Although I would say that losing to Ruzici in the last 16 of 78 wasnt a great result when Stove went into Wimbledon in the best form of her career probably. I know Ruzici had won the French a few weeks before but she was never comfortable on grass. My point was that she did not achieve quite what she could have at Wimbledon. Comparing the results there with other GS for Stove is pointless. She never played the Australian Open apart maybe twice, the French not often and it was on clay, and the US was on clay courts during her peak years.
OK, I am gonna defend Big Bad Betty, and still say her Wimbledon singles results were very good. She did not underachieve at all. And if you want to say her 1978 R16 loss to newly crowned French champ Virginia Ruzici was a bad loss, OK. (Betty had more than her share of bad losses.) But in the 6 years from 1975-1980, she either lost to the eventual champs (Wade and Goolagong), or #1 seed (Evert, 2x), or #6 Fromholtz. She won 18 of 24 matches in those years. Prior to 1975 Betty wasn't really a force in singles. She scored the occasional good win (she also reached R16 at Wimbledon in 1972). But without a doubt her results at Wimbledon were the best singles results of any major. Could/should she have achieved more in singles there? I am not so sure. Doubles yes. But in singles at Wimbledon, I think she fared quite well. And, if you compared Stove's results 1975-1980 with other comparable player's efforts in similar 6 year periods, like Barker, Durr, Turnbull, or Melville Reid, Big Bad Betty's results are better.