February 5, 2001 - There's no such thing as the best ever! (Ladies edition)

I've been watching, playing, teaching and or making a living in the tennis industry for close to 30 years. There's always the constant argument of who's better, who was the best of all time?

I believe that it is very easy to rate results and accomplishments, but basically impossible to rate a player's stroke production against another player from a different era.

I also believe that results from one time frame is more impressive or harder to achieve than another time frame, for example, winning a grand slam today is  more demanding and challenging than winning a grand slam 30-40 years ago.

To see a list of different unique rankings and charts, see the PRO SCENE section above. 

There have been may players with one or two exceptionally great shots, but never one player possessing all the strokes that are better than any other players' stroke.

Here's a list of the best strokes of all time:

Serve: In years past, the serve in the woman's game consisted of getting the ball over the net to start the rally, with the exception of a small handful of players, the same thing is still true today. If pure power is the criteria, then Brenda Schultz-MacCarthy and Venus Williams would take the crown, if consistency and longevity is the criteria then Martina is the one, but Martina could barely crack 90mph and double faulted under pressure in crucial situations far too many times, Brenda never had the results to go along with her serve and Venus still has not figured out her service motion, my choice here will surprise many people but I am going with Mary Pierce, that's right the 2-time Grand Slam winner, has an almost flawless delivery, with accuracy, consistency and power. I'm reserving the right to take this choice back when and if the Williams sisters ever truly dominate the woman's tour.

One-handed backhand: People criticized Steffi Graf  for not hitting a topspin backhand and relying mainly on the slice, but what an amazing shot it was. When Gabriella Sabatini first came up, her huge topspin one-handed backhand was not common in the woman's game, she later refined and added variety to it and bested Graf on many occasions. My choice is Gabriella

Two handed backhand: Chris Evert like Bjorn Borg popularized and glamorized the 2-handed backhand in the woman's game, an influence that's still going strong, but her shot was basically built on consistency with very little flair and variety. Then came Monica Seles, the force and voracity that she attacked the ball on the backhand side when she was at her peak, has not been matched. She clearly is on top of this category.

Forehand: Steffi Graf! This is the easiest choice yet, unconventional, late preparation, both feet up in the air, at her best no other player can come close to producing the sheer destruction of the Steffi forehand.

Return of serve: I was tempted to go with Steffi, she certainly put fear in her opponents when they stepped up to serve, but this lady not only put fear she also inflicted pain. Monica Seles's return of serve was nothing short of pure controlled devastation. 

Volleys: Martina Navratilova! Need I say more about her volleying? For the majority of her career, she was basically the only one to venture to the net, yes there were a few who tried but not any where close to the level of Martina. Players like Helena Sukova, Billie Jean King, Hanna Mandlikova were great net players, but Martina was the net. 

Transition Game:  This is another aspect that Martina excelled at, getting to the net was her goal, but there were too many times where she stayed back or attacked with less conviction when playing strong baseliners. Billie Jean King never flinched or backed up away from the net, getting there was the only way she knew how to play. She is to me the first true modern female tennis athlete. Billie Jean.

Foot speed: Steffi Graf! It is widely believed that she could have been a gold medallist in the 100 yard dash had she chosen track over tennis. Her speed, agility and body control on the court was simply the best.

Best shape: Martina Navratilova! Her legendary left arm with that huge vein running down the side of it, bulging on every shot was enough to scare most ladies on the tour. She took the woman's game to a new level.

Most intense:  Steffi, Billie Jean or Monica, as you know, there can't be ties, someone has to be declared the winner. I'm going with Monica Seles, if only that mad man did not reach her, the record books would have been shattered and re-written 3 times over.

Unlike the man's game, the ladies do not dominate with one particular stroke, they tend to play a more wait until you miss kind of a game, but that's changing, they are attacking the ball with the same brute force found in the man's game, a few years from now, this list will contain many new names that we do not yet know about.

 What's your point e-mail us

February 6, 2001 - Sampras is not a serve and volleyer

He is a server that volleys, if you look at his position for his first volley and his form with his left arm dangling and dragging behind his body, compare it with a true serve and volleyer like Tim Henman and the difference is very clear.

9 out of 10 of his volleys are already won by the force and precision of his serve, in contrast, a player like Stefan Edberg had to get to the net and win the point with his volley, his serve was basically an approach shot, he would not serve you off the court, but instead volley you into submission.

If Pete's serve is off by a couple percentage points, if the surface is a little slower than indoor carpet and grass, then Alex Corretja happens, his weaknesses get magnified, 
his suspect backhand crumbles, his weak volleys are dumped into the net, his questionable stamina fails him, and his weak shaky heart tells him to quit.

Pete is the perfect example of how important the serve is in tennis. He may be the greatest to have ever played, but he's no serve and volleyer.

 What's your point e-mail us

February 7, 2001 - Wishy washy decision makers!

If you institute a new system, kill the old one and kill it good. Don't keep it lingering on and worse, don't make the one you supposedly killed more important than the new one.

Don't t assume the public is stupid, that they can' t understand something that had been around for 17 years, don't tell them the old system is dead and that the new system better, but still keep the old system alive.

Be true to your commitment.
The points race is a good thing, adopt it fully, promote it properly, forget the past and move on, otherwise, go back to the old 52 week ranking system, the same one that people used to complain about.

The entry system is used to seed players, why not use the points race results from the previous year as a seeding criteria and switch to the current year's points total at mid year, by then, after 2 slams and countless tournaments have been played, there will be sufficient information for tournaments to use for entry purposes.

The old system where players ducked tournaments and each other to protect their ranking, had poor results dropped, had one good tournament and rode it for a whole year, made it virtually impossible for players to reach the top (hence the great notoriety for getting to number one) was wrong.  Getting to number one was not just a reflection on the level of play on the tour, but also the level of toughness of the ranking formula.

I say keep the points race! 

 What's your point e-mail us

February 8, 2001 - If only the world was made of clay!

Where gladiators swung deadly weapons made of graphite with tight meshes molded out of the intestines of an unfortunate cat.

The mark of a real man would be the clay stained trophies he possesses.

No other surface challenges a tennis player more than red clay
No other surface is more artistic
No other surface is more colorful
No other surface is more punishing

An all clay ( red , not the Green American stuff) tour would prolong careers, diminish injuries, and not to mention more entertaining to the public.

The serve would be less dominant, the power would have to be controlled, the desire to win would have to increase, and the world of tennis would be much happier.

Tennis was once primarily played on one surface - grass - it's time to go back to that trend, this time make it red clay!

 What's your point e-mail us

February 9, 2001 - Americans do not matter!

Top tennis stars like Andre Agassi Pete Sampras are demanding changes in the Davis Cup format, mainly that it should be held every other year and over a two week period. John McEnroe who had the same suggestions ( and then some) resigned over the issue when the USTA made it clear that they will not force any Davis Cup overall requests on the ITF, the governing body of the Grand Slams and Davis Cup.

A few days ago, the ITF announced that they will not be making changes to the Davis Cup format in the near future, even though the US is a big player in the game of tennis they are after all just one nation, all other participating sides are satisfied with the current format, we can't ignore everyone else to please one they say.

I agree with their reasoning, now it's up to the US to lobby and even boycott the Davis Cup if they want their changes to take place. The odds of that happening are not as far fetched as you might think, a few more losing years, and if Pete and Andre are not replaced by new American champions, watch for the USTA to change their approach and ask for changes by threatening to stay out of the competition, and if they do bypass the Davis Cup, the other nations will soon realize that winning a championship that do not include the US will have an asterisk by it's name and they too will start to demand changes - Maybe!

Personally the Davis Cup is irrelevant, the idea of team tennis and country against country will not be a big selling point in an individual sport, leave that kind of  competition and nationalistic pride to the Olympics, even a revamped Davis Cup will never be a big event in the US.

I say leave the Davis Cup as is and let it die!

(c) 1stserve