PDA

View Full Version : Rank the 15 best hard court players since start of 1997


justineheninfan
Oct 26th, 2011, 06:20 PM
It seems the best surface of most of the women the last 15 years have been hard courts. So how would you rank the best 15 hard court players since the start of 1997. Here would be mine:

1. Serena Williams

----huge gap-----


2. Kim Clijsters
3. Martina Hingis
4. Justine Henin
5. Lindsay Davenport
6. Maria Sharapova
7. Venus Williams (would put higher but she didnt win the Australian unfortunately)
8. Jennifer Capriati (no U.S Open final)
9. Amelie Mauresmo

-----enormous gap-----

10. Svetlana Kuznetsova
11. Elena Dementieva
12. Monica Seles
13. Sam Stosur
14. Caroline Wozniacki
15. Jelena Jankovic



Graf and Seles obviously arent high since they didnt win a major hard cour title in this span, although Seles won a good number of decent tournaments. I ranked Elena over her since she won Olympic Gold and reached a U.S Open final in that span. Stosur made the list only because of her U.S Open title, beating Serena in the final.

DragonFlame
Oct 26th, 2011, 06:26 PM
On achievements or level of play? Hingis is not a better hardcourt player then justine looking at level of play.

Pump-it-UP
Oct 26th, 2011, 06:27 PM
3-7 are all interchangeable IMO

justineheninfan
Oct 26th, 2011, 06:28 PM
On achievements or level of play? Hingis is not a better hardcourt player then justine looking at level of play.

It depends on your own criteria.

I agree with you about level of play but with 6 straight Australian Open finals, 3 straight Australian Open titles, a U.S Open title, titles in Miami, and two titles at the WTA Championships like Henin (I dont even remember which years they were on hard courts and which they were on carpet anymore), her achievements force me to rank her above Henin.

I think Henin, Davenport, and Venus at their best on hard courts would most times be too much for Hingis though. Harder to say with Sharapova as they arent even from the same era really.

skanky~skanketta
Oct 26th, 2011, 06:29 PM
WTF is there an "enormous gap" between Kuznetsova/Dementieva and Mauresmo?

shap_half
Oct 26th, 2011, 06:35 PM
Notable exclusions: Pierce (Australian and US finalist during this period plus a YEC finals), Myskina (no real accomplishment on hard but very good on the surface anyway), Zvonareva (similar accomplishments to Wozniacki in terms of significant events)...

Wozniacki, Stosur and Jankovic are terrible options really...Stosur has done NOTHING on hard except win the Open.

The Dementieva, Kuznetsova and Mauresmo conversation is interesting, because if I had to bet on it, more often than not I think Dementieva would win against both of them, but she's the one who struggled to take her career to that slam winning level. In fact, Dementieva, based on skill alone, is not worse than say Sharapova or Capriati.

My rankings
Serena
Kim
Justine
Lindsay
Martina
Venus
Maria
Jennifer
Dementieva
Mauresmo
Kuznetsova
Pierce
Seles
Zvonareva
Jankovic

melodynelson
Oct 26th, 2011, 06:40 PM
Mauresmo won Montreal twice, AO W, A F, Olympics silver, two USO SF. Is indoor hard or carpet or just indoors included in this at all?

Kuznetsova has Miami W, USO W, USO F, Beijing W, Dubai F, 2 IW F...it's close, actually. One win and one final each at a major hardcourt, but Mauresmo made SF multiple times at USO where Kuznetsova never made a single AO SF. But Kuznetsova has three additional TI hardcourt Fs (equal or better or not as good as Mauresmo's Olympics F?) and I think overall was more consistent or better than Mauresmo in TI HC events.

Dementieva made USO F, 3 USO SF and 1 AO SF. Olympic gold, silver, title in Canada, finals in Miami/Indian Wells/Tokyo (when it was outdoors). Order is right, though.

Direwolf
Oct 26th, 2011, 06:40 PM
Serena
Venus
Justine
Kim
Lindsay
Martina

There are no others.

justineheninfan
Oct 26th, 2011, 06:41 PM
WTF is there an "enormous gap" between Kuznetsova/Dementieva and Mauresmo?

Mauresmo has beaten Clijsters, Henin, Capriati, Serena, Davenport, all in hard court slams. Clijsters, Henin, Capriati, Davenport, were all at the very top of the game at the time, although Serena was in her worst year ever. Kuznetsova has beaten Davenport, Henin, Pierce in slams, and that was an injured Davenport, Henin in her final ever event, and Pierce in a huge slump and ranked very low. Mauresmo in hard court slams has 1 title, 1 runner up, 2 semis. Kuznetsova has 1 title, 1 runner up, and no very strong results at the Australian Open. Mauresmo has also won a WTA Championships and been runner up in one on hard courts. She has beaten the likes of Henin, Clijsters , Sharapova, Pierce, and others at the event, some more than once. Kuznetsova has no success at the WTA Championships, and only 1 tier title of any kind on hard courts. Mauresmo in addition to her WTA Championship title has 2 other hard court tier 1s, in addition to another tier 1 title on carpet (ok carpet is another surface but closest to hard court). Dementieva meanwhile doesnt even have a hard court slam, only one final, and also little success at the WTA Championships. All she has compared to Mauresmo is the Olympic singles Gold (vs silver for Mauresmo).

Yes Mauresmo is definitely far above Kuznetsova or Dementieva on hard courts IMO (feel free to make your own list if you disagree though).

Come to think of it though Maursemo is probably in her own category. She is clearly behind 3-7 and even probably Capriati, while well ahead of Kuznetsova or Dementieva.

justineheninfan
Oct 26th, 2011, 06:43 PM
Wozniacki over Zvonerava or Myskina? No, thanks.

Well in achievements she clearly is. In terms of level of play I agree she isnt, but I knew I would get flamed if I didnt include Wozniacki with all her tier 1 and tier 2 titles on the surface (and a number of good slam results already).

Myskina really didnt achieve nearly as much as she could have on hard courts.

shap_half
Oct 26th, 2011, 09:41 PM
Yes Mauresmo is definitely far above Kuznetsova or Dementieva on hard courts IMO (feel free to make your own list if you disagree though).


Far above by what criteria? By achievements she is probably far above Dementieva, but not really that far above Kuznetsova. I'd be curious to hear your take if this were measured by skill, because outside Mauresmo's AO win (where a handful of people she played against pretty much retired midway through the match), I can't recall many significant career highlights where she showcased her amazing hard court game.

GOATdin0931
Oct 26th, 2011, 09:43 PM
Its obviously Melanie Oudin...are you people dumb or stupid!? :tape:

Serena #1 Pleaseeeeeee :facepalm:

justineheninfan
Oct 26th, 2011, 09:47 PM
Far above by what criteria? By achievements she is probably far above Dementieva, but not really that far above Kuznetsova. I'd be curious to hear your take if this were measured by skill, because outside Mauresmo's AO win (where a handful of people she played against pretty much retired midway through the match), I can't recall many significant career highlights where she showcased her amazing hard court game.

Actually I just broke down their achievements in detail. In terms of achievements Mauresmo is far ahead of Kuznetsova on hard courts. The only area they are equal is both having 1 hard court slam.

As for skill Kuznetsova's lack of ability to beat the best players hardly ever, esepcialy in Slams (amazing she could win 2 slams and make 2 other finals with so few impressive wins) or in regular tournament finals says it all. Except for Serena and Davenport, Mauresmo beat all the top players of her era quite often.

spencercarlos
Oct 26th, 2011, 09:53 PM
Clijsters is so strong on hardcourts, despite she trails Hingis in the # GS Finals on hardcourts Category, she outnumber her by a lot in the number of titles.

shap_half
Oct 26th, 2011, 10:02 PM
Actually I just broke down their achievements in detail. In terms of achievements Mauresmo is far ahead of Kuznetsova on hard courts. The only area they are equal is both having 1 hard court slam.

As for skill Kuznetsova's lack of ability to beat the best players hardly ever, esepcialy in Slams (amazing she could win 2 slams and make 2 other finals with so few impressive wins) or in regular tournament finals says it all. Except for Serena and Davenport, Mauresmo beat all the top players of her era quite often.

Obviously stats point to Mauresmo, but I've never been convinced that she's that big a threat on the surface. For example, no USO final. She and Capriati are the only people on your list to not make the USO final. I suppose there's really nothing concrete that will make the case for Dementieva, who I think is a fantastic hardcourt player, and at her best is better than players who have won a couple of hard court slams.

justineheninfan
Oct 26th, 2011, 10:10 PM
Obviously stats point to Mauresmo, but I've never been convinced that she's that big a threat on the surface. For example, no USO final. She and Capriati are the only people on your list to not make the USO final. I suppose there's really nothing concrete that will make the case for Dementieva, who I think is a fantastic hardcourt player, and at her best is better than players who have won a couple of hard court slams.

Well I thought Mauresmo was atleast a moderate threat on all surfaces. She didnt have one surface that really stood out but she was good on all of them. I dont think not reaching a U.S Open final is the only barometer. For example Capriati never reached a U.S Open final and I consider her a significantly better hard court player than Kuznetsova, Zvonareva, Wozniacki, who all have. I even consider her a better hard court player than Sanchez Vicario who has won a U.S Open and reached another final.

Kuznetsova never seemed like that big a threat on hard courts to me either, definitely less of one than Mauresmo. The only surface she ever felt like one of the elite was clay. Her U.S Open title and U.S Open runner up both came totally out of the blue, and nobody was expecting them. She didnt really post any big wins to get to either one, other than an injured Davenport. She is never picked among the favorites for any hard court slams, only the French. Atleast Mauresmo's 2006 Australian Open final wasnt much of a surprise as she was one of the favorites. She was one of the favorites to win the 2004 and 2006 U.S Opens too (note I am saying among the favorites, not THE favorite), which Kuznetsova probably never was for a hard court slam.

Now on Dementieva I can see your point to some degree. Still she failed to deliver the big wins, and she seemed a much bigger favorite for big hard court events in 2008-2010 when the womens game had already begun to fall apart. She wasnt really before that.

Karolina_Sprem
Oct 26th, 2011, 10:52 PM
I'm Hingis fan but to put Hingis in front of Davenport...VERY FUNNY...
Lindsay Davenport played her best tennis on hard courts especially on US summer hard court seasons...she was the one who stopped Hingis and her domination in 1999.
In my opinion Top 3 players...

1. Serena Williams
2. Venus Williams
3. Lindsay Davenport

cherboy
Oct 26th, 2011, 11:02 PM
1. Davenport
2. Serena
3. Clijsters
4. Venus
5. Hingis
6. Henin
7. Sharapova
8. Pierce
9. Capriati
10. Mauresmo
11. Kuznetsova
12. Dementieva
13. Seles (just because we start at 1997)
14. Stosur (i know she won us open, but other great hardcourt results???)
15. Pushniacki
16. Jankobitch

DragonFlame
Oct 26th, 2011, 11:24 PM
I'm Hingis fan but to put Hingis in front of Davenport...VERY FUNNY...
Lindsay Davenport played her best tennis on hard courts especially on US summer hard court seasons...she was the one who stopped Hingis and her domination in 1999.
In my opinion Top 3 players...

1. Serena Williams
2. Venus Williams
3. Lindsay Davenport

Lol, davenport a greater HC player then the belgians? sick.

spencercarlos
Oct 26th, 2011, 11:27 PM
I'm Hingis fan but to put Hingis in front of Davenport...VERY FUNNY...
Lindsay Davenport played her best tennis on hard courts especially on US summer hard court seasons...she was the one who stopped Hingis and her domination in 1999.
In my opinion Top 3 players...

1. Serena Williams
2. Venus Williams
3. Lindsay Davenport
Davenport won 2 hard court slams, Hingis 4.

Kind of ridiculous to try to make an argument for Lindsay being better than her. Not even if she had won more titles on hardcourts. 2 slams is too much deficit to overcome.

Probably on a peak to peak confrontation, Davenport would straight set Hingis, but overall carreer comparisson on hardcourts, Hingis wins clearly.

spencercarlos
Oct 26th, 2011, 11:28 PM
Lol, davenport a greater HC player then the belgians? sick.
I don´t really don´t get these Davenport direction of these last few posters.. Lindsay does not have better hard court credentials than either Serena, Venus, Hingis, Clijsters or Henin.

Miss Amor
Oct 26th, 2011, 11:30 PM
Serena,

Hingis,

the end.

rimon
Oct 26th, 2011, 11:53 PM
It depends on your own criteria.

I agree with you about level of play but with 6 straight Australian Open finals, 3 straight Australian Open titles, a U.S Open title, titles in Miami, and two titles at the WTA Championships like Henin (I dont even remember which years they were on hard courts and which they were on carpet anymore), her achievements force me to rank her above Henin.

I think Henin, Davenport, and Venus at their best on hard courts would most times be too much for Hingis though. Harder to say with Sharapova as they arent even from the same era really.

I think that your list looks exactly how I would have put it. I don't really agree with this though. Hingis was a bad match up for Venus, so IMO, at their peaks, it would be pretty even. Hingis would definitely beat her on slow hard courts, Venus would have the edge on fast. Henin - way too hard to say. They didn't play enough to draw a conclusion. Peak Davenport was probably Martina's worst match up, so I'd agree there.

Venus may seem a little low to some, but it's about right. She "only" won 2 US Opens, and never won an AO. Hingis won 4 hard court slams, more Tier 1s and won both the AO and USO. Henin the same, although she won 3 to Martina's 4.

rimon
Oct 26th, 2011, 11:59 PM
Actually I just broke down their achievements in detail. In terms of achievements Mauresmo is far ahead of Kuznetsova on hard courts. The only area they are equal is both having 1 hard court slam.

As for skill Kuznetsova's lack of ability to beat the best players hardly ever, esepcialy in Slams (amazing she could win 2 slams and make 2 other finals with so few impressive wins) or in regular tournament finals says it all. Except for Serena and Davenport, Mauresmo beat all the top players of her era quite often.

Davenport and Serena were horrible match ups for Mauresmo.

rimon
Oct 27th, 2011, 12:02 AM
I don´t really don´t get these Davenport direction of these last few posters.. Lindsay does not have better hard court credentials than either Serena, Venus, Hingis, Clijsters or Henin.

Wrong.

rimon
Oct 27th, 2011, 12:11 AM
Actually, I think that there may be a case for putting Martina above Kim. They both have 4 slams, and are the reverse of each other, Martina winning 3 AOS and 1 USO, Kim 1 AO and 3 USOS. Martina, IMO, had greater competition in her wins. She also reached 6 finals at the AO and 3 at the USO, all consecutively (this USO stat is often forgotten, IMO). Kim reached 2 AO finals and 4 USO finals. Martina won 12 Tier 1s to Kim's 6.

Wait, how is this even close? :lol:

Nicolás89
Oct 27th, 2011, 12:21 AM
It depends on your own criteria.

I agree with you about level of play but with 6 straight Australian Open finals, 3 straight Australian Open titles, a U.S Open title, titles in Miami, and two titles at the WTA Championships like Henin (I dont even remember which years they were on hard courts and which they were on carpet anymore), her achievements force me to rank her above Henin.

I think Henin, Davenport, and Venus at their best on hard courts would most times be too much for Hingis though. Harder to say with Sharapova as they arent even from the same era really.

Are you talking about outdoors only? Because Hingis at her best would slay Henin at her best any time on indoors.

shap_half
Oct 27th, 2011, 02:52 AM
Are you talking about outdoors only? Because Hingis at her best would slay Henin at her best any time on indoors.

At Justine's best, Martina's lack of power, pace and a serve won't be slaying anything.

Nicolás89
Oct 27th, 2011, 02:58 AM
At Justine's best, Martina's lack of power, pace and a serve won't be slaying anything.

At Martina's best all of her limitations didn't really matter and on indoors her weaknesses were less exposed.

danieln1
Oct 27th, 2011, 03:06 AM
1. Serena Williams
2. Martina Hingis
3. Lindsay Davenport
4. Justine Henin
5. Kim Clijsters
6. Venus Williams
7. Sharapova
8. Capriati
9. Amelie
10. Seles
11. Dementieva
12. Caro
13. Stosur
14. Sveta
15. Jankovic

VeeJJ
Oct 27th, 2011, 04:10 AM
1. Davenport
2. Serena
3. Clijsters
4. Venus
5. Hingis
6. Henin
7. Sharapova
8. Pierce
9. Capriati
10. Mauresmo
11. Kuznetsova
12. Dementieva
13. Seles (just because we start at 1997)
14. Stosur (i know she won us open, but other great hardcourt results???)
15. Pushniacki
16. Jankobitch

Agree with this top half. 10-16 you can mix and match.

shap_half
Oct 27th, 2011, 04:15 AM
At Martina's best all of her limitations didn't really matter and on indoors her weaknesses were less exposed.

At her best, the only thing that gave Justine trouble is relentless, overwhelming power.

spencercarlos
Oct 27th, 2011, 04:42 AM
Wrong.
They are close in grand slam performances, although Venus has one extra slam final and won one of those finals against Davenport.

Venus also won the YEC on hardcourts, Davenport did not, and both played the YEC on that surface a couple of times.

I would give the edge to Venus, simply because at Davenport's peak in 2000 she just destroyed her in their matches.

bandabou
Oct 27th, 2011, 07:31 AM
1. Serena
2. Kim ( the queen of the american summer HC)
3. Vee ( unlucky to not have won more u.s. opens)
4. Hingis
5. Henin
6. Davenport

then the rest..:lol:

rimon
Oct 27th, 2011, 08:17 AM
1. Serena
2. Kim ( the queen of the american summer HC)
3. Vee ( unlucky to not have won more u.s. opens)
4. Hingis
5. Henin
6. Davenport

then the rest..:lol:

On what planet are Kim and Venus above Martina? :help:

rimon
Oct 27th, 2011, 08:17 AM
They are close in grand slam performances, although Venus has one extra slam final and won one of those finals against Davenport.

Venus also won the YEC on hardcourts, Davenport did not, and both played the YEC on that surface a couple of times.

I would give the edge to Venus, simply because at Davenport's peak in 2000 she just destroyed her in their matches.

Lindsay has more Tier 1s though, and has won both the AO and USO, Venus only the USO.

VeeJJ
Oct 27th, 2011, 08:19 AM
these are the top 5 in no particular order.

serena
davenport
hingis
clijsters
venus

This is factual.

pierce85
Oct 27th, 2011, 08:26 AM
these are the top 5 in no particular order.

serena
davenport
hingis
clijsters
venus

This is factual.

Factual??? :lol: On what planet is Venus in top 5? Deluded

rimon
Oct 27th, 2011, 08:28 AM
these are the top 5 in no particular order.

serena
davenport
hingis
clijsters
venus

This is factual.

One word: Henin.

homogenius
Oct 27th, 2011, 08:29 AM
1.Serena
2.Hingis
3.Clijsters
4.Henin
5.Davenport/Venus
7.Sharapova
8.Capriati
9.Mauresmo
10.Pierce
11.Kuznetsova
12.Dementieva
13.Seles
Jankovic, Ivanovic, Zvonareva, Wozniacki, Stosur

rimon
Oct 27th, 2011, 08:33 AM
1.Serena
2.Hingis
3.Clijsters
4.Henin
5.Davenport/Venus
7.Sharapova
8.Capriati
9.Mauresmo
10.Pierce
11.Kuznetsova
12.Dementieva
13.Seles
Jankovic, Ivanovic, Zvonareva, Wozniacki, Stosur

THIS.

VeeJJ
Oct 27th, 2011, 08:42 AM
Davenport has 45 HC titles.

Hingis has 36 HC titles.

Clijsters has 35 HC titles.

Serena has 32 HC titles.

Venus has 28 HC titles. (17 HC Finals)

Henin has 27 Hc titles. (12 HC Finals)




I don't have time for you whining bitches. These are the stats.

I may be off by one or two but I'm pretty sure I am right. (I know one of you trolls will go check for me.)




Top five goes like this:

Davenport
Hingis
Clijsters
Serena
Venus

melodynelson
Oct 27th, 2011, 09:49 AM
I think if you include indoors to this I would argue Dementieva is above Kuznetsova, and WAY below Mauresmo then. But considering as there are no majors indoors and pretty much only big indoor tournament now (YEC, and since 2007 there hadn't been even that until this year) it's best just to leave it at outdoors.

Miss Amor
Oct 27th, 2011, 10:06 AM
If you just go by the amount of HC titles won, then Smashnova is a better hardcourter than Stosur and as good as Kuznetsova while Wozniacki is far better than Capriati.

Svetlana)))
Oct 27th, 2011, 10:08 AM
Davenport has 45 HC titles.

Hingis has 36 HC titles.

Clijsters has 35 HC titles.

Serena has 32 HC titles.

Venus has 28 HC titles. (17 HC Finals)

Henin has 27 Hc titles. (12 HC Finals)




I don't have time for you whining bitches. These are the stats.

I may be off by one or two but I'm pretty sure I am right. (I know one of you trolls will go check for me.)




Top five goes like this:

Davenport
Hingis
Clijsters
Serena
Venus

Vomit. Davenport has won the most HC titles but only 2 are slams. Serena has EIGHT HC slam titles, 4 times as many as Lindsay.

bandabou
Oct 27th, 2011, 11:21 AM
Davenport has 45 HC titles.

Hingis has 36 HC titles.

Clijsters has 35 HC titles.

Serena has 32 HC titles.

Venus has 28 HC titles. (17 HC Finals)

Henin has 27 Hc titles. (12 HC Finals)



I don't have time for you whining bitches. These are the stats.

I may be off by one or two but I'm pretty sure I am right. (I know one of you trolls will go check for me.)




Top five goes like this:

Davenport
Hingis
Clijsters
Serena
Venus

:spit: How Serena doesn't come out on top?! 8 HC majors, 5 Miami's, 2 IW's ( despite not playing for most of the decade). :lol: I mean...:shrug:

bandabou
Oct 27th, 2011, 11:22 AM
On what planet are Kim and Venus above Martina? :help:

Vee is too high, yeah. My bad. Kim vs Martina? Could go either way, give it Martina then.

rimon
Oct 27th, 2011, 11:57 AM
Vee is too high, yeah. My bad. Kim vs Martina? Could go either way, give it Martina then.

I would have thought that they were closer than they are, but when you look into it, Kim has 6 Tier 1s and 6 hard court finals, winning 4. Martina has 12 Tier 1s and 9 hard court finals, winning 4. Serena and Martina are the top 2, and it's not even close.

VeeJJ
Oct 28th, 2011, 02:31 AM
Bitch's... The thread title says "Best Hard Court Player" not "Best results on HC" If you guys are just gonna go by slams, why the fuck is this even a thread. The answer is obvious.

thrust
Oct 28th, 2011, 03:28 AM
At her best, the only thing that gave Justine trouble is relentless, overwhelming power.

TRUE!!

SERENA
KIM
VENUS
JUSTINE
LINDSAY
HINGIS
MARIA
MAURESMO

The rest, who cares?

thrust
Oct 28th, 2011, 03:35 AM
On what planet are Kim and Venus above Martina? :help:

IN REALITY. I would bet that most of Hingis HC wins were before: Davenport, the Williams, Kim, Justine were at their best. Hingis was a transition champion between the Graf and Willimas-Belgian eras.

MakarovaFan
Oct 28th, 2011, 03:40 AM
Why are people putting Venus so highly??? I mean based off achievements then def not even top 4 but then if we go off overall "hard court players" as implied by the Thread title then are we to base that off what exactly?? Her ability,potential, H2Hs, title count....idk

rafaelkafka
Oct 28th, 2011, 03:53 AM
It seems the best surface of most of the women the last 15 years have been hard courts. So how would you rank the best 15 hard court players since the start of 1997. Here would be mine:

1. Serena Williams

----huge gap-----


2. Kim Clijsters
3. Martina Hingis
4. Justine Henin
5. Lindsay Davenport
6. Maria Sharapova
7. Venus Williams (would put higher but she didnt win the Australian unfortunately)
8. Jennifer Capriati (no U.S Open final)
9. Amelie Mauresmo

-----enormous gap-----

10. Svetlana Kuznetsova
11. Elena Dementieva
12. Monica Seles
13. Sam Stosur
14. Caroline Wozniacki
15. Jelena Jankovic



Graf and Seles obviously arent high since they didnt win a major hard cour title in this span, although Seles won a good number of decent tournaments. I ranked Elena over her since she won Olympic Gold and reached a U.S Open final in that span. Stosur made the list only because of her U.S Open title, beating Serena in the final.

Dementieva was far better than a steroid cheater like Mauresmo.

thrust
Oct 28th, 2011, 04:00 AM
Davenport has 45 HC titles.

Hingis has 36 HC titles.

Clijsters has 35 HC titles.

Serena has 32 HC titles.

Venus has 28 HC titles. (17 HC Finals)

Henin has 27 Hc titles. (12 HC Finals)




I don't have time for you whining bitches. These are the stats.

I may be off by one or two but I'm pretty sure I am right. (I know one of you trolls will go check for me.)




Top five goes like this:

Davenport
Hingis
Clijsters
Serena
Venus

It would be interesting to know the % of tournaments won VS the number played. Only Slams, Tier 1 and 2 should be considered.

justineheninfan
Oct 28th, 2011, 04:06 AM
Why are people putting Venus so highly??? I mean based off achievements then def not even top 4 but then if we go off overall "hard court players" as implied by the Thread title then are we to base that off what exactly?? Her ability,potential, H2Hs, title count....idk

Everyones own criteria is for each to decide. I go mostly by achievements, but going by peak level of play or subjective viewpoints on ability or level of competition is fine as well.

VeeJJ
Oct 28th, 2011, 05:20 AM
It would be interesting to know the % of tournaments won VS the number played. Only Slams, Tier 1 and 2 should be considered.

gurl :lol: you know how much time that would take to figure out :lol:

rimon
Oct 28th, 2011, 05:52 AM
IN REALITY. I would bet that most of Hingis HC wins were before: Davenport, the Williams, Kim, Justine were at their best. Hingis was a transition champion between the Graf and Willimas-Belgian eras.

Then why did she dominate Venus in their H-2-H and lead her 4-2 in slam matches, including 3-1 on hard courts. In fact, the only 1/4 that Martina lost, she should have won, and served for the match.

And to say that Martina's slams were weaks, but not Kim's? :rolleyes:

rimon
Oct 28th, 2011, 05:53 AM
Everyones own criteria is for each to decide. I go mostly by achievements, but going by peak level of play or subjective viewpoints on ability or level of competition is fine as well.

Why Kim over Martina then? Anyone who is objective can see that Serena and Martina are 1 and 2, and Kim is a very very very distant third.

VeeJJ
Oct 28th, 2011, 06:38 AM
I still say Lindsay is top 3

rimon
Oct 28th, 2011, 06:44 AM
I still say Lindsay is top 3

How though? She's my third favourite of all time (behind Margaret Court and Monica Seles) but I don't see how Serena, Martina and Kim cannot be top 3? :shrug:

VeeJJ
Oct 28th, 2011, 06:53 AM
all her titles, and her quality wins over to players and big titles, even though she only has 2 hc slams she has a few finals as well.

bandabou
Oct 28th, 2011, 07:29 AM
Bitch's... The thread title says "Best Hard Court Player" not "Best results on HC" If you guys are just gonna go by slams, why the fuck is this even a thread. The answer is obvious.

:lol: How are you gonna decide who's the better player other than by result?! And even by h2h, Serena is still better than Linds, no?! :shrug:

thrust
Oct 28th, 2011, 10:25 PM
gurl :lol: you know how much time that would take to figure out :lol:

True, but I think someone did do it some time agao, the same with clay.

justineheninfan
Oct 29th, 2011, 01:01 AM
Why Kim over Martina then? Anyone who is objective can see that Serena and Martina are 1 and 2, and Kim is a very very very distant third.

I actually didnt know Martina was so far ahead of Kim in tier 1 titles. I dont know every stat out there for every players. Now that I know that I will have to reconsider.

Initally without knowing the gap in tier 1 titles was so much I had Kim ahead since:

1. She won 3 WTA Championships. Martina only won 2. I believe each had 1 of their wins on carpets, and the others on hard courts, although I dont remember that exactly either. The WTA Championships is clearly the biggest hard court (well sort of/often hard court) event outside the 2 hard court slams. So looking at the most important events Kim comes out ahead overall.

2. Both won 4 hard courts, and 3 at one and 1 at the other. Clijsters though has won every U.S Open she played since 2005 though. That is pretty incredible. While I wouldnt assume of course she would win all the years she missed, she probably would have won some of them- 2004, maybe 2008, maybe 2011. I am not awarding her imaginary titles there, but remember we are comparing 2 women who both have 4 hard court slams.

3. I strongly believe Kim at her best would pretty regularly beat Hingis at hers on hard courts. I actually believe that to be true of a number of others who I rated Hingis above, but in this case we are again comparing people who both have 4 hard court slams with Kim having 1 more WTA Championship title on hard court/close to hard court type surfaces. While I go mostly by stats that doesnt mean there isnt some subjective elements I consider, especialy when the most important things seems equal.

I admit I didnt know the gap between them in tier 1 titles was anywhere near that big though which puts a different perspective on things. Overall I rate Hingis well above Kim since she was much better on non hard court/carpet surfaces, and they seem about equal even on those surfaces.

MakarovaFan
Oct 29th, 2011, 01:37 AM
all her titles, and her quality wins over to players and big titles, even though she only has 2 hc slams she has a few finals as well.

Then by that logic Lindsay should be miles ahead of the rest due to those things you just said

GAGAlady
Oct 29th, 2011, 02:38 AM
Bitch's... The thread title says "Best Hard Court Player" not "Best results on HC" If you guys are just gonna go by slams, why the fuck is this even a thread. The answer is obvious.

I completely agree here. This is not about slams alone but overall numbers. And Lindsay davenport has the single most amount of title won period. Nobody is saying she won more grand slams but this is about title amounts not grand slam title amounts. Jesus Christ people READ!!!

armand campbell
Oct 29th, 2011, 06:06 AM
im looking for 'Serena?' thread. Anybody please? up that. lol

bandabou
Oct 29th, 2011, 07:47 AM
I completely agree here. This is not about slams alone but overall numbers. And Lindsay davenport has the single most amount of title won period. Nobody is saying she won more grand slams but this is about title amounts not grand slam title amounts. Jesus Christ people READ!!!

:rolls: Of course..try harder! :wavey: