PDA

View Full Version : Which bombshell's title run is better?


DEETHELICK
Apr 22nd, 2003, 12:11 AM
Daniela or Elena???

Daniela won a Tier I (IW) defeating Justine and Martina H on a hardcourt.

Elena won a Tier II (AI) defeating Hantuchova, Justine & Lindsay on clay.

Combining both objectivity and personal bias, Elena wins hands down.

The calibre of players (add Coetzer to her list too, who'd just won a tourney on clay) she defeated was amazing, as well as the mental toughess she displayed in those matches. Also she did this in one week, whilst Daniela had the course of two weeks to rack up her title.

What do you think?

Roxers
Apr 22nd, 2003, 12:53 AM
Elena :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

kodeRED
Apr 22nd, 2003, 12:54 AM
ya dee u r right fo sho i mean elena had one amazing week by any players standards!!!! dani have the bigger tourny win but the players she beat were not as good ... plus AI was on clay

Leena
Apr 22nd, 2003, 01:04 AM
I think it's close... but probably the slight edge to Elena.

Elena beat Lina, Amanda, Dani, Juju & Lindsay... those are 5 quality wins there.

Dani didn't have as difficult as draw overall... but beating Martina was a better quality win. Martina was still playing as a Top 2 player then.

kodeRED
Apr 22nd, 2003, 01:07 AM
ya also remember that if elena had meat hingis in the finals she would have beaten her too!!!! she owned hingis.

Berlin_Calling
Apr 22nd, 2003, 01:18 AM
Elena @ Amelia cause its MUCH tougher to beat Justine on clay than it is on a hardcourt :p;)

Venus Forever
Apr 22nd, 2003, 02:26 AM
Definitely Daniela.

Before Amelia Island, Elena got to the US Open Semifinals, she was already in the top 10, so these things should have been expected from her, even after she fell out of the top 20.

Daniela, was new, not much was known of her, and she relatively cruised to the final, CRUSHING Hingis after she just came from the OZ final. That was just more amazing.

moby
Apr 22nd, 2003, 11:21 AM
i'm not sure, but both of them had a slight advantage

they came out playing really well
in normal circumstances, the top players would have risen to the occasion
but as they did not expect elena and daniela to be playing so well, they had a little bit of a let down

so it also depends on how complacent the players they are playing are

TonyP
Apr 22nd, 2003, 01:07 PM
Dementieva "owned Hingis?" They played three times, Martina won two out of three of those matches.

switz
Apr 22nd, 2003, 01:14 PM
Definitely Daniela.

Before Amelia Island, Elena got to the US Open Semifinals, she was already in the top 10, so these things should have been expected from her, even after she fell out of the top 20.

Daniela, was new, not much was known of her, and she relatively cruised to the final, CRUSHING Hingis after she just came from the OZ final. That was just more amazing.

exactly. elena's win was better quality, but in terms of bombshells daniela takes the cake. i know people did not expect elena to win this tournament but she has been playing well on clay so far and had the results and the game for people who know her well to know that she was eventually going to this, very much like patty in zurich/charlseton, and iva in charlseton

TatiAnnahølic
Apr 22nd, 2003, 01:14 PM
Chanda @ LA

sartrista7
Apr 22nd, 2003, 01:20 PM
Dementieva "owned Hingis?" They played three times, Martina won two out of three of those matches.

Actually, it's 2-2.

Elena DEMENTIEVA (RUS) v Martina HINGIS (SUI)

1999 Australian Open Hard (O) 64 Martina HINGIS 3-6 2-6
2000 Moscow Carpet (I) QF Martina HINGIS 0-6 7-6(5) 5-7
2001 Moscow Carpet (I) QF Elena DEMENTIEVA 6-2 6-2
2002 Stuttgart Hard (I) 16 Elena DEMENTIEVA 6-3 6-1

kodeRED
Apr 22nd, 2003, 01:23 PM
no tonyP ... they played at least three if i remember and dementieva won the last 2 of how ever many they played (i think it was something like 4 or 5 times) ne way in '01 in moscow dementieva beat hingis #1 in the world 6-2, 6-2...and then at stuttgart in '02 dementieva won 6-3, 6-1....
oh here is their record:
1999 Australian Open Hard (O) 64 Martina HINGIS 3-6 2-6

2000 Moscow Carpet (I) QF Martina HINGIS 0-6 7-6(5) 5-7

2001 Moscow Carpet (I) QF Elena DEMENTIEVA 6-2 6-2

2002 Stuttgart Hard (I) 16 Elena DEMENTIEVA 6-3 6-1
u can clearly see that elena was taking over the rivalry!

Chance
Apr 22nd, 2003, 02:21 PM
lol I've got to go with AKFan#1
Chanda @ LA

However out of your options, I think both were impressive bombshell title runs. Hantuchova came out relatively unknown, with not much experience to rely on but she had a weak field. On the other hand Dementieva had experience making a semi at a GS,final at the olympics,expectations placed on her, and had some form but she did have a tougher draw and defeated 3 top ten players.

So I'll be boring and sit on the fence.

ys
Apr 22nd, 2003, 02:54 PM
I have always considered Daniela's run a fluke and still do. Beating Henin on US hardcourts is nothing, we know that. And Hingis has never been competitive again after this match, and neither she was in that match too, she was playing in her last career final. These days, winning a hardcourt event without beating one of Williams, Davenport, Capriati or Clijsters is indication that that was very weak event or you got plain lucky. Elena , on the other hand, beat three players who used to win Tier Is on this surface, and she beat Hantuchova as well. Oh did she really beat her? No. "Beat" is not an appropriate word..

TonyP
Apr 22nd, 2003, 03:09 PM
There's a difference between "owning" some one and being tied 2-2. Yes, the last two were won by Elena, who I like, but they came long after Martina stopped playing her best tennis. By the last match, Martina was moving at half speed.

sartrista7
Apr 22nd, 2003, 05:03 PM
There's a difference between "owning" some one and being tied 2-2. Yes, the last two were won by Elena, who I like, but they came long after Martina stopped playing her best tennis. By the last match, Martina was moving at half speed.

There's also a big difference between trailing 1-3 and being tied 2-2.

Anyway, the point was that Elena could have been equally favoured against Hingis in the 2001 IW final, and given that Elena had beaten her pretty comprehensively a few months previously, this certainly isn't out of the question.

As for whose title was better... Elena's, by far. I agree with ys: she had better quality opposition (I rate JHH on clay above Hingis on hard courts) for one thing, and far more pressure for another. Daniela had virtually no expectation on her at IW; Alyona's career has been an exercise ion crumbling in the face of expectation until now.

Kart
Apr 22nd, 2003, 05:06 PM
I give it to Elena, although it has to be said that Daniela played a fantastic match against a lacklustre Hingis in the final.

Dava
Apr 22nd, 2003, 05:06 PM
I think based on the form the players Elena beat last week are in its definatly her who wins. I mean they are all playing well except Daniela. Its kinda reversed, Elena has had previously good results and now is backing them up with a tournament win, Daniela has had a title, and now is backing it up with poor results.

maya
Apr 22nd, 2003, 05:14 PM
Elena's.

Not only because of who she beat - it wasn't that the oponents were playing bad, she played really fantastic. In my opinion Elena on the day she won would beat Daniela on the day of her victory in 2 sets.