Originally posted by BK4ever
They are showing her match against Venus on ESPN right now, and the commentators are going on about what will it take for Dani to make top 5. They truly suck...she's already there.
I think she deserves #5 because she earned the points. But players like her and Dokic are the reason why people question the ranking system. Here Dani is #5 and she has no wins over the top players and holds only one title. Same for Dokic, but at least she has a few titles. Dani does have better showing than Dokic at the slams.
The ranking system is working just fine. I really do not see what the problem is here. #5 is about where Dani deserves to be at the moment. Who deserves to be conclusively infront of her when judged by any standard? The fact is that she holds the #5 rank very narrowly from Mauresmo and Capriati - they are within 110 pts of eachother so they are more of less on an equal footing - Dani is only technically ranked superior. Lets go through the contenders for #5
SF QF QF 1r = 960
Finals Miami, Montral (tier1) and tier 1 semis @ Berlin, Rome and Charleston and semis @ the tour champs
2 titles ( Tier I beating then world #3, Tier II)
4r SF SF DNP = 1216 pts
Dokic and Seles' performances of the past year do not approach the records of these three.
Dani has earnt 1070 pts in Grand Slams while reaching three quarterfinals (only Seles, Capriati, Venus and Serena have achieved that feat in the past year) and the round of 16 in each grandslam (only Venus and Serena have achieved that feat). Only Venus, Serena and arguably Mauresmo can claim to have a better GS record in the past year - including Clijsters and Henin, the worlds #3 and #4, whose GS records in the past year are littered with pre-quarterfinal and early round defeats. She won a Tier 1 beating the world #3, and reached a swag of semi and quarterfinals while defeating players like Henin, Mauresmo and Dokic and pushing players like Davenport, Clijsters and Venus Williams. Some of you are asking has she ever beaten Capriati or Davenport - well maybe not - but their records over the past 52 weeks are far from spectacular - without a single title between them - and the rankings ONLY reflect the past 52 weeks not the players reputation or achievements prior to those 52 weeks. Whether she has beaten Williams or Clijsters is irrevelant also as the ranking already reflects that they are better than her - to be ranked #5 does not mean that you need to have beaten those ranked 1-4 (although she has beaten Henin). The fact is that with the incidence of the Williams domination - a dupoly - a top 5 player is likely to be less credentialed than a top 5 player might be in a more even era as the dominant players are achieving the more spectacular results and accumulating the most points.