PDA

View Full Version : I remember that Venus/Serena said that they have only been outplayed a couple times..


for-sure
Nov 24th, 2003, 08:32 PM
what are those times?

oggie
Nov 24th, 2003, 08:34 PM
Wasn't there a match where Pierce defeated Serena 6-1 6-2 at Indian Wells (possibly in 2000)? I would call that being outplayed.

joaco
Nov 24th, 2003, 08:36 PM
I believe Serena was outplayed in the USOPEN 2000 QF by Lindsay. It was something like 6-3, 6-4. Serena was just being punished!

Cam'ron Giles
Nov 24th, 2003, 08:38 PM
Venus said she was outplayed by Sonia Jayaseelan (sp) in Canada once and she said that Sonia def beat her that time...LOL

tennisIlove09
Nov 24th, 2003, 08:39 PM
Davenport beat Serena 6-4 6-2
I'd agree with that one. Davenport was just on fire.

Venus said the 4-6 6-7 loss to Sonya. I haven't seen the match.

TonyP
Nov 24th, 2003, 08:47 PM
Well, let's see. The two of them beat Hingis 16 times. But she beat them 16 times, too, so I assume she "out played" them on at least one or two of those occasions.

Truth is, the Williams sisters have a hard time acknowledging that anyone ever outplays them. But that's kind of a delusional idea that some players have about tennis.

It's like some player with a great forehand thinking, "I have a much better forehand than she does and if she just gives me some hard, flat ones to my forehand, I'm gonna killer her."

Well, that player is correct, except her opponent knows that, so she doesn't hit to her forehand, she hits to her crappy backhand and she wins.

See, its not your opponent's job to let you play your game, its their job to take you out of your game. And unless you are playing against a backboard, there is always the chance that will happen.

And guess what? When it happens, you have been outplayed, like it or not.

Knizzle
Nov 24th, 2003, 08:52 PM
what are those times?

Venus never said "outplayed". She said there were only like 4 matches were she felt the match was out of her hands. That there was nothing she could have done to turn it around. She made this statement back in like 2001 or something anyway. I don't know about Serena.

Cam'ron Giles
Nov 24th, 2003, 09:02 PM
BTW, Serena has never said this...this came from Venus...:rolleyes:

bandabou
Nov 24th, 2003, 09:20 PM
Some would call it being a sore-loser and stuff, but in a way itīs cool. You NEVER EVER have to admit that you got out-played. You just say your opponent played well. Thatīs it.

Outplayed?! NEVER EVER!

WinningRecord
Nov 24th, 2003, 09:46 PM
What are you talking about bandana-whatever? That makes no sense. Nobody is obliged to say their opponent out-played them, but not being able to admit this makes one seem haught and arrogant and rude. A little humility never hurt anyone.

For that matter, I can only think of two matches: When Pierce beat Serena 6-2 6-1 Serena seemed awed, and when Henin (believe it or not!) beat Venus 6-4 6-1 Venus said that "if she played like that all the time she would be #1 in the world, and I'm not joking". Funny how nobody seems to remember that quote!

tennisIlove09
Nov 24th, 2003, 09:50 PM
The problem is, when Venus and Serena lose, it's because of what THEY did. They hit too many errors. Rarely, VERY rarely does someone actually beat them. It's them beating themselves.

The only time I seen Hingis "beat" Venus was the 99 US Open semi. And I wonder what would have happened if Venus didn't cramp in the final set. But we'll never know.

WinningRecord
Nov 24th, 2003, 09:59 PM
LOL Hingis beat them 15 other times. Take note of the Aussie 2001 quarters because Serena played one of the best matches she ever played against Hingis but Hingis was driving her backhand all over the court.

Of course I could argue that the Williams sisters never 'beat' Hingis that often because they didn't start turning the tide until late 1999 which is when Hingis started slowing down with foot injuries. After all the only reason they ever beat Hingis is because she was about three times as slow as she was during 96/97/98. But I don't reach for dumb excuses.

I'd love for you to explain why Hingis never beat them in all the other 15 wins she had. If Hingis never did anything to beat them then why did the Williams sisters rarely if ever lose to even quicker, more consistent players like Coetzer and Smashnova?

Right.

10-9. ;)

LeonHart
Nov 24th, 2003, 10:03 PM
2001 Aus Open SF, Hingis def. V. Williams 6-1 6-1 :tape:

WinningRecord
Nov 24th, 2003, 10:05 PM
Yea but Venus didn't say Hingis was too good. In fact Venus' press conference afterwards was about as excellent as her forehnad. :tape: Poor girl just took a mental holiday during that Slam.

PatM04
Nov 24th, 2003, 10:07 PM
When Monica beat Venus. I didn't see the entire match but I heard that in the latter stages She just really went after her shots. If I am wrong then someone please correct me:)

WinningRecord
Nov 24th, 2003, 10:08 PM
And actually Hingis didn't play all that well. She made some silly errors and kind of looped the ball too much...although she had a ton of nice dropshot/lob combos that sent Venus scrambling!

Still if Hingis played that match like she played the prior match against Serena it would have been Venus' only career double bagel.

tennisIlove09
Nov 24th, 2003, 10:09 PM
Martina did NOTHING special in the 6-1 6-1 victory. She played her normal game. Venus just made all the errors. I believe it was like 45 errors...in 14 games. 45! Keep in mind, it only takes 24 points to win a set. 24+24= 48; Venus gave her 45 errors!

I can honestly say, that the 10 losses Venus had to Hingis (with the exception of the 99 US Open), Venus beat herself.

Serena, I can't say as much because I haven't see all their matches. Anyone who has seen the 01 AO QF, has to admit that Serena started to miss a lot more shots when up 3-1, or whatever it was. But Hingis was great in the match.

WinningRecord
Nov 24th, 2003, 10:18 PM
You are retarded. Hingis was always the agressor in the pre-99 matches agaist Venus, she took it to her. After that Hingis got slower and weaker, so Venus became the agressor, but Hingis still managed to win through her incredible depth, shotmaking, and consistence. You say Venus 'beat herself' but then WHY did she always beat herself against Hingis and no one else? Seems Hingis always made Venus want to just hit the ball into the net huh? Right.

I take it you've never actually played tennis but let me tell you how utterly annoying it is to play someone who almost never makes errors and hits the ball a foot from the baseline with every shot: it's totally frustrating.

Sorry but you cannot rationalize ten losses by saying the opponent may has well not even have existed. It takes two. :-D

tennisIlove09
Nov 24th, 2003, 10:22 PM
You are retarded. Hingis was always the agressor in the pre-99 matches agaist Venus, she took it to her. After that Hingis got slower and weaker, so Venus became the agressor, but Hingis still managed to win through her incredible depth, shotmaking, and consistence. You say Venus 'beat herself' but then WHY did she always beat herself against Hingis and no one else? Seems Hingis always made Venus want to just hit the ball into the net huh? Right.

I take it you've never actually played tennis but let me tell you how utterly annoying it is to play someone who almost never makes errors and hits the ball a foot from the baseline with every shot: it's totally frustrating.

Sorry but you cannot rationalize ten losses by saying the opponent may has well not even have existed. It takes two. :-D

Venus didn't only "beat herself" against Hingis! Against Davenport, Pierce...EVERYONE! The sisters are SO aggressive, that's all they did when they joined the tour. The hit the ball as hard as they could! Either it stayed hit, or they missed. They missed more, because they didn't have the experience!

Martian Willow
Nov 24th, 2003, 10:23 PM
...players don't need to say they were outplayed...the scoreline does it for them... :)

WinningRecord
Nov 24th, 2003, 10:27 PM
I know Willow haha

"Hi I lost 6-1 6-1 but I wasn't outplayed!"

Oh how amusing that is! :)

tennisIlove09
Nov 24th, 2003, 10:29 PM
I know Willow haha

"Hi I lost 6-1 6-1 but I wasn't outplayed!"

Oh how amusing that is! :)

No, she wasn't. She MADE THE ERRORS! Had Hingis made that same # of errors and STILL won 6-1 6-1; THEN you can say she out played you!

But when you hit about 5-6 winners; and the same # of UFE and your opponet hits about 15-20 winners; 40-50 errors, you are NOT out played! :rolleyes:

WinningRecord
Nov 24th, 2003, 10:34 PM
LOL did Venus even hit 5 winners that match? Certainly not 15-20.

And yes you CAN say that she was outplayed! If Hingis was smart enough to let Venus take care of the easy work for her, and if Venus was dumb enough to try and mindlessly blast balls into oblivion against a player who rarely makes errors, then the result is expected.

Who played better that day, tennisIlove? Hingis.

If Hingis played better and won, she outplayed Venus. But I know you enjoy rationalizing this but either way, etch this in stone: 10 wins. And Hingis had to go on the court and earn her way to match point in all 10 of them.

SpikeyAidanm
Nov 24th, 2003, 10:37 PM
Dokic def V Williams 6-1, 6-2

CanadianBoy21
Nov 24th, 2003, 10:44 PM
What are you talking about Winning record, Hingis never outplayed Venus, even before 99, Venus was BY FAR the stronger one. I see outplayed as taking it to a player, that player had no chance even if they had the best day. Hingi gave herself opportunities, and you gotta respect that. Why do you think she is gone? She got outplayed by Serena and Venus, and OVERPOWERED, of course something is gonna hurt. Ever watch the 2001 Nasdaq Open after the AO, Venus against Hingi, lol.
How about the trashing Serena gave Hingi at Nasdaq in 2002? 6-4 6-0.
Serena got outplayed by Lindsay ones(but she outplayed her so many more times)

WinningRecord
Nov 24th, 2003, 10:48 PM
Yes I watched the 2001 Nasdaq and Hingis played terrible and yet again choked away a match, missing the set point she had in the second set tie break. But I don't excuse Hingis' losses, she lost because the other person was a better player.

Just like the Williams sisters undeniably lost to Hingis 16 times because Hingis played better those 16 times.

And look at matches like the 97 US Open lol some people here only have very recent memories. Hingis absolutely toyed with Venus, serving and volleying, hitting winners on the run, drop shots, and swinging at balls that were about to land five feet wide. That was great and an example of how Hingis dominated them before she started to slow down.

joao
Nov 24th, 2003, 10:48 PM
blah blah blah blah .... obviously neither one of you will let it go so ... just stop arguing about AO 2001!:rolleyes:

The reason why the sisters started to defeat over and over hingis at one point was probably because Hingis slowed down (although she was still reaching GS finals and winning titles as hell) and Venus and Serena were playing better.

Venus Forever
Nov 24th, 2003, 10:52 PM
Here are the stats:

Hingis Williams
10 Winners 17
8 Unforced errors 38
6 of 9 Break point converts 1 of 7
0 Aces 0
0 Double Faults 6
78 1st serve pct 50
3 of 5 Net winners 14 of 32
67 1st serve win pct 48
60 2nd serve win pct 32
60 Total points won 36

Rocketta
Nov 24th, 2003, 10:56 PM
blah blah blah blah .... obviously neither one of you will let it go so ... just stop arguing about AO 2001!:rolleyes:

The reason why the sisters started to defeat over and over hingis at one point was probably because Hingis slowed down (although she was still reaching GS finals and winning titles as hell) and Venus and Serena were playing better.


:kiss: Hey Joao! :wavey:

I tried to rep you but it said I have to spread it around a little more. ;)

bandabou
Nov 24th, 2003, 11:09 PM
Still my point is: You say all the right things: The opponent played well, stuck to her gameplan, etc.

But I PERSONALLY would never say I got outplayed. Outplay means that there was NOTHING I couldīve done that day. Hello!! Everytime I lose is because I did something wrong too, it wasnīt just the opponent.

U wanna act like even if I was 100 % I would have lost that match?! Get away from me!

I got BEATEN bad, but not outplayed.

space
Nov 24th, 2003, 11:10 PM
Yes I watched the 2001 Nasdaq and Hingis played terrible and yet again choked away a match, missing the set point she had in the second set tie break. But I don't excuse Hingis' losses, she lost because the other person was a better player.

Just like the Williams sisters undeniably lost to Hingis 16 times because Hingis played better those 16 times.

And look at matches like the 97 US Open lol some people here only have very recent memories. Hingis absolutely toyed with Venus, serving and volleying, hitting winners on the run, drop shots, and swinging at balls that were about to land five feet wide. That was great and an example of how Hingis dominated them before she started to slow down.

Hingis was ran out of the WTA by the power players. Hingis cannot serve. 80mi hr serve is not going to make it playing the sisters. Hingis was smart she new she could not keep up so she used that so call foot pbm as an excuse. Slow down my foot.. she was pushed out of the game by better players. They claim she is so smart on the court, if she was so smart she should have done something with that serve of hers.

bandabou
Nov 24th, 2003, 11:15 PM
specially Serena never really had much trouble against Hingis, only on rebound ace she wasnīt able to beat Hingis. Even in ī98, Serena had mpīs I remember in their match at either Lipton or IW, so Serena always could play with Hingis.

Lindsay?! Donīt even come with Lindsay. Since that U.S. open ī00, Lindsay has been getting spanked 6-1 6-2 left and right, so......QUIET!

Peter M
Nov 24th, 2003, 11:34 PM
what are those times?

Venus said once each to Davenport, Jayseelean, Spirlea and Van Roost. Yet, I can recall many more. ;)

bandabou
Nov 24th, 2003, 11:43 PM
People are so desperate, they are even willing to dig in challenger results, just to see who outplayed a Williams.

Well, one thing I know....they have OUTPLAYED much much more than that they have BEEN outplayed.

TonyP
Nov 24th, 2003, 11:55 PM
Serena never had much trouble with Hingis? She lost to her six out of 13 matches. I'd say that was a lot of trouble.

And whether Venus wanted to admit it or not, she lost to Martina 10 out of 19 times. So if she wasn't "out played," that means she is such a head case she threw away ten out of 19 matches?

Sorry, Hingis ended her career with 471 wins against 100 loses. What Martina did was take players out of their game, forcing them into making errors. That was her strategy and it worked on Venus just like it did on everyone else, with the exception of Graf, who she only beat twice.

But it certainly worked often with Venus and you can make all the excuses you want, Hingis beat her more times than Venus beat Hingis, end of story.

TSequoia01
Nov 25th, 2003, 12:04 AM
I was always entrigued with the Williams versus Hingis matchups. Early on Hingis seemed to have a much easier time with Venus as opposed to Serena. Hingis was on top and the Sisters were the new kids on the block. Martina's savvy and experience enabled her to hold off Venus. Actually there was little she could do with Serena. She needed Serena to breakdown mentally. Which she did quite often. Let me say this however. Marti was never better, faster, hit harder than she did in 1999, 2000, and 2001. She was fit and at the top of her game. The Williams Sisters, and Davenport saw to that. By 2001 both Sisters had passed Hingis. She was better during 99, and parts of 2000. As other posters have said, she saw the writing on the wall. Oh yeah, Venus' lost at the Australian 6-1, 6-1 to Marti was due to Venus not playing and being in school. She said before the A.O. she had only 11 days to prepare. No player retires at 22 unless there are more than physical issues. Look at Lindsay knee construction and now foot surgery but will be at AO 04. nuff said. :cool:

bandabou
Nov 25th, 2003, 12:08 AM
Serena never had much trouble with Hingis? She lost to her six out of 13 matches. I'd say that was a lot of trouble.

And whether Venus wanted to admit it or not, she lost to Martina 10 out of 19 times. So if she wasn't "out played," that means she is such a head case she threw away ten out of 19 matches?

Sorry, Hingis ended her career with 471 wins against 100 loses. What Martina did was take players out of their game, forcing them into making errors. That was her strategy and it worked on Venus just like it did on everyone else, with the exception of Graf, who she only beat twice.

But it certainly worked often with Venus and you can make all the excuses you want, Hingis beat her more times than Venus beat Hingis, end of story.

And the other end of the story is that Serena beat Hingis more often Hingis beat Serena. No excuses for that either! Martina got outplayed by Serena, because Serena won more often than not against Martina.

Infiniti2001
Nov 25th, 2003, 12:10 AM
No player retires at 22 unless there are more than physical issues. Look at Lindsay knee construction and now foot surgery but will be at AO 04. nuff said.

:worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:

bandabou
Nov 25th, 2003, 12:10 AM
I was always entrigued with the Williams versus Hingis matchups. Early on Hingis seemed to have a much easier time with Venus as opposed to Serena. Hingis was on top and the Sisters were the new kids on the block. Martina's savvy and experience enabled her to hold off Venus. Actually there was little she could do with Serena. She needed Serena to breakdown mentally. Which she did quite often. Let me say this however. Marti was never better, faster, hit harder than she did in 1999, 2000, and 2001. She was fit and at the top of her game. The Williams Sisters, and Davenport saw to that. By 2001 both Sisters had passed Hingis. She was better during 99, and parts of 2000. As other posters have said, she saw the writing on the wall. Oh yeah, Venus' lost at the Australian 6-1, 6-1 to Marti was due to Venus not playing and being in school. She said before the A.O. she had only 11 days to prepare. No player retires at 22 unless there are more than physical issues. Look at Lindsay knee construction and now foot surgery but will be at AO 04. nuff said. :cool:

Exactly....after ī01 the sisters surpassed Martina. Martina stood no chance against them after that. I doubt that even without the injuries, that Hingis would have been able to keep handling with the sisters much longer.

Infiniti2001
Nov 25th, 2003, 12:17 AM
Well, let's see. The two of them beat Hingis 16 times. But she beat them 16 times, too, so I assume she "out played" them on at least one or two of those occasions.

Truth is, the Williams sisters have a hard time acknowledging that anyone ever outplays them. But that's kind of a delusional idea that some players have about tennis.

It's like some player with a great forehand thinking, "I have a much better forehand than she does and if she just gives me some hard, flat ones to my forehand, I'm gonna killer her."

Well, that player is correct, except her opponent knows that, so she doesn't hit to her forehand, she hits to her crappy backhand and she wins.

See, its not your opponent's job to let you play your game, its their job to take you out of your game. And unless you are playing against a backboard, there is always the chance that will happen.

And guess what? When it happens, you have been outplayed, like it or not.

"we" can always count on Tonyp to make Martina seem like the best thing in tennis history :lol: man you gotta let go :tape:

bandabou
Nov 25th, 2003, 12:30 AM
Martina was good, but after ī01 the sisters surpassed her.

TSequoia01
Nov 25th, 2003, 12:33 AM
Serena never had much trouble with Hingis? She lost to her six out of 13 matches. I'd say that was a lot of trouble.



Serena had the type of game that Marti had the most trouble with. Look at their history. Serena won early when there was no pressure and no one expected her to win. When expectation pressures entered in she lost match after match usually in 3 sets. When she got control of this weakness she started beating Marti consistently. When Serena was on her game such as Wimbledon 2001 or Miami 2002 Marti had actually no chance. Infact she began to just watch balls go by simply waving her racquet. Serena simply would not let Marti play. No point construction, no change of direction, and no opportunity to come to net. At least Venus would rally with her. Venus too began to defeat Marti with ease ...the sisters won their last 5 matches. :cool:

Mister B
Nov 25th, 2003, 12:34 AM
I also think Hingis was the better player until late 2001.. in US Open 2001, Venus was at her all-time best, nobody could stand a chance against her... (just see against Clijsters, Capriati and Serena)...
but in AO 2001 Hingis was certainly the better player!

All I want to say is that they are 2 very different players, both with winning tactics and great players, among the best-ever!

Fyndh0rnElf
Nov 25th, 2003, 01:07 AM
Dokic hammered Venus 6-1 6-2 (Rome 2000) and Venus recognized Dokic's brilliant play. Venus said "and that was all I could do to stay in the match" and has said several times how much she admires Dokic, and how much she loves her attacking game. Dokic has also said, contrarily to what many players on tour say, that she doesn't find the sisters arrogant at all, but rather people with great personalities

TonyP
Nov 25th, 2003, 01:15 AM
The original point of this thread seemed to be that Venus and Serena claimed very few people could beat them but themselves.

My contention is, if Venus lost ten times to the same player, then Venus is a real head case. And the fact that she loses to her sister so consistantly now may prove that to be the case. (Assuming the matches are not fixed.)

Doesn't matter. At the end of the day, what goes into the record books is either a W or an L. There is no L* and a notation at the bottom of the page saying: "well, sure she lost, but she beat herself."

No one cares about that, apparently except the highly insecure Williams sisters.

bandabou
Nov 25th, 2003, 01:25 AM
Tony is sure quick to turn it around...now that people showed that Martina got some serious spankings by Serena as well for the ones Nartina gave Venus, he wanna turn it around say a W is a W?!

What happened to the outplaying thing?!

Infiniti2001
Nov 25th, 2003, 01:32 AM
tonyp you definitely have a problem man... you're always groping for grounds to go negative on on the Williames , get help already :rolleyes:

~ The Leopard ~
Nov 25th, 2003, 01:33 AM
OTOH some people want to give Hingis no credit at all. We'll never know how good she would be now without the foot injury. I see no reason for her continue if she's not at her absolute peak. Without her full speed she's no match for the sisters, or for the likes of Kim or Amelie if it comes to that. A less-than-perfect Marti gets blasted off the court by all those players. If she's less-than-perfect, why hang around and lose to the big girls? It's common sense, not cowardice.

Her inability to beat those players much in recent times doesn't take away from how good she was when she was mostly winning against them. And don't tell me they have improved since then. I know that. But if Marti had remained physically right she may have improved, too, and would still be winning her share of matches against all the current top-five-plus-Venus.

Sure, the Marti fans should let it go and enjoy the current crop of top players: the Willies, the Belgians, Amelie, etc. But there is no need to slag off against Marti.

Diya
Nov 25th, 2003, 01:35 AM
Venus and Serena are known to never( ok change that to rarely) give credit to the opponents who beat them fair and square so i am not shocked by their " We've been OUTPLAYED only a couple of times" kinda statements. :rolleyes:

bandabou
Nov 25th, 2003, 01:43 AM
Diya,you as a Jen-fan must know better than this.

Wasnīt it Jen who said something like:" There is always something with her, but her healing powers sure are magical." after she got spanked by Justine?!

That sure was giving credit, huh?!

Diya
Nov 25th, 2003, 01:46 AM
Jennifer was atleast diplomatic about it ;)

LeonHart
Nov 25th, 2003, 01:50 AM
Just because Hingis didn't OVERPOWER the williams don't mean she didn't OUTPLAY them. Stupid Dumbass!

bandabou
Nov 25th, 2003, 01:53 AM
Who are u talking too, Leon?!

As Tony said: winning is winning.

What use did all the spins and slices Martina have, if she couldnīt end the points with them?!

Diya
Nov 25th, 2003, 01:56 AM
Who are u talking too, Leon?!

As Tony said: winning is winning.

What use did all the spins and slices Martina have, if she couldnīt end the points with them?!


She still ended with a dead even combined record (16-16) against the "great" Williams sisters you'll love to worship ! Live with that :tape:

LeonHart
Nov 25th, 2003, 01:57 AM
What are you talking about Winning record, Hingis never outplayed Venus, even before 99, Venus was BY FAR the stronger one. I see outplayed as taking it to a player, that player had no chance even if they had the best day. Hingi gave herself opportunities, and you gotta respect that. Why do you think she is gone? She got outplayed by Serena and Venus, and OVERPOWERED, of course something is gonna hurt. Ever watch the 2001 Nasdaq Open after the AO, Venus against Hingi, lol.
How about the trashing Serena gave Hingi at Nasdaq in 2002? 6-4 6-0.
Serena got outplayed by Lindsay ones(but she outplayed her so many more times)
I'm responding to this guy :)

jenn
Nov 25th, 2003, 02:13 AM
The obvious clearly doesn't stop some people from speaking trash. Anyone who says that Martina was at her best in 2001 is delussional or trying an unsuccessful joke :lol:

Hingis' quarterfinal win over Serena Williams at the 2001 Australian Open was the last gasp of her era. She returned to an excellent level for the first three months of 2002 but outside of that she was never the same player again. I mean seriously losing 2 and 2 to Demetieva? Being beaten in straight sets by Sanchez Vicario? Getting her clocked cleaned by Monica twice in a row? You knew things were bad for Marti when she was losing to Seles because she only ever lost to her when she was in a slump. Hingis was jaded and not herself from the moment she lost the AO final 2001, this is evident in the fact that she only beat one top 10 player all year after the AO in Mauresmo. Anyone who wants to argue that Hingis was at her peak during 2001 and was still suparssed by the sisters faces the uneviable task of explaining how players such as Seles and Sanchez Vicario (not to mention Pascual and Demetieva), whom she invariably dominated, were able to beat her, and then explain how Serena, presumably so superior, still finished ranked behind her that year with a record against her of 1-2.


Its actually correct that Martina played her best tennis in 1999 and 2000 and in this period there was very little between Hingis and the Williams sisters. Indisputably Venus was at the peak of her powers in the summer of 2000, and on both occassions she met Hingis she beat her by one break in the final set. WOW! What superiority! Despite all the rhetoric about Venus surpassing her, on the tennis court there was very little seperating them at all in 2000. Also Serena never SURPASSED Hingis. Until Martina's forced exit from the game in Spring 2002, Serena has NEVER been ranked higher than her. In fact when Martina left the game Serena had still not won a GS title since 1999. Now Im not saying that Serena wouldn't have won those GS's had Martina been there in 2002, but its stupid to say that she SURPASSED her. Its like saying Martina surpassed Graf in 1997 when the latter was out with injury most of the year. When Martina left the game, both were in the midst of a grand slam drought so I would say they were pretty evenly matched at that stage. The fact is that Serena played her best tennis when Martina was out of the game so it is hard to compare the two.

And Williams fans wanting to argue the 6-4 6-0 beating that Serena handed out to Martina in 2002 would be wise to look to the next round where serena handed out a 6-2 6-2 defeat to Venus. Serena simply played out of her mind that week - pure and simple. This leads me to a point that is so often missed about Martina's exit from the game. Martina's problem was never POWER PLAYERS as such. This is an illusion borne from the fact that Martina was the only top player without (significant) power. The fact is the 90% of the time a top power player loses these days it is to another top power player. Does this mean that these players cannot handle power either? The facts demonstrate that Hingis was more than capable of sharing match wins with power players. Even in 2002, while she was beaten by Serena, Venus and Jennifer before her ankle surgery, she had beaten Clijsters and Seles, gone within a point of beating Jenn and stretched Serena to three sets. This shows that she could handle power just fine. The problem with Martina was that people expected her to go on dominating forever like she did in 1997 and when she didn't they looked for an excuse. The fact that Serena and Venus never dominated at an early age has allowed them to get away with a couple of losses here and there without the neccessity for talk of a decline. Because of 1997, Hingis was held to an impossible standard. The fact is that between 1998 and mid 2002 no player was truly dominant - not Venus, not Lindsay, not Serena, not Martina and not Jennifer - each had patches of brilliance, but no one was good enough to dominate such a competitive era. The fact that Martina didn't is not proof that she didn't handle power.

bandabou
Nov 25th, 2003, 02:32 AM
Fact remains that since ī99 Martina hasnīt won a GS and was consistently beaten in those slam-finals she did reach by power-players, so she wasnīt "imune" to them either.

bandabou
Nov 25th, 2003, 02:33 AM
She still ended with a dead even combined record (16-16) against the "great" Williams sisters you'll love to worship ! Live with that :tape:

Wanna hear her record against Jen?! 6-3! So at least the sisters were competitive....Jen?! :tape:

jenn
Nov 25th, 2003, 02:36 AM
Fact remains that since ī99 Martina hasnīt won a GS and was consistently beaten in those slam-finals she did reach by power-players, so she wasnīt "imune" to them either.

Correct. No one is invicible. Serena has lost a slam final to power player, Venus 5 times, Lindsay a couple of times, Kim twice, juju once.

bandabou
Nov 25th, 2003, 02:44 AM
For Martina it was more striking, because she was no.1!! for most of that period, yet she kept coming on the short-end at the GSīs, while there were other players dominating her, the slams, everything.

Thatīs why people said the game passed her by. Martina still was good, but no longer the best.

jenn
Nov 25th, 2003, 02:53 AM
For Martina it was more striking, because she was no.1!! for most of that period, yet she kept coming on the short-end at the GSīs, while there were other players dominating her, the slams, everything.

Thatīs why people said the game passed her by. Martina still was good, but no longer the best.

Not the ABSOLUTE best ALL THE TIME. But I would argue that no one was the absolute best during that period. Who was it? Lindsay in the first half of 2000? Venus in the second half of 2001? Jenn in the first half of 2001? Venus in the second of 2001? If one takes the whole period into account, no one was better performed than her really. Martina played a consistently high level thoughout, but your right, she didn't crack it when it really counted.

~ The Leopard ~
Nov 25th, 2003, 02:56 AM
I actually think that Serena at her best is better than anyone else has ever been at their best, at least in the recent era with comparable equipment etc (forget about Margaret Court).

But maybe not that much better than Marti at her best. It's not just that Serena in particular has improved. Marti was actually getting worse after 1999, presumably because of the injury. Although they are about the same age, we'll never be able to say for sure that Serena at her best would dominate Marti at her best. I think Ree would have the edge but Marti would win quite often.

It's all interesting speculation, nothing more. The only thing that pisses me off is when I see claims that Marti retired because she was cowardly or whatever. She retired because she had no prospect of ever playing at her best again and did no want to hang around as just another constantly-injured under-performing player...which is all she could be at less than her best in what is now a very competive game. She's rich and she's made her mark on history. I say she had every right to retire.

Doraemon
Nov 25th, 2003, 03:09 AM
Hingis at her best may not be as great as Serena at her best but Hingis was able to bring out her near best game much more consistenly than Serena. Of course it's before Martina got injured I'm talking about. So if Hingis of her peak period met the present Serena, I would think the outcome would be anyone's guess. Serena often players far bellow her best and that's part of the game where consistency speaks volumes.
As for the original question, I dunno exactly how badly one has to be beaten to be outplayed.. But certainly Martina has outsmarted the sisters a number of times and basically every time she won, it was her outsmarting and the sisters won, it was their overpowering. As the sisters were "potentically" better, they were more likely to outplay Martina than the other way around.

Ryan
Nov 25th, 2003, 03:09 AM
:worship: To jenn for saving this arguement with an amazing post.


bandabou, please stop piping up with your small mindless posts, I know you're not that stupid.

Jenn's post is absolutely right, and it refutes all of the "logic" presented by Williams fans here. Hingis at her BEST disrupted the rhythm of any player and did amazing things with the ball. The reason many power players had errors against her was because she forced them into it by making them rush, think twice, over compensate. Once Serena realised she needed to play it cool, she was able to wait out the tide and beat Hingis easily. Anyone saying Hingis played her best in 2001 is retarded, thats like saying Venus played her best in 2003. :tape:

bandabou
Nov 25th, 2003, 03:12 AM
Not the ABSOLUTE best ALL THE TIME. But I would argue that no one was the absolute best during that period. Who was it? Lindsay in the first half of 2000? Venus in the second half of 2001? Jenn in the first half of 2001? Venus in the second of 2001? If one takes the whole period into account, no one was better performed than her really. Martina played a consistently high level thoughout, but your right, she didn't crack it when it really counted.

THAT is what hurting her. During ī99-ī02 she reached like 6 slam finals, more than anybody else, but what did she win?! One oz open....and she got beaten in all those slam-finals by power hitters and only ONCE was it close: OZ open ī02, which she should have won.

Thatīs the thing. I think Kim saw too much of the wrong Martina, donīt you think?!

bandabou
Nov 25th, 2003, 03:19 AM
:worship: To jenn for saving this arguement with an amazing post.


bandabou, please stop piping up with your small mindless posts, I know you're not that stupid.

Jenn's post is absolutely right, and it refutes all of the "logic" presented by Williams fans here. Hingis at her BEST disrupted the rhythm of any player and did amazing things with the ball. The reason many power players had errors against her was because she forced them into it by making them rush, think twice, over compensate. Once Serena realised she needed to play it cool, she was able to wait out the tide and beat Hingis easily. Anyone saying Hingis played her best in 2001 is retarded, thats like saying Venus played her best in 2003. :tape:

Where are YOU coming from?! Your first post and you already post non-sense?!

bandabou
Nov 25th, 2003, 03:20 AM
I actually think that Serena at her best is better than anyone else has ever been at their best, at least in the recent era with comparable equipment etc (forget about Margaret Court).

But maybe not that much better than Marti at her best. It's not just that Serena in particular has improved. Marti was actually getting worse after 1999, presumably because of the injury. Although they are about the same age, we'll never be able to say for sure that Serena at her best would dominate Marti at her best. I think Ree would have the edge but Marti would win quite often.

It's all interesting speculation, nothing more. The only thing that pisses me off is when I see claims that Marti retired because she was cowardly or whatever. She retired because she had no prospect of ever playing at her best again and did no want to hang around as just another constantly-injured under-performing player...which is all she could be at less than her best in what is now a very competive game. She's rich and she's made her mark on history. I say she had every right to retire.

Good one....I think Serena would rule on hardcourts and grass, while Martina would probably rule on clay and certainly rebound ace.

SerenaSlam
Nov 25th, 2003, 03:39 AM
Well, let's see. The two of them beat Hingis 16 times. But she beat them 16 times, too, so I assume she "out played" them on at least one or two of those occasions.

Truth is, the Williams sisters have a hard time acknowledging that anyone ever outplays them. But that's kind of a delusional idea that some players have about tennis.

It's like some player with a great forehand thinking, "I have a much better forehand than she does and if she just gives me some hard, flat ones to my forehand, I'm gonna killer her."

Well, that player is correct, except her opponent knows that, so she doesn't hit to her forehand, she hits to her crappy backhand and she wins.

See, its not your opponent's job to let you play your game, its their job to take you out of your game. And unless you are playing against a backboard, there is always the chance that will happen.

And guess what? When it happens, you have been outplayed, like it or not.
that is a great point you make, i think its exactly why players and commentators say the "sisters" when they are "on" just don't let you play their game.

bandabou
Nov 25th, 2003, 03:45 AM
that is a great point you make, i think its exactly why players and commentators say the "sisters" when they are "on" just don't let you play their game.

Hahahaha. Serena slam youīre SO right. Iīm not sure Tony meant us to say something good about the SISTERS though! :lol: ;)

TSequoia01
Nov 25th, 2003, 04:14 AM
Marti played at a very high level in 2001 and had some great wins.

Sydney

She defeated Clijsters 6-4,6-4
She defeated Serena 6-4,7-5
She defeated Conchita 6-3,6-2

Australian

She defeated Serena 6-2, 3-6, 8-6
She defeated Venus 6-1, 6-1
She lost to Jennifer 4-6, 3-6 in the finals

Tokyo

She lost in the Finals to Lindsay 7-6, 4-6,2-6

DOHA

She won defeating Testude 6-3, 6-2

Dubai

She won defeating Tauziat 6-4, 6-4

Indian Wells

She lost to Clijsters in the SF 2-6,6-2, 1-6

Miami

She lost to Venus in the Semis

Amelia Island

She lost to Arantza Sanchez in the quarters

Charleston

She lost in the finals to Jen

Berlin and Rome

She lost in the semis to Amelie

French Open

She lost in the Semis to Jen

Wimbledon

Lost in the first round to Virginia Pasqual

San Diego

lost in the semis to Monica

US Open

Lost in the Semis to Serena

Moscow

Lost in the quarters to Dementieva

Stuttgart

Retired in the semis against Lindsay


Martina played at a high level in 2001 especially in the beginning of the year. Where she defeated both Sisters at the A.O. She basically was getting to semis, a trait that was becoming the norm for her. True she has had better results but her level and fitness were high until her injury. :cool:

Knizzle
Nov 25th, 2003, 04:27 AM
Dokic hammered Venus 6-1 6-2 (Rome 2000) and Venus recognized Dokic's brilliant play. Venus said "and that was all I could do to stay in the match" and has said several times how much she admires Dokic, and how much she loves her attacking game. Dokic has also said, contrarily to what many players on tour say, that she doesn't find the sisters arrogant at all, but rather people with great personalities

Where did you get that quote from??

Knizzle
Nov 25th, 2003, 04:28 AM
2000 FORO ITALICO

ROME, ITALY

May 18, 2000

J. DOKIC/ V. Williams
6-1, 6-2

An interview with:

VENUS WILLIAMS

Q. Did you have some problem with your wrist?

VENUS WILLIAMS: No, no. I felt fine. No problems.

Q. Venus, were you surprised by the way she played tonight?

VENUS WILLIAMS: She played quite well. No, not really because usually she plays pretty solid tennis and I expected her to play quite well. But she played too good today. That's all I could say.

Q. Did you watch her play before?

VENUS WILLIAMS: No, I had not. I've seen her, of course. I'm a tennis player.

Q. And what was the problem with your game, if there was one?

VENUS WILLIAMS: You know, I wasn't getting a rhythm. Things were clear in my mind how I wanted to play, but I wasn't playing that way. So it was a little bit frustrating because I know how to play but I wasn't doing that, and she played quite well. I didn't get into the match. I wasn't serving the way I can. But I'm going to practice the rest of this week, I'm going to practice next week and be ready for the French Open.

Q. Would you compare the feeling you have now with the one you had in Hamburg, the fact that you don't manage to do what you want to do?

VENUS WILLIAMS: Yeah. Yeah, it's better than Hamburg. I'm feeling better than Hamburg. But, you know, it's like my mind is there but my body isn't there yet; I'm still catching up. I know what I want to do. I watched a lot of tennis when I was off. I'm thinking it, but it's not always coming, and so that's tough. I'm trying.

Q. I mean, you didn't seem really angry. I'm glad you're smiling.

VENUS WILLIAMS: Yeah.

Q. After you lost, you should be a little bit

more --

VENUS WILLIAMS: Well, you know, there's no need to come in here crying and upset and bitter. I can do that after the press conference.

Q. Where are you going to prepare for the French Open?

VENUS WILLIAMS: Yeah, I'm going to stay here a few more days then head to France. That's the plan.

Q. And what are your expectations for the tournament?

VENUS WILLIAMS: For the French?

Q. Yes.

VENUS WILLIAMS: I expect to do a lot better than what I did here. You know, I go in to each match expecting to play well, expecting to win, expecting just to start off from where I dropped off in November, but that, you know, just takes some time and I'm just trying to figure it out. It's tough to say. You know, unless you've been where I am before, it's tough to say how it feels.

Q. When you started to play at Hamburg, it was a comeback. Did you imagine that it would be maybe so difficult to get back?

VENUS WILLIAMS: No, not at all.

Q. No?

VENUS WILLIAMS: No. I really just thought I was going to come back and start playing tennis. I am playing tennis, but not the kind of tennis I want to play. So everyone keeps saying it takes time. For me, I really don't understand that. For me, it just seems like I should be playing perfect.

Q. Can you speak about the frustration, anger?

VENUS WILLIAMS: Yeah, I came back a different player at this point. Because of my past, I'm going to be more calm and more readily able to accept mistakes. But right now, I can't accept it. I don't want to deal with mistakes and losses and that's unnecessary for me now. I feel different from before.

Q. Is there an urgency, what makes it feel different? After the match, you were being consoled. What were you saying, what were you feeling at that point?

VENUS WILLIAMS: I was just talking to my mom. You know?

Q. She have any wisdom you'd want to share with us?

VENUS WILLIAMS: No. No.

Knizzle
Nov 25th, 2003, 04:34 AM
This thread was started under false pretenses. Venus nor Serena ever said they were OUTPLAYED only a few times. Venus said there were only a few matches that she felt she couldn't have done anymore to change the outcome. That's all. This thread should be locked. It's worthless.

GoDominique
Nov 25th, 2003, 05:16 AM
Great post jenn !!! :worship:

The FO 1999 loss hurted Martina's confidence in important matches, but not that much her game.
Only after AO 2001 her game went down. She began to play passive throughout a whole match, and she was dominated by players SHE would have dominated before (Arantxa etc.) And only then she began to lose badly to "power-players" like Serena regularly.
I don't think her game picked up again in 2002. Her draw at AO was damn easy. She HAD to win this. After she failed, it only got worse. Just remember her loss against Daniela.

Serena and Venus could beat Martina "at her best" (and they did). But in the end it was rather Martina herself who ended her time on the top by getting worse and giving up, and not being unable to handle "power-players" and the game passing her by.

moby
Nov 25th, 2003, 06:46 AM
Here are the stats:

Hingis Williams
10 Winners 17
8 Unforced errors 38
6 of 9 Break point converts 1 of 7
0 Aces 0
0 Double Faults 6
78 1st serve pct 50
3 of 5 Net winners 14 of 32
67 1st serve win pct 48
60 2nd serve win pct 32
60 Total points won 36


stats for AO 01?
first it seems like martina also forced 12 errors to venus' 11
but that isnt significant

what is significant is the net points won
venus won only 14 of 32 net points
which is easily less than 50%
now you usually don't win matches unless you win more than half the points
so why did venus persist in coming to the net so many times
either she was silly
or martina was intelligent in luring her to the net
whatever

slice
Nov 25th, 2003, 07:15 AM
zvonareva IMO outplayed venus for a lot of the match, running down everyball and turning impossible shots into winners, but a few errors on venus' part cost her the match but id still count vera's win ova her as her outplaying venus.

slice
Nov 25th, 2003, 07:26 AM
how culd i 4get the most important one? the dokic d. venus 2000 rome, venus did get outplayed. dokic just attacked from the beginning and was the player with the most pace. even chek the commentary for the match, venus was absolutely annihilated in this match.

topspin
Nov 25th, 2003, 07:38 AM
The obvious clearly doesn't stop some people from speaking trash. Anyone who says that Martina was at her best in 2001 is delussional or trying an unsuccessful joke :lol:

Hingis' quarterfinal win over Serena Williams at the 2001 Australian Open was the last gasp of her era. She returned to an excellent level for the first three months of 2002 but outside of that she was never the same player again. I mean seriously losing 2 and 2 to Demetieva? Being beaten in straight sets by Sanchez Vicario? Getting her clocked cleaned by Monica twice in a row? You knew things were bad for Marti when she was losing to Seles because she only ever lost to her when she was in a slump. Hingis was jaded and not herself from the moment she lost the AO final 2001, this is evident in the fact that she only beat one top 10 player all year after the AO in Mauresmo. Anyone who wants to argue that Hingis was at her peak during 2001 and was still suparssed by the sisters faces the uneviable task of explaining how players such as Seles and Sanchez Vicario (not to mention Pascual and Demetieva), whom she invariably dominated, were able to beat her, and then explain how Serena, presumably so superior, still finished ranked behind her that year with a record against her of 1-2.


Its actually correct that Martina played her best tennis in 1999 and 2000 and in this period there was very little between Hingis and the Williams sisters. Indisputably Venus was at the peak of her powers in the summer of 2000, and on both occassions she met Hingis she beat her by one break in the final set. WOW! What superiority! Despite all the rhetoric about Venus surpassing her, on the tennis court there was very little seperating them at all in 2000. Also Serena never SURPASSED Hingis. Until Martina's forced exit from the game in Spring 2002, Serena has NEVER been ranked higher than her. In fact when Martina left the game Serena had still not won a GS title since 1999. Now Im not saying that Serena wouldn't have won those GS's had Martina been there in 2002, but its stupid to say that she SURPASSED her. Its like saying Martina surpassed Graf in 1997 when the latter was out with injury most of the year. When Martina left the game, both were in the midst of a grand slam drought so I would say they were pretty evenly matched at that stage. The fact is that Serena played her best tennis when Martina was out of the game so it is hard to compare the two.

And Williams fans wanting to argue the 6-4 6-0 beating that Serena handed out to Martina in 2002 would be wise to look to the next round where serena handed out a 6-2 6-2 defeat to Venus. Serena simply played out of her mind that week - pure and simple. This leads me to a point that is so often missed about Martina's exit from the game. Martina's problem was never POWER PLAYERS as such. This is an illusion borne from the fact that Martina was the only top player without (significant) power. The fact is the 90% of the time a top power player loses these days it is to another top power player. Does this mean that these players cannot handle power either? The facts demonstrate that Hingis was more than capable of sharing match wins with power players. Even in 2002, while she was beaten by Serena, Venus and Jennifer before her ankle surgery, she had beaten Clijsters and Seles, gone within a point of beating Jenn and stretched Serena to three sets. This shows that she could handle power just fine. The problem with Martina was that people expected her to go on dominating forever like she did in 1997 and when she didn't they looked for an excuse. The fact that Serena and Venus never dominated at an early age has allowed them to get away with a couple of losses here and there without the neccessity for talk of a decline. Because of 1997, Hingis was held to an impossible standard. The fact is that between 1998 and mid 2002 no player was truly dominant - not Venus, not Lindsay, not Serena, not Martina and not Jennifer - each had patches of brilliance, but no one was good enough to dominate such a competitive era. The fact that Martina didn't is not proof that she didn't handle power.

A very insightful post!

Chance
Nov 25th, 2003, 07:52 AM
Tony P - you crack me up...

Getting back to the original question, this is what Venus said in 2000 after she won Pilot Pen

Q. The way your confidence is right now, do you think Venus Williams is about the only one that can beat Venus Williams?

VENUS WILLIAMS: That is how it has always been in the past. I was defeating myself most of the times. Not to say that -- I would say four times in my career where the player just came out and there was nothing I could do, I was totally confused. But under normal circumstances, sure. But I think it is with any player, miss out an opportunity; person who makes the most mistakes usually is the one that loses. But I am getting through that. I am not doing that as much.

Q. You mentioned that there is four players that would confuse you in the past. Who are they?

VENUS WILLIAMS: No, -- not four players, but about four times where I have just been beat outright, where I didn't have a chance that day.


I remember clearly Venus saying one of those matches was against Irina SPIRLEA but I can't find the interview...

Gandalf
Nov 25th, 2003, 08:11 AM
Yeah, I also read that. She sais that it had been once against Davenport (6-1,6-2 in Philadelphia'99), once against Jelaseelan, once against Sprilea in Philadelphia :eek: and the other one I think was against Van Roost.

Ryan
Nov 25th, 2003, 11:47 AM
Where are YOU coming from?! Your first post and you already post non-sense?!


Well of course its nonsense to a tool like you, I'm surprised all the big words in this thread haven't scared you off yet.

justine&coria
Nov 25th, 2003, 12:01 PM
Serena was outplayed by Justine during 1 set and a half at FO semis.

And I'm fed up of those people who say that the reason the Williams lose is because of themselves first.
I can for example say, that the reason Justine lost the Wimbledon match, was because she wasn't as aggressive as normally. Serena won because Justine didn't play her best tennis. Had Justine been more agressive, Serena would probably have lost.
For me, there's no real difference between losing because of making too many errors and losing because of not being as agressive as you're used to !!

Paneru
Nov 25th, 2003, 12:13 PM
Funny, the fact thatr these words never came out of either sisters mouth and yet people continue. :lol:

I agree with Venus, their have been very few matches where things were out of her hands and their was really nothing she could do to change it. More than not, when either sister loses it's because of what they didn't do opposed to what the other did do.

Pureracket
Nov 25th, 2003, 12:58 PM
Really weird that an entire thread is being propagated on words that the Williams Sisters did not even say.

When it comes to Venus & Serena, it seems that even if there nothing bad there, the people who dislike them will put it there anyway.


Sad

Kart
Nov 25th, 2003, 01:01 PM
Really weird that an entire thread is being propagated on words that the Williams Sisters did not even say.


Weird yet strangely not weird for this forum ...

jenn
Nov 25th, 2003, 01:02 PM
Really weird that an entire thread is being propagated on words that the Williams Sisters did not even say.

When it comes to Venus & Serena, it seems that even if there nothing bad there, the people who dislike them will put it there anyway.


Sad

They may not have said EXACTLY the words in the title of the thread , but don't you think "about four times where I have just been beat outright, where I didn't have a chance that day" is pretty damn close to the proposition that the thread author offered?

jenn
Nov 25th, 2003, 01:04 PM
Anyway this is a tired debate, because its all a subjective standard with no clear answer. Even if Venus says herself "four times" that she has been outplayed, this is only her opinion from her experience of the matches. It doesn't make it fact.

GoDominique
Nov 25th, 2003, 01:07 PM
Filderstadt 1998 2nd round: Dominique van Roost def. Venus Williams 6-1 6-2 :worship:

Pureracket
Nov 25th, 2003, 01:53 PM
Kart,

LOL!!!!!

space
Nov 25th, 2003, 02:33 PM
why Don't You People Leave The Williams Sisters Alone.

justine&coria
Nov 25th, 2003, 04:15 PM
why Don't You People Leave The Williams Sisters Alone.

I'm not sure, but maybe it's because we're in a forum which is about tennis (and the Williams sisters are tennis players :eek: :eek: ).

Anyway, even if the Williams never said they've been outplayed, I think it's interesting to know when the Williams have been really outplayed in a match !

bandabou
Nov 25th, 2003, 04:27 PM
And how many times has that been?! Theyīve been playing since ī97 and ī98 respectively, but even IF they have been outplayed, you can count the times on one hand.

Doraemon
Nov 25th, 2003, 04:44 PM
Some players just give credit to their opponents easily and others hardly do even when they really think they got kicked in the ass.
Venus always seems more gracious about getting defeated than Serena regardless how crappy she played. I think we shouldn't read too much into players' words.

gmak
Nov 25th, 2003, 04:53 PM
well i think those 4 times are against

dokic ( 6-1 6-2 Rome 2000 )
davenport ( 6-1 6-2 Philadelphia 1999 )
spirlea ( 6-3 6-2 :devil: Philadelphia 1997 )
monami ( 6-1 6-2 :worship: Filderstadt 1998 )

i didn't see jelena or lindsay but irina and dominique played out of their skin :D
the encounter against spirlea was soon after the famous " bump " so sort of revenge for the romanian

DA FOREHAND
Nov 25th, 2003, 04:54 PM
I think Maritna Hingis had her dazed in confused at least twice. 97 Open final and again in one of the Cali. hcourt tournies.

Knizzle
Nov 25th, 2003, 05:05 PM
They may not have said EXACTLY the words in the title of the thread , but don't you think "about four times where I have just been beat outright, where I didn't have a chance that day" is pretty damn close to the proposition that the thread author offered?

No not at all. Even if it was she said it way back in 2000.

moby
Nov 25th, 2003, 05:19 PM
so something she said in 2000 totally changes now that 1998 is so 5 years ago?

griffin
Nov 25th, 2003, 05:25 PM
Yes and we must fight about it.

Or not.