PDA

View Full Version : Why the double standards regarding Hingis-Venus and Seles-Graf head-to-heads?


hingis-seles
Jun 12th, 2003, 06:23 PM
I find a huge double standard everytime head-to-head records are brought up for Hingis and Venus and Seles and Graf.

Some Williams fans state that in their earlier encounters, Venus was still very young so those losses don't count. Ironically, some of these same fans also claim that Steffi's 3 wins over a 15-year old Monica Seles should count as losses. I get extremely confused.

So what will it be:

Seles and Venus were too young and inexperienced, playing dominant world number one's so their early losses don't count.

They were ready to play and if they lost, that's thier problem.

I agree with the second option. Graf and Hingis were ready to play and I believe that if a player is healthy enough to step on the court and play a match, then they should be ready to face the results/consequences.

This is also in reference to those tired excuses of "she made too many unforced errors" and didn't lose but "beat herself" regarding Martina's wins over any power player. Well, that just proves that she was such a poor player that she kept on making those errors and didn't deserve to win, meaning she was the INFERIOR player.

AjdeNate!
Jun 12th, 2003, 06:26 PM
Ppl will make the stats only work for their own benefit or how they want to view them.

kyk710
Jun 12th, 2003, 06:29 PM
Who cares :yawn:. A win is a win, a loss is a loss.

kyk710
Jun 12th, 2003, 06:30 PM
* except of course when you cheat ;)

G-Ha
Jun 12th, 2003, 06:38 PM
I'm not sure what posts you've been reading, but we're continually reminded that Steffi's first 3 wins over Monica don't count. And then magically, Monica's first win over Steffi does count, coming just over six months after Steffi's 3rd win. So I guess their head-to-head doesn't "officially" start until Monica scored a victory.

irma
Jun 12th, 2003, 06:38 PM
ali :worship:

DA FOREHAND
Jun 12th, 2003, 06:39 PM
If you step on the court you are in basically saying that you are ready to compete. If you lose it counts as much as the win.. A h2h is a record of two players matches, doesn't matter if you're 9 or 90.

hingis-seles
Jun 12th, 2003, 06:44 PM
I'm not sure what posts you've been reading, but we're continually reminded that Steffi's first 3 wins over Monica don't count. And then magically, Monica's first win over Steffi does count, coming just over six months after Steffi's 3rd win. So I guess their head-to-head doesn't "officially" start until Monica scored a victory.

I have read threads where I have seen posters not count Hingis' first 3 wins over Venus, yet count Graf's first three wins over Seles. My point is that Hingis' wins should count as well.

I don't know about you, but for me, the Seles-Graf head-to-head opened with a 6-3,3-6,6-3 win for Steffi at Roland Garros. Not counting losses because of age is absurd.

hingis-seles
Jun 12th, 2003, 06:45 PM
Irma! :kiss:

irma
Jun 12th, 2003, 06:50 PM
monica also won a title right before the french 89 and she reached the semis so without a doubt was already a great clayplayer (wich she then understriped the year after of course)

G-Ha
Jun 12th, 2003, 06:54 PM
I have read threads where I have seen posters not count Hingis' first 3 wins over Venus, yet count Graf's first three wins over Seles. My point is that Hingis' wins should count as well.

I don't know about you, but for me, the Seles-Graf head-to-head opened with a 6-3,3-6,6-3 win for Steffi at Roland Garros. Not counting losses because of age is absurd.

Yep, I'm with you. Head-to-heads begin when the first match is played. So, I agree that Hingis's early wins count as well.

DA FOREHAND
Jun 12th, 2003, 06:57 PM
Of course they count as much as her losses from 99 on.

G-Ha
Jun 12th, 2003, 06:59 PM
monica also won a title right before the french 89 and she reached the semis so without a doubt was already a great clayplayer (wich she then understriped the year after of course)

You're right irma, and I think Steffi and Monica's early encounters were very telling of how their rivalry would unfold. First match out, Monica already takes a set off of Steffi on clay, but weeks later on grass, Monica is overwhelmed only winning one game. Throughout their rivarly Steffi ended up winning every match on faster surfaces, while Monica usually won the encounters on slower surfaces.

irma
Jun 12th, 2003, 07:05 PM
steffi-monica clay 3:3

so not so much domination

and for people who start 99 this and 99 that
monica could beat steffi on rebound ace then she could also beat steffi on clay but she didn't :o

G-Ha
Jun 12th, 2003, 07:12 PM
steffi-monica clay 3:3

so not so much domination

and for people who start 99 this and 99 that
monica could beat steffi on rebound ace then she could also beat steffi on clay but she didn't :o

Right again irma :kiss:

I agree that Monica didn't dominate Steffi on clay (likewise, Monica never dominated their head-to-head in general). But I was mainly referring to the fact that all 5 of Monica's wins over Steffi came on the slower surfaces: 3 wins on clay and 2 on rebound ace. Steffi won every encounter on grass, carpet and hardcourt.

DA FOREHAND
Jun 12th, 2003, 07:18 PM
Steffi was a better fast surface player, she'd always strectch the court on those surfaces, which hindered Monica's two-handed game.

Glenn
Jun 12th, 2003, 07:26 PM
I don't see why any meeting in any head-to-head should be ignored.
Venus Williams is older than Martina Hingis and they've both turned pro in 1994.

irma
Jun 12th, 2003, 07:30 PM
and what about injury. I always like to say novotna never beat steffi after chicago 92 again either while she officially did in philadelphia 96;)

Midnite Surfer
Jun 12th, 2003, 07:32 PM
I find a huge double standard everytime head-to-head records are brought up for Hingis and Venus and Seles and Graf.

Some Williams fans state that in their earlier encounters, Venus was still very young so those losses don't count. Ironically, some of these same fans also claim that Steffi's 3 wins over a 15-year old Monica Seles should count as losses. I get extremely confused.

So what will it be:

Seles and Venus were too young and inexperienced, playing dominant world number one's so their early losses don't count.

They were ready to play and if they lost, that's thier problem.

I agree with the second option. Graf and Hingis were ready to play and I believe that if a player is healthy enough to step on the court and play a match, then they should be ready to face the results/consequences.

This is also in reference to those tired excuses of "she made too many unforced errors" and didn't lose but "beat herself" regarding Martina's wins over any power player. Well, that just proves that she was such a poor player that she kept on making those errors and didn't deserve to win, meaning she was the INFERIOR player.

I wouldn't say those losses don't count in either case. Isn't Venus actually older than Hingis anyway? I mean it can be argued that Venus wasn't at the top of her game yet becasue of her lack of juniors play but a loss is a loss. Anyway, a thread like this is purely antagonistic as you are making general statements without naming specific posters. That's like me saying, "You know some people are liars and it really confuses me." Yeah well that's life. Some people are bad and some are good. Some people are idiots and others are not. What's your point?

Midnite Surfer
Jun 12th, 2003, 07:38 PM
And another thing, I'm sure there are people who are not Williams fans who are guilty of what you accuse the Wiliiams fans. Why is this phenomenon you have discovered only associated with Williams fans. I'm sure you can find some Steffi fans who feel the same.

Glenn
Jun 12th, 2003, 07:38 PM
I wouldn't say those losses don't count in either case. Isn't Venus actually older than Hingis anyway? I mean it can be argued that Venus wasn't at the top of her game yet becasue of her lack of juniors play but a loss is a loss. Anyway, a thread like this is purely antagonistic as you are making general statements without naming specific posters. That's like me saying, "You know some people are liars and it really confuses me." Yeah well that's life. Some people are bad and some are good. Some people are idiots and others are not. What's your point?
I think his point was pretty clear.