PDA

View Full Version : Who's better on grass? Davenport or Sharapova?


atominside
May 2nd, 2011, 10:56 PM
At their prime best. Discuss, i think lindsay :confused:

Sammo
May 2nd, 2011, 10:59 PM
That's a tough one. I'm gonna say Davenport but it's pretty close.

atominside
May 2nd, 2011, 11:04 PM
i retract my answer, i think ill go with maria. that h2h

Craig.
May 2nd, 2011, 11:06 PM
Davenport.

Lucemferre
May 2nd, 2011, 11:07 PM
These are tricky questions.You must be precise. Does this mean who achieved more or who beats who? You gotta go with sharapova because of h2h if youre asking who wins at their best but davenport achieved more on grass. Maria is still young though.

AcesHigh
May 3rd, 2011, 12:05 AM
Davenport and there is no other answer.

Davenport has 3 finals.. other semi's.. she also can go toe-to-toe with some of the GOATs on the surface in Steffi and Venus.
Sharapova could never produce tennis like the 2005 final

hurricanejeanne
May 3rd, 2011, 12:21 AM
Lindsay's Wimbledon record is pretty solid. Between 1998 and 2005, she at least made the quarterfinals, and that includes her championship run in 1999 and the finals in 2000 and 2005.

Maria may have won their one match up on the surface, but Linds' always played great tennis there, pushing Grass-GOAT Venus harder than anyone of their generation outside of Serena.

Sharapowerr
May 3rd, 2011, 12:23 AM
all the haters>> Davenport

Batiguza
May 3rd, 2011, 12:26 AM
Really tough one... Davenport maybe? :shrug:

Miss Atomic Bomb
May 3rd, 2011, 12:33 AM
In her prime, Lindsay had a better serve, better return, much better volleys and a better forehand than Sharapova in her prime (the only areas where Maria edges Lindsay is intensity and movement. I would rate their backhands at about the same level, Lindsay's being much more solid and fluid while Pova's being more volatile but rigid). No wonder Lindsay has achieved a lot more on grass than Sharapova :shrug:

BuTtErFrEnA
May 3rd, 2011, 12:33 AM
davenport without question

theFutureisNow
May 3rd, 2011, 12:48 AM
In her prime, Lindsay had a better serve, better return, much better volleys and a better forehand than Sharapova in her prime (the only areas where Maria edges Lindsay is intensity and movement. I would rate their backhands at about the same level, Lindsay's being much more solid and fluid while Pova's being more volatile but rigid). No wonder Lindsay has achieved a lot more on grass than Sharapova :shrug:

Then how do you explain that Maria crushed Lindsay H2H?

Obviously Sharapova had to be better at something.

Lindsay had a longer career, but I would guess in terms of slams/attempt and wins over top players that Maria was better.

Miss Atomic Bomb
May 3rd, 2011, 12:49 AM
Then how do you explain that Maria crushed Lindsay H2H?

Thats why I said 'In her Prime' (1998-01), since thats what the OP had asked.

BlueTrees
May 3rd, 2011, 12:49 AM
i retract my answer, i think ill go with maria. that h2h

In that case I guess Pironkova > Venus on grass.

BlueTrees
May 3rd, 2011, 12:50 AM
The last four years Sharapova has lost 4R - 2R - 2R - 4R...

BuTtErFrEnA
May 3rd, 2011, 01:02 AM
Then how do you explain that Maria crushed Lindsay H2H?

Obviously Sharapova had to be better at something.

Lindsay had a longer career, but I would guess in terms of slams/attempt and wins over top players that Maria was better.

ummm


maria is better mentally on a whole than lindsay...however, ON GRASS, lindsay is a better player, and the h-2-h on grass took 3 sets and a rain delay for maria to win (reminds madmax of cincy?) - ...better results at wimbly :shrug:

theFutureisNow
May 3rd, 2011, 01:06 AM
Thats why I said 'In her Prime' (1998-01), since thats what the OP had asked.

Lindsay's prime clearly extended through 2005.

1999 might have been the weakest year ever for Wimbledon. All Lindsay had to do was beat a retiring Graf and Novotna.

I don't care how much you guys like to us the injury excuse. 99 Graf isn't even in the same league as 04 Serena.

AcesHigh
May 3rd, 2011, 01:09 AM
Lindsay's prime clearly extended through 2005.

1999 might have been the weakest year ever for Wimbledon. All Lindsay had to do was beat a retiring Graf and Novotna.

I don't care how much you guys like to us the injury excuse. 99 Graf isn't even in the same league as 04 Serena.

No it clearly did not extend through 2005. What are you smokin ;)


And that 1999 Graf not being in the same league as 2004 Serena is :help:

Miss Atomic Bomb
May 3rd, 2011, 01:14 AM
Lindsay's prime clearly extended through 2005.

1999 might have been the weakest year ever for Wimbledon. All Lindsay had to do was beat a retiring Graf and Novotna.

I don't care how much you guys like to us the injury excuse. 99 Graf isn't even in the same league as 04 Serena.

Novotna on grass is a very formidable opponent (especially given the fact that she had won 17 of her last 18 matches at Wimbledon before losing to Lindsay). 99 Graf had won a slam just before Wimbledon while 04 Serena was coming back from an injury :shrug: Its not an excuse, its the truth.

And if you think a 29 year old Lindsay was still in her prime, then I am not even going to bother. She might've been ranked number 1, but then again even Serena was ranked #1 in 2008, Clijsters was ranked #1 in 2010 and they were nowhere near her prime either. The only reason she was number 1 was because the WS and Belgians were sidelined/injured during the various parts of the season.

theFutureisNow
May 3rd, 2011, 01:14 AM
No it clearly did not extend through 2005. What are you smokin ;)


And that 1999 Graf not being in the same league as 2004 Serena is :help:

She was #1 in 2005. I know you hate Maria, but seriously.

The reason she didn't win slams after 2000 was that the competition at the top was much better. She was playing just as well.

AcesHigh
May 3rd, 2011, 01:17 AM
She was #1 in 2005. I know you hate Maria, but seriously.

The reason she didn't win slams after 2000 was that the competition at the top was much better. She was playing just as well.

:sobbing: I can't. So the competition of Kuznetsova, Dementieva, Sharapova was better than Hingis, Graf, Serena, Venus and Capriati?

Davenport was #1 in 2005 b/c the big 4 was a MESS and no one else was good enough to take the spot.

danieln1
May 3rd, 2011, 01:21 AM
Even though she has a title, since 2006 Sharapova doesn´t go beyond the fourth round, something Lindsay in her last years constantly reaches QF or better...

Lindsay is the better player on grass, she knew how to play on that surface like very few people did....

Potato
May 3rd, 2011, 01:53 AM
She was #1 in 2005. I know you hate Maria, but seriously.

The reason she didn't win slams after 2000 was that the competition at the top was much better. She was playing just as well.

:hysteric::facepalm: What is this I don't even

Smitten
May 3rd, 2011, 01:59 AM
Davenport solidified herself. She made far more in-roads against Venus than Sharapova ever did.

Every year Sharapova's Wimbledon title looks more and more like a fluke...

In The Zone
May 3rd, 2011, 02:05 AM
Davenport, easily.

Sharapova's game was never solid on grass. The stars aligned and she peaked at the best moment. Sharapova excels best on a medium-fast hardcourt where the ball sits up a little.

Sharapova does not have the reach or the athleticism to excel purely on grass.

Davenport compensated for her lack of athleticism with incredible placement and heavy topsin, something Sharapova has no clue about.

The finals and semifinals show it.

It's not a coincidence that Sharapova's best results in the past three years have been on clay.

The whole "Wimbledon at 17" thing has been completely blown out of porportion. Sharapova is a hard-court player. Always has been. Those results usually translate to a Wimbledon run but as the Dulkos, Kudryavtsevas can say, it doesn't make it fact.

Sharapowerr
May 3rd, 2011, 02:16 AM
@InTheZone, from a Britney Spears fan it is ..... , Maria is like a decade younger leads 6-1 against Davenport, both 3 GS, Maria won at 17 FACT and she beat Lindsay when they met in the SF.\\

In The Zone
May 3rd, 2011, 02:32 AM
What the hell is with people using BRITNEY against my comments!

STOP HOLDING IT AGAINST ME!!!

Bunch of haters I tell you. And head to head has nothing to do with you. On what surface was the majority of the matchups? ding ding ding ding ding. hardcourts.

RenaSlam.
May 3rd, 2011, 02:56 AM
Lindsay's prime clearly extended through 2005.

1999 might have been the weakest year ever for Wimbledon. All Lindsay had to do was beat a retiring Graf and Novotna.

I don't care how much you guys like to us the injury excuse. 99 Graf isn't even in the same league as 04 Serena.

The Graf of '99 could most definitely be Top 3 right now. No question.

theFutureisNow
May 3rd, 2011, 02:57 AM
Lol. I like how you guys all dance around the obvious facts.

We know Lindsay is great on grass thanks to her massive 2 titles in an unusually long career. Maria has 3 in a much shorter period, not that anyone's counting.

Also, we all know Maria's career as a top player probably ended thanks to her shoulder injury. Maria only played Wimbledon 4 times in her prime. She won once and lost to the champion the other 3 times. For all we know, Maria was the second best player those 3 years.

Throw in Maria's dominant H2H vs Lindsay and her grass victory over her in a year Davenport reached #1 and there is no fact-based case that Lindsay was better than Maria.

starin
May 3rd, 2011, 02:58 AM
Thats why I said 'In her Prime' (1998-01), since thats what the OP had asked.

no way was that her prime. That may be when she won all her slams but I thought she was much fitter, faster (lol) and playing some of her best tennis in 2005. in 1998-2001 she was fat and ridiculously slow.

Davenport > Sharapova but in a wimbly final I would beat on Sharapova to pull through.

BlueTrees
May 3rd, 2011, 03:24 AM
Lol. I like how you guys all dance around the obvious facts.

We know Lindsay is great on grass thanks to her massive 2 titles in an unusually long career. Maria has 3 in a much shorter period, not that anyone's counting.

Also, we all know Maria's career as a top player probably ended thanks to her shoulder injury. Maria only played Wimbledon 4 times in her prime. She won once and lost to the champion the other 3 times. For all we know, Maria was the second best player those 3 years.

Throw in Maria's dominant H2H vs Lindsay and her grass victory over her in a year Davenport reached #1 and there is no fact-based case that Lindsay was better than Maria.

Take a look at the poll and who's "dancing around the obvious facts". Maybe it's no coincidence that you're a Sharapova fan and you're trying to make out that in her peak she's better than Davenport on grass.

Pops Maellard
May 3rd, 2011, 03:26 AM
Davenport. Since 2004 Pova hasn't reached another final. Davenport reached two more finals after winning it.

faboozadoo15
May 3rd, 2011, 04:00 AM
Another title, and Sharapova's way ahead of Davenport. Looking like a good shot when her greatest competition in a few years will be Woz, Azarenka, and... Kvitova?

faboozadoo15
May 3rd, 2011, 04:06 AM
After Sharapova beat Lindsay at Wimbledon, Lindsay ran roughshod over everyone for the rest of the year, USO aside. She was at her best. She won 5 of the next 6 tournaments she entered!

BlueTrees
May 3rd, 2011, 04:10 AM
Another title, and Sharapova's way ahead of Davenport. Looking like a good shot when her greatest competition in a few years will be Woz, Azarenka, and... Kvitova?

Seeing as Sharapova's playing her best tennis in years yet still loses 6-1 6-2 to Wozniacki and 6-4 6-1 to Azarenka...yeah. ;)

faboozadoo15
May 3rd, 2011, 04:49 AM
Seeing as Sharapova's playing her best tennis in years yet still loses 6-1 6-2 to Wozniacki and 6-4 6-1 to Azarenka...yeah. ;)

Best tennis in years? More consistent, maybe... She was pretty flat in both of those matches, to disagree with that would be crazy.

doomsday
May 3rd, 2011, 06:00 AM
no way was that her prime. That may be when she won all her slams but I thought she was much fitter, faster (lol) and playing some of her best tennis in 2005. in 1998-2001 she was fat and ridiculously slow.

Davenport > Sharapova but in a wimbly final I would beat on Sharapova to pull through.

THIS. Even though Lindsay is a lil better on grass you just know Maria would beat her in a Wimbledon final and prolly anywhere else.

doomsday
May 3rd, 2011, 06:01 AM
ummm


maria is better mentally on a whole than lindsay...however, ON GRASS, lindsay is a better player, and the h-2-h on grass took 3 sets and a rain delay for maria to win (reminds madmax of cincy?) - ...better results at wimbly :shrug:

:help: Wimbledon final 2004 happened, just get over it.

justineheninfan
May 3rd, 2011, 06:29 AM
Davenport. Sharapova had 3 very strong years at Wimbledon (2004-2006) and even in those was on her way to being walloped by Davenport in the semis before the rain delay (04), was spanked by Venus in the semis (2005), and lost to Mauresmo in the semis (2006). Davenport was a very strong performer at Wimbledon for many years, basically every appearance from 99-2005.

justineheninfan
May 3rd, 2011, 06:31 AM
Another title, and Sharapova's way ahead of Davenport. Looking like a good shot when her greatest competition in a few years will be Woz, Azarenka, and... Kvitova?

Maybe you havent been paying attention but Wozniacki and Azarenka have been handing Maria her worst beatdowns over the last year or so. They do it almost entirely by provoking alot of sloppy errors by Maria, but that cant just be coincidence, obviously their playing styles are a bad matchup for her these days. At her best I think she would have little problem with either outside of clay, but it is equally clear she is past her best tennis for good most likely.

The one saving grace for her is Wozniacki probably will always sort of suck on grass, and many of the other up and comers also prefer hard courts or clay. Still Maria's odds to ever win another slam anywhere are less than good right now.

VeeJJ
May 3rd, 2011, 06:33 AM
Davenport as of right now. Maria still has plenty of years to win another Wimbledon or two. This conversation will change then, but for now, Davenport takes the cake.

madmax
May 3rd, 2011, 06:43 AM
gotta love how despite that all the facts are favouring Sharapova in this case scenario, TF still knows "better" and proclaims Davenport being much better...and so Maria's diminishing and bashing continues:yawn:

doomsday
May 3rd, 2011, 06:43 AM
Maybe you havent been paying attention but Wozniacki and Azarenka have been handing Maria her worst beatdowns over the last year or so. They do it almost entirely by provoking alot of sloppy errors by Maria, but that cant just be coincidence, obviously their playing styles are a bad matchup for her these days. At her best I think she would have little problem with either outside of clay, but it is equally clear she is past her best tennis for good most likely.

The one saving grace for her is Wozniacki probably will always sort of suck on grass, and many of the other up and comers also prefer hard courts or clay. Still Maria's odds to ever win another slam anywhere are less than good right now.

Maybe you haven't been paying attention but Cibulkova spanked Maria over the last years too. Anyway when Maria is very flat she can't produce any good shot and basically spray errors all over the place, there isn't much Caroline and Cibulkova had to do if you ask me, Maria was in a error mode and really tired in both matches and we saw what happened.
Maria can sure do better than that against pushers/retrievers/whatever.

justineheninfan
May 3rd, 2011, 06:46 AM
Maybe you haven't been paying attention but Cibulkova spanked Maria over the last years too. Anyway when Maria is very flat she can't produce any good shot and basically spray errors all over the place, there isn't much Caroline and Cibulkova had to do if you ask me, Maria was in a error mode and really tired in both matches and we saw what happened.
Maria can sure do better than that against pushers/retrievers/whatever.

LOL what is your point exactly. :lol: Cibulkova is basically a very poor womens version of the Wozniacki and Azarenka game styles and you are the one who chooses to point out even she whooops on Maria these days, so actually you only further validate my point. Maria at this stage in her career has mega trouble with that style of player, let alone the two of the younger age group who do it best.

justineheninfan
May 3rd, 2011, 06:48 AM
gotta love how despite that all the facts are favouring Sharapova in this case scenario, TF still knows "better" and proclaims Davenport being much better...and so Maria's diminishing and bashing continues:yawn:

Besides the head to head stat what other "facts" are in Maria's favor that you are referring to:

Slam titles- Davenport 3, Sharapova 3
Slam finals- Davenport 7, Sharapova 4
Career titles- Davenport 55, Sharapova 22
Year end #1- Davenport 4, Sharapova 0
Wimbledon finals- Davenport 3, Sharapova 1
Wimbledon semis- Davenport 5, Sharapova 3

If you want to believe Maria was better based on subjective opinion and not facts which obviously dont exist that support that, then fine. Dont make me laugh by referring to the fact s that support Maria being over Lindsay though. The arguments (and I agree there are valid ones that could be made) on Maria being better are based on anything but facts.

doomsday
May 3rd, 2011, 07:00 AM
LOL what is your point exactly. :lol: Cibulkova is basically a very poor womens version of the Wozniacki and Azarenka game styles and you are the one who chooses to point out even she whooops on Maria these days, so actually you only further validate my point. Maria at this stage in her career has mega trouble with that style of player, let alone the two of the younger age group who do it best.

Cibulkova defeated Woz this year in straights and lost in 3 sets against Azarenka in Miami.
Anyway I was just saying that Maria would have lost to many players in IW SF because she was tired so that loss isn't really an indicator. They caught her at a really good time I can admit that she has trouble against pushers these days but seriously losing 1 and 2 and love and 2(almost love and love):lol:

madmax
May 3rd, 2011, 07:03 AM
Besides the head to head stat what other "facts" are in Maria's favor that you are referring to:

Slam titles- Davenport 3, Sharapova 3
Slam finals- Davenport 7, Sharapova 4
Career titles- Davenport 55, Sharapova 22
Year end #1- Davenport 4, Sharapova 0
Wimbledon finals- Davenport 3, Sharapova 1
Wimbledon semis- Davenport 5, Sharapova 3

If you want to believe Maria was better based on subjective opinion and not facts which obviously dont exist that support that, then fine. Dont make me laugh by referring to the fact s that support Maria being over Lindsay though. The arguments (and I agree there are valid ones that could be made) on Maria being better are based on anything but facts.

Maria won all the important H2H meeting with Lindsay (first one while being a 17 years old teenager nonetheless) - check
She has the same amount of slam titles, which she achieved in much shorter time span and still has opportunity to win more of them in the future - check
She lost to eventual IW winners three times in a row from 2005-2007, meaning that she was still very close to winning a trophy those years - check

These are my arguments. And I don't need any arbitrary BS about how Lindsay trumps Maria game wise, because that was clearly not the case in their H2H history.

VeeJJ
May 3rd, 2011, 07:05 AM
Besides the head to head stat what other "facts" are in Maria's favor that you are referring to:

Slam titles- Davenport 3, Sharapova 3
Slam finals- Davenport 7, Sharapova 4
Career titles- Davenport 55, Sharapova 22
Year end #1- Davenport 4, Sharapova 0
Wimbledon finals- Davenport 3, Sharapova 1
Wimbledon semis- Davenport 5, Sharapova 3

If you want to believe Maria was better based on subjective opinion and not facts which obviously dont exist that support that, then fine. Dont make me laugh by referring to the fact s that support Maria being over Lindsay though. The arguments (and I agree there are valid ones that could be made) on Maria being better are based on anything but facts.

Your forgetting the most important fact!!!

Davenport - Non-active Player, Sharapova - 6 more years of a career left give or take.

justineheninfan
May 3rd, 2011, 07:08 AM
Your forgetting the most important fact!!!

Davenport - Non-active Player, Sharapova - 6 more years of a career left give or take.

That only means something if a player is going strong enough it seems fairly obvious they are going to add to their achievements. Which is clearly not the case here (not that it couldnt happen, but it seems more unlikely than likely and thus not even worth considering until/if it actually does happen).

doomsday
May 3rd, 2011, 07:12 AM
That only means something if a player is going strong enough it seems fairly obvious they are going to add to their achievements. Which is clearly not the case here (not that it couldnt happen, but it seems more unlikely than likely and thus not even worth considering until/if it actually does happen).

Maybe but she is definitely on the right track. She has many chances to come back in top 5 after RG.

theFutureisNow
May 3rd, 2011, 07:13 AM
Davenport. Sharapova had 3 very strong years at Wimbledon (2004-2006) and even in those was on her way to being walloped by Davenport in the semis before the rain delay (04), was spanked by Venus in the semis (2005), and lost to Mauresmo in the semis (2006). Davenport was a very strong performer at Wimbledon for many years, basically every appearance from 99-2005.

Davenport was in her prime from 97-05. Sharapova from 04-07. In her prime Sharapova never lost to anyone but the champion. They both averaged making it to the semifinals. Even though you don't need a tiebreaker since Maria wins this comparison you can add Maria's Wimbledon win or 5-1 H2H record to leave no doubt.

97-2R Lost to QF
98-QF Lost to F
99-Winner
00-F Lost to Winner
01-SF Lost to Winner
03-QF Lost to F
04-SF Lost to Winner
05-F Lost to Winner


04-Winner
05-SF Lost to Winner
06-SF Lost to Winner
07-4R Lost to Winner

You guys can bad rep me all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that prime Maria was better than Lindsay.

SwingVolley93
May 3rd, 2011, 07:24 AM
Davenport was in her prime from 97-05. Sharapova from 04-07. In her prime Sharapova never lost to anyone but the champion. They both averaged making it to the semifinals. Even though you don't need a tiebreaker since Maria wins this comparison you can add Maria's Wimbledon win or 5-1 H2H record to leave no doubt.

97-2R Lost to QF
98-QF Lost to F
99-Winner
00-F Lost to Winner
01-SF Lost to Winner
03-QF Lost to F
04-SF Lost to Winner
05-F Lost to Winner


04-Winner
05-SF Lost to Winner
06-SF Lost to Winner
07-4R Lost to Winner

You guys can bad rep me all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that prime Maria was better than Lindsay.

wtf is your point? Davenport has more success at Wimbledon and those stats that you just posted prove it...you just contradicted yourself...:lol:

theFutureisNow
May 3rd, 2011, 07:31 AM
wtf is your point? Davenport has more success at Wimbledon and those stats that you just posted prove it...you just contradicted yourself...:lol:

Clearly you don't know how to read. I guess I will repeat myself.

Maria averaged the same Wimbledon result as Lindsay but against better competition. She beat her at Wimbledon and won the overall H2H 5-1.

There was nothing contradictory about my post and nothing to indicate Lindsay was better.

BartoLiNa
May 3rd, 2011, 08:02 AM
At their peak I would say they are pretty evenly matched, but Davenport gets my vote due to her great net game.

AcesHigh
May 3rd, 2011, 08:10 AM
Clearly you don't know how to read. I guess I will repeat myself.

Maria averaged the same Wimbledon result as Lindsay but against better competition. She beat her at Wimbledon and won the overall H2H 5-1.

There was nothing contradictory about my post and nothing to indicate Lindsay was better.

:sobbing: you are too much

bandabou
May 3rd, 2011, 08:50 AM
Maria's wimbledon run is proving to be more and more a fluke as the years pass. I mean, her results starting from ' 05 are too sad for words. Davenport was pretty consistent there. Basically only losing to Venus for the whole ' 00- ' 05 period.

doomsday
May 3rd, 2011, 09:12 AM
Maria's wimbledon run is proving to be more and more a fluke as the years pass. I mean, her results starting from ' 05 are too sad for words. Davenport was pretty consistent there. Basically only losing to Venus for the whole ' 00- ' 05 period.

Sharapova's results after her win are more than decent, always losing against the eventual champ before the injury.
But I think we get it Sharapova's run is a fluke and Serena's win at FO in 2002 will never be a fluke no matter her next results who are worse than Maria's ones.

Shinjiro
May 3rd, 2011, 09:17 AM
Davy – I mean, the stronger built one. :sobbing:

BlueTrees
May 3rd, 2011, 09:40 AM
Clearly you don't know how to read. I guess I will repeat myself.

Maria averaged the same Wimbledon result as Lindsay but against better competition. She beat her at Wimbledon and won the overall H2H 5-1.

There was nothing contradictory about my post and nothing to indicate Lindsay was better.

Right. I guess Mauresmo > Sharapova then seeing as she beat her at Wimbledon and won the overall H2H 3-1. :wavey:

BlueTrees
May 3rd, 2011, 09:43 AM
Sharapova's results after her win are more than decent, always losing against the eventual champ before the injury.
But I think we get it Sharapova's run is a fluke and Serena's win at FO in 2002 will never be a fluke no matter her next results who are worse than Maria's ones.

People really need to stop blaming Sharapova's decline on the shoulder injury. It's been over two years now. :rolleyes: If you think that's the only reason she dropped down the rankings then you're delusional. That's like me saying if it wasn't for Safina's back injury she'd still be Top 5. :o

skanky~skanketta
May 3rd, 2011, 09:57 AM
Davenport DUH!

She did everything better, except maybe serve. Oh and mentality of course. Lindsay had such a gorgeous game, effortless hard hitting and deft touch at the net. For someone with her horrendous movement, she achieved plenty. Opponent had one game plan playing her: make her move. But it was never easy. That's how good her strokes were. She didnt have to move.

Sharapova has the hard flat balls, the killer serve and strong mentality. However, I think that similar to clay, the grass courts exposed her weaknesses a lot. Her movement wasn't great and her variety was limited.

bandabou
May 3rd, 2011, 10:04 AM
Sharapova's results after her win are more than decent, always losing against the eventual champ before the injury.
But I think we get it Sharapova's run is a fluke and Serena's win at FO in 2002 will never be a fluke no matter her next results who are worse than Maria's ones.

Oh the shoulder..it already started in ' 06, huh? You really wanna compare Masha's results at Wimbledon to Serena's at RG? Hmm..
Serena has reached the second week every year at RG, except ' 08. Maria? Only last year she finally advanced past 4th round since ' 06! :help:
And Serena's always competitive in her losses there. mp on Stosur, 3-1 lead in the 3rd set against Sveta. Has been losing to the winner in almost all those years, except ' 08 and '10;. Soooo...:shrug:

doomsday
May 3rd, 2011, 10:35 AM
People really need to stop blaming Sharapova's decline on the shoulder injury. It's been over two years now. :rolleyes: If you think that's the only reason she dropped down the rankings then you're delusional. That's like me saying if it wasn't for Safina's back injury she'd still be Top 5. :o

I think that's the main reason why she lost to Dulko and whoever it was in 2008. Period.

Oh the shoulder..it already started in ' 06, huh? You really wanna compare Masha's results at Wimbledon to Serena's at RG? Hmm..
Serena has reached the second week every year at RG, except ' 08. Maria? Only last year she finally advanced past 4th round since ' 06! :help:
And Serena's always competitive in her losses there. mp on Stosur, 3-1 lead in the 3rd set against Sveta. Has been losing to the winner in almost all those years, except ' 08 and '10;. Soooo...:shrug:

Maria lost to Venus two times, the greatest active grasscourt player and also a loss to Serena, second greatest active grasscourt player. She lost against quality opponents on the surface.
Serena despite reaching the second weeks lost against scrubs, Kuznetsova and Stosur can you remind me their record at the French? :help:
Anyway Maria has still time to win another Wimbledon whereas Serena will prolly never win another French.

bandabou
May 3rd, 2011, 10:44 AM
I think that's the main reason why she lost to Dulko and whoever it was in 2008. Period.



Maria lost to Venus two times, the greatest active grasscourt player and also a loss to Serena, second greatest active grasscourt player. She lost against quality opponents on the surface.
Serena despite reaching the second weeks lost against scrubs, Kuznetsova and Stosur can you remind me their record at the French? :help:
Anyway Maria has still time to win another Wimbledon whereas Serena will prolly never win another French.

:lol: Of course..Maria winning another Wimbledon? :spit: Ok, if you still believe that OSama is alive, then maybe..:lol:

Pump-it-UP
May 3rd, 2011, 10:46 AM
Maria lost to Venus two times, the greatest active grasscourt player and also a loss to Serena, second greatest active grasscourt player. She lost against quality opponents on the surface.
Serena despite reaching the second weeks lost against scrubs, Kuznetsova and Stosur can you remind me their record at the French? :help:
Anyway Maria has still time to win another Wimbledon whereas Serena will prolly never win another French.

If Kuznetsova and Stosur are scrubs, then please describe Dulko and Kudryavtseva. :tape::lol: Quality opponents? Dulko's record at Wimbledon is 9-9 and Kudryavtseva's is 4-5. :help:

I love Maria, but stop. This isn't an argument you're going to win. :hug:

Sp!ffy
May 3rd, 2011, 10:50 AM
:lol: Of course..Maria winning another Wimbledon? :spit: Ok, if you still believe that OSama is alive, then maybe..:lol:

Well I haven't exactly seen the body. :unsure:

doomsday
May 3rd, 2011, 10:50 AM
If Kuznetsova and Stosur are scrubs, then please describe Dulko and Kudryavtseva. :tape::lol: Quality opponents? Dulko's record at Wimbledon is 9-9 and Kudryavtseva's is 4-5. :help:

I love Maria, but stop. This isn't an argument you're going to win. :hug:

We were talking about players reaching finals of these events, did I bring Robotnik.:rolleyes:

:lol: Of course..Maria winning another Wimbledon? :spit: Ok, if you still believe that OSama is alive, then maybe..:lol:

What's so funny about that?

doomsday
May 3rd, 2011, 10:51 AM
Well I haven't exactly seen the body. :unsure:

:lol: I think Osama is dead five years ago.:lol:

hectopascal
May 3rd, 2011, 10:54 AM
I always thought on tennisforum that SLAM > NO SLAM.

doomsday
May 3rd, 2011, 10:56 AM
I always thought on tennisforum that SLAM > NO SLAM.

They both have one.

bandabou
May 3rd, 2011, 11:12 AM
We were talking about players reaching finals of these events, did I bring Robotnik.:rolleyes:



What's so funny about that?

:lol: And that's the thing..Srbetonik is the ONLY player Serena lost to at RG since ' 01 that didn't reach at least the SF.

Wishful thinking by your part. NOTHING in Maria's results at Wimbledon suggest she's threat anymore there. Heck, not even on HC can she be called a factor. Funnily it might be on clay she can actually do some damage. Although 3-sets against Rus and Makarova?! :help:

doomsday
May 3rd, 2011, 11:25 AM
:lol: And that's the thing..Srbetonik is the ONLY player Serena lost to at RG since ' 01 that didn't reach at least the SF.

Fine but if it wasn't for WS, Maria would have won more titles can we say the same thing with Serena and the French not sure about that.

Wishful thinking by your part. NOTHING in Maria's results at Wimbledon suggest she's threat anymore there. Heck, not even on HC can she be called a factor. Funnily it might be on clay she can actually do some damage. Although 3-sets against Rus and Makarova?! :help:

She lost against the eventual champ last year, there is hope. One thing is sure it's that Maria believe in her chances and she'll be on Tour many more years to prove you wrong.

bandabou
May 3rd, 2011, 11:31 AM
Fine but if it wasn't for WS, Maria would have won more titles can we say the same thing with Serena and the French not sure about that.



She lost against the eventual champ last year, there is hope. One thing is sure it's that Maria believe in her chances and she'll be on Tour many more years to prove you wrong.

Well, considering Serena's record at majors once she gets past the QF's..and the people that won it in recent years...

That's a good thing. Always keep believing.

atominside
May 3rd, 2011, 01:39 PM
The polling results seems very one sided, but i think itll be a toss up, at their prime. I really think maria would come out on top though, but overall better grass player, based on her results, i think itll be davenport

AcesHigh
May 3rd, 2011, 01:54 PM
Losing against the eventual champion means nothing... you still lost. There's no consolation prize, sorry.

BuTtErFrEnA
May 3rd, 2011, 03:11 PM
:help: Wimbledon final 2004 happened, just get over it.

7 years later, with 13 slams to only 2 more...i'm already way over it :lol: in fact...2005 sf beatdown showed me i was over it :rolls:


get a grip mashafaaan :lol: i simply included that since you and others kept harping on about how kim only won cincy due to a rain delay...see how the tables can turn?

BuTtErFrEnA
May 3rd, 2011, 03:13 PM
Right. I guess Mauresmo > Sharapova then seeing as she beat her at Wimbledon and won the overall H2H 3-1. :wavey:

with both having 1 wimbledon title as well :lol:

doomsday
May 3rd, 2011, 03:58 PM
7 years later, with 13 slams to only 2 more...i'm already way over it :lol: in fact...2005 sf beatdown showed me i was over it :rolls:


get a grip mashafaaan :lol: i simply included that since you and others kept harping on about how kim only won cincy due to a rain delay...see how the tables can turn?

Well then you should know that I'm not one of those mashafaans, Maria choked in that final period.
The SF vs Lindsay is another story I don't remember Lindsay having match points or sth, Maria was too good when it mattered.

BuTtErFrEnA
May 3rd, 2011, 04:01 PM
predictable :lol:


anywho...lindsay is better on grass

Shivank17
May 3rd, 2011, 04:03 PM
Well,Lindsay has the better record currently cause she has completed her career.Maria has years to play and I think we can only compare them once Masha completes her career.As of current records ,it has to be Lindsay.

doomsday
May 3rd, 2011, 04:20 PM
predictable :lol:


anywho...lindsay is better on grass

And that's exactly what I said in this thread but we will compare again once Maria's carreer is over.