PRIME Versions of WTA VS. Current Field

[HollerOne5]

Where would a PRIME version of the following players rank versus today's current WTA field? Would they be as dominant? Slams? Rankings? ETC.

Chris Evert
Martina Navratilova
Steffi Graf
Monica Seles
Gabriela Sabatini
Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario
Lindsay Davenport
Jennifer Capriati
Martina Hingis

BONUS QUESTION: If all these players in their PRIME played at the same time, what would the rankings be, and the slam results?

 

[Joe Pike]

Where would a PRIME version of the following players rank versus today's current WTA field? Would they be as dominant? Slams? Rankings? ETC.

Chris Evert
Martina Navratilova
Steffi Graf
Monica Seles
Gabriela Sabatini
Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario
Lindsay Davenport
Jennifer Capriati
Martina Hingis

BONUS QUESTION: If all these players in their PRIME played at the same time, what would the rankings be, and the slam results?

Navratilova and Graf would be dominating easily (provided they played with modern rackets). Evert, Seles would be #1 without a doubt. Hingis, Sanchez and Sabatini probably, too. Davenport would be top 3 for sure, Capriati most probably as well.

The rankings if all those players in their prime played at the same time:
1. Graf
2. Navratilova
3. Seles
4. Evert
5. Hingis
6. Sabatini
7. Sanchez
8. Davenport
9. Capriati

Graf would be the favourite in every slam.
But with this great opposition one average day could mean a loss. Navratilova could very well surprise her in Wimbledon or at the USO, Evert, Sanchez, Sabatini and Seles at the FO, Hingis and Seles at the AO.
Davenport and Capriati would have no chance anywhere.

 

[dominikk1985]

Navratilova and Graf would be dominating easily (provided they played with modern rackets). Evert, Seles would be #1 without a doubt. Hingis, Sanchez and Sabatini probably, too. Davenport would be top 3 for sure, Capriati most probably as well.

The rankings if all those players in their prime played at the same time:
1. Graf
2. Navratilova
3. Seles
4. Evert
5. Hingis
6. Sabatini
7. Sanchez
8. Davenport
9. Capriati

Graf would be the favourite in every slam.
But with this great opposition one average day could mean a loss. Navratilova could very well surprise her in Wimbledon or at the USO, Evert, Sanchez, Sabatini and Seles at the FO, Hingis and Seles at the AO.
Davenport and Capriati would have no chance anywhere.

So today's players would have no chance at all against that field (considering the developement in stroke technique and physical training)?

 

[Joe Pike]

So today's players would have no chance at all against that field (considering the developement in stroke technique and physical training)?

You want to make fun of me?
Wozniacki, Clijsters, Azarenka etc. with better stroke technique and physical abilities than Graf or Navratilova?

 

[RAFA2005RG]

Wasn't prime Seles better than prime Graf?

 

[Joe Pike]

Wasn't prime Seles better than prime Graf?

I don't think so.

Prime Graf had several seasons with only two (1987, 1989, 1995), three (1988.) or four (1996) losses.
Prime Seles had zero seasons with less than 5 losses.

Prime Graf in her two best years (1988/89) was 4-0 H2H against her main opponent (Navratilova).
Prime Seles in her two best years (1991/92) was 1-3 H2H against her main opponent (Graf).

And this is the clincher:
In her two best years (1991/92) Seles had a lower winning percentage (93.55 %) than Graf in the 11-year period from 1986-1996 (93.88 %).

Peak Seles worse than average Graf ...

 

[NadalAgassi]

1. Martina Navratilova- would dominate on grass and carpet, be player to beat on decoturf, and be a threat on clay. Prime Navratilova was scary.

2. Steffi Graf- since she would be a threat to win on all surfaces but favorite on none.

3. Monica Seles- would be favorite on rebound ace, major threat on clay, and threat everywhere but grass.

4. Chris Evert- would arguably still be favorite on clay.

5. Martina Hingis- since she was better than Sanchez IMO.

6. Davenport- would be better than Sanchez outside of clay.

7. Sanchez Vicario

8. Sabatini

9. Capriati- the flukiest 3 slam winner ever. She would have no hope in this field. Even Sabatini leads her 11-5 head to head.

 

[dannykl]

Just ask 41years granny Date. She has beaten so many current top players including current Asia No 1 Li Na. It is really a joke current Asia No 1 Li Na lost to 40 yrs Date, a former Asia No 1 15 years ago.

Date also almost defeat Venus at Wimbledon this year.Venus is the best player at Wimbledon in this decade. Grass is her favorite surface. But she is almost beaten by a 41yrs old Date, only narrowly won by 8-6 in the third set. You have a clue how average current top women players are compared with top players in the 80s and 90s.

 

[dominikk1985]

Wasn't prime Seles better than prime Graf?

please discuss that in one of the hundred seles vs graf threads.
otherwise you ruin that thread.

I'm not sure if those old player are really as good as today's players.

girls like venus, serena, lisicky or kvitova serve with well over 115 MPH. they also hit groundstrokes with more than 80 MPH (I have seen sharapova hit like 83 consistently in some matches).

could graf, seles and navratilova really do that?

kimiko date is an a good point of course. that she is still about top50 is a bad sign for the WTA. Outside the top 10 the WTA still sucks but I think girls like kvitova, clijsters, azarenka, sharapova are really good. they have primitive games but a ton of power.

 

[dannykl]

please discuss that in one of the hundred seles vs graf threads.
otherwise you ruin that thread.

I'm not sure if those old player are really as good as today's players.

girls like venus, serena, lisicky or kvitova serve with well over 115 MPH. they also hit groundstrokes with more than 80 MPH (I have seen sharapova hit like 83 consistently in some matches).

could graf, seles and navratilova really do that?

kimiko date is an a good point of course. that she is still about top50 is a bad sign for the WTA. Outside the top 10 the WTA still sucks but I think girls like kvitova, clijsters, azarenka, sharapova are really good. they have primitive games but a ton of power.

Sharapova was beaten by 40 yrs Kimiko as well. Another example of how good top 90's players were compared with current top ones.

In 2006, Brenda Schultz-McCarthy, a 90's player, at age 35, breaks the fastest serve record held by Venus by using modern racket and string and served at a record of 130 mph. This is still the fastest serve record at WTA.

I'm sure Graf, Martina or Seles would all serve and hit even faster and stronger had they used modern racket and string in their prime.

On the other hand, current players would not be able to serve that fast had they used old equipment in the 80's or 90's.

 

[Joe Pike]

please discuss that in one of the hundred seles vs graf threads.
otherwise you ruin that thread.

I'm not sure if those old player are really as good as today's players.

girls like venus, serena, lisicky or kvitova serve with well over 115 MPH. they also hit groundstrokes with more than 80 MPH (I have seen sharapova hit like 83 consistently in some matches).

could graf, seles and navratilova really do that?
...

Let Serena, Kvitova and Lisicki serve with Graf's 1988 racket, stupid ...

 

[Joe Pike]

Sharapova was beaten by 40 yrs Kimiko as well. Another example of how good top 90's players were compared with current top ones.

In 2006, Brenda Schultz-McCarthy, a 90's player, at age 35, breaks the fastest serve record held by Venus by using modern racket and string and served at a record of 130 mph. This is still the fastest serve record at WTA.

...

In her prime she served with only 115 mph.
She must have improved her stroke technique considerably.
Or maybe it was because of modern nutrition ... ?

 

[dannykl]

Wimbledon: Steffi and Nav are the favorites, others almost no chance.

France: Evert probably is still the favorite, but Seles and Graf are huge threats.

Aus: wide open to Seles, Hingis, Evert and Graf. No clear favorite.

US: Steffi and Nav are favorites. Seles and Evert are potential threats, but not big threats.

 

[TMF]

Where would a PRIME version of the following players rank versus today's current WTA field? Would they be as dominant? Slams? Rankings? ETC.

Chris Evert
Martina Navratilova
Steffi Graf
Monica Seles
Gabriela Sabatini
Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario
Lindsay Davenport
Jennifer Capriati
Martina Hingis

BONUS QUESTION: If all these players in their PRIME played at the same time, what would the rankings be, and the slam results?

If all of them are playing together at their prime, I don't think any player including the WS(and younger) have much of a chance at the slam. All court are cover...clay will be owned by Chris, grass will be Martina and Graf. Monica and Hingis guard the gate at AO. Chris, Graf, and Martina won 15 USO combined, the chance to get pass them are slim and none. Pretty similar to Fed/Nadal use to guard the gate at all 4 slams but that's only two players.

 

[Manus Domini]

1} Steffi Graf
2} Martina Navratilova
3} Chris Evert

Those three would basically be vying really close-like for the top spots, they're in what I think it would be most of the time, but not 100%, and it would be fairly close imo

4} Monica Seles
5} Hingis

Rest, I'm not gonna take a stab at

 

[LDVTennis]

Let Serena, Kvitova and Lisicki serve with Graf's 1988 racket, stupid ...

Would they even make it out of one match without injurying themselves?

Those were some mighty heavy racquets --- stiffer than wood, but heavy. If you got them going though, they produced quite a thud.

When I watch replays of shots Graf hit in the 87-89 timeframe, I marvel at the fact that she can manipulate the face of the racquet almost as if the racquet were one of today's lightweights. There is a drive backhand in her 1987 Wimbledon match versus Shriver in which she turns over the face of the racquet, on what is almost a block return. Folks, this was not easy with one of those racquets.

For as long as she played, I am also amazed that she never developed any shoulder injuries, playing with such a heavy racquet. And, she had probably the best all-around serve of her era. What probably saved her shoulder were two things, the invention of full-pronation which some have attributed to the German school and strong hands. Hers was really a hand serve. I once heard Billy Jean King talk about this. It made so much sense.

I suppose we could also talk racquet face size and sweet spot. It is really hard to see how today's player could adapt to playing with those less forgiving frames. On the women's side, there's so much laziness in the footwork and preparation leading up to shots. With racquets circa 88, you really needed to track the ball perfectly and be on balance to hit a winner.

 

[Ico]

I would be more than happy with just Henin and Hingis coming back. If they could get back to a high level along with Clijsters and the Williams sisters, the WTA could at least be interesting for the next few years.

 

[Joe Pike]

Would they even make it out of one match without injurying themselves?

Those were some mighty heavy racquets --- stiffer than wood, but heavy. If you got them going though, they produced quite a thud.

When I watch replays of shots Graf hit in the 87-89 timeframe, I marvel at the fact that she can manipulate the face of the racquet almost as if the racquet were one of today's lightweights. There is a drive backhand in her 1987 Wimbledon match versus Shriver in which she turns over the face of the racquet, on what is almost a block return. Folks, this was not easy with one of those racquets.

For as long as she played, I am also amazed that she never developed any shoulder injuries, playing with such a heavy racquet. And, she had probably the best all-around serve of her era. What probably saved her shoulder were two things, the invention of full-pronation which some have attributed to the German school and strong hands. Hers was really a hand serve. I once heard Billy Jean King talk about this. It made so much sense.

I suppose we could also talk racquet face size and sweet spot. It is really hard to see how today's player could adapt to playing with those less forgiving frames. On the women's side, there's so much laziness in the footwork and preparation leading up to shots. With racquets circa 88, you really needed to track the ball perfectly and be on balance to hit a winner.

Problem is that most of the posters here don't play tennis.
And those who really play are mostly very young and have never held one of those old pieces in their hands.

 

[FedExpress 333]

Navratilova and Graf would be dominating easily (provided they played with modern rackets). Evert, Seles would be #1 without a doubt. Hingis, Sanchez and Sabatini probably, too. Davenport would be top 3 for sure, Capriati most probably as well.

The rankings if all those players in their prime played at the same time:
1. Graf
2. Navratilova
3. Seles
4. Evert
5. Hingis
6. Sabatini
7. Sanchez
8. Davenport
9. Capriati

Graf would be the favourite in every slam.
But with this great opposition one average day could mean a loss. Navratilova could very well surprise her in Wimbledon or at the USO, Evert, Sanchez, Sabatini and Seles at the FO, Hingis and Seles at the AO.
Davenport and Capriati would have no chance anywhere.

This is pretty much it.

 

[NadalAgassi]

If all of them are playing together at their prime, I don't think any player including the WS(and younger) have much of a chance at the slam. All court are cover...clay will be owned by Chris, grass will be Martina and Graf. Monica and Hingis guard the gate at AO. Chris, Graf, and Martina won 15 USO combined, the chance to get pass them are slim and none. Pretty similar to Fed/Nadal use to guard the gate at all 4 slams but that's only two players.

Serena has more Australian Opens than Seles or Hingis. Peak Hingis barely beat baby Serena 8-6 in the 3rd set after bein down 5-2 in 2001.

Chris was thumped badly by prime Martina a couple times on clay, and Martina's worst surface is clay. She wouldnt be unbeatable on clay vs Graf, Seles, and Henin. She was so dominant on clay in the 70s since there was no good clay courters.

 

[WinNCash]

WHY is everyone so hung up on Kimiko Date?? She doesn't play the same style as anyone on tour and never has. That is why she is able to win matches.

 

[dannykl]

WHY is everyone so hung up on Kimiko Date?? She doesn't play the same style as anyone on tour and never has. That is why she is able to win matches.

Had Date been 10 to 15 years younger now, she would easily defeat many current elite wta players. Li Na, Sharapova, Safina in their 20's all lost to a 40 yrs old Date. They would be humiliated on court had Date were 15 years younger and in her prime now.

Venus, the best grass player in the 21st century, almost got beaten by 41yrs old Kimiko on grass, what the score would be had a 41yrs old Venus played with a prime Date? 6-0, 6-2 in favour of Kimiko perhaps?

 

[Joe Pike]

WHY is everyone so hung up on Kimiko Date?? She doesn't play the same style as anyone on tour and never has. That is why she is able to win matches.

Date wins matches ALTHOUGH she plays an old-fashioned style of tennis.
Just imagine today's rackets in the hands of former power players like Graf!
And what would do the Wozniackis, Serenas, Kvitovas of today!!

 

[Joe Pike]

Had Date been 10 to 15 years younger now, she would easily defeat many current elite wta players. Li Na, Sharapova, Safina in their 20's all lost to a 40 yrs old Date. They would be murdered had Date were 15 years younger and in her prime now.

Venus, the best grass player in the 21st century, almost got beaten by 41yrs old Kimiko on grass, what the score would be had a 41yrs old Venus played with a prime Date? 6-0, 6-2 in favour of Kimiko perhaps?

No, closer, IMO.
Venus is no slouch either. Maybe 6-3, 6-3?

 

[TERRASTAR18]

Where would a PRIME version of the following players rank versus today's current WTA field? Would they be as dominant? Slams? Rankings? ETC.

Chris Evert
Martina Navratilova
Steffi Graf
Monica Seles
Gabriela Sabatini
Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario
Lindsay Davenport
Jennifer Capriati
Martina Hingis

BONUS QUESTION: If all these players in their PRIME played at the same time, what would the rankings be, and the slam results?

prime serena is better than all of them...

 

[TERRASTAR18]

Date wins matches ALTHOUGH she plays an old-fashioned style of tennis.
Just imagine today's rackets in the hands of former power players like Graf!
And what would do the Wozniackis, Serenas, Kvitovas of today!!

keep dreaming graf's forehand would do nothing to serena.....look for another great white hope.

 

[TERRASTAR18]

Just ask 41years granny Date. She has beaten so many current top players including current Asia No 1 Li Na. It is really a joke current Asia No 1 Li Na lost to 40 yrs Date, a former Asia No 1 15 years ago.

Date also almost defeat Venus at Wimbledon this year.Venus is the best player at Wimbledon in this decade. Grass is her favorite surface. But she is almost beaten by a 41yrs old Date, only narrowly won by 8-6 in the third set. You have a clue how average current top women players are compared with top players in the 80s and 90s.

you are embarassing yourself,homie. date played a rusty venus, who was playing only her 2nd tournament back. like brandy said,"almost doesn't count".

 

[LDVTennis]

keep dreaming graf's forehand would do nothing to serena.....look for another great white hope.

No need to dream. Here it is. See 52:50 of this clip, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgfLmC0evlA.

 

[Sid_Vicious]

No need to dream. Here it is. See 52:50 of this clip, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgfLmC0evlA.

Oh god, that was dumbest statement ever made.

What is wrong some of these WTA fans? When people debate about the greatest male tennis players, the conversation is exclusively about Federer, Laver, Borg, and Sampras. Not surprisingly, all these players have comparable achievements in the game.

On this forum I have seen people argue that Serena is a greater than Graf. Graf has won 9 more slams than Serena and has achieved feats that Serena will never even come close to matching.

 

[TERRASTAR18]

No need to dream. Here it is. See 52:50 of this clip, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgfLmC0evlA.

how bias of you...here's a more accurate video-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJE4vCj155o&feature=related

besides that, a still developing serena wasn't near her prime...i'm sure an adult roddick could beat a toddler fed.

 

[Evan77]

1.Seles (before she got stubbed). This girl was so amazing
2. Graf
3. Navratilova
4. Evert (Gosh, I still love her so much ;-))

 

[MichaelNadal]

These girls today would get eaten alive by the greats mentioned.

 

[TERRASTAR18]

Oh god, that was dumbest statement ever made.

What is wrong some of these WTA fans? When people debate about the greatest male tennis players, the conversation is exclusively about Federer, Laver, Borg, and Sampras. Not surprisingly, all these players have comparable achievements in the game.

On this forum I have seen people argue that Serena is a greater than Graf. Graf has won 9 more slams than Serena and has achieved feats that Serena will never even come close to matching.

maybe because they actually watched the players we are talking about, and don't use stats without the context of how they were achieved. numbers are good in a weak era, but it's against the greater opposition possible that really counts. because by your logic margaret court is the undisputed best?
no need to insult, if you could formulate decent arguments....

 

[Sid_Vicious]

maybe because they actually watched the players we are talking about, and don't use stats without the context of how they were achieved. numbers are good in a weak era, but it's against the greater opposition possible that really counts. because by your logic margaret court is the undisputed best?
no need to insult, if you could formulate decent arguments....

I don't need to since your own arguments are hilariously shallow and short-sighted.

keep dreaming graf's forehand would do nothing to serena.....look for another great white hope.

:lol:

 

[cc0509]

maybe because they actually watched the players we are talking about, and don't use stats without the context of how they were achieved. numbers are good in a weak era, but it's against the greater opposition possible that really counts. because by your logic margaret court is the undisputed best?
no need to insult, if you could formulate decent arguments....

Ahhh, no that is not correct. 22>13 which means Graf>Serena Williams. It does not matter if Graf played Donald Duck to win those slams. She has 9 more slams period. Serena Williams is not even in the "approximate" vicinity of greatness that Graf is. No exceptions on this one! It is very clear.

 

[Tanya]

Ahhh, no that is not correct. 22>13 which means Graf>Serena Williams. It does not matter if Graf played Donald Duck to win those slams. She has 9 more slams period. Serena Williams is not even in the "approximate" vicinity of greatness that Graf is. No exceptions on this one! It is very clear.

That's fair, but I had better never see you discredit someone's slam victory because of who they defeated en route.

And that goes for everyone that agrees with your viewpoint as well.

Fair is fair -- no more "Serena only won because of the weak field" nor "Serena only won because Justine Henin retired" etc etc comments.

 

[halalula1234]

Sharapova was beaten by 40 yrs Kimiko as well. Another example of how good top 90's players were compared with current top ones.

In 2006, Brenda Schultz-McCarthy, a 90's player, at age 35, breaks the fastest serve record held by Venus by using modern racket and string and served at a record of 130 mph. This is still the fastest serve record at WTA.

I'm sure Graf, Martina or Seles would all serve and hit even faster and stronger had they used modern racket and string in their prime.

On the other hand, current players would not be able to serve that fast had they used old equipment in the 80's or 90's.

Venus evened it out when she served 130mph in zurich 2008 vsing Penetta

 

[cc0509]

That's fair, but I had better never see you discredit someone's slam victory because of who they defeated en route.

And that goes for everyone that agrees with your viewpoint as well.

Fair is fair -- no more "Serena only won because of the weak field" nor "Serena only won because Justine Henin retired" etc etc comments.

That is not my point. My point is that if we dissect every multiple slam winner we can find some fault and say one opponent he/she played was weak, or that on a particular day the winner was lucky, etc. etc. We can all make excuses until the cows come home but at the end of the day it does not matter. It is the slam total that matters. In this particular case I was just trying to say that there is no way one can say Serena is more successful or greater than Graf when Graf has 9 more slams! 9 more slams, do you know how difficult that is to achieve? Most people in their tennis careers don't even achieve one slam let alone 9 so when you are a player who has achieved 9 more slams than another player, you can't even begin to compare them in terms of greatness. It is sillly to do so. Sure Serena is talented and has achieved a lot, but put her next to Graf and her achievements pale in comparison.

 

[Joe Pike]

keep dreaming graf's forehand would do nothing to serena.....look for another great white hope.

There were tons of journeywomen whose forehands did a lot of damage to Serena:

Testud, Likhovtseva, Suarez, Shaughnessy, Schnyder, Rubin, Petrova, Jidkova, Farina Elia, Craybas, Sun, Hantuchova, Bammer, Chan, Chakvetadse, Srebotnik, Wozniak, Azarenka, Zakopalova come to mind.

 

[Joe Pike]

you are embarassing yourself,homie. date played a rusty venus, who was playing only her 2nd tournament back. like brandy said,"almost doesn't count".

When was Venus not rusty in the last 10 years?
I mean except in Wimbledon?

 

[Joe Pike]

how bias of you...here's a more accurate video-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJE4vCj155o&feature=related

besides that, a still developing serena wasn't near her prime...i'm sure an adult roddick could beat a toddler fed.

Serena looked fully developed in 1999. OK, not fat, if you mean that ...

BTW, she won 5 tournaments in 1999.
In which years did she win more?
Right, only in her brilliant 2008.

Ouch, facts are a bit.ch ...

 

[Joe Pike]

1.Seles (before she got stubbed). This girl was so amazing
2. Graf
3. Navratilova
4. Evert (Gosh, I still love her so much ;-))

Graf had a better winning percentage in 1986-96 (that is a 11-year time frame) than Seles in her best year ever (1992).


But, hey, why let facts come into the way?
After all you are a proud Selesian!!

 

[Joe Pike]

maybe because they actually watched the players we are talking about, and don't use stats without the context of how they were achieved. numbers are good in a weak era, but it's against the greater opposition possible that really counts. because by your logic margaret court is the undisputed best?
no need to insult, if you could formulate decent arguments....

Yes, an era when players like Jankovic, Ivanovic, Safina and Wozniacki can reach #1 must be a really strong era.
Oh, how they would have dominated in the 80s or 90s ...

 

[Joe Pike]

Venus evened it out when she served 130mph in zurich 2008 vsing Penetta

So Venus serves as fast as a 35-year-old has-been from the 90s.

 

[DjokovicForTheWin]

What was Graf's winning pct during 1991 and 1992?

 

[Roy125]

89% and 91% respectively.

 

[egn]

Had Date been 10 to 15 years younger now, she would easily defeat many current elite wta players. Li Na, Sharapova, Safina in their 20's all lost to a 40 yrs old Date. They would be humiliated on court had Date were 15 years younger and in her prime now.

Venus, the best grass player in the 21st century, almost got beaten by 41yrs old Kimiko on grass, what the score would be had a 41yrs old Venus played with a prime Date? 6-0, 6-2 in favour of Kimiko perhaps?

Cause 31 yr old Venus who hasn't played tennis in about half a year is prime Venus..uh huh.

 

[Tanya]

When was Venus not rusty in the last 10 years?
I mean except in Wimbledon?

This is getting a little ridiculous... You're a literal fool if you think Venus at Wimbledon this year was not "rusty". She was 31 years old playing in her second tournament back after coming back from an injury that kept her out of the game since January. Not to mention the fact that Venus's game had been showing signs of deterioration since late in 09. Who cares if she barely beat Kimiko Date anyway? The fact is she did beat her. Everyone has close calls and ugly wins--I'm sure even your beloved Graf had a couple in her great career. Besides, Kimiko Date is a bit of an anomaly, as I think many would agree. To be able to play the level of tennis she has played the past few years when she is in her 40s is quite a remarkable feat. Just look at Seles who not too recently played a doubles exhibition with Alexandra Wozniak against (I believe) Serena and Navratilova. Seles' form had deteriorated immensely and she is even younger than Kimiko Date, and I'm sure almost everyone would agree that she was much greater as well. So Date's level of play in recent years is not a testament to the weak WTA field per se, I believe it's more a testament to her own unique specialness.

So enough with the craziness, eh? Here, gather 'round the chalice...

 

[LDVTennis]

Oh god, that was dumbest statement ever made.

Folks, don't be fooled. TerraStar18 is NadalAgassi by another username.

The syntax and diction in his posts is inconsistent. His first post tried to sound ethnic, but then later he reverts to sounding just like NadalAgassi and the rest of his/her usernames.

Add this username to the 23 others on the list.

 

[Tanya]

So Venus serves as fast as a 35-year-old has-been from the 90s.

Just because she was a "has-been from the 90s" doesn't mean she couldn't serve hard. There's a reason we haven't heard anything else from her, you know. Because the rest of her game was not good enough.

Btw, she was only 4 years older than Venus is today.