There has been much talk on the board about Kim becoming no.1 without a major. I think that obviously, you need to win one or a couple to be considered a great player, but after that, how important are they?
Three examples spring to mind
1. Many people consider that Steffi a greater player than Margaret Court, even though their respective singles titles total 22 and 24
2. i think that most people would agree that Gaby sabatini had a better career than say Mary Pierce, even though Mary won 2 GS and Gaby 1
3. Would we have felt different about Martina Nav and Chris Evert had Martina lost the 93 Wimbeldon final to Zina, and ended up with 17 GS compared to Chris's 18?
Three examples spring to mind
1. Many people consider that Steffi a greater player than Margaret Court, even though their respective singles titles total 22 and 24
2. i think that most people would agree that Gaby sabatini had a better career than say Mary Pierce, even though Mary won 2 GS and Gaby 1
3. Would we have felt different about Martina Nav and Chris Evert had Martina lost the 93 Wimbeldon final to Zina, and ended up with 17 GS compared to Chris's 18?