PDA

View Full Version : Serena Has Crossed That Threshold of Legend in Her Generation..


Serenus Christ
Feb 4th, 2010, 09:09 AM
By winning the 2010 Australian Open, became only the second female player (and third player overall) to win at least one grand slam singles title in three different decades (1990s, 2000s, 2010s), tied with Martina Navratilova (1970s, 1980s, 1990s) in the women's game, and in the men's game Ken Rosewall (1950s, 1960s, 1970s).

:worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:

MBM
Feb 4th, 2010, 09:11 AM
thats a stat i overloooked. she was lucky to get in that win at the last GS of the 90s!!

hdfb
Feb 4th, 2010, 09:26 AM
Amazing stat. It really is.

Caralenko
Feb 4th, 2010, 09:28 AM
Go away fangurl, we already knew this :worship:

Direwolf
Feb 4th, 2010, 09:28 AM
nice find...

Venus/Serena did in it doubles aswell

Cp6uja
Feb 4th, 2010, 09:42 AM
GOATrena is only tennis player ever which won GS titles in three different decades, two different centuries and two different millenniums in same time :eek:

Serenus Christ
Feb 4th, 2010, 09:43 AM
GOATrena is only tennis player ever which won GS titles in three different decades, two different centuries and two different millenniums in same time :eek:

oh mi god!
:eek:

bandabou
Feb 4th, 2010, 09:52 AM
Impressive..and that's why she's the greatest of gen post-Graf. She weathered all the storms: veterans, comteporaries and youngsters...and kept winning.

bandabou
Feb 4th, 2010, 09:54 AM
GOATrena is only tennis player ever which won GS titles in three different decades, two different centuries and two different millenniums in same time :eek:

:lol: Now how about THAT?

DOUBLEFIST
Feb 4th, 2010, 09:55 AM
GOATrena is only tennis player ever which won GS titles in three different decades, two different centuries and two different millenniums in same time :eek:
That's wild! :lol:

Six Feet Under
Feb 4th, 2010, 10:23 AM
On a side note Martina Navratilova's first and last grand slam wins are 32 years apart :lol:

tennnisfannn
Feb 4th, 2010, 11:51 AM
On a side note Martina Navratilova's first and last grand slam wins are 32 years apart :lol:
Now that is incredible!!!:D

Lulu.
Feb 4th, 2010, 02:56 PM
:bowdown:

BuTtErFrEnA
Feb 4th, 2010, 03:02 PM
On a side note Martina Navratilova's first and last grand slam wins are 32 years apart :lol:

wow :lol:

SVK
Feb 4th, 2010, 03:05 PM
Both Serena and Martina are legends:bowdown:

Matt01
Feb 4th, 2010, 03:08 PM
On a side note Martina Navratilova's first and last grand slam wins are 32 years apart :lol:


Let's see if Serena will be able to top this :lol:

Kunal
Feb 4th, 2010, 04:15 PM
On a side note Martina Navratilova's first and last grand slam wins are 32 years apart :lol:

ok...that is insane

Olórin
Feb 4th, 2010, 04:17 PM
thats a stat i overloooked. she was lucky to get in that win at the last GS of the 90s!!

Lucky?! LUCKY?

:speakles:

BuTtErFrEnA
Feb 4th, 2010, 04:46 PM
that's why serena knew when someone was hitting lucky shots :cheer:

Denise4925
Feb 4th, 2010, 07:45 PM
thats a stat i overloooked. she was lucky to get in that win at the last GS of the 90s!!

Luck had nothing to do with it.

Denise4925
Feb 4th, 2010, 07:46 PM
GOATrena is only tennis player ever which won GS titles in three different decades, two different centuries and two different millenniums in same time :eek:

Oh my. :eek:

~Cherry*Blossom~
Feb 4th, 2010, 08:28 PM
GOATrena is only tennis player ever which won GS titles in three different decades, two different centuries and two different millenniums in same time :eek:

:bowdown:

doni1212
Feb 5th, 2010, 02:58 AM
GOATrena is only tennis player ever which won GS titles in three different decades, two different centuries and two different millenniums in same time :eek:

:worship:

geoepee
Feb 5th, 2010, 03:07 AM
s/he said lucky to get in the win, not lucky to win :D i'm sure referring to her being born when she was and the timing of the win and all, but i could be wrong. Congrats to Serena anyhow! They could totally win doubles in 2020!

Volcana
Feb 5th, 2010, 03:31 AM
Margaret Court won her first slam singles title in 1960, and her last in 1973. Fourteen years of wining slam singles titles. Serena is up to 12. And counting. The 60+ overall slam titles i course, unreachable by humans.

young_gunner913
Feb 5th, 2010, 03:37 AM
Go away fangurl, we already knew this :worship:

SOMEBODY'S jelis. :wavey:

GracefulVenus
Feb 5th, 2010, 04:10 AM
nice :yeah:

Pheobo
Feb 5th, 2010, 04:14 AM
Pretty amazing accomplishment :worship:

Serenus Christ
Feb 5th, 2010, 05:45 AM
i think that when she retires from singles she will still play doubles for another million years,
but im certain she will compete in the 2020 Wimbledon singles.

Yewwww

DOUBLEFIST
Feb 5th, 2010, 05:45 AM
Margaret Court won her first slam singles title in 1960, and her last in 1973. Fourteen years of wining slam singles titles. Serena is up to 12. And counting. The 60+ overall slam titles i course, unreachable by humans.
But Serena's a goddess. :angel:

Galsen
Feb 5th, 2010, 11:20 AM
GOATrena is only tennis player ever which won GS titles in three different decades, two different centuries and two different millenniums in same time :eek:

:eek::eek::worship:

hotandspicey
Feb 5th, 2010, 12:02 PM
GOATrena is only tennis player ever which won GS titles in three different decades, two different centuries and two different millenniums in same time :eek:

Super Goat Rena.:worship: That's just insane!!:eek:

BlameSerena
Feb 5th, 2010, 12:29 PM
i think that when she retires from singles she will still play doubles for another million years,
but im certain she will compete in the 2020 Wimbledon singles.

Yewwww

i hope :sobbing:

anywho...amazing stat for Serena :worship:

Sam L
Feb 5th, 2010, 12:32 PM
On a side note Martina Navratilova's first and last grand slam wins are 32 years apart :lol:

That's singles, doubles and mixed. Obviously it's a lot easier to have a longer career in doubles.

In singles only, the record is held by Helen Wills whose gap between first and last grand slams is 14 years ~ 10 months. 1923 US championships to 1938 Wimbledon.

Olórin
Feb 5th, 2010, 04:10 PM
That's singles, doubles and mixed. Obviously it's a lot easier to have a longer career in doubles.

In singles only, the record is held by Helen Wills whose gap between first and last grand slams is 14 years ~ 10 months. 1923 US championships to 1938 Wimbledon.

Interesting stat.
And I would imagine Court comes second with 13ish years?
Then we have Navratilova, Evert and Graf all with 12 years. Serena is almost certain to make it to 12 years. It would be amazing if she could get close to the first two records.

PlayByPlay
Feb 5th, 2010, 07:18 PM
All hail Serena. She is such a great player I must add..:worship:

friendsita
Feb 5th, 2010, 07:49 PM
nice find...

Venus/Serena did in it doubles aswell

great :wavey:

MBM
Feb 8th, 2010, 08:39 PM
Lucky?! LUCKY?

:speakles:

Luck had nothing to do with it.

Lolz. The luck i was referring to was her timing, not her winning the event!

tennisbum79
Feb 8th, 2010, 10:14 PM
.. Any win she gets now will only increase her legend.

This win has consolidated her place as the best of her generation.

From this pointon , any GS win will either set a record or tie another legend.
From now on, no GS win is idle, every GS win has has a significant and historical meaning.

Serena y Monica
Feb 8th, 2010, 10:24 PM
True.

tennisbum79
Feb 8th, 2010, 10:42 PM
If she's crossed it, what is there to aim for next ?

Saint ?
Cute, but you need to read carefully
I stated "in her generation".
Then went on to say, every GS win now will either tie a record of another lengend or set a new one.

darrinbaker00
Feb 8th, 2010, 10:47 PM
Cute, but you need to read carefully
I stated "in her generation".
Then went on to say, every GS win now will either tie a record of another lengend or set a new one.
What record will Serena tie if she wins Roland Garros?

tennisbum79
Feb 8th, 2010, 10:49 PM
What record will Serena tie if she wins Roland Garros?
She will have 13 GS, passing BJK.

She would alos be 1 slam away from doubling her next competitor total of her generation.
Both Venus and Justine having 7 GS each.

darrinbaker00
Feb 8th, 2010, 10:52 PM
She will have 13 GS, passing BJK.
That's not a record.

tennisbum79
Feb 8th, 2010, 10:56 PM
That's not a record.
It may not be a record in the universe of overall record, but she would have surpassed BJK on the slam list.
Not all records are absolute

darrinbaker00
Feb 8th, 2010, 10:58 PM
It may not be a record in the universe of overall record, but she would have surpassed BJK on the slam list.
Not all records are absolute
If you say so. :yeah:

DragonFlame
Feb 8th, 2010, 11:00 PM
This win has consolidated her place as the best of her generation.


How come? What makes this win different then any other? Careers ain't over till they are over, serena will likely be the best of her generation but if she still gets passed in achievements this win really won't make the difference. You're giving the wrong reason for why this puts her as the best of her generation.

tennisbum79
Feb 8th, 2010, 11:03 PM
How come? What makes this win different then any other? Careers ain't over till they are over, serena will likely be the best of her generation but if she still gets passed in achievements this win really won't make the difference. You're giving the wrong reason for why this puts her as the best of her generation.
I said that, becaase I think, (and it is my opinion) with this win, she will not be caught by anybody of her generation.

latte
Feb 8th, 2010, 11:11 PM
It may not be a record in the universe of overall record, but she would have surpassed BJK on the slam list.
Not all records are absolute

:help: So what are they then?

kiwifan
Feb 8th, 2010, 11:12 PM
She did that back when she held all 4 majors. :yawn:

Serena = "Nothing to prove since 2003"

just sayin' :shrug:


:devil:

goldenlox
Feb 8th, 2010, 11:14 PM
Serena is a great player. The way she plays when she is down at a major is special.
Vika was close to up a set and 5-0.
Kim had matchpoints at 5-1 in the 3rd.
Maria had 3 matchpoints on her serve.
Nadia and Sveta were serving for the match.

BuTtErFrEnA
Feb 8th, 2010, 11:15 PM
If she's crossed it, what is there to aim for next ?

Saint ?

already there

Mynarco
Feb 8th, 2010, 11:17 PM
Serena is a great player. The way she plays when she is down at a major is special.
Vika was close to up a set and 5-0.
Kim had matchpoints at 5-1 in the 3rd.
Maria had 3 matchpoints on her serve.
Nadia and Sveta were serving for the match.

I forgot what is Maria's and Nadia's one

Junex
Feb 8th, 2010, 11:27 PM
She did that back when she held all 4 majors. :yawn:

Serena = "Nothing to prove since 2003"

just sayin' :shrug:


:devil:



Indeed.. Serena has nothing to prove that she is the GOHH, a legend in her own right.
Saying that, I don't understand why most of her fans are so insecure and are always on the defensive when talking about her achievements...:confused:

tennisbum79
Feb 8th, 2010, 11:31 PM
:help: So what are they then?
When someone wins a GS, then by way of comparaison , they put the names on the screen, in descending order of total wins.

When your name is on that list, you are already in the recor books in my mind.
Serena will now be on that screen, ahead of BJK.
She will be part of this conversation.

tennisbum79
Feb 8th, 2010, 11:38 PM
Indeed.. Serena has nothing to prove that she is the GOHH, a legend in her own right.
Saying that, I don't understand why most of her fans are so insecure and are always on the defensive when talking about her achievements...:confused:
Where is the insecurity here.

Look, you can't have it both ways.
You can't go in every thread whining how the arroagnt the WS fans are too .

BTW, how is that "purge" thread your created earlier is coming along.

You know, the one you wanted the TRUE Justine fans to identify themselves so you can separate them for the mole in your ranks?

I think you are the most fragile and insecure Justine fan of the bunch.
I read many of your posts

tennisbum79
Feb 8th, 2010, 11:48 PM
:help: So what are they then?
Keep the discussion in the open.
Bad reps are not necessary when you have this big space.

Don't let your temper get the best of you.

Junex
Feb 8th, 2010, 11:55 PM
Where is the insecurity here.

Look, you can't have it both ways.
You can't go in every thread whining how the arroagnt the WS fans are too .

BTW, how is that "purge" thread your created earlier is coming along.

You know, the one you wanted the TRUE Justine fans to identify themselves so you can separate them for the mole in your ranks?

I think you are the most fragile and insecure Justine fan of the bunch.
I read many of your posts

Arrogance is not the same as insecurity....
and i specifically wrote "most" WS fans, so you can't accuse of me of lumping ..

About that thread it was moved in the players forum, thank you...

and no I am not, sadly among the WS fans, that description you gave me fits you right, you should be proud you already had a title among your ranks!

and please, how can i be when i only post 2 to 3 responses and that is not even everyday...
silly you!!!!

:p:hearts:

And BTW, I am not even talking about this thread when i posted my first reply, it is in response to kiwi's post..
So this reply of yours just proves my point.... :wavey:

BlameSerena
Feb 8th, 2010, 11:59 PM
.. Any win she gets now will only increase her legend.

This win has consolidated her place as the best of her generation.

From this point on , any GS win will either set a record or tie another legend.
From now on, no GS win is idle, every GS win has has a significant and historical meaning.
I agree with your overall point. Anything from here on out that Serena wins is just extra. Of course she could have called it a career in 03 or 99 even, depending on what goals she has set for herself. She had the best of her generation bit in the bag at 8,9,10 and 11...now if people don't believe it at 12 (when the next closest is FIVE slams behind) then that's just what we call hard headed, I guess.

darrinbaker00
Feb 8th, 2010, 11:59 PM
When someone wins a GS, then by way of comparaison , they put the names on the screen, in descending order of total wins.

When your name is on that list, you are already in the recor books in my mind.
Serena will now be on that screen, ahead of BJK.
She will be part of this conversation.
OK, I get it now. Thank you.

darrinbaker00
Feb 9th, 2010, 12:03 AM
When Serena won her Serena Slam, it stamped her mark permanently on her generation of tennis.

Should she and Venus play doubles at the 2010 French Open, they will be going for a rare doubles slam.

Serena and Venus lead their generation with 11 grand slam women's doubles titles.
Serena leads her generation with 12 grand slam singles titles.

Not since Martina Navratilova has tennis seen a woman be that successful in grand slam singles and doubles.
They will be going for four majors in a row at Roland Garros. An amazing accomplishment, of course, but you must win all four in the same calendar year for a Grand Slam.

SAEKeithSerena
Feb 9th, 2010, 01:33 AM
now she's definitely gonna be gunning for that 18.

Volcana
Feb 9th, 2010, 01:40 AM
Saying that, I don't understand why most of her fans are so insecure and are always on the defensiveI don't understand why you're so certain you're inside the minds of 'most of her fans'. THAT, in all honesty, seems like the reasoning of an insecure and defensive mind.

On a more general note, I thought tying Monica in slam singles titles was actually pretty historical.

BuTtErFrEnA
Feb 9th, 2010, 01:43 AM
indeed...

LightWarrior
Feb 9th, 2010, 01:54 AM
To better understand the dominance and outstanding doubles record that Serena and Venus have achieved, you don't have to look far beyond the list Most Grand Slam Titles (All-Time) per team:

1. Louise Brough Clapp (USA)
Margaret Osborne duPont (USA) (20)

1. Martina Navrátilová (USA)
Pam Shriver (USA) (20)

3. Natasha Zvereva (BLR)
Gigi Fernández (USA) (14)

4 Doris Hart (USA)
Shirley Fry Irvin (USA) (11)

4. Serena Williams (USA)
Venus Williams (USA) (11)

During an on-court interview with Serena after winning the Australian Open singles title, Pam Shriver asked Serena if she and Venus were going to break her and Navratilova's record of doubles titles. Serena acted totally oblivous to the record, but something tells me she and Venus know they have an excellent shot at it.

Why does she care so much about doubles anyway ? Nobody cares or even remembers that either Graf or Evert were not interested in doubles and won only one or two GS doubles titles. And yet both Graf and Evert are among the top 4/5 all-time greats. Serena should just focus on singles from now on.

dsanders06
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:00 AM
Why does she care so much about doubles anyway ? Nobody cares or even remembers that either Graf or Evert were not interested in doubles and won only one or two GS doubles titles. And yet both Graf and Evert are among the top 4/5 all-time greats. Serena should just focus on singles from now on.

I agree that anyone who thinks winning doubles Slams earns Serena any points in the GOAT stakes are kidding themselves. But I don't think there's anything wrong with players like the Williams sisters using doubles to fine-tune their games. Actually, I think it would be beneficial for most top players to play doubles at Slams. It allows them to improve their games (particularly up at net) in a stress-free environment, as a substitute for practice sessions, with a bit of extra cash thrown in for good measure.

trufanjay
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:04 AM
Why does she care so much about doubles anyway ? Nobody cares or even remembers that either Graf or Evert were not interested in doubles and won only one or two GS doubles titles. And yet both Graf and Evert are among the top 4/5 all-time greats. Serena should just focus on singles from now on.
She cares about doubles because its fun to her and she enjoys playing with her sister. Its quite obvious that she can win doubles grand slams without having it take away from her singles. So why not play?

G1Player2
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:10 AM
I agree that anyone who thinks winning doubles Slams earns Serena any points in the GOAT stakes are kidding themselves. But I don't think there's anything wrong with players like the Williams sisters using doubles to fine-tune their games. Actually, I think it would be beneficial for most top players to play doubles at Slams. It allows them to improve their games (particularly up at net) in a stress-free environment, as a substitute for practice sessions, with a bit of extra cash thrown in for good measure.

:rolleyes: Navratilova is known for her doubles prowess as MUCH as her singles. I mean, why do you think alot of people say she's the greatest female of all time? I mean, there are at least 3 women's players I'd place above her if singles were the only exclusive category.

LightWarrior
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:12 AM
I agree that anyone who thinks winning doubles Slams earns Serena any points in the GOAT stakes are kidding themselves. But I don't think there's anything wrong with players like the Williams sisters using doubles to fine-tune their games. Actually, I think it would be beneficial for most top players to play doubles at Slams. It allows them to improve their games (particularly up at net) in a stress-free environment, as a substitute for practice sessions, with a bit of extra cash thrown in for good measure.

I'm not saying it's wrong but in the case of Serena I think it's more of a sister thing, being so close to Venus, knowing that Venus can only win at Wimbledon in GS. And I'm pretty sure that if it wasn't for Venus, Serena would have defaulted at the AO doubles. And I'm sure that Venus was aware of that when she kept cheering for Serena during the singles final. So they did it at the AO, and it was a close call, but I'm not sure that Serena should play doubles at RG because clay is so much more demanding to her.

LightWarrior
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:17 AM
:rolleyes: Navratilova is known for her doubles prowess as MUCH as her singles. I mean, why do you think alot of people say she's the greatest female of all time? I mean, there are at least 3 women's players I'd place above her if singles were the only exclusive category.

Not everybody says that Nav is the greatest. A lot of other people say that Graf is. They're pretty much tied as being the GOAT. And yet Graf didn't care about doubles. Doubles are are just the icing on the cake but certainly don't count in tennis history books.

dsanders06
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:17 AM
:rolleyes: Navratilova is known for her doubles prowess as MUCH as her singles.

She isn't. Really. And the consensus is that Steffi Graf is the greatest of alltime (although there are SOME arguments in favour of Navratilova, aka her greater longevity, her greater number of singles titles, the fact she was involved in the WTA's best ever rivalry; NONE of the reasons have anything to do with doubles).

darrinbaker00
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:20 AM
Why does she care so much about doubles anyway ? Nobody cares or even remembers that either Graf or Evert were not interested in doubles and won only one or two GS doubles titles. And yet both Graf and Evert are among the top 4/5 all-time greats. Serena should just focus on singles from now on.
Referring to yourself as "nobody," eh? How appropriate.

dsanders06
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:21 AM
When you speak of legendary status, you can't simply ignore one set of tennis accomplishments. You have to look at the total picture in my opinion. Both sisters keep moving up, up and up on these all-time lists.

No. Almost all of the greats in the last 20 years have pretty much ignored doubles. You can't just say "well it's their problem if they chose not to play it" either. By that logic, I could just unilaterally declare that Fes is a really important tournament, and consequently, Medina Garrigues is a better player than Serena, and it's Serena's fault for not playing Fes when she had the option to.

Do you think Pam Shriver is a greater player than Lindsay Davenport?

G1Player2
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:21 AM
She isn't. Really. And the consensus is that Steffi Graf is the greatest of alltime (although there are SOME arguments in favour of Navratilova, aka her greater longevity, her greater number of singles titles, the fact she was involved in the WTA's best ever rivalry; NONE of the reasons have anything to do with doubles).

:bs: BJKing has said many times that Martina Navratilova is the greatest all around women's tennis player of all time. But, as you said, there are SOME arguments that favor Navratilova and they do bring in doubles. Hell, if you ask martina Navratilova yourself, she will tell you she's the greatest of all time and would mention her doubles accomplishments as being a reason. At least she did on "I Am a Celebrity Get me Outta Here." :lol: But, to each its own. I personally don't hold much clout on doubles being a baromter of greatness but MANY believe otherwise.

dsanders06
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:25 AM
:bs: BJKing has said many times that Martina Navratilova is the greatest all around women's tennis player of all time.

O RLY?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oo6AnSBhSno

On a side note, why do people ALWAYS keep bringing up Billie Jean King as an attempt to settle an argument. She's done a hell of a lot for women's tennis, but still, I must've missed when the world declared she had infallibility.

darrinbaker00
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:26 AM
Not everybody says that Nav is the greatest. A lot of other people say that Graf is. They're pretty much tied as being the GOAT. And yet Graf didn't care about doubles. Doubles are are just the icing on the cake but certainly don't count in tennis history books.
Maybe not in the tennis history books you invented in your head, but in every tennis history book that has actually been written, doubles are counted.

G1Player2
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:29 AM
O RLY?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oo6AnSBhSno

On a side note, why do people ALWAYS keep bringing up Billie Jean King as an attempt to settle an argument. She's done a hell of a lot for women's tennis, but still, I must've missed when the world declared she had infallibility.

BJKing has said that Martina Navratilova is the greatest all around player of all time. She will acknowledge that Steffi Graf is the greatest singles player of all time, but, she has said time and time again that Navratilova is the greatest all around tennis player ever.

darrinbaker00
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:33 AM
No. Almost all of the greats in the last 20 years have pretty much ignored doubles.
Why do you suppose that is? I am of the opinion that they skip doubles because they make too much playing singles to be bothered, and the reason for that is because of their singles-and-doubles-playing predecessors building the popularity of the sport.

dsanders06
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:37 AM
Why do you suppose that is? I am of the opinion that they skip doubles because they make too much playing singles to be bothered, and the reason for that is because of their singles-and-doubles-playing predecessors building the popularity of the sport.

I agree with John McEnroe on this, and I believe it's because the top players as a general rule these days don't want to get too close to other top players, for fear of surrendering a psychological edge.

(And I'm not going to be able to provide a link to him saying this. I distinctly remember him saying it on a "Today at Wimbledon" on the BBC back in 2007 I think, though I doubt it's on YouTube.)

G1Player2
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:44 AM
Historically speaking, it might be easier to pick out Pam Shriver's name on a list of notable historical tennis accomplishments than that of Lindsay Davenport. That's not to say that Pam was a better singles player than Lindsay, but Pam's historic doubles career is much more notable than that of Lindsay's singles success. When you talk about legendary status, Pam was a lengendary doubles player. Lindsay was not a legendary singles or doubles player.

I don't know if I'd agree with this.

dsanders06
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:45 AM
Historically speaking, it might be easier to pick out Pam Shriver's name on a list of notable historical tennis accomplishments than that of Lindsay Davenport. That's not to say that Pam was a better singles player than Lindsay, but Pam's historic doubles career is much more notable than that of Lindsay's singles success. When you talk about legendary status, Pam was a lengendary doubles player. Lindsay was not a legendary singles or doubles player.

Well, I would unhesitantly say Davenport is far more of a great than Shriver.

dsanders06
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:56 AM
Again, its much easier to pick Pam out in the history of tennis than what it is Lindsay. Pam had one of the all-time best doubles career in the history of women's tennis. Its reflected on many historical lists. Lindsay doesn't make the top twenty in singles or doubles grand slam events.

Well, I just don't agree with this. Shriver might be a big name, but how much of that is due to her post-tennis commentary work? Zvereva and Gigi Fernandez have very low public recognition ratings I would guess, even though they're one of the all-time top doubles teams. I'm not saying doubles is "worthless" as such; it's fine for what it is, and it's a nice sideshow at the Slams in particular. But singles is a different ball game.

LightWarrior
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:56 AM
You base this on? Lindsay looks kinda pale in the grand slam department. She's about to faint in the All-Time department as well.

Again, its much easier to pick Pam out in the history of tennis than what it is Lindsay. Pam had one of the all-time best doubles career in the history of women's tennis. Its reflected on many historical lists. Lindsay doesn't make the top twenty in singles or doubles grand slam events.

People know about Pam Shriver or Tracy Austin for that matter just because they are commentators.

AcesHigh
Feb 9th, 2010, 03:15 AM
People know about Pam Shriver or Tracy Austin for that matter just because they are commentators.

:spit: Tracy Austin's a pretty big deal

AcesHigh
Feb 9th, 2010, 03:17 AM
For the record, I'm not anti-Lindsay. She's super!! I just don't think that in 30 years, much will be remembered about Lindsay's career in comparison to other tennis players whose results were the best all-time.

You might want to check out Lindsay's weeks at #1, years ended at #1, career wins, career titles, etc.
Her career is actually spectacular and she will be remembered not only for her achievements, but also her longetivy, her great matches and her excellent game.

LightWarrior
Feb 9th, 2010, 03:20 AM
:spit: Tracy Austin's a pretty big deal

Yeah, a lame 2 slam winner, like Momo or Kuzny or Pierce.

G1Player2
Feb 9th, 2010, 03:21 AM
Yeah, a lame 2 slam winner, like Momo or Kuzny or Pierce.

A 2 time slam winner is LAME?!

AcesHigh
Feb 9th, 2010, 03:22 AM
Yeah, a lame 2 slam winner, like Momo or Kuzny or Pierce.

:lol: okay.. you showed me all I need to know with that statement.
Carry on.

friendsita
Feb 9th, 2010, 04:01 AM
She's a legend!

SerenaSlam
Feb 9th, 2010, 04:15 AM
i think more than anything serena is a total package. look at her. she is playing and winning both the singles and doubles at the same slam events. and she is consistently doing this. ao 2010 is the third time in the past year that she has done this. what tennis player do you know were achieving things like this? physically could they or would they have been able to?

serena is a legend in her own right. i look back at ALL she has been through and i see why serena has the fire to always persevere. and to even discuss her in a way of not deserving of ANY accolades based off her many accomplishments just makes those look like a part of the group of dummies that make these articles and negative comments towards a woman whose goal was to be the best should could be in her sport. whats wrong with that?

kiwifan
Feb 9th, 2010, 04:16 AM
Indeed.. Serena has nothing to prove that she is the GOHH, a legend in her own right.
Saying that, I don't understand why most of her fans are so insecure and are always on the defensive when talking about her achievements...:confused:

They are on the defensive because Chucky and Justine's fans and other haters are always on the attack...and silence is an affirmation around here. ;)

Ignorance must be addressed. :p :devil:

SerenaSlam
Feb 9th, 2010, 04:18 AM
and to read that doubles doesnt matter or count is soo stupid to me. i personally think you don't see the players playing because of the physical toll it takes to achieve success in both singles and doubles. why risk it if your not comfortable that you are able to achieve great things in it?

kiwifan
Feb 9th, 2010, 04:32 AM
and to read that doubles doesnt matter or count is soo stupid to me. i personally think you don't see the players playing because of the physical toll it takes to achieve success in both singles and doubles. why risk it if your not comfortable that you are able to achieve great things in it?

Oh just look at the people who are saying it...:devil:

...Serena's biggest fans :rolleyes:

More importantly remember when doubles prowess was a credit for Hingis and Anna K. but now it "doesn't really matter" for anyone named Williams. :lol:

Keep winning those slams, doubles and singles!!! :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

LightWarrior
Feb 9th, 2010, 05:42 AM
Actually, Tracy was well-known for her embarrassing ass-kickings of Evert. :wavey::devil: It was May 1979, Italian Open Semifinals. Chris Evert was riding a 125 match clay court win streak and faced young, darling, Tracy Austin. Austin won 7-6 in the third set. Tracy Austin is one of the few players Chris Evert had a losing record against.

Yeah, its tough to forget Tracy.

Another that is hard to forget : when Chrissie defeated Austin 6/0 6/0 at YEC in 1982. That was their last meeting.

LightWarrior
Feb 9th, 2010, 06:00 AM
Evert did get revenge on an injured Austin. Tracy retired that year. I assure you that when both Evert and Austin were healthy, Tracy gave Chris fits on a tennis court. It was a shame to see Tracy prematurely retire because her presence on tour would have definitely changed the dynamic of the Navratilova-Evert rivalry. It very well could have been the Navratilova-Austin rivalry.

coulda woulda shoulda...If Seles hadn't been stabbed she undoubtedly would be the GOAT...Don't go that road.

Olórin
Feb 9th, 2010, 11:00 AM
Evert did get revenge on an injured Austin. Tracy retired that year. I assure you that when both Evert and Austin were healthy, Tracy gave Chris fits on a tennis court. It was a shame to see Tracy prematurely retire because her presence on tour would have definitely changed the dynamic of the Navratilova-Evert rivalry. It very well could have been the Navratilova-Austin rivalry.

Unlikely though. Tracy's hold over Evert only lasted about a year. It was Chris who knocked out defending champion Tracy Austin of the US Open giving her two breadsticks in the process, to reclaim her own title.

BuTtErFrEnA
Feb 9th, 2010, 11:29 AM
Oh just look at the people who are saying it...:devil:

...Serena's biggest fans :rolleyes:

More importantly remember when doubles prowess was a credit for Hingis and Anna K. but now it "doesn't really matter" for anyone named Williams. :lol:

Keep winning those slams, doubles and singles!!! :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

oui...the sport has always credited players who go out and play singles AND doubles and have amazing success at both cause it's difficult to do...hingis was lauded, much like kim, for being #1 in singles AND doubles...and they weren't playing with their sisters so obviously it can be done by people who AREN'T siblings no?

AnnaK_4ever
Feb 9th, 2010, 11:39 AM
You base this on? Lindsay looks kinda pale in the grand slam department. She's about to faint in the All-Time department as well.

Again, its much easier to pick Pam out in the history of tennis than what it is Lindsay. Pam had one of the all-time best doubles career in the history of women's tennis. Its reflected on many historical lists. Lindsay doesn't make the top twenty in singles or doubles grand slam events.

Thirty years from now, when Shriver's doubles records are still atop tennis history, she will continue to be known as one of the all-time great doubles players in tennis history. When comparing historical accomplishments thirty years from now, Lindsay's name may probably never be mentioned.

Yeah, a lame 2 slam winner, like Momo or Kuzny or Pierce.

Two worthy contenders for the most moronic post of the year award.

bandabou
Feb 9th, 2010, 01:12 PM
Go babygirlll!

moby
Feb 9th, 2010, 03:00 PM
Oh just look at the people who are saying it...:devil:

...Serena's biggest fans :rolleyes:

More importantly remember when doubles prowess was a credit for Hingis and Anna K. but now it "doesn't really matter" for anyone named Williams. :lol:It cuts both ways. I remember back in the day, in the early 2000s, when Hingis had 6 AO finals in a row, and 3 AO wins... certain factions claim that it was because she "capitalised" on other players not being in shape in the early season (and "capitalised" was meant in a derogatory manner, because of course her wins don't count if her opponents aren't at their mythical best), and that the AO was worth the least of the slams historically and wasn't as legitimate, so it didn't count for much.

Now that Serena has 5 of those... :shrug:
It's because of her work ethic in the off-season... her ability to focus when her opponents are still finding their games in the early season... and so on...

See the difference in the nuance?

Or even the number one ranking. Now that Serena is back at number one, it has meaning again! When before, the likes of Henin chalked up their weeks at number one by playing tournaments week-in-week-out (completely untrue in the case of Henin).

Volcana
Feb 9th, 2010, 03:47 PM
coulda woulda shoulda...While you are correct that most fans now know Austin more as a commentator than a player, that's no knock on Austin. She could flat out play. And of course, there are the small matters of winning a professional tournament when she was fourteen, and the US Open when she was sixteen. Her career path was actually one of the motivations for the AER. She had sciatica and back injuries by the time she was twenty.

bandabou
Feb 9th, 2010, 03:50 PM
Difference is Serena has 12 and has won at least 3 at 3 of the 4 majors..and has won them all at least once. Hingis isn't really comparison for Serena no more.

Pureracket
Feb 9th, 2010, 07:06 PM
It cuts both ways. I remember back in the day, in the early 2000s, when Hingis had 6 AO finals in a row, and 3 AO wins... certain factions claim that it was because she "capitalised" on other players not being in shape in the early season (and "capitalised" was meant in a derogatory manner, because of course her wins don't count if her opponents aren't at their mythical best), and that the AO was worth the least of the slams historically and wasn't as legitimate, so it didn't count for much.

Now that Serena has 5 of those... :shrug:
It's because of her work ethic in the off-season... her ability to focus when her opponents are still finding their games in the early season... and so on...

See the difference in the nuance?

Or even the number one ranking. Now that Serena is back at number one, it has meaning again! When before, the likes of Henin chalked up their weeks at number one by playing tournaments week-in-week-out (completely untrue in the case of Henin).I'm wondering if you are talking about WS fans when you mention the first set of factions. If so, you are referring to a rare subset. Most WS fans I know were pissed off @ how Serena and Venus would show up to the AO out of shape.

Also, I don't remember too many people complaining about Henin being #1. Serena's fans have always claimed she was the best player, whether she was #1 or not.

AnnaK_4ever
Feb 9th, 2010, 09:27 PM
I consider that a compliment coming from an Anna K fan. Of course, you would know about winning results, now wouldn't you?

Only a newbie or an idiot would try to "hurt my feelings" by insulting Kournikova :lol:
Not to mention by trying to discredit Kournikova you would devalue your own arguments re historical importance of doubles.

brickhousesupporter
Feb 9th, 2010, 09:51 PM
Anna's doubles achievements are by no means legendary in comparison to the history of women's tennis. Slightly significant compared to her off-court endeavors. And well, we know how the singles ended up.

You enjoy slinging around insults. I mean, you attacked me. I think the term you used was "moron."

Well, guess what. I've got ALL__THIS__ASS you can kiss, Pornakova.


:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

You are going to fit in here quite nicely.

trufanjay
Feb 9th, 2010, 09:52 PM
Anna's doubles achievements are by no means legendary in comparison to the history of women's tennis. Slightly significant compared to her off-court endeavors. She and Lindsay Davenport won the same number of doubles grand slams: 3.

You enjoy slinging around insults. I mean, you called me a "moron" without attempting to debate why you disagreed with anything I said.

Well, guess what. I've got ALL__THIS__ASS you can kiss, Pornakova.
:haha:

Thkmra
Feb 9th, 2010, 09:58 PM
coulda woulda shoulda...If Seles hadn't been stabbed she undoubtedly would be the GOAT...Don't go that road.

NO to Seles, and YES to it being very possibly a Nav-Austin legendary rivalry. Austin, who matter of fact was a younger, more talented, dynamic version of Evert!!:)

brickhousesupporter
Feb 9th, 2010, 10:01 PM
NO to Seles, and YES to it being very possibly a Nav-Austin legendary rivalry. Austin, who matter of fact was a younger, more talented, dynamic version of Evert!!:)

She was more dynamic, but I always felt like she was working so much harder than Chris. Tracy scrambled a lot on the court, while Chris seemed to effortlessly get to the balls. This difference in styles may have played a role in the injuries of Tracy.

DOUBLEFIST
Feb 9th, 2010, 11:01 PM
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

You are going to fit in here quite nicely.

Wow! Took the words right out of my mouth. Not that I have anything terrible against AnnaK_4ever, but you gotta admire someone who can hold there own.

AcesHigh
Feb 10th, 2010, 12:21 AM
Anna's doubles achievements are by no means legendary in comparison to the history of women's tennis. Slightly significant compared to her off-court endeavors. She and Lindsay Davenport won the same number of doubles grand slams: 3.

You enjoy slinging around insults. I mean, you called me a "moron" without attempting to debate why you disagreed with anything I said.

Well, guess what. I've got ALL__THIS__ASS you can kiss, Pornakova.

:spit: nicely done

Olórin
Feb 10th, 2010, 12:23 AM
As I recall, the scoreline of that 1980 US Open Semifinals was Evert 4-6, 6-1, 6-1. It was a much needed win for Evert, with Austin having won their five previous matches in straight sets. Tracy's well-documented back problems and sciatica in her young career forced her from the game at 21. Her early retirement changed the course of tennis history, leaving the Navratilova v Evert rivalry unchallenged until Steffi Graf dominated the women's game.

It was a much needed win, that Evert got. In fact, during Austin's prime when she was number one, setting up for this de-throning of Evert as the American #1, Evert still won more Grand Slams in that period alone - never mind the fact that Evert was lacking motivation against ALL her opponents in those couple of years Austin was beating her, and even contemplating retirement.

It's analogous to Maria Sharapova's wins over Serena in 2004. Austin had her moment but the greatest champion was there first and last - let's not be silly and talk about altering the Nav-Evert rivalry. I actually think Austin's inferior technique was what lead to her crippling back injuries. She took the ball so early and swung at it with a such pronounced hip rotation, coupled with her height - it's no wonder she had back problems. Chris' superior technique saw her have a stunngingly consistent and healthy career.

AcesHigh
Feb 10th, 2010, 12:26 AM
It was a much needed win, that Evert got. In fact, during Austin's prime when she was number one, setting up for this de-throning of Evert as the American #1, Evert still won more Grand Slams in that period alone - never mind the fact that Evert was lacking motivation against ALL her opponents in those couple of years Austin was beating her, and even contemplating retirement.

It's analogous to Maria Sharapova's wins over Serena in 2004. Austin had her moment but the greatest champion was there first and last - let's not be silly and talk about altering the Nav-Evert rivalry. I actually think Austin's inferior technique was what lead to her crippling back injuries. She took the ball so early and swung at it with a such pronounced hip rotation, coupled with her height - it's no wonder she had back problems. Chris' superior technique saw her have a stunngingly consistent and healthy career.

I agree mostly but I think a healthy Austin would have definitely thrown a wrench into the unrivaled Evert/Navratilova dominance.
And we've seen players with godawful technique have long careers so i don't think that was the main reason.

tennisbum79
Feb 10th, 2010, 12:29 AM
Anna's doubles achievements are by no means legendary in comparison to the history of women's tennis. Slightly significant compared to her off-court endeavors. She and Lindsay Davenport won the same number of doubles grand slams: 3.

You enjoy slinging around insults. I mean, you called me a "moron" without attempting to debate why you disagreed with anything I said.

Well, guess what. I've got ALL__THIS__ASS you can kiss, Pornakova.

You are lucky, you could have gotten worse.

If you are WS fan, you can be called delussional for simply stating a score.
Of course that is an exageration, but it illustrates how little you have to do in area of disagreement to be called names your mother would not be proud of.
Sometime as yo drive the point home, the insuting post wibb be followed by bad rep using the same epithet


Don't mind the word "newbie", that is just intended to intimidate and throw off new members.
You may be new here, but you fit in nicely already

kiwifan
Feb 10th, 2010, 12:48 AM
It cuts both ways. I remember back in the day, in the early 2000s, when Hingis had 6 AO finals in a row, and 3 AO wins... certain factions claim that it was because she "capitalised" on other players not being in shape in the early season (and "capitalised" was meant in a derogatory manner, because of course her wins don't count if her opponents aren't at their mythical best), and that the AO was worth the least of the slams historically and wasn't as legitimate, so it didn't count for much.

Now that Serena has 5 of those... :shrug:
It's because of her work ethic in the off-season... her ability to focus when her opponents are still finding their games in the early season... and so on...

See the difference in the nuance?

Or even the number one ranking. Now that Serena is back at number one, it has meaning again! When before, the likes of Henin chalked up their weeks at number one by playing tournaments week-in-week-out (completely untrue in the case of Henin).
I do recall those comments about Chucky but don't you think it was a bit different because in her case she had one Slam in NY one in England and like overwhelming successful performances in Australia...her Aussie results stuck out like a sore thumb...so logical minds would wonder "why?" (as opposed to just "haters being haters") ;) Don't recall Serena's Aussie fitness ever being a positive issue (meaning it was either a non-issue or a huge negative) :p

The number one ranking only has meaning when Serena has it...that isn't spin...that is the consistent message...if someone else has it, no big deal because we know who the best tennis player is...if Serena has it, that just means rankings and reality match...call it arrogance, I call it the truth...

...as far as the Aussie, I haven't heard anyone claim the Australian Open as being "extra special" :confused: since Serena keeps winning it...I think you're confusing arguments with Venus because Wimbledon IS extra special and winning Wimbledon is the single greatest achievement a professional tennis player can aspire to. No offense to the other 3 (which are all impressive in their own right) but Wimbledon is like "Tennis Mecca", "Tennis Jerusalem" and the "Tennis Vatican" all rolled into one. :angel: :angel: :angel: :angel: :angel:

The best thing about the Aussie O is that it adds to the totals! :p :p :p :p :p

darrinbaker00
Feb 10th, 2010, 04:50 AM
Chris Evert married John Lloyd in 1979. I just wonder if her motivation issue was related to being newly married and trying to figure out how to prioritize her life.
No, it was related to getting regularly pimp-slapped by Tracy Austin.

bandabou
Feb 10th, 2010, 06:11 AM
Serena-Sharapova was never a rivalry. Folks were just overrating it because finally SOMEBODY ANYBODY beat Serena.

MrSerenaWilliams
Feb 10th, 2010, 07:04 AM
Serena-Sharapova was never a rivalry. Folks were just overrating it because finally SOMEBODY ANYBODY beat Serena.

This.

RVD
Feb 10th, 2010, 07:09 AM
I'm wondering if you are talking about WS fans when you mention the first set of factions. If so, you are referring to a rare subset. Most WS fans I know were pissed off @ how Serena and Venus would show up to the AO out of shape.

Also, I don't remember too many people complaining about Henin being #1. Serena's fans have always claimed she was the best player, whether she was #1 or not.Thanks for posting this. I was wondering where Moby came up with that as well. I can't ever recall Serena fans making light of Hingis' record(s)....EVER! If it happened at all, it might have been in reciprocation from others dogging Serena and her fans for whatever strange reasons they might have had at the time. But really, when has an opposing fanbase not dogged Serena fans. :lol: We can take it and can certainly dish it out with the best of em. ;)

Serena fans are GOATs at putting folks in there place. :lol:

RVD
Feb 10th, 2010, 07:12 AM
Anna's doubles achievements are by no means legendary in comparison to the history of women's tennis. Slightly significant compared to her off-court endeavors. She and Lindsay Davenport won the same number of doubles grand slams: 3.

You enjoy slinging around insults. I mean, you called me a "moron" without attempting to debate why you disagreed with anything I said.

Well, guess what. I've got ALL__THIS__ASS you can kiss, Pornakova.I don't know who you are, but I am L-O-V-I-N-G your posts. :haha:
Just keep em coming, and WELCOME to the board. :cool:

AnnaK_4ever
Feb 10th, 2010, 08:28 AM
Anna's doubles achievements are by no means legendary in comparison to the history of women's tennis. Slightly significant compared to her off-court endeavors. She and Lindsay Davenport won the same number of doubles grand slams: 3.

You enjoy slinging around insults. I mean, you called me a "moron" without attempting to debate why you disagreed with anything I said.

Well, guess what. I've got ALL__THIS__ASS you can kiss, Pornakova.

1) Learn to count. Kournikova won 2 doubles slams, not 3.
2) Learn to read. I didn't call you a moron, I called your post moronic.
3) I always admit my mistakes. I was wrong. You are a moron.

Have a nice day, :wavey:

P.S.
As for you proposition, I think I'll find a better ass to kiss. I'm a gay afterall.

Kunal
Feb 10th, 2010, 09:49 AM
this has a lot to do with timing as well