It has been noted that every year we see players reach gaudy heights by playing a lot, only to see them crash land the next year. They only way to tell if a player is really 'top ten' or 'top five' material, is to see them ranked there year after year. This is a high standard.
i.e. Serena Williams is a top ten player. She's one of the five best players in the world. She's not a top five player. Only one year she's been on the tour has she finished ranked that high. If you don't do it over time, it doesn't count.
Here's the whole top 20, by number of wins, then rank
09 09 S.WILLIAMS*
13 04 V.WILLIAMS*
15 08 SELES*
17 03 DAVENPORT
17 06 MAURESMO
17 19 HUBER
18 01 CAPRIATI
21 02 HINGIS
21 07 HENIN
21 17 COETZER
22 05 CLIJSTERS
23 13 DEMENTIEVA
24 11 TAUZIAT
24 16 MALEEVA
24 18 SANCHEZ-VICARIO
26 14 TESTUD
26 20 SCHETT
27 10 DOKIC
27 12 SHAUGHNESSY
30 15 FARINA
*The players with less than 17 tournaments owe that to injury. There is no virtue attached to being at the top of the list. It's just means you're injury-prone.
Sometimes the number of wins can indicate something important. Consider
22 05 CLIJSTERS
17 06 MAURESMO
21 07 HENIN
It only took Amelie Mauresmo 17 tours to have the same effective ranking as Clijsters and Henin. To me, that makes it likelier that Amelie will hang around. Also, this is her second or third year in the top ten, so we know she's the real deal.
Maybe Anke Huber is retiring prematurely. Most of the players ranked ahead of her play WAY more than she does.
Martina Hingis is in the half of the top 20 that plays LESS.
Dokic and Shaughnessy are playing REALLY hard for their rankings. Dementieva has done nearly as well in four fewer tournaments. Clearly Elena is the likelier long term top ten presence.
27 10 DOKIC
27 12 SHAUGHNESSY
23 13 DEMENTIEVA
i.e. Serena Williams is a top ten player. She's one of the five best players in the world. She's not a top five player. Only one year she's been on the tour has she finished ranked that high. If you don't do it over time, it doesn't count.
Here's the whole top 20, by number of wins, then rank
09 09 S.WILLIAMS*
13 04 V.WILLIAMS*
15 08 SELES*
17 03 DAVENPORT
17 06 MAURESMO
17 19 HUBER
18 01 CAPRIATI
21 02 HINGIS
21 07 HENIN
21 17 COETZER
22 05 CLIJSTERS
23 13 DEMENTIEVA
24 11 TAUZIAT
24 16 MALEEVA
24 18 SANCHEZ-VICARIO
26 14 TESTUD
26 20 SCHETT
27 10 DOKIC
27 12 SHAUGHNESSY
30 15 FARINA
*The players with less than 17 tournaments owe that to injury. There is no virtue attached to being at the top of the list. It's just means you're injury-prone.
Sometimes the number of wins can indicate something important. Consider
22 05 CLIJSTERS
17 06 MAURESMO
21 07 HENIN
It only took Amelie Mauresmo 17 tours to have the same effective ranking as Clijsters and Henin. To me, that makes it likelier that Amelie will hang around. Also, this is her second or third year in the top ten, so we know she's the real deal.
Maybe Anke Huber is retiring prematurely. Most of the players ranked ahead of her play WAY more than she does.
Martina Hingis is in the half of the top 20 that plays LESS.
Dokic and Shaughnessy are playing REALLY hard for their rankings. Dementieva has done nearly as well in four fewer tournaments. Clearly Elena is the likelier long term top ten presence.
27 10 DOKIC
27 12 SHAUGHNESSY
23 13 DEMENTIEVA