[Volcana]

No, that's not an Anna quote. It was actually said by the (now) coach of the Dallas Cowboys, Bill Parcells.

In another thread, in MANY other threads, I've read that Anna Kournikova had the potential to win GS titles, but had 'pissed it away for a little money and fame'. That's never been my sense with Anna. She was a slightly built player with an relatively unsophisticated game who excelled for three short months in 1998. In that period she beat Graf, Seles, Martinez, Davenport, Hingis and Sanchez-Vicario (twice). Outside that period, her significant wins over high ranked players are very few.

1996 Zurich              32 W Amanda COETZER          (RSA) 2-6 7-6 6-4   

1997 Key Biscayne        64 W Amanda COETZER          (RSA) 6-1 3-6 6-3   

1997 Berlin              16 W Ax SANCHEZ-VICARIO      (ESP) 3-6 6-0 6-3   
[color=red]
1998 Key Biscayne        32 W Monica SELES            (USA) 7-5 6-4   
1998 Key Biscayne        16 W Conchita MARTINEZ       (ESP) 6-3 6-0   
1998 Key Biscayne        QF W Lindsay DAVENPORT       (USA) 6-4 2-6 6-2   
1998 Key Biscayne        SF W Arantxa SANCHEZ-VICARIO (ESP) 3-6 6-1 6-3   

1998 Berlin              16 W Arantxa SANCHEZ-VICARIO (ESP) 6-4 6-2   
1998 Berlin              QF W Martina HINGIS          (SUI) 6-3 7-6   

1998 Eastbourne          QF W Steffi GRAF             (GER) 6-7 6-3 6-4   
[/color]
1999 Key Biscayne        32 W Julie HALARD-DECUGIS    (FRA) 6-4 7-6        

1999 Amelia Island       16 W Lindsay DAVENPORT       (USA) 6-4 6-1   

2000 San Diego           16 W Lindsay DAVENPORT       (USA) 2-6 6-4 7-5   

2000 WTA Championships   16 W Jennifer CAPRIATI       (USA) 6-4 6-4   
2000 WTA Championships   QF W Conchita MARTINEZ       (ESP) 6-4 6-0

That isn't the career record of a GS winner vs elite players.
That isn't the career record of a Top Ten player vs elite players.
However, it IS pretty typically the record of a talented but erratic top thrity player, say a Patty Schnyder or a Meghann Shaughnessy. Brilliant wins over elite opposition coupled with inexplicable losses, and long periods of substandard play.

When was the last time top thirty talent garnered this ind of money and fame? Ever?

Anna isn't the one with the problem. It's her fans over-inflated expectations. Nothing in Anna's GS record says 'GS winner'. She's played in 21 GS tournaments and only made it past the fourth round twice. Yet she ws always saddled with 'has the talent to win a GS', has the talent to be a top five player'. A crock, and a total one. The ultimate measure of tennis talent ois winning tournaments. If you don't, then whatever you LACKED in talent overwhelmed what you had.

Anna wasn't/isn't the most talented player, but 'pissed away' is ridiculous. Far from wasting what talent she had, Anna maximized the fame and dollars that talent would bring.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

* 1997 Wimbledon        128 W Chanda RUBIN (USA) 6-1 6-1   
  1997 Wimbledon         64 W Barbara RITTNER (GER) 4-6 7-6 6-3   
  1997 Wimbledon         32 W Anke HUBER (GER) 3-6 6-4 6-4     
  1997 Wimbledon         16 W Helena SUKOVA (CZE) 2-6 6-2 6-3   
  1997 Wimbledon         QF W Iva MAJOLI (CRO) 7-6 6-4   
  1997 Wimbledon         SF L Martina HINGIS (SUI) 3-6 2-6

 

[oddkayla]

I have often thought the same about Anna, that given her built, and the style of play she has, she would not be able to hang with the top players, that although she might be able to spring an upset here and there, that is all it would be. I have never thought she was talented enough to be a grand slam champion!

I have also thought that her good wins were overly inflated, which is why fans had such great expectations. A few good tournaments here and there does not make a champion!

Having said that, I have often wondered how her career would have turned out had she won Lipton in 98. Would she have had more confidence, not battling the "titleless" albatross?
When you consider that she once said Venus and Serena do not know how to win and that she thought she was better them, you realise how hard her career must be for her!

 

[KV]

How many injuries Anna's been having? Far too many, with a little less injuries she'd have had more wins against the top players. It's not fair to judge Anna

 

[The Guilty]

Yes and we can't forget how many times she choked when she was able to win a match against a top player or when she was close to it.

 

[bandabou]

I have often thought the same about Anna, that given her built, and the style of play she has, she would not be able to hang with the top players, that although she might be able to spring an upset here and there, that is all it would be. I have never thought she was talented enough to be a grand slam champion!

I have also thought that her good wins were overly inflated, which is why fans had such great expectations. A few good tournaments here and there does not make a champion!

Having said that, I have often wondered how her career would have turned out had she won Lipton in 98. Would she have had more confidence, not battling the "titleless" albatross?
When you consider that she once said Venus and Serena do not know how to win and that she thought she was better them, you realise how hard her career must be for her!

Yeah, how would her career have turned out?! Of course she was better than Serena back then....I mean, this was Serena´s first year on tour. Venus otoh already had a tournament victory, soooo.....

I think probably was talented, but the fame got to her. Instead of doing what the sisters did: Keep working hard, keep improving....Anna was more content to go Hollywood...

 

[Volcana]

How many injuries Anna's been having? Far too many, with a little less injuries she'd have had more wins against the top players. It's not fair to judge Anna

Sorry. Not getting it done.

Venus and Serena Williams are the poster childremn for injured players.
Steffi's career was virtually defined by injuries.
So was BJK.

No excuse for a lack of success

 

[tennisjam]

well, she is not big deal then...

and I agree

one of the biggest tennis failures so far

pitty...

 

[*JR*]

....a talented but erratic top thirty player, say a Patty Schnyder....

Peppermint Patty erratic? Surely you jest!

 

[Chance]

What does her built have anything to do with it? For that part - Justine has prove you wrong!

 

[ajayares]

When was the last time top thirty talent garnered this ind of money and fame? Ever?

Yeah top 30 talent.. that's right she has never made it pass the top 30 in rankings ever.. you are a tool, I was going to reply to the rest of your post, but I haven't got time to type out a reply at the moment (not going to bother either), you obviously have since with the stats you have selectively picked out, it shows that you haven't got much of an idea who was ranked where, going back a few years.. that would have taken some time to pick and choose what you wanted to suit your your argument, but it makes you look like a dickhead, to me anyway, since there is so much missing info.. No doubt though, you will get some of your fellow haters in this thread to back have your stats.. oh well whatever..

BTW 1999 Key Biscayne 32 W Julie HALARD-DECUGIS (FRA) 6-4 7-6

I am still scratching my head to why this stat is included here? I didn't know that someone who is ranked around 12 (Anna) would be playing a top 10 player in the rd of 32? Yeah only 16 seeds too.. Let me know please...


BTW - Injuries wouldn't have anything to do where Anna is now would it, of course not, next you will be saying she has top 220 talent

 

[Volcana]

What does her built have anything to do with it? For that part - Justine has prove you wrong!

Justine is not 'slightly built'. You are talking about a player who battling rumors of steroid use right now. A player who said she trained so hard the last six months to build herself up the sessions left her crying.

 

[Volcana]

I was going to reply to the rest of your post, but I haven't got time to type out a reply at the moment (not going to bother either),

A coherent reply would require both intelligence and the abiltiy to understand my initial post. Given that you lack both of these, your inability to answer is understandable.

That's okay, though. I'm sure you tried your best.

 

[Volcana]

well, she is not big deal then...

Of course she is. Just not as a singles tennis player. She does have two GS doubles titles, which is at least significant.

one of the biggest tennis failures so far

No. That's EXACTLY where I disagree. Anna is NOT a failure as player, let alone 'one of the biggest'. Her singles success was simply not commensurate with her fortune and fame. But she'd have had to win double digit GS singles titles to come close.

 

[Martian Willow]

...I don't think that win over Graf was particularly significant...Zvereva beat her two weeks later...given their past record it just tells you how out of form Graf was at that time...Anna could have been a top ten player (...like Myskina, say...) but she is no GS winner...Lucic is a bigger waste of talent imho...and less responsible for it I suspect...

 

[Monsters]

No. That's EXACTLY where I disagree. Anna is NOT a failure as player, let alone 'one of the biggest'. Her singles success was simply not commensurate with her fortune and fame. But she'd have had to win double digit GS singles titles to come close.

er....when we talk about the failures, we use different standards than
we use to measure Lucic .......
when a play beats Monica and Steffi in a matter of a month,
that usually spells out future slam holder,
so tiltes aside, she is no more of a failure than Amanda Coezter

 

[Martian Willow]

er....when we talk about the failures, we use different standards than
we use to measure Lucic .......
when a play beats Monica and Steffi in a matter of a month,
that usually spells out future slam holder,
so tiltes aside, she is no more of a failure than Amanda Coezter

...if that's meant to be a response to me...and I'm the only one who mentioned Lucic...I already explained why the win over Graf wasn't significant...

 

[Chance]

OMG Willow where's the smile

 

[Spirit]

Your post is well taken, Volcana. I'm not a big fan of Anna, but I believe the reason people pay more attention to her (besides her looks) is that she had her brief but impressive success early. It wasn't that she reached the Wimbledon semifinals only once -- lots of people have done that and never become famous. It was that she reached the Wimbledon semifinals the first time she ever played the tournament.

Had she done that the fifth or sixth time, people would say, "Oh, that's nice. Look, Anna made a deep run." But when someone does that the first time, as a (I believe) 15- or 16-year old, everyone boldy predicts "Future champion!" and saddles her with expectations.

If you jump to an early and bold success right out of the gate, it is the standard by which you are judged forever (Mirjana Lucic, anyone?), even if it was a fluke that just happened to come very early rather than later. Result? You are saddled with the stigma, "Not living up to expectations." It's not fair, but that's the way it goes.

 

[-Sonic-]

Aww bless lil Amanda... who hasn't beaten her in their career?

 

[Kart]

Sorry. Not getting it done.

Venus and Serena Williams are the poster childremn for injured players.
Steffi's career was virtually defined by injuries.
So was BJK.

No excuse for a lack of success

I don't think you can compare Anna with those players. Not that I particularly think that injury is the only reason for Anna's lack of success but injury affects different people in different ways and the road back is longer for some than it is for others.