[GoDominique]

Vote!

[Adal]

So far - Davenport

[John.]

Lindsay unfortunately

[Xepher]

Hingis is not a bad comeback AT ALL.
She won PPO 2007 and Rome 2006, both tier 1, how bad is that?

IMO, Dokic.

[brayster87]

Hingis not just because I like Lindsay...

Lindsay has won 4 titles since she came back and beaten some really good players in Hantuchova, Jankovic, Ivanovic etc...

So it has been a fair comeback (except the injuries)

[lympyisthebest]

Hingis had the better comeback, winning 2 Tier 1s, and reaching #6. Unfortunately, Lindsay has been plagued by injuries this season.

[OsloErik]

Originally Posted by brayster87

Hingis not just because I like Lindsay...

Lindsay has won 4 titles since she came back and beaten some really good players in Hantuchova, Jankovic, Ivanovic etc...

So it has been a fair comeback (except the injuries)

Meanwhile, Hingis actually LOST 4 titles, bringing her total DOWN from the pre-comeback level, and only beat a panda bear and muskrat in exhibition play, and she got to use the doubles alleys whilst her animal opponents used wooden rackets.

I fail to see how 3 Tier III and 1 Tier IV title compare with 2 Tier I and 1 Tier III title, or how Lindsay's super impressive 3 matches at slams compare to Martina's 3 slam quarterfinals. By any objective standpoint, Davenport hasn't been a top player in her comeback. Hingis kind of was.

I mean, it's one thing to say that Davenport has had a pretty good comeback (she has!) but it's entirely another to say it's been better than Hingis. Even if you compare just the first 10 months of their comebacks (roughly the period Davenport has been back on tour), Hingis had a better stretch.

That all said, I do think Davenport had a more impressive comeback. She was older when she retired, pretty much immobilized at the time, AND had a baby.

[Marlboro]

How much older is Lindsay for one? A more equivalent comeback would be that of 2002 after her knee surgery.

[babsi]

It doesn't look like Mrs Leach will be around for too much longer as she isn't entered for anything after the US Open (and they are tournaments she likes to play like Bali, Beijing and Tokyo). I think she will end her year in New York playing or not playing.

Martina beats Mrs Leach in every category in her comeback. She had a good 2006 and after Tokyo last year it seemed to fizzle out as she never reached a quarter-final again. It's just a shame she couldn't get past the quarter-final in GS's she had her chances.

[Olórin]

Well it's all relative. Surely the definition of a good comeback is basically picking up where you left off. For a mother in her thirties, and a tennis player who was having the results she was in 2006, I think Lindsay's comeback has been both successful and worthwhile.

Let's bear in mind that Hingis was barely 25 years old, still in her physical prime, when she came back. Let's also bear in mind that in her final season before her first retirement Hingis had four match points to win a Grand Slam. Did Hingis pick up where she left off? I'm not really sure but I don't think, given this context, that her comeback was anymore successful than Lindsay's.

[Pheobo]

I never thought that Lindsay really quit. When she said she wasn't coming back it was none too convincing. She started playing about 6 weeks after Jagger was born...so really she came back as soon as she could. I don't think that Lindsay was ever gone per se, so I don't see it as a comeback from retirement like Hingis. More like coming back from maternal leave.

[OsloErik]

Originally Posted by Serena~lover

Well it's all relative. Surely the definition of a good comeback is basically picking up where you left off. For a mother in her thirties, and a tennis player who was having the results she was in 2006, I think Lindsay's comeback has been both successful and worthwhile.

Let's bear in mind that Hingis was barely 25 years old, still in her physical prime, when she came back. Let's also bear in mind that in her final season before her first retirement Hingis had four match points to win a Grand Slam. Did Hingis pick up where she left off? I'm not really sure but I don't think, given this context, that her comeback was anymore successful than Lindsay's.

As far as "where they left off..."

Hingis: Last full season before retirement (2001), ended the year ranked #4. In her comeback she hit #6. Pretty darn close.
Davenport: Last full season before retirement (2005), ended the year ranked #1. In her comeback, she's been inside the top 30. Barely.

I see your point, but by the same token Davenport never fell off the ranking. Her last two events of 2006 were Bali and Beijing. Her first two events of 2007 were Bali and Beijing. Hingis, meanwhile, took a little over three years off. I'm not counting her Pattaya match in 2005, as it was effectively the equivalent of Davenport's doubles match in the US Open series.

Both are pretty impressive, but I think Hingis came much closer to matching her level pre-retirement, and has the results as well.

[Dave.]

It's not even comparable- why start a thread? Hingis established herself as a top 10 player again, Lindsay was injured when she had her big chance.

[Uncle Jason]

worst？ i'm going with poor Dokic.........

[misael]

Originally Posted by brayster87

Hingis not just because I like Lindsay...

Lindsay has won 4 titles since she came back and beaten some really good players in Hantuchova, Jankovic, Ivanovic etc...

So it has been a fair comeback (except the injuries)

Are you kidding, Martina made the quarters of a few slams, and beat Lyndsey, Venus , and Maria.