PDA

View Full Version : I know what Kim Clijsters is thinking, but she is wrong


clonesheep
Apr 14th, 2009, 10:49 AM
The reason for Kim's decision to comeback is quite simple. She looked at the current top 10 and realized that, aside from Williams sisters, those who lead the tour now are the peons and garbages who she regularly beat before her retirement. Beside, her nemesis Justine is apparently retired for good. If she comes back she will rule again.

Well, she is in for a big surprise. The level of play with young players like Safina has gone up. Three years ago Safina was just an inconsistent big hitter. Now she has a much more mature game. Even young guns like Azarenka are catching up. Kim's defensive game will no longer be effective. This is the same situation that Martina hingis faced in her comeback: Her finesse game play was no longer enough to overcome power+speed of the young players. Azarenka bageled her at US Open. That was before Vika became famous. I think Kim will have her ass kicked by some 18-year old nobody and I am quite looking forward to it.

mauresmofan
Apr 14th, 2009, 10:51 AM
We'll see.

Golovinjured.
Apr 14th, 2009, 10:54 AM
Hater.

Josh.
Apr 14th, 2009, 10:54 AM
Martina's comeback was pretty sucsessful IMO. Yes, she sucumbbed to the same problem that forced out of the game in the first place, but coming back to #6 in the world was a giant feat. Kim had the game to compete then and now, it was her body that was letting her down. But, as mauresmofan said, we'll see.

Lapaco
Apr 14th, 2009, 10:55 AM
:haha:Safina and Azarenka thrashing Clijsters? Nice joke

Daniel K
Apr 14th, 2009, 10:56 AM
Totally disagree. The game in my opinion hasn't improved since she left, in fact it has probably regressed. Sure Azarenka is playing well at the moment but Clijsters playing well is better than everyone on the tour bar the Williams' and Sharapova.

Martina more than handled her own against the young players in her comeback. She played horribly for most of 2007 but during 2006 you'll find she overcame most of the young guns she faced.

Nicolas
Apr 14th, 2009, 10:57 AM
Hingis>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Clijsters

Davodus
Apr 14th, 2009, 11:00 AM
:confused: it isn't like all kim had was a defensive game, she is a great ball striker as well
if she is fully committed she will do well

tennnisfannn
Apr 14th, 2009, 11:17 AM
:haha:Safina and Azarenka thrashing Clijsters? Nice joke
The joke must surely be on you, do you really believe safina/azarenka have made no progress and Kim has remained at the same level she was at two years ago?:rolleyes:

Lapaco
Apr 14th, 2009, 11:23 AM
The joke must surely be on you, do you really believe safina/azarenka have made no progress and Kim has remained at the same level she was at two years ago?:rolleyes:

Kim from two years ago was horrible, we are talking about a committed Kim here. And there is no way a committed Kim would get thrashed by Safinas and the like.

akephon35695
Apr 14th, 2009, 11:31 AM
I'm doubt only her mobility since she has a kid.
If she play 80% at her best top15 at least compare with level of the tour right now.

mckyle.
Apr 14th, 2009, 11:33 AM
:confused: it isn't like all kim had was a defensive game, she is a great ball striker as well

thats what i was thinking :lol: he's making it seem as if kim completely depended on her defensive skills and slides, which isn't true...

muniu
Apr 14th, 2009, 11:33 AM
The reason for Kim's decision to comeback is quite simple. She looked at the current top 10 and realized that, aside from Williams sisters, those who lead the tour now are the peons and garbages who she regularly beat before her retirement. Beside, her nemesis Justine is apparently retired for good. If she comes back she will rule again.

Well, she is in for a big surprise. The level of play with young players like Safina has gone up. Three years ago Safina was just an inconsistent big hitter. Now she has a much more mature game. Even young guns like Azarenka are catching up. Kim's defensive game will no longer be effective. This is the same situation that Martina hingis faced in her comeback: Her finesse game play was no longer enough to overcome power+speed of the young players. Azarenka bageled her at US Open. That was before Vika became famous. I think Kim will have her ass kicked by some 18-year old nobody and I am quite looking forward to it.

I think we can fairly say : "Safina, the wall" ............ yes :lol:

Hardiansf
Apr 14th, 2009, 11:51 AM
Kim from two years ago was horrible, we are talking about a committed Kim here. And there is no way a committed Kim would get thrashed by Safinas and the like.
:tape: :confused: Why? Safina will be #1 next week. Last season is her best season. Her play game is more developed than when Kim was still on the tour.
I love Kim :kiss:, but you just underestimated Safina, Azarenka, etc.

santhuruu
Apr 14th, 2009, 12:09 PM
I think Kim Clijsters could suprise everyone again, I would just say enjoy her game during this summer, because she is a great player to watch first of all, and second of all she just wants to see where her game is now and most of all she wants to enjoy tennis, something she was not able to do a lot of times in her career!

youizahoe
Apr 14th, 2009, 12:17 PM
The reason for Kim's decision to comeback is quite simple. She looked at the current top 10 and realized that, aside from Williams sisters, those who lead the tour now are the peons and garbages who she regularly beat before her retirement. Beside, her nemesis Justine is apparently retired for good. If she comes back she will rule again.

Well, she is in for a big surprise. The level of play with young players like Safina has gone up. Three years ago Safina was just an inconsistent big hitter. Now she has a much more mature game. Even young guns like Azarenka are catching up. Kim's defensive game will no longer be effective. This is the same situation that Martina hingis faced in her comeback: Her finesse game play was no longer enough to overcome power+speed of the young players. Azarenka bageled her at US Open. That was before Vika became famous. I think Kim will have her ass kicked by some 18-year old nobody and I am quite looking forward to it.
That's where you are thinking wrong. Kim isn't a defensive player, she starts being defensive, but she turns it easily into offense, that's what you could see, she can hit hard balls and do a split at the same time. Also Kim Clijsters had mostly double the winners than errors, which means she's not defensive. She has a superb defence, but all do respect, that Kim Clijsters won points by dictating points and hitting have forehand drive volleys and hard backhands DTL.

You seriously have never seen Kim Clijsters play. If She plays like 2005. She can control 8 players of the top 10 already. And I do not think Azarenka is good enough for Clijsters yet, she'll be just another Hantuchova that she'll go 10-0 against her career. Plus Azarenka can barely win a 10+ shots rally, and that will her issue be against Clijsters, as for all other players.

youizahoe
Apr 14th, 2009, 12:18 PM
:tape: :confused: Why? Safina will be #1 next week. Last season is her best season. Her play game is more developed than when Kim was still on the tour.
I love Kim :kiss:, but you just underestimated Safina, Azarenka, etc.
Seriously hit a rally of 10 shots on a consistent base to safina or azarenka and they will both most likely lose that point.

Wojtek
Apr 14th, 2009, 12:20 PM
Well, thread starter knows what Clijsters is thinking. :o

PLEASE TAKE PILLS OR GO TO THE DOCTOR.

youizahoe
Apr 14th, 2009, 12:22 PM
The joke must surely be on you, do you really believe safina/azarenka have made no progress and Kim has remained at the same level she was at two years ago?:rolleyes:
Do you actually think Safina and Azarenka have a great level? They are good players, no doubt, but Safina is still a mental nut-case and that will come out again during the next months.

Azarenka on the other hand, she's mentally strong and can play well, but in Miami nearly 60% of her points were won within 5 strokes. The majority of long points against Kuznetsova for example, she lost. Plus she always picks the wrong side with smashes and volleys, and that's where Kim excelled at. She needs to improve a lot more to beat Kim Clijsters or other players, but she's young so she's allowed to make mistakes in order to grow.

youizahoe
Apr 14th, 2009, 12:23 PM
Well, thread starter knows what Clijsters is thinking. :o

PLEASE TAKE PILLS OR GO TO THE DOCTOR.
I love Gdansk, and that last post part :hearts:

Wojtek
Apr 14th, 2009, 12:25 PM
I love Gdansk, and that last post part :hearts:

You were in Gdańsk?

youizahoe
Apr 14th, 2009, 12:25 PM
Hingis>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Clijsters
In terms of career yes, but in terms of handeling the youngsters and powerplayers;

Clijsters >>>>> (crushes) >>>>> Hingis.

youizahoe
Apr 14th, 2009, 12:27 PM
You were in Gdańsk?
Yes 3 days in 2006 (weekend-trip). I loved the houses, especially the Green Gate and Old Arsenal, such nice architecture ^^

Zébulon
Apr 14th, 2009, 12:29 PM
A more interesting question would be " will Clijsters'return be a good thing for WTAa ?" If she does well and beats top players, will it make wta more interesting or just show that the level did drop ? What's good about this ? And if she doesn't come back at her near best level, will it be interesting ? And if her best level isn't enough to beat current top players, will it be enough to make the tour look better ?

Sammm
Apr 14th, 2009, 12:47 PM
And the hate starts already :rolleyes:

I'm just hoping for some great matches involving Kim and that she enjoys it. I think last year's US Open series was a little sucky so anything new will spice it up.

cn ireland
Apr 14th, 2009, 12:47 PM
I think Kim will be well able to handle Safina, Azarenka & Co.

If Kim plays even 75% the way she used to, she'll be a major threat along with the Williams sisters & Sharapova!!

I can't wait:hearts:!

MyskinaManiac
Apr 14th, 2009, 01:12 PM
OH please... Clijsters level of play was incredible and will match and surpass many of the top crop. She was like JJ except with powerful groundies.

Look at Mary Pierce... similar in strokes and far inferior mover to Clijsters, Mary's game stood the test of time, and if hers can then I'm 100% positive Clijsters' can. Kim only retired like 2 years back... stupid thread!

Matt01
Apr 14th, 2009, 01:22 PM
Look at Mary Pierce... similar in strokes and far inferior mover to Clijsters, Mary's game stood the test of time, and if hers can then I'm 100% positive Clijsters' can. Kim only retired like 2 years back... stupid thread!


Mary's and Kim's strokes were not similar. :o

And considering that Kim won one whopping Slam in her whole career so far, I very much doubt that she'll be a serious contender for Slams again after her comeback. Like Mother Lindsay after her comabck, she'll be a serious threat at MM tourneys but not more. But of course that's just speculation on my part. We'll see when (or if) she comes back.

tennnisfannn
Apr 14th, 2009, 01:22 PM
Kim from two years ago was horrible, we are talking about a committed Kim here. And there is no way a committed Kim would get thrashed by Safinas and the like.
Do you even remember the Kim before she retired? She was commitment manifested! She played week in week out in both singles and doubles, one of the very few to be ranked no. 1 in both singles and doubles at the same time. Just because we hope/think she has willed herself to become a champion does not necessarily mean she si going to be one right away. She still has to play matches.
BTW just because Safina is having a difficult start to the year does not mean she is never going to find her game. JJ just won a title after she was struggled all year.
I think we go overboard on this baord in rubbishing players. Who is to say Kim will not struggle in a match situation.

MyskinaManiac
Apr 14th, 2009, 01:25 PM
In terms of career yes, but in terms of handeling the youngsters and powerplayers;

Clijsters >>>>> (crushes) >>>>> Hingis.

PFFFFFFFFFT, for one Hingis owned a young Clijsters, both a young and a powerful player, so go figure. Pre 2002 Hingis won 4 out of their 5 encounters... Winning the first three easily in straight sets.

Marshmallow
Apr 14th, 2009, 01:29 PM
Clijsters playing well > than what I've seen from Safina, Kuzzy, Jankovic, Azarenka etc so far. Ivanovic playing well though :scratch:

If she can get the spring back in her step (assuming the mental break did her good too), the aforementioned should be stocking up on packs of Pampers.

Real question is, what level will she be at upon her return. :unsure:

youizahoe
Apr 14th, 2009, 01:30 PM
PFFFFFFFFFT, for one Hingis owned a young Clijsters, both a young and a powerful player, so go figure. Pre 2002 Hingis won 4 out of their 5 encounters... Winning the first three easily in straight sets.
Hingis played Clijsters back then when ;
1. Clijsters didn't have the movement she had in 2003-2005 back then.
2. Clijsters wasn't offensive enough back then
3. Clijsters was still very young and immature
4. Clijsters by far didn't hit as hard as in 2003-2005
Clijsters in 2006 when she played like shit with her hip, still managed to overpower Ms comeback Hingis.

MyskinaManiac
Apr 14th, 2009, 01:32 PM
Mary's and Kim's strokes were not similar. :o

And considering that Kim won one whopping Slam in her whole career so far, I very much doubt that she'll be a serious contender for Slams again after her comeback. Like Mother Lindsay after her comabck, she'll be a serious threat at MM tourneys but not more. But of course that's just speculation on my part. We'll see when (or if) she comes back.

Perhaps not techinically the same, or the impart of top spon etc, but they were both trying to achieve the same result, that being: wrong footing their opponent with deep groudies, or just hit winners from either wing. :kiss:

You cannot seriously compare Lindsay and Kim. Both are of different ages and it's very clear to me that Kim is going to be fit when she returns, Linsdays was anything but.

AnnaK_4ever
Apr 14th, 2009, 01:32 PM
Do you even remember the Kim before she retired? She was commitment manifested!

especially in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007 she was playing SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much. Something like 6, 17, 14 and 5 tournaments in singles and 1, 1, 1 and 1 in doubles.

Beat
Apr 14th, 2009, 01:33 PM
Look at Mary Pierce... similar in strokes and far inferior mover to Clijsters,

similar strokes??

spencercarlos
Apr 14th, 2009, 01:34 PM
The joke must surely be on you, do you really believe safina/azarenka have made no progress and Kim has remained at the same level she was at two years ago?:rolleyes:
Actually Venus and Serena are playing worse than they did before and they are still beating these so called top players.

This same sh.t was said when Hingis cameback, and Hingis´s game had very little power. Kim has the weapons and she can hit the ball well. We will see i think she has great chances to get to the top again. IMO those Aga, Bartolis and Wozniakis of this world ran into trouble.

sammy01
Apr 14th, 2009, 01:41 PM
The reason for Kim's decision to comeback is quite simple. She looked at the current top 10 and realized that, aside from Williams sisters, those who lead the tour now are the peons and garbages who she regularly beat before her retirement. Beside, her nemesis Justine is apparently retired for good. If she comes back she will rule again.

Well, she is in for a big surprise. The level of play with young players like Safina has gone up. Three years ago Safina was just an inconsistent big hitter. Now she has a much more mature game. Even young guns like Azarenka are catching up. Kim's defensive game will no longer be effective. This is the same situation that Martina hingis faced in her comeback: Her finesse game play was no longer enough to overcome power+speed of the young players. Azarenka bageled her at US Open. That was before Vika became famous. I think Kim will have her ass kicked by some 18-year old nobody and I am quite looking forward to it.

:help: thats just not true, shes still an inconsistent big hitter, shes a bit quicker now but she plays players that give her a million UE's back.

clijsters will be top 10 within 8 months of being back.

youizahoe
Apr 14th, 2009, 01:45 PM
Clijsters leads 5-4

2000 H 60 64
2000 H 60 63
2001 H 64 64
2001 C 62 26 61*
2002 H 75 46 62
2006 C 63 26 64
2006 C 76 61
2006 C 75 62
2007 C 36 64 63

---------

H2H Matches ; Clijsters leads Hingis 5-4

H2H 2-set-matches ; Hingis leads Clijsters 3-2
H2H 3-set-matches ; Clijsters leads Hingis 3-1

H2H Sets ; Clijsters ties Hingis 11-11
H2H Games ; Hingis leads Clijsters 102-97
H2H Tiebreaks ; Clijsters leads Hingis 1-0

H2H R16 ; Hingis leads Clijsters 2-0
H2H QF ; Clijsters leads Hingis 4-0
H2H SF ; Clijsters ties Hingis 1-1
H2G F ; Hingis leads Clijsters 0-1

MyskinaManiac
Apr 14th, 2009, 01:48 PM
Hingis played Clijsters back then when ;
1. Clijsters didn't have the movement she had in 2003-2005 back then.
2. Clijsters wasn't offensive enough back then
3. Clijsters was still very young and immature
4. Clijsters by far didn't hit as hard as in 2003-2005
Clijsters in 2006 when she played like shit with her hip, still managed to overpower Ms comeback Hingis.


Ok... in you're previous post you made it clear that Clijsters handled younger and more powerful players better than Hingis. Totally false I believed. So I used Clijsters' performance against Hingis as evidence. Clijsters being a YOUNG and POWERFUL player was owned by Hingis. You even went as far as saying that she'd crush her lols

You state:
"in terms of handeling the youngsters and powerplayers... clijsters 'crushes' Hingis" .

You never said anything about a fully matured Clijsters.

MyskinaManiac
Apr 14th, 2009, 01:53 PM
Clijsters leads 5-4

2000 H 60 64
2000 H 60 63
2001 H 64 64
2001 C 62 26 61*
2002 H 75 46 62
2006 C 63 26 64
2006 C 76 61
2006 C 75 62
2007 C 36 64 63

---------

H2H Matches ; Clijsters leads Hingis 5-4

H2H 2-set-matches ; Hingis leads Clijsters 3-2
H2H 3-set-matches ; Clijsters leads Hingis 3-1

H2H Sets ; Clijsters ties Hingis 11-11
H2H Games ; Hingis leads Clijsters 102-97
H2H Tiebreaks ; Clijsters leads Hingis 1-0

H2H R16 ; Hingis leads Clijsters 2-0
H2H QF ; Clijsters leads Hingis 4-0
H2H SF ; Clijsters ties Hingis 1-1
H2G F ; Hingis leads Clijsters 0-1

OMG, this is embarrassing for you. Reread what you've previously written dude!!! You're spamming now!

youizahoe
Apr 14th, 2009, 01:58 PM
Clijsters vs Top 10

# 01 Dinara Safina ; Clijsters leads 6-1
# 02 Serena Williams ; Serena leads 7-1
# 03 Elena Dementieva ; Clijsters leads 11-3
# 04 Jelena Jankovic ; Clijsters leads 6-0
# 05 Venus Williams ; Venus leads 6-4
# 06 Vera Zvonareva ; Clijsters leads 5-0
# 07 Ana Ivanovic ; Clijsters leads 1-0
# 08 Victoria Azarenka ; N/A
# 09 Svetlana Kuznetsova ; Clijsters leads 6-1
# 10 Nadia Petrova ; Clijsters leads 4-0

Conclusion ; Clijsters leads the top 10 by 44-18 or 71%.


However if you leave out the result against the Williams' sisters, she would be 39-5 or 89%.


I think these numbers confirm well enough that Kim could handle the top 10 easily, apart from Serena.

Harvs
Apr 14th, 2009, 02:01 PM
i think many people are WAYYYYYYYYY off with kim.

i always thought she would come back, she just needed a break to do stuff she hadnt been able to do.

i think she just wanted to play again. full stop.

youizahoe
Apr 14th, 2009, 02:04 PM
Ok... in you're previous post you made it clear that Clijsters handled younger and more powerful players better than Hingis. Totally false I believed. So I used Clijsters' performance against Hingis as evidence. Clijsters being a YOUNG and POWERFUL player was owned by Hingis. You even went as far as saying that she'd crush her lols

You state:
"in terms of handeling the youngsters and powerplayers... clijsters 'crushes' Hingis" .

You never said anything about a fully matured Clijsters.
Actually I am right. Clijsters was beating the younger hitter with ease, while Hingis was struggling for wins against those hard-hitters. If it went to 3 sets, she was more likely to lose that match because she couldn't keep up with the pace.

I actually hinted well enough that I was talking about matured clijsters. Clijsters in 2000-2001 wasn't really that strong as she was in 2003&2005.

And actually if you are smart, you would use smarter evidence, it's not that Hingis 'owned' Clijsters (which she only did at her peak, yet still managed to lose to her) justifies that she is better at defeating Powerfull hitters.

miffedmax
Apr 14th, 2009, 02:06 PM
Hard to say. Motherhood brings a host of physical and psychological changes. Some women athletes come back. Some don't. A kid is a huge distraction that's on your mind 24/7 and Kim was never the strongest player mentally. Of course, that may also serve as a source of inspiration.

I expect her to struggle more than Hingis early on, but it will be interesting to see how she does. I'm not going to make an rash predictions beyond she will struggle a little initially.

youizahoe
Apr 14th, 2009, 02:11 PM
Hard to say. Motherhood brings a host of physical and psychological changes. Some women athletes come back. Some don't. A kid is a huge distraction that's on your mind 24/7 and Kim was never the strongest player mentally. Of course, that may also serve as a source of inspiration.

I expect her to struggle more than Hingis early on, but it will be interesting to see how she does. I'm not going to make an rash predictions beyond she will struggle a little initially.
It all depends on her motivation, if it's as big as she claims it to be, I think we can expect great things from her. We also need a good draw too, but yeah at start she'll struggle to play, get her movement sorted, but Clijsters will do fine I think.

MyskinaManiac
Apr 14th, 2009, 02:13 PM
Actually I am right. Clijsters was beating the younger hitter with ease, while Hingis was struggling for wins against those hard-hitters. If it went to 3 sets, she was more likely to lose that match because she couldn't keep up with the pace.

I actually hinted well enough that I was talking about matured clijsters. Clijsters in 2000-2001 wasn't really that strong as she was in 2003&2005.

And actually if you are smart, you would use smarter evidence, it's not that Hingis 'owned' Clijsters (which she only did at her peak, yet still managed to lose to her) justifies that she is better at defeating Powerfull hitters.

Well, I'm sorry I'm not a mind reader.

Smarter evidence?? I used results. What more could you want? You're throwing around totally irrelevant facts. I'm talking about a period of time where Clijsters happened to be both young and a powerful player.

You're totally lost here... Hingis was not at her peak when Clijsters was a top ten player. Her peak was 97 to 99, a period where Hingis lost to almost no one younger than her.

Mynarco
Apr 14th, 2009, 02:17 PM
The main factor of every comeback :$$ or interest

hdfb
Apr 14th, 2009, 02:18 PM
I love both Hingis and Clijsters but it's a bit wrong trying to compare their comebacks. Yes they are bith defenders but Clijster's tennis also has something which Hingis' tennis doesn't, an attacking powerful dimension.

youizahoe
Apr 14th, 2009, 02:27 PM
The main factor of every comeback :$$ or interest
No, dying wish of her farther. He wanted her to play tennis again and find the joy she lost the day she quited, Bryan Lynch even quited basketball for Kim's Tennis Career :)

youizahoe
Apr 14th, 2009, 02:28 PM
I love both Hingis and Clijsters but it's a bit wrong trying to compare their comebacks. Yes they are bith defenders but Clijster's tennis also has something which Hingis' tennis doesn't, an attacking powerful dimension.
I agree, but then again, Hingis has the very tactical type of tennis, she's a smart thinker, which Kim rarely is ^^ But anyway both are great players, and Hingis should come back too. Then we will see in a match up, who'll prevail :)

Kart
Apr 14th, 2009, 03:14 PM
If Williams sisters were winning slams ten years ago and still capable of it today, it's hard to believe Clijsters isn't if she comes back fit and committed.

However, I wonder just how committed she's going to be given that she has a family.

We'll have to wait and see.

She may just be coming back to play a bit of tennis and have some fun.

Nothing wrong with that IMHO though no doubt the 'she's tarnishing her legacy' brigade will come out in full force if that happens.

sammy01
Apr 14th, 2009, 03:20 PM
If Williams sisters were winning slams ten years ago and still capable of it today, it's hard to believe Clijsters isn't if she comes back fit and committed.

However, I wonder just how committed she's going to be given that she has a family.

We'll have to wait and see.

She may just be coming back to play a bit of tennis and have some fun.

Nothing wrong with that IMHO though no doubt the 'she's tarnishing her legacy' brigade will come out in full force if that happens.

i agree, i mean she reached a grand slam semi final just 2 years ago. if she wants it its still there for her, how much she wants it is down to her ambition to still achieve. i get the feeling that she wouldn't comeback though unless serious, i heard shes training 6 hours a day, thats a heck of a lot for having some fun on tour.

miffedmax
Apr 14th, 2009, 03:21 PM
It all depends on her motivation, if it's as big as she claims it to be, I think we can expect great things from her. We also need a good draw too, but yeah at start she'll struggle to play, get her movement sorted, but Clijsters will do fine I think.

I'm being cautious, having never recovered from my prediction of 10 years ago involving a tall Russian blonde, multiple slams, new dominant force, and a host of other statements that I appear to have been slightly mistaken about. ;)

I really do think Kim's comeback is really hard to call because there are so many more factors than Martina's (which I was completely wrong about as well).

tennisfan5
Apr 14th, 2009, 03:23 PM
umm...Kim had lots of power, not just defense. I think she'll be just fine

sammy01
Apr 14th, 2009, 03:24 PM
I'm being cautious, having never recovered from my prediction of 10 years ago involving a tall Russian blonde, multiple slams, new dominant force, and a host of other statements that I appear to have been slightly mistaken about. ;)

I really do think Kim's comeback is really hard to call because there are so many more factors than Martina's (which I was completely wrong about as well).

out of intrest which way were you wrong about hingis's comeback, did you think top 10 no way, or she would be top 5 easy?

hablo
Apr 14th, 2009, 03:27 PM
I think Clijsters will surprise us. :D

AndreConrad
Apr 14th, 2009, 03:30 PM
I thought that Kim felt like playing tennis will feel good again and see how much damage she can do. Obviously the OP is in Kim's head so I am wrong again.

miffedmax
Apr 14th, 2009, 03:49 PM
out of intrest which way were you wrong about hingis's comeback, did you think top 10 no way, or she would be top 5 easy?

I boldly predicted that she would not make the Top 50.

Actually, my track record of predicting tennis careers is spectacularly bad. Which is why I've taken to waffling so much around here. Hingis was one of the few times I didn't, and I was wrooong. So wrong. Very wrong. I admit I was wrong.

Protoss
Apr 14th, 2009, 03:58 PM
If Williams sisters were winning slams ten years ago and still capable of it today, it's hard to believe Clijsters isn't if she comes back fit and committed.

However, I wonder just how committed she's going to be given that she has a family.

We'll have to wait and see.

She may just be coming back to play a bit of tennis and have some fun.

Nothing wrong with that IMHO though no doubt the 'she's tarnishing her legacy' brigade will come out in full force if that happens.
Kim struggled to win just the 1 slam. Venus had won 4 slams at the age Kim won her only slam and Serena had won 6 slams. So I don't think it's really the same situation.

sammy01
Apr 14th, 2009, 03:58 PM
I boldly predicted that she would not make the Top 50.

Actually, my track record of predicting tennis careers is spectacularly bad. Which is why I've taken to waffling so much around here. Hingis was one of the few times I didn't, and I was wrooong. So wrong. Very wrong. I admit I was wrong.

i find that intresting, did you predict that because you thought the game had moved on and everyone is hitting harder now, because i believe thats true the girls hit harder than ever, but its so UE filled and bad technique has become so common that a player like hingis could take advantage of it easily. im of the mind womens tennis has become more powerful, but not better tennis as hingis proved (she was barely in the top 10 in her last year on tour before the 1st retirement).

Kart
Apr 14th, 2009, 04:02 PM
Kim struggled to win just the 1 slam. Venus had won 4 slams at the age Kim won her only slam and Serena had won 6 slams. So I don't think it's really the same situation.

You're right.

I didn't mean to say that I thought Kim was actually going to win slams - though re-reading it I realise it came across that way - I more meant to say that she could contend for them as much as she ever did if she can match her previous level.

I don't think she will achieve any more necessarily because the competition at the very top level - ie. Williams sisters - has not changed despite some claims that the tour may be stronger now than it was two years back.

Protoss
Apr 14th, 2009, 04:07 PM
I agree, but then again, Hingis has the very tactical type of tennis, she's a smart thinker, which Kim rarely is ^^ But anyway both are great players, and Hingis should come back too. Then we will see in a match up, who'll prevail :)
I don't see an older, slower Martina doing as well as she did in her 1st comeback. I kind of think she'd be lucky to crack the top 20.

Martina was 0-4 against Kim in her 1st comeback. I don't think she'd do much better in her 2nd comeback as a worse player. :shrug:

Martina wasn't willing to committ to being aggressive, improving her serve, and getting in tip top shape in her last comeback. I don't see her changing in that regard if she were to try a 2nd comeback.

I just don't see any real point to a 2nd comeback by Martina. :shrug:

tennisfan5
Apr 14th, 2009, 04:14 PM
Martina was in great shape in her comeback. The lack of power and weak serve did her in; what always confused me is that martina had the capability of serving 100MPH or thereabouts, but seldom did

Joachim1978
Apr 14th, 2009, 05:08 PM
I think that it is generally accepted that the level of the WTA is lower, and less consistent (at least at the top) than it was in 2006, by both players and pundits.

Then, we had a consistent top tier - consisting of Henin, Clijsters, Mauresmo, Sharapova, and Kuznetsova with Jankovic, Ivanovic, Azarenka, Chakvetadze and Bartoli coming up and the Williams sisters, along with Petrova and Hingis battling to come back.

So while I do think Clijsters will have a few uncharacteristic losses, a la Hingis in 06, I think she will definitley make the top 5 (and could seriously challenge for 1 if she wasn't so determined to play a limited scehdule). She will win titles, possibly slams, and will provide the tour with some much needed consistent brilliance.

Welcome back Kim, I missed you!

Ciarán
Apr 14th, 2009, 05:13 PM
I don't think so.

lolas
Apr 14th, 2009, 05:26 PM
We'll see :)

but her h2h against this week's top 10 (bar the sisters of course :p ) is 39-5. Will be very interesting to follow her comeback.

Pristine
Apr 14th, 2009, 05:41 PM
I think people fail to realize the true quality of Clijsters. She has everything in her career except more slams.

Clijsters' quality is being trampled on by the thread starter and some posters. Outside of her mental hardware in the business end of slams, Clijsters' game arguably has no real consistently attackable weakness.

She can volley better than more than half of the girls at the top.
If she finds her peak in her comeback, she can defend better than Jankovic.
She had a solid slice backhand, solid dropshot.
Her serve wasn't an ace machine, but it isn't notorious for double faults or being jumped on consistently.
She has enough pace to compete with anyone at the top of the game.

Pound for pound if you take ANY shot in Clijsters' game, it definitely is at LEAST better than 5 of the other girls in the top. She's really solid all around from an objective point of view.

This should be what people want right? Clijsters played fairly often, she has the accomplishments to gain more approval than a Safina or Jankovic IF she reaches number one again. Which means in 2010, if she plays anywhere near her true level she can benefit more from the ranking system than a Serena or Sharapova.

People saying she is going to get trashed by Safina and Azarenka. The type of players Clijsters was notorious for sending away with ease. Face it folks, Clijsters rarely lost to people she SHOULDN'T be losing to as indicated by her 39-5 H2H with the rest of the current top 10. Her main detraction was that, in the slams she lost far too often to the bigger names.

Knizzle
Apr 14th, 2009, 05:44 PM
If she is really working harder than she did before, I don't see why she can't be top 5 again. Being a quick player with great defense is now a rare thing at the top of the WTA so that will give her an edge.

HardCandy
Apr 14th, 2009, 05:50 PM
As much as I would like her to lose every match she plays, she will crush most of the competition with ease. SHe's only been away for two years. That's nothing. Top 5 if she plays a full schedule.

Leo_DFP
Apr 14th, 2009, 05:55 PM
The reason for Kim's decision to comeback is quite simple. She looked at the current top 10 and realized that, aside from Williams sisters, those who lead the tour now are the peons and garbages who she regularly beat before her retirement. Beside, her nemesis Justine is apparently retired for good. If she comes back she will rule again.

Well, she is in for a big surprise. The level of play with young players like Safina has gone up. Three years ago Safina was just an inconsistent big hitter. Now she has a much more mature game. Even young guns like Azarenka are catching up. Kim's defensive game will no longer be effective. This is the same situation that Martina hingis faced in her comeback: Her finesse game play was no longer enough to overcome power+speed of the young players. Azarenka bageled her at US Open. That was before Vika became famous. I think Kim will have her ass kicked by some 18-year old nobody and I am quite looking forward to it.

The fact that you're even comparing Clijsters and Hingis and calling Clijsters foremost a defensive player just shows that you really don't know much about tennis. :wavey:

Pristine
Apr 14th, 2009, 05:57 PM
Clijsters vs Top 10

# 01 Dinara Safina ; Clijsters leads 6-1
# 02 Serena Williams ; Serena leads 7-1
# 03 Elena Dementieva ; Clijsters leads 11-3
# 04 Jelena Jankovic ; Clijsters leads 6-0
# 05 Venus Williams ; Venus leads 6-4
# 06 Vera Zvonareva ; Clijsters leads 5-0
# 07 Ana Ivanovic ; Clijsters leads 1-0
# 08 Victoria Azarenka ; N/A
# 09 Svetlana Kuznetsova ; Clijsters leads 6-1
# 10 Nadia Petrova ; Clijsters leads 4-0

Conclusion ; Clijsters leads the top 10 by 44-18 or 71%.


However if you leave out the result against the Williams' sisters, she would be 39-5 or 89%.


I think these numbers confirm well enough that Kim could handle the top 10 easily, apart from Serena.

IF and this is a big IF she got back to her highest level she could beat THIS Serena on a hardcourt. Serena is still fast and what not in glimpses but the main reason her H2H with Venus post 2003 and these loses to Dementieva happened is primarily due to Serena not being as fast as she used to be consistently.

Clijsters served for the match against Serena at the '99 Open on HC.
Had matchpoints at the '03 Australian.
Indian Wells '01 and Princess Cup both went three sets.

If this were prior to 03, I wouldn't give her a chance with Serena but Serena does not have the same movement I'm not saying she is slow, but she used to be quicker just that half-step. Plus, she has lost just a little of her explosiveness during normal rallies. Again, this is what I believe to be the reasoning behind Venus closing the gap in H2H and loses to players like Dementieva whom you need to be able to match in movement to beat. Not saying Clijsters would win all the time but on hard and clay against post 2003 Serena, Clijsters could win more than once.

Yasmine
Apr 14th, 2009, 05:59 PM
She may just be coming back to play a bit of tennis and have some fun.

Nothing wrong with that IMHO though no doubt the 'she's tarnishing her legacy' brigade will come out in full force if that happens.
That's what I think it's going to be all about. That said having fun less pressure to achieve because she has built a life besides tennis might not be incompatible with winning titles.

I think Clijsters will surprise us. :D
I hope so. But I'm not keeping my hopes too high.

Knizzle
Apr 14th, 2009, 06:03 PM
IF and this is a big IF she got back to her highest level she could beat THIS Serena on a hardcourt. Serena is still fast and what not in glimpses but the main reason her H2H with Venus post 2003 and these loses to Dementieva happened is primarily due to Serena not being as fast as she used to be consistently.

Clijsters served for the match against Serena at the '99 Open on HC.
Had matchpoints at the '03 Australian.
Indian Wells '01 and Princess Cup both went three sets.

If this were prior to 03, I wouldn't give her a chance with Serena but Serena does not have the same movement I'm not saying she is slow, but she used to be quicker just that half-step. Plus, she has lost just a little of her explosiveness during normal rallies. Again, this is what I believe to be the reasoning behind Venus closing the gap in H2H and loses to players like Dementieva whom you need to be able to match in movement to beat. Not saying Clijsters would win all the time but on hard and clay against post 2003 Serena, Clijsters could win more than once.
Serena has learned to win without ultimate movement. She mixes up her shots alot more than she did back then, Kim would see different strategy from Serena this time around.

terjw
Apr 14th, 2009, 07:40 PM
That's what I think it's going to be all about. That said having fun less pressure to achieve because she has built a life besides tennis might not be incompatible with winning titles.


I hope so. But I'm not keeping my hopes too high.

Yeah - actually nobody here can know for a fact what Kim really thinks though unless they know her personally. Anyone like the OP who arrogantly comes out with "I know what Kim is thinking" is either a personal friend or just spouting a load of hot air. And somehow I don't think the OP is a close personal friend.

When you say for "fun" though - yes I also think she wants to enjoy herself but I don't think it's her main reason. She certainly seems to be taking it very seriously with all the training she's doing - someone said 6 hours a day. - I think she's deadly serious about doing everything she can do win.

Personally myself I think first of all that Kim is simply missing not playing and second that she'd just like to see how she'd do right now in these three tournaments she's going to be playing if she gives it her best shot.

The one thing I certainly don't believe Kim thinks is "I'm good - what a load of rubbish out there. I'm better than them. I'll come back and show them". That's so unlike Kim and she just doesn't think that way about other players.

So all this talk about her being great or a flop is great debate but is really so unlike anything Kim thinks.

Dokic-Fan
Apr 14th, 2009, 07:50 PM
Well, she is in for a big surprise. The level of play with young players like Safina has gone up. Three years ago Safina was just an inconsistent big hitter. Now she has a much more mature game. Even young guns like Azarenka are catching up. Kim's defensive game will no longer be effective. This is the same situation that Martina hingis faced in her comeback: Her finesse game play was no longer enough to overcome power+speed of the young players. Azarenka bageled her at US Open. That was before Vika became famous. I think Kim will have her ass kicked by some 18-year old nobody and I am quite looking forward to it.

:lol: :lol:

The level of play dropped dramatically with Safina being so high-ranked now. Kim should kick her ass immediately after her return.

Uranus
Apr 14th, 2009, 08:04 PM
Haha, poor thread starter doesn't really know what he is saying. As everyone pointed out, Kim isn't a defensive player, although she was the best at it. She is powerful and is better when she dictates points.
The comparison with Hingis is inaccurate. Hingis clearly lacked power, that was the case when she left and also when she came back. She still reached #6 and won Tier Is, at a time the tour was stronger IMO. She got pretty successful.

Robert-KimClijst
Apr 14th, 2009, 08:39 PM
I disagree. Kim isn't coming back because she looked at the top ten and believed she could dominate. Kim has never thought about tennis like that. Did she retire because of the results or the competition? No. She retired for health reasons and she wanted a family. She has her family, and she is (supposedly) healthy. Maybe the state of the game today is a small motivation, but if the game was where it was ten years ago, I do not think Kim's decision would be any different.

That being said, I agree with you on some points. People are underestimating today's game. We don't know how Kim will be able to play. The Kim of 2005 would beat a Safina or Jankovic in straight sets probably, maybe three. But Kim had a pretty mediocre 2006 and 2007 for her standards. The tour isn't HORRIBLE right now, players still have good matches. I think we should see where Kim is at before we start assessing her chances against the players now.

VeeReeDavJCap81
Apr 14th, 2009, 08:40 PM
You can't compare Martina's situation with Kim's. They are two different players and Kim has way more power and speed than Martina ever did. She'll be fine as long as her wrist problems don't resurface.

youizahoe
Apr 14th, 2009, 08:49 PM
:lol: :lol:

The level of play dropped dramatically with Safina being so high-ranked now. Kim should kick her ass immediately after her return.
:rolls:

WhatTheDeuce
Apr 14th, 2009, 08:53 PM
Kim hits as hard as any of these young wannabes. And as you said, plays better defense.

Champion.

Dominic
Apr 14th, 2009, 08:57 PM
Actually, if she is thinking that, she is totally right.

friendsita
Apr 14th, 2009, 09:01 PM
Kim will do well

LUVMIRZA
Apr 14th, 2009, 10:09 PM
Kim will do very good. I am sure. She is a grandslam champion and she knows her business.

pepaw
Apr 14th, 2009, 10:27 PM
youre wrong. its not like players are so much more powerful than they were 3 yrs ago. clijsters beat venus, maria and pierce in succession to win her slam? if she plays at 75% of that level she can obviously beat these "young guns" you speak of.

kim being injured and unmotivated isnt the same as the game passing hingis by.

starin
Apr 14th, 2009, 10:35 PM
It'll depend on how well her movement is.
Davenport's movement was much worse when she came back and she didn't rely on her movement much but it still hampered her imo.

BuTtErFrEnA
Apr 14th, 2009, 10:36 PM
:rolls: shows how much you know

switz
Apr 14th, 2009, 11:25 PM
The reason for Kim's decision to comeback is quite simple. She looked at the current top 10 and realized that, aside from Williams sisters, those who lead the tour now are the peons and garbages who she regularly beat before her retirement. Beside, her nemesis Justine is apparently retired for good. If she comes back she will rule again.

Well, she is in for a big surprise. The level of play with young players like Safina has gone up. Three years ago Safina was just an inconsistent big hitter. Now she has a much more mature game. Even young guns like Azarenka are catching up. Kim's defensive game will no longer be effective. This is the same situation that Martina hingis faced in her comeback: Her finesse game play was no longer enough to overcome power+speed of the young players. Azarenka bageled her at US Open. That was before Vika became famous. I think Kim will have her ass kicked by some 18-year old nobody and I am quite looking forward to it.

i have many things to say about this post but there's one word that really encapsulates my thoughts: bullshit.

the only thing that is going to stop Clijsters coming back to the top is a lack of commitment. If she's dedicated she is class above most girls on tour.

Ben.
Apr 14th, 2009, 11:34 PM
:confused: it isn't like all kim had was a defensive game, she is a great ball striker as well
if she is fully committed she will do well

Exactly.

But like some posters I'm not expecting a lot from Kim when she begins her comeback. And the thread starter can say whatever he/she likes for all I care :lol: Gotta have people who criticise & have doubts about her comeback, which is natural.

CoolDude7
Apr 15th, 2009, 12:42 AM
Kim owned the entire tour when she was on expect Hen, and the william sisters. She beat the players she was suppose to beat even better than the players I just listed, but there was usually one of them playing great tennis to beat her in some point along the way.

fifiricci
Apr 15th, 2009, 03:28 PM
The reason for Kim's decision to comeback is quite simple. She looked at the current top 10 and realized that, aside from Williams sisters, those who lead the tour now are the peons and garbages who she regularly beat before her retirement. Beside, her nemesis Justine is apparently retired for good. If she comes back she will rule again.

Well, she is in for a big surprise. The level of play with young players like Safina has gone up. Three years ago Safina was just an inconsistent big hitter. Now she has a much more mature game. Even young guns like Azarenka are catching up. Kim's defensive game will no longer be effective. This is the same situation that Martina hingis faced in her comeback: Her finesse game play was no longer enough to overcome power+speed of the young players. Azarenka bageled her at US Open. That was before Vika became famous. I think Kim will have her ass kicked by some 18-year old nobody and I am quite looking forward to it.

I think this is bollocks. If Kim can get back to being 90% of the player she was she will still whoop most arses out there. I think the comeback is motivated by a whole raft of personal and professional factors weren't there (or that Kim couldn't see) when she retired prematurely a few years ago and I don't believe the comeback is based on wishful thinking or an under-estimation of the opposition. My biggest worry (as a kind of fan of hers) is that this comeback is motivated too much by the emotion generated by her father's death (ie an escape from grief) and will be a flash in the pan. The other huge question mark is, of course, the injury issue. But who knows what's going to happen, we'll just have to wait and see. I can't see her winning another slam though ......................

frenchie
Apr 15th, 2009, 03:34 PM
Kim has good offensive skills like most of the players nowadays but she has excellent defensive skills too which is a winning combo!

The Dawntreader
Apr 15th, 2009, 03:44 PM
Kim has good offensive skills like most of the players nowadays but she has excellent defensive skills too which is a winning combo!

Even post-pregnancy?

I will be absolutely suprised if Kim is anywhere near the fitness level she was back in the day, even despite these probably (ludicrous) reports that she's training like 8 hours a day:lol:

tennnisfannn
Apr 15th, 2009, 04:30 PM
i wish Kim had not announced her comeback until the week she was to play cincinatti. We have more than three months to wait for her and a bazillion threads specualting how well she will do.
Two years is lot of time in tennis, to presume that time stood still as she nursed her baby is beyond ridiclous. We all know what a great player she was and until she hits the first ball we can throw everything out the window.

Matt01
Apr 15th, 2009, 07:06 PM
Kim has good offensive skills like most of the players nowadays but she has excellent defensive skills too which is a winning combo!


Too bad that that "winning combo" only won her one Slam.

youizahoe
Apr 15th, 2009, 07:08 PM
Even post-pregnancy?

I will be absolutely suprised if Kim is anywhere near the fitness level she was back in the day, even despite these probably (ludicrous) reports that she's training like 8 hours a day:lol:

Nobody said 8 hours a day. She's training 7 days a week, and around 5 hours a day.

sammy01
Apr 15th, 2009, 07:47 PM
Even post-pregnancy?

I will be absolutely suprised if Kim is anywhere near the fitness level she was back in the day, even despite these probably (ludicrous) reports that she's training like 8 hours a day:lol:

i think she will be back at the same fitness speed levels, shes still so young, her being older say nearly 30 than having a baby would slow her down more.

pav
Apr 15th, 2009, 07:58 PM
I would never question Kim's ability as a player, or her being a good relisting to the tour, but she is a bit of a pudding face!

Sammm
Apr 15th, 2009, 08:36 PM
I would never question Kim's ability as a player, or her being a good relisting to the tour, but she is a bit of a pudding face!

:confused:

switz
Apr 17th, 2009, 05:53 AM
I would never question Kim's ability as a player, or her being a good relisting to the tour, but she is a bit of a pudding face!

great point. what else needs to be said :o

Pristine
Apr 17th, 2009, 06:01 AM
Too bad that that "winning combo" only won her one Slam.

And that is still more successful than the majority of the Top 10. :rolls: Even 3/5 of the Top Five don't have one while I write this.

Golovinjured.
Apr 17th, 2009, 06:07 AM
I would never question Kim's ability as a player, or her being a good relisting to the tour, but she is a bit of a pudding face!

Interesting..

miffedmax
Apr 17th, 2009, 01:56 PM
i find that intresting, did you predict that because you thought the game had moved on and everyone is hitting harder now, because i believe thats true the girls hit harder than ever, but its so UE filled and bad technique has become so common that a player like hingis could take advantage of it easily. im of the mind womens tennis has become more powerful, but not better tennis as hingis proved (she was barely in the top 10 in her last year on tour before the 1st retirement).

Yeah, I thought she'd be blown of the court by the heavy hitters. I also thought her serve would be more of a liability than it was.

spencercarlos
Apr 17th, 2009, 02:06 PM
Too bad that that "winning combo" only won her one Slam.
Kim is (was) a nice player, you don´t have to blame her because she only got a slam. There have been many tennis talents men and women that have many many weapons and tools and have won few slams (and should have won more) (Davenport, Mauresmo, Sabatini, Clijsters for the women), (Safin, Rios)... just they were mental cases out there.

Vanity Bonfire
Apr 17th, 2009, 02:07 PM
Well, Sabine Appelmans reckons she's great.
I wish when people retire they would retire for good. Does the word 'hiatus' mean anything to tennis players?

MyskinaManiac
Apr 17th, 2009, 02:29 PM
Kim has good offensive skills like most of the players nowadays but she has excellent defensive skills too which is a winning combo!

I totally agree. She's like the super version of Jankovic. Perhaps slower...

MyskinaManiac
Apr 17th, 2009, 02:36 PM
Too bad that that "winning combo" only won her one Slam.

And the world number one ranking. And $14.7 million. And 33 other titles.

I'm pretty sure she can sleep at night knowing that that "winning combo" took her pretty damn far. ;)

Davodus
Apr 17th, 2009, 03:48 PM
Too bad that that "winning combo" only won her one Slam.

funny how you say 'only one' like that is a bad thing :shrug:

yes she should have won more, but she still has one, and that's something that the majority of tennis players dream of
that winning combo took her to achieving pretty much everything possible in the game...

petra martinnen
Apr 17th, 2009, 03:55 PM
In her last 15 meetings with Davenport, Mauresmo, Henin and Serena, Kim was 0-15. Of those nemises only Serena is still sort of standing. Kim had a good record versus the other big names Dementieva, Venus, Kuznetsova.

Kim could be in for a rude awakening. Unlike Hingis, Kim gave birth too. And Clijsters is no Margaret Smith!

Matt01
Apr 17th, 2009, 06:12 PM
Brainless hater comment.
It's like you've stopped following the Tour 7 years ago.


No need to comment on that crap.


Kim is (was) a nice player, you don´t have to blame her because she only got a slam. There have been many tennis talents men and women that have many many weapons and tools and have won few slams (and should have won more) (Davenport, Mauresmo, Sabatini, Clijsters for the women), (Safin, Rios)... just they were mental cases out there.


Frankly, I couldn't care less if Kim was a nice, a very nice or an extremely nice player or not.

But what you wrote about "mental case" was exactly my point. Some players, and Kim does belong to them, have a vey good game but they simply don't win the very big tournaments becaus they're too weak mentally. When Seles and Hingis (who didn't belong to that group at first) came back to the tour they were mentally weaker than they were before. And Kim on her comback will mostlikely not become suddenly mentally stronger, either.

Matt01
Apr 17th, 2009, 06:13 PM
funny how you say 'only one' like that is a bad thing :shrug:

yes she should have won more, but she still has one, and that's something that the majority of tennis players dream of
that winning combo took her to achieving pretty much everything possible in the game...


What? :lol:

Kenny
Apr 17th, 2009, 06:18 PM
:haha:Safina and Azarenka thrashing Clijsters? Nice joke
You laugh, but I think it's quite true.

Davodus
Apr 17th, 2009, 06:29 PM
What? :lol:

GS, number 1 (singles and doubles, at the same time) 2 YEC, 34 titles, heaps of prizemoney

there isnt a whole lot left in that unless she becomes GOAT...
you can't just say "only one GS"
she did a hell of a lot in her career