PDA

View Full Version : Has the Hingis story...


*JR*
Dec 4th, 2005, 03:35 PM
drowned out much of the interest in the ability to play of Jen, Chanda, and Monica? (Please discuss).

yukon145
Dec 4th, 2005, 03:38 PM
yes, but i think its only because Martina enjoys the spotlight and the media. the others enjoy their life outside of the public eye. there has been little or no media attention about the other 3. i think thats why.

vogus
Dec 4th, 2005, 03:49 PM
Yes, but only temporarily. Announcement of a Seles return would make big headlines but it's different than Hingis because nobody really believes that Seles can come back and make an impact in terms of being a leading player. Rubin doesn't make that many waves under any circumstances. But people are expecting a lot from Hingy.

Capriati will just let her results do the talking, she's not much about fanfare.

auntie janie
Dec 4th, 2005, 03:52 PM
Yes, but only temporarily. Announcement of a Seles return would make big headlines but it's different than Hingis because nobody really believes that Seles can come back and make an impact in terms of being a leading player. Rubin doesn't make that many waves under any circumstances. But people are expecting a lot from Hingy.

Capriati will just let her results do the talking, she's not much about fanfare.

Agreed.

manu32
Dec 4th, 2005, 03:56 PM
yes, but i think its only because Martina enjoys the spotlight and the media. the others enjoy their life outside of the public eye. there has been little or no media attention about the other 3. i think thats why.


and vogus too......
it's a question of personnality only.....and media love people like her ......

K.U.C.W-R.V
Dec 4th, 2005, 04:56 PM
For me, definitely.

Her relative youth, big personality & the possiblity of interesting matchups with the Willams sisters, the Belgians & Sharapova, all make the 2006 WTA Tour a very attractive proposition.

No disrespect to the others but they are all pushing (or over) 30 - their return would only be a last hurrah. At 25, Hingis is young enough to have a genuine second career, just as Capriati did between 2000 & 2004.

barmaid
Dec 4th, 2005, 05:29 PM
Her "star" presence on and off the court was established early in her career and we all know she "loves" the limelight:hearts: :kiss: ....so this is her moment to garner all the headlines:worship: ...Monica at 32 wouldn't create many waves, Capriati a few more I would think and poor Chanda hardly a ripple!:sad:


barmaid:wavey:

~Cherry*Blossom~
Dec 4th, 2005, 05:35 PM
Yes, but only because she has announced for definite that she will return and is targeting Melbourne!!!

Seles and Capriati haven't really said when they will return!!! I think, when (if) Seles announces her return to the tour, it will be massive!!!

However, both of them are being very coy on when/if they are returning, therefore a lot less attention is surrounding them than Hingis!!!

Volcana
Dec 4th, 2005, 07:47 PM
drowned out much of the interest in the ability to play of Jen, Chanda, and Monica? (Please discuss).

No one really believes Seles is returning to the tour for anything more than a victory lap anymore, and that's just not that interesting.

Rubin wasn't ever a big enough star.

Capriati has made a deliberate choice to fly under the radar. She's not someone to whom the media has always been kind.

Hingis is still young enough that if she can solve the puzzle, she can still be a top player.

What's interesting is that when Hingis retired, many people said no player her size would ever thrive in the WTA again. But now there are three players smaller than her in the top fifteen, including the reigning RG champ. Who also has been #1 since Hingis retired. So the whole 'Martina vs the Amazons' storyline has kind of fizzled.

I also wonder if this will affect her place in tennis history. I think history as already assessed Venus Williams as the better of the two players, just because Venus began winning slams when they were 20, and Hingis stopped. The H2H swung to Venus at that point as well.

If Hingis returns and can't make the top ten, when players even smaller than her, like Henin-Hardenne and Schnyder can, it's starts seeming more the case that hingis' game simply matured early, rather than being transcendent.

Mercredi
Dec 4th, 2005, 08:01 PM
No one really believes Seles is returning to the tour for anything more than a victory lap anymore, and that's just not that interesting.

Rubin wasn't ever a big enough star.

Capriati has made a deliberate choice to fly under the radar. She's not someone to whom the media has always been kind.

Hingis is still young enough that if she can solve the puzzle, she can still be a top player.

What's interesting is that when Hingis retired, many people said no player her size would ever thrive in the WTA again. But now there are three players smaller than her in the top fifteen, including the reigning RG champ. Who also has been #1 since Hingis retired. So the whole 'Martina vs the Amazons' storyline has kind of fizzled.

I also wonder if this will affect her place in tennis history. I think history as already assessed Venus Williams as the better of the two players, just because Venus began winning slams when they were 20, and Hingis stopped. The H2H swung to Venus at that point as well.

If Hingis returns and can't make the top ten, when players even smaller than her, like Henin-Hardenne and Schnyder can, it's starts seeming more the case that hingis' game simply matured early, rather than being transcendent.

Which Histroty made Venus better than Hingis? I disagree, Hingis acheived much more than Venus at this point in their Career, Venus is an amazing champion but she never was the best for a long time of period.

venus_rulez
Dec 4th, 2005, 08:24 PM
Which Histroty made Venus better than Hingis? I disagree, Hingis acheived much more than Venus at this point in their Career, Venus is an amazing champion but she never was the best for a long time of period.


It's arguable, but I think it's still fair to say Hingis has had the better career. But I do think history does look at Venus as the better player and there is a difference. Again, many people believe that part of the reason Hingis thrived so much is because of a lack of competition. This is not to say she would not have been successful on the tour anyway, I think she would have been, she was too good not to win, but amongst most people who have followed tennis and can be objective, I think her stats are seen as a bit exaggerated. Really from mid 1999 onwards Hingis wasn't the best player in the world, and as we go deeper into the 2000's that point becomes more and more clear, but she was still ranked number one. In part because she played so many tournaments, but also in part because one, Lindsay started becoming chronically injured for parts of the year and two, Venus didn't play enough. This is in no way Martina's fault, but it begs the point that under "normal" circumstances, Hingis' reign at number one would have ended long before it did. Not to mention that someone posted a stat a few days ago that in her five slam wins, Hingis only had to beat 6 top 10 players. Finally, history has really felt Venus was always going to be the better player really from 1998 on. When Venus beat Martina in Sydney and in Miami in 1998, the though process became that when the two met the match was in Venus' hand. She was either going to hold her nerve and win, or get nervous and start spraying forehands. But does any of this really matter? Both players are going into the Hall of Fame for sure, so why argue who's higher on the best ever list. As we've seen with some of the more, ahem, colorful posters on the board, no one's going to agree on one "best ever" anyway, so being one of the few is good enough.

crazyroberto6767
Dec 4th, 2005, 08:32 PM
What's interesting is that when Hingis retired, many people said no player her size would ever thrive in the WTA again. But now there are three players smaller than her in the top fifteen, including the reigning RG champ. Who also has been #1 since Hingis retired. So the whole 'Martina vs the Amazons' storyline has kind of fizzled.

If Hingis returns and can't make the top ten, when players even smaller than her, like Henin-Hardenne and Schnyder can, it's starts seeming more the case that hingis' game simply matured early, rather than being transcendent.
I think there are going to always be special cases of players being smaller and beating the bigger players of the game. However, in nearly all of these cases, these players have not played like Hingis. They have built up their bodies and produced as much power as the bigger girls. Thus I think people were accurate in saying there wouldn't be another Hingis, because her game becomes harder and harder to win with.

As for overshadowing other possible comebacks, it's like what others are saying: it's the choice of the player to make it a big deal or not. I believe that even if Chanda was a bigger star, she still wouldn't have made a big hooplah about her comeback. Same with Capriati who has already made a quiet comeback. It's more of the personality in most instances, rather than the level of stardom. Seles coming back would be *huge* news, but I don't see it happening and she would probably try to make it as quiet as possible. Although I'm sure it would only last a year or two anyways.

Oh and as for the Venus vs. Hingis debate, I would say Hingis is still ahead due to her massive doubles success. Another singles slam would probably put Vee ahead of Marti in almost anyone's mind. It's impossible to say who is really the "better player".

thelittlestelf
Dec 4th, 2005, 08:37 PM
Yes, but if Monica came back she would get just as much, if not more, press than Hingis. Jen and Chanda have not been out of the game nearly as long as Monica or Hingis.

franny
Dec 4th, 2005, 10:08 PM
Yes, but if Monica came back she would get just as much, if not more, press than Hingis. Jen and Chanda have not been out of the game nearly as long as Monica or Hingis.

No she wouldn't because she didn't formally announce her retirement. Technically, Monica is still just out with an injury. Martina on the other hand is coming out of retirement. It's for that reason that the Hingis story has made so much press. The other players aren't retired people. They're just injured. People expect them to come back. No one expected Hingis to come back so now everyone is shocked and surprised.

LeRoy.
Dec 4th, 2005, 10:13 PM
I think a Monica comeback would generate a lot more headlines than Hingis' return (atleast here in the US) :)

switz
Dec 4th, 2005, 10:19 PM
Nobody's comeback has lowered my expections of Chanda's return :bounce: and it's only my opinion that counts in this world :)

CrossCourt~Rally
Dec 4th, 2005, 10:19 PM
yes, but i think its only because Martina enjoys the spotlight and the media. the others enjoy their life outside of the public eye. there has been little or no media attention about the other 3. i think thats why.

Whaaaat? There has been TREMENDOUS interest in Monicas return. i also think that people 100% expect Jenny to comeback in January..there has been very little doubt of her not returning. Chanda...although i love her... has never been a big star in the states outside small tennis circles :sad:

switz
Dec 4th, 2005, 10:24 PM
Whaaaat? There has been TREMENDOUS interest in Monicas return. i also think that people 100% expect Jenny to comeback in January..there has been very little doubt of her not returning. Chanda...although i love her... has never been a big star in the states outside small tennis circles :sad:

don't be sad. yes it's shame that injuries have stopped her achieving what she could have but i'm pretty sure Chanda is pretty happy with her life and prefers not being a big star. she's a very intelligent and i think she'll have a great post tennis life.

dinhd82
Dec 4th, 2005, 10:47 PM
OMG, hingis is coming back, i'm sooo happy!!

JulesVerne
Dec 4th, 2005, 10:57 PM
drowned out much of the interest in the ability to play of Jen, Chanda, and Monica? (Please discuss).

No. While Martina actually retired and disappeared from the tour the others are returning/or not returning from injury. Therefore, like is not being with like.

Zauber
Dec 5th, 2005, 01:12 AM
She has the possibility to win another grand slam.
She still has the possibility to have a lot of succcess.
She was one of the greatest.

TonyP
Dec 5th, 2005, 02:08 AM
Since Hingis leads Venus in head to heads, number of titles won, both singles and doubles, and had an infinitely longer reign as number one than Venus, I too question this "history" that said Venus was better. And the most concerned about size are the Williams fans, manical to prove that Venus and Serena were "smart" and just not winning because they are bigger and stronger than most of their opponents. But almost everyone acknoledges that being bigger and stronger is an advantage in almost all sports. How could it not be.

dinhd82
Dec 5th, 2005, 06:56 AM
Venus never had an easy win over hingis, ever, while hingis has had a couple, early and late in the rivalry.

Hingie
Dec 5th, 2005, 07:06 AM
It's arguable, but I think it's still fair to say Hingis has had the better career. But I do think history does look at Venus as the better player and there is a difference. Again, many people believe that part of the reason Hingis thrived so much is because of a lack of competition. This is not to say she would not have been successful on the tour anyway, I think she would have been, she was too good not to win, but amongst most people who have followed tennis and can be objective, I think her stats are seen as a bit exaggerated. Really from mid 1999 onwards Hingis wasn't the best player in the world, and as we go deeper into the 2000's that point becomes more and more clear, but she was still ranked number one. In part because she played so many tournaments, but also in part because one, Lindsay started becoming chronically injured for parts of the year and two, Venus didn't play enough. This is in no way Martina's fault, but it begs the point that under "normal" circumstances, Hingis' reign at number one would have ended long before it did. Not to mention that someone posted a stat a few days ago that in her five slam wins, Hingis only had to beat 6 top 10 players. Finally, history has really felt Venus was always going to be the better player really from 1998 on. When Venus beat Martina in Sydney and in Miami in 1998, the though process became that when the two met the match was in Venus' hand. She was either going to hold her nerve and win, or get nervous and start spraying forehands. But does any of this really matter? Both players are going into the Hall of Fame for sure, so why argue who's higher on the best ever list. As we've seen with some of the more, ahem, colorful posters on the board, no one's going to agree on one "best ever" anyway, so being one of the few is good enough.

Great post and objective. The only thing i would add to this is that Venus really needs to consistently stay on tour for an extended period of time. If she plays here and there and wins the occasional title but never holds #1 for a period of time, then i think this would effect the way she is seen - particularly when the new crop come along and the Hingis/Venus/Serena generation move on from the pro world.

Plus Martina holding the youngest #1 in the Open era - this is an incredible stat which i don't see being changed any time soon.

the bambi
Dec 9th, 2005, 11:47 AM
drowned out much of the interest in the ability to play of Jen, Chanda, and Monica? (Please discuss).

tell them to leak stories to the press and that'll change things around here. the cappy fans will go ballistic on the board. ;)

TonyP
Dec 9th, 2005, 01:32 PM
I never got around to answering the overall question.


I don't think there is much if any chance that Monica will seriously return to the WTA tour, nor to my knowledge has she said she would.

Chanda is a fine player plagued her whole career by nagging injuries that kept her from achieving her potential. But since she has never won a slam nor been number one, or even 2,3,4 or 5, her return is not going to cause much of a stir.

Jennifer is another story, but I have not heard when she is expected to return to the tour or even IF she is expected to return.

So Hingis' current story is getting attention because her's is the only story.

Hingis story also hit after the season when there isn't too much to write about, especially since the tennis press doesn't exactly show up at training camp to watch the players prepare for their upcoming seasons.

Lastly, of the four players you mentioned, Hingis strands out in terms of charisma and personality. Monica is a legend, but basically a fairly quiet person who has lived anything but a colorful life.

Jennifer is colorful,at times a little too colorful for the tastes of the prim and proper WTA.

Chanda seems to be pretty much an average girl.

Hingis, even off the tour, has led an interesting life, appearing in the broadcast booth, show jumping horses, visiting Phukett Island to talk with orphans from the tsunami, and essentially coming in and just plain taking over World Team Tennis in her very first season there.

She is not only comfortable in the limelight, but a player who naturally attracts attention no matter where she goes or what she does. Yet she does it with class and dignity. You don't often see pictures of her partying, usually pictures of her playing one sport or another or else, doing something fairly serious, but always doing it with a smile on her face.

That's why her return is attracting so much attention and why so many tournament organizers, now including those in Doha and Dubia, want her back so badly.

Pureracket
Dec 9th, 2005, 02:00 PM
Since Hingis leads Venus in head to heads, number of titles won, both singles and doubles, and had an infinitely longer reign as number one than Venus, I too question this "history" that said Venus was better. And the most concerned about size are the Williams fans, manical to prove that Venus and Serena were "smart" and just not winning because they are bigger and stronger than most of their opponents. But almost everyone acknoledges that being bigger and stronger is an advantage in almost all sports. How could it not be.Tony, it's so cute how you jump on every bandwagon headed in the opposite direction of Venus and Serena.;)

For some reason, though, the WS fans just can't get into you. In our PMs to each other, WS fans have suggested that you come off as flat and rather smarmy. Your approach also lacks a certain air of subtlety(see: Julia).

Greenout
Dec 9th, 2005, 02:19 PM
drowned out much of the interest in the ability to play of Jen, Chanda, and Monica? (Please discuss).


I don't think so. People are getting sentimental about Jen, and Monica now
and want them to return too.

The players whom are drowned out by the Hingis interest are the ones whom the media, and fans are not particulary fascinated or curious in seeing how she plays them.

Right now the interest with Hingis is for her against Maria, Justine and the WS. The other Russians and the other top 16 match-ups don't seem to grab imaginations as much.

TonyP
Dec 9th, 2005, 02:54 PM
Tony, it's so cute how you jump on every bandwagon headed in the opposite direction of Venus and Serena.;)

For some reason, though, the WS fans just can't get into you. In our PMs to each other, WS fans have suggested that you come off as flat and rather smarmy. Your approach also lacks a certain air of subtlety(see: Julia).

I cannot tell you how this hurts me.

Pureracket
Dec 9th, 2005, 02:56 PM
I cannot tell you how this hurts me.Well, you better think of some way to get your point across because I'm probably gonna have your ass on "ignore" by the end of the w'end. (As soon as the Royale Courte PM Committee gives me the "go ahead," you're history, bud).

TonyP
Dec 9th, 2005, 05:33 PM
I didn't know you had the right to ban anyone from WTAworld. I thought Griffin was the moderator of this board.

griffin
Dec 9th, 2005, 05:44 PM
I didn't know you had the right to ban anyone from WTAworld. I thought Griffin was the moderator of this board.

I think he's actually waiting for permission to not read your posts. Which seems rather silly to me.

To answer the question, Chanda never generated the same level of interest that Monica, Hingis and Jen did - so you really can't compare her. But I think if Jen or Monica held press conferences to announce they were coming back, they'd generate a similar amount of publicity. Of course the spin would be different, but it would still be there.

creep
Dec 9th, 2005, 05:59 PM
I think he's actually waiting for permission to not read your posts. Which seems rather silly to me.
To answer the question, Chanda never generated the same level of interest that Monica, Hingis and Jen did - so you really can't compare her. But I think if Jen or Monica held press conferences to announce they were coming back, they'd generate a similar amount of publicity. Of course the spin would be different, but it would still be there.

It's a bugger that one. Whenever Helen's not logged in, I don't know what to do.

Pureracket
Dec 9th, 2005, 06:27 PM
I think he's actually waiting for permission to not read your posts. Which seems rather silly to me.

To answer the question, Chanda never generated the same level of interest that Monica, Hingis and Jen did - so you really can't compare her. But I think if Jen or Monica held press conferences to announce they were coming back, they'd generate a similar amount of publicity. Of course the spin would be different, but it would still be there.Griff,
Don't do it. You know good and well I was joking. Anyway. . ..

griffin
Dec 9th, 2005, 06:41 PM
Griff, Don't do it.

Oh yeah? Don't tell me what to don't do...(da do run run) ;)

!!!--Duiz™--!!!
Dec 10th, 2005, 04:55 AM
Martina Hingis

LostInThe80s
Dec 14th, 2005, 11:08 AM
drowned out much of the interest in the ability to play of Jen, Chanda, and Monica? (Please discuss).

Marti has been gone the longest so it's only natural that she garners the most attention.