However, none of this changes the fact that Venus won 3 out of of 4 of their last 4 matches.
Also, given the fact that Venus was playing with an injured left wrist most of 2006, I would imagine it wouldn't be all that difficult for Hingis to win.
Fair enough, so Hingis played with injured feet with most of the 2001-2002 (resulting to Tacchini lawsuit), not that hard for others to win then, is it?
Are you kidding me? Are you seriously comparing Venus' serve to Hingis?
And also, do you not realize that you contradicted yourself concerning Hingis' 1st serve in your previous post?
You stated that she had a 70% 1st serve record, yet you also go on to say that she no longer took any chances with it
True. Those statements are not contradictory at all. Taking power off from your shots or serve does NOT necessarily lead to improved reliability. Anyone who has ever played tennis understands this, but it is hard to actually implement if you have lost confidence in your shots. It's same thing what happened to her forehand.
Martina's best first serves were at 170km/h+ at her peak, late 2001 they had dropped to 130km/h.
The other reason is that she just could not handle the pace and depth of the base-line players.
Why is this so hard to understand? And why is this even now an argument?
Honestly, reading these posts it sometimes baffles me how Hingis ever won any matches at all. She apparently couldn't serve, couldn't move, couldn't hit groundstrokes...
Man, she must have been luckiest player alive to achieve winning or even record against most of the prominent baseliners of her time.
Come on now...
We'll just have to agree to disagree on this last line of logic.
Here's bit of logic for you: when you have 1000 point lead over your closest competitor, how does it help your ranking to play a tournament which gives you 250 points if you win it? That's right.