PDA

View Full Version : Objectively, Sharapova=Venus - Great Movement...


Ackms421
Jul 5th, 2007, 12:56 AM
...so why would she be expected to win? And frankly, the more I follow the Williams storyline, the more I like them. At this point, I am buying what they are putting out there:

Their losses (99/100 times) have more to do with them than with their opponents.

Injury free, they can walk into any tournament on any surface and (at the very least) threaten for the title.

Serena is one of the best ever and can win whenever she chooses. I mean, really. She held all four slams, went *through* Henin at the French to do so, and went *through* her sister (two-time defending champion of wimbledon, and who would make four *straight* finals when all was said and done)to win Wimbledon. She beats the best. When you throw in AO 05 and 07, where her preparation was ahem, lackluster, you have to show some serious respect. I do not disagree than Henin thoroughly outplayed her this year at RG though.

The point is that while Venus has a losing record to Sharapova, she must have played far below her best in those matches. Sharapova has absolutely nothing to hurt Venus with. They are like clones except Venus' movement is 5times better than Sharapova's. Venus' serve is better, she's stronger at the net. They both hit flat. The only real difference, though, is the movement. It's sort of like when Davenport played Seles in her later years. Very similar players, but Davenport moved much better.

The result is not surprising. Sharapova winning a set would have been...

I don't hate Sharapova, but I do think she's severely overrated. She really doesn't do anything special. Though, if she plays the match of her life, she can win slams..Just won't happen frequently.

tennis_pIayer
Jul 5th, 2007, 01:11 AM
davenport did not beat seles bc of her movement. she beat her b/c she hit the ball bigger and had a MUCH more lethal serve

Ackms421
Jul 5th, 2007, 01:36 AM
She may have hit the ball a little harder; serve was definetly better, but had Seles' movement been as good as Davenport's, the matches would have been closers. Other points notwithstanding...

goldenlox
Jul 5th, 2007, 01:46 AM
Venus has won one major in more than 5 years. Sharapova won 2 as a teen.
I think Sharapova has a big shot to outdo Venus. And she has a winning h2h

Ackms421
Jul 5th, 2007, 01:49 AM
Sure, Sharapova is not done yet, but neither is Venus. And if they (all 3 of them) continue playing well, Venus' post-prime year results are going to seriously detract from Sharapova's prime year results. Take a look at her record against the Williams' in slams. It's horrendous.

goldenlox
Jul 5th, 2007, 01:52 AM
Venus is 27 and Sharapova is 20. Lets see their numbers when they're both retired.
Of course Venus has more majors now, but she won them when Sharapova was 13.

Ackms421
Jul 5th, 2007, 01:58 AM
No point to debate about who will accomplish more after it's all said and done, but I think Maria's having gone 1-4 against the Williams in Grand Slams (during years where even the sternest anti-williams fans would admit were far below their best) says a lot.

goldenlox
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:01 AM
It says she was 17 when she started playing them. No excuse for blowing those match points in the AO SF.
She's going to be the player to beat at majors for years.

Ackms421
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:06 AM
No actually that argument falls flat. The only one she won was the one she played when she was 17. I think that highlights that match as an outlier. Sharapova is regarded as a great fighter, but she lost those matchpoints to a greater fighter. Proves the whole point. Sharapova is about 3/5 of a Williams.

goldenlox
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:10 AM
I think you should let Sharapova at least get to 25 years old before you make those assumptions.
She is much more consistent than Venus. That doesn't mean she wins every match.
But over time, consistent greatness builds impressive numbers.

Ackms421
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:17 AM
I disagree. Monica Seles was one of the most consistent players on tour from 97-2002 and she got nothing from it. Another point, you said Venus has one slam in the last five years. If she wins this one (and I know she's a long way from doing it) she will have two in two years. Sharapova will be at 2 in 3 years, so at that point her consistency (and unreasonable number of losses in slam semis) would have produced less than Venus' inconsistent brilliance. Serena also has two in the last two years, and she was outside of the top hundred for a large portion of last year. Consistency produces Jana Novotna and Conchita Martinez. Brilliance produces slams, and that's where the impressive numbers come from.

goldenlox
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:22 AM
Serena has 2 in the last 4 years and counting, because she's already been bounced out of this one. And Justine wasn't at both of those majors.
Venus won one since 2001. Sharapova was born in '87. She was 13 when 2001 started.

Ackms421
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:28 AM
AO 2005, AO 2007... It's two plus years since aussie 05, so you're a little off base there. No where near 'four plus years.' And it doesn't matter how old Sharapova was in 2001. Venus won Wimbledon in 05 and if she wins it this years, it's two in the last 2 plus years. How are you getting four?? If you're forgetting the Aussie 05 and thinking of W 03, then that gives Serena 3. You're fighting a losing battle here. The Williams are on the other side of their career and Sharapova is in her prime, and yet they're handing out straight-set losses to her like they're going out of style. Their slam results over the past 3 years (since Sharapova won) are neck and neck with hers. If Venus wins here, you're running on fumes. Proves that sporadic brilliance trumps consistency.

darrinbaker00
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:29 AM
Objectively, Sharapova = Venus - Great Movement - Net Play - Bootyliciousness. ;)

goldenlox
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:34 AM
Sharapova=Venus-30 in ranking -7 years +many endorsements and webhits

G1Player2
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:36 AM
Venus is 27 and Sharapova is 20. Lets see their numbers when they're both retired.
Of course Venus has more majors now, but she won them when Sharapova was 13.

:weirdo: At the age Maria is now, Venus was dominating the tour with back to back Wimbledon and US Open wins and a near 40 match win streak. What are you talking about? Age has nothing to do with it.

darrinbaker00
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:37 AM
Venus = Sharapova + at least one more round at Wimbledon 2007

Ackms421
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:38 AM
Yep, I'll give you that. Sharapova will definetly be remembered more for her personality than for her tennis. I bet everyone here will give you that.

G1Player2
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:38 AM
Sharapova=Venus-30 in ranking -7 years +many endorsements and webhits

:lol: You are gonna come up with anything today to help you deal with that beatdown today eh?

goldenlox
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:39 AM
If you compare career majors between a 20 and a 27, then age has something to do with it.
Compare career slam totals when they're both retired.
I think Sharapova will do well in that comparison.

Both Venus and Sharapova have been getting beaten down all year. A Tier III win combined.

G1Player2
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:42 AM
If you compare career majors between a 20 and a 27, then age has something to do with it.
Compare career slam totals when they're both retired.
I think Sharapova will do well in that comparison.


Speculation. That's all it is. I remember at age 20 people predicting that Venus would win over 10 majors by 27 and never thought that Serena would ever claw past her. Besides that, the tour is only getting tougher, where as back then with Venus, at or near her best, she was arguably better than anyone at the time. There are still several players who can deal with Sharapova even when Sharapova is at or near her best.

Ackms421
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:44 AM
No. We don't even need to compare the entire slam record of the Williams. Just compare what they've done since Sharapova came into her own. Serena has two slams since that time, and Venus has 1. This is compared to Sharapova's two. Wait until after Wimbledon and they all may be even on this timeframe.

The problem is that, assuming they are all even, Sharapova's in her prime and is putting up the same numbers that the Williams' are while on the downswing. Sharapova has glaring weaknesses. She ain't gonna bag too many more slams...

goldenlox
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:44 AM
Of course it's speculation. So go back to when Sharapova had her 15th birthday. She was ranked around 400.
Since then she's got 2 Venus has 1

spencercarlos
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:48 AM
...so why would she be expected to win? And frankly, the more I follow the Williams storyline, the more I like them. At this point, I am buying what they are putting out there:

Their losses (99/100 times) have more to do with them than with their opponents.

Injury free, they can walk into any tournament on any surface and (at the very least) threaten for the title.

Serena is one of the best ever and can win whenever she chooses. I mean, really. She held all four slams, went *through* Henin at the French to do so, and went *through* her sister (two-time defending champion of wimbledon, and who would make four *straight* finals when all was said and done)to win Wimbledon. She beats the best. When you throw in AO 05 and 07, where her preparation was ahem, lackluster, you have to show some serious respect. I do not disagree than Henin thoroughly outplayed her this year at RG though.

The point is that while Venus has a losing record to Sharapova, she must have played far below her best in those matches. Sharapova has absolutely nothing to hurt Venus with. They are like clones except Venus' movement is 5times better than Sharapova's. Venus' serve is better, she's stronger at the net. They both hit flat. The only real difference, though, is the movement. It's sort of like when Davenport played Seles in her later years. Very similar players, but Davenport moved much better.

The result is not surprising. Sharapova winning a set would have been...

I don't hate Sharapova, but I do think she's severely overrated. She really doesn't do anything special. Though, if she plays the match of her life, she can win slams..Just won't happen frequently.
I agree. Venus had to concentrate and not to choke like she did in Miami, she did it that prefect today. She should not be losing to a player like Sharapova.

goldenlox
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:53 AM
Sharapova's last 4 majors were a win and a final a semi and today.
That's pretty good for 19 into 20.
She has by far the best record of the young players, and other young players only beat her at RG, not the other majors.
She will win at those 3 majors over the years, because she's the best of her age group.

HippityHop
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:53 AM
She may have hit the ball a little harder; serve was definetly better, but had Seles' movement been as good as Davenport's, the matches would have been closers. Other points notwithstanding...


I must say that as much as I like Linds, when I think of great movement, she is not the first player to spring to my mind.

Ackms421
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:57 AM
Certainly not, but she'd be above the Seles of that age, yes? And the Davenport of 99 and on would also rank far above the Davenport of previous years...The point is not that she was a great mover. The point is that she was a great mover relative to Seles, and that was the difference in their results.

moby
Jul 5th, 2007, 03:05 AM
Not that it matters, but Serena did not beat Justine on her way to the 2002 RG. They were both equal favourites for that particular RG, having met in the finals of both Tier 1 red clay tournaments and splitting them, but Justine was ill with fever and was sent out of the tournament in the first round.

As for Sharapova-Venus, Maria will always find it hard to beat Venus on grass. The one thing she's better than Venus at is consistency, and that particular trait is not rewarded on grass, where Venus' athleticism puts her clearly ahead. On a slow to mid-pace hard court, she's able to outgrind Venus.

HippityHop
Jul 5th, 2007, 03:09 AM
Soothsaying is such an embarassing endeavor. I can remember when the conventional wisdom was that Venus would never win a major, then it was she'd never win another major, then is was she and Serena would never be 1 and 2 in the world.

Fishy business, this soothsaying.

DA FOREHAND
Jul 5th, 2007, 03:10 AM
[QUOTE=moby;11133887]Not that it matters, but Serena did not beat Justine on her way to the 2002 RG. They were both equal favourites for that particular RG, having met in the finals of both Tier 1 red clay tournaments and splitting them, but Justine was ill with fever and was sent out of the tournament in the first round.



She was sent home, as in she went to the nurse and got a sick slip, or she was beaten in the first round?:tape:

frontier
Jul 5th, 2007, 03:13 AM
The Russians are slowly becoming a non-factor,there is a new crop of players taking over.
Maria is not losing to the Williams only she is losing to this new group of players.The Russians as we knew them in 2004 and 2006 are fast becoming yesterday's news.Myskina is retiring who is next maybe Demented.

G1Player2
Jul 5th, 2007, 03:13 AM
Not that it matters, but Serena did not beat Justine on her way to the 2002 RG. They were both equal favourites for that particular RG, having met in the finals of both Tier 1 red clay tournaments and splitting them, but Justine was ill with fever and was sent out of the tournament in the first round.

As for Sharapova-Venus, Maria will always find it hard to beat Venus on grass. The one thing she's better than Venus at is consistency, and that particular trait is not rewarded on grass, where Venus' athleticism puts her clearly ahead. On a slow to mid-pace hard court, she's able to outgrind Venus.

That is not true. I've seen all there matches and they never had longer rallies than this one. Besides, Miami played fast this year while Wimbledon was said to be a little slower.

moby
Jul 5th, 2007, 03:17 AM
That is not true. I've seen all there matches and they never had longer rallies than this one. Besides, Miami played fast this year while Wimbledon was said to be a little slower.Oh, I'm not saying she'll outgrind Venus for sure. Just that there's the possibility she might. :tape: Miami is definitely slower than Wimbledon.

On a grass court, Maria just can't recover once she's placed on the defence.

spencercarlos
Jul 5th, 2007, 03:17 AM
Not that it matters, but Serena did not beat Justine on her way to the 2002 RG. They were both equal favourites for that particular RG, having met in the finals of both Tier 1 red clay tournaments and splitting them, but Justine was ill with fever and was sent out of the tournament in the first round.

As for Sharapova-Venus, Maria will always find it hard to beat Venus on grass. The one thing she's better than Venus at is consistency, and that particular trait is not rewarded on grass, where Venus' athleticism puts her clearly ahead. On a slow to mid-pace hard court, she's able to outgrind Venus.
One thing is clear, if Venus plays well and is able to be within herself, Sharapova has absolutely no chance, no matter how she plays. Venus will find a way to get her out of the court and exploit her mobility.
Kind of what happened to Davenport-Venus matches between 1999-2003.

mankind
Jul 5th, 2007, 04:04 AM
The Russians are slowly becoming a non-factor,there is a new crop of players taking over.
Maria is not losing to the Williams only she is losing to this new group of players.The Russians as we knew them in 2004 and 2006 are fast becoming yesterday's news.Myskina is retiring who is next maybe Demented.

Yes, unfortunately 2004 was shown to be, as many predicted, a fluke of a year. :sad: As for Maria, well she may have won another slam, but she's still pretty much a sham of a player. :shrug:

Matt01
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:15 PM
One thing is clear, if Venus plays well and is able to be within herself, Sharapova has absolutely no chance, no matter how she plays. Venus will find a way to get her out of the court and exploit her mobility.
Kind of what happened to Davenport-Venus matches between 1999-2003.

This is absolutely ridiculous, especially the the comparison with Davenport :rolleyes:

goldenlox
Jul 5th, 2007, 02:16 PM
If Venus was a better player than Sharapova, she would have better results over the last few years. She doesn't.