Hingis has even record against Williams sisters...
If you want to look for single player who put Hingis in the pastures, it was Capriati. The idea that "power" as such was something particularly troublesome for Martina is a myth.
True...Hingis' H-2-H with both Serena and Venus are fairly even.
However, taking their meetings separately...
Serena's game had just begun its upward momentum by the time Hingis left. And Serena was no longer affected by Hingis' game.
As proof, I offer their last four meetings where Serena had a 3-1 H2H.
And in the last two of three of those matches, Serena won in fairly commanding fashion.
In the the last match, Serena served Hingis a bagel.
That being the case, it's clear that at that point, Serena completely understood Hingis' game, and that Hingis was rendered ineffective against Serena.
Venus also held 3-1 H2H against Hingis in their last 4 games (1on hard court, and 2 on clay
And clay is where Hingis' game style should
eclipse Venus'...but didn't.
I only present the above to demonstrate that H2Hs can be used to argue in so many ways.
And, btw, I chose their last four meetings because this was during all three player's dominant period.
Hingis was still presented as the "master tactician genius", and Venus and Serena...the "athletic bashers" of the game.
Fact is, Capriati won the last 4 matches in a roll before Hingis retired.
And if you look closely at Hingis' last 7 slam appearances, in which she only won 1 title (1999 AO against Amelie Mauresmo), every single match she lost involved a Big Babe tennis player.
Now, that alone has gotta prove the point that she just couldn't compete with the big hitters.
Nothing wrong with Hingis' serve, really. Her second serve was pretty poor, but she had a good first serve with usually high percentage (~70). I don't understand S&V comment, she seldom played S & V. What did Hingis in was quite simply burnout - she played a lot in her teens and unlike SOME #1 players, she loved all that representing, charities etc committments. It was taxing life and she couldn't maintain it. If you look at Hingis at ~2001-2002, and compare to that of ther peak few years earlier, it's so obvious how much she had declined as a player - movement gone, loopy short forehand, no longer taking any risks with her first serve.
If their is nothing wrong with Hingis' serve, then her second serve shouldn't be a problem either.
Yet you just admitted that her second serve was "pretty poor".
But here's the question...
If you are using her 70% first serve effectiveness as an argument, then how did she do against great returners like Capriati, Venus, Davenport, and Serena? I'm willing to bet that her first serve percentage against these four was far below that 70%.
Davenport was a great server; Venus was a great server; and Serena an even greater server during that period against the big babes.
No "myths" were involved with these facts.
You can't use the 'she was burned out'
excuse, because it was her choice to play an ungodly number of events to maintain her #1 ranking.
Lastly, she lost her last 5 Grand Slams against the Big Babes.
That isn't GOAT-like statistics by anyone's measuring stick, and it certainly doesn't support the idea that her serve was affective against the Big Babes either..
Look, I'm no fan of Hingis' but I respect that she accomplished what she accomplished.
But to inflate her accomplishments does no one any good.
Her record speaks for itself...and it's a good record. Let's not embellish it.