WTA Rivalries (old and new)

[Calvy]

just saw Esther Lee with the Vika team....this is coming off as very creepy,so next she is going to recruit Patrick.

No way is that happening. He's currently associated with the most successful player on tour -- and arguably the greatest ever -- during a period in which she's having tremendous success. That's priceless in terms of his reputation as a coach, not to mention his tennis academy in Paris. The only way this partnership would end would be if Serena ends it.

EDIT: I see in the time it took me to post this, kskate2 wrote many of the same things.

I'm glad you said "currently" because I probably wouldn't put Serena in my TOP 5 overall! I put her there "begrudgingly" when pressed due to her numbers, but her level of pathetic competition bothers me; psychologically they're deficient and can't finish serving for it with multiple MP's! It's just too sad to even think about! :cover :nono :angel:

As oppose to the players Graf racked up her slams against? You know, like Sabatini, Fernandez, Martinez, Coetzer, Shriver, Sanchez-Vicario, aging Evert and Martina? Who was the player that was a set up and 5-0, 40-0 and lost the match in the French Open? Oh, yeah, Sabatini, from Graf's era. Novotna, let's not even go there...but, I'm sure Graf is in your top 5 if not number one. Thing is, anyone can find fault in a era where a player dominated, and you seem to only find fault with Serena when it pertains to Serena.

 

[Fiero425]

No way is that happening. He's currently associated with the most successful player on tour -- and arguably the greatest ever -- during a period in which she's having tremendous success. That's priceless in terms of his reputation as a coach, not to mention his tennis academy in Paris. The only way this partnership would end would be if Serena ends it.

EDIT: I see in the time it took me to post this, kskate2 wrote many of the same things.

I'm glad you said "currently" because I probably wouldn't put Serena in my TOP 5 overall! I put her there "begrudgingly" when pressed due to her numbers, but her level of pathetic competition bothers me; psychologically they're deficient and can't finish serving for it with multiple MP's! It's just too sad to even think about! :cover :nono :angel:

As oppose to the players Graf racked up her slams against? You know, like Sabatini, Fernandez, Martinez, Coetzer, Shriver, Sanchez-Vicario, aging Evert and Martina? Who was the player that was a set up and 5-0, 40-0 and lost the match in the French Open? Oh, yeah, Sabatini, from Graf's era. Novotna, let's not even go there...but, I'm sure Graf is in your top 5 if not number one. Thing is, anyone can find fault in a era where a player dominated, and you seem to only find fault with Serena when it pertains to Serena.

It's ugly even if Serena wins easily! I'm spoiled by past champions who played a lot more effortlessly! The groaning, grunting, with legs and arms flailing about is just not what I'd called graceful or elegant! I've been very consistent in my stance and well know about deficiencies in Graf's record; which is why I don't have a lot of regard for her either! Martina's the GOAT with 59 majors; 18 singles, 32 dubs, & 10 MxD! Navratilova probably would have won more singles titles if not for consistently making finals in doubles as well in every major, year in and year out! :clap

Sharapova, Azarenka, and many others have actually won multiple majors while the ones you mention managed 1 each! They are all over-hyped and over-blown in their resumes and accomplishments, just tickling me when I see them go down again and again to Serena; even at her worst! Their so called competitiveness just doesn't pass the laugh test IMO! Where's the consistency, the play in doubles, and racking up of smaller events when Serena isn't there! It just isn't happening and they're hard to watch; and listen to for that matter! :cover :nono :angel: :dodgy:

 

[the AntiPusher]

Interesting..

Head To Head Matches - Chat About The Steffi Graf vs Serena Williams Head To Head

Year Name Round Surface Winning Player Losing Player Score
1999 Indian Wells Masters F Hard Serena Williams Steffi Graf 6-3 3-6 7-5
1999 Sydney R16 Hard Steffi Graf Serena Williams 6-2 3-6 7-5

29 year old Steffi Graf vs 17 year old Serena Williams

 

[Jelenafan]

WTA players simply don't play the 25+ tournaments a year like before. I doubt if any future champhions will ever challenge the Martina/ Chris career tournament wins. It like the pitcher Cy Young 511 career wins in baseball, different era.

Even Steffi, who arguably was more dominant didn't come close.

Comparing different eras as to Major titles is a fruitless battle. For example WTT was big for awhile to the point that Chris Evert skipped the French Open 3 consecutive years when she was undefeated on clay and does anyone even keep WTT records anymore.

As to Serena not winning "effortlesslly" against all opponents, it becomes a circuitous argument as then the response would be the lack of depth in womens tennis.

 

[sk310]

WTA players simply don't play the 25+ tournaments a year like before. I doubt if any future champhions will ever challenge the Martina/ Chris career tournament wins. It like the pitcher Cy Young 511 career wins in baseball, different era.

Even Steffi, who arguably was more dominant didn't come close.

Comparing different eras as to Major titles is a fruitless battle. For example WTT was big for awhile to the point that Chris Evert skipped the French Open 3 consecutive years when she was undefeated on clay and does anyone even keep WTT records anymore.

As to Serena not winning "effortlesslly" against all opponents, it becomes a circuitous argument as then the response would be the lack of depth in womens tennis.

I agree it's pointless to try and compare eras. It's incredibly to think back to the amount of tournaments Martina and Chris played and won. Yet there's a reason they could physically handle that and today's players can't. The physical nature of the game has changed.

I hate the claim that Serena hasn't had a deep field to play. It's silly to me when you actually lay out the fields against each other.

 

[Fiero425]

WTA players simply don't play the 25+ tournaments a year like before. I doubt if any future champhions will ever challenge the Martina/ Chris career tournament wins. It like the pitcher Cy Young 511 career wins in baseball, different era.

Even Steffi, who arguably was more dominant didn't come close.

Comparing different eras as to Major titles is a fruitless battle. For example WTT was big for awhile to the point that Chris Evert skipped the French Open 3 consecutive years when she was undefeated on clay and does anyone even keep WTT records anymore.

As to Serena not winning "effortlesslly" against all opponents, it becomes a circuitous argument as then the response would be the lack of depth in womens tennis.

I agree it's pointless to try and compare eras. It's incredibly to think back to the amount of tournaments Martina and Chris played and won. Yet there's a reason they could physically handle that and today's players can't. The physical nature of the game has changed.

I hate the claim that Serena hasn't had a deep field to play. It's silly to me when you actually lay out the fields against each other.

I hope you don't mean me! Serena's field is quite extensive and like the men have many who are technically and physically able, but the problem is "mental!" Too many times players like Sharapova, Azaranka, and many others "can't finish" the deal when in charge! Serving for it with MP's isn't enough! They need Serena to keel over or totally give up! It's hard to call any of these people rivals when winning isn't exactly going back and forth! That's what I'm talking about! It happens on both tours; hence the BIG 4 being so successful! :nono :cover :angel: :dodgy:

 

[Jelenafan]

Serena has played in the "entire" era of Venus Williams, Justine Henin, Lindsay Davenport, Maria Sharapova, Kim Klijsters and Vika Azarenka, (you could add Martina Hingis, since Serena beat her for his first Major in 1999) who are all multiple slam winners, can't think of anything comparable in the Steffi era outside of contemporaries Sanchez Vicario and Seles, and we all know about Seles.

 

[Calvy]

Interesting..

Head To Head Matches - Chat About The Steffi Graf vs Serena Williams Head To Head

Year Name Round Surface Winning Player Losing Player Score
1999 Indian Wells Masters F Hard Serena Williams Steffi Graf 6-3 3-6 7-5
1999 Sydney R16 Hard Steffi Graf Serena Williams 6-2 3-6 7-5


31 year old Steffi Graf vs 19 year old Serena Williams

Graf was 29 and Serena was 17.

 

[Sundaymorningguy]

I always get tired of this competitive argument. If things aren't competitive, then why hasn't Serena seriously cleaned up at all the majors? Why hasn't she since her return in 2011 won every slam she has entered? I think even Serena knows that everyone is gunning for her. It is a much easier ask of the unknown or lower ranked players to do so as no one is expecting it of them. Everyone knows Azarenka is capable of taking Serena out, but knowing and doing are two different things. The tennis world expects Azarenka to take it to Serena, and she knows this which is why the pressure and ability for the upset at a major for Azarenka is much harder to achieve than say a Cornet or Ivanovic who no one gives a second glance at being able to pull off the upset and then bam they do. It is much easier to get that win when no one gives you a snow balls chance in hell to get it versus saying you have a shot at the win. Serena has always been tough as nails the later she gets into a major. You don't go 21-4 in finals for your career if you didn't bring your best where it counted. Everyone knows with Serena at a major one of two things will happen either she will go out early or she is winning the title. You don't know which one you are going to get which makes it an interesting task for the rest of the WTA.

 

[Jelenafan]

I always get tired of this competitive argument. If things aren't competitive, then why hasn't Serena seriously cleaned up at all the majors? Why hasn't she since her return in 2011 won every slam she has entered? I think even Serena knows that everyone is gunning for her. It is a much easier ask of the unknown or lower ranked players to do so as no one is expecting it of them. Everyone knows Azarenka is capable of taking Serena out, but knowing and doing are two different things. The tennis world expects Azarenka to take it to Serena, and she knows this which is why the pressure and ability for the upset at a major for Azarenka is much harder to achieve than say a Cornet or Ivanovic who no one gives a second glance at being able to pull off the upset and then bam they do. It is much easier to get that win when no one gives you a snow balls chance in hell to get it versus saying you have a shot at the win. Serena has always been tough as nails the later she gets into a final. You don't go 21-4 in finals for your career if you didn't bring your best where it counted. Everyone knows with Serena at a major one of two things will happen either she will go out early or she is winning the title. You don't know which one you are going to get which makes it an interesting task for the rest of the WTA.

So agree with this statement, and I do give props to Vika that she does battle Serena toe to toe most of the time. I do think Vika can't help but THINK once she's close to the finish line, which is not a good thing.

Serenas has actually had good rivalries for "mini periods" of her career, first Venus and Martina Hingis, then Capriatti, for a few years Justine Henin , though curiously enough, Serena/Kim Clijsters never developed into one. Serena dominated their earlier matches and due to breaks in both their careers they only played once in 6 years, which was the infamous 2009 US Open default.

The Capriati rivalry (10-7 Serena) was IMO probably the best. 12 of the matches (in one swing 9 out of 10 matches were 3 setters and the one 2 setter was 7-5, 7-6) went the distance and Cappy is one of the few rivals who has a Majors advantage in their head to head (4-3) beating Serena in 3 different Majors in 3 surfaces, with 6 of those 7 Major matches going 3 sets. It's too bad injuries curtailed Cappy after 2004. I liked them because Cappy was deceptively fast for her size and could go toe to toe with power on the groundies. She was like an American Vika.

 

[atttomole]

Serena has played in the "entire" era of Venus Williams, Justine Henin, Lindsay Davenport, Maria Sharapova, Kim Klijsters and Vika Azarenka, (you could add Martina Hingis, since Serena beat her for his first Major in 1999) who are all multiple slam winners, can't think of anything comparable in the Steffi era outside of contemporaries Sanchez Vicario and Seles, and we all know about Seles.

That is a good point. Serena lost slams to Martina Hingis and to her sister early in her career. Hingis is one of the most talented players to ever play the game, and same with Venus. Then she had to deal with physical beasts from eastern Europe and the Beigians later, and now she also has Azarenka, Sharapova etc. The fact that she beats them does not diminish her quality. I am also of the opinion that so much is made of Martina Navratilova. I do not know exactly how good her rivals were but, I read that she had Chris Evert. Because of that, they met in so many finals. That also raises questions as to how good their own rivals were if they met in almost every grand slam final they played in. I would love to get some info on the Navra/Evert era to see how good they really were.

 

[tossip]

Serena has always been good and she beat Graf as a 17yr old.She had rivalries like Capriati Hingis Davenport and the belgian sisters,she was young and somewhat immature but now she is older and experienced she knows every match matters .
Azarenka is just good for a set thats all and this year she will be in a race with pova to reach 20 losses.She can recruit everyone from Serena s camp but its not going to work because that will offend Serena even more.Vika has the same mental dilemma as povamits going to get bigger this season.
I am glad that Serena has a new team of hitters that dont want the limelight,its good she got rid of all the z listers..

 

[Fiero425]

Serena has played in the "entire" era of Venus Williams, Justine Henin, Lindsay Davenport, Maria Sharapova, Kim Klijsters and Vika Azarenka, (you could add Martina Hingis, since Serena beat her for his first Major in 1999) who are all multiple slam winners, can't think of anything comparable in the Steffi era outside of contemporaries Sanchez Vicario and Seles, and we all know about Seles.

That is a good point. Serena lost slams to Martina Hingis and to her sister early in her career. Hingis is one of the most talented players to ever play the game, and same with Venus. Then she had to deal with physical beasts from eastern Europe and the Beigians later, and now she also has Azarenka, Sharapova etc. The fact that she beats them does not diminish her quality. I am also of the opinion that so much is made of Martina Navratilova. I do not know exactly how good her rivals were but, I read that she had Chris Evert. Because of that, they met in so many finals. That also raises questions as to how good their own rivals were if they met in almost every grand slam final they played in. I would love to get some info on the Navra/Evert era to see how good they really were.

What did you want to know? I watched them from the beginning! OTTH, they met 80 times; more than any other rivals on either tour! Their competition came and went while they battled for about 15 years; Navratilova hanging on for another 5 until retiring the first time in '94 after making her last Wimbledon final against Conchita Martinez! The record wound up being 43-37 in Martina's favor! Both had to deal with Goolagong, BJK, Wade, & Court at the end of their careers, then Mandlikova, Shriver, and Austin who were the new bloods! After that crop came Graf, Sabatini, and Seles! It didn't look at all competitive for a while there from '82-'87 and I don't blame people for questioning that era, but like Serena, Chris and Martina could only play who came to the party! Back then it was more like the "Big 2," then the Big 4 when Graf and Seles came along! Tournaments weren't worth watching without one of them there and they scheduled themselves to make sure someone was there to have "some" star power! Anything else? uzzled :nono :angel:

 

[Kirijax]

Serena has played in the "entire" era of Venus Williams, Justine Henin, Lindsay Davenport, Maria Sharapova, Kim Klijsters and Vika Azarenka, (you could add Martina Hingis, since Serena beat her for his first Major in 1999) who are all multiple slam winners, can't think of anything comparable in the Steffi era outside of contemporaries Sanchez Vicario and Seles, and we all know about Seles.

That is a good point. Serena lost slams to Martina Hingis and to her sister early in her career. Hingis is one of the most talented players to ever play the game, and same with Venus. Then she had to deal with physical beasts from eastern Europe and the Beigians later, and now she also has Azarenka, Sharapova etc. The fact that she beats them does not diminish her quality. I am also of the opinion that so much is made of Martina Navratilova. I do not know exactly how good her rivals were but, I read that she had Chris Evert. Because of that, they met in so many finals. That also raises questions as to how good their own rivals were if they met in almost every grand slam final they played in. I would love to get some info on the Navra/Evert era to see how good they really were.

What did you want to know? I watched them from the beginning! OTTH, they met 80 times; more than any other rivals on either tour! There competition came and went while they battle for about 15 years; Navratilova hanging on for another 5 until retiring the first time in '94 after making her last Wimbledon final against Conchita Martinez! Both had to deal with Goolagong, BJK, Wade, & Court at the end of their careers, then Mandlikova, Shriver, and Austin who were the new bloods! After that crop came Graf, Sabatini, and Seles! It didn't look at all competitive for a while there from '82-'87 and I don't blame people for questioning that era, but like Serena, Chris and Martina could only play who came to the party! Back then it was more like the "Big 2," then the Big 4 when Graf and Seles came along! Tournaments weren't worth watching without one of them there and they scheduled themselves to make sure someone was there to have "some" star power! Anything else? uzzled :nono :angel: :dodgy:

Navratilova, Evert, Graf and Seles never made a "Big 4". Evert was gone the year before Seles hit it big. I remember Mandilikova and Graf being touted as the ones who would challenege MN/CE because they were the ones right under them in the rankings at the time ('86). Then Mandilikova faded and Sabatini came up a bit. The Evert retired, Navratilova faded and it was the Big 3 (Graf, Sabatini, and Seles) for a while with very few rankings points between them. Then Seles took off. Then the stabbing incident put Graf in control until Hingis came along.

 

[Fiero425]

The BIG 4 I was thinking of was Graf, Navratilova, Seles, and Sabatini! I remember the first time there were 2 events going on at the same time; Graf and Sabatini in the States while Navratilova played Seles in the final in Paris! This didn't happen at all early on with the women's game! They needed all to be at one event instead of spreading things a little thin with multiple events, but it worked out finally; Sabatini over Graf and Navratilova over Seles indoors in Paris! I need to look up the year and actual events!

 

[Jelenafan]

The Martina/Evert rivalry also continued dominant because the next wave generation of Tracy Austin/Andrea Jaeger fell to injuries. Well Andrea was never really a mental giant but Austin was the real deal, it is interesting to see if she could have improved to challenged the physically fit Martina.

 

[Kirijax]

The Martina/Evert rivalry also continued dominant because the next wave generation of Tracy Austin/Andrea Jaeger fell to injuries. Well Andrea was never really a mental giant but Austin was the real deal, it is interesting to see if she could have improved to challenged the physically fit Martina.

When I first started watching, Austin was the post-Evert, and in a sense Mandilikova was the post Navratilova, mainly because of their nationalties and such. I really thought those two would take over in the early 80s but obviously it never happened. Evert and Navratilova were just too good for everyone else. I mean, we had Shriver ranked No. 3 for a while. Nothing was happening until Graf and Sabatini finally showed up.

 

[Jelenafan]

Hana Mandlikova was such a gifted athlete, and when on, could beat anyone including Martina N and Chris Evert.

She simply lacked the consistency and her career was so checkered, yet despite that beat Martina N on grass at both Wimbledon and the Australian, but burnt out by age 26.

 

[Kirijax]

Hana Mandlikova was such a gifted athlete, and when on, could beat anyone including Martina N and Chris Evert.

She simply lacked the consistency and her career was so checkered, yet despite that beat Martina N on grass at both Wimbledon and the Australian, but burnt out by age 26.

Yeah, that was a shame. She was so fun to watch when she was on. Still, four Slams was not shabby.

 

[atttomole]

Serena has played in the "entire" era of Venus Williams, Justine Henin, Lindsay Davenport, Maria Sharapova, Kim Klijsters and Vika Azarenka, (you could add Martina Hingis, since Serena beat her for his first Major in 1999) who are all multiple slam winners, can't think of anything comparable in the Steffi era outside of contemporaries Sanchez Vicario and Seles, and we all know about Seles.

That is a good point. Serena lost slams to Martina Hingis and to her sister early in her career. Hingis is one of the most talented players to ever play the game, and same with Venus. Then she had to deal with physical beasts from eastern Europe and the Beigians later, and now she also has Azarenka, Sharapova etc. The fact that she beats them does not diminish her quality. I am also of the opinion that so much is made of Martina Navratilova. I do not know exactly how good her rivals were but, I read that she had Chris Evert. Because of that, they met in so many finals. That also raises questions as to how good their own rivals were if they met in almost every grand slam final they played in. I would love to get some info on the Navra/Evert era to see how good they really were.

What did you want to know? I watched them from the beginning! OTTH, they met 80 times; more than any other rivals on either tour! Their competition came and went while they battled for about 15 years; Navratilova hanging on for another 5 until retiring the first time in '94 after making her last Wimbledon final against Conchita Martinez! The record wound up being 43-37 in Martina's favor! Both had to deal with Goolagong, BJK, Wade, & Court at the end of their careers, then Mandlikova, Shriver, and Austin who were the new bloods! After that crop came Graf, Sabatini, and Seles! It didn't look at all competitive for a while there from '82-'87 and I don't blame people for questioning that era, but like Serena, Chris and Martina could only play who came to the party! Back then it was more like the "Big 2," then the Big 4 when Graf and Seles came along! Tournaments weren't worth watching without one of them there and they scheduled themselves to make sure someone was there to have "some" star power! Anything else? uzzled :nono :angel:

So can we say that Navra and Evert went through brutal draws before they met each other? I agree they were great players, but for me the competition they faced may not have been as tough as Serena faced. I hear some analysts say that Navra in part had a physical advantage. They say that she is the one who brought the physical game to tennis. With that premise, I would say that her physicality could have been key to her dominance because during that time, the WTA players were not that strong physically. Overall, the game became more physical around the 90's with Davenport, Capriati, the Williams sisters, and the eastern Europeans. I had also forgotten to mention Capriati and Davenport as some of Serena's major rivals.
I have to add that it is a matter of conjecture because the eras are different.