PDA

View Full Version : Henin is the #4 in the world, not Davenport


luv-ya
Mar 24th, 2003, 03:18 PM
just a reminder..
so you guys will stop leaving Henin out of the picure.......:)

toobaxx
Mar 24th, 2003, 04:38 PM
[QUOTE='luv-ya']just a reminder..
so you guys will stop leaving Henin out of the picure.......:)[/QUOTE

the picture? maybe not, but the the number 4 spot in the ranking, YES :devil: :D

Volcana
Mar 24th, 2003, 04:53 PM
Justine is the #4 ranked player, and justifiably so. However, if you actually care why anyone treats Lindsay like the 'real' #4, look at ALL the tournaments, not just the top 17.

Justine has played 21 tournaments in the past 12 months, accumulating 3608 points. She had four 1st match losses.

Lindsay has played 15 tournaments in the past 12 months, accumulating 2911 points. She had one 1st match loss.

On a points per tournament basis,
Justine earns 171 ppt
Lindsay earns 194 ppt

Justine won the last time they played.
Lindsay won every other time they played (Last time Zurich '02).
H2H 5-1 Lindsay

Lindsay does better on average in every tournament she plays, and is much less likely to have a bad outing and lose early.

There's also the 3 GS titles and being Year End #1 three times.

Justine is, in point of fact, the #4 ranked player.
Lindsay is, IMHO, the fourth BEST player.

The Crow
Mar 24th, 2003, 05:06 PM
Volcana,

Why would we have to look to all tourneys instead of the 17 best??

And most facts you sum up to label Lindsay as "better" than Justine bottles down to the fact that she was better in the past (naming head to head, the 3 GS titles, ...), not at the present time.

Sure, one can debate that Linds "should" be the number 4. Fact is that she isn't atm. People should give Justine the credit she deserves (not directed at you Volcana, just a general remark)

fleemke³
Mar 24th, 2003, 06:08 PM
Justine is the number 4 of the world and she will get higher and higher ans higher :cool::worship:

tenn_ace
Mar 24th, 2003, 06:35 PM
[QUOTE='Volcana']Justine is the #4 ranked player, and justifiably so.
There's also the 3 GS titles and being Year End #1 three times.

QUOTE]

if you use this argument, Martina Navratilova is #1 in the world. Still. At 47.

Jutine proved at Ao that she is better than Lindsay. What else do you need?

Volcana
Mar 24th, 2003, 07:07 PM
The Crow - The reason for looking at all the tournaments is that how they performed in the extra tournaments is informative. Multiple first match losses is significant, if you're trying to decide who's better, rather than who should be ranked higher.

tenn_ace - The head to head is 5-1
Justine's one win was 9-7 in the third.

I disagree that win proves Justine is better. At OZ 2002, Monica beat Venus. It did not prove Monica was better. It was, and remains, the only time she beat her. One match is rarely the measure of a rivalry.

But I'm not much invested in Lindsay or Justine. There just happen to be reasons why people think so highly of Lindsay. I listed a few. If Justine wins a GS title or two, I'm sure people will cease to overlook her.

tenn_ace
Mar 24th, 2003, 07:08 PM
The Crow - The reason for looking at all the tournaments is that how they performed in the extra tournaments is informative. Multiple first match losses is significant, if you're trying to decide who's better, rather than who should be ranked higher.

tenn_ace - The head to head is 5-1
Justine's one win was 9-7 in the third.

I disagree that win proves Justine is better. At OZ 2002, Monica beat Venus. It did not prove Monica was better. It was, and remains, the only time she beat her. One match is rarely the measure of a rivalry.

But I'm not much invested in Lindsay or Justine. There just happen to be reasons why people think so highly of Lindsay. I listed a few. If Justine wins a GS title or two, I'm sure people will cease to overlook her.

Justine will win. she's still 21. Lindsay what? 25? 26?

fleemke³
Mar 24th, 2003, 07:08 PM
oh head-2-heads :D
Kim couldn't win from Seles and Cap ... so she isn't the number 3 in the world then? :rolleyes:

Mercury Rising
Mar 24th, 2003, 07:32 PM
I think the most important thing is overlooked:

Lindsay: AMERICAN
Justine: BELGIAN :worship:

caseyl45
Mar 24th, 2003, 10:06 PM
tenn_ace: Justine is 20, and Lindsay is 26.

Now, is Henin-Hardenne or Davenport the better player right now? Good question, so let's compare them since Davenport came back (post-Wimbledon 2002). That seems fair, doesn't it?

Lindsay Davenport -- Tournaments played: 15, Record: 43-14, Winning percentage: 75%, Titles: 1 (2003 Tokyo), Record Against Top Ten: 8-9 (Losses Against Current Top Three: 7), First-Round Losses: 1

Justine Henin-Hardenne -- Tournaments played: 14, record: 30-11, Winning percentage: 73%, Titles: 2 (2002 Linz and 2003 Dubai), Record Against Top Ten: 3-7 (Losses Against Current Top Three 5), First-Round Losses: 1

Head-to-Head: 1-1 2002 Zurich: Davenport 7-6, 7-6
2003 Australian Open: Henin-Hardenne 7-5, 5-7, 9-7

So what separates these two? Obviously, there's very little separation right now. The only thing that really stands out is their records against other top ten players, and if you take away losses to the Williams sisters and Clijsters, both would only have two losses. Davenport's two losses were to Seles and Henin-Hardenne, and Henin-Hardenn's losses were to Capriati and Davenport. At the Grand Slams, Davenport reached the semis of the U.S. Open and lost to Serena, and she reached the Round of 16 at the Australian Open and lost to Henin-Hardenne. Henin-Hardenne reached the Round of 16 at the U.S. Open, losing to Hantuchova, and she reached the semifinals of the Australian Open, losing to Venus.
This year, both have won one title (Davenport a Tier I and Henin-Hardenne a Tier II), but Henin-Hardenne won their only matchup so far, plus her record is better (16-3 with a percentage of 84% to 19-5 and 79%). All three of her losses are against the top three, while only two of Davenport's are (although she retired in one match).
The one who deserves to be ranked higher is going to be the one who does better on clay and grass this spring and summer, because then, both will have twelve months of competition under their belts (barring injury). Right now, though, they're practically tied.

Fingon
Mar 24th, 2003, 10:53 PM
Justine is the #4 ranked player, and justifiably so. However, if you actually care why anyone treats Lindsay like the 'real' #4, look at ALL the tournaments, not just the top 17.

Justine has played 21 tournaments in the past 12 months, accumulating 3608 points. She had four 1st match losses.

Lindsay has played 15 tournaments in the past 12 months, accumulating 2911 points. She had one 1st match loss.

On a points per tournament basis,
Justine earns 171 ppt
Lindsay earns 194 ppt

Justine won the last time they played.
Lindsay won every other time they played (Last time Zurich '02).
H2H 5-1 Lindsay

Lindsay does better on average in every tournament she plays, and is much less likely to have a bad outing and lose early.

There's also the 3 GS titles and being Year End #1 three times.

Justine is, in point of fact, the #4 ranked player.
Lindsay is, IMHO, the fourth BEST player.

You either look at the rankings or career's achievements.
Yes, Davenport has a better per tournament average, but the ranking system is NOT an average system.

Also, that includes Justine playing most tournaments on her worst surface (hardcourt) and Davenport has played none on hers (clay).

The head-to-heads are irrelevant for ranking purposes.

Ending the year # 1, GS titles, what does it have to do with current rankings?

if that was the case, then Iva Majoli, Conchita Martinez, Mary Pierce should be ranked ahead of Justine and Kim and Monica Seles should be the # 1 player of the world right now :rolleyes:

Lindsay does better than average?

well, this year Davenport has played 6 tournaments:

won Tokyo
finals Sydney and Indian Wells
fourth round Miami (injured)
fourth round Australian Open
first round (with a first round bye) Scottsdale.

Justine has played 5 tournaments

won Dubai
semis: Australian Open, Sydney, Antwerp
quarters Miami (she is still playing).

if the rankings were based on history, then when Martina Navratilova briefly returned to the tour in Eastbourne last year she should have been ranked # 1, after all she's won 18 GS singles titles and by weeks at # 1 she is second to Steffi Graf in history :rolleyes:

Also, why do those comparissons apply to Justine and not Kim? other that your desire of always disminishing what Justine does I can't see why Davenport's 3 GS and ye # 1 don't count against her.

Too bad Martina Hingis is not playing, it would be very interesting to see how you would rate her against Serena.

Cybelle Darkholme
Mar 24th, 2003, 11:09 PM
You either look at the rankings or career's achievements.
Yes, Davenport has a better per tournament average, but the ranking system is NOT an average system.

Also, that includes Justine playing most tournaments on her worst surface (hardcourt) and Davenport has played none on hers (clay).

The head-to-heads are irrelevant for ranking purposes.

Ending the year # 1, GS titles, what does it have to do with current rankings?

if that was the case, then Iva Majoli, Conchita Martinez, Mary Pierce should be ranked ahead of Justine and Kim and Monica Seles should be the # 1 player of the world right now :rolleyes:

Lindsay does better than average?

well, this year Davenport has played 6 tournaments:

won Tokyo
finals Sydney and Indian Wells
fourth round Miami (injured)
fourth round Australian Open
first round (with a first round bye) Scottsdale.

Justine has played 5 tournaments

won Dubai
semis: Australian Open, Sydney, Antwerp
quarters Miami (she is still playing).

if the rankings were based on history, then when Martina Navratilova briefly returned to the tour in Eastbourne last year she should have been ranked # 1, after all she's won 18 GS singles titles and by weeks at # 1 she is second to Steffi Graf in history :rolleyes:

Also, why do those comparissons apply to Justine and not Kim? other that your desire of always disminishing what Justine does I can't see why Davenport's 3 GS and ye # 1 don't count against her.

Too bad Martina Hingis is not playing, it would be very interesting to see how you would rate her against Serena.


well justine imo is the number four ranked player. Now on to serena and martina. Serena trumps Martina simply by holding not only a career slam but all four tittles at once. Yes martina has more weeks at number one and more titles blah blah blah because the slams are where greatness lies.

Now serena versus monica is a little different because monica has 9 grandslams but no wimbledon. Serena has a few more slams to win before taking over monicas spot. which brings up a point: does nine aussie opens trump a career slam? I'm not saying monica has nine aussietitles I know she doesn't. However A better comparison would be court versus graf: 24 slams versus steffi's 22. Though one might argue that once you get into that kind of territory its really moot because both are greats.

Fingon
Mar 25th, 2003, 12:37 AM
well justine imo is the number four ranked player. Now on to serena and martina. Serena trumps Martina simply by holding not only a career slam but all four tittles at once. Yes martina has more weeks at number one and more titles blah blah blah because the slams are where greatness lies.

Now serena versus monica is a little different because monica has 9 grandslams but no wimbledon. Serena has a few more slams to win before taking over monicas spot. which brings up a point: does nine aussie opens trump a career slam? I'm not saying monica has nine aussietitles I know she doesn't. However A better comparison would be court versus graf: 24 slams versus steffi's 22. Though one might argue that once you get into that kind of territory its really moot because both are greats.

if you read my post, I didn't say that I think Martina is better than Serena or even Monica, I also don't think Iva is better than Kim, but following Volcana's reasoning this would be the logical conclusion.

Havok
Mar 25th, 2003, 01:06 AM
anyways you weirdos Justine IS #4. Lindsay still has a ways to go before she gets it back. in reality and on paper, it's justine who is the 4th best player in the world at the moment. you can argue the fact that lindsay is the 4th best player in the world when she occupies that spot in the rankings. till the it's Justine #4, and lindsay #5

Crazy Canuck
Mar 25th, 2003, 01:07 AM
Why is Lindsay better than Justine, but not Kim?

banana
Mar 25th, 2003, 01:25 AM
jennifer is no. 5 and Lindsay is no.6 :rolleyes:

Fingon
Mar 25th, 2003, 01:28 AM
Why is Lindsay better than Justine, but not Kim?


because first of all Kim isn't as nice to everyone as Kim.

and second, some people don't like that Justine is referred to as a finesse player, that sound like an insult to some posters.

They even got to the extreme of saying Justine is a little Serena :cool:

Crazy Canuck
Mar 25th, 2003, 01:32 AM
They even got to the extreme of saying Justine is a little Serena

Are you just pulling my leg, or did somebody actually say that? :o

Fingon
Mar 25th, 2003, 01:42 AM
Are you just pulling my leg, or did somebody actually say that? :o


somebody did say that :confused:

niceman
May 4th, 2003, 09:34 AM
hoping Justine will stay there...:)

bis2806
May 4th, 2003, 09:59 AM
omg.... henin is not the real no.4.... as of now, lindsay is the real no.4... first of all, justine has been playing more tourneys in the past 12 months or so and lindsay just came back from her injury and still trying to adjust herself to high quality tennis... and lindsay doesn't fake the way justine did.... in fact, she does not at all....

therefore... the real no.4 - lindsay davenport

Maajken
May 4th, 2003, 10:32 AM
Justine is the #4 ranked player, and justifiably so. However, if you actually care why anyone treats Lindsay like the 'real' #4, look at ALL the tournaments, not just the top 17.

Justine has played 21 tournaments in the past 12 months, accumulating 3608 points. She had four 1st match losses.

Lindsay has played 15 tournaments in the past 12 months, accumulating 2911 points. She had one 1st match loss.

On a points per tournament basis,
Justine earns 171 ppt
Lindsay earns 194 ppt

Justine won the last time they played.
Lindsay won every other time they played (Last time Zurich '02).
H2H 5-1 Lindsay

Lindsay does better on average in every tournament she plays, and is much less likely to have a bad outing and lose early.

There's also the 3 GS titles and being Year End #1 three times.

Justine is, in point of fact, the #4 ranked player.
Lindsay is, IMHO, the fourth BEST player.
great post. i totally agree.

turt
May 4th, 2003, 10:46 AM
Okay, let's do the "points per tournament" stuff for 2003:
Justine: 1663/7 = 238
Lindsay: 1509/8 = 189

So far this year, Justine has better average than Lindsay, on surfaces that should definitely be an advantage for Lindsay...
So, Justine definitely has a shot on the year-end #4, and I think she's playing this year as the fourth BEST player (and the red clay season hasn't even begun ;) )

kr003
May 4th, 2003, 01:50 PM
Here we go again ....

WtaTour4Ever
May 4th, 2003, 02:00 PM
Really in my opinion the rankings should speak for themselves at this level. Once the argument of #1 is made, maybe even #2.....but are you actually arguing about who the TRUE #4 is in the world.....as if thats something people run around excited about. Next we be who is the true #14 in the world.........

starr
May 4th, 2003, 02:15 PM
Once again Volcana has loaded the dice in his statistical "analysis."

Harju.
May 4th, 2003, 02:21 PM
jennifer is no. 5 and Lindsay is no.6 :rolleyes:
:rolleyes:

IMO, Lindsay :p