Greatest Tennis Players of the Decade - TennisForum.com
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 26 (permalink) Old Oct 19th, 2004, 07:50 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 391
                     
Greatest Tennis Players of the Decade

Men ----------------------------- Women

1880s Renshaw / Sears--------------- Bingley Hillyard
1890s R. Doherty / Wrenn ----------- Dod / Atkinson
1900s L. Doherty / Larned---------- Douglass Chambers
1910s Wilding ----------------- Douglass Chambers / Mallory
1920s Tilden ----------------- Lenglen
1930s Budge ------------------- Wills Moody
1940s Kramer-------------------- Brough
1950s Gonzales------------------ Connolly
1960s Rosewall-------------------- Court
1970s Borg--------------------- Evert
1980s Lendl-------------------- Navratilova
1990s Sampras---------------- Seles until she was stabbed
2000s Federer projected------------ who ?



Who is the projected winner for the women in this decade?

Tennis was not so much an international sport before the 1920s and 1930s (really became an international sport in 1925). Therefore, it is harder to have a best player of the sport for those earlier years -- except you have to go with Wilding in the 1910s.

There are some very good players --- Cochet, Lacoste, Perry, Vines, Crawford, Hoad, Laver, Newcombe, Connors, McEnroe, Edberg, Becker, Wilander and Agassi among the men and Jacobs, Marble, du Pont, Hart, Fry, Hard, Gibson, Bueno, King, Goolagong, Graf, Hingis among the women --- who just were not quite good enough to be considered the best players of their decades.

Last edited by LADIEZ CHAMPION; Oct 19th, 2004 at 07:56 AM.
LADIEZ CHAMPION is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 26 (permalink) Old Oct 19th, 2004, 08:42 AM
Moderator - BFTP
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 24,843
                     
The list looks fair enough-I'd have to give Graf the 90's and Pauline Betz the 40's perhaps.
Rollo is offline  
post #3 of 26 (permalink) Old Oct 19th, 2004, 10:36 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 64
                     
I agree with Rollo
GrantyBoy is offline  
 
post #4 of 26 (permalink) Old Oct 19th, 2004, 12:58 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Under Carlos Moya
Posts: 4,918
                     
How about a Graf/Seles joint honour for the 1990s?

Traits Gandhi considered the most spiritually perilous to humanity.
*Wealth without Work * Pleasure without Conscience

*Science without Humanity *Knowledge without Character

*Politics without Principle *Commerce without Morality

*Worship without Sacrifice
Andy T is offline  
post #5 of 26 (permalink) Old Oct 19th, 2004, 03:47 PM
Senior Member
 
daze11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: BrOoKLyN, NY
Posts: 3,074
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy T
How about a Graf/Seles joint honour for the 1990s?
co #1's - hear, hear!

but to answer your question, it has got to be too early to tell...less because of predicting play than the intangible factor of injuries!!

Justine--if she gets her head together so that she doesnt always have a cold or virus (sorry...)--seems to me the most talented, composed, intelligent player who is likewise the best fighter...along with serena on being a fighter. But Justine has sounder form with more shot selection, better footwork, doesnt need to rely on power to make her point, and can stay quite composed if she feels healthy physically. However, IMO, that last part is a big IF for JHH.

Serena had a BIG temporary upperhand on the power front, but everyone on tour has already closed that gap.
daze11 is offline  
post #6 of 26 (permalink) Old Oct 19th, 2004, 04:24 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,551
                     
Serena and Justine would be the frontrunners for this decade and could claim it if either returns to their former glory. But I wonder if one of the up and comers might make a big run to the top and hold it for 3 years... Kuznetsova, Sharapova???

Who knows?

PreacherFan
preacherfan is offline  
post #7 of 26 (permalink) Old Oct 19th, 2004, 04:55 PM
Senior Member
 
alfajeffster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: United States of America
Posts: 9,216
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy T
How about a Graf/Seles joint honour for the 1990s?
Okay, I bite- literally (no seriously)! At the risk of inviting a visit from the dead so soon before the veil is properly lifted at Samhain, let's look at the record books on this one:

1990: Steffi Graf def. Mary Joe Fernandez (Australian Open)
1990: Monica Seles def. Steffi Graf (French Open)
1990: Martina Navratilova def. Zina Garrison (Wimbledon)
1990: Gabriela Sabatini def. Steffi Graf (U.S. Open)
1991: Monica Seles def. Jana Novotna (Australian Open)
1991: Monica Seles def. Arantxa Sanchez Vicario (French Open)
1991: Steffi Graf def. Gabriela Sabatini (Wimbledon)
1991: Monica Seles def. Martina Navratilova (U.S. Open)
1992: Monica Seles def. Mary Joe Fernandez (Australian Open)
1992: Monica Seles def. Steffi Graf (French Open)
1992: Steffi Graf def. Monica Seles (Wimbledon)
1992: Monica Seles def. Arantxa Sanchez Vicario (U.S. Open)
1993: Monica Seles def. Steffi Graf (Australian Open)
1993: Steffi Graf def. Mary Joe Fernandez (French Open)
1993: Steffi Graf def. Jana Novotna (Wimbledon)
1993: Steffi Graf def. Helena Sukova (U.S. Open)
1994: Steffi Graf def. Arantxa Sanchez Vicario (Australian Open)
1994: Arantxa Sanchez Vicario def. Mary Pierce (French Open)
1994: Conchita Martinez def. Martina Navratilova (Wimbledon)
1994: Arantxa Sanchez Vicario def. Steffi Graf (U.S. Open)
1995: Mary Pierce def. Arantxa Sanchez Vicario (Australian Open)
1995: Steffi Graf def. Arantxa Sanchez Vicario (French Open)
1995: Steffi Graf def. Arantxa Sanchez Vicario (Wimbledon)
1995: Steffi Graf def. Monica Seles (U.S. Open)
1996: Monica Seles def. Anke Huber (Australian Open)
1996: Steffi Graf def. Arantxa Sanchez Vicario (French Open)
1996: Steffi Graf def. Arantxa Sanchez Vicario (Wimbledon)
1996: Steffi Graf def. Monica Seles (U.S. Open)
1997: Martina Hingis def. Mary Pierce (Australian Open)
1997: Iva Majoli def. Martina Hingis (French Open)
1997: Martina Hingis def. Jana Novotna (Wimbledon)
1997: Martina Hingis def. Venus Williams (U.S. Open)
1998: Martina Hingis def. Conchita Martinez (Australian Open)
1998: Arantxa Sanchez Vicario def. Monica Seles (French Open)
1998: Jana Novotna def. Nathalie Tauziat (Wimbledon)
1998: Lindsay Davenport def. Martina Hingis (U.S. Open)
1999: Martina Hingis def. Amelie Mauresmo (Australian Open)
1999: Steffi Graf def. Martina Hingis (French Open)
1999: Lindsay Davenport def. Steffi Graf (Wimbledon)
1999: Serena Williams def. Martina Hingis (U.S. Open)

At the risk of reviving an old, beaten to death firestorm, I think the only real way is to look at the record books. 14-6 (20 appearances) does win out over 9-3 (12 appearances) when all is said and done. Is it fair? Is it right? Would it have been different? These are things that are not included in the record books, which can never be influenced by sentiment.

P.S.- I did that list from memory, so please forgive and correct any errors. I always seem to get Amelie Mauresmo and Mary Pierce's losing efforts to Martina Hingis mixed up for some strange reason.

P.S.S.- thanks!

There is nothing more beautiful than Evonne Goolagong in full flight moving across a tennis court.

Last edited by alfajeffster; Oct 19th, 2004 at 07:15 PM.
alfajeffster is offline  
post #8 of 26 (permalink) Old Oct 19th, 2004, 05:23 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,619
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by LADIEZ CHAMPION
Seles until she was stabbed

chris whiteside is offline  
post #9 of 26 (permalink) Old Oct 19th, 2004, 06:17 PM
Senior Member
 
alfajeffster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: United States of America
Posts: 9,216
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by LADIEZ CHAMPION
Men ----------------------------- Women

1880s Renshaw / Sears--------------- Bingley Hillyard
1890s R. Doherty / Wrenn ----------- Dod / Atkinson
1900s L. Doherty / Larned---------- Douglass Chambers
1910s Wilding ----------------- Douglass Chambers / Mallory
1920s Tilden ----------------- Lenglen
1930s Budge ------------------- Wills Moody
1940s Kramer-------------------- Brough
1950s Gonzales------------------ Connolly
1960s Rosewall-------------------- Court
1970s Borg--------------------- Evert
1980s Lendl-------------------- Navratilova
1990s Sampras---------------- Seles until she was stabbed
2000s Federer projected------------ who ?


Who is the projected winner for the women in this decade?

Tennis was not so much an international sport before the 1920s and 1930s (really became an international sport in 1925). Therefore, it is harder to have a best player of the sport for those earlier years -- except you have to go with Wilding in the 1910s.

There are some very good players --- Cochet, Lacoste, Perry, Vines, Crawford, Hoad, Laver, Newcombe, Connors, McEnroe, Edberg, Becker, Wilander and Agassi among the men and Jacobs, Marble, du Pont, Hart, Fry, Hard, Gibson, Bueno, King, Goolagong, Graf, Hingis among the women --- who just were not quite good enough to be considered the best players of their decades.
To be fair, you didn't say "greatest achievers" or "players who won the most majors" per decade, so that does leave it open to conjecture, however, I'm at a loss as to how Ken Rosewall made your 1960s pick instead of either Rod Laver or Roy Emerson. Also, Pancho Gonzales only ever won 2 majors- both in the 1940s, and while he is widely considered one of the greatest ever, he didn't win anything in the 1950s, and both Lew Hoad (my pick) and Ken Rosewall (and even Tony Trabert, who will be the first to admit Lew was the man) won several that decade. Ken Rosewall actually stopped Lew Hoad from winning the Grand Slam at the U.S. Championships in a tight 4-setter, if my recordbook memory serves.

There is nothing more beautiful than Evonne Goolagong in full flight moving across a tennis court.
alfajeffster is offline  
post #10 of 26 (permalink) Old Oct 19th, 2004, 06:44 PM
Senior Member
 
Nacho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Madrid
Posts: 16,400
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by alfajeffster
At the risk of reviving an old, beaten to death firestorm, I think the only real way is to look at the record books. 14-6 (20 appearances) does win out over 9-3 (12 appearances) when all is said and done. Is it fair? Is it right? Would it have been different? These are things that are not included in the record books, which can never be influenced by sentiment.
agreed

Quote:
Originally Posted by alfajeffster
P.S.- I did that list from memory, so please forgive and correct any errors. I always seem to get Amelie Mauresmo and Mary Pierce's losing efforts to Martina Hingis mixed up for some strange reason.
Hingis beat Mary in 1997, Conchita in 1998 and Amelie in 1999

YULIYA BEYGELZIMER
Nacho is offline  
post #11 of 26 (permalink) Old Oct 19th, 2004, 07:10 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 411
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
The list looks fair enough-I'd have to give Graf the 90's and Pauline Betz the 40's perhaps.

Pauline was the best player in the early 40's. Louise doesn't hit her stride until about 1947. A bit late to give her all of the 40s. I think there's a rule in math that says if you're going to start rounding off once you go higher then 5 you're suppose to round up. Thing is poor Louise then runs smack into Connolly so, she's out of luck on this one.
RoanHJ is offline  
post #12 of 26 (permalink) Old Oct 19th, 2004, 08:00 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,714
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by She-ra
How can a player who became number one default and won 3/4 slams because of a horrendous tragedy that befell the best player in that era EVER be among the greats? It's short of cheating.
Logical analysis of the above question/statement:

Premise: Steffi became No. 1 by default. This is a false premise. Ranking points are not earned by "default."

Premise: Seles' stabbing was a "horrendous tragedy." Premise lacks a sense of proportion. The Holocaust was a "horrendous tragedy." Seles' stabbing was a crime.

Premise: At the time of the stabbing, Seles was the best player of her era. Premise fails to define what a "best player" is or what period of time "era" covers. Not a foregone conclusion that Seles was the "best player" of any "era."

Premise: Steffi is not an all time great because of what happened to Seles. Premise fails to define what is an "all time great." Premise also fails to consider that by the time Seles won her first grand slam Graf had already distinguished herself by winning at least each major twice and all majors in one calendar year. To the extent that some players have been annointed as "all time greats" for similar accomplishments, premise falls well short of covering all conditions in which the term "all time great" may be applied.

Premise: Steffi cheated. Premise fails to define "cheating" in such a way as to make sense of Steffi's actions after Seles' stabbing. To the extent that the author never tells us what rules have been broken, the word "cheating" is not a term denoting the infraction of any rules; rather it is a term connoting a value judgment on part of the author.

Knowing full well what that value judgment is and how it is specifically designed in the current context to incite a particular group of fans to respond in kind, that's all I can say for now.
LDVTennis is offline  
post #13 of 26 (permalink) Old Oct 19th, 2004, 08:17 PM
Senior Member
 
alfajeffster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: United States of America
Posts: 9,216
                     
I think I'm going to go home and just masturbate thinking about this argument, again.

There is nothing more beautiful than Evonne Goolagong in full flight moving across a tennis court.
alfajeffster is offline  
post #14 of 26 (permalink) Old Oct 19th, 2004, 09:44 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,619
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by alfajeffster
To be fair, you didn't say "greatest achievers" or "players who won the most majors" per decade, so that does leave it open to conjecture, however, I'm at a loss as to how Ken Rosewall made your 1960s pick instead of either Rod Laver or Roy Emerson.
Although it's men's tennis a quick response, Jeff. It is exceedingly hard to put the players in context pre-1968 simply because the amateur and professional tours were separate and never met so any comparison can only be subjective. The British Lawn Tennis and Squash magazine invited its readers to submit their lists each year of "Open Rankings" and compiled a composite. As this was done at the time I think the results might be said to accurately reflect the positions.

In their lists, Roy Emerson never made it above #5 in the composite list and in fact in the World Rankings (amateurs only) he was actually ranked #1 only in 1964 and 1965. Rosewall was ranked #1 from 1960 through 1965. In 1960 and 61 Gonzales was #2 and then Laver came on at #2 at the end of 1962 immediately he turned pro and remained there until 1965. In 1960 also Laver was not ranked World #1, that was Neale Fraser.

In 1966 Laver ascended to the top spot with Rosewall 2nd, and this was again the order in 1967. Obviously, the whole position changed in 1968 with open tennis as it became much easier to make comparisons. Laver was a clear #1 in 1968 and 69 as Rosewall slipped back, #3 in 68 and 5 in 69, and of course the Grand Slam winner in 1969.

IMO Emerson although he won many Grand Slam singles titles during this period was not judged that highly by the tennis public at the time going by his ranking in the composite list and so I wouldn't put him in the mix.

It is very close between Rosewall and Laver with Laver winning 5 of the first 7 Open tournaments at the end of the decade. The general concensus is that Rosewall was the World #1 from 1960 - 1965 with Laver at the top from 1966 - 69. Laver was ranked #11 in 1960 and #9 in 1961 on the overall lists. I think I would tend to agree that Rosewall just about deserves the "honour" of being player of the decade.
chris whiteside is offline  
post #15 of 26 (permalink) Old Oct 20th, 2004, 09:31 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 110
                     
[QUOTE=LDVTennis]Logical analysis of the above question/statement:

LDV Tennis says: Steffi became No. 1 by default. This is a false premise. Ranking points are not earned by "default."

Logical?


The truth was that Steff Graf lost the number one ranking to Monica Seles in March of 1991. Steffi challenged for it twice and held it again very briefly in mid 1991 but ultimately LOST THAT CHALLENGE to Monica.....

In fact, Steffi never again challenged Monica at number one after that summer in 1991....NEVER, unitl after the stabbing in April 1993, due to Seles' absence.

Steffi still did not overtake Monica at the start of 1993 ( 3 months before the stabbing) as she lost the Aussie open Final 1993, rather decisely, 6-2 in the third......

One week after the stabbing, the tour's top 24 players which included second ranked Graf were asked by WTA Executive Director Gerard Smith to vote on whether to freeze Monica's number one ranking. When the ballots were tabulated, the answer was NO...with the sole exception of Gabriela Sabatini.

In Seles's absence, Steffi had again come to dominate women's tennis and moved back to number one in the Spring of 1993 as Monica Seles was unable to defend all the points she have won in 1992. Seles had more points to defend as she virtually dominated the tournaments in 1992.

It was almost as though the game had slipped through a wrinkle in time. Suddenly it was the late 80's again and Graf was nothing short of invincible. She had reigned for 186 weeks from August 17, 1987 to March 10, 1991-- and now she reigned again as number one. With World #1 Seles out of the picture, Graf suddenly became the best player in the women's game. Seles was eventually dropped from the WTA Tour Rankings on February 14, 1993

Steffi went from a 1-8 record in Grand Slams for the better part of the early 90's, as seles went 7-8, and then, after the stabbing, IMMEDIATELY won four consecutive Grand Slams, eventually six of seven.....it was a total reversal of fortune for Steffi Graf.

Is this is mere coincidence???? that Graf went from winning one Grand slam in three years to winning four consecutive in one year happens to be totally unrelated to the stabbing of Monica????

Last edited by She-ra; Oct 20th, 2004 at 10:06 AM.
She-ra is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

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










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



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
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

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