PDA

View Full Version : Just in case there was Doubt that Women's tennis had Sunk into the Abyss...


Steffica Greles
Sep 14th, 2007, 01:39 PM
First of all, a great win from Lindsay. In numbers, she would not quite rest on the highest perch of all-time greats, but in terms of ability she most certainly does, and always did. So let's take nothing away from her.

But that cannot hide that this result was. not. meant. to. happen. The world number 3 is beaten by a player who has given birth and been away a year, in her first tournament back.

Any more evidence needed for the fools who REALLY think that the standard of women's tennis has shot up? Frankly, there's more gaps at the top of the game than there ever has been. What a sorry, sorry embarrassment for the women's game, and what an indicator of the mess women's tennis is in.

cellophane
Sep 14th, 2007, 01:43 PM
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. It just means that Lindsay is a great player. Was it pathetic when Kim came back ranked in the hundreds after the injury and swept through Indian Wells and Miami? That's how good they are. That, and Jelena is tired, I'm sure. If lindsay came back to win the US Open, you would be right.

Marcell
Sep 14th, 2007, 01:44 PM
I think this is not an indication of the state of women's tennis. You have to understand that Jelena has played too much in my opinion.She has to be careful that she doesn't burn herself out.

Lunaris
Sep 14th, 2007, 01:46 PM
One loss isn't an indication of anything. If your thread wasn't reactionary we could take it more seriously. But your opinion is based on the result of one match and that sucks.

hectopascal
Sep 14th, 2007, 01:49 PM
Yes. Jelena was not playing her best and was fatigued, as she has already said at the US Open. Davenport is a former #1 player, so she is no pushover. What about the sorry state of mens tennis, with #4 ranked Davydenko losing to a nobody in the first round of Bangkok?! Everybody has bad days, including top players.

Were you thinking about how women's tennis was going downhill after Seles made a remarkable comeback? I guess not, because top players will always regain their form if they are determined enough.

jujufreak
Sep 14th, 2007, 01:52 PM
First of all, a great win from Lindsay. In numbers, she would not quite rest on the highest perch of all-time greats, but in terms of ability she most certainly does, and always did. So let's take nothing away from her.

But that cannot hide that this result was. not. meant. to. happen. The world number 3 is beaten by a player who has given birth and been away a year, in her first tournament back.

Any more evidence needed for the fools who REALLY think that the standard of women's tennis has shot up? Frankly, there's more gaps at the top of the game than there ever has been. What a sorry, sorry embarrassment for the women's game, and what an indicator of the mess women's tennis is in.

Agassi at 35-36 still beating most players, winning against Baghdatis, number eight in the world, having a messed up back, does that show the decline of men's tennis? I'm sure if Sampras wanted to come back, he'd still beat most of the players too.

Not every female player can achieve what Lindsay does, she's a champion.

I think women's tennis is better than let's say nine or ten years ago, when I became interested in the game

jujufreak
Sep 14th, 2007, 01:53 PM
Yes. Jelena was not playing her best and was fatigued, as she has already said at the US Open. Davenport is a former #1 player, so she is no pushover. What about the sorry state of mens tennis, with #4 ranked Davydenko losing to a nobody in the first round of Bangkok?! Everybody has bad days, including top players.

Were you thinking about how women's tennis was going downhill after Seles made a remarkable comeback? I guess not, because top players will always regain their form if they are determined enough.

I agree, but Cilic isn't a nobody ;)

lindsayno1
Sep 14th, 2007, 01:53 PM
What a load of crap. Davenport is one of the greatest female tennis players..period. Shes had a baby...it doesnt mean that shes lost her magic. Her ranking isnt a true reflection of anything. Jelena has played too much and was going to come up short at some point. She said herself before the match that shes exhausted and hasn't trained much. Jelena has done plenty this year to prove she is a top player. Shes beaten Sharapova, got to 2 grand slam semi finals for starters!

spencercarlos
Sep 14th, 2007, 01:54 PM
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. It just means that Lindsay is a great player. Was it pathetic when Kim came back ranked in the hundreds after the injury and swept through Indian Wells and Miami? That's how good they are. That, and Jelena is tired, I'm sure. If lindsay came back to win the US Open, you would be right.
Kim was playing in 2004, and reached a grand slam final.. more of a better example would be Hingis who cameback from 3 and a half years of abscense and beat most of the top 20 players.

hectopascal
Sep 14th, 2007, 01:54 PM
Hehe...... sorry I had never heard of him before so just assumed he was low ranked!

tennnisfannn
Sep 14th, 2007, 01:55 PM
And having a baby is not a disease or an injury, it does not cripple, it is only tme consuming and therefore Lindsay can hit her stride as long a she want to.

harloo
Sep 14th, 2007, 01:56 PM
I didn't see anyone question why Canas defeated Federer two times this summer in Indian Wells and Miami. He was off the tour for years due to doping charges. Not one peep, but soon as Lindsay(a former #1 player/Multiple slam winner) beats the current #3 player in the world we hear this dribble about women's tennis.:o

JackFrost
Sep 14th, 2007, 01:57 PM
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. It just means that Lindsay is a great player. Was it pathetic when Kim came back ranked in the hundreds after the injury and swept through Indian Wells and Miami? That's how good they are. That, and Jelena is tired, I'm sure. If lindsay came back to win the US Open, you would be right.

It means, Lindsay is a great player and Jelena is not. :shrug:
I like Jankovic a lot, but that was a number 3 not worthy.
To be honest...some of the current top 10 players ARE Top 10 players, because the real great player are missing and someone has to fill up the spots.

JackFrost
Sep 14th, 2007, 02:00 PM
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. It just means that Lindsay is a great player. Was it pathetic when Kim came back ranked in the hundreds after the injury and swept through Indian Wells and Miami? That's how good they are. That, and Jelena is tired, I'm sure. If lindsay came back to win the US Open, you would be right.

If jelena is tired, then she should go to bed and spare us and herself with this kind of matches.

The Daviator
Sep 14th, 2007, 02:03 PM
No offence to Jelenka (I'm a fan :yeah:) but Lindsay is a class above and should be winning this match-up, she's the type of player who can get back into the swing of things quick, she came back after a long lay-off in 2002 and made the semis of the US Open a few weeks later, she came back after foot surgery in 2004 and was winning titles left, right and centre, she has that natural ball-striking ability :drool: that makes her tough regardless...

So I think you can make an exception ;)

tennnisfannn
Sep 14th, 2007, 02:04 PM
Larry better send Lindsay a list of players she shouldn't beat until an acceptable time has elapsed to save face of the wta.

A Magicman
Sep 14th, 2007, 02:05 PM
First of all, a great win from Lindsay. In numbers, she would not quite rest on the highest perch of all-time greats, but in terms of ability she most certainly does, and always did. So let's take nothing away from her.

But that cannot hide that this result was. not. meant. to. happen. The world number 3 is beaten by a player who has given birth and been away a year, in her first tournament back.

Any more evidence needed for the fools who REALLY think that the standard of women's tennis has shot up? Frankly, there's more gaps at the top of the game than there ever has been. What a sorry, sorry embarrassment for the women's game, and what an indicator of the mess women's tennis is in.

Totally agree. Amateurish sport. Unfortunately it was one of my faves to make me realize that today.

I don't want to diminuish the achievement of Lindsay Davenport - but this result would have been a no-no thing in any professional kinda sport.

Expat
Sep 14th, 2007, 02:10 PM
more than that i am amazed that how long will the USTA depend on the williams sisters and davenport
they aren't developing any new players why????

Tennisaddict
Sep 14th, 2007, 02:24 PM
No, all this proves is that Davenport is a better player than Jelena and that Jelena is only nr.3 because the real elite is missing and or struggling.

Jelena's game is a good match up for Davenport. She doesn't make a lot of mistakes and instead has clean groundstrokes with a lot of pressure on them. Her serve is very crucial as well. Davenport probably hit the crap out of Jelena's serve and outplayed her from the baseline.

Davenport is a true elite player along with Venus, Serena, Henin and Clijsters (when she was playing) no matter where they're ranked.

miffedmax
Sep 14th, 2007, 03:32 PM
And I'm sure all Lindsay did prior to the baby's birth and in the months afterwards was sit around in bed, eating bon-bons, watching Oprah, and yelling at John to rub her feet.

Seriously, not to sound jealous or mean, but compared to most folks Linds probably has a staff to help her with her kid, so she's probably not as frazzled as your typical new mom operating on 3 hours of sleep. She also, from what I hear, drilled her ass off to prepare for her return.

Vee, Ree, Hingis, Henin, all have come back from injuries and long layoffs to perform very well. Now, if only it would happen with a couple of my favorites . . .

Vamos.
Sep 14th, 2007, 03:48 PM
Jelena is a different type of top player. She is a glorified pusher. Very talented, great personality and so on but she simply does not have BIG weapons. She relies on other players to defeat themselves quite often. She has great groundstrokes and the rest but she can be OUTPLAYED by better players without having anything to say about it. That is clear.

Davenport has a huge, imposing game and if she is anywhere near on then she can just simply outplay Jelena. JJ doesn't have the weapons to compete on that level. :shrug:...

Anyone else in the top 10 might well have ousted Davenport but Jelena is a very unique type of player.

terjw
Sep 14th, 2007, 03:51 PM
Larry better send Lindsay a list of players she shouldn't beat until an acceptable time has elapsed to save face of the wta.

:lol: :lol: Good one.

As far as the original post lamenting the state of the women's game - let that OP whine and mope in the corner while the rest of us enjoy what might happen next. I find it interesting when great players make a comeback - Seles, Kim, Martina, Serena, now Lindsay. And Lindsay's is only 1 year out - that's not that long. It adds a bit of spice and interest.

You can't say on just one match if Lindsay will pass Jelena or not - that will unfold with time. But it makes the tour more interesting. I don't see it as proof that women's tennis has sunk into the abyss at all.

Matt01
Sep 14th, 2007, 04:05 PM
Jelena is a different type of top player. She is a glorified pusher. Very talented, great personality and so on but she simply does not have BIG weapons. She relies on other players to defeat themselves quite often. She has great groundstrokes and the rest but she can be OUTPLAYED by better players without having anything to say about it. That is clear.

I can see where some of your points are coming from but I really disagree that Jankovic has no big weapons. Just because she doesn't strike as hard as Lindsay or Venus doesn't mean that she has no big weapons.

Vamos.
Sep 14th, 2007, 04:09 PM
I can see where some of your points are coming from but I really disagree that Jankovic has no big weapons. Just because she doesn't strike as hard as Lindsay or Venus doesn't mean that she has no big weapons.

Well name them. And think carefully about the term weapon.

Matt01
Sep 14th, 2007, 04:13 PM
Well name them. And think carefully about the term weapon.

Read my post from August 20th, 2007, the thread was called "Jankovic is a poor woman's Kim Clijsters" :rolleyes: :

"Her backhand down the line is big weapon. Her consistancy is a weapon. Her speed and quickness and flexibility on the court are a weapon. Her stamina is a weapon. Don't be ridiculous :rolleyes: "

Tennisstar86
Sep 14th, 2007, 04:30 PM
Last time i checked... Having a baby only affected movement..... not her strokes which have always been the best in the game... AND her movement has always been poor... Was lindsay not top ten when she left the game last year? The game hasnt changed much in a year. ANd yes i agree womens tennis isnt as good as it once was; however, this is not an example of why.... Theres a reason lindsay has the most number of weeks as the #2 player.... and most in top 5.

Shvedbarilescu
Sep 14th, 2007, 04:50 PM
First of all, a great win from Lindsay. In numbers, she would not quite rest on the highest perch of all-time greats, but in terms of ability she most certainly does, and always did. So let's take nothing away from her.

But that cannot hide that this result was. not. meant. to. happen. The world number 3 is beaten by a player who has given birth and been away a year, in her first tournament back.

Any more evidence needed for the fools who REALLY think that the standard of women's tennis has shot up? Frankly, there's more gaps at the top of the game than there ever has been. What a sorry, sorry embarrassment for the women's game, and what an indicator of the mess women's tennis is in.

Dumb lazy and reactionary post. Trying to make an argument about the state of women's tennis and basing it on one single result is just the height of stupidity. Do not expect to ever be taken seriously if you continue to produce posts as superficial and empty as this. Player A beats Player B so tennis sucks. Yeah right. :rolleyes:

Tennisstar86
Sep 14th, 2007, 05:16 PM
Also.... In 2002 Serena came back from a big injury and ended up winning 4 grand slams in a row....

In 1995 Seles came back from her stabbing and made the finals of the US Open and then won the AO...... So your point.... really has no merit...

Corswandt
Sep 14th, 2007, 05:19 PM
Dumb lazy and reactionary post. Trying to make an argument about the state of women's tennis and basing it on one single result is just the height of stupidity. Do not expect to ever be taken seriously if you continue to produce posts as superficial and empty as this. Player A beats Player B so tennis sucks. Yeah right. :rolleyes:

Or this one:

http://www.wtaworld.com/showpost.php?p=11593927&postcount=62

The part about the "claycourt strokes" is priceless.

Jankovic is completely spent, and I see no reason why she would waste any more of what little energy she has left on this shitty ass TIII.

A case can be made that women's tennis is now lacking some competitiveness at the highest level, at least when compared to how things were (or seemed to be) in late 2005/early 2006, but Steffica Greles is so full of shit he ruins any chance of a meaningful discussion from the get go.

P3
Sep 14th, 2007, 05:30 PM
more than that i am amazed that how long will the USTA depend on the williams sisters and davenport
they aren't developing any new players why????

Lalit,

The USTA are developing players, just not for the United States.

dwynn10
Sep 14th, 2007, 05:37 PM
Jelena is a different type of top player. She is a glorified pusher. Very talented, great personality and so on but she simply does not have BIG weapons. She relies on other players to defeat themselves quite often. She has great groundstrokes and the rest but she can be OUTPLAYED by better players without having anything to say about it. That is clear.

Davenport has a huge, imposing game and if she is anywhere near on then she can just simply outplay Jelena. JJ doesn't have the weapons to compete on that level. :shrug:...

Anyone else in the top 10 might well have ousted Davenport but Jelena is a very unique type of player.

Yes, much as I'm a fan of Jankovic, based on her matches lately, I would have to agree with you that she really doesn't have any big weapons, other than her defensive skills. Fatigue may be a factor in her defeat to Lindsay, but that's a wash when you consider that Davenport is 31 years-old and just coming back from having a baby and a year-long absence on the tour. Btw, way, way to go, Lindsay! Mama is back and she means business!

Now that Mauresmo is also back (yay!), it'll be interesting to see if the new girls, i.e. Jankovic, Ivanovic, and Bartoli, can keep their rankings. It's probably just a fantasy, but it would be great to see Seles and Capriati make a comeback too.

mr_burns
Sep 14th, 2007, 05:43 PM
look to whom novak lost rigt after wimbledon...

woosey
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:05 PM
suffice it to say that if a healthy davenport, venus, serena, and amelie are back playing, the rankings will shift and the truth shall be revealed.

it will be made clear who the pretenders are.

if you can't beat a group of overweight, baby mama, injured, old biootches, you are not for real.

frontier
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:06 PM
Lindsay is a legitimate top 5 player,and she is very consistent.Jelena has no win against Lindsay because the latter rarely makes mistakes on her powerful serve,and jj is always waiting for an error.
I am totally happy Lindsay has decided to come back and hope she claims her place in the top ten as soon as possible.
Womens'tennis is in the doldrums and if the fab 8 like Lindsay,Serena,Venus,Henin,Momo,Pova,Kim,and Capriati all play the tour will be on fire ,unfortunately we have to contend with lacklustre matches over and over again.

Seyz
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:13 PM
I agree. jelena Jankovic is as we have said in the other threads; a defensive baseliner. She will get everything and anything back so whether or not she wins highly depends on how well the player across the net is playing. She should have no problems defeating anyone outside of the top 10 even not playing defensive tennis, because even though she doesn't have weapons, she definitely has better movement, better backhands/foreheads and ball striking ability than most players outside the top 10. However, when she plays super champions like Venus, Serena, Lindsay or Justine.. then it's more of a matter of whether or not those other players self-destruct.. if they don't, then JJ's chances are much slimmer.

jellybelly
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:21 PM
Lalit,

The USTA are developing players, just not for the United States.

No they're not. Those foreign players go to PRIVATE academies. The USTA only develops American players. In this current generation, they have only been able to produce two top 10 players: Davenport and Rubin. All other top 10 Americans were not USTA products.

Elldee
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:25 PM
I can kind of see both sides of the argument.

Firstly, Lindsay is a great player and was clearly playing well as showcased in her thrashing of danilidou. Similarly, many top players like Henin, Clijsters and Serena [as well as Lindsay herself] have comeback really strong because they have something you can't lose. HOWEVER, none of them had produced life [and Lindsay actually had a C-section] which changes your body so much and limits what you can do. Furthermore, if Jelena wanted a holiday in Bali then she should have had one and not entered the tournement... she should have taken the opportunity to get a win over a former world number one whom she'd lost to before very seriously and assert herself rather than bolstering Lindsay's comeback and throwing her own achievements into doubt.

empressionist
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:29 PM
this forum is full of people who think that the Americans are the only ones who can make tennis for what it is. and you people don't realise that the youngest American who is a great champion is Serena, and is aged 26! that means she is closer to the end of career then she is to the beginning. i totally understand your need to hang on to a plyer like lindsay who is 31 and may as well play one more season, as it is hard to realise that the future of tennis sre Ana and Jelena plus kuznetsova, Chakvetadze, Sharapova, and noo Americans in site. My point is, this was just one match, in a tournament with no real meaning for Jelena. plus Jelena played a LOT this season, and is really burning out at the moment. my point is, she's had a faboulous season, and should be ranked at number 2 just behind Justine, and she's proved it a couple of times this season when she was a real challenge to Justine.

People, the years are going by, and there is nothing we can do about it! we should enjoy tha players we have, and the matches they present us with. I for one would be thrilled to have Monica back, and playing great, but that's just history now. lindsay is a great champion, but who knows what can happen, nice to have her back at the moment, but she is just not the future of tennis anymore.

Tennisstar86
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:29 PM
I can kind of see both sides of the argument.

Firstly, Lindsay is a great player and was clearly playing well as showcased in her thrashing of danilidou. Similarly, many top players like Henin, Clijsters and Serena [as well as Lindsay herself] have comeback really strong because they have something you can't lose. HOWEVER, none of them had produced life [and Lindsay actually had a C-section] which changes your body so much and limits what you can do. Furthermore, if Jelena wanted a holiday in Bali then she should have had one and not entered the tournement... she should have taken the opportunity to get a win over a former world number one whom she'd lost to before very seriously and assert herself rather than bolstering Lindsay's comeback and throwing her own achievements into doubt.

a c-section would affect Davenports movement... Last time i checked she was never known as a great "mover" lol; however, to say Jankovic didnt care.... go to the davenport rides out jelena's meltdown....She obviously cared and most players cant get bad calls/ overrules out of their heads... even the best.

See Serena williams 2003 quaters of french open for an example..... or even Serena Williams 2004 quarters of the US Open.....

empressionist
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:34 PM
I agree. jelena Jankovic is as we have said in the other threads; a defensive baseliner. She will get everything and anything back so whether or not she wins highly depends on how well the player across the net is playing. She should have no problems defeating anyone outside of the top 10 even not playing defensive tennis, because even though she doesn't have weapons, she definitely has better movement, better backhands/foreheads and ball striking ability than most players outside the top 10. However, when she plays super champions like Venus, Serena, Lindsay or Justine.. then it's more of a matter of whether or not those other players self-destruct.. if they don't, then JJ's chances are much slimmer.

oh, please, jelena had Justine on the ropes many times, and in fact it was Jelena who self-destructed, and allowed her to win it. and at US open it was just pure luck that Venus won. it could have easily been Jelena in the semis. I mean really, enough with the hating already!

champGS1452
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:34 PM
I didn't see anyone question why Canas defeated Federer two times this summer in Indian Wells and Miami. He was off the tour for years due to doping charges. Not one peep, but soon as Lindsay(a former #1 player/Multiple slam winner) beats the current #3 player in the world we hear this dribble about women's tennis.:o

Spot on. :)

There are many factors that have all been stated as to why Lindsay won.

Elldee
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:34 PM
a c-section would affect Davenports movement... Last time i checked she was never known as a great "mover" lol; however, to say Jankovic didnt care.... go to the davenport rides out jelena's meltdown....She obviously cared and most players cant get bad calls/ overrules out of their heads... even the best.

See Serena williams 2003 quaters of french open for an example..... or even Serena Williams 2004 quarters of the US Open.....

She grew a child inside her and gave birth three months and four days ago... there's poor movement and then there's THAT. A woman's body changes completely after having a baby and as Lindsay said herself, she's finding she hurts in whole new places.

I also meant to add, and I was thinking of more Ivanovic and Vaidisova than Jankovic, but the up and comers who are coming up and touted for slams are, IMO, inferior to Lindsay. Ivanovic and Vaidisova have inferior ballstriking abilities and aren't amazing movers like Clijsters/Henin/Venus/Serena who drove Lindsay from the game, whilst Peer or whoever are far less impressive off the ground but good movers.

Tennisstar86
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:35 PM
oh, please, jelena had Justine on the ropes many times, and in fact it was Jelena who self-destructed, and allowed her to win it. and at US open it was just pure luck that Venus won. it could have easily been Jelena in the semis. I mean really, enough with the hating already!

lol... ok Serena....

lol Venus held in there protected her serve with BIG bombs... which is what having a big serve is good for (Jelena wouldnt know about that) and then out played Jankovic in the tie break... lol Serena is rubbin off on everyone..:lol: :lol:

Tennisstar86
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:38 PM
She grew a child inside her and gave birth three months and four days ago... there's poor movement and then there's THAT. A woman's body changes completely after having a baby and as Lindsay said herself, she's finding she hurts in whole new places.

I also meant to add, and I was thinking of more Ivanovic and Vaidisova than Jankovic, but the up and comers who are coming up and touted for slams are, IMO, inferior to Lindsay. Ivanovic and Vaidisova have inferior ballstriking abilities and aren't amazing movers like Clijsters/Henin/Venus/Serena who drove Lindsay from the game, whilst Peer or whoever are far less impressive off the ground but good movers.

I wouldnt say they drove her from the game. last i check Davenport ended 2004 and 2005 as the #1 ranked player.....

And yes she may hurt in all new places... That doesnt however effect her strokes and hand eye coordination...

Donny
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:42 PM
I didn't see anyone question why Canas defeated Federer two times this summer in Indian Wells and Miami. He was off the tour for years due to doping charges. Not one peep, but soon as Lindsay(a former #1 player/Multiple slam winner) beats the current #3 player in the world we hear this dribble about women's tennis.:o

When Fed lost, every tennis fan on the internet was commenting on how crappy Federer played those two matches- in fact, he's been playing pretty bad ever since Dubai.

Elldee
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:43 PM
I wouldnt say they drove her from the game. last i check Davenport ended 2004 and 2005 as the #1 ranked player.....

And yes she may hurt in all new places... That doesnt however effect her strokes and hand eye coordination...


No, that'd probably be her year off. Plus, she said her positioning around the ball wasn't what it was.

Lindsay Dee was pushed from the game in 2002/2003, IMO, and even after that she wasn't tipped for slam success and has had bad results against the big four [particularly in the big matches]. Although, before you bring it up, she did beat clijsters in the fourth round at both wimbledon and RG and that was ACE. I think for the rest of this tournement and next year her bodies ability to recover and staying injury free will be of the greatest important and Lindsay's confidence that she'll be ok.

frontier
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:46 PM
oh, please, jelena had Justine on the ropes many times, and in fact it was Jelena who self-destructed, and allowed her to win it. and at US open it was just pure luck that Venus won. it could have easily been Jelena in the semis. I mean really, enough with the hating already!
Venus was outplaying Jelena from the second set onwards specially on the forehand side.Jelena is showing signs of burnout since Wimbledon,if she has good management she should take a break from now till middle October before she plays end of year event otherwise next year we will see a slide in rankings and form.Jelena can trouble Venus on slower surfaces ,but on the fast courts she must not always wait for errors.Jelena is growing on me but one thing I have noticed is lack of focus when it matters.

empressionist
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:51 PM
suffice it to say that if a healthy davenport, venus, serena, and amelie are back playing, the rankings will shift and the truth shall be revealed.

it will be made clear who the pretenders are.

if you can't beat a group of overweight, baby mama, injured, old biootches, you are not for real.

yeah right, and now all we need is Evert, Navratilova and Graf back and playing their best, and be like 10-20 years younger, and we would have a great tennis circuit which you would probably like more.

empressionist
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:51 PM
Venus was outplaying Jelena from the second set onwards specially on the forehand side.Jelena is showing signs of burnout since Wimbledon,if she has good management she should take a break from now till middle October before she plays end of year event otherwise next year we will see a slide in rankings and form.Jelena can trouble Venus on slower surfaces ,but on the fast courts she must not always wait for errors.Jelena is growing on me but one thing I have noticed is lack of focus when it matters.

on this i mostly do agree with you :)

Bruno71
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:52 PM
Since when is the ability to change directions on very difficult shots not a weapon (one result of this is one of the more highly touted BTDL's in the game)? Since when is the ability to run down most balls AND send them back with pace not a weapon? Since when is a great swing volley not a weapon?

I do think that JJ often doesn't play aggressively enough and is content to counter-punch, but that doesn't mean her weapons aren't there to begin with. Some people on this board have very short memories and/or are blinded by their own biases against certain players.

Timariot
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:54 PM
Clown Era of WTA.

'nuff said.

Kart
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:55 PM
First of all, a great win from Lindsay. In numbers, she would not quite rest on the highest perch of all-time greats, but in terms of ability she most certainly does, and always did. So let's take nothing away from her.

But that cannot hide that this result was. not. meant. to. happen. The world number 3 is beaten by a player who has given birth and been away a year, in her first tournament back.

Any more evidence needed for the fools who REALLY think that the standard of women's tennis has shot up? Frankly, there's more gaps at the top of the game than there ever has been. What a sorry, sorry embarrassment for the women's game, and what an indicator of the mess women's tennis is in.

I agree in principle but I don't think being ranked no.3 is a particularly great indication of great tennis ability in today's game - particularly where Jankovic is concerned, the big match abilities have yet to be proven.

That said, I did expect Jelena to win this match comfortably - she gives Venus so many problems, I'd have thought her stamina and retrieval skills would have worn Lindsay out.

dwynn10
Sep 14th, 2007, 06:59 PM
I also meant to add, and I was thinking of more Ivanovic and Vaidisova than Jankovic, but the up and comers who are coming up and touted for slams are, IMO, inferior to Lindsay. Ivanovic and Vaidisova have inferior ballstriking abilities and aren't amazing movers like Clijsters/Henin/Venus/Serena who drove Lindsay from the game, whilst Peer or whoever are far less impressive off the ground but good movers.

I would say that Vaidisova has been a big bust so far, and agree that neither she nor Ivanovic has great ball-striking abilities or movement. Serena may have been a great mover in the past, but the extra weight hasn't done her any favors. Maybe I'm missing something, but some of the new girls, e.g. Ivanovic, Chakvetadze, Vaidisova, Bartoli, Szavay, Safarova, and Peer don't seem to have anything particularly special in their games. Some of them may end up winning a Slam eventually by default, because the older, much greater generation will have retired by then.

LoveFifteen
Sep 14th, 2007, 07:03 PM
First of all, a great win from Lindsay. In numbers, she would not quite rest on the highest perch of all-time greats, but in terms of ability she most certainly does, and always did. So let's take nothing away from her.

But that cannot hide that this result was. not. meant. to. happen. The world number 3 is beaten by a player who has given birth and been away a year, in her first tournament back.

Any more evidence needed for the fools who REALLY think that the standard of women's tennis has shot up? Frankly, there's more gaps at the top of the game than there ever has been. What a sorry, sorry embarrassment for the women's game, and what an indicator of the mess women's tennis is in.

I've been reading your posts for almost two years. You seem to hate women's tennis. Why don't you stop watching? I'm not being sarcastic. I mean, seriously, you don't seem to enjoy it at all. :shrug:

babsi
Sep 14th, 2007, 07:05 PM
The problem with Steffica Greles is that he comes off as very aggressive and states his opinion as fact. The constant tirade against Mirjana years ago put me off and now the Martina one is in full force.

But saying all of that he does somehow have a point. Jankovic is #3 and she loses to a player who hasn't played in a year after having a baby. IMO that really shouldn't happen. The world #3 should find a way to take it but Davenport has the shots and the only things she needs is the fitness and matchplay. It is far easier for someone like Davenport to come back than say Mauresmo (good example as she is coming back next week albeit in very different circumstances).

woosey
Sep 14th, 2007, 07:06 PM
yeah right, and now all we need is Evert, Navratilova and Graf back and playing their best, and be like 10-20 years younger, and we would have a great tennis circuit which you would probably like more.

i would like for old broads not to be able to come back and beat these supposedly top players so easily. that is not how it is supposed to be. it's ok when it happens occasionally. but it happens too much for it to be ok.

when michael jordan came back from retirement, the other players did their best to make sure he did not dominate in the way he used to. why? cuz it would look bad and be a poor reflection of their level of play and the quality/legitimacy of the nba. like they can't beat some aging dude who just retired and hasn't played. it's about pride.

but, sure, i wouldn't mind if graf came back. i'll bet she could kick some ass. most of these girls would be crapping in their pants just like hingis was during that french open final.

RenaSlam.
Sep 14th, 2007, 07:10 PM
The quality of tennis dropped after the 2003 season due to injuries. :)

Timariot
Sep 14th, 2007, 07:14 PM
The quality of tennis dropped after the 2001 season due to injuries. :)

Made just a slight correction...

Shvedbarilescu
Sep 14th, 2007, 07:17 PM
Hey guys. It's a Tier III. Jankovic has virtually no points to gain from winning here, she is tired as hell, and is basically only here because unlike so many players on the circuit she feels a responsibility to forfill her commitments to the tour. For Davenport is her first singles tournament in a about a year and obviously this is a very big opportunity for her to show the world she is still a force. Think very hard. Which player is going to be more motivated to win this match. Okay?

Now can we just end this stupid malarkey that this match indicates anything beyond the obvious facts that Davenport is playing pretty well in her 1st tournament back and Jankovic is tired.

Bruno71
Sep 14th, 2007, 07:21 PM
Hey guys. It's a Tier III. Jankovic has virtually no points to gain from winning here, she is tired as hell, and is basically only here because unlike so many players on the circuit she feels a responsibility to forfill her commitments to the tour. For Davenport is her first singles tournament in a about a year and obviously this is a very big opportunity for her to show the world she is still a force. Think very hard. Which player is going to be more motivated to win this match. Okay?

Now can we just end this stupid malarkey that this match indicates anything beyond the obvious facts that Davenport is playing pretty well in her 1st tournament back and Jankovic is tired.

Chris...you're making too much sense here...some people aren't used to that :lol:

A player is only as good or bad as their last loss or win to WTAWorld posters, no matter if it happens at a slam or a rinky-dink sideshow. The collective short-term memory on this board is wondrous.

RenaSlam.
Sep 14th, 2007, 07:21 PM
Made just a slight correction...

Hope you aren't talking about Hingis. :lol:

woosey
Sep 14th, 2007, 07:26 PM
Hey guys. It's a Tier III. Jankovic has virtually no points to gain from winning here, she is tired as hell, and is basically only here because unlike so many players on the circuit she feels a responsibility to forfill her commitments to the tour. For Davenport is her first singles tournament in a about a year and obviously this is a very big opportunity for her to show the world she is still a force. Think very hard. Which player is going to be more motivated to win this match. Okay?

Now can we just end this stupid malarkey that this match indicates anything beyond the obvious facts that Davenport is playing pretty well in her 1st tournament back and Jankovic is tired.

most of the greats (in any sport) never ever want to lose, especially to a player like davenport, who is a slam winner.

you never want anyone to think they got a shot at you. part of winning is not just the actual play but also getting inside your opponent's head - making them think they cannot beat you even on your worst day no matter where you play.

sometimes i think tennis fans are not actually sports fans when i read something like this. it's so silly.

Bruno71
Sep 14th, 2007, 07:35 PM
most of the greats (in any sport) never ever want to lose, especially to a player like davenport, who is a slam winner.

you never want anyone to think they got a shot at you. part of winning is not just the actual play but also getting inside your opponent's head - making them think they cannot beat you even on your worst day no matter where you play.

sometimes i think tennis fans are not actually sports fans when i read something like this. it's so silly.

I think winning 7 straight games and taking a set announced that JJ didn't want to let Lindsay think she could win this match. You try sometimes and fail sometimes...it's sad that she let herself melt down, but she didn't step on court ready to hand Davenport the match.

But I won't argue if what you're trying to say is that JJ isn't (as of yet anyway) a "great of the sport." She doesn't need to be to be considered a very good tennis player worthy of praise.

Shvedbarilescu
Sep 14th, 2007, 07:42 PM
most of the greats (in any sport) never ever want to lose, especially to a player like davenport, who is a slam winner.

you never want anyone to think they got a shot at you. part of winning is not just the actual play but also getting inside your opponent's head - making them think they cannot beat you even on your worst day no matter where you play.

sometimes i think tennis fans are not actually sports fans when i read something like this. it's so silly.

When I read stuff like this I am amazed that people on this forum can be so naive. Get this. Tennis players are human. They are not machines. They have good days. They have bad days. Sometimes they play even when they don't feel like it. Sometimes they just don't care that much. I don't even say this as a criticism. I'm no different. Most people are the same.

Name me a player and I will give you some poor results by that player. No one is immune from bad results. Unsurprisingly players who play very light schedules and are more inclined to withdraw from tournaments they do not feel like playing produce less such results but all players produce poor results on occasion. If someone wants to draw stupid conclusions from those results well they are free do so and can wallow in their ignorance as long as it makes them happy.

woosey
Sep 14th, 2007, 09:01 PM
I think winning 7 straight games and taking a set announced that JJ didn't want to let Lindsay think she could win this match. You try sometimes and fail sometimes...it's sad that she let herself melt down, but she didn't step on court ready to hand Davenport the match.

But I won't argue if what you're trying to say is that JJ isn't (as of yet anyway) a "great of the sport." She doesn't need to be to be considered a very good tennis player worthy of praise.

actually, i was responding more to the excuse made that somehow jj was just tired, listless so it doesn't matter that she lost to lindsay. she just showed up to fulfill her tour commitment, so she was not so motivated to win and lindsay was. that is essentially what chrischorse wrote.

makes me think that if i see a motivated lindsay davenport, i'm gonna work harder to shut her down. afterall, lindsay is a slam winner. a motivated former number one and slam winner is not the same as a motivated top 100 player.

i don't know what was going through jj's mind. and i would hope that her attitude would not be the above, despite flying halfway around the world to play. stay the eff home. if you show up, come to play.

the point is, if jj had the attitude that chrischorse outlined, then that is a ridiculous attitude for a player to have.

this is what makes me not like tennis at times.

maybe the real problem is that reality is setting in for jj. maybe she is recognizing that her ranking ain't so real. she crumbled at the feet of venus and serena this year. lindsay was not rolling over. maybe she sees davenport, venus, and serena as threats - rightfully so too.

and like i said before, only tennis fans seem to accept this kinda crap.

can't wait for basketball season to start.

btw, if she is to be a great, she needs to beat the greats of the sport or of this generation, imo.

in general though, jj's game is not the type of game i admire. i prefer a more aggressive game myself, not just a retrieving running game.

Shonami Slam
Sep 14th, 2007, 09:18 PM
mind you - Jelena didn't play a big server like Lindsay since....lindsay.

venus and sharapova have a huge serve, but not the consistancy that we all know in Lindsay's game.
she has a great second shot, and a really good swinging volley for those short returns.
it's something Jelena needs to get used to.

should they meet again with Jelena well rested (as in next week, because so much off-time is rare for her) i'm not sure Lindz would win again. it was close with jelena playing a sub-par game.
proportions are heavily needed here.

Bruno71
Sep 14th, 2007, 09:26 PM
actually, i was responding more to the excuse made that somehow jj was just tired, listless so it doesn't matter that she lost to lindsay. she just showed up to fulfill her tour commitment, so she was not so motivated to win and lindsay was. that is essentially what chrischorse wrote.

makes me think that if i see a motivated lindsay davenport, i'm gonna work harder to shut her down. afterall, lindsay is a slam winner. a motivated former number one and slam winner is not the same as a motivated top 100 player.

i don't know what was going through jj's mind. and i would hope that her attitude would not be the above, despite flying halfway around the world to play. stay the eff home. if you show up, come to play.

the point is, if jj had the attitude that chrischorse outlined, then that is a ridiculous attitude for a player to have.

this is what makes me not like tennis at times.

maybe the real problem is that reality is setting in for jj. maybe she is recognizing that her ranking ain't so real. she crumbled at the feet of venus and serena this year. lindsay was not rolling over. maybe she sees davenport, venus, and serena as threats - rightfully so too.

and like i said before, only tennis fans seem to accept this kinda crap.

can't wait for basketball season to start.

btw, if she is to be a great, she needs to beat the greats of the sport or of this generation, imo.

in general though, jj's game is not the type of game i admire. i prefer a more aggressive game myself, not just a retrieving running game.

Fair enough...I don't know what's in JJ's mind either...but subconsciously I'd have to think she'd be less motivated for Bali than other tournaments. That's just natural, and it happens on the ATP tour too.

Can you tell me where she "crumbled at the feet of Venus" this year? She was 2 points from winning the only match she lost to her this year. Are you saying this because she played a couple of loose points in the tiebreaker? It's still hardly crumbling at the feet. I suppose Venus crumbled at JJ's feet this year at RG then when she lost the last set 6-1?

Max565
Sep 14th, 2007, 09:27 PM
I expected Lindsay to win. She's just a better player than Jelena. It doesn't really mean a decline in anything. ;)

The Daviator
Sep 14th, 2007, 09:37 PM
mind you - Jelena didn't play a big server like Lindsay since....lindsay.

venus and sharapova have a huge serve, but not the consistancy that we all know in Lindsay's game.
she has a great second shot, and a really good swinging volley for those short returns.
it's something Jelena needs to get used to.

should they meet again with Jelena well rested (as in next week, because so much off-time is rare for her) i'm not sure Lindz would win again. it was close with jelena playing a sub-par game.
proportions are heavily needed here.

Lindsay could have played better than she did today too :shrug:

sweetpeas
Sep 14th, 2007, 09:42 PM
Originally Posted by mb011
oh, please, jelena had Justine on the ropes many times, and in fact it was Jelena who self-destructed, and allowed her to win it. and at US open it was just pure luck that Venus won. it could have easily been Jelena in the semis. I mean really, enough with the hating already!


So true...Why bring my Venus in this crap ?:wavey: ...We"re talking about Lindsay and Jelena:bounce: :lol: Please,!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Corswandt
Sep 14th, 2007, 10:24 PM
Hey guys. It's a Tier III. Jankovic has virtually no points to gain from winning here, she is tired as hell, and is basically only here because unlike so many players on the circuit she feels a responsibility to forfill her commitments to the tour. For Davenport is her first singles tournament in a about a year and obviously this is a very big opportunity for her to show the world she is still a force. Think very hard. Which player is going to be more motivated to win this match. Okay?

Now can we just end this stupid malarkey that this match indicates anything beyond the obvious facts that Davenport is playing pretty well in her 1st tournament back and Jankovic is tired.

*signs underneath*

simba
Sep 14th, 2007, 10:36 PM
Lindsay is a former champion and No. 1 player. we all know that a player just needs to play everyday to be ranck high.

LindsayRulz
Sep 14th, 2007, 11:01 PM
Lindsay was #1 at the beginning of 2006. It just proove that she's still playing at a high level.

Vamos.
Sep 14th, 2007, 11:13 PM
Read my post from August 20th, 2007, the thread was called "Jankovic is a poor woman's Kim Clijsters" :rolleyes: :

"Her backhand down the line is big weapon. Her consistancy is a weapon. Her speed and quickness and flexibility on the court are a weapon. Her stamina is a weapon. Don't be ridiculous :rolleyes: "

I don't think you can count "consistency, speed, quickness, flexibility or stamina" as weapons per se. They are all subjective. You cannot impose any of those things on anyone.

The backhand down the line is something that could be counted as a big weapon, for sure. I think, though, that by itself it isn't. She cannot just step up and fire a backhand winner down the line. She has to RELY on the other person even with this shot. They have to give her some power because she simply does not possess it by herself.

That showed so much in her match with Venus at the USO where I really, once and for all, realised what JJ's game was all about. She is a very talented and impressive player, don't get me wrong, but she simply does not have the weapons to impose her game on somebody else.

And, therefore, she is liable to be outplayed by a bigger hitter or somebody with more weapons than her.

Hence this result.

frontier
Sep 14th, 2007, 11:24 PM
Lindsay is an accomplished player with 50 titles including slams and her h2h with Jelena speaks for itself.Jelena aims for three sets hoping to wear out her opponent and wait upon errors,unless she changes this trend she will always be on the fringes and will wear herself out in the process.
I still believe even when she is rested she will find it hard to beat Lindsay because of the accurate big serve and mental edge that she has over jj.The losses are starting to pile up on JJ unless she stops the rot she will end up losing her confidence and will be back to square one.I think this loss will bite her where it hurts because this is a player coming of maternity and as no3 was supposed to beat,I think at this point she is doubting herself.
On the other hand Lindsay is welcomed with open arms.Go Lindsay!