- View Single Post - Jane Lehane O'Neill - Underappreciated or Over-rated
View Single Post
post #46 of (permalink) Old Feb 2nd, 2010, 07:47 PM
country flag GeeTee
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 3,727
Re: Jane Lehane O'Neill - Underappreciated or Over-rated

Yeah I've seen the Lehane thread before and know (like the Aussie) that you don't really rate her much.

If this record was applied to a player of today, would anyone think it was that bad, really??

16 R1 -- -- -- --
17 SF -- -- -- --
18 FI QF -- QF 8
19 FI R4 R3 QF --
20 FI QF QF R3 --
21 FI QF R3 -- 7
22 SF QF -- -- 10
23 -- -- -- -- --
24 R2 -- -- -- --
25 R3 R3 R4 -- --

I think she was a solid top 10 player for most of the early 60s. The world rankers of the time seemed to concur with the ranking positions she got, so there was no doubt at the time about her credentials.

Her game was limited and that prevented her from rising higher, as did injuries at the wrong time. Margaret Court thought Lehane was playing at her best ever standard just before 1963 Fed Cup/Wimbledon and that her injury cost Australia the Cup.

Jan's losses in overseas Slams - particularly before her layoff - were usually only to in-form top players:

60 lost to Maria Bueno
61 lost to Pilar Barril - wtf!
62 lost to Ann Haydon
63 lost to finalist Haydon-Jones
64 lost to Schultze
67 lost to Pat Walkden

61 lost to 62 champ Karen Hantze
62 lost to runner-up Vera Sukova
63 retired injured to Darlene Hard
64 lost to Norma Baylon (injured requiring surgery)
67 upset 4th seeded Durr, lost to SF-ist Harter

60 lost to champion Darlene Hard
61 lost to finalist Ann Haydon
62 lost to finalist Darlene Hard

Last edited by GeeTee; Feb 2nd, 2010 at 07:53 PM.
GeeTee is offline  
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome