[Volcana]

Recall you're dealing with two players roughly the same age. Kim was a wunderkind. Not Hingis level, or even Williams, but she won her first tournament at 17, usually a sign we expect something out of a player. OTOH, Dani won a Tier I at 18.

CH
FR       KC :                        KC :  
SF    KC    : KC          : KC          :     
QF **       : DH DH DH    :    KC KC    : 
4r          :    KC    DH :             : KC                KC
3r DH       :          KC : DH          :                KC
2r    DH DH :       KC    :       DH DH :    KC KC
1r          :             :    DH       : DH       KC KC                    
-- 03 03 03 : 03 02 02 02 : 02 01 01 01 : 01 00 00 00 00 99 99 
-- US WB RG : OZ US WB RG : OZ US WB RG : OZ US WB RG OZ US WB

WB 99 - OZ 01 : Kim started playing GS's 16 months earlier

RG 01 - OZ 02 : Kim gets results that confirm the validity of what little hype she gets

RG 02 - OZ 03 : Dani produces results confirm the validity of a whole lotta hype. Her results at 3 of 4 GS' are better than Kim's, who by then was a clear and consistent top five player.

RG 03 - US 03 : From Kim, we get what we expect. From Dani, regression.

In many ways, Kim has become the defacto standard for the non-GS winner. More to the point, if you outperform Kim over a period of time, we expect big things from you. Several players have outperformed Kim over a period of time recently, then seen their results drop off. But in most cases, the reasons seems obvious. Or we just don't care.

Lindsay, Jenn, Venus - All multiple GS winners. They got theirs.

Amelie - Constant injury

Jelena - Always this feeling she was doing it by quantity, not quality

But with Dani, I thought, for a while, would be the best of the current 20 year olds. Now I wonder how long she can stay top ten, given the Cassack hordes ascending the rankings.

 

[alexusjonesfan]

IMHO Kim is probably a reason we judge Jelena so harshly as well. Kim's rise has been steady whereas both Daniela and Jelena had 'flashier' results in the beginning of their careers and have trailed off this year. Same deal with Justine (even though she's older than Dani and Kim), rarely do we see such consistent rise in ranking and results...leading to harsh judging of their peers because of the unreasonable expectation that all of their peers should have better results every year. Many players like Elena D. outshined Kim and Justine in terms of how well they did early in their career but so far none of them has been able to capitalize on early breakthroughs and continue improving.
Sometimes we forget how rare it is for a player to become a serious contender one or two years after their breakthrough.

 

[GrahamD]

Recall you're dealing with two players roughly the same age. Kim was a wunderkind. Not Hingis level, or even Williams, but she won her first tournament at 17, usually a sign we expect something out of a player. OTOH, Dani won a Tier I at 18.

For those of us that follow Daniela's career more closely than your 'average' tennis fan, we would be the first to admit that this has not been a great year so far, especially since the Australian Open. Daniela herself has said the same. However, winning Indian Wells last year, together with her performances in last years Slams, a final at Filderstadt and being instrumental in Slovakia winning the Fed Cup, no-one can honestly say that any of that was a fluke and that she has the potential to be a great top ten player. Let's not forget that she reached #5 after the Oz Open this year. That was down to hard graft and achieving consistantly good results, not through relapses of other players. But also bear in mind that she started 2002 at #38.

This year has been a lot harder to live up to the expectations the tennis world has burdened her shoulders with and Daniela has recognised that. She has accepted that she has not been playing well and has struggled with the pressures of maintaining her top ten status. She has been working hard to rectify that and she is slowly but surely pulling her game back together again. It might not be spectacular, but it has been an improvement, which is important. Little steps, big leaps.

She will be defending her indoor season points and has also made a very bold statement - next year, she needs to get back to playing "proper tennis". Daniela needs to prove that 2002 was not a fluke and that 2003 was not the 'real' Daniela. I am certain that 2004 will see Daniela begin to realise the potential everyone knows she has. We all know this has been a bad year, she's not the first player to have a bad year and she won't be the last, and she now has to prove to everyone that this year will be her only bad year. Unlike with Kim, people need to be patient with Daniela and it's only a matter of time before we get to see the 'real' Daniela again.

 

[disposablehero]

Kim is the reason a lot of players get judged harshly. Daniela, Jelena, Elena Bovina, Nadia Petrova, and more all started making their moves AFTER Kim, with the exception of Jelena's singular Wimbledon result, which was followed by 8 months of purely nothing. Players like Hantuchova and Bovina were viewed as "younger" than Kim because they were young and and moving up later. Just look at many of the "top young players" threads from WTAworld a year and a half or so ago. You'll see Hantuchova and Bovina on them, but not Kim. Of course, all the players are at least a couple months older than Kim, and while they have their runs and wilt, Kim is now world #1. So they get judged based on the fact they aren't keeping pace with her. That's a pretty rough criteria.

Perhaps another part of the problem is the glut of historically great players that came along right before Kim. In nearly 30 years we've had a dozen #1's, less than 1 every two years. Yet we've had 2 born in 1980, 1 born in 1981, and Justine Henin, 1982, still has a good chance of taking #1 before the year is out. There is less than two years difference in age between Venus, Martina, Serena, and Justine. People may just be spoiled.

BTW, if you compare results at various ages, I think you could argue that Kim HAS been a wunderkind comparable to Venus.

 

[Volcana]

.We all know this has been a bad year.

IMHO, that right there is part of the problem. It HASN'T been a 'bad year', unless you thought she'd be making GS semis. Drop IW '01 out of the equation, her progress seems fine, except for curiously depressed results at the GS tournaments.

If she would just stop allowing matches to be decided by speed and power, she'd be fine.

 

[GrahamD]

IMHO, that right there is part of the problem. It HASN'T been a 'bad year', unless you thought she'd be making GS semis. Drop IW '01 out of the equation, her progress seems fine, except for curiously depressed results at the GS tournaments.

If she would just stop allowing matches to be decided by speed and power, she'd be fine.

Maybe I should re-phrase that. It's been a disappointing year *so far*, because so much was expected of her. I think Dani will have the last laugh though.

 

[mandy7]

Kim is definitely amazing! And it kinda pisses me off when people say stuff like: Kim doesn't deserve that #1 position, or, she's not that good cause she still hasn't won a GS. anyway..

I agree with Graham (no graham, I'm not on drugs, I really agree with you )
This hasn't been the greatest year, but last year wasn't just coincidence. Daniela can go far, she has all the right shots and when she gets back in shape she has the right balance between power and intelligence. And even though I know I'm the Crazy Optimist at the Cocktail Party, I still believe Daniela has all the skills to turn this "phase" around and reach top 5 (or with all the injuries lately maybe a little higher) again! Now she just has to defend as much points as she can in the Indoor Season and rest a little before next season starts. I'm sure 2004 will be a good year for Daniela again. I might go to some tournaments this year (if I can find the time) and scream my lungs out to support her.

Ciao Mandy

and.. uhm: GO KIM!! WIN THE US OPEN!!

if there are loads of mistakes in this post it's cause the batteries of my keyboard are low and I can't seem to find new ones!

 

[GrahamD]

I agree with Graham (no graham, I'm not on drugs, I really agree with you )
This hasn't been the greatest year, but last year wasn't just coincidence. Daniela can go far, she has all the right shots and when she gets back in shape she has the right balance between power and intelligence. And even though I know I'm the Crazy Optimist at the Cocktail Party, I still believe Daniela has all the skills to turn this "phase" around and reach top 5 (or with all the injuries lately maybe a little higher) again! Now she just has to defend as much points as she can in the Indoor Season and rest a little before next season starts. I'm sure 2004 will be a good year for Daniela again. I might go to some tournaments this year (if I can find the time) and scream my lungs out to support her.

That has to be a first Mandy We're all optimistic about next year, but then, there's not much point being a fan if you're not going to be optimistic about anything.

 

[bandabou]

Kim has wunderkind results like Venus?! Only thing to say is: Show me the slams, show me the slams!

 

[great smash]

Kim has wunderkind results like Venus?! Only thing to say is: Show me the slams, show me the slams!

What about comparing accomplishments at similar ages for Venus and Kim as well?

 

[bandabou]

What about comparing accomplishments at similar ages for Venus and Kim as well?

someone else said that if you look at it Kim had wunderkind results comparable to Venus, which ain´t the case sir!

 

[mandy7]

Kim has wunderkind results like Venus?! Only thing to say is: Show me the slams, show me the slams!

you can't judge a player by how many slams he or she has won!
cause some players had to retire from the game when they were still young but were OBVIOUSLY more talented then.. lets say the willimas sisters... cause Martina H, was/is the most talented girl there ever was on the tour.. EVER!

anyway, Kim will get a slam, and Kim will stay at #1, and venus won't be able to get back up there, and you know it!

ciao MandY

 

[oddkayla]

Can people on this board discuss anything without snapping at each other?

Personally I think among her peers, Kim has been the most consistent and has therefore been used harshly as a yardstick for her peers

Same with Justine, who is regarded as a young gun compared to Serena, even though they are about the same age, give or take a few months.

Kim has the best mentality, save for the slams, where she has either choked or had stage fright this year. She is very positive and very competitive, and I think her priorities are straight. She is believable when she says she is only here for the tennis, because you dont see her getting involved in things that distract her. Her peers have a lot to learn from her.

 

[rikvanlooy]

Can people on this board discuss anything without snapping at each other?

Personally I think among her peers, Kim has been the most consistent and has therefore been used harshly as a yardstick for her peers

Same with Justine, who is regarded as a young gun compared to Serena, even though they are about the same age, give or take a few months.

Kim has the best mentality, save for the slams, where she has either choked or had stage fright this year. She is very positive and very competitive, and I think her priorities are straight. She is believable when she says she is only here for the tennis, because you dont see her getting involved in things that distract her. Her peers have a lot to learn from her.

Justine started playing as a pro at the age of 17. It's her fourth year of competition, the same as Kim. It wil be her seventh semi-final at a GS, not bad for a player which career only has started (3 semi-finals in 4 participations at Wimbledon). If Kim wins against Mauresmo, it will be her sixth semi-final. Justine has had the slightly better results at the slams.

Serena her career started earlier than Justine, so you can't compare them by age. At the age of 17 Serena already had won a slam, while the career of Justine had yet to start.

 

[rikvanlooy]

someone else said that if you look at it Kim had wunderkind results comparable to Venus, which ain´t the case sir!

How may slams had Venus when she was 20 ? How many weeks as number one did Venus have at the age of 20 (or, better, in her fourth year as a pro) ?

At the age of 18 (2 years after her debut) Kim was already number 3. What rank did Venus have after two years as a pro ?

 

[Sharapower]

The comparison Kim-Daniela is pointless, considering that Kim turned full-time pro pretty earlier than Daniela, I guess experience matters there though they're roughly the same age.

Daniela's results are clearly disappointing this year, that has nothing to do with Kim. It's not fair to "judge" people but I can't help saying that Daniela has really sucked from Aussie to date. The thing that really worries me is that she cannot find an answer. When I read her last interview it's seems to me she's totally lacking of self-esteem though what she says is not untrue : for sure she's the one on the court and the one who wins or loses, but I'm pretty convinced she lost confidence partly because of the behavior of people around her (coach and family) and she isn't even aware of that. I mean confidence is not a transcendental data but the sum of everything that happens around.

I still believe Dani's time will come, but when ? She better had to make it happen quickly. If she doesn't find back some top performance by 2004, I'm afraid it will become harder and harder. One bad year is possible and happens to everyone but two bad years in a row would be catastrophic.

And yes : 2003 IS a bad year for Dani, don't forget that last year she beat Hingis, Mauresmo and Henin and she took Kim, Venus, Lyndsay to three sets. This year she loses to Harkleroad, Asagoe, Tanasugarn. There is concretely a regression.