PDA

View Full Version : Rating OZ 2004


Volcana
Feb 8th, 2004, 12:48 PM
I keep hearing people complain about this tournament, and I really don't understand why. Sure it would have been nice if Serena had played, but think of all the slams Monica missed (17 out of 56 - 28%) and Steffi missed (14 out of 68 - 20%). Yet there were some great slams with out them. The quality of what's on the court is the issue, not who plays.

Certainly, the OZ would have been better for ME if Venus hadn't withdrawn lost (isn't denial insidious :)), but given the number of fans around here who hate everything Williams, that should have made then HAPPIER about the tournament.

I wouldn't call this a GREAT tournament. But it was a good one. The quality of play was pretty good (not great) the 2nd week, and we got to see some players that we Americans rarely get to see.

So how would you rate the tournament overall?

Gallofa
Feb 8th, 2004, 01:04 PM
I am a fan of Lisa Raymond.

Enough said :D

sartrista7
Feb 8th, 2004, 01:05 PM
I wouldn't say that the quality of play was good, let alone great, at any point; the best matches I saw were Mauresmo v Molik, Myskina v Rubin and Raymond v Williams, which speaks volumes (only one three-setter in that lot!).

The trouble is, women's tennis has stagnated; it's become stale and predictable. Previously, the top players would cruise through the early rounds but redeem the game with some cracking rivalries, but at the moment there are no meaningful rivalries at the top of the game. Davenport v Henin-Hardenne should have been a classic: a former No 1 and past champion battling for a last chance of glory against the upstart who's usurped her. Instead, it was dreadful - and predictably so. When I say that Davenport will continue to come up woefully short in the biggest matches and fail to win another Slam, I'd quite like it if she proved me wrong, but she proves me right again and again. Ditto with Capriati. And the fact that those two are still clogging up the top 5 when they are no threats whatsoever to win a Slam says it all about the rest.

It's also frustrating to see so many matches being decided on a) injuries and b) nerves. I'm sorry, but it's a professional athlete's job to keep herself healthy and mentally strong, and the fact that just ONE woman managed both at the AO is quite embarrassing.

And compare this situation to the men's game - in the past, the men's game has also suffered from a lack of rivalries (top players rarely playing each other etc), too much surface specialism and too much under-performing, but it's looking very healthy at the moment. To be honest, the women's game just feels like it's waiting around for either the Williams sisters to be healthy and commit fully (shyeah right on both counts) so they can have some proper rivalries with Justine, or for players like Sharapova and Golovin to grow up (which will take a few years yet).

hingis-seles
Feb 8th, 2004, 01:39 PM
I wouldn't say that the quality of play was good, let alone great, at any point; the best matches I saw were Mauresmo v Molik, Myskina v Rubin and Raymond v Williams, which speaks volumes (only one three-setter in that lot!).

The trouble is, women's tennis has stagnated; it's become stale and predictable. Previously, the top players would cruise through the early rounds but redeem the game with some cracking rivalries, but at the moment there are no meaningful rivalries at the top of the game. Davenport v Henin-Hardenne should have been a classic: a former No 1 and past champion battling for a last chance of glory against the upstart who's usurped her. Instead, it was dreadful - and predictably so. When I say that Davenport will continue to come up woefully short in the biggest matches and fail to win another Slam, I'd quite like it if she proved me wrong, but she proves me right again and again. Ditto with Capriati. And the fact that those two are still clogging up the top 5 when they are no threats whatsoever to win a Slam says it all about the rest.

It's also frustrating to see so many matches being decided on a) injuries and b) nerves. I'm sorry, but it's a professional athlete's job to keep herself healthy and mentally strong, and the fact that just ONE woman managed both at the AO is quite embarrassing.

And compare this situation to the men's game - in the past, the men's game has also suffered from a lack of rivalries (top players rarely playing each other etc), too much surface specialism and too much under-performing, but it's looking very healthy at the moment. To be honest, the women's game just feels like it's waiting around for either the Williams sisters to be healthy and commit fully (shyeah right on both counts) so they can have some proper rivalries with Justine, or for players like Sharapova and Golovin to grow up (which will take a few years yet).:worship:

Raj
Feb 8th, 2004, 01:41 PM
sartrista7. Hey i think you summed it up perfectly!

Although the AO was not all that great, the final was still good if only Kim had won. LOL

But your right the tour really needs healthy and fully fit players such as Serena, Venus, Capriati etc right now.

Exciting Rivalries at the moment........ only one i can think of is Kim V Justine.

SJW
Feb 8th, 2004, 01:41 PM
To be honest, the women's game just feels like it's waiting around for either the Williams sisters to be healthy and commit fully (shyeah right on both counts)
that did happen...

but i don't think you liked the outcome :tape:;)

sartrista7
Feb 8th, 2004, 01:45 PM
Exciting Rivalries at the moment........ only one i can think of is Kim V Justine.

That's the worst rivalry ever! It's so predictable (ditto Serena v Venus). And for me, the only thing which could have made AO any worse would have been Kim winning - Justine's triumph was the silver lining :D

Sarah - I meant, of course, that I'm waiting for Vee to be healthy and commit to kicking her pesky little sister's ass from here to Hollywood :p

SJW
Feb 8th, 2004, 01:48 PM
Sarah - I meant, of course, that I'm waiting for Vee to be healthy and commit to kicking her pesky little sister's ass from here to Hollywood :p
i know that...i just wanted you to admit it ;)

so i guess if Venus had won those five slams, the rivalry would have been your cup of tea huh? ;)

sartrista7
Feb 8th, 2004, 01:52 PM
Nah... I love Justine while Kim is possibly my least favourite player, but I'm still getting bored by the all-Belgian non-rivalry. I just want to see a match where I have no idea beforehand who the victor will be.

MLF
Feb 8th, 2004, 01:55 PM
I think the tournament was quite depressing. Obviously I always enjoy slam tennis but this event was someone's big chance to step up there, one of the players on the fringes of the top 6 - 8 i.e the likes of Myskina, Rubin, Dementieva, even Sugiyama or lower down a player like a Bovina. Yet none of them had the balls or belief to step up and grab an opportunity in the big time ( I'm talking semis or better here ). With Davenport capitulating in the quarters tamely all this event did was reinforce that the only true contenders for finals day at the slams are the Belgians, the Williams sisters and possibly Capriati.

SJW
Feb 8th, 2004, 01:55 PM
so who would you pick out of these?

Venus-Justine
Venus-Kim
Serena-Justine
Serena-Kim

?

they've all been predictable (bar Berlin 01, 02 and Hamburg 02...[i knew Serena would be beaten by Justine on clay...just didn't expect the straight sets in charleston])

sartrista7
Feb 8th, 2004, 02:03 PM
Depends on the surface, though I think the greater point is that these, potentailly the best rivalries, are not happening at the moment because the Williams sisters have stopped being healthy (Venus) and committing fully (Serena). As I said... either Williams vs Justine could be a great, unpredictable match. Kim loses vs Venus or Serena in all scenarios though.

David is on the money re: the lower-ranked players, the Nastya match was depressing for that very reason - she had a golden opportunity to take her career to that next level and just proved that she wasn't up to it :sad:

JonBcn
Feb 8th, 2004, 05:08 PM
Can I just say that I'm happy that it sucked, as I was on holiday and couldnt see any of it? :p

CJ07
Feb 8th, 2004, 05:18 PM
I wouldn't say that the quality of play was good, let alone great, at any point; the best matches I saw were Mauresmo v Molik, Myskina v Rubin and Raymond v Williams, which speaks volumes (only one three-setter in that lot!).

The trouble is, women's tennis has stagnated; it's become stale and predictable. Previously, the top players would cruise through the early rounds but redeem the game with some cracking rivalries, but at the moment there are no meaningful rivalries at the top of the game. Davenport v Henin-Hardenne should have been a classic: a former No 1 and past champion battling for a last chance of glory against the upstart who's usurped her. Instead, it was dreadful - and predictably so. When I say that Davenport will continue to come up woefully short in the biggest matches and fail to win another Slam, I'd quite like it if she proved me wrong, but she proves me right again and again. Ditto with Capriati. And the fact that those two are still clogging up the top 5 when they are no threats whatsoever to win a Slam says it all about the rest.

It's also frustrating to see so many matches being decided on a) injuries and b) nerves. I'm sorry, but it's a professional athlete's job to keep herself healthy and mentally strong, and the fact that just ONE woman managed both at the AO is quite embarrassing.

And compare this situation to the men's game - in the past, the men's game has also suffered from a lack of rivalries (top players rarely playing each other etc), too much surface specialism and too much under-performing, but it's looking very healthy at the moment. To be honest, the women's game just feels like it's waiting around for either the Williams sisters to be healthy and commit fully (shyeah right on both counts) so they can have some proper rivalries with Justine, or for players like Sharapova and Golovin to grow up (which will take a few years yet).
i definately agree, tennis was alot better pre-2002 when Hingis, Venus, Serena, Seles, Davenport, Capriati and the bunch all gave 100%

its really getting stale

Belgium = Best
Feb 8th, 2004, 08:50 PM
It was OK, but it sucks that Kim lost again :(

I pressed the wrong button. I picked vote no.1 :(

Aya, mate! :wavey: