Tennis Forum banner

Kim Clijsters

2454 Views 52 Replies 18 Participants Last post by  angele87
First. The dress she wore in the OZ semis. Can we get Serena, Jenn and Martina in the same style dress? Possibly Serena's in white? Thank you.

Second. Kim is a big girl. 68 kg. grrrreat legs. Almost Serena-esque. Super-athlete. Why doesn't she get more pub?

Third. What was that? Tennis. Ah yes.

Why is she so defensive? Against Jenn she was sitting back and basically daring Jenn to try to pass her. Yes, Kim is so athletic she reaches almost everything. But often a slice lob goes back, which is just another chance for a winner for the opponent. She uses relatively little hip rotation. But she uses so much arm and shoulder in her swings, her stroke is REALLY long. So she almost can't hit big on the run.

If a Venus or a Monica gets control of a point, Kim can't take control back. She has to wait for them to give her a short ball or something. I think she could be vastly more aggressive. And which her agility and co-ordination, she could be the best half-volley-er on the tour.


What y'all think?
1 - 2 of 53 Posts
I think that the main reasons that Kim doesn't get as much attention as some other top 10 players are:

1. That her game isn't particularly "flashy". No-one is going to "ooh-ahh" about her shots the way that they do about say Henin's backhand, or Hingis' anticipation, Venus' reach, Serena's serve, Jen's forehand et cetera. Nor is her game easy to describe - she's not precisely a power player, nor is she a finesse player.

2. Her personality/character doesn't attract much attention. Henin, the Williams sisters, Dokic have interesting family backgrounds (as far as the media is concerned anyway). Mauresmo gets a certain amount of attention because she's lesbian. et cetera. Also, she doesn't say anything derogatory about other players or make particularly controversial statements to the press. She's just a quiet, nice girl and that isn't what the media are interested in.

3. She's not spectacularly beautiful. She is quite pretty, but nowhere near as striking or beautful as Venus, Serena, Dokic, Kounikova, or cute like Hingis.

4. She's been steadily climbing her way to the top. She didn't do a Dokic/Kounikova and dramatically reach the semis of Wimbledon at 16, or a Hingis and win 3 slams at 17. Nor did she do a comeback like Capriati or Seles. And her quiet success story is again just not as newsworthy.

I would agree that she perhaps deserves more attention than she gets, I'm just giving reasons why she doesn't get it.
See less See more
Of course beauty is subjective, but I would still say that Kim isn't striking enough physically to get attention because of her looks. She is pretty, just not striking.
1 - 2 of 53 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.