PDA

View Full Version : Beating multiple slam winners in slam finals - sign of greatness!


Calimero377
Apr 27th, 2005, 11:53 PM
Of course the sheer number of slams won don't tell the whole story (Eg. Hingis who most of the time beat Mauresmo types in slam finals). So we have to analyse whom the game's greats beat in their winning slam finals to get a broader picture. Beating a player in a slam final who won at least 4 slams herself in her career most surely is a sign of real greatness.
Let's have a look (open era):


Stefanie Graf beat 5 different opponents who each won 4+ slams during their careers (Navi, Evert, ASV, Seles, Hingis).

Martina Navratilova beat 3 of this rare breed (Evert, Mandlikova, Graf).
Christine Marie Evert beat 3 as well (Navi, Goolagong, Mandlikova).
Court (King, Goolagong, Evert), Seles (Graf, ASV, Navi) and Goolagong (Court, Evert, Navi) are up there with 3 too .

So it is
#1: Graf 5
#2: Navi, Evert, Court, Seles, Goolagong.

What about today's players?
Does anyone know?

LUIS9
Apr 27th, 2005, 11:57 PM
Of course the sheer number of slams won don't tell the whole story (Eg. Hingis who most of the time beat Mauresmo types in slam finals). So we have to analyse whom the game's greats beat in their winning slam finals to get a broader picture. Beating a player in a slam final who won at least 4 slams herself in her career most surely is a sign of real greatness.
Let's have a look (open era):


Stefanie Graf beat 5 different opponents who each won 4+ slams during their careers (Navi, Evert, ASV, Seles, Hingis).

Martina Navratilova beat 3 of this rare breed (Evert, Mandlikova, Graf).
Christine Marie Evert beat 3 as well (Navi, Goolagong, Mandlikova).
Court (King, Goolagong, Evert), Seles (Graf, ASV, Navi) and Goolagong (Court, Evert, Navi) are up there with 3 too .

So it is
#1: Graf 5
#2: Navi, Evert, Court, Seles, Goolagong.

What about today's players?
Does anyone know?

You're too funny you know, your logic is simply illogical as crazy as it may sound. So Hingis slams are worth crap because of whom she beat and then you include her in whom Graf beat, so if shes just crap, then mrs Great Stephanie Graf could only beat crap players dont you think?

The
Apr 27th, 2005, 11:57 PM
Of course the sheer number of slams won don't tell the whole story (Eg. Hingis who most of the time beat Mauresmo types in slam finals). So we have to analyse whom the game's greats beat in their winning slam finals to get a broader picture. Beating a player in a slam final who won at least 4 slams herself in her career most surely is a sign of real greatness.
Let's have a look (open era):


Stefanie Graf beat 5 different opponents who each won 4+ slams during their careers (Navi, Evert, ASV, Seles, Hingis).

Martina Navratilova beat 3 of this rare breed (Evert, Mandlikova, Graf).
Christine Marie Evert beat 3 as well (Navi, Goolagong, Mandlikova).
Court (King, Goolagong, Evert), Seles (Graf, ASV, Navi) and Goolagong (Court, Evert, Navi) are up there with 3 too .

So it is
#1: Graf 5
#2: Navi, Evert, Court, Seles, Goolagong.

What about today's players?
Does anyone know?

I disagree, I think the true sign of greatness is winning 108 or more titles.

Calimero377
Apr 28th, 2005, 12:03 AM
I disagree, I think the true sign of greatness is winning 108 or more titles.


No, I'd say winning a zillion mixed doubles titles clinches it ....

Philbo
Apr 28th, 2005, 12:06 AM
Of course the sheer number of slams won don't tell the whole story (Eg. Hingis who most of the time beat Mauresmo types in slam finals). So we have to analyse whom the game's greats beat in their winning slam finals to get a broader picture. Beating a player in a slam final who won at least 4 slams herself in her career most surely is a sign of real greatness.
Let's have a look (open era):


Stefanie Graf beat 5 different opponents who each won 4+ slams during their careers (Navi, Evert, ASV, Seles, Hingis).

Martina Navratilova beat 3 of this rare breed (Evert, Mandlikova, Graf).
Christine Marie Evert beat 3 as well (Navi, Goolagong, Mandlikova).
Court (King, Goolagong, Evert), Seles (Graf, ASV, Navi) and Goolagong (Court, Evert, Navi) are up there with 3 too .

So it is
#1: Graf 5
#2: Navi, Evert, Court, Seles, Goolagong.

What about today's players?
Does anyone know?

Yawn....

JenFan75
Apr 28th, 2005, 12:15 AM
v__v

This is getting old so fast...

The
Apr 28th, 2005, 12:19 AM
No, I'd say winning a zillion mixed doubles titles clinches it ....

108 singles titles then.

PaulieM
Apr 28th, 2005, 12:42 AM
wow graf wins again, what a shocker! :eek:

mboyle
Apr 28th, 2005, 01:01 AM
I think Wills Moody takes the cake, but Gunther will tell us that he was only counting the open era, so what's the use?:rolleyes:

Knizzle
Apr 28th, 2005, 01:04 AM
Another interesting cutoff at 4+ slams. Wonder who Cali's excluding now.

Munchen
Apr 28th, 2005, 01:09 AM
:o :rolleyes:

Just_lindsay
Apr 28th, 2005, 02:29 AM
Davenport beat Graf and Hingis in slam finals, and she's still chugging!

Sharapova beat Serena...

Serena beat Venus...


I don't know of any others.

Knizzle
Apr 28th, 2005, 02:30 AM
Davenport beat Graf and Hingis in slam finals, and she's still chugging!

Sharapova beat Serena...

Serena beat Venus...


I don't know of any others.

Serena beat Hingis.

Venus beat Serena.

selking
Apr 28th, 2005, 03:46 AM
Its just frustrating to try and put some sense in a moran like calimero.

Stamp Paid
Apr 28th, 2005, 04:35 AM
Serena Williams beat Venus Williams, 4 time slam winner (2 Wimbledons, in fact), 4 consecutive times in 4 Consecutive Slam finals. She also beat 5 time Slam winner Martina Hingis at the US Open 1999.

*Woop-Woop*

vogus
Apr 28th, 2005, 04:43 AM
Its just frustrating to try and put some sense in a moran like calimero.


especially when you're a moron yourself.

selking
Apr 28th, 2005, 04:45 AM
:baby::crying2:

I love it when dumbasses support calimero.

bandabou
Apr 28th, 2005, 06:14 PM
Serena beat Venus and Martina with 4+ and Lindsay with 3.

One curious thing though is that Cali's 3rd greatest player ever, Enna, opponent had an amazing record of ZERO majors!! Now how's that for greatness?

stenen
Apr 28th, 2005, 07:04 PM
Of course the sheer number of slams won don't tell the whole story (Eg. Hingis who most of the time beat Mauresmo types in slam finals). So we have to analyse whom the game's greats beat in their winning slam finals to get a broader picture. Beating a player in a slam final who won at least 4 slams herself in her career most surely is a sign of real greatness.
Let's have a look (open era):


Stefanie Graf beat 5 different opponents who each won 4+ slams during their careers (Navi, Evert, ASV, Seles, Hingis).

Martina Navratilova beat 3 of this rare breed (Evert, Mandlikova, Graf).
Christine Marie Evert beat 3 as well (Navi, Goolagong, Mandlikova).
Court (King, Goolagong, Evert), Seles (Graf, ASV, Navi) and Goolagong (Court, Evert, Navi) are up there with 3 too .

So it is
#1: Graf 5
#2: Navi, Evert, Court, Seles, Goolagong.

What about today's players?
Does anyone know?


:yawn: You don't really care about today's players. you just ask it to be PC whenever you get this need to post something about your #1 obsession - Graf. Haven't you ever heard that too much of anything is bad for you?

kosmikgroove
Apr 28th, 2005, 07:06 PM
that's the most asanine reasoning EVER

Meeting a multiple slam winner in the FINALS is luck of the draw. sometimes you beat a multiple slam winner in the QF or SF just because of how a draw is made! beating them PERIOD is what's admireable, not WHEN.