PDA

View Full Version : Why Attack Sharapova For Being #1????


Mother_Marjorie
Aug 16th, 2005, 04:29 AM
Lemme guess.

The green-eyed monster is on the loose. Yep, that's it.

But seriously, she is a grand slam champion, winner of Wimbledon and the YEC's. What's scary is she will only improve. When you look at Maria Sharapova, you are seeing the future of women's tennis. She will usher a few of the current top ten into retirement while her career is in full swing.

Maria isn't my favorite tennis player, but she deserves respect for being #1 at such a young age. And those of you that pick her bones dry will never be able to accomplish in your lifetime what she has by age 18.

There are only two players in my opinion which can challenge Maria during her reign: Justine Henin-Hardenne and Serena Williams.

RenaSlam.
Aug 16th, 2005, 04:32 AM
Way to make another one of these :retard: threads...

Mother_Marjorie
Aug 16th, 2005, 04:34 AM
Way to make another one of these :retard: threads...

Well, considering how much you participate in them, I guess you know what that makes you.... :rolleyes:

Justeenium
Aug 16th, 2005, 04:36 AM
Way to make another one of these :retard: threads...
Serena fan :retard:

serenafan08
Aug 16th, 2005, 04:38 AM
Don't get so amped up about Maria being hated on. Every player goes through it. Serena did, Justine did, Venus - everyone who's been number one has always come under scrutiny. It will pass with time.

Ceecor
Aug 16th, 2005, 04:38 AM
mm i am not sure why she is attacked or any of the top players,,i guess being up there your a target and if your not up there ..no one cares enough to comment to much.

serenafan08
Aug 16th, 2005, 04:40 AM
Serena fan :retard:
:rolleyes: And you're calling RenaSlam a retard?? Take a good look in the mirror.

Mother_Marjorie
Aug 16th, 2005, 04:42 AM
Don't get so amped up about Maria being hated on. Every player goes through it. Serena did, Justine did, Venus - everyone who's been number one has always come under scrutiny. It will pass with time.

There is a lot of truth to your words. It just seems odd that people don't applaud a youngster for achieving something that is rare for someone her age. Like I said, I'm not a huge Maria fan, but its disheartening that people hate so much, just because their personal fav tennis players aren't number one.

SelesFan70
Aug 16th, 2005, 04:44 AM
2 words: HATER and ATION=HATERATION

But that will subside IF (and only IF) she can back it up by winning the US Open or the Oz on January (although doubtful she'll stay #1 by year end). She must, must, must win at least 3 more tournaments if she doesn't win the US Open to cease any hateration...but some will still hate. :wavey:

serenafan08
Aug 16th, 2005, 04:45 AM
2 words: HATER and ATION=HATERATION

But that will subside IF (and only IF) she can back it up by winning the US Open or the Oz on January (although doubtful she'll stay #1 by year end). She must, must, must win at least 3 more tournaments if she doesn't win the US Open to cease any hateration...but some will still hate. :wavey:
:yeah: Well said.

SelesFan70
Aug 16th, 2005, 04:51 AM
:yeah: Well said.

Aren't all of my posts? :shrug: :lol: :unsure:

Ceecor
Aug 16th, 2005, 04:57 AM
re: thread like this..
If i was to say that years ago in my prime if it wastn for injury i could beat both the william sisters, and the 2 belgians and anyone else that came along, id be writin off as joking oir a fool BUT if i exchanged "I could beat" for say "sharapova could beat"
half the people here would lose there minds.........

true or false who cares...worse part the later would be closer to truth than former.

*JR*
Aug 16th, 2005, 12:11 PM
My theory is that its the "coronation" aspect of this event drawing resentment, where the WTA (which is supposed 2B totally neutral) has been shamelessly salivating about it.

Volcana
Aug 16th, 2005, 12:20 PM
But seriously, she is a grand slam champion, winner of Wimbledon and the YEC's.Make that former-grand slam champion, and past-winner of Wimbledon. Also, allow for one other thing. This is the fifth recent #1 who didn't hold a GS title, following Hingis, Davenport (several times), Mauresmo and Clijsters. All the other 'slamless #1's were attacked as well.

The over all reason is that people hold the mistakent impression that being raked #1 implies you're the best player on the tour. In almost any other sport, this would be true. In tennis, it isn't.

Elldee
Aug 16th, 2005, 12:21 PM
It's tradition.

Stingray
Aug 16th, 2005, 12:25 PM
People use the fact that she hasn't won a slam recently as an excuse for saying she doesn't deserve to be number one. The fact of the matter is the player with the most points deserves to be number one-whether theyve won 1 slam or 25 tier IVs. Sharapova will have the most points and therefore deserves to be number one, and congratulations to her. It's not her fault thats the way the ranking system works.
Let spread a little good and say well done to Shaz

densuprun
Aug 16th, 2005, 12:57 PM
#1 shows who accomplished the most in the last 52 weeks. It is not necessarily the best player. Similar things happen in other sports. Detroit Pistons wasn't the best team in 2004 but they won the NBA championship. Had Karl Malone not been injured in the finals Detroit wouldn't hold the trophy.

Marshmallow
Aug 16th, 2005, 01:06 PM
Way to make another one of these :retard: threads...

This IS getting tiring. We're having the SAME discussion on the same topic. People are divided, and have their opinions. A LOT of people don't seem to be happy about it, but her fans (predominantly horny male population... i'm teasing) are. For her consistency she does (dare i say) 'deserve' the title of number one in the world. But in the ideal situation, the world number one should be the person who can defeat the big guns consistently and be the most talented. At the present, there is doubt as to whether Maria can do this.

Don't get me wrong, winning the Wimbledon at 17 was big, but well, there seems to be agreement that had that rain delay not come - Lindsay could have gotten her slam. Winning the YEC was also big, but well.. Myskina and Serena for different reasons couldn't compete. Put Momo in that final and she could have gotten the title IMO. Beating Serena twice, is a big deal.. but few honestly believe Maria can compete with a healthy, practiced serena.

I personally don't think it's just that she is slamless. That's just the tip of the iceberg. It's a lot of things, relating more to the hype. She has a great hype about her and someone claimed she was athe next graf (and this was a respected commentator).

I can't be bothered to go on... i guess the point is like i said before.. in the ideal situation, the whole presitgue of of being world number one is being the best. While there are obviously better players, people will have an opinion on it. When Clijsters got it... she was one of the best, Lindsay is one of the best in that they can believably defeat their big rivals. Maria did this when the feild wasn't at it's strongest. I'd have a tough time defending Momo because she can't consistently defeat the top four or five (with davy) - but she can thrash almost everyone else in the top feild. All russians included.

*zip*

Portobello
Aug 16th, 2005, 01:07 PM
I dunno know,i'm not the one who attack her:rolleyes: ,never :angel:

maccardel
Aug 16th, 2005, 01:09 PM
Number one players are supposed to be attacked. If I am not mistaken, the cliche term is "one is such a lonely number", well it is. You could comment on number 2 and number 3, but number 1 is the top of the list and signifies an achievement that the others do not have at the moment.

She will live. Attack!Attack!Attack!!!

I am sure she will get used to it in time, afterall, she is ony 18 err....19

Marshmallow
Aug 16th, 2005, 01:09 PM
But it isn't greed-eyed monsters.

densuprun
Aug 16th, 2005, 01:28 PM
When Clijsters got it... she was one of the best, Lindsay is one of the best in that they can believably defeat their big rivals. Maria did this when the feild wasn't at it's strongest.

Maria is practically just as good as Lindsay against top 5 and top 10 in the last 52 weeks.
Lindsay: 10-5 (against top10), 5-3 (against top5)
Maria: 9-5 (against top10), 5-4 (against top5)
It's not like there is some kind of big difference between Lindsay and Maria in how they play against the best players.

(Maria and Lindsay's records pale in comparison with JHH's: 8-1 (against top10), 4-1 (against top5)).

sartrista7
Aug 16th, 2005, 01:51 PM
Don't get me wrong, winning the Wimbledon at 17 was big, but well, there seems to be agreement that had that rain delay not come - Lindsay could have gotten her slam.

No there isn't :rolleyes: I don't believe that the woman who ended up tanking the final set of that match (and would go on to tank a further two Slam matches in the next 52 weeks :tape: ) would show the mental strength necessary to win the final. Dealing with rain delays is part of what it takes to win Wimbledon, anyway.

Beating Serena twice, is a big deal.. but few honestly believe Maria can compete with a healthy, practiced serena.

I don't know where you're getting these insane assumptions from. Look at the record! It's 2-2, and only a couple of inches away from being 3-1 to Sharapova. I don't think that there's any doubt that these two can compete with each other.

The attacks on Sharapova's ranking are fine and most are even justified, she's a horribly weak No 1, but it's stunningly dumb to defend Davenport of all players instead, who is NO BETTER at all!

tennnisfannn
Aug 16th, 2005, 01:54 PM
People use the fact that she hasn't won a slam recently as an excuse for saying she doesn't deserve to be number one. The fact of the matter is the player with the most points deserves to be number one-whether theyve won 1 slam or 25 tier IVs. Sharapova will have the most points and therefore deserves to be number one, and congratulations to her. It's not her fault thats the way the ranking system works.
Let spread a little good and say well done to Shaz
There is no arguing with numbers and she will deserve it when her points add up in a few days. But consider this in the recent past, when serena was no.1, no one questioned her being there, when Justine was on, we all knew she was the no.1, when Venus was no.1, it was quite comprehensive and so on. Some players have been stronger no.1s than others.
Serena was on at about 7000 points with only 11 tournys played.
Justine made no.1 too with over 7000 points too.
Kim too was no.1 at just less than 7000 points (despite ebing slamless)
Lindsay,amelie and maria have been (will be) at just above 4000 points.

Marshmallow
Aug 16th, 2005, 01:59 PM
Maria is practically just as good as Lindsay against top 5 and top 10 in the last 52 weeks.
Lindsay: 10-5 (against top10), 5-3 (against top5)
Maria: 9-5 (against top10), 5-4 (against top5)
It's not like there is some kind of big difference between Lindsay and Maria in how they play against the best players.

(Maria and Lindsay's records pale in comparison with JHH's: 8-1 (against top10), 4-1 (against top5)).


There is a difference between big rivals (what i said) and top 10. In the last 52 weeks, Dementieva, Petrova, and molik for example have been in the top 10, and i wouldn't cosider them the BIG rivals. Also in the last 52 weeks, not everyone has been fit and healthy especially the big rivals. Big rivals (for the number one spot) = William sisters, Belgians, Davenport, and Mauresmo at the end of the list.

Lindsay can take all the other girls on when they're healthy and beat consistently. 8-9 against Clijsters, 5-4 against henin, 9-3 against Amelie. A comparison isn't really possible because Lindsay has been around longer. But i said she had been very consistent and for that should be a number one contender. But if we list the BIG girls on the tour... Williams, beglians, Lindsay, Amelie and Myskina (yes she is) - Maria is at the end of this list because i think the other girls can beat her consistently, where as she will struggle to beat them consistently NOW. I don't know about the future, but at present moment, if they were all healthy - she'd be dead last.

iPatty
Aug 16th, 2005, 02:01 PM
I swear if I have to lay my poor eyes on one of these threads again, Im gonna go nuts!! Why dont you go read one of the other 50 threads about why Maria doesnt deserve to be number one so that we dont have to explain it again and again. If Maria actually won something this year then I would say, Congratulations Maria! Lets be real here. Really she won the YEC because Serena was tired and injured. She has done NOTHING since winning Wimbledon last year. Now while you cant take that win away from her, its ridiculous how we have to talk about Maria SO much. OK shes gonna be number one, great now lets just wait a week till New Haven so Lindsay can take the spot back and we can go on with our normal lives. I think the reason that I hate Masha so much is that she is probably the most talked about #2.

Marshmallow
Aug 16th, 2005, 02:10 PM
No there isn't :rolleyes: I don't believe that the woman who ended up tanking the final set of that match (and would go on to tank a further two Slam matches in the next 52 weeks :tape: ) would show the mental strength necessary to win the final. Dealing with rain delays is part of what it takes to win Wimbledon, anyway.



I don't know where you're getting these insane assumptions from. Look at the record! It's 2-2, and only a couple of inches away from being 3-1 to Sharapova. I don't think that there's any doubt that these two can compete with each other.

The attacks on Sharapova's ranking are fine and most are even justified, she's a horribly weak No 1, but it's stunningly dumb to defend Davenport of all players instead, who is NO BETTER at all!

Insane assumptions? Serena was injured at the YEC. Surely the record is hence 2-1! Serena hasn't been in great shape for a while.

How can you talk about mental toughness (with respect to the Lindsay match) and imply the record should be 3-1 (with respect to Serena). Serena demonstrated HER mental toughness at the AO. But you feel it's okay for you to claim Davenport lost fair in square, but Maria should have won? Bias?

Speaking of the AO, Serena wasn't even in her best shape, and won the whole thing without practicing prior (as much as she wanted to). Right from injury, she defeated Maria. What do you think the score line would be like if Serena was full fit, practiced and ready to fight. Hint... the first set of the YEC before the injury took hold. There is nothing insane about MY assumption.

Davenport is NOT better? 6-0 6-0? Impressive record against The begians, who she can actually beat. 2 slam finals THIS year, and actually challenged Venus at Wimbledon. This isn'y stunningly anything. It's Logical.

iPatty
Aug 16th, 2005, 02:12 PM
Insane assumptions? Serena was injured at the YEC. Surely the record is hence 2-1! Serena hasn't been in great shape for a while.

How can you talk about mental toughness (with respect to the Lindsay match) and imply the record should be 3-1 (with respect to Serena). Serena demonstrated HER mental toughness at the AO. But you feel it's okay for you to claim Davenport lost fair in square, but Maria should have won? Bias?

Speaking of the AO, Serena wasn't even in her best shape, and won the whole thing without practicing prior (as much as she wanted to). Right from injury, she defeated Maria. What do you think the score line would be like if Serena was full fit, practiced and ready to fight. Hint... the first set of the YEC before the injury took hold. There is nothing insane about MY assumption.

Davenport is NOT better? 6-0 6-0? Impressive record against The begians, who she can actually beat. 2 slam finals THIS year, and actually challenged Venus at Wimbledon. This isn'y stunningly anything. It's Logical.

:bowdown: Well said!

densuprun
Aug 16th, 2005, 02:13 PM
There is a difference between big rivals (what i said) and top 10. In the last 52 weeks, Dementieva, Petrova, and molik for example have been in the top 10, and i wouldn't cosider them the BIG rivals. Also in the last 52 weeks, not everyone has been fit and healthy especially the big rivals. Big rivals (for the number one spot) = William sisters, Belgians, Davenport, and Mauresmo at the end of the list.

OK, lets talk about big rivals.

Lindsay can take all the other girls on when they're healthy and beat consistently. 8-9 against Clijsters, 5-4 against henin, 9-3 against Amelie. A comparison isn't really possible because Lindsay has been around longer. But i said she had been very consistent and for that should be a number one contender. But if we list the BIG girls on the tour... Williams, beglians, Lindsay, Amelie and Myskina (yes she is) - Maria is at the end of this list because i think the other girls can beat her consistently, where as she will struggle to beat them consistently NOW. I don't know about the future, but at present moment, if they were all healthy - she'd be dead last.

Lindsay has a minus score against Serena, Kim, Maria.
Maria has a minus score against Justine, Kim, Myskina.

I don't see much of a difference here. Both can win and both can lose against their rivals. Considering that a big portion of Maria losses came when she wasn't a top player, her record is more impressive than Lindsay's who was at the top for ages.

Portobello
Aug 16th, 2005, 02:18 PM
I swear if I have to lay my poor eyes on one of these threads again, Im gonna go nuts!! Why dont you go read one of the other 50 threads about why Maria doesnt deserve to be number one so that we dont have to explain it again and again. If Maria actually won something this year then I would say, Congratulations Maria! Lets be real here. Really she won the YEC because Serena was tired and injured. She has done NOTHING since winning Wimbledon last year. Now while you cant take that win away from her, its ridiculous how we have to talk about Maria SO much. OK shes gonna be number one, great now lets just wait a week till New Haven so Lindsay can take the spot back and we can go on with our normal lives. I think the reason that I hate Masha so much is that she is probably the most talked about #2.
poor yu,so quit to expain that,it's so easy ;)
n poor gal,Maria :sad: yu've been hate only coz yu're the most talked :o

sartrista7
Aug 16th, 2005, 02:19 PM
Insane assumptions? Serena was injured at the YEC. Surely the record is hence 2-1! Serena hasn't been in great shape for a while.

You referred to her earlier as one of the big girls of the tour, one of the players to beat. Make up your mind!

How can you talk about mental toughness (with respect to the Lindsay match) and imply the record should be 3-1 (with respect to Serena). Serena demonstrated HER mental toughness at the AO. But you feel it's okay for you to claim Davenport lost fair in square, but Maria should have won? Bias?

Nowhere did I claim that Maria should have won the AO match. She shouldn't have. But the closeness of the score, the narrowness of Serena's winning margin, indicates that they're very evenly matched - so it's ludicrous to assume that Maria can't compete with Serena.

Speaking of the AO, Serena wasn't even in her best shape, and won the whole thing without practicing prior (as much as she wanted to). Right from injury, she defeated Maria. What do you think the score line would be like if Serena was full fit, practiced and ready to fight. Hint... the first set of the YEC before the injury took hold. There is nothing insane about MY assumption.

Ifs and buts are not things you can base rankings on. You can't say any of that for certain.

Davenport is NOT better? 6-0 6-0? Impressive record against The begians, who she can actually beat. 2 slam finals THIS year, and actually challenged Venus at Wimbledon. This isn'y stunningly anything. It's Logical.

As of next week, Davenport will only hold three titles, all Tier II. You talk about her Slam finals (one of which she TANKED in a performance far less worthy of a No 1 than any double bagel), but when was the last time she won one? Oh right, over half a decade ago :lol:

The double bagel is very bad for Sharapova, yes, but it's hardly rock solid evidence that Davenport is the better player. Sharapova still leads the head-to-head, after all. And, y'know, Evert once double bagelled Navratilova. But who ended up winning the rivalry?

pinkfrog
Aug 16th, 2005, 02:30 PM
i am soooooo tired of everybody argueing about this. instead of complaining and attacking players, you guys should be complaing about the WTA and how they have the points structured. its not the players fault!!!

K-Dog
Aug 16th, 2005, 02:34 PM
Lemme guess.

The green-eyed monster is on the loose. Yep, that's it.

But seriously, she is a grand slam champion, winner of Wimbledon and the YEC's. What's scary is she will only improve. When you look at Maria Sharapova, you are seeing the future of women's tennis. She will usher a few of the current top ten into retirement while her career is in full swing.

Maria isn't my favorite tennis player, but she deserves respect for being #1 at such a young age. And those of you that pick her bones dry will never be able to accomplish in your lifetime what she has by age 18.

There are only two players in my opinion which can challenge Maria during her reign: Justine Henin-Hardenne and Serena Williams.


In just my honest opinion, people overhype her game. When I look at her game, she doesn't have variety, doesn't move forward that well, and is clumsy when going to the net. Her game looks almost finished developing. She'll never be a great vollyer, or a drop shot artist. She might in the future hit the ball a little bit harder, and add angles or topspin, but that's it. There is only so much a person can do with the body that they're given. She isn't going to be Miss Buff because then she can't be a model, and it looks like her frame will be hard to put muscle on. She is long and lanky, which can be very hard to be coordinated all the time. Venus is the only lanky athlete that looks coordinated out there at the moment. Maria loves to bash from the baseline, but if you really watch her, she is great at taking other's pace and throwing it back at them. She really doesn't hit the ball that much harder than other power hitter, just that against lower ranked, less confident players, she can intimidate them with her depth. She doesn't have a tremendous amount of racquet-head speed, which is why she hits so flat. I think that Mashona said it best; "She is great, solid, all-around player." Nothng more. Her serve is nowhere near where the hype is around it, because her topspin serve is lacking, and the mph or kph isn't all that big. On grass, a player who serves over 100 mph can be hard to return, but not on clay or hard courts.

I agree that Justine, and Serena will be worry-some to Maria, but you're forgetting players. Venus is still in the mix and is very much confident at the moment. She might have figured out her own way to beat Maria. Kim will trouble her because of Kim's speed and topspin on her shots that push her back and get her outside the court. Ana I. (if she pans out) will defiantly challenge her. Maria isn't god coming on earth to shows us how to really play tennis. The things that certain commentators and critics say about her are part media-hype and part-premature.

Marshmallow
Aug 16th, 2005, 02:43 PM
OK, lets talk about big rivals.



Lindsay has a minus score against Serena, Kim, Maria.
Maria has a minus score against Justine, Kim, Myskina.

I don't see much of a difference here. Both can win and both can lose against their rivals. Considering that a big portion of Maria losses came when she wasn't a top player, her record is more impressive than Lindsay's who was at the top for ages.

A comparison is no good. It doesn't tell us much. It shows Lindsay has been on the tour longer, played these girls more and has close head to heads with all of them. Her head to heads are larger figures. Maria's are smaller. 0-3 against clijsters, 1-3 against Myskina, 2-2 against serena, 1-2 against Justine and so on. Maria only became a force (and i use that Loosely) last year. Last year, Clijsters and Henin weren't around, Serena and Venus were having trouble (and were below par). we can't compare the head to heads of someone who has shown she can not only take on the big girls and also beat them consistently, to someone who hasn't beat them convincingly at all really. She Stunned Serena at Wimbledon, Upset Justine in Miami, hasn't really touched Clijsters, beat a sub-par Venus, hasn't touched Mauresmo, was on court when Myskina tanked the match (Myskina complained because she could see herself on the big TV above the court - just lost it really - and this was the only time Maria defeated Myskina) and so on.

It just seems the conditions were against most of the Big girls when she beat them. This is why i am looking forward to future match ups. Lindsay has proven herself so to speak. Now that these girls kno what Maria can do, we'll see how they respond (provided they are fit).

I've have said and will repeat, Maria will be number one because she is a good player who has been healthy and very consistent in the last year. But the ideal number one situation would be of a woman who can beat the big girls consisntently and so on. Read my first post for more info.

*Yawns*

goldenlox
Aug 16th, 2005, 02:47 PM
I think Maria deserved the #1 ranking at some point over the last few months.
She's not holding a major now, but neither are Lindsay or Amelie, who are the others in the top 3.
Amelie reached #1 last year. Lindsay has held it a long time without winning a major.
Maria deserves it for a while also.

densuprun
Aug 16th, 2005, 02:48 PM
K-Dog:
I have no problem with what you said. You stated your opinion. We disagree on how much progress she will make in the future. That's fine. At the moment Maria is far from being a strong #1. If she doesn't improve in the next few months and Justine stays healthy, she is likely to take #1 from Maria in the next few months.

The problem arises only when haters start to claim that Davenport somehow deserves #1 more than Maria.

densuprun
Aug 16th, 2005, 02:52 PM
A comparison is no good. It doesn't tell us much. It shows Lindsay has been on the tour longer, played these girls more and has close head to heads with all of them. Her head to heads are larger figures. Maria's are smaller. 0-3 against clijsters, 1-3 against Myskina, 2-2 against serena, 1-2 against Justine and so on. Maria only became a force (and i use that Loosely) last year. Last year, Clijsters and Henin weren't around, Serena and Venus were having trouble (and were below par). we can't compare the head to heads of someone who has shown she can not only take on the big girls and also beat them consistently, to someone who hasn't beat them convincingly at all really. She Stunned Serena at Wimbledon, Upset Justine in Miami, hasn't really touched Clijsters, beat a sub-par Venus, hasn't touched Mauresmo, was on court when Myskina tanked the match (Myskina complained because she could see herself on the big TV above the court - just lost it really - and this was the only time Maria defeated Myskina) and so on.

It just seems the conditions were against most of the Big girls when she beat them. This is why i am looking forward to future match ups. Lindsay has proven herself so to speak. Now that these girls kno what Maria can do, we'll see how they respond (provided they are fit).


Complete and total bias.
*Yawn*


I've have said and will repeat, Maria will be number one because she is a good player who has been healthy and very consistent in the last year. But the ideal number one situation would be of a woman who can beat the big girls consisntently and so on.


Agreed. The last one to do so was either Justine or Serena. Davenport doesn't beat anyone consistently. She loses just as often.

K-Dog
Aug 16th, 2005, 02:55 PM
K-Dog:
I have no problem with what you said. You stated your opinion. We disagree on how much progress she will make in the future. That's fine. At the moment Maria is far from being a strong #1. If she doesn't improve in the next few months and Justine stays healthy, she is likely to take #1 from Maria in the next few months.

The problem arises only when haters start to claim that Davenport somehow deserves #1 more than Maria.

I don't feel that Lindsay has been more dominate than Maria or vice versa. The only thing that Lindsay has over Maria in the last 52 weeks is her grand slam record. The love and love beating was a fluke, and doesn't really say all that much. It was one, bad day for Maria where Lindsay couldn't miss. If these people actaully played competitive tennis, they would know that. This year is really weird. The top four players in majors and tier 1's are all ranked in the bottom portion of the top ten (except for Justine now). Amelie should be moving out soon, and so will Svetlana.

About Maria's potential, it is okay to disagree. That's why I said "in my opinion." Neither Lindsay or Maria are strong no.1's now like Monica, Steffi, Serena, Justine, Hingis. Lindsay has been a strong no.1 once in her career.

Volcana
Aug 16th, 2005, 10:38 PM
I don't feel that Lindsay has been more dominate than Maria or vice versa. The only thing that Lindsay has over Maria in the last 52 weeks is her grand slam record.6-0 6-0.The love and love beating was a fluke, and doesn't really say all that much.Any 6-0 6-0 beating, when you're on the wrong end of it, says you got your ass well and totally kicked. As a competitor, you don't forget a thrashing like that for a long, long time.It was one, bad day for Maria where Lindsay couldn't miss.It was a bad day for Sharapova BECAUSE Lindsay couldn't miss. The thing is, Lindsay usually can't miss. If these people actaully played competitive tennis, they would know that.I play competitive tennis, and what I see is something significant. NO top ten player should EVER get lit up like that. EV-ER. Unless suffering from an injury near-crippling.

A set? Sure, it's unlikely, but possible. But TWO of them!?!? When's the last time that happened to a defending Wimbledon champ?

Does Sharapova deserve to be #1? Emphatically yes.

But her record this year against the elite of the tour?

AUSTRALIAN OPEN SMI WILLIAMS, S..... L 2-6 7-5 8-6
TOKYO.......... WIN DAVENPORT....... W 6-1 3-6 7-6
INDIAN WELLS... SMI DAVENPORT....... L 6-0 6-0
MIAMI.......... QTR HENIN-HARDENNE.. W 6-1 6-7 6-2
MIAMI.......... SMI WILLIAMS, V..... W 6-4 6-3
MIAMI.......... FNL CLIJSTERS....... L 6-3 7-5
BERLIN......... QTR HENIN-HARDENNE.. L 6-2 6-4
ROLAND GARROS.. QTR HENIN-HARDENNE.. L 6-4 6-2
WIMBLEDON...... SMI WILLIAMS, V..... L 7-6 6-1

With perhaps the bigger problem being she lost to Venus, Serena, Davenport, Clijsters and Henin-Hardenne the last time she played them.

sartrista7
Aug 16th, 2005, 10:47 PM
There's waaaay too much importance being placed on the 6-0 6-0 here. Yes, it was a terrible score for Sharapova, though Davenport fans are conveniently not mentioning the way she tanked TWO Slam matches this year, which is far worse.

But Sharapova still leads the head-to-head. And when she becomes No 1, they'll both have 3 big titles on their rolling 52 - except Sharapova's are 1 x Tier II, 1 x Tier I and the YEC, while Davenport not only can't win Slams any more, but it appears that Tier Is are beyond her. Does the double bagel still outweigh that? If you argue that it does, I say...you are an American or Davenport fan who's cutting Lindsay a LOT of slack.

The sooner Justine/Venus/Serena fills in the gaps in her points table and ends this farce the better, is what I say.

Ceecor
Aug 16th, 2005, 10:56 PM
[QUOTE=Volcana]
[font=Courier New]But her record this year against the elite of the tour?

AUSTRALIAN OPEN SMI WILLIAMS, S..... L 2-6 7-5 8-6
TOKYO.......... WIN DAVENPORT....... W 6-1 3-6 7-6
INDIAN WELLS... SMI DAVENPORT....... L 6-0 6-0
MIAMI.......... QTR HENIN-HARDENNE.. W 6-1 6-7 6-2
MIAMI.......... SMI WILLIAMS, V..... W 6-4 6-3
MIAMI.......... FNL CLIJSTERS....... L 6-3 7-5
BERLIN......... QTR HENIN-HARDENNE.. L 6-2 6-4
ROLAND GARROS.. QTR HENIN-HARDENNE.. L 6-4 6-2
WIMBLEDON...... SMI WILLIAMS, V..... L 7-6 6-1


wow i just relized looking ta these stats, did the person that beat her go on to win the tourn' in the majority of cases?

darrinbaker00
Aug 16th, 2005, 11:00 PM
Lemme guess.

The green-eyed monster is on the loose. Yep, that's it.

But seriously, she is a grand slam champion, winner of Wimbledon and the YEC's. What's scary is she will only improve. When you look at Maria Sharapova, you are seeing the future of women's tennis. She will usher a few of the current top ten into retirement while her career is in full swing.

Maria isn't my favorite tennis player, but she deserves respect for being #1 at such a young age. And those of you that pick her bones dry will never be able to accomplish in your lifetime what she has by age 18.

There are only two players in my opinion which can challenge Maria during her reign: Justine Henin-Hardenne and Serena Williams.
You must have missed Indian Wells and Wimbledon..... :rolleyes:

K-Dog
Aug 16th, 2005, 11:40 PM
6-0 6-0.Any 6-0 6-0 beating, when you're on the wrong end of it, says you got your ass well and totally kicked. As a competitor, you don't forget a thrashing like that for a long, long time.It was a bad day for Sharapova BECAUSE Lindsay couldn't miss. The thing is, Lindsay usually can't miss. I play competitive tennis, and what I see is something significant. NO top ten player should EVER get lit up like that. EV-ER. Unless suffering from an injury near-crippling.

A set? Sure, it's unlikely, but possible. But TWO of them!?!? When's the last time that happened to a defending Wimbledon champ?

Does Sharapova deserve to be #1? Emphatically yes.

But her record this year against the elite of the tour?

AUSTRALIAN OPEN SMI WILLIAMS, S..... L 2-6 7-5 8-6
TOKYO.......... WIN DAVENPORT....... W 6-1 3-6 7-6
INDIAN WELLS... SMI DAVENPORT....... L 6-0 6-0
MIAMI.......... QTR HENIN-HARDENNE.. W 6-1 6-7 6-2
MIAMI.......... SMI WILLIAMS, V..... W 6-4 6-3
MIAMI.......... FNL CLIJSTERS....... L 6-3 7-5
BERLIN......... QTR HENIN-HARDENNE.. L 6-2 6-4
ROLAND GARROS.. QTR HENIN-HARDENNE.. L 6-4 6-2
WIMBLEDON...... SMI WILLIAMS, V..... L 7-6 6-1

With perhaps the bigger problem being she lost to Venus, Serena, Davenport, Clijsters and Henin-Hardenne the last time she played them.

Okay, where do we start? The love and love beating WAS a fluke. Name the last time two healthy top five players played and this happened. We know that Sharapova is WAY better than that. That is why she has beaten Davenport twice before. Davenport can miss and usually does in matches, that's why she hasn't won a major yet since 2000. Lindsay usually has less unforced than her opponent, but Lindsay does miss. Watch some of the Clijsters matches from prior to RG this year. Even watch the first set and 3-1 to Clijsters in that match. Lindsay misses. Maria had a bad day that day, as every human does in their life, and didn't play that well. Lindsay was unfourtunately on FIRE and was unconscience. Any truely high competive player knows about these days!!

The computer doesn't care what the match score was, it sees a win for Lindsay, nothing else. It doesn't give her any kind of edge as we know that another love and love beating probably won't happen again between these two. I also agree that Maria deserves to be no.1 because she did what she needed to to get there, that's all. She isn't a dominant no.1 though.

Volcana, what level do you play tennis at? How competitive are you? From your responces, it doesn't sound like you have that much experience being a top player in where ever you play. I do, so I know how players are feeling during certain stages of a match. Don't be afraid Volcana, what level of tennis do you play at competively?

Marshmallow
Aug 16th, 2005, 11:49 PM
But the closeness of the score, the narrowness of Serena's winning margin, indicates that they're very evenly matched - so it's ludicrous to assume that Maria can't compete with Serena.

Ifs and buts are not things you can base rankings on. You can't say any of that for certain.

As of next week, Davenport will only hold three titles, all Tier II. You talk about her Slam finals (one of which she TANKED in a performance far less worthy of a No 1 than any double bagel), but when was the last time she won one? Oh right, over half a decade ago :lol:

The double bagel is very bad for Sharapova, yes, but it's hardly rock solid evidence that Davenport is the better player. Sharapova still leads the head-to-head, after all. And, y'know, Evert once double bagelled Navratilova. But who ended up winning the rivalry?

Alright, i give you one thing - 'compete' was the wrong word to use. Even people ranked outside the top 100 can compete with serena like anyone else on the tour. I mean 'Seriously threaten to defeat'. At the present moment it's not ludicrous to believe this. Above many other reasons, Serena is believed to be the best player on the tour. At her best (off clay) - other than Venus and maybe Kim and Justine - no-one really threatens to defeat her. She's a very versatile player with great fight and power. Maria stunned an over confident yet sub-par Serena at wimbledon. The world was STUNNED and rightfully so. But Serena hasn't been all there for a while, and hasn't been at her best in any of her matches with Maria but was on her way to beating her at the YEC and a really poor Serena battled for the win at the AO. The same Serena who gave Venus Tips to almost defeat Maria 6-3, 6-1 at wimbledon (which became 7-6, 6-1). When Maria actually defeats this good Serena (if she gets back there), then you can call it Ludicrous. It's not a fact of course, but you have just as little evidence to say it is ludicrous. At this moment, the big guns are ready for her and know she's good, but they can all make her look awful silly on court IMO. I just hope she works hard and doesn't start to believe her own hype.

As for Davenport - well she might only have a few titles, but she's the one who's made the 2 slam finals. Making a slam final is close enough to winning one. She lost both times to the Williams sisters, to which there is no shame. The same sisters who defeated Maria on route. Far less worthy than a double bagel? Sure lindsay isn't the toughest mentally, but far less worthy? Is this statment not Ludicrous? Think about it, would you rather be a wrold number one who choked in a slam final but fought bravely in the second, or a world number one that suffered the greatest humiliation. How many other grls in the top 10 or 50 have been double bageled. Not even 1 game! Hopefully Lindsay will befit soon and i can confidently say i believe she has a better chance of getting a slam compared with Maria. Simple because she is more versatile and very good at the net. She's also not afraid of the big girls. I wouldn't be surprised if Kim, Justine, Serena and Venus AND Mauresmo and MYSKINA weren't in Maria's head. And she has no plan B. Lindsay does, and we saw it at wimbledon.

maccardel
Aug 17th, 2005, 01:27 AM
Alright, i give you one thing - 'compete' was the wrong word to use. Even people ranked outside the top 100 can compete with serena like anyone else on the tour. I mean 'Seriously threaten to defeat'. At the present moment it's not ludicrous to believe this. Above many other reasons, Serena is believed to be the best player on the tour. At her best (off clay) - other than Venus and maybe Kim and Justine - no-one really threatens to defeat her. She's a very versatile player with great fight and power. Maria stunned an over confident yet sub-par Serena at wimbledon. The world was STUNNED and rightfully so. But Serena hasn't been all there for a while, and hasn't been at her best in any of her matches with Maria but was on her way to beating her at the YEC and a really poor Serena battled for the win at the AO. The same Serena who gave Venus Tips to almost defeat Maria 6-3, 6-1 at wimbledon (which became 7-6, 6-1). When Maria actually defeats this good Serena (if she gets back there), then you can call it Ludicrous. It's not a fact of course, but you have just as little evidence to say it is ludicrous. At this moment, the big guns are ready for her and know she's good, but they can all make her look awful silly on court IMO. I just hope she works hard and doesn't start to believe her own hype.

As for Davenport - well she might only have a few titles, but she's the one who's made the 2 slam finals. Making a slam final is close enough to winning one. She lost both times to the Williams sisters, to which there is no shame. The same sisters who defeated Maria on route. Far less worthy than a double bagel? Sure lindsay isn't the toughest mentally, but far less worthy? Is this statment not Ludicrous? Think about it, would you rather be a wrold number one who choked in a slam final but fought bravely in the second, or a world number one that suffered the greatest humiliation. How many other grls in the top 10 or 50 have been double bageled. Not even 1 game! Hopefully Lindsay will befit soon and i can confidently say i believe she has a better chance of getting a slam compared with Maria. Simple because she is more versatile and very good at the net. She's also not afraid of the big girls. I wouldn't be surprised if Kim, Justine, Serena and Venus AND Mauresmo and MYSKINA weren't in Maria's head. And she has no plan B. Lindsay does, and we saw it at wimbledon.

I wasn't going to respond to join in this argument, but seriously, I think Maria hasn't really proven herself enough to be number one material. When you go out and get thrashed so effortlessly on any given day and players such as Mashona can take u out even after winning wimbledon, I think u need some more work. But to give her credit, I say she is competitive and like other players out there, a win is a win even if the player was injured.

Now witnessing her performance against the most recent crop of number ones(clijsters, Henin, Williams 2x, Davenport and Mauresmo) I say she does not need to be number one now. She Cannot go out and handly defeat these players, but that is what makes her matches interesting. Unfortunately, she is playing and trying to hang with players who have way too much more experience than she does and it doesn't help much when she has to skip a tourney to retool her game. She should be out there getting match play. I haven't seen her with enough match play yet. With all the players in the top ten, she may be the youngest, but she is also the one with the least amount of matchplay in tough situations.

How many tough matches did it take for the other top players to get the number one spot?

It is a position reserved for experience players, even if that player hasn't won a grand slam. Even though kim and Amelie has yet to win a grand slam, I know they can be confident they are going to win on any given day against any other player. That is not the case with Maria.

Her biggest achievements have been a stroke of luck and not hard fought, as witnessed by the scoreline. Imagine beating Serena in two sets, and also Venus too. I am not saying there is something wrong with winning in two sets, but look at her losing to the players she supposedly beaten on their bad days. When the good days came, Maria could not even etch a third set out of them. She was single handedly defeated in two straight sets.

With the exception of Oz when Serena still wasn't playing her best, but managed to win in three. A top player would have manhandled Serena that night.

I know that Kim had Serena down in the third set 5-1 or 5-2, but Serena was the number one player at the time. That match helped Kim in thrashing Serena at the YEC that year.

I cannot stop Maria from being number one, I could only lend my advice. Whatever the case maybe, as number one you will be criticized and Maria's fans need to understand that her record will be scrutinized as well. Oh well. In time it will all come together, but now, she is on the losing end.

Volcana
Aug 17th, 2005, 03:31 AM
[QUOTE=Volcana]
[font=Courier New]But her record this year against the elite of the tour?

AUSTRALIAN OPEN SMI WILLIAMS, S..... L 2-6 7-5 8-6
TOKYO.......... WIN DAVENPORT....... W 6-1 3-6 7-6
INDIAN WELLS... SMI DAVENPORT....... L 6-0 6-0
MIAMI.......... QTR HENIN-HARDENNE.. W 6-1 6-7 6-2
MIAMI.......... SMI WILLIAMS, V..... W 6-4 6-3
MIAMI.......... FNL CLIJSTERS....... L 6-3 7-5
BERLIN......... QTR HENIN-HARDENNE.. L 6-2 6-4
ROLAND GARROS.. QTR HENIN-HARDENNE.. L 6-4 6-2
WIMBLEDON...... SMI WILLIAMS, V..... L 7-6 6-1


wow i just relized looking ta these stats, did the person that beat her go on to win the tourn' in the majority of cases?Most of them for sure.
Don't be afraid Volcana, what level of tennis do you play at competively?In order, high school team, college Division I, but not traveling squad, club tournaments and now just local tournaments. I've been playing for over thirty years. I don't get what I should be afraid of though. And how does what anybody writes make them seem like a top player or not? Top players come in all sorts of personalities. But I have NEVER heard of any top athlete, in ANY sport, who took a beating that bad and simply forgot about it. I do recall Serena Williams' description of losing to Lindsay Davenport in the L.A. final last year. "She just beat my brains out." Which was a pretty good description of that 6-1 6-3 loss.

Lindsayfan32
Aug 17th, 2005, 10:31 AM
Let me just say this before I answer the question I like Maria. But she not the real world Number 1. Case in point we go on what's happen this year not last year. Lindsay has made two grand slam finals and the best Maria has done is two semi finals. Lindsay has not been beaten before the quater finals in any tournment. Maria has lost before the 1/4 finals at least once that I can remeber head to head results. Lindsay gave her a butt kicking 0 and 0 at Indian wells. Also there is a pretty good chance she will be a one week wonder anyway as Lindsay is playing New Haven (at the time of writing this) and will put on new points as didn't play there last year and she has a good record there. But having said all that it also a sign of a stuffed ranking system there has got to be a better way to do it and before anyone thinks it I will tell you I am not bitter about Lindsay losing the number one ranking just making a point.

Roshane
Aug 17th, 2005, 11:29 AM
Let me just say this before I answer the question I like Maria. But she not the real world Number 1. Case in point we go on what's happen this year not last year. Lindsay has made two grand slam finals and the best Maria has done is two semi finals. Lindsay has not been beaten before the quater finals in any tournment. Maria has lost before the 1/4 finals at least once that I can remeber head to head results. Lindsay gave her a butt kicking 0 and 0 at Indian wells. Also there is a pretty good chance she will be a one week wonder anyway as Lindsay is playing New Haven (at the time of writing this) and will put on new points as didn't play there last year and she has a good record there. But having said all that it also a sign of a stuffed ranking system there has got to be a better way to do it and before anyone thinks it I will tell you I am not bitter about Lindsay losing the number one ranking just making a point.

Davenport lost in the 1st round of Stanford just a few weeks ago. Maria has not lost before a QF since last year's US Open.

Davenport has not even won a Tier 1 in the past 52 weeks. Maria has at least won YEC and tier 1.

rjd1111
Aug 17th, 2005, 01:19 PM
I know that Kim had Serena down in the third set 5-1 or 5-2, but Serena was the number one player at the time. That match helped Kim in thrashing Serena at the YEC that year.





I don't know what this means. The match that Serena came back from
5-2 in the third happened after that YEC.

miracle_laser
Aug 17th, 2005, 02:49 PM
Davenport lost in the 1st round of Stanford just a few weeks ago. Maria has not lost before a QF since last year's US Open.

Davenport has not even won a Tier 1 in the past 52 weeks. Maria has at least won YEC and tier 1.

Yes, you told us the truth.

And I think someone should know the results before they argue.

goldenlox
Aug 17th, 2005, 03:11 PM
Davenport and Sharapova are fighting for #1 from their beds.
The tour is taking a toll on the players.
And it's supposed to be very hot in NYC.

*JR*
Aug 17th, 2005, 03:14 PM
Davenport and Sharapova are fighting for #1 from their beds.

I thought Anna had the edge on that err, "surface". :p

goldenlox
Aug 17th, 2005, 03:18 PM
I meant this http://smileys.******************/cat/15/15_4_100.gif (http://www.******************/?partner=ZSzeb001) kind of bed.

alfonsojose
Aug 17th, 2005, 03:27 PM
stop the Sharaphobia please :tears:

lukehingis
Aug 17th, 2005, 03:55 PM
For what it's worth... I think Maria deserves the top ranking.. it's just a shame she didn't get it when she was still holding the Wimbledon title, then there would be much less debate on whether it's deserving or not...

Geisha
Aug 17th, 2005, 04:05 PM
I am not a person that is attacking Maria for being Number One. I understand that once you are the player who has earned the most points over the past 52 weeks, then you become the Number One player in the world.

The only, itsy-bitsy problem that I have with Maria being ranked Number One, is that she won Seoul, Tokyo, and Birmingham, and in those three tournaments, the highest ranked players she had the beat were 19th and 20th ranked. Had she not won these three tournaments, Lindsay would still be holding her ranking (which is deserving, considering she has been in the finals of two Slams, Indian Wells, Tokyo (PPO), and won three other titles).

Geisha
Aug 17th, 2005, 04:07 PM
Davenport lost in the 1st round of Stanford just a few weeks ago. Maria has not lost before a QF since last year's US Open.

Davenport has not even won a Tier 1 in the past 52 weeks. Maria has at least won YEC and tier 1.

Davenport was injured in Stanford and retired- that's just a low blow. Maria's YEC was a great accomplishment, though- I'll give that to you. But, is her Tokyo title equal to two Grand Slam finals and the Indian Wells final? I'd take those three finals over the lowest Tier I around...

Chrissie-fan
Aug 17th, 2005, 04:17 PM
Sharapova won the YEC. Not a slam of course,but the most important tournament other than the slams. The fact that Serena was injured doesn't matter. There's no rule against beating an injured opponent. True,Lindsay had two slam finals and Maria has none,but that's because Sharapova had to play Venus in the semis. Had Venus been in the other half of the draw Maria probably would have been a Wimbledon finalist and both Lindsay and Maria would have been finalists in one slam this year. Not saying that Sharapova deserves the #1 ranking more than Davenport (or vice versa) but the mere fact that she's got it proves that she must have done something right. :smoke:

Let me just say this before I answer the question I like Maria. But she not the real world Number 1. Case in point we go on what's happen this year not last year. Lindsay has made two grand slam finals and the best Maria has done is two semi finals. Lindsay has not been beaten before the quater finals in any tournment. Maria has lost before the 1/4 finals at least once that I can remeber head to head results. Lindsay gave her a butt kicking 0 and 0 at Indian wells. Also there is a pretty good chance she will be a one week wonder anyway as Lindsay is playing New Haven (at the time of writing this) and will put on new points as didn't play there last year and she has a good record there. But having said all that it also a sign of a stuffed ranking system there has got to be a better way to do it and before anyone thinks it I will tell you I am not bitter about Lindsay losing the number one ranking just making a point.

Roshane
Aug 17th, 2005, 04:18 PM
Davenport was injured in Stanford and retired- that's just a low blow. Maria's YEC was a great accomplishment, though- I'll give that to you. But, is her Tokyo title equal to two Grand Slam finals and the Indian Wells final? I'd take those three finals over the lowest Tier I around...

"YEC and a Tier 1 win plus 2 GS semi's" BEATS "2GS finals" hands down.

Warrior
Aug 17th, 2005, 04:31 PM
Make that former-grand slam champion, and past-winner of Wimbledon. Also, allow for one other thing. This is the fifth recent #1 who didn't hold a GS title, following Hingis, Davenport (several times), Mauresmo and Clijsters. All the other 'slamless #1's were attacked as well.

The over all reason is that people hold the mistakent impression that being raked #1 implies you're the best player on the tour. In almost any other sport, this would be true. In tennis, it isn't.

I don't recall Davenport getting much criticism.

Chrissie-fan
Aug 17th, 2005, 04:38 PM
True,but one doesn't have to attack those players for that. If anything is to blame,it's the system that's being used. But to be fair,it's almost impossible to come up with an objective ranking when everyone,including the two best players (Serena and Henin),is injured all the time. :smoke:

Make that former-grand slam champion, and past-winner of Wimbledon. Also, allow for one other thing. This is the fifth recent #1 who didn't hold a GS title, following Hingis, Davenport (several times), Mauresmo and Clijsters. All the other 'slamless #1's were attacked as well.

The over all reason is that people hold the mistakent impression that being raked #1 implies you're the best player on the tour. In almost any other sport, this would be true. In tennis, it isn't.

daffodil
Aug 17th, 2005, 04:39 PM
Serena fan :retard:

Justine fan = Devil :devil:

daffodil
Aug 17th, 2005, 04:40 PM
"YEC and a Tier 1 win plus 2 GS semi's" BEATS "2GS finals" hands down.

How do you figure?

daffodil
Aug 17th, 2005, 04:40 PM
If Maria hadn't won those Tier 6s, she wouldn't be in a position to be #1.

Helen Lawson
Aug 17th, 2005, 04:41 PM
If she hadn't had a shitty slump last summer or had done a little better in the clay season, she could have been no. 1 before the French and still be holding it. It's come too late. She should have had it months ago.

daffodil
Aug 17th, 2005, 04:43 PM
Sharapova won the YEC. Not a slam of course,but the most important tournament other than the slams. The fact that Serena was injured doesn't matter. There's no rule against beating an injured opponent. True,Lindsay had two slam finals and Maria has none,but that's because Sharapova had to play Venus in the semis. Had Venus been in the other half of the draw Maria probably would have been a Wimbledon finalist and both Lindsay and Maria would have been finalists in one slam this year. Not saying that Sharapova deserves the #1 ranking more than Davenport (or vice versa) but the mere fact that she's got it proves that she must have done something right. :smoke:

If Maria couldn't beat a slumping Serena and Venus Williams in Semifinals of Grand Slams in 2005, she shouldn't be #1. She's 1-2 against the Williams' this year, which is just not good enough, seeing as they are on the bad end of the Top 10.

No #1 player should lose 6-0, 6-0 in the year that they became #1. That's pathetic and shows the lack of depth in women's tennis. At least when Serena is being outplayed, she puts up a fight.

What's worse about Sharapova being #1 is that she didn't even need to play a tournament to get it. Serena had the make the finals of Wimbledon in 2002 to get #1. Venus had to win 4 Grand Slams before she even had a look at being #1. Even JUSTINE deserved #1 more than Sharapova!

Denise4925
Aug 17th, 2005, 04:56 PM
Make that former-grand slam champion, and past-winner of Wimbledon. Also, allow for one other thing. This is the fifth recent #1 who didn't hold a GS title, following Hingis, Davenport (several times), Mauresmo and Clijsters. All the other 'slamless #1's were attacked as well.

The over all reason is that people hold the mistakent impression that being raked #1 implies you're the best player on the tour. In almost any other sport, this would be true. In tennis, it isn't.
That's obvious after the whippings she's received this year from Serena, Lindsay, Kim, Justine and Venus. :shrug:

daffodil
Aug 17th, 2005, 05:03 PM
That's obvious after the whippings she's received this year from Serena, Lindsay, Kim, Justine and Venus. :shrug:

True, but that doesn't necessarily mean that she should be ranked 6th in the world just because she lost to those players.

It should be:

1: Lindsay (2 GS finals, + a butt-load of other great results)
2: Kim (2 huge tournaments + BOTWC, beat Venus, Maria, Lindsay, Anas, Lena D. etc...)
3: Maria (consistently in the last 2 rounds of tournaments.)
4: Justine (won every clay title imaginable...would be ranked higher if she could win on surface other than clay.)
5: Venus (Wimby win, good result in Antwerp, Miami)
6: Serena (Grand Slam win this year, but played shitty.)

densuprun
Aug 17th, 2005, 05:26 PM
Kim doesn't belong in second place. At least not yet. She has to show at least something of value at slams before you can put her in top 3. If she wins Toronto and USO while Lindsay loses early then Kim will be #2.

Lindsay's butt load of tier II/III wins becomes a little lighter come next Monday. Then the top 2 will be:
1. Maria (YEC, Tier I, never loses before QF)
2. Lindsay (2 GS finals)

Martian Jeza
Aug 17th, 2005, 05:45 PM
It's well known that If you didn't win majors or slams : you are a controversial n°1. You shoud know that some people only are focused on slams or majors : The rest of the season doesn't count. Come on the WTA : leave Lindsay n°1 or give the n°1 place to one of the Sisters or Justine or maybe Kim. With Sharapova n°1 : you cannot be serious WTA !

densuprun
Aug 17th, 2005, 05:49 PM
I guess I missed the slam in the last 52 weeks that Lindsay or Kim has won.

Geisha
Aug 17th, 2005, 05:58 PM
"YEC and a Tier 1 win plus 2 GS semi's" BEATS "2GS finals" hands down.

That's not what I said...

Year-End Championships title
Pan Pacific Open title
Australian Open SF
Wimbledon SF

over

US Open SF
Australian Open F
Indian Wells F
Wimbledon F

In my opinion, I'd rather lose in the IW final than win Tokyo...It's much more prestigous...

darrinbaker00
Aug 17th, 2005, 06:03 PM
There's waaaay too much importance being placed on the 6-0 6-0 here. Yes, it was a terrible score for Sharapova, though Davenport fans are conveniently not mentioning the way she tanked TWO Slam matches this year, which is far worse.

But Sharapova still leads the head-to-head. And when she becomes No 1, they'll both have 3 big titles on their rolling 52 - except Sharapova's are 1 x Tier II, 1 x Tier I and the YEC, while Davenport not only can't win Slams any more, but it appears that Tier Is are beyond her. Does the double bagel still outweigh that? If you argue that it does, I say...you are an American or Davenport fan who's cutting Lindsay a LOT of slack.
The sooner Justine/Venus/Serena fills in the gaps in her points table and ends this farce the better, is what I say.
If Queen Masha had a triple-digit ranking when it happened, I would agree with you, but the #3 player in the world (her ranking at the time)? The reigning Wimbledon champion? Also, Lindsay has had the opportunity to play for two major titles this year? Can Maria say the same?

goldenlox
Aug 17th, 2005, 06:07 PM
Lindsay has not won a major since January 2000. And she's injured.
That's life. That's sports.
There's no way Lindsay deserved #1 for dozens of weeks while Maria never has it.
Especially with Lindsay injured. There's no way.

Geisha
Aug 17th, 2005, 06:40 PM
Let me break it down for you, because a lot of people have been talking a lot of smack.

After this week is over:

Over the past 52 weeks, Maria Sharapova has compiled a 65-12 (.844) win-loss record. She has won six titles ('04 Seoul, Tokyo, Year-End Championships, '05 Tokyo, Doha, Birmingham) and has lost two times before the Quarterfinals (R16 at New Haven and R32 at US Open). Maria has defeated 15 Top 20 players and 10 Top 10 players and has lost to eight players out of the Top 10 (Schnyder, Clijsters, Henin-Hardenne x2). Maria has a Grand Slam record of 16-4.

Over the past 52 weeks, Lindsay Davenport has compiled a 51-10 (.836) win-loss record. She has won three titles ('04 Filderstadt, '05 Dubai, Amelia Island) and has lost two times before the Quarterfinals of a tournament ('04 Year-End Championships- had the same record after the RR than Sharapova, '05 Stanford- injury retirement). Lindsay has defeated 18 Top 20 players and nine Top 10 players and has lost to 5 players outside of the Top 10 (Clijsters, Henin-Hardenne- retired, injury, Pierce, V.Williams, Groenfeld- retired, injury). Lindsay has a Grand Slam record of 21-4.

As you can see, these two players are pretty equally matched.

- Sharapova has a better winning percentage

- Sharapova has more wins

- Sharapova has more titles

- Davenport has more Grand Slams wins

- Davenport has made two more Grand Slam finals

- Davenport has defeated more top 20 players

- Sharapova has more top 10 wins

- Davenport has a better Grand Slam winning percentage

- Sharapova leads their head-to-head

- Both players have lost before the Quarterfinals of any tournament, twice

But, there are some intangibles...

Davenport has had two retirements- if we take those retirements out, Lindsay's record becomes 51-8 instead of 51-10. Her 51-8 record has a winning percentage of .864 which is better than Sharapova's. Although Davenport has less titles, in the three titles that she has won, she has defeated five Top 20 players. In the six titles that Maria has won, she has defeated eight top 20 players. One other thing is that during her three lesser titles, Maria never defeated a player inside the top 18- her only top 10 wins in Seoul, Tokyo, and Birmingham were over No.19 Tatiana Golovin and No.20 Jelena Jankovic. Let's not forget that Maria actually lost during the Year-End Championships, but her sets won was able to get her through to the Semifinals.

In the end, although it seems as though Maria has had a more successful year, there were so many intangibles that went her way, instead of Lindsay's. For example, both players had a 2-1 record after the Round Robin at the Year-End Championships, but Maria had enough to bring her to the SF and Lindsay didn't. Also, Lindsay had injuries in her losses against Kuznetsova at the US Open, Henin-Hardenne at Charleston, and Greonfeld at Stanford. Had she not been injured, who knows what she could have done during the rest of those tournaments.

Lindsay deserves the Top ranking...

densuprun
Aug 17th, 2005, 06:50 PM
Let me break it down for you

<.. a lot of irrelevant albeit interesting stats skipped ..>

Lindsay deserves the Top ranking...


Relevant stats:

1. Maria 4452 points
2. Lindsay 4300 points

Maria deserves the Top ranking.

Chrissie-fan
Aug 17th, 2005, 06:52 PM
Maybe we shouldn't have a #1 at all. Sharapova doesn't deserve it for the reasons mentionned here by others. Lindsay hasn't won a slam in years. The Williams sisters and Henin are more often injured than that they are playing.....Maybe we should forget about a #1 and simply start the rankings with #6. Or better still,let's give the #1 ranking to Jennifer Capriati. She hasn't lost a match all year! :drink: :smoke:

densuprun
Aug 17th, 2005, 06:55 PM
Maybe we shouldn't have a #1 at all. Sharapova doesn't deserve it for the reasons mentionned here by others. Lindsay hasn't won a slam in years. The Williams sisters and Henin are more often injured than that they are playing.....Maybe we should forget about a #1 and simply start the rankings with #6. Or better still,let's give the #1 ranking to Jennifer Capriati. She hasn't lost a match all year! :drink: :smoke:

Or to Chris Evert.

goldenlox
Aug 17th, 2005, 06:58 PM
Maybe we shouldn't have a #1 at all. Sharapova doesn't deserve it for the reasons mentionned here by others. Lindsay hasn't won a slam in years. The Williams sisters and Henin are more often injured than that they are playing.....Maybe we should forget about a #1 and simply start the rankings with #6. Or better still,let's give the #1 ranking to Jennifer Capriati. She hasn't lost a match all year! :drink: :smoke:They could do it like cycling. Armstrong races once a year.
But the WTA doesn't run the slams.
And it's obvious from this summer that they want all the top players overplaying in between the majors.
The rankings overrate these prep tournaments.
Everyone would rather have Sveta's hardcourt summer in 2004 over Lindsay's.
But Lindsay gets more points because they overvalue prep tournaments.

Chrissie-fan
Aug 17th, 2005, 07:05 PM
:yeah: :yeah: :yeah: :yeah: :smoke:

Or to Chris Evert.

densuprun
Aug 17th, 2005, 07:34 PM
Yeah, whenever the current #1 doesn't hold a slam, just return the top spot to the original #1 who, while being #1, always held a slam herself! (unlike Austin, Graf, Hingis, Davenport, Clijsters, Mauresmo, and Sharapova)

Chris Evert at #1:

Chris Evert Nov 03, 1975 - Jul 09, 1978 (140)
Chris Evert Jan 14, 1979 - Jan 27, 1979 (2)
Chris Evert Feb 25, 1979 - Apr 15, 1979 (7)
Chris Evert Jun 25, 1979 - Sep 09, 1979 (11)
Chris Evert Nov 18, 1980 - May 02, 1982 (76)
Chris Evert May 17, 1982 - Jun 13, 1982 (4)
Chris Evert Jun 10, 1985 - Oct 13, 1985 (18)
Chris Evert Oct 28, 1985 - Nov 24, 1985 (4)
--
And also:
Chris Evert (instead of Austin) September - November, 1980
Chris Evert (instead of Graf) February - March, 1991
Chris Evert (instead of Graf) February, 1995
Chris Evert (instead of Graf) April - May, 1995
Chris Evert (instead of Hingis) February - April, 2000
Chris Evert (instead of Hingis) May, 2000
Chris Evert (instead of Hingis) May, 2000 - October, 2001
Chris Evert (instead of Davenport) November, 2001 - January, 2002
Chris Evert (instead of Clijsters) August - October, 2003
Chris Evert (instead of Clijsters) October - November, 2003
Chris Evert (instead of Mauresmo) September - October, 2004
Chris Evert (instead of Davenport) October, 2004 - August, 2005
Chris Evert (instead of Sharapova) August, 2005

Marshmallow
Aug 17th, 2005, 07:55 PM
Sharapova won the YEC. Not a slam of course,but the most important tournament other than the slams. The fact that Serena was injured doesn't matter. There's no rule against beating an injured opponent. True,Lindsay had two slam finals and Maria has none,but that's because Sharapova had to play Venus in the semis. Had Venus been in the other half of the draw Maria probably would have been a Wimbledon finalist and both Lindsay and Maria would have been finalists in one slam this year. Not saying that Sharapova deserves the #1 ranking more than Davenport (or vice versa) but the mere fact that she's got it proves that she must have done something right. :smoke:


First highlight...Well it's hardly as impressive as it should be or as people make it seem. It's true that in history people will just say - Maria won the YEC and Wimbledon. But the fact that her opponent was winning until she could barely swing takes the glow off it a little.


The second... if we want to use the condition, we could argue, had Lindsay not been playing doubles she COULD have won the AO and gotten a slam. Had that Rain delay not occurred at Wimbledon, she COULD have won the title. Had she not been tired (got to signles and doubles final at AO and i believe also played doubles in tokyo) she COULD have won Tokyo ... that very close tier 1 final. She COULD have won Indian wells had she not choked an so on. There are two sides.

darrinbaker00
Aug 17th, 2005, 07:55 PM
Or to Chris Evert.
How about Billie Jean King? After all, women's professional tennis as we know it wouldn't even exist without her, so she should be ranked #1 FOREVER! ;)

Marshmallow
Aug 17th, 2005, 08:06 PM
Davenport lost in the 1st round of Stanford just a few weeks ago. Maria has not lost before a QF since last year's US Open.

Davenport has not even won a Tier 1 in the past 52 weeks. Maria has at least won YEC and tier 1.

Lindsay was injured... THIS was a fluke. She retired and wasn't beaten.

It's true Maria won the YEC (well.. she was on court when Serena lost) and a Tier one. Congrats to her. The Circumstances of both wins make them seem less sensational. Serena injured, and Lindsay exhausted (Reaches doubles and singles finals a days earlier and spent a lot of time on court). She deserves credit for making that final along with the finals of 2 slams, and Indian wells also.

But i can't take anything from Maria here.

Roshane
Aug 17th, 2005, 08:07 PM
First highlight...Well it's hardly as impressive as it should be or as people make it seem. It's true that in history people will just say - Maria won the YEC and Wimbledon. But the fact that her opponent was winning until she could barely swing takes the glow off it a little.


Venus beat an injured davenport at wimbledon this year. You can only beat who you play and you deserve it if you win.

None of maria's opponents were even remotely injured during wimbledon. At YEC, Serena was injured but you can only beat who you play.

Roshane
Aug 17th, 2005, 08:09 PM
Lindsay was injured... THIS was a fluke. She retired and wasn't beaten.

It's true Maria won the YEC (well.. she was on court when Serena lost) and a Tier one. Congrats to her. The Circumstances of both wins make them seem less sensational. Serena injured, and Lindsay exhausted (Reaches doubles and singles finals a days earlier and spent a lot of time on court). She deserves credit for making that final along with the finals of 2 slams, and Indian wells also.

But i can't take anything from Maria here.

I know she was injured. Its still does down as a loss if you start the match and retire, let alone be 0-5 down.

goldenlox
Aug 17th, 2005, 08:10 PM
Lindsay was injured... THIS was a fluke. She retired and wasn't beaten.It's not a fluke. Injuries are a part of sports.
Injuries are why Lindsay got to #1, and injuries are why Maria is #1 next week.

Marshmallow
Aug 17th, 2005, 08:11 PM
If Maria hadn't won those Tier 6s, she wouldn't be in a position to be #1.


LOL... i believe this also working in Lindsay's favour a little. She rarely plays below tier 2 (Istanbul or that low tier tourney before the FO is an exception).

This isn't an ATTACK on Maria, but more credit to Lindsay. [She's being attacked a little in this thread].

I'd also like to say, being Slamless isn't a huge issue for me and many others i feel. If a player gets far in slams that's good enough. I have no issue with Maria becoming number one without a a slam in the last 52 weeks. But i respect there are plenty who have a different view.

Marshmallow
Aug 17th, 2005, 08:19 PM
Venus beat an injured davenport at wimbledon this year. You can only beat who you play and you deserve it if you win.

None of maria's opponents were even remotely injured during wimbledon. At YEC, Serena was injured but you can only beat who you play.

I' sorry Wimbledon was a typo. I meant a Tier 1 (Tokyo) instead of wimbledon.

The difference between the Venus-Lindsay Match and the YEC is that Lindsay was able to play well (as well as she did from the beginning it seemed). Her match point was after the injury, and she came up with some great shots. She was even challenging Venus in that final game... do you remember?

At the YEC.. Serena needed heavy straping and could barely swing freely. Her serve was very weak also. She could fire winners but was abviously no real threat.

By principle i can see your point, but the differences were obvious. And this isn't about Venus. She's not really challenging the number one spot. Even if we accept you injured davenport arguement, we're saying Lindsay could have won that final and hence have a slam.

Marshmallow
Aug 17th, 2005, 08:22 PM
It's not a fluke. Injuries are a part of sports.
Injuries are why Lindsay got to #1, and injuries are why Maria is #1 next week.

My whole point was that we can't use that retirement to boost maria's performance, by putting lindsay down. Lindsay had to retire from her Match and couldn't compete. We can't let that result ruin her great no loss pre-quater finals record in the last 52+ weeks. Maria has lost twice pre quater finals in the last 52 weeks and not 1 is a retirement. So THAT stat is in lindsays favour.

Roshane
Aug 17th, 2005, 08:23 PM
I' sorry Wimbledon was a typo. I meant a Tier 1 (Tokyo) instead of wimbledon.

The difference between the Venus-Lindsay Match and the YEC is that Lindsay was able to play well (as well as she did from the beginning it seemed). Her match point was after the injury, and she came up with some great shots. She was even challenging Venus in that final game... do you remember?

At the YEC.. Serena needed heavy straping and could barely swing freely. Her serve was very weak also. She could fire winners but was abviously no real threat.

By principle i can see your point, but the differences were obvious. And this isn't about Venus. She's not really challenging the number one spot. Even if we accept you injured davenport arguement, we're saying Lindsay could have won that final and hence have a slam.

Yes, I'm just trying to be fair. I like both Maria and Lindsay. Maria deserves her number 1.

Last March/April, Maria held wimbledon, yec, tier 1 and 2 titles and was still number 2. If you are going to argue about the ranking system now and say Maria doesn't deserve it, you have to also say Maria should deserved number 1 when last march/april. You can't have it both ways.

Marshmallow
Aug 17th, 2005, 08:31 PM
Yes, I'm just trying to be fair. I like both Maria and Lindsay. Maria deserves her number 1.

Last March/April, Maria held wimbledon, yec, tier 1 and 2 titles and was still number 2. If you are going to argue about the ranking system now and say Maria doesn't deserve it, you have to also say Maria should deserved number 1 when last march/april. You can't have it both ways.

I haven't argued maria DOESN'T deserve th number one ranking. For her consistency she does and i said that fom my first post. I actually like the ranking system ... (but have a few issues with how points are awarded). But there are other issues mentioned earlier. The original post was about people attacking maria and we gave reasons. Although i don't see it as attacking, but rather giving critical opinions.

She'll be number one - fair play. God knows what this will do to the hype.

Roshane
Aug 17th, 2005, 08:35 PM
You mention "hype". Its all justified hype. Maria is a proven player. Wimbledon, YEC, tier 1 and 2 titles, world number 1. She's only 18, she has proved herself. She deserves all the attention.

If you want to talk anout proper hype, then thats kornikova. She had negligible talent yet got a lot of hype.

densuprun
Aug 17th, 2005, 08:36 PM
If all Maria haters and detractors started by saying that Maria deserves #1 then I wouldn't be in this thread, regardless of criticism put on Maria. Unfortunately, that's not what most of them think. Many try to push the idea that Lindsay somehow deserves #1 over Maria.

Marshmallow
Aug 17th, 2005, 08:52 PM
Okay...

Most of what you (two) have written is debatable. Hype Justified? Depends who you talk to. Is calling her the next graf or next big thing logical / premature? You tell me. The circumstances in which she won Wimbledon and the YEC and got her points up post wimbledon don't favour this hype. She's a good player who's been made out to be the best thing since sliced bread. I respect that isn't her fault, but i can't agree with you when you say it's justified. When she can beat healthy and practiced big players on more than one occassion - then my ears will open. When Venus got it together, Maria whimpered. Clijsters and Justine have made her look like an amateur not to mention 6-0, 6-0. Myskina has a winning record. Those don't appear to be the making of the next graf! I'm sorry, it just doesn't seem justified. It doesn't help when they hype appears to be because of her appearance.

Just my opinion.

As for Lindsay over Maria. You can't blame them. I can see both sides. Maria has the titles, but lindsay has the edge on consistency. She was a Semi-finalist at Wimbledon and the USO in 2004 (and almost won both) and a finalist at the AO and Wimbledon and almost won both. Finalist in Tokyo, Dubai, defeated Serena convincingly twice last year (Maria only once) and had she not gotten injured or even played one more tourney at full health would retain the title. But she skipped the european clay. etc.

Marshmallow
Aug 17th, 2005, 08:53 PM
I can't argue anymore... this is too tiring. *White flag* lol.

Denise4925
Aug 17th, 2005, 08:58 PM
I can't argue anymore... this is too tiring. *White flag* lol.
:hug: Good job. :yeah:

densuprun
Aug 17th, 2005, 08:59 PM
As for Lindsay over Maria. You can't blame them. I can see both sides. Maria has the titles, but lindsay has the edge on consistency. She was a Semi-finalist at Wimbledon and the USO in 2004 (and almost won both) and a finalist at the AO and Wimbledon and almost won both. Finalist in Tokyo, Dubai, defeated Serena convincingly twice last year (Maria only once) and had she not gotten injured or even played one more tourney at full health would retain the title. But she skipped the european clay. etc.

And still,

I haven't argued maria DOESN'T deserve th number one ranking. For her consistency she does

So, you accept that Maria is #1. Then I won't bother to bring out the long list of Maria's achievements.

Kart
Aug 17th, 2005, 09:36 PM
I can't think of any player that hasn't been attacked for being no.1.

Mother_Marjorie
Aug 17th, 2005, 09:57 PM
Interesting that no one has mentioned that the current holders of Grand Slam titles, other than Justine Henin-Hardenne, have had weak results the past rolling 52-weeks. None of the current grand slam title holders deserve the number one ranking. However, Justine is only one to win at least one grand slam title per year the past three years.

So, Maria hasn't won a Grand Slam title the past 52 rolling weeks. Well, try to argue who among the title holders is more deserving of the #1 spot????

Really, you can't.

Svetlana
Serena
Justine
Venus

Justine is the only player among them who has a record that includes winning multiple titles and a grand slam title in the past rolling 52 weeks. Its arguable that had Justine played earlier in the year, she would hold the #1 ranking.

The WTA got it right. The computer ranking system is set up to reward those who are most consistent, in the presence of overwhelming depth in the top ten of the WTA.

Those that argue you must hold a current grand slam title to rightfully be the number one player look at the current grand slam title holders. Your argument fails horribly.

:eek:

WIMBLY2004
Aug 17th, 2005, 10:00 PM
Since Davenport became the number one without any slam final and just hold a tier I and some tier II titles last year and hold the number one with just one slam final for the first 6 months of this year while the number two at that time hold a slam, a YEC, a tier I and a tier II. Why can't Maria become the number now?

Maria Croft
Aug 17th, 2005, 10:07 PM
you guys are just repeating the same things over and over again aren't you ?!

Marshmallow
Aug 17th, 2005, 10:11 PM
And still,



So, you accept that Maria is #1. Then I won't bother to bring out the long list of Maria's achievements.

How dare you :P This actually isn't a contradiction. Put it in context. You complained about people arguing that Lindsay deserved the number one MORE than lindsay - i said i can see why and offered stats. That's not arguing that MARIA doesn't deserve the number one ranking... she does for her consistency in reality, but does she deserve it MORE than Davenport... NO. I wish Davenport was healthy - then she'd retain her top spot. But in reality she isn't. For that i can't fault Maria. She IS number two in the world.

I prefer Lindsay over Maria, but none of this has to do with the original thread.

densuprun
Aug 17th, 2005, 10:28 PM
Oh, so you are just as the rest of them. Well, does Maria deserve it MORE than Lindsay... YES!
Both of them are injured and didn't get any points towards their rating since Wimbledon. I can argue that had both of them were healthy Maria would still get #1 at about this time before the US Open. But there are no ifs. No woulda/coulda. Maria has more points, more titles, her titles are of higher quality. She deserves #1 and she deserves it over anybody else.

Marshmallow
Aug 17th, 2005, 10:43 PM
Oh, so you are just as the rest of them. Well, does Maria deserve it MORE than Lindsay... YES!
Both of them are injured and didn't get any points towards their rating since Wimbledon. I can argue that had both of them were healthy Maria would still get #1 at about this time before the US Open. But there are no ifs. No woulda/coulda. Maria has more points, more titles, her titles are of higher quality. She deserves #1 and she deserves it over anybody else.

*Takes final breath for this thread*

LOL. You know what, lets not argue conditionals. Lets just wait and See. You're clearly a loyal Pova fan, and wish her to do extremely well. But i honestly feel over the next few months let alone 52 weeks, she'll have her work cut out if she's gonna win another slam. Having cup-cake draws like at Wimbledon won't help, because the big guns know what she's about and will not take her lightly. From her next few encounters with the big girls, we'll see. Consistency can get you number one, but to get slams and become a respected number one player, you need to consistently beat the big guns. She isn't proven there yet. So we'll see. Lindsay is and i'll be hoping she gets her slam soon.

I respect your loyality, honestly.

sartrista7
Aug 17th, 2005, 10:48 PM
I prefer Lindsay over Maria, but none of this has to do with the original thread.

I think it does :tape:

I don't like Sharapova OR Davenport, and think Sharapova is a dreadfully weak No 1, but I have to defend her because of the sheer hypocrisy and idiocy of people attacking her and then claiming that Davenport of all players deserves it more!

I can't believe the gall of some people, attacking Sharapova of profiting from others' injuries when that is the ONLY REASON Davenport has seen any time in the top 3 at all over the past year.

.ivy.
Aug 17th, 2005, 10:51 PM
#1 shows who accomplished the most in the last 52 weeks. It is not necessarily the best player. Similar things happen in other sports. Detroit Pistons wasn't the best team in 2004 but they won the NBA championship. Had Karl Malone not been injured in the finals Detroit wouldn't hold the trophy.

And what has she accomplished this year?

densuprun
Aug 17th, 2005, 10:52 PM
LOL. You know what, lets not argue conditionals. Lets just wait and See. You're clearly a loyal Pova fan, and wish her to do extremely well. But i honestly feel over the next few months let alone 52 weeks, she'll have her work cut out if she's gonna win another slam. Having cup-cake draws like at Wimbledon won't help, because the big guns know what she's about and will not take her lightly. From her next few encounters with the big girls, we'll see. Consistency can get you number one, but to get slams and become a respected number one player, you need to consistently beat the big guns. She isn't proven there yet. So we'll see. Lindsay is and i'll be hoping she gets her slam soon.

Yeah, we'll see. I am not arguing that she is better than all those other players who didn't play the full year (Lindsay is not among those). However, she does deserves #1 more than them at this moment. Will she deserve it more when they all play the full season? We'll see. The more likely scenario is that she stays #1 till YEC where the fate of YE#1 will be decided.

densuprun
Aug 17th, 2005, 10:58 PM
And what has she accomplished this year?

Titles of some significance:

1. Maria: YEC, Tier I, Tier II
2. Lindsay: :secret: three Tier II

.ivy.
Aug 17th, 2005, 11:02 PM
Titles of some significance:

1. Maria: YEC, Tier I, Tier II
2. Lindsay: :secret: three Tier II

So, a weak Tier I, a Tier II, and YEC was last year. Great stuff for the next No. 1.

But I don't think that Davenport deserved it more than Sharapova, or the other way around, so I'm waiting for a (dare I say it) Williams or JHH to claim the throne.

densuprun
Aug 17th, 2005, 11:04 PM
So, a weak Tier I, a Tier II, and YEC was last year. Great stuff for the next No. 1.

Yeah, I know, nothing beyond tier II is way better than that.

densuprun
Aug 17th, 2005, 11:05 PM
But I don't think that Davenport deserved it more than Sharapova

Then we are cool.

sartrista7
Aug 17th, 2005, 11:06 PM
YEC was last year

We are aware that the last 52 weeks count towards the rankings, yes? YEC is still relevant.

*Karen*
Aug 17th, 2005, 11:11 PM
Whoever has the most points deserves the ranking regardless of what slams they have. It's not Maria's fault if everyone else can't be bothered to play. The slam winners cant be number 1 this year because unless someone wins two slams in a year they are fairly unlikely to have enough points to be number one especially since they've either played badly or not at all the rest of the year.

We've hardly seen Serena, Justine or Venus all year so why do they deserve to be number 1. And if Maria has more points than Lindsay why doesn't she deserve to be number 1.

.ivy.
Aug 17th, 2005, 11:13 PM
We are aware that the last 52 weeks count towards the rankings, yes? YEC is still relevant.

In my mind I refer to last year's YEC champion as last year. Just like I don't think Kuznetsova's the USO Champion.

Does that make sense?

sartrista7
Aug 17th, 2005, 11:22 PM
In my mind I refer to last year's YEC champion as last year. Just like I don't think Kuznetsova's the USO Champion.

Does that make sense?

Not really. If Kuznetsova isn't the US Open champion, who is? The way things work in tennis is that your reward for winning an event is that you get to be called the reigning champion for 52 weeks, until you get a chance to defend it.

ezekiel
Aug 18th, 2005, 01:12 AM
Does Maria really want it now to lose it just as quick?

densuprun
Aug 18th, 2005, 03:12 AM
Does Lindsay really want it now to put some effort to win it back?

VeraNuVirgosFan
Aug 18th, 2005, 03:56 AM
Yeah, whenever the current #1 doesn't hold a slam, just return the top spot to the original #1 who, while being #1, always held a slam herself!
Chris Evert at #1:

...
--
And also:
Chris Evert (instead of Austin) September - November, 1980
Chris Evert (instead of Graf) February - March, 1991
Chris Evert (instead of Graf) February, 1995
Chris Evert (instead of Graf) April - May, 1995
Chris Evert (instead of Hingis) February - April, 2000
Chris Evert (instead of Hingis) May, 2000
Chris Evert (instead of Hingis) May, 2000 - October, 2001
Chris Evert (instead of Davenport) November, 2001 - January, 2002
Chris Evert (instead of Clijsters) August - October, 2003
Chris Evert (instead of Clijsters) October - November, 2003
Chris Evert (instead of Mauresmo) September - October, 2004
Chris Evert (instead of Davenport) October, 2004 - August, 2005
Chris Evert (instead of Sharapova) August, 2005
Were you implying that she would also be playing on the Tour in the next century?

densuprun
Aug 18th, 2005, 04:19 AM
The original #1 never dies! :devil:

Tennisation
Aug 18th, 2005, 09:57 AM
The #1 ranking hasn't been as huge as it was suppose to be eversince Hingis held it for so long without winning a grand slam. Right now, there's no one that deserves the #1, but someone's gotta be the "bad guy" and take it, might as well be Sharapova

Lindsay - slamless #1 for so long, she's got many peepz to thank for helping her hold on to that #1 for awhile this year.
Maria - too much hype around that grunt, but i won't hate her enuff to shoot her, I'll just shoot the commentator who said she's "the next Graf".
Serena - besides AO 05, the gurl have been sittin' up in her room eating cheeseburgers. gurl, u represent Mcdonalds don't mean u gotta eat it more than u train.
Venus - played like shit much of the year up until Wimby, I sense fashion is still more important to her.
Justine - great clay season, but crashed out at Wimby n went into hiding mode. She knew Serena was going to be there at Wimby, so she wanted to leave early before she runs into Serena, what she didn't expect was Serena wasn't going to let her off easy, so Serena followed Justine all the way to the airport and never looked back.
Kimmie - sure she's won a few big tittles this year, but the gurl needs to take a class called "I Can Win A Grand Slam Tittle Before I Retire"
Amelie - Kimmie's a bit lonely, she needs a classmate for her class, why don't u join her Amelie, but before u can take that course, there's a prerequisite course that u have to take called "How To Perform CPR In Case Of Choking".

Portobello
Aug 18th, 2005, 10:02 AM
The #1 ranking hasn't been as huge as it was suppose to be eversince Hingis held it for so long without winning a grand slam. Right now, there's no one that deserves the #1, but someone's gotta be the "bad guy" and take it, might as well be Sharapova

Lindsay - slamless #1 for so long, she's got many peepz to thank for helping her hold on to that #1 for awhile this year.
Maria - too much hype around that grunt, but i won't hate her enuff to shoot her, I'll just shoot the commentator who said she's "the next Graf".
Serena - besides AO 05, the gurl have been sittin' up in her room eating cheeseburgers. gurl, u represent Mcdonalds don't mean u gotta eat it more than u train.
Venus - played like shit much of the year up until Wimby, I sense fashion is still more important to her.
Justine - great clay season, but crashed out at Wimby n went into hiding mode. She knew Serena was going to be there at Wimby, so she wanted to leave early before she runs into Serena, what she didn't expect was Serena wasn't going to let her off easy, so Serena followed Justine all the way to the airport and never looked back.
Kimmie - sure she's won a few big tittles this year, but the gurl needs to take a class called "I Can Win A Grand Slam Tittle Before I Retire"
Amelie - Kimmie's a bit lonely, she needs a classmate for her class, why don't u join her Amelie, but before u can take that course, there's a prerequisite course that u have to take called "How To Perform CPR In Case Of Choking".
seem like every player've never been good enough for yu :lol: :lol: :lol:

Ceecor
Aug 18th, 2005, 10:05 AM
i think 'tennisation' may have been playing people with that one...
trying for the hook,line,sinker,tide charts and copy of angler monthly

WIMBLY2004
Aug 18th, 2005, 10:29 AM
The #1 ranking hasn't been as huge as it was suppose to be eversince Hingis held it for so long without winning a grand slam. Right now, there's no one that deserves the #1, but someone's gotta be the "bad guy" and take it, might as well be Sharapova

Lindsay - slamless #1 for so long, she's got many peepz to thank for helping her hold on to that #1 for awhile this year.
Maria - too much hype around that grunt, but i won't hate her enuff to shoot her, I'll just shoot the commentator who said she's "the next Graf".
Serena - besides AO 05, the gurl have been sittin' up in her room eating cheeseburgers. gurl, u represent Mcdonalds don't mean u gotta eat it more than u train.
Venus - played like shit much of the year up until Wimby, I sense fashion is still more important to her.
Justine - great clay season, but crashed out at Wimby n went into hiding mode. She knew Serena was going to be there at Wimby, so she wanted to leave early before she runs into Serena, what she didn't expect was Serena wasn't going to let her off easy, so Serena followed Justine all the way to the airport and never looked back.
Kimmie - sure she's won a few big tittles this year, but the gurl needs to take a class called "I Can Win A Grand Slam Tittle Before I Retire"
Amelie - Kimmie's a bit lonely, she needs a classmate for her class, why don't u join her Amelie, but before u can take that course, there's a prerequisite course that u have to take called "How To Perform CPR In Case Of Choking".

:lol: :lol: :worship:

kammgretel
Aug 18th, 2005, 10:39 AM
I believe that we the fans do not have the right to hate a player who comes to the number one, there is competition between the players, but they are always respecting in the court, many lost the big opportunities to win a tournament, nevertheless they never hate thier rivals.

This is Tennis, in a tournament only a Champion goes out, the others will have thier opportunities of course.

I don't find any reason and why to attack a player who is going to reach that all the players want.

Maybe we the fans are jealous a little of the victory of other fans's player, but always we have to congratulate them, because we are not who to obtain either the trophy or the money, this is my opinion.

Chrissie-fan
Aug 18th, 2005, 01:44 PM
It's true that in history people will just say - Maria won the YEC and Wimbledon. But the fact that her opponent was winning until she could barely swing takes the glow off it a little.


It would only take the glow of a if Serena's injury had been the result of Sharapova walking over to Serena's side of the court and hitting her with a crow bar or something. Besides,you don't win a slam or a YEC by just winning the final. It's the result of playing great tennis against a variety of opponents. :smoke:

Chrissie-fan
Aug 18th, 2005, 01:49 PM
I can't believe the gall of some people, attacking Sharapova of profiting from others' injuries when that is the ONLY REASON Davenport has seen any time in the top 3 at all over the past year.

Besides,what did they expect Sharapova to do? "Sorry,my opponent is injured,I don't want this YEC title." :rolleyes: :smoke:

!!!--Duiz™--!!!
Aug 18th, 2005, 03:07 PM
everyone can have a bad day in which one losses 6-0 6-0... don't be such a hater Volcana...