I just read about the WTA celebrating their 40th anniversary and gathering together several former Nē 1s at Wimbledon, in the mid-Sunday I think, and I was a little intrigued by how frequently they are using the word "legend" nowadays on the WTA site, implying all the former Nē1s belong to that category.
So,my question is: do you believe a player can be considered a legend only because of achieving the top spot? I don't think so, as I wouldn't consider Ivanovic, Jankovic, Safina, Azarenka and Woznicki like that, and I'm not sure about Mauresmo. Even Arantxa could be questioned by some maybe. Conversely, can someone be considered a "legend" not having been Nē1? I think so, as I believe that career results are relevant of course, but there must be something more, a player must have a distinctive and incredible game, but also personality, looks or aura, something that make her stay in people's mind through time, beyond the somewhat brief moment of the playing glory. From that point of view, and speaking roughly by decade, to me tennis legends are Court, BJ King, Evert, Navratilova, Wade, Goolagong, Austin, Graf, Sabatini, Seles, Capriati, Hingis, Venus&Serena Williams, Henin, Clijsters and Sharapova. Maybe ASV, but not sure.
What do you think?
Witness of an Era of Grandeur
Chris the Ice Lady - Martina Grace&Power
Fraulein Forehand - The Divine Argentine
Merciless Monica - Barcelona Bumblebee