Women's Best of the Present and All Time Greats - who is who?

[Dolgopolov85]

A 22 year old ATG at her peak losing in a slam semi final to a 35 year old ATG

Checkmate !!!

Nothing more to argue, Navratilova is superior.

Another of Graf's strangely diffident post-89 displays. I don't know what happened between the ears in Graf's case but after 89, it seemed (at least until 95) that Graf didn't enjoy competition, as in battle. If she couldn't win easily, she got frustrated or even flustered. In this match, she started slowly, played better in the second set but again faded away in the third.

 

[Fiero425]

Another of Graf's strangely diffident post-89 displays. I don't know what happened between the ears in Graf's case but after 89, it seemed (at least until 95) that Graf didn't enjoy competition, as in battle. If she couldn't win easily, she got frustrated or even flustered. In this match, she started slowly, played better in the second set but again faded away in the third.

Some tumultuous goings on during that period concerning her dad, his cheating on her mom, then the tax evasion that sent him to jail! That may have contributed to it!

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Some tumultuous goings on during that period concerning her dad, his cheating on her mom, then the tax evasion that sent him to jail! That may have contributed to it!

I get that but it actually got even more toxic in 95 and she just shut out all that stuff and clutched it out. She was not able to be that way in 90-94. I think her twin losses to Seles on clay in 90 rattled her and after that, she started doubting herself even against other opponents.

 

[Fiero425]

I get that but it actually got even more toxic in 95 and she just shut out all that stuff and clutched it out. She was not able to be that way in 90-94. I think her twin losses to Seles on clay in 90 rattled her and after that, she started doubting herself even against other opponents.

She was having problems with little known players like Amanda Coetzer, then a couple of losses to Mary Pierce!

 

[Dolgopolov85]

She was having problems with little known players like Amanda Coetzer, then a couple of losses to Mary Pierce!

I think the Coetzer problems started much later (in 97-98) but yes, got blown off the court by Pierce at RG. That possibly set up her Wimbledon capitulation. I don't remember who on this forum (or was it tennisforum) said it but Graf didn't have a big ego like Fed or Novak (or, of course, Serena) and consequently took losses much harder and allowed them to push her into a slump. Whereas those three, no matter how badly they may have played in one match, would have the confidence that they can play their best in the next one. This is why Graf was so obsessive about rhythm, about playing fast and keeping things simple.

 

[Whisper]

No amount or marketing Graf as perfect athlete or Olympics level athlete will change anything, we have all seen perfect athletes struggle when younger guys arrive, Federer himself is a big example of this, the guy is as perfect a physical specimen as anyone ever could be and yet when Nadal arrived and later Novak, he looked helpless as age crept in.

Not a bad post, just gets a little irrational around the edges. The simple truth is nobody knows what would have happened if no stabbing. Yes Seles was winning most of the slams over those couple of years, but they weren’t easy romps. She won a couple slams after saving match points v the likes of Mary in ‘91 AO semis 63 06 97. That score and that quality of opponent doesn’t look like an all time great who’s unbeatable. Navratilova was a granny at the time but she beat Seles 4 times in 91-93 period. In fact Navratilova at age 37 beat Seles in their last ever meeting in 1993 before stabbing.

 

[Fiero425]

Not a bad post, just gets a little irrational around the edges. The simple truth is nobody knows what would have happened if no stabbing. Yes Seles was winning most of the slams over those couple of years, but they weren’t easy romps. She won a couple slams after saving match points v the likes of Mary in ‘91 AO semis 63 06 97. That score and that quality of opponent doesn’t look like an all time great who’s unbeatable. Navratilova was a granny at the time but she beat Seles 4 times in 91-93 period. In fact Navratilova at age 37 beat Seles in their last ever meeting in 1993 before stabbing.

I'm guessing that last match in '93 was Virginia Slims of Palm Springs! I just happened across the match on a financial cable channel not advertized! Martina just relentlessly attacked Seles and just volleyed out of her mind to overcome Seles at her best!

I went back to look it up! That '93 Final was in Paris indoors with a 3rd set TB! It wasn't on US TV! The Palm Springs match was in '91! Sorry!

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Not a bad post, just gets a little irrational around the edges. The simple truth is nobody knows what would have happened if no stabbing. Yes Seles was winning most of the slams over those couple of years, but they weren’t easy romps. She won a couple slams after saving match points v the likes of Mary in ‘91 AO semis 63 06 97. That score and that quality of opponent doesn’t look like an all time great who’s unbeatable. Navratilova was a granny at the time but she beat Seles 4 times in 91-93 period. In fact Navratilova at age 37 beat Seles in their last ever meeting in 1993 before stabbing.

You could argue that point both ways though. Navratilova beat Graf in 93. Their second last meeting. OTOH unlike Graf, Seles beat Navratilova at the slams. Graf beat Navratilova at the slams in 88 and 89 but lost in 91.

 

[Fiero425]

You could argue that point both ways though. Navratilova beat Graf in 93. Their second last meeting. OTOH unlike Graf, Seles beat Navratilova at the slams. Graf beat Navratilova at the slams in 88 and 89 but lost in 91.

Martina must have used up everything in '93 defeating Seles and Graf one more time! By '94 she was running on fumes, losing early and often, with her last hurrah at Wimbledon thanks to upsets of Graf & Sanchez-V.! She played personal pigeons in QF & SF (Novotna & Fernandez resp.) B4 dropping final to Conchita Martinez!

 

[Adam Copeland]

Martina must have used up everything in '93 defeating Seles and Graf one more time! By '94 she was running on fumes, losing early and often, with her last hurrah at Wimbledon thanks to upsets of Graf & Sanchez-V.! She played personal pigeons in QF & SF (Novotna & Fernandez resp.) B4 dropping final to Conchita Martinez!

In 1994 she was 38 years old which is like Federer playing at 45, so naturally she would be on fumes I guess.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

By the way, Henin came back - and lost.

And what a beautiful thing it was to witness.

Yes, it was. So fitting and deserved.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

Navratilova is superior to Graf for 2 reasons :

01. Navratilova at her peak never had any rivals who owned her, unlike Graf who struggled a lot of Monica Seles.
02. Navratilova at her peak in singles was also a champion doubles player, can't say the same the about Graf. Now don't say that doubles don't have any bearing on GOAT, it does when we are discussing at the highest level as to how good a tennis player's co ordination was on court at her peak with other teammates in a team match, this also matters.

No one cares about who "owned" anyone else, or other irrelevant stats to determine the GOAT players. Navratilova's bitter sniping at Graf was due to the fact she (Graf) is considered a GOAT player, while Navratilova is not. On her best day--at the height of her game, Navratilova could not win the Grand Slam. That was never going to happen because she is not on Graf's level by any stretch of the imagination.

Oh, and no, no one considers Laver's doubles record when he's recognized as one of the GOATs.

 

[Adam Copeland]

No one cares about who "owned" anyone else, or other irrelevant stats to determine the GOAT players. Navratilova's bitter sniping at Graf was due to the fact she (Graf) is considered a GOAT player, while Navratilova is not. On her best day--at the height of her game, Navratilova could not win the Grand Slam. That was never going to happen because she is not on Graf's level by any stretch of the imagination.

Oh, and no, no one considers Laver's doubles record when he's recognized as one of the GOATs.

Navratilova has a winning H2H over Graf in Grand Slams and even won over Graf at the USO in the 90s when she was ancient and mummified, this despite being 13 years older.

Thus proven that peak to peak Navratilova would be having a much superior winning H2H and would have had more slams too.

Case Closed.

 

[Adam Copeland]

Highest Peak year in Women's Tennis belongs to Navratilova = 1984

3 Grand Slams won in Singles with 96.1% win records in slams and all 4 Grand Slams won in Doubles with 100% win record

GOAT year for sure!

She did this in the presence of Evert who was also at her peak unlike Graf who vultured 1988 golden slam in the presence of 0 ATGs in prime and had 0 doubles record

Sorry ..... Navratilova rules ..... Graf is below her for sure.

 

[Fiero425]

No one cares about who "owned" anyone else, or other irrelevant stats to determine the GOAT players. Navratilova's bitter sniping at Graf was due to the fact she (Graf) is considered a GOAT player, while Navratilova is not. On her best day--at the height of her game, Navratilova could not win the Grand Slam. That was never going to happen because she is not on Graf's level by any stretch of the imagination.

Oh, and no, no one considers Laver's doubles record when he's recognized as one of the GOATs.

I must have missed it; what "sniping" are you talking about? As far as I know, Martina's the most gracious of champions that wave off detractors trying to diminish her achievements! She didn't get the CYGS in '83 thanks to Kathy Horvath @ the FO, but she still won 6 majors in a row afterwards which no one's done since; esp. Graf with her limited game!

 

[Karma Tennis]

The greatest thing about Martina is not what she achieved ... but how she achieved it. Her journey should be an inspiration to all of us.

There is a wonderful story in her autobiography that explains how as a young player she hugged a post next to the tennis court after winning an important match. She hugged the post because there was no loved one present for her to hug. That story still brings tears to my eyes everytime I read it.

"She recalled winning her first professional tournament, in Florida in 1974. "I didn't have anyone to hug because I didn't know anyone, so I hugged a light pole next to the umpire's chair," she said. "I won $10,000 [£5,400] and had to give it to the Czech federation."

 

[skaj]

@skaj, imho you are flogging a dead horse mate!

THE GRAND SLAM (ie CYGS) is the pinnacle of the sport.

More players have won four Majors in a row than have achieved the GRAND SLAM. There are good reasons for that.

Most obvious, consider the season order of the Majors.

A-RG-W-USO

In modern times, it is the most difficult order ... HC to Clay to Grass to HC. (Very short break between RG and W. No End of Season break either)

All other combinations appear to be much easier to endure from both physical and mental perspective. THAT is the main reason why the GRAND SLAM is so tough to achieve these days.

There are reasons, but not good ones. I have explained it in my previous posts.
If the short breaks are the problem, then why would Serena's 4 in a row be problematic there? For example. She had "channel slams" both times. The time between the Aussie Open and Roland Garros is almost 4 months, practically the same as between USO and Melbourne. Plenty of time for rest. So not all the combinations are much easier, and imho you are flogging a dead horse girl.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

Navratilova has a winning H2H over Graf in Grand Slams and even won over Graf at the USO in the 90s when she was ancient and mummified, this despite being 13 years older.

Thus proven that peak to peak Navratilova would be having a much superior winning H2H and would have had more slams too.

Case Closed.

Graf won the Grand Slam--the achievement of the GOAT players. Navratilova never had the ability to reach that pinnacle of the sport.

Case Closed.

 

[Adam Copeland]

Graf won the Grand Slam--the achievement of the GOAT players. Navratilova never had the ability to reach the zenith of the sport.

Case Closed.

Navratilova 7 out 8 Grand slams in 1984

That is the Zenith of Tennis !

Doubles also matter when we discuss players of the 20th century as they focused on doubles too, even Davis Cup for men matters when you talk of Becker vs Mcenroe rivalry ..... I mean it is not all about slams in singles only for the 20th century.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

I do think however, that this whole ‘Graf’s achievements should have an asterisk due to the Seles stabbing’ is blown way out of proportion here. She was 1-3 in their last 4 slam matches but overall still 6-4 even before the stabbing, as good as Monica was that was still not a Federer-Nadal situation as many here claim.

Certainly not, and anyone who could not win Wimbledon was never going to be a true threat to overtake Graf's majors count, and most importantly, Seles was never going to win the Grand Slam with her being incapable of winning that event. That achievement was far beyond her skillset.

 

[Fiero425]

Certainly not, and anyone who could not win Wimbledon was never going to be a true threat to overtake Graf's majors count, and most importantly, Seles was never going to win the Grand Slam with her being incapable of winning that event. That achievement was far beyond her skillset.

Well, women's tennis was a lot weaker back then! Seles might have snuck in a win at Wimbledon if enough happened to facilitate an easy final! There have been plenty! Do I really need to reference one of the weakest after all the top players were upset in '94, Conchita vs old lady Martina?? It was embarrassing when Tauziat was defeated by Novotna & Bartoli over Lisicki! Seles was able to come back 2+ years after her stabbing to make a USO final in '95 losing to Graf, then won AO in '96! Seles' game may have been limited, but she found a way to make #1 above Graf for years as a teenager!

 

[Karma Tennis]

There are reasons, but not good ones. I have explained it in my previous posts.
If the short breaks are the problem, then why would Serena's 4 in a row be problematic there? For example. She had "channel slams" both times. The time between the Aussie Open and Roland Garros is almost 4 months, practically the same as between USO and Melbourne. Plenty of time for rest. So not all the combinations are much easier, and imho you are flogging a dead horse girl.

Well Babe, many would argue than winning HC to HC then Clay then Grass is a lot easier than winning HC, Clay, Grass, HC.

And the proof of the pudding is in the eating. In the Open Era, only TWO players out of hundreds of millions have achieved the GRAND SLAM. And of the two only ONE player has achieved it across three different surfaces.

So Babe, I think you are flogging a dead donkey.

 

[skaj]

Well Babe, many would argue than winning HC to HC then Clay then Grass is a lot easier than winning HC, Clay, Grass, HC.

And the proof of the pudding is in the eating. In the Open Era, only TWO players out of hundreds of millions have achieved the GRAND SLAM. And of the two only ONE player has achieved it across three different surfaces.

So Babe, I think you are flogging a dead donkey.

Well sweaty, many would argue many things, as we can see in this very forum.

And your proof is not a proof, because of those "hundreds of millions" of players, in the Open Era only TWO have won USO-Wimbledon FOUR IN A ROW across three different surfaces.

So sweaty, I think you are flogging a dead zebra.

 

[Karma Tennis]

So sweaty, I think you are flogging a dead zebra.

Well darl, TWO winning USO-AO-RG-W combo is ONE more than has won the CYGS!

I think you are flogging a dead mule. Hopefully his name wasn't Francis!

 

[skaj]

Well darl, TWO winning USO-AO-RG-W combo is ONE more than has won the CYGS!

I think you are flogging a dead mule. Hopefully his name wasn't Francis!

Well hun, one is significantly smaller than 199 999 999.

I think you are flogging a dead giraffe. Hopefully her name is not desperation.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Wow are we talking tennis?

 

[skaj]

Wow are we talking tennis?

Math.

 

[Karma Tennis]

Math.

MATHS!

@skaj seriously believes that winning all four in a row is just as difficult as winning all four in the same year.

And yet some players who won four in a row were unable to do it in the same year.

BTW, no dead giraffes next door to 64 Zoo Lane. Georgina is doing fine ... and she agrees with me 100% !

 

[skaj]

MATHS!

@skaj seriously believes that winning all four in a row is just as difficult as winning all four in the same year.

And yet some players who won four in a row were unable to do it in the same year.

BTW, no dead giraffes next door to 64 Zoo Lane. Georgina is doing fine ... and she agrees with me 100% !

And yet some players who won four in one year were unable to do it in from USO to Wimbledon. As it is explained already in this very thread, along with many other explanations. But if you don't want to hear it, you won't... You will continue to flog dead animals and watch cartoons.

 

[Karma Tennis]

And yet some players who won four in one year were unable to do it in from USO to Wimbledon.

Maureen went W-USO-AO-RG-W-USO-*-RG-W. (She didn't attend the '54 AO)
Margarat won every Major Final she played from AO 1969 to AO 1971 except for W 1969 where she was beaten by the eventual winner Ann Jones in the SF.
Steffi played in every Major Final from 1987 RG to 1990 RG. She won 9 of 13 of them.

So two out of the three women who achieved the GRAND SLAM also achieved the USO-AO-RG-W four sequence. And the other one (Steffi) came pretty close.

(In the Men's, Donald went W-USC-AC-RG-W-USC. Rod made the Final of the USO, then went AO-RG-W-USO, and then W-Round4 USO-AO-RG-W-USO)

So it's fair to say that all the players who achieved THE GRAND SLAM were pretty good..

And probably fair to say that all the player who have won four Majors in a row would probably prefer it was done in the same calendar year.

Novak achieved his Nole Slam. But he himself has admitted the GRAND SLAM is the pinnacle of the sport.

 

[skaj]

Maureen went W-USO-AO-RG-W-USO-*-RG-W. (She didn't attend the '54 AO)
Margarat won every Major Final she played from AO 1969 to AO 1971 except for W 1969 where she was beaten by the eventual winner Ann Jones in the SF.
Steffi played in every Major Final from 1987 RG to 1990 RG. She won 9 of 13 of them.

So two out of the three women who achieved the GRAND SLAM also achieved the USO-AO-RG-W four sequence. And the other one (Steffi) came pretty close.

(In the Men's, Donald went W-USC-AC-RG-W-USC. Rod made the Final of the USO, then went AO-RG-W-USO, and then W-Round4 USO-AO-RG-W-USO)

So it's fair to say that all the players who achieved THE GRAND SLAM were pretty good..

And probably fair to say that all the player who have won four Majors in a row would probably prefer it was done in the same calendar year.

Novak achieved his Nole Slam. But he himself has admitted the GRAND SLAM is the pinnacle of the sport.

If you failed to get my previous posts, which part of my USO-Wimbledon wins and your the Open Era did you not understand.

 

[jm1980]

@jm1980 can you post that pic again about open era slam tally from 2000, I failed to find that pic

Before Serena broke Steffi's record, we saw this:

Now all of Court's Aussies played against her neighbors suddenly became super important

 

[Karma Tennis]

If you failed to get my previous posts, which part of my USO-Wimbledon wins and your the Open Era did you not understand.

You obviously don't understand that OPEN ERA only applies to Men's Tennis. Basically Tennis History 101!

This thread is primarily about WOMEN's Tennis. So, instead of being condescending, try doing a bit of research. It will facilitate your knowledge and improve your understanding.

 

[skaj]

You obviously don't understand that OPEN ERA only applies to Men's Tennis. Basically Tennis History 101!

This thread is primarily about WOMEN's Tennis. So, instead of being condescending, try doing a bit of research. It will facilitate your knowledge and improve your understanding.

Then why are you bringing it up in the context of this thread?

I am not being anything, I am just responding to your illogical posts, as you can see.

 

[Karma Tennis]

I am not being anything, I am just responding to your illogical posts, as you can see.

If you think my posts here are illogical, then stop responding to them.

But I stand by what I say regarding your knowledge of the history of the sport of tennis. The Women's game transitioned from Amatuer to Professional in an orderly sequence. Because of this, the Women's category is seamless.

That was never the case with the Men's game where the for a period of several years, the top players on the planet chose to play on a Professional Tour and were banned from playing the four Major Tournaments.

 

[skaj]

If you think my posts here are illogical, then stop responding to them.

But I stand by what I say regarding your knowledge of the history of the sport of tennis. The Women's game transitioned from Amatuer to Professional in an orderly sequence. Because of this, the Women's category is seamless.

That was never the case with the Men's game where the for a period of several years, the top players on the planet chose to play on a Professional Tour and were banned from playing the four Major Tournaments.

There's another illogical statement – why would I correct logical posts? It’s the illogical posts that need to be responded to.

Stand by what you want, I am here to show how wrong what you stand by is. Your poor and equally illogical ad hominem attacks won’t help you, neither will the repeating of already exposed as wrong ideas - as I said in my previous post, you yourself brought up the Open Era in this context

 

[Karma Tennis]

BLAH BLAH BLAH!

"D" for you comprehension of other people's posts.
"C+" for your use of written word.
"E-" for your knowledge of tennis history.

That is (pretty much) all!

 

[R. Schweikart]

Steffi has the numbers but numbers aren't everything, Steffi's Golden Slam was obtained a period when Martina and Evert were like 31-34 olds, also rise of young teenage prodigy Seles cause all sorts of problems for her for 3 years, then the unfortunate act of a lunatic fan indirectly helped her to win like half of her resume (11 out of 22) after that incident have all marred the chances of Steffi being in the top 4 in my book.

Steffi did not choose these things to happen, but then reality is what it is, GOAT cannot have all these struggles and lucky benefits.

She is at 5th in my book and her arch rival Seles is right below her at 6th, it is only fair.

Who cares for your book or your alternative reality dreams, Yankee kid?
In real life Steffi has the numbers and the world-wide popularity to be the GOAT and this by a wide margin.
Your country women faltered even when the Grand (not the Golden) Slam was on the line....

Steffi lucky?
No player played and played on with so many injuries as Steffi (in her last years always with painkillers). Watch the videos of her slam wins in 1996 or the glorious one in 1999. All the commentators were praising her for her achievements "especially considering what she has gone through". And then injuries ended her career at an age when all the other greats were still collecting slam titles (a certain one against Zvonareva, Wozniacki, Radwanska, Safarova types).

 

[Adam Copeland]

Who cares for your book or your alternative reality dreams, Yankee kid?

 

[R. Schweikart]

How can you say Court is joint best grass court player in history? Venus for example has more claim than Court. And of course then there’s Serena, Graf, Navratilova who have done far more on grass.

Court won 19 slams on grass.
How many did Venus win?

 

[R. Schweikart]

Your fallacy is that you're assuming Graf would've won as many slams as she did if it hadn't been for the stabbing. Oh wait, it doesn't matter, she still has less than the GOAT...

Without the stabbing Steffi definitely would have won Wimbledon 94.
And I am trying to find a slam she won during Seles's absence which she could not have won with Seles in the field. Don find one.
Steffi's slams are legit.
Which can not be said of Seles's 8 slams pre-stabbing. Because she never was able to prove that she could win slams with a non-slumping Steffi or Hingis in the field (the two best players of the 90s). And that Steffi was in a slump in the early 90s is a fact only crazy Seles fanatics still deny.

 

[Adam Copeland]

Greatest Players of the 21st Century

ATP - Djokovic
WTA - Serena

Greatest Players of the 20st Century

ATP - Pistol Sampras
WTA - Navratilova

Sorry Steffi, you have no place in either century, aunty Navratilova in her old age with 13+ age gap has a winning H2H over you in slams and beat you in 90s ..... This point alone is enough to seal Stefi away for good not withstanding the Seles Asterisk

 

[NaomiKonjuhPotapova]

didn't watch tennis before Hingis won her first, so Serena all time.

 

[Booster Gold]

Serena has the most slams (of the open era) right?

Why is it for men the slams make the goat, but not for women?

Anyway, for success, skill, and longevity (a huge one for me) it's Serena, Navratilova, and, ugh, I guess the she-beast Margaret Court

 

[Booster Gold]

Except Serena sucks (especially as a person), Margaret Court has more slams and titles, and Steffi has the golden slam.

Serena sucks as a person, but no comment on Bigot Court? Sure...

 

[Karma Tennis]

Greatest Players of the 20st Century

ATP - Pistol Sampras

Hmmm ... he did win an Italian Open, didn't he?

 

[Adam Copeland]

Hmmm ... he did win an Italian Open, didn't he?

I agree that he has been very bad on clay and his numbers aren't as complete as Lendl's or Borg's but it is pretty clear that he is the GOAT and BOAT of the 20th century, his game will prevail against everybody before him on the quickest of surfaces, 7W + 5USO + 5 year end titles makes 17 which is a massive number that seals it in his favor.

Same for Navratilova .... 9W + 4USO + 8 WTA Finals .... 21 is a big number....

 

[R. Schweikart]

...
Sorry Steffi, you have no place in either century, aunty Navratilova in her old age with 13+ age gap has a winning H2H over you in slams and beat you in 90s ..... This point alone is enough to seal Stefi away for good not withstanding the Seles Asterisk

Both Steffi and Navratilova have 18 slams when we exclude 1988.
Your problem is that Steffi also won 4 slams and the Olympic gold in 1988....

And that Navratilova was 5-1 win/loss against Steffi in 1985-87, before Steffi even reached her first slam final. But 4-8 later.
When Steffi started to make slam finals she usually thrashed Navratilova there (4-2 in Steffi's favor).

Year-end #1: Steffi 8 times, Navratilova 6 times
Career winning percentage: Steffi 89.2, Navratilova 86.8
Each slam won at least x times: Steffi 4, Navratilova 2

Navratilova has a lot of doubles titles, tough.
And many, many singles titles in Chicago and Dallas.

 

[R. Schweikart]

Serena sucks as a person, but no comment on Bigot Court? Sure...

Why is Court a "bigot"?
Just because she doesn't like homosexuality?? You can criticize her for that. But it has nothing to do with "bigotry".

 

[R. Schweikart]

Serena has the most slams (of the open era) right?

Why is it for men the slams make the goat, but not for women?

Anyway, for success, skill, and longevity (a huge one for me) it's Serena, Navratilova, and, ugh, I guess the she-beast Margaret Court

Because among the women there is someone who won the "Golden Slam".
Which is far more important than just one slam more. Because Golden Slam >>>>>>> slam title.
That this has to be explained again and again is nauseating.