A player plays in 12 tournaments;<br />Wins six of these events;<br />Captures Wimbledon for the second year in a row;<br />Captures U.S. Open for the second year in the row; <br />Defeats Capriatti three straight times;<br />But, Cappy gets the Female Athlete of the Year Award! <img src="graemlins/firey.gif" border="0" alt="[Fiery]" />
I guess some people want VENUS to win 4 GS titles before they are willing to admit that she had a decent year. <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
Capriati got female of the year over Venus, entirely for being "the comeback kid".
She came from NO WHERE to be the second best player on tour this year (IMO...some may say 3rd best).
Thus, that will prompt some people to credit her for coming back from personal problems, as she did.
Though, I have a feeling oyu already knew that, and just wanted to point out Venus had better results. Which, most of us already knew.
Dec 28th, 2001, 11:31 AM
The shock factor of her success with the fact she was once brilliant and has now returned to her former brilliance has won her these awards.
If the same results happened in 2002 Venus would prabably win it .... ?
Dec 28th, 2001, 11:35 AM
I would say getting flogged in the AO Semi's and embarassed at the french sealed Miss Williams place
Dec 28th, 2001, 11:41 AM
Well, ahem, putting my 'contentious' hat on (making sure it covers my face!), Venus fans have a lot to do with her not winning it. For this reason.
You were all so confident that she would Vee-peat at Wimbledon and Flushing Meadows that when she did, no-one was even remotely surprised. Every one was like 'Big Deal'. But it was a big deal. A fantastic achievment parallel with what Jen achieved to come from - what she, #12? - to win back-to-back Slams.
Both incredible feats. Only difference being that in Jan 2001, no Jen fan with a mortgage to wager would even hope that Jen might do that. Whereas every Venus fan expected her to repeat the way she did.
Plus of course most of the media had their faces up Jen's behind for the whole year. This will change next year, incidentally.
Dec 28th, 2001, 11:59 AM
It is hardly surprising... the media wanted Jennifer to win it <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Dec 28th, 2001, 12:07 PM
I'm wondrin if Venus wins FO, her fans would demand " Greatest Player of all time award"
Capriati deserves the award, just my opinion!!!
Dec 28th, 2001, 12:19 PM
No we wouldn't... a Player of the Millinuem is enough <img src="wink.gif" border="0">
Dec 28th, 2001, 01:48 PM
The main reason why I think Jennifer usurped Venus:
Rank in 2001: 2<br />Highest Rank in 2001: 1
AO: W<br />FO: W<br />WC: SF<br />US: SF
Rank in 2001: 3<br />Highest Rank in 2001: 2
AO: SF<br />FO: 1R<br />WC: W<br />US: W
A very marginal victory considering Venus won more titles and had a winning head-to-head.
Dec 28th, 2001, 02:38 PM
Well TeeRexx, maybe it might be that you have to do twice as much to be considered just as good, I dunno. <img src="wink.gif" border="0">
Anyway, I say congrats to Jennifer on ALL her numerous awards. Regardless of her year end melt down, she had a great run, and edged out Venus, because everybody, especially the media, loves a comeback story.
But as I read recently, "Rankings be damned" (awards too,) "Venus is still the best in the biz" and she is still the player everyone, including Serena, must beat in 2002.
So, while we can question the legitimacy of some things, I say<br />2001 IS OVER!!! LET'S BRING ON 2002!!!
[quote] But as I read recently, "Rankings be damned" (awards too,) "Venus is still the best in the biz" and she is still the player everyone, including Serena, must beat in 2002.
<br />ICAM(I couldn't agree more) If anyone wants further proof, just take a look at the WTA year earnings <img src="tongue.gif" border="0">
Dec 28th, 2001, 05:48 PM
I figure there are a few primary factors:
1) Venus had a great year last year. She got many athlete of the year awards for 2000, and thus had already done it, whereas Jen was a "new" candidate.
2) The "slams-only" focus of the media. Jen did better at the only 4 tournaments many pay any attention to.
3) Jen was a comeback story, whereas Venus was already an elite player who was expected to win a slam or so.
4) Many in the media (especially the tennis media), don't like Venus. Whether it's because of her physical gifts, her father, her race, her aggressive style (demolishing the passive play they desire from women), or, most importantly, her contribution to the increased popularity and exposure for the women's tour.
Dec 28th, 2001, 05:58 PM
Good points, Brian.<br />Also, the media loves to build one up in order to tear them down at a later, more opportune time.
TR <img src="cool.gif" border="0">
Dec 28th, 2001, 06:23 PM
Anakin, As a wise man once said...Its all subjective. <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> <img src="wink.gif" border="0">
[ December 28, 2001: Message edited by: Chris Ba ]</p>
Dec 28th, 2001, 06:36 PM
<font color=orange>Congrats there Capriati!!</font>
<br />The FACT is... Williams is TOO BIG for the Female Athlete of Year Award. She's <size=+1THE</font> ATHLETE of the year. <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Williams.. Back 2 Back. Defended Wimbledon and US Open titles.
Williams has won four of the past six majors.
Williams <br />Never mind what the rankings say. After defending her Wimbledon and U.S. Open titles, Reebok's $40 million woman left little doubt that she's the Queen of the hill.
Dec 28th, 2001, 06:59 PM
I think the points about the media, the fans, and the world in general expecting Venus to do well in 2001 are very true, and that Jennifer was a surprise to the media, the fans and the world in general, and was a real feel-good story which sold newspapers and magazines.
What I am wondering is how long it will take the media to start tearing Jennifer down. I know it will happen, the fans have already started bad-mouthing her for the last few months. Should Jennifer not do well at the AO, she will be slaughtered by the media.<br />It seems that nothing makes them happier than tearing down what they worked so hard to build up not too long ago.
However, they may also start to harass Venus if she doesn'twin at least two GS events, and probably lay blame on her if it isn't three. It will be very interesting to watch. 2002 is looking good.
And then there are thequestions as to how Lindsay, Martina, Amélie, and Monica will fare in the new year. I only hope the tennis turns out to be as good as it promises right now.
Many think that Venus should have won the award (and I don't disagree), but Capriati was hardly undeserving as she was also an outstanding athelete this year.
I concur with those who said that her story's 'comeback' aspect probably clinched it for her.
Congratulations to Jennifer <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
I'm sure Venus will win it soon enough <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Dec 28th, 2001, 07:30 PM
cappy would have won the Athlete of the Year and other awards if she(cappy) had won one slam. That is just how it is, she is the great hope. Granted she won two slam and won other tournment over hingis but after May she was like ghost. I think davenport would have been a better choice in some ways, coming off injury and winning the most tournments and obtaining the #1 spot in the process. So I expected Venus not to win no matter how well she did. Anyway the fans may care more than she does about this issue because she knows "what's up" and that is she is the best bar none
Dec 29th, 2001, 02:34 AM
So true QUEENO,YOU hit it on the head.You knock the eyes out of the sockit. <img src="graemlins/bounce.gif" border="0" alt="[Bounce]" />
Dec 29th, 2001, 02:35 AM
So true QUEENO,YOU hit it on the head.You knock the eyes out of the socket. <img src="graemlins/bounce.gif" border="0" alt="[Bounce]" />
Dec 30th, 2001, 01:16 AM
Good point Tee! I was wondering the same thing myself. It must be because Jennifer had such a great feel good story.
Becca, how could anyone think Capriati was the third best player in the world in 2001? Venus is the best. She won 2 slams. Jennifer is clearly the second best. She also won two slams. And made 2 slam semis. Venus gets the nod over Jenny because she won their three head to head battles. I would love to hear somebody's reasoning for saying that Capriati was the third best player in women's tennis in 2001.
Dec 30th, 2001, 02:08 AM
My guess is that the main reason Jen won out over Venus was because of Venus' 1st Round loss in the French. And another possible reason is that Jen did well on all surfaces, whereas Venus only did so on hardcourts and Wimbledon.
Of course you can argue that Venus should have won because she won more tournaments and has a winning record against Jen.
So, to be honest, I don't think that either is a clear winner. Jen, perhaps, gets the edge because she improved so dramatically from last year.
Dec 30th, 2001, 03:49 AM
cat in the hat: I don't think that Jenn was the third best player.
But I have heard some people suggest they think Linsday had a better year. So in their minds, Lindsay was better than Jenn this year.