PDA

View Full Version : Who can win 3 GS titles or more?


Volcana
Oct 13th, 2002, 06:13 PM
Not so simple.

When we ask if Mauresmo, Dokic, Henin, Clijsters, Hantuchova, Myskina, Rubin, etc are good enough to join the 'elite', we aren't just asking if they'll win one GS title, or even two. Historically, the 3 GS level is where the separation from the between the 'good' GS singles record and the 'really good' GS singles record.


24 Margaret Smith Court
22 Steffi Graf
18 Martina Navratilova
18 Chris Evert

12 BJK
9 Monica Seles
7 Evonne Goolagong
5 Martina Hingis

4 Hana Mandlikova
4 Venus Williams
4 Serena Williams
4 Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario

3 Lindsay Davenport
3 Jennifer Capriati
3 Virginia Wade

2 Ann Haydon Jones
2 Nancy Richey
2 Tracy Austin
2 Mary Pierce


As for 'great' vs 'really good', well that's subjective. But four players have won 4 GS titles in the Open era. Only eight have won more than that. So 5 GS titles is some kind of measuring point, at least til next year, when Venus or Serena will likely get their fifth.

Who would you project, among the current NON-GS winners is going to win at least three GS titles? Cause once you hit the 3 GS level, it's nothing but near Hall-of-Fame players.

Ryan
Oct 13th, 2002, 06:17 PM
None. I honestly don't think out of the current non-GS winners that ANY of them will amass three grandslams or more. I reckon Venus and Serena will play for another 3 years, and only players like Jen Cap and Lindsay MIGHT be able to sneak in a slam or two. Then, with Mauresmo, Henin, Clijsters, Hantuchova etc. I don't see any of them "breaking away" from the others. All the top players are previous GS winners,(mostly) and I don't see a new "dominator" yet.

l_hommeca
Oct 13th, 2002, 06:18 PM
It would also depend on the field of players of course. If you just keep rackin up the GS wins but no really good competitors then it's not so impressive in my book. If only the W/S can play during when Graf and Navratilova were at their prime. Oh probably Clijsters from this list would have the chance since she is still young and actually play well against the W/S. But there could be some girl we don't know now that could have a chance too. And I don't think they would have to retire or get slightly injured first for Kim or anyone to win one, two and three GS titles. To think W/S would just win all the remaining GS titles till they retire would be foolish. These two have caught the players off guard - it's a new level of game. It's a matter of knowing how to beat them and working hard to get to that level(moving quickly on the court) Last but not least, although she is a target for critics, Anna K. will have a chance. And no, it's not wishful thinking. It's up to her not really up to others to get it together and win a title and a GS title or two. Don't forget Rubin..she has a chance for a title but maybe not three, although she is up there in age.

TeeRexx
Oct 13th, 2002, 06:23 PM
It is almost impossible to win 1 GS title and not be in the Hall of Fame.

But, to answer the question, Clijsters, because of her age, ability and Tier wins, has the best chance to win 3 GS title, but that feat may not be accomplished until two relatives decide to retire.

CJ07
Oct 13th, 2002, 06:23 PM
It depends on the field. Navratilova and Evert I'd say top the list as they won their GS during a very competitive field, Graf won some during that period and then several during the post-Monica era.

But anyways, I think it will be very tough for anyone to get 3+ grand slams. It really really depends on how long the William Sisters play, because I think they want to be on the top of the list by the time they're careers end. And since they're probably only going to play 3-5 more years, they dont have much time With that said, age wise Clijsters has the best chance because assuming the Williams' retire in 5 years, she'll only be 24 which means she could rack up some then, providing she doesnt get married or anything

fhkung
Oct 13th, 2002, 06:35 PM
Hantuchova......
she is improving and if she continues improving,
she should have a lot of chances on clay against Serena
coz she should be able to match her speed,
and the strokes on clay is easier to match
so she is one to win French Open other than Williams
Clijster......
she is kinda one dimentional,
but she tries to run every ball down,
which is good on clay and rebound ace,
and if she starts to become an all court type player
she should snatch the Aussie Open title
Henin/Mauresmo....
they are the ones to win Wimbledon,
one-hand back is perfect for serve and volley
against the Williams, and Henin is pretty fast too,
so they should be able to win a slam or 2
Myskina/Dokic......
if they play the way they are playing now,
they should drop probably by January...
which means they are probably out of top 20 by next year,
they play similarly like Clijster, but they are a lot more
likely to be upset........so i dont really count on them to win
Rubn/Davenport/Jen.............
they have variety and can match strokes w/ Williams
but they are close to veteran age,
and age does play a factor....so they may win slam
but only in the next 2 years, and probably in US Open
but after that, probably no chance..........
Hingis, Kournikova.......
dont count these 2 out,
one is injured and one has new coach
which means they have time to retool their games,
so hopefully they will be back better than ever,
and i can really see Hingis winning Roland Garrows
and Kournikova should be have a great chance
in Wimbledon coz her volley, and probably on rebound ace AO

Volcana
Oct 13th, 2002, 08:46 PM
On the women's side, top players don't often retire at 25. I'd say we're going to be seeing the WIlliams sisters for more like 8-10 years.

Did Chria and Martina actually play against deeper fields? I'd say the players TODAY are playing against better competition.

BTW, if I ran the Hall fo Fame, there'd only be seven players in it from the Open era based on their SINGLES accomplishments. Goolagong gets in, Hingis doesn't.

england_rules
Oct 13th, 2002, 08:58 PM
Originally posted by Volcana
On the women's side, top players don't often retire at 25. I'd say we're going to be seeing the WIlliams sisters for more like 8-10 years.

Did Chria and Martina actually play against deeper fields? I'd say the players TODAY are playing against better competition.

BTW, if I ran the Hall fo Fame, there'd only be seven players in it from the Open era based on their SINGLES accomplishments. Goolagong gets in, Hingis doesn't.
Hngis would definitely get in!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :mad: :fiery:

PhoenixStorm
Oct 13th, 2002, 09:06 PM
question: With 24 grandslam titles why isnt margaret court considered the best female tennis player of all time?

niratti
Oct 13th, 2002, 09:16 PM
very unlikely for these active players.
Unfortunately, they are GOOD PLAYERS at the era of Hingis, Lindsay, the Williams and Jennifer.
I can see Hingis and Lindsay will win at least one more GS (I hope I'm right) and the Williams with a few more GS before we'll have a new GS champion.

However, the one who has the best chance is Clijsters.

disposablehero
Oct 13th, 2002, 09:29 PM
If anyone has a chance, its Kim. Amelie is certainly a player on a level comparable to Kim, but she is halfway through a career and Kim is less than 1/4 of the way through. Plus I think Kim is going to improve further yet.

Note though, that is IF anyone has a chance.

Volcana
Oct 13th, 2002, 09:46 PM
PhoenixStorm - Mainly it's just that not many current fans were fans then, so they don't realize how dominant she was. Women's tennis wasn't on TV much in those days. Some say that she won 11 OZ titles, and all the top players didn't play OZ then. However, we don't hold that against Roy Emerson, the winniest man before Sampras. He won 11 GS titles. 6 were at OZ. And all the best men definitely did NOT play OZ. In fact, the case discounting the men's GS records is better. Pancho Gonzalez may have been the best male pro EVER. But he turned pro young, and so couldn't play Davis Cup or the Slams.

When you're talking about 'Greatest player ever' I always include Court. In fact, if you start figuring in 'what might have been' becasue of Monica's stabbing, it's not even a competition. Say Monica would have won 6 of Steffi's GS titles. That would give Steffi 16, and Monica 15. Now look at the career records.

24 Court
21 Wills Moody
18 Navratilova
18 Evert
16 Graf
15 Seles

And of course, Margaret Court was tought of more highly as a player before she attacked Martina Navratilova as a bad role model for young girls. Her records have been discounted by many fans (including me) ever since. But she won more titles than anybody and by a large margin. There's no female player in the history of the sport you can make a case, records-wise, that was better than Margaret Smith Court.

mboyle
Oct 13th, 2002, 09:54 PM
In order of chances:
1. Daniela Hantuchova- I say she will win multiple slams. Her game keeps improving, she can come to net, and she has a great first and second serve to back up her perfect groundies. An added bonus is that she has one heck of a coach in Nigel Sears and she seems to absorb all his info like a sponge. Also, unlike Kim, she has a huge HUGE desire to reach number one, and thinks that she deserves it. (I would rather have kim as a girlfriend but her attitude isn't quite as competitive)

2. Kim Clijsters- See Hantuchova. Her serve, groundstrokes, and variety are all there. She moves faster than Dani, but doesn't hit quite as well. (Her strokes are pretty much as hard, but they don't penetrate through the court as well) The main difference is that Kim hasn't improved quite as much as Dani recently, and the desire is not on the same level. (Don't get me wrong, Kimmie is so amiable and still pretty competitive, but she is almost too nice) I think she will win two slams, but she has a long shot at three or more.

Justine Henin- I see no chance. She is not a top ten hard court player at all, and is also the "best" choker on the WTA right now. Her strokes to me seem to have way too much topspin on them for anything but clay, and to get her power she needs alot of time to set up. I say she wins Roland Garros once at about 27 or 28, but nothing else.

Amelie Mauresmo- I don't see her as a slam winner. The variety is there, but the power isn't. She is way to streaky, and she is also 23 (I think), so she has less time. She is best on clay IMHO, but she chokes badly at Roland Garros.

Jelena Dokic- I would be surprised if she wins a slam or the championships. She has an old school game of big flat groundstrokes and nothing else. Jennifer has the speed and determination, most everyone else has at least the serve. Also, Jelena has no legitimate coach, and won't improve at all IMHO until she is willing to get one.

Hingis- She will win another one at Roland Garros maybe, and WILL be in the hall of fame.

Davenport- I don't think she will win another slam. I could be wrong though.

Capriati- I think she can win another one, she has the footspeed, the guts, and can develop the serve. (Wheras Lindsay can't really develop speed)

Everyone else over 17- Slamless. The russians won't win a slam until Svetlana or Dinara, and they will only win one or two. Masha Sharapova and Vera Douchevina however, they will be great. They will be the two rivals the world talks about on the street corners sipping coffee. They will be the spectacular athletes young girls dream of beating, or even merely meeting. They will carry the aura of champions wherever they go, and tournament directors will be drooling to have them sign up for their tournaments. Maria will be the cute girl that boys of all ages fantasize over, but deep down know they can't have. They will replace three people in Venus, Serena, and Anna and will be recorded among tennis' legends. I promise:angel: !

CJ07
Oct 13th, 2002, 09:56 PM
Well I think everyone kinda ignores pre Ever-Navratilova tennis as well since thats when people started to tune in

As for the Monica thing, if she had continued, I'd bet my money that Hingis would still have taken over, not by the way that she did but still I think that she would have kinda taken over

disposablehero
Oct 13th, 2002, 09:58 PM
19 for Wills Moody, Volcana. I like your thinking on Monica and Steffi, but I believe that Steffi wouldn't have been the only one "giving back" to Monica.

mboyle
Oct 13th, 2002, 10:00 PM
Monica would have won way more than 6 of Steffi's. She could have won about 30 or more grand slams. I mean she was improving her serve AND her volleys when she got stabbed. She would have won the grand slam at least once, and would have prevented Martina from winning any slams I think. Alas, she wouldn't have prevented the sisters slams I don't think, but could have stopped Lindsay's 1998 US Open. Monica was destined to be the greatest ever, and it was all taken away by the German courts.

fhkung
Oct 13th, 2002, 10:15 PM
Maria Sharapova and Vera Douchevina are 15
but now that Safina and Casanova etc
17 year olds are occupying top spots,
like top 50, 40, if they want to come in and compete with
them, Maria and Vera have to realize, when they are 18
the Williams will be 24, their PRIME....
and Williams will continue to be a force in the slams
for probably 6,7 years, and other than the Wiliams
the young guns who are at top already
wont give them chances to win slams........
they are just 2,3 years older, they are not likely
to be even at the level of Hingis-Davenport rivalry.

Ryan
Oct 13th, 2002, 10:30 PM
On the women's side, top players don't often retire at 25. I'd say we're going to be seeing the WIlliams sisters for more like 8-10 years.


LMAO! Absolutely no way. They'd be bored by then, and would have "moved on".

CJ07
Oct 13th, 2002, 10:44 PM
"She could have won about 30 or more grand slams"

I think thats a bit of a stretch

Lets go done the line,

'93 Oz, French, Wimbledon, UsOpen
She probably would have won French, Open, MAYBE Wimbledon
Rank-1
Thats 3

'94 OZ, French, Wimbledon, UsOpen
This would've been her GS year
Rank 1
Thats 7

'95 Oz, French, UsOpen
Seeing how she should've beaten Steffi, I'd say 3
Rank-1
Thats 10

'96 Oz, French, UsOpen
She did win OZ, got to final of Open so yeah
Rank-1
Thats 13

'97 French
That darn Hingis kid shows up
Rank-2 (like she was most of the year)
Thats 14

'98 French
That darn Davenport kid shows up
Rank-3
Thats 15

'99 OZ, French (shouldve beaten steffi again)
That darn Serena kid shows up
Rank-2
Thats 17

'00 Slamless; French final
That darn Venus Kid Shows Up
Rank-4 (like she was anyways)
Still 17

'01 Oz, French
That darn Capriati kid shows up....but shes always owned her stabbing or not
Rank- 1
Thats 19

'02, OZ
Those darn Williams sisters
Rank-3
Thats 20

So 28 Grand Slams? Thats a bit of a strech, but now that I think about it, who knows. Maybe Monica would still be #1, maybe shed break all the records or maybe she'd decide to do model and act (like she was starting to do) and quit anyway. We'll never know. But hey 9 Grand Slams and 178 weeks at #1 aint to shabby.

Williams Rulez
Oct 14th, 2002, 05:40 AM
I doubt that any of the current players that have not won 3 slams yet could possibly win 3. But IF someone has to do it, I'd pick Kim. But with the level of competition now, I don't think so. I mean Lindsay is one the best players to be seen recently and she only has 3 slams and there are so few players that have 3 or more slam in the whole open era.

A4
Oct 14th, 2002, 06:33 AM
I see my view's been already touched on. Basically, I think the young ones will have to at the very least, be as good as Lindsay or Jennifer and should be stay around for roughly that period of time before they can count 3 slams in their repertoire. I don't see any of them being as good as Lindsay or Jennifer (her grand slam form), except perhaps Justine and Amelie, though I see them hanging around for about as long as Lindsay has.

CanIGetAWhat
Oct 14th, 2002, 03:30 PM
no one today, not with Venus/Serena/Jennifer/Lindsay still healthy and playing great tennis. i think it'll be someone who will arrive on the scene when the current top ten players are near the end of their careers, an 8-11 year old somewhere in...Russia?

the only likely players are probably Daniela, Kim or Amelie.

selesrules
Oct 14th, 2002, 04:02 PM
I think that Mauresmo will win 2 slams.

As for Kim, Justine, Daniela, Jelena, they can win 1 slam like Martinez, Sabatini, Novotna did, but I don't think they will win more then one.

Experimentee
Oct 14th, 2002, 04:04 PM
Probably Kim and Daniela, i dont see any other current player winning more than 3, maybe 1 or 2 though.

Freefall
Oct 14th, 2002, 06:11 PM
If you count everyone over 17,

I can see Kim & Daniela winning over 10 GS & Amelie winning 3 GS or more

& I could see Justine winning more then 1 French. Maybe 3 French or 2 French & a lucky Wimby. At least 1 French anyway.

Dokic I think has to get a real coach to have a chance to win a GS. If she did everything she could to help herself to win a GS, I could see her winning 3 of them.

I think Lina K, Petrova, Elena B, Vera Z & Svetlana have the talent to win 3 or more GS. Elena D, Myskina & Chanda maybe could win 1 or 2.

All these girls & some others have the talent to win many GS, it's more WHO will step it up & take them.

Then 17 & under there's a LOT of VERY Talented players who can win many GS. I wish I could see them play sometime. I've only had the chance to see Dinara, Ashley H & Jamea Jackson. I think Dinara can win more then 3 GS. Ashley & Jamea, I can see breaking the top 20 easy but a GS would be a lot to ask of them. I haven't seen any other under 18 play a real match, but I trust Eggy & others who have seen them play & are Great at judging talent.

That's my 2 cents :)