Tennis Forum banner

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,215 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Only one player currently in the entire top ten played solid tennis all year. Lindsay Davenport

Jenn had an 'A' first half year and a 'D' second half.<br />Venus had a 'D' first half, and an 'A' second half.

Martina's game has been going downhill since OZ

Serena's year ended well, but except for one win before Toronto, it was a string of QF finishes. Well below her ability.

Kim and Justine both came on strong this year, but had a number of uneven patches.

Amelie's year started off strong and came apart.

Monica bailed on the competition for the end of the year, and toured Asia getting her game together.

Jelena is finally starting to get it together. (though this 'I won't play OZ' rumor does make one ask maturity questions.)

Lindsay may not be the best player on the tour. But she had a better year than the other nine. Venus and Jenn both had good HALF-years.

Mind you, I, like Lindsay herself, consider Venus to be the best player on the tour. But Lindsay EARNED the #1 ranking. It wasn't a quirk in the system. She showed up and won. A lot.

Venus didn't show up enough. (To my chagrine.)<br />Jenn didn't win enough.

No need to change the system over that.
 

·
Veelieve!!!
Joined
·
32,671 Posts
Venus made it to the semi finals at OZ and at Indian Wells, won Ericcson, semis at Nice, won Betty Buckley, R16 at Berlin, 1st rd. at RG, and the quarters at Bank of West... Granted her appearances at RG and at Berlin were horrible, but a D?? I think a B is in order here <img src="tongue.gif" border="0">
 

·
Team WTAworld, Senior Member
Joined
·
8,263 Posts
Also, I really don't think Jenny deserves her D for her fall, I mean semi in Wimbledon, a couple of US toruneys, and semi in US Open and zurich, deserve at least a B, I mean even if you do it in a relative term compare the the first half, she deserve a C+ at least
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,903 Posts
Volcana, I also take issue with your giving Venus a "D" for her half year. Compare it to the "D" you graded Jenn's.

How many titles did Jenn/Venus win in her "bad" half year?

And, sure Venus lost pretty early in Berlin and at Roland Garros...but she lost to a future top tenner (Henin) and a former one (Schett). In Jenn's "good" half year she lost to Rita Kuti Kis!

And if you're grading Venus low on her first half for not playing enough, she actually played more there than in the second.

I do agree about Lindsay Davenport though. The WTA's going crazy. Lindsay only finished ahead by 11 points! Really, it wasn't too much to ask for Jenn to win ONE more match.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,215 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
'D' may have been excessive. However neither player performed in one half of the year as the other. Or even close. Even if I move them up to 'C+', they were both performing well below their abilities. You could argue that, based on her career, Jenn had an 'A' half, and an 'A+++++' half. But I rather doubt Jenn herself would care for the arguement, so I won't make it either.

Actually, I guess what Venus had was a 'D' clay court season.

Tough room.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,495 Posts
Its just a matter of timing.

I think we should devide and rank them according to their performance in three periods. Its just so disaapointing that theres no GS on the third period.

1/3 of the year- 1. Capriati ( 2 GS)<br /> 2. Venus ( Share of Titles) Ericsson etc...<br /> 3. Lindsay( Share of titles) Tokyo, Scottsdale etc....

2/3 of the year 1. Venus( 2 GS)<br /> 2. Lindsay( Share of Titles) eastbourne<br /> 3. Capriati( ????)

3/3 of the year 1. Lindsay( Almost title sweep)<br /> 3. Capritai( ?????) not even reach SF<br /> 5. Venus-I cannot say she's third coz, Venus Never played

This only shows why Lindsay is number 1<br />Linsay------ 3+2+1= 6<br />Capriati---- 1+3+3 = 7<br />Venus------2+1+5up= 8 UP
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top