PDA

View Full Version : Venus MUST lose to Mauresmo to save herself from humiliation


selesrules
Sep 5th, 2002, 01:17 PM
Sorry about how the messages got posted, for some reason there was technical problems.

Anyways, let me explain the title of the thread. There's no doubt in my mind that Serena will win this US Open. She's just been incredible and there's nothing that Davenport, Venus or Mauresmo can do.

HOWEVER, if Venus reaches the final and loses again to Serena for a THIRD CONSECUTIVE GRANDSLAM FINAL to her, in my opinion she will never be able to claim one day that she's the greatest no matter what happens.

Grandslam FINALS are the biggest and more important statistics in history and if someone loses 3 consecutive ones to the same player, this in my opinion proves to be a huge humiliation. No greatest should lose 3 consecutive grandslam FINALS to the same person all in a row, it's just plain embarrassing. Mauresmo has to beat her for Venus' own sake because if she doesn't and Serena beats Venus again, the world will FOREVER consider Serena greater then Venus because losing 3 consecutive grandslam FINALS to the same player does this.

anton
Sep 5th, 2002, 01:21 PM
Venus' first serve is better than Serena's. So IF Venus' first serve holds up she should beat Amelie and whoever is in the final be it is very difficult to break her now that she desperately wants this title. Serena could lose to Lindsay. Serena IS making some errors and has not played a true top top player yet so it is impossible to tell how she is really playing.

Beige
Sep 5th, 2002, 01:27 PM
I'm very tempted to slam another player (read: cite her abysmal Grand Slam final record) to make Venus look good but I won't. I won't stoop that low...as in what you're doing here to diffuse your fave's loss to mine yesterday.

Helen Lawson
Sep 5th, 2002, 01:29 PM
Evert lost three in a row to Navratilova (84 French, 84 Wimbledon, 84 U.S. Open) and I do not think it tarnished her record at all and she is considered among the "best ever" though usually at the end of that short list. It is the accomplishments of the others that places her near the bottom of that list, not the fact she lost three slam finals in a row to the same person. Those consecutive losses just made her work all the harder to beat Martina the next time. She did, in the 85 and 86 French Open finals. Those victories were even sweeter for Chris' fans (and perhaps Chris herself) because of the prior losses and how tough she had to work to get those wins.

Wouldn't Venus be more humiliated by tanking a match to Amelie because of a fear of Serena? That's even worse as far long-term mental hang-ups, you are too scared to even play. Venus has to go for it, that is the nature of professional athletes and is certainly her nature. If Serena beats her again, then Venus has her work cut out for her next year. At least she can say she tried and learn something from it. Why would she want to go home after losing to Amelie on purpose when there's the "what if" of if she had met Serena in the final.

I'm not criticizing your view, I just think you're placing too much emphasis on Venus potentially losing three finals in a row. Plus, the match has not yet been played. Neither is yet in the final.

Beige
Sep 5th, 2002, 01:34 PM
Originally posted by Helen Lawson
Evert lost three in a row to Navratilova (84 French, 84 Wimbledon, 84 U.S. Open) and I do not think it tarnished her record at all and she is considered among the "best ever" though usually at the end of that short list. It is the accomplishments of the others that places her near the bottom of that list, not the fact she lost three slam finals in a row to the same person. Those consecutive losses just made her work all the harder to beat Martina the next time. She did, in the 85 and 86 French Open finals. Those victories were even sweeter for Chris' fans (and perhaps Chris herself) because of the prior losses and how tough she had to work to get those wins.

Wouldn't Venus be more humiliated by tanking a match to Amelie because of a fear of Serena? That's even worse as far long-term mental hang-ups, you are too scared to even play. Venus has to go for it, that is the nature of professional athletes and is certainly her nature. If Serena beats her again, then Venus has her work cut out for her next year. At least she can say she tried and learn something from it. Why would she want to go home after losing to Amelie on purpose when there's the "what if" of if she had met Serena in the final.

I'm not criticizing your view, I just think you're placing too much emphasis on Venus potentially losing three finals in a row. Plus, the match has not yet been played. Neither is yet in the final.

Thanks for the Evert stats to illustrate your objective point. Cool!

Helen Lawson
Sep 5th, 2002, 01:34 PM
Also, you do not become among the best ever by losing in the semis.

Sam L
Sep 5th, 2002, 01:38 PM
Good points Helen.

I'm sorry but this is a pointless thread. NO ONE would tank a match for fear of losing their NEXT match. That's just plain silly! :confused:

servenrichie
Sep 5th, 2002, 01:46 PM
Selerules is only piling rubbish here, i wont even stoop so low to discuss it. BTW, you seem so obssesed with Venus that you cant even make intelligent discussion about her.
How many threads did you start about her during the french open and during wimbledon, i mean you'd think that somebody who likes a player the way you like Seles would discuss her instead of your crude obsession with Venus.
There is another thread around discussing what Seles can improve in her game to counter such a heavy loss, yet you are here suggesting to a professional tennis player she should tank a semi-final match in a grand slam to avoid embarrassment in the finals. Really are you that stupid or plain dim-witted?

And dont you dare complain about my language, because this is one of lowest that i have had to read here.

Infiniti2001
Sep 5th, 2002, 01:49 PM
"Some" folk just can't keep Venus out of their minds . It's so hard for them to look away :rolleyes:

P.S. I bet Venus would have more of a problem if she lost another slam final to anyone not named Serena....

selesrules
Sep 5th, 2002, 01:52 PM
Were did I say that Venus should tank? Do not invent things. I said that in my opinion, if I were a Venus fan or even Venus herself, if I had the choice to lose to Mauresmo in the semis or lose for a 3rd consecutive time in a grandslam final to the same player, then I wouldn't choose the 2nd choice. It just hurts your legacy. And people gave the Evert example, well it proves my point, 90% of people consider Navratilova greater then Evert because of stats like this. If Serena beats Venus for a 3rd consecutive grandslam final, it will be harder for Venus to consider herself greater then Serena.

But I never said that Venus should avoid that possiblity, she should go out there with the intention of beating everyone and winning every match. But if she were to lose, it's better that she avoids losing a 3rd consecutive grandslam final to the same player because that will make her in the eyes of most people 2nd to Serena (just like Evert is 2nd to Navratilova for the big majority).

servenrichie
Sep 5th, 2002, 01:56 PM
If she should go out there with the intention of beating everybody, what is then the purpose of this thread?

BTW, unless you dont understand what you wrote, you insinuated she should tank, perhaps you may want to re-read what you read or think of deleting this thread. I think ven for you that you have steeped lower!

::servenrichie shakes her head at such ridiculous reasoning::

Volcana
Sep 5th, 2002, 01:58 PM
selesrules - If monica had made three GS finals this year, how good would you say her year had been? And if your answer is 'humiliating', how do you describe the year Monica is actually having?

Three GS finals sure isn't as good as winning two GS titles like 2000 and 2001, but its a pretty good year.

selesrules
Sep 5th, 2002, 01:59 PM
The purpose of this thread is that if Serena beats Venus in a 3rd consecutive grandslam final, then Serena will be greater then Venus in the eyes of many, just like Navratilova is considered greater then Evert. Of course the best thing for Venus is to win the whole title, but if she were to lose then I'd rather lose to Mauresmo in the semis then being humiliated by losing to Serena for the 3rd consecutive grandslam final. The latter choice will hurt her legacy and will solidfy Serena as greater.

Also Monica has nothing to do with this thread, she's way past her prime. She never lost 3 consecutive grandslam finals to the same player at her prime (or ever). Venus & Serena are both at their prime and it would be hard for Venus to be ranked higher then Serena on the "greatest list" if she loses to her in 3 consecutive grandslam finals (just like Navratilova/Evert). Venus had a great year even if she loses, I'm talking about other things.

Helen Lawson
Sep 5th, 2002, 02:01 PM
People place Martina over Chris not because of Grand Slam records. Chris made it to 2 more finals and they won the same number in singles. If this were the standard, would not Chris be considered better? It is many more weeks at No. 1 and longevity and doubles that I think places Martina over Chris. Also, once the next generation matured, Chris folded against them. Martina did not. These factors have nothing to do with losing three slam finals in a row. They are 43-37 in Martina's favor. The three losses in a row in slam finals I do not think is a consideration for most. The 13 or so losses in a row I think is forgotten by many as well as Chris routinely beat Martina many, many times early in their rivalry. Maybe I'm wrong, but Martina is not above Chris in most people's minds because of three losses in a row in slam finals.

Sorry, if I am a tennis player, I'd rather lose to Serena in a final than Mauresmo in the semifinals. If Venus cannot even make it to the final, then that makes Serena look all the better.

Sam L
Sep 5th, 2002, 02:03 PM
selesrules, don't worry. Venus' greatness will not be defined by the year 2002. There's plenty more years to come! :)

servenrichie
Sep 5th, 2002, 02:03 PM
Venus and Serena are by far not your favourites, why are you so concerned about their legacy?
Do you know how old Navrat. was before she won her first slam?
No you dont, you wanted to slag Venus and think people wouldnt see thru your sorry ass.

I am extremely irritated!!!

selesrules
Sep 5th, 2002, 02:05 PM
Ok then I guess each person has their opinion. Personally I would rather Monica not lose to the same player in 3 grandslam finals in a row (especially at her prime) because it would be hard for her to claim that she's greater then this player. But hey I guess some people have a different view.

servenrichie
Sep 5th, 2002, 02:07 PM
And if she looses to the same player 15 times as she did against Hingis, does it make Hingis greater?
Are you for real?

selesrules
Sep 5th, 2002, 02:08 PM
Monica's records have nothing to do with anything. Her career is not what it should be and there will always be the fact that she was stabbed at her prime and that her career/priorities changed forever. Why do you guys change the subject? I'm talking about the Williams sisters.

Weevee
Sep 5th, 2002, 02:08 PM
Selesrules the next time anybody says that you are obsessed with Venus tell them that there is no greater tennis player in the world to be obsessed with.

DD
Sep 5th, 2002, 02:12 PM
SHE/HE DOESN'T KNOW WHAT SHE IS TALKING ABOUT.

griffin
Sep 5th, 2002, 02:16 PM
Prediction: If Venus gets to the final, and if she then loses for a 3rd time to Serena, she will do what she did after watching baby sis bring home the first Slam trophy: get hungry, rededicate, make the rest of the tour pay for it next year.

Helen Lawson
Sep 5th, 2002, 02:17 PM
I see selesrules' point a little in that if Venus loses for the third time straight in a slam final to Serena, at the end of the year, it will be Serena's "year" and Venus will be the bridesmaid even more than already. Venus' solution to this is to beat Serena in the final, not lose in the semifinals. That's even worse.

Over the span of a career, the three losses in a row (if this is to happen) will not stand out. Be honest, selesrules, if you think Martina is better than Chris as you have indicated, did you even know about Chris' three losses in a row before I pointed it out much less base you view on that fact? I doubt it. Most consider Martina the better player but I doubt many remember the three losses in a row.

selesrules
Sep 5th, 2002, 02:20 PM
Well that's because Navratilova and Evert had about a zillion matches and grandslam finals that it's hard for people to remember a certain detail. But with Venus & Serena, this stat would be a major point of ranking the two in terms of greatness, IMO.

servenrichie
Sep 5th, 2002, 02:22 PM
You have started babbling, with or without Monicas stabbing she is one of the greatest players to grace tennis and i have to tell you this again your obsession with Venus is crude.

Again when you are talking hog-wash concerning the Williamses, dont expect any real discussion. Others who dislike them actually try to start meaningful discussions about them, but there you have also failed woefully.
Again are you for real? Dont you think you should delete this thread "to save herself (yourself) from humiliation"
Its obvious you forgot to take the blue pills today!!!

selesrules
Sep 5th, 2002, 02:28 PM
So when you will compare who's greater Serena or Venus, you would not consider something like "Serena beat Venus in 3 consecutive grandslam finals" as a huge advantage to Serena? Stop avoiding the subject, either answer NO it's not important (which I doubt), or either say yes and agree Venus must win the final or it will not help her legacy at all. I don't hate the Williams, I'm talking about comparing 2 champions damnit.

servenrichie
Sep 5th, 2002, 02:37 PM
You are not talking tennis dammit.

Venus is 22, Serena is 20 and they just started getting to finals of a grandslam consecutively. When they retire, it will be about their achievements: how many slams, tournament wins, nos of weeks at the top and not who lost 3 slam finals consecutively. Nobody is avoiding any subject here, rather you keep sinking lower and lower with this line of reasoning!

selesrules
Sep 5th, 2002, 02:39 PM
Forget it, I hope this happens and we'll see if experts will use this when they compare the 2 and who's better.

servenrichie
Sep 5th, 2002, 02:40 PM
The tournament is not yet over and you are telling the 2-time defending champion to tank her semis. If Venus happens to win, you'd be the first person here accussing Serena of laying low for Venus. Is there no end to this madness?

Why are you weeping more than the bereaved?

Helen Lawson
Sep 5th, 2002, 02:46 PM
Losing at any Grand Slam to anyone does not help one's legacy. Whether Venus loses to Amelie or Serena (if she is to lose), it is still a title within her reach that she did not win.

I see your point, but only if they both retire or leave tennis in a year or two or turn into terrible players, thus making 1999-2002 their "golden years." If this is the case, then Venus does leave on sort of a sour note and having been dominated by Serena at the end of their careers. But losing to Amelie just makes her look even worse. I think she actually "saves" more face by losing to Serena than to Amelie. Serena would still own the title under your logic so would not her "legacy" expand regardless of what Venus does, and then it will go down that Venus could not even make it to the final.

I guess your point is, Venus loses even more of her legacy if she loses in the final to Serena than to Amelie in the semifinals. I see it the opposite way. I would rather be dominated by one player than lose to handfull.

midora
Sep 5th, 2002, 04:45 PM
Selesrules

Do you EVER try to bring ANYTHING positive to this messageboard. You are getting to be like a broken record. Maybe you and JCap should go to the same shrink because frankly you are http://www.gamers-forums.com/smilies/cwm/cwm/freak3.gif

selesrules
Sep 5th, 2002, 05:46 PM
Well, this thread can be "positive" to Serena and her fans. She's going to prove that she's better then Venus. It's not my fault if Venus fans do not want to accept that experts were all along right when they said in the past that Serena would be come the better of the 2.

Volcana
Sep 5th, 2002, 05:46 PM
The beauty of it is, it;s another 'All-Williams' final. The third one in a row. I was thinking of Orange Pina Coladas for this one. Regardless of the out come here, who has themost GS titles at the end will most effect their legacy. If Venus has 22 GS titles and Serena has 9, then the fact that Serena beat Venus three in a row at one point is simply irrelevent.

OTOH, if Venus never beats Serena in a GS final again, then this year is where it all starled.

Either way, Venus will survive. And one of them has to be the second best player the world. :)

selesrules
Sep 5th, 2002, 05:51 PM
Volcana, if Serena dominates for 2 more years and then everything is stopped by a stabbing at her prime, and then right after that Venus starts winning again and gets such a superior record, then I disagree.

But if they continue both playing and Venus turns things around and gets more slams, then I agree.

midora
Sep 5th, 2002, 05:57 PM
Volcano

"orange pina coladas" thats sounds delish. I have decided to go more informal. It'll be pizza and cola followed by a nice big hot fudge sundae. No matter what happens a Williams wins. Enjoy your pina coladas. :wavey:

WtaTour4Ever
Sep 5th, 2002, 06:00 PM
Selesfan,


I see your point. Its not whether or not Venus has had a great year,compared to the tour, that is an OBVIOUS YES. In a way losing in the semi, to Amelie (which I do NOT want to happen), could be viewed as better than losing the title TO Serena for the third straight major in a row. But I personally think it looks the same for Venus either way, if she does not win the whole thing. If she loses, and Serena wins its still 3-0 to Serena for the year!!


It could be how Capriati has lost in the quarters of the last three, but she probably feels better, than if she had lost to SERENA in the quarters of the last three. But now she has lost three in a row 2GS to Mauresmo, so it ain't looking good for Capriati either way. I think consecutive losses to the same player is more what selesfan is referring to....IMHO

Larrybid
Sep 5th, 2002, 06:29 PM
The thing is Venus is not afraid of losing...to anyone. If more players had that attitude (Cappy..are you listening?) they would be better players and we'd have a more competitive tour. I would be most disappointed in Venus if she were afraid of losing to Serena.

Venus may or may not be eventually recognized as the greater of the 2 champion sisters, but one thing she is NOT is a coward..afraid of a competitive challenge. For that reason this is a luducris thread.

Amanda
Sep 5th, 2002, 07:56 PM
LOL@ selesrules! I'm sure you're just getting over Venus' dominating QF performance......so I'll excuse your ignorance this time!