PDA

View Full Version : What was Kournikova's potential?


lilycolefan
05-28-2009, 07:51 PM
I know she never won a title but she came pretty close at Miami in 1998. It's amazing to me that someone who made the semis at Wimbledon at 16 and had so many wins over number ones only became 8 in the world and never won a title. The question I have is how far could her game have taken her had she not had those nagging injuries and terrible chokes. Would her game ever have been consistent enough to win a slam?

THESEXPISTOL
05-28-2009, 08:10 PM
Kournokiva's potential?
that made think for about 10 minutes :evil:

babbette
05-28-2009, 11:03 PM
To do to men what Nadal does to women minus the talent? she really had great potential for these times when men really don't have tennis stars they can call sexy.

Sharapova-i don't see anything there.
Ivanovic-nice eyes but imo overated.

Dilettante
05-28-2009, 11:31 PM
Ivanovic-nice eyes but imo overated.

There's no way to "overrate" something like that. I think she's hot and I wouldn't care if anybody else said the contrary. It's just a matter of attraction, not of rating anything.

lilycolefan
05-29-2009, 05:49 AM
I meant tennis wise.

Stinkdyr
05-29-2009, 05:56 AM
hey, at least she didnt do something as stupid as getting breast reduction. Don't do it Simona!!!!!!!

fps
05-29-2009, 06:27 AM
she had the potential to be hot. she realised it.

Commando Tennis Shorts
05-29-2009, 09:17 AM
Is this thread a joke?

charlottefromca
05-29-2009, 01:58 PM
I think she had potential..

Not a grand-slam contender, or top 5 mainstay, but I think she could have been a top 10 fixture, won 1-3 tier I/II titles, 3-5 smaller tournaments, a nice pleasant career. The fact she won ZERO singles titles is sort of anomaly to me..

Her problem was she could not play the big points, she could not close out the big matches, too much hype, too much pressure, too much distraction, and her mother coached her and took over when she should have had more professionals working with her constantly.

She had potential.. but so did a lot of others, she still gets these types of threads like 6 years after her professional tennis demise, she was maybe TOO famous..

boredone3456
05-29-2009, 02:29 PM
Kournikova had some potential, but her best results were always going to be in doubles. In singles she never played with her head, instead always trying to overwhelm her opponents with power or pinash and go for blazing winners. She would frequently overhit balls or go for way to much on points and because of this it was pretty easy for an opponent to beat her if that opponent were playing well. She never really set up points and balls consistantly and as a result she always seems to be flying by the seat of her pants on the court.

She was a great net player, good touch on the ball. Her serve was a huge liability, especially in the time she started to emerge as that was the time "big babe" tennis began with the Williams and Davenport. Her weaker serve against harder hitters was a huge problem, and its not like she had a phenominal return, good but not something that could throw off those women.

She also only played the biggest tournaments really, which if she was confident and consistant enough would not have been a problem. If she played some smaller tournaments now and then she could build her confidence and probably would have a title or two to her name. She was never good enough to string together enough big wins in big tournaments to win one, and because of this unless she really worked she probably would not have won a major unless she got extremely lucky in terms of both draw and quality of play from opponents.

grafselesfan
05-29-2009, 02:34 PM
Kournikova had some potential, but her best results were always going to be in doubles. In singles she never played with her head, instead always trying to overwhelm her opponents with power or pinash and go for blazing winners. She would frequently overhit balls or go for way to much on points and because of this it was pretty easy for an opponent to beat her if that opponent were playing well. She never really set up points and balls consistantly and as a result she always seems to be flying by the seat of her pants on the court.

She was a great net player, good touch on the ball. Her serve was a huge liability, especially in the time she started to emerge as that was the time "big babe" tennis began with the Williams and Davenport. Her weaker serve against harder hitters was a huge problem, and its not like she had a phenominal return, good but not something that could throw off those women.

She also only played the biggest tournaments really, which if she was confident and consistant enough would not have been a problem. If she played some smaller tournaments now and then she could build her confidence and probably would have a title or two to her name. She was never good enough to string together enough big wins in big tournaments to win one, and because of this unless she really worked she probably would not have won a major unless she got extremely lucky in terms of both draw and quality of play from opponents.

Excellent accessment.

GS
05-29-2009, 02:51 PM
She gets criticized for never winning a WTA singles title, but in fact, she did win 2 ITF singles titles beforehand.
On the WTA singles tour, she just double-faulted too much. On the doubles tour, she got her 1st serve in and came to net (like decent doubles players should), and won 2 Grand Slam titles. But yeah, her good looks and the endorsements got in the way....

Dark Victory
05-29-2009, 06:23 PM
For what it's worth, she's arguably a better athlete than Sharapova.

flying24
05-29-2009, 07:38 PM
If Anna had Maria's serve, mental toughness, and self discipline on her groundstrokes she would have been not only a many time tournament winner but been a slam champion at some point. She wasnt a great player but she definitely had some talent despite all the mockery she gets.

Thomas Tung
05-29-2009, 07:52 PM
If Anna had Maria's serve, mental toughness, and self discipline on her groundstrokes she would have been not only a many time tournament winner but been a slam champion at some point. She wasnt a great player but she definitely had some talent despite all the mockery she gets.

Agreed, but then she wouldn't be Anna Kournikova, she'd be Maria Sharapova, who, despite the attention she gets for her looks, is tennis first, glamour lifestyle second. Vince Spadea actually mentioned something to that effect in his book, "Break Point", regarding Maria's (and Yuri's) dedication and drive.

120mphBodyServe
05-29-2009, 08:23 PM
Boners!!!!

35ft6
05-30-2009, 09:11 AM
She was pretty talented but her entire game had to be clicking for her to be able to compete with the top girls. She had an unreliable serve and her forehand was too flat.

rod99
06-04-2009, 07:06 PM
she was a VERY good natural athlete. much better than hingis. however her serve was extremely weak and her forehand was way too flat.

grizzly4life
06-04-2009, 07:08 PM
i'm no expert but i was going to say flat forehand too.

film1
06-04-2009, 08:03 PM
About an 8

pmerk34
06-04-2009, 08:22 PM
she was a VERY good natural athlete. much better than hingis. however her serve was extremely weak and her forehand was way too flat.

I read that when she started doing all the modeling she lost weight and some muscle with it and that hurt her game.

CEvertFan
06-05-2009, 03:34 PM
She had a lot of natural athletic ability but she was a player who liked to go for the difficult flashy winners instead of working the point intelligently. Her serve was a major weakness and her forehand could give her trouble but mainly her problems were in her head. Without a doubt she's the most talented player to never win a singles tournament, which is a dubious honor at best.