I dont agree with those of you saying Evert and Navratilova had it much harder than Graf because they had each other, while Graf had nobody since Seles was stabbed. I understand that as a broad view, but not upon closer analogy.
First of all a player can be there, it is a personal accessment what point in their career they were at. Lets say Graf slam winning period was 87-96 where she won 21 of her 22, Navratilova 78-87 where she won 17 of her 18, and Evert 74-86 where she won all of her 18. One could say Navratilova was playing 87-94, 8 of those 10 years; Evert 87-89, 3 of those 10; Seles 89-92, early 93, late 95, 96, 5.5 of those 10. Of course though we all know those players were not among their prime all those years.
Well I dont neccessarily think Evert and Navratilova were both in their primes all those years, either won majors. No way was Navratilova in her prime yet between 74-77 when she won 7 majors, nor were King or Court any longer,73 was probably the last year of their long primes when one evaluates King's play at times in 74 and Court's in 75(she came back after 74 off and played until 77). So Evert faced no all-time great in their prime during 74-77. Some would argue Navratilova was in her prime in 78-79 when she won two Wimbledons. I would disagree, that is the year she first became a real champion, but there was still a huge difference between her those years and 82-86, she still was a bit pudgy, and her weaponary still could not be deemed similar to the 80s. She also would go into another slump in 80-early 81 and suffer a series of bad losses, and motivation depletions, given that 5 different players(she was 1 of them)won majors in 80-81 it is hard to believe her failure to win in 7 straight majors until the final of 81 was simply due to the strength of opposition. So I dont think her prime really started until 82. Austin was very good yet she didnt even play the French or Australian in 79-80, and started suffering health problems as early as 81. So Evert did not face an all-time great in her prime, in my mind, until 82.
On the other hand was Evert in her prime after 81? Starting in 82 she began to post troubling(for her)results in a collective manner, meaning two matches of the same type, indicating not an accident result of some sort. For example she would lose twice in a row to Jaeger on clay, her favorite surface, in the spring of 82. Jaeger was good, but would Evert in her prime lose twice in a row to her, in straight sets, on clay? Then you have a 6-3, 6-3 loss in an Italian Open final, in 84, to Manueal Maleeva, then an up and coming player then, who in many career meetings as a future consistent top-tenner would never beat Graf or Seles, and only took a set apiece of either of them. You also have a 6-0, 6-2 loss to Navratilova on clay, followed by a 6-3, 6-1 loss to Navratilova on clay, again back to back matches. Sorry but it is hard to believe, and yes I have seen her on clay, that Navratilova was ever that astonishing on clay to explain these back to back showings against Evert, if Evert was still in the extended peak of her career.
It could be argued Evert and Navratilova were never truly in their primes together, that Evert's prime finished just as Navratilova's was starting.
Graf atleast had 3.1/4 years facing Seles in her prime(90-early 93)and it is not her fault the tragedy took place, and there is no gaurantee Graf would not have been able to make the rivalry more competitive. Seles actually never beat Graf on a surface other than rebound ace or clay, Graf was going through a bit of a struggle with her own game in the early 90s and failed to reach the two U.S open finals or the two year-end finals to face Seles. Navratilova was obviously past her prime by 91-94 despite having success including a couple wins over Graf and Seles. Many would argue Navratilova was past her prime by 87-89. I am not sure it is any more clear she wasnt in her prime those years as Evert 82-84 however. In 89 she managed to make the finals of Wimbledon, U.S open, and the year-end Championships, smoking everybody except Graf. Her only losses that year were all believable in her prime, three to Graf, one to Sukova(who beat her in her prime), and one to Sabatini on clay (perfectly believable when Gaby has wins over Graf and Seles on clay). In 88 her results were dissapointing, yet in 87 she made the finals of all 4 slams, beating Graf in straight sets to win Wimbledon and the U.S open, and taking Graf to 3 sets in a French Open final, a surface(clay)she generally would be considered an underdog to other all timers. I cant believe she could do that against Graf "past her prime".
So in all I have every reason to believe Graf faced either Seles or Navratilova in their prime for as long a period as Evert and Navratilova faced each other in their primes, if not longer. One other thing you might want to do, when looking at the four years Graf did not have to face pre-stabbing Seles is to imagine if Navratilova or Evert were missing between 83-86. Would either of them have surpassed Graf's slam count of 22?
Evert: In 83 she was sick at Wimbledon, where she was dismissed by Kathy Jordan easily, and she skipped the 83 Australian. In 84 she lost 6-3, 6-1 in the French Open final to Navratilova, but given her 6-3, 6-3 to Maleeva in the Italian final, and Mandilikova taking Navratilova to 3 sets the previous round, it is hard not to speculate somebody else would have been able to take her out had Navratilova not been there. At best she has 3 possable additional slams-83 U.S open, 84 Wimbledon, 84 U.S open. In 85 she lost in the U.S open semis to Mandilikova who beat Navratilova in the final as well so she likely does not beat her on a different day, and by now Mandilikova and Sukova were challenging her more regularly, still she won the 85 French. In 86 she wins the French, but loses in Wimbledon semis to Mandilikova, and U.S open semis to Sukova. She avoids playing Graf who beat her in straight sets to win Hilton Head on clay early in the year. I would guess she gains 1 additional slam in 85. In 86 she would gain none with Navratilova gone, if she is lucky she avoids meeting Graf in the 86 French with the draw rearranged and gets to keep her 1(Mandilikova had an amazing come from behind to beat Graf in 86 French quarters when Graf came into event on 4-event win streak on clay including wins over Evert and Navratilova). The best she does is equal Graf at 22, had Navratilova not played in 83-86, perhaps not even that.
Navratilova-Well she wins 6 of 8 slams in 83-84, and the two she losses she is upset by Horvath and Sukova. One is likely a huge choke, or an inspired playing-out-of-her-mind Horvath. The other is a moderate top player, who never won a slam in a long career as contender, but was a bit of a nemisis for Navratilova in big matches(Sukova)always playing her tough and sometimes beating her in those matches througout her career. I dont see Evert being gone changing a thing in 83-84. 85 she loses the French to Evert, and U.S open to Mandilikova, U.S open does not change, but she probably wins the French with Evert gone. 86 there is no Australian and she loses French to Evert, with draw rearranged who knows what happens, Mandilikova beat Graf in the quarters so could have a hot day, and Graf came into the event on 4-event win streak on clay including wins over Evert and Navratilova. She gains even less than Evert, 1 or 2 wins had Evert not played from 83-86.
Evert might equal Graf's 22 had Navratilova not played the same period Seles did not, but that is it. Navratilova would not have even done that, since she dominated Evert that period anyway, and only lost 2 possable slams at her expense.
