In almost every "Greatest Ever" debate, the issue of the Monica Seles stabbing comes up. I want to know what most posters on this board feel regarding that. Some say that she should because it changed the course of the sport and tennis history. Others argue that we cannot speculate what might have been and have to go with what actually happened. Some add that injuries are a part of the game but being stabbed during a changeover is not. Yet others add that we can only go by the numbers in front of us.
Should the fact that Monica got stabbed be given special consideration in the Greats Debate?
May 1st, 2004, 02:45 PM
well definitely. she has a really great case in the greatest "player" but there's no way to say that she's the most accomplished. it's unfortunate that we never were really able to see how everything was going to pan out, and everyone realizes that to a certain extent. it's definitely an issue that carries some weight into those debates, IMO.
May 1st, 2004, 02:51 PM
It's one of those things that should be brought into the conversation, that and Maureen Connolly's auto accident that ended her career. But just as in Connolly's case, since we can't know what would have happened, ultimately she's judged on what she actually won. Even things like relative youth stop making anytime difference as time goes by. Tracy Austin was so good so young, and then injuries derailed her career. All we can say in cases like that is 'we wish we knew what if'.
Certainly there are enough players who's accomplishments were seemingly supressed by non-tennis events that we ought to be able to come up with some kind of standard for dealing with it. But ask yourself this. When you're thinking about the 'greats', how often do you think of Maureen Connolly? For better or worse, fifty years out, that will be Monica's legacy as well.