What's the argument for Serena? She doesn't have the most match wins in the women's game. Her longevity and accomplishments and titles will never come close to touching Martina N's. Serena's argument is slams and nothing else.
Evert has a ridiculous 52! Slam semifinals. Fifty TWO. Serena has just 27!
This is impressive but quality vs quantity argument can be used here. 52 SFs but only 18 slams wins?? Meanwhile Serena has 27 SFs and has won 20.
Martina has 317 slam match wins. Serena's closer here, with 273.
Martina wins here BUT you could argue Serena has less wins but more titles. I know which record I would take here.
Martina has 167 total titles. Evert, 157. Graf, 107. Serena? A mighty 64 titles.
Martina, 239 finals. Evert, 230. Serena doesn't even have the finals record, that's Davenport, who has 93.
Sorry but whose winning 150+ titles anytime soon in this era or any upcoming era? As great and consistent as Roger is he's still behind Martina by 82 titles, 72 behind Evert, and a bit behind Graf, Connors and Lendl. Also, Serena has 67 titles and is not done yet. I expect her to end up around 75-80 titles which isn't bad at all consider the differences in the game the last few decades.
Total matches won? Where's Serena? Top 10? Yep. Ringing in at 7. Martina? 1442, 2x what Serena has. Followed by, (guess who) Evert and Graf. Davenport, Wade, Aranxa, and Conchita all won more matches than Serena.
Again basically the same argument. Whose winning 1442 matches anytime soon? She's likely to pass Davenport and co. since she the dominant #1 at 715 wins so she'll only be behind Martina, Evert, and Steffi which is fine given context around eras.
Does Serena own a surface yet? Nope. Even on hardcourts, Davenport has more wins.
Sorry but how does having 12 hardcourt slam wins equate to not owning a surface? To be brutally honest, Davenport just played more tournaments. It's not like her winning % is so far above Serena's to even have merit.
Winning percentage? Smith-Court, natch. Followed by Evert, Graf, Martina. Number 5? Serena.
This is the one stat where Serena is lacking. But still not too far away.
Surface winning percentage? Clay? Evert, then Graf. Hard? Graf, then Evert, Martina and Serena. Grass? Martina, then Evert.
Fair enough. But those HC slam wins are pretty impressive if you ask me.
What about weeks number 1? Graf. Then Martina and Evert.
Serena is at 244 weeks at #1 which is only 16 weeks from Evert's 260 weeks. I'll be shocked if Serena loses the #1 ranking in the next four months to not pass Evert. She also has an outside chance to get to 300 weeks if she keeps the ranking for another year which is very possible. She's right up there with the rest of them in this stat.
So, in reality - the Roger Federer of the WTA is Steffi Graf. Weeks at number 1 and the slam record.
Actually both of our arguments prove that there's no true one GOAT. Court's, Serena's, Martina's, Moody's, and Evert's records can all be argued against one another. What is clear is that Serena has reached this exclusive club of the greatest of all time female players. She has her own chapter in WTA history just like the others in this club. They transcend women's tennis. They're some of the greatest female athletes ever.