PDA

View Full Version : Lindsey Davenport


iscottius
07-06-2005, 06:34 AM
Lindsey is getting her chances to solidify herself as one of the best of her era,
but she is having some very tough losses in slams lately:

2004 US Open Semi's losing to Kuznetsova after winning the first set 6-1 (her only loss to kuznetsova)

2005 AO final to serena after winning the first set 6-2 and getting bageled in the third

2005 Wimbledon Final to venus after winning the first set 6-4, then losing 7-6, 9-7.

She won the first set in all these matches, but lost all in three what is preventing her from closing out these matches?

Mental or physical?

GotGame?
07-06-2005, 06:43 AM
She won the first set in all these matches, but lost all in three what is preventing her from closing out these matches?

Mental or physical?

I think it is mainly physical, but there has to be something affecting her mentally also. All those players are far better physical specimens than Davenport, IMHO, I mean those girls she lost to are some highly athletic girls. It is just that Lindsey's movement is so excruciatingly slow. I also notice that Lindsey's head gets to her when she tries to close out matches.

ACE of Hearts
07-06-2005, 07:03 AM
Lindsay has always been an overachiever.Ever since her junior years, she was considered a big time prospect with all the tools.She should have at the very least, 6 GS.Early in her years, she was out of shape.

Bertchel Banks
07-06-2005, 08:23 AM
Lindsey is getting her chances to solidify herself as one of the best of her era, but she is having some very tough losses in slams lately ... Mental or physical?

She's always taken tough losses. A few that stands out:

2000 AO final: She didn't lose this one, but things got close. She led 6-1, 5-1 blowing Hingis off the court, got tight & let Hingis back in the match but won 6-1, 7-5

2000 USO final: Led 4-1 in the first set against Venus, lost the match 6-4, 7-5. Lost the first set by hitting back to back double faults.

2002 USO: I believe it was the Qtr she let 5-2 in the second set against serena, but lost the match something like 6-3, 7-5.

Lindsay Davenport has a problem with closing out matches. As for her "back strain" at Wimbledon, I think it was one of those psychosomatic thingies.

iscottius
07-06-2005, 06:06 PM
Not a lot of interest in Davenport--very few posts

Yours!05
07-06-2005, 06:46 PM
Not a lot of interest in Davenport--very few postsDetailed opinions offered in several threads after the Wimbledon Final. Bump this one up again after her next outing;)

tennissavy
07-06-2005, 07:35 PM
Lindsay's problems are mental. She choked those important matches away and her opponents were all very fortunate. Poor Lindsay, she must be quietly suffering over those loses that never should have happened and that is really a shame. I feel very bad for her.

Bertchel Banks
07-07-2005, 05:07 AM
Lindsay's problems are mental. She choked those important matches away and her opponents were all very fortunate.

Not exactly. Kuznetsova maybe, but the others had scored decisive victories over her else where.

Tennis312
07-07-2005, 01:55 PM
Actually, the US Open semi last year against Kuznetsova Lindsey was injured after she was up -- it was clear it affected her game. The Australian final was just inexplicable and painful to watch for any Lindsey fan, of which I am one. Wimbledon was different, I think. She battled like she hasn't in a long time. The victories over Clisters, Kuznetsova and Mauresamo were all terrific. She fought like she hasn't fought in a while. And then, even after all that, she goes 9-7 with Venus in three sets on grass. She has nothing to feel bad about this years' Wimbledon. Venus has her flaws, but she and Serena are terrific fighters. I remember a NASAQ (I think) match Venus had against J Cap (also a terrific fighter) a few years back and Jen had mutlitple match points against Venus but just could not put her away. So, while I agree Lindsey can at times be a head case, I don't think Wimbledon this year was an example of one of her mental collapses.

RafaN RichardG
07-07-2005, 03:38 PM
i think its a mix between the two.
her movement is quite bad, and her endurance isnt the best either, which i think contributed to some of her long tough matches.
also she gets down on herself and holds back a little at times, but in the wimbledon final, but IMO think she wanted it, but venus wanted it more and fought harder to win.

i think that if she would get her movement down she would win a whoooole whoole lot more, and a whole lot easier, especially with that crystal clear ball striking, and a confidence boost wouldnt hurt her either. but as of now i dont know if i would put her up with "the best", maybe close to the best, but not quite, due to her "lack" of GS titles. however if she gets the career grandslam, she would be there with the best.

Bertchel Banks
07-07-2005, 04:31 PM
i think that if she would get her movement down she would win a whoooole whoole lot more, and a whole lot easier, especially with that crystal clear ball striking, and a confidence boost wouldnt hurt her either. but as of now i dont know if i would put her up with "the best", maybe close to the best, but not quite, due to her "lack" of GS titles. however if she gets the career grandslam, she would be there with the best.

Her movement is fine. She used to barely get to balls and would float them back, now she's returning them on a lower trajectory over the net when stretched wide. That part of her game has greatly improved.

Lindsay's biggest problem is mental weakness. When things get tight she stops playing to win and starts playing not to lose, keeping the ball in play a la Hingis. Against lower ranked players and chokers like Mauresmo and Clijsters it may not seem that way, but against fighters such as Maria, Venus, & Serena, players who go for the jugular when they smell blood, she pays dearly.

tennissavy
07-07-2005, 05:14 PM
Not exactly. Kuznetsova maybe, but the others had scored decisive victories over her else where.
Hi Bertchel! Lindsay's choking in the recent grand slams (since last years Wimbledon to '05 Wimbledon) let her opponents off the hook. Last year at Wimbledon she was up a set and a break over Sharapova, rain delay and choked the match away. Sharapova off the hook. US Open up a set and a break over Kuznetsova choked the match away. Kuz off the hook. '05 Aussie Open up a set and break again, I believe, and choked to Serena. Serena off the hook. '05 Wimbledon up a set and served for the match at 6-5 in the 2nd set choked the set away. 3rd set match points over Venus, choked more. Venus won. Venus off the hook. In these cases she choked. There were no decisive victories over Davenport. She let them off the hook. The only person to have a decisive victory over Davenport, at a grand slam recently, was Mary Pierce who beat the hell out of Lindsay. Of course Pierce choked in the final against Henin but that's another story.

RafaN RichardG
07-07-2005, 05:27 PM
Her movement is fine. She used to barely get to balls and would float them back, now she's returning them on a lower trajectory over the net when stretched wide. That part of her game has greatly improved.

Lindsay's biggest problem is mental weakness. When things get tight she stops playing to win and starts playing not to lose, keeping the ball in play a la Hingis. Against lower ranked players and chokers like Mauresmo and Clijsters it may not seem that way, but against fighters such as Maria, Venus, & Serena, players who go for the jugular when they smell blood, she pays dearly.

umm her movement is ok, but i dont think its as good as it could be. but do you think it is even considered "good". i think at best her movement is "OK"

Bertchel Banks
07-07-2005, 05:52 PM
umm her movement is ok, but i dont think its as good as it could be. but do you think it is even considered "good". i think at best her movement is "OK"

IMO, she has improved a lot in the movement department, and I dont consider it a liability. I think it's part of the reason she's turned the tables against Clijsters, specifically.

In the Wimbledon final she got a lot balls back before she started giving up/got injured/conserving energy.

RafaN RichardG
07-07-2005, 06:01 PM
true she did get a lot of balls back.... i just think it can be improved. i dont know if the movement was the reason she beat clijsters though, i thought she just out hit her with confidence.

Bertchel Banks
07-07-2005, 06:05 PM
Truthfully I didn's see the Clijsters match, so I don't know what happened there.

A D
07-08-2005, 09:46 AM
Lindsay has always been an overachiever.Ever since her junior years, she was considered a big time prospect with all the tools.She should have at the very least, 6 GS.Early in her years, she was out of shape.

Good point.
There has always been that extra ounce of pressure on her.

federerhoogenbandfan
07-08-2005, 09:48 AM
I agree with those of you who say she has choked away 4 of the last 5 grand slams she has played, Wimbledon 2004, U.S open 2004, Australian Open this year, Wimbledon this year. She is a great player, but will probably never have a stretch of tennis like that again, where she will get that many opportunities, it could have been the golden stretch of her career; combined with what she has already accomplished, imagine how people would have looked at her career. Instead it is is something that cements her as a big match failure and the second-most bogus 1 in history next to Martina Hingis, and a player who potentialy ends her career going 6 or 7 years without winning a slam title, despite never dropping out of the top 5(minus injury layoff).

araghava
07-08-2005, 09:58 AM
Part of the reason Lindsey lost to Venus this wimbledon was her reluctance to go to net. She had Venus running from side to side for much of the match. However rather than take advantage of some of Venus's defensive replies by intercepting the ball at the net, she kept trying to blast winners from the baseline. Eventually she would make a mistake as Venus kept getting ball after ball back into play.

Basically her game plan worked against all the other players but Venus is probably the best mover in the womens game. Lindsey needed to adjust to that by comming to net more. Given that she is an excellent doubles player, she has the tools to do so.

federerhoogenbandfan
07-08-2005, 10:15 AM
I agree, on so many key points late in the 3rd set, she put Venus on the defense with thunderous shots, but Venus used her incredable combination of mobility and reach to keep returning them, some of them were floaters Venus barely could get a raquet on, yet Lindsay did not finish the points at the net as she could have. Had she done this a few more times she probably would have won that match. It is something she needs to consider against an opponent like Venus.

Bertchel Banks
07-08-2005, 11:05 AM
Part of the reason Lindsey lost to Venus this wimbledon was her reluctance to go to net. She had Venus running from side to side for much of the match. However rather than take advantage of some of Venus's defensive replies by intercepting the ball at the net, she kept trying to blast winners from the baseline. Eventually she would make a mistake as Venus kept getting ball after ball back into play.

Net players are nimble and agile. Lindsay is neither. Net players are quick. Lindsay is not. Lindsay's hands are "soft" for baseline bashing, but heavy for a net play. Hit a floater and Lindsay will hit a power put-away volley. Hit a screamer or a topspinner at her feet and Lindsay looks like a weekend hacker.

How many times did Venus not draw the error from Lindsay by either passing her on the approach or by drawing her to the net. The last point of the 2000 Wimbeldon final ended with Lindsay making a volley error at net.

Camilio Pascual
07-08-2005, 11:09 AM
Lindsey is getting her chances to solidify herself as one of the best of her era,

Already done.
She's a pushbutton HeiF'er, only retirement is holding her back.
She's had a long career with high quality results right up to now and is the last player to hold the #1 singles and doubles ranking concurrently.

She's been a tremendous success, the most consistent player on the tour, hence the well deserved #1 ranking. A lot of TeeVee fans here get a basically flawed and distorted idea of what the #1 ranking represents
. The #1 ranking isn't taken seriously enough, there's more to pro tennis than the Majors, TeeVee fans focus too much on them and forget a lot of great tennis had to be played to be #1, ESPECIALLY without winning a Major. One year when Hingis was #1 and didn't win a Major, she had TWENTY more wins than the next player. Just because we didn't see it on TeeVee doesn't mean it didn't happen.

araghava
07-08-2005, 11:09 AM
I wan't suggesting that Lindsey play a net rushing game. However there were plenty of times when Venus was scrambling at the baseline and returning floaters back. I think Lindsey should have taken these balls in the air and tried to finish the point earlier.

Captain Lou
07-08-2005, 11:28 AM
I've seen Davenport play for years. It's mostly mental. When things stop going way, she gets this disappointed look on her face and begins to choke. I was watching that final, when Venus fell down and she got the break, 6-5, I said, she dones't hold serve, she will loose. Sure enough, she blew it. She had Venus on the ropes and she couldn't close the deal. When she lost the set, I stop watching. I'm surprised that the last set was 9-7. I figured it would end 6-1 or 6-2. Davenport should have won AO, Wimbledon and she should have been in the finals of the US Open last year with Jen, another one who blew it. Davenport has no killer instinct

byealmeens
07-08-2005, 05:48 PM
I totally agree with tennissavy and others that Lindsay has choked away many important matches, particularly in grand slams. For me, however, this year's Aussie Open was a whole new low. After blowing a lead in the second, she THREW away the last set 6-0, winning only EIGHT points! She didn't just choke, she quit, and in a grand slam FINAL. I've watched tennis for over twenty years now, and I have never seen anything so disgraceful. It's one thing to get tight, it's one thing to lose it mentally, but to not even try. That is the epitome of offensive.

Agassi
07-10-2005, 10:07 AM
If Lindsay didn't move very well she wouldn't be at the top. She has beaten extremely tough opponents and can obviously reach and go for balls and stick with the best of them. Otherwise she wouldn't be number 1. She has some of the best strokes to boot but at least she's able to use them on the court because of her footwork.

Phil Daddario
07-10-2005, 10:35 AM
I don't think her problem lies in her footspeed too much.

She hits the ball pretty flat. As a result, her balls go faster to the other side. But at the same time, she's leaving herself less time to recover constantly. She can move as well as many good athletes, but she's taking out all her recovery time.

If she can't dominate immediately and stay on the offensive, this recovery time can really hurt her.

She has to be in control of the point from the start. Otherwise, she's not winning it.

edit: Forgot something. While I believe Lindsay's flat ballstriking skills are hurting her, I don't think she should change it, or that she can now. It's what she's comfortable with, if she started suddenly adding on the topspin to her balls she'd lose more matches. Stick with her strengths.