PDA

View Full Version : Who are the MOST talented female players of all time?


laurie
Sep 22nd, 2008, 11:37 PM
I've never really seen this discussed in the media or anywhere. Not the greatest but the most talented. In the men for different reasons names like Laver, Pancho Gonzalez, McEnroe, Becker, Agassi, Sampras, Federer, Nastase, Hoad have all been mentioned over time. Then there are guys who didn't achieve as much but are ultra talented like Henri Leconte, Miroslav Mecir or Richard Gasquet.

But for the women? Who would you say were/are real natural talents - amongst the most talented you have seen and for what reasons, great movers or amazing shotmaking ability.

What do you reckon? Henin? Navratilova? Mandlikova, Goolagong? Who do you rate :cool:

AcesHigh
Sep 22nd, 2008, 11:42 PM
I think you have to do it era by era... too many to count and there are too many teens on this forum to even remember or know of some of those you mention.

frenchie
Sep 22nd, 2008, 11:42 PM
I have to go with Hingis, Schnyder and Kournikova!

their ability to hit any shot and their fluid games speak for themselves

Mackep83
Sep 22nd, 2008, 11:44 PM
I think it's Hingis. When you see her matches from 90's and early 2000 its looks like she could have done anything she wanted with the ball... Henin is also very vy talanted but not so natural as Hingis

Mackep83
Sep 22nd, 2008, 11:48 PM
Third place, Conchita Martinez

Ciarán
Sep 23rd, 2008, 12:00 AM
Seles, Graf, Hingis

Kart
Sep 23rd, 2008, 12:02 AM
1. Gabriela Sabatini.








2. The rest :D.

louisa.
Sep 23rd, 2008, 12:41 AM
hingis definately. her game was almost flawless.

Golovinjured.
Sep 23rd, 2008, 12:47 AM
Hingis, Schyder, Martinez, Rubin and Mauresmo I find/found very talented.

Miss Amor
Sep 23rd, 2008, 12:49 AM
serena

Golovinjured.
Sep 23rd, 2008, 12:52 AM
serena

:lol: It's supposed to be about tennis talent, not poetry.

darkchild
Sep 23rd, 2008, 02:56 AM
Lindsay Davenport

Optima
Sep 23rd, 2008, 03:13 AM
Martina Hingis.

AcesHigh
Sep 23rd, 2008, 03:17 AM
I think you have to do it era by era... too many to count and there are too many teens on this forum to even remember or know of some of those you mention.

Boy was I right... Schnyder?? Rubin?? Kournikova?? :help:

SIN DIOS NI LEY
Sep 23rd, 2008, 03:42 AM
Navratilova , Evert and Seles

AcesHigh
Sep 23rd, 2008, 03:57 AM
I don't think Mandlikova gets talked about enough. I'm pretty young myself so I haven't seen Goolagong, BJK and others and I've only seen Evert, Austin, Nav, Graf, etc. on tape, youtube, etc.

However, Mandlikova.. wow, I mean she's just a joy to watch. And it's so great to watch clips from back then and see actual shotmaking and proper strokes, placement, etc.

Richard_from_Cal
Sep 23rd, 2008, 04:02 AM
Okay AcesHigh, :D...Court, King, Goolagong-Cawley...(had her career interrupted by childbirth, then came back to win Wimbledon,) Connoly (sp.?,) Seles...Evert (HASN'T been mentioned???,)

On wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennis_performance_timeline_comparison_(women)
or
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_tennis_players_with_most_singles_major_cham pionship_wins#Women_4
or
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_WTA_number_1_ranked_players

...are some pages to scan. (I didn't realize I had neglected Christine Marie Evert...er, Norman.)

supergrunt
Sep 23rd, 2008, 04:07 AM
I really couldn't speak for any other generation but Serena, Venus, and Justine should be in there,

tonybotz
Sep 23rd, 2008, 04:19 AM
capriati, hingis, austin, seles, graf, connelly.. the ones who dominated young. thats true talent. their gifts were almost innate.

TheBoiledEgg
Sep 23rd, 2008, 04:51 AM
no doubt Zvereva ;)

Justty
Sep 23rd, 2008, 04:58 AM
Capriati with having played 4 tournaments, she was ranked in the WTA computer system and that was 35!!!!!

OZTENNIS
Sep 23rd, 2008, 05:02 AM
MY ORDER;
1) Hingis.
Absolutley flawless. She could play all the shots in the book, and then you could write another about all the other shots she could hit that weren't in the first book.
2) Seles
3) Henin

Honourable mentions to Connelly and Lenglen (judging by her immaculate record)

OsloErik
Sep 23rd, 2008, 05:14 AM
I think you have to do it era by era... too many to count and there are too many teens on this forum to even remember or know of some of those you mention.

Amen.

I think, though, that the conversation starts with Maria Bueno. She hadn't formal training, yet became one of the finest players from a technical standpoint and most accomplished players on grass in an era where you needed talent to win matches.

Maureen Connolly, even though I've never seen so much as a clip of her playing, probably goes right there for being one of the first hard-hitting baseliners. Rumor has it she could hit the ball HARD for a wooden racquet player. That takes the kind of timing you can't really learn. Agassi, for example, and Seles have that kind of timing. But that's really it among modern players.

Of course Lenglen and all that crowd will be in the mix just because, but among more recent players, I'd throw out Mandlikova and Zvereva. Those two would've been dominant players in the Court/King era, but they got smothered by the rise of powerful players.

Tatianadove
Sep 23rd, 2008, 07:09 AM
Kournikova

waterlily_021989
Sep 23rd, 2008, 08:25 AM
Martina Hingis

youizahoe
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:48 AM
1. Martina Navratilova
2. Steffi Graff
3. Serena Williams
4. Monica Seles
5. Martina Hingis

InsideOut.
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:56 AM
1. Martina Hingis
2. Hana Mandlikova
3. Maureen Connolly
4. Jennifer Capriati
5. Justine Henin
6. Monica Seles
7. Steffi Graf
8. Chris Evert
9. Amelie Mauresmo
10. Svetlana Kuznetsova

Hardiansf
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:56 AM
I don't think Mandlikova gets talked about enough. I'm pretty young myself so I haven't seen Goolagong, BJK and others and I've only seen Evert, Austin, Nav, Graf, etc. on tape, youtube, etc.

However, Mandlikova.. wow, I mean she's just a joy to watch. And it's so great to watch clips from back then and see actual shotmaking and proper strokes, placement, etc.
Indeed, Hana was really talented. Even the players/analysts talk about it. Idk, somehow like she didn't know what shot she should take, because she had so many options. :eek:
Another player, you should say Hingis. Some posters already said why.
The other ones would be Maureen Connolly. :worship:

Marshmallow
Sep 23rd, 2008, 11:03 AM
Venus Williams.

tennnisfannn
Sep 23rd, 2008, 11:16 AM
Serena hands down

^bibi^
Sep 23rd, 2008, 11:19 AM
Hingis probably...

And the award of the most unachieved talented players definitely goes to Patty... Ok she's achieved a lot, but her natural ability she should have done so much more...

fightserena!!!
Sep 23rd, 2008, 11:32 AM
Ok I know you will think I'm biased, obviously...but honestly, look at the nature of the question...if you don't include the Williams sisters in here then you're kidding yourself.

The ability to play half/quarter seasons and still rack up grand slams, the ability to run companies, design clothes, pursue acting etc etc. and win slams...they obviously have the natural ability. Who knows what might have happened if they had been more tennis-focused. Maybe great things, maybe burnout, but you can't say they are not incredibly talented.

youizahoe
Sep 23rd, 2008, 11:54 AM
Ok I know you will think I'm biased, obviously...but honestly, look at the nature of the question...if you don't include the Williams sisters in here then you're kidding yourself.

The ability to play half/quarter seasons and still rack up grand slams, the ability to run companies, design clothes, pursue acting etc etc. and win slams...they obviously have the natural ability. Who knows what might have happened if they had been more tennis-focused. Maybe great things, maybe burnout, but you can't say they are not incredibly talented.

Same if you don't include graff or navratilova. Not including those makes your choices look redicilous, but you know, people on here :haha: :tape:

nestor_bgd
Sep 23rd, 2008, 12:31 PM
How can we judge something like that? http://i37.tinypic.com/iv9769.gif
Have any of you seen players from 1900's to compare their talent with modern players?

supergrunt
Sep 23rd, 2008, 12:32 PM
people who aren't including the Williams sisters are stupid

tennisvideos
Sep 23rd, 2008, 12:42 PM
I would say the most naturally talented IMO would be (in no particular order)

Suzanne Lenglen
Maria Bueno
Evonne Goolagong
Martina Navratilova
Martina Hingis
Steffi Graf
Margaret Court
Justine Henin

I give props to Margaret Court because she was a natural left hander who was taught to play right handed - so how phenomenal to rack up that record with that in mind. Ken Rosewall was the same - a natural leftie taught to play right handed.

I don't really include many of today's players as it is hard for me to gauge natural talent with tht technology that favours bashing from the baseline, and that is no disrespect to today's players, it's just the way the game has evolved.

AcesHigh
Sep 23rd, 2008, 05:52 PM
I wouldnt include Venus in most talented.. and she's my fave player. One of the most physically gifted in history, but most of her success is due to extraordinary physical ability. A lot of her shots are mediocre or average (lob, drop shot, second serve, etc.) and I just don't think you can put her next to Court, Lenglen, etc.

My era/time is from mid-late 1990s to now, and I'd say probably the only people to throw into a list of ALLTIME most talented are Hingis, Henin and you have to put Mauresmo IMO. Also, Davenport's perfect timing and technique are a talent in itself.. I'm not sure you can really teach what she has. She also has a great repetoire(sp?) of shots..

Slutiana
Sep 23rd, 2008, 05:55 PM
Tatiana Golovin. :inlove:

OsloErik
Sep 23rd, 2008, 05:57 PM
My era/time is from mid-late 1990s to now, and I'd say probably the only people to throw into a list of ALLTIME most talented are Hingis, Henin and you have to put Mauresmo IMO. Also, Davenport's perfect timing and technique are a talent in itself.. I'm not sure you can really teach what she has. She also has a great repetoire(sp?) of shots..

I can understand adding Serena to that list, but I agree with you that Venus isn't even close. See my "Safina rising" post for more.

thrust
Sep 23rd, 2008, 06:13 PM
Boy was I right... Schnyder?? Rubin?? Kournikova?? :help:

So true-LOL!! Bueno, Cassals, Court, King, Goolagong, Navratilova, Hingis, Henin, Serena, Graf, Mauresmo - To name a few. Cassals never won a Slam but she had an incredible variety of shots, a great player to watch. Her basic problem was size and perhaps mental. And then, there was Franciose Durr! A joy to watch, nonetheless.

.:sk:.
Sep 23rd, 2008, 06:16 PM
Tatiana Golovin. :inlove:

Definitely! ;) But she couldn't show it so often because of injuries :o

darkangel23
Sep 23rd, 2008, 06:18 PM
Seles & Hingis

Donny
Sep 23rd, 2008, 06:21 PM
The ability to produce a tennis stroke is a talent in and of itself. The better the player, the more talent they have. Seems simple to me.

Dodoboy.
Sep 23rd, 2008, 06:48 PM
I wouldnt include Venus in most talented.. and she's my fave player. One of the most physically gifted in history, but most of her success is due to extraordinary physical ability. A lot of her shots are mediocre or average (lob, drop shot, second serve, etc.) and I just don't think you can put her next to Court, Lenglen, etc.

My era/time is from mid-late 1990s to now, and I'd say probably the only people to throw into a list of ALLTIME most talented are Hingis, Henin and you have to put Mauresmo IMO. Also, Davenport's perfect timing and technique are a talent in itself.. I'm not sure you can really teach what she has. She also has a great repetoire(sp?) of shots..

Whose second serve were .....

Dodoboy.
Sep 23rd, 2008, 06:51 PM
I don't really get this thread, to be completely honest.

new-york
Sep 23rd, 2008, 06:53 PM
I don't really get this thread, to be completely honest.

who has naturally all the shots. :shrug: (???)

janko
Sep 23rd, 2008, 06:56 PM
In no order :

Graf
Seles
Lenglen
Mandlikova
Zvereva
Hingis
Schnyder
Navratilova
Goolagong

and if they had longer careers : Barbara Schwartz and Romina Oprandi, definitely lost potentials


I would add the WS but for phenomenal physical habilities, great fighting spirit and many others qualities. But by "most talented" I'm speaking of shotmaking, imagination and technical hability, so they're not in the first 10.

shell
Sep 23rd, 2008, 06:59 PM
So true-LOL!! Bueno, Cassals, Court, King, Goolagong, Navratilova, Hingis, Henin, Serena, Graf, Mauresmo - To name a few. Cassals never won a Slam but she had an incredible variety of shots, a great player to watch. Her basic problem was size and perhaps mental. And then, there was Franciose Durr! A joy to watch, nonetheless.

You saved me the typing...my list would look very, very similar to yours except it would have started with Goolagong. That's as far back as I have seen - but no doubt the others deserve it.

égalité
Sep 23rd, 2008, 07:02 PM
From this era:

Hingis, Serena, Henin

Dodoboy.
Sep 23rd, 2008, 07:03 PM
who has naturally all the shots. :shrug: (???)

OK. Then Henin or Hingis :)

DOUBLEFIST
Sep 23rd, 2008, 07:13 PM
Court,
Goolagong(sp)
Evert
Steffi
Serena



Hingis has no business on the list. Her serve- or lack thereof- utterly disqualifies her. Henin doesn't make the list for me because her talent wan't/isn't particularly "natural," per say, alla a Navratilova- which is why I didn't include her. The both worked their ass off to develop their game to the level of excellence they achieved, but it didn't "seem" to come "naturally."

DA FOREHAND
Sep 23rd, 2008, 07:21 PM
hingis definately. her game was almost flawless.

powder puff serve, weak forehand, ....FLAWS



Graf, Goolagong, Serena

Vamos.
Sep 23rd, 2008, 07:23 PM
Graf, Hingis, Serena, Amelie, Seles, Martina.

Well, there are loads.

I think Serena is the best hitter of a tennis ball ever. But I think Graf is the most all-around talented, well either her or Hingis.

markhingis
Sep 23rd, 2008, 07:24 PM
Martina Hingis was born with IT. Purest talent ever!!!

Shvedbarilescu
Sep 23rd, 2008, 07:27 PM
This is a tough one. A lot depends on one's own personal criteria of what is talented. To be honest, I'm not even sure of what my own criteria is which makes this question personally almost impossible. :shrug:

Dodoboy.
Sep 23rd, 2008, 07:31 PM
Graf, Hingis, Serena, Amelie, Seles, Martina.

Well, there are loads.

I think Serena is the best hitter of a tennis ball ever. But I think Graf is the most all-around talented, well either her or Hingis.

Best comment on this thread :yeah:

Ryan
Sep 23rd, 2008, 07:59 PM
Court,
Goolagong(sp)
Evert
Steffi
Serena



Hingis has no business on the list. Her serve- or lack thereof- utterly disqualifies her. Henin doesn't make the list for me because her talent wan't/isn't particularly "natural," per say, alla a Navratilova- which is why I didn't include her. The both worked their ass off to develop their game to the level of excellence they achieved, but it didn't "seem" to come "naturally."



:retard: Henin has more natural talent than Serena - she had to work her butt off for her physical strength and speed, but her touch, shot selection and actual tennis talent was definitely natural. So because Hingis doesn't have a great serve she's off the list? Evert didn't have a great serve. Serena has no touch/volley skills compared to Hingis, Goolaging or Navratilova. Every player has their strength's and weaknesses.

laurie
Sep 23rd, 2008, 08:56 PM
I don't really get this thread, to be completely honest.

Well, I was thinking that these debates usually are based around who are the greatest players, ie who have the most achievements, especially when debating women players. And it seems to me that female players are not usually associated with natural talent, especially in the media who prefer to focus on players' looks.

So I really wanted to celebrate the natural ability of the many players who have played this great game over the decades - nothing to do with achievments or titles won, or eras or whatever, just who had talent and we really can appreciate that.

I think Jana Novotna deserves a mention, I thought she was a great smooth athletic player and great mover, especially on grass, she was very stylish to watch and moved beautifully. I also agree Hingis was a great improviser on the court, conjured shots from nowhere, and Patty Schnyder at times.

I also thought Chanda Rubin was a great talent and it was a pity she had so many injuries - when she was hot she hit the ball great with pace.

I also think Svetlana has a lot of natural talent, she can improvise some great volleys and stop volleys when at net, in fact sometimes she messes up easy volleys and pulls off incredibly technical volleys.

I would also mention Amelie Mauresmo for her athletic ability and volleying ability plus her backhand.

I would say that since I've been watching tennis (late 1980s onwards) the most talented female player I've had the pleasure of seeing a few times was Justine Henin.

youizahoe
Sep 23rd, 2008, 09:09 PM
OK. Then Henin or Hingis :)

Henin didn't have it natural, I remember her being hours and hours on the court because her backhand, forehand and serve were a mess, around 2003 she finally got it together.

Lilowannabe
Sep 23rd, 2008, 09:11 PM
From my generation, Id have to say Hingis and Henin. Hingis had the most extraordinary control of a tennis ball, and could change the pace and direction of the ball so effectively. And though I was never a big fan of Henin, i always appreciated her outstanding talent. No one, man or woman, has ever timed a one-handed backhand better. And her all court ability was outstanding.

Concerning the william sisters, Id put Serena up there as one of the most talented of her generation (for her serve alone) but Ive always felt Venus' success has been more down to her physical ability than her natural tennis talent. Serena though has always had a edge on her sis, she has a cleaner strike of the ball and has the more variety.

But these are just my opinions.

Cankarlo
Sep 23rd, 2008, 09:12 PM
jelena dokic very natural hitter.

AcesHigh
Sep 23rd, 2008, 09:23 PM
:help: at Henin and Hingis not having natural talent. They are twice as talented as anyone in the last 10 years not named Mauresmo who IMO follows behind fairly closely.

LudwigDvorak
Sep 23rd, 2008, 09:31 PM
I'm still of the opinion that Mauresmo is the most talented player of the past ten, fifteen years. Her forehand was loopy and her mentality wasn't perfect, but that was it. She could do everything else you can feasibly think of and very well at that.

But definitely: Hingis, Henin, Mauresmo, and S. Williams are the most talented players of the past decade or so. I'd include Kuznetsova, but I'm not entirely sure--she can be a great all-court player, but at her best, she's ballbashing with extreme precision and serving out of her mind. She's got the touch, angles, volleys, and athleticism, but she hardly uses them (enough). ((This is kind of embarrassing, but I'd also maybe would like to put in Myskina if I can go by a distinct time limit...the woman was brilliant, honestly.))

I just can't speak for anything before the '80s. Honorable mention to Mandlikova and you have to include Graf in a list like this.

I'd like to see a thread on the most physically gifted female players sometime, one day.

Dave.
Sep 23rd, 2008, 09:33 PM
Lindsay Davenport is quite possibly the greatest striker/hitter of the ball of all time (definetely of the last 20 years). That's just pure talent. The timing and feel on the ball are just awesome. The sound when she hits the ball, omg :drool:

Mary Pierce is a supreme talent. A real great shotmaker.

Monica Seles may not appear as the most talented, but she certainly has great hands to take the ball as early as she does.

Martina Hingis is simply a genius. Tennis just runs through her. Has about a million different ways to win a point and has all the shots to do it. This makes her game extremely versatile, and she was able to handle just about every opponent on any surface, in singles and doubles.

Natasha Zvereva- absolute genius. Has all the shots and created shots of her own.

The likes of Steffi Graf and Serena Williams would probably be the next best ball strikers after Davenport (and Evert). Williams can just about do anything with the ball. Her athletic and fighting qualities are so often talked about, but she has so much natural talent too.



These are just the ones I wanted to mention, there are of course others who are equally/more talented than these.

AnnaK_4ever
Sep 23rd, 2008, 09:35 PM
I can't say for all time cos I wasn't born in 1870s to have a chance to follow every great player women's tennis has ever produced. But over the last 15 years it's Martina Hingis without a doubt.

shell
Sep 23rd, 2008, 09:38 PM
:help: at Henin and Hingis not having natural talent. They are twice as talented as anyone in the last 10 years not named Mauresmo who IMO follows behind fairly closely.

Agree here, but I would go so far as to say Mauresmo probably had the most talent in that her shots seem effortless. She is an underachiever for her talent I think - almost like she had so many options that it became difficult to sort them out under stress. Or else the mental aspect held her back.

serenus_2k8
Sep 23rd, 2008, 09:43 PM
Serena & Vee :worship: Clearly very talented.

Kworb
Sep 23rd, 2008, 09:49 PM
Martina Hingis
Monica Seles

ghDksXXH1kk

Legends :hearts:

maja.amelie
Sep 23rd, 2008, 09:49 PM
Seles,Serena,Maria.

Maria is such a big talent :eek: Serena,too.

AcesHigh
Sep 23rd, 2008, 09:53 PM
Agree here, but I would go so far as to say Mauresmo probably had the most talent in that her shots seem effortless. She is an underachiever for her talent I think - almost like she had so many options that it became difficult to sort them out under stress. Or else the mental aspect held her back.

True, I still rate Henin as her equal or superior though. We really didn't get to see Mauresmo at her best.. however, Henin's talent when it was realized was some of the best tennis in the past 20 years...especially for someone of her stature. The backhand, serve, return, hand-eye coordination, touch, timing, net skills and shot recognition are just amazing.

Henin had a lot holding her back too I think.. in terms of confidence and staying strong mentally. Mauresmo does seem more natural with her talent.. it has a flowing quality to it which is really breathtaking when she was actually on. I'll still stand by my opinion that Hingis and Henin had more though :)

supergrunt
Sep 23rd, 2008, 09:57 PM
Omg this thread is :haha: but I suppose everyone is entitled to thier own opinion.

shell
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:01 PM
True, I still rate Henin as her equal or superior though. We really didn't get to see Mauresmo at her best.. however, Henin's talent when it was realized was some of the best tennis in the past 20 years...especially for someone of her stature. The backhand, serve, return, hand-eye coordination, touch, timing, net skills and shot recognition are just amazing.

Henin had a lot holding her back too I think.. in terms of confidence and staying strong mentally. Mauresmo does seem more natural with her talent.. it has a flowing quality to it which is really breathtaking when she was actually on. I'll still stand by my opinion that Hingis and Henin had more though :)

Can't argue with any point there. Justine was my fav since Martina N. for all of the reasons you stated. Mauresmo second, more for her potential and beauty of shot. I didn't get to see much of Hingis (long story), but I would imagine I would have loved her game also.

Marionated
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:02 PM
Hingis, Henin, Schnyder, Mauresmo, Williams and Bartoli. I can't really comment on players from way back.

thegreendestiny
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:02 PM
HINGIS...with pride and without prejudice.:worship:

unfortunately, her success didn't live up to the potential of of her enormous talent. funny how fate balances the things we possess too much.

DOUBLEFIST
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:03 PM
:retard: ...

Nice, comin' from a Mod' :rolleyes:

Anyway, I disagree that Henin had more Natural talent than Serena. I think she DEVELOPED more technical proficiency, but talking RAW MATERIAL- No way.

As for Hingis' lack of serve v/s Evert's, Hingis' lack of serve was FAAAAAAAAR more detrimental than Evert's.

So, again, neither Henin nor Hingis make my list. :wavey:

So, imho, I'll see your ":retard:" and raise you a :help:

shell
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:03 PM
Omg this thread is :haha: but I suppose everyone is entitled to thier own opinion.

Opinion threads always get interesting :) But these are fun because you get to see why everyone likes their fav, without all the usual arguing :D

Marshmallow
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:06 PM
I think Venus is more talented than Federer, but it's just like Isha said, her number one role is big sister, so she had to hide that talent away so Serena could get more credit. I saw Venus practicing one time at wimbledon when there were no cameras around, and she was toying with her practice partner like you wouldn't believe... and that's when she was hopping on one leg, wearing an eye patch and playing left handed. When she saw me peeping she was NOT happy! :unsure:

supergrunt
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:08 PM
What was she doing :unsure: ?

DOUBLEFIST
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:09 PM
:help: at Henin and Hingis not having natural talent. They are twice as talented as anyone in the last 10 years not named Mauresmo who IMO follows behind fairly closely.

:rolleyes: I'd put Hingis and Momo on the list waaay before Henin.

If we're talking natural talents here, Hingis had it more than Henin because everyone knows Hingis didn't hardly even work at it and was still a great player. Henin had to work her ass off just to keep place with what many call a "part time" player in Serena Williams. In fact, one could argue that Henin didn't start to win majors 'til she took her training to the next level and squeezed every last little bit out of her ability that she could.

To me, when one evaluates most talented, it boils down to MOST POTENTIAL/ABILITY with the LEAST EFFORT.

That, imo, is a metric that must be looked at irrespective of RESULTS. ...ie, it's a metric defined and illustrated by an over weight, written-off (by many)player, ranked somewhere in the 80ties that had the NATURAL TALENT to cut through the field and win the Australian Open. Hingis, Henin, and many others could NEVER do that. NEVER.

Marshmallow
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:15 PM
What was she doing :unsure: ?

Playing tennis silly ^.^, but her hitting partner who could easily be top 10 on the ATP couldn't keep up so she challenged herself some more, by wearing an eye patch and what not. I was impressed needless to say. I hope she doesn't mind me sharing this secret.

supergrunt
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:17 PM
I just can not picture Venus not being serious :shrug:.

Marshmallow
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:21 PM
She is really light hearted off court. Isn't there a video of Venus booty poppin on youtube?

bigshow21
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:21 PM
Jennifer Capriati! *I'm biased though. However, she really did have great talent and was a top player in her years!

laurie
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:27 PM
Opinion threads always get interesting :) But these are fun because you get to see why everyone likes their fav, without all the usual arguing :D

Exactly my intention :wavey:

Although Henin wasn't my fave but I can still aprreciate her talent.

Max565
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:32 PM
I don't know how I would accurately measure 'talent'. It's such a subjective and vague term... But if I had to give a list it'd be:

Hingis
Henin
Serena

from this generation. For those of you who put players like Lenglen... how do you know how they played?

laurie
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:32 PM
:rolleyes: I'd put Hingis and Momo on the list waaay before Henin.

If we're talking natural talents here, Hingis had it more than Henin because everyone knows Hingis didn't hardly even work at it and was still a great player. Henin had to work her ass off just to keep place with what many call a "part time" player in Serena Williams. In fact, one could argue that Henin didn't start to win majors 'til she took her training to the next level and squeezed every last little bit out of her ability that she could.

To me, when one evaluates most talented, it boils down to MOST POTENTIAL/ABILITY with the LEAST EFFORT.

That, imo, is a metric that must be looked at irrespective of RESULTS. ...ie, it's a metric defined and illustrated by an over weight, written-off (by many)player, ranked somewhere in the 80ties that had the NATURAL TALENT to cut through the field and win the Australian Open. Hingis, Henin, and many others could NEVER do that. NEVER.

Like I said at the beginning - this is not about achievements.

Venus and Serena? Well I think Venus moves like a gazelle especially on grass, Venus was born to play on grass, on that surface she looks so graceful. Serena probably has more variety of shots, and as a result has a better record overall. Serena probably has a better first and second serve package.

I would definitely say Serena is one of the most talented female players of the last 40 years.

danieln1
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:35 PM
Davenport
Hingis
Serena
Mauresmo
Seles
Evert
Graf
Navratilova
Venus

VishaalMaria
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:47 PM
Playing tennis silly ^.^, but her hitting partner who could easily be top 10 on the ATP couldn't keep up so she challenged herself some more, by wearing an eye patch and what not. I was impressed needless to say. I hope she doesn't mind me sharing this secret.

When she saw you, did you smile at her awkwardly, and then walk [as fast as you could] away :P :lol:

Tamus
Sep 23rd, 2008, 10:50 PM
Guys,

Shotmaking is not a talent; it is a skill. Nobody is born with the ability to hit a tennis ball; this must be acquired through repetition. Now, there are talents (such as eye-hand coordination, agility, footspeed, reaction time, etc.) that can make it easier to acquire the skills needed for tennis. Keeping this in mind, I would say that the following players from the last two decades belong in the list of most talented ever:


Steffi Graf because her pure athletic ability is at a level rarely seen in tennis players. Her exquisite movement across the court seemed to flow forth effortlessly.

Monica Seles because of her raw power and innate ability to time her shots. She broke the codes of how one should hit a tennis ball, truly transcending the game.

Venus Williams because of her rare ability to combine speed and agility with the physical advantages given to a player of her height. Her flexibility and length allow her to create great torque on her shots, while also allowing her to cover the court in ways never previously thought possible.

Vamos.
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:20 AM
I would say Henin is less talented than Mauresmo. I guess those two are a similar mode of player, right? If you look at the way Amelie plays, the fluidity, the effortlessness...it surpasses Henin.

Often Henin would look rugged out there. Look like she was trying too hard on her strokes. :shrug: I've never bought into this theory that Henin is natural or elegant-looking while playing tennis.

Her backhand was phenomenal, don't get me wrong, but look at her back for goodness sake, it looks like it is about to break.

For me, she engineered her game a lot more than Amelie did. Her serve, even, is a lot more mechanical. :shrug:

I don't think either of these two are THE most talented ever; that has to go to Graf or Hingis (with Serena has the best ever hitter) but out of the two it is Mauresmo that wins.

I've always thought Amelie/Henin were a similar mode of player and the only thing that kept Henin above her, in terms of greatness, was a superior drive/mental strength.

Marshmallow
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:34 AM
When she saw you, did you smile at her awkwardly, and then walk [as fast as you could] away :P :lol:

Sort of :D. Well mayeb not, I sort of did that whole dramamtic groupie thing... "Venus I love you.. have my babies.." .. fell to the ground in tears. I suspect that might have been why she gave me a fierce look. :p

supergrunt
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:38 AM
I wouldnt include Venus in most talented.. and she's my fave player. One of the most physically gifted in history, but most of her success is due to extraordinary physical ability. A lot of her shots are mediocre or average (lob, drop shot, second serve, etc.) and I just don't think you can put her next to Court, Lenglen, etc.

My era/time is from mid-late 1990s to now, and I'd say probably the only people to throw into a list of ALLTIME most talented are Hingis, Henin and you have to put Mauresmo IMO. Also, Davenport's perfect timing and technique are a talent in itself.. I'm not sure you can really teach what she has. She also has a great repetoire(sp?) of shots..

You don't deserve to have Althea Gibson in your avatar :shrug: Who do you think you're fooling at this point? If Henin and Mauresmo are the most talented players of their generation, Venus couldn't be far behind considering she leads both of them in head-to-head and owns 5 more than Mauresmo and is tied with Henin, and will probably surpass her.

Kart
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:38 AM
Seems to me the players themselves would be a good bunch to poll on this subject.

The only player I know of to have answered this question was Seles in 1996 at the Australian open, which leads me back to my original post in this thread :p.

AcesHigh
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:40 AM
You don't deserve to have Althea Gibson in your avatar :shrug: Who do you think you're fooling? :shrug:

Why not? What in what I said was incorrect?

supergrunt
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:44 AM
But I should really just ignore you because in my book, you've lost all credibility. :p

Zauber
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:47 AM
How do you judge talent?
If you dont use results to judge talent what do you use?
Its a little bit like measuring intelligence.
I.Q. tests are a pretty good measure of intelligence just like results are a good measure of talent.
Who is the greatest chess player? the one who wins I would say.
talent if if if i could have been the greatest with my great talent but were you not? with supposedly all your talent?
crazy supposition I submit.

AcesHigh
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:47 AM
You don't deserve to have Althea Gibson in your avatar :shrug: Who do you think you're fooling at this point? If Henin and Mauresmo are the most talented players of their generation, Venus couldn't be far behind considering she leads both of them in head-to-head and owns 5 more than Mauresmo and is tied with Henin, and will probably surpass her.

Did you even read the original post? The question is not who the best players of alltime are or who achieved the most.. it's about who is the most naturally talented :help: We're talking about natural tennis ability.

Venus is an incredible athlete, and ridiculously gifted physically. It's why she has 5 Wimbledon titles and 0 AO and 0 RG titles while Henin and her sister Serena have a more varied resume. I'm not slamming Venus because tennis is a SPORT and there's nothing wrong with being a great athlete.

spencercarlos
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:58 AM
I think Venus is more talented than Federer, but it's just like Isha said, her number one role is big sister, so she had to hide that talent away so Serena could get more credit. I saw Venus practicing one time at wimbledon when there were no cameras around, and she was toying with her practice partner like you wouldn't believe... and that's when she was hopping on one leg, wearing an eye patch and playing left handed. When she saw me peeping she was NOT happy! :unsure:
The most ridiculous and delusional post ever. :lol: Well a Venus fan no less.

so she had to hide that talent away so Serena could get more credit.
Sure that's why she "only" loses to her sister. :lol:

As for talented in no order:
Graf
Hingis
Novotna
Mauresmo
Sabatini
Henin
Navratilova
Zvereva
Serena
Davenport

All of this players made tennis look easy, and their styles of play were great to watch too.

spencercarlos
Sep 24th, 2008, 01:05 AM
Seems to me the players themselves would be a good bunch to poll on this subject.

The only player I know of to have answered this question was Seles in 1996 at the Australian open, which leads me back to my original post in this thread :p.
Without a doubt.
Sabatini had inmense talent, most tennis comentators labeled Gaby the most complete player between 1990/1992, as she was the only one that could play great at the baseline as well as at the net.

supergrunt
Sep 24th, 2008, 01:06 AM
Did you even read the original post? The question is not who the best players of alltime are or who achieved the most.. it's about who is the most naturally talented :help: We're talking about natural tennis ability.

Venus is an incredible athlete, and ridiculously gifted physically. It's why she has 5 Wimbledon titles and 0 AO and 0 RG titles while Henin and her sister Serena have a more varied resume. I'm not slamming Venus because tennis is a SPORT and there's nothing wrong with being a great athlete.

So who was the most athletic player of her generation?

supergrunt
Sep 24th, 2008, 01:07 AM
I'm sorry. I just disagree and I think your desire to be objective makes you biased. I just don't think it's possible to win 5 Wimbledons by just being a good athlete. I think you should watch Wimbledon 05 final again.

AcesHigh
Sep 24th, 2008, 01:16 AM
I'm sorry. I just disagree and I think your desire to be objective makes you biased. I just don't think it's possible to win 5 Wimbledons by just being a good athlete. I think you should watch Wimbledon 05 final again.

This is my last post about this.. did I say she's just a good athlete? No!

But to say that Venus is one of the most talented when she has a mediocre/average lob, dropshot, second serve.. her forehand is terribly shaky and inconsistent, her form on the serve is poor and her entire style seems very strained and unnatural is crazy. She often has sloppy footwork and her net game is not very solid aside from her amazing wingspan and height which give her distinct advantages.

Now, what does this mean? Nothing really. Some basketball players with the ugliest jumpers had the most success. Some football and baseball players with unconventional styles were great.

However, to tout Venus as one of the most talented(excluding physical gifts and athleticism which are not even directly specific to tennis) of all-time is ridiculous

Marshmallow
Sep 24th, 2008, 01:23 AM
The most ridiculous and delusional post ever. :lol: Well a Venus fan no less.

:secret: I don't think crticising THAT post is a clever move.

Otherwise :speakles: Where had you been hiding. I missed your presence [:hug:].

Sure that's why she "only" loses to her sister. :lol:

Well duh :silly: If she only lost to Serena people would accuse her of match fixing! So she had to look patchy and lose to different tier players to make it all seem believable! :weirdo:

Denise4925
Sep 24th, 2008, 01:28 AM
Ok I know you will think I'm biased, obviously...but honestly, look at the nature of the question...if you don't include the Williams sisters in here then you're kidding yourself.

The ability to play half/quarter seasons and still rack up grand slams, the ability to run companies, design clothes, pursue acting etc etc. and win slams...they obviously have the natural ability. Who knows what might have happened if they had been more tennis-focused. Maybe great things, maybe burnout, but you can't say they are not incredibly talented.

I totally agree and would add, BJK, Court, Graf, Seles, Goolagong, Navratilova and Hingis.

supergrunt
Sep 24th, 2008, 01:31 AM
This is my last post about this.. did I say she's just a good athlete? No!

But to say that Venus is one of the most talented when she has a mediocre/average lob, dropshot, second serve.. her forehand is terribly shaky and inconsistent, her form on the serve is poor and her entire style seems very strained and unnatural is crazy. She often has sloppy footwork and her net game is not very solid aside from her amazing wingspan and height which give her distinct advantages.

Now, what does this mean? Nothing really. Some basketball players with the ugliest jumpers had the most success. Some football and baseball players with unconventional styles were great.

However, to tout Venus as one of the most talented(excluding physical gifts and athleticism which are not even directly specific to tennis) of all-time is ridiculous

She doesn't use those shots because she doesn't need to. You're analysis of Venus' game seems to boil down to your opinion and I disagree. You didn't answer my question of who was(is) the ebst athlete so I assume that you got scared and wanted to stop before you lost the debate. But I guess the great Aceshigh with his Althea Gibson avatar will speak no more.

Nicolás89
Sep 24th, 2008, 02:29 AM
people who aren't including the Williams sisters are stupid

Williams sisters shoul be on everyone's list then?

Nicolás89
Sep 24th, 2008, 02:38 AM
Nice, comin' from a Mod' :rolleyes:

Anyway, I disagree that Henin had more Natural talent than Serena. I think she DEVELOPED more technical proficiency, but talking RAW MATERIAL- No way.

As for Hingis' lack of serve v/s Evert's, Hingis' lack of serve was FAAAAAAAAR more detrimental than Evert's.

So, again, neither Henin nor Hingis make my list. :wavey:

So, imho, I'll see your ":retard:" and raise you a :help:

Talent with no tecnique just can't develop.
If you are saying that talent without technique is more natural...you are just wrong.

Serena is easily the best player of our times but to me the most talented player should be able to do everything with the ball in tennis and Henin was more closer than Serena to actually do that.

TheFifthAvocado
Sep 24th, 2008, 03:03 AM
Ok I know you will think I'm biased, obviously...but honestly, look at the nature of the question...if you don't include the Williams sisters in here then you're kidding yourself.

The ability to play half/quarter seasons and still rack up grand slams, the ability to run companies, design clothes, pursue acting etc etc. and win slams...they obviously have the natural ability. Who knows what might have happened if they had been more tennis-focused. Maybe great things, maybe burnout, but you can't say they are not incredibly talented.

How does this prove that the WS have natural tennis talent though? Couldn't winning slams after not playing for a while be based on superior and natural athleticism too? They are clearly much more athletic than every player so that seems more likely to be the case.

I haven't been watching tennis for years but of what I've watched, I would say Serena, Mauresmo, Davenport, and Sharapova are the most naturally talented. Serena is there because her strokes come so natural to her and she always has control over them and how she is playing. Mauresmo is there because she has every shot in the book and can hit each one as well as the next player. Davenport and Sharapova are there for the same reasons because they can hit the ball into any corner, and I think the fact that neither are athletic speaks for how much raw talent makes up their games. I don't include Venus because, like AcesHigh said, her shots, including her volleys, are mediocre except for her strokes and serve. But even in those two areas she always loses the control/feel of them.

Renalicious
Sep 24th, 2008, 03:17 AM
I wouldn't say any of my favorites are 'the most talented'. Venus...she has great natural power but to be talented you also have to have variety and unfortunately Venus doesn't do great in that department. Serena has a great all round game but overall I think it's mostly her will to win matches.

I agree with Hingis, Henin, Davenport but I also want to put Jankovic and Clijsters in there for their amazing retrieving ability, I think their talent is very underrated. I also have to agree with Seles who was one of the hardest hitters and probably first of that generation to come.

supergrunt
Sep 24th, 2008, 05:06 AM
but her timing and her footwork are amzing- and she can volley with the best of them... she is a talented ball-striker and a natural mover

supergrunt
Sep 24th, 2008, 05:07 AM
OMG can someone please watch Wimbledon 05!!!!??!?!

supergrunt
Sep 24th, 2008, 05:08 AM
saying Venus isn't talented is like saying Andre Agassi and Monica Seles aren't talented... where's their variety?

rjd1111
Sep 24th, 2008, 05:14 AM
I've never really seen this discussed in the media or anywhere. Not the greatest but the most talented. In the men for different reasons names like Laver, Pancho Gonzalez, McEnroe, Becker, Agassi, Sampras, Federer, Nastase, Hoad have all been mentioned over time. Then there are guys who didn't achieve as much but are ultra talented like Henri Leconte, Miroslav Mecir or Richard Gasquet.

But for the women? Who would you say were/are real natural talents - amongst the most talented you have seen and for what reasons, great movers or amazing shotmaking ability.

What do you reckon? Henin? Navratilova? Mandlikova, Goolagong? Who do you rate :cool:


Hint: They are both named Williams!!!!

gaviotabr
Sep 24th, 2008, 05:24 AM
I want to talk a little about one of the game's legends. Maria Bueno is definitely up there with the most talented female players. Learning to play basicaly by herself and developing amazing skills is quite something.

In 2005, Martina Hingis and Anna Kournikova came to Brasil to play an exhibition match in Săo Paulo. But Kournikova injured herself in the very begining of the match and they couldn't play. Hingis started to try to entertain the audience somehow, as they had a full stadium watching. She then spotted Maria Bueno in the front row, as she had been invited by the organizers. Hingis went to her and asked her to play a little. It didn't even take 5 minutes and she was on court, ready to play. It was so nice. They played a little only based on skill, and they sure showed some really nice shots, specially at the net. Bueno obviously has her share of age restrictions regarding playing the game, but she has tons of touch and skill to still be able to exchange balls with a pro and entertain the audience. I can only imagine how she was when in her prime. And also very nice of Hingis, as she is also one really talented player, to pay respect for a part of tennis history.

DOUBLEFIST
Sep 24th, 2008, 07:25 AM
Talent with no tecnique just can't develop.

I understand the point you're trying to make, but it, imho, misses a step.

I could just as easily say, "It take's TALENT to ultimately employ and use techiques to their fullest!" The point being that TALENT is a raw commodity nearly synonomous(sp) with POTENTIAL.

Technique merely harnesses that potentiality.


If you are saying that talent without technique is more natural...you are just wrong.
No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that certain players "come out of the box," so to speak, with more natural gifts/talents/potential than others. That is all I'm speaking of when I address the OP's question.

...the most talented player should be able to do everything with the ball...

No, the most PROFICIENT player should be able to do everything with the ball.

If one were to ask me what player I thought was the most technically proficient in recent years, I'd put Henin right there at the top of the list- well ahead of Hingis even. She utilized all of her technical prowess to harness every ounce of her talent, and I applaud her for it. She got the most out of the ability she had and preformed closer to the limits of her ability on average, day in and day out, more so than any of her contemporaries- including Serena. This is one MAJOR reason why I think Henin burnt out. She simply couldn't sustain pushing her personal envelop like that all the time.

But I certainly don't think she was one of the most NATURALLY talented/gifted players. She merely used what potential she had better than others. :shrug:

égalité
Sep 24th, 2008, 07:34 AM
Hingis and Serena should be on everyone's list.

Martina killed everyone in 1997 without breaking a sweat. She never developed her serve because, for a long time, she didn't need it. I remember watching some of the matches she lost in 2002 toward the (first) end of her career, and in desperation, she would blast these crazy winners, but then fold in the next few points. She was capable of doing so much more. She just got used to not having to fight.

Optima
Sep 24th, 2008, 07:49 AM
Martina :o What could have been.

PLP
Sep 24th, 2008, 08:27 AM
Graf and Hingis.

Navratil
Sep 24th, 2008, 08:44 AM
There is no doubt about it: Martina Navratilova!! :worship:

I've never seen a more gifted sportwomen! She was probably the most athletic player and best mover at that time and she's definitly the most talented player in terms of touch and feel.

She could have been the best ever in many other sports!

:bounce:

Navratil
Sep 24th, 2008, 08:54 AM
Martina Hingis doesn't belong to this list! She sure had a lot of feel and touch but she was never able to change anything in her game. She pretty much played the same level throughout her carrer. That was stunning with 15 and disappointing when she was 25!

Her technique on the serve is so bad for a top player and even when she came back on tour, she didn't change anything! She's never been on full stretch on serve and the whole action looked a little bit akward.

The BIG MARTINA worked on her technique throughout her carrer. She was always willing to get better and better. Even with 50!!

Besides Navratilova:
- Serena AND
- Venus Williams
- Davenport
- Graf
- Seles
- Evert
- Martinez
- Zvereva
- Sabatini
- Novotna
- Henin
- Capriati
- Pierce
and probably some players who never got the the top because of injuries or whatever reasons
are the most talented in the OPEN ERA!

oleada
Sep 24th, 2008, 09:27 AM
I don't know. Talent is such a difficult thing to measure. Besides, you can be incredibly talented, not apply yourself at all and lose out to someone who's moderately talented and a hard worker.

donniedarkofan
Sep 24th, 2008, 09:52 AM
I think Venus is more talented than Federer, but it's just like Isha said, her number one role is big sister, so she had to hide that talent away so Serena could get more credit. I saw Venus practicing one time at wimbledon when there were no cameras around, and she was toying with her practice partner like you wouldn't believe... and that's when she was hopping on one leg, wearing an eye patch and playing left handed. When she saw me peeping she was NOT happy! :unsure:

Boy that's a good laugh:lol::lol::lol: Venus and Federer...haha

Now back to the topic:
MARTINA HINGIS!!! No one else can be near her when it comes to pure talent, then Anna Kournikova(great shots,volleys,swing volleys,her movement was one of the best ever) and Natasha Zvereva. Also Henin,Mauresmo,Graf.
Williams sisters are great athletes with alot of talent but not that big imo.To be honest Venus is way more talented than Serena but they're both so strong and great tennis players.
And since when the scores decide about having talent or not?

youizahoe
Sep 24th, 2008, 10:59 AM
:retard: Henin has more natural talent than Serena - she had to work her butt off for her physical strength and speed, but her touch, shot selection and actual tennis talent was definitely natural. So because Hingis doesn't have a great serve she's off the list? Evert didn't have a great serve. Serena has no touch/volley skills compared to Hingis, Goolaging or Navratilova. Every player has their strength's and weaknesses.

As a moderator you can't call reetard a retard. You need to be objective and not call names.

And I don't care if you dislike Serena or whatever, you should know that Venus and Serena worked way harder than Justine and had many more obstacles in their path to become a champion. And they are still, through it all, standing at the top. Henin has talent yes, but it wasn't natural, same for Venus and Serena.

Talent ain't gonna bring you nowhere, only when you put it into hard work, and that's something adults should realise. Natural talent is like, waking up in the morning and singing like Mariah Carey.

In sports, natural talent is rare, since you need to work out and practice hard to become a champion, and by definition that's called creating talent.

Mashafaaaaan
Sep 24th, 2008, 11:13 AM
Davenport, Serena, Sharapova.
Henin, Hingis.

frenchie
Sep 24th, 2008, 11:27 AM
Davenport, Serena, Sharapova.
Henin, Hingis.

Sharapova has no particular talent except power:rolleyes:
All her strokes look manufactured

youizahoe
Sep 24th, 2008, 11:33 AM
Sharapova has no particular talent except power:rolleyes:
All her strokes look manufactured

Well I think Sharapova can play very smart and hard, look at the match against Henin this year at the AO. I think that was a very good match not only won by sheer power.

Mackep83
Sep 24th, 2008, 11:33 AM
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA OMFG, why the hell can someone say that the williams sister are talanted? Thats the biggest joke I ever heard!!!!

Their game is ugly with no variety and no plan B at all.

youizahoe
Sep 24th, 2008, 11:37 AM
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA OMFG, why the hell can someone say that the williams sister are talanted? Thats the biggest joke I ever heard!!!!

Their game is ugly with no variety and no plan B at all.

It's effective and that's what matters. They don't need a plan B, because their plan A- is more powerfull than the A+ game of others.

And Serena Williams is the best player of the last 10 years, the WTA+ITF and the international sports federation also said it. So get over it :)

Mashafaaaaan
Sep 24th, 2008, 11:41 AM
Sharapova has no particular talent except power:rolleyes:
All her strokes look manufactured

No they're not, they're so clean, she can put the ball where she wants, just like Davenport. Personally, I think she and Davenport have the best strokes, better than Serena. Noone can win 3 majors at 20, only thanks to the power:rolleyes:

Mashafaaaaan
Sep 24th, 2008, 11:43 AM
Well I think Sharapova can play very smart and hard, look at the match against Henin this year at the AO. I think that was a very good match not only won by sheer power.

Thank you.

Conor
Sep 24th, 2008, 11:44 AM
As a moderator you can't call reetard a retard. You need to be objective and not call names.

And I don't care if you dislike Serena or whatever, you should know that Venus and Serena worked way harder than Justine and had many more obstacles in their path to become a champion. And they are still, through it all, standing at the top. Henin has talent yes, but it wasn't natural, same for Venus and Serena.

Talent ain't gonna bring you nowhere, only when you put it into hard work, and that's something adults should realise. Natural talent is like, waking up in the morning and singing like Mariah Carey.

In sports, natural talent is rare, since you need to work out and practice hard to become a champion, and by definition that's called creating talent.

:o:weirdo:... need I say anymore? Really? The level of complete stupidity on this forum never ceases to amaze me.

youizahoe
Sep 24th, 2008, 11:45 AM
No they're not, they're so clean, she can put the ball where she wants, just like Davenport. Personally, I think she and Davenport have the best strokes, better than Serena. Nonne can win 3 majors at 20, only thanks to the power:rolleyes:

I think when Serena is timed at her best, nobody hits it better than her, At the Australian Open 2007 is a proof of it.

But I agree, Davenport is the most consecutive clean hitter out there. And yes, nobody can win just by power, there were players that hit very hard, and still haven't gotten anywhere.

youizahoe
Sep 24th, 2008, 11:47 AM
:o:weirdo:... need I say anymore? Really? The level of complete stupidity on this forum never ceases to amaze me.

Serena and Venus started training at the age of 4, both hitting 8 hours a day, at compton, oftenly ducking for bullets If they were a bit unlucky, they would have all been dead. Also they lived with 8 people sleeping on eachother in a studio. Plus richard had to do a lot just to get some money for them to get to where they are now.

Plus they only trained against men that were stronger than them.

While Justine, was trained in a quiet environment, on majestic courts, not so far from my home. And she didn't train that much either, 5 hours a day. And she had a nice home to spend her youth at.

Conor
Sep 24th, 2008, 11:54 AM
Serena and Venus started training at the age of 4, both hitting 8 hours a day, at compton, oftenly ducking for bullets. If they were a bit unlucky, they would have all been dead.

Plus they only trained against men that were stronger than them.

While Justine, was trained in a quiet environment, not so far from my home. And she didn't train that much either, 5 hours a day.

Im not even going to debate with you. You're so completely and utterly biased, absolutely zero objection. Ta ta :wavey:

Mackep83
Sep 24th, 2008, 11:55 AM
It's effective and that's what matters. They don't need a plan B, because their plan A- is more powerfull than the A+ game of others.

And Serena Williams is the best player of the last 10 years, the WTA+ITF and the international sports federation also said it. So get over it :)

Well this thread is about talent, and Williams sisters have no talant. I've played tennis since I was 8 years old and I can say, if anyone says that the williams sisters are talanted they dont know much about tennis!!

Mashafaaaaan
Sep 24th, 2008, 11:58 AM
I think when Serena is timed at her best, nobody hits it better than her, At the Australian Open 2007 is a proof of it.

It's not the same, because when she won that match against Maria, she was really great at serve and return on serve, she is the best at that, no doubt. But Davenport and Sharapova have better strokes, Sharapova vs Ivanovic (YEC) confirms what I'm saying.

Mackep83
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:01 PM
The Williams sisters do have great results, but they are not great tennis players!
Schnyder, Hingis, Henin, Martinez, Mauresmo.. are way better tennisplayers than WS.

youizahoe
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:02 PM
It's not the same, because when she won that match against Maria, she was really great at serve and return on serve, she is the best at that, no doubt. But Davenport and Sharapova have better strokes, Sharapova vs Ivanovic (YEC) confirms what I'm saying.

That's why all players are saying that Serena hits better and harder than them and all the rest.

maki30
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:08 PM
Justine Henin.

Mackep83
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:17 PM
That's why all players are saying that Serena hits better and harder than them and all the rest.

Hmmn no!

Sharapova, Pierce, Davenport hits harder than Serena.. the difference is that Serena moves better than Shar, Pierce and Dav.. thats why Serena has won more big titles

youizahoe
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:23 PM
The Williams sisters do have great results, but they are not great tennis players!
Schnyder, Hingis, Henin, Martinez, Mauresmo.. are way better tennisplayers than WS.

Hingis and Henin are arguable, but seriously mauresmo and schnyder are a few levels below them

youizahoe
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:26 PM
Hmmn no!

Sharapova, Pierce, Davenport hits harder than Serena.. the difference is that Serena moves better than Shar, Pierce and Dav.. thats why Serena has won more big titles

No. Serena hits the hardest strokes. That was measured in 2007. Serena hit a forehand and backhand over 115mph... the previous record was by kuznetsova a forehand at the us open 2004 final at 108mph.

It's also official stated by the wta, that nobody hits harder strokes than Serena. So seriously you are by the wrong end.

Dave.
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:29 PM
Serena hits the hardest physically (of all the players I don't think anybody hits it as hard).

Lindsay hits the hardest the most consistently, and has the cleanest hit.

@Sweet Cleopatra
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:30 PM
All who reached top 1 are sure so talented ...

youizahoe
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:35 PM
Serena hits the hardest physically (of all the players I don't think anybody hits it as hard).

Lindsay hits the hardest the most consistently, and has the cleanest hit.

Good point, I agree.

Mashafaaaaan
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:40 PM
No. Serena hits the hardest strokes. That was measured in 2007. Serena hit a forehand and backhand over 115mph... the previous record was by kuznetsova a forehand at the us open 2004 final at 108mph.

It's also official stated by the wta, that nobody hits harder strokes than Serena. So seriously you are by the wrong end.

No I don't think so, and he is not totally wrong, when we saw Sharapova vs Serena during Charleston, Sharapova's hitting seemed faster, Venus's hitting seemed faster too during QF of US.
On one shot Serena can hit really hard, harder than anyone, I agree but Sharapova, Venus and Davenport's shots are consistently hard, harder than Serena.

Mackep83
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:48 PM
No I don't think so, and he is not totally wrong, when we saw Sharapova vs Serena during Charleston, Sharapova's hitting seemed faster, Venus's hitting seemed faster too during QF of US.
On one shot Serena can hit really hard, harder than anyone, I agree but Sharapova, Venus and Davenport's shots are consistently hard, harder than Serena.

Yes that was my point. Its more interesting to see who has the most consistently hard shots...than just look at one hard shot...

Mackep83
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:51 PM
And Serena have more spinn on the shots than Sharapova, that means, Serenas ball speed will subsided? after the net, (the speedometer is placed on the net?) But Sharapovas shots will have nearly the same speed cause her shots are so flat..

frenchie
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:54 PM
I think Daniela is very talented too

Everything is so natural in her game.

laurie
Sep 24th, 2008, 12:58 PM
No I don't think so, and he is not totally wrong, when we saw Sharapova vs Serena during Charleston, Sharapova's hitting seemed faster, Venus's hitting seemed faster too during QF of US.
On one shot Serena can hit really hard, harder than anyone, I agree but Sharapova, Venus and Davenport's shots are consistently hard, harder than Serena.

I don't know if it's Serena's forehand grip, but I find often that Serena doesn't hit through the ball, she rolls up the back of the ball, I assume trying to get depth on the shot.

Davenport and Sharapova hit through the ball more often and generate consistent pace - they both passed through Robert Lansdorp's training in California so there are similarities.

I can understand if people think that Sharapova and Davenport hit the ball harder. I don't know about that but they probably hit flatter on the forehand more often than Serena giving the impression they hit harder. Serena does hit with a lot of depth though, probably higher net clearance and more topspin, those shots are probably harder to deal with for her opponents than flatter drives lower over the net coming off Davenport's and Sharapova's racquets.

I definitely think Serena hits harder returns as well.

youizahoe
Sep 24th, 2008, 01:03 PM
No I don't think so, and he is not totally wrong, when we saw Sharapova vs Serena during Charleston, Sharapova's hitting seemed faster, Venus's hitting seemed faster too during QF of US.
On one shot Serena can hit really hard, harder than anyone, I agree but Sharapova, Venus and Davenport's shots are consistently hard, harder than Serena.

Serena doesn't hit hard this year because she wants her to move herself around more. There's no player to comes near Serena's full power, only Venus.

Sharapova doesn't hit that hard, she hits hard, but she's below davenport and serena. That's also what Sharapova said of Serena last year. Nobody hits it harder than Serena. All statistics point that way also.

court70
Sep 24th, 2008, 01:07 PM
How do you judge talent?
If you dont use results to judge talent what do you use?
Its a little bit like measuring intelligence.
I.Q. tests are a pretty good measure of intelligence just like results are a good measure of talent.
Who is the greatest chess player? the one who wins I would say.
talent if if if i could have been the greatest with my great talent but were you not? with supposedly all your talent?
crazy supposition I submit.

After this post....this thread should have ended. BINGO

Mackep83
Sep 24th, 2008, 01:48 PM
How do you judge talent?
If you dont use results to judge talent what do you use?
Its a little bit like measuring intelligence.
I.Q. tests are a pretty good measure of intelligence just like results are a good measure of talent.
Who is the greatest chess player? the one who wins I would say.
talent if if if i could have been the greatest with my great talent but were you not? with supposedly all your talent?
crazy supposition I submit.

Results dont necessarily have anything to do with talent. If you dont have any talent... practise really hard and harder than everyone else you can beat them all. If you are a great talent and learn very fast and can do everything you want with the ball and dont practise that much, you maybe lose to a lot of players..

Serena is a great example, I guess she practise a lot both on cort and off ourt... and maybe she is a talent in the gym...but on court shes not a talent.

Lindsayfan32
Sep 24th, 2008, 02:01 PM
I have to go with Hingis, Schnyder and Kournikova!

their ability to hit any shot and their fluid games speak for themselves

Hingis I can agree with you on as she won five slams but it's insulting the question to include Schnyder who has never won a slam and in all likelyhood will never win a slam and Kournikova who didn't win a single tour title at all. I would love to know what your thinking is here.

In modern era the best women's players are the Williams sister, Ivanovic, Jankovic players like that. Going back into the 90's Hingis, Lndsay Davenport, and Jennifer Capriati, Mary piece, Kim ect. :)

youizahoe
Sep 24th, 2008, 02:07 PM
Results dont necessarily have anything to do with talent. If you dont have any talent... practise really hard and harder than everyone else you can beat them all. If you are a great talent and learn very fast and can do everything you want with the ball and dont practise that much, you maybe lose to a lot of players..

Serena is a great example, I guess she practise a lot both on cort and off ourt... and maybe she is a talent in the gym...but on court shes not a talent.

You're an idiot, and you know it. Serena is a champion on the court, and no other players match that. period.

Mackep83
Sep 24th, 2008, 02:15 PM
You're an idiot, and you know it. Serena is a champion on the court, and no other players match that. period.

Haha whats wrong with you? You are sick

You dont practise any sports, right? Cause you dont see the difference between talant and results... you are pathetic

You shouldent write in sports forum, go to paris hilton forum or whatever

Mackep83
Sep 24th, 2008, 02:20 PM
You're an idiot, and you know it. Serena is a champion on the court, and no other players match that. period.

I guess you are one of many moorons here who adminre Serena only beacuse shes winning titles and her fashion and style... because one thing for sure, you dont know anything about tennis

youizahoe
Sep 24th, 2008, 02:21 PM
Haha whats wrong with you? You are sick

You dont practise any sports, right? Cause you dont see the difference between talant and results... you are pathetic

You shouldent write in sports forum, go to paris hilton forum or whatever

I've played one year at the itf before getting a chronic injury, and I still play tennis, do swimming, and run 20 miles per day.

youizahoe
Sep 24th, 2008, 02:22 PM
I guess you are one of many moorons here who adminre Serena only beacuse shes winning titles and her fashion and style... because one thing for sure, you dont know anything about tennis

I admire Serena Williams, Maria Sharapova, Martina Navratilova, Steffi Graff. You freaking dork.

And since I'm playing tennis since im 5 years old, I kinda know what tennis is all about, and know that, talent ain't gonna get you somewhere. Working hard that does, like all players do.

The only thing that devides players is their character and determination, all wanna get there, but some players their will is more powerful than the determination of the player on the other side of the net.

Mackep83
Sep 24th, 2008, 02:28 PM
I admire Serena Williams, Maria Sharapova, Martina Navratilova, Steffi Graff. You freaking dork.

Thats ironic, none of those players are a talent. Steffi Graf, the worst technique in history

frenchie
Sep 24th, 2008, 02:28 PM
Hingis I can agree with you on as she won five slams but it's insulting the question to include Schnyder who has never won a slam and in all likelyhood will never win a slam and Kournikova who didn't win a single tour title at all. I would love to know what your thinking is here.

In modern era the best women's players are the Williams sister, Ivanovic, Jankovic players like that. Going back into the 90's Hingis, Lndsay Davenport, and Jennifer Capriati, Mary piece, Kim ect. :)

well to me, talent has nothing to do with results;)
Talent is more a natural ability to produce shots without effort.

What players do with their talent is another question. Obviously Hingis used her talent very well whereas Schnyder and Kournikova are often called underachievers.
I would say for exemple Dementieva is less talented (her shots are manufactured especially BH and serve) but she still has better results than a lot of more gifted players;)

That being said, any professionnal player has talent and us, behind our screens, are less talented anway:tape::lol:

youizahoe
Sep 24th, 2008, 02:29 PM
Thats ironic, none of those players are a talent. Steffi Graf, the worst technique in history

Navratilova was the best serve&volley player ever, and to be that, you need to have a great technique.

And Graff having the worst technique, is bullshit.

Mackep83
Sep 24th, 2008, 02:31 PM
Navratilova was the best serve&volley player ever, and to be that, you need to have a great technique.

I dident say anything about Navratilovas technique.. she was great but not a talent

youizahoe
Sep 24th, 2008, 02:33 PM
I dident say anything about Navratilovas technique.. she was great but not a talent

If she's not a talent, I guess no player in tennis history was.

laurie
Sep 24th, 2008, 02:35 PM
I dident say anything about Navratilovas technique.. she was great but not a talent

What do you define as talent and which players have impressed you over the years?

Mackep83
Sep 24th, 2008, 02:38 PM
If she's not a talent, I guess no player in tennis history was.

Well, i'm "only" 24 years old and havent seen many of her matches, but it looks like she is one of those players who practised really really hard to be a great tennisplayer.... I can be wrong...Navratilova is not my best subject

Mackep83
Sep 24th, 2008, 02:43 PM
What do you define as talent and which players have impressed you over the years?

A pure talant for me is Hingis. When I see her playing, special in the late 90's, I see so much talent. She do everytinh right with the ball and did shots nobodu did before...

Mackep83
Sep 24th, 2008, 02:45 PM
For me a real talant is someone who dont need to practise very much to be great.. Serena is great and can do many shots but ut doesnt look so natural as is look for Hingis. Thats the difference...for me..

shap_half
Sep 24th, 2008, 03:08 PM
This thread had two lives...

supergrunt
Sep 24th, 2008, 03:09 PM
Martina is over-rated.

supergrunt
Sep 24th, 2008, 03:09 PM
Hingis that is.

patricio
Sep 24th, 2008, 03:19 PM
Talent? Sabatini, Navratilova, maybe Hingis.

Marshmallow
Sep 24th, 2008, 03:26 PM
There are SO many uncontrolled factors. Some players had tennis coach parents, some player did not. Some players worked extremely hard to learn the shorts, some did not. Some players have underachieved with respect to their talents having to deal with troubled relationships, eating disorders and sexuality/image, others have not. With all this diversity and taking into account tennis is the sum of various skills including court sense, shot making and nerve - which are hard enough to measure considering the diversity of players... this thread was probably in trouble from the minute it was posted. And what role does passion for tennis play?

youizahoe
Sep 24th, 2008, 03:30 PM
:lol: It's supposed to be about tennis talent, not poetry.

That wasn't funny :p

homogenius
Sep 24th, 2008, 03:31 PM
Serena and Venus started training at the age of 4, both hitting 8 hours a day, at compton, oftenly ducking for bullets If they were a bit unlucky, they would have all been dead. Also they lived with 8 people sleeping on eachother in a studio. Plus richard had to do a lot just to get some money for them to get to where they are now.

Plus they only trained against men that were stronger than them.

While Justine, was trained in a quiet environment, on majestic courts, not so far from my home. And she didn't train that much either, 5 hours a day. And she had a nice home to spend her youth at.

:rolls:

AcesHigh
Sep 24th, 2008, 03:34 PM
This thread had two lives...

:lol: so true.

shap_half
Sep 24th, 2008, 03:38 PM
:lol: so true.

It really was very funny, because I thought it was a pretty interesting topic. And I really thought the first couple of pages had a good conversation going and then everything started changing and I didn't even know what was going on anymore. :lol:

MyskinaManiac
Sep 24th, 2008, 04:15 PM
I thought about this at work today... strange. I think Hantuchova is an extreme talent. She sometimes reminds me of a version of Hingis that everyone yearned for when she was being slaughtered by the power hitters... taller, hits flatter, serves harder. Except with that come compromise, lack of court speed and of course her lack of court smarts. But techinically she's on par with Hingis, who in my opinion was a gift from the get go.

However, one could compare the artistry of tennis to that of art history... who is to judge what is great art? Is art not art because it's abstract in concept for example compared to that of something created in the Renaissance period? It's purely subjective... we're wasting our time with attempting to prove each other wrong.

Talent should only be judged on your willingness to achieve, and this willingness should be conveyed in the results that are reflected.

Tamus
Sep 24th, 2008, 04:31 PM
I understand the point you're trying to make, but it, imho, misses a step.

I could just as easily say, "It take's TALENT to ultimately employ and use techiques to their fullest!" The point being that TALENT is a raw commodity nearly synonomous(sp) with POTENTIAL.

Technique merely harnesses that potentiality.


No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that certain players "come out of the box," so to speak, with more natural gifts/talents/potential than others. That is all I'm speaking of when I address the OP's question.


No, the most PROFICIENT player should be able to do everything with the ball.

If one were to ask me what player I thought was the most technically proficient in recent years, I'd put Henin right there at the top of the list- well ahead of Hingis even. She utilized all of her technical prowess to harness every ounce of her talent, and I applaud her for it. She got the most out of the ability she had and preformed closer to the limits of her ability on average, day in and day out, more so than any of her contemporaries- including Serena. This is one MAJOR reason why I think Henin burnt out. She simply couldn't sustain pushing her personal envelop like that all the time.

But I certainly don't think she was one of the most NATURALLY talented/gifted players. She merely used what potential she had better than others. :shrug:

Completely agree.
I think most posters are having difficulty comprehending exactly what talent is. :shrug:

Andrew Laeddis
Sep 24th, 2008, 05:24 PM
I have to go with Hingis, Schnyder and Kournikova!

their ability to hit any shot and their fluid games speak for themselves

:haha:

Jakarta
Sep 24th, 2008, 07:32 PM
I tend to agree with the poster who said talent and achievement are two different things. Talent takes you so far, and then it takes the hard work and mental smarts to see you through to the top. Of course, by saying that, it doesn't mean that the top women aren't talented, but there are other players who don't make the top who have great natural talent. That is, if that was the intent of the original question (as opposed to the Most Talented Players who Reached the Top of the Games).

So, for me, great talented players who didn't really make it to the top but were probably more talented than some of the top five or top 10 of their generations:

1) Bettina Bunge: Just awesome style and talent, but injuries and a lack of mental toughness to compete against the top of the game (and a very awkward forehand).

2) Yayuk Basuki: Pure natural talent that was probably greater than some of the top 10 and 15 of her time (Coetzer, Majoli, even a Mary Jo Fernandez) but sometimes couldn't carry through with the big wins.

3) Ines Gorrategchugui (sorry about the spelling).

I watched Savchuk against Hantuchova in Bali. To me, Savchuk is naturally talented, has it all (reminiscent of Mauresmo) compared to many players.

Navratil
Sep 25th, 2008, 08:44 AM
@ jarkata: I totally agree with you: talent and achievement/success are two different things.
Amanda Coetzer was # 3 in the world. There are many players out there much more talented than Coetzer was but not many are so successfull!

The more interesting question is:


What is the definition talent?


It's not only touch and feel. Lori McNeil is one of the players with the best hand but she hasn´t been the greatest mover. The ability to move, to be fast, flexibel and so on is part of the natural talent you need in tennis.

Mental strength is a matter of talent. Also: The ability to learn and to change things.

And again: I really don't think that there's ever been a player with the talent of Martin Navratilova. She has got the greatest touch combined with anything else you can imagine. And she would have had the talent to be the best in pretty much any other sport!

Navratil
Sep 25th, 2008, 08:49 AM
sorry: I mean What is the definition OF talent!! ;-)

Anyway: I made the same thread 12th August!

OsloErik
Sep 25th, 2008, 08:58 AM
2) Yayuk Basuki: Pure natural talent that was probably greater than some of the top 10 and 15 of her time (Coetzer, Majoli, even a Mary Jo Fernandez) but sometimes couldn't carry through with the big wins.

3) Ines Gorrategchugui (sorry about the spelling).

Good call on both counts! I have very good memories of Yayuk Basuki beating Silvia Farina Elia in one of the most incredible throw-back matches I've ever seen in 1995, I believe. Possibly the most entertaining matches I've seen since Navratilova played.

And Gorrochetegui was the winner of the last match I saw Helena Sukova play live. French Open 3rd round, also 1995, I believe. Had very nice, classically struck groundies. Fine mover on clay.

edit: it was 1994, that's the year I went to Berlin, Roland Garros, Eastbourne and Wimbledon.

Tennis Ball
Sep 25th, 2008, 04:22 PM
Henin didn't have it natural, I remember her being hours and hours on the court because her backhand, forehand and serve were a mess, around 2003 she finally got it together.

Isn't that typical for all professional athletes? :lol:

You mean when Serena had just been born she won a grand slam .... even one single match? She didn't have to practice her limited arsenal of shots? :lol: Typical, I am sorry to say so, but the resistance is just typical.
I think you are turning the tables around. I remember Venus and Serena representing a classical American story: starting poor with no easy-to-take chances available, reaching the top in your field by working very hard. Richard's external influence is a classic example of Skinner's (radical) behaviorism.

Justine had that backhand even when she was 4 or 3 years old, she invented it, it came natural to her to play it that way, she didn't even realise it herself when she was little until people/coaches mentioning it to her (same goes for Kim's split btw) and also was determined about it, even when she got the advise to change it into a two-handed backhand. Fortunately, they understood they should leave it because it was a sign of exceptional talent, or because it belonged to her talent if you will. Respect Nature. Her exceptional backhand is just one 'symptom' of the whole package deal.

Btw, that's why I'm worried about changes being made on some technique (or part of technique) of Tammy Hendler (they didn't tell precisely what they changed), while at the same time she and her father really were reluctant to do do. That's a bad sign to me.

Dodoboy.
Sep 25th, 2008, 07:12 PM
Laura Robson :inlove:

Brena
Sep 25th, 2008, 07:47 PM
Serena and Venus started training at the age of 4, both hitting 8 hours a day, at compton, oftenly ducking for bullets If they were a bit unlucky, they would have all been dead. Also they lived with 8 people sleeping on eachother in a studio. Plus richard had to do a lot just to get some money for them to get to where they are now.

Plus they only trained against men that were stronger than them.

While Justine, was trained in a quiet environment, on majestic courts, not so far from my home. And she didn't train that much either, 5 hours a day. And she had a nice home to spend her youth at.

No disrespect meant, but this reminds me of the sketch ''Four Yorkshiremen'' by Monty Python. :rolls:

Xe1a1wHxTyo

heartBREAKeRS
Sep 25th, 2008, 09:17 PM
Serena

Backhand_stille
Sep 26th, 2008, 06:33 PM
Kaia Kanepi :bounce: she always has a problem in her head...but this season :kiss:

venusallday
Sep 26th, 2008, 07:22 PM
I wouldnt include Venus in most talented.. and she's my fave player. One of the most physically gifted in history, but most of her success is due to extraordinary physical ability. A lot of her shots are mediocre or average (lob, drop shot, second serve, etc.) and I just don't think you can put her next to Court, Lenglen, etc.

My era/time is from mid-late 1990s to now, and I'd say probably the only people to throw into a list of ALLTIME most talented are Hingis, Henin and you have to put Mauresmo IMO. Also, Davenport's perfect timing and technique are a talent in itself.. I'm not sure you can really teach what she has. She also has a great repetoire(sp?) of shots..

I guess we think of talent in different ways. Venus is the most talented to me, because she is the most athletically gifted tennis player in history. Her ability to run down shots and change defense to offense is unrivaled to this day. She has underachieved because she, like many Americans, has been too stubborn to change her strokes and add a lot of variety. Still, she has managed to improve her basic game to what we are seeing today. Had Venus utilized her great natural talent and added more technique, I think she would have seen results comparable to the greats in achievements. Still, she is a GREAT in talent.

OsloErik
Sep 26th, 2008, 07:56 PM
I don't care if you dislike Serena or whatever, you should know that Venus and Serena worked way harder than Justine and had many more obstacles in their path to become a champion. And they are still, through it all, standing at the top. Henin has talent yes, but it wasn't natural, same for Venus and Serena.

I don't want to get into this, but I do take exception to this blanket statement. And I'm sorry if this seems like I'm unduly picking on this one poster, or on the Williams story, but I don't feel comfortable writing off the incredible nature of MANY tennis players stories simply because America has this incredible glamourization of the "American Dream", lift yourself up story.

Henin didn't come from a dangerous part of the world, but she didn't have things handed to her on a silver platter. She didn't come from the same kind of family environment, her mother died when she was just a girl, and she earned her way into the tennis training establishment, didn't buy her way in like the assumption sometimes appears. In addition, Belgium didn't have much of a tennis tradition. There weren't public tennis courts throughout Liege. As in, there weren't even poorly maintained courts in the neighborhood to go to. Henin had to commute to the main park, in a single family household, until she had developed enough to earn the investment of a coach. Fortunately for her, that was something she could get access to, and early, just as the Williams got access to Rick Macci early enough to improve on the basics they had and augment the talent and propensity they displayed

Venus and Serena lived in a dangerous part of Los Angeles, and the courts they trained on weren't properly maintained at all. Were there shootings in their neighborhood? Obviously, just as there were shootings in Belgrade, Prague, St. Petersburg, and so on. But just as Ivanovic didn't have to practice tennis while tiptoing around landmines, it's a distortion to say that gangs were having turf wars over the tennis court; they weren't getting shot at so much as there was the danger of an accident. Not targeted violence, accidental "collateral damage". What separates Venus and Serena from many players is that they had a family that was so supportive. A huge part of their success stems from that family, and the remarkable perseverance of 8 people to stay positive in the face of so many challenges.

There is literally nothing to compare these two paths. There is nothing that links them except for tennis. It's impossible to say which is the more difficult as there isn't any basis of comparison. Lots of people lead successful lives after escaping urban poverty; lots of people lead successful lives after losing a parent young or being estranged from your family young. But it cheapens the blood, sweat, and tears of BOTH pathways for us to continue to engage in this petty one-upping and competition. The Williams sisters are clearly the best of their generation; #1 and #2. Henin is clearly the only player who comes close; #3. Do any of them really need us to regard their story of success as the most incredible? Obviously not. And I can't understand why any legitimate fan would feel the need to push that agenda down everyone else's throat. We aren't the media on this board; we aren't trying to sell these players as appealing. We've all heard the stories, and we've all reached our opinions. The competition over having a hard life is just too much. I hope that it can stop, forever, from here on out.

misael
Sep 26th, 2008, 08:14 PM
Isn't that typical for all professional athletes? :lol:

You mean when Serena had just been born she won a grand slam .... even one single match? She didn't have to practice her limited arsenal of shots? :lol: Typical, I am sorry to say so, but the resistance is just typical.
I think you are turning the tables around. I remember Venus and Serena representing a classical American story: starting poor with no easy-to-take chances available, reaching the top in your field by working very hard. Richard's external influence is a classic example of Skinner's (radical) behaviorism.

Justine had that backhand even when she was 4 or 3 years old, she invented it, it came natural to her to play it that way, she didn't even realise it herself when she was little until people/coaches mentioning it to her (same goes for Kim's split btw) and also was determined about it, even when she got the advise to change it into a two-handed backhand. Fortunately, they understood they should leave it because it was a sign of exceptional talent, or because it belonged to her talent if you will. Respect Nature. Her exceptional backhand is just one 'symptom' of the whole package deal.

Btw, that's why I'm worried about changes being made on some technique (or part of technique) of Tammy Hendler (they didn't tell precisely what they changed), while at the same time she and her father really were reluctant to do do. That's a bad sign to me.Justine won the very first prp tournament she played!

irma
Sep 26th, 2008, 08:34 PM
I still don't get why some people think it's better to achieve because you were lucky to be born with the right gifts instead of a person who worked her ass off to achieve. The last seems to be a lot more satisfying.