PDA

View Full Version : If you count singles, doubles, mixed, Olympics, Fed Cup, total titles ....


Volcana
Apr 18th, 2009, 11:22 PM
.... how do you order the players, ALL TIME. in terms of greatness?

For these purposes, I'm going to argue that the arguments about competition being tougher are match by cultural opposition to femlae athletics, difficulties of travel, lack of opportunities, etc. Treat all singles wins as equal to all singles wins, all doubles wins equal to all doubles wins etc. If you don't, it's a dissertation just to set up the comparision.

Name as many players as you like, but if you list something ridiculous, like 'Maria Kirilenko was greater than Chris Evert', at least give a reason, just for laughs

kman
Apr 18th, 2009, 11:23 PM
1. Navratilova

hellas719
Apr 18th, 2009, 11:23 PM
Maria Kirilenko was greater than Chris Evert, becuase she's hotter:lol:

Uranium
Apr 18th, 2009, 11:24 PM
Margaret Smith Court is the true GOAT:worship: 62 total Grand Slam titles more than Martina Navratilova's 59.

bobbynorwich
Apr 18th, 2009, 11:26 PM
This list was posted by me on the silly thread about Pierce as GOAT, but it applies here also. Navratilova is the GOAT with 167 career titles, she creams everybody else except Evert.

OPEN ERA WTA SINGLE TITLE LEADERS

Navratilova 167
Evert 154
Graf 107 Court 92

Cawley 68 King 67

Wade 55
Davenport 55
Seles 53 Hingis 43
Henin 41

V. Williams 41
Clijsters 34
C. Martinez 33
S. Williams 33
Austin 30

hellas719
Apr 18th, 2009, 11:28 PM
Yeah, I had a feeling it would be Martina;)

Uranium
Apr 18th, 2009, 11:28 PM
This list was posted by me on the silly thread about Pierce as GOAT, but it applies here also. Navratilova is the GOAT with 167 career titles, she creams everybody else.

OPEN ERA WTA SINGLE TITLE LEADERS

Navratilova 167
Evert 154
Graf 107 Court 92

Cawley 68 King 67

Wade 55
Davenport 55
Seles 53 Hingis 43
Henin 41

V. Williams 41
Clijsters 34
C. Martinez 33
S. Williams 33
Austin 30

That is Open Era, not all time like first post is asking. BJK, Wade, and Court all won more titles before 1968.

bobbynorwich
Apr 18th, 2009, 11:35 PM
That is Open Era, not all time like first post is asking. BJK, Wade, and Court all won more titles before 1968.

Ok, good point. Would be interesting to know how many titles they each had before 1968 if not included on this list. According to Wikipedia, Wade retired in 1986, King in 1983, and Court in 1977.

Uranium
Apr 18th, 2009, 11:39 PM
Ok, good point. Would be interesting to know how many titles they each had before 1968 if not included on this list. According to Wikipedia, Wade retired in 1986, King in 1983, and Court in 1977.

Supposedly Court won 197, Wade won 68 and BJK won 129.

bobbynorwich
Apr 18th, 2009, 11:44 PM
Supposedly Court won 197, Wade won 68 and BJK won 129.

Wow, 197 career titles for Court --- that's impressive. Wonder how to eliminate from the pre-open era all the junker tourneys from the legitimate ones with real competition, to get a truly comparable career title count.

kman
Apr 18th, 2009, 11:57 PM
Court's Grand Slam title count is vastly overrated thanks to Australian Open and the level of competition that tournament had back then.

Navratilova's record is easily the most impressive.

bobbynorwich
Apr 19th, 2009, 12:01 AM
Margaret Smith Court is the true GOAT:worship: 62 total Grand Slam titles more than Martina Navratilova's 59.

According to wikipedia, Martina only (yeah, only) has 18 GS titles. What stat are you thinking about?

Uranium
Apr 19th, 2009, 12:01 AM
According to wikipedia, Martina only (yeah, only) has 18 GS titles. What stat are you thinking about?

TOTAL is the key word, meaning in singles, doubles and mixed all combined.

Donny
Apr 19th, 2009, 12:06 AM
.... how do you order the players, ALL TIME. in terms of greatness?

For these purposes, I'm going to argue that the arguments about competition being tougher are match by cultural opposition to femlae athletics, difficulties of travel, lack of opportunities, etc. Treat all singles wins as equal to all singles wins, all doubles wins equal to all doubles wins etc. If you don't, it's a dissertation just to set up the comparision.

Name as many players as you like, but if you list something ridiculous, like 'Maria Kirilenko was greater than Chris Evert', at least give a reason, just for laughs

Lol. That's a liberal use of begging the question, isn't it?

Volcana
Apr 19th, 2009, 01:42 AM
Court's Grand Slam title count is vastly overrated thanks to Australian Open and the level of competition that tournament had back then.A point I dealt with in the opening post of the thread.For these purposes, I'm going to argue that the arguments about competition being tougher are match by cultural opposition to femlae athletics, difficulties of travel, lack of opportunities, etc. Treat all singles wins as equal to all singles wins, all doubles wins equal to all doubles wins etc. If you don't, it's a dissertation just to set up the comparision.Toss in how homophobia and the Cold War affectect Navratilova's totals.

We can get into all that in another thread, but it is, literally, a dissertation.

How many more slams does Court win if traveling FROM Australia hadn't been so arduous. How many more does Helen Wills Moody win if travel wasn't so arduous? And expensive. Althea Gibson quit tennis because there was no money in it. Where would she rank even being paid what Nav was, much less what today's players get?

Dave.
Apr 19th, 2009, 01:59 AM
Assuming greatness is only measured by what is actually achieved:

Martina Navratilova is the greatest of all time.

Volcana
Apr 19th, 2009, 02:01 AM
Helen Wills Moody, Suzanne Lenglen, Margaret Court Smith, Billie Jean King, Steffi Graf, Chris Evert, and Martina Navratilova should, at last as 'honorable mention', all be in the discussion for #1. Put another way, those seven are all definitely top ten.

After that, it's becomes more difficult. There are some pre-Open era players that require serious consideration. As in, they, by almost any measure, are definitely all-time top twenty. So If I'm talking about a top twenty all-time, besides Serena Williams, Monica Seles, Evonne Gollagong and Maureen Connolly, there's Margaret Osbourne Dupont, Darlene Hard, Doris Hart, Molla Bjurkstedt Mallory, Maria Bueno.

That's already sixteen names in my all-time top twenty, and I haven't begun really figuring out order yet. Hmmm..... I'm overlooking something ....

Oh yeah. Venus Williams, Justine Henin, Martina Hingis.

That certainly collects all the names that would go in all time top TEN. Now to the order thing .....

Volcana
Apr 19th, 2009, 02:08 AM
Just a note: Margaret Court Smith was the only player to achieve the 'Boxed Set' twice, doing it the pre-Open era and again in the Open Era. All twelve slam championships pre- and post- Open Era.

I love Martina Navratilova, but you can make a pretty good argument for Court as GOAT.

And if you want to get into the unquantifiables 'weak field', 'Seles got stabbed', 'difficult travel', 'amateur vs pro', ie, all the stuff I don't really want to get into here, you can make a fine case for Steffi Graf as GOAT. (When asked who the greatest players of all-time were, Richard Williams replied "Steffi Graf and Steffi Graf and Steffi Graf." An answer that at least puts me in the mind to compare in detail.

CrossCourt~Rally
Apr 19th, 2009, 02:09 AM
Assuming greatness is only measured by what is actually achieved:

Martina Navratilova is the greatest of all time.



:yeah:

G1Player2
Apr 19th, 2009, 02:11 AM
Assuming greatness is only measured by what is actually achieved:

Martina Navratilova is the greatest of all time.

It's subjective. Looking at achievements then Navratilova is amazing. But, when I think of the better player, I think Serena, when AT her best, is the best player of all time. It's rare if we see her best tennis nowadays, but I digress.

G1Player2
Apr 19th, 2009, 02:14 AM
Just a note: Margaret Court Smith was the only player to achieve the 'Boxed Set' twice, doing it the pre-Open era and again in the Open Era. All twelve slam championships pre- and post- Open Era.

I love Martina Navratilova, but you can make a pretty good argument for Court as GOAT.

And if you want to get into the unquantifiables 'weak field', 'Seles got stabbed', 'difficult travel', 'amateur vs pro', ie, all the stuff I don't really want to get into here, you can make a fine case for Steffi Graf as GOAT. (When asked who the greatest players of all-time were, Richard Williams replied "Steffi Graf and Steffi Graf and Steffi Graf." An answer that at least puts me in the mind to compare in detail.


I met Richard before a few years ago. I remember that comment about Steffi Graf. He said that when Serena is focused she's the best player the game has ever seen. He said that verbatim. But like I said, Serena is more 'mediocre' these days especially with these annoying and lingering injuries.

bobbynorwich
Apr 19th, 2009, 02:18 AM
Just a note: Margaret Court Smith was the only player to achieve the 'Boxed Set' twice, doing it the pre-Open era and again in the Open Era. All twelve slam championships pre- and post- Open Era.

What is a "boxed set," not familiar with it.

I love Martina Navratilova, but you can make a pretty good argument for Court as GOAT. Yes, especially with 197 career titles to Martina's 167.

And if you want to get into the unquantifiables 'weak field', 'Seles got stabbed', 'difficult travel', 'amateur vs pro', ie, all the stuff I don't really want to get into here, you can make a fine case for Steffi Graf as GOAT.

Agreed, because every player has unquantifiables.

darrinbaker00
Apr 19th, 2009, 02:19 AM
A point I dealt with in the opening post of the thread.Toss in how homophobia and the Cold War affectect Navratilova's totals.
I would go so far as to say those two factors helped spur Martina to greatness.
How many more slams does Court win if traveling FROM Australia hadn't been so arduous.
In her time, air travel was pretty much the same as it is now. Margaret's career was more adversely affected by pregnancy and motherhood.
How many more does Helen Wills Moody win if travel wasn't so arduous?
Now we're talkin'. There was no commercial air travel when Helen played, so she would have had to hop on a boat and take a TWO-WEEK trip to Australia, which she never did. We'll never know how many more majors Helen would have won, but she definitely would have played Suzanne Lenglen more than once.
Althea Gibson quit tennis because there was no money in it. Where would she rank even being paid what Nav was, much less what today's players get?
Forget the money. Where would Althea Gibson rank if she were allowed to play with the white women before 1950?

Dave.
Apr 19th, 2009, 02:28 AM
It's subjective. Looking at achievements then Navratilova is amazing. But, when I think of the better player, I think Serena, when AT her best, is the best player of all time. It's rare if we see her best tennis nowadays, but I digress.

I think deciding who is a better player is subjective. Results are the only sure measuring stick to go by. Perhaps with the exception of Court, can't really argue against Navratilova's career.

Relating this to the current Pierce thread in GM, Mary Pierce at her best could be argued to be better than anything, say Davenport produced. But it's Davenport who ended up with the greater, all-time great career, and that's the only thing that counts.

Same thing here, people can make arguments about who was better at their best Serena or Navratilova, but they can't argue that Serena's career was greater, so Navratilova therefore is the greater player.

Uranium
Apr 19th, 2009, 02:28 AM
Boxed set is when you win all of the singles, doubles and mixed events at each slam in your career.

Mr.Kardashian
Apr 19th, 2009, 02:30 AM
Court or Navratilova?

G1Player2
Apr 19th, 2009, 02:32 AM
I think deciding who is a better player is subjective. Results are the only sure measuring stick to go by. Perhaps with the exception of Court, can't really argue against Navratilova's career.

Relating this to the current Pierce thread in GM, Mary Pierce at her best could be argued to be better than anything, say Davenport produced. But it's Davenport who ended up with the greater, all-time great career, and that's the only thing that counts.

Same thing here, people can make arguments about who was better at their best Serena or Navratilova, but they can't argue that Serena's career was greater, so Navratilova therefore is the greater player.

:rolleyes: But you just said deciding who the better player is subjective? :rolleyes: IMO, you really can't compare Serena's career to Navratilova. Very different eras. Slams use to be played six matches only at one point but at the same time some slams weren't all that important to Americans back then.

Apoleb
Apr 19th, 2009, 02:38 AM
Same thing here, people can make arguments about who was better at their best Serena or Navratilova,

That's a pretty stupid point to make anyway. You'd actually expect players from the upcoming generations to beat the greats from earlier generations, maybe even handily, because of the progress of the sport. Especially when there are huge technical advancements along the way. I mean, hell, even Graf grew up playing with wooden rackets.

Dave.
Apr 19th, 2009, 02:39 AM
:rolleyes: But you just said deciding who the better player is subjective? :rolleyes: IMO, you really can't compare Serena's career to Navratilova. Very different eras. Slams use to be played six matches only at one point but at the same time some slams weren't all that important to Americans back then.

Better player in terms of 'who is the best at their peak'. You could very well say Serena at her peak is the best ever, but ultimately that's an opinion. What I meant was actual results are not subjective.

Dave.
Apr 19th, 2009, 02:43 AM
That's a pretty stupid point to make anyway. You'd actually expect players from the upcoming generations to beat the greats from earlier generations, maybe even handily, because of the progress of the sport. Especially when there are huge technical advancements along the way. I mean, hell, even Graf grew up playing with wooden rackets.

Relative to their era. Marion Bartoli would probably beat Steffi Graf but she's clearly not the factor in this era that Graf was in her's.

Apoleb
Apr 19th, 2009, 02:47 AM
Relative to their era. Marion Bartoli would probably beat Steffi Graf but she's clearly not the factor in this era that Graf was in her's.

Now I did mean that players should be mostly compared relative to their era, but that is taking the concept a bit too far. :lol:

Volcana
Apr 19th, 2009, 04:05 AM
What is a "boxed set," not familiar with it.All the slam titles. All four singles, all four doules, all four mixed.

tennisvideos
Apr 19th, 2009, 04:19 AM
Court's Grand Slam title count is vastly overrated thanks to Australian Open and the level of competition that tournament had back then.

Navratilova's record is easily the most impressive.

You can't say that with any authority. Court has more singles titles worldwide - 198. She also has the greatest singles win/loss record at 91%. Evert is close by, then Graf and then a gap to Navratilova.

This thread mentioned singles, doubles, mixed, olympics, fed cup etc - the total.

In that case Court is a clear #1 in this context. She has 198 singles titles, 150 Doubles titles, probably close to 100 Mixed titles (she has the Grand Slam in that as well). Not only that, but as I mentioned, her win/loss record in collecting all of those titles is the greatest of any player (bar Connolly, Wills & Lenglen). Also she was unbeaten in 21 Fed Cup singles matches. Amazing. And in some of those Aussie wins Court did beat greats like Maria Bueno, Billie-Jean King, Nancy Richey, Evonne Goolagong, Virginia Wade, Lesley Turner etc. They can't all be dismissed so readily and stiff shxt if other players didn't compete at all of them - Margaret still beat them up around the rest of the world to prove her dominance of her era.

As for competition not being as strong - Court had to face some of the greatest grass court players in history in establishing her record (which was 75% grass in those days). Players like Maria Bueno, Billie-Jean King, Evonne Goolagong, Darlene Hard, Virginia Wade, Casals etc. And in compiling her astonishing clay court record (5 French singles from 10 attempts) she had to beat some of the greatest clay courters of all time - Nancy Richey, Lesley Turner, Chris Evert, Anne Jones as well as a stellar cast including Kerry Melville, Francoise Durr etc.

Based on this thread, Navratilova is 2nd and it is daylight back to third.

Rolling-Thunder
Apr 19th, 2009, 04:29 AM
Navratilova has to be considered as the greatest tennis player of all time. When you combine her singles and doubles titles there is no doubt as to her rank. Love or hate her, she is #1 far and away. That does not mean on a particular surface she was the best or vis-a-vis other players she never played she would have come out on top. Butfor the depth and breath of competitors, she stands above the rest.

Caillou
Apr 19th, 2009, 04:30 AM
another dumb comparison between eras..thats all it is..why dont we just select the best player from each era..doesn't that make more sense, and wouldn't that elminate SOME of the arguments?

tennisvideos
Apr 19th, 2009, 05:03 AM
Navratilova has to be considered as the greatest tennis player of all time. When you combine her singles and doubles titles there is no doubt as to her rank. Love or hate her, she is #1 far and away. That does not mean on a particular surface she was the best or vis-a-vis other players she never played she would have come out on top. Butfor the depth and breath of competitors, she stands above the rest.
I just don't get how you can say she is #1 far and away based on her combined titles when she falls well short of Court in that department?

Navratilova was the greatest Wimbledon player of all time yes. But as far as singles goes she falls behind Court, Evert & Graf in terms of career win/loss and all around versatility.

As for depth Evert had to face great grasscourters consistently through her career like Goolagong, Court, Navratilova. And she also had the top hardcourt and clay court players to handle and she dominated them. Whereas Navratilova was vulnerable on hard and clay courts. Court had to face even more S&V stars as grass was the predominant surface before the late 70s eg. she had to counter Bueno, King, Hard, Goolagong, Wade etc. And Court, like Evert, was able to dominate the clay as well. So they are greater all rounders IMO - as is Graf for that matter (singles wise).

tennisvideos
Apr 19th, 2009, 05:10 AM
another dumb comparison between eras..thats all it is..why dont we just select the best player from each era..doesn't that make more sense, and wouldn't that elminate SOME of the arguments?

Agree entirely

Sam L
Apr 19th, 2009, 05:32 AM
Helen Wills Moody, Suzanne Lenglen, Margaret Court Smith, Billie Jean King, Steffi Graf, Chris Evert, and Martina Navratilova should, at last as 'honorable mention', all be in the discussion for #1. Put another way, those seven are all definitely top ten.

After that, it's becomes more difficult. There are some pre-Open ear players that require serious consideration. As in, they, by almost any measure, are definitely all-time top twenty. So If I'm talking about a top twenty all-time, besides Serena Williams, Monica Seles, Evonne Gollagong and Maureen Connolly, there's Margaret Osbourne Dupont, Darlene Hard, Doris Hart, Molla Bjurkstedt Mallory, Maria Bueno.

That's already sixteen names in my all-time top twenty, and I haven't begun really figuring out order yet. Hmmm..... I'm overlooking something ....

Oh yeah. Venus Williams, Justine Henin, Martina Hingis.

That certainly collects all the names that would go in all time top TEN. Now to the order thing .....

I would definitely put Serena Williams to that 7. She won 4 in a row. Something that Chris Evert didn't do despite winning a slam every year for 13 years in a row, for one.

LDVTennis
Apr 19th, 2009, 05:59 AM
Relative to their era. Marion Bartoli would probably beat Steffi Graf but she's clearly not the factor in this era that Graf was in her's.

Beating Steffi? Marion Bartoli?

At tennis in any era, definitely not! At getting to the buffet line, now there Bartoli really has a chance.

Steffi is fast on a tennis court, but Bartoli is faster in the presence of food --- :lol::lol::lol:

Volcana
Apr 19th, 2009, 06:06 AM
another dumb comparison between eras..thats all it is..why dont we just select the best player from each era..doesn't that make more sense, and wouldn't that elminate SOME of the arguments?I missed that thead when you started it last time. Any chance you could resurrect the one you started before on 'the best player from each era' so we could see how people answered? Answers may have changed, after all, and it would be interesting to read why.

Thanx in advance. :)

Volcana
Apr 19th, 2009, 06:12 AM
We'll never know how many more majors Helen would have won, but she definitely would have played Suzanne Lenglen more than once.Even worse than Seles being stabbed (purely from an oncourt perspective) there was rivalry tennis got cheated out of.Forget the money. Where would Althea Gibson rank if she were allowed to play with the white women before 1950?It's not quite that absolute, but it's a well-made point.

Dave.
Apr 19th, 2009, 06:13 AM
Beating Steffi? Marion Bartoli?

At tennis in any era, definitely not! At getting to the buffet line, now there Bartoli really has a chance.

Steffi is fast on a tennis court, but Bartoli is faster in the presence of food --- :lol::lol::lol:

Clearly...:unsure:

http://images.starpulse.com/Photos/pv/Steffi%20Graf-14.jpg

Volcana
Apr 19th, 2009, 06:14 AM
Beating Steffi? Marion Bartoli?Sure. Steffi's almost 40 years old, twice a mom, and retired ten years ago. I'm sure Bartoli would beat her. Probably in straight sets.

SIN DIOS NI LEY
Apr 19th, 2009, 07:11 AM
Navratilova

Tennis exists since 1968 , before that year this sport was a joke

Sam L
Apr 19th, 2009, 07:19 AM
What if we break it down by 50-year eras and look at things purely from a statistical perspective?

1900-1950 - Helen Wills (19 grand slams, 8 Wimbledons)
1950-2000 - Margaret Court (Most grand slam titles, 6 consecutive grand slams)
2000-2050 - Serena Williams leads with 4 in a row and most grand slam titles.

That's if of course we look at things from purely a statistical point of view and not look at intangibles.

Sam L
Apr 19th, 2009, 07:19 AM
Navratilova

Tennis exists since 1968 , before that year this sport was a joke
According to whom? Do you know anything about tennis before 1968? :rolleyes: Wait, let me make that do you know anything about tennis?

Golovinjured.
Apr 19th, 2009, 11:12 AM
I'm interested to see who won the 3rd most titles in the Navratilova-Evert era. Doesn't anyone have a stat on that?

bobbynorwich
Apr 19th, 2009, 12:16 PM
I'm interested to see who won the 3rd most titles in the Navratilova-Evert era. Doesn't anyone have a stat on that?

Probably Austin with 30 career titles, followed by Mandlikova with 26. Evert played from 1972 until 1989 while Navry didn't turn pro until 1975. Austin and Mandlikova both started pro career in 1978. So looking at the years 1975 to 1989.

Besides Evert and Navry, only 2 other players ever ranked #1 in those years. First, Austin reached #1 in 1980 for 22 weeks, non-consecutive.

Second was Graf who turned pro in 1982, but I don't think of her as in the Navry-Evert era but technically she was. At tail end of the era, Graf reached #1 in 1987, for 186 consecutive weeks. She dethroned Navry who never regained the #1 spot. She had 107 career titles but not sure how many were before 1989 (i.e. Navry-Evert era).

Incidentally, wikipedia reports that Martina didn't retire professionally until 2006, giving her a 31 year career!

disco_rage
Apr 19th, 2009, 02:47 PM
Overall probably Navratilova, Court or King
with Graf and Evert close although they didnt play enough doubles really to win that many titles.
With Court you can't deny what she achieved... however most of her Australian Open wins where won with only other Australians in the draw....

bobbynorwich
Apr 19th, 2009, 03:15 PM
Overall probably Navratilova, Court or King
with Graf and Evert close although they didnt play enough doubles really to win that many titles.
With Court you can't deny what she achieved... however most of her Australian Open wins where won with only other Australians in the draw....

Think it's Navratilova, but then she did have a 31 year career. http://www.murraysworld.com/forum/Smileys/default/icon_rolleyes.gif