PDA

View Full Version : Hingis of late 90's Vs. Today's WTA Tour?


Jaffas85
Sep 1st, 2006, 02:53 PM
Had Hingis emerged on the tour today at the age of 16 or 17 would she have been able to claw her way into the Top 10 *Or Top 20* considering how strong and fast the large majority of the players are today.

Would the dominant Hingis of the late 90's have been nothing more than a 'Huntachova' level player were she to emerge as a youngster today?

Thanks.

*Try to set aside nostalgia and sentimentality and view this objectively*.

Volcana
Sep 1st, 2006, 03:08 PM
So today's players wouldn't have the benefit of having watched Hingis and playing her? I actually think she'd have been a top five player, made #1 and won a slam or two (but not five). Hingis was winning slams competing against both Williams sisters, Capriati, Davenport and Graf. No dearth of power there. Also, she was a little faster back then.

It took the tour four or five years to figure out the best way to play Hingis. Namely, hit it deep, and don't make stupid unforced errors by over-hitting. A lot of players can do that, even ones who lack winner-hitting power. Hingis isn't nearly as good at inducing errors from her opponents when she's behind the baseline. But while the tour was figuring her out, she'd be winning.

But, that's just my opinion. Who really knows?

charmedRic
Sep 1st, 2006, 03:28 PM
So today's players wouldn't have the benefit of having watched Hingis and playing her? I actually think she'd have been a top five player, made #1 and won a slam or two (but not five). Hingis was winning slams competing against both Williams sisters, Capriati, Davenport and Graf. No dearth of power there. Also, she was a little faster back then.

It took the tour four or five years to figure out the best way to play Hingis. Namely, hit it deep, and don't make stupid unforced errors by over-hitting. A lot of players can do that, even ones who lack winner-hitting power. Hingis isn't nearly as good at inducing errors from her opponents when she's behind the baseline. But while the tour was figuring her out, she'd be winning.

But, that's just my opinion. Who really knows?

I'll have to agree. Very well put.

venus_rulez
Sep 1st, 2006, 03:37 PM
I think she'd still make the top ten. Partly because she plays a lot of tennis and to be honest what she's had maybe 2 or 3 early exits this year which is really no worse than any other top player on the tour this year. Her ability to do whatever she wants to the ball cannot be underestimated. But nowadays people would exploit her lack of a serve from th very beginning. Would Hingis be a bit more fit to combat the agrressive returns off of her serve? I think that's a big issue now, if she's not going to improve her serve (a la Dementieva) then she has to be ready to hit aggressively right from the start and that's just not going to happen. I think she'd do well on clay and in Australia because she's obviously a player who peaks early in the season and the clay dents some of the power, but she'd always be up against it on any medium paced hardcourt and especially on grass.