TennisForum.com - Reply to Topic
Thread: 1979 to 1981: Tracy Austin was the best. Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TennisForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Image Verification
Please enter the six letters or digits that appear in the image opposite.

Registration Image

  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
Jan 2nd, 2016 09:44 PM
Rollo
Re: 1979 to 1981: Tracy Austin was the best.

A very determined looking Austin

Feb 17th, 2015 07:40 PM
aarynginamarie
Re: 1979 to 1981: Tracy Austin was the best.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumarokov-Elston View Post
At the Canadian Open, Chris received a death threat before her final against Tracy. And in the round robin, Chris tanked the match, turning up in a black dress and standing with a sour expression on her face the whole time.
The only match Chris won was the RR match of the YEC and you claim she tanked that match. Either way laughable excuses all around to try and justify Tracy's butt whoopings of Chris. Although I am the sure the incredibly biased Steve Flink used similar biased/unjustifiable rational for giving Evert yet another suspect ITF POY. As I said thank goodness today the ITF (which is probably even more corrupt and biased today) and their cheesy Player of Year award no longer holds an ounce of value and their silly verdicts such as Djokovic's POY over Nadal in 2013 or Myskina's POY in 2004 are tossed away as meaningless and a side piece or comedy, unlike then when people had to hold them in high regard.
Feb 17th, 2015 01:54 PM
laschutz
Re: 1979 to 1981: Tracy Austin was the best.

i so remember that round robin match between austin and evert AFTER the 3 1/2 hour 3 set marathon classic that was NEVER shown on tv! if ONLY they would have televised that one!....

anyway, yeah, i remember evert wearing a black ellesse outfit (the only time she ever wore black) and she DID have that sour expression on her face the entire time,, a combination of being very pissed and "whatever" (for having to play austin again in the same tournament) and literally stood around as austin hit winner after winner.. the only time i can ever think of that evert TRULY tanked a match a entire match...

in regards to rankings of that time, it seemed more emphasis was put on 1) how one did at the major as opposed to year week to week results? 2) and if one had bad losses in that year?...

perhaps what "hurts" austin in 1981 was a number of issues 1) she didnt play much if at all the first half, 2) she didn't do well in the slams besides her open win (i.e. loss to shriver at wimbledon and the aussie open and both in the quarters) 3) loss to sue barker? in 3 sets shortly after winning the u.s. open,etcetera)
Feb 16th, 2015 10:33 PM
Sumarokov-Elston
Re: 1979 to 1981: Tracy Austin was the best.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aarynginamarie View Post
Even then Austin would clearly be ahead of her winning the U.S Open, YEC, numerous other tournaments, and crushing Chris badly in 2 of their 3 meetings (barely losing the other which was a RR match).
At the Canadian Open, Chris received a death threat before her final against Tracy. And in the round robin, Chris tanked the match, turning up in a black dress and standing with a sour expression on her face the whole time. Tracy did have a good second half of 1981, but so did Martina. The first half of 1981 was all about Chris and Hana. The second half was more about Martina and Tracy -- but Chris was still there. I think the most definitive matches of the second half of 1981 were Martina's close wins over Chris at the US Open and Australian Open (but Chris still beat Martina on grass just before the AO). Watch the 1981 US Open semi-final between Chris and Martina -- and then try to imagine Tracy playing the same sort of game. And starting in the second half of 1981, you had the crazy seedings, ranking Hana at #5, so she always met Chris in the QF (Canadian Open, US Open...). So before she even reached the SF, Chris would have to replay the Wimbledon final of that year!
Feb 16th, 2015 08:23 PM
aarynginamarie
Re: 1979 to 1981: Tracy Austin was the best.

Didn't she spank them both pretty good there too. I know the win over Evert was quite easy as my dad was there to see it live and he told me about the match.

Steve Flink controlled the rankings back then (not the computer ones, but the more highly regarded ITF ones) and was knowingly biased to Evert. Navratilova complained about it many times, especialy after #1 being given to Evert for 78 when Navratilova was the computer #1 and had better results the majority of the year but fizzled out at the very end. Had someone else been in charge it would be interesting which of Evert, Austin, or Navratilova was awarded #1 for 1981. My guess is Austin, although all 3 would have a decent case. The ITF still makes absurd choices in their Player of Year choices, Djokovic over Nadal for 2013 but thankfully their choices as POY or #1 are no longer important or relevant to anyone but themselves, unlike then when they were actually super important.
Feb 15th, 2015 03:51 PM
Rollo
Re: 1979 to 1981: Tracy Austin was the best.

Quote:
The only way I could see Evert being put in with Navratilova and Austin the 2nd half of 81 is counting her Wimbledon win as part of the 2nd half. Otherwise no. Even then Austin would clearly be ahead of her winning the U.S Open, YEC, numerous other tournaments, and crushing Chris badly in 2 of their 3 meetings (barely losing the other which was a RR match).
I agree. And outside of that it was Austin who won the Canadian Open, beating both Martina and Chris.
Feb 15th, 2015 03:33 PM
aarynginamarie
Re: 1979 to 1981: Tracy Austin was the best.

The only way I could see Evert being put in with Navratilova and Austin the 2nd half of 81 is counting her Wimbledon win as part of the 2nd half. Otherwise no. Even then Austin would clearly be ahead of her winning the U.S Open, YEC, numerous other tournaments, and crushing Chris badly in 2 of their 3 meetings (barely losing the other which was a RR match).
Feb 9th, 2015 05:44 AM
calou
Re: 1979 to 1981: Tracy Austin was the best.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumarokov-Elston View Post
I think it is easier if you count this period not in years, but half-years, because the situation changed so often in a year:

1978 - first half goes to Navratilova
1978 - second half goes to Evert
1979 - whole year goes to Navratilova
1980 - first half split between Austin and Evert
1980 - second half goes to Evert
1981 - first half goes to Evert (followed by Mandlikova)
1981 - second half split three ways between Austin/Navratilova/Evert

So for the 1979 to 1981 period, I would give a year to Navratilova (1979), a year and a bit to Evert (1980/81), half a year and a bit to Austin (1980, 1981) and the other scrappings between Navratilova and Evert. Basically both ends of the period were dominated by Navratilova, while Evert was dominant in the centre (and generally the more consistent from start to finish).
Couldn't agree more
Feb 8th, 2015 07:57 PM
aarynginamarie
Re: 1979 to 1981: Tracy Austin was the best.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
People talk a ton about how the Seles stabbing "inflated" Steffi Graf's numbers. Clearly they did.

But the inflation to Evert and Navratilova's numbers is unremarked on. Tracy was never the same after getting hurt again in 1981. We will never know how much of a threat Jaeger was-and Mandlikova was frail of body.

The Martina/Chris lock on slams wasn't all due only to them. As always other factors were on hand.
Since injuries are part of the game so it is really irrelevant. It is fun to speculate on, and wonder what Austin could have done to Martina and Chris without her injuries and shortened career, but as for tainting achievements it just doesnt work. It is like you could speculate without her prime ending surgery/injures in early 97 Graf would have won over 30 slams and atleast 10 Wimbledons, easily wiping out Court and Navratilova's most important marks, and possibly reached 25 slams and 10+ Wimbledons even without the Seles stabbing without her major 97 injuries. However in that case, just like Austin, it would mean nothing, which is why nobody bothers in that vein, and rightfully so.

Anyway while I am not going to dump on Tracy in her appreciation thread I sense in addition to injuries she was struggling with motivation and where to go with her rather one dimensional structured game post 81. I am not sure she could have kept up with the improvement level of Martina or even Chris that period regardless. I dont think her greatly impacting them is any foregone conclusion at all.
Feb 8th, 2015 07:52 PM
aarynginamarie
Re: 1979 to 1981: Tracy Austin was the best.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumarokov-Elston View Post
I think it is easier if you count this period not in years, but half-years, because the situation changed so often in a year:

1978 - first half goes to Navratilova
1978 - second half goes to Evert
1979 - whole year goes to Navratilova
1980 - first half split between Austin and Evert
1980 - second half goes to Evert
1981 - first half goes to Evert (followed by Mandlikova)
1981 - second half split three ways between Austin/Navratilova/Evert

So for the 1979 to 1981 period, I would give a year to Navratilova (1979), a year and a bit to Evert (1980/81), half a year and a bit to Austin (1980, 1981) and the other scrappings between Navratilova and Evert. Basically both ends of the period were dominated by Navratilova, while Evert was dominant in the centre (and generally the more consistent from start to finish).
Navratilova and Austin were definitely better than Evert in the second half of 81 IMO.
Feb 8th, 2015 07:50 PM
aarynginamarie
Re: 1979 to 1981: Tracy Austin was the best.

I always thought Tracy was the rightful #1 of 1981 after winning the YEC, when you had 4 different 1 slam winners, and a solid overall record. Plus her head to head edge over her main rival for #1- Chris, crushing her silly in 2 of 3 matches, and barely losing the other. It is too bad biased Steve Flink was in charge and would always find some excuse to give it to Chris.

1980 I would agree with Chris since she simply was better in the bigger matches/tournaments, while Chris dominated most of the regular tour and her head to heads, but failed relatively where it mattered most (not playing the French, losing to Goolagong at Wimbledon, losing to Evert at the Open).
Feb 5th, 2015 02:41 AM
Rollo
Re: 1979 to 1981: Tracy Austin was the best.

Quote:
Wow, so 1980 would be Tracy? That is so odd to me considering how Chris won 2 out of the 3 slam finals she made and Tracy was just twice a semifinalist. And Martina #1 for 1981?! Didn't she have something like 17 losses that year? But at least she made two slam finals and won one of them. I never really understood all the various ranking algorithms, especially the one that had Austin at #4 at the beginning of 1984. She was no where to be found
Just remember Mark that you asked what the rankings would be like under today's ranking system.

I hate the "modern" rankings, as they favor many events over quality. It gave us several slamless year end #1s-with Wozniacki being the latest. The 70s-80s earky 90s rankings (until 1997) favored consistency and used a divisor system. It was this divisor that kept Austin rank so high until early 1984.

So, yes, under "modern" rankings Austin in the 1980 #1.
Navratilova would be #1 for 1981, as she played the most.

Sanchez would be hands down #1 in 1994
Conchita Martinez wouls be #1 in 1995.
Feb 5th, 2015 02:33 AM
Rollo
Re: 1979 to 1981: Tracy Austin was the best.

Quote:
I think it is easier if you count this period not in years, but half-years, because the situation changed so often in a year:

1978 - first half goes to Navratilova
1978 - second half goes to Evert
1979 - whole year goes to Navratilova
1980 - first half split between Austin and Evert
1980 - second half goes to Evert
1981 - first half goes to Evert (followed by Mandlikova)
1981 - second half split three ways between Austin/Navratilova/Evert

So for the 1979 to 1981 period, I would give a year to Navratilova (1979), a year and a bit to Evert (1980/81), half a year and a bit to Austin (1980, 1981) and the other scrappings between Navratilova and Evert. Basically both ends of the period were dominated by Navratilova, while Evert was dominant in the centre (and generally the more consistent from start to finish).
Totally agree with all of this.
Feb 2nd, 2015 10:02 PM
Sumarokov-Elston
Re: 1979 to 1981: Tracy Austin was the best.

I think it is easier if you count this period not in years, but half-years, because the situation changed so often in a year:

1978 - first half goes to Navratilova
1978 - second half goes to Evert
1979 - whole year goes to Navratilova
1980 - first half split between Austin and Evert
1980 - second half goes to Evert
1981 - first half goes to Evert (followed by Mandlikova)
1981 - second half split three ways between Austin/Navratilova/Evert

So for the 1979 to 1981 period, I would give a year to Navratilova (1979), a year and a bit to Evert (1980/81), half a year and a bit to Austin (1980, 1981) and the other scrappings between Navratilova and Evert. Basically both ends of the period were dominated by Navratilova, while Evert was dominant in the centre (and generally the more consistent from start to finish).
Feb 2nd, 2015 03:24 PM
Mark43
Re: 1979 to 1981: Tracy Austin was the best.

Wow, so 1980 would be Tracy? That is so odd to me considering how Chris won 2 out of the 3 slam finals she made and Tracy was just twice a semifinalist. And Martina #1 for 1981?! Didn't she have something like 17 losses that year? But at least she made two slam finals and won one of them. I never really understood all the various ranking algorithms, especially the one that had Austin at #4 at the beginning of 1984. She was no where to be found.
This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome