II events with strong fields). And due to various trends within the sport, winning 22 titles from February 1999 - March 2003 was clearly more impressive than winning 23 titles from September 1974 - July 1978 IMO.
- Court 8 majors and 51 or 52 titles overall.

Often when it comes to longevity, there can be a huge focus on results during the latter stages of careers, when a player is in their 30s etc., and less of a focus on the early or middle years. It’s not exactly the same or anything, but sort of on that theme on the men’s side, I’ve never accepted that Agassi’s longevity is a serious argument in his favour vs. the likes of Connors and Lendl. That’s because it seemed clear to me that had he been more consistent during his 20s, he wouldn’t have had as much left in the tank to achieve what he did during his 30s.

 

[Angrybirdstar]

I don't necessarily agree with this; regarding Court. To your defense, Court did some amazing things, like winning 6 straight slam titles, a CYGS, and 3 legs of the grand slam the first year back after having a baby. And her 11-2 record in slam finals in the Open Era while playing some of those past her peak, is truly GOAT-level clutch play. This includes 4-1 at the AO, 3-0 at the FO, 3-0 at the USO, and 1-1 at Wimbledon.

As for Open Era records, Court owns the highest winning pct at 3 different slam events. And some of that was past her prime.

AO: 21-1, .955
FO: 20-1, .952
USO: 29-3, .906

Ok, maybe Court has a stronger case than I realized. You might be onto something.

this makes me think of a GOAT case you can make for Laver, Rosewall, and Gonzalez (in a parallel to the Big 3) - their domination and staying power in old age demonstrates that they must have been even better and had to repeatedly raise their level against each other in their primes, such that when they faced other competition, it was like playing on easy mode. meanwhile the likes of Tilden and Court didn't necessarily have the same GOAT-tier competition in their primes, but their post-prime level was still so indisputably high that it retroactively validated the strength of their prime level. think this is also an important point for Federer and Connors, and even Djokovic in a reversed manner, who often face (imo unjustified) criticism for beating up lower tier opponents at various times in their career

Singles Titles [ Since women's tennis is BO3, why only look at Slams? ]​

all truly inquisitive minds recognize the clear truth that Angela Mortimer is more GOATy than Steffi Graf

And of the 11 in Australia how many were only 4 matches played and won? And also how many were against only Aussies?

Facts are facts but when you look at the amount of matches and who was in the field you gotta laugh. Even Evert, BJK and Navratilova all admitted that nobody bothered coming to Australia that often each year for the AO. But hey kudos to Margaret. Everyone clearly loves her and she clearly loves everyone on earth with her kind heart.

wow Evert and Navratilova admitted that? well then it must be a valid argument, they couldn't possibly have any relevant biases... and never check who BJK lost to in AO '65 and '69 or what Navratilova's opinions and rhetoric on trans people are...

She pretty much put up a Fed ‘04 or Djoko ‘11 5 years in a row (‘82-‘86). Then kept being competitive and remained on Steffi and Monica’s tails while they were at their best. Best girl peak ever!

she was 25 so she wasn't a girl and also Lenglen existed,,,

(Now don’t get me started on Steffi Graf).

I would vote for Navratilova, closely followed by Evert.

is your issue the usual one, that Graf inflated slams with no Seles to stop her? and why Evert specifically in 2nd over Graf, Serena, Court, etc.?

Even today that Graf Golden Calendar Slam never gets mentioned.
Funnily enough Agassi barely gets mentioned these days, he actually had a golden super slam which again never gets mentioned. Graf and Agassi certainly seem to have upset the Establishment, i sometimes wonder if that is partly how they ended up married as that was a sort of common ground.

can't believe Agassi has gotten so overrated someone is trying to seriously argue that his blah blah blah "slam" is in any way comparable to Graf's actual, no qualifiers, grand slam, or that Agassi is "barely mentioned" when everybody and their father loves to hype his 8 slams on 3 surfaces and at 4 venues and his oh so unique talent, never mind that he was beating Todd Martin and Rainer Schüttler for them

three straight WTA Finals

somehow this one never seems to get mentioned, even though to me Seles winning a hat trick of the biggest carpet tournament (beating Navratilova in 2 of those finals!) should be a hugely celebrated accomplishment

with no indication Graf would have taken her throne back

but anyway it's funny to say this when you look at those WTA finals draws because Graf was losing to Sabatini, Novotna, and McNeil before she could even face Seles, so she clearly had other problems she was dealing with

To the question considering Navratilova isn't even the womens GOAT which is one of Graf, Serena, Court obviously my answer is no.

And the overall GOAT is for sure a man. Sorry WTA lovers. The all time garbage field Djokovic is facing today aside when you have 3 dudes reach 20+ slams, there is no way any women with the much lower level of competition in the womens game can compare unless they reach 30 which none of them chicks got anywhere near. Imagine an 18 slam winner in the WTA being better than 20+ slam winners in the oceans more competitive ATP.

tbf if we're adjusting for the fact that different slam counts are possible in different eras among the women and among the men, then clearly there should also at least be some adjustment to account for the different formats. never mind that GOAThood shouldn't be and isn't about slam counting (or any statistical counting)

That is what I argued about Chris in the other thread. Unfortunately it is hard to ever even possibly pick Chris as GOAT. You could rank her anywhere from 2nd to 6th or 7th depending on your opinion, but never #1. And 2nd only being possible if you have Martina at #1. Unfortunately she is just about the only of the top tier all time greats you can't make a case for being #1 either for one specific reason. Since Martina made it pretty clear Chris was #2 in only her own era, thus not possible to be #1 of all time. Court, Serena, Graf, Wills, Connolly, Lenglen, are very subjective comparing to each other and to Chris and Martina, by different records and numbers as there is no prime to prime head to head play, even if Graf and Martina, Evert and Court, had careers that overlapped a bit. Martina vs Chris was ended by the 13 match win streak while Chris was still sort of in her prime basically.

And unfortunately for Chris that means you have to personally rank Martina, which varies by person, before you can even rank Chris. Since the best Chris can ever be is 1 spot directly behind Martina.

i think it's pretty easy to argue for Evert if you more or less disregard h2hs, which imo is totally defensible as they often boil down to random chance of how opponents' games developed in previous decades to get them to their eventual prime form

 

[TheFifthSet]

she was 25 so she wasn't a girl and also Lenglen existed,,,

I say it affectionately, but can see why it might come off as infantilizing.

Lenglen has a seat at the table too, but I’m partial to (the original) “Martinka” (even though there’s a valid argument to be made for the timing of the wood-to-graphite transition benefiting her).

PS, that phenomenon of “post-prime retroactive prime validation” you allude to definitely applies to Nav. She competed admirably against prime/peak Grafeles in her 30’s.

 

[RS]

 

[grandefrankie]

tbf if we're adjusting for the fact that different slam counts are possible in different eras among the women and among the men, then clearly there should also at least be some adjustment to account for the different formats. never mind that GOAThood shouldn't be and isn't about slam counting (or any statistical counting)

Navratilova who is the one being discussed in this topic still wins only around 19 slams even if everyone played and valued the Australian and French then. She wins no French Opens in the 70s-80. Wins 1 Australian in either 78 or 79 most likely, if we assume Evert, Goolagong, King, and everyone else plays. Still far below mens slam counts, LOL! Evert could have as much as 25 now, but nobody is discussing her in the overall (mens and womens together) GOAT topic as we see.

I agree it isnt all about slams, or shouldn't be, but bottom line is clearly NO women, no matter which woman you think is GOAT- Serena, Court, Navratilova, Graf, has done well enough to even be considered for overall GOAT playing in the far less competitive and weaker womens game. When there are several men who have done as much as them or more in the far more competitive mens game. I stand by what I said that any woman would need a 30+ type slam singles title career or something the equivalent of that in other areas to even make a case as overall GOAT, not just female GOAT, and nobody has come anywhere near that yet.

 

[grandefrankie]

In terms of Navratilova, while of course I'm not denying her longevity was incredible any way you look at it, I've always had doubts about the conclusion that her longevity was automatically unparalleled and far superior to that of some of the other all-time legends, based on the fact that she had a relatively slower start compared to them.

She won her her first singles major title at Wimbledon in 1978 at the approximate age of 21 years and 9 months, her 23rd career title overall.

By comparison at that same age:

- Graf had already won 9 majors and 54 titles overall.
- Evert 6 majors and 64 titles overall.
- Serena 5 majors and 22 titles overall (including the YEC, Indian Wells x 2, Miami x 2, Rome, Canada, plus numerous Tier II events with strong fields). And due to various trends within the sport, winning 22 titles from February 1999 - March 2003 was clearly more impressive than winning 23 titles from September 1974 - July 1978 IMO.
- Court 8 majors and 51 or 52 titles overall.

Often when it comes to longevity, there can be a huge focus on results during the latter stages of careers, when a player is in their 30s etc., and less of a focus on the early or middle years. It’s not exactly the same or anything, but sort of on that theme on the men’s side, I’ve never accepted that Agassi’s longevity is a serious argument in his favour vs. the likes of Connors and Lendl. That’s because it seemed clear to me that had he been more consistent during his 20s, he wouldn’t have had as much left in the tank to achieve what he did during his 30s.

IMO she didn't have the best longevity of all. All but 3 of her slams and all 9 of her non Wimbledons came over just a 5 year stretch, 82-87. If the method we use is just playing and playing fairly good tennis, then Venus Williams would have the best longevity ever, and I doubt many would argue that.

 

[TheFifthSet]

IMO she didn't have the best longevity of all. All but 3 of her slams and all 9 of her non Wimbledons came over just a 5 year stretch, 82-87. If the method we use is just playing and playing fairly good tennis, then Venus Williams would have the best longevity ever, and I doubt many would argue that.

Her longevity was fine, results-based analysis just doesn’t do it full justice. She was reaching slam finals and pushing peak Graf to the limit in them, or losing to Seles (after beating Graf!), until her age 36 year. A player entering her 30’s will almost never fare well against two younger GOAT-level players priming concurrently, but she did about as well as you could expect against her two foils while winning 85% of yearly tour matches until ‘94 (a campaign in which she almost won a 9th Wimbledon).

If she did get the better of two such players, it wouldn’t even be a discussion. But not doing so, imo, is eminently excusable.

 

[grandefrankie]

Her longevity was fine, results-based analysis just doesn’t do it full justice. She was reaching slam finals and pushing peak Graf to the limit in them, or losing to Seles (after beating Graf!), until her age 36 year. A player entering her 30’s will almost never fare well against two younger GOAT-level players priming concurrently.

If she did get the better of two such players, it wouldn’t even be a discussion. But not doing so, imo, is eminently excusable.

I agree her longevity was very good but people say she had by far the best longevity ever. She did not. Like I said if the method is simply playing and playing good tennis which is the only method you could argue her as the single sole best longevity by, Venus Williams would have the best of anyone.

 

[Daniel Andrade]

Doubles don't matter.... just consider those doubles records all useless

why

 

[Daniel Andrade]

In absolute terms no.

She could not beat the top men then or now.

If we’re going to afford her the possibility - giving her “credit” so to speak, because she’s obviously limited by her gender - then why don’t we include wheelchair tennis players in the question to “correct for” all physical limitations?

Why don’t we invite juniors into the discussion - or seniors?

If we correct for sex, why don’t we correct for disability or age?

Simply put - “the greatest player” - full stop - shouldn’t be someone who would obviously lose horribly to another group of players who aren’t even ranked in the top 10.

But she would probably lose to any of the top 100 men of her own day, very badly.

As Serena put it honestly to David Letterman: Andy Murray “would beat me 6-0, 6-0, in five to six minutes”.

Perhaps the best player ever was Schwarzman

 

[TheFifthSet]

I agree her longevity was very good but people say she had by far the best longevity ever. She did not.

Agree with this. Too lofty a claim.

Like I said if the method is simply playing and playing good tennis which is the only method you could argue her as the single sole best longevity by, Venus Williams would have the best of anyone.

Don’t agree with this. Navratilova was second or third-best in the world in her mid-to-late 30’s, bettered only by two players with GOAT-level primes/peaks, whom she would still manage to beat every other match and push to deciding sets for much of the rest of the time. That’s not the same (in kind of degree) as what Venus was doing. VW had one top five finish after her age 30 season, and she was 5th that year. 30’s Navratilova wasn’t merely a compiler, the tennis itself was incredible, she just got blocked by two younger ATG’s (barely, at that), while dominating the rest of the tour.

 

[Daniel Andrade]

Pound for pound in her category, yes.

 

[Pheasant]

Martina's argument comes down to peak vs career. Her peak was so absolutely ridiculous, that it looks like a misprint. Now granted, she's missing a handful of slam titles fom the aggregate total. But Evert was no slouch for stealing slams. Martina's 332 weeks at #1, given her competition at the very top, is remarkable. People forget that an aging Martina from the last quarter of 1987 through late 1990 was #2 to Steffi. And at the beginning of her career. Evert costed her a ton of weeks at #1. Also, the Virginia Slims tourney on carpet gets underrated by most. Many of those finals were Best of 5. And that tourney paid huge cash back then. IIRC, it paid more money than 2 of the 4 slams. Martina won 8 of those tourneys, which includes 5 straight. This should definitely be factored into the equation.

As for her peak of when she was beating up on Chrissie from 1982-86, Chrissie was no slouch during that time frame.

From 1982-86, Evert compiled an overall record of 339-39, .897. Chrissie played nearly .900 ball during that streak. Of course, she was only 4-21 vs Martina during that run, which means that she was 335-18, .949 vs the rest of the field.

 

[TheFifthSet]

In absolute terms no.

She could not beat the top men then or now.

If we’re going to afford her the possibility - giving her “credit” so to speak, because she’s obviously limited by her gender - then why don’t we include wheelchair tennis players in the question to “correct for” all physical limitations?

Why don’t we invite juniors into the discussion - or seniors?

If we correct for sex, why don’t we correct for disability or age?

Simply put - “the greatest player” - full stop - shouldn’t be someone who would obviously lose horribly to another group of players who aren’t even ranked in the top 10.

But she would probably lose to any of the top 100 men of her own day, very badly.

As Serena put it honestly to David Letterman: Andy Murray “would beat me 6-0, 6-0, in five to six minutes”.

A prime Floyd Mayweather would lose to any ranked cruiserweight or above, in horrific fashion.

In MMA, all of the GOAT’s of the lower weight classes (BW to LW) wouldn’t stand a chance against the bigger guys — even mid-tier bigger guys.

Yet, very few people care.

Imo there’s nothing wrong, when evaluating athletes, with adjusting for the constraints placed on them by biology/physics. It’s already kind of done that way in combat sports, and no one bats an eye.

 

[Razer]

why

Because lot of unathletic people have won titles in doubles.... if we mix doubles with singles then we are diluting the whole discourse

 

[RS]

Mayweather destroying Wladimir Klitschko's glass chin.

 

[TheFifthSet]

From 1982-86, Evert compiled an overall record of 339-39, .897. Chrissie played nearly .900 ball during that streak. Of course, she was only 4-21 vs Martina during that run, which means that she was 335-18, .949 vs the rest of the field.

Will never tire of reading mind-boggling facts about those two.

 

[Razer]

Mayweather destroying Wladimir Klitschko's glass chin.

Wladimiri Klitschko even with 100 degree fever will thrash Mayweather and knock him out.

 

[Pheasant]

A prime Floyd Mayweather would lose to any ranked cruiserweight or above, in horrific fashion.

In MMA, all of the GOAT’s of the lower weight classes (BW to LW) wouldn’t stand a chance against the bigger guys — even mid-tier bigger guys.

Yet, very few people care.

Imo, there’s nothing wrong, when evaluating athletes, to adjust for the constraints placed on them by biology/physics. It’s already done that way in combat sports, and no one bats an eye.

Yes, there's a massive reason why there are weight classes. They are incredibly important. I believe that 8 lbs separates the first 6-7 weight classes in collegiate wrestling. A wrestler buddy of mine said that you better not jump a weight class without adding a ton of strength, or you are doomed. Cutting weight was practically a cult.

Greatest in this context means which person dominated his/her field the most, with some context being made(# of ATGs in their field, #1 competitor, etc, etc). For a while, Sugar Ray Robinson was considered the GOAT in boxing history. Of course, Joe Frazier, or even Gerry Cooney, would wipe him out.

 

[TheFifthSet]

Yes, there's a massive reason why there are weight classes. They are incredibly important. I believe that 8 lbs separates the first 6-7 weight classes in collegiate wrestling. A wrestler buddy of mine said that you better not jump a weight class without adding a ton of strength, or you are doomed. Cutting weight was practically a cult.

Greatest in this context means which person dominated his/her field the most, with some context being made(# of ATGs in their field, #1 competitor, etc, etc). For a while, Sugar Ray Robinson was considered the GOAT in boxing history. Of course, Joe Frazier, or even Gerry Cooney, would wipe him out.

Absolutely. Even in competitive jiu-jitsu (one of the more size-egalitarian combat sports) size makes a huge difference.

I think it’s okay to draw a line at super-duper niche sports like wheelchair tennis, darts or (if we’re comparing gender-to-gender) women’s basketball (for now)…the competitive fields there are nothing to write home about. But women’s singles tennis is a whole other story. Totally unfair to compare it to wheelchair tennis. There’s probably a bigger gap between the size of talent pools in tennis and footy than there is between wheelchair tennis and women’s singles tennis, yet no one would argue something like Rooney > Federer on that basis. A minimum threshold (at the very least) has been met, to where the female tennis players can’t be dismissed out of hand based on the talent pool.

 

[Daniel Andrade]

Because lot of unathletic people have won titles in doubles.... if we mix doubles with singles then we are diluting the whole discourse

who has?