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

[skaj]

So do you now agree or not with this?
"So Steffi confidence was so shaken that she was 2-8 win/loss against Sabatini and 3-3 win/loss against Novotna but 3-2 against Seles until May 1992?"

So Steffi had the best results and played quite good tennis against the player who caused her "shock" but had terrible results and played sh*t against lesser players?
That is your take, yes?
Wouldn't it be more probable for Steffi to bomb against Seles and continue to beat the others?
I am just asking for my 5-year-old daughter....

I agree with what I have said, not with some unfamiliar quotes you are presenting here.

And Of course she played her best tennis against that player, top players play their best tennis against their best opponents(if that's new for you, you shouldn't teach your 5-year-old about tennis). It didn't help her in the important matches though, she was 1-3 in grand slams against prime Seles since Monica beat her the first time.

 

[R. Schweikart]

If you fully agree, why did you disagree with it previously, and more importantly why are you only partially quoting them here? (This is a rhetorical question, in case you think you should answer it...).

I agree with
"Yes, and Steffi was not peak but prime in 1991/92 (even though she dominated Seles in those two years). ...
And your Seles peak that coincidently starts with the Graf Blackmail Scandal.
And how Seles's trauma coincidently ended in August 1995 when the Graf Tax Scandal started.
Well, this time Seles miscalculated. She hoped that she would profit again from Steffi's woes. And was wrong! "
(post #318)

And with
"It is a fact that Steffi slumped badly for almost three years (but was already improving again in 92/93). No one except Seles fanatics deny that.
So it is no rocket science to conclude that the second-best player mopped up the major tournaments.
And it is no rocket science either to see that against a resurgent Steffi. The stabbing is just a convenient excuse from Seles fanatics like you (and Serenistas who have to put Steffi down in order to have a claim for GOATness)."
(post #335)

And of course also with this (which I didn't quote in post #348, sorry!):
"Could you elaborate a little bit more why Steffi had these win/loss stats:
1) Steffi from May 1988 to April 1989: 97.5 % (2 losses)
2) Steffi from May 1989 to April 1990: 98.7 % (1 loss)
3) Steffi from May 1990 to April 1991: 87.7 % (10 losses, 2 against Seles)
4) Steffi from May 1991 to April 1992: 90.9 % (6 losses)
5) Steffi from May 1992 to April 1993: 92.0 % (8 losses, 2 against Seles)
6) Steffi from May 1993 to April 1994: 96.4 % (2 losses)
In 1) plus 5) plus 6) only 5 losses.
In 2) plus 3) plus 4) a staggering 24 losses (with only 4 against Seles). Almost 5 times as much as in the other time frames."
(also post #335)


Sadly most Seles fanatics are in denial.
They still think that Steffi didn't slump or that baby Seles in 1990 caused the Steffi slump (even though Steffi mostly beat Seles in the next years! )
They deny that Steffi improved steadily from winter 1992 to 1993 to 1995/96, regaining per peak form (even though the numbers clearly prove it).
They deny that Seles always and especially pre-stabbing had an eating disorder problems (even though Seles herself admitted that! ) and think that her dad dying from cancer had not impact on her.
What a sad bunch, I pity them.

 

[R. Schweikart]

I agree with what I have said, not with some unfamiliar quotes you are presenting here.

And Of course she played her best tennis against that player, top players play their best tennis against their best opponents(if that's new for you, you shouldn't teach your 5-year-old about tennis). It didn't help her in the important matches though, she was 1-3 in grand slams against prime Seles since Monica beat her the first time.

You didn't say anything in posts #318 and #335.

 

[R. Schweikart]

I agree with what I have said, not with some unfamiliar quotes you are presenting here.

And Of course she played her best tennis against that player, top players play their best tennis against their best opponents(if that's new for you, you shouldn't teach your 5-year-old about tennis). It didn't help her in the important matches though, she was 1-3 in grand slams against prime Seles since Monica beat her the first time.

The first slam match is not relevant because it was the shock, the cause for Steffi's long slump.
We are investigating here how the terrible shock of losing two matches to 16-year-old Seles in spring 1990 caused Steffi
a) to lose 7 times to Sabatini and 3 times to Novotna
b) but beat Seles in 2 of 2 matches
in the next 24 months.

A rare medical phenomenon. A "shock" gone sidewards!!
It is comparable to Seles getting stabbed on a tennis court and improving in tennis after that but starting to slump in minigolf.

 

[skaj]

The first slam match is not relevant because it was the shock, the cause for Steffi's long slump.
We are investigating here how the terrible shock of losing two matches to 16-year-old Seles in spring 1990 caused Steffi
a) to lose 7 times to Sabatini and 3 times to Novotna
b) but beat Seles in 2 of 2 matches
in the next 24 months.

A rare medical phenomenon. A "shock" gone sidewards!!
It is comparable to Seles getting stabbed on a tennis court and improving in tennis after that but starting to slump in minigolf.

Dude, you come up with an unintelligent quasi-argument, I expose it, then you come up with a new one, I expose that one too, than a couple more of those and then you are back to the first one, repeating what has been exposed already. Not to mention quoting something I have not said, quoting me partially without the context and answering to that, fabricating, etc.

Here you are (again) talking about some "shock", and asking me to explain it - to explain something you came up with.

Everything is explained already in the thread, I am not going to repeat it just because you are repeating the "arguments" and "explanations' that have already been exposed as wrong(for those rare people who did not see them as wrong on a first read, in other words grafanatics).

I strongly suggest you see a therapist, especially if you really have a 5 year old child you look after.