PDA

View Full Version : Wertheim Annoints Juju As 2006 Player Of The Year


pierce0415
Oct 18th, 2006, 08:25 PM
A hypothetical question: Had Rafa won Wimbledon, both Rog and Rafa would each have won two Slams this year. Who would have been considered No. 1 then?
-- M. Lukacko, San Jose, Calif.

Tough one. Nadal has done an awful lot of losing since Wimbledon. On the other hand, not only would he have won the same number of Slams as Federer but he would have beaten him five out of five times, including twice in Grand Slam finals. Hmmm. Funny, but as it stands now, it's not even a conversation. Not only did Federer win three of the four majors, but his overall record is so vastly superior, he's a runaway No. 1.

Incidentally, several of you have asked who's our WTA 2006 MVP. I know I'll get a lot of disagreement here, but I have to go with Henin-Hardenne. Yes, she only won one major, and she didn't play many events and is not ranked No. 1. But I'm sold by her ability to win 25 matches in majors, reaching the final of each, particularly since Amelie Mauresmo had so many shaky results (the French Open loss; those bagels as the No. 1-ranked player) and since Sharapova had such a shaky clay season. If either Sharapova or Mauresmo wins in Madrid, I could be persuaded otherwise.

Paneru
Oct 18th, 2006, 08:28 PM
What an honor! :tape:

I'm sure Momo just maybe would take her
two Slams this year anyday over what's
his names "annointment". :angel:

msharafan
Oct 18th, 2006, 08:31 PM
maria was inured in the clay season!

:inlove:
Oct 18th, 2006, 08:33 PM
How did Sharapova have a shaky clay court season? She just didn't have one. :tape:

The Daviator
Oct 18th, 2006, 08:39 PM
I agree with that :)

Rocketta
Oct 18th, 2006, 08:40 PM
How is Sharapova even in contention for player of year? I mean Justine wouldn't be in the running if she hadn't made the finals of all the slams with just one win. Also, why would a win in a tournament at the very end of the year that's not the YEC decide anything? Give me break. :rolleyes:

tennisIlove09
Oct 18th, 2006, 08:42 PM
Well its either Mauresmo or JHH . . . it could go either way, he went with JHH.

LDF
Oct 18th, 2006, 08:43 PM
How is Sharapova even in contention for player of year? I mean Justine wouldn't be in the running if she hadn't made the finals of all the slams with just one win. Also, why would a win in a tournament at the very end of the year that's not the YEC decide anything? Give me break. :rolleyes:

The only tournament he mentions is the YECs :confused:

Rocketta
Oct 18th, 2006, 08:48 PM
The only tournament he mentions is the YECs :confused:

:haha:

I totally forgot the Year end is in Madrid this year. :lol: :crazy:

Ok, that makes a little more sense but i fail to see how a slam & a YEC equals or is greater than two slam titles with one of them being Wimbledon?

dreamgoddess099
Oct 18th, 2006, 08:56 PM
Since when does losing 3 of 4 grandslam finals hold more prestige than actually winning 2 of 4?

rjd1111
Oct 18th, 2006, 08:57 PM
How did Sharapova have a shaky clay court season? She just didn't have one. :tape:


There is a poll I think on SI that has Pova as the best player of 2006.

LDF
Oct 18th, 2006, 08:57 PM
:haha:

I totally forgot the Year end is in Madrid this year. :lol: :crazy:

Ok, that makes a little more sense but i fail to see how a slam & a YEC equals or is greater than two slam titles with one of them being Wimbledon?

I thought so - no problem :lol:

einna
Oct 18th, 2006, 08:58 PM
Oh, this has been discussed several times in this forum.

imo, the reason why we are all waiting for who will win the YEC and then the best player of the year can be decided is because even though Justine only won one slam title compared to Mauresmo's two slam, she still reached all the slam finals and also won a couple of other titles.

so i'll agree with most people that we just wait for YEC results. If mauresmo wins that, then hands down, momo is the MVP for WTA 2006.

Also, imho, Wimbledon is the most prestigious slam but it doesn't really mean that when you win it, you're better than everyone. You just have more prestige. :) This does not apply to Momo and Juju only but in general.

griffin
Oct 18th, 2006, 09:00 PM
eh. whatever.

I can see his argument, I just don't buy it.

Not that I"m biased or anything ;)

Wannabeknowitall
Oct 18th, 2006, 09:01 PM
Is this before or after he predicted Justine winning every slam this year?
He's still holding on those predictions which were wrong 3 out of 4 times.
And honestly I wouldn't want to be that far up Justine's ass, Wartheim.
Remember she has ze herpes, it could flare up at any time. :tape:

alfonsojose
Oct 18th, 2006, 09:09 PM
let's talk after the YEC. That's why rankings exists :shrug:

Paneru
Oct 18th, 2006, 09:10 PM
Since when does losing 3 of 4 grandslam finals hold more prestige than actually winning 2 of 4?

Since, NEVER! :haha:

Paneru
Oct 18th, 2006, 09:11 PM
let's talk after the YEC. That's why rankings exists :shrug:
No need.

Since when has not winning the most
Slams of the year not brought
"Player of the Year" honors?

alfonsojose
Oct 18th, 2006, 09:13 PM
No need.

Since when has not winning the most
Slams of the year not brought
"Player of the Year" honors?
2000

Veenut
Oct 18th, 2006, 09:20 PM
Since when does losing 3 of 4 grandslam finals hold more prestige than actually winning 2 of 4?

I've been enquiring about this myself but no one seem able to explain it. :( I'm not a fan of either therefore I'm just going by the merits. The record shows that Momo defeated Justine twice to win 2/4 majors while Justine won 1/4 plus Momo has been consistent enough to retain #1 for most of the year. The other touries are secondary to such achievments. BTW if it was Justine who had similar results I would have the same opinion.

Martian Jeza
Oct 18th, 2006, 09:21 PM
eh. whatever.

I can see his argument, I just don't buy it.

Not that I"m biased or anything ;)

In your heart you want this price for Mauresmo, just admit it ;)

Martian Jeza
Oct 18th, 2006, 09:22 PM
I wonder which hard drugs Wertheim took the last times ? JHH as 2006 player of the year ? You must be kidding me :tape:

pigmalion
Oct 18th, 2006, 09:26 PM
I wonder which hard drugs Wertheim took the last times ? JHH as 2006 player of the year ? You must be kidding me :tape:
blablabla so who is the player of the year according to you ? :rolleyes:

Justine deserves it. -point-

faste5683
Oct 18th, 2006, 09:26 PM
What an honor! :tape:

I'm sure Momo just maybe would take her
two Slams this year anyday over what's
his names "annointment". :angel:

True, but Justine did make it to all four finals...something only seven other players have accomplished. She progressed futher in the two Slams that Amelie was eliminated (and) her Fed cup work was brilliant.

:wavey:

Martian Jeza
Oct 18th, 2006, 09:28 PM
blablabla so who is according to you ? :rolleyes:

Justine deserves it. -point-

A player who doesn't only play when it's convenient, you know :)

pigmalion
Oct 18th, 2006, 09:29 PM
A player who doesn't only play when it's convenient, you know :)

a name pleaaaaase :rolleyes:

Martian Jeza
Oct 18th, 2006, 09:30 PM
a name pleaaaaase :rolleyes:

Mauresmo although I'm not a fan of her :)

Andrew..
Oct 18th, 2006, 09:51 PM
Sharapova shouldn't even be in the discussion at this point. If she wins the YEC, I could possibly see the argument. But at this point, no.

I also feel that the Player of the Year is Justine. When both played their best, I feel like Justine's best was better than Mauresmo's. Also, Justine did reach all four slam finals. She's the first player to do that since Hingis.

vejh
Oct 18th, 2006, 10:01 PM
Totally agree with Jon. JHH, regardless of the YEC, has been by far the most consistent WTA tour player of 2006 on every single surface (winning titles on every surface; 9 finals of 12 tournies played); making the finals of 4 GS; that's Awesome (I LOoooooooooove how some folks try to sweep that under the rug), playing big for Fed Cup;winning all her singles. And now even with that nasty muscle tear she's picked up, she's still in contention for year-end #1. There is no doubt that she deserves it. Momo won 2 GS but that cannot make her player of the YEAR (not player of January and July). If the prize were GS player of the yr; it still would be close.lol

Mother_Marjorie
Oct 18th, 2006, 10:01 PM
Actually, this debate reminds me a lot of 1987, when Graf won the French and made it to the finals of all her tournaments. Navratilova won the US Open and Wimbledon, yet Graf was considered the best player.

People became really pissy then too.

If Justine wins the YEC, she's be #1 in the rankings and will end the year #1. Enough said.

Mother_Marjorie
Oct 18th, 2006, 10:04 PM
Is this before or after he predicted Justine winning every slam this year?
He's still holding on those predictions which were wrong 3 out of 4 times.
And honestly I wouldn't want to be that far up Justine's ass, Wartheim.
Remember she has ze herpes, it could flare up at any time. :tape:

Coming from a delusional tranny male who claims to have a better-looking ass than a woman's, well, that speaks for itself.......

bellascarlett
Oct 18th, 2006, 10:07 PM
Is this before or after he predicted Justine winning every slam this year?
He's still holding on those predictions which were wrong 3 out of 4 times.
And honestly I wouldn't want to be that far up Justine's ass, Wartheim.
Remember she has ze herpes, it could flare up at any time. :tape:
so he picked justine to win the us open? didnt he pick maria?

jenny161185
Oct 18th, 2006, 10:08 PM
id pick her too :)

Robynho
Oct 18th, 2006, 10:10 PM
id pick her too :)

and so would I :cool:

vejh
Oct 18th, 2006, 10:11 PM
Good pt Swarmi. How do you beat someone who has made the finals of all tournies? You'll have to win more than they did. Stef's year was very consistent and very successful.

JulesVerne
Oct 18th, 2006, 10:15 PM
Actually, this debate reminds me a lot of 1987, when Graf won the French and made it to the finals of all her tournaments. Navratilova won the US Open and Wimbledon, yet Graf was considered the best player.

People became really pissy then too.

If Justine wins the YEC, she's be #1 in the rankings and will end the year #1. Enough said.

But Graf had a 75-2 win loss record and won 11 tournaments in 1987 and won the year end masters. Navratilova was 56-8 in matches and only won 4 tournaments.

Veenut
Oct 18th, 2006, 10:31 PM
[QUOTE]How do you beat someone who has made the finals of all tournies? You'll have to win more than they did.

Bingo! I will forever maintain that 2/4 is Always more than 1/4. BTW if the numbers were reversed I wonder how many would be giving Momo the advantage :rolleyes:

thrust
Oct 18th, 2006, 10:36 PM
Isn^t the player with the most Race points at the end of the year, player of the year?

vejh
Oct 18th, 2006, 10:37 PM
[ Bingo! I will forever maintain that 2/4 is Always more than 1/4. BTW if the numbers were reversed I wonder how many would be giving Momo the advantage ]

No, not win more GS, Veenut.lol. Win more tournies and matches. JHH has a 88.8% record w/ 5 titles (on every major surface), 9 finals (out of 12 tournies played), and last but certainly not least, 4 GS finals. MOmo's 2006 YEAR's record doesn't compare.

KBdoubleu
Oct 18th, 2006, 10:37 PM
There is a poll I think on SI that has Pova as the best player of 2006.

Unfortunately, thats simply because she is the best looking out of any players in reasonable contention.

vejh
Oct 18th, 2006, 10:40 PM
If the numbers were reversed of course Momo, by my logic would get the benefit of #1. Now, you're trying to make it out to be some JHH favoritism, are you kidding me? lol. If Momo currently had 5 titles, made all 4 GS titles, and made so many finals, how could I ever discount her?? How could anyone discount her, unless there was someone else who ALSO made 4 GS finals (winning some of course), made more finals and won as many titles (even more impressive if they were on different surfaces)?

This has little to do with JHH. The numbers, all the numbers, speak for themselves. We could be talking about X, Y and Z for all I care.

new-york
Oct 18th, 2006, 10:48 PM
Justine this year has been the most consistent, won the most matches, is the leader of the race.

let's see how the rest of the season will turn, but so far, she is the best player of the season in my opinion.

SelesFan70
Oct 18th, 2006, 10:55 PM
I have to agree, but if Mauresmo wins Madrid I'll change my mind. :D

Greenout
Oct 18th, 2006, 11:01 PM
Sorry, but I have to give it to Mauresmo.


Justine has done two GS's in 2003, and that's her bench mark as a good slam year. Ironically being so great as to win a 1 major a year, has sort of set the standard that a uber fabulous year for JHH must be 2 or more. :lol:

It's the perfectionists catch-22.

Amelie winning 2 is better than winning 1 from Justine. Now if it was any other player other than a Justine, Venus or Serena that has not won more than 1 major a year then winning 1 and being a finalist in 3 can be good enough to retire with.

tard~tard
Oct 18th, 2006, 11:01 PM
Totally agree with Jon. JHH, regardless of the YEC has been by far the most consistent on every single surface (winning titles on every surface; 9 finals of 12 tournies played), making the finals of 4 GS; that's Awesome (I LOoooooooooove how some folks try to sweep that under the rug), playing big for Fed Cup;winning all her singles. And now even with that nasty muscle tear she's picked up, she's in contention for year-end #1. There is no doubt that she deserves it. Momo won 2 GS but that cannot make her player of the YEAR (not player of January and July). If the prize were GS player of the yr; it still would be close.lol

I agree with you vejh.
You don't become the year end #1 by performing exellent in just one
or two major tournaments.
No matter the fact that Amélie won 2, and Justine "only" one GS. This
isn't what the rankings are about. You have to take them for what they
are, and try to understand them for what they are.

Justine is #1 in the Race, and she already is so since a long time. Despite
the fact that she has only played 12 tournaments so far, she has earned
herself 3473 points.

#2 in the Race, Amélie Mauresmo, has 2947 points, and is now already
playing her 16th tournament of the year!

#3 Maria Sharapova, whom with Zurich, entered her 13th tournament of
the year, has earned 2802 points so far.

Now, if you take the average of points the top 3 have earned per
tournament they have played this year, you will see that :

#1 = JHH with an average of 289,4 points earned, per tournament she
has played in 2006.

#2 = Maria Sharapova, with an average of 233,5 points earned, per
tournament she has played in 2006.

#3 = Amélie Mauresmo, with an average of 196,5 points earned, per
tournament she played in 2006.

To sum it up, quality wise, Amélie Mauresmo got seriously beaten by
Maria and especially Justine this year.
Which means that, the fact that Justine is injured and can't add any
more points until the YEC (that is, if she will be able to play), Amélie's
only chance to end the year as world #1, is in a quantitative way,
because quality wise she can't beat Henin anymore.

In other words, Amélie's only chance to end the year as #1 is, by playing
(a lot) more tournaments than JHH. (it's up to Amélie to take advantage
of Justine's injury, it's a golden opportunity, almost a gift; because without
Ju's injury, she hardly even had a chance to end the year as #1.)

But that's also what the rankings are about, quantity can overtake quality.
In that case, you also have to accept the rankings just for what they are.

new-york
Oct 18th, 2006, 11:06 PM
Amelie winning 2 is better than winning 1 from Justine. Now if it was any other player other than a Justine, Venus or Serena that has not won more than 1 major a year then winning 1 and being a finalist in 3 can be good enough to retire with.

1- Do Venus & Serena contend for the "best player of the season" title this season?
2- Venus & Serena have never won more than 1 major a year?

Allez-H
Oct 18th, 2006, 11:27 PM
Justine has had an exceptionaland consistent year, but Amelie won two slams which tops Justine one slam. In the end, it's all about the Slams so Momo is the player of the year

harloo
Oct 18th, 2006, 11:30 PM
The fact is that Amelie won two slams beating Justine in each of those finals. No amount of fandom can change that fact. It was just Amelie's year this time.:)

darrinbaker00
Oct 18th, 2006, 11:35 PM
I think Mr. Wertheim makes some good points. Strange as it sounds, reaching the finals of all four majors in one year is tougher to do than winning two. Also, when you're #1, you should be serving bagels, not eating them, and Mauresmo ate three of them at a major (not to mention her annual choke job at Roland Garros). Having said all that, if I had to pick a Player of the Year right now, I'd pick Mauresmo for one reason: she beat Justine for both of her majors.

IceHock
Oct 18th, 2006, 11:46 PM
Amelie- 2 grand slam wins, 2-2 in grand slam finals # 1 in the world

Justine- 1 grand slam win, 1-4 in grand slam finals, # 2 in the world

This favors Amelie, and she has a winning record against Justine this year if i'm correct.

Buitenzorg
Oct 18th, 2006, 11:58 PM
I wouls also say, Justine is no doubt the best player this season ;)

Robbie.
Oct 18th, 2006, 11:58 PM
There is no doubt in my mind that Wertheim is right and most of you are wrong.

It was bad enough when people were saying that a person wihout a slam could not be a legitimate number one against a person who had won one even though their overall level was far superior (eg. Davenport vs most of the slam winners of 2004,5). Now people are saying that even if you win a slam you can't legitimately be declared the best unless you have won the most slams in that period.

By this logic we may as well cancel the rest of the tour.

It's the logic of simpletons.

The fact of the matter is that even by a divisor system, the best indicator osf consistent quality results, Lindsay Davenport would have been number one in 2004/5 and Henin Hardenne number one in 2006.

When are people going to grasp that number one/player of the year are achievements analytically distinct from major tournaments?

Someone should go and tell Lorena Ochoa that her likely Player of The Year and Money List Titles mean nothing because she didn't win a major.

hingis-seles
Oct 19th, 2006, 12:09 AM
Sharapova shouldn't even be in the discussion at this point. If she wins the YEC, I could possibly see the argument. But at this point, no.

I also feel that the Player of the Year is Justine. When both played their best, I feel like Justine's best was better than Mauresmo's. Also, Justine did reach all four slam finals. She's the first player to do that since Hingis.

The problem is, Justine failed to bring her best to any of the four GS finals she contested, which is why I have a problem with proclaiming her the Player of the Year. Amelie's 2-0 record over her in GS finals further weakens Justine's case.

It's something like what happened in 2000, when some felt Hingis was Player of the Year with her 9 titles across all 4 surfaces (Hard, Clay, Grass, Indoors), even though it was clearly Venus, who won the two Slams and led Hingis 2-0, even though she hardly played anything and was ranked #3 at year's end.

j-fan
Oct 19th, 2006, 12:12 AM
This is really a close call. I can understand both sides of the argument and would wait till the outcome of YEC.

But I think one thing is clear, Justine is the most dominant player over the last four years despite being sick and injured and playing only about 50% of the time. She won 5 GS over the period and at least 1 GS a year.

Buitenzorg
Oct 19th, 2006, 12:12 AM
Amelie- 2 grand slam wins, 2-2 in grand slam finals # 1 in the world

Justine- 1 grand slam win, 1-4 in grand slam finals, # 2 in the world

This favors Amelie, and she has a winning record against Justine this year if i'm correct.

Facts as at 16 Oct 2006

SINGLE RANKING

Amelie - Total 3667 pts (18 tournaments) = 203.72 average pts
Justine - Total 3473 pts (12 tournaments) = 289.42 average pts

RACE RANKING

Amelie - Total 2947 pts (15 tournaments) = 196.47 average pts
Justine - Total 3473 pts (12 tournaments) = 289.42 average pts

YTD TITLES

Amelie = 4 Titles (including 2 GS)
Justine = 5 Titles (including 1 GS)

YTD W-L RECORDS

Amelie 47-12 = 79.67%
Justine 56-7 = 88.89%

Buitenzorg
Oct 19th, 2006, 12:15 AM
The odds in favour of Justine ;)

hingis-seles
Oct 19th, 2006, 12:16 AM
There is no doubt in my mind that Wertheim is right and most of you are wrong.

It was bad enough when people were saying that a person wihout a slam could not be a legitimate number one against a person who had won one even though their overall level was far superior (eg. Davenport vs most of the slam winners of 2004,5). Now people are saying that even if you win a slam you can't legitimately be declared the best unless you have won the most slams in that period.

By this logic we may as well cancel the rest of the tour.

It's the logic of simpletons.

The fact of the matter is that even by a divisor system, the best indicator osf consistent quality results, Lindsay Davenport would have been number one in 2004/5 and Henin Hardenne number one in 2006.

When are people going to grasp that number one/player of the year are achievements analytically distinct from major tournaments?

Someone should go and tell Lorena Ochoa that her likely Player of The Year and Money List Titles mean nothing because she didn't win a major.

Robbie., agreed with what you said. Though, how can you claim someone to be the best for a particular year when that player fails to perform well at any of the major events of the season (See Davenport, L. in 2001/2004)? Isn't a #1 ranked player expected to shine their brightest at the biggest events of the season? Or have we lowered our standards that much for a world number one?

MinnyGophers
Oct 19th, 2006, 12:21 AM
I just wish one of them wins the YEC and shuts everyone up about this already tiresome subject...

IceHock
Oct 19th, 2006, 12:23 AM
Facts as at 16 Oct 2006

SINGLE RANKING

Amelie - Total 3667 pts (18 tournaments) = 203.72 average pts
Justine - Total 3473 pts (12 tournaments) = 289.42 average pts

RACE RANKING

Amelie - Total 2947 pts (15 tournaments) = 196.47 average pts
Justine - Total 3473 pts (12 tournaments) = 289.42 average pts

YTD TITLES

Amelie = 4 Titles (including 2 GS)
Justine = 5 Titles (including 1 GS)

YTD W-L RECORDS

Amelie 47-12 = 79.67%
Justine 56-7 = 88.89%


Yes Justine was more consistent, but Amelie was better in finals and she has a higher ranking which is good enough for me to say she has had the best yea, it's my opinion, everybody has a different one but Amelie has played better when it mattered most.

bellascarlett
Oct 19th, 2006, 12:25 AM
I think Mr. Wertheim makes some good points. Strange as it sounds, reaching the finals of all four majors in one year is tougher to do than winning two. Also, when you're #1, you should be serving bagels, not eating them, and Mauresmo ate three of them at a major (not to mention her annual choke job at Roland Garros). Having said all that, if I had to pick a Player of the Year right now, I'd pick Mauresmo for one reason: she beat Justine for both of her majors.

:tape: :lol:

It is quite a complicated decision, isn't it?...

Justine has been more than consistent, but terrific all year. She was the player to beat throughout the year I feel. Got to 9 finals out of 12 tournaments entered (the others 2 semis and 1 2nd round loss). Won 5 titles. Very impressive.

Justine has the best record so far with a winning percentage of 88.9% or 89%(becomes 88.1% if you take away her 4 Fedcup wins)

Maria Sharapova comes in second with a winning percentage of 85.7 % or 86%

Amelie Mauresmo's record has a winning percentage meanwhile of 79.6 % or 80% (becomes 80.7% or 81% excluding fedcup)

Hope my numbers are correct but in looking at the win loss record alone, Justine is the player of the year.

However, those two titles in Amelie's record this year are Slams and that is obviously a great achievement and as darrin above said, in both finals, she beat Justine.

I feel that Justine has been the better player than Amelie on a whole but it's hard to argue when Amelie has Wimbledon and the AO beating Justine on the way (the other was a retirement but still). At the same time, it's quite funny that the player of the year was fed two bagels in a GS semifinal and 1 in the QF. It's probably best to wait until the YEC is over but player of the year talks of performance throughout the year and not just in slams, and record-wise, Justine performed the best.

égalité
Oct 19th, 2006, 12:30 AM
I agree and I'm no Justine fan :tape:

She did win fewer slams, but her overall record is much better than Momo's.

Robbie.
Oct 19th, 2006, 12:43 AM
Robbie., agreed with what you said. Though, how can you claim someone to be the best for a particular year when that player fails to perform well at any of the major events of the season (See Davenport, L. in 2001/2004)? Isn't a #1 ranked player expected to shine their brightest at the biggest events of the season? Or have we lowered our standards that much for a world number one?

What we have to remember is that number one is a relative concept. So it's not so much that we have lowered our standards, as that circumstances determine the standard for us. Obviously the more even the tour is, the less accomplished a number one player is going to be. So while we may instinctively expect a number one to reach a certain level of achievement, this really is an unfair expectation. There are no hard and fast rules. Depending on the state of the tour, a number one can be as dominant as Hingis in '97 or Williams in '02 or as mired in the ruck as Davenport in '04 and '05. They are equally legitimate ones, although obviously they are not equally strong. It's all relative.

To address your specific examples, I must say that 2004 was the strangest year I have ever witnessed, but I think that the ranking system got it correct. In my view, Sharapova, Myskina and Kuznetsova were not realistic candidates for number one. Sharapova and Kuzenstova in particular didn't really even play like top 5 players for most of the year. Henin Hardenne was a genuine candiate in terms of performance but when you barely play after March it's difficult to stake a claim as player of the year. So Davenport, who put herself in contention in all tournaments from January through November, winning 7 (a tour high), got number one, as it was, as the best of bad lot.

As for 2001, that would be the one year where I think justice really miscarried. Venus Williams deserved that number one ranking and would have got it under a divisor system. Although I'm a big fan of Jennifer Capriati and she was the story of 2001, I can't say that she was the best player that year. She simply lost too often and her average, which was lower than both Venus and Lindsay, as well as her poor head to head against those two, is proof of this.

Buitenzorg
Oct 19th, 2006, 12:45 AM
Yes Justine was more consistent, but Amelie was better in finals and she has a higher ranking which is good enough for me to say she has had the best yea, it's my opinion, everybody has a different one but Amelie has played better when it mattered most.

I respect your opinion :kiss:

But number won't lie ;)

to me, they both are great player anyway, but if we have to choose between them, then I would go with Justine ;)

fammmmedspin
Oct 19th, 2006, 12:48 AM
Oh, this has been discussed several times in this forum.

imo, the reason why we are all waiting for who will win the YEC and then the best player of the year can be decided is because even though Justine only won one slam title compared to Mauresmo's two slam, she still reached all the slam finals and also won a couple of other titles.

so i'll agree with most people that we just wait for YEC results. If mauresmo wins that, then hands down, momo is the MVP for WTA 2006.

Also, imho, Wimbledon is the most prestigious slam but it doesn't really mean that when you win it, you're better than everyone. You just have more prestige. :) This does not apply to Momo and Juju only but in general.

Doesn't help does it. Momo would hold then what she holds now. Justine probably won't play anyway. Momo has been number 1 and won the two GS beating guess who - its pretty clear to me. Is Momo the player of late 2006 - no - but she is the player of 2006.

Linnie
Oct 19th, 2006, 01:00 AM
I just wish one of them wins the YEC and shuts everyone up about this already tiresome subject...
Exactly! Let's have this discussion after Madrid. Worthless, IMHO, jumped the gun just a wee bit ;)

LeRoy.
Oct 19th, 2006, 01:05 AM
For me its Amelie :shrug:

As for the comment about bagels - i mean really she still only lost a set - whether its 6-7 or 0-6 i really don't see how that should change the fact that she won the most # of slams and the fact that she beat Justine to win both of those makes her a clear cut fave in my books for the player of the year.

LeRoy.
Oct 19th, 2006, 01:07 AM
Also I think regardless of who wins the YEC, Momo is the player of the year :)

SJW
Oct 19th, 2006, 01:51 AM
LOL.
JHH can have player of the year.
In fact, I'm sure Momo would even GIVE it to her.
Her attention is too occupied with those 2 majors she won, after all.
Making all four grand slam finals is a great achievement. :worship:
But fact is, she lost 2 times out of 2 against Mauresmo in slam finals.
So who really is player of the year? :)

ZeroSOFInfinity
Oct 19th, 2006, 02:20 AM
Wertheim does have a point there... Even though Amelie had won 2 out of the 4 Slams this year and holds the #1 ranking, Justine had also a Slam, been in all 4 Finals, and also leads in the points race. Furthermore, she has been a more consistant performer than Amelie. That's what influence Wertheim to choose Justine over Amelie.

That said, I will still say Ameile should be the Player of The Year... if Justine had won the US Open, the year would be hers, but since it didn't happen... well, it's Amelie's year...

But the debate is still wide open... guess the YEC will be the tie-breaker of who should be the Player of the Year 2006...

.Andrew.
Oct 19th, 2006, 02:21 AM
:woohoo: Yay Juju! :bounce:

Buitenzorg
Oct 19th, 2006, 02:46 AM
LOL.
JHH can have player of the year.
In fact, I'm sure Momo would even GIVE it to her.
Her attention is too occupied with those 2 majors she won, after all.
Making all four grand slam finals is a great achievement. :worship:
But fact is, she lost 2 times out of 2 against Mauresmo in slam finals.
So who really is player of the year? :)

Current World #1 whose got bagelled few times :sad: we still love you Amelie

RenaSlam.
Oct 19th, 2006, 02:56 AM
LOL what an idiot. :tape:

vejh
Oct 19th, 2006, 03:12 AM
Robbie, great posts!! Right on point, and to you I say AMEN!!

I love GS as much as the next guy/girl ( I lurve them.lol) but how in this earth can you simply let 2 GS surpass such a brilliant yr by Juju (even with so few tournies played)? If this were THE criteria by which a player of the year is judged then I strongly agree to abolishing other tour events.

Even so, 4 gs finals in a year..that's nothing to sneeze at all. That in itself deserve some high praise. As does 2 GS. But how about the other 18-20/12 tournies played by the girls?

It would be just perfect if one of them wins the YEC. I hope they both can play. I must say even then that won't change nothing much for me.

Veenut
Oct 19th, 2006, 03:34 AM
Sorry, but I have to give it to Mauresmo.

Now if it was any other player other than a Justine, Venus or Serena that has not won more than 1 major a year then winning 1 and being a finalist in 3 can be good enough to retire with.

First I must give you credit as an ardent Justine fan for being objective here as I can imagine it must have been difficult. Anyway I won't let you get away with your last statement. Please don't get ahead of your self now because let me remind you that Willliams fans are not satisfied with making the finals but actually winning them. Please be reminded that Serena has accomplish such and that's a standard that Justine has yet to attain.

Furthermore they won their single majors during a year that fans considered well below par. All things considered I think I much prefer 1/1 as against 1/4 ;)

Veenut
Oct 19th, 2006, 03:47 AM
[QUOTE]I love GS as much as the next guy/girl ( I lurve them.lol) If this were THE criteria by which a player of the year is judged then I strongly agree to abolishing other tour events.

Like it or not but that is the criteria by which players are judged. Without a major you are not in the conversation. Thats why they are called MAJORS and referred to as GRAND. The other events are considered to be tune ups for the major event. Please note that almost any player can win a tournie but you couldn't say the same for winning a major. Winning a major is weighted more than any other tournie that's why more points are awarded.

komorli
Oct 19th, 2006, 04:09 AM
Honestly, I don't give a shit who's player of the year or whatever. I just want to see my favorite player play on tv and just enjoy the match.

einna
Oct 19th, 2006, 04:15 AM
[QUOTE=vejh]

Like it or not but that is the criteria by which players are judged. Without a major you are not in the conversation. Thats why they are called MAJORS and referred to as GRAND. The other events are considered to be tune ups for the major event. Please note that almost any player can win a tournie but you couldn't say the same for winning a major. Winning a major is weighted more than any other tournie that's why more points are awarded.

imo, winning a grand slam is a criteria by which a player of the year is judged but it is not the only criteria. :) it's so hard when number 1 and number 2 both have such a great year.... all arguments for or against the each player can be considered valid.