Henin vs. Davenport - TennisForum.com
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 18 (permalink) Old Apr 2nd, 2004, 08:10 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
shap_half's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 15,329
                     
Henin vs. Davenport

Davenport leads H2H 5-3

1999 Roland Garros 2R Davenport 3-6 6-2 5-7
2000 du Maurier Open 2R Davenport 6-3 6-7(2) 2-6
2000 US Open 4R Davenport 0-6 4-6
2001 Porsche Tennis Grand Prix Davenport L 5-7 4-6
2002 Swisscom Challenge SF Davenport 6-7(2) 6-7(5)
2003 Australian Open 4R Henin-Hardenne 7-5 5-7 9-7
2004 Adidas International SF Henin-Hardenne WO
2004 Australian Open QF Henin-Hardenne 7-5 6-3
2004 Pacific Life Open F Henin-Hardenne 6-1 6-4

After carefully reviewing their H2H and taking in consideration numerous factors in the situation, I'll say that Justine is the better player when it comes to the two of them. I think that in their best, Justine will win 5 of every 7 matches.

Although the H2H is entirely in Lindsay's favor. It's very important to note that Justine was quite young and inexperience and certainly did not have the experience and growth that she has now. BUt even when you take that into consideration, Lindsay has never had an 'easy' time at defeating Justine except when they met in the 4th R of the 2000 USO. Most of the matches Lindsay won were decided on one break - a clear indication that she won because Justine was mentally fragile player. It wasn't because Lindsay was heaps better, it was because Justine didn't have the mental stability to stay in the match and get a break back. Their very first match, Justine was up a break on Lindsay but still lost. Their second match, Justine had many chances to win, but still lost. Their SF at Zurich, proved that Justine was a mental headcase against Lindsay and couldn't beat someone who was heavily injured. But once Justine was able to get over that obstacle, Justine is beating Lindsay easier than Lindsay was when Lindsay was the higher ranked player and the one who had the mental edge.
shap_half is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 18 (permalink) Old Apr 2nd, 2004, 08:22 PM
Senior Member
 
pigam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: belgium
Posts: 7,434
                     
Those are all pretty close matches.
These two have played some great matches! Strating with the very first on

J u s t i n e x p l i c a b l e


Justine: feb. 5, 2007:

"I hung on to tennis. I have done so for the past 20 years. It is something that is in me, it is me."
pigam is offline  
post #3 of 18 (permalink) Old Apr 2nd, 2004, 08:24 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Miami!
Posts: 812
                     
Lindsay proved that she can compete with Justine's game by going up 4-1 at the AO, her problem is mental, Justine is so strong mentally. But if lindsay can keep positive, I think she could take her.

"On the coin toss Martina said, "Do you want me to break your serve first or hold?" The umpire looked shocked. But we just both cracked up."
Lindsay Davenport, on a match she played with Martina Hingis.

Elena Dementieva
Justine Henin
Jennifer Capriati
Lindsay Davenport
Daniela Hantuchova
Kim Clijsters
Chanda Rubin
Justinefan is offline  
 
post #4 of 18 (permalink) Old Apr 2nd, 2004, 08:32 PM
Senior Member
 
flyingmachine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,425
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justinefan
Lindsay proved that she can compete with Justine's game by going up 4-1 at the AO, her problem is mental, Justine is so strong mentally. But if lindsay can keep positive, I think she could take her.
I'm not sure Lindsay would beat Justine if Lindsay think more positive because Justine games has move up a level since the end of last year. Lindsay is a good player that is not doubt but I think is will be even harder for Lindsay to beat Justine especailly after IW. This is not just a mental problem but also on tennis level as well.

SvetaLisicki

Smells like Kvitova spirit

Allez Forever!

Amelie Mauresmo: Wimbledon Champion 2006
flyingmachine is offline  
post #5 of 18 (permalink) Old Apr 2nd, 2004, 08:38 PM
Senior Member
 
jimbo mack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: London
Posts: 8,896
                     
lets not re-write history here

lindsay was way better back in 2000 and 2001. she's still good now, but not like she was then.

if lindsay was as good now as she was in 2001, then justine would have been an australian open quarter-finalist this year
jimbo mack is offline  
post #6 of 18 (permalink) Old Apr 2nd, 2004, 08:48 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 7,843
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by j-mac
lets not re-write history here

lindsay was way better back in 2000 and 2001. she's still good now, but not like she was then.

if lindsay was as good now as she was in 2001, then justine would have been an australian open quarter-finalist this year
And if Justine had been as good in 2001 as she is now... Lindsay would have been the Porsche runner-up that year
sartrista7 is offline  
post #7 of 18 (permalink) Old Apr 2nd, 2004, 11:56 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
shap_half's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 15,329
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by j-mac
lets not re-write history here

lindsay was way better back in 2000 and 2001. she's still good now, but not like she was then.

if lindsay was as good now as she was in 2001, then justine would have been an australian open quarter-finalist this year

i'm sorry but i think you are deluding yourself. even back then, lindsay struggled to defeat justine. justine was up a break in the third against lindsay at the 1999 FOand it took lindsay three sets and often winning just by a break in most of their matches. clearly that is an indication of where justine was and not lindsay. while lindsay was great then, justine already had the game to beat her and if it wasn't for justine's inability to close out matches because of her mental issues, justine would have a more favorable head to head against lindsay. and now that justine has that, lindsay can't even win sets, never the less matches.

Last edited by shap_half; Apr 3rd, 2004 at 12:29 AM.
shap_half is offline  
post #8 of 18 (permalink) Old Apr 3rd, 2004, 12:05 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Portugal
Posts: 5,843
                     
1999 Roland Garros 2R Davenport 3-6 6-2 5-7 This was the match that made me a Juju fan

Life is so gloriously improbable
VivalaSeles is offline  
post #9 of 18 (permalink) Old Apr 3rd, 2004, 12:32 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 88
   
By the way, WOs do not count as defeats. The head-to-head is 5-2.
chicagofan is offline  
post #10 of 18 (permalink) Old Apr 3rd, 2004, 12:41 AM
-PREMIUM MEMBER-
 
Couver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 17,424
                     
Isn't it a little pointless to be making this comparison now? The fact is even though those matches were close Lindsay won them, and that's what counts. History isn't going to change the results just because Justine may have been the better player.

Just like now it would appear that with her new found game and confidence Justine will probably come out on top against Lindsay in most of their future matches. I still think Lindsay has the game to beat her but at the AO and IW she didn't do it. So I can't say that the head to head should be 6-0 or whathave you.

The head to head is what it is until they play again.

Couver is offline  
post #11 of 18 (permalink) Old Apr 3rd, 2004, 12:43 AM
Senior Member
 
LindsayRocks89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: united states
Posts: 3,384
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagofan
By the way, WOs do not count as defeats. The head-to-head is 5-2.
nope, its 5-3, because Lindsay lost at the aussie last year, the aussie this year, and indian wells
LindsayRocks89 is offline  
post #12 of 18 (permalink) Old Apr 3rd, 2004, 12:45 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 88
   
Ugh. You're right. I can't count.
chicagofan is offline  
post #13 of 18 (permalink) Old Apr 3rd, 2004, 12:49 AM
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 27,280
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by shap_half
Most of the matches Lindsay won were decided on one break - a clear indication that she won because Justine was mentally fragile player.
I don't understand that .

At the best we've seen them so far, Lindsay is still the better player IMHO.

Justine is blatantly better on the clay by miles but Lindsay at her best would still handle her on the hard courts and indoors although the grass could go either way.

That 'Justine was inexperienced when she lost to Lindsay' argument is not really valid - Justine is starting to play her best only now where as Lindsay hasn't shown the kind of focus that saw her cruise to victory in Oz 2000 for several years. So the reverse is true also.

Still it all boils down to what each of us who actually saw them at their best thinks, not what statistics indicate ...

We've probably seen Lindsay's best but not yet Justine's - I might change my opinion in a few years time.
Kart is offline  
post #14 of 18 (permalink) Old Apr 3rd, 2004, 12:53 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,079
                     
How good could Davenport have been? She lost (at "her best") to MARTINA HINGIS AFTER ALL.
for-sure is offline  
post #15 of 18 (permalink) Old Apr 3rd, 2004, 12:57 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
shap_half's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 15,329
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kart
I don't understand that .
what i am saying is that wins were decided with just one break and it often goes to 7-5 or 7-6 or 6-4 in lindsay's favor. eventhough justine lost those matches it wasn't because of her game being inferior to lindsay's but it was because of justine's mental fragility.
shap_half is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TennisForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome