Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 97 comments are related to the topic:
Margaret Court : 'tennis is full of lesbians'
Margaret Court : 'tennis is full of lesbians'
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 97
|
By:
impossible to think that lesbians are not everywhere!
|
|
By:
that lovely things like lesbians exist, is a lovely thought.
|
|
By:
Whatever you think of her opinion, Margaret Court is the greatest female tennis player ever.
|
|
By:
no she's not.
|
|
By:
Won 64 GRAND SLAM TITLES...ffs...
 to the power  |
|
By:
she could have 4000 slams she wouldn't be close to be the greatest.
|
|
By:
Bollox!
Don't tell me...Nicklaus, Pele and Sugar Ray Robinson were no good either... |
|
By:
I'm not a tennis buff, I have been reading several articles about her, very impressive her singles Open win ratio is unequalled.
The International Tennis Hall of Fame states, "For sheer strength of performance and accomplishment there has never been a tennis player to match (her). If she is not the best S_H who then in your opinion is and why?? |
|
By:
if you think she was the greatest tennis player of all time you would literally have to know nothing about tennis
|
|
By:
"Her career singles win-loss record was 1,177-106, for a winning percentage of 91.74 percent on all surfaces (hard, clay, grass, carpet), an all time record."
|
|
By:
That is not an awswer, one last time, you can't get away with a childish 'no she's not. answer the question if you can. If she is not the best S_H who then in your opinion is and why??
|
|
By:
Do you mean....0...?
That sort of thing? "...literally have to know nothing about tennis..." LITERALLY!  |
|
By:
I've LITERALLY just finished a biography of Suzanne Lenglen, so I must know slightly more than NOTHING...perhaps even A LITTLE BIT OF SOMETHING...
 |
|
By:
No answer, scrambling around for someone to nominate??. Argument lost, not that you actually had an arguement to begin with.............'NO SHES NOT' FFS.
|
|
By:
1.....COURT
2.....STEFFI 3.....VENUS 4.....MARTINA Fer me.....  |
|
By:
Velasquez
Velasquez 02 Jun 17 22:01 Joined: 30 Aug 02 | Topic/replies: 9,538 | Blogger: Velasquez's blog "Her career singles win-loss record was 1,177-106, for a winning percentage of 91.74 percent on all surfaces (hard, clay, grass, carpet), an all time record." yeah they all like hard and plenty grass gets cut |
|
By:
sorry wrong fred
 |
|
By:
Not sure about Hingis at 4..
|
|
By:
Only kidding with Venus......
 Any excuse for TAME IMPALA - THE LESS I KNOW THE BETTER... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoU7_qCgUAI |
|
By:
1...FEDERER
2...PANCHO GONZALES 3...SAMPRAS 4...LAVER  |
|
By:
|
|
By:
can't*
|
|
By:
QUITE RIGHT FOXY -- know your posters!
I'm fooking off too.....LITERALLY! |
|
By:
Nice spot, Injera....
Literally... |
|
By:
Pistol Pete
Lew Hoad Fed Buster Mottram |
|
By:
Wimmin
Dumptruck Martina Billie-Jean Moffat Steffi |
|
By:
Winnie Wooldridge...
 Local girl... |
|
By:
It was practically a different sport back then with the way it was played, given the limitations they had with equipment, looking at stats and saying you are the greatest is pretty stupid tbh.
She played and won most of her singles grand slam titles when it was an Amateur game played by amateurs who had other jobs and barely trained, even when it crossed to the Open Professional era it was many years before it became the complete game you see today. The draws were smaller made of 32 players in quite a few of the early slams, you played fewer matches to win the bigger tournaments, 11 of her titles were won in Australia where the majority of players were....Australian, top players in both the men and women's game never travelled there, even up until the late 80's and early 90's the likes of McEnroe and Agassi didn't bother, in the womens Navratilova missed about 7 or 8 early on, Billi Jean King missed most of them. Wooden racquets limited you to less quality shots and less power, compared to the kind of shot making ability and power we have now with modern graphite and carbon fibre types, most points were played within 15ft of the net (serve and volley). Everything about Tennis today is far superior to what it was it terms of the level of competition, the numbers competing to make it to the top, the training methods, sports psychology, diet and nutrition and athleticism. She was off her era, which in comparison to today, was what it was, a weak era. |
|
By:
"Latesr is the greatest"...a sorry argument. You are just talking about equipment, not players.
|
|
By:
It stands to reason that as time moves on, things improve and evolve into something better - that was the point of the Open era, if later is better is a sorry argument it's not half as sorry as pointing and the total column form when Tennis was in the dark ages and saying, you are the best ever.
|
|
By:
So...is Damien Hirst a greater artist than Michelangelo?
|
|
By:
There are no "dark ages" here - has it not occurred to you that a champion THEN would be a champion NOW?
|
|
By:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/19/claims-sir-edward-heath-paedophile-120-per-cent-genuine-police/
|
|
By:
wrong fred
|
|
By:
Wow, you found an answer in 3/4 of an hour, (record for you) well done, unfortunately it's a very weak Ali shuffle', I've been reading this from Goolagong, I suppose she knows nothing about the game either.
Goolagong Cawley has no doubts the pioneer would have excelled in any era and wonders how the modern-day greats would have fared with wooden racquets. "Some people say: 'oh, they're so fit today'. Well, Margaret Court was the first one, first professional woman - or maybe man - to actually take it into the gyms," she said. "She worked out on her body, she was very strong, very fast on the court. I mean, she only had to take one stride anyway; she had such long legs, long limbs. "I'll turn it around the other way. If you gave the (wooden) racquets to the players today, they wouldn't be able to use them. "So technology has gone ahead. When we used the small-faced racquets and wood racquets, we had to use every part of the court. "If you didn't have power, you had to have touch and serve and volley, which I found very exciting and that's why I love watching Federer play, because of those skills. "He's based his game on Laver and done it very well. |
|
By:
Ayrton Senna had a huge mural painted of his ideal Formula 1 starting grid, featuring all the great racing drivers...he had himself placed at number 2...number 1 was Jim Clark who, according to your logic, was driving in the "dark ages"...it didn't stop Senna placing Clark at the front as the greatest of all time...perhaps Senna LITERALLY KNEW NOTHING about being a racing driver...
|
|
By:
She was the best of her era, to say she is also the best of today's era as well because she dominated her era (when no top players bothered to play in Australia where she won 11 slams and over 50% of her slams were in the amateur phase) is ridiculous to even debate.
|
|
By:
I'm out, Byeeeeeeeeeee, beware 'Ali shufflers' they're fakes.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
SH - If it's "ridiculous to even debate", then why the fook are you debating it??
By your own logic, this makes you ridiculous! |
