Tennis Forum banner

Should Martina Hingis be in the Top 10 Greatest of All Time players?


  • Total voters
    63
1 - 20 of 94 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I know this has been debated before but I've recently been re-watching some of the tennis experts' lists and she often misses out on a lot of Top 10 lists of all time to Venus and Maria. Whilst this may be totally fair - and there is obviously a great argument for that - I do wonder if despite having less total slams than Venus and not having the career grand slam like Maria (but the same total slams), if she should be included because of the following reasons:

  • Youngest player in the open era to ever win a grand slam
  • Youngest player in the open era to ever reach number 1
  • 209 weeks at Number 1
  • Doubles and Mixed Doubles Prowess
  • Total number of Grand Slam finals (including 6 straight Aus Open Finals)
There may be other reasons, but I think mainly because of the records she broke, this makes her more of a 'special' player and ahead of Maria at least - in my opinion, maybe not Venus. Those records are unlikely to ever be broken and I think they should hold some clout when discussing the top 10 greatest players of all time. Rather remarkable achievements for such a young age.

Thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,979 Posts
Probably not but a fantastic player and brilliant career none the less.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
86,106 Posts
No.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FritzF

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,782 Posts
tried to think of 10 names greater, here's what i got

serena, navratilova, evert, venus, seles, graf, justine, BJK, court (ugh), goolagong... so i think she's still firmly out of top 10

definitely greater than martha. martha has never shown the dominance the hingis was capable of in the late 90s, even when she had her windows of opportunity / relatively depleted field. (2004-06, 2010-11). martha made her career off of snatching a slam here and there. i think the only thing that maria has over hingis is her career slam and longevity, every other stat hingis is far superior.

hingis racked up 35 titles in the span of 1996-2000, that's an insane stat to me. the only season we've had similar to that was Serena 2013 with 10 titles, and potentially justine 2007. and hingis had multiple seasons with that type of WTA tour dominance - we're never gonna see something like that again imo with how slam focused the tour is nowadays.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
921 Posts
Hingis is one of the greatest player of WTA history, Complete player with successful in single and double.
But if we compare her to another great player like
  • Serena Willimas
  • Steffi Graf
  • Chris Evert
  • Martina Navratilova
  • Billie Jean King
  • Monica Seles
  • Justine Henin
  • Venus Williams
  • Margaret Court
  • Evonne Goolagong
Hingis is out of top10 for sure.

But in terms of Icon images, Hingis can be Top10.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,032 Posts
Just saying that people devalue Courts AO should look into Goolagongs resume.

But agree, Hingis is apparently just slightly out of the Top 10. But you could make an arguement for her being in, as mentioned above.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37,870 Posts
Now that I think about it, probably not anymore but probably yes just before her first retirement, and not a lot of people can say they've been one of the 10 greatest in their sport.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,131 Posts
I always find it strange when people try to "add" doubles results to a list of achievements for an individual player.

Venus definitely edges out Martina, but things are a bit closer with Maria.

Hingis was more dominant
Hingis had more weeks at number 1
Hingis had more titles
Maria has the Career Slam
Maria has an Olympic medal
Maria had a more "top" (10/5/etc) seasons
Maria faced tougher competition
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,951 Posts
I always find it strange when people try to "add" doubles results to a list of achievements for an individual player.
Why? The vast majority of top players since tennis was invented have excelled at doubles as well as singles. A hundred years ago doubles was considered more important. It speaks to their all-round strength if they can add the different requirements of being a top doubles player to their reputation as champion singles exponents.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
I always find it strange when people try to "add" doubles results to a list of achievements for an individual player.

Venus definitely edges out Martina, but things are a bit closer with Maria.

Hingis was more dominant
Hingis had more weeks at number 1
Hingis had more titles
Maria has the Career Slam
Maria has an Olympic medal
Maria had a more "top" (10/5/etc) seasons
Maria faced tougher competition
Hingis also has an Olympic Medal
Hingis finished the year end number 1 three times
Hingis also held the number 1 ranking in singles and doubles simultaneously
Hingis's competition was extremely tough too...I don't think you can say Maria's was tougher?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Hingis is one of the greatest player of WTA history, Complete player with successful in single and double.
But if we compare her to another great player like
  • Serena Willimas
  • Steffi Graf
  • Chris Evert
  • Martina Navratilova
  • Billie Jean King
  • Monica Seles
  • Justine Henin
  • Venus Williams
  • Margaret Court
  • Evonne Goolagong
Hingis is out of top10 for sure.

But in terms of Icon images, Hingis can be Top10.
Yes, I agree with this.

I only bring it up because a lot of people include Sharapova in their top 10 (probably cause of the career grand slam).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,935 Posts
Above Maria but below Vee.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
Above Maria but below Vee.
Agree with this.

Maria had longevity (Which is now tinged more than a little in retrospect) but Hingis is below Venus, imo.

She did dominate the tour and she did so in an exceptional fashion - both in terms of sheer youth and just destroying everyone. Her game was complete and she could keep up with the Williams sisters and that new era, even if only for a short while and it seemed to be turning against her.

Nav
Evert
Graf
Serena
Court
Justine
Venus
BJK
Seles

Those are the 9 I would safely put above Hingis, in no particular order. Goolagong won a lot but I just don't know enough about her and she also suffers from the Court inflation (while winning a lot less)

It is interesting just to look at the career statistics (i.e. the table for slams on Wikipedia) for Hingis, Venus, Serena and Justine and just see how the torch seemed to pass in slam results at least.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,508 Posts
I agree Hingis is above Sharapova but Hingis' dominance is definitely overvalued in this case. The same way people can reduce Sharapova's career to "snatching a Slam here and there", so can Martina's be reduced to "dominating before the real players became good." Martina running away at the age of 22 because she was getting regularly beat up in Slam finals, the absence of an RG title, and an 'ok' comeback when still in her physical prime of 25-27 is kind of a black mark, in my opinion.

Hingis' 5 slam titles were won over a 2-year period. Her slam finals achieved over a 5-year period. Sharapova's slam titles were won over a period of 10 years. I'd rather have longevity than a short period of dominance where I could no longer compete with the best before running away to dominate a weakened doubles tour.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,558 Posts
It’s hard to say, but she’s close. Definitely above Martha. I’m not sure if I’d put her above HeninHardenne either. Definitely not above Goolagong in my book Unless we’re talking singles and doubles?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
284 Posts
IMO my list:

1. Court
2. Graf
3. Serena
4. Navratilova (ew...)
5. Evert
6. Wills
7. BJK
8. Seles
9. Lenglen
10. Connolly
11. Henin (I have to include her here because she is decidedly better than the ones that come after her IMO)

After that I think that you could make a case for any of Goolagong, Venus, Bueno, Hingis or Sharapova. What really hurts Venus is that she only performed well at 2 of the 4 slams. Not only did she not win the AO or RG but her performances there were also very weak; she only made it the RG semis once (!!!!) in 2002, although she did make it to the finals there at the same time, and the AO just thrice, in 2001, 2003 and 2017, although again to her credit she did make the finals on both the second and third time. Not only that, but she had some very ordinary losses to players to whom she should not have lost. Sharapova has far less titles than the other three but she has a career slam, basically the Holy Grail of tennis.
 
1 - 20 of 94 Posts
Top