PDA

View Full Version : What would happen if Petrova won RG?


Greenout
Jun 4th, 2003, 09:35 AM
I'm just curious to see if she won RG how the
sports writers, critics, wta fans would react to this?

Will it just be considered a fluke? One slam
wonder? the turning point in and the end of players
from the pre Hingis era, mainly players like Jen, Monica,
Chanda? Ld? The decline of the Williams era? the
entrance of the new power country of tennis- Russia?,
not an end to the Williams era because she ended up
beating the Belgians? the peak of the Belgians?



Can you (Belgium/ Williams fans) respect this win and
accept it?

What about the neutrals? How do you feel?


Any comments?

Hagar
Jun 4th, 2003, 09:40 AM
In that case, she would lift the trophy.

JonBcn
Jun 4th, 2003, 09:41 AM
I see three scenarios from this point (as the tennis press always loves to compare to past parallels):

If she loses tomorrow they'll call her this years Clarissa Fernandez (2002).

If she plays Serena in the final it could be the new Natalia Zvereva (1988).

If she wins the whole thing it'll be hello Iva Majoli (1997).

But whatever happens, its pointless to start making sweeping statements based on two weeks of tennis.

cynicole
Jun 4th, 2003, 09:46 AM
I would respect Petrova's win because she would have had to beat two top-4 players to win it.

Tennis writers would probably say how the French Open was a crazy tournament full of upsets, none bigger than the one Petrova pulled off on Saturday, beating world no. 1/4 SW/JHH on Court Philippe Chatrier.

They will say how this may be the opening salvo fired in Russia's conquest against the United States' dominance of the women's tennis game.

There will be a brief mention of Vera's win over Venus, touting of other promising Russians and, of course, a mean dig at Anna K.

And you'll probably also get those sour grapes articles saying how Serena beat herself with poor serves and unforced errors.

cynicole
Jun 4th, 2003, 09:48 AM
But whatever happens, its pointless to start making sweeping statements based on two weeks of tennis.

sports writers love hyperbole. It's their job.

Dava
Jun 4th, 2003, 09:53 AM
People would rave on about how she is the first Russian women to win a slam, thats what she would be remembered for, as there are so many Russians, and its hard to believe not one of them has won a slam ever!

SJW
Jun 4th, 2003, 09:54 AM
OMG that is amazing!

in a few years they will be dominating the slams anyways

Greenout
Jun 4th, 2003, 09:55 AM
I think she'll get more respect than Clarissa
did. For one people viewed her wins over
Monica, and Jen. Clarissa if you recall only
got in the main draw because Hingis withdrew.
She went on to beat Kim, Dementieva,
Paola Suarez, and loss to Venus in the semi's.

The entire RG 2nd week hype was the sister/sister
final in 2002. Pam and Mary Jo sure weren't
talking about her last year.

Dava
Jun 4th, 2003, 09:56 AM
Also Clarissa got lucky...

Kim played shit.
Give Elena a chance to do something big like get to the QF's of a slam and she was bound to choke.

Greenout
Jun 4th, 2003, 09:58 AM
I don't think this topic is pointless. People
who aren't Williams fans or foaming at the mouth
for Belgians need something to discuss to get
their interests up for the finals. lol.

Jakeev
Jun 4th, 2003, 10:11 AM
And you'll probably also get those sour grapes articles saying how Serena beat herself with poor serves and unforced errors.

You know it is one thing that I have to read paranoid crap by some of the Williams fans, but it's another when I have to read the same junk by the non fans too.

Have you been paying attention cynicole to the game of tennis? If the rest of the world knows that Serena is a dominating force on court, why can't you accept the fact that when Serena loses, it's because she dictates it?

It's not sour grapes cynicole........it's just hard facts that you are just gonna have to deal with as long as Serena is playing tennis.

1jackson2001
Jun 4th, 2003, 10:34 AM
I would congratulate her and know she deserves to hold the trophy and be named RG 2003 champion.

GoGoMaggie
Jun 4th, 2003, 10:49 AM
If she won the whole thing, she would be the biggest surprise GS champ pretty much in the history of tennis.

carot
Jun 4th, 2003, 11:23 AM
She'd deserve it of course, but i don't really like surprise winners for slams. Even if i know this could be the start for a nice carreer for her, i'd rather see her win one later or so, if she has proven to be a consistent contender.

BasicTennis
Jun 4th, 2003, 11:24 AM
if she wins...she'll get the trophy and prize money.;)

TheBoiledEgg
Jun 4th, 2003, 11:25 AM
She would deserve it no doubt :) :)


plus I'll be over the moon :bounce: :D :D
it would be awesome :)

Scorch
Jun 4th, 2003, 11:37 AM
One of the Eurosport commentators (Simon Reed) went out and placed a bet on her to win the tournament after she beat Monica in the 1st round. Guess what the odds were: 150/1 :eek: seems like a decent bet.

If anyone has seen Nadia play they have to be impressed, her win over Jen was very impressive (the won over Monica less so since Seles is nowhere near match fit or confident in her foot). Nadia has got game - MASSIVE groundies, big serve and seemingly (so far) good mental toughness. I believe she is destined for the top 10 and that this is the start a very good career. i.e. she is no Fernandez!

Fantastic
Jun 4th, 2003, 02:18 PM
If Nadia Petrova wins Roland Garros:

- She will be a celebrated hero back in Russia.

- There will be a huge boom in Russian tennis.

- She will go on to have the best year of her life.

- She will decline and retire due to a lack of motivation and mounting injuries.

- There will be an Apocalypse of epic proportions (hey, it happened when Lleyton won the US Open). ;)

fammmmedspin
Jun 4th, 2003, 04:19 PM
A sensible man would note that she had just beaten 3/4 of the top 4 players and her game looks as if Clay might not be her only or even her best surface. He would put a bet on her for Wimbledon.

The british tabloid writers will come up with awful puns for headlines - "Williams era ova"," Nadia bowls Justine ova" "ova to you" etc

John Parsons will give her a paragraph after his editor tells him who won the womens final as he rested before covering the final the next day.

"Ace" magazine will have a report of the final in a one page report on the French Open after their 7 page spread on "favourite beaches of the tennis stars" , the 4 pages on "Wimbledon ball-gowns the history" and the 5 pages on (Black or white, which colour does Anna look best in?"

Vut
Jun 4th, 2003, 04:51 PM
If she win. That is amazing! :):)

ys
Jun 4th, 2003, 04:54 PM
That would be one of the toughest pathes to a title ever.. And that's given that Vera saved Nadya from playing Venus?

Imagine someone winning this title beating Monica, Jennifer, Venus, Kim and Serena on the way? That would be mindboggling..

Dawn Marie
Jun 4th, 2003, 05:50 PM
If she wins it would mean that imho Juju and Kim will go slamless in 2003.

Dawn Marie
Jun 4th, 2003, 05:51 PM
and Jakeev well said, Serena is dominating and people need to give her respect and just deal with it. If Serena is on her game nobody can beat her on any surface.

SJW
Jun 4th, 2003, 06:06 PM
she'll get to the finals, for sure :D

once ur there....anything can happen

and yes i believe she has a better chance vs Serena than Kim or Justine just for the fact that Serena wont really know her game inside out like she does the other two...

ys
Jun 4th, 2003, 06:09 PM
and Jakeev well said, Serena is dominating and people need to give her respect and just deal with it. If Serena is on her game nobody can beat her on any surface.

That's bullshit. Whenever you speculate about some player being on and off and whether she is beatable when she is on, that's bullshit and that's just a preparation for excuses in case of loss. If a player can't be on in a Grandslam quarters or later, f@ck all these "on" and "off". "If" doesn't count in tennis. There is no "If"..

lizchris
Jun 4th, 2003, 06:23 PM
Even if she gets to the final, it will be letwdown for Kim and Justine beause they were touted as the favorites to win. If she wins, it won't humiliate Kim or Justine personally, but it will look bad for Belgium because Kim and Justine have been hyped to win this Slam and were considered the heavy favorites, moreso than Serena.

BTW, of all the players who won major clay court titles leading up to the French Open, only two are left (Elena lost in the first round and Amelie lost in the QF). It will be interesting to see if either one, one or both get to the final or not.

vs1
Jun 4th, 2003, 07:18 PM
If she won the whole thing, it would be amazing!! I would have utmost respect for her and would continue to cheer her on for the other tourneys.

Of course, my fave is still in the game, so I'm pulling for Serena, but if Nadia manages to get to the final and WIN the final...well...visors off to her!!! :)

Greenout
Jun 5th, 2003, 01:58 AM
Lol. About "Ace" magazine. The ballgowns of
Wimbledon. Hee.

mboyle
Jun 5th, 2003, 02:10 AM
She will be touted as the next GWH. Then we will move on to whomever does well at wimbledon.

As for me, I would start to pay attention to her, and if she really backs up her results for the rest of the year (unlike Majoli:o ), I will really consider her destined for the top.

Aussie_Kim
Jun 5th, 2003, 02:24 AM
If Nadia wins I will be sad Kim didn't win but I'd prefer her to min than serena.

"Topaz"
Jun 5th, 2003, 03:56 AM
That's bullshit. Whenever you speculate about some player being on and off and whether she is beatable when she is on, that's bullshit and that's just a preparation for excuses in case of loss. If a player can't be on in a Grandslam quarters or later, f@ck all these "on" and "off". "If" doesn't count in tennis. There is no "If"..What if the monthly stuff begins tonight, cramps and all? You tell me! :angel:

Greenout
Jun 5th, 2003, 04:01 AM
TennisPower,

That's an interesting point. I've been told by
people that some elite and professional women
sportspersons actually take "the pill" not for the
usual college coed reason to have condom less
protected sex; but to stop having periods.

"Topaz"
Jun 5th, 2003, 04:08 AM
Oooohhhh !!!!

Dawn Marie
Jun 5th, 2003, 04:09 AM
ys, no need to get all crampy and frustrated. All I stated is the truth. Serena is the one to beat and the the entire WTA tour knows that if she is on her game she will win.

Bow down and give her respect.

Jakeev
Jun 5th, 2003, 04:24 AM
That's bullshit. Whenever you speculate about some player being on and off and whether she is beatable when she is on, that's bullshit and that's just a preparation for excuses in case of loss. If a player can't be on in a Grandslam quarters or later, f@ck all these "on" and "off". "If" doesn't count in tennis. There is no "If"..
\

Love ya ys but the actual bullshit is what you just friggen said. Again, people can't and don't want to accept that Serena Williams is a dominating force in women's tennis and when she loses, it's because she lost the match.

But it won't last forever. Eventually, some new player will challenge and outright beat Serena on court. I just don't see it happening in the future, not even from my own fave Lindsay Davenport.

I have accepted Serena's dominance, I think the rest of you should too.

Dawn Marie
Jun 5th, 2003, 04:31 AM
Well stated Jakeev and it won't last forever and she will lose matches but when she is on, right now can't nobody beat her.

php
Jun 5th, 2003, 04:35 AM
Nadia makes too many errors when she's nervous, & she's not
very fast compared to the other players.

Lisbeth
Jun 5th, 2003, 04:39 AM
I would definitely respect and admire her for it. I'm positive the media would mostly not. You can even have a "two slam wonder" as far as the media is concerned if the "wrong" person wins!

Shooter
Jun 5th, 2003, 05:04 AM
Her avatar would be added to the WTAworld list of avatars :)

topspin
Jun 5th, 2003, 06:36 AM
\

Love ya ys but the actual bullshit is what you just friggen said. Again, people can't and don't want to accept that Serena Williams is a dominating force in women's tennis and when she loses, it's because she lost the match.

But it won't last forever. Eventually, some new player will challenge and outright beat Serena on court. I just don't see it happening in the future, not even from my own fave Lindsay Davenport.

I have accepted Serena's dominance, I think the rest of you should too.

jakeev, I agree with you in what you said about some people are unwillingly to accept Serena as a dominating player. However, I disagree with the opinion, "If Serena loses, it's because she lost the match."

This was the belief that Serena and Venus used to have when they started out on tour. It they lost a match, it was because of something they did and not the opponent. After they continued to experience consecutive losses to Hingis and Davenport, it soon became quite clear their losses were due more to having a bad day or being off.

Serena's moment of realization happened in the 3rd round of the 1998 U.S. Open. She got to the point where she was tired of losing and she begin to practice harder. Venus's moment of realization happened in the classic 1999 U.S. Open semi-final with Hingis. Weeks later, there was a request by Richard Williams and Venus to Billie Jean King to provide tennis lessons for the sisters during the Fed Cup tournament. The effects of this training were realized later when Venus started out dominating Hingis in their next match in the semi-finals of 1999 Grand Slam Cup and winning the match. Venus defeated Hingis again in the Zurich final.

It is understandable why fans of other players might be upset if everytime their fave post a victory over Serena or Venus and the response was "Venus or Serena beat themselves or they had an off day." A victory is a sign of hope. It was not too long ago when Serena and Venus were the underdogs to Hingis and Davenport. Some of their fans and non-fans were saying much of the same stuff now. "Yes,
Serena and Venus have gotten a victory over Hingis and Davenport here and there, BUT it's not like they have been able to defeat them on a consistent basis or in a grand slam."

The point was even though Serena and Venus were not solid contenders, each victory over the top players gave hope and belief they too would be great some day. Imagine if I or they gave into the popular concept, "their victorys over Hingis and Lindsay were due to them being off or they had a bad day." Then, I might as well gave up the belief, the cheers, or hope they would one day be a grand slam contender.

Despite what Serena says or implies, she takes every loss seriously. That's why she always says "I'm focused on one match at a time." Serena sees Justine as a legitimate threat. If not, she wouldn't have taken close to a month off before the Italian Open to work on her game after her loss to Justine at the Charleston final.

jakeev, please don't think I just singled you out of other posters. I am a Serena fan as well. I was responding to those who all think whenever Serena or Venus loses, it is due mainly to them having an off day.

F-R-E-A-K
Jun 5th, 2003, 06:38 AM
new page? hehe i done it!

Jakeev
Jun 5th, 2003, 07:00 AM
jakeev, I agree with you in what you said about some people are unwillingly to accept Serena as a dominating player. However, I disagree with the opinion, "If Serena loses, it's because she lost the match."

This was the belief that Serena and Venus used to have when they started out on tour. It they lost a match, it was because of something they did and not the opponent. After they continued to experience consecutive losses to Hingis and Davenport, it soon became quite clear their losses were due more to having a bad day or being off.

Serena's moment of realization happened in the 3rd round of the 1998 U.S. Open. She got to the point where she was tired of losing and she begin to practice harder. Venus's moment of realization happened in the classic 1999 U.S. Open semi-final with Hingis. Weeks later, there was a request by Richard Williams and Venus to Billie Jean King to provide tennis lessons for the sisters during the Fed Cup tournament. The effects of this training were realized later when Venus started out dominating Hingis in their next match in the semi-finals of 1999 Grand Slam Cup and winning the match. Venus defeated Hingis again in the Zurich final.

It is understandable why fans of other players might be upset if everytime their fave post a victory over Serena or Venus and the response was "Venus or Serena beat themselves or they had an off day." A victory is a sign of hope. It was not too long ago when Serena and Venus were the underdogs to Hingis and Davenport. Some of their fans and non-fans were saying much of the same stuff now. "Yes,
Serena and Venus have gotten a victory over Hingis and Davenport here and there, BUT it's not like they have been able to defeat them on a consistent basis or in a grand slam."

The point was even though Serena and Venus were not solid contenders, each victory over the top players gave hope and belief they too would be great some day. Imagine if I or they gave into the popular concept, "their victorys over Hingis and Lindsay were due to them being off or they had a bad day." Then, I might as well gave up the belief, the cheers, or hope they would one day be a grand slam contender.

Despite what Serena says or implies, she takes every loss seriously. That's why she always says "I'm focused on one match at a time." Serena sees Justine as a legitimate threat. If not, she wouldn't have taken close to a month off before the Italian Open to work on her game after her loss to Justine at the Charleston final.

jakeev, please don't think I just singled you out of other posters. I am a Serena fan as well. I was responding to those who all think whenever Serena or Venus loses, it is due mainly to them having an off day.

Sorry but I still beg to differ. We are talking about Serena today not two or three years ago when Serena was still being challenged on court.

But sorry babe, that is not the case today. Good job for Justine and Amelie finding a way to beat Serena this year. But believe me, to dominate Serena WIlliams, you have to play her type of game and better.