PDA

View Full Version : Who was more of a fluke/Who was better?: Ana Ivanovic or Anastasia Myskina?


cowsonice
Nov 25th, 2012, 09:16 PM
Battle of the one-time GS/French Open champs :oh:

Don't pit them against each other though. They existed in different eras.

EDIT: I misspelled Myskina's name in the poll. How do I change it? :sobbing: (The fucking vampire is gonna fucking get me.)

EDIT2: Seems like I worded the question wrong but I still like the comparison of the two players. Who was the better player? :shrug:

AcesHigh
Nov 25th, 2012, 09:19 PM
1. They weren't different eras
2. Ivanovic was not a fluke. She made 3 slam finals... how is that a fluke

Sammo
Nov 25th, 2012, 09:23 PM
None

$uricate
Nov 25th, 2012, 09:30 PM
Nasty beat better people to win her slam.

She won it, despite what TF says.


Ana had less competition but she was legitimate for a longer period. I say neither, but with Justines retirement Ana's slam was less deserved.

Sammo
Nov 25th, 2012, 09:31 PM
Errani reaching RG final :oh:

saint2
Nov 25th, 2012, 09:33 PM
Neither was a fluke. Last 3 years we had 3 flukes at least, but Ana and Nastya aren't close to being a fluke :o:o

Curtos07
Nov 25th, 2012, 09:33 PM
Three slam finals and a slam semi in the span of 13 months, which also included titles in Indian Wells, Los Angeles, Lux and the world #1 ranking.....that is not a fluke.

The Daviator
Nov 25th, 2012, 09:37 PM
A fluke is when something completely unexpected and unforeseen happens which turns out to be a one-off event.

Ivanovic was the #2 seed and the previous year's finalist (expectation was there) and had reached 1 other GS final (not a one-off).

Thanks.

NashaMasha
Nov 25th, 2012, 09:41 PM
in comparison with the likes of Sabatini, Conchita-Martinez and Novotna , they are both flukes.

But in reality , they pretty much deserved one Major title , there are much weaker 1 Slam winners in WTA history

Sammo
Nov 25th, 2012, 09:43 PM
in comparison with the likes of Sabatini, Conchita-Martinez and Novotna , they are both flukes.

But in reality , they pretty much deserved one Major title , there are much weaker 1 Slam winners in WTA history

Ivanovic is a much better player than Conchita Martinez, just way less consistent.

NashaMasha
Nov 25th, 2012, 09:48 PM
Ivanovic is a much better player than Conchita Martinez, just way less consistent.

Ivanovic was much better player just during her 2 peak years , but career wise she is not even close ..

Gentleman
Nov 25th, 2012, 09:50 PM
None of them. Especially not Ivanovic. She won RG 2008, has 2 GS finals and 11 WTA titles. FED cup final, and 25 years. She has so much more to say in tennis in a years to come.

Sammo
Nov 25th, 2012, 10:05 PM
Ivanovic was much better player just during her 2 peak years , but career wise she is not even close ..

I mean as a player, not the career.

Kasey
Nov 25th, 2012, 10:21 PM
I shall cut anyone who dares to call Ivanovic a fluke. the end.

eDonkey
Nov 25th, 2012, 10:28 PM
Ivanovic is a much better player than Conchita Martinez, just way less consistent.

Which actually proves nothing. :shrug:

frenchie
Nov 25th, 2012, 10:29 PM
Watch their RG 2006 3rd match where Nastya taught Ana how to play on clay!

The highlights are in the highlights thread

darrinbaker00
Nov 25th, 2012, 10:35 PM
Ivanovic is a much better player than Conchita Martinez, just way less consistent.

Could you explain that, please?

hablo
Nov 25th, 2012, 10:54 PM
Neither was a fluke. :o

miffedmax
Nov 26th, 2012, 12:01 AM
There's only one player I miss more than the Countess of Darkness. :sobbing:

homogenius
Nov 26th, 2012, 03:05 AM
neither was a fluke

Yoncé
Nov 26th, 2012, 03:08 AM
Ana.

Helen Lawson
Nov 26th, 2012, 03:11 AM
This thread needs to spawn a score of fluke threads, like pitting Graf against Evert on which was the bigger fluke. I'm too lazy, but this could produce great threads.

KeysisGOAT
Nov 26th, 2012, 03:17 AM
This thread needs to spawn a score of fluke threads, like pitting Graf against Evert on which was the bigger fluke. I'm too lazy, but this could produce great threads.

Graf. It was a total stroke of luck that a psychopath stabbed Seles.

Volcana
Nov 26th, 2012, 03:50 AM
Myskina, because she got a walkover in the final.

SilverSlam
Nov 26th, 2012, 03:52 AM
Three slam finals and a slam semi in the span of 13 months, which also included titles in Indian Wells, Los Angeles, Lux and the world #1 ranking.....that is not a fluke.

A fluke is when something completely unexpected and unforeseen happens which turns out to be a one-off event.

Ivanovic was the #2 seed and the previous year's finalist (expectation was there) and had reached 1 other GS final (not a one-off).

Thanks.

None of them. Especially not Ivanovic. She won RG 2008, has 2 GS finals and 11 WTA titles. FED cup final, and 25 years. She has so much more to say in tennis in a years to come.

Now OP you've been put in your place. Don't call VIP a fluke EVER again.

cowsonice
Nov 26th, 2012, 04:11 AM
:oh:

Why hasn't Ana been able to show her GS-winning ways?
I think it's her weight, but that's just me.

faboozadoo15
Nov 26th, 2012, 08:11 AM
Ivanovic is a much better player than Conchita Martinez, just way less consistent.

:spit: What??

Londoner
Nov 26th, 2012, 09:07 AM
A fluke is when something completely unexpected and unforeseen happens which turns out to be a one-off event.

Ivanovic was the #2 seed and the previous year's finalist (expectation was there) and had reached 1 other GS final (not a one-off).

Thanks.

This.

And I really miss The Drama Queen that was Anastasia! I'll never forget her Olympics match against Justine:sad:

Beat
Nov 26th, 2012, 09:15 AM
none. the expression "fluke" is so stupid anyway.

Otlichno
Nov 26th, 2012, 09:15 AM
Charity from the Justine Retirement Foundation vs Beating Venus, Capriati and Dementieva.

Next.

Brad[le]y.
Nov 26th, 2012, 09:39 AM
Ivanovic is a much better player than Conchita Martinez, just way less consistent.Like her game style or not, she's way better than Ana :lol:

Charity from the Justine Retirement Foundation vs Beating Venus, Capriati and Dementieva.

Next.

Indeed, she was the bitch of basically every great player from the previous generation. But we're just bitter :oh:

Lord Choc Ice
Nov 26th, 2012, 09:39 AM
Ana reached the final the previous year :yawn:.

Chrissie-fan
Nov 26th, 2012, 09:40 AM
None. If someone else was better they should have beaten them.

GOATdin0931
Nov 26th, 2012, 12:06 PM
Neither!! :rocker:

Gentleman
Nov 26th, 2012, 01:19 PM
How can you call a fluke someone who is GS winner (RG 2008), multiple finalist (in time when Henin was still on the tour, RG 2007, AO 2008) and has won 11 wta titles, reached No. 1, was a Fed cup finalist and has only 25 years (not a teenager, but surely not a veteran). Help me to understand that please.

bobito
Nov 26th, 2012, 01:44 PM
1. They weren't different eras
2. Ivanovic was not a fluke. She made 3 slam finals... how is that a fluke

Agree on both counts.

Setsuna.
Nov 26th, 2012, 02:00 PM
Neither.

iWill
Nov 26th, 2012, 03:02 PM
Myskina, because she got a walkover in the final.

:devil:

Cajka
Nov 26th, 2012, 04:50 PM
Now we have "fluke" threads instead of "peak" threads. How nice.

y.;22518937']
Indeed, she was the bitch of basically every great player from the previous generation. But we're just bitter :oh:

I'm sure that Majoli doesn't mind being Martina's bitch. :oh:

n1_and_uh_noone
Nov 26th, 2012, 05:39 PM
:lol: when there was a poll about the most undeserving one-Slam wonder, Myskina was the name thrown about (I disagree that any Slam is a fluke BTW) because the field of the poll seemed to bring a teensy bit of perspective into the picture, but now that it is Myskina vs Anci, seems everyone is suddenly undecided :oh:.

Anyway, not a 'fluke', but Myskina's career Slam achievements are pretty poor aside from that RG. Maybe if she had won that match against Justine at Athens, she would be seen differently. However much you hate Anci, she has reached no. 1 AND won a Slam (besides other finals and semis), a pretty much unshakeable combination.

Linguae^
Nov 26th, 2012, 05:44 PM
Putting Ana and Myskina in this poll and totally forgetting Schiavone and, for example, Li Na - are you serious?! :rolleyes:

Start da Game
Nov 26th, 2012, 06:13 PM
in comparison with the likes of Sabatini, Conchita-Martinez and Novotna , they are both flukes.

But in reality , they pretty much deserved one Major title , there are much weaker 1 Slam winners in WTA history

i don't know about overall flukes but sharapova's french open 2012 is the single biggest fluke in women's tennis history......

SilverSlam
Nov 26th, 2012, 06:21 PM
i don't know about overall flukes but sharapova's french open 2012 is the single biggest fluke in women's tennis history......

My god some of your posts literally make me want to gouge my eyes out so I can unsee the stupid.


Sent from my iPhone using Verticalsports.com Free App (http://www.verticalsports.com/mobile)

Brad[le]y.
Nov 26th, 2012, 06:24 PM
I'm sure that Majoli doesn't mind being Martina's bitch. :oh:Iva didn't play Martina Navratilova that much :shrug:

azdaja
Nov 26th, 2012, 07:03 PM
A fluke is when something completely unexpected and unforeseen happens which turns out to be a one-off event.
this. ana had reached the final of the same grand slam the year befor and was the finalist of the previous grand slam that year. i don't know what were the odds of her winning but they surely didn't suggest it was soemthing completely unexpected.

myskina is much closer to being a fluke but personally i don't think she was either. so, why is "neither" not an option? fail poll.

Stonerpova
Nov 26th, 2012, 07:23 PM
I hate the word fluke and the whole idea behind it, but it's clearly Myskina in this case. She only got past the quarters of a slam ONCE.

BuTtErFrEnA
Nov 26th, 2012, 07:24 PM
Three slam finals and a slam semi in the span of 13 months, which also included titles in Indian Wells, Los Angeles, Lux and the world #1 ranking.....that is not a fluke.

preach

Z1988
Nov 26th, 2012, 07:32 PM
Kinda both :oh: . But the question is "which one is MORE ... ". In this case, Myskina. At least Ivanovic still stays stable within the top 20 - 30 ranking now... :shrug:

Gentleman
Nov 26th, 2012, 09:25 PM
Kinda both :oh: . But the question is "which one is MORE ... ". In this case, Myskina. At least Ivanovic still stays stable within the top 20 - 30 ranking now... :shrug:

Actually, Ivanovic is top 15 for a long time now.

Igorche
Nov 26th, 2012, 09:39 PM
Why there is no option, none of them?

Gentleman
Nov 26th, 2012, 09:47 PM
Why there is no option, none of them?

This. :)

Z1988
Nov 26th, 2012, 10:33 PM
Actually, Ivanovic is top 15 for a long time now.

Which means still technically within that top 20 - 30 range :)

The 2nd Law
Nov 26th, 2012, 10:58 PM
Neither were a fluke.

End thread.

JAS_
Nov 27th, 2012, 09:29 AM
Ana is one of a few active players who have a career QF slam, she reached a SF in three different slams, a F in two and WON one, having been in the final of the same slam the previous year.
As gradual and as logical a progression of results as there ever was one. The win is only natural.
But, in the twilight zone of TF, where the most mysterious laws of logic rule, Ana's GS title is called a fluke.
Yep, it's possible. :yeah:

markdelaney
Nov 27th, 2012, 09:42 AM
Myskina took her one chance but nobody gave it to her. She played exceptionally well, beating Venus in the quarters and then taking out Capriati 6-2 6-2 and Dementieva 6-2 6-1 to win. That's not a fluke ! Ivanovic only faced one top 10 player (Jankovic) in her winning run but she still deserved her title.

I'd put Francesca Schiavone ahead of both of them for the fluke. An injured Dementieva in the semis and Stosur took out Serena and Justine, the players Fran wouldn't have beaten.

Harry.
Nov 27th, 2012, 03:53 PM
Three slam finals and a slam semi in the span of 13 months, which also included titles in Indian Wells, Los Angeles, Lux and the world #1 ranking.....that is not a fluke.

This. And neither was Myskina. What a stupid thread :rolleyes:

frenchie
Nov 27th, 2012, 04:14 PM
In 2004, Myskina had a remarkable year too

Titles :
RG
Doha
Moscow
Fed Cup

Olympics semis
YEC semis

San Diego final
IW semis
Toronto semis
AO QF

Many wins against Top 10 players
Wet as high as number 2 during that year

JoPova
Nov 27th, 2012, 05:49 PM
Both are great players, but, if I had to pick one, I'd say Myskina was more of a fluke.

Halepsova
Nov 27th, 2012, 06:17 PM
Myskina was a firework. She had one peak year in 2004 and it's not even for the whole year. She lost her miracle after Athens Games to Henin and never come back to where she was. Ana proved herself to made 3 GS finals while Myskina could only manage to do one and it's also because Henin's absent.

dsanders06
Nov 27th, 2012, 09:23 PM
LOL. Now I know TFers like to rag on Anci, but let's be honest here, there's no rational argument whatsoever to argue her Slam was more of a fluke than Myskina's.

I'm not even completely convinced that Myskina had a tougher draw than Ana did. Capriati is probably the best claycourt player that either beat en route to their respective Slams, but Safina and Jankovic have more stellar claycourt records than Venus or Dementieva. Actually, you could even make an argument that Safina was a more quality win on clay than Capriati.

$uricate
Nov 27th, 2012, 09:31 PM
Nasty existed in a time when there were actually top players to beat.

You couldn't just Kerber your way to the top.

Look at her ranking trajectory. She was on the way up and fulfilled. No fluke about it, she improved.

Ana is also not a fluke.

Max, lock this thread please...

frenchie
Nov 27th, 2012, 11:35 PM
Myskina was a firework. She had one peak year in 2004 and it's not even for the whole year. She lost her miracle after Athens Games to Henin and never come back to where she was. Ana proved herself to made 3 GS finals while Myskina could only manage to do one and it's also because Henin's absent.

That's actually a myth
She had a bad USO, but at the end of 2004 she still made SF in Filderstadt, won Moscow Tier 1, reached YEC SF and won Fed Cup on her own.

During that 2-3 months, she also beat Davenport 2 times (she was a monster that year)

What really derailed her was when she learned about her mother's cancer at the end of 2004, not that Olympics SF

cowsonice
Nov 27th, 2012, 11:46 PM
I changed the thread title to make it less trollish. I still find it interesting comparing these two.

Sombrerero loco
Nov 28th, 2012, 12:05 AM
Myskina is way better than vip :)

Lord Choc Ice
Nov 28th, 2012, 12:16 AM
Myskina is way better than vip :)
Not based on results, no ;)

Steffibestever
Dec 7th, 2012, 03:53 PM
It seems alot of people know very little about the history of womens tennis. There are a huge list of 1 slam winners. Gabriela Sabatini, Jana Novotna, and Conchita Martinez are by far the best three in whatever order, nobody comes even close to them. In the grand scheme of 1 slam winners Ivanovic is easily one of the better ones, and Myskina is probably even in the first half. I think what irks people and have many people calling almost all 1 slam winners weak or flukes is there are many slamless players better than many of the 1 slam winners, but that is the way things go sometimes.

Vespertine69
Dec 7th, 2012, 09:26 PM
I think it is a bit unfair to judge Myskina on what was a career very clearly cut in half at her peak... after 2004, her mother's cancer and her inability to get free from foot/toe problems (for someone who's court coverage was probably her best asset) basically ruined any consistency for the rest of her shortened career. I mean she still showed the odd great match (Eastbourne 2006 F vs Henin comes to mind) but she never got herself anywhere near back to where she was.

I think people also don't give as much respect to players who take a few more years to get their game and head together and confident enough to be a real challenger, versus girls like Ana who are ready for big success very early in their career. (Don't mean that success at a young age isn't impressive, because it is... just that not everyone develops at exactly the same rate.)

I think if people really insist on having polls for this sort of thing, then yeah... Myskina is a "flukier" winner at RG than Ivanovic, because Ana was strong on clay at her best and Anastasia was probably her weakest on clay ordinarily. I think it's kinda sad to do these comparisons though, these are all really talented people who have worked hard to win something that is a big achievement and success.

i.will2
Dec 7th, 2012, 09:33 PM
It seems alot of people know very little about the history of womens tennis. There are a huge list of 1 slam winners. Gabriela Sabatini, Jana Novotna, and Conchita Martinez are by far the best three in whatever order, nobody comes even close to them. In the grand scheme of 1 slam winners Ivanovic is easily one of the better ones, and Myskina is probably even in the first half. I think what irks people and have many people calling almost all 1 slam winners weak or flukes is there are many slamless players better than many of the 1 slam winners, but that is the way things go sometimes.

I'll bite on that one.....like who? If the best 1 slam champions are Novotna, C. Martinez, Sabatini, Ivanovic, Myskina, Azarenka, Stosur, Kvitova, those are the ones I can think of. So who hasn't won a slam that is better than these winners??

Sort of off topic I know but would like to hear who you would say...Dementieva maybe??

edificio
Dec 7th, 2012, 10:35 PM
Neither.

JarkaFish
Dec 7th, 2012, 10:50 PM
Myskina was a firework. She had one peak year in 2004 and it's not even for the whole year. She lost her miracle after Athens Games to Henin and never come back to where she was. Ana proved herself to made 3 GS finals while Myskina could only manage to do one and it's also because Henin's absent.

..and Ana's FO title isn't because of Henin's absence?

Cajka
Dec 8th, 2012, 12:53 AM
I'll bite on that one.....like who? If the best 1 slam champions are Novotna, C. Martinez, Sabatini, Ivanovic, Myskina, Azarenka, Stosur, Kvitova, those are the ones I can think of. So who hasn't won a slam that is better than these winners??

Sort of off topic I know but would like to hear who you would say...Dementieva maybe??

I'm sure he'd like to respond, but since he's obviously previously banned poster, he got banned again.

Sigh... I liked almost all his reincarnations.

Cajka
Dec 8th, 2012, 12:57 AM
I think it is a bit unfair to judge Myskina on what was a career very clearly cut in half at her peak... after 2004, her mother's cancer and her inability to get free from foot/toe problems (for someone who's court coverage was probably her best asset) basically ruined any consistency for the rest of her shortened career. I mean she still showed the odd great match (Eastbourne 2006 F vs Henin comes to mind) but she never got herself anywhere near back to where she was.

I think people also don't give as much respect to players who take a few more years to get their game and head together and confident enough to be a real challenger, versus girls like Ana who are ready for big success very early in their career. (Don't mean that success at a young age isn't impressive, because it is... just that not everyone develops at exactly the same rate.)

I think if people really insist on having polls for this sort of thing, then yeah... Myskina is a "flukier" winner at RG than Ivanovic, because Ana was strong on clay at her best and Anastasia was probably her weakest on clay ordinarily. I think it's kinda sad to do these comparisons though, these are all really talented people who have worked hard to win something that is a big achievement and success.

the best post here, by far... some posts sadly make me wonder if TF posters forgot how these two used to play years ago... or maybe they never watched them, which is more ridiculous since it's an off season. Watching old matches is better than trolling.

Deestruction
Dec 8th, 2012, 12:57 AM
Everytime i look at this thread it makes me furious. Does every player that won just one slam have to be a fluke. :o

Brad[le]y.
Dec 8th, 2012, 01:12 AM
Everytime i look at this thread it makes me furious. Does every player that won just one slam have to be a fluke. :o

No, just players that have done absolutely nothing after their slam wins. Very few people call Kvitova and Azarenka flukes. Ana's 'slump' has been going way longer than her peak lasted. Her 2007-8 is looking more like an abnormality than the rule.

Cajka
Dec 8th, 2012, 01:23 AM
y.;22561315']No, just players that have done absolutely nothing after their slam wins. Very few people call Kvitova and Azarenka flukes. Ana's 'slump' has been going way longer than her peak lasted. Her 2007-8 is looking more like an abnormality than the rule.

Still, she has more slam finals than those two, so what's the point? Would it be better if she won RG in 2007 and lost other two slam finals after that? Would people then think it wasn't a fluke? Someone has already mentioned that she reached QFs on all slams, semifinals of 3 different slams, 3 slam finals and it happened that she won one slam. Ratio 1/3, very poor ratio, actually. Wow, what a fluke! :eek: :help:

And Myskina was very close to #1 position at one point. It must be really strange that this kind of player won a slam.

Brad[le]y.
Dec 8th, 2012, 01:33 AM
Still, she has more slam finals than those two, so what's the point? Would it be better if she won RG in 2007 and lost other two slam finals after that? Would people then think it wasn't a fluke? Someone has already mentioned that she reached QFs on all slams, semifinals of 3 different slams, 3 slam finals and it happened that she won one slam. Ratio 1/3, very poor ratio, actually. Wow, what a fluke! :eek: :help:

And Myskina was very close to #1 position at one point. It must be really strange that this kind of player won a slam.

Most of this was accomplished during a one year period. 4 1/2 years have passed and she hasn't come close to replicating those results :shrug:

Cajka
Dec 8th, 2012, 01:37 AM
y.;22561431']Most of this was accomplished during a one year period. 4 1/2 years have passed and she hasn't come close to replicating those results :shrug:

If we're not talking about true legends, how long one's peaks lasts? For the most of the players, it's one or two seasons.

Brad[le]y.
Dec 8th, 2012, 01:42 AM
If we're not talking about true legends, how long one's peaks lasts? For the most of the players, it's one or two seasons.

Maybe, but even past their prime most were still capable of being a contender at the big events.

I don't want to argue with you anymore; I like you too much :sobbing:

Cajka
Dec 8th, 2012, 01:49 AM
y.;22561469']Maybe, but even past their prime most were still capable of being a contender at the big events.

I don't want to argue with you anymore; I like you too much :sobbing:

Grow a thicker skin, you sensitive bitch. :ras:

OK, I'll give you a :hug: :rolleyes:

It's OK to disagree and argue, even with the posters you like. IMO, as long as it's civil, it's all fine, I don't take it personally, honestly. The only thing I hate is lame insulting, arguing is fine. TF was made for discussions, we're not gonna lick each others asses when we disagree. A certain amount of bitching and arguing is fine by me. :shrug:

frenchie
Dec 8th, 2012, 09:00 AM
Still, she has more slam finals than those two, so what's the point? Would it be better if she won RG in 2007 and lost other two slam finals after that? Would people then think it wasn't a fluke? Someone has already mentioned that she reached QFs on all slams, semifinals of 3 different slams, 3 slam finals and it happened that she won one slam. Ratio 1/3, very poor ratio, actually. Wow, what a fluke! :eek: :help:

And Myskina was very close to #1 position at one point. It must be really strange that this kind of player won a slam.

she needed a QF at USO 2004
She lost 2nd round to Chakvetadze

JCTennisFan
Dec 8th, 2012, 10:33 PM
Ivanovic is still around and trying..... Myskina gave up in what, 2007?

Ivanovic is the better player and has had the better career.

Vincey!
Dec 8th, 2012, 11:03 PM
it's a hard question. I think Myskina's RG win was more of a fluke than Ivanovic's cuz it was Nastya only final in a GS while Ana has 2 more finals in GS. On the other hand, Myskina managed to stay in the top 10 much longer than Ana and she deal with more injuries than Ana....so I'd be tempted to say they were both a fluke for different reasons. Myskina's career would be more like a slamless consistent top 5 and Ana more like a consistent top 15 with peaks in the top 10 I guess. It seems that Ana will never ever get out of her slump, I do think she will have a better 2013 but it's really sad to follow her these days lol