PDA

View Full Version : SERENA WILLIAMS vs. Martina Hingis: Who is greater?


Pages : [1] 2 3

TeeRexx
Apr 27th, 2004, 02:41 AM
Martina Hingis won five slams and was a fine doubles player, but seemed to hit a wall when the Williams came on the tour. SERENA WILLIAMS whipped Hingis at the 1999 U.S. Open when she was only 17 and Hingis was supposed to be the best player in the world. :eek:

Since then, SERENA has won five more GS titles and has won the Grand Slam by holding all four titles at one time and having the achievement called a SERENA Slam, no less.:worship:

In the process of attaining those incredible achievements, SERENA, along with a bum foot, was instrumental in running Hingis off the WTA tour and into early retirement. :eek: :kiss:

So, in my opinion, SERENA is the greater of the two future Hall of Fame players. :angel:

Ballbuster
Apr 27th, 2004, 02:41 AM
Sprite commercial!

Oh No you Didn't!


Yup, I concur Serena single handedly ran Martina into early retirement - and she knew Venus wanted a piece of that azz so she just jetted.

Knizzle
Apr 27th, 2004, 02:45 AM
Martina Hingis of course. Bob Larson said so, so it must BE so.

:worship: Bob Larson :worship:

Ballbuster
Apr 27th, 2004, 02:51 AM
Serena blanking Martina at the US Open and Miami was my favorite moments in tennis EVER!

She showed how you whipp a fake diva.

Billabong
Apr 27th, 2004, 02:53 AM
Serena blanking Martina at the US Open and Miami was my favorite moments in tennis EVER!

She showed how you whipp a fake diva.

Mine were the Sydney 2001 QF and the Aus 01 QF:D! Aus 01 is my favorite EVER!!!

Jericho
Apr 27th, 2004, 02:55 AM
Serena obviously, Martina doesnt compare

PointBlank
Apr 27th, 2004, 02:56 AM
Mine were Manhatten 98 and Montreal 00

PointBlank
Apr 27th, 2004, 03:00 AM
also Roma 99 and Miami 98

vettipooh
Apr 27th, 2004, 03:06 AM
Sprite commercial!

Oh No you Didn't!


Yup, I concur Serena single handedly ran Martina into early retirement - and she knew Venus wanted a piece of that azz so she just jetted. You're a real ball buster! Be nice!!!;) But i'm :haha: :haha: :haha:

CanadianBoy21
Apr 27th, 2004, 03:21 AM
Serena of course.
Serena has more impressive results.
More slams(singles). She has a GRAND SLAM in all surfaces both in singles AND doubles.
Serena also has a leading head to head against Chucky.
Serena had a lot tougher road to winning her slams than Chucky did.
Serena is still on the tour, Chuck's is not.

Vincent
Apr 27th, 2004, 03:38 AM
Serena of course.
Serena has more impressive results.
More slams(singles). She has a GRAND SLAM in all surfaces both in singles AND doubles.
Serena also has a leading head to head against Chucky.
Serena had a lot tougher road to winning her slams than Chucky did.
Serena is still on the tour, Chuck's is not.http://smileys.******************/cat/4/4_14_3.gif (http://www.******************/?partner=ZSzeb001)NO!

Martian KC
Apr 27th, 2004, 03:42 AM
Mine were the Sydney 2001 QF and the Aus 01 QF:D! Aus 01 is my favorite EVER!!!

:haha:

LeonHart
Apr 27th, 2004, 04:07 AM
Sorry, but Martina Hingis will always be in the hall of fame. She was the youngest to ever hold a grandslam, and Serena will never surpass Martina's weeks at #1. Not to mention all the doubles titles Martina has!

hingis-seles
Apr 27th, 2004, 04:18 AM
She showed how you whipp a fake diva.
You must mean US Open 1997, Lipton 1997, San Diego 1997, Indian Wells 1998, San Diego 1999, Australian Open 2001.

Martina sure whipped Venus in all those matches. :kiss:

I must add, that I am surprised that you would refer to Venus as a "fake diva" :eek:

hingis-seles
Apr 27th, 2004, 04:19 AM
If I am being objective, Serena is greater than Martina. No question about it.

CanadianGuy
Apr 27th, 2004, 04:22 AM
In singles, Serena, overall, Martina. Maybe Serena has more slams, however, Martina has far more titles than Serena, longer winning streak, more matches won, more prize money earned more weeks in #1, far better in doubles etc. However, I picked Serena, just because she won Roland Garros, that alone proves to me she is better is singles, and she is still playing.

PS: a poll coming out of nowhere, and with a starting posts mentioning Serena only, no Hingis, everyone knows what you are doing:rolleyes:.

TeeRexx
Apr 27th, 2004, 05:04 AM
In singles, Serena, overall, Martina. Maybe Serena has more slams, however, Martina has far more titles than Serena, longer winning streak, more matches won, more prize money earned more weeks in #1, far better in doubles etc. However, I picked Serena, just because she won Roland Garros, that alone proves to me she is better is singles, and she is still playing.

PS: a poll coming out of nowhere, and with a starting posts mentioning Serena only, no Hingis, everyone knows what you are doing:rolleyes:.
The poll came from somewhere, mentions Hingis, if you could read at a 2nd grade level you would have known and everyone knows what you are about as well, little creature. :eek: :haha:

CanadianGuy
Apr 27th, 2004, 05:09 AM
The poll came from somewhere, mentions Hingis, if you could read at a 2nd grade level you would have known and everyone knows what you are about as well, little creature. :eek: :haha:
Yeah, say what you think:) A poll glorifying Serena from you, just why am I not surprised:rolleyes: I'm just trying to be real that's all:) We are all God's creatures, there is no need to deny that, and everyone knows I'm real:) I dont go around trashing players just so some can be holy:) I think Serena is the better one. Period. But I dont think she is holy, that's all.

Chunchun
Apr 27th, 2004, 05:55 AM
Serena & Hingis
both are great

bandabou
Apr 27th, 2004, 05:55 AM
I love Martina...but in singles at least Serena´s achievements are at another level than Martina. Martina´s great too though.

F-R-E-A-K
Apr 27th, 2004, 06:01 AM
Quick all Serena fans run in and type Serena to reassure yourself that she is 'supposed' to be greater.

Martina has more singles and doubles titles then Serena.
Serena has more GS Singles titles then Martina.
Martina has more GS titles then Serena.
Serena has won all 4 GS.
Martina won 3/4 GS events.
Serena was #1 player in the world for how long?
Martina was #1 player in the world for both singles and doubles for much longer then Serena.

Its hard to say, personally id say Martina Hingis is the greater all round (singles and doubles) tennis player. Where Serena has it over Martina in singles GS events.

Volcana
Apr 27th, 2004, 06:05 AM
Hingis was a greater tennis player.
Serena was a BETTER tennis player.

bandabou
Apr 27th, 2004, 06:17 AM
In a year or two this discussion is gonna be mood....because by then, if there were any doubts about who was greater, all doubts are gonna be erased when Serena´s a three+ titlist at both Wimbledon and the Open, a four or five time titlist at the Nasdaq,etc...

SerialKiller#69
Apr 27th, 2004, 06:20 AM
MARTINA HINGIS. Classic tennis.

vs1
Apr 27th, 2004, 06:59 AM
How can one compare tennis legends?! They all contributed greatly to the game. I respect both Martina and Serena. :worship:

I selected SERENA in this poll because I'm biased (and I really do believe that Serena is one of tennis' greatest athletes). Serena is my favourite tennis player, so of course I am going to select her in this poll. But in all seriousness...I do believe that Serena is a tennis legend, on par with Monica Seles, Evonne Goolagong and Martiva Nav in changing tennis. Each of these legends shifted the tennis paradigm. No one wants to see Serena in their draw too early. Everyone feels like an underdog when compared to Serena, even if they are ranked higher than her. And to top it off, Serena is BEAUTIFUL inside and out. I don't care how any total titles she wins (and tennis greats hardly ever seem to be noted for their double titles), Serena will always be my babygirl! :hearts:

TeeRexx
Apr 27th, 2004, 07:10 AM
SERENA is leading in the poll.

Jarrett
Apr 27th, 2004, 07:39 AM
Hingis was a greater tennis player.
Serena was a BETTER tennis player.
If that is how you felt, than why did you vote the other way? :p

For me, Martina is the greater/better tennis player. Serena I would say it better in singles though.

Kabezya
Apr 27th, 2004, 09:29 AM
How can one compare tennis legends?! They all contributed greatly to the game. I respect both Martina and Serena. :worship:

I selected SERENA in this poll because I'm biased (and I really do believe that Serena is one of tennis' greatest athletes). Serena is my favourite tennis player, so of course I am going to select her in this poll. But in all seriousness...I do believe that Serena is a tennis legend, on par with Monica Seles, Evonne Goolagong and Martiva Nav in changing tennis. Each of these legends shifted the tennis paradigm. No one wants to see Serena in their draw too early. Everyone feels like an underdog when compared to Serena, even if they are ranked higher than her. And to top it off, Serena is BEAUTIFUL inside and out. I don't care how any total titles she wins (and tennis greats hardly ever seem to be noted for their double titles), Serena will always be my babygirl! :hearts:


:clap2:

Peetz
Apr 27th, 2004, 10:07 AM
Serena of course!

Serena WILLIAMS (USA) v Martina HINGIS (SUI) 1998 Key Biscayne Hard (O) QF Martina HINGIS 3-6 6-1 6-7 1998 Manhattan Beach Hard (O) QF Martina HINGIS 4-6 1-6 1999 Key Biscayne Hard (O) SF Serena WILLIAMS 6-4 7-6 1999 Rome Clay (O) QF Martina HINGIS 2-6 2-6 1999 Manhattan Beach Hard (O) SF Serena WILLIAMS 6-3 7-5 1999 US Open Hard (O) FR Serena WILLIAMS 6-3 7-6 2000 Los Angeles Hard (O) SF Serena WILLIAMS 4-6 6-2 6-3 2000 Canadian Open Hard (O) FR Martina HINGIS 6-0 3-6 0-3 Retired 2001 Sydney Hard (O) QF Martina HINGIS 4-6 5-7 2001 Australian Open Hard (O) QF Martina HINGIS 2-6 6-3 6-8 2001 U.S. Open Hard (O) SF Serena WILLIAMS 6-3 6-2 2002 Scottsdale Hard (O) SF Serena WILLIAMS 6-1 3-6 6-4 2002 Miami Hard (O) QF Serena WILLIAMS 6-4 6-0 Serena WILLIAMS (USA) leads 7 : 6


If Hingis had played some more seasons the H2H would look like 20:6 or something like that!;)

Alan
Apr 27th, 2004, 10:43 AM
Yeah, say what you think:) A poll glorifying Serena from you, just why am I not surprised:rolleyes: I'm just trying to be real that's all:) We are all God's creatures, there is no need to deny that, and everyone knows I'm real:) I dont go around trashing players just so some can be holy:) I think Serena is the better one. Period. But I dont think she is holy, that's all.
i would have to agree with the Canadianguy...

you did mention hingis, but it's how you started the thread that makes it obvious...

PEACE:bounce:

sunnysideup
Apr 27th, 2004, 11:10 AM
Serena.

TeeRexx
Apr 27th, 2004, 07:28 PM
SERENA still seems to be the logical choice for the greater of the two.

The big edges for SERENA are:

1. More GS singles titles
2. Domination of Hingis in slams
3. Better server
4. More longevity.
5. Better body :eek: :lol:

TR :cool:

DA FOREHAND
Apr 27th, 2004, 07:32 PM
If that is how you felt, than why did you vote the other way? :p

For me, Martina is the greater/better tennis player. Serena I would say it better in singles though.
Singles is all that matters....leave the doubles rankings to the dubs specialist...and players from a diff. era when all the women played dubs.

DUNEMAN
Apr 27th, 2004, 07:33 PM
SERENA still seems to be the logical choice for the greater of the two.

The big edges for SERENA are:

1. More GS singles titles
2. Domination of Hingis in slams
3. Better server
4. More longevity.
5. Better body :eek: :lol:

TR :cool:

:lick: :lick: SERENA

brunof
Apr 27th, 2004, 08:02 PM
Miss Hingis :wavey:

Cam'ron Giles
Apr 27th, 2004, 08:03 PM
:rolleyes: @ these polls...no offense Tee...:p

These polls serves no purpose...:rolleyes:

faboozadoo15
Apr 27th, 2004, 09:02 PM
i voted for hingis even though i think they are even just because of how idiotically the poll was laid out and because of the first post.
and martina's quite a nice looker...

justine&coria
Apr 27th, 2004, 09:14 PM
I prefer Serena but Hingis was greater mainly because she was just 16 when she became number 1 (i hope i'm not wrong).

hythger
Apr 27th, 2004, 09:37 PM
Hingis all the way!

flyingmachine
Apr 27th, 2004, 09:42 PM
:bowdown: Martina Hingis :bowdown:

shap_half
Apr 27th, 2004, 09:52 PM
:bowdown: Martina Hingis :bowdown:

bandabou
Apr 27th, 2004, 09:57 PM
The funny thing is that the same people who are voting for Hingis being greater than Serena now, are gonna turn around and say Justine is greater than hingis....although she has achieved even less than Martina herself!!! Polls, polls. :lol:

F-R-E-A-K
Apr 27th, 2004, 11:15 PM
Martina is winning!! :)

Go Hingis! :D

Ryan
Apr 27th, 2004, 11:21 PM
Honestly, as much as I looove Martina, Serena is better. I would take Martina's career if I had the choice (at this point-way better overall record) but Serena is the better player IMO. She hits harder, is more driven, and is just...better.

MrSerenaWilliams
Apr 27th, 2004, 11:24 PM
Serena was better for what she accomplished. Hingis was better for how soon she accomplished it. Hingis hit her peak early, but by the time Serena came around, she was to concerned with her rivalry with Davenport to be concerned with Serena. Serena's as viscious as a bull-dog, and Higis was as prissy as a poodle. Hingis was a good player, but I strongly doubt that she had the off-court manor of Serena.

It's a matter of prefrence, mine personally.......(do you really have to ask?) SERENA!

strike86
Apr 27th, 2004, 11:27 PM
100% SERENA WILLIAMS!!!

faboozadoo15
Apr 27th, 2004, 11:45 PM
The funny thing is that the same people who are voting for Hingis being greater than Serena now, are gonna turn around and say Justine is greater than hingis....although she has achieved even less than Martina herself!!! Polls, polls. :lol:
i wouldn't ever say justine has more accomplishments than martina-- not yet anyway...
and i just roll my eyes when people say either one of the girls in this poll have achieved as much as monica...

Jamie
Apr 28th, 2004, 12:20 AM
Martina Hingis. I have one comment. When Serena won her first GS, I hope she thanked her sister Venus. Martina had a tough 2 1/2 hour battle with Venus and had to go back the next day and play Serena who is all brawn (Big brawn). If the match with Venus hadn't taken so much out of Martina, she would of had it. When Serena gets to Martina's record, then Serena is better. Right now Martina leads.

TeeRexx
Apr 28th, 2004, 12:43 AM
Hmmm, many of the voters for Hingis seem to be brand new members and those who are using their first ever post for this little thread.

How interesting. :confused: :rolleyes:

fammmmedspin
Apr 28th, 2004, 01:21 AM
Serena might improve her record - though the knee looks like it might be her achilles Hingis heel. At present neither of them feature very high on the list of GS winners. Hingis features very well on the weeks at number 1 list - against the people who opposed Graf and the early williams sisters (and did it at a younger age than Serena) and Martina has more tournaments which outweigh the odd GS.

faboozadoo15
Apr 28th, 2004, 01:23 AM
Martina Hingis. I have one comment. When Serena won her first GS, I hope she thanked her sister Venus. Martina had a tough 2 1/2 hour battle with Venus and had to go back the next day and play Serena who is all brawn (Big brawn). If the match with Venus hadn't taken so much out of Martina, she would of had it. When Serena gets to Martina's record, then Serena is better. Right now Martina leads.
that's not necessarily true... it would be one thing if she came out smoking serena and ran out of gas, but that's not the case.
and serena had the most difficult draw of all time or something... testud (who was GREAT) then seles and then davenport...
so this isn't a good martina argument...
however, martina is still better ;)

faboozadoo15
Apr 28th, 2004, 01:25 AM
Hmmm, many of the voters for Hingis seem to be brand new members and those who are using their first ever post for this little thread.

How interesting. :confused: :rolleyes:
no one who has posted has fewer than 200 posts :confused: unless i have someone blocked or something... and over half the number of people with less than 500 posts voted for serena...
interesting
some people make really bad losers
interesting...

Yummy
Apr 28th, 2004, 01:26 AM
Hingis :worship:

callado
Apr 28th, 2004, 01:36 AM
Hingis who? :lol:

People are talking about Hingis like she's still playing
"Great" players dont retire at 21.

faboozadoo15
Apr 28th, 2004, 01:47 AM
Hingis who? :lol:

People are talking about Hingis like she's still playing
"Great" players dont retire at 21.
sure they do... and even greater ones have more to show in such a short time than people do in a whole career...
hope that ended your little dash there...

TeeRexx
Apr 28th, 2004, 02:30 AM
How can one be "great" if they were run off the court by two truly great players? :p

AgassiGirl16
Apr 28th, 2004, 02:37 AM
It's hard to say....Martina was my favorite player for the longest time. In her time, she was the greatest...youngest grand slam chamore "natural" talent and grace then any other player out there. Her mind was amazing, and so was what she accomplished. She was forced into early retirement...but she certainly didn't damage the legacy she made..

Serena is a great player, with a lot of power...she has dominated the tour for the past few years, and I'm sure she has a lot ahead of her.

Both of these players are great, and no one can deny that, but they were each a totally different type of player, so they really can't compare. They both dominted the sport, won grand slams...with two totally different types of games....They are both Champions, former #1's...that's how they compare.

faboozadoo15
Apr 28th, 2004, 02:43 AM
How can one be "great" if they were run off the court by two truly great players? :p
then i would ask you how can someone who is "the greatest" be called that when there was someone clearly better right in the middle of their career who had to be taken out so the "greatest" could get back to the top?

martina chased herself out of the game. her stubborness and injuries made her retire. had little to do with the opposition. she could have continued to handle it and stay at the top if she would have changed/grown a little more. but she didn't, and then she became injured.

and martina is great under any scope-- unless "great" means you have to play for 10 years as a pro or something... but she did so much that several goodgirls couldn't do in 5 careers.

1Williams
Apr 28th, 2004, 04:30 AM
Serena is. Hingis was just a lucky tennis squatter at number 1, just like
the Belgian losers right now. Tennis wouldn't be tennis without the Sisters.
Nobody gives two shits about the other players.

Martian KC
Apr 28th, 2004, 04:37 AM
Ignorant posters.:lol:

Martina. :angel:

reyrey
Apr 28th, 2004, 05:00 AM
People are comparing Hingis and Serana doubles record but what team was everyone scared to face: the Williams Sisters or Martina Hingis/whoever.

faboozadoo15
Apr 28th, 2004, 05:04 AM
wow... 1Williams has really stretched himself/herself. only 7 posts, and can you imagine trying to say something less intelligent each time you post?

Bitter Blue Bong
Apr 28th, 2004, 05:20 AM
This reminds me of a very similar discussion on another board awhile ago. This was posted by "StatsUCanTrust" on an AOL board after the Serena Slam...interesting food for thought:

With all the comparison between Serena's career and Miss Hingis' may I join in?

Serena Williams recently won her 5th career Grand Slam singles title in her 18th career Grand Slam singles tournament appearnace. By comparison, Martina Hingis won her 5th career Grand Slam singles title in her 17th appearance. Hingis achieved her 5th win in one less appearance than Serena. Score one for Martina.

However, when you compare Hingis record in her first 18 Grand Slam events vs. Serena's, Serena by far outclassed Hingis.

Hingis first 18 events:
1995 Australian (2R), French (3R), Wimbledon (1R), US Open (4R)
1996 Australian (QF), French (3R), Wimbledon (4R), US Open (SF)
1997 Australian (W), French (RU), Wimbledon (W), US Open (W)
1998 Australian (W), French (SF), Wimbledon (SF), US Open (RU)
1999 Australian (W), French (RU)

Williams first 18 events:
1998 Australian (2R), French (4R), Wimbledon (3R), US Open (3R)
1999 Australian (3R), French (4R), US Open (W)
2000 Australian (4R), Wimbledon (SF), US Open (QF)
2001 Australian (QF), French (QF), Wimbledon (QF), US Open (RU)
2002 French (W), Wimbledon (W), US Open (W)
2003 Australian (W)

Serena won her first Grand Slam singles title in her 7th appearance
Hingis won her first Grand Slam singles title in her 9th appearance

Serena has a 77-13 record in her first 18 Grand Slam events
Hingis has a 73-13 record in her first 18 Grand Slam events

Serena won 5 of 6 Grand Slam finals in her first 18 events
Hingis won 5 of 8 Grand Slam finals in her first 18 events

Serena has won 5 singles, 6 women's doubles and 2 mixed doubles titles for a total of 13 Grand Slam championships in her first 18 events
Hingis has won 5 singles, 7 women's doubles, and 0 mixed doubles titles for a total of 12 Grand Slam championships in her first 18 events

In winning her 5 Grand Slam singls titles, Serena has beaten the following players (rankings in parentheses):
1999 US Open: Hingis (1), Davenport (2), Seles (4)
2002 French: Capriati (1), VWilliams (2)
2002 Wimbledon: VWilliams (1)
2002 US Open: VWilliams (2)
2003 Australian: VWilliams (2), Clijsters (4)
That is three #1 ranked players, four #2 ranked players, and two #4 ranked players - a total of 9 wins over players ranked in the top four in 5 Grand Slam singles wins. In Serena's 5 career Grand Slam wins she has beaten the following players who had were Grand Slam champions: 1999 US Open (Martinez, Seles, Davenport, Hingis), 2002 French Open (Pierce, VWilliams), 2002 Wimbledon (VWilliams), 2002 US Open (Davenport, VWilliams), 2003 Australian Open (VWilliams). 10 total wins against Grand Slam champions.

In winning her 5 Grand Slam singls titles, Hingis has beaten the following players (rankings in parentheses):
1997 Wimbledon: Novotna (3)
1997 US Open: Davenport (6)
No wins over any player ranked #1, #2, or #4; only one win over a player ranked as high as #3, and neither of these players had won a Grand Slam singles title at the time Hingis beat them. In Hingis' 5 career Grand Slam wins, the only times she ever beat a player who was a Grand Slam champion were 1997 Australian Open (Pierce), 1997 US Open (Sanchez Vicario), 1998 Australian (Martinez), and 1999 Australian (Pierce and Seles). 5 total wins against Grand Slam champions.

Smart intelligent folks will recognize that Serena's Grand Slam wins came against much tougher competition than Hingis'.

Serena, should she win just one more Grand Slam singles title will surpass Hingis. It wouldn't matter how long it takes Serena, because she Hingis will never win another.

Some have tried to denegrate Serena's accomplishments by saying they came during a time when Hingis and Davenport were injured and Clijsters and Henin are still on the way up, and Seles is on the way out and Graf is already retired. But I ask you: who did Hingis beat to win her Grand Slam titles (and compare to who Serena beat to win her 5 Grand Slam events)? Mary Pierce, unseeded and ranked #25 at the 1997 Australian Open (did Hingis most definitely benefit from the fact that Seles didn't play and Graf was upset?), unseeded #66 ranked Venus Williams, in only her 3rd ever Grand Slam event, in the 1997 US Open final, #8 seed Conchita Martinez in the 1998 Australian Open, unseeded Amelie Mauresmo in the 1999 Australian Open. Did not Hingis benefit from Steffi Graf not playing in the 1997 Wimbledon or US Open or 1998 Australian Open? In her 5 Grand Slam wins, in the QF and beyond she beat: 1997 Australian: #8, #14, unseeded; 1997 Wimbledon: unseeded, unseeded, #3; 1997 US Open: #10, #6, unseeded; 1998 Australian: #5, #10, #8; 1999 Australian: #7, #6, unseeded. Three of her five Grand Slam final round wins came against unseeded opponents, while Hingis was seeded #1 or #2. 5 of Hingis' 15 opponents in the QF or beyond were unseeded, and only two were in the top 5.

No player who has won 5 Grand Slam singles titles has had it as easy as Hingis.

A question before leaving: If you were a player would you rather have Serena's record or Hingis? Is weeks ranked at #1 more important than Grand Slam titles? Would you rather win more Slam titles and spend less time at #1? Any player who has ever achieved the #1 ranking has always admitted it's a great accomplishment, but what is most important is winning Grand Slam singles titles.

Glenn
Apr 28th, 2004, 06:04 AM
Martina leading the poll! :worship:

bandabou
Apr 28th, 2004, 06:08 AM
I guess Martina H is greater than Martina N too....´cause when she was Hingis´s age she hadn´t won a thing yet. winning young remember?!

faboozadoo15
Apr 28th, 2004, 06:23 AM
Serena Williams recently won her 5th career Grand Slam singles title in her 18th career Grand Slam singles tournament appearnace. By comparison, Martina Hingis won her 5th career Grand Slam singles title in her 17th appearance. Hingis achieved her 5th win in one less appearance than Serena. Score one for Martina.

However, when you compare Hingis record in her first 18 Grand Slam events vs. Serena's, Serena by far outclassed Hingis.

Serena won her first Grand Slam singles title in her 7th appearance
Hingis won her first Grand Slam singles title in her 9th appearance

Serena has a 77-13 record in her first 18 Grand Slam events
Hingis has a 73-13 record in her first 18 Grand Slam events

Serena won 5 of 6 Grand Slam finals in her first 18 events
Hingis won 5 of 8 Grand Slam finals in her first 18 events

Serena has won 5 singles, 6 women's doubles and 2 mixed doubles titles for a total of 13 Grand Slam championships in her first 18 events
Hingis has won 5 singles, 7 women's doubles, and 0 mixed doubles titles for a total of 12 Grand Slam championships in her first 18 events

In winning her 5 Grand Slam singls titles, Serena has beaten the following players (rankings in parentheses):
1999 US Open: Hingis (1), Davenport (2), Seles (4)
2002 French: Capriati (1), VWilliams (2)
2002 Wimbledon: VWilliams (1)
2002 US Open: VWilliams (2)
2003 Australian: VWilliams (2), Clijsters (4)
That is three #1 ranked players, four #2 ranked players, and two #4 ranked players - a total of 9 wins over players ranked in the top four in 5 Grand Slam singles wins. In Serena's 5 career Grand Slam wins she has beaten the following players who had were Grand Slam champions: 1999 US Open (Martinez, Seles, Davenport, Hingis), 2002 French Open (Pierce, VWilliams), 2002 Wimbledon (VWilliams), 2002 US Open (Davenport, VWilliams), 2003 Australian Open (VWilliams). 10 total wins against Grand Slam champions.

In winning her 5 Grand Slam singls titles, Hingis has beaten the following players (rankings in parentheses):
1997 Wimbledon: Novotna (3)
1997 US Open: Davenport (6)
No wins over any player ranked #1, #2, or #4; only one win over a player ranked as high as #3, and neither of these players had won a Grand Slam singles title at the time Hingis beat them. In Hingis' 5 career Grand Slam wins, the only times she ever beat a player who was a Grand Slam champion were 1997 Australian Open (Pierce), 1997 US Open (Sanchez Vicario), 1998 Australian (Martinez), and 1999 Australian (Pierce and Seles). 5 total wins against Grand Slam champions.

Smart intelligent folks will recognize that Serena's Grand Slam wins came against much tougher competition than Hingis'.

Serena, should she win just one more Grand Slam singles title will surpass Hingis. It wouldn't matter how long it takes Serena, because she Hingis will never win another.

No player who has won 5 Grand Slam singles titles has had it as easy as Hingis.

A question before leaving: If you were a player would you rather have Serena's record or Hingis? Is weeks ranked at #1 more important than Grand Slam titles? Would you rather win more Slam titles and spend less time at #1? Any player who has ever achieved the #1 ranking has always admitted it's a great accomplishment, but what is most important is winning Grand Slam singles titles.[/I]
there's so much wrong here i don't know where to begin... why is there an importance placed only on the first 18 events?
why did you not mention total titles, weeks at number one?
why does it matter who won sooner when hingis deliberatly began playing so young so that one day she would win, and serena began when she knew she would win... that's such a different approach...
why didn't you mention any of the wins over davenport by martina in her slams?
and isn't it SLIGHTLY important that martina never beat a #1 in a slam because she was almost always the #1 player IN the slam???
and you neglected a few wins that hingis had over venus, serena, monica, davenport, mauresmo, SERENA, and many others because we're only talking about the first 18 events, which is bogus.

kosmikgroove
Apr 28th, 2004, 06:45 AM
how could she beat the #1 player if SHE was the #1 ranked player?

In winning her 5 Grand Slam singls titles, Hingis has beaten the following players (rankings in parentheses):
1997 Wimbledon: Novotna (3)
1997 US Open: Davenport (6)
No wins over any player ranked #1, #2, or #4; only one win over a player ranked as high as #3, and neither of these players had won a Grand Slam singles title at the time Hingis beat them. In Hingis' 5 career Grand Slam wins, the only times she ever beat a player who was a Grand Slam champion were 1997 Australian Open (Pierce), 1997 US Open (Sanchez Vicario), 1998 Australian (Martinez), and 1999 Australian (Pierce and Seles). 5 total wins against Grand Slam champions.

mandy7
Apr 28th, 2004, 07:39 AM
if you're gonna compare martina to anyone, compare her to graf or navratilova
but come on, serena, the best technician ever???
you on drugs man?

martina! without a doubt!

ciao M

TeeRexx
Apr 28th, 2004, 08:34 AM
:rolleyes: @ these polls...no offense Tee...:p

These polls serves no purpose...:rolleyes:
They keep me from being to bored when my faves are not in action. :p :lol:

sunnysideup
Apr 28th, 2004, 11:06 AM
Serena.

Alan
Apr 28th, 2004, 11:22 AM
no one who has posted has fewer than 200 posts :confused: unless i have someone blocked or something... and over half the number of people with less than 500 posts voted for serena...
interesting
some people make really bad losers
interesting...yeah and the number of posts don't necessarily signify if you are a new member or not, i have been been a tennis fan for a long time and i've been a member for two years now (because of hingis), but then in the past i didn't post much and would much prefer to just read the posts


No player who has won 5 Grand Slam singles titles has had it as easy as Hingis.

A question before leaving: If you were a player would you rather have Serena's record or Hingis? Is weeks ranked at #1 more important than Grand Slam titles? Would you rather win more Slam titles and spend less time at #1? Any player who has ever achieved the #1 ranking has always admitted it's a great accomplishment, but what is most important is winning Grand Slam singles titles.really? how could that have happened, despite having davenport, capriati, sanchez vicario, novotna, pierce, graf(?), seles, VENUS AND SERENA in the same GS tournaments in those years, then why didn't they step THAT time if they can have it as easy at the same period???

how come hingis won? and the others lost in their respective draws?? and five times??? how the hell could that have happened huh???

frankly speaking, i'd rather have hingis's record, and hingis's game-- a smart beautiful game

Serena is. Hingis was just a lucky tennis squatter at number 1, just like
the Belgian losers right now. Tennis wouldn't be tennis without the Sisters.
Nobody gives two shits about the other players.wow!!! unbelievable:eek:

so what was tennis before the sisters???

apparently, the williamses are the only things you know about tennis

and have you heard of that thing called "tennis racket" and "tennis court"... they make tennis:lick:

dude, i suggest you buy the book "tennis for dummies" ... READ UP!:angel:

Martian Jeza
Apr 28th, 2004, 11:27 AM
If Serena Williams the best technician ever is then I am the Pope.

Martian Jeza
Apr 28th, 2004, 11:41 AM
Serena is. Hingis was just a lucky tennis squatter at number 1, just like
the Belgian losers right now. Tennis wouldn't be tennis without the Sisters.
Nobody gives two shits about the other players.

You have a great tennis knowledge, congrats... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

DunkMachine
Apr 28th, 2004, 11:46 AM
You must mean US Open 1997, Lipton 1997, San Diego 1997, Indian Wells 1998, San Diego 1999, Australian Open 2001.

Martina sure whipped Venus in all those matches. :kiss:

I must add, that I am surprised that you would refer to Venus as a "fake diva" :eek:The thread is about Serena shitkicker. Put down the haterade, thanks

TonyP
Apr 28th, 2004, 02:35 PM
It has been claimed by some that Hingis only hung on to her number one ranking because she played "so many tournaments."

Well a check of the stats doesn't exactly support that idea.

From 1995 (her first full year) on through 2001 (the year she was injured at Filderstadt, ending her season), the stats look like this.

1995 14 tournaments
1996 18 "
1997 18 "
1998 18 "
1999 19 "
2000 20 "
2001 18 "

These stats don't include Fed Cup, Hopman Cup or other, non-points paying tournaments.

I would suggest that the reason she maintained her number one ranking so long is not the number of tournaments she played, which was about average for top players and far less than many others like Testud, Dokic, etc., but rather that she usually either won or got to the later rounds of almost every tournament she played.

So, the reason she was number one for so long was consistantly good play. No big revelation, but the stats sure don't sure her playing all that much compared with MOST other players on the tour.

space_eef03
Apr 28th, 2004, 02:43 PM
Well I had a hard time picking one because they're both good but finally I took Hingis because I really liked the way she plays. ;)

Dolpho
Apr 28th, 2004, 02:44 PM
Obviously Hingis! No one has got the talent Hingis had. Serena is no where near Hingis if u are considering the "real" tennis skills, the only skill Serena has is power!

TonyP
Apr 28th, 2004, 03:44 PM
I think BOTH Serena Williams and Martina Hingis are incredibly talented players and the two MOST accomnplished players of their generations. I would say Venus and Davenport are right behind them.

What for the life of me I don't understand is the frequent nastiness of Williams fans who start thread after thread which seems intent upon tearing down Martina's accomplishements. But they also are tearing down other players.

By saying Martina never beat anyone of significance, they are demeaning everyone from Mary Joe Fernandez to four time grand slam winner Aranxta Sanchez-Vacario. They are demeaning 9 time slam winner Monica Seles, along with Mary Pierce and Conchita Martinez and Amelie Mauresmo. They are ignoring that she beat Davenport 11 times and that she also piled up a 16-16 record during that period against the Willies themselves.

But for SOME Williams fans, it seems as if Serena and Venus will never be considered great unless than can prove Martina was NOT great.

DA FOREHAND
Apr 28th, 2004, 03:58 PM
Obviously Hingis! No one has got the talent Hingis had. Serena is no where near Hingis if u are considering the "real" tennis skills, the only skill Serena has is power!


What shot did Hingis have the Serena doesn't?

Serve Serena

Volley Hingis

Forehand Serena

Backhand Hingis

Return about even w/Martina being more consistent but less deadly.

If they were to play out thier careers ala Evert/Navratilova...I'd give Serena the edge.

Bitter Blue Bong
Apr 28th, 2004, 04:09 PM
This reminds me of a very similar discussion on another board awhile ago. This was posted by "StatsUCanTrust" on an AOL board after the Serena Slam...interesting food for thought:

Let me repeat that, since some of you think these are my words. I don't know why he didn't include weeks at #1 or anything else.

faboozadoo15
Apr 29th, 2004, 12:11 AM
The thread is about Serena shitkicker. Put down the haterade, thanks
no it's not... moron
those go in her respective fan forum

faboozadoo15
Apr 29th, 2004, 12:14 AM
Let me repeat that, since some of you think these are my words. I don't know why he didn't include weeks at #1 or anything else.
that's fair... but to say all that and ignore such important validity really puts things further into meaninglessness.

TeeRexx
Apr 29th, 2004, 01:20 AM
What shot did Hingis have the Serena doesn't?

Serve Serena

Volley Hingis

Forehand Serena

Backhand Hingis

Return about even w/Martina being more consistent but less deadly.

If they were to play out thier careers ala Evert/Navratilova...I'd give Serena the edge.
Good post, but here are my choices:

Serve: SERENA

Volley: Hingis

Forehand: SERENA

Backhand: SERENA

Return: About even w/Martina being less deadly.

SERENA seems to be the greater of the two. :angel:

faboozadoo15
Apr 29th, 2004, 01:27 AM
if you can ACTUALLY say that serena's backhand is better then no one of any intelligence will respect your opinion anyway... so you can go ahead and THINK that...

"Topaz"
Apr 29th, 2004, 02:37 AM
I didn't read all the posts but I can tell you Serena is convincingly the better player. If USO-99 could have gone either way, USO-2001 (@ semifinals) was a one-way street with a 100% first serve in the 2nd set (remember?). Montreal 2000 also helped me position those two players, where Serena had to retire in the 2nd set after serving Miss Swiss a bagel in the 1st.

Great memories! Boy... Hingis's early retirement does take away something from women's tennis!

*JR*
Apr 29th, 2004, 02:45 AM
Martina Hingis of course. Bob Larson said so, so it must BE so.

:worship: Bob Larson :worship:
I once gave that moron some inside dirt on something. The next week, he ran a piece totally missing the point. I called him on it, and Bob's excuse was that someone else wrote the story. Duh, you put your name on An Article, see that it makes sense first, no matter who actually wrote it! :rolleyes:

Knizzle
Apr 29th, 2004, 02:49 AM
I once gave that moron some inside dirt on something. The next week, he ran a piece totally missing the point. I called him on it, and Bob's excuse was that someone else wrote the story. Duh, you put your name on An Article, see that it makes sense first, no matter who actually wrote it! :rolleyes:
Like what??

*JR*
Apr 29th, 2004, 02:54 AM
Like what??
Just Something Simple To Test Bob's Brainpower. (He flunked). ;)

TeeRexx
Apr 29th, 2004, 08:07 AM
if you can ACTUALLY say that serena's backhand is better then no one of any intelligence will respect your opinion anyway... so you can go ahead and THINK that...

Sure I can think that fact. SERENA ran Hingis out of tennis with that backhand. :p

GoGoMaggie
Apr 29th, 2004, 08:18 AM
Tennis wise it's a close call... I really wouldn't bother to call it.
But personality and character wise, it would be Martina Hingis hands down.

Tompier
Apr 29th, 2004, 11:13 AM
MARTINA HINGIS:
serve: Serena
forehand: Serena
movement: Serena
unforced errors: Serena (her game compared to Martina's was ugly crap and you all know that)
backhand: Martina
volley: Martina
dropshot: Martina
smash: Martina
smart game: Martina

MARTINA :worship: :worship: :worship:

DJ Troll
Apr 29th, 2004, 11:16 AM
Martina :bounce: for sure

Cybelle Darkholme
Apr 29th, 2004, 02:06 PM
Of course its serena



its like asking who is greater hingis or graf we know its graf.



the person with more slams and more slams on different surfaces is obviously greater because they accomplished more

If martina is greater than serena then where is her french open title? Where is her four slam win streak..... no where.

Experimentee
Apr 29th, 2004, 05:31 PM
Doubles only seems to matter nowadays to Hingis fans in threads like these :lol:

bandabou
Apr 29th, 2004, 06:41 PM
Tennis wise it's a close call... I really wouldn't bother to call it.
But personality and character wise, it would be Martina Hingis hands down.

:haha: :rolls: For sure...you gotta have SOME personality to call someone a half-man!! :tape: DAAANNGGG!!

kosmikgroove
Apr 29th, 2004, 07:13 PM
what is smatch?

MARTINA HINGIS:
serve: Serena
forehand: Serena
movement: Serena
unforced errors: Serena (her game compared to Martina's was ugly crap and you all know that)
backhand: Martina
volley: Martina
dropshot: Martina
smatch: Martina
smart game: Martina

MARTINA :worship: :worship: :worship:

sarza
Apr 29th, 2004, 08:29 PM
martina for sure.
thinking its meant to be smash rather than smatch

kosmikgroove
Apr 29th, 2004, 09:08 PM
thanks for clarifying!

LOL Tompier bad repped me because he thought i was making fun of him. i think smatch is pretty hard to decipher.

martina for sure.
thinking its meant to be smash rather than smatch

DunkMachine
Apr 29th, 2004, 09:09 PM
no it's not... moron
those go in her respective fan forumThread title clearly refer to 2 people Serena and Hingis. Yet someone is talking about how many matches Venus lost :retard:. You know what a thread is right?!

You're stupid, go away!

Tompier
Apr 29th, 2004, 10:15 PM
martina for sure.
thinking its meant to be smash rather than smatch

thanks, that's correct :) sorry for my mistake but just as I expected smart one would figure it out ;) :wavey:

Tompier
Apr 29th, 2004, 10:21 PM
thanks for clarifying!

LOL Tompier bad repped me because he thought i was making fun of him. i think smatch is pretty hard to decipher.

It's about tennis shot and first three letters are correct :p

alfonsojose
Apr 29th, 2004, 10:22 PM
Martina.

DA FOREHAND
Apr 29th, 2004, 10:24 PM
SERENA hands down

DunkMachine
Apr 29th, 2004, 11:12 PM
MARTINA HINGIS:
serve: Serena
forehand: Serena
movement: Serena
unforced errors: Serena (her game compared to Martina's was ugly crap and you all know that)
backhand: Martina
volley: Martina
dropshot: Martina
smash: Martina
smart game: Martina

MARTINA :worship: :worship: :worship:
:retard:smartgame? wtf kind of a criterium is that?

powergame: Serena
drive volley: Serena
passingshot: Serena

etc.......

Volcana
Apr 29th, 2004, 11:33 PM
This reminds me of a very similar discussion on another board awhile ago. This was posted by "StatsUCanTrust" on an AOL board after the Serena Slam...interesting food for thought:

With all the comparison between Serena's career and Miss Hingis' may I join in?

Serena Williams recently won her 5th career Grand Slam singles title in her 18th career Grand Slam singles tournament appearnace. By comparison, Martina Hingis won her 5th career Grand Slam singles title in her 17th appearance. Hingis achieved her 5th win in one less appearance than Serena. Score one for Martina.

However, when you compare Hingis record in her first 18 Grand Slam events vs. Serena's, Serena by far outclassed Hingis.

Hingis first 18 events:
1995 Australian (2R), French (3R), Wimbledon (1R), US Open (4R)
1996 Australian (QF), French (3R), Wimbledon (4R), US Open (SF)
1997 Australian (W), French (RU), Wimbledon (W), US Open (W)
1998 Australian (W), French (SF), Wimbledon (SF), US Open (RU)
1999 Australian (W), French (RU)

Williams first 18 events:
1998 Australian (2R), French (4R), Wimbledon (3R), US Open (3R)
1999 Australian (3R), French (4R), US Open (W)
2000 Australian (4R), Wimbledon (SF), US Open (QF)
2001 Australian (QF), French (QF), Wimbledon (QF), US Open (RU)
2002 French (W), Wimbledon (W), US Open (W)
2003 Australian (W)

Serena won her first Grand Slam singles title in her 7th appearance
Hingis won her first Grand Slam singles title in her 9th appearance

Serena has a 77-13 record in her first 18 Grand Slam events
Hingis has a 73-13 record in her first 18 Grand Slam events

Serena won 5 of 6 Grand Slam finals in her first 18 events
Hingis won 5 of 8 Grand Slam finals in her first 18 events

Serena has won 5 singles, 6 women's doubles and 2 mixed doubles titles for a total of 13 Grand Slam championships in her first 18 events
Hingis has won 5 singles, 7 women's doubles, and 0 mixed doubles titles for a total of 12 Grand Slam championships in her first 18 events

In winning her 5 Grand Slam singls titles, Serena has beaten the following players (rankings in parentheses):
1999 US Open: Hingis (1), Davenport (2), Seles (4)
2002 French: Capriati (1), VWilliams (2)
2002 Wimbledon: VWilliams (1)
2002 US Open: VWilliams (2)
2003 Australian: VWilliams (2), Clijsters (4)
That is three #1 ranked players, four #2 ranked players, and two #4 ranked players - a total of 9 wins over players ranked in the top four in 5 Grand Slam singles wins. In Serena's 5 career Grand Slam wins she has beaten the following players who had were Grand Slam champions: 1999 US Open (Martinez, Seles, Davenport, Hingis), 2002 French Open (Pierce, VWilliams), 2002 Wimbledon (VWilliams), 2002 US Open (Davenport, VWilliams), 2003 Australian Open (VWilliams). 10 total wins against Grand Slam champions.

In winning her 5 Grand Slam singls titles, Hingis has beaten the following players (rankings in parentheses):
1997 Wimbledon: Novotna (3)
1997 US Open: Davenport (6)
No wins over any player ranked #1, #2, or #4; only one win over a player ranked as high as #3, and neither of these players had won a Grand Slam singles title at the time Hingis beat them. In Hingis' 5 career Grand Slam wins, the only times she ever beat a player who was a Grand Slam champion were 1997 Australian Open (Pierce), 1997 US Open (Sanchez Vicario), 1998 Australian (Martinez), and 1999 Australian (Pierce and Seles). 5 total wins against Grand Slam champions.

Smart intelligent folks will recognize that Serena's Grand Slam wins came against much tougher competition than Hingis'.

Serena, should she win just one more Grand Slam singles title will surpass Hingis. It wouldn't matter how long it takes Serena, because she Hingis will never win another.

Some have tried to denegrate Serena's accomplishments by saying they came during a time when Hingis and Davenport were injured and Clijsters and Henin are still on the way up, and Seles is on the way out and Graf is already retired. But I ask you: who did Hingis beat to win her Grand Slam titles (and compare to who Serena beat to win her 5 Grand Slam events)? Mary Pierce, unseeded and ranked #25 at the 1997 Australian Open (did Hingis most definitely benefit from the fact that Seles didn't play and Graf was upset?), unseeded #66 ranked Venus Williams, in only her 3rd ever Grand Slam event, in the 1997 US Open final, #8 seed Conchita Martinez in the 1998 Australian Open, unseeded Amelie Mauresmo in the 1999 Australian Open. Did not Hingis benefit from Steffi Graf not playing in the 1997 Wimbledon or US Open or 1998 Australian Open? In her 5 Grand Slam wins, in the QF and beyond she beat: 1997 Australian: #8, #14, unseeded; 1997 Wimbledon: unseeded, unseeded, #3; 1997 US Open: #10, #6, unseeded; 1998 Australian: #5, #10, #8; 1999 Australian: #7, #6, unseeded. Three of her five Grand Slam final round wins came against unseeded opponents, while Hingis was seeded #1 or #2. 5 of Hingis' 15 opponents in the QF or beyond were unseeded, and only two were in the top 5.

No player who has won 5 Grand Slam singles titles has had it as easy as Hingis.

A question before leaving: If you were a player would you rather have Serena's record or Hingis? Is weeks ranked at #1 more important than Grand Slam titles? Would you rather win more Slam titles and spend less time at #1? Any player who has ever achieved the #1 ranking has always admitted it's a great accomplishment, but what is most important is winning Grand Slam singles titles.God damn! Argument over!

Except, of course, that Serena has won SIX grand slam singles titles.

The player LOSING in the voting right now, and losing badly....

Has more GS singles titles
Won all four of them IN A ROW, something only three other players have accomplished in the history of tennis
Leads the head-to-Head between the two
By these standards, DeWonder Davis must be the greatest player of all time.

FarinaLover
Apr 30th, 2004, 12:08 AM
Hingis of course a real mind in tennis comoare to the dwain chambers of women tennis

TonyP
Apr 30th, 2004, 12:15 AM
For me, its too close to call. I give Serena credit for winning one more slam and for winning the French, something Martina has not done. She also leads their head to head by one.

But Hingis has won a lot more singles titles, more doubles slams, infinitely more doubles titles, and held the number one ranking so much longer. Hingis was number one for something like 70 weeks during her very first stint.

Hingis also won a lot more money, which is some measurement of your overall excellence.

Lastly, Hingis has racked up all those achievements, Youngest number one in history, youngest slam winner in the 20th century, youngest person to win an adult title in Wimbledon history, etc.

So right now, it is pretty even in my book.

Volcana
Apr 30th, 2004, 12:38 AM
Hingis of course a real mind in tennis comoare to the dwain chambers of women tennis
Ah yes of course. Does that sentence MEAN something?

Veritas
Apr 30th, 2004, 01:50 AM
Both women were great.

Why is that so hard to accept?

TeeRexx
Apr 30th, 2004, 03:14 AM
This reminds me of a very similar discussion on another board awhile ago. This was posted by "StatsUCanTrust" on an AOL board after the Serena Slam...interesting food for thought:

With all the comparison between Serena's career and Miss Hingis' may I join in?

Serena Williams recently won her 5th career Grand Slam singles title in her 18th career Grand Slam singles tournament appearnace. By comparison, Martina Hingis won her 5th career Grand Slam singles title in her 17th appearance. Hingis achieved her 5th win in one less appearance than Serena. Score one for Martina.

However, when you compare Hingis record in her first 18 Grand Slam events vs. Serena's, Serena by far outclassed Hingis.

Hingis first 18 events:
1995 Australian (2R), French (3R), Wimbledon (1R), US Open (4R)
1996 Australian (QF), French (3R), Wimbledon (4R), US Open (SF)
1997 Australian (W), French (RU), Wimbledon (W), US Open (W)
1998 Australian (W), French (SF), Wimbledon (SF), US Open (RU)
1999 Australian (W), French (RU)

Williams first 18 events:
1998 Australian (2R), French (4R), Wimbledon (3R), US Open (3R)
1999 Australian (3R), French (4R), US Open (W)
2000 Australian (4R), Wimbledon (SF), US Open (QF)
2001 Australian (QF), French (QF), Wimbledon (QF), US Open (RU)
2002 French (W), Wimbledon (W), US Open (W)
2003 Australian (W)

Serena won her first Grand Slam singles title in her 7th appearance
Hingis won her first Grand Slam singles title in her 9th appearance

Serena has a 77-13 record in her first 18 Grand Slam events
Hingis has a 73-13 record in her first 18 Grand Slam events

Serena won 5 of 6 Grand Slam finals in her first 18 events
Hingis won 5 of 8 Grand Slam finals in her first 18 events

Serena has won 5 singles, 6 women's doubles and 2 mixed doubles titles for a total of 13 Grand Slam championships in her first 18 events
Hingis has won 5 singles, 7 women's doubles, and 0 mixed doubles titles for a total of 12 Grand Slam championships in her first 18 events

In winning her 5 Grand Slam singls titles, Serena has beaten the following players (rankings in parentheses):
1999 US Open: Hingis (1), Davenport (2), Seles (4)
2002 French: Capriati (1), VWilliams (2)
2002 Wimbledon: VWilliams (1)
2002 US Open: VWilliams (2)
2003 Australian: VWilliams (2), Clijsters (4)
That is three #1 ranked players, four #2 ranked players, and two #4 ranked players - a total of 9 wins over players ranked in the top four in 5 Grand Slam singles wins. In Serena's 5 career Grand Slam wins she has beaten the following players who had were Grand Slam champions: 1999 US Open (Martinez, Seles, Davenport, Hingis), 2002 French Open (Pierce, VWilliams), 2002 Wimbledon (VWilliams), 2002 US Open (Davenport, VWilliams), 2003 Australian Open (VWilliams). 10 total wins against Grand Slam champions.

In winning her 5 Grand Slam singls titles, Hingis has beaten the following players (rankings in parentheses):
1997 Wimbledon: Novotna (3)
1997 US Open: Davenport (6)
No wins over any player ranked #1, #2, or #4; only one win over a player ranked as high as #3, and neither of these players had won a Grand Slam singles title at the time Hingis beat them. In Hingis' 5 career Grand Slam wins, the only times she ever beat a player who was a Grand Slam champion were 1997 Australian Open (Pierce), 1997 US Open (Sanchez Vicario), 1998 Australian (Martinez), and 1999 Australian (Pierce and Seles). 5 total wins against Grand Slam champions.

Smart intelligent folks will recognize that Serena's Grand Slam wins came against much tougher competition than Hingis'.

Serena, should she win just one more Grand Slam singles title will surpass Hingis. It wouldn't matter how long it takes Serena, because she Hingis will never win another.

Some have tried to denegrate Serena's accomplishments by saying they came during a time when Hingis and Davenport were injured and Clijsters and Henin are still on the way up, and Seles is on the way out and Graf is already retired. But I ask you: who did Hingis beat to win her Grand Slam titles (and compare to who Serena beat to win her 5 Grand Slam events)? Mary Pierce, unseeded and ranked #25 at the 1997 Australian Open (did Hingis most definitely benefit from the fact that Seles didn't play and Graf was upset?), unseeded #66 ranked Venus Williams, in only her 3rd ever Grand Slam event, in the 1997 US Open final, #8 seed Conchita Martinez in the 1998 Australian Open, unseeded Amelie Mauresmo in the 1999 Australian Open. Did not Hingis benefit from Steffi Graf not playing in the 1997 Wimbledon or US Open or 1998 Australian Open? In her 5 Grand Slam wins, in the QF and beyond she beat: 1997 Australian: #8, #14, unseeded; 1997 Wimbledon: unseeded, unseeded, #3; 1997 US Open: #10, #6, unseeded; 1998 Australian: #5, #10, #8; 1999 Australian: #7, #6, unseeded. Three of her five Grand Slam final round wins came against unseeded opponents, while Hingis was seeded #1 or #2. 5 of Hingis' 15 opponents in the QF or beyond were unseeded, and only two were in the top 5.

No player who has won 5 Grand Slam singles titles has had it as easy as Hingis.

A question before leaving: If you were a player would you rather have Serena's record or Hingis? Is weeks ranked at #1 more important than Grand Slam titles? Would you rather win more Slam titles and spend less time at #1? Any player who has ever achieved the #1 ranking has always admitted it's a great accomplishment, but what is most important is winning Grand Slam singles titles.
That post was so beyond outstanding that I will just stop at the word - brilliant! :worship: :)

I will try and personally hand this post to SERENA and reap the rewards, in your name of course. :eek: :lol:

Once again, thanks for the outstanding post, my friend.

TR :cool:

fOxYLiCiOuS
Apr 30th, 2004, 05:25 AM
Martina Hingis is winning in the poll and most stats.

vs1
Apr 30th, 2004, 05:35 AM
Well, Serena is still playing...Martina isn't. So it's hard to compare until both ladies have finished their contributions to tennis. But the way Serena has helped raise the game of tennis to a new level is revolutionary. Serena has just brought so many fans and so much visibility to the sport...that is a measure of greatness as well. Also, let's not forget that Serena has achieve the grand slam in singles AND doubles. In doubles, she also has an Olympic Gold. So in terms of talent and overall contribution to tennis as a sport, I'd say that Serena is already ahead! :worship:

Rothes
Apr 30th, 2004, 06:03 AM
From what I see, Serena and Martina have contributed greatly to the Game of Tennis and Most Importantly I really do regard it (With Venus) as one of the greatest Inter Tennis Rivalries of the Modern Era of Tennis, though it didn't last long it has provided us with great nail biting entertainment, and as any Tennis Fan surley deserves to see such competition within the sport that they love.

Firstly, It is truly difficult to deceipher who is greater, who is better etc etc, it truly is, and at the end of the day, for someone who has enjoyed Tennis since 1988, I am truly greatful to see Two Legendary Ambassadors to the Sport with such difference in Game and Personality, it truly is. Accolades should be made too both of Martina and Serena for providing us with the Entertainment Necessacerly to be able to Argue that some people here do, yet Never realise the contributions they made to Tennis, and When an Argument here comends I believe that the people involved, do take both Serena and Martina here for granted. but on the Major note Accolades for both as they have provided us with exceptional Tennis, something very significant and special to followers of Tennis.

Both have their own records engraved in the Tennis "Hall of Fame" and both should be proud of the achievments they have done, It was a shame Martina could not captivate a Grand Slam, Missing out on the French Open Twice, beaten in both Finals, and in comparison Serena has one her "Slam" I believe that defintly helps the cause, but within Doubles, and other records which have been mentioned, and on Martina Hingis's side need to be closen in on, even a few surpassed, before "Evangelical Greatness" can be commenced and concluded, but in Greatness, I believe both a fairly equal

If I was to give a solitary opinion on greatness, or who has been the greatest player at this time, I would give Martina Hingis the Edge no doubt, I believe their is a few more holes to be filled Before Serena can surpass, and at the end of the day and Serena does keep on playing for quite sometime, I believe no doubt that Serena will be the greater of the Two Players.

Hopefully People of both tribes and fan bases can respect both players have contributed an excessive amount of Legacy to the game of Tennis.

They are both Tennis Legends in my books.

Jeleno Benesovo
Apr 30th, 2004, 08:02 AM
without ANY doubt, Martina is greater than serena

TeeRexx
Apr 30th, 2004, 09:14 AM
Marti has been off the tour for two years and the media hardly ever mentions her; SERENA was gone for eight months and the media went crazy because she was not on the tour. :)

Jeleno Benesovo
Apr 30th, 2004, 09:28 AM
Marti has been off the tour for two years and the media hardly ever mentions her; SERENA was gone for eight months and the media went crazy because she was not on the tour. :)
so, if nobody mentions Martina, If she has 2 years off the tour, WHY ON EARTH SHE'S LEADING THIS POLL OVER THE "GREAT" SERENA? :D ]WHY THERE ARE SO MANY THREADS ABOUT HER? ;) WHY TROLLS LIKE YOU STILL ARE SO OBSESSED WITH HER EVEN WHEN SHE IS RETIRED? :o

simple answer: MARTINA IS GREATER, anything else is pure envy :cool:

Brαm
Apr 30th, 2004, 09:32 AM
Marti has been off the tour for two years and the media hardly ever mentions her; SERENA was gone for eight months and the media went crazy because she was not on the tour. :)
Maybe that's because Martina doesn't attend every Awards show in the universe? :o

Alan
Apr 30th, 2004, 10:41 AM
Maybe that's because Martina doesn't attend every Awards show in the universe? :oHAHAHA true... and she has been studying, fulfilling her duties for her sponsors, doing commentary for tennis, sharing her knowledge in the sport with kids, and is learning about (and doing great in) her other interests like horseback-riding

:D

i don't think the media went crazy over serena's absence, maybe the american media was

Rothes
Apr 30th, 2004, 10:44 AM
Marti has been off the tour for two years and the media hardly ever mentions her; SERENA was gone for eight months and the media went crazy because she was not on the tour. :)
:confused: Is this supposed to justify something ??

Alan
Apr 30th, 2004, 10:51 AM
:angel: <enter music>

"Let there be peace on earth
And let it begin with me.
Let there be peace on earth
The peace that was meant to be.
With God as our father
Brothers all are we.
Let me walk with my brother
In perfect harmony.

Let peace begin with me
Let this be the moment now.
With every step i take
Let this be my solemn vow.
To take each moment
And live each moment
With peace eternally.
Let ther be peace on earth,
And let it begin with me.

(child)
Let there be peace on earth
And let it begin with me.
Let there be peace on earth
The peace that was meant to be.
With god as our father
Brothers all are we.
Let me walk with my brother
In perfect harmony.

Let peace begin with me
Let this be the moment now.
With every step I take
Let this be my solemn vow.
To take each moment
And live each moment
In peace eternally.
Let there be peace on earth
And let it begin with me."
:bounce: :bounce:

Rothes
Apr 30th, 2004, 10:55 AM
I think it's quite understandable that Martina Hingis was not going to be in amongst Media Frenzy 2 Years after she retired, was she not? Is it not common sence that after she Retired the Media would not contribute their pen and paper to Martina? Where as Serena was known to be the best player out there and that she was to be returning, doesn't aspects such as these help the cause of Media??

Kart
Apr 30th, 2004, 10:58 AM
I'm going to vote for Serena only on the basis of watching the two of them play and my opinion on them.

Anyone saying that Hingis' grand slam wins were easy :rolleyes: - I'd like to see you try.

Martian Jeza
Apr 30th, 2004, 11:04 AM
I think it's quite understandable that Martina Hingis was not going to be in amongst Media Frenzy 2 Years after she retired, was she not? Is it not common sence that after she Retired the Media would not contribute their pen and paper to Martina? Where as Serena was known to be the best player out there and that she was to be returning, doesn't aspects such as these help the cause of Media??

At Least, Martina didn't use tennis to enter into Hollywood Showbizz-world as the Williams do. :drool:

Martina is in Switzerland enjoying her new life and don't need media attention to have a great life ;) Martina, Your true fans will never forget you, be sure of it !

DunkMachine
Apr 30th, 2004, 11:19 AM
At Least, Martina didn't use tennis to enter into Hollywood Showbizz-world as the Williams do. :drool:

Martina is in Switzerland enjoying her new life and don't need media attention to have a great life ;) Martina, Your true fans will never forget you, be sure of it !
That's just jealousy, the VIPs aren't interested in Martina so you hate the Willies for broadening their horizons.

Sux being you!!

Rothes
Apr 30th, 2004, 11:32 AM
I wonder when Mud Slinging is going to become a Olympic Sport ;) :P

DunkMachine
Apr 30th, 2004, 11:51 AM
I wonder when Mud Slinging is going to become a Olympic Sport ;) :PI'm going for GOLD baby

OUT!
Apr 30th, 2004, 02:45 PM
I'm going to vote for Serena only on the basis of watching the two of them play and my opinion on them.

Anyone saying that Hingis' grand slam wins were easy :rolleyes: - I'd like to see you try.Ditto, I hope this doesn't come across as lazy :o

Ballbuster
Apr 30th, 2004, 03:18 PM
At Least, Martina didn't use tennis to enter into Hollywood Showbizz-world as the Williams do. :drool:

Martina is in Switzerland enjoying her new life and don't need media attention to have a great life ;) Martina, Your true fans will never forget you, be sure of it !

Martina is 23. Unless she is going to start having babies, she's about a bored a most of these posters on this board. At that age with nothing to do is depressing. Next time you see her look behind the fake smile and try to get a glimse of her insides. I don't believe Martina is happy at all.

TonyP
Apr 30th, 2004, 03:29 PM
The idea, as one Williams fan posted, that the media never mentions Martina these days is kind of funny. I just recently picked up an issue of Australian Tennis that featured a a five page color spread on Martina. And she just did a 22 minute interview on the BBC.

And has the press talked about wanting her back since she retired? You probably couldn't count all the columns and comments from TV commentators about her.

Hingis has chosen to live a somewhat quieter life now than she did in the past. She also lives in a rather remote place, the suburbs of Zurich, Switzerland, not a very media intensive place. She does not turn up at the music video awards or hit the party circuit very often. That was never her style.

But she seems to continue to generate publicity almost everywhere she goes and when she turns up at tennis events, the media usually seems to want to interview her, even though there is little new she can say about her tennis career.

But claiming she is hardly mentioned is just plain inaccurate.

pigam
Apr 30th, 2004, 03:35 PM
Martina is 23. Unless she is going to start having babies, she's about a bored a most of these posters on this board. At that age with nothing to do is depressing. Next time you see her look behind the fake smile and try to get a glimse of her insides. I don't believe Martina is happy at all.
what about studying :shrug:
Some people actually do that! :eek:

TonyP
Apr 30th, 2004, 03:42 PM
Is Martina bored and unhappy?

Nobody can see into anyone else's mind, but it doesn't seem that way. Since leaving tennis, she seems to be incredibly busy. She has been doing a lot of tennis clincis, doing some TV broadcasting, going to school and show jumping horses (her long time passion.) She has also been making commercials and appearing for her sponsors at various events. And that's all over and above her person life, which she in general tries to keep to herself and wisely so.

Ballbuster
Apr 30th, 2004, 04:01 PM
what about studying :shrug:
Some people actually do that! :eek:

I don't think so. Serena was quoted as saying Martina never thinks before she says something. She doesn't strike me as the type that wants to advance her mind.

Ryan
Apr 30th, 2004, 04:05 PM
Martina is 23. Unless she is going to start having babies, she's about a bored a most of these posters on this board. At that age with nothing to do is depressing. Next time you see her look behind the fake smile and try to get a glimse of her insides. I don't believe Martina is happy at all.
That's possibly the most stupid post you've ever made Ballsucker. How would you know if Martina is bored? She's a mega millionaire, is trying equestrian, taking English courses, living in one of the most beautiful countries in the world, and can do whatever she wants! I'd kill for a life like that.

pigam
Apr 30th, 2004, 04:10 PM
I don't think so. Serena was quoted as saying Martina never thinks before she says something. She doesn't strike me as the type that wants to advance her mind.
:lol: Yeah, and what Serena says is the absolute truth.
I pretty sure Hingis is one of the more intelligent players, and she's studying again. That's great for her :)

Martian Jeza
Apr 30th, 2004, 04:39 PM
That's just jealousy, the VIPs aren't interested in Martina so you hate the Willies for broadening their horizons.

Sux being you!!


Jealousy ? Come on, It seems Williams fans don't have another word than " jealousy ". Why should I be jealous ? Martina made me happy, still make me happy and always will make happy wathever she does !!!

Martina Hingis all the way !!!

TeeRexx
Apr 30th, 2004, 05:50 PM
At Least, Martina didn't use tennis to enter into Hollywood Showbizz-world as the Williams do. :drool:

Martina is in Switzerland enjoying her new life and don't need media attention to have a great life ;) Martina, Your true fans will never forget you, be sure of it !
At least SERENA didn't use tennis to try and snag boyfriends either as Chucky constantly tried to do!! :p :lol: :lol:

Anyway, outside of this darn board, SERENA is the greater player. :p

Martian Jeza
Apr 30th, 2004, 05:53 PM
At least SERENA didn't use tennis to try and snag boyfriends either as Chucky constantly tried to do!! :p :lol: :lol:

Anyway, outside of this darn board, SERENA is the greater player. :p


In your sweatest dreams, boy.

Ballbuster
Apr 30th, 2004, 05:57 PM
Martina Hingis all the way !!!

all the way where? :shrug:

Martian Jeza
Apr 30th, 2004, 05:58 PM
all the way where? :shrug:

Nowhere for you, I know...

TeeRexx
Apr 30th, 2004, 06:07 PM
In your sweatest dreams, boy.
Poor ChelsaFC. She has become so pathetic without her fave in competition. :sad:

She must get new faves or other interest in life as the Great Williams fans will do when their fans go on to new careers. :p :lol:

Martian Jeza
Apr 30th, 2004, 06:13 PM
Poor ChelsaFC. She has become so pathetic without her fave in competition. :sad:

She must get new faves or other interest in life as the Great Williams fans will do when their fans go on to new careers. :p :lol:

I hardly believe you... Great Williams Fans ? OMG, you must be kidding, ain't you ? In show off attitudes you are the greatest, no doubt about it ! Even : You're unbeatable at that level :drool:

hewittrok
Apr 30th, 2004, 06:16 PM
i pick Martina just because she had different shots and it was always great seeing her play real tennis.

Ballbuster
Apr 30th, 2004, 06:18 PM
I hardly believe you... Great Williams Fans ? OMG, you must be kidding, ain't you ? In show off attitudes you are the greatest, no doubt about it ! Even : You're unbeatable at that level :drool:

Thank you :kiss:

and our fave's are unbeatable at their level. Just look at how they leveled yours. :wavey:

TeeRexx
Apr 30th, 2004, 09:25 PM
Thank you :kiss:

and our fave's are unbeatable at their level. Just look at how they leveled yours. :wavey:
Oh, BB, you are so right, my friend. :)

DA FOREHAND
Apr 30th, 2004, 09:27 PM
i pick Martina just because she had different shots and it was always great seeing her play real tennis.


What diff. shots does she have that Serena didn't display in thrashing her for her first Us OPen title? The dropshot, which turned out to be the last trick Hingis had in her bag.

I wish Martina hadn't bailed.

faste5683
Apr 30th, 2004, 10:34 PM
[QUOTE=Tompier]MARTINA HINGIS:
serve: Serena
forehand: Serena
movement: Serena
unforced errors: Serena (her game compared to Martina's was ugly crap and you all know that)
backhand: Martina
volley: Martina
dropshot: Martina
smash: Martina
smart game: Martina

Yup.

:wavey:

faste5683
Apr 30th, 2004, 10:35 PM
At least SERENA didn't use tennis to try and snag boyfriends either as Chucky constantly tried to do!! :p :lol: :lol:

Anyway, outside of this darn board, SERENA is the greater player. :p

:haha:

This darn board....

darrinbaker00
Apr 30th, 2004, 10:50 PM
Serena WILLIAMS (USA) v Martina HINGIS (SUI)

1998 Key Biscayne Hard (O) QF Martina HINGIS 3-6 6-1 6-7
1998 Manhattan Beach Hard (O) QF Martina HINGIS 4-6 1-6
1999 Key Biscayne Hard (O) SF Serena WILLIAMS 6-4 7-6
1999 Rome Clay (O) QF Martina HINGIS 2-6 2-6
1999 Manhattan Beach Hard (O) SF Serena WILLIAMS 6-3 7-5
1999 US Open Hard (O) FR Serena WILLIAMS 6-3 7-6
2000 Los Angeles Hard (O) SF Serena WILLIAMS 4-6 6-2 6- 3
2000 Canadian Open Hard (O) FR Martina HINGIS 6-0 3-6 0-3 Retired
2001 Sydney Hard (O) QF Martina HINGIS 4-6 5-7
2001 Australian Open Hard (O) QF Martina HINGIS 2-6 6-3 6-8
2001 U.S. Open Hard (O) SF Serena WILLIAMS 6-3 6-2
2002 Scottsdale Hard (O) SF Serena WILLIAMS 6-1 3-6 6-4
2002 Miami Hard (O) QF Serena WILLIAMS 6-4 6-0

Serena WILLIAMS (USA) leads 7 : 6
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, Serena has more singles majors than Hingis (6-5) and has a higher career winning percentage (.843-.825). Next topic, please.....

Volcana
Apr 30th, 2004, 11:39 PM
But claiming she is hardly mentioned is just plain inaccurate.We're Americans. We're provincial. I use the net to cover most of American sports media and Hingis is hardly ever mentioned HERE. And of course, HERE is the whole world. If Martina was anybody who needed paying attention to, she'd be covered by the American sports media. Or at least the gossip columns. They still mention Kournikova two or three times a year. Proving who's greater, IMHO.:)

Volcana
Apr 30th, 2004, 11:42 PM
what about studying :shrug:
Some people actually do that! :eek:
Yeah. Venus and Serena.

Volcana
Apr 30th, 2004, 11:52 PM
After Serena wins another couple GS titles we'l try this again. And you what? Martina will win the vote. When Serena has nine, we'll try it again. And Martina will win the vote. Then we'll try Serena vs Monica, and Monica will win.

Face it. it's a boardwide popularity contest.

Work out the criteria for determinig 'greatest' first. Nav didn't win her first GS til she was 23. Does that mean all the people with 'youngest' associated with their names were better? 'Weeks at #1' would mean something. If the ranking system didn't change every couple of years. Who's greater, Martina Hingis or Suzanne Lenglen? Martina Hingis or Evonne Goolagong? Serena Williams or Maria Bueno?

The reason why there's o much focus on GS titles is that they're the only objective criteria we have. Suzanne Lenglen and Helen Wills Moody faced way more sexism than any modern player. Should they not get additional credit for success inspite of that? How much weight do we give Nav for taking all the shit as an openly gay player? Not to mention the literally millions of dollars it cost her?

Popularity contests are fun, but let's not pretend we're actually voting on accomplishments. Helen Wills Moody doesn't have ANY weeks at #1, and NO victories on the WTA tour. No Fed Cup titles. Just those poor lonely 31GS titles. 19 in singles. How should she compete with Serena or Martina in 'greatness'?

AnDyDog621
May 1st, 2004, 12:12 AM
I vote for Serena but i reallie like Martina

faboozadoo15
May 1st, 2004, 12:43 AM
That's just jealousy, the VIPs aren't interested in Martina so you hate the Willies for broadening their horizons.

Sux being you!!
wow... thats completely untrue... martina is connected to so many millionaires/billionaires all over the world...
but this has no importance here... just wanted to say that martina, just like monica, has some friends in high places...

fammmmedspin
May 1st, 2004, 02:23 AM
Work out the criteria for determinig 'greatest' first. Nav didn't win her first GS til she was 23. Does that mean all the people with 'youngest' associated with their names were better? 'Weeks at #1' would mean something. If the ranking system didn't change every couple of years. Who's greater, Martina Hingis or Suzanne Lenglen? Martina Hingis or Evonne Goolagong? Serena Williams or Maria Bueno?

I agree with most of the post but the ranking system changes since 1997 don't mean that we can't compare two chronologically near players like Serena and Martina at number 1. in this case, if anything, the rankings changes since favour Serena's schedule. Fact is they both had about the same length of time to rack up weeks at number 1 and one has been there 4 times as long as the other. They faced the same players - albeit Hingis faced the Graf generation longer and Serena faced a still maturing younger opposition.

You could argue that weeks at number one depends on who you played over the years - but GS wins are even more dependant on which people you faced in the last 2 rounds. The value of weeks at number 1 is that it shows some longevity wheras you can win 5-6 GS with 5-6 weeks of competitive tennis (sometimes at about the level of a Tier 2 in this year's AO )

GS obviously become more important as you get more of them (still a possibility for Serena) but once history books take over from memory anyone looking at this question is going to go looking for figures and with a close H2H and similar GS total the yawning gaps elsewhere in the record will count unless Serena fills them.

Rothes
May 1st, 2004, 02:49 AM
What diff. shots does she have that Serena didn't display in thrashing her for her first Us OPen title? The dropshot, which turned out to be the last trick Hingis had in her bag.

I wish Martina hadn't bailed.
I think He might be meaning Articulate Style in a sence of using an array of different and distinct shots when she played Tennis, theres no way to try to deny that Martina had mastered predominatly most styles of Tennis Shots and knew when and how to use them.

TonyP
May 1st, 2004, 03:23 AM
Personally, I think it is more difficult to get to number one in the rankings than it is to win a slam. More people have won slams than been number one. And you can just play great tennis for two weeks and win a slam, as Iva Majoli did. And you can conceivably get through a slam without facing too many top players.

Over the course of a year on the tour, you are going to run into the other top players, usually more than once, because you will be getting to finals, and the other top players are going to get there, too.

Jamie
May 1st, 2004, 03:32 AM
There are so many comments about how Martina does not get the publicity from the American media as some other players. If Martina was AMERICAN (which she's NOT). If Martina was GAY (which she's NOT). If Martina was BLACK (which she's NOT). If Martina was any of the above, she would be AMERICA's SWEETHEART. And if you folks are honest, you know I'm right.

Volcana
May 1st, 2004, 03:43 AM
once history books take over from memory anyone looking at this question is going to go looking for figures and with a close H2H and similar GS total the yawning gaps elsewhere in the record will count unless Serena fills them.
Once history books take over, people will look at GS totals and stop. They MIGHT go on to head-to-head, but that's about it. Look at Steffi vs Nav. If you get at all past GS singles titles, it's Nav all the way. But most people don't look past that. In fact, most people don't even look past what they wanted to believe before examining the question. They come in with their minds made up, and decide what's important based on what will support their pre-concieved notions. But you know, you gave me an idea.

Rothes
May 1st, 2004, 03:44 AM
There are so many comments about how Martina does not get the publicity from the American media as some other players. If Martina was AMERICAN (which she's NOT). If Martina was GAY (which she's NOT). If Martina was BLACK (which she's NOT). If Martina was any of the above, she would be AMERICA's SWEETHEART. And if you folks are honest, you know I'm right.
I beliee your statement has some truth to it but defintly not accurate.

Bright Red
May 1st, 2004, 06:18 AM
Hingis was a greater tennis player.
Serena was a BETTER tennis player.
Bravo. Hingis has accomplished more than Serena imo. But Serena's still going and I see great things in store for her.

TeeRexx
May 1st, 2004, 06:23 AM
The biggest drawback, in my opinion, to Hingis in this discussion is the head to head match ups. This is to important to ignore or bypass. In many cases of comparisons between two great players can not really be done because they may have been in different eras, but Hingis and SERENA played one another many times and in the slams, which is very important.

SERENA holds the h-to-h record at 7:6. :cool:

However, SERENA defeated Hingis six of the last nine times that they faced each other and two of the three times that they met in grand slam events. :eek: :)

In the last encounter between theses two greats, SERENA put a bagel on Hingis. :eek: :devil:

Nuff said? :cool: Bye. :wavey:

Bright Red
May 1st, 2004, 06:25 AM
So I'm going to vote for *drum roll, please*

Serena, 'cause I think we're talking about tennis players and not tennis records.

monicain
May 1st, 2004, 10:17 AM
One thing for sure: Martina Hingis has way less ignorant, less biased and more intelligent fans than Serena :o

DunkMachine
May 1st, 2004, 12:55 PM
One thing for sure: Martina Hingis has way less ignorant, less biased and more intelligent fans than Serena :o
Bullshit, the stats are in favour of Serena. You don't have a clue so please

kiss mine like this, thanks:
http://img46.photobucket.com/albums/v142/DunkMachine/buttpirate.jpg

TonyP
May 1st, 2004, 02:05 PM
I don't think there is any question that Hingis does NOT get as much coverage in America as the Williams sisters. She ain't an American. When Martina beat Venus in the 1997 US Open final, who wound up on the cover of Sports Illustrated, the Swiss girl who had won three of the four slams that year, or the black girl from Compton who had just been given a tennis lesson?

Who got the ESPN sportswoman of the year award, Hingis or American Mia Hamm?

You could fill a book with the press coverage Martina gets in the rest of the world, and that includes Europe, Australia and Asia. But Americans "don't be paying too much attention to what goes on in them thar furen countries where they don't even be speakin' good English." If we don't have any reason to fly over and bomb a foreign country, we're not interested in it. So she is not as well covered here.

But in case you missed it, there have been very long articles about Martina published in many American publications. Jon Wertheim talks about her often in his column, and she did one of those half hour interviews on "Center Court" on the Tennis Channel. She is hardly forgotten here.

And as I have said, the calls for her to come back to tennis never seem to stop. I believe either Venus or Serena could bail tomorrow and neither would cause the stir Martina caused when she quit. That's not just because there are two of them. The Williams sisters are both power players and there are lots of power players in tennis now.

Hingis was unique and many people would love to see her bring her style of finesse tennis back to the sport.

Martian KC
May 1st, 2004, 02:07 PM
One thing for sure: Martina Hingis has way less ignorant, less biased and more intelligent fans than Serena :o

So true. :lol:

TonyP
May 1st, 2004, 02:16 PM
TeeTexx:

Then I guess by your measuring stick, Hingis is greater than Venus, since Martina finished with a 10-9 record against her?

(Actually, while it is ONE measuring stick, it cannot be called decisive in either case, since it is only a one match margin in both cases. You could say Graf held a distinct adventage over Hingis, since their head to head was 7-2. And Hingis held a distinct advantage over Seles, since their record was 15-5 in favor of Hingis. But a one match advantage? That's hardly much of an advantage.)

Ballbuster
May 1st, 2004, 02:34 PM
Why are your arguing about a Young/Old/Has Been Veteran.

Hingis is a player from two years ago. She's GONE!
Accept the fact that there is nolonger a comparison. The more you argue the more the sistahs will add Slams to their resumes' thereby rebuffing any mark left by Hingis except that Bogus claim at No. 1. (without competition)

She Quit!

TonyP
May 1st, 2004, 03:23 PM
I think TeeRexx, a Williams fan, started this poll. Unfortunately, the results didn't come out the way Williams fans thought it would. Martina was number one, officially and every other way. She will forever be known as the former number one player in the world. People love her and miss her. That's the real story.

timray
Feb 13th, 2005, 10:48 PM
serena is greater than Martina. :angel:

Veritas
Feb 13th, 2005, 10:49 PM
Martina :worship:

tennislover
Feb 13th, 2005, 10:50 PM
I hate admitting it: Serena

Brandon85
Feb 13th, 2005, 11:07 PM
martina hingis for sure.

Denise4925
Feb 13th, 2005, 11:48 PM
Serena, by a long shot and you'd have to be blind, deaf or crazy not to agree.

Stamp Paid
Feb 13th, 2005, 11:54 PM
I can't even believe at this point the question is even asked.

RVD
Feb 13th, 2005, 11:58 PM
Serena, by a long shot and you'd have to be blind, deaf or crazy not to agree.It's actually pretty sad that Hingis didn't hang around long enough to really prove herself. Now I'll always wonder if Hingis ever had the game to overcome Serena and Venus' power. And I'm not talking about V&S pre-domination days when they were still absorbing the particulars of the game, but when their games began to really peak.
All these commentators talk about how smart and tactical Hingis was. But what happened to her smart tactical game when V&S were whomping dat ass? :lol:

Chrissie-fan
Feb 14th, 2005, 12:06 AM
Martina Hingis. Her skils would have made her a top player in any era. Serena's power game is ideally suited to our times,but I don't know if it would have been of much use to her in the days of old. Not saying that it wouldn't,I'm just not sure. But I'm definitely sure about Hingis. :smoke:

Stamp Paid
Feb 14th, 2005, 12:15 AM
Martina Hingis. Her skils would have made her a top player in any era. Serena's power game is ideally suited to our times,but I don't know if it would have been of much use to her in the days of old. Not saying that it wouldn't,I'm just not sure. But I'm definitely sure about Hingis. :smoke:

So that somehow makes her greater than Serena, I'm assuming........

Denise4925
Feb 14th, 2005, 12:18 AM
Martina Hingis. Her skils would have made her a top player in any era. Serena's power game is ideally suited to our times,but I don't know if it would have been of much use to her in the days of old. Not saying that it wouldn't,I'm just not sure. But I'm definitely sure about Hingis. :smoke:
What makes this statement illogical is that Martina was pushed out of this era because of her style of play that did not translate into the power tennis of today. Serves of 65mph are just not going to cut it in today's game. Plus, she doesn't have the ground strokes of Elena, so you can't compare the service games and say if Elena is surviving the top ten, so can Hingis.

OUT!
Feb 14th, 2005, 12:23 AM
Serena all the way :D

Cosmopolitan
Feb 14th, 2005, 12:28 AM
Without a doubt, Serena.

RVD
Feb 14th, 2005, 12:32 AM
What makes this statement illogical is that Martina was pushed out of this era because of her style of play that did not translate into the power tennis of today. Serves of 65mph are just not going to cut it in today's game. Plus, she doesn't have the ground strokes of Elena, so you can't compare the service games and say if Elena is surviving the top ten, so can Hingis.EXACTLY!! Even Hingis herself admited that the girls these days hit hard.
No one denies that Hingis was masterful on the court. But Two girls came along and wacked her with power AND intelligence. :worship:

Volcana
Feb 14th, 2005, 12:45 AM
The difference between 5 GS singles titles and 7 is historically fairly significant on the women's side. Eight players have won 5 GS singles titles. Only three have won seven.

24 Court
22 Graf
19 Wills Moody
18 Navratilova
18 Evert
12 King

09 Connolly
09 Seles

08 Lenglen
08 Mallory

07 11 00 Maria Bueno
07 06 02 Serena Williams
07 06 01 Evonne Goolagong

_s _d _m [year winning GS singles]
06 21 08 [1947-1955] Louise Brough
06 21 09 [1946-1950] Margaret Osborne duPont
06 14 10 [1949-1955] Doris Hart
06 10 00 [1937-1951] Nancye Wynne Bolton
06 00 00 [1908-1908] Maud Barger-Wallach
06 00 00 [1886-1900] Blanche Bingley

05 09 00 [1997-1999] Martina Hingis

05 06 07 [1936-1940] Alice Marble
05 05 00 [1956-1958] Althea Gibson
05 05 00 [1925-1930] Daphne Akhurst
05 03 01 [1932-1936] Helen Jacobs
05 00 00 [1942-1946] Pauline Betz
05 00 00 [1895-1908] Charlotte Cooper Sterry
05 00 00 [1887-1893] Charlotte Dod

Just a historical curiousity. At any event, now that Serena has more GS singles titles AND more total GS titles, I've no doubt history will record Serena the greater player. I do miss Hingis though. Had her feet held up, she'd have won more GS titles. She wouldn't have kept her deathgrip on the #1 ranking, but GS titles are more important. If nothing else, yo'd think she'd hanve managed to win RG, finally.

Robbie.
Feb 14th, 2005, 12:52 AM
It's actually pretty sad that Hingis didn't hang around long enough to really prove herself. Now I'll always wonder if Hingis ever had the game to overcome Serena and Venus' power. And I'm not talking about V&S pre-domination days when they were still absorbing the particulars of the game, but when their games began to really peak.
All these commentators talk about how smart and tactical Hingis was. But what happened to her smart tactical game when V&S were whomping dat ass? :lol:

Let's get this straight. Venus never "whomped" Hingis' ass. Look at the head to head and see who did the most ass whooping during their rivalry, including a 6-1, 6-1 right in the middle of Venus' domination period. I'll give you hint; it wasn't Venus. They met two times when Venus was unquestionably in peak form and Hingis was close enough to it and Venus scraped through both times, and the second one could have easily gone the other way. Hingis and Venus were very evenly matched.

Serena is another story and yes she is the greater player out of her and Hingis now. But I seem to remember Serena whomping a lot of asses, including Venus' over the years.

Also to the people who are saying that a peak Hingis wouldn't be top 10, you obviously have no idea. Out of the 4 players who used to give hingis trouble - Serena, Venus, Lindsay, Jenn - 3 are playing much worse than they were then and all four are still in the top nine. Hello, Myskina was top 3 five minutes ago. M-Y-S-K-I-N-A! And you are trying to tell me Hingis couldn't be top ten? :lol:

go hingis
Feb 14th, 2005, 01:00 AM
Martina Hingis

icequeen
Feb 14th, 2005, 01:08 AM
Serena hands down the best. Why can't people face that.

OUT!
Feb 14th, 2005, 01:13 AM
Serena hands down the best. Why can't people face that.
I know why ;)

Volcana
Feb 14th, 2005, 01:16 AM
Also to the people who are saying that a peak Hingis wouldn't be top 10, you obviously have no idea. Out of the 4 players who used to give hingis trouble - Serena, Venus, Lindsay, Jenn - 3 are playing much worse than they were then and all four are still in the top nine. Hello, Myskina was top 3 five minutes ago. M-Y-S-K-I-N-A! And you are trying to tell me Hingis couldn't be top ten? :lol:The tour adapts. VERY quickly. Perhaps Venus, Lindsay And Jenn ARE playing worse. (I don't think Lindsay is, BTW.) What's undeniable is the tour is playing BETTER. Now, about that 'peak Hingis' thing....

I feel you are failing to analyze the situation. First off, is there some reason I shouldn't consider 2001 a 'peak-Hingis' year? SHE didn't get worse. Other players got BETTER. The slams were one by two players who could generate enough pace that Hingis COULDN'T use her game. She herself said the ball was going so fast it was all she could do to sprint after it. (Actually, you could see this pattern developing at 2000 Roland Garros.) Well, where pace generation is concerned, the top ten looks like Smackdown! right now. The only player in it who CAN'T generate massive pace is Myskina, and she handles pace better than Hingis did. It's like someone created an entire generation of players designed to beat Hingis. The one they most of them do well is the thing she had the most trouble dealing with.

The people saying Hingis wouldn't be top ten may analyzing the situation either. A lot of them just hate Hingis. But if I look at Hingis' losses from RG 2000 on, the kind of player that's all over the top ten is the exact kind she was losing to. It isn't size, but Hingis just couldn't generate the kind of pace Henin-Hardenne could. (And I hope still can.) That's what you need to fend off the power merchants. You have to be able to make THEM run. If you don't, THEY sieze control of the point. A player like Sharapova or Molik is a nightmare for Hingis.

ASTRID
Feb 14th, 2005, 03:09 AM
If Martina had abit more power she would be able to compete with serena and beat her on some occasions

Robbie.
Feb 14th, 2005, 03:09 AM
I feel you are failing to analyze the situation. First off, is there some reason I shouldn't consider 2001 a 'peak-Hingis' year?

Yes, there are many reasons.

After AO 01, Hingis' game slipped markedly; her confidence, such an integral part of her game, totally evapourated. And there is no doubt that her level got worse as the year went on.

Look at her losses that year. They are not all to power players. She was thrashed by Sanchez Vicario, losing to her for the first time in something like 15 matches since 1995. She lost her last two meetings with Mauresmo, who she had had a comprehensive 6-2 record against at one stage. She lost to Ruano Pascual at Wimbledon. She lost twice to Seles in the summer, a player who she always has the edge over at her top. She was demolished 6-2, 6-2 by Dementieva in Moscow, a player who was playing far better a year earlier when they met at the same stage of the same tournament and Hingis emerged victorious, including a bagel set.

And it's not just the losses. Hingis was the master of cleaning up middle order players in double quick time. Yet she dropped 0-6, 1-6 sets to Maleeva. The last time that happened was 1995. She twice dropped sets to Majoli, who had never forced her to break a sweat in four matches since their RG97 meeting.

Do you really think the tour's level rose that much in 8 months that the player who was good enough to beat Lindsay Davenport, Kim Clijsters, Serena Williams (twice), and Venus Williams in her first two tournaments of the year should go winless against the top 10 after April, struggle past the likes of Majoli and Maleeva and struggle to win games against Dementieva?

Her level dropped, there was no doubt about it.

She was still #4 anyway at the end of that season with Jenn and Venus in their best ever form and Lindsay close to it, so I'm not so sure that your argument that she couldn't make top ten stands up from 2001.


SHE didn't get worse. Other players got BETTER.

As I said, I very much doubt that.

The slams were one by two players who could generate enough pace that Hingis COULDN'T use her game. She herself said the ball was going so fast it was all she could do to sprint after it. (Actually, you could see this pattern developing at 2000 Roland Garros.)

Yes Capriati and Venus were consistent enough power players to trouble Hingis. The key term being CONSISTENT. It wasn't just power, per se that troubled Hingis. I am not at all convinced that most of today's top ten are near consistent enough to trouble a Hingis on top of her form. Sharapova yes, Lindsay yes, Serena yes, Molik in the form of the last 6 months, maybe. The others? I highly doubt it.The girl just didn't make mistakes. Peak Hingis would eat the Venus of 2004-5 alive.

Also RG 2000 is a sucky example. Hingis played horribly in that semifinal and Pierce, a far superior player to most of today's top tenners from 1997-2000, was always Hingis' pigeon outside of that match. Hingis won 10 of their 13 matches over that period in straight sets. Pierce came into some of those encounters in top form but Hingis absorbed her power and moved her around the court eventually giving her no option but to make the error. Dementieva, Kuznetsova, Myskina are all quicker than Pierce which would hold them in good stead against Hingis, but they are nowhere near as powerful and just as inconsistent, if not during a match, then from tournament to tournament. All three have had some ugly losses over the last year to players not anywhere near Hingis' callibre. I couldn't possibly see them beating her on a consistent basis.


Well, where pace generation is concerned, the top ten looks like Smackdown! right now. The only player in it who CAN'T generate massive pace is Myskina, and she handles pace better than Hingis did.


Really? I'm not so sure of that at all. Myskina is fortunate that her "peak" has coincided with the decline (or atleast the relative inactivity of) the four that Hingis regularly struggled with IMO, who at their best were atleast a cut above today's middle top tenners (Kuzzie, Dementieva, slumping sharapova) who Nastya has been beating up on; they combined power with great consistency. Jenn and Venus were nowhere near their Hingis era level when I saw them play against Nastya at RG and Serena was error prone in their YEC match. The LD situation is strange. She struggled to win games off Lindsay in their first two meetings of the year, but then won their last two. Having not seen the matches I'm not at all sure of what changed.


It isn't size, but Hingis just couldn't generate the kind of pace Henin-Hardenne could. (And I hope still can.) That's what you need to fend off the power merchants. You have to be able to make THEM run. If you don't, THEY sieze control of the point. A player like Sharapova or Molik is a nightmare for Hingis.

Who says that you need power to be able to make people run?
Hingis could make players run by taking the ball on the rise
Take a look at any of the epic Hingis matches against V,S and LD and you'll see that Hingis often had them on the run. Did she not? The V,S and LD that Hingis faced between 1998-01 are better at seizing control of a point than any of today's top tenners (with the exception of Sharapova) and less likely to make an error off a mid court ball and yet Hingis fought them to a virtual stand off in head to head.

LUIS9
Feb 14th, 2005, 03:52 AM
Robbie i give it to you, you put it so succintly, people just seem to underestimate Hingis game and achievements just because the power players, consistenly were beating her on her declining years on tour. Just to add a few things to your post, I really was pondering about where an in form, fit Hingis would fit in todays top ten and i pretty much agree with you, Kutz, Dementieva and Molik would not trouble an inform Hingis, yes they surely can over power her but for how long and certainly not from tournie to tournie, no body was more consistent than Hingis from tournie to tournie in her generation. In 21 or 23 of her last grand slams matches she reached the semis in 18 of them, i am sometimes too lazy to bother looking up exact stats but these have a confidence interval in the 95% +/- 2 chance of error. The same thing goes for her tournies, the same stat exists from like a time period of 1999 until 2001 U.S open she missed the semis of very few tournies. You can also make the argument that Hingis could and should probably hold her own vs Myskina a rather inconsistent pseudo power baseliner, who surely would not thoroughly overpower her, certainly does not have the kind of pace the Williams especially Serena can generate or Lindsay Davenport or an inform Capriati, the only power players that were consistenly beaten her in her decline. Sharapova is another animal altogether, shes got pace and plenty of it, the more you ask her to give you in a rally the more she will come up with at the end.

Also not only does Hingis have many more tournie wins than Serena Williams she also has 8 more tier 1 titles than her, so that just adds to the argument of Hingis in so far is the better player overall. However singles career wise Serena takes the lead and recognition, you've got to admire her power and athletetic genius. On the fact that she has won more grand slams and has won all 4 of them. Yet overall Hingis still leads.:worship: :worship: However both are great players of their generation!

Black Mamba.
Feb 14th, 2005, 04:05 AM
I base my opinion on the head to head matchups. They played 13 times Serena won 7 Hingis won 6. Not to mention wasn't this the period of time where Vee and Serena weren't playing very many tournaments.

barmaid
Feb 14th, 2005, 05:16 AM
I base my opinion on the head to head matchups. They played 13 times Serena won 7 Hingis won 6. Not to mention wasn't this the period of time where Vee and Serena weren't playing very many tournaments.

This is where the two players have made such a significant impact on the tennis world...their great rivalries and I have to include Venus in that mix as well. :D They were so competitive, colorful, Richard was always there with his comments, Martina had her little antics (tossing the bead into the crowd) I think when Martina retired they both said how much they respected her and Martina did have complimentary things to say about them as well.:kiss: Serena has surpassed Martina in slams, but sadly she didn't get the chance to add to her total:sad: Martina had a unique game full of variety and surprises, the Williams sisters had powerful serves and powerful strokes but lately have been adding variety to their game as well. :D I'm picking Martina as the best overall player because of her 9 doubles titles as well..but Serena certainly has her beat in the Grand Slam singles department! :worship: So two great players who enjoyed a wonderful rivalry on the court!:hearts:

barmaid:wavey:

Andy.
Feb 14th, 2005, 05:30 AM
Definatly Serena more slams more dominant and more feared.

beall420
Feb 14th, 2005, 05:42 AM
When one says martina has more grand slam titles double and singles than serena they should alos look at attempts

it took serena alot less tries to gain her titles than it took martina

menaing her success rate is greater. she rarely plays dubs' anymore so compare theirdoubles titles in a moot point. however in gs single's title serena is the winner and she has won on all surfaces. as to who was number one longer tat is also a non issue since it does not take a grand slam winner to hold the title look at lindsay

so case closed serena is superior

PhoenixStorm
Feb 14th, 2005, 05:44 AM
So does that make navritilova a better tennis player than graf since she holds more singles and doubles?

For me between hIngis and Serena the winner is Serena. Who cares about number one? No one.

What measures greatness is slams whether thats good or bad is not the point its just the way it is. No one looks at steffi and say she spent so and so much tima as number one... no they say she won 22 slams.

When you are reduced to saying how long someone was number one you are just desperate because they must not have achieved much in the slams.

PhoenixStorm
Feb 14th, 2005, 05:56 AM
I think TeeRexx, a Williams fan, started this poll. Unfortunately, the results didn't come out the way Williams fans thought it would. Martina was number one, officially and every other way. She will forever be known as the former number one player in the world. People love her and miss her. That's the real story.

The only reason martina's retirement is talked about is because of the way she went out... afraid and unwilling to compete. Everytime she's brought up in the press its not about an injury its about "how she melted in the face of greater opposition" meaning power players. Or its about how she must not have had a strong work ethic to improve her game and compete.

In any case it really doesnt matter. Martina was a great player, Serena is greater.

When people talk about sampras they dont talk about his weeks at number one or his many titles they talk about his SLAM TITLES. They don't talk about doubles or mixed doubles or anything like that. Pete is regarded as the greatest tennis player ever and yet he has how many doubles slams? How many mixed slams? exactly.

The measure of greatness in tennis is singles slams and face it serena is better. She is an all surface grand slam winner and hingis is not. Serena owned all four slams at the same time not Martina.

Martian KC
Feb 14th, 2005, 06:05 AM
So does that make navritilova a better tennis player than graf since she holds more singles and doubles?

Oui.

RVD
Feb 14th, 2005, 06:08 AM
Let's get this straight. Venus never "whomped" Hingis' ass. Look at the head to head and see who did the most ass whooping during their rivalry, including a 6-1, 6-1 right in the middle of Venus' domination period. I'll give you hint; it wasn't Venus. They met two times when Venus was unquestionably in peak form and Hingis was close enough to it and Venus scraped through both times, and the second one could have easily gone the other way. Hingis and Venus were very evenly matched.

Serena is another story and yes she is the greater player out of her and Hingis now. But I seem to remember Serena whomping a lot of asses, including Venus' over the years.

Also to the people who are saying that a peak Hingis wouldn't be top 10, you obviously have no idea. Out of the 4 players who used to give hingis trouble - Serena, Venus, Lindsay, Jenn - 3 are playing much worse than they were then and all four are still in the top nine. Hello, Myskina was top 3 five minutes ago. M-Y-S-K-I-N-A! And you are trying to tell me Hingis couldn't be top ten? :lol:Robbie,
I'm basing my opinion on the last 10 Venus vs. Martina matches: 6 - 4.
Basically, when Venus began to home in on Hingis' game.

SF Hamburg May 5 2002 V Williams(1) - M Hingis(3) 7-5 6-3
SF Key Bisc. Apr 1 2001 V Williams(3) - M Hingis(1) 6-3 7-6(6)
SF Australian O. Jan 28 2001 M Hingis(1) - V Williams(3) 6-1 6-1
SF US Open Sep 10 2000 V Williams(3) - M Hingis(1) 4-6 6-3 7-5
QF Wimbledon July 9 2000 V Williams(5) - M Hingis(1) 6-3 4-6 6-4
SF Chase Champ's Nov 21 1999 M Hingis(1) - V Williams(3) 6-4 7-62
F Zurich Oct 17 1999 V Williams(2) - M Hingis(1) 6-3 6-4
SF US Open Sep 12 1999 M Hingis(1) - V Williams(3) 6-1 4-6 6-3
F San Diego Aug 8 1999 M Hingis(2) - V Williams(4) 6-4 6-0
SF Rome May 9 1999 V Williams(3) - M Hingis(1)

I look at the Venus of 97 to 98 as a fledgling player on the pro circuit. First, because she didn't play that many matches. And secondly because Martina had already been playing some 3 years pro (3rd October, 1994). Martina had already established herself as one of the best. I guess it's all about perspective. At any rate there were matches were Hingis got her behind soundly spanked by Venus. No biggie though. Hingis spanked Vee many times as well. I'm sure that even you can see this. Hingis was not used to getting routed in straights until BOTH Venus and Serena made a habit out of doing just that.

At this point, to even suggest that Hingis is better than Serena is simply ridiculous. You need to give up that ghost homey. She's retired.

I understand and respect your fanhood for Hingis, but she was passed up by better players who retooled their games and did what was necessary to improve. Martina Hingis REFUSED to do that. End of story.

VeeReeDavJCap81
Feb 14th, 2005, 07:12 AM
Hingis and Venus is a better comparison. Serena is in a different league than Hingis. Serena is not just a power player, she's a great athlete and a shot making machine. When Serena was on fire, Hingis had no weapons on her. And to top that off, Serena was already beating Hingis well before 2002 when Serena went on to start the Serena Slam.

Volcana
Feb 14th, 2005, 01:15 PM
After AO 01, Hingis' game slipped markedlyI think the critical change is before that, and it ISN'T is Hingis' game. It's the 2000 San Diego loss to Amy Frazier. Possibly the best match Frazier ever played, but also the match that showed the rest of the tour you didn't have to hit like Venus or Serena or Lindsay to beat Martina. Arguably though, the 2000 RG loss to Pierce was the beginning of the end. Pierce hadn't beaten Hingis on clay since 1996.The V,S and LD that Hingis faced between 1998-01 are better at seizing control of a point than any of today's top tenners (with the exception of Sharapova) and less likely to make an error off a mid court ball and yet Hingis fought them to a virtual stand off in head to head.You only get 'virtual standstill' by going back to 1998. Things began tracking against Hingis at the 99 US Open. And RG 2000 was less an aberration than a harbinger. Ignore '98 and '99. If you start at 2000, you can virtually track the maturation of power tennis by watching the names who show up defeating Hingis.
2000
SYDNEY .............. SF 09 MAURESMO ......... L 7-5 6-3
AUSTRALIAN OPEN ..... FR 02 DAVENPORT ........ L 6-1 7-5
PAN PACIFIC ......... CH 15 TESTUD ........... W 6-3 7-5
SCOTTSDALE .......... SF 06 PIERCE ........... W 6-4 6-3
INDIAN WELLS ........ QF 08 SELES ............ W 6-3 6-1
INDIAN WELLS ........ SF 06 PIERCE ........... W 6-4 6-2
INDIAN WELLS ........ FR 02 DAVENPORT ........ L 4-6 6-4 6-0
MIAMI ............... SF 08 SELES ............ W 6-0 6-0
MIAMI ............... CH 02 DAVENPORT ........ W 6-3 6-2
HAMBURG ............. CH 11 SANCHEZ-VICARIO .. W 6-3 6-3
BERLIN .............. SF 08 MARTINEZ ......... L 7-5 6-4*
ROLAND GARROS ....... SF 07 PIERCE ........... L 6-4 5-7 6-2
'S-HERTOGENBOSCH .... CH 33 DRAGOMIR ......... W 6-2 3-0 ret.
WIMBLEDON ........... QF 05 WILLIAMS, V ...... L 6-3 4-6 6-4
SAN DIEGO ........... QF 26 FRAZIER .......... L 6-3 6-3
LOS ANGELES ......... SF 07 WILLIAMS, S ...... L 4-6 6-2 6-3
DU MAURIER OPEN ..... CH 07 WILLIAMS, S ...... W 0-6 6-3 3-0 ret.
US OPEN ............. QF 05 SELES ............ W 6-0 7-5
US OPEN ............. SF 03 WILLIAMS, V ...... L 4-6 6-3 7-5
FILDERSTADT ......... CH 45 CLIJSTERS ........ W 6-0 6-3
ZURICH .............. CH 02 DAVENPORT ........ W 6-4 4-6 7-5
MOSCOW .............. CH 11 KOURNIKOVA ....... W 6-3 6-1
PHILADELPHIA ........ FR 02 DAVENPORT ........ L 7-6 6-4
Tour CHAMPIONSHIPS .. CH 04 SELES ............ W 6-7 6-4 6-4

2001 - I think Hingis came into 2001 re-committed and determined. And she started like house on fire, defeating all her main rivals. Then came Capriati, a none top ten player.

SYDNEY .............. QF 06 WILLIAMS, S ...... W 6-4 7-5
SYDNEY .............. CH 02 DAVENPORT ........ W 6-3 4-6 7-5
AUSTRALIAN OPEN ..... QF 06 WILLIAMS, S ...... W 6-2 3-6 8-6
AUSTRALIAN OPEN ..... SF 03 WILLIAMS, V ...... W 6-1 6-1
AUSTRALIAN OPEN ..... FR 14 CAPRIATI ......... L 6-4 6-3
PAN PACIFIC ......... FR 02 DAVENPORT ........ L 6-7 6-4 6-2
DOHA ................ CH 18 TESTUD ........... W 6-3 6-2
DUBAI ............... CH 13 TAUZIAT .......... W 6-4 6-4
INDIAN WELLS ........ SF 19 CLIJSTERS ........ L 6-2 2-6 6-1
MIAMI ............... SF 03 WILLIAMS, V ...... L 6-3 7-6
AMELIA ISLAND ....... QF 11 SANCHEZ-VICARIO .. L 6-2 6-4*
CHARLESTON .......... QF 09 MAURESMO ......... W 7-5 6-2
CHARLESTON .......... FR 05 CAPRIATI ......... L 6-0 4-6 6-4
BERLIN .............. SF 09 MAURESMO ......... L 2-6 6-0 6-4
ROME ................ SF 06 MAURESMO ......... L 6-4 7-6
FRENCH OPEN ......... SF 04 CAPRIATI ......... L 6-4 6-3
WIMBLEDON ........... r1 83 RUANO PASCUAL .... L 6-4 6-2**
SAN DIEGO ........... SF 10 SELES ............ L 6-3 6-4
LOS ANGELES ......... SF 10 SELES ............ L 6-3 1-6 6-4
US OPEN ............. SF 10 WILLIAMS, S ...... L 6-3 6-2
MOSCOW .............. QF 13 DEMENTIEVA ....... L 6-2 6-2
FILDERSTADT ......... SF 03 DAVENPORT ........ L 2-1 ret.

* clay court losses to ASV or Conchi are not a sign of poor play
** inexplicable. Of course VEnus Williams and Amelie Mauresmo managed to crash out of the French in the 1st round one of those years. Which is why we have 32 seed slams.

gray - Hingis won tournament, did not defeat any then-elite power players doing it
red - loss to elite power player
blue - win over elite power player

Chrissie-fan
Feb 14th, 2005, 01:50 PM
No,not necessarily. Just giving my opinion,that's all. Some I'm sure think it's a stupid opinion to have,but that doesn't bother me. My ego ain't that big. :smoke:
So that somehow makes her greater than Serena, I'm assuming........

Geisha
Feb 14th, 2005, 05:09 PM
Mine were Manhatten 98 and Montreal 00

Ooooh, when Serena won the first set 6-0, but then got injured?

Serena is greater. 7 Grand Slams (Career Grand Slam) to 5 Grand Slams. Better head-to-head record. Better winning percentage, I believe. Maybe I'm mistaken.

jj74
Feb 14th, 2005, 05:23 PM
In terms of talent Hingis. Martina was the most talented player in a decade, but tennis is not only talent. Serena was a fighter and Martina don't, Serena won more GS and shows determination to come back to the top, so i think Serena is greater than Hingis

cheesestix
Feb 14th, 2005, 05:28 PM
Let's get this straight. Venus never "whomped" Hingis' ass. Look at the head to head and see who did the most ass whooping during their rivalry, including a 6-1, 6-1 right in the middle of Venus' domination period. I'll give you hint; it wasn't Venus.

:worship:

hingis-seles
Feb 14th, 2005, 06:48 PM
I don't know what Venus has to do with any of this, but she never beat Hingis easily while a lot of Martina's wins were lopsided. Examples: 6-0, 6-4 1997 US Open final, 6-1, 6-1 2001 AO final, 6-2, 6-1 1997 Miami, 6-4, 6-0 1999 San Diego to name a few. Note that all of these are on hardcourts (all except one on US hardcourts!). Martina tops Venus in every category and is greater than her. No question.

As far as Serena-Martina goes, Serena definitely has to get the nod. She's won more GS singles titles. 'Nuff said.

stijntje
Feb 14th, 2005, 06:53 PM
Martina all the way!

pigam
Feb 14th, 2005, 07:34 PM
Yeah. Venus and Serena.
Yeah. Me too. :scratch: :confused: :shrug:

Volcana
Feb 14th, 2005, 08:52 PM
Serena was a fighter and Martina don't,If you actually think Hingis wasn't a fighter, please go look at the 2002 Australian Open final again.

Ot let me simply ask you. Have you ever played any sport in 100 degree weather, and you getting cramps, and chills, and you're dehydrated, and you keep getting up and dragging yourself back out onto the field/court/whatever, KNOWING your opponent is stronger and faster than you? If you haven't, put politely, you have no idea what you're talking about.

Serena isn't more of a fighter than Hingis. Serena brings superior tools to that kind of match. ie, she's fast as hell.

BTW, I find it a bit ..disturbing? .. that the vote has swung so heavily in Serena's favor in the last 72 hours. Serena isn't a different player than she was before winning OZ '05. Have so many opinions changed? Have so many new people joined the board? Are Serena fans voting 'early and often'?:)

Veritas
Feb 14th, 2005, 09:51 PM
I look at the Venus of 97 to 98 as a fledgling player on the pro circuit.

So? Martina was also a "fledging player" since her 2001 season began. And 2 out of Venus' 3 straight sets victories against her came during 2001/2002, when Martina was clearly playing at a level she wasn't happy with. Just as Venus' wins against Martina during her peak years count, then Martina's against Venus' should as well. No excuses needed.

At any rate there were matches were Hingis got her behind soundly spanked by Venus.

Well, out of Venus' 9 wins against Martina, only 3 were done in straight sets. And two of them (6-3, 7-6 at Miami '01; and 7-5, 6-3 at Hamburg '02) were rather close. The only match I'd consider as a "spanking" was the 1999 Zurich final where Venus won 6-3, 6-4.

As for Martina, 8 out of her 10 wins were done in straight sets. If you want to eliminate the ones garnered when Venus was nowhere near Martina's league (e.g. 1997, where Martina won 6-2, 6-1 and 6-4, 6-0), then consider ones such as the 6-4, 6-0 spanking at San Diego '99 and, of course, the 6-1, 6-1 crushing at Melbourne '01, both where you could argue that they happened when both girls where rather close to each other in their level of play.

Anyway, this thread was made to compare Serena and Martina, not Venus or the Williams sisters. I don't even know why Venus was brought up in the first place.

Dawn Marie
Feb 14th, 2005, 10:59 PM
Serena all the way!! She is the better all around champion who is the better fighter!!

When Hingis started to lose she got scared and quit the game, refused to MOTIVATE herself to RISE to the challenge. Serena though fought and has the MOTIVATION and DETERMINATION and the DRIVE to win and to regain the top spot.

Serena as a tennis(sports) player has the DRIVE and the Ambition, where as Hingis does not have the DRIVE and appears unmotivated.

Serena all the way, as imho she is the better SPORTS PLAYER. She never gives up and she will fight to the end!! This fight doesn't mean just in tennis matches, but in mentality and drive to get back to the top!!:)

Stamp Paid
Feb 14th, 2005, 11:02 PM
If you actually think Hingis wasn't a fighter, please go look at the 2002 Australian Open final again.

Ot let me simply ask you. Have you ever played any sport in 100 degree weather, and you getting cramps, and chills, and you're dehydrated, and you keep getting up and dragging yourself back out onto the field/court/whatever, KNOWING your opponent is stronger and faster than you? If you haven't, put politely, you have no idea what you're talking about.

Serena isn't more of a fighter than Hingis. Serena brings superior tools to that kind of match. ie, she's fast as hell.

BTW, I find it a bit ..disturbing? .. that the vote has swung so heavily in Serena's favor in the last 72 hours. Serena isn't a different player than she was before winning OZ '05. Have so many opinions changed? Have so many new people joined the board? Are Serena fans voting 'early and often'?:)

I'm assuming since Serena has won 1 more slam, she has somehow instantly become more obviously greater than Hingis.

cheesestix
Feb 14th, 2005, 11:09 PM
So? Martina was also a "fledging player" since her 2001 season began. And 2 out of Venus' 3 straight sets victories against her came during 2001/2002, when Martina was clearly playing at a level she wasn't happy with. Just as Venus' wins against Martina during her peak years count, then Martina's against Venus' should as well. No excuses needed.



Well, out of Venus' 9 wins against Martina, only 3 were done in straight sets. And two of them (6-3, 7-6 at Miami '01; and 7-5, 6-3 at Hamburg '02) were rather close. The only match I'd consider as a "spanking" was the 1999 Zurich final where Venus won 6-3, 6-4.

As for Martina, 8 out of her 10 wins were done in straight sets. If you want to eliminate the ones garnered when Venus was nowhere near Martina's league (e.g. 1997, where Martina won 6-2, 6-1 and 6-4, 6-0), then consider ones such as the 6-4, 6-0 spanking at San Diego '99 and, of course, the 6-1, 6-1 crushing at Melbourne '01, both where you could argue that they happened when both girls where rather close to each other in their level of play.

Anyway, this thread was made to compare Serena and Martina, not Venus or the Williams sisters. I don't even know why Venus was brought up in the first place.

:worship:

Facts are such a good thing, aren't they! :haha:

Doraemon
Feb 14th, 2005, 11:13 PM
IMHO, Hingis is far better than Serena in many ways. Esp, Hingist wins the race hands down in the beauty department. Serena may have won more GS titles but considering how many weeks Martina spent as no.1, Serena's reign at top was rather short. Anyways, Martina's sepriority in beauty really gives her the edge after all.

switz
Feb 14th, 2005, 11:20 PM
i'm going to serena is simply amazing. nobody comes close.

(for vs1)

Robbie.
Feb 14th, 2005, 11:29 PM
I think the critical change is before that, and it ISN'T is Hingis' game. It's the 2000 San Diego loss to Amy Frazier. Possibly the best match Frazier ever played, but also the match that showed the rest of the tour you didn't have to hit like Venus or Serena or Lindsay to beat Martina. Arguably though, the 2000 RG loss to Pierce was the beginning of the end. Pierce hadn't beaten Hingis on clay since 1996.You only get 'virtual standstill' by going back to 1998. Things began tracking against Hingis at the 99 US Open. And RG 2000 was less an aberration than a harbinger. Ignore '98 and '99. If you start at 2000, you can virtually track the maturation of power tennis by watching the names who show up defeating Hingis.
2000
SYDNEY .............. SF 09 MAURESMO ......... L 7-5 6-3
AUSTRALIAN OPEN ..... FR 02 DAVENPORT ........ L 6-1 7-5
PAN PACIFIC ......... CH 15 TESTUD ........... W 6-3 7-5
SCOTTSDALE .......... SF 06 PIERCE ........... W 6-4 6-3
INDIAN WELLS ........ QF 08 SELES ............ W 6-3 6-1
INDIAN WELLS ........ SF 06 PIERCE ........... W 6-4 6-2
INDIAN WELLS ........ FR 02 DAVENPORT ........ L 4-6 6-4 6-0
MIAMI ............... SF 08 SELES ............ W 6-0 6-0
MIAMI ............... CH 02 DAVENPORT ........ W 6-3 6-2
HAMBURG ............. CH 11 SANCHEZ-VICARIO .. W 6-3 6-3
BERLIN .............. SF 08 MARTINEZ ......... L 7-5 6-4*
ROLAND GARROS ....... SF 07 PIERCE ........... L 6-4 5-7 6-2
'S-HERTOGENBOSCH .... CH 33 DRAGOMIR ......... W 6-2 3-0 ret.
WIMBLEDON ........... QF 05 WILLIAMS, V ...... L 6-3 4-6 6-4
SAN DIEGO ........... QF 26 FRAZIER .......... L 6-3 6-3
LOS ANGELES ......... SF 07 WILLIAMS, S ...... L 4-6 6-2 6-3
DU MAURIER OPEN ..... CH 07 WILLIAMS, S ...... W 0-6 6-3 3-0 ret.
US OPEN ............. QF 05 SELES ............ W 6-0 7-5
US OPEN ............. SF 03 WILLIAMS, V ...... L 4-6 6-3 7-5
FILDERSTADT ......... CH 45 CLIJSTERS ........ W 6-0 6-3
ZURICH .............. CH 02 DAVENPORT ........ W 6-4 4-6 7-5
MOSCOW .............. CH 11 KOURNIKOVA ....... W 6-3 6-1
PHILADELPHIA ........ FR 02 DAVENPORT ........ L 7-6 6-4
Tour CHAMPIONSHIPS .. CH 04 SELES ............ W 6-7 6-4 6-4

2001 - I think Hingis came into 2001 re-committed and determined. And she started like house on fire, defeating all her main rivals. Then came Capriati, a none top ten player.

SYDNEY .............. QF 06 WILLIAMS, S ...... W 6-4 7-5
SYDNEY .............. CH 02 DAVENPORT ........ W 6-3 4-6 7-5
AUSTRALIAN OPEN ..... QF 06 WILLIAMS, S ...... W 6-2 3-6 8-6
AUSTRALIAN OPEN ..... SF 03 WILLIAMS, V ...... W 6-1 6-1
AUSTRALIAN OPEN ..... FR 14 CAPRIATI ......... L 6-4 6-3
PAN PACIFIC ......... FR 02 DAVENPORT ........ L 6-7 6-4 6-2
DOHA ................ CH 18 TESTUD ........... W 6-3 6-2
DUBAI ............... CH 13 TAUZIAT .......... W 6-4 6-4
INDIAN WELLS ........ SF 19 CLIJSTERS ........ L 6-2 2-6 6-1
MIAMI ............... SF 03 WILLIAMS, V ...... L 6-3 7-6
AMELIA ISLAND ....... QF 11 SANCHEZ-VICARIO .. L 6-2 6-4*
CHARLESTON .......... QF 09 MAURESMO ......... W 7-5 6-2
CHARLESTON .......... FR 05 CAPRIATI ......... L 6-0 4-6 6-4
BERLIN .............. SF 09 MAURESMO ......... L 2-6 6-0 6-4
ROME ................ SF 06 MAURESMO ......... L 6-4 7-6
FRENCH OPEN ......... SF 04 CAPRIATI ......... L 6-4 6-3
WIMBLEDON ........... r1 83 RUANO PASCUAL .... L 6-4 6-2**
SAN DIEGO ........... SF 10 SELES ............ L 6-3 6-4
LOS ANGELES ......... SF 10 SELES ............ L 6-3 1-6 6-4
US OPEN ............. SF 10 WILLIAMS, S ...... L 6-3 6-2
MOSCOW .............. QF 13 DEMENTIEVA ....... L 6-2 6-2
FILDERSTADT ......... SF 03 DAVENPORT ........ L 2-1 ret.

* clay court losses to ASV or Conchi are not a sign of poor play
** inexplicable. Of course VEnus Williams and Amelie Mauresmo managed to crash out of the French in the 1st round one of those years. Which is why we have 32 seed slams.

gray - Hingis won tournament, did not defeat any then-elite power players doing it
red - loss to elite power player
blue - win over elite power player

Nice work, but I don't buy it. I saw with my OWN eyes the deterioration in Hingis' game. She was jaded and making many more unforced errors than she used to. At her best Hingis was so miserly with unforced errors but you could not say that in 2001.The key point is the Australian Open 01. The AO01 broke her completely. After that, she stopped going for the shots that made her unique and started playing many more balls up the middle of the court playing the waiting game. The trouble was, not only had this game been superceded by then (note the decline of ASV, Martinez, Coetzer), but she didn't have the patience to execute it.

A low unforced error count combined with an acute knowledge of the position of the racquet face was her chief weapon against the big hitters. In 2001, both of these qualities were foresaken. You say a loss to ASV should not be considered a bad loss. I consider it crisis point. Back when Hingis was 15, not yet physically strong enough or confident enough in her full pallette of strokes, players like Coetzer and ASV could beat her. That was around the same time as she was losing to 0-6, 0-6 to players like Mary Pierce, which is significant. They would just hit with her until she eventually made the unforced error. However at her best they were Hingis' pigeons, on any surface. Why? Because Hingis didn't make the unforced errors they relied on to get by. In addition to a superior when of shot and far more complete pallette of strokes, they struggled to win games off her. She didn't have to get out of second gear to beat them most of the time. Yet here was ASV, in one of her worst seasons on tour, beating up on Hingis. It screams two things; unforced errors and decline.

Similarly I can't see how you use Seles, Pierce, Frazier as examples of the maturation of power tennis. These three were players older than Hingis who played at a pretty steady level through Hingis' prime years, yet Hingis owned them. They weren't suddenly better in 00-01. Seles only ever beat Hingis when her level was down. She beat her five times in their rivalry. Her first two wins in 98 came during hingis title drought that extended from May to November. Her last win came a couple of tournaments before Hingis' retirement. Again UE's were the order of the day. Elsewhere when Hingis was on her game she beat her something like 16 times. And you are trying to tell me that I should take something from the summer 01 wins, other than the fact Hingis was declining? Pierce and Frazier were also Hingis pigeons. Losses to these three, especially when combined with the other evidence, again scream decline.

So while the signs of decline were there in 2000, the rot had really set in by the summer of 2001 and was rancid by the fall. You see by that time, it is true, that Hingis had virtually no ability to handle power tennis. After losing to Seles for only the 3rd and 4th time in 17 matches, she should have lost to Majoli in the third round of the US Open and Dokic had her on the ropes in the 4th until she couldn't keep a ball in court, then she suffered her worst ever loss to Serena Williams (after winning their 2 encounters early in the year mind you), followed by the Dementieva loss. However while you seem to go for the somewhat sociological explanation that it was tour that accelerated past her in a period of 8 months, I find it a much more plausible explanation, considering all the evidence, to conclude that by then Hingis was playing some way from her peak level. You see you have Dementieva down as an elite power player at the time of Moscow 01. I find this interesting. The truth is that Dementieva was far less an elite power player at that time than she was 12 months earlier when Hingis beat her in the same tournament. And she was no more an elite power player in Moscow 01 than Clijsters, Dokic, Capriati, Mauresmo, Davenport and Seles were when Hingis had beaten them all during a glorious run through the indoor circuit in 2000. Playing at her fall 01 level Hingis probably wouldn't have survived matches against any of those players in their 2000 fall form. Then you have the fact that to open the new year she beat Clijsters, Serena Williams (twice), Davenport and Venus Williams in her first two tournaments. Was Dementieva of Moscow 01, ranked in the middle teens while they were all top 6, a better player than those players were at the time Hingis beat them eight months earlier? Can you not see the deterioration in a year? Is it really plausible that the tour improved that much in such a short space of time?

Fianlly, you call the Ruano Pascual loss "inexplicable", which in another circumstance it may have been. In this context it is just another piece of evidence that leads to the inescapable conclusion of decline.

G1Player2
Feb 14th, 2005, 11:44 PM
Nice work, but I don't buy it. I saw with my OWN eyes the deterioration in Hingis' game. She was jaded and making many more unforced errors than she used to. At her best Hingis was so miserly with unforced errors but you could not say that in 2001.The key point is the Australian Open 01. The AO01 broke her completely. After that, she stopped going for the shots that made her unique and started playing many more balls up the middle of the court playing the waiting game. The trouble was, not only had this game been superceded by then (note the decline of ASV, Martinez, Coetzer), but she didn't have the patience to execute it.

A low unforced error count combined with an acute knowledge of the position of the racquet face was her chief weapon against the big hitters. In 2001, both of these qualities were foresaken. You say a loss to ASV should not be considered a bad loss. I consider it crisis point. Back when Hingis was 15, not yet physically strong enough or confident enough in her full pallette of strokes, players like Coetzer and ASV could beat her. That was around the same time as she was losing to 0-6, 0-6 to players like Mary Pierce, which is significant. They would just hit with her until she eventually made the unforced error. However at her best they were Hingis' pigeons, on any surface. Why? Because Hingis didn't make the unforced errors they relied on to get by. In addition to a superior when of shot and far more complete pallette of strokes, they struggled to win games off her. She didn't have to get out of second gear to beat them most of the time. Yet here was ASV, in one of her worst seasons on tour, beating up on Hingis. It screams two things; unforced errors and decline.

Similarly I can't see how you use Seles, Pierce, Frazier as examples of the maturation of power tennis. These three were players older than Hingis who played at a pretty steady level through Hingis' prime years, yet Hingis owned them. They weren't suddenly better in 00-01. Seles only ever beat Hingis when her level was down. She beat her five times in their rivalry. Her first two wins in 98 came during hingis title drought that extended from May to November. Her last win came a couple of tournaments before Hingis' retirement. Again UE's were the order of the day. Elsewhere when Hingis was on her game she beat her something like 16 times. And you are trying to tell me that I should take something from the summer 01 wins, other than the fact Hingis was declining? Pierce and Frazier were also Hingis pigeons. Losses to these three, especially when combined with the other evidence, again scream decline.

So while the signs of decline were there in 2000, the rot had really set in by the summer of 2001 and was rancid by the fall. You see by that time, it is true, that Hingis had virtually no ability to handle power tennis. After losing to Seles for only the 3rd and 4th time in 17 matches, she should have lost to Majoli in the third round of the US Open and Dokic had her on the ropes in the 4th until she couldn't keep a ball in court, then she suffered her worst ever loss to Serena Williams (after winning their 2 encounters early in the year mind you), followed by the Dementieva loss. However while you seem to go for the somewhat sociological explanation that it was tour that accelerated past her in a period of 8 months, I find it a much more plausible explanation, considering all the evidence, to conclude that by then Hingis was playing some way from her peak level. You see you have Dementieva down as an elite power player at the time of Moscow 01. I find this interesting. The truth is that Dementieva was far less an elite power player at that time than she was 12 months earlier when Hingis beat her in the same tournament. And she was no more an elite power player in Moscow 01 than Clijsters, Dokic, Capriati, Mauresmo, Davenport and Seles were when Hingis had beaten them all during a glorious run through the indoor circuit in 2000. Playing at her fall 01 level Hingis probably wouldn't have survived matches against any of those players in their 2000 fall form. Then you have the fact that to open the new year she beat Clijsters, Serena Williams (twice), Davenport and Venus Williams in her first two tournaments. Was Dementieva of Moscow 01, ranked in the middle teens while they were all top 6, a better player than those players were at the time Hingis beat them eight months earlier? Can you not see the deterioration in a year? Is it really plausible that the tour improved that much in such a short space of time?

Fianlly, you call the Ruano Pascual loss "inexplicable", which in another circumstance it may have been. In this context it is just another piece of evidence that leads to the inescapable conclusion of decline.

I think you are trying to make excuses for Hingis...Can you explain her form in 2002?!!! She was playing the best tennis of her life at the Austrailian Open that year...Also, I definitely do not agree with Hingis committing too many unforced errors led to her decline...Against Monica Seles she committed 12 unforced errors in a 3 set match in the AO semifinals....12!!! That's as clean as it gets in a tough 3 setter...

Also, in 2001, when she lost to Seles in the summer two times, Seles was red hot...She also defeated Serena Williams and pushed her in the best match of the year in Canada...She also crushed Capriati 6-3, 6-3 and these were all players who had given her trouble in the past so I think this was more determined by Seles's level of play whether than Hingis' so called decline...I don't buy it...

Robbie.
Feb 15th, 2005, 12:01 AM
I think you are trying to make excuses for Hingis...Can you explain her form in 2002?!!! She was playing the best tennis of her life at the Austrailian Open that year...Also, I definitely do not agree with Hingis committing too many unforced errors led to her decline...Against Monica Seles she committed 12 unforced errors in a 3 set match in the AO semifinals....12!!! That's as clean as it gets in a tough 3 setter...

Well Hingis was a different player in between the first and the second surgery than she was at other times after the year 2000, her form against power players shows that. By then Serena had gone to another level but Hingis beat Seles, Clijsters, Hantuchova and should have beaten Capriati (she certainly wasn't overpowered). We were talking about her deterioration during 2001. If you want to talk about 2002, we can but it just kind of proves my point that when Hingis is playing well she doesn't lose to Seles (3 straight wins when Seles was in top form).

Also, in 2001, when she lost to Seles in the summer two times, Seles was red hot...She also defeated Serena Williams and pushed her in the best match of the year in Canada...She also crushed Capriati 6-3, 6-3 and these were all players who had given her trouble in the past so I think this was more determined by Seles's level of play whether than Hingis' so called decline...I don't buy it...

I think that was a big hype that Seles was playing so well. People base that idea on her two wins over Hingis, her win over Capriati and her win over Serena Williams. However, IMO, Hingis was far from her peak and
Seles usually had Capriati's number anyway. Her win over Serena was good but most of their matches through the years were battles anyway that could have gone either way and Serena did have match points. During this time she won no title, dropped a set to Testud, went down rather routinely in finals to Davenport and Venus Williams, and lost to Bedanova at the US Open.

I stand by statement, peak Hingis doesn't lose to post-stabbing Seles. The h2h clearly bears this out.

1jackson2001
Feb 15th, 2005, 12:16 AM
Here's how I look at it. I included doubles GS and mixed doubles GS because they are slams, but otherwise didn't include doubles. You have a partner with you on court helping you in doubles so IMO the achievements can't really be counted towards personal greatness.

I gave each player stars, depending on how much "greater" each player is in the respective category.

Comparing the major categories of their careers:


-----------Martina----Serena

Weeks #1.........209...............57.....Martina**(many more weeks, so 2 stars)

Singles GS..........5.................7......Serena*****(m ore, plus 1 of 9 to own Career GS, 1 of 5 to hold all four at same time)

Doubles GS.........9.................6......Martina*

Mixed D. GS........0.................2......Serena*

Year End#1.........3.................1......Martina*

Sing. Titles.........40...............26......Martina*

Total: Martina *****(5) Serena ******(6)


Notes:

1) Martina, since she has about 150 weeks on Serena at #1, she gets 2 stars there instead of one.

2) Serena owns two more singles GS (the most important career statistic is the singles GS). She is also one of 9 players in history to have won all 4 (aka Career Grand Slam). She is also one of 5 players of all time (not just Open Era) to have held all 4 majors at once. To me that is very significant. It is a rare feat to win all 4 of them. Many great players have won slams but very few owns the full deck. Serena gets 5 star advantage here (1 star for having won 2 more, 2 stars for Career Grand Slam, 2 stars for four-in-a-row).

3) Rest of the categories are self-explanatory.

Had Serena still won 7, but not held all 4 at once, it would be a much closer case. But since she does, it really cements her case. ;)

Serena still hasn't completed her career yet so let's wait and see how much more she wins.

G1Player2
Feb 15th, 2005, 12:18 AM
Well Hingis was a different player in between the first and the second surgery than she was at other times after the year 2000, her form against power players shows that. By then Serena had gone to another level but Hingis beat Seles, Clijsters, Hantuchova and should have beaten Capriati (she certainly wasn't overpowered). We were talking about her deterioration during 2001. If you want to talk about 2002, we can but it just kind of proves my point that when Hingis is playing well she doesn't lose to Seles (3 straight wins when Seles was in top form).



I think that was a big hype that Seles was playing so well. People base that idea on her two wins over Hingis, her win over Capriati and her win over Serena Williams. However, IMO, Hingis was far from her peak and
Seles usually had Capriati's number anyway. Her win over Serena was good but most of their matches through the years were battles anyway that could have gone either way and Serena did have match points. During this time she won no title, dropped a set to Testud, went down rather routinely in finals to Davenport and Venus Williams, and lost to Bedanova at the US Open.

I stand by statement, peak Hingis doesn't lose to post-stabbing Seles. The h2h clearly bears this out.


Well Seles did beat Hingis 6-3, 6-2 in the 1998 French Open and Hingis was playing solid tennis...Also, in the 2000 Chase Championships Seles was up 7-6, 4-2, but it makes it seems as if you are acting like post-stabbing Seles stood no chance against Hingis...Even though Hignis lead the H-2-H 15-5 most of their matches have been competitive...

Let's put it this way...In early 2002, Hingis was in the best shape of her life and playing the best tennis I have ever seen from her...She dropped just 9 games in 4 matches at Oz that year...She breezed through to the semi-finals and faced Seles again...

Hingis had incredible stats in this match...32winner/5 aces/12UE's...If I looked at these numbers I would suspect that Hingis won the match easily...Something like 6-3, 6-3...However, this wasn't the case...Hingis squeaked away with the win 4-6, 6-1, 6-4...It took numbers like the ones above for Hingis to get through this match...12 UE's in a 3 set match is almost unheard of...

So, IMO...Oh yes, the players definitely got stronger and improved as this match is a definite testament to this...I remember Hingis beating Seles in straight sets with 30 UE's and like 8 winners, 0 aces in one match...

Hingis had to play her very best tennis and create stats that we never knew she could come up with to win a match like this...Hingis never hit over 20 winners in a match and I can't think of a match where she hit 5 aces which is my reasoning that the tour steadily improved and Hingis just couldn't keep up...

Tennisfan-Mtl
Feb 15th, 2005, 12:21 AM
Definitely Martina :) :) :hearts:

PhoenixStorm
Feb 15th, 2005, 12:21 AM
Definitely Serena.

Now if you want to compare Venus and Martina my answer would be different.

ys
Feb 15th, 2005, 12:25 AM
I like Martina more than both Williams sisters together.. But Serena and Martina are simply incomparable. Serena is one of all time greats, all time Top 10. Martina is not. Now if we compare Martina and Venus, it is closer. Still, a nod to Venus. 4 first tier Slams + sweep of Olympic gold beat 2 first tier Slams plus 3 second tier Slams. Narrowly but surely.

Robbie.
Feb 15th, 2005, 12:39 AM
Well Seles did beat Hingis 6-3, 6-2 in the 1998 French Open and Hingis was playing solid tennis...Also, in the 2000 Chase Championships Seles was up 7-6, 4-2, but it makes it seems as if you are acting like post-stabbing Seles stood no chance against Hingis...Even though Hignis lead the H-2-H 15-5 most of their matches have been competitive...

Of course many of their matches were competitive. But Hingis did beat Seles 12 times in straight sets and the record was 4-1 in slams in Hingis' favour. Let's face it she had her number.


Hingis had incredible stats in this match...32winner/5 aces/12UE's...If I looked at these numbers I would suspect that Hingis won the match easily...Something like 6-3, 6-3...However, this wasn't the case...Hingis squeaked away with the win 4-6, 6-1, 6-4...It took numbers like the ones above for Hingis to get through this match...12 UE's in a 3 set match is almost unheard of...

It wasn't exactly squeaking away. Seles played out of her mind in the first. Close to the best set I have seen her play. But Hingis turned it around with awesome retrieving and then led 6-1 5-1 and should have closed it out there, but she tightened up as she did in the final.

So, IMO...Oh yes, the players definitely got stronger and improved as this match is a definite testament to this...I remember Hingis beating Seles in straight sets with 30 UE's and like 8 winners, 0 aces in one match...

Hingis had to play her very best tennis and create stats that we never knew she could come up with to win a match like this...Hingis never hit over 20 winners in a match and I can't think of a match where she hit 5 aces which is my reasoning that the tour steadily improved and Hingis just couldn't keep up...
Hingis never hit 20 winners, that a bit silly.
Can I ask why you are basing your whole analysis on one match, against a player who Hingis nearly almost beat anyway?
Yes, Hingis was playing well at the beginning of 2002. Who ever questioned that? But Hingis on early '02 was not the Hingis of most of '01. If you can't see that then you don't follow tennis very closely. The hingis who played Seles and Capriati at AO '02 was certainly not the player who lost to ASV, Ruano Pascual, Dementieva, Seles and was nearly toppled by Majoli in '01.
Hingis' good form in early '02 was reflected in results, and her ranking. Hingis was leading the race to the championships when she left the tour in May 2002 and was #3 in the world! That's hardly indicative of not being able to keep up. Is it?
Also Volcana is not talking about steady improvement. He is talking about RAPID improvement, in which Hingis went from being able to beat the majority of big hitters most of the time (late '00-early 01), to being completely at their mercy within 8 months. That's just stuff of fairy tales IMO.
Serena was another level to Hingis by '02 without question that was proved in their last two matches and a peak hingis would lose to a peak Serena most of the time. However the Dementieva, Kuznetsova, Myskina's of 05 are nowhere near peak Serena level. Early 2002 was the last time Hingis was in good form and she was a top 3 player then. No one is saying she would dominate the tour now but to say she wouldn't be top ten, is far fetched IMO.

Robbie.
Feb 15th, 2005, 12:43 AM
I like Martina more than both Williams sisters together.. But Serena and Martina are simply incomparable. Serena is one of all time greats, all time Top 10. Martina is not. Now if we compare Martina and Venus, it is closer. Still, a nod to Venus. 4 first tier Slams + sweep of Olympic gold beat 2 first tier Slams plus 3 second tier Slams. Narrowly but surely.

second tier slams? :lol: There's no such thing :rolleyes:

G1Player2
Feb 15th, 2005, 12:44 AM
Hingis never hit 20 winners, that a bit silly.

Ummm...

In the 2000 Wimbledon quarterfinal Hingis hit 19 winners against Venus Williams...


In the 2000 US Open semi-final Hingis hit 15 winners (close enough) against Venus...

This was against one of the fastest player in the business...

ys
Feb 15th, 2005, 12:46 AM
second tier slams? :lol: There's no such thing :rolleyes:

Agreed. There is no such thing now. There was.

Robbie.
Feb 15th, 2005, 12:47 AM
Ummm...

In the 2000 Wimbledon quarterfinal Hingis hit 19 winners against Venus Williams...


In the 2000 US Open semi-final Hingis hit 15 winners (close enough) against Venus...

This was against one of the fastest player in the business...

Yes, that's two matches hardly the basis for a claim of 'never' hit 20 winners.

Plus Venus is fast. I'm sure against Seles/Pierce type player she has hit more than 20 winners before.

Robbie.
Feb 15th, 2005, 12:48 AM
Agreed. There is no such thing now. There was.

in the late nineties? surely you jest.

ys
Feb 15th, 2005, 12:52 AM
in the late nineties? surely you jest.

In the late nineties. Now there are no players who would say that AO is not worth trouble. Back then , some players, like say Novotna, were doing that regularly. Others - like Williams sisters - would not even bother to come decently prepared.

G1Player2
Feb 15th, 2005, 12:53 AM
Yes, that's two matches hardly the basis for a claim of 'never' hit 20 winners.

Plus Venus is fast. I'm sure against Seles/Pierce type player she has hit more than 20 winners before.

Hingis was playing some of her best tennis in these matches and she was confident...But you have to admit, Hingis was not known for hitting over 20 winners in a match against anybody...

15 winners is what I would consider the norm for her...But 20 and over, not very usual...

G1Player2
Feb 15th, 2005, 01:05 AM
Robbie it seems as if you are trying to make it seems as if Hingis game in 2001 was SO far below level than her previous years...She still reached 1 grand slam final, and reached the semis at the FO and UO...It's just that the players she faced that day were playing out of their minds...

At the FO Capriati was as fit as ever and high on confidence...Also, Capriati was a big hitter who was unlike other big-hitters Hingis played...Capriati was one of the select few who didn't mind getting into long rallies with her...Serena and Davenport avoided long rallies with Hingis, while Capriati didn't, and she did not get fatigued from it...It was total irony that when they played each other that the longer the point the more Capriati was favored to win it...

Against Serena in the US semis, that was one of the best matches Serena has ever played...I don't care what form Hingis was in, she wasn't going to beat Serena that day...Even going into the match, Hingis had the right strategy while playing Serena, but Serena was so in-the-zone that she had to abandon it...

She lost to Ruano-Pascual at Wimbledon but the same thing happened a couple years earlier to Dokic...

Also, Hingis had other bad losses as well...In her best year, 1997, she lost to Lisa Raymond and Amanda Coetzer, players she owned and in 1998 she had a lost to Dominique Van Roost...

So I really don't think Hingis's level in 2001 was that below par...It's just that the only way Hingis could win a tournament was that she would have to beat between two-three improving BIG-HITTERS in a row and she just couldn't cut it...Hingis may stand a chance against one of them, but not three especially considering the fact that at LEAST one of them will be playing out of their mind...

Ryan
Feb 15th, 2005, 03:07 AM
Well Seles did beat Hingis 6-3, 6-2 in the 1998 French Open and Hingis was playing solid tennis...Also, in the 2000 Chase Championships Seles was up 7-6, 4-2, but it makes it seems as if you are acting like post-stabbing Seles stood no chance against Hingis...Even though Hignis lead the H-2-H 15-5 most of their matches have been competitive...

Let's put it this way...In early 2002, Hingis was in the best shape of her life and playing the best tennis I have ever seen from her...She dropped just 9 games in 4 matches at Oz that year...She breezed through to the semi-finals and faced Seles again...

Hingis had incredible stats in this match...32winner/5 aces/12UE's...If I looked at these numbers I would suspect that Hingis won the match easily...Something like 6-3, 6-3...However, this wasn't the case...Hingis squeaked away with the win 4-6, 6-1, 6-4...It took numbers like the ones above for Hingis to get through this match...12 UE's in a 3 set match is almost unheard of...

So, IMO...Oh yes, the players definitely got stronger and improved as this match is a definite testament to this...I remember Hingis beating Seles in straight sets with 30 UE's and like 8 winners, 0 aces in one match...

Hingis had to play her very best tennis and create stats that we never knew she could come up with to win a match like this...Hingis never hit over 20 winners in a match and I can't think of a match where she hit 5 aces which is my reasoning that the tour steadily improved and Hingis just couldn't keep up...

I agree with you that "Hingis was in decline" cannot be used for every one of her losses. She played great in AO '02 until the final, when her mental fragility took over when it got close. THAT is an example of her decline, in 2000 she would have whammed, bammed, and thank you-mammed Capriatio 6-4 6-1. After Tokyo Hingis clearly was not herself either, playing timid tennis against the top power players.

Ryan
Feb 15th, 2005, 03:13 AM
Ummm...

In the 2000 Wimbledon quarterfinal Hingis hit 19 winners against Venus Williams...


In the 2000 US Open semi-final Hingis hit 15 winners (close enough) against Venus...

This was against one of the fastest player in the business...

You jest. Hingis had more than 15 winners in the first two sets against Venus in that match. In matches against top players, anywhere from 15-30 was a "norm" for her, and anywhere from 10-20 UE's.

Deira
Feb 15th, 2005, 03:16 AM
Serena Williams of course. If I was a Martina fan I don't think I would be braggin about how long she was #1. The girl was playing tournies all over the place to hang on to that position while others were winning grand slams and Tier 1's. She played herself ragged. Her #1 ranking became a humongous joke ... remember?

Ryan
Feb 15th, 2005, 03:20 AM
Serena Williams of course. If I was a Martina fan I don't think I would be braggin about how long she was #1. The girl was playing tournies all over the place to hang on to that position while others were winning grand slams and Tier 1's. She played herself ragged. Her #1 ranking became a humongous joke ... remember?

Yes, but at many times someone has held the #1 ranking when many have felt they were not the best in the game. The only difference here was Venus did not play enough to take it, and Hingis was consistantly better in the tournies she did play.

G1Player2
Feb 15th, 2005, 03:24 AM
You jest. Hingis had more than 15 winners in the first two sets against Venus in that match. In matches against top players, anywhere from 15-30 was a "norm" for her, and anywhere from 10-20 UE's.

Hingis did NOT hit more than 15 winners in this match...

Cat5
Feb 15th, 2005, 03:38 AM
Sorry, but Martina Hingis will always be in the hall of fame. She was the youngest to ever hold a grandslam, and Serena will never surpass Martina's weeks at #1. Not to mention all the doubles titles Martina has!

A agree. Martina is much more classier both on and off the court.

rjd1111
Feb 15th, 2005, 05:14 AM
The williams Sisters Ran Chucky out of tennis I can't say it better than this Article.

By STEVEN WINE
AP Sports Writer
March 28, 2002
KEY BISCAYNE, Fla. (AP) -- The Williams sisters have done what once seemed impossible: They've transformed Martina Hingis into a sympathetic figure.
Once a brash teen tennis queen, Hingis can no longer stay in a rally with the game's most powerful players. Serena Williams provided the latest evidence Wednesday, drubbing Hingis 6-4, 6-0 in the quarterfinals of the Nasdaq-100 Open.
Their once-fierce rivalry has become so lopsided that when they met at the net afterward, Williams offered Hingis a consoling pat on the back.
``It's kind of sad to see a champion like Martina lose all the time like she does when she plays Serena,'' said Richard Williams, father and coach of the sisters.
Serena has beaten Hingis three straight times and seven consecutive times on U.S. hardcourts. Venus Williams has won five of her past seven matches against Hingis, including their most recent meeting at Key Biscayne last year.
After 209 weeks at No. 1, Hingis has slipped to third in the rankings, behind Venus and top-ranked Jennifer Capriati. It's been more than three years since Hingis won the most recent of her five Grand Slam titles at the Australian Open.
But she bristled at the suggestion she might not win another major title.
``How can you say that?'' she said. ``Come on. It's not that I played that bad.''
Actually, she did. Hingis hit just four winners to 34 for Williams, who won the last seven games. Shots whizzed past as Hingis stood helpless and motionless with no time to react. In the final set, she won six points.
Hingis grudgingly admitted she was outclassed by Williams.
``I just didn't stay with her,'' she said. ``It was difficult for me to do anything. She was hitting winners from all over the court.''
And in Hingis' first four matches at Key Biscayne, she lost a total of four games. But she has no weapons with which to do damage against the Williamses, who thrive on her softball shots.
There was a time when Serena and Martina traded barbs after their matches, but those days are over. Now that Williams dominates, she has only nice things to say about the former No. 1.
``Until I was shaking her hand, that's when I knew the match was over,'' Serena said. ``I never think the match is over until it's done, because Martina is always good at making comebacks.''
She needs one now.
The drubbing was another sign of decline for Hingis, who has slipped to third in the rankings after 209 weeks at No. 1 and has lost three times in a row to Williams. But the way Serena played Wednesday, it's possible no one could have beaten her.

TM
Feb 15th, 2005, 12:05 PM
oh i miss that Chucky :D

steffilover
Feb 15th, 2005, 01:29 PM
Answering this question is like having to choose death by drowning or by suffocation!:devil:
Seriously, for impartial viewers (and I'm as impartial to these two as you could ever wish for!), there really is no contest. serena wins BY A MILE.

PhoenixStorm
Feb 15th, 2005, 02:17 PM
The williams Sisters Ran Chucky out of tennis I can't say it better than this Article.

By STEVEN WINE
AP Sports Writer
March 28, 2002
KEY BISCAYNE, Fla. (AP) -- The Williams sisters have done what once seemed impossible: They've transformed Martina Hingis into a sympathetic figure.
Once a brash teen tennis queen, Hingis can no longer stay in a rally with the game's most powerful players. Serena Williams provided the latest evidence Wednesday, drubbing Hingis 6-4, 6-0 in the quarterfinals of the Nasdaq-100 Open.
Their once-fierce rivalry has become so lopsided that when they met at the net afterward, Williams offered Hingis a consoling pat on the back.
``It's kind of sad to see a champion like Martina lose all the time like she does when she plays Serena,'' said Richard Williams, father and coach of the sisters.
Serena has beaten Hingis three straight times and seven consecutive times on U.S. hardcourts. Venus Williams has won five of her past seven matches against Hingis, including their most recent meeting at Key Biscayne last year.
After 209 weeks at No. 1, Hingis has slipped to third in the rankings, behind Venus and top-ranked Jennifer Capriati. It's been more than three years since Hingis won the most recent of her five Grand Slam titles at the Australian Open.
But she bristled at the suggestion she might not win another major title.
``How can you say that?'' she said. ``Come on. It's not that I played that bad.''
Actually, she did. Hingis hit just four winners to 34 for Williams, who won the last seven games. Shots whizzed past as Hingis stood helpless and motionless with no time to react. In the final set, she won six points.
Hingis grudgingly admitted she was outclassed by Williams.
``I just didn't stay with her,'' she said. ``It was difficult for me to do anything. She was hitting winners from all over the court.''
And in Hingis' first four matches at Key Biscayne, she lost a total of four games. But she has no weapons with which to do damage against the Williamses, who thrive on her softball shots.
There was a time when Serena and Martina traded barbs after their matches, but those days are over. Now that Williams dominates, she has only nice things to say about the former No. 1.
``Until I was shaking her hand, that's when I knew the match was over,'' Serena said. ``I never think the match is over until it's done, because Martina is always good at making comebacks.''
She needs one now.
The drubbing was another sign of decline for Hingis, who has slipped to third in the rankings after 209 weeks at No. 1 and has lost three times in a row to Williams. But the way Serena played Wednesday, it's possible no one could have beaten her.

Your right this article nails it.

Serena is simply better than martina, get over it already martians. Just because serena is better doesnt mean martina is anything less. She is still a great champion. Someone else is just better.

Ryan
Feb 15th, 2005, 02:37 PM
Your right this article nails it.

Serena is simply better than martina, get over it already martians. Just because serena is better doesnt mean martina is anything less. She is still a great champion. Someone else is just better.

Please don't judge ALL Martians based on some of the responses to this thread. In career results they are fairly even matched, but Serena's 2 extra Grand Slams clearly elevates her to another level. Hingis IS a phenominal champion in her own right, and none of us (Martians) should feel that she is being slighted when someone with superior results is considered better than her.

bronco
Feb 15th, 2005, 02:41 PM
Sprite commercial!

Oh No you Didn't!


Yup, I concur Serena single handedly ran Martina into early retirement - and she knew Venus wanted a piece of that azz so she just jetted.


when Steffi Graf combined with the French crowd in the final against Hingis thats what brought an end to Hingis as a top player since that day no comparison with the Williams sisters holds water because after that day Hingis was never the same again.

if Hingis had kept her mouth shut earlier that year in Aus and not slagged off maresmo then you would have seen what she could really do against the 2 sisters.

Stamp Paid
Feb 15th, 2005, 07:43 PM
``It's kind of sad to see a champion like Martina lose all the time like she does when she plays Serena,'' said Richard Williams, father and coach of the sisters.

:haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::p

rjd1111
Feb 15th, 2005, 09:10 PM
I don't know what Venus has to do with any of this, but she never beat Hingis easily while a lot of Martina's wins were lopsided. Examples: 6-0, 6-4 1997 US Open final, 6-1, 6-1 2001 AO final, 6-2, 6-1 1997 Miami, 6-4, 6-0 1999 San Diego to name a few. Note that all of these are on hardcourts (all except one on US hardcourts!). Martina tops Venus in every category and is greater than her. No question.

As far as Serena-Martina goes, Serena definitely has to get the nod. She's won more GS singles titles. 'Nuff said.



All of those but 1 was when Venus was just Starting. The H2H after the Grand Slam Cup in late 1999 to hamburg Cup in 2002 was 6-2 Venus. and only 3 of those were 3 setters.

rjd1111
Feb 15th, 2005, 09:21 PM
Your right this article nails it.

Serena is simply better than martina, get over it already martians. Just because serena is better doesnt mean martina is anything less. She is still a great champion. Someone else is just better.




Serena has beaten Hingis three straight times and seven consecutive times on U.S. hardcourts. Venus Williams has won five of her past seven matches against Hingis, including their most recent meeting at Key Biscayne last year.

Deira
Feb 15th, 2005, 09:26 PM
Martina tops Venus in every category and is greater than her. No question.

As far as Serena-Martina goes, Serena definitely has to get the nod. She's won more GS singles titles. 'Nuff said.

So I suppose you think Venus' career is over (like Martina's) and she will NEVER win anymore slams :confused:

PhoenixStorm
Feb 15th, 2005, 09:51 PM
when Steffi Graf combined with the French crowd in the final against Hingis thats what brought an end to Hingis as a top player since that day no comparison with the Williams sisters holds water because after that day Hingis was never the same again.

if Hingis had kept her mouth shut earlier that year in Aus and not slagged off maresmo then you would have seen what she could really do against the 2 sisters.

My My You martian fanatics sure do come up with some strange ideas. Well whatever lets you sleep at night, tell yourself these lies if you have to.:tape:

RVD
Feb 15th, 2005, 10:18 PM
The williams Sisters Ran Chucky out of tennis I can't say it better than this Article.

By STEVEN WINE
AP Sports Writer
March 28, 2002
KEY BISCAYNE, Fla. (AP) -- The Williams sisters have done what once seemed impossible: They've transformed Martina Hingis into a sympathetic figure.
Once a brash teen tennis queen, Hingis can no longer stay in a rally with the game's most powerful players. Serena Williams provided the latest evidence Wednesday, drubbing Hingis 6-4, 6-0 in the quarterfinals of the Nasdaq-100 Open.
Their once-fierce rivalry has become so lopsided that when they met at the net afterward, Williams offered Hingis a consoling pat on the back.
``It's kind of sad to see a champion like Martina lose all the time like she does when she plays Serena,'' said Richard Williams, father and coach of the sisters.
Serena has beaten Hingis three straight times and seven consecutive times on U.S. hardcourts. Venus Williams has won five of her past seven matches against Hingis, including their most recent meeting at Key Biscayne last year.
After 209 weeks at No. 1, Hingis has slipped to third in the rankings, behind Venus and top-ranked Jennifer Capriati. It's been more than three years since Hingis won the most recent of her five Grand Slam titles at the Australian Open.
But she bristled at the suggestion she might not win another major title.
``How can you say that?'' she said. ``Come on. It's not that I played that bad.''
Actually, she did. Hingis hit just four winners to 34 for Williams, who won the last seven games. Shots whizzed past as Hingis stood helpless and motionless with no time to react. In the final set, she won six points.
Hingis grudgingly admitted she was outclassed by Williams.
``I just didn't stay with her,'' she said. ``It was difficult for me to do anything. She was hitting winners from all over the court.''
And in Hingis' first four matches at Key Biscayne, she lost a total of four games. But she has no weapons with which to do damage against the Williamses, who thrive on her softball shots.
There was a time when Serena and Martina traded barbs after their matches, but those days are over. Now that Williams dominates, she has only nice things to say about the former No. 1.
``Until I was shaking her hand, that's when I knew the match was over,'' Serena said. ``I never think the match is over until it's done, because Martina is always good at making comebacks.''
She needs one now.
The drubbing was another sign of decline for Hingis, who has slipped to third in the rankings after 209 weeks at No. 1 and has lost three times in a row to Williams. But the way Serena played Wednesday, it's possible no one could have beaten her.Thanks for that article, Rjd111.
I 'highlighted' the parts of this article for Martians who are still having a problem reading documented facts.

Funny, but some people will still find a reason to suggest that Hingis is better, classier, prettier, stronger, and tactically superior to Serena, no matter what the bone obvious evidence suggests. Even the commentators stopped singing that “Hingis Is Better Than The Sisters” song.

Some of you Martian Fans are clearly suffering from a case of severe DENIAL. You folks need to get over it. Martina's time is...
Over!
Done!
SHE'S GONE!
GET OVER IT!

Serena is the better athlete. She never quits, she's gone back to revamp her game when needbe. She doesn't rely on a finese tactic that doesn't work any longer. And after a surgery she's come back to win a SLAM and is regaining her mental strength and peak game condition! JEEZ! What more evidence do you need?!!