PDA

View Full Version : So much for the Belgians 'saving' the tour.


Ferg
Mar 16th, 2010, 07:08 PM
I prefer it this way to be honest though. :lick:

Golovinjured.
Mar 16th, 2010, 07:13 PM
Marion sucks. Deal with it.

Ferg
Mar 16th, 2010, 07:15 PM
Marion sucks. Deal with it.

She could crush you between her thighs.

The Witch-king
Mar 16th, 2010, 07:25 PM
What ever happened to belzebub and kaghat??

Break My Rapture
Mar 16th, 2010, 07:26 PM
belzebub got banned. so long ago.

roelc
Mar 16th, 2010, 07:31 PM
they both reached final of a grand slam, not too bad imo.
but true, they should back it up with more wins.

BuTtErFrEnA
Mar 16th, 2010, 07:34 PM
belzebub got banned. so long ago.

i wouldn't be too sure he's still absent :tape:

The Witch-king
Mar 16th, 2010, 07:34 PM
belzebub got banned. so long ago.

aww, i miss him or her. :(

Ferg
Mar 16th, 2010, 07:35 PM
they both reached final of a grand slam, not too bad imo.
but true, they should back it up with more wins.

Well thats kinda what I mean, the real elite players only seem to be taking the Slams seriously, meanwhile with the majority of the smaller tournaments we stll have the high seeds tumbling out in early rounds. Its the same situation as last year.

Cosantoir
Mar 16th, 2010, 07:38 PM
they both reached final of a grand slam, not too bad imo.
but true, they should back it up with more wins.

Yes. Of the last two grand slam finals has featured one of them. Hard to imagine Roland Garros final without Henin. So there is nothing to complain about.

Serena y Monica
Mar 16th, 2010, 07:50 PM
Yes. Of the last two grand slam finals has featured one of them. Hard to imagine Roland Garros final without Henin. So there is nothing to complain about.

One can hope!

Slampova
Mar 16th, 2010, 07:55 PM
To be honest I didn't expect them to come back and 'save the tour.' I'm just glad their back and playing...

Malva
Mar 16th, 2010, 08:22 PM
Yes. Of the last two grand slam finals has featured one of them. Hard to imagine Roland Garros final without Henin. So there is nothing to complain about.

«Saving the WTA tour» was supposed to mean: 'an elite player doesn't lose to a random player'. Reaching grand slam finals is what Top 5-7 players do anyway.

So in this sense the Belgians are not fulfilling the role ascribed to them by some members of the tennisforum: they are not 'WTA saviors'. They are just among the best players. But that was obvious anyway, wasn't it?

miffedmax
Mar 16th, 2010, 08:24 PM
they both reached final of a grand slam, not too bad imo.
but true, they should back it up with more wins.

Yes, but it wasn't the slams that needed saving. Allegedly it was the tour, with a horrorshow of worthless ones like Ana, JJ, Safina...(and an idiot blonde who couldn't even keep JJ from claiming the #1 spot :tape:)

Cookie Power
Mar 16th, 2010, 08:32 PM
Wicky is still in it!

Raiden
Mar 16th, 2010, 08:38 PM
^ No, Nina isn't part of what lazy people refer to as 'the Belgians'.

Not yet (be patient).

Londoner
Mar 16th, 2010, 08:40 PM
No one 'saves' the Tour and all players have bad losses. It's just great they are back mixing it up and I hope they do well.

kiwifan
Mar 16th, 2010, 08:40 PM
Yes, but it wasn't the slams that needed saving. Allegedly it was the tour, with a horrorshow of worthless ones like Ana, JJ, Safina...(and an idiot blonde who couldn't even keep JJ from claiming the #1 spot :tape:)

Exactly, it was that the Belgians would knockoff the pretenders and prevent unqualified #1s from becoming the punching bags of the Williams Sisters (by ***** the WTA computer becomes the punching bag of the Williams Sisters).

I'm sure there were a few "Carillo-ists" who were even hoping that the Bell Gims might even take over the tour and knock off the Williams Sisters but that was always going to be wishful thinking.

Saint Kim was playing the US Open with House Money; good for her but now she's got "Real Number 1 Player" expectations. Is that fair? I don't think it is fair that Venus has "Real Number 1 Player" expectations (in that she can be considered a failure while doing better than 95% of the tour).

Henin IS a failure if she doesn't win the French. Posters can't run around declaring her the "if not for this" GOAT if she can't back it up. Serena would be considered a failure if she didn't win a Slam this year.

I think just like when Henin quit, big hitters aren't afraid to face her and expect to beat her so Wimby and the US Open will be extra tough for her.

tennnisfannn
Mar 17th, 2010, 12:15 AM
Well thats kinda what I mean, the real elite players only seem to be taking the Slams seriously, meanwhile with the majority of the smaller tournaments we stll have the high seeds tumbling out in early rounds. Its the same situation as last year.
Indian Wells is a mjor event, Kim and Justine did not lose becuase they don't take this event seriously- points wise and money wise this is of the same class as miami and even a serial slamist like serena knows that. Kim and jutine lost coz thy did not hae the goods on the said dates.

hdfb
Mar 17th, 2010, 12:54 AM
Yeah I was thinking this too when Kim lost. As long as they stop people like Caro from winning slams....

tennisbum79
Mar 17th, 2010, 02:58 AM
There was a change of plan after the novelty of their comeback has worn out.

The new plan is to save their own skin from the people they were supposed to flush out from going deep in the tournament.

Apparently, their fans on this forum were not aware of the change of plan, so they kept beating the drum of the old (and noble) mission of "saving the WTA tour".

Yorker
Mar 17th, 2010, 03:03 AM
Kim looked out of it last night, it was pretty emotionless from her, not a lot of drive, she probably kept getting annoyed when kleybs would hit those shots on the run. I'm more happy their back for the grand slams. It creates more potential winners, anticipated matches, and just overall quality. We have to remember that both belgians are still early in their comebacks, they've both already done well at 1 slam.

The Witch-king
Mar 17th, 2010, 05:28 AM
Indian Wells is a mjor event, Kim and Justine did not lose becuase they don't take this event seriously- points wise and money wise this is of the same class as miami and even a serial slamist like serena knows that. Kim and jutine lost coz thy did not hae the goods on the said dates.

lol @ serial slamist. What you said is true.

Midnight_Robber
Mar 17th, 2010, 07:33 AM
While there maybe posters who had reasonable expectations of Kim and Justine (keeping in mind that they are human in the end) and were simply glad to have them back in the mix I find it a little bit disingenuous that some are now behaving as if the "WTA saviour" narrative was some wild hyperbolic fantasy concocted by the media 'out there'; all the while behaving as if no-one around these parts had *ever* bought into the saviour meme hook, line and sinker,, repeated it ad infinitum and then proceeded to play a hand in propagating this meme around our ever fair and rational board...

But suddenly some of these posters have shifted from believing the hype to now turning around and accusing the hype of being unfair and unduly placing pressure on the Belgian duo - now that they haven't lived up to expectation. Well - you can't have both ways. I try to be consistent. I criticised the tour last year - not for it's lack of Justine or Kim but for the absence of consistent quality play. And there have been several occasions where I've had to level the same criticism at the tour. But it seems as if some people were criticising the tour for a 'lack' of Kim and Justine as if they were some

Face it - for a time, there were a number of posters who truly believed that Kim and Justine were going to save us from the performances of any player not named Serena, and possibly from Serena herself. Like it or not this was a slap in the face to Safina, Serena, Dementieva, Kuznetsova, Venus, Maria, JJ, Ana et. al who irrespective of how well or how poorly they were playing were at least keeping the tour afloat (or bailing water) while neither Kim nor Justine were anywhere in view. So it is kind of amusing to see that when Kim and Justine perform poorly you're not getting anywhere near the level vitriol or disdain that the rest of the tour received and the usual suspects haven't jumped out of the woodwork to conduct a round chorus condemning them for their poor play etc. followed by a bout of hand-wringing as to how irredeemably hopeless the WTA is.

tennnisfannn
Mar 17th, 2010, 08:43 AM
While there maybe posters who had reasonable expectations of Kim and Justine (keeping in mind that they are human in the end) and were simply glad to have them back in the mix I find it a little bit disingenuous that some are now behaving as if the "WTA saviour" narrative was some wild hyperbolic fantasy concocted by the media 'out there'; all the while behaving as if no-one around these parts had *ever* bought into the saviour meme hook, line and sinker,, repeated it ad infinitum and then proceeded to play a hand in propagating this meme around our ever fair and rational board...

But suddenly some of these posters have shifted from believing the hype to now turning around and accusing the hype of being unfair and unduly placing pressure on the Belgian duo - now that they haven't lived up to expectation. Well - you can't have both ways. I try to be consistent. I criticised the tour last year - not for it's lack of Justine or Kim but for the absence of consistent quality play. And there have been several occasions where I've had to level the same criticism at the tour. But it seems as if some people were criticising the tour for a 'lack' of Kim and Justine as if they were some

Face it - for a time, there were a number of posters who truly believed that Kim and Justine were going to save us from the performances of any player not named Serena, and possibly from Serena herself. Like it or not this was a slap in the face to Safina, Serena, Dementieva, Kuznetsova, Venus, Maria, JJ, Ana et. al who irrespective of how well or how poorly they were playing were at least keeping the tour afloat (or bailing water) while neither Kim nor Justine were anywhere in view. So it is kind of amusing to see that when Kim and Justine perform poorly you're not getting anywhere near the level vitriol or disdain that the rest of the tour received and the usual suspects haven't jumped out of the woodwork to conduct a round chorus condemning them for their poor play etc. followed by a bout of hand-wringing as to how irredeemably hopeless the WTA is.
Well said. I have not wtched as many matches mostly because of the time difference and having to be at work for themost art of thises matches, but most of these matches have been very competitive. How many three setters have we witnessed? I don't consider upsets a bad thing, i know how I get excited when a lower ranked player is giving it her all against amuch higher ranked one unless ofcourse it is aginst my favs. It is only after the player is upset that someties I thkn, oh, shoot, I won't get to see her play in a while.
As for saving the tour, that is alot of whishful thinking from people who don't want to see certain players be successful. Is it so hard to appreciate that players like Alysa can play ball, she has taken down ana (the ana who was decent), venus and some good names. It is easier to call attention to her 'weight' than to appreciate that she is playing well.
I think women's tennis will struggle to find a saviour if the so called saviour has to look a certain way or be packaged a certin way. why can't players just be. People whine about base liners and refuse to acknowlege serve vollyers like Stosur or MJMS. They whine about 'error machines' and refuse to acknowledge the consistency of Wozniacki, some whine about how the 'big girls' have an unfair adv. over players like Justine but show little respect for Dulko for taking her down, Alysa get scalled 'fat' but she chases down every ball that the retriever Kim hit back.
The way i see it peole are looking for a 'maria' and that has nothing to do with tennnis.
Rather sexist if you ask me- Federer lost today and no one is going to be spewing out the kind of garbage we see around these parts. nadal is not th force he was before the injury, federer is only showing up for slams like someone famous around these parts.

bandabou
Mar 17th, 2010, 08:50 AM
It ain't that easy, huh? :lol:

bandabou
Mar 17th, 2010, 09:03 AM
:lol: It's just that people couldn't handle it: Serena winning all those majors. SOMEBODY/ANYBODY had to stop her.

Guess what? It ain't gonna matter...they can call whomever they like, Serena has beaten them and WILL continue beating them all.

SIN DIOS NI LEY
Mar 17th, 2010, 09:08 AM
Indian Wells is a major event

No way Jose

Uranus
Mar 17th, 2010, 09:12 AM
Kim was playing better when she came back last year. I'm not sure she's committed and focused enough to dominate.

Justine played one bad match after an amazing month in Australia. Let her breathe, I'm sure she'll be back winning tournaments in the next few weeks. Still has to get used to that 'new game' of hers - hopefully it works.

shoparound
Mar 17th, 2010, 09:14 AM
Yeah I was thinking this too when Kim lost. As long as they stop people like Caro from winning slams....

No one stopped Ana from winning a Slam. Now most idiots dont consider her the worst #1 ever. She had and pretty open draw with a tired Dinara in the finals after barely surviving Jankovic.

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 17th, 2010, 09:19 AM
While there maybe posters who had reasonable expectations of Kim and Justine (keeping in mind that they are human in the end) and were simply glad to have them back in the mix I find it a little bit disingenuous that some are now behaving as if the "WTA saviour" narrative was some wild hyperbolic fantasy concocted by the media 'out there'; all the while behaving as if no-one around these parts had *ever* bought into the saviour meme hook, line and sinker,, repeated it ad infinitum and then proceeded to play a hand in propagating this meme around our ever fair and rational board...

But suddenly some of these posters have shifted from believing the hype to now turning around and accusing the hype of being unfair and unduly placing pressure on the Belgian duo - now that they haven't lived up to expectation. Well - you can't have both ways. I try to be consistent. I criticised the tour last year - not for it's lack of Justine or Kim but for the absence of consistent quality play. And there have been several occasions where I've had to level the same criticism at the tour. But it seems as if some people were criticising the tour for a 'lack' of Kim and Justine as if they were some

Face it - for a time, there were a number of posters who truly believed that Kim and Justine were going to save us from the performances of any player not named Serena, and possibly from Serena herself. Like it or not this was a slap in the face to Safina, Serena, Dementieva, Kuznetsova, Venus, Maria, JJ, Ana et. al who irrespective of how well or how poorly they were playing were at least keeping the tour afloat (or bailing water) while neither Kim nor Justine were anywhere in view. So it is kind of amusing to see that when Kim and Justine perform poorly you're not getting anywhere near the level vitriol or disdain that the rest of the tour received and the usual suspects haven't jumped out of the woodwork to conduct a round chorus condemning them for their poor play etc. followed by a bout of hand-wringing as to how irredeemably hopeless the WTA is.

Got a spread some first, but :bowdown: :bowdown:

If anyone asks how I feel on the issue, I'll just refer them to you! :yeah:

Olórin
Mar 17th, 2010, 02:28 PM
While there maybe posters who had reasonable expectations of Kim and Justine (keeping in mind that they are human in the end) and were simply glad to have them back in the mix I find it a little bit disingenuous that some are now behaving as if the "WTA saviour" narrative was some wild hyperbolic fantasy concocted by the media 'out there'; all the while behaving as if no-one around these parts had *ever* bought into the saviour meme hook, line and sinker,, repeated it ad infinitum and then proceeded to play a hand in propagating this meme around our ever fair and rational board...

But suddenly some of these posters have shifted from believing the hype to now turning around and accusing the hype of being unfair and unduly placing pressure on the Belgian duo - now that they haven't lived up to expectation. Well - you can't have both ways. I try to be consistent. I criticised the tour last year - not for it's lack of Justine or Kim but for the absence of consistent quality play. And there have been several occasions where I've had to level the same criticism at the tour. But it seems as if some people were criticising the tour for a 'lack' of Kim and Justine as if they were some

Face it - for a time, there were a number of posters who truly believed that Kim and Justine were going to save us from the performances of any player not named Serena, and possibly from Serena herself. Like it or not this was a slap in the face to Safina, Serena, Dementieva, Kuznetsova, Venus, Maria, JJ, Ana et. al who irrespective of how well or how poorly they were playing were at least keeping the tour afloat (or bailing water) while neither Kim nor Justine were anywhere in view. So it is kind of amusing to see that when Kim and Justine perform poorly you're not getting anywhere near the level vitriol or disdain that the rest of the tour received and the usual suspects haven't jumped out of the woodwork to conduct a round chorus condemning them for their poor play etc. followed by a bout of hand-wringing as to how irredeemably hopeless the WTA is.

Very well said. Threads such as this are entirely justified in my view.

DemWilliamsGulls
Mar 17th, 2010, 02:38 PM
I never expected them to "save" the tour...but I think they will turn it up at the slams. Things will get more intersting later in the year I think. I'm going to be honest (and many know this deep down inside but wont come out and say it) but as long as Venus and Serena are playing...I think the tour will always be pretty safe.

DragonFlame
Mar 17th, 2010, 04:03 PM
Justine played 3 tournaments reaching the final of 2, and an early loss in the other. Give her some time for godsakes. :shrug:

The first 'small' setback and some people are on it like dogs. :lol: Lets just wait for the clayseason shall we. ;)

fifiricci
Mar 17th, 2010, 04:09 PM
While there maybe posters who had reasonable expectations of Kim and Justine (keeping in mind that they are human in the end) and were simply glad to have them back in the mix I find it a little bit disingenuous that some are now behaving as if the "WTA saviour" narrative was some wild hyperbolic fantasy concocted by the media 'out there'; all the while behaving as if no-one around these parts had *ever* bought into the saviour meme hook, line and sinker,, repeated it ad infinitum and then proceeded to play a hand in propagating this meme around our ever fair and rational board...

But suddenly some of these posters have shifted from believing the hype to now turning around and accusing the hype of being unfair and unduly placing pressure on the Belgian duo - now that they haven't lived up to expectation. Well - you can't have both ways. I try to be consistent. I criticised the tour last year - not for it's lack of Justine or Kim but for the absence of consistent quality play. And there have been several occasions where I've had to level the same criticism at the tour. But it seems as if some people were criticising the tour for a 'lack' of Kim and Justine as if they were some

Face it - for a time, there were a number of posters who truly believed that Kim and Justine were going to save us from the performances of any player not named Serena, and possibly from Serena herself. Like it or not this was a slap in the face to Safina, Serena, Dementieva, Kuznetsova, Venus, Maria, JJ, Ana et. al who irrespective of how well or how poorly they were playing were at least keeping the tour afloat (or bailing water) while neither Kim nor Justine were anywhere in view. So it is kind of amusing to see that when Kim and Justine perform poorly you're not getting anywhere near the level vitriol or disdain that the rest of the tour received and the usual suspects haven't jumped out of the woodwork to conduct a round chorus condemning them for their poor play etc. followed by a bout of hand-wringing as to how irredeemably hopeless the WTA is.

Well said. Who decided the Belgians could save the tour? Their fans wanted them back on the tour for nostalgic and personal reasons. It's a pity that the original shine has worn off so quickly!? Womens' tennis is pretty pants all round at the moment and I'd much rather watch the mens' game for the time being. At least the men are more consistent and most of the time manage to avoid the kind of car crash matches the women put us through on a regular basis ..............

DragonFlame
Mar 17th, 2010, 04:10 PM
:lol: It's just that people couldn't handle it: Serena winning all those majors. SOMEBODY/ANYBODY had to stop her.

Guess what? It ain't gonna matter...they can call whomever they like, Serena has beaten them and WILL continue beating them all.

It already did matter. And obviously like we've seen in the last 2 slams it's gonna be a lot more competitive in slams to come then it was in 08/09.

Kim beat Serena at her favourite/best slam.
Serena beat Justine at her favourite/best slam.

Lets just see what the clay and grass will bring us, shall we. ;)

The Witch-king
Mar 17th, 2010, 04:52 PM
I love the "they just came back from retirement!" and "they only played X number of tournaments!" protestations, considering that the whole point was that the tour was supposed to be so mediocre and inadequate that the Belgians were supposed to be able to just show up and EDUCATE us on what real tennis was. That was the gist of many of the comments after the US open anyway. But now that that hasn't happened ...

BuTtErFrEnA
Mar 17th, 2010, 05:17 PM
:lol: come time for wimbledon we'll still be hearing the "just got out of retirement" excuse

Joe.
Mar 17th, 2010, 09:35 PM
its a shame kim isnt doing great :(

but as for henin, she can play as shit as she likes. infact, the shitter the better :)

Donny
Mar 17th, 2010, 10:33 PM
It already did matter. And obviously like we've seen in the last 2 slams it's gonna be a lot more competitive in slams to come then it was in 08/09.

Kim beat Serena at her favourite/best slam.
Serena beat Justine at her favourite/best slam.

Lets just see what the clay and grass will bring us, shall we. ;)

Her best major is the AO.

And Dementieva gave Serena a far harder time at Wimbledon than Justine did in the AO final this year. In fact, Azarenka challenged Serena more than Justine did at the AO this year. And of course, Kuznetsova beat Serena at the FO last year. I've no idea what you're talking about it being 'tougher' all of a sudden, as if it was easy for Serena at the slams against players not from Belgium.

Cosantoir
Mar 17th, 2010, 10:48 PM
Her best major is the AO.

And Dementieva gave Serena a far harder time at Wimbledon than Justine did in the AO final this year. In fact, Azarenka challenged Serena more than Justine did at the AO this year. And of course, Kuznetsova beat Serena at the FO last year. I've no idea what you're talking about it being 'tougher' all of a sudden, as if it was easy for Serena at the slams against players not from Belgium.

Clijsters' best slam is not the Australian Open. In terms of results yes, but Clijsters' play on some of those runs are very very very shaky.

In Kim's last 3 ventures to New York 2003, 2005, and 2009 she has no less than made the final and has beaten everyone that is ever mattered there sans Justine.

To put it in perspective for you: Clijsters has beaten Venus, Serena, Sharapova, Davenport, Mauresmo, Dementieva, Kuznetsova, Pierce in New York.

Of those 7 she has played Serena, Davenport, Mauresmo, and Sharapova at Australian and never beat any of them there.

Her best major for her game and anything else is definitely New York.

Midnight_Robber
Mar 17th, 2010, 11:18 PM
Donny and Cosantoir - "Kim beat Serena at her favourite/best slam" is an ambiguous sentence - :rolleyes: - precisely because the pronoun ("her") can refer to either Kim OR Serena and doesn't specify. So Donny assumes the 'her' refers to Serena - Consantoir assumes that the 'her' refers Kim so you're both talking at cross purposes

It *can* be read either way but in light of recent history I'd have to assume that the poster who wrote the sentence was actually referring to Kim's favourite slam if the claim were to actually make any sense. :o (After all, that's where Kim recently won, and obviously Kim didn't win in Oz so they can't be referring to the Australian Open.) Same with "Serena beat Justine at her favourite/best slam", though again with a bit of context, Serena is clearly the 'her' in question.)

"Kim beat Serena at the USO, which is Kim's best slam while Serena's best slam is the AO where she proceeded to beat Justine in the finals." Or something like that.

Dunlop1
Mar 17th, 2010, 11:23 PM
Not a fan of Kim so she's on her own :o, but Justine returned to the tour with a revamped game and has played 3 tournies.

Give it time to see how she adjusts to her new game. Thread is premature IMO.

Midnight_Robber
Mar 18th, 2010, 12:02 AM
The thread is not premature because it (quite rightly) ridicules the validity of the overblown 'saviour meme' in the first place. You'd only think this was premature unless you think the tour needs to be saved or that 1 or both Belgians are saviours and you are patiently waiting for them to 'save' us all from bad tennis (and are secretly holding out for this to happen. :rolleyes:)

Sure, I'm willing to give Justine time to see whether the new game comes together or not (which could be interesting) but I'm NOT going to give her 'time' to single-handedly 'save' the tour since that is not her or any other player's role on the tour. Yet this (the Belgians are going to save us from mediocre tennis!) was a widely circulated, popular if implausible notion that the OP refers to and dismisses.

I, for one am not "waiting' for Kim or Justine to perform some dramatic miracle rescue (because that's what it would be if two players could turn the tour around 180) and ( have zero expectations of them on that front because I see them as good/elite players in the mix who'll have their good and bad days like anybody else. If they play well, I'll enjoy it, but I don't believe for a second that everything hangs in the balance *because* of them; nor do I don't think that the quality and the worth of the entire WTA can be determined simply by *their* good OR poor play.

When they returned my reaction was one of curiousity and anticipation but I didn't fall down on my knees and start thanking God that they'd returned because I doubted (and continue to doubt) that they were going to have the stupendous impact that so many people seemed to expect.

Even if Justine plays well this year, she's just an individual and this won't address the real underlying problem/question. And that is whether or not enough of the elite and the upcoming younger players (in the plural) can pull themselves together and play with enough consistency to generate depth and even a few rivalries? *That* is the only thing that is going to 'rescue' the tour. (i.e. the tour - not just one or two players that people happen to like.)

No single player - be they named Serena or Justine has the answer to that question.
Now, if Justine holds up her end of the bargain and plays well then she could play an important role in that process and could help aid it along - but she alone could never *be* the entire process, let alone the tour. Same with Kim. We need as many players as possible playing well. The tour is not the "Kim and Justine show" however much some of their fans would like to believe that this is the case.

Uranus
Mar 18th, 2010, 12:23 AM
Justine's best slam is RG for sure :shrug:.

Larrybidd
Mar 18th, 2010, 09:56 AM
The thread is not premature because it (quite rightly) ridicules the validity of the overblown 'saviour meme' in the first place. You'd only think this was premature unless you think the tour needs to be saved or that 1 or both Belgians are saviours and you are patiently waiting for them to 'save' us all from bad tennis (and are secretly holding out for this to happen. :rolleyes:)

Sure, I'm willing to give Justine time to see whether the new game comes together or not (which could be interesting) but I'm NOT going to give her 'time' to single-handedly 'save' the

Wonderful post!! I rarely say this, but i couldn't have say this better myself.

If fans would stop whining a minute, they would realize that the WTA has never had so many good players - even considering that the Serbs and Masha have kinda fallen back. The Belgians add to an already strong mix of players well capable of taking down any of the heavyweights on a given night. That wasn't really the case back when Evert, Navi, or even Graf ruled to tour.

bandabou
Mar 18th, 2010, 11:38 AM
It already did matter. And obviously like we've seen in the last 2 slams it's gonna be a lot more competitive in slams to come then it was in 08/09.

Kim beat Serena at her favourite/best slam.
Serena beat Justine at her favourite/best slam.

Lets just see what the clay and grass will bring us, shall we. ;)

:lol: I guess you're talking about the finals..because even at the Oz open, Juju wasn't Serena's hardest match.

But it's good.

StephenUK
Mar 18th, 2010, 12:35 PM
I think it is the press's fault. They spent most of 2009 harping on about Safina did not deserve to be No 1 and in the end, she lived up (or should I say down)to the billing. Beyond Serena when she felt like it, Venus having declined in 09, there seemed no great players at the top of the game. The return of Justine and Kim has brought new excitement to the game but to see them as saviours from Day One smacks of desperation. They have both done amazingly well so far, but it remains to be seen what will happen over the next few months. Kim seems to have gone into the doldrums since her US win and Justine is clearly a work in progress. The other factor, of course, is the fact that Maria has been unable to rise to the occasion since her comeback and may never be a great again. Meanwhile, there doesn't seem to be any worldbeaters coming up to challenge - Vika seems unable to get beyond a grand slam QF and Caroline is consistent but hardly earth-shattering.

I think you have to give the Belgians more time. Capriati took a few years before she was back in the swing. Justine and Kim need more time to develop that consistency that they had before - at the moment, they are suffering from the fluctuations in form that bedevil the rest of the top players. I am fascinated to see how Justine performs on clay, whether she will try her new game and risk all for Wimbledon or revert to a clay game and get Roland Garros in the bag. The fact is that no-one holds a candle to her on clay, but is she prepared to do a Lendl and sacrifice clay for that final Wimbledon win? I very much doubt she will Wimbledon this year unless somehow the Williams sisters suffer shock defeats/injuries - it could happen as you can never predict anything in tennis these days.

Looking for the Belgians to 'save tennis' can never be more than a sticking plaster as they only have a few years left. The worrying thing is the lack of younger talent in the game and the fact that so many youngsters seem to have slumped/retired - not just Vaidisova, but Cornet, Paszek, Krajicek, Larcher de Brito.

BuTtErFrEnA
Mar 18th, 2010, 01:18 PM
I think it is the press's fault. They spent most of 2009 harping on about Safina did not deserve to be No 1 and in the end, she lived up (or should I say down)to the billing. Beyond Serena when she felt like it, Venus having declined in 09, there seemed no great players at the top of the game. The return of Justine and Kim has brought new excitement to the game but to see them as saviours from Day One smacks of desperation. They have both done amazingly well so far, but it remains to be seen what will happen over the next few months. Kim seems to have gone into the doldrums since her US win and Justine is clearly a work in progress. The other factor, of course, is the fact that Maria has been unable to rise to the occasion since her comeback and may never be a great again. Meanwhile, there doesn't seem to be any worldbeaters coming up to challenge - Vika seems unable to get beyond a grand slam QF and Caroline is consistent but hardly earth-shattering.

I think you have to give the Belgians more time. Capriati took a few years before she was back in the swing. Justine and Kim need more time to develop that consistency that they had before - at the moment, they are suffering from the fluctuations in form that bedevil the rest of the top players. I am fascinated to see how Justine performs on clay, whether she will try her new game and risk all for Wimbledon or revert to a clay game and get Roland Garros in the bag. The fact is that no-one holds a candle to her on clay, but is she prepared to do a Lendl and sacrifice clay for that final Wimbledon win? I very much doubt she will Wimbledon this year unless somehow the Williams sisters suffer shock defeats/injuries - it could happen as you can never predict anything in tennis these days.

Looking for the Belgians to 'save tennis' can never be more than a sticking plaster as they only have a few years left. The worrying thing is the lack of younger talent in the game and the fact that so many youngsters seem to have slumped/retired - not just Vaidisova, but Cornet, Paszek, Krajicek, Larcher de Brito.


error...while you had the press going on, you still had posters here who treated the return of the belgians as the second coming of Jesus...all of a sudden serena would have more challenges and wouldn't win slams this year...the pretenders were going to drop out of the top 10 immediately and make room for said belgians etc...

all you have to do is revisit the brisbane final result thread and see how that match was lauded as the star in the sky leading to where Jesus would be found....the match wasn't any better than the others the wta produced: it contained some nice points here and there, but still contained choking from both players and a lot of errors...it's simply because it was jh vs kim that it has received the praise it has - a matter of who is playing and wins, not a matter of how it is played and won...

bandabou
Mar 18th, 2010, 01:33 PM
error...while you had the press going on, you still had posters here who treated the return of the belgians as the second coming of Jesus...all of a sudden serena would have more challenges and wouldn't win slams this year...the pretenders were going to drop out of the top 10 immediately and make room for said belgians etc...

all you have to do is revisit the brisbane final result thread and see how that match was lauded as the star in the sky leading to where Jesus would be found....the match wasn't any better than the others the wta produced: it contained some nice points here and there, but still contained choking from both players and a lot of errors...it's simply because it was jh vs kim that it has received the praise it has - a matter of who is playing and wins, not a matter of how it is played and won...

Uhum...the Belgians coming back is good, but people were saying that Serena ONLY was winning because the Belgians were gone. Brisbane was labeled match of decade..blah blah.

And then came Oz open..Kim almost got double-bageled by Nadia Petrova and Serena showed that her wins were no flukes.

DefyingGravity
Mar 18th, 2010, 02:08 PM
Honestly, when so much success happens when you aren't ready for it at any point in your career, it's going to wreck the next couple of months. Look at what happened to Caro after that great U.S. Open and YEC. Totally just fell off the wagon until about now.

Kim is gonna feel it too. I don't expect her to keep losing 3R often, but she's not going to have immediate success in places anymore. There's only so much of your game that people will be tricked by if they haven't seen it for a while, then they see you losing to players like Petrova, Kleybanova, Dulko and just destroy you. Justine as well. They will rebound and get back into the top 10, but they're human. The women's tour needed restructuring as a whole, and no amount of stars would have done that for them. Hell, we could have Myskina, Capriati, Pierce, Davenport, Hingis back and we would still have upsets galore because the way the schedule and the way everything works is just about ass backwards. You can't blame the women for something that has gotten so ridiculous.

Who can play their best when they're flying to God Knows Where every week. This is probably the first time that these women haven't had to fly all over creation to play their sport SINCE the Australian season. The level of play, IMO, gets better on clay and grass because they all get to stay in the same spot with about the same time zones and they can adjust better.

So in order to actually save the tour, they'd have to try again. Reschedule with people's health and sanity in mind, and try again.

Nicolás89
Mar 18th, 2010, 07:58 PM
Who needs the belgians when we have Azarenka, Wozniacki and A. Radwanska. :hearts:

Midnight_Robber
Mar 18th, 2010, 08:57 PM
I think it is the press's fault. They spent most of 2009 harping on about Safina did not deserve to be No 1 and in the end, she lived up (or should I say down)to the billing. Beyond Serena when she felt like it, Venus having declined in 09, there seemed no great players at the top of the game. The return of Justine and Kim has brought new excitement to the game but to see them as saviours from Day One smacks of desperation. They have both done amazingly well so far, but it remains to be seen what will happen over the next few months. Kim seems to have gone into the doldrums since her US win and Justine is clearly a work in progress. The other factor, of course, is the fact that Maria has been unable to rise to the occasion since her comeback and may never be a great again. Meanwhile, there doesn't seem to be any worldbeaters coming up to challenge - Vika seems unable to get beyond a grand slam QF and Caroline is consistent but hardly earth-shattering.

I think you have to give the Belgians more time. Capriati took a few years before she was back in the swing. Justine and Kim need more time to develop that consistency that they had before - at the moment, they are suffering from the fluctuations in form that bedevil the rest of the top players. I am fascinated to see how Justine performs on clay, whether she will try her new game and risk all for Wimbledon or revert to a clay game and get Roland Garros in the bag. The fact is that no-one holds a candle to her on clay, but is she prepared to do a Lendl and sacrifice clay for that final Wimbledon win? I very much doubt she will Wimbledon this year unless somehow the Williams sisters suffer shock defeats/injuries - it could happen as you can never predict anything in tennis these days.

Looking for the Belgians to 'save tennis' can never be more than a sticking plaster as they only have a few years left. The worrying thing is the lack of younger talent in the game and the fact that so many youngsters seem to have slumped/retired - not just Vaidisova, but Cornet, Paszek, Krajicek, Larcher de Brito.

I strongly agree with most of what you said StephenUK except for your first sentence. Sure, the media played a significant role in generating the hype and are partly culpable for built-up expectations regarding Kim and Justine - but there were posters who were generating and circulating their own hype and projecting their own sky-high, pressurising expectations on to Kim and Justine the minute that their un-retirements were announced - even before the media had had time to get the press rolling. And while the media is hugely influential, there comes a point where an adult human being has to take some degree of responsibility for what they believe and which implausible narratives they're willing to buy into. Fact of the matter is the media didn't "mislead" people because most people were more than happy - more than willing - to be led in that direction. The reason why people didn't question a supposition that (to me at least) sounded highly unlikely was because they were being given a narrative that they found attractive and so had no desire to be critical of or circumspect about it. They were being told what they WANTED to hear and so had no objection or scepticism.

That, and what Butterena said upthread ^^^(at 1.18 am.) Especially about the error-strewn, choke-a-minute final in Brisbane. Sure, it had it's moments but it seemed that people's excitement about the return of Kim and Justine clouded their critical faculties about the overall quality of the on-court play. When I look at it, I think the Dubai final has already been a superior WTA final to Brisbane in terms of actual quality play (as opposed to "drama"). It had much better stats from both players, compared to what we got in Brisbane. (i.e. Players were able to hold serve and their nerve for the most part, a positive winners to errors ratio, blistering clean shot-making with instances of variety etc.) Yet to read most of this board you'd certainly never know it. :rolleyes: Which leaves me to conclude that Butterena is correct when s/he states in a sig-worthy quote that it's "a matter of who is playing and wins, not a matter of how it is played and won..."

And again, I wouldn't even have too much of a problem with this if there was some honesty and self-awareness to go along with it. Instead this tends to come from posters who a.) believe that there is such a thing as 'objectivity' (newsflash: There isn't) and b.) proceed to posture as if they are not only the most knowledgeable posters about 'tennis the sport' but like to pretend that they're magically above mere fan bias (unlike 'the rest' of us.:rolleyes:) Well, I have my biases - but anyone who was waving the 'saviour meme' about and trying to argue about it as if it were some kind of factual basis of reality or a blueprint for how the tour *would* unfold in 2010 certainly demonstrated that they have theirs too....

MBM
Mar 18th, 2010, 09:06 PM
i hate the phrase "saving the WTA tour". It didn't need saving, it just needed a couple of years to readjust! So many good players just disappeared (or stopped playing well) right after each other so there were no up and coming players quite ready to fill their shoes

Gdsimmons
Mar 18th, 2010, 09:39 PM
error...while you had the press going on, you still had posters here who treated the return of the belgians as the second coming of Jesus...all of a sudden serena would have more challenges and wouldn't win slams this year...the pretenders were going to drop out of the top 10 immediately and make room for said belgians etc...

all you have to do is revisit the brisbane final result thread and see how that match was lauded as the star in the sky leading to where Jesus would be found....the match wasn't any better than the others the wta produced: it contained some nice points here and there, but still contained choking from both players and a lot of errors...it's simply because it was jh vs kim that it has received the praise it has - a matter of who is playing and wins, not a matter of how it is played and won...

THIS!!

I completely agree! It was so annoying and just wrong how people were acting as if Clijsters and Henin's return was jesus coming for the rapture. As if those two would just hop into the WTA and kill the competition. As if no one had an inkling of a chance against them. Im glad people are seeing the light and realizing the truth

Adaora
Mar 18th, 2010, 09:50 PM
I always thot Kim got lucky with the US Open win.

danieln1
Mar 18th, 2010, 10:08 PM
I always thot Kim got lucky with the US Open win.

She would have lost to Venus if her knee wasn´t bothering Venus...

And Serena got robbed, she could have saved those match points and turned it around

Yeaj, luck helped, and faced a first time slam finalist, all those things helped her to win, but it´s not all totally luck, she played well to win the tournament

Raiden
Mar 18th, 2010, 11:02 PM
I always thot Kim got lucky with the US Open win.:lol:

Nothing better that a Yank indulging in Monday morning quarterbacking.

I still say based only on the performances Kim and Juju alone so far, based on that alone, there is indeed a proces of saving women's tennis going on right now. That's right I said women's tennis (not the tour as the OP suggested) the headlines throughout 2009 were about saving wimmen's tennis, not just the tour. One can't really completely separate the tour from the majors.

After all, the scandal during the absence of Kim & Juju was that the likes of Safina and JJ were becoming n°1 but consistently failing to step up to the plate and have a realistic go at a slam. Serena was practically bored to death to such an extent that she started bragging about being n°2. That was what was causing a scandal. That was what 'folks' were referring to when they were scoffing at women's tennis

And from that calamity is what Kim and Juju managed to get WTA out of in less that 6 months. If it wasn't for Kim's return, an uber-pusher who has yet to mature and develop would have grabbed the slam title in New York and we wouldn't have the best AO slam final in years if Juju wasn't back in action.

So I don't wanna sound pushy but I say mission accomplished already :cool:

Raiden
Mar 18th, 2010, 11:05 PM
I always thot Kim got lucky with the US Open win.:lol:

Nothing better that a Yank indulging in Monday morning quarterbacking.

I still say based only on the performances so far, based on that alone, 'the Belgians' are indeed in the process of saving women's tennis... This is a process not an incident.

By the way the headlines was saving women's tennis, i.e. one can't separate the tour from the majors here. The whole disgrace of WTA during the absence of Kim & Juju was that the likes of Safina and JJ were becoming N°1 but consistently failing to step up to the plate and have a realistic go at a slam. That was what was causing a scandal. That was what people were referring to when they were scoffing at women's tennis

Andfrom that calamity is what Kim and Juju managed to get WTA by the scruff of it's tail in less that 6 months. If it wasn't for Kim's return, an uber-pusher who has yet to mature and develop would have grabbed a grand slam title in New York and we wouldn't have the best AO final in years if Juju wasn't back in action.

I don't wanna sound Bushy but I say mission accomplished already.

Vlover
Mar 18th, 2010, 11:09 PM
a matter of who is playing and wins, not a matter of how it is played and won..."[/B]

And again, I wouldn't even have too much of a problem with this if there was some honesty and self-awareness to go along with it. Instead this tends to come from posters who a.) believe that there is such a thing as 'objectivity' (newsflash: There isn't) and b.) proceed to posture as if they are not only the most knowledgeable posters about 'tennis the sport' but like to pretend that they're magically above mere fan bias (unlike 'the rest' of us.:rolleyes:) ... waving the 'saviour meme' about and trying to argue about it as if it were some kind of factual basis of reality or a blueprint for how the tour *would* unfold in 2010
I totally concur with both you and Butterena on this! Notice that some of the same sentiments were also applied to IW as the same group had great expectations that at least one or both Belgians would make the final.:tape: It would appear they now can't wait to start the clay season and hope things get better there.:lol:

Raiden
Mar 18th, 2010, 11:22 PM
^ That's right. Despite IW, it's still safe to bet that all of this year's slams would be divided between the Belgians and the W-sisters, just like old times.

Two of the other contenders Pova & Ana are toast as far as 2010 is concerned and, as for Kuzzy, well, during that exo match at Madison Square Garden, it actually appeared as if she and not Kim who is coming from retirement.

Midnight_Robber
Mar 19th, 2010, 12:26 AM
:lol:

Nothing better that a Yank indulging in Monday morning quarterbacking.

I still say based only on the performances so far, based on that alone, 'the Belgians' are indeed in the process of saving women's tennis... This is a process not an incident.

By the way the headlines was saving women's tennis, i.e. one can't separate the tour from the majors here. The whole disgrace of WTA during the absence of Kim & Juju was that the likes of Safina and JJ were becoming N°1 but consistently failing to step up to the plate and have a realistic go at a slam. That was what was causing a scandal. That was what people were referring to when they were scoffing at women's tennis

Andfrom that calamity is what Kim and Juju managed to get WTA by the scruff of it's tail in less that 6 months. If it wasn't for Kim's return, an uber-pusher who has yet to mature and develop would have grabbed a grand slam title in New York and we wouldn't have the best AO final in years if Juju wasn't back in action.

I don't wanna sound Bushy but I say mission accomplished already.

I'll credit you for at least sticking to your guns and admitting that you embrace the 'saviour' narrative instead of back-peddling into revisionism. However:


1.) Caro still has her chances to climb further up the rankings during IW and could go as high as number 2 (I think). Again, Kim and Justine have done nothing remotely useful to prevent this 'supposed' catastrophe or whatever. If Caro falls short it will be no thanks to either of those two.

2.) "If it wasn't for Kim's return, an uber-pusher who has yet to mature and develop would have grabbed a grand slam title in New York..." :confused: So - if Serena had won the semi instead of Kim, then of course Caro would have whipped Serena and would have won the USO? Because *only* super-Kim could have save the day and beaten Caro? :lol: Face it - given Caro's game-style and her lack of experience whoever won the Kim-Serena semi-final on the other side of the draw was the likely winner of the whole tournament. :rolleyes:

3.) I agree that Justine was half of a relatively competitive final - one which was decent but hardly brilliant. (Again, credit for Justine for her role in it, but I find it funny how you extend absolutely no credit to Serena for it - almost as if she was just a bystander in the match and had nothing to do with the quality of play that ensued. As if Justine 'single-handedly' made it a decent finals. ("If it weren't for Justine...") Uh - no. Serena needed to play her part as defending champion and hold up her end of the bargain, which she did, but which you can't acknowledge because it gets in the way of your rather fragile 'saviour' narrative. And it's precisely this type of 'logic' that is being called into question here. Some Justine fans are actually indulging in precisely the same shoddy thinking that they accuse Serena fans of (i.e. behaving as if 'their' player alone determines the quality of the match or the outcome.)

Last time I checked it actually takes two players to make a match competitive. :rolleyes: Justine alone did not accomplish this.

4.) I don't see how Kim and Justine could have correctively grabbed the WTA by the 'scruff of the neck' when (like Serena) they've barely played since the AO and (unlike Serena) both have crashed out early of their latest tournament. If, as I suspect, the Belgians end up playing a light schedule and saving themselves for the slams (because they're there for themselves rather than to 'save' the tour or any other such noble "mission") I wonder if they'll draw the same outrage and ire that the likes of Serena tends to?

5.) It's interesting to me that Justine has made 1 WTA final and 1 slam final apiece this year - just as Serena has (except Justine hasn't actually won any of her finals yet.) But somehow Justine's two finals is magically 'saving' the tour, but Serena's two finals aren't? :confused: Why is that? Kim winning a slam (last year) 'saves' the tour, but Serena winning slams (plural) last year, then already winning one this year isn't 'saving' the tour? Again, why is that?
Hmmm. Can only certain specified players save the tour? :rolleyes:

6.) To repeat - most of us already know that it's a process. Many of us even think that the Belgians could play a role in that process. Unlike you however, we just don't make the mistake of thinking that they *are* the process or are the only ones involved in the process. :rolleyes:

Raiden
Mar 19th, 2010, 12:58 AM
I'll credit you for at least sticking to your guns and admitting that you embrace the 'saviour' narrative instead of back-peddling into revisionism.:lol: That's right. I ain't gonna crawl into some shed just cuz Kim & Juju failed to blitz their way through the Mojave desert. In fact this IW result is a blessing in disguise. They won't get complacent (start acting as if they're Serenas and appear at tournaments without adequate training/matchplay).

Unlike you however, we just don't make the mistake of thinking that they *are* the process or are the only ones involved in the process.Don't get your panties in a twist. No one is thinking that. In fact, the whole saving bla bla was not that Serena was not doing any saving but the fact that she was all alone in that endeavor. The return of K and J is also good for Serena cuz she's the kind of player who raises her level when she plays against better opponents.

moby
Mar 19th, 2010, 07:55 AM
While there maybe posters who had reasonable expectations of Kim and Justine (keeping in mind that they are human in the end) and were simply glad to have them back in the mix I find it a little bit disingenuous that some are now behaving as if the "WTA saviour" narrative was some wild hyperbolic fantasy concocted by the media 'out there'; all the while behaving as if no-one around these parts had *ever* bought into the saviour meme hook, line and sinker,, repeated it ad infinitum and then proceeded to play a hand in propagating this meme around our ever fair and rational board...To begin with, I think it is a bit disingenuous to claim that it is "a little bit disingenuous that some are now behaving as if the "WTA saviour" narrative was some wild hyperbolic fantasy concocted by the media ... behaving as if no-one around these parts had *ever* bought into the saviour meme". I don't really see evidence of this backpeddling that you speak of? It's merely setting up a strawman and tearing it apart. There were always "believers" and "doubters", to continue the religious idiom, and I don't think people are denying that. (There will of course, always be a few aberrants, but certainly nothing on a scale big enough to be made a fuss about.)

Next, I don't think it makes much sense to put Kim and Justine together. Your criticism must be considered in the context of history - in the linear passage of events unfolding in the past months. First of all, few thought Kim was going to save the tour when she announced her comeback. Polls before the comeback showed that most people thought Kim would end up in the top 5 - 20 range, be a contender (but not a favourite) at the slams. And that is exactly where she is now. Expectations only got out of control after she won the US Open in only her first slam back, and in the process breaking all kinds of comeback records. (In hindsight, it seems as though her level has settled where tennis fans thought she would be before her comeback.)

Expectations for Justine, yes, were inflated, partly because she had always been the better Belgian - so "if Kim can do it, why can't Justine?". Even then, there were plenty of doubters within groups of fans and non-fans alike who felt that Justine's more subtle game needed more time to fine-tune and that she would surely not find her form as quickly as Kim had. And to be fair, other than the Dulko fiasco, Justine has been 2 out of 2. She gave tennis fans great tournaments in Brisbane and the AO (without her it would have been Demented, Zheng, Kleybanova, Wickmayer, or Petrova in the final - what would surely have been an easy routing by Serena).

Another point: I think this whole "saving the tour" business has drawn so much flake because different people are interpreting it differently. I suspect (but have no confirmation), that most people who think that Justine and Kim will "save the tour" think they will do so not by dominating it week in week out, but by serving as a catalyst, by increasing the number of elite players to critical mass.

Let's face it - quite a few of those who are unhappy that Justine and Kim could even possibly be considered to save the tour are those who jokingly or otherwise, bandy about "Williams Tennis Association" as a backronym for WTA. This is not surprising, for they perceive "Saviour Kim" or "Saviour Justine" to be a slight on Serena (and Venus) and her performances in their absence. At the same time, the irony cannot be missed.

bandabou
Mar 19th, 2010, 08:31 AM
:lol:

Nothing better that a Yank indulging in Monday morning quarterbacking.

I still say based only on the performances so far, based on that alone, 'the Belgians' are indeed in the process of saving women's tennis... This is a process not an incident.

By the way the headlines was saving women's tennis, i.e. one can't separate the tour from the majors here. The whole disgrace of WTA during the absence of Kim & Juju was that the likes of Safina and JJ were becoming N°1 but consistently failing to step up to the plate and have a realistic go at a slam. That was what was causing a scandal. That was what people were referring to when they were scoffing at women's tennis

Andfrom that calamity is what Kim and Juju managed to get WTA by the scruff of it's tail in less that 6 months. If it wasn't for Kim's return, an uber-pusher who has yet to mature and develop would have grabbed a grand slam title in New York and we wouldn't have the best AO final in years if Juju wasn't back in action.

I don't wanna sound Bushy but I say mission accomplished already.

:rolls: So u think Wozniacki would've beaten Serena, if Serena had beaten Kim?! Please..

duhcity
Mar 19th, 2010, 08:36 AM
I value what I have. I prefer Serena playing whenever she wants, top players (Belgian's included) dropping like flies every once in a while, and a little drama and flair to the constant crowning of Federer and Nadal over on the ATP.

Apoleb
Mar 19th, 2010, 08:51 AM
The tour in 2009 needed saving. There was Serena in slams and a bunch of drones (Jankovic, Dementieva, Safina, Kuznetsova - that have a combined slam total of two - with Kuznetsova winning her first GS in 5 years on clay, the surface where WS haven't done anything significant for the last 7 years) with Venus flashing at Wimbledon. If Justine and Kim perform up to expectations, week-in week-out, with competitive matches between them and the WS/high quality matches, the theory of them saving the tour holds ground. Of course, that does not mean that they are the *only* ones responsible for the more appreciated tour. Saving it here is in the context of them being critically and crucially added to Serena, and Venus in Wimbledon. Serena and Venus are just as important. A non-shoulderpova Maria can also play a critical role in "saving the tour." And the fact is that up to Brisbane and to a certain extent the AO (because Kim bombed out), the idea had a lot of merit. 1) Kim had upset Serena in the USO in good quality/drama fest. 2) Justine and Kim brought it in a non-slam. 3) Justine had a great run in the AO with a hyped and competitive final, that brought a lot of media back to the WTA (Kim however was distinctly bad). Things have started to go bad for both them, so obviously if they continue playing like they did in IW, you can throw that idea in the trash.

So basically I agree with Dunlop. It's a little bit too early to make a final judgment on them saving the tour. But the hypothetical idea itself is not without merit; it only applies if Justine and Kim can bring a level of performance that was similar when they were enjoying a lot of success on the tour.

homogenius
Mar 19th, 2010, 09:03 AM
All this "emergency to save the tour" was bs to begin with.Besides that, one or two players don't make the tour.Sure it's better to have great players like Justine and Kim added to the mix, but just like the tour doesn't revolve around Serena or Maria alone, the same can be said about them.

Finally, I think it's a good thing that both Justine and Kim suffered some bad losses despite their successfull return.Maybe some are realizing than the tour has some depth, instead of saying all day long that "they all suck".

Apoleb
Mar 19th, 2010, 09:09 AM
All this "emergency to save the tour" was bs to begin with.Besides that, one or two players don't make the tour.Sure it's better to have great players like Justine and Kim added to the mix, but just like the tour doesn't revolve around Serena or Maria alone, the same can be said about them.

The tour doesn't revolve around Kim and Justine alone. It revolves around several "elite" multi-GS players, performing up to expectations placed by looking at their history. It certainly revolves a lot, lot less around Shitlana, Demented, Jankovic and Ivanovic.


Finally, I think it's a good thing that both Justine and Kim suffered some bad losses despite their successfull return.Maybe some are realizing than the tour has some depth, instead of saying all day long that "they all suck".Ummmm, sure. That can only make sense in the context of how did they lose. I did not see Justine vs Dulko, but given that I know what the opposition can bring, I'm pretty sure Justine was terrible. Kim was awful. She lost in a bad match. So how is that testament to "depth." Seriously, "top" players losing does not mean the tour has "depth", and I'm taking the latter to mean general quality.

For me, Stosur getting in the top 10 with such an awful ground game is a bigger testament to depth in the women's tour.

Uranus
Mar 19th, 2010, 09:39 AM
Love your posts, Apoleb. Completely agree. But 'have to spread some reputation around before giving it to you again'.

homogenius
Mar 19th, 2010, 09:58 AM
The tour doesn't revolve around Kim and Justine alone. It revolves around several "elite" multi-GS players, performing up to expectations placed by looking at their history. It certainly revolves a lot, lot less around Shitlana, Demented, Jankovic and Ivanovic.

Ummmm, sure. That can only make sense in the context of how did they lose. I did not see Justine vs Dulko, but given that I know what the opposition can bring, I'm pretty sure Justine was terrible. Kim was awful. She lost in a bad match. So how is that testament to "depth." Seriously, "top" players losing does not mean the tour has "depth", and I'm taking the latter to mean general quality.

For me, Stosur getting in the top 10 with such an awful ground game is a bigger testament to depth in the women's tour.

It's all in the eye of the person watching it imo.Just take the Brisbane's final : just because it was between two "elite, multi-gs players, with a great history and reputation" it became the match of century.Had it been between let's say Dementieva and Sveta/Safina... whatever, the same people would have called it a battle of chokers.

There is a gap between what people believe/hope to be the reality, and the facts.Was Clijsters's level of play at USO drastically better than the level of the other 3 slam winners in their respective slam ? Don't think so but some (mostly her fans obviously)will believe the opposite.Admitting she had a bad day against Petrova, what happened to her vs Alisa few days ago ?
Why Justine didn't manage to beat Serena in Ao final (who was, let face it, not that good) ? Why did she lose against Dulko ? She is fresh and according to what she was saying, is a different person, feeling less pressure etc...

Strangely, when they get these losses, they don't get half of the bashing, Safina, Elena, Jelena etc...got at one point.
I'm just thinking fans like to bitch about everything when they're frustrated by their faves results.Somme bitter Serena/venus fans weren't able to give credit when JJ got the n°1 by being uber-consistent (and we all can see it's not that easy these days)and being competitive against them.
Same with the fans of Justine/Kim who were saying that Serena was only winning because of their absence and we could go on and on.

While I agree the quality is not always here, and that it's frustrating for everyone to see top players not being able to be consistent like "in the past" and therefore to face each other more often, I think it has more to do with the tour being more competitive/having more depth than with the alleged suckiness of them all.

bandabou
Mar 19th, 2010, 10:13 AM
:lol: Exactly..if it was about elite players missing, then people would've been wanting for the sisters to make a successful comeback in '04 too.

Apoleb
Mar 19th, 2010, 10:19 AM
It's all in the eye of the person watching it imo.Just take the Brisbane's final : just because it was between two "elite, multi-gs players, with a great history and reputation" it became the match of century.Had it been between let's say Dementieva and Sveta/Safina... whatever, the same people would have called it a battle of chokers.

I agree hype had to do with it, and the fact that this was an intense rivalry with both having an accomplished record. But this isn't unjustified. This is part of "saving the tour" - because the two players have at least the record that could make things interesting on paper and get people excited to see how the rivalries will turn (same with Serena/Justine). But this was not the only reason. 2) The quality was better than most Dementieva/Safina/Svetlana matches will ever be. 3) it was a non-slam event at that.


There is a gap between what people believe/hope to be the reality, and the facts.Was Clijsters's level of play at USO drastically better than the level of the other 3 slam winners in their respective slam ? Don't think so but some (mostly her fans obviously)will believe the opposite. No it wasn't, but the point is that she was the only player who could have challenged Serena in that tournament.


Admitting she had a bad day against Petrova, what happened to her vs Alisa few days ago ?
Why Justine didn't manage to beat Serena in Ao final (who was, let face it, not that good) ? Why did she lose against Dulko ? She is fresh and according to what she was saying, is a different person, feeling less pressure etc...

Strangely, when they get these losses, they don't get half of the bashing, Safina, Elena, Jelena etc...got at one point.
I just thinking fans like bitching when they're frustrated by their faves results.Somme bitter Serena/venus fans weren't able to give credit when JJ got the n°1 by being uber-consistent (and we all can see it's not that easy these days)and beating competitive against them.
Same with the fans of Justine/Kim who were saying that Serena was only winning because of their absence and we could go on and on.1) You'll get no arguments for me that Kim was awful at the AO. And that both were awful at IW. But I think this is besides the point I'm making. 2) I think your assessment of the AO final is wrong. How many times has Serena been taken to three sets in a GS final? Look at her record in GS finals especially AO finals, and that tells the whole story. She was more than "not that good" in the final. And you know, Justine was in her second tournament, already in a GS final.

As for Justine and Kim not getting the same bashing... this is the first tournament where they both bombed, and there's already quite a bit of bashing. Just reference Steffica Greles' thread. They certainly deserve all the bashing if they keep up with that, and I'd be the first to start crying again over the WTA. :shrug:


While I agree the quality is not always here, and that it's frustrating for everyone to see top players not being able to be consistent like "in the past" and therefore to face each other more often, I think it has more to do with the tour being more competitive/having more depth than with the alleged suckiness of them all.I disagree. The tour is not more competitive/has more depth in comparison to 5 years ago, early 00s or hell, in 1999, more than 10 years ago. The new generation sucks, and there's no way around that. Those "upsets" are only there because too many elite players are sucking too and having troubles. 5 years ago there was more depth at the top of the game. Early 00s, and it's still not comparable. There may be more depth outside the top 20, but that does not change the dynamics that much.

SIN DIOS NI LEY
Mar 19th, 2010, 10:26 AM
I would rather prefer someone charismatic like Capriati saving the tour instead of Henin

homogenius
Mar 19th, 2010, 10:48 AM
I agree hype had to do with it, and the fact that this was an intense rivalry with both having an accomplished record. But this isn't unjustified. This is part of "saving the tour" - because the two players have at least the record that could make things interesting on paper and get people excited to see how the rivalries will turn (same with Serena/Justine). But this was not the only reason. 2) The quality was better than most Dementieva/Safina/Svetlana matches will ever be. 3) it was a non-slam event at that.

No it wasn't, but the point is that she was the only player who could have challenged Serena in that tournament.

1) You'll get no arguments for me that Kim was awful at the AO. And that both were awful at IW. But I think this is besides the point I'm making. 2) I think your assessment of the AO final is wrong. How many times has Serena been taken to three sets in a GS final? Look at her record in GS finals especially AO finals, and that tells the whole story. She was more than "not that good" in the final. And you know, Justine was in her second tournament, already in a GS final.

As for Justine and Kim not getting the same bashing... this is the first tournament where they both bombed, and there's already quite a bit of bashing. Just reference Steffica Greles' thread. They certainly deserve all the bashing if they keep up with that, and I'd be the first to start crying again over the WTA. :shrug:

I disagree. The tour is not more competitive/has more depth in comparison to 5 years ago, early 00s or hell, in 1999, more than 10 years ago. The new generation sucks, and there's no way around that. Those "upsets" are only there because too many elite players are sucking too and having troubles. 5 years ago there was more depth at the top of the game. Early 00s, and it's still not comparable. There may be more depth outside the top 20, but that does not change the dynamics that much.

I disagree about the Brisbane's final : a lot of matches between other players the past two years have been better quality wise than this one.There was some good patches but it was that close mostly cause Kim started to totally suck and give away several games in a row, then it was Justine's turn to choke.
As for the Ao : Serena has been dominated off the ground in several of her last matches in later stages of slams the past year (by li and Azarenka at Ao, by Lena at Wimbledon etc...).She got through it mostly because of her serve and mental strengh.She was not different in the Ao final.Justine just wasn't good enough to take advantage of it (and in this aspect she was no different than the other players I mentionned).

Anyway, this debate is really like beating a dead horse so i don't think it's very usefull to start again.Let just say we have a different point of view on this : I think the matches were maybe more enjoyable to watch 5 years ago, but it was also easier for the top players to be consistent both in terms of rallies and being able to win week in/week out.The overall level of conditionning has improved and the gap between the top players and the rest of the top100 has been reduced, hence a more competitive tour.It's a logical evolution of the game.What I think is missing the most is the lack of tactical approach of the game in most of the young generation but except for this they do what they can in the context of today (as it's difficult for the old guard to stay consistent, it's also more difficult for the youngsters supposed to reach the top to really emerge than it was in the past : more competition, a LOT more pressure than before etc...).
I just try to see the positive instead of always notice the things that suck.

PS : steffica greles is stucked in 1990 and just can't help himself/herself to bitch about everything he/she can.He/she saw the return of Kim as a testimony of how much the tour sucks with all the "Pigovas" out there.Guess what : a Pigova just beat Kim and he/she will only see in this the occasion to return the point and to show that it's another proof of the poor state of the game.

SAEKeithSerena
Mar 19th, 2010, 01:10 PM
Yes. Of the last two grand slam finals has featured one of them. Hard to imagine Roland Garros final without Henin. So there is nothing to complain about.
she will not be making the final.

DefyingGravity
Apr 2nd, 2010, 10:46 PM
*bump*

Tennisstar86
Apr 2nd, 2010, 10:53 PM
http://i43.tinypic.com/mcbyo5.jpg

treufreund
Apr 3rd, 2010, 12:27 AM
LOL I guess this thread originator is wrong. Justine, Kim and Yanina are doing great so far!

Squiddie
Apr 3rd, 2010, 12:35 AM
http://i43.tinypic.com/mcbyo5.jpg

Never gets old. :lol:

Roookie
Apr 3rd, 2010, 01:38 AM
http://i45.tinypic.com/s5juhe.gif

Loudman
Apr 3rd, 2010, 01:43 AM
After Miami it looks different than after Indian Wells, there is still hope for the WTA after all.

Ferg
Apr 3rd, 2010, 11:50 AM
LOL I guess this thread originator is wrong. Justine, Kim and Yanina are doing great so far!

You seem to be missing the point of the thread, so no, I still think Im quite right. 1 big final for Kim and people seem to think everythings ok again. :happy:

terjw
Apr 3rd, 2010, 12:25 PM
You seem to be missing the point of the thread, so no, I still think Im quite right. 1 big final for Kim and people seem to think everythings ok again. :spit:

I think it's pretty unanimous from everyone involved in the game that Kim and Justine returning is great for the WTA and brings more interest and that they are top players. I don't know what this thread is really trying to say. But the term "saving the WTA" - only parrotted by posters on these boards because they are copycats and don't actually think what they are saying is and always was meaningless. No-one involved in the game who knows anything about the WTA believes the WTA is in any danger of not existing or anything. True that top players often get beaten nowadays - but that's partly because the WTA has never been stronger in terms of the depth it has nowadays. Posters also use the term "saving the game" to hide that what they mean is the Belgians or someone beat a player they don't personally like.

But Kim winning the USO beating both Willams sisters, beating Justine in the final at Brisbane and beating Justine here at Miami in the semi-final, and Justine making it to the AO final against Serena in only her 2nd tournament back adds an enormous amount of interest to the women's game.

Mrs. Berasetegui
Apr 3rd, 2010, 12:42 PM
I think it's pretty unanimous from everyone involved in the game that Kim and Justine returning is great for the WTA and brings more interest and that they are top players. I don't know what this thread is really trying to say. But the term "saving the WTA" - only parrotted by posters on these boards because they are copycats and don't actually think what they are saying is and always was meaningless. No-one involved in the game who knows anything about the WTA believes the WTA is in any danger of not existing or anything. True that top players often get beaten nowadays - but that's partly because the WTA has never been stronger in terms of the depth it has nowadays. Posters also use the term "saving the game" to hide that what they mean is the Belgians or someone beat a player they don't personally like.

But Kim winning the USO beating both Willams sisters, beating Justine in the final at Brisbane and beating Justine here at Miami in the semi-final, and Justine making it to the AO final against Serena in only her 2nd tournament back adds an enormous amount of interest to the women's game.

That.

goldenlox
Apr 3rd, 2010, 12:55 PM
The WTA will thrive no matter who is playing.
In 2008, the 1st slam final was Maria-Ana. Then Ana-Dinara.
2 years later all 3 might be finished as contenders.
So what? As far as the tour is concerned.

IW just set new attendance records, with Jelena and Caro, and go ask people on the street who won the mens final.

sammy01
Apr 3rd, 2010, 01:07 PM
I think it's pretty unanimous from everyone involved in the game that Kim and Justine returning is great for the WTA and brings more interest and that they are top players. I don't know what this thread is really trying to say. But the term "saving the WTA" - only parrotted by posters on these boards because they are copycats and don't actually think what they are saying is and always was meaningless. No-one involved in the game who knows anything about the WTA believes the WTA is in any danger of not existing or anything. True that top players often get beaten nowadays - but that's partly because the WTA has never been stronger in terms of the depth it has nowadays. Posters also use the term "saving the game" to hide that what they mean is the Belgians or someone beat a player they don't personally like.

But Kim winning the USO beating both Willams sisters, beating Justine in the final at Brisbane and beating Justine here at Miami in the semi-final, and Justine making it to the AO final against Serena in only her 2nd tournament back adds an enormous amount of interest to the women's game.

this! also if kim wins miami she will be holding 2 of the 7 biggest tournaments (4 slams, YEC, IW and Miami) and she has only played 4 of them.

Roookie
Apr 3rd, 2010, 09:02 PM
http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/1152/justinekim.jpg

it keeps getting better and better :dance:

sammy01
Apr 3rd, 2010, 09:43 PM
kim aint doing a bad job is she.

Ferg
Apr 3rd, 2010, 09:44 PM
:spit: Keep bumping it all you want to try to gain some satisfaction, please, if it makes you feel better. I really dont care, especially if you all really believe I feel stupid after Kim winning MIAMI. :happy:

sammy01
Apr 3rd, 2010, 09:47 PM
so kim has won 3 of her 8 tournaments so far, has won her 3 matches vs the WS. yeah the tour was obviously better off before she came back and is back in the top 10 with only 8 tournaments played lmao

Ferg
Apr 3rd, 2010, 09:49 PM
I never mentioned the tour being better before they came back and you know it damn well Sammy. :kiss:

G1Player2
Apr 3rd, 2010, 09:49 PM
so kim has won 3 of her 8 tournaments so far, has won her 3 matches vs the WS. yeah the tour was obviously better off before she came back and is back in the top 10 with only 8 tournaments played lmao

Kim is doing great like I expected. But, Serena is keeping the competition good as well and has won the AO and YEC back to back. :worship:

Apoleb
Apr 3rd, 2010, 09:51 PM
:spit: Keep bumping it all you want to try to gain some satisfaction, please, if it makes you feel better. I really dont care, especially if you all really believe I feel stupid after Kim winning MIAMI. :happy:

OMG, it looks you ARE really feeling stupid now. :rolls:

G1Player2
Apr 3rd, 2010, 09:51 PM
I never mentioned the tour being better before they came back and you know it damn well Sammy. :kiss:

Kim and Henin definitely add something more to tennis though as would any top player who wins slams and comes back. Clijsters would have more slams if she hadn't retired.

sammy01
Apr 3rd, 2010, 09:52 PM
I never mentioned the tour being better before they came back and you know it damn well Sammy. :kiss:

so what is the point of the thread, surely womens tennis is only strengthened having them back.

they are enhancing the tour by being back.

Ferg
Apr 3rd, 2010, 09:57 PM
so what is the point of the thread, surely womens tennis is only strengthened having them back.

they are enhancing the tour by being back.

Because IWs, and Australia in Kims case, showed that they too are prone to lapses and freak losses during tournaments, something that many poster here vilified the top players for, and acted as though their return would mean it would back to the days were Henin had 30 match winning streaks going.

Many people here seem to take it personnally and as an insult to the Belgians, but it wasnt intended as that, Im quite happy to see them back and challenging for the top tournaments, its great to see more top players back and hopefully take some of these pretenders out of contention for top honours. Thats why all these gloating replies after Kim wins Miami amuse me. But it was to be expected I suppose, considering how emotional this board is.

thrust
Apr 3rd, 2010, 10:10 PM
There can be NO doubt that having Kim and Justine has been great for the WTA. After just a few tournaments both have proved they are among the top 4 players on tour. Kim's return has been spectacular, while Justine's has been outstanding. It may not continue, but as of now the WTA is much stronger with them back and perhaps will encourage the other top ten players to try harder to improve their game.

sammy01
Apr 3rd, 2010, 10:11 PM
Because IWs, and Australia in Kims case, showed that they too are prone to lapses and freak losses during tournaments, something that many poster here vilified the top players for, and acted as though their return would mean it would back to the days were Henin had 30 match winning streaks going.

Many people here seem to take it personnally and as an insult to the Belgians, but it wasnt intended as that, Im quite happy to see them back and challenging for the top tournaments, its great to see more top players back and hopefully take some of these pretenders out of contention for top honours. Thats why all these gloating replies after Kim wins Miami amuse me. But it was to be expected I suppose, considering how emotional this board is.

come on henin has played 4 tournaments and made 2 finals, a semi and had 1 bad loss. kim has won 3 titles. if after a year back on tour they are having freak losses then you have a point. right now they still have to adjust to the tour, the traveling, the new demands.

also isn't kim like the one who has won the most titles since she returned in that time frame of any player?

Ferg
Apr 3rd, 2010, 10:15 PM
come on henin has played 4 tournaments and made 2 finals, a semi and had 1 bad loss. kim has won 3 titles. if after a year back on tour they are having freak losses then you have a point. right now they still have to adjust to the tour, the traveling, the new demands.

also isn't kim like the one who has won the most titles since she returned in that time frame of any player?

Yes it is premature, just as premature as the fans who suddenly flooded the place claiming that they would immediatly 'save' the tour, the people who this thread was directed at. :shrug: It wasnt aimed at all their fans, merely those ones mentioned. I know they have a majority of perfectly reasonable fans too, dont get me wrong.

You're right though, we'll see how they are getting on at this stage next year. But the arrogance of some of their fans did annoy me, Im looking forward to many battles between them and Serena for the big titles this year.

LeonHart
Apr 3rd, 2010, 10:15 PM
The thread starter just got OWNT.

Ferg
Apr 3rd, 2010, 10:16 PM
The thread starter just got OWNT.

Just like you did on that Marion thread? :spit: At least I backed myself up here.

sammy01
Apr 3rd, 2010, 10:21 PM
Yes it is premature, just as premature as the fans who suddenly flooded the place claiming that they would immediatly 'save' the tour, the people who this thread was directed at. :shrug: It wasnt aimed at all their fans, merely those ones mentioned. I know they have a majority of perfectly reasonable fans too, dont get me wrong.

You're right though, we'll see how they are getting on at this stage next year. But the arrogance of some of their fans did annoy me, Im looking forward to many battles between them and Serena for the big titles this year.

you cant ask anymore consistency from a player who has only played 4 tournaments then 3 semis or better, or the player with the most titles since her return. it will only get easier as they get higher ranked to.

LeonHart
Apr 3rd, 2010, 10:26 PM
Just like you did on that Marion thread? :spit: At least I backed myself up here.

Wtf are you talking about :lol:

Ferg
Apr 3rd, 2010, 10:30 PM
Wtf are you talking about :lol:

In that thread about Marions weight, you replied to someones post about her fitness working out fine last year, and you wanted someone to post her 3 set record with one of those sarcastic smilies, her record was posted, and you said no more. :lol:

Donny
Apr 3rd, 2010, 10:36 PM
so what is the point of the thread, surely womens tennis is only strengthened having them back.

they are enhancing the tour by being back.

Posts like these:

Just as Davenport did when she waltzed back onto the court and smashed Jankovic and soon-to-be no.1 Ivanovic, Clijsters has proved what a laughable mess women's tennis is.

Taking nothing away from Kim, because she always was a class act (and looked a little tired 2006-7, I thought), to say these screaming pigovas and averagovices had sewn up the gap was always spurious, and evidently untrue to anybody who had followed the game long enough to know the difference. If Henin returned (and I'm pretty sure she won't) tomorrow, she'd do what Kim is doing. Heck, I'm even wondering about Capriati or Pierce.

It all falls down to a lack of talent coming through. There are absolutely no remarkable juniors, aside from Robson (who I have other doubts about, although her game seems quite refreshing), and there hasn't been for years.

Are the point of this thread.

People made out the tour to be complete crap. If that's so, why haven't Henin and Clijsters been dominating the tour this year?

sammy01
Apr 3rd, 2010, 10:43 PM
Posts like these:



Are the point of this thread.

People made out the tour to be complete crap. If that's so, why haven't Henin and Clijsters been dominating the tour this year?

henin has played 4 tournaments and made 3 semis or better (including a slam final, losing to serena who no one doubts in slams), kim has won the most titles since she came back.

they haven't exactly struggled so far have they.

Kworb
Apr 3rd, 2010, 10:43 PM
Williams, Belgians, and to a lesser extent the magical three Russians (Sharapova, Kuznetsova, Dementieva) are keeping the tour alive. When only Sveta is left the tour will die.

sammy01
Apr 3rd, 2010, 10:46 PM
and i have to agree with steffica on the lack of talent coming through. vika got a bitchslap from clijsters this week (kims 2-0 already vs her), caro couldn't beat a 50+ UE count henin.

as of yet the 2 most promising youngsters are 0-4 to henin and clijsters. if the obviously better players of kim anf henin weren't there to beat them they would be going even deeper in tournaments without being any better or more talented players.

Donny
Apr 3rd, 2010, 10:48 PM
henin has played 4 tournaments and made 3 semis or better (including a slam final, losing to serena who no one doubts in slams), kim has won the most titles since she came back.

they haven't exactly struggled so far have they.

No one said they wouldn't do well. They're top players. It'd be odd if they DIDN'T do well. But they haven't exposed the tour as the fraud lots of posters were exclaiming it to be.

So far, Clijsters and Henin are doing EXACTLY what the top players did last year: They have a mix of great results, and inexplicably bad results.

sammy01
Apr 3rd, 2010, 10:52 PM
No one said they wouldn't do well. They're top players. It'd be odd if they DIDN'T do well. But they haven't exposed the tour as the fraud lots of posters were exclaiming it to be.

So far, Clijsters and Henin are doing EXACTLY what the top players did last year: They have a mix of great results, and inexplicably bad results.

and i have to agree with steffica on the lack of talent coming through. vika got a bitchslap from clijsters this week (kims 2-0 already vs her), caro couldn't beat a 50+ UE count henin.

as of yet the 2 most promising youngsters are 0-4 to henin and clijsters. if the obviously better players of kim anf henin weren't there to beat them they would be going even deeper in tournaments without being any better or more talented players.

see my post. they are exposing the new generation as not being good enough yet, if kim or henin weren't there maybe caro would be US open champion and one of them could have won miami, whilst not being any better players only their competition weaker.

Donny
Apr 3rd, 2010, 11:01 PM
see my post. they are exposing the new generation as not being good enough yet, if kim or henin weren't there maybe caro would be US open champion and one of them could have won miami, whilst not being any better players only their competition weaker.

There is no way Serena would have not made the final and crushed Wozniacki if Clijsters had not been in the draw. Her only other challenge would have been an injured Venus.

Point taken re Miami, but Elena likely would have gone far if not for Henin, possibly to the final.

sammy01
Apr 3rd, 2010, 11:05 PM
There is no way Serena would have not made the final and crushed Wozniacki if Clijsters had not been in the draw. Her only other challenge would have been an injured Venus.

Point taken re Miami, but Elena likely would have gone far if not for Henin, possibly to the final.

cus dementieva has never lost to caro :tape:

another case in point compare the 2009 to 2010 oz open finals, which one did serena really have to pit her wits against a worthy opponent who wasn't gonna choke and hand it to her?

goldenlox
Apr 3rd, 2010, 11:11 PM
Clijsters is winning with the toughest draws. She beat both Williams sisters at the USO.
That doesn't expose the tour, it shows Kim can beat anyone on hardcourt.

Matt01
Apr 3rd, 2010, 11:22 PM
Williams, Belgians, and to a lesser extent the magical three Russians (Sharapova, Kuznetsova, Dementieva) are keeping the tour alive. When only Sveta is left the tour will die.


:spit:

clementine
Apr 3rd, 2010, 11:42 PM
:lol: Good bump.

BlameSerena
Apr 4th, 2010, 12:18 AM
cus dementieva has never lost to caro :tape:

another case in point compare the 2009 to 2010 oz open finals, which one did serena really have to pit her wits against a worthy opponent who wasn't gonna choke and hand it to her?

Serena was in far worse condition for the 2010 final than the 2009 one. That's not a good comparison at all.

CloudAtlas
Apr 4th, 2010, 01:06 AM
see my post. they are exposing the new generation as not being good enough yet, if kim or henin weren't there maybe caro would be US open champion and one of them could have won miami, whilst not being any better players only their competition weaker.



In the early part of their careers weren't Kim and Justine getting beaten by more experienced players like Seles and Hingis? It didn't mean they weren't good players just meant that they lacked experience against them and eventually figured them out. So far players like Azarenka and Wozniacki have both played the Belgians twice each , and certainly they have all been close matches bar Kim and Vika in Miami. I don't think women's tennis can now create more teenage prodogies since the most common style of play , the heavy hitting baseline slugging style is perfected later on in most players' careers., therefore I don't think those losses show weaknesses in younger players at all , especially Wozniacki who in both her meetings challenged both Belgians even despite her lack of experience on big stages the first time round.

Donny
Apr 4th, 2010, 01:32 AM
cus dementieva has never lost to caro :tape:

another case in point compare the 2009 to 2010 oz open finals, which one did serena really have to pit her wits against a worthy opponent who wasn't gonna choke and hand it to her?

What do you call the last five games of the third set in this year's final? Henin either collapsed like a house of cards or got fatigued.

G1Player2
Apr 4th, 2010, 01:36 AM
Serena was in far worse condition for the 2010 final than the 2009 one. That's not a good comparison at all.

Not to mention having played the singles and doubles as well and her QF and SF matches were played on back to back days and well over 2 hours in both of those matches plus the doubles. She went into the final wrapped like a mummy and Henin was obviously much fresher.

terjw
Apr 4th, 2010, 01:51 AM
Yes it is premature, just as premature as the fans who suddenly flooded the place claiming that they would immediatly 'save' the tour, the people who this thread was directed at. :shrug: It wasnt aimed at all their fans, merely those ones mentioned. I know they have a majority of perfectly reasonable fans too, dont get me wrong.

You're right though, we'll see how they are getting on at this stage next year. But the arrogance of some of their fans did annoy me, Im looking forward to many battles between them and Serena for the big titles this year.

Ferg - I agree with you this "saving the tour" is ridiculous. But where you are wrong is your assertion that its even a minority of Kim and Justine fans who ever claimed this or flooded the place with claims of what Kim / Justine would do. It's posters who have this axe to grind and are always whining about how bad the WTA is you should be talking to.

Kim's name got mentioned after the USO in a totally negative sense not by Kim fans - but those saying "look how bad the tour is if a Mum can come back and win the USO after a few matches" and then "she's saved the tour". That's not the language a Kim fan would use. That's the language of posters like Steffica Greles with their own agenda who aren't and never have been Kim or Justine fans. And anyway saving the tour has now become a euphamism for just about any copycat to mean just about anything. Nowadays - it's usually made about a match a poster wants a player to win against a player he/she hates.

So the title of this thread really looks like you are just out to bash Kim and Justine and Kim / Justine fans every time they lose. The truth of the matter is that there is no saviour and we fans have never claimed it. But Kim and Justine have definitely enhanced the tour and made it much more interesting. And whilst they don't win every match - one of them has captured 3 titles including a slam and Miami whilst the other has made 2 final including a slam and a semi at Miami.

Roookie
May 2nd, 2010, 06:34 PM
:happy:

http://img532.imageshack.us/img532/235/2010w.jpg

bandabou
May 2nd, 2010, 09:32 PM
:lol: Go Belgiummmm!! But the biggest title of the year, still is in house Williams! Peace!

Gdsimmons
May 2nd, 2010, 09:44 PM
:lol: Go Belgiummmm!! But the biggest title of the year, still is in house Williams! Peace!

:bigclap::bigclap:

TennisFan66
May 2nd, 2010, 09:57 PM
BIG :yawn: @ posts with 'save the tour, save WTA, win for tennis, loss for tennis' :bs:...

Did football stopped being played when Pele, Maradona retired. Is there no Formula 1 anymore, because Senna, Prost isnt racing anymore. (I would mention M.Schumacher but he's made a comeback too lol). Tennis is played world wide, even after Court, Evert, Navratilova, Graf stopped.

That anyone thinks just because THEIR faves aren't in the game anymore or must come back and win to 'save WTA', is just simply :lol:

Ramos
May 2nd, 2010, 10:56 PM
BIG :yawn: @ posts with 'save the tour, save WTA, win for tennis, loss for tennis' :bs:...

Did football stopped being played when Pele, Maradona retired. Is there no Formula 1 anymore, because Senna, Prost isnt racing anymore. (I would mention M.Schumacher but he's made a comeback too lol). Tennis is played world wide, even after Court, Evert, Navratilova, Graf stopped.

That anyone thinks just because THEIR faves aren't in the game anymore or must come back and win to 'save WTA', is just simply :lol:
I think the main problem with those analogies, is the lack or the perception that there is a lack of new superstars. People that have the potential to rival or at least come close to what other legends in a sport have achieved.

You're right, football had Pele in the sixties and Maradona in the eighties, but football didn't become boring because other out of this world players emerged like Zidane in the nineties and now the current generation have someone like Messi to look forward to.

In cycling you had Merckx who won the tour de France 5 times, that record was equaled by Hinault in the eighties, equaled again by Indurain in the nineties and even improved by Armstrong 5 years ago, who won it 7 times.

See what i mean? This is probably in my humble opinion what bothers most people. They want to see a glimpse of the player who has zero slams right now but might have a huge amount of them a decade from now. Someone who is above the others talentwise, someone who they can compare to players from previous generations. A new star that represents this generation, not the best of the rest.

JadeFox
May 2nd, 2010, 11:07 PM
See what i mean? This is probably in my humble opinion what bothers most people. They want to see a glimpse of the player who has zero slams right now but might have a huge amount of them a decade from now. Someone who is above the others talentwise, someone who they can compare to players from previous generations. A new star that represents this generation, not the best of the rest.

For all we know, we could've had a glance at this player already. I still maintain though that this next great player will sneak up on people when they least expect it.

Ramos
May 2nd, 2010, 11:29 PM
For all we know, we could've had a glance at this player already. I still maintain though that this next great player will sneak up on people when they least expect it. It's possible she's already active, that's true. I don't deny that. A player that might make incredible improvements in the years to come and impress us all in the end.

kaghat
May 3rd, 2010, 12:12 AM
What ever happened to belzebub and kaghat??

Iam here, working more with image than text :). I am following you everyday guys. Love yeah :hearts: Justine makes me a happy person. Here is my present of the day.

8PKt_2I54H8

bandabou
May 3rd, 2010, 05:21 AM
I think the main problem with those analogies, is the lack or the perception that there is a lack of new superstars. People that have the potential to rival or at least come close to what other legends in a sport have achieved.

You're right, football had Pele in the sixties and Maradona in the eighties, but football didn't become boring because other out of this world players emerged like Zidane in the nineties and now the current generation have someone like Messi to look forward to.

In cycling you had Merckx who won the tour de France 5 times, that record was equaled by Hinault in the eighties, equaled again by Indurain in the nineties and even improved by Armstrong 5 years ago, who won it 7 times.

See what i mean? This is probably in my humble opinion what bothers most people. They want to see a glimpse of the player who has zero slams right now but might have a huge amount of them a decade from now. Someone who is above the others talentwise, someone who they can compare to players from previous generations. A new star that represents this generation, not the best of the rest.


If this is true...then how come ae the Belgians saving the tour? They ain't NEW stars, they just made a comeback. we should be talking about the woz and azarenka's of this world, no?

JamieOwen3
May 3rd, 2010, 05:34 AM
8Izpv8o2zOM

save the tour save the cheerleader :haha: :cheer:

davidtennis515
May 3rd, 2010, 07:40 AM
Rome wasn't built in a day, the Belgians certainly are helping the tour, by the end of the year both should finish in the top ten.

vandy
May 3rd, 2010, 07:42 AM
So, since Kim and Justine have been back, there have been two grand slams played. Serena has won one, and neither sister made the final of the other. Now the Belgians have won one, and made the final of the other. So going into the French, edge to the Belgians.

Ramos
May 3rd, 2010, 04:33 PM
If this is true...then how come ae the Belgians saving the tour? They ain't NEW stars, they just made a comeback. we should be talking about the woz and azarenka's of this world, no? Well that is what i was saying actually. I explained that in every sport sooner or later someone with incredible talent steps up and makes a name for themselves making them the new icon of the sport for that specific generation. Off course it won't happen overnight but it will happen, it always does. What understandably worries people in this situation is that this person isn't really apparent or visible just yet. That's where all this "saving the tour"-stuff comes from.

Ferg
May 3rd, 2010, 04:42 PM
This was bumped again? Clijsters lost to... Beatriz somethingsomething and Henin lost to Kanepi last week. :shrug: They're keeping their best for the big tournaments, exactly what the big players did before the Belgians returned and got lambasted for, and my point is still proven.

Ferg
May 9th, 2010, 08:15 PM
:happy:

http://img532.imageshack.us/img532/235/2010w.jpg

:bigclap:

The tour is in the exact same state as last year. Yeah, she'll probably win Roland Garros, but it wasnt the Slams that needed 'saving'.

mure
May 31st, 2010, 03:28 PM
bump

cellophane
May 31st, 2010, 03:30 PM
Kim will be back to savin' soon... I can't believe how much I've missed seeing her play :(

ghost world
May 31st, 2010, 03:38 PM
Ice cold, mure.

jefrilibra
May 31st, 2010, 03:41 PM
:rolls:

I knew this thread would be bumped!

homogenius
May 31st, 2010, 03:45 PM
All this hype...

cellophane
May 31st, 2010, 03:46 PM
All this hype...

Well, Kim *has* won the US Open and Miami :shrug:

Michael!
May 31st, 2010, 03:46 PM
Well, Henin still plays good, but she isnt that impressive like before, I mean before she retired she had a awesome 2007 and still a pretty strong 2008 before she quit after Berlin, she probably still needs a few more matches until she achieves her "old" strength again or she will never be that impressive again, who knows!

And Kim is just a part time pro, she has impressive wins with US Open and Miami, then again she takes a break for a few weeks, at the moment she is injured, it is just difficult with a small child, and Kim won´t play for a long time anyway, as far as I remember she said before that she won´t play for a long time as she wants a 2nd child before she turns 30!

homogenius
May 31st, 2010, 03:56 PM
Well, Kim *has* won the US Open and Miami :shrug:

They were supposed to save the tour by bringing quality.Kim's win at the USO wasn't different (bar the nice story)that any of the other slams we witnessed (not worst but not better either).
the past few years.Besides that, some top players with good results (like Safina, JJ etc...)got a lot of shit during their absence, but when you see Kim losing 0 and 1 against Petrova at the AO (or to the n°250 in a MM event somewhere)and Justine playing like she is lately, it's just shows that these players should have get more respect at the time : it ain't easy to have consistently good results these days, let alone bringing quality level of play on a regular basis.In this aspect, Justine and Kim are no more succesfull than the others for the moment.

AnnaK_4ever
May 31st, 2010, 03:59 PM
Kim is a part time player. She didn't return to have "consistently good results", she returned to win the biggest titles on her favorite surface. And in this regard she's been very successful so far.

kman
May 31st, 2010, 03:59 PM
They were supposed to save the tour by bringing quality.Kim's win at the USO wasn't different (bar the nice story)that any of the other slams we witnessed (not worst but not better either).
the past few years.Besides that, some top players with good results (like Safina, JJ etc...)got a lot of shit during their absence, but when you see Kim losing 0 and 1 against Petrova at the AO (or to the n°250 in a MM event somewhere)and Justine playing like she is lately, it's just shows that these players should have get more respect at the time : it ain't easy to have consistently good results these days, let alone bringing quality level of play on a regular basis.In this aspect, Justine and Kim are no more succesfull than the others for the moment.

true

the tour is just so competitive and unpredictable at the moment

homogenius
May 31st, 2010, 04:05 PM
Kim is a part time player. She didn't return to have "consistently good results", she returned to win the biggest titles on her favorite surface. And in this regard she's been very successful so far.

The topic is not really what Kim wants to achieve or not with this comeback (but I'm sure that she's not so pleased to get huliliated by Petrova in a slam, or being beaten by an unkown player)but rather the never ending complaint about the poor state of the tour the past few years and saying that the Belgians would "save it" (what a bs when you think about it).I don't personnally think the tour needed to be save, but admitting it did, how did they succeed at "saving it" according to you ?

AcesHigh
May 31st, 2010, 04:08 PM
Best matches this year have involved the Belgians.... they've definitely brought back excitement. that being said... i think their early success brought on expectations that were highly unrealistic.

AnnaK_4ever
May 31st, 2010, 04:09 PM
The topic is not really what Kim wants to achieve or not with this comeback (but I'm sure that she's not so pleased to get huliliated by Petrova in a slam, or being beaten by an unkown player)but rather the never ending complain about the poor state of the tour the past few years and saying that the Belgians would "save it" (what a bs when you think about it).I don't personnally think the tour needed to be save, but admitting it did, how did they succeed at "saving it" according to you ?

I've never come up with this "The Belgians will save the tour" concept. Actually, I don't recall anybody coming up with something like this. It was just great to have two excellent players back and they've actually produced several stunning matches since their comeback but that's it.

Mikey.
May 31st, 2010, 04:10 PM
Awful bump. :help:

homogenius
May 31st, 2010, 04:15 PM
I've never come up with this "The Belgians will save the tour" concept. Actually, I don't recall anybody coming up with something like this. It was just great to have two excellent players back and they've actually produced several stunning matches since their comeback but that's it.

:rolleyes:
Anyway I agree that it's cool to have them both back on tour but I don't see any drastic changes.We got great matches without them the past years as well.And both of their encounters were highly overrated imho.The Brisbane match had drama but was full of choking as for the Miami's match :tape:

cellophane
May 31st, 2010, 04:18 PM
The topic is not really what Kim wants to achieve or not with this comeback (but I'm sure that she's not so pleased to get huliliated by Petrova in a slam, or being beaten by an unkown player)but rather the never ending complaint about the poor state of the tour the past few years and saying that the Belgians would "save it" (what a bs when you think about it).I don't personnally think the tour needed to be save, but admitting it did, how did they succeed at "saving it" according to you ?


No, it's not bs. ... sure Kim had one random loss. so what?. But they are performing better than other top players (who are not Venus and Serena) and ... well at least Kim is. When Kim has won, it's been extremely impressive. If she played more, she'd probably be back top 3, and Caro wouldn't be there.

Justine - I don't know... she clearly isn't playing that great at the moment and still has to work on her game to get it back to where it was.

AnnaK_4ever
May 31st, 2010, 04:19 PM
:rolleyes:

No need to roll your eyes. Who has ever proclaimed they are gonna "save" the tour? Names, please.
And their Brisbane and Miami matches were great and highly intense battles, something we barely got to see in the last couple of years.

homogenius
May 31st, 2010, 04:21 PM
No, it's not bs. ... sure Kim had one random loss. so what?. But they are performing better than other top players (who are not Venus and Serena) and ... well at least Kim is. When Kim has won, it's been extremely impressive. If she played more, she'd probably be back top 3, and Caro wouldn't be there.

Justine - I don't know... she clearly isn't playing that great at the moment and still has to work on her game to get it back to where it was.

Beating the sisters at the usowas impressive but Kim 's level of play wasn't that high.That's all I'm saying.

homogenius
May 31st, 2010, 04:25 PM
No need to roll your eyes. Who has ever proclaimed they are gonna "save" the tour? Names, please.
And their Brisbane and Miami matches were great and highly intense battles, something we barely got to see in the last couple of years.

No more intense than some JJ vs Venus matches, or Safina vs Venus on clay last year, or Lena vs Serena at Wimbly etc...And it's strange how when someone like Sveta or Lena chokes they get shit but when Kim and Justine do it it's "great and highly intense battles".So much hypocrisy here.

PS : quality wise, Henin vs Wickmayer at the AO was way better than the other two mentionned but since it was Wickmayer instead of Kim it sure got less publicity.Names aren't everything and people should watch more matches.

cellophane
May 31st, 2010, 04:26 PM
^No, it wasn't... won't get any argument from me there...Kim actually played like crap in Miami SF vs. Justine too...

I see "saving the tour" more as establishing themselves as top 4 alongside Venus & Serena in events, if not necessarily in the rankings.

AnnaK_4ever
May 31st, 2010, 04:34 PM
No more intense than some JJ vs Venus matches, or Safina vs Venus on clay last year, or Lena vs Serena at Wimbly etc...And it's strange how when someone like Sveta or Lena chokes they get shit but when Kim and Justine do it it's "great and highly intense battles".So much hypocrisy here.

That's because Kuznetsova and Dementieva are inferior to Clijsters and Henin as both players and entertainers.

PS : quality wise, Henin vs Wickmayer at the AO was way better than the other two mentionned but since it was Wickmayer instead of Kim it sure got less publicity.Names aren't everything and people should watch more matches.

I agree on Wick/Henin. I believe it's the best match of 2010 so far.

miffedmax
May 31st, 2010, 05:39 PM
There was a cadre of people on this forum who I think really believed Justine and Kim were just going to steamroll their way right back into the top 5 because players like Wozniaki, Stosur, Pennetta, etc. were just crappy pretenders to be brushed aside.

It's like it never occurred to them that there might be two sides to the story, i.e. that some of the women were working their asses off to get better.

DOUBLEFIST
May 31st, 2010, 06:08 PM
There was a cadre of people on this forum who I think really believed Justine and Kim were just going to steamroll their way right back into the top 5 because players like Wozniaki, Stosur, Pennetta, etc. were just crappy pretenders to be brushed aside.

It's like it never occurred to them that there might be two sides to the story, i.e. that some of the women were working their asses off to get better.
Agreed.

The game, despite all the protestations to the contrary, ALWAYS incrementally gets better. Players, while maybe not exciting or flashy or appealing, always seek to improve. It's likely difficult for most of us to see it. We're looking too close and too often and are waaaaaaay too bias toward our fave.

BuTtErFrEnA
May 31st, 2010, 06:10 PM
There was a cadre of people on this forum who I think really believed Justine and Kim were just going to steamroll their way right back into the top 5 because players like Wozniaki, Stosur, Pennetta, etc. were just crappy pretenders to be brushed aside.

It's like it never occurred to them that there might be two sides to the story, i.e. that some of the women were working their asses off to get better.


this

Patrick345
May 31st, 2010, 06:14 PM
Clijsters prevented Wozniacki from winning a Slam (for now). That alone made it worth it. :lol:

Ferg
May 31st, 2010, 06:18 PM
oh gawl, bumped again?!

Serenita
May 31st, 2010, 06:23 PM
There was a cadre of people on this forum who I think really believed Justine and Kim were just going to steamroll their way right back into the top 5 because players like Wozniaki, Stosur, Pennetta, etc. were just crappy pretenders to be brushed aside.

It's like it never occurred to them that there might be two sides to the story, i.e. that some of the women were working their asses off to get better.

Lena's Bangs.

miffedmax
May 31st, 2010, 07:07 PM
Lena's all banged up. :sobbing:

bandabou
May 31st, 2010, 07:11 PM
I guess it's just Clijsters who have saved the tour? :shrug:

cellophane
May 31st, 2010, 07:18 PM
There was a cadre of people on this forum who I think really believed Justine and Kim were just going to steamroll their way right back into the top 5 because players like Wozniaki, Stosur, Pennetta, etc. were just crappy pretenders to be brushed aside.

They will if they play a full schedule :shrug: It's only May!

AcesHigh
May 31st, 2010, 07:20 PM
There was a cadre of people on this forum who I think really believed Justine and Kim were just going to steamroll their way right back into the top 5 because players like Wozniaki, Stosur, Pennetta, etc. were just crappy pretenders to be brushed aside.

It's like it never occurred to them that there might be two sides to the story, i.e. that some of the women were working their asses off to get better.

I don't think people thought that.. but the fact that they both made the slam finals in less than 4 tournaments back speaks incredible volumes.

miffedmax
May 31st, 2010, 07:37 PM
They will if they play a full schedule :shrug: It's only May!

It's June tomorrow, and that's getting beyond midpoint for a season that runs from January through early November.

The two Belgians have had some impressive results, but they haven't proven to be any more immune to injury, or lapses, or being outplayed by other top players than anybody else, which, in truth, many people including some of their most ardent supporters predicted.

But there were those who said they were going to be not merely getting impressive results, but dominating. They aren't. Really, no one is. Serena and Vee are coming the closest, but Ree hasn't done much away from the slams and Vee's coming up just short at them. Other players (Dementieva, Rezai, Stosur, etc.) have good months, but that's about it.

cellophane
May 31st, 2010, 08:00 PM
It's June tomorrow, and that's getting beyond midpoint for a season that runs from January through early November.

It's only been 4 months since Justine came back and she is # 3 in the race... Kim has only played what 3 tournaments since January?


The two Belgians have had some impressive results, but they haven't proven to be any more immune to injury, or lapses, or being outplayed by other top players than anybody else, which, in truth, many people including some of their most ardent supporters predicted.

Nobody is immune to injury. They've had better results in top tournaments than most other top players bar Venus and Serena. Kim won Miami, Justine got to the finals of AO.




But there were those who said they were going to be not merely getting impressive results, but dominating. They aren't. Really, no one is. Serena and Vee are coming the closest, but Ree hasn't done much away from the slams and Vee's coming up just short at them. Other players (Dementieva, Rezai, Stosur, etc.) have good months, but that's about it.

They will continue to do better at the bigger tournaments than most other top players.

bandabou
May 31st, 2010, 09:13 PM
It's only been 4 months since Justine came back and she is # 3 in the race... Kim has only played what 3 tournaments since January?




Nobody is immune to injury. They've had better results in top tournaments than most other top players bar Venus and Serena. Kim won Miami, Justine got to the finals of AO.






They will continue to do better at the bigger tournaments than most other top players.

People were acting like once the Belgians came back, it would all over for the Williamses...THAT was the underlying implication.

But the sisters are still standing strong. Putting up big results just as the Belgians. It isn't the Williams thunder that the Belgians are stealing.

miffedmax
May 31st, 2010, 09:47 PM
People were acting like once the Belgians came back, it would all over for the Williamses...THAT was the underlying implication.

But the sisters are still standing strong. Putting up big results just as the Belgians. It isn't the Williams thunder that the Belgians are stealing.

Not entirely true. Wozniaki, Safina, Stosur and a number of other "undeserving" Top 10 players had targets on their backs from some of the posters around here. Dementieva and Petrova weren't going to make any more deep runs at slams etc....(I distinctly remember these, but yeah, I'm too lazy to go find them).

Six months in, Woz is still at Number 3, Safina's collapse is injury, not Belgian-related, one of the Russians will be in the semis (though yeah, JuJu fucked Lena up at the AO) and as for Stosur...

As far as injuries, I'm not sure if cellophane realizes it or not, but we're making the same point. People who made assumptions about the Belgians running roughshod over everyone (and I'm not saying cello was one of those) completely ignored the possibility that one or both of them might be injured.

That broken pinky may not be as bad as some problems, but it can't help, even for a one-handed player.

Matt01
May 31st, 2010, 10:41 PM
People were acting like once the Belgians came back, it would all over for the Williamses...THAT was the underlying implication.


Only stupid people who don't know much about tennis would have acted like that :wavey:

bandabou
Jun 1st, 2010, 08:24 AM
Only stupid people who don't know much about tennis would have acted like that :wavey:

You said it..:lol:

Matt01
Jun 1st, 2010, 12:43 PM
You said it..:lol:


No I didn't, stop putting words into my mouth.
And thanks for the good rep :kiss: :wavey:

bandabou
Jun 1st, 2010, 02:06 PM
No I didn't, stop putting words into my mouth.
And thanks for the good rep :kiss: :wavey:

:yeah: ;)

BuTtErFrEnA
Jun 1st, 2010, 02:32 PM
I don't think people thought that.. but the fact that they both made the slam finals in less than 4 tournaments back speaks incredible volumes.

yea it shows they are fresh :lol:

getting back into the wear and tear of the season they perform like everyone else :lol:


and yes people did think they would come and save the tour...look at the thread about how 2010 would be a slamless year for the ws...the ws recent success is due to the sidelining of their major rivals...the top 10 was going to have a drastic turn around with all the "pretenders" dropping out like caro...

Vlover
Jun 1st, 2010, 02:47 PM
People were acting like once the Belgians came back, it would all over for the Williamses...THAT was the underlying implication.
Tou are exactly correct. Especially after the US fiasco you would think that was the end of the Sisters.:tape: Remember how orgasmic some were about the Brisbane final, some even touting it as the best women's match in a long time.:tape: It is so good to see them now brought back to earth and the Belgians fitting quite well with everyone else and adding their portion of shit matches like everyone else.:lol: My question is who will they turn to next?;)

Matt01
Jun 1st, 2010, 03:41 PM
yea it shows they are fresh :lol:


At the beginning of season, at AO, everyone is fresh.



getting back into the wear and tear of the season they perform like everyone else :lol:


Probably not even you really believe this :lol:

miffedmax
Jun 1st, 2010, 04:47 PM
yea it shows they are fresh :lol:

getting back into the wear and tear of the season they perform like everyone else :lol:


and yes people did think they would come and save the tour...look at the thread about how 2010 would be a slamless year for the ws...the ws recent success is due to the sidelining of their major rivals...the top 10 was going to have a drastic turn around with all the "pretenders" dropping out like caro...

I'm glad somebody else remembers reading all that :bs:.

As long as I'm only delusional about Lena D. and her bangs, I can probably function (marginally, anyway)...

gentenaire
Jun 1st, 2010, 05:02 PM
yea it shows they are fresh :lol:

getting back into the wear and tear of the season they perform like everyone else :lol:


and yes people did think they would come and save the tour...look at the thread about how 2010 would be a slamless year for the ws...the ws recent success is due to the sidelining of their major rivals...the top 10 was going to have a drastic turn around with all the "pretenders" dropping out like caro...

I think the WS are playing better now than they did last year. I think the fact that Kim and Justine are back, has forced them to play better. They can no longer get away with the semi-form that they had last year.

I think the WTA tour is very exciting at the moment. Saving the tour doesn't necessarily mean dominating. I think the return of the Belgians has made the tour more interesting again, there's been more talk about it all, and in a way that IS saving the tour.

mure
Jun 29th, 2010, 03:16 PM
The Belgians can still save the tour....




the mixed doubles one....


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v255/Sarah87/Wimbledon%202010/media_xl_3771187.jpg