With all the furore of JJ being crowned #1 I was wondering who people believe is
a "deserving" #1.
- well she was at the helm of the game previously. But her reign as #1 was shit, to put it bluntly. And she is sucking as much as JJ right now, only without the drama. So why does she deserve it that much more? Two Slam Finals and a Slam, I hear you say. True...but she is still a rather shoddy #1, the way she plays sometimes is just
...I don't think a #1 should be like that, personally.
- I'm a fan. But no, just no. I really don't want her to get anywhere near that...she does not deserve it at all.
- legitimate contender. But Slam performances?
- Wimbledon and...?
- definite contender. She did well at Stanford and bravely skipped the Olympics. She is probably favourite.
Larche de Brito
- If only she had come a couple of years earlier.
- should we just pretend
she never retired?!
*Ye, I know the real sages of this forum are going to wade in with "Whoever amassed the most ranking points deserve it"...but that is schmuck, so don't bother.