Are Slams Overrated? - TennisForum.com
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 82 (permalink) Old Jul 13th, 2005, 11:13 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,961
                     
Are Slams Overrated?

Even though Lindsay has not won a Slam in quite a long time, the fact is that she has been the most consistant WINNER on the tour since Justine fell ill. While winning Slams is most desirable, one has to win many other matches in order to be ranked #1. Lindsay is to be complimented for her ranking especially considering her age and various injuries. Interestingly Maria was twice within a win to pass Lindsay this year, but was stopped by Justine in Berlin and Paris. Graf should be very proud of her achievement last night. She, a mother of two who has bee off the tour for many years played very well against a very good player. I was not a fan of hers while she was playing but truly do respect her achievements and her personality. She is a great champion with class and grace.
thrust is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 82 (permalink) Old Jul 13th, 2005, 11:34 PM
Senior Member
 
kiwifan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 9,737
                     
no, slams are what really matters.

the rest of that stuff is just revenue for sports bureaucrats and thankfully the players.

the rankings really only exist to force players to participate in the rest of that stuff.

YECs are stupid, half the players wouldn't show if they weren't forced to be there.

Of course the good thing about "the rest of that stuff" is that fans get to see the players more often and usually in a more convenient setting.

kiwifan is offline  
post #3 of 82 (permalink) Old Jul 13th, 2005, 11:38 PM
Veelieve!!!
 
Infiniti2001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 27,054
 
Well, no one will be remembered for consistency, but for their slams. Luckily Lindsay has 3 under her belt
Infiniti2001 is offline  
post #4 of 82 (permalink) Old Jul 13th, 2005, 11:39 PM
Senior Member
 
jamatthews's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,377
                     
Should the Red Clay slam be moved to Russia?

jamatthews is offline  
post #5 of 82 (permalink) Old Jul 13th, 2005, 11:40 PM
Senior Member
 
tennisIlove09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 44,073
                     
when you're measured by your degree of greatness by majors, they cant be overrated. lol. that would be like saying "is the superbowl over rated". that's what you play for. lol
tennisIlove09 is offline  
post #6 of 82 (permalink) Old Jul 13th, 2005, 11:43 PM
Team WTAworld
Senior Member
 
DragonFlame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Groningen
Posts: 15,482
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamatthews
Should the Red Clay slam be moved to Russia?
no to belgium
DragonFlame is offline  
post #7 of 82 (permalink) Old Jul 13th, 2005, 11:58 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Combray
Posts: 16,536
                     
No, Slams are NOT overrated. In the end, it's Slam titles alone that players are remembered for.

For a totally different angle on things, though, it's always fun to check out the WTA site's Career Earnings list -- Lindsay's numbers are eye-popping!! And it's fun to see how well some players known mostly for their doubles prowess have done. (Of course to earn a lot in doubles, you have to do very well in those Slams!)
auntie janie is offline  
post #8 of 82 (permalink) Old Jul 14th, 2005, 12:06 AM
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 27,278
 
Slams are not overrated.

I do feel that players should be remembered for more than just the slams they won but I concede I'm in the minority on that issue around here.
Kart is offline  
post #9 of 82 (permalink) Old Jul 14th, 2005, 12:17 AM
country flag ys
Adrenaline junkie
 
ys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: always on the move
Posts: 21,554
                     
If anything, they are underrated. For serious majority of time in this decade the rankings were lead by a player holding no Slams, i.e., by #1 players not capable of proving their supremacy when it really mattered, when wins would have counted for their historical legacy. #1 player in the world must be a favourite against any player she would have to face. It was not true for Hingis, Clijsters, Davenport. They just enjoyed playing into ranking system while other players were building their legacy. Result? In 10 years Davenport and Hingis will be what Jim Courier is now for men's tennis - i.e. one of the best players of certain generation, but nowhere close to all time greats. Williams sisters will be at least in the third Tier of all time greats. So will probably be Henin.

"..just knowing that as long as i choose life, there is hope."

Je ne suis pas charlie

PLAY TENNIS!
ys is offline  
post #10 of 82 (permalink) Old Jul 14th, 2005, 12:45 AM
Senior Member
 
Black Mamba.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,649
                     
Slams are like the equivalent to championships in other sports. For example no matter how great certain athletes in other sports were like a Dan Marino or a Karl Malone people will remember their great acomplishments to a certain extent, but they will forever be known as greats that never won a championship.
Black Mamba. is offline  
post #11 of 82 (permalink) Old Jul 14th, 2005, 01:13 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,268
                     
Players value them more than regular WTA events. Are they over-rated in terms of measuring a players ability? Probably. But unless you take the time to examine the draw of each individual event, the slams are when you can count on the competition being the toughest available.

Proud to be an American
Not blind. Not uninformed. We are party to atrocities. But the response of the world after 9/11 is worth noting. Even our most dire enemies offered aid. We should all be so lucky.
Volcana is offline  
post #12 of 82 (permalink) Old Jul 14th, 2005, 01:29 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 83
                     
Slams are not over but I think the importance of winning a Slam has been slightly diminished because (A) no one has completely come through a Slam for ages and been brilliant i.e not losing a set, I mean the last three Slam winners faced down Match Points at some stage and (B) the last few Slam winners have not been consistent after winning- Myskina, Sharapova, Kuznetsova, Serena, Henin Hardenne have all fallen away a bit after winning a Slam. Tennis is going through a period where winning a Slam does not automatically render you a fantastic or special player saying all that it is of course still very special.

LINDSAY DAVENPORT

THE TOWER OF POWER

OLYMPIC GOLD, WIMBLEDON CHAMPION, US OPEN WINNER, AUSTRALIAN OPEN WINNER, WORLD NUMBER 1!
irishgirl is offline  
post #13 of 82 (permalink) Old Jul 14th, 2005, 02:33 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Hitlum
Posts: 8,050
                     
slams are not overrated, they are what counts.

Yes, there are other achievements but they pale compared to the slams.

Personally, I prefer my favourites to win GSs than to be # 1, for example, if Justine had won 20 GSs and had never been # 1, I would prefer her to win GS # 21 than reaching the # 1, it's that simple.
Fingon is offline  
post #14 of 82 (permalink) Old Jul 14th, 2005, 02:49 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,096
                     
Slams are over rated in tour points terms to the extent that one good week can get you enough points to make your ranking for the year.

With an increasingly injured and inconsistent top 10 who won this year's GS tells you very little about who the top players are likely to be - ask Justine, Serena, Venus or Billie Jean.

Of course GS are not all that gets you remembered, Venus will be remembered for a period of total dominance. Lindsay will be remembered for being a top player and number 1 on and off for 6 years, ASV will be remembered as second best to Graf in the period between Seles and Hingis. Hingis will be remembered as the girl who was number 1 for 4 years and won GS young. Few will know if they had 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6 GS titles. They may know Graf had 22 and navratilova and Evert had 18 but thats about it.
fammmmedspin is offline  
post #15 of 82 (permalink) Old Jul 14th, 2005, 02:50 AM
Team WTAworld
Senior Member
 
DragonFlame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Groningen
Posts: 15,482
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fingon
slams are not overrated, they are what counts.

Yes, there are other achievements but they pale compared to the slams.

Personally, I prefer my favourites to win GSs than to be # 1, for example, if Justine had won 20 GSs and had never been # 1, I would prefer her to win GS # 21 than reaching the # 1, it's that simple.
if someone would have won 20 grandslams without getting to the #1 ranking she must have really screwed things up during the season
but i think grandslams are what counts, i see people that won grandslams higher then the ones without. But its wierd, i have an exeption to that rule, isee the people with more then 1 grandslams the highest. Justine, lindsay, venus and serena are the highest for me. but i dont see myskina and kuznetsova higher then dementieva, mauresmo and clijsters its wierd but i still have the feeling 1time grandslamchampoins could have gotten lucky. I dont see myskina winning another grandslam but we will see
sorry for this wierd explanation, but this is how i feel it
DragonFlame 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









Image Verification
Please enter the six letters or digits that appear in the image opposite.

Registration Image

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