Jul 6th, 2007, 08:42 AM
for me it's Daniela Hantuchova-with her heigh,net game and power she should've won more than 2 titles so far.
and Martina,she should've won that FO 1999... and AO 2002 :bigcry: :bigcry: :bigcry:
what do you think?
p.s Not to mention Anna Kournikova, the biggest bud lucker in tennis maybe.
Jul 6th, 2007, 08:46 AM
We've discussed this over and over and over again.
I don't think there's any point focusing on the should, could and would haves of tennis because if you didn't win, you didn't win. 99.9999999% of players should have achieved more in tennis. Hell, Steffi should have achieved more.
But if you're talking about the people who never seem to live up to their potential, it's Hantuchova, Hingis, Davenport, Kournikova, Myskina, Dementieva, Petrova, Majoli, Pierce, Goolagong, Mauresmo, etc etc etc.
Jul 6th, 2007, 09:11 AM
Everyone could have achieved more and so many should have. Even Justine, who is incredibly acomplished should have at least one more GS title, given the 3 lost finals last year, but that's life and in the end no one cares about your potential and looks at the actual results. Maybe if you are so hyped and fail to come through over and over again, you didn't have that much potential in the first place, as tennis is not only about talent, but even more about hard work, abnegation and mentality.