Tennis Forum banner

1 - 20 of 253 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,619 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
The recent 1981 Rankings Project brought Tracy Austin to the fore and the general impression I get (at least in BFTP land) is that there wasn't really that much love nor admiration for her. I think she deserves a thread of her own apart from discussion in the 1981 rankings.

I had a lot going on in my personal life at that time and tennis consisted mainly of Wimbledon plus following the results at the Slams and I would have to admit that I myself never particularly warmed to her.

But perhaps she deserves a higher profile in the history of the game. Overall her h2h was 8-9 with Chris Evert and 13-20 with Martina Navratilova but when you consider that in 1977/early 78 when Tracy was serving her apprenticeship, which the majority of players do, both Chris and Martina beat her three times and after 1981 when Tracy's health problems caused a deterioration in her game Chris won their only meeting and Martina won all four contests - from 1979 to 1981 it would seem Tracy was very much their equal. In fact in 1981 in the five tournaments all three played in (3 Slams, Toyota end of year Championships and the Tier I Canadian) Tracy won 3 of them as against 1 each for the other two.

The 1981 Toyota Champs was really the last event before the problems really took a toll on her but even in 1982 and 1983 she finished Nos 4 and 9 respectively in the year-end rankings.

After 1981 she never went beyond a quarter-final at a Slam - but the defeats were to top class players in 1982 twice to Hana Mandlikova arguably the most naturally gifted player in the game after Goolagong retired. The 1983 loss on clay at RG to Jo Durie can only be described as horrible.

The big question,if she had remained healthy, is how her game would have manifested itself at the Slams?

You've certainly got to think that she would have been a major force at the USO given her victories there in 1979 and 1981 but the evidence at the other 3 is inconclusive. She only ever played the Australian once losing on grass to Pam Shriver but she may have suffered a let-down after the Toyota, where some believed the winner deserved the #1 ranking and she had a rough ride to winning it, although Pam had beaten her at Wimbledon also.

Her appearances at RG were in 1982 and 1983 and this was after the problems began to manifest themselves so it's hard to draw conclusions. At Wimbledon she lost in 1979 and 1980 to Martina and Goolagong in the semis but the 1980 semi was in doubt until the last point had been played. An Evert/Austin final would have been intrigueing and perhaps she did have the potential at the top of her game to become champion there.

Just another one in the long list of "what-ifs" in the history of women's tennis how would Tracy have continued to perform against the two all time greats.

Chris, of course had taken time off, had "re-invented" herself after a string of losses to Tracy in 1979 and was playing on level terms with her again.

Would Tracy have been able to cope with the increasing power of Martina especially on grass?

And how would she have coped with the evolvement of the racquets?

We had the wonderful Evert-Navratilova rivalry of the 80s and while I'm not into claiming what "would have happened" it is my belief that had Tracy remained fit this would have been a tripartite contest to around the mid-80s.

Of course injuries and ill-health are a normal part of the game and similar to Nadal perhaps the effort needed to maintain her challenge in the end was her undoing.

Tracy commentates nowadays during Wimbledon for the BBC (the national broadcaster in the UK) during Wimbledon. Having not had a lot of regard for her during her playing days I find I have nothing but admiration for her her in her new role.

She has an in-depth knowledge of the women's game which shines through and her previews and post-match anlaysis is second to none.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,918 Posts
The recent 1981 Rankings Project brought Tracy Austin to the fore and the general impression I get (at least in BFTP land) is that there wasn't really that much love nor admiration for her. I think she deserves a thread of her own apart from discussion in the 1981 rankings.

I had a lot going on in my personal life at that time and tennis consisted mainly of Wimbledon plus following the results at the Slams and I would have to admit that I myself never particularly warmed to her.

But perhaps she deserves a higher profile in the history of the game. Overall her h2h was 8-9 with Chris Evert and 13-20 with Martina Navratilova but when you consider that in 1977/early 78 when Tracy was serving her apprenticeship, which the majority of players do, both Chris and Martina beat her three times and after 1981 when Tracy's health problems caused a deterioration in her game Chris won their only meeting and Martina won all four contests - from 1979 to 1981 it would seem Tracy was very much their equal. In fact in 1981 in the five tournaments all three played in (3 Slams, Toyota end of year Championships and the Tier I Canadian) Tracy won 3 of them as against 1 each for the other two.

The 1981 Toyota Champs was really the last event before the problems really took a toll on her but even in 1982 and 1983 she finished Nos 4 and 9 respectively in the year-end rankings.

After 1981 she never went beyond a quarter-final at a Slam - but the defeats were to top class players in 1982 twice to Hana Mandlikova arguably the most naturally gifted player in the game after Goolagong retired. The 1983 loss on clay at RG to Jo Durie can only be described as horrible.

The big question,if she had remained healthy, is how her game would have manifested itself at the Slams?

You've certainly got to think that she would have been a major force at the USO given her victories there in 1979 and 1981 but the evidence at the other 3 is inconclusive. She only ever played the Australian once losing on grass to Pam Shriver but she may have suffered a let-down after the Toyota, where some believed the winner deserved the #1 ranking and she had a rough ride to winning it, although Pam had beaten her at Wimbledon also.

Her appearances at RG were in 1982 and 1983 and this was after the problems began to manifest themselves so it's hard to draw conclusions. At Wimbledon she lost in 1979 and 1980 to Martina and Goolagong in the semis but the 1980 semi was in doubt until the last point had been played. An Evert/Austin final would have been intrigueing and perhaps she did have the potential at the top of her game to become champion there.

Just another one in the long list of "what-ifs" in the history of women's tennis how would Tracy have continued to perform against the two all time greats.

Chris, of course had taken time off, had "re-invented" herself after a string of losses to Tracy in 1979 and was playing on level terms with her again.

Would Tracy have been able to cope with the increasing power of Martina especially on grass?

And how would she have coped with the evolvement of the racquets?

We had the wonderful Evert-Navratilova rivalry of the 80s and while I'm not into claiming what "would have happened" it is my belief that had Tracy remained fit this would have been a tripartite contest to around the mid-80s.

Of course injuries and ill-health are a normal part of the game and similar to Nadal perhaps the effort needed to maintain her challenge in the end was her undoing.

Tracy commentates nowadays during Wimbledon for the BBC (the national broadcaster in the UK) during Wimbledon. Having not had a lot of regard for her during her playing days I find I have nothing but admiration for her her in her new role.

She has an in-depth knowledge of the women's game which shines through and her previews and post-match anlaysis is second to none.
What she achieved 79-81 establishes her as a great player on hardcourts and, given her Californian tennis upbringing/culture, it is to be expected that cement would be her best surface. Indoors she was no slouch either but her development on grass and clay probably suffered from the tour structure in the late 70s. In particular, her failure to bag the biggest scalps on grass (an aged BJK excepted) casts some doubt as to her prospects on that surface. Nobody with less grasscourt skill than Tracy ever won Wimbledon and one or two with considerably more didn't make it either.

Her prospects on clay are harder to establish: her wins at the FC Cup and Rome suggest that she had the game to win RG but players like Gaby and Conchita didn't make it there because there was always someone that bit better and one could argue that in Tracy's case, the double-thick barrier of Mesdames Evert and Navratilova in their form of 82-6 would have proven just as hard to overcome as that of Graf and Seles in the early 90s.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
25,650 Posts
What she achieved 79-81 establishes her as a great player on hardcourts and, given her Californian tennis upbringing/culture, it is to be expected that cement would be her best surface.
A light bulb went on in my head after reading you post Andy. Did Austin's young start age and the surface she played on contribute to her injuries?
Evert grew up on clay, a kinder surface and didn't go full throttle like Tracy did at 14. Anyway, it's a thought.

As for the French: I wish Austin had competed in 1979 or 1980. After all it was Austin who broke that 125 match win streak.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,782 Posts
The recent 1981 Rankings Project brought Tracy Austin to the fore and the general impression I get (at least in BFTP land) is that there wasn't really that much love nor admiration for her. I think she deserves a thread of her own apart from discussion in the 1981 rankings.

I had a lot going on in my personal life at that time and tennis consisted mainly of Wimbledon plus following the results at the Slams and I would have to admit that I myself never particularly warmed to her.

But perhaps she deserves a higher profile in the history of the game. Overall her h2h was 8-9 with Chris Evert and 13-20 with Martina Navratilova but when you consider that in 1977/early 78 when Tracy was serving her apprenticeship, which the majority of players do, both Chris and Martina beat her three times and after 1981 when Tracy's health problems caused a deterioration in her game Chris won their only meeting and Martina won all four contests - from 1979 to 1981 it would seem Tracy was very much their equal. In fact in 1981 in the five tournaments all three played in (3 Slams, Toyota end of year Championships and the Tier I Canadian) Tracy won 3 of them as against 1 each for the other two.

The 1981 Toyota Champs was really the last event before the problems really took a toll on her but even in 1982 and 1983 she finished Nos 4 and 9 respectively in the year-end rankings.

After 1981 she never went beyond a quarter-final at a Slam - but the defeats were to top class players in 1982 twice to Hana Mandlikova arguably the most naturally gifted player in the game after Goolagong retired. The 1983 loss on clay at RG to Jo Durie can only be described as horrible.

The big question,if she had remained healthy, is how her game would have manifested itself at the Slams?

You've certainly got to think that she would have been a major force at the USO given her victories there in 1979 and 1981 but the evidence at the other 3 is inconclusive. She only ever played the Australian once losing on grass to Pam Shriver but she may have suffered a let-down after the Toyota, where some believed the winner deserved the #1 ranking and she had a rough ride to winning it, although Pam had beaten her at Wimbledon also.

Her appearances at RG were in 1982 and 1983 and this was after the problems began to manifest themselves so it's hard to draw conclusions. At Wimbledon she lost in 1979 and 1980 to Martina and Goolagong in the semis but the 1980 semi was in doubt until the last point had been played. An Evert/Austin final would have been intrigueing and perhaps she did have the potential at the top of her game to become champion there.

Just another one in the long list of "what-ifs" in the history of women's tennis how would Tracy have continued to perform against the two all time greats.

Chris, of course had taken time off, had "re-invented" herself after a string of losses to Tracy in 1979 and was playing on level terms with her again.

Would Tracy have been able to cope with the increasing power of Martina especially on grass?

And how would she have coped with the evolvement of the racquets?

We had the wonderful Evert-Navratilova rivalry of the 80s and while I'm not into claiming what "would have happened" it is my belief that had Tracy remained fit this would have been a tripartite contest to around the mid-80s.

Of course injuries and ill-health are a normal part of the game and similar to Nadal perhaps the effort needed to maintain her challenge in the end was her undoing.

Tracy commentates nowadays during Wimbledon for the BBC (the national broadcaster in the UK) during Wimbledon. Having not had a lot of regard for her during her playing days I find I have nothing but admiration for her her in her new role.

She has an in-depth knowledge of the women's game which shines through and her previews and post-match anlaysis is second to none.
Chris. What a great and timely post. I fail to understand the lack of respect that is shown to Austin and in my mind she would definitely have been a factor up to and including the mid 80s if she had stayed injury free. This idea that she would not have been able to evolve to graphite is nonsense. Of course she would- who didnt among the great male and female players? And as for the GS, I am sure she would have won the US Open at least 2 or 3 more times and a few French. On the grass I think she would have been dependent on a break in the draws in order for her to go through. And I find her fascinating at Wimbledon- she is easily the best analyser of what is happening. Those who disparage her have issues to resolve in their attitude as she was a great player. Not better than Evert or Navratilova- but the nearest to them if she had stayed on the tour.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,782 Posts
What she achieved 79-81 establishes her as a great player on hardcourts and, given her Californian tennis upbringing/culture, it is to be expected that cement would be her best surface. Indoors she was no slouch either but her development on grass and clay probably suffered from the tour structure in the late 70s. In particular, her failure to bag the biggest scalps on grass (an aged BJK excepted) casts some doubt as to her prospects on that surface. Nobody with less grasscourt skill than Tracy ever won Wimbledon and one or two with considerably more didn't make it either.

Her prospects on clay are harder to establish: her wins at the FC Cup and Rome suggest that she had the game to win RG but players like Gaby and Conchita didn't make it there because there was always someone that bit better and one could argue that in Tracy's case, the double-thick barrier of Mesdames Evert and Navratilova in their form of 82-6 would have proven just as hard to overcome as that of Graf and Seles in the early 90s.
But Andy, the whole point with Austin was that she was not intimidated by Evert or Navratilova. That counts for so much. There are countless matches I can think of in the 80s, post 81, when Evert and Navratilova won GS semis and finals with tennis that would not have been good enough to put Austin away. I think on clay she would have been formidable- sadly she never played at the French when at her peak. And I dont think there is any comparison as a mental and strategic maestro between Austin and Martinez and Sabatini.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,782 Posts
A light bulb went on in my head after reading you post Andy. Did Austin's young start age and the surface she played on contribute to her injuries?
Evert grew up on clay, a kinder surface and didn't go full throttle like Tracy did at 14. Anyway, it's a thought.

As for the French: I wish Austin had competed in 1979 or 1980. After all it was Austin who broke that 125 match win streak.
Rollo, I particularly feel that in 79 she could have won the French Open- look at how Evert struggled so badly against Fromholtz in the Federation Cup and Madruga in Paris??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,551 Posts
Great thread. I remember the buzz around Tracy when she made it to the QF's the USO in '77. I do think that she suffers in reputation because she was viewed as a threat to Evert. We Evert fans didn't like that. It would've been interesting to see if her game evolved with time. The evolution of Evert's game was what brought her back to the top of the rankings. The evolution of Navratilova built her into the dominant player that she was. Tracy was a hard-hitting metronome. She didn't show a Plan B. I think it's impossible to tell if she would have had the ability to take herself physically or strategically to the next level. I think that Martina would've begun to punish her serve more and more as the years went on if Tracy didn't beef that up. Unfortunately, Tracy's career began to wind down at the same point where Navratilova and Evert were taking theirs to the next level, so we'll never know how she might have responded.

Regardless, I think with Tracy's firepower, she would have periodically had times that she could have beaten anyone. How often, who knows?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,782 Posts
Great thread. I remember the buzz around Tracy when she made it to the QF's the USO in '77. I do think that she suffers in reputation because she was viewed as a threat to Evert. We Evert fans didn't like that. It would've been interesting to see if her game evolved with time. The evolution of Evert's game was what brought her back to the top of the rankings. The evolution of Navratilova built her into the dominant player that she was. Tracy was a hard-hitting metronome. She didn't show a Plan B. I think it's impossible to tell if she would have had the ability to take herself physically or strategically to the next level. I think that Martina would've begun to punish her serve more and more as the years went on if Tracy didn't beef that up. Unfortunately, Tracy's career began to wind down at the same point where Navratilova and Evert were taking theirs to the next level, so we'll never know how she might have responded.

Regardless, I think with Tracy's firepower, she would have periodically had times that she could have beaten anyone. How often, who knows?
I agree it is one of the great unknowns of the womens game. But Austin was a fantastic hitter of the ball even with the old wooden rackets. I am not sure how she would have fared against Navratilova or Mandlikova on a fast grass court if she didnt beef up her serve. But I think she would have done. She was effectively finished at the same age as Evert was when she won her first GS title against Morozova in Paris. Even the most ardent Evert fans could not have accused her of being a very complete player either at that stage.:confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,971 Posts
She's not nearly maligned enough IMO....j/k Surely she's a bit of a pantomime villan? She just seemed a bit protected and wet (while ruthless at the same time if that's possible) I have warmed to her in recent times and like her commentary.

As for whether she could have taken her game to the next level in the mid 80s- her greatest strength was that mind and determination- but agree that she would have to beef up that serve. Her game is stiffer and more inflebile than Chris's but she was pretty handy at the net when she got up there. Also maybe her (lack of) height would be a problem?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,782 Posts
She's not nearly maligned enough IMO....j/k Surely she's a bit of a pantomime villan? She just seemed a bit protected and wet (while ruthless at the same time if that's possible) I have warmed to her in recent times and like her commentary.

As for whether she could have taken her game to the next level in the mid 80s- her greatest strength was that mind and determination- but agree that she would have to beef up that serve. Her game is stiffer and more inflebile than Chris's but she was pretty handy at the net when she got up there. Also maybe her (lack of) height would be a problem?
I dont know if the height issue would have been so significant to be honest. As an athlete I am in no way comparing her to Henin but look at what the latter has achieved in the most powerful era. It is great to hear her getting some overdue praise, and I guess it would be interesting to hear what peoples favourite Austin match was. For me it has to be the Open final against Martina in 81.:worship:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,701 Posts
The sudden decline and then rapid disappearance of Tracy, along with Borg's unfathomable departure, was such a low point for me in the early to late '80s. I felt a loss and a disappointing lack of interest from 1982 to nearly 1990. Tennis was really my only sport and I wanted to care more. When Tracy and Bjorn were gone my whole vision of what the 80's could have–and should have–been was thrown for a loop. And, save for a few victories by Mandlikova and Becker, just so blah.

Who knows what would have happened had Tracy remained healthy, but surely she would have threatened Chris and Martina. As someone else pointed out in an earlier post, she never seemed afraid of them from the very start. If anything, they feared her. Her youth, enthusiasm and obvious lack of fear. What I am not so sure about is whether Tracy would have evolved as much as Evert. Chris's game was so much more dynamic and complete. Tracy was stiff as a board and after watching her immensely exciting '81 US victory over Martina, she was also a twitchy basket of nerves. She didn't have the look of fear in her eyes that Martina had, but she just simply could not keep still.

I am not so sure she would have beaten Martina on grass at Wimbledon, but she would have given her something to think about. Chris and Martina were contemporaries, but they viewed Austin differently, her youth threatened them and they went into matches with her with a with a different mindset. Perhaps this would have factored into their grand slam totals more than Austin is given credit for. Probably so, but who knows?

A few weeks ago I was thinking about the greatest 'what if's' in tennis history. Obviously, Monica Seles is the greatest 'what if' in the open game. Maureen Connelly in the pre-open. But what role would Tracy have played in the greatest rivalry of all time? Would Chris have become discouraged again and left the game well before 1989? Would Tracy, who was only 27 in 1990 when most of the great women peak, have affected Graf's slams? Even Seles's? Would Gaby have won her only slam with 27 year old Tracy in the field? Or Martina her last Wimbledon earlier that summer? Hell, don't get me started on how Bjorn would have affected Connor's resurgence in 1982. Don't even get me started.

Whew. Sorry about that...

As for my favorite Austin match - although I thoroughly enjoyed her kicking Chris's ass in the 1979 Open final, nothing beats the '81 final for sheer excitement and roller coaster drama. It was a lovely nail biter. It was the first time I really wanted Martina to beat Tracy, but I was thrilled that she was back at her rightful place at the top and at that point in 1981, with Hana on a roll and Evonne set to return in the fall, I thought that women's tennis had never looked better. Boy, was I wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,918 Posts
But Andy, the whole point with Austin was that she was not intimidated by Evert or Navratilova. That counts for so much. There are countless matches I can think of in the 80s, post 81, when Evert and Navratilova won GS semis and finals with tennis that would not have been good enough to put Austin away. I think on clay she would have been formidable- sadly she never played at the French when at her peak. And I dont think there is any comparison as a mental and strategic maestro between Austin and Martinez and Sabatini.
I agree with you about Tracy's mental fortitude Iain but the Evert-Navratilova obstacle I had in mind was more along the lines of having to play well enough in two successive matches to beat both to win a major.

Sure, Tracy would certainly have approached the challenge from a much better place mentally but physically she'd have found it very tough against two women who managed to up the stakes considerably on the fitness level, especially given that she'd be playing an attacker one time and a baseliner the next. Given the way both Chris and Martina raised their physical game, I am skeptical about how often she'd have been able to deal with both of them back to back in the kind of form they were in during thein the period in question. For example, if she'd been able to get past Chris at RG 84, would she have stopped Martina? If she'd been able to pull of a win over Martina in 85 RG, would she have stopped Chris? You can only answer yes if you assume (a) a vast physical improvement in Tracy's game (b) a notable development in her tactics (c) a real beefing up of her serve and (d) efface the psychological damage (e.g. 06 06) done in 82/3 during her 'decline'. In other words, we'd be talking about a reinvented Tracy Austin: injury free, airbrushed career history/psychology; beefed up body, more complete game.... In that case, the sky's the limit as to what she'd have achieved.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
25,650 Posts
I agree with you about Tracy's mental fortitude Iain but the Evert-Navratilova obstacle I had in mind was more along the lines of having to play well enough in two successive matches to beat both to win a major.
That worked the other way round too. Martina beat Chris but failed to beat Tracy at the US Open in 1981. Tracy DID beat both Chris and Martina to win the 1979 US Open. When she did it again at the Toyota Chmps she became the last person to do this until Mandlikova in 1985.

I think Evert never had to beat Tracy and Martina to win a slam.
Martina defeated Austin and then Evert to win Wimbledon in 1979.

Anyhow, I realize you were projecting this foward into the mid 80's, but assuming Austin was healthy we really don't know how Austin could have responded.

(a) a vast physical improvement in Tracy's game (b) a notable development in her tactics (c) a real beefing up of her serve and (d) efface the psychological damage (e.g. 06 06) done in 82/3 during her 'declin
a) If Martina and Chris did this with older bodies, why not a younger Austin?
b) She was pretty smart cookie. At the Open in 1981 she suddenly hit to
Martina's forehand out of nowhere.
c) Her serve improved during her comeback in 1981. I doubt if her serve
would ever be great, but then neither was Evert's
d) She overcame some psychological baggage in returning in 1981. Again,
if Evert could face the monster in mirror (Tracy) and Martina could get it
together after her 1980 meltdown at middle-age.


Anyhow, that's me playing devil's advocate for the day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,782 Posts
The sudden decline and then rapid disappearance of Tracy, along with Borg's unfathomable departure, was such a low point for me in the early to late '80s. I felt a loss and a disappointing lack of interest from 1982 to nearly 1990. Tennis was really my only sport and I wanted to care more. When Tracy and Bjorn were gone my whole vision of what the 80's could have–and should have–been was thrown for a loop. And, save for a few victories by Mandlikova and Becker, just so blah.

Who knows what would have happened had Tracy remained healthy, but surely she would have threatened Chris and Martina. As someone else pointed out in an earlier post, she never seemed afraid of them from the very start. If anything, they feared her. Her youth, enthusiasm and obvious lack of fear. What I am not so sure about is whether Tracy would have evolved as much as Evert. Chris's game was so much more dynamic and complete. Tracy was stiff as a board and after watching her immensely exciting '81 US victory over Martina, she was also a twitchy basket of nerves. She didn't have the look of fear in her eyes that Martina had, but she just simply could not keep still.

I am not so sure she would have beaten Martina on grass at Wimbledon, but she would have given her something to think about. Chris and Martina were contemporaries, but they viewed Austin differently, her youth threatened them and they went into matches with her with a with a different mindset. Perhaps this would have factored into their grand slam totals more than Austin is given credit for. Probably so, but who knows?

A few weeks ago I was thinking about the greatest 'what if's' in tennis history. Obviously, Monica Seles is the greatest 'what if' in the open game. Maureen Connelly in the pre-open. But what role would Tracy have played in the greatest rivalry of all time? Would Chris have become discouraged again and left the game well before 1989? Would Tracy, who was only 27 in 1990 when most of the great women peak, have affected Graf's slams? Even Seles's? Would Gaby have won her only slam with 27 year old Tracy in the field? Or Martina her last Wimbledon earlier that summer? Hell, don't get me started on how Bjorn would have affected Connor's resurgence in 1982. Don't even get me started.

Whew. Sorry about that...

As for my favorite Austin match - although I thoroughly enjoyed her kicking Chris's ass in the 1979 Open final, nothing beats the '81 final for sheer excitement and roller coaster drama. It was a lovely nail biter. It was the first time I really wanted Martina to beat Tracy, but I was thrilled that she was back at her rightful place at the top and at that point in 1981, with Hana on a roll and Evonne set to return in the fall, I thought that women's tennis had never looked better. Boy, was I wrong.
Great post- I agree, there was a definite sense of something missing once Borg and Austin went. In the case of the latter it is too easy for Evert and Navratilova fans to point to the deficincies in Austins game and state this was proof that she would not have evolved in the 80s. What about the deficincies in the Evert game in the early 70s? What, even more, about the psychological deficiencies in the Navratilova game for many years? But champions are champions and I am certain Tracy would have worked her butt off to remain at the top of the game. Seles, Austin and Connolly- yes the great what ifs indeed???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,782 Posts
I agree with you about Tracy's mental fortitude Iain but the Evert-Navratilova obstacle I had in mind was more along the lines of having to play well enough in two successive matches to beat both to win a major.

Sure, Tracy would certainly have approached the challenge from a much better place mentally but physically she'd have found it very tough against two women who managed to up the stakes considerably on the fitness level, especially given that she'd be playing an attacker one time and a baseliner the next. Given the way both Chris and Martina raised their physical game, I am skeptical about how often she'd have been able to deal with both of them back to back in the kind of form they were in during thein the period in question. For example, if she'd been able to get past Chris at RG 84, would she have stopped Martina? If she'd been able to pull of a win over Martina in 85 RG, would she have stopped Chris? You can only answer yes if you assume (a) a vast physical improvement in Tracy's game (b) a notable development in her tactics (c) a real beefing up of her serve and (d) efface the psychological damage (e.g. 06 06) done in 82/3 during her 'decline'. In other words, we'd be talking about a reinvented Tracy Austin: injury free, airbrushed career history/psychology; beefed up body, more complete game.... In that case, the sky's the limit as to what she'd have achieved.
Good post Andy:wavey:I agree with a lot of what you say. My stand point was though that Austin had remained on track without injuries. If that had been the case she would NEVER have lost 60 60 to anyone. Therefore the damage wouldnt have happened. I think she would have eaten significantly into the Evert Navratilova hegemony of the game.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,782 Posts
That worked the other way round too. Martina beat Chris but failed to beat Tracy at the US Open in 1981. Tracy DID beat both Chris and Martina to win the 1979 US Open. When she did it again at the Toyota Chmps she became the last person to do this until Mandlikova in 1985.

I think Evert never had to beat Tracy and Martina to win a slam.
Martina defeated Austin and then Evert to win Wimbledon in 1979.

Anyhow, I realize you were projecting this foward into the mid 80's, but assuming Austin was healthy we really don't know how Austin could have responded.



a) If Martina and Chris did this with older bodies, why not a younger Austin?
b) She was pretty smart cookie. At the Open in 1981 she suddenly hit to
Martina's forehand out of nowhere.
c) Her serve improved during her comeback in 1981. I doubt if her serve
would ever be great, but then neither was Evert's
d) She overcame some psychological baggage in returning in 1981. Again,
if Evert could face the monster in mirror (Tracy) and Martina could get it
together after her 1980 meltdown at middle-age.


Anyhow, that's me playing devil's advocate for the day.
Rollo:wavey:I so agree with you. The whole point about Austin was that she was a champion. GS winners and world number ones find a way to deal with their challenges until their mind or body becomes too tired to do it anymore. If Austin had stayed fit who knows what she could have achieved. And the point you made re Navratilova and Evert having to beat each other and Austin is pertinent. I mean who, apart from Mandlikova, did they beat from 82 to 86 who could be classed a truly great player? I cant think of anyone- lots of great players but not GREAT as in world beaters. They were fortunate to have Austin out of the way and Mandlikova so off form a lot of the time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,619 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
As for the French: I wish Austin had competed in 1979 or 1980. After all it was Austin who broke that 125 match win streak.
Good point although success at the Foro Italico didn't necessarily translate to Roland Garros e.g. Maria Bueno.

Her results at RG in 1982 and 1983 can in no way be an indicator of how she might have performed there at or near her best.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
576 Posts
The much maligned Miss Austin? Who is bad mouthing Tracy? And is it undeserved ?

OK I'll get right to it. I wasn't a fan of Tracy. How dare she challenge Queen Chris? But I'll start of with something nice. While I despised her and her hyper-twitching, finger nail blowing, face-in-the-towel antics, as a TV commentator I felt she was vastly superior to Chris Evert in the TV booth. Always felt she was a very astute commentator who was not only able to relate to the competitors, but to average fans as well. She dissected the game, the player's strokes, and was easily able to offer analysis as to why players would miss or have difficulty with certain shots. She was often on the money with her analysis.

Now as for her playing career. No, she was not number in 1981. Yes, she got a lot out of that little frame of hers. She could hit the ball on a dime, perhaps better than anyone ever, even better than Christine Marie Evert. And she was a fierce competitor who never gave up. And that counted for a lot in women's tennis. I think she was raised to feel like she was a champion. And she had no fear. But I have always said it's easier getting to the top than staying there. And a quick analysis of Tracy's 1980 season, and her fall from #1 reveals, to me, she was never destined to dominate women's tennis. And she would never be able to permanently solve the dynamic duo of Chris and Martina.

Tracy was a close #2 to Martina for 1979. And with her win in the 1980 Avon Championships she officially overtook Martina as #1. She maintained that ranking until the end of the year. But beginning with Wimbledon, where as the #1 seed and favorite - yes she was the favorite even though Martina was 2 time champion, but struggling with her form. Chris had taken time off so no one really considered her the favorite. Austin's Eastbourne win boosted her status as the one to win the title. And yet she was stymied by Evonne Goolagong. Goolagong exposed Austin's weaknesses in that match, moving her around, taking pace off the ball, mixing her play up. Even dropping a love set (Evonne could still do her walkabouts and win matches) Evonne held off Austin. I challenge anyone who thinks Austin would have beaten Evert, even if Tracy got by Evonne. Another fight for another day.

In the summer, after winning San Diego again, Austin stumbled to 15 year old Andrea Jaeger for the first time in Mahwah. And that loss had repercussions for the US Open and rest of the year. Suddenly, the pressure of #1, being defending US Open champion, and having to face a younger, fearless opponent who refused to give up shook Austin's confidence a bit. Even though Tracy advanced to the Open semis without the loss of a set, I recall she didn't win with quite the ease she did earlier int he year. Pressure was beginning to mount. And waiting in the semis was Evert. After winning the first 4 games, Tracy won only 4 more. And it seemed like she was lucky to win those 4. Chris also exposed Tracy's weaknesses, by mixing up the play, being willing to attack Austin at opportune times, and not allow Tracy any real comfort on her serve. After watching the match recently I am surprised Tracy was ever able to beat Chris again.

Despite her protestations, Tracy was not the #1 player for 1980. Sadly injuries kept her out of the game for 5 months in early 1981. She did well to win Eastbourne, which to me was actually a big upset win. Her back to back triumphs over Navratilva and Evert in Canada were another surprise, but signalled she was not done yet. But let's face it folks. She was lucky to win the 1981 US Open. Probably the worst choke of Martina's career. To Austin's credit she never gave up. And the swirling winds in Flushing favored her. Austin followed that up with a win in Atlanta, which had only one other top 20 player in the field. Losses to Barker, Navratilova, and Shriver in the fall didn't help her cause.

I always felt that the first Avon event of 1982, in which Austin was crushed by Anne Smith was the perfect validation that Tracy was definitely not #1 for 1981. And it was effectively the end of her membership of the elite three of the women's game.

I do despise the 'woulda, coulda, shoulda' show. And the 'what if" follies to. We can all speculate and write our own ending. We only know what actually happened.

But I for one don't believe Austin was physically capable of keeping up with Navratilova and Evert. Martina was the one who physically reformed herself, circa 1981. And Chris followed suit. Neither were motivated by Austin, but by their own desires. Austin had kinks in her game that were bigger than Chris or Martina's flaws. The serve is the most glaring one. Once Martina went with her Yonex racquet, and more of the women used graphite, you could see how that squeaky little Tracy serve was going to remain under constant attack. And Tracy had a hitch in her serve that was always going to prevent her from really having it be anything more than a point-starter. Tracy had good feet, and she moved fairly well. But she wasn't as quick as Evert. And when you got her on the run, she was never able to recover as well as some other players. Let's face it, she wasn't truly athletic. But she did work hard at the game. Someone mentioned her size, and compared her to Henin. There is absolutely no valid comparison at all! Henin is a pure athlete. Austin was not. Finally, as others have noted, Austin's ground strokes were a bit mechanical. She could hit the ball on a dime. Which is why she did well on indoor surfaces. With no wind to contend with, her strokes could be lethal. But get her out of her comfort zone, or if she were a bit off, Austin's game suffered.

I don't think there is any way at all she could have won the French Open, ever. Not even in 1979. Ian - you mentioned how Evert struggled against Fromholtz in Madrid and Madruga in Paris. Chris still won those matches. Fromholtz was #5 in the world and had recently beat the newly married Evert. Madruga was a tough cookie on clay. But Tracy never had the comfort or experience of playing on slow red European clay. Over the long haul, her weaknesses would have been exposed by any number of players in 1979-1981, had she played. And the fact she never did play indicated to me she didn't believe she could win. Getting to the quarters in 1982 and 1983 were actually big accomplishments for her.

A Wimbledon or Australian title were out of the question for Austin. In the Navratilova era, along with Chris and even Hana (who did win 2 Aussies but no Wimbledons), there is simply no way Austin could have broken through. The only way to an Aussie title would have been had the surface changed to Rebound Ace while she was still young and healthy. Austin might have had some success in events like Indian Wells or Miami, but seeing how Navratiova dominated in 1983-1985, and how close Evert was to Martina, and far ahead of everyone else, I find it unfathomable Austin could have knocked both off again to win another US Open title.

As far as her H2H against Navratilova, I felt Tracy did pretty well to win as many matches as she did, including some big wins indoors. I believe they only played once on clay, in 1983, when Martina won in the finals of the FCC.

And for her 9-8 H2H over Evert. Yup it's true. And undeniable fact, she had a head to head advantage. But I do want to dissect the numbers. They met first at Wimbledon in June 1977, and last played in December 1982. 17 times over 5-1/2 years. True that during that period both missed significant time from the game. And 9 of their 17 matches were played between March 1979 and January 1980, with 5 of those on indoor carpet. More than half of their matches were contested in a period when Austin was on the ascendancy and Evert on the decline. In fact I would say mentally 1979 was the worst year of Evert's career until she wound down her career. Getting married certainly didn't help Chris either. And while some would want to toss out Evert's early wins: OK her 1977 Wimbledon and 1978 FCC wins, and perhaps even the 1978 US Open win (although Austin was #6 by then), still from the 1980 US Open to the end of their career, Chris won 3 of 5 matches.

They split their two clay meetings, although Austin won the more significant, the streak busting Rome semi win in 1979. They only met once on grass, their first ever match at Wimbledon. On hard courts Evert held a 4-2 advantage. It was indoors where Tracy really beat up on Chris, winning 6 of 8 career matches. To me, Evert's 6-3 advantage outdoors proves her game was more flexible on all surfaces, and she more than had the ability to beat Tracy when the elements came into play. The structure of the women's tour was such that there were many more indoor events back then. Austin did not compete on clay very often (she did play FCC in 1977-1980, but Chris missed it the 2 times Tracy won). Tracy never played Amelia Island, and rarely ever played on European clay. Personally, I don't envision a circumstance in which Tracy was ever going to beat Chris on grass.

So while you can't argue the numbers, I do feel the H2H is a bit misleading. 17 matches in 5-1/2 years is not a lot. Navratilova and Austin played almost twice as many matches.

Tracy was a great, no doubt about it. A two-time teen US Open champion. Who knows what might have happened? ! ? I for one think the tally of majors won by Evert, Navratilova, Mandlikova, Graf, and Tracy would have been exactly what they are today regardless of Austin's injuries. That's just my 3-1/2 cents worth!
 
1 - 20 of 253 Posts
Top