Tennis Forum banner
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
547 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Is it necessary to have won a grand slam to become no.1?

Is it a coincidence that Kim became number one in all four categories: single, double, championship single and double? This unique in tennis history. From the 12 female players who ever ascenden to the number one place, only Navratilova was number one in single and double. Players lijk Suarez and Ruano-<pasqual, top double players played more tournaments than KIm. Yet , Kim became no. 1 in double. It's up to any individual player to play in as many tournaments he or she likes. What will be the reaction when Henin became no. 1: Kim only played a few more tournaments. Will it be justified because she won a major? (remember the semi-final?)

Our Kim won two majors in double (Roland-Garros and Wimbledon. Is this quality or not?
It's not the the other players' fault when Serena prefers to cancel her paricpation in a tournament and act in a movie. That is completely her own choice, bur then you cannot blame the others they play too many tournaments. It's not only Kim who played so many tournaments on that age. Capriata, Davenport, Mauresmo would play the same amount, but were unlucky enough to get injured.

People pretend Kim becam no. 1 because Serena couldn't play. What if Venu s or Justine wins the US open? "Thank you Serena for your injury"?

How long ago di Venus win a major?? I can't remember.

Kim became 20 years, three months ago. She was younger to be a no. 1 than many others (Navratilova: 22; Serena: 21; Davenport: 22; Capriati: 25; Sanchez-Vicario: 24; Venus: 22). Seles was younger, but had not to struggle against the Williams-sisters, neither so with Steffi Graf. Kim deserves to be no.1; she still has lots of time to win a major.

People say Kim chokes in the big matches.
It's frustration: whenever Kim has the lead after the first set, het opponent calls for a time-out to look after her injury. Result: Kim loses next set or the match. This happened against Serena in the Australian Open, against Venus in Wimbledon (Venus got saved by the rain), against Capriati in Stanford and last but not least against HeniHardenne in San Diego.

Good luck for Kim next week, but if she doesn't make it all the way to the final: she will stay our hero

WE LOVE YOU, KIM

:wavey: :wavey: :wavey: :wavey: :wavey: :wavey: :wavey:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
547 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Forgot: 2002 was a very unlucky year for Kim. She got injured at the shoulder and couldn't play for months. Nobody ever said: ppor Kim!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,096 Posts
Betty said:
Is it necessary to have won a grand slam to become no.1?

Is it a coincidence that Kim became number one in all four categories: single, double, championship single and double? This unique in tennis history. From the 12 female players who ever ascenden to the number one place, only Navratilova was number one in single and double. :
Arantxa, Hingis and Davenport have also been number 1 in singles and doubles. Kim is the 5th to do this, not the second
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,365 Posts
Kim :bounce:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,126 Posts
:yawn:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
547 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
why "off course"?
Arantxia was no. 1 for 12 weeks, Davenport 37 weeks. Maybe they became 1 in double before or after they were no. 1 in single. Sorry, maybe my sources, (WTA tour) were wrong. I got my info from there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,956 Posts
Betty said:
why "off course"?
Arantxia was no. 1 for 12 weeks, Davenport 37 weeks. Maybe they became 1 in double before or after they were no. 1 in single. Sorry, maybe my sources, (WTA tour) were wrong. I got my info from there.
No both of them at least at some point in time held both #1 rankings at the same time..as for if they both held the championships singles and doubles at the same time, that I don't know :confused: It would be logical to assume they did though.

It's obviously a difficult feat..but Kim isn't one of the first to do this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,096 Posts
Arantxa did hold both number one in singles at the same time. In World of Tennis it says ' On 13. Feb she became the first player since Navratilova in August 1987 to hold both singles and doubles number one rankings' Lindsay I am not sure of, but I am sure Hingis held both at the same time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,365 Posts
Kim :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47,640 Posts
Betty said:
Is it necessary to have won a grand slam to become no.1?

Is it a coincidence that Kim became number one in all four categories: single, double, championship single and double? This unique in tennis history. From the 12 female players who ever ascenden to the number one place, only Navratilova was number one in single and double. Players lijk Suarez and Ruano-<pasqual, top double players played more tournaments than KIm. Yet , Kim became no. 1 in double. It's up to any individual player to play in as many tournaments he or she likes. What will be the reaction when Henin became no. 1: Kim only played a few more tournaments. Will it be justified because she won a major? (remember the semi-final?)

Our Kim won two majors in double (Roland-Garros and Wimbledon. Is this quality or not?
It's not the the other players' fault when Serena prefers to cancel her paricpation in a tournament and act in a movie. That is completely her own choice, bur then you cannot blame the others they play too many tournaments. It's not only Kim who played so many tournaments on that age. Capriata, Davenport, Mauresmo would play the same amount, but were unlucky enough to get injured.

People pretend Kim becam no. 1 because Serena couldn't play. What if Venu s or Justine wins the US open? "Thank you Serena for your injury"?

How long ago di Venus win a major?? I can't remember.

Kim became 20 years, three months ago. She was younger to be a no. 1 than many others (Navratilova: 22; Serena: 21; Davenport: 22; Capriati: 25; Sanchez-Vicario: 24; Venus: 22). Seles was younger, but had not to struggle against the Williams-sisters, neither so with Steffi Graf. Kim deserves to be no.1; she still has lots of time to win a major.

People say Kim chokes in the big matches.
It's frustration: whenever Kim has the lead after the first set, het opponent calls for a time-out to look after her injury. Result: Kim loses next set or the match. This happened against Serena in the Australian Open, against Venus in Wimbledon (Venus got saved by the rain), against Capriati in Stanford and last but not least against HeniHardenne in San Diego.

Good luck for Kim next week, but if she doesn't make it all the way to the final: she will stay our hero

WE LOVE YOU, KIM

:wavey: :wavey: :wavey: :wavey: :wavey: :wavey: :wavey:

First set the record straight! Serena took her time out when it was 2-1 in the THIRD SET after she just won the second! So don´t come with the medical thing crap and besides everyone could see that Serena DID HAVE blisters under her feet! The medical didn´t seem to bother Kim at all, ´cause she WON the next THREE games AFTER the time-out! So...what frustration?! And the French Open I don´t think there was even time for a injury-timeout!! :lol:

People only beef is that against the othe Big three of the top 4: Serena, Venus and Justine, world no.1 Kim´s record is: 3-7!!! Damn!! Contrast this with Serena: 5-2, Venus: 3-2 and Justine´s 5-4. So against the top contenders Kim´s the only one with a losing record! THAT tells the whole story and not the ranking´s numbers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,943 Posts
Who are you trying to convince yourself or others?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47,640 Posts
DA FOREHAND said:
Who are you trying to convince yourself or others?
About what?!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,943 Posts
the thread title
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47,640 Posts
DA FOREHAND said:
the thread title
I know for myself....no slam, no no.1. Not when there are other players dominating the no.1 player AND the slams.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,089 Posts
Kim :bounce:
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top