Thread Tools

jrollaneres25 · Feb 5th, 2013, 11:15 PM

You're a Goddamn hater!

Geisha · Feb 6th, 2013, 01:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt01

Henin won 3 out of 4 Slams in 2003/2004. Venus never even got close to that.
Henin reached all 4 Slam finals in the same year. Venus never even got close to that.
Henin had back-to-back years as year-end #1. Venus never even got close that that.

Do you need some more stats?

She didn't get close to that?

My notes tell me this:

Wimbledon 2000 - WON
US Open - WON
Australian Open 2001 - SF
French Open - R128
Wimbledon - WON
US Open - WON

That's 4/6 Grand Slams and you can add an Olympic Gold Medal in there, as well (and a Miami title, if you want)...in an era where Grand Slam champions competed against each other.

Geisha · Feb 6th, 2013, 01:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt01

My point is that Henin dominated on the WTA tour for a longer period than Venus did and I think only the most ardent Venus stans would seriously try to deny that.

2003/2004 was good play, but hardly dominance.

2006 was comparable to Hingis in 1999 (1/4 Slams does not equate dominance).

Venus played from 2000 to early 2002 practically crushing everyone in her way. That's 2 1/2 years of dominance.

Geisha · Feb 6th, 2013, 01:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bandabou

Well, Juju was more CONSISTENT in that she went deep at tourneys throughout the year..but to say she dominated longer? She only won back to back majors once, in '03-'04, u.s. open-oz open. so to say she DOMINATED would be a stretch imo.

Because by RG she was already losing to Garbin, no?!

Well, Vee has what 2 titles, 2 RU, bunch of SF's at the U.S. open ( Juju apart from the two great runs at the Open and the RU to Masha in '06, isn't that impressive at the U.S. open..at the Oz open, that I give you..is all Juju.

Agreed.

US Open:

1997 - F
1998 - SF
1999 - SF
2000 - WON
2001 - WON
2002 - F

Does anybody else not consider six consecutive SF+ results at a GS impressive?

moby · Feb 6th, 2013, 02:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geisha

2003/2004 was good play, but hardly dominance.

2006 was comparable to Hingis in 1999 (1/4 Slams does not equate dominance).

Venus played from 2000 to early 2002 practically crushing everyone in her way. That's 2 1/2 years of dominance.

Where did you get 2.5 years from? I only count 6 months. 3 months at the end of 2000, and 3 months at the end of 2001.

Matt01 · Feb 6th, 2013, 03:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geisha

2003/2004 was good play, but hardly dominance.

So Venus winning 2/4 Slams in 2000 and 2001 (or 4 out of 6 if you count her best months) is dominance but Henin winning 3 out of 4 Slams in 2003/04 is not?

Hardiansf · Feb 6th, 2013, 04:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt01

So Venus winning 2/4 Slams in 2000 and 2001 (or 4 out of 6 if you count her best months) is dominance but Henin winning 3 out of 4 Slams in 2003/04 is not?

You mean while her main rival, arguably the best player on those period, were injured in 2 of her 3 slams? Okay...

sharapovaslam · Feb 6th, 2013, 04:13 AM

Well the intense debate between Venus and Henin and neutral fans alike between Venus and Henin already answers the question. Nobody in this thread even bothers debating her vs Seles or King, so that already says enough about where she is and where she isnt as far as all time greatness. Her rank all time is about dead even with Henin, only one or two spots at most ahead or behind. Basically she is in the league of Henin and Goolagong and maybe Bueno, and clearly behind Seles and King, and clearly above Hingis and Gibson.

Akil · Feb 6th, 2013, 04:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sharapovaslam

Well the intense debate between Venus and Henin and neutral fans alike between Venus and Henin already answers the question. Nobody in this thread even bothers debating her vs Seles or King, so that already says enough about where she is and where she isnt as far as all time greatness. Her rank all time is about dead even with Henin, only one or two spots at most ahead or behind. Basically she is in the league of Henin and Goolagong and maybe Bueno, and clearly behind Seles and King, and clearly above Hingis and Gibson.

That was quick.

Sam L · Feb 6th, 2013, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt01

Oh yes, those stats are really impressive.

Henin, unlike Venus, has a winning H2H with Serena in Slams but of course you are only mentioning that one loss shortly after Henin's comeback

Oh, and Venus did not peak at the same time with Serena.

Venus peaked in 2000/2001.

How is a player not at their peak if they've reached all slam finals in the last 52 weeks? Venus was absolutely at her peak in 2002-03.

Also, Henin may have reached all four finals in 2006 but who did she lose to? Twice to Mauresmo and once to Sharapova and beat Kuznetsova. These are all great players but they're not Serena Williams.

The only thing Henin has more than Venus is weeks at No. 1. But this is not divisor system and Wozniacki too has more weeks at No. 1 than Venus and Year end No. 1. Doesn't mean much these days.

Henin has winning W/L against Serena in slams but most of those wins came when Serena wasn't even at her peak. Venus played Serena almost exclusively at her peak.

Most importantly, it is Venus's longevity that should put things in her favour.

She is Serena's main rival for the last decade and that's how she'll be remembered whether you like it or not. She is to Serena, Seles to Graf or Evert to Navratilova. Henin is more Goolagong level to Evert/Navratilova.

Caesar1844 · Feb 6th, 2013, 07:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iguehi

For a minute there, they were saying the same thing about Novak Djokovic, but he adapted. The good and smart ones are able to do this.

What are you yapping about, little doggie? Djokovic was born at the perfect time, his game has always been suited to the slow courts and high bouncing balls.

Wingis was the reverse. Slow courts and balls sapped the power out of her already low-power game. Not much you can do about that.

gbenga · Feb 6th, 2013, 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caesar1844

What are you yapping about, little doggie? Djokovic was born at the perfect time, his game has always been suited to the slow courts and high bouncing balls.

Wingis was the reverse. Slow courts and balls sapped the power out of her already low-power game. Not much you can do about that.

But she was "better and smarter than any of the current clowns, including Serena" according to you but now you're claiming not much she could do about slow courts and her low-power game?

When you said she was smart I was about to recommend her for NASA job but now I don't know.

Caesar1844 · Feb 6th, 2013, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gbenga

But she was "better and smarter than any of the current clowns, including Serena" according to you but now you're claiming not much she could do about slow courts and her low-power game?

What was she supposed to do about it? She's a little Swiss girl, not a man mountain like Serena. You can't just develop a power game mid-career because the conditions have changed, and suddenly the courts don't let you hit winners.

liuxuan · Feb 6th, 2013, 11:04 AM

if only henin hadn't shat her load mid match against bartoli at the thought of facing Venus in the Wimbledon 2007, this debate wouldn't be a debate

gbenga · Feb 6th, 2013, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caesar1844

What was she supposed to do about it? She's a little Swiss girl, not a man mountain like Serena. You can't just develop a power game mid-career because the conditions have changed, and suddenly the courts don't let you hit winners.

Hingis is the same age as Venus so what mid-career are you talking about? She was 18 when she lost to Serena in 1999 USO final. She couldn't adapt either because she didn't know how to or was too lazy to try.

And your pathetic attempt at insult as the bold above exposed you as lacking manner. Something to see to.