Justine vs Venus: who is greater?

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

If Henin who reached 2 Wimbledon finals had no real chance to win, it's it's highly laughable to suggest that Sampras who never made a final, failed to win for any other reason than not being good enough. You actually make Pete look bad by suggesting he did not try hard enough to win the last major he did not have, that mental attitude belongs to someone like Murray, not one of the best players of all time.

You have a hard time accepting the truth. I watched Sampras from the beginning to end of his career, and he never put as much effort into the FO as seen in his perfomances at Wimbledon and the USO. There's no getting around that. Moreover, Sampras' success of failures have nothing to do with Henin--one half of this thread's subject--and her history which proved sans question that she never had the talent to win at Wimbledon.

By the way, 2 finals and 3 semis is a solid record. I suppose Djokovic has a patchy record at the US Open?

I see you're an "anything goes" kind of guy, by listing SF results. Next, you will list just entering events as some sign of a good record.

If Henin was no good at Wimbledon, Sampras was certainly no good at the french and if Henin's record is patchy, then...

Then nothing. One had the intention of wanting to win Wimbledon, while the other hardly committed himself to the FO. That is the essential difference you continue to have a hard time wrapping your mind around..or you are just grasping for excuses to ease the sting of Henin's lack of ability.

The idea that Venus had not much competition was one up for debate

You're not selling that here. You were not debating. You were making a hardline statement completely divorced from fact, which was countered, and when challenged to be fair and assess Henin's FO competition, you tap-shuffle-tapped around the task, as you do to this day.

The reasons are quite evident.

Back to back doesn't mean squat.

Thanks for hammering in how utterly sensless your position was. Back to back only means nothing to those--like you--who wish to make paper-thin excuses why Henin failed to show a period of dominant play by defending at the USO--the very thing accomplished by Venus.

Your defense is falling apart as quickly as you post it, guy.

btw in some ways the Aussie open is better than the US, no final set TB for instance. but onto..

Still falling apart.

But fair play to you. I actually stick by my guns too and say if nadal wins the same amount of US Open's plus the AO, he's achieved more on HC due to getting both HC slams, but oh well.

...which has nothing to do with value judgements of events or feats achieved at the events. Accepted historical perceptions and conclusions are not goig to fade away, so you can make some roundabout attempt to inflate Henin's career standing.

Well fair play to you. Does that mean she was better than Venus on clay though?

You have not entered the realm of posting anything with fair play in mind, as i've had to remind of that issue post after post after post, so until you can wipe away the yoke of laughably fanatical devotion to Henin (with enough spin to make the most hardcore politician blush), you are in no position to request anything (not that it was relevant to the discussion).

 

[TMF]

There's a very specific reason Graf is considered a true GOAT while Matina is not: winning the Grand Slam. The same applies to Laver, much to the anger of certain fans, who cannot accept that he's not the end-all of tennis.

One criteria is one criteria. There are many more to be considered. It's utterly nonsense to use one criteria and ignore the rest. Plus, Graf's GS is achieved on 3 surfaces, not 2 like Laver. And Graf goat status was more about her 22 slams including a host of other achievements that sets apart from other players. Same with Navratilova...her numbers are ridiculously mind boggling

 

[jones101]

Serena looking in decent shape!

Cant wait for the open!

 

[jones101]

Why? Tennis is just their job. Not focusing 100% on a tennis match is no different to someone checking the internet at their office desk when they should be working. It's just a job and they probably have more important things to think about.

I swear people on these boards care more about tennis and all these records and rivalries than the actual players do.

People dont understand the notion that some players dislike playing full schedules and prefer to pursue other interests, whether its family, friends, relationships, fashion, design, celebrity, modelling etc.

There is no rule to say that you have to play constantly to be a comitted player. If you can play part time, still be successful, and have a life away from the game, more power to you I say.

 

[Towser83]

You have a hard time accepting the truth. I watched Sampras from the beginning to end of his career, and he never put as much effort into the FO as seen in his perfomances at Wimbledon and the USO. There's no getting around that. Moreover, Sampras' success of failures have nothing to do with Henin--one half of this thread's subject--and her history which proved sans question that she never had the talent to win at Wimbledon.

So the truth is that Sampras couldn't be bothered to try and complete his set of slams like Laver? He went all out to get 13 majors, then all out again to beat THAT, but couldn't get motivated to win the French? Firstly that makes Sampras a flaky, unmotivated player (which he isn't) and skirts around the issue, trying to make out Sampras WAS good enough to win the French. Your arguments are a total joke.

I see you're an "anything goes" kind of guy, by listing SF results. Next, you will list just entering events as some sign of a good record.

Again you only deal in black and white. Semis is the same as entering? What's that smell? Oh yeah epic bulls**t. You saying Djokovic has a bad record at the US Open?

Then nothing. One had the intention of wanting to win Wimbledon, while the other hardly committed himself to the FO. That is the essential difference you continue to have a hard time wrapping your mind around..or you are just grasping for excuses to ease the sting of Henin's lack of ability.

Maybe he never commited himself cos he knew he never had a chance to win it. That's the only reason someone like Sampras who beat the record for majors won, wouldn't try to complete a career slam. Your excuses would make Sampras an idiot.

Thanks for hammering in how utterly sensless your position was. Back to back only means nothing to those--like you--who wish to make paper-thin excuses why Henin failed to show a period of dominant play by defending at the USO--the very thing accomplished by Venus.

Your defense is falling apart as quickly as you post it, guy.

Back to back (In Venus's case) means you were only good enough to win for a length of 2 years. By the way, who's this Guy you keep mentioning?

Accepted historical perceptions and conclusions are not goig to fade away, so you can make some roundabout attempt to inflate Henin's career standing.

Henin is winning this poll. Her standing is just fine, get over it.

You have not entered the realm of posting anything with fair play in mind, as i've had to remind of that issue post after post after post, so until you can wipe away the yoke of laughably fanatical devotion to Henin (with enough spin to make the most hardcore politician blush), you are in no position to request anything (not that it was relevant to the discussion).

Blah, blah blah. You still can't say it. I already said Venus was better on grass, (which is fair play, you joke of a poster - you haven't posted anything fair towards Henin) but you can't actually say the words "Henin was better on clay" the sign of a truly deluded and bitter fan. Of course not surprising when you insist Sampras could have won the French and didn't want to.

I'm done with you, the highlights of your fanatical, biased, deluded rantings -

Sampras - a man so driven by success that even after capturing a record amount of majors, still carried on to get one more at the age of 31 - could not really be bothered to win the French Open and complete a career slam. He knew he totally could... but he just couldn't be bothered.

Winning 2 slams is better than 3. Especially if you win them in a very narrow period and totally cease to be a threat after that, compared to being a threat for 5 years.

If there is a weak field, no player can do any better than another player even if they win far more. Because somehow the weak field accusation cancels out the better performance in that same field of players.

But I love you for proving Federer is the Wimbledon GOAT for defending 4 times in a row which Sampras could never do. Thanks, guy! What a great guy you are. Guy.

 

[Sid_Vicious]

Serena looking in decent shape!

Cant wait for the open!

I am sure this passes as "morbidly obese" in TMF's book.

 

[MichaelNadal]

She does look to be in great shape. I would love to see her win the USO. Would prefer Venus to though. She should have beaten Clijsters last year and made the final.

 

[luvly]

I am sure this passes as "morbidly obese" in TMF's book.

clearly she is mordidly obese she has breast and they are real....

 

[DRII]

Serena looking in decent shape!

Cant wait for the open!

She looks good in that picture, but in her WTT match Wednesday - she looked quite heavy! She also lost her match against Hingis...

 

[abmk]

Thundervolley

You seem to be suggesting. Venus' 2 US Opens are better than henin's 2 US Opens + 1 AO just because venus won the USOs back to back. All I can say at that is the heights of delusion !

Oh and yeah your excuses for Sampras about the FO are plain pathetic to say the least

 

[abmk]

TMF,

You know very little about Laver and his era. I suggest you really stop talking about that to avoid embarassing yourself time and again

 

[TMF]

TMF,

You know very little about Laver and his era. I suggest you really stop talking about that to avoid embarassing yourself time and again

Never said I know a lot about Laver. But how can you use Laver's 69 GS to say Fed's has hole when he can't do it today when he's being ask to conquer on 3 surfaces? Not fair to Fed or any today's player.

 

[DRII]

Serena has monster hands!

 

[dannykl]

As far as athleticism, Venus was in a league of her own. Honestly she was about as quick as Federer, and served bigger at the time too. Only Mauresmo and Graf come close in terms of speed.

Steffi is at least as fast, if not faster than Venus.
Furthermore Graf's footwork is much better than Venus.
Venus has great speed but not first class footwork.
Graf has great footwork with top speed.
Therefore Steffi is a better in movement than Venus.

 

[krz]

As far as athleticism, Venus was in a league of her own. Honestly she was about as quick as Federer, and served bigger at the time too

Always think it's funny when people compare the WS to the men.

Serena is just as powerful as Nadal!

The men are in a league of their own... wait a second... they are.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

So the truth is that Sampras couldn't be bothered to try and complete his set of slams like Laver?

Sampras--and Federer are not Laver, so any other references to Sampras and Federer ends with this fact. Too bad for you that is was so easy to dismiss your conflused, irrelevant noise...but that's what happens when you lack the ability to reason and construct logical statements.

We will return to the failures of Justine Henin.

Again you only deal in black and white.

Semis is the same as entering?

You are rather dense. The point is that you were attempting to laud players--ultimately Henin for anything, rather than focusing on her Wimbledon finals results, which are two appearances, two runner-up titles.

Maybe he never commited himself cos he knew he never had a chance to win it. That's the only reason someone like Sampras who beat the record for majors won, wouldn't try to complete a career slam. Your excuses would make Sampras an idiot.

It is now apparent your knowledge of tennis history began sometime around 5 weeks ago, since you are unaware of various players throughout history preferring one surface and/or event over others, or disliking surfaces. Because of this subconscious mindset, a player is not going to give it his all when he's already displayed a marked preference for certain surfaces. Try to avoid making such an embarassing mistake again.

Back to back (In Venus's case) means you were only good enough to win for a length of 2 years.

It means an extended period of dominance, which by all measure of common sense--does not apply to a player who won the title several years apart, like Henin.

Try as you will--and though doomed to failure each time--there's no way to spin this into a positive for Henin.

Henin is winning this poll. Her standing is just fine, get over it.

A TW poll means nothing (particularly with all of the multiple accounts certain members use). Another member referred to larger polls offsite, but I notice you will never seek out such a poll. I do not wonder why.

I already said Venus was better on grass

Bullsh*t--The Sequel. You ripped her record by claiming she never had grass worthy competition, which is not a compliment by any stretch of the imagination. Then--like the coward you are--refused to judge Henin's FO competition as a true sign of fair play.

You are about as slick a spin-artist as a road paved with broken glass and screws.

I'm done with you, the highlights of your fanatical, biased, deluded rantings

Translation: like the cowardly, fanboy brat you are, when you cannot spin the debate into a Henin "victory," you whine, lie, duck, dodge and now promise to run away. We will see how long you keep that promise, kid. Meanwhile, as Henin's one-person defense, you have successfully provided all the evidence required to conclude she will remain several rungs below Venus Williams on the "greatest" ladder.

 

[boredone3456]

There's a very specific reason Graf is considered a true GOAT while Matina is not: winning the Grand Slam. The same applies to Laver, much to the anger of certain fans, who cannot accept that he's not the end-all of tennis.

There are quite a few people, like myself, who say Martina is in fact the GOAT and there are quite a few reasons to back up this claim, and even if they don't think she is the #1 GOAT quite a lot of people would say she deserves to be at least in the discussion and given her due. there are quite a few reasons she deserves to be in the discussion at the very least:

18 Major Titles- 4th overall

32 Major Finals overall

6 majors won in a row at one point in her career- she may have never won 4 in a row in the same Julian Calender year, but I think winning 6 straight in succession is in and of itself impressive enough. You can make the quality of opposition argument, but even with terrible competition the mental pressure to acheive that must be immense..

167 Career Singles Titles- Most won by a female player ever I believe

7 Years as the Year End #1 player, 5 in a row

9 years, all in a row, winning 10 or more titles in a year

5 Straight year winning more then 90% of the matches she played, 7 such year overall, and a few years where she won 88 or 89% of her matches.

Yes Graf has a ton of amazing numbers and statistics on her side in the debate, and I have no problem with anyone giving her the title of GOAT because of them, she was amazing. But to say that Martina is not considered anywhere near her or that she has no claim to be, that is ridiculous.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

There are quite a few people, like myself, who say Martina is in fact the GOAT and there are quite a few reasons to back up this claim

...yet what does it say when so many fans, sports writers and--most telling--a large number of ex-players almost universally say Graf is the GOAT...not Martina?

 

[boredone3456]

...yet what does it say when so many fans, sports writers and--most telling--a large number of ex-players almost universally say Graf is the GOAT...not Martina?

It says that it is debateable and that there is no complete general consensus on who is the GOAT, much like in the debate between Laver and Federer, there is no totally universal opinion. Considering the number both have on their sides it is completely ludicrous to totally dismiss one in favor of the other in the GOAT discussion as both have quite a lot of their side to merit credit for their amazing careers within the sport.

 

[lethalfang]

Justine Henin has prettier strokes, and that's it.
Venus is more accomplished, because Wimbledon > French Open.

 

[Towser83]

I'm not running away, I just don't want to waste too much time talking to a moron fanboy lunatic. I'll make this brief.

You are rather dense. The point is that you were attempting to laud players--ultimately Henin for anything, rather than focusing on her Wimbledon finals results, which are two appearances, two runner-up titles.

No, I'm just saying 2 finals 2 semis is not patchy. You still don't say if Djokovic has a bad record at the US Open.

It is now apparent your knowledge of tennis history began sometime around 5 weeks ago, since you are unaware of various players throughout history preferring one surface and/or event over others, or disliking surfaces. Because of this subconscious mindset, a player is not going to give it his all when he's already displayed a marked preference for certain surfaces. Try to avoid making such an embarassing mistake again.

Erm, I was the one who brought up different surfaces and said the majors differ in difficulty based on the individual player and thye surface preference, and you tried to deny it making you the fool with no knowledge of the different surfaces. Saying a serial winner like Sampras didn't try at the French cos he prefered grass/hc is stupid. EVERYONE has a least favourite surface. Federer tried on clay, Serena tried on clay, Nadal tried at the US Open, Djokovic tried on grass. Pete wasn't good enough, end of.

It means an extended period of dominance, which by all measure of common sense--does not apply to a player who won the title several years apart, like Henin.

2 years? hahaha. Well done, she was a good HC player for 2 years out of her whole career. The fact they were back to back means nothing except she couldn't recapture it after such a brief period of form.

Bullsh*t--The Sequel. You ripped her record by claiming she never had grass worthy competition, which is not a compliment by any stretch of the imagination. Then--like the coward you are--refused to judge Henin's FO competition as a true sign of fair play.

You are obviously unable to read/understand as well as moronic. Henin had the same grass competition,so no matter how weak or strong it was Venus doing better proves she was better. Your failure to grasp this either points to you being a small child or having mental problems. You ripped Henin's clay court competition and still refuse to say she was better on clay as I have said Venus was better on grass so that's not a compliment for her - you probably still think Venus WAS better on clay but did a "Sampras" and didn't try.. And I already said the grass and clay competition was not very strong but not totally weak either. You ignore that again. I have judged both as average. But then most of the women's game has been average for a while.[/QUOTE]

 

[heftylefty]

It's Official....This thread is beyond DONE....

Shut her down boyz!!!

 

[TMF]

It's Official....This thread is beyond DONE....

Shut her down boyz!!!

This thread needs to be around so people knows Henin is a better player based on the poll results. If most fans believe Venus is better(more votes), you wouldn't want to end this thread.

 

[heftylefty]

This thread needs to be around so people knows Henin is a better player based on the poll results. If most fans believe Venus is better(more votes), you wouldn't want to end this thread.

I take it you have never study Logic.

 

[Tanya]

This thread needs to be around so people knows Henin is a better player based on the poll results. If most fans believe Venus is better(more votes), you wouldn't want to end this thread.

So Henin winning a poll on a largely anti-Williams message board makes her the better player, eh?

You're stupider than Mother Marjorie and her chihuahua LDVTennis combined.

 

[TMF]

I take it you have never study Logic.

If you don't like this thread no one is asking you to stay around. Don't come here showing your fustration.

So Henin winning a poll on a largely anti-Williams message board makes her the better player, eh?

You're stupider than Mother Marjorie and her chihuahua LDVTennis combined.

There are anti-Henin too, duh. If one say Graf > Serena you assumed that person is anti-Wiliams too? Don't get you're panties all in a bunch just b/c most fans believe she's better.

 

[DRII]

Steffi is at least as fast, if not faster than Venus.
Furthermore Graf's footwork is much better than Venus.
Venus has great speed but not first class footwork.
Graf has great footwork with top speed.
Therefore Steffi is a better in movement than Venus.

No way!

Prime Venus was the fastest, most athletic, most explosive female player I've ever seen on the tennis court!

I do agree that Graf had better foot work.

 

[LDVTennis]

Steffi is at least as fast, if not faster than Venus.
Furthermore Graf's footwork is much better than Venus.
Venus has great speed but not first class footwork.
Graf has great footwork with top speed.
Therefore Steffi is a better in movement than Venus.

During the 1999 Wimbledon Quarter between these two, Martina N. (commenting for HBO Sports) used the word "flat-footed" to describe Venus' inability to cover a dropshot.

Commenting on another point for NBC Sports, Chris just laughed at Venus' lack of anticipation, agility, and quickness, when in the later stages of the match Steffi dashed to the net and hit a chip lob over Venus' head for a winner.

Earlier in the match, Chris also opined that Steffi was the better mover, just as fast, but quicker off the mark, and better able to change directions.

 

[Tanya]

There are anti-Henin too, duh. If one say Graf > Serena you assumed that person is anti-Wiliams too? Don't get you're panties all in a bunch just b/c most fans believe she's better.

There are always going to be "anti-Whoever" individuals on message boards, but that has very little to do with the fact that on THIS message board there are more anti-Williams members than anti-anyone else.

Most "fans" consider Venus Williams the more legendary player and she will live on as a greater remembered champion than Justine Henin. A poll on an anti-Williams message board is not indicative of truth, but alas, there's no getting through to you.

 

[mellowyellow]

What the hell is this "fans". Anyone who cares to look that is not biased because of nationality or wants to play the race card will see that, for the short career she had Justine was better than Venus. Neither of the Williams is to be talked about in terms of longevity with their incomplete seasons.

 

[CCNM]

I like Venus, but I'd have to pick Justine.

 

[Joe Pike]

So Henin winning a poll on a largely anti-Williams message board makes her the better player, eh?

You're stupider than Mother Marjorie and her chihuahua LDVTennis combined.

It is not about "better", it is about "greater".

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

I'm not running away, I just don't want to waste too much time talking to a moron fanboy lunatic. I'll make this brief.

Translation: The post above is last resort of a little boy who cannot construct a logic-based argument, as we will see in a moment...

Erm, I was the one who brought up different surfaces and said the majors differ in difficulty based on the individual player and thye surface preference, and you tried to deny it making you the fool with no knowledge of the different surfaces.

False premise with no relation to the topic, so it was ignored, as no one is going to waste their time trying to justify your exercises in puerile, fanboy desperation to give Henin an undeserved credit.

Saying a serial winner like Sampras didn't try at the French cos he prefered grass/hc is stupid.

Again, you ignorance is telling. Continue proving it with your "everybody tries" nonsense, since it is clear you are a textbook example of a tennis "newbie" with little to no knowledge of preferences of various former pros and the effect of said preference on performance.

2 years? hahaha. Well done, she was a good HC player for 2 years out of her whole career.

Yes, because in your warped view, winning the USO several years apart shows dominance at that event, as opposed to someone who proved she was superior by defending. Your Olympian level of fanatical idiocy knows no equal.

Henin had the same grass competition,so no matter how weak or strong it was Venus doing better proves she was better.

Tough sh*t boy, but you are not spinning this. You downgraded Venus' competition to tear down her success at Wimbledon, so from that point forward, anything else you posted about the event was backpedaling or outright denial invalidated by your original intent.

You should avoid being such an easy mark.

I have judged both as average

You are really rolling in the bullsh*t, now.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

There are always going to be "anti-Whoever" individuals on message boards, but that has very little to do with the fact that on THIS message board there are more anti-Williams members than anti-anyone else.

...an observation made time after time by several members. We all know the reason why--a reason why the recent "WTA Needs Williams Sisters" thread was deleted from the Pro Match Results forum.

Most "fans" consider Venus Williams the more legendary player and she will live on as a greater remembered champion than Justine Henin. A poll on an anti-Williams message board is not indicative of truth, but alas, there's no getting through to you.

Quoted for truth. Henin was not a game changer to any degeee. She barely has a legacy worth considering (not to mention her history of cheating, or cowardly behavior). As noted days ago, i'm not surprised another member's reference to off-site polls (ex. ESPN) are avoided like the plague--after all, the usual suspects cannot afford having their little fantasies shattered.

 

[DRII]

During the 1999 Wimbledon Quarter between these two, Martina N. (commenting for HBO Sports) used the word "flat-footed" to describe Venus' inability to cover a dropshot.

Commenting on another point for NBC Sports, Chris just laughed at Venus' lack of anticipation, agility, and quickness, when in the later stages of the match Steffi dashed to the net and hit a chip lob over Venus' head for a winner.

Earlier in the match, Chris also opined that Steffi was the better mover, just as fast, but quicker off the mark, and better able to change directions.

Venus was not in her prime in 99! She was incredibly raw and brutal, yet still owned amazing physicality. Her overall movement improved greatly in the next two years, when she went on to dominate the women's game.

 

[LDVTennis]

Venus was not in her prime in 99! She was incredibly raw and brutal, yet still owned amazing physicality. Her overall movement improved greatly in the next two years, when she went on to dominate the women's game.

Speed, Footwork, quickness, you either got it or you don't?

How old was Venus in 99, 18 to 19?

That is just as old as Graf was when she won Wimbedon in 88.

Graf moved no differently in 99 than she did in 88.

 

[DRII]

Speed, Footwork, quickness, you either got it or you don't?

How old was Venus in 99, 18 to 19?

That is just as old as Graf was when she won Wimbedon in 88.

Graf moved no differently in 99 than she did in 88.

Ok, and your point???

Venus' movement improved from her 1999 Wimbledon QF performance against Graf, plain and simple.

Venus became more efficient with her foot work and her lateral side stepping was faster and more proficient. All that, combined with the most explosive and quickest first step in women's tennis history (IMO), made her - literally the fastest woman on tour and the fastest I've ever seen; period!

And what makes prime Venus' speed and spectacular movement even more astounding; is that she is a tall woman. No other tall woman even comes close!

There have been more graceful movers, of which I include Graf, Henin, and classics like Suzanne Lenglen. But no other woman could match prime Venus' overall speed and defense!

 

[Joe Pike]

...an observation made time after time by several members. We all know the reason why--a reason why the recent "WTA Needs Williams Sisters" thread was deleted from the Pro Match Results forum.



Quoted for truth. Henin was not a game changer to any degeee. She barely has a legacy worth considering (not to mention her history of cheating, or cowardly behavior). As noted days ago, i'm not surprised another member's reference to off-site polls (ex. ESPN) are avoided like the plague--after all, the usual suspects cannot afford having their little fantasies shattered.

Espn, this Belgian TV station?

Oh, wait ...

 

[Joe Pike]

Venus was not in her prime in 99! She was incredibly raw and brutal, yet still owned amazing physicality. Her overall movement improved greatly in the next two years, when she went on to dominate the women's game.

Venus won 6 tournament in 1999.
When did she win more?
Inquiring minds want to know ...

And how did this 19-year-old athlete improve her overall movement greatly within 12 months? Did she lose weight? Better nutrition?

 

[Joe Pike]

Speed, Footwork, quickness, you either got it or you don't?

How old was Venus in 99, 18 to 19?

That is just as old as Graf was when she won Wimbedon in 88.

Graf moved no differently in 99 than she did in 88.

Graf was slower in 1999 than in 1988.
But still the fastest and quickest on the tour.

 

[jones101]

Venus was quicker from A to B, but I think Graf had better adjustment steps, change of direction and general footwork.

This however would be my all time favourite fantasy matchup, on grass, in their primes.

 

[Joe Pike]

Venus was quicker from A to B, but I think Graf had better adjustment steps, change of direction and general footwork.

This however would be my all time favourite fantasy matchup, on grass, in their primes.

They played a crucial Wimbledon quarter final in 1999.
Steffi won with 6-2 3-6 6-4 (95-84 on points played).

1999 was Steffi's 13th-best year in numbers of titles won.
12th-best (tied) in winning percentage (counting only years with 40+ matches). Steffi was 10 years away from her best year.

1999 was Venus's 2nd-best (tied) in numbers of titles won.
5th-best in winning percentage (counting only years with 40+ matches). Venus was one year away from her best year.

 

[NadalAgassi]

We all agree Henin is by far better than Venus on clay, and Venus by far better on grass than Henin. So since there is hardly any carpet anymore the tiebreaker has to be hard courts. Justine has the better records at the Australian Open and WTA Championships, but Venus has the better records at the U.S Open and Miami. It is overall pretty close but most experts would agree Venus's peak level of play on hard courts beats Justine's 7 times out of 10 or more.

I also have an easier time imagining prime Venus going toe to toe and quite possibly beating prime Navratilova or Graf on grass than I do prime Henin going toe to toe and possibly beating Graf, Evert, or Seles in their primes on clay. Henin is by far the best clay courter of her generation but that is mostly because of her being in such a weak clay court era. Just look at the players who have won the French since she first retired. Yes when I say a weak clay field that includes the Williams sisters who I readily admit are not that strong on clay. Put her up against past fields on clay and I doubt she would look as special. Even a 35 year old Conchita Martinez nearly beat her at the French one year so just imagine putting her in the early to mid 90s clay court field up against Graf, Seles, Sanchez Vicario, Martinez, Pierce, Sabatini, and many others, as opposed to facing Venus, Serena, Sharapova, Kuznetsova, Ivanovic, Jankovic, either players who are on by far their worst surface on clay or marginal elites. While the Williams on grass would be huge threats in any era IMO.

 

[DRII]

Venus won 6 tournament in 1999.
When did she win more?
Inquiring minds want to know ...

And how did this 19-year-old athlete improve her overall movement greatly within 12 months? Did she lose weight? Better nutrition?

I have no idea but her movement along with other crucial aspects of her game improved mightily from 99 to 01, which was her peak in terms of performance!

If were talking just defense in terms of speed; 2000 would be the best example of Venus' speed - by 2001 Venus had added even more offense and consistency to her game so she didn't have to defend as much.

Best match example would probably be the 2000 USO final between Venus and Davenport. Davenport was the biggest and cleanest hitter in the game at the time - she played amazing first strike tennis. But, Venus was so fast, and had such astounding defense, that Davenport could not hit her way past Venus like she could every other player. Venus won in straight sets.

 

[NadalAgassi]

I agree the 2000 U.S Open final and to lesser degree 2000 Wimbledon final are the best examples of Venus's amazing defense. Davenport was getting so frusterated since she was hitting shots that would be cold winners that her opponent would be 10 feet away from vs nearly everyone else, and yet Venus would get 4 or 5 of them back in a row.

Henin has a nice game but she cant overwhelm you with either offense or defense, nor is she a tactical genius like Evert or Hingis.

 

[LDVTennis]

Graf was slower in 1999 than in 1988.
But still the fastest and quickest on the tour.

Joe, I saw her play twice that year. She looked as fast to me as she did in 89. (I didn't see her play in person until 89.)

Now, I will give you this. There was a difference. She didn't go for every ball in 99, maybe saving herself. She didn't let a single thing go in 89 or 96. She was magnificent in 96.

 

[LDVTennis]

Ok, and your point???

Venus' movement improved from her 1999 Wimbledon QF performance against Graf, plain and simple.

Venus became more efficient with her foot work and her lateral side stepping was faster and more proficient. All that, combined with the most explosive and quickest first step in women's tennis history (IMO), made her - literally the fastest woman on tour and the fastest I've ever seen; period!

My point is that I don't agree with you.

I don't see any of these improvements. Her sense of what she was doing on the court might have gotten better. And, that might have made it look like she was quicker. But, same old Venus.

Quickness is something you either have or you don't. It is innate and instinctive. If Venus was getting caught flat-footed on dropshots in 99, she didn't have it.

 

[DRII]

My point is that I don't agree with you.

I don't see any of these improvements. Her sense of what she was doing on the court might have gotten better. And, that might have made it look like she was quicker. But, same old Venus.

Quickness is something you either have or you don't. It is innate and instinctive. If Venus was getting caught flat-footed on dropshots in 99, she didn't have it.

I'm sorry but I just don't follow your logic. Venus was clearly, a better overall player in 2000 and 2001 than she was in 99, hence her dominating performances in 2000 and 2001 where she won 4 grand slams and 2 Olympic golds and dominated women's tennis. I think movement was part of that improvement. Even if its only, as you describe, "Her sense of what she was doing on the court might have gotten better." which otherwise can be referred to as anticipation and its prerequisites; Venus was a better mover in 2000 and 2001 than in 99...

And if you do not think that prime Venus was quick, then we simply disagree - now and forever!

 

[DRII]

I agree the 2000 U.S Open final and to lesser degree 2000 Wimbledon final are the best examples of Venus's amazing defense. Davenport was getting so frusterated since she was hitting shots that would be cold winners that her opponent would be 10 feet away from vs nearly everyone else, and yet Venus would get 4 or 5 of them back in a row.

Henin has a nice game but she cant overwhelm you with either offense or defense, nor is she a tactical genius like Evert or Hingis.

Thanks N.A., good to see we are agreeing so much lately; LOL!

 

[Joe Pike]

Joe, I saw her play twice that year. She looked as fast to me as she did in 89. (I didn't see her play in person until 89.)

Now, I will give you this. There was a difference. She didn't go for every ball in 99, maybe saving herself. She didn't let a single thing go in 89 or 96. She was magnificent in 96.

LDV, there is one thing in this universe we will never agree on - whether Graf of 88/89 or Graf of 95/96 was better/faster/stronger. I'm quite sure that athletically she was at her best in 88/89.