PDA

View Full Version : Last World #1 Without a Slam?


SOA_MC
May 9th, 2008, 04:57 AM
I know people scoff at the idea of Ana or Jelena becoming World #1 before they have won a Grand Slam title.

But it got me thinking has there ever been a player who got to #1 before they won their first slam?

Cakeisgood
May 9th, 2008, 05:09 AM
Kim C and Momo both did. Shame both their careers are probably over.

Chunchun
May 9th, 2008, 05:16 AM
Kim and Momo both reach no.1 BEFORE winning a slam. I don't think any no.1 didn't ever win a slam.

SOA_MC
May 9th, 2008, 05:33 AM
Kim C and Momo both did. Shame both their careers are probably over.

Kim and Momo both reach no.1 BEFORE winning a slam. I don't think any no.1 didn't ever win a slam.

Thanks, What's the history on players reaching #1 before winning a slam? How many players have done it? I guess I have to wait for Anna K or Cp6uja to log on.

In The Zone
May 9th, 2008, 05:35 AM
Sharapova was # 1 while she didn't have a slam victory in her ranking, if that counts.

A Magicman
May 9th, 2008, 05:42 AM
Jelena will win the FO and then become #1 after Wimbledon, so everything will be fine. ;)

SOA_MC
May 9th, 2008, 05:43 AM
Sharapova was # 1 while she didn't have a slam victory in her ranking, if that counts.

No, I mean getting to #1 without having a Grand Slam title at that point of their career but thanks anyway.

OsloErik
May 9th, 2008, 06:28 AM
Clijsters and Mauresmo are the only two in history, they made a big deal about it when Clijsters hit #1 that she was the first player to do so. For the men, I think only Marcelo Rios hit #1 before winning a slam, although unlike Mauresmo and Clijsters, he never did.

WIMBLY2004
May 9th, 2008, 06:43 AM
Sharapova was # 1 while she didn't have a slam victory in her ranking, if that counts.

Actually before and after her, davenport held the No.1 ranking without slam counted in the ranking point for quite a long time.

OsloErik
May 9th, 2008, 07:20 AM
Actually before and after her, davenport held the No.1 ranking without slam counted in the ranking point for quite a long time.

And Mauresmo held the #1 spot without even a slam FINAL in her ranking points!

AnnaK_4ever
May 9th, 2008, 08:26 AM
Clijsters and Mauresmo are the only two in history, they made a big deal about it when Clijsters hit #1 that she was the first player to do so. For the men, I think only Marcelo Rios hit #1 before winning a slam, although unlike Mauresmo and Clijsters, he never did.

+ Ivan Lendl reached #1 before winning his first Slam.

Cp6uja
May 9th, 2008, 09:01 AM
In XXI century 9 different players reach #1 spot at some moment:

Jennifer Capriati
Kim Clijsters
Lindsay Davenport
Justine Henin
Martina Hingis
Amélie Mauresmo
Maria Sharapova
Serena Williams
Venus Williams

4 of them (sisters, Henin and Capriati) every week at #1 have atleast one slam win in theirs rankings records and other 5 (Davenport, Hingis, Sharapova, Clijsters and Mauresmo) is "slamless" in many of theirs weeks at #1.

When we talking about Ivanovic or Jankovic chances to reach #1 - currently they have better chances to not reach #1 spot this season after eventual 1st slam win than reach #1 like "slamless" b/c results of Henin of last season and Sharapova/Serena results this season.

OsloErik
May 10th, 2008, 12:45 AM
Of the players we've listed who reached #1 before their first slam win (Clijsters, Mauresmo, Rios, and Lendl), only Mauresmo and Rios managed to reach it without winning the YEC, and Rios is the only one who never won a slam. Rios actually has the least impressive career of pretty much ANYONE to reach #1, and probably a majority of #2's and #3's. 1 slam final, 5 slam QFs...if it weren't for those masters shields, he'd be a nobody.

OsloErik
May 10th, 2008, 12:48 AM
When we talking about Ivanovic or Jankovic chances to reach #1 - currently they have better chances to not reach #1 spot this season after eventual 1st slam win than reach #1 like "slamless" b/c results of Henin of last season and Sharapova/Serena results this season.

Maybe I'm not understanding this properly, but if you're saying what I think you're saying, I don't think it's true. Maybe 5 of the 9 women to hit #1 in the 21st century haven't had a slam win on their ranking, but winning a slam gives you more points, and it's obviously the best thing you can do if you're trying to reach #1. So there's a statistical fluke, but that doesn't mean if you want to be #1 you're better off not winning a slam...

sunsfuns
May 10th, 2008, 01:09 AM
I really hope they (Ana or Jelena) win a slam first and get to #1 after that. Another paper #1 is the last thing tennis needs right now...

vettipooh
May 10th, 2008, 01:21 AM
I really hope they (Ana or Jelena) win a slam first and get to #1 after that. Another paper #1 is the last thing tennis needs right now...


They both better hurry and win a slam soon...within the next 2 years. Competition is getting too tough...and the Veterans are still hungry.:lol:

sunsfuns
May 10th, 2008, 01:26 AM
They both better hurry and win a slam soon...within the next 2 years. Competition is getting too tough...and the Veterans are still hungry.:lol:

Actually it seems like there will be less not more competition in immediate (2-3 years) future...

Justin
May 10th, 2008, 01:58 AM
Tracy Austin.

In The Zone
May 10th, 2008, 02:21 AM
Actually before and after her, davenport held the No.1 ranking without slam counted in the ranking point for quite a long time.

Duh. Should have remembered that.