PDA

View Full Version : Is Monica Seles really that weak on grass?


hingis-seles
May 17th, 2004, 11:10 AM
I have heard many arguments about how Monica is a weak grass-courter. Is she really that bad a grass-court player? Let's have a look:

Wimbledon GBR GS 26 Jun 1989 - 09 Jul 1989 Grass (O) Entry: DA Seed: 11


128WBrenda SCHULTZ-MC CARTHY (NED)7-6 1-6 6-4
64WClaudia PORWIK (GER)6-2 6-4
32WEva SVIGLEROVA (TCH)6-4 6-3
16LSteffi GRAF (GER)0-6 1-6


Wimbledon GBR GS 25 Jun 1990 - 08 Jul 1990 Grass (O) Entry: DA Seed: 3


128WMaria STRANDLUND (SWE)6-2 6-0
64WCamille BENJAMIN (USA)6-3 7-5
32WAnne MINTER (AUS)6-3 6-3
16WAnn HENRICKSSON (USA)6-1 6-0
QFLZina GARRISON (USA)6-3 3-6 7-9


Wimbledon GBR GS 22 Jun 1992 - 05 Jul 1992 Grass (O) Entry: DA Seed: 1


128WJenny BYRNE (AUS)6-2 6-2
64WSabine APPELMANS (BEL)6-3 6-2
32WLaura GILDEMEISTER (PER)6-4 6-1
16WGigi FERNANDEZ (USA)6-4 6-2
QFWNathalie TAUZIAT (FRA)6-1 6-3
SFWMartina NAVRATILOVA (USA)6-2 6-7 6-4
FRLSteffi GRAF (GER)2-6 1-6


Eastbourne GBR WT 18 Jun 1996 - 22 Jun 1996 Grass (O) Entry: WC Seed: 1


32BBYE
16WMeredith MC GRATH (USA)6-2 6-4
QFWInes GORROCHATEGUI (ARG)6-3 6-1
SFWNathalie TAUZIAT (FRA)6-4 6-4
FRWMary-Joe FERNANDEZ (USA)6-0 6-2


Wimbledon GBR GS 24 Jun 1996 - 07 Jul 1996 Grass (O) Entry: DA Seed: 2


128WAnn WUNDERLICH (USA)6-1 6-2
64LKatarina STUDENIKOVA (SVK)5-7 7-5 4-6


Eastbourne GBR WT 17 Jun 1997 - 22 Jun 1997 Grass (O) Entry: DA Seed: 1


32BBYE
16WNaoko SAWAMATSU (JPN)6-2 7-5
QFLBrenda SCHULTZ-MC CARTHY (NED)5-7 5-7


Wimbledon GBR GS 23 Jun 1997 - 06 Jul 1997 Grass (O) Entry: DA Seed: 2


128WRachel MC QUILLAN (AUS)6-0 6-2
64WKristina BRANDI (PUR)5-7 6-3 6-3
32LSandrine TESTUD (FRA)6-0 4-6 6-8


Wimbledon GBR GS 22 Jun 1998 - 05 Jul 1998 Grass (O) Entry: DA Seed: 6


128WMaria SANCHEZ LORENZO (ESP)6-3 6-4
64WAlexandra FUSAI (FRA)6-1 6-1
32WYayuk BASUKI (INA)6-2 6-3
16WSandrine TESTUD (FRA)6-3 6-2
QFLNatalia ZVEREVA (BLR)6-7 2-6


Eastbourne GBR WT 14 Jun 1999 - 19 Jun 1999 Grass (O) Entry: DA Seed: 1


32BBYE 16LAnne KREMER (LUX)4-6 4-6


Wimbledon GBR GS 21 Jun 1999 - 04 Jul 1999 Grass (O) Entry: DA Seed: 4


128WCristina TORRENS VALERO (ESP)6-3 6-1
64WMarlene WEINGARTNER (GER)6-0 6-0
32LMirjana LUCIC (CRO)6-7 6-7


Wimbledon GBR GS 26 Jun 2000 - 09 Jul 2000 Grass (O) Entry: DA Seed: 6


128WKarina HABSUDOVA (SVK)3-6 6-2 7-5
64WEls CALLENS (BEL)6-4 6-4
32WSarah PITKOWSKI-MALCOR (FRA)6-0 6-3
16WArantxa SANCHEZ-VICARIO (ESP)6-3 6-4
QFLLindsay DAVENPORT (USA)7-6 4-6 0-6


Wimbledon GBR GS 24 Jun 2002 - 07 Jul 2002 Grass (O) Entry: DA Seed: 4


128WEva BES (ESP)6-0 6-0
64WRossana NEFFA-DE LOS RIOS (PAR)6-4 6-0
32WAi SUGIYAMA (JPN)4-6 6-1 6-4
16WTamarine TANASUGARN (THA)6-2 6-2
QFLJustine HENIN-HARDENNE (BEL)5-7 6-7(4)


She's played only 12 grass tournaments in her career, of which she's won the title once (Eastbourne 1996) and been a runner-up once (Wimbledon 1992). She has also been a quarterfinalist five times.


Her losses have come to:


Steffi Graf (1988, 1992)
Zina Garrison (1990)
Katarina Studenikova (1996)
Sandrine Testud (1997)
Brenda Schultz-McCarthy (1997)
Anne Kremer (1999)
Mirjana Lucic (1999)
Natasha Zvereva (1998)
Lindsay Davenport (2000)
Justine Henin-Hardenne (2002)


Of that list, the only eye-openers are Studenikova, Kremer and Lucic. Garrisson and Zvereva also beat Steffi that same tournament and are both good on grass. Testud, Graf, Davenport and Henin-Hardenne have defeated Monica on other surfaces as well.

Another very important fact is that she only played three grass-court tournaments prior to the stabbing, while playing at what we have to assume was the closest to her peak.


She has wins on grass over:


Martina Navratilova
Nathalie Tauziat (twice without dropping a set)
Brenda Schultz-McCarthy
Sandrine Testud
Aranxta Sanchez-Vicario (2-time Wimbledon finalist)
Tamarine Tanasugarn
Els Callens



Is she really that weak on grass, or is it just that she has played so much more on clay/hard/carpet and has had relatively more success on those surfaces as a result? Discuss.

JonBcn
May 17th, 2004, 11:23 AM
She's weaker on grass than she is on any other surface, that's for sure. Compared to 95% of players, she's not weak on grass at all.

But losing to the likes of Lucic, Kremer, Testud (in 1997!) and Studenikova definitely dont rank as her greatest achievements.

tyk101
May 17th, 2004, 11:35 AM
think she's training hard for wimbledon this year;

hingis-seles
May 17th, 2004, 11:59 AM
She's weaker on grass than she is on any other surface, that's for sure. Compared to 95% of players, she's not weak on grass at all.

But losing to the likes of Lucic, Kremer, Testud (in 1997!) and Studenikova definitely dont rank as her greatest achievements.
I agree that grass is her weakest surface, but is she not a good grass-court player?

She's also lost to Nagyova (1999) and Ferrando (1990) on hardcourts. Granted, she has had most of her bad losses on grass than any other surface.

tommyk75
May 17th, 2004, 12:28 PM
She's a very good grass-court player. She reached the final (beating Martina N in the process), reached the quarters a few times, and won Eastbourne.

However, it's not her best surface. It doesn't suit her game well, and she never had the phenomenal results she had on the other surfaces.

The bottom line: Seles was a GREAT player, period.

hingis-seles
May 17th, 2004, 12:43 PM
She's a very good grass-court player. She reached the final (beating Martina N in the process), reached the quarters a few times, and won Eastbourne.

However, it's not her best surface. It doesn't suit her game well, and she never had the phenomenal results she had on the other surfaces.

The bottom line: Seles was a GREAT player, period.
Seles is a GREAT player, period. :) :angel: If only she wasn't injured. :fiery:

People talk about Monica Seles on grass like she's Pete Sampras on clay. It's like apples and oranges.

pigam
May 17th, 2004, 12:46 PM
:eek: OMG !!! :eek: she actually beat Els Callens on grass! :eek: :eek: ;)

I think she isn't a 'bad grasscourtplayer' at all! She's a great player on every surface. Grass is probably her 'least favourite' surface, but almost every player has one. Too bad she never won Wimbledon, but who knows ... .
In a way she has a good game for grass (hard hitting) but her reach (with the 2 hands) is a clear disadavantage. She probably lacked a bit of luck, and without the stabbing, I'm almost certain she would have won Wimbledon at least once...

alfajeffster
May 17th, 2004, 01:15 PM
Seles is a GREAT player, period. :) :angel: If only she wasn't injured. :fiery:

People talk about Monica Seles on grass like she's Pete Sampras on clay. It's like apples and oranges.
I have to come to good ole Petey's defense here. He beat Sergi Bruguera, that clay-court octopus on red clay, at Roland Garros, and Pete did win the Italian Open in 1994, and played alot more at Roland Garros than Seles ever played at Wimbledon. Pete's game, chiefly his groundstrokes, racquet grips, speed about the court, and the fact that he could hit every shot in the book meant he had the opportunity to do well on clay. Monica's game (and this is not a personal attack- please see the difference folks) is much more one-dimensional, and suffers on grass more than any other surface- she has extreme western grips on both sides, limited mobility, limited variety on her serve, and very little inkling to end the point quickly at the net. It's not her fault- it's just not something I think was ever a major goal for her when she learned to play tennis. She only ever played Navratilova once on grass, and never played most of the great serve-and-volley attacking players on the surface.

spencercarlos
May 17th, 2004, 01:21 PM
She was not a great grass court player period. When you compare her results with other surfaces, definetly she used her talent to adjust her game to the low skiddy bounces of grass. Reaching a grand slam final and winning another event were good results, but really low to her standards. The only former Wimbledon champion she could beat on the surface was Martina Navratilova 6-4 in the third in the semis of 1992.

spencercarlos
May 17th, 2004, 01:36 PM
I have to come to good ole Petey's defense here. He beat Sergi Bruguera, that clay-court octopus on red clay, at Roland Garros, and Pete did win the Italian Open in 1994, and played alot more at Roland Garros than Seles ever played at Wimbledon. Pete's game, chiefly his groundstrokes, racquet grips, speed about the court, and the fact that he could hit every shot in the book meant he had the opportunity to do well on clay. Monica's game (and this is not a personal attack- please see the difference folks) is much more one-dimensional, and suffers on grass more than any other surface- she has extreme western grips on both sides, limited mobility, limited variety on her serve, and very little inkling to end the point quickly at the net. It's not her fault- it's just not something I think was ever a major goal for her when she learned to play tennis. She only ever played Navratilova once on grass, and never played most of the great serve-and-volley attacking players on the surface.
2 things

1)Pete played many many more clay court events than Monica and was only able to win just 3 events, which only ONE of them was a Master Series. And was only able to reach 1 Semis, and 3 QF as best results in Roland Garros in 13 trips there. Monica had 1 final, 4 QF finishes in 9 trips to Wimbledon. Not to mention the many oportunities Pete had on the other clay events along the year, and to come up with only 3 wins, says a lot about the kind of clay court player he was.
I tried to do this same comparisson but Monica was a better grass court player than Pete was on clay, and also because Pete had MANY MANY more opotunities to win events on clay than Monica could on grass, yet only 2 titles are the difference, while Monica performed better at the weaker slam.. if this makes sense :p
2)Monica DOES NOT USE EXTREME western grips for her shots. I guess you have not seen Anke Huber`s forehand. Brenda Schultz forehand or Barbara Paulus`s game at all :p. Anyway i think you tried to mean that those both hands for both shots hurted Monica so much on grass, which is correct.

hingis-seles
May 17th, 2004, 02:59 PM
I have to come to good ole Petey's defense here. He beat Sergi Bruguera, that clay-court octopus on red clay, at Roland Garros, and Pete did win the Italian Open in 1994, and played alot more at Roland Garros than Seles ever played at Wimbledon. Pete's game, chiefly his groundstrokes, racquet grips, speed about the court, and the fact that he could hit every shot in the book meant he had the opportunity to do well on clay. Monica's game (and this is not a personal attack- please see the difference folks) is much more one-dimensional, and suffers on grass more than any other surface- she has extreme western grips on both sides, limited mobility, limited variety on her serve, and very little inkling to end the point quickly at the net. It's not her fault- it's just not something I think was ever a major goal for her when she learned to play tennis. She only ever played Navratilova once on grass, and never played most of the great serve-and-volley attacking players on the surface.
Hey Jeff! :wavey:

It was not my intention to try and undermine Pete Sampras' accomplishments on clay. However, given how many more events he played on clay and also given the fact that there are no Tier 1 events on grass, and how few grass events Monica played, I still feel she is overall more consistent than him and better on grass than he is on clay.

Monica's game definitely suffers on grass as she never had that "big serve" or "brilliant volleys" which are essential. She's probably one of the greatest returners in the history of the game and I believe that is responsible for a large part of her success on grass.

I love that she's unbeaten on grass against Navratilova. :lol:

It should also be pointed out that Monica, despite her limited game on grass, did have a better record in her first three Wimbledons than Steffi Graf and Martina Navratilova.

DA FOREHAND
May 17th, 2004, 03:04 PM
Not weak, just several levels lower than STEFFI GRAF.

canuuk..or however you spell your name...bad rep or not...it's the truth. She got what three/four games in four sets? Scorelines look like first round matches.

croat123
May 17th, 2004, 03:24 PM
most players would kill for those results. she actually played really well vs. mirjana. that was one of the best matches i've ever seen...

morbidangle
May 17th, 2004, 03:40 PM
I have said it before that Monica is not a bad grass court player. But I dont think she is great either. She is above average, but the thing is Monica was sooo good on all other surfaces. Her results on grass are good, but nothing compared to what she did on clay or hard courts, that is why people usually think of her as a bad glass court player. We call Nathelie Tauziat a good grass court player, and I don't think she was better than Monica on grass.

SelesFan70
May 17th, 2004, 03:44 PM
I think Monica plays well on grass. Her 1992 Wimbledon final against Graf should never have been played in the dark and fog. I'll never forgive Wimbledon for that! :mad:

DA FOREHAND
May 17th, 2004, 03:57 PM
I think Monica plays well on grass. Her 1992 Wimbledon final against Graf should never have been played in the dark and fog. I'll never forgive Wimbledon for that! :mad:
ROFLMBAO!!! :lol: :lol: :drool:

spencercarlos
May 17th, 2004, 04:11 PM
I have said it before that Monica is not a bad grass court player. But I dont think she is great either. She is above average, but the thing is Monica was sooo good on all other surfaces. Her results on grass are good, but nothing compared to what she did on clay or hard courts, that is why people usually think of her as a bad glass court player. We call Nathelie Tauziat a good grass court player, and I don't think she was better than Monica on grass.
Im reallt sorry to say this but Tauziat has proved to be a better player on grass than Monica. 3 Titles on Grass (2 Birmighams 1 Eastbourne), among other RU finishes on Grass and her best Wimbledon results are 1 Runner Up and 4 QF finishes at Wimbledon same as Monica.
Tauziat has achieved more on Grass than Monica.

hingis-seles
May 17th, 2004, 04:26 PM
Im reallt sorry to say this but Tauziat has proved to be a better player on grass than Monica. 3 Titles on Grass (2 Birmighams 1 Eastbourne), among other RU finishes on Grass and her best Wimbledon results are 1 Runner Up and 4 QF finishes at Wimbledon same as Monica.
Tauziat has achieved more on Grass than Monica.
Yet the two times they played on grass, Monica won 6-1, 6-3 and 6-4, 6-4.

DA FOREHAND
May 17th, 2004, 04:29 PM
Yet the two times they played on grass, Monica won 6-1, 6-3 and 6-4, 6-4.
That doesn't say much.
How many times have Hingis -v-Davenport played at the A.O.

The last time Lindsay totally thumped her, but guess who has more titles and finals @ the A.O?

spencercarlos
May 17th, 2004, 04:32 PM
Yet the two times they played on grass, Monica won 6-1, 6-3 and 6-4, 6-4.
Another case is Martina Hingis head 2 head over Monica like 16-5, yet who had the better carreer?
As i said Tauziat has achieved more than Seles on grass that`s plain and simple, then she was a better player on grass.

hingis-seles
May 17th, 2004, 05:16 PM
Another case is Martina Hingis head 2 head over Monica like 16-5, yet who had the better carreer?
As i said Tauziat has achieved more than Seles on grass that`s plain and simple, then she was a better player on grass.
But if Tauziat was the better player on grass (which in my opinion, she may well have been), how come she failed to take a set of Monica while playing on grass. One would have imagined she would have taken advantage of playing on her own best surface and Monica's worst.

baleineau
May 17th, 2004, 05:44 PM
seles is not a good grass court player. it says a lot about women's tennis that if you are generally very good, then you can reach the Quarter Finals of Wimbledon at least 4 or 5 times despite looking so uncomfortable/clueless on the surface. the fact is, most women players are awful on grass and do not know how to play the surface at all. which means that some of them have to make it through to the last 8, simply because there always is a last 8.

the few grass court specialists of the Seles era (e.g. Tauziat, McNeil, Schultz-McCarthy, Zvereva) were generally weaker on hardcourts and clay, so when it came to the grass-court season, they'd square up against the likes of Seles, ASV and other two-handed baseliners and lose to them. Not because Seles, ASV et al are better on grass, but because they mass-up those daunting 8-0 H2Hs on other surfaces.

Seles' main problems on grass (1) awkwardness at the net and unwillingness to come forward (2) two handed strokes on each side limit the ability to retrieve low skidding shots out wide, or los skidding shorter balls and (3) movement up and down the court being weak. Seles was much better side to side than running back and forward, which necessarily happens a lot on grass.

Kart
May 17th, 2004, 06:12 PM
I don't think even Monica considers herself a good grass court player.

Still an appearance in the Wimbledon final is nothing that can be dismissed.

I think she'd be better on the grass if she believed in herself a bit more.

- L i n a -
May 17th, 2004, 06:25 PM
Those results aren't that bad...

1 title in very convincing fashion, a Wimby final, and numerous QF's.

Let us also remember that Monica only played Wimbly twice in her "prime" years... she didn't play in '91.

Obviously, grass was the worst surface for Monica's game, and mentally she hated the stuff... but, she was still a threat.

spencercarlos
May 17th, 2004, 06:26 PM
But if Tauziat was the better player on grass (which in my opinion, she may well have been), how come she failed to take a set of Monica while playing on grass. One would have imagined she would have taken advantage of playing on her own best surface and Monica's worst.
One good reason is that Tauziat`s peak came much after 1996 Eastbourne. Anyway that does not means anything the bottom line is the overall achievements. This is where Tauziat tops Seles on Grass, not by much anyway but still she does.
Im not saying Seles was awful on grass, she was good.. but not great as in other surfaces.
Being better than Navratilova and Graf in her first 3 Wimbledons compared does not say anything. It`s all about the overall result.

Where Martina and Steffi tops by a lot over Monica.. Steffi had 4 Wimbledons before the stabbing and beat Monica twice at Wimbledon not losing more than 4 games combining all of those scores.

tennisIlove09
May 17th, 2004, 06:27 PM
She's had some odd losses at Wimbledon, that she didn't have at the other three majors in her prime.

Obviously 6-2 6-1 final against Graf is the question mark. That was the year with the grunting. Had nothing been made of it, it may have been a different story.

Volcana
May 17th, 2004, 06:40 PM
She was pitiful on grass. I mean c'mon. She won multiple Grand Slams on every other other surface and only made one Wimbledon final. Where, I might add, she got housed. Next you'll be arguing her (admittedly) mediocre clay results are somehow meaningful. Face it, she lucked into winning nine GS titles.

What a ridiculous thread.

Havok
May 17th, 2004, 06:43 PM
To her standards, maybe so, but she wasn't a "nobody" on grass either. Seles was always a threat no matter the surface being played one:D

00seles04
May 17th, 2004, 07:21 PM
I think it's hard to really determine how good (or bad) Monica is on grass. First thing is that she's done so well with other events that when you look her grass results, they're not as great...relative to the others.

Also it's tough to compare Pete on clay and Monica on grass. I mean think about the length of time they are played. If there are more grass tournaments, I'm sure Monica will be better prepared and perhaps have better results as she would during the claycourt season. It is just not easy to adjust that quickly.

Part of her results over the years I think is mental. She might be intimidated by it or just the surface. But if you've noticed in the last few interviews regarding Wimbledon, she even said she really has started to like the atmosphere and everythig to do with it. I think if she continues this attitude that will translate to better results.

Whether Monica is a good grass court player is anyone's opinion. Heck, I have thought that she was the queen of clay court there for a while..but look she hasn't won the Family Circle Cup (unless I'm wrong).

In the end, it is all relative. It is so easy for us to compare her achievements with other results or with other players' results. It's like night and day. And you guys have to remember she is a tennis player, and she is human. She's not a robot, she might show up for a match that she expects to win and just tank it. And really, if you're Monica Seles, I think you have to get used to so many asterisks on your results because people make a big deal about what you've done. She could play and win Wimbledon and we will still be talking about how many MORE she could have won.

If she can get satisfied with her career, why can't we? After all, it's not our life to live. This is like another stab in the back for her, especially if you're a Seles fan like I do.

SelesFan70
May 17th, 2004, 07:25 PM
She was pitiful on grass. I mean c'mon. She won multiple Grand Slams on every other other surface and only made one Wimbledon final. Where, I might add, she got housed. Next you'll be arguing her (admittedly) mediocre clay results are somehow meaningful. Face it, she lucked into winning nine GS titles.

What a ridiculous thread.

I love sarcasm disguised as intense truth... :worship:

alfonsojose
May 17th, 2004, 07:35 PM
To her standards, maybe so, but she wasn't a "nobody" on grass either. Seles was always a threat no matter the surface being played one:D

:yeah:

Spirit
May 17th, 2004, 07:39 PM
Monica has never played on grass! She doesn't do drugs!

Gosh, what sick thread! :smash:

Tompier
May 17th, 2004, 07:47 PM
the "weak" word doesn't fit with Monica

faboozadoo15
May 17th, 2004, 09:44 PM
it's too bad she didn't get a littl more time to play on the grass. she's just now started to like it over the last few years...
tauziat has better results, but monica was better on grass, funny how that works...

LindsayRulez
May 17th, 2004, 09:58 PM
I think she's a great player on grass but maybe she doesn't think she's too great which leads to her not doing too well on it, kind of like Lindsay and red clay.

jimbo mack
May 18th, 2004, 02:40 PM
Obviously 6-2 6-1 final against Graf is the question mark. That was the year with the grunting. Had nothing been made of it, it may have been a different story.

i doubt it

alfajeffster
May 18th, 2004, 03:05 PM
Hey Jeff! :wavey:

It was not my intention to try and undermine Pete Sampras' accomplishments on clay. However, given how many more events he played on clay and also given the fact that there are no Tier 1 events on grass, and how few grass events Monica played, I still feel she is overall more consistent than him and better on grass than he is on clay.

Monica's game definitely suffers on grass as she never had that "big serve" or "brilliant volleys" which are essential. She's probably one of the greatest returners in the history of the game and I believe that is responsible for a large part of her success on grass.

I love that she's unbeaten on grass against Navratilova. :lol:

It should also be pointed out that Monica, despite her limited game on grass, did have a better record in her first three Wimbledons than Steffi Graf and Martina Navratilova.Hey Hingis-Seles, how are ya?

Just a quick proviso in comparison: There were several grass warm-up tournaments Seles could have used to hone her skills on grass before and even after Wimbledon, and she always chose not to. Sampras, to his eternal credit, did everything he could during his brilliant career to get that Roland Garros title- on a surface he obviously didn't like as much as Seles doesn't like grass. The training comparison and tournament schedules they chose on their least favorite surface is proof. There were grass tourneys in Germany, Holland, and England which Seles could have played, but avoided like the plague. I'm not trying to demean anybody's favorite here, just pointing out that it's obvious that Seles never really gave same effort as Sampras to try and win that big title on her worst surface. I have nothing but respect for her beating Navratilova in the 92 semis of Wimbledon- there are so few players who can say they've beaten Martina on grass. That said, it's also safe to surmise that had she played Martina on at least 3 more occasions, say Eastbourne or even at Wimbledon a few more times, it's a safe bet Martina would have the edge. That one match they played was SOOOO close- a few points here and there- and we've all seen Nav play better than that- I've never seen Monica play better on grass than that one single match.

mishar
May 18th, 2004, 04:29 PM
People here have named all the reasons why Monica isn't as good on grass: limited mobility, her grips, reluctance to move forward, mentally allergic.

Having said that, it's interesting to note that in her last two Wimbledons (far from her peak as a player) she reached the QF both times and fought close matches against 2 very good grass-court players (Justine and LIndsay). Not bad for someone with all of her liabilities on grass!

mishar
May 18th, 2004, 04:38 PM
Might also note in the Tauziat-Seles grass comparison, their win-loss records on grass. Tauziat did win those 2 birmingam titles, but she of course played many many more grass tournaments than Monica, so while her list of titles is longer, her winning percentages are not nearly as good.

Monica 35-11
Natalie 109-43

Plus while they have the same number of QF/F finishes, Natalie played Wimbledon 16 times, Monica only 9

Monica's WC record:
30-9
Natalie at WC:
40-16

DA FOREHAND
May 18th, 2004, 04:52 PM
Might also note in the Tauziat-Seles grass comparison, their win-loss records on grass. Tauziat did win those 2 birmingam titles, but she of course played many many more grass tournaments than Monica, so while her list of titles is longer, her winning percentages are not nearly as good.

Monica 35-11
Natalie 109-43

Plus while they have the same number of QF/F finishes, Natalie played Wimbledon 16 times, Monica only 9

Monica's WC record:
30-9
Natalie at WC:
40-16

Why compare her to Tauziat? Why not Lindsay, Jennifer, justine, Steffi, Martina?

hingis-seles
May 18th, 2004, 06:45 PM
Why compare her to Tauziat? Why not Lindsay, Jennifer, justine, Steffi, Martina?
Because the last few posts were comparing Monica to Nathalie.

DA FOREHAND
May 18th, 2004, 06:48 PM
Because the last few posts were comparing Monica to Nathalie.
let me clarify....are people comparing her to Natalie to say see she's beaten her on grass therefore she's not weak on this surface?

I would think if you're trying to prove she isn't weak on a surface you'd compare her play on grass against the better grass court players.


If one were trying to make a case that player "C" isn't weak on clay, they wouldn't compare them to Lindsay, or on the mens side Pete.

hingis-seles
May 18th, 2004, 07:06 PM
let me clarify....are people comparing her to Natalie to say see she's beaten her on grass therefore she's not weak on this surface?

I would think if you're trying to prove she isn't weak on a surface you'd compare her play on grass against the better grass court players.


If one were trying to make a case that player "C" isn't weak on clay, they wouldn't compare them to Lindsay, or on the mens side Pete.
morbidangle started the discussion by saying we call Tauziat a good grasscourt player but he thought Monica was better. You can read the rest of the posts to see how we reached Mishar's post comparing the two.

DA FOREHAND
May 18th, 2004, 07:16 PM
Hingis somehow managed to get a Wimbledon title, but her Wimby record isn't that great. 2 1st rd losses 1 Qf, , Champion, and I think a 4th round.

Joseosu19
May 18th, 2004, 07:16 PM
I think Cool Canuck has the right idea. Monica is clearly weak on grass---compared to how she plays on all other surfaces. However, is she weak on grass compared to the majority of WTA players? No.

samn
May 18th, 2004, 07:20 PM
Hingis somehow managed to get a Wimbledon title, but her Wimby record isn't that great. 2 1st rd losses 1 Qf, , Champion, and I think a 4th round.

1995 1R -- lost to Graf (eventual champion)
1996 4R -- lost to Graf (eventual champion)
1997 won
1998 sf -- lost to Novotna (eventual champion)
1999 1R -- lost to Dokic
2000 qf -- lost to Venus Williams (eventual champion)
2001 1R -- lost to Ruano Pascual

Not a great record, but not too shabby, either! There's no shame in losing to Graf, Novotna, or Venus on grass.

DA FOREHAND
May 18th, 2004, 07:25 PM
Other players have done the Clay/Grass conversion winning both RG and Wimbledon. Monica didnt' care much for grass. I'm sure if Wimbledon was played on clay she would have played in 91 "injury" or no "injury"

hingis-seles
May 18th, 2004, 07:29 PM
Hey Hingis-Seles, how are ya?

Just a quick proviso in comparison: There were several grass warm-up tournaments Seles could have used to hone her skills on grass before and even after Wimbledon, and she always chose not to. Sampras, to his eternal credit, did everything he could during his brilliant career to get that Roland Garros title- on a surface he obviously didn't like as much as Seles doesn't like grass. The training comparison and tournament schedules they chose on their least favorite surface is proof. There were grass tourneys in Germany, Holland, and England which Seles could have played, but avoided like the plague. I'm not trying to demean anybody's favorite here, just pointing out that it's obvious that Seles never really gave same effort as Sampras to try and win that big title on her worst surface. I have nothing but respect for her beating Navratilova in the 92 semis of Wimbledon- there are so few players who can say they've beaten Martina on grass. That said, it's also safe to surmise that had she played Martina on at least 3 more occasions, say Eastbourne or even at Wimbledon a few more times, it's a safe bet Martina would have the edge. That one match they played was SOOOO close- a few points here and there- and we've all seen Nav play better than that- I've never seen Monica play better on grass than that one single match.
But there were only 2 weeks between the French and Wimbledon for grass-court events. She almost always reaches the second week of Roland Garros; it wouldn't be wise of her to play the week after a Slam with another Slam so close. Judging by her record, she has performed best without any warm-up events.
In comparison, Pete had close to 8 weeks between Miami and Roland Garros, including 3 Masters Series events. The clay-court season is MUCH longer than the grass-court season. Plus, Monica only had a handful of chances when at her peak on grass.

1989


Reached Roland Garros semifinals
No warm-ups, goes to Wimbledon and loses 4th Round.
1990

Wins Roland Garros
No warm-ups, reaches quarters at Wimbledon
1991

Wins Roland Garros
No warm-ups; injured withdraws from Wimbledon
1992

Wins Roland Garros. 6-2, 3-6, 10-8 final victory in a gruelling tournament.
No warm-ups; reaches final at Wimbledon.
1996

Earliest exit ever at the time at Roland Garros in quarterfinals.
Enters Eastbourne and wins the title. Goes to Wimbledon and loses 2R.
1997

Loses in Roland Garros semifinals.
Enters Eastbourne and loses to Brenda in QF. Loses in 3R to Sandrine Testud.
1998

Reaches Roland Garros final.
No warm-ups. Loses in QF to Zvereva.
1999

Reaches Roland Garros semifinals
Loses opener in Eastbourne to Anne Kremer. Loses 3R to Lucic at Wimbledon.
2000

Loses in Roland Garros quarterfinals.
No warm-ups. Loses to Davenport in QF at Wimbledon.
2002

Loses in Roland Garros quarterfinals
No warm-ups. Loses to Henin-Hardenne in QF at Wimbledon.
If you notice a trend, she never entered a grasscourt warm-up before the stabbing. The reason could very well be that she won Roland Garros all but once before her trip to Wimbledon. It wouldn't be smart to play the week after winning a GS title, with another GS event so close by. In 1996, when she lost "early" at RG, she entered a warm-up. It was also the case in 1997 and 1999 when she lost in the semifinals at RG, but not in 1998 when she reached the final. By the time 2000 came around though, I think she'd learnt her lesson. Her worst results at Wimbledon came when she'd played warm-up events.

Whenever Monica has played a warm-up to Wimbledon, she's never reached the last sixteen at Wimbledon. When she hasn't played a warm-up, her results at Wimbledon have been R16, QF, F, QF, QF, QF.

The results show it's better for Monica to skip any warm-ups to Wimbledon and I feel she may very well have realized that and decided to not play any warm-ups for Wimbledon post-1999.

hingis-seles
May 18th, 2004, 07:32 PM
Other players have done the Clay/Grass conversion winning both RG and Wimbledon. Monica didnt' care much for grass. I'm sure if Wimbledon was played on clay she would have played in 91 "injury" or no "injury"
Would have, should have, could have. :zzz:

When will the conspiracy theories end? :bs:

alfajeffster
May 18th, 2004, 07:38 PM
But there were only 2 weeks between the French and Wimbledon for grass-court events. She almost always reaches the second week of Roland Garros; it wouldn't be wise of her to play the week after a Slam with another Slam so close. Judging by her record, she has performed best without any warm-up events.
In comparison, Pete had close to 8 weeks between Miami and Roland Garros, including 3 Masters Series events. The clay-court season is MUCH longer than the grass-court season. Plus, Monica only had a handful of chances when at her peak on grass.

1989


Reached Roland Garros semifinals
No warm-ups, goes to Wimbledon and loses 4th Round.
1990

Wins Roland Garros
No warm-ups, reaches quarters at Wimbledon
1991

Wins Roland Garros
No warm-ups; injured withdraws from Wimbledon
1992

Wins Roland Garros. 6-2, 3-6, 10-8 final victory in a gruelling tournament.
No warm-ups; reaches final at Wimbledon.
1996

Earliest exit ever at the time at Roland Garros in quarterfinals.
Enters Eastbourne and wins the title. Goes to Wimbledon and loses 2R.
1997

Loses in Roland Garros semifinals.
Enters Eastbourne and loses to Brenda in QF. Loses in 3R to Sandrine Testud.
1998

Reaches Roland Garros final.
No warm-ups. Loses in QF to Zvereva.
1999

Reaches Roland Garros semifinals
Loses opener in Eastbourne to Anne Kremer. Loses 3R to Lucic at Wimbledon.
2000

Loses in Roland Garros quarterfinals.
No warm-ups. Loses to Davenport in QF at Wimbledon.
2002

Loses in Roland Garros quarterfinals
No warm-ups. Loses to Henin-Hardenne in QF at Wimbledon.
If you notice a trend, she never entered a grasscourt warm-up before the stabbing. The reason could very well be that she won Roland Garros all but once before her trip to Wimbledon. It wouldn't be smart to play the week after winning a GS title, with another GS event so close by. In 1996, when she lost "early" at RG, she entered a warm-up. It was also the case in 1997 and 1999 when she lost in the semifinals at RG, but not in 1998 when she reached the final. By the time 2000 came around though, I think she'd learnt her lesson. Her worst results at Wimbledon came when she'd played warm-up events.

Whenever Monica has played a warm-up to Wimbledon, she's never reached the last sixteen at Wimbledon. When she hasn't played a warm-up, her results at Wimbledon have been R16, QF, F, QF, QF, QF.

The results show it's better for Monica to skip any warm-ups to Wimbledon and I feel she may very well have realized that and decided to not play any warm-ups for Wimbledon post-1999.
Bjorn Borg was a guy who had pretty revolutionary grips and style of play, and seems like he made the transition pretty well. Could it be that the style Monica was taught was a little too far out for her to ever be able to make this adjustment? I tend to think so, and would even go as far as to thank Mr. Bollettieri for yet another long-lasting contribution to the degradation of this great sport of ours. Ah, but that's another thread entirely, no? I'm just thankful to have seen her play and warm-up in person several times in the past 14 years. I might add, that if anyone EVER gets a chance to just go watch Seles practice, U.S. Open, Canada, wherever she may play again- don't pass it up- it's a revelation!

hingis-seles
May 18th, 2004, 07:47 PM
Bjorn Borg was a guy who had pretty revolutionary grips and style of play, and seems like he made the transition pretty well. Could it be that the style Monica was taught was a little too far out for her to ever be able to make this adjustment? I tend to think so, and would even go as far as to thank Mr. Bollettieri for yet another long-lasting contribution to the degradation of this great sport of ours. Ah, but that's another thread entirely, no? I'm just thankful to have seen her play and warm-up in person several times in the past 14 years. I might add, that if anyone EVER gets a chance to just go watch Seles practice, U.S. Open, Canada, wherever she may play again- don't pass it up- it's a revelation!
I know this is off-topic, but IMO, Borg's achievement of winning back-to-back RG and Wimbledon titles so many times ranks right up there with the best of tennis achievements in the sport's history. Monica did achieve most of her success on grass, simply because she was that much better than the rest. The gap between the top and the lower ranked players has always been huge. We'll never know if she would have won a Wimbledon title, but it will always be her biggest challenge, and if she retires without one, her biggest shortcoming.

Don't even get me started on Mr. Bollettieri. I think it was John McEnroe who said,"He doesn't even know how to play tennis." or something like that. I got to see Monica practice in Dubai. It was an amazing experience watching her whack that ball.

mishar
May 18th, 2004, 08:19 PM
I was just responding to someone else posting that Tauziat had achieved more on grass than Monica.

Monica vs. Steffi or Nav really isn't worth comparing the disparity is so huge.

She has a better grass record than Jennifer, who has reached two SF but no F and never won a grass court tournament. Justine has won a gc tournament (a Tier III), reached the F and 2 SF so I think she'd get the nod over Monica.