Who is the WTA GOAT

Jun 27, 2013 -- 11:22PM, ;[p wrote:

henin in her short career won same amount of slams as serena, year younger turned pro 4 yrs later than serena. if someone using argument serena wasted her time. well same argument here. henin was best player in her era where serena venus clisters etc girls was playing . also hingins was great player

Aga next Hingis

aga is next aga

Henin wasn't really the best player in her era though.

Arantxa Sanchez Vicario
Mary Joe Fernandez
Paola Suarez

the only 3 top 10ers in that list with winning records over Serena, and the last 2 played her once

I think Serena said the 1998 loss to ASV at FO was one of the defeats she was most disappointed about in her career

Henin head to head vs both Williams is still heavy negative and that takes into account as said she played literally the worst Serena that ever played.

kimmy was class. i miss her

8-6 Serena vs Justine
5-1 HC
1-4 CC
1-1 Grass
1-0 Carpet

Jun 27, 2013 -- 11:24PM, n88uk wrote:

Henin wasn't really the best player in her era though.

hingins won her 7 slams in 4 years. she was the best in her era

did you know Hingis was a slamless no.1

So was Clijsters.

also Davenport, but not in the sense Woz, Safina and the like were of course

Most these players your mentioning ;[p weren't really an "era". They dominated for a couple of years. They weren't like Serena, Fed, Nadal winning over a long period.

It can't be Henin because she couldn't get the job done on grass

It can't be Martina because she was utterly owned in her own era by Steffi, and only won one slam after 1987 (when Steffi had been KO'd by Garrison)

Has to be between Graf and Williams

Yes I meant. if Serena had had GOAT status through maximum GS titles as her life ambition from before she went on the tour, she probably could have won 2 or 3 calendar slams plus another 2 or 3 slams every year

25 was easily achievable but that wasn't her objective

if she had Masha's absolute desperate need and desire to win she probably would have done that

not really worth worrying about, the womens game has changed so much in every decade they are not comparable

Jun 27, 2013 -- 11:27PM, aaronh wrote:

8-6 Serena vs Justine5-1 HC1-4 CC1-1 Grass1-0 Carpet

just before  she retired she was dominating serena on all surfaces later on it does not count really if she would carry on,this record would be better for her imo

if she had Masha's absolute desperate need and desire to win she probably would have done that

very well put

Journeyman you realise peak Navratilova never actually faced peak Graf. The fact Graf was 12 years youngers obviously heavily in her favour, and I think you sold Navratilova seriously short.

Jun 27, 2013 -- 11:30PM, n88uk wrote:

Most these players your mentioning ;[p weren't really an "era". They dominated for a couple of years. They weren't like Serena, Fed, Nadal winning over a long period.

lol my point is most of them didnt play as long as serena. henin finished her career on the top if she would  carry on she would bag more titles,and she was best player of her era

Martina played slams at the age of 47

But Henin first retired as soon as the going got tough ;[p, that has to be a massive black mark against her. She started losing and retired instantly.

yes well Masha has always had that self validation thing where her own self image is determined by how much she wins

Serena is not like that, she wants to win but not to validate her self image so would not be thinking ' I can do 2 x calendar slams, how great will I be if I do that? I HAVE to do it because I know I can'

henin won her first slam few years after she turned pro and she carried on winning till she retired , she was  dominating dfor her whole career

Jun 27, 2013 -- 11:31PM, ;[p wrote:

Jun 27, 2013 -- 11:27PM, aaronh wrote:8-6 Serena vs Justine5-1 HC1-4 CC1-1 Grass1-0 Carpetjust before  she retired she was dominating serena on all surfaces later on it does not count really if she would carry on,this record would be better for her imo

This is rubbish. Henin only year she won the H2H was in 2007 when Serena was so unfit and out of shape. I remember Serena on 1 leg still being competitive with Henin. In the last match before her first retirement Serena won 6-2, 6-0. Obviously matches like this get forgotten in the nostalgia.

3/2010 WTA Australian Open (AUS)    Hard    Serena Williams    Justine Henin    6-4 3-6 6-2         Final    1.91    -    1.87   
13/2008 WTA Miami (USA)    Hard    Serena Williams    Justine Henin    6-2 6-0         1/4    2.73    -    1.45    $
35/2007 WTA U.S. Open (USA)    Hard    Justine Henin    Serena Williams    7-6(3) 6-1         1/4    1.31    -    3.41   
26/2007 WTA Wimbledon (GBR)    Grass    Justine Henin    Serena Williams    6-4 3-6 6-3         1/4    1.32    -    3.33   
22/2007 WTA French Open (FRA)    Clay    Justine Henin    Serena Williams    6-4 6-3         1/4    1.53    -    2.46   
12/2007 WTA Miami (USA)    Hard    Serena Williams    Justine Henin    0-6 7-5 6-3         Final    1.65    -    2.21   
26/2003 WTA Wimbledon (GBR)    Grass    Serena Williams    Justine Henin    6-3 6-2         1/2

well maybe henin was out of  shape in other years  with you ridiculous point

Henin actually won the H2H in 2003 checking, but more meetings were on clay. Henin was the better player on clay though in those times that's not really in debate.

3/2010 WTA Australian Open (AUS)    Hard    Serena Williams    Justine Henin    6-4 3-6 6-2    [Stats]     Final    1.91    -    1.87   
13/2008 WTA Miami (USA)    Hard    Serena Williams    Justine Henin    6-2 6-0    [Stats]     1/4    2.73    -    1.45    $
35/2007 WTA U.S. Open (USA)    Hard    Justine Henin    Serena Williams    7-6(3) 6-1    [Stats]     1/4    1.31    -    3.41   
26/2007 WTA Wimbledon (GBR)    Grass    Justine Henin    Serena Williams    6-4 3-6 6-3    [Stats]     1/4    1.32    -    3.33   
22/2007 WTA French Open (FRA)    Clay    Justine Henin    Serena Williams    6-4 6-3    [Stats]     1/4    1.53    -    2.46   
12/2007 WTA Miami (USA)    Hard    Serena Williams    Justine Henin    0-6 7-5 6-3    [Stats]     Final    1.65    -    2.21   
26/2003 WTA Wimbledon (GBR)    Grass    Serena Williams    Justine Henin    6-3 6-2    [Stats]     1/2                  
22/2003 WTA French Open (FRA)    Clay    Justine Henin    Serena Williams    6-2 4-6 7-5    [Stats]     1/2                  
15/2003 WTA Charleston, South Carolina (USA)    Clay    Justine Henin    Serena Williams    6-3 6-4         Final                  
39/2002 WTA Leipzig (GER)    Carpet    Serena Williams    Justine Henin    6-4 6-2         1/2                  
20/2002 WTA Rome (ITA)    Clay    Serena Williams    Justine Henin    7-6(6) 6-4         Final                  
19/2002 WTA Berlin (GER)    Clay    Justine Henin    Serena Williams    6-2 1-6 7-6(5)         Final                  
44/2001 WTA Munich (GER)    I_Hard    Serena Williams    Justine Henin    6-3 7-6(5)         1/4                  
35/2001 WTA U.S. Open (USA)    Hard    Serena Williams    Justine Henin    7-5 6-0         Fourth

Henin would get battered vs the Serena Williams you see these days, and did anytime she faced Serena when she actually cared about tennis.

Jun 27, 2013 -- 11:37PM, n88uk wrote:

Henin actually won the H2H in 2003 checking, but more meetings were on clay. Henin was the better player on clay though in those times that's not really in debate.

ok so clasy cont less than hard court ffs and serena when losing is out of shape ffs  im out of this mugfest

serena only winning on hc against henin

Firstly and grass and secondly hard court is the most important surface these days.

and saying she was starting to lose blah blah blah. wasnt bacause she declined as an athlete she had personal problems

Using your logic ;[p Kafelnikov, Kuerten, Rafter are better players than Federer.

Jun 27, 2013 -- 11:40PM, n88uk wrote:

Firstly and grass and secondly hard court is the most important surface these days.

they 1-1 on grass firstly secondly who says hard court is  more important than caly, and why? there is less play on hc so the record would be better for henin is they play 50-50 with caly and hc

more play*

Has to be between Graf and Williams


And as somebody has said, graf benefited from seles missing 10 straights right off the back off winning 7 of her last 8 slams - the other one she was runner up, during that those 10 absent slams graff won 6 of them and then beat seles in her comeback slam

To even be in the discussion you need to have won on all three surfaces.
Hence why winning the French mattered so much to Fed.

So Henin (and for that matter Sanchez vicario) are out of the running.

And Martina beat what was put in front of her in the early 80s (which wasn't much) and got actually better as the competition increased later on,  still getting to the Wimbledon final in 1994.
She didn't just go away for the seven years in between. She was just being constantly owned by Graf.

Jun 27, 2013 -- 11:43PM, n88uk wrote:

Using your logic ;[p Kafelnikov, Kuerten, Rafter are better players than Federer.

your logic about my logic is totally crap

Guga was pretty cool

Because the most tournaments are on hard court? Like I said you have to bare in mind when you were winning anyway. Because as I said using your logic Kafelnikov, Kuerten and Rafter are better players than Federer.

Are we going to start saying all the mugs who start beating Venus now are far better players than Venus was, because her fitness is irrelevant now using your logic?

he once beat Djokovic

The strict head to heads aren't the full picture clearly, because otherwise Murray will go down in history as a better player than Federer.

Jun 27, 2013 -- 11:45PM, n88uk wrote:

Because the most tournaments are on hard court? Like I said you have to bare in mind when you were winning anyway. Because as I said using your logic Kafelnikov, Kuerten and Rafter are better players than Federer.Are we going to start saying all the mugs who start beating Venus now are far better players than Venus was, because her fitness is irrelevant now using your logic?

i totally dont understand what are you saying now. im not gonna dwell in facts just to  prove im smarter more knowledgeable  about sport than others ,i stated my opinion already

You said me saying Serena was nowhere near full fitness during Henin's wins is irrelevant. I am giving you simple obvious reasons that anyone can see why that is clear rubbish. Because if we're going to start claiming that, any old mug that starts beating you when you are well past it is a better player.

maybe Stako is the GOAT

Jun 27, 2013 -- 11:47PM, n88uk wrote:

The strict head to heads aren't the full picture clearly, because otherwise Murray will go down in history as a better player than Federer.

full picture is  same time they played there is this h2h and amount of slams they won which is the same and amount oif weeks the had been as no1 which hennin was more

Jun 27, 2013 -- 11:50PM, n88uk wrote:

You said me saying Serena was nowhere near full fitness during Henin's wins is irrelevant. I am giving you simple obvious reasons that anyone can see why that is clear rubbish. Because if we're going to start claiming that, any old mug that starts beating you when you are well past it is a better player.

yeah henin wasnt in fill fitness since 2008 till now with you rubbish logic

full

But they didn't play in that time?

The H2H which she is losing despite the fact she come up against Serena in years when she was losing to utter mugs. Number 1 doesn't really mean anything because Serena basically didn't play tournaments outside grand slams. Serena was literally playing 10 tournaments a year. Was Wozniacki better than Clijsters and Serena a few years ago?

We'll never know how good Seles would have been. She was definitely the best player in the world the year running up to getting stabbed but the question of how Steffi would have adapted if Monica hadn't been stabbed is unanswerable.

A single year of dominance isn't enough to forward-project  (and she still lost Wimbledon to Steffi in that 12 months anyway)

But there's no question that without the stabbing, Seles had the potential to become the best of the lot.
Wasn't quite there yet however

It can't be Martina because she was utterly owned in her own era by Steffi

Martina-Graf H2H was 9-9

Most of these wins came before Graf set out her stall in '88, when she became a household nemae by winning all 4 slams and the Olympics (which serena incidentally will probably be unable to match)

From 1988 till the end of both their careers Martina only managed to beat Steffi once in a slam, and lost all the finals they played.

But over and above the numbers, it's Graf's temparement that sets her apart imo from everyone else.

In a game where frailty abounds, where even Serena has a suspect temperament that got her disqualified from a slam final (!),
Steffi Graf's air of authority was like nothing before or since.

serena already has a golden slam

not calendar though was it

You may well be right about Graf being GOAT but i think it dubious to say that 1988> was Martina's 'Own Era'

She was 31 in 1988 , and the 3 finals she lost to Graf after that all went to 3 sets , so hardly 'owned' imo

she beat a 34 year old chris evert in 88 for the aussie open who'd won her last slam 2 years earlier
she double bagkled a 17 year old  in 88Natasha Zvereva for the french whos never won a lsma t that point
she beat a 34 year old navratilova in 88 for wimbledon who only went on to win one more slam
she beat a 18 year old Gabriela Sabatini in 88 for the us open and olympic gold - who only ever won 1 slam


nobody in their peak years,

31 yo navratilova

Athletes do peak at different ages though tbf

Evert and Martina were very good for a very long time, though both past their best in '88

Sabatini was close to her peak in '88 though i'd guess .She'd been around for years by then  (as had Graf who was the same age)

Recall first match i saw Steffi in was v Jo Durie at Wimbeldon in 1984

The top players in different eras are the top players because their style of play and physical attributes are better suited to that time. Some players could adapt to different eras and still be a top player while others would not be able to.

10 grand slams in todays more competitive era where there is far greater strength in depth would be more difficult to achieve than more grand slams in another era.

my vote btw would go to Graf.

Sabatini was close to her peak in '88 though i'd guess .She'd been around for years by then  (as had Graf who was the same age)


she was 18 only been around on tour 3 years or so and hadnt won a slam so not sure how she was close to her peak,

well the slam she did win was a year or so later from what i recall, and i can't remember her doing much in the 90s so i'd say she was close to her peak in 1988

I'd say Sabatini was at her peak in 91, when she had the Open under her belt, was competing to be number 1 in the world, and reached the Wimbledon final.

Still couldn't get past Graf.

sanchez Vicario was definitely at her peak when she played graf in the wimbledon final. She was a multi slam winner at US open and French and had got to the final of the Aus, but also had watched her spanish rival Martinez win Wimbledon in 94 and was absolutely determined to win in 95 and 96.

Still couldn't get past Graf. (both times)

an 18 year old is no t near peak level, she had most of her best results in the 90's that's where she reached the latter part of slams more consistenty

but not to take away from grafss achievemnets - one way or another she won 22 slams and the olympics

Graf-s williams only played one big match the indian wells final and a 17 year old beat a 29 year old graf in 3 sets is impressive, not that that's the defining factor but still

I just get the feeling that a fully focused s williams with her power and all round game would be better from what i've seen and heard over many matches, williams era is more power based, could graff handle that power..

I agree with Bhoys point about the modern racket.

Much easier to hit the ball very hard with reasonable accuracy , which gives naturally taller,stronger players an advantage .

Try blasting down serves with wooden rackets, most of these beanpole players would hardly get a first serve in. The average height of top tennis players must be 4 inches higher than 30 years ago.

Sabatini was in the semis of the FO when she was 15, and made several further semi finals in the next 3 years.

Fair enough as Journeyman say she was probably at her best 90/91 but it is hardly like there was a dramatic improvement then , just gradual . She was not far off her best in 1988 .

i can only go by records mate as i didint see her play as barely born but going by records it seems her best years were early  to mid 90's

really though it's an indefinite answer but fun debate nonetheless

sabatini's best years were definitely around 1990 and 1991. won the us open in 90 and iirc served for it twice in that wimbledon final.

graf really did get out of a lot of losing positions. sabatini and the famous novotna choke too

how many would graf have won is shed been in todays era?

For all the talk about records the post by journeyman sums up best the case for Graf.

17 down
6 more to go

you'd have to say serena has been lucky to some extent that she isn't playing in golden era. her main rivals were her sister and justine henin really. not great by any means

how much slams did navratilova and evert take off each other ?

Venus must have made 8 Wimbledon finals by chance

what was tennis like in 80's? comparing the standards is it as good as now? didnt they have 4 grass slams?

venus a great grass court player but on other surfaces ? not close to the top 10 of all time

serena was up against no other all time greats

3*

well when Venus and Henin had Wimbledon and the French on lock for most of the early-mid 2000s they are a pretty big roadblock despite what they were like on the other surfaces

wasn't Steffi's biggest rival never the same and probably allowed her to rack up a lot more quickly than expected if Seles stuck around

in between Sele's first and last slam - she misses 17 slams and steffi was 8 of them

won*

found this What if column about Graf and Seles interesting,
http://www.tennisfrontier.com/blogs/britbox/monica-seles-stabbing-steffi-gra...

http://www.tennisfrontier.com/blogs/britbox/
monica-seles-stabbing-steffi-grafs-legacy/

Mats Wilander is another prime example of a player who in 1988 won three majors in a single year.  He never won another.

He just lost all motivation after becoming World No 1, which he did after his USO win that year.

henin was the only player who could outrally an in form williams

1. Navratilova
2. Graf
3. Evert
4. Williams


Navratilova the most dominant player of all time, she holds countless numbers of records, many of which will never be broken. My opinion is totally unbiased because I couldn't stand her for years (cos she was always beating Chrissy )

margaret court is getting very short shrift here.

certainly to put navratilova and evert in front of her is patently wrong.

starting with the raw stats she won more slams than anyone else.

then factor in a two year hiatus between 24 and 26 to start a family.

then factor in that the second half of her career was juggled with having three kids (not to mention making a grand slam final while pregnant)

she was physically dominating and in addition worked hard at her fitness; many consider navratilova to be the modern standard of fitness but court preceded her.

you then have to start comparing across eras which is an endless discussion.

in the modern era, graf edges it for me. williams relies too much on her being able to bully and is fragile if she's not allowed to dominate.

1= Court/Graf
3= Williams/Navratilova

most natural=mandlikova
pure grit=evert
most unique style=greer stevens

I did think about putting Court in there as well, but it's just too long ago and I've never seen her play.

best slice=turnbull

Nav had the boxed set slam.

just watched some clips of margeret court, looks like very passive tennis, tbh i think she would of been blitzed by todays ball bashers, but then the racquet doesnt help

as i alluded to, i think it's unfair to compare like that across eras.

statistically she was undisputedly the most successful old school style/racquet player, despite taking a bucketload of time off in the middle of her career, and you can't discount a player from the GOAT discussion just because the game has changed.

Lever and Emerson would no doubt be discussed when considering the male GOAT, but can you imagine someone like verdasco, blake or gonzalez matching up against them with modern racquets?

*laver

Maureen Connolly