which of these players who reached the Wimbledon finals, really should have won the title?

Henin-really should have won it last year IMO. In 2001 her only ray of light was a Venus wobble in the second set, but apart from that she was never in the contest. However, last year, she surprised me by playing tighter than Momo, even when she won the first set she never looked comfortable. And playing tighter than Momo will never win you a match.

Sanchez had her best shot in 1995, winning the first set quite easily. This stirred Steffi into action though and she upped the pace winning the 2nd. Sanchez threw everything at Grafs backhand in the third, with great success, but there was a feeling of inevitability about Graf, breaking Sanchez in the 11th game (with a Becker like diving volley en route) to win the match. She made the final again the year later but was routinely dismissed by Graf.

Seles was dominating the circuit in 1992, winning AO and FO before reaching the wimbledon final, beating Navratilova in the semis. However, her magical play was non existant in the final when she bowed down to the wta bullies and stifled her grunts, resulting imo in a stifled performance. Whether she would have beaten Steffi when playing her natural game we will never know.

Sabatini reached the final in 1991, losing to Graf 8-6 in the final set. I cant remember much about the match except she served for the match twice (i think). Im not sure if she actually choked (she had already beaten Graf in a slam final) or whether Grafs fighting qualities won through.

Mandlikova reached 2 Wimbledon finals, losing both relatively easy to Evert then Navratilova, although she did win at the other 3 slams so just missing out on the career slam.

Ive included Stove because i heard she was born a man which should have easily have given her the advantage over Wadee :lol:

For me it it's Seles. She played terribly when she lost to Graf in the final, but had Hamburg not have happened I think she would have picked up 1 or 2 SW19 titles at least.

Henin still has a great chance going forward to win it still.

No surprise who my vote goes to.Sanchez shouldve won in 1995. I have that match on dvd and that penultimate game always makes me so sad coz thats where Sanchez had her wind knocked out!

I've put Seles since Henin still has a chance of winning it.

I know ASV got closer to winning it but I just feel that if Seles had played fully fit over the 1993-6 period she would have won it

I voted for Seles also, even though I don't feel she would've won that 1992 Final even if she played her best.

I still think like GS2, that she would've managed it once in the 1993-1996 period if she played, she would've had a great shot in 1994, with Steffi being knocked out and also in 1993 when Steffi wasn't at her best still.

I heard Sabatini did a little bit of a choke job in the 1991 final, which isn't shocking :lol: I must get that match on DVD as it sounds good :)

Betty Stove ha ha....no Betty shouldn't have won. Stove should have lost to Sue Barker in the SF (Barker was the form player of Wimbledon 1977) and Sue should have gone onto to face Virginia (who Sue had a leading H2H against that year)....but the knowledge that she was the favourite was too much for Sue and she crumbled, thus allowing Stove to go through....

ASV had a great chance in 1994 when graf went out and as reigning RG champion, people expected her to be the favourite. However she lost to Garrison in the fourth round.........

However her real, legit chance was that 95 final. The 20 minute penultimate game really was to prove the winner. Graf proved mentally stronger when it really mattered, but it was sublime tennis from the spaniard.

Seles was so close in 92. Fought past Navratilova in the semis, but was so inhibited by Navratilova's anti-grunt campaign which really supressed Seles, and effectively her title shot. Graf played a great match though, moving probably better than ever on grass at that stage.

If it wasnt for the stabbing, i could've envisaged a Wimby title, but i dont think she would've had a string of them like graf. graf was always the better player on grass, movement wise anyway and had a more all-rounded game.

mandlikova led early on against Navratilova in the 86 final. Was 5-2 up in the first, before losing 6-7 3-6 to the legend. Never really played her superb attacking game well enough at Wimbledon compared to the other GS's.

Henin had a great chance against mauresmo last year, but after the first set, never looked liked really getting back in the match again, broken early in the last two sets. Against Venus, she was beaten in 68 minutes, didnt have the experience to challenge Venus in the final set after a superlative second set.

Betty Stove lost all her Wimby finals that year in 1977 :unsure: roflmao

I was undecided between Justine and Hana and finally gave my vote for Mandalikova. If I remember correctly, her game was well quipped for wimbledon and I thought given the attacking game she has she should have won it. Unfortunately she was in an era graced by such a legend as Navartilova. Again I feel the same about Justine and she should have won i last year. I really think she is a better player at wimbledon than Amelie. She has a better all court game and is a better volleyer than Momo , I think.

Mandlikova beat Martina in the Aussi Open Final on grass so clearly could beat anyone on the surface on her day. Such a talent :)

It's interesting as Mandlikova went on record saying she preferred playing Navratilova to Evert, as she found Evert harder to beat.