Ana Ivanovic- Let's Be Realistic... - TennisForum.com
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 44 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2006, 04:11 AM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 80
                     
Ana Ivanovic- Let's Be Realistic...

Ok, just wanted to let you know right now that this isn't a hate thread...

Ivanovic is a great player, top 20, and is celebrating her first career Tier I title. I'm really happy for her, and I think she can do great things in the future.

However, her hardcore fans are starting to get a bit out of control here. Calling her the next Queen of tennis, saying she's better than Vaidisova (who happens to be in the Top 10), is just a little premature. Let the girl get some consistency first before going this far.

What's going to happen is that people are going to end up hating her because of her fans. She's getting more popular by the day becuase of her personality and her beauty, and now that she has a Tier I title, she's the best thing since sliced bread? If she makes it pretty far in the US Open, ok, I'll be right along cheering with you guys, but until then, hold it, b/c its starting to get a bit obnoxious.

Not trying to take away from her Tier I victory, winning the title in the weakest tier I of the year, not even facing a top ten player on the way to victory doesn't mean this is a turn around in her career. Be careful before you jinx her guys. Consistency is key.

Last edited by Robt424; Aug 24th, 2006 at 04:18 AM.
Robt424 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 44 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2006, 04:18 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Neuchâtel
Posts: 11,063
                     
the only person who i saw call her the queen of tennis is a "fan" who insults her whenever she plays poorly. Most people are aware she still has more to prove. I've always believed this girl has a lot of potential because she does everything well - but there still remains a lot of areas that need to be tightened for her to be challenging for slams.

I see her career following a similar path to Davenports.
switz is offline  
post #3 of 44 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2006, 04:29 AM
Senior Member
 
JackWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,807
                     
im a huge fan of ana. i dont think however she will be the queen of tennis, or anyone else for that matter, but i do think that she is a better player than vaidisova. i think ana's game is much more unlikely to break down than vaidisova's. i think that the winner of serena and ana will get to the semis of the us open at the very least. serena vs ana is really a toss up because there are way to many uncertainties but ana's recent play should give her a bit of an advanatge and i hope she gets to the semis at least.

Monica Seles | Martina Hingis | Anna Kournikova
JackWalker is offline  
post #4 of 44 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2006, 04:34 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Neuchâtel
Posts: 11,063
                     
yes Vaidisova's game is very effective against a player ranked below her or an out of sorts top players like Mauresmo and Venus at RG. I'm sure she'll achieve great things but i don't see her game really developing all that much.

who really knows though
switz is offline  
post #5 of 44 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2006, 04:49 AM
Senior Member
 
mboyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 18,514
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by switz
I see her career following a similar path to Davenports.
Okay I hope I don't come across as mean here, but I have to address this: Ivanovic plays NOTHING like Davenport. There are just so many differences.

Shot Production

1. Ivanovic's forehand is semi-open. When she gets a chance she steps into the ball. Davenport's forehand is completely open.

2. Davenport loops her backhand stroke. Ivanovic's takeback is completely straight.

3. Davenport's right foot is always across her left foot when she hits her backhand (if she has time.) Ivanovic's right foot stays to the right of her left foot.

4. Davenport takes small steps when running to the ball. Ivanovic's steps are much longer.

5. Davenport's arm is in constant motion when serving. Ivanovic's toss is higher, leading to a pause in her motion before she hits the ball.

6. Ana's forehand is a simple low takeback followed by a straight follow through over her left shoulder. Davenport has the old school "C" forehand swing (she takes the racket up to her shoulder, loops it down and then swings through) and often finishes above her right shoulder.

Gameplay

1. Ivanovic runs around her backhand. Lindsay never runs around any shot.

2. Ivanovic goes for outright winners early in points. Lindsay, for all her power, plays high percentage ball to set up points for easy winners.

3. Davenport goes for the slice serve (out wide on deuce, down the tee on ad) when she gets nervous. Ivanovic goes for a flat serve (down the tee on deuce, out wide on ad.)

4. Ivanovic moves more quickly than Davenport, and is willing to move more often (Davenport is a selective mover, whereas Ivanovic scrambles for everything.)

5. Ivanovic prefers to hit her forehand inside out, from the middle or the backhand side. Lindsay loves hitting her forehand crosscourt or down the line, from the forehand corner. Lindsay never hits inside out forehands. If she does step around her backhand (and she only does when the ball is in the middle of the court,) she smacks it to her opponent's forehand (assuming a right hander.)

6. Ivanvoic cannot produce crosscourt angles on her strokes (she has an off angle inside out, but none crosscourt.) She hits too flat. Davenport has the ability to add topspin and hit really nice angles.

7. Ivanovic uses dropshots and volleys far more often than Davenport does.

8. Davenport almost never double faults. Ivanovic's second serve is improving, but she still double faults frequently for a top player.

9. Ivanovic's forehand is clearly better than her backhand, whereas Lindsay's groundstrokes are pretty equal.

Mental /Intangibles

1. Lindsay is famous for her negative body language. When Ivanovic was getting crushed by Petrova at the French last year, I still saw that she thought she could win. She stayed positive until the last point. Ivanovic is so much more positive.

2. Ivanovic's game is high risk. When she's off, she can't find ways to win. Davenport's game is deceptively high percentage. She hits flat, but she hits with enough spin to keep the ball in court, and she goes for high percentage shots (as opposed to outright winners,) so she has far fewer bad days than Ana does. Also, when Lindsay is not playing well, she tones it down and reels herself in, whereas Ana keeps going for it.


I think the only reason people compare the two is that they both hit hard and flat, and move relatively slowly, or are thought to. However, even here, Ivanovic hits harder and flatter, and Davenport moves more slowly. Almost everything about their games is different. Ivanovic doesn't really remind me of any previous player...A little bit of Capriati...a little bit of Graf with the poise of Mary Pierce, but really she is different from most tennis players.

Romney/Ryan 2012
mboyle is offline  
post #6 of 44 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2006, 04:51 AM
Senior Member
 
mboyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 18,514
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brashkoala
i think ana's game is much more unlikely to break down than vaidisova's.
Actually it is just the opposite. Nicole hits with much more margin for error, and is much more technically sound on serve. Technically, Nicole's game is much sounder. However, Ana does not lose it mentally, and contains herself beautifully. Nicole is...well...Nicole like .

Romney/Ryan 2012
mboyle is offline  
post #7 of 44 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2006, 05:00 AM
Senior Member
 
ezekiel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: manjaro
Posts: 4,806
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robt424
Ok, just wanted to let you know right now that this isn't a hate thread...

Ivanovic is a great player, top 20, and is celebrating her first career Tier I title. I'm really happy for her, and I think she can do great things in the future.

However, her hardcore fans are starting to get a bit out of control here. Calling her the next Queen of tennis, saying she's better than Vaidisova (who happens to be in the Top 10), is just a little premature. Let the girl get some consistency first before going this far.

What's going to happen is that people are going to end up hating her because of her fans. She's getting more popular by the day becuase of her personality and her beauty, and now that she has a Tier I title, she's the best thing since sliced bread? If she makes it pretty far in the US Open, ok, I'll be right along cheering with you guys, but until then, hold it, b/c its starting to get a bit obnoxious.

Not trying to take away from her Tier I victory, winning the title in the weakest tier I of the year, not even facing a top ten player on the way to victory doesn't mean this is a turn around in her career. Be careful before you jinx her guys. Consistency is key.
It's about potential, some fans get carried away, me included but we suffered a lot of disappointments this year and she finally showed us how well she can play. Just 3 weeks ago , she made me really sad with her loss to Chakvetadze . Don't mind us it's just a temporary thing but I think she is here to stay
ezekiel is offline  
post #8 of 44 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2006, 05:06 AM
Senior Member
 
ezekiel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: manjaro
Posts: 4,806
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by switz
the only person who i saw call her the queen of tennis is a "fan" who insults her whenever she plays poorly. Most people are aware she still has more to prove. I've always believed this girl has a lot of potential because she does everything well - but there still remains a lot of areas that need to be tightened for her to be challenging for slams.

I see her career following a similar path to Davenports.
I criticize , not insult and I called her queen out of excitement but she is not queen yet, far from it but she could be so I am goint to take down that line of sig soon as it seems to draw controversy

Last edited by ezekiel; Aug 24th, 2006 at 05:12 AM.
ezekiel is offline  
post #9 of 44 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2006, 05:10 AM
Senior Member
 
mboyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 18,514
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by switz
yes Vaidisova's game is very effective against a player ranked below her or an out of sorts top players like Mauresmo and Venus at RG. I'm sure she'll achieve great things but i don't see her game really developing all that much.

who really knows though
You also must remember Vaidisova is 18 months younger than Ivanovic. That is critical to keep in mind. Already, Nicole is much more consistent. Nicole's serve/forehand combination is much safer and more reliable than Ana's, and Nicole's backhand is more versatile. Ana at her best is, in my opinion, more explosive and dominant, but, on an average day, Ana is farther from her best than Nicole is from her best. A lot of people on the boards are rightfully impressed by Ana at her peak. "Wait until she can play that way all the time," people say. Well the problem is, she likely will never be able to sustain that play match after match. She has so little margin for error on all her shots. It is very hard for her to pull them off time after time, match after match.

By contrast, Nicole's game is not flashy, but workman like. It is essentially the same every time she steps on court. She has a fraction of the "bad" days that Ana does. Because she always plays the same way and isn't no. 1 right now, it is hard to see the room for improvement. However, Mauresmo was always consistent before she rose to the top. Davenport was fairly consistent before she rose to the top. Venus was pretty consistent in 1998 and 1999 before she rose to the top.

I believe both Ana and Nicole have fairly similar levels of potential. Both can be hall of famers with multiple slams and weeks at no. 1. The differece, to me, is that I can sit here and tell you right now Nicole Vaidisova is going to be a solid top five player for most of her career, and that, if you put her up against any non top ten player, she is going to win. With Ana, I feel less confident that she will be consistent.

As for what can Vaidisova do to improve...it's simple: she needs to get to net more. One of her biggest strengths is her volley. She's a tall girl with a long reach, and she has a monster serve and forehand that are effective in getting her to net. If she developed that skill, it would be very hard to pass her, and I believe she would rocket into the top 5. However, that doesn't come up as a weakness in her matches, whereas Ana's mobility used to and her consistency still does. It is harder to spot the unused potential in Vaidisova, but that speaks more to the fact that she has tamed herself than to the fact that Ivanovic necessarily has MORE potential.

Vaidisova is my no. 2 fave and Ivanovic is a close no. 3, just to clarify (both after Masha,) so I really hope they both figure things out and rise to the top. I just think it is weird that, on this board, everyone chooses Ivanovic over Vaidisova...

Romney/Ryan 2012
mboyle is offline  
post #10 of 44 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2006, 05:13 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 12,925
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboyle
Okay I hope I don't come across as mean here, but I have to address this: Ivanovic plays NOTHING like Davenport. There are just so many differences.

Shot Production

1. Ivanovic's forehand is semi-open. When she gets a chance she steps into the ball. Davenport's forehand is completely open.

2. Davenport loops her backhand stroke. Ivanovic's takeback is completely straight.

3. Davenport's right foot is always across her left foot when she hits her backhand (if she has time.) Ivanovic's right foot stays to the right of her left foot.

4. Davenport takes small steps when running to the ball. Ivanovic's steps are much longer.

5. Davenport's arm is in constant motion when serving. Ivanovic's toss is higher, leading to a pause in her motion before she hits the ball.

6. Ana's forehand is a simple low takeback followed by a straight follow through over her left shoulder. Davenport has the old school "C" forehand swing (she takes the racket up to her shoulder, loops it down and then swings through) and often finishes above her right shoulder.

Gameplay

1. Ivanovic runs around her backhand. Lindsay never runs around any shot.

2. Ivanovic goes for outright winners early in points. Lindsay, for all her power, plays high percentage ball to set up points for easy winners.

3. Davenport goes for the slice serve (out wide on deuce, down the tee on ad) when she gets nervous. Ivanovic goes for a flat serve (down the tee on deuce, out wide on ad.)

4. Ivanovic moves more quickly than Davenport, and is willing to move more often (Davenport is a selective mover, whereas Ivanovic scrambles for everything.)

5. Ivanovic prefers to hit her forehand inside out, from the middle or the backhand side. Lindsay loves hitting her forehand crosscourt or down the line, from the forehand corner. Lindsay never hits inside out forehands. If she does step around her backhand (and she only does when the ball is in the middle of the court,) she smacks it to her opponent's forehand (assuming a right hander.)

6. Ivanvoic cannot produce crosscourt angles on her strokes (she has an off angle inside out, but none crosscourt.) She hits too flat. Davenport has the ability to add topspin and hit really nice angles.

7. Ivanovic uses dropshots and volleys far more often than Davenport does.

8. Davenport almost never double faults. Ivanovic's second serve is improving, but she still double faults frequently for a top player.

9. Ivanovic's forehand is clearly better than her backhand, whereas Lindsay's groundstrokes are pretty equal.

Mental /Intangibles

1. Lindsay is famous for her negative body language. When Ivanovic was getting crushed by Petrova at the French last year, I still saw that she thought she could win. She stayed positive until the last point. Ivanovic is so much more positive.

2. Ivanovic's game is high risk. When she's off, she can't find ways to win. Davenport's game is deceptively high percentage. She hits flat, but she hits with enough spin to keep the ball in court, and she goes for high percentage shots (as opposed to outright winners,) so she has far fewer bad days than Ana does. Also, when Lindsay is not playing well, she tones it down and reels herself in, whereas Ana keeps going for it.


I think the only reason people compare the two is that they both hit hard and flat, and move relatively slowly, or are thought to. However, even here, Ivanovic hits harder and flatter, and Davenport moves more slowly. Almost everything about their games is different. Ivanovic doesn't really remind me of any previous player...A little bit of Capriati...a little bit of Graf with the poise of Mary Pierce, but really she is different from most tennis players.
Damn if you analyse that closely and that picky nobody's game is gonna be similar to anybody. and actually some of the things you said are not 100% true. davenport often goes for big winners early in points, yes its true that she's a good point constructer but she hits tons of return winners and does go for low percentage shots but she rarely ever misses so she makes it seem like high percentage. also ive seen davenport hit inside out forehands many times and i dont think ivanovic volleys more than lindsay. if you keep it simple their game is similar. Both hit very hard and pretty flat are not that quick and have a good serve.
Dominic is offline  
post #11 of 44 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2006, 05:18 AM
Two and counting.
 
Derek.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dublin
Posts: 25,897
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboyle
You also must remember Vaidisova is 18 months younger than Ivanovic. That is critical to keep in mind. Already, Nicole is much more consistent. Nicole's serve/forehand combination is much safer and more reliable than Ana's, and Nicole's backhand is more versatile. Ana at her best is, in my opinion, more explosive and dominant, but, on an average day, Ana is farther from her best than Nicole is from her best. A lot of people on the boards are rightfully impressed by Ana at her peak. "Wait until she can play that way all the time," people say. Well the problem is, she likely will never be able to sustain that play match after match. She has so little margin for error on all her shots. It is very hard for her to pull them off time after time, match after match.

By contrast, Nicole's game is not flashy, but workman like. It is essentially the same every time she steps on court. She has a fraction of the "bad" days that Ana does. Because she always plays the same way and isn't no. 1 right now, it is hard to see the room for improvement. However, Mauresmo was always consistent before she rose to the top. Davenport was fairly consistent before she rose to the top. Venus was pretty consistent in 1998 and 1999 before she rose to the top.

I believe both Ana and Nicole have fairly similar levels of potential. Both can be hall of famers with multiple slams and weeks at no. 1. The differece, to me, is that I can sit here and tell you right now Nicole Vaidisova is going to be a solid top five player for most of her career, and that, if you put her up against any non top ten player, she is going to win. With Ana, I feel less confident that she will be consistent.

As for what can Vaidisova do to improve...it's simple: she needs to get to net more. One of her biggest strengths is her volley. She's a tall girl with a long reach, and she has a monster serve and forehand that are effective in getting her to net. If she developed that skill, it would be very hard to pass her, and I believe she would rocket into the top 5. However, that doesn't come up as a weakness in her matches, whereas Ana's mobility used to and her consistency still does. It is harder to spot the unused potential in Vaidisova, but that speaks more to the fact that she has tamed herself than to the fact that Ivanovic necessarily has MORE potential.

Vaidisova is my no. 2 fave and Ivanovic is a close no. 3, just to clarify (both after Masha,) so I really hope they both figure things out and rise to the top. I just think it is weird that, on this board, everyone chooses Ivanovic over Vaidisova...
Very well said.
Derek. is offline  
post #12 of 44 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2006, 05:23 AM
Senior Member
 
brent-o's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,007
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboyle
Okay I hope I don't come across as mean here, but I have to address this: Ivanovic plays NOTHING like Davenport. There are just so many differences.

Shot Production

1. Ivanovic's forehand is semi-open. When she gets a chance she steps into the ball. Davenport's forehand is completely open.

2. Davenport loops her backhand stroke. Ivanovic's takeback is completely straight.

3. Davenport's right foot is always across her left foot when she hits her backhand (if she has time.) Ivanovic's right foot stays to the right of her left foot.

4. Davenport takes small steps when running to the ball. Ivanovic's steps are much longer.

5. Davenport's arm is in constant motion when serving. Ivanovic's toss is higher, leading to a pause in her motion before she hits the ball.

6. Ana's forehand is a simple low takeback followed by a straight follow through over her left shoulder. Davenport has the old school "C" forehand swing (she takes the racket up to her shoulder, loops it down and then swings through) and often finishes above her right shoulder.

Gameplay

1. Ivanovic runs around her backhand. Lindsay never runs around any shot.

2. Ivanovic goes for outright winners early in points. Lindsay, for all her power, plays high percentage ball to set up points for easy winners.

3. Davenport goes for the slice serve (out wide on deuce, down the tee on ad) when she gets nervous. Ivanovic goes for a flat serve (down the tee on deuce, out wide on ad.)

4. Ivanovic moves more quickly than Davenport, and is willing to move more often (Davenport is a selective mover, whereas Ivanovic scrambles for everything.)

5. Ivanovic prefers to hit her forehand inside out, from the middle or the backhand side. Lindsay loves hitting her forehand crosscourt or down the line, from the forehand corner. Lindsay never hits inside out forehands. If she does step around her backhand (and she only does when the ball is in the middle of the court,) she smacks it to her opponent's forehand (assuming a right hander.)

6. Ivanvoic cannot produce crosscourt angles on her strokes (she has an off angle inside out, but none crosscourt.) She hits too flat. Davenport has the ability to add topspin and hit really nice angles.

7. Ivanovic uses dropshots and volleys far more often than Davenport does.

8. Davenport almost never double faults. Ivanovic's second serve is improving, but she still double faults frequently for a top player.

9. Ivanovic's forehand is clearly better than her backhand, whereas Lindsay's groundstrokes are pretty equal.

Mental /Intangibles

1. Lindsay is famous for her negative body language. When Ivanovic was getting crushed by Petrova at the French last year, I still saw that she thought she could win. She stayed positive until the last point. Ivanovic is so much more positive.

2. Ivanovic's game is high risk. When she's off, she can't find ways to win. Davenport's game is deceptively high percentage. She hits flat, but she hits with enough spin to keep the ball in court, and she goes for high percentage shots (as opposed to outright winners,) so she has far fewer bad days than Ana does. Also, when Lindsay is not playing well, she tones it down and reels herself in, whereas Ana keeps going for it.


I think the only reason people compare the two is that they both hit hard and flat, and move relatively slowly, or are thought to. However, even here, Ivanovic hits harder and flatter, and Davenport moves more slowly. Almost everything about their games is different. Ivanovic doesn't really remind me of any previous player...A little bit of Capriati...a little bit of Graf with the poise of Mary Pierce, but really she is different from most tennis players.
Um, no one actually suggested that Ana was the exact carbon copy of Davenport's game. There are similarities (something that in all those points you failed to acknowledge) and frankly I think the fact that Ana hits a heavy, cleanly-struck forehand (like Lindsay), is a somewhat slow, big girl (not as bad as Lindsay but still not a good mover), hits with effortless power, and has the same friendly, outgoing personality (also like Lindsay) far outweigh small minute details like the difference in their take backs or how one doesn't position their feet exactly like the other. I just think it's fair to acknowledge that they do share some things in common, hence the comparisons. I'm sorry, I don't mean to be rude but some of those are really small, nit-picking details.
brent-o is offline  
post #13 of 44 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2006, 05:27 AM
Senior Member
 
mboyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 18,514
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoDokic!
Damn if you analyse that closely and that picky nobody's game is gonna be similar to anybody. and actually some of the things you said are not 100% true. davenport often goes for big winners early in points, yes its true that she's a good point constructer but she hits tons of return winners and does go for low percentage shots but she rarely ever misses so she makes it seem like high percentage. also ive seen davenport hit inside out forehands many times and i dont think ivanovic volleys more than lindsay. if you keep it simple their game is similar. Both hit very hard and pretty flat are not that quick and have a good serve.
If you keep it that simple, almost everyone in the top 100 has the same game . It's all about patterns. Lindsay and Maria have very similar patterns. Justine and Amelie have very similar patterns. Actually, Nicole and Ana have very similar games.

Lindsay does not go for low percentage shots. She hits crosscourt when she's in trouble, and only goes down the line when she is inside the baseline. She goes for big returns off of second serves, but she doesn't try to crush first serves, as Nicole and Ana often do.

Lindsay really does not go for winners early in the point. She almost never goes for winners when she is behind the baseline.

Romney/Ryan 2012
mboyle is offline  
post #14 of 44 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2006, 05:35 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 4,071
                     
well so far Vaidisova is younger and higher ranked than Ivanovic.
She has much better so far.
My opion is that Vaidisova will continue to outshine Ivanovic.
Let the results speak for themselves however.

Zauber is offline  
post #15 of 44 (permalink) Old Aug 24th, 2006, 05:52 AM
Senior Member
 
JackWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,807
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboyle
Actually it is just the opposite. Nicole hits with much more margin for error, and is much more technically sound on serve. Technically, Nicole's game is much sounder. However, Ana does not lose it mentally, and contains herself beautifully. Nicole is...well...Nicole like .
i think nicole hits with a bit more spin than ana. ana is like a young seles and nicole is like a young mary to be honest. i think that every are of ana's game is more technically sound than nicole's. nicole has funny grips and long takebacks and is not technically sound. it works well for her now but it will give her problems in the future. the prove is in the pudding. hingis beat vaidisova in rome in straight sets and ana beat hingis in montreal in straight sets and never even faced a break point against hingis so you cant say nicole is more technically sound on serve. its a really ludicrous statement.

Monica Seles | Martina Hingis | Anna Kournikova
JackWalker 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