PDA

View Full Version : Will Jankovic become no. 1 after L.A.?


starred06
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:01 AM
Ana is not defending her points in L.A. next week. She will have 3828-275=3553 pts after L.A.

Jelena on the other hand only has 125 points to defend in L.A., so even if she loses in the 1st round next week, she will still have 3685-125+1=3561 pts after L.A.

Jelena could become no. 1 unless Kuznetsova finishes at least 2 rounds better than JJ does.



Edit: Ok Serena has a chance to make it to no. 1 too if:
Serena wins this week and next week she will become no. 1 unless Jelena reaches SF.


Serena may not reclaim her throne immediately after L.A., but she has a good chance to crack top 3. The downside is if she is seeded top 4 in Olypmics or USO she could face Venus in QF!

Chunchun
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:03 AM
:help:

Uranium
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:04 AM
Let's go Sveta, save the WTA and become #1:hearts:

starred06
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:07 AM
By the way Serena has a chance to make it to no. 1 after L.A. too... but the scenarios are more complicated.

Uranium
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:08 AM
By the way Serena has a chance to make it to no. 1 after L.A. too... but the scenarios are more complicated.

:eek:
I would like to hear these scenarios please;)

Willam
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:08 AM
Jelena Jankovic :rocker2:

Craig.
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:08 AM
OMG, it's actually possible? :help:

BuTtErFrEnA
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:09 AM
good heavens no!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :tape:

Craig.
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:11 AM
BTW, when are Maria's San Diego points going to be taken off?

Zoeki
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:12 AM
But if serena wins back to back……

mdterp01
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:19 AM
God I hope not! What a disgrace to the tour it would be. :rolleyes:

nashi
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:22 AM
:rolleyes:one more no slam NO.1?

Zoeki
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:23 AM
NO,Jankovic will have 3685-125+70=3630 even if she loses in the 1st round .

Uranium
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:26 AM
NO,Jankovic will have 3685-125+70=3630 even if she loses in the 1st round .

why +70?
if you get a bye and lose then you get 1.

Lulu.
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:26 AM
Oh god no.

What a joke that would be. :lol:

starred06
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:26 AM
NO,Jankovic will have 3685-125+70=3630 even if she loses in the 1st round .

Thanks. Corrected :)

Geisha
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:43 AM
Serena can be NUMBER ONE?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Willam
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:46 AM
70 because the 18th best result.

Miss Atomic Bomb
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:57 AM
lol jj the world no.1

save us sveta until serena reclaims whats rightfully hers

danieln1
Jul 19th, 2008, 05:13 AM
Ivanovic is the most stupid player for not defending her points in L.A., why is she doing that??? she isn´t even injured!!!
Now thanks to her Jankovic will be the number 1 player, that´s got to be a joke, i´ll be depressed if that happens, a player that NEVER reached a slam final becomes number 1???? A bad joke indeed...
The only good thing is that it will be for just a few weeks

Willam
Jul 19th, 2008, 05:24 AM
Ivanovic is the most stupid player for not defending her points in L.A., why is she doing that??? she isn´t even injured!!!
Now thanks to her Jankovic will be the number 1 player, that´s got to be a joke, i´ll be depressed if that happens, a player that NEVER reached a slam final becomes number 1???? A bad joke indeed...
The only good thing is that it will be for just a few weeks

nu-uh.

She will win Olympics and US Open.

Jankovic for a long while. :rocker2:

shaktincredible
Jul 19th, 2008, 05:24 AM
this is the worst year fo WTA :lol:

but it's kinda more interesting day by day :hearts:

i hope the real number one player become the number one soon :rolleyes:

Asif_Nawaz
Jul 19th, 2008, 05:32 AM
I think you should consider what Jelena Jankovic HAS done rather bash what she has not done. She has reached the second week at every Grand Slam since, Wimbledon 2006.That is 9 straight GS second weeks.In those 9 trips to the second week, she has played 4 SFs. Im really very sick of hearing people say that Jankovic only got her ranking because she played every tournament in 2007.So?, anyone can do that. She played well at almost every tournament she entered and the tournaments she WON were Tier I's with a PACKED field e.g Charleston,Rome as well as Birmingham which is the strongest Tier III of the year. Coupled with the fact that she is the best defensive player we've seen in years and that she has the best backhand on tour, i think she is a perfect candidate for No.1 BUT I also think she should tank LA so she can become No.1 after winning the US Open.;)

Uranium
Jul 19th, 2008, 05:33 AM
i hope the real number one player become the number one soon :rolleyes:

don't worry, Serena will in about 2 weeks time:)

Shakira4000
Jul 19th, 2008, 05:35 AM
That would be awful. More than awful. Words can't describe it.

ArturoAce.
Jul 19th, 2008, 05:36 AM
Jankovic always finds a way to screw her chances up!
am i right?:tape:

Willam
Jul 19th, 2008, 05:39 AM
Jankovic always finds a way to screw her chances up!
am i right?:tape:

Not this time i think.

If she wins 2 matches in LA (QFs) the only way she wouldnt be #1 is if Kuznetsova wins the title. If she wins 1 match only Kuznetsova needs to reach the final atleast. If she loses in R1 then Kuznetsova haves to do QF.

I'd be really surprise if the 28th Jankovic is not the new #1.

Hope she dosen't tank this chance.

Mikey.
Jul 19th, 2008, 05:42 AM
why +70?
if you get a bye and lose then you get 1.

Thanks. Corrected :)

No no starred06 you were right the first time. If she loses 1st round her 125 semifinal points will be taken off, but instead of the 1st round 1 point being added, her 18th best result will be added to her total. So therefore her total will be 3685 - 125 + 70 = 3630

AnomyBC
Jul 19th, 2008, 05:43 AM
If it has to be Jankovic or Kuznetsova, then I'd rather it be Jankovic.

ArturoAce.
Jul 19th, 2008, 05:47 AM
Not this time i think.

If she wins 2 matches in LA (QFs) the only way she wouldnt be #1 is if Kuznetsova wins the title. If she wins 1 match only Kuznetsova needs to reach the final atleast. If she loses in R1 then Kuznetsova haves to do QF.

I'd be really surprise if the 28th Jankovic is not the new #1.

Hope she dosen't tank this chance.

common jankovic!:bounce:

btw..i like your avi

Sharapowerr
Jul 19th, 2008, 05:52 AM
"Not" JJ , i hope she won t get number 1 , it wouldn t be fair to the world...

Miss Atomic Bomb
Jul 19th, 2008, 05:56 AM
A long shot I know, but if serena wins both LA and stanford she will have 3676 points if jj doesnt go past quarters at stanford,..serena has a shot at no.1

Willam
Jul 19th, 2008, 05:57 AM
common jankovic!:bounce:

btw..i like your avi

Thanks :yeah:

I have to say i like yours too ;)

Willam
Jul 19th, 2008, 05:59 AM
"Not" JJ , i hope she won t get number 1 , it wouldn t be fair to the world...

And if Maria "I'm more inconsistent that the rain at wimbledon" Sharapova is the new #1, would be fair?

venus_rulez
Jul 19th, 2008, 06:07 AM
Dear God no! She will be the WORST number one by far. Hopefully a hole opens up to swallow the ENTIRE WTA (minus Venus :angel:) should this happen.

Basically her supporters are saying hey she's been the most consistent at ALMOST being a champion then anybody else this year. Sorry but I'd rather be an inconsistent champion any day of the year than being consistently just good.

Willam
Jul 19th, 2008, 06:09 AM
Dear God no! She will be the WORST number one by far. Hopefully a hole opens up to swallow the ENTIRE WTA (minus Venus :angel:) should this happen.

Basically her supporters are saying hey she's been the most consistent at ALMOST being a champion then anybody else this year. Sorry but I'd rather be an inconsistent champion any day of the year than being consistently just good.

Why she would be the worst? For being incredibly consistant? :rolleyes:

Geisha
Jul 19th, 2008, 06:15 AM
If it has to be Jankovic or Kuznetsova, then I'd rather it be Jankovic.

:help:

I don't really care. Jankovic and Kuznetsova as #1 are equally the bottom of the barrel. I thought Ivanovic was bad. I used to think Mauresmo and Clijsters were bad, but they are "domination" compared to these slouches.

Jankovic hasn't even reached a GS final. Kuznetsova has three, I believe. Jankovic has won two Romes and Charleston. Kuznetsova has reached the finals of Indian Wells, won Miami, and finals in Berlin and Rome. But, these are career results, not in the past 52 weeks.

Oh God...the more I think about it, the worse it gets. I'm just remembering the horrible play from Jankovic at the end of 2007.:help:

Optima
Jul 19th, 2008, 06:29 AM
Seriously, she can't help it, she wins matches :shrug: That's what you do when you're a tennis player. The rankings come naturally. Someone else that clearly deserves to be number 1 should start winning more.

Renalicious
Jul 19th, 2008, 06:40 AM
Go Serena win back to back, come on!!

Willam
Jul 19th, 2008, 06:42 AM
Seriously, she can't help it, she wins matches :shrug: That's what you do when you're a tennis player. The rankings come naturally. Someone else that clearly deserves to be number 1 should start winning more.

Wise post. :worship:

kwilliams
Jul 19th, 2008, 07:00 AM
:rolleyes:one more no slam NO.1?

Not even a slam final!

stevos
Jul 19th, 2008, 07:02 AM
Jankovic the most underrated tennis player ever?
She hassles the William's sisters a hell of a lot, so all the William's fans that are hating on her, why shouldn't she be there if she's been beating these girls?
Why should Serena take it, because looking at Slams, Serena has been in the Wimbledon final yes, but third round at RG, Quarters at AO (losing to Jankovic), Quarters at USO (to go back a full calendar year). Whereas Jelena has been fourth round, Semis, Semis, Quarters. Not too different.

And I say this as a very big Serena fan. I just think Jankovic deserves her due.

Willam
Jul 19th, 2008, 07:03 AM
Jankovic the most underrated tennis player ever?
She hassles the William's sisters a hell of a lot, so all the William's fans that are hating on her, why shouldn't she be there if she's been beating these girls?
Why should Serena take it, because looking at Slams, Serena has been in the Wimbledon final yes, but third round at RG, Quarters at AO (losing to Jankovic), Quarters at USO (to go back a full calendar year). Whereas Jelena has been fourth round, Semis, Semis, Quarters. Not too different.

And I say this as a very big Serena fan. I just think Jankovic deserves her due.

:worship::worship::worship:

And BTW Lesbionic :worship::worship::worship:

Asmus
Jul 19th, 2008, 07:14 AM
I don't think any of these scenarios are possible. This year the schedule was bumped up because of the Olympics and the San Diego tournament was eliminated so I think the LA tournament is being played two weeks sooner than last year. This means that Ana's points will not come off until after the Canadian Open, so she will be defending her points after all, if not her title. This week last year's Cincinatti points are coming off, so next week last year's Stanford points should come off. However, if Jankovic wins the event she will be very close although I think she will fall just short but will have an opportunity to capture the ranking if she outperforms Ivanovic in Montreal (of course, it wouldn't last long as she would have finalist points from last year's Canadian Open coming off during the Olympics).

starin
Jul 19th, 2008, 07:20 AM
I don't want Serena to become no.1 w/ out a slam under her belt, kinda besmirch her great no.1 record. I'd rather her win olympics or a slam and let the ranking follow those results.

Willam
Jul 19th, 2008, 07:24 AM
I thought Serena had 8 GS titles.

Maybe it's just me.

young_gunner913
Jul 19th, 2008, 07:25 AM
I don't want Serena to become no.1 w/ out a slam under her belt, kinda besmirch her great no.1 record. I'd rather her win olympics or a slam and let the ranking follow those results.

She has 8 slams. And I know you mean a slam this year, but when Linds was ranked number one in 2005/2006, she hadn't won a slam either but she was still deserving because of her results. Serena's won 3 titles this year, 2 tier 1's, Wimbledon finalist, and she could win title 4 this week. :)

Nikkiri
Jul 19th, 2008, 07:29 AM
Jankovic always finds a way to screw her chances up!
am i right?:tape:

Yes. :tape:

I think she'll get to #1 but it will be short lived anyways.

Agata.
Jul 19th, 2008, 07:32 AM
It would be great (at least for me :p)

Go for it Jelena :worship:

Poova
Jul 19th, 2008, 07:58 AM
I'm not sure if this is correct, Los Angeles points come off the first week in August. ;)

One of our ranking experts will work it out I'm sure. :lol:

C. Drone
Jul 19th, 2008, 08:05 AM
I don't think any of these scenarios are possible. This year the schedule was bumped up because of the Olympics and the San Diego tournament was eliminated so I think the LA tournament is being played two weeks sooner than last year. This means that Ana's points will not come off until after the Canadian Open, so she will be defending her points after all, if not her title. This week last year's Cincinatti points are coming off, so next week last year's Stanford points should come off. However, if Jankovic wins the event she will be very close although I think she will fall just short but will have an opportunity to capture the ranking if she outperforms Ivanovic in Montreal (of course, it wouldn't last long as she would have finalist points from last year's Canadian Open coming off during the Olympics).
your're right.
LosAngeles-2007 points come off the 32th week.
but calendar 2008: LA - 30th week, Canadian Open -31th week. and no tournament at the 32th week.

but i think JJ will be No.1 if she reach the final in LA.

starin
Jul 19th, 2008, 08:08 AM
She has 8 slams. And I know you mean a slam this year, but when Linds was ranked number one in 2005/2006, she hadn't won a slam either but she was still deserving because of her results. Serena's won 3 titles this year, 2 tier 1's, Wimbledon finalist, and she could win title 4 this week. :)

yeah i meant no slam w/ in her ranking points.
I don't want her to become one of those no.1's who are no.1 w/out a slam in their rankings. of course Serena is a proven no.1 but it's kinda hollow if she does it w/out a slam and she's already been no.1 so I would rather her win a slam.

Willam
Jul 19th, 2008, 08:09 AM
Jelena won mixed doubles so.. :rolleyes: :p

MaBaker
Jul 19th, 2008, 08:23 AM
And let the bitchin begin :bounce:


Win them all JJ :angel:

Cp6uja
Jul 19th, 2008, 08:40 AM
Next week Ana Ivanovic will not defend her Los Angeles 2007 title but she will lose her points from LA in August, at "Olympics week".

Jelena Jankovic will also not lose her SF points from LA/07 but she have chances to improve her rankings in points if she reach atleast SF or even in position and overtake Ana and finaly reach WTA#1 spot - but only if she win. Most dangeres opponents in California she will have in Serena and Venus Williams and Svetlana Kuznetsova.

Points after Los Angeles:

Jelena Jankovic Winner 3890
Ana Ivanovic (not play) 3828
Jelena Jankovic Runnerup 3805
Jelena Jankovic Semifinalist 3740
Jelena Jankovic QF or worse 3685

(after LA Ana and JJ both will play in Montreal)If Jelena beat Tanasugarn in Wimbledon she will need just SF in LA for #1, but because she lose, she needs win if want #1 already next week. Her best chance will be Olympic week and next week after that will be perfect for Kuznetsova b/c JJ will lose Toronto/07 final points.

Existing possibility for example that Jankovic will be #1 just one week (when Ivanovic lose LA/07 title points), than Kuznetsova will overtake her at #1 when JJ lose Toronto/07 but already next week Sveta will lose #1 and New Haven/07 title points and Ana or Maria or Serena will comeback at #1.

Viktymise
Jul 19th, 2008, 09:01 AM
Jankovic the most underrated tennis player ever?
She hassles the William's sisters a hell of a lot, so all the William's fans that are hating on her, why shouldn't she be there if she's been beating these girls?
Why should Serena take it, because looking at Slams, Serena has been in the Wimbledon final yes, but third round at RG, Quarters at AO (losing to Jankovic), Quarters at USO (to go back a full calendar year). Whereas Jelena has been fourth round, Semis, Semis, Quarters. Not too different.

And I say this as a very big Serena fan. I just think Jankovic deserves her due.

Beating Venus and Serena, or even hasseling them, does not mean you deserve to be No.1. She's been beating practically nobody else.

Jankovic hasn't even had a top 5 win in over a year. She is owned by the current world No.1. She has never been in a slam final. I can't see how she deserves any due.

It will be quite rediculous if she does become No.1, considering the above.

cheo23
Jul 19th, 2008, 09:11 AM
Omg :help: I hope not!!! Serena, VEnus, Lindsay and Ana, Save tennis please!!!!

дalex
Jul 19th, 2008, 09:12 AM
No. She would need to win the title in LA and she will prolly play under painkillers cos Serbian media are reporting her knee isn't fully recovered yet! :rolleyes:

Get it together, Jelena! :hearts:

But I would love it if she became new #1 if only for bitching in GM after she does it! :drool:

cheo23
Jul 19th, 2008, 09:17 AM
nu-uh.

She will win Olympics and US Open.

Jankovic for a long while. :rocker2:

Yes and that WILL be the day when Cows fly in the air :help::help::help:

Tennisation
Jul 19th, 2008, 09:27 AM
I have a feeling during her match in LA right before she's about to become #1, she's going to call for a trainer and a helicopter over the parking lot she's playing in and retire.

Zweli
Jul 19th, 2008, 09:38 AM
Yes it is possible she will be the #1,but she will need a helicopter to reach there

Dodoboy.
Jul 19th, 2008, 09:47 AM
Yes and that WILL be the day when Cows fly in the air :help::help::help:

Maria flying with British Airways :lol:

Dodoboy.
Jul 19th, 2008, 09:49 AM
Beating Venus and Serena, or even hasseling them, does not mean you deserve to be No.1. She's been beating practically nobody else.

Jankovic hasn't even had a top 5 win in over a year. She is owned by the current world No.1. She has never been in a slam final. I can't see how she deserves any due.

It will be quite rediculous if she does become No.1, considering the above.

Exactly.

People here are downplaying the WS then putting them up to a superior stature to measure the achievements of other players. So what if Jankovic is troubling the WS Vera troubles them but does that mean she deserves #1.

Serena has beaten every player in the top 5 this year apart from Ana.

If Jelena gets to #1 i think we have to consider her as the worst player ever to reach that spot.

Drimal
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:01 AM
Please Jelena make this dream come true. :worship:

So many whiners in this thread! :spit:

Ksenia.
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:01 AM
Oh, here we go again :o
There is no such term as "undeserved win" or "undeserved ranking".
If a player beats her opponents on her road to a title, if a player beats them all - this is a deserved win.
If a player has gained more ranking points than any other player during past 52 weeks - she is a number one deservedly.
So I don't get what some people here are trying to prove...

Anyway: BriE WhiTeHEad Is tHe rEAl NumBEr OnE!!!!!!!!!111111!!!!!!1 DeaL wITh It!!111

amirbachar
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:06 AM
Why do you listen to thw WTA - it they decide to take Serena of the rankings with no reason, will that be OK?
Henin is the no. 1 with 3970. End of story.

amirbachar
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:07 AM
Oh, here we go again :o
There is no such term as "undeserved win" or "undeserved ranking".
If a player beats her opponents on her road to a title, if a player beats them all - this is a deserved win.
If a player has gained more ranking points than any other player during past 52 weeks - she is a number one deservedly.
So I don't get what some people here are trying to prove...

Anyway: BriE WhiTeHEad Is tHe rEAl NumBEr OnE!!!!!!!!!111111!!!!!!1 DeaL wITh It!!111

But she didn't - Henin got more points than her.

Il Primo!
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:11 AM
Jankovic the most underrated tennis player ever?
She hassles the William's sisters a hell of a lot, so all the William's fans that are hating on her, why shouldn't she be there if she's been beating these girls?
Why should Serena take it, because looking at Slams, Serena has been in the Wimbledon final yes, but third round at RG, Quarters at AO (losing to Jankovic), Quarters at USO (to go back a full calendar year). Whereas Jelena has been fourth round, Semis, Semis, Quarters. Not too different.

And I say this as a very big Serena fan. I just think Jankovic deserves her due.

Excellent. :worship:

cheo23
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:12 AM
Oh, here we go again :o
There is no such term as "undeserved win" or "undeserved ranking".
If a player beats her opponents on her road to a title, if a player beats them all - this is a deserved win.
If a player has gained more ranking points than any other player during past 52 weeks - she is a number one deservedly.
So I don't get what some people here are trying to prove...

Anyway: BriE WhiTeHEad Is tHe rEAl NumBEr OnE!!!!!!!!!111111!!!!!!1 DeaL wITh It!!111

:weirdo:

Richie's
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:12 AM
Yes she can make it this time!

Ksenia.
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:13 AM
But she didn't - Henin got more points than her.Henin retired. She has 0 points. If she decided to come back, she would have 0 points. This means zero, null, naught, love - whatever you call it, this is not three thousand nine hundred seventy :shrug:

Adal
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:15 AM
Henin retired. She has 0 points. If she decided to come back, she would have 0 points. This means zero, null, naught, love - whatever you call it, this is not three thousand nine hundred seventy :shrug:
Ноль :hearts:

ce
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:15 AM
:hearts:

history for Jelena :dance:

Matt01
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:20 AM
People here are downplaying the WS then putting them up to a superior stature to measure the achievements of other players.


Yeah, and the WS fans are putting the WS to a superior status ("rankings don't matter for them" etc.) but then are downplaying Jankovic's achievements when she beats them or when she wins the tournaments the WS don't even bother to enter or pulling out of because of "injury". But of course that part of the story for some reasons didn't make it into your post. :rolleyes:

amirbachar
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:21 AM
Henin retired. She has 0 points. If she decided to come back, she would have 0 points. This means zero, null, naught, love - whatever you call it, this is not three thousand nine hundred seventy :shrug:

So I guess Venus leads Venus 562-117 in their H2H:

http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/2/players/playerprofiles/playerheadtoheaddetail.asp?PlayerID=230220&Player1ID=230220&x=6&y=1

Henin got 3970 points, no matter what the WTA site says.

Wojtek
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:23 AM
5 pages about NOTHING. Next we will have LA but Stanford points will be off :rolleyes:
Montreal - LA points will be off
Olympics- Toronto pts will be off
NH - NH

thread starter :rolleyes:

amirbachar
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:24 AM
BTW, LA points don't come off of the rankings this week, but only in the week of August 19th (where they originally entered).

Ksenia.
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:25 AM
Henin got 3970 points, no matter what the WTA site says.WTA? She, Justine, asked to be taken off the ranking, which is equal to asking to set to nil your points. But if you want to believe she is #1, I can't help you. Have a good day, bye:wavey:

Costanza
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:27 AM
Can "Blondy" be No.1?
Only if she win whole turnament,which is possible, but unlikely.
Serena is to take L.A.

cheo23
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:35 AM
Only when

http://www.blogstudio.com/jhawk/capt.1042917853.switzerland_hot_air_balloons_oex10 9.jpg

Just Do It
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:52 AM
i am kinda lost here. So, Jelena has to reach SF and she will be 100% #1 ?

Jelena :banana:

Haters :rolls:

MaBaker
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:04 AM
Only when

http://www.blogstudio.com/jhawk/capt.1042917853.switzerland_hot_air_balloons_oex10 9.jpg

If you could fly away from this thread, Jelena can become no.1 before LA :angel:

Brena
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:10 AM
Maybe she can become the first player who managed to get to the No 1 ranking on only one leg?

RenaSlam.
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:12 AM
:tape: :tape: :tape:

Jelena at #1 :spit:

Costanza
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:14 AM
i am kinda lost here. So, Jelena has to reach SF and she will be 100% #1 ?

Jelena :banana:

Haters :rolls:

"... but she have chances to improve her rankings in points if she reach atleast SF or even in position and overtake Ana and finaly reach WTA#1 spot - but only if she win."

That means,she must win whole L.A. tournament.
Capish?

Brena
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:20 AM
"... but she have chances to improve her rankings in points if she reach atleast SF or even in position and overtake Ana and finaly reach WTA#1 spot - but only if she win."

That means,she must win whole L.A. tournament.
Capish?

Pure formality. Consider it won.

Costanza
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:30 AM
Pure formality. Consider it won.

Yeah,right:lol:

~Kiera~
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:46 AM
Maybe she can become the first player who managed to get to the No 1 ranking on only one leg?

She's got her pegleg in production right now ;)

Brena
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:51 AM
Yeah,right:lol:

Do I sense a subtle hint of skepticism?

She's got her pegleg in production right now ;)

JJ - opening new horizons in WTA! :lol: :bigclap:

wales1994
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:51 AM
OMG that would be stupid she hasnt even been a GS finalist yet

Dawson.
Jul 19th, 2008, 12:13 PM
ana doesnt have any points to defend this week. her points from LA will come off in two weeks

Noctis
Jul 19th, 2008, 12:20 PM
Ivanovic :spit: how many weeks did she hold 1st,JJ or Sveta *1 Idm they keep it till Olympics Where Serena reclaim throne

Costanza
Jul 19th, 2008, 12:27 PM
Ivanovic :spit: how many weeks did she hold 1st,JJ or Sveta *1 Idm they keep it till Olympics Where Serena reclaim throne

Don't worry,Ana will stay No.1 on the 28th July.:wavey:

serenus_2k8
Jul 19th, 2008, 12:44 PM
ana doesnt have any points to defend this week. her points from LA will come off in two weeks

Is this true?


Players who win slams get lots of points for it, but they dont need to win the slams to earn the ranking they have.

Fan or no fan, JJ is showing the tour that you can be number 1 and still make plenty of appearances to help promote the tour. Hate her for whatever reasons but its not fair to hate the fact that she has the most points.

Nikkiri
Jul 19th, 2008, 12:47 PM
Ivanovic :spit: how many weeks did she hold 1st,JJ or Sveta *1 Idm they keep it till Olympics Where Serena reclaim throne

:confused: can you speak English?

This thread is about Jankovic becoming #1 because Ana isn't defending her LA points.. funny? :confused:

BAD_MOUTH
Jul 19th, 2008, 12:51 PM
don't worry, Serena will in about 2 weeks time:)

u mean justine?
no she's retired already

heart
Jul 19th, 2008, 01:00 PM
cmon sveta! :bounce:
you've been waiting too long for this! :armed:

Just Do It
Jul 19th, 2008, 01:07 PM
Ivanovic :spit: how many weeks did she hold 1st,JJ or Sveta *1 Idm they keep it till Olympics Where Serena reclaim throne

Wy do you have to include Serena in every story ? This is a thread about Jankovic becoming number 1. No one mentioned Serena and her " reclaiming throne " . Go and open a separate thread for that shit, because I am fed up with reading posts from you and trollssimilar to you, who have to put Serena in front of everything.

Jelena worked hard to get here, she did not get 4000 points just like that, she earned them !! I cant believe how people can be bitter and jealous here.

alfonsojose
Jul 19th, 2008, 01:28 PM
Jankovic the most underrated tennis player ever?
She hassles the William's sisters a hell of a lot, so all the William's fans that are hating on her, why shouldn't she be there if she's been beating these girls?
Why should Serena take it, because looking at Slams, Serena has been in the Wimbledon final yes, but third round at RG, Quarters at AO (losing to Jankovic), Quarters at USO (to go back a full calendar year). Whereas Jelena has been fourth round, Semis, Semis, Quarters. Not too different.

And I say this as a very big Serena fan. I just think Jankovic deserves her due.

:yeah: Rankings exists for a reason. Go Potato face :D

Adal
Jul 19th, 2008, 01:33 PM
:yeah: Rankings exists for a reason. Go Potato face :D
Potato face :bigcry:

Nikkiri
Jul 19th, 2008, 01:36 PM
Potato face :bigcry:

:crying2:

Adal
Jul 19th, 2008, 01:38 PM
:crying2:
http://www.sxc.hu/pic/m/a/as/asolario/476331_potato_face.jpg

Nikkiri
Jul 19th, 2008, 01:41 PM
:crying2:

http://www.sxc.hu/pic/m/a/as/asolario/476331_potato_face.jpg

OMG NO. :bigcry:

Mikey.
Jul 19th, 2008, 01:42 PM
Potato face :bigcry:

:crying2:

http://www.sxc.hu/pic/m/a/as/asolario/476331_potato_face.jpg

:mad::mad::mad:

Slutiana
Jul 19th, 2008, 01:44 PM
It's soooo open right now. EVERY player has a chance to become no.1 by the end of the year.. If Venus wins Montreal, Olympics, USO and YEC she would probs become number 1. Improbable but if anyone is gonna do this it would probably be venus. She did almost exactly the same in 00. :p

hacberto
Jul 19th, 2008, 01:45 PM
Well if she does it'll be strange really because she hasn't been in any Grand Slam final. But I think she'll totally deserve it, she has played a lot of tournaments (remember last year?) so in my opinion it'll be a strange situation but a deserving one if that makes any kind of sense. lol

Just Do It
Jul 19th, 2008, 01:57 PM
http://www.sxc.hu/pic/m/a/as/asolario/476331_potato_face.jpg

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/6573/44775349sharapova512tf9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/6573/44775349sharapova512tf9.164f4a2680.jpg (http://g.imageshack.us/g.php?h=515&i=44775349sharapova512tf9.jpg)

:unsure: ?

doni1212
Jul 19th, 2008, 01:58 PM
If she becomes number one, that will be absolutely horrible, :tape: :help:

Chance
Jul 19th, 2008, 02:00 PM
it's happend before and it will happen again...

Nikkiri
Jul 19th, 2008, 02:00 PM
http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/6573/44775349sharapova512tf9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/6573/44775349sharapova512tf9.164f4a2680.jpg (http://g.imageshack.us/g.php?h=515&i=44775349sharapova512tf9.jpg)

:unsure: ?

:spit:

Olórin
Jul 19th, 2008, 02:01 PM
So once again it's on Serena's shoulders to save the WTA :lol:

Adal
Jul 19th, 2008, 02:02 PM
http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/6573/44775349sharapova512tf9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/6573/44775349sharapova512tf9.164f4a2680.jpg (http://g.imageshack.us/g.php?h=515&i=44775349sharapova512tf9.jpg)

:unsure: ?
OMG. I got owned :bigcry: :haha:
Anyway,
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42041000/jpg/_42041182_jankovic300.jpg

Costanza
Jul 19th, 2008, 02:15 PM
Jelena Jankovic at No. 1? :drool:

The era of "Sexy Tennis" has arrived. :drool:

http://i35.tinypic.com/25ssi.jpg
:worship:

doni1212
Jul 19th, 2008, 02:20 PM
http://i35.tinypic.com/25ssi.jpg
:worship:

:haha:

CoolDude7
Jul 19th, 2008, 02:40 PM
I have to take JJ's side on this one. It is not her FAULT that others choose or cannot play at a high level day in and day out to stop her from becoming number 1.

WTA made the rankings so that becoming number one is possible without getting to a grandslam final. JJ owes nothing to the WTA, she trains hard day in and day out just like everyone else. She has waited a long time for this moment and deserves this.

She can hold her own against anyone in the top 10. It's really time for some of the hate against her to subside. If she manages to get to number 1 within the rules she deserves it, just like everyone before her.

Serenidad.
Jul 19th, 2008, 03:06 PM
1) Jelena being number will be good for the lower players that upset her in matches.
2) If the top 8 are in tournaments, the best form player will win. You guys act like Jankovic will actually hold to her number 1 seed and WIN something. :rolls: Hardly.
3) Pete Sampras said it best when Rios got number one. Something to the lines of - "He was number one on paper, sure. No one in the locker room looked at him as number one because he hadn't won a slam."

ChriS.
Jul 19th, 2008, 03:19 PM
Maybe the WTA need to revise the ranking system to take points off players each time they blow their nose or call for a trainer? That would give the other players a more level playing field wouldn't it?

ivanban
Jul 19th, 2008, 03:23 PM
Beating Venus and Serena, or even hasseling them, does not mean you deserve to be No.1. She's been beating practically nobody else.

Jankovic hasn't even had a top 5 win in over a year. She is owned by the current world No.1. She has never been in a slam final. I can't see how she deserves any due.

It will be quite rediculous if she does become No.1, considering the above.

So now is convenient that Ree was out of top5 when JJ beaten her at AO, but in every other case Serena is considered #1 :rolleyes:

Mikey.
Jul 19th, 2008, 03:30 PM
So now is convenient that Ree was out of top5 when JJ beaten her at AO, but in every other case Serena is considered #1 :rolleyes:

Don't forget Venus :)

Kaja and Milan
Jul 19th, 2008, 03:35 PM
Jelena deserves being on no.1 becouse she trained hard and fought for it.. It is not her fault cause Serena and Venus can "play" just three tournaments in a year, it is not her fault that Ivanovic needs a one month before wining a title... C'mon JJ :)

Vaidisova Ruled
Jul 19th, 2008, 03:43 PM
So once again it's on Serena's shoulders to save the WTA :lol:
please serena, save the WTA, once again

vadin124
Jul 19th, 2008, 03:46 PM
Sveta or Ree, we are counting on you :help:

Miss Atomic Bomb
Jul 19th, 2008, 03:48 PM
does masha have no chance of gaining the no.1 soon-ish? i wud rather she has the no.1 rank rather than the serbians

Optima
Jul 19th, 2008, 03:51 PM
Yeah, and the WS fans are putting the WS to a superior status ("rankings don't matter for them" etc.) but then are downplaying Jankovic's achievements when she beats them or when she wins the tournaments the WS don't even bother to enter or pulling out of because of "injury". But of course that part of the story for some reasons didn't make it into your post. :rolleyes:

:inlove:

I don't think anyone read this post.

Either the Williams sisters are the best of their generation, or they're overestimated, they suck because Jelena beats them. Which one is it?

дalex
Jul 19th, 2008, 03:55 PM
Why are people so serious about this? :lol:

:lol: @ people thinking Rena (who I love ;)) would save us if she was #1 without a GS title counting for her ranking, but JJ doing the same would be a disaster!

Oh, and I highly doubt JJ will win LA and thus become #1, anyway. She's never even won an US hardcourt title, she's hardly gonna do it now, coming off an injury break and not fully recovered...:shrug:

But, I agree with *all* (;)) of you - she would be the sexiest #1 ever! :drool:

Volcana
Jul 19th, 2008, 03:58 PM
I think it would be good that a player who never made a slam final, much less won a slam, held the #1 ranking. People might stop making more of it than it is. As for JJ, I believe that as of now, only one tournament win of any kind is counted toward her ranking. But she plays a lot, and deep into tournaments, so if she gets the #1 ranking, she's certainly earned the right to the #1 seeding, which is all rankings are really about.

Dexter
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:13 PM
Jelena deserves being on no.1 becouse she trained hard and fought for it.. For that reason Martina Muller deserves to be #1 no less than Jelena.

LefandePatty
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:17 PM
I'd like a new n°1. :)

TennisFanForever
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:27 PM
LA will be very interesting. So many possibilities for a new n°1 :worship:

go JJ :rocker:

FoxyliciousKhat
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:29 PM
Yeah, and the WS fans are putting the WS to a superior status ("rankings don't matter for them" etc.) but then are downplaying Jankovic's achievements when she beats them or when she wins the tournaments the WS don't even bother to enter or pulling out of because of "injury". But of course that part of the story for some reasons didn't make it into your post. :rolleyes:

Please do tell me the tournaments that JJ has won when they sisters have not bother to enter or pulled out of due to an injury because as far as I can tell JJ has SIX title so it's not like she's been hauling in titles. She has one in 2008 so far beating Alize, Four in 2007 beating Bepa, Maria (who sucked at the time) Dinara, and Kuzzie, not sure when she won the 6th, but again see how you can state that she won the tournaments the sisters did not enter and or pulled out of.

I'm totally fed up of people using the wins over the WS by Jankovic as a measuring stick to make her more of an exceptional player than she is. JJ is a retriever and backboard and those types of players have always troubled the sisters,in my opinion. However less we forget most of JJ's wins against Venus has been on JJ's best surface which is clay and it's not like she blew Venus off court, the h2h is only 4/3. Her h2h with Serena is 3/3 all played on hardcourt and except for AO last year she did beat Serena when Serena was being beaten by most people 2005-2006. The thing is while she plays them well she's does have a horrible h2h with the said players that the sisters have a good or equally good h2h against like Ana/Venus which is 4/1 for Venus and 6/1 Ana against JJ. Serena is 5/2 against Maria and JJ is 1/4. Serena is 4/1 against Kuzzie, JJ is 2/3. Elena/Venus 6/2, Serena/Elena 4/1 with JJ/Elena 4/3.

So while JJ trouble the sisters, she has a tough time with most of the players the sisters beat repeatedly so to me this is more about match up than giving JJ this huge/superior advantage. And yes it work the same for the sisters and the players they had the huge h2h against.

Also it's funny how people now want to give consistency this great pat on the back, because their faves are now rewarded for playing and going deep instead of actually WINNING the respective tournaments. Yet when Venus was losing to mostly Serena during the years they dominated people did not recognise the same consistent play.

Foxy

maddogz48
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:35 PM
http://www.sxc.hu/pic/m/a/as/asolario/476331_potato_face.jpg


Potato face. :lol:
I will refer to Janko as this from now on.

RenaSlam.
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:47 PM
Potato face :lol:

Dodoboy.
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:48 PM
1Yeah, and the WS fans are putting the WS to a superior status ("rankings don't matter for them" etc.) but then are 2.downplaying Jankovic's achievements when she beats them or when she wins the tournaments the WS don't even bother to enter or pulling out of because of "injury". But of course that part of the story for some reasons didn't make it into your post. :rolleyes:

1. Where have you been the last 3 years????

Rankings don't matter for them. Serena has won slams ranked outside the top 100.

2. Who is downplaying Jankovic's achievements when she wins tournamentS:lol:

If rankings do affect the WS why is it so special to beat someone ranked #7 or #8?

alfonsojose
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:51 PM
She looks like Rumer Willis. Perez Hilton calles her potato face, so . :shrug: ;)
http://www.perezhilton.com/category/rumer-wilis/

LindsayRulz
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:52 PM
Let's hope Serena wins Standford and Los Angeles back to back then :tape:

Mikey.
Jul 19th, 2008, 04:52 PM
Please do tell me the tournaments that JJ has won when they sisters have not bother to enter or pulled out of due to an injury because as far as I can tell JJ has SIX title so it's not like she's been hauling in titles. She has one in 2008 so far beating Alize, Four in 2007 beating Bepa, Maria (who sucked at the time) Dinara, and Kuzzie, not sure when she won the 6th, but again see how you can state that she won the tournaments the sisters did not enter and or pulled out of.

I'm totally fed up of people using the wins over the WS by Jankovic as a measuring stick to make her more of an exceptional player than she is. JJ is a retriever and backboard and those types of players have always troubled the sisters,in my opinion. However less we forget most of JJ's wins against Venus has been on JJ's best surface which is clay and it's not like she blew Venus off court, the h2h is only 4/3. Her h2h with Serena is 3/3 all played on hardcourt and except for AO last year she did beat Serena when Serena was being beaten by most people 2005-2006. The thing is while she plays them well she's does have a horrible h2h with the said players that the sisters have a good or equally good h2h against like Ana/Venus which is 4/1 for Venus and 6/1 Ana against JJ. Serena is 5/2 against Maria and JJ is 1/4. Serena is 4/1 against Kuzzie, JJ is 2/3. Elena/Venus 6/2, Serena/Elena 4/1 with JJ/Elena 4/3.

So while JJ trouble the sisters, she has a tough time with most of the players the sisters beat repeatedly so to me this is more about match up than giving JJ this huge/superior advantage. And yes it work the same for the sisters and the players they had the huge h2h against.

Also it's funny how people now want to give consistency this great pat on the back, because their faves are now rewarded for playing and going deep instead of actually WINNING the respective tournaments. Yet when Venus was losing to mostly Serena during the years they dominated people did not recognise the same consistent play.

Foxy

I'm sorry, but how can you say JJ isn't hauling titles when the WS haven't been hauling that many titles themselves? In the last 2 years Venus has won 4 and Serena has won 5 and JJ has won 5. So that argument is moot. :)

Secondly, retrieving is a style of tennis and every player has their own style. Just because the Williams sisters hit the ball hard and really go for their shots, does not mean their style of play is any more superior to Jelena's retrieving style of play. If Jelena is able to trouble the sisters with this style of play, then good on her. Maybe more players should try this strategy and they will be able to trouble the sisters more often. :shrug:

Also, no one said JJ blew the sisters off the court, just that she troubles them ;) Where did you get "blew them off the court" from "that she troubles them"?

LoLex
Jul 19th, 2008, 05:05 PM
It's funny that some of you say Jelena doesn't deserve to be no.1. because she hasn't reached any GS final. We are talking about last 52 weeks. Why does Serena deserve it? Because she won AO in 2007? :lol: It's very close now and ranking just shows that. If you are talking about slams...

Last 52 weeks
Ana.....(4r USO, F AO, W RG, 3r Wimb) 1930 pts + 1898 from other tournaments
Jelena..(QF USO, SF AO, SF RG, 4r Wimb) 1290 pts + 2395
Serena..(QF USO, QF AO, 3r RG, F Wimb) 1290 pts + 1836
Masha...(3r USO, W AO, 4r RG, 2r Wimb) 1290 pts + 2336
Sveta...(F USO, 3r AO, SF RG, 4r Wimb) 1380 pts + 2075

She wasn't in any final but she seems to be the most regular reaching 4r in all four slams.

Ranking points shows who is no.1. Not the fact about winning a slam or head-to-head with top players. Player deserves to be no.1 when she reaches that place. You could say about an award if someone deserves it or not but not about ranking, not jury decides who is no.1 in WTA tour. If you say it would not be fair, then why don't you just say the whole ranking system worked wrong all these years...

Some of you desperately want someone like Graf, Hingis or Henin who dominates the rest of players. Now it's a different situation and for me it's exciting. No-one knows what will happen. I would not complain if Dementieva become no. 1 in a few weeks.

ivanban
Jul 19th, 2008, 05:09 PM
Originally Posted by Matt01
Yeah, and the WS fans are putting the WS to a superior status ("rankings don't matter for them" etc.) but then are downplaying Jankovic's achievements when she beats them or when she wins the tournaments the WS don't even bother to enter or pulling out of because of "injury". But of course that part of the story for some reasons didn't make it into your post.

Please do tell me the tournaments that JJ has won when they sisters have not bother to enter or pulled out of due to an injury because as far as I can tell JJ has SIX title so it's not like she's been hauling in titles. She has one in 2008 so far beating Alize, Four in 2007 beating Bepa, Maria (who sucked at the time) Dinara, and Kuzzie, not sure when she won the 6th, but again see how you can state that she won the tournaments the sisters did not enter and or pulled out of.

I'm totally fed up of people using the wins over the WS by Jankovic as a measuring stick to make her more of an exceptional player than she is. JJ is a retriever and backboard and those types of players have always troubled the sisters,in my opinion. However less we forget most of JJ's wins against Venus has been on JJ's best surface which is clay and it's not like she blew Venus off court, the h2h is only 4/3. Her h2h with Serena is 3/3 all played on hardcourt and except for AO last year she did beat Serena when Serena was being beaten by most people 2005-2006. The thing is while she plays them well she's does have a horrible h2h with the said players that the sisters have a good or equally good h2h against like Ana/Venus which is 4/1 for Venus and 6/1 Ana against JJ. Serena is 5/2 against Maria and JJ is 1/4. Serena is 4/1 against Kuzzie, JJ is 2/3. Elena/Venus 6/2, Serena/Elena 4/1 with JJ/Elena 4/3.

So while JJ trouble the sisters, she has a tough time with most of the players the sisters beat repeatedly so to me this is more about match up than giving JJ this huge/superior advantage. And yes it work the same for the sisters and the players they had the huge h2h against.

Also it's funny how people now want to give consistency this great pat on the back, because their faves are now rewarded for playing and going deep instead of actually WINNING the respective tournaments. Yet when Venus was losing to mostly Serena during the years they dominated people did not recognise the same consistent play.

Foxy

You completely missed Matt01 point :rolleyes:

joão.
Jul 19th, 2008, 05:52 PM
Please other players on L.A. tournament, don't let it happen.

Matt01
Jul 19th, 2008, 05:53 PM
You completely missed Matt01 point :rolleyes:


It's okay, I'm used to that already when argueing with the WS fans ;)

In The Zone
Jul 19th, 2008, 06:18 PM
I wish people would learn how the rankings worked. :o I can't believe this thread made it to this many posts.

2007 LA is not coming off this week. 2007 Stanford is coming off during 2008 LA.

Jankovic can only be # 1 if she wins Los Angeles.
If Sveta can win LA, she will almost definitely be # 1 after Toronto comes off. ( The week of no tournaments after Montreal ).

Serena's shot at # 1 will be the Olympics, unless she wins LA where she will likely get it during the off week.

Sharapova's and Ivanovic's openings come at the Olympics and USO.

SIN DIOS NI LEY
Jul 19th, 2008, 06:23 PM
This year Jelena won Rome

Nobody deserves more the number one than Jankovic in my opinion

saint2
Jul 19th, 2008, 06:26 PM
Yes Jelena! Do it! I'll cheer You. I want to be witness of The Worst World Number One In History...

winone23
Jul 19th, 2008, 06:28 PM
I'm sorry, but how can you say JJ isn't hauling titles when the WS haven't been hauling that many titles themselves? In the last 2 years Venus has won 4 and Serena has won 5 and JJ has won 5. So that argument is moot. :)

Secondly, retrieving is a style of tennis and every player has their own style. Just because the Williams sisters hit the ball hard and really go for their shots, does not mean their style of play is any more superior to Jelena's retrieving style of play. If Jelena is able to trouble the sisters with this style of play, then good on her. Maybe more players should try this strategy and they will be able to trouble the sisters more often. :shrug:

Also, no one said JJ blew the sisters off the court, just that she troubles them ;) Where did you get "blew them off the court" from "that she troubles them"?

One MAJOR difference is that the Williams sisters are hauling off majors..... (no pun intended)

дalex
Jul 19th, 2008, 06:47 PM
^ :unsure:

FoxyliciousKhat
Jul 19th, 2008, 06:58 PM
I'm sorry, but how can you say JJ isn't hauling titles when the WS haven't been hauling that many titles themselves? In the last 2 years Venus has won 4 and Serena has won 5 and JJ has won 5. So that argument is moot. :)

Secondly, retrieving is a style of tennis and every player has their own style. Just because the Williams sisters hit the ball hard and really go for their shots, does not mean their style of play is any more superior to Jelena's retrieving style of play. If Jelena is able to trouble the sisters with this style of play, then good on her. Maybe more players should try this strategy and they will be able to trouble the sisters more often. :shrug:

Also, no one said JJ blew the sisters off the court, just that she troubles them ;) Where did you get "blew them off the court" from "that she troubles them"?

No, my dear you missed my point. The poster acting as if JJ was winning the vast majority of Tournaments that he/she claimed the sisters were doing nothing in because they never played, were injured and or weren't making the rounds JJ was, when in fact in the last 2 years just like the sisters she's won 5, yeah she got further in a number of tournaments but she never won those. Justine is the only player that was winning tournaments consistently with a couple of other here and there.

Also I said, players affect others differently because of match ups, for instance Venus might struggle with a particular player but win easily with another and that's the issue to me with JJ, she gets every ball back and often is a nightmare it work well against some (the sisters) and not others. I'm not attacking her style of play, but was merely trying to point out how match-ups can affect h2h. Also I used the term not being blown off the court to point out that while they sometimes stuggle against JJ they matches are usually even with maybe a break or two per set.

I hope I have made myself much clearer.

Foxy

ChriS.
Jul 19th, 2008, 07:02 PM
Potato face. :lol:
I will refer to Janko as this from now on.

Potato face :lol:The last resort of morons who have lost an argument!

danieln1
Jul 19th, 2008, 07:05 PM
I´m relieved that L.A points will come off only in Montreal, that means the WTA won´t reach a new low

Equipped
Jul 19th, 2008, 07:07 PM
I wish people would learn how the rankings worked. :o I can't believe this thread made it to this many posts.

2007 LA is not coming off this week. 2007 Stanford is coming off during 2008 LA.

Jankovic can only be # 1 if she wins Los Angeles.
If Sveta can win LA, she will almost definitely be # 1 after Toronto comes off. ( The week of no tournaments after Montreal ).

Serena's shot at # 1 will be the Olympics, unless she wins LA where she will likely get it during the off week.

Sharapova's and Ivanovic's openings come at the Olympics and USO.

Thank God SOMEONE is an actual fan!!!!! :bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::b ounce::bounce:

Ranking points aren't difficult to figure out, folks. Maybe if some of you actually checked out sites OTHER THAN this one, you may figure out how these things work.


***We now return you to your regularly scheduled program of unsubstantiated rumors and uninformed commentary.

ivanban
Jul 19th, 2008, 09:22 PM
Hmmm, now that Ree had to retire against Wozniak, one would thought that JJ's capability to be consistent should be more valued :shrug:
Not to mention Vee's, Lindz's and other retirements for upcoming tournaments....

Dodoboy.
Jul 19th, 2008, 09:26 PM
Oh i don't care anymore.

Give the damn thing to her!

Noone else seems to want it anymore :lol:

mdterp01
Jul 19th, 2008, 09:29 PM
Yeah..in reality we all know that the rankings don't truly reflect who the best player is. Look at all that time Hingis had the #1 ranking but didn't win a slam. If you play like a slave on the WTA tour you will be rewarded for your consistency and quantity, but everyone will know who the cream of the crop truly is. That would be people who actually make it to grand slam finals and win. :wavey:

goldenlox
Jul 19th, 2008, 09:35 PM
Who is the best player? I would have said Sharapova, but after her Wimbledon, and Ivanovic's, Jelena deserves #1 as much as anyone.

égalité
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:05 PM
Yeah..in reality we all know that the rankings don't truly reflect who the best player is. Look at all that time Hingis had the #1 ranking but didn't win a slam. If you play like a slave on the WTA tour you will be rewarded for your consistency and quantity, but everyone will know who the cream of the crop truly is. That would be people who actually make it to grand slam finals and win. :wavey:

You know that Hingis never played over 20 tournaments in a year, right? :o

AnnaK_4ever
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:07 PM
THANK YOU VERY MUCH JUSTINE!!! :fiery:

frontier
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:08 PM
Yeah..in reality we all know that the rankings don't truly reflect who the best player is. Look at all that time Hingis had the #1 ranking but didn't win a slam. If you play like a slave on the WTA tour you will be rewarded for your consistency and quantity, but everyone will know who the cream of the crop truly is. That would be people who actually make it to grand slam finals and win. :wavey::worship::worship:

Serenita
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:08 PM
You know that Hingis never played over 20 tournaments in a year, right? :o
:lol::lol:

Kworb
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:15 PM
Relax guys, I think Justine is still #1 until the Olympics

AnnaK_4ever
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:18 PM
And to think about this, Sabatini was only #3 in July/August 1991 when she was USO champion, Wimbledon finalist, French Open semifinalist, Australian Open quarterfinalist, YEC finalist, winner of Tokyo Pan Pacific, Boca Raton, Hilton Head, Amelia Island, Rome, finalist of Zurich, Boston and Miami (72-11 win-loss record, 17-8 vs Top-10).
All JJ has is Rome title, Miami, Canadian Open and Beijing finals, Australian and French Open semifinals and USO quarterfinal (54-23 win-loss record, 4-12 vs Top-10).

Shows how little rankings actually mean.

Matt01
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:19 PM
You know that Hingis never played over 20 tournaments in a year, right? :o


Hingis played exactly 20 tournaments in the year she held the #1 ranking without winning any Slams (in 2000).

Matt01
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:22 PM
And to think about this, Sabatini was only #3 in July/August 1991 when she was USO champion, Wimbledon finalist, French Open semifinalist, Australian Open quarterfinalist, YEC finalist, winner of Tokyo Pan Pacific, Boca Raton, Hilton Head, Amelia Island, Rome, finalist of Zurich, Boston and Miami (72-11 win-loss record, 17-8 vs Top-10).
All JJ has is Rome title, Miami, Canadian Open and Beijing finals, Australian and French Open semifinals and USO quarterfinal (54-23 win-loss record, 4-12 vs Top-10).

Shows how little rankings actually mean.


No, it shows that there is much more depth in the WTA nowadays than there was in 1991.

AnnaK_4ever
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:24 PM
Hingis played exactly 20 tournaments in the year she held the #1 ranking without winning any Slams (in 2000).

Hingis was a 5-time GS champion, defending AO finalist and won NINE tournaments (including YEC and countless Tier Is) in 2000.

JJ has won ONE title over the last 52 weeks.

AnnaK_4ever
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:28 PM
No, it shows that there is much more depth in the WTA nowadays than there was in 1991.

Nope, it shows we had Graf, Seles, Sanchez, Sabatini, Capriati playing near their best back then. Now we have JJ and Sveta who both won one title over the last year fighting for #1.

ivanban
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:30 PM
Nope, it shows we had Graf, Seles, Sanchez, Sabatini, Capriati playing near their best back then. Now we have JJ and Sveta who both won one title over the last year fighting for #1.

No, it means only women from top10 knew to play proper tennis back then

goldenlox
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:31 PM
More depth or less, is subjective.
I think when Justine retired, the tour got much weaker.
Justine had won more than twice as many majors as ANYONE else over the last 5 years up to her retirement.
When you lose clearly the best player at age 25, it weakens the quality of the tour a lot.

AnnaK_4ever
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:34 PM
More depth or less, is subjective.
I think when Justine retired, the tour got much weaker.
Justine had won more than twice as many majors as ANYONE else over the last 5 years before her retirement.
When you lose clearly the best player at age 25, it weakens the quality of the tour a lot.

Come on now, regardless of the sudden loss of the tour best player, it's just wrong that someone can become #1 by winning one non-major title.

Matt01
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:39 PM
More depth or less, is subjective.
I think when Justine retired, the tour got much weaker.
Justine had won more than twice as many majors as ANYONE else over the last 5 years up to her retirement.
When you lose clearly the best player at age 25, it weakens the quality of the tour a lot.


That is certainly true.

But that doesn't change the fact that there is generelly more depth nowadays than there was in, let's say 1991-1993. The 3-5 Top Player in these years were rarely troubled or tested in the first 4 rounds of a Slam. Early losses of lots of seeded players like it happended this year at RG (Serena, Venus, Pova) or Wimbledon (Ana, Pova, Kuzzie) most likely would not have happened in those years.

hankqq
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:43 PM
Of course, this is a rather strange situation that we're facing now. Certainly, the slams don't count for all the points in the players' rankings, but they can potentially make up a good portion of them.

If we strictly rank the players on how well they've done at the past 4 majors we get:

1. Ivanovic: W/F/4th/3rd
2. Venus W/SF/QF/3rd

after Ivanovic and Venus, who have done the best at the slams over the past year, it gets complicated:

Sharapova: W/4th/3rd/2nd
Kuznetsova: F/SF/4th/3rd
Serena : F/QF/QF/3rd
Jankovic: SF/SF/QF/4th
Dementieva: SF/QF/4th/3rd


Then throw in the other events throughout the year, and we can see how this is happening. Nothing against Jankovic, but it would look bad if she didn't at least reach a slam final before becoming #1. Certainly it's not Jankovic's fault though. The rankings are what they are, and the fact that everyone else has been so inconsistent for a variety of reasons, whether it's injuries, personal issues or just bad form, is not her fault either.

goldenlox
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:44 PM
THere's only 3 players holding majors.
Maria, Venus and Ana shouldn't get a gift of the #1 spot because they are holding a major.

AnnaK_4ever
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:49 PM
THere's only 3 players holding majors.
Maria, Venus and Ana shouldn't get a gift of the #1 spot because they are holding a major.

But why should JJ get this "gift"? Because she reached 2584751 SF/QFs?

You know, I wouldn't whine that much if Jankovic had the season similar to Hingis-2000 or Davenport-2004. But she's not even winning smaller titles!

Matt01
Jul 19th, 2008, 10:57 PM
But why should JJ get this "gift"? Because she reached 2584751 SF/QFs?

You know, I wouldn't whine that much if Jankovic had the season similar to Hingis-2000 or Davenport-2004. But she's not even winning smaller titles!


Jankovic is the most consistant player of the tour. Stop whining or tell us who in your opinion deserves the #1 ranking.

AnnaK_4ever
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:05 PM
Jankovic is the most consistant player of the tour. Stop whining or tell us who in your opinion deserves the #1 ranking.

JJ is consistent in not winning titles, that's true.
Btw, I never said she doesn't deserve #1 spot, I only said it's wrong.

Il Primo!
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:06 PM
Ree or Janko at the top spot, same damn thing.

I see no reason why Ree as number one is more credible than Jankovic.

:yawn:

winone23
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:11 PM
Ree or Janko at the top spot, same damn thing.

I see no reason why Ree as number one is more credible than Jankovic.

:yawn:

Serena has one of the best records on the tour this year. Serena has beaten more top ten players. Serena has more titles and a slam final under her belt this year. Plus Serena is more credible because she has already proven herself time and time again. Janko still has a lot to prove.

goldenlox
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:12 PM
If Jelena gets there, it's not a gift. That's the system the WTA uses.

Fingon
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:21 PM
this only proves the absurdity of the current ranking system, it's just plain stupid.

A player needs to win 4 matches (or five if she doesn't get a bye) to win Stanford.
They have to win 6 (or 5) in LA, yet, they get the same number of points, how is it fair? just stupid.

Second round of a GS: 60 points, meaning, the value of winning a first round match is 58 points (60 - 2).

Third round is 90 points, so the value of winning a second round match is 30 points.

Forget about the quality points, forget about the average system, if you look at the round points tables, they make absolutely no sense, there is no relation whatsover, they just randomly put some number without giving it a single thought.

I actually hope that Jankovic becomes # 1, so the the WTA ranking can be the laughing stock for weeks to come.

terjw
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:28 PM
I very much doubt Jelena will become #1 after LA. She'd have to win and it's only lately she's started to practice a little and she's trying to get recover from her injury. So I'm not expecting her to win it which she has to do to get #1.

The situation is simply that it's all so close between about 6 players now. Someone has to be #1 and will deserve it. It would seem strange if Jelena did it without a slam final. But nobody else seems to be able to really grasp it and keep it with any conviction. Looking at Ana or Maria at Wimbledon - you wouldn't believe they were #1 or in the running for #1. You'd wonder about top 20. And yes - the sisters played like #1 and #2 in the world at Wimbledon - but they looked didn't look anything like that at RG where they lost early or AO where Jelena beat Serena.

goldenlox
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:34 PM
The situation is that Justine took herself off the rankings, and a year ago, she dominated, not losing a match from this moment in 2007 right thru the YEC.
So none of these players have standout numbers, because they were all being dominated.

Il Primo!
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:34 PM
Serena has one of the best records on the tour this year. Serena has beaten more top ten players. Serena has more titles and a slam final under her belt this year. Plus Serena is more credible because she has already proven herself time and time again. Janko still has a lot to prove.

But Serena beat no one is GS those latest 52weeks so that levels it all IMO. And the rankings don't give a damn about Serena's past achievements :p

Only Ana and Maria are really credible in term of RESULTS.

terjw
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:42 PM
this only proves the absurdity of the current ranking system, it's just plain stupid.

Second round of a GS: 60 points, meaning, the value of winning a first round match is 58 points (60 - 2).

Third round is 90 points, so the value of winning a second round match is 30 points.



So what - stupid rant about nothing. A #1 player shouldn't be getting knocked out in the first two rounds anyway. And if they do - quibling about 30 and 58 points - jeez :rolleyes: Sure - let's reverse it to make it "fair". And let's see it make no practical difference at all.

adam_ads_n
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:47 PM
If such thing happens, that will be good. Jelena deserves it! Sveta deserves number 1 too, so it will be good however it turns out.

Cat's Pajamas
Jul 19th, 2008, 11:49 PM
oh my gosh. say it ain't so! :bigcry:

Worst #1 ever! :help:
Wouldn't say Svetlana would be much of an improvement but at least she has a slam, no matter how flukey that was. :o

goldenlox
Jul 20th, 2008, 12:00 AM
Winning a slam 4 years ago has nothing to do with the rankings now. It's the last 52 weeks.

spiritedenergy
Jul 20th, 2008, 12:10 AM
http://i35.tinypic.com/25ssi.jpg
:worship:

:haha:

You go JJ do your thing:worship:

spiritedenergy
Jul 20th, 2008, 12:22 AM
And to think about this, Sabatini was only #3 in July/August 1991 when she was USO champion, Wimbledon finalist, French Open semifinalist, Australian Open quarterfinalist, YEC finalist, winner of Tokyo Pan Pacific, Boca Raton, Hilton Head, Amelia Island, Rome, finalist of Zurich, Boston and Miami (72-11 win-loss record, 17-8 vs Top-10).
All JJ has is Rome title, Miami, Canadian Open and Beijing finals, Australian and French Open semifinals and USO quarterfinal (54-23 win-loss record, 4-12 vs Top-10).

Shows how little rankings actually mean.

well this actually means there is more depth now... top players are not able to reach Finals and SF at every event they enter just because there are a lot more of dangerous players. They can lose to anyone in the top-100. So this is the effect of more depth --> more leveling at the top. I guess this situation will go on for long until someone able to dominate will come again.
And if Justine was still playing, she would probably be in the mix fighting for n.1 and not dominating anymore. So her departure just accelerated an ongoing process.

Pasta-Na
Jul 20th, 2008, 12:39 AM
hope jj and kuzzy will be no.1 soon :p

mdterp01
Jul 20th, 2008, 12:45 AM
Yeah..in reality we all know that the rankings don't truly reflect who the best player is. Look at all that time Hingis had the #1 ranking but didn't win a slam. If you play like a slave on the WTA tour you will be rewarded for your consistency and quantity, but everyone will know who the cream of the crop truly is. That would be people who actually make it to grand slam finals and win. :wavey:


My bad...should have said that in reality the rankings don't ALWAYS truly reflect who the best player is. Clearly Justine was a deserved #1 ranked player. She whipped everyone's ass the past couple years.

Fingon
Jul 20th, 2008, 12:47 AM
So what - stupid rant about nothing. A #1 player shouldn't be getting knocked out in the first two rounds anyway. And if they do - quibling about 30 and 58 points - jeez :rolleyes: Sure - let's reverse it to make it "fair". And let's see it make no practical difference at all.

were you really born that stupid? or did you go to stupidity school?

when did I say anything about #1? if you could understand simple statements you would see that it was an example of how the ranking system is fucked up.

The ranking is more than the # 1 although you probably can't count any further and can't realize that. Giving double points for winning an earlier round is just plain stupid and only an idiot like you would like that.

As per Jankovic being #1, it's the result of several distortions in the system, I won't even bother to point that out because a) you won't undertand it and b) the whole system is fucked up.

And per you stupid example, in this ridiculous system, if a high ranked player is knocked out in the first round of a GS, it has no effect, specially with a player like Jankovic that has a lot of tournament to make up for it, it counts now a little more because GS are included in the best 17 but still, most of the other top player are below that mark.

With an average system a first round lose at a GS is devastating, it really pushed the average down, of course, I don't expect you to understand something as complicated as an average.

spiritedenergy
Jul 20th, 2008, 12:53 AM
were you really born that stupid? or did you go to stupidity school?

when did I say anything about #1? if you could understand simple statements you would see that it was an example of how the ranking system is fucked up.

The ranking is more than the # 1 although you probably can't count any further and can't realize that. Giving double points for winning an earlier round is just plain stupid and only an idiot like you would like that.

As per Jankovic being #1, it's the result of several distortions in the system, I won't even bother to point that out because a) you won't undertand it and b) the whole system is fucked up.

And per you stupid example, in this ridiculous system, if a high ranked player is knocked out in the first round of a GS, it has no effect, specially with a player like Jankovic that has a lot of tournament to make up for it, it counts now a little more because GS are included in the best 17 but still, most of the other top player are below that mark.

With an average system a first round lose at a GS is devastating, it really pushed the average down, of course, I don't expect you to understand something as complicated as an average.

The average system would be as much bad (it would go on the opposite to reward players who play less, and it would penalize players who are injured in the first rounds and exit).

Fingon
Jul 20th, 2008, 01:04 AM
The average system would be as much bad (it would go on the opposite to reward players who play less, and it would penalize players who are injured in the first rounds and exit).


that's precisely the problem, the current system reward quantity, not quality. It doesn't reward players that play less, it rewards players that consistently win.

If a player wins consistently, they don't play that much, look at Serena, Venus, Justine, even Maria and Ana.

it's not about rewards, it's about measuring performance. Yes, if a player got injured in the first round, so what? she didn't win did she?

no system is perfect but the current one is just a joke. The average system never produced stupid results and it's used in other sports quite succesfully (e.g. NBA, NHL, baseball, etc.).

AndreConrad
Jul 20th, 2008, 01:35 AM
Whoever will be #1 deserves to be one because that person collected the most over last 12 months... I don't mean to sound remedial but it seems that 75% of posters here don't understand it. Everyone would like to see their fave to be #1. Some others are requireing GS winners to have an exclusive right to it... in last 12 months that would be 4 people... and guess what it looks like only Ana has enough points, but in a week she may come short :shrug:. Anyway I am not Jankovic's fun but if she is #1 I am happy for her. I have no doubt she worked hard for it.

young_gunner913
Jul 20th, 2008, 01:36 AM
Save us Sveta. Please! :tape:

Fingon
Jul 20th, 2008, 01:49 AM
Whoever will be #1 deserves to be one because that person collected the most over last 12 months... I don't mean to sound remedial but it seems that 75% of posters here don't understand it. Everyone would like to see their fave to be #1. Some others are requireing GS winners to have an exclusive right to it... in last 12 months that would be 4 people... and guess what it looks like only Ana has enough points, but in a week she may come short :shrug:. Anyway I am not Jankovic's fun but if she is #1 I am happy for her. I have no doubt she worked hard for it.

this has nothing to do with favourites. Ana is my favourite, if sha had gotten the #1 without winning the French Open I would have thought it was wrong.

It's not who deserves it, it's who, according with a brainless system established and patched by the WTA gets the most points, it has nothing to do with deserving it and certainly, nothing with working hard.

Say what you want, but the general perception is that the # 1 should be holding a GS. Ask anybody, who they consider better, Venus or Jankovic?, again, this is not a championships or a reward to hard work, it's who is the best player in the past 12 months. I use Venus because she didn't have good results except for Wimbledon but that Wimbledon win makes people think she is up there with the top.

Who are really considered the best players right now?: Venus, Ana, Maria, all GS winners, Serena, who isn't holding a GS but everyone knows she can win one at any time, other than that, nobody (except hardcore fans) will put Jankovic, Kuznetsova or Dementieva there, ranking or not, simply because the perception is that they can't win a GS.

Perception is not everything and a system shouldn't be just about perception, but when the system is so at odds with perception then something it's definitely wrong.

It's like having a complex mathematical model that tells you that it's dark when can see the sun light, the model is obviously wrong because it shows a wrong reality.

In the current system, I am actually for not allowing a player to be # 1 without holding a GS, that's because the system is so wrong that it's a joke.

If they go back to an average system, with quality points and draw the points table with some logic, then you won't see this obvious discrepancies with realities, it won't be perfect but it will be a lot more accurate.

spiritedenergy
Jul 20th, 2008, 01:56 AM
that's precisely the problem, the current system reward quantity, not quality. It doesn't reward players that play less, it rewards players that consistently win.

If a player wins consistently, they don't play that much, look at Serena, Venus, Justine, even Maria and Ana.

it's not about rewards, it's about measuring performance. Yes, if a player got injured in the first round, so what? she didn't win did she?

no system is perfect but the current one is just a joke. The average system never produced stupid results and it's used in other sports quite succesfully (e.g. NBA, NHL, baseball, etc.).

I think they could use an average system with a minimum number of tournaments (i.e. 12, if a player plays less than that her results would still be averaged on 12). Otherwise, let's say, a player who has good results than got injured would be ranked higher than someone playing the whole year.

And about the injury thing, a player who got injured in the first round (i.e. Ana in Doha) would still have that tournament lowering the average even though she didn't play; while with the current system such a tournament can be replaced.

But I think starting next year there will be more fairness, since the top players will be forced to play pretty much the same number of tournaments.

Fingon
Jul 20th, 2008, 02:02 AM
I think they could use an average system with a minimum number of tournaments (i.e. 12, if a player plays less than that her results would still be averaged on 12). Otherwise, let's say, a player who has good results than got injured would be ranked higher than someone playing the whole year.

And about the injury thing, a player who got injured in the first round (i.e. Ana in Doha) would still have that tournament lowering the average even though she didn't play; while with the current system such a tournament can be replaced.

But I think starting next year there will be more fairness, since the top players will be forced to play pretty much the same number of tournaments.

the average system they used before had a minimu divisor of 12 at first and then it was 14, I agree with that.

Regarding the injury, you can't design a system for that situation, when a player retires injured there are distortions, you can't cover every single case.

Yes, with the current system, they just replace it with another, but also, a player that loses first round just replaces it with another, it just doesn't work.

AndreConrad
Jul 20th, 2008, 02:49 AM
the average system they used before had a minimu divisor of 12 at first and then it was 14, I agree with that.

Regarding the injury, you can't design a system for that situation, when a player retires injured there are distortions, you can't cover every single case.

Yes, with the current system, they just replace it with another, but also, a player that loses first round just replaces it with another, it just doesn't work.

Whatever the system is the player that is #1 will not always be the perceived best, often not the one that has the best results in last few tournaments. Let's consider a bicycle race streached for over 100 miles. The rider up front is not always the best. Even assuming that there is no unforseen events injurries and such for tactical, strategic and other reasons the best player (or anyone) has to slow down once in a while simply because our bodies are not machines. Even if they were machines we have to know how to use them wisely. I simply don't undertstand this outrage with a Jelena assuming front position. If she does, that is her position that is hers because according to existing rules she has the most points. I don't care what system you will put in place players that you will not thing are the best are going to be #1 from time to time. If JJ will take position #1 let's see how long she is going to hold on to it.

hablo
Jul 20th, 2008, 04:31 AM
that's precisely the problem, the current system reward quantity, not quality. It doesn't reward players that play less, it rewards players that consistently win.

If a player wins consistently, they don't play that much, look at Serena, Venus, Justine, even Maria and Ana.

it's not about rewards, it's about measuring performance. Yes, if a player got injured in the first round, so what? she didn't win did she?

no system is perfect but the current one is just a joke. The average system never produced stupid results and it's used in other sports quite succesfully (e.g. NBA, NHL, baseball, etc.).

There's an average system in NHL hockey? :confused:

Sharapowerr
Jul 20th, 2008, 06:26 AM
the system should count 14 tournaments , so the tennisplayers of the caliber Jankovic wouldn t be number 1 to me she s just a top 5 player 2 day ... the real number ones on the tour are the WS , Maria , Linday , Mauresmo ( maybe Ana... but JJ ...?? NUMBER 1:( help.. btw.. if she becomes number 1 after the US OPEN she ll fall out of the top 3 i think ...

Seyz
Jul 20th, 2008, 06:57 AM
Wow, go Jankovic, finally world #1. I like her there more than Ivanovic.

skanky~skanketta
Jul 20th, 2008, 07:10 AM
I love Jankovic, but she's not even made the finals of a slam yet!

Dodoboy.
Jul 20th, 2008, 09:04 AM
Ree or Janko at the top spot, same damn thing.

I see no reason why Ree as number one is more credible than Jankovic.

:yawn:

You don't :lol:

Viktymise
Jul 20th, 2008, 09:08 AM
Ree or Janko at the top spot, same damn thing.

I see no reason why Ree as number one is more credible than Jankovic.

:yawn:

Beating Venus and Serena, or even hasseling them, does not mean you deserve to be No.1. She's been beating practically nobody else.

Jankovic hasn't even had a top 5 win in over a year. She is owned by the current world No.1. She has never been in a slam final. I can't see how she deserves any due.

It will be quite rediculous if she does become No.1, considering the above.

;)

Dodoboy.
Jul 20th, 2008, 09:09 AM
And to think about this, Sabatini was only #3 in July/August 1991 when she was USO champion, Wimbledon finalist, French Open semifinalist, Australian Open quarterfinalist, YEC finalist, winner of Tokyo Pan Pacific, Boca Raton, Hilton Head, Amelia Island, Rome, finalist of Zurich, Boston and Miami (72-11 win-loss record, 17-8 vs Top-10).
All JJ has is Rome title, Miami, Canadian Open and Beijing finals, Australian and French Open semifinals and USO quarterfinal (54-23 win-loss record, 4-12 vs Top-10).

Shows how little rankings actually mean.

I think i just teared up a bit!

That is a horrible statistic!

willrock
Jul 20th, 2008, 09:32 AM
But this whole thread is FALSE only because L.A. points from last year won't be taken off next week but after Montreal. So Ivanovic will remain number 1 unless Jankovic wins the title next week. Is that right? Where is the BoiledEgg?

AnnaK_4ever
Jul 20th, 2008, 10:40 AM
The problem with Jankovic is not she has never won a Slam / reached Slam final.
The porblem is she ain't winning any other titles.

elenadrocks
Jul 20th, 2008, 11:10 AM
i dont know, just think it will be weird if JJ becomes #1 like that. I mean Nadal has won the last 2 GS and hes still not #1 and still trailing by like 500 points whereas on the WTA its possible to be #1 without even reaching a slam final. Quite a joke i think

Dodoboy.
Jul 20th, 2008, 11:25 AM
I guess the real current top 10 should look something like this ...

1. Ivanovic
2. S. Williams
3. Sharapova

4. Jankovic

5. V. Williams
6. Kuznetsova

7. Dementieva
8. Safina
9. Radwanska
10.Chakvetadze/Bartoli

;)

Kworb
Jul 20th, 2008, 11:56 AM
I still don't see the problem with Jankovic becoming #2. It's pretty obvious that in the past 52 weeks she's the second best player after Henin. :confused: Sharapova is not consistent enough. Ivanovic is not consistent enough. Kuznetsova has had worse results than Jankovic. Serena is injured already after playing decently for a couple of weeks. The ranking system works very well; especially now that different people keep winning all the tournaments and to find the best person you have to look at who wins the matches they should definitely win, and not just title winners.

Fingon
Jul 20th, 2008, 04:23 PM
There's an average system in NHL hockey? :confused:


don't they divide the number of wins by the number of games played?

Fingon
Jul 20th, 2008, 04:24 PM
Whatever the system is the player that is #1 will not always be the perceived best, often not the one that has the best results in last few tournaments. Let's consider a bicycle race streached for over 100 miles. The rider up front is not always the best. Even assuming that there is no unforseen events injurries and such for tactical, strategic and other reasons the best player (or anyone) has to slow down once in a while simply because our bodies are not machines. Even if they were machines we have to know how to use them wisely. I simply don't undertstand this outrage with a Jelena assuming front position. If she does, that is her position that is hers because according to existing rules she has the most points. I don't care what system you will put in place players that you will not thing are the best are going to be #1 from time to time. If JJ will take position #1 let's see how long she is going to hold on to it.

I don't think that's a right comparisson, the ranking is accumulating several results over a period of time, it might be called race but it's not really a race on the sense a cyclist race is.

AndreConrad
Jul 20th, 2008, 04:52 PM
I don't think that's a right comparisson, the ranking is accumulating several results over a period of time, it might be called race but it's not really a race on the sense a cyclist race is.

I agree that it is not a race in a litteral sense, however the argument still stands that you have to be smart about how you use your energy and your body during the tennis season. For that reason it may not be feasable even for the best player to stay on top of ranking unless it is a player that for long period of time dominates the game. Today we do not have a player that would dominate wta therefore there will be frequnet changes on top. Different players will be at #1 and I think this is exciting. Even if there is a player that can in short spurts be unbeatable we don't have one today that can sustain it for a long time.

I remember a scene from "Days of Thunder" where Tom Cruise playes a race car driver. He drives very fast for a few laps of a training race, Robert Duvall who plays his coach shows him condition of the tires on his car just to prove that if he drives like that he's not going to win the race due to frequent tire changes in the pit stop (read injuries in tennis). Bottom line is that in close competition that we have today the only player that can be on top for long is the one who is smart how much she plays and how much energy she puts in every game.

Going back to Jelena, even if she will get to the top for a week or two doesn't make and it should not make her the best, but if she will be capable to hold on to this position for a while then we have to admit that she is the best for that period of time. Just my opinion :wavey:

xcrtbckhnd
Jul 20th, 2008, 05:01 PM
I for one really hope she makes it to #1. If she does, she deserves it just as much as anyone else who gets there. The ranking system is the ranking system is the ranking system. Jelena didn't create it, she just goes out and plays, and plays consistently well. If that gets her to #1, then well done to her.

plantman
Jul 20th, 2008, 05:10 PM
I for one really hope she makes it to #1. If she does, she deserves it just as much as anyone else who gets there. The ranking system is the ranking system is the ranking system. Jelena didn't create it, she just goes out and plays, and plays consistently well. If that gets her to #1, then well done to her.

:lol:

I agree! If she gets the #1 position it's because she's earned it by playing consistent solid tennis!

Lunaris
Jul 20th, 2008, 07:30 PM
Nowadays women win the Slams mainly due to the fact that others are way below their best at them. That's how Sharapova won AO, Ivanovic RG and Venus Wimbledon. They reached their respective peaks at those tournaments while the other players were struggling. That's what the Slams are about these days. Only Henin was able to keep her form at a consistently high level and win Slams regularly (prior to 2008) - that's what made her a real number one as some would say. Nowadays as some would say there is no real number one, which also lowers the importance of the Slams, as all you have to do is beat inconsistent "top" players who aren't able to produce good performances at more than few tournaments in a row. That's the so called depth of the tour. Jankovic would be just as good world number one as anyone despite the fact that she has no Slams. She is at least somewhat consistent and you can rely on her that she will produce at least a decent performance, which can't be said about the other "top" players.

LudwigDvorak
Jul 20th, 2008, 07:39 PM
I don't think it's that big of a deal. I am 100% certain she is going to win a slam one day, if not multiple. So what if she reaches #1 before making a slam final? She's going to get there.

There's a void in the game right now. Jankovic is going to take advantage of it. I don't exactly feel the apocalypse happening when she becomes #1. :shrug:

If the #1 spot doesn't matter as so many of you say, then it shouldn't matter if Jankovic is there.

ChriS.
Jul 20th, 2008, 07:45 PM
i dont know, just think it will be weird if JJ becomes #1 like that. I mean Nadal has won the last 2 GS and hes still not #1 and still trailing by like 500 points whereas on the WTA its possible to be #1 without even reaching a slam final. Quite a joke i thinkI think you forgot that he is up against God (Federer). Nothing at all to do with the ranking system,

I still don't see the problem with Jankovic becoming #2. It's pretty obvious that in the past 52 weeks she's the second best player after Henin. :confused: Sharapova is not consistent enough. Ivanovic is not consistent enough. Kuznetsova has had worse results than Jankovic. Serena is injured already after playing decently for a couple of weeks. The ranking system works very well; especially now that different people keep winning all the tournaments and to find the best person you have to look at who wins the matches they should definitely win, and not just title winners.

I agree that it is not a race in a litteral sense, however the argument still stands that you have to be smart about how you use your energy and your body during the tennis season. For that reason it may not be feasable even for the best player to stay on top of ranking unless it is a player that for long period of time dominates the game. Today we do not have a player that would dominate wta therefore there will be frequnet changes on top. Different players will be at #1 and I think this is exciting. Even if there is a player that can in short spurts be unbeatable we don't have one today that can sustain it for a long time.

I remember a scene from "Days of Thunder" where Tom Cruise playes a race car driver. He drives very fast for a few laps of a training race, Robert Duvall who plays his coach shows him condition of the tires on his car just to prove that if he drives like that he's not going to win the race due to frequent tire changes in the pit stop (read injuries in tennis). Bottom line is that in close competition that we have today the only player that can be on top for long is the one who is smart how much she plays and how much energy she puts in every game.

Going back to Jelena, even if she will get to the top for a week or two doesn't make and it should not make her the best, but if she will be capable to hold on to this position for a while then we have to admit that she is the best for that period of time. Just my opinion :wavey:

I for one really hope she makes it to #1. If she does, she deserves it just as much as anyone else who gets there. The ranking system is the ranking system is the ranking system. Jelena didn't create it, she just goes out and plays, and plays consistently well. If that gets her to #1, then well done to her.

Nowadays women win the Slams mainly due to the fact that others are way below their best at them. That's how Sharapova won AO, Ivanovic RG and Venus Wimbledon. They reached their respective peaks at those tournaments while the other players were struggling. That's what the Slams are about these days. Only Henin was able to keep her form at a consistently high level and win Slams regularly (prior to 2008) - that's what made her a real number one as some would say. Nowadays as some would say there is no real number one, which also lowers the importance of the Slams, as all you have to do is beat inconsistent "top" players who aren't able to produce good performances at more than few tournaments in a row. That's the so called depth of the tour. Jankovic would be just as good world number one as anyone despite the fact that she has no Slams. She is at least somewhat consistent and you can rely on her that she will produce at least a decent performance, which can't be said about the other "top" players.At last, we actually have some intelligent people posting in this thread.

ArturoAce.
Jul 21st, 2008, 01:33 AM
Kuznetsova withdrew!:eek:

slamchamp
Jul 21st, 2008, 02:16 AM
I like JJ, but n°1 hell no!!!:scared:

njnetswill
Jul 21st, 2008, 02:20 AM
Maybe Jelena can reach number 1 and win the USO? :unsure: Otherwise, even as a big fan of hers I have to agree that she does not really deserve being named the best player in the world yet.

sandv1
Jul 21st, 2008, 03:34 AM
I know this thread is much more about JJ than the L.A. tourney, and as far as that goes I'm really fine with it. Maybe the points system should be revised but _as it is_ if JJ can get to #1 by continuing to post great results, then I don't see the problem with that. Frankly, as a WS fan, if the sisters were in ideal health, then I would certainly hope for even better results from them. The point being that although I think the world of them, I don't think that either of the WS deserve much higher rankings than they have for the time being. ...and that really brings me to the pressing matter for this coming week:

Kuznetsova withdrew!:eek:

Are you freaking kidding!?!?!?! I'm nearly gutted. :sad: I've been trying to spend the day catching up on recent results and news in order to get a better perspective. I mean this is rather exasperating:

Ana won't defend; there's 3 Americans with knee injuries (and, as of right now, who knows if Serena will go into or last long in the L.A. tourney...), and now no Kuzy in L.A.????

I think there were at least 5 top 10 players in last year's East West tourney. Now, it looks like local fans will be lucky to get 4 of the top 10 in this year's tourney.

I mean, Hell, JJ had better win in Los Angeles!!!! :fiery: :angel:

c note
Jul 21st, 2008, 04:03 AM
I think there were at least 5 top 10 players in last year's East West tourney. Now, it looks like local fans will be lucky to get 4 of the top 10 in this year's tourney.

I mean, Hell, JJ had better win in Los Angeles!!!! :fiery: :angel:

Even with all the withdrawals I will be shocked if JJ wins LA. According to reports she's only been practicing for a week or two, spending most of the time after Wimbledon resting her knee. I don't think she's match fit and against this hungry field, someone's going to take her down.

That being said, she has a really cake through to the quarters.

hablo
Jul 21st, 2008, 04:16 AM
don't they divide the number of wins by the number of games played?

No.

NHL has a point system to decide the eight team who will make the playoffs, in each conference :

2 pts for wins (if the match is still tied after regulation and overtime, it goes to a shootout, and the winning team gets the 2 pts) ;
0 pts for regulation losses ;
1 pt for losses in either OT or SO.

The system in the NHL is not the greatest either, as some teams are SO specialist and can rack up the pts that way. :shrug:

Sharapowerr
Jul 21st, 2008, 06:14 AM
I have a feeling that JJ will loose the third round against Nadia..

Andrew Laeddis
Jul 21st, 2008, 07:00 AM
does it really matter? this has already been a horrible year for tennis. nadal moonballed his way to a wimbledon title. ivanovic won a slam. kirilenko is 19 in the world. martina navratilova and mary carillo are still commentating. bartoli made a tier 2 final. jankovic getting to number one without a single slam final would simply be the nail in the coffin.

ivanban
Jul 21st, 2008, 07:33 AM
does it really matter? this has already been a horrible year for tennis. nadal moonballed his way to a wimbledon title. ivanovic won a slam. kirilenko is 19 in the world. martina navratilova and mary carillo are still commentating. bartoli made a tier 2 final. jankovic getting to number one without a single slam final would simply be the nail in the coffin.

Don't forget that Wozniak just won Tier II title ;)

RenaSlam.
Jul 21st, 2008, 01:58 PM
LOL, if Maria played more tournaments within the last year, she would be number one. She only trails Jelena by a mere 59 points, and Jelena has 22 tournaments to her name, whereas Maria only 14 :lol: :rolls:

Serena is #5 with only 14 tournaments and Venus #7 with only 13 tournaments.

Maria, Serena, and Venus are able to step up their play during the big stages, winning when they need to.

However, if all three of these players had played at least 4 more tournaments this year, no doubt they would all be in the Top 5, with Maria holding the #1 spot.

LCS
Jul 21st, 2008, 02:59 PM
:help:

Matt01
Jul 21st, 2008, 04:32 PM
LOL, if Maria played more tournaments within the last year, she would be number one. She only trails Jelena by a mere 59 points, and Jelena has 22 tournaments to her name, whereas Maria only 14 :lol: :rolls:

Serena is #5 with only 14 tournaments and Venus #7 with only 13 tournaments.

Maria, Serena, and Venus are able to step up their play during the big stages, winning when they need to.

However, if all three of these players had played at least 4 more tournaments this year, no doubt they would all be in the Top 5, with Maria holding the #1 spot.


Well, it's not Janko's problem that these players don't do their job and only play a handfull of tournaments per year.

ivanban
Jul 21st, 2008, 05:47 PM
Well, it's not Janko's problem that these players don't do their job and only play a handfull of tournaments per year.

Plus, no other top5 player seems to be capable to play good on 20+ tournaments per season :tape:

дalex
Jul 21st, 2008, 06:04 PM
Plus, no other top5 player seems to be capable to play good on 20+ tournaments per season :tape:

20+? You're asking for too much! Not even JJ has played good at 20+ tourneys. More like 16. So, let them try 16 for a start, 16 good tournaments.

If JJ wins LA that would be her 17th tournament with more than 100pts each for her ranking. And that's why she would become #1. The rest of them are just not consistent enough, yet. But who knows what the future will bring?

ChriS.
Jul 21st, 2008, 06:21 PM
LOL, if Maria played more tournaments within the last year, she would be number one. She only trails Jelena by a mere 59 points, and Jelena has 22 tournaments to her name, whereas Maria only 14 :lol: :rolls:

Serena is #5 with only 14 tournaments and Venus #7 with only 13 tournaments.

Maria, Serena, and Venus are able to step up their play during the big stages, winning when they need to.

However, if all three of these players had played at least 4 more tournaments this year, no doubt they would all be in the Top 5, with Maria holding the #1 spot.But do not forget that only 17 of JJ's tournaments count towards her ranking.

saniapower
Jul 21st, 2008, 06:25 PM
A big No! an injury very early:haha: just wait.

дalex
Jul 21st, 2008, 06:33 PM
A big No! an injury very early:haha: just wait.

Hahaha. So funny...NOT!

SAEKeithSerena
Jul 21st, 2008, 07:54 PM
eek.

Leo_DFP
Jul 21st, 2008, 09:37 PM
This is the 5th anniversary of the US Open Series, and the 5th year of major disappointments, pull-outs, weak fields, mostly weak matches... it goes on and on. It is embarrassing because ESPN commentators, especially Mary Joe Fernandez, go out of their way hyping up the Series: the race for a million dollars, all the top players, newly cohesive television coverage (when really the coverage gets worse and worse every year), etc. and it never pans out into anything exciting or meaningful. Especially with the Olympics this year, it sucks. Wozniak will probably get one of the three top slots. :lol:

DragonFlame
Jul 22nd, 2008, 01:52 AM
So... because of sveta's withdrawl and serena not performing well enough it's almost certain jankovic will become a new world no.1:eek: Awh well, as it is this year this couldn't hurt the tour anymore.:lol: I'd rather have her then sveta :tape:

alfonsojose
Aug 12th, 2008, 06:26 PM
http://www.sxc.hu/pic/m/a/as/asolario/476331_potato_face.jpg

Potato rules :D

Geisha
Aug 13th, 2008, 06:05 AM
It is all just mind-boggling.

I am usually never in favour of the #1 player not having a GS under their belt in the previous 52 weeks, but sometimes I make exceptions. Take Hingis, for example. In a span of a little over a year from 2000 to 2001, she amassed an incredible 94-10 record. She won more than 90% of her matches, won 11 titles, and her worst results in 23 tournaments were TWO QFs. Jankovic has one title, a couple of finals here and there, and she's being murdered by lowly-ranked opposition. What an embarassment.

Serenidad.
Aug 13th, 2008, 07:05 AM
:hearts: It is all just mind-boggling.

I am usually never in favour of the #1 player not having a GS under their belt in the previous 52 weeks, but sometimes I make exceptions. Take Hingis, for example. In a span of a little over a year from 2000 to 2001, she amassed an incredible 94-10 record. She won more than 90% of her matches, won 11 titles, and her worst results in 23 tournaments were TWO QFs. Jankovic has one title, a couple of finals here and there, and she's being murdered by lowly-ranked opposition. What an embarassment.

Lastslam1999tina IfonlyIcouldinvertmytierIwinswithmyGStitlesingisov a. :hearts:

Mikey.
Aug 13th, 2008, 08:09 AM
Gogogo Potato face!!! :worship:

Adal
Aug 13th, 2008, 08:12 AM
:bigcry:

Sander.
Aug 13th, 2008, 08:37 AM
Please not:sad: