Tennis Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,631 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Number 1 :)

You all know how I am with this number 1 situation. But I was wondering what you alls defintion of number 1 is and was. I say what it "was" only b/c its clear a lot have changed their opinions on who can be number 1.

Number 1 to me means.

They are the favorites in basically all their matches.
They are grandslam champions
They got to number 1- as in- they got to number 1 beating the former number 1, beating thet top players.
DOMINATION? - all the number 1's were a dominate at some point (maybe just a "lil") but they were.

I can think of number 1's that have done this. Opps i guess I should say all the number 1 players in the world have done these things at some point.

Now, I think that is some peoples opinions today, and it was back then the ONLY opinion of who was number 1. But now we have people out there, that say you don't have to acheive any of these 3-4 things to even be considered number 1, or even be ranked number 1.

My other question is, when and why did people change their minds on what/who number 1 is? It is so surprising. Cuz I know for a fact that say a couple years ago, if there was anyone close to getting to number 1, and not achieved any of the top 3 things above, people would for sure be talking how they DO NOT need any type of consideration of being called "number 1" as in the player or tournies played.

I already know, people will pop in here, and talk about how this is another one of SS number 1 issue threads. But people this is serious. Why everyone is changing their minds on what 'number 1 ' is all about is beyond me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,100 Posts
Number one can only mean number one in the rankings. On the above criteria very few people since Graf have been "number one" for a year on the tour. Several number ones were hardly invincible or even probable winners outside the GS or in some cases of the GS. Some fell foul of the curse of Sandrine Testud in that they neither won their matches against her as number one nor did the sage Sandrine watcher expect them to. You can apply the other criteria but you end up judging on fewer matches. The number one on the tour becomes - last weeks "number one" or the GS winning number one, the number one who is number one but doesn't play very often or the Tier 2 winning number one. The player most likely to win also turns up as the player least likely to play - which means that they are not that likely actually to win. You are also logically derailed by the people who turn up for a week and thrash the best players (the Schnyder or 15 year old Hingis phenomena) They are the best and often look like it - until their week is over.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,762 Posts
SerenaSlam, you made us all happy with ur news about leaving this board. Now please shoo!! Be gone!
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top