PDA

View Full Version : Who is the greater singles player: Justine Henin vs Venus Williams?


rimon
Jul 11th, 2011, 05:44 AM
Purely in singles?

SerenaClijsters
Jul 11th, 2011, 05:53 AM
I'd say Justine by a very slight margin.

KBlade
Jul 11th, 2011, 05:57 AM
This has already been settled, Justine is the greater Singles player, Venus is the greater Tennis player. And as a Venus fan, I agree.

Novichok
Jul 11th, 2011, 05:59 AM
This has been discussed to death. Henin is the better singles player.

bandabou
Jul 11th, 2011, 06:21 AM
:lol: Rimon, Rimon...3/4 is better than 2/4, is that what you gonna say? :lol:

Stern
Jul 11th, 2011, 06:32 AM
Henin cheated in 2003 RG. So it should be 7>6, Venus leads by number of slam (including double titles) and better personality.

SerenaClijsters
Jul 11th, 2011, 06:34 AM
Henin cheated in 2003 RG. So it should be 7>6, Venus leads by number of slam (including double titles) and better personality.

:o

singles player, so do not include the doubles titles and the intangibles like personality and appearance.

VeeJJ
Jul 11th, 2011, 06:38 AM
Rimon.... tisk tisk.

A good rule to follow is that you should NEVER make "Who is Better?" threads until BOTH players are retired.

Venus still has plenty of opportunity to pick up more titles, and a slam or two, if she does, this is not a contest, hence why you should have waited.

hingis-seles
Jul 11th, 2011, 08:25 AM
Oh for fuck's sake not this shit again.

Please search for your topic(s) of interest - they have all been done countless times before.

Slutiana
Jul 11th, 2011, 08:38 AM
:help: I don't even know why people are replying seriously. Useless thread.

Polikarpov
Jul 11th, 2011, 08:50 AM
Serena?

Serena_Williams_
Jul 11th, 2011, 09:12 AM
Serena?

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

jrollaneres25
Jul 11th, 2011, 09:22 AM
Venus. Anything else said has no validity. All you need to say is Venus. Get my drift?

Mistress of Evil
Jul 11th, 2011, 09:51 AM
http://i864.photobucket.com/albums/ab210/_svetlio_/Glee/tumblr_lmnfq6Gaq31qe1bxm.gif

Svetlana)))
Jul 11th, 2011, 09:54 AM
This has been done to FUCKING death.

rimon
Jul 11th, 2011, 10:15 AM
Sorry everyone, I wasn't aware that it was a big issue. I am pretty recent to this board, so I apologise for any annoyance.

BuTtErFrEnA
Jul 11th, 2011, 10:42 AM
uh huh :lol:

Sam L
Jul 11th, 2011, 11:07 AM
I would say Venus. Longer career, more Grand slam singles finals and more tour finals overall.

All things being equal, 5 Wimbledons trump no Wimbledon. Just my opinion.

bandabou
Jul 11th, 2011, 11:15 AM
:lol: Yeaahh, right that you're new.

What's next? Serena vs Justine/Hingis/Davenport? :lol:

Smitten
Jul 11th, 2011, 11:43 AM
Justine by far.

vixter
Jul 11th, 2011, 12:36 PM
Justine by far.

Can I be so blunt and ask if you are serious with your posts? Is there something I don't understand? :confused:

The Witch-king
Jul 11th, 2011, 12:48 PM
Sorry everyone, I wasn't aware that it was a big issue. I am pretty recent to this board, so I apologise for any annoyance.

But that won't stop you from starting your next annoying thread.

justineheninfan
Jul 11th, 2011, 12:57 PM
I vote too close to call. I have done the breakdown before and it depends what your criteria is as each has clear advantages over the other.

madmax
Jul 11th, 2011, 01:01 PM
Justine - much more talented player, who won her slams in a tougher era too.

Steven.
Jul 11th, 2011, 01:02 PM
jesus fuck, not again. :facepalm:

Sammo
Jul 11th, 2011, 01:14 PM
Henin

Pops Maellard
Jul 11th, 2011, 01:20 PM
I prefer Venus, but the answer is Christine.

Steven.
Jul 11th, 2011, 01:22 PM
FlameOn, can I ask you what happened on May 15th of 2009?

doooma6816
Jul 11th, 2011, 01:34 PM
Not again:facepalm:

Justine Henin...but it's very close obviously..

Novichok
Jul 11th, 2011, 02:06 PM
Justine - much more talented player, who won her slams in a tougher era too.

Just because Sharapova was better then doesn't make it a tougher era.:tape::help:

kiwifan
Jul 11th, 2011, 02:07 PM
More Wimbledons and Head to Head are two hard little factoids for y'all to dance around. :devil:

Venus' legend will rise and in a decade only the most biased Europeans will still cling to this Henin fantasy. ;)

Steven.
Jul 11th, 2011, 02:15 PM
Just because Sharapova was better then doesn't make it a tougher era.:tape::help:

And who even mentioned Sharapova? :lol: And I thought you thought haters' obsession with Caro was unhealthy. Your obsession with madmax and Sharapova isn't a pretty sight either.

Novichok
Jul 11th, 2011, 02:20 PM
And who even mentioned Sharapova? :lol: And I thought you thought haters' obsession with Caro was unhealthy. Your obsession with madmax and Sharapova isn't a pretty sight either.

Neither is your obsession with me. I never said anything about obsessions being unhealthy.:wavey:

I didn't say anything that could be considered disparaging or hating toward Sharapova. madmax is a big Sharapova fan so I assumed that he would consider the Henin "era" stronger because Sharapova was a better player back then. It's not a very far fetched implication.

justineheninfan
Jul 11th, 2011, 02:21 PM
More Wimbledons and Head to Head are two hard little factoids for y'all to dance around. :devil:

Venus' legend will rise and in a decade only the most biased Europeans will still cling to this Henin fantasy. ;)

The h2h is pretty easy to dismiss actually when all but 1 match were before Henin won her first slam. Everyone in the top 10 would own Henin if they played 90% of their matches with her before spring 2003, Anyway if H2H was the be all and end all then Davenport and Sharapova would be equal or better players than Venus, LOL!

Head to head is a unique stat in that it will only be brought up when it suits ones own purpose.

justineheninfan
Jul 11th, 2011, 02:23 PM
Justine - much more talented player, who won her slams in a tougher era too.

Venus won her slams in a tougher era. 2003-2007 was very good but 1999-2003 (before the Williams got hurt) still had more competition.

Steven.
Jul 11th, 2011, 02:28 PM
Neither is your obsession with me.:wavey:

I didn't say anything that could be considered disparaging or hating toward Sharapova. madmax is a big Sharapova fan so I assumed that he would consider the Henin "era" stronger because Sharapova was a better player back then. It's not a very far fetched implication.

:spit: I believe I've addressed you maybe 3 times max (infact I can't even remember the last time I did).

Anyway, fair enough. I do agree that the era Henin dominated is not better, but rather comparible to that of Venus'. Hell, can they even be considered as different eras considering the top players were all the same people outside a select few? lol.

Leo St
Jul 11th, 2011, 02:30 PM
justineheninfan is the argument king/queen

Novichok
Jul 11th, 2011, 02:35 PM
:spit: I believe I've addressed you maybe 3 times max (infact I can't even remember the last time I did).

Anyway, fair enough. I do agree that the era Henin dominated is not better, but rather comparible to that of Venus'. Hell, can they even be considered as different eras considering the top players were all the same people outside a select few? lol.

You seem to believe that addressing someone makes them obsessed with that person. I'm not obsessed with madmax but I do have a tendency to call out statement that I find ridiculous.

doomsday
Jul 11th, 2011, 02:39 PM
justineheninfan is the argument king/queen

king.

madmax
Jul 11th, 2011, 02:40 PM
You seem to believe that addressing someone makes them obsessed with that person. I'm not obsessed with madmax but I do have a tendency to call out statement that I find ridiculous.

so just because I think that 2003-2007 era was stronger and deeper than 1999-2003 means I'm promoting my fave Pova here? It was not only Maria who was at her peak then - we had plenty of dangerous young rising east europeans like Ivanovic, Vaidisova, Jankovic and others. There was simply much more depth and quality in overall field. The fact that teenage Maria was taking away the slams from older players just further solidifies my point:wavey:

Novichok
Jul 11th, 2011, 02:48 PM
so just because I think that 2003-2007 era was stronger and deeper than 1999-2003 means I'm promoting my fave Pova here? It was not only Maria who was at her peak then - we had plenty of dangerous young rising east europeans like Ivanovic, Vaidisova, Jankovic and others. There was simply much more depth and quality in overall field. The fact that teenage Maria was taking away the slams from older players just further solidifies my point:wavey:

I'm sorry but I can't read minds. If you don't want any negative interpretations of your posts, then support your conclusion with premises.:wavey:

BlueTrees
Jul 11th, 2011, 02:51 PM
Justine has a slight edge :)

danieln1
Jul 11th, 2011, 02:52 PM
Lakeisha

L'Enfant Sauvage
Jul 11th, 2011, 03:11 PM
Justine is slightly greater, but the obvious choice. That make sense? They each have seven slams, but Justine has 3/4 to Venus' 2/4. Slams on 3/4 with both HCs and one on either clay/grass is not as EXTRAORDINARY as the numbers would lead you to believe, but when both players have the same slam count that certainly tips the scale. I personally don't pay attention to weeks at #1, but Henin leads the category by a large margin. Henin has two YECs, Venus has one. Venus usually has the Olympic Gold in Singles to tip the scales in her favor, but Henin has one of those too. Venus DOES have the 7-2 H2H, but that's the only solid stat in her favor. Justine doesn't eclipse Venus in any achievement(other than weeks at #1,) but is just slightly greater in most of them.

I obviously favor Venus, and I do feel that peak v peak(or 00/01 vs 06/07) Venus would have won most of their meetings not on clay, even slower HCs like at the AO where she has underachieved. That is entirely subjective however.

EDIT: I forgot the last bit, that really depends on personal preference. Some say Justine is greater for winning her seven in a shorter period, more dominance(from FO 03 - USO 07,) while others cite Venus's staying power as being advantageous to her case(from Wimb 00 - Wimb 08.) I personally don't find either considerably more impressive than the other in that regard.

justineheninfan
Jul 11th, 2011, 03:15 PM
I actually lean slightly to Venus. I think at her best she would be more scary for past greats to face overall than Henin. Graf and Seles for instance would rather play a prime Henin than prime Venus.

rimon
Jul 11th, 2011, 03:35 PM
I actually lean slightly to Venus. I think at her best she would be more scary for past greats to face overall than Henin. Graf and Seles for instance would rather play a prime Henin than prime Venus.

This is about RESULTS.

rimon
Jul 11th, 2011, 03:36 PM
Justine is slightly greater, but the obvious choice. That make sense? They each have seven slams, but Justine has 3/4 to Venus' 2/4. Slams on 3/4 with both HCs and one on either clay/grass is not as EXTRAORDINARY as the numbers would lead you to believe, but when both players have the same slam count that certainly tips the scale. I personally don't pay attention to weeks at #1, but Henin leads the category by a large margin. Henin has two YECs, Venus has one. Venus usually has the Olympic Gold in Singles to tip the scales in her favor, but Henin has one of those too. Venus DOES have the 7-2 H2H, but that's the only solid stat in her favor. Justine doesn't eclipse Venus in any achievement(other than weeks at #1,) but is just slightly greater in most of them.

I obviously favor Venus, and I do feel that peak v peak(or 00/01 vs 06/07) Venus would have won most of their meetings not on clay, even slower HCs like at the AO where she has underachieved. That is entirely subjective however.

EDIT: I forgot the last bit, that really depends on personal preference. Some say Justine is greater for winning her seven in a shorter period, more dominance(from FO 03 - USO 07,) while others cite Venus's staying power as being advantageous to her case(from Wimb 00 - Wimb 08.) I personally don't find either considerably more impressive than the other in that regard.

This sentence doesn't make sense.

Novichok
Jul 11th, 2011, 03:39 PM
This sentence doesn't make sense.

Yes it does make sense. It's conjecture though.

rimon
Jul 11th, 2011, 03:48 PM
Yes it does make sense. It's conjecture though.

"Venus would have won most of their meetings not on clay, even..." It doesn't make sense.

Novichok
Jul 11th, 2011, 03:51 PM
"Venus would have won most of their meetings not on clay, even..." It doesn't make sense.

He means that Venus would have won most of their meetings if they weren't contested on clay.

L'Enfant Sauvage
Jul 11th, 2011, 03:53 PM
This sentence doesn't make sense.

Venus would have won most of their meetings on any surface other than clay. I made a grammatical error, but I think it's fairly obvious what I meant there :shrug:

Sombrerero loco
Jul 11th, 2011, 04:03 PM
justine

Apoleb
Jul 11th, 2011, 04:10 PM
I actually lean slightly to Venus. I think at her best she would be more scary for past greats to face overall than Henin. Graf and Seles for instance would rather play a prime Henin than prime Venus.

Traitor.

Off with his head Justards.

But in a way you are right, as bad it is to admit this bitter pill. If you take their USO 07 meeting, it could be very well be Justine's greatest tennis match (in terms of striking and tennis) beyond the clay and it's hard to recall a performance at such a high level, but Venus has put in multiple higher performances than hers at USO 07.

Doully
Jul 11th, 2011, 04:11 PM
It's a pity these two only played once after the 2003 AO. Looking at the US07 match, we could have witnessed a couple more epics.
I'm going with Justine on this one because I do believe she is the second best singles player of her generation.
The 3/4 slams is the deal sealer for me. Wimbledon or no wimbledon.
However Venus Williams has not retired from tennis.
I don't see the need in this kind of thread until that time comes. While I doubt she'll ever even get close to Justine's weeks at #1, she is bound to pass their shared number of titles (43) and could very well come away with an 8th slam.

Anything is possible in tennis.

My only qualm with Venus is that she wasn't able to eclipse Justine's records after her(first) retirement. Something I thought she would absolutely do.

Chrissie-fan
Jul 11th, 2011, 04:20 PM
Too close to call. Ok, in my opinion Justine by the tiniest of margins at this point, but Venus' career isn't over yet.

rimon
Jul 11th, 2011, 04:21 PM
Venus would have won most of their meetings on any surface other than clay. I made a grammatical error, but I think it's fairly obvious what I meant there :shrug:

Fair enough, but I strongly disagree. IMO, Justine would win on slow hardcourts, and Venus on fast hardcourts. Clay and grass are obviously foregone conclusions.

justineheninfan
Jul 11th, 2011, 04:22 PM
Venus and Henin both prefer faster hard courts to slower ones.

rimon
Jul 11th, 2011, 04:24 PM
Venus and Henin both prefer faster hard courts to slower ones.

Justine has a fairly equal record at the AO and USO, and has a far better AO record than Venus does.

moby
Jul 11th, 2011, 04:37 PM
Justine spotted Venus a 3 year headstart, retired twice, and Venus still hasn't overtaken her in slam count or in titles. :shrug:

As for those talking about Venus's peak game, I just want to point out that Venus has never been that great or consistent at defending hard shots coming at her. Memories of peak Venus circa 2000-01 involve her utterly dominating points, running around acrobatically when defending against the well-placed attacking shots of under-powered opponents. But even in her prime, Venus had many days when she couldn't hit the ball quite as aggressively, and relied on her retrieving and pushing skills, knowing that she was fast enough for none of her opponent's shots to hurt her and that eventually she would get an opening.

Within a few years, the number of players who hit almost as hard as Venus increased (although they tended to be fairly inconsistent). But there were enough of them that on their day and on Venus's off day, they could take her out. In a way, she too was a victim of the Xtreme power game she ushered in.

Apoleb
Jul 11th, 2011, 04:41 PM
Justine spotted Venus a 3 year headstart, retired twice, and Venus still hasn't overtaken her in slam count or in titles. :shrug:

Not only that. Supposedly Venus had a longer career, but her last GS final was in 2009, whereas Justine's was in 2010. :tape:

Specter
Jul 11th, 2011, 04:57 PM
The hand.

bandabou
Jul 11th, 2011, 04:58 PM
That's the biggest knock on Vee..should've surpassed Juju by now, all things considered. Has become too much one-surface pony and her surface of choice, she isn't unplayable on it either.

Ryusuke Tenma
Jul 11th, 2011, 04:59 PM
24 people voted for Venus? Why? Care to explain yourselves?

Let's see:

Justine Henin


503 career wins, 109 career losses with an 82.19% win percentage.
Seven slam victories. Four at Roland Garros, two at the United States Open and one at the Australian Open.
Five slam finals. Two at the Wimbledon Championships, two at the Australian Open and one at the United States Open. She has a 100% success rate in Roland Garros finals.
She won the olympic gold medal at the Athens Olympics in 2004.
She won two consecutive year end championships in 2006 and 2007.
She has 43 titles and jas been the runner-up in eighteen other tournaments.
She has been year end number one in three seperate years.
She has career prize money of roughly $20 million.
She has 117 weeks at number one.


Venus Williams


558 career wins, 143 career losses with a 80.5% win percentage.
She has seven slam victories, like Henin.
She has more finals though, and has been the runner-up on seven occasions, two more than Henin.
She also has an olympic gold medal, won in Sydney, 2000.
She only has one year end championship win, whereas Henin has two.
She has the same amount of titles as Henin, with 43.
She has never been year end number one and doesn't have anywhere near the amount of weeks at number one that Henin has. She has a meager eleven weeks.
She does have $7 million more prize money than Henin, but Henin has been retired twice and has had a shorter career at the top.


Henin has far more weeks at number one, a higher match win percentage, less losses (less wins, though), the same ammount of gold medals, slam titles and overall titles, less slam finals, one more year end championship and more years ended as number one. She has all of this over Venus while being retired twice and having a shorter career at the top.

Henin trumps Venus, clearly.

Vee Williams
Jul 11th, 2011, 05:20 PM
This is about RESULTS.

Then their head-to-head RESULTS should also serve as an indication.

2001 T1 Berlin R3 J. Henin V. Williams 6-1 6-4
2001 GS Wimbledon F V. Williams J. Henin 6-1 3-6 6-0
2001 T2 New Haven QF V. Williams J. Henin 6-3 5-7 6-2
2002 T3 Gold Coast F V. Williams J. Henin 7-5 6-2
2002 T2 Antwerp F V. Williams J. Henin 6-3 5-7 6-3
2002 T2 Amelia Island F V. Williams J. Henin 2-6 7-5 7-6(5)
2002 GS Wimbledon SF V. Williams J. Henin 6-3 6-2
2003 GS Australian Open SF V. Williams J. Henin 6-3 6-3
2007 GS US Open SF J. Henin V. Williams 7-6(2) 6-4

Venus won 77.8% of their meetings. Venus is also 3-1 in Slams.

Venus has won agains Justine on hard, on grass, on clay, and on carpet.

Apoleb
Jul 11th, 2011, 05:24 PM
2001 T1 Berlin R3 J. Henin V. Williams 6-1 6-4
2001 GS Wimbledon F V. Williams J. Henin 6-1 3-6 6-0
2001 T2 New Haven QF V. Williams J. Henin 6-3 5-7 6-2
2002 T3 Gold Coast F V. Williams J. Henin 7-5 6-2
2002 T2 Antwerp F V. Williams J. Henin 6-3 5-7 6-3
2002 T2 Amelia Island F V. Williams J. Henin 2-6 7-5 7-6(5)
2002 GS Wimbledon SF V. Williams J. Henin 6-3 6-2
2003 GS Australian Open SF V. Williams J. Henin 6-3 6-3
2007 GS US Open SF J. Henin V. Williams 7-6(2) 6-4



Justine is the beginning and the end. :worship:

John was really prophesying about Jesustine in the Book of Revelations when this was mentioned: " I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End." More evidence for the superiority of Justine.

Vee Williams
Jul 11th, 2011, 05:50 PM
Justine is the beginning and the end. :worship:

John was really prophesying about Jesustine in the Book of Revelations when this was mentioned: " I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End." More evidence for the superiority of Justine.

"And you shall know that I am in the middle" (Joel 2:27).

It all depends on how you interpret a text. Fortunatelly, the head-to-head results require little interpreation. Thay are clear.

bobito
Jul 11th, 2011, 05:55 PM
Henin: 7 slams out of 35 entered 20%
Williams: 7 slams out of 53 13.2%

Henin: 43 tour titles from 143 events 30.1%
Williams: 43 tour titles from 188 events 22.9%

The dates of the head to head matches tell the tale. Venus beat Justine 5 times when she was a teenager who had yet to break into the top 5. That's where her lead comes from. Even so, most of them were mighty close matches.

Martian KC
Jul 11th, 2011, 06:13 PM
Laughable. Justine by a mile.

edificio
Jul 11th, 2011, 06:39 PM
Venus is just better in all things. :)

vixter
Jul 11th, 2011, 06:45 PM
If you only stare yourself blind at numbers and weeks and wins and losses,
I can see how people would possibly potentially vote for Justine.

Taking other things into account, looking more outside the picture,
the bigger and more longevity tennis player is clearly VENUS!

Also when 2 players has so many titles and also the same amount of slams, we surely can't say one is clearly ahead of the other.

Venus owned Henin so Venus wins!

frenchie
Jul 11th, 2011, 07:41 PM
Henin has the best numbers

but Venus' game in 2000-2002 was amazing
If only she could have that BH now....

Matt01
Jul 11th, 2011, 08:31 PM
Justine is the beginning and the end. :worship:


Your posts in this thread are too good :lol:

Matt01
Jul 11th, 2011, 08:37 PM
It all depends on how you interpret a text. Fortunatelly, the head-to-head results require little interpreation. Thay are clear.


Yeah, it's quite clear that the H2H here is twisted and doesn't tell us who the better player is. But I don't know why I even bother. :tape: Well, threads like these are classics :lol:

Temperenka
Jul 11th, 2011, 08:42 PM
As much as I hate her, I think it's Justine.

But if you want to look at impact on the sport... Venus.

Stonerpova
Jul 11th, 2011, 09:04 PM
Henin:
-won three of the four slams
-10x the weeks at #1
-had several extended periods of dominance
-was a more complete player
-won the only match played when both were anywhere close to their prime

Why does this thread exist?

serenafan08
Jul 11th, 2011, 09:17 PM
Had Serena not been around, Venus would have more weeks at #1 because she was #2 behind Serena for a good while, not only when they dominated in 2002-03 but also in '09 and '10 when Serena got back to #1. Having said that, I think this is closer than people realize, but Justine has had the greater results. I still think Venus is a terrific player. You have to give the slight edge to Justine here, but based purely on results. If you want to talk about impact on the game, it's Venus by a country mile.

thrust
Jul 11th, 2011, 09:25 PM
Henin cheated in 2003 RG. So it should be 7>6, Venus leads by number of slam (including double titles) and better personality.

BULLSHIT!!

Novichok
Jul 11th, 2011, 09:29 PM
BULLSHIT!!

Henin didn't cheat?:confused:

Potato
Jul 11th, 2011, 09:41 PM
Had Serena not been around, Venus would have more weeks at #1 because she was #2 behind Serena for a good while, not only when they dominated in 2002-03 but also in '09 and '10 when Serena got back to #1. Having said that, I think this is closer than people realize, but Justine has had the greater results. I still think Venus is a terrific player. You have to give the slight edge to Justine here, but based purely on results. If you want to talk about impact on the game, it's Venus by a country mile.

/thread

DragonFlame
Jul 11th, 2011, 09:54 PM
If you want to talk about impact on the game, it's Venus by a country mile.

Impact on the game? Clarify please... Justine Henin's the one who was the best player from 2003-2007, she dominated this period playing second fiddle to none. Venus has always been second best. If we're talking about impact on the game it's Justine who's the one that played by far the best tennis for half a decade.

vixter
Jul 11th, 2011, 09:55 PM
Henin:
-won three of the four slams
-10x the weeks at #1
-had several extended periods of dominance
-was a more complete player
-won the only match played when both were anywhere close to their prime

Why does this thread exist?

Well I think your two last arguments is highly your opinion more than truth. They are both such complete players. Sure, Justine has the slices and the dropshots. But Venus has the reach and speed. And I don't know why you say that the last match that they played was the only match where play played 'close to their prime', dude that was a WICKED MATCH quality like that don't come around often, that was like match of the decade in quality so yeah other matches they played were more normal standard sure. Venus usually won because Justine didn't quite believe in herself against Venus. Amelia Island final a superb example where Venus won after Justine was up 6-2 4-0. :devil:

Novichok
Jul 11th, 2011, 10:00 PM
Impact on the game? Clarify please... Justine Henin's the one who was the best player from 2003-2007, she dominated this period playing second fiddle to none. Venus has always been second best. If we're talking about impact on the game it's Justine who's the one that played by far the best tennis for half a decade.

Justine did not dominate 2003, 2004 or 2005. She definitely played second fiddle to some players in those years. In 2006, she made the finals of all 4 GS but only won 1.

vixter
Jul 11th, 2011, 10:02 PM
Impact on the game? Clarify please... Justine Henin's the one who was the best player from 2003-2007, she dominated this period playing second fiddle to none. Venus has always been second best. If we're talking about impact on the game it's Justine who's the one that played by far the best tennis for half a decade.

Venus and Serena revolusionised womens tennis together.
Venus was not always second best she was the better sister until Serena champion blossomed out in 2002.
Venus is like spokesperson for WTA and most respected woman on WTA.
But yeah, Justine will always be praised for her game and her backhand, and her impact was big too I guess.

Matt01
Jul 11th, 2011, 10:20 PM
Justine did not dominate 2003, 2004 or 2005. She definitely played second fiddle to some players in those years. In 2006, she made the finals of all 4 GS but only won 1.


Justine dominated for a large part in 2003/2004, just like Serena did in 2002/2003. And Justine dominated of course in 2007.
Venus never really dominated the tour except for a few weeks (at best: months) in 2000 and 2001. And please don't give me the argument that without Serena, Venus would have been #1 for soooo long :rolleyes:

vixter
Jul 11th, 2011, 10:29 PM
Justine dominated for a large part in 2003/2004, just like Serena did in 2002/2003. And Justine dominated of course in 2007.
Venus never really dominated the tour except for a few weeks (at best: months) in 2000 and 2001. And please don't give me the argument that without Serena, Venus would have been #1 for soooo long :rolleyes:

Venus dominated US HC seasons 2000-2002. In 2000 she had that very famous winning streak. She totally dominated.

DragonFlame
Jul 11th, 2011, 10:29 PM
Justine did not dominate 2003, 2004 or 2005. She definitely played second fiddle to some players in those years. In 2006, she made the finals of all 4 GS but only won 1.

She won 2 slams and was YE#1 in 2003. She won 4 out of 5 tournaments in 2004 before she got hit by the virus, came back and won Olympics. Got hit by injuries then again. Came back in 2005 and went undefeated in the clay season only to be hit by injury again in the hardcourt season.

My point:
If you start breaking the years 2003,2004 down to stats she was the player with the best results in both 2003 and 2004. Dominance might not be the right word but she was definitely the best player even in those years.(i broke the stats of all players down a few years ago in those years)

On the other hand, if we look at a certain point in the 2003/2004 season. After Indian Wells(right before she got sick) in 2004 she was holding a total of 11 titles!(including 3 slams and 5/6 tier1's) That's dominance.




2005 she was one of the best but clearly not the best. Domination from the start of the year till the end of the year might not be the right word. Still, there's no other player that comes close to what she achieved in those 5 years. She was the best player.

Just to make it clear, my definition of dominance is the following:
You win 3/5 big titles(slams+YEC) and hold the #1 ranking. This means you've won more big tournaments then any other player statistically can and have the most points on the ranking.(#1) When this happens there's 0% argument that you weren't the best player. Justine did this in 2003-2004 and 2007

Novichok
Jul 11th, 2011, 10:34 PM
Justine dominated for a large part in 2003/2004, just like Serena did in 2002/2003. And Justine dominated of course in 2007.
Venus never really dominated the tour except for a few weeks (at best: months) in 2000 and 2001. And please don't give me the argument that without Serena, Venus would have been #1 for soooo long :rolleyes:
I agree but DragonFlame made it seem as if Justine reigned supreme from 2003-2007 but that's not the case. I'm not really a Venus fan so you don't have to worry about that. :lol:
She won 2 slams and was YE#1 in 2003. She won 4 out of 5 tournaments in 2004 before she got hit by the virus, came back and won Olympics. Got hit by injuries then again. Came back in 2005 and went undefeated in the clay season only to be hit by injury again in the hardcourt season.

My point:
If you start breaking the years 2003,2004 down to stats she was the player with the best results in both 2003 and 2004. Dominance might not be the right word but she was definitely the best player even in those years.(i broke down the stats of all players down a few years ago in those years)

On the other hand, if we look at a certain point in the 2003/2004 season. After Indian Wells(right before she got sick) in 2004 she was holding a total of 11 titles!(including 3 slams and 5/6 tier1's) That's dominance.




2005 she was one of the best but clearly not the best. Domination from the start of the year till the end of the year might not be the right word. Still, there's no other player that comes close to what she achieved in those 5 years. She was the best player.

She was the best player through those years but she was far from not playing second fiddle to anyone.

Olórin
Jul 11th, 2011, 10:36 PM
Justine definitely was not the best player exclusively in 2004 or 2005. 2006 is an interesting debate really. And 2003 is close-ish with Serena (not as many tournies but more weeks @ #1 and higher w/l %age)

I agree she was overall the best player in that time-period 2003-2007, but given it's a time period that begins with the serious injuries and person of Serena takes a little shine off that little segment of the decade.

The reason Justine edges Venus is singles accomplishments that she truly dominated the tour for an extended period, beginning end of 2006 until her loss to Sharapova in '08. This is reflected in her weeks at #1 and YE#1s where she clearly smashes Venus. Although as someone else mentioned Venus was unlucky that Serena's game-peak and ranking accumulation peak came so swiftly after Venus' peak at both of these things. We will never know if Venus could have extended her slam count and weeks at #1.

I actually love these done to death threads :lol:

Uranium
Jul 11th, 2011, 10:36 PM
Like all the previous threads into this topic it turns into a #1 and dominance discussion:yawn:

Venus screwed herself out of not getting the #1 and YE #1 in 2001. Could have been #1 after Roland Garros, but flops in R1. And then for YE #1, granted she didn't play any indoor events and YEC because of 9/11, but it hurt her because she only had Linz final to defend from 2000, that's it. So plenty up for grabs for her. She had her chances in 2001 to get to #1 earlier. Didn't. Finally gets #1 in 2002, but gets cut short courtesy of sister Serena. Venus had great results in 2000 and 2001, but did not get #1. Players have rather mediocre results nowadays and become #1. But that is the name of the game when it comes to the #1 rank.

Matt01
Jul 11th, 2011, 10:38 PM
I agree but DragonFlame made it seem as if Justine reigned supreme from 2003-2007 but that's not the case. I'm not really a Venus fan so you don't have to worry about that. :lol:


Oh, good. Venus fans are evil ;)

DragonFlame
Jul 11th, 2011, 10:48 PM
Justine definitely was not the best player exclusively in 2004

If you break down the stats you will come to the conclusion she was by a VERY slight margin.

Davenport was #1 but she didn't win any big tournaments.(slams+YEC)

It was close between Sharapova and Henin(Henin won AO+Olympics, Sharapova won Wimby+YEC and both won 5 titles) but if you break it down to winning% and titleworth(tier1 etc) and stuff like that Henin actually has a slight margin.(which i did a few years ago, if you want me to do it again i don't mind.)

(Not to mention she was sick for such a big part of the year and was still #1 till after the usopen)

mirzalover
Jul 11th, 2011, 11:09 PM
Venus. Anything else said has no validity. All you need to say is Venus. Get my drift?

*rubs computer screen trying to touch your abs :drool:*


Im sorry what was the question

justineheninfan
Jul 12th, 2011, 02:18 AM
One thing I will say is if you are saying Serena and not Justine was best in 2003 based on what ifs with injury than you have to likewise say Henin was clearly best in 2004. After all being healthy only 30% of the year she still had a year atleast on par with Davenport and Sharapova. If healthy all year she would have been by far the dominant player that year. On the flip side if it is just on results with no what ifs then it would clearly be Henin for 2003 in that case. So at the very least Henin was definitely the best one of those two years IMO.

2006 I would clearly give Henin over Mauresmo. One extra slam does not overcome 3 other slam finals, WTA Championships, plus 4 extra non major tournaments all combined.

2007 meanwhile is no debate.

I do feel Henin spent alot of time as the best in the World. More than Venus, and in 2007 far more emphatically than Venus ever was. I think Venus at her best reached a higher level on most surfaces than Justine at her best though. Venus was unlucky to peak at times Serena, Davenport, Hingis, and Capriati were also at their best, sometimes all at once. Venus also inexplicably underachieved at the Aussie and French Opens were she easily had the ability to do alot better.

As for 2003-2007 reference while Henin wasnt the best every single moment of that period, for the overall period she was by far the best. 7 slams, while nobody else won more than 4 (and that being Serena who played sparodically outside the slams), atleast 1 slam each of those years, year end #1 3 times. If you consider the overall period she was by far the best, and that is a significant chunk of time.

Novichok
Jul 12th, 2011, 02:23 AM
One thing I will say is if you are saying Serena and not Justine was best in 2003 based on what ifs with injury than you have to likewise say Henin was clearly best in 2004. After all being healthy only 30% of the year she still had a year atleast on par with Davenport and Sharapova. If healthy all year she would have been by far the dominant player that year. On the flip side if it is just on results with no what ifs then it would clearly be Henin for 2003 in that case. So at the very least Henin was definitely the best one of those two years IMO.

2006 I would clearly give Henin over Mauresmo. One extra slam does not overcome 3 other slam finals, WTA Championships, plus 4 extra non major tournaments all combined.

2007 meanwhile is no debate.

I do feel Henin spent alot of time as the best in the World. More than Venus, and in 2007 far more emphatically than Venus ever was. I think Venus at her best reached a higher level on most surfaces than Justine at her best though. Venus was unlucky to peak at times Serena, Davenport, Hingis, and Capriati were also at their best, sometimes all at once. Venus also inexplicably underachieved at the Aussie and French Opens were she easily had the ability to do alot better.

As for 2003-2007 reference while Henin wasnt the best every single moment of that period, for the overall period she was by far the best. 7 slams, while nobody else won more than 4 (and that being Serena who played sparodically outside the slams), atleast 1 slam each of those years, year end #1 3 times. If you consider the overall period she was by far the best, and that is a significant chunk of time.

I agree but by that reasoning I can claim that Serena was the best by far from 2002-2010. :angel:

Raiden
Jul 12th, 2011, 02:33 AM
Tennis H2H is irrelevant for the purpose of judging who was the overall superior one (so V-Ju h2h is just as irrelevant as Venus's h2h versus her slamless mistresses like Jankovich and Pironkova doesn't mean that those two are overall greater than Venus). What matters most in tennis is "bringing home" the big ones. Winning important tournaments trumps everything.

And when we look at that, we find out that Venus never won enough to dominate the tour ever. During the "fake peak Venus" period (2000-2001) she only had a nice summer between W & USO. Other than that the rest of those years she was losing left and right to the likes of "old and slow" ASV and scrubs like Maleeva and Shagnessy. Anyone who remembers those days knows that Venus actually peaked in 2002 and not before. That's was the ONLY year she played her best ever tennis, consistently and all year round (like Justine did from 2003 till she retired in 2008). But alas, somebody else was also peaking in 2002.

Justine did what peak Venus failed to do: she dethroned Goatrena and took over WTA from spring '03 till spring '08. The fact that the likes of Kim and Moresmo and Pova won a few slams and YECs in-between or the fact that slamless, YEC-less mickymouse-hogger Davenport latched onto the #1 spot is inconsequential cuz Ju was winning more of the big/important matches than literally anyone and therefore was the queen of the tour all throughout this entire post Serena-slam period (that she herself ushered) until she retired.

Ergo Ju is greater than the elder Williams by quite a significant amount. Shanknus needs 3 or more slams in order to compensate for this imbalance in Ju's favor.

Novichok
Jul 12th, 2011, 02:38 AM
Tennis H2H is irrelevant for the purpose of judging who was the overall superior one (so V-Ju h2h is just as irrelevant as Venus's h2h versus her slamless mistresses like Jankovich and Pironkova doesn't mean that those two are overall greater than Venus). What matters most in tennis is winning the big/important tournaments. That trumps everything.

And when we look at that, we find out that Venus never won enough to dominate the tour ever. During the "fake peak Venus" period (2000-2001) she only had a nice summer between W & USO. Other than that the rest of those years she was losing left and right to the likes of "old and slow" ASV and scrubs like Maleeva and Shagnessy. Anyone who remembers those days knows that Venus actually peaked in 2002 and not before. That's was the ONLY year she played her best ever tennis, consistently and all year round (like Justine did from 2003 till she retired in 2008). But alas, somebody else was also peaking in 2002.

Justine did what peak Venus failed to do: she dethroned Goatrena and took over WTA from spring '03 till spring '08. The fact that the likes of Kim and Moresmo and Pova won a few slams and YECs in-between or the fact that slamless, YEC-less mickymouse-hogger Davenport latched onto the #1 spot is inconsequential cuz Ju was winning more of the big/important matches than literally anyone and therefore was the queen of the tour all throughout this entire post Serena-slam period (that she herself ushered) until she retired.

Ergo Ju is greater than the elder Williams by quite a significant amount. Shanknus needs 3 or more slams in order to compensate for this imbalance in Ju's favor.

I'm sorry but Justine did not take over from spring '03-'08. She definitely didn't dominate 2004 or 2005. She only played 2 slams during those 2 years and she ended the years as #8 and #6 respectively.

justineheninfan
Jul 12th, 2011, 02:40 AM
I agree but by that reasoning I can claim that Serena was the best by far from 2002-2010. :angel:

Well of course. This is a thread about Henin and Venus though and I was saying that is a definite edge in Henin's favor. She spent more time as probably being the best and had a longer period where her overall achivements far outdid all others. Of course Venus has other edges in her own right which is why I voted I couldnt decide. Adding in doubles definitely Venus though.

Raiden
Jul 12th, 2011, 02:48 AM
I'm sorry but Justine did not take over from spring '03-'08. She definitely didn't dominate 2004 or 2005. She only played 2 slams during those 2 years and she ended the years as #8 and #6 respectively.I don't count injury periods in order to decide who was the better player. I only look at who beat who won the most important matches more and owned the tour.

Which is why as far as I'm concerned this is the dynasty of WTA:

2000-2002 Davanport-JenCap-Venus triumvirate
2002-2003 Serena
2003-2008 Ju
2008-2010 Serena
2010-2011 Kim

justineheninfan
Jul 12th, 2011, 02:48 AM
I'm sorry but Justine did not take over from spring '03-'08. She definitely didn't dominate 2004 or 2005. She only played 2 slams during those 2 years and she ended the years as #8 and #6 respectively.

Henin despite missing much of the year with illness, and often playing ill when she did after March, ended 2004 as Australian Open, Olympic singles, and Indian Wells Champion. She was no World #6 or #8 this year regardless what often comical WTA rankings said. She also thrashed year end #1 Davenport both times they met this year on hard courts. You can all but throw out the year end #1 rankings of 2004 as they are pretty much useless. Year end #1 Davenport would much rather have Henin or Sharapova's year this year than her own.

2005 her low end top 10 ranking was possibly justified as she really did little outside her usual clay court dominance, a few decent but not great hard court events and that was all. Still well above where Serena was for this overall year though, despite that Serena also won a slam. 2005 is the only year this whole period Henin wasnt atleast arguably the best player in the World, and even this year she was clearly best on clay and always considered a major contender everywhere else.

Leo St
Jul 12th, 2011, 04:09 AM
Ok, what do you think about my argument? it is not a "end the debate" one, just adding more points of view, im no tennis expert such as justineheninfan

theres this match, great uso 07 encounter, pretty close, when justine was just dominating and peaking
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQzNhvaoNAA

and theres this match when venus was at her prime, wimbledon final, not too much contest
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mL9aIBSkhaQ

just to point, i think both underachieved ; for different reasons, venus with family and injury issues and a huge era, henin.. lack of focus on the tour? (someone can say it with more precision)

Moveyourfeet
Jul 12th, 2011, 04:27 AM
Henin would NEVER have lost 2 consecutive times to a scrub by the same score at Roland Garros.

Roookie
Jul 12th, 2011, 05:02 AM
The poll results don't lie. Justine won 7 slams (3 different!), 1 Olympic gold, 2 YEC and over 100 weeks at number one. And she did it all in 5 years...Venus can't touch that.

moby
Jul 12th, 2011, 05:30 AM
Ok, what do you think about my argument? it is not a "end the debate" one, just adding more points of view, im no tennis expert such as justineheninfan

theres this match, great uso 07 encounter, pretty close, when justine was just dominating and peaking
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQzNhvaoNAA

and theres this match when venus was at her prime, wimbledon final, not too much contest
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mL9aIBSkhaQVenus in the summer of 2007 was the closest she's been to the peak since 2000-2002. The main difference was probably that she didn't exude the same kind of confidence.

On the other hand, the Wimbledon final was Justine's first GS final, when she was a n00b teen with a choker rep, played the last time the Wimbledon grass was fast and Justine's forehand was tres loopy, and yet she still managed to take a set off Venus (even though, as you mentioned, the result of the match was NID). If anything, I'm convinced that Justine would have had a better chance at Wimbledon if the grass had stayed as fast, especially against Amelie who never went past the 3rd round of Wimbledon until they slowed the grass down in 2002.

That said, I think Venus would also have had a better chance against Serena in all those Wimbledon finals on faster grass.

bandabou
Jul 12th, 2011, 07:46 AM
Juju was more dominating...and Vee just didn't enough at the other majors apart from Wimbledon, since the injury in ' 03. Really should've done better at the Oz open..specially in '04 and '06.

Leo St
Jul 12th, 2011, 07:51 AM
i wish both could have 10 slams, it is what they deserve in my opinion

jrollaneres25
Jul 12th, 2011, 08:14 AM
king.

Quenn:lol: Just kidding:angel:

SwingVolley93
Jul 12th, 2011, 08:18 AM
This thread is a joke :rolleyes:

SoClose
Jul 12th, 2011, 09:34 AM
Im sick and tired of these kind of polls!!!:shout: Mods pls close this thread !!!

Smitten
Jul 12th, 2011, 10:50 AM
Henin: 7 slams out of 35 entered 20%
Williams: 7 slams out of 53 13.2%

Henin: 43 tour titles from 143 events 30.1%
Williams: 43 tour titles from 188 events 22.9%



Basically.

The longevity argument hurts Venus more than it helps her because she's not actually winning anything and hasn't in three years. All she's doing in making these number look even more pathetic by losing to Pironkova each year.

As moby said, even Justine has seen a slam final more recently than Venus and she's retired again.

serenafan08
Jul 12th, 2011, 12:07 PM
Impact on the game? Clarify please... Justine Henin's the one who was the best player from 2003-2007, she dominated this period playing second fiddle to none. Venus has always been second best. If we're talking about impact on the game it's Justine who's the one that played by far the best tennis for half a decade.

Serena and Venus together made the game greater. They made the girls get more fit, run faster, hit harder - they raised the bar. And the only years Justine "dominated" were 2003 and 2007 - 2004 2005 and 2006 weren't anything spectacular from her. :lol: You call quitting a Slam final and then choking a lead away in another "dominating?"

Matt01
Jul 12th, 2011, 01:11 PM
Serena and Venus together made the game greater. They made the girls get more fit, run faster, hit harder - they raised the bar. And the only years Justine "dominated" were 2003 and 2007 - 2004 2005 and 2006 weren't anything spectacular from her. :lol: You call quitting a Slam final and then choking a lead away in another "dominating?"


Yeah, reaching all Slam finals in 2006 is nothing spectacular...oh wait, because your fave never was able to do that.
Yeah, dominating the clay court season and winning everything left and right there is nothing spectacular...oh wait, because your fave was never able to do that.
Yeah, winning the Australian Open in 2004, getting seriously ill and then come back to win the Gold Medal at the Olympics in Singles is nothing spectacular...oh wait, because your fave was never able to do that. :oh: