some posts are so stupid, that i cant pass them by. billie jean got her most notoriety from beating an old man ? that is just about the dumbest comment i have seen in a long time. why in the heck do you suppose that she was playing him, in the first place ?

she won 12 Grand Slam singles titles, 16 Grand Slam women's doubles titles, and 11 Grand Slam mixed doubles titles. this is where her notoriety comes from - geesh !!!

she and margaret court ruled tennis for quite awhile. chris evert was not as good, that is for sure. she had no net game.

you cant really compare different people from different eras. i read another stupid comment in the laver thread, about the players of that era not being as good as the ones of today.

the major change in any sport is not the ability of the athletes. we have been around for many millions of years. our athletic ability does not change in a generation. what does change is the equipment. that is really true in the game of tennis.

most people making reviews have never played with a wooden racket. you simply cant compare that with todays rackets. there is so much difference that the best high school players of today could beat the best pros from the 60s if the high schooler got to play with a racket from today, and the pro had to play with a wooden racket.

a wooden racket could not generate anywhere near the pace, and would have a hard time dealing with a ball going as fast as today. you had to hit in the exact center of a wooden racket, or you would get an off-hit ball. the complete racket face of today is a sweet spot.

as i said, there simply is no comparison at all. you always have to look at players in the same time frame. margaret court is the only player in the same league as billie jean, for that time. margaret had a lot more size. billie jean was better, mentally.