PDA

View Full Version : How many weeks was Martina H. ranked number one


DA FOREHAND
Apr 28th, 2004, 07:46 PM
but in fact wasn't the best player on tour?


She had a 7-10(?) h2h -v- top ten in 01.

DeDe4925
Apr 28th, 2004, 07:46 PM
Too long before the paper caught up with her and crumbled. :p

DA FOREHAND
Apr 28th, 2004, 08:17 PM
She did win the 99 A.O. but lost the French final to a player the game had passed by...so it had to have been sometime after the French.

ptkten
Apr 28th, 2004, 08:29 PM
If you're # 1, you're # 1...simple as that. As for being the best player, I'd say she clearly was in 1997 and 1999. It became less clear who was the best in 2000 and 2001 (I would probably say Venus and Lindsay) but she was one of them.

DA FOREHAND
Apr 28th, 2004, 08:32 PM
If you're # 1, you're # 1...simple as that. As for being the best player, I'd say she clearly was in 1997 and 1999. It became less clear who was the best in 2000 and 2001 (I would probably say Venus and Lindsay) but she was one of them.


Thanks for stating the obvious.. :rolleyes:


Part of Hingis' tenure as number one devalued the position a bit, but thanks to slamless Kim ascending to the top of the rankings, all charges against Martina were commuted, and she's been let off with time served.:sport:

sioul
Apr 28th, 2004, 09:02 PM
you know for being one of hingis' biggest critiques, you sure seem to have some sort of obsession with her. why dont you leave her ACCOMPLISHMENTS alone, and focus on Venus and serena's ACCOMPLISHMENTS. do you really have to compare them? Are you not confident enough in your own players abilities to not have to put another player down in order to boost them up? Venus and Serena are classy when they talk about martina, if only some of their fans would follow in their foot steps and not babble aimlessly starting completely useless threads void of any real point. can we say boring ville? population YOU.

and for your information, she was ranked number 1 for a hell of a long time, probablly longer then we are going to see from anyone after her.

Martian Jeza
Apr 28th, 2004, 09:04 PM
209.

DA FOREHAND
Apr 28th, 2004, 09:07 PM
you know for being one of hingis' biggest critiques, you sure seem to have some sort of obsession with her. why dont you leave her ACCOMPLISHMENTS alone, and focus on Venus and serena's ACCOMPLISHMENTS. do you really have to compare them? Are you not confident enough in your own players abilities to not have to put another player down in order to boost them up? Venus and Serena are classy when they talk about martina, if only some of their fans would follow in their foot steps and not babble aimlessly starting completely useless threads void of any real point. can we say boring ville? population YOU.

and for your information, she was ranked number 1 for a hell of a long time, probablly longer then we are going to see from anyone after her.
funny I never mentioned Venus or Serena:tape: :rolleyes:

So is that the rule you have to be a fan of a player to talk about thier career?

DeDe4925
Apr 28th, 2004, 09:10 PM
Thanks for stating the obvious.. :rolleyes:


Part of Hingis' tenure as number one devalued the position a bit, but thanks to slamless Kim ascending to the top of the rankings, all charges against Martina were commuted, and she's been let off with time served.:sport:
:lol: :lol:

sioul
Apr 28th, 2004, 09:11 PM
funny I never mentioned Venus or Serena:tape: :rolleyes:

So is that the rule you have to be a fan of a player to talk about thier career?
I've read your other posts. It's quite obvious who you support and who you DON't.

DeDe4925
Apr 28th, 2004, 09:13 PM
209.
"Devoted and Proud Belgian Fan of Martina Hingis ! Tennis will never be the same without you ! "
Thank God for that. :yawn: :hehehe:

fammmmedspin
Apr 28th, 2004, 09:22 PM
Hingis was number 1 for the very simple reason that she had better results than anyone else when she was number 1. You don't get to number 1 by playing sparingly, being injured or losing more than Martina which is why no one else was number 1. A non-playing number 1 is a contradiction in terms and If someone else had been winning lots of tournaments and getting to the ends of GS they would have been number 1. The others could have been number 1 - but they were simply not good enough, often enough.

I don't see how a H2H from 2001 tells you much about her 4 years at number 1 - you could equally point out that Hingis was more dominant in terms of tournament wins for much of her period as number 1 than anyone who has been number 1 since. She won those tournaments playing the same players who turned up for the rest of the tour including the GS so you can't write them off as if the year consists of 3 competitive rounds of 4 GS. Even at the point when she won her last tournament of 2001 she had 11 tournament wins in her ranking.

Its true some players could beat Hingis but she could beat most of them and none of them could actually beat the others enough to get the points to be number 1. Hingis consistently won more tournaments than anyone else when facing opposition from both her own and Graf's generaion of players - history may think that was more substantial an achievement than her successors who either had short periods at number 1 or achieved the goal against far more limited opposition. I suspect that whoever is number 1 in 2004-5 will be in a similar position as an increasingly competitive tour throws up more losses for anyone but a really dominant number 1. Whoever gets the title - Justine or whoever- will have truly deserved it though.

DA FOREHAND
Apr 28th, 2004, 09:27 PM
Hingis was number 1 for the very simple reason that she had better results than anyone else when she was number 1. You don't get to number 1 by playing sparingly, being injured or losing more than Martina which is why no one else was number 1. A non-playing number 1 is a contradiction in terms and If someone else had been winning lots of tournaments and getting to the ends of GS they would have been number 1. The others could have been number 1 - but they were simply not good enough, often enough.

I don't see how a H2H from 2001 tells you much about her 4 years at number 1 - you could equally point out that Hingis was more dominant in terms of tournament wins for much of her period as number 1 than anyone who has been number 1 since. She won those tournaments playing the same players who turned up for the rest of the tour including the GS so you can't write them off as if the year consists of 3 competitive rounds of 4 GS. Even at the point when she won her last tournament of 2001 she had 11 tournament wins in her ranking.

Its true some players could beat Hingis but she could beat most of them and none of them could actually beat the others enough to get the points to be number 1. Hingis consistently won more tournaments than anyone else when facing opposition from both her own and Graf's generaion of players - history may think that was more substantial an achievement than her successors who either had short periods at number 1 or achieved the goal against far more limited opposition. I suspect that whoever is number 1 in 2004-5 will be in a similar position as an increasingly competitive tour throws up more losses for anyone but a really dominant number 1. Whoever gets the title - Justine or whoever- will have truly deserved it though.

I would agree w/that on paper.....

I'll add Serena was clearly the #1 and best player for her entire stint at number one....Knee surgery knocked her off the top, not any other player(s)

DeDe4925
Apr 28th, 2004, 09:34 PM
I would agree w/that on paper.....

I'll add Serena was clearly the #1 and best player for her entire stint at number one....Knee surgery knocked her off the top, not any other player(s)
Oh I disagree, I think Venus was clearly the real No. 1 player in 2000 and 2001, that's if we're talking about the best player in the world and not tournament queen.

TonyP
Apr 28th, 2004, 11:12 PM
How many threads will be started by jealous Williams fans?

fammmmedspin
Apr 28th, 2004, 11:52 PM
Oh I disagree, I think Venus was clearly the real No. 1 player in 2000 and 2001, that's if we're talking about the best player in the world and not tournament queen.
Number one rankings don't set out to measure the best player - the best player might change week on week (and this year probably may). Best against one player might look like lame against another. Best in the GS doesn't mean best over the other weeks of the year. Because best over a short period is not very meaningful, the rankings look for the best player on tour over a selected timeframe of one year. There are requirements implicitly laid in - you play enough tournaments and you can get 17 (or 18 when that was the rule) to count. You don't and you deny other people the opportunity to gain quality points as well as denying yourself points. Venus might well have been the best player often as not when she played but she couldn't be number 1 on her schedule and results. Its like expecting to win the olympic 400M when you ran 300 M. You also have to ask the question why would anyone be content to run the 300M when they could be number 1 at 400M.

DeDe4925
Apr 29th, 2004, 02:06 AM
Number one rankings don't set out to measure the best player - the best player might change week on week (and this year probably may). Best against one player might look like lame against another. Best in the GS doesn't mean best over the other weeks of the year. Because best over a short period is not very meaningful, the rankings look for the best player on tour over a selected timeframe of one year. There are requirements implicitly laid in - you play enough tournaments and you can get 17 (or 18 when that was the rule) to count. You don't and you deny other people the opportunity to gain quality points as well as denying yourself points. Venus might well have been the best player often as not when she played but she couldn't be number 1 on her schedule and results. Its like expecting to win the olympic 400M when you ran 300 M. You also have to ask the question why would anyone be content to run the 300M when they could be number 1 at 400M.
Again, you are measuring No. 1 by how many tournaments they played. The No. 1 ranking should go to the best player in the world and whether you want to believe it or not, it was Venus in 2000 and 2001. Everyone knows it, except for Hingis fans, and even some of them concede that she was a paper champion in those last two years.