PDA

View Full Version : Grand Slams & the "Ruling Houses"... UPDATE: Anastasia Myskina and Mary Pierce!!!


ZeroSOFInfinity
Apr 2nd, 2007, 03:56 PM
NOTE: Only CURRENTLY ACTIVE PLAYERS IN WTA are mentioned in here... no retirees!!

:worship: AUSTRALIAN OPEN:worship:

Ruled By:- House of Hingis
Current Ruler:- Martina Hingis (Winner 1997 - 1999)

Second-In-Command: Serena Williams (Winner in 2003, 2005, 2007)

http://www.monoli.com/tennis/austra98/hingis10.jpg

Reason: So why Martina Hingis, and not Serena Williams. The answer lies in 3 major factors. One, Martina won it 3 times in a row, while Serena didn't do so. Two,, Martina were in more finals than Serena (6 finals by Martina to 3 by Serena). And finally, to gloss it off, Martina had won 4 AO Doubles title too during her career. Therefore, this puts Martina on the throne of the AO. However, Serena fans will argue that she has won all the 3 finals she was in, while Martina only won half of them (3 out of 6 finals). This debate will definately rage on, but one thing's for certain, the ruler is a Hingis.

:worship: FRENCH OPEN:worship:

Ruled By:- House of Henin
Current Ruler:- Justine Henin (Winner in 2003, 2005, 2006)

Second-In-Command: Serena Williams (Winner in 2002)

http://www.scooterchronicles.com/blogpics/jhh%20french%202005.jpg

Reason: There's no absolute question whatsoever who currently rules this tournament - the Pride of Belgium, Justine Henin! With 3 titles under her belt so far, she proved that clay is her home, and definately the one to beat. And the Second-In-Command deserves her place as well. Serena Williams is the only currently active player on tour which had won on all four different surfaces, and she achieved her glory on the red clay in 2002. No one (and maybe none at all) could match her 8 Grand Slam titles at this moment. Even so, Justine seems undefeatable on her home turf.... and it would take some time (and effort) to dethrone the Queen of Clay herself in the future.

:worship: WIMBLEDON:worship:

Ruled By:- House of Williams
Current Ruler:- Venus Williams (Winner in 2000, 2001, 2005)

Second-In-Command: Serena Williams (Winner 2002-2003)

http://www.comcast.net/data/2005/07/03/bin8882.jpg

Reason: When everyone speaks about Wimbledon, one player comes to mind - Venus Williams. Winning it once is an achievment, twice is a brilliant, and three times... magnificent! And grass seems to be the favourite surface of the Williams. Venus' sister, Serena, had also won it twice and could equal the number of titles won by Venus if she wins this year. However, there are others who are trying to replace Serena (and possibly Venus). Both should be vary of Maria Sharapova (who beat Serena in the Wimbledon 2004 final) and Amelie Mauresmo (the defending champion), both with one titles each. Still, Venus rules SW19, and it could be for a long, long time.

:worship: US OPEN:worship:

Ruled By:- House of Williams
Current Ruler:- Serena Willams (Winner in 1999 and 2002)

Second-In-Command: Venus Williams (Winner in 2000-2001)

http://images.supersport.co.za/WilliamsSerenaUSOpenTrophy070902Abg.jpg

Reason: A role-reversal by the house of Williams here - while Venus rules the green pastures of Wimbledon, Serena is in command of the concrete jungle which is New York. Both had won the title twice, but Serena's win is much more recent that Venus. Furthermore Venus is already the defacto ruler of Wimbledon. and therefore Serena should be the incumbent ruler of the US Open. "So why not Maria Sharapoava then?" her fans might ask. Well, the reason would be that she has only won it once instead of twice (even though she is the current holder of the title). With that, Maria will have to wait in the shadows for the throne or the Second-In-Command position.... unless she does something about it (and that's winning the US Open title once again)

================================================== =======
THE SUB-HOUSES
("Sub-Houses" refer to those who have won at least a Slam, but not in a ruling or Second-In-Command Position - they are considered as "Nobles". Their position can change anytime though if the ruler(s) or Second-In-Command(s) were to retire or step down, or they had won more Slams than them).

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42069000/jpg/_42069466_shaz2_getty_270.jpg
House of Sharapova - MARIA SHARAPOVA
Current Status: 2 titles (Wimbledon 2004 and US Open 2006)
Possible replacement: US Open (Ruler and Second-In-Command), Wimbledon (Second-In-Command)

If any of the rulers and Second-In-Command should look out for, it would be the Siberian Tigress herself - Maria Sharapova. Her best bet might be the US Open throne or Second-In-Command, and judging from her photo, she's "looking" at upstaging Serena and Venus. Wimbledon would be her other option, but it would take a mighty effort to dethrone either Venus or Serena. While her form might be suspect at this moment, she might pounce on an unsuspecting moment... and the US Open 2007 is still far, far away.

http://www.afterellen.com/archive/ellen/People/2006/photos/wimbledon/award2.jpg
House of Mauresmo - AMELIE MAURESMO
Current Status: 2 titles (Australian Open 2006 and Wimbledon 2006)
Possible replacement: Wimbledon (Second-In-Command)

When you talk about the 2006 season, one will surely mention about Amelie Mauresmo's feat in winning the AO and Wimbledon titles. Add in the Player of The Year Award, and you have a very serious challenger for the throne in the future. Her best bet at this moment is the Second-In-Command position currently owned by Serena, and she have the chance to do so this year with Wimbledon only a few months away. Injuries might be hampering her effort, but she won't go down without a fight.


http://www.mary-pierce.org/RG_2000/rg-2000-5.jpg
House of Pierce - MARY PIERCE
Current Status: 2 titles (Australian Open 1995 and French Open 2000)
Possible replacement: French Open (Second-In-Command)

Ah... Mary Pierce. Turned pro in 1989, she had managed to win two Slams (and also pride to France) during her long, illustrious career. Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario was her 1st "victim" when she bagged the Australian Open title in 1995. The second, and best of all, would be the win against another Spainard, Conchita Martinez, in front of her home crowd in 2000. While she is missing the first half of 2007 due to an unfortunate injury, nevertheless one of the remaining "old guards" of the WTA will be back soon... and might sprung up a surprise to win her third (and maybe last) Grand Slam.

http://www.sportinglife.com/pictures/general/allsportclijstersusopentitletongue.jpg
House of Clijsters - KIM CLIJSTERS
Current Status: 1 title (US Open 2005)
Possible replacement: US Open (Ruler and Second-In-Command)

Belgium has two heroes... one is Justine Henin, and the other is Kim Clijsters. While she is the lesser of the two in terms of success, she is much more liked by others than Justine. This is her swansong year though, and she still has only one title with her - the US Open 2005. If she wins this year's edition though, she might take over as the ruler or Second-In-Command... albeit for a brief moment. Nevertheless, she is a fighter, and everyone would be hoping that she will be able to achive it before she departs the WTA forever.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-09/12/xin_530901121405866307084.jpg
House of Kuznetsova - SVETLANA KUZNETSOVA
Current Status: 1 title (US Open 2004)
Possible replacement: US Open (Ruler and Second-In-Command)

The country Russia is blessed with a wealth of talent. There's Maria Sharapova, Elena Dementieva, Anastasia Myskina and not forgetting Svetlana Kuznetsova herself. The winner of US Open in 2004, she displayed superb tennis against her Russian counterpart Elena Dementieva in the Final. While she might have not won anything more since (she did come very close in French Open 2006, only losing to Justine), she's still young and have abundance of time to find more titles to her name.

http://www.bahraintribune.com/Archive/June_2004/7_6_2004_e20-2.jpg
House of Myskina - ANASTASIA MYSKINA
Current Status: 1 title (French Open 2004)
Possible replacement: French Open (Second-In-Command)

When the Queen of the Red Courts had to "vacate" her throne in 2004, there was a frantic search for her replacement. "Who would it be?" the crowd bellowed from the stands. Step up one of Mother Russia's finest - Anastasia Myskina. In an All-Russian Final, Myskina showed no mercy to her rival in the quest to sit on the throne of Roland Garros. She might only be the Queen for a year, but the legacy of her rule in 2004 will be remember throughout the pages of history.


INFORMATION:-
No one can be the ruler of two or more Grand Slams. If this exists, another person shall become the incumbent ruler based on the following order - number of Slams won; current holder of Slam; and year(s) the Slam(s) were won.

So, are you agreeable to the above? Or do you want to dispute it? State and debate them here... who knows, your post might change "history"! ;)

miffedmax
Apr 2nd, 2007, 03:59 PM
Interesting thoughts. Actually, for the most part I agree with your calls.

Of course, I've been backing the House of Dementieva, which remains slamless amongs the major houses.

pooh14
Apr 2nd, 2007, 03:59 PM
if one player rules one GS, i think Serena should be US Open. Just because one if the defending champion, it does not give them advantage over 2 slam winner.

another thing, Hingis should be AO rules, cause she entered finals 6 times, winning 3 times, and also her 4 AO doubles titles there.

ZeroSOFInfinity
Apr 2nd, 2007, 04:30 PM
Anyone else have opinions about what I posted?

Apoleb
Apr 2nd, 2007, 04:33 PM
Anyone else have opinions about what I posted?

It's lame. (sorry you wanted an opinion)

ZeroSOFInfinity
Apr 2nd, 2007, 04:36 PM
^^^
Oh well, at least I tried :angel:

AnDyDog621
Apr 2nd, 2007, 04:44 PM
Put Serena for US Open and Martina for AUS, Sharapova should not be ruler of US Open

Demska
Apr 2nd, 2007, 04:51 PM
Myskina second in command of FO?

fufuqifuqishahah
Apr 2nd, 2007, 04:56 PM
Myskina second in command of FO?

mhmmmm.


i like this whole idea

Reuchlin
Apr 2nd, 2007, 05:02 PM
great post idea.

xan
Apr 2nd, 2007, 05:07 PM
Nice idea. The ease of the wins could also play a part as a factor.

ZeroSOFInfinity
Apr 2nd, 2007, 11:40 PM
Okay... since everyone suggested so... changes will be made then ;)

Wannabeknowitall
Apr 2nd, 2007, 11:44 PM
I think it's cute.

sgsox
Apr 2nd, 2007, 11:53 PM
lol myskina should not be second in command of the french..
didnt she lose in the first round at roland garros as the defending champ in 05?? i think serena should be second in command...she has been most consistent there above all players except justine

Serena Williams..
01-quarters
02-champion
03-semifinals
04-quarters
or...
Jennifer Capriati
01-champion
02-semifinals
03-4th round
04-Quarters
or....
Kim Clijsters(even though she never won it)
01-finals
02-not sure(4th round maybe)
03-finals
04-not sure
05-not sure
06-semifinals

yea serena deserves second in command

Havok
Apr 3rd, 2007, 12:02 AM
AO: ruler; Hingis runner-up; Serena
RG: ruler: Henin, runner-up; Pierce
Wimbledon: ruler: Venus, runner-up; Serena
US Open: ruler: none (Sharapova won it last year, Clijsters the year before, Kuznetsova the year before that, nobody's stepping up to the plate and owning it) runner-up; Serena/Venus

ZeroSOFInfinity
Apr 3rd, 2007, 12:04 AM
^^^
But didn't Serena and Venus won it twice?

Wayn77
Apr 3rd, 2007, 12:11 AM
Roland Garros 2nd in command - Mary Pierce

PLP
Apr 3rd, 2007, 12:26 AM
USO-I think Serena and Venus should rule but it has been a few years since either has done great in NY...still, I have a feeling that will change this year.

;)

PS...Maria and JuJu should 2nd in command.

ZeroSOFInfinity
Apr 3rd, 2007, 01:59 AM
OK... the changes have been made... anyone still not happy at this moment? :)

(P.S: By the way, does anyone have a better picture of Serena holding the US Open title? That'sthe best I can find... any help will be appreciated. Thank you!)

lecciones
Apr 3rd, 2007, 02:11 AM
I agree about the rulers about the other runner ups i hafta look that up, but interesting post. Martina made a record of her own in Wta history when she won 3 back to back Australian singles and doubles 1997-1999. :) She rules AO!

ZeroSOFInfinity
Apr 3rd, 2007, 03:14 AM
I have made updates to this topic... adding in the "Sub-Houses". Any comments?

Might add in something else in the future... (possibly "Potentials").

Hingiswinsthis
Apr 3rd, 2007, 03:25 AM
There should also be Rulers of the the Apartments aka the Tier I events lol :-) we have to mention the WTA Champs as well....

let's see:

Tokyo- Hingis
Indian Wells- Hantuchova
Miami- Serena Williams
Charleston- Henin
Berlin- Henin
Rome- Mauresmo
San Diego- Venus Williams
Toronto/Montreal- Hingis
Zurich- ?
Moscow- Myskina
WTA Champs- Clijsters

ZeroSOFInfinity
Apr 3rd, 2007, 04:36 AM
^^^
We don't have enough space in here already... maybe you can open a topic about it? :lol:

ZeroSOFInfinity
Apr 3rd, 2007, 07:25 AM
Bump, bump, bump

lecciones
Apr 3rd, 2007, 12:11 PM
I really like your post its fun to read. :) btw please add that aside from 4 doubles, Martina has another mixed grandslam from AO. She has 8 from this grandslam if im not mistaken (3 singles, 4 doubles, 1 mixed)

There should also be Rulers of the the Apartments aka the Tier I events lol :-) we have to mention the WTA Champs as well....

let's see:

Tokyo- Hingis
Indian Wells- Hantuchova
Miami- Serena Williams
Charleston- Henin
Berlin- Henin
Rome- Mauresmo
San Diego- Venus Williams
Toronto/Montreal- Hingis
Zurich- ?
Moscow- Myskina
WTA Champs- Clijsters

WTA Champs should be Martina she has two singles (98 & 00) and two doubles (99-00) from this tournament.
Charleston (FCC) I think should be Martina's too because she has won 2 titles like Henin (plus a final to Henins SF) and a doubles title too.

CORIA01
Apr 3rd, 2007, 02:12 PM
Nice Thread!

shad9480
Apr 3rd, 2007, 02:31 PM
Agreed...totally.
Masha...Give her time to dethrone the ruler of the US Open throne :bounce: :kiss: :angel:

TomTennis
Apr 3rd, 2007, 05:57 PM
mmm. I think the reasons you have used for Serena over Venus are a bit bad.

Just because Venus is ruling at Wimbledon doenst mean that Serena should rule at the US Open to make up for it.

Serena - won in 99 and 02, lost final in 01. She has also won the doubles and mixed event.

Venus - won 2000, 2001, lost final in 97 and 02. She too has the doubles but no mixed.

Venus should be ruling at the US Open because she has reached 4 finals over Serena's 3. Just like in Australia where Hingis is ruling because she has more final appearances than Serena. Plus, Venus reached 3 consecutive finals 00-02, something Serena hasnt done there.

I think they should be changed.

ZeroSOFInfinity
Apr 3rd, 2007, 11:34 PM
^^^
You can't rule two countries at the same time, can you ;)

TomTennis
Apr 4th, 2007, 03:35 PM
^^^
You can't rule two countries at the same time, can you ;)


erm...Yes! Just because Venus has wimbledon doenst mean that the US open should be gifted to another player (I realise its hardly gifted to Serena because of what she has achieved there) but I think your ignoring the facts and trying just to make your thread look good.


I think you should change it.

lecciones
Apr 4th, 2007, 03:47 PM
You can call Serena REGENT in place of Venus who is already the titular head of the other house. But I agree with TomTennis, Venus has a better record in the US Open then Serena but by a small margin.

Oh I just realized for the years 1999-2003 or so the the Williamses have monopolized Wimbledon and the US Open, thats really something!

tennisjunky
Apr 4th, 2007, 03:56 PM
lol myskina should not be second in command of the french..
didnt she lose in the first round at roland garros as the defending champ in 05?? i think serena should be second in command...she has been most consistent there above all players except justine

Serena Williams..
01-quarters
02-champion
03-semifinals
04-quarters
or...
Jennifer Capriati
01-champion
02-semifinals
03-4th round
04-Quarters
or....
Kim Clijsters(even though she never won it)
01-finals
02-not sure(4th round maybe)
03-finals
04-not sure
05-not sure
06-semifinals

yea serena deserves second in command

the one major problem is second in command at the french open. without question it should be serena williams.

fix that and your list will become credible, until then its just cute.

tennisjunky
Apr 4th, 2007, 04:00 PM
You can call Serena REGENT in place of Venus who is already the titular head of the other house. But I agree with TomTennis, Venus has a better record in the US Open then Serena but by a small margin.

Oh I just realized for the years 1999-2003 or so the the Williamses have monopolized Wimbledon and the US Open, thats really something!

serena should be second in command at all four slams.

should be second to hingis at australia
should be second to justine at french
should be second to venus at wimbledon
should be second to venus at us open, but a good case can be made for her to be number one there too.

second in command, ruler of the house, this thread reminds of me sir stefwhit's signature.

lecciones
Apr 4th, 2007, 04:05 PM
If you consider Mary Pierce active she has won the French in 2000 and was in two other finals 1994 and 2005 (darn those are far away dates).

A lot better than Serena, Capriati or Clijsters who are also contending to be second in command.

fufuqifuqishahah
Apr 4th, 2007, 04:14 PM
I really like your post its fun to read. :) btw please add that aside from 4 doubles, Martina has another mixed grandslam from AO. She has 8 from this grandslam if im not mistaken (3 singles, 4 doubles, 1 mixed)



WTA Champs should be Martina she has two singles (98 & 00) and two doubles (99-00) from this tournament.
Charleston (FCC) I think should be Martina's too because she has won 2 titles like Henin (plus a final to Henins SF) and a doubles title too.

yea you should make a house for the wta championships.

lecciones
Apr 4th, 2007, 04:27 PM
Im not sure maybe in another thread, I think the thread is about Grand Slams only. Maybe there should be another thread with Championships and Tiered Titles Ruling Houses. lol, but i'm not doing that my brain will hurt with all the research you need to do :P

thrust
Apr 4th, 2007, 04:47 PM
Dubai- Henin, undefeated! 4 played, 4 wins. Has Serena ever lost at the AO?

Direwolf
Apr 4th, 2007, 04:59 PM
I so like the fantasy surrounding this thread...
since Venus is still finding her groove...
I think that she should rule
the kingdom of USO...

Venus does hold a 43-6 record there
While Serena has 36-6

and in h2h Venus has 2-1 lead..

:)

but...
by the rate Serena is going at this moment...
She could be the ruler of all the houses after Wimbledon
next year.. :P ...

lecciones
Apr 4th, 2007, 05:13 PM
Could just be sala_ryan.

ZeroSOFInfinity
Apr 4th, 2007, 10:57 PM
the one major problem is second in command at the french open. without question it should be serena williams.

fix that and your list will become credible, until then its just cute.

The reason why I choose Myskina and not Serena is because while both had won 1 Slam each, Myskina's was much more recent than Serena's (2004). Therefore, Myskina was the S-I-C instead of Serena.

This can surely change if Serena wins her 2nd FO title this year ;)

all_slam_andre
Apr 4th, 2007, 11:09 PM
The problem with Myskina as second in command at the French Open is that aside from 2004, her record is terrible there, with 4 first round defeats, 1 second round defeat and 1 4th round defeat. The fact that apart from during her title winning year, she hasn't been able to reach another French Open quarter-final surely has to rule her out.

Imperfect Angel
Apr 5th, 2007, 07:53 AM
The problem with Myskina as second in command at the French Open is that aside from 2004, her record is terrible there, with 4 first round defeats, 1 second round defeat and 1 4th round defeat. The fact that apart from during her title winning year, she hasn't been able to reach another French Open quarter-final surely has to rule her out.

yeah!totally agree!she's just a fluke.she was just lucky to make it into the final and beat her opponent who was worse than her.:rolleyes:
i agree that pierce should be the 2nd in command(W,F,F,QF).however,since she's gonna retire anyway,let serena(W,SF,QF,QF) be the one to replace it.:p
or even jeniffer(W,SF,SF,SF,QF,QF)!!!;)
too bad hingis didn't win it too.hers is quite impressive too. F,F,SF,SF,SF,QF!:worship:

lecciones
Apr 5th, 2007, 12:54 PM
Yeah Hingis has been trying so hard to win FO, the first loss was a fluke a most terrible fluke and the second one was a most terrible loss, already 2 points away from winning but then discouraged and bullied by a worked up crowd. Martina really should work harder to win the French her record is really good there. She is just so consistently good at tournaments, hopefully her consistency will pay off and get her the French at last.

tennisjunky
Apr 5th, 2007, 02:17 PM
yeah!totally agree!she's just a fluke.she was just lucky to make it into the final and beat her opponent who was worse than her.:rolleyes:
i agree that pierce should be the 2nd in command(W,F,F,QF).however,since she's gonna retire anyway,let serena(W,SF,QF,QF) be the one to replace it.:p
or even jeniffer(W,SF,SF,SF,QF,QF)!!!;)
too bad hingis didn't win it too.hers is quite impressive too. F,F,SF,SF,SF,QF!:worship:

the kingdom has spoken, here your people. we want change!!

ZeroSOFInfinity
Apr 5th, 2007, 02:55 PM
:lol: Okok... a revolution is on the way ;)

brickhousesupporter
Apr 5th, 2007, 03:01 PM
:lol: Okok... a revolution is on the way ;)

Its the French Revolution....Prepare the guillotine!:lol:

John.
Apr 5th, 2007, 03:03 PM
Pierce should be 2nd in command at RG.

3 Finals with one win :shrug:

The Daviator
Apr 5th, 2007, 03:10 PM
Serena should be the ruler of the AO, I presume you're asking who the rulers are as of now, well then it should definitely be Serena, Hingis hasn't won there since the 90s :o

ZeroSOFInfinity
Apr 5th, 2007, 03:28 PM
Pierce should be 2nd in command at RG.

3 Finals with one win :shrug:

You can state your case in here, but until you can find support, I guess the majority here wants Serena as Second-In-Command :tape:

ZeroSOFInfinity
Apr 5th, 2007, 03:31 PM
Serena should be the ruler of the AO, I presume you're asking who the rulers are as of now, well then it should definitely be Serena, Hingis hasn't won there since the 90s :o

Yeah, I believe so, but then Hingis won it 3-times consecutively and had been in more Finals than Serena (albeit losing half of them...)

John.
Apr 5th, 2007, 03:37 PM
You can state your case in here, but until you can find support, I guess the majority here wants Serena as Second-In-Command :tape:

:tape:

As much as I like Serena, at this moment in time, I would rather have Pierce's RG record.

Her run to the final in 94 is probably the most devastating in recent years.

1R Bradtke 61 60
2R Bentivoglio 60 61
3R McNeil 60 60
4R Coetzer 61 61
QF Schwarz 60 62
SF Graf 62 62

10 games lost in getting to the final

John.
Apr 5th, 2007, 03:40 PM
Has Serena ever lost at the AO?

98 - 2R to Venus
99 - 3R to Testud
00 - 4R to Likhovtseva
01 - QF to Hingis
02 - DNP
04 - DNP
06 - 3R to Hantuchova

all_slam_andre
Apr 5th, 2007, 03:44 PM
Hingis must have been really annoyed to beat both Williams sisters at the Australian Open in 2001 but still end up not winning title

lecciones
Apr 5th, 2007, 05:47 PM
No Hingis is annoyed that she had to have her name on the runners up trophy 3 times in a row.

piercerocks
Apr 5th, 2007, 05:57 PM
Pierce should be 2nd in command at RG.

3 Finals with one win :shrug:

i definitely agree. im sorry serena fans, but she only got to the final once, and that was a while ago. mary has gotten there three times at different stages in her career and deserves to be second in command

TomTennis
Apr 5th, 2007, 06:59 PM
mmmm. I see you moved Serena into second in command, yet you havent changed Venus as ruler of the US Open.

You look at some facts yet ignore others!?!?? This thread as just lost its credability.

TomTennis
Apr 5th, 2007, 07:00 PM
i definitely agree. im sorry serena fans, but she only got to the final once, and that was a while ago. mary has gotten there three times at different stages in her career and deserves to be second in command

agreed.

DOUBLEFIST
Apr 5th, 2007, 08:04 PM
I know I sound like a traitor, but I think Mary should probably be second in command at the French.

Hey, but since Mary is injured, MAYBE Serena Should be SIC until Mary is active again. :shrug:

piercerocks
Apr 5th, 2007, 08:08 PM
mary at RG

1 title 2 other finals
44-14 record

won ranked 7 in the world
got to 94 final as 12 in the world, 05 final as 29 in the world

serena at RG
25-5 record

1 title

won ranked 2 in the world

mary has stronger results, more match wins, and SHOULD be 2nd in command at roland garros.

MrSerenaWilliams
Apr 5th, 2007, 08:09 PM
mmmm. I see you moved Serena into second in command, yet you havent changed Venus as ruler of the US Open.

You look at some facts yet ignore others!?!?? This thread as just lost its credability.

S/he said earlier that no one can rule two GSs at one time :hug:

John.
Apr 5th, 2007, 08:14 PM
mary at RG

1 title
44-14 record

won ranked 7 in the world
got to 94 final as 12 in the world, 05 final as 29 in the world

mary has stronger results, more match wins, and SHOULD be 2nd in command at roland garros.

She also beat the number 1 seed each time she got to the final - Graf, Hingis & Davenport.

Mary IS the Second in Command at RG. Unquestionably

MrSerenaWilliams
Apr 5th, 2007, 08:21 PM
mary at RG

1 title
44-14 record

won ranked 7 in the world
got to 94 final as 12 in the world, 05 final as 29 in the world

serena at RG
25-5 record

1 title

won ranked 2 in the world

mary has stronger results, more match wins, and SHOULD be 2nd in command at roland garros.

Mary's played the FO 9 more times than Serena.

Serena's beaten MP in their only FO meeting, losing only two games, and EVERY time that they've both played the FO, Serena's out perfomed Mary by at least one round:

1998- Serena(27) R16 to ASV* Mary(11) R64 to Serna
1999- Serena(10) R32 to MJF Mary(8) R64 to Martinez
2002- Serena(3) CHAMPION Mary(132) QF to Serena*
2003- Serena(1) SF to JH* Mary(47) R128 to Fernandez
2004- Serena(7) QF to Capriati Mary(31) R32 to Venus

*Represents loss to Eventual Champion

Serena's NEVER lost in the first round of the French Open (or any major for that matter :cool: ) I think Serena deserves the S-I-C spot.

And in 2002, when she won, she beat the #1 seed AND Defending champion Jennifer Capriati. When Mary beat Graf in 1994, that was the ONLY time she'd beaten the defending champ. I mean COME ON, even though Lindsay was the #1 seed in 2005, there was NO WAY she was going to win. I think beating the DC is more impressive than beating someone with the most points at that time...and they've each done that once, as well as win the title, once.

piercerocks
Apr 5th, 2007, 08:36 PM
Mary's played the FO 9 more times than Serena.

Serena's beaten MP in their only FO meeting, losing only two games, and EVERY time that they've both played the FO, Serena's out perfomed Mary by at least one round:

1998- Serena(27) R16 to ASV* Mary(11) R64 to Serna
1999- Serena(10) R32 to MJF Mary(8) R64 to Martinez
2002- Serena(3) CHAMPION Mary(132) QF to Serena*
2003- Serena(1) SF to JH* Mary(47) R128 to Fernandez
2004- Serena(7) QF to Capriati Mary(31) R32 to Venus

*Represents loss to Eventual Champion

Serena's NEVER lost in the first round of the French Open (or any major for that matter :cool: ) I think Serena deserves the S-I-C spot.

And in 2002, when she won, she beat the #1 seed AND Defending champion Jennifer Capriati. When Mary beat Graf in 1994, that was the ONLY time she'd beaten the defending champ. I mean COME ON, even though Lindsay was the #1 seed in 2005, there was NO WAY she was going to win. I think beating the DC is more impressive than beating someone with the most points at that time...and they've each done that once, as well as win the title, once.


um hello?? mary has got to the final more times than serena, she did beat the defending champion once and the number one seed 3 times at RG, beating two of them in straight sets, and we all know that when serena beat mary at RG, mary was ranked 132 in the world, im not making excuses, but its kind of reminiscent of when serena lost 4th round to mauresmo at 2006 US Open ranked 91. So, like when lindsay lost, there was "NO WAY" mary, ranked 132, was going to beat serena. Serena can only take the spot away from mary if she gets to two more finals, or wins another one. cased close.

TomTennis
Apr 5th, 2007, 10:36 PM
S/he said earlier that no one can rule two GSs at one time :hug:

so how can Serena be S-I-C at all FOUR slams then!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Its plain and simple, Venus has one more final than Serena so she should rule USO. Pierce should be S-I-C because she has reached the final two more times than Serena.

Dont get me wrong, Im a huge Williams fan, but you cant base half of it on facts then keep chaning the rules "just because another player has alread achieved too much at another slam"!

The Daviator
Apr 5th, 2007, 10:43 PM
so how can Serena be S-I-C at all FOUR slams then!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Its plain and simple, Venus has one more final than Serena so she should rule USO. Pierce should be S-I-C because she has reached the final two more times than Serena.

Dont get me wrong, Im a huge Williams fan, but you cant base half of it on facts then keep chaning the rules "just because another player has alread achieved too much at another slam"!

Yeah, but Serena won more recently than Venus :shrug:

This is why Serena, to me, should definitely rule at least the AO, Hingis has great stats there no doubt, but over the past 5 years, Serena has clearly been the best at that event...

In The Zone
Apr 5th, 2007, 11:33 PM
I'd be more comfortable putting Pierce as second-command for the French. Serena's lone title in 2002 is really her only stand out performance. Mary has two finals and a championship. I'd give Pierce the nod.

lecciones
Apr 6th, 2007, 03:09 AM
I don't get the recently thing, you see no matter how old a monarch is if his hold on the crown is the strongest he is the leader till he dies. Nobody has a better record in AO among active players than Martina so she is the ruler even if Serena also has 3 titles and won it more recently.

The same can be said of Pierce as second in command in RG, or Venus holding both US and Wimbledon dominions. The only question is, is Pierce really still active now?

S/he said earlier that no one can rule two GSs at one time :hug:

Thats why i suggested putting it like this:

US Open Ruler: House of Venus Williams REGENT: House of Serena Williams
Second in command: [third best result]

Funny thing is if this were really like modeled after monarchies then it would be possible for one person to rule different countries. The title of Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire (besides being the titular head of the region known as the HRE in central europe) which was usually the Monarch of the dual crowns Austria-Hungary ruled over so many countries (i.e. Albania, Moravia, Bohemia, etc.), besides the union of Austria and Hungary.

MistyGrey
Apr 6th, 2007, 06:37 AM
Pierce should be the SIC at RG. Yes, she has had early losses, but come on... its the finals and the titles that count. Serena has one title. Mary has one title and two finals... Not to mention she holds the record for the fewest games lost in reaching the final at RG (10 in 1994), she also has the record for fewest games lost en route to a GS 4th round (2 in 94RG), fewest games lost in reaching a GS quarters (4, 94RG) and the fewest games lost in reaching a GS semifinal (6, 94RG). She has beaten the world number one 3 times at the French Open, including the 6-2,6-2 drubbing of Steffi Graf in 94, when Steffi was the holder of all four majors. She also beat Hingis in 2000 and Lindsay in 2005. But really, I dont even need to make a case for her, 1 title and 2 finals is greater than 1 title. Also, Pierce has won more big events on clay than Serena. She has won or reached the final at all the Tier 2 and above clay events.
And who says Mary is not active. Has she said she is going to retire? from the moment she got injured, she has maintained that she is coming back. She has started training and plans to return for the hardcourt season.
Serena fans, dont be stingy :p, Serena is the ruler or SIC at all the other majors, Let Mary be the SIC for the French! :lol:

VeeReeDavJCap81
Apr 6th, 2007, 06:54 AM
Venus winning % at Wimbledon .921 :eek:

tennisjunky
Apr 6th, 2007, 07:04 AM
mmmm. I see you moved Serena into second in command, yet you havent changed Venus as ruler of the US Open.

You look at some facts yet ignore others!?!?? This thread as just lost its credability.
the rules are updated. and this thread is about getting support for your argument. like that he made changes when enough people made a case. think is one of the best threads going. he's like the tie breaker. since none of us every agree, you can state your reasons why you think things should be one way, people can agree or disagree, then he makes the changes. you just want us to be under queen venus' rule :lol: she can only rule one kingdom at a time, she's a queen not a god. :lol:

tennisjunky
Apr 6th, 2007, 07:15 AM
thread starter this is your thread so you make the rules, dont let them dick you around, but keep having an open mind. and dont change the rules, i like them just like you have them.

MrSerenaWilliams
Apr 6th, 2007, 07:16 AM
I think the W/L % should be a factor as well:

AO: Martina- 88% Serena - 87%
FO: Justine - 88% Serena - 83% Mary - 76%
W: Serena - 87% Venus - 86%
USO: Venus - 88% Serena - 86%

:shrug: How much it should count for, I dunno, but I think their overall success at a major over time should count for something.

Serena is the ONLY player w/ 80%+ winning percentage at all 4 majors :worship:

MistyGrey
Apr 6th, 2007, 09:22 AM
Mary's played the FO 9 more times than Serena.

Serena's beaten MP in their only FO meeting, losing only two games, and EVERY time that they've both played the FO, Serena's out perfomed Mary by at least one round:

1998- Serena(27) R16 to ASV* Mary(11) R64 to Serna
1999- Serena(10) R32 to MJF Mary(8) R64 to Martinez
2002- Serena(3) CHAMPION Mary(132) QF to Serena*
2003- Serena(1) SF to JH* Mary(47) R128 to Fernandez
2004- Serena(7) QF to Capriati Mary(31) R32 to Venus

*Represents loss to Eventual Champion

Serena's NEVER lost in the first round of the French Open (or any major for that matter :cool: ) I think Serena deserves the S-I-C spot.

And in 2002, when she won, she beat the #1 seed AND Defending champion Jennifer Capriati. When Mary beat Graf in 1994, that was the ONLY time she'd beaten the defending champ. I mean COME ON, even though Lindsay was the #1 seed in 2005, there was NO WAY she was going to win. I think beating the DC is more impressive than beating someone with the most points at that time...and they've each done that once, as well as win the title, once.

Let me throw some numbers of my own :)

Serena has one title and no final at RG, Mary has one title and 2 finals.

Both Mary and Serena have beaten the defending champ only once at the RG, so the tie breaker should be the quality of that defedning champ, and surely beating a Steffi Graf defending her title at a GS is 10 times more impressive than beating Jennifer Capriati.

Serena has 4 top 20 wins at RG, Mary has 11.

Serena has 3 top 10 wins at RG, Mary has 6.

Serena has 3 top 5 wins at RG, Mary has 5.

Serena has 2 top 3 wins at RG, Mary has 4.

Serena has beaten the #1 player once at RG, Mary has beaten the #1 3 times.

The opponents Serena has beaten at RG have 2 RG titles and 3 finals between them. Mary's opponents have 9 titles and 7 finals between them.

Besdies RG, Serena's clay court resume has a title at Rome and a final at Berlin. Mary has won RG,Rome,FCC,Amelie Island and been to the finals of Berlin and Hamburg.

Serena has the edge in a better win loss ratio at RG (83 to 76)

So while I have no doubt that Serena will eventually move ahead of Mary( might happen even this year) as of right now Mary has a better record at RG and clay overall.

TomTennis
Apr 6th, 2007, 09:45 AM
just because Serena won the title in 2002 and Venus won in 2001 doesnt make a difference. its only 1 year, not like its 9-10 years gap.

Its plain and simple, Venus has reached 4 USO finals, Serena only 3. Just because Venus is ruling at Wimbledon doesnt mean she cant be US Ruler, why doesnt anyone else agree??

This is tennis, just because a player has won at one tournament doesnt mean she goes lightly on all the rest of the field at another tournament.

TomTennis
Apr 6th, 2007, 09:47 AM
Serena is S-I-C at all FOUR slams?? If someone cant rule TWO slams then surely no one can be S-I-C at all FOUR!?

TomTennis
Apr 6th, 2007, 09:49 AM
Aus: Hingis
S-I-C: Serena

Im sorry, Im a Serena fan but Hingis has reached 6 consecutive finals, and is still an active player, just because Serena's wins are more recent doesnt mean she should rule.

FO: Henin
S-I-C: Pierce

The facts are there.

Wim: Venus
S-I-C: Serena

USO: Venus
S-I-C: Serena



That is what it should be like.

MistyGrey
Apr 6th, 2007, 09:52 AM
Aus: Hingis
S-I-C: Serena

Im sorry, Im a Serena fan but Hingis has reached 6 consecutive finals, and is still an active player, just because Serena's wins are more recent doesnt mean she should rule.

FO: Henin
S-I-C: Pierce

The facts are there.

Wim: Venus
S-I-C: Serena

USO: Venus
S-I-C: Serena



That is what it should be like.

Agreed, however, Serena should be the ruler of USO.. since Venus is the ruler at Wimbledon.
Serena's record is very impressive at all the four slams.

MistyGrey
Apr 6th, 2007, 09:54 AM
Serena is S-I-C at all FOUR slams?? If someone cant rule TWO slams then surely no one can be S-I-C at all FOUR!?

Got a point there. Lets make both Venus and Serena the ruler at USO.

MistyGrey
Apr 6th, 2007, 09:56 AM
I just realized how seriously we are taking this thread :lol:
Its just a fun thread! kuddos to the creater. :wavey:

tennisjunky
Apr 6th, 2007, 02:28 PM
I just realized how seriously we are taking this thread :lol:
Its just a fun thread! kuddos to the creater. :wavey:

so true :lol:

The Daviator
Apr 6th, 2007, 02:45 PM
just because Serena won the title in 2002 and Venus won in 2001 doesnt make a difference. its only 1 year, not like its 9-10 years gap.

Its plain and simple, Venus has reached 4 USO finals, Serena only 3. Just because Venus is ruling at Wimbledon doesnt mean she cant be US Ruler, why doesnt anyone else agree??

This is tennis, just because a player has won at one tournament doesnt mean she goes lightly on all the rest of the field at another tournament.

Because it makes no sense if the most dominant player of the generation is not a ruler at any Slam...

lecciones
Apr 6th, 2007, 03:43 PM
Being allover the place is already a sign of dominance.

bandabou
Apr 7th, 2007, 01:19 PM
Hey...as long as Serena has the most majors...doesn't matter if she's ruler or sic...keep racking them up babygirl! :woohoo:

bandabou
Apr 7th, 2007, 01:23 PM
just shows how all-round Serena is...3 2 2 1, almost equally good on all surfaces.