Will Serena reach 22 slams? More?

[sk310]

^I would be surprised if you're right. She's 34 already. It wouldn't shock me, if the next serious relationship she has forces a revision of her priorities. I just hope she hurries up and gets past Graf. I couldn't care less about Court's record. For my money if she even matches Graf, she is unquestionably the female GOAT

With Court's cheap Australian Open titles and the whole Graf-Seles thing, I think Serena is already there. But I never like to say "SHE IS THE GREATEST! END OF DISCUSSION!" Along with Graf, Navratilova and Evert, she is the greatest of all-time. But I sure don't want to see her stop now. Twenty-five is suddenly a very possible number, with the way all the young players keep flaming out.

Yeah I really don't consider Court's record "the" record. The open era is called the open era for a reason. If you weren't competing in an open tournament against all of the best then you weren't competing in the same context we understand grand slams today.

Still theres an argument to be made for each of the top 4 slam winners as GOAT...especially Martina I'd say just for sheer numbers.

 

[Calvy]

^I would be surprised if you're right. She's 34 already. It wouldn't shock me, if the next serious relationship she has forces a revision of her priorities. I just hope she hurries up and gets past Graf. I couldn't care less about Court's record. For my money if she even matches Graf, she is unquestionably the female GOAT

With Court's cheap Australian Open titles and the whole Graf-Seles thing, I think Serena is already there. But I never like to say "SHE IS THE GREATEST! END OF DISCUSSION!" Along with Graf, Navratilova and Evert, she is the greatest of all-time. But I sure don't want to see her stop now. Twenty-five is suddenly a very possible number, with the way all the young players keep flaming out.

Yeah I really don't consider Court's record "the" record. The open era is called the open era for a reason. If you weren't competing in an open tournament against all of the best then you weren't competing in the same context we understand grand slams today.

Still theres an argument to be made for each of the top 4 slam winners as GOAT...especially Martina I'd say just for sheer numbers.

I disagree, first, the "closed" era didn't affect the women's game the way it affected the men's game. Remember there was a men's professional tour, whereas there was not for the women.

Courts Aussie titles during the "closed" era were won when any of the top female player's were only allowed to play the event, many just chose not to make the trip. So, Court can not be penalized for that.

Second, Court accomplished the Grand Slam, and almost did it again in 1973, so it's not like she was a pre-Open era phenom, she dominated in the early years of the Open era.

 

[Sundaymorningguy]

You also have to think had Evert not stupidly chosen to play World Team Tennis for 3 years and missed the French played on her best surface that she would have more slam titles. There is a lot of dynamics. Serena has a choice in the matter and can certainly add to her totals and maybe best Court too. She definitely stands a shot at beating Steffi in Slam numbers.

 

[tossip]

I think Serena will redeem herself at Wimbledon this year...just have that feeling

 

[shawnbm]

She could end up with 25

 

[Front242]

I dunno. Personally I think people are getting carried away a bit here. She's almost 34 and winning 2 more would seem the absolute most to me, but 5? Can't see it personally.

 

[Calvy]

You also have to think had Evert not stupidly chosen to play World Team Tennis for 3 years and missed the French played on her best surface that she would have more slam titles. There is a lot of dynamics. Serena has a choice in the matter and can certainly add to her totals and maybe best Court too. She definitely stands a shot at beating Steffi in Slam numbers.

Sorry, it wasn't stupid, actually at that time, the French and Australian Opens were not considered as important as they are now, and WTT was at it's apex at the time, which explains why not only Evert, but the majority of the top players skipped it. In fact, the Grand Slam was not a big deal at that time.

 

[the AntiPusher]

I dunno. Personally I think people are getting carried away a bit here. She's almost 34 and winning 2 more would seem the absolute most to me, but 5? Can't see it personally.

I am with you on this one Front, maybe 2 or 3 , that's really extraordinary but beyond that is really a stretch

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I dunno. Personally I think people are getting carried away a bit here. She's almost 34 and winning 2 more would seem the absolute most to me, but 5? Can't see it personally.

While it is true that she is aging, it is also true that there is no real competition for her. So, anything can happen.

 

[Front242]

Yup, even 22 would be amazing but posters predicting 5 more slams from a nearly 34 year old are higher than Charlie Sheen imo!

 

[Front242]

I dunno. Personally I think people are getting carried away a bit here. She's almost 34 and winning 2 more would seem the absolute most to me, but 5? Can't see it personally.

While it is true that she is aging, it is also true that there is no real competition for her. So, anything can happen.

True and when she loses it's usually 'cos she beats herself but I can see more of those losses as she gets older rather than the other way round. Next 2 slams will be interesting for sure.

 

[shawnbm]

The next two she could win. It's not that big a stretch. I can see her winning two slams next year as well. She's the dominant after and has been the last four years

 

[Front242]

She could but personally I don't think she will. Every year we see a dominant player doing well there are threads about players potentially winning all 4 slams in the one year but look how the men's RG final turned out. It's the hardest task in tennis.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I think if she completes the calendar slam this year, either she will retire immediately or at least she will announce that she will retire at the end of 2016.

Having said that, I think she won't complete calendar slam. She will win Wimby and then fail at USO.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

She could but personally I don't think she will. Every year we see a dominant player doing well there are threads about players potentially winning all 4 slams in the one year but look how the men's RG final turned out. It's the hardest task in tennis.

There is key difference between ATP and WTA. In WTA, there is no real competition. Even though Novak won many events this year, we all (not casual fans, but members of this forum) knew there was competition for him and it is not a walk in the park.

 

[Front242]

A lot of the WTA players are a joke alright but I certainly wouldn't bet on Serena winning the next 2 slams personally.

 

[tossip]

Serena is an unique athelete and seems to be very strong physically and mentally...if she starts losing its because she is no longer interested..that unique serve will always be there and bail her out of situations.I think age has not yet started catching up on her if she can outrun Sloane or Timea who appears to be very swift.It will take a unique player to dethrone her...at RG15 most players tried mostly out of their comfort zone to dethrone her...for a set and a half and lost steam.Azarenka is deemed Serena s trouble but has lost 16 times out of 19 and counting thats not threatening.
it will take a player of a Capriati quality to go toe to toe with her...

 

[GameSetAndMath]

OK, tossip we get it, you don't have to say twice. :snicker

 

[tossip]

OK, tossip we get it, you don't have to say twice. :snicker

stop patronising me...

 

[sk310]

A lot of the WTA players are a joke alright but I certainly wouldn't bet on Serena winning the next 2 slams personally.

I know what you mean. I think its kind of a misnomer to say that there is no "real" competition. Sure there are no "legends" on tour right now other than Serena and an aged Venus. Normally in tennis you have at least two players playing that will eventually be written into the history books as legends of some level. Think Everett and Martina, Steffi and Monica, Serena and Venus. Still that's not to say there is no real competition. If that were the case Serena would have 40 slams right now.

I agree ultimately. I think winning a calendar year slam is a huge ask for any player. It takes so much to fall into place at the same time. There's so much that could happen to derail that situation--pressure, having to play two matches in two days, sickness, a minor injury, an upstart. We're going to faster courts now. I'm not sure if Serena got in a situation of a slow start on grass she'd have the time to make up for it.

I would love to see her do a calendar year slam. It would be a history making event. Still it's a huge ask especially considering the sometimes messy manner in which she won the AO and the French Open.