PDA

View Full Version : Real #1 of 1987-Navratilova or Graf?


samsam4087
Sep 30th, 2010, 06:44 PM
Real #1 of 1987-Navratilova or Graf?

1987: Martina Navratilova
Australian Open- Runner Up
French Open- Runner Up
Wimbledon- Champion
US Open- Champion
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport/furniture/in_depth/tennis/2002/wimbledon/legends/martina_navratilova.jpg

1987: Steffi Graf
Australian Open- DNP
French Open- Champion
Wimbledon- Runner Up
US Open- Runner Up
http://www.tennisserver.com/turbo/images/pilotpen98/GRAF1.JPG

Marionated
Sep 30th, 2010, 06:49 PM
Martina is great.

:worship: :worship: :worship:

hingis-seles
Sep 30th, 2010, 07:19 PM
You forgot to mention that the only 2 matches Steffi lost all year were the Wimbledon and US Open finals to Martina.

justineheninfan
Sep 30th, 2010, 07:20 PM
Definitely Graf. Martina's slam results dont overcome that she only won 4 tournaments all years (2 non slam events) to 12 for Graf. Graf lost only 2 matches all year, granted huge matches being the Wimbledon and U.S Open final, but I forget how many Martina lost but it was a huge number.

samsam4087
Sep 30th, 2010, 07:32 PM
Martina is great.

Olórin
Sep 30th, 2010, 07:35 PM
Steffi's got the numbers BUT Pam Shriver actually mentioned after the US Open Final that there were two number ones "the computer #1 and the #1 for most people in the locker room". Yes people, this #1 moaning was happening even back then with Steffi Graf and Martina Navratilova as the top two players!!!

I agree with Pam to be honest. If not so much now, back then I think Martina was the "real #1". It's similar to Justine and Amelie in 2006. Justine/Steffi got the numbers, the statistical invincibility, but Amelie/Martina got the slams :shrug:

samsam4087
Sep 30th, 2010, 07:36 PM
Steffi's got the numbers BUT Pam Shriver actually mentioned after the US Open Final that there were two number ones "the computer #1 and the #1 for most people in the locker room - because you can't win the two biggest tournaments in the world and not be number one" - to paraphrase.

I agree with Pam to be honest. If not so much now, back then I think Martina was the "real #1". It's similar to Justine and Amelie in 2006. Justine/Steffi got the numbers, the statistical invincibility, but Amelie/Martina got the slams :shrug:

Yes, well said.

:worship::worship::worship:

justineheninfan
Sep 30th, 2010, 08:14 PM
Shriver is a notorious Graf hater and Martina's best friend so she is hardly a credible source. There is no similarity to Henin/Mauresmo in 2006. Henin didnt lose only 2 matches in 2006 and didnt win 8 more tournaments than Mauresmo. And even then there are many who feel Henin deserved #1 in 2006.

jimmy_the_greek
Sep 30th, 2010, 11:10 PM
Martina!

delicatecutter
Sep 30th, 2010, 11:18 PM
I can't vote against Steffi. :hearts:

Pops Maellard
Oct 1st, 2010, 02:11 AM
Navrat.

samsam4087
Oct 2nd, 2010, 12:16 AM
Martina is the greatest

TS
Oct 2nd, 2010, 12:32 AM
Too young to remember the intricacies of the ranking system in 1987 and 'who did what better than someone else', but I do remember that these two were head and shoulders above the pack. As an 8 year old I did think Martina was the better player and deserved number 1 (because at that age I only thought the tour consisted of RG, Wimbledon, US Open and the inferior AO at the time), so I'll stick with that :angel:

Good arguments for both though, and I had no idea Steffi was so dominant that year until reading this thread. 1987 was clearly her "look out bitches, I'm here" year.

PLP
Oct 2nd, 2010, 01:13 AM
Steffi all the way and it's not even close.
Martina had a good year though.

Kəv.
Oct 2nd, 2010, 01:26 AM
Steffi!

samsam4087
Oct 10th, 2010, 11:42 AM
Too young to remember the intricacies of the ranking system in 1987 and 'who did what better than someone else', but I do remember that these two were head and shoulders above the pack. As an 8 year old I did think Martina was the better player and deserved number 1 (because at that age I only thought the tour consisted of RG, Wimbledon, US Open and the inferior AO at the time), so I'll stick with that :angel:

Good arguments for both though, and I had no idea Steffi was so dominant that year until reading this thread. 1987 was clearly her "look out bitches, I'm here" year.

Yes, well said.

:worship::worship::worship:

terjw
Oct 10th, 2010, 12:18 PM
Steffi's got the numbers BUT Pam Shriver actually mentioned after the US Open Final that there were two number ones "the computer #1 and the #1 for most people in the locker room". Yes people, this #1 moaning was happening even back then with Steffi Graf and Martina Navratilova as the top two players!!!



I remember that year. Steffi didn't really comment about it - let her results do the talking - but I remember Martina proclaiming herself as the real #1 because she had those 2 slams including Wimbledon - but she couldn't cling to that and say the same the next year. I'm with Steffi all the way.

As a friend of Martina - Pam was hugely biased. I agree with Pam there were two #1s - but not with her saying Steffi was just a "computer" #1. Martina was still the slam #1. Steffi was an overwhelming whole season #1.

justineheninfan
Oct 10th, 2010, 01:38 PM
Pam also hated Steffi. Her commentary on matches Steffi played was a complete and utter joke. Even saying when Steffi was playing Huber and Tauziat the match was up to how they played, please.

terjw
Oct 10th, 2010, 02:57 PM
Pam also hated Steffi. Her commentary on matches Steffi played was a complete and utter joke. Even saying when Steffi was playing Huber and Tauziat the match was up to how they played, please.

I also remember in 1998 at RG with Steffi Graf vs Natasha Zvereva in the final. And because Nat had just beaten Nav in the SF Pam was saying how good she was and that Steffi was just a ball basher.

The score was 6-0: 6-0 to Graf. Pam just couldn't accept that Steffi by then was simply much better than Nav.

Anabelcroft
Oct 10th, 2010, 04:08 PM
Pam also hated Steffi. Her commentary on matches Steffi played was a complete and utter joke. Even saying when Steffi was playing Huber and Tauziat the match was up to how they played, please.

Oh God ;)

Steffica Greles
Oct 10th, 2010, 05:22 PM
Steffi's got the numbers BUT Pam Shriver actually mentioned after the US Open Final that there were two number ones "the computer #1 and the #1 for most people in the locker room". Yes people, this #1 moaning was happening even back then with Steffi Graf and Martina Navratilova as the top two players!!!

I agree with Pam to be honest. If not so much now, back then I think Martina was the "real #1". It's similar to Justine and Amelie in 2006. Justine/Steffi got the numbers, the statistical invincibility, but Amelie/Martina got the slams :shrug:

Except in 2006 Amelie, through no fault of her own, was handed the Australian Open when Clijsters, then Henin, retired in her matches. Both would have beaten her, in my opinion.

I always think of Amelie as having won ONE slam.

Direwolf
Oct 10th, 2010, 05:54 PM
It's similar to Justine and Amelie in 2006. Justine/Steffi got the numbers, the statistical invincibility, but Amelie/Martina got the slams :shrug:

Martin - 2 slams
Stiffy - 2 Slams

Juju 1 - Slam
Amelie - 2 Slams...

see the difference...

Betten
Oct 10th, 2010, 06:08 PM
Martin - 2 slams
Stiffy - 2 Slams

Juju 1 - Slam
Amelie - 2 Slams...

see the difference...

Graf only won the French Open that year.

justineheninfan
Oct 10th, 2010, 06:24 PM
I also remember in 1998 at RG with Steffi Graf vs Natasha Zvereva in the final. And because Nat had just beaten Nav in the SF Pam was saying how good she was and that Steffi was just a ball basher.

The score was 6-0: 6-0 to Graf. Pam just couldn't accept that Steffi by then was simply much better than Nav.

Pam was very close to both Martina and Chris. Even as a competitor of both I think she looked on the rivalry with a huge amount of pride. Seeing some young teenage upstart who was clearly the games next legend kick them off the top of the womens game was probably something she just couldnt come to grips with. Well it is reality, everyone gets old (not saying age was the only reason Graf was able to take over #1 from Martina), and everyone gets dethroned at some point.

And she never got over her ridiculous grudge against Graf. Who knows what it was, maybe she never got over how Graf gave her virtually no credit or acknowledgement for her win at the 1988 WTA Championships (teenaged Graf was a bit abrasive at times but really matured into a classy sportswomen). The way she talks about the Graf-Seles post stabbing matches almost implies she looks at Steffi as the villian in each match, despite that she atleast admits Steffi was at no fault for the horrible act.

Calvin M.
Oct 10th, 2010, 07:55 PM
Navratilova, without question. How about moving this to Blast from The Past? Thanks a lot.

samsam4087
Oct 21st, 2010, 07:53 AM
Martin - 2 slams
Stiffy - 2 Slams

Juju 1 - Slam
Amelie - 2 Slams...

see the difference...

Graf only won French in 1987.

samsam4087
Dec 13th, 2010, 08:33 AM
Martina was the real no. 1 of 1987.

guyinsf
Dec 14th, 2010, 04:08 AM
Graf did win 12 versus Martina's 4 but when you look at the slams, Martina was 2 for 4 and runner up of the other 2 while Graf didn't play AO and won 1 slam and runner up of the other 2. Could the computer have made them co number 1s? No harm in that.

justineheninfan
Dec 14th, 2010, 07:57 AM
It is too bad Steffi didnt play the Austtralian Open in 1987. She probably would have won that as well. Hana beat Martina in the final in straight sets, and Hana was Steffi's bitch.

Philbo
Dec 14th, 2010, 09:32 AM
Watch how Graf fans will diminish the importance of Slams when it suits their argument, and Steffi's 11 wins in non slam events somehow trump Martina winning the two biggest most important slams of the year. You can bet your bottom dollar if Graf had won the USO and Wimbledon, we'd hear the same people saying how the slams are what really matter.

It was the year the queen was dethroned, but if I was to choose either players year, I'd choose a US Open and a Wimbledon title over a French plus a heap of Tier 1's anytime...

justineheninfan
Dec 14th, 2010, 10:47 AM
12 tournament wins to 4 is an extreme case, not just a minor one. I for one would always argue a player with 12 tournament wins and only 2 losses all year deserves #1 over a player with 4 tournament wins, even if the latter has 2 slams to the former's 1. The only way Martina would have a true claim to #1 is if Steffi had won 0 slams this year. Slams are the most imporant but to go as far to say Martina deserved #1 in this case is to basically say the other tournaments mean nothing at all since you cant get a more extreme case than this.

As for the silly generalization of "Graf fans" Martina fans like to say her 83-84 is better than Steffi's 88-89 because of just 2 fewer losses despite 1 fewer slam win, 2 fewer slam finals, and an embarassing 3rd round loss in one. So apparently 3 losses overall with 6 slams, 1 slam semi loss to Sukova, 1 slam 3rd round loss to Jordan > 5 losses overall with 7 slams, 1 slam final loss to Sanchez but 12 tournament titles and 2 losses and 1 slam < 4 tournament titles and 2 slams. LOL!

calou
Dec 14th, 2010, 11:23 AM
12 tournament wins to 4 is an extreme case, not just a minor one. I for one would always argue a player with 12 tournament wins and only 2 losses all year deserves #1 over a player with 4 tournament wins, even if the latter has 2 slams to the former's 1. The only way Martina would have a true claim to #1 is if Steffi had won 0 slams this year. Slams are the most imporant but to go as far to say Martina deserved #1 in this case is to basically say the other tournaments mean nothing at all since you cant get a more extreme case than this.

As for the silly generalization of "Graf fans" Martina fans like to say her 83-84 is better than Steffi's 88-89 because of just 2 fewer losses despite 1 fewer slam win, 2 fewer slam finals, and an embarassing 3rd round loss in one. So apparently 3 losses overall with 6 slams, 1 slam semi loss to Sukova, 1 slam 3rd round loss to Jordan > 5 losses overall with 7 slams, 1 slam final loss to Sanchez but 12 tournament titles and 2 losses and 1 slam < 4 tournament titles and 2 slams. LOL!
You're ridiculous ,nobody played like Martina in 83 and 84 (i know what i say because i went to RG a lot of times ) In 83 she lost ONLY ONE match in the year and Steffi never did that .
We know you're a Martina hater so your opinion is priceless

calou
Dec 14th, 2010, 11:26 AM
Martina
quality (slams ) > quantity
Same thing for this year ,Serena is the real number one :worship:

Andy T
Dec 14th, 2010, 11:27 AM
It was the year the queen was dethroned, but if I was to choose either players year, I'd choose a US Open and a Wimbledon title over a French plus a heap of Tier 1's anytime...

Absolutely. Steffi was deservedly number 1 on the computer but as had happened before and has happened since, she was not the player with the most coveted titles. Although I'm sure it hurt Martina to lose the top ranking spot, I bet she willingly sacrificed that for the two majors she clinched. She came extremely close in Paris to making it three in Paris as well. I'm sure that, as they approach 30, Serena and Federer are far more focussed on adding majors to their record than spending a few more weeks at the top of the rankings and I bet that Steffi herself felt exactly the same after winning Roland Garros in 99.

danieln1
Dec 14th, 2010, 12:19 PM
Navratilova all the way...

Reaching ALL Slam finals and winning 2 of them is bigger than whatever Graf did that year!

justineheninfan
Dec 14th, 2010, 01:35 PM
You're ridiculous ,nobody played like Martina in 83 and 84 (i know what i say because i went to RG a lot of times ) In 83 she lost ONLY ONE match in the year and Steffi never did that .
We know you're a Martina hater so your opinion is priceless

So you would know better than anyone Martina in 83-84 played at a much higher level than anyone since you witnessed first hand her losing to Kathy Jordan at RG. :lol: Sorry darling but your ridiculous and baseless post in no way relates to the point I was making. Which is if winning 1 more slams compensates for winning 8 fewer tournaments and having a better year than someone who lost only 2 matches, then by that logic it would be extremely foolish to even begin to suggest Martina's 83-84 with with only 2 fewer losses than Graf's 88-89 is better with a semifinal and 3rd round loss at 2 of the slams vs just 1 final loss. Yet despite this no doubt the same blind Martina fanboys like yourself who want to argue Martina deserved #1 in 1987 with 8 fewer tournament wins because of 1 more slam will also argue her 83-84 is better than Graf's 88-89 because of 2 fewer losses despite the big edge Graf has in slam dominance. Hilarious. And no I dont "hate" Martina, I just dont have the same sick obsession with her you have. Only 312 posts on this forum and about 300 of them are on Martina, pathetic. And you claim I have no credibility yet believe your posts involving your hero Navratilova have any credibility, ROTFL!! Now have a good day loser. :p

thrust
Dec 14th, 2010, 01:38 PM
Shriver is a notorious Graf hater and Martina's best friend so she is hardly a credible source. There is no similarity to Henin/Mauresmo in 2006. Henin didnt lose only 2 matches in 2006 and didnt win 8 more tournaments than Mauresmo. And even then there are many who feel Henin deserved #1 in 2006.

Well, Justine and Steffi both reached the finals of all the Slams they played. Both won the FO, their only Slam win. Amelie and Martina both won 2 Slams compared to Justine's and Steffi's 1 Slam. As did Steffi in 87, Justine DID deserve to be ranked #1 in 06

justinehfan
Dec 14th, 2010, 01:44 PM
Well, Justine and Steffi both reached the finals of all the Slams they played. Both won the FO, their only Slam win. Amelie and Martina both won 2 Slams compared to Justine's and Steffi's 1 Slam. As did Steffi in 87, Justine DID deserve to be ranked #1 in 06

Lol, someone should start a thread like this, except for 2006.

I have to say Steffi. All of her titles more than make up for 1 less slam, and her only two losses were in slam finals.

calou
Dec 14th, 2010, 02:26 PM
So you would know better than anyone Martina in 83-84 played at a much higher level than anyone since you witnessed first hand her losing to Kathy Jordan at RG. :lol: Sorry darling but your ridiculous and baseless post in no way relates to the point I was making. Which is if winning 1 more slams compensates for winning 8 fewer tournaments and having a better year than someone who lost only 2 matches, then by that logic it would be extremely foolish to even begin to suggest Martina's 83-84 with with only 2 fewer losses than Graf's 88-89 is better with a semifinal and 3rd round loss at 2 of the slams vs just 1 final loss. Yet despite this no doubt the same blind Martina fanboys like yourself who want to argue Martina deserved #1 in 1987 with 8 fewer tournament wins because of 1 more slam will also argue her 83-84 is better than Graf's 88-89 because of 2 fewer losses despite the big edge Graf has in slam dominance. Hilarious. And no I dont "hate" Martina, I just dont have the same sick obsession with her you have. Only 312 posts on this forum and about 300 of them are on Martina, pathetic. And you claim I have no credibility yet believe your posts involving your hero Navratilova have any credibility, ROTFL!! Now have a good day loser. :p
Glad to be called darling by a guy who could be my son and who received the award of the worst thread of the year ::p:
I also remember you were excluded from BFTP by Rollo (another award )
I'm of the same generation than Chris and Martina ,i didn't write 300 posts about Martina ,i have others subjects but i don't care about you .
Error :in 83 it was Kathy Horwath :help:

Philbo
Dec 14th, 2010, 03:50 PM
12 tournament wins to 4 is an extreme case, not just a minor one. I for one would always argue a player with 12 tournament wins and only 2 losses all year deserves #1 over a player with 4 tournament wins, even if the latter has 2 slams to the former's 1. The only way Martina would have a true claim to #1 is if Steffi had won 0 slams this year. Slams are the most imporant but to go as far to say Martina deserved #1 in this case is to basically say the other tournaments mean nothing at all since you cant get a more extreme case than this.

As for the silly generalization of "Graf fans" Martina fans like to say her 83-84 is better than Steffi's 88-89 because of just 2 fewer losses despite 1 fewer slam win, 2 fewer slam finals, and an embarassing 3rd round loss in one. So apparently 3 losses overall with 6 slams, 1 slam semi loss to Sukova, 1 slam 3rd round loss to Jordan > 5 losses overall with 7 slams, 1 slam final loss to Sanchez but 12 tournament titles and 2 losses and 1 slam < 4 tournament titles and 2 slams. LOL!
Right on queue. Argue GOAT with a Graf fan, and they will ALL fight to the death that the slam tally is all important and the only criteria that needs to be looked at in rating GOAT. Discuss 1987 and suddenly its NOT all about the slams and a bunch of tier 1's = or > the TWO BIGGEST SLAMS of the year. Pathetic inconsistency.


Glad to be called darling by a guy who could be my son and who received the award of the worst thread of the year ::p:
I also remember you were excluded from BFTP by Rollo (another award )
I'm of the same generation than Chris and Martina ,i didn't write 300 posts about Martina ,i have others subjects but i don't care about you .
Error :in 83 it was Kathy Horwath :help:
OWNED!!! :)

Raiden
Dec 14th, 2010, 04:31 PM
Let's apply the world renowned Navratilova-tard math, let's see what happenes then:

if Xn > Yn then Y > X (Steffi'22 > Martina'18 => Martina = goat)

So then:

Martina'2 > Steffi'1 => steffi is the real #1 in 1987 Voila!

Calypso
Dec 14th, 2010, 04:42 PM
"The real number one" in 1987? Steffi.

The computer does not lie ;-)

vandy
Dec 14th, 2010, 05:14 PM
didn't martina beat steffi at both wimbledon and the u.s. open that year?

RenaSlam.
Dec 14th, 2010, 08:06 PM
Graf

Rollo
Dec 14th, 2010, 08:54 PM
Shriver is a notorious Graf hater and Martina's best friend so she is hardly a credible source. There is no similarity to Henin/Mauresmo in 2006. Henin didnt lose only 2 matches in 2006 and didnt win 8 more tournaments than Mauresmo. And even then there are many who feel Henin deserved #1 in 2006.


I voted for Graf as #1 for 1987, but there is a case for Navratilova as well. When Shriver made her comments at the US Open Martina had won 2 of the biggest 3 slams and reached the finals at the Aussie, an event Graf skipped in 1987.

Of course Steffi went on to have a great fall. For many it was her YEC win that sort of clinched #1. Navratilova went into the event claiming to be #1 but conceded Graf was #1 when she lost to Sabatini in the quarters.

When expert panel rankings came out (and in 1987 these counted for a lot) most votes went to Graf. Still, Martina got seveal votes. Those who voted for Navratilova cited her 2 slams to 1 for Graf and the notion that the challenger (Graf) had to knock the champion out. It was this same sentiment that in 1978 worked against Martina when she finished as computer #1 but saw some still support Chris Evert.

Whatever one feels it was a great year. Even their head to head meetings were split, with Graf winning the Lipton and French encounters and Martina taking Wimbledon and the US.

Steffica Greles
Dec 14th, 2010, 09:51 PM
Yes people, this #1 moaning was happening even back then with Steffi Graf and Martina Navratilova as the top two players!!!


Hehe, yes. And that was when it was a worthwhile discussion. One star, or the other.

samsam4087
Dec 15th, 2010, 05:08 AM
Navratilova all the way...

Reaching ALL Slam finals and winning 2 of them is bigger than whatever Graf did that year!

Yes, well said.

:worship::worship::worship:

justinehfan
Dec 15th, 2010, 05:23 AM
[QUOTE=Philbo;18863988]Right on queue. Argue GOAT with a Graf fan, and they will ALL fight to the death that the slam tally is all important and the only criteria that needs to be looked at in rating GOAT. Discuss 1987 and suddenly its NOT all about the slams and a bunch of tier 1's = or > the TWO BIGGEST SLAMS of the year. Pathetic inconsistency.

Steffi still comes in second if all that's counted is slams. 24>22. :wavey:

Raiden
Dec 15th, 2010, 05:48 AM
Right on queue. Argue GOAT with a Graf fan, and they will ALL fight to the death that the slam tally is all important and the only criteria that needs to be looked at in rating GOATSo ALL Graf fans "fight to death" to proclaim that the GOAT is... Margaret Court? :haha:

The absurdity of Navratilova-tards knows no bounds.

justineheninfan
Dec 15th, 2010, 06:05 AM
Court is a very worthy GOAT contender who would get more consideration if she were an American, attached to America in anyway, and not someone who had most of her career pre Open Era and dissapeared from the tennis World radar altogether upon retirement.

justineheninfan
Dec 15th, 2010, 06:09 AM
Glad to be called darling by a guy who could be my son and who received the award of the worst thread of the year ::p:
I also remember you were excluded from BFTP by Rollo (another award )
I'm of the same generation than Chris and Martina ,i didn't write 300 posts about Martina ,i have others subjects but i don't care about you .
Error :in 83 it was Kathy Horwath :help:

Sorry but almost all 317 of your pathetic posts are about your hero Navratilova. Anyone can search your posting history and see for themselves. Unlike you I am not a sad addict who is obsessed with any of my favorites and makes all my posts about them.

And it is Horvath, sorry to school you yet again idiot:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathleen_Horvath

justineheninfan
Dec 15th, 2010, 06:14 AM
Right on queue. Argue GOAT with a Graf fan, and they will ALL fight to the death that the slam tally is all important and the only criteria that needs to be looked at in rating GOAT. Discuss 1987 and suddenly its NOT all about the slams and a bunch of tier 1's = or > the TWO BIGGEST SLAMS of the year. Pathetic inconsistency.

ROTFL another pathetic post by a Navratilovatard so desperate to mask their weak argument they make baseless assumptions on people they dont even know. First of all I am a Graf fan but not an obsessive crazed fanatic the way you and your pathetic sidekick (alternate account?) calou are Martina fanatics. Graf isnt even my favorite player, I prefer Henin, Novotna, Davenport, and Mauresmo on a fan support level amongst others. Secondly you dont even know who I rate as GOAT nor what my criteria is. For the record though if I do argue in favor of Graf it is based on her surface versatility being far beyond any other women in history more than anything else, and the balance of her slam record, not strictly based on total slam count. The only inconsistency is of Navratilovatards like yourself which I pointed out, trying to make Martina's 1987 as a worthy #1 over Graf because of 1 more slam despite 8 fewer tournament wins, yet arguing Navratilova's 83-84 as superior to Graf's 88-89 with losses to Sukova and Horvath (3rd round) of slams vs Steffi's 7 slam wins and 1 runner up all due to only 2 fewer losses. Of course to gloss over this embarassing truth you make up something altogether which you have no basis of. Typical. :wavey:

calou
Dec 15th, 2010, 06:39 AM
Sorry but almost all 317 of your pathetic posts are about your hero Navratilova. Anyone can search your posting history and see for themselves. Unlike you I am not a sad addict who is obsessed with any of my favorites and makes all my posts about them.

And it is Horvath, sorry to school you yet again idiot:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathleen_Horvath
Number ONE on the waiting list for the brain transplant :devil:

Raiden
Dec 15th, 2010, 07:00 AM
Court is a very worthy GOAT contender who would get more consideration if she were an American, attached to America in anyway, and not someone who had most of her career pre Open Era and dissapeared from the tennis World radar altogether upon retirement.Oh I agree!

I was just pointing out Philbo's inadvertent assertion that the GOAT according to, quote, "all Graf fans" is Margaret Court :lol:.

Aside from that, on the issue itself I actually don't disagree if anyone claims that Margaret was the true goat. The arguments for that assertion are rock-solid while the arguments against it are pathetically petty and paltry

Philbo
Dec 15th, 2010, 08:26 AM
So ALL Graf fans "fight to death" to proclaim that the GOAT is... Margaret Court? :haha:

The absurdity of Navratilova-tards knows no bounds.

Thats exactly my point. Grafanatics when discussing GOAT will START the discussion by claiming slam tally is all that matters, the only criteria.. When you quite correctly point out that that means Margaret Court is GOAT, then they backtrack and start arguing that courts 11 oz opens make her slam tally inflated so therefore it doesnt count.. They like to move the argument onto WHY Court has 24 slams.. But then when you move the argument onto WHY Graf has 22 slams, (the stabbing!!), they then backtrack all over again and claim 'what if's dont count (except the WHAT IF Court had to face all the best opposition in Australia, THAT particular WHAT IF counts for Graf fans, but not WHAT IF Monica hadnt been stabbed)..

Its a funny circle, but one Ive been through on these boards many times over the last decade or so...

justineheninfan
Dec 15th, 2010, 08:33 AM
Please, Graf fans I have seen respect Court far more than Martina fanatics. It is Martina fanatics who are the first to ignore Court altogether. The reasons being probably:

1. Court's remark about Martina's sexuality right after Wimbledon 1990 (which by the way I also thought was offensive and crude but in no way relates to Court's tennis greatness) still irks them.

2. Court has more combined singles/doubles/mixed slams than Martina does despite that Martina played until 50 to desperately try and break it, while Court attained her mark by having babies and taking breaks whenever she wanted and retiring for good once she was a bit past her prime and actually moving on with life.

3. Court in reality has won more than the 167 tournaments Martina is listed as winning. According to people who have researched over 200.


Navratilova fanatics are the most biased, close minded, and obsessive tennis fans there are. They cant bear the sheer thought anyone but their hero could be considered the GOAT. So they slander Graf and her fans, making baseless and false accusations of who her biggest fans supposably are or what they say as clowns such as philbo and calou in this thread prove. They ignore Court altogether as if she didnt exist since they cant even tackle her, she who matched and even outperformed Martina in singles and doubles alike. And they milk Martina's dominance over Evert for 2 years for all it is worth, while virtually ignoring the other aspects of Chris's career that are superior to create any kind of balanced argument.

Raiden
Dec 15th, 2010, 09:12 AM
When you quite correctly point out that that means Margaret Court is GOAT, then they backtrack and start arguing that courts 11 oz opens make her slam tally inflated so therefore it doesnt count.. They like to move the argument onto WHY Court has 24 slams.. But then when you move the argument onto WHY Graf has 22 slams, (the stabbing!!), they then backtrack all over again and claim 'what if's dont count... I don't accept any what-ifs, neither in Court's case nor in Graf's. I don't indulge in contradictory "why Graf = 22" questions cuz I'd be inconsistent if I don't follow that up with "Why Monica = 8 or 9".

Likewise I disregard the "Court shouldn't be the goat cuz she won too many AOs" argument cuz this is one of the most ludicrous tennis arguments that exist out there. How can winning something "too many times" makes someone less of a contender? Had Margaret lost a few of those AO's, then that would have made her a better contender or what? :lol:
.

justineheninfan
Dec 15th, 2010, 09:17 AM
I have heard more Martina fanatics dismiss Court's Australian Open titles and their validity than fans of any other player other than possibly Billie Jean King fans. And little wonder when that is the only way to make it appear Court did not completely eclipse Martina's singles record, while Martina needing to play until 50 to even match Court's doubles record. King, Martina, Evert, Shriver and their clique are in fact the most responsible for making Court all but invisible in America, mentioning endlessly on air how Court's record is inflated by the Australian Open and doing anything to downplay her. More out of pety jealousy of Court's amazing record than anything else, especialy in the case of King who cant stand that as much as she contributed to tennis both on and off court, strictly in tennis terms she is so far inferior to another player of her own era.

Raiden
Dec 15th, 2010, 10:41 AM
^ You may have a point. It is more of BJ's fault rather than Martina's. In fact the original tennis idol of Martina was none other than Margart Court! I suspect later on Martina was put under pressure to "switch allegance" to BJ. Martina was vulnerable at that time because of her background. BJ probably "put the squeeze" on Martina that if she doesnt take BJ's side she will not get a Green Card and might be sent back to communist Czechoslovakia or something like that. BJ was pretty much the mistress of female tennis in America so Martina relented.

But initially it was all Margaret that Martina looked up to and to an extent tried to emulate. That's where Martina got the idea of the importance of fitness and doing exercise as a female tennis player, which at that time was frowned upon. Female tennis players at that time barely went to the gym cuz that was supposedly regarded as "too dangerous for women" or whatever. Apparently exercise for women in those days meant getting rubber-band-strapped to a "whole body vibration" machine.

It was Margaret Court who was the first female tennis player with an advanced daily excercise routine and she did it with her fellow travelling male Australian tennis players. That was partly the reason to the success of Australia in both men and women during those times. An Aussie tennis player was, more often than not, the fitter player on the court (it still is by the way, c.i.p: Stosur :)

justineheninfan
Dec 15th, 2010, 11:34 AM
I agree with all of that. And as much as I respect BJK and all she has done for womens tennis and womens sport her attitude towards Court is so bitter and jaded. She cant put her personal dislike and grudge against her former great rival aside. It is the aspect of her I find most dissapointing.

justinehfan
Dec 15th, 2010, 11:44 AM
I have heard more Martina fanatics dismiss Court's Australian Open titles and their validity than fans of any other player other than possibly Billie Jean King fans. And little wonder when that is the only way to make it appear Court did not completely eclipse Martina's singles record, while Martina needing to play until 50 to even match Court's doubles record. King, Martina, Evert, Shriver and their clique are in fact the most responsible for making Court all but invisible in America, mentioning endlessly on air how Court's record is inflated by the Australian Open and doing anything to downplay her. More out of pety jealousy of Court's amazing record than anything else, especialy in the case of King who cant stand that as much as she contributed to tennis both on and off court, strictly in tennis terms she is so far inferior to another player of her own era.

Yeah, look at their head to head, they were apparently such great rivals, so explain Maargaret's 22-10 record against King. :help:

justineheninfan
Dec 15th, 2010, 11:47 AM
Court had no really true close rival. That is what is most remarkable about her record. Martina and Chris were really close. Steffi has the unanswered questions about her rivalry with Seles. Court though had no particularly close rival. King and Bueno were pretty good rivals but was neither was ultimately a true equal of Court.

Raiden
Dec 15th, 2010, 12:17 PM
Yeah, look at their head to head, they were apparently such great rivals, so explain Maargaret's 22-10 record against King. :help:The word 'rival' doesn't automatically imply 'close rival' or 'evenly matched'.

At first Bueno and then BJ were the principal rivals of Margaret by default (by virtue of being the "next best thing").

thrust
Dec 15th, 2010, 01:20 PM
I have heard more Martina fanatics dismiss Court's Australian Open titles and their validity than fans of any other player other than possibly Billie Jean King fans. And little wonder when that is the only way to make it appear Court did not completely eclipse Martina's singles record, while Martina needing to play until 50 to even match Court's doubles record. King, Martina, Evert, Shriver and their clique are in fact the most responsible for making Court all but invisible in America, mentioning endlessly on air how Court's record is inflated by the Australian Open and doing anything to downplay her. More out of pety jealousy of Court's amazing record than anything else, especialy in the case of King who cant stand that as much as she contributed to tennis both on and off court, strictly in tennis terms she is so far inferior to another player of her own era.

Well stated and true! Though I was never a BJK fan, I would not say that she was Far inferior a player to Court, inferior though she was. King was indeed lucky that she did not play Court often on clay.

justinehfan
Dec 15th, 2010, 01:31 PM
The word 'rival' doesn't automatically imply 'close rival' or 'evenly matched'.

At first Bueno and then BJ were the principal rivals of Margaret by default (by virtue of being the "next best thing").

Yeah, that's true. It's just funny to hear someone say that two players have/has a "rivalry" when one won more than double the matches that the other did. The exception is Graf-Seles. That was 6-4 before the stabbing. What was Margaret's record against Bueno?

justinehfan
Dec 15th, 2010, 01:32 PM
Well stated and true! Though I was never a BJK fan, I would not say that she was Far inferior a player to Court, inferior though she was. King was indeed lucky that she did not play Court often on clay.

I don't understand why Margaret was soooo much better on clay than BJK? Both were serve-volleyers.

justineheninfan
Dec 15th, 2010, 01:51 PM
Court's baseline game was much better than King. King's biggest weakness in her game was her forehand and on clay with the long rallies and high bounce it was exposed more than ever. Court had no real weakness so was excellent on any surface. Grass was perfect for King's game as she had one of the best serves, very good volleys of course, a very good and versatile backhand, and her craftiness and attacking instincts combined worked beautifully. She did not allow herself to get dragged into long rallies like on clay.

justinehfan
Dec 15th, 2010, 02:02 PM
Court's baseline game was much better than King. King's biggest weakness in her game was her forehand and on clay with the long rallies and high bounce it was exposed more than ever. Court had no real weakness so was excellent on any surface. Grass was perfect for King's game as she had one of the best serves, very good volleys of course, a very good and versatile backhand, and her craftiness and attacking instincts combined worked beautifully. She did not allow herself to get dragged into long rallies like on clay.

Thanks. I haven't been able to see much of their play. Did Goolagong have a much better baseline game than King as well?

Philbo
Dec 15th, 2010, 03:05 PM
^ You may have a point. It is more of BJ's fault rather than Martina's. In fact the original tennis idol of Martina was none other than Margart Court! I suspect later on Martina was put under pressure to "switch allegance" to BJ. Martina was vulnerable at that time because of her background. BJ probably "put the squeeze" on Martina that if she doesnt take BJ's side she will not get a Green Card and might be sent back to communist Czechoslovakia or something like that. BJ was pretty much the mistress of female tennis in America so Martina relented.

But initially it was all Margaret that Martina looked up to and to an extent tried to emulate. That's where Martina got the idea of the importance of fitness and doing exercise as a female tennis player, which at that time was frowned upon. Female tennis players at that time barely went to the gym cuz that was supposedly regarded as "too dangerous for women" or whatever. Apparently exercise for women in those days meant getting rubber-band-strapped to a "whole body vibration" machine.

It was Margaret Court who was the first female tennis player with an advanced daily excercise routine and she did it with her fellow travelling male Australian tennis players. That was partly the reason to the success of Australia in both men and women during those times. An Aussie tennis player was, more often than not, the fitter player on the court (it still is by the way, c.i.p: Stosur :)
Martina's original tennis idol was Rod Laver. You are correct she certainly did idolise Court as well. But come on, what utter rubbish that Martina 'chose' BJK as the 'best ever' to GET A GREENCARD AND AVOID BEING SHIPPED BACK TO CZECH!!!:lol::lol::lol::lol:
Where do you imagine crap like that? BJK may have been influential on the tour, but the WTA does not decide who gets immigration rights into the USA.. Thats a priceless quote..
Please, Graf fans I have seen respect Court far more than Martina fanatics. It is Martina fanatics who are the first to ignore Court altogether. The reasons being probably:

1. Court's remark about Martina's sexuality right after Wimbledon 1990 (which by the way I also thought was offensive and crude but in no way relates to Court's tennis greatness) still irks them.

2. Court has more combined singles/doubles/mixed slams than Martina does despite that Martina played until 50 to desperately try and break it, while Court attained her mark by having babies and taking breaks whenever she wanted and retiring for good once she was a bit past her prime and actually moving on with life.

3. Court in reality has won more than the 167 tournaments Martina is listed as winning. According to people who have researched over 200.


Navratilova fanatics are the most biased, close minded, and obsessive tennis fans there are. They cant bear the sheer thought anyone but their hero could be considered the GOAT. So they slander Graf and her fans, making baseless and false accusations of who her biggest fans supposably are or what they say as clowns such as philbo and calou in this thread prove. They ignore Court altogether as if she didnt exist since they cant even tackle her, she who matched and even outperformed Martina in singles and doubles alike. And they milk Martina's dominance over Evert for 2 years for all it is worth, while virtually ignoring the other aspects of Chris's career that are superior to create any kind of balanced argument.
LOL, well we must just have different experiences. In my experience, most Martina fans (me inclduded) can easily admit there is a valid argument for any one of Graf, Martina, Court and possibly even BJK and Chris Evert to have an ARGUMENT for their claim to GOAT. Most of the Martina fans I interact with obviously think Martina is GOAT, but certainly can concede she isnt the 'inarguable choice'....

Take a dose of posters such as Calimero (years ago), LDVTennis, Claycourter (current) and the likes of them for the kind of Grafanatics Im referring to. Noone, and I repeat NOONE has even the slightest HINT of an argument to being best ever outside of Graf.
As for the rest of your post, you're simply full of shit claiming Martina kept playing til her 50's to break courts record. The logic of that is absurd. She continued playing because she LOVES PLAYING and could still hold her own on tour. If she wanted the record so badly, why would she retire from doubles from 95-2000 when she was younger and had more chance of winning?
Court is a homophobe religious wingnut. But that in no way diminishes what she achieved on the tennis court. She is a living legend of the game with a very good argument to GOAT. We can at least agree on that.

justineheninfan
Dec 15th, 2010, 03:15 PM
Thanks. I haven't been able to see much of their play. Did Goolagong have a much better baseline game than King as well?

Overall yes. Goolagong could rally with Evert from the baseline. King could not. Goolagong's quickness helped her alot though. Her actual groundstrokes were not the most powerful or most consistent either.

thrust
Dec 15th, 2010, 04:40 PM
Overall yes. Goolagong could rally with Evert from the baseline. King could not. Goolagong's quickness helped her alot though. Her actual groundstrokes were not the most powerful or most consistent either.

True! Evonne, brilliant though she could be, was Very insonsistant. She even lost to BJK in the FO final. Billie Jean owned Evonne in slam finals, primarily because she was mentally far superior to Evonne.

calou
Dec 15th, 2010, 05:05 PM
Martina's original tennis idol was Rod Laver. You are correct she certainly did idolise Court as well. But come on, what utter rubbish that Martina 'chose' BJK as the 'best ever' to GET A GREENCARD AND AVOID BEING SHIPPED BACK TO CZECH!!!:lol::lol::lol::lol:
Where do you imagine crap like that? BJK may have been influential on the tour, but the WTA does not decide who gets immigration rights into the USA.. Thats a priceless quote..

LOL, well we must just have different experiences. In my experience, most Martina fans (me inclduded) can easily admit there is a valid argument for any one of Graf, Martina, Court and possibly even BJK and Chris Evert to have an ARGUMENT for their claim to GOAT. Most of the Martina fans I interact with obviously think Martina is GOAT, but certainly can concede she isnt the 'inarguable choice'....

Take a dose of posters such as Calimero (years ago), LDVTennis, Claycourter (current) and the likes of them for the kind of Grafanatics Im referring to. Noone, and I repeat NOONE has even the slightest HINT of an argument to being best ever outside of Graf.
As for the rest of your post, you're simply full of shit claiming Martina kept playing til her 50's to break courts record. The logic of that is absurd. She continued playing because she LOVES PLAYING and could still hold her own on tour. If she wanted the record so badly, why would she retire from doubles from 95-2000 when she was younger and had more chance of winning?
Court is a homophobe religious wingnut. But that in no way diminishes what she achieved on the tennis court. She is a living legend of the game with a very good argument to GOAT. We can at least agree on that.
Hi :)
This thread was about 1987 real number 1 and it deteriorated because someone who can't stand Martina and her fans put her sour mouth on it .I don't care about the GOAT ,i respect the others players and if we want to celebrate our fav is our choice ! On BFTP many post fans are ONLY about their fav and we don't blame them !
Don't waste your time with this dude (probably unemployed ) ,it's not our fault if his life is miserable :(

Raiden
Dec 15th, 2010, 07:09 PM
You are correct she certainly did idolise Court as well. But come on, what utter rubbish that Martina 'chose' BJK as the 'best ever' to GET A GREENCARD AND AVOID BEING SHIPPED BACK TO CZECH!!!:lol::lol::lol::lol:You know damn well that's not what I wrote, But I digress.

BJK may have been influential on the tour, but the WTA does not decide who gets immigration rights into the USA..Forget WTA. BJ had real power... political power. BJ had Washington connections ever since she became a womens lib cause célèbre. Meaning she could pick up the phone and get maybe not the president on the line but certainly someone like feminist congresswoman Bella Abzug. Meaning BJ had real clout. The kind of clout that a vulnerable alien fugee like Martina couldn't afford to cross.

Court is a homophobe religious wingnut.Indeed but that's irrelevant as far as tennis is concerned. After all, once upon a time, so was BJ also exactly that: a bible thumping "wingnut" as you put it.

Most of the Martina fans I interact with obviously think Martina is GOAT, but certainly can concede she isnt the 'inarguable choice'....Fair enough. But that's probably the case for many or most of the fans of other goat contenders.

Philbo
Dec 15th, 2010, 09:54 PM
Indeed but that's irrelevant as far as tennis is concerned.
Clever selective editing, did you miss the end of my sentence you quoted that said 'But that in no way diminishes what she achieved on the tennis court. She is a living legend of the game with a very good argument to GOAT' ... Did you just miss that all together, or just feel the need to agree with me and repeat my point?

justinehfan
Dec 15th, 2010, 10:56 PM
Martina's original tennis idol was Rod Laver. You are correct she certainly did idolise Court as well. But come on, what utter rubbish that Martina 'chose' BJK as the 'best ever' to GET A GREENCARD AND AVOID BEING SHIPPED BACK TO CZECH!!!:lol::lol::lol::lol:
Where do you imagine crap like that? BJK may have been influential on the tour, but the WTA does not decide who gets immigration rights into the USA.. Thats a priceless quote..

LOL, well we must just have different experiences. In my experience, most Martina fans (me inclduded) can easily admit there is a valid argument for any one of Graf, Martina, Court and possibly even BJK and Chris Evert to have an ARGUMENT for their claim to GOAT. Most of the Martina fans I interact with obviously think Martina is GOAT, but certainly can concede she isnt the 'inarguable choice'....

Take a dose of posters such as Calimero (years ago), LDVTennis, Claycourter (current) and the likes of them for the kind of Grafanatics Im referring to. Noone, and I repeat NOONE has even the slightest HINT of an argument to being best ever outside of Graf.
As for the rest of your post, you're simply full of shit claiming Martina kept playing til her 50's to break courts record. The logic of that is absurd. She continued playing because she LOVES PLAYING and could still hold her own on tour. If she wanted the record so badly, why would she retire from doubles from 95-2000 when she was younger and had more chance of winning?
Court is a homophobe religious wingnut. But that in no way diminishes what she achieved on the tennis court. She is a living legend of the game with a very good argument to GOAT. We can at least agree on that.

2 things:

1. Why put Evert and BJK in the same sentence? BJK has NO argument as GOAT.
2. You're a bigot, calling someone a wingnut just because they have a different opinion than you.

justinehfan
Dec 15th, 2010, 10:59 PM
Clever selective editing, did you miss the end of my sentence you quoted that said 'But that in no way diminishes what she achieved on the tennis court. She is a living legend of the game with a very good argument to GOAT' ... Did you just miss that all together, or just feel the need to agree with me and repeat my point?

Well what was the point of saying it in the first place then?

Philbo
Dec 16th, 2010, 08:19 AM
2 things:

1. Why put Evert and BJK in the same sentence? BJK has NO argument as GOAT.
2. You're a bigot, calling someone a wingnut just because they have a different opinion than you.
Based on numbers alone, BJK doesnt have an argument. But if you factor in the time she invested off court to get the tour up and running, I believe she may have achieved numbers that would have put her in the discussion had she been able to be focussed 100% on just playing tennis.

In terms of me being a bigot, when Margaret Court condemmed all homosexuals as bad 'role models', she qualifies as a religious wingnut. I have no problem with her christianity so long as she refrains from judging others and leaves that up to God, but unfortunately Court chose not to do that. If my opinion of her opinion of me makes me a bigot, so be it.
Well what was the point of saying it in the first place then?
Umm, because I felt like saying it. What is the point of saying ANYTHING on these messageboards by that logic?

justineheninfan
Dec 16th, 2010, 09:19 AM
King as the GOAT? I doubt it. She just wasnt as talented as people like Court, Navratilova, or Evert. A very young Evert was beating up on her a few times on clay and hard courts even. Her game just wasnt as powerful or stable as many of the other greats, and she wasnt the biggest of physically strongest either. She had to make up for alot it with craftiness and alot of determination. Even Goolagong and Bueno were probably more naturally talented, although King was the greater and more accomplished player. If anything she was an overachiever to have won all she has (10 combined Wimbledon/U.S Opens, top 5 or 6 player of the Open Era) when you watch her play. And that is meant as a compliment of course, better to be an overachiever than an underachiever.

That isnt to say she wasnt extremely talented in her own right. Just not GOAT level talent IMO.

Raiden
Dec 16th, 2010, 11:05 AM
Based on numbers alone, BJK doesnt have an argument. But if you factor in the time she invested off court to get the tour up and running,Nonsense! It was the well publisized battle-of-sexes matchup with Riggs that gave BJ fame and made her a cause célèbre for women's lib./feminism and led to her extra-tennis activities and hobbies (and not the fact that she was one of the original 9 'invitees' of the tour)

So stop being sneaky and stealing credit from a dead person! It was Gladys Heldman who set the whole tour up and running. BJ's job was the same as the 8 other players who were all hand-picked by Gladys to join her creation: to be present at the tournaments and play tennis.

Philbo
Dec 16th, 2010, 04:16 PM
Nonsense! It was the well publisized battle-of-sexes matchup with Riggs that gave BJ fame and made her a cause célèbre for women's lib./feminism and led to her extra-tennis activities and hobbies (and not the fact that she was one of the original 9 'invitees' of the tour)

So stop being sneaky and stealing credit from a dead person! It was Gladys Heldman who set the whole tour up and running. BJ's job was the same as the 8 other players who were all hand-picked by Gladys to join her creation: to be present at the tournaments and play tennis.
Source? I'd like some evidence that BJK did nothing in the early years besides turn up and play tennis. So reports of BJK getting up at 6am to do radio promo i/v's for whichever city/tournament they were in before having to play her match that day is made up rubbish is it?

samsam4087
Dec 17th, 2010, 12:37 AM
http://www.woa.tv/images/athletics/at_battlesexes/at_battlesexes_04_600x430.jpg
http://www.woa.tv/images/athletics/at_battlesexes/at_battlesexes_02_600x471.jpg
http://www.woa.tv/images/athletics/at_battlesexes/at_battlesexes_05_412x600.jpg
http://www.woa.tv/images/athletics/at_battlesexes/at_battlesexes_06_600x403.jpg
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39360000/jpg/_39360718_billieandbobbie203.jpg
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/blogs/thelede/posts/0222sexes.jpg

samsam4087
Sep 21st, 2011, 08:57 AM
Martina is the greatest woman tennis player.

Melange
Sep 21st, 2011, 12:27 PM
http://www.woa.tv/images/athletics/at_battlesexes/at_battlesexes_06_600x403.jpg


Why dont we have this anymore

thrust
Sep 21st, 2011, 01:50 PM
Nonsense! It was the well publisized battle-of-sexes matchup with Riggs that gave BJ fame and made her a cause célèbre for women's lib./feminism and led to her extra-tennis activities and hobbies (and not the fact that she was one of the original 9 'invitees' of the tour)

So stop being sneaky and stealing credit from a dead person! It was Gladys Heldman who set the whole tour up and running. BJ's job was the same as the 8 other players who were all hand-picked by Gladys to join her creation: to be present at the tournaments and play tennis.

Basing anything on the Riggs matches, is nonsense! First, Margreat was a shy woman who did not seek the limelight. Therefore, she probably froze during the match. Second, Riggs was about 2 years older when he playe BJK and out of shape. For anyone over 50, every year makes a big difference. I have first hand experience about that sort of thing. Past 65 is even worse-LOL!!

samsam4087
Sep 22nd, 2011, 09:48 AM
Why dont we have this anymore

Bille is great as well, but Martina is the greatest.

:worship::worship::worship:

samsam4087
Sep 22nd, 2011, 09:50 AM
Steffi's got the numbers BUT Pam Shriver actually mentioned after the US Open Final that there were two number ones "the computer #1 and the #1 for most people in the locker room". Yes people, this #1 moaning was happening even back then with Steffi Graf and Martina Navratilova as the top two players!!!

I agree with Pam to be honest. If not so much now, back then I think Martina was the "real #1". It's similar to Justine and Amelie in 2006. Justine/Steffi got the numbers, the statistical invincibility, but Amelie/Martina got the slams :shrug:

Yes, well said.

:worship::worship::worship:

Raiden
Sep 22nd, 2011, 03:21 PM
Steffi's got the numbers BUT Pam Shriver actually mentioned after the US Open Final that there were two number ones "the computer #1 and the #1 for most people in the locker room". Yes people, this #1 moaning was happening even back then with Steffi Graf and Martina Navratilova as the top two players!!!

I agree with Pam to be honest. If not so much now, back then I think Martina was the "real #1". It's similar to Justine and Amelie in 2006. Justine/Steffi got the numbers, the statistical invincibility, but Amelie/Martina got the slams :shrug:Really, is that a fact? Did Pam really say "most people"?

I somehow don't think so cuz I still remember those days and it didn't look like that was possibly going on. Quite the opposite as a matter of fact: Monica felt that she was not respected enough as number one (the WTA explicitly refused extension of the ranking protection and when Monica disagreed with that decision the WTA responded that it had the support of pretty much all of the top 30 or top whatever players for their decision). So it sure as hell didn't look like Monica was the "number one" in the locker room at all. In fact she pretty much has admitted that she felt somewhat abandoned by the tour (with one or two exceptions like Gaby Sabatini).

So Olórin, either you made that story up or Pam made that up...

...or else maybe Pam was taking only about the geriatric corner of the locker room :lol:

Philbo
Sep 22nd, 2011, 03:51 PM
Really, is that a fact? Did Pam really say "most people"?

I somehow don't think so cuz I still remember those days and it didn't look like that was possibly going on. Quite the opposite as a matter of fact: Monica felt that she was not respected enough as number one (the WTA explicitly refused extension of the ranking protection and when Monica disagreed with that decision the WTA responded that it had the support of pretty much all of the top 30 or top whatever players for their decision). So it sure as hell didn't look like Monica was the "number one" in the locker room at all. In fact she pretty much has admitted that she felt somewhat abandoned by the tour (with one or two exceptions like Gaby Sabatini).

So Olórin, either you made that story up or Pam made that up...

...or else maybe Pam was taking only about the geriatric corner of the locker room :lol:
Monica at the top in 1987? This thread was about Steffi or Martina in 87 wasnt it?

The story rings true to me. Ive heard it before.

Raiden
Sep 22nd, 2011, 04:02 PM
Monica at the top in 1987? This thread was about Steffi or Martina in 87 wasnt it?

The story rings true to me. Ive heard it before.You're right, my fault. Not sure how I got Monica confused with Martina. I'm sure there's some Freudian explanation for it cuz the two players have little in common :lol:

By the way half the thread seems to be all about BJK as much as anyone else, go figure!

Philbo
Sep 22nd, 2011, 04:19 PM
You're right, my fault. Not sure how I got Monica confused with Martina. I'm sure there's some Freudian explanation for it cuz the two players have little in common :lol:

By the way half the thread seems to be all about BJK as much as anyone else, go figure!
hehe Monica and Martina tend to go hand in hand. Especially when dispelling the Graf as GOAT myth ;)

samsam4087
Jan 13th, 2012, 01:42 PM
Martina is the greatest forever.

Calvin M.
Jan 13th, 2012, 09:51 PM
hehe Monica and Martina tend to go hand in hand. Especially when dispelling the Graf as GOAT myth ;)

Even I can admit this to being true and I'm a die-hard Graf fan (with old school affection for Navratilova and tons of respect for Seles).

Anabelcroft
Jan 13th, 2012, 11:39 PM
Justine/Steffi got the numbers, the statistical invincibility, but Amelie/Martina got the slams :shrug:

Oh God :lol:

samsam4087
Feb 2nd, 2012, 09:10 AM
Martina was the real number one in 1987.

Clijsters28
Feb 12th, 2012, 05:33 PM
I dont like Graf and loved Navratilova, but Graf is the clear answer here. 1 extra slam doesnt come close to compensating for the huge chasm between their overall tournament performance. How is Navratilova leading the poll. Is this another of those jokes like all the votes for Wozniacki winning the French Open or are there alot of stupid people on this site.

Anabelcroft
Feb 13th, 2012, 10:29 PM
I dont like Graf and loved Navratilova, but Graf is the clear answer here. 1 extra slam doesnt come close to compensating for the huge chasm between their overall tournament performance.

Graf has lost only 14 sets in the entire 1987 season!

danieln1
Feb 13th, 2012, 10:36 PM
Martina was the real number one in 1987.

Yes, well said.

:worship::worship::worship:

samsam4087
May 10th, 2012, 05:54 AM
From the poll result, Martina Navratilova is the real number 1 of 1987.