v2 G.O.A.T Round 2 Match 16

First topic message reminder :

Below are the previous round 1 articles written by forum members

Please vote for the participant you believe has achieved the most in sport

Please leave a comment as to why you voted

Steffi Graf- Tennis- Championed by legendkillarV2

Arguably one of tennis's most gifted and successful players ever. 22 Grand Slam titles. 6 end of year titles. 69 other tour event titles. 377 weeks at number 1. Gold, Silver and Bronze Olympic medals. The only player ever to have won the Career Golden Calendar Year Slam. A feat which will never be repeated. The Fraulein Forehand as she was known. She had a lovely and velvet like backhand slice to match that of the great Rod Laver. Her footwork and speed was amazing. The game had simply never witnessed anything like it. It still hasn't.

Steffi began playing tennis at the age of 4 being coached by her tennis enthusiast father. By age 5 she had played in her first tournament. In 1982 she won both the under 12's and under 18's European Championships. She then turned pro at the age of 13 and her first match lost to 2 time Slam winner Tracey Austin. There was no doubt that this talented youngster was going to go far. In 1983 she broke into the top 100 of the world which for a 14 year old is just sensational. Let that sink in for a minute. The top 100 on the pro tour at the age of 14. At the age of 15 she won her first Grand Slam match. At the age of 16 she won her first pro title by winning the Family Circle Cup by defeating the legendary Chris Evert in straight sets.

It wasn't until 1987 when Steffi started to come to prominence. She won the Sony Ericsson Open and then went on to win in Rome. A month later and Graf was in her first Grand Slam final at Roland Garros. A week shy of her 18th birthday. Standing on the other side of the net was the greatest female player of them all. Martina Navratilova. A winning machine. The ultimate competitor. Graf was unbeaten in 1987. After a set all, it came down to a final set showdown. Nerve would fancy the more experienced Navratilova. Graf was 3-5 in the third. Navratilova double faulted serving for the match at 5-4. Graf broke the Navratilova serve and got 6-7. Match point. Navratilova served another DF thus handing Graf her first Slam title and making her the youngest female winner of the French Open. Navratilova however got her measure of revenge by beating Graf in the Wimbledon and US Open finals. Slam finals were many things which Graf would feature in. This would mark a run of 13 consecutive Slam finals for Graf.

1988. The single most amazing year in tennis history. She started the year winning her first Australian Open title. She overcame Chris Evert in straight sets. She won the title without the loss of a single set. She went on to Roland Garros where she defended her title by defeating Natalia Zvereva 6-0 6-0 in the final. The first time anyone had been bagelled in a Slam final since 1911!. Along came Wimbledon. She faced Navratilova who had won 6 straight Wimbledon titles. After losing the first set, Steffi found herself 2-0 in second. She rallied back and won 6 straight games to clinch the second set. Steffi then saw out the 3rd to win the match 7-5 2-6 1-6 and usher in new period of dominance. Graf then went on to win the US Open defeating Gabriela Sabatini in the final and then at the Summer Olympics in Seoul completed the most amazing year in tennis by capturing Gold. Thus sealing her place in history.

In her career she went on to win Wimbledon 7 times. 5 in a row. The French Open 6 times. The US Open 5 times and Australian Open 4 times. She appeared in 31 Slam finals. She won 18 Masters Titles making 24 finals. She won 5 end of year championships.

Quite simply she was the greatest player to have ever played the game.

Brain Lara- Cricket- Championed by VTR

"We can all look at statistics when we try to decide who is the greatest but sometimes seeing with our own eyes is the only way to judge. Bradman’s average, Tendulkar’s runs, Sober’s all-round feats are all there in the record books, but for sheer aesthetics there is the man with the high back-lift and flashing blade that made batting look so elegant you knew you were witnessing something special: that man is Brian Charles Lara.

Equally as devastating when facing fast, spin bowling or anything in between, Lara had the ability to dominate any attack in any part of the world. With a Test career spanning 1990-2006, playing at a time when opposition bowling attacks were almost universally strong (Wasim & Waqar, McGrath & Warne, Donald & Pollock), here was a batsmen who would have all in the ground enthralled as he played every shot in the book with such panache you would think he was playing a different game to everyone else. As an opposition supporter you’d somehow want him to stay in and get out at the same time; you knew the damage he could do, yet you would always want to watch more.

And it’s not as if the style was lacking in the way of substance. Far, far from it. In 1994 Lara destroyed a capable England attack to help himself to 375 runs and take the record for the highest individual Test score, overtaking Sober’s 365 which had stood for 36 years. This was merely the start of a purple patch of an incredible 7 hundreds in 8 first-class innings, culminating in a record that could, like The Don’s Test average stand forever: an innings of 501 not out against Durham when playing for Warwickshire in the County Championship. An entire team is generally elated with an innings total of 500+, but such was his hunger for runs Lara was able to achieve that many on his own.

When Matthew Hayden bullied a club-standard Zimbabwe attack for 380 runs a decade later to take away the record of highest individual Test score, the world wept that such a prestigious record could be achieved against such poor opposition. Thankfully Lara wasn’t finished, and with mutterings of a decline during an unusually subdued home series in 2004 he astonishingly took the record back with a chanceless innings of 400 not out. England were again on the receiving end, and despite having dominated the series for a 3-0 lead at that point were powerless to stop another innings of absolute genius. To put this into context, the record individual Test score has only changed hands 4 times since the Second World War. Lara stands apart in having gained the record twice.

Do you need any more convincing? An overall Test average of 52.88 is 17th on the all-time list, which is exceptional given the bowling attacks he faced, the lack of reliable batting partners in his later career and the challenges of captaining a team that was often in crisis for a large part of that. As the Windies decline set in from the mid to late 1990’s, Lara often seemed to be fighting a lone battle as a once-dominant team started to taste defeat on a regular basis. One of his most astonishing feats was somehow dragging the Windies to a 2-2 draw against the great Australia team in 1999. His innings of 153 not out in securing a thrilling one wicket victory in the Third Test is rated by Wisden as the second greatest Test innings of all time. Even more remarkable is that just days earlier he’d scored 213 in setting up a shock victory in the Second Test to level the series.

I haven’t even mentioned one-day cricket yet where Lara was one of the masters of his age, averaging over 40 in the shorter form and playing an integral part in the Windies shock run to the 1996 World Cup final. Naturally there was a defining innings in there: his masterful 111 off just 94 balls knocked the stuffing out of South Africa in the Quarter Final.

Some say when he retired in 2007 it was too early, the flourish was still there, he could still make a difference (Lara had averaged 66 in his final Test Series). But as with those flashing strokes, I’d say his timing was perfect. We were not to be subjected to any tarnishing of memories as a slow decline set in: we witnessed and will remember nothing but sheer beauty."

Er, because they're not physically strong enough. So you're saying that the reason men are greater sportspeople than women is because they are physically stronger?

PS you didn't answer my question

JuliusHMarx wrote:Er, because they're not physically strong enough. So you're saying that the reason men are greater sportspeople than women is because they are physically stronger?

PS you didn't answer my question

It's not all about physical attributes though. I never mentioned the physical side.

So why can't Serena Williams beat Jeremy Chardy (which she couldn't)? Because her technique is worse?

(Is there any point asking direct questions?)

Hand eye co-ordination? The fact is, men are better than women at tennis, so how can Graf be the GOAT of Tennis?

What direct question? Calm down man.

JuliusHMarx wrote:So why can't Serena Williams beat Jeremy Chardy (which she couldn't)? Because her technique is worse?

(Is there any point asking direct questions?)

Is it because she's black? It is, isn't it?

Stella wrote:Hand eye co-ordination? The fact is, men are better than women at tennis, so how can Graf be the GOAT of Tennis?

What direct question? Calm down man.

I asked about Esther Vergeer - even gave a link.
Thanks for the patronising 'calm down' though

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Stella wrote:Hand eye co-ordination? The fact is, men are better than women at tennis, so how can Graf be the GOAT of Tennis?

What direct question? Calm down man.

I asked about Esther Vergeer - even gave a link.
Thanks for the patronising 'calm down' though

Of course she can be a great sportsperson but to be honest, it was a bad analogy.

Stella wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Stella wrote:Hand eye co-ordination? The fact is, men are better than women at tennis, so how can Graf be the GOAT of Tennis?

What direct question? Calm down man.

I asked about Esther Vergeer - even gave a link.
Thanks for the patronising 'calm down' though

Of course she can be a great sportsperson but to be honest, it was a bad analogy.

Are you not arguing that women are effectively physically less able than men and cannot therefore be regarded as being as great as men, from a sporting perspective?

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Stella wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Stella wrote:Hand eye co-ordination? The fact is, men are better than women at tennis, so how can Graf be the GOAT of Tennis?

What direct question? Calm down man.

I asked about Esther Vergeer - even gave a link.
Thanks for the patronising 'calm down' though

Of course she can be a great sportsperson but to be honest, it was a bad analogy.

Are you not arguing that women are effectively physically less able than men and cannot therefore be regarded as being as great as men, from a sporting perspective?

No. I've never mentioned the physical side. I was saying that Graf cannot be considered the GOAT as she is not as good as most top male players. The reasons may be a little physical, I don't know. To me, it's more down to hand eye co-ordination. I could be wrong.

Hand eye co-ordination being a difference in what? Biology? Physiology?
The same as saying women are born not as good at sports, therefore can't be the GOAT. As opposed to evaluating their achievements and accomplishments against their peers i.e. those they play against.

To be honest, who know's why women are not as good at some sports as men. It's certainly not a physical thing in say snooker, darts and to some extent Cricket.

I have evaluated Graf's achievements and that's why I have her above Lara but again, how can she be the tennis GOAT?

If your argument is that she can't be the tennis GOAT because she doesn't play at the same level as Fed in absolute terms, then clearly Graf is not in the top 500 (at least) best tennis players.
If, on the other hand, you'd put her in the top 20 best ever tennis players, then you're not judging on an absolute level, but on other criteria.

JuliusHMarx wrote:If your argument is that she can't be the tennis GOAT because she doesn't play at the same level as Fed in absolute terms, then clearly Graf is not in the top 500 (at least) best tennis players.
If, on the other hand, you'd put her in the top 20 best ever tennis players, then you're not judging on an absolute level, but on other criteria.

She wouldn't be in the top 500? I'll take your word for that. Some may be cruel and not even contemplate her as a top 64 GOAT, given there have been 500 better male tennis players.

I think we've got 19 former members of the WICB on this site.

You know things are bad on a thread when a Yorkshire man like me looks like a progressive forward thinking Guardian reading liberal.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:Graf is a woman and surely can make no claim to be the GOAT. Best of the women perhaps, but she is not even close to being the best at her sport.

Presumably you'd rule out any paralympian on the same grounds?

Yes

People tend to get hung up on issues like this because the perceive it to be sexist/racist/ageist etc...

For whatever reasons, men are simply better than women. They have as much claim to be the GOAT as youth champions... None. They are obviously talented, but you know other people are better.

Stella wrote:To be honest, who know's why women are not as good at some sports as men. It's certainly not a physical thing in say snooker, darts and to some extent Cricket.

I have evaluated Graf's achievements and that's why I have her above Lara but again, how can she be the tennis GOAT?

Is it me or isnt this obvious. How many women play darts and snooker compared to men, and indeed cricket. Its a tiny percentage so how on earth can they hope to produce the same quality of competitors from a massively smaller talent pool is beyond me.
It would be interesting to see a study testing people of both sexes who have never say thrown a dart and to see if there was any greater ability shown by either gender, personally I very much doubt there would be but I could be wrong. Ive got a little girl who is 3, she plays with lots of kids who are a similar age and I can tell you at that age there isn't any greater ability shown by boys in hand eye co-ordination. Im more inclined personally to think this develops in boys later through practise, in short its nurture not nature.

Rowley wrote:You know things are bad on a thread when a Yorkshire man like me looks like a progressive forward thinking Guardian reading liberal.

You really don't mate. The guardian costs 70p.

ShahenshahG wrote:

Rowley wrote:You know things are bad on a thread when a Yorkshire man like me looks like a progressive forward thinking Guardian reading liberal.

The guardian costs 70p.

What, each!

I bought two today, and they were both the bloody same.

Rowley wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:

Rowley wrote:You know things are bad on a thread when a Yorkshire man like me looks like a progressive forward thinking Guardian reading liberal.

The guardian costs 70p.

What, each!

Aye. I picked up 10 hoping to sell them at 8p a piece and got the shock of my life.

Had to vote for Lara,

Last week the Tennis "experts" were on here telling us that Roger Federer was the greatest player to ever pick up a racket.

Voted for Lara, doesn't look like he's going to win though.

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Last week the Tennis "experts" were on here telling us that Roger Federer was the greatest player to ever pick up a racket.

He really isn't.
Don't believe these experts when they tell you that.

When it comes to boxing, tennis and GOATS I believe everything the "experts" tell me.

While me being a big fan of Lara I still have to go with Graf, Steffi has un parallel success in the sports and its hard to see Lara past her.

Steffi win by 58-42 margin.