PDA

View Full Version : Conchita and the Hall of Fame


Bette_Midler
Feb 24th, 2006, 11:42 AM
"....Here's the question of the year then, Hall of Fame division: Would Conchita Martinez gotten in this year, given that she doesn't have Gaby's sex appeal or her own wildly successful perfume? She does have a Slam singles title (Wimby), more WTA singles titles (33) , 13 dubs crowns, Fed Cup titles, nine years in the Top 10 and greater longevity. Probably not, which is sad, because in my book, the quieter Conchi has had a better career than Gaby. "Tennis Reporters"


source: tennis reporters.net

/sub_sabatini_012406.html

FaceyFacem
Feb 24th, 2006, 11:46 AM
i think she would make it...her fed cup results with arantxa are phenomenal, has a few olympic medals, and a few other GS finals

spencercarlos
Feb 24th, 2006, 11:49 AM
"....Here's the question of the year then, Hall of Fame division: Would Conchita Martinez gotten in this year, given that she doesn't have Gaby's sex appeal or her own wildly successful perfume? She does have a Slam singles title (Wimby), more WTA singles titles (33) , 13 dubs crowns, Fed Cup titles, nine years in the Top 10 and greater longevity. Probably not, which is sad, because in my book, the quieter Conchi has had a better career than Gaby. "Tennis Reporters"


source: tennis reporters.net

/sub_sabatini_012406.html
She will in 2021.
Greater longevity does not means a better carreer.
Gaby was much more of a factor against the top players, and by a lot and much more than Conchita ever was on any period of her carreer.
But still i think someday she´ll get there, that Wimbledon win was very important and she was a consistent top 10 player on a big part of her carreer.

*Jool*
Feb 24th, 2006, 11:50 AM
it's a shame if she doesn't , but we won't know before she's officially retired ( :unsure: ) , right?

crazillo
Feb 24th, 2006, 11:51 AM
I think she will make it, too. :)

cakiteror
Feb 24th, 2006, 12:26 PM
oh,she will make it for sure!

Steffica Greles
Feb 24th, 2006, 12:55 PM
She will in 2021.
Greater longevity does not means a better carreer.
Gaby was much more of a factor against the top players, and by a lot and much more than Conchita ever was on any period of her carreer.
But still i think someday she´ll get there, that Wimbledon win was very important and she was a consistent top 10 player on a big part of her carreer.

Let's look at this.

Sabatini had wins against Evert, Navratilova, Graf, Seles and Sanchez-Vicario. They were the five number ones of her time. She beat Sanchez-Vicario before she reached the top however, Evert and Navratilova afterwards.

Martinez has wins over Hingis (while she was no.1), Davenport (while she was no.2), Seles (while she was no.2), Graf (while she was no.1), Mauresmo, Sanchez-Vicario (while was she no.1) Capriati, Navratilova (at Wimbledon) and Clijsters, although admittedly very early in her career. So, all in all, Martinez has more wins against number one players. In fact, Martinez has beaten almost all the number one players who ever played the game. The only exceptions who played in her era are Henin, Sharapova and the Williams sisters.

Martinez's first win over a top ten player was in 1988. Her last was only last year, over Petrova. That's a 17 year span. Sabatini's span was only 10 years.

Conchita's also reached finals at 3 of the 4 slams, while Sabatini only managed 2. And of course, as has already been stated, Martinez has more career titles, more career wins, and a good record against Sabatini.

I think Conchita has a very strong case.

borisy
Feb 24th, 2006, 01:21 PM
Martinez has a better career than Gabriela "I'm-milking-my-fans-money-with-some-crap-perfumes" Sabatini.

thrust
Feb 24th, 2006, 01:37 PM
Neither Sabatini or Martinez deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. One Slam should not be enough to be even considered for the HOF. But then, we are talking the tennis HOF, which is a joke!

Gandalf
Feb 24th, 2006, 01:54 PM
Let's look at this.

Sabatini had wins against Evert, Navratilova, Graf, Seles and Sanchez-Vicario. They were the five number ones of her time. She beat Sanchez-Vicario before she reached the top however, Evert and Navratilova afterwards.

Martinez has wins over Hingis (while she was no.1), Davenport (while she was no.2), Seles (while she was no.2), Graf (while she was no.1), Mauresmo, Sanchez-Vicario (while was she no.1) Capriati, Navratilova (at Wimbledon) and Clijsters, although admittedly very early in her career. So, all in all, Martinez has more wins against number one players. In fact, Martinez has beaten almost all the number one players who ever played the game. The only exceptions who played in her era are Henin, Sharapova and the Williams sisters.

Martinez's first win over a top ten player was in 1988. Her last was only last year, over Petrova. That's a 17 year span. Sabatini's span was only 10 years.

Conchita's also reached finals at 3 of the 4 slams, while Sabatini only managed 2. And of course, as has already been stated, Martinez has more career titles, more career wins, and a good record against Sabatini.

I think Conchita has a very strong case.

Hum, if Conchita has a 'good record against Sabatini' at 6:9, then Sabatini has a 'better record against Conchita' at 9:6. ;)

Sabatini also beat Capriati, actually more times than Conchita did.

If we count that Conchita beat Seles and Davenport while they were number 2, then Gaby beat ASV while she was number 2 (Italian Open'93, if you don't count Seles as active anymore), Navratilova while she was number 1 (YEC'87). She also beat Hingis and Davenport, but never played them while they were number 1 or 2. And didn't play Sharapova, the Williams, Henin or Clijsters, so couldn't beat them either. Actually, she beat all the players to get to number 1 in her era, something Conchita hasn't done.

I wouldn't count Fed Cup titles as much: if ASV was Argentinian probably Gaby would have 5 two.

And Gaby has 2 YEC, a Silver Olympic medal in singles, and a doubles Slam, which Conchita hasn't.

And if we count Tier 2 or above titles then Gaby has about the same or more than Conchita.

In summary, I don't think that statistics show that Conchita has had 'clearly' the better career.

Bette_Midler
Feb 24th, 2006, 02:01 PM
And Gaby has 2 YEC, a Silver Olympic medal in singles, and a doubles Slam, which Conchita hasn't.



Conchi has 3 Olympic medals, 2 silver and 1 bronze

Steffica Greles
Feb 24th, 2006, 02:02 PM
Hum, if Conchita has a 'good record against Sabatini' at 6:9, then Sabatini has a 'better record against Conchita' at 9:6. ;)

Sabatini also beat Capriati, actually more times than Conchita did.

If we count that Conchita beat Seles and Davenport while they were number 2, then Gaby beat ASV while she was number 2 (Italian Open'93, if you don't count Seles as active anymore), Navratilova while she was number 1 (YEC'87). She also beat Hingis and Davenport, but never played them while they were number 1 or 2. And didn't play Sharapova, the Williams, Henin or Clijsters, so couldn't beat them either. Actually, she beat all the players to get to number 1 in her era, something Conchita hasn't done.

I wouldn't count Fed Cup titles as much: if ASV was Argentinian probably Gaby would have 5 two.

And Gaby has 2 YEC, a Silver Olympic medal in singles, and a doubles Slam, which Conchita hasn't.

And if we count Tier 2 or above titles then Gaby has about the same or more than Conchita.

In summary, I don't think that statistics show that Conchita has had 'clearly' the better career.

Yeah sorry, I forgot Sabatini's wins over Jen. If I had to choose between the two, I lean towards Gabi as well. But I'm also saying Conchita has a strong case. Her 6:9 record against Gabi was not bad considering when Conchita joined the tour Gabi was no.3 in the world.

Most importantly I'm saying that I agree Sabatini is hyped far too much, when in fact, she delivered not very much relative to what was expected of her. And I'm sick of attractive women (botox, in Gabi's case) being hyped over others who are often as good or better.

Maria Sharapova, in my estimation, is no higher than 6th in the world rankings, 8th when the Williamses are on form. Would people be talking about her dominating if she wasn't as photogenic? I don't think so.

I think the same applies to Gabi.

tennislover
Feb 24th, 2006, 02:06 PM
:tape:

Gandalf
Feb 24th, 2006, 02:22 PM
Yeah sorry, I forgot Sabatini's wins over Jen. If I had to choose between the two, I lean towards Gabi as well. But I'm also saying Conchita has a strong case. Her 6:9 record against Gabi was not bad considering when Conchita joined the tour Gabi was no.3 in the world.

Most importantly I'm saying that I agree Sabatini is hyped far too much, when in fact, she delivered not very much relative to what was expected of her. And I'm sick of attractive women (botox, in Gabi's case) being hyped over others who are often as good or better.

Maria Sharapova, in my estimation, is no higher than 6th in the world rankings, 8th when the Williamses are on form. Would people be talking about her dominating if she wasn't as photogenic? I don't think so.

I think the same applies to Gabi.

Steffica: no problem, I just can't let a topic with Gaby pass by. :wavey:

Actually I feel that Gaby had something of the Kournikova trap: she had a lot of fans because of her beauty, and she had the talent to win much more than she did in her career. And when she didn't people reacted as if she wasn't that talented and had actually won as much as she could. But if you see her matches and see the shots she could play, you see more talent (IMHO) than with Conchita.

Gabrielle, I know that Conchita has 3 olympic medals, but they are in doubles; the thing is that we can both find stats for either of them that the other one doesn't have. I just wanted to make the point that Conchita's career is not better for me, although I understand that it is not clear-cut in this case.

Oh, and Gaby doesn't use botox: she's naturally THAT beautiful :angel:

Aquanetta
Feb 24th, 2006, 02:57 PM
Let's look at this.

Sabatini had wins against Evert, Navratilova, Graf, Seles and Sanchez-Vicario. They were the five number ones of her time. She beat Sanchez-Vicario before she reached the top however, Evert and Navratilova afterwards.

Martinez has wins over Hingis (while she was no.1), Davenport (while she was no.2), Seles (while she was no.2), Graf (while she was no.1), Mauresmo, Sanchez-Vicario (while was she no.1) Capriati, Navratilova (at Wimbledon) and Clijsters, although admittedly very early in her career. So, all in all, Martinez has more wins against number one players. In fact, Martinez has beaten almost all the number one players who ever played the game. The only exceptions who played in her era are Henin, Sharapova and the Williams sisters.

Martinez's first win over a top ten player was in 1988. Her last was only last year, over Petrova. That's a 17 year span. Sabatini's span was only 10 years.

Conchita's also reached finals at 3 of the 4 slams, while Sabatini only managed 2. And of course, as has already been stated, Martinez has more career titles, more career wins, and a good record against Sabatini.

I think Conchita has a very strong case.

What you failed to mention in this Martinez vs. Sabatini debate, is that Conchita only beat Graf and Seles once…AND…she never beat Graf and Seles in Grand Slam play…AND…Conchita didn’t beat Seles until Stanford ’98 or’99. Sabatini competed very well against Graf and Seles in their prime; Martinez did not.

I do think, though, that Conchita should be inducted at some point.

spencercarlos
Feb 24th, 2006, 04:06 PM
Let's look at this.

Sabatini had wins against Evert, Navratilova, Graf, Seles and Sanchez-Vicario. They were the five number ones of her time. She beat Sanchez-Vicario before she reached the top however, Evert and Navratilova afterwards.

Martinez has wins over Hingis (while she was no.1), Davenport (while she was no.2), Seles (while she was no.2), Graf (while she was no.1), Mauresmo, Sanchez-Vicario (while was she no.1) Capriati, Navratilova (at Wimbledon) and Clijsters, although admittedly very early in her career. So, all in all, Martinez has more wins against number one players. In fact, Martinez has beaten almost all the number one players who ever played the game. The only exceptions who played in her era are Henin, Sharapova and the Williams sisters.

Martinez's first win over a top ten player was in 1988. Her last was only last year, over Petrova. That's a 17 year span. Sabatini's span was only 10 years.

Conchita's also reached finals at 3 of the 4 slams, while Sabatini only managed 2. And of course, as has already been stated, Martinez has more career titles, more career wins, and a good record against Sabatini.

I think Conchita has a very strong case.
Talking about Number one players (or players that were number one at some point of their carreer)..
Sabatini this head to head totals vs players that have been number one.
Evert, Navratilova, Graf, Seles,Sanchez-Vicario, Hingis, Davenport, Capriati, Austin
(3-6,6-15,11-29,3-11,12-11,1-1,7-3,11-5,1-0)
For a grand total of:
55-81 for a 40,4%

Martinez vs Number one players (when she`s been able to win)
Capriati, Clijsters, Graf, Hingis, Mauresmo, Sanchez Vicario, Seles, Davenport, Nravratilova)
(4-6,1-5,1-13,3-11,1-4, 4-15, 1-20, 9-9, 4-1)
For a grand total of:
28-84= for a great 25% of success against players that have been number one and she`s been able to beat.

Do you want me to add her records vs Evert,Serena, Venus and Henin? (0-2,0-5,0-3,0-8) OK
28-102=21.5% record against the players that were number one at some point of their carreers.

To still be on head to head records againt non-number one ranked players Sabatini has positive head to head records vs Novotna, Huber, Martinez, Pierce, Date. On the other hand Martinez has losing records to Novotna, Huber, Pierce and Date.

Gaby has losing head to head record against 13 players, Martinez has losing head to head records against 37 players. :lol:

Another topic...How many times Conchita Martinez beat the world`s number one ranked player?
I can only think of 2 times. Philly 93 and Hamburg 2000. And that is very poor.

Sabatini has beaten the world number one:
1987 Italian Open (Navratilova)
1988 Boca Raton (Graf)
1988 Amelia Island (Graf)
1989 Amelia ISland (Graf)
1990 Usopen (Graf)
1990 Vs. CHampionships (Graf)
1991 Tokio Pan Pacific (Graf)
1991 Boca Raton (Graf)
1991 Rome (Seles)
1992 Rome (Seles)

Ok to sum it up Gaby was successful 40% of the time against players that were number one at some point of their carreers, while Martinez has a respectable but not great 21% of success against these kind of players.
Sabatini upset the worlds top ranked player 10 times while Martinez did it only 2 times.
Sabatini has a losing record to just 13 players. Martinez has losing record to 37 players.

Don`t tell me that Sabatini hyped, but hype is to say that Martinez is better than Sabatini because of her 33 (most of them low Tier) events. When i just showed you how they fared against the top players.

This is for the ones that loves to compare Sabatini and Martinez.. They are on a different league.
Bye

Bette_Midler
Feb 24th, 2006, 04:21 PM
because in my book, the quieter Conchi has had a better career than Gaby. "Tennis Reporters"


source: tennis reporters.net

/sub_sabatini_012406.html

I agree

Bette_Midler
Feb 24th, 2006, 04:30 PM
Does Sabatini belong in the Hall?
Checking out players' blogs

By Matthew Cronin, Tennis Reporters.net

Australian tennis player Patrick Rafter
Susan Mullane/Camerawork USA
Patrick Rafter was elected into the International Tennis Hall of Fame, but without the controversy surround the selection of Gabriela Sabatini.

Outside the grounds of the Aussie Open, the voters in the International Hall of Fame balloting blew a major gasket in electing Gabriela Sabatini to the International Tennis Hall of Fame. The Argentine joins the deserving Patrick Rafter in the players' category, while Italian journalist Gianni Clerici was elected as a contributor by the Masters Panel, which I sit on.

I've been arguing in private for more than a few years now that tennis needs to have a more respectable bar for entrants, like at least two Slam titles in singles and, if not, an amazing Slam record in doubles, or an gigantic amount of tour singles titles, or title runs on Davis or Fed Cups, or the Olympics.

Gaby had none of those and, as much as I enjoyed covering her, given that she's complete charming and, at times, was a terrific fighter, she should not have been elected given her on-court record. But, the hall has been tainted by its own history, electing doubles standouts Pam Shriver and Rosie Casals even after it became an "International" Hall of Fame. (It was a US Hall of Fame up until 1975 and wasn't recognized by the ITF until 1986).

Voters were bewitched by Gaby's beauty and her contributions as an ambassador for the sport, neither quality that should play into player selection. In fact, that Gaby got in and Michael Stich didn't last year is embarrassing.

To her credit, Sabatini was ranked in the Top 10 for 10 consecutive years and was the first Argentine woman to win a Slam singles event ('90 US Open). She captured 27 WTA singles championships and 14 doubles championships, including the Wimbledon doubles title in 1988 with Steffi Graf. But, she consistently choked, and players who gag as much as Gaby did don't belong in the hall, unless they won a dozen or so Slam dubs titles like Jana Novotna did.

Here's the question of the year then, Hall of Fame division: Would Conchita Martinez gotten in this year, given that she doesn't have Gaby's sex appeal or her own wildly successful perfume? She does have a Slam singles title (Wimby), more WTA singles titles (33) , 13 dubs crowns, Fed Cup titles, nine years in the Top 10 and greater longevity. Probably not, which is sad, because in my book, the quieter Conchi has had a better career than Gaby.

With Gaby's "yes" vote, pencil in Michael Chang immediately. He's a one Slammer with many ATP singles titles and has been a great ambassador of the game, In fact, since there is no doubles wing, pencil in Iva Majoli, too, who has just as good as singles career as Shriver.

The problem with the hall voting is that like US baseball, there isn't enough public debate and that there are too many ex-players involved in the balloting. It's more like a vanity and buddy contest than a legitimate vote on who is worthy of what is supposed to be the highest accolade in the sport. As the bar keeps dropping, the interest in the result will decline.

BTW: You can credit Hall of Famer Bud Collins for Clerici's entrance: he's one of Bud's best friends and was denied once, but it's hard to put either Bud or Gianni down when they have their entire games working for them.

" ....

Aquanetta
Feb 24th, 2006, 04:34 PM
Talking about Number one players (or players that were number one at some point of their carreer)..
Sabatini this head to head totals vs players that have been number one.
Evert, Navratilova, Graf, Seles,Sanchez-Vicario, Hingis, Davenport, Capriati, Austin
(3-6,6-15,11-29,3-11,12-11,1-1,7-3,11-5,1-0)
For a grand total of:
55-81 for a 40,4%

Martinez vs Number one players (when she`s been able to win)
Capriati, Clijsters, Graf, Hingis, Mauresmo, Sanchez Vicario, Seles, Davenport, Nravratilova)
(4-6,1-5,1-13,3-11,1-4, 4-15, 1-20, 9-9, 4-1)
For a grand total of:
28-84= for a great 25% of success against players that have been number one and she`s been able to beat.

Do you want me to add her records vs Evert,Serena, Venus and Henin? (0-2,0-5,0-3,0-8) OK
28-102=21.5% record against the players that were number one at some point of their carreers.

To still be on head to head records againt non-number one ranked players Sabatini has positive head to head records vs Novotna, Huber, Martinez, Pierce, Date. On the other hand Martinez has losing records to Novotna, Huber, Pierce and Date.

Gaby has losing head to head record against 13 players, Martinez has losing head to head records against 37 players. :lol:

Another topic...How many times Conchita Martinez beat the world`s number one ranked player?
I can only think of 2 times. Philly 93 and Hamburg 2000. And that is very poor.

Sabatini has beaten the world number one:
1987 Italian Open (Navratilova)
1988 Boca Raton (Graf)
1988 Amelia Island (Graf)
1989 Amelia ISland (Graf)
1990 Usopen (Graf)
1990 Vs. CHampionships (Graf)
1991 Tokio Pan Pacific (Graf)
1991 Boca Raton (Graf)
1991 Rome (Seles)
1992 Rome (Seles)

Ok to sum it up Gaby was successful 40% of the time against players that were number one at some point of their carreers, while Martinez has a respectable but not great 21% of success against these kind of players.
Sabatini upset the worlds top ranked player 10 times while Martinez did it only 2 times.
Sabatini has a losing record to just 13 players. Martinez has losing record to 37 players.

Don`t tell me that Sabatini hyped, but hype is to say that Martinez is better than Sabatini because of her 33 (most of them low Tier) events. When i just showed you how they fared against the top players.

This is for the ones that loves to compare Sabatini and Martinez.. They are on a different league.
Bye

Thank you for all these statistics. It's a telling point in this Martinez vs. Sabatini debate. I respect both players and agree that Conchita should be admitted to the Hall but in comparing their play against the best, I always knew that Sabatini fared a lot better.

Ms Tracy Austin
Feb 24th, 2006, 04:37 PM
Since they are electing a single player and not a team into the HOF, I don't think Conchita's Fed Cup results should matter. Martinez may have more titles than Gaby (6 I think), but can anyone tell us how many of those were Tier 3 and below? I know many were while Gaby mainly won T1's and T2's and didn't even compete in T3's. Novotna had a better career than Conchita too IMO. If they all deserve to be in the HOF, the order should have been Gaby, then Jana, then Chita.

Bette_Midler
Feb 24th, 2006, 04:38 PM
With Gaby's "yes" vote, pencil in Michael Chang immediately. He's a one Slammer with many ATP singles titles and has been a great ambassador of the game, In fact, since there is no doubles wing, pencil in Iva Majoli, too, who has just as good as singles career as Shriver.

.

" ....

and what happend with Sergi Brugera? :p

manu32
Feb 24th, 2006, 04:55 PM
one slam is not suffisant for hall of fame!!!
in the next years:lindsay,jhh,hingis,serena and venus,jencap ,sanchez vicario and pierce...and navratilova deserved to ....
but why novotna,sabatini,majoli,ruzici ......or gaudio,noah,ferrero,moya,johanson???
it's not a addition of gs winners but a real contribution to game's history......

Danke Anke
Feb 24th, 2006, 05:24 PM
She definitely will -- she's made 3 grand slam finals (at three different slams), winning one, and has so many Tier I titles as well.

baleineau
Feb 24th, 2006, 05:53 PM
She was a force in women's tennis for at least 10 years, posting great results on clay, grass and hardcourts. I don't think you can easily compare two players, just on results against other players, because they didn't play the same events, the same surfaces, the same era. A win over World #2 Davenport on a hardcourt, World #1 Hingis on Clay, World #1 Graf on Carpet, Navratilova in a Wimbledon final........these are much more significant than beating Navratilova aged 37 on clay, Evert aged 30+ on a hardcourt or whatever.

Pick about half a dozen players from the 90s who are HOF contenders (Graf, Seles, ASV, Sabatini, Novotna, Martinez). For the 80s, Navratilova, Evert, Mandlikova, Sukova, Shriver, Austin, Jaeger). For the 00s, Hingis, Davenport, Venus, Serena, Capriati, Kim, Justine, Amelie.....

Each decade roughly produces about half-a-dozen stand out players, some much better than others. However, they are all in a league above the "nearly" players such as MJF, Maleeva-F, Zina Garrison, Tauziat........

this is where the distinction lies.

spencercarlos
Feb 24th, 2006, 06:03 PM
Does Sabatini belong in the Hall?
Checking out players' blogs

By Matthew Cronin, Tennis Reporters.net

Australian tennis player Patrick Rafter
Susan Mullane/Camerawork USA
Patrick Rafter was elected into the International Tennis Hall of Fame, but without the controversy surround the selection of Gabriela Sabatini.

Outside the grounds of the Aussie Open, the voters in the International Hall of Fame balloting blew a major gasket in electing Gabriela Sabatini to the International Tennis Hall of Fame. The Argentine joins the deserving Patrick Rafter in the players' category, while Italian journalist Gianni Clerici was elected as a contributor by the Masters Panel, which I sit on.

I've been arguing in private for more than a few years now that tennis needs to have a more respectable bar for entrants, like at least two Slam titles in singles and, if not, an amazing Slam record in doubles, or an gigantic amount of tour singles titles, or title runs on Davis or Fed Cups, or the Olympics.

Gaby had none of those and, as much as I enjoyed covering her, given that she's complete charming and, at times, was a terrific fighter, she should not have been elected given her on-court record. But, the hall has been tainted by its own history, electing doubles standouts Pam Shriver and Rosie Casals even after it became an "International" Hall of Fame. (It was a US Hall of Fame up until 1975 and wasn't recognized by the ITF until 1986).

Voters were bewitched by Gaby's beauty and her contributions as an ambassador for the sport, neither quality that should play into player selection. In fact, that Gaby got in and Michael Stich didn't last year is embarrassing.

To her credit, Sabatini was ranked in the Top 10 for 10 consecutive years and was the first Argentine woman to win a Slam singles event ('90 US Open). She captured 27 WTA singles championships and 14 doubles championships, including the Wimbledon doubles title in 1988 with Steffi Graf. But, she consistently choked, and players who gag as much as Gaby did don't belong in the hall, unless they won a dozen or so Slam dubs titles like Jana Novotna did.

Here's the question of the year then, Hall of Fame division: Would Conchita Martinez gotten in this year, given that she doesn't have Gaby's sex appeal or her own wildly successful perfume? She does have a Slam singles title (Wimby), more WTA singles titles (33) , 13 dubs crowns, Fed Cup titles, nine years in the Top 10 and greater longevity. Probably not, which is sad, because in my book, the quieter Conchi has had a better career than Gaby.

With Gaby's "yes" vote, pencil in Michael Chang immediately. He's a one Slammer with many ATP singles titles and has been a great ambassador of the game, In fact, since there is no doubles wing, pencil in Iva Majoli, too, who has just as good as singles career as Shriver.

The problem with the hall voting is that like US baseball, there isn't enough public debate and that there are too many ex-players involved in the balloting. It's more like a vanity and buddy contest than a legitimate vote on who is worthy of what is supposed to be the highest accolade in the sport. As the bar keeps dropping, the interest in the result will decline.

BTW: You can credit Hall of Famer Bud Collins for Clerici's entrance: he's one of Bud's best friends and was denied once, but it's hard to put either Bud or Gianni down when they have their entire games working for them.

" ....
This is a ridiculous article.
First compare Rafter with Sabatini.
2 GS vs 1 GS
4 GS finals vs 3 GS finals
but...
11 Singles titles against 28 Singles titles
7 GS Semifinals against 18 GS Semifinals
5 years as a top ten player against 10 years and 8 months straight in the top ten
(Gaby was top 10 since on 4/8/1985 and dropped out in June of 1996 because of inactivity injured since April 1996).

Look at the titles Gaby won 20 either Tier II or better, while Rafter has only 5 big titles 2 Usopens, CIncintati, Toronto and Indianapolis important event likes for the mens...
So to say that Rafter`s one more GS makes him a more deserving HOF spot than Gaby`s 15 more high quality titles, 5 more years as a top ten player and 11 more GS semifinals than Rafter, is simply ridiculous.

That being said and going back to Sabatini-Martinez..
Saying Conchita Martinez 33 titles, (more than half being Tier III or TIer IV events),12 GS semifinals, 6 straight years as top ten (8 overall) could be considered better than Gaby`s 28 titles (20 of them Tier II or better), 18 GS semifinals and 10 years 10 months as a top ten player. Is just far ridiculous.. Not to mention if we look at the comparisson against the top players.

borisy
Feb 24th, 2006, 06:04 PM
Titles don't mean anything. Only GSs are important.

spencercarlos
Feb 24th, 2006, 06:04 PM
She was a force in women's tennis for at least 10 years, posting great results on clay, grass and hardcourts. I don't think you can easily compare two players, just on results against other players, because they didn't play the same events, the same surfaces, the same era. A win over World #2 Davenport on a hardcourt, World #1 Hingis on Clay, World #1 Graf on Carpet, Navratilova in a Wimbledon final........these are much more significant than beating Navratilova aged 37 on clay, Evert aged 30+ on a hardcourt or whatever.

Pick about half a dozen players from the 90s who are HOF contenders (Graf, Seles, ASV, Sabatini, Novotna, Martinez). For the 80s, Navratilova, Evert, Mandlikova, Sukova, Shriver, Austin, Jaeger). For the 00s, Hingis, Davenport, Venus, Serena, Capriati, Kim, Justine, Amelie.....

Each decade roughly produces about half-a-dozen stand out players, some much better than others. However, they are all in a league above the "nearly" players such as MJF, Maleeva-F, Zina Garrison, Tauziat........

this is where the distinction lies.
In total Martinez has been a top ten players for 8 years.. so i dont see where she has been a force for 10 years as you say..

baleineau
Feb 24th, 2006, 06:07 PM
oh, because she ranked 11th one year (1990) and 12th another (1997)? Yes, you're right. year-end ranks can be misleading, as a player can slip to 12th for a few weeks but then be back firmly in the top-10.

glad to see you know your facts though. i prefer to concentrate on the bigger picture.

*Jool*
Feb 24th, 2006, 06:13 PM
always this fight Conchi-Gaby :rolleyes:

so what ? yes Sabatini was better than Conchita. Ok , and now ?

does a thread : "does Conchita deserve to be in the HOF?" have to end as "does Conchita deserve HOF more or less than the great among the greats Gabriela Sabatini ?"

faboozadoo15
Feb 24th, 2006, 06:16 PM
She will in 2021.
Greater longevity does not means a better carreer.
Gaby was much more of a factor against the top players, and by a lot and much more than Conchita ever was on any period of her carreer.
But still i think someday she´ll get there, that Wimbledon win was very important and she was a consistent top 10 player on a big part of her carreer.
i actuallt think conchi had a better dominant period, her 94 wimbledon up until her 95 RG were amazing.

but in the end, gaby stepped it up way more often against th very best players the game has seen, and that's what she'll be remembered for.

Gallofa
Feb 24th, 2006, 06:20 PM
Shriver is in, Novotna is in, Sabatini is in. Conchita will be in too. I am sure. :D

Let's just hope she's not eligible for a few more years though. We still want to see more of Conchita :D!

spencercarlos
Feb 24th, 2006, 06:20 PM
i actuallt think conchi had a better dominant period, her 94 wimbledon up until her 95 RG were amazing.

but in the end, gaby stepped it up way more often against th very best players the game has seen, and that's what she'll be remembered for.
Oh really ? Tell me what 1994-1995 Martinez period has better in acomplishments compared to Gaby´s 1990-1991?
You want me to bring stats? again??

faboozadoo15
Feb 24th, 2006, 06:21 PM
Oh really ? Tell me what 1994-1995 Martinez period has better in acomplishments compared to Gaby´s 1990-1991?
You want me to bring stats? again??
:eek:
i love gaby, don't make me :sad:

Ms Tracy Austin
Feb 24th, 2006, 06:22 PM
Hey Spence, as far as the Rafter/Sabatini debate goes, what else would you expect from a bunch of people that think the acheivements of Sampras are greater than Court, Graf, Navratilova and Evert... they are bias.

spencercarlos
Feb 24th, 2006, 06:22 PM
oh, because she ranked 11th one year (1990) and 12th another (1997)? Yes, you're right. year-end ranks can be misleading, as a player can slip to 12th for a few weeks but then be back firmly in the top-10.

glad to see you know your facts though. i prefer to concentrate on the bigger picture.
big picture.. record against the best players..
Sabatini 40% success.. Martinez 21%....
I will add this to my signature! :angel:

*Jool*
Feb 24th, 2006, 06:31 PM
you really are a Calimero "a la mode Sabatini" :p

Rollo
Feb 24th, 2006, 06:46 PM
Conchita should get in based on current minimum HOF standards-which seems to be 1 slam.

Conchita had gobs of semis and finals in slams-a lot of years in the top 10-and led Spain to Fed Cup titles.

While I don't think she was as good as Sabatini there's not THAT much difference. If she doesn't get in it would only be due to "personality" factors or bias.

If Rafter and Sabatini deserve it-so does Martinez.

And in case anyone from the HOF reads this-how about giving the older or dead stars of yesteryear their due? If you continue at your present rate you'll be enshrining the likes of Julie Halard in 20 years!

LONG OVERDUE FOR THE HOF

1. Hilde Sperling German/Danish champ of the 30s. 3 times (1935-1937)
winner of the French.

2. Simone Mathieu 2 time French winner (1938-39) multiple doubles slams.

3. Nancye Bolton 5 time winner at the Aussie.

4. Pat Todd (alive but recently rejected) winner of the French and multiple
winner of doubles slams.

spencercarlos
Feb 24th, 2006, 06:52 PM
:eek:
i love gaby, don't make me :sad:
Martinez 1994-1995.
GS: 1 Win, 0 finals , 5 SF
Titles: 10 titles
Top wins: Navratilova 1994 Wimbledon,Arantxa 1994 straton mountain, Arantxa 1995 Rome.

Sabatini 1990-1991
GS. 1 win, 1 GS final, 1 GS SF.
Titles: 6 titles
Top wins: Graf 1990 Usopen, Graf 1990 Masters, Graf 1991 Tokio, Navratilova 1991 Tokio ,Graf 1991 Boca Raton, Graf 1991 Miami, Arantxa 1991 Hilton Head, Arantxa 1991 Amelia Island ,Graf 1991 Amelia Island, Seles 1991 Rome.

The top wins shows who without any doubt who was the more dominant player during their best period.

PamShriverRockz
Feb 24th, 2006, 07:37 PM
Shriver is in

;)

I think Conchita will get in.

baleineau
Feb 24th, 2006, 10:00 PM
spencercarlos - i don't think anybody denies that Gaby was more of a threat to Graf, Seles and ASV. the record speaks for itself. but is H2H the only factor in deciding a worthy candidate for H2H, or comparing players for that matter? How often did Conchita play Steffi on Clay? How often did she play Seles on Grass? I'm not saying she'd beat either more times than they'd beat her, but it is the case that Gaby had a lot of opportunities to play Steffi (something like 30-40 times). It undoubtedly helped Gaby a bit, especially all the encounters in Florida, and on Green Clay. Her H2H was really poor prior to this.

Any, Gaby wins the H2H battle hands down, but they are equal in so many other senses. Conchita out-performs Gaby in match wins and titles, as well as years at the top. Definition of "top" is subjective, obviously, but I'd say being ranked 11 or 12 is still "being a force". It's just a computer for gods sake.

RJWCapriati
Feb 24th, 2006, 10:01 PM
I think Conchita will be in the Hall of Fame within the next 10 years

fammmmedspin
Feb 24th, 2006, 10:33 PM
He's right they had no line and Gabi just moves one lower if you work out where the line is. You now logically have to let in Mary and Conchita and the line is somewhere above Iva and Sveta.

faboozadoo15
Feb 24th, 2006, 11:56 PM
Martinez 1994-1995.
GS: 1 Win, 0 finals , 5 SF
Titles: 10 titles
Top wins: Navratilova 1994 Wimbledon,Arantxa 1994 straton mountain, Arantxa 1995 Rome.

Sabatini 1990-1991
GS. 1 win, 1 GS final, 1 GS SF.
Titles: 6 titles
Top wins: Graf 1990 Usopen, Graf 1990 Masters, Graf 1991 Tokio, Navratilova 1991 Tokio ,Graf 1991 Boca Raton, Graf 1991 Miami, Arantxa 1991 Hilton Head, Arantxa 1991 Amelia Island ,Graf 1991 Amelia Island, Seles 1991 Rome.

The top wins shows who without any doubt who was the more dominant player during their best period.
i believed you
but i looked up top 10 wins during their best year, titles during their best year, and total losses.

gaby had 15 top 10 wins, 6 titles, and 11 losses. (from us open 90 until us open 91)
conchi had 12 top 10 wins, 6 titles, and 13 losses (from Wim 94 to wim 95)

Winston's Human
Feb 25th, 2006, 12:32 AM
After they let in Yannick Noah with one singles slam title and no other singles slam finals, the IHOF opened the door for a number of players who previously might not have been considered.

spencercarlos
Feb 25th, 2006, 01:04 AM
spencercarlos - i don't think anybody denies that Gaby was more of a threat to Graf, Seles and ASV. the record speaks for itself. but is H2H the only factor in deciding a worthy candidate for H2H, or comparing players for that matter? How often did Conchita play Steffi on Clay? How often did she play Seles on Grass? I'm not saying she'd beat either more times than they'd beat her, but it is the case that Gaby had a lot of opportunities to play Steffi (something like 30-40 times). It undoubtedly helped Gaby a bit, especially all the encounters in Florida, and on Green Clay. Her H2H was really poor prior to this.

Any, Gaby wins the H2H battle hands down, but they are equal in so many other senses. Conchita out-performs Gaby in match wins and titles, as well as years at the top. Definition of "top" is subjective, obviously, but I'd say being ranked 11 or 12 is still "being a force". It's just a computer for gods sake.
Conchita does not out perform Gaby in match wins. If you look at winning percentage:
Martinez 721-300=70,6%
Sabatini 624-187=76,9%
Gaby clearly has a better winning percentage than Conchita. Or because Conchita has 721 means she has performed better? :lol:
Head to head loss records against 37 players against just 13 for Sabatini clearly shows who was the most challenged player, and who was the one who challenged others the most.

Once again years at the top ten Gaby wins with 10 years and 10 months and straight. Conchita had 8 years (6 from 1991 to 1996, then 1998 and then 2000) finishing at the top ten. Explain me then how she tops Gaby on this department?

Yet again Conchita can play 4 more years, and still her winning % record will never be better than Gaby, neither her performance against the top players and neither will win more big tournaments than Gaby ever did. Playing more years does not means she is better not an once.
Or now winning titles against Groenefeld, Maleeva, Raymond and Rubin like players are more valuable than winning matches against Graf, Seles, Navratilova and Arantxa? :rolleyes:.

Her record against Graf only proves that she was the player that challenged Steffi the most, at least beat her the most times, but she had to earn them, not because she is playing Steffi more times, means she is beating her the most. Conchita´s record vs Seles is 1-20, and she had the luxury to play Monica most times after the stabbing, still she could not challenge Monica as Gaby could 3-11, most of those matches pre stabbing, when Monica was clearly a better player.
Gaby challenged the top players twice as better than Conchita ever could. 40% wins vs players ranked number one to 21% is only another stat.

To think that Conchita 6 more low tier titles made more impact on the tour than Gaby´s wins over Graf/Seles/Arantxa/Navratilova and other top ten players like Pierce, Novotna, Huber, Davenport, Capriati.. is just believing a big farse..

Head to head records proves it.
Overall winning % record proves it.
Number of wins against the top ranked players proves it.
Number of big tittles (Tier II or better) proves it.

Sabatini was a better player than Conchita.

*Jool*
Feb 25th, 2006, 01:07 AM
once again Carlos, we don't care (at least me)

spencercarlos
Feb 25th, 2006, 01:19 AM
once again Carlos, we don't care (at least me)
And its ok.
What i hate is when people talk about Martinez 33 titles, and fed cup titles and inmediatly assume that she was a better player than Gaby.
And in the end Martinez will be a hall of famer no matter what. She has more than enough merits herself to get in.

*Jool*
Feb 25th, 2006, 01:21 AM
ok , fair enough

and true
:)

baleineau
Feb 25th, 2006, 02:27 AM
spencercarlos - i think we take your point. the question here is whether conchita has done enough to qualify for the HoF.
BTW - you forgot she finished at #7 back in 1989. Also, her winning % is damaged by playing for so long. Had she quit in 2000 (same career length as Gaby), she'd have a 614-202 record (75%). Not much in it really. Just like their best ranks - Conchita 2 but behind Graf/Seles, Gaby 3. Same sort of thing. Let's just say they're "clearly comparable careers".

CrossCourt~Rally
Feb 25th, 2006, 03:50 AM
:worship: She deserves it :worship:

timray
Feb 25th, 2006, 06:55 AM
I think Martinez deserve a back sit in the hall of fame. :yeah:

galadriel
Feb 25th, 2006, 09:26 AM
I'M absolute sure that she will be in :D

Gallofa
Feb 25th, 2006, 09:36 AM
spencercarlos, thanks for all the Sabatini information, vey interesting indeed. Can you find a thread with a bunch of people who are actually talking about her and go and post it there? :lol:

I do think Conchita is somewhat below "greatness" but so are many of the recent people that have entered the HOF. At a rate of 3 people in every year, Conchita should be in eventually, considering the standard.

C.MARTINEZ
Feb 25th, 2006, 10:17 AM
Conchita will be in :worship: :worship:

Bette_Midler
Feb 25th, 2006, 10:32 AM
baleineau :worship: :hearts: :wavey: :kiss:

Elisse
Feb 25th, 2006, 11:46 PM
Sabatini was a better player than Conchita.

:rolleyes:

Really, I think it's very difficult to compare Sabatini (with Conchita) because she retired so early - and in contrast Conchita has had a very long career!


I definately think Conchita will be in the Hall of Fame when she retires - she is an internationally well known and well respected player, she has been very success, won many titles and of course, especially has her name on the Wimbledon trophy, so I see no reason why she wouldn't be honoured and I think she totally deserves it!!! :worship: :worship: :worship:


:kiss: :bounce: Vamos Conchita!!!! :bounce: :kiss:

spencercarlos
Feb 26th, 2006, 01:39 AM
:rolleyes:

Really, I think it's very difficult to compare Sabatini (with Conchita) because she retired so early - and in contrast Conchita has had a very long career!


I definately think Conchita will be in the Hall of Fame when she retires - she is an internationally well known and well respected player, she has been very success, won many titles and of course, especially has her name on the Wimbledon trophy, so I see no reason why she wouldn't be honoured and I think she totally deserves it!!! :worship: :worship: :worship:


:kiss: :bounce: Vamos Conchita!!!! :bounce: :kiss:
I already found the records against the best players (players ranked number one), even records against other top players, and eventhough Sabatini played 6 or 7 years less than Conchita, not only she was more sucessful, but also got better porcentages.
The only numbers Conchita takes Gaby are number of titles (which we all know more than half are Tier III or less) and number of Fed Cup titles whch is a competition nation team, sadly Sabatini did not have an Arantxa to join her. Oh well..

Why you can´t compare?
Please elaborate...
I already did... and talking about head to heads.. 37 deficit heads to heads against 13 says a lot :tape: .
55 wins against quality players compared to 28 might ring a bell :lick:
And if you are not already convinced.. 10 wins against the top ranked player compared to 2 for Conchta :rolleyes:
Not to mention that Gaby outnumbers Conchita in the amount of Tier II or better events won.
All of this comparing a 12 year carreer with a 17-18 year carreer Conchta has had.
Oh well i can´t help the ones who have the facts in front keep fooling theirselves.

samn
Feb 26th, 2006, 02:02 PM
Martinez has wins over Hingis (while she was no.1), Davenport (while she was no.2), Seles (while she was no.2), Graf (while she was no.1), Mauresmo, Sanchez-Vicario (while was she no.1) Capriati, Navratilova (at Wimbledon) and Clijsters, although admittedly very early in her career. So, all in all, Martinez has more wins against number one players. In fact, Martinez has beaten almost all the number one players who ever played the game. The only exceptions who played in her era are Henin, Sharapova and the Williams sisters.



Another #1 player whom Martinez played and never beat was Chris Evert. (Oft forgotten trivia item of the day: Evert's last competitive match was not the US Open quarterfinal loss against Zina Garrison; it was a win over Martinez in the first rubber of the 1989 Federation Cup final in Tokyo.)

spencercarlos
Feb 26th, 2006, 02:26 PM
Sabatini had wins against Evert, Navratilova, Graf, Seles and Sanchez-Vicario. They were the five number ones of her time. She beat Sanchez-Vicario before she reached the top however, Evert and Navratilova afterwards.

Martinez has wins over Hingis (while she was no.1), Davenport (while she was no.2), Seles (while she was no.2), Graf (while she was no.1), Mauresmo, Sanchez-Vicario (while was she no.1) Capriati, Navratilova (at Wimbledon) and Clijsters, although admittedly very early in her career. So, all in all, Martinez has more wins against number one players. In fact, Martinez has beaten almost all the number one players who ever played the game. The only exceptions who played in her era are Henin, Sharapova and the Williams sisters.

For the record...
Sabatini beat Navratilova while being number one.. Rome 1987.
Sanchez Vicario was number two when Conchita beat her in Rome 1995. Arantxa became number one again after Berlin 1995 when she beat Maleeva in the final and Graf´s points from winning 1994 Berlin dropped off.
It´s unfair the comparisson about beating multiple number one players, pretty much since then Navratilova, Graf and Seles dominated for a long time while Gaby was playing. BTW still when you count the number of times, you see that Gaby beat the number one player 10 times and Conchita 2. And 55 to 28 overall wins..
Interesting enough is that Gaby and Conchita played 136 times and 130 times respectively against players that have been number one at some point of their carreer..
This despite the number of years that Conchita has been on the tour.. :eek:

Volcana
Feb 26th, 2006, 03:05 PM
"....Here's the question of the year then, Hall of Fame division: Would Conchita Martinez gotten in this year, given that she doesn't have Gaby's sex appeal or her own wildly successful perfume? She does have a Slam singles title (Wimby), more WTA singles titles (33) , 13 dubs crowns, Fed Cup titles, nine years in the Top 10 and greater longevity. Probably not, which is sad, because in my book, the quieter Conchi has had a better career than Gaby. "Tennis Reporters"
Answer: yes. Each has a slam title, so that balances out. Both were top five, neither #1. The five Fed Cup titles, and the doubles career give her far better career accomplishments. Tennis is about wining tournaments, not individual matches, si I don't really care about head to heads.

spencercarlos
Feb 26th, 2006, 03:44 PM
Answer: yes. Each has a slam title, so that balances out. Both were top five, neither #1. The five Fed Cup titles, and the doubles career give her far better career accomplishments. Tennis is about wining tournaments, not individual matches, si I don't really care about head to heads.
Yes and Nagoyva has a better carreer compared to Mary Joe Fernandez.. after all titles are all that counts. :tape:

And cows flies.. :lol:

spencercarlos
Feb 26th, 2006, 04:01 PM
Answer: yes. Each has a slam title, so that balances out. Both were top five, neither #1. The five Fed Cup titles, and the doubles career give her far better career accomplishments. Tennis is about wining tournaments, not individual matches, si I don't really care about head to heads.
See this Volcana and my last post to this thread, because i really feel i already proved my pont.
Sabatini has more Tier II and above wins than Conchita 24 to 17.
With two masters wins. 2 RU finishes.
The reason why Martinez could never be a factor at the Masters is the same reason why Gaby was better.. Gaby was able to compete against the top players much better, twice as better (proved by the head to heads 40% success by Gaby against 21% for Conchi) than Conchita ever could and ever will.
To compare players carreers there must be a balance about quality and quantity, because 3 Tier III titles will never be as good as a Tier I or Tier II title. Beating Maleeva, Raymond, Rubin in a final, will never be as good as beating Graf, Seles, Arantxa. Conchita beating more non top players can´t never be better than Gaby´s wins against the top ones, just because in quantity they are more. And the quality???

To be fair with Conchita and as i stated on my very first post on this thread, she has had a great carrerr, and someday she will be hall of famer. And i hope she finds a way to end up her carreer in style.

Bette_Midler
Apr 7th, 2006, 02:18 PM
Good luck Conchi!

alfonsojose
Apr 7th, 2006, 02:22 PM
If Sabatini and Novotna are in, why not Cheetah?

spec7er
Apr 7th, 2006, 06:10 PM
I think she will get in at some point in the future. I would think it would take a lot of time, just like Sabatini (assuming that she'd get in this year or has she already gotten in?) and many of the other inductees. :)

But her case gets weakened by her lack of impact/popularity when compared to Sabatini and the doubles titles of Novotna, which I think really tipped the scale for her.

Kart
Apr 7th, 2006, 06:56 PM
I've always said that Gaby didn't need the hall of fame to vindicate her stellar career.

I feel the same about Conchita and because I like her and her fans I won't get drawn into the argument about who's better.

Ultimately though, I think that Conchita will get a spot in the hall of fame. These kind of inane institutions - to me - are about remembering great player that made a big contribution to the sport.

Tennis elitists will produce loads of statistics to argue against her but numbers can't quantify for the entertainment that players like her have given us over many years.

Volcana
Apr 7th, 2006, 08:04 PM
If Yannick Noah and Gaby are in, then Conchi is a living lock.

RJWCapriati
Apr 7th, 2006, 08:07 PM
If Yannick Noah and Gaby are in, then Conchi is a living lock.


:lol: She will be in :)

Mother_Marjorie
Apr 7th, 2006, 08:10 PM
I think its a given she will get in. She's a Wimbledon champion.