PDA

View Full Version : Has she successfully converted her potential into achievements/results?


AnnaK_4ever
Dec 12th, 2006, 10:18 PM
We often talk about certain players’ accomplishments, talent, weapons etc. But could we estimate how successfully they have converted their potential abilities into factual results, titles, rankings? In other words could we say “Yes, she has achieved the maximum she was capable of” or “It’s such a shame she couldn’t handle all the expectations and went down as under-achiever”?
Lets rate this “conversion” from 10 to 1 (from the best self-realization to the worst one).
Me to begin.

Serena Williams: 8
She could have won much more Slams had she stayed more fit but still she has claimed the Grand Slam so I can’t call her under-achiever

Venus Williams: 8,5
Basically has the same problems but three Wimbledon crowns, Olympics and finals at all Slams are great accomplishments

Lindsay Davenport: 9
A handful of Grand Slams. But sincerely speaking, with her permanent fitness issues have many of you expected Lindsay being the force to deal with for such a long period of time?

Martina Hingis: 9
She had an incredible 1997, probably the most dominant performance since Graf’s the Gold Slam in 1988. And despite three years lay-off she has proved she remains one of the best players these days too.

Justine Henin-Hardenne: 10
Maybe it’s just me but I have never thought she was going to become such successful competitor.

Kim Clijsters: 8
Plenty of good but not great titles. Consistent struggles at the majors, plus injuries. As a result she has “just” one Grand Slam under her belt.

Amelie Mauresmo: 9
Two Slams including Wimbledon, plus YEC, plus No. 1 ranking for almost a year - not so bad for “the worst choker ever”.

Mary Pierce: 8,5
Injuries, injuries, injuries but 2 Slams including the French Open and 4 more finals and “renaissance” at 30 years - not bad as well.

Maria Sharapova: 8,5 at the moment
It’s a bit early to estimate her career but she’s already two-time Slam champion and will win much more, without a doubt.

Svetlana Kuznetsova: 9 at the moment
Though I was hoping she would improve since 2004 I don’t think her game has developed much and don’t think it will develop drastically in future.

Nadia Petrova: 7
As much as I dislike her game I must admit she has all the skills to be the real top-player except maybe the most important ones: mental toughness and fighting spirit. Still, she has been No. 3 and remains one of the favorites to win Roland Garros.

Anastasia Myskina: 9,5
It could have been 10 had she won that f*ing Olympic semifinal!

Elena Dementieva: 9.5
With that crap serve and quite one-dimensional game it’s almost a miracle that she is staying in Top 10 for years now and has reached two major finals.

Your thoughts, guys? Oh, and about other players too.

P.S.
I guess similar topic has been discussed already but it’s off-season so lets talk anyway :wavey:

Viktymise
Dec 12th, 2006, 10:22 PM
We often talk about certain players’ accomplishments, talent, weapons etc. But could we estimate how successfully they have converted their potential abilities into factual results, titles, rankings? In other words could we say “Yes, she has achieved the maximum she was capable of” or “It’s such a shame she couldn’t handle all the expectations and went down as under-achiever”?
Lets rate this “conversion” from 10 to 1 (from the best self-realization to the worst one).
Me to begin.

Serena Williams: 8
She could have won much more Slams had she stayed more fit but still she has claimed the Grand Slam so I can’t call her under-achiever

Venus Williams: 8,5
Basically has the same problems but three Wimbledon crowns, Olympics and finals at all Slams are great accomplishments

Lindsay Davenport: 9
A handful of titles and lack of Grand Slams. But sincerely speaking, with her permanent fitness issues have many of you expected Lindsay being the force to deal with for such a long period of time?

Martina Hingis: 9
She had an incredible 1997, probably the most dominant performance since Graf’s the Gold Slam in 1988. And despite three years lay-off she has proved she remains one of the best players these days too.

Justine Henin-Hardenne: 10
Maybe it’s just me but I have never thought she was going to become such successful competitor.

Kim Clijsters: 8
Plenty of good but not great titles. Consistent struggles at the majors, plus injuries. As a result she has “just” one Grand Slam under her belt.

Amelie Mauresmo: 9
Two Slams including Wimbledon, plus YEC, plus No. 1 ranking for almost a year - not so bad for “the worst choker ever”.

Mary Pierce: 8,5
Injuries, injuries, injuries but 2 Slams including the French Open and 4 more finals and “renaissance” at 30 years - not bad as well.

Maria Sharapova: 8,5 at the moment
It’s a bit early to estimate her career but she’s already two-time Slam champion and will win much more, without a doubt.

Svetlana Kuznetsova: 9 at the moment
Though I was hoping she would improve since 2004 I don’t think her game has developed much and don’t think it will develop drastically in future.

Nadia Petrova: 7
As much as I dislike her game I must admit she has all the skills to be the real top-player except maybe the most important ones: mental toughness and fighting spirit. Still, she has been No. 3 and remains one of the favorites to win Roland Garros.

Anastasia Myskina: 9,5
It could have been 10 had she won that f*ing Olympic semifinal!

Elena Dementieva: 9.5
With that crap serve and quite one-dimensional game it’s almost a miracle that she stays in Top 10 for years now and has reached two major finals.

Your thoughts, guys? Oh, and about other players too.

P.S.
I guess similar topic has been discussed already but it’s off-season so lets talk anyway :wavey:

:rolleyes: yes she's just lucky, its nothing to do with the fact she is one of the best fighter, the fittest, has some of the best groundstrokes and is one of the fastest on the tour, plus i dont know how a one dimensional player can make 2 USO doubles final and win the YEC in dubz too

AnnaK_4ever
Dec 12th, 2006, 10:36 PM
:rolleyes: yes she's just lucky, its nothing to do with the fact she is one of the best fighter, the fittest, has some of the best groundstrokes and is one of the fastest on the tour, plus i dont know how a one dimensional player can make 2 USO doubles final and win the YEC in dubz too

No offense, really.
By miracle I mean her amazing fighting abilities and work ethics. When calling her one-dimensional I mean she has no plan B. Once her groundies are off she struggles not being able to change rhythm, mix it up and so on.

AnnaK_4ever
Dec 12th, 2006, 10:53 PM
Oops... "have she" :tape: My bad...

goldenlox
Dec 12th, 2006, 10:53 PM
If you think Nadia doesn't have fighting spirit, then you are clueless.

frenchie
Dec 12th, 2006, 11:01 PM
Anastasia Myskina: 9,5
It could have been 10 had she won that f*ing Olympic semifinal!

What???:confused:
I would give her 6/10:rolleyes:
I mean of course she could have won a gold medal in 2004, but she could have become a great player if she hadn't been bothered by her mother's health problems and her own injuries and fatigue

She also could have reached nr1, won more title and won another GS
Nastya was becoming huge before the begining of 2005. Don't forget that!;)

RJWCapriati
Dec 12th, 2006, 11:20 PM
Jennifer -

3/10

AnnaK_4ever
Dec 12th, 2006, 11:22 PM
Anastasia Myskina: 9,5
It could have been 10 had she won that f*ing Olympic semifinal!

What???:confused:
I would give her 6/10:rolleyes:
I mean of course she could have won a gold medal in 2004, but she could have become a great player if she hadn't been bothered by her mother's health problems and her own injuries and fatigue

She also could have reached nr1, won more title and won another GS
Nastya was becoming huge before the begining of 2005. Don't forget that!;)

I love Nastya but I am not delusional.
Even in 2004 she was solid Top 5 player but not "huge force". She was often losing to lower-ranked players. She wasn't dominant.
The fact she has won almost nothing since Roland Garros only shows it was her absolute peak, the highest level of her abilities.

frenchie
Dec 12th, 2006, 11:30 PM
I love Nastya but I am not delusional.
Even in 2004 she was solid Top 5 player but not "huge force". She was often losing to lower-ranked players. She wasn't dominant.
The fact she has won almost nothing since Roland Garros only shows it was her absolute peak, the highest level of her abilities.

then you need to check her 2004 year!
her only bad losses were to Chakvetadze and Maria-Elena Camerin in the 2 tournaments following the olympics!

Actually she was more than "a solid top 5 player": she had the best year of all the players;)

morningglory
Dec 12th, 2006, 11:39 PM
If you think Nadia doesn't have fighting spirit, then you are clueless.

Weeeeeeeeeell... hard to call on this one. I've seen Nadia put up a fight, but sometimes I think she's like Lindsay. She pouts, frowns, gets down on herself and just... negative. :o

Nicolás89
Dec 12th, 2006, 11:40 PM
i agree myskina has a lot of potencial wasted for me she could make it so many others titles :sad: but i guess she still has a litle bit of time:wavey:

goldenlox
Dec 12th, 2006, 11:41 PM
I thought Nastya deserved POY in 2004.
4 different players won majors, and 2 others finished #1 & #2.
But Nastya didn't show herself to be the best player. She only made 1 slam semi.
It was a wide open year.
Justine won the AO and the Olympic gold, but was injured most of the year.
Sharapova won Wimbly and YEC, but Nastya was 3-1 h2h.
Nastya was the highest ranked player who won a major, and she was a Fed Cup heroine.
But she didn't show she was the best player. It was too close between about 6 players.

goldenlox
Dec 12th, 2006, 11:42 PM
Weeeeeeeeeell... hard to call on this one. I've seen Nadia put up a fight, but sometimes I think she's like Lindsay. She pouts, frowns, gets down on herself and just... negative. :oIt's hard to call for you, because you have no idea what you're talking about.

Wayn77
Dec 12th, 2006, 11:46 PM
If you regard LenaD's game as one-dimensional (with that vast array of groundstrokes) - again you are quite clueless.

hurricanejeanne
Dec 13th, 2006, 12:21 AM
Lindsay Davenport: 9
A handful of titles and lack of Grand Slams. But sincerely speaking, with her permanent fitness issues have many of you expected Lindsay being the force to deal with for such a long period of time?

I look at Lindsay from the angle of her being that chubby 16 year old that no one in the sport gave a second look to be anything "special" on tour. So in that reguard, she's over achieved. She proved those people wrong.

But I said it before in TOP, that if she was a touch faster and a touch more mentally stable on court, she would have more majors. That's the only thing she's come up short on (in terms of her talent, especially in the last two/three years.)

That said I'm willing to give my big girl a solid 8.

I'm still very proud of what she's made of herself, professionally and personally.

morningglory
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:04 AM
It's hard to call for you, because you have no idea what you're talking about.

I think I do. I've seen Nadia play plenty, and I can tell you that she hasn't got the same type of fighting spirit Masha, Justine, or Serena has.

goldenlox
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:07 AM
That's why she won 5 titles this year, and was injured half the year.

morningglory
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:22 AM
That's why she won 5 titles this year, and was injured half the year.

You don't need champion-level mental strength and fighting spirit to win non-slam titles :lol: What I'm saying is that while Nadia's mentality is somewhat decent, it is nowhere as good as the elite's.

goldenlox
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:25 AM
You know nothing about tennis.
Nadia beat Justine in a final, and Amelie in a final.
No one works harder, no one tries harder than Nadia.

UDACHi
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:35 AM
you people will do anything to argue.

dementieva IS one dimensional. petrova is certainly NOT a fighter. and myskina DID overacheive.

goldenlox
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:39 AM
Nadia is totally a fighter. She won 5 titles, she was on her way to #1 when she was injured.
Nadia hasn't been mentally tough enough at the biggest moments at majors.
Anyone who says Nadia is not a fighter, might as well watch a different sport.
Tennis is beyond your scope.

morningglory
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:42 AM
You know nothing about tennis.
Nadia beat Justine in a final, and Amelie in a final.
No one works harder, no one tries harder than Nadia.

Do I, now? Go ahead, make a poll, do whatever makes you happy. I can assure you that Nadia's mentality is NOT the best on the tour. :lol:
At the "no one works harder, no one tries harder" part :lol: Masha and Justine spring to mind...

If we proceed by your logic, oooh in the 21st century up til 2004-5 Amelie beat the top players in non-slam finals, yeah her mentality has gotta be elite (YEAH right... :rolleyes: We all know what her mentality was like back then)

UDACHi
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:43 AM
Nadia is totally a fighter. She won 5 titles, she was on her way to #1 when she was injured.
Nadia hasn't been mentally tough enough at the biggest moments at majors.
Anyone who says Nadia is not a fighter, might as well watch a different sport.
Tennis is beyond your scope.

anyone who will fight to the death to make every russian tennis player EXCEPT MARIA SHARAPOVA, for some dumb, childish reason, might as well get a hobby.

goldenlox
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:43 AM
You are a dope. Both of you. Nadia spills her guts out there.

goldenlox
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:46 AM
Udachi, you should rethink it. Nadia fights hard, as hard as Dementieva.
morninglory knows nothing about tennis.

UDACHi
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:51 AM
she fights as hard as elena? elena threw one racket this year, nadia probably threw about 40.

three set record of 2006
petrova: 9-8
henin-hardenne: 9-5
sharapova: 7-3
dementieva: 19-4

morningglory
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:52 AM
Nice (lack of) logic there GL :lol:
I said it b4, Nadia's mental strength is NOT lacking, but it is not at the elite level of say, Serena.

goldenlox
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:54 AM
Nadia won AI, then won the FCC the next week. She was exhausted in her first FCC match. She gutted out the whole week.
Same thing in Moscow. She won the week before the KC, and was exhausted in Moscow.
She spills her guts. She beat Justine in 3 sets in the Berlin final.

goldenlox
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:55 AM
Nice (lack of) logic there GL :lol:
I said it b4, Nadia's mental strength is NOT lacking, but it is not at the elite level of say, Serena.I'm not going to argue tennis with you, because you know nothing about it.
With Udachi, I can disagree. You are on the wrong messageboard. This is about tennis.

iPatty
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:55 AM
I'm a Nadia fan, but she's not as big of a fighter as you think she is, Goldielocks. The one time I've seen her REALLY fight was in the FCC final, when she was struggling with the heat but still found a way to win. That was guts.

But other than that, I can't think of a time where I watched her and thought, "There's no way Nadia's going away." She just does it too often.

On Myskina, she clearly overachieved. Even Nick Bolletieri said it.

Andy.
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:57 AM
It's hard to call for you, because you have no idea what you're talking about.
Nadia has even said it herself when things start to go wrong she gets down on herself and the shoulders slump and she gets that cranky face the eurosport commentators metioned it in the Linz final.

morningglory
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:57 AM
Nadia won AI, then won the FCC the next week. She was exhausted in her first FCC match. She gutted out the whole week.
Same thing in Moscow. She won Lux, and was exhausted in Moscow.
She spills her guts. She beat Justine in 3 sets in the Berlin final.

Yes, that is impressive but during their careers most of the elite players have done the same. And having patches of inspiration at some certain time of the year does not equate to consistently and innately possessing nerves of steel. Sometimes, Nadia pouts, throws rackets, berates herself, like Lindsay sometimes does. Other times, she puts up a fight.

goldenlox
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:58 AM
Did you see the Berlin final? The Doha final? Did you see her fight against Sveta in Stuttgart?
Not talking to morninglory, who saw none of them.

Nadia had a hip injury where she missed 5 months, and still finished #6

iPatty
Dec 13th, 2006, 02:01 AM
Did you see the Berlin final? The Doha final? Did you see her fight against Sveta in Stuttgart?
Not talking to morninglory, who saw none of them.

For me, a real fighter is someone who approaches every match with a "never say die" attitude.

And if we're being completely honest, Nadia just doesn't do that. Sure, she competes well and is one of the biggest fighters when she wants to be.

But for some reason (and this is why she can be called a headcase), she just plainly looks like she doesn't care in some matches. As a fan, it frustrates me. But, I stick with her because I know what she can do when she sets her mind to it.

urock34
Dec 13th, 2006, 02:03 AM
nadia is a fights but isnt known as the greatest the greatest i believe is either serena or justine even though sharapova is up there how many matches has nadia won wen she was down match point?

morningglory
Dec 13th, 2006, 02:05 AM
Did you see the Berlin final? The Doha final? Did you see her fight against Sveta in Stuttgart?
Not talking to morninglory, who saw none of them.

Nadia had a hip injury where she missed 5 months, and still finished #6

TBH I saw Family Circle Cup (but not the two others) Still...
Did you see her just crapping out in tough QF matches with Masha in those slams? Nadia was often not outplayed at all, sometimes I thought she was the better player on that day, but for instance, Masha's serving for the match and Nadia holding tbp, she throws in 3 errors. That is NOT elite mentality.

And GL you better know when to quit when you're clearly the only one thinking Nadia's mentality is the best on the tour.

goldenlox
Dec 13th, 2006, 02:06 AM
For me, a real fighter is someone who approaches every match with a "never say die" attitude.
When Nadia's not healthy, she'll still finish the match.
It's true that sometimes Justine and Sharapova don't.

But I don't know what is exactly the injuries and illnesses involved.
Nadia won 2 Tier I's this year, and made a 3rd final.
She won 3 Tier II's and made a fourth final.
And she missed half the year.

iPatty
Dec 13th, 2006, 02:08 AM
When Nadia Nadia's not healthy, she'll finish the match.
It's true that sometimes Justine and Sharapova don't.

But I don't know what is exactly the injuries and illnesses involved.
Nadia won 2 Tier I's this year, and made a 3rd final.
She won 3 Tier II's and made a fouth final.
And she missed half the year.

When Justine and Maria are healthy, they fight for every point of every match.

Nadia picks and chooses, for some reason.

goldenlox
Dec 13th, 2006, 02:10 AM
What Nadia hasn't done is play her absolute best at the end of a major.
Although 2006 was a not a year where was fit for the majors.

Outside the majors, she has shown she can compete week in week out.
There should be no doubt how much she fights.

goldenlox
Dec 13th, 2006, 02:13 AM
7 final, 5 titles. All Tier I and Tier II.
Sharapova walked off the court against Kirilenko in Beijing, instead of losing the match.
Justine did that in Melbourne.
Nadia will stay on the court and lose the match instead of doing that.
But a healthy Nadia fights as well as anyone.

Ferosh
Dec 13th, 2006, 02:16 AM
I have to say that Nadia improved a lot this year. As the clay season progressed, her confidence level shot to an all-time high. Nadia fought really hard to win that FCC final and she fought even harder to win every match in Berlin. It appeared she was going to go out early against Zheng and Safina, but she somehow found a way to pull through.

After the Roland Garros injury it was obvious that the confidence and the fighting spirit were gone. She lost first round at every hard-court tournament prior to the USO, which obviously hurt her even more. Slowly but surely she is gaining her confidence and fight back. Stuttgart, Moscow and Linz were great for her confidence, so she'll go into Melbourne with a different type of attitude.

goldenlox
Dec 13th, 2006, 02:19 AM
I have to say that Nadia improved a lot this year. As the clay season progressed, her confidence level shot to an all-time high. Nadia fought really hard to win that FCC final and she fought even harder to win every match in Berlin. It appeared she was going to go out early against Zheng and Safina, but she somehow found a way to pull through.

After the Roland Garros injury it was obvious that the confidence and the fighting spirit were gone. She lost first round at every hard-court tournament prior to the USO, which obviously hurt her even more. Slowly but surely she is gaining her confidence and fight back. Stuttgart, Moscow and Linz were great for her confidence, so she'll go into Melbourne with a different type of attitude.It wasn't that her fighting spirit was gone. When she came back from the hip injury, she wasn't playing good enough. That's why she was losing. She pulled it together in Stuttgart. It seems like she ran out of gas at the end of the year.

If we see the Nadia from Berlin, Doha, or green clay in 2007, don't worry about the fighting spirit.

jazar
Dec 13th, 2006, 06:56 AM
myskina, kuznetsova and dementieva don't have the same potential the other players mentioned do, but they have done well considering their abilities. they won't be able to go that extra step though. myskina will never be in contention for another GS again, kuznetsova is just a serve and forehand and dementieva is most definitely one dimensional

MyskinaManiac
Dec 13th, 2006, 11:39 AM
I'm a Nadia fan, but she's not as big of a fighter as you think she is, Goldielocks. The one time I've seen her REALLY fight was in the FCC final, when she was struggling with the heat but still found a way to win. That was guts.

But other than that, I can't think of a time where I watched her and thought, "There's no way Nadia's going away." She just does it too often.

On Myskina, she clearly overachieved. Even Nick Bolletieri said it.

Who gives a flying duck what Nick Bolletieri says, he's just pissed becuase Myskina beat both his Russian pupils to being the first from their country to win a slam. It may have come as a surprise to some that Nastya won a slam, but her resume spoke for itself, she had a swag of tournament wins - one of which was a tier one. The same couldn't have been said for Sharapova when she one Wimbledon, total shock to me.

Nastya did not overacheive. In my opinion, she has the detirmination that Nadia lacks, the heart that Lindsay never had, the bravery that Amelie could only dream of and the fittness that Serena would wish she had for one day. Nastya has recently underachieved due to her external issues. You'd be saying the same thing about Martina if she only won one slam - it's because Nastya doesn't play like the rest of em'.

AnnaK_4ever
Dec 13th, 2006, 11:41 AM
Petrova lost 8 matches by retirement and 4 more by walk-over. 12 matches total. I don't know other top-player who so often quits the match if she feels she's losing.
And winning solid tournaments like Doha, Stuttgart, Charleston etc. is very good achivement, of course. But where fighting abilities mean the most it is Grand Slams and Fed Cup. And with her technique Nadia should be real contender and much more accomplished player.

MyskinaManiac
Dec 13th, 2006, 11:45 AM
Nadia's mental strength isn't the weakest in the top 10. I rate Amelie still the weakest. I think that Martina suffers similarly too. Seriously, everyone said stupidly the same about Mary before she won the French that she was mentaly weak - and today we say she's one of the strongest coz she's old and all. Nadia has matured with age. She can only get better.

goldenlox
Dec 13th, 2006, 11:54 AM
And winning solid tournaments like Doha, Stuttgart, Charleston etc. is very good achivement, of course. But where fighting abilities mean the most it is Grand Slams and Fed Cup. And with her technique Nadia should be real contender and much more accomplished player.Nadia fought well against Sharapova at Wimbledon and USO last year. Justine outplayed her at RG 2005. She didn't play well enough to win. This year Nadia was not fit for any of the majors.

Nadia had not won a tournament until last fall. Sharapova and Justine were significantly better players.
This year Nadia closed the gap. And she fought hard all the way.

Dexter
Dec 13th, 2006, 12:08 PM
You know nothing about tennis.
Nadia beat Justine in a final, and Amelie in a final.
No one works harder, no one tries harder than Nadia.
exactly she tries too hard. :tape:

MyskinaManiac
Dec 13th, 2006, 12:10 PM
Nadia had not won a tournament until last fall. Sharapova and Justine were significantly better players.
This year Nadia closed the gap. And she fought hard all the way.

Justine is closer to her potential than what Nadia is. Nadia has the perfect build. Never has the gap be closer. I also believe that Justines game is on a steady decline, just look at her serve. Nadia's game is still improving, she reminds me of Pierce to a lesser extent, always developing and rejuvinating her game. If by chance Nadia gets a slight sniff of GS victory, she could be a massive force - only time will tell.

goldenlox
Dec 13th, 2006, 12:14 PM
exactly she tries too hard. :tape:It's not a lack of trying. Maybe it's a lack of confidence at majors or nerves.
Anyone who followed Nadia this year saw tremendous effort.

MyskinaManiac
Dec 13th, 2006, 12:16 PM
exactly she tries too hard. :tape:

What an absurd comment. One does not try 'too hard' to only lose. Tennis is tennis, she's still playing the same players in the slams. If they happen to beat her in a GS well tough luck, she can beat them in a minor event. Doesn't detract from the fact that she at least tries.

bellascarlett
Dec 13th, 2006, 12:46 PM
you people will do anything to argue.

dementieva IS one dimensional. petrova is certainly NOT a fighter. and myskina DID overacheive.

Exactly. Agreed.

Petrova...a fighter??? :tape: Petrova doesn't even deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence as Sharapova and JHH when mental toughness is concerned...Seriously...

Does remind me of Davenport at times once she starts scolding and getting down on herself...the sour face does at least...

anyone who will fight to the death to make every russian tennis player EXCEPT MARIA SHARAPOVA, for some dumb, childish reason, might as well get a hobby.

:lol:

MyskinaManiac
Dec 13th, 2006, 12:55 PM
anyone who will fight to the death to make every russian tennis player EXCEPT MARIA SHARAPOVA, for some dumb, childish reason, might as well get a hobby.

That made little sense to me. Have I missed soemthing?

Dexter
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:02 PM
That made little sense to me. Have I missed soemthing?seeing that you're a member for like a month, yes you did a lot. :wavey:

goldenlox
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:05 PM
Exactly. Agreed.

Petrova...a fighter??? :tape: Petrova doesn't even deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence as Sharapova and JHH when mental toughness is concerned...Seriously...

Does remind me of Davenport at times once she starts scolding and getting down on herself...the sour face does at least...



:lol:Nadia won 5 titles this year. And missed several months.
It's interesting how people who never watch Nadia play know her effort level so well :rolleyes:

MyskinaManiac
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:08 PM
seeing that you're a member for like a month, yes you did a lot. :wavey:

Are you patronizing me?

Dexter
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:16 PM
Are you patronizing me?what? :spit:

no, you asked - I answered.
I have no interest in personal fights. :wavey:

MyskinaManiac
Dec 13th, 2006, 01:20 PM
what? :spit:

no, you asked - I answered.
I have no interest in personal fights. :wavey:

Ok, I reread what you wrote, I'm seeing the lighter side of it now. Sorry.

thrust
Dec 13th, 2006, 02:08 PM
9 is a bit high for Mauresmo, IMO. Sure, she had a great year but it was a long time coming. With her physical assets, she should have achieved much more before the age of 27.

miffedmax
Dec 13th, 2006, 02:22 PM
9 is a bit high for Mauresmo, IMO. Sure, she had a great year but it was a long time coming. With her physical assets, she should have achieved much more before the age of 27.

That's the problem with a discussion like this. What do we really mean by potential? Tennis is such a physcial and mental game that I'm not even sure you can really lump them together.

Momo is a good example. She is physically very talented, but has had head problems from the get go. Does she underachieve because she's so physically talented, or is she overachieving because her mental fragility is such a high hurdle to overcome?

Lena D. is another example. I still say that if I'm building my perfect player, physically I use her or Venus for a template. She can be incredibly mentally tough, but has a tendency to implode in finals, even minor ones. Then there's that whole inability to cut the apron strings and work with a real coach to fix the problems in her game. Honestly, I can't say whether she rates a 9/10 for overcoming her mental crap or a 3/10 for squandering her incredible athleticism.