Joined
·
6,640 Posts
That is why right now she is number 1. Someone said this about Kim. She has played 11 tournies. She has 11 semi finals. She has won 4 titles. They say she consistently wins. When you look at her tournies. She is loosing more than she wins.
What about Serena? Well she has played 7 tournies. She has been in 7 Semis. She has 4 titles. She is winning more than she looses. She has already beaten Kim twice this year. She has two slams. They say she isn't playing enough.
Take a look at these numbers. How much more do you peope want serena to play? Like 10 more tourneis? Last year she ended 56-4. They say she played more, and therefore got to number 1. This year she is already 38-3. Well ahead of pace. Last year serena ONLY PLAYED 12 TOURNIES. She already has played 7. After wimbledon last year, she only played 5 tournies. Having w/drawn from Like 2-3. This year she only needs 5 tournies, to be caught up with last years performance in tournies played. This is why i am confused about why people say Serena doesn't play enough. Last year, everyone was saying, she is playing more, and therefore getting to number 1. When in fact the main reason why she got to number 1, is whe won 3 straight slams. At the same time, she was yes winning all the other tournies. Look at this year. She has won 2 slams, and 2 tournies. And we are still counting. We are halfway through the year, and she has already done half of what she did last year.
No matter what you people say, the amount Serena is playing is always going to be in questions as long as kim is playing like 10 more tournies than her. Serena is playing on schedule to the same as she did last year. And everyone was talking about how she is playing more. Look at the big picture folks. Serena is playing the same amount as last year, hell she is playing MORE than last year. After her wimbledon win last year, Serena was 36-3. She is 38-3 now. That is only 2 more matches. But she is playing more isn't she? Even if she was even at 36-3 this year and last year, how people can say she doesn't play enough this year, and last year they say she played more. I dont understand.
you people really make no sense. As long as Kim is playing around 10 more tournies than Serena, she is just going to keep getting more points than Serena. Its what you people say that makes no sense. One year you are talking about how much more Serena is playing. Now she does the same thing the following year, and b/c her number 1 ranking is in jepordy, everyone is running their mouth about how serena doesn't play enough. You are all just contradicin yalls selves. you are takin back shit you said last year, and turnin it all around.
Serena is way more deserving of number 1 in the world. Everyone is calling Steffi Graf the greatest. But let me ask this question. If the tour had as much depth as it did back then, and Steffi had an opponent she continued to beat, but they were consistetn in getting to the semis and finals like kim, playing about 10 more tournies than Steffi, would they ever get any consideration of being number 1 above Steffi? Hell no. So why now, all of a sudden, you have Serena winning slams, and tournies, and beating this gurl, Are we trying to figure out a way to call someone number 1, that is 1 not deserving, 2 has not won a slam, and 3 hasn't beaten number 1 almost over a year? But has lost to number 1 twice since the last time she beat her?
Steffi played around the same amount as Serena Played. Had someone Like Kim Clijsters been aorund, and challenged her number 1 ranking. W/out any doubts in my mind, there would be no discussion of how "deserving" she would actually be. People had since back then. You have steffi winning the slams, you had steffi win the "grandslam" and you had her winning the tournies as well. If Kim Clijsters was back then w/ steffi, they would make her a set number 2 w/out any hopes of becoming number 1.
I don't know why people do this. They say what kim has accomplished. They know Serena has done the same, and more, but act like they can't say it. Why can't they say it? B/c they want to overlook it, act like Serena hasn't done antyhing, and wanna have any chance of trying to act like kim is deserving of number 1. you through serena's accomplishments, which are greater of Kim's out the window like they have never even happend.
Serena is defitnelty deserving of number 1. That is why she is number 1. People say what kim is "deserving of" and she hasn't even gotten to number 1 yet. When she gets there, if she hasn't beaten serena or won a slam, she is not deserving at all. When you want to be called the best, the best is supposed to be able to beat EVERYBODY, AND WIN THE SLAMS.
What about Serena? Well she has played 7 tournies. She has been in 7 Semis. She has 4 titles. She is winning more than she looses. She has already beaten Kim twice this year. She has two slams. They say she isn't playing enough.
Take a look at these numbers. How much more do you peope want serena to play? Like 10 more tourneis? Last year she ended 56-4. They say she played more, and therefore got to number 1. This year she is already 38-3. Well ahead of pace. Last year serena ONLY PLAYED 12 TOURNIES. She already has played 7. After wimbledon last year, she only played 5 tournies. Having w/drawn from Like 2-3. This year she only needs 5 tournies, to be caught up with last years performance in tournies played. This is why i am confused about why people say Serena doesn't play enough. Last year, everyone was saying, she is playing more, and therefore getting to number 1. When in fact the main reason why she got to number 1, is whe won 3 straight slams. At the same time, she was yes winning all the other tournies. Look at this year. She has won 2 slams, and 2 tournies. And we are still counting. We are halfway through the year, and she has already done half of what she did last year.
No matter what you people say, the amount Serena is playing is always going to be in questions as long as kim is playing like 10 more tournies than her. Serena is playing on schedule to the same as she did last year. And everyone was talking about how she is playing more. Look at the big picture folks. Serena is playing the same amount as last year, hell she is playing MORE than last year. After her wimbledon win last year, Serena was 36-3. She is 38-3 now. That is only 2 more matches. But she is playing more isn't she? Even if she was even at 36-3 this year and last year, how people can say she doesn't play enough this year, and last year they say she played more. I dont understand.
you people really make no sense. As long as Kim is playing around 10 more tournies than Serena, she is just going to keep getting more points than Serena. Its what you people say that makes no sense. One year you are talking about how much more Serena is playing. Now she does the same thing the following year, and b/c her number 1 ranking is in jepordy, everyone is running their mouth about how serena doesn't play enough. You are all just contradicin yalls selves. you are takin back shit you said last year, and turnin it all around.
Serena is way more deserving of number 1 in the world. Everyone is calling Steffi Graf the greatest. But let me ask this question. If the tour had as much depth as it did back then, and Steffi had an opponent she continued to beat, but they were consistetn in getting to the semis and finals like kim, playing about 10 more tournies than Steffi, would they ever get any consideration of being number 1 above Steffi? Hell no. So why now, all of a sudden, you have Serena winning slams, and tournies, and beating this gurl, Are we trying to figure out a way to call someone number 1, that is 1 not deserving, 2 has not won a slam, and 3 hasn't beaten number 1 almost over a year? But has lost to number 1 twice since the last time she beat her?
Steffi played around the same amount as Serena Played. Had someone Like Kim Clijsters been aorund, and challenged her number 1 ranking. W/out any doubts in my mind, there would be no discussion of how "deserving" she would actually be. People had since back then. You have steffi winning the slams, you had steffi win the "grandslam" and you had her winning the tournies as well. If Kim Clijsters was back then w/ steffi, they would make her a set number 2 w/out any hopes of becoming number 1.
I don't know why people do this. They say what kim has accomplished. They know Serena has done the same, and more, but act like they can't say it. Why can't they say it? B/c they want to overlook it, act like Serena hasn't done antyhing, and wanna have any chance of trying to act like kim is deserving of number 1. you through serena's accomplishments, which are greater of Kim's out the window like they have never even happend.
Serena is defitnelty deserving of number 1. That is why she is number 1. People say what kim is "deserving of" and she hasn't even gotten to number 1 yet. When she gets there, if she hasn't beaten serena or won a slam, she is not deserving at all. When you want to be called the best, the best is supposed to be able to beat EVERYBODY, AND WIN THE SLAMS.
