Tennis Forum banner
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,593 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Loit earns clash with Clijsters


Tuesday, 05 August , 2003, 11:29

California: France's Emilie Loit and Russian youngster Maria Sharapova were among unseeded players to advance early as the 635,000-dollar WTA Tour event got underway on Monday.
Loit defeated South Korea's Cho Yoon Jeong 6-3, 6-2 to earn a second-round clash with top-seeded Belgian Kim Clijsters, the world number two who like all the top 16 seeds has a first-round bye.

Sharapova, 16, defeated Slovenian Katarina Srebotnik in similarly short order 6-3, 6-1.

"It was a pretty good match, I felt pretty good," said Sharapova, who hadn't played on the WTA Tour since reaching the fourth round at Wimbledon.

"I hadn't really played a big match since Wimbledon. It was pretty exciting for me."

"My game was there. I could have played a little bit better, but it was solid."

The number of tournaments Sharapova can enter is limited by tour rules designed to prevent burnout and injury among young players, but the teenager is chafing to play more.

"I definitely think there could be some changes," Sharapova said.

"But a rule is a rule, and you've just got to go with the flow."

"I'd rather play tournaments in the US than going to, for example, Japan and playing some tournaments that I've played before."

She said her family has spoken with WTA Tour chief executive officer Larry Scott about perhaps bending the rule.

"So there have been some discussions," she said. "I hope it will be successful. It'll help my career, definitely."

Three unseeded French players fell at the first hurdle.

Thailand's Tamarine Tanasugarn survived two set points in the 12th game of the first set en route to a 7-6 (7/2), 6-3 victory over Mary Pierce.

After taking the tiebreaker, Tamarine won three straight games to open the second set before Pierce sought treatment for a sore muscle, which caused pain in her back and side.

Pierce then won the next two games to get the set back on serve.

"You know Mary's never going to give up," Tamarine said. "And she really tried after her medical time-out."

The two traded breaks in four of the last five games, Tamarine finally holding at love to take the match.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,898 Posts
As I've stated before, the new WTA CEO Larry Scott will make adjustments to the WTA Tour's well intended but misguided Age Eligibility Rules for next year. That's why Maria added Luxembourg to her schedule this year. She's knows the Are Rules will be modified for next year. And they should be.

Maria wouldn't be talking about this publicly if it wasn't going to happen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
278 Posts
This is total bullshit...she has done absolutely nothing to warrant having the rules changed just because her media hungry promoters are trying to get to her money faster and propel the Anna factor....and yes she would love to have Anna's popularity

What I dont understand is why she is whining about the rule...she will be 17 in April and can play 17 tournaments...which is exactly the number of tournaments that are counted in your ranking.

Somebody needs to call her and her entourage and tell them that many players under the AER have done more than her and that the number 1 player in the world has 11 or 12 tournament on the books :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,056 Posts
Well, I think that the rules should be struck down altogether. Is the WTA the only professional organization with discriminating age limits?

These laws are Fascist.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,565 Posts
It'll help my career, definitely."
It will help her career in the short run.

In the long run, playing too much too early leds to more injuries more quickly, and perhaps less of an overall career.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,565 Posts
Here's Maria's career record (obvious short)

Code:
                                   curr
TR mth tear tournament             rank

T1 Mar 2002 Indian Wells     128 W [231] RIPPNER       5-7 6-1 6-2   
T1 Mar 2002 Indian Wells      64 L [ 28] SELES         0-6 2-6*
T4 Sep 2002 Japan Open        32 L [ 60] GAGLIARDI     6-2 6-7 4-6   
                                                 
GS Jan 2003 Australian Open  128 L [ 63] KOUKALOVA     4-6 6-7   
T1 Mar 2003 Indian Wells     128 L [ 81] REEVES        3-6 6-1 0-6   
T1 Mar 2003 Miami            128 L [ 79] CALLENS       6-7 1-6   
T1 Apr 2003 Charleston        64 L [ 42] MATEVZIC      4-6 7-5 2-6   
GS May 2003 Roland Garros    128 L [ 31] SERNA         3-6 3-6   
                                                  
T3 Jun 2003 Birmingham        64 W [133] KOULIKOVSKAYA 6-1 6-1   
T3 Jun 2003 Birmingham        32 W [ 24] DECHY         6-3 6-2   
T3 Jun 2003 Birmingham        16 W [ 34] MIKAELIAN     6-0 7-5   
T3 Jun 2003 Birmingham        QF W [ 16] DEMENTIEVA    2-6 7-6 6-2   
T3 Jun 2003 Birmingham        SF L [ 55] ASAGOE        2-6 6-2 6-7   
                                                 
GS Jun 2003 Wimbledon        128 W [ 47] HARKLEROAD    6-2 6-1   
GS Jun 2003 Wimbledon         64 W [ 21] BOVINA        6-3 6-1   
GS Jun 2003 Wimbledon         32 W [ 15] DOKIC         6-4 6-4   
Gs Jun 2003 Wimbledon         16 L [ 26] KUZNETSOVA    1-6 6-2 5-7   
                                   
T2 Aug 2003 Los Angeles       64 W [ 36] SREBOTNIK

* Monica was a top ten player atthe time
I see some great grass court results, but nothing that makes me think the AER are holding her back. To honest, I think the AER should be MORE restrictive.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
172,296 Posts
it was easier to move up the ranks under the divisor ranks
Maria would be ranked about 25 if it was under the old divisor system.

this is where the AER and the new Best of 17 hurts the most
if the old system was still in place, it wouldnt affect the kids as much.

Also she would have been seeded in LA as well, and then at the US Open
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,565 Posts
Pureracket said:
Well, I think that the rules should be struck down altogether. Is the WTA the only professional organization with discriminating age limits?
No. American Football has age limits.

These laws are Fascist.
Technical point - These aren't laws but rules. That is, the organization enforces them, not the government.

There ARE child labor laws, at least in the USA, but no one I know of has applied them to professional sports.

Dictionary.com defines 'Fascist in a couple ways, the most applicable being. "A reactionary or dictatorial person."

How are the AER more dictatorial or reactionary than any other rule? For example, seeding the #1 ranked player first. That's completely arbitrary. (It makes total sense of course, but it IS arbitrary.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,056 Posts
Whether she plays too much too early should be the decision of hers and her family's, shouldn't it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
278 Posts
Either way her and her crew needs to shut the hell up and stop whining...because she is clearly not the poster girl for "how bad" the AER is...

She is very talented and she will probably end up being as great as they predict, but what is the hurry...someone needs to tell her that the number one player has about 11 or 12 tournaments on the books and give her Martina's H's number ;)

She will be able to play 17 tournaments as a 17 year old...whats wrong with that...how many more does she want to play
 

·
Veelieve!!!
Joined
·
33,802 Posts
whiteplains said:
This is total bullshit...she has done absolutely nothing to warrant having the rules changed just because her media hungry promoters are trying to get to her money faster and propel the Anna factor....and yes she would love to have Anna's popularity

What I dont understand is why she is whining about the rule...she will be 17 in April and can play 17 tournaments...which is exactly the number of tournaments that are counted in your ranking.

Somebody needs to call her and her entourage and tell them that many players under the AER have done more than her and that the number 1 player in the world has 11 or 12 tournament on the books :rolleyes:
Couldn't have said it any better... rules may be stupid but they are in place for a reason... Why didn't the WTA take a hard look at the rule when Kim was Maria's age??? Her results were far better, but alas it's all about marketing for TIIC (the idiots in charge) :eek: :tape: :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,056 Posts
I consider these rules or laws:) rather dictatorial because they deal with a player's life outside of the actual game of tennis.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,565 Posts
Pureracket said:
Whether she plays too much too early should be the decision of hers and her family's, shouldn't it?
In some places.

In other places, they have laws governing how much a minor can work, and what defines that 'work'.

Still others, leave it up to individual organizations.

In the USA, if an 8 year old's family decided the child should work in a coal mine, no it's NOT 'the decision of hers and her family's'.

There ARE limits which are reasonable for age and type of work.

Now 8 isn't 16, and tennis isn't coal-mining. The law currently leaves it to the sports organizations, NOT the parents, to determine when and where children can play pro sports. Or almost any other job.

I can't speak for other countires, but in the USA, no, the decision is NOT 'hers and her family's' by any matter of means. Nor should it be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,056 Posts
Volcana said:
In some places.

In other places, they have laws governing how much a minor can work, and what defines that 'work'.

Still others, leave it up to individual organizations.

In the USA, if an 8 year old's family decided the child should work in a coal mine, no it's NOT 'the decision of hers and her family's'.

There ARE limits which are reasonable for age and type of work.

Now 8 isn't 16, and tennis isn't coal-mining. The law currently leaves it to the sports organizations, NOT the parents, to determine when and where children can play pro sports. Or almost any other job.

I can't speak for other countires, but in the USA, no, the decision is NOT 'hers and her family's' by any matter of means. Nor should it be.
Volcana,
You discussed exactly what we've been knowing, and I thank you for a bit of history when it comes to child labor laws; however, it still does not directly address what I've been saying. Your analogy to tennis playing and coal mine working, though eloquont, succeeds in diverting attention off of a point.

Why were the AER rules formed in the first place? Because little girls were made to stay up 18 hours a day working in coal mines? No. They were put in place so that the JenCaps of the tour would not turn to drugs in the offseason or that the Hingis' of the tour would not ruin their feet.

Well, what has happened? Kournikova's back has hindered her from being in the top 100. Venus is taking the second longest break of her career. (Too bad the AER didn't help her tendonitis back in 2000). Serena has had this kind of quadracep pain for almost six months, and who knows if Hantuchova even eats anymore?

The AER rules are not necessarily what has caused these women to get hurt or injured, but it certainly has not stopped them from the injuries. The rules are only a noble gesture for these little girls, but they will train, and they will train hard. Injuries and burnout are pretty much inevitable.
JenCaps
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,056 Posts
Whiteplains,
It's not that simple, though. The little girls who are NOT playing a full schedule could very well be spending double time off of the court, further damaging their bodies.
 
1 - 20 of 25 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.
Top