PDA

View Full Version : Who is better? Navratilova or Steffi Graf?


Doraemon
Dec 10th, 2004, 08:45 AM
Steffi would have a hard time avoiding gettin double bagelled.
Ppl say Steffi was better than Navratilova having won more GS titles in singles but is she?

Greatest
Dec 10th, 2004, 08:49 AM
Steffi would have a hard time avoiding gettin double bagelled.
Ppl say Steffi was better than Navratilova having won more GS titles in singles but is she?


Gunther Parche.... :lol:

Great Seles
Dec 10th, 2004, 08:55 AM
Steffi would have a hard time avoiding gettin double bagelled.
Ppl say Steffi was better than Navratilova having won more GS titles in singles but is she?

Where were their biggest matches? Grand Slam events and the WTA Tour Championships.

Navratilova had the winning edge vs. Graf at Grand Slam events ... Navratilova also had the winning edge vs. Graf in the WTA Tour Championships.

Navratilova had a winning record vs. Graf where it counted most -- the biggest events in the world.

Well, let's COUNT them then:

GRAND SLAM EVENTS

First, we will start with the Grand Slam events --- let's limit the results to the Australian Open, French Open, Wimbledon and U.S. Open Championships --- since these actually are the Grand Slam events:

1985-08-26 U.S. Open Hardcourt SF Navratilova won 6-2 6-3
1986-08-25 U.S. Open Hardcourt SF Navratilova won 6-1 6-7 7-6
1987-05-25 French Open Clay F Steffi Graf won 6-4 4-6 8-6
1987-06-22 Wimbledon Grass F Navratilova won 7-5 6-3
1987-08-31 U.S. Open Hardcourt F Navratilova won 7-6 6-1
1988-06-22 Wimbledon Grass F Steffi Graf won 5-7 6-2 6-1
1989-06-26 Wimbledon Grass F Steffi Graf won 6-2 6-7 6-1
1989-08-28 U.S. Open Hardcourt F Steffi Graf won 3-6 7-5 6-1
1991-08-26 U.S. Open Hardcourt SF Navratilova won 7-6 6-7 6-4

Not only a winning record for Navratilova vs. Graf in the Grand Slam events ... Navratilova won their only matches at the Grand Slam events that were won in straight sets ... 3 of Navratilova's 5 match wins vs. Graf in Grand Slam events were won in straight sets ... Graf never beat Navratilova in straight sets in a Grand Slam event --- but then, Graf only won 4 matches against Navratilova in Grand Slam events to begin with.

TOUR CHAMPIONSHIPS

Next, we will look at the Tour Championships --- let's limit the results to the singles since Steffi Graf did not play doubles --

1986-03-17 Virginia Slims Championships SF Navratilova won 6-2 6-2
1986-11-17 Virginia Slims Championships F Navratilova won 7-6 6-3 6-2
1989-11-13 Virginia Slims Championships F Steffi Graf won 6-4 7-5 2-6 6-2

Not only a winning record for Navratilova vs. Graf in the Tour Championships ... Navratilova won their only matches at the Tour Championships that were won in straight sets ... both of Navratilova's 2 match wins vs. Graf in the WTA Tour Championships were won in straight sets ... Graf never beat Navratilova in straight sets the WTA Tour Championships --- but then, Graf only won 1 match against Navratilova at the WTA Tour Championships to begin with.

Martina Navratilova reigns supreme above Steffi Graf...Not even close :)

Greatest
Dec 10th, 2004, 09:02 AM
Where were their biggest matches? Grand Slam events and the WTA Tour Championships.

Navratilova had the winning edge vs. Graf at Grand Slam events ... Navratilova also had the winning edge vs. Graf in the WTA Tour Championships.

Navratilova had a winning record vs. Graf where it counted most -- the biggest events in the world.

Well, let's COUNT them then:

GRAND SLAM EVENTS

First, we will start with the Grand Slam events --- let's limit the results to the Australian Open, French Open, Wimbledon and U.S. Open Championships --- since these actually are the Grand Slam events:

1985-08-26 U.S. Open Hardcourt SF Navratilova won 6-2 6-3
1986-08-25 U.S. Open Hardcourt SF Navratilova won 6-1 6-7 7-6
1987-05-25 French Open Clay F Steffi Graf won 6-4 4-6 8-6
1987-06-22 Wimbledon Grass F Navratilova won 7-5 6-3
1987-08-31 U.S. Open Hardcourt F Navratilova won 7-6 6-1
1988-06-22 Wimbledon Grass F Steffi Graf won 5-7 6-2 6-1
1989-06-26 Wimbledon Grass F Steffi Graf won 6-2 6-7 6-1
1989-08-28 U.S. Open Hardcourt F Steffi Graf won 3-6 7-5 6-1
1991-08-26 U.S. Open Hardcourt SF Navratilova won 7-6 6-7 6-4

Not only a winning record for Navratilova vs. Graf in the Grand Slam events ... Navratilova won their only matches at the Grand Slam events that were won in straight sets ... 3 of Navratilova's 5 match wins vs. Graf in Grand Slam events were won in straight sets ... Graf never beat Navratilova in straight sets in a Grand Slam event --- but then, Graf only won 4 matches against Navratilova in Grand Slam events to begin with.

TOUR CHAMPIONSHIPS

Next, we will look at the Tour Championships --- let's limit the results to the singles since Steffi Graf did not play doubles --

1986-03-17 Virginia Slims Championships SF Navratilova won 6-2 6-2
1986-11-17 Virginia Slims Championships F Navratilova won 7-6 6-3 6-2
1989-11-13 Virginia Slims Championships F Steffi Graf won 6-4 7-5 2-6 6-2

Not only a winning record for Navratilova vs. Graf in the Tour Championships ... Navratilova won their only matches at the Tour Championships that were won in straight sets ... both of Navratilova's 2 match wins vs. Graf in the WTA Tour Championships were won in straight sets ... Graf never beat Navratilova in straight sets the WTA Tour Championships --- but then, Graf only won 1 match against Navratilova at the WTA Tour Championships to begin with.

Martina Navratilova reigns supreme above Steffi Graf...Not even close :)


There biggest matches were the ones they played at the biggest events --- Wimbledon, U.S. Open, Australian Open, French Open and WTA Tour Championships ....

Navratilova had the winning edge vs. Graf at Grand Slam events ... Navratilova also had the winning edge vs. Graf in the WTA Tour Championships.

Navratilova had a winning record vs. Graf where it counted most -- the biggest events in the world :lol:

Greatest
Dec 10th, 2004, 09:09 AM
The Graf fanatics falsely claim that Graf is better than Navratilova???? :lol:

Except for when it came to:

• most consecutive years at #1 ...
• most Wimbledon singles titles ...
• most consecutive years winning Wimbledon ...
• most overall total Grand Slam titles won ....
• most singles titles won on the WTA Tour ...
• most doubles titles won on the WTA Tour ...
• most impressive record for longevity and playing past the age of 30.
• most wins head to head between Graf and Navratilova in the Slams.
• most wins head to head between Graf and Navratilova at the Tour Championships.

Oh, and by the way ... Navratilova is the only woman in women's tennis history to have the all-time record for most number of wins at 2 of the 5 biggest events in women's tennis.

Oh, may I add a few more impressive numbers to this list, please? Martina also holds the records for -

-- most singles matches won (Navratilova-1442, Evert-1304, Graf-900)
-- most consecutive singles matched won (74)
-- most consecutive doubles matches won (109, record shared with Pam Shriver)
-- most dominant year (86-1 W/L record in 1983)
-- 2nd oldest player to hold the #1 ranking (Evert was oldest)
-- most career wins over the #1 player
-- most years finished ranked in the top 10 (Navratilova - 20; Evert - 19, Seles & Graf - 13)
-- most weeks ranked #1 in singles and doubles at the same time (Navratilova-103, Graf -0)
-- most career prize money (by far) when you factor in prize money relativity
-- most years finished ranked #1 in prize money
-- most consecutive years earning $100K or more
-- most consecutive years earning $500K or more
-- most years earning $500K or more
-- most consecutive years on top 10 prize money list (Navratilova-20, Evert-16 ... Graf is 6th on this list at 11)
-- most consecutive WTA Tour singles titles (Navratilova-13, Court-12)
-- most consecutive years winning at lest 1 singles title (Navratilova -21, Evert-18,)
-- most singles titles won at the same tournament (Navratilova-Chicago/12, Navratilova-Eastbourne/11, )
-- most consecutive titles won a tthe same tournament (Navratilova-Wimbledon/6, Navratilova-Chicago/6, )
--- most dominant individual performance at a 128-draw grand slam event - US Open: Navratilova conceded just 19 games at the 1983 US Open
- most dominant individual performance at Wimbledon: Navratilova conceded just 25 games at the 1983 Wimbledon (Evert conceded just 26 games at the 1981 Wimbledon)
-- most singles matches won in the same season: Navratilova-74 (1984), Evert-55 (1974), Navratilova 53 (1986), Navratilova 50 (1983), Graf 66 snapped by Monica Seles in Berlin 1990)
-- most consecutive singles finals reached (23)
-- most WTA Tour awards for doubles team of the year (10 - 2 with King, 8 with Shriver)
-- most WTA Tour awards - 18
-- most WTA Tour Special Service to the Game Award - Billie Jean King is the only person to have won this twice since it was first awarded in 1980; Navratilova, Evert and Shriver have all received this award. Graf was never nominated.

Would you like more records for Navratilova or is this enough? :lol:

Great Seles
Dec 10th, 2004, 09:14 AM
By the way, Navratilova almost 10 years past her prime made the Wimbledon final in 1990 and 1994 (2 years and 6 years after Graf's Golden Slam) and Navratilova actually won the one in 1990.

Navratilova won her all-time record 9th Wimbledon in 1990 when she was the age that Steffi Graf was in early 2002 - long after Graf had retired.

Navratilova got to the 1994 Wimbledon final when she was the age Steffi Graf will be in the early part of 2006.

Greatest
Dec 10th, 2004, 09:25 AM
By the way, Navratilova almost 10 years past her prime made the Wimbledon final in 1990 and 1994 (2 years and 6 years after Graf's Golden Slam) and Navratilova actually won the one in 1990.

Navratilova won her all-time record 9th Wimbledon in 1990 when she was the age that Steffi Graf was in early 2002 - long after Graf had retired.

Navratilova got to the 1994 Wimbledon final when she was the age Steffi Graf will be in the early part of 2006.

Here we are a decade later remembering that Navratilova has the ALL-TIME record for most singles titles at 2 of the 5 biggest events in women's tennis. No other player in women's tennis can claim this --- the all-time record for most singles titles at 2 of the 5 biggest events in women's tennis.

Australian ------------- Margaret Court
French ----------------- Chris Evert
Wimbledon ------------ Martina Navratilova
U.S. Open -------------- Molla Bjurstedt Mallory
WTA Championships --- Martina Navratilova :lol:

BeautifulGirl
Dec 10th, 2004, 11:15 AM
Steffi would have a hard time avoiding gettin double bagelled.
Ppl say Steffi was better than Navratilova having won more GS titles in singles but is she?

Martina Narvatilova. No looney involved in all her GS titles.

Great Seles
Dec 10th, 2004, 12:18 PM
Here we are a decade later remembering that Navratilova has the ALL-TIME record for most singles titles at 2 of the 5 biggest events in women's tennis. No other player in women's tennis can claim this --- the all-time record for most singles titles at 2 of the 5 biggest events in women's tennis.

Australian ------------- Margaret Court
French ----------------- Chris Evert
Wimbledon ------------ Martina Navratilova
U.S. Open -------------- Molla Bjurstedt Mallory
WTA Championships --- Martina Navratilova :lol:


No player in women's tennis history has had to face more all-time great women champions during their careers than Evert and Navratilova.

Navratilova won titles against the likes of BJ King, Court, Evert, Graf and Seles (fully half of the all-time top 10).

tennislover
Dec 10th, 2004, 12:30 PM
Navratilova.
Case closed (forever).
Period.

kabuki
Dec 10th, 2004, 01:06 PM
Whhhhhhhyyyyyyyyy!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!!?

bandabou
Dec 10th, 2004, 01:35 PM
Martina was the best on grass, 9 straight Wimbledon finals and 6 straight titles thatīs unprecendented!!!, and probably was better on hardcourts too.....but on the slower surfaces Steffi as a baseliner gets the edge again.

alfajeffster
Dec 10th, 2004, 01:39 PM
Here's a thought:

Margaret Court has more grass court singles majors than Martina Navratilova. Discuss.

Andy T
Dec 10th, 2004, 01:41 PM
Here's my take.
I'm a huge Navratilova fan and have been since the late 1970s. For me she has the perfect mix of athletic and technical skills. I've never seen a better attacker and I've never seen a natural attacker perform better on clay.

BUT
I deeply admire and respect the games and achievements of all the tennis greats I've seen, from Court, King, Goolagong and Evert, through Graf and Seles to Hingis, Serena and Justine, to name only a few. It is futile to argue over who was better because we all know that tennis is a game of relatives between two players on a given day in a given place on a given surface, etc, etc. All we can say is that both Steffi and Martina are among the greatest players the game has ever know, each made a unique contribution to the sport, was the best in the world over a long period during her career and was capable of beating the other on a regular basis. We can say the same for Chrissie and Madge Court and for me those four are the top tier. Martina is the one whose game I personally admire the most and I don't care if other people have a different opinion - as long as they don't insult mine.

Greatest
Dec 10th, 2004, 01:42 PM
Martina was the best on grass, 9 straight Wimbledon finals and 6 straight titles thatīs unprecendented!!!, and probably was better on hardcourts too.....but on the slower surfaces Steffi as a baseliner gets the edge again.

"probably hardcourts?

Navratilova leads Graf 5-2 on hardcourts (including 4-1 at the U.S. Open). :lol:

Greatest
Dec 10th, 2004, 01:46 PM
Here's my take.
I'm a huge Navratilova fan and have been since the late 1970s. For me she has the perfect mix of athletic and technical skills. I've never seen a better attacker and I've never seen a natural attacker perform better on clay.

BUT
I deeply admire and respect the games and achievements of all the tennis greats I've seen, from Court, King, Goolagong and Evert, through Graf and Seles to Hingis, Serena and Justine, to name only a few. It is futile to argue over who was better because we all know that tennis is a game of relatives between two players on a given day in a given place on a given surface, etc, etc. All we can say is that both Steffi and Martina are among the greatest players the game has ever know, each made a unique contribution to the sport, was the best in the world over a long period during her career and was capable of beating the other on a regular basis. We can say the same for Chrissie and Madge Court and for me those four are the top tier. Martina is the one whose game I personally admire the most and I don't care if other people have a different opinion - as long as they don't insult mine.

Martina's chief rival Chris Evert was never stabbed in the back by a jealous fan of Navratilova at the top of her career.

bandabou
Dec 10th, 2004, 02:00 PM
Here's a thought:

Margaret Court has more grass court singles majors than Martina Navratilova. Discuss.

She does? Didnīt know that...

But I was talking about Martina N v Steffi...I think of those two Martina was the best grass-courter, because of her playing style.

Chunchun
Dec 10th, 2004, 02:04 PM
maybe actually Navra

Steffi should not take the no.1 for so long time if Monica WAS NOT STABBED :tape:

alfajeffster
Dec 10th, 2004, 02:08 PM
She does? Didnīt know that...

But I was talking about Martina N v Steffi...I think of those two Martina was the best grass-courter, because of her playing style.
You didn't? Well, back in the day (isn't that how they say it now?:lol: ), when 3 of the 4 majors were held on grass, Margaret won 11 Australian, 5 United States, and 3 Wimbledon singles titles on grass. That's a total of 19 major singles titles on grass...

Back to the subject argument, I must defer to my friend AndyT- threads like this are really just kiddies pouring sand buckets on each others' heads at the beach, and we're all missing the beauty of the tide's ebb and flow when we sit here and bicker about whose favorite is better. I'm getting visions of the jabberwocky from Lewis Carroll for some strange reason...:lol:

Andy T
Dec 10th, 2004, 02:09 PM
Steffi was #1 87-90 anyway, so whether you're a fan of hers or not, you have to give her credit as a true great.

Pamela Shriver
Dec 10th, 2004, 02:27 PM
Steffi leads me 9-3 win loss (yes I'm amazed I won that many too)
While Mart....Ma-ma-m-martina....w-w-won... 40- 3... *shudder*

So that naturally tells you everything.

BeautifulGirl
Dec 10th, 2004, 02:28 PM
Steffi was #1 87-90 anyway, so whether you're a fan of hers or not, you have to give her credit as a true great.

boring 90's should in the blast. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: what's the big deal with that big nose player who got more slams because of the looney. :rolleyes:

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 02:33 PM
[B][COLOR=Navy]Where were their biggest matches? Grand Slam events and the WTA Tour Championships.

Navratilova had the winning edge vs. Graf at Grand Slam events ... Navratilova also had the winning edge vs. Graf in the WTA Tour Championships.

Navratilova had a winning record vs. Graf where it counted most -- the biggest events in the world.
....



Graf had the winning edge vs. Navi when it counted most - in slam FINALS.
Graf won 2-1 Wimbledons against Navi, 1-1 USOs and 1-0 FO.

Navi avoided Graf post-87 on clay and rebound-ace. Because she knew she would get waxed there. She only showed up on grass, fast hard-courts an indoors. Nevertheless Graf is 6-2 H2H against Navi in that time. Would have been 12-2 if Navi hadn't been a coward ....

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 02:37 PM
By the way, Navratilova almost 10 years past her prime made the Wimbledon final in 1990 and 1994 (2 years and 6 years after Graf's Golden Slam) and Navratilova actually won the one in 1990.

Navratilova won her all-time record 9th Wimbledon in 1990 when she was the age that Steffi Graf was in early 2002 - long after Graf had retired.

Navratilova got to the 1994 Wimbledon final when she was the age Steffi Graf will be in the early part of 2006.


If Graf had continued to play she would be Wimbledon champ 2004.
If her knee had held she could have made the Grand Slam again.
Well, Henin at AO might have been to much, but those Russians could not have stopped her.
Myskina? :lol:
Sharperova?? :lol: :lol:
Kuznetsova??? :lol: :lol: :lol:

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 02:40 PM
By the way, Navratilova almost 10 years past her prime made the Wimbledon final in 1990 and 1994 (2 years and 6 years after Graf's Golden Slam) and Navratilova actually won the one in 1990.
...


Graf won FO 99 10 years past her prime.
11 years after she had won her 3rd slam (FO 88).

Navi won her last slam only 8 years after her 3rd slam.

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 02:46 PM
No player in women's tennis history has had to face more all-time great women champions during their careers than Evert and Navratilova.

Navratilova won titles against the likes of BJ King, Court, Evert, Graf and Seles (fully half of the all-time top 10).


Seles "all-time top 10"?
Without even ONE Wimbledon title?
Retarded ....

Navi beat only TWO slam winners in her slam finals (Evert, Mandlikova).
Graf beat SEVEN slam winners in her slam finals (Navi, Evert, Sabby, Seles, Novotna, ASV, Hingis).

Navi beat only ONE player who was #1 sometime in their careers. Graf FIVE.

Navi beat only ONE player who was #1 at that moment. Graf FOUR.

End of discussion (who beat better opposition).
Next question?

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 02:55 PM
Martina was the best on grass, 9 straight Wimbledon finals and 6 straight titles thatīs unprecendented!!!, and probably was better on hardcourts too.....but on the slower surfaces Steffi as a baseliner gets the edge again.


You obviously didn't watch Wimbledon 88 & 89 finals when Graf wiped the floor with the "6 straight title" holder.
In 88 Graf won with 17-10 games and 97-78 on points-played.
In 89 with 18-10 games and 90-74 on points played.
In 87 - Graf with almost no grass court experience - Navi struggled to hold down young Steffi with 13-9 games and only 68-63 on points-played.

Graf simply and unceremoniously surpassed Navi even on grass at the end of the 80ies.
On clay Navi had had enough by 1987. She simply avoided Graf on that surface. Good decision ... :lol:

As the stunned BBC reporter said after Graf's glorious 88 Wimbledon win: "Steffi has lifted the game to a new level!".
Well said ....
:worship:

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 02:58 PM
Here's my take.
I'm a huge Navratilova fan and have been since the late 1970s. For me she has the perfect mix of athletic and technical skills. I've never seen a better attacker and I've never seen a natural attacker perform better on clay.

BUT
I deeply admire and respect the games and achievements of all the tennis greats I've seen, from Court, King, Goolagong and Evert, through Graf and Seles to Hingis, Serena and Justine, to name only a few. It is futile to argue over who was better because we all know that tennis is a game of relatives between two players on a given day in a given place on a given surface, etc, etc. All we can say is that both Steffi and Martina are among the greatest players the game has ever know, each made a unique contribution to the sport, was the best in the world over a long period during her career and was capable of beating the other on a regular basis. We can say the same for Chrissie and Madge Court and for me those four are the top tier. Martina is the one whose game I personally admire the most and I don't care if other people have a different opinion - as long as they don't insult mine.


OK, Andybaby ...

But hmm, I'd prefer that you care what opinion I have!
So next time ...

bandabou
Dec 10th, 2004, 02:58 PM
That doesnīt say much Cali.....because when Martina was winning her majors it was only TWO players who traded the no.1 place....either it was Evert or Martina N, after then when Steffi became no.1 we have seen Steffi, Monica, Martina H, Lindsay D, etc....so of course Steffi got more opportunities to beat no.1 players.

But NONE of those players have 18 majors....well only Martina N.

Orion
Dec 10th, 2004, 03:01 PM
Margaret Court has more grass court singles majors than Martina Navratilova.

True. But, Margaret Court played in an era when Grass courts were the norm, not the exception. Now adays, to be dominant on Grass courts doesn't count for much. If Martina Navratilovs had played when Margaret Court did, who could say what would have happened? But, Martina Navratilova won on many more different surfaces. Margaret Court and Martina were always one of the top 5 clay players in their peak years, despite clay being their weakest surface. That says something. But Navratilova had to play on clay more than Margaret Court did.

bandabou
Dec 10th, 2004, 03:02 PM
You obviously didn't watch Wimbledon 88 & 89 finals when Graf wiped the floor with the "6 straight title" holder.
In 88 Graf won with 17-10 games and 97-78 on points-played.
In 89 with 18-10 games and 90-74 on points played.
In 87 - Graf with almost no grass court experience - Navi struggled to hold down young Steffi with 13-9 games and only 68-63 on points-played.

Graf simply and unceremoniously surpassed Navi even on grass at the end of the 80ies.
On clay Navi had had enough by 1987. She simply avoided Graf on that surface. Good decision ... :lol:

As the stunned BBC reporter said after Graf's glorious 88 Wimbledon win: "Steffi has lifted the game to a new level!".
Well said ....
:worship:


Nice, nice..........but 9 wimbledons are still 9 wimbledons and assorted finals.

Steffi was great in ī88 &ī89....but Martina was great over a whole career. And what about ī87? A straight setter is still better than a rally in three.

skanky~skanketta
Dec 10th, 2004, 03:03 PM
You obviously didn't watch Wimbledon 88 & 89 finals when Graf wiped the floor with the "6 straight title" holder.
In 88 Graf won with 17-10 games and 97-78 on points-played.
In 89 with 18-10 games and 90-74 on points played.
In 87 - Graf with almost no grass court experience - Navi struggled to hold down young Steffi with 13-9 games and only 68-63 on points-played.

Graf simply and unceremoniously surpassed Navi even on grass at the end of the 80ies.
On clay Navi had had enough by 1987. She simply avoided Graf on that surface. Good decision ... :lol:

As the stunned BBC reporter said after Graf's glorious 88 Wimbledon win: "Steffi has lifted the game to a new level!".
Well said ....
:worship:
you can say what u want, but many of us will never comply to your opinion. i believe that martina was better. steffi got lucky.

Orion
Dec 10th, 2004, 03:05 PM
Seles "all-time top 10"?
Without even ONE Wimbledon title?

That's saying that Sampras isn't desrving of a top 10 place in men's tennis because he never won the French Open. Regardless of what they won, they still are two of the finest talents ever to grace the courts.

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 03:18 PM
That doesnīt say much Cali.....because when Martina was winning her majors it was only TWO players who traded the no.1 place....either it was Evert or Martina N, after then when Steffi became no.1 we have seen Steffi, Monica, Martina H, Lindsay D, etc....so of course Steffi got more opportunities to beat no.1 players.

But NONE of those players have 18 majors....well only Martina N.


Navi started her career in 1973 and ended it in 1994.
In that time we had as #1: Court, King, Evert, Austin, Graf, Seles.
She only beat Evert and Graf in a slam final.
And only Evert was #1 at that time.

Graf started her career in 1982 and ended in in 1999.
In that time we had as #1: Navi, Evert, Seles, ASV, Hingis, Davenport.
Graf beat 5 of the them in slam finals (she would have beaten Lindsay too if she hadn't been injured AND ill at Wimbledon 99 final's day).
Navi, Seles, ASV and Hingis were #1 at that moment.
:worship:

skanky~skanketta
Dec 10th, 2004, 03:24 PM
Navi started her career in 1973 and ended it in 1994.
In that time we had as #1: Court, King, Evert, Austin, Graf, Seles.
She only beat Evert and Graf in a slam final.
And only Evert was #1 at that time.

Graf started her career in 1982 and ended in in 1999.
In that time we had as #1: Navi, Evert, Seles, ASV, Hingis, Davenport.
Graf beat 5 of the them in slam finals (she would have beaten Lindsay too if she hadn't been injured AND ill at Wimbledon 99 final's day).
Navi, Seles, ASV and Hingis were #1 at that moment.
:worship:
you're full of excuses. full of shyt.

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 03:25 PM
Nice, nice..........but 9 wimbledons are still 9 wimbledons and assorted finals.

Steffi was great in ī88 &ī89....but Martina was great over a whole career. And what about ī87? A straight setter is still better than a rally in three.


In the end it is the winner that matters.
But if we take a closer look then it is more significant how the points played out that the sets.
Take Graf's losses to Navi at Wim 87, to Seles at FO 90, to Davenport at Wim 99.
Graf lost all three matches in 2 sets.
But she made 63-68, 73-74 and 64-68 points respectively. The players obviously played almost at the same level.
Which cannot be said about the Wimbledon 88 final. Graf won in a 3-setter but made 97-78 points. Graf obviously played considerably better than Navi that day. 19 points advantage is more than 1, 4 or 5 points.
Well, I know - numbers are not your strength, are they?
:lol:

bandabou
Dec 10th, 2004, 03:27 PM
Navi started her career in 1973 and ended it in 1994.
In that time we had as #1: Court, King, Evert, Austin, Graf, Seles.
She only beat Evert and Graf in a slam final.
And only Evert was #1 at that time.

Graf started her career in 1982 and ended in in 1999.
In that time we had as #1: Navi, Evert, Seles, ASV, Hingis, Davenport.
Graf beat 5 of the them in slam finals (she would have beaten Lindsay too if she hadn't been injured AND ill at Wimbledon 99 final's day).
Navi, Seles, ASV and Hingis were #1 at that moment.
:worship:

Austin? Wasnīt it like 2/3 years she played....and she wasnīt burning the field either...only some wins against Evert.

Seles? When Seles was reigning Martina was about to retire and already too old.

Court/ King..by the time Martina became a force, they already were retired.

Woulda coulda again about Wimbledonī99? Come with facts...fact is: Steffi lost..she sure wasnīt injured when she was beating Lucic in the Sfīs, soooo...

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 03:28 PM
you can say what u want, but many of us will never comply to your opinion. i believe that martina was better. steffi got lucky.


But some will comply. Which will add to the vast majority of tennis fans who think Graf is the greatest-ever.
You'll have to live with it. Your whole life long ...

:wavey:

bandabou
Dec 10th, 2004, 03:31 PM
In the end it is the winner that matters.
But if we take a closer look then it is more significant how the points played out that the sets.
Take Graf's losses to Navi at Wim 87, to Seles at FO 90, to Davenport at Wim 99.
Graf lost all three matches in 2 sets.
But she made 63-68, 73-74 and 64-68 points respectively. The players obviously played almost at the same level.
Which cannot be said about the Wimbledon 88 final. Graf won in a 3-setter but made 97-78 points. Graf obviously played considerably better than Navi that day. 19 points advantage is more than 1, 4 or 5 points.
Well, I know - numbers are not your strength, are they?
:lol:

She played considerable better than Martina N in ī88 and ī89, still had to rally.

When they both played well Martina N won in straights...same goes for Monica and Lindsay. Telling isnīt it?

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 03:31 PM
That's saying that Sampras isn't desrving of a top 10 place in men's tennis because he never won the French Open. Regardless of what they won, they still are two of the finest talents ever to grace the courts.


No - Wimbledon is the holy grail.
FO and USO are far behind. Not even talking of AO.

Why is Lendl not considered a all-time top-10?
Lack of Wimbledon title(s) ...

bandabou
Dec 10th, 2004, 03:32 PM
But some will comply. Which will add to the vast majority of tennis fans who think Graf is the greatest-ever.
You'll have to live with it. Your whole life long ...

:wavey:


To you she is, to some Martina N is, to some other Margareth is......point is that there isnīt ONE greatest ever....

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 03:35 PM
you're full of excuses. full of shyt.


:lol:
When they lack arguments and statistical data ....

bandabou
Dec 10th, 2004, 03:38 PM
No - Wimbledon is the holy grail.
FO and USO are far behind. Not even talking of AO.

Why is Lendl not considered a all-time top-10?
Lack of Wimbledon title(s) ...


case closed: Martina N : 9 Wimbledon titles. Steffi G: 7.....why are we still discussing?

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 03:42 PM
Austin? Wasnīt it like 2/3 years she played....and she wasnīt burning the field either...only some wins against Evert.

Seles? When Seles was reigning Martina was about to retire and already too old.

Court/ King..by the time Martina became a force, they already were retired.

Woulda coulda again about Wimbledonī99? Come with facts...fact is: Steffi lost..she sure wasnīt injured when she was beating Lucic in the Sfīs, soooo...


Austin: Helped to prevent Navi winning slams in 80/81.

Seles: won her first slam before Navi won her last.

Court/King. Ah, suddenly ...

Lucic: She was. Lucic types usually don't win sets against Graf at Wimbledon.

bandabou
Dec 10th, 2004, 03:46 PM
Austin: Helped to prevent Navi winning slams in 80/81.

Seles: won her first slam before Navi won her last.

Court/King. Ah, suddenly ...

Lucic: She was. Lucic types usually don't win sets against Graf at Wimbledon.

One month before?

Court/King...what Ah suddenly?

:lol: about Lucic....the same thing was said about Lindsay, still has wins over a healthy Steffi...

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 03:49 PM
She played considerable better than Martina N in ī88 and ī89, still had to rally.

When they both played well Martina N won in straights...same goes for Monica and Lindsay. Telling isnīt it?


There were many rallies in all those matches.
:confused:

You want to tell me a 6-2, 6-7, 6-1 win (Graf, Wim 89) is closer than a 7-6, 6-4 (Seles, FO 90) win?
18-10 games closer than 13-10?
16 points more closer than 1 point more?

Yeah, numbers are not exactly your strength ...

:lol: :lol: :lol:


Next time this dumbo tells me a 6-0, 6-7, 6-0 is closer than a 7-6, 7-6 ...

:lol:



(OMG, why do I do this still? Discussing with kids and retardos .... )

alfajeffster
Dec 10th, 2004, 03:52 PM
...But Navratilova had to play on clay more than Margaret Court did.
Whoa there pardner! Not necessarily true! Not only did Margaret Court win 5 French Championships, she also won the Italian Open (something Martina never did), a couple of German Opens, and countless other titles on clay right throughout her career. Her victory over Chris Evert in the 1973 French Open Final was the best major final of the year. Virginia Wade has even told me personally that she was better from the backcourt than Martina, and in BFTP, Nancy Richey has called Margaret Court the most complete player she had ever seen, because she could play from anywhere on the court, and was good enough to beat you from anywhere on the court.

Amazing what you find out about Margaret Court when you get past the Billie Jean King influenced babble that's been coming out of TV tennis commentary booths for the past 20 years...

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 04:01 PM
case closed: Martina N : 9 Wimbledon titles. Steffi G: 7.....why are we still discussing?


Bandyboy, you are at least WILLING to learn a thing or two in the internet.

I'll make it easy for you again:

Difference between 9 Wims and 7 Wims is far less than between 1 Wim and ZERO Wims.
Legacy-wise and econimically.
Marginal utiliy - if you know what I mean.

2 Wimbledons less can be outweighed by far with 6 other slams more.
But NO Wimbledons AT LEAST has every player with 2 Wimbledon above you. Considering only post-WW2 players we have:
Brough, Connolly, Gibson, Bueno, Court, King, Goolagong, Evert, Navi, Graf, V. Williams, S. Williams.
If we raise the bar to at least THREE Wimbledon we have:
Brough, Connolly, Bueno, Court, King, Evert, Navi, Graf. 8 players.
Add to that Lenglen and Wills.

There simply is no room for Seles among the top-10.


Of course Seles would have waxed Brough.
But if we take those criteria then we would not be able to include Connolly in the top-10. Because even Anke Huber would have destroyed Connolly.


:wavey:

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 04:04 PM
One month before?

Court/King...what Ah suddenly?

:lol: about Lucic....the same thing was said about Lindsay, still has wins over a healthy Steffi...


Which "wins" could that be?
You don't seriously want to cite post-97 matches?
And at their L.A. 96 match (only Davenport win pre-98) Graf was injured ...

bandabou
Dec 10th, 2004, 04:05 PM
There were many rallies in all those matches.
:confused:

You want to tell me a 6-2, 6-7, 6-1 win (Graf, Wim 89) is closer than a 7-6, 6-4 (Seles, FO 90) win?
18-10 games closer than 13-10?
16 points more closer than 1 point more?

Yeah, numbers are not exactly your strength ...

:lol: :lol: :lol:


Next time this dumbo tells me a 6-0, 6-7, 6-0 is closer than a 7-6, 7-6 ...

:lol:



(OMG, why do I do this still? Discussing with kids and retardos .... )

Come on Cali....think logically. Of course in a STRAIGHT-sets win the points-differential is gonna be less, because you can only win SO much points in a straight-sets win...and yeah, most of the point itīs about a point here or there.

The longer a match goes on, the larger the point differential becomes....because rarely do BOTH players keep up a high level through-out the whole match....and Steffi graf has won most of her majors based on this....count how many majors Steffi won in three-sets after losing the first and even trailing in the second or third.....she could keep an even level or even raise it a bit, whilst most of her opponents couldnīt....Monica was the only one who could do this consistently, at least...pre-stabbing.

tennislover
Dec 10th, 2004, 04:09 PM
Steffi leads me 9-3 win loss (yes I'm amazed I won that many too)
While Mart....Ma-ma-m-martina....w-w-won... 40- 3... *shudder*

So that naturally tells you everything.

Dear Pam, you made..... my year!
I want to frame (with a golden frame)your post and hang it on the wall, like a painting!!!!!

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 04:10 PM
Whoa there pardner! Not necessarily true! Not only did Margaret Court win 5 French Championships, she also won the Italian Open (something Martina never did), a couple of German Opens, and countless other titles on clay right throughout her career. Her victory over Chris Evert in the 1973 French Open Final was the best major final of the year. Virginia Wade has even told me personally that she was better from the backcourt than Martina, and in BFTP, Nancy Richey has called Margaret Court the most complete player she had ever seen, because she could play from anywhere on the court, and was good enough to beat you from anywhere on the court.

Amazing what you find out about Margaret Court when you get past the Billie Jean King influenced babble that's been coming out of TV tennis commentary booths for the past 20 years...


Maybe you are right. There is a tendency to denigrate non-U.S. players here at WTAWorld (Graf, Sabatini, ASV, Hingis, Henin). Cause could be the U.S. media. Maybe the same occurred with Court. Perhaps we should not ask
"Graf or Navi?" but "Graf or Court?" ....

I remember watching Court only one - against Bobby Riggs. Perhaps I got a wrong impression.

bandabou
Dec 10th, 2004, 04:10 PM
Bandyboy, you are at least WILLING to learn a thing or two in the internet.

I'll make it easy for you again:

Difference between 9 Wims and 7 Wims is far less than between 1 Wim and ZERO Wims.
Legacy-wise and econimically.
Marginal utiliy - if you know what I mean.

2 Wimbledons less can be outweighed by far with 6 other slams more.
But NO Wimbledons AT LEAST has every player with 2 Wimbledon above you. Considering only post-WW2 players we have:
Brough, Connolly, Gibson, Bueno, Court, King, Goolagong, Evert, Navi, Graf, V. Williams, S. Williams.
If we raise the bar to at least THREE Wimbledon we have:
Brough, Connolly, Bueno, Court, King, Evert, Navi, Graf. 8 players.
Add to that Lenglen and Wills.

There simply is no room for Seles among the top-10.


Of course Seles would have waxed Brough.
But if we take those criteria then we would not be able to include Connolly in the top-10. Because even Anke Huber would have destroyed Connolly.


:wavey:


So let me see if I got it right this time: The other majors ONLY come up in play when Steffi Graf TRAILS in Wimbledon titles......o.k., I got it.

Because when Monica was winning three majors a year in the ī90-ies, she was dismissed as a flash in the pan, because Steffi who won just one each year won Wimbledon...so then the logic was Wimbledon> 3 majors, because Steffi won wimbledon....

Now we have 9 wimbledon > 7 wimbledon...no,no....now we have to take the other majors into account.

Only difference: this time it is Steffi who trails in wimbledon titles...

bandabou
Dec 10th, 2004, 04:13 PM
Maybe you are right. There is a tendency to denigrate non-U.S. players here at WTAWorld (Graf, Sabatini, ASV, Hingis, Henin). Cause could be the U.S. media. Maybe the same occurred with Court. Perhaps we should not ask
"Graf or Navi?" but "Graf or Court?" ....

I remember watching Court only one - against Bobby Riggs. Perhaps I got a wrong impression.


Cali, cai....YOU are talking about denigrading?

Letīs see: Monicaīs a cry-baby, it was just an eating-knife.

Trauma? what trauma? only blackmails can give you trauma.....and the list goes on and on.

And that is without the "lower-class"-braggarts thing......

Somehow Iīve the same thing with Steffi.....only watched one match of her: against Lindsay at Wimbledonī99.....wasnīt pretty.

faboozadoo15
Dec 10th, 2004, 04:20 PM
Graf had the winning edge vs. Navi when it counted most - in slam FINALS.
Graf won 2-1 Wimbledons against Navi, 1-1 USOs and 1-0 FO.

Navi avoided Graf post-87 on clay and rebound-ace. Because she knew she would get waxed there. She only showed up on grass, fast hard-courts an indoors. Nevertheless Graf is 6-2 H2H against Navi in that time. Would have been 12-2 if Navi hadn't been a coward ....
off topic a bit... but you think martina avoided steffi because "she knew she'd get waxed" but the same isn't true of steffi in all her losses one match away from playing seles? get real, cali.

skanky~skanketta
Dec 10th, 2004, 04:30 PM
off topic a bit... but you think martina avoided steffi because "she knew she'd get waxed" but the same isn't true of steffi in all her losses one match away from playing seles? get real, cali.
methinks he is gunther parche in disguise. a total freakshow who claims to be a lawyer and he has so many double standards and contradictions my dog just walked out of the room cuz it wasnt funny anymore.

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 04:32 PM
So let me see if I got it right this time: The other majors ONLY come up in play when Steffi Graf TRAILS in Wimbledon titles.....

Wrong!

You are more intellectually challenged than I thought ....



...
Because when Monica was winning three majors a year in the ī90-ies, she was dismissed as a flash in the pan,..

No.
She is dismissed as a flash in the pan because she had only TWO really good years. She was the best player in 1991 and 1992 winning 3 slams.
But 3 slams which do not include Wimbledon, the greatest tournament in the world, is not THAT far better than a single simple Wimbledon title.
Let's say
Wimbledon = 5 pts.
USO, FO = 3 pts.
AO = 2 pts.
That gives Seles a 8-5 pts. advantage against Graf in 91 & 92.

Graf on the other hand leads the field with 13-0 in 88, ASV with 10-3 in 89, Seles with 11-2 in 1993, Pierce with 11-2 in 1995, Seles with 11-2 in 1996.

Graf's 5 years when she won 3 slams ALL included Wimbledon.

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 04:36 PM
Cali, cai....YOU are talking about denigrading?

Letīs see: Monicaīs a cry-baby, it was just an eating-knife.

Trauma? what trauma? only blackmails can give you trauma.....and the list goes on and on.

And that is without the "lower-class"-braggarts thing......

Somehow Iīve the same thing with Steffi.....only watched one match of her: against Lindsay at Wimbledonī99.....wasnīt pretty.


I never mentioned an "eating knife" or maintained that only blackmail can give you trauma, Bandyliar ...

Now I know why you hold Graf in disregard. Yes, her Wimbledon 99 final performance was her worst ever in a final matches there.
What about this: you don't denigrate Graf any more and I don't denigrate Court any longer?

bandabou
Dec 10th, 2004, 04:36 PM
Wrong!

You are more intellectually challenged than I thought ....




No.
She is dismissed as a flash in the pan because she had only TWO really good years. She was the best player in 1991 and 1992 winning 3 slams.
But 3 slams which do not include Wimbledon, the greatest tournament in the world, is not THAT far better than a single simple Wimbledon title.
Let's say
Wimbledon = 5 pts.
USO, FO = 3 pts.
AO = 2 pts.
That gives Seles a 8-5 pts. advantage against Graf in 91 & 92.

Graf on the other hand leads the field with 13-0 in 88, ASV with 10-3 in 89, Seles with 11-2 in 1993, Pierce with 11-2 in 1995, Seles with 11-2 in 1996.

Graf's 5 years when she won 3 slams ALL included Wimbledon.


and why does Oz open get so lil points? maybe because Steffi never managed to beat Monica there?

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 04:40 PM
off topic a bit... but you think martina avoided steffi because "she knew she'd get waxed" but the same isn't true of steffi in all her losses one match away from playing seles? get real, cali.


Navi didn't play AO post-87 and FO post-88 because she knew she would be destroyed by Graf on these surfaces.

Graf never was a quitter.
When she got hold of a #1 Seles on court Graf won most of the time (5 out of 7 matches). Even when she was severely slumping.

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 04:42 PM
and why does Oz open get so lil points? maybe because Steffi never managed to beat Monica there?


No.
Because I never heard a player say "It was my life-long dream to win AO!"
:lol: :lol: :lol:

alfajeffster
Dec 10th, 2004, 05:18 PM
Maybe you are right. There is a tendency to denigrate non-U.S. players here at WTAWorld (Graf, Sabatini, ASV, Hingis, Henin). Cause could be the U.S. media. Maybe the same occurred with Court. Perhaps we should not ask
"Graf or Navi?" but "Graf or Court?" ....

I remember watching Court only one - against Bobby Riggs. Perhaps I got a wrong impression.
How is it that the 1973 "Mother's Day Massacre" in San Diego, which was televised by CBS in the United States (but not widely), is the only chance you had to watch Margaret Court in action? Have you never seen the re-runs of the 1970 Wimbledon Final they haul out even to this day during lengthy rain delays and on "best points ever" collections and montages? CBS hasn't even made that Court/Riggs match available for clips. You must have been in California to have seen it at all. We're getting close to nailing you, A.:lol:

FrauleinSteffi
Dec 10th, 2004, 05:45 PM
Steffi was not lucky to win 22 Slams if she had only won 1 then maybe lucky but 22 is the sign of an all time great champ who is mentally & physically awesome....with that logic we can say the Justine was lucky Serena & venus were out at the US OPen 03 & she took advantage to win it but she a classic match with Jenny in the semis so that doesnt make sense to say that...no matter what all of the top players are not in every Slam or big tourney each year injuries take their tol... Steffi did have to beat 4 #1 players to win 1989 Wimby Seles in 4th round,Arantxa in the OF,Chris Evert in semis & Martina in the final...She also beat Martina & Chris back to back to win the Lipton in 1987 & she beat Venus & serena back to back in Sydney in 1999 so Steffi is was not lucky...she was extremely tough & powerful & talented...in my opinion talent doesnt equal luck..that goes for any great champ like Seles or Martina or Chris:)

manu32
Dec 10th, 2004, 06:33 PM
graf of course....

i don't understand why people are talking about seles on this thread....

please look at the subject.....

fammmmedspin
Dec 10th, 2004, 06:35 PM
H2Hs only show you that players age and number 1 players often beat very young players.

Wimbledon 88 and 89 tell you all you need to know about their abilities relative to each other. Just watch the matches.

KV
Dec 10th, 2004, 06:42 PM
Stick with what most posters say in this thread. M. Navratilova, had way more variety too.

Martian KC
Dec 10th, 2004, 06:45 PM
Navratilova, of course.

mand
Dec 10th, 2004, 07:33 PM
Navratilova, indeed.

tennislover
Dec 10th, 2004, 07:34 PM
Navratilova, indeed.
my dear mand welcomeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 07:54 PM
How is it that the 1973 "Mother's Day Massacre" in San Diego, which was televised by CBS in the United States (but not widely), is the only chance you had to watch Margaret Court in action? Have you never seen the re-runs of the 1970 Wimbledon Final they haul out even to this day during lengthy rain delays and on "best points ever" collections and montages? CBS hasn't even made that Court/Riggs match available for clips. You must have been in California to have seen it at all. We're getting close to nailing you, A.:lol:


I saw at least 15 minutes of the Court/Riggs match in "Sport unter der Lupe" on SWF3 some days after the match. And Court was so slow and made so many UEs ....

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 08:07 PM
H2Hs only show you that players age and number 1 players often beat very young players.

Wimbledon 88 and 89 tell you all you need to know about their abilities relative to each other. Just watch the matches.


Yes, Navi made more winners than UEs in both matches. Whom did she beat in her 9 Wimbledon finals anyway?

Garrison in 90. Enough said.
Graf in 87 (Graf had almost no grass-court experience, hadn't played at Wimby in 86).
Evert in 85, 84, 82, 79, 78. Chrissie was no grass-court giant. Nevertheless Navi struggled even against her at many of those matches.
Mandlikova in 86. Hana, who was thrashed by Chrissie at the same venue in 82.
Jaeger in 83.

Was 88/89 Graf better than 83 Jaeger? Yes.
Better than 86 Mandlikova. You bet.
Better than 90 Garrison. Sure.
Better than 87 Graf. Ask Graf.
What about Evert? Who wants to tell me that 88/89 Graf would have struggled against peak Evert on grass????

Conclusio:
Navi should thank her lucky star that she didn't face peak Graf in 78, 79, 82-87, 90 at Wimbledon.
Navi NEVER ever played on the same level as Graf did in the 88, 89 & 92 Wimbledon finals.

bandabou
Dec 10th, 2004, 08:45 PM
And then on to Graf:

Novotna....enough said
Monica Seles.....hmmm, you fill it in.
ASV, what can one say.

And of course Martina N twice...

So Cali, you were talking? So of all the players Steffi beat ONLY Martina N had a Wimbledon title, and only Novotna went on to win a wimbledon title.....and only ASV even so much had another final at wimbledon....talking about murdererīs row.

At least Chrissie had a couple of wimbledons already.

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 08:55 PM
And then on to Graf:

Novotna....enough said
Monica Seles.....hmmm, you fill it in.
ASV, what can one say.

And of course Martina N twice...

So Cali, you were talking? So of all the players Steffi beat ONLY Martina N had a Wimbledon title, and only Novotna went on to win a wimbledon title.....and only ASV even so much had another final at wimbledon....talking about murdererīs row.

At least Chrissie had a couple of wimbledons already.


But Graf won 17 of 27 games against Navi in 1988 and 18 of 28 in 1989 at Wimbledon. The point is: Do you think Navi of 78, 79, 82-87 or 90 would have fared better?

bandabou
Dec 10th, 2004, 09:08 PM
But Graf won 17 of 27 games against Navi in 1988 and 18 of 28 in 1989 at Wimbledon. The point is: Do you think Navi of 78, 79, 82-87 or 90 would have fared better?

what happened? suddenly the list of wimbledon finalists that steffi faced doesnīt look all that impressive, huh?

about the question....who knows? I think that Martina of 82-86 would have beaten Graf.

Calimero377
Dec 10th, 2004, 09:21 PM
what happened? suddenly the list of wimbledon finalists that steffi faced doesnīt look all that impressive, huh?

about the question....who knows? I think that Martina of 82-86 would have beaten Graf.

A 88/89 Wimbledon-form Graf?

Which Navi?
The Navi who beat Evert in 82 with 6-1, 3-6, 6-2 or in 85 with 4-6, 6-3, 6-2?
With the same result as she beat Evert? Or closer?

How would a 82 or 85 Wimbledon-Evert have played against a 88/89 Wimbledon-form Graf? Beaten her too?

No, Bandyboy. Graf of 88/89 was simply too much for Navi. For every Navi ...

bandabou
Dec 10th, 2004, 09:28 PM
A 88/89 Wimbledon-form Graf?

Which Navi?
The Navi who beat Evert in 82 with 6-1, 3-6, 6-2 or in 85 with 4-6, 6-3, 6-2?
With the same result as she beat Evert? Or closer?

How would a 82 or 85 Wimbledon-Evert have played against a 88/89 Wimbledon-form Graf? Beaten her too?

No, Bandyboy. Graf of 88/89 was simply too much for Navi. For every Navi ...

different match-ups....

moby
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:09 AM
A 88/89 Wimbledon-form Graf?

Which Navi?
The Navi who beat Evert in 82 with 6-1, 3-6, 6-2 or in 85 with 4-6, 6-3, 6-2?
With the same result as she beat Evert? Or closer?

How would a 82 or 85 Wimbledon-Evert have played against a 88/89 Wimbledon-form Graf? Beaten her too?

No, Bandyboy. Graf of 88/89 was simply too much for Navi. For every Navi ...
i know martina n. beat chris evert 6-3 6-1 at a certain RG final
martina's worst surface against the queen of clay, so :confused:

btw wasnt martina already 32 or 33 in 1988/1989
steffi probably wouldn't even be competitive anymore at that age if she had not retired

moby
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:12 AM
Let's say
Wimbledon = 5 pts.
USO, FO = 3 pts.
AO = 2 pts.:bs:
personally i rate all slams equally... if anything, AO is the fairest of all the slams, because it is conducive to all styles of play



That gives Seles a 8-5 pts. advantage against Graf in 91 & 92.

Graf on the other hand leads the field with 13-0 in 88, ASV with 10-3 in 89, Seles with 11-2 in 1993, Pierce with 11-2 in 1995, Seles with 11-2 in 1996.

Graf's 5 years when she won 3 slams ALL included Wimbledon.makes you wonder why, doesn't it? :rolleyes:

Philbo
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:18 AM
The Steffi Graf of 88, 89 was no better than the Steffi of 87 - the difference ws that Martina was 32 and burnt out from over 5 straight years at the top!

Martina whipped Steffi's ass in st8 sets in the 87 final after Graf hadnt lost a match before that the whole year.

Keep fighting your losing battle Cali, loser :)

LeRoy.
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:34 AM
Martina Navratilova. Steffi herself said that.

Berlin_Calling
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:36 AM
Graf.

FrauleinSteffi
Dec 11th, 2004, 05:35 AM
I know you guys really dont think Steffi or anyone is just lucky to be a champion Thanks!:)

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 07:21 AM
Hello! if you reduce Steffi win's (after 1993 Monica's stabbing) to half, she does not have many records.

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 07:25 AM
I would say Navratilova is better than Steffi at all courts except French.

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 07:27 AM
Navartilova is definitely better because when Navratilova is old and getting older, still Steffi cannot have winning record against her easily.

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 07:35 AM
Martina Navratilova has the biggest love for tennis and for players. so she is better!

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 09:34 AM
The Steffi Graf of 88, 89 was no better than the Steffi of 87 - the difference ws that Martina was 32 and burnt out from over 5 straight years at the top!

Martina whipped Steffi's ass in st8 sets in the 87 final after Graf hadnt lost a match before that the whole year.

Keep fighting your losing battle Cali, loser :)


What did Navi say about her loss in 88?

"It was not so bad because I lost to a better player und because I was swept from the court during the last two sets."

"Steffi's return and serve have improved dramatically."

"Life goes on. Every generation is better than the older one."

"She's a nice human being and a super player." (on Graf)

"Unfortunately she has learned her lessons from last year's final. Unfortunately for me!" (on Graf)

Hmm, Loserfan .....
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 09:53 AM
i know martina n. beat chris evert 6-3 6-1 at a certain RG final
martina's worst surface against the queen of clay, so :confused:

btw wasnt martina already 32 or 33 in 1988/1989
steffi probably wouldn't even be competitive anymore at that age if she had not retired


Martina was 31 and 32 at Wimbledon 88 & 89.

She won her 1st slam when 21 years old, her 3rd slam when 25 years old , her 10th slam when 27 years old, her 16th slam when 30 years old.

Graf won her 1st slam when 17 years old, her 3rd slam when 18 years old, her 10th slam when 22 years old, her 16th slam when 25 years old.

Obviously Navi was a late-bloomer and Graf did everything about 5 years earlier. Navi won 15 of her 18 slams between age 25 and 30! Graf's career was cut short by a complicated knee surgery when she was 27 years old that allowed her only some months or glory in 98/99 before the knee fell apart again.

A 31 or 32-year-old Navi in 88/89 can be compared to a 26, 27 year old Graf. Graf was stopped by injury, Navi by Graf. That is the difference.
And people know this, they feel that Graf never was replaced by a younger generation. Graf beat them all in slams until the end: ASV, Seles, Hingis, Venus. Most people still said in summer 99 that Graf was the best player around. A good epitaph: "Still The Best."

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 09:59 AM
:bs:
personally i rate all slams equally... if anything, AO is the fairest of all the slams, because it is conducive to all styles of play


makes you wonder why, doesn't it? :rolleyes:


When in 20 years from now someone introduces a middle-aged man at a party and says, "This is Mr. Ivanisevic, Wimbledon champ!" it will be the same for you as when he says, "This is Mr. Korda, AO champ!"????

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 10:00 AM
Martina Navratilova. Steffi herself said that.


You obviously don't know Ms. Graf or people like her.

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 10:02 AM
Hello! if you reduce Steffi win's (after 1993 Monica's stabbing) to half, she does not have many records.


If we reduce Monica's wins (after the Soviet Union ended) to half, she does not have many records.

Your point being?

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 10:04 AM
I would say Navratilova is better than Steffi at all courts except French.


You don't want to tell me you saw them ever play against each other, son?

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 10:05 AM
Martina Navratilova has the biggest love for tennis and for players. so she is better!


You want to hold it against Graf that she isn't lesbian????

:confused:

Doraemon
Dec 11th, 2004, 10:19 AM
As the starter of the thread, I must say none of u guys read my post carefully enough.

1jackson2001
Dec 11th, 2004, 10:56 AM
That's saying that Sampras isn't desrving of a top 10 place in men's tennis because he never won the French Open. Regardless of what they won, they still are two of the finest talents ever to grace the courts.That's a bad analogy you're trying to make. Sampras may not have won the French, but he holds the all time record in slams. That's why he's definitely a shoo-in for top-10, if not better. Does Monica hold the record in slams? NO.

If Monica had say, 25 slams (would be all-time record), then yes you could make the comparison. But she is FAR from the record. She "only" has nine slams...AND she doesn't have all four of the majors. If she even has 15+ slams, it'd be a very different case.

I'm not saying Monica does or does not deserve to be in the top-10. I'm just saying that your analogy there is majorly flawed...this coming from a Monica fan (and not really into Pete). :)

Kart
Dec 11th, 2004, 11:03 AM
As the starter of the thread, I must say none of u guys read my post carefully enough.
That's because the first sentence makes you want to stop reading :rolleyes:.

Unlike many of the apparent experts in here, I never got to watch Martina at her very best so can't truly comment.

My gut feeling is that Steffi was better when it came down to the close points but a lot of that probably had to do with youthful fearlessness because even she became vulnerable to nerves in the latter stages of her career.

bandabou
Dec 11th, 2004, 12:08 PM
Navi wasnīt necesarily stopped by Graf.....Grafīs situation in ī99 was comparable to Martina N in ī87....she still could beat the youngsters once in a while, but the writing was starting to get on the wall....

Luckily for her and her legacy Steffi stopped when she was still on a high, although she DID end with a two-match losing streak, but it was a good way to and a career.

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 01:33 PM
That's because the first sentence makes you want to stop reading :rolleyes:.

Unlike many of the apparent experts in here, I never got to watch Martina at her very best so can't truly comment.

My gut feeling is that Steffi was better when it came down to the close points but a lot of that probably had to do with youthful fearlessness because even she became vulnerable to nerves in the latter stages of her career.


You got a point here ...

Many forget that 18 or 19-year-olds believe only the sky is the limit. When you get older you start to think and doubts creep in.
Happened with Graf, Seles (abruptly ... ), Hingis, Venus, Sabby, Austin.

Graf in 87/89 didn't fear anything. She simply didn't think about the possibility of losing. Seles was the same in 91/92. Or Hingis in 97/98.

It is easy to win as a 18/19-year-old. The real greats win as women too, not only as girls. That separates Evert & Graf types from the rest.
:worship:

JCF
Dec 11th, 2004, 01:36 PM
Martina obviously....I don't see her biggest rival being stabbed in a tennis match, never to be able to properly challenge again. Nav had better competition as well.

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 01:43 PM
Navi wasnīt necesarily stopped by Graf.....Grafīs situation in ī99 was comparable to Martina N in ī87....she still could beat the youngsters once in a while, but the writing was starting to get on the wall....

Luckily for her and her legacy Steffi stopped when she was still on a high, although she DID end with a two-match losing streak, but it was a good way to and a career.


If Graf had not had her knee injury that forced her to retire in the end she could have continued some years. Probably she could not have gained the #1 spot again on a permanent basis (perhaps only for a short time in 99/00) but she could of course have won AT LEAST 2 more slams to equal or surpass Margaret Court. Even if she had ended losing on an almost permanent basis to the likes of Serena, Venus and Enna in 02 or 03 those 2 or 3 more slams would have ended all discussions about "greatest-ever". In summer of 99 Graf - with a reduced training program! - proved what she was capable of. Imagine what damage a Graf without injuries could have done to the likes of Hingis, Davenport, Capriati, Venus & Serena in 00, 01, 02. Imagine a 30/33-year-old Graf with a stable & healthy body like Navratilova or Evert!!!

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 01:50 PM
Martina obviously....I don't see her biggest rival being stabbed in a tennis match, never to be able to properly challenge again. Nav had better competition as well.


Seles was able to play again in autumn of 1993. She didn't chose to.
Seles played again from summer 1995 on (Graf was struggling with injuries and tax scandal). Her challenge was repelled.

Navi "better competition"?
Retarded .....

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 03:28 PM
Can you 100% guaranteed Monica Seles will not win any more slams if she managed to escape the stabbing incident? in 1993
Answer: NO. no one dare to guarantee.

Can you guarantee Monica Seles can win 3 slams or all slams each year if she was not stabbed?
Answer: YES

Did Steffi Graf dominate Monica Seles in 1993 when Monica Seles is at 19? Answer: NO

Who did Gabriela Sabitini, Sanchez, Navratilova fear the most in early 1990s?
Answer: Gabriela fear Seles. Sanchez fear Navratilova. Navratilova fear Seles.

Did Steffi has a winning record against Navratilova before managed to tie an aging Navratilova or increasingly winning record against Seles? Answer: NO


Did Steffi Graf lose to other players after Monica was stabbed in 1993? Answer: YES. this shows... she still didn't has the marvellous record that year.

Can you guarantee Monica Seles can win Wimbledon if she is not stabbed and since Conchita can win one? Answer: YES 100% Do you think Monica Seles can lose to Lori McNeil?Answer:Definitely NO

bandabou
Dec 11th, 2004, 03:39 PM
If Graf had not had her knee injury that forced her to retire in the end she could have continued some years. Probably she could not have gained the #1 spot again on a permanent basis (perhaps only for a short time in 99/00) but she could of course have won AT LEAST 2 more slams to equal or surpass Margaret Court. Even if she had ended losing on an almost permanent basis to the likes of Serena, Venus and Enna in 02 or 03 those 2 or 3 more slams would have ended all discussions about "greatest-ever". In summer of 99 Graf - with a reduced training program! - proved what she was capable of. Imagine what damage a Graf without injuries could have done to the likes of Hingis, Davenport, Capriati, Venus & Serena in 00, 01, 02. Imagine a 30/33-year-old Graf with a stable & healthy body like Navratilova or Evert!!!


Why stop there? I mean if she can beat Serena of ī02, she certainly can beat Justine of ī03 too, no? Or are you saying that Justine of ī03 was better than Serena of ī02? I donīt see 4 majors in a row, three majors in a year, no Wimbledons for Justine, do you?......Yet another thing: The other day you said that when you donīt have any Wimbledon that automatically puts you behind players with at least one. Venus has TWO wimbledons back to back and FOUR finals in a row ( not even Graf managed that), while Justine has just ONE FINAL adn LOST it BADLY to that same Venus: talking in games: 15-7, set scores: 6-1 3-6 6-0, we wonīt even go about points won, yet you still talk about Justine as an all-time great and dismiss venus as just an amateur. So Cali, mind to explain that to me? Or is this another of Caliīs talking without meaning it, thingies?

Woulda coulda woulda coulda....come on Cali, if you said that stabbings are part of tennis, then certainly injuries are part of it too no? It wasnīt meant to be for Steffi to have the all-time record for majors.....you want Selestials to accept that, so accept it for Steffi too. Stop whining....at least she didnīt get stabbed in name of a rival.

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 03:44 PM
Who managed to stop Monica's winning streak in 1993?. steffi lost to Monica Seles in 1993 Australia Open and lost to Martina in Pan Pacific Open. Martina Navratilova triumphed in Paris Open indoor over Monica Seles.

Who rules before Monica stabbing?
Monica Seles and Navratilova. The ranking performance shows.. an amazing athlete Navratilova was.

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 03:45 PM
Who managed to stop Monica's winning streak in 1993?. steffi lost to Monica Seles in 1993 Australia Open and lost to Martina in Pan Pacific Open. Martina Navratilova triumphed in Paris Open indoor over Monica Seles.

Who rules before Monica stabbing?
Monica Seles and Navratilova. The ranking performance shows.. an amazing athlete Navratilova was.

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 03:51 PM
According to Monica Seles, Martina Navratilova is the most perfectionist player.

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 03:56 PM
Who owns the top5 winning streaks?
Navratilova - 3 times.
Steffi Graf - 1 time
Hingis - 1 time.

and you want to say Steffi Graf has the best winning streak?

wake up .

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:01 PM
Can you guarantee Monica Seles can win 3 slams in 1993 if Steffi Graf is there? Answer: YES

If Steffi Graf was stabbed and Seles is not, and then Steffi come back, will she get a CO-No.1 ranking?
Answer: Definitely NO!

Can you guarantee Monica Seles will win more than Margaret Court's Grand Slam if Steffi Graf was stabbed? Answer: YES

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:03 PM
Can Steffi Graf win a slam at 47? You can ask Steffi and see.

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:06 PM
Can you 100% guaranteed Monica Seles will not win any more slams if she managed to escape the stabbing incident? in 1993
Answer: NO. no one dare to guarantee. ....

Seles won another slam (AO 96) because Steffi was injured and didn't participate.

Without The Stabbing Seles would have had to beat Graf to win FO 93, Wim 93, USO 93, AO 94. And we know that Seles suffered from a shoulder injury beginning in spring 96. If she had not made the big break after The Stabbing she probably would have lost slams in 93/94 against an improving Graf (compared to 92), got her shoulder injury in spring 94, gained weight and never won anything again. Can you garantee that this is not a probable scenario?


...
Can you guarantee Monica Seles can win 3 slams or all slams each year if she was not stabbed?
Answer: YES ...

Based on what?
Don't forget: Graf was not the push-over in 93/96 as in 90/92 (when Graf nevertheless trounced Seles in Wimbledon and lost only 8-10 in 3rd at FO).
Don't forget: Seles didn't win anything post-AO96. She gained weight and never really lost it again. Fat tennis players don't usually win 3+ slams a year.




...
Can you guarantee Monica Seles can win Wimbledon if she is not stabbed and since Conchita can win one? Answer: YES 100% Do you think Monica Seles can lose to Lori McNeil?Answer:Definitely NO


A player who loses against Studenikova, Testud and Lucic at Wimbledon can lose against anybody.

BTW, McNeill was a solid serve-and-volley and at a wet day in Wimbledon she could beat almost the whole world class. You obviously don't know a lot about tennis.

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:09 PM
Who has the best consecutive streaks Grand Slam?

Australia Open: Monica Seles
French Open: Monica Seles
Wimbledon: Navratilova
US Open: -

Where is Steffi then?

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:15 PM
Calimero... has no excuse or no record for Steffi beating Monica Seles in 93. :p
Haha.. at least a fat Seles still can beat a slim Steffi in 99. I cannot foresee a fat Steffi can beat a slim Monica Sels in 93. :p

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:15 PM
Why stop there? I mean if she can beat Serena of ī02, she certainly can beat Justine of ī03 too, no? Or are you saying that Justine of ī03 was better than Serena of ī02? I donīt see 4 majors in a row, three majors in a year, no Wimbledons for Justine, do you?......Yet another thing: The other day you said that when you donīt have any Wimbledon that automatically puts you behind players with at least one. Venus has TWO wimbledons back to back and FOUR finals in a row ( not even Graf managed that), while Justine has just ONE FINAL adn LOST it BADLY to that same Venus: talking in games: 15-7, set scores: 6-1 3-6 6-0, we wonīt even go about points won, yet you still talk about Justine as an all-time great and dismiss venus as just an amateur. So Cali, mind to explain that to me? Or is this another of Caliīs talking without meaning it, thingies?

Woulda coulda woulda coulda....come on Cali, if you said that stabbings are part of tennis, then certainly injuries are part of it too no? It wasnīt meant to be for Steffi to have the all-time record for majors.....you want Selestials to accept that, so accept it for Steffi too. Stop whining....at least she didnīt get stabbed in name of a rival.

Serena profited a lot that she had to play only her sisters in slam finals and that Henin was still maturing. Most probably peak Henin is better than peak Serena.
But please consider that Graf of 03 would have been one or two years older than Graf of 01/02. Of course even for the greatest-ever it would have been more difficult from year to year to fend off the youngsters. I think Graf of 01/02 would have found ways to prevail against the one-dimensional game of Serena most of the time. Against peak Henin in 03 even I have my doubts ...

I don't whine.
I only point out that not only Selesians can play the woulda-coulda game.

Selesians have to live with the fact that Seles returned as a 21-year-old and didn't win much. When we have TWO years of great success for Seles but TEN years of failure simple probability calculus says that it is more probable that Seles would have won ONE or ZERO slams a year in 93/95 than three or four as rabid Selesians tend to think.

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:20 PM
Who managed to stop Monica's winning streak in 1993?. steffi lost to Monica Seles in 1993 Australia Open and lost to Martina in Pan Pacific Open. Martina Navratilova triumphed in Paris Open indoor over Monica Seles.

Who rules before Monica stabbing?
Monica Seles and Navratilova. The ranking performance shows.. an amazing athlete Navratilova was.


You are "Czechfan's" little brother, Dumbo?

WTA ranking as of April 1993:
1) Seles 321 pts.
2) Graf 300 pts.
3) ASV 217 pts.
4) Navi 195 pts.

Yeah, Seles and Navi ruled in the rankings ....

You don't earn your living with your brain, do you?

KV
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:20 PM
Cali, what do you mean Lori Mcneill was a solid serve & volleyer? Yes, she had her days but she had her off-days too. You are not going to tell that she could win Wimbledon the year she def. S. Graf. If the caps fits maybe semi-finalist but certainly not winning Wimbledon.

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:22 PM
According to Monica Seles, Martina Navratilova is the most perfectionist player.


We didn't expect her to say "Steffi Graf" .....

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:25 PM
haha.. you must check the ranking after the toray pan pacific open. :p
Seles, Navratilova and then Steffi.

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:27 PM
Who has the best consecutive streaks Grand Slam?

Australia Open: Monica Seles
French Open: Monica Seles
Wimbledon: Navratilova
US Open: -

Where is Steffi then?


Steffi simply concentrated on winning 22 slams and each of them at least 4 times.

Do you think she would trade those records against Seles "3-consecutive AOs" record?
Think about it .... hard ....

:lol:

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:29 PM
haha ... i am enjoying all my fun here. gotcha.

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:29 PM
Calimero... has no excuse or no record for Steffi beating Monica Seles in 93. :p
Haha.. at least a fat Seles still can beat a slim Steffi in 99. I cannot foresee a fat Steffi can beat a slim Monica Sels in 93. :p


Don't know. Can't imagine a "fat Steffi".
Steffi always could pull herself together ... :lol:

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:32 PM
22 slams not approved at all.
Monica has the highest precentage winning matches player in her prime.
Steffi did not in her prime. Remind you that.

If Steffi Graf was stabbed and Seles is not, and then Steffi come back, will she get a CO-No.1 ranking?
Answer: Definitely NO!

bandabou
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:32 PM
Serena profited a lot that she had to play only her sisters in slam finals and that Henin was still maturing. Most probably peak Henin is better than peak Serena.
But please consider that Graf of 03 would have been one or two years older than Graf of 01/02. Of course even for the greatest-ever it would have been more difficult from year to year to fend off the youngsters. I think Graf of 01/02 would have found ways to prevail against the one-dimensional game of Serena most of the time. Against peak Henin in 03 even I have my doubts ...

I don't whine.
I only point out that not only Selesians can play the woulda-coulda game.

Selesians have to live with the fact that Seles returned as a 21-year-old and didn't win much. When we have TWO years of great success for Seles but TEN years of failure simple probability calculus says that it is more probable that Seles would have won ONE or ZERO slams a year in 93/95 than three or four as rabid Selesians tend to think.



Pardon the language but this post is just plain: :bs:

Justine had to mature? :haha: :rolls: The girl is just ONE year younger than Serena... but o.k., she had to mature....letīs play that tune. She pulled out a sqweaker at RG, 7-5 in the third, on her best surface and Serenaīs worst.....but then, then!....then came Wimbledon!! the biggest of them all, isnīt that right, Cali? You know the result: 6-3 6-2....if we follow the logic you always use when discussing Graf vs Seles....on the holy grass of wimbledon and Justine PEAK got spanked by Serena.....

And for all Justineīs peak....Serena still won two majors and they were tied in matches at majors but Serena won the most important one if we follow Cali-logic.


And may I add that Serena already beat Steffi BACK in ī99....and it can be said that Serena improved since then, hard to say that Steffi could still improve at her age......

And Justine STILL hasnīt won wimbledon, Serena already has two....how can Juju be rated higher than Serena without even so much ONE Wimbledon? Maybe Serena profited from facing Venus.....but she DID beat Justine on route to winning Wimbledon too and that was a PEAK Justine.

You were saying?

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:33 PM
Cali, what do you mean Lori Mcneill was a solid serve & volleyer? Yes, she had her days but she had her off-days too. You are not going to tell that she could win Wimbledon the year she def. S. Graf. If the caps fits maybe semi-finalist but certainly not winning Wimbledon.


"Maybe semis" at Wimbledon 94 for McNeil?
Lori lost in the semis against Martinez.
8-10 in 3rd set.
Martinez had not that much problems in the final two days later.

Dumbo ....

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:37 PM
haha.. you must check the ranking after the toray pan pacific open. :p
Seles, Navratilova and then Steffi.


Toray Pan Pacific, February 1st - 7th, 1993
Winner: Navratilova

WTA rankings, February 8th, 1993
1) Seles 303 pts.
2) Graf 271 pts.
3) Navi 189 pts.


Dumbo ...

Or perhaps is "liar" more appropriate?

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:39 PM
Dumbo.. you must check the best Corel Tour ranking. not the accumulated one. dumbo!

bandabou
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:40 PM
And Justine didnīt profit from facing KIM CLIJSTERS in her finals, Cali?! You might not rate Venus that high but she at least managed to win majors, so she was up to the task.....


Ask most players, even Graf, who would you rather face in a major final: Venus or Kim? Hmmm....

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:42 PM
Pardon the language but this post is just plain: :bs:

Justine had to mature? :haha: :rolls: The girl is just ONE year younger than Serena... but o.k., she had to mature...


Hingis and Seles won slams with 16, Graf with 17.
Venus was "still maturing" when she lost against Graf in Wimbledon 99. She was 19 years old.

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:43 PM
Clearly Martina Navratilova has the lasting life in ranking compared to Steffi graf. At least even when in injury, Martina doesn't fall out of Top Ten. but Steffi did. Steffi's comeback was't as great as Monica Seles who captured first tournament when came back twice, once after stabbing and once after injury.

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:44 PM
Dumbo.. you must check the best Corel Tour ranking. not the accumulated one. dumbo!


What had "Corel" to do with women's tennis in 1993, Dumbo?

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:46 PM
And Justine didnīt profit from facing KIM CLIJSTERS in her finals, Cali?! You might not rate Venus that high but she at least managed to win majors, so she was up to the task.....


Ask most players, even Graf, who would you rather face in a major final: Venus or Kim? Hmmm....


Tell you what, Bandyboy - this Serena W. doesn't interest me the least.

Let's concentrate on the all-time greats (18+ slams) and the second-tier greats (7+ slams) ....

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:46 PM
you don't know much about tennis. dumbo.

Jang2
Dec 11th, 2004, 04:53 PM
good night dumbo... always finding excuse. posed to you many questions.. you just answered so little.

tennislover
Dec 11th, 2004, 05:09 PM
[QUOTE=Calimero377]"Martinez had not that much problems in the final two days later.

....[QUOTE]

what?????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????? check the score please

KV
Dec 11th, 2004, 05:16 PM
In the final M. Conchita Martinez needed 3 sets against 37 y.o. M. Navratilova. And yes Navratilova could've won Wimbledon in 94. C. Martinez never rep. her 1994 Wimbly perf. again. Was her Wimbly 94 title a fluke? Yes.

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 06:28 PM
you don't know much about tennis. dumbo.


Well, I know that Corel wasn't sponsor of the WTA tour in 1993.
It was "Kraft General Foods".

What did you want to know?
Whether Navi was on 2nd place in the "Kraft General Foods Grand Prix Rankings" after Tokyo 93 (on February 8th, 1993)?

Well, let's have a look, Dumbo ....

1) Seles 900 pts.
2) Graf 840 pts.
3) Sabby 535 pts.
4) Capriati 500 pts.
5) ASV, Navi 470 pts.

Oops .....


:lol: :lol: :lol:


C'mon, another name-change is necessary.
This "Jang2" has been burned completely ....

bandabou
Dec 11th, 2004, 06:29 PM
Tell you what, Bandyboy - this Serena W. doesn't interest me the least.

Let's concentrate on the all-time greats (18+ slams) and the second-tier greats (7+ slams) ....

as you wish.....but thatīs pretty weak though. when someone presses you to explain your opinion, suddenly itīs letīs focus on the all-time and second-tier greats?

Serenaīs much closer to being second-tier great than Justine will probably ever be....AND she has Wimbledon. Yet Justineīs still better than her in your eyes?

Donīt get it. You said all players with 2+ wimbledons are greater on the scale of greatness than Monica with 9 but no wimbledons.

Now youīve Serena who has 6 majors amongst them TWO wimbledons, has won ALL four majors, four in a row, etc....against Justine with three but NO wimbledon, only one final...yet you think sheīs a greater player than Serena?

I donīt care if you donīt care about Serena....just explain this logic to me.

bandabou
Dec 11th, 2004, 06:31 PM
Hingis and Seles won slams with 16, Graf with 17.
Venus was "still maturing" when she lost against Graf in Wimbledon 99. She was 19 years old.


Well...her peak sure didnīt last long. Two majors in a calendar year, no wimbledon in ī02, then only one major in ī03 and early losses at two other majors. Way to go....

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 06:32 PM
[QUOTE=Calimero377]"Martinez had not that much problems in the final two days later.

....[QUOTE]

what?????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????? check the score please


Martinez - McNeil 10-8 in 3rd.
Martinez - Navratilova 6-3 in 3rd.

Done.

Next question, Tennistony?

:wavey:

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 06:33 PM
In the final M. Conchita Martinez needed 3 sets against 37 y.o. M. Navratilova. And yes Navratilova could've won Wimbledon in 94. C. Martinez never rep. her 1994 Wimbly perf. again. Was her Wimbly 94 title a fluke? Yes.


No, Navi reaching final again was a fluke.

Calimero377
Dec 11th, 2004, 06:35 PM
as you wish.....but thatīs pretty weak though. when someone presses you to explain your opinion, suddenly itīs letīs focus on the all-time and second-tier greats?

Serenaīs much closer to being second-tier great than Justine will probably ever be....AND she has Wimbledon. Yet Justineīs still better than her in your eyes?

Donīt get it. You said all players with 2+ wimbledons are greater on the scale of greatness than Monica with 9 but no wimbledons.

Now youīve Serena who has 6 majors amongst them TWO wimbledons, has won ALL four majors, four in a row, etc....against Justine with three but NO wimbledon, only one final...yet you think sheīs a greater player than Serena?

I donīt care if you donīt care about Serena....just explain this logic to me.


Of course Serena is "greater" (career-wise) until now as Henin.
Same with Sharapova.

Nevertheless peak Henin and peak Sharapova are better than peak Serena.

Do you understand the difference?

bandabou
Dec 11th, 2004, 06:39 PM
Of course Serena is "greater" (career-wise) until now as Henin.
Same with Sharapova.

Nevertheless peak Henin and peak Sharapova are better than peak Serena.

Do you understand the difference?

And how do you measure that exactly?

Because so far I know Serenaīs best career-year was better than that of Justine and Maria....

bandabou
Dec 11th, 2004, 06:41 PM
Of course Serena is "greater" (career-wise) until now as Henin.
Same with Sharapova.

Nevertheless peak Henin and peak Sharapova are better than peak Serena.

Do you understand the difference?


So the next time: respect....Serenaīs career is much much better than Justineīs...if weīre talking greatness Serenaīs much closer to that than Justine. Remember that!

bandabou
Dec 12th, 2004, 12:25 PM
So peak Justine has ZERO wimbledons, yet sheīs still better than Serena? Hmmm......funny, because back in ī91-ī92 when Monica was in the same position as Justine, without Wimbledon, you still couldnīt admit peak Seles was better than peak Graf...what happened?

Calimero377
Dec 12th, 2004, 12:46 PM
So peak Justine has ZERO wimbledons, yet sheīs still better than Serena? Hmmm......funny, because back in ī91-ī92 when Monica was in the same position as Justine, without Wimbledon, you still couldnīt admit peak Seles was better than peak Graf...what happened?


"Peak" means level of play when playing at one's best.
This Enna/Serena discussions don't interest me.
Therefore I explain the "peak" concept with Graf/Seles.

Seles won more slams (3-1) in 91/92 than Graf. She had more success than Graf in a short timeframe.
That has nothing to do who played better when playing at their best.
Graf EVEN in those two years ("Graf Slump Years") was better when playing in "peak form" (eg. Wimbledon 1992). Not even talking about "peak" career-wise.

What are Seles's "peak performances"?
Selesians usually cite AO 93 final (vs. Graf), FO 92 final (vs. Graf) or USO 91 semis (vs. 15-year-old JenCap). But no-one would say that Graf's performance at AO 93 was "peak-Graf", some say - I don't! - that Graf played near her peak at FO 92 final. At AO 93 Seles won 86-78 on points-played. Definitely not clearly superior to Graf. FO 92 and USO 91 were real cliff-hangers.

Compare that to Graf.
Grafans usually cite
Wimbledon 88 final (when Navi was thrashed in last two sets, broken in 7 consecutive service games!),
FO 88 final (when Navi-conquerer Zvereva wa double-bageled!),
AO 89 semis (when Sabby was destroyed in a manner that made Ted Tinling name Graf "best-ever"),
Wimbledon 92 final (enuff said ...),
USO 96 final (when Seles - after playing her best-ever USO - lost 66-79 in a high-profile battle)
as Graf's peak performances.

Do you get the difference?

BTW, are you a Serena fan?
:confused:
I always thought you were a fan of female grace and elegance on tennis courts (and maybe elsewhere) ....

bandabou
Dec 12th, 2004, 01:24 PM
"Peak" means level of play when playing at one's best.
This Enna/Serena discussions don't interest me.
Therefore I explain the "peak" concept with Graf/Seles.

Seles won more slams (3-1) in 91/92 than Graf. She had more success than Graf in a short timeframe.
That has nothing to do who played better when playing at their best.
Graf EVEN in those two years ("Graf Slump Years") was better when playing in "peak form" (eg. Wimbledon 1992). Not even talking about "peak" career-wise.

What are Seles's "peak performances"?
Selesians usually cite AO 93 final (vs. Graf), FO 92 final (vs. Graf) or USO 91 semis (vs. 15-year-old JenCap). But no-one would say that Graf's performance at AO 93 was "peak-Graf", some say - I don't! - that Graf played near her peak at FO 92 final. At AO 93 Seles won 86-78 on points-played. Definitely not clearly superior to Graf. FO 92 and USO 91 were real cliff-hangers.

Compare that to Graf.
Grafans usually cite
Wimbledon 88 final (when Navi was thrashed in last two sets, broken in 7 consecutive service games!),
FO 88 final (when Navi-conquerer Zvereva wa double-bageled!),
AO 89 semis (when Sabby was destroyed in a manner that made Ted Tinling name Graf "best-ever"),
Wimbledon 92 final (enuff said ...),
USO 96 final (when Seles - after playing her best-ever USO - lost 66-79 in a high-profile battle)
as Graf's peak performances.

Do you get the difference?

BTW, are you a Serena fan?
:confused:
I always thought you were a fan of female grace and elegance on tennis courts (and maybe elsewhere) ....


Donīt change the topic, cali....be a man! You said peak Henin is better than peak Serena.

And I say to you: How then? show me a list of Justineīs best matches and how they compare to Serenaīs best matches.

But no, you have to chicken out like you always do when pressed to come up with things to back up your point.....by saying things like Serena isnīt an example of female grace and elegance...like JHH is? Yellow teeth, no boobies, bad skin? Is that what you look for in a female?

So again....Serenaīs best two years are waaaaaayyyyyyyyyyy better than Justineīs 16-months of glory, because even then she still got beaten by Serena for the biggest prize of them all.....and so are Serenaīs best matches compared to Justineīs best ones.

Calimero377
Dec 12th, 2004, 01:45 PM
Donīt change the topic, cali....be a man! You said peak Henin is better than peak Serena.

And I say to you: How then? show me a list of Justineīs best matches and how they compare to Serenaīs best matches.

But no, you have to chicken out like you always do when pressed to come up with things to back up your point.....by saying things like Serena isnīt an example of female grace and elegance...like JHH is? Yellow teeth, no boobies, bad skin? Is that what you look for in a female?

So again....Serenaīs best two years are waaaaaayyyyyyyyyyy better than Justineīs 16-months of glory, because even then she still got beaten by Serena for the biggest prize of them all.....and so are Serenaīs best matches compared to Justineīs best ones.



Man, you are really obsessed with your Serena ....

:eek:

bandabou
Dec 12th, 2004, 01:52 PM
Man, you are really obsessed with your Serena ....

:eek:


Obsessed is what you are with Steffi....

And now answer the question.

bandabou
Dec 12th, 2004, 08:44 PM
You still didnīt answer the question as always...

Calimero377
Dec 12th, 2004, 09:01 PM
You still didnīt answer the question as always...


I've answered it in the other thread:

Henin's performances in her slam final wins were better than Serena beating her sister.
Case closed.
Don't embarrass yourself.

bandabou
Dec 12th, 2004, 09:35 PM
I've answered it in the other thread:

Henin's performances in her slam final wins were better than Serena beating her sister.
Case closed.
Don't embarrass yourself.

So youīre saying beat Kim Clijsters in finals is a bigger achievement than beating Venus williams and Martina Hingis in finals?

So Kim Clijsters is a greater player than both Venus AND Martina H?

Hmmmm......what tier of greatness is Kim C again?

Calimero377
Dec 12th, 2004, 09:37 PM
So youīre saying beat Kim Clijsters in finals is a bigger achievement than beating Venus williams and Martina Hingis in finals?
...

No.
But Henin played better in her matches against Clijsters than Serena in her matches against Venus and Hingis.

bandabou
Dec 12th, 2004, 09:50 PM
No.
But Henin played better in her matches against Clijsters than Serena in her matches against Venus and Hingis.

Or is it this way: Kim Clijsters performed WORSE in those matches against Justine than Venus and Martina did against Serena?

considering that even during her peak year Justine lost more often against Kim than Serena did in her whole career against Kim, I think we got an answer....OF COURSE Justineīd look great against Kim....because Kim is a CHOKER who has NEVER get it done when it really matters..

One thing Iīm wondering: Justine clearly was coming off a high after Rg...heck even beating Serena and then putting her peak performance as you say against Kim. Then we get to wimbledon...the biggest tournament of the year....what happened? 6-3 6-2 against Serena...why couldnīt she translate her peak on the grass? or is the peak only reserved for matches against Kim?

Philbo
Dec 12th, 2004, 10:56 PM
BAndy - Yo've backed him into another corner on this issue..

Jeez its fun watching Calimero clutch at straws when trying to stick to an argument he wishes he never had..

Very entertaining..

Keep it up Bandy, its fun watching Cali tapdance around and avoiding giving any real answer..hehehe

Calimero377
Dec 12th, 2004, 11:00 PM
Or is it this way: Kim Clijsters performed WORSE in those matches against Justine than Venus and Martina did against Serena?

considering that even during her peak year Justine lost more often against Kim than Serena did in her whole career against Kim, I think we got an answer....OF COURSE Justineīd look great against Kim....because Kim is a CHOKER who has NEVER get it done when it really matters..

One thing Iīm wondering: Justine clearly was coming off a high after Rg...heck even beating Serena and then putting her peak performance as you say against Kim. Then we get to wimbledon...the biggest tournament of the year....what happened? 6-3 6-2 against Serena...why couldnīt she translate her peak on the grass? or is the peak only reserved for matches against Kim?

Enna was injured as you may remember.

tennislover
Dec 12th, 2004, 11:02 PM
"Maybe semis" at Wimbledon 94 for McNeil?
Lori lost in the semis against Martinez.
8-10 in 3rd set.
Martinez had not that much problems in the final two days later.

Dumbo ....

In 1990 happened the same thing: Graf lost to Garrison in SF and Garrison was destroyed (6-1 6-4) in final by Martina :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Calimero377
Dec 12th, 2004, 11:05 PM
In 1990 happened the same thing: Graf lost to Garrison in SF and Garrison was destroyed (6-1 6-4) in final by Martina :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


What do you mean with "same thing"?
Please elaborate ...

faboozadoo15
Dec 12th, 2004, 11:06 PM
I've answered it in the other thread:

Henin's performances in her slam final wins were better than Serena beating her sister.
Case closed.
Don't embarrass yourself.
sometimes it's not all about the final. you have to do quite a lot to get there...

tennislover
Dec 12th, 2004, 11:08 PM
almost the same... in 94 martina reached the final
in 90 graf only the sf

Calimero377
Dec 12th, 2004, 11:10 PM
sometimes it's not all about the final. you have to do quite a lot to get there...


Tells this to these rabid Selesians who maintain that Seles would have made all the finals Graf won in 93/95 for sure.

bandabou
Dec 12th, 2004, 11:25 PM
Enna was injured as you may remember.


On her NON-playing hand and as an one-hander that really didnīt have any effect.....plus she sure didnīt look injured when she was beating the Moliks and Pierces of this world.

So again: Why couldnīt peak JHH beat Serena at Wimbledon?

bandabou
Dec 12th, 2004, 11:27 PM
No Cali....donīt switch the conversation yet again. Man, you really are a chicken at times. JHH vs Serena....what happened with the wimbledons? I donīt see them.....all she had to do is beat Serena...in ī03, her peak year...and what happens? 6-3 6-2...spanked.

Volcana
Dec 12th, 2004, 11:53 PM
As a singles player - Graf
As a tennis player - Navratilova

tennislover
Dec 12th, 2004, 11:57 PM
As a singles player - Graf
As a tennis player - Navratilova

I don't agree, but that's a reasonable agreement.......
that could be the end of the war............................

LDVTennis
Dec 13th, 2004, 12:59 AM
The Steffi Graf of 88, 89 was no better than the Steffi of 87 - the difference ws that Martina was 32 and burnt out from over 5 straight years at the top!

Martina whipped Steffi's ass in st8 sets in the 87 final after Graf hadnt lost a match before that the whole year.

Keep fighting your losing battle Cali, loser :)

Again, I am going to have to remind you that some of us here (myself included) did not need the benefit of video tape to see these matches for the first time.

I watched the '87 and '88 Final on NBC. In '88, Graf was a much better player than the one who lost the '87 Final to Martina. She had a much better strategy behind her passing shots and reacted better to Martina's short or drop volleys.

As for Martina, she looked the same to me. Hard to fault her for not placing some volley's deep enough. True, some of hit was her fault. She could get too cute from time to time. And, in '88, Graf was ready for it. But, most of it was beyond her control. Graf attacked Martina's position at the net with a whole range of shots, pure passing shots, short slices, etc. Against this array of shots, Martina just couldn't get a rhythm going.

As for the burnout excuse, it would makes some sense if we were talking about another major event. But, this was Wimbledon, the highlight of Martina's year. Martina never lacked the motivation to play Wimbledon. By this time in her career, in fact, I think she had begun chasing certain records at Wimbledon. So, she had even more incentives as the years wore on. Moreover, whether she ever mentioned it or not, Martina also had to be mindful that Steffi had come to Wimbledon with 2 out of the 4 major events of the year in hand. Given her own well-publicized flirtations with a calendar year Grand Slam, one has to imagine that Martina, more than anyone else, wanted to play the role of spoiler. So, it is ludricous to think that she wasn't motivated. She was motivated by Wimbledon, she was motivated by the records, she was motivated by her own place in tennis history vis-a-vis the young German upstart.

bandabou
Dec 13th, 2004, 01:13 AM
O.k., so that is settled.....on to the next question. Is Justine really a better player or greater than Serena?

bandabou
Dec 13th, 2004, 01:15 AM
As a singles player - Graf
As a tennis player - Navratilova

Considering the discrenpacy between their records in doubles, I think this is a pretty good conclusion.

Philbo
Dec 13th, 2004, 02:52 AM
Again, I am going to have to remind you that some of us here (myself included) did not need the benefit of video tape to see these matches for the first time.

I watched the '87 and '88 Final on NBC. In '88, Graf was a much better player than the one who lost the '87 Final to Martina. She had a much better strategy behind her passing shots and reacted better to Martina's short or drop volleys.

As for Martina, she looked the same to me. Hard to fault her for not placing some volley's deep enough. True, some of hit was her fault. She could get too cute from time to time. And, in '88, Graf was ready for it. But, most of it was beyond her control. Graf attacked Martina's position at the net with a whole range of shots, pure passing shots, short slices, etc. Against this array of shots, Martina just couldn't get a rhythm going.

As for the burnout excuse, it would makes some sense if we were talking about another major event. But, this was Wimbledon, the highlight of Martina's year. Martina never lacked the motivation to play Wimbledon. By this time in her career, in fact, I think she had begun chasing certain records at Wimbledon. So, she had even more incentives as the years wore on. Moreover, whether she ever mentioned it or not, Martina also had to be mindful that Steffi had come to Wimbledon with 2 out of the 4 major events of the year in hand. Given her own well-publicized flirtations with a calendar year Grand Slam, one has to imagine that Martina, more than anyone else, wanted to play the role of spoiler. So, it is ludricous to think that she wasn't motivated. She was motivated by Wimbledon, she was motivated by the records, she was motivated by her own place in tennis history vis-a-vis the young German upstart.

I watched the 87, 88, 89 Wimbledon finals without videotape as well.

Would you agree that Martina of 88, 89, had at least dropped a shade in her quality of performance?
Considering that she lost 3 times to Zvereva, once to Savchenko, once to Garrison (the only time in 34 meetings) would you agree Martina was no longer at her peak?

I only posted that post to refute Calimero's claims that Martina of 88, 89 was still at her peak (at 32, 33 years old..)

Here is a good chance for you LDV - to display a bit of non biased analysis - if you jump on Calimero's bandwagon and agree that Martina of 88, 89 was still at her peak, you will show yourself up as just another graffanatic, incapable of a balanced debate.

The choice of whcih way you go is up to you. But i have a good idea of which way you'll go...

moby
Dec 13th, 2004, 03:08 AM
On her NON-playing hand and as an one-hander that really didnīt have any effect.....plus she sure didnīt look injured when she was beating the Moliks and Pierces of this world.

So again: Why couldnīt peak JHH beat Serena at Wimbledon?
i don't see how it can have no effect
the left hand is used for balance and grip adjustments even for a one hander, and any discomfort is certainly detrimental to playing up to one's potential
hint: the injury was serious enough for her to withdraw from the rosmalen final, in which she was actually leading by a set to none against kim, no less, who according to you, keels over and gives away every match she plays against justine

i'm not saying justine would necessarily have beaten serena without the injury, but i do think that the match would be much closer at the very least

btw why are you comparing serena to molik and a non-in-her-prime pierce?
i don't even think they are at the same level

stenen
Dec 13th, 2004, 05:26 AM
As a singles player - Graf
As a tennis player - Navratilova

I agree with this poster.
If the question would have been "who's the best singles player?" then it would have been a tighter match, of which Steffi would have won with a small margin. However the question was who is better? Navratilova or Graf and it doesn't even take a genius to figure out that the best player of the two is Navratilova.

bandabou
Dec 13th, 2004, 11:35 AM
i don't see how it can have no effect
the left hand is used for balance and grip adjustments even for a one hander, and any discomfort is certainly detrimental to playing up to one's potential
hint: the injury was serious enough for her to withdraw from the rosmalen final, in which she was actually leading by a set to none against kim, no less, who according to you, keels over and gives away every match she plays against justine

i'm not saying justine would necessarily have beaten serena without the injury, but i do think that the match would be much closer at the very least

btw why are you comparing serena to molik and a non-in-her-prime pierce?
i don't even think they are at the same level

Just to point out: Justine could beat Molik and Pierce easily despite the injury, but couldnīt match Serena.....surely that must be an indication that beating Serena wasnīt as easy for Justine as Cali seems to think.

Andy T
Dec 13th, 2004, 12:59 PM
Again, I am going to have to remind you that some of us here (myself included) did not need the benefit of video tape to see these matches for the first time.

I watched the '87 and '88 Final on NBC. In '88, Graf was a much better player than the one who lost the '87 Final to Martina. She had a much better strategy behind her passing shots and reacted better to Martina's short or drop volleys.

As for Martina, she looked the same to me. Hard to fault her for not placing some volley's deep enough. True, some of hit was her fault. She could get too cute from time to time. And, in '88, Graf was ready for it. But, most of it was beyond her control. Graf attacked Martina's position at the net with a whole range of shots, pure passing shots, short slices, etc. Against this array of shots, Martina just couldn't get a rhythm going.

As for the burnout excuse, it would makes some sense if we were talking about another major event. But, this was Wimbledon, the highlight of Martina's year. Martina never lacked the motivation to play Wimbledon. By this time in her career, in fact, I think she had begun chasing certain records at Wimbledon. So, she had even more incentives as the years wore on. Moreover, whether she ever mentioned it or not, Martina also had to be mindful that Steffi had come to Wimbledon with 2 out of the 4 major events of the year in hand. Given her own well-publicized flirtations with a calendar year Grand Slam, one has to imagine that Martina, more than anyone else, wanted to play the role of spoiler. So, it is ludricous to think that she wasn't motivated. She was motivated by Wimbledon, she was motivated by the records, she was motivated by her own place in tennis history vis-a-vis the young German upstart.

Martina actually felt that her problems with burnout started in early 1987, before (incidentally) Steffi had won a slam at all. She cites not being fired up to play in Australia that year and delaying her departure from the US to prepare for it. Having spent five seasons at the top of the game, this is understandable and going back into history, it should be noted that the same thing happened to both Margaret Court (who retired in 1966 having been at the top since 1961), and Chrissie (who took a long break in 1980 having been at the top since 1974). One major difference between Martina and those two women was age, however: both Chrissie and Madge were around 24-25 when the burnout hit, whereas Martina was 30.

Martina did not take a break and, as we all know, went into Wimbledon in 1987 without one single tournament victory that season. It can hardly, therefore, be argued that she was on top form in 1987, when she beat Steffi to win her 6th consecutive Wimbeldon title. The loss of the #1 ranking
provided her with some added incentive at the US Open where she followed up the Wimbledon win with a second victory over Graf.

The three finals fought between these two players in 88 and 89 all went the distance and in each of them Navratilova was on top for some of the match. That she lost them all was in my opinion due to a combination of factors and by that I don't mean to take anything away from Steffi, who ultimately deserved all three victories. Steffi played brilliant uninhibited tennis when it mattered most; she was riding high on confidence and at her physical best.
Martina was mentally not at her best and in all three matches it is obvious to the observer that she loses her focus and becomes almost resigned once Steffi gets ahead in the third. She admits herself that she was obsessed with getting the top spot back in those years and as they met so rarely, I think she just put too much pressure on herself. Martina was not as physically robust in those years either: her knees were beginning to play up and her speed around the court was not what it had been. This was especially harmful against someone as quick as Steffi because even if Martina was able to put Steffi on the defensive, if she couldn't get into position herself and cover the net, she was open to those passes.

Martina's overall performance was better in 1989 than it had been in 1988, largely credited to the influence of BJK who slowly managed to wean Martina off her destructive obsession about getting the #1 spot back and impart her experience about how to compensate for the effects of age with smarter tactical play. This shift in approach took time to seep into Martina's mind and the US Open final of 89 was definitelmy one in which her self-doubt may well have cost her a victory.

I don't think it is an accident that Martina, once she'd had her knees fixed and achieved her objective of winning a 9th Wimbledon, was able to beat Steffi at the US Open in 1991.

I really hope this post is not taken as one long list of excuses for Martina because I don't mean it to be. The bottom line is that Steffi was better than Martina in 88 and 89 but I don't think that proves anything else than that. I'm not interested in relating individual performances to the endless haggle over their all-time status (in fact for the first time I've used the ignore option on Calimero now because I'm so fed up with reading the same old propaganda without any respect for other players or understanding of the history and development of the game; it's no surprise he's a lawyer: no respect for the truth, just a single-minded obsession to defend the client in any way possible).

bandabou
Dec 13th, 2004, 01:48 PM
it's no surprise he's a lawyer: no respect for the truth, just a single-minded obsession to defend the client in any way possible).


Thinking about it.....he REALLY acts like a lawyer!! :eek: Bringing up as many excuses as possible for Steffi ( his client) while dismissing all the ones brought up in favour of the opposition ( martina N, Monica, etc..). You really nailed it.

moby
Dec 13th, 2004, 01:56 PM
Just to point out: Justine could beat Molik and Pierce easily despite the injury, but couldnīt match Serena.....surely that must be an indication that beating Serena wasnīt as easy for Justine as Cali seems to think.
well obviously
at their best i give serena the edge on grass, hardcourts about even, edge to justine on clay

though of course justine's best is still getting better :p
if she starts doing the serve and volley and coming to net more on grass she'll overtake serena

bandabou
Dec 13th, 2004, 02:07 PM
well obviously
at their best i give serena the edge on grass, hardcourts about even, edge to justine on clay

though of course justine's best is still getting better :p
if she starts doing the serve and volley and coming to net more on grass she'll overtake serena

Weīll see about that one.

about even on hardcourts? A tad bit optimistic, donīt you think? They are closer to being even on CLAY than that theyīre so on hardcourts imo.

DA FOREHAND
Dec 13th, 2004, 02:22 PM
all of you BIOTCHES can't seem to keep STEFFI GRAF far from your thoughts....Simply the Best.

moby
Dec 13th, 2004, 02:23 PM
justine has only lost one match on american hardcourts since miami 2003

schris
Dec 13th, 2004, 02:30 PM
Steffi :bounce: ;)

bandabou
Dec 13th, 2004, 03:15 PM
justine has only lost one match on american hardcourts since miami 2003

Plenty good....weīll see how she fares against Serena then....hopefully both will be healthy next year.

Calimero377
Dec 13th, 2004, 06:22 PM
....
<start of long list of excuses for Martina snipped> ...
I don't think it is an accident that Martina, once she'd had her knees fixed and achieved her objective of winning a 9th Wimbledon, was able to beat Steffi at the US Open in 1991. ....
<rest of long list of excuses for Martina snipped> ....



Do you REALLY think Navi's win against Graf at USO 91 and compared to her four losses at Wimbledon, USU & YEC in 88/89 can be explained mainly by Navi being better in 91 than by Graf being worse??????????????????????????

In 88 Navi won nine tournaments, in 89 eight tournaments but in 91 only five tournaments ....

matija-seles
Dec 13th, 2004, 06:26 PM
There is NO comparison. Navratilova is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH better than Graf. Please don't try to compare legend to the very good player.

Calimero377
Dec 13th, 2004, 06:26 PM
Thinking about it.....he REALLY acts like a lawyer!! :eek: Bringing up as many excuses as possible for Steffi ( his client) while dismissing all the ones brought up in favour of the opposition ( martina N, Monica, etc..). You really nailed it.


Problem is that Steffi is not my client.

As a lawyer I'm a fan of truth and objectivity. And when I detect that justice is not served then I act. It is a natural impulse with me ...

:angel: :angel: :angel:

Calimero377
Dec 13th, 2004, 06:28 PM
There is NO comparison. Navratilova is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH better than Graf. Please don't try to compare legend to the very good player.


How do you explain that Graf wins almost all best-ever polls?

matija-seles
Dec 13th, 2004, 06:28 PM
Calimero you are such an ass.

bandabou
Dec 13th, 2004, 06:32 PM
Problem is that Steffi is not my client.

As a lawyer I'm a fan of truth and objectivity. And when I detect that justice is not served then I act. It is a natural impulse with me ...

:angel: :angel: :angel:

Keep telling that to yourself...

If you were really a fan of justice then why do you seem to think that NOBODY was to blame for the stabbing? You seem to think that Monica shouldnīt have sued the tennis center for lack of security, that Gunther was blameless, etc?

Calimero377
Dec 13th, 2004, 06:32 PM
Calimero you are such an ass.


Because I ask how you explain that Graf wins almost all best-ever polls?

Oh sorry - I know that reality bites ...

tennislover
Dec 13th, 2004, 06:41 PM
Martina actually felt that her problems with burnout started in early 1987, before (incidentally) Steffi had won a slam at all. She cites not being fired up to play in Australia that year and delaying her departure from the US to prepare for it. Having spent five seasons at the top of the game, this is understandable and going back into history, it should be noted that the same thing happened to both Margaret Court (who retired in 1966 having been at the top since 1961), and Chrissie (who took a long break in 1980 having been at the top since 1974). One major difference between Martina and those two women was age, however: both Chrissie and Madge were around 24-25 when the burnout hit, whereas Martina was 30.

Martina did not take a break and, as we all know, went into Wimbledon in 1987 without one single tournament victory that season. It can hardly, therefore, be argued that she was on top form in 1987, when she beat Steffi to win her 6th consecutive Wimbeldon title. The loss of the #1 ranking
provided her with some added incentive at the US Open where she followed up the Wimbledon win with a second victory over Graf.

The three finals fought between these two players in 88 and 89 all went the distance and in each of them Navratilova was on top for some of the match. That she lost them all was in my opinion due to a combination of factors and by that I don't mean to take anything away from Steffi, who ultimately deserved all three victories. Steffi played brilliant uninhibited tennis when it mattered most; she was riding high on confidence and at her physical best.
Martina was mentally not at her best and in all three matches it is obvious to the observer that she loses her focus and becomes almost resigned once Steffi gets ahead in the third. She admits herself that she was obsessed with getting the top spot back in those years and as they met so rarely, I think she just put too much pressure on herself. Martina was not as physically robust in those years either: her knees were beginning to play up and her speed around the court was not what it had been. This was especially harmful against someone as quick as Steffi because even if Martina was able to put Steffi on the defensive, if she couldn't get into position herself and cover the net, she was open to those passes.

Martina's overall performance was better in 1989 than it had been in 1988, largely credited to the influence of BJK who slowly managed to wean Martina off her destructive obsession about getting the #1 spot back and impart her experience about how to compensate for the effects of age with smarter tactical play. This shift in approach took time to seep into Martina's mind and the US Open final of 89 was definitelmy one in which her self-doubt may well have cost her a victory.

I don't think it is an accident that Martina, once she'd had her knees fixed and achieved her objective of winning a 9th Wimbledon, was able to beat Steffi at the US Open in 1991.

I really hope this post is not taken as one long list of excuses for Martina because I don't mean it to be. The bottom line is that Steffi was better than Martina in 88 and 89 but I don't think that proves anything else than that.


:worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:
that's the true story!!!!! clear, objective,perfect analisis......

tennislover
Dec 13th, 2004, 06:48 PM
******it's no surprise he's a lawyer: no respect for the truth, just a single-minded obsession to defend the client in any way possible).*******

poor lawyers: they have a UNIVERSAL BAD REPUTATION!! :lol:
i don't think so, Andy: Calimero don't speak as lawyer but as fan......all his (wrong ;) ) ideas come from the deepest part of his heart which is crazy for Graf......
Lawyer are usually so "cold" and professional: they must be like that.

LDVTennis
Dec 13th, 2004, 06:49 PM
I watched the 87, 88, 89 Wimbledon finals without videotape as well.

Would you agree that Martina of 88, 89, had at least dropped a shade in her quality of performance?
Considering that she lost 3 times to Zvereva, once to Savchenko, once to Garrison (the only time in 34 meetings) would you agree Martina was no longer at her peak?

I only posted that post to refute Calimero's claims that Martina of 88, 89 was still at her peak (at 32, 33 years old..)

Here is a good chance for you LDV - to display a bit of non biased analysis - if you jump on Calimero's bandwagon and agree that Martina of 88, 89 was still at her peak, you will show yourself up as just another graffanatic, incapable of a balanced debate.

The choice of whcih way you go is up to you. But i have a good idea of which way you'll go...

Honestly, I can't form an accurate opinion on the matter. I just don't have enough data. I just didn't watch her play consistently enough to form an opinion. I can give you an opinion on when I thought Graf was at her peak and when Chris was at or near her peak. But, not Martina.

I could go back and research the issue. But, frankly, as you know, I am not a big fan of hers. So, there is no motivation to do that.

Calimero377
Dec 13th, 2004, 06:52 PM
Keep telling that to yourself...

If you were really a fan of justice then why do you seem to think that NOBODY was to blame for the stabbing? You seem to think that Monica shouldnīt have sued the tennis center for lack of security, that Gunther was blameless, etc?


When you are stabbed in your local WalMart by a lunatic you can sue WalMart. But don't be surprised if you lose that one ...

BTW, who said that Günther Parche was "blameless", Bandyliar?

tennislover
Dec 13th, 2004, 06:55 PM
Calimero you are such an ass.

this an up-dated list of "kind" words written in these threads to poor Cali:
- idiot
- caligunther
- ass
- horrible human being.......

OMG!!!!! :lol: stop it please......

He is not a monster he is simply crazy for his idol.........
(such as me for mine........"Martina i'm crazy for you" :hearts: :hearts: :hearts: :hearts: :hearts: :hearts: :hearts: :hearts: :hearts: :hearts: :hearts: :hearts: :hearts: :hearts: :hearts: ;)

stenen
Dec 13th, 2004, 06:57 PM
Because I ask how you explain that Graf wins almost all best-ever polls?


Partly it could be the age of the voters, also for some people, unfortunately, sexual orientation could be the contributing fact.

bandabou
Dec 13th, 2004, 07:02 PM
When you are stabbed in your local WalMart by a lunatic you can sue WalMart. But don't be surprised if you lose that one ...

BTW, who said that Günther Parche was "blameless", Bandyliar?

So you want to say that the tournament isnīt responsible for the security of the players?

You said it cali....NO ONE was to be blamed for the stabbing. Whoīs the liar?

LDVTennis
Dec 13th, 2004, 07:02 PM
Martina actually felt that her problems with burnout started in early 1987, before (incidentally) Steffi had won a slam at all. She cites not being fired up to play in Australia that year and delaying her departure from the US to prepare for it. Having spent five seasons at the top of the game, this is understandable and going back into history, it should be noted that the same thing happened to both Margaret Court (who retired in 1966 having been at the top since 1961), and Chrissie (who took a long break in 1980 having been at the top since 1974). One major difference between Martina and those two women was age, however: both Chrissie and Madge were around 24-25 when the burnout hit, whereas Martina was 30.

Martina did not take a break and, as we all know, went into Wimbledon in 1987 without one single tournament victory that season. It can hardly, therefore, be argued that she was on top form in 1987, when she beat Steffi to win her 6th consecutive Wimbeldon title. The loss of the #1 ranking
provided her with some added incentive at the US Open where she followed up the Wimbledon win with a second victory over Graf.

The three finals fought between these two players in 88 and 89 all went the distance and in each of them Navratilova was on top for some of the match. That she lost them all was in my opinion due to a combination of factors and by that I don't mean to take anything away from Steffi, who ultimately deserved all three victories. Steffi played brilliant uninhibited tennis when it mattered most; she was riding high on confidence and at her physical best.
Martina was mentally not at her best and in all three matches it is obvious to the observer that she loses her focus and becomes almost resigned once Steffi gets ahead in the third. She admits herself that she was obsessed with getting the top spot back in those years and as they met so rarely, I think she just put too much pressure on herself. Martina was not as physically robust in those years either: her knees were beginning to play up and her speed around the court was not what it had been. This was especially harmful against someone as quick as Steffi because even if Martina was able to put Steffi on the defensive, if she couldn't get into position herself and cover the net, she was open to those passes.

Martina's overall performance was better in 1989 than it had been in 1988, largely credited to the influence of BJK who slowly managed to wean Martina off her destructive obsession about getting the #1 spot back and impart her experience about how to compensate for the effects of age with smarter tactical play. This shift in approach took time to seep into Martina's mind and the US Open final of 89 was definitelmy one in which her self-doubt may well have cost her a victory.

I don't think it is an accident that Martina, once she'd had her knees fixed and achieved her objective of winning a 9th Wimbledon, was able to beat Steffi at the US Open in 1991.

I really hope this post is not taken as one long list of excuses for Martina because I don't mean it to be. The bottom line is that Steffi was better than Martina in 88 and 89 but I don't think that proves anything else than that. I'm not interested in relating individual performances to the endless haggle over their all-time status (in fact for the first time I've used the ignore option on Calimero now because I'm so fed up with reading the same old propaganda without any respect for other players or understanding of the history and development of the game; it's no surprise he's a lawyer: no respect for the truth, just a single-minded obsession to defend the client in any way possible).

Andy, this is a fair representation of the circumstances. My only criticism would be that you make it seem as if Martina only started to feel self-doubt as her game declined.

The Martina, I remember, was always emotionally unsteady. Even in some of her matches during her best years, especially against Chris, you just knew that if Chris could somehow manage to get a break or even a set that Martina's head might get the best of her. So, I guess what i would say is that the bouts of negativity to which Martina had always been susceptible became more frequent or unmanageable as her game became more and more difficult to execute.

tennislover
Dec 13th, 2004, 07:06 PM
So you want to say that the tournament isnīt responsible for the security of the players?

You said it cali....NO ONE was to be blamed for the stabbing. Whoīs the liar?


IMHO the tournament is responsable.........

yes I agree, Cali is the liar.... :haha: (kidding)

Calimero377
Dec 13th, 2004, 07:44 PM
So you want to say that the tournament isnīt responsible for the security of the players?

You said it cali....NO ONE was to be blamed for the stabbing. Whoīs the liar?


Where did I say that, Bandyliar?

Andy T
Dec 13th, 2004, 07:51 PM
Andy, this is a fair representation of the circumstances. My only criticism would be that you make it seem as if Martina only started to feel self-doubt as her game declined.

The Martina, I remember, was always emotionally unsteady. Even in some of her matches during her best years, especially against Chris, you just knew that if Chris could somehow manage to get a break or even a set that Martina's head might get the best of her. So, I guess what i would say is that the bouts of negativity to which Martina had always been susceptible became more frequent or unmanageable as her game became more and more difficult to execute.
Sorry LDVTennis, I didn't mean you to draw that conclusion. I guess that because I was only talking about that period, it is a fair inference to make but any fan who agonised over those defeats to Tracy in 81 in NY and to Chrissie at RG in 85 and Steffi at RG in 87, among many others, is painfully aware that Martina could go from supreme confidence to panic in the space of twenty minutes. That said, she has become tagged with this reputation but imo it is a bit exaggerated as she won quite a few nailbiters too, NY84 vs Chris and NY86 vs Steffi among them.

Her emotions were certainly more volatile (or she was less able to control them) than those of Steffi and Chris (both of whom did let winning leads slip in slam finals, though, or made much harder work of a match than they needed to) and, like most players, when she lost confidence her game suffered. I don't think there's anything radical or intelligent in this observation.

The point I wanted to make was that on her own terms and relative to her own standards, Martina was not, mentally, the player she had been a few years earlier. For me, the 87-9 period was a moment of transition for her: from the fittest, strongest, most technically complete world leader of women's tennis to a top player who was forced to accept the ravages of time on her mind and body, the onslaught of a phenomenal talent in the form of Steffi and the realisation that she had to adapt her game to a new reality. That process was a painful one for her but her performances at Wimbledon in 1990 and 1994, at Flushing Meadows in 1991 and at Madison Square Garden in 1991 and 1992 - in addition to a host of others in lesser events - are testimony to the fact that she succeeded. Steffi's results in Paris and at Wimbledon in 1999 fall into a similar category for me and all credit to her for them.

KV
Dec 13th, 2004, 08:01 PM
Pity S. Graf & M. Navratilova don't have the same age. Doesn't look good for S. Graf, no doubt about it. M. Navratilova won her GS easier (in general). S. Graf won a few too many. J. Novotna didn't convert a 4-1 lead in the FS. G. Sabatini was serving for the match at Wimbledon. Further at RG, M. Hingis should've def. S. Graf, same goes for A. Sanchez. And of course the stabbing incident. IMO, there's no contest both at peak clear adv. M. Navratilova & M. Navratilova had firmer oppostion than S. Graf.

Calimero377
Dec 13th, 2004, 08:07 PM
Sorry LDVTennis, I didn't mean you to draw that conclusion. I guess that because I was only talking about that period, it is a fair inference to make but any fan who agonised over those defeats to Tracy in 81 in NY and to Chrissie at RG in 85 and Steffi at RG in 87, among many others, is painfully aware that Martina could go from supreme confidence to panic in the space of twenty minutes. That said, she has become tagged with this reputation but imo it is a bit exaggerated as she won quite a few nailbiters too, NY84 vs Chris and NY86 vs Steffi among them.

Her emotions were certainly more volatile (or she was less able to control them) than those of Steffi and Chris (both of whom did let winning leads slip in slam finals, though, or made much harder work of a match than they needed to) and, like most players, when she lost confidence her game suffered. I don't think there's anything radical or intelligent in this observation.

The point I wanted to make was that on her own terms and relative to her own standards, Martina was not, mentally, the player she had been a few years earlier. For me, the 87-9 period was a moment of transition for her: from the fittest, strongest, most technically complete world leader of women's tennis to a top player who was forced to accept the ravages of time on her mind and body, the onslaught of a phenomenal talent in the form of Steffi and the realisation that she had to adapt her game to a new reality. That process was a painful one for her but her performances at Wimbledon in 1990 and 1994, at Flushing Meadows in 1991 and at Madison Square Garden in 1991 and 1992 - in addition to a host of others in lesser events - are testimony to the fact that she succeeded. Steffi's results in Paris and at Wimbledon in 1999 fall into a similar category for me and all credit to her for them.


Sometimes even Andybaby has his intervalla lucida ....

BTW, were did Navi beat the #2, #3 and #1 player in the world in a slam tournament to lift the trophy in 90-94?
(No, I can' resist .... :devil: )

bandabou
Dec 13th, 2004, 08:14 PM
Where did I say that, Bandyliar?


Thatīs the thing.....explain us what you REALLY said and MEANT with that wallmart comment.

Calimero377
Dec 13th, 2004, 08:15 PM
Pity S. Graf & M. Navratilova don't have the same age. Doesn't look good for S. Graf, no doubt about it. M. Navratilova won her GS easier (in general). S. Graf won a few too many. J. Novotna didn't convert a 4-1 lead in the FS. G. Sabatini was serving for the match at Wimbledon. Further at RG, M. Hingis should've def. S. Graf, same goes for A. Sanchez. And of course the stabbing incident. IMO, there's no contest both at peak clear adv. M. Navratilova & M. Navratilova had firmer oppostion than S. Graf.


Whom did Navi beat in her slam finals?
10 times Evert, many of them on grass. Evert was no grass court specialist.
2 wins against a young Graf in 87.
One win against superflake Hana.
That's all. The rest is Jaeger, Jordan, Garrison stuff.

Graf on the other hand beat:
Navi (4 times), Seles (3 times), Sanchez (4 times), Evert (once), Hingis (once), Sabatini (once). She beat 4 different players (Navi, Seles, ASV, Hingis) when they were #1.

BTW, Novotna, Sabatini and Hingis didn't deserve to win. You have to play the deciding points well against a Graf. They didn't. And they lost.
Rightfully so.

Calimero377
Dec 13th, 2004, 08:17 PM
Thatīs the thing.....explain us what you REALLY said and MEANT with that wallmart comment.


That WalMart isn't to blame when someone stabs you in a WalMart outlet.

Calimero377
Dec 13th, 2004, 08:18 PM
I don't know why people argue over this as "better" is very subjective.


You sure?

bandabou
Dec 13th, 2004, 08:26 PM
That WalMart isn't to blame when someone stabs you in a WalMart outlet.

So in the end, it REALLY was tough luck for Monica.

In the end what it basically comes down to it: NOBODY was held accountable for the stabbing.

Calimero377
Dec 13th, 2004, 08:29 PM
So in the end, it REALLY was tough luck for Monica.

In the end what it basically comes down to it: NOBODY was held accountable for the stabbing.


Parche was.

bandabou
Dec 13th, 2004, 08:38 PM
Parche was.

No....he was guilty, but he WASNīT held ACCOUNTABLE. So in the end......nobody was.

KV
Dec 13th, 2004, 08:47 PM
Whom did Navi beat in her slam finals?
10 times Evert, many of them on grass. Evert was no grass court specialist.
2 wins against a young Graf in 87.
One win against superflake Hana.
That's all. The rest is Jaeger, Jordan, Garrison stuff.

Graf on the other hand beat:
Navi (4 times), Seles (3 times), Sanchez (4 times), Evert (once), Hingis (once), Sabatini (once). She beat 4 different players (Navi, Seles, ASV, Hingis) when they were #1.

BTW, Novotna, Sabatini and Hingis didn't deserve to win. You have to play the deciding points well against a Graf. They didn't. And they lost.
Rightfully so.yes, Cali. But SF's and QF's exit too. Martina played as well serve & volleyers like Shriver, Sukova. Kathy Jordan was a very good grass courter, her GS final wasn' a coincidence. I give them all the edge over A. Sanchez on the faster courts. Very slim chance with their ability on the fast courts A. Sanchez will reach the Wimbledon/Aus-Open final (when it was on grass) even though Arantxa made it too a Wimbledon final. As J. Novotna once said "against a good serve & volleyer A. Sanchez is out of the race. Jana meant Wimbly. Really find Shriver/Sukova and even Jordan firmer oppositon than A. Sanchez on the fast courts.

bandabou
Dec 13th, 2004, 08:56 PM
Cali is really desperate when he considers ASV a formidable foe on GRASS!!! :haha: :rolls: Please Cali...be realistic. Even a young Graf was still a more credible opponent than ASV ever was on faster surfaces.

Philbo
Dec 13th, 2004, 09:01 PM
Andy T - Thank you so much for coming into this thread and doing a terrific job of fair, balanced, objective argument. You are a brilliant example for us all to follow..

LDV - Extremely disapointed in your pissweak response to my question on whether Navratilova was still at her peak in 88, 89.. You act as an expert on that period, acting superior because you didnt need to watch videotapes of the late 80's wimbeldon finals, then when challenged on something you suddenly claim you 'dont have enough data' - well if you dont have enough data to have a real opinion on whether Martina of 88, 89 was still at her peak you really dont belong in this discussion.

However I know that you do have a real opinion, but you know that admitting anything that weakens Graf's case (i.e that Martina of 88, 89 was a shade below her best) goes againt your pro-steffi, anti-Martina position, so you claim you dont have enough data.. thats really pissweak IMO.

KV
Dec 13th, 2004, 09:02 PM
Bandabou, as far as I'm concerned A. Sanchez reached the Wimbledon/US-Open final GS cause in this days women's tennis wasn't strong in depth. Same goes for C. Martinez, despite winning Wimbledon, she wasn't a very good grass courter. Whatever I enjoy the discussion, but I'm off now have to wake up early :wavey: Cali & Bandabou.