PDA

View Full Version : Davenport/Hingis vs. Venus/Serena - Best '4-Person' Rivalry Ever?!


Geisha
Dec 21st, 2005, 06:31 AM
These four greats have shown us something special ever since 1997. Look at their records through the years, going from 1997 to 2002, until Hingis' retirement:

1997
Davenport/Hingis vs. V.Williams/S.Williams - 6/0

1998
Davenport/Hingis vs. V.Williams/S.Williams - 9/4

1999
Davenport/Hingis vs. V.Williams/S.Williams - 7/11

2000
Davenport/Hingis vs. V.Williams/S.Williams - 3/7

2001
Davenport/Hingis vs. V.Williams/S.Williams - 3/7

2002
Davenport/Hingis vs. V.Williams/S.Williams - 0/6

The years coloured in red are the years they played, but there was not much of a rivalry going on. I counted their four "prime years" from 1998 to 2001. During this time, Venus and Serena led their rivalry 29/24.

What made their rivalry so special and competitive?

To make it more of a contest, let's count their four "prime years".

franny
Dec 21st, 2005, 06:44 AM
The thing is, Serena pretty much dominated Davenport. So I don't know if I'd call them a rivalry. Davenport only occasionally defeated Martina. But Venus/Lindsay/Martina had a great three way rivalry.

franny
Dec 21st, 2005, 06:52 AM
You know what's really interesting. Serena never defeated Hingis outside of the U.S. Hingis won all 4 times they played outside the U.S. However, when they were on U.S soil, Serena was 7-2 against Hingis.

Geisha
Dec 21st, 2005, 06:57 AM
You know what's really interesting. Serena never defeated Hingis outside of the U.S. Hingis won all 4 times they played outside the U.S. However, when they were on U.S soil, Serena was 7-2 against Hingis.

That's not very interesting, really. I mean, Hingis still beat Serena in the USA.

I think it was Venus vs. Martina who never beat each other in their home places - Martina always beat Venus in the USA, until 2000. Venus always beat Martina outside of the USA, until 2001. I think that's how it worked.

Geisha
Dec 21st, 2005, 07:01 AM
The thing is, Serena pretty much dominated Davenport. So I don't know if I'd call them a rivalry. Davenport only occasionally defeated Martina. But Venus/Lindsay/Martina had a great three way rivalry.

Lindsay always beat Martina - she led their H2H. Even though Lindsay wasn't really able to beat Serena, consistently, they still played incredible matches that made an amazing rivalry.

'98 Sydney - Serena def. Lindsay 16 75 75
'99 New York - Serena def. Lindsay 64 16 64
'00 LA - Serena def. Lindsay 46 64 76
'01 New York - Serena def. Lindsay 63 67 75

I mean, Lindsay had amazing chances in all of these matches. I think she was up 61 52 (and matchpoints) in that first match in Sydney. I believe she had matchpoints in LA and the New York match was arguably the Best Power Match of All-Time.

franny
Dec 21st, 2005, 07:08 AM
Lindsay always beat Martina - she led their H2H. Even though Lindsay wasn't really able to beat Serena, consistently, they still played incredible matches that made an amazing rivalry.

'98 Sydney - Serena def. Lindsay 16 75 75
'99 New York - Serena def. Lindsay 64 16 64
'00 LA - Serena def. Lindsay 46 64 76
'01 New York - Serena def. Lindsay 63 67 75

I mean, Lindsay had amazing chances in all of these matches. I think she was up 61 52 (and matchpoints) in that first match in Sydney. I believe she had matchpoints in LA and the New York match was arguably the Best Power Match of All-Time.

Lindsay didn't always beat Martina. Though she lead their head to head, there was never a point where their head to head was highly in favor of one player. In the end, it was 14-10. Not that big of a gap. There was a point when Serena lead Davenport 10-2. I'd hardly call that a rivalry, regardless of how close several of those matches were. My main point then is that I don't think it was that great of a 4 way rivalry. I saw it as more of a 3 way rivarly between Hingis/Davenport/Williams. But then again, as I typed the last line, I think I just understood what you actually originally meant. You meant to say Davenport + Hingis versus Serena + Venus was the best rivalry. In that regards, yes I agree, it was a good rivalry. Lol.

franny
Dec 21st, 2005, 07:11 AM
That's not very interesting, really. I mean, Hingis still beat Serena in the USA.

I think it was Venus vs. Martina who never beat each other in their home places - Martina always beat Venus in the USA, until 2000. Venus always beat Martina outside of the USA, until 2001. I think that's how it worked.

Yes, in 98. The first two times they played Martina won in the U.S But after that, Hingis was 4-0 versus Serena outside the U.S. Serena was 7-0 against Hingis inside the U.S. I think that's pretty interesting, but I guess we shall have to disagree once again.

Geisha
Dec 21st, 2005, 07:24 AM
Lindsay didn't always beat Martina. Though she lead their head to head, there was never a point where their head to head was highly in favor of one player. In the end, it was 14-10. Not that big of a gap. There was a point when Serena lead Davenport 10-2. I'd hardly call that a rivalry, regardless of how close several of those matches were. My main point then is that I don't think it was that great of a 4 way rivalry. I saw it as more of a 3 way rivarly between Hingis/Davenport/Williams. But then again, as I typed the last line, I think I just understood what you actually originally meant. You meant to say Davenport + Hingis versus Serena + Venus was the best rivalry. In that regards, yes I agree, it was a good rivalry. Lol.

It is true that Davenport and Hingis were never dominating their rivalry in overall terms, but at one points, Davenport had won 7/8 and 8/10 matches from 1998 to 2000. In five matches during this time, Martina won only one set against Lindsay.

Geisha
Dec 21st, 2005, 07:27 AM
Yes, in 98. The first two times they played Martina won in the U.S But after that, Hingis was 4-0 versus Serena outside the U.S. Serena was 7-0 against Hingis inside the U.S. I think that's pretty interesting, but I guess we shall have to disagree once again.

Oh OK, now I see what you mean. Yes, that is pretty interesting.

In their H2H, what is also interesting is that in their last nine matches, one player won three matches each. It went:

Serena
Serena
Serena
Martina
Martina
Martina
Serena
Serena
Serena

Geisha
Dec 21st, 2005, 07:28 AM
Another funny thing is that Serena never played Martina when she was seeded higher than her. The closest they ever got in the seedings was in Scottsdale of '02, when Serena was 3rd and Hingis was 2nd.

hingis-seles
Dec 21st, 2005, 09:01 AM
Lindsay always beat Martina - she led their H2H. Even though Lindsay wasn't really able to beat Serena, consistently, they still played incredible matches that made an amazing rivalry.

'98 Sydney - Serena def. Lindsay 16 75 75
'99 New York - Serena def. Lindsay 64 16 64
'00 LA - Serena def. Lindsay 46 64 76
'01 New York - Serena def. Lindsay 63 67 75

I mean, Lindsay had amazing chances in all of these matches. I think she was up 61 52 (and matchpoints) in that first match in Sydney. I believe she had matchpoints in LA and the New York match was arguably the Best Power Match of All-Time.

You left out Lindsay's 6-4, 6-2 win over Serena at the 2000 US Open, after which Richard grumbled,"She played with no common sense." and Venus shot Davenport a dirty look when Lindsay hugged her coach after the win. This was during the tag-team drama that was going on. Those were the good ole days. :lol:

hingis-seles
Dec 21st, 2005, 09:04 AM
Hingis scored a number of lopsided wins over Venus (not just in '97 but in '99 and '01 as well) while most of Venus' wins were by competitive scorelines. The easiest ones she got were 6-3, 6-4 in Zurich '99, 6-3, 7-6 in '01 Miami and 7-5, 6-3 in Hamburg '02.

Also, Hingis almost always had a difficult match when she played Serena. It was never easy, except for the Italian Open in 1999, when she beat Rena 6-2, 6-2. Serena had some tough wins but some easy wins over Martina as well (6-3, 6-2 at the '01 US Open, 6-4, 6-0 in '02 Miami)

hingis-seles
Dec 21st, 2005, 09:08 AM
These four greats have shown us something special ever since 1997. Look at their records through the years, going from 1997 to 2002, until Hingis' retirement:

1997
Davenport/Hingis vs. V.Williams/S.Williams - 6/0

1998
Davenport/Hingis vs. V.Williams/S.Williams - 9/4

1999
Davenport/Hingis vs. V.Williams/S.Williams - 7/11

2000
Davenport/Hingis vs. V.Williams/S.Williams - 3/7

2001
Davenport/Hingis vs. V.Williams/S.Williams - 3/7

2002
Davenport/Hingis vs. V.Williams/S.Williams - 0/6

The years coloured in red are the years they played, but there was not much of a rivalry going on. I counted their four "prime years" from 1998 to 2001. During this time, Venus and Serena led their rivalry 29/24.

What made their rivalry so special and competitive?

To make it more of a contest, let's count their four "prime years".

That's a bit misleading when you consider, Hingis was the one scoring the wins, while Lindsay would more often than not lose to the sisters. It got to a point where at the 2000 US Open, Hingis went up to Davenport and told her that she always lost to the Williamses and to finally beat one of them already instead of always leaving them to Martina. Lindsay responded that she expected Martina to take out Venus in return. This "pact" was blown out of proportion in the media. Lindsay and Martina were just joking around, but Oracene wasn't amused. Venus was seething but was asked to take the high road by the WTA. Serena, though, was pissed and made a reference to it in her post-match press conference after losing to Lindsay. Man, I'm really longing for these days again. :lol:

Geisha
Dec 21st, 2005, 10:31 AM
You can say that again. Now, we're forced to stay with Pierce, Mauresmo, and Clijsters at the top. Everybody is just TOO nice these days.

Geisha
Dec 21st, 2005, 10:37 AM
Q. Lindsay said on TV that she and Martina had a little discussion that they didn't want to see that all-Williams final that everybody was expecting. Did you find that surprising they would do that?

SERENA WILLIAMS: Not at all. That's the way a lot of people would want it. I'm sure a lot of people never want to see an all-Williams final. It's going to happen in the future inevitably. Nobody's going to be able to stop it. Unfortunately, I didn't pull my end up this year. I'm sure in the next Grand Slam, the Australian Open, Wimbledon or the French, the US Open, I'm going to do my utmost to make sure it happens, make sure it happens because that's just what I would like. Obviously, no one would want to see an all-Williams final because everyone doesn't really like us. That's just the way it is.


Man, was Serena right - or was she right? The next time she would play Lindsay, it would be a 61 62 romping. Lindsay and Martina were the players Serena beat to make the first Williams Sister Final come true.

Karma is a bitch. :wavey:

volta
Dec 21st, 2005, 11:26 AM
Q. Lindsay said on TV that she and Martina had a little discussion that they didn't want to see that all-Williams final that everybody was expecting. Did you find that surprising they would do that?

SERENA WILLIAMS: Not at all. That's the way a lot of people would want it. I'm sure a lot of people never want to see an all-Williams final. It's going to happen in the future inevitably. Nobody's going to be able to stop it. Unfortunately, I didn't pull my end up this year. I'm sure in the next Grand Slam, the Australian Open, Wimbledon or the French, the US Open, I'm going to do my utmost to make sure it happens, make sure it happens because that's just what I would like. Obviously, no one would want to see an all-Williams final because everyone doesn't really like us. That's just the way it is.


Man, was Serena right - or was she right? The next time she would play Lindsay, it would be a 61 62 romping. Lindsay and Martina were the players Serena beat to make the first Williams Sister Final come true.

Karma is a bitch. :wavey:
:lol: aint that the truth :lol:

SJW
Dec 21st, 2005, 11:34 AM
That's a bit misleading when you consider, Hingis was the one scoring the wins, while Lindsay would more often than not lose to the sisters. It got to a point where at the 2000 US Open, Hingis went up to Davenport and told her that she always lost to the Williamses and to finally beat one of them already instead of always leaving them to Martina. Lindsay responded that she expected Martina to take out Venus in return. This "pact" was blown out of proportion in the media. Lindsay and Martina were just joking around, but Oracene wasn't amused. Venus was seething but was asked to take the high road by the WTA. Serena, though, was pissed and made a reference to it in her post-match press conference after losing to Lindsay. Man, I'm really longing for these days again. :lol:

i don't think it was funny either :) i'm glad Serena kicked their asses after that, even if i do like them.

TomTennis
Dec 21st, 2005, 01:17 PM
i don't think it was funny either :) i'm glad Serena kicked their asses after that, even if i do like them.

same here!!!! :lol:

OMG how good would it be if the AO 2006 semi's where Davenport, Venus, Serena and Hingis! Just like the good old days!!!!!!!! :bounce: :wavey:

azinna
Dec 21st, 2005, 01:55 PM
Q. Lindsay said on TV that she and Martina had a little discussion that they didn't want to see that all-Williams final that everybody was expecting. Did you find that surprising they would do that?

SERENA WILLIAMS: Not at all. That's the way a lot of people would want it. I'm sure a lot of people never want to see an all-Williams final. It's going to happen in the future inevitably. Nobody's going to be able to stop it. Unfortunately, I didn't pull my end up this year. I'm sure in the next Grand Slam, the Australian Open, Wimbledon or the French, the US Open, I'm going to do my utmost to make sure it happens, make sure it happens because that's just what I would like......

Sigh. Yes, those were the dayz. Hingis sure knew how to get the entire Williams family riled up and training and practising. Wonder if she still has it. Hopes she does.....

Meanwhile, I do hope the Sisters are slowly finding some inner motivation to be their best as tennis players. Back in the day (as we can see in the above quote and surrounding drama) it was all about proving a series of points to the public. That motivation is all but gone now. Yes, the Bud Collins question got Serena going in Aussie 2005, but now Rena can't stay pissed off long enough to do the off-court training. I repeat: those were indeed the days. But there just has got to be some other way for the Sistas to get motivated, committed and strong once again.

Here's hoping for that blast-from-the-past feeling in 2006.

moby
Dec 21st, 2005, 02:05 PM
Q. Lindsay said on TV that she and Martina had a little discussion that they didn't want to see that all-Williams final that everybody was expecting. Did you find that surprising they would do that?The question was a little ridiculous though. Did the reporter seriously think Martina and Lindsay wanted to beat Venus and Serena solely because they wanted to prevent an all-Williams final? :retard:

martinailuv
Dec 21st, 2005, 02:10 PM
That's not very interesting, really. I mean, Hingis still beat Serena in the USA.

i was going to post that as well. marti beat serena in tournaments all over the world.

hingis-seles
Dec 21st, 2005, 03:42 PM
i don't think it was funny either :) i'm glad Serena kicked their asses after that, even if i do like them.

Really? Maybe, we just have a different sense of humour. I found it all thoroughly amusing. When I first read about it, I actually chuckled out loud. Could you ever imagine Sabatini and Sanchez-Vicario making a "pact" in the early 90s to prevent a Graf-Seles final? :lol: I don't think it was a personal thing. Lindsay almost always lost to the first Williams she faced those days, while Martina usually beat one but lost to the other one the next day. Martina was just telling her to do "her part".

hingis-seles
Dec 21st, 2005, 03:43 PM
Q. Lindsay said on TV that she and Martina had a little discussion that they didn't want to see that all-Williams final that everybody was expecting. Did you find that surprising they would do that?

SERENA WILLIAMS: Not at all. That's the way a lot of people would want it. I'm sure a lot of people never want to see an all-Williams final. It's going to happen in the future inevitably. Nobody's going to be able to stop it. Unfortunately, I didn't pull my end up this year. I'm sure in the next Grand Slam, the Australian Open, Wimbledon or the French, the US Open, I'm going to do my utmost to make sure it happens, make sure it happens because that's just what I would like. Obviously, no one would want to see an all-Williams final because everyone doesn't really like us. That's just the way it is.


Man, was Serena right - or was she right? The next time she would play Lindsay, it would be a 61 62 romping. Lindsay and Martina were the players Serena beat to make the first Williams Sister Final come true.

Karma is a bitch. :wavey:

Was she right? The Australian Open 2001, the very next Slam, Hingis beat Serena and her big sister. Infact, after that US Open, Hingis won her next two matches against Serena.

Sometimes karma takes her sweet time. :lol:

hingis-seles
Dec 21st, 2005, 03:47 PM
Sigh. Yes, those were the dayz. Hingis sure knew how to get the entire Williams family riled up and training and practising. Wonder if she still has it. Hopes she does.....

Meanwhile, I do hope the Sisters are slowly finding some inner motivation to be their best as tennis players. Back in the day (as we can see in the above quote and surrounding drama) it was all about proving a series of points to the public. That motivation is all but gone now. Yes, the Bud Collins question got Serena going in Aussie 2005, but now Rena can't stay pissed off long enough to do the off-court training. I repeat: those were indeed the days. But there just has got to be some other way for the Sistas to get motivated, committed and strong once again.

Here's hoping for that blast-from-the-past feeling in 2006.

That motivation worked both ways. Remember, in San Diego in 1999, when Richard Williams said before the final between Martina Hingis and Venus Williams, that Venus would win easily but then Hingis won 6-4, 6-0. Or even, when Richard said before the Serena-Hingis match in 1998 in one of the California tournaments that Serena would "kick her ass coming and going" and Martina won 6-4, 6-1. I love Richard. His obnoxious comments crack me up almost as much as Martina's obnoxious comments. :lol: Those were fun days. Here's hoping to more trash-talk. :p

SJW
Dec 21st, 2005, 03:54 PM
Really? Maybe, we just have a different sense of humour. I found it all thoroughly amusing. When I first read about it, I actually chuckled out loud. Could you ever imagine Sabatini and Sanchez-Vicario making a "pact" in the early 90s to prevent a Graf-Seles final? :lol: I don't think it was a personal thing. Lindsay almost always lost to the first Williams she faced those days, while Martina usually beat one but lost to the other one the next day. Martina was just telling her to do "her part".

we must have a different sense of humour.
but then again, you're primarily a Hingis fan and i'm primarily a Serena fan.
i'm sure it would be more amusing if Serena had said it about someone. ;)

Knizzle
Dec 21st, 2005, 04:03 PM
That motivation worked both ways. Remember, in San Diego in 1999, when Richard Williams said before the final between Martina Hingis and Venus Williams, that Venus would win easily but then Hingis won 6-4, 6-0. Or even, when Richard said before the Serena-Hingis match in 1998 in one of the California tournaments that Serena would "kick her ass coming and going" and Martina won 6-4, 6-1. I love Richard. His obnoxious comments crack me up almost as much as Martina's obnoxious comments. :lol: Those were fun days. Here's hoping to more trash-talk. :pUmmm....Notice that RICHARD said these things, NOT Venus or Serena, whereas that talk came out of Lindsay and Martina's mouths, but it's OK the sisters knocked them off the top anyway.

Brooks.
Dec 21st, 2005, 04:18 PM
Was she right? The Australian Open 2001, the very next Slam, Hingis beat Serena and her big sister. Infact, after that US Open, Hingis won her next two matches against Serena.

Sometimes karma takes her sweet time. :lol:

how many slams did Martina win after that so called pact...and how many all-williams grand slam finals were there???? ;)

azinna
Dec 21st, 2005, 05:31 PM
.....Those were fun days. Here's hoping to more trash-talk. :p

I'm with you, hingis-seles. Bring on the entertainment. I see Hingis is giving more loving to Maria now. Hopes she remembers to spread it around.

TeamUSA#1
Dec 21st, 2005, 05:45 PM
best trifecta of recent years: Serena - Jen - Venus.... those 3 were unstoppable in 2001-2003.

!<blocparty>!
Dec 21st, 2005, 05:59 PM
Good thread. :)

Bonfire
Dec 21st, 2005, 05:59 PM
best trifecta of recent years: Serena - Jen - Venus.... those 3 were unstoppable in 2001-2003.

yeah..although in 98, 99, and 2000...Davenport, Hingis, and the Williams sisters were the main four...2001 and 2002 seemed to be all about jen and venus and serena...between the three of them they won every grand slam of those two years...Jen with three...Serena with three and Venus with two...aahhh memories..misty water colored memories...

jamatthews
Dec 21st, 2005, 06:01 PM
Kuznetsova-Sharapova-Ivanovic-Vaidisova

When they all hit their peak...:drool:

hingis-seles
Dec 21st, 2005, 07:17 PM
we must have a different sense of humour.
but then again, you're primarily a Hingis fan and i'm primarily a Serena fan.
i'm sure it would be more amusing if Serena had said it about someone. ;)

Probably. :lol:

hingis-seles
Dec 21st, 2005, 07:20 PM
how many slams did Martina win after that so called pact...and how many all-williams grand slam finals were there???? ;)

She won the 2002 Australian Open doubles title with Kournikova (that's 1 Slam) :p

Seriously, though, the one Hingis quote, that haunts me to this day is during the 1999 US Open, when all the trash talk was REALLY getting to her. When asked about it, she said, "I am number one in the world not them. I have five Grand Slam singles titles, they haven't won any." or something along those lines. Since she uttered those words, she didn't win another singles Slam, lost her number one ranking, watched Venus win 5 majors, Serena win 7 majors, and both of them spend time over "her" number one ranking. I still vividly remember that quote because the first time I read it, I just thought to myself, don't let this come back to bite her in the ass. :sad:

Hopefully, all that changes with the comeback. :bounce:

hingis-seles
Dec 21st, 2005, 07:27 PM
Ummm....Notice that RICHARD said these things, NOT Venus or Serena, whereas that talk came out of Lindsay and Martina's mouths, but it's OK the sisters knocked them off the top anyway.

Venus and Serena rarely ever said much, since Richard did most of their talking for them. Melanie was the silent type, hence, Hingis had to talk all the trash for that camp. :p :lol:

Personally, I've always believed that contrary to the popular belief, the Sisters did NOT chase Hingis out of the game. When Serena won her RG and Wimbledon titles in 2002, where were Hingis and Davenport? They were absent from the event recovering from surgeries, something that is often overlooked. Serena lost badly to Hingis (6-2, 6-2) in their only clay meeting at the 1999 Italian Open. Hingis was knocked off the top by her injuries more than any one player or group of players.

That's how it's always been in the WTA. The last time a player came out and literally snatched the top billing was when Monica toppled Steffi as the best in 1991. Since then, Graf became #1 once Monica was stabbed, Hingis took over once Graf was injured, the House of Williams took over once Hingis was injured and on her way out of the game, Justine Henin-Hardenne took the top spot only once the sisters got injured and then lost it to Davenport when she herself was out with the virus. It's weird that it's been 15 years now, since the last time a girl came on Tour and outright took over #1 from the reigning queen simply by beating her on the tennis court and consistently producing the big results.

Geisha
Dec 21st, 2005, 07:53 PM
best trifecta of recent years: Serena - Jen - Venus.... those 3 were unstoppable in 2001-2003.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but Jennifer was definitely "stoppable" - especially later on in the seasons. She had some great matches with Serena, though.

venus_rulez
Dec 21st, 2005, 07:59 PM
Venus and Serena rarely ever said much, since Richard did most of their talking for them. Melanie was the silent type, hence, Hingis had to talk all the trash for that camp. :p :lol:

Personally, I've always believed that contrary to the popular belief, the Sisters did NOT chase Hingis out of the game. When Serena won her RG and Wimbledon titles in 2002, where were Hingis and Davenport? They were absent from the event recovering from surgeries, something that is often overlooked. Serena lost badly to Hingis (6-2, 6-2) in their only clay meeting at the 1999 Italian Open. Hingis was knocked off the top by her injuries more than any one player or group of players.

That's how it's always been in the WTA. The last time a player came out and literally snatched the top billing was when Monica toppled Steffi as the best in 1991. Since then, Graf became #1 once Monica was stabbed, Hingis took over once Graf was injured, the House of Williams took over once Hingis was injured and on her way out of the game, Justine Henin-Hardenne took the top spot only once the sisters got injured and then lost it to Davenport when she herself was out with the virus. It's weird that it's been 15 years now, since the last time a girl came on Tour and outright took over #1 from the reigning queen simply by beating her on the tennis court and consistently producing the big results.



I think what people mean by the Sisters ran her out of tennis is that they got in her head mentally. And it became very obvious that especially when she played venus that the match was in the sisters' hands. They were either going to make their shots when it counted or they wouldn't and lose. She knew that she would have to expend so much energy beating one, that when she inevitably had to face the other she was going to lose. Then Davenport started hitting her stride and Capriati, someone she had never lost to, started beating her regularly. All of these players contributed to her leaving, but she always had a sore spot for the Sisters, because the media always gave them so much attention before they ever acheived anything. She also said that Venus would never be number one while she was still playing. And I think the truest form of karma is venus beating Hingis in their last match as the number one player in the world on clay in Hamburg and after the match all Martina could say was, "nothing worked. I kept hitting to her forehand and it didn't work.

hingis-seles
Dec 21st, 2005, 09:41 PM
I think what people mean by the Sisters ran her out of tennis is that they got in her head mentally. And it became very obvious that especially when she played venus that the match was in the sisters' hands. They were either going to make their shots when it counted or they wouldn't and lose. She knew that she would have to expend so much energy beating one, that when she inevitably had to face the other she was going to lose. Then Davenport started hitting her stride and Capriati, someone she had never lost to, started beating her regularly. All of these players contributed to her leaving, but she always had a sore spot for the Sisters, because the media always gave them so much attention before they ever acheived anything. She also said that Venus would never be number one while she was still playing. And I think the truest form of karma is venus beating Hingis in their last match as the number one player in the world on clay in Hamburg and after the match all Martina could say was, "nothing worked. I kept hitting to her forehand and it didn't work.

Oh, the sister definitely got into her head. No question about that. But I do disagree, with the match being in their hands. Yes, the match is in their hands against lower-ranked opponents, but was NEVER in their hands when they took on Martina Hingis. If we went by the logic that the outcome of the match was always determined by the sisters, then they'd be beating her 6-2, 6-0 in every match like she was Kveta Hrdlickova or something. But, being Martina Hingis, she had the ability to put all sorts of spins on the ball and use her variety to get them out of position, float the balls and push it around to extract errors. When they played against Martina, the unforced errors would be high, because she could return their balls deep and not get blown away consistently. There were instances when she did get completely blown off the court (Serena's career-peak performance in the 2001 US Open semifinals/ the Hingis burnout/decline in full swing) by the Serena, and the awesome power and athleticism of Venus and Serena mixed with their acquired tennis acumen was what theyr brought to the table. That's what made their matches so great. Hingis could hang with them in the rallies and use her superior tactical abilities to extract the error and they could run down Martina's shots and send them back with interest or simply use a one-two punch. The two biggest misconceptions that annoy me are: 1) In Hingis-Williams matches, the outcome was in the hands of the Sisters depending on the number of errors they made (Uhhh...that has to be the most retarded statement ever. A lot of those errors were the result of trying to belt a clean winner past Hingis. To defeat an in-form Hingis, the Sisters had to be serving a high-first serve percentage, and hit a lot of winners and keep their errors in control) 2) The Williamses are only athletic and powerful (Uhhh...another retarded statement. Mirjana Lucic had tons of power. It's not just the power and athleticism. They do have a tactical sense and know how to use variety)

Back to your post, yes I remember that Hamburg match, but crowing about it would be in very poor taste when you consider Martina was playing on one leg. :sad:

Ryan
Dec 21st, 2005, 09:52 PM
I think what people mean by the Sisters ran her out of tennis is that they got in her head mentally. And it became very obvious that especially when she played venus that the match was in the sisters' hands. They were either going to make their shots when it counted or they wouldn't and lose. She knew that she would have to expend so much energy beating one, that when she inevitably had to face the other she was going to lose. Then Davenport started hitting her stride and Capriati, someone she had never lost to, started beating her regularly. All of these players contributed to her leaving, but she always had a sore spot for the Sisters, because the media always gave them so much attention before they ever acheived anything. She also said that Venus would never be number one while she was still playing. And I think the truest form of karma is venus beating Hingis in their last match as the number one player in the world on clay in Hamburg and after the match all Martina could say was, "nothing worked. I kept hitting to her forehand and it didn't work.


I'd have to disagree with you on that. The Hamburg match saw Hingis playing on practically one leg, right before her surgery. And I'd also disagree that the match was always in the Williams' hamds. Oz '01, Hingis beat Serena 8-6 in the final set, before beating Venus 1&1. You can make cases for Venus playing poorly, and it's true she wasn't at her best. But it's just plain false to say that she LOST the match without Hingis doing anything. If the Williams' won and lost every match they played without their opponent having an effect on their play, they would be much more inconsistant. Hingis ALWAYS posed problems for them, and dictated many of their matches. Of course, the Williams will always dictate due to their amazing winners and unforced errors, but not as much as many people would like to think.

venus_rulez
Dec 21st, 2005, 10:07 PM
Oh, the sister definitely got into her head. No question about that. But I do disagree, with the match being in their hands. Yes, the match is in their hands against lower-ranked opponents, but was NEVER in their hands when they took on Martina Hingis. If we went by the logic that the outcome of the match was always determined by the sisters, then they'd be beating her 6-2, 6-0 in every match like she was Kveta Hrdlickova or something. But, being Martina Hingis, she had the ability to put all sorts of spins on the ball and use her variety to get them out of position, float the balls and push it around to extract errors. When they played against Martina, the unforced errors would be high, because she could return their balls deep and not get blown away consistently. There were instances when she did get completely blown off the court (Serena's career-peak performance in the 2001 US Open semifinals/ the Hingis burnout/decline in full swing) by the Serena, and the awesome power and athleticism of Venus and Serena mixed with their acquired tennis acumen was what theyr brought to the table. That's what made their matches so great. Hingis could hang with them in the rallies and use her superior tactical abilities to extract the error and they could run down Martina's shots and send them back with interest or simply use a one-two punch. The two biggest misconceptions that annoy me are: 1) In Hingis-Williams matches, the outcome was in the hands of the Sisters depending on the number of errors they made (Uhhh...that has to be the most retarded statement ever. A lot of those errors were the result of trying to belt a clean winner past Hingis. To defeat an in-form Hingis, the Sisters had to be serving a high-first serve percentage, and hit a lot of winners and keep their errors in control) 2) The Williamses are only athletic and powerful (Uhhh...another retarded statement. Mirjana Lucic had tons of power. It's not just the power and athleticism. They do have a tactical sense and know how to use variety)

Back to your post, yes I remember that Hamburg match, but crowing about it would be in very poor taste when you consider Martina was playing on one leg. :sad:




True, I understand what yo uare saying, but I don't think it means Hingis' pretty much did nothing. I don't believe in that statement if for no other reason then the person has to have the smarts to know to just hit the ball back and let the other player self destruct. I think the fact that venus and serena always had high numbers against her proves the match was in their hands. it had to be. Venus and Serena would have so many winners because they went for so many, they'd have so many errors because they went for her shots so much. A lot of the times the points were in their hands because they are either going to hit the ball pass Hingis or eventually make an error because Hingis would be able to track down their balls. I think both the sisters and Lindsay knew that letting Martina get into a rhythm by rallying wasn't a good idea so they would go for their shots immediately. By definition the match is in their hands because if they miss tons of shots, they'll lose, if they made a good percentage of them they were almost guaranteed to win. hingis could definitely make them stay out there for hours regardless of how they were playing, but more times than not, their losses to Hingis can be summed up by saying it was a story of errors. The way Hingis played depends on having the other player's game self destruct. Never giving her opponent the same shot twice, by mixing up the spins and speed of her balls, by being able to run. It worked for a long while against those three. Again, that's why so many people, commentators included, recognized that once Lindsay, venus, and Serena got themselves together they would win a majority of their matches with Hingis because they have the ability to blow anyone off the court regardless of who's on the other side of the net, Hingis simply doesn't have the physical ability to do that.

Ryan
Dec 21st, 2005, 10:09 PM
True, I understand what yo uare saying, but I don't think it means Hingis' pretty much did nothing. I don't believe in that statement if for no other reason then the person has to have the smarts to know to just hit the ball back and let the other player self destruct. I think the fact that venus and serena always had high numbers against her proves the match was in their hands. it had to be. Venus and Serena would have so many winners because they went for so many, they'd have so many errors because they went for her shots so much. A lot of the times the points were in their hands because they are either going to hit the ball pass Hingis or eventually make an error because Hingis would be able to track down their balls. I think both the sisters and Lindsay knew that letting Martina get into a rhythm by rallying wasn't a good idea so they would go for their shots immediately. By definition the match is in their hands because if they miss tons of shots, they'll lose, if they made a good percentage of them they were almost guaranteed to win. hingis could definitely make them stay out there for hours regardless of how they were playing, but more times than not, their losses to Hingis can be summed up by saying it was a story of errors. The way Hingis played depends on having the other player's game self destruct. Never giving her opponent the same shot twice, by mixing up the spins and speed of her balls, by being able to run. It worked for a long while against those three. Again, that's why so many people, commentators included, recognized that once Lindsay, venus, and Serena got themselves together they would win a majority of their matches with Hingis because they have the ability to blow anyone off the court regardless of who's on the other side of the net, Hingis simply doesn't have the physical ability to do that.


I agree with most of your statement, but you could easily turn that around and say that Hingis made them self-destruct, therefore the match was in HER hands. I think it's a combination of both.

hingis-seles
Dec 21st, 2005, 10:16 PM
True, I understand what yo uare saying, but I don't think it means Hingis' pretty much did nothing. I don't believe in that statement if for no other reason then the person has to have the smarts to know to just hit the ball back and let the other player self destruct. I think the fact that venus and serena always had high numbers against her proves the match was in their hands. it had to be. Venus and Serena would have so many winners because they went for so many, they'd have so many errors because they went for her shots so much. A lot of the times the points were in their hands because they are either going to hit the ball pass Hingis or eventually make an error because Hingis would be able to track down their balls. I think both the sisters and Lindsay knew that letting Martina get into a rhythm by rallying wasn't a good idea so they would go for their shots immediately. By definition the match is in their hands because if they miss tons of shots, they'll lose, if they made a good percentage of them they were almost guaranteed to win. hingis could definitely make them stay out there for hours regardless of how they were playing, but more times than not, their losses to Hingis can be summed up by saying it was a story of errors. The way Hingis played depends on having the other player's game self destruct. Never giving her opponent the same shot twice, by mixing up the spins and speed of her balls, by being able to run. It worked for a long while against those three. Again, that's why so many people, commentators included, recognized that once Lindsay, venus, and Serena got themselves together they would win a majority of their matches with Hingis because they have the ability to blow anyone off the court regardless of who's on the other side of the net, Hingis simply doesn't have the physical ability to do that.

You just said it yourself. They went for their shots right away, because they were pressured by the fact that they shouldn't get into rallies with Martina. What made them go on all-out agression and not engage in rallies or "percentage tennis". That pressure of going for the perfect winner and going on all-out attack was brought about as a result of the opponent: Martina Hingis. Still say the outcome was in the Sisters' hands?

venus_rulez
Dec 21st, 2005, 10:17 PM
I agree with most of your statement, but you could easily turn that around and say that Hingis made them self-destruct, therefore the match was in HER hands. I think it's a combination of both.


hmmm...good point....i guess it depends on your perspective. :)

Ryan
Dec 21st, 2005, 10:19 PM
hmmm...good point....i guess it depends on your perspective. :)


Exactly, and neither of us can claim to be subjective in this argument. :tape: ;)

venus_rulez
Dec 21st, 2005, 10:20 PM
You just said it yourself. They went for their shots right away, because they were pressured by the fact that they shouldn't get into rallies with Martina. What made them go on all-out agression and not engage in rallies or "percentage tennis". That pressure of going for the perfect winner and going on all-out attack was brought about as a result of the opponent: Martina Hingis. Still say the outcome was in the Sisters' hands?


Yes, I would, though like i said i see the other side. But playing the way they play, again as i stated by definition puts the match in their hands. Hingis simply cannot run forever, more times than not the ball was either blown by her or it went 5 feet out or into the net. If they could keep their errors down or have an equal or positive ratio, they would win 9 times out of ten with Hingis, Hingis cannot say the same as she almnost always had low numbers no matter who she was playing.

venus_rulez
Dec 21st, 2005, 10:22 PM
Exactly, and neither of us can claim to be subjective in this argument. :tape: ;)


:lol: another good point. even though it's no secret I don't like Martina, I think she was a fantastic champion and I think she had probably the most creative, while at the same time being effective game we'll ever see.

hingis-seles
Dec 21st, 2005, 10:27 PM
Yes, I would, though like i said i see the other side. But playing the way they play, again as i stated by definition puts the match in their hands. Hingis simply cannot run forever, more times than not the ball was either blown by her or it went 5 feet out or into the net. If they could keep their errors down or have an equal or positive ratio, they would win 9 times out of ten with Hingis, Hingis cannot say the same as she almnost always had low numbers no matter who she was playing.

That's a huge "If" and close to impossible considering the style of tennis they play, and the quality opposition provided by Martina Hingis. The sister did hit winners against Hingis a lot of the time, but their number of errors was always insanely high too, which is understandable considering the high risk game they play.

But, like I stated earlier, I don't believe the outcome lay in the hands of one player. Both Hingis and Williams brought their own unique talent, skills and personal strengths to the court and tried their best to impose their will on the other. The better player would win on that given day. If Hingis won, it was because she had outfoxed the opponent by forcing them to go for winners too early, or by getting them off-balance with her shot-making. If a Williams won, they managed to consistently overpower her and hit a lot of winners and keep their unforced errors low.

venus_rulez
Dec 21st, 2005, 10:30 PM
That's a huge "If" and close to impossible considering the style of tennis they play, and the quality opposition provided by Martina Hingis. The sister did hit winners against Hingis a lot of the time, but their number of errors was always insanely high too, which is understandable considering the high risk game they play.

But, like I stated earlier, I don't believe the outcome lay in the hands of one player. Both Hingis and Williams brought their own unique talent, skills and personal strengths to the court and tried their best to impose their will on the other. The better player would win on that given day. If Hingis won, it was because she had outfoxed the opponent by forcing them to go for winners too early, or by getting them off-balance with her shot-making. If a Williams won, they managed to consistently overpower her and hit a lot of winners and keep their unforced errors low.



Like i said i totally see your point, I just don't agree. But yes all parties certainly brought a lot to the court, especially when they all had to face each other, and they've all given us some classic encounters to enjoy. :)

tennisIlove09
Dec 21st, 2005, 10:56 PM
I think those were the "big four" until 2002...and then it switched to Venus/Serena vs. Justine/Kim.

Hingis was so good because of her consistency and anticipation. She could read where Venus, Serena, Lindsay were going so much of the time...and that's how she was able to win. In the lopsided matches that she had (97, 01 Aussie vs. Venus); (98? Hamburg vs. Serena); (00 Miami Davenport) the power player was just making tons of errors, mostly because they knew Hingis would track it down.

Serena vs. Davenport is interesting because Serena has really owned Davenport. From the get go. I think it's the serve of Serena that troubles Davenport. Although, I think the reason their last few matches have been close, or better for Lindsay (04 LA F Davenport 61 63; 04 Sanex Davenport 36 76 61; 05 Aussie Serena 26 63 60) because she's in so much better conditioning.

Venus vs. Hingis is the best rivarly here because it's the classic contrasting styles. Like Navratilova/Evert; Agassi/ Sampras, these two always (well most of the time) bring out the best in each other. I still think the 99 and 00 US Open semi finals are two of the ebst matches Ive ever seen. In 99, you have the question "what if Venus hadn't cramped?" and in 00 you have the question "what if Hingis had put the overhead away?"

Venus vs. Lindsay is so interesting because they are so much alike. Tall, powered Americans. And they have so much respect for each other (which I dont think you really have with any of the other three. Well not as much respect anyways).

hingis-seles
Dec 22nd, 2005, 03:44 AM
I think those were the "big four" until 2002...and then it switched to Venus/Serena vs. Justine/Kim.

Hingis was so good because of her consistency and anticipation. She could read where Venus, Serena, Lindsay were going so much of the time...and that's how she was able to win. In the lopsided matches that she had (97, 01 Aussie vs. Venus); (98? Hamburg vs. Serena); (00 Miami Davenport) the power player was just making tons of errors, mostly because they knew Hingis would track it down.

Serena vs. Davenport is interesting because Serena has really owned Davenport. From the get go. I think it's the serve of Serena that troubles Davenport. Although, I think the reason their last few matches have been close, or better for Lindsay (04 LA F Davenport 61 63; 04 Sanex Davenport 36 76 61; 05 Aussie Serena 26 63 60) because she's in so much better conditioning.

Venus vs. Hingis is the best rivarly here because it's the classic contrasting styles. Like Navratilova/Evert; Agassi/ Sampras, these two always (well most of the time) bring out the best in each other. I still think the 99 and 00 US Open semi finals are two of the ebst matches Ive ever seen. In 99, you have the question "what if Venus hadn't cramped?" and in 00 you have the question "what if Hingis had put the overhead away?"

Venus vs. Lindsay is so interesting because they are so much alike. Tall, powered Americans. And they have so much respect for each other (which I dont think you really have with any of the other three. Well not as much respect anyways).

Great post. :)

Though, Venus and Lindsay didn't always have respect for each other. :p Remember, when Venus nicknamed Lindsay "The Big L" and when Lindsay turned her face when she flubbed that volley on matchpoint at Wimbledon in 2000, because she said she didn't want to see Venus' reaction and then again, at the 2000 US Open, Lindsay turned her face when Richard and Venus came on court, because she said it's better not to see how they act. Oh, and who can forget Lindsay's blunt and biting remarks on Venus' absence from the 2000 Australian Open. They're all such a bunch of drama queens. :lol: