PDA

View Full Version : Is Serena that good? Or is the tour that bad? Wertheim opines


Volcana
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:11 AM
From Wertheim's 'Mailbag'

Have you been threatened by the women's tour? Not a single comment in your post-Aussie mailbag on the defining aspect of the current tour -- a total lack of talent except for Serena. I cannot recall the No. 1 player in the world ever being humiliated so badly in a championship match in any sport and yet you avoid comment like Donald Trump avoids good taste? Long live Justin Gimelstob.
-- Mike, San Diego

Go ahead and accuse me being bribed by the WTA. But "Long love Justin Gimelstob?" Heaven help us all. Actually, Justin and I have been debating this issue over e-mail.
I see his point (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/justin_gimelstob/01/25/wta.serena/index.html) and agree that it doesn't help the credibility of the WTA when a player with very little preparation swoops in and beats five seeds, including a blow-out of the world's top player. But it's not like we're talking about Marion Bartoli or Sybille Bammer here. Serena Williams is -- to use an indelicate phrase -- a freak, a one-in-four-billion talent who also happens to compete like no other player.

Let's remember, too, that Serena had won seven Grand Slams previously. Michael Jordan comes out of retirement and still puts up 30 points a game. Ted Williams interrupts his baseball to fly fighter jets and returns to lead the league in batting. Some players just have it.
To me, the storyline is about the strength of Serena, not the weakness of the rest of the field. Also, I think you have to look at this qualitatively. Had Serena been spraying balls and limping around the court and still won, well, that would have been one thing. But that match against Maria Sharapova was an absolute clinic in aggressive tennis. (Note her winners-to-errors count.) Serena looked every bit like the world beater she was in 2002, not the gimpy, bored hack she was in '06.

Intersting comment, and it may denote a subtle sexism. As Wertheim notes, when Michael Jordan came back from two years off and started winning titles again, that was considered a credit to Jordan, not an inditement of basketball. Ditto Ted Williams. His winning the batting title after a break to fight in a war wasn't considered an inditement on the poor quality of baseball. It was an exhibition of the greatness of Ted Williams.

Then again, maybe I've got the wrong 'ism'. When Monica Seles won the 1996 Australian Open, that was considered as a credit to her greatness, not an indication of the weakness of the tour. So it's not about people's refusal to give women credit.

Paneru
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:19 AM
Similar to Federer.

In so much as, the continual griping of some in the game and media seemingly want to slight their awesome accomplishments and their obvious talent and will by denouncing their competition.
However, as soon as they lose, those things go out the window.
Then, you get, "Is the gap closing".

cellophane
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:20 AM
I'd say it's both.

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:25 AM
From Wertheim's 'Mailbag'

Intersting comment, and it may denote a subtle sexism. As Wertheim notes, when Michael Jordan came back from two years off and started winning titles again, that was considered a credit to Jordan, not an inditement of basketball. Ditto Ted Williams. His winning the batting title after a break to fight in a war wasn't considered an inditement on the poor quality of baseball. It was an exhibition of the greatness of Ted Williams.

Then again, maybe I've got the wrong 'ism'. When Monica Seles won the 1996 Australian Open, that was considered as a credit to her greatness, not an indication of the weakness of the tour. So it's not about people's refusal to give women credit.

Thanks for posting this. The whole damn thing. Wertheim AND your observations. Right on the money!!! :yeah: Spot on!


But it's not like we're talking about Marion Bartoli or Sybille Bammer here. Serena Williams is -- to use an indelicate phrase -- a freak, a one-in-four-billion talent who also happens to compete like no other player.

Let's remember, too, that Serena had won seven Grand Slams previously. Michael Jordan comes out of retirement and still puts up 30 points a game. Ted Williams interrupts his baseball to fly fighter jets and returns to lead the league in batting. Some players just have it.
To me, the storyline is about the strength of Serena, not the weakness of the rest of the field.

I've been arguing this same point. The problem is, people don't want to acknowledge Serena's greatness! Period! Once they do, everything else falls in place. People just dislike Serena so much they'd rather malign the WTA and the quality of the players than simply recognize her greatness! As Wertheim said it- her "one-in-four-billion talent."

Thanks for posting this and your keen observations along with it.

Gotta spread some rep before hittin' you up with it again! ;)

Tennisation
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:30 AM
that "Serena is a freak" comment is funny:lol:
go head gurl, get cho freak on

VeeReeDavJCap81
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:34 AM
It's funny how from 2004-2006 the sisters were losing because the tour was better and stronger according to many analyst. Serena comes virtually out of no where and wins the AO and now the tour sucks. Such a double standard.

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:34 AM
...However, as soon as they lose, those things go out the window.
Then, you get, "Is the gap closing".

:haha: don't forget, the ol' the rest of the tour has caught up and the game has moved on. :lol: :lol:

Serena is simply a once in a generation athlete. I know it hurts to hear that for some, but :shrug: she's made it very obvious.

Credit Wertheim for being one of the first WELL KNOWN tennis pundits to say it. :yeah:

kiwifan
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:35 AM
I don't think Serena being that good has to equal the tour being that bad.

Cuz, old news, Serena can be just that good.

And so is Venus ;)

The only ones who need to feel dumb are those who proclaimed that the tour was so vastly different/improved/advanced that Serena couldn't just show up and string a few matches together and walk away with a Slam.

She can, end of story. :smoke:

And so can Venus. :devil:

austennis
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:39 AM
LOL y cant ppl just accept that Serena played like perhaps she has never played before and she will never play again @ the aus open - she came in under done and low on confidence and played her way into champion form.. she deserves respect and not criticism

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:43 AM
LOL y cant ppl just accept that Serena played like perhaps she has never played before and she will never play again @ the aus open - she came in under done and low on confidence and played her way into champion form.. she deserves respect and not criticism

Actually, Serena simply played like she did back in '02. Even Wertheim now seems to acknowledge that. Anyone who goes back and reviews zoning, peaking '02 Serena knows that that's a level she's accustomed to playing at.

cellophane
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:43 AM
I think this question will be answered once and for all when the rest of the tour decides to show up playing anywhere near to decent tennis at the next slam. Would Serena still dominate then? We'll see at Miami.

driger
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:59 AM
the article is pointless. serena, maybe the best athlete in the wta, has won one tournament in how many months or even years? the tour did have something to do with that, regardless of what serena says. who say serena should never win another tournament. no doubt the quality of play at the AO was horrific. high seeds losing in early rounds or barely surviving against unknows, henin a no show. nearly every match looked like an error filled chokefest. serena had the experience to take advantage of her opportunity. how good the tour or serena is will have to be seen over a several month period.

VeeReeDavJCap81
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:02 AM
the article is pointless. serena, maybe the best athlete in the wta, has won one tournament in how many months or even years? no doubt the quality of play at the AO was horrific. high seeds losing in early rounds or barely surviving against unknows, henin a no show. nearly every match looked like an error filled chokefest. how good the tour or serena is will have to be seen over a several month period.

I don't think Miami will prove anything, because Serena was a proven champion coming INTO the AO. To add to the fact Serena beat 5 players who had the best seasons of their career in '06 at the AO. So suddenly '07 comes and they just suck? Or does it have to do more with the amazing champion that is Serena Williams?

darrinbaker00
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:03 AM
the article is pointless. serena, maybe the best athlete in the wta, has won one tournament in how many months or even years? no doubt the quality of play at the AO was horrific. high seeds losing in early rounds or barely surviving against unknows, henin a no show. nearly every match looked like an error filled chokefest. how good the tour or serena is will have to be seen over a several month period.
THE ALMIGHTY DRIGER HAS SPOKEN!!

Lulu.
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:03 AM
Serena is just that damn good.

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:04 AM
I don't think Miami will prove anything, because Serena was a proven champion coming INTO the AO. To add to the fact Serena beat 5 players who had the best seasons of their career in '06 at the AO. So suddenly '07 comes and they just suck? Or does it have to do more with the amazing champion that is Serena Williams?

I think the later, but it would seem certain posters in here are objects of the lesson. :lol:

cellophane
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:05 AM
Miami may not prove anything, because I don't know to what extent Serena cares about non-slams. The slams to follow hopefully will provided they is some decent quality tennis.

driger
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:07 AM
I don't think Miami will prove anything, because Serena was a proven champion coming INTO the AO. To add to the fact Serena beat 5 players who had the best seasons of their career in '06 at the AO. So suddenly '07 comes and they just suck? Or does it have to do more with the amazing champion that is Serena Williams?


i'm interested to see miami and how well serena defends now that she will be the favorite, and where her yearend ranking is.

driger
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:12 AM
Miami may not prove anything, because I don't know to what extent Serena cares about non-slams. The slams to follow hopefully will provided they is some decent quality tennis.


i suppose if she loses its because she doesn't care. i guess she only cares about the australian open at least since 2003. lol

VeeReeDavJCap81
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:13 AM
i'm interested to see miami and how well serena defends now that she will be the favorite, and where her yearend ranking is.

Defends what? Serena has not played Miami since her '05 QF loss to Venus. What exactly are you talking about? :shrug:

driger
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:23 AM
Defends what? Serena has not played Miami since her '05 QF loss to Venus. What exactly are you talking about? :shrug:


defend her favored status, now that shes no longer an underdog, but rather the favorite. people will playing against her with nothing to lose, and the high expectations will be on serena.

got it? :weirdo:

VeeReeDavJCap81
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:27 AM
defend her favored status, now that shes no longer an underdog, but rather the favorite. people will playing against her with nothing to lose, and the high expectations will be on serena.

got it? :weirdo:

Honestly, nothing has changed. Serena will always be Serena, and has a chance to win any tournament she enters if she is fit and ready to play regardless if she has just won a slam or not.

starin
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:33 AM
WTA World is my secret drug addiction and driger and cellophane are like the dirty needle filled with AIDS that make me regret ever stepping into this forum. Please don't listen to or respond to "haters". I'm all for an honest debate. But what posters like these do is use coherent and well written sentences to hide their disdain for the WS. It's like Bill O'Reily, he comes across as intelligent but his intelligence is a cover for the bigot, sexist, egotistical, hate monger that he is. And honestly if you don't respond to them they will go away.

darrinbaker00
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:36 AM
WTA World is my secret drug addiction and driger and cellophane are like the dirty needle filled with AIDS that make me regret ever stepping into this forum. Please don't listen to or respond to "haters". I'm all for an honest debate. But what posters like these do is use coherent and well written sentences to hide their disdain for the WS. It's like Bill O'Reily, he comes across as intelligent but his intelligence is a cover for the bigot, sexist, egotistical, hate monger that he is. And honestly if you don't respond to them they will go away.
Driger's next coherent post will be his first, my friend. ;)

cellophane
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:37 AM
WTA World is my secret drug addiction and driger and cellophane are like the dirty needle filled with AIDS that make me regret ever stepping into this forum. Please don't listen to or respond to "haters". I'm all for an honest debate. But what posters like these do is use coherent and well written sentences to hide their disdain for the WS. It's like Bill O'Reily, he comes across as intelligent but his intelligence is a cover for the bigot, sexist, egotistical, hate monger that he is. And honestly if you don't respond to them they will go away.

Thanks for bringing out the old "lump everybody into haters" mantra. I don't hide my disdain for anything. the fact that I don't like Serena has never been hidden. :lol: At the same time, you are a fan, so maybe I should start going around saying your posts are bullshit too (which actually happens)? If you feel like the only way you can have an honest debate is by calling people haters if they disagree about your favourite... well... that really only reflects on you.

driger
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:41 AM
WTA World is my secret drug addiction and driger and cellophane are like the dirty needle filled with AIDS that make me regret ever stepping into this forum. Please don't listen to or respond to "haters". I'm all for an honest debate. But what posters like these do is use coherent and well written sentences to hide their disdain for the WS. It's like Bill O'Reily, he comes across as intelligent but his intelligence is a cover for the bigot, sexist, egotistical, hate monger that he is. And honestly if you don't respond to them they will go away.



you don't know how happy that makes me. serena fans are sooooo thin skinned. :bounce:

hdfb
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:42 AM
I say it's both.

starin
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:54 AM
you don't know how happy that makes me. serena fans are sooooo thin skinned. :bounce:

lol..it has nothing to do with being thin skinned. You could call Serena a monkey who doesn't deserve to walk on the face of the earth for all I care. Unlike some posters i'm able to separate myself from Venus and Serena. Lol. I'm not them. So when you insult them it doesn't bother me. But what does bother me is when people try to have a normal discussion and someone comes in and just talks nonsense to stir things up. If you wanna hate just to hate then please go do it somewhere else. I'm tired of going into threads about V&S and seeing you're name and HeyLookI'mGay just talking shit and getting other posters all riled up. Just lay off it. If you wanna have a normal discussion then please just do it. You know what a good tennis message board for your type of post is http://www.espn.com Go there, you will be in good company. But let fan's of women's tennis enjoy this board without your stupid, incendiary comments.

Volcana
Mar 3rd, 2007, 06:04 AM
BTW, just because we NEVER give the guy props, Wertheim's response was well-reasoned and articulate. You may not agree with it, but it was well-constructed.

winone23
Mar 3rd, 2007, 06:04 AM
Serena is good!

cellophane
Mar 3rd, 2007, 06:05 AM
BTW, just because we NEVER give the guy props, Wertheim's response was well-reasoned and articulate. You may not agree with it, but it was well-constructed.

He shouldn't have brought up Bammer. :tape:

VeeReeDavJCap81
Mar 3rd, 2007, 06:07 AM
He shouldn't have brought up Bammer. :tape:

Yeah, that was low...whatever though....'07 AO champion :bounce:

cellophane
Mar 3rd, 2007, 06:09 AM
Yeah, that was low...whatever though....'07 AO champion :bounce:

What was? It was just a dumb example.

darrinbaker00
Mar 3rd, 2007, 06:10 AM
Yeah, that was low...whatever though....'07 AO champion :bounce:
How was that low? Bammer won that match fair and square.

Brian Stewart
Mar 3rd, 2007, 06:43 AM
Actually, Volcana, there was some of that after '96 Oz, but it may have been tempered a bit because Monica was pushed so hard in the semis. However, at her first major upon return, the '95 USO, there was plenty of tour bashing.

But even then, it's nothing like the Serena situation. How they conveniently forget she was virtually gone in the quarters, and most likely would have been had she faced someone with more big match experience. To hear some of the talking heads, you'd think Serena won every match 1 & 1.

But you're not alone in noticing how the tour seems to get so much "worse" when it's Serena and/or Venus dominating than when someone else does. And notice how the tennis media doesn't recognize the tactics and point construction the Williamses employ in their matches, prefering to simply (and falsely) label them as mere "bashers". Using powerful shots to chase your opponent from corner to corner to open the court is the most basic tactic in the history of tennis. From Wills, to Connolly, to Connors, to Agassi, to Seles, to Williams, great champions of all eras have employed this strategem for success. It's the fundamental principle of tennis. You make your opponent run more than you do. You make them hit from more disadvantageous positions than you do. In other words, you make it harder for them to hit successful shots, and easier for yourself.

If anyone were out there merely "bashing the ball", or "spraying it all over the court" (popular slogans in the media), they wouldn't be out there long. If you can't place the shots with enough accuracy to allow yourself to construct and control points, you won't be a consistent winner on the tour, period.

But a lot of this comes down to another sexist mentality-- the old "all the women play the same way" spiel. Remember how, in the 1980's, "all" the women were "moonballing Chrissie clones"? This was often repeated, even though 7 of the top 10 were serve and volleyers. Now "all" the women are "mindless bashers". Yes, they have all those one-dimensional ball bashers like Henin, Mauresmo, Molik, Schiavone, Rubin, Kirilenko, Chakvetadze, Daniilidou, Perry, Hingis, Sfar, Schnyder, Loit, Pratt, Bremond, Garbin, Ruano-Pascual, Raymond, etc. How boring it is watching them all just bash every shot as hard as they can. </sarcasm>

The real problem is, so many of the "professionals" attacking women's tennis aren't qualified to do so. How many of them have even watched a WTA-only event? How many have ever watched a women's match that didn't involve a top-10 player or superstar? In other words, these people have no real familiarity of the women's tour, Yet they feel qualified to talk (and complain) about it. Sorry, but that doesn't wash. Most couldn't even name the current top 10 women if you stopped them and asked, and almost all would fail a basic quiz about the tour. So why are they given the space to spew their unqualified rantings? (And getting paid to do it?) Just about the only person currently scribing professionally about tennis qualified to comment on the WTA is Lisa Raymond, and she's been given what, one column so far? Now, could she wind up spewing tour hype and/or personal bias? Yes, but at least she is qualified to comment on the tour. For that matter, many of us have seen more women's tennis matches, (and followed countless more), than 95% of the members of the ITWA. We should be writing the columns about women's tennis. :)

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 3rd, 2007, 08:38 AM
Actually, Volcana, there was some of that after '96 Oz, but it may have been tempered a bit because Monica was pushed so hard in the semis. ....We should be writing the columns about women's tennis. :)

Nice! And everything in between as well.

I'd give ya a rep', but I'm sure you don't need it.

But what posters like these do is use coherent and well written sentences to hide their disdain for the WS.

Exactly. I much prefer to see someone argue a point of view, not based on their dislike/hate of a another player, but rather because of the RELEVANT merits of their point of view.

For example, I can't really stand JuJu. I just can't stand her! I think very little of her character. Period. But the girl can play her azz off! :lol: And it cost me nothing to admit that. I'm not going to construct some sort of psuedo logic to tear her game and achievments down simply and stir things up simply because I severely dislike her. To do otherwise, I think, is a kind of dishonesty.

supergrunt
Mar 3rd, 2007, 10:23 AM
If Federer had come back after an injury and won a major then noone would have said anything... it would have been all about Federer.. heck if Justine came back from injury noone would have said anything like that! :( Honestly, its all about Serena, and the haters :shrug: :rolleyes:

ce
Mar 3rd, 2007, 10:24 AM
its serena

supergrunt
Mar 3rd, 2007, 10:29 AM
I mean come on there is nothing wrong with the tour in 2006 until Serena wins a major and then, O- then women's tour is weak :weirdo: You want to see a week tour, look no further than men's proffesional tennis, were one man has managed to win more than half of the slams that he has entered in the last two years.. he's not even being challenged for the #1 spot...does anyone say that the men's feild is weak? NO :( The reason for this, according to everyone is that, Federer is "just to good."

supergrunt
Mar 3rd, 2007, 10:37 AM
How do you write a letter to Justin Gimelstob? :devil:

Shimizu Amon
Mar 3rd, 2007, 10:40 AM
Serena is just unbelievable good!

But let´s not forget that she also had the faiths on her hand.
Davenport stopped playing, Kimmy, Masha and Momo weren´t playing their best tennis and Justine was absence for obvious reasons.

I don´t wanna diminish this incredible result, but one should take this into consideration before blowing everything out of proportion by saying or writing anything negative about the WTA tour.

Yes Serena is one of the best players ever, whenever she puts her mind to it but as I said she also had the good faiths on her hand and I for one think she deserved it. Masha's time will come :lol:

Chrissie-fan
Mar 3rd, 2007, 10:47 AM
But a lot of this comes down to another sexist mentality-- the old "all the women play the same way" spiel. Remember how, in the 1980's, "all" the women were "moonballing Chrissie clones"? This was often repeated, even though 7 of the top 10 were serve and volleyers. Now "all" the women are "mindless bashers". Yes, they have all those one-dimensional ball bashers like Henin, Mauresmo, Molik, Schiavone, Rubin, Kirilenko, Chakvetadze, Daniilidou, Perry, Hingis, Sfar, Schnyder, Loit, Pratt, Bremond, Garbin, Ruano-Pascual, Raymond, etc. How boring it is watching them all just bash every shot as hard as they can. </sarcasm>
:) Well, men were hardly in a position to call the women "moonballing Chrissie clones" anyway. In fact, there was much more about Evert herself than just moonballing. She was actually considered as someone who could hit the ball very hard by her contemporaries, and considering the technology of her day, she could. And there was far too much variation in her baseline game in terms of speeds, spins and placement to dismiss Evert as a boring moonballer with nerves of steel.

But anyway, men weren't in a position to complain about women moonballing. How about Bjorn Bjorn, Guillermo Vilas, Harold Solomon, Mats Wilander and countless other male players who moonballed themselves to many a victory? The game of some of those guys was much more one dimensional than that of Evert or most of her main rivals.

As for whatever negative comments there may have been about depth on the women's tour after Seles' impressive comeback or Serena winning the Australian Open, I didn't hear those complaints when Ivanisevic who wasn't even ranked in the top 100 won Wimbledon in 2001....Double standards, anyone? :help:

supergrunt
Mar 3rd, 2007, 10:51 AM
but then again... who is Justin Gimelstob anyway? :rolls: :shrug: I guess when he wins a slam the tour really is in bad condition :haha: :crazy: :p

acetoace
Mar 3rd, 2007, 12:01 PM
i'm interested to see miami and how well serena defends now that she will be the favorite, and where her yearend ranking is.


.......whatever doubts you may have will be resolved in few weeks. Take deep breath and relax!!

williams123
Mar 3rd, 2007, 12:06 PM
It's funny how from 2004-2006 the sisters were losing because the tour was better and stronger according to many analyst. Serena comes virtually out of no where and wins the AO and now the tour sucks. Such a double standard.

just a black thing. tennis is a mostly white sport like race car driving. and we know how racist nascar is. if venus and serena were in basketball or track and field that would be ok for lot's of people cause white's dont do that well in those sports. the tennis gods just cannot understand how can two black girls from compton be that good. they just cannot deal with it. even after twenty grand-slams between the two. maybe if they do a tiger woods, and say they werent black they would be a lot better off. lol.

supergrunt
Mar 3rd, 2007, 12:22 PM
It's funny how from 2004-2006 the sisters were losing because the tour was better and stronger according to many analyst. Serena comes virtually out of no where and wins the AO and now the tour sucks. Such a double standard.

I agree.

Bijoux0021
Mar 3rd, 2007, 01:04 PM
WTA World is my secret drug addiction and driger and cellophane are like the dirty needle filled with AIDS that make me regret ever stepping into this forum. Please don't listen to or respond to "haters". I'm all for an honest debate. But what posters like these do is use coherent and well written sentences to hide their disdain for the WS. It's like Bill O'Reily, he comes across as intelligent but his intelligence is a cover for the bigot, sexist, egotistical, hate monger that he is. And honestly if you don't respond to them they will go away.
:worship: :worship: :worship: DITTO! :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:

Volcana
Mar 3rd, 2007, 01:57 PM
just a black thing. tennis is a mostly white sport like race car driving. and we know how racist nascar is.That's something of an unfair shot a NASCAR. Yes, it's fan base has a significant white supremacist faction. The Confederate flags at it's southern events have been a staple since the organization's inception. At the same time, the organization is doing what it can to suppress that, while retaining it's fan base. NASCAR drivers are some of the most fan-friendly athletes on the planet. NASCAR and its fans are seperate entities.

trufanjay
Mar 3rd, 2007, 02:01 PM
I think it is just ridiculous. Why is the tour all of a sudden bad when Serena wins? I can't believe this crap still goes on. It's a shame. The tour is not in the best possible shape, but Serena is one of the best players of all time. I'm just glad stuff like this doesn't come up too often.

Black Mamba.
Mar 3rd, 2007, 02:46 PM
No one was making these type of comments when MJ came back and led the Bulls to three straight championships or when he was dropping 50 on kids way younger then him we he came back to the Wizards. My point is that some people are just that good. It isn't about the poor play from the other players but just how good that player is.

driger
Mar 3rd, 2007, 02:59 PM
just a black thing. tennis is a mostly white sport like race car driving. and we know how racist nascar is. if venus and serena were in basketball or track and field that would be ok for lot's of people cause white's dont do that well in those sports. the tennis gods just cannot understand how can two black girls from compton be that good. they just cannot deal with it. even after twenty grand-slams between the two. maybe if they do a tiger woods, and say they werent black they would be a lot better off. lol.

can be that good? wrong. there rankings have been outside of the top 10 for years. serena makes it through a 2 week tournament and your proclaiming her the best ever. its attitudes like yours that are more bothersome. anytime theres are disagreement or criticizm, racism is always the reason. the white media gives serena a complete pass, on her dedication, and behavior on the court. you'll notice serena catches way more criticism from posters than venus.

trufanjay
Mar 3rd, 2007, 03:22 PM
Serena is not afraid of Justine.

mykarma
Mar 3rd, 2007, 03:28 PM
defend her favored status, now that shes no longer an underdog, but rather the favorite. people will playing against her with nothing to lose, and the high expectations will be on serena.

got it? :weirdo:
You would think the players in the top 10 would be the favorites. Serena is the one with nothing to lose. It's all gravy for her and Vee since they have nothing to defend.

Life is beautiful.:worship:

mykarma
Mar 3rd, 2007, 03:34 PM
.......whatever doubts you may have will be resolved in few weeks. Take deep breath and relax!!
:lol:

sweetpeas
Mar 3rd, 2007, 03:36 PM
people will playing against her with nothing to lose, and the high expectations will be on serena.

got it?

Your"ll a fool ,if you dont think people always play Venus and Serena that way?Always!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

mykarma
Mar 3rd, 2007, 03:37 PM
:worship: :worship: :worship: DITTO! :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:
:bowdown::bowdown::bowdown::bowdown::bowdown:

Mantee, you got a good rep. coming.

felipe2004
Mar 3rd, 2007, 03:37 PM
Sharapova was still number 2 at the time, people keep forgeting that.

sweetpeas
Mar 3rd, 2007, 03:43 PM
Originally Posted by manatee
WTA World is my secret drug addiction and driger and cellophane are like the dirty needle filled with AIDS that make me regret ever stepping into this forum. Please don't listen to or respond to "haters". I'm all for an honest debate. But what posters like these do is use coherent and well written sentences to hide their disdain for the WS. It's like Bill O'Reily, he comes across as intelligent but his intelligence is a cover for the bigot, sexist, egotistical, hate monger that he is. And honestly if you don't respond to them they will go away.


Thanks....I think ones of them has 2 or 3 different names post"s here? SICK

mykarma
Mar 3rd, 2007, 03:44 PM
can be that good? wrong. there rankings have been outside of the top 10 for years. serena makes it through a 2 week tournament and your proclaiming her the best ever. its attitudes like yours that are more bothersome. anytime theres are disagreement or criticizm, racism is always the reason. the white media gives serena a complete pass, on her dedication, and behavior on the court. you'll notice serena catches way more criticism from posters than venus.

:lol::lol::lol:

Oh a btw, Serena catches more criticism because Vee is more laid back Serena is the best at this point and time. When Vee was winning all of the time, the talked was about her. The main point is that the sisters don't kiss the establishments behind and they don't like it.

mykarma
Mar 3rd, 2007, 03:49 PM
the article is pointless. serena, maybe the best athlete in the wta, has won one tournament in how many months or even years? the tour did have something to do with that, regardless of what serena says. who say serena should never win another tournament. no doubt the quality of play at the AO was horrific. high seeds losing in early rounds or barely surviving against unknows, henin a no show. nearly every match looked like an error filled chokefest. serena had the experience to take advantage of her opportunity. how good the tour or serena is will have to be seen over a several month period.
Were the wins of the other players pointless while the sisters were out injuried?

ToeTag
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:05 PM
the quality of play at the AO was horrific. high seeds losing in early rounds or barely surviving against unknows,
Well when males do it it's called "DEPTH"!

Stamp Paid
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:20 PM
I think the fact that Serena wasn't in her best shape is the reason why most of the criticism has come. They see it as an overweight, out of shape (not true on both ends) player breezing through and winning a grand slam, when we know there was mch more to it. Both Petrova and Peer had Serena on the ropes.

Vlover
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:31 PM
[QUOTE]But you're not alone in noticing how the tour seems to get so much "worse" when it's Serena and/or Venus dominating than when someone else does. And notice how the tennis media doesn't recognize the tactics and point construction the Williamses employ in their matches, prefering to simply (and falsely) label them as mere "bashers". Using powerful shots to chase your opponent from corner to corner to open the court is the most basic tactic in the history of tennis. From Wills, to Connolly, to Connors, to Agassi, to Seles, to Williams, great champions of all eras have employed this strategem for success. It's the fundamental principle of tennis. You make your opponent run more than you do. You make them hit from more disadvantageous positions than you do. In other words, you make it harder for them to hit successful shots, and easier for yourself.
If anyone were out there merely "bashing the ball", or "spraying it all over the court" (popular slogans in the media), they wouldn't be out there long. If you can't place the shots with enough accuracy to allow yourself to construct and control points, you won't be a consistent winner on the tour, period.

This has always been puzzling to me and I've never read or heard any rational explanation as to why women hitting with pace if you can is "bad".:( Why is it not OK to maximize your strengths to win matches for you? It would be down right stupid for someone not to exploit their advantages over an opponent.:tape: Why play moon balls, loopy shots etc when it isn't necessary.

Anyway I quite enjoy how the Williams sisters have been causing chaos with the tennis establishment since they came on tour:lol: They have been busting "tradition" and the establishment have been scrambling to come with various explainations that are just irrational.:D

It seem that few are catching on including Werthiem that the sisters are just exceptional.:D

terjw
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:43 PM
I think the fact that Serena wasn't in her best shape is the reason why most of the criticism has come. They see it as an overweight, out of shape (not true on both ends) player breezing through and winning a grand slam, when we know there was mch more to it. Both Petrova and Peer had Serena on the ropes.

Yeah - I agree with that. Serena was in much better shape and match fit contrary to what was believed beforehand.

The comment about the state of the women's game so reminds me what they said when Monica Seles came back after her absence with the stabbing. I don't know if anyone remembers this. But in her first tournament back in 1995 she won the Canadian Open. Immediately after that one tournament I remember comments like - This says a lot about the state of the women's game when she can just come back and dominate it :rolleyes:

starin
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:46 PM
[QUOTE=Brian Stewart;10200219]


This has always been puzzling to me and I've never read or heard any rational explanation as to why women hitting with pace if you can is "bad".:( Why is it not OK to maximize your strengths to win matches for you? It would be down right stupid for someone not to exploit their advantages over an opponent.:tape: Why play moon balls, loopy shots etc when it isn't necessary.

Anyway I quite enjoy how the Williams sisters have been causing chaos with the tennis establishment since they came on tour:lol: They have been busting "tradition" and the establishment have been scrambling to come with various explainations that are just irrational.:D

It seem that few are catching on including Werthiem that the sisters are just exceptional.:D


lol.. all i gotta say last year during the AO when Venus got knocked out in the first round and Serena got knocked out in the 3rd round, all the pundits were saying how there was so much more depth in women's tennis and that both WS could never regain their former glory and neither could simply walk into a slam and win it. A year later, Serena wins the AO ranked 81 and the competition is sooo weak. People, you can't have it both ways. At least Wertheim doesn't contradict himself. He said the competition was much tougher when the WS were losing and now that Serena won AO he doesn't back peddle.

harloo
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:50 PM
[quote=Vlover;10203352]


lol.. all i gotta say last year during the AO when Venus got knocked out in the first round and Serena got knocked out in the 3rd round, all the pundits were saying how there was so much more depth in women's tennis and that both WS could never regain their former glory and neither could simply walk into a slam and win it. A year later, Serena wins the AO ranked 81 and the competition is sooo weak. People, you can't have it both ways. At least Wertheim doesn't contradict himself. He said the competition was much tougher when the WS were losing and now that Serena won AO he doesn't back peddle.

The sad fact is the competition wasn't even that much tougher, the sisters just weren't playing high quality tennis as they did in previous years. Alot of it had to do with injuries, family tragedy, and a loss of focus.

driger
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:51 PM
don't think anyones questioning the talent in the wta, it just their consistancy, serena included.

cellophane
Mar 3rd, 2007, 04:59 PM
If you've been reading the board, there has been lots of talk of bad quality in slams (last year)... not just after Serena won it.

KYLIE
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:14 PM
Serena Played beyond good at the AO finals...before then you could see she was building up her game to that "crescendo"....but she still had alot of fight and guts in previous rounds too. Nothing new there!

Do i think she can maintain it? who knows, i think its up to her, she can i think do it in and out until her body eventually breaks down, sure.

But thats a matter of time of course, her style of play takes its toll...esp on females...she better watch it. Only female i ever saw take it to serena when she was "at her peaK' was Venus and Jennifer.

So thats not a whole lot of opposition...and Jennifer aint playing nomore! COME BACK VEE!!!!

driger
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:18 PM
Serena Played beyond good at the AO finals...before then you could see she was building up her game to that "crescendo"....but she still had alot of fight and guts in previous rounds too. Nothing new there!

Do i think she can maintain it? who knows, i think its up to her, she can i think do it in and out until her body eventually breaks down, sure.

But thats a matter of time of course, her style of play takes its toll...esp on females...she better watch it. Only female i ever saw take it to serena when she was "at her peaK' was Venus and Jennifer.

So thats not a whole lot of opposition...and Jennifer aint playing nomore! COME BACK VEE!!!!

wasn't there a little 6-1, 6-4, 2004 wimbledon thing, 17 year old maria put on serena? that was a whipping. and i'm expecting justine to make a statement soon as well.

LoveFifteen
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:38 PM
WTA World is my secret drug addiction and driger and cellophane are like the dirty needle filled with AIDS that make me regret ever stepping into this forum.

AIDS can't fill anything. It's a syndrome. Maybe you meant filled with HIV? :p

starin
Mar 3rd, 2007, 05:56 PM
AIDS can't fill anything. It's a syndrome. Maybe you meant filled with HIV? :p

LOL....:tape: :tape: :tape: my bad. I know that!!! I took a class on HIV/AIDS!!!!

serenafann
Mar 3rd, 2007, 06:16 PM
The bottom line is Serena is truly one of the handful of Greats to ever play this game,She has great talent a great head and a great heart the traits of the all-time great champions.Serena's 07 Aussie victory is only about her exceptional ability and unique will to win and nothing else,plus we know it's no fluke since she did the same thing at the 05 Aussie Open,just better this time and against greater odds.

Kunal
Mar 3rd, 2007, 06:36 PM
she is that good...plain and simple

even i dont remember a number one player being humiliated in that manner before

jj74
Mar 3rd, 2007, 08:15 PM
Serena was amazing in the final, but Sharapova like many other powerplayers has no plan B, it's incredible that a top player hasn't no more weapons than hitting hard the ball, when the match going bad.
All the 90's top players have plans when the match goes bad, even the Williams come to the net in that circunstances to make something different, but the new generation seems only know to hit the ball hard, it's a pity

driger
Mar 3rd, 2007, 08:21 PM
she is that good...plain and simple

even i dont remember a number one player being humiliated in that manner before


well, just think back to 2004 wimbledon when maria humilated serena, the number 1 seed.

hingisGOAT
Mar 3rd, 2007, 08:32 PM
I think we all saw the AO with our own eyes, and the quality of the matches :tape: That should answer everything. Kind of like when Venus had to face the four slowest players in the top 100 to win her Slam. :lol: Sometimes, the draw Gods smile upon players and bless them with weak competition.

Volcana
Mar 3rd, 2007, 08:41 PM
well, just think back to 2004 wimbledon when maria humilated serena, the number 1 seed.Serena competed in that match. She just got beat. Sharapova might as well not have been on the court in the 2007 OZ final. She looked like she was just trying to avoid being bageled.

davidmario
Mar 3rd, 2007, 08:42 PM
I think we all saw the AO with our own eyes, and the quality of the matches :tape: That should answer everything. Kind of like when Venus had to face the four slowest players in the top 100 to win her Slam. :lol: Sometimes, the draw Gods smile upon players and bless them with weak competition.

she had to beat hantuchova(who recently beat hingis), then pierce, sharapova(who powers hingis off the court whenever she wants to) and davenport to win that slam. I think it was pretty deserved.

Volcana
Mar 3rd, 2007, 08:44 PM
That should answer everything. Kind of like when Venus had to face the four slowest players in the top 100 to win her Slam. :lol: Sometimes, the draw Gods smile upon players and bless them with weak competition.Which of her five slams was that? It wasn't WImbledon '05.

For some people, the competition is strong when they like the outcome, but it's weak when they don't.

davidmario
Mar 3rd, 2007, 08:51 PM
Which of her five slams was that? It wasn't WImbledon '05.

For some people, the competition is strong when they like the outcome, but it's weak when they don't.

come on let him have some fun, he has a hard time as a hingis-fan now;)

Vlover
Mar 3rd, 2007, 09:20 PM
come on let him have some fun, he has a hard time as a hingis-fan now;)

Good reason to deny his fun with facts as he should first check the quality opponents Hingis had to beat to win her slams.:o

It's just hilarious from my perspective because Serena and Venus keep telling them the truth but they shrug it off and call it arrogance. When they actually prove it on the court they say its because the rest is no damn good.:haha: :haha: What a bunch of :weirdo: :hysteric: :timebomb:

VeeReeDavJCap81
Mar 3rd, 2007, 09:32 PM
I think we all saw the AO with our own eyes, and the quality of the matches :tape: That should answer everything. Kind of like when Venus had to face the four slowest players in the top 100 to win her Slam. :lol: Sometimes, the draw Gods smile upon players and bless them with weak competition.

Hmmmmmmm, if you consider who Hingis beat to win her 5 slams vs who Venus had to beat....Venus' is more impressive IMO.

brodle1
Mar 3rd, 2007, 10:29 PM
I for one never thought the bar had been raised in the last few years. Hingis returned after a 3 year layoff, with no significant differences in her game (she is certainly not hitting with more power than right before her retirement), and returned to the top 10 after 1 season which did not suprise me in the least (and I don't think that suprised Hingis either which is problematic for her IMO - but that is a totally different discussion left for another time).

The fact that Serena could show up to the AO, where she has had great results before, and win, does not suprise me either. The draw did her some favors too. In the earlier rounds where she could have met Mauresmo or Sharapova, she instead drew players who allowed her some time to work through the rustiness that was obviously still in her game at that point. She drew mostly players she should either always beat or younger inexperienced but decidely good players (with little to no grand-slam latter round experience), and Petrova (who just can't seem to get it together at slams) and then Sharapova who hadn't been playing well all tournament (who IMO is highly overrated).

What this says to me is that the women's field is fairly weak (and has been for quite awhile). I was on board with the "Serena is just a one in a billion player and only she can do this" except a look at the other side of the draw told the same story. When the number 1 player in the world plays far below the standard of what she is capable of (I remember all the commentators talking about how poorly Maria was playing - and in watching it I had to agree - her serve was crap and at times her game was a festival of errors) and yet still makes it to the final of a grand slam only playing 1 tight 3-set match amidst a bunch of fairly routine victories (against players ranked 4, 12, 22, and 30 respectively), and on the other side of the draw a player who has had iffy results for 2 years whilst during that time having questionable fitness and a fairly casual attitude toward the game playing a minimal number of events and losing farily early in many tournaments can win the whole thing (granted while having played at least fairly competitive tight matches several times during the tournament) - it doesn't say much for the depth in women's tennis and doesn't bode well for the game. I would have been pissed-off had I paid good money for that final at the AO (seems the AO women's final hasn't been a good ticket to have for a few years now actually).

I'm not denying that Serena is a great player. She, at her best, is better than anyone on the tour right now (i'm not saying some of the youngsters out there don't have the potential to be better - I don't have a the crystal ball - I'm just saying right now at their current best state and her best, that she is better). I am only saying that she got a pretty decent draw that helped get her through - if you look back at AO threads they were all lamenting the top half of the draw as the decidely more difficult one. For instance I'm sure Hingis would have gladly traded Peer for Clijsters.

I don't think Serena will dominate the tour this year...at least i'm hoping she doesn't...because while there were glimpses of her old self, by and large she was not what she once was. Luckily for her, her competition was not as it once was either. As a fan of tennis generally, I love it when we have no clear domination by one player, and where each tournament is a genuine contest between several players instead of one being the overwhelming favorite. Unfortunatley right now I see Serena (if she dosen't pull a 2005 and win the AO and then disappear into injury/hiatus), Henin (especially on clay), and some occasional showings by Sharapova dominating the courts. Anyway, that is just my opinion - and is not meant to "hate" on any particular player.

cellophane
Mar 3rd, 2007, 10:34 PM
Agree with everything you said, brodle1. I do think the bar has been raised somewhat though.... and there is more depth.

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 3rd, 2007, 10:39 PM
the white media gives serena a complete pass, on her dedication, and behavior on the court. you'll notice serena catches way more criticism from posters than venus.

Comments like this always are amusing because it demonstrates no real sense of recent history.

Pre-Serena Williams ascension to legendary status, Venus was the focus of all the vitriol and hostility from commentators and posters and like driger. They didn't like how brash she was. They didn't like her father's bravado (predicting both his girls would be #1 and 2 one day. How absurd! :lol: ), they didn't like her beads on the court :lol: .

There was, however, a great sense of sympathy for poor Serena who had to be in the shadow of her big sister. She was- figuratively speaking- receiving the patronizing pat on the back after the crazy prediction that she, Serena, would be even better than Vee one day. Then of course at the USO, in '99, at 17 years of age, Serena fired the shot her round the tennis world.

Anyway, enough nastalgia. The point is, before Serena begin to dominate the tour, it was VENUS who was the recipient of all the ill will. Now that it's Serena dominating, Serena receives the same ill will and Venus gets the sympathetic pats on the back.

It's their DOMINANCE that is resented simply because it proved the establishment wrong! Just let Venus start dominating again. It will be HER that "catches way more criticism from posters..."

TSequoia01
Mar 3rd, 2007, 10:40 PM
I for one never thought the bar had been raised in the last few years. Hingis returned after a 3 year layoff, with no significant differences in her game (she is certainly not hitting with more power than right before her retirement), and returned to the top 10 after 1 season which did not suprise me in the least (and I don't think that suprised Hingis either which is problematic for her IMO - but that is a totally different discussion left for another time).

The fact that Serena could show up to the AO, where she has had great results before, and win, does not suprise me either. The draw did her some favors too. In the earlier rounds where she could have met Mauresmo or Sharapova, she instead drew players who allowed her some time to work through the rustiness that was obviously still in her game at that point. She drew mostly players she should either always beat or younger inexperienced but decidely good players (with little to no grand-slam latter round experience), and Petrova (who just can't seem to get it together at slams) and then Sharapova who hadn't been playing well all tournament (who IMO is highly overrated).

What this says to me is that the women's field is fairly weak (and has been for quite awhile). I was on board with the "Serena is just a one in a billion player and only she can do this" except a look at the other side of the draw told the same story. When the number 1 player in the world plays far below the standard of what she is capable of (I remember all the commentators talking about how poorly Maria was playing - and in watching it I had to agree - her serve was crap and at times her game was a festival of errors) and yet still makes it to the final of a grand slam only playing 1 tight 3-set match amidst a bunch of fairly routine victories (against players ranked 4, 12, 22, and 30 respectively), and on the other side of the draw a player who has had iffy results for 2 years whilst during that time having questionable fitness and a fairly casual attitude toward the game playing a minimal number of events and losing farily early in many tournaments can win the whole thing (granted while having played at least fairly competitive tight matches several times during the tournament) - it doesn't say much for the depth in women's tennis and doesn't bode well for the game. I would have been pissed-off had I paid good money for that final at the AO (seems the AO women's final hasn't been a good ticket to have for a few years now actually).

I'm not denying that Serena is a great player. She, at her best, is better than anyone on the tour right now (i'm not saying some of the youngsters out there don't have the potential to be better - I don't have a the crystal ball - I'm just saying right now at their current best state and her best, that she is better). I am only saying that she got a pretty decent draw that helped get her through - if you look back at AO threads they were all lamenting the top half of the draw as the decidely more difficult one. For instance I'm sure Hingis would have gladly traded Peer for Clijsters.

I don't think Serena will dominate the tour this year...at least i'm hoping she doesn't...because while there were glimpses of her old self, by and large she was not what she once was. Luckily for her, her competition was not as it once was either. As a fan of tennis generally, I love it when we have no clear domination by one player, and where each tournament is a genuine contest between several players instead of one being the overwhelming favorite. Unfortunatley right now I see Serena (if she dosen't pull a 2005 and win the AO and then disappear into injury/hiatus), Henin (especially on clay), and some occasional showings by Sharapova dominating the courts. Anyway, that is just my opinion - and is not meant to "hate" on any particular player.

Great post!

driger
Mar 3rd, 2007, 10:51 PM
Serena competed in that match. She just got beat. Sharapova might as well not have been on the court in the 2007 OZ final. She looked like she was just trying to avoid being bageled.

serena was never in he match. and serena played reasonably well, unlike maria who never showed up to the AO final.

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 3rd, 2007, 10:53 PM
I for one never thought the bar had been raised in the last few years.

...Unfortunatley right now I see Serena (if she dosen't pull a 2005 and win the AO and then disappear into injury/hiatus), Henin (especially on clay), and some occasional showings by Sharapova dominating the courts. Anyway, that is just my opinion - and is not meant to "hate" on any particular player.

I appreciate your opinion. Of course, I don't entirely agree with it, but, judging from your first line, at least you have an intellectual leg to stand on (unlike many around here) and are not simply petulantly arguing your point because you don't like a player.

Anyone who HONESTLY felt like the bar in the WTA hadn't been raised over the past couple of years sans Williams can arrive at the conclusions you make. A lot of people, however, believe that the bar HAD BEEN RAISED on the tour over the past couple of years. THOSE are the people who, now arguing the tour is weak, are the ones who seem dishonest and petty.

Anyway, I G-repped ya- not because I agree, but because it seemed sincere and well reasoned.

driger
Mar 3rd, 2007, 10:56 PM
Comments like this always are amusing because it demonstrates no real sense of recent history.

Pre-Serena Williams ascension to legendary status, Venus was the focus of all the vitriol and hostility from commentators and posters and like driger. They didn't like how brash she was. They didn't like her father's bravado (predicting both his girls would be #1 and 2 one day. How absurd! :lol: ), they didn't like her beads on the court :lol: .

There was, however, a great sense of sympathy for poor Serena who had to be in the shadow of her big sister. She was- figuratively speaking- receiving the patronizing pat on the back after the crazy prediction that she, Serena, would be even better than Vee one day. Then of course at the USO, in '99, at 17 years of age, Serena fired the shot her round the tennis world.

Anyway, enough nastalgia. The point is, before Serena begin to dominate the tour, it was VENUS who was the recipient of all the ill will. Now that it's Serena dominating, Serena receives the same ill will and Venus gets the sympathetic pats on the back.


It's their DOMINANCE that is resented simply because it proved the establishment wrong! Just let Venus start dominating again. It will be HER that "catches way more criticism from posters..."


you are totally nuts. venus is down to earth and laid back. serena disrespects her opponents, always makes excuses when she loses, acts like a bully(the peer incident, hantuckova incident, jankovic incident, etc, etc,etc) and dresses like a clown.

arthur ashe, althea gibson, had it tougher, made less money, and complained a fraction as much.

PatrickRyan
Mar 3rd, 2007, 10:59 PM
you are totally nuts. venus is down to earth and laid back. serena never credits her opponents, always makes excuses when she loses, acts like a bully(the peer incident, hantuckova incident, jankovic incident, etc, etc,etc) and dresses like a clown.

And to correct you Daniela was saying stuff about Serena after the match, that's why Serena responded. :rolleyes: And what was the Peer incident??????

PatrickRyan
Mar 3rd, 2007, 11:00 PM
well, just think back to 2004 wimbledon when maria humilated serena, the number 1 seed.

Not as a big a humiliation as Serena defeating Maria in Australia. Serena lead 4-2 in the second in Wimbledon. In Australia Maria never lead Serena in the match, or even had a chance.

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 3rd, 2007, 11:08 PM
you are totally nuts. venus is down to earth and laid back. serena disrespects her opponents, always makes excuses when she loses, acts like a bully(the peer incident, hantuckova incident, jankovic incident, etc, etc,etc) and dresses like a clown.

arthur ashe, althea gibson, had it tougher, made less money, and complained a fraction as much.

Yes I'm sure YOU'D like to go back to the days of Althea Gibson. I'm sure those times would suit you well.

You simply don't know your RECENT history. You sound young. Venus was VERY MUCH disliked when she first arrived. All the things that you accused Serena of- "disrespects her opponents, always makes excuses when she loses, acts like a bully", Venus was accused of it well before(with perhaps the exception of dress). Just ask Spirlea :lol:

Anyone who posted on the old CBS sportsline boards could tell you that, if they're being honest.

davidmario
Mar 3rd, 2007, 11:43 PM
... she instead drew players who allowed her some time to work through the rustiness that was obviously still in her game at that point. She drew mostly players she should either always beat or younger inexperienced but decidely good players...

I think that Jankovic in third round was one of the toughest draws you could have faced back in January. Jankovic was winning everything then!


... and on the other side of the draw a player who has had iffy results for 2 years whilst during that time having questionable fitness and a fairly casual attitude toward the game playing a minimal number of events and losing farily early in many tournaments can win the whole thing ...

isn't that the thing we are talking about here? How good Serena is to be able to do that what you mentioned here? To be able to play the best tennis of her life so far under the circumstances you mentioned above(serena's unfitness etc.)


I am only saying that she got a pretty decent draw that helped get her through - if you look back at AO threads they were all lamenting the top half of the draw as the decidely more difficult one. For instance I'm sure Hingis would have gladly traded Peer for Clijsters.

Hingis can be happy that she wasn't on the other side of the net in Melbourne on the Women's final day.


I don't think Serena will dominate the tour this year...at least i'm hoping she doesn't...because while there were glimpses of her old self, by and large she was not what she once was
when I watch THIS (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwzHl0n7w9Q) I see a Serena at her VERY best. I've never seen her dominating like THAT before.

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 4th, 2007, 12:18 AM
Hingis can be happy that she wasn't on the other side of the net in Melbourne on the Women's final day.

:haha: Nice!

btw,

I'll never tire of watching that match. It's just insane to think that Sharapova played poorly. she didn't. In some of those rallies, Sharapova hit GREAT shots that would have been winners against anyone else (except for Vee ;) ), but Serena had the better response.

That wrong-footed, backhand pass was JUST SICK!!! :eek: I love that shot! To get that much left hand on that shot..., :bowdown:

driger
Mar 4th, 2007, 01:25 AM
And to correct you Daniela was saying stuff about Serena after the match, that's why Serena responded. :rolleyes: And what was the Peer incident??????

serena bumped hantuckova on the changeover. such class. after the match against young peer a couple years ago, serena, instead of congratulating peer on a good losing effort, accused her of trying to hit her. like i said, shes a bully. she trys to win on intimidation, like mike tyson. and when she loses, she disappears.

17 year old maria destroyed serena in her prime, on serenas best surface, grass. that would be like maria being destroyed by viadosova at the us open.

rjd1111
Mar 4th, 2007, 01:52 AM
i'm interested to see miami and how well serena defends now that she will be the favorite, and where her yearend ranking is.

Serena is not the favorite. There are 14 players ranked above her.
Each one of them who shows up will be seeded above her.
If she wins it will be an upset.

rjd1111
Mar 4th, 2007, 01:57 AM
defend her favored status, now that shes no longer an underdog, but rather the favorite. people will playing against her with nothing to lose, and the high expectations will be on serena.

got it? :weirdo:

Serena is the Underdog. She is ranked 15. Every win against the 14
above her will be an upset.

driger
Mar 4th, 2007, 03:01 AM
Serena is not the favorite. There are 14 players ranked above her.
Each one of them who shows up will be seeded above her.
If she wins it will be an upset.


wrong, oddsmakers will make serena the betting favorite. and the public now expects serena to win, regardless of her seeding.

and the other girls will have extra incentive, now that serena won the 2007 AO.

VeeReeDavJCap81
Mar 4th, 2007, 04:02 AM
serena bumped hantuckova on the changeover. such class. after the match against young peer a couple years ago, serena, instead of congratulating peer on a good losing effort, accused her of trying to hit her. like i said, shes a bully. she trys to win on intimidation, like mike tyson. and when she loses, she disappears.

17 year old maria destroyed serena in her prime, on serenas best surface, grass. that would be like maria being destroyed by viadosova at the us open.

you really don't have a bit of sense do you? :lol:

brodle1
Mar 4th, 2007, 04:14 AM
isn't that the thing we are talking about here? How good Serena is to be able to do that what you mentioned here? To be able to play the best tennis of her life so far under the circumstances you mentioned above(serena's unfitness etc.)


Sorry, you must have misunderstood what I was saying because that is not what those comments were designed to illustrate. First, we disagree that she was playing the best tennis of her life. IMO she was far from it and instead showed only glimpses of what she is capable of. This is my opinion - nothing more. My comment was that with Serena and Sharapova playing sub-best tennis, they were still able to reach the finals (and Sharapova did it pretty easily after round 1). Would Serena have survived Clijsters in the Quarters instead of scraping by Peer in what was not a great match (drama for sure - great tennis, not so much)? We'll never know...but in my opinion Clijsters was a much tougher draw than Peer and Jankovic combined. Again, just my opinion.

What I was posting about was that tought draw or not, Serena and Sharapova's ability to make it to the finals illustrates the lack of depth in the women's tour, and that I disagree that the level of play has moved up a notch in the last several years. I don't think it has, as evidenced by: Hingis's ability to return to the tour after 3 years and find herself easily in the top 10 without any major overhaul to her game (and almost in the top 5 as of now), Sharapova's ability to make it to the finals of the AO while playing pretty average tennis (and definitely not the best of her ability - and I'm not a fan in the least), and Serena's ability to win while not playing what I consider to be her best tennis.

I think that Serena's win was a combination of the fact that she is a great tennis player and that the field is just not all that tough right now. Sure some players have a great match and show some real promise, but not nearly enought of them for my liking seem to have true consistency - how many "great matchups" on paper have turned into real snooze-fests when they happen??

That was pretty much my point. I'm hopeful that in the future some of the young up and comers and some of the veterans can all manage to play their best tennis (and stay healthy) at the same time. To me that is when tennis is really exciting.

Volcana
Mar 4th, 2007, 04:31 AM
when I watch THIS (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwzHl0n7w9Q) I see a Serena at her VERY best. I've never seen her dominating like THAT before.Did you check out that drop volley on game point to go up 5-0? That was sweet. Every time I see that, I realize just how far from reality some of Serena's critics live. Specifically those who say she has poor volleys.

NOTE: Just so we know whcih players various posters are saying aren't any good, this is Serena's 'weak' draw from OZ '07.

r1 Santangelo
r2 Kremer
32 Petrova
16 Jankovic
QF Peer
SF Vaidisova
FR Sharapova

If it's your opinion that the new generation of players is 'weak', well .... that's an opinion. Be interesting to hear exactly why someone thinks Jankovic, Peer, Vadisova and Sharapova are such weak players.

driger
Mar 4th, 2007, 05:06 AM
Did you check out that drop volley on game point to go up 5-0? That was sweet. Every time I see that, I realize just how far from reality some of Serena's critics live. Specifically those who say she has poor volleys.

NOTE: Just so we know whcih players various posters are saying aren't any good, this is Serena's 'weak' draw from OZ '07.

r1 Santangelo
r2 Kremer
32 Petrova
16 Jankovic
QF Peer
SF Vaidisova
FR Sharapova

If it's your opinion that the new generation of players is 'weak', well .... that's an opinion. Be interesting to hear exactly why someone thinks Jankovic, Peer, Vadisova and Sharapova are such weak players.

petrova did her usual choke, jankovic overplayed and had foot problems, sharapova was nearly ousted by a nobody in the first round, and served horribly. peer has never won a tournament and choked, vaidisova is only 17, the rest are nobodys. no justine, clijsters, amelia, hingis. most of serenas matches were errorfilled.just look at the stats.

regardless serena is the champ. but as far as being top 5, the jury is still out.

WonderfulLee
Mar 4th, 2007, 05:52 AM
Serena is the best player ever!!!

Lol to Driger! u just such a Hater!

JustineTime
Mar 4th, 2007, 06:05 AM
I wish Justine hadn't missed the AO this year. :shrug:

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 4th, 2007, 06:39 AM
Sorry, you must have misunderstood what I was saying because that is not what those comments were designed to illustrate. First, we disagree that she was playing the best tennis of her life. IMO she was far from it and instead showed only glimpses of what she is capable of. This is my opinion - nothing more. My comment was that with Serena and Sharapova playing sub-best tennis, they were still able to reach the finals (and Sharapova did it pretty easily after round 1). Would Serena have survived Clijsters in the Quarters instead of scraping by Peer in what was not a great match (drama for sure - great tennis, not so much)? We'll never know...but in my opinion Clijsters was a much tougher draw than Peer and Jankovic combined. Again, just my opinion.

What I was posting about was that tought draw or not, Serena and Sharapova's ability to make it to the finals illustrates the lack of depth in the women's tour, and that I disagree that the level of play has moved up a notch in the last several years. I don't think it has, as evidenced by: Hingis's ability to return to the tour after 3 years and find herself easily in the top 10 without any major overhaul to her game (and almost in the top 5 as of now), Sharapova's ability to make it to the finals of the AO while playing pretty average tennis (and definitely not the best of her ability - and I'm not a fan in the least), and Serena's ability to win while not playing what I consider to be her best tennis.

I think that Serena's win was a combination of the fact that she is a great tennis player and that the field is just not all that tough right now. Sure some players have a great match and show some real promise, but not nearly enought of them for my liking seem to have true consistency - how many "great matchups" on paper have turned into real snooze-fests when they happen??

That was pretty much my point. I'm hopeful that in the future some of the young up and comers and some of the veterans can all manage to play their best tennis (and stay healthy) at the same time. To me that is when tennis is really exciting.

I respect your point because your premise is the tour hasn't improved. I disagree, but that's fine.

What I do think is waaaaay off the mark though, is your belief that that wasn't some of Serena's best tennis!! :eek: Simply look at her incredible shot making, authoritative serving and devastating returns (and not just on second serves). Check out her stats. It's quite clear that was some of Serena's best tennis. If not, I'd like you to say why it wasn't. I sure the stats would argue against you, though.

dreamgoddess099
Mar 4th, 2007, 07:59 AM
serena makes it through a 2 week tournament and your proclaiming her the best ever.She may not be the best ever, but the fact that she's the only one on tour with 8 slams certainly makes her the best on tour.

you are totally nuts. venus is down to earth and laid back. serena disrespects her opponents, When have you heard Serena Williams say another player is not that good?

arthur ashe, althea gibson, had it tougher, made less money, and complained a fraction as much.

Oh is that is, it bothers you that Serena isn't living in a time like Althea was where she can be lynched for speaking out?

serena bumped hantuckova on the changeover. such class. Hantuckova is the one who bumped into Serena, but Serena let it go and didn't feel the need to bitch to the press about it. That's class.

after the match against young peer a couple years ago, serena, instead of congratulating peer on a good losing effort, accused her of trying to hit her.
Peer hit a ball at Serena, and at net Serena simply asked Peer if she meant to do it on purpose. You can that bullying? :lol:
like i said, shes a bully. she trys to win on intimidation, like mike tyson. and when she loses, she disappears. If players are intimidated by Serena's intensity, then their weak asses need to get the hell off tour. This is a sport, not a hand holding contest. These women are not little girls, they don't need you riding to their rescue making them seem like children who can stand up for themselves.

17 year old maria destroyed serena in her prime, on serenas best surface, grass. that would be like maria being destroyed by viadosova at the us open.:lol: First Serena was far from her prime. She recently come back after knee surgery and had trouble playing constantly good tennis on it, as evidenced by her 2 points from defeat struggle in the previous match to make it past a player she had a 9-1 H2H against. Secondly, Grass is not Serena's best surface. You could argue that it's her worst, she has the least about of titles on it.

wrong, oddsmakers will make serena the betting favorite. and the public now expects serena to win, regardless of her seeding.Yeah right, just like she was seeded #1 in Miami after she won AO in 2005.

and the other girls will have extra incentive, now that serena won the 2007 AO.They had that extra incentive when they thought it would be easier to score cheap wins off her in her slump. Beating Serena under any circumstances still get a player more notice, respect, and press than beating anyone else. Hell in some countries you don't even have to beat her, just take 4 games off her like Sania.

petrova did her usual choke, jankovic overplayed and had foot problems, sharapova was nearly ousted by a nobody in the first round, and served horribly. peer has never won a tournament and choked, vaidisova is only 17, the rest are nobodys. no justine, clijsters, amelia, hingis. most of serenas matches were errorfilled.just look at the stats.
So everybody can excuses, but Serena?

regardless serena is the champ. but as far as being top 5, the jury is still out.To hell with being top five, she can stay at 81 forever for all I care, as long as she keep winning slams.

Marcus1979
Mar 4th, 2007, 08:36 AM
well, just think back to 2004 wimbledon when maria humilated serena, the number 1 seed.

Just remember Serena was #1 seed but that was a special seeding her actual computer ranking at the time was #10 and Sharapova was #15

hingis-seles
Mar 4th, 2007, 08:57 AM
I think we all saw the AO with our own eyes, and the quality of the matches :tape: That should answer everything. Kind of like when Venus had to face the four slowest players in the top 100 to win her Slam. :lol: Sometimes, the draw Gods smile upon players and bless them with weak competition.

This weak competition argument is the only thing that is weak. We can make scenarios of "weak" competition for every player in the history of women's tennis, whether they're our faves or players we dislike. I love Tina but just take a look at her 1997 Wimbledon run. She had to beat Denisa Chladkova and Anna Kournikova to reach the final. :tape::help:

Why not just give credit where it's due and move on? Whatever the case, Serena did win the Slam, right? I was rooting against her in every match she played, but the Aussie Open is done and over with. I wish she hadn't won, but she did. Give the champion the respect that she deserves and move on.

hingis-seles
Mar 4th, 2007, 09:00 AM
Did you check out that drop volley on game point to go up 5-0? That was sweet. Every time I see that, I realize just how far from reality some of Serena's critics live. Specifically those who say she has poor volleys.

NOTE: Just so we know whcih players various posters are saying aren't any good, this is Serena's 'weak' draw from OZ '07.

r1 Santangelo
r2 Kremer
32 Petrova
16 Jankovic
QF Peer
SF Vaidisova
FR Sharapova

If it's your opinion that the new generation of players is 'weak', well .... that's an opinion. Be interesting to hear exactly why someone thinks Jankovic, Peer, Vadisova and Sharapova are such weak players.

Volcana, this really isn't the strongest of draws. None of these players are proven except Sharapova. Serena won the title and that's great for her, but it doesn't change the fact that she played inexperienced and/or unproven players. We could even say Martina did not face a weak draw by any means at the 1997 US Open, when she defeated Aranxta Sanchez-Vicario, Lindsay Davenport, and Venus Williams in succession for the loss of just 15 games.

Chrissie-fan
Mar 4th, 2007, 09:25 AM
Volcana, this really isn't the strongest of draws. None of these players are proven except Sharapova. Serena won the title and that's great for her, but it doesn't change the fact that she played inexperienced and/or unproven players.
Maybe it's not the strongest of draws, but it's not the weakest one either. And her having beaten Jankovic or Vaidisova will in retrospect probably look more impressive a couple of years from now than is the case today. But as you say yourself, it really doesn't matter one way or the other. I agree with you that the "weak draw" argument is a kinda lame excuse (much like the "weak era" one) that's only used to downgrade the resume of those players that people don't like.

You have to beat whoever is at the other side of the net seven times in a row and if someone other than Serena was better they should have seen to it that they moved through the draw kicking everyone's ass in the process. That didn't happen, so Serena was best.

supergrunt
Mar 4th, 2007, 09:32 AM
serena bumped hantuckova on the changeover. such class. after the match against young peer a couple years ago, serena, instead of congratulating peer on a good losing effort, accused her of trying to hit her. like i said, shes a bully. she trys to win on intimidation, like mike tyson. and when she loses, she disappears.

17 year old maria destroyed serena in her prime, on serenas best surface, grass. that would be like maria being destroyed by viadosova at the us open.

it wasn't exactly destroyed... 6-4 in the second, I thought it was respectable (atleast moreso than 1 and 2 :lol: :tape: ) but yeah anyways... that was in the past and now it is 2007 :D

acetoace
Mar 4th, 2007, 09:34 AM
wrong, oddsmakers will make serena the betting favorite. and the public now expects serena to win, regardless of her seeding.

and the other girls will have extra incentive, now that serena won the 2007 AO.


.......U talk as though players didn't have extra incentive to play Serena in 02-03 when she was at the top. If I recall correctly, Serena sustained the beat down she gave everyone on tour for 52 wks as World #1.

Therefore, your talk about players having extra incentive to play Serena don't hold any water........."as it was in the beginnig, so is now and ever shall be". Untill SERENA RETIRES she will continue to be the REAL DEAL; the wanna be(s) will try as they may......but SERENA will always, as usual, OVERCOME regardless!!

We know you are Madd61 on ESPN message board. Keep hating.....not like your hate will change the continuing recent course of events though.

supergrunt
Mar 4th, 2007, 09:35 AM
but at the end of the day.. its not going to say "Serena Williams 2007 Australian Open Champion *"

*weak feild and easy draw according to a few haters.. :lol:

dreamgoddess099
Mar 4th, 2007, 10:29 AM
Volcana, this really isn't the strongest of draws. None of these players are proven except Sharapova. Serena won the title and that's great for her, but it doesn't change the fact that she played inexperienced and/or unproven players.

If those players were so unproven and inexperienced, then why were commentators, the press, and the other players picking them and (not the proven experienced Serena) to win every match? And if proof and experience matters so much, then how was Serena considered the under in every match?

Craigy
Mar 4th, 2007, 10:33 AM
People should take no notice of driger. All he wants is for Serena fans to get at him.

hingis-seles
Mar 4th, 2007, 11:21 AM
If those players were so unproven and inexperienced, then why were commentators, the press, and the other players picking them and (not the proven experienced Serena) to win every match? And if proof and experience matters so much, then how was Serena considered the under in every match?

One could hardly fault them for counting Serena out, when you consider her performance in the warm-up at Hobart. No one saw this Australian Open win coming, except for Serena and maybe some of her most ardent fans.

Think back to 1998, when Hingis, Kournikova, Serena, and Venus were being hyped by the media at all the Slams. Yet, look at what actually happened. Besides Hingis, none of the teens made an appearance in the finals. Sanchez-Vicario beat Seles at RG, Novotna beat Tauziat at Wimbledon, in what were considered surprise victories, which were certainly not expected. Kournikova, Hingis, and the Williamses were unproven and inexperienced (Hingis was unproven at having to deal with the pressure of defending and being the hunted) yet were favoured by commentators and the press. It was experience that helped Novotna overcome a whiny Kournikova in Paris, a careless Hingis and an emotionally unstable Venus at Wimbledon.

Serena's big-match experience and champion's fight won her the dogfight against Peer and the up-and-down semifinal against Vaidisova.

Pureracket
Mar 4th, 2007, 11:24 AM
People should take no notice of driger. All he wants is for Serena fans to get at him.
I was thinking the same thing too. He's/She's not much different from cellophane and spencercarlos. It's weird how the threads just draw these posters who are not even fans.

T-GIRL87
Mar 4th, 2007, 11:45 AM
A 7-time grand slam champion, 2-time australian winner at that gets to the finals of a major, wins it, and suddenly it is b/c that tour is lacking in depth. Had Camille pin and Petrova made it into the finals that would have been clear indication that the tour is suddenly super competitive? The general consensus on this board a week prior to the aussy open was that S.W was done and the young guns had suddenly caught up to her. Now I'm hearing that she beat a bunch of inexperienced ball bashers and chokers? so when they do happen to beat Serena in the future, it will be b/c the young guns have caught up to her again?

bandabou
Mar 4th, 2007, 12:37 PM
It doesn't matter...let them talk. Ok people wanna say the tour's bad, Serena was lucky, once in a year play, blah blah...at the end of the day: it doesn't change a thing to the result: Serena Williams '07 Australian Open Champion. At the end of the day, that's the only result that matters.

All the rest is just talk..and talk is cheap.

miffedmax
Mar 4th, 2007, 12:53 PM
The thing that gets me is Serena did pretty much the same thing at the Aussie Open a couple of years ago. And she had some of her best years when she was playing less, not more.

Serena is, to me, like a some of those old sports cars from the '60s. When she's running and in tip-top shape, she's awesome to behold. But she's not a daily driver--just too prone to breaking down.

So it's Serena, not the WTA IMHO. That's the upside. The downside is that also reflects her problems with physical durability and focus. And why for now, I consider her one of the near greats, not one of the all-time great players. Although a few more performances like the one in Australia and I'll move her up.

Kart
Mar 4th, 2007, 12:56 PM
The tour is weaker at elite level now than it was ten years ago IMHO but overall I think the lower ranked players are generally more competitive.

None of that really impacts on Serena's victory though - the fact is, that in the absence of Justine, Maria would have thrashed anyone else in the draw.

Serena beat the best player in the draw convincingly to win the title - she earned her credit.

cellophane
Mar 4th, 2007, 01:09 PM
I was thinking the same thing too. He's/She's not much different from cellophane and spencercarlos. It's weird how the threads just draw these posters who are not even fans.

:weirdo: I would never say that Hingis is going to kick Serena's ass.

driger is right though about Serena's opposition. She played great tennis in a couple of matches (not her best), but barely scraped through Peer and Petrova (she shouldn't have). All I can say is if people think that Peer and Vaidisova are the toughest quarterfinal and semifinal opponents you can get, they are living in lalaland. Same with Petrova. Nadia is great, but she isn't there mentally. Gosh, it really, really bothers some people when it's said the quality at the Australian was awful, doesn't it? Well, the thread is about that.... but as usual if you say that the quality was awful, you are immediately labeled a "hater". :help: Serena's win wasn't just about her opponents obviously, but I never said that it was.

cellophane
Mar 4th, 2007, 01:14 PM
Would Serena have survived Clijsters in the Quarters instead of scraping by Peer in what was not a great match (drama for sure - great tennis, not so much)? We'll never know...but in my opinion Clijsters was a much tougher draw than Peer and Jankovic combined. Again, just my opinion.

Serena would have beaten Clijsters. Clijsters was awful in the quarters and the semis, and that again has nothing to do with Serena's win. It's just a fact.

Mr. Magassi
Mar 4th, 2007, 01:16 PM
yes, serena is that good -- however, she also got the best draw she could ask for. she could've faced a top 5 player in the first round, and although petrova (her 3rd round opponent) is a great player; i think serena knew her chances against her were pretty good... and once she reached the final, she was unstoppable! so, kudos to serena who just ran with it given the opportunity

bandabou
Mar 4th, 2007, 01:39 PM
It doesn't matter...let them talk. Ok people wanna say the tour's bad, Serena was lucky, once in a year play, blah blah...at the end of the day: it doesn't change a thing to the result: Serena Williams '07 Australian Open Champion. At the end of the day, that's the only result that matters.

All the rest is just talk..and talk is cheap.

davidmario
Mar 4th, 2007, 01:40 PM
First, we disagree that she was playing the best tennis of her life. IMO she was far from it and instead showed only glimpses of what she is capable of.

YOU disagree. I bet you haven't even watched the final. So hitting like 30 winners and just 15 or so UEs is not playing at her best? she had like 8 aces or so and was pushing winner after winner. if you watch the highlights on YouTube you should notice that there are shots out of EVERY game, which stands for the quality of Serenas play.

IMO, Serena played the best match of her life there. And serena is "that good" in a way to be able to play the best match of her life under bad circumstances for her(no matchpraxis, overweight etc.)

And please stop talking about how much more difficult a clijsters would have been for Serena.

SERENA DESTROYED THE ONE WHO DESTROYED CLIJSTERS.

That pretty much tells everything.



You guys have to accept that Serena is two steps ahead of all women tennis players out there if she really wants to.


So go visit another thread and talk about Hingis' efforts to win against Agnes Szavay and Vladka Uhlirova. Or go to the "tallest girl on tour" thread.

bandabou
Mar 4th, 2007, 01:41 PM
And for all the: Henin wasn't there...how many Oz opens does Henin have anyways? It ain't like it's a foregone conclusion that with Henin in the draw, Henin's the winner...this ain't RG.

davidmario
Mar 4th, 2007, 01:50 PM
This weak competition argument is the only thing that is weak. We can make scenarios of "weak" competition for every player in the history of women's tennis, whether they're our faves or players we dislike. I love Tina but just take a look at her 1997 Wimbledon run. She had to beat Denisa Chladkova and Anna Kournikova to reach the final. :tape::help:

Why not just give credit where it's due and move on? Whatever the case, Serena did win the Slam, right? I was rooting against her in every match she played, but the Aussie Open is done and over with. I wish she hadn't won, but she did. Give the champion the respect that she deserves and move on.
... next post...
Volcana, this really isn't the strongest of draws. None of these players are proven except Sharapova. Serena won the title and that's great for her, but it doesn't change the fact that she played inexperienced and/or unproven players. We could even say Martina did not face a weak draw by any means at the 1997 US Open, when she defeated Aranxta Sanchez-Vicario, Lindsay Davenport, and Venus Williams in succession for the loss of just 15 games.

:lol: you are so stupid. you just dissed yourself:help:

One could hardly fault them for counting Serena out, when you consider her performance in the warm-up at Hobart. No one saw this Australian Open win coming, except for Serena and maybe some of her most ardent fans.

Think back to 1998, when Hingis, Kournikova, Serena, and Venus were being hyped by the media at all the Slams. Yet, look at what actually happened. Besides Hingis, none of the teens made an appearance in the finals. Sanchez-Vicario beat Seles at RG, Novotna beat Tauziat at Wimbledon, in what were considered surprise victories, which were certainly not expected. Kournikova, Hingis, and the Williamses were unproven and inexperienced (Hingis was unproven at having to deal with the pressure of defending and being the hunted) yet were favoured by commentators and the press. It was experience that helped Novotna overcome a whiny Kournikova in Paris, a careless Hingis and an emotionally unstable Venus at Wimbledon.

Serena's big-match experience and champion's fight won her the dogfight against Peer and the up-and-down semifinal against Vaidisova.

This is a thread for Serena and not for that former top player called Hingis. It is really ridicolous how you are bringing in her name and trying to praise her in EVERY of your post. I understand that now when she can't praise herself anymore she needs others to do that by grabbing out some oold history, but I think it is really annoying.

Bijoux0021
Mar 4th, 2007, 02:00 PM
Yes to all who wish Justine was at AO '07. Don't worry....Serena will kick her butt soon enough for you. Let's hope they finally meet a few times this year, hopefully starting in Miami.

Kunal
Mar 4th, 2007, 02:04 PM
This weak competition argument is the only thing that is weak. We can make scenarios of "weak" competition for every player in the history of women's tennis, whether they're our faves or players we dislike. I love Tina but just take a look at her 1997 Wimbledon run. She had to beat Denisa Chladkova and Anna Kournikova to reach the final. :tape::help:

Why not just give credit where it's due and move on? Whatever the case, Serena did win the Slam, right? I was rooting against her in every match she played, but the Aussie Open is done and over with. I wish she hadn't won, but she did. Give the champion the respect that she deserves and move on.

AGREED!

Mother_Marjorie
Mar 4th, 2007, 02:20 PM
Yes to all who wish Justine was at AO '07. Don't worry....Serena will kick her butt soon enough for you. Let's hope they finally meet a few times this year, hopefully starting in Miami.
Well, if Serena shows up in Miami.:rolleyes:

Be careful what you wish for.:devil:

Henin isn't the same player she was in 2003; improved service speed, improved mental toughness, more volleying and improved confidence. Heck, Justine has even won on all surfaces since then. And even in 2003, Justine beat her 2 of the 3 times they met.

This thread is about Werthless and Serena. Why on earth anyone would include Queen Justine in this mess is beyond me???

hingis-seles
Mar 4th, 2007, 02:46 PM
... next post...


:lol: you are so stupid. you just dissed yourself:help:



This is a thread for Serena and not for that former top player called Hingis. It is really ridicolous how you are bringing in her name and trying to praise her in EVERY of your post. I understand that now when she can't praise herself anymore she needs others to do that by grabbing out some oold history, but I think it is really annoying.

In the first response, I was trying to explain to heylookimgay that the weak draw argument can be applied to anyone and in my second response, to Volcana, I was pointing out why it could be argued that the next generation was not necessarily weak but unproven and inexperienced which would explain that it isn't the strongest of draws, but it still doesn't take away from her victory. If you read the posts I had quoted when I stated my responses, you would understand what my posts were responding to. Unfortunately you're paranoid and clearly have a disorder if not complete mental retardation.

If I'm trying to praise Hingis in every post, why am I referring to her 1997 Wimbledon run as an example of how someone can say it is a weak draw? If you actually read my posts instead of highlighting Hingis' name in them, maybe you'd understand the gist of the post.

But wait. You're allergic to logic and reasoning. And you're mentally retarded.

rjd1111
Mar 4th, 2007, 02:50 PM
petrova did her usual choke, jankovic overplayed and had foot problems, sharapova was nearly ousted by a nobody in the first round, and served horribly. peer has never won a tournament and choked, vaidisova is only 17, the rest are nobodys. no justine, clijsters, amelia, hingis. most of serenas matches were errorfilled.just look at the stats.

regardless serena is the champ. but as far as being top 5, the jury is still out.


Am I missing something or doesn't Serena have a winning H2H against
all of those players.

rjd1111
Mar 4th, 2007, 03:01 PM
And for all the: Henin wasn't there...how many Oz opens does Henin have anyways? It ain't like it's a foregone conclusion that with Henin in the draw, Henin's the winner...this ain't RG.


RG is not a foregone conclusion either.

bandabou
Mar 4th, 2007, 03:02 PM
Well, if Serena shows up in Miami.:rolleyes:

Be careful what you wish for.:devil:

Henin isn't the same player she was in 2003; improved service speed, improved mental toughness, more volleying and improved confidence. Heck, Justine has even won on all surfaces since then. And even in 2003, Justine beat her 2 of the 3 times they met.

This thread is about Werthless and Serena. Why on earth anyone would include Queen Justine in this mess is beyond me???

Wouldn't be surprising...I mean Henin is the no.2 in the world and stuff. Serena's barely top 20.

Mother_Marjorie
Mar 4th, 2007, 03:22 PM
RG is not a foregone conclusion either.
Yes it is.

Bijoux0021
Mar 4th, 2007, 03:23 PM
Well, if Serena shows up in Miami.:rolleyes:

Be careful what you wish for.:devil:

Henin isn't the same player she was in 2003; improved service speed, improved mental toughness, more volleying and improved confidence. Heck, Justine has even won on all surfaces since then. And even in 2003, Justine beat her 2 of the 3 times they met.

This thread is about Werthless and Serena. Why on earth anyone would include Queen Justine in this mess is beyond me???
First and foremost, it was a couple of Henin fans on this thread who'd said they wished she was at AO '07....

Yes, Henin has improved since 2003, but it's against other players, NOT against the Williams sisters, granted they have not played since Serena humiliated her at Wimbledon just a few weeks after she cheated and lied at the semis of RG '03. Remember? I know, I know some people simply don't want to admit the facts. Nonetheless, you can't ever erase history no matter how many times you try.

Yes, Henin did beat Serena 2 of 3 times they met in '03...And those two times were on Clay. Henin has NEVER beaten a Williams sister on any other surface but Clay.

You also stated that Henin has won on all surfaces since then. That' s true too. Again, that's against other players, NOT against Venus and Serena. We won't know if Henin has truly "improved" against the Williams sisters until she beats them on all other surfaces, which she has NEVER done.

Mother_Marjorie
Mar 4th, 2007, 03:26 PM
You also stated that Henin has won on all surfaces since then. That' s true too. Again, that's against other players, NOT against Venus and Serena. We won't know if Henin has truly "improved" against the Williams sisters until she beats them on all other surfaces, which she has NEVER done.
Hey, Justine has been out there playing...its been Venus and Serena who have chosen not to play regularly for the past few years.

Not Justine's issue.

Justine's improvement was proven by her on-court results. Over 400+ victories, 31 tournament wins (on all three surfaces), 5 Grand Slam titles (on two surfaces) , Olympic Gold singles, #1 YE for two years, YEC winner (on indoor carpet), all during the twins generation/watch.

I'm glad the twins are finally back playing again. They will see a different Justine on the other side of the net than they did in 2003.

bandabou
Mar 4th, 2007, 03:33 PM
We'll see..has Henin even reached the finals ever at Miami? Even in her best years? Not sure about that...correct me if I'm wrong.

Anyways, should be good match..if it happens.

Bijoux0021
Mar 4th, 2007, 03:35 PM
Hey, Justine has been out there playing...its been Venus and Serena who have chosen not to play regularly for the past few years.

Not Justine's issue.
Well, let's hope all that will change this year and the years to come.

driger
Mar 4th, 2007, 03:48 PM
Well, if Serena shows up in Miami.:rolleyes:

Be careful what you wish for.:devil:

Henin isn't the same player she was in 2003; improved service speed, improved mental toughness, more volleying and improved confidence. Heck, Justine has even won on all surfaces since then. And even in 2003, Justine beat her 2 of the 3 times they met.

This thread is about Werthless and Serena. Why on earth anyone would include Queen Justine in this mess is beyond me???


well put, if serena shows up.

rjd1111
Mar 4th, 2007, 03:49 PM
lol..it has nothing to do with being thin skinned. You could call Serena a monkey who doesn't deserve to walk on the face of the earth for all I care. Unlike some posters i'm able to separate myself from Venus and Serena. Lol. I'm not them. So when you insult them it doesn't bother me. But what does bother me is when people try to have a normal discussion and someone comes in and just talks nonsense to stir things up. If you wanna hate just to hate then please go do it somewhere else. I'm tired of going into threads about V&S and seeing you're name and HeyLookI'mGay just talking shit and getting other posters all riled up. Just lay off it. If you wanna have a normal discussion then please just do it. You know what a good tennis message board for your type of post is http://www.espn.com Go there, you will be in good company. But let fan's of women's tennis enjoy this board without your stupid, incendiary comments.

He is on that board. And he screws it up too.

rjd1111
Mar 4th, 2007, 03:51 PM
He shouldn't have brought up Bammer. :tape:


That was an important match. She took that loss hard. I think
that is what fired her up for the AO.

driger
Mar 4th, 2007, 03:53 PM
First and foremost, it was a couple of Henin fans on this thread who'd said they wished she was at AO '07....

Yes, Henin has improved since 2003, but it's against other players, NOT against the Williams sisters, granted they have not played since Serena humiliated her at Wimbledon just a few weeks after she cheated and lied at the semis of RG '03. Remember? I know, I know some people simply don't want to admit the facts. Nonetheless, you can't ever erase history no matter how many times you try.

Yes, Henin did beat Serena 2 of 3 times they met in '03...And those two times were on Clay. Henin has NEVER beaten a Williams sister on any other surface but Clay.

You also stated that Henin has won on all surfaces since then. That' s true too. Again, that's against other players, NOT against Venus and Serena. We won't know if Henin has truly "improved" against the Williams sisters until she beats them on all other surfaces, which she has NEVER done.

:lol: :lol: :lol: maybe the williams should sit out the rest of the decade too.


is serena of 2003 better or worse than serena of 2007?

and henin?

rjd1111
Mar 4th, 2007, 03:59 PM
I mean come on there is nothing wrong with the tour in 2006 until Serena wins a major and then, O- then women's tour is weak :weirdo: You want to see a week tour, look no further than men's proffesional tennis, were one man has managed to win more than half of the slams that he has entered in the last two years.. he's not even being challenged for the #1 spot...does anyone say that the men's feild is weak? NO :( The reason for this, according to everyone is that, Federer is "just to good."


Fed has a 3415 pt lead over # 2 Rafa.

rjd1111
Mar 4th, 2007, 04:07 PM
That's something of an unfair shot a NASCAR. Yes, it's fan base has a significant white supremacist faction. The Confederate flags at it's southern events have been a staple since the organization's inception. At the same time, the organization is doing what it can to suppress that, while retaining it's fan base. NASCAR drivers are some of the most fan-friendly athletes on the planet. NASCAR and its fans are seperate entities.


I agree

harloo
Mar 4th, 2007, 04:09 PM
A 7-time grand slam champion, 2-time australian winner at that gets to the finals of a major, wins it, and suddenly it is b/c that tour is lacking in depth. Had Camille pin and Petrova made it into the finals that would have been clear indication that the tour is suddenly super competitive? The general consensus on this board a week prior to the aussy open was that S.W was done and the young guns had suddenly caught up to her. Now I'm hearing that she beat a bunch of inexperienced ball bashers and chokers? so when they do happen to beat Serena in the future, it will be b/c the young guns have caught up to her again?

:lol: Yep, the whole thing is an endless cycle haters use to justify their dislike of Serena. If Pete Sampras or Steffi Graf came back and won a slam the tennis analyst, cynics, and haters wouldn't even blink an eye. Hell, if Capriati came back and won a slam we would never hear the end of it from the American commentators.

JustineTime
Mar 4th, 2007, 04:38 PM
RG is not a foregone conclusion either.

You're right...more like a three-gone conclusion. ;) :p

:lol:

JustineTime
Mar 4th, 2007, 04:44 PM
Again, that's against other players, NOT against Venus and Serena. We won't know if Henin has truly "improved" against the Williams sisters until she beats them on all other surfaces, which she has NEVER done.

Well, if THE WILLIAMS SISTERS would hang around in the draw long enough, maybe we'd have the opportunity to find out. ;)

:tape:

bandabou
Mar 4th, 2007, 05:02 PM
We'll see..has Henin even reached the finals ever at Miami? Even in her best years? Not sure about that...correct me if I'm wrong.

Anyways, should be good match..if it happens.

AcesHigh
Mar 4th, 2007, 06:26 PM
Justine better than she was in 2003?? What are you people smoking??

Justine has lost power in her groundstrokes(remember bulked up Justine?) and effectiveness on her service games. The absence of the WS allowed Justine to win USO 2003.. the Henin that Serena destroyed at Wimby 2003 was at the top of her game, winning 2 slams in a year for the only time in her career and winning 3 out of 4 of the slams entered(RG 2003, USO 2004, AO 2004).

Henin's #1 status is because of a watered down tour with too many injuries. Kim doesn't seem to care, JCap is gone, Davenport is gone and hasn't been dangerous or healthy for a while.. both WS have been out.

JustineTime
Mar 4th, 2007, 06:37 PM
Justine better than she was in 2003?? What are you people smoking??

Belgian blond! :hehehe: Good stuff, Baby! :yeah: http://humferier.free.fr/sad/bongsmi.gif

Justine has lost power in her groundstrokes(remember bulked up Justine?) and effectiveness on her service games. The absence of the WS allowed Justine to win USO 2003.. the Henin that Serena destroyed at Wimby 2003 was at the top of her game, winning 2 slams in a year for the only time in her career and winning 3 out of 4 of the slams entered(RG 2003, USO 2004, AO 2004).

Henin's #1 status is because of a watered down tour with too many injuries. Kim doesn't seem to care, JCap is gone, Davenport is gone and hasn't been dangerous or healthy for a while.. both WS have been out.

What are YOU smoking??? :confused:

As for serena, Justine, et al...:hehehe: I guess we'll see when the smoke clears...;)

:shrug:

Seenus
Mar 4th, 2007, 08:14 PM
we always knew she was that good but the tour underestimated her. I don't think she would have won otherwise.

Mother_Marjorie
Mar 4th, 2007, 08:16 PM
Belgian blond! :hehehe: Good stuff, Baby! :yeah: http://humferier.free.fr/sad/bongsmi.gif
Belgian chocolate's not bad either.

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 4th, 2007, 08:22 PM
They will see a different Justine on the other side of the net than they did in 2003.

Duely noted. Please believe I will be talkin' MUCH smack when Justine gets beaten down by the sisters. I wonder what your excuse will be then? But until then, I'm just gonna wait.

Tie-Break
Mar 4th, 2007, 08:25 PM
If Justine did beat Serena the next time they played, what would be dem Williams Gulls fans' excuse? :tape:

MaRtInA-rUlEs
Mar 4th, 2007, 08:26 PM
Belgian chocolate's not bad either.

yes, but Serena should cut down

cellophane
Mar 4th, 2007, 08:26 PM
Duely noted. Please believe I will be talkin' MUCH smack when Justine gets beaten down by the sisters. I wonder what your excuse will be then? But until then, I'm just gonna wait.

Will be? Future tense? :confused:

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 4th, 2007, 08:28 PM
Will be? Future tense? :confused:

Exactly, I WILL BE talkin' much smack. I'm not going to now. It's pointless.

MaRtInA-rUlEs
Mar 4th, 2007, 08:28 PM
Duely noted. Please believe I will be talkin' MUCH smack when Justine gets beaten down by the sisters. I wonder what your excuse will be then? But until then, I'm just gonna wait.

no way - Justine will give her a beating:wavey:

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 4th, 2007, 08:29 PM
no way - Justine will give her a beating:wavey:
Again, noted.

We'll see, won't we. It should be fun.

Mother_Marjorie
Mar 4th, 2007, 08:31 PM
Exactly, I WILL BE talkin' much smack.
Is smack some type of drug?

davidmario
Mar 4th, 2007, 08:31 PM
In the first response, I was trying to explain to heylookimgay that the weak draw argument can be applied to anyone and in my second response, to Volcana, I was pointing out why it could be argued that the next generation was not necessarily weak but unproven and inexperienced which would explain that it isn't the strongest of draws, but it still doesn't take away from her victory. If you read the posts I had quoted when I stated my responses, you would understand what my posts were responding to. Unfortunately you're paranoid and clearly have a disorder if not complete mental retardation.

If I'm trying to praise Hingis in every post, why am I referring to her 1997 Wimbledon run as an example of how someone can say it is a weak draw? If you actually read my posts instead of highlighting Hingis' name in them, maybe you'd understand the gist of the post.

But wait. You're allergic to logic and reasoning. And you're mentally retarded.

and if YOU'D read YOUR posts closely you'll notice that I was refering to the second and the third post.
anyway, you'll cheer against Serena again in Miami and you will be disappointed again by Hingis. I really hope for Hingis that she doesn't get a strong draw with Razzano in it or so...

IceHock
Mar 4th, 2007, 08:35 PM
Duely noted. Please believe I will be talkin' MUCH smack when Justine gets beaten down by the sisters. I wonder what your excuse will be then? But until then, I'm just gonna wait.


It's amazing how cocky some fans are.

cellophane
Mar 4th, 2007, 08:37 PM
It's amazing how cocky some fans are.

I'm hardly surprised.

cellophane
Mar 4th, 2007, 08:38 PM
Exactly, I WILL BE talkin' much smack. I'm not going to now. It's pointless.


"I will be talking smack when Justine gets beaten down by the sisters" is some kind of an oxymoron... (And no, I'm not a moron.)

Denise4925
Mar 4th, 2007, 08:44 PM
WTA World is my secret drug addiction and driger and cellophane are like the dirty needle filled with AIDS that make me regret ever stepping into this forum. Please don't listen to or respond to "haters". I'm all for an honest debate. But what posters like these do is use coherent and well written sentences to hide their disdain for the WS. It's like Bill O'Reily, he comes across as intelligent but his intelligence is a cover for the bigot, sexist, egotistical, hate monger that he is. And honestly if you don't respond to them they will go away.

driger???!! :eek: :lol:

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 4th, 2007, 08:56 PM
"I will be talking smack when Justine gets beaten down by the sisters" is some kind of an oxymoron... (And no, I'm not a moron.)

:lol:

There's nothing oxymoronic about it. B will take place when A happens.

For the record, I might have called you many things, but Moron wasn't one of them :nerner:

cellophane
Mar 4th, 2007, 08:58 PM
:lol:

There's nothing oxymoronic about it. B will take place when A happens.

For the record, I might have called you many things, but Moron wasn't one of them :nerner:

I feel truly blessed. When you say "she is going to get beaten down", it sounds like you know it will happen for a fact or at least are confident in it, so... it sounds to me like you already are ... :shrug: But whatever.

Denise4925
Mar 4th, 2007, 09:00 PM
don't think anyones questioning the talent in the wta, it just their consistancy, serena included.

You weren't questioning it when the WS were out with injury and losing in early rounds for various reasons.

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 4th, 2007, 09:03 PM
I feel truly blessed. When you say "she is going to get beaten down", it sounds like you know it will happen for a fact or at least are confident in it, so... it sounds to me like you already are ... :shrug: But whatever.

I get ya. Oh sure, I could have said "IF", but I chose "WHEN", because I'm a fan and I'm confident. But that's not the same as "talkin' much smack." Trust me, you'll know the difference "WHEN" it happens. ;)

bandabou
Mar 4th, 2007, 09:06 PM
The question is: when will this next meeting happen? Neither are player IW and Justine has never done much at Miami..so again this leave the clay. How convenient for Justine! Ah well....

Denise4925
Mar 4th, 2007, 09:11 PM
you are totally nuts. venus is down to earth and laid back. serena disrespects her opponents, always makes excuses when she loses, acts like a bully(the peer incident, hantuckova incident, jankovic incident, etc, etc,etc) and dresses like a clown.

arthur ashe, althea gibson, had it tougher, made less money, and complained a fraction as much.

If she were white, would you compare her with the same people?

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 4th, 2007, 09:12 PM
Justine has never done much at Miami..

Still, that's no excuse- well, no good excuse.

Denise4925
Mar 4th, 2007, 09:43 PM
It's amazing how cocky some fans are.

Takes one to know one. :wavey:

Denise4925
Mar 4th, 2007, 09:45 PM
"I will be talking smack when Justine gets beaten down by the sisters" is some kind of an oxymoron... (And no, I'm not a moron.)

:lol: He quotes your post and then proceeds to misquote it in his response post. Hilarious :lol:

Copying and pasting is the key. :yeah:

mboyle
Mar 4th, 2007, 10:51 PM
From Wertheim's 'Mailbag'

Intersting comment, and it may denote a subtle sexism. As Wertheim notes, when Michael Jordan came back from two years off and started winning titles again, that was considered a credit to Jordan, not an inditement of basketball. Ditto Ted Williams. His winning the batting title after a break to fight in a war wasn't considered an inditement on the poor quality of baseball. It was an exhibition of the greatness of Ted Williams.

Then again, maybe I've got the wrong 'ism'. When Monica Seles won the 1996 Australian Open, that was considered as a credit to her greatness, not an indication of the weakness of the tour. So it's not about people's refusal to give women credit.

People said the same thing about Navratilova and she's not black, so it is sexism, not racism.

Besides, sports is one of the few arenas where there is little racism existent. It was probably t he first place where racism broke down. By contrast, it remains the most male dominated enterprise in the world. Even the armies of the world have a better record at letting women succeed.

IceHock
Mar 4th, 2007, 11:15 PM
Takes one to know one. :wavey:


not really, when someone else states their fave is going to win a match before it even happens, it's pretty easy to tell.

Pureracket
Mar 4th, 2007, 11:28 PM
People said the same thing about Navratilova and she's not black, so it is sexism, not racism.

Besides, sports is one of the few arenas where there is little racism existent. It was probably t he first place where racism broke down. By contrast, it remains the most male dominated enterprise in the world. Even the armies of the world have a better record at letting women succeed.
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

ico4498
Mar 4th, 2007, 11:52 PM
Besides, sports is one of the few arenas where there is little racism existent.

need to read more history hoss.

signed,
Jack Johnson

cosigned,
Joe Louis

cosigned,
Althea Gibson

cosigned,
Barry Bonds

cosigned,
Arantes do Nacimento

cosigned,
all the forgotten folks disabled by $

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 5th, 2007, 12:23 AM
not really, when someone else states their fave is going to win a match before it even happens, it's pretty easy to tell.

Don't worry about it, Dee. I'll own "cocky" on Vee and Serena's behalf. I have a great deal of confidence in them.

But I will TALK SMACK when they win. In the meantime, I'll just be..., confident. ;)

Volcana
Mar 5th, 2007, 01:02 AM
People said the same thing about Navratilova and she's not black, so it is sexism, not racism.Excuse, but exactly what 'same thing'?
Besides, sports is one of the few arenas where there is little racism existent.I'll be charitable, and assume you mean 2007, and that you mean professional players.

If you look at the amateur ranks, and among the management of sports franchises, and in advertising, there's plenty of white supremacist behavior. Of course, this varies among sports, and tennis, being as expensive as it is, is a poor example.
It was probably the first place where racism broke down.Not even close. That would be the military. Second is probably labor unions, but don't quote me on that.

IceHock
Mar 5th, 2007, 01:04 AM
Don't worry about it, Dee. I'll own "cocky" on Vee and Serena's behalf. I have a great deal of confidence in them.

But I will TALK SMACK when they win. In the meantime, I'll just be..., confident. ;)


thank you

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 5th, 2007, 01:10 AM
thank you

;) no problem.

Volcana
Mar 5th, 2007, 01:12 AM
arthur ashe, althea gibson, had it tougher, made less money, and complained a fraction as much.It was Arthur Ashe who got me interested in tennis, way back in the 1960's. WHich leads me to wonder.

a) What's you definition of 'complaining'?

b) Do you know how much of it Arthur Ashe or Althea Gibson actually did?

You said it yourself. Times were tougher for Black players. It was perfectly legal to exclude them from a tennis tournament because they were American-Blacks. But they both had something to say about it.

So...

If you could just give some example of what you consider 'complaints' from Serena, so I have something to measure Ashe's and Gibson's words against, that would be nice.

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 5th, 2007, 01:20 AM
...Second is probably labor unions, but don't quote me on that.

Actually labor unions were BEFORE the military, but essentially you're right on, as usual. :yeah:

SJW
Mar 5th, 2007, 01:58 AM
People said the same thing about Navratilova and she's not black, so it is sexism, not racism.

Besides, sports is one of the few arenas where there is little racism existent. It was probably t he first place where racism broke down. By contrast, it remains the most male dominated enterprise in the world. Even the armies of the world have a better record at letting women succeed.

:awww:
And you were doing so well :awww:
Since Americans know nothing about football (soccer?), I'll refrain from boring you about COUNTLESS tales of racism in sport (even in the 21st century)

Denise4925
Mar 5th, 2007, 01:58 AM
People said the same thing about Navratilova and she's not black, so it is sexism, not racism.

Besides, sports is one of the few arenas where there is little racism existent. It was probably t he first place where racism broke down. By contrast, it remains the most male dominated enterprise in the world. Even the armies of the world have a better record at letting women succeed.

Yikes! I don't think so.

I think religion is the most male dominated enterprises in the world in terms of hierarchy. But, I get your point.

Denise4925
Mar 5th, 2007, 01:59 AM
not really, when someone else states their fave is going to win a match before it even happens, it's pretty easy to tell.

That's true, it wouldn't be easy for you to do that. :)

Denise4925
Mar 5th, 2007, 02:02 AM
Actually labor unions were BEFORE the military, but essentially you're right on, as usual. :yeah:

Yep. Wasn't it the Pullman Porters in 1925 with A. Phillip Randolph?

tennisbum79
Mar 5th, 2007, 02:13 AM
Yes she is that good.
One week she plays like crap at the Gold Coast and every player in the locker
room tells each other how out of shape she is ( this was true) and cannot go the distance.

Then 2 weeks later. here she is in the final, crashing the number one seed.

Wannabeknowitall
Mar 5th, 2007, 02:21 AM
Serena is that good but the tour is definately in a transition period, something that Serena can't control.
Martina is the only player in the top ten that's has won a slam in the 90s.
The average age now in the top 10 is 23, years below what it was in 2005.

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 5th, 2007, 03:15 AM
Martina is the only player in the top ten that's has won a slam in the 90s.
The average age now in the top 10 is 23, years below what it was in 2005.

But couldn't all those facts be argued for the opposing view as well?

Martina being the only one there could just as easily be seen as a testament to her talent, and the fact that their are no others from the nineties means that the strong have come in and ushered out the weak (except for Hingy of course).

The average age also points to the strength and vigor the top ladies as opposed to players on the downslope of their careers.

mykarma
Mar 5th, 2007, 03:31 AM
She may not be the best ever, but the fact that she's the only one on tour with 8 slams certainly makes her the best on tour.

When have you heard Serena Williams say another player is not that good?



Oh is that is, it bothers you that Serena isn't living in a time like Althea was where she can be lynched for speaking out?

Hantuckova is the one who bumped into Serena, but Serena let it go and didn't feel the need to bitch to the press about it. That's class.


Peer hit a ball at Serena, and at net Serena simply asked Peer if she meant to do it on purpose. You can that bullying? :lol:
If players are intimidated by Serena's intensity, then their weak asses need to get the hell off tour. This is a sport, not a hand holding contest. These women are not little girls, they don't need you riding to their rescue making them seem like children who can stand up for themselves.

:lol: First Serena was far from her prime. She recently come back after knee surgery and had trouble playing constantly good tennis on it, as evidenced by her 2 points from defeat struggle in the previous match to make it past a player she had a 9-1 H2H against. Secondly, Grass is not Serena's best surface. You could argue that it's her worst, she has the least about of titles on it.

Yeah right, just like she was seeded #1 in Miami after she won AO in 2005.

They had that extra incentive when they thought it would be easier to score cheap wins off her in her slump. Beating Serena under any circumstances still get a player more notice, respect, and press than beating anyone else. Hell in some countries you don't even have to beat her, just take 4 games off her like Sania.


So everybody can excuses, but Serena?

To hell with being top five, she can stay at 81 forever for all I care, as long as she keep winning slams.
:lol::lol::lol:

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 5th, 2007, 03:36 AM
Yep. Wasn't it the Pullman Porters in 1925 with A. Phillip Randolph?

That was essential, but I was actually refering to this.

Wobblies on the Waterfront
Interracial Unionism in Progressive-Era Philadelphia
Peter Cole

The rise and fall of America's first truly interracial labor union

For almost a decade during the 1910s and 1920s, the Philadelphia waterfront was home to the most durable interracial, multiethnic union seen in the United States prior to the CIO era. For much of its time, Local 8 was majority black, always with a cadre of black leaders. The union also claimed immigrants from Eastern Europe, as well as many Irish Americans, who had a notorious reputation for racism. This important study is the first book-length examination of how Local 8, affiliated with the Industrial Workers of the World, accomplished what no other did at the time. Peter Cole outlines the factors that were instrumental in Local 8's success, both ideological (the IWW's commitment to working-class solidarity) and pragmatic (racial divisions helped solidify employer dominance). He also shows how race was central not only to the rise but also to the decline of Local 8, as increasing racial tensions were manipulated by employers and federal agents bent on the union's destruction.

Peter Cole is an associate professor of history at Western Illinois University.

A volume in the series The Working Class in American History, edited by David Brody, Alice Kessler-Harris, David Montgomery, and Sean Wilentz


Peter (the author) is actually a friend and we're hoping to work on a project together. The account of the "Wobblies" is very interesting.

SelesFan70
Mar 5th, 2007, 03:40 AM
I don't think Serena being that good has to equal the tour being that bad.

Cuz, old news, Serena can be just that good.

And so is Venus ;)

The only ones who need to feel dumb are those who proclaimed that the tour was so vastly different/improved/advanced that Serena couldn't just show up and string a few matches together and walk away with a Slam.

She can, end of story. :smoke:

And so can Venus. :devil:

I was one of those people. :o I am glad she did, though. I love Serena.

Wannabeknowitall
Mar 5th, 2007, 03:57 AM
But couldn't all those facts be argued for the opposing view as well?

Martina being the only one there could just as easily be seen as a testament to her talent, and the fact that their are no others from the nineties means that the strong have come in and ushered out the weak (except for Hingy of course).

The average age also points to the strength and vigor the top ladies as opposed to players on the downslope of their careers.

Well usually the high average comes in cycles, about every 3-4 years.
In 2005 there was a high cycle (Lindsay Davenport and Mary Pierce), as well as 2001 (Monica Seles and Nathalie Tauziat), as well as 1998/1999 (Jana Novotna, Steffi Graf, Nathalie Tauziat, Julie Halard-Decugis).
So there does seem to be a transition period of sorts.

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 5th, 2007, 03:59 AM
Well usually the high average comes in cycles, about every 3-4 years.
In 2005 there was a high cycle (Lindsay Davenport and Mary Pierce), as well as 2001 (Monica Seles and Nathalie Tauziat), as well as 1998/1999 (Jana Novotna, Steffi Graf, Nathalie Tauziat, Julie Halard-Decugis).
So there does seem to be a transition period of sorts.
Indeed. I'm just wondering if the transition from young to old has to also equate strong to weak?

Wannabeknowitall
Mar 5th, 2007, 04:39 AM
Indeed. I'm just wondering if the transition from young to old has to also equate strong to weak?

In the years wth lower average ages excluding 2001, there's a tendency of dominace by players or a group of players, 2000 Venus, 2001 Venus & Capriati, 2002 Serena, 2003 Serena & Justine, 2004 Russians, 2006 Mauresmo & Justine.
I wouldn't say that it's an extreme weakness.
It's more like a blip on a radar.
I would say in the lower average age years, those that have some veteran experience being in finals previously, etc., will capitalize and sometimes dominate.

Mother_Marjorie
Mar 5th, 2007, 05:10 AM
In the years wth lower average ages excluding 2001, there's a tendency of dominace by players or a group of players, 2000 Venus, 2001 Venus & Capriati, 2002 Serena, 2003 Serena & Justine, 2004 Russians, 2006 Mauresmo & Justine.
I wouldn't say that it's an extreme weakness.
It's more like a blip on a radar.
I would say in the lower average age years, those that have some veteran experience being in finals previously, etc., will capitalize and sometimes dominate.
Funny thing. In the WTA, only Justine has been able to win at least one grand slam singles event every year since 2003. 2007 would make five years in a row, and there's a very strong possibility her streak will continue.

VeeReeDavJCap81
Mar 5th, 2007, 07:30 AM
I'm glad the twins are finally back playing again. They will see a different Justine on the other side of the net than they did in 2003.

Is this a reference to Serena's chest? :shrug:

Zhao
Mar 5th, 2007, 07:46 AM
Is Federer that good?

or its just that the mens tour sucks? :p

Kunal
Mar 5th, 2007, 07:54 AM
if safin gets into his stride then he is the only person that can challenge federer

nadal on his best days perhaps as well

darrinbaker00
Mar 5th, 2007, 04:06 PM
if safin gets into his stride then he is the only person that can challenge federer

nadal on his best days perhaps as well
Unfortunately, Safin doesn't care enough to be that guy, and Nadal is becoming beatable again on non-clay surfaces. Nalbandian and Roddick are the only other guys on tour who don't bow at Federer's feet, but how many kitchen sinks will Roddick throw at him before he finally gives up?

Pureracket
Mar 5th, 2007, 04:19 PM
Is this a reference to Serena's chest? :shrug:
You aint living right!

SJW
Mar 5th, 2007, 04:44 PM
Unfortunately, Safin doesn't care enough to be that guy, and Nadal is becoming beatable again on non-clay surfaces. Nalbandian and Roddick are the only other guys on tour who don't bow at Federer's feet, but how many kitchen sinks will Roddick throw at him before he finally gives up?

Roddick? Roddick who?
The one who's lost to him a million times since 2003?
The one who got raped in the AO SF?
Surely not the one Fed has complete ownage over?

starin
Mar 5th, 2007, 04:49 PM
Unfortunately, Safin doesn't care enough to be that guy, and Nadal is becoming beatable again on non-clay surfaces. Nalbandian and Roddick are the only other guys on tour who don't bow at Federer's feet, but how many kitchen sinks will Roddick throw at him before he finally gives up?

when was Nadal ever unbeatable on non-clay surfaces? I still believe his run to the finals of Wimbledon last year is a serious mark against the rest of the men's tour. I think Fed's contemporaries can't really do much against him. I have hope that Gonzo can challenge and I really think Berdych, Monfils and Murray could break up this monotonous Fed dominance. They just need to mature (esp. Berdych and monfils).

Volcana
Mar 5th, 2007, 05:06 PM
The one who got raped in the AO SF?Inevitably, breeding shines through. Low class speaks low class.

oddkayla
Mar 6th, 2007, 05:22 AM
Having seen the arguments and counter arguments put forth here, all I know is that from the very beginning of the tournament, all the commentators were saying that Serena was out of shape and out of touch, and that the tour had left her behind, great depth, hungry and ready young players, a fearsome Sharapova, a winning Amelie, etc.

Round by round, Serena was supposed to lose to every one, and when she was finally in the finaly against the great Sharpova, Serena's out of shape body was going to be used to wipe the court.

And all i remember is that commentators were predicting a very easy win for Sharapova, who just needed to show up. Well she showed up, and the end result is Game Set Match Serena Williams 61 62, and Sharapova is there stunned that the whole establishment deluded her!

frontier
Mar 6th, 2007, 12:29 PM
serena is damn good and some of the tennis media experts never give her credit for her achievements.the players like petrova and jankovic feed on what they hear from the likes of mary carillo et al say on tv.petrova was disrespectful and serena fed her humble pie,as for jankovic she got a beat down she was not expecting because she went on tv and was bragging and saying she can easily beat serena because she knows how to,well the rest is history.
Serena is a player that will never allow a player to consistently beat her,and the rest of the tour should note that serena is the yardstick of everyone not momo or juju beat a serena and you make headlines.look at pova her career shot up after 2004.i think success for these players is to beat serena.
the wta quality is not that great at the moment,every 'ova'wants to bash the ball like pova tint their hair blonde and just hope for a miracle.i think in a few years there will be pova clones all over the place and that is not good for tennis.if tennis comes down to three quaters russian i will not bother watching.

pigam
Mar 6th, 2007, 01:08 PM
The question is: when will this next meeting happen? Neither are player IW and Justine has never done much at Miami..so again this leave the clay. How convenient for Justine! Ah well....

Justine just played 3 hardcourt trounaments.
plenty of occasions to have a Serena-Justine match up to happen. It just didn't.
Don't make it look as if Justine "waits with playing" untill the clay season arrives, because that's just stupid. :rolleyes:

bandabou
Mar 6th, 2007, 01:23 PM
Justine just played 3 hardcourt trounaments.
plenty of occasions to have a Serena-Justine match up to happen. It just didn't.
Don't make it look as if Justine "waits with playing" untill the clay season arrives, because that's just stupid. :rolleyes:

No,no..that wasn't what I meant to say. Just contemplating on when this match-up is likely to happen. Of course Justine's done amazing in the middle-east.

Kunal
Mar 6th, 2007, 01:29 PM
serena is damn good and some of the tennis media experts never give her credit for her achievements.the players like petrova and jankovic feed on what they hear from the likes of mary carillo et al say on tv.petrova was disrespectful and serena fed her humble pie,as for jankovic she got a beat down she was not expecting because she went on tv and was bragging and saying she can easily beat serena because she knows how to,well the rest is history.
Serena is a player that will never allow a player to consistently beat her,and the rest of the tour should note that serena is the yardstick of everyone not momo or juju beat a serena and you make headlines.look at pova her career shot up after 2004.i think success for these players is to beat serena.
the wta quality is not that great at the moment,every 'ova'wants to bash the ball like pova tint their hair blonde and just hope for a miracle.i think in a few years there will be pova clones all over the place and that is not good for tennis.if tennis comes down to three quaters russian i will not bother watching.


some very interesting points that u make there..

agree with most of em.

but i really cannot wait for these two players.....i.e. justine and serena to play each other.

the tour should be flexible enough or have some kind of system were certain clauses can be modified so that the top players get to play each other more....i really dont know why serena is not playing right now...ok i know why with the indian wells but is her injury so serious for her to take such an extended break? especially after winning a slam....it just bothers me. it does not do the game of tennis any good...when the best player out there just dissapears off the radar

AcesHigh
Mar 6th, 2007, 01:39 PM
some very interesting points that u make there..

agree with most of em.

but i really cannot wait for these two players.....i.e. justine and serena to play each other.

the tour should be flexible enough or have some kind of system were certain clauses can be modified so that the top players get to play each other more....i really dont know why serena is not playing right now...ok i know why with the indian wells but is her injury so serious for her to take such an extended break? especially after winning a slam....it just bothers me. it does not do the game of tennis any good...when the best player out there just dissapears off the radar

She can play when she wants. Frankly, Serena is never going to play a full schedule. Miami, 2 or 3 events on clay, Fed Cup 1st round, Roland Garros, Wimbledon, 2 or 3 hardcourt events b4 USO, US Open, 2 or 3 more events, and then YEC. That's what I expect at the most.

Btw, I don't see what the big deal about this matchup is. Justine fans... look at what Serena did to Sharapova. If Justine meets Serena late in a tournament, I don't expect any result different from their last meeting. It is just a terrible matchup for Justine against any of the WS. She can only hope for a bunch of UFE's because both Venus and Serena do everything better than Justine except volley.. they serve better, return better, have better groundstrokes, move better.. there's a reason the H2H is lopsided.

Sinnet
Mar 6th, 2007, 01:44 PM
The latest I've heard is that Williams will next play in Miami (which starts in a mere two weeks, and further reports say that Williams has been in FL training for the majority of the time SINCE winning in Australia). After that, I believe she's set to play at the Family Circule Cup in April (what is that, a week off?) and then she'll likely play Rome/Fed Cup before the French Open in May.

For her, that's a great setup, assuming she can win quite a few matches.

I'd be extremely shocked if she were to not play again until the French as so many seem to believe. For Christ's sake, she played in HOBART of all tournaments at the start of the year before Australia. That obviously shows she knows she has to knock off that rust before the big events. Hopefully that's what she's gearing up for.

As for the Henin/Williams rivalry, let's forget about it until it's necessary. Sure, they've had some good matches in the past, but it's not as if the two avoid playing each other or, quite the opposite, hyped to play each other. If it happens, it happens. I just want to see both of them competing well and often. :)

bandabou
Mar 6th, 2007, 01:55 PM
indeed..if it happens it happens. and the odds are the same. on clay justine is favoured to win, on a faster surface serena is favoured to win..

frontier
Mar 6th, 2007, 01:59 PM
when serena and justine play it will be a war of 'strong will'
each has a score to settle.if they meet in miami i give the edge to serena because justine doesnt play well in miami,if it on clay its fifty fifty.
lets hope there will be great matches throughout the year between these 2 champions.

Denise4925
Mar 6th, 2007, 03:57 PM
Is this a reference to Serena's chest? :shrug:

:spit:

Denise4925
Mar 6th, 2007, 04:02 PM
Having seen the arguments and counter arguments put forth here, all I know is that from the very beginning of the tournament, all the commentators were saying that Serena was out of shape and out of touch, and that the tour had left her behind, great depth, hungry and ready young players, a fearsome Sharapova, a winning Amelie, etc.

Round by round, Serena was supposed to lose to every one, and when she was finally in the finaly against the great Sharpova, Serena's out of shape body was going to be used to wipe the court.

And all i remember is that commentators were predicting a very easy win for Sharapova, who just needed to show up. Well she showed up, and the end result is Game Set Match Serena Williams 61 62, and Sharapova is there stunned that the whole establishment deluded her!

:worship: Great post. Sadly, I think Maria also thought all she had to do what show up. I guess she'll know next time. :shrug: She should have asked somebody. :lol:

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 6th, 2007, 04:33 PM
players like petrova and jankovic feed on what they hear from the likes of mary carillo et al say on tv.petrova was disrespectful and serena fed her humble pie,as for jankovic she got a beat down she was not expecting because she went on tv and was bragging and saying she can easily beat serena because she knows how to,well the rest is history.


While I agree with the spirit of your post, I never really fault players for talking stuff before a match. That's the way it's supposed to be. They're supposed to be confident. They're supposed to believe that they know how to beat somebody. If I were their coach or fan or friend- if I was on their side- that's how I'd want them to feel.

Carillo and the rest of her collegues are a different story. I would prefer she just keep her mouth shut. I'd much rather (if I could) listen to the Eurosports commentators.

But the players? Nah. I don't fault them for their belief of the willingness to publically declare it. At the end of the day, the score is settled on the court. I imagine JJ (maybe not Nadia) will be a little more careful with her tongue next time she faces Serena.

dangerjenny
Mar 6th, 2007, 05:10 PM
She is so darn good,look at the facts,she won the first major of the year.And that was her second tournament back.Enough said.