[jrj]

Since there is again a good chance that a non slam winner (or finalist for that matter) will end the year ranked number 1 over a winner of 2 slams. I ask the question why not eliminate the slams and have 52 weeks of Eastborne, Dohai, Dubai, Linz, LA, New Haven, Tokyo, etc.. Apparently winning titles with 1 or 2 top players is more important than winning a 2 week tournament with all the top players?

 

[-Sonic-]

there are 4 slams, and your ranking counts for 17 results. thats less than 25%. doing well in 13 events (even if they give u fewer points) will of course be more important than doing well in 4, even if they give more.

 

[Shane54]

RIGHT on JRJ!! I just cant believe of the posters who diss Jenn b/c of some losses in smaller tournies, yet she is the one who made 4 GS semis, 2 Grand Slams titles, A tier ONE title, and a breath away from the biggest tourney outside the GSs...but I guess it just seems that way b/c alot of the posters let's face it are not Jennifer fans...BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? The fans are solidly behind Jennifer where it counts ....AT the MATCHES!!! You go girl!! JENN JENN JENN JENN <img src="graemlins/bounce.gif" border="0" alt="[Bounce]" /> <img src="graemlins/bounce.gif" border="0" alt="[Bounce]" /> <img src="graemlins/bounce.gif" border="0" alt="[Bounce]" /> <img src="graemlins/bounce.gif" border="0" alt="[Bounce]" /> <img src="graemlins/bounce.gif" border="0" alt="[Bounce]" /> <img src="graemlins/bounce.gif" border="0" alt="[Bounce]" />

 

[-Sonic-]

lindsay talk:

"It's not that important," she said. "I really think Jennifer deserves to be ahead of me by winning the Slams this year," Davenport said. "I didn't perform well in our biggest tournament. I just did the best I can. I can't worry about what the computer says."

there ya go.

 

[Volcana]

jrj - THe Slams are worth twice what the Tier I's are worth. So if a player wins all nine Tier I's, they'll have more points than a player who wins the Grand Slam. Maybe that's not right. But for the tour to survive, the small tournaments have to have SOME importance. You can't make the Slams worth ten times a Tier I. Otherwise the 'name' players won't play except the Slams, the crowds don't show, and the tournament fails.

 

[Viva]

Lindsay doesn't want it. jrj just doesn't like her and has to make a negative post out of it. Here's another quote for you:

"Mathematically, I don't know if it is possible for me to finish the year No. 1. It isn't my goal. Having not won any Grand Slams this season, if I were to become No. 1, you guys would barbecue me."

<img src="tongue.gif" border="0">

 

[disposablehero]

Better idea. The Australian Open has always been the "weaker cousin" in the Slams, so how about we cancel it and everyone just plays 3 tournaments a year?

 

[Williams Rulez]

But cancelling the AO would be bad for Capriati...

 

[Viva]

And also the AO is the friendliest slam out of them all. Take that away and all you have are rude, arrogant and snobby audiences. The only reason it is 'weak' is because it is so far away.

Nah, don't think so. What a stupid idea.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

I agree Viva.

Also, just because 40 years ago (alright, 15 yeaers) not all the top players showed up for OZ, doesn't mean its "weak" now.<br />The same players show up for that slam as do all the other.<br />SOme people are just so stuck on staunch tradition and history, that they don't really recognize whats happening now!

 

[jrj]

Where did I say that I didn't like Lindsay? I rooted for her vs Venus at Wimby and Serena at the Open. Maybe because I'm not in love with her like some of you I can look at this objectively and say it's freaking nuts!<br />In Jen winning the Australian and the French she had to beat Seles, (a higher ranked Seles at that time), Davenport, and Hingis. In Paris she beat Hingis and Clijsters and 5 other players in each tourney. Playing 4 mathces and 2 top players does in no way stack up!<br />This is what Jenn should do next year to end the year number 1, don't defend the Australian title lose in straight sets in the semis, don't bother to play the French, lose in the semis of the US and Wimbledon and win a bunch of dink titles like Eastbourne. That's what the game is based on everyone remembers who won Eastbourne certainly not the slams!

 

[Viva]

Thanks Becca! <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

[ October 29, 2001: Message edited by: Viva ]</p>

 

[Shane54]

JRJ I love your posts!! <img src="wink.gif" border="0">

...Everyone used to cut Martina to shreads I mean SHREADS-no grand slams...now everyone is jumping on the "Lindsay for President" bandwagon......JRJ keep on posting what you believe and dont let the detractors stop you....Yes, you are right people remember who won Eastbourne and Zurich...not the Grand Slams-NOT!!!<br /> <img src="graemlins/wavey.gif" border="0" alt="[Wavey]" /> <img src="graemlins/wavey.gif" border="0" alt="[Wavey]" />

[ October 29, 2001: Message edited by: Shane54 ]</p>

 

[ASV_FAN]

Hmmmm I suspect dispo-hero was joking guys <img src="wink.gif" border="0"> ! Can you imagine a Monica Seles fan suggesting abolishment of the Aussie Open?! It would be like an Arantxa fan wanting to get rid of Roland Garros - CRAZY!!! <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> <img src="eek.gif" border="0"> <img src="tongue.gif" border="0">

 

[Volcana]

Lindsay is absolutely right about being 'barbequed'. Unfortunately, she's going to have to get used to it. She's gonna win Chase. ONe thing she has in her favor is that she isn't an arrogant sort in public. She isn't going to say 'I'm ranked #1 so I'm the best'. It's a little harder to barbeque the humble. Not much harder, but a little.

 

[Hingie]

I want to know whether this idea about the Australian Open being 'weak' is still holding ground. I mean with the new Vodaphone Arena i'm sure the crowds at Melbourne would rival any of the other slams, does anyone have the numbers?

Also, the field is just as fierce as any other tournament, sure it's true that not every player attends a warm up tournament, but does that really matter? As long as you pull in the stars when it counts.

The only area i see as a disadvantage is money related, and that's only cause our Exchange Rate with the US and Brit and many others is so low.

I think the system is great as it is. Although it would be good if more of the top women consistently played (but it's understandable at the moment with all the conflict). Many aspire to do well at the Grand Slams and it makes for interesting tennis each time.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Johnny: yeah, I am pretty sure he was kidding.<br />But some people actually do feel that way about OZ, so I thought I'd make a comment about it.<br /> However, it would be ironic for a Monica fan to seriously suggest that lol <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

 

[jrj]

first as far as the Australian it does not hold weight with the US Open as far as money and attendance. The US Open yearly is the most attended sporting event in the world.<br />Really it doesn't matter we need more tier 1 ones and less slams so we can have a real number 1!<br />Next year Jen should skip all the slams and use all her time and energy focusing on winning Eastbourne, Linz, Dohai, Sydney, Tokyo, and San Diego because ultimately they are the ones that matter.

 

[kazbeee]

oh leave the slams alone its 4 times in the year I have a good reason to site back on sofa for a full 2 weeks and really be a couch potatoe!! <img src="graemlins/lick.gif" border="0" alt="[Lick]" /> <img src="graemlins/lick.gif" border="0" alt="[Lick]" />

 

[Double Fault]

Not eliminated but maybe moved on the calender. The French and Wimbledon are far too close together for me.

I know that this thread is about the legitimacy of a player being No. 1 without winning a slam, but I wanted to answer the question in the title.