Tennis Forum banner
1 - 20 of 54 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Based on their performances at 1)The Grand Slam tournaments 2)other major tournaments (Virginia Slims Championships, Olympic Games, Lipton Championships) 3)Tournament wins 4)Rankings (highest ranking, sum of years in the top 10) and 5)mixed and doubles at the Grand Slams plus Federation Cup and Hopman Cup, I made a ranking of the most succesful players, including all results until April 30, 1993.

1. Seles
2. Graf
3. Sanchez
4. Sabatini
5. Navratilova
6. Capriati
7. Fernandez
8. Novotna
9. Martinez
10. K.Maleeva
 

·
agradecería con alegría que me comierais la ñocla.
Joined
·
17,777 Posts
Those are the "best players of the first four years of the 90s", aren't they? :p

Sticking with the topic, I'd say

Graf
Seles
Hingis
Sánchez
Davenport
Novotna
Sabatini
Martinez
Pierce
MJ Fernandez/Majoli

I'd leave both the Williams out because their real success came with the 00s. Serena won the last Grand Slam of the decade but she was just into her second full season ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,216 Posts
Those are the "best players of the first four years of the 90s", aren't they? :p

Sticking with the topic, I'd say

Graf
Seles
Hingis
Sánchez
Davenport
Novotna
Sabatini
Martinez
Pierce
MJ Fernandez/Majoli

I'd leave both the Williams out because their real success came with the 00s. Serena won the last Grand Slam of the decade but she was just into her second full season ;)
I personally think Martina Navratilova deserves at least mention. From 1990-95 she was still pretty close to the top, and beating Graf, Seles and Sanchez Vicario on occasion, and winning Wimbledon in 90 and a runner-up finish in 94 count.
 

·
agradecería con alegría que me comierais la ñocla.
Joined
·
17,777 Posts
Actually, I totally forgot about her :lol: My mistake :angel:

I'd take the MJ/Majoli position off and I'd rank Martina before or after Martínez ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
An interesting decade because of the departure and welcome return of both Seles and Capriati. Seles would be 1 or 2 but I'm not certain if I'd include Capriati if we could only choose 10 players (she didn't win a Slam).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,471 Posts
1. Graf
2. Seles
3. Hingis
4. Sanchez Vicario
5. Davenport
6. Novotna
7. Sabatini
8. Navratilova
9. Martinez
10. Pierce

Hovering just outside the top 10: S Williams, MJF, V Williams, Majoli, Date
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
811 Posts
All results until April 30, 1993. What kind of crap is that. So someone like Hingis doesnt even exist now and is omited from a 90s top 10 in favor of likes of Mary Joe Fernandez, LOL! Anyway here is my list and it is a pretty simple one:

1. Graf- dominated mid 90s and won atleast 1 slam every full year she played
2. Seles- dominated early 90s but won only 1 slam from 96-99
3. Hingis- dominant overall player of late 90s, but only 1 dominant year- 1997 which puts her below Seles
4. Sanchez- 3 slams
5. Davenport
6. Novotna
7. Martinez
8. Sabatini
9. Pierce
10. Navratilova
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
811 Posts
1. Seles
2. Graf
3. Sanchez Vicario
4. Sabatini
5. Martinez
6. Novotna
7. Hingis
8. Davenport
9. Pierce
10. Majoli
Hingis who won 5 slams and spent oodles of time at #1 in the 90s below Sabatini, Martinez, Novotna, and her bitch Sanchez!?!? God there seem to be alot of stupid people on this forum.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,256 Posts
Well, I didn't post on this thread but I read the differente lists, I agree with some and not with others, but I don't think it's necessary to call anybody stupid out of his/her tennis preferences, don't you think Misty?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
Hingis who won 5 slams and spent oodles of time at #1 in the 90s below Sabatini, Martinez, Novotna, and her bitch Sanchez!?!? God there seem to be alot of stupid people on this forum.
The reason I placed those players higher than Hingis is that Sabatini, Martinez, Novtona and ASV regularly played against Graf and Seles. Hingis did not. I'm not discounting Hingis' talent and consistency but she really didn't have much competition. Hingis' contemporaries and more seasoned rivals didn't flourish as fast as she did. If they had, who knows if she would've won 5 Slams?

Well, I didn't post on this thread but I read the differente lists, I agree with some and not with others, but I don't think it's necessary to call anybody stupid out of his/her tennis preferences, don't you think Misty?
I wouldn't call anyone that but at least the poster was honest with his/her feelings. People are quite passionate on this board (about a multitude of things) so reading comments like this is no big surprise.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
811 Posts
Who cares about so called level of competition when you win 5 slams and dominate vs people who win 1. Do you really think the mid 90s where Martinez and Sanchez had their most success was a great field either. Martinez especialy was completely useless agaisnt any competition, and won Wimbledon by beating a nearly 40 year old women in the final and a nobody in the semis. Novotna also had her most success in the late 90s, just far less than Hingis. Hingis at her best would crush all of Sanchez, Martinez, and Novotna at their best, that is all that matters. Only Sabatini at her best might give her some competition, but with only 1 slam she has to rate even below Sanchez so it doesnt matter.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
811 Posts
Anyway a good list that makes sense:

1. Graf



2. Seles
3. Hingis



4. Sanchez
5. Sabatini
6. Davenport


7. Novotna
8. Martinez
9. Pierce
10. Navratilova

I upped Sabatini from my previous list since if you factor level of play and level of competition she moves well up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
Who cares about so called level of competition when you win 5 slams and dominate vs people who win 1. Do you really think the mid 90s where Martinez and Sanchez had their most success was a great field either. Martinez especialy was completely useless agaisnt any competition, and won Wimbledon by beating a nearly 40 year old women in the final and a nobody in the semis. Novotna also had her most success in the late 90s, just far less than Hingis. Hingis at her best would crush all of Sanchez, Martinez, and Novotna at their best, that is all that matters. Only Sabatini at her best might give her some competition, but with only 1 slam she has to rate even below Sanchez so it doesnt matter.
Perhaps Martinez, Sabatini and Novotna would've won more Slams if they didn't have to compete against Graf and Seles.

Perhaps Hingis would've been Slam-less if she had to regularly play Graf and Seles, circa '89-'93.

Again, it's nothing against Hingis but I took her lack of competition into consideration.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
811 Posts
Perhaps Martinez, Sabatini and Novotna would've won more Slams if they didn't have to compete against Graf and Seles.

Perhaps Hingis would've been Slam-less if she had to regularly play Graf and Seles, circa '89-'93.

Again, it's nothing against Hingis but I took her lack of competition into consideration.
How many times do you need simple things spelt out. Novotna was a super late bloomer and peaked in the HINGIS era. That is when her best tennis came in 1997-1999, not the early to mid 90s, everyone knows this, and she managed a measley 1 slam and no time at #1 vs Hingis's 5 slams and 100+ weeks at #1 while peaking at the exact same time despite the decade age gap (Hingis is the oppositie, a super early bloomer).

Martinez would have probably won no slams in the Hingis era considering she is Hingis's bitch. Martinez is a lightweight who gets bullied around by any top player. The only reason she ever held a high ranking for awhile was her consistency, like Wozniacki today. To create an era she would win 5 slams would be a field like todays minus Serena, Clijsters, Na, Stosur, Sharapova, Kvitova, and about 5 others, then maybe. Her one Wimbledon win was a joke beating McNeil and 38 year old Martina.

Sabatini got unlucky I agree, but she wouldnt have been a dominant player in any era. Even if she peaked in the late 90s not a prayer she wins 5 slams like Hingis did.

Sanchez is the only one close to Hingis in achievements but Hingis is something like 18-2 against her.

Sanchez and Martinez by the way were in the mid 20s when Hingis dominated and won all those slams. If they were past their primes that was their problem. They were fully able bodied women who certainly werent old and had the same chance as Hingis to capatilize on the weak field and win alot of big titles but just wernet good enough. Sanchez and Martinez didnt face Graf and Seles anyway. They had the bulk of their biggest success in the mid 90s after Seles was stabbed.


To rank those players over Hingis is a joke.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
How many times do you need simple things spelt out. Novotna was a super late bloomer and peaked in the HINGIS era. That is when her best tennis came in 1997-1999, not the early to mid 90s, everyone knows this, and she managed a measley 1 slam and no time at #1 vs Hingis's 5 slams and 100+ weeks at #1 while peaking at the exact same time despite the decade age gap (Hingis is the oppositie, a super early bloomer).

Martinez would have probably won no slams in the Hingis era considering she is Hingis's bitch. Martinez is a lightweight who gets bullied around by any top player. The only reason she ever held a high ranking for awhile was her consistency, like Wozniacki today. To create an era she would win 5 slams would be a field like todays minus Serena, Clijsters, Na, Stosur, Sharapova, Kvitova, and about 5 others, then maybe. Her one Wimbledon win was a joke beating McNeil and 38 year old Martina.

Sabatini got unlucky I agree, but she wouldnt have been a dominant player in any era. Even if she peaked in the late 90s not a prayer she wins 5 slams like Hingis did.

Sanchez is the only one close to Hingis in achievements but Hingis is something like 18-2 against her.

Sanchez and Martinez by the way were in the mid 20s when Hingis dominated and won all those slams. If they were past their primes that was their problem. They were fully able bodied women who certainly werent old and had the same chance as Hingis to capatilize on the weak field and win alot of big titles but just wernet good enough. Sanchez and Martinez didnt face Graf and Seles anyway. They had the bulk of their biggest success in the mid 90s after Seles was stabbed.


To rank those players over Hingis is a joke.
We agree to disagree. What you have never addressed was Hingis playing Seles and Graf in their peak form. If Hingis had debuted on the tour in 1990, instead of 1994, would she still have made the same progress? If she had to regularly face Seles and Graf pre-stabbing, I find it highly unlikely that she would have progressed as fast as she did.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,154 Posts
Sanchez is the only one close to Hingis in achievements but Hingis is something like 18-2 against her.

Sanchez and Martinez by the way were in the mid 20s when Hingis dominated and won all those slams. If they were past their primes that was their problem. They were fully able bodied women who certainly werent old and had the same chance as Hingis to capatilize on the weak field and win alot of big titles but just wernet good enough. Sanchez and Martinez didnt face Graf and Seles anyway. They had the bulk of their biggest success in the mid 90s after Seles was stabbed.
Err, how didn't Arantxa face Graf? I think you lose your argument there.

And as an Arantxa fan, I would rank Martina Hingis above Arantxa. She had the game to beat Arantxa and it frustrated the hell out of ASV (and myself).
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
811 Posts
Of course Aranxta faced Graf. She didnt face much of Seles, her ultimate nightmare matchup more than Graf, who was stabbed and away most of Sanchez's glory years. So saying she faced "Graf and Seles" to win all her slams is not at all accurate. Same goes for Conchita and her success.

We agree to disagree. What you have never addressed was Hingis playing Seles and Graf in their peak form. If Hingis had debuted on the tour in 1990, instead of 1994, would she still have made the same progress? If she had to regularly face Seles and Graf pre-stabbing, I find it highly unlikely that she would have progressed as fast as she did.
Sanchez, Martinez, and Novotnva have never won a major title with Seles at peak form so your point already loses all value. However to answer your question, if Hingis peaked at the same time Sanchez and Martinez did she would have done way better than both, I can guarantee you that much. Sanchez won 2 slams in 1994 with Graf fighting injuries and loss of form and Seles gone altogether, if prime Hingis were around that would have never happened, heck it is doubtful Sanchez could even win one slam if she had to play Hingis who is probably an even worse matchup for her than Seles. With Sanchez and Martinez winning 3 of the 4 slams that year, it probably would have been a 97 esque year for Hingis, and with her bitch (in Hingis's prime years) Mary Pierce winning the Australian to start 95 maybe the Hingis slam. Hingis would have shone brightly in the mid 90s which were really weak, Graf would have been her only real competition in fact. Hingis did peak at the same time as Novotna, both peaked in the late 90s, and did far better than her as well.

Sabatini is the only one who was unlucky to have tougher competition in the early 90s but 18 slam semis and only 1 slam title is still the ultimate fail. It is too bad too, she certainly had a better game than Sanchez atleast, but not the same mentality.

It is annoying to have to defend Hingis so heavily when I dont even like her, but Hingis was in a whole other league then all the players you named. Hingis is closer to being #2 in the 90s then she is to being any lower than #3.


Sanchez Vicario was the biggest beneficiary of the Seles stabbing, contrary to Selestials belief even more than Graf as Graf was fully capable of beating Seles most anywhere, and a lock to beat her at Wimbledon. To hear someone knocking Hingis's superior achievements, dominance, and career due to weak competition in favor of the Seles stabbing vultures Sanchez and Martinez, and an even bigger opportunist of the late 90s transition period than Hingis who unlike Hingis immediately plunged downwards and retired once the brief transition period was ending- Jana Novotna, is rich with both irony and silliness. Sanchez is really one of the luckiest players ever, peaking while Seles was out, before Hingis emerged, with the whole womens field that had peaked in the late 80s and early 90s falling apart, and being a naturally bad matchup for Graf which allowed her to shine and look more competitive in that matchup then she would typically look vs even a much less great player, and that Graf was also injury prone around the field was so thin that there was literally nobody else in her way for awhile if something happened to Graf or she somehow could get past her.

Lastly why couldnt any of Sanchez, Martinez, or Jana capatilize on this period you think Hingis was so lucky in. All were in their mid 20s, except Jana who was still hitting her career peak at that point. I will give Sabatini a pass as she had mentally lost the plot and been in steep decline years before that point. Since you asked me a question you have to now answer this one. Also while you are at it explain Sanchez's head to head with Hingis, and why even in 1996 15 year old Hingis had a winning record over prime Sanchez.


I just noticed you ranked Seles over Graf. That is another terrible judgement, and almost as bad as ranking Hingis below Sanchez (but still not nearly as bad as ranking her below the 1 slammers core to boot).
 
1 - 20 of 54 Posts
Top