PDA

View Full Version : Is Henin now considered GREATER than Hingis and Venus?


BingBing
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:04 AM
Henin has now won more Grand Slams than Martina and Venus.

Vamos.
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:04 AM
Don't know. Is Graf considered great than Navratilova?

JStennis
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:04 AM
Henin has now won more Grand Slams than Martina and Venus.

Hmm... perhaps....

In singles, Henin is better. In doubles, obviously not, because Henin does not play doubles.

lizchris
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:04 AM
Venus has proved she can win GS; Hingis will probably never win another GS.

Kworb
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:05 AM
Greater than Venus, yes. Greater than Hingis, hmm.. maybe when she gets closer to her 200+ weeks at #1.

JStennis
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:13 AM
Greater than Venus, yes. Greater than Hingis, hmm.. maybe when she gets closer to her 200+ weeks at #1.

Great than Venus? In singles, not in doubles.

champGS1452
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:15 AM
Venus is still a contender for GS,so you can't say she is greater yet.

-Sonic-
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:16 AM
Yes

JStennis
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:21 AM
Yes

That depends on who you ask.

mckyle.
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:22 AM
Ok.

cellophane
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:23 AM
ZZZZZZZZZZZ. People here are obsessed. Numbers aren't everything.

mckyle.
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:23 AM
ZZZZZZZZZZZ. People here are obsessed. Numbers aren't everything.

Really?

skanky~skanketta
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:31 AM
not greater than Venus, just a little better. but DEFINITELY better than Hingis. in singles ONLY. in doubles, she falls way behind the both of them. Hingis' weeks at #1 mean jack. i have no idea why tthe place so much importance on that. i mean, look at venus, she was there a short time, but please, we know she's definitely got more chances to win slams.

ASP0315
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:36 AM
Greater than Venus, yes. Greater than Hingis, hmm.. maybe when she gets closer to her 200+ weeks at #1.

agreed

Matt01
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:37 AM
In singles, yes.

Xanadu11
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:37 AM
It's all about grand slams, so yes deffinetly. I don't really think Hingis will win another GS (although I hope) but I think Venus still has a chance to win more. At the very least you can't count her out at Wimbledon.

RJWCapriati
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:38 AM
Yes definitely

Tennisstar86
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:42 AM
tough question... depends on how you look at it... Henin has 7 GS; however, has never really dominated the game....

Hingis clearly dominated 97
Venus clearly dominated 00-01, In 02-03 she dominated with Serena..... So as far as that goes no....

Its much like she has 7 GS; and Serena 8; however, she never dominated like Serena and noone in this generation prolly ever will.....

barmaid
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:46 AM
Of course this is open for debate depending on who you are rooting for....based on the slam numbers...she's one shy of Serena's 8 and one more than Venus's 6 and two more than Martina. To evaluate her performace so far does put her into a different category....I'm sure she's going to stick around for another couple of years so who knows how many more she will capture....both Serena and Venus have won Slams this year and are certainly talented enough to win more too. Martina seems "mired" in the same bog she's been in since 1999...but who knows she just might have another one or two in her as well but realistically her chances are less than the other 3!:sad: :worship: :rolleyes:


barmaid:wavey:

goldenslam888
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:53 AM
In singles, yes.

i saw venus playing womens doubles in wtt and fed cup. they were hitting the ball right at venus even though venus was at the net. venus sure showed her liabilities at the net.

goldenslam888
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:56 AM
justine has the numbers, and is currently the best player in the world. i'd say yes, serena included. justine is bringing the wta to a new level with her skillful allcourt play.

Veritas
Sep 9th, 2007, 03:56 AM
It's a tough question because there's more to tennis than just raw numbers. For the time being, Henin has the edge in singles, but there are other factors that Hingis and Williams have over her - namely doubles.

For anyone who's played both singles and doubles, they'd know that both games are a different breed from each other. It's no coincidence that more often than not, those who do well in singles don't do so well in doubles - and vice versa.

Venus and Martina not only did well in doubles, they were also dominant at some point. They managed to balance good results in both areas and have got the record to prove it.

Some would say that doubles is a 50/50 affair, but that only works if you manage to translate an individual mindset to a team one. This is especially true of Martina, who blended her style with that of so many different players.

But still, it's ridiculous judging 'greatness' when all are currently active. It's best to wait when they've all retired to gather the results and make a judgement.

matty
Sep 9th, 2007, 05:21 AM
what's kinda special about Hingis is that she was so great at such a young age--I think Hingis, Henin the Williams sisters, Davenport are all great for maybe slightly differnet reasons.

Apoleb
Sep 9th, 2007, 05:28 AM
Henin>Penus>Hingis

Polikarpov
Sep 9th, 2007, 05:30 AM
In singles--yes. In GS slam count--yes.

hingis-seles
Sep 9th, 2007, 06:56 AM
Henin>Penus>Hingis

I agree with this.

Hingis has the greater dominance in singles and doubles during a specific time period than the other two, but they have more singles majors, which trumps it for them, not to mention greater longevity in their favour.

LeChuck
Sep 9th, 2007, 07:44 AM
At this moment in time, Justine is a greater player than both Venus and Martina.

faboozadoo15
Sep 9th, 2007, 08:36 AM
Hingis>Justine>Venus

MistyGrey
Sep 9th, 2007, 08:36 AM
IMO Its Justine>Hingis>Venus

Venus never had a year like Hingis' 97, nor did she stay at the top like Hingis did. Before today's match Hingis was greater than Justine IMO, but two more major titles trump the doubles achievements and the excessive weeks at #1, specially since after this year, both of them will have 3 year end number one rankings. Venus never ended the year at number one, and has won 2/4 majors compared to 3/4 for Henin and Hingis. I guess it just depends on how you look at it and each person will have his own rating, but for me its Justine, then Martina and then Venus.

MistyGrey
Sep 9th, 2007, 08:38 AM
Don't know. Is Graf considered great than Navratilova?

Yep. In most people's book.

faboozadoo15
Sep 9th, 2007, 08:42 AM
tough question... depends on how you look at it... Henin has 7 GS; however, has never really dominated the game....

Hingis clearly dominated 97
Venus clearly dominated 00-01, In 02-03 she dominated with Serena..... So as far as that goes no....

Its much like she has 7 GS; and Serena 8; however, she never dominated like Serena and noone in this generation prolly ever will.....

Justine has been every bit as dominant this year as Venus ever was. 00'- won what-- 6 titles? in 2001, Venus got crushed by Hingis at the AO and burned out in the 1st round of the French. Capriati picked up both of those majors.

LMAO @ "dominated WITH Serena." Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?

The Dawntreader
Sep 9th, 2007, 10:03 AM
Not greater than Venus yet, we had this conversation after RG when justine overtook Venus in the Slam tally. Venus can still catch up, whilst i dont think Martina ever can.

jazzfuzion
Sep 9th, 2007, 10:26 AM
clearly we are talking about singles,so i have absolutely no idea where retarded insecure fans of the other two still try to salvage the situation(if any left at all for that matter) by going,"in singles yes.in doubles no". DUH,we know in singles but have you seen how valued the doubles slam is? It is as valued as a 1/4 filled Arthur Ashe stadium.

So as to that,clearly Henin is greater than the two of them(although only by THAT SMALL of a margin so its not that much of a whitewash). Only insecure fans trying to salvage a losing situation will say otherwise,of which all logical people should thoroughly ignore.

Chrissie-fan
Sep 9th, 2007, 10:50 AM
If we only consider singles, yes, Justine is now greater than Hingis and Venus. Not by much, but she's nevertheless greater. And it's likely that she will move further ahead of them in the future. I can't see Hingis adding any slam titles to her resume at this point.

If we include doubles it's a different story, but having said that, if we include doubles Elizabeth Ryan and Pam Shriver and quite a few others move ahead of several great players in singles history which is absurd. Doubles is a different discipline deserving of it's own, seperate ranking.

die_wahrheit
Sep 9th, 2007, 10:56 AM
Henin = Venus > Hingis

The missing Wimbledon title can't be overlooked.
It's the biggest title and Henin has - luckily - zero.

jujufreak
Sep 9th, 2007, 11:00 AM
Henin = Venus > Hingis

The missing Wimbledon title can't be overlooked.
It's the biggest title and Henin has - luckily - zero.


Venus has no Aussie and no French Open

ce
Sep 9th, 2007, 11:16 AM
She really needs that Wimbledon

ce
Sep 9th, 2007, 11:17 AM
Venus has no Aussie and no French Open

Wimbledon is more important:cool:

stickwitju(ju)
Sep 9th, 2007, 11:20 AM
She really needs that Wimbledon

That's true. It's OK though that Venus hasn't won Melbourne or Roland Garros and hasn't won a Slam in consecutive years since 2001.

:dance:

Chrissie-fan
Sep 9th, 2007, 11:23 AM
Wimbledon is more important:cool:
Wimbledon is ARGUABLY more important than the AO or FO. But Wimbledon is definitely NOT more important than the AO and FO combined.

Matt01
Sep 9th, 2007, 11:28 AM
Wimbledon is ARGUABLY more important than the AO or FO. But Wimbledon is definitely NOT more important than the AO and FO combined.

Exactly.

PLP
Sep 9th, 2007, 11:30 AM
HMMM

Steffi isn't greater than Navratilova. Martina has the edge, sorry. ;)

IMNSHO Venus, JuJu, and Martina have about an equal place in the history books of tennis and they are all great champions. But history isn't done for any of them so I guess it's absurd to speculate at this point.

Maryamator
Sep 9th, 2007, 11:35 AM
hell no! venus and hungis could have won more by now, but when venus was 20 there were so many great players, as for now, u dont have a seles, u dont have a capriati, and so on .
so its really not comparable:)

LeChuck
Sep 9th, 2007, 11:43 AM
All 4 grand slams have a field of 128 players, and at each of them a player has to win 7 matches and 14 sets to bring home the title. Therefore all 4 grand slams are equally important in this day and age.

Chrissie-fan
Sep 9th, 2007, 11:49 AM
hell no! venus and hingis could have won more by now, but when venus was 20 there were so many great players, as for now, u dont have a seles, u dont have a capriati, and so on .
so its really not comparable:)
Venus and Hingis are still around today, and they ain't exactly old women. If it's so much easier now they have just as much of an opportunity to add to their cv as Justine.

Maryamator
Sep 9th, 2007, 11:51 AM
Venus and Hingis are still around today, and they ain't exactly old women. If it's so much easier now they have just as much of an opportunity to add to their cv as Justine.

well if venus and hingis werent out so much due to injury it could have been different now

Apoorv
Sep 9th, 2007, 11:57 AM
Justine>Martina>Venus

Renalicious
Sep 9th, 2007, 12:04 PM
She's less greater than both of them.

slams
Sep 9th, 2007, 12:17 PM
tough question... depends on how you look at it... Henin has 7 GS; however, has never really dominated the game....


Am not a Henin fans but let us compare the win-loss record of Federer (51-6) and Henin (50-4) for year 2007 at this point. If Henin does not dominate the game, then what about Federer?

Marshmallow
Sep 9th, 2007, 12:25 PM
She has more slams but different people have different views.

Hingis is a Legend because of what she was doing at her age. She is great because she was just so phenomenal. I don't think that can be parallelled.

When Venus won her first 4 slams, you didn't have easy straight sets slam final victories. The competition was tough. She accomplished some great things. Also, a Wimbledon legend.

Henin is the dominant player of the moment, and playing great tennis and has more slams.

There are different ways of looking at it all. But as it stands, Henin has more slams.

sportywoman
Sep 9th, 2007, 01:29 PM
1) Henin has more slams than Hingis and Venus so it's Henin > Venus > Hingis
2) Henin has 3/4 of the slams as Hingis, then it's Henin = Hingis > Venus
3) Henin has more single titles than Venus but less than Hingis, so it's Hingis > Henin > Venus
4)Henin has more weeks at number 1 than Venus and much less than Martina, so it's Hingis > Henin > Venus.

Overall, I think that Henin and Hingis are in a tie (both 3/4) with a slight edge of Henin, both have more single titles and both dominated at number 1 spot longer. If (when) Henin wins another slam and/or pass the 100 weeks at number 1 and/or pass Hingis in terms of single titles (43 so far), then I will consider that she is clearly superior to Hingis.

Venus needs to get a slam other than Wimbly and the USO.

GogoGirl
Sep 9th, 2007, 06:05 PM
Hey All,

I'd say - let the record books sort it out when their careers are all ova. The fact that Venus has 7 Singles (1 in Olympics) - 7 Doubles (1 in Olympics) & 2 Mixed indicates to me that most tennis historians would declare that Venus has proved herself to be the best out of these three in the total slam win count column.

That being said - they will all make the record books.

Justine is the undisputed number one. Everyone knows it. She should be commended on it and winning her 7th slam - but no - IMO - she is not greater than Venus - and some would say because of the total slam count for Martina - she is not greater than she - either.

HTE
Sep 9th, 2007, 06:28 PM
Not comparable

Helen Lawson
Sep 9th, 2007, 06:39 PM
Without a Wimbledon title and short so many weeks at no. 1 and less singles than Martina, I myslef would not place Justine above them. But I absolutely would not place her below them either.

rocksania
Sep 9th, 2007, 06:45 PM
JH has come a step close to hingis but nt surpased her greatness.
she has definetely a more better player than venus.

Mightymirza
Sep 9th, 2007, 06:50 PM
only in singles..jujus doubles career is nonexistent :lol: while martinas is :eek:

Super_Marion
Sep 9th, 2007, 06:51 PM
I think Henin's achievements are greater in view of the obstacles she has had to overcome. She has put in a lot of gym work to be conditioned to compete with tall, powerful, muscular player like the Williams.

Henin's victories are a victory for the sport of tennis in itself, showing that finesse and diversity are just as important as brute force.

Chrissie-fan
Sep 9th, 2007, 07:00 PM
I think Henin's achievements are greater in view of the obstacles she has had to overcome. She has put in a lot of gym work to be conditioned to compete with tall, powerful, muscular player like the Williams.

Henin's victories are a victory for the sport of tennis in itself, showing that finesse and diversity are just as important as brute force.
Justine Henin has the skills and the finesse of the players of old and the power and speed of the modern players. She combines the best of both worlds.:worship:

LeChuck
Sep 9th, 2007, 07:37 PM
Comparing Justine to Venus:
Grand Slam Titles - Justine 7, Venus 6
WTA Titles - Justine 36, Venus 35
YEC Titles - Justine 1, Venus 0
Weeks as world no. 1 - Justine 82 (from tomorrow), Venus 11
Years ended as world no. 1 - Justine 2, Venus 0
Tier I Titles - Justine 9, Venus 6
Tier II Titles - Justine 14, Venus 16
Combined Tier I and Tier II titles - Justine 23, Venus 22
Versatility - Justine has won 3 out of the 4 grand slams, Venus has won 2 out of the 4. Justine has a better record at her missing link Wimbledon, than Venus does at either of her two missing links the Australian and French Opens.

Justine is ahead of Venus at this moment in time in my opinion. People need to stop falling for the myth that Wimbledon is a bigger tournament than the other 3 grand slams, when that viewpoint is complete nonsense and outdated, and it is clear that all 4 grand slams are on a par with each other in this day and age.
Hingis's 209 weeks as world no. 1 is mightily impressive, but during 83 of those weeks (roughly 40%), she didn't hold any of the 4 grand slams. Therefore her no.1 ranking weeks total is inflated somewhat. Basically I think that any time she spent as world no.1 after losing the 2000 Australian Open final to Davenport, was hollow, and I'm a huge fan of hers. I think that Justine's 2 extra grand slam titles are enough to see her placed above Martina. Of course Justine, Venus and Martina will all go down as great players, even if the 3 of them were to all fail to win another title for the remainder of their careers.

die_wahrheit
Sep 9th, 2007, 08:15 PM
Justine is ahead of Venus at this moment in time in my opinion. People need to stop falling for the myth that Wimbledon is a bigger tournament than the other 3 grand slams, when that viewpoint is complete nonsense and outdated, and it is clear that all 4 grand slams are on a par with each other in this day and age.

The reality is: Henin has zero titles at tennis' most important event.

LeChuck
Sep 9th, 2007, 08:32 PM
The reality is: Henin has zero titles at tennis' most important event.

The reality is that the Australian Open, French Open, Wimbledon and US Open are all equally important to each other, and that Justine has won 7 titles across those events :).

spencercarlos
Sep 9th, 2007, 08:51 PM
Comparing Justine to Venus:
Grand Slam Titles - Justine 7, Venus 6
WTA Titles - Justine 36, Venus 35
YEC Titles - Justine 1, Venus 0
Weeks as world no. 1 - Justine 82 (from tomorrow), Venus 11
Years ended as world no. 1 - Justine 2, Venus 0
Tier I Titles - Justine 9, Venus 6
Tier II Titles - Justine 14, Venus 16
Combined Tier I and Tier II titles - Justine 23, Venus 22
Versatility - Justine has won 3 out of the 4 grand slams, Venus has won 2 out of the 4. Justine has a better record at her missing link Wimbledon, than Venus does at either of her two missing links the Australian and French Opens.

Justine is ahead of Venus at this moment in time in my opinion. People need to stop falling for the myth that Wimbledon is a bigger tournament than the other 3 grand slams, when that viewpoint is complete nonsense and outdated, and it is clear that all 4 grand slams are on a par with each other in this day and age.
Hingis's 209 weeks as world no. 1 is mightily impressive, but during 83 of those weeks (roughly 40%), she didn't hold any of the 4 grand slams. Therefore her no.1 ranking weeks total is inflated somewhat. Basically I think that any time she spent as world no.1 after losing the 2000 Australian Open final to Davenport, was hollow, and I'm a huge fan of hers. I think that Justine's 2 extra grand slam titles are enough to see her placed above Martina. Of course Justine, Venus and Martina will all go down as great players, even if the 3 of them were to all fail to win another title for the remainder of their careers.
Saying Wimbledon is a bigger event it´s not a myth, just a deluded way to say Venus is better. The same goes when her fans talk about the YEC, they try to minimize it because she either does not make it or never won it.

:wavey:

spencercarlos
Sep 9th, 2007, 08:54 PM
The reality is: Henin has zero titles at tennis' most important event.
Old deluded stuff 7-1..
Reality 7-6 6-4 :lol:

:wavey:

die_wahrheit
Sep 9th, 2007, 09:18 PM
The reality is that the Australian Open, French Open, Wimbledon and US Open are all equally important to each other, and that Justine has won 7 titles across those events :).

Henin has zero titles at tennis' most important event.
Zero.

If you want it or not.

LeChuck
Sep 9th, 2007, 09:24 PM
Henin has zero titles at tennis' most important event.
Zero.

If you want it or not.

It's time to remove your head out of that soapbox that you're stuck in, and get with modern times.
There are 4 tournaments that share the mantle of being the joint most important events in tennis with each other, and they are the 4 grand slams. None of the grand slams are any more important than the other 3.
Any remotely intelligent tennis fan can see that :).

~Eclipsed~
Sep 9th, 2007, 09:25 PM
H2H

Venus vs. Henin 7-2
Hingis vs. Henin 2-2

Even though, Henin has won more GS than Venus(1). Indicated by their records, Venus is still the better player than Henin. She has won 7 of their 9 meetings.

Hingis is tied with Henin as far as career meetings go (one of Hingis's wins was a retirement by Henin). Obviously, right now Henin is the better player and will probably achieve more than Hingis. Hingis is having a hard time beating a lot of players ATM.:tape:

spencercarlos
Sep 9th, 2007, 10:12 PM
H2H

Venus vs. Henin 7-2
Hingis vs. Henin 2-2

Even though, Henin has won more GS than Venus(1). Indicated by their records, Venus is still the better player than Henin. She has won 7 of their 9 meetings.

Hingis is tied with Henin as far as career meetings go (one of Hingis's wins was a retirement by Henin). Obviously, right now Henin is the better player and will probably achieve more than Hingis. Hingis is having a hard time beating a lot of players ATM.:tape:
Yes.. and Schnyder is a better player than Graf because she won 100% of their matches played :lol:

Yes Nadal > Federer too

:wavey:

spencercarlos
Sep 9th, 2007, 10:15 PM
H2H

Venus vs. Henin 7-2
Hingis vs. Henin 2-2

Even though, Henin has won more GS than Venus(1). Indicated by their records, Venus is still the better player than Henin. She has won 7 of their 9 meetings.

Hingis is tied with Henin as far as career meetings go (one of Hingis's wins was a retirement by Henin). Obviously, right now Henin is the better player and will probably achieve more than Hingis. Hingis is having a hard time beating a lot of players ATM.:tape:
Just like Venus and Serena had a hard time in 2006 because of injury. Ops i forgot, the only ones allowed to get injured in a losing match are Venus and Serena..

:wavey:

SunriseSunset
Sep 9th, 2007, 10:21 PM
My opinion:

Better than Hingis...yes. The woman is rubbish, and I don't see how she was number one and winning so much plus her attitude towards other players is disgusting and a sign of immaturity.

Better than Venus...no. They seemed on the same level the other day, but Venus kept making stupid mistakes so maybe she's greater.

CaptnMatt
Sep 10th, 2007, 12:05 AM
My opinion:

Better than Hingis...yes. The woman is rubbish, and I don't see how she was number one and winning so much plus her attitude towards other players is disgusting and a sign of immaturity.

If you'd like to know how Hingis was No.1 for so long go and watch videos of the 1999 US Open against Venus and the 2001 Australian Open against Serena and Venus back-to-back...

I'll have you know that Hingis did exactly what Justine did in this US Open tournament....she beat Serena in the Quarters and Venus in the semi's (61 61)......The difference was, Hingis had tough competition by the time she reached the final, having to play Capriati....Henin won her match 6-1 6-3.

You clearly know nothing about tennis.

homogenius
Sep 10th, 2007, 12:08 AM
By the end of the year, Henin will be ahead both in terms of single achievements.

~Eclipsed~
Sep 10th, 2007, 12:55 AM
Yes.. and Schnyder is a better player than Graf because she won 100% of their matches played :lol:

Yes Nadal > Federer too

:wavey:

no, Schnyder and Graf only played once. I don't think that compares much to 9 meetings between Justine and Venus.

And no Nadal isn't greater than Federer just because he has a 8-5 edge. You have to take in account that most of their meetings were on clay.

The point is, let Justine and Venus play more against each other before we look at who is a greater player. The way i see it right now, Venus owns her 7-2.

:wavey:


Just like Venus and Serena had a hard time in 2006 because of injury. Ops i forgot, the only ones allowed to get injured in a losing match are Venus and Serena..

:wavey:

I wasn't trying to take credit away from Hinigis' win over Henin. I'm not a William's fan that overlooks anything bad they do (i.e. Serena's comments about her loss to Justine).

DimaDinosaur
Sep 10th, 2007, 01:11 AM
Because of all the personal problems that she had to suffer and because she's worked so hard to offset her small size disadvantage, she has always been better than Hingis, Venus, and Serena in my opinion. :worship:

ALLEZ!!!!!

MistyGrey
Sep 10th, 2007, 09:13 AM
no, Schnyder and Graf only played once. I don't think that compares much to 9 meetings between Justine and Venus.

And no Nadal isn't greater than Federer just because he has a 8-5 edge. You have to take in account that most of their meetings were on clay.


Ok how about Jo Durie? She played Graf 7 times and lead their H2H? Is she greater than Graf?
Venus and Justine's H2H is skewed and everybody knows that. Imagine if Justine and Lindsay hadnt played for 4 years after the 2003 AO, their H2H would've been 5-1 for Lindsay. Same with Kim, if she hadn't played Justine after 2003 Antwerp,she would've had a 7-2 lead in their H2H. Venus last won a match against Justine, when Justine was a Tier 2 player at best. Justine really stepped into the big league from the start of the 03 clay season and since then she hasn't had a negative H2H against any other elite player. She turned the tables on Serena, Kim and Lindsay who owned her back then. Venus has the benifit of only playing Justine once after Justine became a grandslam champion, and as a result has a 7-2 lead over her.


The point is, let Justine and Venus play more against each other before we look at who is a greater player. The way i see it right now, Venus owns her 7-2.
:wavey:


H2H records dont decide who the greater player is. Is Davenport greater than Seles? Anna K greater than JenCap? Pierce greater than ASV? Paola Suarez greater than Serena?
The biggest deciding factor is the singles Grandslams, then weeks at number one/YE #1, overall titles and then doubles and Venus only scores over Justine in the doubles department, which is the least important factor in the greater player debate.

Helaena
Sep 10th, 2007, 09:33 AM
Venus and Hingis are still around today, and they ain't exactly old women. If it's so much easier now they have just as much of an opportunity to add to their cv as Justine.

good point...:yeah:

Helaena
Sep 10th, 2007, 09:56 AM
Ok how about Jo Durie? She played Graf 7 times and lead their H2H? Is she greater than Graf?
Venus and Justine's H2H is skewed and everybody knows that. Imagine if Justine and Lindsay hadnt played for 4 years after the 2003 AO, their H2H would've been 5-1 for Lindsay. Same with Kim, if she hadn't played Justine after 2003 Antwerp,she would've had a 7-2 lead in their H2H. Venus last won a match against Justine, when Justine was a Tier 2 player at best. Justine really stepped into the big league from the start of the 03 clay season and since then she hasn't had a negative H2H against any other elite player. She turned the tables on Serena, Kim and Lindsay who owned her back then. Venus has the benifit of only playing Justine once after Justine became a grandslam champion, and as a result has a 7-2 lead over her.



H2H records dont decide who the greater player is. Is Davenport greater than Seles? Anna K greater than JenCap? Pierce greater than ASV? Paola Suarez greater than Serena?
The biggest deciding factor is the singles Grandslams, then weeks at number one/YE #1, overall titles and then doubles and Venus only scores over Justine in the doubles department, which is the least important factor in the greater player debate.


EXACTLY. :yeah:

V-MAC
Sep 10th, 2007, 11:27 AM
That's true. It's OK though that Venus hasn't won Melbourne or Roland Garros and hasn't won a Slam in consecutive years since 2001.

:dance:

She could very possibly win a slam or two next year yet so...

darice
Sep 10th, 2007, 11:33 AM
Henin has now won more Grand Slams than Martina and Venus.

juju is one of my fav's and i think that right now she's had a greater career than marti but she's even with vee. now if juju wins wimby that'll totally be a diff. story. :)

KBdoubleu
Sep 10th, 2007, 12:50 PM
Its really tough to rank these three, though Justine is probably first at the moment. Though, as of right now, I'm sure history will remember Venus first, then Hingis, then Justine.

miss_molik
Sep 10th, 2007, 12:53 PM
in my books she is :D

DragonFlame
Sep 10th, 2007, 01:10 PM
tough question... depends on how you look at it... Henin has 7 GS; however, has never really dominated the game....

Hingis clearly dominated 97
Venus clearly dominated 00-01, In 02-03 she dominated with Serena..... So as far as that goes no....

Its much like she has 7 GS; and Serena 8; however, she never dominated like Serena and noone in this generation prolly ever will.....

What we're seeing right now is domination

lets compare serena's best year with justine's year this year untill now.

Serena 2002

13 tournaments played, 8 won 3 grandslams DNP AO
win-loss record 56-5

justine 2007(untill now)

11 tournaments played, 7 won 2 grandslams DNP AO YEC TBD
win-loss record 50-4

If justine ends up winning the YEC i would call it pretty similar years. She's DEFINETLY a dominating #1 already right now. Her win-loss record could end up better then serena's 2002 record. Maybe she won't end up being more dominating then serena's 2002 year but she's definetly having a better domination year then venus in 2000 or 2001. Go look at the stats.

Tennisaddict
Sep 10th, 2007, 01:27 PM
Right now Henin is the greater player out of the three based on her single slam wins.
Venus is still the better player tough IMO and has the ability to add to her slam count, so it will be very exciting to see at end of their careers.

Ntour
Sep 10th, 2007, 02:18 PM
Right now Henin is the greater player out of the three based on her single slam wins.
Venus is still the better player tough IMO and has the ability to add to her slam count, so it will be very exciting to see at end of their careers.

IMO justine is the better player, and she obviously has the abaility to add to her slam count as well

I really hope venus can keep her game at slam winning level, so we can have more exciting showdowns between the two, I personally think venus is a better player than serena, its a shame her slam wins don't reflect that

Tennisaddict
Sep 10th, 2007, 02:32 PM
IMO justine is the better player, and she obviously has the abaility to add to her slam count as well

I really hope venus can keep her game at slam winning level, so we can have more exciting showdowns between the two, I personally think venus is a better player than serena, its a shame her slam wins don't reflect that

Nah, Venus made a lot of unforced errors and was not serving well and still made it to two close sets with chances to break in each of them in their last match.
Henin is a more complete player but when Venus serves well attacks the net and hits clean groundstrokes she still beats Henin and is therefore the better player to me. But I respect your opinion.

I don't know about Venus and Serena. Venus is my nr.1 fave and Serena is second but I think that Serena is the better player when she plays well. She makes more angles with her groundstrokes and her serve is just awesome and she has an aggressive second serve, something Venus doesn't have.

spencercarlos
Sep 10th, 2007, 02:38 PM
Nah, Venus made a lot of unforced errors and was not serving well and still made it to two close sets with chances to break in each of them in their last match.
Henin is a more complete player but when Venus serves well attacks the net and hits clean groundstrokes she still beats Henin and is therefore the better player to me. But I respect your opinion.

I don't know about Venus and Serena. Venus is my nr.1 fave and Serena is second but I think that Serena is the better player when she plays well. She makes more angles with her groundstrokes and her serve is just awesome and she has an aggressive second serve, something Venus doesn't have.
Keep up with the excuses.
Facts are that Venus made MORE unforced errors in the last two sets she won against Jankovic, despite playing less games, than the amount of unforced errors she did against Henin, which were longer in time and the quality of play exceeded. That speaks volumes.

Lets not even talk how Henin was able to outnumber Venus in winners :lol:....

Next!

spencercarlos
Sep 10th, 2007, 02:44 PM
no, Schnyder and Graf only played once. I don't think that compares much to 9 meetings between Justine and Venus.

And no Nadal isn't greater than Federer just because he has a 8-5 edge. You have to take in account that most of their meetings were on clay.

The point is, let Justine and Venus play more against each other before we look at who is a greater player. The way i see it right now, Venus owns her 7-2.

:wavey:




I wasn't trying to take credit away from Hinigis' win over Henin. I'm not a William's fan that overlooks anything bad they do (i.e. Serena's comments about her loss to Justine).
A carreer is not based only in head to heads, which is only the number where Venus tops Henin.
Everything else Henin dominates, and only tied in the amount of slam wins in one event (RG and Wimbledon respectively).
Even before this Usopen Henin had the slight edge, but now the difference has extended considerably.

stickwitju(ju)
Sep 10th, 2007, 02:45 PM
2nd Response:

No. Justine will have to get a life first.

:rocker2:

spencercarlos
Sep 10th, 2007, 02:48 PM
Ok how about Jo Durie? She played Graf 7 times and lead their H2H? Is she greater than Graf?
Venus and Justine's H2H is skewed and everybody knows that. Imagine if Justine and Lindsay hadnt played for 4 years after the 2003 AO, their H2H would've been 5-1 for Lindsay. Same with Kim, if she hadn't played Justine after 2003 Antwerp,she would've had a 7-2 lead in their H2H. Venus last won a match against Justine, when Justine was a Tier 2 player at best. Justine really stepped into the big league from the start of the 03 clay season and since then she hasn't had a negative H2H against any other elite player. She turned the tables on Serena, Kim and Lindsay who owned her back then. Venus has the benifit of only playing Justine once after Justine became a grandslam champion, and as a result has a 7-2 lead over her.



H2H records dont decide who the greater player is. Is Davenport greater than Seles? Anna K greater than JenCap? Pierce greater than ASV? Paola Suarez greater than Serena?
The biggest deciding factor is the singles Grandslams, then weeks at number one/YE #1, overall titles and then doubles and Venus only scores over Justine in the doubles department, which is the least important factor in the greater player debate.
Even Venus did this against LIndsay and Hingis at some point, but i guess you are losing your time explaining this to this deluded fans.

Let them think Venus "owns" Henin.

Matt01
Sep 10th, 2007, 02:48 PM
Keep up with the excuses.
Facts are that Venus made MORE unforced errors in the last two sets she won against Jankovic, despite playing less games, than the amount of unforced errors she did against Henin, which were longer in time and the quality of play exceeded. That speaks volumes.

Lets not even talk how Henin was able to outnumber Venus in winners :lol:....

Next!

:lol:

RenaSlam.
Sep 10th, 2007, 03:10 PM
Yep.

~Eclipsed~
Sep 10th, 2007, 03:10 PM
Ok how about Jo Durie? She played Graf 7 times and lead their H2H? Is she greater than Graf?
Venus and Justine's H2H is skewed and everybody knows that. Imagine if Justine and Lindsay hadnt played for 4 years after the 2003 AO, their H2H would've been 5-1 for Lindsay. Same with Kim, if she hadn't played Justine after 2003 Antwerp,she would've had a 7-2 lead in their H2H. Venus last won a match against Justine, when Justine was a Tier 2 player at best. Justine really stepped into the big league from the start of the 03 clay season and since then she hasn't had a negative H2H against any other elite player. She turned the tables on Serena, Kim and Lindsay who owned her back then. Venus has the benifit of only playing Justine once after Justine became a grandslam champion, and as a result has a 7-2 lead over her.

I understand what you mean about Justine being a better player now. They've only played once now since 03. I hope you're not trying to say Justine would beat Venus everytime if they played just because Justine is better since 03.


H2H records dont decide who the greater player is. Is Davenport greater than Seles? Anna K greater than JenCap? Pierce greater than ASV? Paola Suarez greater than Serena?
The biggest deciding factor is the singles Grandslams, then weeks at number one/YE #1, overall titles and then doubles and Venus only scores over Justine in the doubles department, which is the least important factor in the greater player debate.

Ugh...why does everyone keep giving me bad examples of H2Hs to try to prove their point(The Davenport/Seles isn't a bad one though)?! We're talking about Justine and Venus...no one else.

Yes, ATM Justine has accomplished more than Venus, but their careers are far from over. Let's wait a few years before we see who is greater.

~Eclipsed~
Sep 10th, 2007, 03:22 PM
Keep up with the excuses.
Facts are that Venus made MORE unforced errors in the last two sets she won against Jankovic, despite playing less games, than the amount of unforced errors she did against Henin, which were longer in time and the quality of play exceeded. That speaks volumes.

Lets not even talk how Henin was able to outnumber Venus in winners :lol:....

Next!

Yeah she really dominated her in winners. 29-26=Venus was schooled.:rolleyes:

And i guess you're another one who thinks just because Justine won this match, she'll own their H2H now too.

spencercarlos
Sep 10th, 2007, 04:12 PM
Yeah she really dominated her in winners. 29-26=Venus was schooled.:rolleyes:

And i guess you're another one who thinks just because Justine won this match, she'll own their H2H now too.
Or like you thinking that because Venus won matches 4 years ago against a non slam winner yet Henin, she would continue to dominate their head to head, and beat her in the Usopen semifinals, played on hardcourts nevertheless.

And still i would rate the chances of an event that just happened to ocurr being much higher than one occurred 4 and a half years ago, especially in a sport like tennis and their recent development of each of their carreers.

:wavey:

jellybelly
Sep 10th, 2007, 04:30 PM
If you look inside yourself, you will see that it just does not "feel right" to rate Henin above Venus. You have to see why this is everyone's first instinct. Venus was the first African American to win a slam in the open era. The first trailblazer who did not play juniors but made the finals of the US Open her first time as a qualifier. The first one to have the confidence to prophesize her and her sister's rise to the top of the game and to shrug off detractors in regal fashion. The first one to play a new kind of tennis that totally raised the bar in the sport. That alone gives her a very important place in history, not just tennis history, but world history. Compared to that, Henin is just a garden variety athlete. And those "unquantifiable" things cannot be overcome because Henin happens to have 1 more singles GS or because she beat her this one time. Venus isn't just a player, she is a historical figure in tennis. And this is even without mentioning her TWO (2) fashion lines, her numerous degrees and a successful interior design business (she even designed for a TV talk show!--she does more in part time hobbies than most do in full time jobs).

Apoleb
Sep 10th, 2007, 04:32 PM
I think it's quite obvious. Henin>Venus>=Hingis.

The only one that is very debatable is Venus and Hingis. Venus has one more slam, but Hingis won 3 of the 4 while Venus won only 2. Hingis has more titles, more weeks at #1..etc. So I think it's very subjective to decide between those 2.

On the other hand, Henin has more slams than Venus, won 3 of the 4 while Venus won 2, more weeks at #1 and more titles, and generally more consistent in her career so far. Seems obvious to me.

homogenius
Sep 10th, 2007, 04:33 PM
If you look inside yourself, you will see that it just does not "feel right" to rate Henin above Venus. You have to see why this is everyone's first instinct. Venus was the first African American to win a slam in the open era. The first trailblazer who did not play juniors but made the finals of the US Open her first time as a qualifier. The first one to have the confidence to prophesize her and her sister's rise to the top of the game and to shrug off detractors in regal fashion. The first one to play a new kind of tennis that totally raised the bar in the sport. That alone gives her a very important place in history, not just tennis history, but world history. Compared to that, Henin is just a garden variety athlete. And those "unquantifiable" things cannot be overcome because Henin happens to have 1 more singles GS or because she beat her this one time. Venus isn't just a player, she is a historical figure in tennis. And this is even without mentioning her TWO (2) fashion lines, her numerous degrees and a successful interior design business (she even designed for a TV talk show!--she does more in part time hobbies than most do in full time jobs).

And don't forget she has the best wigs of the tour.

VivalaSeles
Sep 10th, 2007, 04:35 PM
And this is even without mentioning her TWO (2) fashion lines, her numerous degrees and a successful interior design business (she even designed for a TV talk show!--she does more in part time hobbies than most do in full time jobs).

All of which are essential standards to measure the greatness of a tennis player :rolleyes:

Petersmiler
Sep 10th, 2007, 04:42 PM
If you look inside yourself, you will see that it just does not "feel right" to rate Henin above Venus. You have to see why this is everyone's first instinct. Venus was the first African American to win a slam in the open era. The first trailblazer who did not play juniors but made the finals of the US Open her first time as a qualifier. The first one to have the confidence to prophesize her and her sister's rise to the top of the game and to shrug off detractors in regal fashion. The first one to play a new kind of tennis that totally raised the bar in the sport. That alone gives her a very important place in history, not just tennis history, but world history. Compared to that, Henin is just a garden variety athlete. And those "unquantifiable" things cannot be overcome because Henin happens to have 1 more singles GS or because she beat her this one time. Venus isn't just a player, she is a historical figure in tennis. And this is even without mentioning her TWO (2) fashion lines, her numerous degrees and a successful interior design business (she even designed for a TV talk show!--she does more in part time hobbies than most do in full time jobs).

Excuse me, I think you mean YOUR first instinct?

It is obvious from your post that no matter what Justine achieves, you will consider that Venus is greater. That's fine, but please don't assume that everyone feels the same.

spencercarlos
Sep 10th, 2007, 04:46 PM
Excuse me, I think you mean YOUR first instinct?

It is obvious from your post that no matter what Justine achieves, you will consider that Venus is greater. That's fine, but please don't assume that everyone feels the same.
Exactly that only happens in most of the deluded Venus Fans world.

new-york
Sep 10th, 2007, 04:52 PM
Yep.

Serena better watch out.

jellybelly
Sep 10th, 2007, 04:53 PM
Excuse me, I think you mean YOUR first instinct?

It is obvious from your post that no matter what Justine achieves, you will consider that Venus is greater. That's fine, but please don't assume that everyone feels the same.

Really? you don't feel awkward when you try to convince yourself that someone like Henin will be remembered as better than, to paraphrase, THE FUCKING VENUS WILLIAMS?

new-york
Sep 10th, 2007, 05:00 PM
Really? you don't feel awkward when you try to convince yourself that someone like Henin will be remembered as better than, to paraphrase, THE FUCKING VENUS WILLIAMS?

i'd have loved to hear the officials calling Venus "Christine" while giving her the trophy this year.
fame can eat mangoes.

Petersmiler
Sep 10th, 2007, 05:01 PM
Really? you don't feel awkward when you try to convince yourself that someone like Henin will be remembered as better than, to paraphrase, THE FUCKING VENUS WILLIAMS?

Wow, you can really see inside my head!

No, I don't feel awkward. Why would I?

Petersmiler
Sep 10th, 2007, 05:03 PM
i'd have loved to hear the officials calling Venus "Christine" while giving her the trophy this year.
fame can eat mangoes.


That says far more about the officials than it does about Justine.

spencercarlos
Sep 10th, 2007, 05:03 PM
Really? you don't feel awkward when you try to convince yourself that someone like Henin will be remembered as better than, to paraphrase, THE FUCKING VENUS WILLIAMS?
It´s not difficult, just showing that stats you´ll realize who is better.
Other than that Venus being remmembered as better than Henin is only product of the media.

:wavey:

No.1Hingis
Sep 10th, 2007, 05:04 PM
The Williams, Justine and Martina.. as active players are the greatest.. why.. cause their achives.. having great season in some part of their carrer.. I know you mean who is done more.. well.. Justine took the advantage on 2 of 3.. but they are champsand part of the history and I dont really will distingue them cause who's winning more now.. cause all them had have awsome times playing out there.. playing with legends like Graff and etc, between them or just dominating the whole circuit.. so there achives for everyone in diff levels..
Justine is the player of moment and we have to reckon it cause she had worked for .. is her time and good theres not really someone that can really compete..
Even I think the escenarios where Martina was great werent the same where the Williams were or are great.. as arent the same environment where Justine now is great.. circunstances are diff, the quality of some contenders arent the same.. thats why.. for me, is not fair to talk abt greatness, they are all already rich ;) and great.. talk abt statics or carrer achieves is fair enough.. ppl just forgets easily but those gilrs have awsome records on women´s tennis ..

new-york
Sep 10th, 2007, 05:04 PM
That says far more about the officials than it does about Justine.

my point.

VivalaSeles
Sep 10th, 2007, 05:05 PM
That says far more about the officials than it does about Justine.

I think you did not understand what new-york was trying to say, that is, achievements in tennis top fame.

Kart
Sep 10th, 2007, 05:10 PM
Yep.

Serena better watch out.


Basically.


If Henin carries on at this rate - and frankly there's no reason why she won't - she's going to leave Venus and Martina (further) behind.

mirzalover
Sep 10th, 2007, 05:12 PM
yes she is right now cause she has one more title than venus. I still think think venus and her will add 2 more slams to their total so even if that happens it will be justine 9 venus 8

Petersmiler
Sep 10th, 2007, 05:15 PM
I think you did not understand what new-york was trying to say, that is, achievements in tennis top fame.


Maybe I was being oversensitive too!

Sorry NY, I didn't really understand the Mangoes bit! Is that an American saying?

venus_rulez
Sep 10th, 2007, 05:37 PM
Henin MIGHT (and that's a very arguable point) have had a better career than Venus, but it's absolutely no question who will have the greater legacy. Someone like Arthur Ashe only won 3 slams, but look at his legacy and importance to the game. Venus can say she changed the face of the game and made tennis more popular world wide (ironically enough through all those outside interests she gets criticized for) In my opinion, that's not something that any stat can measure up to.

Kworb
Sep 10th, 2007, 05:43 PM
Henin MIGHT (and that's a very arguable point) have had a better career than Venus, but it's absolutely no question who will have the greater legacy. Someone like Arthur Ashe only won 3 slams, but look at his legacy and importance to the game. Venus can say she changed the face of the game and made tennis more popular world wide (ironically enough through all those outside interests she gets criticized for) In my opinion, that's not something that any stat can measure up to.
Subjective. Many people think women's tennis was ruined by the style of play the Williams sisters introduced.

venus_rulez
Sep 10th, 2007, 05:52 PM
Subjective. Many people think women's tennis was ruined by the style of play the Williams sisters introduced.

Like who? Fans? Wait, Venus and Serena are the two top attractions on the WTA tour (especially in the U.S.) and get the best ratings. Journalists? You mean the same ones that constantly write about everything they do. Commentators? The ones that consistently say we need the Sisters out there to support the game. Who are the many people you speak of that think the sisters ruined women's tennis?

Chrissie-fan
Sep 10th, 2007, 06:09 PM
Henin MIGHT (and that's a very arguable point) have had a better career than Venus, but it's absolutely no question who will have the greater legacy. Someone like Arthur Ashe only won 3 slams, but look at his legacy and importance to the game. Venus can say she changed the face of the game and made tennis more popular world wide (ironically enough through all those outside interests she gets criticized for) In my opinion, that's not something that any stat can measure up to.
Not taking anything away from Venus. She's having a great career and has indeed contributed a lot to the game. I wouldn't underestimate Justine's lagacy neither though.

Justine Henin's legacy, appart from her career stats themselves, will be about how she played the game. A little girl competing against bigger and stronger girls than herself who thanks to her incredible skills and work ethic regularly came out on top. That is a wonderful legacy to have IMO. She will never be the most popular player. She doesn't have the star quality of the Williams sisters, she's not a glamour girl like Sharapova and she's definitely not as cute as Ivanovic. But when she picks up a tennis racket those that love the game for the game itself first sit on the edge of their seats because they know they are about to witness something special.

SerenaAndTheVee
Sep 10th, 2007, 06:13 PM
I always thought before she even won her first major that Henin was greater than Hingis. It just took her longer to develop.

As for being greater than Venus, I say no. Henin will have to win the great "W" first and then we can discuss who is greater between the two.

jellybelly
Sep 10th, 2007, 06:17 PM
Not taking anything away from Venus. She's having a great career and has indeed contributed a lot to the game. I wouldn't underestimate Justine's lagacy neither though.

Justine Henin's legacy, appart from her career stats themselves, will be about how she played the game. A little girl competing against bigger and stronger girls than herself who thanks to her incredible skills and work ethic regularly came out on top. That is a wonderful legacy to have IMO. She will never be the most popular player. She doesn't have the star quality of the Williams sisters, she's not a glamour girl like Sharapova and she's definitely not as cute as Ivanovic. But when she picks up a tennis racket those that love the game for the game itself first sit on the edge of their seats because they know they are about to witness something special.


We have seen those qualities before in players like BJK and CHrissy. The Williams OTOH are UNPRECEDENTED. They have the qualities of great tennis players AND of celebrity superstars. This is why Henin's achievements will not be remarked upon as spectacular as those of Venus or Serena.

~Eclipsed~
Sep 10th, 2007, 06:43 PM
Or like you thinking that because Venus won matches 4 years ago against a non slam winner yet Henin, she would continue to dominate their head to head, and beat her in the Usopen semifinals, played on hardcourts nevertheless.

And still i would rate the chances of an event that just happened to ocurr being much higher than one occurred 4 and a half years ago, especially in a sport like tennis and their recent development of each of their carreers.

:wavey:

no, i'm not saying that i expected Venus to keep dominating her just because she did over 4 years ago. But i also wouldn't say that Justine will dominate her now too. You would be pretty naive to think that as well.

I'm not even sure if it's worth debating this with you. You're obviously a Venus hater. :armed:

SerenaAndTheVee
Sep 10th, 2007, 06:45 PM
"Many people think women's tennis was ruined by the style of play the Williams sisters introduced."

If you're talking about power hitting then I disagree. Seles, Graf, Davenport and Pierce were playing that game before Venus and Serena turned pro.

QUEENLINDSAY
Sep 10th, 2007, 07:04 PM
achievement wise:

Hingis>Henin>Venus

Being the best player:

Henin>Venus>Hingis

So to summarize:

Henin>Hingis=Venus

Furthermore to include other players as of now:

Serena>Henin>Hingis=Venus>Lindsay

SerenaAndTheVee
Sep 10th, 2007, 07:08 PM
"achievement wise:

Hingis>Henin>Venus"

What's your criteria?

Forehand_Volley
Sep 10th, 2007, 07:14 PM
Venus was the first African American to win a slam in the open era.
Incorrect. Arthur Ashe.

Forehand_Volley
Sep 10th, 2007, 07:16 PM
But when she picks up a tennis racket those that love the game for the game itself first sit on the edge of their seats because they know they are about to witness something special.
Couldn't have explained it better.

QUEENLINDSAY
Sep 10th, 2007, 07:17 PM
"achievement wise:

Hingis>Henin>Venus"

What's your criteria?

I dont have to enumerate, everything has been said.

slams singles and doubles, weeks at number 1, total number of titles in singles and doubles etc...... everything matters!

SerenaAndTheVee
Sep 10th, 2007, 07:19 PM
I see. That being said, without doubles in general Hingis wouldn't even be in contention.

QUEENLINDSAY
Sep 10th, 2007, 07:22 PM
I see. That being said, without doubles in general Hingis wouldn't even be in contention.

Thats an exageration! even without doubles, 200+ weeks at number one achievement is hard to surpass!

Chrissie-fan
Sep 10th, 2007, 07:23 PM
"Many people think women's tennis was ruined by the style of play the Williams sisters introduced."

If you're talking about power hitting then I disagree. Seles, Graf, Davenport and Pierce were playing that game before Venus and Serena turned pro.
In fact, as far back as the late 1920's and the 1930's Helen Wills was already power hitting. Of course, it's all relative to the time when she was active and (especially) the racket she was playing with, but Helen Wills had very powerfull groundstrokes for her era and her game was based on overpowering her opponents. This in contrast with her near contemporary and fellow ATG Suzanne Lenglen who was more of a finesse player. The 1991 US Open semi-final between Seles and Capriati is a milestone in the history of power tennis as we know it today and is often referred to as the blueprint of things to come.

spencercarlos
Sep 10th, 2007, 07:27 PM
I see. That being said, without doubles in general Hingis wouldn't even be in contention.
7 and 6 > 5. Although Hingis has a strong case against Venus given her 2 YEC wins, way more weeks at number one and 3 of 4 grand slams won, and number of titles.

SerenaAndTheVee
Sep 10th, 2007, 07:30 PM
"Thats an exageration! even without doubles, 200+ weeks at number one achievement is hard to surpass!"

200+ weeks is phenomenal. I forgot about that accomplishment.

thrust
Sep 10th, 2007, 09:11 PM
I find the Serena domination statements rather interesting. Surely she did dominate in 2002, however, I believe that was the only time she ended the year as #1. Justine has ended 2003,2006 and no doubt, 2007 as #1. Three years as #1 seems more dominating than 1 year to me. Justine will have won 2 of the 3 Slams she played in this year, has won 7 of 11 tournaments so far, has defeated Serena 3 of 4 this year and has defeated Venus the only time they played this year. I would say that Justine has been pretty dominant this year, and at least nearly as dominant as Serena was in 2002.

Kworb
Sep 10th, 2007, 09:33 PM
I find the Serena domination statements rather interesting. Surely she did dominate in 2002, however, I believe that was the only time she ended the year as #1. Justine has ended 2003,2006 and no doubt, 2007 as #1. Three years as #1 seems more dominating than 1 year to me. Justine will have won 2 of the 3 Slams she played in this year, has won 7 of 11 tournaments so far, has defeated Serena 3 of 4 this year and has defeated Venus the only time they played this year. I would say that Justine has been pretty dominant this year, and at least nearly as dominant as Serena was in 2002.
Serena's main period of domination was from March 2002 to March 2003. She lost 4 times and won 10 tournaments. Justine's current period of domination started in Dubai. She's won 7 tournaments and lost 3 times. If she manages to stay undefeated for the rest of the year, they will have dominated the field similarly.

DOUBLEFIST
Sep 10th, 2007, 09:54 PM
:lol: she passed Hingis a while ago.

I have to admit, she has now eclipsed Vee by a nose.

spencercarlos
Sep 10th, 2007, 09:56 PM
:lol: she passed Hingis a while ago.

I have to admit, she has now eclipsed Vee by a nose.
Sure a slam, a YEC, 3 of 4 slam wins, titles, weeks at number one sure a "nose" :lol:

jellybelly
Sep 10th, 2007, 10:08 PM
Let's not put too much emphasis on the no. 1 ranking weeks. The system is obviously broken and all attempts to fix it haven't worked. I mean Venus didn't make it to no.1 even when she won two slams and the olympics. Clijsters (LOL) became no.1 in summer 2003 and stayed until the end of the year even though three players were obviously better than her that year. In a proper system (one which would clearly define which players are better than others) Serena would have been no. 1 longer and Henin shorter, so it would even out.

OZTENNIS
Sep 10th, 2007, 10:13 PM
Justine may have won more grand slams than Martina, but Martina reached more grand slam finals, has spent more weeks at No.1, has won more WTA Singles titles, has won more career prizemoney and has way more records which will never ever be broken...I still think Martina is greater ATM...

But I do think Justine is greater than Venus ATM

QUEENLINDSAY
Sep 10th, 2007, 10:17 PM
Let's not put too much emphasis on the no. 1 ranking weeks. The system is obviously broken and all attempts to fix it haven't worked. I mean Venus didn't make it to no.1 even when she won two slams and the olympics. Clijsters (LOL) became no.1 in summer 2003 and stayed until the end of the year even though three players were obviously better than her that year. In a proper system (one which would clearly define which players are better than others) Serena would have been no. 1 longer and Henin shorter, so it would even out.


Dont put emphasis on number one? Yeah right!!! The system is broken because Venus only spent 11 weeks right there.

Kworb
Sep 10th, 2007, 10:22 PM
Let's not put too much emphasis on the no. 1 ranking weeks. The system is obviously broken and all attempts to fix it haven't worked. I mean Venus didn't make it to no.1 even when she won two slams and the olympics. Clijsters (LOL) became no.1 in summer 2003 and stayed until the end of the year even though three players were obviously better than her that year. In a proper system (one which would clearly define which players are better than others) Serena would have been no. 1 longer and Henin shorter, so it would even out.
Venus missed the AO and only reached QF at RG. She lost to Martina at the YEC. Yes she was the best player the summer of 2000 but to be #1 you have to be at the top of the game for a whole year.

faboozadoo15
Sep 10th, 2007, 10:22 PM
Incorrect. Arthur Ashe.

I think this poster also forgot that Serena won a major before Venus :tape:

jellybelly
Sep 10th, 2007, 10:52 PM
I think this poster also forgot that Serena won a major before Venus :tape:
No she didn't. Venus won two doubles majors in 1998.

Forehand_Volley
Sep 10th, 2007, 11:04 PM
Serena would have been no. 1 longer and Henin shorter, so it would even out.
The only time Henin has held the #1 ranking is when she's held a grand slam event within the previous 12 months. The same for Serena. Their numbers and time at number one are very appropriate.

Forehand_Volley
Sep 10th, 2007, 11:05 PM
No she didn't. Venus won two doubles majors in 1998.
Arthur Ashe was the first in the Open Era with his win at the 1968 US Open.

Matt01
Sep 10th, 2007, 11:08 PM
"Is Henin now considered GREATER than Hingis and Venus?"

For me, it's practically Henin=Hingis=Venus. They are all great champions, and in a few years when their careers are over we can say more about that topic. ATM I give a slight edge to Justine though; I'm biased and I like her the most :angel:

In a proper system (one which would clearly define which players are better than others) Serena would have been no. 1 longer and Henin shorter, so it would even out.

:lol: Of course.

venus_rulez
Sep 10th, 2007, 11:30 PM
Dont put emphasis on number one? Yeah right!!! The system is broken because Venus only spent 11 weeks right there.

Uh isn't that the point? The system doesn't show who's the best it shows who's played the most and been the most consistent. The Sisters are really the beginning of why the ranking system was questioned to begin with because it was the first time that you had someone who was consistent but couldn't win a slam (hingis) and players who were the players to beat (The sisters and at some points davenport) who didn't play as much but were winning the biggest titles. There isn't any person who is unbiased who would say that Hingis was the BEST player in the world for over 200 weeks, nor would they say that Venus has been the BEST player for only 11 weeks.

QUEENLINDSAY
Sep 10th, 2007, 11:43 PM
Uh isn't that the point? The system doesn't show who's the best it shows who's played the most and been the most consistent. The Sisters are really the beginning of why the ranking system was questioned to begin with because it was the first time that you had someone who was consistent but couldn't win a slam (hingis) and players who were the players to beat (The sisters and at some points davenport) who didn't play as much but were winning the biggest titles. There isn't any person who is unbiased who would say that Hingis was the BEST player in the world for over 200 weeks, nor would they say that Venus has been the BEST player for only 11 weeks.

If you are the best in the world, Why do you have a problem aquiring points to earned the ranking? Bartoli was in Wimbledon finals, do you want to give her the the number 2 ranking?

Why is it that ranking system fails and work for others?

Well, ranking system maybe fails at some point but thats the only system that will work as of now, unless you have something in mind. Any other ideas?

jellybelly
Sep 10th, 2007, 11:49 PM
If you are the best in the world, Why do you have a problem aquiring points to earned the ranking? Bartoli was in Wimbledon finals, do you want to give her the the number 2 ranking?

Why is it that ranking system fails and work for others?

Well, ranking system maybe fails at some point but thats the only system that will work as of now, unless you have something in mind. Any other ideas?

I would expect nothing better from a fan of a player who took advantage of the broken system so many times. By the end even Lindsay had to laugh at the ridiculous ways in which she became no. 1 despite not being the best player. :lol:

Here's a question: if you see Vee and Ree on one side of the draw in 2001 and 2002 and Lindsay and Capriati on the other, which half would you bet the winner comes out of?:kiss: But who was ranked higher?

Better yet if you see Rena and Clijsters in the same tournament in 2003, who do you think is likelier to win it? But who was ranked higher?

Yup, that's right.

Chrissie-fan
Sep 10th, 2007, 11:49 PM
The No.1 ranking is the reward for the best player in terms of consistency. Slam titles are the reward for the best players in terms of peak performances. That's fine, and both are major achievements.

QUEENLINDSAY
Sep 11th, 2007, 12:04 AM
I would expect nothing better from a fan of a player who took advantage of the broken system so many times. By the end even Lindsay had to laugh at the ridiculous ways in which she became no. 1 despite not being the best player. :lol:

Here's a question: if you see Vee and Ree on one side of the draw in 2001 and 2002 and Lindsay and Capriati on the other, which half would you bet the winner comes out of?:kiss: But who was ranked higher?

Better yet if you see Rena and Clijsters in the same tournament in 2003, who do you think is likelier to win it? But who was ranked higher?

Yup, that's right.

You dont even bother to answer any of my questions.

Do you have any ideas of a system that will work?

Linds was in slam finals and semis in 2001 and aquired most number of titles, thats why she ranks higher and I dont see any problem on that. Lindsay did not play like 20+ tournament.

In 2002, lindsay was 9 months injured, so I dont know what are you talking about.

Going back to the topic and being objective, There maybe some exceptional players who goes for quantity but I dont think Linds and Kim falls in that category.

Now if a player show up in slams, lose in the first-third round and won surprisingly on the other, I'm not sure I'm ready to crowned her number one.

Would you rank Bartoli ahead of Jankovic just because she was in one slam finals?

Would you ranked Serena higher playing only in 5 or 6 tournaments winning AO and beaten at quarters in the other three while others was able to win tournaments and be in semis of most slams.

Well, at the end of the day, weeks at number will always be in the book and the number of slams won. Now its up to anyone which one is greater.

~Eclipsed~
Sep 11th, 2007, 12:26 AM
No she didn't. Venus won two doubles majors in 1998.

First off, let me just say that i hate your avatar. Serena's face is way too blown up.

I'm pretty sure people are talking about singles majors.

Singles major > doubles major

Kworb
Sep 11th, 2007, 12:49 AM
If you only play like 8 big tournaments and win half of them, then that's usually not enough to show that you were the best player of the past 12 months. That's good. The system works.

SV_Fan
Sep 11th, 2007, 01:16 AM
Not yet.

freeandlonely
Sep 11th, 2007, 01:46 AM
Now I do not exactly know.
But I would say Justine has very good opportunity
to be convincingly greater in the near future
if considered singles.

lecciones
Sep 11th, 2007, 01:07 PM
The No.1 ranking is the reward for the best player in terms of consistency. Slam titles are the reward for the best players in terms of peak performances. That's fine, and both are major achievements.

I agree with this, and this is my line of thinking. This is the best explanation actually I've read so far concerning no.1 and GS titles.

lecciones
Sep 11th, 2007, 01:11 PM
I see. That being said, without doubles in general Hingis wouldn't even be in contention.

:D 43 singlese titles, 37 doubles titles, 17 Tier Is.... 209 weeks at no.1, doubles grandslam...., etc.... theres a lot out there that Martina still holds even if she hasn't been contending much in the past few years (like 5 years). And remember she got 90% of that in 4 years. How much do players get in 4 years?

p.s. anyway about Justine which is the point of this thread, she isn't finished at all. And so I on my part cannot know for sure what her future will be, but definitely it is very very bright in the singles field.

Tennisaddict
Sep 11th, 2007, 01:37 PM
Keep up with the excuses.
Facts are that Venus made MORE unforced errors in the last two sets she won against Jankovic, despite playing less games, than the amount of unforced errors she did against Henin, which were longer in time and the quality of play exceeded. That speaks volumes.

Lets not even talk how Henin was able to outnumber Venus in winners :lol:....

Next!

I'm not making excuses. I'm telling it like it is. Henin won fairly but that doesn't mean she's the better player overall just on that day. On her day Venus is a better player than Henin on everything but clay. But that doesn't get trough your anti-Venus brain anyway :rolleyes:.

Anty
Sep 11th, 2007, 04:37 PM
Henin has won more slams + the masters then Venus. She is number one for 81 weeks now. Pretty clear for me.

The head-to-head record doesn't mather, since 8 of these 9 matches were played before January 2003. At that moment, Henin was just "one of the best", now she is thé best. If Henin and Venus had played 8 matches against eachother in the periode 2003-2007, the head-to-head would have been totally different.

spencercarlos
Sep 11th, 2007, 04:55 PM
I'm not making excuses. I'm telling it like it is. Henin won fairly but that doesn't mean she's the better player overall just on that day. On her day Venus is a better player than Henin on everything but clay. But that doesn't get trough your anti-Venus brain anyway :rolleyes:.
Venus was in amazing form for this Usopen, she was trashing everybody up until facing her nemesis Jankovic and beat her then played a very good match against Henin, still lost. Which tells me that eventhough Venus played one of her best matches of the year, she still lost in straight sets to Henin and on hardcourts.

You have no stats to prove that Henin only plays better than Venus on clay, "on her day" as you say.
In fact only Venus is a better player than Henin on grass, and only grass.

:wavey:

Leo_DFP
Sep 11th, 2007, 04:59 PM
We're not talking about doubles here, so people should stop bringing it up like it truly matters to any of the three.

Yes, Henin is currently the best. She's been the most consistent for the longest period of time and has the most Slams. However, things can change. I see Venus winning a couple more Slams (at least one more Wimbledon) and Henin winning a bunch more, including her first Wimbledon, but Hingis never winning again.

Leo_DFP
Sep 11th, 2007, 05:01 PM
I'm not making excuses. I'm telling it like it is. Henin won fairly but that doesn't mean she's the better player overall just on that day. On her day Venus is a better player than Henin on everything but clay. But that doesn't get trough your anti-Venus brain anyway :rolleyes:.

What evidence do you have to support that theory? Henin is the best hard and clay court player in the world.

kinseh
Sep 11th, 2007, 05:01 PM
GS's doesn't say everything. :shrug:

martina rulz!
Sep 16th, 2007, 01:49 PM
In my opinion:

Hingis=Henin>Venus.

There isn't a thing of significance that in which Venus leads the other two, except she has one more Grand Slam than Martina. Martina's other accomplishmnets though, more than make up for that.

I think it's best to wait to the end of their careers to judge though. All three should win more Slams in their careers.

papru
Sep 16th, 2007, 02:10 PM
NOoooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ys
Sep 16th, 2007, 02:28 PM
Venus is still greater. 4 Wimbledons vs 0 Wimbledons.

alex14
Sep 16th, 2007, 02:49 PM
I dont know what you mean by greater! but at the moment from what i can tell i dont know if Justin Henin will be very well recognised in decades to come because of her humbleness. She is not that often talked about even on gm, in her peak year, but depending on how her results turn out and how long her no1 rank will last, might change that. Venus/Serena will always be known for being the great african american sisters! and as for hingis, she will always be known for her dominance of the game at such a young age and her style of tennis!

I think alot of people are putting to much stats of grand slams into the whole 'greater' equation, instead of the whole dominance thing. They are all great in different aspects...but 'greater' i dont think we will ever know! IMO it will be venus-serena-hingis that people will still be talking about in 30 years time.

Tennisaddict
Sep 16th, 2007, 03:10 PM
Venus was in amazing form for this Usopen, she was trashing everybody up until facing her nemesis Jankovic and beat her then played a very good match against Henin, still lost. Which tells me that eventhough Venus played one of her best matches of the year, she still lost in straight sets to Henin and on hardcourts.

You have no stats to prove that Henin only plays better than Venus on clay, "on her day" as you say.
In fact only Venus is a better player than Henin on grass, and only grass.

:wavey:

You see, that's where you're wrong. Venus was in good not amazing form this US Open. She played a very tough exhausting match against Jankovic. She unfortunately could not bring her best against Henin so don't try to spin it that way. She still made it to two close sets despite being drained from her previous match. I need no stats to know that Venus on her day is a better hardcourt and grasscourt player than Henin. If you really think that Venus played close to her best against Henin than you really have no clue as to what Venus is capable of, or you just don't want to see it. In light of your usual comments of Venus I suspect the latter.

Tennisaddict
Sep 16th, 2007, 03:22 PM
What evidence do you have to support that theory? Henin is the best hard and clay court player in the world.

The thread topic is if Henin is considered greater than Hingis and Venus. IMO she is because she has more single major titles.

I added that Venus IMO is the better player tough. I just don't see Henin beating Venus when she's in full flight. Henin is more consistent and is therefore posting better result which make her greater for the time being.

Matt01
Sep 16th, 2007, 03:30 PM
She unfortunately could not bring her best against Henin so don't try to spin it that way.
I need no stats to know that Venus on her day is a better hardcourt and grasscourt player than Henin.

1. You only play as well as your opponent allows it.

2. Hardcourt Slams won: Justine: 3, Venus 2. Don't be so arrogant :wavey:

Tennisaddict
Sep 16th, 2007, 04:02 PM
(QUOTE=Matt01;11653663]1. You only play as well as your opponent allows it.

2. Hardcourt Slams won: Justine: 3, Venus 2. Don't be so arrogant :wavey:[/QUOTE]

When Venus hits many serves out and makes unforced errors that is because of her own level of play and has nothing to do with her opponent. So that first comment of yours is not only dumb but untrue as well.

Second you can post as many stats as you want, that still doesn't change my opinion on who's the best player on hardcourt and grass on their day. It's Venus for me, you can call it arrogance I call it belief in Venus'abilities, take it or leave it, I couldn't care less.

Geisha
Sep 16th, 2007, 05:06 PM
(QUOTE=Matt01;11653663]1. You only play as well as your opponent allows it.

2. Hardcourt Slams won: Justine: 3, Venus 2. Don't be so arrogant :wavey:

When Venus hits many serves out and makes unforced errors that is because of her own level of play and has nothing to do with her opponent. So that first comment of yours is not only dumb but untrue as well.

Second you can post as many stats as you want, that still doesn't change my opinion on who's the best player on hardcourt and grass on their day. It's Venus for me, you can call it arrogance I call it belief in Venus'abilities, take it or leave it, I couldn't care less.[/QUOTE]

You know, I've never understood this argument. I mean, when Venus hits first serves out and commits a ton of unforced errors, that means her level of play is bad, correct? If her level of play is bad, then it is her fault and nobody else's. If Henin's was higher, then she was the better player. And, the thing with Venus these days is that she has more "bad" days than good days.

Serenidad.
Sep 16th, 2007, 05:27 PM
The point is, let Justine and Venus play more against each other before we look at who is a greater player. The way i see it right now, Venus owns her 7-2.


Federer said it best about Lleyton Hewitt this year. Even with his lopsided head-to-head, they hadn't played in a while and he considered it 0-0 again because people's game changes and people play differently and evolve. I see that H2H as 1-0 Henin, but Venus may have a mental edge in matches.

I definately think Henin is greater than Venus; the numbers don't lie. I'm not even a Henin fan, but you can't dispute facts. She not only has more slams won, but more variety, and more other achievements as well over Venus.

The problem with Hingis is : What value do you place on her period of dominance and all those weeks at number 1. At the beginning, she was fresh dominating an arguably weaker field of tennis pre-2000. The state of the game was not as strong then, no discredit to Hingis. She still won her matches and did what was required. You just can never know how to value the period of Hingis. In reality, she has more weeks @ Number 1, More Outside Titles, but Less Grand Slams. However, they share the same 3/4 Variety. Henin missing Wimbledon. Hingis Missing the French Open. Ironically, both have made two finals at their missing Grand Slam.

I love this fact about Hingis though. Besides the French Open :

She has won every Grand Slam, and Tier 1 title at LEAST once.

Tennisaddict
Sep 16th, 2007, 05:31 PM
Originally posted by Geisha You know, I've never understood this argument. I mean, when Venus hits first serves out and commits a ton of unforced errors, that means her level of play is bad, correct? If her level of play is bad, then it is her fault and nobody else's. If Henin's was higher, then she was the better player. And, the thing with Venus these days is that she has more "bad" days than good days.[/QUOTE]

That's what I meant. When Venus is hitting many first serves out and making stupid unforced errors, than it's not because of her opponent but because of her own play. Hence the word 'unforced' errors.

So she basically is handing her opponent presents because they don't have to do anything just wait for her mistakes. So allowing Venus'level of play is just an irrelevant point in this discussion. This of course wasn't the case in the whole match against Justine but it was in parts especially in the second set.

Matt01
Sep 16th, 2007, 07:22 PM
(QUOTE]

When Venus hits many serves out and makes unforced errors that is because of her own level of play and has nothing to do with her opponent. So that first comment of yours is not only dumb but untrue as well.

Second you can post as many stats as you want, that still doesn't change my opinion on who's the best player on hardcourt and grass on their day. It's Venus for me, you can call it arrogance I call it belief in Venus'abilities, take it or leave it, I couldn't care less.

I couldn't care less about your stupid opinion, either. :wavey:

Idiot

jellybelly
Sep 16th, 2007, 07:50 PM
I couldn't care less about your stupid opinion, either. :wavey:

Idiot

There we go again with the personal attacks.

Watch the 2003 Aussy semifinal or Wimblendon semifinal from the same year. That was after Henin's "transformation" right? After she had "bulked up" to compete with big hitters right? Then look at those beatdowns. Then compare those to how Serena and Venus played at the Open. It will be clear that who has more potential and at what level the Williams sisters were playing this year. They basically had a year like Hingis. Started off ok but had lots of injuries along the way and lots of starts and stops. However, unlike HIngis, they each still won a slam in that sub-par form. This was nothing more than a transition year. I hope they remain healthy from now on.

Matt01
Sep 16th, 2007, 07:54 PM
Watch the 2003 Aussy semifinal or Wimblendon semifinal from the same year. That was after Henin's "transformation" right?

2003 Aussy Open was not after Henin's "transformation", my dear friend. :kiss:

Adamatp
Sep 16th, 2007, 08:03 PM
In tennis terms, it comes down to the number of slams won, so Justine-Venus-Martina is the correct order, with Serena above all of them. Weeks at # 1, YEC, Olympic Gold (which has hardly been mentioned, but gives Justine and Venus an edge)and doubles are really just tie-breakers. Both Justine and Venus are far from done (I wish I could say the same about Martina) but as of right now (which was the original question) it is Justine.

Historical legacy is a different matter. Jelly-something-or-the-other and Venus-Rulez presented the case for the Williams sisters very well and I agree with them totally. Historically, they will be viewed as the most important tennis players of their generation and I have no argument with that.

However, "historically-important" and "better" are not the same thing. Billie Jean-King is an important figure in American history, not just tennis history, but she was not a better player than her principal rival, Margaret Court.

jellybelly
Sep 16th, 2007, 08:17 PM
2003 Aussy Open was not after Henin's "transformation", my dear friend. :kiss:
Why? The "bulking up" happened in the winter, not between Miami and the clay season.

spencercarlos
Sep 16th, 2007, 08:26 PM
There we go again with the personal attacks.

Watch the 2003 Aussy semifinal or Wimblendon semifinal from the same year. That was after Henin's "transformation" right? After she had "bulked up" to compete with big hitters right? Then look at those beatdowns. Then compare those to how Serena and Venus played at the Open. It will be clear that who has more potential and at what level the Williams sisters were playing this year. They basically had a year like Hingis. Started off ok but had lots of injuries along the way and lots of starts and stops. However, unlike HIngis, they each still won a slam in that sub-par form. This was nothing more than a transition year. I hope they remain healthy from now on.
Yes bring back 2003, that´s best and works in most delusional minds.. Until you get owned by 2007´s results :lol:

:wavey:

spencercarlos
Sep 16th, 2007, 08:28 PM
I couldn't care less about your stupid opinion, either. :wavey:

Idiot
Exactly, he does not care about stats, (which indeed are the most objective way to establish comparissons between players) then we don´t care about what a deluded mind thinks..

:wavey:

spencercarlos
Sep 16th, 2007, 08:31 PM
You see, that's where you're wrong. Venus was in good not amazing form this US Open. She played a very tough exhausting match against Jankovic. She unfortunately could not bring her best against Henin so don't try to spin it that way. She still made it to two close sets despite being drained from her previous match. I need no stats to know that Venus on her day is a better hardcourt and grasscourt player than Henin. If you really think that Venus played close to her best against Henin than you really have no clue as to what Venus is capable of, or you just don't want to see it. In light of your usual comments of Venus I suspect the latter.
Venus played at the Usopen her best hard court tennis, in years, and she played a pretty good match against Henin. 35 Unforced Errors in a two hour match for Venus sounds like a personal record :lol:, especially against the quality of a Henin playing great also nevertheless, still was not enough to win, not even a set.

:wavey:

Helaena
Sep 16th, 2007, 08:33 PM
Exactly, he does not care about stats, (which indeed are the most objective way to establish comparissons between players) then we donīt care about what a deluded mind thinks..

:wavey:

PERFECT.

jellybelly
Sep 16th, 2007, 08:40 PM
Yes bring back 2003, thatīs best and works in most delusional minds.. Until you get owned by 2007īs results :lol:

:wavey:

Why are 2003 stats not relevant now? It was the last year before this one where Henin and the Williams had regular matches. That year counts much more than 04,05, and 06 where none of them played each other, when we're looking for who is better.

Matt01
Sep 16th, 2007, 08:44 PM
Exactly

Thank you :kiss:

venusallday
Sep 17th, 2007, 09:47 AM
IMO the number one ranking has little to do with greatness. Look at Hingis post 1999. During that time period, Venus was top three for just as long, she just didn't play week in and week out to hold the number one spot. Had she been around in Graf's time, she wouldn't have need to play week-in and week-out(like Hingis) to get the number one spot because no one played that much nor was the field as deep. In much of the Open Era, the number one spot barely fluctuated because competition was pitiful. So I could really care less about who holds the past records for number one spots (or majors for that matter) because this time's greater depth means so much more. That being said, the number one holdings of justine and serena are the only impressive ones to me.

I am the biggest of Venus fans. I really believe I am the biggest. For me, her lost this US Open was the worst of her career because it put Justine ahead of her yet again. I must side with my fellow supporters in saying that Venus was not nearly at her best in that match. She shouldn't have opted to play Janko that Wednesday, because Venus was obviously tired in the Henin match. Her anemia didn't help either. She was very sluggish and her first serve was a complete mess.

Because of this loss, and this loss alone, Venus<Justine. Martina is third because she hasn't been at all a force in women's tennis for the last 7 years, besides beating Venus at the AO in 2001.

But let me add this. Venus is one of the best natural athletes that women's sports has ever seen without question. Had she not been so stubborn with her poor strokes on the forehand and serve and with keeping her father and mother as her only coaches, then she may have developed strokes to match her physicality. Could you imagine Venus with technically superb strokes like a Henin or Serena(serve)? She would be unbeatable.

And, to my final point. Because Venus wins with sub-par technical form is only a testament to her fight. And, that is why I love her. Believe me, next year will be Venus' year. Believe it or not.

p.s.-I love it when I'm called delusional. It rarely happens because I'm far from it, but it still amuses me quite a lot. What friend will be first to say it?

Beny
Sep 17th, 2007, 10:14 AM
And, to my final point. Because Venus wins with sub-par technical form is only a testament to her fight. And, that is why I love her. Believe me, next year will be Venus' year. Believe it or not.
Well, not.
I can say next year will be Henin's or Serena's or Sharapova's or Camille's year... Believe me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :lol:

Helaena
Sep 17th, 2007, 12:28 PM
But let me add this. Venus is one of the best natural athletes that women's sports has ever seen without question. Had she not been so stubborn with her poor strokes on the forehand and serve and with keeping her father and mother as her only coaches, then she may have developed strokes to match her physicality. Could you imagine Venus with technically superb strokes like a Henin or Serena(serve)? She would be unbeatable.

i agree...she's superb :yeah: her main problem i guess is her health.. but unbeatable? :scratch: i dnt think so, probably very very very dominant....

andra
Sep 17th, 2007, 12:36 PM
At the moment Henin IS the number1 in women`s tennis - no questions.

Will change of course - but for the momen:worship: t she`s simply the best (able to win on any surface!!!)

SO for the moment: YES: she IS greater than Hingis and Venus....and she deserves that!

venusallday
Sep 17th, 2007, 03:35 PM
Well, not.
I can say next year will be Henin's or Serena's or Sharapova's or Camille's year... Believe me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :lol:

I'm sure you deserve to have your own opinion, and I know I deserve to have mine...any more comments?

Tennisaddict
Sep 17th, 2007, 04:30 PM
I couldn't care less about your stupid opinion, either. :wavey:

Idiot

Wow, great comeback :rolleyes:

I guess being mature and respecting one's opinion is too much to ask from you. Well hey, it's your loss not mine.

Tennisaddict
Sep 17th, 2007, 04:35 PM
Exactly, he does not care about stats, (which indeed are the most objective way to establish comparissons between players) then we don´t care about what a deluded mind thinks..

:wavey:

What are you rambling about? I said many times that Henin is greater because she has achieved more especially in the singles slams department.

I also said that in my opinion Venus is the better player on her day. Now, it seems very hard to swallow for you guys but I don't get why since it's my opinion. Wow, and personal attacks are a sign of weakness in case you didn't know but keep them coming because I don't care.

Tennisaddict
Sep 17th, 2007, 04:45 PM
Venus played at the Usopen her best hard court tennis, in years, and she played a pretty good match against Henin. 35 Unforced Errors in a two hour match for Venus sounds like a personal record :lol:, especially against the quality of a Henin playing great also nevertheless, still was not enough to win, not even a set.

:wavey:

I agree that she played her best hard court tennis in years but that doesn't mean that it was her best hard court tennis by any means. She has played way better in the early 2000's. You know that and I know that. Venus has shown promising play at this US Open but she's not there yet. I'd say it was an great achievement of Venus to take most games of Henin in the tournament after playing a tough draining match. If it took Henin two close sets to beat this Venus, what will it take when Venus is actually well rested and up for it?

Tennisaddict
Sep 17th, 2007, 04:55 PM
IMO the number one ranking has little to do with greatness. Look at Hingis post 1999. During that time period, Venus was top three for just as long, she just didn't play week in and week out to hold the number one spot. Had she been around in Graf's time, she wouldn't have need to play week-in and week-out(like Hingis) to get the number one spot because no one played that much nor was the field as deep. In much of the Open Era, the number one spot barely fluctuated because competition was pitiful. So I could really care less about who holds the past records for number one spots (or majors for that matter) because this time's greater depth means so much more. That being said, the number one holdings of justine and serena are the only impressive ones to me.

I am the biggest of Venus fans. I really believe I am the biggest. For me, her lost this US Open was the worst of her career because it put Justine ahead of her yet again. I must side with my fellow supporters in saying that Venus was not nearly at her best in that match. She shouldn't have opted to play Janko that Wednesday, because Venus was obviously tired in the Henin match. Her anemia didn't help either. She was very sluggish and her first serve was a complete mess.

Because of this loss, and this loss alone, Venus<Justine. Martina is third because she hasn't been at all a force in women's tennis for the last 7 years, besides beating Venus at the AO in 2001.

But let me add this. Venus is one of the best natural athletes that women's sports has ever seen without question. Had she not been so stubborn with her poor strokes on the forehand and serve and with keeping her father and mother as her only coaches, then she may have developed strokes to match her physicality. Could you imagine Venus with technically superb strokes like a Henin or Serena(serve)? She would be unbeatable.

And, to my final point. Because Venus wins with sub-par technical form is only a testament to her fight. And, that is why I love her. Believe me, next year will be Venus' year. Believe it or not.

p.s.-I love it when I'm called delusional. It rarely happens because I'm far from it, but it still amuses me quite a lot. What friend will be first to say it?

:lol: Well, expect to be called many things a lot since this thread unfortunately has some posters who have a problem with opinions that differ from theirs.

plantman
Sep 17th, 2007, 05:34 PM
At the moment Henin IS the number1 in women`s tennis - no questions.

May change of course - but for the momen:worship: t she`s simply the best (able to win on any surface!!!)

SO for the moment: YES: she IS greater than Hingis and Venus....and she deserves that!

:)

Matt01
Sep 17th, 2007, 07:17 PM
Wow, great comeback :rolleyes:

I guess being mature and respecting one's opinion is too much to ask from you. Well hey, it's your loss not mine.

:lol: Uh, read this thread again. You were the first one who said that you couldn't care less about my opinion, even though I, unlike you, was at least trying to back up my opinion with stats.

Since you didn't care about my opinion, why should I care about yours?

spencercarlos
Sep 17th, 2007, 07:30 PM
I agree that she played her best hard court tennis in years but that doesn't mean that it was her best hard court tennis by any means. She has played way better in the early 2000's. You know that and I know that. Venus has shown promising play at this US Open but she's not there yet. I'd say it was an great achievement of Venus to take most games of Henin in the tournament after playing a tough draining match. If it took Henin two close sets to beat this Venus, what will it take when Venus is actually well rested and up for it?
I know that? well she certainly hit plus 60 unforced errors while playing against Hingis in the Semifinals.

For a fact Venus hit a similar number of errors in her match against Davenport in the 2000 final in comparisson to her match against Henin, despite we know the 2000 final took just less that 1 1/2 hours, and her match against Henin took 2 hours.

And sorry Venus was in top form in 2000, and she was playing just a good in 2007 Usopen, in fact i think she was moving better this year.

spencercarlos
Sep 17th, 2007, 07:40 PM
What are you rambling about? I said many times that Henin is greater because she has achieved more especially in the singles slams department.

I also said that in my opinion Venus is the better player on her day. Now, it seems very hard to swallow for you guys but I don't get why since it's my opinion. Wow, and personal attacks are a sign of weakness in case you didn't know but keep them coming because I don't care.
I think it´s not very difficult to understand, you don´t care about stats, i don´t care about your subjective opinion.

Who cares if i think Sabatini "on her day" for me is a better player than everybody else?.... since stats proves otherwise.

Helaena
Sep 17th, 2007, 07:47 PM
I think itīs not very difficult to understand, you donīt care about stats, i donīt care about your subjective opinion.

Who cares if i think Sabatini "on her day" for me is a better player than everybody else?.... since stats proves otherwise.


:yeah: :)

Tennisaddict
Sep 17th, 2007, 09:55 PM
:lol: Uh, read this thread again. You were the first one who said that you couldn't care less about my opinion, even though I, unlike you, was at least trying to back up my opinion with stats.

Since you didn't care about my opinion, why should I care about yours?

No, you should read the thread again. I said I couldn't care less if you accepted my opinion or not, take it or leave it. So I didn't say anything about your opinion. I try to respect everyone's opinion which you clearly could not with mine and on top of it you started with personal attacks. Get a grip :rolleyes:

Tennisaddict
Sep 17th, 2007, 09:57 PM
I know that? well she certainly hit plus 60 unforced errors while playing against Hingis in the Semifinals.

For a fact Venus hit a similar number of errors in her match against Davenport in the 2000 final in comparisson to her match against Henin, despite we know the 2000 final took just less that 1 1/2 hours, and her match against Henin took 2 hours.

And sorry Venus was in top form in 2000, and she was playing just a good in 2007 Usopen, in fact i think she was moving better this year.

Well, if that's what you want to believe go right ahead. I for one know that Venus was not in top form in her match against Henin.

Tennisaddict
Sep 17th, 2007, 10:01 PM
I think itīs not very difficult to understand, you donīt care about stats, i donīt care about your subjective opinion.

Who cares if i think Sabatini "on her day" for me is a better player than everybody else?.... since stats proves otherwise.

Nobody asked you to care about my opinion but you keep responding to my posts. Why is that? I never said that I don't care about stats. I stated my opinion on who is the better player when they meet in top form. I care about that and that's enough for me. I don't need validation from you or anyone else.

Beny
Sep 17th, 2007, 10:30 PM
I'm sure you deserve to have your own opinion, and I know I deserve to have mine...any more comments?

I respect your opinion.

The only reason I replied to your post is that i don't like it when someone is too sure that something is going to happen. You wrote 'Believe it or not..X is gonna dominate in x year,believe me!'

You just can not know. I find it a bit ridiculous, you know. You sounded like you could see in the future. What if she's injured or just plays bad.. (I hope she'll be 100% healthy and fit, i hope all players will be.)
But you can say what you want.