Stats for 1984 USO F(Navratilova-Evert)

[Moose Malloy]

Navratilova d Evert 4-6, 6-4, 6-4

Martina was on a 54 match winning streak going into this match & had won the last 5 majors.

Martina won 36 of 45 points on 1st serve(80%) & 22 of 43 on 2nd(51%)
She made 45 of 88 1st serves(51%)

serve %'s by set: 31, 58, 64

Chris won 44 of 65 points on 1st serve(68%) & 9 of 19 on 2nd(47%)
She made 65 of 84 1st serves(77%)

serve %'s by set: 77, 69, 86

Martina had 5 aces, 2 doubles
Chris had no aces, 2 doubles

Martina had 21 unreturned serves, Chris had 12

Martina had 28 winners: 5 fh, 3 bh, 8 fhv, 6 bhv, 6 ov
Chris had 23: 10 fh, 10 bh, 2 fhv, 1 bhv,

Martina had 6 passing shot winners(3 fh, 3 bh)
Chris had 20(10 fh, 10 bh)

Martina was 3 of 4 on break points, Chris was 2 of 8

Stats from CBS

at 5-4 in the 1st, Martina had 16 unforced errors, Chris 4
at 4-3 in the 2nd, Martina had 24 ue's, Chris 5

at 1-0 in the 2nd, Martina was 21 of 43 at net, Chris was 1 of 2

at 1-1 in the 3rd, Martina had 21 winners, Chris 20

 

[krosero]

CBS has got Chris approaching the net only twice after a set and one game, and you've got Martina passing her a total of 6 times throughout the match. I guess that means Chris starting coming in a little more in the last two sets (though I haven't seen the match in a while now).

And I don't know what Chris' total net stats were, but up there she put away only 3 volleys cleanly, while Martina passed her cleanly 6 times.

Meanwhile Martina put away 20 clean volleys/overheads, and was passed cleanly 20 times.

I've never found any stats for this match in the print media, other than Martina's service percentage being only 31 in the first set (that was in the Philadelphia Inquirer).

 

[krosero]

Stats from CBS

at 5-4 in the 1st, Martina had 16 unforced errors, Chris 4
at 4-3 in the 2nd, Martina had 24 ue's, Chris 5

at 1-0 in the 2nd, Martina was 21 of 43 at net, Chris was 1 of 2

at 1-1 in the 3rd, Martina had 21 winners, Chris 20

If you just had these stats, you would think that Chris was playing at a higher level than Martina, after two sets. Their winners are nearly equal, and Martina's errors are much, much higher than Evert's.

But the forced errors are not reported, and there must have been a ton of those. And your stats show how many errors Martina was forcing with her serve (21 return errors by Chris, only 12 by Martina -- and I know you didn't separate these into forced and unforced, but I'm sure the vast majority of Chris' return errors must have been forced on her).

 

[krosero]

Plus, we now know that the winners given by CBS don't include aces (as they would today). So Chris and Martina appear to be nearly equal in winners after two sets, but Martina's aces aren't in there.

 

[krosero]

Chris and Martina were interviewed recently about this match: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/24/m...lova-and-evert-look-back.html?ref=tennis&_r=0

 

[conway]

This match showed how far the gap between the two had grown. Martina played a very bad match for her standards and still beat Chris playing her best. This was motivation for Chris to kick up her fitness and strength training yet another notch.

I did sense Chris was not nearly as mentally tough vs Martina as everyone else. She played the big points in this match very poorly, despite overall playing very well otherwise, and she seems to be tentative and not hitting out vs Martina like she does vs everyone else. Martina was definitely in her head, the way Tracy Austin once was, but Martina a far more imposing and scary figure.

 

[jrepac]

This match showed how far the gap between the two had grown. Martina played a very bad match for her standards and still beat Chris playing her best. This was motivation for Chris to kick up her fitness and strength training yet another notch.

I did sense Chris was not nearly as mentally tough vs Martina as everyone else. She played the big points in this match very poorly, despite overall playing very well otherwise, and she seems to be tentative and not hitting out vs Martina like she does vs everyone else. Martina was definitely in her head, the way Tracy Austin once was, but Martina a far more imposing and scary figure.

?? This match was painfully close, IMHO. And very good quality overall. Chris started out very strong as I recall and MN was taken aback. I do think Chris needed to be a bit more aggressive in that 3rd set, but in all honesty, MN was on the verge of losing it in two. I still think of this as one of the most painful Evert losses I've ever seen. Made the '85 FO win all the more sweet, I suspect.

 

[conway]

?? This match was painfully close, IMHO. And very good quality overall. Chris started out very strong as I recall and MN was taken aback. I do think Chris needed to be a bit more aggressive in that 3rd set, but in all honesty, MN was on the verge of losing it in two. I still think of this as one of the most painful Evert losses I've ever seen. Made the '85 FO win all the more sweet, I suspect.

With all due respect you are delusional if you that match was at all how Martina usually played during her dominance. Just look at Moose's stats of Chris having 24 unforced errors (a whole set worth of them) and 5 times as many errors as Chris, after only a set and half of tennis. The first set is probably the poorest set she played of the entire 82-87 period (even her loss to Horvath at the French). Just a storm of easy errors. Virginia Wade and Tony Trabert even talk about it repeatedly.

Yes I agree despite that it ended up being a great and memorable match, but no mistake about one thing. It was a visibly "off" Martina and winning over a Chris playing great. And that must have been a real kick for Chris, and an impetus to push her revolution of her game even further (she had already come a long way since 83).

 

[BTURNER]

lol, It all depends on whether you are looking at this match backwards or forwards. Evert appears to be playing better than that she had vs Martina for over a year. She was moving a little better, and playing with more confidence and employing a few of the tactics that she needed to be a constant threat - unless you watch the matches from the following two years first. By that standard, she is tentative, a bit sluggish and without true belief in comparison.

Martina played a crappy first set and shined some light into the end of Evert's tunnel. Her first serve began to work better and better, and she held the mental edge by this point.

A few points. Evert was never going leave her comfort zone and attack the net, until after she had tasted victory without. Compare her net stats with those at RG '85, a slower surface 8 months hence. In part because she stood further forward during rallies in Paris.

Note the there is relatively little disparity between the number of winners and passes her forehand gave her, vs her backhand. The her topspin forehand was becoming a real factor in the last year since she went graphite.

Note this was another occasion when windy conditions seemed in impact martina more than Evert.

Most of her work in the gym was already paying off by this point, she was definitely definitely stronger and faster vs other players and the disparity between them and her was getting larger - thus she was a consistent finalist in the big ones, but vs Martina, it did not seem it yet.

Ps NO, conway, this was not Evert 'playing great' IMO, just better than she had of late vs Martina. I have sen some other matches around this time vs s/vers and frankly, she played and moved better consistently then than here. She is still playing for pride, rather than playing to win and you can tell it in the swing of her stroke and in her footspeed. But she is thinking again, and allowing herself some hope.

 

[CEvertFan]

lol, It all depends on whether you are looking at this match backwards or forwards. Evert appears to be playing better than that she had vs Martina for over a year. She was moving a little better, and playing with more confidence and employing a few of the tactics that she needed to be a constant threat - unless you watch the matches from the following two years first. By that standard, she is tentative, a bit sluggish and without true belief in comparison.

Martina played a crappy first set and shined some light into the end of Evert's tunnel. Her first serve began to work better and better, and she held the mental edge by this point.

A few points. Evert was never going leave her comfort zone and attack the net, until after she had tasted victory without. Compare her net stats with those at RG '85, a slower surface 8 months hence. In part because she stood further forward during rallies in Paris.

Note the there is relatively little disparity between the number of winners and passes her forehand gave her, vs her backhand. The her topspin forehand was becoming a real factor in the last year since she went graphite.

Note this was another occasion when windy conditions seemed in impact martina more than Evert.

Most of her work in the gym was already paying off by this point, she was definitely definitely stronger and faster vs other players and the disparity between them and her was getting larger - thus she was a consistent finalist in the big ones, but vs Martina, it did not seem it yet.

Ps NO, conway, this was not Evert 'playing great' IMO, just better than she had of late vs Martina. I have sen some other matches around this time vs s/vers and frankly, she played and moved better consistently then than here. She is still playing for pride, rather than playing to win and you can tell it in the swing of her stroke and in her footspeed. But she is thinking again, and allowing herself some hope.

I'd agree with all of that. Evert played well but not her best. She was still working through her change in racquet (I think it was mostly a mental thing at this point) and the intimidation factor caused by the losing streak. I too thought Chris stepped back a bit after losing the 2nd set and tried to play too careful and conservative almost as if she was just content to keep the ball in play, but winning the 2nd set gave Martina confidence and she rode that to the finish. Evert needed to be AGGRESSIVE from all aspects of her game and take some risks at that point but that was something she sometimes struggled with - it took her a bit out of her comfort zone which was just being consistent and accurate.

IMO it really is the single most painful loss of Evert's career though. She did want it badly, perhaps too badly in retrospect.

 

[Kirijax]

I remember this match well. I thought it would be a repeat of 1983 but wow, Chris came ready to play! I remember her pumping her fist after winning the first set and thought she just might pull it off. Great, great match.

 

[jrepac]

With all due respect you are delusional if you that match was at all how Martina usually played during her dominance. Just look at Moose's stats of Chris having 24 unforced errors (a whole set worth of them) and 5 times as many errors as Chris, after only a set and half of tennis. The first set is probably the poorest set she played of the entire 82-87 period (even her loss to Horvath at the French). Just a storm of easy errors. Virginia Wade and Tony Trabert even talk about it repeatedly.

Yes I agree despite that it ended up being a great and memorable match, but no mistake about one thing. It was a visibly "off" Martina and winning over a Chris playing great. And that must have been a real kick for Chris, and an impetus to push her revolution of her game even further (she had already come a long way since 83).

That is not what I said. I know what prime Martina looked like and that was not who showed up in the first set. But, w/out seeing the "forced" errors, it's easy to think that Chris had no role in it and MN was just a mess. That wasn't quite true. MN was a very nervous player, was "off" at the start and Chris took full advantage by playing very, very well. All in all, overall, it was a very entertaining and competitive match, even if not the cleanest. It showed Chris that she could in fact compete w/MN.

 

[jrepac]

lol, It all depends on whether you are looking at this match backwards or forwards. Evert appears to be playing better than that she had vs Martina for over a year. She was moving a little better, and playing with more confidence and employing a few of the tactics that she needed to be a constant threat - unless you watch the matches from the following two years first. By that standard, she is tentative, a bit sluggish and without true belief in comparison.

A few points. Evert was never going leave her comfort zone and attack the net, until after she had tasted victory without. Compare her net stats with those at RG '85, a slower surface 8 months hence. In part because she stood further forward during rallies in Paris.


Most of her work in the gym was already paying off by this point, she was definitely definitely stronger and faster vs other players and the disparity between them and her was getting larger - thus she was a consistent finalist in the big ones, but vs Martina, it did not seem it yet.

Ps NO, conway, this was not Evert 'playing great' IMO, just better than she had of late vs Martina. I have sen some other matches around this time vs s/vers and frankly, she played and moved better consistently then than here. She is still playing for pride, rather than playing to win and you can tell it in the swing of her stroke and in her footspeed. But she is thinking again, and allowing herself some hope.

Yes, you hit the nail on the head here. Relative to '83, Chris was worlds better, but not quite where she needed to be to beat MN as she did in '85/'86 when she took it up another notch. Still, you could see and feel the difference....she saw the light on what she'd need to do to be competitive w/MN once again. She could no longer play a "passive" game against MN and expect to win...she had to be aggressive and take some chances...back court and fore court. I do think if she took a more aggressive stance in that 3rd set, she might've pulled it off.

 

[suwanee4712]

It's been a while since I've watched this one. I thought Evert was really aggressive in hitting out, and Martina just didn't look ready for it. This was also one of those matches where the crowd visibly shook Martina up. I remember watching Martina in the second set and thinking she is now blocking it out.

It seems like there was a point early in the third where Chris' quality of play dropped and then she couldn't break Martina's serve to get back in the set.

I liked the match, but I remember thinking that the first set of the Wimbledon final was better played by both ladies at the same time.

Had Chris won this match she might've retired meaning no French titles in 85 and 86. Considering the drama of 85 and the near perfection of Chris' play in the last two sets of 86, I'm glad that Chris stuck around.

 

[conway]

Navratilova always had a sore spot about the fact Chris was more popular and better liked than her (and still is today). Of course at this point Chris also had the huge underdog factor going for her, which was a large part of it, but even when Chris was #1 crowds rooted for her over Martina. She puts it down to homophobia, and other extraneous factors, but I think the real truth is Martina is about the most arrogant tennis champion ever (even worse than Serena which is saying something) and that simply doesn't appeal to people.

She even protests about Chris's greater popularity today saying things like "I am just as good a person as Chris so it doesn't make any sense", and implying that the favor towards Chris by the public must be homophobia, being an immigrant rather than a true American, being very muscular women at the time people were sensitive to this with a slew of doped up East German athletse, and other prejudiced type excuses. Such a great person doesn't take potshots at other greats like Martina has towards Court, Graf, Serena, and Venus, just for the starters; wouldn't be publicly campaigning for herself as the best ever (in frusteration more people favor Graf, and today even the overhyped Serena for that title) so many years after retiring; and doesn't need to say things like "I am just as good a person as so and so." Most people rate her over Chris all time today, despite Chris having a career you could easily do otherwise, so the public obviously isn't consumed with bias against her. She simply isn't as likeable or easy to want to root for.

 

[CEvertFan]

It's been a while since I've watched this one. I thought Evert was really aggressive in hitting out, and Martina just didn't look ready for it. This was also one of those matches where the crowd visibly shook Martina up. I remember watching Martina in the second set and thinking she is now blocking it out.

It seems like there was a point early in the third where Chris' quality of play dropped and then she couldn't break Martina's serve to get back in the set.

I liked the match, but I remember thinking that the first set of the Wimbledon final was better played by both ladies at the same time.

Had Chris won this match she might've retired meaning no French titles in 85 and 86. Considering the drama of 85 and the near perfection of Chris' play in the last two sets of 86, I'm glad that Chris stuck around.

Exactly. Evert got passive and started playing it safe in the 3rd but that's exactly the point where she needed to hit out and be aggressive like she had been in the 1st set.

I don't know if Evert would have retired but she has strongly hinted she would have seriously considered it if she had won that match but I too am glad she stayed around until 89. She had those great wins in Paris in 85 and 86 and then beat Martina in straight sets (6-2, 7-5) in the semis at the Aussie Open in 88 which was also a HUGE win for her.

 

[conway]

IMO what really hurt Evert was that 10th game of the 2nd set. She missed some real opportunities to break Martina. I think if she had she would have won the 2nd set and the match. She was never winning the 3rd set since Martina had fully regained her form by the end of the 2nd set, and now had all the momentum and extra confidence too, and Chris's only chance was to somehow take that 2nd set.

I don't think beating Martina on rebound ace is a big deal, even with Martina still in her prime, and Chris past hers. Martina would have been an unremarkable rebound ace player had the surface been around earlier, and much poorer than any other surface, including clay. Just an awful surface for any all out serve and volleyer. Notice how in my Graf-Navratilova prime to prime matchup thread most people have Graf winning on rebound ace 4 or all 5 out of 5, despite that this is Graf's poorest surface by far as well. Martina is just fortunate the Australian Open was on grass rather than rebound ace back then, or Chris would probably rank above Martina today.

 

[BTURNER]

Navratilova always had a sore spot about the fact Chris was more popular and better liked than her (and still is today). Of course at this point Chris also had the huge underdog factor going for her, which was a large part of it, but even when Chris was #1 crowds rooted for her over Martina. She puts it down to homophobia, and other extraneous factors, but I think the real truth is Martina is about the most arrogant tennis champion ever (even worse than Serena which is saying something) and that simply doesn't appeal to people.

She even protests about Chris's greater popularity today saying things like "I am just as good a person as Chris so it doesn't make any sense", and implying that the favor towards Chris by the public must be homophobia, being an immigrant rather than a true American, being very muscular women at the time people were sensitive to this with a slew of doped up East German athletse, and other prejudiced type excuses. Such a great person doesn't take potshots at other greats like Martina has towards Court, Graf, Serena, and Venus, just for the starters; wouldn't be publicly campaigning for herself as the best ever (in frusteration more people favor Graf, and today even the overhyped Serena for that title) so many years after retiring; and doesn't need to say things like "I am just as good a person as so and so." Most people rate her over Chris all time today, despite Chris having a career you could easily do otherwise, so the public obviously isn't consumed with bias against her. She simply isn't as likeable or easy to want to root for.

martina never had a prayer on the PR battleground. The arrogance you are sensing is simply the overgrown ego of all champions, uncamouflaged and undiluted by the niceties of social grace. Evert had an uncanny knack for finding the perfect tone and phrasing to communicate exactly what she intended, no more, no less and still leave each interview with her image pristine. The humor rarely felt awkward, the comments about the matches or her opponents always seemed well chosen and artfully balanced what she ought to say with what she wanted left understood as an undercurrent.

All native born Americans consciously or unconsciously understand that words have connotations, foreigners like Martina might not, and those leave a residual nuanced message. Evert in the late 20's and 30's had the gift of exploiting the same, crafting her message and image more shrewdly than most sports figures. if you think about it, very few sports figures came off as consistently well using either the published interview or the post match press conference as Chrissy. She left most all of her hetero, non czech, less masculine built native english speakers contemporaries in the dust too.

 

[Gizo]

It's true that Navratilova was and is a lot more arrogant than any other tennis great in living memory, female or male.

Let's take the 5 greatest female players of the open era (although in women's tennis the whole pre/post open era distinction doesn't really mean anything), Court, Evert, Navratilova, Graf and Serena, and the 5 greatest male players of the open era, Laver, Borg, Sampras, Federer and Nadal. Navratilova is the only one out of those 10 players who has publicly declared herself as the greatest player of all time, and she did it repeatedly, both during her career and post-retirement. She also labelled herself as the greatest female athlete of all time in the past. Those other 9 players didn't feel the need to self-aggrandising. They were happy to let their achievements speak for themselves and to let other people lavish praise on them.

Navratilova was and continues to be completely obsessed with her tennis legacy, way more than any other great player, and has been desperate to remain in the limelight. She was publicly bitter when Graf won her 19th grand slam title at RG in 1996 and overtook her in the slam count, while Evert on the other hand who Graf had also overtaken was gracious and praised her. And recently she made it clear that she doesn't want Serena to reach 18 slam titles as well.

A lot of other players 'let go' once they've retired, moving onto the next phase of their lives without trying to continue to live off their tennis accomplishments, but not Navratilova who will never let go. She can recite her matches and accomplishments better than any other retired great that's for sure.

In 1983-1984 especially it was difficult for crowds anywhere to root for Navratilova, when she was routinely crushing most of her opponents in 30-40 minutes, winning practically everything in sight and barely losing any matches, and displaying such arrogance. People wanted to see longer matches to get better value for their money, a bit more unpredictability, and a less arrogant player dominating the sport.

 

[BTURNER]

It's true that Navratilova was and is a lot more arrogant than any other tennis great in living memory, female or male.

Let's take the 5 greatest female players of the open era (although in women's tennis the whole pre/post open era distinction doesn't really mean anything), Court, Evert, Navratilova, Graf and Serena, and the 5 greatest male players of the open era, Laver, Borg, Sampras, Federer and Nadal. Navratilova is the only one out of those 10 players who has publicly declared herself as the greatest player of all time, and she did it repeatedly, both during her career and post-retirement. She also labelled herself as the greatest female athlete of all time in the past. Those other 9 players didn't feel the need to self-aggrandising. They were happy to let their achievements speak for themselves and to let other people lavish praise on them.

Navratilova was and continues to be completely obsessed with her tennis legacy, way more than any other great player, and has been desperate to remain in the limelight. She was publicly bitter when Graf won her 19th grand slam title at RG in 1996 and overtook her in the slam count, while Evert on the other hand who Graf had also overtaken was gracious and praised her. And recently she made it clear that she doesn't want Serena to reach 18 slam titles as well.

A lot of other players 'let go' once they've retired, moving onto the next phase of their lives without trying to continue to live off their tennis accomplishments, but not Navratilova who will never let go. She can recite her matches and accomplishments better than any other retired great that's for sure.

In 1983-1984 especially it was difficult for crowds anywhere to root for Navratilova, when she was routinely crushing most of her opponents in 30-40 minutes, winning practically everything in sight and barely losing any matches, and displaying such arrogance. People wanted to see longer matches to get better value for their money, a bit more unpredictability, and a less arrogant player dominating the sport.

I have heard this a lot, but I have never personally seen links to these. Can you provide links to these quotes. It one of those 'its common knowledge' assertions around this forum that I often wonder about.

 

[Gizo]

I have heard this a lot, but I have never personally seen links to these. Can you provide links to these quotes. It one of those 'its common knowledge' assertions around this forum that I often wonder about.

Here's one link:

If only every athlete were this brutally honest.

I asked Martina Navratilova: "How do you rank yourself against the all-time greatest of women's tennis?"

She said, "I know I'm one of the top three women athletes of all time. And I'm the greatest tennis player who ever played the game. When you're up there with an elite group of people, that's good enough. But I probably was the greatest. I know my best was better than anybody else's."

Brutally honest ... and correct.

http://www.chron.com/default/article/Hoffman-Greatness-It-s-all-just-a-state-of-mind-1591889.php

I'll try to dig out some other links, as I remember her saying things along these lines on numerous other occasions. I remember watching a BBC interview quite a long-time ago where she again said that she considered herself the greatest, and during her career when things were frosty between Evert and her, I remember her self-anointing herself as the greatest and Evert responding that she hadn't proven it yet or something along those lines.

She stops short of going quite that far in this tennis channel segment, but still wow she really does love to praise herself:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_D8lLibXfrA

 

[conway]

The funniest thing is I think Martina's defensiveness and insistence on calling herself the best ever repeatedly is because she knows full well that she is NOT the best ever anymore. Steffi Graf is now widely considered the best ever and not her. And boy does she ever know that, as everyone with a brain knows what her hate filled rant on Graf and rehashing the Seles stabbing just a year ago was based upon. It was nothing to do with moral obligation to her now good friend Seles (who btw she was not friends with at all, and in fact treated very nastily before the stabbing), but her own personal vendetta, and yet another desperate attempt to change peoples minds on the person most feel is better than her. As far as stats Court is superior to her (in both singles and combined singles/doubles) and once she moves as out of the limelight as Court is, most will probably recognize this as well. With the crazy hype Serena now gets I wouldn't be surprised if more people consider her better than Martina than vice versa. Now this I don't agree with yet, but it is still the perception of most people these days, and it is only perceptions and certainly not achievements that have her seen as superior to Court too, so whichever angle you go by Martina probably comes out only 3rd at best. She knows this and it gnaws at her, and it is something her massive ego cannot stand. Even as egotistical as she is, I do not believe if she REALLY believed she was still the best ever, or perceived as the best ever, that she would be saying it so frequently. She is only doing that to try and convince herself, and obviously unable to even do that as she keeps continuing. Kind of like when someone has a good friend die and they keep telling themself it didn't happen to try and fool oneself.

Best female athlete ever? That is a good laugh. I guess she has never heard of people like Fanny Blankers- Koen, Bonnie Blair, Jackie Joyner Kersee, Jeannie Longo, Ekaterina Karsten, and now Missy Franklin and Kate Ledecky. All of those are even greater athletes in the true sense of the word than any of Navratilova, Graf, or the Williams sisters, as well as being even greater and more dominant at their given sport than any of those are.

 

[Gizo]

Yes you're right, I think a lot of her arrogance and obsession with her legacy stems from insecurity. She displayed that a lot during her career, publicly displaying her jealously in 1988 when Graf was understandably receiving most of the attention with her grand slam quest, and the fact that Chrissy was just way more popular with crowds than her.

She wants to keep ramming it down people throats about how great she was. The male equivalent of her is Mac. Obviously his body of work isn't enough for him to be considered in the top tier of greats, but he also has a hugo ego, is obsessed with his legacy, and is desperate to remain in the limelight and will never be able to let go. The fact that he banned people from mentioning the 1984 RG final in his company many, many years after he retired is just laughable.

It's funny that Navratilova actually cares so much about the whole greatness debate where other people rate her though. Graf by comparison certainly doesn't. Obviously during her career she was all business and wanted to win as much as she possibly could, but since retirement like a normal person who isn't an egotistical maniac like Navratilova, Graf hasn't felt the need to big herself or her career achievements up. She is perfectly happy with she achieved on the court and has moved on from that. Why would she care at all whether people regard her as the absolute greatest or merely as one of the greatest?

I much prefer the Graf/Lendl approach to retirement (making peace what they did and didn't win and moving on) than the Navratilova/Mac approach (continuing to be desperate for attention and never letting go).

 

[BTURNER]

Here's one link:

If only every athlete were this brutally honest.

I asked Martina Navratilova: "How do you rank yourself against the all-time greatest of women's tennis?"

She said, "I know I'm one of the top three women athletes of all time. And I'm the greatest tennis player who ever played the game. When you're up there with an elite group of people, that's good enough. But I probably was the greatest. I know my best was better than anybody else's."

Brutally honest ... and correct.

http://www.chron.com/default/article/Hoffman-Greatness-It-s-all-just-a-state-of-mind-1591889.php

I'll try to dig out some other links, as I remember her saying things along these lines on numerous other occasions. I remember watching a BBC interview quite a long-time ago where she again said that she considered herself the greatest, and during her career when things were frosty between Evert and her, I remember her self-anointing herself as the greatest and Evert responding that she hadn't proven it yet or something along those lines.

She stops short of going quite that far in this tennis channel segment, but still wow she really does love to praise herself:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_D8lLibXfrA

wow, that's pretty damning alright. No room for false modesty or any other kind, it seems. I alsoo can't really argue that any of her statements aren't justifiable either. It really does sound bad. I don't remember her as being this egocentric before.

 

[suwanee4712]

To be a champion, you need to have supreme self confidence. At this level, this often spills over into arrogance. The only exception I can think of is Evonne. Or perhaps she was just more quiet in her self confidence.

Federer is extremely arrogant, yet he is still beloved. I'm not saying that he shouldn't be, but he certainly doesn't lack for self confidence or sense of his own place in tennis history. I don't see much difference between he and Martina in this respect.

Graf was arrogant and haughty. She was often dour bordering on petulant. They all make excuses when they lose, every single one of them. It's an ugly trait that each of them share. But it's a part of their formula for success either consciously or subconsciously. Perhaps Martina's was more conscious and she wielded it like a weapon. In fact, I'm sure that both she and Graf did that in order to keep people away from them.

Today, I think it's more accepted. But even in the 80's many people still considered it unladylike for a woman to express confidence.

Right now I am reminded of a quote by the late Ted Tinling that personally knew every female tennis player of note since Lenglen. He said, "They are all *******, every single one of them."

I don't think he was being disrespectful, just observent of what it takes for these people to achieve at such a high level while having the whole world try to knock you off, all the while being subjected to uncommon scrutiny.

 

[conway]

That is true, but most of those necessarily arrogant past champions move on with a new perspective when they are no longer playing serious professional tennis. All but Martina, who remains fixated in the same mindset.

 

[suwanee4712]

That is true, but most of those necessarily arrogant past champions move on with a new perspective when they are no longer playing serious professional tennis. All but Martina, who remains fixated in the same mindset.

There are signs that this is correct. Can't think of another that didn't settle down and move on. Seems sad in a way. I hope that I'm wrong.

 

[conway]

As for Federer I honestly believe if there is another who is just as arrogant as Martina it is him. He is just very good at masking it most of the time (but at times it comes out and when it does it is ugly). Between the two of them, just during their playing days only as one obviously cant evaluate Fed's post playing days, I probably prefer Martina. Atleast she doesn't try to be this completely phony nice like Roger tries to be. It is funny when Roger's other side comes out and he says things like he feels he controlled the outcome of every match with Nadal (despite losing 70% of their matches). I just hope Roger 30 years from now isn't going on TV shows and campaigning for himself as the best ever, and calling himself the best ever everytime he is interviewed or commentates like Martina is today.

 

[BTURNER]

There are signs that this is correct. Can't think of another that didn't settle down and move on. Seems sad in a way. I hope that I'm wrong.

That 'settled down' phrase may be key. Has Martina and any of her partners ever adopted or had children, because that is normally part of the process by which hetero champion women move forward. I wonder what we expect will draw Martina's energy and focus away from obsessing about her role in tennis history. Its hard enough to move on for mega star professional athletes who have devoted so much of their identity to their performance. Take away the spouse and kids and watching them grow and change, and it must be harder to find an independant purpose. It sure put a lot of perspective in the minds Evert, Court, Goolagong, Davenport etc or so they claim.

 

[conway]

I believe Martina currently has children with her current partner. They are her partner's original children from a marriage though, so Martina is only a mom while they are together. If they break up (and given Martina's history they probably have 3 years max) they will no longer be her kids as she is only marrying into that role.

 

[Gizo]

To be a champion, you need to have supreme self confidence. At this level, this often spills over into arrogance. The only exception I can think of is Evonne. Or perhaps she was just more quiet in her self confidence.

Federer is extremely arrogant, yet he is still beloved. I'm not saying that he shouldn't be, but he certainly doesn't lack for self confidence or sense of his own place in tennis history. I don't see much difference between he and Martina in this respect.

Graf was arrogant and haughty. She was often dour bordering on petulant. They all make excuses when they lose, every single one of them. It's an ugly trait that each of them share. But it's a part of their formula for success either consciously or subconsciously. Perhaps Martina's was more conscious and she wielded it like a weapon. In fact, I'm sure that both she and Graf did that in order to keep people away from them.

Today, I think it's more accepted. But even in the 80's many people still considered it unladylike for a woman to express confidence.

Right now I am reminded of a quote by the late Ted Tinling that personally knew every female tennis player of note since Lenglen. He said, "They are all *******, every single one of them."

I don't think he was being disrespectful, just observent of what it takes for these people to achieve at such a high level while having the whole world try to knock you off, all the while being subjected to uncommon scrutiny.

The thing is though there is the supreme confidence/arrogance that most legendary tennis have had, and then there is the Navratilova level of arrogance which is simply on another stratosphere. Yes a lot of these players have hated to lose and have been petulant when they have done so, and carried the belief that if they play their best tennis they're going to beat anyone. They've had the single minded desire to win as much as possible and beat everyone who stood in their away.

But Navratilova stands alone in the category of players who have actually declared themselves as the greatest. I could be wrong here as I certainly haven't followed every interview that they've given, but I don't recall any incidents of Court, Evert, Graf, Serena, Laver, Borg, Sampras, Federer or Nadal where they have gone that far. No player seems to care about where other people rank her/him in the greatness debate as much as she does.

Sampras also had the necessary arrogance when he was the top dog in men's tennis and racking up majors, but still he was quite humble about his place in history during his career and was happy to praise Laver who he was regularly being compared to.

Plus as Conway said, Sampras, Graf etc. quickly made peace with their achievements and standing in their sport after retiring, and have both frequently praised the next generation of greats, Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Serena, Venus, Henin etc. Navratilova however hasn't made peace with her career or achievements, and has regularly been bitter towards Graf and Serena as she simply couldn't/can't bear to stand these players potentially surpassing her or getting more credit than her.

With Federer we'll have to see, but he has also praised Sampras a lot during his career, and I doubt he'll go far enough to declare himself as the greatest after he has retired. In 2009 when he finally won RG then won his 15th major at Wimbledon, he never went around anointing himself as the greatest of all time. I also doubt he'll go around saying that he has the greatest forehand of all time for instance, while Navratilova even said of herself a few years ago "I'm the greatest volleyer that's ever played'' (http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/usopen06/news/story?id=2570537).

 

[conway]

I still remember how Martina was during her commentary and comments during Wimbledon 96, especialy when it was over, and at that point it seemed likely Graf would surpass Navratilova's Wimbledon record of 9, and perhaps usurp her as the grass GOAT (forget just the GOAT, Navratilova was even in real danger of losing her grass GOAT status at that point). Then the unexpected gift of Graf's major surgery, and Graf would never win another Wimbledon, and Navratilova atleast is firmly still entrenched (to most) as the grass GOAT, and atleast in contention with Graf (and others) as the overall GOAT. So things could have been even worse for her. I wonder what she would have done had Graf not had her knee surgery, gone on to win 10 Wimbledons (as she probably would have), and Navratilova lost her most major record, and status as even the GOAT on her favorite surface or her favorite slam event. I shudder to think what her emotional state would be in fact. She wouldn't have even been able to use the Seles stabbing to try and diminish and raise doubts about Graf, as anyone would just laugh at someone downplaying any Wimbledon record for Graf due to Seles, and her overall slam count would now so dwarf Martina's in a hypothetical she won 10 Wimbledons the speculation on her winning a lot less in other slams wouldn't even matter either.

 

[bluetrain4]

Yes you're right, I think a lot of her arrogance and obsession with her legacy stems from insecurity. She displayed that a lot during her career, publicly displaying her jealously in 1988 when Graf was understandably receiving most of the attention with her grand slam quest, and the fact that Chrissy was just way more popular with crowds than her.

She wants to keep ramming it down people throats about how great she was. The male equivalent of her is Mac. Obviously his body of work isn't enough for him to be considered in the top tier of greats, but he also has a hugo ego, is obsessed with his legacy, and is desperate to remain in the limelight and will never be able to let go. The fact that he banned people from mentioning the 1984 RG final in his company many, many years after he retired is just laughable.

It's funny that Navratilova actually cares so much about the whole greatness debate where other people rate her though. Graf by comparison certainly doesn't. Obviously during her career she was all business and wanted to win as much as she possibly could, but since retirement like a normal person who isn't an egotistical maniac like Navratilova, Graf hasn't felt the need to big herself or her career achievements up. She is perfectly happy with she achieved on the court and has moved on from that. Why would she care at all whether people regard her as the absolute greatest or merely as one of the greatest?

I much prefer the Graf/Lendl approach to retirement (making peace what they did and didn't win and moving on) than the Navratilova/Mac approach (continuing to be desperate for attention and never letting go).

And, the thing is, she doesn't have to be so desperate. Maybe the majority of people think Graf is GOAT. But, so many people know how great Martina was and acknowledge her greatness and would put her Top 2, Top 3, Top 5 at the lowest. yeah, she's arrogant, but people really DO respect her legacy. If she'd just let them, and allow herself t see that people actually do revere her as a tennis player.

 

[CEvertFan]

To be a champion, you need to have supreme self confidence. At this level, this often spills over into arrogance. The only exception I can think of is Evonne. Or perhaps she was just more quiet in her self confidence.

Federer is extremely arrogant, yet he is still beloved. I'm not saying that he shouldn't be, but he certainly doesn't lack for self confidence or sense of his own place in tennis history. I don't see much difference between he and Martina in this respect.

Graf was arrogant and haughty. She was often dour bordering on petulant. They all make excuses when they lose, every single one of them. It's an ugly trait that each of them share. But it's a part of their formula for success either consciously or subconsciously. Perhaps Martina's was more conscious and she wielded it like a weapon. In fact, I'm sure that both she and Graf did that in order to keep people away from them.

Today, I think it's more accepted. But even in the 80's many people still considered it unladylike for a woman to express confidence.

Right now I am reminded of a quote by the late Ted Tinling that personally knew every female tennis player of note since Lenglen. He said, "They are all *******, every single one of them."

I don't think he was being disrespectful, just observent of what it takes for these people to achieve at such a high level while having the whole world try to knock you off, all the while being subjected to uncommon scrutiny.

Ted Tinling knew well what he spoke of. I for one always thought his insights about all the women were quite fascinating and he did indeed personally know all the great ladies of tennis from Lenglen in the 20s until he died in the early 90s.

It would have been quite something to sit down with him and have a nice long talk. Sigh....

 

[BTURNER]

Ted Tinling knew well what he spoke of. I for one always thought his insights about all the women were quite fascinating and he did indeed personally know all the great ladies of tennis from Lenglen in the 20s until he died in the early 90s.

It would have been quite something to sit down with him and have a nice long talk. Sigh....

CEvertfan - want your opinion on a post of mine in discussion on Graf/ Evert droppers /overheads in the thread comparing their careers. travel over there and tell me if you agree with my view of the differences post # 100 and then 101, will you? I got real wordy, LOL

 

[conway]

And, the thing is, she doesn't have to be so desperate. Maybe the majority of people think Graf is GOAT. But, so many people know how great Martina was and acknowledge her greatness and would put her Top 2, Top 3, Top 5 at the lowest. yeah, she's arrogant, but people really DO respect her legacy. If she'd just let them, and allow herself t see that people actually do revere her as a tennis player.

I agree. There are also many who do still think Martina is the GOAT, even if more people think Graf is (and today maybe more think Serena is which I can understand irking her moreso than Graf, as that is just so wrong, but IMO it is wrong she is rated higher than Court mostly for popularity, perception, and visability reasons, so it works both ways). That alone should make her thrilled, that there is even a sizeable group of people that consider her the best ever, and everyone acknowledges her as a legend and one of the best ever. She will never be completely forgotten. She is still today regarded by most as the greatest ever at Wimbledon, and on grass. That still isn't enough for her though. She wants to be the unquestioned queen for everyone in the way Michael Phelps is in swimming, but she needs to get over the reality that isn't the case, and never will again (if it ever was) be the case. Even if all people should think that way (which I of course don't, but she is entitled her opinion) if they haven't for years, she isn't going to change anyones mind with aggressive self campaigning.

 

[bluetrain4]

To be a champion, you need to have supreme self confidence. At this level, this often spills over into arrogance. The only exception I can think of is Evonne. Or perhaps she was just more quiet in her self confidence.

Federer is extremely arrogant, yet he is still beloved. I'm not saying that he shouldn't be, but he certainly doesn't lack for self confidence or sense of his own place in tennis history. I don't see much difference between he and Martina in this respect.

Graf was arrogant and haughty. She was often dour bordering on petulant. They all make excuses when they lose, every single one of them. It's an ugly trait that each of them share. But it's a part of their formula for success either consciously or subconsciously. Perhaps Martina's was more conscious and she wielded it like a weapon. In fact, I'm sure that both she and Graf did that in order to keep people away from them.

Today, I think it's more accepted. But even in the 80's many people still considered it unladylike for a woman to express confidence.

Right now I am reminded of a quote by the late Ted Tinling that personally knew every female tennis player of note since Lenglen. He said, "They are all *******, every single one of them."

I don't think he was being disrespectful, just observent of what it takes for these people to achieve at such a high level while having the whole world try to knock you off, all the while being subjected to uncommon scrutiny.

Most people who are top of any profession have big egos and are arrogant. But, arrogant people can be insecure or not insecure. Arrogance combined with insecurity can result in various degrees of the vibe Martina gives off at times - desperate for approval and acknowledgement, putting others down. It can even be done sort of unconsciously. In their mind, they're just rightfully defending or sticking up for themselves. They don't see it like it appears to many outsiders. I like Martina a lot, even enjoy a lot of her matter-of-factness. But, yeah, sometimes her arrogance and insecurity make for a bad combination.

And then there are people like Fed, who are arrogant but generally secure, so they never really feel the need to make targeted statements about their legacy or the legacy of others.

 

[CEvertFan]

Navratilova is a very different person from Graf or Evert, who were both much more internal in everything they do. Martina wears her heart on her sleeve and her emotions are plain for all to see. Perhaps that's the difference everyone is seeing.

All people who excel at something have an arrogance about them, Martina's is just more visible because of her personality.

 

[suwanee4712]

Most people who are top of any profession have big egos and are arrogant. But, arrogant people can be insecure or not insecure. Arrogance combined with insecurity can result in various degrees of the vibe Martina gives off at times - desperate for approval and acknowledgement, putting others down. It can even be done sort of unconsciously. In their mind, they're just rightfully defending or sticking up for themselves. They don't see it like it appears to many outsiders. I like Martina a lot, even enjoy a lot of her matter-of-factness. But, yeah, sometimes her arrogance and insecurity make for a bad combination.

And then there are people like Fed, who are arrogant but generally secure, so they never really feel the need to make targeted statements about their legacy or the legacy of others.

I think you are right about security, and you put it out there much better than I did.

Ever since she got to this country, Martina has tried to build a family. I won't comment in this thread on her success/failures and the reasons. I just hope that she is happy and content.

 

[suwanee4712]

Navratilova is a very different person from Graf or Evert, who were both much more internal in everything they do. Martina wears her heart on her sleeve and her emotions are plain for all to see. Perhaps that's the difference everyone is seeing.

All people who excel at something have an arrogance about them, Martina's is just more visible because of her personality.

Very true. Martina's filter doesn't work sometimes. Steffi is more guarded and Chris is more diplomatic.

 

[don_budge]

A U. S. Open to Remember: Navratilova and Evert Look Back

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1...a-navratilova-vs-chris-evert-full-match_sport

After the Stan Smith and John Newcombe senior singles match on that September day in 1984...it was Ivan Lendl and Pat Cash. Two great tennis matches in a row. The match on deck was the best woman's match that I have ever seen. Chris Evert versus Martina Navratilova. From the article you can read what a terrific rivalry these two had until Martina turned on the afterburners or until Martina started medicating...whichever you want to believe. Martina won 4-6, 6-4, 6-4...it was only a warm up for the night match...McEnroe and Connors.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/24/m...lova-and-evert-look-back.html?ref=tennis&_r=1

Tony Trabert and Pat Summerall with the Vicar's daughter...Virginia Wade in the booth. Can you see the trails of the ball in the video? I can swear that at times I was seeing trails that day...it was a long day and my eyes were probably playing tricks on me.

This may be one of the first...if not the first when both used oversized racquets. It would be interesting to know if they faced each other when one was not playing oversized...that would be Chris as Martina went over quickly. Her buddy Pam Shriver was the first person to make the finals of a Grand Slam using a Prince Racquet...maybe as early as 1978.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...1UsAAAAIBAJ&sjid=184EAAAAIBAJ&pg=4947,2679796

From the text of this article it appears that Chris and Jimmy Connors may have been the last to convert. The conversion started from the bottom...and worked its way up. An indication of something being rotten in Denmark...as Shakespeare alluded.

From Marshall Jon Fischer's article entitled..."The Feel of Wood":

In 1982 Chris Evert won the U.S. Open with a conventional-sized racket, but the majority of players at the Open wielded big rackets, and for the first time more than half of all rackets sold were oversized. That was the year Martina Navratilova switched to the big elliptical head of the Yonex R-7 just three weeks before the French Open and won it for the first time. Navratilova became the first player to win a major tournament with a big-head racket (Mats Wilander became the second the following day), and helped to make 1982 the Year of the Switch. "When big rackets first came out," she said at the time, "I thought they should have been outlawed. But since they weren't, why shouldn't I use one too?"

One other thing...you just have to love that lefty service motion of Martina's. It is textbook classic and one that makes a good teaching model. There aren't too many of those.

 

[Moose Malloy]

I've never found any stats for this match in the print media, other than Martina's service percentage being only 31 in the first set (that was in the Philadelphia Inquirer).

I think that may be MN's lowest service % in any set of the matches we've done stats for her.

She made 45 of 88 1st serves(51%)

That % is the lowest for MN in all her matches vs Evert we have done so far.

1981 AO Final - 62%
1982 W Final - 64%
1982 AO Final - 62.5%
1987 W SF - 79%

and her %'s in some other GS finals:

1981 USO - 58%
1983 W - 65%
1985 USO - 66%
1986 W - 76%
1987 AO - 64%
1987 W - 73%
1988 W - 61%

 

[BTURNER]

I think that is MN's lowest service % in any set of the matches we've done stats for her.



That % is the lowest for MN in all her matches vs Evert we have done so far.

1981 AO Final - 62%
1982 W Final - 64%
1982 AO Final - 62.5%
1987 W Final - 79%

I know that martina was way off her game in that first set and cleaned things up enough to skate by in the second and third sets, but I am not entirely sure why, she was that far off. Undoubtedly part of it was the wind which often threw her serve and strokes off, and part of it was that her prep timing that day was thrown slightly by the inordinate wait due to the long semifinal ( they went on court later than expected) but both those circumstances are part of life in world of tennis. Nerves normally impact that serve as well, but I don't know why she would be more nervous than at Wimbledon when she straight setted her opponent.