Tennis Forum banner

1 - 20 of 34 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,215 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I've compiled the number of wins each of these players has against the year end top ten. That doesn't mean the player was top ten when they lost. It's means they are top ten now. Obviously, this does not favor players who get injured a lot. Tough.

Again, the associated number is simply total victories in 2001 over the CURRENT top ten.

16 Davenport<br />15 Williams, V.<br />14 Capriati

09 Williams, S.<br />09 Seles

06 Hingis<br />05 Clijsters<br />04 Mauresmo<br />03 Henin<br />02 Dokic

It looks amazingly reasonable as a ranking system.

[ December 19, 2001: Message edited by: Volcana ]</p>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,704 Posts
Very Interesting... they are quite close to the original rankings and quite reasonable although no way should Serena or Monica be ranked higher than Martina. HEr results this year were overall better than theirs.

Venus still isn't No.1 <img src="wink.gif" border="0">

As expected Lindsay's consistent excellence was rewarded with top placing on this list.

Another interesting thread
 

·
Team WTAworld, Senior Member
Joined
·
20,610 Posts
That's interesting. But we could divide it by the tournaments played and come up with another list.... the average number of top ten players played per tournament. That way, we could see the average strength of the draws faced by the players.
 

·
I'm so current, I'm tomorrow.
Joined
·
49,309 Posts
<font size=3><pre><br />1 Venus 1.250<br />2 Davenport 0.941<br />3 Serena 0.900<br />4 Jennifer 0.778<br />5 Monica 0.600<br />6 Hingis 0.333<br />7 Mauresmo 0.250<br />8 Clijsters 0.227<br />9 Henin 0.143<br />10 Dokic 0.070</pre></font>

That's taking wins divided by events.

[ December 20, 2001: Message edited by: Seles ]</p>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,295 Posts
Interesting.

But if you count Hopman Cup, which the ITF does in its head to heads, then Seles has 10 (a victory over Clijsters) and Hingis has 7 (a victory over Seles).

Also how does Capriati have 14? What am I missing?<br />1 over Seles<br />1 over Davenport<br />3 over Hingis<br />3 over Serena<br />0 over Venus<br />1 over Henin<br />1 over Clijsters<br />1 over Dokic<br />1 over Mauresmo

Adds up to 12
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
621 Posts
Someone please clue me in. How were Martina's results overall better than Serena's? I'd appreciate any enlightenment, and of course, I'm sure their respective winning percentages will be taken into account.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,011 Posts
lobbum, Capriati has at least 2 wins over Dockic, one in Berlin and another one in the summer (don't remember where). I don't know if there is another one missing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,865 Posts
Jennifer has beatipt"elena Dokic THREE times this year.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
63,499 Posts
Berlin, San Diego and New Haven was Jelena in Top 20 not 10!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,704 Posts
A4, while this point is debatable and in reality both players had very similar years results wise I am willing to say that Martina had a better year overall than Serena. Although in those final 3-4 months as Serena tore quality fields apart and Martina wilted mentally and physically it made the decision more unclear.

The fact is that before August Serena had passed the quarterfinals of a tournament just once all year. Her confidence lifted in Canada but she still appeared past the quarterfinals in only 4 events all year. her statistics look like this:

TOURNAMENTS:10<br />WINS:3 FINAL:1 QF:6<br />While all her wins were in high quality fields and in high tier events, these are hardly the results of a top 5 player. (And before you argue Martina didn't win a Tier 1 event, I seem to recall Jelena Dokic also winning two Tier 1's this season, as Serena did - did she also have a better season than Martina <img src="wink.gif" border="0"> )

Serena fared well in grandslams, never falling before the quarters and then making that brilliant run at the US Open. But still in 4 Grandslams she went past the quarterfinals just once.

Martina had a year that by her standards was VERY mediocre but nonetheless it was a top 5 calibre season in which she contested 18 tournaments and fell before the semifinals just three times. Her results read impressively:

TOURNAMENTS:18<br />WINS:3 FINAL:3 SF:9 QF:2 EARLY ROUND:1

That is a high quality season, and her consistent excellence is demonstrated at the grandslams most of all, where she reached the semifinals in 3 out of 4 events, only Jennifer Capriati reached the semis at all majors.

While Serena held a better record overall in 2001 at the Grandslams (mainly due to Martina's first round wimbledon exit), Martina's appearance in 3 semifinals to serena's 1 (they both made 1 final) is enough for me to say that she performed to a higher quality at the grandslams overall.

And Martina held a 2-1 head to head record against Serena over the year.

Their winning percentages are also quite similar and both exemplary though Serena has a slight edge, Martina - 80% (81% if yout take out her very early retirement to Lindsay) and Serena - 84%. Slight edge to Serena, but she played thirty less matches.

The only other statistic that favours Serena is the higher calibre of her 3 wins over Martina's 3. But I do not believe that reasonably this makes up for all the semifinals and finals she DID NOT play in.

So while this is a tough call(even the computer saw it this wya as they are only 2 spots apart), and you can easily interpret these statistics in which ever way you wish to make an argument for Serena, I believe that Martina's Season while unspectacular by her standards was still the 4th best set of results on tour and that is the ranking slot in which she belongs at present.

[ December 20, 2001: Message edited by: tennisaddict ]</p>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,215 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
AlexSydney - It's victories over the year-end top ten, regardless of where they weere ranked when beaten.

"Again, the associated number is simply total victories in 2001 over the CURRENT top ten."

Doesn't matter if they were top ten when they were defeated or not. I had a feeling that wasn't relevant, and I still don't think it's that important. Look how little it changes anything.

Williams_Rulez, Seles - I think all dividing by number of tournaments accomplishes is hiding the fact that Monica and Serena miss a lot of tournaments. That's been a fact of life for both of them since Serena came on tour.

Like I said in the first post, if they can't stay on the court, tough.

[ December 20, 2001: Message edited by: Volcana ]</p>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
653 Posts
I think Venus' numbers are very telling as well as Monica's and Serena's just from the stand point of the number of tournaments they've played. I think the award for most outstanding performance at a tournament goes to Venus Williams for her performance at the Pilot Pen, beating Justine Henin, J. Capriati and L. Davenport, back to back to back in a span of 25 hours and then turn around and win the US Open. I don't think she fully got recognized for that feat. Who else on tour could have done that (maybe Serena).

To the poster who said Martina had a better year than Serena, I couldn't DISAGREE MORE after February of this Martina's year was all down hill. Her best tournaments were Sydney and the AO. Her two tournament wins in February were a joke, lets face it, and no disrespect to those she beat, but they were jokes. As far as both their performances at Grand Slams, yea Hingis made it atleast to the semi's before losing, but she lost to people who were ranked lower than she was, at least Serena lost to players who were all ranked ahead of her. Also look at the fact that Serena had 9 wins over year end top 10 players and only played in 10 tournaments and yet Hingis had only 6 and played in 18 tournaments. Now you tell me who's the better player and had the better year.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,704 Posts
Supremeross, martina may have been all down hill after the AO but she still was still making SF and F when Serena was falling in QF. Until Serena played 3 great tournaments at the end of the year this wouldn't have even been a question. And I don't think three tournaments jsutifies ranking her above Martina overall. If those three tournaments had been at the start of the year and she hadn't gone past a quarterfinal since, we wouldn't even conceive of her being ranked ahead of Martina. Due to the fact these Marvellous feets are fresh in your mind, as a martina's apparent "failures" it is easy to be clouded. AND this ISN"T about who is the best player, it IS ABOUT who performed better this year. As for Martina falling to players ranked below her at grandslams, that tends to happen when your number one <img src="wink.gif" border="0"> . And barring Wimbledon the quality of player that each lost to was very high. Martina lost to Jennifer twice, Serena once and Serena lost to Martina, Jennifer twice, and Venus. That isn't really an issue becuase they more or less lost to the same players at majors.

[ December 20, 2001: Message edited by: tennisaddict ]</p>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
653 Posts
Tennisattick, you're probably the only one who thinks Hingis had a descent year, I think Hingis would even tell you she had the crappiest year since what 1997 or 1996. Who did Hingis beat enroute to the semis of the FO or the semis of the USO? Exactly. And when Serena did beat Hingis at the semis of the USO she handed Hingis her worst loss ever at the USO. And I don't know if you actually watch tennis (I doubt it from your feeble argument) but for those who did watch that match at the USO between Serena and Hingis did anyone else notice that when Serena beat both Hingis and Davenport no one was suprised and the announcer never called Serena's victory over them an upset. It's like no matter what Serena's ranking is, it's expected that she'll beat both of those players. That said, again you're the only one who didn't think Hingis year sucked and now she doesn't even have the number one ranking to cling to and milk respect out of from her fellow players and commentators. Hingis is still a good player, but she slipped this year and that you have to admit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,704 Posts
supremeross, (I am sorry for calling you the wrong name it was an accident, no disrespect ;o)

That said, anmd seeing you've launched a personal attack aginst me, i seriously doubt that you can read.

The fact is Martina had a CRAP year by her standards and it was her WORST year since 1996. She didn't play as well this YEAR as SHE has in the past. Her end of year ranking confirms this. I acknowledged that in my very first post on the subject. But by the standards of the tour the year she had was more than "decent" it was exemplery, how many players can reach the semifinals in all but 3 tournaments they play all year, including three times at majors? The answer is, not many. Certainly not Serena.(and on the subject of quality wins in majors, who exactly did serena beat of any note in her trips to the quarters of AO, RG and Wimbledon?)

Yes Serena smoked Martina at the US Open. But I definitely wouldn't say that she was EXPE|CTED to win every time she stepped out on the court aginst Martina or Lindsay. Was that the only tournamnet you watched all year because I seem to remember Martina dealing out two defeats to Serena earlier in the year. You are obviously from another planet, because everyone knows that mathces between Martina/lindsay/serena/venus/jennifer are always in the balance - no one is expected to win. And of course it isn't a shock when Serena beats Lindsay and Martina, she is one of the best players on tour.

if you want to judge Serena better on the strength of three tournaments in the dying stages of the year, when Martina achieved comprable feats plus more, go ahead, but I will not be convinced otherwise and certainly do not expect to be torpedoed for holding opposing views to you.

[ December 20, 2001: Message edited by: tennisaddict ]</p>
 

·
HAND SCRAPED
Joined
·
7,145 Posts
why is a win over a player who is top ten _now_ any better than a player who was, for example, #8 until october then went to #11 the week before the year end rankings?

surely thats a better win than beating someone in february who was say ranked 20 from jan til oct then got one good result as well as others falling in ranking and scraped in at #10 at the end of the year?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
27,114 Posts
Martina beat Serena twice earlier on in the year so it's not like their matches have been one sided this year.

I think it would be most accurate to say that Hingis had the better first half of the year and Serena the better second half.

As for the original post of this thread, I find it quite interesting that Justine has had so few wins over the current top ten, but yet arguably a better year in terms of grand slams than most of them.

Also it's quite telling about Amelie's year - dominated the clay court season prior to the French, but without all that many wins over the top ten, you have to wonder what would have happened to her results if Serena, Monica and Lindsay had been fit enough to play in the spring.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,215 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
Hedge - It's a matter of mindset. If you view the season from the perspective of a constant rolling 52 weeks, it doesn't make any difference. If you view the season from a champion's race perspective, The rankings at the beginning of the season are just a convenience for seeding purposes. From that perspective, the only rank that matters is the one at the end of the year.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,704 Posts
Kart, I believ some of these results might give a false impression of the quality of players wins through out the year - because quite often there are more wins over players that were top 10 at the time, but weren't by years end. Take Mauresmo for example in reality she had 8 wins over top 10 players (double the amount she is given credit for here) here top 10 wins were:

Monica Seles (Sydney)<br />Anna Kournikova (Paris)<br />Amanda Coetzer (Amelia Island)<br />Amanda Coetzer (berlin)<br />Martina Hingis (berlin)<br />Jennifer Capriati (berlin)<br />Martina Hingis (Rome)<br />Nathalie Tauziat (US Open)

I will try and do this for all of the current top 10 and see what the difference is.

[ December 20, 2001: Message edited by: tennisaddict ]</p>
 
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Top