PDA

View Full Version : Williams domination? or Serena domination?


selesrules
Jan 25th, 2003, 02:31 PM
Well, it's obvious that both Williams sisters are clearly no.1 and no.2 and above the rest. However should we talk about Williams domination? It seems to me that it's more of a Serena domination. It's more something like

1. Serena
...big gap...
2. Venus
...big gap...
3-10

Venus has lost the last 5 times to Serena, including the last 4 grandslam finals. That to me shows that Venus isn't part of the domination, she's won 0 tier 1s and 0 grandslams in the last year or more. So should we refer to it as Williams domination or Serena domination?

selesrules
Jan 25th, 2003, 02:34 PM
Well, I agree that Venus is clearly the 2nd best and above the rest. But I still think that it should be called the Serena domination since she's way above everyone else including Venus. But anyways it's just some stupid technical thing, it doesn't really matter at the end of the day.

yoyo
Jan 25th, 2003, 02:34 PM
If it was not Williams domination, you would have seen somebody else in the other side of the net. Be Smart ! Think for yourself !

selesrules
Jan 25th, 2003, 02:36 PM
Well I don't see Venus dominating. It's Serena who's dominating. Otherwise we can say that Clijsters is also dominating because she's way above the rest of the top 10 right now. Why stop at 2 and not at 3 for example....

selesrules
Jan 25th, 2003, 02:39 PM
There was a period after the stabbing when for example Steffi and Aranxta were no.1 and no.2. However it was Steffi who was winning everything and Aranxta was only the finalist. Did we say it was an Steffi/Aranxta domination? it was more of a Steffi domination.

Uxobi
Jan 25th, 2003, 02:39 PM
DUH---Who else has been playing GS finals? Venus and Serena are both dominating women's tennis. The AO final proved that they are both very dominating. A few miscue's by Venus cost her the match...it could have gone either way. Venus just tensed up.
Compared to the rest of the field, both Venus and Serena are playing at a different level.

selesrules
Jan 25th, 2003, 02:40 PM
Uxobi, read my previous post.

Uxobi
Jan 25th, 2003, 02:50 PM
I did. I agree with the majority of tennis experts....both Venus and Serena will be dominating women's tennis for a long time. Both Venus and Serena play the same type of dominating tennis. They are equally dominating.

Averylove
Jan 25th, 2003, 03:17 PM
Just Looking at who your Favorite Players are just tells me Selesrules is in a losing era !:)
Venus And my Ming The Merciless One " are head and shoulders over the rest ! I knew serena was going to win the 'damn thing"
base on her play of last year as i predicted :angel: Serena's Domination will pay a heavy toll once Venus beats her in a off Tournament Like Miami or someplace else ! once Venus Taste Victory again from Serena she will go on a tear ! and it will be Serena who will have to catch up;)

selesrules
Jan 25th, 2003, 03:34 PM
Venus And my Ming The Merciless One " are head and shoulders over the rest !

But Serena is head and shoulders over Venus too. That's my point. How can someone who is dominated like this be part of the "domination". It's a Serena domination, Venus just happens to be the victim just like the rest of the tour.

kiwifan
Jan 25th, 2003, 03:39 PM
Selesrules shows his/her nerdy stupidity again...

If you're in Venus' half of the draw Venus kicks your ass.

If you're in Serena's half of the draw Serena kicks your ass.

That is the definition of Williams Domination.

The fact that Chris won fewer Slams in the end didn't change the fact that Chris and Navrat dominated their era.

Don't know if you knew this but even Chris and Navrat didn't meet in four grand slam finals in a row!!!

I'm sure this is all lost on "some people".

Volcana
Jan 25th, 2003, 05:26 PM
selesrules - Youwrote it yourself

1. Serena
...big gap...
2. Venus
...big gap...
3-10


It's BOTH Williams domination and Serena domination. But history will record the last twelve months as Serena's time. (Not yet finished, either)

TennisSTUD
Jan 25th, 2003, 06:05 PM
Both of them are dominating tennis right now...doubles and singles...

but i did say RIGHT NOW:p

calabar
Jan 25th, 2003, 06:09 PM
Selesrules,

If it makes you feel better, call it Serena Domination. There... don't you feel better now?

tfannis
Jan 25th, 2003, 07:33 PM
I think selesrules has a point :)....and the Steffi-Arantxa example is a great argument. I think it's a Serena domination right now....It's she who's dominating tennis...not Venus...Serena is capable of winning from everyone...Venus is not...she didn't beat her sister in their last, what was it, 5? matches. So clearly...it is Serena on top dominating EVERYONE...you can't deny that

btw...I'm looking at this totally objectively...I'm not a fan of a Williams sister, but I kinda like Venus and I really can't stand Serena, so if there has to be a Williams' domination, I rather had it the other way around...but I'm just looking at it like it is :)

That been said...and I hope I can say this without getting loads of nasty comments coming back at me :confused:...I think/hope Kim is closing the gap a little bit...she ain't at Venus' level yet, I know that, but she showed us this week she can come near to a Williams in a Slam :) What do you guys think? :)

banana
Jan 27th, 2003, 11:42 PM
but don't u feel like ur discrediting Serena achievement by attributing it as Venus success aswell?

Lisbeth
Jan 27th, 2003, 11:47 PM
Obviously Serena is currently leading Venus, but since the two of them are so far ahead of the pack I would say it is a "Williams domination".

(Though I'm hoping by this time next year it will be a "Williams/Clijsters" domination!!)

Rocketta
Jan 27th, 2003, 11:53 PM
um, didn't Venus win like 7 titles last year? Exactly how many times did she lose when Serena wasn't in the tournament? That is domination people. It doesn't matter if Serena's not in the draw the field still doesn't have a chance cause Venus is playing. That is a "Williams dominiation" but whatever. :rolleyes:

Roseie
Jan 28th, 2003, 12:35 AM
Selesrules, you keep starting these stupid threads. OK, Serena is dominating. Feel better?

Robbie.
Jan 28th, 2003, 12:48 AM
Rocketta and others. The idea really isn't that stupid.

I mean when you look at it rationally Venus' record over the past year has much more in common with Clijsters than it does with Serena's.

Consider this

Serena holds 4 Grandslam titles to Venus and Kim's 0
Serena holds 9 titles to Venus' 6 and Kim's 5
Serena holds 2 Tier 1's to Venus' 0 and Kim's 0
Kim holds the season ending championship while Venus holds no title greater than a Tier II
Kim has beaten Serena in the last year - Venus hasn't

if you had to say who was more evenly matched at the moment, you would say that Venus and Clijsters owned much more similar records - in fact neither is comprable to Serena.

tennisIlove09
Jan 28th, 2003, 01:04 AM
I know I am in the minority, but I still think it's odd that Serena has beaten Venus 5 straight times.

Leading into Roland Garros 2002, Venus hadn't lost to the same person twice in a row since the summer of 99...then suddenly it's 5 in a row to Serena?

It doesn't all add up to me. I really feel the only time Serena beat Venus last year was the Wimbledon finals. I sense something else was going on in the other 3 :o

Just my opinion though.

Cybelle Darkholme
Jan 28th, 2003, 01:07 AM
domination by both. whenever two people meet in the finals of four straight grandslams and one before that, well thats domination because no other player is getting to the finals.

HAIL-VENUS
Jan 28th, 2003, 01:16 AM
As long as you continue to see these two faces in tournament finals....then, guess what? It's a Williams Domination. I see your point, but in order for your theory to be true there would constantly be other players in the finals against Serena. Venus is clearly dominating everyone else in these slams. And, she usually wins whatever tier she enters. I think Williams Domination it is.


http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20030124/capt.1043465599australian_open_mel103.jpg

Volcana
Jan 28th, 2003, 02:31 AM
However it was Steffi who was winning everything and Aranxta was only the finalist.

'winning everything' obviously doesn't refer to just GS tournaments, since Arantxa WASN'T the finalist every time in GS tournaments. Consequently the fact that Venus currently holds six tournament titles is relevant. Venus is doing a lot more than being 'only the finalist'.

tennisIlove09 - That's your opinion and you're entitled to it.

Rocketta
Jan 28th, 2003, 03:31 AM
Originally posted by {{{RoB}}}
Rocketta and others. The idea really isn't that stupid.

I mean when you look at it rationally Venus' record over the past year has much more in common with Clijsters than it does with Serena's.

Consider this

Serena holds 4 Grandslam titles to Venus and Kim's 0
Serena holds 9 titles to Venus' 6 and Kim's 5
Serena holds 2 Tier 1's to Venus' 0 and Kim's 0
Kim holds the season ending championship while Venus holds no title greater than a Tier II
Kim has beaten Serena in the last year - Venus hasn't

if you had to say who was more evenly matched at the moment, you would say that Venus and Clijsters owned much more similar records - in fact neither is comprable to Serena.

First off Venus has 7 titles and Kim has 4 titles for 2002. Venus did not play but two tier I's. How many did Kim play? Venus has 7 titles out of 16 tournaments. What that is like winning almost 50% of the tournaments you entered. Kim has won 4 out of the 22? These are 2002 numbers. Yeah that's close.

I never knew that the championships have now become slam-like in importance. :)

The Williams have played one tournament in 2003 and low and behold they made it to the finals. We will see if Kim has squeezed herself between Venus and Serena this year. Time will tell.

tennisIlove09
Jan 28th, 2003, 03:35 AM
Volcana --Thank you!!

Rocketta --you are right. Last year was the first year since 99 that Venus had a losing record [%] in tournaments entered/tournaments won.

2000--won 6, entered 10
2001--won 6, entered 11
2002--won 7, entered 16

Larrybid
Jan 28th, 2003, 03:44 AM
OK, its been 4 straight GS's now and has any other player besides Serena betten Venus? Sorry, IT'S THE WILLIAMS DOMINANCE.

P.S. the field couldn't even take Venus out of the final on clay in Paris!

Larrybid
Jan 28th, 2003, 03:53 AM
Originally posted by banana
but don't u feel like ur discrediting Serena achievement by attributing it as Venus success aswell?

No. Both Serena's and Venus's record the last year speaks for it self and can't be diminished. Facts are nobody could beat Serena in a GS tounament this past year, and nobody but Serena could beat Venus in a GS the past year. Nobody's else's record is remotely comparable.

Robbie.
Jan 28th, 2003, 04:04 AM
Originally posted by Rocketta
First off Venus has 7 titles and Kim has 4 titles for 2002. Venus did not play but two tier I's. How many did Kim play? Venus has 7 titles out of 16 tournaments. What that is like winning almost 50% of the tournaments you entered. Kim has won 4 out of the 22? These are 2002 numbers. Yeah that's close.

I never knew that the championships have now become slam-like in importance. :)

The Williams have played one tournament in 2003 and low and behold they made it to the finals. We will see if Kim has squeezed herself between Venus and Serena this year. Time will tell.

First of all, you know very well I was talking about what currently appears on their records over the last 52 weeks - you know, the 52 weeks that count towards their ranking - not 2002 alone. In that time frame Kim has 5 titles, Venus 6.

if we really want to go into winning percentages, lets do so. In the past 52 weeks (the ones that count)

SERENA has won 9/13 tournaments (69%)
VENUS has won 6/15 tournaments (40 %)
KIM has won 5/22 tournaments (23 %)

You are correct in saying that Venus has a better winning percentage than Kim. But quite frankly, so? We are not arguing whether Kim is a rightful #2 - which Venus most certainly is. We are arguing about whether Venus is infact comparable to Serena over the past 52 weeks. After seeing those stats, I still say that VENUS and KIM are much more comparable than VENUS is with SERENA (phenomonal percentage :eek: )

Secondly, I will be quite happy to argue with you until I'm blue that the championships is much more prestigious, and much more important than any Tier II tournament. The championships are the fifth most prestigious tournament on the calendar. The WTA recognises this in its point allocation. The players recognise this, as the top 16 players all turn up. Where in my post did I say that the championships were in any way equal with a grandslam? I certainly cannot see that - please do not put words in my mouth. I merely stated that Kim has been successful at a much more prestigious tournament than Venus has been in the past year. A fact.

As for 2003. Kim has played two tournaments. Venus has played 1. Kim won her first tournament and lost to SERENA in the other. Venus lost to SERENA in her only tournament this year. You cannot see the similarity there? Reverse their semifinal opponents and the result is that Venus is the Semifinalist and Kim runner up. This is especially plausible considering that Kim had beaten Justine (Venus' semifinal opponent) comprehensively in Sydney.

Lets atleast admit that KIM is a lot closer to VENUS than Venus is to SERENA. The statistics say it. There is a much bigger gap between 0 slams and 4, than between 0 and 0. :) Now this does not mean that the tour is not "Williams Dominated", but the contention of some of you that this is a "no brainer" and a "stupid thread" does not ring true when stats are examined. It is certainly a question with some merit and there is no need for some posters to get defensive and rude towards the thread author.

BasicTennis
Jan 28th, 2003, 04:22 AM
It's a Williams duopoly!!!!

Until when??? that's the $1million dollar question.:D

Uxobi
Jan 28th, 2003, 10:21 PM
All the tenis experts agree tha both Venus and Serena are the dominant forces in women's tennis.

Rocketta
Jan 28th, 2003, 10:49 PM
Robb like I said time will tell. No I don't think Kim is closer to Venus then Venus is to Serena. I don't think Venus is close to Serena and I don't think Kim is close to Venus. People are looking to the championships as the ultimate sign of something. The championships might give the players a lot of points but if it was soo important to the players why have so many missed it through the years?

So like I said I dont' think Kim is close to Venus. I think Venus dominates the tour and has a Venus slam if it wasn't for Serena and Serena alone. If you switched and Kim had to play Venus in the semi's Kim still would've been a semi-finalist and Venus still would be the runner-up. It would've been impossible for Venus to have played Serena in the Semi's because Venus is the 2nd best player on tour and she's ranked 2nd. ;)

as to whether it is a good question that can be decided by each individual. I personally don't see why people need to say Sereana domination not Williams domination. As far as the slams go its been a Williams domination 4 out of 4 times.

Robbie.
Jan 28th, 2003, 11:07 PM
Originally posted by Rocketta
Robb like I said time will tell. No I don't think Kim is closer to Venus then Venus is to Serena. I don't think Venus is close to Serena and I don't think Kim is close to Venus. People are looking to the championships as the ultimate sign of something. The championships might give the players a lot of points but if it was soo important to the players why have so many missed it through the years?

So like I said I dont' think Kim is close to Venus. I think Venus dominates the tour and has a Venus slam if it wasn't for Serena and Serena alone. If you switched and Kim had to play Venus in the semi's Kim still would've been a semi-finalist and Venus still would be the runner-up. It would've been impossible for Venus to have played Serena in the Semi's because Venus is the 2nd best player on tour and she's ranked 2nd. ;)

as to whether it is a good question that can be decided by each individual. I personally don't see why people need to say Sereana domination not Williams domination. As far as the slams go its been a Williams domination 4 out of 4 times.

It is your personal opinion that it is Williams Domination, it is also your personal opinion that there is the same distance between Kim and Venus as there is between Serena and Venus - and you are entitled to that opinion :) Others are entitled to think other wise though.

On the championships - I think you may be barking up the wrong tree when you say

The championships might give the players a lot of points but if it was soo important to the players why have so many missed it through the years?

I can't remember a player who has intentionally missed the championships - injury aside. I mean three top ten players missed the Australian Open, does that mean that they do not see it as important? At every major tournament there are always going to be players who are injured and unable to play, but I'd be happily corrected if you could find me a list of players over the years who have missed the championships just because they didn't feel like playing at that point in time.

People are looking to the championships as the ultimate sign of something.

I'm not looking to the championships as the ultimate sign of anything. IMO it is the culmative records of Venus and Kim that make them close over the past 12 months, and the championships makes up only a small part of those records.

Uxobi
Jan 28th, 2003, 11:22 PM
Venus Williams plays no warm up matches before the AO. She doesn't drop a set until she reaches the finals......now that's domination. She is really that good.

Robbie.
Jan 28th, 2003, 11:25 PM
Uxobi

Kim hasn't dropped a set all year either except to Serena. Whats your point exactly? :confused:

Rocketta
Jan 28th, 2003, 11:32 PM
Robb- Venus missed the Championships 2001 and 2000 and I don't remember it being to injury more like fear of burnout. Monica didn't play last year due to it being in Germany. Serena didn't play in 2000. I don't remember that being to injury or maybe she wasn't ranked high enough I don't remember. Some others have missed for their own reasons as well. When Serena won it in 2001 it was a good tournament to win but I don't remember people (not saying you do this about kim) pointing to that as an example of how Serena was in the short list of the best top two players. Serena had to go on a tear and win tournaments and a Slam.

In the end it doesn't matter because it will be settled on the tennis court by their play. I'm sure Kim will have an opportunity to play Venus and Serena on clay and on hard courts.

Uxobi
Jan 28th, 2003, 11:33 PM
My point is that Venus is dominating women's tennis. Venus has reached the finals of the last 5 grand slams. Kim hasn't. Venus did not play any warm up tournaments. She just played the AO cold and reached the finals with ease.

Robbie.
Jan 28th, 2003, 11:45 PM
I don't think you can use Seles as an example of players not playing the tournament. I mean if a GS was held in Germany Monica would not play there, so I think that point is moot.

And the schedules of the Williams Sisters have always been an oddity, but in any case, Venus was injured I am quite sure after Linz 2000, and shed didn't play at all after the US Open in 2001, i think citing a wrist injury :confused:. Serena was also injured in 2000.

I think it is a tournament most people want to win, a rung below the Grand Slams definitely, but also a rung above all the other tourneys on the tour.