PDA

View Full Version : Fascinating Stat: Justine is 3-5 in Non-Roland Garros Grand Slam Finals


Sectumsempra
Feb 7th, 2010, 12:37 PM
And she's lost 4 of her last 5. Also, she's lost 3 of the 4 three set matches she's played in Grand Slam finals. :eek:

GrandMartha
Feb 7th, 2010, 12:39 PM
allez!

Andreas
Feb 7th, 2010, 12:40 PM
It's not like it's 0-8, so it's hardly fascinating in any way.

Sectumsempra
Feb 7th, 2010, 12:44 PM
Well it's no less fascinating than this (http://http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?t=401380) statistic. But apparently for Henin fans, analysing stats is a favourite pasttime so I'm sure they already know this.

Sectumsempra
Feb 7th, 2010, 12:46 PM
But of course all those losses were outliers

Noctis
Feb 7th, 2010, 12:46 PM
she plays headcases like Kim (final hadcase) kuzzy final headcase

Szavay #1
Feb 7th, 2010, 12:53 PM
we get it. you don't like juju. next topic, pls. :wavey:

The Crow
Feb 7th, 2010, 12:55 PM
Err... why leave out RG? Because she's doing too good there?

Uranium
Feb 7th, 2010, 12:55 PM
she plays headcases like Kim (final hadcase) kuzzy final headcase

And UE error machines in the finals like Pierce and Ivanovic.

AnnaK_4ever
Feb 7th, 2010, 01:07 PM
So Justine won 3 hardcourt slams?
Yeah, she really sucks.

Lucemferre
Feb 7th, 2010, 01:14 PM
What is fascinating? Everybody knows she is not that good out of clay :devil:

tennnisfannn
Feb 7th, 2010, 01:17 PM
Err... why leave out RG? Because she's doing too good there?
hey 4-0 does not serve this thread well:devil:

Shinjiro
Feb 7th, 2010, 01:19 PM
Mauresmo was outstanding in 2006.

brickhousesupporter
Feb 7th, 2010, 01:20 PM
Err... why leave out RG? Because she's doing too good there?
Is it any more erroneous than leaving out Aces and unreturnables?

Sectumsempra
Feb 7th, 2010, 01:21 PM
Err... why leave out RG? Because she's doing too good there?

To point out that she struggles in Grand Slam finals on hardcourt and grass :shrug: Not rocket science sweetie :hearts:

SM
Feb 7th, 2010, 01:38 PM
To point out that she struggles in Grand Slam finals on hardcourt and grass :shrug: Not rocket science sweetie :hearts:
i wouldnt say struggles...the fact a lot of those matches were 3 sets means it could have gone either way and she could have won more slams than she has

shes a good player to have in the finals, unlike a lot of the chokers in the top ten

BlameSerena
Feb 7th, 2010, 01:41 PM
It's not like it's 0-8, so it's hardly fascinating in any way.
I find it interesting.
It's just as fascinating, if not more, than the number of break points she had in the AO final. :lol:

The Witch-king
Feb 7th, 2010, 01:46 PM
Err... why leave out RG? Because she's doing too good there?

:rolleyes:
i'm sure you're opposed to the phrase "outside of wimbledon" too.

The Crow
Feb 7th, 2010, 01:54 PM
Is it any more erroneous than leaving out Aces and unreturnables?

Err what? :confused:

VishaalMaria
Feb 7th, 2010, 01:59 PM
Outside of Roland Garros, Justine has won three hard court slams.

Outside of Wimbledon, Venus has won two hard court slams.

WOW! I didn't think that extra slam would be the borderline between "one surface player" and "All round, all court player".

The Crow
Feb 7th, 2010, 02:01 PM
To point out that she struggles in Grand Slam finals on hardcourt and grass :shrug: Not rocket science sweetie :hearts:

Oh okay. So the conclusion is that she chokes in GS finals, but only if they are not played on clay?

Sorry, but I just don't get it. We all know clay is her best surface and that she's going to have worse statistics on other surfaces. GS finals conversion is just a mere example of that.

Uranium
Feb 7th, 2010, 02:02 PM
Outside of Roland Garros, Justine has won three hard court slams.

Outside of Wimbledon, Venus has won two hard court slams.

WOW! I didn't think that extra slam would be the borderline between "one surface player" and "All round, all court player".

Don't you remember? Justine's AO win is what makes her greater than Venus even though that AO win, 3/7 players Justine beat were ranked outside the top 100 and beat only 2 players in the top 30.;)

The Crow
Feb 7th, 2010, 02:03 PM
And the same holds for Venus I guess (grass is best, other surfaces are not as good). The difference probably is that everyone expected Venus to have hardcourt GS titles, but expected this less from Justine.

Just Do It
Feb 7th, 2010, 02:05 PM
3-5 is hardly fascinating :lol:

brickhousesupporter
Feb 7th, 2010, 02:06 PM
Err what? :confused:
Since you are going to act like you did not see this other "fascinating" thread....
http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?t=401380

The Crow
Feb 7th, 2010, 02:06 PM
Don't you remember? Justine's AO win is what makes her greater than Venus even though that AO win, 3/7 players Justine beat were ranked outside the top 100 and beat only 2 players in the top 30.;)

A win is a win. It's not Justine's fault that Serena was there to stop big sister from having more slam wins and that Kim did not deliver enough when the Belgians ruled the court ;)

But anyway, I never liked this comparing between players. I like Justine and Venus both and I'm glad they both won their fair share of GSs.

moby
Feb 7th, 2010, 02:08 PM
Outside of Roland Garros, Justine has won three hard court slams.

Outside of Wimbledon, Venus has won two hard court slams.

WOW! I didn't think that extra slam would be the borderline between "one surface player" and "All round, all court player".Justine has reached 3 AO finals. Venus just 1.

Justine has reached 2 Wimbledon finals and another 3 semifinals. Venus has been past the quarters of RG once.

The last non-Wimbledon final Venus played was in 2003, 7 years ago.
The last non-RG final Justine played was 2 weeks ago.

The Crow
Feb 7th, 2010, 02:09 PM
Since you are going to act like you did not see this other "fascinating" thread....
http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?t=401380

Ah rationalising Terp. I have to agree with you on this one, although it is comforting for Justine fans. If only Serena wouldn't hit all those aces :mad:

Hurley
Feb 7th, 2010, 02:13 PM
It's not that fascinating. After all, she went 0-3 in 2006 so clearly that will affect this "statistic" :shrug:

Of course, this also implies that she reached every Grand Slam final in 2006...and that she has won at least 3 Grand Slams off of clay. So...I think this "fascinating stat" only shows what an all-time great she is. :shrug:

Sectumsempra
Feb 7th, 2010, 02:18 PM
It's not like it's 0-8, so it's hardly fascinating in any way.

Perhaps this fascinates you?

Bgm7vA2rumE&feature=related

Oh okay. So the conclusion is that she chokes in GS finals, but only if they are not played on clay?

No sweetie. :hearts: The conclusion :kiss: is that she has a losing hard/grass record in slam finals. Why would I include Roland Garros in that, when it's played on clay. Correct me if I'm wrong. Not to mention we all know Justine is a very good claycourt player. Please quote me where I said "she chokes in GS finals". Kthxbye :bigwave:

Anyway what are you being so defensive about? I'm not discrediting Justine's achievements in any way. I'm just trying to analyze an interesting stat. I guess things look quite ominous in Justine's future grass/hardcourt slam finals, that of course if she does manage to reach that stage :eek:

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 02:28 PM
So b/c she has a losing record in finals... what? What does that mean?

2001 Wimbledon final
2006 AO Final
2006 Wimbledon final
2006 USO final
2010 AO final

Now, I've watched all these finals... have you? IF so, what is the conclusion you've taken from watching all of them?

The Crow
Feb 7th, 2010, 02:29 PM
No sweetie. :hearts: The conclusion :kiss: is that she has a losing hard/grass record in slam finals. Why would I include Roland Garros in that, when it's played on clay. Correct me if I'm wrong. Not to mention we all know Justine is a very good claycourt player. Please quote me where I said "she chokes in GS finals". Kthxbye :bigwave:


Sure, but 3-5 is not so far away from 4-4. 'About even' is what I would have expected, so it's not that interesting.

And btw it's 3-3 on hardcourts and 0-2 on grass, so maybe she's just a bad grass player? You just add those two numbers, because it suits your purposes. And that's just bad science, sweetie :kiss:

VishaalMaria
Feb 7th, 2010, 02:54 PM
Justine has reached 3 AO finals. Venus just 1.

Justine has reached 2 Wimbledon finals and another 3 semifinals. Venus has been past the quarters of RG once.

The last non-Wimbledon final Venus played was in 2003, 7 years ago.
The last non-RG final Justine played was 2 weeks ago.

But what does Justine have to show for it?

Success at a slam = when you win it, not when you make the QF, SF, or F. Because losing first round or losing in the final, results in the same thing, losing.

As much as Justine is so good on those surfaces and Venus is poor, all Justine has to show for it is one extra HC slam compared to Venus.

All it really shows is that Justine has made it deep into slams but has always fell at the last hurdle, very much like Venus from 02-03.

BuTtErFrEnA
Feb 7th, 2010, 03:42 PM
But of course all those losses were outliers

omg I think I love you :rolls: :sobbing:

Arnian
Feb 7th, 2010, 04:24 PM
Sectum you're such a Justine hater, why don't we look at the fact that your favorite can't even make it to the quarterfinals of a grand slam anymore :rolleyes:

Justine has won 3 majors off clay and that's the only fascinating statistic.
She in no way has a bad final record, because when put into perspective it's not bad at all.

pov
Feb 7th, 2010, 04:44 PM
Success at a slam = when you win it, not when you make the QF, SF, or F. Because losing first round or losing in the final, results in the same thing, losing.
Yes . it's exactly the same thing. That's why the tours give the same amount of points to players who lose in the first round as to players who lose in the final. It's also why Federer is noted for making 23 major SF in a row. Had he made 23 1st rounds in a row, we'd all be just as impressed.

The Witch-king
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:00 PM
Yes . it's exactly the same thing. That's why the tours give the same amount of points to players who lose in the first round as to players who lose in the final. It's also why Federer is noted for making 23 major SF in a row. Had he made 23 1st rounds in a row, we'd all be just as impressed.

i thought Federer is famous for winning 16 grand slams not for how many semifinals he made :shrug:
venus has played in 7 wimbledon finals and won 5. What do you think she and her fans are most proud of?

Yes different rounds of grand slams offer money and points, but i think some players (multiple grand slam champions) get to a point where the prize money and points aren't as important as the trophys no matter what darrinbaker says. Why do you think runnerups always look so miserable and you never see anyone celebrating losing in the semis...

VishaalMaria
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:03 PM
Yes . it's exactly the same thing. That's why the tours give the same amount of points to players who lose in the first round as to players who lose in the final. It's also why Federer is noted for making 23 major SF in a row. Had he made 23 1st rounds in a row, we'd all be just as impressed.

Well that's the thing, I didn't say it was "exactly" the same. I indicated that it's same in terms of losing. Losing is losing in this case, despite someone reaching the finals.

Arnian
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:04 PM
i thought Federer is famous for winning 16 grand slams not for how many semifinals he made :shrug:
venus has played in 7 wimbledon finals and won 5. What do you think she and her fans are most proud of?

Yes different rounds of grand slams offer money and points, but i think some players (multiple grand slam champions) get to a point where the prize money and points aren't as important as the trophys no matter what darrinbaker says. Why do you think runnerups always look so miserable and you never see anyone celebrating losing in the semis...

His record of, what is it now 23 grand slam semifinals in a row, is something he's famous for. Consistency at the GS level is a great thing and something that should garner respect.

Now why Venus is even being brought up in this thread, as if she's relevant to it, is beyond me

pov
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:07 PM
Well that's the thing, I didn't say it was "exactly" the same. I indicated that it's same in terms of losing. Losing is losing in this case, despite someone reaching the finals.
No. Losing in a final is not even nearly similar to losing in the 1st round, in this or any case. Sorry. There's a reason why there are players who only choke in finals.

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:11 PM
Hmm...suddenly stats ain't all that fascinating I guess, huh? Last week was this fascinating stat about the Oz open final...Serena only winning because of her serve. Now Juju having losing record off clay, isn't fascinating. :lol:

pov
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:12 PM
i thought Federer is famous for winning 16 grand slams not for how many semifinals he made :shrug:
venus has played in 7 wimbledon finals and won 5. What do you think she and her fans are most proud of?

Yes different rounds of grand slams offer money and points, but i think some players (multiple grand slam champions) get to a point where the prize money and points aren't as important as the trophys no matter what darrinbaker says. Why do you think runnerups always look so miserable and you never see anyone celebrating losing in the semis...
<sigh> Federer is famous for a few things. One of them being the SF run. And he's proud of it


-Clearly anyone playing in a final wants to win it and is bummed out if they don't. So go ask them if they feel they were no more successful in that tourney than someone who went out in the 1st round.

- the fact that I'm even bothering to reply to people who have the idiotic idea that losing in a final is in some way similar to losing in an early round, means I really need to log-off this board. now.

The Witch-king
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:14 PM
Hmm...suddenly stats ain't all that fascinating I guess, huh? Last week was this fascinating stat about the Oz open final...Serena only winning because of her serve. Now Juju having losing record off clay, isn't fascinating. :lol:

it's quite fascinating :scratch:

Matt01
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:14 PM
Err... why leave out RG? Because she's doing too good there?


Obviously that's the point of this thread. Manipulating the stats to make Justine look bad.

VishaalMaria
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:18 PM
No. Losing in a final is not even nearly similar to losing in the 1st round, in this or any case. Sorry. There's a reason why there are players who only choke in finals.

Why you can't understand the simplicity of my post is astounding to say the least.

Losing in the final and losing in the first round is the same because it means you've lost.

Arnian
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:18 PM
Obviously that's the point of this thread. Manipulating the stats to make Justine look bad.

Cleary :rolleyes:

It's just petty posting

Arnian
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:19 PM
Why you can't understand the simplicity of my post is astounding to say the least.

Losing in the final and losing in the first round is the same because it means you've lost.

Kishan yes losing in the final might be losing but a grand slam final is a huge deal, and means a lot. It's totally different than losing in the 1st round

brickhousesupporter
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:20 PM
Obviously that's the point of this thread. Manipulating the stats to make Justine look bad.
Hey Matt01 or Arnian
Could you please tell me the point of this thread.....
http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?t=401380

BlameSerena
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:23 PM
^^:lol:

brickhouse, don't you see that's a perfectly reasonable thread that's just meant to discuss such an interesting fact, not discredit serena in any way. :rolleyes:

shame they don't feel the same way about this thread.
op, i agree with you. fascinating stat, indeed. ;)

Matt01
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:32 PM
Hey Matt01 or Arnian
Could you please tell me the point of this thread.....
http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?t=401380


No, I can't, because IMO that thread didn't have a point, either. And I never said that it had one.

BuTtErFrEnA
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:33 PM
Hey Matt01 or Arnian
Could you please tell me the point of this thread.....
http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?t=401380

keeps getting better :rolls:

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:34 PM
:lol: the OP has no intent of discussing this stat. It's some petty failed attempt to put Justine down.

That other thread had nothing to do with discrediting Serena. Uber-defensive fans just took it that way.

BuTtErFrEnA
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:35 PM
of course let's discuss this....

how can you claim she's the best of the generation when serena has a stellar slam record of 12-3 compared to 7-5...interesting stat that needs discussion

tennisIlove09
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:37 PM
The only questionable loss in a Slam final, IMO, is the 61 20 ret to Mauresmo. Every other loss can be chalked up to she ran into a better player that day.
01 WB -- loss to Venus (best grass courter of the generation)
06 AO -- Momo
06 Wimby -- amazing three setter vs. Mauresmo
06 US -- Sharapova's serve was on fire that match
10 AO -- vs. Serena, the best hard court player of the generation

Matt01
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:37 PM
of course let's discuss this....

how can you claim she's the best of the generation when serena has a stellar slam record of 12-3 compared to 7-5...interesting stat that needs discussion


I think we also desperately need to discuss the H2H between Justine and Serena in Slams because that could tell us who the better player of the two is when it really counts :lol:

BuTtErFrEnA
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:37 PM
:lol: the OP has no intent of discussing this stat. It's some petty failed attempt to put Justine down.

That other thread had nothing to do with discrediting Serena. Uber-defensive fans just took it that way.


if you think the OP of that other thread had any intention of "just discussing an interesting stat" he/she could have done it in the player forum instead of coming right after the finals and posting that and about the finals reflecting better on whoever...

if THAT isn't the sign of people trying to ignore the winner and thereby discredit her, i don't know what is

brickhousesupporter
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:38 PM
of course let's discuss this....

how can you claim she's the best of the generation when serena has a stellar slam record of 12-3 compared to 7-5...interesting stat that needs discussion
It looks to me like Justine is ripe for the picking in the finals. When her oppenent does not back down she seems to go away in non French Open finals. Interesting......

brickhousesupporter
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:42 PM
No, I can't, because IMO that thread didn't have a point, either. And I never said that it had one.
Where is your condemnation of that thread in that thread when it was going on. Your first post in this thread is condemning this one. Hmmmmm.....

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:46 PM
Hey Matt01 or Arnian
Could you please tell me the point of this thread.....
http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?t=401380

It looks to me like Justine is ripe for the picking in the finals. When her oppenent does not back down she seems to go away in non French Open finals. Interesting......

Where is your condemnation of that thread in that thread when it was going on. Your first post in this thread is condemning this one. Hmmmmm.....

What is wrong with this?

When Justine got her racquet on to a Serena first serve she won the point 60.2% of the time.

Who sez Serena's serve dominated?

Other interesting fact: Justine won a higher percentage of points off BOTH the first and second serves.

Note for those viewing the match statistics: yes, the stats do say that Serena won 47% on the second serve and Justine only 45% but this is misleading because those stats include double-faults. As Justine had three more DF's than Serena the true stat for winning percentage on the second serve (when the ball was in - same as for the first serve) is Serena:51%; Justine: 53%!

BTW whoever did the statistical framework for the ITF stats should be sacked!

Now where is this poster putting down Serena?

Matt01
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:48 PM
Where is your condemnation of that thread in that thread when it was going on. Your first post in this thread is condemning this one. Hmmmmm.....


I think I'm allowed to chose the threads that I want to post in by myself, no? And besides it is not that there was no one in the other thread that condemned it.

brickhousesupporter
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:50 PM
What is wrong with this?



Now where is this poster putting down Serena?
What is wrong with this.......? Where did the OP put Justine down.

And she's lost 4 of her last 5. Also, she's lost 3 of the 4 three set matches she's played in Grand Slam finals. :eek:

Steffica Greles
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:53 PM
Discount the loss to Amelie in 06. She was clearly ill.


But yes, Justine suffers more against unremitting power on hard courts than on clay. Sharapova in 06 was playing the best tennis of her career, and there's no need to explain why she lost to Serena.

Justine defeats players on hard courts who have problems being aggressive and like to run around, such as Kim, or Sveta.

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:54 PM
What is wrong with this.......? Where did the OP put Justine down.

And she's lost 4 of her last 5. Also, she's lost 3 of the 4 three set matches she's played in Grand Slam finals. :eek:

Well it's no less fascinating than this (http://http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?t=401380) statistic. But apparently for Henin fans, analysing stats is a favourite pasttime so I'm sure they already know this.

But of course all those losses were outliers

The intent of the OP was obvious.. the second post of his/hers quoted here makes it known this is a petty attempt to retaliate at what was actually a harmless thread.
Not to mention that the OP really doesnt have any interest in any real analysis.. it's really just a baiting thread.

brickhousesupporter
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:56 PM
I think I'm allowed to chose the threads that I want to post in by myself, no? And besides it is not that there was no one in the other thread that condemned it.

Obviously that's the point of this thread. Manipulating the stats to make Justine look bad.

Matt01
To quote you from the other thread....
When other people are interested in those "other stats", why don't you let them discuss them? In this case, I don't really see the relevance of those stats, either, but as long the comments are not disrespectful to the players, I have no problem with that.
Why can't you allow us the same courtesy you extended to the Justine fans in the other thread?

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:57 PM
Discount the loss to Amelie in 06. She was clearly ill.


But yes, Justine suffers more against unremitting power on hard courts than on clay. Sharapova in 06 was playing the best tennis of her career, and there's no need to explain why she lost to Serena.

Justine defeats players on hard courts who have problems being aggressive and like to run around, such as Kim, or Sveta.

Yet she has a 4-3 record against Sharapova on hardcourt... won one of the best matches in recent years against Venus Williams on hardcourt, and has a pretty good record against the likes of Serena, Davenport, etc.

What are you basing this on?

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:58 PM
Why can't you allow us the same courtesy you extended to the Justine fans in the other thread?

B/c that's not the point of this thread :rolleyes: and we all know it.

moby
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:59 PM
Justine defeats players on hard courts who have problems being aggressive and like to run around, such as Kim, or Sveta.The issue is more with the serve. Barring AO 06, as you mentioned, all those players had amazing serving days when they beat Justine in the slam final. Coupled with rather mediocre serving from Justine.
.
Venus's serve was monstrous in 01 Wimbledon.
Amelie - unbreakable in the third set of Wimbledon 06
SuperMasha has never served better than she did in summer 06.
Serena got her GOAT serve together on key points in the third set of their Australian final.
.
And it's not like Justine's never beat these players when they're NOT playing in a slam final.
So it's interesting to ask why she has more trouble in a final. And why her serve just goes away.

To me a lot of it is physical and mental fatigue. It's not choking: in tight situations, she's as clutch as the best of them.
But there's some sort of mental frailty at play. I think she sort of eats herself up with her pre-match mental anxiety.

brickhousesupporter
Feb 7th, 2010, 05:59 PM
The intent of the OP was obvious.. the second post of his/hers quoted here makes it known this is a petty attempt to retaliate at what was actually a harmless thread.
Not to mention that the OP really doesnt have any interest in any real analysis.. it's really just a baiting thread.
So you clearly know the intent of this poster was to bait but can't see that the other threads poster was trying to bait also. It seems clear to me that this is a case of who feels it, knows it.

brickhousesupporter
Feb 7th, 2010, 06:01 PM
B/c that's not the point of this thread :rolleyes: and we all know it.
Would you stop distracting me, I really want to discuss this interesting stat....;).

Dunlop1
Feb 7th, 2010, 06:04 PM
And she's lost 4 of her last 5. Also, she's lost 3 of the 4 three set matches she's played in Grand Slam finals. :eek:

If only Ana had such statistics...

BuTtErFrEnA
Feb 7th, 2010, 06:04 PM
:lol:

brickhousesupporter
Feb 7th, 2010, 06:04 PM
The issue is more with the serve. Barring AO 06, as you mentioned, all those players had amazing serving days when they beat Justine in the slam final. Coupled with rather mediocre serving from Justine.
.
Venus's serve was monstrous in 01 Wimbledon.
Amelie - unbreakable in the third set of Wimbledon 06
SuperMasha has never served better than she did in summer 06.
Serena got her GOAT serve together on key points in the third set of their Australian final.
.
And it's not like Justine's never beat these players when they're NOT playing in a slam final.
So it's interesting to ask why she has more trouble in a final. And why her serve just goes away.

To me a lot of it is physical and mental fatigue. It's not choking: in tight situations, she's as clutch as the best of them.
But there's some sort of mental frailty at play. I think she sort of eats herself up with her pre-match mental anxiety.

It looks to me like Justine is ripe for the picking in the finals. When her oppenent does not back down she seems to go away in non French Open finals. Interesting......
That is what I said in an earlier post before being accosted by over sensitive Justine fans.

Matt01
Feb 7th, 2010, 06:12 PM
Matt01
To quote you from the other thread....

Why can't you allow us the same courtesy you extended to the Justine fans in the other thread?


I'm "alllowing" you to discuss (obviously I have to even if I didn't want to). But in this case, it is really not that hard to see the patheticness of this thread. Just look at the first few posts of the threadstarter :rolleyes:

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 06:12 PM
The issue is more with the serve. Barring AO 06, as you mentioned, all those players had amazing serving days when they beat Justine in the slam final. Coupled with rather mediocre serving from Justine.
.
Venus's serve was monstrous in 01 Wimbledon.
Amelie - unbreakable in the third set of Wimbledon 06
SuperMasha has never served better than she did in summer 06.
Serena got her GOAT serve together on key points in the third set of their Australian final.
.
And it's not like Justine's never beat these players when they're NOT playing in a slam final.
So it's interesting to ask why she has more trouble in a final. And why her serve just goes away.

To me a lot of it is physical and mental fatigue. It's not choking: in tight situations, she's as clutch as the best of them.
But there's some sort of mental frailty at play. I think she sort of eats herself up with her pre-match mental anxiety.

I don't think she had any chance in 2001 in that final. 2010 was too soon as well.. the mind was willing, but she wasn't ready to go toe-to-toe with Serena in that 3rd set.

Justine always struck me as a player who needs a ton of physical, mental and emotional energy to get through these matches and it's very draining for her. She doesn't seem to have that endless reserve that Serena has. That being said, I think Justine is more vulnerable at the end of those 2 weeks, especially if she had a difficult run(AO 2006 SF vs Masha, 2006 USO SF vs JJ, 2010 run in general.)

No excuse of course.. but I think maybe that has something to do with it.

Would you stop distracting me, I really want to discuss this interesting stat....;).

Discuss away :) I would love for the OP to return and get into the statistic.

debby
Feb 7th, 2010, 06:13 PM
:eek: Ok, what a fascinating stat indeed. You are a genius, Sectusempra.

Si_Hi
Feb 7th, 2010, 06:21 PM
why is some ana fan worrying about justine henin at the moment:confused::lol:

#kArLoS#
Feb 7th, 2010, 06:23 PM
why is some ana fan worrying about justine henin at the moment:confused::lol:

well said:worship::lol:

brickhousesupporter
Feb 7th, 2010, 06:24 PM
There are a few hostile uber-defensive fans in this forum. I've encountered at least three since I began participating here.

One example, I posted a list of grand slam winners without comment, so that those participating in a thread discussion could place it into historical context and context of the thread. Thought I was being helpful. In reply, someone quoted me (my list) and said, "So why is that Serena's fault?" I was dumbfounded! All I did was post a list of grand slam winners without comment and it was morphed into me somehow blaming Serena.

The turf wars here are awful. I do enjoy reading your posts and like-minded adults who show true admiration for the sport by respectfully discussing and debating. Thank you.
Mary....
If you have issues with "other" posters why don't you take it up with them. PM them and you and them can work it out. It seems so passive aggressive and gossipy to post something they may or may not have said to you. You can compliment Aceshigh without bringing others into it.
Anyways off to my Superbowl pre-party.

Lucemferre
Feb 7th, 2010, 06:25 PM
Henin fans are too sensitive :o This is an interesting topic.

sammy01
Feb 7th, 2010, 06:26 PM
If you take away any players best surface and then look at their stats of course they wont look as impressive. venus is a big example of this.

all this stat shows is henin has reached 8 slam finals on a surface she has to alter her game to do well on, winning 3 of them. yep she can very very occasionally be over-powered and out served on a hard court, but that is the case in the qtrs as it is in the final, it is just there are only 2 or 3 players who can do it to her, and they are most likely to meet her in the final.

shes still very much the second best player of this generation and almost certain to add to the number of slams she has won.

franklinbouvier
Feb 7th, 2010, 06:52 PM
i thought Federer is famous for winning 16 grand slams not for how many semifinals he made :shrug:
venus has played in 7 wimbledon finals and won 5. What do you think she and her fans are most proud of?

Yes different rounds of grand slams offer money and points, but i think some players (multiple grand slam champions) get to a point where the prize money and points aren't as important as the trophys no matter what darrinbaker says. Why do you think runnerups always look so miserable and you never see anyone celebrating losing in the semis...

O bless. How sweet to see someone not understand sarcasm so spectacularly. I almost want to ruffle your hair.

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 06:55 PM
Henin fans are too sensitive :o This is an interesting topic.

Where are the sensitive Henin fans :confused:

And if it's so interesting, I'd like to hear your 2 cents :wavey:

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 06:58 PM
If you take away any players best surface and then look at their stats of course they wont look as impressive. venus is a big example of this.

all this stat shows is henin has reached 8 slam finals on a surface she has to alter her game to do well on, winning 3 of them. yep she can very very occasionally be over-powered and out served on a hard court, but that is the case in the qtrs as it is in the final, it is just there are only 2 or 3 players who can do it to her, and they are most likely to meet her in the final.

shes still very much the second best player of this generation and almost certain to add to the number of slams she has won.

Well it's interesting to see the full breakdown.

Henin is:
4-0 in clay slam finals
3-3 in hardcourt slam finals
0-2 in grass slam finals

I don't think 3-3 is bad on hardcourt slams actually.

WTA Grand Slam Singles Finalists Record of Active Players:

.500 or better

Serena Williams 12-3
Maria Sharapova 3-1
Justine Henin 7-5
Venus Williams 7-7
Svetlana Kuznetsova 2-2

----------------------------

below .500

Kim Clijsters 2-4
Ana Ivanovic 1-2
Marion Bartoli 0-1
Jelena Jankovic 0-1
Caroline Wozniacki 0-1
Elena Dementieva 0-2
Dinara Safina 0-3

Nice stats.. it'd also be interesting to see how they all fare when their best surfaces are removed from those statistics.

sammy01
Feb 7th, 2010, 07:11 PM
Well it's interesting to see the full breakdown.

Henin is:
4-0 in clay slam finals
3-3 in hardcourt slam finals
0-2 in grass slam finals

I don't think 3-3 is bad on hardcourt slams actually.



Nice stats.. it'd also be interesting to see how they all fare when their best surfaces are removed from those statistics.

for me the fact that she consistenly reaches slam finals, even on surfaces that don't suit her game says alot about henin.

the henin that plays the french open has to play very differently to make a hardcourt final. for me personally, clay is the most specialized surface and it takes much more adjustment to win a hardcourt slam if you are a claycourter at heart. where as if you are a grass court player you should be able to mould your game easier to suit a hard court, especially these days.

it is no wonder these days that most of the top players are most comfortable on hardcourts as it is 2 of the 4 slams and a huge chunk of the year.

hankqq
Feb 7th, 2010, 07:19 PM
well Henin feels most comfortable on clay :shrug: One comment I've heard/read her say more than once is that she likes clay because "it gives [her] time to organize [her] game". That's a telling quote-she doesn't feel rushed on clay.

the very best players can really rob her of time on other surfaces. Wimbledon 2006 though is a bit different-from the 2nd half of the 2nd set to the end of the 3rd, Henin's fh really fell apart. She made a lot more mistakes and Mauresmo realized this and took advantage of it.

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 07:28 PM
for me the fact that she consistenly reaches slam finals, even on surfaces that don't suit her game says alot about henin.

the henin that plays the french open has to play very differently to make a hardcourt final. for me personally, clay is the most specialized surface and it takes much more adjustment to win a hardcourt slam if you are a claycourter at heart. where as if you are a grass court player you should be able to mould your game easier to suit a hard court, especially these days.

it is no wonder these days that most of the top players are most comfortable on hardcourts as it is 2 of the 4 slams and a huge chunk of the year.

I don't see Henin as a claycourter though. She has more hardcourt slams than anyone not named Serena in her generation. Not to mention a boatload of hardcourt titles including 2 YEC's.

It's just she's more natural on clay and she's miles ahead of the rest there, but hardcourts definitely suit her game if not as well as clay does.

Thanx4nothin
Feb 7th, 2010, 07:28 PM
for me the fact that she consistenly reaches slam finals, even on surfaces that don't suit her game says alot about henin.
the henin that plays the french open has to play very differently to make a hardcourt final. for me personally, clay is the most specialized surface and it takes much more adjustment to win a hardcourt slam if you are a claycourter at heart. where as if you are a grass court player you should be able to mould your game easier to suit a hard court, especially these days.

it is no wonder these days that most of the top players are most comfortable on hardcourts as it is 2 of the 4 slams and a huge chunk of the year.

I don't agree with the fact that hardcourts don't suit her game. I mean in large parts of her later career she was one of the most aggressive players on tour, she still is. That perfectly suits the fast hardcourts of the US Open - reflected in her success there, with 2 wins.

Moreover, didn't Navratilova say Justine's game was very well suited to the grass courts, what with her volleys and slice etc etc, albeit her serve is a weakness. And who would know better than Navratilova?

I really don't know if Henin is a 'clay courter at heart' it's definitely her best surface, perhaps I'm just turned off that expression by the usual conotation of a clay courter as very defensive and moonballing quite a bit. Plus overall justine has 4 slams on clay and 3 on hard, a much more even spread than say Serena's 8-3-1. Therefore, I really wouldn't call Justine unsuited to any of the surfaces, just so happens she is the elite claycourter of her generation and she has had the misfortune of playing during an era where a few players are better than her on grass, and perhaps the best hard court player of all time - Serena Williams has mopped up many of the harcourt slams.

Overall, I did find it to be an interesting statistic, I've always found it strange that Justine lost that 2006 USO final, especially in straight sets, but it is what it is. Sharpova dismantled (excuse me Venus) the 2 best players of the generation in slam finals - says something about her (and why I miss her so much).

Obviously removing a players best surface is always going to make the results look bad, but people on this board have been spurting this nonsense about Venus for so long now, it was interesting to see it reversed, although, with different criteria. For me it was just interesting because as an opponent to my favourites I always hold Justine in very high esteem, not that these results suggest she should be viewed in any other way, they do show she is fallable, outside clay that is.

It's a shame Justine has never REALLY (to memory) been challenged on clay, she jsut sort of strolls through FO finals, not her fault whatsoever, but it would be nice to See Serena give her a similar run that Justine did Serena at this years AO.

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 07:30 PM
Serena:

4-2 in non-hardcourt slam finals
--------------------------------

Justine:

3-5 in non-clay slam finals
---------------------------

Venus:

2-4 in non-grass slam finals
----------------------------

Maria:

2-1 in hardcourt slam finals
1-0 in non-hardcourt slam finals
--------------------------------

Svetlana:

1-1 in clay slam finals
1-1 in non-clay slam finals
---------------------------

Thanks :) once again, interesting stats.

Thanx4nothin
Feb 7th, 2010, 07:30 PM
I don't see Henin as a claycourter though. She has more hardcourt slams than anyone not named Serena in her generation. Not to mention a boatload of hardcourt titles including 2 YEC's.

It's just she's more natural on clay and she's miles ahead of the rest there, but hardcourts definitely suit her game if not as well as clay does.

Exactly what I thought. ;)

DontGetItTwisted
Feb 7th, 2010, 07:31 PM
Henin NEVER won any shit against mentally tough players. She wins against all the PrincessFiona's, Dumbanovic's, PhattyPierce's and Chokelana's of the word. When she mets the likes of Williams and Pova, she crumbles. Even Mauresmo was pissing on her.

This is a FACT.

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 07:33 PM
I don't agree with the fact that hardcourts don't suit her game. I mean in large parts of her later career she was one of the most aggressive players on tour, she still is. That perfectly suits the fast hardcourts of the US Open - reflected in her success there, with 2 wins.

Moreover, didn't Navratilova say Justine's game was very well suited to the grass courts, what with her volleys and slice etc etc, albeit her serve is a weakness. And who would know better than Navratilova?

I really don't know if Henin is a 'clay courter at heart' it's definitely her best surface, perhaps I'm just turned off that expression by the usual conotation of a clay courter as very defensive and moonballing quite a bit. Plus overall justine has 4 slams on clay and 3 on hard, a much more even spread than say Serena's 8-3-1. Therefore, I really wouldn't call Justine unsuited to any of the surfaces, just so happens she is the elite claycourter of her generation and she has had the misfortune of playing during an era where a few players are better than her on grass, and perhaps the best hard court player of all time - Serena Williams has mopped up many of the harcourt slams.

Overall, I did find it to be an interesting statistic, I've always found it strange that Justine lost that 2006 USO final, especially in straight sets, but it is what it is. Sharpova dismantled (excuse me Venus) the 2 best players of the generation in slam finals - says something about her (and why I miss her so much).

Obviously removing a players best surface is always going to make the results look bad, but people on this board have been spurting this nonsense about Venus for so long now, it was interesting to see it reversed, although, with different criteria. For me it was just interesting because as an opponent to my favourites I always hold Justine in very high esteem, not that these results suggest she should be viewed in any other way, they do show she is fallable, outside clay that is.

It's a shame Justine has never REALLY (to memory) been challenged on clay, she jsut sort of strolls through FO finals, not her fault whatsoever, but it would be nice to See Serena give her a similar run that Justine did Serena at this years AO.

Great post :worship:

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 07:35 PM
Btw, Serena in 2003 and Sveta(who was VERY close to winning) in 2005 gave Henin her toughest tests at the French.
Other than that, she really hasn't broke a sweat. I think Kuznetsova has the potential.. whether she'll be able to bring it as defending champ, we'll see (fingers crossed).

sammy01
Feb 7th, 2010, 07:54 PM
I don't agree with the fact that hardcourts don't suit her game. I mean in large parts of her later career she was one of the most aggressive players on tour, she still is. That perfectly suits the fast hardcourts of the US Open - reflected in her success there, with 2 wins.

Moreover, didn't Navratilova say Justine's game was very well suited to the grass courts, what with her volleys and slice etc etc, albeit her serve is a weakness. And who would know better than Navratilova?

I really don't know if Henin is a 'clay courter at heart' it's definitely her best surface, perhaps I'm just turned off that expression by the usual conotation of a clay courter as very defensive and moonballing quite a bit. Plus overall justine has 4 slams on clay and 3 on hard, a much more even spread than say Serena's 8-3-1. Therefore, I really wouldn't call Justine unsuited to any of the surfaces, just so happens she is the elite claycourter of her generation and she has had the misfortune of playing during an era where a few players are better than her on grass, and perhaps the best hard court player of all time - Serena Williams has mopped up many of the harcourt slams.

Overall, I did find it to be an interesting statistic, I've always found it strange that Justine lost that 2006 USO final, especially in straight sets, but it is what it is. Sharpova dismantled (excuse me Venus) the 2 best players of the generation in slam finals - says something about her (and why I miss her so much).

Obviously removing a players best surface is always going to make the results look bad, but people on this board have been spurting this nonsense about Venus for so long now, it was interesting to see it reversed, although, with different criteria. For me it was just interesting because as an opponent to my favourites I always hold Justine in very high esteem, not that these results suggest she should be viewed in any other way, they do show she is fallable, outside clay that is.

It's a shame Justine has never REALLY (to memory) been challenged on clay, she jsut sort of strolls through FO finals, not her fault whatsoever, but it would be nice to See Serena give her a similar run that Justine did Serena at this years AO.

i agree with you in part, but henin is way more aggressive on hard courts than she ever is on clay. she knows on clay her slice and angled backhand are huge weapons and she can use them even when the big guns are hitting hard at her because clay gives her that little extra time.

you could see in the oz open final henin wanted to dominate as best she could (trying to come in on her returns) as she feels it is her best way of beating the very best on hardcourts.

on clay it is slightly different, in she will let the big guns hit at her more knowing she can use consistency, slice, angles and her speed to neutralise the point or gain the upper hand. on hard courts she knows that style wont cut it. see her 2006 taking apart sharapova with the drop shot and slice, she would never use that tactic on hardcourts. it is a risk for henin to go all out, but she knows it is her biggest chance of reward on faster sufaces.

for serena i would love to see her take that leaf out of henins book and know she HAS to adjust her game if she wants to win another french open. as much as henin has to be more dominant and hit harder on hardcourts, serena has to be more clever, more passive and use more angle on clay. i feel serena has played the last 3 french opens wanting to use her hardcourt tennis to win the title and it just isn't going to happen. it would be great to see her try and beat henin on clay in the final playing like that.

as for henin on grass, her slice and volleys are well suited to grass, but she just cant get around the fact that she just lacks sheer power (a reason venus does so well) off the ground. when venus comes to net on grass it is behind a thunder of a groundstroke and shes looking for an easy volley, henin has tried to sneak her way in in the past, and it needs more than that. her serve is also most exposed on grass.

what i saw from henin in australia was a wanting to thunder her way forward, especially on returns behind big shots. it was a bit hit and miss in australia, but it is something she will need to do come wimbledon if she wants to win it.

great post btw.

DOUBLEFIST
Feb 7th, 2010, 08:03 PM
Is it any more erroneous than leaving out Aces and unreturnables?
exactly.

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 08:08 PM
you could see in the oz open final henin wanted to dominate as best she could (trying to come in on her returns) as she feels it is her best way of beating the very best on hardcourts.

I agree with most of your post in theory but I have a big problem with this. I think Henin was still experimenting in that final. She knows how to beat the very best on hardcourt(she did it from 2003-2007) and it wasnt with the strategy she used this January.

Henin's game translates to all surfaces. She just finetunes it as it relates to the surface.
Has nothing to do with inability or deficiencies. It's just how tennis works and Henin has so many tools and facets to her game that she is able to adjust according to opponent or surface.

And with Serena, I just don't think she has those tools necessary to make a sudden shift in her game. She's done an amazing job of making adjustments throughout the last few years, but she's not going to win the French by playing claycourt tennis. That's definitely not how she won it in 2002.

All players these days play pretty much the same game on all surfaces.. it works for some, not for others(Venus for example :o) so I don't think Serena faces too much of a problem until she meets someone who is actually skilled on the surface.

sammy01
Feb 7th, 2010, 08:19 PM
I agree with most of your post in theory but I have a big problem with this. I think Henin was still experimenting in that final. She knows how to beat the very best on hardcourt(she did it from 2003-2007) and it wasnt with the strategy she used this January.

Henin's game translates to all surfaces. She just finetunes it as it relates to the surface.
Has nothing to do with inability or deficiencies. It's just how tennis works and Henin has so many tools and facets to her game that she is able to adjust according to opponent or surface.

And with Serena, I just don't think she has those tools necessary to make a sudden shift in her game. She's done an amazing job of making adjustments throughout the last few years, but she's not going to win the French by playing claycourt tennis. That's definitely not how she won it in 2002.

All players these days play pretty much the same game on all surfaces.. it works for some, not for others(Venus for example :o) so I don't think Serena faces too much of a problem until she meets someone who is actually skilled on the surface.

what i meant coming in against serena this year, is she obviously feels she may even have to take being aggressive even futher than before, but shes willing to try it (possibley only against serena, as her regualar aggressive hardcourt game should be good enough against others).

i think she is thinking about this for wimbledon, when it may need to be done against venus to.

as for serena im not suggesting she go clay specialist, i just mean adjust her game, use her forehand angle (which she deffo has), try really kicking her 1st serve especially to henins backhand should they meet. i think there are things she can deffinately add in or adjust that will make her more dangerous on clay.

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2010, 08:23 PM
:lol: the OP has no intent of discussing this stat. It's some petty failed attempt to put Justine down.

That other thread had nothing to do with discrediting Serena. Uber-defensive fans just took it that way.

Of course..so predictable of Aces. The other thread had no intent of discrediting Serena. Only pointing out that she "only" won because of her serve?

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2010, 08:26 PM
I agree with most of your post in theory but I have a big problem with this. I think Henin was still experimenting in that final. She knows how to beat the very best on hardcourt(she did it from 2003-2007) and it wasnt with the strategy she used this January.

Henin's game translates to all surfaces. She just finetunes it as it relates to the surface.
Has nothing to do with inability or deficiencies. It's just how tennis works and Henin has so many tools and facets to her game that she is able to adjust according to opponent or surface.

And with Serena, I just don't think she has those tools necessary to make a sudden shift in her game. She's done an amazing job of making adjustments throughout the last few years, but she's not going to win the French by playing claycourt tennis. That's definitely not how she won it in 2002.

All players these days play pretty much the same game on all surfaces.. it works for some, not for others(Venus for example :o) so I don't think Serena faces too much of a problem until she meets someone who is actually skilled on the surface.

:lol: sureee...and Serena is just a ball-basher, huh? so now hwen Justine loses..it's because she was "experimenting", not because a player is better than her on the surface. Okaayyyyy..

Donny
Feb 7th, 2010, 08:27 PM
I agree with most of your post in theory but I have a big problem with this. I think Henin was still experimenting in that final. She knows how to beat the very best on hardcourt(she did it from 2003-2007) and it wasnt with the strategy she used this January.

Henin's game translates to all surfaces. She just finetunes it as it relates to the surface.
Has nothing to do with inability or deficiencies. It's just how tennis works and Henin has so many tools and facets to her game that she is able to adjust according to opponent or surface.

And with Serena, I just don't think she has those tools necessary to make a sudden shift in her game. She's done an amazing job of making adjustments throughout the last few years, but she's not going to win the French by playing claycourt tennis. That's definitely not how she won it in 2002.

All players these days play pretty much the same game on all surfaces.. it works for some, not for others(Venus for example :o) so I don't think Serena faces too much of a problem until she meets someone who is actually skilled on the surface.

The AO final this year, and the Wimbledon final in 06, suggests otherwise.

In fact, it shows that Justine lacks facets (like crushing second serves and weak first serves' mixing up the serve; hitting reliable second serves) that Serena has mastered, just as Serena lacks facets that Henin has mastered.

Henin tried unsuccessfully to duplicate what Venus, Maria, Serena et al do well, and this is evidence of her ability to adjust? I don't see it.

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2010, 08:33 PM
I really don't know if Henin is a 'clay courter at heart' it's definitely her best surface, perhaps I'm just turned off that expression by the usual conotation of a clay courter as very defensive and moonballing quite a bit. Plus overall justine has 4 slams on clay and 3 on hard, a much more even spread than say Serena's 8-3-1.


:lol: Go tell that to Roger Federer... 9-6-1..now that's even more pronounced than Serena's, no?

Thing is..they won ALL of them, so it don't matter what spread.

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 08:40 PM
When Justine got her racquet on to a Serena first serve she won the point 60.2% of the time.

Who sez Serena's serve dominated?

Other interesting fact: Justine won a higher percentage of points off BOTH the first and second serves.

Note for those viewing the match statistics: yes, the stats do say that Serena won 47% on the second serve and Justine only 45% but this is misleading because those stats include double-faults. As Justine had three more DF's than Serena the true stat for winning percentage on the second serve (when the ball was in - same as for the first serve) is Serena:51%; Justine: 53%!

BTW whoever did the statistical framework for the ITF stats should be sacked!

Of course..so predictable of Aces. The other thread had no intent of discrediting Serena. Only pointing out that she "only" won because of her serve?

You are so predictable. Where in that post does it say that Serena only won b/c of her serve? :smash:

:lol: sureee...and Serena is just a ball-basher, huh? so now hwen Justine loses..it's because she was "experimenting", not because a player is better than her on the surface. Okaayyyyy..

Did I say that? :help: Why are you soooo paranoid and defensive?!?!

The AO final this year, and the Wimbledon final in 06, suggests otherwise.

In fact, it shows that Justine lacks facets (like crushing second serves and weak first serves' mixing up the serve; hitting reliable second serves) that Serena has mastered, just as Serena lacks facets that Henin has mastered.

Henin tried unsuccessfully to duplicate what Venus, Maria, Serena et al do well, and this is evidence of her ability to adjust? I don't see it.

:lol: How did Henin try to duplicate what Venus, Maria, etc. do well? Henin is able to crush second serves(Serena has one of the best second serves EVER), etc... and that's not a facet of the game. Henin is able to play aggressively and has the ability to hit service winners. I really don't know what you are talking about.
What I meant is Henin has a huge shot selection, can play great defense, offense, is effective on all surfaces and can play superb tennis from all sections of the court.

Why are you jumping in and making this Serena vs. Henin?


:lol: Go tell that to Roger Federer... 9-6-1..now that's even more pronounced than Serena's, no?

Thing is..they won ALL of them, so it don't matter what spread.

Actually 9-6-1 is not more pronounced than 8-3-1 as 6 is only 3 less than 9. And interesting how you take what was a great post and pull from it some criticism of Serena that wasnt even there.

Thanx4nothin
Feb 7th, 2010, 08:44 PM
:lol: Go tell that to Roger Federer... 9-6-1..now that's even more pronounced than Serena's, no?

Thing is..they won ALL of them, so it don't matter what spread.

I don't know what your post is supposed to be getting at? I wasn't saying Serena was a one trick pony :o I was merely showcasing that people don't call Serena a 'hard-court specialist' even though she excels on that surface far more than the others.

égalité
Feb 7th, 2010, 08:44 PM
So what? :weirdo:

Donny
Feb 7th, 2010, 08:51 PM
How did Henin try to duplicate what Venus, Maria, etc. do well? Henin is able to crush second serves(Serena has one of the best second serves EVER), etc...

Really? She is? I didn't see much of that last week. I saw a boat load of returns hit long though.

and that's not a facet of the game.

How is that any less a facet of the game that the ability to play defense, or the ability to come to net?


Henin is able to play aggressively and has the ability to hit service winners.

Again, Henin played aggressively well for a five games stretch at the end of the 2nd set and the start of the third. Besides that, she was missing lots of balls.


What I meant is Henin has a huge shot selection, can play great defense, offense, is effective on all surfaces and can play superb tennis from all sections of the court.

Half of the kinds of shots Henin was trying simply weren't working. She tried to be aggressive on second serve returns and failed most of the time, she tried to go big on first serves and failed most of the time, and tried to go big on second serves and failed a lot of the time.

Why are you jumping in and making this Serena vs. Henin?

"It's just how tennis works and Henin has so many tools and facets to her game that she is able to adjust according to opponent or surface.

And with Serena, I just don't think she has those tools necessary to make a sudden shift in her game."

I'm comparing and contrasting their games, just like you did. Why are you soooo defensive?

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 09:13 PM
Really? She is? I didn't see much of that last week. I saw a boat load of returns hit long though.
How is that any less a facet of the game that the ability to play defense, or the ability to come to net?
Again, Henin played aggressively well for a five games stretch at the end of the 2nd set and the start of the third. Besides that, she was missing lots of balls.
Half of the kinds of shots Henin was trying simply weren't working. She tried to be aggressive on second serve returns and failed most of the time, she tried to go big on first serves and failed most of the time, and tried to go big on second serves and failed a lot of the time.
"It's just how tennis works and Henin has so many tools and facets to her game that she is able to adjust according to opponent or surface.
And with Serena, I just don't think she has those tools necessary to make a sudden shift in her game."

I'm comparing and contrasting their games, just like you did. Why are you soooo defensive?

You're talking about one match.. after a long layoff, vs the best server in the history of women's tennis. If you haven't seen Henin's ability to aggressivly return second serves or weak first serves, you're not watching enough of her matches.

You made this Serena vs. Henin... my post had nothing to do with that.

Donny
Feb 7th, 2010, 09:15 PM
You're talking about one match.. after a long layoff, vs the best server in the history of women's tennis. If you haven't seen Henin's ability to aggressivly return second serves or weak first serves, you're not watching enough of her matches.

You made this Serena vs. Henin... my post had nothing to do with that.

She's playing better than she was when she retired. Why do you assume she's going to keep improving?

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 09:16 PM
I've often felt that one of Henin's largest stumbling blocks in preparation for London was her success in Paris because of the drastic change from clay to grass in such a short amount of time. There aren't too many successful clay court players who won Paris that made the successful transition to grass.

In Women's tennis History, only 10 women were able to win the French Open and Wimbledon in the same year:

1. Steffi Graf (1988, 1993, 1995, 1996) (note: years she won French, but runner-up at Wimby, 1987, 1999) 22 Grand Slam wins
2. Helen Wills Moody (1928, 1929, 1930, 1932) 19 Grand Slam wins
3. Suzanne Lenglen (1921, 1922, 1923, 1925)**
4. Martina Navratilova (1982, 1984) 18 Grand Slam Wins
5. Maureen Connelly (1953, 1954) 9 Grand Slam Wins
6. Margaret Court (1970) 24 Grand Slam Wins
7. Chris Evert (1974) (note: years she won French, but runner-up at Wimbledon, 1979, 1980, 1985) 18 Grand Slam wins
8. Serena Williams (2002) 12 Grand Slam Wins
9. Billie Jean King (1972) 12 Grand Slam Wins
10. Evonne Goolagong (1971) 7 Grand Slam Wins

**pre 1924, only French nationals were allowed to play in the French Open

Justine Henin won the French Open in 2006, but was runner-up in the 2006 Wimbledon Championships.

For someone of Henin's stature, it will be interesting to see how she tries to turn it around.
A few times she has been able to make it deep at Wimbledon after winning the French I believe but it takes a monumental effort to do this. There's a reason it's the hardest double in tennis

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2010, 09:17 PM
You are so predictable. Where in that post does it say that Serena only won b/c of her serve? :smash:



Did I say that? :help: Why are you soooo paranoid and defensive?!?!



:lol: How did Henin try to duplicate what Venus, Maria, etc. do well? Henin is able to crush second serves(Serena has one of the best second serves EVER), etc... and that's not a facet of the game. Henin is able to play aggressively and has the ability to hit service winners. I really don't know what you are talking about.
What I meant is Henin has a huge shot selection, can play great defense, offense, is effective on all surfaces and can play superb tennis from all sections of the court.

Why are you jumping in and making this Serena vs. Henin?




Actually 9-6-1 is not more pronounced than 8-3-1 as 6 is only 3 less than 9. And interesting how you take what was a great post and pull from it some criticism of Serena that wasnt even there.


I guess we see things differently..it's cool. When Serena hits 12 aces in a match she won...and the thread goes: When Juju, who lost the match, got a racket on the serve..she won such and such % of the points. What is that supposed to mean? Tell me.

You said thing like Juju's the ONLY one who can adapt and Serena can only play one way. When it was Serena who adapted her game last week, no? Serena's the one who has proven that she CAN and HAS oon on all surfaces. But it's good.

Yet she can't win Wimbledon...and u r belittling players that HAVE won on all surfaces.

Not really, it's even more pronounced..only ONE of Roger's 16 majors came on the slow clay. Whereas only one of Serena's 12 came on clay.

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 09:18 PM
She's playing better than she was when she retired. Why do you assume she's going to keep improving?

Because it's common sense for anyone who has followed her career. When she left, the mental part of her game was lacking.. the passion, the motivation, etc.

Now that is back and the only thing that needs improving is fine-tuning her game. She looked rusty and about 50% of her potential. Serena didn't play amazingly in the final but neither did Henin.

And if there's one thing that is consistent with Henin's career it's her unrivaled dedication and training.

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2010, 09:19 PM
I don't know what your post is supposed to be getting at? I wasn't saying Serena was a one trick pony :o I was merely showcasing that people don't call Serena a 'hard-court specialist' even though she excels on that surface far more than the others.

That people can't go around calling Juju a non-specialist when she hasn't won them all, and Serena a hardcourt-specialist when has won them all.

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 09:26 PM
I guess we see things differently..it's cool. When Serena hits 12 aces in a match she won...and the thread goes: When Juju, who lost the match, got a racket on the serve..she won such and such % of the points. What is that supposed to mean? Tell me.

It's a statistic like all statistics. It's there to be interpreted and analyzed.
That particular statistic was of interest b/c it's always telling to see who wins the majority of the points when the ball is in play.. I'd love to see statistics like this for Roddick, Karlovic, Davenport when she played, Venus, etc.
Nowhere in that original post did the poster discredit Serena

You said thing like Juju's the ONLY one who can adapt and Serena can only play one way. When it was Serena who adapted her game last week, no? Serena's the one who has proven that she CAN and HAS oon on all surfaces. But it's good.
And how did Serena adapt her game? And did you even look at the context of my post? I was talking about the French Open.. where Serena has not reached the semi's since 2003. I stated that she doesn't have the capacity to play like a claycourter and she doesn't.. it's just not natural for her on clay and she does not have the weapons of a Justine, Sveta, etc. on that surface. She plays largely the same gay she plays on hardcourts. I even credited Serena's changes in her game over the last few years but said they are not MAJOR shifts. Serena can win the French of course.. but she'll do it playing aggresive baseline tennis

Yet she can't win Wimbledon...and u r belittling players that HAVE won on all surfaces.
Where did I belittle anyone?

Not really, it's even more pronounced..only ONE of Roger's 16 majors came on the slow clay. Whereas only one of Serena's 12 came on clay.
That poster was referencing one surface dominance. Serena's hardcourt slam titles double her titles on grass and clay combined. Federer has dominated 3/4 slams.. with a much more even ratio than Serena.


My responses are in bold italics.

Donny
Feb 7th, 2010, 09:26 PM
Because it's common sense for anyone who has followed her career. When she left, the mental part of her game was lacking.. the passion, the motivation, etc.

Now that is back and the only thing that needs improving is fine-tuning her game. She looked rusty and about 50% of her potential. Serena didn't play amazingly in the final but neither did Henin.

And if there's one thing that is consistent with Henin's career it's her unrivaled dedication and training.

Like Clijsters, right? We see how that has gone. At any rate, she also had recurring injuries. Her knee got so bad that she required surgery. How often has a player returned to their best after serious injuries?

You assume she's going to be better because at some point nearly three years ago, before injuries, she was better. This isn't how sports works.

Matt01
Feb 7th, 2010, 09:30 PM
She's playing better than she was when she retired. Why do you assume she's going to keep improving?


:help:

Donny
Feb 7th, 2010, 09:31 PM
:help:

Yes, that's exactly what Henin needs in non clay slam finals. Very astute of you.

Matt01
Feb 7th, 2010, 09:40 PM
Yes, that's exactly what Henin needs in non clay slam finals. Very astute of you.


Obviously you know nothing about women's tennis This thread proved it again. Kthxbye.

youizahoe
Feb 7th, 2010, 09:40 PM
Mauresmo was outstanding in 2006.

Moonballing your way to a GS final is not that outstanding. But yeah, she did play that game like a goat.

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 09:49 PM
:lol: Ok Donny.. whatever. The comparison to Clijsters is a bit ridiculous and even if it were appropriate, you act as if Kim has done poorly? In a few tournaments back, she has won a slam and won a tournament recently with spectacular play.. not too shabby.

But Henin and Clijsters aren't really close.. Henin is retooling her game, Kim is not. Henin's style of play requires more time to get back into form, Kim's style is not as intricate and much of her success is due to her power, speed, athleticism. Then you can factor in that Henin and Kim are in different leagues mentally and always have been.

But I've had enough of this back-and-forth. This was actually an interesting thread when it was on-topic.

Given 2.0 Henin's goal to win Wimbledon, should she skip the French Open in preparation for Wimbledon?

I recall Ivan Lendl doing this unsuccessfully (he did make it to the Wimbledon finals the year he skipped the French to make a run at winning Wimbledon). Thoughts?

Why though.. Henin wants Wimbledon but it's not everything. Henin has a realistic chance of becoming the greatest French Open champion of all time if she stays on tour for a few more years. I think that's worth more than one Wimbledon title.

And no matter how much she changes her playing style, she'll always be an underdog at Wimby. She'll need a few breaks such as meeting Serena before the final if at all. I don't think Henin is great enough on grass to handle the serving display Rena showed in the Wimbledon final of 2009

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2010, 09:53 PM
My responses are in bold italics.

Why would it be of any interest? Aces are as much part of the game as groundstrokes winners. By only taking interest of the groundstroke winners, you're making it look like the serve is some illegal weapon. But ok, whatever. Serena was hitting aces AND hit her share of winners off the ground too, so..whatever.

suree..but Juju has NOT won Wimbledon, so what r u talking about adaptability?
Serena HAS won RG so that's more testament to adaptability than anything Juju has done..till she happens to win Wimbledon.

You don't even see it, huh? Cool, not worth it.

Federer has dominated TWO majors and is very good at a third. And really now U.S. Open and Oz open are the same surface? Only for the last two wins, no?

and if Serena was to win wimbledon and the Open this year...then her 5-1-4-4 spread might look actually pretty much like Fed's 4-1-6-5 spread, no?

AcesHigh
Feb 7th, 2010, 09:56 PM
Why would it be of any interest? Aces are as much part of the game as groundstrokes winners. By only taking interest of the groundstroke winners, you're making it look like the serve is some illegal weapon. But ok, whatever. Serena was hitting aces AND hit her share of winners off the ground too, so..whatever.

suree..but Juju has NOT won Wimbledon, so what r u talking about adaptability?
Serena HAS won RG so that's more testament to adaptability than anything Juju has done..till she happens to win Wimbledon.

You don't even see it, huh? Cool, not worth it.

Federer has dominated TWO majors and is very good at a third. And really now U.S. Open and Oz open are the same surface? Only for the last two wins, no?

and if Serena was to win wimbledon and the Open this year...then her 5-1-4-4 spread might look actually pretty much like Fed's 4-1-6-5 spread, no?

Did you read my post? If we are talking about who is winning points when the ball is in play then aces and DF's have no relevance. It's like talking about points won at net and then asking why baseline winners aren't counted.

And winning RG means Serena knows how to play very well on clay? :help:
Watch Serena play on clay and tell me how well she adapts to the surface, ok? She won RG with the same style she plays everywhere else.

And that 5-1-4-4 spread makes no sense b/c USO and AO are both on hardcourt. We are talking about surfaces and Fed has 5+ slams on more than two surfaces. And if you want to compare, Fed has a ton of finals at RG while Serena hasn't been to the semi's since 2003. Once again, why are we talking about Serena vs. Federer anyway?

youizahoe
Feb 7th, 2010, 10:01 PM
Serena can play on clay, for whatever reason she doesn't feel bothered to even do so. She just likes losing there, more than anywhere else. But hey, if you can dominate the 3 other slams...

I wouldn't bother for the clay one either, certainly not with that crowd made out of losers.

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2010, 10:06 PM
Did you read my post? If we are talking about who is winning points when the ball is in play then aces and DF's have no relevance. It's like talking about points won at net and then asking why baseline winners aren't counted.

And winning RG means Serena knows how to play very well on clay? :help:
Watch Serena play on clay and tell me how well she adapts to the surface, ok? She won RG with the same style she plays everywhere else.

And that 5-1-4-4 spread makes no sense b/c USO and AO are both on hardcourt. We are talking about surfaces and Fed has 5+ slams on more than two surfaces. And if you want to compare, Fed has a ton of finals at RG while Serena hasn't been to the semi's since 2003. Once again, why are we talking about Serena vs. Federer anyway?

Cool. No problemos, can analyse all we want. As long as people don't go blah blah about Serena being all serve. Then it's good.

And Juju's shown his adaptablity...how?! If winning isn't the ultimate prove, then where does leave Juju?

It only started when some poster made fun of Serena's 8-3-1 spread being worse than Juju's 4-0-3 spread.
And if that's the way it goes..then Serena has 3+ titles on the two surfaces, just like Juju, no?

Thanx4nothin
Feb 7th, 2010, 10:13 PM
That people can't go around calling Juju a non-specialist when she hasn't won them all, and Serena a hardcourt-specialist when has won them all.

Was someone calling Serena a hard-court specialist? I didn't see that, but that is silly.
Edit, apparently it was me :help:

Donny
Feb 7th, 2010, 10:13 PM
:lol: Ok Donny.. whatever. The comparison to Clijsters is a bit ridiculous and even if it were appropriate, you act as if Kim has done poorly? In a few tournaments back, she has won a slam and won a tournament recently with spectacular play.. not too shabby.

When did I say either have done poorly? Stop putting words in my mouth please.

But Henin and Clijsters aren't really close.. Henin is retooling her game, Kim is not. Henin's style of play requires more time to get back into form, Kim's style is not as intricate and much of her success is due to her power, speed, athleticism. Then you can factor in that Henin and Kim are in different leagues mentally and always have been.


So in other words... you just have faith she will get better after a long layoff and a major knee surgery. There is no precedent for such a thing ever happening, but you just assume it will. Is that what I'm gathering?

Thanx4nothin
Feb 7th, 2010, 10:15 PM
Cool. No problemos, can analyse all we want. As long as people don't go blah blah about Serena being all serve. Then it's good.

And Juju's shown his adaptablity...how?! If winning isn't the ultimate prove, then where does leave Juju?

It only started when some poster made fun of Serena's 8-3-1 spread being worse than Juju's 4-0-3 spread.
And if that's the way it goes..then Serena has 3+ titles on the two surfaces, just like Juju, no?

OMG :o I'm an out and out Serena fan, the biggest there is, I was NOT insulting her spread ffs, I was saying that her spread is more disproportionate than Justine's which it is? It was a refute to someone saying Justine was a clay court specialist, whereas even though her spread of hard-courts to clay is far closer than Serena's, NOONE says Serena is a hardcourt specialist. OMG :o How can anyone view that as a criticism? Obviously she's won all 4 slams, I kinda watched her do it and rooted for her you know...you totally misinterpreted EVERYTHING I said....

Donny
Feb 7th, 2010, 10:18 PM
Obviously you know nothing about women's tennis This thread proved it again. Kthxbye.

Where you going, Matt? To Serena's forum?

Matt01
Feb 7th, 2010, 10:19 PM
And Juju's shown his adaptablity...how?!


:rolleyes:

Justine "The Claycourter" Henin has beaten great players like Capriati, Seles, Martinez, S. Williams, Mauresmo and Clijsters on grass. She has won several tournaments on that surface. She has reached 2 Wimbledon finals. If that does not show her adaptability and that she is a great player on grass, I don't know what does. (except for winning Wimbledon which she is reason why she came back...)

Matt01
Feb 7th, 2010, 10:22 PM
Where you going, Matt? To Serena's forum?


Yes, I'll go there. Troll-hunting is my favorite sport.

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2010, 10:23 PM
:rolleyes:

Justine "The Claycourter" Henin has beaten great players like Capriati, Seles, Martinez, S. Williams, Mauresmo and Clijsters on grass. She has won several tournaments on that surface. She has reached 2 Wimbledon finals. If that does not show her adaptability and that she is a great player on grass, I don't know what does. (except for winning Wimbledon which she is reason why she came back...)

Agreed..never said Juju ain't. But people are acting like Serena ain't...when she has done pretty much as Juju has done AND won RG, no? Serena too has beaten many great clay-courters, including Juju, on clay.

Human Nature
Feb 7th, 2010, 10:28 PM
:rolleyes:

Justine "The Claycourter" Henin has beaten great players like Capriati, Seles, Martinez, S. Williams, Mauresmo and Clijsters on grass. She has won several tournaments on that surface. She has reached 2 Wimbledon finals. If that does not show her adaptability and that she is a great player on grass, I don't know what does. (except for winning Wimbledon which she is reason why she came back...)


Does it mean that she has adapted her game to this surface ..how..?

Serena Won RG and several clay tournaments , still some Henin'fans (AcesHigh) say she plays on clay like she plays on hard .

Same can be said for justine . Realy i dont see the difference in her game when she plays on clay than when she plays on grass, she just play EXACTELY the same game , except that her results are less effecient since she never won Wimbledon .. .

Matt01
Feb 7th, 2010, 10:29 PM
Agreed..never said Juju ain't. But people are acting like Serena ain't...when she has done pretty much as Juju has done AND won RG, no? Serena too has beaten many great clay-courters, including Juju, on clay.

Justine on grass is a more consistant player than Serena is on red clay in my opinion. And Serena didn't have much success on red clay in the last few years if I remember correctly.
But Serena has won RG which is her big advantage.

Matt01
Feb 7th, 2010, 10:36 PM
Does it mean that she has adapted her game to this surface ..how..?

Serena Won RG and several clay tournaments , still some Henin'fans (AcesHigh) say she plays on clay like she plays on hard .

Same can be said for justine . Realy i dont see the difference in her game when she plays on clay than when she plays on grass, she just play EXACTELY the same game , except that her results are less effecient since she never won Wimbledon .. .


Justine doesn't play the same on clay and grass. The comes to the net more often on grass, even playing serve-and-volley sometimes. Other than that, she doesn't need to adjust to grass much since her game is suited for all surfaces.

One of the main reasons why her game seems "less efficient" as you say, is that the competition is harder on grass than on clay. Serena, Venus, Sharapova and (formerly) Mauresmo were big threats at Wimbledon. At RG, not so much...

bandabou
Feb 8th, 2010, 03:58 AM
Justine on grass is a more consistant player than Serena is on red clay in my opinion. And Serena didn't have much success on red clay in the last few years if I remember correctly.
But Serena has won RG which is her big advantage.

More by accident than by virtue...if the sisters bothered to play on grass like Juju plays on clay, then Juju wouldn't be having much success on grass either, no?

i see your point though.

Szavay #1
Feb 8th, 2010, 08:41 AM
Err... why leave out RG? Because she's doing too good there?

:worship:

Matt01
Feb 8th, 2010, 11:17 AM
More by accident than by virtue...if the sisters bothered to play on grass like Juju plays on clay, then Juju wouldn't be having much success on grass either, no?



Speculations.

bandabou
Feb 8th, 2010, 11:59 AM
Speculations.

;) Indeed..

Shinjiro
Feb 8th, 2010, 12:13 PM
still some Henin'fans (AcesHigh) say she plays on clay like she plays on hard . cause it's true. Her hardcourt game can be good enough to win on clay.

Sectumsempra
Feb 8th, 2010, 12:22 PM
Sure, but 3-5 is not so far away from 4-4. 'About even' is what I would have expected, so it's not that interesting.

And btw it's 3-3 on hardcourts and 0-2 on grass, so maybe she's just a bad grass player? You just add those two numbers, because it suits your purposes. And that's just bad science, sweetie :kiss:

And Serena is 8-1. Quite a big difference, no?

Sectum you're such a Justine hater, why don't we look at the fact that your favorite can't even make it to the quarterfinals of a grand slam anymore :rolleyes:

Wow how hilarious, playing the "Ana sucks" card. If that's the best you've got then I must be doing pretty well and getting on your nerves, which greatly amuses me :)

Obviously that's the point of this thread. Manipulating the stats to make Justine look bad.

How am I "manipulating" the stats? The stat is that Justine has a 3-5 record in hard/grass Slam finals. How is that manipulating it? It's a cold hard fact. And besides isn't taking Serena's serve away "manipulating" the stats, as was the case in the other "Fascinating Stat" thread? Or is it only "manipulating" when it's against Justine, and perfectly ok when it's for Serena?

the OP has no intent of discussing this stat. It's some petty failed attempt to put Justine down.

That other thread had nothing to do with discrediting Serena. Uber-defensive fans just took it that way.

This isn't a "petty failed attempt to put Justine down", I simply want to reflect on this intriguing statistic, which I am completely entitled to do, apparently.

How is this thread discrediting Justine? It seems that uber-defensive Justine fans are taking it that way.

I think we also desperately need to discuss the H2H between Justine and Serena in Slams because that could tell us who the better player of the two is when it really counts :lol:

Should we discuss the H2H between Justine and Bartoli in Slams? Would that tell us who the better player of the two is when it really counts? But what am I talking about, of course this loss was yet another outlier.

Now where is this poster putting down Serena?

And where am I putting down Justine?

The intent of the OP was obvious.. the second post of his/hers quoted here makes it known this is a petty attempt to retaliate at what was actually a harmless thread.
Not to mention that the OP really doesnt have any interest in any real analysis.. it's really just a baiting thread.

How exactly is this any different to the other "Fascinating stat" thread? So my intent is so obvious yet it wasn't of the OP of the other thread? Funny that.

So you clearly know the intent of this poster was to bait but can't see that the other threads poster was trying to bait also. It seems clear to me that this is a case of who feels it, knows it.

Exactly.

If only Ana had such statistics...

If only Justine had this...

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s120/Seanlol123/anaivanovic.jpg

There are a few hostile uber-defensive fans in this forum. I've encountered at least three since I began participating here.

One example, I posted a list of grand slam winners without comment, so that those participating in a thread discussion could place it into historical context and context of the thread. Thought I was being helpful. In reply, someone quoted me (my list) and said, "So why is that Serena's fault?" I was dumbfounded! All I did was post a list of grand slam winners without comment and it was morphed into me somehow blaming Serena.

The turf wars here are awful. I do enjoy reading your posts and like-minded adults who show true admiration for the sport by respectfully discussing and debating. Thank you.

What are you trying to say? That all Serena fans are hostile or something? :confused: If not, why are you posting it here, open to view by all posters, instead of the select few who misbehave (i.e. PM).

I don't think she had any chance in 2001 in that final. 2010 was too soon as well.. the mind was willing, but she wasn't ready to go toe-to-toe with Serena in that 3rd set.

Justine always struck me as a player who needs a ton of physical, mental and emotional energy to get through these matches and it's very draining for her. She doesn't seem to have that endless reserve that Serena has. That being said, I think Justine is more vulnerable at the end of those 2 weeks, especially if she had a difficult run(AO 2006 SF vs Masha, 2006 USO SF vs JJ, 2010 run in general.)

No excuse of course.. but I think maybe that has something to do with it.

You say "no excuses" but you just listed several :confused: Is Justine suddenly given a free pass because she "needs a ton of physical, mental and emotional energy to get through matches" and it's "very draining for her" and that she's "more vulnerable at the end of those 2 weeks if she had a difficult run". Why are you even mentioning these facts if you're not willing to make excuses?

:eek: Ok, what a fascinating stat indeed. You are a genius, Sectusempra.

Yeah, just as fascinating as that other amaze thread :eek:

why is some ana fan worrying about justine henin at the moment:confused::lol:

I don't worry about Justine, but clearly Justine fans worry about Serena :lol:

And if it's so interesting, I'd like to hear your 2 cents :wavey:

To find it "interesting", one doesn't have to post in the thread. They can simply read the posts. Or is that something only Justine fans could do in the other thread?

Well it's interesting to see the full breakdown.

Henin is:
4-0 in clay slam finals
3-3 in hardcourt slam finals
0-2 in grass slam finals

I don't think 3-3 is bad on hardcourt slams actually.

You're right, but it's not exactly "great" either, is it :confused:

Thanks :) once again, interesting stats.

May I ask which one of Grand Slam W/L ratios (without the players best surface) is interesting, because apparently Justine's isn't :confused:

I think Henin was still experimenting in that final.

That's your new excuse for the loss? :confused:

Henin is able to crush second serves(Serena has one of the best second serves EVER), etc... and that's not a facet of the game.

Yeah, she really crushed that return to save the first championship point, didn't she :lol: What do you mean "that's not a facet of the game"?

Because it's common sense for anyone who has followed her career. When she left, the mental part of her game was lacking.. the passion, the motivation, etc.

Now that is back and the only thing that needs improving is fine-tuning her game. She looked rusty and about 50% of her potential. Serena didn't play amazingly in the final but neither did Henin.

And if there's one thing that is consistent with Henin's career it's her unrivaled dedication and training.

How many excuses do you want to make? Maybe the motivation was lacking because she wasn't doing so well (for her standards, of course) :confused: Unless those initial bad losses (i.e. Sharapova @ AO), which caused the loss of motivation, were also outliers?

Obviously you know nothing about women's tennis This thread proved it again. Kthxbye.

How odd. Justine fans analyzing a stat in her favour are knowledgeable women's tennis fans yet suddenly when we're analyzing a stat that doesn't go in the favour of your Queen, it means we know nothing?

Did you read my post? If we are talking about who is winning points when the ball is in play then aces and DF's have no relevance. It's like talking about points won at net and then asking why baseline winners aren't counted.

Which is also like talking about hardcourt/grass Slams and then asking why claycourt slams aren't counted, right?

And winning RG means Serena knows how to play very well on clay? :help:
Watch Serena play on clay and tell me how well she adapts to the surface, ok? She won RG with the same style she plays everywhere else.

Why does it matter whether Serena won RG playing claycourt tennis or not? Do you think players adapt their game to win or to look like a specialist on that surface? Serena won RG playing the way she played, and therefore adapted adequtely. If she didn't adapt at all, and still won, then who cares? On the other hand Justine hasn't adapted well enough to grass, has she, otherwise she would've won Wimbledon. Should Serena/Venus have their Wimbledon titles taken away because they didn't serve-volley to the title?

bandabou
Feb 8th, 2010, 12:28 PM
Well it's interesting to see the full breakdown.

Henin is:
4-0 in clay slam finals
3-3 in hardcourt slam finals
0-2 in grass slam finals

I don't think 3-3 is bad on hardcourt slams actually.



Nice stats.. it'd also be interesting to see how they all fare when their best surfaces are removed from those statistics.

Would still be 4-2..plenty good.

bandabou
Feb 8th, 2010, 12:32 PM
And Serena is 8-1. Quite a big difference, no?



Wow how hilarious, playing the "Ana sucks" card. If that's the best you've got then I must be doing pretty well and getting on your nerves, which greatly amuses me :)



How am I "manipulating" the stats? The stat is that Justine has a 3-5 record in hard/grass Slam finals. How is that manipulating it? It's a cold hard fact. And besides isn't taking Serena's serve away "manipulating" the stats, as was the case in the other "Fascinating Stat" thread? Or is it only "manipulating" when it's against Justine, and perfectly ok when it's for Serena?



This isn't a "petty failed attempt to put Justine down", I simply want to reflect on this intriguing statistic, which I am completely entitled to do, apparently.

How is this thread discrediting Justine? It seems that uber-defensive Justine fans are taking it that way.



Should we discuss the H2H between Justine and Bartoli in Slams? Would that tell us who the better player of the two is when it really counts? But what am I talking about, of course this loss was yet another outlier.



And where am I putting down Justine?



How exactly is this any different to the other "Fascinating stat" thread? So my intent is so obvious yet it wasn't of the OP of the other thread? Funny that.



Exactly.



If only Justine had this...

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s120/Seanlol123/anaivanovic.jpg



What are you trying to say? That all Serena fans are hostile or something? :confused: If not, why are you posting it here, open to view by all posters, instead of the select few who misbehave (i.e. PM).



You say "no excuses" but you just listed several :confused: Is Justine suddenly given a free pass because she "needs a ton of physical, mental and emotional energy to get through matches" and it's "very draining for her" and that she's "more vulnerable at the end of those 2 weeks if she had a difficult run". Why are you even mentioning these facts if you're not willing to make excuses?



Yeah, just as fascinating as that other amaze thread :eek:



I don't worry about Justine, but clearly Justine fans worry about Serena :lol:



To find it "interesting", one doesn't have to post in the thread. They can simply read the posts. Or is that something only Justine fans could do in the other thread?



You're right, but it's not exactly "great" either, is it :confused:



May I ask which one of Grand Slam W/L ratios (without the players best surface) is interesting, because apparently Justine's isn't :confused:



That's your new excuse for the loss? :confused:



Yeah, she really crushed that return to save the first championship point, didn't she :lol: What do you mean "that's not a facet of the game"?



How many excuses do you want to make? Maybe the motivation was lacking because she wasn't doing so well (for her standards, of course) :confused: Unless those initial bad losses (i.e. Sharapova @ AO), which caused the loss of motivation, were also outliers?



How odd. Justine fans analyzing a stat in her favour are knowledgeable women's tennis fans yet suddenly when we're analyzing a stat that doesn't go in the favour of your Queen, it means we know nothing?



Which is also like talking about hardcourt/grass Slams and then asking why claycourt slams aren't counted, right?



Why does it matter whether Serena won RG playing claycourt tennis or not? Do you think players adapt their game to win or to look like a specialist on that surface? Serena won RG playing the way she played, and therefore adapted adequtely. If she didn't adapt at all, and still won, then who cares? On the other hand Justine hasn't adapted well enough to grass, has she, otherwise she would've won Wimbledon. Should Serena/Venus have their Wimbledon titles taken away because they didn't serve-volley to the title?


My feelings exactly..curious how they're gonna react. The stat that kinda makes Juju look good is interesting and the one that makes her look bad, isn't interesting, huh?

Shinjiro
Feb 8th, 2010, 12:40 PM
If only Justine had this...

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s120/Seanlol123/anaivanovic.jpg

I do wish she had her 2008 forehand. :(

Human Nature
Feb 8th, 2010, 12:44 PM
cause it's true. Her hardcourt game can be good enough to win on clay.


I think Henin plays on grass exactely like she plays on clay . Realy i dont see the difference . Only her fans can see the miniscule adjustements she makes when she is on grass ..because to say the truth , not because a player go to the net 2 or 3 times in a match means she plays a grass game .

bandabou
Feb 8th, 2010, 12:49 PM
I think we also desperately need to discuss the H2H between Justine and Serena in Slams because that could tell us who the better player of the two is when it really counts :lol:

3-4 for Serena..so not too bad, certainly not when she already has 5 more majors.

bandabou
Feb 8th, 2010, 12:55 PM
I think Henin plays on grass exactely like she plays on clay . Realy i dont see the difference . Only her fans can see the miniscule adjustements she makes when she is on grass ..because to say the truth , not because a player go to the net 2 or 3 times in a match means she plays a grass game .

:lol: U tell me...

Sectumsempra
Feb 8th, 2010, 12:58 PM
3-4 for Serena..so not too bad, certainly not when she already has 5 more majors.

As I said in my previous post, I wonder what Matt01 thinks of the H2H record between Justine and Bartoli in Slams, because according to his theory, that makes Bartoli the better player. :lol:

Human Nature
Feb 8th, 2010, 01:08 PM
Justine doesn't play the same on clay and grass. The comes to the net more often on grass, even playing serve-and-volley sometimes. Other than that, she doesn't need to adjust to grass much since her game is suited for all surfaces.

One of the main reasons why her game seems "less efficient" as you say, is that the competition is harder on grass than on clay. Serena, Venus, Sharapova and (formerly) Mauresmo were big threats at Wimbledon. At RG, not so much...


How ..?

two main weapons for a grasscourt player :

A big serve
A volley game

Pete Sampras was the perfect grass player .

How often does Henin go to the net ..? 2 , 3 times a match .:help:
What about her serve ? = a Hot Mess :help:
Her slice has no efficiency on grass like it has on clay .. .

I dont know how you see that a player who has a bad serve and go a very few times to net can have a game suited for all surfaces .

Just like serena plays her game on clay , Henin plays her game on grass and do the best she can to have succes .

Shinjiro
Feb 8th, 2010, 01:51 PM
How often does Henin go to the net ..? 2 , 3 times a match .:help:
What about her serve ? = a Hot Mess :help:
Her slice has no efficiency on grass like it has on clay .. .

I dont know how you see that a player who has a bad serve and go a very few times to net can have a game suited for all surfaces .
Ahah. She plays far more aggressively on grass than she does on the red clay.


Hope this helps.


I guess we'll see how much Henin is willing to change in order to win Wimbledon. I thought she did a tremendous job in the 2006 Wimbledon finals of becoming more aggressive and rushing the net against Amelie. It was by far the most times Henin had volleyed in a singles match in her career. Unfortunately for her it was her service games in the final set that was her undoing.

I never felt that being more aggressive was a problem for Henin then and now. Its her serve that continues to be problematic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPcOoHPohk8

AcesHigh
Feb 8th, 2010, 02:17 PM
How ..?

two main weapons for a grasscourt player :

A big serve
A volley game

Pete Sampras was the perfect grass player .

How often does Henin go to the net ..? 2 , 3 times a match .:help:
What about her serve ? = a Hot Mess :help:
Her slice has no efficiency on grass like it has on clay .. .

I dont know how you see that a player who has a bad serve and go a very few times to net can have a game suited for all surfaces .

Just like serena plays her game on clay , Henin plays her game on grass and do the best she can to have succes .
You have no idea what you're talking about. Stop while you're not too far behind

Matt01
Feb 8th, 2010, 02:29 PM
As I said in my previous post, I wonder what Matt01 thinks of the H2H record between Justine and Bartoli in Slams, because according to his theory, that makes Bartoli the better player. :lol:


Are you mentally retarded?

bandabou
Feb 8th, 2010, 03:40 PM
:lol: Getting interesting and interesting...

RenaSlam.
Feb 8th, 2010, 03:41 PM
Not that fascinating. There have simply been better grass court players (Venus, Mauresmo) and hardcourt players (Serena, Sharapova) that she has come across in those GS Finals.

AcesHigh
Feb 8th, 2010, 04:13 PM
:lol: Getting interesting and interesting...

No, it was actually interesting before you and Donny came in. Now it's just a troll war apparently.

sammy01
Feb 8th, 2010, 04:18 PM
No, it was actually interesting before you and Donny came in. Now it's just a troll war apparently.

yep 3 pages ago there was actually some discussion going on with valid points from all sides, now it is yet again another playground fight.

Human Nature
Feb 8th, 2010, 04:24 PM
You have no idea what you're talking about. Stop while you're not too far behind


You should stop before you are not too far.. . In your previous posts i didnt see anything which made me feel that you knew what you were talking about and being condescendent wont change this fact .

AcesHigh
Feb 8th, 2010, 04:31 PM
You should stop before you are not too far.. . In your previous posts i didnt see anything which made me feel that you knew what you were talking about and being condescendent wont change this fact .

You're making claims like they are facts.. when in fact they couldnt be farther from the truth.
Do you watch Henin play? If you did, you would know that she plays different only clay, hardcourt and grass. It's not even debatable.

And I don't mean to be mean or put you down. I say you have no idea what you are talking about when you say Henin comes to net 2 to 3 times a net.. Henin is one of only maybe 3 or 4 players in the last 5 years who actually has served and volleyed. Her slice is not effective on grass? A slice is one of the most dangerous shots on grass.

Anyway, I'm done with this thread. It was interesting for a while but I hope it dies.

cecilija
Feb 8th, 2010, 04:51 PM
You're making claims like they are facts.. when in fact they couldnt be farther from the truth.
Do you watch Henin play? If you did, you would know that she plays different only clay, hardcourt and grass. It's not even debatable.

And I don't mean to be mean or put you down. I say you have no idea what you are talking about when you say Henin comes to net 2 to 3 times a net.. Henin is one of only maybe 3 or 4 players in the last 5 years who actually has served and volleyed. Her slice is not effective on grass? A slice is one of the most dangerous shots on grass.

Anyway, I'm done with this thread. It was interesting for a while but I hope it dies.

She averaged more than 23 net approaches in Melbourne. In the Dementieva match alone there were 43 net approaches from Henin :lol:

bandabou
Feb 8th, 2010, 05:01 PM
No, it was actually interesting before you and Donny came in. Now it's just a troll war apparently.

Sorry to see u leave. My only intent was to prove to you that now that this was a stat that wasn't all too good for Justine, all of sudden you didn't find it intereting. You saw it like putting Justine down, etc..

While the other thread about: "taking out Serena's serve and Justine actually won more points" was interesting to you. While it was even as downputting for Serena as this one is for Juju, no?

But it's cool. Peace.

Arnian
Feb 8th, 2010, 05:04 PM
Are you mentally retarded?

Sectum is a moron matt, I wouldn't even bother.

Also :lol: @ Justine not coming forward often. Just like Cecil said above, Justine came to the net very often in Melbourne.

trufanjay
Feb 8th, 2010, 05:06 PM
Justine has an adaptable game for all surfaces imo. But the problem for her has just been other players that are better than her on those surfaces.

I think it's very interesting how theres a fine line when it comes to this. Justine has the game to win an Australian or US Open (obviously since she's done it), but if she catches a player like Maria or Serena on the right day then she can be blown off the court. Same thing at Wimbledon, even a tactical player like Mauresmo can beat her, not to mention several of the other big hitters that can beat her. (even Bartoli :lol:)

Justine is just a fantastic player to watch and very talented. Because the big hitters are more likely to play better at the grand slams, Justine is going to lose most of the non-clay finals that she enters.

freeandlonely
Feb 8th, 2010, 05:40 PM
She is already great, and I believe she can be better(on hard/grass).

youizahoe
Feb 8th, 2010, 05:47 PM
Are you mentally retarded?

Like, that would be much different compared to you :lol:

Human Nature
Feb 8th, 2010, 06:05 PM
She averaged more than 23 net approaches in Melbourne. In the Dementieva match alone there were 43 net approaches from Henin :lol:



Going to the net is not always on purpose , most of the time a player is just obliged to go to the net because of the direction of the game in the heat of the moment . Of course if your opponent makes a drop shot , what would you do ..? . Same when your opponent' shots are too short and fall right behind the net , then your only solution is going to the net .

And if the execution leads to a winner , the statistics will count it as a net approche and increase the figure in this field..when it clearly isnt... .


A volleyer goes to the net on purpose right after the serve 80% of the time , has no fear to be passed , and sometime obliged to execute some incredibles low volleys .

Most of those kind of players have a perfect serve , powerfull and accurate .

To me Henin is far from being this kind of player . I dont make it a fact , its only my vision of her game ..but your vision is no a fact either .. .

Human Nature
Feb 8th, 2010, 06:11 PM
You're making claims like they are facts.. when in fact they couldnt be farther from the truth.
Do you watch Henin play? If you did, you would know that she plays different only clay, hardcourt and grass. It's not even debatable.

And I don't mean to be mean or put you down. I say you have no idea what you are talking about when you say Henin comes to net 2 to 3 times a net.. Henin is one of only maybe 3 or 4 players in the last 5 years who actually has served and volleyed. Her slice is not effective on grass? A slice is one of the most dangerous shots on grass.

Anyway, I'm done with this thread. It was interesting for a while but I hope it dies.


I dont see how your vision is the fact either.. .

I watch Henin playing everytime as a tennis fan , as much as you ..i think its just a question of opinion , because i just dont see the same justine Henin than you .

sammy01
Feb 8th, 2010, 06:20 PM
Going to the net is not always on purpose , most of the time a player is just obliged to go to the net because of the direction of the game in the heat of the moment . Of course if your opponent makes a drop shot , what would you do ..? . Same when your opponent' shots are too short and fall right behind the net , then your only solution is going to the net .

And if the execution leads to a winner , the statistics will count it as a net approche and increase the figure in this field..when it clearly isnt... .


A volleyer goes to the net on purpose right after the serve 80% of the time , has no fear to be passed , and sometime obliged to execute some incredibles low volleys .

Most of those kind of players have a perfect serve , powerfull and accurate .

To me Henin is far from being this kind of player . I dont make it a fact , its only my vision of her game ..but your vision is no a fact either .. .


if this is true, why can i not think of any match, not involving momo, where a top player has come forward 43 times in the last few years. serena hits hard, gets lots of shorter balls but never has 43 net approaches, because she unlike henin doesn't seek to move forward whenever she can.

henin goes to net more than 95% of the top players on hardcourts, she doesn't do it nearly as much on clay, that is henin adapting her game to each surface. that is why in the last few years she has reached a slam final on all surfaces, and every other player has had at least 1 slam where they cant adapt their game enough to make it that far.

trufanjay
Feb 8th, 2010, 07:22 PM
Henin Career finals:

Hardcourt: 25-10
Clay: 12-3
Grass: 3-3
Carpet: 1-2

If you include the Olympics and YEC, Henin's major finals record on non-clay surfaces would be 6-5. Players she defeated in those finals were: Amelie Mauresmo, Maria Sharapova, Kim Clijsters, and Svetlana Kuznetsova.
Right. I was talking about the non-clay grand slam finals where she is 3-5

Losing to Venus, Sharapova, Mauresmo, and Serena.

trufanjay
Feb 8th, 2010, 07:42 PM
Very interested to know why some in this thread want to exclude YEC and Olympics, especially since Henin's victories in those finals were played on hardcourt surfaces :)
I am never one to try and twist facts in order to take away from another player's accomplishments. But this thread is about grand slams.

trufanjay
Feb 8th, 2010, 07:48 PM
Good enough. I accept your answer at face value.
ok :)

Arnian
Feb 8th, 2010, 09:36 PM
Right. I was talking about the non-clay grand slam finals where she is 3-5

Losing to Venus, Sharapova, Mauresmo, and Serena.

1 of those losses she had no chance of winning. In 2001 she was lucky to make the final at the time, she did not posses the game to beat Venus in her prime then. So I don't take much from that.

Now the other three are three matches where she had chances but lost. Particularily the 2006 Wimbledon & 2010 AO, but no where in any of these matches did she get blown off the court like you claimed. These are her worse losses in a slam final, and they are the only ones that honestly matter in this conversation and that does not make a bad record. In two of them she had her chances to win and in the other she was playing against someone playing A+ tennis at the time. So, going by these three, I don't really see how you support your argument of her getting blown off the court in the finals....

SAEKeithSerena
Feb 9th, 2010, 01:34 AM
that is absolutely horrible. never really realized that!

moby
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:04 AM
Another interesting stat:

Justine is 17-2 in quarterfinals at the Slams. (12-2 outside RG)
Serena is 18-11. (13-9 outside AO)
Venus is 17-13. (9-11 outside Wimbledon)

Discuss.

Donny
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:11 AM
Another interesting stat:

Justine is 17-2 in quarterfinals at the Slams. (12-2 outside RG)
Serena is 19-11. (14-9 outside AO)
Venus is 17-13. (9-11 outisde Wimbledon.)

Discuss.

It shows to me that Serena and Venus reach a lot of quarters even in bad (or non championship winning) form.

When Serena wins a quarterfinal, she usually is in good enough form to win.

G1Player2
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:12 AM
Another interesting stat:

Justine is 17-2 in quarterfinals at the Slams. (12-2 outside RG)
Serena is 19-11. (14-9 outside AO)
Venus is 17-13. (9-11 outside Wimbledon)

Discuss.

:shrug: And. Remember, Serena lost many QF's in 2001 when she was choking matches away.

trufanjay
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:13 AM
1 of those losses she had no chance of winning. In 2001 she was lucky to make the final at the time, she did not posses the game to beat Venus in her prime then. So I don't take much from that.

Now the other three are three matches where she had chances but lost. Particularily the 2006 Wimbledon & 2010 AO, but no where in any of these matches did she get blown off the court like you claimed. These are her worse losses in a slam final, and they are the only ones that honestly matter in this conversation and that does not make a bad record. In two of them she had her chances to win and in the other she was playing against someone playing A+ tennis at the time. So, going by these three, I don't really see how you support your argument of her getting blown off the court in the finals....
That was not my argument. I didn't say that she had been blown off the court in finals. I said that on the right day she can be blown off the court in general on a non-clay surface. I said that just to make the point that there are players a lot better than her on other surfaces.

moby
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:16 AM
It shows to me that Serena and Venus reach a lot of quarters even in bad (or non championship winning) form.

When Serena wins a quarterfinal, she usually is in good enough form to win.Or it shows that Justine reaches a lot of semis even in bad (or non championship winning) form. ;)

Ultimately if any percentage matters, it is this:
Serena: 12/41 = 29%
Justine: 7/32 = 22%
Venus: 7/47 = 15%

(If Justine had won the AO final, it would have been 27% for Serena and 25% for Justine.)

sammy01
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:16 AM
Another interesting stat:

Justine is 17-2 in quarterfinals at the Slams. (12-2 outside RG)
Serena is 19-11. (14-9 outside AO)
Venus is 17-13. (9-11 outside Wimbledon)

Discuss.

it would be intresting to know what percentage each of them has of reaching the qtrs of a slam to.

G1Player2
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:18 AM
it would be intresting to know what percentage each of them has of reaching the qtrs of a slam to.

Why would that be interesting? As Donny already pointed out, Serena can usually reach the quarters in bad form/injured. SHe had that thumb injury in 2007 in Wimbledon and made the quarters and the same at the US Open that year. Not to mention missing the entire clay court season in 2001 and 2004 and still getting to at least the quarters.

moby
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:26 AM
it would be intresting to know what percentage each of them has of reaching the qtrs of a slam to.

Percentage reaching R16 of a slam:
Serena: 33/41 = 80%
Justine: 25/32 = 78%
Venus: 35/47 = 74%

Percentage reaching quarters of a slam:
Serena: 29/41 = 71%
Venus: 30/47 = 64%
Justine: 19/32 = 59%

Percentage reaching semis of a slam:
Justine: 17/32 = 53%
Serena: 18/41 = 44%
Venus: 17/47 = 36%

Percentage reaching final of a slam:
Justine: 12/32 = 38%
Serena: 15/41 = 37%
Venus: 14/47 = 30%

Percentage winning slam:
Serena: 12/41 = 29%
Justine: 7/32 = 22%
Venus: 7/47 = 15%

sammy01
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:28 AM
Percentage reaching quarters of a slam:
Serena: 29/41 = 71%
Venus: 30/47 = 64%
Justine: 19/32 = 59%

Percentage reaching semis of a slam:
Justine: 17/32 = 53%
Serena: 18/41 = 44%
Venus: 17/47 = 36%

Percentage reaching final of a slam:
Justine: 12/32 = 38%
Serena: 15/41 = 37%
Venus: 14/47 = 30%

intresting stats, once henin gets going in a slam she is very tough to derail. serena is very good at making the qtrs at least.

G1Player2
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:30 AM
intresting stats, once henin gets going in a slam she is very tough to derail. serena is very good at making the qtrs at least.

Yet Serena still has 12 slams to Justine's 7. :rolleyes:

Arnian
Feb 9th, 2010, 04:20 AM
That was not my argument. I didn't say that she had been blown off the court in finals. I said that on the right day she can be blown off the court in general on a non-clay surface. I said that just to make the point that there are players a lot better than her on other surfaces.

You make it sound as if Justine hasn't won 3 Hard Court majors. Justine can compete with whoever whenever on whatever surface, whenever she is playing well :rolleyes:

bandabou
Feb 9th, 2010, 06:15 AM
Or it shows that Justine reaches a lot of semis even in bad (or non championship winning) form. ;)

Ultimately if any percentage matters, it is this:
Serena: 12/41 = 29%
Justine: 7/32 = 22%
Venus: 7/47 = 15%

(If Justine had won the AO final, it would have been 27% for Serena and 25% for Justine.)

Alas..Juju's good, but there's always a Serena who's better.

bandabou
Feb 9th, 2010, 06:17 AM
You make it sound as if Justine hasn't won 3 Hard Court majors. Justine can compete with whoever whenever on whatever surface, whenever she is playing well :rolleyes:

Kim Clijsters, Kim Clijsters, Svetlana Kuznetsova (although she did beat the WS en route, sthat was good).

She was favored to win all of those. If she can't beat Kim or Sveta on hardcourts, thenn..

bandabou
Feb 9th, 2010, 06:23 AM
Curious as to why the thread starter didn't include the YEC and Olympics as part of the non-Roland Garros major finals?

Henin is 6-5 in non-clay major finals including the GS majors, YEC and Olympics.

Curious why they'd exclude service winners and aces from a match, to begin with.

Matt01
Feb 9th, 2010, 03:51 PM
Alas..Juju's good, but there's always a Serena who's better.


That's also why Justine leads Serena in Slams 4:3 ;)

bandabou
Feb 10th, 2010, 04:24 PM
That's also why Justine leads Serena in Slams 4:3 ;)

;) Good...but 12-7 is bigger than that, plus Serena won their only final.

DOUBLEFIST
Feb 10th, 2010, 04:35 PM
Curious as to why the thread starter didn't include the YEC and Olympics as part of the non-Roland Garros major finals?

Henin is 6-5 in non-clay major finals including the GS majors, YEC and Olympics.
Because I believe the thread starter said "Grand Slam" not "major."

Thanx4nothin
Feb 10th, 2010, 06:40 PM
You make it sound as if Justine hasn't won 3 Hard Court majors. Justine can compete with whoever whenever on whatever surface, whenever she is playing well :rolleyes:

She's won more hardcourt slams that Venus, so you're so right....Justine on her day on any surface is a force! :worship:

Serena y Monica
Feb 10th, 2010, 07:21 PM
Yes . it's exactly the same thing. That's why the tours give the same amount of points to players who lose in the first round as to players who lose in the final. It's also why Federer is noted for making 23 major SF in a row. Had he made 23 1st rounds in a row, we'd all be just as impressed.

The tour has created levels of loosing for the good of the tour. But when you cut to the chase, whether ur the 1st to loose or the last to loose...u still loose.

trufanjay
Feb 10th, 2010, 08:01 PM
You make it sound as if Justine hasn't won 3 Hard Court majors. Justine can compete with whoever whenever on whatever surface, whenever she is playing well :rolleyes:
I know that.

I was just making the point that she has to work harder to win the US, AO, and Wimbledon. There is not much that separates Justine from the big hitters on hardcourts because she has proven that she can win big titles on those surfaces.

HOWEVER, I was just stating my opinion that whenever she faces a player like Serena, Sharapova, Venus or a few others that the match is not in her hands.

Matt01
Feb 10th, 2010, 08:07 PM
I know that.

I was just making the point that she has to work harder to win the US, AO, and Wimbledon. There is not much that separates Justine from the big hitters on hardcourts because she has proven that she can win big titles on those surfaces.

HOWEVER, I was just stating my opinion that whenever she faces a player like Serena, Sharapova, Venus or a few others that the match is not in her hands.


I respect your opinion but I disagree. When Justine is meeting a hard hitter the match is in her hans and it is in the hands of the hard hitter she eets.

trufanjay
Feb 10th, 2010, 08:11 PM
I respect your opinion but I disagree. When Justine is meeting a hard hitter the match is in her hans and it is in the hands of the hard hitter she eets.
I am referring to the TOP hard-hitters exactly. I don't think you can honestly say that the Australian Open 2010 match was in Justine's hands, or the US Open 2006 or Wimbledon 2001 or her grand slam finals with Mauresmo.

Matt01
Feb 10th, 2010, 08:14 PM
I don't think you can honestly say that the Australian Open 2010 match was in Justine's hands, or the US Open 2006 or Wimbledon 2001 or her grand slam finals with Mauresmo.


Yes, I can. Honestly.

trufanjay
Feb 10th, 2010, 08:18 PM
Yes, I can. Honestly.
I guess that is your opinion. If that were true then Justine would have more slams. Justine has played some very good tennis and still lost.

Matt01
Feb 10th, 2010, 08:24 PM
I guess that is your opinion. If that were true then Justine would have more slams. Justine has played some very good tennis and still lost.


Have you even seen those matches? Justine wasn't even close to her best in them. Watch her US Open wins in 2003 or 2007 and then tell me again that the matches against the big hitters were not in her hans.

trufanjay
Feb 10th, 2010, 08:31 PM
Have you even seen those matches? Justine wasn't even close to her best in them. Watch her US Open wins in 2003 or 2007 and then tell me again that the matches against the big hitters were not in her hans.
I've seen every grand slam final that Justine has ever played. Justine is a fantastic player, don't get me wrong. You can argue the point about Sharapova because I think Justine is a better player than her.
The following matches, imo, are not in Justine's hands
vs Serena (hard, grass)
vs Venus (hard, grass)
vs Mauresmo (grass)
vs Davenport (grass)
vs Dementieva (grass)

and there may be some others....

She's still hands down one of the top three players of this generation but she's not the best in every situation.....

Matt01
Feb 10th, 2010, 08:38 PM
I guess we have to agree to disagree.
BTW, the players in your avatar are great palyers, too, but they are not the best in every situation, either.

Arnian
Feb 10th, 2010, 08:38 PM
I am referring to the TOP hard-hitters exactly. I don't think you can honestly say that the Australian Open 2010 match was in Justine's hands, or the US Open 2006 or Wimbledon 2001 or her grand slam finals with Mauresmo.

ok are you dense or just blind?

In 2001, Justine was no where near her top form and Venus was in her prime, and yet she still took a set off her.

In 2006 Wimbledon, Justine choked but had her chances to win that, she also had her chances to win in the final this year. I really don't see where you're coming off with this idea that she can't beat the top players on other surfaces, or that 2 of the 4 finals you just listed weren't competitive. Give me a break. Justine had her chances in 06 (w) and 2010.

The 2006 Us Open, Maria just flat out played better, and that happens, just like she played better than Serena in 04.

:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Olórin
Feb 10th, 2010, 08:40 PM
ok are you dense or just blind?


Why do you say this kind of thing to everyone who disagrees with you. :weirdo:

Get a fricking clue, you mess.

Arnian
Feb 10th, 2010, 08:42 PM
Why do you say this kind of thing to everyone who disagrees with you. :weirdo:

Get a fricking clue, you mess.

Why do you care?

Obviously you'd have to be dense or blind, not to know that some of those matches were competitive :rolleyes:

Ellery
Feb 10th, 2010, 08:43 PM
Juju is love :hearts:

trufanjay
Feb 10th, 2010, 08:46 PM
ok are you dense or just blind?

In 2001, Justine was no where near her top form and Venus was in her prime, and yet she still took a set off her.

In 2006 Wimbledon, Justine choked but had her chances to win that, she also had her chances to win in the final this year. I really don't see where you're coming off with this idea that she can't beat the top players on other surfaces, or that 2 of the 4 finals you just listed weren't competitive. Give me a break. Justine had her chances in 06 (w) and 2010.

The 2006 Us Open, Maria just flat out played better, and that happens, just like she played better than Serena in 04.

:rolleyes::rolleyes:
No one said that she can't beat top players on other surfaces, that wouldn't be logical because she has done it before. I just believe that when she faces certain players on hard courts and grass then she's not in control of the match if that player happens to be playing their best.

She had her chances but there are chances on both sides of the net in almost every final.

Some people seem to think that Justine can beat any player on any surface when she is at her best and I disagree. Thats really all I'm saying.

trufanjay
Feb 10th, 2010, 08:50 PM
ok are you dense or just blind?

In 2001, Justine was no where near her top form and Venus was in her prime, and yet she still took a set off her.

In 2006 Wimbledon, Justine choked but had her chances to win that, she also had her chances to win in the final this year. I really don't see where you're coming off with this idea that she can't beat the top players on other surfaces, or that 2 of the 4 finals you just listed weren't competitive. Give me a break. Justine had her chances in 06 (w) and 2010.

The 2006 Us Open, Maria just flat out played better, and that happens, just like she played better than Serena in 04.

:rolleyes::rolleyes:
And another thing....who cares if the matches were competitive? My argument was that they were not in her hands. That means if, for example, Justine had beaten Serena at the Australian Open that wouldn't change my opinion that the match was in Serena's hands because Serena is a better player on hardcourt. Just like if Serena and Justine play on clay the match is most likely in Justine's hands.

moby
Feb 10th, 2010, 08:51 PM
Some people seem to think that Justine can beat any player on any surface when she is at her best and I disagree. Thats really all I'm saying.Do you think she was at her best in those matches that she lost?

Arnian
Feb 10th, 2010, 08:53 PM
No one said that she can't beat top players on other surfaces, that wouldn't be logical because she has done it before. I just believe that when she faces certain players on hard courts and grass then she's not in control of the match if that player happens to be playing their best.

She had her chances but there are chances on both sides of the net in almost every final.

Some people seem to think that Justine can beat any player on any surface when she is at her best and I disagree. Thats really all I'm saying.

Well you have been giving off the wrong impression. It seems like you've been claiming that she can't challenge or beat the other top players at her best, on any surface other than clay. It's rare that we ever see two top players playing their best at the same time, so it's hard to even make that judgement.

I do believe that Justine can beat any player anywhere, at her best, and that's because she is an amazing player. There are really on a few players I could say that about, but I think it's hard to deny that she would have her chances.

DOUBLEFIST
Feb 10th, 2010, 08:57 PM
ok are you dense or just blind?

Arnie, you need to chill with that. TFJ, is about as peaceful as you'll get around here.

Now, had you said that to me, I'd understand ( ;) sort of ), TFJ! Come on that's over the top. He's just arguing what he (and many others) believe to be true with out callin' folk outside there name..., er..., nick name, that is.

trufanjay
Feb 10th, 2010, 08:59 PM
Well you have been giving off the wrong impression. It seems like you've been claiming that she can't challenge or beat the other top players at her best, on any surface other than clay. It's rare that we ever see two top players playing their best at the same time, so it's hard to even make that judgement.

I do believe that Justine can beat any player anywhere, at her best, and that's because she is an amazing player. There are really on a few players I could say that about, but I think it's hard to deny that she would have her chances.
Well there you have it....you believe that Justine can beat any player anywhere at her best. I believe the same for Serena. It's all a matter of opinion because like you said, rarely do two players play their best against each other. At the beginning I tried to use results to prove my point but I guess your opinion would be that Justine would have won those matches had she played her best tennis. I just disagree with that, I like Justine's game a lot but I think that MOST of her matches lie on her racquet, not all of them.

trufanjay
Feb 10th, 2010, 09:01 PM
Arnie, you need to chill with that. TFJ, is about as peaceful as you'll get around here.

Now, had you said that to me, I'd understand ( ;) sort of ), TFJ! Come on that's over the top. He's just arguing what he (and many others) believe to be true with out callin' folk outside there name..., er..., nick name, that is.
:lol: thank you

I try to be as fair and as peaceful as possible.

trufanjay
Feb 10th, 2010, 09:21 PM
Do you think she was at her best in those matches that she lost?
No, she probably wasn't at her best but that wasn't my point.

Arnian
Feb 10th, 2010, 09:29 PM
Arnie, you need to chill with that. TFJ, is about as peaceful as you'll get around here.

Now, had you said that to me, I'd understand ( ;) sort of ), TFJ! Come on that's over the top. He's just arguing what he (and many others) believe to be true with out callin' folk outside there name..., er..., nick name, that is.

Then I apologize to TFJ but I just missunderstood him/her, my mistake. I don't think I would ever say that to you double rofl.

I expect you to jump on certain Serena fans for insulting some Justine fans now though... seems unfair to me, but yes you are right TFJ seems fairly nice.

DOUBLEFIST
Feb 10th, 2010, 09:39 PM
I expect you to jump on certain Serena fans for insulting some Justine fans now though... seems unfair to me, but yes you are right TFJ seems fairly nice.
Well, it's not like I see you jumpin' on a lot of Juju fans, either. :lol:

It's just that TJF is the homey! We go way back to the venusserenafan days.

tennisbum79
Feb 10th, 2010, 09:39 PM
Originally Posted by trufanjay http://imgsrv2.tennisuniverse.com/wtaworld/images2007/buttons/lastpost.gif (http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?p=17268468#post17268468)
I don't think you can honestly say that the Australian Openhttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/2_bing.gif (http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?t=401707&page=14#) 2010 match was in Justine's hands, or the US Open 2006 or Wimbledon 2001 or her grand slam finals with Mauresmo.


Yes, I can. Honestly.

From an interview "De Laatste Show." in Belgium posted by Chrissie-fan
http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?t=401845&highlight=interview

.....
Q> But you only won two more games after that.

Justine: I found it hard to stay with her and to continue at that tempo. I had already played some tough matches earlier in the tournament.


No, the match was never in her hand.

AcesHigh
Feb 10th, 2010, 09:50 PM
No, the match was never in her hand.

So Serena only let her stay in the match the first set and win the second set, right?

AcesHigh
Feb 10th, 2010, 09:52 PM
Coach: Henin wasn't 'ready' to win final

MELBOURNE, Australia


Justine Henin wasn't physically or mentally ready to win a Grand Slam final, according to her coach Carlos Rodriguez.


Rodriguez was proud of Henin after Saturday's loss to Serena Williams in the Australian Open final, but admitted she was still up to six months away from returning to the top.


"I think we can see on the court today she's not ready to beat somebody like Serena,'' Rodriguez said. "Maybe in three or four or six months, I don't know, (she needs) more matches. Emotional situation like tonight, maybe she's going to be ready then.''


Rodriguez started guiding Henin's career in 1995 and has been instrumental during her comeback.


He said Henin, who lost to Williams in three sets, would now take a break to work on improving her game.


"(We're) disappointed because we always try to win,'' he said. "But I think the best player won today. That's the first thing to say, she's better than Justine. Now for me and Justine we try to find out how we going to do better in the next match or in the next month.


"We're going to stop now and work on the physical skills and more specific things in her game. "Maybe take a little bit more time to find a way to manage different situations also. Not only a question of technique, try to manage this emotions and the tactics to serve. I cannot say better for sure but (we need to improve) the serve and important points.''


Henin should return to the top 40 now and Rodriguez is hopeful she may sneak in for a seeding at the French Open.


She has only played two tournaments so far, the other being Brisbane where she was also a finalist.


"You never know, still two or three tournaments to go before they put ranking up there,'' Rodriguez said. "Even in claycourts I prefer she's seeded if we do the right job.


"It's very difficult but we already withdraw from two (tournaments), Sydney and Dubai. If she continue to perform like this she can go further. She has to work but also she has to open-minded a little bit and not just think about tennis but other things. Also how she approach a new career.''

Expected. She still has a lot of work to do. Thanks for posting this.

brickhousesupporter
Feb 10th, 2010, 09:57 PM
(We're) disappointed because we always try to win,'' he said. "But I think the best player won today.

See Arnian, they were trying to win the tournament (match) and not using it as a practice.

tennisbum79
Feb 10th, 2010, 10:01 PM
So Serena only let her stay in the match the first set and win the second set, right?
Justine said it, I did no say it.

Let me get this straight.
Serena won the first set.
Justine won the second set.

Justine said herself she could not handle the tempo in the 3rd set.
What else do you want know to prove that match was never in Justine's hand?

BTW, Carlos has made similar statement elsewhere.

Matt01
Feb 10th, 2010, 10:44 PM
Justine said it, I did no say it.

Let me get this straight.
Serena won the first set.
Justine won the second set.

Justine said herself she could not handle the tempo in the 3rd set.
What else do you want know to prove that match was never in Justine's hand?

BTW, Carlos has made similar statement elsewhere.


:weirdo:

No need to discuss this with you.

Btw, Serena beat herself in the 2nd set. :help:

treufreund
Feb 10th, 2010, 10:50 PM
Fascinating stat if you are trying ***desperately*** to find some sort of thing to criticize the woman's incredible accomplishments. On the other hand, it's a rather transparent and unfascinating troll thread.

Shinjiro
Feb 10th, 2010, 10:58 PM
From an interview "De Laatste Show." in Belgium posted by Chrissie-fan
http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?t=401845&highlight=interview


No, the match was never in her hand.
She ran out of gas in the third.

Apoleb
Feb 11th, 2010, 04:48 AM
She ran out of gas in the third.

Indeed. 2-4 in the third set, she played like she did against Bartoli at Wimbledon. Probably even worse. There was hardly any pace coming off her racket, and I'm not going to believe that's "mental" and that she didn't have physical issues like she said. She's never been able to play great tennis in a slam final since 04, and it's all because her game just takes too much of her when she reaches that stage. This AO final wasn't bad (she had worse). She screwed it in the first set.

bandabou
Feb 11th, 2010, 06:04 AM
So Serena only let her stay in the match the first set and win the second set, right?

You can't say the match was in Juju's hand, like Serena was just a bystander. Serena didn't have a thing to say about the outcome then? Is that what u saying?

bandabou
Feb 11th, 2010, 06:52 AM
:lol::help::lol::help::lol:

What's so funny?

Sectumsempra
Feb 12th, 2010, 08:49 AM
LOL. So the new excuse for Justine fans to content themselves with is that "the match was in Justine's hands". OMG...GOAT return of serve stats, now she match was actually in her hands! SERENA NEEDS TO HAND OVER THE TROPHY RIGHT NOW! THIS A SCANDAL!!!

Betten
Feb 12th, 2010, 09:15 AM
Lets try to stop this from regressing into another of those 'Serena Williams def. Justine Henin in the AO finals' slugfests between fans.

If you look at each of the finals she lost:

2001 (W): a pre-Prime Henin lost to a Prime Venus Williams in three sets on the latters best surface.
2006 (AO): Henin retired in the second set against Mauresmo. Embarrassing, but she would have lost anyway.
2006 (W): the one that got away, Henin forgetting to finish things off, and after three sets, Mauresmo walks away with the trophy.
2006 (US): a loss to a strong Sharapova (who would end the year at no.2) in straight sets. Maria was simply too good that day.
2010 (AO): Henin, playing in only her second tournament in her comeback, stretches no.1 (and three times champion) Serena to three sets.

It's interesting to note that she beat both Sharapova and Mauresmo in straight sets en route to the YEC title in 2006.

As someone said before, I believe that none of those finals show that Justine chokes in GS finals (apart from maybe Wimbledon 2006). Only two of those didn't go to three sets. It's just that she's good enough to reach all those finals, but can be overpowered by an opponent who's on fire during that tournament.

bandabou
Feb 12th, 2010, 10:07 AM
Overpowered, huh? Juju's soooo tinyy..

Matt01
Feb 12th, 2010, 11:39 AM
As someone said before, I believe that none of those finals show that Justine chokes in GS finals (apart from maybe Wimbledon 2006). Only two of those didn't go to three sets. It's just that she's good enough to reach all those finals, but can be overpowered by an opponent who's on fire during that tournament.


That's not only true for Justine but for any player...

Juju4ever
Feb 12th, 2010, 11:59 AM
I think that all those losses were against better players at that moment. Venus 2001 is obvious. 2006 was Mauresmo's best year ever, she was playing on another level. Sharapova is a bad matchup for Justine, especially when the russian playing her best tennis. The loss to Serena was kind of predictable, since Serena is the best in the world and always plays great in Australia. I think that the fact Justine reached 8 non-Roland Garros GS finals is something she should be proud of, and I'm sure she is.