Joined
·
4,073 Posts
Yeah, much as I've enjoyed watching Lindsay over the years, much as I love her attitude and her media persona, and in spite of the fact that I think at her peak she was one of the finest hitters of a tennis ball in the history of women's tennis, I really do pray that she's not the victor next Saturday.
As Jennifer Capriati put it, the winner of the tournament will have an asterix next to her name saying "Williams' weren't present", devaluing the accolade to an extent that not even the stabbing of Seles ridiculed Graf's grandslam victories in the mid 90s.
If that's how it must be, I'd rather see a play with hunger, passion, steel and heart holding the trophy in six days' time. A player who can use the achievement to inspire herself and others to greater feats in years to come - when Venus and Serena are back.
Like Lindsay Davenport, I see Mauresmo as a timid competitor with little heart or tenacity, certainly not a player who will ever achieve a great deal while Venus and Serena are competing. Like Lindsay, she's a fine player with more ability than most to charge through seven matches, but when placed on the other side of the net from either two of the greatest and most feared athletes of all time, she's a mouse. Her inferiority complex takes over.
The absence of the Williams' can either be remembered as a void waiting to be filled on their return, or as an inevitability, when the remainder of the hungry pack had a chance to hone their skills without added the pressure of the sister factor.
Should Lindsay Davenport win the US Open for a second time, after the pitiful attitude she displayed against Clijsters in Los Angeles a few weeks ago, the 2003 championship really will be a tournament the WTA will wish to forget.
The WTA tour needs an inspiration in the wake left by the Williams family, who are no doubt preparing for their next assault on the slams. A grandslam win from either Davenport or Mauresmo, or possibly even Capriati, would smell of flagrant opportunism. And for its own credibility, the WTA does not need that.
As Jennifer Capriati put it, the winner of the tournament will have an asterix next to her name saying "Williams' weren't present", devaluing the accolade to an extent that not even the stabbing of Seles ridiculed Graf's grandslam victories in the mid 90s.
If that's how it must be, I'd rather see a play with hunger, passion, steel and heart holding the trophy in six days' time. A player who can use the achievement to inspire herself and others to greater feats in years to come - when Venus and Serena are back.
Like Lindsay Davenport, I see Mauresmo as a timid competitor with little heart or tenacity, certainly not a player who will ever achieve a great deal while Venus and Serena are competing. Like Lindsay, she's a fine player with more ability than most to charge through seven matches, but when placed on the other side of the net from either two of the greatest and most feared athletes of all time, she's a mouse. Her inferiority complex takes over.
The absence of the Williams' can either be remembered as a void waiting to be filled on their return, or as an inevitability, when the remainder of the hungry pack had a chance to hone their skills without added the pressure of the sister factor.
Should Lindsay Davenport win the US Open for a second time, after the pitiful attitude she displayed against Clijsters in Los Angeles a few weeks ago, the 2003 championship really will be a tournament the WTA will wish to forget.
The WTA tour needs an inspiration in the wake left by the Williams family, who are no doubt preparing for their next assault on the slams. A grandslam win from either Davenport or Mauresmo, or possibly even Capriati, would smell of flagrant opportunism. And for its own credibility, the WTA does not need that.
