PDA

View Full Version : Winning Stats


VenusSerena
Jul 8th, 2002, 06:56 PM
I wanted to see how Venus, Serena, and Jennifer have been playing since Wimbledon 2001. And the reason why I picked Wimbledon 2001 was b/c everyone was talking about Jennifer by then. How she is doing so good, and has a real good Chance for the "Grand Slam". And at the time she was really the only one that could challenge them. So here are their winning stats from 2001 Wimbledon to end of 2002 Wimbledon.

Serena- 58-6- 91%
Venus- 65-7- 90%
Jennifer 56-16- 78%

I'd hate to say it, but I have been saying it. Jennifer was just a Fluke, a 1999 Ameilie Mauresmo win she made it to the Ausie Finals. Some people don't believe me when I say that inorder to be deserving of your Grandslam Titles, you would need to beat the best(a williams). At the time of Jennifer's winnings, she only beat 1 williams out of her grand slam wins. Now some may not agree with me that you have to beat a williams inorder for it to be deserving, but that is how i feel. That is how it was when Martina was winning. You had to beat her to be deserving of the title, cuz she was playing the best at that time. Jennifer only beat Serena at the 2001 French Open. That title she desrves. But her others, I don't think she really deserves. Had she ran into Venus or Serena at the 2001 and 2002 Aussie Open, I don't think she would've had a chance in hell. When you look at her winning percentage and stats. She has only had four titles from last year to this year. Venus has had 10 and Serena 8. She can continue to play. But from now on, since Serena has been playing so great. There is a very big gap between the sisters and cappy. They were saying that She was the only one that had a chance at stopping an all williams affair at the Championships, but she got handily defeated by Mauresmo. Right now no one can beat Venus and Serena except eachother. Jennifer I feel can get beat my players like Seles, Clijsters, Henin, Davenport, Hingis, and Mauresmo. Just those players. And you are not considered the best if you have all those people that going into a match have high odds against you. Like I said in my earlier post. Jennifer is quickly turning into Kournikova, not the winning factor, but the fact that she can't win tournies. She can play, but when it comes to the later rounds, she is defeated by a williams or another player. I hand it to Jennifer that she has a had a great comeback, but you have to back it up. Don't make things a one time deal. You said that you can "hit with them" meaning the sisters. I remember that remark clearly. Now that you can "hit with them" please, show me that you can also beat them! I've seen you defeat them, meaning they beat them seleves, but you have not beaten them yet. And they way things are looking. Unelss you come up with a better serve, and backhand. Tough luck is all I can think of!

villa
Jul 8th, 2002, 07:17 PM
You can only beat who you play, not jen's fault the williams didn't reach the later rounds of the slams she won.
It would make far more sense (something you clearly lack) to post a topic about how jens form has dipped since last year rather than say say she never had any form and was a fluke.

RAA
Jul 8th, 2002, 07:50 PM
It cannot be a fluke to win THREE grand slam titles. Thats totally ridiculous. Jen played who was in the field and beat her opponents.
same with Hingis' five GSs.
I don't understand why people don't get it - if you diminish Jen's Three grand slams then you also diminish Monica's 9 GS and Venus' 4 and Serena's 3. It can't only be your fave who won the grand slams "legitimately".
a fluke is Iva Majoli. jen cap is no fluke, plus in 2001 form, she did beat a 2001-form Serena.

villa
Jul 8th, 2002, 09:07 PM
Originally posted by RAA
It cannot be a fluke to win THREE grand slam titles. Thats totally ridiculous. Jen played who was in the field and beat her opponents.
same with Hingis' five GSs.
I don't understand why people don't get it - if you diminish Jen's Three grand slams then you also diminish Monica's 9 GS and Venus' 4 and Serena's 3. It can't only be your fave who won the grand slams "legitimately".
a fluke is Iva Majoli. jen cap is no fluke, plus in 2001 form, she did beat a 2001-form Serena.

You've just contradicted yourself, iva mojoli won 7 matches at the french open, she beat all the players she faced in that tournament and the world no.1, during those two weeks she was the best player at the french open and desreved her title.

Ryan
Jul 8th, 2002, 09:20 PM
VenusSerena, get help. Jen can't help that she didn't play Venus or Serena at the slams she won. If you think the winner has to beat Venus or Serena at one point, thats saying that Venus didn't deserve her Wimby 01 because JENNIFER CAPRIATI beat Serena. Or that Serena didn't deserve her US 99 title because MARTINA HINGS beat Venus. Moron, yes. Jennifer's 3 slams(equivalent to Serena's) are a complete fluke, and she deserved only the one where she beat Serena.:rolleyes:

evadafan
Jul 8th, 2002, 09:26 PM
Its not Jen's fault Venus could only win two games from Hingis in the Australian semis, or that they were both on the other side of the draw. I think beating Hingis in Australia (3 titles all to herself) is a greater achievement than beating a Williams in Australia (0 titles for both)