PDA

View Full Version : Who has had the better career? Hantuchova, Rubin, Maleeva, Schnyder?


crazillo
Nov 19th, 2012, 01:44 PM
I have been wanting to create a thread on the "second guard" of the WTA tour for quite a while. I might do so in the future, but now I'd simply like to ask: Out of these players, who do you consider to be the most successful? Why?

I initially wanted to include Pennetta as well but as she is the only one to have won a doubles slam I decided to leave her out of the competition. Sugiyama has been very successful in doubles, too. Same for Tauziat who has played in a GS final.

I actually am quite fascinated by those player that are not exactly considered GS singles titles winners yet have managed to stay at the top of the tour for a very long time. We should do a list of that "second guard" sometime.

Here is a list of their career accomplishments:

Daniela Hantuchova - still active -
WTA singles titles: 5, 2 Tier I-titles (2012 - Pattaya City; 2011 - Pattaya City; 2007 - Indian Wells, Linz; 2002 - Indian Wells)
WTA doubles titles: 9
Career high ranking: #5 (5 year-end top 20 finishes)
Career record: 483-315 (1.53 wins/event)
GS singles results: 1*SF, 3*QF

Chanda Rubin
WTA singles titles: 7 (2003 - Madrid, Eastbourne; 2002 - Eastbourne, Los Angeles; 2000 - Quebec City; 1999 - Hobart; 1997 - Linz)
WTA doubles titles: 10
Career high ranking: #6 (5 year-end top 20 finishes)
Career record: 399-254 (1.57 wins/event)
GS singles results: 1*SF, 3*QF

Magdalena Maleeva
WTA singles titles: 10, 2 Tier I-titles (2003 - Birmingham; 2002 - Moscow; 2001 - Budapest; 1999 - Pattaya City; 1995 - Chicago, Moscow, Oakland; 1994 - Moscow, Zurich; 1992 - San Marino.
WTA doubles titles: 5 (1 Tier I)
Career high ranking: #4 (7 year-end top 20 finishes)
Career record: 439-290 (1.51 wins/event)
GS singles results: 1*QF, 15*4R

Patty Schnyder
WTA singles titles: 11, 1 Tier I-title (2008 - Bali; 2005 - Gold Coast, Cincinnati; 2002 - Zürich; 2001 - Pattaya City; 1999 - Gold Coast; 1998 - Hobart, Hannover, Madrid, Maria Lankowitz, Palermo)
WTA doubles titles: 5
Career high ranking: #7 (7 year-end top 20 finishes)
Career record: 555-369 (1.5 wins/event)
GS singles results: 1*SF, 6*QF

crazillo
Nov 19th, 2012, 01:49 PM
My liste would be:

1. Schnyder
2. Maleeva (although she has the surface slam, Schnyder's GS results are superior.)
3. Rubin
4. Hantuchova (I think she and Rubin are very close.)

In The Zone
Nov 19th, 2012, 01:54 PM
I think I'd put Rubin ahead of Schnyder. Rubin contended with and defeated the best.

1. Rubin.
2. Schnyder.
3. Maleeva
4. Hantuchova

Maleeva also contended with the best but other than her GOAT Moscow run, she was always stuck behind the best.

babsi
Nov 19th, 2012, 01:59 PM
I think I'd put Rubin ahead of Schnyder. Rubin contended with and defeated the best.

1. Rubin.
2. Schnyder.
3. Maleeva
4. Hantuchova

Maleeva also contended with the best but other than her GOAT Moscow run, she was always stuck behind the best.

Charleston Tier I Clay Apr 21 2002
1 Schnyder - Virginia Ruano Pascual 6-2 6-3
2 Schnyder - Amélie Mauresmo(6) 6-3 3-6 6-2
3 Schnyder - Mary Pierce-WC 7-64 6-2
QF Schnyder - Serena Williams(3) 2-6 6-4 7-5
SF Schnyder - Jennifer Capriati(1) 6-4 6-3
F Iva Majoli - Schnyder 7-6 6-4

Just one example.

crazillo
Nov 19th, 2012, 02:03 PM
I think I'd put Rubin ahead of Schnyder. Rubin contended with and defeated the best.

1. Rubin.
2. Schnyder.
3. Maleeva
4. Hantuchova

Maleeva also contended with the best but other than her GOAT Moscow run, she was always stuck behind the best.

I think they all did, which is why I selected those players. And none of them reached a Slam final. I thought that was the most fair criteria for "second guard".

AndreConrad
Nov 19th, 2012, 02:40 PM
They are all very close. Selecting different criteria for tie break will lead to different winner, so let me just go by my gut and say Patty leads the pack (five minutes from now maybe I will pick someone else ;))

Shvedbarilescu
Nov 19th, 2012, 03:11 PM
It is very close. Trying to be objective, not easy because I am a fan of Dani's, I think I would go with 1) Patty, the amount of Slam quarterfinals is well ahead of the others, that helps, 2) Dani 3) Chandra (Dani and Chandra stats here are frighteningly similar but the fact that Dani has two Tier I's gives her the edge.) 4) Magdalena (The fact that her slam record in singles is very substantially weaker than the other three on from this group hurts her.)

Having said this, it is very close between the four, and access to another stat, particularly the four players record during their careers against top 10ers, could alter the order I would put them in.

homogenius
Nov 19th, 2012, 03:22 PM
It is very close. Trying to be objective, not easy because I am a fan of Dani's, I think I would go with 1) Patty, the amount of Slam quarterfinals is well ahead of the others, that helps, 2) Dani 3) Chandra (Dani and Chandra stats here are frighteningly similar but the fact that Dani has two Tier I's gives her the edge.) 4) Magdalena (The fact that her slam record in singles is very substantially weaker than the other three on from this group hurts her.)

Having said this, it is very close between the four, and access to another stat, particularly the four players record during their careers against top 10ers, could alter the order I would put them in.

http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?t=393374&highlight=

Patty had way more wins but the other 3 are pretty close to each other (last update was in 2010 so Dani must have improve a bit since then though)

crazillo
Nov 19th, 2012, 03:35 PM
http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?t=393374&highlight=

Patty had way more wins but the other 3 are pretty close to each other (last update was in 2010 so Dani must have improve a bit since then though)

I honestly didn't expect to have Patty above the other three by such a big margin. That's quite suprising.
As I said, I originally had contemplated to include a couple more players. Pennetta for example might not even match the other players despite her AO doubles title when you look at those top 10 win stats.
Also, Rubin is the lowest of the four players in this thread.
Maybe we should do an even bigger thread and include the likes of Petrova, Date Krumm and Pennetta (although they are still active)...

forehand27
Nov 19th, 2012, 03:47 PM
Rubin should have won the 96 Australian Open where she choked badly when firmly in control in the semis vs Seles. In the form she was in she would probably have beaten Huber in the final, and btw she had already drubbed Sabatini, and outlasted Sanchez Vicario in an epic at that event. That alone makes her the winner for me. She was the only one of these 4 ever capable of winning a slam, and she should have won that particular slam. Maggie Maleeva, Patty Schnyder, and Daniela Hantuchova never were capable of winning a slam. Hantuchova should have made the 2008 Australian Open final but had no chance of actually winning if she had.

danieln1
Nov 19th, 2012, 04:39 PM
What an interesting thread, I really like prime Hantuchova, Rubin and Maleeva

My order would be?
1.Maleeva
2.Schnyder
3.Hantuchova
4.Rubin

Sammo
Nov 19th, 2012, 05:42 PM
Hantuchova obviously, she won Indian Wells, twice, none of them has won a title as important as Indian Wells. Daniela also has victories over Henin, Serena, Venus, Hingis, and Clijsters. She's also been number 5 in the world (the second best ranked of them all), and she has the Grand Slam in mixed doubles.

Drake1980
Nov 19th, 2012, 06:08 PM
Maleeva! :hearts:

KournikovaFan91
Nov 19th, 2012, 06:34 PM
Dani has 2 IWs (Premier Mandatory which now trumps just a regualar Tier 1) and the Grand Slam in Mixed, I know its only mixed but still getting all 4 is quite an achievement.

So I'd go with Dani.

Monzanator
Nov 19th, 2012, 07:55 PM
Chanda Rubin must be one of the most underrated players in the modern game. If she had Hantuchova's looks, she'd be winning this poll hands down. Rubin and it's not even close IMO.

Sammo
Nov 19th, 2012, 08:02 PM
Chanda Rubin must be one of the most underrated players in the modern game. If she had Hantuchova's looks, she'd be winning this poll hands down. Rubin and it's not even close IMO.

Rubin hasn't even won a Tier I, her career high singles is number 6, Hantuchova's is number 5, her best GS performance was a SF at the Australian Open, tied with Hantuchova, Hantuchova has made the QF at 3 of the 4 Slams, Rubin at 2 of the 4 Slams. You tell me how on Earth Rubin is greater than Hantuchova.

crazillo
Nov 19th, 2012, 08:23 PM
Rubin hasn't even won a Tier I, her career high singles is number 6, Hantuchova's is number 5, her best GS performance was a SF at the Australian Open, tied with Hantuchova, Hantuchova has made the QF at 3 of the 4 Slams, Rubin at 2 of the 4 Slams. You tell me how on Earth Rubin is greater than Hantuchova.

Slam results sometimes are overrated on here I think, and there's nothing between Rubin and Hantuchova there. You are right that Daniela has won bigger titles than Rubin. The argument raised about Rubin's SF loss to Seles might be correct, but she lost and that's the only thing we can count. So I'd say they are even. But then, Hantuchova has won the least titles of all players listed here (Schnyder has many more even if she only got one Tier I-titles; Maleeva also and she got two Tier I-titles), she has neither won a title on clay nor grass (while Maleeva has) and she spent less years in the top 20 than Maggie and Patty.
I still think Patty -> Maggie -> Rubin/Hantuchova.
(Mixed is irrelevant to me, you might disagree on this, but it really is to me.)

crazillo
Nov 19th, 2012, 08:51 PM
BTW, h2h between the players listed here. It's pretty close mostly. :eek:

Hantuchova-Rubin 2:0
2002 BERLIN (Clay) R32 D. Hantuchova 6-2 6-4
2005 CINCINNATI (Hard) R16 D. Hantuchova 6-2 7-5

Hantuchova-Maleeva 3:1
2002 SYDNEY (HARD) R32 D. Hantuchova 4-6 6-4 6-4
2002 PARIS (CARPET) R32 D. Hantuchova 7-5 6-4
2002 TOUR CHAMPIONSHIPS (HARD) R16 M.Maleeva 6-2 7-5
2005 DOHA (HARD) R32 D. Hantuchova 4-6 6-4 6-3 (Maggie led 3-0 final set)

Hantuchova-Schnyder 10:9
2001 FILDERSTADT (Hard) R32 P. Schnyder 6-3 1-6 7-5
2002FED CUP WEEK 1 (Clay) R1 P. Schnyder 6-3 6-3
2002 MONTREAL (Hard) R2 D.Hantuchova 6-3 7-6(3)
2002 NEW HAVEN (Hard) Q D.Hantuchova 6-4 6-3
2002 ZURICH (Carpet) Q P. Schnyder 6-7(5) 6-3 7-6(5)
2003 AUSTRALIAN OPEN (Hard) R16 D.Hantuchova 7-5 6-3
2003 LEIPZIG (Carpet)R16 P. Schnyder 6-4 4-6 7-6(3)
2004 BERLIN (Clay) R64 P. Schnyder 6-2 6-2
2004 OLYMPICS (Hard) R32 P. Schnyder 3-6 6-1 6-4
2004 US OPEN (Hard) R32 P. Schnyder 6-4 4-6 7-6(6)
2005 NEW HAVEN (Hard) R16 D.Hantuchova 5-7 6-2 6-4
2005 FILDERSTADT (Hard) R16 D.Hantuchova 6-4 6-3
2005 LINZ (Hard) Q P. Schnyder 6-2 6-1
2006SYDNEY (Hard) R16 D.Hantuchova 3-6 6-3 6-4
2006ZURICH (Hard) R32 D.Hantuchova 6-2 7-5
2007LUXEMBOURG (Hard) Q D.Hantuchova 6-3 5-7 7-5
2007 LINZ (Hard) F D.Hantuchova 6-4 6-2
2010 MIAMI (Hard) R64 D.Hantuchova 6-1 6-4
2010 LINZ (Hard) Q P. Schnyder 6-4 6-4

Rubin-Maleeva 1:7
1992 US OPEN (Hard) R16 M. Maleeva 7-5 5-7 6-1
1994 CHICAGO (Carpet) S C.Rubin 7-6(4) 2-0 Ret.
1994 US OPEN (Hard) R128 M. Maleeva 6-3 6-3
1995 HILTON HEAD (Clay) R16 M. Maleeva 6-3 6-2
1995 AMELIA ISLAND (Clay) R16 M. Maleeva 2-6 6-3 6-0
1995 ZURICH (Carpet) Q C.Rubin W/O
1998 SYDNEY (Hard) R16 M. Maleeva 6-3 1-6 6-4
2001 LINZ (Hard) Q M. Maleeva6-3 6-3
2003 FILDERSTADT (Hard) R16 M. Maleeva 6-3 6-4
2004 TOKYO PAN PACIFIC (Carpet) S M. Maleeva W/O

Rubin-Schnyder 1:3 -> this one is a little unfair because Rubin drew Schnyder three times in a row when she was about to retire
1997 LINZ (Hard) R32 C.Rubin 7-5 6-0
2006 LUXEMBOURG (Hard) R16 P. Schnyder 6-0 6-3
2006 STUTTGART (Hard) R32 P. Schnyder 6-2 6-2
2006 MOSCOW (Carpet) R32 P. Schnyder 6-3 6-0

Maleeva-Schnyder 3:4 -> Patty turned 0:3 to 4:3 in ONE year :eek:; just like with Rubin, she ended Maggie's career
2000 LUXEMBOURG (Carpet) Q M. Maleeva 6-3 5-7 7-6(7)
2001 NICE (Carpet) R32 M. Maleeva 6-3 5-7 6-3
2004 WARSAW (Clay) R16M. Maleeva 5-7 6-2 6-3
2004 ZURICH (Hard) R32 P.Schnyder 1-6 6-1 6-4
2005 SYDNEY (Hard) R16 P.Schnyder 6-4 6-2
2005 DUBAI (Hard) R32 P.Schnyder 7-6(1) 6-2
2005 ZURICH (Hard) R16 P.Schnyder 6-3 6-2

hurricanejeanne
Nov 19th, 2012, 08:55 PM
Out of this group, Hantuchova is sort of the oddball. Maleeva, Rubin, and Schnyder are all about the game generational era, give or take a year or two. Yet the one consistency is that all of them were shelved behind the bigger names with the bigger games.

Schnyder and Rubin are the two tremendous talents of the group. If the former hadn't had the coaching issues and the latter the health problems, those two are top, top players. That and the fact that if my favorite was slated to play one of them, I'd be nervous because both are capable of putting up great matches since they could be very dangerous.

Maleeva was a great player but she was beatable, same goes for Hantuchova.

markdelaney
Nov 19th, 2012, 09:02 PM
This is a tough one. Better career isn't the same as better player. I think they're fairly equal. Rubin and Hantuchova I feel badly underachieved and should have done more. Schnyder and Maleeva I think managed to do the best they could.

Maggie had 15 4R in GS not 12. She was also quite unlucky with the draws. Graf, Seles, Serena, Venus, Clijsters, Mauresmo, Sanchez-Vicario and Novotna (not in the mood to lose from 5-0 40-0) making up for a lot of the 4R losses and she has a 7-1 record against Chanda. The only loss was a retirement and with better draws she might have achieved more.

What criteria do you use for most successful ? If I had to pick one I'd got for Daniela but it's close. I can't use GS for the decision because if Tauziat was in this list I'd put her 5th and she has a (fortunate) GS Final.

crazillo
Nov 19th, 2012, 09:19 PM
Out of this group, Hantuchova is sort of the oddball. Maleeva, Rubin, and Schnyder are all about the game generational era, give or take a year or two. Yet the one consistency is that all of them were shelved behind the bigger names with the bigger games.

Schnyder and Rubin are the two tremendous talents of the group. If the former hadn't had the coaching issues and the latter the health problems, those two are top, top players. That and the fact that if my favorite was slated to play one of them, I'd be nervous because both are capable of putting up great matches since they could be very dangerous.

Maleeva was a great player but she was beatable, same goes for Hantuchova.

All of these players had their prime season where you could argue they were part of the very best themselves (yet never close to win a slam).
Maleeva: 1995 (3 titles)
Hantuchova: 2002 and again 2007 to a lesser extent
Schnyder: 1998 (5 titles, still to a lesser extent) and again 2005-2006
Rubin: 1995 and 2003

But I think when on they always proved to be dangerous even when ranked a bit lower, albeit on different surfaces.

Sammo
Nov 19th, 2012, 09:22 PM
All of these players had their prime season where you could argue they were part of the very best themselves (yet never close to win a slam).
Maleeva: 1995 (3 titles)
Hantuchova: 2002 and again 2007 to a lesser extent
Schnyder: 1998 (5 titles, still to a lesser extent) and again 2005-2006
Rubin: 1995 and 2003

But I think when on they always proved to be dangerous even when ranked a bit lower, albeit on different surfaces.

Had Hantuchova double bageled Ivanovic at the 2008 AO SF and played like that against Sharapova she would have straightsetted her in the final :o Which she would have never had, but still :lol:

forehand27
Nov 19th, 2012, 10:26 PM
It is too bad Rubin didnt win the 96 Australian Open like she SHOULD have, since this would be no discussion then. Like I said she is the only one of those 4 who had the ability to win a slam, that was her only real shot at a slam it turned out, but those others would never have one.

BTW anyone thinking Hantuchova could have beaten Sharapova at the 2008 Australian Open in any form is an idiot. Who cares even if she had double bageled Ivanovic, Sharapova beat an in form Henin 4 and 0 which is more impressive than giving Ivanovic on a non clay court a golden set. Hantuchova would never beat a peak Henin 4 and 0 in a slam even playing the match of her life, that is for sure. Sharapova vs Hantuchova even both playing well is no contest.

pattyclijsters
Nov 19th, 2012, 10:41 PM
All of them won Pattaya City but Rubin :-/

As someone pointed out, better carreer ist not better player. But to me it both is Schnyder. She beat so many good/goat players (Serena, Henin on clay, Clijsters on hard...) and to me was the most dangerous player out of these.

MisterMan
Nov 19th, 2012, 10:58 PM
I'm sure the other 3 would love to see 4 Grand Slam trophies in their home, like Hantuchova has.:cool:

forehand27
Nov 19th, 2012, 11:31 PM
Here is the slam Rubin SHOULD have won but choked at the end of her semifinal (the real final) with Seles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5e9Xhiub82U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dy_1-0o4l8&feature=relmfu

So sad. The other 3 on this poll didnt even have the sheer ability to win a slam, they just werent good enough, but Rubin did and this event proved it, she just didnt take it.

mikahhakim
Nov 20th, 2012, 03:23 AM
Hantuchova

MegaDethly
Nov 20th, 2012, 12:25 PM
Penny Schneiden.

LegionArgentina
Nov 20th, 2012, 01:42 PM
Im a big fan of Chanda,Patty and Maggie, really hard one.
But the who has better career is probably Patty :hearts:

Better player
clay: Patty // Chanda
carpet: Maggie
grass: Daniela
hardcourt: Patty

crazillo
Nov 20th, 2012, 01:45 PM
I'm a little surprised to see Hantuchova ahead of Rubin and Maleeva but probably that's due to the fact that she is still active?

tennismaster8820
Nov 20th, 2012, 02:38 PM
For me Schnyder is first.
She just had amazing talent and when she was on it was so good that she could beat ANY player then.
Second would be Rubin, she also had great abbility to challenge any player on her days.
I would put Hantuchova third and Maleeva forth, both great players but I don't think they ever could be as impressive as Schnyder and Rubin with their games.

By accomplishments order would be Patty, Daniela, Rubin, Maleeva.

I must admit I don't remember any matches where Maleeva played amazing tennis against some great player, I would like to see highlights of such match if it exists.

carretta
Nov 20th, 2012, 09:48 PM
It's a shame Rubin didn't have a longer career. She only has 653 matches while Schnyder has 924. This makes it difficult to compare the two players. Although Rubin may have shone brighter for a brief period of time, Schnyder had great longevity and was still recording slam QF's much later into her career. My pick is Schnyder based on this.

forehand27
Nov 20th, 2012, 10:15 PM
In early 1996 some thought Rubin was the future of tennis and a future #1. People were literally that high on her at that point.

petkoan
Nov 20th, 2012, 10:35 PM
For the sake of bias: Maggie

vixter
Nov 20th, 2012, 11:02 PM
Here is the slam Rubin SHOULD have won but choked at the end of her semifinal (the real final) with Seles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5e9Xhiub82U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dy_1-0o4l8&feature=relmfu

So sad. The other 3 on this poll didnt even have the sheer ability to win a slam, they just werent good enough, but Rubin did and this event proved it, she just didnt take it.

True she was up 5-2 but it was only one break after all. I guess Rubin getting a little nervous too was to be expected since Rubin had never even won a title at this stage and never been in a GS final.
But yeah I do agree that she had the biggest chance of the 4 discussed players to win a slam right here... Daniela made a marvellous start in her SF against Ivanovic but really, she was never that close to winning... As soon as Ana finally got on the board early 2nd set, the Daniela game collapsed like a misbuilt house of cards.

forehand27
Nov 20th, 2012, 11:10 PM
True she was up 5-2 but it was only one break after all. I guess Rubin getting a little nervous too was to be expected since Rubin had never even won a title at this stage and never been in a GS final.
But yeah I do agree that she had the biggest chance of the 4 discussed players to win a slam right here... Daniela made a marvellous start in her SF against Ivanovic but really, she was never that close to winning... As soon as Ana finally got on the board early 2nd set, the Daniela game collapsed like a misbuilt house of cards.

Well the big difference is Rubin probably 70% most likely would have beaten Huber in the final (although Huber still was probably cursing and breaking things in her hotel room when Seles won as vs Seles she always has 0% chance vs the 30% she would have had vs on fire Rubin). Hantuchova would have had about 2% chance of actually beating Sharapova to win the 2008 Australian Open final. Granted of course on fire Sharapova is a much tougher opponent than in form Huber, but that is aside the point.

Helen Lawson
Nov 20th, 2012, 11:27 PM
Chanda Rubin beat Serena in the summer of 2002 on a hard court outdoors and made a Miami final. I think that's enough right there,

crazillo
Nov 21st, 2012, 01:06 AM
Chanda Rubin beat Serena in the summer of 2002 on a hard court outdoors and made a Miami final. I think that's enough right there,

Doesn't indicate if she had a better career than the other players though.
BTW I think all four of them could cause upsets on given days (as various posters have already pointed out by mentioning some highlights during their careers).

Wiggly
Nov 21st, 2012, 04:03 AM
Hantuchova with two Indian Wells, a Fed Cup win in 2002 in a Career Slam in Mixed Doubles.