A really subjective top ten that makes slightly more sense - TennisForum.com
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 31 (permalink) Old Jul 28th, 2002, 01:57 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,722
                     
A really subjective top ten that makes slightly more sense

Code:
01 5742 Serena Williams   12 tournaments 
02 4976 Venus Williams    14 tournaments

03 3947 Jennifer Capriati 16 tournaments 

        The concensus third-best player 
        in the world.  Then Amelie 
        dropped the bomb on her at Wimbledon.
        Well, Amelie's a top ten player.

04 2859 Kim Clijsters     20 

        She should have shut it down two
        months ago.  Every indication is 
        she's still in pain and its
        affecting her play.  She's beaten
        ONE top ten player since Hamburg.
        Sandrine Testud.

        QF 's-Hertogenbosch
        32 Roland Garros
        64 Wimbledon

        Do we need to draw you a map, girl?

        Beat Lindsay at Stanford.  I'll shut up now.
That's the top 4. Here's the rest. A lot of these players have had some inexplicable loss dropped on them.
Code:
05 2592 Lindsay Davenport  9 tournaments

        Stanford Kim d Lindsay at Stanford 
        4-6 6-4 6-2.
        Nice return to action for LD thought.

06 2814 Hingis      12

        The Hantuchova loss at IW.
        On top of all the other losses to top ten
        players in the last year.
        Three wins over Monica
        Hope she plays the US Open.

07 3005 Justine Henin     23 

        Illness and injury.  But two 
        of her last three four tournaments
        have been 1st round losses.
        Just beat Monica so I have to put her ahead
        of her.

08 3898 Monica Seles      19 

        I didn't see Lisa Raymond coming.
        3 wins over top ten players in 2002.
        8 losses to top ten players in 2002. 
        2 losses to NON-top ten players in 2002. 
        1 win over Hantuchova

09 3048 Jelena Dokic      29 

        Three losses to Kremer
        Two losses to Hantuchova
        Loss to Farina-Elia
        Loss to Smashnova        
        Loss to Myskina
        Loss to Bedanova

        You all are right, and I'm wrong.
        All my defenses of her at #5 was marginal.

10 2285 Mauresmo     18 

        Suspending judgement til I get
        over what she said at Wimbledon.
        The QFs of a GS is the QFs, though.

11 1951 Hantuchova   23 

        I can't take away Indian Wells.
        The record since
        
        Miami               64 L BLACK        6-4 4-6 2-6   
        Amelia Island       32 L HUSAROVA     4-6 6-3 1-6   
        Charleston          32 L PIERCE       3-6 4-6   
        Hamburg             QF L HINGIS       5-7 4-6   
        Berlin              QF L SMASHNOVA    6-1 2-6 3-6   
        Rome                64 L MYSKINA      4-6 4-6   
        Roland Garros       16 L SELES        4-6 5-7   
        Eastbourne          SF L MYSKINA      2-6 1-6   
        Wimbledon           QF L WILLIAMS     3-6 2-6
 
12 1711 Dementieva   25

        Can beat virtually anyone on tour.
        Can't win a tournament.
        No threat to win a GS.
        A threat to near anyone.

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  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 31 (permalink) Old Jul 28th, 2002, 02:07 PM
Senior Member
 
irma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: the netherlands
Posts: 13,635
 
I agree with this list only I am not so sure about Martina right now, she would probarly be up there if she would play but she doesn't so I would put her below Justine and Monica at this moment!

In the middle of the night
I go walking in my sleep
Through the desert of the truth
To the river so deep
We all end in the ocean
We all start in the streams
We're all carried along
By the river of dreams
In the middle of the night
irma is offline  
post #3 of 31 (permalink) Old Jul 28th, 2002, 02:10 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 2,895
                     
This doesn't make any sense to me.
Mark43 is offline  
post #4 of 31 (permalink) Old Jul 28th, 2002, 02:12 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,722
                     
I think my #5-#8 could be safely re-arranged in almost any order.

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 #5 of 31 (permalink) Old Jul 28th, 2002, 02:14 PM
HAND SCRAPED
 
-Sonic-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 7,155
                     
Well it takes some time for the slower among us.

Volcana, I think its great how you can change ur opinions with the results as they come, and not be stuck into one frame of mind (e.g. she's better than her..... forever) that many people have.
-Sonic- is offline  
post #6 of 31 (permalink) Old Jul 28th, 2002, 02:15 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,722
                     
If the previous thread not only made no sense, but actively increased confusion, it wold be possible for THIS thread to make MORE sense, and still make NO sense. Perfectly 'sensible', eh?

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 #7 of 31 (permalink) Old Jul 28th, 2002, 02:16 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,625
                     
What bad losses has Davenport had this year?

Also Kim beats Davenport in Stanford but her bad form is forgotten because of this, when Dokic's and Justine's are still mentioned.

Mauresmo has a tier 2 title to her name, and also one semi, one quarter and a 4th round in Grand Slams this year. Wins over Monica and Capriati, I would put her over Dokic.
babsi is online now  
post #8 of 31 (permalink) Old Jul 28th, 2002, 02:22 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 2,895
                     
Yes, and it usually takes just a wee bit longer for the fatter among us as well.
Putting Monica Seles at number 8 when she has made the quarters or better at every slam this year doesn't gel...like the way fat gels.
Mark43 is offline  
post #9 of 31 (permalink) Old Jul 28th, 2002, 02:45 PM
HAND SCRAPED
 
-Sonic-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 7,155
                     
i had forgotten for momo it was a W'don SF.
-Sonic- is offline  
post #10 of 31 (permalink) Old Jul 28th, 2002, 03:35 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,722
                     
Mark35 - Here's Monica's record in 2002. All the wins over players on this list vs All 2002 losses
Code:
Australian Open     QF W V.WILLIAMS   6-7 6-2 6-3
Australian Open     SF L HINGIS       6-4 1-6 4-6
Toray Pan Pacific   FR L HINGIS       6-7 6-4 3-6
Paris               QF W HENIN        6-4 6-3
Paris               SF L DOKIC        3-6 6-3 4-6
Dubai               SF L MAURESMO     4-6 3-6
Indian Wells        SF L HINGIS       3-6 2-6
Miami               QF W CLIJSTERS    4-6 6-3 6-3
Miami               SF L CAPRIATI     6-4 3-6 6-7
Charleston          16 L FORETZ       4-6 6-7
Roland Garros       16 W HANTUCHOVA   6-4 7-5
Roland Garros       QF L V.WILLIAMS     4-6 3-6
Wimbledon           QF L HENIN        5-7 6-7
Stanford            QF L RAYMOND

Venus    won the last time they played
Jennifer won the last time they played.
Justine  won the last time they played.
Jelena   won the last time they played.
Martina  won the last time they played
Amelie   won the last time they played.
Monica beat Kim the last time they played, but Kim is in the Stanford final now, Monica lost in the QFs to a player outside the top 20.
She beat Daniela the last time they played, and I ranked her ahead of her.
Maybe Lindsay shouldn't be ahead of her.
If Monica was in the Stanford final right now, I'd probably have her #3.
If Kim wins Stanford, I'll probably make he co-#2 with Venus.

It's not cast in stone. More like badly cured concrete.

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 #11 of 31 (permalink) Old Jul 28th, 2002, 03:42 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 8,315
                     
Quote:
Originally posted by babsi
What bad losses has Davenport had this year?
Well, I mean seriously we know that Lindsay hasn't had half a dozen bad losses this year, but she hasn't had half a dozen quality wins either. Her year basically consists of a win over the world #6 and a loss to the world #5.
disposablehero is offline  
post #12 of 31 (permalink) Old Jul 28th, 2002, 03:48 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,625
                     
So shouldn't Davenport be up there with a question mark?

You can't judge her on only one tournament back.

But I was saying that about Davenport because Volcana put her in the bad loss group.
babsi is online now  
post #13 of 31 (permalink) Old Jul 28th, 2002, 05:38 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 18,115
                     
Hingis beat Clijsters earlier this year and had four match points in a Grand Slam, won Tokyo and was in the finals of Indian Wells. Why is Clijsters ahead of her especially given her early round losses this year? I mean if you are basing it on injuries then fine but for the time that Hingis was physically able to play she did better than Kim. Davenport I would not necessarily put ahead of Hingis either just yet since she did lose to Kim and has only played one tournament. I am not saying Davenport is not deserving of being a subjective #5 but it's too early to say. She basically has not played. Also Justine made it to the Wimbledon SEMIS, beat Serena in the finals of a Tier 1, made it to the finals of another Tier 1, had Venus totally on the ropes at Amelia Island, made it to the FINALS of two other tournaments and EASILY BEAT CLIJSTERS in their last match. So I don't see how she could be behind CLIJSTERS. Several of her losses have been do to a seriously high fever or a broken finger, etc.


Sorry Volcana about picking your SUBJECTIVE list to death. It just shocks me given the facts that you would put Kim ahead of Justine or Martina. For that matter Monica beat her the last time they played and has had better results at all three of the Grand Slams and at the Ericsson.
treufreund is offline  
post #14 of 31 (permalink) Old Jul 28th, 2002, 05:46 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 18,115
                     
I find your thinking a little strange. Clijsters had not great results in the Grand Slams or at the Tier I's so far this year. You would make her possibly #2??? I guess I just don't understand the concept of having some "bad" losses as being the main criterion.

Hopefully you are not taking this personally Volcana. Just find your thinking a bit strange on first Dokic and now Kim. And I really really like Kim. I like Kim more than Monica actually but would still put Monica ahead. Yes Monica has had some bad losses but has done better at the bigger events and has accumulated more points. Hingis and Henin have outperformed kim also (when they have been able to play.)
treufreund is offline  
post #15 of 31 (permalink) Old Jul 28th, 2002, 05:52 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Wales
Posts: 24,244
                     
I'd say

1.Serena
2.Venus
3.Jenny
4.Lindsay
5.Kim(she might have beaten lindsay but bar that has had a crap year)Monica should be above her but after Stanford pfffffff
6.Monica
7.Henin
8.Hingis
9.Mauresmo
10.Dokic

GOOD LUCK IN 2016 GB TENNIS GIRLS

Johanna Konta, Naomi Broady, Tara Moore, Heather Watson , Laura Robson

Eleanor Dean, Katy DunneKatie Boulter, Sam Murray

Katie Swan, Harriet Dart,
Monica_Rules 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