Tennis Forum banner

41 - 60 of 567 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,273 Posts
Discussion Starter #41
Re: The Top 100 Greatest Active Singles Players, Honorable Mentions pg. 3

98


Varvara is one of the few players to make this list without winning a WTA title. She's also the only one to make the list based solely on the strength of her top 10 wins. Congrats to her for that unique achievement.

Varvara has been a consistent figure in the top 100 rankings for several years now, but her career-high ranking of #19 was a true over-achievement. I don't believe she possesses the skills of a top 20 player, but the rankings aren't always perfect. Her lone WTA final came at Seoul in 2014. She seems like the perfect type of player who could win her maiden title at Tashkent Slam, but her rocky relationship with Uzbekistan has prevented her from playing there. Perhaps she'll set her sights on Bogota Slam?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,273 Posts
Discussion Starter #42
Re: The Top 100 Greatest Active Singles Players, Honorable Mentions pg. 3

96


Yulia Putintseva, like Rogers, has not won a WTA title, but has reached a slam quarterfinal. Coincidentally, it also came at Roland Garros in 2016. However, the strength of Putintseva's top 10 wins puts her ahead on this list.

Putintseva is one of the most fiery and entertaining players on tour. She's obnoxious in every way, which makes her a unique form of entertainment. She came close to winning her first title this year in St. Petersburg, but was beaten by another title virgin, Mladenovic, in the final. Her fiery disposition is her greatest strength because it makes up for her lack of stature, but it seems it is also her great weakness because she loses her cool so often. However, I do still think there is time for her to make a breakthrough.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,273 Posts
Discussion Starter #43
Re: The Top 100 Greatest Active Singles Players, Honorable Mentions pg. 3

94


Ashleigh Barty was one of the biggest revelations of 2017. After facing severe criticism for unearned wildcards, and a brief retirement, Barty vaulted into the top 20 of the rankings and won her first WTA title this year. How's that for proving haters wrong?

With her win in Kuala Lumpur, and her collection of top 10 wins, Barty sneaks into the list at #94 even though all of her accomplishments happened in just this one year. She has a lot of room for growth, and it will be interesting to see where she lands at the end of 2018.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,273 Posts
Discussion Starter #44
Re: The Top 100 Greatest Active Singles Players, Honorable Mentions pg. 3

93


Continuing the theme of 2017 breakthroughs, Anett Kontaveit comes in at #93 on the list. After making some great strides earlier in the year, Kontaveit managed to win her first WTA title on the grass of Den Bosch.

Anett first made a splash in 2015 when she reached the fourth round of the US Open as a qualifier. She then went through a bit of a sophomore slump in 2016, before re-emerging as a new threat in 2017. She recorded a win over a reigning world #1 when she defeated the slumping Kerber in Rome. She also had a huge win over Muguruza in Stuttgart. I really think 2017 was just the start of great things to come for this talented Estonian.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,273 Posts
Discussion Starter #45
Re: The Top 100 Greatest Active Singles Players, Honorable Mentions pg. 3

92


Fresh off her Fed Cup team victory, #92 is Alison Riske. For those wondering, Fed Cup is counted as a title when a player wins a live singles rubber for her team in any round of World Group, and her country goes on to win the title that year.

For many years, Riske was seen as a grass-court specialist. However, she has developed her game beyond that, and her lone WTA title actually came on hard courts in Tianjin. Since that title, she has lost four other finals, with three of them being in China. Her best slam result was the fourth round at the US Open, so I'm still waiting for her big Wimbledon breakthrough.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,273 Posts
Discussion Starter #46
Re: The Top 100 Greatest Active Singles Players, Honorable Mentions pg. 3

91


Capping off today's list is Brazil's own Teliana Pereira. I imagine this pick could be controversial as Pereira has her fair share of haters on this forum. However,
her two international titles put her in the top 100, fair and square.

Pereira has spent most of her time on the challenger circuit, so her stunning victory at, not one, but two international events was something to behold. I believe her pride as one of the few successful South American players helped her win those two titles in Bogota and Florianopolis. However, since the points from those events fell off, Pereira has been stuck in ITF challenger hell, and I doubt she'll make her way back to WTA level in the future.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,318 Posts
Re: The Top 100 Greatest Active Singles Players, Honorable Mentions pg. 3

98


Varvara is one of the few players to make this list without winning a WTA title. She's also the only one to make the list based solely on the strength of her top 10 wins. Congrats to her for that unique achievement.

Varvara has been a consistent figure in the top 100 rankings for several years now, but her career-high ranking of #19 was a true over-achievement. I don't believe she possesses the skills of a top 20 player, but the rankings aren't always perfect. Her lone WTA final came at Seoul in 2014. She seems like the perfect type of player who could win her maiden title at Tashkent Slam, but her rocky relationship with Uzbekistan has prevented her from playing there. Perhaps she'll set her sights on Bogota Slam?
Funny thing is that IIRC Lepchenko was yet to score a top 10 win when she broke the top 20. Can't believe she has as many now. :worship:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,975 Posts
Re: The Top 100 Greatest Active Singles Players, Honorable Mentions pg. 3

.....
Wouldn't you think that the Reference player is better (when it really matters)?!?

No, you are still biased by the ranking points, that have just a marketing value.

Do you think that a player considers not important a first round of a slam, no need to really give the best?

It's OK to grade the level of tournaments, there will be a different attention and preparation, it is well known that players skip or retire during low level tourneys to save the force for the big ones.

But there is no reason to rate in a different way the various rounds of the same tournament: there are not round-robins (except in the Final) where some match is less important and does not deserve the maximum attention, a loss in the first rounds of a slam is very heavy from a sport point of view, even worse than the loss in the final.

Just to follow your example, having Halep lost to Sharapova in the first round of USO, do you believe that she has reasoned: "Oh, doesn't really matters, it was just a first round"?
Hasn't she gave the best to win? Hasn't Sharapova gave the best to win? Do you suppose they both reasoned: "Well, no matter to really fight for just 60 points"?

In conclusion OK to give different weight to the matches of tournaments of different level, but not to the rounds of the same tournament.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,273 Posts
Discussion Starter #50
Re: The Top 100 Greatest Active Singles Players, NOW 100-91 pg. 3

Please stop going off-topic, thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,692 Posts
Re: The Top 100 Greatest Active Singles Players, NOW 100-91 pg. 3

Great work and great thread! Thanks for doing this :)

Why did you put Kontaveit ahead of Barty though?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,273 Posts
Discussion Starter #52
Re: The Top 100 Greatest Active Singles Players, NOW 100-91 pg. 3

Great work and great thread! Thanks for doing this :)

Why did you put Kontaveit ahead of Barty though?
She has more points in my calculations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,318 Posts
Re: The Top 100 Greatest Active Singles Players, NOW 100-91 pg. 3

I really don't think Pereira being above Barty, Lepchenko or Kontaveit makes any sense at all. :lol:

But the rest looks really good and most places are justified, so good job. :yeah:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,779 Posts
Re: The Top 100 Greatest Active Singles Players, Honorable Mentions pg. 3

No, you are still biased by the ranking points, that have just a marketing value.

Do you think that a player considers not important a first round of a slam, no need to really give the best?

It's OK to grade the level of tournaments, there will be a different attention and preparation, it is well known that players skip or retire during low level tourneys to save the force for the big ones.

But there is no reason to rate in a different way the various rounds of the same tournament: there are not round-robins (except in the Final) where some match is less important and does not deserve the maximum attention, a loss in the first rounds of a slam is very heavy from a sport point of view, even worse than the loss in the final.

Just to follow your example, having Halep lost to Sharapova in the first round of USO, do you believe that she has reasoned: "Oh, doesn't really matters, it was just a first round"?
Hasn't she gave the best to win? Hasn't Sharapova gave the best to win? Do you suppose they both reasoned: "Well, no matter to really fight for just 60 points"?

In conclusion OK to give different weight to the matches of tournaments of different level, but not to the rounds of the same tournament.
:topic:

I wouldn't say "not important at all", but definitely LESS IMPORTANT than a SF match, for instance. At least this is what the really good players do! And this kind of behavior SHOULD BE reflected in the ranking system too! What is more, this is ACTUALLY REFLECTED by the WTA ranking system, giving more points for the more important victories against the SAME OPPONENT!

The Elo system, on the other hand, works in a complementary manner: the relative importance of the tournaments and rounds are neglected, and only the strength of THE DEFEATED OPPONENT is measured. NEITHER of theses systems are "really good" (in my view), but using BOTH (or combining their methods) we can get a better ranking system.

2nd bold part: This is a MISCONCEPTION. It is NOT TRUE that the various rounds of the same tournament have the same importance! Why? Because if the player is relatively good, then during the early rounds she's INVESTING HER EFFORTS in order to reach the final stages (her goal), while the obtained money and points ARE MARGINAL. If she exits early, she does NOT lose her efforts, while on the other hand, if she exits later, she worked hard for practically NOTHING! And this is reflected by the WTA tanking system via giving MORE POINTS for "the same" victories in the later rounds!

A mathematical example: Let's suppose that two players are playing only the 4 Majors and ends up with THE SAME WIN-LOSE DIFFERENCE (4-4)! Nevertheless, the distribution of their victories are different in the following way:
1st Player: exits at R128, R128, R128, and QF - obtaining 10+10+10+430= 460 points
2nd Player: exits at R64, R64, R64, and R64 - obtaining 70+70+70+70= 280 points
Can you see the difference?

Regarding to your question:
Because Sharapova has BIG GOALS, and SHE IMPATIENTLY WANTS TO GET BACK TO THE TOP, she surely wants to win all her matches with maximum intensity - especially against Halep :devil:.
But Halep is the PRIME EXAMPLE OF THINKING IN ANOTHER WAY: She's a small girl (in tennis terms), therefore she MUST SAVE HER STRENGTH for the more important matches. And those are the more important, which can provide more points (and money) with less work. From the above example by now you should know that R128+R128+R128+QF is BETTER in this respect, than R64+R64+R64+R64, even though representing the same number of matches against the same opponents and getting the same balance!

Or take this further example:
Ostapenko defeated Halep in the RG final, and got +700 points (2000-1300) for that match.
Halep defeated Ostapenko in the Beijing SF, and got +260 points (650-390) for that match. (If Beijing was a major too, the difference would be: 1300-780=520)
==> Ostapenko won the more important match.

My last example:
The Wuhan-Beijing-YEC trio is very hard to win. Some players have strong enough body to make it. Wozniacki or Garcia had a fair chance for that. Garcia ACTUALLY almost made it. :hatoff: But even for her this needed HUGE efforts, and if she continues to play with this effort level, injuries may come... (Wozniacki would not be in the same danger, because her stamina is exceptional.)

But for Halep only max. 2 of the 3 tournaments were winnable. The conclusion is clear: the best is the early exit at Wuhan or at Beijing - the only problem is that it is hard to know in advance which one (it depends on the draw).
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
7,427 Posts
Re: The Top 100 Greatest Active Singles Players, Honorable Mentions pg. 3

100


We begin ...
Seems appropriate to start with her. And now @miffedmax can add his perspective on this as proof of relevancy and that, if you look "from a certain angle" she actually looks like the leader of the platoon. That "100" on top stands for 100 points after all, isn't it? :p :devil:
...
98
Varvara has been a consistent figure in the top 100 rankings for several years now, but her career-high ranking of #19 was a true over-achievement...
Wasn't she using Meldonium at the time?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,585 Posts
Re: The Top 100 Greatest Active Singles Players, NOW 100-91 pg. 3

Thanks mckyle... It is wonderful read and thread.
Can't wait for the rest...
Again, great job.
 

·
Worshipping the bangs
Joined
·
62,496 Posts
Re: The Top 100 Greatest Active Singles Players, Honorable Mentions pg. 3

100


We begin the countdown with a familiar face here on TennisForum. It is a bit strange that a fairly standard journeywoman who only seems to play well in her home country would have such a large following, but perhaps having an admin as her biggest fan has something to do with that.

Johanna's biggest career accomplishments in singles have almost exclusively come at Bastad. This includes her lone WTA title in 2015. It remains to be seen what will happen to her career now that the tournament has been canceled after 2017.
There's really only one possible reaction to JoLa's being included on this list.

 
41 - 60 of 567 Posts
Top