Margaret Court is a detestable creep

[malaise]

https://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/34527959/margaret-court-defends-tennis-record-wake-serena-williams-farewell-says-admiration-not-reciprocated

She is not even in Serena's league.

[JT45242]

1. You may not like her views, I don't, but recency bias on ESPN and others is rampant

Court, Navratilova, Evert all had long great careers without the exorbitant amounts of cash thrown at the Williams sisters.

The era in which Serena dominated did not include any other all time greats (just imagine how many Navratilova or Every would have won if not for the other).

Williams never had to play in 25 tournament in a year because and risk the wear and tear on her body that the players in earlier eras did because there was not money.

ESPN and other sports carriers decided a couple of decades ago to push only modern players with easily clipped highlights could even be in the discussion of GOAT... Earlier tennis players. Basketball, etc are long forgotten.

That Wilt averaged 50 points and 20 rebounds a game for several seasons ... doesn't matter. Or that Russell has almost twice as many rings as Jordan. That Martina Navratilova consistently was in the semis of both singles and doubles at every major for over a decade (and sometimes mixed doubles too) is ignored.

Margaret Court is an old woman who has beliefs about LGBTQ+ that I completely disagree with. But, she was one of the greatest and to not admit that ignores the history of the sport.

(Tennis magazine did an interesting study on rackets of different eras, they found that you could hit the ball virtually the same speed with wooden or metal rackets, but that the sweet spots were much. Much smaller than the modern rackets. Would be interesting to see how a big hitter like Williams not known for accuracy would have fared with a tiny sweet spot wooden racket.

[Sugarcoated]

9. You cited Navratilova, but Evert's record reaching semis and finals of GSs

is the best in the sport, male or female. That level of consistency will likely never be matched.

[Quakerfriend]

2. I can't believe she put herself out there

to bellyache & to try and put herself above Serena!

But, I do wish Serena had acknowledged Tomljanovic a bit more. And, I thought that Tomljanovic handled it all with great class.

[malaise]

3. Agree re Ajla but I also blame the media folks

The winner of the match should have been interviewed first.
But yes, Serena should have acknowledged her victory.

[Jarqui]

4. I watched Margaret Court in those years

She was a great player during her time.
It was a very different era in so many ways.

But when it comes to a conversation about the greatest ever, I'm not sure I would have given her much thought.

Off hand, without giving it much thought, I think Serena is the best I ever saw and the only ones that would give me any pause would be Martina Navratilova & Steffi Graf. Margaret Court wouldn't be in that conversation with me. I think I would consider Chris Evert and Billie Jean King ahead of Margaret Court.

[malaise]

6. Thanks for this

[bahboo]

5. many of the top players didn't travel to Australia for the Aussie Open...

back in Court's day. She won 11 AO championships....enough said.

[tishaLA]

8. 11 of Court's Slams happened at the Aussie Open

this was back before most players played the Australian Open and in many years literally no non-Aussie appeared in the women's raw (when she won in 1960 for example 2 non-Aussies, Maria Bueno and Christine Truman played; the next year, it was down to 1 non-Aussie). I admit that I never saw her play, and I have no doubt that she was a great champion, as her record against Billie Jean attests, but I can't ignore what a terrible person she seems to be, a minister without an ounce of grace.

I have my own, probably unpopular, feelings about this "greatest" debate, but let's face it: if you're part of the conversation, you did pretty damn well