Tennis Forum banner

1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,215 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm writing an article and I've come across a fact that is little mentioned. Steffi Graf might have won a lot MORE GS titles if she hadn't missed so much time to injury.

Just as a comparision, between 1991 and 1999, Monica played 102 tournaments. But remember she only played 4 in 1993, none ine 1994, and 2 in 1995. In the same period, 1991 to 1999, steffi played 118 tournaments. A difference of 16 tournaments, just about a full season. Why are the numners so close? From 1994 through her retirement, Steffi never managed to play more than 13 tournaments a year, five in 1997. With normal health, Steffi might have won 30 GS titles.

(BTW, if you play 17 trs a year from 1991 to 1999, you'd have played 153 tournaments.)

YEAR SG MS
1991 17 16
1992 20 15
1993 16 04
1994 13 00
1995 11 02
1996 13 16
1997 05 17
1998 13 17
1999 10 15
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,315 Posts
I have no idea what playing tournaments has to do with winning Slams. Don't you have to play Slams to do that?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
27,114 Posts
She certainly would have given herself more opportunities to win the OZ open, from what I remember she missed it in 1992, 1995 and 1996.

Apart from that I don't think she missed that many of the other slams did she ? Apart from 1997 Wimbledon to 1998 French open when she had that surgery.

I'm sure irma will know :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,315 Posts
I did the research. Monica played 19 Slams during that 9 year period, Steffi played 28, or nearly 80% of the 36 which were held. I don't think Monica is a good example.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,484 Posts
Thanxs Volcana for the numbers. But you know, overall, Steffi's record at slams finals is 22-9. That means she won 22 slams and lost 9 finals. In other words, with a little more focus and luck, she could have won 31 slams with the same number of tournaments she played during her carrer! Don't need to play more than she did to reach 30 slams! And nobody knows if she would have won any other finals, had she had reached any other one! It's all speculation.......anyways, her 22 slams are a record and I think we won't see anybody ever reach these high numbers again!!!

Thanxs anyway.......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,215 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
My apologies. I was unclear.

I didn't mean to imply that number of tournaments played correlated with number of slams played. My point is that the number of tournament played is some indication of your health in a given year, and hence your health in the slams. Steffi never came close to an injury free year after 1993. She never came close to playing a full season. In fact, from 94 to 99 she averaged 10 tournaments a season. Had she stayed healthy, she would have had a lot better record than 22-9 in slam finals, as well as playing a few more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,004 Posts
I understand your point Volcana and I think it is very interesting! I remember watching Steffi avidly when I was quite young and although the media frequently reported her injuries, she was always reluctant to admit anything. Only in her later career did she become more open in describing her physical condition... Steffi never was one to make excuses and that is part of why she is such a great champion. Love her and always will!!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,635 Posts
In 91 and 92 Steffi had her breaks too, she played 16 tournaments in 92 not 20 and 15 in 91 not 17, fed cup and hopmand cup not included, she missed the summer hardcourt tournaments(except for us open) in both years in 91 because of her shoulder, and in 92 too
she missed also the australian season that year!<P>I never heard Steffi say that she lost because she was injured, that was a mythe wich I think started after french 89 but last I heard she said the I had my day thing because of an annoying journalist, so that`s different :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,635 Posts
and the most funny thing was that the time when Steffi was accused most of faking injuries was in the time she never lost any important match(95, 96) so she didn`t even need it!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,315 Posts
Once again I have to question the line of reasoning. How would improved health have had a significant effect on a 22-9 Slam Finals record? Steffi was in peak health on April 30, 1993, and she only lost 2 Finals after that (94 US and 99 WI).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,270 Posts
I don't really see the reasoning at all either?? :eek: :eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,635 Posts
If she had played Australian open 95, 96 she might have won(I am not saying she would, she could have) and if she could have been fit at the us open 94 maybe she had won too(and I know you thought that injury was fake because she had no break but she had, after that tournament she played one tournament till feb 95) but I know you want to say with a fit and healty Monica around these tournaments would have been different anyway and I am not gonna deny that.
 

·
Team WTAworld, Senior Member
Joined
·
20,610 Posts
Steffi skipped many Australian Opens that she might have won.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,289 Posts
I can see what Volcana is trying to say.

But I don't think an injury plagued year would have been a problem for Steffi in a Slam. E.g. She hardly ever played a warmup event before Wimbledon and still won it 7 times. She just wasn't a player who had problems with rustiness or slowness after an injury/time off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,992 Posts
Volcana said:
With normal health, Steffi might have won 30 GS titles.
8 more Slam titles? Hardly. She would probably have needed 12 additional finals to do so. I'm not sure where they should come from. A few Australian Opens, yes. But not much more.

And having a moderate schedule, as a result of injuries or other reasons, is not necessarily a great hindrance to winning Slams when you actually do show up. I think Venus Williams can confirm this.

And if it wasn't for Günther Parche, I strongly doubt she'd have reached 20 in her career. Perhaps 17-18 would be more likely.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
27,114 Posts
I'm not sure that playing more tournaments would have won her more slams, apart from playing more slams than she did - after all, she had a 22-9 record in FINALS, which means she had played good enough tennis to get to the finals so she certainly was giving herself an adequate chance to win the whole event.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,059 Posts
She would've won less slams if Monica wasn't stabbed and Jen was playing like she is now. Steffi is definitely the luckiest player in the tennisworld. She should be counting her blessings.............
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,635 Posts
So now Steffi was lucky that JC went on drugs LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,635 Posts
In that case Martina was just as lucky to win her grand slams, since JC was only 20 in 97 and still won a set against Martina while she didn`t play like she did now
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Top