PDA

View Full Version : Who is more talented - Serena or Justine?


Jen'sFan
Feb 7th, 2004, 12:55 PM
Just wanna see your opinions!

SJW
Feb 7th, 2004, 12:55 PM
define talent

Jen'sFan
Feb 7th, 2004, 12:59 PM
define talent
Backhand, forehand, volleys, serve, etc, etc

SJW
Feb 7th, 2004, 01:02 PM
mental toughness?
slams won?
h2h vs each other?
h2h vs the tour?
weeks at #1?

talent is subjective, no? :confused:

for example, IMO Patty Schnyder is without a doubt the most talented player on tour. does she have a chance of matching either in achievements? chances have to be slim to none

Sam L
Feb 7th, 2004, 01:03 PM
For someone of height, Justine's overachieved in her career. So I think she's more talent.

I define "talent" as been related to size/physical strength. Because let's face it, tennis is a VERY physical sport. IMO, someone like Davenport/Venus should achieve a lot more than say Hingis/Justine because they're taller, has longer reach, stronger, etc...

The fact that Justine has 3 slams in the last year means she's taken her physical limitations out of the equation and used her talent to make an excellent career for herself. She doesn't look that strong either.

Lady
Feb 7th, 2004, 01:05 PM
I agree with you, SJW!
Talent is such a subjective thing!
That's why I don't like this who's more talanted polls, was a little sick of them on Mens Forum! ;)

But I voted for Justine, of course! :angel:

SJW
Feb 7th, 2004, 01:06 PM
so is Justine more talented than Steffi Graf, Martina Nav, Chris Evert, Martina Hingis??

i would have to say no :shrug:

tennis has to be the only sport where "talent" doesn't mean "being the best"

after all...there is no way in hell that Liverpool are more talented than Manchester United, and Manchester United are more talented than Real Madrid etc :confused:

Sam L
Feb 7th, 2004, 01:09 PM
Can we NOT go there with other sports. It's too confusing. lol

I think it all comes back down to the definition of "talent". But I think more people will PERCEIVE Justine is more talented than Serena because she's smaller, she has more variety in her game etc... Serena with her height and strength is born with physical advantages and people will assume (rightly or wrongly) that that is why she wins.

per4ever
Feb 7th, 2004, 01:12 PM
talent is very subjective...

Serena is the talented one on the physical parts of the game
Justine is the talented one in the game.. she's born to play tennis..while Serena probably could succeed at other sports too because of her physical talents..

SJW
Feb 7th, 2004, 01:14 PM
Can we NOT go there with other sports. It's too confusing. lol

I think it all comes back down to the definition of "talent". But I think more people will PERCEIVE Justine is more talented than Serena because she's smaller, she has more variety in her game etc... Serena with her height and strength is born with physical advantages and people will assume (rightly or wrongly) that that is why she wins.
see what i mean? this whole thread is confusing :confused: Linsdsay is taller than Serena...weighs more. but apparently that's not the same. there's (to the nearest inch) 4 between Justine and Serena and 4 between Serena and Lindsay. let's go back say, 3 or 4 years. would people have called Serena more talented? :confused:

like i said, tennis is the only game that i can think of where being more talented doesn't go with being the best. :shrug:

SJW
Feb 7th, 2004, 01:16 PM
talent is very subjective...

Serena is the talented one on the physical parts of the game
Justine is the talented one in the game.. she's born to play tennis..while Serena probably could succeed at other sports too because of her physical talents..hehe it's my day to pick at posts so don't take it personally

so say you took a degree in something where you've only got one career path
and somebody else took a degree (like business or law) which means they could do more things

how would that make you more talented? :confused:

doesn't having the ability to succeed in more things than other people make you more talented? :confused: if not, why not?

Sam L
Feb 7th, 2004, 01:19 PM
see what i mean? this whole thread is confusing :confused: Linsdsay is taller than Serena...weighs more. but apparently that's not the same. there's (to the nearest inch) 4 between Justine and Serena and 4 between Serena and Lindsay. let's go back say, 3 or 4 years. would people have called Serena more talented? :confused:

like i said, tennis is the only game that i can think of where being more talented doesn't go with being the best. :shrug:
Serena has ALWAYS been more talented than Lindsay. I remember back in 98(?) I saw them two play a match in Sydney. Lindsay led 6-1 5-1 and then lost the match. Serena was still a teenager then. Yes, even then she looked physically imposing, BUT in her case, you could REALLY see the inexperience. I.e. using wrong shots at wrong times, etc.. but somehow she pulled through. That's TALENT too.

per4ever
Feb 7th, 2004, 01:24 PM
hehe it's my day to pick at posts so don't take it personally

so say you took a degree in something where you've only got one career path
and somebody else took a degree (like business or law) which means they could do more things

how would that make you more talented? :confused:

doesn't having the ability to succeed in more things than other people make you more talented? :confused: if not, why not?
you're just using the fact that talent is subjective ;)

Serena has a talent that she can use for different purposes (in this case sports)
Justine's talent is more specific: tennis. The wider variety, to be able to play many different ways, to use lots of differents shots, the 'touch' at the net.

When both use their talents in tennis, they compensate eachother ;)

Greenout
Feb 7th, 2004, 01:25 PM
you're just using the fact that talent is subjective ;)

Serena has a talent that she can use for different purposes (in this case sports)
Justine's talent is more specific: tennis. The wider variety, to be able to play many different ways, to use lots of differents shots, the 'touch' at the net.

When both use their talents in tennis, they compensate eachother ;)


This is so unfair. It's obvious isn't it? There's on one answer,
and it's :tape:

She's the best!

pigam
Feb 7th, 2004, 01:26 PM
I voted equal. And i Mean it.
Serena is obviously very talented but Justine is too. In fact I don't think their talent is that different. Both are quick, both have great groundstrokes, the only difference is maybe that Serena is more athletic (faster, higher, more powerfull) wereas Justine has a bit more feeling for playin dropshots and volley's I think. ALTHOUGH! Justine is not a natural volleyer either. She is training them consantly. She trains a lot on all of her strokes, except her backhand. I think Justine is someone who trains VERY intensely, so I don't think it all comes down to natural talent in her case. Serena (she has said this herself, not trying to diss her) trains less, I think, and still seems to be the best 'with ease' (untill now ? ...). Does this mean Serena is more talented? maybe! :eek:. I'm confusing myself. I'm glad I voted equal :)

Experimentee
Feb 7th, 2004, 01:27 PM
Can we NOT go there with other sports. It's too confusing. lol

I think it all comes back down to the definition of "talent". But I think more people will PERCEIVE Justine is more talented than Serena because she's smaller, she has more variety in her game etc... Serena with her height and strength is born with physical advantages and people will assume (rightly or wrongly) that that is why she wins.

But Justine only started to really succeed and win Slams after she did all that physical training and bulked up. So would you say the reason for her success is physical advantages due to hard work, and therefore thats not a talent? Talent is natural ability, as opposed to hard work.

SJW
Feb 7th, 2004, 01:28 PM
you're just using the fact that talent is subjective ;)

Serena has a talent that she can use for different purposes (in this case sports)
Justine's talent is more specific: tennis. The wider variety, to be able to play many different ways, to use lots of differents shots, the 'touch' at the net.

When both use their talents in tennis, they compensate eachother ;)
;)

i'm gonna leave it with this:

Justine has all the shots. that's talent
Serena may not have it all (her volleys are suspect, her smashes should be better, i'm only being critical cuz i think she can win another 10+ slams if she concentrates) BUT...she uses what she has better than anybody on tour. that's why she's so tough to beat. she rarely has to adjust for other people, just herself. on her day (i refuse to use "IMO" here :p) she is better than anyone, and can beat anyone. and i don't think that's bias or arrogance :confused: that's a different kind of talent ;)

Greenout
Feb 7th, 2004, 01:30 PM
Which of these two players is more cocky or arrogant?

SJW
Feb 7th, 2004, 01:31 PM
But Justine only started to really succeed and win Slams after she did all that physical training and bulked up. So would you say the reason for her success is physical advantages due to hard work, and therefore thats not a talent? Talent is natural ability, as opposed to hard work.
that is actually a REALLY good point. if talent is natural ability, shouldn't Serena get it since her game and style is natural? :confused: Henin bulked up

see...this "talent" business should just be left alone ;)

pigam
Feb 7th, 2004, 01:33 PM
that is actually a REALLY good point. if talent is natural ability, shouldn't Serena get it since her game and style is natural? :confused: Henin bulked up

see...this "talent" business should just be left alone ;)
Actually I came to that conclusion too :eek: (see my previous post)
Serena more talented than Justine.!!!!! This thread should be DELETED. DELETED I tell you :( ;)

SJW
Feb 7th, 2004, 01:34 PM
Actually I came to that conclusion too :eek: (see my previous post)
Serena more talented than Justine.!!!!! This thread should be DELETED. DELETED I tell you :( ;)
LOL! i'm sticking by my "the different talents" post :angel:

mimbari24
Feb 7th, 2004, 01:47 PM
Does it matter? They are both hugely successful and will continue to win as long as the dedicate themselves to the game. THere is no reason to chose because they are both Great athletes!

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2004, 02:07 PM
Haaaa......all of sudden it ainīt all that clear anymore as for Justine being more "talented", huh?!


P.s.: I donīt care whoīs more talented...one thing I know is that Serena at her best totally dusts Justine on all the non-clay surfaces and they are practically even on clay...

FerreroFan
Feb 7th, 2004, 02:11 PM
P.s.: I donīt care whoīs more talented...one thing I know is that Serena at her best totally dusts Justine on all the non-clay surfaces and they are practically even on clay...
I dont care either, seeing as it is all about results. But these 2 have not played recently for u to be so confident about that mate. ;)

irma
Feb 7th, 2004, 02:19 PM
For someone of height, Justine's overachieved in her career. So I think she's more talent.

I define "talent" as been related to size/physical strength. Because let's face it, tennis is a VERY physical sport. IMO, someone like Davenport/Venus should achieve a lot more than say Hingis/Justine because they're taller, has longer reach, stronger, etc...

The fact that Justine has 3 slams in the last year means she's taken her physical limitations out of the equation and used her talent to make an excellent career for herself. She doesn't look that strong either.
Why didn't Sukova,Shriver or Kohde Kilsch reach the top?
They were all way taller then the players who were 1 (Evert, Nav,Steffi, even Monica but she was already taller then the other three)

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2004, 02:22 PM
I dont care either, seeing as it is all about results. But these 2 have not played recently for u to be so confident about that mate. ;)

The lay-off, the lay-off...that could trouble Serena perhaps, but once she gets in match-shape and gets her toughness back, canīt see Juju winning.

Not with that pathetic 45 % first-serve percentage and not against an agressive returner like Serena.

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2004, 02:23 PM
Why didn't Sukova,Shriver or Kohde Kilsch reach the top?
They were all way taller then the players who were 1 (Evert, Nav,Steffi, even Monica but she was already taller then the other three)

:haha: :rolls: Pam, Pam....wasnīt Pam Davenport-like tall?! sure didnīt help her much..

SJW
Feb 7th, 2004, 02:23 PM
Why didn't Sukova,Shriver or Kohde Kilsch reach the top?
They were all way taller then the players who were 1 (Evert, Nav,Steffi, even Monica but she was already taller then the other three)
i was thinking that too

Elena Bovina is the tallest woman on tour...does that mean she's destined to kick ass? :bounce:

irma
Feb 7th, 2004, 02:35 PM
people act like Justine is like Dumbelina in giant land. I think that's exaggerated. first her arms are really big, her legs look really strong too. kim is about 5 cm taller that's really not such a big difference.

but of course the question of the thread is about talent. well she is number 1. she did it with hard work and obvious she has the talent, so has serena of course
see I can say Serena is more talented because I am biased and I say so, but what do I know;)

LindsayRocks89
Feb 7th, 2004, 02:38 PM
Serena hands down

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2004, 02:40 PM
people act like Justine is like Dumbelina in giant land. I think that's exaggerated. first her arms are really big, her legs look really strong too. kim is about 5 cm taller that's really not such a big difference.

but of course the question of the thread is about talent. well she is number 1. she did it with hard work and obvious she has the talent, so has serena of course
see I can say Serena is more talented because I am biased and I say so, but what do I know;)

Thank you very much....and people seem to forget that Justine plays really big. She even served waaaaaayyyyy faster than Kim.

for-sure
Feb 7th, 2004, 02:49 PM
I voted equal. And i Mean it.
Serena is obviously very talented but Justine is too. In fact I don't think their talent is that different. Both are quick, both have great groundstrokes, the only difference is maybe that Serena is more athletic (faster, higher, more powerfull) wereas Justine has a bit more feeling for playin dropshots and volley's I think. ALTHOUGH! Justine is not a natural volleyer either. She is training them consantly. She trains a lot on all of her strokes, except her backhand. I think Justine is someone who trains VERY intensely, so I don't think it all comes down to natural talent in her case. Serena (she has said this herself, not trying to diss her) trains less, I think, and still seems to be the best 'with ease' (untill now ? ...). Does this mean Serena is more talented? maybe! :eek:. I'm confusing myself. I'm glad I voted equal :)

It is my opinion that Serena was lying when she said how little she trains. Her muscles/fitness did not come out of the air after-all. I have always thought of the Williams sisters as those kids in high school who always got straight A's but said they never study; everyone knew they did however.

SJW
Feb 7th, 2004, 02:52 PM
It is my opinion that Serena was lying when she said how little she trains. Her muscles/fitness did not come out of the air after-all. I have always thought of the Williams sisters as those kids in high school who always got straight A's but said they never study; everyone knew they did however.
did you see her when she was little?

even when she was a lil girl she's always been hench.

FerreroFan
Feb 7th, 2004, 02:53 PM
The lay-off, the lay-off...that could trouble Serena perhaps, but once she gets in match-shape and gets her toughness back, canīt see Juju winning.

Not with that pathetic 45 % first-serve percentage and not against an agressive returner like Serena.
The serve will have to be improved.......I'm not saying JUJU will win but the matches are gonna be alot closer....

Sam L
Feb 7th, 2004, 02:53 PM
Why didn't Sukova,Shriver or Kohde Kilsch reach the top?
They were all way taller then the players who were 1 (Evert, Nav,Steffi, even Monica but she was already taller then the other three)
They didn't have much talent, and that's the point. No offense to them of course. They still did very well in their careers, just weren't "best".

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2004, 02:56 PM
The serve will have to be improved.......I'm not saying JUJU will win but the matches are gonna be alot closer....

They better be.....I mean always losing in straigth-sets, it ainīt pretty.

Cybelle Darkholme
Feb 7th, 2004, 04:11 PM
you're just using the fact that talent is subjective ;)

Serena has a talent that she can use for different purposes (in this case sports)
Justine's talent is more specific: tennis. The wider variety, to be able to play many different ways, to use lots of differents shots, the 'touch' at the net.

When both use their talents in tennis, they compensate eachother ;)

this makes no sense. How do you know serena would be great at other sports? Have you seen her play other sports professionally? How do you know justine wouldnt be great at other sports? She played soccer and I hear was quite good before she chose tennis. Maybe she could have been an ice skater or a golfer. What you are doing is making generalizations based on how they look not how they peform. How you look has nothing much to do with talent. Just because you are tall does not mean you will be a great basketball player or a great tennis player it just means your tall.

saki
Feb 7th, 2004, 04:22 PM
people act like Justine is like Dumbelina in giant land. I think that's exaggerated. first her arms are really big, her legs look really strong too. kim is about 5 cm taller that's really not such a big difference.


Justine is fit and strong but you're just blind if you can't see that she's significantly physically smaller than everyone else in the top 10. As much muscle as she's added to her legs, any picture of her beside Kim or Serena will show you how much smaller they are.

That said, I don't think that being smaller makes her more talented because that just makes no sense ;) Without a decent definition of talent, no-one can really answer this question, so I'm not voting in the poll.

Knizzle
Feb 7th, 2004, 05:13 PM
Serena, obviously.

Knizzle
Feb 7th, 2004, 05:16 PM
I dont care either, seeing as it is all about results. But these 2 have not played recently for u to be so confident about that mate. ;)
Ummm, Wimbledon 2003 semis??

SerenaSlam
Feb 7th, 2004, 05:33 PM
i think the talent comes in the game a certain way.

take serena for example, there is no one on the tour built identical to her. her body and game is for her, and she is very talented with it. i think if justine had the body of serena her game would not work for it. vice versa for serena, it wouldn't work out for her if she had justine's game etc.

venus and lindsay. games are similar, but body wise, venus' talent overwhelms lindsay b/c of her physical presence.

i think talent is in the players games. like the comment someone made on patty, if she put her best game together and brouhgt it out on a good day, when you think of all the talent she had, put her best out there on the court with serena's best, and she would have the opportunity to pull a piece of talent out of the bag and on to the court.

some talent, like serena's is far more ahead of the game than others, and right now she has a lot going for herself, and like they say, the scary thing is serena can get better. a lot of comparison with justine to the sisters, the "has she caught up with them" but people need to realize that the sister haven't stopped in "performance or out right ability" they can still get better

daniela86
Feb 7th, 2004, 05:34 PM
FRENCH OPEN 2003 semis?

Justine obviously is the best player!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :)

SerenaSlam
Feb 7th, 2004, 05:47 PM
funnie how those remeber selected matches

i remeber

2003 french
2003 wimbledon etc.....

Knizzle
Feb 7th, 2004, 05:48 PM
Which of these two players is more cocky or arrogant?

Justine, hands down.

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2004, 05:49 PM
Isnīt talent supposed to be: player Xīs best vs players Yīs best and the more talented player X wins?!

If this is so, than Serena is more talented....donīt think Justineīs best beats( or is ever gonna beat) Serenaīs best.

SerenaSlam
Feb 7th, 2004, 05:56 PM
Isnīt talent supposed to be: player Xīs best vs players Yīs best and the more talented player X wins?!

If this is so, than Serena is more talented....donīt think Justineīs best beats( or is ever gonna beat) Serenaīs best.
that is how it is usually done, but those on this board don't believe this, and i think they judge talent more so on "beauty" than they do on their "games" all together.

when you look a roger federer on the mens side, people think he i so talented b/c of the variety of shots he has etc, but also has un believable power.

when you look at serena williams, they don't consider her "beautifuly talented" although she has a variety of shots etc, put it think way, those w/ 1 handed backhands have been considered more so "beauties of the game" and people right away think of how way back when back in the day when thats all you saw was 1 handed backhand, and no power.

i just think people judge talent (especially on this board) with "beauty" and not "talent in ones game"

im sorry, but when you put serena williams out on the court playing her best tennis, and throw anyone else on the tour out there playing their best "talented tennis" serena doesn't even allow them to play their game b/c her game is so big and much better. if that isn't talent i don't know what is

jenny161185
Feb 7th, 2004, 06:07 PM
We haven t really really seen a match though when both Serena and Justine have equally played their best so you can t really say that - At the french Justine was playing great but Serena had chances and the ''hand'' didnt even factor in the outcome, While at Wimbledon Serena was playing great and Juju wasn t she had chances but was making too many errors etc. Every tennis player has power ------ Rogers backhand is beautiful and very powerful nobody is saying he doesnt hit hard its just that one handed backhands like Rogers and Justines just look so natural when they are executing well . :)

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2004, 06:10 PM
that is how it is usually done, but those on this board don't believe this, and i think they judge talent more so on "beauty" than they do on their "games" all together.

when you look a roger federer on the mens side, people think he i so talented b/c of the variety of shots he has etc, but also has un believable power.

when you look at serena williams, they don't consider her "beautifuly talented" although she has a variety of shots etc, put it think way, those w/ 1 handed backhands have been considered more so "beauties of the game" and people right away think of how way back when back in the day when thats all you saw was 1 handed backhand, and no power.

i just think people judge talent (especially on this board) with "beauty" and not "talent in ones game"

im sorry, but when you put serena williams out on the court playing her best tennis, and throw anyone else on the tour out there playing their best "talented tennis" serena doesn't even allow them to play their game b/c her game is so big and much better. if that isn't talent i don't know what is

Yep...and thatīs the bottom-line. No matter how cute or nice Jujuīs dropshots may look, when facing Serena at her best...she doesnīt stand a chance most of the times.

CC
Feb 7th, 2004, 06:13 PM
We are being premature, but I guess that is human nature.

So, at this point in their careers I have seen more change and improvement in Justine's game than I have in Serena's. Critics have always said that Serena has a far way to go in order to reach her true level of talent and potential. What would be very revealing to me, in terms of comparing their games, is how they match up when Serena returns. If Serena comes back with the same old game --- which was up until her injury very effective against everyone --- and continues to be successful against Justine as well, then we have a pretty good indication.

Apart from that, everything else is conditional, that is, based upon each player's true potential. And of course, who can really say if that is what it has to come down to?

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2004, 06:14 PM
We haven t really really seen a match though when both Serena and Justine have equally played their best so you can t really say that - At the french Justine was playing great but Serena had chances and the ''hand'' didnt even factor in the outcome, While at Wimbledon Serena was playing great and Juju wasn t she had chances but was making too many errors etc. Every tennis player has power ------ Rogers backhand is beautiful and very powerful nobody is saying he doesnt hit hard its just that one handed backhands like Rogers and Justines just look so natural when they are executing well . :)

Funny isnīt it?! Justine may hit her backhands harder than Serena, but because she hits it one-handed she ainīt a power player.

Interesting....

jenny161185
Feb 7th, 2004, 06:17 PM
Did I say she wasn t a power player ? NO I just said one handers look more natural - alot nicer than Serenas Imo :)

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2004, 06:19 PM
We are being premature, but I guess that is human nature.

So, at this point in their careers I have seen more change and improvement in Justine's game than I have in Serena's. Critics have always said that Serena has a far way to go in order to reach her true level of talent and potential. What would be very revealing to me, in terms of comparing their games, is how they match up when Serena returns. If Serena comes back with the same old game --- which was up until her injury very effective against everyone --- and continues to be successful against Justine as well, then we have a pretty good indication.

Apart from that, everything else is conditional, that is, based upon each player's true potential. And of course, who can really say if that is what it has to come down to?

I hope you DO realise that if what youīre saying is true, that it is scary. Serena won 4 slams in a row, 5 of 6....and if she can improve even more on that form, then why even bother asking whoīs the more talented between Serena and Justine?!

The last time they met, Justine got pasted...donīt think the Justine of say after Wimbledon is MUCH MUCH better than the Justine before Wimbledon or anything.

Once again: Justine ainīt beating Serena with that 45 % first serve percentage. On clay, maybe....but on grass, hardcourts, indoors, etc....no chance in hell...īcause sheīs gonna be facing a player whose serve is an even bigger weapon than hers in Serena.

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2004, 06:20 PM
Did I say she wasn t a power player ? NO I just said one handers look more natural - alot nicer than Serenas Imo :)

Of course....and then nicer than Jenīs too, but we already knew that..didnīt we?! ;)

Diya
Feb 7th, 2004, 06:57 PM
There was never ANY doubt in my mind that Justine was WAY more talented than Serena but she really didn't have the numbers(results) to "prove" it but i think soon Justine will have the numbers too on her side !

Go Justine ! ;)

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2004, 07:11 PM
There was never ANY doubt in my mind that Justine was WAY more talented than Serena but she really didn't have the numbers(results) to "prove" it but i think soon Justine will have the numbers too on her side !

Go Justine ! ;)

:haha: :rolls: :haha: only took Serena to be injured for her to get the numbers....hmm,interesting.

skanky~skanketta
Feb 7th, 2004, 07:36 PM
Funny isnīt it?! Justine may hit her backhands harder than Serena, but because she hits it one-handed she ainīt a power player.

Interesting....
whats interesting is how u can flip personas so easily.

skanky~skanketta
Feb 7th, 2004, 07:39 PM
oh btw. IMO, talented means being able to hit all the shots in the book.

thats momo. too bad she's injury prone and a headcase.

this thraad is ridiculous. its like saying who's talented?whitney or mariah?

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2004, 07:50 PM
oh btw. IMO, talented means being able to hit all the shots in the book.

thats momo. too bad she's injury prone and a headcase.

this thraad is ridiculous. its like saying who's talented?whitney or mariah?

And?! Whoīs the more talented?!

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2004, 08:39 PM
Bandabou can write whatever he/she wants, but Justine looks more talented to an average human being which inhabits this planet...

Maybe....depends in what you see as talent. Itīs aight for you or anyone to think so....Iīll take the wins by Serena and Justine can have the talent. Talent without winning, tjaaa..

Justinefan
Feb 7th, 2004, 08:58 PM
Justine is definitely the more talented of the two, Serena is definitely the strongest physically, but justine is mroe talented and stronger mentally.

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2004, 09:11 PM
Justine is definitely the more talented of the two, Serena is definitely the strongest physically, but justine is mroe talented and stronger mentally.

Strongest mentally?! Well....it ainīt THAT difficult to beat Kim, so donīt know if ms Juju is really that strong...

VS Fan
Feb 7th, 2004, 09:43 PM
I have to comment on this post in a different way.

Justine is obviously very talanted and is a great player to watch.

But I have to remember how Oresene pointed out that Venus came into the game more talented and found the game rather easy in juniors.

She said, however that Serena had to work her butt off to compete. Serena was trying to BE Venus.

Note that with that hard work, Serena has blossomed into the currently superior player of the Williams sisters.

With the above in mind, I would say that Justine is the most talanted, while Serena is STILL the superior player.

Knizzle
Feb 7th, 2004, 09:46 PM
Justine is definitely the more talented of the two, Serena is definitely the strongest physically, but justine is mroe talented and stronger mentally.

Justine stronger mentally?? Give me a break!! LOL

Excuse me while I ROTFLMBAO

:haha: :haha: :haha: (I brought along a couple friends to help me)

LindsayRocks89
Feb 7th, 2004, 09:47 PM
first of all just because justine has a 1 handed backhand and can hit a more variety of shots doesnt mean she is more talented, im sure serena can hit those shots to and the shots serena uses on court are very good she uses really good angles a depth and she is alot more mentally tougher, and well her serve is tons better and well so are her volleys for that matter, you people need to wake up and look at the facts, Serena is better then Justine

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2004, 09:57 PM
If Justineīs SOOOOOOOO much talented, then letīs break their games down to see who wins.

serve: No contest..Serena, one of the best servers ever.
return: again....not many people return like Serena and Justine isnīt one of the few.
forehand: Serena.

backhand: Justine.
angles: does Justine know that word?!
dropshots: Justine.
volleys: Justine may be more comfortable at the net.

So this clearly shows that Serenaīs the better game, isnīt that all what talent is about?!

VS Fan
Feb 7th, 2004, 10:06 PM
Addendum:

Talant is what comes naturally from the players feel of the game, and how well one picks up the sport. This is INBORNE and not related to ones skills.
Justine gets my vote on this one.

Skills are what one learns thorugh an intense determination to be the best at their chosen field. ALL of Serena's tennis skills are hard earned learned skills.
This is why she has been so successful on the court.

She had a talanted player to learn from: Venus.

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2004, 10:15 PM
Then I donīt understand why the people act like the Williamses are lazy, this and that...they donīt have any talent whatsoever, yet they have been as successful as one can be.

SerenaSlam
Feb 7th, 2004, 10:15 PM
i just don't understand a lot of people and their opinions

ima just throw it out there, please someone name of the "talents" that justine has, b/c this is really gettin me.

its funnie also how one says, justine played great at the french etc and serena played bad and at wimbledon, serena played great and justine played bad

if this is true and the evident case, than why is justine struggling to beat serena williams on serena's worst surfcae on a bad day from serena in 3 tough sets? it was not understanding at all.

talent is somthing players have, and serena and justine are both very talented players, but talent can only go so far.

i will put it like this, if you are playing in a tennis match at your best, we should be able to see your best tennis and that talent.

now when after thinking of that, put serena williams and justine at their best on tennis courts. its like Chris Evert said during the wimbledon semis 2002 serena vs amelie.

Serena at her best does allow others to play their best, or even play at all really. this is not to take anything away from justine or other players, but to throw in the "error count" and everything else is rediculous and wrong. in my mind serena is very much so more talented than justine right now. anytime you can play a match and beat someone like justine as bad as she did and have more errors than justine, that is talent. what serena did during wimbledon semis 2002 and 2003 showed all of her talent. and you cannot say so and so had an off day, b/c they both justine and amelie had a much lower error count that their opponent.

Knizzle
Feb 7th, 2004, 10:15 PM
Addendum:

Talant is what comes naturally from the players feel of the game, and how well one picks up the sport. This is INBORNE and not related to ones skills.
Justine gets my vote on this one.

Skills are what one learns thorugh an intense determination to be the best at their chosen field. ALL of Serena's tennis skills are hard earned learned skills.
This is why she has been so successful on the court.

She had a talanted player to learn from: Venus.

A skill is a developed talent.

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2004, 10:25 PM
i just don't understand a lot of people and their opinions

ima just throw it out there, please someone name of the "talents" that justine has, b/c this is really gettin me.

its funnie also how one says, justine played great at the french etc and serena played bad and at wimbledon, serena played great and justine played bad

if this is true and the evident case, than why is justine struggling to beat serena williams on serena's worst surfcae on a bad day from serena in 3 tough sets? it was not understanding at all.

talent is somthing players have, and serena and justine are both very talented players, but talent can only go so far.

i will put it like this, if you are playing in a tennis match at your best, we should be able to see your best tennis and that talent.

now when after thinking of that, put serena williams and justine at their best on tennis courts. its like Chris Evert said during the wimbledon semis 2002 serena vs amelie.

Serena at her best does allow others to play their best, or even play at all really. this is not to take anything away from justine or other players, but to throw in the "error count" and everything else is rediculous and wrong. in my mind serena is very much so more talented than justine right now. anytime you can play a match and beat someone like justine as bad as she did and have more errors than justine, that is talent. what serena did during wimbledon semis 2002 and 2003 showed all of her talent. and you cannot say so and so had an off day, b/c they both justine and amelie had a much lower error count that their opponent.


ssshhhhh.....only when Justine wins, do the matches count! Serena canīt beat Justine when she plays well, donīt you know it?! ;)

VS Fan
Feb 7th, 2004, 10:27 PM
Knizzle:

Important point! Thank you.



I guess I was trying to point out that Serena got there through hard work, and possibly Justine has also, but Serena's early history of being in the shadow of Venus I think helped her achieve what she has so far. Serena has been out for 7 months now, but her last match was a Grand Slam Final. How quickly some forget.

SerenaSlam
Feb 7th, 2004, 10:30 PM
Knizzle:

Important point! Thank you.



I guess I was trying to point out that Serena got there through hard work, and possibly Justine has also, but Serena's early history of being in the shadow of Venus I think helped her achieve what she has so far. Serena has been out for 7 months now, but her last match was a Grand Slam Final. How quickly some forget.
on this baord they do not forget, they "choose" not to remember :)

bandabou
Feb 7th, 2004, 10:50 PM
on this baord they do not forget, they "choose" not to remember :)

No kidding! :lol:

K&J fan
Feb 7th, 2004, 11:20 PM
Justine of course, without any shade of a doubt :banana:

Crazy_Fool
Feb 7th, 2004, 11:35 PM
At the end of the day, does it really matter who is more talented?! Like someone said Patty has more talent than most if not all players on the tour. Justine has an amazing natural ability but so does Serena. I wouldnt like to say who is more talent but its easier if it is measured by what u win.

There is a discussion on the mens board about how Hewitt having less talent than the likes of Escude. So i have come to the conclusion that its winning that defines talent and nothing else.

per4ever
Feb 7th, 2004, 11:54 PM
A skill is a developed talent.
don't agree..you don't have to be talented to have skills. You get a certain skill when you can practice/do it a lot. By doing something often, you develop your knowledge about it and can do it more efficiently. That's a skill. I can learn skills, even if I ain't really talented..

Knizzle
Feb 7th, 2004, 11:58 PM
don't agree..you don't have to be talented to have skills. You get a certain skill when you can practice/do it a lot. By doing something often, you develop your knowledge about it and can do it more efficiently. That's a skill. I can learn skills, even if I ain't really talented..

You don't have to agree, it's the dictionary definition of the word.

bandabou
Feb 8th, 2004, 12:27 AM
At the end of the day, does it really matter who is more talented?! Like someone said Patty has more talent than most if not all players on the tour. Justine has an amazing natural ability but so does Serena. I wouldnt like to say who is more talent but its easier if it is measured by what u win.

There is a discussion on the mens board about how Hewitt having less talent than the likes of Escude. So i have come to the conclusion that its winning that defines talent and nothing else.

Just the way it is, crazy!

SJW
Feb 8th, 2004, 12:30 AM
At the end of the day, does it really matter who is more talented?! Like someone said Patty has more talent than most if not all players on the tour. Justine has an amazing natural ability but so does Serena. I wouldnt like to say who is more talent but its easier if it is measured by what u win.

There is a discussion on the mens board about how Hewitt having less talent than the likes of Escude. So i have come to the conclusion that its winning that defines talent and nothing else.
that's what i mean...talent is too hard to define

at the end of a day to prove a point, you (plural) discredit one of the girls...which is crazy.

Roddick_tease
Feb 8th, 2004, 12:35 AM
bandabou I've never witnessed such a pathetic poster... congratulations.

Anyway, um, I'd say Martina Hingis. ;)

bandabou
Feb 8th, 2004, 01:17 AM
bandabou I've never witnessed such a pathetic poster... congratulations.

Anyway, um, I'd say Martina Hingis. ;)

says a Roddick-fan....

Rub
Feb 8th, 2004, 01:26 AM
they are both so talented!

but nothing comes closer to martina hingis! yeah... :dance:

Rothes
Feb 8th, 2004, 06:22 AM
Patty is one of the most talented players out there, but being talented does not mean you will fufill a successful career, Just look at Hana Mandlikova.

Greenout
Feb 8th, 2004, 06:24 AM
Patty is one of the most talented players out there, but being talented does not mean you will fufill a successful career, Just look at Hana Mandlikova.


Justine rates Patty high. Has alot of respect for her; calls her
very "talented". Successful and talent isn't the same. Some
can put it all together, others can't. Look at Anna Smashnova-
consistent; but not what I would call a player tennis of "freakish"
talent ala Patty.

Patty is IMHO a pure "talent" more than Serena or Justine. They
really practice, Patty doesn't. Everything comes so easy,
that she's quite un-coachable. Remember, Patty only started to
seriously play tennis in her late teen years; unlike Justine or
Serena.

Rothes
Feb 8th, 2004, 06:32 AM
The thing is, I have seen alot of these threads involving Talent etc, And it usually derails into how we define it, If you look at the clearer picture, who is more talented Martina or Rita Grande?? Patty or Chanda Rubin?? I mean all players have talent, more then what I will ever have in Tennis, but you can just imagine if they fufilled their talent and career to the potentional you can visualise who would be vastly successful. It's nothing to do with success etc but there is a clear picture of who has the talent, who has a more fufilling game. It's evident and has been stated by commentators and public, It doesn't need to be defined as being more successful or how much grandslams you have won.

SJW
Feb 8th, 2004, 11:30 AM
Yeah, talent is too hard to define...Specially when you know that outcome of this poll will not be in your favor.

Anyway, do you remember this ? (Jan 7th, 2003)lol we have similarities then

Justine proved me wrong...what more to say? :shrug:

i can admit it. you've never been wrong? ok then

good day to you, troll :wavey:

SJW
Feb 8th, 2004, 11:32 AM
btw since that was posted in January, and you joined in December how did you find that? you searched for all my posts?

oh look, i have a fan :wavey:

Kart
Feb 8th, 2004, 12:00 PM
I'd probably vote for equal.

Both do some things better than the other - eg. Justine volleys better but Serena serves better.

When it comes down to it between those two it's about who believes in themself more on the day - something which I think partly depends on the surface they meet on ... Justine loves the clay, Serena loves the grass.

I'd love to see them battle it out somewhere where they're both sure they're better but I don't think such a place exists.

I have to say that I'd probably expect Serena to win the majority of their encounters - at least until she and Justine have met a few more times. This stop-start period isn't really giving any of us or them a real feel for how their games match up and what the weaknesses are.

bandabou
Feb 8th, 2004, 12:36 PM
I'd probably vote for equal.

Both do some things better than the other - eg. Justine volleys better but Serena serves better.

When it comes down to it between those two it's about who believes in themself more on the day - something which I think partly depends on the surface they meet on ... Justine loves the clay, Serena loves the grass.

I'd love to see them battle it out somewhere where they're both sure they're better but I don't think such a place exists.

I have to say that I'd probably expect Serena to win the majority of their encounters - at least until she and Justine have met a few more times. This stop-start period isn't really giving any of us or them a real feel for how their games match up and what the weaknesses are.

Pretty good summing up....and thatīs just the way it is.

Greenout
Feb 8th, 2004, 12:49 PM
I'd probably vote for equal.

Both do some things better than the other - eg. Justine volleys better but Serena serves better.

When it comes down to it between those two it's about who believes in themself more on the day - something which I think partly depends on the surface they meet on ... Justine loves the clay, Serena loves the grass.

I'd love to see them battle it out somewhere where they're both sure they're better but I don't think such a place exists.

I have to say that I'd probably expect Serena to win the majority of their encounters - at least until she and Justine have met a few more times. This stop-start period isn't really giving any of us or them a real feel for how their games match up and what the weaknesses are.


Actually this isn't all true. Justine's (Zhoo-steen)career stats
for clay is 81%, it's 79% for grass. She's as solid on grass as
she is on clay. It's indoor carpet which is her weaker surface at
67% career match wins. Hardcourt career wins come in at 76%.

bandabou
Feb 8th, 2004, 01:07 PM
Actually this isn't all true. Justine's (Zhoo-steen)career stats
for clay is 81%, it's 79% for grass. She's as solid on grass as
she is on clay. It's indoor carpet which is her weaker surface at
67% career match wins. Hardcourt career wins come in at 76%.

Exactly...she IS confident on grass, but still doesnīt stand a chance against les Williamses.

Kart
Feb 8th, 2004, 04:35 PM
Actually this isn't all true. Justine's (Zhoo-steen)career stats
for clay is 81%, it's 79% for grass. She's as solid on grass as
she is on clay. It's indoor carpet which is her weaker surface at
67% career match wins. Hardcourt career wins come in at 76%.
I'm talking about against Serena. Justine is pretty much favourite to win on any surface against almost everybody else.

Take example of their meeting at Wimbledon last year - even before the match Justine was saying that the faster surfaces favour Serena so she wasn't 100% about her chances.

You'd never hear her doubt her abilities if they met on a clay court. If she doesn't believe in herself totally then how can she win ?