PDA

View Full Version : Sharapova has never lost to a younger player. Who will be the first to beat her?


the cat
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:04 PM
Maria Sharapova has the incredible record of having never lost to a younger tennis player in a singles match on any level of her young but illustrious career including the WTA Tour. Which younger player will be the first younger player to beat Maria? I've thought all along it would be Tatiana Golovin. Now I think it will be Ana Ivanovic. Tomorrow could be the day as Masha could be a bit tired from playing 3 tournaments in row and playing at less than 100% health. Part of the reason I've switched my choice to Ivanovic is because Masha doesn't lose Bollettieri Backyard Brawls to fellow Bollettieri students like Golovin and Jankovic because she's very motivated to beat those girls who've trained with her at Bolletteri's. But Ivanovic doesn't have a connection to Bollettieri's academy so Masha could be caught with her guard down late in the year and with the YEC in Madrid on the horizon.

I also can't wait until Masha gets a chance to play Nicole Vaidisova for the first time on the WTA Tour. Nicole beat Masha in a 2004 World Team Tennis singles match. But that doesn't count. Although I bet Nicole remembers that match. ;)

Nicolás89
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:06 PM
we are close to know:D
im not guessing because im always wrong:o

xan
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:07 PM
Hopefully Masha will maintain her record. ;)

Pengwin
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:07 PM
Naomi Cavaday!!!

the cat
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:10 PM
Xan, Masha has maintained her incredible record very well so far in her tennis career. But at some point she has to lose a match to a younger player. She can't be perfect forever when it comes to beating younger players. :(

Helen Lawson
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:23 PM
She lost to Little Masha, but I see on www.wtatour.com (http://www.wtatour.com) that Little Masha is a few months older!

Hmmm, I say, that Vania King chick gets Big Masha when she's having a bad day sometime next year.

LoveFifteen
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:25 PM
It's rare to lose to players "younger" than you when you celebrated your 7th birthday three times before coming to the States. :angel:

bis2806
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:25 PM
She lost to Little Masha, but I see on www.wtatour.com (http://www.wtatour.com) that Little Masha is a few months older!

Hmmm, I say, that Vania King chick gets Big Masha when she's having a bad day sometime next year.

That's true. Little Masha actually beat her in the Beijing match, even though Maria retired at the urge of Yuri :p

Helen Lawson
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:28 PM
It's rare to lose to players "younger" than you when you celebrated your 7th birthday three times before coming to the States. :angel:

I was thinking the same thing, hon, Little Masha looks heaps younger than Big Masha.

LoveFifteen
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:30 PM
I was thinking the same thing, hon, Little Masha looks heaps younger than Big Masha.

Here's a joke I love ...

What was Nicole Vaidisova's favorite birthday party?

Her 3rd 8th birthday!

shirley
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:31 PM
wow, Maria's never lost to a player younger than her? That's an incredible record!

barryproudfoot
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:31 PM
Naomi Cavaday!!!

:yeah:

But I think Vaidisova will beat her :p

barryproudfoot
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:31 PM
wow, Maria's never lost to a player younger than her? That's an incredible record!

well, it's not like she's 25 or something

LoveFifteen
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:32 PM
well, it's not like she's 25 or something

Yes, she is. :secret:

manu32
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:32 PM
agassi graf daughter

Helen Lawson
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:32 PM
Here's a joke I love ...

What was Nicole Vaidisova's favorite birthday party?

Her 3rd 8th birthday!

I saw her up close at an exhibition about 3-4 years ago, the girl looked like she was in her 20s, like WELL into her 20s.

Wayn77
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:33 PM
Nicole Vaidisova :bounce: :drool: :boxing:

LoveFifteen
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:33 PM
I saw her up close at an exhibition about 3-4 years ago, the girl looked like she was in her 20s, like WELL into her 20s.

The only thing "teen" about Vaidisova is her attitude! :lol:

saki
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:34 PM
I think Aga will beat her at some point next year. She has the sort of game to bother Maria. I don't really see Ana or Nicole doing it - they're basically inferior versions of Maria. Unless they improve a lot fast, they aren't going to be beating her anytime soon.

barryproudfoot
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:36 PM
The only thing "teen" about Vaidisova is her attitude! :lol:

:lol: she's roughly the same age as me, but she looks about 15 years older than me

LoveFifteen
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:38 PM
:lol: she's roughly the same age as me, but she looks about 15 years older than me

There's a lot of money to be made if you're a teen sensation. I'm sure lots of the Eastern Europeans have fudged a bit on the year of their birth.

ezekiel
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:38 PM
Ana Ivanovic never lost to a younger player :worship:

Sharapova lost in exhibition vs Vaidisova in summer 2004

the cat
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:44 PM
Thsi thread has just taken off! :bolt: ;)

Helen of WTA World, you might be right about Vania King. Only time will tell.

bis, Little Masha is older than big Masha. ;)

You could be right saki.

LoveFifteen
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:53 PM
Sesil Karatancheva's baby never lost to someone younger either! :tape:

RR-87
Oct 26th, 2006, 06:55 PM
Hope Nastya P. will beat her one day :hearts:

the cat
Oct 26th, 2006, 07:01 PM
That day very likely isn't near RR-87. ;) But I expect Nastya to be a very good player in a couple years.

vogus
Oct 26th, 2006, 07:21 PM
what if we assume that Masha was actually born in April 1986, instead of the officially listed '87? Does the thread title still hold?

papru
Oct 26th, 2006, 07:23 PM
noone before Urszula Radwanska

Piotr'ek
Oct 26th, 2006, 07:26 PM
Ana Ivanovic never lost to a younger player :worship:

Ana lost to Sesil :lol:

azdaja
Oct 26th, 2006, 07:30 PM
Ana lost to Sesil :lol:
and sharapova lost to vaidisova :shrug:

however, neither ana nor maria could ever suck as much as their fans arguing about them in this way :rolleyes:

Louis Cyphre
Oct 26th, 2006, 07:34 PM
and sharapova lost to vaidisova :shrug:

however, neither ana nor maria could ever suck as much as their fans arguing about them in this way :rolleyes:

:lol:

Helen Lawson
Oct 26th, 2006, 07:35 PM
what if we assume that Masha was actually born in April 1986, instead of the officially listed '87? Does the thread title still hold?

No, because then she's lost to Little Masha, who was born in January of 1987.

Piotr'ek
Oct 26th, 2006, 07:43 PM
and sharapova lost to vaidisova :shrug:

I cant find this in her record :shrug:

azdaja
Oct 26th, 2006, 07:51 PM
I cant find this in her record :shrug:
who cares? :shrug: the most important part of my post was the one you chose to ignore. thusly, you confirmed it.

bellascarlett
Oct 26th, 2006, 09:01 PM
and sharapova lost to vaidisova :shrug:

however, neither ana nor maria could ever suck as much as their fans arguing about them in this way :rolleyes:

Sharapova never lost to Vaidisova...who is younger, thus the thread title.

That was the point of the thread and it is valid. Fans arguing along the way does not make the question posed any less valid so quit the shrugging. ;)

azdaja
Oct 26th, 2006, 09:15 PM
Sharapova never lost to Vaidisova...who is younger, thus the thread title.

That was the point of the thread and it is valid. Fans arguing along the way does not make the question posed any less valid so quit the shrugging. ;)
sharapova supposedly did lose an exhibition match to vaidisova, but that's irrelevant. the point of the thread might be valid, but it's still worthless. this fact does not make sharapova a great player. it's not a great statistic for someone this young.

there is no doubt that sharapova has been more successful than ana so far, but certainly not because she has never lost to a younger player before :shrug: it just makes some sharapova fans look silly.

bellascarlett
Oct 26th, 2006, 09:38 PM
sharapova supposedly did lose an exhibition match to vaidisova, but that's irrelevant. the point of the thread might be valid, but it's still worthless. this fact does not make sharapova a great player. it's not a great statistic for someone this young.

there is no doubt that sharapova has been more successful than ana so far, but certainly not because she has never lost to a younger player before :shrug: it just makes some sharapova fans look silly.

yes that match was irrelevant (they even played under a different scoring system).

Ah so this is what this is all about. Thing is, the threadstarter did not in any way imply Sharapova to be a more successful player than Ana BECAUSE she never lost to a younger opponent. Where is that implied? It was simply a highlighted statistic in her record. As I said the question is valid and I don't see it as worthless if I go by your POV as it's main point wasn't to proclaim Maria as a great player. The statistic was highlighted in view of her match against younger opposition tomorrow. It is a simple question really. Nothing to get all fussed about. You'll only see it as worthless if you approach it from the way in which I think you have - that it reflects well on Maria but badly on Ana.

Brooks.
Oct 26th, 2006, 09:40 PM
I'm sure she lost to someone younger in the juniors a time or two

but still a very good record...but it can't last forever

azdaja
Oct 26th, 2006, 09:48 PM
yes that match was irrelevant (they even played under a different scoring system).

Ah so this is what this is all about. Thing is, the threadstarter did not in any way imply Sharapova to be a more successful player than Ana BECAUSE she never lost to a younger opponent. Where is that implied? It was simply a highlighted statistic in her record. As I said the question is valid and I don't see it as worthless if I go by your POV as it's main point wasn't to proclaim Maria as a great player. The statistic was highlighted in view of her match against younger opposition tomorrow. It is a simple question really. Nothing to get all fussed about. You'll only see it as worthless if you approach it from the way in which I think you have - that it reflects well on Maria but badly on Ana.
no, it's worthless because it is worthless and i'm saying this just because some people (not the thread starter) started getting silly or otherwise i would have ignored it (i suppose i should have anyway, but fuck it). i know tennis fans are fanaticall about statistics, but this statistic does not really reflect badly on ana as compared to sharapova. she may have lost a match to a younger player once long time ago, but that was just one match long time ago. it means nothing. and saying that this is so is nothing to get all fussed about :p

the cat
Oct 26th, 2006, 09:50 PM
No VeeReeFan. Never. So far anyway.

Well said bella. I never implied that Masha was better than Ana because she has never lost ot a younger player. That's a fact and people should make of it what they want. As for me I'm looking forward to this match between Maria and Ana. I wish I could watch it.

And World Team Tennis matches don't count because they exhibition tennis matches.

bellascarlett
Oct 26th, 2006, 09:58 PM
i know tennis fans are fanaticall about statistics, but this statistic does not really reflect badly on ana as compared to sharapova. she may have lost a match to a younger player once long time ago, but that was just one match long time ago. it means nothing. and saying that this is so is nothing to get all fussed about :p

It was you who chose to view the threadstarter's intentions as implying Maria to be a great player and more successful than Ana due to the fact that she's never lost to younger opposition which isn't at all the case.

Maria's record is to be taken as independent of any other record, including Ana's. Ana's record shouldn't even be talked about here. The question as I said is simple - "who do you think will be the younger player first to beat maria?"...the issues you speak of are nonexistent in such a question.

anyway, we need not get fussed over this any longer.

azdaja
Oct 26th, 2006, 10:02 PM
It was you who chose to view the threadstarter's intentions as implying Maria to be a great player and more successful than Ana due to the fact that she's never lost to younger opposition which isn't at all the case.
i did not post because of threadstarters intentions, but because of silly argument that developed because of this thread. otherwise i'm not interested in statistical records that much at all. i just want to make that clear and yeah, no reason to continue this argument.

Ben.
Oct 26th, 2006, 10:02 PM
even if that stat is in maria's favour doesn't indicate that ana isn't gonna let maria run all over her. ana no's that she has tough challenge ahead & will look forward 2try take advantage of it.

-jenks-
Oct 26th, 2006, 10:03 PM
hopefully it will be Ana! ;)

morningglory
Oct 26th, 2006, 10:45 PM
we won't find out for a looooooooong time :p

the cat
Oct 26th, 2006, 10:47 PM
You might be right morningglory. Let's hope so for Masha's sake.

LoveFifteen
Oct 26th, 2006, 10:55 PM
As she blew out the 7 birthday candles on top of her cake, she exchanged a knowing glance with her father. He smiled back, savoring their little secret. Later that night he would put two more candles on small, private cake, and they would celebrate again, just the two of them. Daddy liked to say that the two "hidden" candles represented 2 billion dollars, and that's how much he promised she'd make by the end of her illustrious career. She would giggle excitedly, and then let out a piercing shriek over the cake, blowing out those two candles. Papa would clap and cheer. She would smile and hug Papa tight. Did he know that she wasn't really wishing for $2 billion when she shrieked those two candles out? She prefered to see the two candles as a pair -- her parents. And she wished that they would be together again. But the wishes prayed over that private cake never came to pass. :sad:

SIN DIOS NI LEY
Oct 26th, 2006, 11:10 PM
Never has lost against a younger cuz Sharapova has 25 or 26 years old

kittyking
Oct 27th, 2006, 12:56 AM
She will loose to Marina Erakovic at the 1st round at the AO next year :)

Dan23
Oct 27th, 2006, 01:00 AM
As she blew out the 7 birthday candles on top of her cake, she exchanged a knowing glance with her father. He smiled back, savoring their little secret. Later that night he would put two more candles on small, private cake, and they would celebrate again, just the two of them. Daddy liked to say that the two "hidden" candles represented 2 billion dollars, and that's how much he promised she'd make by the end of her illustrious career. She would giggle excitedly, and then let out a piercing shriek over the cake, blowing out those two candles. Papa would clap and cheer. She would smile and hug Papa tight. Did he know that she wasn't really wishing for $2 billion when she shrieked those two candles out? She prefered to see the two candles as a pair -- her parents. And she wished that they would be together again. But the wishes prayed over that private cake never came to pass. :sad:
you enjoy talking to yourself??

waratahsrock
Oct 27th, 2006, 01:06 AM
She will loose to Marina Erakovic at the 1st round at the AO next year :)

:lol: dream on buddy!

bellascarlett
Oct 27th, 2006, 01:32 AM
you enjoy talking to yourself??

:haha: :haha: :rolls:

Ben.
Oct 27th, 2006, 01:36 AM
She will loose to Marina Erakovic at the 1st round at the AO next year :)

u wish! :lol: :tape: keep on dreamin.

Martian KC
Oct 27th, 2006, 01:42 AM
LoveFifteen!:haha:

Derek.
Oct 27th, 2006, 01:49 AM
Nicole's finna snap the streak when they meet. :drool:

Buitenzorg
Oct 27th, 2006, 02:32 AM
Vaidisova maybe?

Radwanska ?

Rezai?

Havok
Oct 27th, 2006, 02:36 AM
It'll be Golovin. She's played her close pretty much every single time she's played her. There'll always be the "what if" question concerning their Miami match. What's holding Golovin back so far is her inexperience. She's got the exact game to wreak havok to Sharapova and she's proved that but the more she plays big matches, the better she will become and she'll beat Sharapova. Ivanovic can probably do it also, but she can be insanely retarded and just try to outhit Sharapova right off the bat and hit 482028303 unforced errors :o.

swissmr
Oct 27th, 2006, 02:36 AM
Never has lost against a younger cuz Sharapova has 25 or 26 years old

Wow then her growth spurt last year was pretty amazing. :rolleyes:

Miranda
Oct 27th, 2006, 02:59 AM
maria does look like 25 for me, but i do think she is only 19 :wavey:

tennisrox
Oct 27th, 2006, 05:11 AM
It'll be Golovin. She's played her close pretty much every single time she's played her. There'll always be the "what if" question concerning their Miami match. What's holding Golovin back so far is her inexperience. She's got the exact game to wreak havok to Sharapova and she's proved that but the more she plays big matches, the better she will become and she'll beat Sharapova. Ivanovic can probably do it also, but she can be insanely retarded and just try to outhit Sharapova right off the bat and hit 482028303 unforced errors :o.

I agree. Golovin has the game that'll most likely trouble Sharapova. Great defence, and a pretty good offensive game. I think once golovin matures she'll get the better of Sharapova more often than not.
I'm not so sure about ivanovic. Looking at Sharapova's H2H against lindsay, Mary etc I don't think she has too much trouble with big-hitters with poor movement. I think sharapova's court coverage is much better, and thats where she scores. Her movement and defence although not great, is underrated, and thats what gives her the edge over the other big babes. The only way ivanovic can beat her at this point is if she goes for broke on everything, and plays the match of her life where everything lands in. Or she could end up making 482028303 unforced errors ;)

hydrofor
Oct 27th, 2006, 08:18 AM
There's a lot of money to be made if you're a teen sensation. I'm sure lots of the Eastern Europeans have fudged a bit on the year of their birth.

Come on. Faking your birthday date is not so easy. Maybe more easy in Africa :lol:

Kunal
Oct 27th, 2006, 10:08 AM
that is a really impressive record tbh

azdaja
Feb 3rd, 2007, 02:19 PM
we have the answer now :p

Dasha_
Feb 3rd, 2007, 02:32 PM
we have the answer now :p

Yes, we have.

АНА ЈЕ НАЈБОЉА И НАЈЛЕПША!

austennis
Feb 5th, 2007, 03:43 AM
im so happy ana was the 1st player to beat her.. and not nicole

égalité
Feb 5th, 2007, 04:07 AM
It's rare to lose to players "younger" than you when you celebrated your 7th birthday three times before coming to the States. :angel:

Not only that, but she's also the father of Sesil's baby.

Reuchlin
Feb 5th, 2007, 04:13 AM
im so happy ana was the 1st player to beat her.. and not nicole

does a ret. count?

Orion
Feb 5th, 2007, 04:17 AM
retirement's count on head-to-heads. Once a ball is served, the match goes on the official head-to-head.

spencercarlos
Feb 5th, 2007, 04:18 AM
does a ret. count?
Retire is not like a withdraw, once you play a point in the match, even if you decide to retire after that, it counts as an official loss.

Imagine then Stevenson would have very few loses in her carreer :lol:

vogus
Feb 5th, 2007, 04:28 AM
Not only that, but she's also the father of Sesil's baby.


you think it doesn't happen, that the parents of female tennis star-hopefuls never alter their daughters' birthdates? If so, youre pretty naive.

RJWCapriati
Feb 5th, 2007, 04:50 AM
Probably Vaidisova (Considering Full Match Without Retirements)

égalité
Feb 5th, 2007, 04:51 AM
you think it doesn't happen, that the parents of female tennis star-hopefuls never alter their daughters' birthdates? If so, youre pretty naive.

Yeah, I was going along with the joke. YURI'S ALSO HIDING THE FACT THAT MARIA'S A DUDE... HAHAHA?

Dan23
Feb 5th, 2007, 05:35 AM
im so happy ana was the 1st player to beat her.. and not nicole
the match wasnt completed :hehehe:

ZListCelebrity
Feb 5th, 2007, 05:37 AM
I think we'll see her losing to youngsters often soon... Think of Hewitt.

Dexter
Feb 5th, 2007, 05:38 AM
АНА ЈЕ НАЈБОЉА И НАЈЛЕПША!:worship: :worship: :worship:

Dan23
Feb 5th, 2007, 05:38 AM
I think we'll see her losing to youngsters often soon... Think of Hewitt.
Aside from also being #1 very young, how is Hewitt relevant?

ZListCelebrity
Feb 5th, 2007, 05:42 AM
Aside from also being #1 very young, how is Hewitt relevant?

They both won their matches by grinding it out and their will but Hewitt lost it as he got mellower. It'll be the same with Sharapova.

SAEKeithSerena
Feb 5th, 2007, 06:10 AM
well, it's not like she's 25 or something


lol i know, right? it will be vaidisova i think, though.

Dan23
Feb 5th, 2007, 06:21 AM
They both won their matches by grinding it out and their will but Hewitt lost it as he got mellower. It'll be the same with Sharapova.
Vintage Hewitt and Maria are similar in their application oncourt but their game styles are far different.

Serge007
Feb 5th, 2007, 06:23 AM
They both won their matches by grinding it out and their will but Hewitt lost it as he got mellower. It'll be the same with Sharapova.
I don't think so. One win is nothing. Good players like Dementieva, Petrova, Schnyder are also beating Clijsters, Henin, Davenport and Sharapova sometimes. But it's nonsense.
This generation of young players in ATP and WTA (Ivanovic, Vaidisova, Chakvetadze, Kirilenko, Golovin etc.) are mediocre players. Genius players (Federer in ATP and Williams, Henin, Sharapova in WTA) are rare.

Awating next generation.

ZListCelebrity
Feb 5th, 2007, 06:37 AM
I don't think so. One win is nothing. Good players like Dementieva, Petrova, Schnyder are also beating Clijsters, Henin, Davenport and Sharapova sometimes. But it's nonsense.
This generation of young players in ATP and WTA (Ivanovic, Vaidisova, Chakvetadze, Kirilenko, Golovin etc.) are mediocre players. Genius players (Federer in ATP and Williams, Henin, Sharapova in WTA) are rare.

Awating next generation.

Maria a genius. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA

cypher_88
Feb 5th, 2007, 06:53 AM
Maria a genius. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA

and who is it that you consider a genius??don't tell it's vaidisova...:rolleyes:

Serge007
Feb 5th, 2007, 06:56 AM
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA
Another laugher? hahahahahaha.
top 50 in 2003, top 1 in 2005 -- hahahaha.
15 singles titles - hahahaha, 2 GS titles+1 F - hahahaha. Top 1 - hahahaha. And 20 y.o. - hahahaha.

ZListCelebrity
Feb 5th, 2007, 06:57 AM
and who is it that you consider a genius??don't tell it's vaidisova...:rolleyes:

Martina, Justine. I had never heard of a brainless ball basher called a genius.

bucklemyshoe
Feb 5th, 2007, 06:58 AM
congrats ana!

drory
Feb 5th, 2007, 07:07 AM
shahar peer is younger in a month from maria and was very close in all thair meeting, on clay defenetly peer will win.

Sam L
Feb 5th, 2007, 07:10 AM
They both won their matches by grinding it out and their will but Hewitt lost it as he got mellower. It'll be the same with Sharapova.

Um.. did you watch the Wimbledon 04 and US Open 06 finals? What grinding?

Serge007
Feb 5th, 2007, 07:25 AM
shahar peer is younger in a month from maria and was very close in all thair meeting, on clay defenetly peer will win.
What's Maria? Kirilenko? Peer lost to Kirilenko in Tokio.

drory
Feb 5th, 2007, 07:31 AM
What's Maria? Kirilenko? Peer lost to Kirilenko in Tokio.

i ment the other maria, the better one

Dan23
Feb 5th, 2007, 07:33 AM
Martina, Justine. I had never heard of a brainless ball basher called a genius.
...possibly because Maria isnt a brainless ball basher :wavey:

Just ask Martina and Justine yourself.

Orion
Feb 5th, 2007, 07:59 AM
the match wasnt completed :hehehe:

SO...does that mean Sharapova is 2-0 against Groenefeld, and has never beaten Petra Mandula.

Or maybe that her Quebec City title has an asterisk above it?

Orion
Feb 5th, 2007, 08:05 AM
I don't think so. One win is nothing.

...

This generation of young players in ATP and WTA (Ivanovic, Vaidisova, Chakvetadze, Kirilenko, Golovin etc.) are mediocre players. Genius players (Federer in ATP and Williams, Henin, Sharapova in WTA) are rare.

I disagree. If it weren't for one win, Sharapova would be 0-3 against Mauresmo.

And of course the young generation doesn't look good if you include Kirilenko. Seriously, put Peer their.

améliemomo
Feb 5th, 2007, 08:29 AM
she lost kirilenko and ivanovic already:o

Tenis Srbija
Feb 5th, 2007, 08:30 AM
Ivanović mediocre player??? :haha: :haha: :haha:
Vaidisova mediocre player??? :lol: :lol: :lol:

Serge007 - on what drogs are you today??? :rolleyes:

jacobruiz
Feb 5th, 2007, 03:32 PM
she lost kirilenko and ivanovic already:o


Maria Kirilenko is older than Maria S.

bellascarlett
Feb 5th, 2007, 04:05 PM
Um.. did you watch the Wimbledon 04 and US Open 06 finals? What grinding?

Exactly. Well another one of Zwhatever's useless posts. :o

...possibly because Maria isnt a brainless ball basher :wavey:

Just ask Martina and Justine yourself.

:lol:

Maria Kirilenko is older than Maria S.

Yup. Kirilenko is already 20. Sharapova is 19 and turns 20 in April.

vogus
Feb 5th, 2007, 05:02 PM
And of course the young generation doesn't look good if you include Kirilenko.




LOL good point. Kirilenko is not a serious contender, and it makes the other young players look bad to list her in that category. But i have to largely agree with Serge that the "new generation" is not too impressive, and it'll be a few years before the next generation of players born in the 1990s starts to come through the ranks.

vogus
Feb 5th, 2007, 05:03 PM
Sharapova is 19 and turns 20 in April.




or maybe 21 or 22, only Yuri and IMG know for sure... :p

Russianboy
Feb 5th, 2007, 05:17 PM
Maria didn't lost to Ana! Maria retired:o She lost the first set and led in the second set. So nobody knew if Maria had won that Match! She lost the first set against Sugiyama too and after taht she destroyed Ai... So nobody can say that ana BEAT (!!) her!!! :rolleyes:

bucklemyshoe
Feb 5th, 2007, 05:20 PM
Maria didn't lost to Ana! Maria retired:o She lost the first set and led in the second set. So nobody knew if Maria had won that Match! She lost the first set against Sugiyama too and after taht she destroyed Ai... So nobody can say that ana BEAT (!!) her!!! :rolleyes:

lmao. its not like maria was serving for the 2nd set:rolleyes: :lol: :lol: the h2h counts retirements, so ana DID beat maria. deal with it.

bellascarlett
Feb 5th, 2007, 05:30 PM
or maybe 21 or 22, only Yuri and IMG know for sure... :p

:lol: sure, as long as it's mentioned that Vaidisova is maybe 20, Kirilenko maybe 22, Golovin maybe 21, etc. only their parents and their agencies know for sure. :p

saki
Feb 5th, 2007, 05:34 PM
:por maybe 21 or 22, only Yuri and IMG know for sure...

The fact that Maria grew a couple of inches last year makes it impossible for her to be 21 or 22.

I understand the suspicion over Vaidisova and Golovin because both look like they're in their mid-20s but Maria is definitely no older than 19.

bellascarlett
Feb 5th, 2007, 05:47 PM
:p

The fact that Maria grew a couple of inches last year makes it impossible for her to be 21 or 22.

I understand the suspicion over Vaidisova and Golovin because both look like they're in their mid-20s but Maria is definitely no older than 19.

Exactly. And it's funny coz suspicion mainly is targeted at Maria who is proven to have grown a couple of inches in recent years. Plus, just look at Maria 3 ago as a 16 year old (winning her first two tournaments for ex)...one can immediately see a body change right there (and its not just because she hit the gym).

Shimizu Amon
Feb 5th, 2007, 05:53 PM
Too me personally Masha hasn't lost this match to Ana.

She lost the match due to an injury. I for once have never looked upon a retirement as a loss or a win. Someone's retiring due to an injury, one can never tell what the outcome would've been if the player would've been healthy throughout the match.

But that's just how I see it.

Serge007
Feb 5th, 2007, 05:56 PM
Too me personally Masha hasn't lost this match to Ana.
"lost" and "retired" are the same. But can Ana beat Maria next time?

And of course the young generation doesn't look good if you include Kirilenko. Seriously, put Peer their.
As you wish :-) But Kirilenko beat Peer in Tokio.

vogus
Feb 5th, 2007, 06:02 PM
:p

The fact that Maria grew a couple of inches last year makes it impossible for her to be 21 or 22.

I understand the suspicion over Vaidisova and Golovin because both look like they're in their mid-20s but Maria is definitely no older than 19.


It disproves nothing. If a girl can grow two inches at age 18 (very late for a girl to grow), she can do so at age 19 or 20 as well. And Masha growing to a height of 6'3 should be raising eyebrows. How tall are Yuri and the mother?

Not to single out Sharapova either, because i think Golovin (also born in Russia) is for sure a year or two older than her given age. I saw her in April 2003 when she had supposedly just turned 15. No way.

SuperMaria
Feb 5th, 2007, 06:04 PM
or maybe 21 or 22, only Yuri and IMG know for sure... :p

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

That's like saying maybe Venus and Serena were born male, only father and mother know for sure.:p

Shimizu Amon
Feb 5th, 2007, 06:07 PM
"lost" and "retired" are the same. But can Ana beat Maria next time?


Well officially (in tennis world) it may be so, but to me a lost is if you lose the match against a stronger opponent not having to stop because you're injured. Too me personally it's not a lost. So in my opinion "lost" and "retired" have two completely different meaning.
And no Ana will lose the next time, but that's also my own strong believe and opinion. ;)

bellascarlett
Feb 5th, 2007, 06:07 PM
It disproves nothing. If a girl can grow two inches at age 18 (very late for a girl to grow), she can do so at age 19 or 20 as well. And Masha growing to a height of 6'3 should be raising eyebrows. How tall are Yuri and the mother?

Not to single out Sharapova either, because i think Golovin (also born in Russia) is for sure a year or two older than her given age. I saw her in April 2003 when she had supposedly just turned 15. No way.


:lol: so now it's the Maria must have been adopted campaign? :lol:

although it is quite amazing that Maria has grown so much given both her parents' heights. must be the nuclear fallout or something! what do you suggest is the reason for this? :lol:

ezekiel
Feb 5th, 2007, 06:13 PM
Too me personally Masha hasn't lost this match to Ana.

She lost the match due to an injury. I for once have never looked upon a retirement as a loss or a win. Someone's retiring due to an injury, one can never tell what the outcome would've been if the player would've been healthy throughout the match.

But that's just how I see it.

Ana beat her fair and square , she just cowered to finnish the match.
As far as retirements go I see them as losses especially after 1 set is over and in this case no visible injury but some issues with the player. But you can think whatever you want if it makes you feel better

ryan09
Feb 5th, 2007, 06:15 PM
:lol: so now it's the Maria must have been adopted campaign? :lol:

although it is quite amazing that Maria has grown so much given both her parents' heights. must be the nuclear fallout or something! what do you suggest is the reason for this? :lol:

HGH?

ezekiel
Feb 5th, 2007, 06:21 PM
Well officially (in tennis world) it may be so, but to me a lost is if you lose the match against a stronger opponent not having to stop because you're injured. Too me personally it's not a lost. So in my opinion "lost" and "retired" have two completely different meaning.
And no Ana will lose the next time, but that's also my own strong believe and opinion. ;)

6-1 seems like a beatdown, not a loss

Shimizu Amon
Feb 5th, 2007, 06:22 PM
Ana beat her fair and square , she just cowered to finnish the match.
As far as retirements go I see them as losses especially after 1 set is over and in this case no visible injury but some issues with the player. But you can think whatever you want if it makes you feel better

Well that's your opinion. And I don't agree with your opinion.
Maria has an injury, this was only the 2nd match ever which she retired and that's because:
A: she's a fighter, she always believes that she can win the match and if you have any interest and knowledge about Maria's history and so on, you know this is a fact;
B: her health is more important to Maria then a just a win, which I think is very wise.
And if you had followed the news (perhaps you have), you know that Maria asked the docter (whatchamecallit) how long it would take to heal. As soon as she found out that it would take at least 10 days, she decided the retire for her own good.

jacobruiz
Feb 5th, 2007, 06:24 PM
:lol: so now it's the Maria must have been adopted campaign? :lol:

although it is quite amazing that Maria has grown so much given both her parents' heights. must be the nuclear fallout or something! what do you suggest is the reason for this? :lol:


Maybe a top secret experiment with HGH (human growth hormones).:confused: :lol:

Seriously, why on earth would anyone want to make it appear that Maria is several years younger than she really is? Since Yuri is such a greedy bastard (according to Maria's detracters), why would he or anyone else want to DELAY Maria professional career? She couldn't make any money until she was 14 but apparently some posters think she didn't turn pro until she was 16 or 17, or even older!:lol:

I<3Myskina
Feb 5th, 2007, 06:28 PM
Vaidisova

vogus
Feb 5th, 2007, 07:12 PM
Maybe a top secret experiment with HGH (human growth hormones).:confused: :lol:

Seriously, why on earth would anyone want to make it appear that Maria is several years younger than she really is? Since Yuri is such a greedy bastard (according to Maria's detracters), why would he or anyone else want to DELAY Maria professional career? She couldn't make any money until she was 14 but apparently some posters think she didn't turn pro until she was 16 or 17, or even older!:lol:


to become a teen sensation and sign huge contracts, a player has to have the ball rolling at an early age. So there is always an incentive to roll back the birthdays of the girls to give them some extra time. If a player hasn't hit the jackpot by age 18, it's too late to become a media darling. Look at Capriati, look at Hingis, look at Anna K, Seles, the Williams. All of them made huge money because they were household names by the (supposed) age of 17.

SuperMaria
Feb 5th, 2007, 07:21 PM
to become a teen sensation and sign huge contracts, a player has to have the ball rolling at an early age. So there is always an incentive to roll back the birthdays of the girls to give them some extra time. If a player hasn't hit the jackpot by age 18, it's too late to become a media darling. Look at Capriati, look at Hingis, look at Anna K, Seles, the Williams. All of them made huge money because they were household names by the (supposed) age of 17.

what about the incentive for Venus and Serena's sex change as winning in womens tennis is easier that to win in men's tennis?

vogus
Feb 5th, 2007, 07:31 PM
what about the incentive for Venus and Serena's sex change as winning in womens tennis is easier that to win in men's tennis?


last i checked, it was somewhat easier to go into a database and change somebody's year of birth, than it was to physically alter their sex. But maybe you know something i don't, and things have changed... :p

goldenlox
Feb 5th, 2007, 07:51 PM
last i checked, it was somewhat easier to go into a database and change somebody's year of birth, than it was to physically alter their sex. But maybe you know something i don't, and things have changed... :p
You are sounding really stupid. Sharapova spent years with Golovin and Jackson and Jankovic.
The elite players in Bradenton are around each other for years and years.

Orion
Feb 5th, 2007, 08:19 PM
Well that's your opinion. And I don't agree with your opinion.

You also don't agree with the rules of the WTA, apparently. And neither does Maria. How much money has she spent on coaching fines, out of curiousity?

Sharapova's serve was lousy, so Ivanovic likely would have broken her at LEAST once in the set, and Ivanovic was on fire serving-wise, and likely wouldn't have been broken. Look, I would buy this whole "Maria could have won" crap if she was up a break in the second set.

This wasn't even close to one of those situations. And comparing Sugiyama to Ivanovic is foolhardy. Sugiyama is a walkabout player. Even when she's up a set and two breaks, you don't know she's going to win it. She's snatched defeat from the jaws of victory an awful lot in her career. Ivanovic doesn't. Her play stays roughly the same throughout a match. She can comprehensively dictate play against anyone, and she was doing that on that day.

AND, again, if retirements don't count as wins, Sharapova's title WIN count should only read 14. Quebec '03 doesn't count, Sequera could have won it. And since she could have won it, it's not fair to say Sharapova won that title.

Incidentally, Ivanovic was giving Sharapova a beatdown far worse than Sharapova was giving Sequera.

goldenlox
Feb 5th, 2007, 08:22 PM
Quebec counts. Injuries are a part of sport.

Corswandt
Feb 5th, 2007, 09:01 PM
She's snatched defeat from the jaws of victory an awful lot in her career. Ivanovic doesn't. Her play stays roughly the same throughout a match.

Her performance vs Hingis the next day on the final being a good example. :rolleyes:

And what have the fines for coaching got to do with anything being discussed on this thread?

Orion
Feb 5th, 2007, 09:20 PM
Quebec counts. Injuries are a part of sport.

So you'd agree that Sharapova lost to Ivanovic? And has now been beaten by a younger player? Seeing as injuries are part of the sport...

goldenlox
Feb 5th, 2007, 09:23 PM
Of course. She lost. And she lost when she retired against Kirilenko in Beijing.

Orion
Feb 5th, 2007, 09:25 PM
Her performance vs Hingis the next day on the final being a good example. :rolleyes:

And what have the fines for coaching got to do with anything being discussed on this thread?

I never saw Ivanovic being ahead in that match. In that entire match, her quality was poor. She didn't have a radical shift from great to crap. She didn't lose after being ahead, and she was never on.

Ivanovic is a classic example of a player with good-day/bad-day play. She has good DAYS, and sometimes she links a whole bunch of them together. On Saturday, she didn't play well. That's not to say she wasn't playing well on Friday.

As for coaching fines, the previous poster expressed his/her disapproval for the rules of the WTA. I merely pointed out that it is something he/she has in common with his/her favorite, seeing as Sharapova doesn't seem to care about certain rules. But, then again, neither do the people enforcing them much of the time...

Orion
Feb 5th, 2007, 09:26 PM
Of course. She lost. And she lost when she retired against Kirilenko in Beijing.

Good! I'm glad to find someone who can admit to it.

SuperMaria
Feb 5th, 2007, 09:34 PM
Why are you even arguing?

Ivanovic beat Maria. Any Maria fan can tell you that happened. Whether she was injured or not makes no difference cos if match starts then player retires, its a loss as long the match starts

Orion
Feb 5th, 2007, 09:43 PM
Why are you even arguing?

Ivanovic beat Maria. Any Maria fan can tell you that happened. Whether she was injured or not makes no difference cos if match starts then player retires, its a loss as long the match starts

Have you read the posts on this board? Virtually NO Sharapova fans have admitted it's truly a fair loss. You, my friend, are in the minority. The correct minority, but still the minority.

Corswandt
Feb 5th, 2007, 09:56 PM
I never saw Ivanovic being ahead in that match. In that entire match, her quality was poor. She didn't have a radical shift from great to crap. She didn't lose after being ahead, and she was never on.

She was leading the first set 4-3 with Hingis running all the way to Korea to return her shots, and then all of a sudden was down 0-4 on the second after losing 19 (IIRC) consecutive points. If that isn't a sharp decline in performance standards, then I don't know what is.

But as for the rest, typical Monday night football talk show stuff - some gloating, others making excuses and blaming the referee.

And as for your intervention in here, I'm just surprised because I must have missed your transition from Kuznetsova fan understandably jealous of Sharapova's success to militant full time Maria hater.

SuperMaria
Feb 5th, 2007, 09:57 PM
Have you read the posts on this board? Virtually NO Sharapova fans have admitted it's truly a fair loss. You, my friend, are in the minority. The correct minority, but still the minority.

well a loss is a fair loss. there is no arguing a loss. people could argue ivanovic being a bad player but me as a maria fan will say she beat maria and is the first player younger than maria to beat her.

bellascarlett
Feb 5th, 2007, 10:24 PM
Have you read the posts on this board? Virtually NO Sharapova fans have admitted it's truly a fair loss. You, my friend, are in the minority. The correct minority, but still the minority.

Sharapova fans??? How many have given their opinion on this matter may I ask? I am a Sharapova fan, and for your information, I am of the opinion that the Ivanovic match is a fair loss for Maria. Do I necessarily think it's a big deal? No. But that's an altogether different matter. As far as losses go, it was fair and legitimate.

Derek.
Feb 5th, 2007, 10:48 PM
Some of Ana's fans are just :o.

bellascarlett
Feb 5th, 2007, 11:38 PM
Ivanovic doesn't. Her play stays roughly the same throughout a match. She can comprehensively dictate play against anyone, and she was doing that on that day.


omg are you kidding me? :lol: See Corswandt's post. In the final against Hingis, Ana's inconsistency throughout that match was what did her in. Her play midway in the 1st set was completely different from the net-hitting play she showed in most of the second. When she picked it up again at the end of the 2nd, it was too late. By then, Martina had already led 4-0. Ana lost her fight and focus after she lost the 1st set.

goldenlox
Feb 5th, 2007, 11:50 PM
Sharapova won a major almost 3 years. Eventually, she was going to lose to a younger player.
Big deal, she's #1 with a long lead in points.

the cat
Feb 6th, 2007, 12:08 AM
Sharapova won a major almost 3 years. Eventually, she was going to lose to a younger player.
Big deal, she's #1 with a long lead in points.

That's the truth. But I hope Maria doesn't make it a habit of losing to younger players because that will hurt her confidence. And I'm okay with Ivanovic being the first younger player to beat Maria because I like Ana. But if it happened in a grand slam instead of Tokyo I would be almost as hurt as Maria. :(

Maria will have her hands full in the coming years against youngsters like Ivanovic, Vaidisova and Golovin. I think Masha will do well against them but they will have their share of wins too. But as long as Masha beats them in the grand slams then I'll be happy. :yeah: Because that's where Maria's greatness will be determined.

Dementieva Guts
Feb 6th, 2007, 12:25 AM
Sharapova will probably lose to Olga Poutchkova in an indoor tourney (maybe in moscow, none the less). "Big Forehand" Sharapova will blame it on the heat:rolleyes:

Poutch has such more potential

goldenlox
Feb 6th, 2007, 01:43 AM
Sharapova will probably lose to Olga Poutchkova in an indoor tourney (maybe in moscow, none the less). "Big Forehand" Sharapova will blame it on the heat:rolleyes:

Poutch has such more potential
If Olga has more potential than Sharapova, it's about time she showed it on the court. She plays Anna C in Paris. Go show your potential, Olga.

mboyle
Feb 6th, 2007, 03:05 AM
I never saw Ivanovic being ahead in that match. In that entire match, her quality was poor. She didn't have a radical shift from great to crap. She didn't lose after being ahead, and she was never on.

Ivanovic is a classic example of a player with good-day/bad-day play. She has good DAYS, and sometimes she links a whole bunch of them together. On Saturday, she didn't play well. That's not to say she wasn't playing well on Friday.

As for coaching fines, the previous poster expressed his/her disapproval for the rules of the WTA. I merely pointed out that it is something he/she has in common with his/her favorite, seeing as Sharapova doesn't seem to care about certain rules. But, then again, neither do the people enforcing them much of the time...

No, Actually Ana hit 6 straight winners from 2-3 to 4-3. She served huge. Then she lost 19 straight points.

I don't think a loss is a loss if a player is obviously injured. Like I don't count Tati's loss to Maria in Miami because the match didn't finish. Alex Stevenson or Kournikova retiring at like 1-6; 1-5 is fine...you know who won. But...especially seeing as Maria won the first game of the second set and then retired and seeing as she was obviously injured the past two/three weeks (serve issues with Sharapova?) I don't think it's a win for either player. Ivanovic played well, of course, but it does not tell us much about either player. I still think that, playing at their bests, Maria beats Ana, and that, uninjured, Maria beats Ana in straights. Ana of course will improve and might change this...

ezekiel
Feb 6th, 2007, 04:12 AM
No, Actually Ana hit 6 straight winners from 2-3 to 4-3. She served huge. Then she lost 19 straight points.

I don't think a loss is a loss if a player is obviously injured. Like I don't count Tati's loss to Maria in Miami because the match didn't finish. Alex Stevenson or Kournikova retiring at like 1-6; 1-5 is fine...you know who won. But...especially seeing as Maria won the first game of the second set and then retired and seeing as she was obviously injured the past two/three weeks (serve issues with Sharapova?) I don't think it's a win for either player. Ivanovic played well, of course, but it does not tell us much about either player. I still think that, playing at their bests, Maria beats Ana, and that, uninjured, Maria beats Ana in straights. Ana of course will improve and might change this...


you say what you believe and justify everything to suit that agenda even when facts don't fit it. It's called "DeNiAl"
In the real world Ana beat her fair and square, there was no injury . Pova wasn't in good shape but that's her responsability and players lose and careers end if one is not in shape so you are just making excuses

ezekiel
Feb 6th, 2007, 04:16 AM
That's the truth. But I hope Maria doesn't make it a habit of losing to younger players because that will hurt her confidence. And I'm okay with Ivanovic being the first younger player to beat Maria because I like Ana. But if it happened in a grand slam instead of Tokyo I would be almost as hurt as Maria. :(

Maria will have her hands full in the coming years against youngsters like Ivanovic, Vaidisova and Golovin. I think Masha will do well against them but they will have their share of wins too. But as long as Masha beats them in the grand slams then I'll be happy. :yeah: Because that's where Maria's greatness will be determined.

I don't see PoVa sustaining her ball bashing style, she isn't that physically strong and will eventually wear down , we see that already

Dementieva Guts
Feb 6th, 2007, 04:25 AM
I don't see PoVa sustaining her ball bashing style, she isn't that physically strong and will eventually wear down , we see that already

Right on:worship: When opponents get at here by making her run a bit, she can't defend herself. When all top 40 players understand that fitness lack, she will drop in a hurry. She has no flexibilty at all and almost can't hit on the run.

Dan23
Feb 6th, 2007, 04:42 AM
Right on:worship: When opponents get at here by making her run a bit, she can't defend herself. When all top 40 players understand that fitness lack, she will drop in a hurry. She has no flexibilty at all and almost can't hit on the run.
All the top 40 players have had a couple years to 'understand' this but it still seems you are the only one who has worked it out ;) yet Maria is #1 :scratch: they mustnt be listening to you.

Serge007
Feb 6th, 2007, 04:49 AM
she can't defend herself.
Who? Sharapova? In 2006 she can't defend herself just 9 times, 59 times she defends herself.

Wayn77
Feb 6th, 2007, 04:51 AM
Right on:worship: When opponents get at here by making her run a bit, she can't defend herself. When all top 40 players understand that fitness lack, she will drop in a hurry. She has no flexibilty at all and almost can't hit on the run.

Yes, rather than worrying about the world no. 1 - you should be concerned about the top-10 well-being of your own fave: her fitness situation, the coaching options, her recent regressive and generally negative tactics on court plus the continued inability to hold serve.

Sharapova's_Boy
Feb 6th, 2007, 05:50 AM
All the top 40 players have had a couple years to 'understand' this but it still seems you are the only one who has worked it out ;) yet Maria is #1 :scratch: they mustnt be listening to you.

:haha:

goldenlox
Feb 6th, 2007, 10:51 AM
I don't see PoVa sustaining her ball bashing style, she isn't that physically strong and will eventually wear down , we see that already
You mean wear down career-wise? Because each year, she either makes the YEC semis, or wins the whole thing.

Cp6uja
Jun 7th, 2007, 03:30 PM
OK... if that Tokyo Ana/Masha match 6-1 0-1 Sharapova ret. is not counted... Today we have her first lose against younger player (Ana of course... who else).

Ana Ivanovic (19 y.o.) BEAT Maria Sharapova (20 y.o.) 6-2 6-1 in RG2007 SF!

Congrats Ana! :worship:

TennisGuy21
Jun 7th, 2007, 03:35 PM
Ana just beat her today!?

acetoace
Jun 7th, 2007, 03:40 PM
No, Actually Ana hit 6 straight winners from 2-3 to 4-3. She served huge. Then she lost 19 straight points.

I don't think a loss is a loss if a player is obviously injured. Like I don't count Tati's loss to Maria in Miami because the match didn't finish. Alex Stevenson or Kournikova retiring at like 1-6; 1-5 is fine...you know who won. But...especially seeing as Maria won the first game of the second set and then retired and seeing as she was obviously injured the past two/three weeks (serve issues with Sharapova?) I don't think it's a win for either player. Ivanovic played well, of course, but it does not tell us much about either player. I still think that, playing at their bests, Maria beats Ana, and that, uninjured, Maria beats Ana in straights. Ana of course will improve and might change this...

If there is any validity in your logic, would you agree then that Maria's "victory" over Serena at the 04 YEC was not really a genuine victory as Maria would have lost if Serena had not been injured?

azmad_88
Jun 7th, 2007, 03:50 PM
i like the score as well...nice way to announce I BEAT YOU

RenaSlam.
Jun 7th, 2007, 04:01 PM
A win is a win. Ana beat her earlier this year in that match, too. Maria quit.

Cp6uja
Jun 7th, 2007, 04:21 PM
A win is a win. Ana beat her earlier this year in that match, too. Maria quit.

6-1 0-1 6-2 6-1

Maria won only 5 games in 4 sets against Ana this season :eek: :eek: :eek: .

RenaSlam.
Jun 7th, 2007, 04:45 PM
6-1 0-1 6-2 6-1

Maria won only 5 games in 4 sets against Ana this season :eek: :eek: :eek: .

Same in the four sets she's lost to Serena this year. :wavey: :lol:

Jogi
Jun 7th, 2007, 04:56 PM
Here's a joke I love ...

What was Nicole Vaidisova's favorite birthday party?

Her 3rd 8th birthday!

omg :spit: :lol:

mboyle
Jun 7th, 2007, 05:03 PM
If there is any validity in your logic, would you agree then that Maria's "victory" over Serena at the 04 YEC was not really a genuine victory as Maria would have lost if Serena had not been injured?

Serena finished the match.

mboyle
Jun 7th, 2007, 05:05 PM
Same in the four sets she's lost to Serena this year. :wavey: :lol:

Despite all the heat and slack Williams fans gave me when I first said this, I have to stick to my guns:

Ana plays almost exactly like Serena. They hit as hard, serve as hard, Anna has more natural options and makes fewer errors, but Serena moves much better. Maria has trouble when she can't work the ball side to side. Serena and Ana hit winners or winning shots off every single ball that comes their way. Maria can't beat people like that unless she's serving very well.

Russianboy
Jun 7th, 2007, 05:11 PM
But the differnce of Ana and Masha is VERY small! both born in 87 ;)

the cat
Jun 7th, 2007, 05:15 PM
I had forgotten all about this thread. Until today. :p

Good points MBoyle about Masha's struggles against Serena and Ana and why she struggles against them. Masha has major problems with elite power players like Serena and Ana who can serve and break serve. And Masha looks skinny and weak compared to Serena and Ana too. ;) I hope Nicole Vaidisova doesn't cause Masha similar problems but I fear she will since she has a huge serve and powerful game. :eek:

Stamp Paid
Jun 7th, 2007, 05:19 PM
An elite returner would rape Maria at this point. Until her serve becomes the weapon that it once was, she is in trouble. Not from just Ana or Serena either. Justine would beat her bad on an surface right now.

oceandrive
Jun 7th, 2007, 07:15 PM
Pova was mauled by Ana today and she was almost bagelled in the process.Ana is a force to reckon with for sure her serve is powerful and her game has variety.2007 has not been kind to Maria for sure the spokes are coming off fast.
For some reason the Russians are now second to the Serbians most of the Russians are not performing like they did 2004 and 2006....the Serbians are the flavour of this season for sure.

.

bandabou
Jun 7th, 2007, 07:29 PM
Hmmmm....Maria might be going the same path as Lindsay. If you can hold serve and absorve her power, she's pretty much toast. The beatdowns haven't been pretty this year to Maria. Hopefully she'll find some way to regroup.

goldenlox
Jun 7th, 2007, 07:38 PM
Maria won a major in 2004. By 2007, it's not surprising that a younger player would finally beat her.
That streak wasn't going to last forever.

RenaSlam.
Jun 7th, 2007, 11:26 PM
Despite all the heat and slack Williams fans gave me when I first said this, I have to stick to my guns:

Ana plays almost exactly like Serena. They hit as hard, serve as hard, Anna has more natural options and makes fewer errors, but Serena moves much better. Maria has trouble when she can't work the ball side to side. Serena and Ana hit winners or winning shots off every single ball that comes their way. Maria can't beat people like that unless she's serving very well.

A little pre-mature to compare Ana to Serena at this point...:tape: :lol: :help:

Bruno71
Jun 7th, 2007, 11:31 PM
Despite all the heat and slack Williams fans gave me when I first said this, I have to stick to my guns:

Ana plays almost exactly like Serena. They hit as hard, serve as hard, Anna has more natural options and makes fewer errors, but Serena moves much better. Maria has trouble when she can't work the ball side to side. Serena and Ana hit winners or winning shots off every single ball that comes their way. Maria can't beat people like that unless she's serving very well.

Strangely I felt that Ana didn't play this game against Maria today, although that is how she normally plays. More than half the time I'd say, Ana was just getting the ball back in play, playing defense, and letting Maria make the errors (which was very smart). Aside from her serve, it was a downright Jankovic-like performance. Not the slugfest I was expecting.

Aaron.
Oct 10th, 2007, 06:19 PM
Victoria :eek:

borisyBACK
Oct 10th, 2007, 06:27 PM
Now we have to find another stat for Maria. Has she ever lost to someone out of top 100? If not, it may happen soon so we can create a thread about it.

joão.
Oct 10th, 2007, 06:30 PM
How ridiculous is this ^^

HenryMag.
Oct 10th, 2007, 06:35 PM
Now we have to find another stat for Maria. Has she ever lost to someone out of top 100? If not, it may happen soon so we can create a thread about it.

Hingis - last year in Tokyo
Asagoe in 2003 - Birmingham

Sefo
Oct 10th, 2007, 06:40 PM
How come this thread wasn't dug out when she lost to Radwanska at the USO? lol

Mikey B
Oct 10th, 2007, 06:50 PM
well it was hard for her to lose to younger players when she was one of the best players in the world aged 17-19, not that many players that were younger than her could hang with sharapova and it wasnt often that we saw teenage sharapova play another teen.. not as often as it was sharapova vs the veteran... although, now aged 20 things seem alot different!