[GoDominiqu]

or 'Venus is the best player right now' DURING THE INDOOR SEASON, like many people did ???

How can she be the best player when she has played 2 (!) indoor tournaments the past 2 years, once losing to Lindsay and once losing to Maleeva.<br />Isn't that really unfair to Lindsay, the player with - by far - the best indoor results ?<br />I think just because Venus dominates on one (or two, if you count grass) surface you can't assume she will do the same on the other surfaces when she doesn't even play there.<br />Strange that so many people (including Martina N.) only remember 3 months of the season, when it actually lasted 10 months.

[ November 29, 2001: Message edited by: GoDominique ]</p>

 

[CanIGetAWhat]

Originally posted by GoDominique:<br /><strong><br />How can she be the best player when she has played 2 (!) indoor tournaments the past 2 years, once losing to Lindsay and once losing to Maleeva.<br />Isn't that really unfair to Lindsay, the player with - by far - the best indoor results ?</strong><hr></blockquote>

you forgot one minor detail: Venus did played three more indoor tournaments in the past two years. she played Zurich in 1999 and defeated Martina Hingis in straight sets, the '99 Grand Slam Cup in Munich losing to Serena in the finals and the '99 Chase Championships losing to Martina in the semis.

as for your question, Venus has proven she's the best player by winning 4 of 6 majors and she did dominate when she played, rarely losing. IMO, that's why she is the true No. 1.

[ November 29, 2001: Message edited by: CanIGetaWhat ]</p>

 

[rated_next]

I agree with you GoDominique.

 

[thefreedesigner]

...Well I didn't (but then maybe I don't count).

 

[GoDominiqu]

Sorry, I should have said 'in the past 2 SEASONS - 2000 and 2001'.

This IS a serious question. I just want to know how those people rate players' performances so that the result is 'Venus is the best'.

[ November 29, 2001: Message edited by: GoDominique ]</p>

 

[HAIL-VENUS]

Basically, Venus is the toughest player to beat. Ask any of the top players. Look at Venus' record. She rarely loses, she's won 4 out of the last 6 majors, she covers more ground than most of the players on the tour, she's powerful, she's hard to pass at the net, her competitive instincts are tremendous, her mental toughness on court is a major weapon, she's always confident during matches, against any <br />player, etc... The list goes on and on. This is just about undeniable. Who else could be considered the best player? Certainly not the #1,2, 4, or 6 right now. She's beaten all of them this year. Hingis beat her once, but hey, so did Henin, Schett, Shaunassay, and Maleeva. That's a pretty impressive considering everyone elses losses. Venus is definitely beatable, but it's usually when she's out of form, unfamiliar with the player, or on her worst surface. For the past 2 seasons, come summertime it's Vee-time. Nobody gets in her path. BTW, this question is starting to sound ridiculous.<br /> <img src="tongue.gif" border="0">

 

[tfannis]

This is just about undeniable. Who else could be considered the best player? Certainly not the #1,2, 4, or 6 right now. She's beaten all of them this year. <hr></blockquote>

Why should there be "the best"? <br />I don't think there's any player who is dominate the whole season. On clay Venus is absolutly NOT the best. In the beginning of the year she really sucked. So why would someone call her the best? <br />Winning 4 of the 6 last GS is no indicator to me that she is the best. She won those four tournaments, which were big tournaments, but they're played on only 2 different surfaces. The only thing you can decide out of that is that Venus is dominant from July 'till mid-September, and still, she lost to Shaughnessy during that period. The rest of the year she's a very good player, who wins a lot, doesn't play much and loses sometimes. <br />She's good, but not the best.

 

[cynicole]

Originally posted by HAIL-VENUS:<br /><strong> Venus is definitely beatable, but it's usually when she's out of form, unfamiliar with the player, or on her worst surface.</strong><hr></blockquote>

That's true about EVERYONE, not just Venus. <img src="tongue.gif" border="0">

I don't buy the "True Number 1" label. "Best Player" yes. "True Number 1"? No. There were rules laid down for becoming the top player in the rankings and Davenport happened to play by those rules. To me, the "True" part is redundant.

You could say that Davenport had the most consistent year with the most consistent results. But when it comes to impressive results (Slam titles; performing on the big stage) Venus and Capriati surpass her.

Is it taking away from Davenport? I don't think so. Even she thinks that Venus is the best. If she feels (or claims to feel) that she doesn't deserve the ranking, well, what does that tell you?

Maybe the more interesting topic would be where Davenport fits along with Serena, Martina and the Belgians.

 

[HAIL-VENUS]

Cynicole, can you HONESTLY say that Capriati was out of form, unfamiliar, or on her worst surface at the Ericcson and US Open against Venus this year? Come on, Venus is the hardest person for the top players to beat and it's been proven. It's been a hell-uv-a long time since Venus Williams lost a match where she was playing her best tennis.

tfannis, ok, you make a good point, but the topic is why Venus is concidered the true number 1 right now. If you don't think she is, considering her efforts this year, then that's fine, but I gave my reason in support of her and I think I make a good argument. Considering her amount of play, she's had the best results of the other top players, and she poses the most problems for them. That's why I think she's the best player.

[ November 29, 2001: Message edited by: HAIL-VENUS ]</p>

 

[tfannis]

Hey! Love that signature, HAIL-VENUS! <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0">

About the number 1 stuff. I really think it's a very relative thing, you know. If Davenport is mathematicly #1, good for her. But the last couple of years showed us that every #1 gets beaten several times. And so would Venus. <br />I see it this way: if you're in the top ten, it means you played very well and can compete with all the big ones. But I don't think there's a big difference between being #1 or #4. <br />But #1 sure looks good on your cv, though! <img src="wink.gif" border="0">

 

[HAIL-VENUS]

Thanx, I thought it was cute, and much smaller than my first one <img src="wink.gif" border="0">

tfannis, good point. The reason I love tennis so much is because of ALL of the talent in the top 10. You really have to play some great tennis to beat ANY of them, whether they're #1 or #10 <img src="graemlins/bounce.gif" border="0" alt="[Bounce]" />

As far as the "true #1", I think that we can argue the issue, but the fact remains that (as Cynicole stated) the rules were laid, and the player who best followed them and was the most consistant under these rules IS the "true #1", as far as the ranking system goes. My view on Venus is that I think she's the best player overall over the past 2 seasons. I have accepted that she didn't follow the ranking system rules, so #3 is a deserving spot for her.

 

[QUEENLINDSAY]

LINDSAY IS NUMBER ONE AS OF NOW !!!!!! PERIOD!!!!!!!!

NO ONE ACTUALLY DOMINATES THE WHOLE YEAR. IT WAS DEVIDED BETWEN THREE PLAYERS, namely Capriati,Venus and Lindsay. If could actually see it, Lindsay has share of titles all year long and dominated the last indoor season. Whereas venus and capriati only had titles in the first and mid season up to US open. Though the two grab the most important tournaments of the year, number one is actually a player who could actually win regardless of the surface.

Titles surface:<br />Lindsay- Rebound ace Hardcourt, US hardcourt, Grass, Carpet

Capriati- Rebound Ace hardcourt & Clay

Venus- US hardcourts, Grass

 

[cynicole]

Originally posted by HAIL-VENUS:<br /><strong>Cynicole, can you HONESTLY say that Capriati was out of form, unfamiliar, or on her worst surface at the Ericcson and US Open against Venus this year? Come on, Venus is the hardest person for the top players to beat and it's been proven. It's been a hell-uv-a long time since Venus Williams lost a match where she was playing her best tennis.</strong><hr></blockquote>

A response to your second point: Players have fewer chances to beat Venus because she plays fewer tournaments. I'm not saying that she's going to lose all of them but I wouldn't say she'd win all of them either.

The rest, let's put the rest this way...

A lot of players lose matches because they're out of form, unfamiliar with their opponent or playing on their worst surface. And "out of form" is such an objective measurement in my mind. A lot of players lose because they're not playing THEIR BEST.

I guess, by your measure, the wins that Hingis, Maleeva, Henin and Schett garnered are an afterthought because Venus was out of form or, in the cases of Henin and Schett, on Venus' worst surface. Nevermind that they took her out in straight sets either.

So, if you want to follow that line, the competition Venus wiped out at Hamburg - Leon-Garcia, Farina Elia, Dokic and Shaughnessy - are non-entities. Oh, no wait, Shaughnessy beat Venus on North American hard court! But I guess Venus was "out of form" then, huh.

Hmm...

So, tell me, what do you think about Venus' Wimbledon final? She beat a girl who was in physical pain, playing on a surface that until two weeks previous was her worst...and needed three sets to do it. And don't bring up the rain delay. It's not like it only rained for Venus.

Anyway, Capriati's been out of sorts since she lost in the semis at Wimbledon. IMO, she coasted on the good graces of the good draws she was given as a result of her ranking. She got beat by Venus, I don't deny it.

This is the part where I'd offer the speculative IF Capriati beat Venus on clay but I don't feel like getting into an argument over it.

And if it were about "quality losses" Davenport and Serena actually do better in that catagory. It just happens that they lost to Venus. But Venus loses to people out of the top 10.

We're probably just reading what you wrote differently.

BTW - I never denied that Venus was THE person to beat. Don't put words into my mouth.

 

[saki]

GoDominique has a point. Everyone keeps saying that Venus Williams is the best player in the world at the moment. (forget about the rankings issue) But in actual fact, while it's fair to say that she dominates on hardcourts and on grass she is by no means the best player in the world on clay, indoors or on Rebound Ace.

 

[Lindsayfan]

why u talk so much about Venus as n.1 if when Martina was n.1,Venus always said the Martina deserved it?Williams girls respect rankings and respect who is in top of ranking. also Serena said at masters (i saw her speaking at german tv) "Lindsay is playing great-she won 3 tourneys in a row,she and Martina are the most consistent players".why williams fans always talk about that if your idols dont argue about ranking?<br />sorry for my poor english!

 

[cynicole]

I think one of the hard facts of the tour is that the surface with the largest number of events is hard court, and mostly the North American brand of it.

Also, Wimbledon is perceived as the most prestigious title in tennis. And most people don't think that there are events that exist outside of the slams.

This is where I like to use the cycling analogy. Lance Armstrong won the Tour de France. But there are other cycling events...and people other than Armstrong - Jan Ullrich, Joseba Beloki, etc. - excel at them. But if you ask the average person, or even the average sportswriter, who the best cycler in the world is, they'll say Lance Armstrong. I think they have a points system too. I'm not sure (it's my dad who follows cycling not me) but I don't think Armstrong is leading that.

A lot of the perceptions for "who is the best" is gathered from what happens on "the big stage."

I'm not saying that it's right. But it is what happens.

 

[HAIL-VENUS]

Cynicole, where did I put words into YOUR mouth? Anyway, I thought you wouldn't grasp it so easily, but you did. You got my point head on. Venus was NOT playing damn good tennis when she lost to any of those players, and you would know it if you'd watched the matches. Like I said before, it's been a hell-uv-a long time since Venus has lost while playing her very best, quite unlike many of the other top 10 players who she's beaten. They were playing their asses off, and lost to her. That tells me a lot. And doesn't being "THE person to beat", make you the best player?

 

[HAIL-VENUS]

Oh, yeah, don't put words into my mouth. I never thought that the rain delay at Wimbledon caused Venus the 2nd set. Henin played better than she did, and won it. Venus recognized this, and created a storm of her own in the 3rd. I also never said that Venus hasn't lost a SET while playing her best, she just hasn't lost a match. <img src="tongue.gif" border="0">

 

[cynicole]

No, I just don't appreciate the efforts of the Hingises, Maleevas, Henins, Schetts and Shaughnessys of the tour being downgraded because Venus wasn't playing well.

I guess Venus' Wimbledon final isn't really impressive because Henin was in pain (she had to pull out of the next tournament because of a broken bone in her foot, BTW).

And Serena certainly wasn't playing well in that U.S. Open final. So I guess Venus' win really wasn't impressive there either.

[ November 29, 2001: Message edited by: cynicole ]</p>

 

[HAIL-VENUS]

I'm not down playing their efforts, I'm just being realistic. Those players weren't doing anything particularly well. They didn't have to. Venus was making all of the errors. Don't think that I'm making excuses for Venus. It's not her opponents problem that she's not ready, or had slacking results on a certain surface, and it's damn sure not their fault that she's out of form. They simply took advantage of a poor playing Venus by playing the ball consistantly. You know, getting the ball back over the net. Hell, Venus helped defeat herself.

BTW, I didn't enjoy the Venus/Serena final, and I didn't say that EVERY win by Venus is IMPRESSIVE. There are times when Venus wins and she's not even playing well. Commentators have even noticed and commented about this. It's not that the players who defeated Venus this year aren't good players. Some of them great even. It's just that, I FEEL, Venus is a better player than they are.

Why do you keep making excuses for Justine? So, her foot was hurting. Why not pull out? She couldn't have been in that much pain. She played a hell of a 2nd set. She just got out-played the rest of the way.