Tennis Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

SI: BEST EVER: Serena Gaining On Federer In Debate

92K views 2K replies 175 participants last post by  Dominic 
#1 · (Edited)
Serena RG triumph, the needle for best ever has kept moving and has now entered new territory.
She has earned a comparison to Federer in their race to achieve the honor in their respective "league"

This debate, which was unthinkable to non-Serena fan just a year ago, is now ripe in the public and among sport writers.

Serena Williams gaining on Federer in best-ever debate



After a win at Roland Garros, Serena Williams is now within six titles of Steffi Graf's record 22 majors.




"Best ever" arguments generally hit a roadblock in tennis, usually about the refined modern equipment that makes wooden rackets and gut strings so dramatically obsolete. So let's stay in the present and ask this question: Is Serena Williams challenging Roger Federer as the best player of this generation? And could she soon own that distinction all by herself?



It has reached the point where even the most cynical insiders view Williams with reverence, at once startled and blown away by her utter dominance on court. That's how it was with Federer at his best, a time when so many sporting legends -- from Rod Laver to Tiger Woods -- sat courtside to grasp the full measure of his greatness.



Recent memory tends to be the sharpest, focusing on Williams' 91-4 record over the past 14 months and another astounding performance from Rafael Nadal at the French Open. Federer appears to be in gradual retreat -- certainly no shock, by any reasonable standard -- while Williams might be playing the best tennis of her life. In that sense, these two 31-year-old players seem to be headed in opposite directions. But let's take a measured, long-view approach to the argument. I think a strong case could be made for either.



Breaking it down by categories:
The numbers. Before you start wondering if Nadal should be the man in this conversation, remember that between the 2003 Wimbledon and the 2010 Australian Open, Federer won 16 of the 27 majors. That's astounding, especially considering the ever-burgeoning globalization that has brought such depth to the men's tour. Federer is also working on a streak of 36 consecutive quarterfinals in the majors, and as colleague Jon Wertheim noted, only five other players even competed in all of those tournaments. Federer's numbers require a separate book, something to last through the ages, ideally crafted by fountain pen on seasoned parchment paper.



Williams can't match that brand of consistency, and, in fact, became known (often scorned) for missing tournaments over the years. Some felt she was too easily lured by distractions, but in retrospect, her multifaceted life kept her fresh and motivated. Her decisions were vital to her longevity. She has won each of the majors at least twice -- no other active player can make that claim, man or woman -- and with a total of 16, she looks like a cinch to pass Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova (18 each) and perhaps even make a run at Steffi Graf's 22.


The competition.
Scanning the list of Federer's final victims in majors over the years, names such as Lleyton Hewitt, Mark Philippoussis, Robin Soderling, Marcos Baghdatis, Fernando Gonzalez and Andy Roddick appear -- each an exceptional player, but falling short of the caliber Federer faces today in Nadal, Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray. Still, it's worth recalling Federer's absolute mastery in those days, fashioning a set of tools that would have dismantled anyone. Roddick's game fairly screamed "Wimbledon champion," yet he could never get past Federer. The purity of Andre Agassi's ball-striking was the stuff of legend, but I'll never forget his reaction after the 2005 U.S. Open final, when Federer won a tense third-set tiebreaker and then closed out Agassi with a 6-1 fourth set.



"There's nowhere to go," Agassi said. "Every shot you make has a sort of urgency to it. With other guys there's a safety zone, there's a way, even with Pete [Sampras]. But anything you do, Roger potentially has an answer for. He plays the game in a very special way. I haven't seen it before. It's crazy."
For Williams, the toughest challenges came early -- starting with the formidable Martina Hingis, outclassed by the 17-year-old Serena in the 1999 U.S. Open final. Serena had to deal with Jennifer Capriati, Lindsay Davenport, Kim Clijsters, Hingis, Justine Henin, Arantxa Sanchez Vicario and her own sister Venus, each of whom held the No. 1 ranking and did so fiercely, as opposed to the flighty Dinara Safina, Jelena Jankovic Ana Ivanovic and Caroline Wozniacki in contemporary times.



While Federer confronts the frightening proposition of easing toward retirement against Nadal, Djokovic and maybe a half-dozen big hitters capable of taking him down at any time, Serena has no rivals, no worthy challengers. If she won the next four majors without losing a set, no one would be the slightest bit surprised.



Technique.
While everyone takes note of Serena's serve, universally acclaimed as the best ever, has any female player been so devastatingly effective with the two-handed backhand? Evert could match her for accuracy (particularly impressive in the wooden-racket days), but Serena's power is a modern-day marvel. She can be a bit erratic with the forehand, but seldom alarmingly so, and she has great feel around the net. Other players might be quicker around the court, but Serena has kept herself remarkably fit and agile. In short: She has no weakness.



Then there's Federer, and let's face it, he's a cut above everyone -- maybe ever. What Agassi, Laver, Sampras and Bjorn Borg (among others) have admired so greatly was Federer's elegance, grace and anticipation, especially on points absolutely crucial to his survival in a match. It all seemed so effortless for him, and I'm sure he would resent that past-tense reference. He still brings the A-game on his best days


Intangibles.

In terms of what to expect at any given time, they couldn't be more opposite. Federer was a force at every major, guaranteed, never losing his temper beyond a snarl or a growl, quite properly aloof as the master of all he surveyed. Williams could be hurt, dealing with personal issues, absent altogether or playing in an unbridled fury, to the point of inexcusable meltdowns at the U.S. Opens of 2009 (against Kim Clijsters) and 2011 (Samantha Stosur).



On the other hand, Serena's doubles record sends her even farther into the historical stratosphere. It could be argued that she and Venus formed the greatest women's team of all time, and they've got the Grand Slam trophies to prove it. Federer has a magical touch around the net and could have reached the heights (I'd love to see Federer and a chosen partner take on Bob and Mike Bryan), but he simply didn't care that much about doubles -- not enough to routinely pack it into his schedule.



Here, perhaps, is the most significant intangible of all: Serena grew up with a big sister who was making tremendous inroads in the sport, a worldwide role model and all-conquering player at Wimbledon and the U.S. Open. Serena always described herself as the more temperamental, unreliable sister, given to wild flights of fancy, all of which could have undermined her talent, not to mention the fact that she unconditionally loved Venus and savored the many years they lived together. For Serena to rise to such heights, in the sport so many felt would pass her by, is one of the great athletic feats of our time.



Conclusion.

Not a clear call. If pressed, I'd go with Federer's 16 majors in 27 tries as the essential piece of information. Serena just reached 16, and she played her first Grand Slam tournament 15 years ago. But it feels as if Serena has reached Federer's level, just in terms of how she is viewed by the other players. And by all accounts, there is much more to come. Let "best of their generation" have a men's and women's division, and see how it looks five years from now.


Source: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/te...er-federer-serena-williams-best-players-ever/
 
#2 ·
Re: SI: BEST EVER: Serema Gaining On Federer In Debate

I'm one of Serena's biggest fans, but come on. Roger's statistics are unmatched. I agree with the last paragraph about Serena being viewed by her tour in the same way Federer has been viewed by his tour, but in terms of actual 'greatness', there really is no comparison other than the fact that they are close in Grand Slam titles.

Injuries play a large part in Serena's inconsistent results (in terms of 'greatness' -- because she's actually been quite consistent throughout her career), but even she will tell you that injuries and distractions are a major reason as to why she has been able to compete for so long.

Serena has no real rivals, while Roger had Nadal for a long time, and he is part of the Big Four, and he doesn't have a dominating record against any of them. I suppose that gives Serena an edge.

Federer's statistics that really stand out to me and put him way ahead of Serena are: 34 consecutive Grand Slam quarterfinal or better appearances. 23 consecutive Grand Slam semifinal appearances; he has been in the finals of every single Grand Slam at least five times (ten conseuctive Australian Open semifinals); and his five consective Wimbledon and US Open titles are pure greatness; six Year-End Championships.

The most telling statistic that sets them apart in Federer's lengthy period of dominance. Serena's 73-3 record in the past year is amazing -- even if we stretch it to the beginning of the claycourt season in 2012, it is astonishing. But Federer had that record for over three consecutive years! Eight years in a row, he was in the top two, and four years in a row, he finished as number one!

Serena will surpass Federer if she continues this kind of play for another year, and possibly (inevitably) winning two or three more Grand Slams. She's getting closer, but she's not there yet.
 
#8 ·
Re: SI: BEST EVER: Serema Gaining On Federer In Debate

Serena's 73-3 record in the past year is amazing -- even if we stretch it to the beginning of the claycourt season in 2012, it is astonishing. But Federer had that record for over three consecutive years!
Agreed, Serena is now arguably playing the best tennis of her life, being on her career best winning streak.

This is how her recent 73-3 record matches up with Graf and Navra, who were able to maintain fantastic consistency over several CONSECUTIVE years:

75–2 72–3 86–2 72–5 (Graf 1987-1990)

90-3 86-1 82-2 84-5 89-3 (Navra 1982-1986)

Her current winning consistency is an exception rather than a rule.
 
#3 ·
Re: SI: BEST EVER: Serema Gaining On Federer In Debate

The answer to the question who the most impressive road to the title is not important to me.
The fact it has been asked at all is already a win for the WTA.

Also by anecdotal evidence, it is believed that the WTA final was more interesting than the ATP final.

French Open 2013: Was Rafael Nadal or Serena Williams the More Impressive Champ?






Rafael Nadal and Serena Williams are officially the King and Queen of Roland Garros, respectively, after winning the 2013 French Open.


But was Nadal or Williams’ title run more impressive? Nadal faced a lot of the best players in the world along the way, but is that more important than Williams’ domination through the women’s bracket?
Let’s revisit each match that Serena and Rafa played, take a look at how they were tested—if at all—and then determine who was the more impressive champion. They were clearly the two best players at Roland Garros this year, but one was definitely better than the other. So, who will it be? Williams or Nadal?

Revisiting Serena’s Route to the Title
Williams entered Roland Garros as the woman to beat at the French Open as the No. 1 seed and the top player in the world. With a big target on her back, Williams took the pressure in stride and didn’t allow another early-round upset like a year ago.
Williams only dropped one game to Anna Tatishvili in the first round and just three in the second round against Caroline Garcia. Serena easily handled her third-round opponent, Sorana Cirstea, in straight sets, too. She defeated Roberta Vinci in the fourth round just as easily.
Svetlana Kuznetsova was the lone opponent who gave Serena any sort of trouble. Serena dominated the first set, winning 6-1. But Kuznetsova took the second, 6-3. Attempting to avoid a quarterfinal exit, Williams put the pedal to the metal and took down Kuznetsova in the third set, 6-3.


It was thought that Williams might face a similar battle against Sara Errani, the No. 5 seed at Roland Garros. But that didn’t happen. Williams absolutely crushed Errani, falling in just one game throughout the entire match. Williams would win in straight sets, 6-0, 6-1, to advance to the title.


If anyone was going to top Serena at the French Open, it was going to be No. 2 Maria Sharapova. Williams proved to be the stronger player, taking the first set 6-4. Sharapova put in a solid effort to avoiding losing in the final, but Williams was much too powerful, as she won her second French Open crown in straight sets 6-4, 6-4.

Revisiting Rafa’s Route the Title
Rafa is easily the best clay player there is and quite possibly the best there ever will be. He’s only lost on the surface twice this year and made sure that playing at Roland Garros wasn’t going to be the third. Nadal, however, didn’t make things easy on himself.


Nadal dropped the opening set to Daniel Brands in the first round, and the second round went to a tiebreak, which Rafa would end up winning. From there, he took no prisoners and won the following pair of sets to advance to the second round.


For the second straight match, Nadal fell in the opening set. But yet again, he battled back and ended up losing just three games in the next three sets against Martin Klizan. The streak would stop in the third round when Nadal defeated Fabio Fognini in straight sets. It would only take three sets to win in the fourth round and quarterfinals, too.
Then, Nadal faced his biggest test of the French Open, having to go head-to-head against the No. 1 player in the world, Novak Djokovic. Despite the fact that Nadal held a 1-0 and a 2-1 set lead, Djokovic forced a fifth, where the winner would advance to the title match. The two went back and forth, but after 16 games, Nadal prevailed.
Playing David Ferrer in the final was a cakewalk compared to his match against Djokovic. Ferrer never stood a chance against Nadal, as the seven-time champion made it eight in nine attempts, winning the French Open final in straight sets.



Whose Title Run Was More Impressive?
While some may think this is a close race, it isn’t. Nadal’s run was more impressive.


There’s no doubt that Williams was the most dominant woman in this year’s tournament. She only needed a third set once throughout her run at Roland Garros, and that didn’t even come in the final—it came in the quarterfinals. She rarely dropped a game and was never really in any danger of losing.


But then there’s Nadal, who was constantly tested all tournament long. He had to defeat the No. 27 seed, the No. 13 seed, the No. 9 seed, the No. 4 seed and the top seed. While Williams faced some worthy opponents, Nadal faced a much tougher road to his eighth French Open title.


It was mostly expected that both Serena and Rafa would come out on top at the beginning of the French Open, but considering that Nadal faced some of the game’s best players, he deserves the nod as the champion with the most important run to the title.


source: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-or-serena-williams-the-more-impressive-champ
 
#223 ·
Re: SI: BEST EVER: Serema Gaining On Federer In Debate

The answer to the question who the most impressive road to the title is not important to me.
The fact it has been asked at all is already a win for the WTA.

Also by anecdotal evidence, it is believed that the WTA final was more interesting than the ATP final.
When you have the top two players in the world in the final both carrer grand slam champions is much more interesting than having a first time RU Ferrer in the final huh?.. Seriosly.

As for this thread is ridiculous comparisson, Federer has all time numbers and records on the mens side while Serena is still chasing and gunning for a top 4, 3 in the best ever comparisson.

Federer won his first slam almost 4 years after Serena won his first slam, and competition wise, Federer is playing against the best clay courter of all time and probably second the best hard court player of all time in Djokovic (after Federer), something that we can not say about Serena and her competition throught her carreer, and lets not even talk to what she is facing now.. a tour where Sharapova is among the favorites for a Roland Garros title.... geez
 
  • Like
Reactions: wayitis
#6 ·
Re: SI: BEST EVER: Serema Gaining On Federer In Debate

Yes, she is gaining. But that's like saying that I am gaining on Serena Williams because for the first time I made an overhead smash today without injuring vital parts of my body ...
Well, if you put it that way, yes it makes sense.
But that is not the argument I would use.

What is Serena's head-to-to head against her close rivals in the top 10 and what is that of Federer?

This could begin to give you an answer.
BTW, Federer and Serena are also the same age.
 
#5 · (Edited)
Re: SI: BEST EVER: Serema Gaining On Federer In Debate

Serena isn't even in the league of Djokovic, her tennis isn't as good as it should be to be compared with tennis geniuses. Yes, she has power which is too much against her fellow women and her serve (which is better than Ferrer's) , but it's not what can put her at the same level with much more talented Roger or Rafa etc. Roger is better in everything: forehand, backhand, serve, volleys, dropshots, lobs. smash,point construction, even if we exclude physical aspects. His techniques are head and shoulders superior. He beat in his career much physically stronger , faster athletes with huge serves and bullet groundstrokes. They should not be compared at all.


Conclusion. Not a clear call. If pressed, I'd go with Federer's 16 majors in 27 tries as the essential piece of information. Serena just reached 16, and she played her first Grand Slam tournament 15 years ago. But it feels as if Serena has reached Federer's level, just in terms of how she is viewed by the other players. And by all accounts, there is much more to come. Let "best of their generation" have a men's and women's division, and see how it looks five years from now.
author should be ashamed of not knowing about how much Slams Roger won and in how many Slam finals he played...... New lows for SI
 
#14 ·
Re: SI: BEST EVER: Serema Gaining On Federer In Debate

Serena isn't even in the league of Djokovic, her tennis isn't as good as it should be to be compared with tennis geniuses. Yes, she has power which is too much against her fellow women and her serve (which is better than Ferrer's) , but it's not what can put her at the same level with much more talented Roger or Rafa etc. Roger is better in everything: forehand, backhand, serve, volleys, dropshots, lobs. smash,point construction, even if we exclude physical aspects. His techniques are head and shoulders superior. He beat in his career much physically stronger , faster athletes with huge serves and bullet groundstrokes. They should not be compared at all.




author should be ashamed of not knowing about how much Slams Roger won and in how many Slam finals he played...... New lows for SI
Actually the real reason that they should not be compared is because Roger is a man and Serena is a woman. To paraphrase what Tennisbum said, the fact that people feel the need to compare a female player to a male player says a lot about the people making the comparison. They are really pressed about Serena. :lol:
 
#7 ·
Re: SI: BEST EVER: Serema Gaining On Federer In Debate

This one is good too. :D

The Triumph of Serena Williams


Microwave pizza takes longer than the tennis matches of Serena Williams. It feels a little excessive to refer to these engagements as "matches," considering that most of them consist of Serena Williams arriving, and then, on the opposite side, an unconditional surrender. Williams's semifinal versus Sara Errani in the French Open the other day lasted 46 minutes—that's about 1½ episodes of "Seinfeld"—during which Williams won the first set 6-0, the second 6-1. Errani, a finalist at the French in 2012, hit only two winners in the whole deal.

This is the part where I'm supposed to remind you that we're talking about the semifinal of one of the most prestigious tournaments in the game, in which the athletes who reach the semifinal are presumably, you know, pretty good. And yet Williams, the No. 1 women's tennis player in the world, breezes through her competition faster than you or I get through airport security.


For Saturday's French women's final, Williams met the No. 2 player in the world, Maria Sharapova. Normally it is a big whoop when two top players meet in a Grand Slam—think of the rapture that met Friday's men's semi between eventual champion Rafael Nadal and No. 1 Novak Djokovic—but there was little pre-match suspense for Serena v. Maria. Sharapova, the winner of four grand slams, had not beaten Williams—anywhere, on any surface—in nine years, a run of 12 matches.

In August, Williams steamrolled Sharapova in the gold-medal round of the Summer Olympics, 6-0, 6-1, making Sharapova look as if she were playing with a spatula. Entering the French final, Williams had won 30 consecutive matches, the longest winning streak of her career. At the moment, there is not an earthly gap between Williams and the rest of the elite in women's tennis. Serena is her own planet.

Sharapova did better than most people expected Saturday, which is a weird thing to say, because she lost in straight sets, and was the defending champion. But this is how things are at the moment for the field versus Serena Williams. The losing is assumed. The goal is dignity. Win seven or eight games. Survive more than an hour. Sharapova did both of those things in a 6-4, 6-4 match that lasted a solid one hour, 46 minutes—a respectable 3½ Seinfelds—and she was showered with praise. :tape:


When Williams is focused and her best physically, the outcome is not in doubt. Already among the greatest tennis players of all time, Williams is playing the tennis of her life.

It was different last year in Paris. Williams lost in the first round at the French, the first time she'd ever lost in the opening round of a Grand Slam, falling in three sets to Virginie Razzano. Overall Williams hadn't won a singles title at Roland Garros in 11 years, not since her 2002 victory over her big sister Venus. But the early exit in 2012 seemed to rally Williams, who had recently begun working with a new coach, Patrick Mouratoglou. She ripped through the summer, winning Wimbledon, Olympic gold, and the U.S. Open. Since last year's French defeat, she is 74-3. Here's your tennis analysis: That is awesome.

Williams revamped her game for this tournament—as always, she was physical and pounding, but now there was better fitness and lateral movement along that dusty red limestone. Of course, Williams doesn't out-finesse anyone; she overwhelms. She lost one set in Paris. If there was a moment that encapsulated Saturday's final, it arrived at 1-1 in the second set, with Sharapova serving at 30-30.

Sharapova struck a nasty forehand down the line to Williams's left—a put-away shot that most opponents would have netted or missed altogether. Williams managed to slide and stretch to get a racket on it, but then she put a little something extra on it as well, flicking a backhand return that was almost rude in its angle. A couple of strokes later, Sharapova lost the point. In the aftermath, the NBC analyst John McEnroe was still awe-struck that Williams had managed to chase down Sharapova's forehand.

"Against anyone else, that would have been a winner," McEnroe said. "That's the difference."

Women's tennis gets a bad rap for its lack of rivalries and competitiveness, and this is partly true and partly untrue, but at the moment Serena Williams is the greatest show in the sport, on either side. Nobody dominates like she does, not even Nadal, who rolled to his record eighth men's title 6-3, 6-2, 6-3 over David Ferrer on Sunday in a match that will be remembered more for the flare-carrying protester who crashed the court before being tackled by dapper French security. :lol:

At 31, Williams is just a couple of years removed from a blood clot in her lung she says she was lucky to survive, but she has relocated her prime, and added on a jet pack. Her French title is her 16th major tournament singles title of her career (she also has 13 in doubles and two in mixed doubles), putting her two behind both Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova. She might get those by the second week of September.

Williams has at times struggled with her composure, which she's acknowledged, but it also used to be fashionable to give her a hard time about her perceived lack of engagement, as if the idea that a professional tennis player with non-tennis interests was somehow bad for the sport, a complaint that always seemed to be abruptly dismissive of Williams's hard work.

But it's become clear that Williams's ability to navigate in and out of the game has contributed to her staying power. Tennis does not have to be the end-all be-all, even for someone who plays it better than anyone. But don't for a minute question the commitment of Serena Williams, not the Williams who spoke French in her trophy ceremony Saturday, not the Williams who climbed her way back to the top of a game she obviously loves. She is happy, she is hungry, she wants more.

If you have the misfortune of facing her in the next few months, I got nothing for you. Good luck.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324904004578535373681816516.html
 
#40 ·
Re: SI: BEST EVER: Serema Gaining On Federer In Debate

This one is good too. :D

The Triumph of Serena Williams


Microwave pizza takes longer than the tennis matches of Serena Williams. It feels a little excessive to refer to these engagements as "matches," considering that most of them consist of Serena Williams arriving, and then, on the opposite side, an unconditional surrender. Williams's semifinal versus Sara Errani in the French Open the other day lasted 46 minutes—that's about 1½ episodes of "Seinfeld"—during which Williams won the first set 6-0, the second 6-1. Errani, a finalist at the French in 2012, hit only two winners in the whole deal.

This is the part where I'm supposed to remind you that we're talking about the semifinal of one of the most prestigious tournaments in the game, in which the athletes who reach the semifinal are presumably, you know, pretty good. And yet Williams, the No. 1 women's tennis player in the world, breezes through her competition faster than you or I get through airport security.


For Saturday's French women's final, Williams met the No. 2 player in the world, Maria Sharapova. Normally it is a big whoop when two top players meet in a Grand Slam—think of the rapture that met Friday's men's semi between eventual champion Rafael Nadal and No. 1 Novak Djokovic—but there was little pre-match suspense for Serena v. Maria. Sharapova, the winner of four grand slams, had not beaten Williams—anywhere, on any surface—in nine years, a run of 12 matches.

In August, Williams steamrolled Sharapova in the gold-medal round of the Summer Olympics, 6-0, 6-1, making Sharapova look as if she were playing with a spatula. Entering the French final, Williams had won 30 consecutive matches, the longest winning streak of her career. At the moment, there is not an earthly gap between Williams and the rest of the elite in women's tennis. Serena is her own planet.

Sharapova did better than most people expected Saturday, which is a weird thing to say, because she lost in straight sets, and was the defending champion. But this is how things are at the moment for the field versus Serena Williams. The losing is assumed. The goal is dignity. Win seven or eight games. Survive more than an hour. Sharapova did both of those things in a 6-4, 6-4 match that lasted a solid one hour, 46 minutes—a respectable 3½ Seinfelds—and she was showered with praise. :tape:


When Williams is focused and her best physically, the outcome is not in doubt. Already among the greatest tennis players of all time, Williams is playing the tennis of her life.

It was different last year in Paris. Williams lost in the first round at the French, the first time she'd ever lost in the opening round of a Grand Slam, falling in three sets to Virginie Razzano. Overall Williams hadn't won a singles title at Roland Garros in 11 years, not since her 2002 victory over her big sister Venus. But the early exit in 2012 seemed to rally Williams, who had recently begun working with a new coach, Patrick Mouratoglou. She ripped through the summer, winning Wimbledon, Olympic gold, and the U.S. Open. Since last year's French defeat, she is 74-3. Here's your tennis analysis: That is awesome.

Williams revamped her game for this tournament—as always, she was physical and pounding, but now there was better fitness and lateral movement along that dusty red limestone. Of course, Williams doesn't out-finesse anyone; she overwhelms. She lost one set in Paris. If there was a moment that encapsulated Saturday's final, it arrived at 1-1 in the second set, with Sharapova serving at 30-30.

Sharapova struck a nasty forehand down the line to Williams's left—a put-away shot that most opponents would have netted or missed altogether. Williams managed to slide and stretch to get a racket on it, but then she put a little something extra on it as well, flicking a backhand return that was almost rude in its angle. A couple of strokes later, Sharapova lost the point. In the aftermath, the NBC analyst John McEnroe was still awe-struck that Williams had managed to chase down Sharapova's forehand.

"Against anyone else, that would have been a winner," McEnroe said. "That's the difference."

Women's tennis gets a bad rap for its lack of rivalries and competitiveness, and this is partly true and partly untrue, but at the moment Serena Williams is the greatest show in the sport, on either side. Nobody dominates like she does, not even Nadal, who rolled to his record eighth men's title 6-3, 6-2, 6-3 over David Ferrer on Sunday in a match that will be remembered more for the flare-carrying protester who crashed the court before being tackled by dapper French security. :lol:

At 31, Williams is just a couple of years removed from a blood clot in her lung she says she was lucky to survive, but she has relocated her prime, and added on a jet pack. Her French title is her 16th major tournament singles title of her career (she also has 13 in doubles and two in mixed doubles), putting her two behind both Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova. She might get those by the second week of September.

Williams has at times struggled with her composure, which she's acknowledged, but it also used to be fashionable to give her a hard time about her perceived lack of engagement, as if the idea that a professional tennis player with non-tennis interests was somehow bad for the sport, a complaint that always seemed to be abruptly dismissive of Williams's hard work.

But it's become clear that Williams's ability to navigate in and out of the game has contributed to her staying power. Tennis does not have to be the end-all be-all, even for someone who plays it better than anyone. But don't for a minute question the commitment of Serena Williams, not the Williams who spoke French in her trophy ceremony Saturday, not the Williams who climbed her way back to the top of a game she obviously loves. She is happy, she is hungry, she wants more.

If you have the misfortune of facing her in the next few months, I got nothing for you. Good luck.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324904004578535373681816516.html
Now this article was great! :cool:
 
#9 ·
Re: SI: BEST EVER: Serema Gaining On Federer In Debate

stupid argument as it is pretty much impossible to compare male and female tennis players when searching for the "greatest ever"

fed is arguably the greatest ever male tennis player
serena is arguably the greatest ever female tennis player

and that should be enough.
 
#10 ·
Re: SI: BEST EVER: Serema Gaining On Federer In Debate

stupid argument as it is pretty much impossible to compare male and female tennis players when searching for the "greatest ever"

fed is arguably the greatest ever male tennis player
serena is arguably the greatest ever female tennis player

and that should be enough.
I believe you are missing "of their generation"
At the same age, they are of the same generation.
 
#19 ·
Re: SI: BEST EVER: Serema Gaining On Federer In Debate

Folks, as you debate from your usual corners, keep in mind the central point of the debate.
That is, Serena is gaining on Federer.

That in, my understanding, suggests a judgment based on latest trend of the 2 players results and performance.


What I am suggesting is, the arguments made should at least take into account this aspect.

Look at this in marathon terms.
There is a leader in the lead pack, but other are gaining on him or her as the race progresses.
 
#28 ·
Well I'm a fan of both but it's really hard to compare Fed to Serena because in my eyes the mens side of tennis is more challenging, more demanding and even more physical (Djoker, rafa, andy and fed of course) but not saying that the woman's game isn't however. Serena has so much power she wastes virtually no time at all (that explains the GS) but fed is considered the G.O.A.T of mens tennis and yeah serena even though she has won so much she is still behind Steffi and navratilova in terms of no. of majors won. I think that fed and Serena are gonna win Wimbledon this year (obviously)
 
#31 · (Edited)
. Serena has so much power she wastes virtually no time at all (that explains the GS) but fed is considered the G.O.A.T of mens tennis and yeah serena even though she has won so much she is still behind Steffi and navratilova in terms of no. of majors won. I think that fed and Serena are gonna win Wimbledon this year (obviously)
This is an interesting argument.
The fact that Serena makes quick work of her opponents with total domination is held against her?

And Federer latest struggle to survive his closest rivals (but with mixed results) is an asset for him?

Perhaps that was not your intent, but it comes out that way.

Serena has winning record against all top 10.
The higher they ranked, the more lopsided the head-to-head with Serena becomes.

You can't say the same about Federer. This is where the word "gaining" comes from.
Federer and Serena are going in opposite directions regarding this aspect.
 
#32 ·
if you want to allow only Reetards pray to their Goddess , open threads in Serena Slam. Here is discussion thread and you should be ready to read comments you may not like.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leo.
#35 ·
:lol: At NashaMasha in this thread please have a seat.:rolleyes:

I have to agree that the general consensus is that Serena hasn't surpassed Federer in terms of "Greatest of their Generation." I think if she wins more slams than he does however than you can make the comparison and likely agree that Serena was greater. Her tennis skills at their heights are unmatched. Even the past Greats like Evert, BJK, and Navratilova have even acknowledged as much. If Serena is playing her best NO ONE past or present would be able to stay with her in a match. Federer HAD that same aura but if you put him on clay against Rafa, we know who will win and it won't be Roger. In Serena's case you can argue that Henin on clay would challenge or push Serena, but she has no other peer that has a winning H2H record against her. That is pretty damn significant, considering she has played her career against a list of Hall of Famers that are multiple slam winners. She is head and shoulders above her contemporaries, ATM so is Federer but if Nadal can stay healthy it is very likely that he can even challenge Federer in slam count and with that fairly lopsided H2H Nadal could arguably be considered the GOAT on the men's side. No one is brushing up against Serena's records like that. It just makes me conclude if she continues on this path there won't be a valid argument against her GOAT status.
 
This post has been deleted
#37 ·
With threads like this, you know that Serena fanatics have taken over TF.

Serena cannot touch the skills nor the statistics of Federer. And she will never come close. It's not about her.. it's just that his level of play has only been seen on the women's side by the likes of Graf, Navratilova and Evert and the records of those 3 in terms of complete dominance will likely never be touched again.
 
#38 · (Edited)
To be honest, I don't know why the question is even posed or the comparison even made, except to create yet another level of unnecessary hype.

Serena is doing what she desires for and in the WTA, and I doubt she herself cares about what Federer achieves.
I know I don't.
Next thing you now, these same bozos will be dogging Serena about this dumb as dung beetle droppings of a comparison, and adding a level of stress that she doesn't need.

I fully realize that there are a great number of people who admire his game, personality, and even that fugly ass smirk he pastes on his twisted mug to fool people.
But I'm just not one of them.
He just does absolutely nothing for me to even appreciate him.
Just so phoney and fake, IMHO.

Anyway, I just would rather the journalists concentrate(d) on what Serena is doing for and within the WTA only.
There are many fans who don't appreciate the comparison, as it's just plain silly when they compare women to men anyway.

But let me exit this thread before posting what I really think.
 
#41 ·
Serena is doing what she desires for and in the WTA, and I doubt she herself cares about what Federer achieves.
She has said over the years that she has wanted to catch up to Roger in the objective measures (slams), but he keeps winning and moving away from her. She said again at RG that she wanted to match him in slams. I think she will achieve this. In any case, she and Roger are two of the greatest tennis players to play the sport.
 
#57 ·
31>17
 
#60 ·
very silly,you'd better not take this

1 Margaret Smith Court (AUS) 62
2 Martina Navrátilová (USA) 59
3 Billie Jean King (USA) 39
4 Margaret Osborne duPont (USA) 37
5 Louise Brough Clapp (USA) 35
= Doris Hart (USA) 35
7 Helen Wills Moody (USA) 31
= Suzanne Lenglen (FRA) 31
 
#65 ·
Also the way you rank a player in terms of Greatest of All Time varies depends on who you're asking. Some people give all the weight to Slam count, some look at Weeks at #1, others consider a dominant few seasons as their ultimate measurement, so it is really hard to compare. Its like comparing apples to oranges IMO once you start doing a G.O.A.T list of men AND women players. It wasn't very long ago that you would find people argue Pete Sampras is/was the GOAT even though he never won a French Open on the men's side solely based on his slam count.

Its somewhat interesting that on the women's side people are so quick to dismiss Serena when comparing her to Graf, Evert, and Navratilova when clearly she is solidly in that category of greatest singles players of all time. Just my $.02
 
#67 · (Edited)

Scanning the list of Federer's final victims in majors over the years, names such as Lleyton Hewitt, Mark Philippoussis, Robin Soderling, Marcos Baghdatis, Fernando Gonzalez and Andy Roddick appear each an exceptional player, but falling short of the caliber Federer faces today in Nadal, Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray...

For Williams, the toughest challenges came early -- starting with the formidable Martina Hingis, outclassed by the 17-year-old Serena in the 1999 U.S. Open final. Serena had to deal with Jennifer Capriati, Lindsay Davenport, Kim Clijsters, Hingis, Justine Henin, Arantxa Sanchez Vicario and her own sister Venus, each of whom held the No. 1 ranking and did so fiercely, as opposed to the flighty Dinara Safina, Jelena Jankovic Ana Ivanovic and Caroline Wozniacki in contemporary times.
It's not a question.

Serena's dominance is greater. It's been over a longer period of time against a BROADER SPECTRUM of great competition, against whom she has a better record in slam finals than Roger against his more elite competitors, and Serena's still on the up-surge while Roger is looking like a shell of his former self.
 
#68 ·
It's not a question.

Serena's dominance is greater. It's been over a longer period of time against a BROADER SPECTRUM of great competition over-which she has a better record in slam finals against than Roger against his more elite competitors, and Serena's still on the up-surge while Roger is looking like a shell of his former self.
You stated it much better than I have tried to do in several posts now.
 
#70 ·
I'm gunna be careful what I say and I don't care what your opinion is on this but how many trick shots or near-impossible do you see Fed do almost every match he plays nowadays?? I'm not saying Serena is in anyway boring I'm a massive fan of hers but every match she plays its like massive serve followed up by massive forehand or backhand. I'm sorry if that offends anyone but thats my general opinion.
 
#71 ·
If shanks are considered trick shots than he makes a whole lot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jimmy Dragoon
#74 ·
I ain't saying that trick shots are the new craze because he does them regularly, I ain't slagging Serena off believe me I'm a massive fan of hers and I couldn't be happier that she won the french and hopefully wimby next. Some of them are amazing you know.
 
#80 ·
I guess another thing to consider is H2H. How many of Serena's "rivals" have a winning or even close H2H against her? Look at Serena's h2h against the current top 10 or top 50 or top 100. Now look at Federer's... Can't say the same about Federer...
 
#86 ·
Does it really matter how you when on clay? At least she's won it more than once.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top