PDA

View Full Version : Martina's 9 tour wins in 2000: Can't happen again. The tour's too deep.


Volcana
Jul 16th, 2002, 01:32 PM
That's what I thought too. Check it out.


2002-06-24 Wimbledon 1056 WON GS
2002-05-27 Roland Garros 1052 WON GS
2001-10-29 Tour Champs 503 WON I+
2001-08-13 Toronto 423 WON I
2002-05-13 Rome 427 WON I
2002-03-18 Miami 590 WON I
2002-02-25 Scottsdale 334 WON II

2001-08-27 U.S. Open 818 FR GS
2002-05-06 Berlin 246 FR I

2002-01-07 Sydney 139 SF II

2002-04-15 Charleston 92 QF I
2001-08-06 Los Angeles 62 QF II


Seven down, two to go, and its only July.

supremeross
Jul 16th, 2002, 02:18 PM
She is sooo awesome. The number 1 player in the world has only played in 12 tournaments in the past 52 weeks. Who knew it could be done?

mboyle
Jul 16th, 2002, 02:30 PM
Well, she is only playing ONE tournament until her first title defense (Canadian Open) but then she plays the Princess Cup, Moscow, and Zurich, so the most tournaments she can win by the year's end is: 12! :eek: WHAT IS MORE: That would consist of: 3 Grand Slams, the Tour Championships, 5 tier ones, and two tier twos! :eek: When Martina won her 9 titles, they were: 0 Grand Slams, Tour Championships, 5 Tier Ones, 2 Tier Twos, 1 Tier Three. GO REE!

supremeross
Jul 16th, 2002, 02:31 PM
I thought Serena was on the commitment list for Linz. Or am I mistaken?

villa
Jul 16th, 2002, 02:33 PM
OMG, serena has won 7 tournaments already!! i lol this girl needs to be stopped (come on venus), is this the most tournaments a williams has won in a year??

martinafan
Jul 16th, 2002, 02:44 PM
Could I just point out one tiny thing....it's only 5 titles so far THIS year, but 7 titles in the past 52 weeks......

Ryan
Jul 16th, 2002, 03:24 PM
Volcana, Martina won 9 titles in 2000. Not in 52 weeks, but in the year of 2000. Serena has only 5 titles in 2002, so she needs 4 more titles THIS year to make 9.

supremeross
Jul 16th, 2002, 06:01 PM
Serena will and can win 9 titles in one year and more.

mboyle
Jul 16th, 2002, 06:51 PM
By this time 2000, Martina had 4 titles! (Pan Pacific, Hamburg, Miami, s'Hertogenboesch (sp.?) Serena already has Five!!!

Volcana
Jul 16th, 2002, 07:53 PM
Martinafan and Ryan15 are absolutely right. Mt bad. So its really 5 down and 4 to go. That's important because I'm still betting on Venus for the USOpen. So Serena is going to have to win 4 out fo 6 tournaments to get 9.

Actually, the way she's playing, that's not unreachable at all.

Cute girl. Okay tennis player. Smiles a lot. I've got $50 million. Wear my shoes.

Raj
Jul 16th, 2002, 11:02 PM
Year: 1997
WTA Tour Tournaments Played: 17
WTA Tour Record: 75-5
Tournament Titles: 12 (Sydney International, Australian Open,
Pan Pacific Open, Open Gaz De France, Lipton Championships,
Family Circle Cup, Wimbledon, Bank of the West Classic, Toshiba
Classic, U.S. Open, Porsche Tennis Grand Prix, Advanta
Championships)
Hardcourt Record: 48-2
Carpet Record: 12-2
Clay Record: 11-1
Grass Record: 7-0
Overall Record (including non-WTA Tour events): 78-5


At the age of 15/16. Hingis got to all four Grand Slam finals.
Won 12 titles including 3 Grand Slams.

So please could we stop these annoying comparisons. But if you want to compare past results 1997 was Hingis' year not 2000!

Volcana
Jul 16th, 2002, 11:31 PM
Raj - Some of us think winning 9 tournaments in a year, including 5 Tier I's, is pretty impressive. It may not come up to YOUR lofty standands, but it's pretty damn hard to do.

Also, with respect, 2000 is a much better indication of what martina can do NOW than 1997. And unless she's been taking some rather suspect chemicals, 2000 is a better indicator of what she'll do in the future than 1997.

Youth is not everything. Martina Navratilova won her first GS title at 23. In the universe of GS titles, how long you're on top is more important than how fast you get there.

Cybelle Darkholme
Jul 16th, 2002, 11:36 PM
so true volcana. There are a lot of late bloomers who were not super child prodigies winning grand slams in their diapers. Lindsay still is going strong but it will be tough for her to claim the us open especially after coming off an injury. Jen has a good chance but i think she has williams on the brain. and anyone else I dont see as a legitimate threat for the title.

Williams Rulez
Jul 17th, 2002, 09:25 AM
That is right... Serena has a chance of winning 12 titles... and it would better than Martina's record in 1997... because it would include 3 slam titles, 5 Tier 1s, Tour Championships and 2 Tier 2s.

Robbie.
Jul 17th, 2002, 09:41 AM
Originally posted by Williams Rulez
That is right... Serena has a chance of winning 12 titles... and it would better than Martina's record in 1997... because it would include 3 slam titles, 5 Tier 1s, Tour Championships and 2 Tier 2s.

Yes, this is correct. But the operative word here is chance. A lot of people are acting like Serena winning a Grandslam, the tour championships and three tier 1's (while not losing a match from april to november) is a gimme :rolleyes:. I for one am not that naive. Even in her year of utter domination, Martina's form tailed off towards the end of the year (she lost three of her 5 matches for the year after the US Open). Winning can be draining. Everyone seems to think that today's tour is so much "tougher" than in 1997, so for Serena to keep up her superhuman form and almost immaculate win/loss record , while playing a fairly hectic schedule (particularly for her) would be while possible, inprobable. At the moment Serena's year ranks with Venus' 2000 (a great achievement), but her equalling Martina's feet is not a gimme by any stretch. I do agree however, 9 tourney wins is well within her reach.

Williams Rulez
Jul 17th, 2002, 10:04 AM
Yeah... the word used was chance.

But you must know that Serena would only have played 15 tournaments, and she had a long rest in the beginning of the season. But I'm not expecting her to win 12 titles myself, though 9 IMO, is achievable.

Alan
Jul 17th, 2002, 11:43 AM
It does look like Serena may win 9 or more titles this year, this is SERENA'S YEAR i guess

Ryan
Jul 17th, 2002, 01:39 PM
So Serena is going to have to win 4 out fo 6 tournaments to get 9.


Does this mean she's only playing 6 more tournaments forthe rest of the year, including all the tune-ups for USOpen? If it is, she CANT win 12 tournaments, only 11. 5+6=11:) Although I'm betting she'll play more tournies then 6.

Monica_Rules
Jul 17th, 2002, 01:44 PM
I'm sure she'll loose a few more matches this year she isn't invincible but i do think that she will win at least 9 tournies!

SerenasMelons
Jul 17th, 2002, 04:26 PM
Originally posted by Volcana
Raj - Some of us think winning 9 tournaments in a year, including 5 Tier I's, is pretty impressive. It may not come up to YOUR lofty standands, but it's pretty damn hard to do.

Also, with respect, 2000 is a much better indication of what martina can do NOW than 1997. And unless she's been taking some rather suspect chemicals, 2000 is a better indicator of what she'll do in the future than 1997.

Youth is not everything. Martina Navratilova won her first GS title at 23. In the universe of GS titles, how long you're on top is more important than how fast you get there.

I thought the purpose of this thread was to show a great stat and a great opportunity for Serena to win a LOT of tournaments this year. Raj was just showing that Martina had won a lot of tournaments in 1997. I don't think that warranted a sarcastic reply.

Raj
Jul 17th, 2002, 06:36 PM
SERENASMELONS; thanks for getting the point.
Volcana:thanks for the sarcasm.
My point was simple, if you want to compare Serenas results and hingis' past results. Compare the results when Hingis was at her peak.

jay_k
Jul 17th, 2002, 08:20 PM
Makes Sense to me Raj :)
But then you are talking to the Williams Fans ;)

Volcana
Jul 17th, 2002, 08:24 PM
Raj - I wasn't trying to compare Serena's results to Marttina's past results. I was comparing Serena's results to Martina's 2000 results. I see nothing wrong with making that comparision. I could have compared Serena's results toi Martina's 2001 results. I didn't intend to do that anymore than I intended to use 1997 as point of comparision.

Though, being more recent, 2001 is a better point of comparison than 1997.

jay_k
Jul 17th, 2002, 08:34 PM
Hingis at her peak Vs Serena at her best would be anytime the more logical comparison IMHO .:)

Williams Rulez
Jul 18th, 2002, 08:11 AM
Well, he was just trying to make a point - winning 9 titles is hard and 2000 was the last time anyone did it. Satisfied? :rolleyes:

Volcana
Jul 18th, 2002, 12:01 PM
jay_k - Then start a thread making that comparison, since that's YOUR 'humble opinion'. No doubt I'll post in it.