PDA

View Full Version : The "new" Amélie?


turt
Mar 5th, 2006, 08:10 AM
Okay, I think that with 6 tournaments played this year, we can begin to discuss Amélie's "renewal"...

Out of six tournaments played, she has lost to Ivanovic, Kuznetsova and Petrova, none of these players having had a tremendous 2006 besides their win against Amélie...

Now okay she's won 3 tournaments including a slam, but who has she beaten? Twice an injured Kim, an ill Justine and a slumping Mary... Sure she beat Patty and Nadia, but top players shoud beat them anyway!

So really, to me there's nothing like "new mentality" for Amélie. It looks like she's still the same old player, always there but losing to opponents she shouldn't lose to.

I think the only Tier I or above she could maybe win this year is Rome, because of the depleted field, but I don't expect her to do that well this year from now on. She'll probably win some Tier II as she usually does, but nothing stellar. Amélie isn't dominating the tour, she was just on a good streak and had some luck with the draw and her opponents for 3 tournaments, the same way she was on a good streak at the YEC.

Don't expect too much of her, really. I'm not a hater btw, I was just surprised by all the fuss about Amélie this year, although nothing has changed really, except that now she's not anymore the best player not having a slam under her belt.

So Disrespectful
Mar 5th, 2006, 08:22 AM
I agree. But it has to be a big step for her to win the YEC and the Australian Open. I'm sure it won't be her last slam.

turt
Mar 5th, 2006, 08:33 AM
Well yeah, don't get me wrong, I still think she really belongs to top 5 and she's a top player, but she has been there for a while now, so it's not like it's something new... She will definitely not win all grand slams (like I've read recently), maybe she can win another slam but it doesn't depend exclusively on her...

Justine Fan
Mar 5th, 2006, 08:52 AM
Sorry but I don't agree with you on this!

Amelie is playing with much more confidence and you can tell by the shots she's making and coming up with. Her backhand was great before this new found confidence, but now it's just amazing and the positioning of it ... :eek:

She has played a lot of tournaments and this loss yesterday was down to three reasons:

1. Nadia played out of her mind and she has a new found confidence and a new coach; and

2. Amelie has played far too many tournaments and was just that little bit tired; and

3. The match against Hingis took a certain amount of energy out of her!

I know you are not bashing her and you are just expressing your opinion but you have to look at it objectively and try to understand the reasons why.

So Disrespectful
Mar 5th, 2006, 08:58 AM
Well, if you want my honest opinion, she's like a stand in for when the top players are out of the game. She's an awesome player and all, but she can't be expected to consistently beat players like Clijsters, JHH and Davenport.

All of her "great" acheivments have practically been handed to her. Thinking back to when she first made number 1, when she won the YEC and when she took out the Aus Open- each time she was conveniently lucky.

vutt
Mar 5th, 2006, 08:59 AM
Out of six tournaments played, she has lost to Ivanovic, Kuznetsova and Petrova, none of these players having had a tremendous 2006 besides their win against Amélie...


Well Petrova won Tier II. Ivanovic and Sveta haven't had even something close to that. Also Nadia went deep in AO.

vertigo
Mar 5th, 2006, 09:10 AM
I also totally disagree. It's the way she's playing tournaments that demonstrates the arrival of the "new Amelie". Her play has been sensational of late. Her backhand has become a far greater, and more spectacular shot than it has ever been - and it has always been something special ;) Her serve has vastly improved. Her confident game is a pleasure to watch. I think she's going to keep on playing wonderfully this year. And keep on racking up those titles..... :D :p

ALLEZ!

fifiricci
Mar 5th, 2006, 09:14 AM
I think you've made a very harsh judgment, although I'm not surprised, coming from you. I just hope that Amerlie's results in the months to come will prove you wrong, so that an obliging Amelie fan can dig this out and rub your nose in it ;)

Also, not everyone will agree with your judgments about Kim and Justine being "injured" and "ill" respectively. Kim spent the whole of the Antwerp tournament, it seems to me, saying that she wasn't injured. And as for Justine being "ill" with a "stomach ulcer", well I don't want to bring that old chestnut up again ;)

spencercarlos
Mar 5th, 2006, 09:17 AM
Okay, I think that with 6 tournaments played this year, we can begin to discuss Amélie's "renewal"...

Out of six tournaments played, she has lost to Ivanovic, Kuznetsova and Petrova, none of these players having had a tremendous 2006 besides their win against Amélie...

Now okay she's won 3 tournaments including a slam, but who has she beaten? Twice an injured Kim, an ill Justine and a slumping Mary... Sure she beat Patty and Nadia, but top players shoud beat them anyway!

So really, to me there's nothing like "new mentality" for Amélie. It looks like she's still the same old player, always there but losing to opponents she shouldn't lose to.

I think the only Tier I or above she could maybe win this year is Rome, because of the depleted field, but I don't expect her to do that well this year from now on. She'll probably win some Tier II as she usually does, but nothing stellar. Amélie isn't dominating the tour, she was just on a good streak and had some luck with the draw and her opponents for 3 tournaments, the same way she was on a good streak at the YEC.

Don't expect too much of her, really. I'm not a hater btw, I was just surprised by all the fuss about Amélie this year, although nothing has changed really, except that now she's not anymore the best player not having a slam under her belt.
What a ridiculous post.
Kim injured at Antwerp? :lol:
Mary slumping? since when? How come she is slumping when she is reaching a final? :retard:
And no she is not the same player, she is enjoying her best 4 months of her life, from November to early March she has won 5 titles, Masters, a Grand Slam, RU of another event (Doha). Last year she had her best end of a season for her and this year she has had her best start of a season, sure this not a Serena´s like dominance, or Steffi Graf, but she is at her peak right now.

améliemomo
Mar 5th, 2006, 09:45 AM
Sorry but I don't agree with you on this!

Amelie is playing with much more confidence and you can tell by the shots she's making and coming up with. Her backhand was great before this new found confidence, but now it's just amazing and the positioning of it ... :eek:

She has played a lot of tournaments and this loss yesterday was down to three reasons:

1. Nadia played out of her mind and she has a new found confidence and a new coach; and

2. Amelie has played far too many tournaments and was just that little bit tired; and

3. The match against Hingis took a certain amount of energy out of her!

I know you are not bashing her and you are just expressing your opinion but you have to look at it objectively and try to understand the reasons why.

totally agree with you :)

perhaps the poster of this thread wants to convince himself that amélie is like she was some times ago,you know a good player but not able to get through against big players.But if you are a good observator you should have noticed that she IS different NOW.She didnt win the doha finale so what??she just has the right to not play good and yes be beaten by a better opponent on this particular day.She played a lot , 7 weeks of competition and won 4 tournaments.She has to calm down and get some rest because the season is long,great events to come Miami(semi to defend)and especially the fed cup,roland garros,the clay tour so she will need all her energie to make another great things.

Its very quite obvious that amélie is different,her game is different and when she is on her "top health" physique she can be very impressive and yes beat any player.Thats my opinion.

Jenny.C.Fan
Mar 5th, 2006, 09:49 AM
totally agree with you :)

perhaps the poster of this thread wants to convince himself that amélie is like she was some times ago,you know a good player but not able to get through against big players.But if you are a good observator you should have noticed that she IS different NOW.She didnt win the doha finale so what??she just has the right to not play good and yes be beaten by a better opponent on this particular day.She played a lot , 7 weeks of competition and won 4 tournaments.She has to calm down and get some rest because the season is long,great events to come Miami(semi to defend)and especially the fed cup,roland garros,the clay tour so she will need all her energie to make another great things.

Its very quite obvious that amélie is different,her game is different and when she is on her "top health" physique she can be very impressive and yes beat any player.Thats my opinion.

:yeah:

MLF
Mar 5th, 2006, 09:54 AM
Well, if you want my honest opinion, she's like a stand in for when the top players are out of the game.

Whilst this is perhaps a tad too harsh, I do tend to agree with it.

However, just like anyone else Amelie can only be expected to beat those who are on the other side of the net, it's not her problem if the other players are injured, unfit or ill or not playing at their best level. When you look at her losses this year, all have been to players who can hit through her defense - Ivanovic, Kuznetsova & Petrova and it does make you wonder if she would be able to cope if she had to face Davenport or fully fit & committed Williams sisters at the moment.

améliemomo
Mar 5th, 2006, 10:07 AM
Whilst this is perhaps a tad too harsh, I do tend to agree with it.

However, just like anyone else Amelie can only be expected to beat those who are on the other side of the net, it's not her problem if the other players are injured, unfit or ill or not playing at their best level. When you look at her losses this year, all have been to players who can hit through her defense - Ivanovic, Kuznetsova & Petrova and it does make you wonder if she would be able to cope if she had to face Davenport or fully fit & committed Williams sisters at the moment.

well I think we can turn it differently too.A very fit amélie should compete with any of the top player,yesterday against petrova or even against kuznetsova its quite obvious that she wasnt at her best with her physique,she was slow and didnt make good choices tacticly.So I think the best illustration will be at Miami,all the tops will be there,fit and with a rested amélie.Dont think that it will be the same match as yesterday if she has to meet nadia again but we'll see. :)

Para
Mar 5th, 2006, 10:24 AM
IMO the "new" Amélie can be seen in the way she plays, not necessarily in the results. Since YEC she hasn't had any problems closing out sets and matches, and she does not start slow like she once use to do. Her improved confidence can be seen in her play.

Justine Fan
Mar 5th, 2006, 10:37 AM
I think you've made a very harsh judgment, although I'm not surprised, coming from you. I just hope that Amerlie's results in the months to come will prove you wrong, so that an obliging Amelie fan can dig this out and rub your nose in it ;)

Also, not everyone will agree with your judgments about Kim and Justine being "injured" and "ill" respectively. Kim spent the whole of the Antwerp tournament, it seems to me, saying that she wasn't injured. And as for Justine being "ill" with a "stomach ulcer", well I don't want to bring that old chestnut up again ;)

Nice little dig there fifi! You just can't stop can you? :devil:

Do you want me to start with my little digs about your fave? :tape: Believe me, I can write about 10 pages! I'm not into that because I don't like bashing players - I only do it when I get provoked! :devil:

Give it a rest eh fifi - you are only showing yourself up!

jaex
Mar 5th, 2006, 10:59 AM
Ofcourse the poster who started this thread is not a hater like he/she said so probably just a case of sourgrape or jealousy that Amelie get so much positive feedback with her aussie wins and not so much for Justine. Ofcourse every opportuinity to bring down Amelie and defending your favourite arise, surely you wont miss the chance to bring it to our attention.

Sam L
Mar 5th, 2006, 11:20 AM
Okay, I think that with 6 tournaments played this year, we can begin to discuss Amélie's "renewal"...

Out of six tournaments played, she has lost to Ivanovic, Kuznetsova and Petrova, none of these players having had a tremendous 2006 besides their win against Amélie...

Now okay she's won 3 tournaments including a slam, but who has she beaten? Twice an injured Kim, an ill Justine and a slumping Mary... Sure she beat Patty and Nadia, but top players shoud beat them anyway!

So really, to me there's nothing like "new mentality" for Amélie. It looks like she's still the same old player, always there but losing to opponents she shouldn't lose to.

I think the only Tier I or above she could maybe win this year is Rome, because of the depleted field, but I don't expect her to do that well this year from now on. She'll probably win some Tier II as she usually does, but nothing stellar. Amélie isn't dominating the tour, she was just on a good streak and had some luck with the draw and her opponents for 3 tournaments, the same way she was on a good streak at the YEC.

Don't expect too much of her, really. I'm not a hater btw, I was just surprised by all the fuss about Amélie this year, although nothing has changed really, except that now she's not anymore the best player not having a slam under her belt.
I agree. I still think she's lacking a lot of mental strength and will always be. I'm sure on the practise court she's the amongst the best ever but when executing in tense match situations, it's all gone.

griffin
Mar 5th, 2006, 12:47 PM
I agree. I still think she's lacking a lot of mental strength and will always be. I'm sure on the practise court she's the amongst the best ever but when executing in tense match situations, it's all gone.

Oh come on, Sam. Can't some of you see anything BESIDES the losses? Were you not following tennis last fall when she bounced back from (what was for her) a devastating loss in Fed Cup and two brutal first-round losses to win Philly and the YEC?

There were 2 differences between Amelie's run in LA and Kim's first Slam win, by the way: Amelie had to play Kim instead of Venus, and the Mary Pierce that showed up for the YEC final actually put up a fight. But I don't hear too many people saying Kim's US Open win doesn't prove anything. I don't hear people saying there's an asterisk on Kim's slam because the person she played in the final didn't really challenge her (well, except for a few extremists who are rightly put down as whackos)

The other amazing this that happened at Oz this year was that a lot of Amelie's matches actually got televised in the US, and I got to watch them. And the Amelie Mauresmo I saw on court was a lot more focused than anything I'd seen from her before. IMO, anyone who can watch her play and not see the difference, is making some very deliberate choices about what not to see.


(OT - Marriage in Mass, the Sox won a world series, Amelie won a Slam AND they're showing her matches in the US? I hardly know what to do with myself these days. :lol: )

Marshmallow
Mar 5th, 2006, 01:08 PM
A comments on Amelies Losses:

Ivanovic was Mauresmo's first match.. her game wasn't ready. Yes Justine was, but she made it no secret that she had been training since i think December first. At this time, we can assume Amelie was still sipping in fine wines, and basking in the orgasmic after glow of winning the YEC - her first major title.

Kusnetsova - Will, playing 3 weeks straight, winning her last two torunaments, cold you no expect her to be a little tired, a little out of focus. She IS Human.

Petrova - Hingis match demanded her physical and mental all. Hingis is playing very well and i personally feel can be called a top player. Just look at who she has beaten and pushed.

I can't take away from Amelie's 3 opponents, they clearly played very well, but i'm still not convinced that at her best, when fully focused Ameie cannot beat these people. As hard as people are trying, you can't take away from Amelies success. I hope it continues.

Marshmallow
Mar 5th, 2006, 01:10 PM
Sorry but I don't agree with you on this!

Amelie is playing with much more confidence and you can tell by the shots she's making and coming up with. Her backhand was great before this new found confidence, but now it's just amazing and the positioning of it ... :eek:

She has played a lot of tournaments and this loss yesterday was down to three reasons:

1. Nadia played out of her mind and she has a new found confidence and a new coach; and

2. Amelie has played far too many tournaments and was just that little bit tired; and

3. The match against Hingis took a certain amount of energy out of her!

I know you are not bashing her and you are just expressing your opinion but you have to look at it objectively and try to understand the reasons why.

*Faints*

Are pigs flying? A sensible post from Justine Fan? ... now i've seen everything... *cough* ..... *DIES*

Bumsby
Mar 5th, 2006, 01:15 PM
I would like to say that the "new" Amélie does not only have a new, fresh mental approach in big matches, but has significantly improved technically after the Fed Cup claque in September, especially on the forehand side.

She is more consistent, makes very few errors;
She is more precise, hits closer to the lines;
She has a new, much more reliable forehand down the line;
She has a new, more angled crosscourt forehand;
She has a more various backhand, both pace and angle-wise;
She hits longer and deeper, making fewer short and middle-of-the-court shots;
She learned how to mix baseline and net game better;
She learned she doesn't need to "overperform" and can just play her regular, accurate game to win even in big matches;
She has learned to be more "detached" in big events and doesn't get emotionally involved as she used to, something that has allowed her to play more focused and relaxed.
She's improved even physically! As if she wasn't the fittest player on tour already...

They all were slight adjustments, but if you put them all together...they have made a big difference, so far, in terms of results.


EDIT: I forgot to mention, she hits a somehow flatter forehand (esp. since Filderstadt 2005) and she takes more risks on the return, somehow scoring more winning returns. :)

vettipooh
Mar 5th, 2006, 01:29 PM
. As hard as people are trying, you can't take away from Amelies success. I hope it continues.

:yeah: I hope so too. It's such a shame that some people can never give credit, where credit is due!!! With Momo, it's damn if she does, and damn if she don't.:mad:

timafi
Mar 5th, 2006, 04:23 PM
:yeah: I hope so too. It's such a shame that some people can never give credit, where credit is due!!! With Momo, it's damn if she does, and damn if she don't.:mad:
Amen mate :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:

Mightymirza
Mar 5th, 2006, 04:41 PM
Well shes one a YEC and a grand slam..And she seems to be having more fun on court now..So her shots are flowing even better..I think its enough signs of a 'new' Amelie..(BTW am a Justine fan too... :angel: :angel: )

MinnyGophers
Mar 5th, 2006, 04:52 PM
Well, if you want my honest opinion, she's like a stand in for when the top players are out of the game. She's an awesome player and all, but she can't be expected to consistently beat players like Clijsters, JHH and Davenport.

All of her "great" acheivments have practically been handed to her. Thinking back to when she first made number 1, when she won the YEC and when she took out the Aus Open- each time she was conveniently lucky.

Yes, but again who consistently beat those players? No one. They ALL lose to each other. The way I've seen it, the top players beat and lose to each other all the time. Nothing annoys me more than people who keep on bringing back the "WS era of domination" or the "Belgian era"... the point is, those eras do not exist anymore, and there wont be domination until some extremely gifted kid ala Federer shows up on the women's side. The top is far too balanced right now for having someone beating everyone else consistently.
No one has dominated the tour for a while, and I dont think anyone is going to dominate anytime soon either.

Yasmine
Mar 5th, 2006, 05:08 PM
and this comes from a Kim fan :rolleyes:

turt
Mar 5th, 2006, 05:09 PM
I would beg to differ a bit with you, MinnyGophers...
Kim won 9 tournaments last year, beginning her season in March... She also had won 9 two years before (was injured most of 2004). Justine won 4 out of the last 12 slams and was a finalist in the last one, only to withdraw with illness. She also won 7 out of her last 10 Tier I.

I think you can see a trend of "Belgian domination", especially when they are healthy enough to play, can't you? Sure, it doesn't come close to the Williams sisters domination a few years ago, but it sure is domination...

MinnyGophers
Mar 5th, 2006, 06:03 PM
I would beg to differ a bit with you, MinnyGophers...
Kim won 9 tournaments last year, beginning her season in March... She also had won 9 two years before (was injured most of 2004). Justine won 4 out of the last 12 slams and was a finalist in the last one, only to withdraw with illness. She also won 7 out of her last 10 Tier I.

I think you can see a trend of "Belgian domination", especially when they are healthy enough to play, can't you? Sure, it doesn't come close to the Williams sisters domination a few years ago, but it sure is domination...

What I'm saying is that there is not going to be a complete utter domination anymore. Kim is about to retire and is nagged by injuries, and as for Justine, yes, if healthy enough she is I would think, even as a Momo fan, THE player to beat. But she IS beatable. All the elite players can beat her, just as much as she can beat all the other elite players. That's what I mean by no domination. It's not the same thing as during the Steffi Graf era, or Monica Seles era, or even Williams era (more particularly Serena's) where they were nearly undefeated, and most people wouldnt even think of challenging them.

There are too many IFs to consider with Davenport, Sharapova, the WS (? that's BIG IF), Capriati, and the other top players. Too many people love to use the word IF, IF Davenport was healthy/younger/more fit, IF Sharapova would learn to not only bash the ball, IF Kim and Justine were healthy, IF Jennifer was here, IF the Williams sisters were only focusing on tennis, IF Alexandra Stevenson was elite worthy (okay just kidding on that one).. but you see the point.

Momo IS the only player playing great right now, there are no IF and don't about it. It just irks me how some people just are way too quick on prophetizing the future based on the past.

DragonFlame
Mar 5th, 2006, 06:05 PM
Yes, but again who consistently beat those players? No one. They ALL lose to each other. The way I've seen it, the top players beat and lose to each other all the time. Nothing annoys me more than people who keep on bringing back the "WS era of domination" or the "Belgian era"... the point is, those eras do not exist anymore, and there wont be domination until some extremely gifted kid ala Federer shows up on the women's side. The top is far too balanced right now for having someone beating everyone else consistently.
No one has dominated the tour for a while, and I dont think anyone is going to dominate anytime soon either.

there is one who consistently beats those players when healthy, it's justine. just look back untill 2003 and you'll see hardly anyone has beaten her when she's healthy:) she didnt play many tournies in the last years but when she's playing she's winning.
you'll see it again soon enough, injury may have stopped her in melbourne but she'll strike back. dubai was just a little preview :angel:

sapir1434
Mar 5th, 2006, 06:11 PM
:yeah: I hope so too. It's such a shame that some people can never give credit, where credit is due!!! With Momo, it's damn if she does, and damn if she don't.:mad:
:worship:
:rolleyes: @ this thread

K.U.C.W-R.V
Mar 5th, 2006, 06:12 PM
I stand somewhere in the middle.

I think Amelie is a wonderful talent. Her victories at YEC & AO have solidified her mental state & she is more often than not, playing excellent, self-assured tennis.

However, I don't think shes suddenly the best player on tour. In my eyes that accolade still rests with Kim or Justine.

turt
Mar 5th, 2006, 06:21 PM
there is one who consistently beats those players when healthy, it's justine. just look back untill 2003 and you'll see hardly anyone has beaten her when she's healthy:) she didnt play many tournies in the last years but when she's playing she's winning.
you'll see it again soon enough, injury may have stopped her in melbourne but she'll strike back. dubai was just a little preview :angel:
Yeah... I would say only Kuznetsova in Doha 2004 has beaten a healthy Justine since the beginning of 2004. Meanwhile she has won 2 slams, the Olympics, 3 Tier I, 5 Tier II, and has made a few finals including the last GS.

MinnyGophers
Mar 5th, 2006, 06:51 PM
there is one who consistently beats those players when healthy, it's justine. just look back untill 2003 and you'll see hardly anyone has beaten her when she's healthy:) she didnt play many tournies in the last years but when she's playing she's winning.
you'll see it again soon enough, injury may have stopped her in melbourne but she'll strike back. dubai was just a little preview :angel:

that's when she is healthy though. ;)

turt
Mar 5th, 2006, 06:57 PM
that's when she is healthy though. ;)
when but not if :lol:

fammmmedspin
Mar 5th, 2006, 07:42 PM
Of course she has changed. At times in the past she could collapse to a ball girl on the other side if the court. Now she is toughing out wins. She's not hitting errors except under a lot of pressure. The point about losing to big hard hitters in 2006 is whether she can take the pressure of someone coming at her or someone staying with her without hitting UE - thats why we need to see her against a fit Serena, Lindsay, Kim, Justine or a consistent Myskina, an error free Martina, a consistent Dementieva or a non-wornout Mary.

PLP
Mar 5th, 2006, 08:42 PM
I think that she is a new player to an extent...plus she is out there PLAYING unlike many of the other 'top' players. Her backhand has become far more consistent and she is extremely mentally strong at the moment. I think the Hingis match, though error filled from Martina, took a huge toll on her mentally as well as physically and Nadia played fantastic stuff...I don't know if she will win another grandslam this year though, the tour is so deep...I can see her winning Wimbledon or the US within the next few years, P

SAEKeithSerena
Mar 5th, 2006, 08:55 PM
great thread:) watch out for her in '06, baby:)

flyingmachine
Mar 5th, 2006, 09:06 PM
Sorry but I don't agree with you on this!

Amelie is playing with much more confidence and you can tell by the shots she's making and coming up with. Her backhand was great before this new found confidence, but now it's just amazing and the positioning of it ... :eek:

She has played a lot of tournaments and this loss yesterday was down to three reasons:

1. Nadia played out of her mind and she has a new found confidence and a new coach; and

2. Amelie has played far too many tournaments and was just that little bit tired; and

3. The match against Hingis took a certain amount of energy out of her!

I know you are not bashing her and you are just expressing your opinion but you have to look at it objectively and try to understand the reasons why.
Great analysis by a fellow Justine fan. :yeah: You are very right about Amelie's confidence especially since the end of last year. Also I think she also improve her forehand since this time last year. I don't think she is the best at the moment I have give that to Justine. However, she is very close to become that.

saint
Mar 5th, 2006, 09:07 PM
All I can say is, time will tell and her results for the rest of this year will be telling, we're only around the corner from Miami which has a good field, if she beats Davenpoty, JHH or Kim if she's back than that will be unequivocal evidence that hse has the right to be no1. I think regardless of how she won the AO it must give her confidence. She beat Pierce fair and square in Paris and Clijsters in Antwerp, a year ago, in my opinion she may not have come through those matches. I don't think we are going to see Mauresmo quietly get beaten by other players in the top five, she'll take her fair share of tropheys. The concept i always struggle with is comments baout her being beaten by 'top players' she is one of the top players and they all lose to eachother throughout the season, i think a contnued focus on her mental strengths is not relevant anymore. she's made the breakthrough, i think the challenge now is who can knock her off the no 1 spot and when, imo she'ss be there for several months.

Bumsby
Mar 5th, 2006, 09:18 PM
i think the challenge now is who can knock her off the no 1 spot and when, imo she'ss be there for several months.
:yeah: that seems a more sensible thing to discuss ;) :p

Bumsby
Mar 5th, 2006, 09:30 PM
Too many people love to use the word IF, IF Davenport was healthy/younger/more fit, IF Sharapova would learn to not only bash the ball, IF Kim and Justine were healthy, IF Jennifer was here, IF the Williams sisters were only focusing on tennis, IF Alexandra Stevenson was elite worthy (okay just kidding on that one)
Exactly my thoughts...

I saw a demonstration of wheelchair tennis in Antwerp, there was this girl who had a huge backhand.... I bet IF she didn't need to be on a wheelchair she'd double bagel our Momo, right? :tape: :lol:

Some people have to understand that being standing and fully fit is part of the reality of the sport, that's how it's been played for more than a century... no ifs, buts, table discussions nor computer simulations: just two REAL human beings battling it out on a REAL court.

That's how different Playstation tennis is from real-life tennis. I've always thought this board was about discussing the latter, while many posters here seem to be more interested in virtual tennis.

MinnyGophers
Mar 5th, 2006, 11:18 PM
when but not if :lol:

there's IF she can stay healthy enough ;)

MinnyGophers
Mar 5th, 2006, 11:21 PM
Of course she has changed. At times in the past she could collapse to a ball girl on the other side if the court. Now she is toughing out wins. She's not hitting errors except under a lot of pressure. The point about losing to big hard hitters in 2006 is whether she can take the pressure of someone coming at her or someone staying with her without hitting UE - thats why we need to see her against a fit Serena, Lindsay, Kim, Justine or a consistent Myskina, an error free Martina, a consistent Dementieva or a non-wornout Mary.

See the problem is that "a fit Serena, Lindsay, Kim, Justine or a consistent Myskina, an error free Martina, a consistent Dementieva or a non-wornout Mary" might just not happen.
We could easily reverse it and say let's look at how "a fit Serena, Lindsay, Kim, Justine or a consistent Myskina, an error free Martina, a consistent Dementieva or a non-wornout Mary will play against a on fire,100%, nonmental Amelie."

I agree it's a good TENIIS debate without player hating going on. Hopefully it'll stay that way :cool:

anlavalle
Mar 6th, 2006, 02:58 AM
Haters would never gave credit to her, so why I have to say make no difference

anlavalle
Mar 6th, 2006, 02:59 AM
haters would never give credit to her, so why I have to say make no difference

Fat Frog
Mar 6th, 2006, 04:26 AM
- each time she was conveniently lucky.


You could say that about every player that ever won anything in any sport. Some people would say you make your own luck..i find it hard to disagree.

Btw isn't that what the rankings are there for. I.e. a player might have a good run of a few tournaments but rankings show a years tennis. Are you saying a player can have a 'lucky' year? How far does 'luck' run before you say its deserved?

DragonFlame
Mar 6th, 2006, 08:17 PM
How far does 'luck' run before you say its deserved?

well, this is off course an interesting discussion.
for me it is:

-beating healthy topplayers in a row to win a grandslam(no retirements by topplayers)
-winning more then 1 slam to prove your slam isn't just going away with the occasions. winning more then 1 shows your not just lucky for sure.


for me that's proving you're one of the best yourself and earned your grandslams.
i won't give any examples to keep the hating 'low' :o.
this is my opinnion off course, everyone to his own. :)

Kimmi
Mar 6th, 2006, 08:26 PM
Life is full of "its", "buts", "ands" and "maybes"....

If I hadn't stopped playing tennis when I was 12 maybe I would have won Wimbledon but I was stupid and quit.

As for my opinion on this - read griffin's post.

Morrissey
Mar 6th, 2006, 08:58 PM
I think Amelie will have to win another major..for people to take her seriously as a contender. I mean..she loses to Petrova a player she had a 4-1 edge before that final. The problem with Amelie is that she doesn't win when she's supposed to. It is a bit dissapointing to see her fail to deliver when it really matters. We have yet to see Amelie win a slam with seven consecutive wins. Until Amelie wins a second major..and can consistently beat the top players..people will call her Australian Open title a fluke...

tard~tard
Mar 6th, 2006, 11:11 PM
I think Amelie will have to win another major..for people to take her seriously as a contender. I mean..she loses to Petrova a player she had a 4-1 edge before that final. The problem with Amelie is that she doesn't win when she's supposed to. It is a bit dissapointing to see her fail to deliver when it really matters. We have yet to see Amelie win a slam with seven consecutive wins. Until Amelie wins a second major..and can consistently beat the top players..people will call her Australian Open title a fluke...

I tend to agree with you Morrissey on that, but would also like to add
that what whe are seeing now, is indeed a "new" Amélie Mauresmo.
She is still refining her game, technical- and tactical wise. Her tactical
game against JHH in the AO final was simply brilliant -- unfortunatily,
because of JHH's illness, there never was a match, so she would've won
that final anyway, even if she'd played her worst game.
Nevertheless, I think if JHH would've been healthy that day, AM would
still have had a 50% chance to beat Henin.

At this moment AM is JHH's biggest threat, the hardest opponent to beat.
So, in terms of players to fear, I truly believe AM is one of them -- especialy
to JHH, whom I still consider as one of the best, if not THE best (if she wasn't
so prone to illness and injuries) female tennisplayer of the world.(atm)

Mentaly wise, there, AM has improved the most. She's a late bloomer in that
area. But once you have found a way to cope with your fears, it's there
to stay. Of course, it needs time to develope further, of course it needs
time to settle down inside as a new found force and of course, she will still
have unexpected losses against players she should normaly beat. It's a
growing proces and things can only get better.

But I do agree with you that AM has still a lot to prove. Her AO title is
indeed a fluke and despite of the history books for the next generations,
we can only consider that title as a win out of luck. (not her fault of course,
just an objective fact, she could've won the semi final and final against Kim
Clijsters and Justine Henin, but that's the most we will ever know; "she could
have won") In terms of GS's, she hasn't proved anything yet, so far, although
I hope she does in the future, she has all the weapons that are needed to
win a GS.

She could've become the new world number 1, by reaching the Dubai final,
she didn't.
She could've become the new world number 1, by winning Doha, she didn't.
She will now become the new world number one, March the 20th, thanks to
Kim Clijsters' injury and withdrawel from IW.

2006 is indeed (so far) Amélie's lucky year (with the Belgians handing out
beautiful presents to her), but good luck isn't everything (it's a lot atm, I
agree), but being the N°2 and within two weeks reaching the N°1 spot, is
especially the result of hard work, consistency and simply being one of the
bests out there. I do believe the new AM is arrived, it's up to her now to
show the non-believers that they are wrong. :D

Barbarela
Mar 7th, 2006, 08:33 AM
Okay, I think that with 6 tournaments played this year, we can begin to discuss Amélie's "renewal"...

Out of six tournaments played, she has lost to Ivanovic, Kuznetsova and Petrova, none of these players having had a tremendous 2006 besides their win against Amélie...

Now okay she's won 3 tournaments including a slam, but who has she beaten? Twice an injured Kim, an ill Justine and a slumping Mary... Sure she beat Patty and Nadia, but top players shoud beat them anyway!

So really, to me there's nothing like "new mentality" for Amélie. It looks like she's still the same old player, always there but losing to opponents she shouldn't lose to.

I think the only Tier I or above she could maybe win this year is Rome, because of the depleted field, but I don't expect her to do that well this year from now on. She'll probably win some Tier II as she usually does, but nothing stellar. Amélie isn't dominating the tour, she was just on a good streak and had some luck with the draw and her opponents for 3 tournaments, the same way she was on a good streak at the YEC.

Don't expect too much of her, really. I'm not a hater btw, I was just surprised by all the fuss about Amélie this year, although nothing has changed really, except that now she's not anymore the best player not having a slam under her belt.

Why is Amélie sucess annoying so many people? :confused:
I don't see these kind of feelings for other top players!!!! :confused:

turt
Mar 7th, 2006, 09:13 AM
Did I say I was annoyed? I said I was surprised by all the fuss about her, it's different... Actually I do agree with some of you when you say she is more confident, she goes more for her shots and so on...

But really, how many bad losses will be sufficient for her to go back to the same old choking Momo? Probably she's trying to convince herself, but if her "new mentality" doesn't bring her good results in the next weeks or months, expect her to fold under pressure in Roland Garros again...

fifiricci
Mar 7th, 2006, 09:21 AM
Probably she's trying to convince herself, but if her "new mentality" doesn't bring her good results in the next weeks or months, expect her to fold under pressure in Roland Garros again...

Sounds to me like its you trying to convince yourself that Momo is going to revert to the "old choker" you know and no doubt loved more! :devil:

turt
Mar 7th, 2006, 09:39 AM
Really, I'm not trying to convince myself. I enjoy watching Amélie's matches, and actually I love watching women's tennis on TV, my fave playing or not... But maybe it's because you're not French speaking fifiricci, but if you read French medias you would believe Amélie is the new Steffi Graf or something, and she will dominate everything. I, as a regular women's tennis follower since quite a few years, tend to disagree with this, and believe time will prove me right.

And honestly, when my fave is fully fit, I really don't care who she plays or what mentality they have, I just enjoy the show and the final result ;) :devil:

fifiricci
Mar 7th, 2006, 09:51 AM
Ok, fair enough, so why don't we just wait and see how the clay season pans out, instead of starting provocative threads suggesting that Amelie is going to be yet another one hit wonder? :D

suzie
Mar 7th, 2006, 10:33 AM
But maybe it's because you're not French speaking fifiricci, but if you read French medias you would believe Amélie is the new Steffi Graf or something, and she will dominate everything. I, as a regular women's tennis follower since quite a few years, tend to disagree with this, and believe time will prove me right.
And being able to understand the French media (not only reading them), you should know that it's just the way they act with their players, going from being the beast to the best (or the opposite) in a minute! That's the kind of pressure Amélie had troubles to deal with in the past and only the future can tell how different her attitude is about that. After the Fed Cup Final, the media made very harsh comments on her, not only her mental but also her game, almost suggesting that she would have to completely rebuild her game in order to compete with the other top players. The "new" Amélie (as you call her) prove them all wrong, I hope she can do the same to you in the months to come. :p

fifiricci
Mar 7th, 2006, 10:35 AM
But maybe it's because you're not French speaking fifiricci, but if you read French medias you would believe Amélie is the new Steffi Graf or something,

Actually, for the record, I am French speaking, but don't read the French media. And you know, you really shouldn't give so much credence to the vagaries of the media anyway. They're doing the same to Andrew Murray in the UK. He needs to learn to ignore it and so must we, if we don't believe it ourselves! ;)

Justine Fan
Mar 7th, 2006, 10:42 AM
*Faints*

cough* ..... *DIES*

FABULOUS NEWS!!!!