PDA

View Full Version : Has Justine Henin officially turned into a ballbasher?


it-girl
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:08 PM
After seeing her play last year and with the overall results I thought that she would add a little more of her original game back into the mix. But she seems to still be content with her new style of play. I am not complaining about her playing style I just think it is funny that so many people dislike a lot of other players because they lack variety. Then you have a player like Justine who embodied variety but decided that she would rather do more ball bashing to get more results.

Do you think Justine will add more of the variety back to her game?

Also do you think ball bashing is underrated?

shap_half
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:13 PM
It's funny, because at the beginning of last year people said she was ball bashing. Then when clay came around, people were calling her a pusher against Sharapova. But then you also have matches like the one she played against Dementieva and Wickmayer in Melbourne, where it was all court brilliance and shot selection that won the match.

Lapaco
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:13 PM
No :lol:
She had no pace or depth in her shots today.

vixter
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:14 PM
Is the difference in her playing style really that different from before her break? I don't know... I guess I have missed something.

Gawain
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:14 PM
Has Justine Henin officially turned into a ballbasher?

What' s a ballbasher?

LCS
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:16 PM
and a bad one at that too.

tennisbum79
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:19 PM
It looks like the new strategy to win wimbledon has been aborted and stopped mid-way through.

And she now seems to have settled on game plan that looks rather incomplete, inacheve

Lucemferre
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:20 PM
No like everybody else her serve sucks. This was the first time I've seen Henin chasing her ball toss:tape: What the hell is going on with these women?I hope Serena's serve will be fine when she comes back :sad:

tennisbum79
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:24 PM
No like everybody else her serve sucks. This was the first time I've seen Henin chasing her ball toss:tape: What the hell is going on with these women?I hope Serena's serve will be fine when she comes back :sad:
Are you panicking, about women game, as a group, falling apart??:lol:

I thought Venus served rather well.
I did not see Maria, but she won easily so I assumed her serve was fine.
Sam Stosur, the other player known for her server. has not played, I think.

shap_half
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:28 PM
It looks like the new strategy to win wimbledon has been aborted and stopped mid-way through.

And she now seems to have settled on game plan that looks rather incomplete, inacheve

What inacheve game plan is this?

TennisFan66
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:30 PM
Are you panicking, about women game, as a group, falling apart??:lol:

I thought Venus served rather well.
I did not see Maria, but she won easily so I assumed her serve was fine.
Sam Stosur, the other player known for her server. has not played, I think.

:tape:

As for Justine being a plain ball basher. Neah. Don't see it.

n1_and_uh_noone
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:31 PM
Are you panicking, about women game, as a group, falling apart??:lol:

I thought Venus served rather well.
I did not see Maria, but she won easily so I assumed her serve was fine.
Sam Stosur, the other player known for her server. has not played, I think.

Well, bask away in the delusion, she was HORRENDOUS. 3 DFs in the 1st game, I think, and some 10 overall, being broken thrice by Tanasugarn, in a 6-1, 6-3 win :lol:.

I haven't watched the Sania match, but Justine was playing just fine at Hopman Cup, mixing things up and coming in to net to hit brilliant volleys. Maybe 1st round jitters all around? Wozniacki, Henin, Schiavone, Sharapova all looked unimpressive.

Somebody just made a point a few days ago that Justine at her best was ALWAYS very aggressive. Can somebody who thinks she ballbashes now give examples of matches she won back in her 1st career that characterized her play in your opinion?

Lapaco
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:35 PM
No like everybody else her serve sucks. This was the first time I've seen Henin chasing her ball toss:tape: What the hell is going on with these women?I hope Serena's serve will be fine when she comes back :sad:

The serve actually got better towards the end. But the forehand, no words.

tennisbum79
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:36 PM
What inacheve game plan is this?
Just that. Incomplete
Stuck in the middle of nowhere

tennisbum79
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:39 PM
Well, bask away in the delusion, she was HORRENDOUS. 3 DFs in the 1st game, I think, and some 10 overall, being broken thrice by Tanasugarn, in a 6-1, 6-3 win :lol:. ?
What was this for?

I clear stated I did not see the match and that was an assumption.

shap_half
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:40 PM
Just that. Incomplete

But what is the actual game plan you speak of? I ask, because I haven't seen her play at all this year. But it seems that you may have insight that I would appreciate hearing about.

Apoleb
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:43 PM
Well, even like that.. if Kim continues to be unreliable outside the USO, she can still win the AO. :haha: Justine 2008 might even dominate the tour.

Mightymirza
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:50 PM
Justines FH was jus horrendous.. The only thing it seemed to do was to return well.. Apart from that it was pretty useless.. :lol: I guess today she did not need to be a ballbasher.. being patient won her the match but someone like kim wont be as forgiving as Sania is :shrug:

tennisbum79
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:55 PM
But what is the actual game plan you speak of? I ask, because I haven't seen her play at all this year. But it seems that you may have insight that I would appreciate hearing about.
I don't have specific insights.
But as I seem to recall, The Wimbledon Game Plan she and Carlos were working on to be aggressive, early on in the rallies and not let up.
Taking initiative away from the likes of Serena, Venus, Maria; all of them players who have perfected the art of early and sustained aggression in Wimbledon.

The strategey was to keep working on it, and play like this on any surface, culminating at the Championship for a first test.

But when she got hurt and it did not fare well in the Wimbledon, it seem like some doubts were planted in their mind, this was further reinforced with criticism questioning the approach of changing her game in the first place.

Some people thought with her old game, she could win Wimbledon. Which is a moot point since Carlos and Justine had decided that game plan was not enough and they needed a new approach.

After Wimbledon and with the injury, I don't think they continue perfecting what they had started, and they did not go back to her old game either.

debby
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:58 PM
LOL

No Justine is not a ballbasher at all :tape:

She is mindless or she doesn't settle well to hit her shots. Nothing else.
A ballbasher doesn't go that often to the net, doesn't do lobs, doesn't use slice, and always try to paint the lines.
Justine is not like that.

debby
Jan 17th, 2011, 07:59 PM
Justines FH was jus horrendous.. The only thing it seemed to do was to return well.. Apart from that it was pretty useless.. :lol: I guess today she did not need to be a ballbasher.. being patient won her the match but someone like kim wont be as forgiving as Sania is :shrug:

To be fair, Justine always steps up when she plays a better player.

vixter
Jan 17th, 2011, 08:00 PM
Well, bask away in the delusion, she was HORRENDOUS. 3 DFs in the 1st game, I think, and some 10 overall, being broken thrice by Tanasugarn, in a 6-1, 6-3 win :lol:.

I haven't watched the Sania match, but Justine was playing just fine at Hopman Cup, mixing things up and coming in to net to hit brilliant volleys. Maybe 1st round jitters all around? Wozniacki, Henin, Schiavone, Sharapova all looked unimpressive.

Somebody just made a point a few days ago that Justine at her best was ALWAYS very aggressive. Can somebody who thinks she ballbashes now give examples of matches she won back in her 1st career that characterized her play in your opinion?

Yes I would like to hear someone evaluate about this too. Everyone talks about her change of gamestyle adapted for winning Wimbledon, and now about her changing to be a "ballbasher", as if it would be all black or white anyway. I have heard Justine talking a lot about the changes she's made in her serve and stuff, so she's not secretive about the way she works. But I have never heard her saying anything about changing her game for winning Wimbledon or hitting harder or whatever. When she's at her best she's hitting pretty hard but also with great depth and using opponents pace. :shrug: The Lucky Shots match against Serena and the WTA Champs final against Maria of 2007 comes to mind. She can still also slice, approach the net, volley, smash you name it. She is pretty complete and all-round. :shrug:

Mightymirza
Jan 17th, 2011, 08:01 PM
To be fair, Justine always steps up when she plays a better player.

Yeah thats why she lost to kimmie 3 times last year :tape: :smash:

Fuzzylogic
Jan 17th, 2011, 08:02 PM
I don't see any transitioning to ball basher, her game still looks the same to me. However, I kinda surprised it's still taking her soo long to get her rhythm back and get her game at 100%. I guess the injuries haven't helped, but it's still kinda surprising.

n1_and_uh_noone
Jan 17th, 2011, 08:05 PM
I don't specific insights.
But as I seem to recall, The Wimbledon Game Plan she and Carlos were working on to be aggressive, early on in the rallies and not net up.
Taking initiative away from the likes of Serena, Venus, Maria; all of them players who have perfected the art of early and sustained aggression in Wimbledon.

The strategey was to keep working on it, and play like this on any surface, culminating at the Championship for a first test.

But when she got hurt and it did not fare well in the Wimbledon, it seem like some doubts were planted in their mind, this was further reinforced with criticism questioning the approach of changing her game in the first place.

Some people thought with her old game, she could win Wimbledon. Which is a moot point since Carlos and Justine had decided that game plan was not enough and they needed a new approach.

After Wimbledon and with the injury, I don't think they continue completing what they had started, and they did not go back to her old game either.

THanks for taking the time to compose the above, but did you watch Justine AT ALL since Wimbledon? If you did watch all her HC matches as well as exhibitions/practice and have formed an opinion of her 'game plan' and revisions thereof since last season, then I apologize, because you would be stating a well-thought-out opinion (not accurate, but an opinion nevertheless).

If everything you say is based on this 1 match (you specifically say since Wimbledon, and this is her 1st tour match since then), then it is foolish of you to pass judgments already viz. 'I don't think they continue completing what they had started', and 'they did not go back to her old game either'.

(I wouldn't care if I hadn't seen some other poster asking you for your insight into her strategy on court.)

n1_and_uh_noone
Jan 17th, 2011, 08:09 PM
Yeah thats why she lost to kimmie 3 times last year :tape: :smash:

Well, Kim played pretty awful in those matches as well :lol:, so maybe Justine was just mirroring her level during the matches, was unlucky in 2 of them and was outplayed after her stubborn refusal to switch gears in the 3rd one.

debby
Jan 17th, 2011, 08:11 PM
Yeah thats why she lost to kimmie 3 times last year :tape: :smash:

Kim got lucky... it is not like she beat Justine easily, in two of these matchs, Justine had at least one matchpoint, and in the third match, Justine got injured.

And see, maybe I am deluded but I still think Justine has the spirit of a great champion like in her first career. It allowed her to dominate Kim, and I am sure she can do it again.

$uricate
Jan 17th, 2011, 08:13 PM
I think its the same as always, its just the sheer volume of pushing on tour these days creates the illusion that she is ballbashing.

n1_and_uh_noone
Jan 17th, 2011, 08:14 PM
I think its the same as always, its just the sheer volume of pushing on tour these days creates the illusion that she is ballbashing.

I cracked up reading that :haha:

justineheninfan
Jan 17th, 2011, 08:21 PM
It annoys the heck out of me she thinks this new game is better. It obviously isnt, the results speak for itself. With her old playing style she won 7 slams and was the best player in the World from 2003-2007, and in 2007 completely dominated the game and had 2nd best year of a women this past decade behind only Serena's 2002. As a wannabee ball basher which she has become since her comeback she will never be anything more than a middling top 10 player who only wins a slam by fluke through an easy draw, which with the curent pitiful field still would probably somehow happen at one point.. Hopefully something will finally click and she will realize what a foolish path she is continuing to go down. As a one dimensional ball basher she is barely better than people like Mirza, Wickmayer, and Kleybanova.

justineheninfan
Jan 17th, 2011, 08:23 PM
I would also like to add she was hitting the ball harder and better in 2003, 2004, 2006, and especialy her glory year in 2007 as an all around variety player as she is now as a ball basher. That is worse, she was playing her current game better when it wasnt even her main game as she is now as her only game.

Anyway it was only her 1st match back. Hopefully she will improve as the tournament goes on.

Mightymirza
Jan 17th, 2011, 08:24 PM
Kim got lucky... it is not like she beat Justine easily, in two of these matchs, Justine had at least one matchpoint, and in the third match, Justine got injured.

And see, maybe I am deluded but I still think Justine has the spirit of a great champion like in her first career. It allowed her to dominate Kim, and I am sure she can do it again.

I really hope so.. But in all the big matches christine lost last year, she came up short when it mattered.. I mean her BH went off for a stroll during the match against stosur..

cellophane
Jan 17th, 2011, 08:26 PM
Kim got lucky... it is not like she beat Justine easily, in two of these matchs, Justine had at least one matchpoint, and in the third match, Justine got injured.

Lucky :spit:

Kim led in both matches by a set and a break (almost a double break) and was dominating play.... these matches really should never have gone to a 3rd.

n1_and_uh_noone
Jan 17th, 2011, 08:29 PM
Lucky :spit:

Kim led in both matches by a set and a break (almost a double break) and was dominating play.... these matches really should never have gone to a 3rd.

Kim also led Li Na 5-0 recently and lost the set. Blew multiple leads in the past as well. So her topsy-turvy play did not come as a surprise. Not saying she shouldn't have won earlier, note.

debby
Jan 17th, 2011, 08:32 PM
I really hope so.. But in all the big matches christine lost last year, she came up short when it mattered.. I mean her BH went off for a stroll during the match against stosur..

You must believe. :hug:
I was angry at Justine this morning but now, I still want to believe ! To think she will improve match by match, and will beat Clijsters in straights in the final. ^^
And don't even remind me that awful match against Stosur. :tape: At 4-4 last set, she lost seven out of eight points on.... unforced errors. Really really close. And she fucked it up. :sad:

Lucky :spit:

Kim led in both matches by a set and a break (almost a double break) and was dominating play.... these matches really should never have gone to a 3rd.

You often need luck to win close matchs. It applies to Justine as well.

tennisbum79
Jan 17th, 2011, 08:36 PM
THanks for taking the time to compose the above, but did you watch Justine AT ALL since Wimbledon? If you did watch all her HC matches as well as exhibitions/practice and have formed an opinion of her 'game plan' and revisions thereof since last season, then I apologize, because you would be stating a well-thought-out opinion (not accurate, but an opinion nevertheless).

If everything you say is based on this 1 match (you specifically say since Wimbledon, and this is her 1st tour match since then), then it is foolish of you to pass judgments already viz. 'I don't think they continue completing what they had started', and 'they did not go back to her old game either'.

(I wouldn't care if I hadn't seen some other poster asking you for your insight into her strategy on court.)
Not withstanding your rant.
I am commenting on what I see and observe, not what I wish it were.
If you disagree with that, that is fine.
If the revisions you are speaking of later surfaced in this tournament, I will recognize them.
For now, I have not seen any.

If you read the first sentence of my post, I cleaely stated I do not have specififcs(and privildge) insights

Nicolás89
Jan 17th, 2011, 08:44 PM
Yeah thats why she lost to kimmie 3 times last year :tape: :smash:

I guess, if you consider Clijsters a better player which she is not.

cellophane
Jan 17th, 2011, 08:51 PM
You often need luck to win close matchs. It applies to Justine as well.

Lucky = winning a point because of a netcord. Not being better in a close match... It's ridiculous to say she was "lucky" to win those matches considering she was the better player for a set and a half before collapsing

debby
Jan 17th, 2011, 08:54 PM
Lucky = winning a point because of a netcord. Not being better in a close match...

Justine hit a DF at 6-6 in tie break at Brisbane.
Kim hit a very lucky volley at Miami, even her acknowledged it.

So.... it's all about details. Nothing really wrong, Kim deserved to win, but Justine could have won these matchs, and no one would doubt her abilities to play good tennis again. :tape:

RenaSlam.
Jan 17th, 2011, 08:58 PM
Keep in mind she was out for a great deal of last year. Give her time.

cellophane
Jan 17th, 2011, 09:03 PM
Justine hit a DF at 6-6 in tie break at Brisbane.
Kim hit a very lucky volley at Miami, even her acknowledged it.

How was that volley even remotely lucky? And when did she acknowledge it as "lucky". It was a great clutch volley period... Nothing lucky about it

She hit winners on MPs.

Being the better player who makes a winning play on key points has nothing to do with luck. Then winning close matches is all about being lucky :rolleyes: I guess Justine would have been way more lucky if she'd won those matches courtesy of a Clijsters collapse considering she was being bossed around the baseline for most of the match.
.

LCS
Jan 17th, 2011, 09:09 PM
Kim got lucky... it is not like she beat Justine easily, in two of these matchs, Justine had at least one matchpoint, and in the third match, Justine got injured.

And see, maybe I am deluded but I still think Justine has the spirit of a great champion like in her first career. It allowed her to dominate Kim, and I am sure she can do it again.

Can you read yourself? :spit: No one wins 3 matches against someone out of luck..:wavey: oh wait, maybe Christine does :rolleyes:

Matt01
Jan 17th, 2011, 09:11 PM
Lucky = winning a point because of a netcord. Not being better in a close match... It's ridiculous to say she was "lucky" to win those matches considering she was the better player for a set and a half before collapsing


When you're collapsing after 1.5 sets then you are not that good.

And to answer the question, no she has not offcially turned into a ballbasher. :lol: She was dominating the tour in 2007 by "ballbashing" (meaning: by being aggressive and hitting hard).

cellophane
Jan 17th, 2011, 09:14 PM
When you're colasping after 1.5 sets then you are not that good.

No, it just means you lose concentration easily.


And to answer the question, no she has not offcially turned into a ballbasher. :lol: She was dominating the tour in 2007 by "ballbashing" (meaning: by being aggressive and hitting hard).

She is getting outhit these days though :shrug:

debby
Jan 17th, 2011, 09:15 PM
When you're collapsing after 1.5 sets then you are not that good.

And to answer the question, no she has not offcially turned into a ballbasher. :lol: She was dominating the tour in 2007 by "ballbashing" (meaning: by being aggressive and hitting hard).

This.

And it's not like Justine played so well during that 1.5 set :lol: Up and down match from both of them.

@Luis Santos : Yes, she has been lucky against Jankovic or Kuznetsova, for instance.

debby
Jan 17th, 2011, 09:16 PM
No, it just means you lose concentration easily.

Give me a break, she is one of the girls who are the most focused.

cellophane
Jan 17th, 2011, 09:19 PM
Give me a break, she is one of the girls who are the most focused.

Is this a joke? :lol:

US Open 2009 4R vs Venus? 6-0 0-6? YEC 2010 with Wozniacki? She's been so up & down in her matches.... all the commentators mention it.

Even when she played Arn last year at the US Open....

LCS
Jan 17th, 2011, 09:20 PM
This.

And it's not like Justine played so well during that 1.5 set :lol: Up and down match from both of them.

@Luis Santos : Yes, she has been lucky against Jankovic or Kuznetsova, for instance.

She's certainly been on the ropes quite the amount of times ;)

cellophane
Jan 17th, 2011, 09:21 PM
This.

And it's not like Justine played so well during that 1.5 set :lol:

She couldn't do too much... she was getting pummeled at the baseline by Clijsters.

@Luis Santos : Yes, she has been lucky against Jankovic or Kuznetsova, for instance.

Justine >>> Kuznetsova.

As for Jankovic... hm... maybe 2006 US Open.

Miss Atomic Bomb
Jan 17th, 2011, 09:23 PM
I wouldn't call her a ballbasher just yet.

She played with a very controlled aggressive style in 2007. She was fit enough to rely on her defensive abilities and agile enough to maintain a stronger position even when she opened up angles for her opponent with the topspin CC shots. But more importantly, after all the strength training (and other stuff) that she underwent during the off-season, she had the stamina to keep it up for 7 matches in a row.

Maybe now, she feels that she needs to shorten the points more so she can preserve her body for that third set in a Slam final. She is definitely playing with an even more aggressive mindset, bashing the service returns regularly and trying to go for extremely low percentage shots instead of trying to manoeuvre the opponent around on every point, but she still has some variety in her game.

Spring Pools
Jan 17th, 2011, 09:48 PM
What' s a ballbasher?

Someone who hits every ball as hard as possible and usually goes for low-percentage shots instead of going with a safer shot and trying to construct the point. Usually, they have very little variety, and this screws them over if they aren't 100% on.

Matt01
Jan 17th, 2011, 09:48 PM
No, it just means you lose concentration easily.



When you're easily losing concentration it means that you are not that good.

cellophane
Jan 17th, 2011, 09:50 PM
When you're easily losing concentration it means that you are not that good.

Yeah, I guess someone who has won 3 GS titles and 3 YECs is not that good. :lol:

Matt01
Jan 17th, 2011, 09:54 PM
Yeah, I guess someone who has won 3 GS titles and 3 YECs is not that good. :lol:


Not as good as some people here make her out to be. :)

cellophane
Jan 17th, 2011, 09:55 PM
Not as good as some people here make her out to be. :)

Whatever you want to believe :)

justineheninfan
Jan 17th, 2011, 11:18 PM
Clijsters is being overrated on this forum lately. All I can is she had better win the Austrailan Open (as I think she probably will but isnt a sure thing) or some people are going to look pretty stupid.

Clijsters is not some mythical god of tennis. She might be by default the best of a bad lot of women players today, but she has yet to even produce anywhere near the quality of tennis Serena of 2002, Justine of 2007, or even Venus in 2001 produced. Serena of that year would beat Clijsters of today even on clay, and Justine of that year (or even 2003 or 2006 as we saw first hand) would beat Clijsters of today even on hard courts. Heck Clijsters of 2005 and 2003 was probably better than today, the rest of the women are just so much worse than they were those years.

cellophane
Jan 17th, 2011, 11:28 PM
Clijsters is being overrated on this forum lately. All I can is she had better win the Austrailan Open (as I think she probably will but isnt a sure thing) or some people are going to look pretty stupid.

Who are these "some people".

but she has yet to even produce anywhere near the quality of tennis Serena of 2002, Justine of 2007, or even Venus in 2001 produced. Serena of that year would beat Clijsters of today even on clay, and Justine of that year (or even 2003 or 2006 as we saw first hand) would beat Clijsters of today even on hard courts. Heck Clijsters of 2005 and 2003 was probably better than today, the rest of the women are just so much worse than they were those years.Your opinion :shrug: Clijsters in 2005 (i.e. Miami) was pretty spectacular at her best...

AcesHigh
Jan 17th, 2011, 11:46 PM
And for each person that overrates Clijsters, there are at least 10 people who believe she sucks.

Kim is very popular to hate on TF right now.

wayitis
Jan 17th, 2011, 11:47 PM
After seeing her play last year and with the overall results I thought that she would add a little more of her original game back into the mix. But she seems to still be content with her new style of play. I am not complaining about her playing style I just think it is funny that so many people dislike a lot of other players because they lack variety. Then you have a player like Justine who embodied variety but decided that she would rather do more ball bashing to get more results.

Do you think Justine will add more of the variety back to her game?

Also do you think ball bashing is underrated?

another bash-post by it-girl :zzz: , and the questions posed to try to make it less transparent did not work, there is just too much hatred dripping out of her posting history... we get it, you don't like the girl, but do not become so obsessive about it...

justineheninfan
Jan 17th, 2011, 11:56 PM
And for each person that overrates Clijsters, there are at least 10 people who believe she sucks.

Kim is very popular to hate on TF right now.

Well I cant speak for everyone but I defended her often last year and did say she was the best player of 2010 IMO ahead of Serena and Wozniacki. Some people are making her out to be unbeatable and some superwomen lately though which she is not.

justineheninfan
Jan 17th, 2011, 11:58 PM
Your opinion :shrug: Clijsters in 2005 (i.e. Miami) was pretty spectacular at her best...

I agree, hence my point 2010 isnt even neccessarily her best tennis. Heck even if the big titles were less, her results were much more consistent from 2003-2005 (when she played) than today in a much tougher field.

Heck in 2003 she would have done the Calendar Slam if she faced the current Serena 30 pounds heavier than her peak (this despite Serena was the best player of the current WTA the last few years until her post Wimbledon injury), the curent Venus at 30 years old, and the current Henin nowhere near her former self at the moment. Yet even in the current abysmal field we are still waiting for her first non U.S Open. It should happen here but if it doesnt there is going to be alot of answering for many people on here.

cellophane
Jan 18th, 2011, 12:14 AM
I agree, hence my point 2010 isnt even neccessarily her best tennis. Heck even if the big titles were less, her results were much more consistent from 2003-2005 (when she played) than today in a much tougher field.

I don't think 2010 is her best tennis at all...She is a more aggressive / mentally stronger player than before however...

n1_and_uh_noone
Jan 18th, 2011, 12:21 AM
I agree, hence my point 2010 isnt even neccessarily her best tennis. Heck even if the big titles were less, her results were much more consistent from 2003-2005 (when she played) than today in a much tougher field.

Heck in 2003 she would have done the Calendar Slam if she faced the current Serena 30 pounds heavier than her peak (this despite Serena was the best player of the current WTA the last few years until her post Wimbledon injury), the curent Venus at 30 years old, and the current Henin nowhere near her former self at the moment. Yet even in the current abysmal field we are still waiting for her first non U.S Open. It should happen here but if it doesnt there is going to be alot of answering for many people on here.

Yeah, isn't it amazing? This generation would have been filled with such instant legends if only Serena and Venus and Justine hadn't been so inconsiderate as to play well and stay fighting-fit. Heck, Sharapova could have won the Calendar Slam in 2005 with an overweight Serena, aging Venus, erratic Henin and up-and-down Clijsters with a weaker game. Petrova could have won the calendar Slam that year with all the above, a Sharapova with a bum shoulder and a retired Mauresmo and Davenport.

:rolleyes: