PDA

View Full Version : Would Henin now have more slams than Serena had she not retired?


grafselesfan
06-07-2009, 12:18 AM
Does anyone else think Henin would have surpassed Serena in slam titles by now if she had not retired? I think so. This is how I see. When Justine retired she had 7 slams, Serena had 8. Lets look at the slams since then.

2008 French- Ivanovic won, her only threat was Jankovic in the semis. Henin is a combined 13-0 vs them. Done.

2008 Wimbledon- Henin's worst surface by far, a sight of some of her ugliest chokes as the mental block of winning Wimbledon increased, and Williams sisters both in blazing form here this year. No.

2008 U.S Open- a return to the site of her back to back straight sets conquests of the sisters from a year ago. Serena though was in better form than in 2007 here, Venus about the same. Despite their terrible fixed quarterfinal which Venus would have won on merit otherwise both were playing at a level here Justine would need to be at her 2007 level to win. Would she have been? Based on her early 2008 form on hard courts it might not have been. Give this to a Williams too I guess.

2009 Australian Open- Serena wasnt that impressive here at all. She would have gone out to Azarenka had she not gotten sick, then Kuznetsova if Kuznetsova hadnt choked bigtime in their quarterfinal. Dementieva underperformed in the semis, Safina as usual blew up in the final. Henin takes this one.

2009 French Open- This years French was so pathetic that even a past her prime and out of shape Serena on CLAY probably would have won in hindsight if she had closed out Kuznetsova. The day I will stop considering Henin had she continued a 110% lock for the French is the day the clay court field is atleast strong enough where a past her prime Serena on clay is stopped being talked about as a real threat there. Kuznetsova choked in both the quarters and semis and still won the title. Safina played unstoppable tennis almost all event and then played like a scared little girl in the final. Henin in a breeze.

So IMO Henin would now have 10 slams and Serena 9 had she continued. What is most annoying is she was on the verge of surpassing Serena as the greatest player of this generation, particularly if she could win Wimbledon atleast once, and she didnt even seem to care that she is giving all that up by retiring.

baseline08thrasher
06-07-2009, 12:22 AM
She would have more slams of course.

She is the smartest player out there with her combined abilities to match it.

I mean look at how consistent she is.

The top players now can ONLY beat her when they are on their A+ Game.

This is the biggest shame in womens tennis..

I would love to see her back, but she clearly states that wont ever happen.

What a pitty.

jamesblakefan#1
06-07-2009, 12:38 AM
No. She was already showing signs of being past her prime last yr before she retired, with convincing losses to Sharapova and Serena on HC. She'd probably still be dominant on clay, which gives her 2 FO titles. But I don't see how you just magically take away Serena's AO title w/o Henin beating her there. Henin always had trouble against Serena on hard courts, and a past her prime Henin, as she was before she retired, would not, IMO, have beaten Serena in Australia. So it'd be still 10-9 Serena.

Moving forward, even if you give Henin 2 more FO titles from this pt on, I don't think she'd be able to run through other slams as she did the 07 USO. That was her in her prime, and it's hard to believe that she'd still have that level 2 yrs later. So Henin >>Serena at the French. Serena >>>>>>>>>>Henin everywhere else, IMO. That's IF she still were playing and IF she kept the form she showed early 08.

Cesc Fabregas
06-07-2009, 01:03 AM
She would have calkwalked the last 2 FO's for sure.

Dgpsx7
06-07-2009, 01:08 AM
she really dominated and I don't think it would stop anytime soon. She had more skills and fight than most of the WTA players now. On top of everything it was a pleasure to watch her play.

DarthMaul
06-07-2009, 01:16 AM
Henin is more talented than any other WTA player. She's WTA's version of Federer. Too bad she quit :(

Dutch-Guy
06-07-2009, 03:14 AM
No.She couldn't cop with young players that were caughting up with her.So she "fled".Serena came back from a long injury in early 2007 was unseeded in AO 07.She crushed everyone on her way to the final.An unseen performance. Serena is and 'll remain the best of her generation,the greatest of her era.

thalivest
06-07-2009, 03:19 AM
Serena came back from a long injury in early 2007 was unseeded in AO 07.She crushed everyone on her way to the final.An unseen performance.

ROTFL!! Serena did not "crush everyone" on her way to the 2007 AO final. She was way down to Nadia Petrova in the 3rd round and escaped by the skin of her teeth after a collapse of double faults by Petrova. Shenay Peer also serve for the match in the 3rd set of their quarterfinal and also choked. Yeah Serena won there, crushing a badly injured Sharapova in the final. Serena forget to give her thank you speech ala Kafelnikov 99 to Henin for not playing allowing her to win. Henin then returned to tour after missing that AO which Serena luckily won due to her divorce and put Serena back in her place, beating her in the quarters of 3 straight slams on 3 different surfaces, allowing Serena 1 set along the way.

Lionheart392
06-07-2009, 04:24 AM
Henin retired for a reason. Her motivation had gone and she was losing to people like Schiavone whom she normally owned. If she continued to play, her results probably would've got worse. Yes I agree that she would still be winning slams if she had got her motivation back and would likely have more than Serena now. But she didn't, so that's the way it is.

anointedone
06-07-2009, 04:27 AM
Henin retired for a reason. Her motivation had gone and she was losing to people like Schiavone whom she normally owned. If she continued to play, her results probably would've got worse. Yes I agree that she would still be winning slams if she had got her motivation back and would likely have more than Serena now. But she didn't, so that's the way it is.

The ultimate question though is why did her motivation leave her. She always was a puzzling person to say the least.

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-07-2009, 04:49 AM
Henin retired for a reason. Her motivation had gone and she was losing to people like Schiavone...

..and Bartoli...on grass, where--according to Henin cheerleaders--she should have (at least) defeated Bartoli with her "all court" game.

OP: I say no. Wimbledon was never going to be hers with Venus around, and again, it was not even Venus who defeated her the last time she played there, which speaks volumes.


...and let's forget her convenient "illness" and retirement to Mauresmo in the AO final (after her "peak of fitness" comments during the semis--which people still question/criticize to this day). Henin was having her *** handed to her, so she bails--a slap to Mauresmo's face that Henin did not just finish the match (and take what was clearly shaping up to be a defeat).

hewittboy
06-07-2009, 05:05 AM
..and Bartoli...on grass, where--according to Henin cheerleaders--she should have (at least) defeated Bartoli with her "all court" game.

Everyone has bad days. Graf has lost to Lori McNeil at Wimbledon, and Navratlova to Kathy Horvath at the French at her peak. Does that make them weak players.

jamesblakefan#1
06-07-2009, 05:14 AM
Yeah, but she didn't just lose. She choked after being up a set and a break. And she didnt lose in the early rounds. She lost in the semis.

hewittboy
06-07-2009, 05:16 AM
Yeah, but she didn't just lose. She choked after being up a set and a break. And she didnt lose in the early rounds. She lost in the semis.

Grass is her worst surface by far. She has lost to Daniilidou at Wimbledon as well. She is much better on hard courts than on grass. Atleast she isnt as bad on grass as Venus is on clay though.

jamesblakefan#1
06-07-2009, 05:18 AM
True. but I still didn't see her winning a Wimbledon, especially since her last memory there was an all time gag.

BorisBeckerFan
06-07-2009, 05:18 AM
Who knows?

lambielspins
06-07-2009, 05:22 AM
True. but I still didn't see her winning a Wimbledon, especially since her last memory there was an all time gag.

I agree. Mentally it had become too much for her, and the Williams are better on grass, and by the time the Williams get old there should be some kind of quality grass court coming up even though the womens field on grass now sucks more than even the other surfaces. Still it is possible for her to have surpassed Serena in slam wins without ever winning Wimbledon, but if never won Wimbledon I wouldnt rate her greater. Right now I rate them in this order though.

1. Serena
2. Henin
3. Venus

Venus is getting old so there is a good chance she stays at #3. Plus her record is poorly balanced even compared to Henin, let alone Serena. Her slow court performances are poor for such a great player, and they arent going to get better as she nears 30.

jamesblakefan#1
06-07-2009, 05:41 AM
It's tough to just put Justine over Venus. 5 Wimbledon's to 4 FO titles. Both have Olympic Gold. Justine has more slams, but Venus has more of the most prestigious (wimbledon).

But the strange thing is, as long as Venus has been playing, she's only been #1 in the world for 11 wks in her career. So I'd put Henin over her, close though.

lambielspins
06-07-2009, 05:43 AM
It's tough to just put Justine over Venus. 5 Wimbledon's to 4 FO titles. Both have Olympic Gold. Justine has more slams, but Venus has more of the most prestigious (wimbledon).

But the strange thing is, as long as Venus has been playing, she's only been #1 in the world for 11 wks in her career. So I'd put Henin over her, close though.

How is it tough? Venus has only 1 final at the Australian Open and French Open. Pretty weak. No other semis at the French either, overall she will go down as a very mediocre clay courter, while Justine is atleast a pretty good grass courter. She has never ended a year #1 or spent much time there. This is the day in age where the 4 slams are equal. It isnt the 70s anymore.

jamesblakefan#1
06-07-2009, 05:50 AM
OK. I agree with your argument. Henin > Venus. I guess I overrated Venus in my mind.

mentalcase
06-07-2009, 06:10 AM
The French is the only slam she would win for sure.

She was a mental midget at Wimbledon, her last AO win was 2004, and she's never defended a USO win.

I say she trails Serena.

egn
06-07-2009, 06:15 AM
What? did anyone see how Henin was playing in 2008..she was far off her form. Henin looked as if she had been done. I doubt Henin could have snatched the US Open from Serena maybe the AO but she had been playing far from her best. I pencil Henin in for 2 more tops putting her at 9 behind Serena as I feel both would have been French Opens.

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-07-2009, 06:22 AM
This is the day in age where the 4 slams are equal. It isnt the 70s anymore.

According to...?

Wimbledon is still almost universally hailed as THE GS of all--the one most want, usually followed by the U.S. Open. Do you actually think the AO or FO titles are as valued across the world?

lambielspins
06-10-2009, 04:44 AM
According to...?

Wimbledon is still almost universally hailed as THE GS of all--the one most want, usually followed by the U.S. Open. Do you actually think the AO or FO titles are as valued across the world?

Yes I think the 4 majors are pretty much equal these days. Maybe the Australian a bit behind the other 3, but more or less all equal. As big a deal is made about those who dont win the French but won the other 3 (Sampras, Becker, Edberg, Hingis, McEnroe, Federer up to this year) as those who dont win Wimbledon but won the other 3 (Henin, Lendl, Rosewall).

If we follow your logic Venus would rank higher all time than not only Henin but even Serena. After all Venus has 5 Wimbledons to only 2 for Serena and 0 for Henin. Serena has 5 of her 10 majors at the "weak two" slams according to you, and Henin 5 of her 7. Venus has all 7 of her slams at Wimbledon and the U.S Open. However of course this is not the case. All rank Venus below Serena, and most even below Henin, since her record is poorly balanced, too heavy on just Wimbledon, with mediocrity overall at both slow court slams- Australian and French Opens.

SerenaVenusFan
06-10-2009, 08:17 AM
No.She couldn't cop with young players that were caughting up with her.So she "fled".Serena came back from a long injury in early 2007 was unseeded in AO 07.She crushed everyone on her way to the final.An unseen performance. Serena is and 'll remain the best of her generation,the greatest of her era.

Co-sign! When Serena is fit, determined and focused, no one can beat her.

thalivest
06-10-2009, 08:23 AM
Co-sign! When Serena is fit, determined and focused, no one can beat her.

A completely moot point when she hasnt been fit and fully focused on tennis since 2003. Yet even way back then during her unusually short peak she already had a losing head to head with a pre prime slamless Henin on clay and was starting to have a tougher time with her on hard courts. I guess Serena was mysteriously never fit, focused, or determined in 2007 when Henin last played a full season given that she lost to her in the biggest hard court, biggest clay court, and biggest grass court event there is all in the same year. Well except for Australia when Justine was absent and she won, so amazingly she became fit, determined, and focused only when Justine was absent.

JeMar
06-10-2009, 08:25 AM
Most definitely. Women's tennis is the running joke of the sports world without Henin.

LanceStern
06-10-2009, 10:01 AM
Henin was getting wooped on in 2008. It's horrible to say she would just take the AO because she hadn't done anything there for the past few years.

The only lock she would have is the Frech Open, and in 2008 she lost on clay to Schiavone.

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-10-2009, 02:13 PM
Yes I think the 4 majors are pretty much equal these days. Maybe the Australian a bit behind the other 3, but more or less all equal. As big a deal is made about those who dont win the French but won the other 3 (Sampras, Becker, Edberg, Hingis, McEnroe, Federer up to this year) as those who dont win Wimbledon but won the other 3 (Henin, Lendl, Rosewall).

If we follow your logic Venus would rank higher all time than not only Henin but even Serena. After all Venus has 5 Wimbledons to only 2 for Serena and 0 for Henin. Serena has 5 of her 10 majors at the "weak two" slams according to you, and Henin 5 of her 7. Venus has all 7 of her slams at Wimbledon and the U.S Open. However of course this is not the case. All rank Venus below Serena, and most even below Henin, since her record is poorly balanced, too heavy on just Wimbledon, with mediocrity overall at both slow court slams- Australian and French Opens.

I've never heard anyone make any particularly strong arguments that the slams are on equal ground, unless they were supporting/defending a preferred slam attacked for not being as important. Usually, there is a pecking order based on history, and/or historic/famous matches played at a particular slam, and other factors. While Borg's (and later Nadals) run at the FO is historic (among other events which occured there), over the decades, i've hear and read more people pointing to innumerable matches at Wimbledon and the U.S. Open than the other slams.

Some may argue that regional opionions/experiences color this view, but its not just natives saying this.

I would like to see a major, updated (as of 6/09) online poll of fans' pick of the 50 greatest matches of all time, and see which slams end up dominating the poll.

Cyan
06-10-2009, 02:30 PM
Yup....................................

LuckyR
06-10-2009, 03:00 PM
Justine left tennis when she did for a reason. And the reason wasn't that she was bored by all of the tournament wins in 2008. True, she beat Ivanovic and Kuznetzova in a meaningless tourney in January but who else did she beat that season? Uummm.... noone.

P_Agony
06-10-2009, 03:06 PM
Henin is more talented than any other WTA player. She's WTA's version of Federer. Too bad she quit :(

I second that. I miss Henin. She had so much variety and added a lot to the WTA tour, she actually made it worth watching. Today there is not a single consistent player on all surfaces there.

jamesblakefan#1
06-10-2009, 03:06 PM
Justine left tennis when she did for a reason. And the reason wasn't that she was bored by all of the tournament wins in 2008. True, she beat Ivanovic and Kuznetzova in a meaningless tourney in January but who else did she beat that season? Uummm.... noone.

Exactly. It seems people have revisionist history all of a sudden.

l. Aus Open QF Sharapova 6-4 6-0
l. Dubai QF Schiavone 7-6, 7-6
l. Miami QF S. Williams 6-2, 6-0
l. Berlin 3rd rnd Safina 5-7, 6-3, 6-1

She was clearly not performing at her 07 level at the start of 08. This is an indication that, at least on non-clay surfaces, there was no way she'd continue to be dominant as she was in her 07 year. In 2007, she was unreal. There was no way she was going to keep that level and dominate the game the way Graf, Navriltalova, and Evert had in the past. Don't put her on that level, even in this weak WTA era.

Serendipitous
06-10-2009, 03:20 PM
Yes!


10 chars!

thalivest
06-12-2009, 04:19 AM
Exactly. It seems people have revisionist history all of a sudden.

l. Aus Open QF Sharapova 6-4 6-0
l. Dubai QF Schiavone 7-6, 7-6
l. Miami QF S. Williams 6-2, 6-0
l. Berlin 3rd rnd Safina 5-7, 6-3, 6-1

She was clearly not performing at her 07 level at the start of 08. This is an indication that, at least on non-clay surfaces, there was no way she'd continue to be dominant as she was in her 07 year. In 2007, she was unreal. There was no way she was going to keep that level and dominate the game the way Graf, Navriltalova, and Evert had in the past. Don't put her on that level, even in this weak WTA era.

Ever hear of something called a mini slump. All players go through them including your beloved Williams sisters. It doesnt mean it was going to last forever, it just means she went through a stretch she was playing at about 40% of her usual level but it would have passed. Anyway Sharapova and Serena are so hopeless on clay that Henin could play the same for her terrible tennis that has her losing by those scores on hard courts and still would beat them on clay. In addition to how terrible Henin played in those two matches Sharapova was healthy and playing lights out, and Serena played a rare match (for her these days) with hardly any mistakes, and those are things that very rarely happen anyway. As for the Safna loss if you lose in 3 sets to Safina in a regular tour final you were already close enough you just have to play the same way in a slam semi or final and you win 6-2, 6-1 since Safina the chokers level is certain to drop that much anytime she plays a slam semi or final.

I dont know why you say 2007 was "unbelievable" for her. She went through a stretch from French Open 2003-Australian Open 2004 where she won 3 of 4 majors vs a much deeper field than exists in recent years. She made all 4 slam finals in 2006 and won the WTA Championships on top of that.
In 2004 she missed most of the year with illness and even missing large chunks of the year or not being healthy still won the Australian Open, Miami, and the Olympic Gold in singles, more significant wins than anyone else that year. I would say 2007 was probably her best year ever but it was also not far from a normal performance for her. She had been the best player in womens tennis ever since mid 2003 when Serena went down with injury and never returned to the same level.

deltox
06-12-2009, 06:04 AM
No.She couldn't cop with young players that were caughting up with her.So she "fled".Serena came back from a long injury in early 2007 was unseeded in AO 07.She crushed everyone on her way to the final.An unseen performance. Serena is and 'll remain the best of her generation,the greatest of her era.

thats your opinion, serena is .. repulsive. she has one advantage over other tour players, genetics, period

shes huge in comparison to other FEMALE players, yet she can still get pwnt by them. if she wasnt 250 pounds and 6'4" she would be ranked somewhere in the top 100 but not inside the top 25. she doesnt have GREAT tennis skills, only size and power over the average female.

those my friends, are the facts.

jamesblakefan#1
06-12-2009, 06:55 AM
I'm sorry but, it's hard for me to have seen her continuing to be the favorite in the other 3 slams besides the French. She also had a knee injury which everyone was talking about, which would have contributed to her eventual downfall. These are all natural parts of the game-age, injury, loss of form. I don't understand why people seem to think Justine is so great that she would have been immune to these factors and magically bounce back.

Would she have won the French last year? Probably. But, IMO, that would have been her last slam win. And no, I'm not a Williams fan, but if she was losing to lower ranked opposition that she wasn't losing to in her prime, this is a clear indication that her time of dominance was over early last yr and she was no longer invincible.

thalivest
06-12-2009, 07:00 AM
ROTFL like she wouldnt have won the French this year. The womens clay court field is so bad now that a past her prime out of shape Serena was probably close to winning the French on clay this year. Her 30% of her former best would have atleast won the last two French Opens. Like I said even playing the very bad tennis she played early last year she lost to regular tournament Safina in 3 sets on clay, which automaticaly translates to a 6-2, 6-1 win over Safina if you play the exact same match vs her in a slam semi or final.

hewittboy
06-12-2009, 07:07 AM
A much lesser player than Henin like Kuznetsova won this years French Open even choking away two of her matches (she still won them despite choking them away), and had Serena the eventual winner beat in Australia before another typical Kuznetsova choke gifted Serena the match on a silver platter, and eventually the title. If the field is so bad that even the far inferior Kuznetsova should have won both slams this year already than Henin would be winning most of the slams today unless she fell off drastically.

jamesblakefan#1
06-12-2009, 07:12 AM
Henin would be winning most of the slams today unless she fell off drastically.

And my point is, she was falling off. Losing to Safina on clay, which would have never happened to a prime Henin. I concede clay to her, but thats only 1/4 of the slams. She wouldn't have won Wimbledon, even in her prime she couldn't win Australia, if her and Serena had met in this yr's final, it would have been something like the 6-2, 6-0 result from last yr. Her results speak for themselves, she was starting to struggle on the faster surfaces, and it's hard for me to see her winning any other slams outside of clay, even with this weak field. If she lost to Bartoli at Wimbledon, she definetly wasn't invincible on non clay surfaces.

hewittboy
06-12-2009, 07:15 AM
You make it sound like Serena was impressive in Australia. She was anything but. She won won the Australian Open this year because of Azarenka getting sick when she was in control erly in the match, Kuznetova collapsing when she had Serena beat, and because Dementieva and Safina are mental midgets who never perform in the semis or finals. Serena hasnt won a slam title since Wimbledon 2003 when Justine was in the field. She won the 2005 and 2007 Australians also because Justine wasnt here. What do you mean "even in her prime she couldnt win Australia". She won the Australian Open twice. Obviously you dont even know her career.

split-step
06-12-2009, 07:34 AM
Polls like this are stupid. Sorry but that's just the truth.

No one knows whether Justine would have bounced back or whether she would have continued downward on her slow slump (just like Mauresmo after her amazing 2006 season)

To say she would have won more slams than Serena is baseless conjecture.

tintin
06-12-2009, 08:03 AM
she would have won more titles in Paris no question but she could have won an Australian or USO but not at Wimbledon
there are way 2 many players that are better on grass compared to her
V.Williams
S.Williams
M.Sharapova
A.Mauresmo
have all proven to be better grass court players

thalivest
06-12-2009, 08:07 AM
she would have won more titles in Paris no question but she could have won an Australian or USO but not at Wimbledon
there are way 2 many players that are better on grass compared to her
V.Williams
S.Williams
M.Sharapova
A.Mauresmo
have all proven to be better grass court players

I think one thing we all agree on is she probably would not have won Wimbledon. However dont make me laugh by including Sharapova and Mauresmo (especaly Mauresmo) if we are talking about her chances at Wimbledon there since her retirement date. Mauresmo has been finished early 2007. She is done, the fork has been stuck into her for awhile now. Sharapova hasnt played Wimbledon healthy since 2006. 2007 and 2008 she couldnt even serve and was a complete non factor at Wimbledon both times. The womes grass court field outside the Williams is just terrible. Last year some Chinese player I never heard of before, and Dementieva a good player on non-grass surfaces but on grass with the worst serve and one of the worst volleys in tennis history, were the other two semifinalists.

heftylefty
06-12-2009, 08:27 AM
thats your opinion, serena is .. repulsive. she has one advantage over other tour players, genetics, period

shes huge in comparison to other FEMALE players, yet she can still get pwnt by them. if she wasnt 250 pounds and 6'4" she would be ranked somewhere in the top 100 but not inside the top 25. she doesnt have GREAT tennis skills, only size and power over the average female.

those my friends, are the facts.

Do you even watch women tennis? I get you are not attracted to Serena Williams. To each his own. But if you think that just being strong is the only key to winning tennis, you have exposed yourself as someone who does not have a clue about the sport.

And that my friend is the cold hard truth.

jamesblakefan#1
06-12-2009, 08:42 AM
thats your opinion, serena is .. repulsive. she has one advantage over other tour players, genetics, period

shes huge in comparison to other FEMALE players, yet she can still get pwnt by them. if she wasnt 250 pounds and 6'4" she would be ranked somewhere in the top 100 but not inside the top 25. she doesnt have GREAT tennis skills, only size and power over the average female.

those my friends, are the facts.

LOL at a 6'4, 250 lb Serena. What an idiotic statement. If she was 250, she wouldn't be a tennis player, she'd look something more like this.

http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00448/Awesome_Kong_448877a.jpg

Serena's bigger than most players, but she's not a wildebeast, let's get that straight.

Bilbo
06-12-2009, 08:51 AM
thats your opinion, serena is .. repulsive. she has one advantage over other tour players, genetics, period

shes huge in comparison to other FEMALE players, yet she can still get pwnt by them. if she wasnt 250 pounds and 6'4" she would be ranked somewhere in the top 100 but not inside the top 25. she doesnt have GREAT tennis skills, only size and power over the average female.

those my friends, are the facts.

WTF???? aren't most of the best women players of today HUGE. Sharapova is... HUGE, Safina is... HUGE. All of the best players in todays game are big. Don't u dare tell me, someone who's 5'8" and 130 lbs that the game is about power and size. Power has nothing to do with how hard the ball is hit, it's 95% about skill and technique. Yes, if skill and technique are equal, then the more naturally athletic player will win. U obviously dont understand the sport if u think Serena's dominant 100% because of her size and athleticism. To call her repulsive like an animal is also very demeaning. U should really watch ur words if u dont mean to offend anyone.

tintin
06-12-2009, 09:22 AM
WTF???? aren't most of the best women players of today HUGE. Sharapova is... HUGE, Safina is... HUGE. All of the best players in todays game are big. Don't u dare tell me, someone who's 5'8" and 130 lbs that the game is about power and size. Power has nothing to do with how hard the ball is hit, it's 95% about skill and technique. Yes, if skill and technique are equal, then the more naturally athletic player will win. U obviously dont understand the sport if u think Serena's dominant 100% because of her size and athleticism. To call her repulsive like an animal is also very demeaning. U should really watch ur words if u dont mean to offend anyone.

wait you mean to tell me that you believe that Serena is 130lbs?:shock:
pardon me why I :lol: at you :lol:Mauresmo is not 130 and you think Serena is?:roll:

Bilbo
06-12-2009, 09:23 AM
wait you mean to tell me that you believe that Serena is 130lbs?:shock:
pardon me why I :lol: at you :lol:Mauresmo is not 130 and you think Serena is?:roll:
im talkin about me... im 5'8 and 130... sry if i made that unclear.

boredone3456
06-12-2009, 09:41 AM
I thinks its hard to say for sure, but she would have at least as many if not more. Henin definitely had she stuck around and been on top of her game would have won these last 2 French Opens, especially this past years where 2extremely low seeds with almost no slam pedigree made the Semi's. This years Australians would have been a distinct Possibility also. Serena won because Azarenka was sick, Kuznetsova choked at the finish line, Dementieva double faulted herself to death and Safina well, I can't think of a word to really express what she did but we all saw it. Thats at least 3.

Last years US Open was a pretty poor one, Serena got lucky Venus threw it to her if you ask me, Henin would not have given it to her like that.

As for Wimbledon last year, the only 2 people who would have been a threat to her would have been the Williams. Both of the sisters had sucky draws to the final, Venus didn't even have to face a seed until the Semi's and it was grass court nobody Dementieva. Serena's draw was almost as bad, I mean Zheng???. Henin would have certainly been in the mix there last year, though Venus still would have been the favorite. Henin could have made the final, where anything could happen. t would depend on where in the draw she was placed...if she were in the opposite half from Venus she could have easily made the final, where anything could have happened. Outside her prime she got a set off Prime Venus on Grass in 2001. Prime Henin vs non Prime Venus would have been a lot closer I think than some people would like to believe.

Serena is very lucky that at 60-70% of her former self she can do what she does at the majors because her opponents gag against her at them. Outside the slams her opponents actually get some guts, which coupled with her lack of non slam enthusiasm its no wonder she isn't number 1.

Looking at it this way....there are 4 slams Henin could have won, and if we give them all to her she would have 11, but I say she would have won the Australian or US Open...not both...Dunno why just a feeling. So 10 if she stuck around.

deltox
06-12-2009, 09:48 AM
LOL at a 6'4, 250 lb Serena. What an idiotic statement. If she was 250, she wouldn't be a tennis player, she'd look something more like this.

http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00448/Awesome_Kong_448877a.jpg

Serena's bigger than most players, but she's not a wildebeast, let's get that straight.

of course i exagerated the weight and height to put emphasis on it. facts are she has more genetic muscle and size which equal more power. she overpowers her opponents, always has always will. but to include serena above henin on grass is kinda crazy, venus yes for sure, that chick can play on grass but not serena, just because she can overpower "most" doesnt mean she could own henin on grass.

as for the other remarks in this thread, your half right, i dont watch much female tennis. other half of the facts about me not playing is well, ridiculous.

only fanbois of serena can disagree that she is barely a top ten player by skill alone, its her power that she prevails with.

deltox
06-12-2009, 09:51 AM
WTF???? aren't most of the best women players of today HUGE. Sharapova is... HUGE, Safina is... HUGE. All of the best players in todays game are big. Don't u dare tell me, someone who's 5'8" and 130 lbs that the game is about power and size. Power has nothing to do with how hard the ball is hit, it's 95% about skill and technique. Yes, if skill and technique are equal, then the more naturally athletic player will win. U obviously dont understand the sport if u think Serena's dominant 100% because of her size and athleticism. To call her repulsive like an animal is also very demeaning. U should really watch ur words if u dont mean to offend anyone.

sharapova is huge? i meant purely by body mass, whcih is what serena uses to draw her power. i have major respect for venus williams, but for serena, she doesnt play with true tennis skill, she uses brute force.

as for not knowing about sizes, im 6'4" 185 and i know my size is an insane advantage. same holds true in all sports, except in football we dont say a 400 pound lineman has true football skill, he just makes a large detour. tennis and womens tennis recently is the only sport defining women who can just overpower their opponents with size and genetic athleticism as having skill.

jamesblakefan#1
06-12-2009, 10:00 AM
And Sharapova is so skilled, with her excellent volleys and technique. She should S&V more often, that skillful Sharapova.

Bilbo
06-12-2009, 10:00 AM
sharapova is huge? i meant purely by body mass, whcih is what serena uses to draw her power. i have major respect for venus williams, but for serena, she doesnt play with true tennis skill, she uses brute force.

as for not knowing about sizes, im 6'4" 185 and i know my size is an insane advantage. same holds true in all sports, except in football we dont say a 400 pound lineman has true football skill, he just makes a large detour. tennis and womens tennis recently is the only sport defining women who can just overpower their opponents with size and genetic athleticism as having skill.
if height and power were all it took to win grand slams, mark phillopousis (excuse my spelling) would have more grand slams than everyone. Your argument is stupid anyway, there's absolutely no way u can prove or support ur claim about serena winning ALL of her matches due to her being a "repulsive, ugly, monster, who dominates all with her crushing man-power". She is a human, she's not She-Man for Christ Sake.

thalivest
06-12-2009, 10:03 AM
if height and power were all it took to win grand slams, mark phillopousis (excuse my spelling) would have more grand slams than everyone.

That is mens tennis. You cant compare mens tennis to womens. Even less can you compare a strong period of mens tennis to the worst period of womens tennis in history. A female Philippoussis would win many slams today.

deltox
06-12-2009, 10:09 AM
if height and power were all it took to win grand slams, mark phillopousis (excuse my spelling) would have more grand slams than everyone. Your argument is stupid anyway, there's absolutely no way u can prove or support ur claim about serena winning ALL of her matches due to her being a "repulsive, ugly, monster, who dominates all with her crushing man-power". She is a human, she's not She-Man for Christ Sake.

dont rage out, i just stated the obvious to anyone ive ever spoken to. yeah she merely overpowers her opponents in 99% of the occasions, slams included. there is only a select few in history who have that special gear that kicks in during slams. federer nadal, agassi, sampras etc. in the females game there is no "active" player today that has that special extra gear.

deltox
06-12-2009, 10:10 AM
And Sharapova is so skilled, with her excellent volleys and technique. She should S&V more often, that skillful Sharapova.

she has a wicked forehand and tons of other skills, she sure doesnt overpower her opponents when playing someone else with confidence.

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-12-2009, 10:15 AM
Do you even watch women tennis? I get you are not attracted to Serena Williams. To each his own. But if you think that just being strong is the only key to winning tennis, you have exposed yourself as someone who does not have a clue about the sport.

And that my friend is the cold hard truth.

Rational response. The "genetics" argument used by some is just another way of saying "she cannot possibly have the talent/mind combination over the others. That is impossible, so it MUST be a genetic advantage of strength. Nothing more."

Unfortunately, that kind of argument has been used decade after decade where certain athletes are concerned.

It is just too painful for some to admit that Serena's mind and talents are superior because that is just her--her individual gifts and hard work combined to give her more than an edge over many on tour--the driving force behind her career.

jamesblakefan#1
06-12-2009, 10:16 AM
Sharapova is all power,are you kidding me. Oh wait, she's "so determined, so much heart", aka, she has no skill, tenniswise. At least not as much as Serena, an accomplished doubles player who has more skill as far as getting to the net than Sharapova could ever dream. Sharapova's a pure baseliner, at least Serena tries to come in every once in a while.

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-12-2009, 10:19 AM
she has a wicked forehand and tons of other skills, she sure doesnt overpower her opponents when playing someone else with confidence.

Name these alleged "tons of other skills."

grafselesfan
06-12-2009, 10:25 AM
Sharapova is all power,are you kidding me. Oh wait, she's "so determined, so much heart", aka, she has no skill, tenniswise. At least not as much as Serena, an accomplished doubles player who has more skill as far as getting to the net than Sharapova could ever dream. Sharapova's a pure baseliner, at least Serena tries to come in every once in a while.

I agree with you on Maria. She benefits from being very tall and able to thump the ball even more than Serena benefits from being very muscular and able to thump the ball. Despite her complete aversion to fitness and training these days Serena atleast does have great all arond tennis to play tennis, not just bang although she does that better than pretty much anyone. Unfortunately it isnt maximized like it used to be letting herself be so badly otu of shape these days, and not training or playing as much as she needs to, but the overall talent is still apparent even in its now rougher and less fulfilled state. Maria is just a slugger, nothing else really. She works hard at her game but really has no other dimensions as much as she tries.

scotus
06-12-2009, 11:02 AM
Justine was struggling in 08 for sure.

She lacked motivation and her nagging knee injury kept coming back.

That said, it still does not mean she was past her prime.

Slumps and injuries plague every athlete. But they do not necessarily spell the "end" for the athlete.

Remember how Justine stormed back on the tour and won pretty much every title after taking a year off due to her mono?

With enough rest and full recovery, she could still be winning titles left and right.

deltox
06-12-2009, 11:40 AM
Name these alleged "tons of other skills."

her serve didnt suck til after the shoulder injury, here is one for you, she is "fit" unlike your idol. she has more stamina, as much agression, although she doesnt have a full all around game i fully admit, she is not weaponless.

gj011
06-12-2009, 11:47 AM
No. I don't think Henin would have won any more slams. She was playing pretty bad for the whole 2008 before retirement and if she felt she still had it in her she would not have retired.

jamesblakefan#1
06-12-2009, 11:54 AM
No. I don't think Henin would have won any more slams. She was playing pretty bad for the whole 2008 before retirement and if she felt she still had it in her she would not have retired.

I agree dude. Good to see ya back. Hope it's no hard feelings or anything. If so, I'm sorry. But that's water under the bridge now.

Ripster
06-12-2009, 12:16 PM
Yeah the OP affirmed my thoughts that Henin would lead the GS count over Serena. I always thought that she was the one to beat on all surfaces besides grass. During '08 she lost her drive and motivation so I'm not sure why people are harping on that. The woman's field in the second half of last year and this year as well has been pathetic. Even a burned out Henin could have won the French and possibly the US Open last year. Not to mention the Australian and French this year lol.

imalil2gangsta4u
06-12-2009, 03:44 PM
Henin retired for a reason. Her motivation had gone and she was losing to people like Schiavone whom she normally owned. If she continued to play, her results probably would've got worse. Yes I agree that she would still be winning slams if she had got her motivation back and would likely have more than Serena now. But she didn't, so that's the way it is.

Good answer.