Tennis - 1983 US Ladies Singles Final

[@zeddeka]

Martina hugely dominant in 1983 but it's often forgotten that Chris was playing to win the non calendar grand slam at Wimbledon 1983. She won 3 consecutive grand slams - 1982 US Open, 1982 Australian Open (then held in December) and the 1983 French Open. Martina then won 6 consecutive grand slams from Wimbledon 1983 until the 1984 US Open.

[@ProBloggerWorld]

One remark: winning a Grand Slam means winning all major championships in one calendar year. That’s why I find your statement a bit misleading.

[@JSmith-zr2ve]

@@ProBloggerWorldAnd that’s why they said non calendar grand glam.

[@kalewolfecheng-doc7829]

Thanks for posting this match!

[@dominiksapara8985]

Thank you very much and we look forward to more beautiful tennis archives, especially I wish good health to you. Best regards Dominik :)

[@michaelbla]

thank you for posting!

[@pjesf]

It took Chris 5 consecutive defeats to realize she had to do something new against Austin and I remember back in the day wondering why she didn’t react to Martina sooner. I’ve always been a big fan of Chris’ so this was a painful period to witness. Hats off to Martina though - she fully committed herself to becoming what everyone thought she could be. I have a great deal of admiration for her.

[@eastfiftyseven]

This was a brutal match to watch , Martina had Chris under her thumb at this stage. But that started to change in ‘85

[@michaelparbatule]

R u absolutely sure

[@burninglightfire]

It started even at Wimbledon 1984. Much closer matches from then on

[@martinpascoe7678]

but strangely never at Wimbledon after 1980

[@martinpascoe7678]

but strangely never at Wimbledon after 1980

[@gregmcfarnon1140]

​@@martinpascoe7678She didn't have the game to beat Martina on grass.

[@bryanbradford4708]

Wow Chris was still playing with a wood racket compared to Martina graphite., disadvantage right off the jump. Listen to the sound of the hits.

[@martinpascoe7678]

OH WHAT RUBBISH, give Martina her dues m8

[@martinpascoe7678]

many would say that a two fisted backhand is somewhat of an advantage, not me, I see it as a bit of a two-way thing, it has its negatives , especially on grass

[@zeddeka]

Interesting to see how tight and nervous Martina got in that second set, no doubt desperate to win after all the horror stories she'd had at the US Open. If Chris has been in a bit better form, she might have really been able to take advantage of that.

[@martinpascoe7678]

sorry but she looks in pretty good shape right here !

[@zeddeka]

​@@martinpascoe7678I said form, not shape. They're different things.

[@tomschmitz-dj1fg]

besides the obvious, even the SOUND of the rackets sound different.. Evert's racket sounds like a badminton racket, no punch at all....As most agree, she stayed with the wood far too long. It was like 2 different sports being played on the opposite side of the court. Although Evert was able to take Martina to 3 sets a short time earlier at the Canadian open...Congrats To Martina winning her first U.S. Open after triumphing in all of the other slams...

[@tomschmitz-dj1fg]

@tobiasisback4605 NO, it's not "overstated" by her fans. The Martina of 1983 was a whole different player from the Martina of even a year earlier. Evert won the french in 83 without having to play Martina and that was the opponent she needed to focus on. As far as the 12-7 head to head of Martina over Evert in their last years of competing against each other, that head to head has to be taken into context. Martina won more during that time because the two played on surfaces that favored Martina more. In actuality, the most "neutral" surface is not grass, or clay or indoor carpet, but a hard court and Evert had the 3 to 2 edge on that surface from 1985 to 1988...

[@tomschmitz-dj1fg]

@tobiasisback4605 I'm not immune to facts, I'm just stating other facts, that you don't want to listen to. The fact remains in the ENTIRETY of their rivalry, the vast majority of matches WERE on surfaces that favored martina Especially indoor carpet and grass. They played 40 matches on those 2 surfaces compared to only 13 matches on har-tru and clay... And what I said about the remaining matches that Martina led 12-7 holds true to this stat. Martina won on the fast surfaces, Evert won on the slower surfaces and they played more of those 19 matches on surfaces that favored Martina, hence her head to head lead. Whether the surface issue is martina's fault is not in question, it's NOT her fault, but the truth remains.

[@tomschmitz-dj1fg]

@tobiasisback4605 You seemingly are pathologically stubborn in your conclusions. Everything you stated is true, but what I stated is also true. Their rivalry isn't simply numbers, it's context and nuance. The fact is as you stated they played on the surfaces that were played on most of the time, and the surface they played on MOST of the time favored Martina, indoor carpet and gass.. BOTH can be true, this is what I mean by taking everything into context. and yes, this includes their matches fro 1985 to 1988...they were tied 8 to 8 on hard courts by the way and in the breakdown of their 80 matches ONLY 30 of those matches were played on clay and hard court, the other 50 were played on indoor carpet and grass, hence the advantage to Martina. END OF STORY.....

[@tomschmitz-dj1fg]

@tobiasisback4605 1) EVERYONE KNOWS that surfaces DO favor certain players and certain styles, if they didn't favor or the surfaces didn't matter, why then would they have to "adapt" their games at all then??? 2) It is you who are using simpleton black and white facts, when those who know tennis, know that every fact while fact also had context to said facts. Martina was better than Evert on 2 surfaces, evert was better on one and the most neutral of surfaces that being hard court they were tied 8 to 8. 3) It is pretty much agreed opinion, that if Evert had switched to graphite earlier and focused on everything she eventually did do to compete with Martina earlier, that Martina would never have won those 13 matches in a row against her, which is huge in the head to head record. Sorry but every single stat, fact, record in Tennis has/had context to it. I do not prescribe to the black and white argument that you do. What's next? Court won those 24 grand slams with those 11 Aussie wins that don't have context? Serena is AUTOMATICALLY the greatest of all time because she is 2nd to court in the grand slam count (most in the open era) and that is ALL THAT IS NEEDED (nothing else, no other stats, records, etc?) to proclaim her as the GOAT? NO!...Both Martina and Chris, would have had way more than 18 slams singles a piece if they had played all 4 grand slams every single year! Examples of context for you! Sure, one can say these examples are "what if's" and "could of's" but they are not baseless..Ciao...

[@davidavila7234]

The ampayer was blind. One Shoot in 4:22 of Martina was good ball.

[@EXCEDRIN10]

Martina is the GOAT

[@kamint2258]

yes👍️✨✨

[@nordna]

ABSOLUTELY! Not even a debate

[@DouglasMcCulley]

mentioned the whole Evert clan the first/only time they showed them- showed Nancy 4 times and never said her name.

[@mikebatlinh6650]

Martina wasnt that good in this tournament. I dont know how she won she certainly played with a huge racquet which gave her an unfair advantage.

[@bb1111116]

There is nothing unfair by playing with a graphite racket.

[@Apollo19713]

​@@bb1111116 Unless you are unaware of the number of significant advantages that a graphite racket gives a player over one using a wooden racket, then I would say you are not being honest.

[@bb1111116]

@@Apollo19713 ; The key word is “unfair”. It is not unfair to use the equipment which is allowed by the rules. * Of course there are advantages to using a graphite racket. That’s why I switched from a wooden racket to a graphite racket in the early 80s. So did McEnroe and every other top professional tennis pro in the 80s except for Borg. And even Bjorn switched in the 90s. - But again, using a graphite racket is not an UNFAIR advantage and that is an HONEST FACT.

[@Apollo19713]

​@@bb1111116 It's not against the rules, but that doesn't change the objective facts about the considerable advantages a player with a graphite racket has playing an opponent with a wooden racket. In any sporting contest the outcome is supposed to be due to the sporting talents of the winner on the day, and not because one competitor has much better equipment which gives them a number of significant unfair advantages.

[@bb1111116]

​@@Apollo19713 wrote; *”the considerable advantages a player with a graphite racket”* * Yes, there is an advantage using a graphite racket over a wooden racket. I wrote *”there are advantages to using a graphite racket.”* ​ @Apollo19713 wrote; *”In any sporting contest the outcome is supposed to be due to the sporting talents of the winner on the day”* * Which includes sports equipment within the rules in various sporting events from rackets, shoes, skis, bowling balls, golf clubs/balls, baseball gloves, etc. Better equipment within the rules can help the athlete in competition. That is an obvious fact. ​ @Apollo19713 wrote; *”not because one competitor has much better equipment”* * You have some illusion that if a pro athlete enters competition with inferior equipment, to keep things “fair” iyo, that all the other athletes in that event have to downgrade their equipment. It’s a silly argument. For instance, when Borg tried a comeback in the early 90s with a wooden racket, your fantasy thinking believes that all the male pro tennis players who played Borg had to switch to wooden rackets to keep things “fair” iyo. Your argument about better equipment within the rules being unfair is literally nonsense.

[@jl3322]

Chris was always so friendly to Martina who never returned the favor. Now Martina does reality TV with her 2nd or 3rd wife? One has class and the other lives in a cesspool of filth.

[@MrHorowitzlover]

How many men's hearts Ms Evert broke. True class, indeed.

[@scarysarie7645]

Ummm, they are really close friends. These comments are a joke.

[@zeddeka]

You mentally ill?

[@jl3322]

Martina was definitely the 1st trans tennis player.

[@scarysarie7645]

No, she was the first female tennis player to work on her fitness and strength training to play the level of tennis she did. She was lean and muscular. There is nothing wrong with how she looks. Even today after cancer battles she is in great shape. Stop judging women by looks and body types. Super ignorant. It's not like a person has control over their genetics.

[@martinpascoe7678]

consider yourself reported