PDA

View Full Version : who are the non number 1 greats??


jimbo mack
Nov 8th, 2003, 08:46 PM
All players who have been world number 1 obviously go down as one of the ''greats''.

they are, as most of u will know

navratilova
evert
austin
graf
seles
sanchez vicario
himgis
davenport
capriati
serena
venus
clijsters
henin- hardenne

but who in your opinion, are players who HAVEN'T been world number 1 BUT goes down into your ''greats'' category????

i'm thinking sabatini???

irma
Nov 8th, 2003, 08:49 PM
Mandlikova she won more slams then many did who were number 1.

jimbo mack
Nov 8th, 2003, 08:51 PM
Mandlikova she won more slams then many did who were number 1.

definitely a very underesrimated player- probably THE most?

Venus Forever
Nov 8th, 2003, 09:00 PM
Goolagong

Libertango
Nov 8th, 2003, 09:00 PM
How many exactly did Hana win?

Others, maybe, Gabriela, Conchita, Jana....

Venus Forever
Nov 8th, 2003, 09:05 PM
Mandlikova she won more slams then many did who were number 1.

Mandlikova only won four slams, better than only 4 number one's.

Goolagong won SEVEN slams, yet, never reached number one. Almost the career slam, as she only missed out on the US Open, but reached the finals four times. Not to mention 7 other Slam Finals, outside the US Open one's.

Evonne Goolagong has to be the best.

irma
Nov 8th, 2003, 09:08 PM
I thought she was number 1 in 71 but that was a different ranking.

Venus Forever
Nov 8th, 2003, 09:11 PM
I thought she was number 1 in 71 but that was a different ranking.

May have been, but she still won most of her slams during the Open Era, and reached many slam finals as well.

MisterQ
Nov 8th, 2003, 09:33 PM
maybe mary pierce, or conchita martinez?

But really I think the players who actually have reached No. 1 are at another level.

jimbo mack
Nov 8th, 2003, 09:33 PM
what about helena sukova? never won a grandslam but she made a few finals and was reanked as high as 3 or 4?

u never hear about her in these posts........

jimbo mack
Nov 8th, 2003, 09:34 PM
maybe mary pierce, or conchita martinez?

But really I think the players who actually have reached No. 1 are at another level.

except clijsters, she still has alot more to prove

bandabou
Nov 8th, 2003, 09:48 PM
except clijsters, she still has alot more to prove


Yeah...Kim has more to prove as (former) no.1 than many non-no.1 greats.

MisterQ
Nov 8th, 2003, 09:53 PM
except clijsters, she still has alot more to prove

Yeah, I was thinking that but didn't write it... She needs a couple of slam wins imo.

jimbo mack
Nov 8th, 2003, 09:57 PM
she's the only number 1 who people could really question as to whether she deserved that status?

Kart
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:03 PM
i'm thinking sabatini???

OMG even if you are an obsessive Graf fan I love you :worship:.

I'm going to bring my Gaby avatar hold on ...

Kart
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:05 PM
That's more appropriate :D.

bandabou
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:11 PM
she's the only number 1 who people could really question as to whether she deserved that status?

And then REALLY question.

ans
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:12 PM
except clijsters, she still has alot more to prove

:topic: :yawn:

bandabou
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:13 PM
:topic: :yawn:

You tell them, miss! Donīt mess with your fav! :lol:

katrientje
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:14 PM
Jennifer Capriati is a great player, but to my feeling she doesn't belong in this list like the others do...
No insult really, she just not at the same level as the others imho

Kart
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:14 PM
bandabou I can see your posts again.

I'm overjoyed :p.

jimbo mack
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:15 PM
:topic: :yawn:

dont be rude!

bandabou
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:16 PM
bandabou I can see your posts again.

I'm overjoyed :p.

Yeah man! You were missing some good stuff!

MisterQ
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:17 PM
she's the only number 1 who people could really question as to whether she deserved that status?

Well, putting aside the argument that she obviously won enough points to "deserve it", everyone else on the list has won at least 2 slams. So I would say that Kim is definitely underachieved compared to them.

Kart
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:18 PM
Yeah man! You were missing some good stuff!

You'll forgive me if I don't go back and read them - I think I probably know what the general theme of them was ... :p

bandabou
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:19 PM
You'll forgive me if I don't go back and read them - I think I probably know what the general theme of them was ... :p

Hahaha...Iīm sure you do!

jimbo mack
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:20 PM
Jennifer Capriati is a great player, but to my feeling she doesn't belong in this list like the others do...
No insult really, she just not at the same level as the others imho

why not?

she won 3 grandslams (1 as a defending champ, and also 1 why she was world number 1)

also gold medallists at olympics

you're wrong, she has every right to be there!

i'm not a capriati fan but it annoys me when people dont understand what players have achieved :cross:

ans
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:21 PM
You tell them, miss! Donīt mess with your fav! :lol:

:armed: :p

ans
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:22 PM
dont be rude!

lol, me...rude....???

bandabou
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:23 PM
No, Anske is NEVER rude!

katrientje
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:24 PM
why not?

she won 3 grandslams (1 as a defending champ, and also 1 why she was world number 1)

also gold medallists at olympics

you're wrong, she has every right to be there!

i'm not a capriati fan but it annoys me when people dont understand what players have achieved :cross:

I reckon Jen being a great player. Above all she did win 3 slams, but I just feel that she isn't on the same level with both Martina's, Steffi, Chris; etc... She didn't win that many tournaments like the others did.

The same goes for Kim and Justine, but they have all the time in the world to prove that they do belong there, while I think that Jen had her best time

Just my personal opinion...

bandabou
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:30 PM
I reckon Jen being a great player. Above all she did win 3 slams, but I just feel that she isn't on the same level with both Martina's, Steffi, Chris; etc... She didn't win that many tournaments like the others did.

The same goes for Kim and Justine, but they have all the time in the world to prove that they do belong there, while I think that Jen had her best time

Just my personal opinion...

And a correct one at that.

Linzi
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:32 PM
Yes katrientje i agree. To be honest when has she even dominated the tour? She won a couple of slams in 01 and that was about it. Justine this yr has won 2 slams, but she didnt just think 'oh yeh i won 2 slams i can lose the plot now'. She's still fighting like hell to win the yec. A great player doesnt just win a couple of titles and stop, she basically dominates. Capriati has never done this.

ans
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:34 PM
No, Anske is NEVER rude!

:armed: ----> :angel:

MisterQ
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:35 PM
While I would agree that Capriati is near the bottom of that list of players, I think she belongs in the list. Her accomplishments are comparable to Tracy Austin, for example.

jimbo mack
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:38 PM
i agree she's never dominated for a great period of time, but she was definitely the best player of 2001, and if anyone dominated that year it would be her.

bandabou
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:41 PM
Jen is the other extreme of only slams matter. The sisters win slams and tournaments. But Jen wins only slams...that is a bit TOO extreme.

Linzi
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:41 PM
Venus was alot more dominant in 01

bandabou
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:42 PM
In 01 Venus was more dominant than Jen indeed. More titles, winning h2h, equal number of slams... in ī01 Jen won only THREE titles!! That ainīt dominating.

katrientje
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:43 PM
Venus was alot more dominant in 01

That's what I was thinking, winning wimbedon and the USopen

Linzi
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:44 PM
And she owned Jen. Was it 3-0?

jimbo mack
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:44 PM
Venus was alot more dominant in 01

how could i forget venus?? !!

venus dominated between wimbledon and us

capriati MAINLY dominated between australian and french

and i suppose davenport dominated the fall

however, capriati was THE player of 2001

bandabou
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:46 PM
Jen was all fairy tale and when the fairy tale stopped going her way, she started to moan and bitch! Remember Monica-gate?!

Linzi
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:48 PM
how could i forget venus?? !!

venus dominated between wimbledon and us

capriati MAINLY dominated between australian and french

and i suppose davenport dominated the fall

however, capriati was THE player of 2001
You are so wrong! Capriati didnt dominate between the australian and french, she won them both, dont think any titles in between. Capriati got a sympathy vote for her comeback, she wasnt the best player.

jimbo mack
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:48 PM
capriati haters- can we put her personality to one side and concentrate on her TENNIS !!

this thread is not about ''who's the bitch of the tour.......''

A4
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:49 PM
Well, IMO, Jen deserves to be up with the greats more than some others I could mention, but won't. Had Steffi and Monica been out at the same time, Sabatini might very well been up with the greats, right?

Jen won slams, which were pretty competitive. She actually has talent, loads of it, I daresay, more so than the majority of the top players in the last 10 -12 years. Thats how come she could beat Graf at the tender age of...... what was it again? And then "take a break" and come back to win slams, beating some of the best players of the era (Hingis, Serena etc). Does she deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence as Navratilova and Steffi? Probably, not quite. But she definitely deserves to be called a great (at the current moment, no-one knows the future) much more so than some others on the list.

jimbo mack
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:50 PM
You are so wrong! Capriati didnt dominate between the australian and french, she won them both, dont think any titles in between. Capriati got a sympathy vote for her comeback, she wasnt the best player.

she won tier 1 charleston in between aussie and french.

she was THE best player in 2001! FACT! she won the award, go and do some research, u dont have enough knowledge......

jimbo mack
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:52 PM
Well, IMO, Jen deserves to be up with the greats more than some others I could mention, but won't. Had Steffi and Monica been out at the same time, Sabatini might very well been up with the greats, right?

Jen won slams, which were pretty competitive. She actually has talent, loads of it, I daresay, more so than the majority of the top players in the last 10 -12 years. Thats how come she could beat Graf at the tender age of...... what was it again? And then "take a break" and come back to win slams, beating some of the best players of the era (Hingis, Serena etc). Does she deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence as Navratilova and Steffi? Probably, not quite. But she definitely deserves to be called a great (at the current moment, no-one knows
the future) much more so than some others on the list.


At last, somebody with a brain!! its nice to see somebody else recognises her achievements :)

Linzi
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:52 PM
Award=sympathy vote. Oh what a great comeback...etc.

katrientje
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:53 PM
At last, somebody with a brain!! its nice to see somebody else recognises her achievements :)

So only people who have the same opinion as you, have a brain??

jimbo mack
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:54 PM
Award=sympathy vote. Oh what a great comeback...etc.

come back when you are an adult.

Linzi
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:54 PM
Go on then A4 say who u think she deserves to be there more than on this list? Yep Kim and Justine but they have time on their side. Everyone else has won alot more titles than Jen.

jimbo mack
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:55 PM
So only people who have the same opinion as you, have a brain??

nope, people who aren't blind to see a player's achievements have a brain........ why are u putting words into my mouth ??

katrientje
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:57 PM
nope, people who aren't blind to see a player's achievements have a brain........ why are u putting words into my mouth ??

You are putting words into my mouth. I do see everything Jen achieved, I reckoned that she is a great player, I just said she isn't on the same level than most others on "the list"

jimbo mack
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:57 PM
Go on then A4 say who u think she deserves to be there more than on this list? Yep Kim and Justine but they have time on their side. Everyone else has won alot more titles than Jen.

she deserves to be where she already is...one of the greats.

Linzi
Nov 8th, 2003, 10:59 PM
You are putting words into my mouth. I do see everything Jen achieved, I reckoned that she is a great player, I just said she isn't on the same level than most others on "the list"
Exactly...i never said she wasnt a great player, she just looks out of place on the list, thats all.

katrientje
Nov 8th, 2003, 11:07 PM
I see jen rather in the leaugue of Jana novotna, conchita Martinez, etc... which are all "greats" too

jimbo mack
Nov 8th, 2003, 11:10 PM
I see jen rather in the leaugue of Jana novotna, conchita Martinez, etc... which are all "greats" too

no, jen is in the number 1's league

novotna and martinez aren't, they're greats, but not as high as the number 1 greats

katrientje
Nov 8th, 2003, 11:13 PM
no, jen is in the number 1's league

novotna and martinez aren't, they're greats, but not as high as the number 1 greats

I guess we've established that we don't agree on this point ;)

jimbo mack
Nov 8th, 2003, 11:15 PM
I guess we've established that we don't agree on this point ;)

erm....yep!

Linzi
Nov 8th, 2003, 11:16 PM
Lets see:

navratilova-won many more slams
evert-not sure so no comment
austin-same
graf-22 slams
seles-8 slams, dominated w. graf in early 90s
sanchez vicario-double titles
himgis-triple no. of titles
davenport-double no. of titles
serena-double slams
venus-double titles
clijsters-just started, same no of titles already(although no slams)
henin- hardenne-just started,same no of titles of already

DO U GET MY POINT?

mishar
Nov 8th, 2003, 11:17 PM
I think Jen is one of the greats, by virtue of having three slams, but she was never a dominating #1. The flower of her career (so far) was the first half of 2001. While the AO 2002 was a triumph, it was sandwiched around a lot mediocre results. From the Australian of 2001 to Wimbledon, she was the best player on the tour. But even so, she did not dominate. She only won 3 tournaments. She lost to Seles, Davenport, Serena, Mauresmo, and who in Rome?

mishar
Nov 8th, 2003, 11:19 PM
You could say the same about Tracy, and perhaps (this is questionable) about Arantxa.

Venus Forever
Nov 8th, 2003, 11:19 PM
:topic: :topic: :topic:

jimbo mack
Nov 8th, 2003, 11:19 PM
Lets see:

navratilova-won many more slams
evert-not sure so no comment
austin-same
graf-22 slams
seles-8 slams, dominated w. graf in early 90s
sanchez vicario-double titles
himgis-triple no. of titles
davenport-double no. of titles
serena-double slams
venus-double titles
clijsters-just started, same no of titles already(although no slams)
henin- hardenne-just started,same no of titles of already

DO U GET MY POINT?

got your point a long time ago, just wasnt that interested

katrientje
Nov 8th, 2003, 11:25 PM
:topic: :topic: :topic:

Your demonstration is completely justified.

Jana might be the only one in my eyes who comes close to the A+ list
24 titles and a win at wimbledon

jimbo mack
Nov 8th, 2003, 11:28 PM
Your demonstration is completely justified.

Jana might be the only one in my eyes who comes close to the A+ list
24 titles and a win at wimbledon

i think i might agree with u!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

although handlikova and sabatini are close to the A list aswell

katrientje
Nov 8th, 2003, 11:33 PM
i think i might agree with u!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:)

A4
Nov 9th, 2003, 07:04 AM
Go on then A4 say who u think she deserves to be there more than on this list? Yep Kim and Justine but they have time on their side. Everyone else has won alot more titles than Jen.

Actually, I agree a lot with katie's original post, with the exception of Jen. I think she did something unique. Played with the best and beat the best of probably 3 mini-generations: Steffi/Monica era, Lindsay/Martina and Venus/Serena. She definitely wasn't the best among them but at least, she showed she could be with the best.

Linzi mentions Justine and Kim and time. Sure, they have the luxury of time. Jen didn't. Who knows how many more slams she'd have racked up in the nineties?

I think age's caught up with her and her current results should be taken with some perspective, pretty much the same way Monica's results for the past couple of years should be looked at, in deciding her greatness and contribution to tennis.

azza
Nov 9th, 2003, 07:30 AM
Seles