Tennis Forum banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,215 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
People in these parts say a lot of nasty stuff about Wertheim. But in my experience he's more right than wrong. I just came upon his USOpn 2001 predictions and, in retrospect, he did a nice job.

He predicted Lindsay would beat Serena, but when he wrote this, Serena had gotten out of the QF's once all year.<br />He also predicted Monica would beat Daja Bedanova. (As did we all.)

US Open WOMEN'S SEEDING REPORT

1. Martina Hingis: She's given little indication this year that she deserves her seeding. If the USTA suits had the hubris of their All England counterparts, they'd depart from the rankings and seed one of the Americans first. Unkind draw has her facing NCAA champ Laura Granville and talented Lina Krasnoroutskaya in first two matches.

2. Jennifer Capriati: Her status as a comeback kid for all time would be cemented if she won her third major of the year. But her play has tailed off since losing to Justine Henin at Wimbledon. Also, it remains to be seen how well she'll handle the pressure of her "home Slam."

3. Lindsay Davenport: Not a bad bet to win her first Slam in nearly two years. But one senses that Venus Williams is embedded a little too deeply in her dome.

4. Venus Williams: Hard to pick against defending champ, who has won three of last five Slams.

5. Kim Clijsters: Should be smooth sailing for first week. But if she beats Venus in the quarters it will be an epic upset -- never mind their propinquity in the rankings.

6. Justine Henin: Like her countrywoman Clijsters, it's hard to see her beating a Williams -- Serena, in this case -- in the fourth round.

7. Monica Seles: Inspired play of late and improved fitness make her a credible contender, if an outside one. She needs to get past recent nemesis Meghann Shaughnessy in Round 4. If so, she'll rouse the crowds like no player since Jimmy Connors a decade ago.

8. Amelie Mauresmo: Jangly nerved French femme is overdue for a breakout. She can bang with the best of them, but it's hard to see her surpassing Capriati.

9. Nathalie Tauziat: Could do some damage in final Slam, but, as with Mauresmo, it's hard to see her surviving Capriati's quadrant.

10. Serena Williams: Shame on her for slipping to the 10th spot. That said, after beating both Capriati and Seles last week in Toronto, she has to be feeling confident. Possible rematch against Davenport in quarters is tantalizing.

11. Elena Dementieva: Sophomore slump will continue for last year's surprise semifinalist.

12. Meghann Shaughnessy: Beats a hasty retreat from publicity, but reed-thin Arizonan has game.

13. Amanda Coetzer: A serial underachiever at Slams who could easily lose to Virginie Razzano in Round 2.

14. Jelena Dokic: Tends to play her best tennis at Slams. Not a bad pick if you're in the market for a dark horse. On a related note, we hear Restaurant Associates has curbed the price of salmon.

15. Magdalena Maleeva: Never seems to play her best at the majors.

16. Silvia Farina Elia: Will live up to her seeding. No more, no less.

LOWER SEEDS WORTH WATCHING

17. Anke Huber: In her last event on American soil, she could make life hard for the right seed.

18. Sandrine Testud: Never beats the top guns but always gives them a workout

19. Barbara Schett: Fittingly, the belle du jour of the women's tour takes Anna Kournikova's seeding.

31. Lisa Raymond: Aggressive style always makes for fun watching.

DANGEROUS FLOATERS

Patty Schnyder: On talent alone. <br />Elena Bovina: Davenport-sized teenager has top-10 potential. <br />Daniela Hantuchova: See: Bovina. <br />Francesca Schiavone: The best player you've never heard of. <br />Ashley Harkleroad: Is she as good as her people advertise?

FIRST-ROUND MATCHES TO WATCH <br />(And there aren't many, thanks to the 32 seeds)

Hingis vs. Laura Granville: Top seed might get a surprise from NCAA singles champ.

Seles vs. Nicole Pratt: Fiesty, annoying all-courter will make Seles work.

Huber vs. Maria Emilia Salerni: Former junior champ has little to lose against veteran.

Cara Black vs. Tauziat: The rare women's match between two attacking players.

PREDICTIONS

Semifinals: Seles vs. Davenport; Venus Williams vs. Capriati <br />Final: Davenport vs. Williams <br />Champion: Williams
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,886 Posts
Wertheim and praise in the same sentence, WOW. Yeah, he did better than me on his predictions.<br />I enjoy his column. I don't always agree with him though. I miss his sibling look a like section or whatever he called it. He had to stop it for legal reasons. They weren't allowed to use the celebrity pictures anymore.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
85 Posts
Isn't it ironic for the past 5 slams he has choosen Venus Williams as the champ!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,315 Posts
I have to give Wertheim credit where credit is due. His spelling and punctuation are usually excellent.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,870 Posts
Originally posted by Sam_Forever:<br /><strong>Isn't it ironic for the past 5 slams he has choosen Venus Williams as the champ!!!</strong><hr></blockquote>

there's a reason his book's called venus envy


I have to give Wertheim credit where credit is due. His spelling and punctuation are usually excellent <hr></blockquote>

lol disposable
...

i don't really like jon. well i used to for some time, but then i noticed how he always takes shots at players he doesn't like in his column, and praises those he likes. im starting to think he has a personal vendetta against someone...*cough*
anna... maybe im partly being biased here, but oh well.....

--------------------<br />Go Russians!!!
<br />Go Anna!!!
 

·
Plainclothes Division
Joined
·
6,350 Posts
Actually, DH, he can flub those up too. (Witness his recent mangling of Meskhi.)

I'll credit him with an Evertian ability to recognize the obvious, but that's about it. Venus, Serena, and Lindsay are major threats here, Jen is a contender whose play has slipped since early in the year, Monica had a strong summer, Martina is in a bit of a slide.... etc.

Where to begin...

Lower seeds worth watching... Hmm No Amy Frazier? Oh, yeah, it's not like she'd be dangerous on hardcourts. No Chanda Rubin? That's right, she also usually gives the top guns a workout,... but she occasionally beats them. I can see why she'd be excluded. No Elena Likhovtseva? Does anyone enjoy playing her? No Iroda Tulyaganova?

Floaters... Harkleroad? Whatever possessed him to think she would do anything here? (Other than Nike's PR dept.) Schiavone is "the best player you've never heard of"? Yes, fans who are so into tennis that they'd read Wertheim have never heard of someone who reached a slam quarterfinal less than 2 months ago.

Where's Bedanova in that list? Majoli? <br />First round matches to watch... he actually thought Granville had a chance at beating Hingis? And he felt there weren't many because of 32 seeds? Does he follow tennis at all? Here are some that could have been expected to be good matchups:<br />Majoli/Panova<br />Rittner/Frazier<br />Shaughnessy/Grande<br />Bedanova/Kruger<br />Tanasugarn/McQuillan<br />Schwartz/Coetzer<br />Sucha/Vinci<br />Schnyder/de Los Rios<br />Hantuchova/Dechy<br />Gagliardi/Habsudova<br />Kapros/Srebotnik<br />Maleeva/Hrdlickova<br />Stevenson/Schett<br />Schiavone/Ruano-P

Not all of those turned out as good matches, but for every one that didn't, there were others that were better than expected. And these are just sticking with the names you could reasonably expect a follower of tennis to know. They often cite men's early round matchups featuring players more obscure than these, and most of those disappoint. Wertheim's a typical tennis writer: he follows the men and ignores all but the top women. And his technical analysis is pathetic. I saw him refer to a player A, who hits 95% of his shots in the middle 2/3 of the court, as playing "closer to the lines" than a player B, who actually hits within inches of the sidelines.

Wertheim has access the rest of us can only dream of. I'll give him major props if he can come up with an analysis that will actually make you sit back and think "Hmm, I never thought of that", or "That's a valid point!" Something to indicate he actually understands the nuances of the game, the mathematics of it, and other details. But he's not alone. Other tennis writers are clueless, too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,901 Posts
Hes a prick and should learn to shut his big fat mouth!He knows nothing he just joins the most popular band wagon when it suits him!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,215 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
He knew the Seles fans would kill him. And they did. She lost to Daja Bedanova.

Granville-Hingis WAS one of the few opening round matches that had any chance of being interesting.

Wertheim isn't right all of the time. Neither is anyone who posts here. But a lot of this comes down to killing somebody for not being right enough.

Then again, if people had a rational reaction to him, why would I start the thread?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,901 Posts
GRanville hingis was boring!

Laura couldn't hit a ball in the bloody court shes crap!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,903 Posts
I agree with pretty much everything that Brian Stewart wrote.

I take digs at Wertheim (Werth-less) all the time but I will admit that he's still better than most of the hacks out there. (But they are hacks, remember.)
 

·
double-dog daredevil
Joined
·
12,044 Posts
It's not that he isn't "right enough," it's just that I could name 6 posters on this board off the top of my head who have a better understanding of tennis and the women's tour (and I don't even know that many people here that well yet) and they DON'T have the luxury of getting paid to follow a sport and write about it.

And I don't want to kill him, just shake him by the scruff of his neck sometimes <img src="wink.gif" border="0">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,215 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
griff - If we can first convince Brian Stewart he wants Wertheim's job, we can then convince cnnsi to hire him. He'd be a lot better, it he'd do it.

Hey, Brian! How about a career change?
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top