PDA

View Full Version : 2005 GS Winners Did Not Advance Beyond QF of 3 Other GS (besides the one they won)


pierce0415
Oct 25th, 2005, 08:54 PM
This is probably a new record :scared:

AO Champ Serena
FO: DNP
W: 3R
USO: 4R

FO Champ Justine
AO: DNP
W: 1R
USO: 4R

W Champ Venus
AO: 4R
FO: 3R
USO: QF

USO Champ Kim
AO: DNP
FO: 4R
W: 4R

pierce0415
Oct 25th, 2005, 08:55 PM
Masha, Lindsay and Mary were much more consistent in GS. I hope they sweep the 2006 GS :D

le bon vivant
Oct 25th, 2005, 08:56 PM
And only Venus made a quarterfinal.

isn't that sad? :lol: :lol:

Pengttaya
Oct 25th, 2005, 08:56 PM
Is that because there is more depth? Or is it because of basic unhealthiness/illness/injury etc

crazyroberto6767
Oct 25th, 2005, 08:57 PM
I think last year was the same situation :lol:

pierce0415
Oct 25th, 2005, 09:03 PM
I think last year was the same situation :lol:

I think you are right :tape: although it is to be expected when first time Russian winners won 3 GS and Justine was sick after AO ;)

Calimero377
Oct 25th, 2005, 09:20 PM
Is that because there is more depth? Or is it because of basic unhealthiness/illness/injury etc


It's because there are no great players.
Same situation as at the end of the 1950ies.
After that we had Court, King, Evert, Navratilova, Graf. Almost 40 years with at least one all-time great who swept the slams.

Today Lindsay Davenport is #1.
Enough said ...

:sad:

Denise4925
Oct 25th, 2005, 09:34 PM
Is that because there is more depth? Or is it because of basic unhealthiness/illness/injury etc
I think was a result of illness/injury or recovery. Just a bad year for that. Hopefully and I know it was said in 2004, in 2006 we can have all the tour healthy and in top form.

VSFan1 aka Joshua L.
Oct 25th, 2005, 09:41 PM
I think it's a testament to the depth in womens tennis, at the same time look at the 4 players - 4 very established women. I also think it's attributed to injuries. Look at the DNPs and the early round exits. Those are abnormal.

Paneru
Oct 25th, 2005, 10:08 PM
Big Whoopy Deal! :lol:

Venus, Kim, Justine,
& Serena all have Slams
this year and the others don't! :cool:

KoOlMaNsEaN
Oct 25th, 2005, 10:43 PM
I guess the key is peaking at the right time and only one time ;)

TomTennis
Oct 25th, 2005, 11:22 PM
Big Whoopy Deal! :lol:

Venus, Kim, Justine,
& Serena all have Slams
this year and the others don't! :cool:

excatly.

what is everyone whining about in here. You should be thankful that the slams were good this year, as this is where all the action was for 2005. The rest of the year (outside the slams) sucked Big time!

VeraNuVirgosFan
Oct 26th, 2005, 02:27 AM
That's very interesting!

Buitenzorg
Oct 26th, 2005, 02:36 AM
nice pick up :kiss:

xan
Oct 26th, 2005, 02:43 AM
Masha, Lindsay and Mary were much more consistent in GS. I hope they sweep the 2006 GS :D

Good point. It's certainly possible. :lick:

Zauber
Oct 26th, 2005, 04:04 AM
The quality of the top 10 players this year was really low.
The quality of the top 5 defenitly has not improved.
From 50-100 the field has improved. But not the top.
more quality at the bottom.
more quantity at the top.

switz
Oct 26th, 2005, 04:09 AM
it only happened because Clijsters was coming back. She got unluckly drawing Lindsay at Wimbledon. Although she got lucky drawing Lindsay at RG but choked big time.

xin_hui
Oct 26th, 2005, 04:13 AM
ok, let's put it this way.

serena
Wimby--lost to craybas : ok, this is a bad loss
USO--lost to venus : nothing wrong

justine
wimby--lost to daniilidou : going by rankings, yes, a bad loss. but abilities on grass? not really
USO--lost to mary : not a bad loss

venus
AO--lost to alicia : not a bad loss
RG--lost to sesil: ok, quite bad
USO--lost to kim: nothing wrong

kim
RG--lost to lindsay : nothing wrong (ok, maybe it should be a little worse considering it's clay)
wimby--lost to lindsay : nothing wrong


so actually, the only bad losses the players have are to craybas and possibly daniilidou and sesil. otherwise, they didnt totally lose to players way below them

Sir Stefwhit
Oct 26th, 2005, 07:00 AM
Masha, Lindsay and Mary were much more consistent in GS. I hope they sweep the 2006 GS :D
You can even add my girl Nadia to the list. She had two QFs and one SF. Consistency sure is great, but it's no substitute for winning. I wouldn't be the least bit happy with a sweep of the players you've mentioned. But they will definitely be the top contenders alongside the Big 4. I for one, am hoping for at least one slam a year for both Serena and Kim. If Kim and Serena can't be multiple slam winners next year I'll be more than content if they pull off just one... AGAIN!

terjw
Oct 26th, 2005, 07:51 AM
I'm very proud of what Kim achieved in the GS this year. She came back from injury. Was injured at RG - and only played there to get a few matches under her belt - no wonder she "choked" as someone put it. Got a bad draw at Wimbledon against Lindsay and won the USO - she's the only player in which the trend has been better and better.

monicain
Oct 26th, 2005, 08:58 AM
I'm quite satisfied with 2005 GS champions...they deserved what they achieved. Maybe switch Kim with Oz and Serena with the US...and the 4 biggest names get what they should under their belt :)Hope for the same thing in ATP...Safin Nadal Federer and Roddick...not gonna happen anyway :(

jonny84
Oct 26th, 2005, 09:28 AM
I think last year was the same situation :lol:

OK, in 2004 :

Justine Henin Hardenne

Australian Open WON
French Open 2R (lost to Garbin, but did have the strains of the virus)
Wimbledon Did not play
US Open 4R (lost to Nadia Petrova, tired from Olympics too)

Anastasia Myskina

Australian Open Reaced the QF (lost to Kim, but did lead in second set 4-0 and lost it 7-6)
French Open WON
Wimbledon 3R (lost to Fraizer; was second seed in GS for first time too, so bad loss)
US Open 2R (lost to Qualifier Chakvetadze in straight sets, probably lack of confidence after losing to JHH at Olympics after 5-0 in final set)

Maria Sharapova

Australian Open 3R (lost to Myskina)
French Open QF (lost to Suarez, bad not bad as she is not the best on clay)
Wimbledon WON
US Open 3R (lost to Mary Pierce)

Svetlana Kuznetsova

Australian Open 3R (lost to eventual winner Justine Henin Hardenne!)
French Open 4R (lost 8-6 in final set to Myskina, eventual champion, and held a match-point too!)
Wimbledon 1R (lost to qualifier Razzano, but won Eastbourne the day earlier,so should have been in-form)
US Open WON

So 2004 not quite the same as 2005 - but still Grand Slam winners were not really the consistent this year either. Justine Henin Hardenne was illness - Myskina crumbled under the pressure of not wanting to be a one-slam winner; probably the same as Sharapova at the US Open, while Kuznetsova was unlucky with her draws!

crazillo
Sep 6th, 2011, 02:32 PM
Haha we had something like that in 2005. :p Albeit there were more injuries back then.

alex.2812
Sep 6th, 2011, 04:43 PM
From what I remember, 2006 was a solid year for slam winners... 2007 wasn't bad either...
2008 started to be quite messy with Sharapova having bad losses after AO, Ivanovic had the worst losses after the FO... Williamses had acceptable results....
2009 Serena had a consistent year but Kuznetsova wasn't so amazing besides FO and Clijsters only played US.
2010 Serena was good. Schiavone could have been worst and Clijsters was pretty average.
2011 Li Na started well but collapsed after winning the FO. Clijsters couldn't play after AO. Kvitova had decent results except for US.

killerqueen
Sep 6th, 2011, 05:46 PM
It's funny reading threads from yesteryear, and seeing people complain about the same old things that many complain about today - "there's no outstanding players" "there's no strength in depth" yadda yadda yadda. :p