PDA

View Full Version : How well would Mary Joe fair against today's players?


Doraemon
Oct 2nd, 2004, 09:24 AM
I was a huge fan of Mary Joe when she was playing . She was the cleverest player I have ever seen on the court. She shoulda won a GS or two.
Anyways, how well do you think she would play against today's players?
I think she would beat most of the top 50 players but beating top 10nners would be a differnet story. But given she managed to beat Serena in the twilight stage of her career, I woulnd't be surprised if she beat some of them.

Calimero377
Oct 2nd, 2004, 09:30 AM
I was a huge fan of Mary Joe when she was playing . She was the cleverest player I have ever seen on the court. She shoulda won a GS or two.
Anyways, how well do you think she would play against today's players?
I think she would beat most of the top 50 players but beating top 10nners would be a differnet story. But given she managed to beat Serena in the twilight stage of her career, I woulnd't be surprised if she beat some of them.


Mary-Joe would have won this years French Open.
Hands down.

Doraemon
Oct 2nd, 2004, 11:19 AM
Mary-Joe would have won this years French Open.
Hands down.

I think saying she would have won it hands down is a bit of a stretch.
She might have done well but I don't think she would have won the whole thing. I think she would have beaten the likes of Capriati, Serena but beating Nastya would have been a different story.
Mary Joe lacked power and her health problems kept holding her back in much of her long career. Clay was her favorite surface as she won her biggest title (German Open) on this ground.
I think Mary Joe would have beaten Steffi.

Calimero377
Oct 2nd, 2004, 11:52 AM
I think saying she would have won it hands down is a bit of a stretch.
She might have done well but I don't think she would have won the whole thing. I think she would have beaten the likes of Capriati, Serena but beating Nastya would have been a different story.
Mary Joe lacked power and her health problems kept holding her back in much of her long career. Clay was her favorite surface as she won her biggest title (German Open) on this ground.
I think Mary Joe would have beaten Steffi.


I like the words "hands down". They add so much emphasis.

How do you think MJF would have beaten Steffi?
During change-over with her hand into Steffi's face?

spencercarlos
Oct 2nd, 2004, 01:11 PM
Mary-Joe would have won this years French Open.
Hands down.
I agree. Mary Joe could actually hit the ball hard and strategically she was a very gifted player (see her wins vs Davenport, Pierce just to mention some power players). I could easily see Mary Joe 93 beat this year french open finalists. Just my opinion, Mary Joe another underated player. (Can`t believe people talk a lot more from Amanda Coetzer while Mary joe made grand slam finals)

kabuki
Oct 2nd, 2004, 01:42 PM
MJF had a solid technical game, and was incredibly consistent. She just lacked fast-twitch muscles of any kind. She always looked like she was playing underwater, or in slow-mo IMO.

Calimero377
Oct 2nd, 2004, 02:01 PM
MJF had a solid technical game, and was incredibly consistent. She just lacked fast-twitch muscles of any kind. She always looked like she was playing underwater, or in slow-mo IMO.

Well, she didn't scream and grunt. That made her look slow by today's standards.
BTW, did you watch her FO 93 final against Graf, son?

kabuki
Oct 2nd, 2004, 02:58 PM
Well, she didn't scream and grunt. That made her look slow by today's standards.
BTW, did you watch her FO 93 final against Graf, son?

Actually, Daddy, I did. You are right, she didn't grunt, but she did do that weird big cheek exhale thing.

thelittlestelf
Oct 2nd, 2004, 03:01 PM
Mary Joe was a bit before my tennis era---but I still know enough about her to know that she was a great player!

She's also one of my favorite commentators :).

kabuki
Oct 2nd, 2004, 03:04 PM
Mary Joe was a bit before my tennis era---but I still know enough about her to know that she was a great player!

She's also one of my favorite commentators :).

:scared:

fammmmedspin
Oct 2nd, 2004, 03:06 PM
The problem is you can't set a level playing field. If MJF had modern technology and had been playing recently she would be serving faster and playing differently. depending on how well she did that you could see her anywhere in the top 10. Smart like Nastya? Dementieva minus plus serve? Too consistent for Sveta or Maria or Jennifer? Like Kim? She was competitive with Venus when Venus was at her best and Venus hasn't been there for 2 +years.

rhz
Oct 3rd, 2004, 11:50 PM
Did you remember her match at the US Open vs Venus where she was dominating Venus in the first set... her 1st serve perecentage was 100% ( I remember John McEnroe comentating on that match, and he too could not believe what he saw...) Mary Joe slipped and injured herself on the court as the umpire refuses to stop the match (was raining at that time)

I think if she plays, she would be at least in the top 20 if not better hands down

faboozadoo15
Oct 4th, 2004, 12:29 AM
strange story alert!!!! i saw he play an exhibition match while 5 months pregnant :eek: , and she could still hit the ball better (cleaner and lower over the net) than the local pros. she didn't move at all though ;)
i think she'd still be a pretty decent force in tennis. she's the type of player who really could have benefitted from the slightly better technology of today. who knows?

Stefwhit
Oct 4th, 2004, 12:42 AM
MJF biggest problem was she didn't have any weapons. Her groundstrokes were solid and she played really good at the net, but she didn't have any answers facing an opponent with weapons. Of course those consistent steady players are usually the ones who benefit most when the power players can't get the ball in court.

Mary-Jo always pushed herself to be aggressive but you can tell that wasn't her comfort zone. I think she came along at a perfect time- her combined records against Monica and Steffi were very telling. Mary-Jo, Zina, Gaby, and Novotna all seemed equally likely to win a major and they all had their chances- as luck would have it Gaby and Novotna were meant to win one and for whatever reasons Zina and Mary weren't.

Fingon
Oct 4th, 2004, 01:04 AM
well, that depends.

First, it depends on who she is facing, today's player means over 1000 players and yes, she would be able to beat most of them, now if you say top 20 it's a different story.

It also depends what Mary Jo you bring on.

the Mary Jo at her prime, teletransported to the current times?

Oh Mary Jo, like she was, physically and technically, but evolving to meet today's requirements.

In the first case the answer is simple, any top 20 player (and many top 50) would simply trounce her. Yes, she did challenge Serena that later won the US Open but Serena was inexperienced then.

Now, if Mary Jo, with the skills she had, played in today's environment, in other words, she developed her tennis in today's environment, then she would have a reasonable chance.

She wouldn't beat Serena, or Justine, or Kim, or Lindsay, or Sharapova (at least on grass) if they are playing well, but she could be dangerous if they are a bit off, same applies to other top players with the difference that I think she could beat for example Myskina, even if Myskina is playing well.

She would consistenly beat players outside the top 20 but she would have trouble handling today's pace, especially against someone like Serena, or Sprem, she would probably do better against Kim or Justine because her game would suit them better but she wouldn't win if they are on.

TennisLurker
Oct 4th, 2004, 01:09 AM
Mary joe was probably the cleanest ball striker ive ever seen, I always felt she was at least as good as Conchita, or better.
I agree with Calimero, on this.

switz
Oct 4th, 2004, 01:10 AM
she was very consistant in her game so i think she would be still be a top 10/15 player. i know her achievements but i only really saw the end of her career though. the main thing i remember was that she had great legs. i'm sure she's proud of that legacy.

TennisLurker
Oct 4th, 2004, 01:12 AM
novotna and gaby didnt win slams because they had more luck than mjf or zina, novotna and gaby were simply better, just check novotna and gaby's record against steffi and monica and compare it with zina's and mjf's record against steffi and monica.

faboozadoo15
Oct 4th, 2004, 01:36 AM
novotna and gaby didnt win slams because they had more luck than mjf or zina, novotna and gaby were simply better, just check novotna and gaby's record against steffi and monica and compare it with zina's and mjf's record against steffi and monica.
i was thinking that too. gaby should have won more slams, if anything... and maybe even novotna too. they both choked more than their share of matches. mjf, i don't recall her choking, i remember her just "not having enough." but she was better than zina if you ask me.

TennisLurker
Oct 4th, 2004, 01:44 AM
yeah, she was better than zina.

Stefwhit
Oct 4th, 2004, 02:39 AM
yeah, she was better than zina.
It always seemed to me that Zina, Mary-Jo, and Jana were all in the same league- Gaby was one notch above them so maybe I shouldn't have mentioned her. I don't know their records agains Stef and Mon (too lazy to look it up,) but they were all ranked in the top five, they all made at least one slam final and the way I saw it each was as likely as the other to win a slam. Remember all of these players are within one slam title of each other so if there was a huge difference, in terms of levels of play, it didn't show when it was all said and done. Zina has the weakest record of em' all at the slams, if my memory serves me correct, but I'm almost positive Zina has won a lot more career titles than Mary-Jo has. In their generation, these players were all in the same tier- in terms of level of play. As for Gaby, she played in something close to 20 semi-finals (or further) in the slams and only managed to win just one. Keeping that in mind I'd say she deserves to be grouped with these players, she's not worthy of the GREATS. In this particular bunch of ladies I'd say that Mary-Jo accomplished the least.

...I did love her though. I remember her one long braid and that head-band she would always wear, too bad she couldn't have just got that one slam.

Calimero377
Oct 4th, 2004, 05:01 AM
MJF biggest problem was she didn't have any weapons. Her groundstrokes were solid and she played really good at the net, but she didn't have any answers facing an opponent with weapons. Of course those consistent steady players are usually the ones who benefit most when the power players can't get the ball in court.

Mary-Jo always pushed herself to be aggressive but you can tell that wasn't her comfort zone. I think she came along at a perfect time- her combined records against Monica and Steffi were very telling. Mary-Jo, Zina, Gaby, and Novotna all seemed equally likely to win a major and they all had their chances- as luck would have it Gaby and Novotna were meant to win one and for whatever reasons Zina and Mary weren't.


Garrison and Sabatini in the same category - that's really a good one .....

:lol:

Calimero377
Oct 4th, 2004, 05:05 AM
well, that depends.

First, it depends on who she is facing, today's player means over 1000 players and yes, she would be able to beat most of them, now if you say top 20 it's a different story.

It also depends what Mary Jo you bring on.

the Mary Jo at her prime, teletransported to the current times?

Oh Mary Jo, like she was, physically and technically, but evolving to meet today's requirements.

In the first case the answer is simple, any top 20 player (and many top 50) would simply trounce her. ....


Sugiyama, Suarez, Frazier, Farina Elia, Maggie Maleeva and Raymond for example?
Oh boy .......

:lol: :lol: :lol:

pcrtennis
Oct 4th, 2004, 05:22 AM
Sugiyama would beat Fernandez today!

LADIEZ CHAMPION
Oct 4th, 2004, 10:14 AM
I was a huge fan of Mary Joe when she was playing . She was the cleverest player I have ever seen on the court. She shoulda won a GS or two.
Anyways, how well do you think she would play against today's players?
I think she would beat most of the top 50 players but beating top 10nners would be a differnet story. But given she managed to beat Serena in the twilight stage of her career, I woulnd't be surprised if she beat some of them.

Mary Joe would be able to compete with the Seles breed- new rulers of women's tennis BUT I don't see her winning any top tier tournaments at all. She will be a top 50 player.

Let's not even go to the Grand Slams. :angel:

LADIEZ CHAMPION
Oct 4th, 2004, 10:20 AM
I like the words "hands down". They add so much emphasis.

How do you think MJF would have beaten Steffi?
During change-over with her hand into Steffi's face?


At least Mary Joe was not the luckiest loser in women's tennis history. Right? :D

Mjf should have befriended Monica earlier in their career and get trained with Karolj Seles. Seles perfected the strategy to beat Graf at her own game. :D

:angel:

LADIEZ CHAMPION
Oct 4th, 2004, 10:22 AM
Garrison and Sabatini in the same category - that's really a good one .....

:lol:

Sabatini and Graf in the same category then? :D :angel:

Calimero377
Oct 6th, 2004, 09:46 PM
Sugiyama would beat Fernandez today!


MJF was 4-0 against Sugi career-wise.
Ai was what, 21/22 years old then.
And you think she is better now as a 29 year-old grandma?

:lol:

Calimero377
Oct 6th, 2004, 09:50 PM
At least Mary Joe was not the luckiest loser in women's tennis history. Right? :D

Mjf should have befriended Monica earlier in their career and get trained with Karolj Seles. Seles perfected the strategy to beat Graf at her own game. :D

:angel:


Seles perfected the strategy so she won 2 out of 7 matches against Graf at the height of their rivalry.
:lol:

SELES was the luckiest loser in women's tennis history.
All her blunders after age 21 can be excused by a 1-cm stab wound received as a 19-year-old ........
:)

pcrtennis
Oct 6th, 2004, 09:51 PM
MJF was 4-0 against Sugi career-wise.
Ai was what, 21/22 years old then.
And you think she is better now as a 29 year-old grandma?

:lol:

Of course I think Ai is better in these last few years than when she was in her early 20's.....who doesn't??? You'd have to be realllllly dense to say otherwise....DO you know anything about tennis? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :o :rolleyes: :lol: :lol: :tape: :lol:

Calimero377
Oct 6th, 2004, 09:52 PM
Sabatini and Graf in the same category then? :D :angel:


No, Sabatini and Seles.
Both had almost the same win/loss percentage against Graf.
Both managed some wins against the greatest-ever in 90/93 but didn't do much damage to Graf in other years.

rhz
Oct 6th, 2004, 10:17 PM
Career Highlights!!

SINGLES
Winner (7): 1997 - German Open; 1995 - Indian Wells, Brighton; 1994 - Strasbourg; 1993 - Indian Wells; 1990 - Tokyo Indoors, Filderstadt.
Finalist (9): 1996 - Eastbourne; 1994 - Sydney; 1993 - Roland Garros; 1992 - Australian Open, Essen; 1991 - Houston, Tokyo Nichirei; 1990 - Australian Open; 1989 - Filderstadt.

DOUBLES
Winner (19): 1997 - Hilton Head (w/Hingis), Madrid (w/Sanchez Vicario); 1996 - Roland Garros (w/Davenport), Season-Ending Championships (w/Davenport), Olympics (w/G. Fernandez), Sydney (w/Davenport), Oakland (w/Davenport); 1995 - Delray Beach (w/Novotna), Strasbourg (w/Davenport), Tokyo [Nichirei] (w/Davenport); 1993 - European Open (w/Sukova); 1992 - Tokyo Nichirei (w/R. White), Olympics (w/G. Fernandez); 1991 - Australian Open (w/Fendick), Miami (w/Garrison Jackson), Tokyo Nichirei (w/Shriver); 1990 - Tokyo Indoors (w/R. White), Filderstadt (w/Garrison Jackson); 1989 - Dallas (w/Nagelsen).
Finalist (24): 1999 - Sydney (w/Huber), Indian Wells (w/Novotna), Miami (w/Seles); 1998 - Boston (w/de Swardt), Tokyo [Toyota] (w/Sanchez-Vicario); 1997 - Roland Garros (w/Raymond); 1996 - Australian Open (w/Davenport), Hilton Head (w/G. Fernandez), Canadian Open (w/Sukova); 1995 - Sydney (w/Fendick); 1994 - Brighton (w/Novotna); 1993 - Italian Open (w/Garrison Jackson); 1992 - Australian Open (w/Garrison Jackson), Sydney (w/Garrison Jackson), Eastbourne (w/Garrison Jackson); 1991 - Pan Pacific (w/R. White), Houston (w/Fendick), Philadelphia (w/Garrison Jackson); 1990 - Australian Open (w/Fendick), New England (w/Novotna); 1989 - US Open (w/Shriver), Boca Raton (w/Durie), Los Angeles (w/Kohde-Kilsch), Pan Pacific (w/Kohde-Kilsch).

rhz
Oct 6th, 2004, 10:20 PM
Prize Money $5,258,471
Win Loss Record - Singles 437-203
Win Loss Record - Doubles 344-141

DeDe4925
Oct 6th, 2004, 10:32 PM
I was a huge fan of Mary Joe when she was playing . She was the cleverest player I have ever seen on the court. She shoulda won a GS or two.
Anyways, how well do you think she would play against today's players?
I think she would beat most of the top 50 players but beating top 10nners would be a differnet story. But given she managed to beat Serena in the twilight stage of her career, I woulnd't be surprised if she beat some of them.
Only if she used that HUGE :eek: head of hers for a racquet. :lol:

rhz
Jun 20th, 2006, 04:16 PM
bring this up!

magassi
Jun 20th, 2006, 04:41 PM
I like Mary Jo... but she would be pushed off the court by today's top players. She never had real weapons and was injured quite a lot. Didn't Capriati beat her at the French when Jenn was 12? I think is was a quarterfinal match...

rhz
Jun 20th, 2006, 11:01 PM
I like Mary Jo... but she would be pushed off the court by today's top players. She never had real weapons and was injured quite a lot. Didn't Capriati beat her at the French when Jenn was 12? I think is was a quarterfinal match...

MJ was 16 herself that year!

Steffica Greles
Jun 20th, 2006, 11:29 PM
Mary Jo had no strengths that stood out. Why? Because all of her game was more than rock solid.

She served well, could volley decently, had a rocket double-handed backhand, a great two-handed slice, drop shots, lobs, a deceptively dangerous forehand which she laced with underspin -- Mary Jo had it all.

Against today's players she would have too much savvy for most of them. She's easily, in my opinion, the best player never to win a grandslam in the last 25 years.

SAEKeithSerena
Jun 20th, 2006, 11:59 PM
Mary-Joe would have won this years French Open.
Hands down.


HAHAHA RIGHTTTTTTTTTTTT:lol: :lol: :lol:

GermanBoy
Jun 21st, 2006, 12:19 AM
I like Mary Jo... but she would be pushed off the court by today's top players. She never had real weapons and was injured quite a lot. Didn't Capriati beat her at the French when Jenn was 12? I think is was a quarterfinal match...

12, don't be ridiculous! Jen was 14!

Mike_T
Jun 21st, 2006, 12:37 AM
At least Steffi is no longer around: H2H 17-0 (http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/players/playerprofiles/PlayerHeadToHeadDetail.asp?PlayerID=70044&Player1ID=60016) :devil:

mirzalover
Jun 21st, 2006, 01:53 AM
[QUOTE]Seles perfected the strategy so she won 2 out of 7 matches against Graf at the height of their rivalry.


SELES was the luckiest loser in women's tennis history.
All her blunders after age 21 can be excused by a 1-cm stab wound received as a 19-year-old ........



please monica was like 16 in their first three meeting and two of those meeting went three sets and this was a year after steffi won all four grand slams plus if you go from their first meeting in 89 to 93 steffi won 6 of 10 but only one was in a grand slam final all of monica's wins except one were in finals of grand slams gabriela beat steffi once in a final. and a similar head to head to monica that just stupid 10-5 to 29-11 i mean sure gaby had more wins but she also had a extra 25 more head to head with her and only managed 6 more wins and lastly seles 9 grand slams sabatini 1 their no way their in the same group

perseus2006
Jun 21st, 2006, 03:15 AM
MJ looked mighty fine on the court regardless of whether she won or lost.

rhz
Jun 21st, 2006, 06:33 AM
Again People... it's MARY JOE...................... Please ad an E. Thank you!

Reuchlin
Jun 21st, 2006, 06:36 AM
The game has not moved on as much as many might want to think it has. With improved fitness she would still be around Top 20 without too many problems.

Jakeev
Jun 21st, 2006, 09:20 AM
If Mary Jo stayed healthy perhaps she could do some damage on today's players. In terms of consistency, she was right behind Martina Hingis.

But Mary Jo was also one-dimensional and like what was said in other posts, she had no big weapons.

Still, I would like her game better than say a Kristina Brandi or Camille Pin, but I doubt in today's game that you would see her go deep in a lot of Tier 11 or better events.

Robbie.
Jun 21st, 2006, 10:07 AM
Mary Joe is the purist Evert clone there has ever been. Beautiful, flat stroke production off both wings, metronomic consistency, competent at the net - basically no real weaknesses. While she was rather one dimensional, a product of that was that nothing could really go wrong with her game and, like Chris, her game adapted well to all surfaces. I remember back in 1997 she played a really close match with Novotna at Wimbledon, after which Novotna said she was a more dangerous player on the surface than ASV (of course this was during the ASV/Jana rift :p ).

I love it how people with no idea are so quick to say that she would have no chance today or that the game would be too powerful for her. I disagree. Look at her record with power players of her time like Davenport (4-5) or Pierce (5-2) or Majoli (4-1) or Huber (4-3). She could handle power fine, especially the sort of untempered and imprudent power which is the hallmark of the modern game. She hit a more than solid ball herself and would drive many the supposedly superior youngsters crazy with her depth and accuracy.

Mary Joe was atleast twice the player Myskina is. At her peak she would be capable of being top 10 now as she was then.

Matt01
Jun 21st, 2006, 10:56 AM
please monica was like 16 in their first three meeting and two of those meeting went three sets and this was a year after steffi won all four grand slams plus if you go from their first meeting in 89 to 93 steffi won 6 of 10 but only one was in a grand slam final all of monica's wins except one were in finals of grand slams gabriela beat steffi once in a final. and a similar head to head to monica that just stupid 10-5 to 29-11 i mean sure gaby had more wins but she also had a extra 25 more head to head with her and only managed 6 more wins and lastly seles 9 grand slams sabatini 1 their no way their in the same group

Exactly.

Mary Joe :hearts: