Tennis Forum banner

1 - 20 of 34 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
35,813 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Henin-Hardenne had 5677 points going into Wimbledon...she has said that playing the US Open will be unlikely for her, so there's a good possibility she'll miss the entire summer circuit. She has 2236 points to defend this summer, so in September, she'll have 3441 points

Kim Clijsters is DEFINITELY out until after the US Open. She had 4861 points going into Wimby and 2007 to defend during the summer...she'll have 2854 points in December.

Mauresmo had 3590 points going into Wimby. She had nothing to defend there and gained 440 points. She had 445 to defend during the summer. Assuming even the absolute worst case scenario (her back prevents her from competing this summer), she'll still have 3585, more than both Henin and Clijsters.

Myskina had 3816 points going into Wimbledon. She failed to defend 92 of her points, so now she has 3724 points, with 489 to defend this summer. As long as she racks up 197 points this summer, which shouldn't be too difficult, she'll be ahead of Henin.

So there you go...almost by default, we'll have a new #1 at the end of the summer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,433 Posts
Well, If Venus and/or Serena play this summer, they have NOTHING to defend and will just be adding points. Lets just see how this works out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,947 Posts
Yes, we've known this for a while. The battle is one between Mauresmo and Myskina. I think Myskina deserves it more because I am a believer that a true #1 should own at least 1 Grand Slam, but I do slightly prefer Mauresmo as a player and I wouldn't be too displeased to see her name up there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,863 Posts
It's just what will happen. Kim might have still reached #1 last summer had the Williams sisters played (she was so close to #1 and had so few points to defend then), but Justine might not have reached #1 had Serena and Venus been able to compete. We might have had a different year-end #1 had Steffi not retired in summer of 1999. Things like this always happen.

The fact is that Myskina won a major this year, and the only top player who missed Roland Garros was Kim Clijsters. Amelie is the only player - if I'm not mistaken - to have made at least the QF of all 3 majors this year. Both of those things trump what Serena, Kim, and Venus have done, in my opinion. Justine won the Australian Open and has a few other titles, so she still merits consideration for #1. Still, if she's not playing you can't really say she is the #1 player. She's not even a player at this point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,863 Posts
VS Fan said:
Well, If Venus and/or Serena play this summer, they have NOTHING to defend and will just be adding points. Lets just see how this works out.
Even if they win a few tournaments this summer, they are too far away from #1 to challenge for that ranking anytime soon.

What top players who are playing the U.S. Open are skipping the Olympics? I know Sharapova didn't make the team. Anyone else? I give them a slight edge because it will be hard to go off to Greece and then come right back to the Open. It could end up being good for Maria (in terms of the Open) that she didn't make the team. Hell, she could be #1 by the end of the U.S. Open.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,687 Posts
Although Amelie has not win a GS, overall she has had a good year, remember Amelie was injured herself at the beginning of the year.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,960 Posts
That would be really weird if Mauresmo became #1 if she doesn't win the US Open. People made a stink when Kim got to #1 with two GS finals and two sf's plus the WTA Champs, so I'm sure they will make a fuss about this one.

Then again, people seem alright with Tiger Woods being #1 in golf, despite the fact that he hasn't won a major in 2 years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,863 Posts
JennyS said:
Then again, people seem alright with Tiger Woods being #1 in golf, despite the fact that he hasn't won a major in 2 years.
That's an excellent point that I hadn't even thought of. He's seen as the dominating player in the world despite not having won a major in awhile. Hell, he's only won 1 tournament so far this year. Interesting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,961 Posts
Lindsay can still compete with them since she missed all of last year's indoor season. I know Myskina won a few tournaments and Amelie also won Philadelphia and got to the finals of the Masters. Nothing is ever as obvious as it seems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,942 Posts
JennyS said:
That would be really weird if Mauresmo became #1 if she doesn't win the US Open. People made a stink when Kim got to #1 with two GS finals and two sf's plus the WTA Champs, so I'm sure they will make a fuss about this one.

Then again, people seem alright with Tiger Woods being #1 in golf, despite the fact that he hasn't won a major in 2 years.
The fact is he has won majors, so that's why there should be no fuss.

Depending on what happens, I think Mauresmo will probably end up in the number oen position, even if she doesn't win the USO title, though I think she is a favorite. The fact that Myskina has not been that impressive during the summer hardcourt season in previous years and I don't expect her to be this year makes be believe that she won't make it to number one. Venus and Serena should not even be considered as possibly challenging the number one position because they are out of the top ten at the moment, but they will most likely be back in the top ten and replace either Dimentieva, Sugiyama or Petrova (the first two have a lot of points to defend up to the YEC and they may not defend them). Before anyone bring Sharapova into the equation as she can only play four more tournaments druing the year and since one of them will be the USO, that only leaves three, not enough to get to number one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,947 Posts
JennyS said:
That would be really weird if Mauresmo became #1 if she doesn't win the US Open. People made a stink when Kim got to #1 with two GS finals and two sf's plus the WTA Champs, so I'm sure they will make a fuss about this one.

Then again, people seem alright with Tiger Woods being #1 in golf, despite the fact that he hasn't won a major in 2 years.
True, but men's golf has absolutely no consistency these days in terms of there being a special elite who win all the titles. And it doesn't matter anyway because if Tiger Woods continues to play as poorly as he has this year for the rest of the season, he won't stay #1 for year-end.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,947 Posts
LindsayRulez said:
Lindsay can still compete with them since she missed all of last year's indoor season. I know Myskina won a few tournaments and Amelie also won Philadelphia and got to the finals of the Masters. Nothing is ever as obvious as it seems.
That would be so amazing for her to finish the year at #1, especially if it's her last year on tour.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,863 Posts
lizchris said:
The fact is he has won majors, so that's why there should be no fuss.
So Venus should be #1 now? :confused: I don't see why his winning majors years ago means his ranking can't be criticized now. Was Linfsay deserving of #1 in 2001 because she had won majors in previous years? Both Jennifer and Venus won multiple majors that year.
Before anyone bring Sharapova into the equation as she can only play four more tournaments druing the year and since one of them will be the USO, that only leaves three, not enough to get to number one.
The majors count as part of her number? I thought they were separate. Anyway, I had forgotten about her restriction, and it changes things regardless.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,096 Posts
Looks pretty fair though it would be interesting to look at Myskina and Momo's tournament wins, quality points etc as i just can't remember how Momo got so high (Yec plus more consistency than Nastya?) its fair because the one of them that gets number 1 will be the one who gets the points between now and the end of the US open. 2005 could start with 5-6 players with a real chance at number 1 which must be a historic first?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,942 Posts
jenglisbe said:
So Venus should be #1 now? :confused: I don't see why his winning majors years ago means his ranking can't be criticized now. Was Linfsay deserving of #1 in 2001 because she had won majors in previous years? Both Jennifer and Venus won multiple majors that year.
The majors count as part of her number? I thought they were separate. Anyway, I had forgotten about her restriction, and it changes things regardless.
Venus should be number one when she can play enough tournaments and either win them or have great results.

Lindsay got to the number one position because of her consistent play even though she didn't win a Grand Slam; whether or not she deserved it is another story. Venus should have been number one but she chose to play only 12 tournaments, even though she won six of them. Jennifer should consider herself lucky that Venus made that decision because that paved the way for her to get to number one, even though she only won one tournament outside of a Grand Slam.

A Grand Slam goes into your ranking total.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,687 Posts
fammmmedspin said:
Looks pretty fair though it would be interesting to look at Myskina and Momo's tournament wins, quality points etc as i just can't remember how Momo got so high (Yec plus more consistency than Nastya?) its fair because the one of them that gets number 1 will be the one who gets the points between now and the end of the US open. 2005 could start with 5-6 players with a real chance at number 1 which must be a historic first?

momo got so high because she does not lose early in GS, has won 2 big titles this year and her worst result is a loss in the QF cannot remember which tournament to Schiavone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,105 Posts
We've seen this coming for awhile now. There are earlier threads on it. Yes, Momo will get to # 1 if her back is okay and if she continues to play the way she has been so far this year. I don't see anything wrong with that. If not for that injury at the AO which had her out for weeks and cost her the chance of winning that title, she'd be doing even better. She's been the form player so far this year, even though she hasn't been able to convert it into a slam title as yet.

I do hope she wins the USO, though. If she's a semifinalist or runner up, or even a quarterfinalist, it will probably be enough to get her to #1 but there'll be an ill-informed outcry if she gets there without a slam to her credit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,372 Posts
I think Myskina will get to #1. I just think she has a lot of pride and will want to upstage Sharapova. She has always said she wants to be the best of the Russians, and she wants to be #1.

If she plays half way decent this summer, and can hold seeding at the US open, she'll get to #1.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,484 Posts
Any player who reaches #1 deserves to be #1 ... with or without a GS title. I can't believe there are still people asking this question! A #1 ranking doesn't mean you're the best player of the WTA ... it only means you're the player with the most points in the last 52 weeks. PERIOD! Mauresmo, if she gets to #1, will deserve to be #1.
 
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Top