PDA

View Full Version : Greatest active players: Serena trumps Jennifer


disposablehero
Jul 6th, 2002, 11:45 PM
1. Monica Seles
2. Martina Hingis
3. Venus Williams
4. Arantxa Sanchez Vicario
5. Lindsay Davenport
6. Serena Williams
7. Jennifer Capriati
8. Mary Pierce
9. Conchita Martinez
10. Iva Majoli

Some notes:

4 slam winners: Venus Williams has a far far far superior head to head against top players compared to Arantxa. That's the big factor.

3 Slam winners: Lindsay has a ton of regular titles, a ton of weeks at #1, and some good doubles results. Serena has basically everything on Jen. More titles, far superior doubles results, more prize money, better head to heads, Slams on 3 different surfaces, and in half the time.

Iva Majoli: Objectively, she has done more than any non Slam winner, keeping in mind that her career is nearing a decade.

Gallofa
Jul 6th, 2002, 11:56 PM
I don't agree. You have listed the one thing where Arantxa is *maybe* worse off than Venus. To mention a few other things: Arantxa has more titles (both in singles and in doubles), has been N.1 in doubles and singles at the same time, has won 10 GS in doubles (Venus has won 6), has participated in 4 Olympics and won 4 Olympic medals (2 in singles and 2 in doubles), has won 5 Fed Cup titles, has had a career at the very top of the game for over a decade.

If you are listing people based on number of GS and then telling them apart by other factors, Arantxa has as many GS as Venus and her career aside from that exceeds that of Venus up to this point.

Kart
Jul 6th, 2002, 11:57 PM
Re: ASV (well, until Venus wins another slam).

Although I can't argue with record against top players I think that it is influenced by how many years she's been playing since she last was in GS winning form.

Surely ASV belongs above Venus if you consider how many GS finals she's reached as well. Also her doubles are better.

Of course, there's no disputing who will be the greater player at the end of their careers.

disposablehero
Jul 7th, 2002, 12:13 AM
I knew there would be opposition to that one. I stand by it.

Arantxa has 29 singles titles. Venus is 8 and a half years younger and has 25.

Venus worst record against anyone is 9-10 against Martina, 9-10 against Lindsay. Arantxa is 2-17 against Martina Hingis, 3-21 against Monica Seles, 8-29 against Steffi Graf, and 3-12 against Martina Navratilova. Yes, it is difficult to compare generations, but Arantxa has been dominated in one sided fashion by someone much older than her, someone barely older than her, someone barely younger than her, and someone much younger than her.

Plus, Venus has had some very good oppostion. Arantxa's peak was in 1994 and the first half of 95. A Dark Age.

Robbie.
Jul 7th, 2002, 12:22 AM
Disposable, do players who have won more slams, immediately get a higher ranking. Because outside of Mary's two GS wins to her 1, it is very hard to rate Conchita below her - More titles, More Prizemoney, More years in top 10, higher career high ranking, superior record in majors overall, superior fed cup record, superior doubles record etc...

Also majoli's #10 spot must be in contention to a player like coetzer. Iva has only ever reached one (1) GS Semifinal - the year she won roland garros.

disposablehero
Jul 7th, 2002, 12:29 AM
tennisaddict, not necessarily. In this case Mary is clearly below all the 3 Slam winners, but I would place her ahead of Conchita. That one is certainly open to debate, however, as you are correct that Conchita is superior in several aspects.

Robbie.
Jul 7th, 2002, 12:34 AM
Disposable, just a question, who did you rate as superior before the French Open 2000 (career wise), for me it was Conchita. Mary's win narrowed the gap, but Conchita is just too far ahead in every other aspect of achievement to be rated below Mary.

disposablehero
Jul 7th, 2002, 12:35 AM
Also, I definitely considered putting Amanda in Iva's spot, but she has never even been IN a GS Final, and has 8 career singles titles, same as Iva. And of course Iva did it considerably quicker. I also considered Kim, Justine, and Amelie for that spot, but it is hard to justify when none of them have been above #3, and they onloy have about the same number of titles as her.

disposablehero
Jul 7th, 2002, 12:37 AM
Oh, before 2000 RG, Conchita, no question. Mary had done slightly better against top players overall, but Conchita had many other things on her side.

disposablehero
Jul 7th, 2002, 12:42 AM
The other thing is, Conchita and Mary are contemporaries, only about 3 years apart in age so their record against each other is far more significant than say Arantxa vs Serena would be. Mary leads that 11-6.

Robbie.
Jul 7th, 2002, 12:42 AM
disposable of course your rankings are completely valid, but their are always points of contention. tHere's no fun without debate ;). Mary CAN be rated above Conchita, but really it is a matter of what you prioritise most.

Rollo
Jul 7th, 2002, 12:43 AM
What's happening DH-I find I agree with you more and more:)

Mary CAN be rated ahead of Conchita when head to heads are taken into consideration. Pierce has several wins over Graf, Seles, or any other player we care to name. Conchita has horrible head to heads vs the same names. Mary herself is 11-6 vs. Conchita.

Gallofa-while you consider the Olympic medals ASV has as points in her favor, to me it actually makes the case for Venus. Sanchez hasn't done what Venus did, which was win a gold medal.

disposablehero
Jul 7th, 2002, 12:57 AM
Originally posted by tennisaddict.
disposable of course your rankings are completely valid, but their are always points of contention. tHere's no fun without debate ;). Mary CAN be rated above Conchita, but really it is a matter of what you prioritise most.

What do you mean there is no fun without debate? I've had sex without debate and it was lots of fun.

JonBcn
Jul 7th, 2002, 01:07 AM
I think its a fair analysis...well done.

Robbie.
Jul 7th, 2002, 01:08 AM
lol@disposable

well let's just say, there is no fun on the board without debate ;)

Julian
Jul 7th, 2002, 02:12 AM
It's hard to put Venus ahead of Arantxa and vice versa because they are very close IMO..I think Arantxa has achieved a lot more then Venus but Venus is playing in one of the most intense generations in history..yet I do believe that Arantxa was a threat from 1991 to 1996 and 1998 with 1994 being her coming out party..but for me I would still put Arantxa ahead of Venus...Venus can wait about 2 more years then she'll probably accomplish more and we'll see what happends. :)

R. DIS
Jul 7th, 2002, 02:23 AM
I feel Jen belongs at the top of the list!!!!!!
Wait a sec Martina Navratilova is playing, she belongs at the top.

evadafan
Jul 7th, 2002, 03:33 AM
Disposable, you should give Jen some credit for her gold medal in Olympic singles. I think this is also a reason I would put Venus above Arantxa, as you did.

disposablehero
Jul 7th, 2002, 03:41 AM
A Gold Medal is nothing. It's like a Tier II title. Seriously, look at 2000. Martina was ranked #1 in the world, and Venus had just barely beaten her both times on the way to Venus first two Slams. Martina was ineligible. Serena didn't play because she was only the 4th highest ranked American. The 3rd highest ranked Italian was more crucial to the draw apparently. Nathalie Tauziat was not selected to the French "team" because her teamates hated her.

Seriously, even at Key Biscayne you play all the best players in the world. At the Olmypics, you play the best players who are allowed to enter.

evadafan
Jul 7th, 2002, 03:45 AM
I don't think history will treat it as nothing, as much as what you say may be true. Jen's gold medal was hard fought if I do remember correctly.

disposablehero
Jul 7th, 2002, 03:59 AM
Yes, she even beat Monica in that tournament, but IMHO a Gold Medal in tennis is not of much consequence.

My bad. I thought Monica played the 92 Olympics. Apparently she sat it out. Of course, that doubly makes my point.

evadafan
Jul 7th, 2002, 04:05 AM
I think she beat Steffi, but my memory is cloudy too. I think Monica sat it out because that's when she was beginning to think of switching her nationality to USA.

Sam L
Jul 7th, 2002, 06:16 AM
evadafan, I don't think that's true. Firstly, I didn't even know that Monica was thinking of switching nationalities that early. Was she? :confused:

But I know that the reason why she DIDN'T play the Olympics was because she didn't make herself available for the 1992 Fed Cup (a precondition of Olympic selection then, apparently). This was the same case for Sabatini and Navratilova. So that's why they all didn't play.

BTW, dh, I agree completely with that top ten list, but I have a feeling there's going to be radical changes in the next 2 years :eek:

irma
Jul 7th, 2002, 07:54 AM
she was banned because of the 91 fed cup fiasco!
same for sabatini and nav
but I am sure she also thought about switching already that time and she was mad at the yougoslavian tennisbond anyway because they didn't care about her when she was young!

Williams Rulez
Jul 7th, 2002, 12:50 PM
Honestly... I think Lindsay can even be considered to be on the same level as Arantxa given how many titles she has won... and how many weeks she has been at number 1 as well. She also won slams on more different surfaces... but well, all these are a little subjective as well

selesrules
Jul 7th, 2002, 04:12 PM
The thing about Aranxta is that she DIRECTLY benefited from the Seles stabbing. I doubt Aranxta would have become no.1 or won all those slams if Seles was not stabbed. Seles simply dominated her. Aranxta reminds me of Michael Chang, both won the 1989 French Open but then if "Pete Sampras" was stabbed Michael Chang would have also become no.1 and won more slams instead of being no.2 and not winning anymore slams. In any case, I'm not saying that Aranxta isn't a champion, I'm just saying that her records (and especially her no.1 ranking) was effected a lot by Monica's absence.

mboyle
Jul 7th, 2002, 06:26 PM
Right Now, this is how i would rate them:
1-Monica Seles
2-Martina Hingis
3-Venus Williams
4-Arantxa Sanchez Vicario
5-Lindsay Davenport
6-Serena Williams
7-Jennifer Capriati
8-Conchita Martinez (true, Pierce has ONE more GS, but Conchita is vastly superior in every other category
9-Mary Pierce
10-Amanda Coetzer (more consistent than Majoli)

R. DIS
Jul 7th, 2002, 07:38 PM
I'll say again, what about Martina Navratilova?? She has done much more than anyone on the list and she is currently playing.

Nimi
Jul 7th, 2002, 09:00 PM
if a gold madel is like a tier II event, than Venus is below Arentxa

Nimi
Jul 7th, 2002, 09:03 PM
Martina Navartilova is not really active right now. playing a bit doubles, but i wouldnt say shes really active.

disposablehero
Jul 7th, 2002, 11:26 PM
Originally posted by Niminator
if a gold madel is like a tier II event, than Venus is below Arentxa

Giving Venus the minimal credit I think a Gold Medal deserves, she is still ahead of Arantxa based solely on a half dozen other factors.

Robbie.
Jul 8th, 2002, 12:47 AM
mboyle...that'd be my list exactly. i think that most people would agree that Amanda Coetzer's career has been overall better than Majoli's. Majoli's peaks have been higher (GS Glory), but so have her troughs (ranked in the 400's), I know she was injured but still. Iva spent 4-5 years challenging the best, Amanda spent close to 10, that's why she gets the nod for me.

Williams Rulez
Jul 8th, 2002, 03:55 AM
But Amanda has never been in a grandslam finals!

Nimi
Jul 8th, 2002, 12:48 PM
yep. someone should replace Iva. but not Amanda, who can?? actually, i think Kim Clijsters, think about it.

Sevenseas
Jul 8th, 2002, 01:04 PM
Considering the fact that both Serena and Jen are still active, it’s likely that we will be able to watch more competitive matches in the very near future; so let’s just enjoy them.

mboyle
Jul 8th, 2002, 01:46 PM
Originally posted by Niminator
yep. someone should replace Iva. but not Amanda, who can?? actually, i think Kim Clijsters, think about it.

Well Amanda has one more title, and has had more QF and SF of grand slams, and again, while Clijsters has had a year in the top ten, Amanda had many, many weeks there. Actually, Clijsters was my next pick.

Rollo
Jul 8th, 2002, 03:48 PM
Much as I like Amanda, Iva deserves to be above her. All 8 of Majoli's titles are class(tier 1 or 2) wins, while Amanda has only 2 class wins among her 8 tour victories.

Majoli leads the head to head 4-1.
Coetzer has 3 semis and 4 quarters in slams.
Majoli has the French and 5 quarterfinals.

Coetzer is 460-286 (about .61 percent)
Majoli is 260-174(about .59 percent)

Majoli never got as low as the 400s. She finished in the top 10 at least 2 years (1996-7) which equals or betters Coetzer's.

Which would you rather have on your record, a slam victory or 3 semis? That's the difference between the two.

RYNJ
Jul 8th, 2002, 03:55 PM
All I know Monica, Venus, Serena, Martina, Jennifer, and Lindsay will be in the hall fo fame.

disposablehero
Sep 8th, 2002, 04:00 PM
1. Monica Seles
2. Martina Hingis
3. Venus Williams
4. Serena Williams
5. Arantxa Sanchez Vicario
6. Lindsay Davenport
7. Jennifer Capriati
8. Mary Pierce
9. Conchita Martinez
10. Iva Majoli

I very seriously considered putting Serena ahead of Venus. In "historical greatness" the margin is razor thin right now. What stands out about Serena is that she has won Slams on Clay, Grass, and Decoturf. Players who win 3 out of 4 invariably are missing either Roland Garros or Wimbledon, not Australian, because they are more specialized surfaces.

Hurley
Sep 8th, 2002, 04:58 PM
Serena should almost definitely be ahead of Venus. More often than not, the French is the missing jewel for women and men looking for the career Grand Slam, and that Serena has it should count for something.

I never was convinced, though, that winning different Slams is more prestigious than winning one Slam multiple times. So...who does this stuff anyway???

disposablehero
Sep 8th, 2002, 05:06 PM
Hurley, I have to consider that Venus has won near twice as many titles, never lost to Capriati, and been in 8 Slam Finals compared to Serena's 5. Even considering all that, if Venus lost in her next Tier II and Serena won in hers, I would switch them.

Hurley
Sep 8th, 2002, 06:21 PM
I'll buy that. But she certainly feels like the better player at the moment. And I understand that isn't the objective of this thread...but it's hard to ignore.

CJ07
Sep 8th, 2002, 11:44 PM
1. Monica Seles-way ahead
2. Martina Hingis- diddo
3. Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario- She had a great career
4. Venus Williams
5. Serena Williams
6. Lindsay Davenport
7. Jennifer Capriati
8. Mary Pierce
9. Conchita Martinez
10. Iva Majoli

Williams Rulez
Sep 9th, 2002, 07:51 AM
Well, I must admit that Serena should be ahead of Venus at this point. 3 slams in a year out of 3 played is no tiny feat... and then you look at her record against top players, she hardly trails anyone.

Only thing is her lack of titles in a sense.

jenn
Sep 9th, 2002, 09:00 AM
Here is an even more poignant point....if she wins the Australian does she deserve to be ahead of Martina?

Sure Martina will still have 170+ more weeks at #1 and around 20 more titles, millions of dollars more prize money....but Serena will have the career slam and only evert, graf and navratilova have done that in the modern era. She will also have a non-calendar year grandslam and only Navratilova and steffi have done that. It has to be considered.

Questions a plenty over the next few months!

Oizo
Sep 9th, 2002, 09:47 AM
Around 20 more titles? ;) It is far more than that, Navratilova has the record of 167 titles....then comes Evert with 157. :angel:

Beige
Sep 9th, 2002, 11:14 AM
I'm glad you put Mary ahead of Conchita.Conchita has Mary beat if you it base on consistency (she's made it to the semi's or better of every Slam, for example) and tour titles. However, Mary has one more Slam than Conchita and has had higher profile wins than Conchita. As someone else pointed out, Seles owns Conchita whereas Mary has held her own against Monica. In Grand Slam play, Mary has beaten champions Graf, Seles, Sanchez Vicario, Hingis and even Conchita herself; Conchita cannot make the same claim.

disposablehero
Sep 9th, 2002, 03:27 PM
I've already been thinking about that jenn, and at this point I would have to say no. Martina actually has about 30 more titles, and more Doubles achievements. Serena really does need to pass Martina with 6 Slams in order to justify placing her higher. (Or win 15-20 more titles including 1 Slam, I'll bet the 2 Slams happen first)

sartrista7
Sep 9th, 2002, 04:06 PM
I agree with the new ranking on all points.

Venus is above Serena if you look at their careers as a whole: more titles, 3 more Slam finals clinching it. The fact that Serena owns Venus right now is irrelevant: the head-to-head is still in Venus' favour (or at least equal). Serena's never defended a Slam, though she has won on three different surfaces.

Iva is certainly above Amanda, no question. The points on which Amanda beats Iva are very close indeed - one more title, one more Slam QF - while the quality of Iva's titles and the lack of a Slam final for Amanda put Iva way ahead.

Should Serena win Oz, that wouldn't necessarily put her ahead of Martina if the career is taken as a whole (though it would mean Serena would be the only active woman to have won 4 in a row) for the reasons dh stated.

disposablehero
Nov 12th, 2002, 05:45 AM
Hmm, I guess Serena is ahead of Venus now.

The question is, should Kim now be ranked ahead of Iva, or do we need to wait a couple more months? Certainly she has the strongest case out of the field now.

TSequoia01
Nov 12th, 2002, 06:01 AM
No I like your list! Serena is definitely on the rise but next year will tell. :cool:

disposablehero
Jan 25th, 2003, 04:29 AM
1. Monica Seles
2. Martina Hingis
3. Serena Williams
4. Venus Williams
5. Lindsay Davenport
6. Jennifer Capriati
7. Mary Pierce
8. Conchita Martinez
9. Iva Majoli
10. Kim Clijsters


Arantxa is gone. Given the breadth of Kim's accomplishments, she could be ranked ahead of Iva soon, even without a Slam. But she needs to do some more yet. Plus, the biggest gap in importance is between 0 Slams and 1.

Sam L
Jan 25th, 2003, 04:36 AM
Serena has to be #2 now. Equal number of slams but she has everything.

Cybelle Darkholme
Jan 25th, 2003, 04:38 AM
Greatest Active Players:

1. Monica Seles
2. Serena Williams
3. Martina Hingis
4. Venus Williams
5. Arantxa Sanchez Vicario
6. Lindsay Davenport
7. Jennifer Capriati
8. Mary Pierce
9. Conchita Martinez
10. Iva Majoli

ttaM
Jan 25th, 2003, 04:44 AM
Serena has to be bumped up to #2 at least. Perhaps #1.

disposablehero
Jan 25th, 2003, 04:46 AM
Originally posted by Sam L
Serena has to be #2 now. Equal number of slams but she has everything.

Less doubles titles and Slam doubles, all with the same formidable partner. Half as many titles.

disposablehero
Jan 25th, 2003, 04:48 AM
And 6 Slam Finals total, compared to I think 12.

Tapatio
Jan 25th, 2003, 04:48 AM
Originally posted by disposablehero
1. Monica Seles
2. Martina Hingis
3. Serena Williams
4. Venus Williams
5. Lindsay Davenport
6. Jennifer Capriati
7. Mary Pierce
8. Conchita Martinez
9. Iva Majoli
10. Kim Clijsters


.

Agree

Robbie.
Jan 25th, 2003, 04:49 AM
i agree DH

Martina is still ahead of Serena - titles won, prizemoney, weeks @#1, doubles titles.

And Monica is way infront. Monica has 9 slam titles for heaven sake. 9 is always better than 5 IMO.

disposablehero
Jan 25th, 2003, 04:51 AM
Originally posted by GoMonica
Serena has to be bumped up to #2 at least. Perhaps #1.

#1? She has two less Slams than Monica did when she was still 18. She's got a hell of a lot of work to get there.

And she can thank Monica for her stalker being in jail.

Robbie.
Jan 25th, 2003, 04:52 AM
I still find it kind of eerie that Iva is in #9. As much as I love her the girl was only a threat from 1995-1997 and has done jack for the last five years aside from her Charleston victory.

Sam L
Jan 25th, 2003, 04:53 AM
ok, well I thought we were only talking about singles. If we include singles, doubles, mixed and overall career, then yes I'd still have Hingis at #2. But for singles only Serena has to be #2.

But NO WAY I'd put her at #1. Serena's had 1 solid year. Seles dominated for 3 years. 8 out 12 slams, that's a level Serena needs to get to before she becomes #1.

disposablehero
Jan 25th, 2003, 04:54 AM
Yeah, Sam. 91-93 especially. 9 Slams held, 8 entered, 55-1. And the tour championships to end 90 91 and 92.

ttaM
Jan 25th, 2003, 04:57 AM
Ok. Maybe I got carried away :p

Now if Serena can win the Australian Open and Roland Garros mix doubles crowns she will have the complete complete Slam ;) Martina will get her shot tomorrow. :)

hingis-seles
Jan 25th, 2003, 06:48 AM
Originally posted by disposablehero
Yeah, Sam. 91-93 especially. 9 Slams held, 8 entered, 55-1. And the tour championships to end 90 91 and 92.

Go M0o0o0oo0NICA!!!!~

martinailuv
Jan 25th, 2003, 10:54 AM
Originally posted by Rollo
Mary CAN be rated ahead of Conchita when head to heads are taken into consideration. Pierce has several wins over Graf, Seles, or any other player we care to name. Conchita has horrible head to heads vs the same names. Mary herself is 11-6 vs. Conchita.

rollo that's exactly why i would put mary ahead of conchi. sorry i don't have the numbers but compare mary's head to head v. monica to conchi's head to head v. monica. i realised as well that mary has defeated both williams sisters while conchi hasn't
beaten either of them. to conchi's credit i should say that she owned lindsay for some time in the 90's while mary only managed one win over lindsay.

good to see my favourite in the #2 position. :)

way
Jan 25th, 2003, 01:20 PM
My twopennies:
Serena is still behind Seles, I agree.
But she's head and shoulder over the rest, Hingis included.
A non-calendar Slam has been achieved by very few players.
And even Monica, at the end of the day, cannot be so sure about her being *greater* than Serena, at the time being.......

way
Jan 25th, 2003, 01:22 PM
Originally posted by GoMonica
Ok. Maybe I got carried away :p

Now if Serena can win the Australian Open and Roland Garros mix doubles crowns she will have the complete complete Slam ;) Martina will get her shot tomorrow. :)

are you sure Serena misses *only* two titles to have all them twelve???
gosh, I didn't know!!!
:o

Experimentee
Jan 25th, 2003, 01:32 PM
Originally posted by disposablehero
1. Monica Seles
2. Martina Hingis
3. Serena Williams
4. Venus Williams
5. Lindsay Davenport
6. Jennifer Capriati
7. Mary Pierce
8. Conchita Martinez
9. Iva Majoli
10. Kim Clijsters


Arantxa is gone. Given the breadth of Kim's accomplishments, she could be ranked ahead of Iva soon, even without a Slam. But she needs to do some more yet. Plus, the biggest gap in importance is between 0 Slams and 1.

Serenas career slam puts her ahead of Hingis, IMO, 4 singles Slams in a row is better than some doubles Slams and lesser titles.

I'm a big fan of Kim, but she should be left off until she wins a Slam. No doubt she will do it, but until then she looks out of place among slam winners.

Tennis Fool
Jan 25th, 2003, 01:33 PM
Originally posted by disposablehero
Less doubles titles and Slam doubles, all with the same formidable partner. Half as many titles.

Sorry, four slams in a row trumps doubles in any arena.
Hingis never completed the "Hingis slam".

So it should be:

Seles
Serena
Hingis
Venus


Also, how does Arantxa fall behind Iva and Mary??? Singles GS titles should be given greater weight, because you're covering twice as much court, among other things.

Otherwise, Kournikova would be appearing on this list, LOL

bobcat
Jan 25th, 2003, 06:25 PM
Arantxa isn't on the list anymore because she's retired.

I would also put Serena above Hingis since this discussion is clearly about singles and not doubles. Otherwise we would have included Renee Stubbs and Lisa Raymond on the list.

Cybelle Darkholme
Jan 25th, 2003, 06:32 PM
How many doubles titles did steffi win? So does that mean that martina nav is the all time time great because she has more doubles grand slams?

irma
Jan 25th, 2003, 06:36 PM
when you include doubles then there is not much argue about that (there is still court too though)

steffi btw won 11 doubles titles. I know it's not much;)

Cybelle Darkholme
Jan 25th, 2003, 06:41 PM
steffi Graf
WTA Tour singles titles 107 (includes 1 Olympics)
WTA Tour doubles titles 11
Grand Slam titles 22 singles, 1 doubles
ITF Women's Circuit singles titles 0
Career Prize Money $21,895,277
Career Win Loss Record 902-115


martina nav
WTA Tour singles titles 167
WTA Tour doubles titles 167
Grand Slam titles 18 singles, 31 doubles, 7 mixed doubles
ITF Womens Circuit singles titles 0
Career Prize Money End of 2002 $20,527,874
Career Win Loss Record End of 2002-Singles 1440-213


So if we're counting singles and doubles titles then by Martina nav is by far the greatest woman to ever play the game. She is head and shoulders better than graf. Yes steffis 11 doubles titles are nice but nothing compared to martinas 167!

Cybelle Darkholme
Jan 25th, 2003, 06:49 PM
Serena Williams
WTA Tour singles titles 20
WTA Tour doubles titles 11 (includes one Olympic title)
Grand Slam titles 5 singles, 6 doubles, 2 mixed doubles
ITF Womens Circuit singles titles 0
Prize Money 2002 $3,935,668
Career Prize Money End of 2002 $10,041,992
Win Loss Record 2002 - Singles 56-5
Career Win Loss Record End of 2002-Singles 210-44


Venus Williams
WTA Tour singles titles 28 (including one Olympic title)
WTA Tour doubles titles 10 (including one Olympic title)
Grand Slam titles 4 singles, 6 doubles, 2 mixed doubles
ITF Womens Circuit singles titles 0
Prize Money 2002 $2,583,571
Career Prize Money End of 2002 $11,902,908
Win Loss Record 2002 - Singles 62-9
Career Win Loss Record End of 2002-Singles 305-67

Martina Hingis
WTA Tour singles titles 40
WTA Tour doubles titles 36
Grand Slam titles 5 singles, 9 doubles
ITF Womens Circuit singles titles 2
Prize Money 2002 $1,467,584
Career Prize Money End of 2002 $18,344,660
Win Loss Record 2002 - Singles 34-10
Career Win Loss Record End of 2002-Singles 471-100


Monica Seles
WTA Tour singles titles 53
WTA Tour doubles titles 6
Grand Slam titles 9
ITF Womens Circuit singles titles 0
Prize Money 2002 $1,096,630
Career Prize Money End of 2002 $14,615,549
Win Loss Record 2002 - Singles 47-14
Career Win Loss Record End of 2002-Singles 585-115

Jennifer Capriati
WTA Tour singles titles 13 (includes 1 Olympics)
WTA Tour doubles titles 1
Grand Slam titles 3 singles
ITF Womens Circuit singles titles 0
Prize Money 2002 $2,217,939
Career Prize Money End of 2002 $6,974,563
Win Loss Record 2002 - Singles 48-16
Career Win Loss Record End of 2002-Singles 359-146

Lindsay Davenport
WTA Tour singles titles 37 (includes one Olympic title)
WTA Tour doubles titles 32
Grand Slam titles 3 singles, 3 doubles
ITF Womens Circuit singles titles 0
Prize Money 2002 $805,191
Career Prize Money End of 2002 $14,842,061
Win Loss Record 2002 - Singles 24-9
Career Win Loss Record End of 2002-Singles 525-146

disposablehero
Jan 25th, 2003, 11:41 PM
As of the moment they happen to be in order of total Slam titles, although that is not an absolute rule. However, when you look at cybelle's stats for the top 6. a few interesting things come up.

#1: Order the top 6 in total singles titles, then move Lindsay down 2 spots, and you will have the order I gave.

#2; Order the top 6 by career match winning %, and they will EXACTLY match my order, with the exception of Serena being one tenth of one percent higher than Martina. And that's despite Monica bring on the downside of her career for more than half her career already.

Add that in to the all important total Slams criteria, and I think my list looks pretty good.

Dawn Marie
Jan 26th, 2003, 12:01 AM
Here is the CORRECT list;)

Navriltilova
Seles
Serena
Venus
Lindsay
Cochita
Jennifer
Mary
Iva
Clijsters


I think if you are going to use past doubles achievements then that should automatically include Martina as active for singles and doubles. She is an active player.

Martina hingis is not active. That is why she is off the list.

Dawn Marie
Jan 26th, 2003, 12:52 AM
I think that one should use Martina N. cause she is playing. Ok she doesn't play singles but she still plays doubles. Doubles is part of your criteria for the list. That imho should automatically put Martina as a canidate. Imho either dismiss doubles from the options or include Martina. Single players have their doubles listed, but the doubles don't have their singles listed.:)

Nicole, Marty was active but told the press she is not going to play indefinetly. That imho is inactive. Infact I would say Martina n is more active for this list that Hingis. Just my opinion. I do love these kinds of stat threads though.

V@S are in a great position.:)

CJ07
Jan 26th, 2003, 01:15 AM
Singles ONLY

1. Monica Seles
2. Martina Hingis
Serena Williams
4. Venus Williams
5. Lindsay Davenport

Doubles Included

1. Martina Navratilova
2. Monica Seles
3. Martina Hingis
4. Serena Williams
5. Venus Williams


I'm putting Hingis and Serena at a tie, Hingis dominated was #1 for 3 years and whiped the tour in 97, even more so than Serena did last year. Also she has twice as many titles, and has been in more finals. Yes Serena has won 4 in a row, but shes going to need to keep it up to trump Martina. As for getting to #1, Serena is going to really have to win all four this year to even be considered.

And she can thank Monica for her stalker being in jail
You nailed it

disposablehero
Jun 5th, 2003, 11:53 PM
1. Martina Navratilova
2. Monica Seles
3. Serena Williams
4. Venus Williams
5. Lindsay Davenport
6. Jennifer Capriati
7. Mary Pierce
8. Conchita Martinez
9. Winner of Roland Garros
10. Runner Up of Roland Garros

Given a close examination of their respective careers, I feel that Justine now deserves to be ranked ahead of Iva win or lose.

Snuffkin
Jun 5th, 2003, 11:58 PM
Glad you bumped this...gives me the chance to say this:

When Jen went on her run in the first half of 2001, there was talk of her doing the Slam and after Paris a list of women to have done the first 2 legs of the Slam in the same year was in every newspaper. Since the Oz moved to January, only 5, yes 5!, women have done the double. I did expect Serena to become the 6th, but it just goes to show, all the great players active right now that are not on that list. What Serena was expected to do was immense - that shows how good she is. She was expected to do the double, yet the list stands at 5. Doing the Oz and French double isn't easy. Coming so close says a lot about the player though.

That has no relevance to anything, but I just wanted to share it and maybe give some perspective to fans.

1jackson2001
Jun 6th, 2003, 12:25 AM
interesting

Robbie.
Sep 7th, 2003, 04:37 AM
1. Martina Navratilova
2. Monica Seles
3. Serena Williams
4. Venus Williams
5. Lindsay Davenport
6. Jennifer Capriati
7. Justine Henin
8. Mary Pierce
9. Conchita Martinez
10. Kim Clijsters

mishar
Sep 12th, 2003, 06:13 PM
In a few short months, Justine will have done what so few have done before her: win 2 grand slams, and probably become #1. Very impressive.

She already has 13 titles; Capriati only has 14! And Pierce only has 15

Trish101
Sep 12th, 2003, 06:19 PM
mishar...its not Quantity its QUALITY Jennifer Has 14 titles 45 finals (including 25 tier 1's) plus she has a gold medal and three majors...so as far as thats concerned Jennifer is higher than both belgians

Cybelle Darkholme
Sep 12th, 2003, 06:39 PM
Here I'll fix you're list of greatest active players..

1. Monica Seles nine slams, enough said.
2. Serena Williams six slams, enough said
3. Venus Williams four slams, better head to head vs top players
4. Arantxa Sanchez Vicario four slams
5. Lindsay Davenport, three slams more titles
6. Jennifer Capriati three slams not many titles
7. justine henin hardenne two slams, growing titles
8. Mary Pierce, two slams titles but slumping
9. Conchita Martinez someone must be nine
10. Iva Majoli look at number nine

DA FOREHAND
Sep 12th, 2003, 06:48 PM
Singles ONLY

1. Monica Seles
2. Martina Hingis
Serena Williams
4. Venus Williams
5. Lindsay Davenport

Doubles Included

1. Martina Navratilova
2. Monica Seles
3. Martina Hingis
4. Serena Williams
5. Venus Williams


I'm putting Hingis and Serena at a tie, Hingis dominated was #1 for 3 years and whiped the tour in 97, even more so than Serena did last year. Also she has twice as many titles, and has been in more finals. Yes Serena has won 4 in a row, but shes going to need to keep it up to trump Martina. As for getting to #1, Serena is going to really have to win all four this year to even be considered.


You nailed it

Post stabbing Monica has had a built in excuse not to have worked on her game, and especially her fitness.

Maybe she should get an asterik next to her name...

Monica Seles*

(*) Could still be a serious contender had she improved her fitness.

bandabou
Sep 12th, 2003, 07:09 PM
Post stabbing Monica has had a built in excuse not to have worked on her game, and especially her fitness.

Maybe she should get an asterik next to her name...

Monica Seles*

(*) Could still be a serious contender had she improved her fitness.

Maybe in the first few years after the stabbing. In ´95 u.s. open finals, clearly a result of lack of conditioning. But after that I just think that the game has passed her away. Serena, Venus et al were bound to surpass her.

Ryan
Sep 12th, 2003, 07:12 PM
Here I'll fix you're list of greatest active players..

1. Monica Seles nine slams, enough said.
2. Serena Williams six slams, enough said
3. Venus Williams four slams, better head to head vs top players
4. Arantxa Sanchez Vicario four slams
5. Lindsay Davenport, three slams more titles
6. Jennifer Capriati three slams not many titles
7. justine henin hardenne two slams, growing titles
8. Mary Pierce, two slams titles but slumping
9. Conchita Martinez someone must be nine
10. Iva Majoli look at number nine


Why is Arantxa included, isn't she retired? Otherwise I agree with your list, but I would Kim at #10 instead of Iva.

DA FOREHAND
Sep 12th, 2003, 07:15 PM
Maybe in the first few years after the stabbing. In ´95 u.s. open finals, clearly a result of lack of conditioning. But after that I just think that the game has passed her away. Serena, Venus et al were bound to surpass her.


That may be true, but had she gotten fit she could have seriously contended for titles at the French and A.O., her game is/was still that good. Fitness or lack thereof is one of the main reasons she lost the 98 French Crown. If ever there was a player who could say she played for fun it'd be Monica not Kim.

bandabou
Sep 12th, 2003, 07:19 PM
That may be true, but had she gotten fit she could have seriously contended for titles at the French and A.O., her game is/was still that good. Fitness or lack thereof is one of the main reasons she lost the 98 French Crown. If ever there was a player who could say she played for fun it'd be Monica not Kim.

A thing I found odd....in ´95 againstn Graf, she bageled Graf and then all of sudden it seemed like she lost steam, same thing at the French ´98.

I think her window was ´95 till ´98....after that the sport became athlete dominated and Seles wasn´t an athlete.

DA FOREHAND
Sep 12th, 2003, 07:21 PM
A thing I found odd....in ´95 againstn Graf, she bageled Graf and then all of sudden it seemed like she lost steam, same thing at the French ´98.

I think her window was ´95 till ´98....after that the sport became athlete dominated and Seles wasn´t an athlete.


Nor did she make any credible effort to get into the best physical shape. LIndsay did a total transformation, and I would have never called her athletic, now or when she tipped the scales. :worship:

1jackson2001
Sep 12th, 2003, 07:27 PM
again...interesting stuff. thanks for the bump and extra opinions.

bandabou
Sep 12th, 2003, 07:29 PM
Nor did she make any credible effort to get into the best physical shape. LIndsay did a total transformation, and I would have never called her athletic, now or when she tipped the scales. :worship:

Yep, but don´t you find her slump timing curious too?! Lindsay had a two-year run prior to the sisters´ascendance and during Hingis´s decline. It was easy for Davenport because she could overpower Hingis. After the sisters got serious with tennis( after the French ´00) Lindsay didn´t have ANY chance either. Don´t you find it curious that her last win against either sister is since ´00?!

Trish101
Sep 12th, 2003, 07:30 PM
at the end of the day its about QUALITY (who the hell cares if someone wins a tier 3 tournement in acapulco?)

1.Martina Hingis
2.Jennifer Capriati
3.Serena williams


thats all ...thats QUALITY ...all those other girls just are....yukky

mishar
Sep 12th, 2003, 08:05 PM
Post stabbing Monica has had a built in excuse not to have worked on her game, and especially her fitness.

Maybe she should get an asterik next to her name...

Monica Seles*

(*) Could still be a serious contender had she improved her fitness.

So Monica gets an asterik for tournaments she didn't win? Don't quite follow you there.

I wonder why otherwise intelligent Graf fans seem to be obsessed with putting down Monica and baiting fans of Monica. It may be because of rude Seles fans insulting Graf, but it seems to take on a life of its own.

In fact you can't say anything nice about Monica without them rushing in to insult her or remind you that Steffi did everything better.

I can only think they are so threatened by Monica because she was the only rival who really challenged Steffi. Graf fans were so infuriated by this pretender to the throne that, even after she was stabbed and her threat removed, they still need to insult and denigrate her.

bandabou
Sep 12th, 2003, 08:13 PM
So Monica gets an asterik for tournaments she didn't win? Don't quite follow you there.

I wonder why otherwise intelligent Graf fans seem to be obsessed with putting down Monica and baiting fans of Monica. It may be because of rude Seles fans insulting Graf, but it seems to take on a life of its own.

In fact you can't say anything nice about Monica without them rushing in to insult her or remind you that Steffi did everything better.

I can only think they are so threatened by Monica because she was the only rival who really challenged Steffi. Graf fans were so infuriated by this pretender to the throne that, even after she was stabbed and her threat removed, they still need to insult and denigrate her.

And you mean it too!

Kart
Sep 12th, 2003, 08:31 PM
Has JenCap really been in 45 finals that she didn't win ?

:eek:

Ryan
Sep 12th, 2003, 08:57 PM
at the end of the day its about QUALITY (who the hell cares if someone wins a tier 3 tournement in acapulco?)

1.Martina Hingis
2.Jennifer Capriati
3.Serena williams


thats all ...thats QUALITY ...all those other girls just are....yukky

Serena's quality is twice Jennifers, and one more then Hingis'. :)

CanIGetAWhat
May 25th, 2006, 12:34 AM
This needs a bump since Martina Hingis has come out of retirement.

Ryan
May 25th, 2006, 01:21 AM
This needs a bump since Martina Hingis has come out of retirement.


Word!

New list: Monica not included, since she hasn't played in what, 2 years? Jen also not included.

1. Serena
2. Hingis
3. Venus
4. Justine
5. Lindsay
6. Kim
7. Pierce
8. Mauresmo
9. Sharapova
10. Myskina

Hingis/Venus, Justine/Lindsay, and Kim/Pierce were tough ones.

LeRoy.
May 25th, 2006, 01:24 AM
1) Serena Williams
2) Venus Williams
3) Martina Hingis
4) Justine Henin Hardenne
5) Lindsay Davenport
6) Jennifer Capriati
7) Mary Pierce
8) Kim Clijsters
9) Amelie Mauresmo
10) Maria Sharapova

I hope i didn't miss anyone ;)

hingis-seles
Dec 27th, 2010, 07:52 PM
This REALLY needs to be updated.

_Cell-chuk
Dec 27th, 2010, 09:35 PM
1. Serena Williams
2. Justine Henin
3. Venus Williams
4. Maria Sharapova
5. Kim Clijsters
6. Svetlana Kuznetsova
7. Ana Ivanovic
8. Francesca Schiavone
9. Jelena Jankovic
10. Caroline Wozniacki

I am not sure about 9-10. Zvonareva,Safina could also be included. I hope I'm not missing anyone. I would have Dementieva at 9 if she was still playing.

I put Jankovic at 9 because she has a number of quality wins over Serena/Venus and she totally owns Wozniacki.

Stamp Paid
Dec 27th, 2010, 10:19 PM
1.) Serena
2.) Justine
3.) Venus
4.) Clijsters
5.) Sharapova
6.) Kuznetsova
7.) Ivanovic

justineheninfan
Dec 28th, 2010, 02:45 AM
1. Serena
2. Justine
3. Venus
4. Clijsters
5. Sharapova
6. Kuznetsova
7. Ivanovic
8. Jankovic
9. Schiavone
10. Wozniacki

V's a star
Dec 28th, 2010, 04:26 AM
1. Serena
2. Venus
3. Justine
4. Clijsters
5. Sharapova
6. Kuznetsova
7. Ivanovic
8. Jankovic
9. Schiavone
10. Wozniacki

it-girl
Dec 28th, 2010, 05:03 AM
1. Serena
2. Venus
3. Justine
4. Clijsters
5. Sharapova
6. Kuznetsova
7. Ivanovic
8. Jankovic
9. Schiavone
10. WozniackiThis

justineheninfan
Dec 28th, 2010, 05:07 AM
There arent really many points of debate amongst still "active" players. Venus vs Justine for #2, Clijsters vs Sharapova for #4 perhaps. And Schiavone vs Wozniacki vs Ivanovic vs Jankovic at the bottom of the top 10.

To be honest this would have been a way more interesting topic when the thread was started in mid 2002.

bandabou
Dec 28th, 2010, 07:18 AM
Wow...serena sure has run away with this title. :lol:

Smitten
Dec 28th, 2010, 05:25 PM
1) S. Williams
2) Henin
3) V. Williams
4) Clijsters
5) Sharapova
6) Kuznetsova
7) Ivanovic
8) Safina
9) Jankovic
10) Wozniacki

Bartosh
Dec 28th, 2010, 05:34 PM
1. Serena
2. Venus
3. Henin
4. Sharapova
5. Clijsters
6. Kuznetsova
7. Ivanovic
8. Schiavone
9. Safina
10. Jankovic

:)

doooma6816
Dec 28th, 2010, 06:20 PM
1) S. Williams
2) Henin
3) V. Williams
4) Clijsters
5) Sharapova
6) Kuznetsova
7) Ivanovic
8) Safina
9) Jankovic
10) Wozniacki

This.

Srodgers
Dec 28th, 2010, 06:56 PM
Hmm can someone tell me why some have Justine above Venus :scratch:

The Witch-king
Dec 28th, 2010, 07:18 PM
Serena
Venus
The rest.

Potato
Dec 28th, 2010, 07:27 PM
Hmm can someone tell me why some have Justine above Venus :scratch:

Obviously it is a very close discussion, so I would understand if it goes either way. It all depends on what is important. Justine has won 3/4 slams, and has had more consistency throughout all the slams throughout the years. Venus has won 2/4 slams, and has only been consistent through Wimbledon and the US Open. Venus's domination at Wimbledon has earned her 5 Wimbledons, while Justine's domination at the French has earned her 4 French Opens. Some people like to say that Wimbledon is more prestigious but personally I think a slam is a slam. Others like to put Venus's doubles accomplishments over Justine.

Personally, I give Justine the edge because she was able to completely dominate 2003 and 2007.

Usually, the deal breaker is which player you like more.;)

Smitten
Dec 28th, 2010, 07:27 PM
Hmm can someone tell me why some have Justine above Venus :scratch:

Because Justine was more dominant and consistent than Venus ever was and leads Venus in the overwhelming majority of every important singles statistic.

Srodgers
Dec 28th, 2010, 08:02 PM
Because Justine was more dominant and consistent than Venus ever was and leads Venus in the overwhelming majority of every important singles statistic.
They have the same amount of titles :scratch: And Venus leads the H2H 7-2

The thread isnt about just singles, its about overall play. 16 GS >>> 7 GS

Matt01
Dec 28th, 2010, 08:04 PM
The thread isnt about just singles, its about overall play. 16 GS >>> 7 GS


From reading the first post in this thread, it actually IS about singles, so Justine > Venus clearly.

debopero
Dec 28th, 2010, 08:21 PM
From reading the first post in this thread, it actually IS about singles, so Justine > Venus clearly.

There are almost even really :shrug: .

V's a star
Dec 28th, 2010, 08:30 PM
From reading the first post in this thread, it actually IS about singles, so Justine > Venus clearly.

Obviously u didnt read the 1st post. :weirdo: :lol: Dont worry no one would expect you to, or at least be honest about it.

I agree with the person that said its basically even and the deal breaker is who u like more. Venus has more GS finals, the edge in the h2h, more years in top 10, more prize money, many more golds and doubles GS. Justine has more weeks at #1 and one more YEC. Am i missing anything?
Overall Venus clearly has the edge, when just talking about singles its more debatable. Hopefully this year will be the year when they separate from each other.

it-girl
Dec 28th, 2010, 08:34 PM
They have the same amount of titles :scratch: And Venus leads the H2H 7-2

The thread isnt about just singles, its about overall play. 16 GS >>> 7 GSThank you. The h2h is the deal breaker, there is no way to overlook the truth about that. Venus 7 - Henin 2.

it-girl
Dec 28th, 2010, 08:36 PM
Obviously u didnt read the 1st post. :weirdo: :lol: Dont worry no one would expect you to, or at least be honest about it.

I agree with the person that said its basically even and the deal breaker is who u like more. Venus has more GS finals, the edge in the h2h, more years in top 10, more prize money, many more golds and doubles GS. Justine has more weeks at #1 and one more YEC. Am i missing anything?
Overall Venus clearly has the edge, when just talking about singles its more debatable. Hopefully this year will be the year when they separate from each other.Could not have said it better myself.

Veesus
Dec 28th, 2010, 08:43 PM
Based on whose career I'd prefer to have:
1. Serena
2. Venus
3. :shrug:

Wimbledon is the best slam in my eyes. Venus has 5 of them.

Matt01
Dec 28th, 2010, 08:44 PM
Obviously u didnt read the 1st post. :weirdo: :lol: Dont worry no one would expect you to, or at least be honest about it.



The first post is about Singles :weirdo:


Thank you. The h2h is the deal breaker, there is no way to overlook the truth about that. Venus 7 - Henin 2.


The H2H cannot be the tie-breaker for obvious reasons.
And btw, this thread is not about Venus vs. Justine.

Sp!ffy
Dec 28th, 2010, 08:45 PM
The H2H cannot be the tie-breaker for obvious reasons.

:haha::haha:

The Witch-king
Dec 28th, 2010, 08:53 PM
Because Justine was more dominant and consistent than Venus ever was and leads Venus in the overwhelming majority of every important singles statistic.
Incl. cheating...
:devil::secret::scared::ras:

Oh no I didn't!
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/yZMCPa4EkGs/0.jpg

V's a star
Dec 28th, 2010, 08:57 PM
The first post is about Singles :weirdo:





The H2H cannot be the tie-breaker for obvious reasons.
And btw, this thread is not about Venus vs. Justine.

"4 slam winners: Venus Williams has a far far far superior head to head against top players compared to Arantxa. That's the big factor.

3 Slam winners: Lindsay has a ton of regular titles, a ton of weeks at #1, and some good doubles results. Serena has basically everything on Jen. More titles, far superior doubles results, more prize money, better head to heads, Slams on 3 different surfaces, and in half the time.

Iva Majoli: Objectively, she has done more than any non Slam winner, keeping in mind that her career is nearing a decade."

We all know u have selective reading matt its ok. Not even gonna get into the H2H with someone who cant read.

V's a star
Dec 28th, 2010, 08:58 PM
:haha::haha:

:lol::lol:

Matt01
Dec 28th, 2010, 09:04 PM
"4 slam winners: Venus Williams has a far far far superior head to head against top players compared to Arantxa. That's the big factor.

3 Slam winners: Lindsay has a ton of regular titles, a ton of weeks at #1, and some good doubles results. Serena has basically everything on Jen. More titles, far superior doubles results, more prize money, better head to heads, Slams on 3 different surfaces, and in half the time.

Iva Majoli: Objectively, she has done more than any non Slam winner, keeping in mind that her career is nearing a decade."

We all know u have selective reading matt its ok. Not even gonna get into the H2H with someone who cant read.


"4 slam winners: Venus Williams has a far far far superior head to head against top players compared to Arantxa. That's the big factor.

3 Slam winners: Lindsay has a ton of regular titles, a ton of weeks at #1, and some good doubles results. Serena has basically everything on Jen. More titles, far superior doubles results, more prize money, better head to heads, Slams on 3 different surfaces, and in half the time.

Iva Majoli: Objectively, she has done more than any non Slam winner, keeping in mind that her career is nearing a decade."


I know, reading is hard...

The Witch-king
Dec 28th, 2010, 09:09 PM
"4 slam winners: Venus Williams has a far far far superior head to head against top players compared to Arantxa. That's the big factor.

3 Slam winners: Lindsay has a ton of regular titles, a ton of weeks at #1, and some good doubles results. Serena has basically everything on Jen. More titles, far superior doubles results, more prize money, better head to heads, Slams on 3 different surfaces, and in half the time.

Iva Majoli: Objectively, she has done more than any non Slam winner, keeping in mind that her career is nearing a decade."


I know, reading is hard...
GIRL, tell me about it.:lick::lick::lick::help::help::help:

Matt01
Dec 28th, 2010, 09:12 PM
GIRL, tell me about it.:lick::lick::lick::help::help::help:


Not sure what you're trying to say :confused:

pierce85
Dec 28th, 2010, 09:27 PM
Justine is clearly above venus, even some Serena fans see it

V's a star
Dec 28th, 2010, 09:36 PM
"4 slam winners: Venus Williams has a far far far superior head to head against top players compared to Arantxa. That's the big factor.

3 Slam winners: Lindsay has a ton of regular titles, a ton of weeks at #1, and some good doubles results. Serena has basically everything on Jen. More titles, far superior doubles results, more prize money, better head to heads, Slams on 3 different surfaces, and in half the time.

Iva Majoli: Objectively, she has done more than any non Slam winner, keeping in mind that her career is nearing a decade."


I know, reading is hard...

:lol: man stop ur bullshit do u ever have anything else to do??
They BOTH HAVE THE SAME AMOUNT OF SLAMS!!! It's like i'm talking to a damn child. But in reality its an old man :help:

Matt01
Dec 28th, 2010, 09:39 PM
LOL...you don't get it. Bye and thanks.

V's a star
Dec 28th, 2010, 09:47 PM
LOL...you don't get it. Bye and thanks.

Your rite, no one gets your random rambling and selective reading. Bye sweety. :kiss:

Smitten
Dec 28th, 2010, 10:22 PM
They have the same amount of titles :scratch: And Venus leads the H2H 7-2

The thread isnt about just singles, its about overall play. 16 GS >>> 7 GS

Winning percentage, Tier I titles, YEC titles, Weeks at #1, Year-End #1.

BuTtErFrEnA
Dec 28th, 2010, 10:25 PM
GIRL, tell me about it.:lick::lick::lick::help::help::help:



total pwnage :lol:

it-girl
Dec 28th, 2010, 11:06 PM
Justine is clearly above venus, even some Serena fans see itJustine clearly wishes she was above Venus & what do Serena fans have to do with this? Everyone knows that Wimbledon is the pinnacle of the slams though many will not admit it in this forum. People who do not even follow tennis have heard of Wimbledon there is even a movie called Wimbledon. Justine herself even came out of retirement because she wants to win, dare I say Wimbledon. Venus has 5 & more finals to Justine having 0 & 2 finals. Justine would do anything to have 1 of what Venus has 5 of.

pierce85
Dec 28th, 2010, 11:20 PM
Justine clearly wishes she was above Venus & what do Serena fans have to do with this? Everyone knows that Wimbledon is the pinnacle of the slams though many will not admit it in this forum. People who do not even follow tennis have heard of Wimbledon there is even a movie called Wimbledon. Justine herself even came out of retirement because she wants to win, dare I say Wimbledon. Venus has 5 & more finals to Justine having 0 & 2 finals. Justine would do anything to have 1 of what Venus has 5 of.

Venus would do anything to have one of Justine's roland garros or australian open trophies, venus would do anything to have justine's weeks at #1 to solidify her place in history, venus would do anything to have one more YEC or three year ending number one's and she would do anything to have Justine's winning percentage. Do i need to go on? I win, you lose such a shame

terjw
Dec 28th, 2010, 11:23 PM
Serena
Justine
Venus
Kim
Maria
Sveta

justineheninfan
Dec 29th, 2010, 12:55 AM
Hmm can someone tell me why some have Justine above Venus :scratch:

It depends what you value. Both have about equal the amount of arguments.

In Henins favor is:

-More consistency
-Winning atleast 1 slam for 5 years in a row
-Winning 3 of the 4 slams
-Better results at her weakest slam than Venus on at hers, and just a bit more balanced results across all surfaces in general than Venus even if Henins are also a bit clay heavy
-3 year end #1s vs 0 for Venus
-Being overall by far the most successful player in the game (including Serena) over a particular 5 year period- 2003-2007. That is something Venus didnt come close to for that long of any random period at any point in her career.
-Henins 2007 is much better than any year Venus has ever had. Henins 2003 is also probably even better than the best year of Venus. You could even argue Henins 2006 which is only her 3rd best year ever is overall as good as the best year of Venus.
-Better record at the WTA Championships


In the favor of Venus is:

-her success at Wimbledon, still the Worlds most prestigious event, especialy with 5 titles there vs Henin never winning
-superior longevity of success
-more overall strong performances (outside the titles) at the U.S Open
-Way better record in Miami (which Henin never won) and also having won a WTA Championships
-peaked at a time of tougher competition than Henin



For those who value singles predominantly it is very close and could be argued either way, but actually breaking it down as I see it now I honestly see more in favor of Henin. Anyone who would like to add to my points or dispute any of them is free to do so. I agree for those who value doubles highly that would put Venus clearly ahead. I am not one who values doubles highly, particularly in this era of really weak doubles, it has nothing to do with who my favorites are either, that has always been my perspective. Others are free to disagree of course, and I wont argue it. I definitely appreciate those who value doubles as well.

BTW the head to head is a joke when all their matches except 1 where when Venus was at the absolute peak of her career (2000-early 2003) and Justine was a slamless relatively nobody. Lets say they played all 9 of their matches from say 2004-2007 when Venus was at her career worst (except 2007) and Henin was peaking, the H2H would probably be 7-2 the other way. They hardly ever played each other in their mutual primes really, the 2003 Australian Open and 2007 U.S Open are the closest times they met when both were playing well and each won one. And if Henin retired in April 2003 she would have horrible head to heads with Davenport, Clijsters, Hingis, nearly everyone. Since she hardly played Venus after that it is basically the same as if she had retired.

Matt01
Dec 29th, 2010, 01:00 AM
Everyone knows that Wimbledon is the pinnacle of the slams though many will not admit it in this forum.


Wrong.

Svetlana)))
Dec 29th, 2010, 01:49 AM
Matt01, you're so thick. What then is the pinnacle of the slams? EVERYONE including all the players knows that Wimbledon has the most tradition and prestige. The outside world, regardless of tennis knowledge, all know of Wimbledon and how all the greats have won there.

it-girl
Dec 29th, 2010, 03:30 AM
Venus would do anything to have one of Justine's roland garros or australian open trophies, venus would do anything to have justine's weeks at #1 to solidify her place in history, venus would do anything to have one more YEC or three year ending number one's and she would do anything to have Justine's winning percentage. Do i need to go on? I win, you lose such a shameThere is nothing that Venus desires of Justine's career and Venus Williams already has her place in history she does not need anything to solidify that. The bottom line is Justine is the one who wants more, she is the one who wants Wimbledon. Venus said that it has been her dream since she was a little girl to win Wimbledon and she has won it 5 times now. You cannot put words in a players mouth because that is all that you are doing. I am stating the facts Justine came out of retirement because she wants to win Wimbledon, these are the words that came out of her mouth. Venus is content with what she has and she has plenty anything else is gravy on a wonderful career.

justineheninfan
Dec 29th, 2010, 03:32 AM
There is nothing that Venus desires of Justine's career

Yes I am sure Venus wants none of an Australian Open title, French Open title, or a year end #1 ranking, and never wanted any of those things. Then again it is hard to take someone seriously who picked Venus as having the best forehand in the womens game:

http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?p=18649077#post18649077

:lol:

it-girl
Dec 29th, 2010, 03:43 AM
Yes I am sure Venus wants none of an Australian Open title, French Open title, or a year end #1 ranking, and never wanted any of those things. Then again it is hard to take someone seriously who picked Venus as having the best forehand in the womens game:

http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?p=18649077#post18649077

:lol:It is also hard to take someone serious who thinks a players career is so stellar when it is filled with cheating:help:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bb8w5_i6wms

justineheninfan
Dec 29th, 2010, 03:51 AM
It is also hard to take someone serious who thinks a players career is so stellar when it is filled with cheating:help:

That is your best comeback. :wavey: Anyway enjoy watching Anas has been career continue to disintegrate to nothing and the Venus bid for her first non Wimbledon since 2001 with her Steffi Graf forehand which apparently only you know exists. :lol:

pancake
Dec 29th, 2010, 03:53 AM
LOL @ anyone saying Henin or Venus is 'obviously' or 'clearly' above/ahead of another. Please, it's just about how you like more/hate more and how you DECIDE to see things, so it's just your opinion and everyone trying to tell the world which one 'cleary has the edge' is just delusional. If you think Venus is better then she's better IN YOUR OPINION, if someone finds Henin better then it's his opinion and both sides will have valid points to prove it.

Claycourter
Dec 29th, 2010, 03:58 AM
Henin is better: 3 years ended @1, more weeks at #1. Better all around game, more talented the list is endless. There is a reason why Henin was considered one of the greatest players of all time at the end of 2003 already. Her fluid and effortless game, which revived women's tennis.

it-girl
Dec 29th, 2010, 03:58 AM
That is your best comeback. :wavey: Anyway enjoy watching Anas has been career continue to disintegrate to nothing and the Venus bid for her first non Wimbledon since 2001 with her Steffi Graf forehand which apparently only you know exists. :lol:Justine knows too from personal experience. Venus 7 - Justine 2.:kiss:

As for Ana she will be fine and there is nothing has been about her.

bandabou
Dec 29th, 2010, 06:43 AM
It's in these discussions that Venus's freak losses at RG and Oz open come back to hunt her. She has a stellar record at Wimby and U.S. open, but not much consistency at the other two majors.

The Witch-king
Dec 29th, 2010, 07:54 AM
That is your best comeback. :wavey: Anyway enjoy watching Anas has been career continue to disintegrate to nothing and the Venus bid for her first non Wimbledon since 2001 with her Steffi Graf forehand which apparently only you know exists. :lol:

Why are you so obsessed with putting Venus down? Every single thread about her accomplishments, you're the first one in it arguing endlessly about her ... moreso than some of her biggest fans. It's really quite disturbing.

terjw
Dec 29th, 2010, 10:07 AM
It depends what you value. Both have about equal the amount of arguments.

In Henins favor is:

-More consistency
-Winning atleast 1 slam for 5 years in a row
-Winning 3 of the 4 slams
-Better results at her weakest slam than Venus on at hers, and just a bit more balanced results across all surfaces in general than Venus even if Henins are also a bit clay heavy
-3 year end #1s vs 0 for Venus
-Being overall by far the most successful player in the game (including Serena) over a particular 5 year period- 2003-2007. That is something Venus didnt come close to for that long of any random period at any point in her career.
-Henins 2007 is much better than any year Venus has ever had. Henins 2003 is also probably even better than the best year of Venus. You could even argue Henins 2006 which is only her 3rd best year ever is overall as good as the best year of Venus.
-Better record at the WTA Championships


In the favor of Venus is:

-her success at Wimbledon, still the Worlds most prestigious event, especialy with 5 titles there vs Henin never winning
-superior longevity of success
-more overall strong performances (outside the titles) at the U.S Open
-Way better record in Miami (which Henin never won) and also having won a WTA Championships
-peaked at a time of tougher competition than Henin



For those who value singles predominantly it is very close and could be argued either way, but actually breaking it down as I see it now I honestly see more in favor of Henin. Anyone who would like to add to my points or dispute any of them is free to do so..

Yep - I thimk those lists are pretty good.

You invite adding to the list. One thing I've done is to compile the rates at which the top players win tournaments and slams. Both players have the same number of titles and slams - but Justine wins at a much faster rate needing far fewer tournaments and slams to get there.

Tournaments:
Player....Wins....Played.....Rate
Justine....43.....142....30.28%
Venus.....43.....187....22.99%

In a nutshell:
Justine wins nearly 1 in 3 of every tournament she plays. Venus is 1 in every 4 to 5.

Slams:
Player....Wins....Played.....Rate
Justine.......7.......34..........20.59%
Venus........7.......51..........13.73%

In a nutshell:
Justine wins 1 in 5 of every slam she plays. Venus is 1 in just less than every 8.

BTW - I have the rates of a number of top players - not just these two and what their rates were throughout their career at the end of each year they played for tournaments.

bandabou
Dec 29th, 2010, 10:14 AM
Can you post it for the other top players too, terjw?

terjw
Dec 29th, 2010, 10:19 AM
Can you post it for the other top players too, terjw?

http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?t=420684

Matt01
Dec 29th, 2010, 12:59 PM
Matt01, you're so thick. What then is the pinnacle of the slams? EVERYONE including all the players knows that Wimbledon has the most tradition and prestige. The outside world, regardless of tennis knowledge, all know of Wimbledon and how all the greats have won there.


I'm not "thick", I'm just living in the reality. What you say was true 25 years ago when lots of played were skipping AO and often also RG for different reasons. Please stop living in the past, because nowadays all 4 Slams are worth the same, 1 win in Australia is not worth less than 1 win in New York or 1 win at Wimbledon.
The 4 different Slams, even though Slams are overrated by some people here, are the pinnacle of the tennis sport now.

:wavey:

homogenius
Dec 29th, 2010, 01:03 PM
In single, Justine >>Venus

terjw
Dec 29th, 2010, 01:11 PM
I'm not "thick", I'm just living in the reality. What you say was true 25 years ago when lots of played were skipping AO and often also RG for different reasons. Please stop living in the past, because nowadays all 4 Slams are worth the same, 1 win in Australia is not worth less than 1 win in New York or 1 win at Wimbledon.
The 4 different Slams, even though Slams are overrated by some people here, are the pinnacle of the tennis sport now.

:wavey:

Exactly.

SoClose
Dec 29th, 2010, 09:08 PM
1Serena
2Venus
3Sharapova
-----------------------
4henin
5clijsters
6Sveta

justineheninfan
Dec 29th, 2010, 10:25 PM
LOL at anyone ranking Sharapova above Henin.

puppy777
Dec 30th, 2010, 12:43 AM
Indeed, since 3>7 :o I'd like to see an argument for why pova should be ahead of henin. And no, current form doesn't count, since you ranked Sveta 6th.

1Serena
2Venus
3Sharapova
-----------------------
4henin
5clijsters
6Sveta

justineheninfan
Dec 30th, 2010, 01:17 AM
He will probably say something like "well except for clay" (for the record Henin is still slightly more accomplished on all types of hard courts and indoors than Sharapova, on everything but grass and only because of Maria's 04 Wimbledon title).