Tennis Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
298 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Court only won 11 slams in the open era. Serena won 23 slams in the open era. Sure, Stanford and New York city college are both colleges, but they are certainly not the same class. Likewise, pre open slams and open slams are certainly not the same class. So on this aspect I would say Serena has a much better career than Court even though Court has 1 more major. Your thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39,725 Posts
Yeah, and everyone had different competition, Graf only played until she was 30 years old, but she won more slams due to Seles stabbing, but then Serena wasted years of her early career, had good opposition with the likes of Capriati, Venus, Henin, Clijsters, but then those retired early, and afterwards Serena had comparatively pretty weak opponents... In the end, it's impossible to compare things. The sheer number will stand for eternity and this is why Serena is still playing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,501 Posts
Yeah, and everyone had different competition, Graf only played until she was 30 years old, but she won more slams due to Seles stabbing, but then Serena wasted years of her early career, had good opposition with the likes of Capriati, Venus, Henin, Clijsters, but then those retired early, and afterwards Serena had comparatively pretty weak opponents... In the end, it's impossible to compare things. The sheer number will stand for eternity and this is why Serena is still playing.

this is a spam thread but you make a very good point nonetheless.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,266 Posts
Yeah, and everyone had different competition, Graf only played until she was 30 years old, but she won more slams due to Seles stabbing, but then Serena wasted years of her early career, had good opposition with the likes of Capriati, Venus, Henin, Clijsters, but then those retired early, and afterwards Serena had comparatively pretty weak opponents... In the end, it's impossible to compare things. The sheer number will stand for eternity and this is why Serena is still playing.
Good points..which is why goat is such a stupid term in sports... it's not fair to compare players from different eras considering they faced different competition and also the equipment with which they played is so much different to what we have now. Also, I remember Chrissy saying that back in their days, there wasn't this huge obsession with slams which we see these days.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
Good points..which is why goat is such a stupid term in sports... it's not fair to compare players from different eras considering they faced different competition and also the equipment with which they played is so much different to what we have now. Also, I remember Chrissy saying that back in their days, there wasn't this huge obsession with slams which we see these days.
Obviously. Otherwise Evert would have played all the RG ans AO she missed in the 70s. She'd have at least 24 slams.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38,323 Posts
Yeah, and everyone had different competition, Graf only played until she was 30 years old, but she won more slams due to Seles stabbing, but then Serena wasted years of her early career, had good opposition with the likes of Capriati, Venus, Henin, Clijsters, Legend but then those retired early, and afterwards Serena had comparatively pretty weak opponents... In the end, it's impossible to compare things. The sheer number will stand for eternity and this is why Serena is still playing.
Fify.


But agreed anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47,534 Posts
And of course... Graf was the undisputed GOAT with 22 majors, nobody said a thing about Court and # 24. Now all of sudden... everybody loves Court, even the LQBT community , and considers #24 the REAL benchmark for GOATness. :lol:

It is what it is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
282 Posts
OP makes a very good point. Even travel was difficult and expensive during the 1960s. The lack of prize money and and costs resulted in smaller talent pool.

Between 1960 and 1973 - a time in which Court won 11 Australian slams - over 95% of the players were local players from Australia! Beyond the travel and cost logistics of getting to Australia, the time slot of mid and late December also shunned players. Respectfully, the Australian Open shouldn't even count as a slam till around the mid-1980s.

Nowadays, the prize money is so big in the slams and the travel costs are reduced, resulting in 1000s of hopefuls trying to get into the slams.

Objectively, considering the level of competition, Serena is the undisputed GOAT. M Court was the greatest of her era, but she was not greatest of all time.Yes, Graf was very successful, but she quit earlier than Serena. To be the greatest of all time, you need a lot of great qualities and Serena had more preservence than Graf.

In conclusion, Serena, to date, is the GOAT. That said, I hope Andreescu beats her on Saturday.
 

·
La nuit je mens
Joined
·
87,976 Posts
OP makes a very good point. Even travel was difficult and expensive during the 1960s. The lack of prize money and and costs resulted in smaller talent pool.

Between 1960 and 1973 - a time in which Court won 11 Australian slams - over 95% of the players were local players from Australia! Beyond the travel and cost logistics of getting to Australia, the time slot of mid and late December also shunned players. Respectfully, the Australian Open shouldn't even count as a slam till around the mid-1980s.

Nowadays, the prize money is so big in the slams and the travel costs are reduced, resulting in 1000s of hopefuls trying to get into the slams.

Objectively, considering the level of competition, Serena is the undisputed GOAT. M Court was the greatest of her era, but she was not greatest of all time.Yes, Graf was very successful, but she quit earlier than Serena. To be the greatest of all time, you need a lot of great qualities and Serena had more preservence than Graf.

In conclusion, Serena, to date, is the GOAT. That said, I hope Andreescu beats her on Saturday.

Nobody is GOAT and it's useless to compare. Both Evert and Navratilova skipped Slams left and right at some point because Slams were not that hyped and other competitions were offering more money. They both would have more than 24 Slams had they played the same kind of schedule as Serena.

So yeah, pointless debate. You can twist it for basically anyone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,696 Posts
Court only won 11 slams in the open era. Serena won 23 slams in the open era. Sure, Stanford and New York city college are both colleges, but they are certainly not the same class. Likewise, pre open slams and open slams are certainly not the same class. So on this aspect I would say Serena has a much better career than Court even though Court has 1 more major. Your thoughts?
People don't want to talk about this because they'd have to admit that the goal posts were moved on purpose and in my opinion unfairly. Thanks for reminding and annoying some fans.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
282 Posts
Nobody is GOAT and it's useless to compare. Both Evert and Navratilova skipped Slams left and right at some point because Slams were not that hyped and other competitions were offering more money. They both would have more than 24 Slams had they played the same kind of schedule as Serena.

So yeah, pointless debate. You can twist it for basically anyone.
Objectively, and quantitatively, Serena is the GOAT. One must take in account the talent pool, level of competition, prize money, overall competitiveness of WTA, access to tournaments, access to training and coaching, etc. Using all the factors, objectively Serena is GOAT.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
44,067 Posts
Today they say Hingis is the youngest winner of Wimbledon and keep forgetting Lottie Dod who won it a few months younger in 1887.

Be unfair to the past as much as you want, but there would be no history without past. And without Margaret Smith-Court, no number 24 to beat. Would Serena still play without that? I don't know. Be grateful to Margaret. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mark43

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,441 Posts
And of course... Graf was the undisputed GOAT with 22 majors, nobody said a thing about Court and # 24. Now all of sudden... everybody loves Court, even the LQBT community , and considers #24 the REAL benchmark for GOATness. :lol:

That's because no one likes Serena :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,106 Posts
Good points..which is why goat is such a stupid term in sports... it's not fair to compare players from different eras considering they faced different competition and also the equipment with which they played is so much different to what we have now. Also, I remember Chrissy saying that back in their days, there wasn't this huge obsession with slams which we see these days.
Obviously. Otherwise Evert would have played all the RG ans AO she missed in the 70s. She'd have at least 24 slams.
I doubt the at least 24. She missed 10 slams during the span she wasnt committed to all the slams. I doubt she would win all of them. I think she would have gotten around 22-24, 24 being the most. Martina also missed slams during that time. And i doubt she would have won a lot of aussie opens as it was on grass, i would say 1 or 2. She only won 5 grass slams to 10 clay court slams (7 french plus 3 US). Martina would be the favorite to win those. Martina missed 5 AO.

I would put both Martina and Evert at 21.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47,534 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
32,000 Posts
24 > 23
24 > 22

It is what it is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,695 Posts
We all know the pressed Serena haters like moving the goalposts.

The record was always Steffi at 22 but they had to cope with the GOAT passing that mark so they invented the homophobe's asterisked 24 slams as a new benchmark.

When Serena passes that they'll gift imaginary slams to players who retired early or were affected by circumstances outside their control and say Serena needs 30 to be better than them.

We all know she's the GOAT though. And so do they.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top