Serena, Graf, Navratilova, Evert, and Court

thrust

Legend
The women couldn’t compete a the men’s level and then segregated themselves so that they could win something and pat themselves on the back.

I don’t care about these titles anymore than I care about Jr. titles. Let me know when they’re ready to play a best of 5 with the adults for once in their lives :-D
Incredibly stupid, vicious attack on women tennis players, who you would be lucky to win a game against
 

buscemi

Legend
AGAIN, open era ONLY applies to men's tennis. Court probably had the toughest competition throughout her entire career, starting with: Bueno, Hard, BJK, Haydon, Richey, Cassals, Goolagong Wade, Evert and Navratilova. Also, she lost at least 2 of her prime years due to a year off in 67 and a pregnancy in the early seventies.
I would say Open Era applies to the women as well. The Major winners in the late 1940s-early/mid-1950s look very different had Pauline Betz not been banned for stating an intention to turn pro.

And then, as is pertinent to Margaret Court, there's Althea Gibson. Gibson dominated women's tennis in 1957-1958, winning the last 4 Majors she played (2 Wimbledons & 2 U.S. Opens). But, because she wasn't making any money as an amateur, Gibson turned pro and played at a really high level through 1964, when she turned to pro golf b/c she wasn't making much money.

Gibson likely would have given Smith a lot of trouble through at least 1964 had women players been paid back then.
 

zvelf

Hall of Fame
The women couldn’t compete a the men’s level and then segregated themselves so that they could win something and pat themselves on the back.

I don’t care about these titles anymore than I care about Jr. titles. Let me know when they’re ready to play a best of 5 with the adults for once in their lives :-D
What are you talking about? Men and women never competed against one another at the top levels in such a way that the women then decided to "segregate themselves" due to being noncompetitive. And did you know that the women's year-end championship final was best-of-5 for 15 years from 1984-1998? Navratilova, Graf, Sabatini, Seles, Novotna, and Hingis all won it playing best-of-5.
 

jackson vile

G.O.A.T.
Competition is about who is the best out of everyone, and they all compete against each other to test themselves and find out no exclusions.

Why don’t women tennis players compete against the male tennis players?

Why should we take the WTA records anymore serious than Jr. records when they don’t compete against the best players in the world?
 

martinezownsclay

Hall of Fame
I would say Open Era applies to the women as well. The Major winners in the late 1940s-early/mid-1950s look very different had Pauline Betz not been banned for stating an intention to turn pro.

And then, as is pertinent to Margaret Court, there's Althea Gibson. Gibson dominated women's tennis in 1957-1958, winning the last 4 Majors she played (2 Wimbledons & 2 U.S. Opens). But, because she wasn't making any money as an amateur, Gibson turned pro and played at a really high level through 1964, when she turned to pro golf b/c she wasn't making much money.

Gibson likely would have given Smith a lot of trouble through at least 1964 had women players been paid back then.

Sorry but huge no here. Huge respect for Gibson, and if she didn't grow up in an era that racism in tennis, and society in general, was through the roof, who knows what she may have achiveved. However she was already 31 at the end of 58. She would have been 37 in the year 1964. Tennis was nothing like today when players were excelling way into their 30s. The best 30+ player in history, atleast women player 30+, in the 20th century, was probably Navratilova. And even Navratilova won only ONE major after turning 31. And while yes she did post the occasional win over the likes of Graf and Seles even in her mid 30s, nearly all the wins were in non slam events, she also posted only 1 combined win over them in slams after turning 31. And that was over Graf at the 91 US Open, the worst year of tennis of Graf's career other than 97 where she played half a year badly injured, in a very tough 3 setter. Even Navratilova who excelled into her 30s probably more than any female player that century was still a shadow of herself by that point. Connors another of the 20th century best examples of best ever 30+ play, also still won 0 majors after turning 31 (or 1, I forget if he turned 31 before the end of the 83 US Open or not, so 0 or 1 I guess). I don't see a universe a 35-37 year old Gibson is some huge obstacle for Court (basically starting 62 when she began really doing well). That would literally go far against anything that ever happened in the sport until the 21st century.

If you want to do a hypothetical to dump on Court you might as well have instead said Maureen Connolly's career ending accident, considering Connolly is 7 years younger than Gibson and would still only be 27/28 when Court began her big run of dominance and winning multiple slams in 1962.
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
Competition is about who is the best out of everyone, and they all compete against each other to test themselves and find out no exclusions.

Why don’t women tennis players compete against the male tennis players?

Why should we take the WTA records anymore serious than Jr. records when they don’t compete against the best players in the world?
This is the stupidest argument I’ve seen here. So should kids play grown men because competition is about who is the best out of everyone? Should disabled athletes play grown able bodied men? The seniors tour?

Genetics and situation is different so they have their own tour just as the juniors do, just as the wheelchair athletes do, just as seniors have their own tournaments. You actually want the women to play against the men? Why? So you can see them get thrashed and your triggered basement sitting self can attack women and say they’re inferior to men?

Womens sports are incredible and for you to say we shouldn’t take womens records seriously shows who you are as a person and how you view women. I feel bad for any woman in your life.
 

buscemi

Legend
Sorry but huge no here. Huge respect for Gibson, and if she didn't grow up in an era that racism in tennis, and society in general, was through the roof, who knows what she may have achiveved. However she was already 31 at the end of 58. She would have been 37 in the year 1964. Tennis was nothing like today when players were excelling way into their 30s. The best 30+ player in history, atleast women player 30+, in the 20th century, was probably Navratilova. And even Navratilova won only ONE major after turning 31. And while yes she did post the occasional win over the likes of Graf and Seles even in her mid 30s, nearly all the wins were in non slam events, she also posted only 1 combined win over them in slams after turning 31. And that was over Graf at the 91 US Open, the worst year of tennis of Graf's career other than 97 where she played half a year badly injured, in a very tough 3 setter. Even Navratilova who excelled into her 30s probably more than any female player that century was still a shadow of herself by that point. Connors another of the 20th century best examples of best ever 30+ play, also still won 0 majors after turning 31 (or 1, I forget if he turned 31 before the end of the 83 US Open or not, so 0 or 1 I guess). I don't see a universe a 35-37 year old Gibson is some huge obstacle for Court (basically starting 62 when she began really doing well). That would literally go far against anything that ever happened in the sport until the 21st century.

If you want to do a hypothetical to dump on Court you might as well have instead said Maureen Connolly's career ending accident, considering Connolly is 7 years younger than Gibson and would still only be 27/28 when Court began her big run of dominance and winning multiple slams in 1962.
Let's look at the other player I mentioned in my post: Pauline Betz. She was dominating the women's game in 1946 before being banned from playing amateur events after declaring a desire to turn pro in 1947. She then had a similar trajectory as Gibson, playing tons of pro matches. Here's her entry in the Tennis Abstract 128:

Later in the decade, the US Professional Championships–the biggest pay-for-play tournament on the calendar–added a women’s competition. Pauline entered whenever she could, and she was undefeated until 1960. In 1956, she won two matches against Doris Hart when Doris was the reigning Forest Hills champion. She lost to Althea Gibson in three sets in May 1960, then reversed the result at an exhibition three months later. Even at age 41, no one could definitively claim to be her superior.​

So, yeah, Betz was at a higher level than the leading amateur players through at least age 37 and still highly competitive past age 40.

Gibson might have had even better prospects for longevity b/c she was such a late bloomer. Indeed, she reached her peak ranking in pro golf at age 38/39 in 1966.
 

martinezownsclay

Hall of Fame
Let's look at the other player I mentioned in my post: Pauline Betz. She was dominating the women's game in 1946 before being banned from playing amateur events after declaring a desire to turn pro in 1947. She then had a similar trajectory as Gibson, playing tons of pro matches. Here's her entry in the Tennis Abstract 128:

Later in the decade, the US Professional Championships–the biggest pay-for-play tournament on the calendar–added a women’s competition. Pauline entered whenever she could, and she was undefeated until 1960. In 1956, she won two matches against Doris Hart when Doris was the reigning Forest Hills champion. She lost to Althea Gibson in three sets in May 1960, then reversed the result at an exhibition three months later. Even at age 41, no one could definitively claim to be her superior.​

So, yeah, Betz was at a higher level than the leading amateur players through at least age 37 and still highly competitive past age 40.

Gibson might have had even better prospects for longevity b/c she was such a late bloomer. Indeed, she reached her peak ranking in pro golf at age 38/39 in 1966.
So the only examples of players winning a bunch of big titles in their 30s, or atleast past 31, in the 20th century are hypothetical ones that don't exist. Got it. I am even more convinced now. The best 30 something players of the century that are in real time, not hypotheticals, almost all capped out at 1 slam post their 31st birthday. Laver did complete the Grand Slam just after turning 31 I believe, but even he dried up as far as winning big titles immediately after that. Navratilova as noted played at an outstanding level for a player in her 30s (still well below her absolute prime level, as was the case for every player in their 30s in the 20th century), and still won only 1 slam after turning 31. And everyone knows about Connors as well. And Laver as I just mentioned. And Court herself, and King. You are fooled by the state of the game now with advanced training, knowledge on nutrition and help, science, much advanced PEDs too, LOL! And just assuming that translates to then when evidence exists already it never did. Tennis was not like that before recently.
 

thrust

Legend
I would say Open Era applies to the women as well. The Major winners in the late 1940s-early/mid-1950s look very different had Pauline Betz not been banned for stating an intention to turn pro.

And then, as is pertinent to Margaret Court, there's Althea Gibson. Gibson dominated women's tennis in 1957-1958, winning the last 4 Majors she played (2 Wimbledons & 2 U.S. Opens). But, because she wasn't making any money as an amateur, Gibson turned pro and played at a really high level through 1964, when she turned to pro golf b/c she wasn't making much money.

Gibson likely would have given Smith a lot of trouble through at least 1964 had women players been paid back then.
Due to the racists who ran tennis, Gibson was older than most when she won her first slam, so I think she would have been too old to give Smith-Court much trouble, especially after Court won her first slam. I saw the 73 USO final, live at Forest Hills, between Court and Goolagong and while Court did not have the flair or charisma that Evonne did, she did everything so well which made her hard for anyone to beat her.
 

martinezownsclay

Hall of Fame
Due to the racists who ran tennis, Gibson was older than most when she won her first slam, so I think she would have been too old to give Smith-Court much trouble, especially after Court won her first slam. I saw the 73 USO final, live at Forest Hills, between Court and Goolagong and while Court did not have the flair or charisma that Evonne did, she did everything so well which made her hard for anyone to beat her.

The things Gibson went through are unbelievable, but that is the era of Jackie Robinson, and that the movie The Help is based upon, so no surprise really. Thank god as a society we have come a long way since then.

Poor Goolagong, put out 3 great efforts to win a US Open and couldn't win any of them. A tough 3 setter with Court in 73. Beating Evert who was already considered the #1 in the semis, then losing a really tough final to King after being up a couple times. Then her most impressive try, a tough 3 set loss to Evert on clay in the midst of Evert's 125 match win streak on clay, which she could have won if she had just played some of the big points in the 2nd or early in the 3rd better. Then a 4th final in 76 while pregnant. She deserved atleast 1 US Open.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PDJ

zvelf

Hall of Fame
So the only examples of players winning a bunch of big titles in their 30s, or atleast past 31, in the 20th century are hypothetical ones that don't exist. Got it. I am even more convinced now. The best 30 something players of the century that are in real time, not hypotheticals, almost all capped out at 1 slam post their 31st birthday. Laver did complete the Grand Slam just after turning 31 I believe, but even he dried up as far as winning big titles immediately after that. Navratilova as noted played at an outstanding level for a player in her 30s (still well below her absolute prime level, as was the case for every player in their 30s in the 20th century), and still won only 1 slam after turning 31. And everyone knows about Connors as well. And Laver as I just mentioned. And Court herself, and King. You are fooled by the state of the game now with advanced training, knowledge on nutrition and help, science, much advanced PEDs too, LOL! And just assuming that translates to then when evidence exists already it never did. Tennis was not like that before recently.
You are forgetting one exceptional player, however. Ken Rosewall won the 1970 USO and 1971 and 1972 Australian Opens, all after turning 35, the last one after turning 37. I'm not saying this proves anything about how Gibson would do against Court as I am no expert on Gibson.
 

martinezownsclay

Hall of Fame
You are forgetting one exceptional player, however. Ken Rosewall won the 1970 USO and 1971 and 1972 Australian Opens, all after turning 35, the last one after turning 37. I'm not saying this proves anything about how Gibson would do against Court as I am no expert on Gibson.

True, I forgot him. So there is one exception. I still think my point about it being extremely rare for even the all time greats to be contending super strongly for big titles regularly well into their 30s in the 20th century stands though.

Who knows maybe given her highly unusual path Gibson would have been an especialy late bloomer and nearly at her best in her mid 30 to late 30s, but at absolute best it is purely a guess with little backing or indication of likelihood, and not something that could diminish Court.
 

thrust

Legend
You are forgetting one exceptional player, however. Ken Rosewall won the 1970 USO and 1971 and 1972 Australian Opens, all after turning 35, the last one after turning 37. I'm not saying this proves anything about how Gibson would do against Court as I am no expert on Gibson.
TRUE! Rosewall was the only player, since perhaps Tilden, to win as slam after turning 35, 36 or 37. He also reached 2 slam finals, at nearly 40 in 1974
 

buscemi

Legend
So the only examples of players winning a bunch of big titles in their 30s, or atleast past 31, in the 20th century are hypothetical ones that don't exist. Got it. I am even more convinced now. The best 30 something players of the century that are in real time, not hypotheticals, almost all capped out at 1 slam post their 31st birthday. Laver did complete the Grand Slam just after turning 31 I believe, but even he dried up as far as winning big titles immediately after that. Navratilova as noted played at an outstanding level for a player in her 30s (still well below her absolute prime level, as was the case for every player in their 30s in the 20th century), and still won only 1 slam after turning 31. And everyone knows about Connors as well. And Laver as I just mentioned. And Court herself, and King. You are fooled by the state of the game now with advanced training, knowledge on nutrition and help, science, much advanced PEDs too, LOL! And just assuming that translates to then when evidence exists already it never did. Tennis was not like that before recently.
It's completely fair to say that this is all hypothetical, but I'd also say that it's hypothetical that the top women of the time couldn't compete into their mid-30s.

As noted, Pauline Betz in her mid/late 30s twice beat two-time defending Forest Hills champion Doris Hart in 1956. Hart herself was 30 when she won that second Forest Hills title to become a teaching pro, so we have no idea how she would have played at the Majors into her 30s.

As noted, Althea Gibson won her last 4 Majors in 1957-1958, the last of these coming at age 31 before she turned pro in tennis and then turned to golf. Again, we don't know whether she could have continued to stack Majors in her 30s.

Alice Marble was the top player of the mid-1930s-1940. She won her last 4 Majors before turning pro. Again, we don't know how long she could have continued winning Majors.

Before Alice Marble, the top dog was Helen Willis Moody. She won every Major she played from 1927-1933 before retiring in the Forest Hills final. After a year off to recover from her injury, she only played Wimbledon and won it in 1935. Then, after two years off, she returned at Wimbledon in 1938 at age 32 and won it again.

Breaking this down, the top women's players from 1927-1958 were: Helen Willis Moody, Alice Marble, Pauline Betz, Mo Connolly, and Althea Gibson. Connolly had her tragic injury, and we have no evidence that Moody, Marble, Betz, and Gibson couldn't have been competitive in their 30s while we do have some solid evidence from Moody and Betz that they could have been competitive into their 30s.

Of course, the next top player to emerge was Margaret Court, the center of this whole discussion. In 1973, she won 3/4 Majors at age 30/31 after giving birth to her first child in 1972. Then, she gave birth to her second child in 1974 and played for a bit in 1975 before having her third child in 1976. Again, we have no idea how long Smith could have continued winning Majors if she had not been having children.
 

thrust

Legend
It's completely fair to say that this is all hypothetical, but I'd also say that it's hypothetical that the top women of the time couldn't compete into their mid-30s.

As noted, Pauline Betz in her mid/late 30s twice beat two-time defending Forest Hills champion Doris Hart in 1956. Hart herself was 30 when she won that second Forest Hills title to become a teaching pro, so we have no idea how she would have played at the Majors into her 30s.

As noted, Althea Gibson won her last 4 Majors in 1957-1958, the last of these coming at age 31 before she turned pro in tennis and then turned to golf. Again, we don't know whether she could have continued to stack Majors in her 30s.

Alice Marble was the top player of the mid-1930s-1940. She won her last 4 Majors before turning pro. Again, we don't know how long she could have continued winning Majors.

Before Alice Marble, the top dog was Helen Willis Moody. She won every Major she played from 1927-1933 before retiring in the Forest Hills final. After a year off to recover from her injury, she only played Wimbledon and won it in 1935. Then, after two years off, she returned at Wimbledon in 1938 at age 32 and won it again.

Breaking this down, the top women's players from 1927-1958 were: Helen Willis Moody, Alice Marble, Pauline Betz, Mo Connolly, and Althea Gibson. Connolly had her tragic injury, and we have no evidence that Moody, Marble, Betz, and Gibson couldn't have been competitive in their 30s while we do have some solid evidence from Moody and Betz that they could have been competitive into their 30s.

Of course, the next top player to emerge was Margaret Court, the center of this whole discussion. In 1973, she won 3/4 Majors at age 30/31 after giving birth to her first child in 1972. Then, she gave birth to her second child in 1974 and played for a bit in 1975 before having her third child in 1976. Again, we have no idea how long Smith could have continued winning Majors if she had not been having children.
I saw Margret du Pont play doubles at the East Coast Grass Court Championships, in her early forties. About the same time, she and Neale Fraser won the Wimbledon mixed, having won the US mixed 3 times while she was in her mid-late thirties. Also, she was ranked #10 in 1957 at 39 years old, according to the Bud Collins Tennis Records book. Interestingly, later in her career she won mixed slam titles with Australian Men: Ken McGregor, Rosewall, and 3 with Neale Fraser.
 

buscemi

Legend
I saw Margret du Pont play doubles at the East Coast Grass Court Championships, in her early forties. About the same time, she and Neale Fraser won the Wimbledon mixed, having won the US mixed 3 times while she was in her mid-late thirties. Also, she was ranked #10 in 1957 at 39 years old, according to the Bud Collins Tennis Records book. Interestingly, later in her career she won mixed slam titles with Australian Men: Ken McGregor, Rosewall, and 3 with Neale Fraser.
Yeah, and that late success you cite came after she had a child.

I don't see any evidence that the very top women's players from 1927-1973 couldn't have continued winning Majors into their mid-30s had they been paid professionals, and I see some solid evidence to the contrary.
 

Olli Jokinen

Hall of Fame
My thoughts on Greatest of All Time or GOAT in a particular sport is sometimes that there can’t be one and sometimes that there can be one. Of course, there is no official title of GOAT or formal criteria for it. Statistics can confer some objectivity to it, but because sports evolve so much across different eras, a lot of subjectivity inherently enters into these debates. So there is no official GOAT. There is however often general consensus as to who is GOAT in a certain sport. That is arguably the case for all of these athletes:

Babe Ruth in baseball
Michael Jordan in basketball
Muhammad Ali in boxing
Tom Brady in American football
Pele in non-American football
Jack Nicklaus in golf
Wayne Gretzky in hockey
Michael Phelps in swimming
Usain Bolt in track

I mean sure, some of these are in dispute. Cases could be made for Willie Mays or Ty Cobb or Hank Aaron, Lebron James or Kareem Abdul Jabbar or Bill Russell, Messi or Ronaldo or Maradona, and many others. My personal opinion doesn’t align with the general consensus for all of the above, but despite some dispute, these consensus exists. With Serena Williams’ pending retirement, I’m seeing lots of claims being made for Serena as the GOAT in tennis, not even just on the female side, but the GOAT for both men and women or even the GOAT among all female athletes. I definitely do not think though that there is a consensus GOAT in even just women’s tennis. Serena, Graf, Navratilova, Evert, and Court’s achievements are all enormously high and those achievements are specific to the eras in which they played and qualifications are needed to clarify what their numbers mean.

Serena Williams:
She has the second most grand slam titles with 23, but the qualification is that virtually all her greatest rivals retired early, half-way through Serena’s career leaving her with a weak, inconsistent field in the second half of her career in terms of competition. Hingis mostly retired in 2003 (at age 22!), Capriati retired in 2004 (at age 28), Davenport basically played singles tennis part time after 2006 due to motherhood and retired in 2008, Henin retired in early 2008 (at age 26 while she was ranked #1), and Mauresmo retired in 2009. Clijsters retired in 2007 (at the age of 23!), a year in which she barely played. She came back in late 2009 and retired again in 2012 though she played a light schedule this entire period back. That a Clijsters who wasn't putting her full focus on tennis won 3 majors during that time speaks to how weak the women's field was after 2007. And add to that, Venus was revealed to have Sjögrens Syndrome in 2011 and didn't reach another major final until 2017. In my opinion, 2008-present is one of the weakest eras of women’s tennis that has introduced no new all-time great players (Sharapova is arguably the last ATG in women’s tennis and some probably wouldn’t even count her as an ATG; Osaka and Swiatek could still get there). This was an era when players like Dinara Safina, Caroline Wozniacki, Ana Ivanovic, Jelena Jankovic, and Karolina Pliskova reached #1. Serena dominated from 2008-2017, winning 15 slams in an extremely unusual era of women's tennis with virtually zero great players to counter her (an argument could be made that Azarenka was great for 2 years but that was it). Still, Serena did have very tough competition through 2007 and during that period, she was still able to win her first Serena slam and was able to hold all 4 grand slam titles simultaneously again in 2014-2015.

Steffi Graf:
She has the third most grand slam titles with 22, but the qualification is that her biggest rival, Monica Seles, got stabbed when Seles was age 19 at a point in which Seles had won 8 of the last 9 grand slam tournaments she played. Arguably, when Seles came back to the game 3 years later, having missed her peak years, she was never quite the same with her biggest strength, her mental game, diminished. For the 2½ years while Seles was out, Graf won 6 of the 9 slams she played. Who benefitted most between Graf getting her rivalry with Seles interrupted for 2½ years or Serena having her combined rivalries with Hingis, Henin, and Clijsters disappear half-way through her career? I think that is highly debatable. Graf, however, won the Grand Slam, actually a Golden Slam, and that’s got to be worth the equivalent of at least one slam to place her roughly even Serena. Not often noted is that Graf’s Grand Slam was actually part of a run winning 5 majors in a row, which Serena has never managed.

Margaret Court:
She has the record for most grand slam titles with 24, but the qualification is that her 11 Australian Open wins often had weak draws in which many of the world’s top players did not attend, every draw of which was smaller than 1000-level tournaments of today, and Court also often had byes and so would only need to play 4 or 5 matches to win these slams. Court even won the 1966 AO title match in a walkover. This analysis (http://www.tennisabstract.com/blog/2021/02/07/serenas-23-vs-margarets-24/) handicaps Court’s slam wins to 20, not 24, based on estimated adjusted difficulty, albeit Serena’s 23 is downgraded to 22, also due to easier draws. All that said, Court did win the calendar-year Grand Slam, which was actually part of a run of 6 majors in a row, which no other player except Navratilova has achieved on the women’s side and Don Budge on the men’s.

Chris Evert: She won 18 grand slam titles, but the qualification is that she skipped the Australian for 2/3 of her career. She skipped it 7 times in her prime and would have been the favorite to win it at least 4 of those times. She skipped the AO 11 total times in her career. Of the 5 times she did play the Australian, she won it twice and reached the final the other 3. So Evert's major count of 18 is a major victim of the unpopular AO era. Evert was a monster on clay and she also missed 3 French Opens at her peak and would have been the favorite to win all 3 had she played. In other words, if slams mattered more in the 70s when the AO and FO had weak draws, Evert could very well have had 23 major wins.

Martina Navratilova: She won 18 grand slam titles, but the qualification, like Evert, is that she skipped the Australian Open 10 times and the French Open 10 times during her career, half of those times in years she either won other slams or at least reached slam finals. Like Evert, if slams mattered more in the 70s when the AO and FO had weak draws, Navratilova could very well have had 23 major wins.

The other thing about Evert and Navratilova is that, unlike these other GOAT-contenders, they had each other as their biggest rivals throughout the primes of their career. They played each other 80 times, 60 times were in finals, and 14 times in slam finals. Yes, their era did not have as much depth as later on, but they had to deal with waning but still strong Margaret Court, Billie Jean King, and Virginia Wade early on, a very competitive Evonne Goolagong, Tracy Austin, and Hana Mandlikova in the middle, and an ascendant Graf and Seles at the end.

It’s one thing to have to play another good player many times. It’s another to have to play another GOAT-contender 80 times in their prime. Any weaker competition in the early rounds for Evert and Navratilova were compensated for by far stronger competition in the later rounds. Between Evert (80 times), Graf (18 times), and Seles (17 times), Navratilova played them 115 times. Between Davenport (14), Hingis (13), Venus (30), Henin (14), Clijsters (9), and Sharapova (20), Serena played them 100 times, and prime Graf, Evert, and Seles are better than ALL of Serena’s strongest competition, some by a significant margin. Navratilova played a pre-stabbing Seles more times than Serena has played anyone other than Venus, Azarenka, and Sharapova.

The only area in which Serena surpasses Navratilova is with majors, but Navratilova played Evert in 14 major finals and Graf in 6. That’s 20 times against a fellow GOAT-contender. Evert played Navratilova 14 times, Graf once (in the year Graf won her Golden Slam), and Court once (in a year Court won 3 majors) in slam finals. Serena has never had to play another GOAT-contender at any stage of a slam, much less a final.

Here are some numbers:

Major wins:
Court 24
Williams 23
Graf 22
Evert 18
Navratilova 18

Major finals:
Evert 34
Williams 33
Navratilova 32
Graf 31
Court 29

Weeks at #1
Graf 377
Navratilova 332
Williams 319
Evert 260 (but this should be higher as official rankings only began when Evert was already the current #1)
Court – not applicable

Career winning percentage:
Court 91%
Evert 90%
Graf 89%
Navratilova 87%
Williams 85%

Year-end championships:
Navratilova 8
Graf 5
Williams 5
Evert 4
Court – not applicable

Premier titles won:
Navratilova 32
Graf 31
Evert 25
Williams 22
Court 3, but really not applicable

Titles won:
Court 192
Navratilova 167
Evert 157
Graf 107
Williams 73

Longest winning streaks:
Navratilova 74
Graf 66
Court 57
Evert 55
Williams 34

My conclusion: There is no GOAT in women's tennis, not because there aren't supremely great players, but because their achievements are too close to differentiate one as clearly superior.
Agree, there is no GOAT here. My personal favourite is Graf.
 

Olli Jokinen

Hall of Fame
Its a tragedy that the likes of American multinationals Nike, EA & Mastercard make profits out of football, advertise their products/services through football matches and thus were able to hire more American employees. Football jerseys, games and other football related products should have been made by multinationals from Europe.
Ever heard of Adidas and Puma?
 

Olli Jokinen

Hall of Fame
This is the stupidest argument I’ve seen here. So should kids play grown men because competition is about who is the best out of everyone? Should disabled athletes play grown able bodied men? The seniors tour?

Genetics and situation is different so they have their own tour just as the juniors do, just as the wheelchair athletes do, just as seniors have their own tournaments. You actually want the women to play against the men? Why? So you can see them get thrashed and your triggered basement sitting self can attack women and say they’re inferior to men?

Womens sports are incredible and for you to say we shouldn’t take womens records seriously shows who you are as a person and how you view women. I feel bad for any woman in your life.
This.
 

Olli Jokinen

Hall of Fame
Competition is about who is the best out of everyone, and they all compete against each other to test themselves and find out no exclusions.

Why don’t women tennis players compete against the male tennis players?

Why should we take the WTA records anymore serious than Jr. records when they don’t compete against the best players in the world?
This is a discussion about the women GOATs. Your views are completely irrelevent.
 

martinezownsclay

Hall of Fame
It's completely fair to say that this is all hypothetical, but I'd also say that it's hypothetical that the top women of the time couldn't compete into their mid-30s.

As noted, Pauline Betz in her mid/late 30s twice beat two-time defending Forest Hills champion Doris Hart in 1956. Hart herself was 30 when she won that second Forest Hills title to become a teaching pro, so we have no idea how she would have played at the Majors into her 30s.

As noted, Althea Gibson won her last 4 Majors in 1957-1958, the last of these coming at age 31 before she turned pro in tennis and then turned to golf. Again, we don't know whether she could have continued to stack Majors in her 30s.

Alice Marble was the top player of the mid-1930s-1940. She won her last 4 Majors before turning pro. Again, we don't know how long she could have continued winning Majors.

Before Alice Marble, the top dog was Helen Willis Moody. She won every Major she played from 1927-1933 before retiring in the Forest Hills final. After a year off to recover from her injury, she only played Wimbledon and won it in 1935. Then, after two years off, she returned at Wimbledon in 1938 at age 32 and won it again.

Breaking this down, the top women's players from 1927-1958 were: Helen Willis Moody, Alice Marble, Pauline Betz, Mo Connolly, and Althea Gibson. Connolly had her tragic injury, and we have no evidence that Moody, Marble, Betz, and Gibson couldn't have been competitive in their 30s while we do have some solid evidence from Moody and Betz that they could have been competitive into their 30s.

Of course, the next top player to emerge was Margaret Court, the center of this whole discussion. In 1973, she won 3/4 Majors at age 30/31 after giving birth to her first child in 1972. Then, she gave birth to her second child in 1974 and played for a bit in 1975 before having her third child in 1976. Again, we have no idea how long Smith could have continued winning Majors if she had not been having children.

To a degree hypothetical yes, but the evidence still seems much more against it than for it. As even people playing great into their 30s like Navratilova, Connors, Evert, Court, King, Laver, all winning just 1 more slam after their 31st birthday shows. With the only known exception so far being Rosewall. The remaining best counter examples are literally what if cases like Betz or Gibson and other similar ones that you are citing, which is obviously still less strong than existing careers we saw play out at that age; even from specific people who were excelling and still playing at a really high level at that age, but still couldn't win big titles anymore due to how hard it was in the 20th century to keep winning big titles at that age.
 

BTURNER

Legend
AGAIN, open era ONLY applies to men's tennis. Court probably had the toughest competition throughout her entire career, starting with: Bueno, Hard, BJK, Haydon, Richey, Cassals, Goolagong Wade, Evert and Navratilova. Also, she lost at least 2 of her prime years due to a year off in 67 and a pregnancy in the early seventies.
Really, Thrust? Take another look at those names and try to be completely honest and ask yourself some hard questions about how long each of them really was serious competition during Court's prime years or career. By the time you are done, you will find her career was really no different than any other champion, with its share of good fortune, its share of bad fortune and the strength of its competition. I find nothing particularly special about the way Court's career intersects with the greats of the generation preceding or the generation that followed. All the champions have the same basic list you provided here.
 
Last edited:

thrust

Legend
To a degree hypothetical yes, but the evidence still seems much more against it than for it. As even people playing great into their 30s like Navratilova, Connors, Evert, Court, King, Laver, all winning just 1 more slam after their 31st birthday shows. With the only known exception so far being Rosewall. The remaining best counter examples are literally what if cases like Betz or Gibson and other similar ones that you are citing, which is obviously still less strong than existing careers we saw play out at that age; even from specific people who were excelling and still playing at a really high level at that age, but still couldn't win big titles anymore due to how hard it was in the 20th century to keep winning big titles at that age.
Rosewall reached 8 slam finals, winning 4 of them after turning 33, when the open era began in 68. His last two slam finals were at Wimbledon and USO in 74, when he was close to his 40th birthday. Unfortunately, he had to play Connors in those two last finals, the one player he could not beat.
 
The women's game was much more comparable in the Pre-open era than the men's. Most of the time, there was no pro tour to take the top women "amateurs".
 

buscemi

Legend
The women's game was much more comparable in the Pre-open era than the men's. Most of the time, there was no pro tour to take the top women "amateurs".
I agree that it's more comparable, but there were still huge exceptions like Alice Marble, Pauline Betz, and Althea Gibson.
 

BTURNER

Legend
I agree that it's more comparable, but there were still huge exceptions like Alice Marble, Pauline Betz, and Althea Gibson.
Althea specifcally really had a lot of money troubles. She could not get the same under the table 'shamateur' deal offers that white tennis players got, and she sure as hell could not depend on tournament directors to keep to those unwritten commitments. Tennis players were often screwed over. Women tennis players were more often screwed over. What can we surmise about a black woman tennis player's chances dependent an 'honor code system' ? No Gibson needed a contract!
 
Last edited:
Top