PDA

View Full Version : Why do people say Wozniacki is consistent?


dsanders06
Aug 17th, 2011, 08:54 PM
One thing I've noticed is that everyone here seems to think the reason for Wozniacki's long spell at #1 is consistency... one of her fans claimed a few weeks ago that her consistency was "phenomenal", and even her haters while saying she's a bad player usually say something like "atleast she's consistent".

But she's actually extremely inconsistent. She's already lost before the quarterfinals at 8 tournaments this year... compared to Sharapova who's only lost before the same stage at 3 tournaments, Azarenka at five tournaments, Zvonareva at six tournaments, even the supposedly erratic Kvitova only lost before that stage at 5 WTA tournaments (6 including ITFs). And comparing Wozniacki's "consistency" to the other so-called non-#1s is an insult to them - Safina had a 52-week stretch from summer 2008 to just after Wimbledon '09 where she'd made SFs or better at all but 4 tournaments, while Jankovic in 2008 only lost before the QFs at Wimbledon and Zurich.

Literally the only thing keeping her at #1 is the fact she plays so many little Premier events like Brussels and Charleston, which offer a load of points but don't add anything to a world #1's career. The WTA really is going to have to move to a situation where rankings are based more on an average score, because this is just getting ridiculous now.

Mary Cherry.
Aug 17th, 2011, 08:56 PM
She used to be consistent :tape: And that consistency from the latter part of last year is what's keeping her at #1.

However, it's looking grim now if she keeps this up.

toby345
Aug 17th, 2011, 08:57 PM
Well she is consistently losing :shrug:

dsanders06
Aug 17th, 2011, 08:58 PM
She used to be consistent :tape: And that consistency from the latter part of last year is what's keeping her at #1.

Honestly, she never really was. Like I said this year she's already lost before the QFs at 8 events, last year she lost before that stage at 9. She only ever looked consistent in comparison to other top players, but even 3-4 years ago, her results would've made her one of the most inconsistent players in the top 10.

tennisbum79
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:00 PM
She used to be consistent :tape: And that consistency from the latter part of last year is what's keeping her at #1.

However, it's looking grim now if she keeps this up.
This reflects what is happening to Carol than what OP post states.

Carol has always been consistent, and that has been reputation for some times.

Just because she is faltering at being consistent does not mean she has never been

matthias
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:00 PM
she used to beat all players outside top20
but now she even lose against them

vozas
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:01 PM
I think most of the people who claim she's consistent mean it within a match. She IS consistent, as in she makes very, very few mistakes and her game is really monotonous.

lang26
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:01 PM
Honestly, she never really was. Like I said this year she's already lost before the QFs at 8 events, last year she lost before that stage at 9. She only ever looked consistent in comparison to other top players, but even 3-4 years ago, her results would've made her one of the most inconsistent players in the top 10.

She was very consistent Last Year, THis year she stated off Playing Good but her game seem to be falling apart. But as far as her being Consistent yeah that wat her game basic on and wat brought her too number 1 and all those titles.

CloudAtlas
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:02 PM
What they meant was , that outside Slams , she almost always won when she was expected to. Last year she actually did rather well for most of the year, the only blips being a slightly slow start to the year and her injured clay season. This year she was also quite consistent until the clay season , which is when she started to fall apart.

I fail to see what was so incredibly shocking about people calling her consistent, she was :shrug:

Jimmie48
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:02 PM
Useless topic that raises a dumb point, she was obviously very consistent before the early summer.

Brad[le]y.
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:03 PM
Another Wozniacki thread :rolls:

Purple_Rain
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:05 PM
Well she is consistently losing :shrug:

Right, and a dozen variations on this. Once you've won a Slam, you're deemed inconsistent the moment you don't blow every opponent off the court. But until that day, people won't expect you to win, so you're consistent whether you lose in R1 or make the semifinals.

Caro's game is more consistent than, say, Kvitova, because she doesn't take risks. She'll have bad days like today, but her playing style prevents her from having good days.... Thus, the gap is much smaller, and she's technically more consistent. :shrug:

dsanders06
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:05 PM
Useless topic that raises a dumb point, she was obviously very consistent before the early summer.

Then why did she suffer early-round losses at 9 tournaments last year, and at 6 tournaments this year even before the US Open Series? Like I said, there are numerous players who've been much more consistent this year (Maria, Azarenka, Zvonareva, Kvitova).

backhandsmash
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:06 PM
Honestly, she never really was. Like I said this year she's already lost before the QFs at 8 events, last year she lost before that stage at 9. She only ever looked consistent in comparison to other top players, but even 3-4 years ago, her results would've made her one of the most inconsistent players in the top 10.

That's not enough or what?

2moretogo
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:06 PM
Because she is. You don't win like 5-7 tourneys a year with some finals appearances sprinkled in there for good measure without being consistent.

Ryan
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:08 PM
Then why did she suffer early-round losses at 9 tournaments last year, and at 6 tournaments this year even before the US Open Series? Like I said, there are numerous players who've been much more consistent this year (Maria, Azarenka, Zvonareva, Kvitova).


:facepalm: I mean, are you hearing what you're saying? Going into RG, how many "pre-QF" losses did Caroline have? That's when she was being uber consistent - no one would argue you now and say she is.

And Maria, Vika, and Vera may have fewer losses pre-QF; but how many titles do they have? Uh, 5 between them or something? Caroline might lose early more often, but she's consistently made more Semis, Finals and Won more tournaments than anyone in the past 3 years. THATS why she's #1.

And is anyone doubting you about Safina's record? The tour had more healthy top players then; now, Caroline's consistency is enough for #1, but its not like people are screaming that her records far outstrip Dinara's.

madmax
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:10 PM
she just took advantage of a very weak period of women's tennis last year and swept all events after US Open. Opportunism was always her biggest weapon and she is very good at dismissing erratic headcases. Tour seems to be in better shape this year, hence her struggles to beat a lot of steady players - really as simple as that

lang26
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:14 PM
Then why did she suffer early-round losses at 9 tournaments last year, and at 6 tournaments this year even before the US Open Series? Like I said, there are numerous players who've been much more consistent this year (Maria, Azarenka, Zvonareva, Kvitova).

True She is Suffer first round lost but look at wat she won as well 5 titles this year last year was 6. the most on tour so far.

Maria, Azarenka, Zvonareva, Kvitova R doing Great as well but wat they R doing beside Caro is going deep in the slams somthing Caro need to start too do

dsanders06
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:17 PM
:facepalm: I mean, are you hearing what you're saying? Going into RG, how many "pre-QF" losses did Caroline have? That's when she was being uber consistent - no one would argue you now and say she is.

She'd already had 3 (Sydney, Miami, Madrid), which would've been unheard of for a world #1 as recently as 3 years ago. I mean, when everyone was getting on Justine's case right before she retired around RG time, she'd only lost before the QFs once that year.

And is anyone doubting you about Safina's record? The tour had more healthy top players then; now, Caroline's consistency is enough for #1, but its not like people are screaming that her records far outstrip Dinara's.

Actually, in a thread a few weeks ago, a lot of her fans WERE screaming about how Wozniacki was better than Jankovic and Safina because of her supposedly greater consistency.

Ryan
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:22 PM
Caroline's year is CLEARLY marked into 2; pre and post French Open.

Going in, she had: 4 titles, 2 Finals, 2 SF, 3 R16's. That is remarkably consistent, no one can deny that. Since Brussels.... 1 title, R32 & R16 at Slams....and two early losses. Very different performances.

Ryan
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:23 PM
She'd already had 3 (Sydney, Miami, Madrid), which would've been unheard of for a world #1 as recently as 3 years ago. I mean, when everyone was getting on Justine's case right before she retired around RG time, she'd only lost before the QFs once that year.



Actually, in a thread a few weeks ago, a lot of her fans WERE screaming about how Wozniacki was better than Jankovic and Safina because of her supposedly greater consistency.



Whatever, you're only going to hear what you want. :shrug: Her 2011 was pretty great going into the French Open.

backhandsmash
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:24 PM
It's like 2010 turned on it's head.

bandabou
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:27 PM
People were giving Safina hell...now Caro, THAT's a bad no.1 for you. She now even starts losing her 1st matches at regular events?! :help:

dsanders06
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:28 PM
Going in, she had: 4 titles, 2 Finals, 2 SF, 3 R16's. That is remarkably consistent, no one can deny that.

Name one world #1 who ever had a less consistent record.

dsanders06
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:29 PM
It's like 2010 turned on it's head.

Again, no, it was the same story in 2010 - she lost before the QFs nine times. That's just never happened for a year-ending #1 before, to my knowledge.

Jimmie48
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:30 PM
Again, no, it was the same story in 2010 - she lost before the QFs nine times. That's just never happened for a year-ending #1 before, to my knowledge.

If you can't see the difference between her performance in 2010 and this year then you can't be helped, sorry.

You´re raising a moot point as pretty much everybody has told you already... but ignoring facts is trolling 101 obviously...

Ryan
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:33 PM
Name one world #1 who ever had a less consistent record.



SMH. Are you seriously this stubborn? I'm not saying Caroline is better than ANY #1. I'm just saying that compared to everyone else on tour she is very consistent. Her record (early losses and all) IS better than anyone else's (more titles/finals). GS's notwithstanding obviously.

Stop trying to make my argument into something it never was.

dsanders06
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:35 PM
SMH. Are you seriously this stubborn? I'm not saying Caroline is better than ANY #1. I'm just saying that compared to everyone else on tour she is very consistent. Her record (early losses and all) IS better than anyone else's (more titles/finals). GS's notwithstanding obviously.

Stop trying to make my argument into something it never was.

But it's not. I just gave you 4 players who've been more consistent than her this year. And Caroline isn't top in terms of peak performances, so the only thing that she's #1 for is just that she plays a lot - and that's why the system needs to be changed. Which was the point of my post.

CloudAtlas
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:36 PM
Again, no, it was the same story in 2010 - she lost before the QFs nine times. That's just never happened for a year-ending #1 before, to my knowledge.


When you win the most tournaments of any players on the tour , rational people tend to think a degree of consistency is involved.

CloudAtlas
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:37 PM
But it's not. I just gave you 4 players who've been more consistent than her this year. And Caroline isn't top in terms of peak performances, so the only thing that she's #1 for is just that she plays a lot - and that's why the system needs to be changed. Which was the point of my post.


Erm no. The 4 players who you stated were not more consistent than Wozniacki till the French Open , and if I recall correctly , hardly anyone has called Wozniacki consistent since then.

And yes she plays a lot , that is also why she loses more often. Previous #1's did not play as much hence they had less pre-QF losses. It's not that hard to understand.

Ryan
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:38 PM
But it's not. I just gave you 4 players who've been more consistent than her this year. And Caroline isn't top in terms of peak performances, so the only thing that she's #1 for is just that she plays a lot - and that's why the system needs to be changed. Which was the point of my post.



Our definitions are just different then. I'd rather Caroline's record than Vika's or Vera's or Maria's.

smarties
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:38 PM
Right now, I think she's consistently getting from Rory :tape:

backhandsmash
Aug 17th, 2011, 09:38 PM
Again, no, it was the same story in 2010 - she lost before the QFs nine times. That's just never happened for a year-ending #1 before, to my knowledge.

She wasn't #1 when losing before the QF those 9 times though. Then she went on a streak.

Matt01
Aug 17th, 2011, 11:20 PM
she just took advantage of a very weak period of women's tennis last year and swept all events after US Open. Opportunism was always her biggest weapon and she is very good at dismissing erratic headcases. Tour seems to be in better shape this year, hence her struggles to beat a lot of steady players - really as simple as that


Yeah, her losing to the likes of McHale clearly proves that the tour is in much better shape now...Caro's really losing to the GOAT-players now :awww:

Stonerpova
Aug 17th, 2011, 11:24 PM
What's consistent about Woz is her game. And the reason she got to #1 is that she rarely lost to a player ranked outside the top 10. That has clearly changed since the clay season.

dsanders06
Aug 17th, 2011, 11:28 PM
When you win the most tournaments of any players on the tour , rational people tend to think a degree of consistency is involved.

Title counts isn't consistency, that's MAYBE a higher peak (although no-one would argue Wozniacki has ever had the highest peak within a 12-month period at any point). Someone like Peng who's made a ton of finals and semis this year has clearly been more consistent than Dokic, who won one title and has done virtually nothing else.

Erm no. The 4 players who you stated were not more consistent than Wozniacki till the French Open , and if I recall correctly , hardly anyone has called Wozniacki consistent since then.

Actually, Sharapova had less pre-QF defeats than Woz before RG, and Zvonareva had an equal amount... Clijsters had had less too, although obviously she'd been out with injury. Wozniacki's NEVER been top of the WTA in consistency even in this era of inconsistency at the top.

Our definitions are just different then. I'd rather Caroline's record than Vika's or Vera's or Maria's.

This year? You really think Woz's record (2 Tier 1 titles, early exits at the other Tier 1s, a few MM titles, Slam SF) trumps Maria's (1 Tier 1 title, Slam final and Slam SF)? Maria actually has a considerably higher average score from her tournaments this year - hence she's been more consistent - the only reason Woz is ranked higher is that she's played more events (Maria has two or three 0's in her ranking score).

Excelscior
Aug 17th, 2011, 11:29 PM
I find it amusing that some people who normally pick Wozniaki to win tournaments (including this one), or at least get to the finals, are now calling her inconsistent.

I guess she's inconsistent now, cause she doesn't win, after someone picks her to win ( or to at least predicts to make the finals) of the past two hard court tournaments she entered, then floundered, 1st match?

You can't make this stuff up.

SMH/LOL

Matt01
Aug 17th, 2011, 11:32 PM
This year? You really think Woz's record (2 Tier 1 titles, early exits at the other Tier 1s, a few MM titles, Slam SF) trumps Maria's (1 Tier 1 title, Slam final and Slam SF)? Maria actually has a considerably higher average score from her tournaments this year - hence she's been more consistent - the only reason Woz is ranked higher is that she's played more events (Maria has two or three 0's in her ranking score).


It is easier to be consistant when you don't play that many tournaments. And besides, Woz' "MM titles" in Charleston and Warsaw were Premier titles and had nothing to do with the Mickey Mouse comics you are reading.

dsanders06
Aug 17th, 2011, 11:33 PM
I find it amusing that some people who normally pick Wozniaki to win tournaments (including this one), or at least get to the finals, are now calling her inconsistent.

I guess she's inconsistent now, cause she doesn't win, after someone picks her to win ( or to at least predicts to make the finals) of the past two hard court tournaments she entered, then floundered, 1st match?

You can't make this stuff up.

SMH/LOL

Is this directed at me? :confused: If so, what tournaments did I predict her to win lately? I might've said it as a joke in one of the threads, but I predicted Azarenka in the game in the Cincinnati forum.

dsanders06
Aug 17th, 2011, 11:34 PM
It is easier to be consistant when you don't play that many tournaments. And besides, Woz' "MM titles" in Charleston and Warsaw were Premier titles and had nothing to do with the Mickey Mouse comics you are reading.

So wait a minute, number of tournaments shouldn't be taken into account when you're talking how many titles they've won, but it SHOULD be taken into account when talking about how many early-round defeats she has? :lol:

Matt01
Aug 17th, 2011, 11:38 PM
So wait a minute, number of tournaments shouldn't be taken into account when you're talking how many titles they've won, but it SHOULD be taken into account when talking about how many early-round defeats she has? :lol:


No, did I say so?
Read my post again, try to understand it and then come back to me ;)

backhandsmash
Aug 17th, 2011, 11:39 PM
Maria actually has a considerably higher average score from her tournaments this year - hence she's been more consistent - the only reason Woz is ranked higher is that she's played more events (Maria has two or three 0's in her ranking score).


You know you are stretching it a bit here. Maria has had an exceptional run for sure (as I have championed several times in the YEC thread), but really, trying to diminish Woz's performance this year is just wrong.

KBdoubleu
Aug 17th, 2011, 11:41 PM
People say Wozniacki is consistent because her game is based around consistency. Following Wimbledon last year to Indian Wells this year she went 52-7. Since then her level has dropped significantly and we are seeing erratic results.

madmax
Aug 17th, 2011, 11:42 PM
Yeah, her losing to the likes of McHale clearly proves that the tour is in much better shape now...Caro's really losing to the GOAT-players now :awww:

yeah, because only GOAT players were beating her last year, right?:lol:
Give it up Matty and admit that she was very lucky to run into so many erratic out of form headcases last year. She's losing to any consistent player nowadays, no matter their playing style:wavey:

CloudAtlas
Aug 17th, 2011, 11:44 PM
Title counts isn't consistency, that's MAYBE a higher peak (although no-one would argue Wozniacki has ever had the highest peak within a 12-month period at any point). Someone like Peng who's made a ton of finals and semis this year has clearly been more consistent than Dokic, who won one title and has done virtually nothing else.



Actually, Sharapova had less pre-QF defeats than Woz before RG, and Zvonareva had an equal amount... Clijsters had had less too, although obviously she'd been out with injury. Wozniacki's NEVER been top of the WTA in consistency even in this era of inconsistency at the top.


I agree with the other poster , you're just gonna see it as how you want to , so I'm not gonna bother get into this. You also seem to be bringing in Sharapova for no apparent reason. And stop acting like those players you mention were that much more consistent than Woz. Sharapova had ONE less pre-QF defeat even when taking into account that she played what , 5 less tournaments , and Clijsters , well she played what ,3 tournaments after Aus Open? It's just so irrelevant I can't even believe you're even bringing it up as a line of argument.

It's also to do with perception. Between July 2010 and April 2011 Wozniacki hardly ever lost to players she shouldn't have lost to whereas Zvonareva, Azarenka and Sharapova all had odd losses. Yes Wozniacki has lost to players she shouldn't lose to since that time period , but that is why she has now lost that consistency tag , but you seem to want to outright deny she ever was consistent in the first place , which just seems silly.

goldenlox
Aug 17th, 2011, 11:45 PM
Last year she won Rogers Cup & NH, USO SF, won Tokyo, Beijing, YEC final.

Bad tournament to start this year, then AO SF, win in Dubai, final in Doha, then IW win.

That's 1 bad tournament out of 11
These last 2 losses to Vinci & McHale, not sure what to make of it. She played poorly, especially at the later part of all 4 sets
We'll see in New Haven & New York.

dsanders06
Aug 18th, 2011, 12:05 AM
I agree with the other poster , you're just gonna see it as how you want to , so I'm not gonna bother get into this. You also seem to be bringing in Sharapova for no apparent reason. And stop acting like those players you mention were that much more consistent than Woz. Sharapova had ONE less pre-QF defeat even when taking into account that she played what , 5 less tournaments , and Clijsters , well she played what ,3 tournaments after Aus Open? It's just so irrelevant I can't even believe you're even bringing it up as a line of argument.

I keep bringing Maria into it because she is probably top for the year in terms of consistency, and CLEARLY ahead of Wozniacki (though Maria isn't the BEST of the year because Petra and Na have had higher peaks).

Wozniacki wasn't the most consistent player in 2010 either: she lost before the QFs nine times, whereas Kim only lost before that stage twice and had a considerably higher match-winning %. Again, the only reason Wozniacki topped the rankings last year was because she played more tournaments than Kim, because she wasn't top in terms of either peak performance or consistency.

Jens K A
Aug 18th, 2011, 01:29 AM
Literally the only thing keeping her at #1 is the fact she plays so many little Premier events like Brussels and Charleston, which offer a load of points

This false claim is often repeated at TF (although you are the first I have seen to say "Literally" and use bold about it). Wozniacki has a huge rankings lead of 2870 points. It would take more than some 470-point Premiers to lose it. Everybody without long-term injuries play at least 14 events per year. If she had only played the 14 largest events (Premier 5 and up) in the last year then she would still be #1 with 900+900+900+1000+890+900+900+1000+140+140+395+160+ 280+1 = 8506 points, giving a big lead of 1461 points over players allowed to count 16 selected events. On Monday it would have been 8506-900+1 = 7607 pints, still enough to ensure #1 no matter who wins this week.

Blu€
Aug 18th, 2011, 01:37 AM
This false claim is often repeated at TF (although you are the first I have seen to say "Literally" and use bold about it). Wozniacki has a huge rankings lead of 2870 points. It would take more than some 470-point Premiers to lose it. Everybody without long-term injuries play at least 14 events per year. If she had only played the 14 largest events (Premier 5 and up) in the last year then she would still be #1 with 900+900+900+1000+890+900+900+1000+140+140+395+160+ 280+1 = 8506 points, giving a big lead of 1461 points over players allowed to count 16 selected events. On Monday it would have been 8506-900+1 = 7607 pints, still enough to ensure #1 no matter who wins this week.

Case closed. Next thread ;)

VishaalMaria
Aug 18th, 2011, 01:41 AM
what a FAIl attempt to make Maria look good.

After that loss to Voskoboeva....

You tried.

Siderophyre
Aug 18th, 2011, 01:45 AM
Because she IS?

delicatecutter
Aug 18th, 2011, 02:06 AM
Everyone knows she only got to #1 because of tournament-whoring and the fact that the good players were out injuried (Serena and Venus), headcases (too many to mention), or part-time (Kim). She took opportunism to a whole new level. When you're battling Zvonaryova time and time again in crucial matches (and not even winning most of them), that tells you what level of player you are.

I'm seriously angry I have missed her losses to Hantuchova, Vinci, and now McHale. I don't even get to enjoy her fall on the TV. :sad:

dsanders06
Aug 18th, 2011, 02:11 AM
what a FAIl attempt to make Maria look good.

After that loss to Voskoboeva....

You tried.

What a comedown it must be for Venus that, even after Maria was humiliated by Voskoboeva, the betting markets STILL like her chances of winning the US Open three times as much as Venus's :sad: Shows just what depths Venus has plunged to.

dsanders06
Aug 18th, 2011, 02:15 AM
This false claim is often repeated at TF (although you are the first I have seen to say "Literally" and use bold about it). Wozniacki has a huge rankings lead of 2870 points. It would take more than some 470-point Premiers to lose it. Everybody without long-term injuries play at least 14 events per year. If she had only played the 14 largest events (Premier 5 and up) in the last year then she would still be #1 with 900+900+900+1000+890+900+900+1000+140+140+395+160+ 280+1 = 8506 points, giving a big lead of 1461 points over players allowed to count 16 selected events. On Monday it would have been 8506-900+1 = 7607 pints, still enough to ensure #1 no matter who wins this week.

Except Wozniacki is behind both Azarenka and Maria in average ranking points per tournament this year, and I don't think she was ever first. So it IS purely about the number of tournaments she plays, because she relies on the players who play at a more consistently high level to have zeros in their ranking score.

Everyone knows she only got to #1 because of tournament-whoring and the fact that the good players were out injuried (Serena and Venus), headcases (too many to mention), or part-time (Kim).

Unfortunately true. And she pissed away her chance to win a Slam by chasing appearance fees at tournaments like New Haven and Brussels.

Craig.
Aug 18th, 2011, 02:16 AM
what a FAIl attempt to make Maria look good.

After that loss to Voskoboeva....

You tried.

What's happened to you? :unsure:

dsanders06
Aug 18th, 2011, 02:23 AM
What's happened to you? :unsure:

He's on a mission to prove that Venus is more of a title threat at the US Open than Maria :lol: I'll try to find the thread that started it all...

http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?t=441370

MB.
Aug 18th, 2011, 02:46 AM
She used to be very consistent--rarely lost to players outside the top 10.

Recently, that's changed...

AnomyBC
Aug 18th, 2011, 02:59 AM
It's silly argue about things like this when they can easily be proved one way or the other with statistics. Caro currently has a 0.803 win/loss ratio for the year. That makes her the 3rd most consistent player of 2011, after Serena (who hasn't played many matches) and Kvitova. So yes, she's extremely consistent :shrug:

PS - She also has the most wins for the year, just like she did in 2010 and 2009.

delicatecutter
Aug 18th, 2011, 03:11 AM
Well it says something if she has a worse winning percentage than Kvitova who lost in a Challenger not once but twice. Just sayin'.

Wozniacki is HORRIBLE. And the sooner she fades into irrelevance, the happier this forum will be. I just can't with anyone who sees anything of value in her.

SoBlackAndBlue
Aug 18th, 2011, 03:32 AM
He's on a mission to prove that Venus is more of a title threat at the US Open than Maria :lol: I'll try to find the thread that started it all...

http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?t=441370

Speaking of which:

Is Clijsters still "heavy favorite" to win the USO?

dsanders06
Aug 18th, 2011, 03:39 AM
Speaking of which:

Is Clijsters still "heavy favorite" to win the USO?

If you go back and read the thread where I said that, you'll notice I applied the rider "unless she gets injured again". :)

SoBlackAndBlue
Aug 18th, 2011, 03:46 AM
If you go back and read the thread where I said that, you'll notice I applied the rider "unless she gets injured again". :)

So Serena's the favorite now?

VishaalMaria
Aug 18th, 2011, 11:05 AM
What's happened to you? :unsure:

Nothing.

He/she's been harping on about how Maria's passed the QF stage eight times or whatever, I just knew he was going to create a thread about it. Indirectly too, I'm not surprised.

longtin23
Aug 18th, 2011, 12:17 PM
In this match, she is really inconsistent... 30+UEs...

Sammo
Aug 18th, 2011, 12:17 PM
Well she used to be

Vika & Fish
Aug 18th, 2011, 12:45 PM
because they are wrong and misunderstood and anyway, if Vika dated Mardy Fish it would be far better for the WTA

debby
Aug 18th, 2011, 12:49 PM
because they are wrong and misunderstood and anyway, if Vika dated Mardy Fish it would be far better for the WTA

what ??!!? :spit: :sobbing: Fish is married, dude.

Vika & Fish
Aug 18th, 2011, 12:58 PM
what ??!!? :spit: :sobbing: Fish is married, dude.

so was Judy Nelson

Sombrerero loco
Aug 18th, 2011, 01:21 PM
she used to be

Vika & Fish
Aug 18th, 2011, 01:22 PM
she used to be

i know that, until Navvy stole her from her husband

dsanders06
Aug 18th, 2011, 02:43 PM
So Serena's the favorite now?

All I know is that Kim will probably withdraw, and then will play in 2012, where she'll be going for 4 in a row and will be the heavy favourite. :dance:

bandabou
Aug 18th, 2011, 02:55 PM
All I know is that Kim will probably withdraw, and then will play in 2012, where she'll be going for 4 in a row and will be the heavy favourite. :dance:

was NOT the question! :banghead:

:lol: Come onnnn...it pains you THAT much to say that Serena MIGHT be a favorite at the U.S. open?! :facepalm:

Navratil
Aug 19th, 2011, 11:20 AM
There must be sth good about her - cause she is #1 :D

She doesn't have power, no variaty, no mental strength, no touch, no volley, no winner, no serve, no nothing.

She must be consistent at least ;)