PDA

View Full Version : Peak Kournikova v. Peak Vaidisova?


JJ all the way
Nov 9th, 2012, 05:28 PM
In light of off season tradition......

If both these beauties played today at their peak, who would win?

babsi
Nov 9th, 2012, 05:32 PM
Roll on January!

donniedarkofan
Nov 9th, 2012, 06:48 PM
Kournikova had more talent in her little finger than Vaidisova in her whole body (and Radek's).

saint2
Nov 9th, 2012, 06:50 PM
Vaidisova.

dynamoRockstarr
Nov 9th, 2012, 06:59 PM
Nicki V!! :sobbing:

Halepsova
Nov 9th, 2012, 07:10 PM
Vaidisova was gifted and she proved it many times before retiring. Kournikova did nothing but seeking for attention. Period.

Miracle Worker
Nov 9th, 2012, 07:40 PM
Kournikova's boobs.

NashaMasha
Nov 9th, 2012, 07:43 PM
i remember the times when a number of tennis specialists and just fans considered that Vaidisova was future tennis star and multiple Slam winner..... Epic fail

hurricanejeanne
Nov 9th, 2012, 09:05 PM
The Devilsova.

Stonerpova
Nov 9th, 2012, 09:07 PM
God :sobbing:

Vaidisova. No update on the supposed comeback?

danieln1
Nov 9th, 2012, 09:54 PM
Kournikova had a beautiful all court game, she could volley, slice, play on the baseline, it was a joy to watch her, along with the beauty :lick: Too bad her serve let her down.

azinna
Nov 9th, 2012, 10:18 PM
If it were a final, Nicole would win.

....

NashaMasha
Nov 9th, 2012, 10:32 PM
If it were a final, Nicole would win.

....

I'm not sure she's ever reached Final on any significant tournament .. Kournikova at least was in big Finals in singles and won trophies in doubles

Halepsova
Nov 9th, 2012, 10:50 PM
I'm not sure she's ever reached Final on any significant tournament .. Kournikova at least was in big Finals in singles and won trophies in doubles

Kournikova had a longer career. Nicole retired at such a young age so she didn't have the luxury of being a Tier I finalist. Though Nicole reached the semis of GSs and won 6 titles while Kournikova could only hoped for.

And for doubles, Kournikova won them with the help of Hingis and other doubles GOATs.

JJ all the way
Nov 9th, 2012, 10:54 PM
^ nicole had 2 sf, anna had 1
but anna had victories over graf, hingis, and other great players

NashaMasha
Nov 9th, 2012, 10:57 PM
Kournikova had a longer career. Nicole retired at such a young age so she didn't have the luxury of being a Tier I finalist. Though Nicole reached the semis of GSs and won 6 titles while Kournikova could only hoped for.

And for doubles, Kournikova won them with the help of Hingis and other doubles GOATs.

and Hingis won with a help of Kournikova, Doubles - it's not like mixed where girls can win with a help of Paes or Mirnyi who are making 90% of game

Nicolás89
Nov 9th, 2012, 10:57 PM
Kournikova had a beautiful all court game, she could volley, slice, play on the baseline, it was a joy to watch her, along with the beauty :lick:

Contrary to popular belief so did Nicole.

Lord Choc Ice
Nov 9th, 2012, 10:59 PM
Peak Nicole has the serve advantage and would also challenge Anna's serve constantly :shrug:. But Anna had lovely groundies too :).

The Dawntreader
Nov 9th, 2012, 11:03 PM
Is this a joke? Vaidisova hands down.

Cajka
Nov 9th, 2012, 11:21 PM
Peak Nicole has the serve advantage and would also challenge Anna's serve constantly :shrug:. But Anna had lovely groundies too :).

tbh, Nicole's return wasn't great at all, but Anna's serve didn't need much of a challenge, she was a dfs queen. :bigcry:

Anyway, I'll go with Nicole, she had much more power, the variety was on Anna's side, but I don't think it would be enough in today's game.

Lord Choc Ice
Nov 9th, 2012, 11:27 PM
tbh, Nicole's return wasn't great at all, but Anna's serve didn't need much of a challenge, she was a dfs queen. :bigcry:

Anyway, I'll go with Nicole, she had much more power, the variety was on Anna's side, but I don't think it would be enough in today's game.
Nicole could deal harshly with a weak serve though. Maybe she wasn't good at returning medium-fast serves :p. Take this for example. Elena's serve was mincemeat :sad:.

UIDO-EOtMRI

CrossCourt~Rally
Nov 9th, 2012, 11:38 PM
Gotta love the off season :happy:

Cajka
Nov 10th, 2012, 12:02 AM
Nicole could deal harshly with a weak serve though. Maybe she wasn't good at returning medium-fast serves :p. Take this for example. Elena's serve was mincemeat :sad:.

UIDO-EOtMRI

I see your point. :lol:

Dav.
Nov 10th, 2012, 02:01 AM
Kournikova had a longer career. Nicole retired at such a young age so she didn't have the luxury of being a Tier I finalist. Though Nicole reached the semis of GSs and won 6 titles while Kournikova could only hoped for.

And for doubles, Kournikova won them with the help of Hingis and other doubles GOATs.

Yes...Anna had such a long career, retiring at age 21. :hysteric:

And she won large doubles titles with several different partners. ;)

miffedmax
Nov 10th, 2012, 03:16 AM
Lena is invincible.

Sombrerero loco
Nov 10th, 2012, 07:07 AM
kournikova. she was a huge underachiever

forehand27
Nov 17th, 2012, 03:48 PM
Vaidisova. In her 2007 Australian Open semifinal loss to Serena she was outhitting Serena, she had many more winners, just lost since she had way too many errors. This the same Serena who made silly putty out of Maria the next day. Anna would never be capable of that level of power tennis. Nicole's best tennis also took her 2 slam semis in less than one year, and the only reason she wasnt the 2006 French Open finalist is she choked badly when serving for a straight sets win over Kuznetsova in the semis. Kournikova never had a chance to make a slam final and never got to a second slam semi. Not to mention peak Anna was so weak she couldnt even win a freaking tournament.

Halepsova
Nov 17th, 2012, 03:55 PM
Vaidisova. In her 2007 Australian Open semifinal loss to Serena she was outhitting Serena, she had many more winners, just lost since she had way too many errors. This the same Serena who made silly putty out of Maria the next day. Anna would never be capable of that level of power tennis. Nicole's best tennis also took her 2 slam semis in less than one year, and the only reason she wasnt the 2006 French Open finalist is she choked badly when serving for a straight sets win over Kuznetsova in the semis. Kournikova never had a chance to make a slam final and never got to a second slam semi. Not to mention peak Anna was so weak she couldnt even win a freaking tournament.

This. :sobbing:

Trickle
Nov 17th, 2012, 04:44 PM
Vaidisova. In her 2007 Australian Open semifinal loss to Serena she was outhitting Serena, she had many more winners, just lost since she had way too many errors. This the same Serena who made silly putty out of Maria the next day. Anna would never be capable of that level of power tennis. Nicole's best tennis also took her 2 slam semis in less than one year, and the only reason she wasnt the 2006 French Open finalist is she choked badly when serving for a straight sets win over Kuznetsova in the semis. Kournikova never had a chance to make a slam final and never got to a second slam semi. Not to mention peak Anna was so weak she couldnt even win a freaking tournament.

I feel like Nicole doesn't get enough credit for having 2 GS SFs at 17. Everyone always says she wasn't impressive cause she never won a big title.

I always wonder who would have won the 2007 Australian Open if Nicole was able to beat Serena because 2004 Nicole beat 2004 Maria in an exho. It would have been the first all teenage final in... how long? Who knows. Would have been interesting to see how Nicole would have done or be remembered if she had a Slam under her belt.

KournikovaFan91
Nov 17th, 2012, 05:29 PM
Is this a joke? Vaidisova hands down.

:lol: Not the first time I've seen you dismissing Anna completely. :haha:

carling
Nov 17th, 2012, 07:00 PM
Anna.

NashaMasha
Nov 17th, 2012, 07:10 PM
Kournikova beats 6-0 6-0 in beauty department , it's not even close

Halepsova
Nov 17th, 2012, 09:58 PM
Kournikova beats 6-0 6-0 in beauty department , it's not even close

Duh, Nicole is way hotter. That's why Radek marries her. :rolleyes:

iWill
Nov 17th, 2012, 11:44 PM
It has got to be Vaidisova. Have we even seen another 17-18 year old make a GS SF or even QF since her? I still wish she was playing she would hopefully be at the top of the game now and with the likes of Sharapova, Azarenka, and Radwanska making slam Finals I think she definitely could have been a great champion.

With that said she beats Anna K for sure. This was a interesting comparison for sure though

NashaMasha
Nov 17th, 2012, 11:50 PM
Duh, Nicole is way hotter. That's why Radek marries her. :rolleyes:


way hotter? not even close to Ana

i've seen Vaidisova at the stands during Fed Cup Chech vs Spain .....

\http://img.blesk.cz/img/2/full/1462431_.jpg

:rolleyes:

Berdych's babe outshined her with ease, as will do all SF of our TF beauty contest

Tag
Nov 18th, 2012, 01:19 AM
vaidisova

kournikova was too busy getting her boobs out (or constantly about to)

plus, she had hingis as a doubles partner :shrug:

anyone can win doubles titles when partnering with the GOAT

jaredlikesbieber
Nov 18th, 2012, 05:04 AM
vaidisova would overpower her pretty much anywhere. kournikova had a nice feel to her game but wasn't able to win a tour title

donniedarkofan
Nov 18th, 2012, 12:30 PM
vaidisova

kournikova was too busy getting her boobs out (or constantly about to)

plus, she had hingis as a doubles partner :shrug:

anyone can win doubles titles when partnering with the GOAT

Kournikova also had Janet Lee as a partner, Lindsay Davenport, Daniela Hantuchova, Natasha Zvereva, Barbara Schett, Elena Dementieva and guess what - she was still getting great results. Duh.

Kournikova never showed her "boobs" (as you call them), at last not for money. Ger over it.

Kournikova would beat Vaidisova holding her racket in left hand.

donniedarkofan
Nov 18th, 2012, 12:39 PM
vaidisova would overpower her pretty much anywhere. kournikova had a nice feel to her game but wasn't able to win a tour title

Overpower? Kournikova? She was hitting the ball pretty strong herself, she definitely wasn't a big hitter, but you obviously didn't watch Kournikova during her best years. It wasn't that easy to overpower her - that's why she was comfortable playing Capriati (she basically owned her), that's why she had wins over Davenport, Seles, that's why she took Venus to three sets few times and Serena in their only meeting (although we can agree that both Serena and Venus are completely another league). Kournikova had troubles with all around players, with good footwork and passing shots, also with players that played with top spin. Vaidisova would be just like Capriati. Anna would take her out in two straight sets.

mauresmofan
Nov 18th, 2012, 02:26 PM
Kournikova every day of the week on every surface. Better athlete by a mile, had volley skills which Nicole could only dream of and although would be outgunned on power Kournikova had power of her own as well as lots of variety.

hablo
Nov 18th, 2012, 02:38 PM
Kournikova.

Too bad she was too proud at one time to play MM tournaments and get that one title win... :tape:

KournikovaFan91
Nov 18th, 2012, 02:44 PM
I think the pressure of sponsors and her mother prevented her from playing MMs, when she had her big chance in Shanghai it was too late, the monkey on her back, the fact she had such an on/off time with injuries, and the fact MM Queen Anna Smashnova was her opponent all resulted in the loss.

RenaSlam.
Nov 18th, 2012, 02:49 PM
Peak Nicole beats Peak Anna. Better serve and groundies. Anna's FH was a liability.

babsi
Nov 18th, 2012, 03:06 PM
Just talking about tennis:

The over-hyped vs. the under-hyped

Which is which?

forehand27
Nov 18th, 2012, 03:20 PM
Overpower? Kournikova? She was hitting the ball pretty strong herself, she definitely wasn't a big hitter, but you obviously didn't watch Kournikova during her best years. It wasn't that easy to overpower her - that's why she was comfortable playing Capriati (she basically owned her), that's why she had wins over Davenport, Seles, that's why she took Venus to three sets few times and Serena in their only meeting (although we can agree that both Serena and Venus are completely another league). Kournikova had troubles with all around players, with good footwork and passing shots, also with players that played with top spin. Vaidisova would be just like Capriati. Anna would take her out in two straight sets.

Your Capriati reference is laughable considering this is a peak thread. Kournikova never played or beat a beat Capriati. Their last ever match was 2000. Capriati of 2001-2003 probably would have owned Anna's ass, even had Anna mantained form, but we will never know for certain. The last sighting of peak Anna though was playing a great match and still losing 6-4, 6-2 to an out of sorts Davenport at the Australian Open, the same Davenport who would go on to lose to Capriati in similar easy straight sets the very next round. Capriati from her comeback start of 1996 to the end of 2000 was mired in her career slump, never held a top 10 ranking, and wasnt any good, or even as good as "peak" Vaidisova. Anyway while peak Capriati whom Anna never once played is obviously a better player than peak Vaidisova, Vaidisova no doubt whatsoever hit the ball harder than even peak Capriati, so even in that sense a poor reference to how Nicole would be a good matchup for Anna.

Your Williams reference is even more laughable. She never beat either once ever, yet they are an example of her handling power since she occasionaly won a set. What a joke. Atleast Nicole has actually beaten Venus in a slam, not peak Venus, but most of Anna's peak wasnt facing peak Williams either.

Seles owned Kournikova as well, only losing to her once. This post stabbing, very fat, and non champion level Seles.

The only power player Anna did respectably against in their primes was Davenport but when they played when it mattered Davenport won easily even when Anna played her very best tennis (eg- their 2 Australian Open matches where Anna played great and still got spanked). All the indicators I see is Anna did not like to play huge power players, which Nicole despite not being at the level of these players overall definitely is in the power stakes. Pierce owned her as well.


Not that I think Nicole is some amazing player but this insane overrating of a clown who couldnt even win a tournament is so funny. What the heck was peak Kournikova, the one who lost to Smashanova in a couple of the tournament finals she made (reminder again Anna = ZERO tournament titles), and made only TWO slam quarterfinals. Obviously alot of men on this forum drooling over Anna's "beauty".

KournikovaFan91
Nov 18th, 2012, 03:40 PM
Not that I think Nicole is some amazing player but this insane overrating of a clown who couldnt even win a tournament is so funny. What the heck was peak Kournikova, the one who lost to Smashanova in a couple of the tournament finals she made (reminder again Anna = ZERO tournament titles), and made only TWO slam quarterfinals. Obviously alot of men on this forum drooling over Anna's "beauty".

:haha:

Using the title argument surely Smashnova with her 19 is one of the greatest players to never win a slam :rolleyes:

Apart from Smashnova Kournikova lost her finals to Venus and Hingis whereas Nicole beat Granville, Razzano, Peng and Tati (by retirement) plus when Kournikova was losing in Tier I and II she was losing in QF and SF to people like Hingis, Venus, Seles, Graf, Davenport, and Pierce all slam winners.

Maybe this thread should be WWW: Peak Stacey Tan vs Peak Bruna Colosio. No way would Anna lose 6-2, 6-1 to Stacey Tan who never even made Top 500. When you take their most embarrassing losses at least Colosio was a Top 300 player.

I personally like Nicole but to say she is immensely better than Kournikova is ridiculous, had Anna played in the same era she would have had a similar if not better career than Nicole, Anna's years on tour were possibly the toughest, whereas Nicole was peaking 2006-2008 a pretty weak time for the WTA.

forehand27
Nov 18th, 2012, 03:51 PM
:haha:

Using the title argument surely Smashnova with her 19 is one of the greatest players to never win a slam :rolleyes:

I wouldnt say that but it seems peak Smashanova > peak Kournikova probably. Anna at her peak (and she is only making tournament finals to play people like Anna S. at her peak considering she isnt good enough to win a tournament ever) cant do what Smashanova managed many times, win tournaments, even sometimes entering some of the same Mickey Mouse draws and events she did and won. Anna leads their H2H 3-2 when both were roughly at their career peak, but Anna S. won their two most important finals, a tournament final, and the semis of Auckland which led to a title for Ana over Panova in the final (which Anna probably also would have won but for the 2nd time was denied the title she so desperately craved by Anna S.).


I personally like Nicole but to say she is immensely better than Kournikova is ridiculous, had Anna played in the same era she would have had a similar if not better career than Nicole, Anna's years on tour were possibly the toughest, whereas Nicole was peaking 2006-2008 a pretty weak time for the WTA.

Yes a time ruled by peak Justine Henin, who light years from her prime many years earlier was beating peak Kournikova in straight sets everytime they met (even once as the World #58 while Anna was a top 16 seed), would be easy fodder for the great 0 titles Kournikova. BTW Anna was owned by both Henin and Clijsters in 2000 when they werent even top 30 players, are 2000 versions of Clijsters and Henin (when they were pre of their pre prime periods if you will, lol) better than peak Nicole. Anna lost one of her best ever chances at a tournament title as well in Leipzig 2000 where she was crushed in the semis by a 16 year old 31st ranked Clijsters, who would go on to win the title in 3 sets over Likhovtseva in the final. So lets not pretend Anna didnt have some fairly easy opportunities at tournament titles, but still wasnt good enough to get it done.

You say it is laughable to imply Nicole is immensely better than Anna, yet you of course say NOTHING to the people I was responding to who imply Kournikova was immensely better than Nicole. Apparently in your eyes that is completely fine. :lol:

Halepsova
Nov 18th, 2012, 04:34 PM
What a delusional you guys are. :o
She retired since 2003 with zero title and 1 slam semifinal. Get over it.

markdelaney
Nov 18th, 2012, 05:00 PM
Anna's years on tour were possibly the toughest, whereas Nicole was peaking 2006-2008 a pretty weak time for the WTA.

That is far from true. e.g. 1997-2000 with Graf out the game and ending her career, Seles nothing like her former self and the Williams sisters only breaking through and still beatable. Novotna was the world number 2 and Coetzer the world number 4 in 1997 ! That's how tough it was ! Nathalie Tauziat made a Wimbledon final the next year. 2 years later Barbara Schett and Julie Halard-Decugis were top ten players. Not the toughest by a long, long way !

Nicolás89
Nov 18th, 2012, 05:22 PM
:haha:

Using the title argument surely Smashnova with her 19 is one of the greatest players to never win a slam :rolleyes:

Apart from Smashnova Kournikova lost her finals to Venus and Hingis whereas Nicole beat Granville, Razzano, Peng and Tati (by retirement) plus when Kournikova was losing in Tier I and II she was losing in QF and SF to people like Hingis, Venus, Seles, Graf, Davenport, and Pierce all slam winners.

Maybe this thread should be WWW: Peak Stacey Tan vs Peak Bruna Colosio. No way would Anna lose 6-2, 6-1 to Stacey Tan who never even made Top 500. When you take their most embarrassing losses at least Colosio was a Top 300 player.

I personally like Nicole but to say she is immensely better than Kournikova is ridiculous, had Anna played in the same era she would have had a similar if not better career than Nicole, Anna's years on tour were possibly the toughest, whereas Nicole was peaking 2006-2008 a pretty weak time for the WTA.

LOL

Volcana
Nov 18th, 2012, 06:38 PM
Kournikova, unless it was a final.

Halepsova
Nov 18th, 2012, 08:36 PM
:haha:

Using the title argument surely Smashnova with her 19 is one of the greatest players to never win a slam :rolleyes:

Apart from Smashnova Kournikova lost her finals to Venus and Hingis whereas Nicole beat Granville, Razzano, Peng and Tati (by retirement) plus when Kournikova was losing in Tier I and II she was losing in QF and SF to people like Hingis, Venus, Seles, Graf, Davenport, and Pierce all slam winners.

Maybe this thread should be WWW: Peak Stacey Tan vs Peak Bruna Colosio. No way would Anna lose 6-2, 6-1 to Stacey Tan who never even made Top 500. When you take their most embarrassing losses at least Colosio was a Top 300 player.

I personally like Nicole but to say she is immensely better than Kournikova is ridiculous, had Anna played in the same era she would have had a similar if not better career than Nicole, Anna's years on tour were possibly the toughest, whereas Nicole was peaking 2006-2008 a pretty weak time for the WTA.

Your opinion is dismissed because of your username. Total bias.
Come back when you are someone else's fan.