PDA

View Full Version : Pierce vs Sabatini: Who is greater?


LINDZFAN!!!!!!!!
Jun 21st, 2008, 12:15 AM
Who is greater and why?

IanRadi
Jun 21st, 2008, 12:19 AM
I'm Argentinian and a huge fan of Gabriela but Mary is just Mary :hearts: Such a talented player and the most important thing: Such a lady! :worship:

thongcarmen
Jun 21st, 2008, 01:00 AM
both by achivement and actual talent, Mary is better...

Serenidad.
Jun 21st, 2008, 01:01 AM
Mary.

In The Zone
Jun 21st, 2008, 01:25 AM
Pierce, no question.

VeeJJ
Jun 21st, 2008, 02:29 AM
Mary

orfgab
Oct 21st, 2008, 09:21 PM
Gaby, of course. Mary was lucky enough to win 2 slams, but for the rest: pretty nothing. If you look at their statistics, there's no doubt. And I don't speak about their natural ability.

ViennaCalling
Oct 21st, 2008, 09:41 PM
Queen Mary, god how i miss her :sobbing:

Without her tennis seems boring and slow :crying2:

sebbe
Oct 21st, 2008, 09:52 PM
Mary should have done soo much in tennis if it wasn't for those damn injuries!

goldenlox
Oct 21st, 2008, 10:00 PM
Mary also had to overcome her dad, who was a little wild.
Dads hurt Dokic and Lucic

Miss Amor
Oct 21st, 2008, 10:05 PM
mary by far.

danieln1
Oct 21st, 2008, 10:16 PM
Mary at her best is way more effective than Sabatini at her best, so Mary by far!

Danči Dementia
Oct 21st, 2008, 10:18 PM
Gaby by far!!! :worship: :rocker2:

MistyGrey
Oct 21st, 2008, 10:25 PM
Mary....

tenn_ace
Oct 21st, 2008, 10:32 PM
Mary by far in my books

laurie
Oct 21st, 2008, 10:39 PM
Gaby had huge problems with her serve, Mary had huge problems with her father. Both players suffered with nerves on the big ocassion which prevented them playing their best. Gaby was able to overcome that for one match in the most spectacular fashion against Graf in the 1990 US Open final.

Gaby has one major title, Mary has two major titles. Gaby won the year end WTA Masters twice and Mary never won a WTA masters final but played in two finals in 1997 and 2005. Gaby became disillusioned and packed it in in 1997 at the young age of 27, Mary had an Agassi like resurgence in her early 30s in 2005. As Mary got older she improved her movement and actually increased the power on her serve until injury got in the way. Mary also won the Federation cup in 1997 and a Wimbledon mixed doubles title in 2005. I think Gaby won Wimbledon doubles with Graf in 1988.

I think taklng those factors into account I will give it to Mary for sticking at it longer although they are both great and both deserve to be in the Hall of Fame (when Mary is eventually elected).

AcesHigh
Oct 21st, 2008, 10:52 PM
Overall.. Pierce's career is SO spotty. I mean.. just look at her slam record. In 52 slams, she made it past the quarters only 6 times. However, 2 of those were slam titles and the other 4 are slam finals.

Pierce's peaks were higher and that's what matters. At their best, Gaby wasn't as good on the court or in the stats IMHO.

FERLKE
Oct 22nd, 2008, 12:49 AM
Overall.. Pierce's career is SO spotty. I mean.. just look at her slam record. In 52 slams, she made it past the quarters only 6 times.

:eek:

Tripp
Oct 22nd, 2008, 01:33 AM
They're both amazing :hearts:

Although in therms of achievements, Mary would be greater :secret:

mirzalover
Oct 22nd, 2008, 01:37 AM
Overall.. Pierce's career is SO spotty. I mean.. just look at her slam record. In 52 slams, she made it past the quarters only 6 times. However, 2 of those were slam titles and the other 4 are slam finals.





Thats not that bad if you count her quarter finals in with that, or did she only make the quarters like 3 times or something :lol:

AcesHigh
Oct 22nd, 2008, 02:03 AM
Thats not that bad if you count her quarter finals in with that, or did she only make the quarters like 3 times or something :lol:

It's something like 8 QF, 0 SF, 4 F and 2 W. But for Sabatini, it's 10 QF, 15 SF's, 2 F's and 1 W. So I was just making a comparison there.

sammy01
Oct 22nd, 2008, 02:05 AM
Overall.. Pierce's career is SO spotty. I mean.. just look at her slam record. In 52 slams, she made it past the quarters only 6 times. However, 2 of those were slam titles and the other 4 are slam finals.

Pierce's peaks were higher and that's what matters. At their best, Gaby wasn't as good on the court or in the stats IMHO.

to me thats a great stat in favour of mary lol. once she was injury free, fit and focussed she went deep into a slam, to play 6 semi's and win them all shows when all her problems were out the way mary was in it to win.

gaby to me came across as happy if she had made the semi's, hence her giving up when only 27 and mary fighting through years of injuries to have an amazing 2005 when in her 30's.

for me theres no doubt that mary had everything, she had the game to do a lot mnore than her stats suggest, but as in life her path was never straight forward, but i think she can hold her head high and be proud of whats shes achieved. so for me its mary by a long way.

long live the memory of mary 'the body' 'diva' pierce, the original wta drama queen!

Uranium
Oct 22nd, 2008, 03:01 AM
Mary:D:D

A Magicman
Oct 22nd, 2008, 11:22 AM
The moonballer war greater, cos greatness doesnt only derive from playing but also from the impact your career had in the restrospective, so I'd say Sabatini.

*Jool*
Oct 22nd, 2008, 01:34 PM
Pierce, but closely

thrust
Oct 22nd, 2008, 02:48 PM
Mary by far in my books

ABSURD! Mary does have one more Slam, however, that is her only advantage. They played 5 times, with Gabriela winning 4 of those matches. Mary has 18 tournament wins, Gabriela has 27. Gabriela has 2 WCT wins, Mary has none. I would give the edge to Gabriela, but to say either by far, is absurd.

MistyGrey
Oct 22nd, 2008, 03:12 PM
The Gaby Mary head to head is pretty skewed... They never played after Mary broke into the top ten, so the head to head doesnt say much. The extra slam is HUGE... Gaby sadly never managed to remove the one slam wonder tag... The difference between one GS and two GS titles is huge in my book. Mary had twice as many GS titles and twice as many GS finals as Gaby did, and that seals the deal in my book.
And although I dont think doubles makes a huge difference in the whoz greater debate, but Mary has 1 GS double and 1 GS mixed title, Gaby has 1 GS doubles.
And finally... Mary's peak was so much better than Gaby's.

I love Gaby though!

OsloErik
Oct 22nd, 2008, 04:19 PM
Mary has the one slam more, and more slam finals. But by virtually every other measure if singles greatness, Sabatini exceeds her

More titles (27 vs 19) in less time (11 year career vs. 17 year career)
28 slam QF-or-better out of 43 total slams vs. 14 slam QF-or-better out of 52 total slams played
18 slam SF-or-better out of 43 total slams vs. 6 slam SF-or-better out of 52 total slams played
6 Tier I titles vs. 5 Tier I titles
2 YEC titles vs. 0 YEC titles

Sabatini also made the SF or better of every slam at LEAST 4 times. Pierce would have to go to the 4th round to say the same thing.

As far as doubles go, it's pretty even. One slam each, 12 titles for Sabatini to 10 titles for Pierce.

As for the context of their victories, Sabatini's entire career took place amidst 4 of the greatest players of all time. She had to face Evert, Navratilova, Graf, and Seles. In her lone slam win, she had to beat Steffi Graf in the final, coming through a draw that included Seles and Navratilova. In both of Pierce's slam wins, Graf wasn't even in the draw. Pierce emerged at a time when Graf was in her final years as a top player, and won the French when none of the three best players in the world were clay court champions. She filled the vacuum left by Graf (and, to a certain extent, ASV). That's different from BEING the player who leaves the vacuum.

I think we remember Pierce way too fondly. Yes, she had the kind of game that was near impossible to deal with when it was on. But in 1997, she could have been the player to inherit Graf's mantle. She couldn't do it. And as a result, while playing in several seasons where the competition was much weaker than other times, she still only picked up two slam titles.

Matt01
Oct 22nd, 2008, 04:19 PM
Gaby, of course. Mary was lucky enough to win 2 slams, but for the rest: pretty nothing.


I didn't know that reaching the finals at AO, RG and US Open (plus 2 finals at YEC) is "pretty nothing".

OsloErik
Oct 22nd, 2008, 04:21 PM
Mary had twice as many GS titles and twice as many GS finals as Gaby did, and that seals the deal in my book.
And although I dont think doubles makes a huge difference in the whoz greater debate, but Mary has 1 GS double and 1 GS mixed title, Gaby has 1 GS doubles.

While Gaby had 3 times as many slam semifinals as Mary. And can I quote everything you said here in the future when another Venus-Henin thread opens up?

OsloErik
Oct 22nd, 2008, 04:22 PM
to me thats a great stat in favour of mary lol. once she was injury free, fit and focussed she went deep into a slam, to play 6 semi's and win them all shows when all her problems were out the way mary was in it to win.

OR, it could be indicative that she could only win matches when playing well :shrug:

Matt01
Oct 22nd, 2008, 04:30 PM
More titles (27 vs 19) in less time (11 year career vs. 17 year career)
28 slam QF-or-better out of 43 total slams vs. 14 slam QF-or-better out of 52 total slams played
18 slam SF-or-better out of 43 total slams vs. 6 slam SF-or-better out of 52 total slams played
6 Tier I titles vs. 5 Tier I titles
2 YEC titles vs. 0 YEC titles



It's the Slam wins and the Slam finals what makes you great. The other stats like 6 vs. 5 Tier I titles or 2 YECs vs. 0 YECs (when Mary has reached two YEC finals beating Graf, Hingis and Davenport on the way) are not significant enough IMO.

Slight edge to Mary :)

homogenius
Oct 22nd, 2008, 05:42 PM
Mary

ms_nut
Oct 22nd, 2008, 08:25 PM
Mary has the one slam more, and more slam finals. But by virtually every other measure if singles greatness, Sabatini exceeds her

More titles (27 vs 19) in less time (11 year career vs. 17 year career)
28 slam QF-or-better out of 43 total slams vs. 14 slam QF-or-better out of 52 total slams played
18 slam SF-or-better out of 43 total slams vs. 6 slam SF-or-better out of 52 total slams played
6 Tier I titles vs. 5 Tier I titles
2 YEC titles vs. 0 YEC titles

Sabatini also made the SF or better of every slam at LEAST 4 times. Pierce would have to go to the 4th round to say the same thing.

As far as doubles go, it's pretty even. One slam each, 12 titles for Sabatini to 10 titles for Pierce.

As for the context of their victories, Sabatini's entire career took place amidst 4 of the greatest players of all time. She had to face Evert, Navratilova, Graf, and Seles. In her lone slam win, she had to beat Steffi Graf in the final, coming through a draw that included Seles and Navratilova. In both of Pierce's slam wins, Graf wasn't even in the draw. Pierce emerged at a time when Graf was in her final years as a top player, and won the French when none of the three best players in the world were clay court champions. She filled the vacuum left by Graf (and, to a certain extent, ASV). That's different from BEING the player who leaves the vacuum.

I think we remember Pierce way too fondly. Yes, she had the kind of game that was near impossible to deal with when it was on. But in 1997, she could have been the player to inherit Graf's mantle. She couldn't do it. And as a result, while playing in several seasons where the competition was much weaker than other times, she still only picked up two slam titles.

You make it sound like she won those titles because Graf wasn't in the draw.In at least 2 GS she made the final in which Graf was in her draw (AO 97 and FO 94).She also won the FO title beating Seles and Conchita along the way.. 2 of the better clay court players.(She also beat ASV 6-1,6-0 at the HH final)

AnnaK_4ever
Oct 22nd, 2008, 08:32 PM
Mary has the one slam more, and more slam finals. But by virtually every other measure if singles greatness, Sabatini exceeds her

More titles (27 vs 19) in less time (11 year career vs. 17 year career)
28 slam QF-or-better out of 43 total slams vs. 14 slam QF-or-better out of 52 total slams played
18 slam SF-or-better out of 43 total slams vs. 6 slam SF-or-better out of 52 total slams played
6 Tier I titles vs. 5 Tier I titles
2 YEC titles vs. 0 YEC titles

Sabatini also made the SF or better of every slam at LEAST 4 times. Pierce would have to go to the 4th round to say the same thing.

As far as doubles go, it's pretty even. One slam each, 12 titles for Sabatini to 10 titles for Pierce.

As for the context of their victories, Sabatini's entire career took place amidst 4 of the greatest players of all time. She had to face Evert, Navratilova, Graf, and Seles. In her lone slam win, she had to beat Steffi Graf in the final, coming through a draw that included Seles and Navratilova. In both of Pierce's slam wins, Graf wasn't even in the draw. Pierce emerged at a time when Graf was in her final years as a top player, and won the French when none of the three best players in the world were clay court champions. She filled the vacuum left by Graf (and, to a certain extent, ASV). That's different from BEING the player who leaves the vacuum.

I think we remember Pierce way too fondly. Yes, she had the kind of game that was near impossible to deal with when it was on. But in 1997, she could have been the player to inherit Graf's mantle. She couldn't do it. And as a result, while playing in several seasons where the competition was much weaker than other times, she still only picked up two slam titles.

Tough competition doesn't excuse Sabatini's apalling record vs former GS champions at slams -- 2-23 with wins over Sanchez at USO-1989 and Graf at USO-1990.
Pierce did prove she could beat anyone at slam. Her win over Graf at RG-1994 alone was more impressive than Sabatini's entire run to USO title.

baleineau
Oct 22nd, 2008, 09:55 PM
okay.

peak pierce was better than peak sabatini. no question.
normal pierce was the same as normal sabatini
poor pierce was worse than poor sabatini

during their careers (Sabatini 1985-1996 and Pierce 1991-2005) Sabatini played at a higher level for longer. this is supported by the numbers (18 Slam SFs is not to be sniffed at), the rankings and the titles won etc.

It's hard to pick. Neither are that far apart. I say Gaby marginally has it.

Would be interesting to throw Mauresmo into this equation.....

MistyGrey
Oct 22nd, 2008, 10:49 PM
While Gaby had 3 times as many slam semifinals as Mary. And can I quote everything you said here in the future when another Venus-Henin thread opens up?

Firstly, I mentioned the doubles only for the people who keep throwing the doubles achievments in similar Whoz greater threads... Like I said... I dont think doubles mean much.. In this case, we dont even need the doubles... 2 slams >>>>> 1 slam and a million semis

Secondly... just listen to urself... "Mary only has more GS titles and GS finals than Gaby" :lol:
Thats what matters the most.... history remembers the slams and then slam finals...

And about the competition, How many times did Gaby beat a world No. 1 in a grandslam? Peak Pierce was far better than peak Gaby, she won more slams, had more slam finals, and managed to be top 5 in three different generations of competition. Enuff said!

orfgab
Oct 23rd, 2008, 05:39 PM
My problem with Mary Pierce is that she could be so bad when it was not her day, and you can see it with her results. She had no regularity. Sabatini was 2 points away from being number one because, at her peak, she had only a few bad results. But if you think about this period (Graf and Seles at her best), you can understand why she has only one slam. She was really unlucky because it was too late for her when it became easier. She had been there for a lot of years and was a little frustrated. But think that she was in the top ten for ten years (and not far from it for still one year or more), and in the top 5 for six years in a row. That's really impressive. And the fact that Mary Pierce had injuries is not an excuse (or we could also mention that Gabriela Sabatini suffered from anemia. That's a real handicap). Sabatini also won more than 600 matches (the tenth best record), she has a very good percentage win-loss matches, and the impressive list of SF in grand slams is also great.

Steffica Greles
Oct 23rd, 2008, 06:51 PM
Pierce NO question?

I think people need to read the stats. Sabatini certainly had more wins over the most elite players, Graf and Seles. At one point in 1991, she even appeared even with them. I don't think Pierce ever quite achieved that consistency.

That said, I do think this is tough one to judge. Probably Sabatini left more of a mark on the game as she had more success on all surfaces.

Kart
Oct 23rd, 2008, 06:58 PM
Slams don't matter.

Sabatini has a rose named after her, Mary does not.

Ergo Sabatini is greater.

Even Steffi Graf could only manage to get them to name a horse after her and look at all the slams she won.

Steffica Greles
Oct 23rd, 2008, 07:08 PM
Slams don't matter.

Sabatini has a rose named after her, Mary does not.

Ergo Sabatini is greater.

Even Steffi Graf could only manage to get them to name a horse after her and look at all the slams she won.

Sabatini's looks helped inestimably in that respect. I think in terms of tennis achievements they both have strong cases.

Steff_forever
Oct 23rd, 2008, 08:15 PM
Gabi, sorry Mary

jjcrew#1
Oct 23rd, 2008, 08:26 PM
Mary! There is no comparison really!

orfgab
Oct 23rd, 2008, 09:07 PM
I think that many people put Mary Pierce in the first place because they are too young and have only seen Gaby Sabatini in the end of her career. After the 93 French Open, she was not the same player anymore. But definitely, she has a stronger career.

markdelaney
Oct 23rd, 2008, 09:56 PM
Gabriela retired just past her 26th birthday and had a career record of 624-187. Pierce has 482-229. Gabriela won 27 titles in her career, Mary won 18

Head to head is 4-1 to Sabatini. That says it all, including two straight set wins in 1994, one on clay.

Mary hit the ball harder that's all and could blow someone off court, which Gabriela couldn't do.

Gabriela was at her best in the period between August 1990 and April 1992. She played Graf 11 times in this period and won 8 times, losing that close Wimbledon final. People bemoaning Mary's injuries should look at Gabriela's injuries too.

Volcana
Oct 23rd, 2008, 10:40 PM
This is a GREAT comparison! What are slams worth? Pierce 2 slams, 4 other finals. Sabatini - 1 slam, 2 other finals. That seems pretty clear. But then go one level deeper. Sabatini - 15 slam semi-finals, Pierce ZERO. 27 singles titles vs 18. 13 doubles titles vs 10.

I saw both of them often, and I can only put it one way. Pierce had the better career, but Sabatini LOOKED like the better player.

Serenita
Oct 23rd, 2008, 10:52 PM
I really can't choose between them:o
i love them both,
love the drama
love the passion
love their tennis
i just can't choose. ;)

spencercarlos
Oct 24th, 2008, 08:54 AM
The Gaby Mary head to head is pretty skewed... They never played after Mary broke into the top ten, so the head to head doesnt say much. The extra slam is HUGE... Gaby sadly never managed to remove the one slam wonder tag... The difference between one GS and two GS titles is huge in my book. Mary had twice as many GS titles and twice as many GS finals as Gaby did, and that seals the deal in my book.
And although I dont think doubles makes a huge difference in the whoz greater debate, but Mary has 1 GS double and 1 GS mixed title, Gaby has 1 GS doubles.
And finally... Mary's peak was so much better than Gaby's.

I love Gaby though!
Too bad Gaby did not have to play Conchita Martinez or Arantxa Sanchez Vicario for her slam finals but no other player than Steffi Graf.

Sure 2>1 in slam count is huge, but Gaby's other numbers tops Mary, and their carreer grand slam resume in comparisson. Titles, ranking longevity and consistency, are in Gaby's favour as well.

In a shorter carreer im sure Gaby still has more top 5 wins, than Mary, and a better head to head ration against the greatest names in the game.

It's a close call, i would say Mary by the slimmest of margins.

spencercarlos
Oct 24th, 2008, 08:56 AM
This is a GREAT comparison! What are slams worth? Pierce 2 slams, 4 other finals. Sabatini - 1 slam, 2 other finals. That seems pretty clear. But then go one level deeper. Sabatini - 15 slam semi-finals, Pierce ZERO. 27 singles titles vs 18. 13 doubles titles vs 10.

I saw both of them often, and I can only put it one way. Pierce had the better career, but Sabatini LOOKED like the better player.
Definetly i agree here. Mary as strong and deadly she could look at times, stroke for stroke, Sabatini could do more things on the court than Mary.

Im tempted to post a footage of their Australian Open 1993 match which was an amazing match i rewatched a couple of days ago.

markdelaney
Oct 24th, 2008, 04:47 PM
Too bad Gaby did not have to play Conchita Martinez or Arantxa Sanchez Vicario for her slam finals but no other player than Steffi Graf.



and Elena Likhovtseva or Amanda Coetzer to reach those finals.

Mary hit the ball much harder but she was completely one dimensional. Each time she played a top player in a GS final she got completely thrashed.

We can forget head to heads if people want but career wins and losses do count and Gaby has a far better ratio.

cakiteror
Oct 24th, 2008, 07:17 PM
Mary is the best player of all times never to become no.1!

markdelaney
Oct 24th, 2008, 08:22 PM
Mary is the best player of all times never to become no.1!

I think Hana Mandlikova might have something to say about that