[marineblue]

Originally Posted by C. W. Fields

Serena is really in her opponent's head. She has won all her matches in straight sets despite not playing particularly well in any of them, she has simply made her opponents play worse. Ironically, that's exactly what so many bashers used to accuse Caro of doing when she was #1!

Well, as usual, bashers are never very consistent with their opinion.

[goldenlox]

Originally Posted by marineblue

Well, as usual, bashers are never very consistent with their opinion.

Oh it was idiots gone wild
The funniest was that Kvitova was the real #1. She still has never spent a moment at #1. I think she'd down to 8 next week, and she has AO SF points to defend
That was just crazy, and its still going on, with Serena & Vika threads

[marineblue]

Originally Posted by goldenlox

Oh it was idiots gone wild
The funniest was that Kvitova was the real #1. She still has never spent a moment at #1. I think she'd down to 8 next week, and she has AO SF points to defend
That was just crazy, and its still going on, with Serena & Vika threads

I know, she's become a bit of a joke in GM thanks to this 'real no.1' , KvittyGOAT hype spread by the crazier proportions of her fans. I noticed the new thread about real no1 and just had to laugh because people who were bashing players like Caro,Safina or JJ are now also bashing Vika even though she won a GS title.
That's just shows how much of a non-argument 'real no.1' is.

Serena owns Vika, I'm not arguing against that, however she is not a real no.1 because she simply doesn't have the points. Same like it was when Safina was a no.1 or whoever that took that ranking.
If Vika loses YEC,which I think she will, I think the press might start spouting the real no.1 nonsense again.

[CWTennis]

the fck, this match will never end

[Robert77]

Aga won 6-7 7-5 6-4! Aga aginst Serena in SF YEC Istanbul 2012 .
Very, very tough match, 3h 30m !!! Stats Aga 53W / 43UE Sara 49W / 47UE.
Both looked extremely tired. It's first Aga's SF YEC. Well done Aga.

[goldenlox]

Li had 2 points to go up a double break. Both very makeable, and missed both. Vika wins set 1, hard to see Li winning 2 sets now, unless she plays a lot steadier

[marineblue]

I watched the first set and a bit of second. Li has gifted all important points to Azarenka. She doesn't have the cool head necessary to finish the job in tight situations. I can't see her winning second set neither.

[terjw]

Originally Posted by goldenlox

Oh it was idiots gone wild
The funniest was that Kvitova was the real #1. She still has never spent a moment at #1. I think she'd down to 8 next week, and she has AO SF points to defend
That was just crazy, and its still going on, with Serena & Vika threads

Yes. I find these "real #1" posts annoying. But in fairness to Petra - she may never have actually got to #1 - but I certainly thought she had a great 2011 and was the best player overall that year despite Caro actually being Y/E #1. My opinion only switched from Caro to Petra the last two or three tournaments of the year. They both won 6 tournaments that year but Petra had Wimbledon and YEC

That's not to say I think the rankings are discredited or that Caro winning two successive YE #1s wasn't a great achievement. But in my own mind - I thought Petra was the best that year.

But the way some posters go - you'd think they want to change the ranking system at the end so as to give Petra the Y/E #1. I'm sure Petra herself would be horrified at the thought and would not want the #1 like that by changing the rules. But it was absolutely right that she got the POW which she can be proud of.

Of course - how things have changed.

[DownInAHole]

Originally Posted by terjw

Yes. I find these "real #1" posts annoying. But in fairness to Petra - she may never have actually got to #1 - but I certainly thought she had a great 2011 and was the best player overall that year despite Caro actually being Y/E #1. My opinion only switched from Caro to Petra the last two or three tournaments of the year. They both won 6 tournaments that year but Petra had Wimbledon and YEC

That's not to say I think the rankings are discredited or that Caro winning two successive YE #1s wasn't a great achievement. But in my own mind - I thought Petra was the best that year.

But the way some posters go - you'd think they want to change the ranking system at the end so as to give Petra the Y/E #1. I'm sure Petra herself would be horrified at the thought and would not want the #1 like that by changing the rules. But it was absolutely right that she got the POW which she can be proud of.

Of course - how things have changed.

I'm not sure what the point difference ended up being at the end of the year but Petra had chances to become number one but due to her own lacklustre results she failed to do so. If you look at the five tournaments that she played immediately after Wimbledon her results were not impressive. In those five events she won just five matches. If you take out Tokyo she only won two matches in four events (including a first round loss at the U.S. Open). All of those events were fairly big/important tournaments (Toronto/Cincinnati/U.S. Open/Tokyo/Beijing) where there were plenty of points available but she did not capitalise on her opportunities and because of that she did not end the year ranked number one. I do agree that if you just compare the titles they won that Petra had a more impressive year but you also need to consider how deep she was getting at the tournaments that she wasn't winning. Earlier in the year she had a poor stretch at three big tournaments (Dubai/Indian Wells/Miami) where she only won a single match.

If you dig a little deeper it becomes very obvious why she was unable to reach number one. There were four big tournaments where Petra could have earned as many as 4900 points (Dubai [900], Indian Wells [1000], U.S. Open [2000] and Beijing [1000]) instead she lost in the first round in all four and only earned 16 points. There were three other big tournaments (Miami [1000], Toronto [900] and Cincinnati [900]) where she only won a single match at each of them earning 330 points out of a possible 2800 points. If you combine the four tournaments where she lost in the first round and the three where she only won her first match she earned 346 points out of a possible total of 7700. Of course no player was going to win all of those tournaments but I think it is reasonable to expect the "real" number one to have made much deeper runs in at least a few of them. These are all fairly big events that featured most of the top thirty and she never made the quarters at any of them. She never even made round of sixteen at any of them. Those are dismal results and her poor performance at those events are the reason why she did not end 2011 as number one.

[terjw]

^^^^ Yes yes OK DIAH. My actual post was not intended to get into an argument about who was the "real" #1. And yes - the reason no doubt that Petra didn't get the #1 was that despite those 6 wins including Wimbledon and YEC that she had some very bad results as well.

I don't want to get into an argument on this. I put bigger weight on those wins than her worst results. And a poll of the players at the YEC that year was pretty unanimous that she was the best that year. Her POY was well deserved. My point was that I think it's quite reasonable to have a view that Petra "deserved" the #1 even though she never actually got it without slagging off the actual rankings implying they are not "real" and slagging off the player (in this case Caro) who does get the #1. And I thought Petra was being dismissed as not deserving anyone even thinking of her as the #1 because "she's never even been #1".

Anyway - you flip-flop don't you. I remember you going on and on and posting how Petra deserved the #1 and not Caro back then. And why do you always have to add such emotive negative words abot a player - Caro or Petra "..those are dismal results and her poor performance.." You've made your point. There's no need for that.

[Chrissie-fan]

Originally Posted by marineblue

I know, she's become a bit of a joke in GM thanks to this 'real no.1' , KvittyGOAT hype spread by the crazier proportions of her fans. I noticed the new thread about real no1 and just had to laugh because people who were bashing players like Caro,Safina or JJ are now also bashing Vika even though she won a GS title.
That's just shows how much of a non-argument 'real no.1' is.

Serena owns Vika, I'm not arguing against that, however she is not a real no.1 because she simply doesn't have the points. Same like it was when Safina was a no.1 or whoever that took that ranking.
If Vika loses YEC,which I think she will, I think the press might start spouting the real no.1 nonsense again.

Yep, whoever is the number one is the real number one. Serena is the best player, but the rankings are not decided by a poll of fans or 'experts' but by whoever has the most points. All that number one vs real number one is just nonsense to me. It's like saying that Real Madrid isn't the real number one whenever they are leading in Spain because Barcelona is better. In fact, it's even like saying that, say, Stosur isn't the real 2011 USO champion because there are several players that are normally better on hardcourts than Sam.

[DownInAHole]

Azarenka/Sharapova are soon to face off for the twenty-third time this year, who is with me in predicting a win for Maria? Not only that but she is going to shock the world by defeating Serena in the final.

[Chrissie-fan]

Originally Posted by DownInAHole

Azarenka/Sharapova are soon to face off for the twenty-third time this year, who is with me in predicting a win for Maria? Not only that but she is going to shock the world by defeating Serena in the final.

[marineblue]

Originally Posted by terjw

^^^^ Yes yes OK DIAH. My actual post was not intended to get into an argument about who was the "real" #1. And yes - the reason no doubt that Petra didn't get the #1 was that despite those 6 wins including Wimbledon and YEC that she had some very bad results as well.

I don't want to get into an argument on this. I put bigger weight on those wins than her worst results. And a poll of the players at the YEC that year was pretty unanimous that she was the best that year. Her POY was well deserved. My point was that I think it's quite reasonable to have a view that Petra "deserved" the #1 even though she never actually got it without slagging off the actual rankings implying they are not "real" and slagging off the player (in this case Caro) who does get the #1. And I thought Petra was being dismissed as not deserving anyone even thinking of her as the #1 because "she's never even been #1".

Anyway - you flip-flop don't you. I remember you going on and on and posting how Petra deserved the #1 and not Caro back then. And why do you always have to add such emotive negative words abot a player - Caro or Petra "..those are dismal results and her poor performance.." You've made your point. There's no need for that.

I disagree. She never deserved the no.1 ranking, ranking can be only earned and since she did not earn it...tough luck. She had a potential but never fulfilled it.IMO she shouldn't have got the POY because she'd not reached no.1 and Caro actually defended the year-end no.1 that year. Well, as these awards come down to individuals' opinions s it was what it was.

[marineblue]

It looks like Sharapova is on her way to take this match. However, it's not all over until it's over. She's had her erratic moments here,too.