Tennis Forum banner

21 - 40 of 53 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,617 Posts
you are just wrong. serena has won in ever decade she has played in so your point is mute. serena has had deeper fields. evert has said as much. henin was only a thing because serena wasn't on her game.
it isn't a niche, it is understanding the history of the game.
But you argument is that tennis hasnt been the same standard every decade so what does arguing winning in multiple decades advocate for your argument?

I am a fan of Serena and we (you and me) generally see eye to eye but i dont agree with the first post i quoted from you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
84,910 Posts
Discussion Starter #22

·
Registered
Joined
·
753 Posts
Court won the Calendar Grand Slam in 1970: IN THE OPEN ERA. She didn't choke against a journeywoman in the semifinal of the 4th Slam of the year, like Navratilova did against Sukova in 1984 or Williams against Vinci in 2015.
Sukova journeywoman, really ? Four-time GS singles runner-up is no journeywoman imo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
84,910 Posts
Discussion Starter #24
Boris Becker

“Can Serena equal Margaret Court? She is past 30 and she’s become a proud mother. I'm sure she would love to play the US Open this year. They call her the Greatest of all Time on the women's circuit, and she certainly deserves the title.
“Me, being German, I still think of Steffi Graf as our queen, but Serena is certainly, certainly the greatest. Margaret Court is the most successful. Having said that, back in the day they played three of the four majors on grass, so it was easier if you're comfortable on grass to win more.
“I'm sure Serena wants to reach 24, I think that's the reason she's playing. You know, she’s a role model for all the mothers out there who are professionally involved in sport. As long as she wants to play, I think she can win. So as long as Serena is good enough to reach a final, she's good enough to win.
“Having said that, the young generation won't sleep. You know once you are in a final you're not playing the name, you're playing the title. That was Bianca Andreescu at the US Open final or Simone Halep in Wimbledon last year. They didn’t play the name.”
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,359 Posts
But you argument is that tennis hasnt been the same standard every decade so what does arguing winning in multiple decades advocate for your argument?

I am a fan of Serena and we (you and me) generally see eye to eye but i dont agree with the first post i quoted from you.
i brough up serena winning in every decade because you were the one talking about tennis falling off after henin left. my point was the goat was still there. my other point is competition does matter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,344 Posts
Not in my opinion...come back when Serena wins the calendar golden slam....something that will NEVER be achieved ever again...
She couldn't even win the calendar slam, choking against Vinci LOL
I mean... if she can't even wrap up the calendar slam against Vinci and Pennetta, the calendar golden slam is completely out of her reach.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
84,910 Posts
Discussion Starter #28
She couldn't even win the calendar slam, choking against Vinci LOL
I mean... if she can't even wrap up the calendar slam against Vinci and Pennetta, the calendar golden slam is completely out of her reach.
🤦‍♀️
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,094 Posts
Purely on results and how they dominated their eras and not in order for there are a number of possible arguments for placing players in different orders and there are a few just outside this list that could qualify for it.

1. Serena Williams
2. Steffi Graf
3. Chris Evert
4. Martina Navratilova
5. Margaret Court
6. Billie Jean King
7. Monica Seles
8. Venus Williams
9. Martina Hingis
10. Helen Moody Willis
11. Suzanne Lenglen
12. Maureen Connolly
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,094 Posts
This list is very biased. When will the media finally realize that these lists should be exclusively based on tennis results and not achievements or popularity off the court? At this point, they might as well put Kournikova in the top ten.
Not only they put King above Court and Venus above Henin, which tennis wise doesn't make any sense, but Court at #6 is an absolute disgrace. She might be a bigot and narrow minded individual, but that has nothing to do with the results that she achieved on the court.
She should have been #1 or at least #2. Besides holding the record for the most Grand Slams, she also won the Calendar Grand Slam fair and square!
Where the heck are Maureen Connolly, another Calendar Grand Slam winner, or Helen Wills Moody, who has 19 Grand Slam titles to her name?
Before reading the Golden Era I had assumed that Court was the better player but that book gave me the impression that King at her best was a tad too good for Court.

Agree about Maureen Connolly, such a great player that is often overlooked but deserves to be recongised as a great player.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37,642 Posts
I literally lol'd when I saw Sharapova at 10th 😂
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,396 Posts
Purely on results and how they dominated their eras and not in order for there are a number of possible arguments for placing players in different orders and there are a few just outside this list that could qualify for it.
...
10. Helen Wills Moody [not Moody Willis]
11. Suzanne Lenglen
...
Irrespective of the arguments in favour of anyone else on the list, the order in which you've placed these two is simply wrong. Elizabeth Ryan, who played many times against both in singles and was a regular partner for both in doubles, said that Lenglen was unquestionably the better player.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,359 Posts
She couldn't even win the calendar slam, choking against Vinci LOL
I mean... if she can't even wrap up the calendar slam against Vinci and Pennetta, the calendar golden slam is completely out of her reach.
Not in my opinion...come back when Serena wins the calendar golden slam....something that will NEVER be achieved ever again...
the delusion. graf won the golden slam before anyone took the olympics serious. court won the cygs on 3 grass surfaces......troll better both of you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,396 Posts
the delusion. graf won the golden slam before anyone took the olympics serious. court won the cygs on 3 grass surfaces......troll better both of you.
What's your point? She also won the French Open on clay, so it's not as if her best play was limited to one surface. Hard courts as we know them now (Rebound Ace, Plexicushion or whatever) simply didn't exist back then.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,359 Posts
What's your point? She also won the French Open on clay, so it's not as if her best play was limited to one surface. Hard courts as we know them now (Rebound Ace, Plexicushion or whatever) simply didn't exist back then.
again that is my point. it was easier for court since she was good on grass. serena had to be good on 4 different surfaces. hence why she is goat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,566 Posts
again that is my point. it was easier for court since she was good on grass. serena had to be good on 4 different surfaces. hence why she is goat.
4? Grass, Clay, hard and what's the fourth? Besides, nowadays the surfaces are much more homogeneous than in the past
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,396 Posts
again that is my point. it was easier for court since she was good on grass. serena had to be good on 4 different surfaces. hence why she is goat.
Try thinking logically. If three of the major events were on grass, that meant ALL the players had to be good on grass if they were to have any chance of winning. It's not as if Court double-bagelled everyone she played.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,515 Posts
Try thinking logically. If three of the major events were on grass, that meant ALL the players had to be good on grass if they were to have any chance of winning. It's not as if Court double-bagelled everyone she played.
If 3 slams a year were played on grass now, Serena would 100% be over 30 slams.
 
21 - 40 of 53 Posts
Top