PDA

View Full Version : Hantuchova - overrated?


ys
Jan 21st, 2003, 05:02 AM
Not intended as a bashing thread.. Neither I am jumping bandwagons because of todays loss - I was saying that for quite a while..

Anyways.. Don't you think that in Hantuchova we have another very overrated player?

She is #5 for chrissake..

Has she ever beaten Venus? Serena? Lindsay? Monica? Jennifer? Kim?

It looks like in her rankings we are just getting another dokic-like bubble not backed up by ability to beat top players..

Informative
Jan 21st, 2003, 05:15 AM
Of course she's over rated. She has NEVER beaten Venus. She is 0-5 lifetime against V. BTW: Venus has a COMBINED career head-to-head record of 23-3 against Hantuchova, Capriati, Mauresmo, Clijsters, and Henin (all top ten players by the way) WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU?

REPEAT: 23-3 or .885. Yet Shriver, Hernandez, Drysdale, and Carillo keep brazenly lying to viewers that these players are "genuine threats" against Venus. Who do they think they are kidding with their BS? Give me a break!!

tennisIlove09
Jan 21st, 2003, 05:16 AM
I don't think she's overrated. In another thread, someone asked if she will be this year's Dokic. Small difference with Dokic. Look at the Slam results

Dani:
FO-4th
WB-QF
US-QF
AO-QF

Dokic:
FO-QF
WB-4th
US-2nd
AO-DNP

I think she's great. Her big win is still coming.

Gonzo Hates Me!
Jan 21st, 2003, 05:17 AM
lol! Just knock it on our heads!

Hawk
Jan 21st, 2003, 05:30 AM
She hasn't had any of the big wins yet. She's never beaten Serena, Venus, Kim, Jennifer, Monica or Lindsay (plus a losing record against Momo)..but she's still young, I just think it'll take a little more time. But she is definatly not #5 material right now!

spencercarlos
Jan 21st, 2003, 05:36 AM
NOt at all she is a great player, she will just have to improve her serve and movement just a bit and she will be a real threat

tennisIlove09
Jan 21st, 2003, 05:36 AM
Look at her H2H:
Jennifer Capriati
2001-02-19 Oklahoma City Indoor Hardcourt SF Jennifer Capriati (USA) 6-4 3-6 6-2
2001-08-13 Toronto Hardcourt R32 Jennifer Capriati (USA) 5-7 7-5 6-2

Monica Seles
2002-05-27 Roland Garros Clay R16 Monica Seles (USA) 6-4 7-5

Serena
2002-06-24 Wimbledon Grass QF Serena Williams (USA) 6-3 6-2
2002-08-26 U.S. Open Hardcourt QF Serena Williams (USA) 6-2 6-2

Venus
2001-06-25 Wimbledon Grass R64 Venus Williams (USA) 6-3 6-2
2002-01-14 Australian Open Hardcourt R32 Venus Williams (USA) 3-6 6-0 6-4
2002-08-19 New Haven Hardcourt SF Venus Williams (USA) 6-3 6-3
2003-01-13 Australian Open Hardcourt QF Venus Williams (USA) 6-4 6-3

Clijsters
2000-05-15 Antwerp Clay R32 Kim Clijsters (BEL) 7-6(6) 6-1
2002-10-07 Filderstadt Indoor Hardcourt F Kim Clijsters (BEL) 4-6 6-3 6-4

Henin-Hardenne
2001-12-31 Gold Coast Hardcourt R16 Justine Henin-Hardenne (BEL) 1-6 6-0 6-3
2002-03-04 Indian Wells Hardcourt R16 Daniela Hantuchova (SVK) 6-3 6-3
2002-08-26 U.S. Open Hardcourt R16 Daniela Hantuchova (SVK) 6-1 3-6 7-6(4)
2002-09-23 Leipzig Indoor Carpet QF Justine Henin-Hardenne (BEL) 6-4 7-5


Mauresmo
2001-05-14 Rome Clay R16 Amelie Mauresmo (FRA) 6-2 3-6 6-3
2002-07-20 Fed Cup (WG-QF) FRA vs. SVK Indoor Carpet RR Daniela Hantuchova (SVK) 2-6 6-4 6-3
2002-08-12 Montreal Hardcourt SF Amelie Mauresmo (FRA) 6-2 7-6(3


Now, really the ONLY player NOT to struggle against her is Serena. However, the Wimbledon match was VERY close. Much closer then the score indicates.

To me, she reminds me of the Williams sisters when they first came along. So much talent, but not a lot of expierence. Once she has been on tour for a while, she will start winning this close matches.

BK4ever
Jan 21st, 2003, 05:38 AM
They are showing her match against Venus on ESPN right now, and the commentators are going on about what will it take for Dani to make top 5. They truly suck...she's already there.

I think she deserves #5 because she earned the points. But players like her and Dokic are the reason why people question the ranking system. Here Dani is #5 and she has no wins over the top players and holds only one title. Same for Dokic, but at least she has a few titles. Dani does have better showing than Dokic at the slams.

Hawk
Jan 21st, 2003, 05:41 AM
haha the commentators are pretty funny..they have made quite a few mistakes..personally I liked Mary Joe saying that Kim has reached her career high #4..close Mary Joe lol :o

Maybe they arn't informed of the updated rankings :confused:

matthias
Jan 21st, 2003, 05:55 AM
wta should not put any player on #3 #4 #5......

#1 and #2 are the williams and then WTA should start with #15 again

~|Naomi|~
Jan 21st, 2003, 06:11 AM
Dani is still young that is true but it really annoys me when people use that as an excuse for her not yet having a big win, because hello Kim is actually the same age in fact even a few months younger

Robbie.
Jan 21st, 2003, 06:12 AM
Originally posted by BK4ever
They are showing her match against Venus on ESPN right now, and the commentators are going on about what will it take for Dani to make top 5. They truly suck...she's already there.

I think she deserves #5 because she earned the points. But players like her and Dokic are the reason why people question the ranking system. Here Dani is #5 and she has no wins over the top players and holds only one title. Same for Dokic, but at least she has a few titles. Dani does have better showing than Dokic at the slams.

The ranking system is working just fine. I really do not see what the problem is here. #5 is about where Dani deserves to be at the moment. Who deserves to be conclusively infront of her when judged by any standard? The fact is that she holds the #5 rank very narrowly from Mauresmo and Capriati - they are within 110 pts of eachother so they are more of less on an equal footing - Dani is only technically ranked superior. Lets go through the contenders for #5

Capriati -

0 titles

GS Record
SF QF QF 1r = 960

Finals Miami, Montral (tier1) and tier 1 semis @ Berlin, Rome and Charleston and semis @ the tour champs

Mauresmo

2 titles ( Tier I beating then world #3, Tier II)

GS Record
4r SF SF DNP = 1216 pts

Dokic and Seles' performances of the past year do not approach the records of these three.

Dani has earnt 1070 pts in Grand Slams while reaching three quarterfinals (only Seles, Capriati, Venus and Serena have achieved that feat in the past year) and the round of 16 in each grandslam (only Venus and Serena have achieved that feat). Only Venus, Serena and arguably Mauresmo can claim to have a better GS record in the past year - including Clijsters and Henin, the worlds #3 and #4, whose GS records in the past year are littered with pre-quarterfinal and early round defeats. She won a Tier 1 beating the world #3, and reached a swag of semi and quarterfinals while defeating players like Henin, Mauresmo and Dokic and pushing players like Davenport, Clijsters and Venus Williams. Some of you are asking has she ever beaten Capriati or Davenport - well maybe not - but their records over the past 52 weeks are far from spectacular - without a single title between them - and the rankings ONLY reflect the past 52 weeks not the players reputation or achievements prior to those 52 weeks. Whether she has beaten Williams or Clijsters is irrevelant also as the ranking already reflects that they are better than her - to be ranked #5 does not mean that you need to have beaten those ranked 1-4 (although she has beaten Henin). The fact is that with the incidence of the Williams domination - a dupoly - a top 5 player is likely to be less credentialed than a top 5 player might be in a more even era as the dominant players are achieving the more spectacular results and accumulating the most points.

Jakeev
Jan 21st, 2003, 06:13 AM
Hmmm from what I am reading I see some people seem to have resentment toward Daniela. I don't think that is cool at all.

For crying out loud she hasn't even been a top-ten player for even a 1 year. GIve her break would you.

Daniela has got nothing but time to prove herself.

Informative
Jan 21st, 2003, 06:19 AM
Hantuchova is still overrated. You have to WIN in sports to be seriously considered a major contender. Until she beats SOMEBODY with consistency (and by that I mean a major player in the top ten) she can't possibly be considered a major player herself. Gimme a break!! Like everybody else she has to EARN all the ridiculous accolades she's receiving. So far she's won ONE MORE TITLE THAN KOURNIKOVA. That's hardly a measure of grewatness. When and if DH gets to the point of truly WINNING something more than verbal support from retired tennis players I will be the first in line to congratulate her. Until then, she is just another "pretender to the throne." Repeat: DH HAS TO EARN IT! Being cute and having skills is NOT ENOUGH

Informative
Jan 21st, 2003, 06:21 AM
The sentence should read: "That's hardly a measure of greatness..." Excuse my typo...

Robbie.
Jan 21st, 2003, 06:24 AM
She has beaten the current world #4 twice in the past twelve months on major occassions - or is Henin not one of the "major" people in the top 10?

Sam L
Jan 21st, 2003, 06:29 AM
Daniela's top 5

Daniela's just reached QF in last three slams

Daniela's only 19

Daniela's beautiful, talented and very popular

I can understand why some people are SOOOO JEALOUS! :p

Go Daniela! :D

Informative
Jan 21st, 2003, 06:37 AM
Until Hantuchova actually wins consistently like other major players there's NOTHING to be "jealous" of. Sticking out your tongue won't change that Sam L--LOL!! Beauty, talent, and popularity alone don't make you a champion--WINNING does...Grow up folks...

Calvin
Jan 21st, 2003, 06:37 AM
people should get a life outside H2H's... Daniela is a young player, so of course she has lousy H2H's against the top players! *NEWSFLASH* The Williamses didn't win every match they played when they first came on tour either! Let the girl develop her potential (being no5 when youre 19 shows you have potential, no matter what some internet-losers claim), and when she reaches full maturity, then we can talk about being overrated...

Sam L
Jan 21st, 2003, 06:44 AM
Informative, clearly you have a problem with Daniela, you feel threatened by her. She lost her match today but you just have to spew so much negativity about her. Imagine if she won. Ouch!

You can't be happy she lost, you're bothered cause you know that she'll grow into a champion one day! :p :p :p

Informative
Jan 21st, 2003, 06:45 AM
Dave,

You're right. DH has yet to truly EARN her place as a major player (like everybody else). She has obvious potential but until she actually WINS and truly becomes competitive with the top players potential is all she has (again, the same way it was for EVERYONE ELSE--including Venus & Serena)... In other words: PROVE that you great. Don't just TALK... (that goes for her fans too)...

Robbie.
Jan 21st, 2003, 06:49 AM
I don't see who is saying Hantuchova is "great" or a major contender? Many are looking with optimism towards her future prospects but very few people would say that she was a real threat to WIN a Grand Slam yet

Last time I looked, yesterday before her loss of course, she was at odds of something like 25-1 to win the tourney - odds which donote a rough chance, hardly odds of a major contender.

ys
Jan 21st, 2003, 06:50 AM
She has beaten the current world #4 twice in the past twelve months on major occassions - or is Henin not one of the "major" people in the top 10?

Beating Henin on US hardcourts is pretty much like beating Davenport on clay - it does go to H2H, but should not be taken seriously. Henin really sucks on US hardcourts, and hates the surface..

BrianII
Jan 21st, 2003, 06:50 AM
Don't think she's overated ......She came up after Kim and justine and so she more or less has to take her turn in the peking order....she's the kind of player the top players take very seriously ...and now she's too high ranked to catch them off guard in an early round i can't see how eg. Maggie is a better player than Hantuchova but Maggie has beaten Venus a few times ....the real part in being a top player is beaten the players your supposed to beat reasonably consistently and so getting to later rounds to meet the elite players eventually the upsets will come ....give her time .

caseyl45
Jan 21st, 2003, 07:24 AM
I don't see how you can overrate a young lady who's been one of the more consistent players on tour in the past year. She's been very consistent at the Grand Slams, she's won a tournament, reached the finals of another, won Fed Cup, and qualified at the year-end championships. Not bad for someone who has started, I think, her third full year on tour. Yes, she isn't going to reach a Grand Slam final as a teenager like many of the other players in the top ten, but that doesn't make her bad. Looking at everyone else in the top ten and how they've done, I think that her ranking is accurate. Realistically, if you list any of the players ranked behind her, I could probably give you a valid reason why they shouldn't be ranked ahead of her.
Anyhow, from the looks of Hantuchova, she's got other things to worry about. But that's a subject for another thread.

TSequoia01
Jan 21st, 2003, 07:29 AM
I think where the problem comes with Daniela is she was picked by so called knowledgeable people to defeat Venus. Werthiem comes to mind. In fact if you listen to commentators everyone is going to defeat Venus and Serena. Although I realize this may be hype to drum up viewership, it does a disservice to players such as Daniela. But let the games continue. :cool:

irma
Jan 21st, 2003, 07:32 AM
I just don't think she is fit for pro tennis (and this is no joke)

Sharapower
Jan 21st, 2003, 07:40 AM
Tennis is definitely not only the "win a title" stuff (though you had better win some :p ).
Tennis is firstly "win matches" and Daniela wins a lot of matches : 56/26 W/L in a year, that's respectable. And if she doesn't often win against higher ranked players isn't that logic ? It just shows that the ranking system is meaningful and really reflects a hierarchy.
Daniela is #5 (is she ? - I'm not sure yet) means she's the fifth player in the world and that there are 4 and only 4 other players that did better than her in the 52 last weeks.
One would be stupid to state she's the best or something like that, she obviously isn't. But it's even more stupid to refuse acknowledging she's great to be at that level at 19 and just 3 seasons on the tour. Dani is definitely not only potential. But she has some left to realize and that confirms she's really a champion.

spencercarlos
Jan 21st, 2003, 08:24 AM
Originally posted by ys
Beating Henin on US hardcourts is pretty much like beating Davenport on clay - it does go to H2H, but should not be taken seriously. Henin really sucks on US hardcourts, and hates the surface..

Pfff don`t be silly YS, Henin is an all court player, you can`t compare her Hardcourt play against Lindsay`s clay court play.

Plus is really ridiculous from you the "US HARDCOURTS SURFACE" statement on Henin, are they so different than other Hardcourts in the world???

Hantuchova deserves credit, she has been very consistent, maybe top 5 is too much right now for her, remmeber Amelie not playing, Seles injured, i`m pretty sure when they can come back they`ll be ahead of Daniela. But the girl is improving, she has lost the last 4 of last 5 slams vs the williams sisters (the other loss was to Seles at French 02). So shows how consistent she has been on major events.

Beat
Jan 21st, 2003, 08:36 AM
do you mean "overrated" or "too highly ranked"? - 2 totally different things.

one can argue about whether daniela's overrated or not, whether she's really as good a player as she's made out to be. but one can not argue about the rank IMO. there's a reason that she is where she is. we've had this a million times before, i don't see the problem. if she doesn't deserve it, she'll fall down the rankings soon enough, e.g. after indian wells.

and btw/ who in your opinion should be ranked above hantuchova? :confused:

-Sonic-
Jan 21st, 2003, 12:30 PM
I'm just re-iterating what has been said, but I do not believe Daniela is the 5th best player on the tour.

However, she has had better results in the past year than everyone ranked below her, so fair do's.

tennischick
Jan 21st, 2003, 12:38 PM
i think she has talent but i don't understand why she is so thin. how can she last out there in such a punishing sport with a body like that? does she want to be a tennis player or a pro model?

irma
Jan 21st, 2003, 12:45 PM
tennischick

we had leotine van moorsel here won the tour femine on less then 100 pounds. then after a while she broke down. now she is healty again.

willpower can do a lot

the cat
Jan 21st, 2003, 12:50 PM
ys, Dani is better than all of the Russian girls. Isn't she? She has wonderful stroke production on her serve and ground strokes and is a good volleyer. She has a complete game. What she is lacking right now is a stronger body.

TC, it's probably hard for Daniela to add weight with her slight frame. But she will have to add weight if she wants to have a long and prosperous career.

I've said all along that Daniela has top 5 talent. And I was right! :D But she needs to be given a couple more years to fully develope as a tennis player. By then she'll be ready to compete for grand slam titles.

ys
Jan 21st, 2003, 12:52 PM
Pfff don`t be silly YS, Henin is an all court player, you can`t compare her Hardcourt play against Lindsay`s clay court play.

Before saying that you'd better have checked Henin's results on US hardcourts.. At least Davenport does have titles and Slam semis on clay. Henin did nothing at all on US hardcourts.. Ever..

GoGoMaggie
Jan 21st, 2003, 01:06 PM
Umm I dont know if she is overrated...certinaly she s a talented girl n she deserves all the credit she s been receiving from everyone. but as far as her rainking goes, I dunno if her tennis is where her ranking indicates. in a way she was lucky as a lot of the girls who were ranked higher than her got injured (Martina, Lndsay, Amelie).. yeah of course she earned it without a doubt. but I dont think in terms of how good she is, she is where her ranking is now.

Infiniti2001
Jan 21st, 2003, 01:06 PM
I'm not sure if she is overrated , but the pressure the media put on these young players is ridiculous... Anyway, we will see when it's time to defend her IW title .

P.S. she is actually skinnier than last year at this time:eek:

Randy H
Jan 21st, 2003, 01:27 PM
I don't think Hantuchova is at all overrated, but I do think that her ranking is slightly inflated based on a bit of "fortune" for her having Seles, Mauresmo, and Capriati not at 100% right now. Matched up with the rest of the players, I would rate Daniela as around the 9th best on tour (behind the 3 mentioned above, and Davenport).

That doesn't mean *she* is overrated though. She has been exceeding and living up to her seedings at the slams, she has a tier 1 title, and she has many other consistent, solid performances. Why shouldn't she have been considered a threat for the title in Melbourne? Venus was in her quarterfinal section, someone who had played no warmup events. No one knew what to expect. Semifinal matchup with potentially Justine (who she'd beaten before), Davenport (who she was very very close to beating in Sydney), and at the start of the tournament Capriati (not at her best right now physically and perhaps mentally too).

It's only a matter of time before she breaks through. Did many really think that in 2001 Clijsters and Henin were going to be in slam finals? Sure everyone knew they had the talent and potential, but they weren't really considered slam threats, but anything can happen at the slams as we all know, and I see no reason why Daniela shouldn't have been recognized as someone who could at least go a step further in the slams from her previous 2 quarterfinals.

She's still working on her game, she has more to learn, but she's made leaps and strides and that is undeniable. She needs to work on her movement, net play, and the experience of knowing when to play shots at the right times.

Keep up the good work Dani :)

Volcana
Jan 21st, 2003, 01:35 PM
Over-rated is subjective. Is she over-RANKED? Possibly. Look at the number of tournament played. There are some very good players currently behind Dani who are (theoretically) only behind her because of injury.

01 xxxx (12) Serena Williams
02 xxxx (15) Venus Williams
03 xxxx (21) Kim Clijsters
04 xxxx (22) Justine Henin-Hardenne
05 2838 (24) Daniela Hantuchova

Now, who 'should' be ranked ahead of Dani,
EVEN IF YOU ASSUME 'FLUKE' AT IW?

06 2790 (17) Jennifer Capriati -

No. She hasn't won a tournament
in over a year, and she played
the minimum.

07 2729 (15) Amelie Mauresmo - Injury

109 points difference and two
fewer tournament than the
minimum? Yeah, given health,
she'd be ranked ahead of Dani.

08 2506 (29) Jelena Dokic - No

09 2492 (15) Monica Seles - Injury

A toughie. 346 fewer points,
but she played 15 tournaments.
And she flamed out early at OZ.
Her ppt is 166, not quite enough
to catch Dani in two tournament.
Give this to Dani by a hair.

10 2171 (11) Lindsay Davenport

Over 700 points behind, but only
11 tournaments. 197 ppt.
Extrapolate that to 17 tournaments
and Lindsay has ove 3000 points.
Edge Lindsay.

12 1965 (16) Chanda Rubin - No

18 1386 (10) Hingis - For practical purposes,
no longer an active player.

So MAYBE the top ten should look like this

01 (12) S.Williams
02 (15) V.Williams
03 (21) Clijsters
04 (22) Henin-Hardenne
05 (11) Davenport - Injury
06 (15) Mauresmo - Injury
07 (24) Hantuchova
08 (15) Seles - Injury
09 (17) Capriati
10 (29) Dokic


MAYBE

As was said countless times from 1997 to the year 2000, remaining healthy is part of the game. Credit for being injured begins and ends with the 'Injury Protected Ranking'. And remember, drop the IW points, and Dani's still a top ten player. The only player ranked behind Dani that can make an indisputable case that she'd be ranked ahead of her if she played the minimum is Lindsay.

No, she isn't over-rated. Some people make too much of being 'top five' is all.

Sonja
Jan 21st, 2003, 01:35 PM
What Randy said!

ys
Jan 21st, 2003, 01:40 PM
There are players who I'd call "Real" Top 10, and that's real elite of the sport. And that's Wx2, Davenport, Capriati, Seles, Clijsters, Henin and probably Mauresmo. Those are elte. Others are not. Dokic is not. Hantuchova is not. Despte of having numbers on their side, the quality of their tennis is nowhere near elte. When was the last time Dokic did anything at Slams? We really forgot. Hantuchova.. Quarterfinals? Quarterfinals and nothing better is really Top 5 credentials, huh? And did she beat any Top quality opponents on their good surface in making it to those QF? Or was it just a luck of the draw?

In my opinion - we have 7 or 8 Top 10 players. Other 2 or 3 places are taken by temporary residents and should be considered vacant. In fact, they are vacant for most of the time.

Volcana
Jan 21st, 2003, 01:41 PM
Why shouldn't she have been considered a threat for the title in Melbourne?

'Threat for the title', to me, means you're good enough to win it if you play your best, and your opponents are slightly off. I think that list went Williams, Belgians, stop. No one ranked below those players was gonna win this year if they were only 'slightly' off. Dani got as far as she could have been reasonably expected to go. She defended her seeding, and lost to the world #2.

gentenaire
Jan 21st, 2003, 01:44 PM
This time last year Hantuchova was unknown. In only one year she's climbed from unknown to #5 in the world. In that respect she's very much like Kim Clijsters. I remember when Kim was #5 in the world, her results were similar to Dani (more titles but no tier I). Kim could beat the players ranked below her but had problems with those ranked ahead of her: Davenport, Capriati, etc.
Look at Kim now! She's still very much the underdog when facing one of the Williams sisters, but she can beat them, just as she can now beat players she used to have problems with.

Dani is still young, she's still a new face. Let her grow. The wins will come.

aura of daniela
Jan 21st, 2003, 01:59 PM
I think Daniela is overrated........like, I rate her Number 1, and she's actually NUMBER 5 ;)

All I can say is Well Done Daniela, you were a little known 18 year old last year when I really first saw here at the Aus Open, and just 12 months later you've become a much more consistent and threatening player.
By next year, she'll probably be a top 4 player and a top 4 seed meaning plenty of appearances on Rod Laver Arena.......I better get my tickets ready now.

Overrated????
You guys are true gooses, and thats being nice.
At the end of the day, Daniela and every other player goes out there and does their best to achieve their most desired dreams, rankings and everything else are just a means to an end really.
The media are idiots and people who always try to find faults in players and their positions are just as bad.

ys
Jan 21st, 2003, 02:29 PM
In that respect she's very much like Kim Clijsters. I remember when Kim was #5 in the world, her results were similar to Dani (more titles but no tier I).

And French Open finals.. But that's nothing, right?

gentenaire
Jan 21st, 2003, 02:40 PM
I suppose you could put a grand slam final on the same level as a Tier 1, so in that respect Dani's career is somewhat similar.

Quite a few people saw Kim's RG final as a fluke, said she'd had an easy draw, didn't have to beat any top players to get there, Dani got the same remarks after winning Indian Wells.

Volcana, most notoriously, often said Kim was overrated because she's never won a Tier I. Volcana was gracious enough to review his opinion after the masters. I think he'll have to review his opinion on Dani as well at some point in the future. But of course, you never know. Personally I feel Dani's a bit too thin right now, she needs to beef up a bit, something Kim has done. Kim started working with a physical trainer because of her arm injury, it has paid off.

irma
Jan 21st, 2003, 02:44 PM
no it's not. they started at the same age.(they are the same age)

Kimmy more titles, better grand slam results, wins over higher players so right now there is no comparing (hantu might catch up but that's still an if)

ARealVenusFan
Jan 21st, 2003, 02:47 PM
I disagree that Dani is overrated. She's better than eight players and actually better than two - three of ones higher than her.

At Indian Wells she not only beat Hingis but also beat Capriati.
She's a level or two below V&S and that's nothing to be ashamed of.

Tratree
Jan 21st, 2003, 03:02 PM
Hmmm....I see to remember a girl who was consistently making quarterfinals of the slams but never beating Venus or Jennifer, etc. and no one was saying she was overrated....then all of the sudden she made her breakthrough wins over these players and no one has been able to stop her since.

Daniela has played TWO full seasons on the tour....and made great progress I might add. She's not Venus or Serena or Lindsay or Capriati...she's Daniela. She is a relative "late bloomer" compared to most, but i don't think's she's reached her potential.

As was mentioned on TV last night, she is aware she needs to put on some weight....actually doing it while you are playing at such a level is harder than it might seem. Plus I've thought since the last part of last year that she has gained at least a half-inch to an inch on her already tall frame. It does make a difference.

For the most part , her matches against the top players she has been right there...just unable to capitalize on the big break points...and she does get them. It's not like she's losing 1 and 2 out there all the time....her loss to Venus last night at 6-4, 6-3 was MUCH closer than the scoreline shows. I have no doubt she will make her breakthrough on her timetable.

As for this she "doesn't deserve" to be #5 or wouldn't be there IF IF IF .....that's not reality folks. Reality is that players get hurt or just don't show up at the Aussie (Jelena dear). It's not the cafeteria line...we don't hold their place in line til they get back.
If Lindsay is better (which she is right now), then she can get the results and find herself right up there above Dani.

Give the kid a break....she's making great strides in a short time. I'm anxious to see what 2003 has in store for her.

gmak
Jan 21st, 2003, 03:06 PM
i still think that lindsay amelie and monica are better players than daniela so daniela's real ranking should be #7-8 at the moment
i am sure amelie will pass daniela when she comes back

but i would definitely put her ahead of capriati and dokic at the moment

apoet29
Jan 21st, 2003, 03:08 PM
I have to wonder if this thread would have existed had Dani actually won yesterday. Players who receive a lot of media attention are in a no win situation. Fans and critics expect these players to show themselves worthy of the media hype. Consequently these players are under even more pressure on the court. I really think media hype is what killed Kournikova's tennis career and Dani would do well to take a page from Anna's mistakes and not pay attention to what the media or fans say about her game.

Is Hantuchova overranked? Yes, when you consider that Hingis and Mauresmo did not play this event and Capriati and Seles went MIA in the first two rounds. Yet, looking at her record on the SanexWTA website, 2001 is the first year that Hantuchova actually played all four grand slam events, where she won only two grand slam matches. When you consider how greatly she was able to improve her game in a year, I think she deserves more credit than she is getting in this thread. Dani was 1-1 in finals last year, made four semifinals last year (Eastbourne, Canadian Open, New Haven, Linz) and six quaterfinals (US Open, Wimbledon, Hamburg, German Open, Leipzig and Zurich). In addition, she won two doubles titles (Amelia Island, New Haven) and made the finals in four other events (Hamburg, German Open, San Diego, Los Angeles) , made a GS doubles final (Australian Open) , and won a mixed doubles title (Australian Open). Of course, I'm not including her Fed Cup victory or qualifying for the year end event.

All in all when you consider that where Dani was at the end of 2001 to where she ended up in 2002; I would venture that she has achieved great success for her age and playing ability. When you consider that this player played her first full season on the tour in 1999 and by the end of 2000 managed to improve her ranking 93 spots to no. 108 in the world and win a GS mixed doubles title in the process and by the end of 2001 had managed to rise to no. 38 in the rankings. Give this girl some credit. She deserves it.

BTW, Beggin' Beguine, I love your signature. I'm a Pride and Prejudice fan too.

Randy H
Jan 21st, 2003, 03:10 PM
Volcana, perhaps not a threat up there with the Williams sisters and Kim, but the media is naming other players trying to find potentials to threaten them at this stage, and that's where I feel putting Daniela in that mix of things is reasonable. She has lost several times to players above her, but she's been right up there with them and it's just a difference in experience right now. She's new to the top 10, she's new to being consistently on the big stage, but she works very very hard, and in time the big results will come for her. :)

ys
Jan 21st, 2003, 03:12 PM
I am not actually suggesting that she in not rightful WTA #5 ranked player. I am suggesting she is a far cry from #5 in terms of playing strength. I mean, Hingis was holding for #1 for so long while not being anywhere #1 in terms of strength. The biggest function of rankings is being a very good predictor of who beats who, who is stronger. Of course some H2H have its subtle issues (see Safin-Santoro for instance ), but in average, it should be a good predictor. Up to #4 it works just fine. Serena is likelier to beat Venus rather than lose to her, Venus is same to Kim. Kim is Same to Justine. Justine is same to Dani (on overall surface balance ) . But Dani is not same to Seles, Davenport, Capriati, Mauresmo or even Myskina.

Randy H
Jan 21st, 2003, 03:28 PM
ys,

you can't criticize Daniela or say she is overrated just because you think the rankings are flawed, that's not her problem or fault.

people get injured, it's part of the game, and some people will benefit - dani probably has benefitted from 3 or 4 players not being at full strength, but the fact that she reached quarters at wimbledon and the us open (beating henin and dokic, both higher ranked), shows she was playing as one of the best 8 players in the big events. this time she proved herself again, being in the position of a top 8 seeding with far more pressure on her than last year.

btw, i think your excuse that dani has beaten players on their "weak surfaces" is lame. sorry, but a win is a win, and the top 10 in the world should all be capable of good tennis on all surfaces. whether henin is worse on american hardcourts or not, is irrelevant. henin is a capable player on all surfaces, and the reason she lost to daniela is because 1. in indian wells she was psyched out by daniela worrying too much ahead of time and not believing in herself imo. and 2. at the us open, an *injured* daniela still beat justine because she was the better player that day. does that mean that monica and amelie's wins on clay are meaningless because daniela hasn't done as well on clay?? it works both ways.

ys
Jan 21st, 2003, 03:31 PM
I really think media hype is what killed Kournikova's tennis career

I think you are wrong and hope you are twice wrong here. First, and that's soemthing I am quite sure, that people may attribute Anna's problems to media hype all they want, but the truth is much simpler - you won't think of any player who'd have that many serious injuries by her age. I think that that's what ultimately stopped her progress. And I hope you are twice wrong, in a sense that it is too early to bury her career. 95% of people would bury Jennifer's career just 2 years ago.

ys
Jan 21st, 2003, 03:38 PM
but the fact that she reached quarters at wimbledon and the us open (beating henin and dokic, both higher ranked), shows she was playing as one of the best 8 players in the big events.

And Ruano Pascual played as one of 8 best players at AO. And Mandula was playing as one of the best 8 players in FO. She is getting consistent at beating low ranked players. But she is
very consistent in lsoing to the best players too.

btw, i think your excuse that dani has beaten players on their "weak surfaces" is lame.and the top 10 in the world should all be capable of good tennis on all surfaces.


Demagogy. Nonsense. The game of most of players are designed to be great on some surfaces, and just decent on others. I.e. players, for whom single-handed topspin backhand is shot their game is pretty much built around, those players will always have their worst results on US hardcourts. That's just how physics of tennis works. There is nothing you can do about that. There is nothing they can do about that.

apoet29
Jan 21st, 2003, 03:40 PM
Originally posted by ys
I think you are wrong and hope you are twice wrong here. First, and that's soemthing I am quite sure, that people may attribute Anna's problems to media hype all they want, but the truth is much simpler - you won't think of any player who'd have that many serious injuries by her age. I think that that's what ultimately stopped her progress. And I hope you are twice wrong, in a sense that it is too early to bury her career. 95% of people would bury Jennifer's career just 2 years ago.

For the record, I am hope that I am wrong too. However, for now, I will answer you by saying that all players get serious injuries in their careers (Seles, Davenport, Henin-Hardenne, Clijsters, Graf amoungst others) and yet they have managed to have consistent results in their careers. Injuries are not a good excuse for Anna, particularly when she has been working with a great coach since last April and yet turns in results like her terrible loss to Henin in the second round. I saw that match. Anna was absolutely crushed by the pressure of playing a top ten player. Her mental collapses have been a problem her entire career and have gotten worse because of the constant media pressure. Yes, Anna had had injuries, but she is too good of an athlete to put in the poor showings that we have seen from her since this time last year.

I'm not trying to bury Kournikova's career just yet, so perhaps the word "killed" was not the proper term to use to describe her current situation. I think you are wrong for not acknowledging that the constant pressure Anna faces every time she sets foot onto the tennis court adversely affects her in some way. It does and matches like the Henin match are proof positive of that. I hope that Anna and Harold are finding a way to deal with those mental issues, if not, she will never be the player she could be.

ys
Jan 21st, 2003, 03:47 PM
I will answer you by saying that all players get serious injuries in their careers (Seles, Davenport, Henin-Hardenne, Clijsters, Graf amoungst others)

WHich of them had 4(!!) serious injuries by the age of 21? She had back injury ( took monthes to heal, and it's healed completely, remember that pach on her back ) , thumb injury ( the biggest one, that was probably the biggest contribution ), 2 or 3 stress fractures, each of those took from few monthes ( as the first one ) to almost an year ( like the last one ) to heal.

No talented tennis player had that many tough injuries in such a young career. It is even surprising that she is still trying to hang on, despite all tough luck. If she was not Kournikova, if she were just another player, who was nto that famous and not supposed to be a champion, I am sure she'd have given up by now, and by now few people would even remember her name. You don't hear and don't remember the names of very talented young players who were not able to launch their careers into the elite because of injuries. It doesn't mean that there is no such players. It's just that they are not kournikovas to get noticed.

Havok
Jan 21st, 2003, 03:49 PM
IMO both Dokic and Hantuchova deserve their rankings, but Dokic deserved it more. Dokic earned that ranking while all of the top 10 players where playing at the same time. while Hantuchova on the other hand got to #5 because 3 out of the top 10 weren't even playing the Australian Open, Seles was injured and then there was Capriati ( i don't buy her reason for loosing). if you compare both Dokic's and Hantuchova's break-through year, Dokic totally kicked her ass. Hantuchova just won 1 tournie and it was a tier 1, while Dokic won 3 tournies, 2 were tier 1's and she won a tier 2 event. anyways, i very much doubt it that Hantuchova will stay up there for that long because next week Dokic is coming back and doesn't have too too many points to defend and the week after Mauresmo is coming back and she's not that far ahead of these 2 players, and if freakin Capriati stops loosing, she'll bump Hantuchova back down in the list of the top 10's.:)

Randy H
Jan 21st, 2003, 03:54 PM
yes Ruano Pascual was one of the 8 best this year at the Australian Open given the section of the draw she was in. She lasted through her section, the others didn't. She was better.

If Henin is amongst one of the *elite* players you list, then surely there is no excuse why she should lose to someone below elite like Daniela on a hardcourt :rolleyes:

Stop making sad excuses.

apoet29
Jan 21st, 2003, 03:54 PM
Originally posted by ys
WHich of them had 4(!!) serious injuries by the age of 21? She had back injury ( took monthes to heal, and it's healed completely, remember that pach on her back ) , thumb injury ( the biggest one, that was probably the biggest contribution ), 2 or 3 stress fractures, each of those took from few monthes ( as the first one ) to almost an year ( like the last one ) to heal.

No talented tennis player had that many tough injuries in such a young career. It is even surprising that she is still trying to hang on, despite all tough luck. If she was not Kournikova, if she were just another player, who was nto that famous and not supposed to be a champion, I am sure she'd have given up by now, and by now few people would even remember her name. You don't hear and don't remember the names of very talented young players who were not able to launch their careers into the elite because of injuries. It doesn't mean that there is no such players. It's just that they are not kournikovas to get noticed.

Let's just agree to disagree on this issue.

daniela's necklace
Jan 21st, 2003, 04:15 PM
jeesus you ppl, Daniela is good and she's getting better, she's doing a good job for now and she's still got many players to face, she's young and will eventually kick some top player butt even if she doesnt necessarily go up on the rankings

if it doesnt get to her head, she will make a better player of herself in time, she still has long ways to go

http://www.geocities.com/shameless_poster/love.txt

spencercarlos
Jan 21st, 2003, 10:01 PM
Originally posted by ys
Before saying that you'd better have checked Henin's results on US hardcourts.. At least Davenport does have titles and Slam semis on clay. Henin did nothing at all on US hardcourts.. Ever..

Henin at the Usopen last 3 years
1999 1st Losing to Mauresmo
2000 4th Losing to Lindsay
2001 4th Losing to Serena
2002 4th Losing to Daniela

Not too shadow. Henin has hard court titles, finals of Hawai Oh, a Usa event also. Now semis of Australian Open, so Henin´s chances on hard are bigger than Lindsay´s on clay, that´s my point.

WhatTheDeuce
Jan 21st, 2003, 10:04 PM
I'd give her more time...

ys
Jan 21st, 2003, 10:10 PM
Not too shadow.

We are talking about a player whose resume has SF of any other Slam, don't we?


Henin has hard court titles

We are talking US hardcourts, OK? Henin's game is OK for RA, because RA is much slower.


finals of Hawaii

Tier IV or Tier V? Can't remember for sure..



so Henin´s chances on hard are bigger than Lindsay´s on clay

I am talking US hardcourts, don't I? And Lindsay is a semifinalist and QF of RG, losing both times to future champion, and she has like 6 clay titles. So no comparison. Henin did nothing on US hardcourts, ever.

~ The Leopard ~
Jan 21st, 2003, 10:29 PM
Let's be honest. I love Dani as much as anyone but I don't think she is currently the fifth strongest player on the tour. In that sense, she will be technically overrated by the new rankings. The rankings do tend to penalise people who don't play a lot of tournaments for reasons such as injuries, or who miss important tournaments for whatever reason.

However, I do think that Daniela has proved that she is a genuine top-10 player. I don't think any of her fans claim more than that. I don't see anyone here (or in the media) claiming that she is currently better than such players as Amelie, Lindsay and Monica. So, apart from the technical point that she is not currently a true #5, I don't think Dani is hyped to the extent that she can be called an overrated player.

I expect she will drift back to a lower place in the top 10 as the year goes on...where she is pending release of the rankings. That kind of ranking, around #8, is appropriate to her current level of play. But she will get better and better, and will become a genuine top 5 player (barring some disaster such as injury).

Great posts apoet :kiss: , and I generally agree with all you say, though I think that ys has a point about Anna's injury problems.

Greenout
Jan 22nd, 2003, 12:35 AM
I don't think she's overated. Andy Roddick is overated-
everyone goes over the top by saying he's America's
golden boy, our new hero, the heir to Agassi/Sampras
dynasty. Pffugh!!

Eurosport, and their British commentators were
the only ones sort of hyping Dani due to coach
Nigel connection. The American press only got
onto the Dani wagon after her huge Indian Wells
title win.

She's a very easy on the eyes, has tons of
charisma and play aggro all court tennis.
What's not to like about that? She actually wins
matches- and gives good matches against the
world top 10.

I don't know why some people discount FED CUP
2002?. It's kind of dumb to give any opinion about
FED CUP 2002 if you didn't even see the matches!!
I did. SLOVAKIA ,and Dani were incredible.

Informative
Jan 22nd, 2003, 01:02 AM
Like I said until I see her winning matches consistently against her competition in the top 10 DH in my opinion remains if not "over-rated" (which as Volcana pointed is a subjective category), then clearly "over hyped." As far as the rankings are concerned (which is a different issue altogether): Hantuchova has obviously earned the points she currently has, and that's that. But is she a better player at this point in her career than Monica or Lindsay or Justine or Kim or Amelie? The answer is NO. So as of now I would personally rate her # 8. I agree she has great potential and like I said in an earlier post I will be the first to congratulate her on her success IF and or WHEN she actually delivers the goods (i.e. WINS slams and major titles). Until then, DH remains a serious up-and-comer but clearly not what so many ill-informed and/or biased media people and some fans think she is. The bottomline in sports is still that champions PRODUCE, not just TALK...

Greenout
Jan 22nd, 2003, 01:05 AM
So, does this mean - that Albert Costa, Thomas Johanssen,
and Iva Majoli are the great players of our generaton because
they won a grand slam?

Sometimes- the non-stigma is stupid. Rios is a greater
player than Costa or Johanssen. Became number 1,
won a hell of alot of Masters Series event titles, and
beat alot of top 10 players. What does it all mean?

selesfan
Jan 22nd, 2003, 01:46 AM
I guess we can also say Anastasia Myskina doesn't deserve to be in the top 10, I don't recall her winning a Tier I title but all I hear for her are cheers and congratulations. I think Daniela has been playing consistent tennis and has had the misfortune of having a Williams sister in her quarter. There aren't many players who can beat them.

Richie77
Jan 22nd, 2003, 02:06 AM
Originally posted by {{{RoB}}}
Dani has earnt 1070 pts in Grand Slams while reaching three quarterfinals (only Seles, Capriati, Venus and Serena have achieved that feat in the past year) and the round of 16 in each grandslam (only Venus and Serena have achieved that feat). Only Venus, Serena and arguably Mauresmo can claim to have a better GS record in the past year - including Clijsters and Henin, the worlds #3 and #4, whose GS records in the past year are littered with pre-quarterfinal and early round defeats. She won a Tier 1 beating the world #3, and reached a swag of semi and quarterfinals while defeating players like Henin, Mauresmo and Dokic and pushing players like Davenport, Clijsters and Venus Williams. Some of you are asking has she ever beaten Capriati or Davenport - well maybe not - but their records over the past 52 weeks are far from spectacular - without a single title between them - and the rankings ONLY reflect the past 52 weeks not the players reputation or achievements prior to those 52 weeks. Whether she has beaten Williams or Clijsters is irrevelant also as the ranking already reflects that they are better than her - to be ranked #5 does not mean that you need to have beaten those ranked 1-4 (although she has beaten Henin). The fact is that with the incidence of the Williams domination - a dupoly - a top 5 player is likely to be less credentialed than a top 5 player might be in a more even era as the dominant players are achieving the more spectacular results and accumulating the most points.

I agree 100 percent. Especially with the last part. So many people are bowled over by what Serena and Venus are doing...and what they're doing is remarkable. But let's not lose perspective...winning a Tier I title, and reaching three Grand Slam quarterfinals is still a huge accomplishment. There are not very many tennis players in history that have done that.
Dani has done nothing but improve ever since her big win at Indian Wells...she may be improving slowly, but she's doing it nonetheless.
Not everyone can just go out and win their first majors at 16 and 17 like Martina Hingis and Serena did. For some players it takes time.

Sharapower
Jan 22nd, 2003, 05:36 AM
Originally posted by jouissant
Let's be honest. I love Dani as much as anyone but I don't think she is currently the fifth strongest player on the tour. (...)
However, I do think that Daniela has proved that she is a genuine top-10 player. (...) I expect she will drift back to a lower place in the top 10 as the year goes on...where she is pending release of the rankings. That kind of ranking, around #8, is appropriate to her current level of play. But she will get better and better, and will become a genuine top 5 player (barring some disaster such as injury).
Jouissant, great post, your honesty is really admirable.
Anyway, being ranked #5 is good for Daniela's carreer and makes us, fans, very proud whatever the context. The point is that from now on, she will have easier draws and increase her chances in major events, TIER I and GS's. Her challenge will be to show she deserves that unique chance by performing results and winning over the top guns (Williamses, Kimmy, Jenny etc.).
The worst thing that I fear concerning Daniela is to become just another Sabatini if you see what I mean...
Becoming the WTA #5 may be either a good or bad situation : good if she considers it as a boost for her motivation and mental energy and as an unexpected chance, bad if it becomes a source of pressure, be it from the public and medias or from herself.
But it's quite obvious that it will be very hard, maybe impossible, for Dani to progress in the rankings for this season. It would require major titles and at least GS finals.

Sharapower
Jan 22nd, 2003, 07:05 AM
Originally posted by knopfler6
Haters are the most pathetic breed. Are you folks sad, angry or just threatened?

Anyway #5 is too high for Dani, she'll drop down after IW for sure. But to say she's over-hyped is specious - it's only hyping if you're ass enough to buy it. The question I always ask myself is "How can they hate such a lovely and nice person?":eek:

Larrybid
Jan 22nd, 2003, 07:47 AM
Will pundits never learn? Venus never needed warm-up events before. Venus could roll out of bed in her pajamas and beat 80% of the tour. I would agree that she generally doesn't play that well this early in the season. Having a GS this early in the season is insane. Why not have the baseball playoofs right after spring trainning, why don't we?

I have no great quibble with Dh's ranking. Some better players have been injured lately, and she seems to beat the players she's supposed to beat - which is something that can't be said about other young talented players. I personally don't see her with the one great talent that jumps out at you, I guess her strenth is solid groundies, but are they that strong to put her ahead ot the pack consistenly? I don't see it.

Neither do I see the sex appeal she supposedly has. Are stick figure women back "in" these days? But I guess people thought Kate Moss was strikingly beautiful too.

the cat
Jan 22nd, 2003, 11:52 AM
I agree with apoet's post. Especially in regards to Dani paying attention to Anna's mistakes, and that Daniela is slightly over ranked. But it's not Hantuchova's fault that Capriati's game has slipped or that Davenport and Hingis have been injured. Otherwise Dani would be ranked about eigth instead of fifth.

The bottom line is this. Daniela is a fine talent who needs more time to mature. And I'm pleased she's becoming consistent in the grand slams. If she stays healthy she will turn in a top 5 player and a consistent threat at the grand slams! :D

The very feline Knop bares her claws! :eek:

tennischick
Jan 22nd, 2003, 11:56 AM
Originally posted by Larrybid
Will pundits never learn? Venus never needed warm-up events before. Venus could roll out of bed in her pajamas and beat 80% of the tour...

LOL!! sad but true.

i wonder if someone can convince her to try this strategy against Serena in the finals...;) ;)

the cat
Jan 22nd, 2003, 12:04 PM
If you think Venus can roll out of bed and beat 80% of the WTA Tour, what does that say about the quality of the WTA Tour?

Sam L
Apr 1st, 2003, 12:24 AM
Well it looks like she WAS/IS overrated afterall! :eek:

aussiefan83
Apr 1st, 2003, 04:16 AM
great post volcana! :)

Crazy Canuck
Apr 1st, 2003, 08:58 AM
Well it looks like she WAS/IS overrated afterall! :eek:
She is still 19, no?

eshell
Apr 2nd, 2003, 02:42 PM
I agree with Rebecca. Daniela is still young. Let's give her a chance to mature with her game before we label her as overrated.