PDA

View Full Version : Is Clijsters the best the Williams have or could have played?


Steffica Greles
May 10th, 2003, 02:42 AM
To me, Kim is overrated. I never say any player who's no.3 in the world is anything other than a great player, and Kim has proved that she is. She's tested - and beaten - both of the Williams'.

But to me, Kim's game is not that of a future no.1. She doesn't have the acceleration in her shots. She's a curious mix between Hingis and Serena. She has Hingis' shot production and a similar technique. Yet Kim has far less finesse and talent than Hingis. At the same time, however, she's quicker than Hingis and far stronger. She's built like a European version of Serena Williams, which is to say that she's not QUITE as formidable an athlete as Serena (or Venus).

So I feel Kim is not QUITE as athletic as Serena and NOT quite as clever as Hingis.

Like Hingis, Kim's forehand is where she lacks acceleration. She can time power very well with her immense strength, but she can't attack forehand-to-forehand without losing length (that wasn't meant to rhyme! LOL).

So, is Kim more of a threat to the Williams' than say, Aranxta in her prime would have been?

To be honest, I think Aranxta of 1994 would been able to beat both of the Williams' on clay, and frustrated them on other surfaces. She had a game that didn't play into their hands and was designed to frustrate and counter. In her prime she had just boundless energy, and MOST IMPORTANTLY, Aranxta NEVER gave up. You could knock her down love and love and she'd still come back fighting the next time. She would willingly run miles to win a point, and had the heart and courage of a lion.

I pick Aranxta because Graf and Seles were both dominant champions, as was Navratlova. I'm interested in Aranxta because she was in many ways in Kim's position in the early and mid-90s. Sabatini would be another candidate.

To me, so many of the players lose to Venus and Serena because they simply don't believe in themselves enough to take advantage of the chances they are given. Mauresmo, Capriati, Kim, Justine, Davenport are all the same.

I just think players in years gone by, unique players like Aranxta, would have ACTUALLY provided stiffer opposition than those of today.

disposablehero
May 10th, 2003, 02:44 AM
A curious mix between Hingis and Serena is supposed to be a bad thing?

Steffica Greles
May 10th, 2003, 02:50 AM
Did you read the line when I said she's not quite as good in either department?

Of course it's not a bad thing, that's why she's no.3 in the world. But it's not enough to seriously challenge them, in my opinion. Both Serena and Venus are too good and match up to her game too well from her perspective.

disposablehero
May 10th, 2003, 02:58 AM
Did you read the line when I said she's not quite as good in either department?

Right. And she's also better at the Hingis things than Williams, better at the Williams things than Hingis. She'll be fine. Her results are an exact mirror of Venus at the same age. 1 Slam Final, career high ranking of #3.

CJ07
May 10th, 2003, 03:30 AM
good point
and i agree with you as ASV has a very good record with both of the for that reason

Experimentee
May 10th, 2003, 06:43 AM
I dont think ASV would have been better competition than Kim or Justine today. I think she would be easily overpowered. When Venus and Serena were just starting out they had tough matches with her, and now they have improved so much i think they would beat her most of the time.

1jackson2001
May 10th, 2003, 07:45 AM
I think Kim may be the best in terms of absolute ability in a way...but ASV posed more problems for W/S at the time because they were more or less just starting and not as good as they are now.

Kart
May 10th, 2003, 01:18 PM
ASV was far superior to Kim mentally in her prime. The fact that she never gave up on anything was key to her winning those grand slam titles. Kim is still getting better though and I see no reason why she can't be that good too.

Julian
May 10th, 2003, 01:37 PM
ASV was far superior to Kim mentally in her prime. The fact that she never gave up on anything was key to her winning those grand slam titles. Kim is still getting better though and I see no reason why she can't be that good too.

ITA Arantxa was definitely better in her prime then Kim is now. Who knows how many matches Arantxa came back from and I don't think I've ever seen her choke in a match. IMO the Kim today is like the Arantxa in 92-93, Arantxa wasn't a grand slam winner but she was one hell of a consistent player and was a threat to the top 2 as well. But yes I think Kim can definitely improve. :)

As far as matching the Williams' sisters. Arantxa always gave them tough matches, especially Venus. When Venus was at her best at the end of the 2000 (when she had that winning streak) Arantxa took Venus to 3 tough sets at the Olympics and even last year when Arantxa was not even close to her best she took Venus to 3 sets as well!

TonyP
May 10th, 2003, 02:14 PM
Hingis vs Venus 10-9

Hingis vs Serena, 6-7

That's all that needs to be said. Results don't lie.

Infiniti2001
May 10th, 2003, 02:36 PM
Hingis vs Venus 10-9

Hingis vs Serena, 6-7

That's all that needs to be said. Results don't lie.

No they don't-- but you conveniently omitted the fact that Venus won 4 of their last 5 matches. :eek:

Venus Williams (USA) vs. Martina Hingis (SUI)
1997-03-17 Key Biscayne Hardcourt R32 Martina Hingis (SUI) 6-4 6-2
1997-07-28 San Diego Hardcourt R16 Martina Hingis (SUI) 6-2 6-1
1997-08-25 U.S. Open Hardcourt F Martina Hingis (SUI) 6-0 6-4
1998-01-12 Sydney Hardcourt R16 Venus Williams (USA) 3-6 6-4 7-5
1998-03-02 Indian Wells Hardcourt SF Martina Hingis (SUI) 6-0 7-6(7)
1998-03-16 Key Biscayne Hardcourt SF Venus Williams (USA) 6-2 5-7 6-2
1998-05-04 Rome Clay F Martina Hingis (SUI) 6-3 2-6 6-3
1998-05-25 Roland Garros Clay QF Martina Hingis (SUI) 6-3 6-4
1999-05-03 Rome Clay SF Venus Williams (USA) 6-4 1-6 6-4
1999-08-02 San Diego Hardcourt F Martina Hingis (SUI) 6-4 6-0
1999-08-30 U.S. Open Hardcourt SF Martina Hingis (SUI) 6-1 4-6 6-3
1999-09-27 Munich Indoor Carpet SF Venus Williams (USA) 6-2 6-7(6) 9-7
1999-10-11 Zurich Indoor Hardcourt F Venus Williams (USA) 6-3 6-4
1999-11-15 Chase Championships Indoor Carpet SF Martina Hingis (SUI) 6-4 7-6(2)
2000-06-26 Wimbledon Grass QF Venus Williams (USA) 6-3 4-6 6-4
2000-08-28 U.S. Open Hardcourt SF Venus Williams (USA) 4-6 6-3 7-5
2001-01-15 Australian Open Hardcourt SF Martina Hingis (SUI) 6-1 6-1
2001-03-19 Miami Hardcourt SF Venus Williams (USA) 6-3 7-6(6)
2002-04-29 Hamburg Clay SF Venus Williams (USA) 7-5 6-3
Martina Hingis (SUI) leads 10:9
Hard: Martina Hingis (SUI) leads 7:5
Clay: Tied 2:2
Grass: Venus Williams (USA) leads 1:0
Indoor: Venus Williams (USA) leads 2:1


Topic related, ASV definitely frustrated the Williames-- I don't see Kim doing this yet or if ever waaaaaaaaaa

DEETHELICK
May 10th, 2003, 03:09 PM
I get what you are saying Steffica.

Venus and Serena are like Monica and Steffi. Four very dominant players who separated themselves from the pack.

What Arantxa did, which Kim didn't, was that she had won a Slam at age 17, almost setting the scene for Arantxa's career. Obviously, things are tougher today, but Arantxa was a GS champ at a very early age which must have added to her confidence and mental toughness, which impacted on her future career.

I think Arantxa and Monica are THE most mentally toughest women out there. Kim may improve, but honestly, I don't think any of today's players (not even my beloved Jen) can match up to their level.

Kim does not seem as much of a threat to Venus/Serena as Arantxa was.

I mean even though Monica dominated their H2H (vs Arantxa) their matches were either close or very tight.

I can see Kim winning Slams, but I just don't know when.

In regards to Arantxa vs Williams, Arantxa 1994 vs Venus 2000 and Serena 2002 would have been a dream match-up.

Arantxa was the ultimate defensive player who had that extra ability to attack and place the ball extremely well. It was her speed that set a new level for on-court fitness (along with Monica's power and Steffi's athleticism).

Arantxa would have defnitely won some matches.

Diya
May 10th, 2003, 03:17 PM
Great post DEE :)

Kart
May 11th, 2003, 01:04 PM
As far as matching the Williams' sisters. Arantxa always gave them tough matches, especially Venus. When Venus was at her best at the end of the 2000 (when she had that winning streak) Arantxa took Venus to 3 tough sets at the Olympics and even last year when Arantxa was not even close to her best she took Venus to 3 sets as well!

Not to mention French open 2000 :D. Amazing to think that Venus would go on to win Wimbledon a month later.

Hagar
May 11th, 2003, 01:08 PM
I think Kim's game is that of the current number 2.

TonyP
May 11th, 2003, 02:51 PM
INifiti: And you conveniently omitted that Hingis was playing far from her best tennis in the last two years. Overall, Hingis exceeds Venus in every category. Her accomplishments in tennis far overshadow Venus'. 209 weeks at #1 vs?????

Infiniti2001
May 11th, 2003, 03:11 PM
Pathetic you would even mention this because it makes Martina seem even more past her prime. Yeah, yeah, we know all about "before her 21st birthday....yada yada yada..." But to toss around her achievements now has about as much meaning as tossing around those of Margaret Court. Face it: Hingis is/ was the hollowing #1 in history and the more you gloat about her weeks at #1, the more you remind everyone just HOW hollow.

CJ07
May 11th, 2003, 03:15 PM
The only thing with Sanchez-Vicario was that she'd need some extra bulk

but if she had that, then yeah definately

shap_half
May 11th, 2003, 03:18 PM
when avs was playing the williams sisters were just starting out. same with hingis, when you show those head to heads it definitely shows that hingis won those events in the beginning of the sisters careers when hingis was more dominant. i don't know how avs would play the williams sisters now. i don't think you can make this kind of analysis unless we've seen avs play the sisters at the peak of both parties.

TonyP
May 11th, 2003, 04:44 PM
But the facts are that the big Williams sisters could NOT get to the top while little Martina was there and I suspect that is what Williams fans hate the most about her.

Julian
May 11th, 2003, 04:47 PM
when avs was playing the williams sisters were just starting out. same with hingis, when you show those head to heads it definitely shows that hingis won those events in the beginning of the sisters careers when hingis was more dominant. i don't know how avs would play the williams sisters now. i don't think you can make this kind of analysis unless we've seen avs play the sisters at the peak of both parties.

I believe Arantxa played Venus at her peak. :) And also, it's ASV not AVS ;)

Infiniti2001
May 11th, 2003, 04:58 PM
Get over yourself man... How many times was Hingis seeded #1 at slams and did not live up to it?? and why the hell would I hate a player who knew how to stay on the top for a long time by playing the system? The whole world knew the truth waaaaa. I actually pitied her when she lost her #1 ranking because she couldn't make up for her lack of Grand Slam winner points by playing a gazillion tournaments<chuckle chuckle>

Chance
May 11th, 2003, 05:01 PM
Is Hingis a midget?

I remember ASV defeating both Venus and Serena back in 1998 in Sydney - her game definitely frustrated Vee and Rena... if ASV had worked on her serve she could have achieved more.
As for Kim, well she is only 19. If Kim works on the mental side and becomes a bit more aggressive..along with Juju they could be Serena and Venus's biggest rivals.

jenny161185
May 11th, 2003, 05:08 PM
I really think Justine is the real threat to the number 1 spot - we've seen patches of her brilliance in 2001/2002 but this year she is finally showing showing great consistency winning three titles(and proving she can win on hard aswell)

maccardel
May 11th, 2003, 05:23 PM
I really think Justine is the real threat to the number 1 spot - we've seen patches of her brilliance in 2001/2002 but this year she is finally showing showing great consistency winning three titles(and proving she can win on hard aswell)


I agree also. Kim is gonna get her ass beaten so bad by serena or venus that she is gonna take a few months off...you saw what Rena did to her in OZ. She couldn't collect herself for months and lost so many close matches that she could have won and to think that she got trashed by Ai after Ai played another match...come on !!!!!!!!

I can't wait for Kim to get trashed by the williams and Justine. She is not the number two player in the world, she has to play double what the real number two has to play and she still don't have the shit lock down. Venus played like two tourneys took time out to go to the beach and enjoy herself and come back to make the final and is still in the running for the number two ranking.

I don't see any of those players complaining now that the sisters don't play enough, cos that is the only way they could get any points is if venus and serena is not in the draw. Pleez!!!!!!!( Go Kimmie!!!!!! Get your ass beaten!!!!! It's on for RG!!!!! Just bring it!!!!!!)

Fedcup
May 11th, 2003, 07:52 PM
To be honest, I think Aranxta of 1994 would been able to beat both of the Williams' on clay, and frustrated them on other surfaces. She had a game that didn't play into their hands and was designed to frustrate and counter. In her prime she had just boundless energy, and MOST IMPORTANTLY, Aranxta NEVER gave up. You could knock her down love and love and she'd still come back fighting the next time. She would willingly run miles to win a point, and had the heart and courage of a lion.



Nope. Sorry But I totally disagree with you.
With all the respect to ASV her career but this are other times
You can't compare 2 periods. But woman tennis has changed a lot the last couple of years. It's much much more faster and powefull.

I think ASV even her best times would been blow away from the court by the williams nowadays.

The only word that's the key too succes is AGRESSIVE,attacking tennis
That's the way the williams sisters,the belgians plays.

And you can't count out on Kim. Look at the AO. She was giving Serena a lot of work.
And Henin on Clay has a very good record against Serena.
So they are giving the sisters the competion you spoke about

azinna
May 11th, 2003, 09:03 PM
Always tough to compare player's peaks when separated by years. Still, I'm pretty confident that the 1994 ASV would have been a dangerous opponent on clay for the current Williams sisters. But that's about it.

Recall that ASV beat the 1994 Steffi (and 1998 Monica) by counting on her discomfort at net. She simply floated stuff back into the Graf's backhand corner, then waited for the frustration. Once in a while, she pounced on something volleyable, which further frustrated Graf.

Steffi and Heinz went back, worked on her tendency to hit crosscourt, sharpened the slice, got her to attack the net, and presto. ASV solved. Sure, we had delicious matches in 1995 and 1996. But again, that was about it. ASV was no less an opponent then, but Graf's game had become slightly more patient and complete.

Patience and completeness. It was exactly what the Williams Sisters lacked during those early matches against ASV. They had realised what every other player was exploiting at will: ASV's pedstrian serve, her even less intimidating returns, and her lack of a stable forehand.

Any stable power player who constructed points and seized opportunities to come to net had ASV. And that proved to be the case, and ASV slip from the game.

azinna
May 11th, 2003, 09:12 PM
And just so we're clear on how they matched up:

Venus leads ASV 6 : 3

1994 Oakland (Carpet) ASV 6-2 3-6 0-6

1998 Sydney (Hard) ASV 1-6 3-6

1998 Rome (Clay) Venus 6-3 2-6 7-5

1998 US Open (Hard) Venus 2-6 6-1 6-1

1998 Grand Slam Cup (Hard) Venus 6-3 6-2

1999 Hamburg (Clay) Venus 6-1 6-3

2000 Roland Garros (Clay) ASV 0-6 6-1 2-6

2000 Olympics-Sydney (Hard) Venus 3-6 6-2 6-4

2002 Hamburg (Clay) Venus 3-6 6-4 6-1

topspin
May 11th, 2003, 09:22 PM
To me, Kim is overrated. I never say any player who's no.3 in the world is anything other than a great player, and Kim has proved that she is. She's tested - and beaten - both of the Williams'.

But to me, Kim's game is not that of a future no.1. She doesn't have the acceleration in her shots. She's a curious mix between Hingis and Serena. She has Hingis' shot production and a similar technique. Yet Kim has far less finesse and talent than Hingis. At the same time, however, she's quicker than Hingis and far stronger. She's built like a European version of Serena Williams, which is to say that she's not QUITE as formidable an athlete as Serena (or Venus).

So I feel Kim is not QUITE as athletic as Serena and NOT quite as clever as Hingis.

Like Hingis, Kim's forehand is where she lacks acceleration. She can time power very well with her immense strength, but she can't attack forehand-to-forehand without losing length (that wasn't meant to rhyme! LOL).

So, is Kim more of a threat to the Williams' than say, Aranxta in her prime would have been?

To be honest, I think Aranxta of 1994 would been able to beat both of the Williams' on clay, and frustrated them on other surfaces. She had a game that didn't play into their hands and was designed to frustrate and counter. In her prime she had just boundless energy, and MOST IMPORTANTLY, Aranxta NEVER gave up. You could knock her down love and love and she'd still come back fighting the next time. She would willingly run miles to win a point, and had the heart and courage of a lion.

I pick Aranxta because Graf and Seles were both dominant champions, as was Navratlova. I'm interested in Aranxta because she was in many ways in Kim's position in the early and mid-90s. Sabatini would be another candidate.

To me, so many of the players lose to Venus and Serena because they simply don't believe in themselves enough to take advantage of the chances they are given. Mauresmo, Capriati, Kim, Justine, Davenport are all the same.

I just think players in years gone by, unique players like Aranxta, would have ACTUALLY provided stiffer opposition than those of today.

My opinion is the current crop of the women players are unreasonable being judged and are being held to a higher standard than the players of previous years because Serena and Venus are at the top and the sisters are dominating PRIMARILLY because the other players are not trying hard enough, inferior tennis depth, don't have enough skills, and so on.

Many writers, players, and fans have unfairly criticized and devalued the abilities of tennis players in the "Hingis" era because they haven't been able to mount a sufficient challenge to Serena and Venus.

"To me, so many of the players lose to Venus and Serena because they simply don't believe in themselves enough to take advantage of the chances they are given. Mauresmo, Capriati, Kim, Justine, Davenport are all the same."

Didn't Davenport defeat Graf in a grand slam final? She had to have some kind of belief in herself to defeat the winner of 22 grand slams and argueably omitting Martina N., the greatest player in tennis history.
Justine stopped Serena's winning streak and defeat Amelie, Jen, and Ki this year. Kim and Justine have defeat both Serena and Venus. Jen is a three-time grand slam champion. Frequent injuires have kept Amelie from getting into a grove.

You wonder if they or other players would tell those who doubt their performance, work ethic, or abilities if the champions of the past had to face such opposition as the current top two players who have taken tennis to a new, different, and higher level. The players would probably say the Serena and Venus of today have improved a lot since 1998. Theoretically, Serena and Venus are still improving and haven't even reach their peak yet.

I am not trying to start an argument. But, I think today's players are judged unfairly because they haven't been able to stop Serena and Venus from winning.

Could it be Venus and Serena are just that good? As Anke Huber said "they are winning because they are the fastest, tallest, and strongest players in history." sarcasm...