PDA

View Full Version : Who is greater? Conchita Martinez or Jana Novotna?


samsam4087
Nov 10th, 2009, 04:10 AM
Who is greater? Conchita Martinez or Jana Novotna?

:confused::confused::confused:

http://www.sporting-heroes.net/files_tennis/MARTINEZ_Con_1994_SF_R.jpg

http://rhein-zeitung.de/on/98/07/05/sport/news/novotna2.jpg

Elegante
Nov 10th, 2009, 04:11 AM
Conchita without a doubt.

samsam4087
Nov 10th, 2009, 06:58 AM
Conchita without a doubt.

:confused::confused::confused:

darkangel23
Nov 10th, 2009, 07:41 AM
GS Finals:

Martinez
Wimbledon 1994
Australian Open 1998
Roland Garros 2000

Novotna:
Australian Open 1991
Wimbledon 1993
Wimbledon 1997
Wimbledon 1998


Am I missing something?

I'd say Novotna...

C.MARTINEZ
Nov 10th, 2009, 08:35 AM
:hearts::hearts: Conchita Martinez

cherboy
Nov 10th, 2009, 09:16 AM
martinez:
1 slam (wimb.94)
2 further finals (AO98, RG00)
9 further semifinals (all in 95)

33 titles
seasons in Top10: 7 (91,92,93,94,95,96,00)
Prize Money: $11,527,977
Win Loss Record: 739 - 297


novotna:
1 slam (wimb.98)
3 further finals (AO91, wimb. 93/97)
5 further semifinals

24 titles (one YEC 97)
seasons in Top10: 7 (91,92,93,94,96,97,98)
Prize Money: $11,230,762
Win Loss Record: 571 - 225

Head2Head:
4-1 Novotna

I WOULD SAY: MARTINEZ, BUT VERY CLOSE

Lunaris
Nov 10th, 2009, 09:21 AM
Jana of course. Martinez was a useless spanish pusher.
Jana's accomplishments are greater as well, especially if we include doubles.

Bosco123
Nov 10th, 2009, 09:22 AM
martinez:
1 slam (wimb.94)
2 further finals (AO98, RG00)
9 further semifinals (all in 95)

33 titles
seasons in Top10: 7 (91,92,93,94,95,96,00)
Prize Money: $11,527,977
Win Loss Record: 739 - 297


novotna:
1 slam (wimb.98)
3 further finals (AO91, wimb. 93/97)
5 further semifinals

24 titles (one YEC 97)
seasons in Top10: 7 (91,92,93,94,96,97,98)
Prize Money: $11,230,762
Win Loss Record: 571 - 225

Head2Head:
4-1 Novotna

I WOULD SAY: MARTINEZ, BUT VERY CLOSE

According to this, the stat that determines Conchiata's supremacy is the number of titles won and the win loss percentage, but if I remember correctly, Conchita played much more lower tier tournaments than Novotna and thus these 2 stats are irrelevant. I pick Novotna because she was in the top 5 between 97-99 when the power era began while Conchita struggled to succeed after the Graf era, also Novotna was top 5 till her late twenties, while Conchita was in the top 5 only till age 24-25 or so.

hingis-seles
Nov 10th, 2009, 09:26 AM
You have to give the nod to Novotna here - she has a Slam and a YEC. Also, her records against Graf, Seles, and Hingis are superior to Conchita's record against them.

Lunaris
Nov 10th, 2009, 09:29 AM
Just to mention Novotna's doubles record, thanks wikipedia.

Career record 697–153
Career titles 76 (6 ITF)
Highest ranking No. 1 (27 August 1990)

Grand Slam Doubles results
Australian Open W (1990, 1995)
French Open W (1990, 1991, 1998)
Wimbledon W (1989, 1990, 1995, 1998)
US Open W (1994, 1997, 1998)

Major doubles tournaments
WTA Championships W (1995, 1997)


Mixed Doubles
Australian Open W (1988, 1989)
Wimbledon W (1989)
US Open W (1988)


And Martinez's

Career record 414–232
Career titles 13
Highest ranking No. 7 (January 11, 1993)

MJMS
Nov 10th, 2009, 09:43 AM
Conchita Martinez has 9 Tier-I titles - Novotna only 2

Conchita won 5 FED CUPīs - Novotna only 1

markdelaney
Nov 10th, 2009, 10:03 AM
Conchita Martinez has 9 Tier-I titles - Novotna only 2

Conchita won 5 FED CUPīs - Novotna only 1

Fed Cup does depend on other players too and Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario might have helped just a little bit there !

Jana's Wimbledon was a lot harder to win than Conchita's and she upset world number 1 players in big tournamentsseveral times, which I don't think Conchita ever did.

Conchita on clay , Jana on the other surfaces for me.

Nacho
Nov 10th, 2009, 10:16 AM
not again :sobbing:



seasons in Top10: 9 (89,91,92,93,94,95,96,98,00)


corrected ;)

MJMS
Nov 10th, 2009, 10:18 AM
Fed Cup does depend on other players too and Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario might have helped just a little bit there !



well, Novotna has won doubles titles with players like Davenport,Sanchez-Vicario, Hingis. Probably they have helped a little bit too.:lol:

markdelaney
Nov 10th, 2009, 10:26 AM
well, Novotna has won doubles titles with players like Davenport,Sanchez-Vicario, Hingis. Probably they have helped a little bit too.:lol:


Yes I agree, which is why I never quoted the doubles records.

medved
Nov 10th, 2009, 10:58 AM
jana. no doubt :-)

!Gio!
Nov 10th, 2009, 10:59 AM
Jana Novotna wins this!!! Conchi Martinez played 18 years on the tour, 7 more than Jana Novotna yet accomplished less!!
She did win 9 more titles than Jana but a lot of those, were tier III or tier IV's.
Novotna finished as many seasons inside the top 10 having played 7 years less Conchi! Having played 7 years less, Jana earned the same amount of money from the tour. Jana won one YEC and made two other Semifinals, Conchita never even reached the semifinals in 12 appearances.
Jana made 4 grand slam finals to Conchita's 3.

Also not to take away anything from Conchita's amazing career but she was dominated by the top players.

Jana Novotna leads Martinez 4-1(Conchita has only won two sets in 5 matches)
Monica Seles leads Martinez 20-1(Conchita has only won 4 sets in 21 matches):tape:
Steffi Graf leads Martinez 13-1(Graf has only lost 4 sets in 14 matches)
Gabby Sabatini leads Martinez 9-6(Conchita won 4 of those matches from the period between 1993-1995 when Gabby was a mere shadow of her former self, on verge of ending her career, before that Gabby dominated, at one point winning 6 in a row.)
Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario leads Martinez 14-4
Mary Pierce leads Martinez 12-6
Martina Hingis leads Martinez 11-3 (Martina has lost only 6 sets in 14 matches, Martina lost 2 of those matches in 95 and 96 when she was just 14 and 15 years old)
Anke Huber leads Martinez 7-2
Kimiko Date Krumm leads Martinez 6-2
Jennifer Capriati leads Martinez 6-4 (two of those matches that Conchi won, Jennifer wasn't even in the top 30, it was the period in which she was dealing with her issues and the other one time Capriati was 14 years old).
Manuela Maleeva-Fragniere leads Martinez 5-4
Chris Evert leads Martinez 2-0(9 games in two matches)
Venus Williams leads Martinez 3-0
Serena Williams leads Martinez 5-0
Lindsay Davenport leads Martinez 9-7(from 99 onwards, when Lindsay lost the weight, got fit, she won all 7 of their matches and only lost one set in all that time.)
Myskina leads Martinez 3-1
Justine Henin leads Martinez 7-0(only lost 2 sets)
Kim Clijsters leads Martinez 5-1
Amelie Mauresmo leads Martinez 4-1
Svetlana Kuznetsova leads Martinez 2-0

Conchi does lead Martina Navratilova 4-1;) but 3 of those matches were played in 93 and 94 (Martina was 37 years old)

What is amazing is that she lasted as long as she did:bounce: but even with playing some 6 years longer than Jana, Jana was still the better player with the better career, head to head, etc.

Nacho
Nov 10th, 2009, 11:52 AM
She did win 9 more titles than Jana but a lot of those, were tier III or tier IV's.

Ok remove all the tier III and below and still Conchi has more titles:

Nartinez 9 tier I - 7 tier II
Novotna 2 tier I - 11 tier II

Novotna had just as many seasons inside the top 10 having played 7 years less Conchi!

WRONG. Firstly Conchita didn't play 7 more years than Jana, get your facts right.

Secondly, Conchita ended 2 more years in the top 10 than Jana (and you could also remove her last 5 years on tour since she never got back to the top 10 after 2000)

Having played 7 years less, Jana earned the same amount of money from the tour.

Well Jana's prize money includes of course her doubles earnings. She was a very sussceful doubles player while Conchi never really cared for doubles

Jana won one YEC and made two other Semifinals, Conchita never even reached the semifinals in 12 appearances.
True, but the YEC happened to be played on Jana's best surface and Conchita's worst :shrug:

Jana made 4 grand slam finals to Conchita's 3.
Conchita did it on 3 different surfaces. Besides Jana's Wimbledon record is certainly better, but Conchi got much better results in Roland Garros and Australia. Their US Open record is about the same I believe


Also not to take away anything from Conchita's amazing career but she was dominated by the top players.
That's something I won't argue ;) But still it's hard to find someone who wasn't owned by the likes of Graf and Seles :p

What I always found interesting is that these 2, having both long and succesful careers, only played each other 5 times :eek:

!Gio!
Nov 10th, 2009, 01:00 PM
Conchita did it on 3 different surfaces. Besides Jana's Wimbledon record is certainly better, but Conchi got much better results in Roland Garros and Australia. Their US Open record is about the same I believe

Jana had a better record at the US Open and Wimbledon!
Jana reached 2 Semifinals of the US Open and 6 Quarterfinals, while Conchita made 2 Semifinals, 3 Quarterfinals and she also had 6, 1st or 2nd round loses in the 17 times she played(her record at US Open is 36-17), Jana played 13 times and was (38-13). As for the Aussie Open they both reached 1 final there and Jana only played 9 times compared to Conchita's 15.

WRONG. Firstly Conchita didn't play 7 more years than Jana, get your facts right.

Jana Novotna Status: Pro Feb. 26, 1987/Retired 1999
Conchita Martinez Status: Pro (February 1988) / Retired (April 2006)

Ok not 7 years but 6:p


Well Jana's prize money includes of course her doubles earnings. She was a very sussceful doubles player while Conchi never really cared for doubles

Jana retired in 99 long before Conchita(inflation in price earnings) and she still had 11 million(the same as Conchi), she did have better results in doubles and that just proves she was the more complete player of the two.

True, but the YEC happened to be played on Jana's best surface and Conchita's worst

Grass was Jana's favorite surface and not Carpet!;)

Conchita ended 2 more years in the top 10 than Jana (and you could also remove her last 5 years on tour since she never got back to the top 10 after 2000

My bad, you are right there:), but once again Jana retired in 99 and Conchita played 6 more years after that.
Conchita played longer hence the more titles, and I am not sure how many tier I's they both won, I will have to check that out as the tour kept changing the status of the tournaments(for example, Indian Wells was not always a tier I.

Overall IMO they were close but Jana was the better player with the better results both in doubles(Jana wins by a landslide here) and in singles(Jana reached more Slam finals, won YEC, played less.)

Don't get me wrong I think Conchi is a great player with a very accomplished career but Jana is just a bit better.

Anyway Nacho, I am from Barcelona;) I love Arantxa!!!
By the way Conchi lives in Barcelona now, pretty close to me and I have seen her a couple of times with her girlfriend at the mall by my house, she is very nice.

Matt01
Nov 10th, 2009, 01:07 PM
Jana of course. Martinez was a useless spanish pusher.


Martinez' game, when on, was beautiful to watch. Novotna on the other hand, when she was in choking mode like she was so often, was one of the most useless players I've ever seen.

Voted for Novotna.

Nacho
Nov 10th, 2009, 01:36 PM
Jana had a better record at the US Open and Wimbledon!
Jana reached 2 Semifinals of the US Open and 6 Quarterfinals, while Conchita made 2 Semifinals, 3 Quarterfinals and she also had 6, 1st or 2nd round loses in the 17 times she played(her record at US Open is 36-17), Jana played 13 times and was (38-13). As for the Aussie Open they both reached 1 final there and Jana only played 9 times compared to Conchita's 15.

Ok Novotna was better at Wimbledon and the US Open and Conchi at the French and Australia, so they are more or less tied there :p


Jana Novotna Status: Pro Feb. 26, 1987/Retired 1999
Conchita Martinez Status: Pro (February 1988) / Retired (April 2006)

Ok not 7 years but 6:p

Conchita's last professional match was on 2005, she announced her retirement in 2006 but never played that year ;)

Besides Novotna was already playing slams in 1986 :p



Jana retired in 99 long before Conchita(inflation in price earnings) and she still had 11 million(the same as Conchi), she did have better results in doubles and that just proves she was the more complete player of the two.

Obviously Jana was the better doubles player, there's no way someone could argue that :p I just said Conchi never really cared for doubles, only when it mattered most (i.e. Fed Cup and the Olympics, where she was very successful by the way)

If we count doubles results then it's obvious Jana wins, but where's the fun in that? :angel:



Grass was Jana's favorite surface and not Carpet!;)

I know, but still Jana only won 2 grass titles. I know there are very few grass tournaments, but she should have won more.

She won most of her biggest titles on carpet (the YEC, the 2 tier I she won and 8 out of her 11 tier II titles)



Conchita played longer hence the more titles,

Again please don't take in consideration Conchita's last 5 years on tour, where she only won 1 MM tournament.



Don't get me wrong I think Conchi is a great player with a very accomplished career but Jana is just a bit better.


I'm not getting you wrong, it's good to have someone who's not a troll to discuss these things, specially now that the boring off season has just begun and there's no much to discuss about ;)

BartoliBabes
Nov 10th, 2009, 01:41 PM
Conchita

Dave.
Nov 10th, 2009, 02:05 PM
Jana of course. Martinez was a useless spanish pusher.
Jana's accomplishments are greater as well, especially if we include doubles.

As opposed to ... a useless pusher? :confused:



Martinez' game, when on, was beautiful to watch. Novotna on the other hand, when she was in choking mode like she was so often, was one of the most useless players I've ever seen.

Voted for Novotna.

Same.

I voted for Novotna (she is unquestionably the greater player) but IMO Conchi's tennis was alot prettier to watch.

AnnaK_4ever
Nov 10th, 2009, 03:48 PM
Novotna due to additional slam final and YEC title. Besides, for such a successful player Martinez's record versus top-tenners is simply atrocious.

Elegante
Nov 10th, 2009, 06:07 PM
Conchita has more overall titles, more slam semis, more slam quarters, more top titles, more career wins...

spencercarlos
Nov 10th, 2009, 06:31 PM
Novotna due to additional slam final and YEC title. Besides, for such a successful player Martinez's record versus top-tenners is simply atrocious.
I agree again with Mr stats.

Definetly i think that if both are at their best, Novotna would win. Plus Novotna was always the more agressive player of the two that for my watching excitement :p.

Its a very close call indeed but i think their performance at the best events (Grand Slams and YEC) made that slim difference towards Jana. Its too close to say. Conchita for her consistency and Jana for her being the stronger player at her best.

Lunaris
Nov 10th, 2009, 07:15 PM
As opposed to ... a useless pusher? :confused::confused:

btw. I love how everyone ignores doubles, which weren't a joke competition for 2nd tier players like nowadays.

propi
Nov 10th, 2009, 07:20 PM
One of the headcases battles of wta history :bounce:
I have to go with Conchita because of reaching finals in different surfaces.
And of course, her Fed Cup titles and matches where she usually gave her best (unless playing vs. Germany, thanks Magüi) :worship:
For those saying Conchita's game was boring, go watch the passing shot master class she gave in London in 1994 agains the best player ever on that surface or her semifinal in Aus Open 97 vs. Davenport where she moved her to extenuation.
It's a pity both girls never reached number 1 and another GS :(

spencercarlos
Nov 10th, 2009, 08:08 PM
One of the headcases battles of wta history :bounce:
I have to go with Conchita because of reaching finals in different surfaces.
And of course, her Fed Cup titles and matches where she usually gave her best (unless playing vs. Germany, thanks Magüi) :worship:
For those saying Conchita's game was boring, go watch the passing shot master class she gave in London in 1994 agains the best player ever on that surface or her semifinal in Aus Open 97 vs. Davenport where she moved her to extenuation.
It's a pity both girls never reached number 1 and another GS :(
I can understand your bias, but Conchitaīs Fed Cup singles record is not even impressive. She does not even have a big win in Fed Cup either, never beaten a big name like Graf, Seles.

cherboy
Nov 10th, 2009, 08:08 PM
not again :sobbing:




corrected ;)

I'm sorry ^^

Aphrodite
Nov 10th, 2009, 09:01 PM
Both played beautifully when they were on,liked them both but Jana just had the better career overall.

skanky~skanketta
Nov 11th, 2009, 01:30 AM
I like them both, but voted for Conchita because to win her slam, she beat the best at that surface. Strange she never won the French though!

samsam4087
Nov 11th, 2009, 03:50 AM
51.02% vs 48.98%, very close.

Kooyong
Nov 11th, 2009, 11:40 AM
I voted Novotna for she had a broader game than Martinez but not a lot of difference between them.

Martinez dominated the european claycourt season during the 1990s and it is true that in the early part of her career she played a large number of lower tied tourements but i don't have a problem with that.

In a way they both were overshadowed by Steffi and Monica

Kooyong
Nov 11th, 2009, 11:45 AM
Jana Novotna leads Martinez 4-1(Conchita has only won two sets in 5 matches)
Monica Seles leads Martinez 20-1(Conchita has only won 4 sets in 21 matches):tape:
Steffi Graf leads Martinez 13-1(Graf has only lost 4 sets in 14 matches)
Gabby Sabatini leads Martinez 9-6(Conchita won 4 of those matches from the period between 1993-1995 when Gabby was a mere shadow of her former self, on verge of ending her career, before that Gabby dominated, at one point winning 6 in a row.)
Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario leads Martinez 14-4
Mary Pierce leads Martinez 12-6
Martina Hingis leads Martinez 11-3 (Martina has lost only 6 sets in 14 matches, Martina lost 2 of those matches in 95 and 96 when she was just 14 and 15 years old)
Anke Huber leads Martinez 7-2
Kimiko Date Krumm leads Martinez 6-2
Jennifer Capriati leads Martinez 6-4 (two of those matches that Conchi won, Jennifer wasn't even in the top 30, it was the period in which she was dealing with her issues and the other one time Capriati was 14 years old).
Manuela Maleeva-Fragniere leads Martinez 5-4
Chris Evert leads Martinez 2-0(9 games in two matches)
Venus Williams leads Martinez 3-0
Serena Williams leads Martinez 5-0
Lindsay Davenport leads Martinez 9-7(from 99 onwards, when Lindsay lost the weight, got fit, she won all 7 of their matches and only lost one set in all that time.)
Myskina leads Martinez 3-1
Justine Henin leads Martinez 7-0(only lost 2 sets)
Kim Clijsters leads Martinez 5-1
Amelie Mauresmo leads Martinez 4-1
Svetlana Kuznetsova leads Martinez 2-0

.


The interesting thing about this list is that Martinez had more success against the top players in her early years, you highlight her record against Hingis i think you will find that all her wins against Hingis were at the start of Hingis's career and once Hingis developed as a playerr Martinez couldn't get near her.

This was shown in the Australian Open final when Hingis was all over Martinez i think the score was 63-62 and was the most boring final i have ever seen, did Hingis break a sweat that day!

bavaria86
Nov 11th, 2009, 11:46 AM
Conchita of course:hearts:
her game was just amazing:worship:

Miss Atomic Bomb
Nov 11th, 2009, 11:47 AM
Novotna.

mauresmofan
Nov 11th, 2009, 02:10 PM
Well I have to go with Novotna because of her game - she could beat anyone with her aggressive attacking net game and her serve was pretty formidable as well as her athletic ability all of which lead me to believe she would be a contender in this day and age because of the weapons she possessed - Conchita on the other hand had very poor athletisism for someone as good as she was and her serve wasn't either a weapon or that much of a weakness it was merely there to start the point her spins were great and so were her slices and she could certainly figure in todays game but only really on the clay and every now and again on a hard court. I'd still place Novotna somewhere in the top 10 of todays game with her game whereas Conchita would probably end up at around 15.

spencercarlos
Nov 11th, 2009, 03:20 PM
Another interesting fact is that Novotna was able to beat Venus (in fact leads 3-1 head to head and beat her in 1999 Hannover and Wimbledon 98) and took a set off Serena in 1998 before retiring in Filderstat.

This in contrast to Martinez who never beat Venus, and being RU in 1998 Australian Open, loses 6-2 6-2 to Serena at her "home" in Rome 98, wins just a couple of sets off Serena.

propi
Nov 11th, 2009, 06:29 PM
I can understand your bias, but Conchitaīs Fed Cup singles record is not even impressive. She does not even have a big win in Fed Cup either, never beaten a big name like Graf, Seles.
And I can understand you hate so we're even, oh, you spencercarlos, nemesis and almost archenemy :p ;) :p
Not like many other top players Conchita's commitment with Fed Cup team was rarely broken, it's not her fault if these never played that often, plus there's a lot of dependance of luck in Fed cup, since it depends on a draw vs a country and the selection the captains made. :p
Anyway we both know you will never agree with me and I will never agree with you so we agree to disagree :p

propi
Nov 11th, 2009, 06:36 PM
The interesting thing about this list is that Martinez had more success against the top players in her early years, you highlight her record against Hingis i think you will find that all her wins against Hingis were at the start of Hingis's career and once Hingis developed as a playerr Martinez couldn't get near her.

This was shown in the Australian Open final when Hingis was all over Martinez i think the score was 63-62 and was the most boring final i have ever seen, did Hingis break a sweat that day!
Ern, wrong :p
2000 BERLIN-GERMAN OPENCLAYSC. MARTINEZ 7-5 6-4
Actually Hingis never beat Conchita on red clay :p
Conchita's serve and fitness is a bit underated IMHO, her problem was not these, it was more a question of head/will.

spencercarlos
Nov 11th, 2009, 06:47 PM
And I can understand you hate so we're even, oh, you spencercarlos, nemesis and almost archenemy :p ;) :p
Not like many other top players Conchita's commitment with Fed Cup team was rarely broken, it's not her fault if these never played that often, plus there's a lot of dependance of luck in Fed cup, since it depends on a draw vs a country and the selection the captains made. :p
Anyway we both know you will never agree with me and I will never agree with you so we agree to disagree :p
Again you overlooked my question and failed to answer it. Bring up Conchitaīs Fed Cup record, and bring up Conchitaīs best wins (in singles) on that Fed Cup Team Competition event

Elegante
Nov 11th, 2009, 06:51 PM
Conchita has game too as not people say... she was still reaching quarters of slam in 2004...

AnnaK_4ever
Nov 11th, 2009, 07:29 PM
TOURNAMENT RECORD
#trns WON RU SF QF Tournament-winning
percentage
Conchita MARTINEZ 309 33 23 40 78 10.68%
Jana NOVOTNA 225 24 17 39 53 10.67%

WIN-LOSS RECORD
Jana NOVOTNA .718 530-208
Conchita MARTINEZ .707 719-298

TOP-10 RECORD
Jana NOVOTNA .392 60-93
Conchita MARTINEZ .276 53-139

GRAND SLAM RECORD

#trns WON RU SF QF 4R 3R 2R 1R
Jana NOVOTNA 50 1 3 5 13 9 8 4 7
Conchita MARTINEZ 64 1 2 9 11 11 12 9 9

WIN-LOSS RECORD and RECORD VS TOP-10
Jana NOVOTNA .753 149-49 .386 17-27
Conchita MARTINEZ .734 174-63 .225 9-31

Elegante
Nov 11th, 2009, 07:35 PM
Conchita dragged her career out longer than Jana big deal... 7 more big titles and more title overall and has 200 more career wins than Jana

laurie
Nov 11th, 2009, 08:20 PM
Boy you lot love an argument on this forum :haha:

As so often with SamSam's threads - he picks two players who have similar accompishments and asks who's greater. Who cares? They both did well and its impossibe to come up with an answer.

But you lot fall for this every time - and you will fall for it next week when SamSam decides to pick out two more players with similar achievements and ask the same dumb question again :haha:

*Jool*
Nov 11th, 2009, 08:28 PM
Agrreing with laurie, I'd say there's absolutely no point in trying to "decorticate" all the stats of both careers to try and tell who was greater .

As a fan of Conchita I really don't care if she was greater than Novotna or not , for me she was :angel: but I just enjoy my fave's achievements like other fans of her and of Jana do so can we not do that: let people enjoy their retired fans ' careers and achievements and not try to rank them (sometimes at all cost , even putting down one or the other player) :rolleyes:

spencercarlos
Nov 11th, 2009, 08:38 PM
TOURNAMENT RECORD
#trns WON RU SF QF Tournament-winning
percentage
Conchita MARTINEZ 309 33 23 40 78 10.68%
Jana NOVOTNA 225 24 17 39 53 10.67%

WIN-LOSS RECORD
Jana NOVOTNA .718 530-208
Conchita MARTINEZ .707 719-298

TOP-10 RECORD
Jana NOVOTNA .392 60-93
Conchita MARTINEZ .276 53-139

GRAND SLAM RECORD

#trns WON RU SF QF 4R 3R 2R 1R
Jana NOVOTNA 50 1 3 5 13 9 8 4 7
Conchita MARTINEZ 64 1 2 9 11 11 12 9 9

WIN-LOSS RECORD and RECORD VS TOP-10
Jana NOVOTNA .753 149-49 .386 17-27
Conchita MARTINEZ .734 174-63 .225 9-31

This is very telling, again by the slim of margins, but enough to tell who was better.

Elegante
Nov 11th, 2009, 08:41 PM
No because Conchita should have not evens tepped on court in 2005...

LightWarrior
Nov 11th, 2009, 08:51 PM
Just because Martinez won Wimbledon - yes, slow, typical Spanish cay-courter player - she is better.

laurie
Nov 11th, 2009, 09:09 PM
This is very telling, again by the slim of margins, but enough to tell who was better.

Sigh......

spencercarlos
Nov 11th, 2009, 09:25 PM
Sigh......
??
Most of the stats favors Jana, again some with close close margins, and their carreers where very similar.

Conchita hss the edge in tournament wins, but when you take a closer look, 15 of those were Tier III/IV events so lesser events. Donīt tell me you take that over a grand slam final and a YEC title, and the head to head comparisson against the top players which favours Jana by a good margin.

laurie
Nov 11th, 2009, 09:49 PM
??
Most of the stats favors Jana, again some with close close margins, and their carreers where very similar.

Conchita hss the edge in tournament wins, but when you take a closer look, 15 of those were Tier III/IV events so lesser events. Donīt tell me you take that over a grand slam final and a YEC title, and the head to head comparisson against the top players which favours Jana by a good margin.

No Spencer,

I was sighing because I made the point earlier that this is an absolutely useless discussion - but chaps like you really seem to be getting worked up about who was the better player.

As far as I'm concerned it can't be scientifically proven who's better and as I already said before - Who cares?!

Spam Spam - will you stop making these ridicolous threads! :wavey:

saska77
Nov 11th, 2009, 09:50 PM
:lol::lol:Hard call - I used to have a crush on both:lol::lol:

seriously though - Novotna :angel:

Chrissie-fan
Nov 11th, 2009, 10:14 PM
Novotna by a narrow margin.

Chrissie-fan
Nov 11th, 2009, 10:24 PM
Martinez' game, when on, was beautiful to watch.
That's true, but when she she was NOT on she gave new meaning to the words "not on." If she had a bad day she often looked like she wasn't even trying. That may just have been her body language giving me the wrong impression sometimes, but I nevertheless found it annoying. Jana on the other hand is one of the all time great chokers, but at least she didn't stop trying. Her problem was that her racquet always felt as though it weighed twenty pounds heavier when she had the chance to close out a big match.

Steff_forever
Nov 11th, 2009, 10:51 PM
Jana Novotna, no doubt about this

LightWarrior
Nov 11th, 2009, 11:03 PM
Jana Novotna, no doubt about this

Yes, especially when choking. She was THE greatest choker.

danieln1
Nov 12th, 2009, 12:23 AM
Novotna by a mile!

She had a way more effective game than the spaniard, who was a plain PUSHER and moonballer... some rallies were just unbearable to watch! And people had the nerve to call carolina a pusher, they should watch conchita before saying shit...

Novotna was a lesser version of Graf, but jana was very good also