PDA

View Full Version : So,which majorless #1 player is greater among them?


Lin Lin
Jul 6th, 2009, 11:29 AM
Vote please.:wavey:

Kworb
Jul 6th, 2009, 11:30 AM
Safina

Sharapower
Jul 6th, 2009, 11:30 AM
Who are they all? Safina, Jankovic, anybody else?

Bartosh
Jul 6th, 2009, 11:32 AM
Mauresmo

Lin Lin
Jul 6th, 2009, 11:34 AM
so I added a time in the options

Kworb
Jul 6th, 2009, 11:34 AM
Clijsters and Mauresmo are not majorless :confused:

Bartosh
Jul 6th, 2009, 11:34 AM
Clijsters and Mauresmo are not majorless :confused:

Clijsters in 2003 and Mauresmo 2004 were majorless :angel:

Lin Lin
Jul 6th, 2009, 11:34 AM
so I added a time in the options.:wavey:

Sam L
Jul 6th, 2009, 11:37 AM
I know who's the worst. It's Jankovic.

I'm not sure who the greatest should be. I guess if I had to pick one probably Clijsters. That is, at the time they became slamless No. 1.

jade001
Jul 6th, 2009, 11:37 AM
Mauresmo, obviously 2majors.

Polikarpov
Jul 6th, 2009, 11:40 AM
I think I'd go with Clijsters here -- competed against better players.

Bartosh
Jul 6th, 2009, 11:41 AM
Mauresmo, obviously 2majors.

yeah ... majorless Mauresmo is the best because 2 majors :rolleyes:

Lin Lin
Jul 6th, 2009, 11:43 AM
yeah ... majorless Mauresmo is the best because 2 majors :rolleyes:

Apparently the poster is a newbie judging from that his/her posts number is only 4:rolls:

jade001
Jul 6th, 2009, 11:46 AM
yeah ... majorless Mauresmo is the best because 2 majors :rolleyes:

:lol: the thread title is so confused:lol: well, def. Not Mauresmo, i'd go with Kim too.

Kworb
Jul 6th, 2009, 11:48 AM
I don't understand the thread at all. Like who had the greater career? Who was greater at the time? Who was greater in size?

Lulu.
Jul 6th, 2009, 11:51 AM
Kim.

Polikarpov
Jul 6th, 2009, 11:51 AM
I don't understand the thread at all. Like who had the greater career? Who was greater at the time? Who was greater in size?

I thought it's about who's the best player during their slamless days?

Lin Lin
Jul 6th, 2009, 11:53 AM
Lol,if PEOPLE can understand millions of threads like peak A vs peak B,why can't people understand this?:lol:

Bartosh
Jul 6th, 2009, 12:14 PM
I thought it's about who's the best player during their slamless days?

and I think you are right ;)

John.
Jul 6th, 2009, 12:17 PM
Kim

Experimentee
Jul 6th, 2009, 12:53 PM
It means who was the best player at the time they became #1 for the first time? All the players on the list were major-less at that time.

I would have to go with Kim, as she was very dominant on hardcourts at the time despite not having won a Slam. I don't think there was ever any time when the others were dominant players.

Thanx4nothin
Jul 6th, 2009, 01:04 PM
Kimmy Clijsters. She was winning things left right and centre in the Serena slam era, no mean feat.
Plus, she achieved everything at a very young age and really looked like she could have kicked on and won many more slams,wasn't to be unfortunately.

Mikey.
Jul 6th, 2009, 01:22 PM
Kim

jubliant11
Jul 7th, 2009, 05:17 AM
Kim with eight or nine titles and two YEC on her 52 weeks.

LeonHart
Jul 7th, 2009, 05:19 AM
Yeah of those it's Kim. She really dominated everyone except the elite players (Serena, Venus, Henin). Even in those match ups it was close and she was just mentally a bit weaker.

Balltossovic
Jul 7th, 2009, 05:43 AM
Amelie :)

njnetswill
Jul 7th, 2009, 05:53 AM
Kim was #1 in singles AND doubles and had lost that epic against Capriati. :worship:

Jelena and Safina don't even come close. Mauresmo getting to #1 was kind of odd. 2004 was a crazy year in general.

Volcana
Jul 7th, 2009, 06:42 AM
I'm sure this is NOT what the thread starter meant but ....
Probably the greatest, when she WAS 'slamless', was Clijsters. She won more tournaments before she won her slam. Other side of the coin, Safina is holding the #1 ranking, despite not winning a slam. And holding by a wide margin. It's sort of 'Kournikova Syndrome', at a high level. Safina can't win big matches in the late rounds in slams. But she sure as hell can win anywhere else.

That, arguably, makes HER the greatest 'slamless #1'.

Seyz
Jul 7th, 2009, 07:01 AM
Well taking age into consideration. It's hard to tell at the moment.

Mauresmo is 30.
Clijsters is 26.
Jankovic 24.
Safina 23.

In 6-7 years time when Jankovic and Safina are 30, they may have won 2 slams like Mauresmo as well. They're not super young, but they still have some time to refine their games a little bit.
I want to say Clijsters, but she tarnished her own legacy. Who the hell retires at ( was it 23? ) No one in real life can afford that type of luxury.. and it reeks of laziness and lack of ambition. I know it sounds harsh, but anyone who thinks about retiring at that age, no matter what field they are in, is ridiculous, especially when they have so much talent.

For now I'm going to say Mauresmo,
but there's something I see in JJ. I don't know, just a feeling that she may still have some stuff to show us.

njnetswill
Jul 7th, 2009, 07:07 AM
The thread is about who was the best player AT THE TIME when they were a slamless #1. So talk of legacy and the final number of slams won isn't quite relevant. Just my take. :p

Serenita
Jul 7th, 2009, 07:08 AM
momo, hands down
if only she had her brain in check

LH2HBH
Jul 7th, 2009, 07:51 AM
Funny how time colours our perception :rolleyes:

tenn_ace
Jul 7th, 2009, 07:54 AM
Jankovic has more votes than Safina :lol:

Safina has been to 3 GS finals plus semis. Jankovic has only been to one final and note sure if there were any semis

Edinboro
Jul 7th, 2009, 08:15 AM
Safina. She will win her grand slam soon. Jelena im not so sure. :/

Singleniacki
Jul 7th, 2009, 08:18 AM
lol, there all better than ivanovic