When Margaret Court played she was one of the classiest champions of all time. She never made a fuss over bad line calls, and always said nice things about her opponents even in defeat. She was a real class act. Although she could get nervous in big moments, most of the time she composed herself enough to win, and was always a fighter in her matches. Her 1970 wimbledom victory over Billie Jean King by the scores of 14-12, 11-9, was one of the most entertaining women's matches ever.
Too Margaret Court became a religious nutcase. Shes almost forgotten as an Australian sporting legend which is a shame because she was such a great player. Suppose she would prefer it that way. Suppose its her life and if she wants to be a bigoted homophobic narrow minded person. Definitely a shame.
I think the worst decision was to allow the rackets to be made of other materials. They should have never allowed this. They got away from the tradition of the game. Baseball didn't change their bats to Graphite, and they kept the integrity of the game.
The main reason to stop using wood rackets is for the environment. I can understand that.
They should have just kept using Wood Rackets. Again, if they didn't want to destroy trees for this, I understand and agree.
Billie Jean was doing commentary (rather than playing) because she was recovering from major knee surgery. Some were doubting whether she could ever return to her previous level of play, but her best days were still ahead. She'd win several more grand slam singles (and doubles) titles - including a French Open singles win in 1972 (clay never being her favourite surface).
Rosie Casals was hot stuff. A self-taught child of working-class parents who came off the public courts (like BJK) with the most amazing shot selection and acrobatic style to play at the top of the game for decades and put tennis -- as well as womens tennis -- on the map. Thrilling to watch. An inspiration. I wish she had one at least a Grand Slam singles title in addition to her 12 doubles, but, hey, she accomplished so much! What a contribution.
Both were at their peaks at the same time and it is hardly surprising there was a niggling rivalry, especially given BJK's ego! Court did not support BJK's independent women's tour, BJK responded by saying she should cos she is a feminist, after all it is Court who brings in the money in her family! Court said BJK was just jealous becos she, Madge had a family, while BJK had had an abortion! There was certainly no love lost between these two great players.
They had a sporting air about them back then. But conservative or not I think either of them would have liked to take that umpire's chair and stick it each other's eye.
Billie might have an ego but at least she was true to herself. Margaret did not support Billie's fight for women's equal prize money & yet, she benefited big time from the Virginia Slims tour (which Billie spearheaded along with Gladys & the gang).
I disagree with topjazz69 completely. The true beneficiary of the VS tour was Billie-Jean King herself. She played and won most of the events in the early years whilst the other top players continued with the regular tour eg. Court, Goolagong, Evert, Wade etc. Court didn't benefit much - she played one full season in 1973 and a few tournaments in 1975 after coming back from having her second child in 1974. So it was King was organised and benefitted from the VS tour.
Tennisvideos33, That's beside the point. Court still benefited especially in 1973 when she had the most prize money for women's. The point that I was trying to drive is that Court never supported King & the early proponents of equal prize money. She was even quoted saying "I don't want any part of the movement". Ironically, she played & kept her prize money when equal prize started its realization. She left Billie do the campaigns & protests & yet, she benefited in the end.
topjazz69 - Margaret Court was pregnant in 1971 and out for most of 1972 when the Slims tour started. So how could she support it anyway? And who cares that she didn't. Only a dozen or so women supported the VS tour at the beginning - why don't you attack all the others, including Evert, Wade, Goolagong etc. None of them could read the stars and predict the way tennis was to go, so they were following the traditional path and supporting the normal tour - what's wrong with that???????
I didn't attack Evert because at least she was honest when she said that "My father thought that Billie Jean's personality is too strong for my own good in the beginning. But in the end, both tours (Virginia & the USTA's) did well". Whereas Court's response that "Oh, women's lib, equality isn't really my cup of tea" was hypocritical. And that's not the last time that Court said something hypocritical. In '90, as Martina won #9 Wim., she said that Martina isn't a good role model coz she's gay.
It's not hypocritical at all. The problem is that you don't know how to apply reason. And Court was right: Navratilova is a horrible role model. Lesbianism is a grave sin.
OutlanderWarrior, you are the problem. Just because your blinded by your "organized religion" you assumed that the lesbian Martina is a bad role model. Martina's "work ethic" & "pursuit of excellence" are both great qualities for young people, expecially young aspiring women athletes. She never said to "imitate" her lifestyle. She's only being honest about who she is. You on the other hand was quick to "judge" Martina. Didn't your "God" say anything about casting the first stone?
Well, you're blinded by the spirit of the age and your secular values. See how easy that is? People don't have to think or engage in intellectual debate when they simply dismiss a point with fashionable stereotypes. As for judging, is this the same topjazz who wrote, "OutlanderWarrior, you are the problem"? That's awfully judgmental of you. As C.S. Lewis once said, "Their scepticism about values is only on the surface; it's for use on other people's values. As far as the values current in their
own set go, they're not nearly sceptical enough." If you preach non-judgmentalism as part of your relativistic creed, practice it! As for me, I don't preach it. My creed is very realistic. It acknowledges that everyone makes judgments (as you judged me). The key is to make the correct ones. Oh, just so you know - because I realize your set loves quoting the few Bible passages you know when you think it helps your cause - the New Testament also says, "Judge with righteous judgment."
It's not a tough question for me. I'm a member of the one true church, the Catholic Church. She wrote the Bible and safeguarded it, and she is charged with the task of interpreting it. Anyone can become a Christian.
Ironic that Margaret Court left Catholicism due to the fact that she couldn't be a pastor and that she got kicked out of Catholic school for being a rebel. One the nuns told that she must write with her right instead of her left.
It's always a shame when someone drifts from truth. Having said that, I prefer that people leave rather than be pretenders. And as far as making decisions based on what some nun said goes, that's like deciding to pollute because some environmentalist once gave you stupid advice.
When Renee Richard applied to play in the women's tournament in 75 U.S. Open, the tournament says no. Who she got, Roy Cohn. It seems like your gay bashing on Gentile ones than Jewish ones.
"Ariamaluum" I have not seen that name for some time, Renee Richards. Now 74- last heard- Dr. R.R. is still practicing medicine in N.Y. In 2000 she was inducted into the tennis hall of fame. I have spoken with her in the past. A conservative person. She calls the 2004 decision of I.O.C. which allows transsexuals to compete, "...a stupid decision." Explaining that when she sued to play at the U.S. Open, she was 40, and she wasn't going to be "competitve" against top players. Go figure?
Jiminy effing Cricket. What kind of role model are you? Don't you know these kinds of comments potentiate violence and hatred. Our good Bible says all sins are equal in the eyes of the Lord. Don't you think it is about time you "caught up with the spirit of the age," because, hey you are living and sinning in it. To use your own style of circular reasoning I say "You are a hypocrite, because you are."
Yes, well, anytime you criticize anyone it can evoke hatred and incite violence. Perhaps we should repeal the First Amendment.
And since, according to you, "all sins are equal in the eyes of the Lord," your sins must be as severe as mine. So, then what kind of a role model are you? Who are you to criticize my character, when, based on your own theology, you must be just as bad?
Is that the same tennis court on which Molla Mallory played her controversial second-round singles match against Suzanne Lenglen at the US Nationals in 1921, with Suzanne retiring ill when 2-6, 0-30 behind (her only singles "loss" as an adult)?
I agree with erwinlemi. Margaret won 11 Aussie Opens because noone wanted to play it. Also when she won the slam, the slams were only played on 2 surfaces - clay and grass PLUS you didn't have to win as many matches ie. there were no 3rd and 4th rounds, just 1st 2nd, quarters, semis and finals, so less matches were played. Just a few stats. to put things in perspective. BUT she was a great player all the same.
That is absolutely untrue--I disagree with your perspective and logic. For example, she bet players like Billie Jean King in the final of the 1969 Aussie open. And WHO exactly skipped the Aussie Open. You were probably not around back then, but I was. And since Harry Hopman produced well rounded players like Court who were capable of playing and winning all three events, exactly how many fewer matches did Margaret Court play than say someone who concentrated on singles.
Well in the earliest days there was not so much competition, as many competitors in the draw. But it is not fair to say that Court still would not have won as many Grand Slam titles. Who knows, with a little weight training, a new kind of racket, she might still have beaten the competition. She is from a different era. I think some people don't like her because of her conservative beliefs. To say the Aussie open was not a premier tennis tourney, is to say neither was the French.
This was Margaret Court's year. In 1970, she became the first woman during the open era and the second woman ever to win all four Grand Slam singles titles in the same calendar year. She had a great twist serve--she made it look easy--Ha it is not.
You may be correct to imply that it is indeed disgraceful that she might allow a 15 y.o. to whoop her. Evert also had some bad losses in her career, but that does not marginalize her achievements. Of course Court won 24 singles, 19 women's double, + 19 mixed doubles Slams. Chris only won 18 grand slam singles and 3 women's double and 0 mixed double grand slam titles during her career. Older than 15 perhaps, nonetheless, a Teenage Tracy Austin whooped Chris at her own game too.
but...Evert's career winloss record in singles matches of 1,309146 (.900) is the best of any professional player in tennis history. I dont care about the doubles-- which again were won mostly at the unimportant Aussie Opens. plus, NO ONE IN THE PAST THREE GENERATIONS OF PROs ever says "I wanna be like Margaret Court". Tracy Austin is a one-off. she played a Chrissie-style baseline game. Chrissie NEVER lost to a 15 year old or a 55 year old (Riggs) at her peak like Margaret Court. NEVER.
Your absolutely right, Chris Evert was the most wonderful female tennis player in the whole wide world and no one else should matter. You have decided for all us, thank you. Also, it is good to know that no one "wanna be like Margaret Court" and that doubles and the Australian Open in particular, are both, if not only something you personally don't care about, indeed entirely unworthy of mentioning or keeping track of in the name of professional tennis.
gimme a break. youre taking this too effing personal. im just responding to your comment about Mr. Over-Rated Smith-Court. Im entitled to my opinion. Im just pointing out that she won in Aussie alot because no one wanted to play it. AND she had much-publicized loss at her peak at the hands of Chris Evert & Bobby Riggs. She's decent. But not the Greatest.
No, you are not merely stating your opinion-- you're taking pop shots, for example "Mr. over-Rated Smith-Court", as stated above. Personally I am amused with your Wikipedia knowledge of tennis, but that is as far as it goes--you have failed to illicit much emotion in regard to your disrespectful lack of reverence.
Margaret Court has the best slams record. But Court was much more mentally fragile than Evert of Graf making her susceptible to silly losses. Graf loss to 16 year old Seles in a Slam, Evert got beaten by 15 year old Seles. The current generation of players barely remember Graf so a bit unrealistic expecting people born in the last forty years to remember Court playing! Hence she is not longer girls idol. But ask some 15 year olds of 1969 and answer'd be different. Court is not young here either.
Good comment, but I don't know if I agree with your assessment regarding Court as being mentally "fragile." Given her win-loss singles titles 1,177-106, her longevity in the game, and the fact she came back after having a child to win even more grand slam singles titles in both singles and doubles after 30. Graf never did this. As far as the losses to young players--I say so what? Changing of the guards--so what to lose to an up and coming player? It means little compared to their records.
I am actually finding your comments a little rude, so cut the insults if you can. These are all opinions, not university thesis's. I wasn't simply just refering to her losing to teenage players. Here in Australia this woman is a legend, she trained very hard (supposedly like men of the time) and was very quick. She herself says she suffered incredible nerves (caused by mental processing) during matches which affected her game and outcomes of matches.
If you had good things to say about Court why didn't you say so in your previous response. All I read into your comment is she was fragile, prone to silly losses, and not young here either. I am sick of people saying negative things about her. Most likely from a generation that can't remember her. But it is good to know that she is a legend in Australia. Here in America some of us are known to be rude, yes I can be and am often.
She was not well-liked in Australia during her early years because she kept dominating. Many have accused her of killing women's tennis in Australia. She herself was about to move to New Zealand due to her spat with the wife of Harry Hopman.
Court was a great tennis player but it does not surprise that she might stage a Red Herring event to avoid a conflict.Hey look we got a
RELIGIOUS ZEALOT TROLL
Posting here for the first time--never have seen that in a tennis video comment section. Too bad there are no Harlots or crotch shots for him to sniff up his nose at--I guess he will just have to regurgetate Margaret's sentiments regarding Martina's sexuality ZZZZzzzzzz...
I also disagree that Court was mentally fragile. Hell, she won 24 of the 29 GS singles finals she competed in! Not only that, she won 1170 singles to only 106 losses (92% career win/loss record). She also has the greatest singles title haul in history with 200 at last count (Navratilova has 167). So what is she was not prepared for Bobby Riggs - it was a circus event. In terms of her tennis records she is unmatched - so I don't think she was fragile. Just a few nerves at Wimb - but who didn't!
Tennisvideos33, Navratilova has the most number of singles titles at 167 and that's in every records books. It used to be Evert at 157 until Navratilova broke it in 1992.
Topjass69 - you know very well that the reason the record books have Navratilova as the singles title holder is that they don't have access to records prior to the open era. However, there are a group of tennis historians who have compliled the records of many of the past greats at WTA World in the Blast From the Past section. Here you will find that Court has 198 singles titles and 158 Womens Doubles titles. And her singles career win/loss is 1180-107.
No. You know very well that they did everything (from the days of Suzanne Lenglen and beyond) were recorded officially; from Bud Collins Tennis encyclopedia to even some books in the latter 70's. The tennis establishment is not stupid to declare that Martina's the winningness pro if facts haven't been checked. Who's the author or publisher of that record book which entails that 198 singles by Court? I'd love to read it.
Thats not correct at all. You just have to go the official WTA threads to see they have hardly any results prior to 1968, and they are only for the Slams. So they are missing critical info on King, Casals, Bueno, Court, Richey, Turner and the other greats from that generation. The records for that era are available on WTAworld - search via google. Then go to the Blast From The Past areas and you can search for different players and their records.
Ok. Thanks for the heads up. I'll go check it. But why didn't the establishment (from the WTA site, Hall of Fame, Bud Colllin's Tennis Encyclopedia, etc...) include all information from "Blast From The Past" before they finalized their facts? I have just read the revised edition of Bud Collin's Tennis Encyclopedia last week and I did see records ranging from Bill Tilden in the 20's & other notables before the 60's. Anyway, this could be a good inquiry to be sent to those authors.
Yes, and a book such as "Suzanne Lenglen - Tennis Idol of the Twenties" by Alan Little (available in the Wimbledon shop and probably elsewhere!) contains the records of all the singles, doubles and mixed matches Lenglen ever played. This includes her early matches from before the First World War. I was amazed that someone (or several people) were able to dig up such detailed records, but I suppose it just proves that most of the records are still there if people care to look for them.
Just so you know, Riggs would have beaten King as well had he been prepared. He became involved in media appearances and special events after the Court match and neglected practice. He didn't train much before the King match and gained a substantial amount of weight. As he said to his son after that match, "Son, I underestimated her." (That was from his son's book.) At age 55, he couldn't afford to let himself slip. The point is that there is no reason to consider Court's loss to him a bad one.
No, the 1974 French Open. When Evert had a absolute walk-through beating Helga Masthoff in the semi and then Olga Morovova in the final. OH PLEASE--so difficult?!?!?
Yes, I get the dates mixed up. 1970 was the year Chris Evert beat her in N.C. at 15. Despite that horrendous loss Court won all 4 Grand Slam single titles that year. They met again at the French Open in 1973, where Court beat Evert in the final. That year at Wimbledon, Evert, now pushing 19 beat Court in the semi-finals.
I don't even think Madge losing to Chrissie in 1970 was all that bad. She had just won the Grand Slam, with all the accompanying pressure. Evert was only playing selected events and even then was already a horror to play on clay. Before beating Court in 1970, she had also beaten Durr and in 1971 beat Virginia Wade (1968 US champion) and in Feb 1972 walloped BJK on clay 6-1 6-0. Madge did very well to beat her on clay as late as 1973.
When Margaret Court played she was one of the classiest champions of all time. She never made a fuss over bad line calls, and always said nice things about her opponents even in defeat. She was a real class act. Although she could get nervous in big moments, most of the time she composed herself enough to win, and was always a fighter in her matches. Her 1970 wimbledom victory over Billie Jean King by the scores of 14-12, 11-9, was one of the most entertaining women's matches ever.
reparata11 4 days ago
What a shame Margareth has such ridiculous morality...
furaskin 3 weeks ago
check out facebook "rainbows over MCA" for the truth about this homophobe.
michaelmouse1 1 month ago
both players wouldn´t be able to win one game in a two set match against a female player of the first hundred in the world of today...
waytomordor 1 month ago
@waytomordor there are so many technicalities to comparisons like that
cain2335 2 weeks ago
I love how they don't scream at all...
jzrnsk 2 months ago
i don't agree with margaret's view but she was one of the greatest players ever and i admit that..
gerhyuga 8 months ago
Too Margaret Court became a religious nutcase. Shes almost forgotten as an Australian sporting legend which is a shame because she was such a great player. Suppose she would prefer it that way. Suppose its her life and if she wants to be a bigoted homophobic narrow minded person. Definitely a shame.
bongo155 10 months ago 2
RF
I think the worst decision was to allow the rackets to be made of other materials. They should have never allowed this. They got away from the tradition of the game. Baseball didn't change their bats to Graphite, and they kept the integrity of the game.
The main reason to stop using wood rackets is for the environment. I can understand that.
They should have just kept using Wood Rackets. Again, if they didn't want to destroy trees for this, I understand and agree.
Tks
JimAsian1 1 year ago
Hey- they were using metal rackets in 1970?
spartyutube 1 year ago
white is nice but if your talking about balls of a natural color, it's either pink or brown ha ha
preciousjey 1 year ago
Martina is a lesbian!!!!. No wonder why she looks like a man.
golchhasanchit 1 year ago
@golchhasanchit i always said the same
simoncito7777 1 month ago
white tennis balls! lol
nelle069214 2 years ago
wtf lines not even straight
gabe228 2 years ago
Billie Jean was doing commentary (rather than playing) because she was recovering from major knee surgery. Some were doubting whether she could ever return to her previous level of play, but her best days were still ahead. She'd win several more grand slam singles (and doubles) titles - including a French Open singles win in 1972 (clay never being her favourite surface).
etienne818 2 years ago
$7,500 prize money!!!
In 2009 it is $1.6 million
smancez 2 years ago
Was that billie jean king? Did she always look like a Nerdy Man? I thought it was just later on.
mymmcom 2 years ago
She's a lesbian.
isselman2000 2 years ago
Did she take male hormones to make herself look like a nerdy man?
My friends a lesbian and she just looks like a normal woman. Why doe billie look like shes taken something? Was she ever tested?
mymmcom 2 years ago
and she is wearing the color blue.. what's ur point?
jesparza562 2 years ago
un clasico .....Court , genial
rugbier28 2 years ago
ahhhh hah classic serve and volleying :]
xaniimax 2 years ago
Rosie Casals was hot stuff. A self-taught child of working-class parents who came off the public courts (like BJK) with the most amazing shot selection and acrobatic style to play at the top of the game for decades and put tennis -- as well as womens tennis -- on the map. Thrilling to watch. An inspiration. I wish she had one at least a Grand Slam singles title in addition to her 12 doubles, but, hey, she accomplished so much! What a contribution.
billgordon37 3 years ago 2
BJK commentary: "That's called a passing shot"! WTF?
notthelastword 3 years ago
I know, that was for people new to tennis!
newmark401 2 years ago
Great tennis!!! Also very good and very generous commentary from BJK, who was not a great friend of Margaret Court!
sandrovic1970 3 years ago
sandrovic 1970 I didn't realise that BJK and Margaret Court had issues between them. Do you know why this was so?
MARKBPHARM 3 years ago
Both were at their peaks at the same time and it is hardly surprising there was a niggling rivalry, especially given BJK's ego! Court did not support BJK's independent women's tour, BJK responded by saying she should cos she is a feminist, after all it is Court who brings in the money in her family! Court said BJK was just jealous becos she, Madge had a family, while BJK had had an abortion! There was certainly no love lost between these two great players.
sandrovic1970 3 years ago
Thank you - I didn't realise this
MARKBPHARM 3 years ago
Court is a conseervative type; born again Christian, married into a politically prominent conservative family in West Australia, anti gay, etc
notthelastword 3 years ago
They had a sporting air about them back then. But conservative or not I think either of them would have liked to take that umpire's chair and stick it each other's eye.
SapersteinMD 3 years ago
Billie might have an ego but at least she was true to herself. Margaret did not support Billie's fight for women's equal prize money & yet, she benefited big time from the Virginia Slims tour (which Billie spearheaded along with Gladys & the gang).
topjazz69 3 years ago
I disagree with topjazz69 completely. The true beneficiary of the VS tour was Billie-Jean King herself. She played and won most of the events in the early years whilst the other top players continued with the regular tour eg. Court, Goolagong, Evert, Wade etc. Court didn't benefit much - she played one full season in 1973 and a few tournaments in 1975 after coming back from having her second child in 1974. So it was King was organised and benefitted from the VS tour.
tennisvideos33 2 years ago
Tennisvideos33, That's beside the point. Court still benefited especially in 1973 when she had the most prize money for women's. The point that I was trying to drive is that Court never supported King & the early proponents of equal prize money. She was even quoted saying "I don't want any part of the movement". Ironically, she played & kept her prize money when equal prize started its realization. She left Billie do the campaigns & protests & yet, she benefited in the end.
topjazz69 2 years ago
topjazz69 - Margaret Court was pregnant in 1971 and out for most of 1972 when the Slims tour started. So how could she support it anyway? And who cares that she didn't. Only a dozen or so women supported the VS tour at the beginning - why don't you attack all the others, including Evert, Wade, Goolagong etc. None of them could read the stars and predict the way tennis was to go, so they were following the traditional path and supporting the normal tour - what's wrong with that???????
tennisvideos33 2 years ago
I didn't attack Evert because at least she was honest when she said that "My father thought that Billie Jean's personality is too strong for my own good in the beginning. But in the end, both tours (Virginia & the USTA's) did well". Whereas Court's response that "Oh, women's lib, equality isn't really my cup of tea" was hypocritical. And that's not the last time that Court said something hypocritical. In '90, as Martina won #9 Wim., she said that Martina isn't a good role model coz she's gay.
topjazz69 2 years ago
It's not hypocritical at all. The problem is that you don't know how to apply reason. And Court was right: Navratilova is a horrible role model. Lesbianism is a grave sin.
OutlanderWarrior 2 years ago
OutlanderWarrior, you are the problem. Just because your blinded by your "organized religion" you assumed that the lesbian Martina is a bad role model. Martina's "work ethic" & "pursuit of excellence" are both great qualities for young people, expecially young aspiring women athletes. She never said to "imitate" her lifestyle. She's only being honest about who she is. You on the other hand was quick to "judge" Martina. Didn't your "God" say anything about casting the first stone?
topjazz69 2 years ago 8
Well, you're blinded by the spirit of the age and your secular values. See how easy that is? People don't have to think or engage in intellectual debate when they simply dismiss a point with fashionable stereotypes. As for judging, is this the same topjazz who wrote, "OutlanderWarrior, you are the problem"? That's awfully judgmental of you. As C.S. Lewis once said, "Their scepticism about values is only on the surface; it's for use on other people's values. As far as the values current in their
OutlanderWarrior 2 years ago
own set go, they're not nearly sceptical enough." If you preach non-judgmentalism as part of your relativistic creed, practice it! As for me, I don't preach it. My creed is very realistic. It acknowledges that everyone makes judgments (as you judged me). The key is to make the correct ones. Oh, just so you know - because I realize your set loves quoting the few Bible passages you know when you think it helps your cause - the New Testament also says, "Judge with righteous judgment."
OutlanderWarrior 2 years ago
Book of Ruth, dude.
Ariamaluum 2 years ago
Actually, it's John 7:24, dude. But perhaps there's something similar in the OT that confused you.
OutlanderWarrior 2 years ago
I don't care about John. I'm talking about Book of Ruth.
Ariamaluum 2 years ago
I don't care about the Book of Ruth. I'm talking about John.
OutlanderWarrior 2 years ago
The question becomes who can become Christians. Certainly not Gentiles?
Ariamaluum 2 years ago
It's not a tough question for me. I'm a member of the one true church, the Catholic Church. She wrote the Bible and safeguarded it, and she is charged with the task of interpreting it. Anyone can become a Christian.
OutlanderWarrior 2 years ago
Ironic that Margaret Court left Catholicism due to the fact that she couldn't be a pastor and that she got kicked out of Catholic school for being a rebel. One the nuns told that she must write with her right instead of her left.
Ariamaluum 2 years ago
It's always a shame when someone drifts from truth. Having said that, I prefer that people leave rather than be pretenders. And as far as making decisions based on what some nun said goes, that's like deciding to pollute because some environmentalist once gave you stupid advice.
OutlanderWarrior 2 years ago
Try taking on Allen Ginsburg and see what you come out.
Ariamaluum 2 years ago
Ginsburg is a punk. I'd eat him for breakfast.
OutlanderWarrior 2 years ago
When Renee Richard applied to play in the women's tournament in 75 U.S. Open, the tournament says no. Who she got, Roy Cohn. It seems like your gay bashing on Gentile ones than Jewish ones.
Ariamaluum 2 years ago
OK, now you're descending into illiteracy and incoherence. Maybe someone on the board can translate for the rest of us, though.
OutlanderWarrior 2 years ago
Easy. You go to have conviction of Jesus to stand up to those two. You just don't have it. You are just a Gentile who can only bully other Gentiles.
Ariamaluum 2 years ago
A Gentile? Hey, don't be jealous because you're not. No one is perfect.
OutlanderWarrior 2 years ago
As Roy Cohn can attest.
Ariamaluum 2 years ago
Comment removed
vgoodperson23 2 years ago
"Ariamaluum" I have not seen that name for some time, Renee Richards. Now 74- last heard- Dr. R.R. is still practicing medicine in N.Y. In 2000 she was inducted into the tennis hall of fame. I have spoken with her in the past. A conservative person. She calls the 2004 decision of I.O.C. which allows transsexuals to compete, "...a stupid decision." Explaining that when she sued to play at the U.S. Open, she was 40, and she wasn't going to be "competitve" against top players. Go figure?
vgoodperson23 2 years ago
Comment removed
vgoodperson23 2 years ago
Well, yes, you're here, but it's still not entirely true. I mean, I'm here, after all.
OutlanderWarrior 2 years ago
Comment removed
vgoodperson23 2 years ago
@topjazz69, Martina Navratilova must be the greatest thing to happen to sport.
I mean a grand slam box set, that is a great.
1444 wins, 227 losses in singles, 747-143 in doubles, 18 grand slam singles, 31 doubles, 167 singles titles, 177 doubles and 15 mixed.
Tennis is thankful for her existence.
I'm not sure if this is a compliment but she's the feminine Jimmy Connors in terms of longevity and indefatigability.
APH1991 1 year ago
Jiminy effing Cricket. What kind of role model are you? Don't you know these kinds of comments potentiate violence and hatred. Our good Bible says all sins are equal in the eyes of the Lord. Don't you think it is about time you "caught up with the spirit of the age," because, hey you are living and sinning in it. To use your own style of circular reasoning I say "You are a hypocrite, because you are."
vgoodperson23 2 years ago
Yes, well, anytime you criticize anyone it can evoke hatred and incite violence. Perhaps we should repeal the First Amendment.
And since, according to you, "all sins are equal in the eyes of the Lord," your sins must be as severe as mine. So, then what kind of a role model are you? Who are you to criticize my character, when, based on your own theology, you must be just as bad?
OutlanderWarrior 2 years ago
Your projection here is ridiculous and pathetic.
vgoodperson23 2 years ago
Your projection here is ridiculous and pathetic.
OutlanderWarrior 2 years ago
Is that the same tennis court on which Molla Mallory played her controversial second-round singles match against Suzanne Lenglen at the US Nationals in 1921, with Suzanne retiring ill when 2-6, 0-30 behind (her only singles "loss" as an adult)?
newmark401 3 years ago
I agree with erwinlemi. Margaret won 11 Aussie Opens because noone wanted to play it. Also when she won the slam, the slams were only played on 2 surfaces - clay and grass PLUS you didn't have to win as many matches ie. there were no 3rd and 4th rounds, just 1st 2nd, quarters, semis and finals, so less matches were played. Just a few stats. to put things in perspective. BUT she was a great player all the same.
craigferris1 3 years ago
That is absolutely untrue--I disagree with your perspective and logic. For example, she bet players like Billie Jean King in the final of the 1969 Aussie open. And WHO exactly skipped the Aussie Open. You were probably not around back then, but I was. And since Harry Hopman produced well rounded players like Court who were capable of playing and winning all three events, exactly how many fewer matches did Margaret Court play than say someone who concentrated on singles.
vgoodperson23 3 years ago
Well in the earliest days there was not so much competition, as many competitors in the draw. But it is not fair to say that Court still would not have won as many Grand Slam titles. Who knows, with a little weight training, a new kind of racket, she might still have beaten the competition. She is from a different era. I think some people don't like her because of her conservative beliefs. To say the Aussie open was not a premier tennis tourney, is to say neither was the French.
BeemerryNYC 3 years ago
With her height, her power, her short hair...she reminds me of Lindsay Davenport.
latino6604 3 years ago
Margaret said she was 5'9. Media says 5'11 or even 6'1. Lindsay is 6'3.
Ariamaluum 3 years ago
Well whatever her height, she was a formidable athelete and looks tall compared to Casals. Either way, something about her reminds of me Davenport :)
latino6604 3 years ago
Very historic clip! Great stuff!
Lava1964 3 years ago
This was Margaret Court's year. In 1970, she became the first woman during the open era and the second woman ever to win all four Grand Slam singles titles in the same calendar year. She had a great twist serve--she made it look easy--Ha it is not.
vgoodperson23 3 years ago
AND she lost to a 15-year old AFTER winning the Grand Slam at a clay court tournament. who was that kid? Chris Evert.
erwinlemi 3 years ago
Well, whatever but she beat Chris Evert on clay at the French Open on CLAY in 1973 6-7,7-6, 6-4.
vgoodperson23 3 years ago
Steffi Graf never lost to a 15 year old after winning the Slam. Neither did Mo Connolly, Rod Laver or Don Budge. haha!
erwinlemi 3 years ago
You may be correct to imply that it is indeed disgraceful that she might allow a 15 y.o. to whoop her. Evert also had some bad losses in her career, but that does not marginalize her achievements. Of course Court won 24 singles, 19 women's double, + 19 mixed doubles Slams. Chris only won 18 grand slam singles and 3 women's double and 0 mixed double grand slam titles during her career. Older than 15 perhaps, nonetheless, a Teenage Tracy Austin whooped Chris at her own game too.
vgoodperson23 3 years ago
but...Evert's career winloss record in singles matches of 1,309146 (.900) is the best of any professional player in tennis history. I dont care about the doubles-- which again were won mostly at the unimportant Aussie Opens. plus, NO ONE IN THE PAST THREE GENERATIONS OF PROs ever says "I wanna be like Margaret Court". Tracy Austin is a one-off. she played a Chrissie-style baseline game. Chrissie NEVER lost to a 15 year old or a 55 year old (Riggs) at her peak like Margaret Court. NEVER.
erwinlemi 3 years ago
Your absolutely right, Chris Evert was the most wonderful female tennis player in the whole wide world and no one else should matter. You have decided for all us, thank you. Also, it is good to know that no one "wanna be like Margaret Court" and that doubles and the Australian Open in particular, are both, if not only something you personally don't care about, indeed entirely unworthy of mentioning or keeping track of in the name of professional tennis.
vgoodperson23 3 years ago
gimme a break. youre taking this too effing personal. im just responding to your comment about Mr. Over-Rated Smith-Court. Im entitled to my opinion. Im just pointing out that she won in Aussie alot because no one wanted to play it. AND she had much-publicized loss at her peak at the hands of Chris Evert & Bobby Riggs. She's decent. But not the Greatest.
erwinlemi 3 years ago
No, you are not merely stating your opinion-- you're taking pop shots, for example "Mr. over-Rated Smith-Court", as stated above. Personally I am amused with your Wikipedia knowledge of tennis, but that is as far as it goes--you have failed to illicit much emotion in regard to your disrespectful lack of reverence.
vgoodperson23 3 years ago
Margaret Court has the best slams record. But Court was much more mentally fragile than Evert of Graf making her susceptible to silly losses. Graf loss to 16 year old Seles in a Slam, Evert got beaten by 15 year old Seles. The current generation of players barely remember Graf so a bit unrealistic expecting people born in the last forty years to remember Court playing! Hence she is not longer girls idol. But ask some 15 year olds of 1969 and answer'd be different. Court is not young here either.
jordanaus75 3 years ago
Good comment, but I don't know if I agree with your assessment regarding Court as being mentally "fragile." Given her win-loss singles titles 1,177-106, her longevity in the game, and the fact she came back after having a child to win even more grand slam singles titles in both singles and doubles after 30. Graf never did this. As far as the losses to young players--I say so what? Changing of the guards--so what to lose to an up and coming player? It means little compared to their records.
vgoodperson23 3 years ago
Comment removed
vgoodperson23 3 years ago
I am actually finding your comments a little rude, so cut the insults if you can. These are all opinions, not university thesis's. I wasn't simply just refering to her losing to teenage players. Here in Australia this woman is a legend, she trained very hard (supposedly like men of the time) and was very quick. She herself says she suffered incredible nerves (caused by mental processing) during matches which affected her game and outcomes of matches.
jordanaus75 3 years ago
If you had good things to say about Court why didn't you say so in your previous response. All I read into your comment is she was fragile, prone to silly losses, and not young here either. I am sick of people saying negative things about her. Most likely from a generation that can't remember her. But it is good to know that she is a legend in Australia. Here in America some of us are known to be rude, yes I can be and am often.
vgoodperson23 3 years ago
She was not well-liked in Australia during her early years because she kept dominating. Many have accused her of killing women's tennis in Australia. She herself was about to move to New Zealand due to her spat with the wife of Harry Hopman.
Ariamaluum 2 years ago
Court was a great tennis player but it does not surprise that she might stage a Red Herring event to avoid a conflict.Hey look we got a
RELIGIOUS ZEALOT TROLL
Posting here for the first time--never have seen that in a tennis video comment section. Too bad there are no Harlots or crotch shots for him to sniff up his nose at--I guess he will just have to regurgetate Margaret's sentiments regarding Martina's sexuality ZZZZzzzzzz...
vgoodperson23 2 years ago
I also disagree that Court was mentally fragile. Hell, she won 24 of the 29 GS singles finals she competed in! Not only that, she won 1170 singles to only 106 losses (92% career win/loss record). She also has the greatest singles title haul in history with 200 at last count (Navratilova has 167). So what is she was not prepared for Bobby Riggs - it was a circus event. In terms of her tennis records she is unmatched - so I don't think she was fragile. Just a few nerves at Wimb - but who didn't!
tennisvideos33 2 years ago
Tennisvideos33, Navratilova has the most number of singles titles at 167 and that's in every records books. It used to be Evert at 157 until Navratilova broke it in 1992.
topjazz69 2 years ago
Topjass69 - you know very well that the reason the record books have Navratilova as the singles title holder is that they don't have access to records prior to the open era. However, there are a group of tennis historians who have compliled the records of many of the past greats at WTA World in the Blast From the Past section. Here you will find that Court has 198 singles titles and 158 Womens Doubles titles. And her singles career win/loss is 1180-107.
tennisvideos33 2 years ago
No. You know very well that they did everything (from the days of Suzanne Lenglen and beyond) were recorded officially; from Bud Collins Tennis encyclopedia to even some books in the latter 70's. The tennis establishment is not stupid to declare that Martina's the winningness pro if facts haven't been checked. Who's the author or publisher of that record book which entails that 198 singles by Court? I'd love to read it.
topjazz69 2 years ago
Thats not correct at all. You just have to go the official WTA threads to see they have hardly any results prior to 1968, and they are only for the Slams. So they are missing critical info on King, Casals, Bueno, Court, Richey, Turner and the other greats from that generation. The records for that era are available on WTAworld - search via google. Then go to the Blast From The Past areas and you can search for different players and their records.
tennisvideos37 2 years ago
topjazz69 - the website is tennisforum . com and then you go to Blast From The Past section (down the bottom) to find all the past players records
tennisvideos37 2 years ago
Ok. Thanks for the heads up. I'll go check it. But why didn't the establishment (from the WTA site, Hall of Fame, Bud Colllin's Tennis Encyclopedia, etc...) include all information from "Blast From The Past" before they finalized their facts? I have just read the revised edition of Bud Collin's Tennis Encyclopedia last week and I did see records ranging from Bill Tilden in the 20's & other notables before the 60's. Anyway, this could be a good inquiry to be sent to those authors.
topjazz69 2 years ago
Even today, the best 50-something men can beat the best women (if they're in shape).
OutlanderWarrior 2 years ago
Yes, and a book such as "Suzanne Lenglen - Tennis Idol of the Twenties" by Alan Little (available in the Wimbledon shop and probably elsewhere!) contains the records of all the singles, doubles and mixed matches Lenglen ever played. This includes her early matches from before the First World War. I was amazed that someone (or several people) were able to dig up such detailed records, but I suppose it just proves that most of the records are still there if people care to look for them.
newmark401 2 years ago
Just so you know, Riggs would have beaten King as well had he been prepared. He became involved in media appearances and special events after the Court match and neglected practice. He didn't train much before the King match and gained a substantial amount of weight. As he said to his son after that match, "Son, I underestimated her." (That was from his son's book.) At age 55, he couldn't afford to let himself slip. The point is that there is no reason to consider Court's loss to him a bad one.
OutlanderWarrior 2 years ago
the 1973 French Open.
Ariamaluum 3 years ago
No, the 1974 French Open. When Evert had a absolute walk-through beating Helga Masthoff in the semi and then Olga Morovova in the final. OH PLEASE--so difficult?!?!?
vgoodperson23 3 years ago
No, the 1973 French Open where Margaret beat Chris on her own surface.
Ariamaluum 3 years ago
Yes, I get the dates mixed up. 1970 was the year Chris Evert beat her in N.C. at 15. Despite that horrendous loss Court won all 4 Grand Slam single titles that year. They met again at the French Open in 1973, where Court beat Evert in the final. That year at Wimbledon, Evert, now pushing 19 beat Court in the semi-finals.
vgoodperson23 3 years ago
I don't even think Madge losing to Chrissie in 1970 was all that bad. She had just won the Grand Slam, with all the accompanying pressure. Evert was only playing selected events and even then was already a horror to play on clay. Before beating Court in 1970, she had also beaten Durr and in 1971 beat Virginia Wade (1968 US champion) and in Feb 1972 walloped BJK on clay 6-1 6-0. Madge did very well to beat her on clay as late as 1973.
sandrovic1970 3 years ago
just the start of the changing of the guard to the next champion really, like chrissie was walloped the last 7 times she played Steffi.
justnatural 3 years ago
I liked better when the US open was played on grass.
EugenioJorge 3 years ago
I'm sure Venus Williams shares your sentiment.
Ariamaluum 3 years ago
Rosie was amazing. One of my favorite players ever. Would be great to see footage of her winning in singles.
billgordon37 3 years ago