The Greatest Female Tennis Player of All Time

[Kieran]

I can see that, but while Serena didn't have that one rival because she played so long she did have to battle quite a few multi-slam winners and former #1s: Hingis, Vee, Lindsay, Kimmie, Pova and Justine

She did, and I’d certainly include her among the greats, but not as the greatest I’ve seen. Like with the men, I don’t believe in a woman Goat either, but the woman who’s impressed me most in tennis is Martina. I’d have Chrissy and Steffi next, and Serena below them, because she had an easier field to navigate…

 

[PhiEaglesfan712]

She did, and I’d certainly include her among the greats, but not as the greatest I’ve seen. Like with the men, I don’t believe in a woman Goat either, but the woman who’s impressed me most in tennis is Martina. I’d have Chrissy and Steffi next, and Serena below them, because she had an easier field to navigate…

Maybe in the second half of Serena's career, but definitely not in the first decade of her career. Serena had to face the likes of Capriati, Davenport, Hingis, Mary Pierce, Venus, Henin, Clijsters, Amalie Mauresmo, and Sharapova near their primes in Serena's first decade. Steffi's field from 1994 to the end of her career was a lot easier than this, when her two main rivals (Capriati and Seles) missed 2+ years and were nowhere near their prime levels during the rest of Steffi's career (though Capriati did return to her early 90s level after Steffi's retirement, which ironically helped Serena's field strength).

 

[Kieran]

Maybe in the second half of Serena's career, but definitely not in the first decade of her career. Serena had to face the likes of Capriati, Davenport, Hingis, Mary Pierce, Venus, Henin, Clijsters, Amalie Mauresmo, and Sharapova near their primes in Serena's first decade. Steffi's field from 1994 to the end of her career was a lot easier than this, when her two main rivals (Capriati and Seles) missed 2+ years and were nowhere near their prime levels during the rest of Steffi's career (though Capriati did return to her early 90s level after Steffi's retirement, which ironically helped Serena's field strength).

Nice post, and welcome to the forum!

You probably have a higher regard for some of these players you named, than I have. They’re very good but it’s as if Chrissy never existed and the best opposition to Martina was Tracy Austin and Hana Mandlikova. Still tough players but not quite what Chrissy was to Martina, and vice versa.

By the way, I agree with you about Steffi, because even though she cut her teeth against Martina and Chrissy, and won the CYS in 1988, she faced a threadbare, lesser field for most of her career. And soon as Monica Seles became a great player, she was stabbed: Steffi instantly won the next 4 slams. Monica is definitely an example of a player who I’d rate higher than her slam count…

 

[kskate2]

Nice post, and welcome to the forum!

You probably have a higher regard for some of these players you named, than I have. They’re very good but it’s as if Chrissy never existed and the best opposition to Martina was Tracy Austin and Hana Mandlikova. Still tough players but not quite what Chrissy was to Martina, and vice versa.

By the way, I agree with you about Steffi, because even though she cut her teeth against Martina and Chrissy, and won the CYS in 1988, she faced a threadbare, lesser field for most of her career. And soon as Monica Seles became a great player, she was stabbed: Steffi instantly won the next 4 slams. Monica is definitely an example of a player who I’d rate higher than her slam count…

Just a different era really. I mean no one since Graf really had a main rival that could equal her level in Seles before the stabbing. Serena did not have a main rival because honestly no one could match her level for any consistent period of time. Same for all of the slam champs since then. There was no one who could consistently play at a high level and own the tour when Serena was offboard. Remember what a revolving door the #1 spot was? We really have been spoiled by the men's Big3 era. We may be facing the same kind of new era the women have had depending on what happens w/ Carlito.

 

[Fiero425]

Maybe in the second half of Serena's career, but definitely not in the first decade of her career. Serena had to face the likes of Capriati, Davenport, Hingis, Mary Pierce, Venus, Henin, Clijsters, Amalie Mauresmo, and Sharapova near their primes in Serena's first decade. Steffi's field from 1994 to the end of her career was a lot easier than this, when her two main rivals (Capriati and Seles) missed 2+ years and were nowhere near their prime levels during the rest of Steffi's career (though Capriati did return to her early 90s level after Steffi's retirement, which ironically helped Serena's field strength).

What about Arantxa Sanchez Vic.? She competed well vs Graf! Annoyances were Coetzer & Pierce! Forget upset @ Wimbl. by Lori McNeil!

 

[BTURNER]

To add a different insight here, I am going to turn these women's singles slam careers upside down and inside out and look at the underbelly as well as the glory. It makes no sense to look at the wins outside of any context of losses acrued to get them to get a better idea of their career long patterns and consistency levels. No statistic in this post includes any match outside of the singles Australian, French, Wimbledon, or US championship results.

Evert entered 56 majors between 1971-1989 (19 years) and won 18 with an 89% win/loss match ratio. That means she won 32.1 % of those 56 and reached the finals 60.7% of the time with a finals conversion rate of 52.9 %. Evert reached the semifinals 92.9% of the time she entered a slam with a SF conversion rate of 65.4% and the QFs 96.4% with a QF conversion rate of 96.2%

Chris's underbelly: I am just putting aside what happens in the fourth round, and looking downwards now, Evert lost in Rds 1, 2, or 3 of a major 3.6% of the time she played one, with no 1st Rd losses, no 2nd Rd losses and 2 Rd 3 losses( Jordan and Sanchez) .

Navratilova entered 67 majors between 1973-2004 (30 yr span w/ 8 yr sabbatical 1995-2003 included. She played in 23 separate yrs ) and won 18 with an 86% win/loss match ratio. That means she won 26.9 % of those 67 and reached the finals 47.8% of the time with a finals conversion rate of 56.3 %. Martina reached the semifinals 65.7% of the time she entered a slam with a SF conversion rate of 72.7% and the QFs 79.1% with a QF conversion rate of 83.0%

Navratilova's underbelly: I am just putting aside what happens in the fourth round, and looking downwards now, Martina lost in Rds 1, 2, or 3 of a major 13.4% of the time she played one, with 5 1st Rd losses, 2 2nd Rd losses and 2 Rd 3 losses.

Steffi entered the main draw in 54 slams between 1983-1999 (17 years) and won 22 with a 90% win/loss match ratio . She won 40.7% of the major championships she entered and reached the finals of 30 slams, or 55.6% of the slams she entered. Finals conversion rate is 73% . 66% of the time she was a semifinalist. Her semifinal conversion rate is 81.1%. 74.1% of the time Steffi reached the QFs with a QF conversion rate of 88.1%

Steffi's underbelly: I am just putting aside what happens in the fourth round, and looking downwards now, Graf lost in Rds 1, 2, or 3 of a major 13% of the time she played one, with 3 1st Rd losses, 1 2nd Rd losses and 3 Rd 3 losses .

Serena entered 81 majors between 1998-2022 (25 years) and won 23 with an 87% win/loss match ratio. That means she won 28.4 % of those 81 and reached the finals 32 times or 40.7% of the time for a finals conversion rate of 71.9%. Serena reached the semifinals 49.4% of the time she entered a slam with a semifinal conversion rate of 82.5% . She reached the QFs 66.7% of the time with a 74.1% QF conversion rate.

Serena's underbelly: I am just putting aside what happens in the fourth round, and looking downwards now, Serena lost in Rds 1, 2, or 3 of a major 21% of the time she played one, with 2 1st Rd losses, 3 2nd Rd losses and 11 Rd 3 losses



Slam Career win/loss % 1. Graf 90% 2. Evert 89% 3. Serena 87% 4. Martina 86%
% of majors champ won 1. Graf 40.7% 2. Evert 32.1% 3. Martina 29.9% 4. Serena 28.4%
% of majors reached final 1. Evert 60.7% 2. Graf 55.6% 3. Martina 47.8% 4. Serena 40%
Slam finals conversion 1. Graf 73.1% 2.Serena 71.9% 3. Martina 56.3% 4. Evert 52.9%
% of major reached SF's 1. Evert 92.9% 2. Graf 66% 3. Martina 65.7% 4. Serena 49.4%
Semifinals conversion 1.Serena 82.5% 2. Graf 81.1% 3. Martina 72.7% 4. Evert 65.4%
% of major Reached QF's 1. Evert 96.4% 2. Martina 79.1% 3. Graf 74.1% 4. Serena 66.7%
QFinals conversion rate 1. Evert 96.2 2. Graf 88.1% 3. Martina 83% 4.Serena 74.1%
* % of slam losses - Rds1-3 1.Evert 3.6% 2. Graf 13% 3. Martina 13.4% 4. Serena 21%
*Here a low number is a better number


. Now I have yet to use the word 'upset' because that involves more defining. You can define an 'upset' as failing to meet your 'seeding' If you are ranked in the top 4 seeds, then you should reach the semifinal round to uphold your seeding. Or you can define an upset as losing to an opponent seeded lower than you are. If you are ranked # 8 in the tournament, and lose to someone ranked # 16, then you have been upset in the tournament.

 

[tented]

To add a different insight here, I am going to turn these three women's singles slam careers upside down and inside out and look at the underbelly as well as the glory. It makes no sense to look at the wins outside of any context of losses acrued to get them to get a better idea of their career long patterns and consistency levels.

First Steffi she entered the main draw in 54 slams between 1983-1999 (17 years) and won 22 with a 90% win/loss match ratio . She won 40.7% of the major championships she entered and reached the finals of 30 slams, or 55.6% of the slams she entered. Finals conversion rate is 73% . 66% of the time she was a semifinalist. Her semifinal conversion rate is 81.1% 74.1% of the time Steffi reached the QFs with a QF conversion rate of 88.1%

Steffi's underbelly: I am just putting aside what happens in the fourth round, and looking downwards now, Graf lost in Rds 1, 2, or 3 of a major 13% of the time she played one, with 3 1st Rd losses, 1 2nd Rd losses and 3 Rd 3 losses .

Serena entered 81 majors between 1998-2022 (25 years) and won 23 with an 87% win/loss match ratio. That means she won 28.4 % of those 81 and reached the finals 32 times or 40.7% of the time for a finals conversion rate of 71.9%. Serena reached the semifinals 49.4% of the time she entered a slam with a semifinal conversion rate of 82.5% . She reached the QFs 66.7% of the time with a 74.1% QF conversion rate.

Serena's underbelly: I am just putting aside what happens in the fourth round, and looking downwards now, Serena lost in Rds 1, 2, or 3 of a major 21% of the time she played one, with 2 1st Rd losses, 3 2nd Rd losses and 11 Rd 3 losses

Evert entered 56 majors between 1971-1989 (19 years) and won 18 with an 89% win/loss match ratio. That means she won 32.1 % of those 56 and reached the finals 60.7% of the time with a finals conversion rate of 52.9 %. Evert reached the semifinals 92.9% of the time she entered a slam with a SF conversion rate of 65.4% and the QFs 96.4% with a QF conversion rate of 96.2%

Chris's underbelly: I am just putting aside what happens in the fourth round, and looking downwards now, Evert lost in Rds 1, 2, or 3 of a major 3.6% of the time she played one, with no 1st Rd losses, no 2nd Rd losses and 2 Rd 3 losses( Jordan and Sanchez) .

Slam Career win/loss ratio 1. Graf 90% 2. Evert 89% 3. Serena 87%
Percentage of majors won 1. Graf 40.7% 2. Evert 32.1% 3. Serena 28.4%
Percentage of majors finalist 1. Evert 60.7% 2. Graf 55.6% 3. Serena 40%
slam finals conversion rate 1. Graf 73.1% 2.Serena 71.9% 3. Evert 52.9%
SemiFinals conversion rate 1.Serena 82.5% 2. Graf 81.1% 3. Evert 65.4%
Percentage of majors semifinals 1. Evert 92.9% 2. Graf 66% 3. Serena 49.4%
Percentage of major Quarterfinals 1. Evert 96.4% 2. Graf 74.1% 3. Serena 66.7%
QF conversion rate 1. Evert 96.2 2. Graf 88.1% 3. Serena 74.1%
lowest % of majors loss rds1-3 1.Evert 3.6% 2. Graf 13% 3. Serena 21%


. Now I have yet to use the word 'upset' because that involves more defining. You can define an 'upset' as failing to meet your 'seeding' If you are ranked in the top 4 seeds, then you should reach the semifinal round to uphold your seeding. Or you can define an upset as losing to an opponent seeded lower than you are. If you are ranked # 8 in the tournament, and lose to someone ranked # 16, then you have been upset in the tournament.

That’s an interesting analysis of the numbers! I’m curious, though, why you didn’t include Navratilova?

 

[BTURNER]

That’s an interesting analysis of the numbers! I’m curious, though, why you didn’t include Navratilova?

Tennis Stats Fatigue is a real diagnosis I suffer from. I have been given 25 mg pills by my doctor. I am doing Martina and Margaret Court in the next two days and will edit.

 

[BTURNER]

Some thoughts so far. You can really see how deciding to extend your career to get that one more slam, one more wimbledon, really impacts more inconsistent players. Martina got her ninth wimbledon over Garrison with a heavy cost and her decision to play in 2004 really hurt these numbers. Serena deciding to play on several years to get her 24th push her down, and you can see that pregnancy took its toll and injuries took their toll. Maybe she tended to come back before she was really ready to mentally and physically compete at the top level.

Evert is interesting. she amassed such volume in those QF, SF numbers, and of course she reached more finals than anyone in the sport, but she crashes at semifinal and final conversions. I think this is where surface affects her. Evert began playing when 3 of four majors were grass, and that slowed her progress at reaching US Open finals. She loses 4 straight semis to the likes of Court, Goolagong, King and Kerry Reid. And then all those losses to Martina at Wimbledon at up. In addition Evert spent so many years ranked 2 or 3 in the world ( which is better than 4-9! as some of these women dropped) but she rarely managed to beat the best grass-courter in the world at a slam. Evert reached her seeding despite the lawn, but did not exceed it often enough.

What astonishes about Graf, is how good these numbers ended up despite joining the tour at 13 yrs old and playing all four events at those early years. I made the executive decision not to include those two qualifying round losses at Wimbledon and US Open 1983 when she was 13 year old. She was not in the main draw, so she cannot win or lose in the main draw. She reached only one semifinal in her first 3 years on the tour, and was able to make up so much ground with phenomenal number from 1986 forward, that there is no real detriment left.

One more point on my chart above than needs explanation.
% of major Quarterfinls won 1. Evert 96.4% 2. Martina 79.1% 3. Graf 74.1% 4. Serena 66.7%
QFinals conversion rate 1. Evert 96.2 2. Graf 88.1% 3. Martina 83% 4.Serena 74.1%
* % of slam losses rds1-3 1.Evert 3.6% 2. Graf 13% 3. Martina 13.4% 4. Serena 21%

Notice how Graf inexplicably drops low between % of slam losses rd's 1-3, and % of majors where she reached the QF's. Thats because Graf's troublesome rd was the 4th rd which I did not document at all. Graf lost 5 times in that 4th rd which you are not seeing reflected elsewhere outside the slam win/ loss ratio. I decided it was neither a late rd, or early round that explained much, but with Graf its a significant round. Once she gets past that round, her winning ways return.

 

[Fiero425]

Some thoughts so far. You can really see how deciding to extend your career to get that one more slam, one more wimbledon, really impacts more inconsistent players. Martina got her ninth wimbledon over Garrison with a heavy cost and her decision to play in 2004 really hurt these numbers. Serena deciding to play on several years to get her 24th push her down, and you can see that pregnancy took its toll and injuries took their toll. Maybe she tended to come back before she was really ready to mentally and physically compete at the top level.

Evert is interesting. she amassed such volume in those QF, SF numbers, and of course she reached more finals than anyone in the sport, but she crashes at semifinal and final conversions. I think this is where surface affects her. Evert began playing when 3 of four majors were grass, and that slowed her progress at reaching US Open finals. She loses 4 straight semis to the likes of Court, Goolagong, King and Kerry Reid. And then all those losses to Martina at Wimbledon at up. In addition Evert spent so many years ranked 2 or 3 in the world ( which is better than 4-9! as some of these women dropped) but she rarely managed to beat the best grass-courter in the world at a slam. Evert reached her seeding despite the lawn, but did not exceed it often enough.

What astonishes about Graf, is how good these numbers ended up despite joining the tour at 13 yrs old and playing all four events at those early years. I made the executive decision not to include those two qualifying round losses at Wimbledon and US Open 1983 when she was 13 year old. She was not in the main draw, so she cannot win or lose in the main draw. She reached only one semifinal in her first 3 years on the tour, and was able to make up so much ground with phenomenal number from 1986 forward, that there is no real detriment left.

The reversals of fortune comes into play when it comes to Graf & Navratilova! Steffi took out Martina 2 of 3 times at Wimbledon, while MN defeated SG 4 of 5 times at the USO! Strange; esp. their meeting in 1991 when Martina was all but done! She hadn't played any WTA matches all Summer doing WTT after dropping QF to Capriati at Wimbledon! It was a wonder she even got to that SF, but prevailed magnificently late in her career!

 

[BTURNER]

Now I provide these stats about these majors in this thread, not because they are definitive in deciding 'GOAT'. I don't believe that they are. The GOAT debates are way too driven by these singles results and these four events and I see that as simplistic understanding of history and lack the context of the women's tennis competition from 1880's through 2022. Ignoring ranking, team play, the relative importance of doubles in the era, , and 90% of what they do on the tour that is not a slam is silly! But if you are going to have these four event results completely dominate, at least look at them thoroughly. Even this is not enough. You have to look at these early round and mid tournament losses and put them in context. Navratilova reaching the semis and losing tells an entirely different story in 1973 at 16 years old at RG, then it does when she loses to Sukova at the Aussie in 1984. One is a triumph, and the other a disappointment.

 

[BTURNER]

The reversals of fortune comes into play when it comes to Graf & Navratilova! Steffi took out Martina 2 of 3 times at Wimbledon, while MN defeated SG 4 of 5 times at the USO! Strange; esp. their meeting in 1991 when Martina was all but done! She hadn't played any WTA matches all Summer doing WTT after dropping QF to Capriati at Wimbledon! It was a wonder she even got to that SF, but prevailed magnificently late in her career!

Part of that was simply the luck of the draw and age. At the Open Steffi happened to meet Martina two times before she gained her adult physique 15-16 yrs but she never met Martina at Wimbledon before she was 17. Young Steffi still had enough experience on hard courts to get into the Sf's despite her youth, but on grass this petite girl wasn't grass ready enough to get into SF's . As for '91, Martina was by then a very rare anamoly. She was virtually the only S/Ver left in the game. Steffi would have gone several tournaments without ever having to hit more than a dozen passing shots/ lobs with Martina out of commission for months. When you add those lefty serves and spins to the mix, Martina had a HUGE advantage simply by being Martina. Nobody played like her, and if Martina's first serve was going in, by the time a player in the 90's got a groove on their dipping return and passing shots/lobs she had the set. Her unique style alone could grab her a lot of games.

 

[Fiero425]

Now I provide these stats about these majors in this thread, not because they are definitive in deciding 'GOAT'. I don't believe that they are. The GOAT debates are way too driven by these singles results and these four events and I see that as simplistic understanding of history and lack the context of the women's tennis competition from 1880's through 2022. Ignoring ranking, team play, the relative importance of doubles in the era, , and 90% of what they do on the tour that is not a slam is silly! But if you are going to have these four event results completely dominate, at least look at them thoroughly. Even this is not enough. You have to look at these early round and mid tournament losses and put them in context. Navratilova reaching the semis and losing tells an entirely different story in 1973 at 16 years old at RG, then it does when she loses to Sukova at the Aussie in 1984. One is a triumph, and the other a disappointment.

Only us "oldsters" remember how important doubles was "way back when!" All the top players competed; esp. the women! Evert got down and dirty partnering with the best to keep her from embarrassment! I can remember seeing her with Casal, Durr, Navratilova, & Morozova! Her teaming with Martina broke down when she started losing to her and admits it half-heartedly! Martina never seemed to have a problem playing with anyone; even when Shriver beat her twice at the USO!

That Sukova match still makes me SMH! IIRC Martina took the 1st set 6-1, though it was highly contested! Margaret Court even said she left after the 1st set thinking "it's all over!" That ruined Martina's run of 6 Majors in a row and a completion of her CYGS unfortunately! Martina lost on that court many times! Between the choppy courts, trains, bugs, and wind, I guess she was lucky to win 3 times!

 

[BTURNER]

Only us "oldsters" remember how important doubles was "way back when!" All the top players competed; esp. the women! Evert got down and dirty partnering with the best to keep her from embarrassment! I can remember seeing her with Casal, Durr, Navratilova, & Morozova! Her teaming with Martina broke down when she started losing to her and admits it half-heartedly! Martina never seemed to have a problem playing with anyone; even when Shriver beat her twice at the USO!

That Sukova match still makes me SMH! IIRC Martina took the 1st set 6-1, though it was highly contested! Margaret Court even said she left after the 1st set thinking "it's all over!" That ruined Martina's run of 6 Majors in a row and a completion of her CYGS unfortunately! Martina lost on that court many times! Between the choppy courts, trains, bugs, and wind, I guess she was lucky to win 3 times!

yep, but it sure put Evert in the history books. Evert went on to win a slam in her 11th year in a row, then 12th and 13th thanks to Sukova's great win.



One more point on my chart above than needs explanation.
% of major Quarterfinls won 1. Evert 96.4% 2. Martina 79.1% 3. Graf 74.1% 4. Serena 66.7%
QFinals conversion rate 1. Evert 96.2 2. Graf 88.1% 3. Martina 83% 4.Serena 74.1%
* % of slam losses rds1-3 1.Evert 3.6% 2. Graf 13% 3. Martina 13.4% 4. Serena 21%

Notice how Graf inexplicably drops low between % of slam losses rd's 1-3, and % of majors where she reached the QF's. Thats because Graf's troublesome rd was the 4th rd which I did not document at all. Graf lost 5 times in that 4th rd which you are not seeing reflected elsewhere outside the slam win/ loss ratio. I decided it was neither a late rd, or early round that explained much, but with Graf its a significant round. Once she gets past that round, her winning ways return.

 

[Fiero425]

yep, but it sure put Evert in the history books. Evert went on to win a slam in her 11th year in a row, then 12th and 13th thanks to Sukova's great win.



One more point on my chart above than needs explanation.
% of major Quarterfinls won 1. Evert 96.4% 2. Martina 79.1% 3. Graf 74.1% 4. Serena 66.7%
QFinals conversion rate 1. Evert 96.2 2. Graf 88.1% 3. Martina 83% 4.Serena 74.1%
* % of slam losses rds1-3 1.Evert 3.6% 2. Graf 13% 3. Martina 13.4% 4. Serena 21%

Notice how Graf inexplicably drops low between % of slam losses rd's 1-3, and % of majors where she reached the QF's. Thats because Graf's troublesome rd was the 4th rd which I did not document at all. Graf lost 5 times in that 4th rd which you are not seeing reflected elsewhere outside the slam win/ loss ratio. I decided it was neither a late rd, or early round that explained much, but with Graf its a significant round. Once she gets past that round, her winning ways return.

Graf's 1st Rd. loss to McNeil in '94 Wimbl. is the most memorable! Lori played out of her mind doing what she did best; ATTACK! Loved it! That match facilitated Martina's run to the final to taste the grass one last time as a singles player! It shook the tournament up and inspired Navratilova! It also helped that personal pigeons were in her path in the QF (Novotna) & SF (GG.Fernandez)! The dream died of winning Wimbledon only to reitire like BJK did in '75! It would have been classic! Her luck ran out against Martinez and without a more penetrating serve, she had little chance! You lose that little bit of punch in you late 30's! I know I wasn't getting those free points when I got there! End RANT!

 

[BTURNER]

Graf's 1st Rd. loss to McNeil in '94 Wimbl. is the most memorable! Lori played out of her mind doing what she did best; ATTACK! Loved it! That match facilitated Martina's run to the final to taste the grass one last time as a singles player! It shook the tournament up and inspired Navratilova! It also helped that personal pigeons were in her path in the QF (Novotna) & SF (GG.Fernandez)! The dream died of winning Wimbledon only to reitire like BJK did in '75! It would have been classic! Her luck ran out against Martinez and without a more penetrating serve, she had little chance! You lose that little bit of punch in you late 30's! I know I wasn't getting those free points when I got there! End RANT!

McNeil was a dangerous player. She had wins over Evert, Sabatini, Maleeva as well as Graf.

 

[Kieran]

Now I provide these stats about these majors in this thread, not because they are definitive in deciding 'GOAT'. I don't believe that they are. The GOAT debates are way too driven by these singles results and these four events and I see that as simplistic understanding of history and lack the context of the women's tennis competition from 1880's through 2022. Ignoring ranking, team play, the relative importance of doubles in the era, , and 90% of what they do on the tour that is not a slam is silly! But if you are going to have these four event results completely dominate, at least look at them thoroughly. Even this is not enough. You have to look at these early round and mid tournament losses and put them in context. Navratilova reaching the semis and losing tells an entirely different story in 1973 at 16 years old at RG, then it does when she loses to Sukova at the Aussie in 1984. One is a triumph, and the other a disappointment.

A gigantic shock, on a level with Serena losing the semis of the US Open against Vinci. More so, maybe, because Martina was so dominant then, but they look up and see the prize and it makes them nervous. It’s understandable, but this was one of those tennis losses that I still haven’t fully gotten over. Mind you, she’d have faced an amplified level of that same terror if she’d made the final, and this time against Chrissy…

 

[PhiEaglesfan712]

If I remember correctly, Graf was compromised by the injury she suffered during the French Open loss to Mary Pierce. That contributed to her 1st round loss at Wimbledon. Let's be honest, if healthy, a prime Graf doesn't lose in the first round. Navratilova losing that Wimbledon final is the women's tennis equivalent of Federer's 2019 Wimbledon loss.

But to me, the biggest question about 94 Wimbledon is what if Seles and Capriati were healthy and available to play that slam. Would that have been the year either one broken through to win Wimbledon?

 

[BTURNER]

A gigantic shock, on a level with Serena losing the semis of the US Open against Vinci. More so, maybe, because Martina was so dominant then, but they look up and see the prize and it makes them nervous. It’s understandable, but this was one of those tennis losses that I still haven’t fully gotten over. Mind you, she’d have faced an amplified level of that same terror if she’d made the final, and this time against Chrissy…

Sukova was actually the kind of player that troubled Martina more than Chris. Martina took a long time to get her passing shots, and return grooved, and her backhand pass was 'readable' so the tall, heavy hitting serve/ volleyers like Shriver, Sukova, Kohde Kilch always got victories over Navratilova before they got one over Chris. Martina's return of that hard flat serve simply was not as effective as Evert's.

Matter of fact, I looked at all the players who were 5'9"or taller to see when they got their first victory/last victory over Evert . There was only one I am sure of, between the time during her prime years June 1974 through June of 1986 by Lisa Bonder (5'10") in 1983. None for Court, Leslie Allen, Karen Kranscke, Sukova, Shriver, Kodhe Kilch, Mary Jo Fernandez, Silvia Hanika within those timeframes. Graf's first victory may fit the parameters, depending on whether she had reached her full adult ht at 16 in April of 1986.

Think about it. Court's last win was before Evert's 1st RG. Sukova's first was 6 months after Evert's last RG, . Shriver got her's in 1987 as did Hanika after they got any against Martina. That's 13 years of virtual blemish free record against these tall lanky sorts. I actually posted this factoid to Shriver herself ( so she would not quite feel alone) , and she said she was not surprised. She believed that Evert did a better job exploiting mobility issues by tall women like herself, jerking them around that baseline, hitting behind them etc.

 

[Fiero425]

Sukova was actually the kind of player that troubled Martina more than Chris. Martina took a long time to get her passing shots, and return grooved, and her backhand pass was 'readable' so the tall, heavy hitting serve/ volleyers like Shriver, Sukova, Kohde Kilch always got victories over Navratilova before they got one over Chris. Matter of fact, I looked at all the players who were 5'9"or taller to see when they got their first victory/last victory over Evert . There was only one I am sure of, between the time during her prime years June 1974 through June of 1986 by Lisa Bonder (5'10") in 1983. None for Court, Leslie Allen, Karen Kranscke, Sukova, Shriver, Kodhe Kilch, Mary Jo Fernandez, Silvia Hanika within those timeframes. Graf's first victory may fit the parameters, depending on whether she had reached her full adult ht at 16 in April of 1986.

Think about it. Court's last win was B4 Evert's RG. Sukova's first was 6 months after Evert's last. Shriver got her's in 1987 as did Hanika after they got any against Martina.

Going back to '87 hurts! After Borg's retirement at the end of '81, thinking of Martina going out so soon was disturbing! After a sensational run from the end of '81 to the end of '86, in '87 she was only getting to finals, but wasn't able to close them out! She finally won Wimbledon over Graf! It was so bizarre! It was like she was being punished for all her sucess, maybe destined to lose any tight match in a final! Grass was no guarantee of sucess as she dropped a 1st set lead of 5-1, at Eastborne losing to Sukova 6-7, 3-6! It could't be explained! Her season was salvaged by defeating Graf again at the USO, but she was never the same player! The embarrassment of the FO in '88 to Zvereva knocked me off my feet! I didn't know who she was! That last Wimbledon win in '90 saved those last few seasons!