So if we "weighted" results Way, would you give more weight to the 93 Aussie (because Monica was there) than the other slams that year? Sorry, I couldn't resist!
Well, finally a well put way to ask questions about the noSeles period!
Y'know, in a way i would.
But then you have to weight also *others'* absences, Graf's ten (?not checked) slams not entered because of injuries when she was in a position to run to the end (4 Ao for sure, all 97 and 98), outside tennis factors and........... the calculation would become infinite.
When i said we have to "weight" slams, i meant that winning twenty Wimbs is not like winning five times each slam.
I wasn't making a "personal" Graf vs Court case
Surface-wise Court was just as versatile as Graf. She won regularly on grass and clay, the two dominant surfaces of her era. Indoor courts were not a problem for her, nor hard, for she won the South African Open sevreal times. No edge there for Graf IMO.
The "Golden Slam" is unique, I'll give you that. But 1988 would have been even more impressive if she had won the WTA finals as well, for it had a tougher field. That would have given her EVERY major in one year, something no one else has done. She also lost a couple times in 1988, while Navratilova remains the only woman since Mo Connolly to lose only one match an entire year(1983).
I think while we can suggest so and so should be an all-time #1 it's always debatable. That's what makes it fun
You know i'll always agree on that.
I've learned to distingush facts from opinions.
My opinion is that Graf shares the first spot with Lenglen and Connolly.
Objectively i perfectly know that any choice pointing to one of the greats (Wills, Court, Evert, King, Navra) has the same amount of good reasons i can raise for SG, SL and MC.
You're flogging a dead horse with me here!