Originally Posted by dsanders06
But I just don't understand that mindset atall though, and never have. Like, I've just never seen ANYONE try and detract from a player's greatness by saying "yeah well, they lost a lot of finals". I just don't understand why someone would say it's better to lose in an early round rather than lose in a final
I mean, do people say Capriati is greater than fellow 3-Slam-titles Davenport, just because Capriati never lost a Slam final?
Davenport is obviously greater, and one of the reasons for that is because she made so many more Slam finals. I dunno, it would be the strangest thing in the world to me if someone suggested Capriati was greater just because she didn't make those extra finals that Davenport did in the first place, even if she ended up losing them.
Exactly, this is why I don't partake in the whole Serena vs Evert and Navrat debates. For me, I class her with them in the sense of greatest of her era but when you look at they both made like 40 Slam Finals while skipping two a year for large parts of their career you realise how much more accomplished they are.
Plus, it leaves no doubt in the mind. The worst type scenario for me is one like last USO where she loses in SF and then Serena throws in a shitshow in the Final and you're wondering if she had just won that match just maybe...
It sucks to see her lose Finals but in years to come we'll look back and be proud of them.