Disagree. Which slam would it have been? Look closely. With the possible exception of Mary Pierce, every slam was won by the then dominant player on the surface.SJW said:
99 OZ Martina Hingis
99 RG Steffi Graf
99 WB Lindsay Davenport*
99 US Serena Williams
00 OZ Lindsay
00 RG Pierce
00 US Venus
00 US Venus
01 OZ Jenn
01 RG Jenn
01 WB Venus
01 US Venus
02 OZ Jenn
02 RG Serena
02 WB Serena
02 US Serena
03 OZ Serena
03 RG Justine
03 WB Serena
* Seems odd, but after four years of looking at baseline tennis at Wimbledon, her winning there makes sense. Biggest serve, biggest groundies.
Remember, Venus Jenn and Serena dividing 11 straight GS titles between them. And 13 of the last 16. And Amelie was and is often injured. She really SHOULDN'T have won a GS since OZ 99. She was never the best player at the tournament, and the bets player won most of those. No wierd upsets. (Well, there was RG 2001, the tournament that ruined the seeding system. But Jenn had won OZ that year, was defending RG champ. Amelie wasn't the best player.)
Yes and yes. I figure about a week.SJW said:
