Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by coolhandluke, Jan 18, 2011.
0 & 0
whats up with that? is there no love for her on the boards? Maybe Marat should coach her?
I was shocked to see Dinara changed her service motion like Elena Dementieva... why go backward???????? She used to serve a little bit like John McEnroe :lol:
her mind went completely south after that loss to kuznetsova in the 09 FO.
Maybe she should eat a double bagel
I think she's had enough chocolate cake
0 & 0 is horrendous. But Kim should have given her at least one game - maybe Kim had a deja vu of the match against Li Na when leading 5-0?
The girl looks very depressed. She should take a break.
Yeah perhaps Kim worried that she would lose the match after leading 60 50 :lol:
Seems like it. She should go on a vacation... she already died her hair.
When she comes back, she should change her racquet too
The Kim-Na final in Sydney only proved that you cannot just give a game to anyone at that level, especialy a former #1, even if the worst #1 in history playing with no confidence. It would have been foolish of Kim to do any such thing. It is highly unlikely it would have made any difference, but it is pointless to consider taking the chance. If Safina cant earn a game on her own merit she didnt deserve one.
I think the worst thing that could ever happen to Safina was getting to #1. It was almost something she stumbled into by accident. She has none of the game, talent, weaponary, or mental fortitude to remotedly handle holding such a lofty position. She clearly does not even have the talent of say Kimiko Date, whose age of 39 is clearly a bigger disadvantage than any slump or injury Safina has, yet is still able to post close wins over Safina in their 2 matches last year. Yet even Date in her prime never made a slam final or ranked higher than #6, so that puts Safina into perspective. Being a #1 who the Williams and the other big names could flick away in a big match as if she were a little fly, and the outrage of people about her ranking, all wore on her.
If she sets a reasonable goal for herself like being a top 20 player again then perhaps there is hope for her to return to a decent career from here. She will never attain even close to the heights she did in 2008-2009 which were a huge overachievement for her, something she can be very proud of, but unrealistic to ever come close to matching again.
So? Why should Kim give her a game?
Stick a fork in her, she's done. She's reaching Vaidisova-like levels at this point.
Where is her Stapanek?
You don't get to #1 in the world by accident. She has lots of talent and huge firepower, but it seems all mental at this point.
Her two straight losses to 40-something Kimiko Date were pretty shocking to her psyche and to the tennis world, but we all know Date (career high #4) gives all the top players fits.
She almost beat Wickmayer in Brisbane, but losing 6-0, 6-0 to Kim and 6-1, 6-0 to Bartoli the week before doesn't do well for your confidence...
Time to switch hands
The contrast between Safina's movement and Clijsters' was really remarkable in this match. Even more amazing is how Safina managed to make it to number 1 when she moves like a herniated lumberjack.
She is the most accidental of anyone who reached that rank in the 35 year history of the WTA ranking system. And probably for the next 200 atleast to come. So she is atleast as accidental as you can possibly be to reach that rank.
Some of it is mental I concur, but she never had a #1 level game. It makes me laugh some delude themselves to thinking she does and overlook the array of circumstance that led to her becoming #1. At best she has really only a top 20 game, but even her actual game isnt as good as its best so it isnt even that right now. She is a one dimensional power player with no serve that can be overpowered by an old Date or Wickmayer easily. Not exactly a great recipe for elite success.
I felt sorry for her watching her being beaten up by Serena Williams in 2009. This year against Kim it's beyond sorry, that display. Kim obviously didn't celebrate that win, only did what she had to do which was exactly right. Pity because I see Safina and Woz too as really victims of a bad points system.
Can we give Safina a break here? This is like the 4th or 5th thread, it seems. I didn't see Venus get bashed like this when she lost 6-0 6-1 to Clijsters on Venus' home turf.
I dont recall Venus ever losing a match to Clijsters 6-1, 6-0 unless it was an exhibition.
I agree Safina should not be bashed for losing 6-0, 6-0 to Clijsters though. That was exactly what I expected. Even when Safina was at her best the real champions destroyed her in all big matches, so now nowhere near her best a double bagel is the expected result.
The poor girl should just go down to challengers to get away from the spotlight and rebuild herself from scratch. It is too bad she ever reached #1. She has too much scrutiny on her for someone of her limited (relatively speaking) talent and it is unfair to the poor girl.
Uh, Miami 2010 final....
I thought it was 6-1 6-0, but that 6-2 6-1 beatdown was almost as bad.
This? Coming from you? Surely even you see the hypocrisy in this coming from you.
Exactly! Kim is not there to be charitable, she is there to win!
Safina needs some mood stabilizers.
That brought tears to my eyes. Very funny sir!
It doesn't really matter. I seriously doubt any pro reads these threads anyway. The haters have been out on force since that match. Did anyone really expect Safina to beat Clijsters? True I root for Safina, but I'm also realistic.
Safina isn't going to do much this year (I fear even longer) for as long as she plays with a huge chip on her shoulder (back worries, criticism, internal and external pressure). Add to it changing her service motion, being somewhat defensive, and losing her identity when playing and this is what she ends up with.
Folks bashed Safina for losing to Venus at Wimbledon in 2009. Venus is only the best or 2nd best grass player to play over the past 10 years. Serena is only the AO-GOAT over that span as well. At least Safina has beaten both Williams', something the "TT Darling" Wozniacki hasn't done.
Anyway, the mob can now resume tarring and feathering her.
But you bash every WTA player under the sun pretty much, even when they lose in close matches. But Safina we should take pity on? Coming from the most cutthroat WTA basher on here, even when players win you find someway to bash them.
Look I know you have a mancrush on Safina for some reason, but still. Losing 0 and 0 is deplorable for a former #1. It's impossible to say people should take it easy on her after that effort and the effort she's shown the past year. And yes I know she's your fave, but to glaze over it as if it's no big deal to lose 0 and 0 is hypocrisy. Even if Blake lost 0 and love I'd bash the crap out of him.
It isnt that she lost those matches. It was how she lost them. Only getting 1 game in the Wimbledon semis vs Venus, not acceptable for a #1. It doesnt matter how great Venus is on grass, all other #1s would have done alot better than that, even the other weak ones like Jankovic or Ivanovic. Same with Serena in the Australian Open. Compare her final to a year later when Henin barely back from retirement and nowhere near her best still pushed Serena to a tougher 3 setter. 3 games and a bagel set is not good enough for someone who you want to be taken seriously as a #1.
No #1 player ever has been so easily b1tchslapped around by the best players during their peak period that got them and for awhile kept them at #1 on the computer.
And that is what most of us mean when she was never a worthy #1.
Venus was clearly injured in that match and Venus is in the twlight of her career anyway. Anyway I agree with you Safina shouldnt be that blasted for losing 6-0, 6-0. It is not like she is #1 or anywhere close to it anymore, and that is pretty much the result I expected vs Clijsters right now. The worst thing is the best players were beating up on her nearly that bad even when she was #1.
It will take a very macho man to tame that beast.
Safina wanted to be like Marat, controversial, insane on the court, but she forgot she isn't as good.
She's been humiliated often lately, but it has been good, because 2 years ago after she almost lost to Alize Cornet she said in an interview that she would never lose to a girl like that. Here is her pay back. Since then I disliked her for not respecting the opponent.
At least she was honest and let everybody know, unlike the W. Bros that are fake and tell all that BS about the opponents, but you know they mean otherwise.
Safina should retire ASAP.
To give away a game is an insult to your opponent.
You are SO clueless.
She never would have made the top-10 in 1986-96, the Golden Age of women's tennis.
She had two stress fractures in her back, as well as a ruptured muscle. That's an incredibly bad injury, and she obviously has yet to fully recover mentally.
It helped Dementieva, and it has helped Safina. Both double fault LESS after adopting the abbreviated motion.
I've said before, she needs a break and a new coach. Obviously the one she has been with forever is not producing results. The talent is there but the mental toughness is not.
So, when Sharapova lost to Serena while winning a total of 2 games or somewhere in that ball park in Aussie open one year, she does not deserve it either. You really need to watch some tennis before you speak.
She was just a victim in the ranking system, and perhaps she played the system. But she had consistent results in leading up to her number 1 ranking. Was she number 1? no, but that does not mean she didn't work hard for it. There are plenty of girls that reached number 1 that don't deserve it based on grand slam records, including on the men's side.
May I suggest you do some more thinking before you post again?
And watching Safina drop this far is quite sad. You have got to feel for her. Watching her the other day, I saw that she has actually trimmed down. I think she can still compete, because she has a pretty big game, but right now, it is all about confidence. And like the other poster have said, I am afraid that she is in the Vaidisova territory.
Of course Sharapova did not deserve #1 in 2007. What a stupid question. Henin was by far the #1 player of 2007 and soon swept in and easily ripped the #1 right away from Sharapova which Maria only temporarily took by default since Henin took some time off for her divorce. Sharapova was badly injured, serving like crap, and playing nowhere near #1 caliber tennis, hence why she was soon replaced at that spot and barely ended 2007 in the top 10.
Her strong 2006 performances are what briefly put her in that spot, combined with Mauresmo's 07 AO flop and Henin's brief sabatical, so it was still fine in the short term.
Whatever, I have watched lots of tennis and no #1 has ever been everyones b-tch to the extent Safina was. If she played a big name in a big match she was gauranteed to only get 1-4 games or something. And less than a year after being #1 or even while still ranked #1 anyone in the top 250 can beat her on a given day. You cant compare any other #1 than her, even other weak slamless #1s like Jankovic or Wozniacki.
Heck even Jankovic has beaten Venus at Wimbledon and Serena at the Australian and never been humiliated in a big match anywhere, be it a slam semi or final, or a WTA Championship or Miami semi or final.
Take your own advice next time.
I would have to agree with you on this one. Very similar to Jankovic, IMO. Safina, at her best, is a solid, consistent ball striker with the ability to outlast her opponents. She moved well and seemed to be in very good shape, at her peak. When she started trying to outhit her opponents, go for too much on her groundstrokes and add variety(getting too cute with her shots), she started losing. What is going on with her serve? I thought that she was working with her brother, on a limited basis.
It is very easy for a top 20 player on the WTA tour to play a ton of events, just be very consistent(not outstanding) and fall ass backwards into the #1 spot. Jankovic, Safina, Wozniacki etc. Not winners of majors. As accidental as it can get.
I have to disagree on Jankovic. Jankovic truly has moments of brilliance. Jankovic has a much better serve, and is FAR more athletic. Jankovic had (has) the talent to be a true #1.
And Wozniacki won a ton of events. She deserves the #1 ranking. She won the most, and was the most consistent. Best player? No, that was Kim Clijsters. But Kim did not win as many tourneys, or play as much. Caroline is #1.
I dont think Jankovic is a #1 caliber player either but she is definitely a more talented player than Safina.
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree won't we?
My response was based on the fact that this does NOT happen on the men's tour. Or, It hasn't happened since the days of Muster, Rios and Kafelnikov. I understand that the current men's top 5 is absolutely loaded, but the revolving door of #1 players on the women's tour(that have not won a major) is not a good thing.
I'm not saying that Jankovic or Wozniacki don't deserve to be #1. I'm not saying that they are not world class players. I'm saying that being # 1 on the women's tour does not mean a whole hell of a lot right now. If it doesn't indicate who the best player is, its flawed. The powers that be better get off their ass and do something. Either force the best players to play more events, which is not going to happen. Or reduce the # of events and make most of them mandatory to maintain a ranking, so that they can represent their sport accordingly.
I agree this is not a good thing, but the difference between the men and women is not the ranking system(which is fundamentally very, very similar and therefore is not the problem), but the players themselves. The top women fit into one of two categories: they are either less consistent than the men, or they invest less in the sport(i.e. not interested in playing hardly any non-slam events, even the 'mandatory' ones).
The attitude of the top women players today towards their craft is the problem.
The WTA ranking system is also terrible though. Both the mens ranking system and the old womens ranking system is better. The old womens ranking system had your average divided by 12 if you played 12 or less events, but divided by whatever # you played if it was more than 12. It also, and I think this is VERY important, awarded quality points for the higher the ranked opponents you beat. The current ranking system awards no points depending on the rank of opponents you beat, and it takes your best 17 so players can play 25 (sometimes over 30) events and throw out a bunch of bad performances. And players who play 12 or less events are hurt even more, even if they are better players producing better results and bigger winswhen they do play. The mens ranking system is set to award points at the 4 slams and the Masters which are the next biggest events. Only a very small # of minor events are allowed to count. Again much better than the current WTA system.
Maybe even with a better ranking system we would have some strange #1s the last few years but it would certainly decrease the chances and the time they spend their most likely.
And yes it is if fair to say that many recent #1s were never considered the best player in the World, irregardless of their rank. Nobody ever considered Safina the best player in the World. Few really considered Jankovic the best player in the World while she was #1. Almost nobody considers Wozniacki the best player in the World now. Ivanovic is the only one that some might have considered the best when she took #1 since she had just won a slam, had 2 slam finals already that year, and since Henin the previous clear #1 had retired, while Serena hadnt won a slam in 18 months at that point. That feeling didnt last long though as she flamed out quickly at that point.
Agreed; she did not have the genuine talent or court intellect to overcome anyone when it counted at the majors. To sharp minds, Safina was never a part of--or had the potential to be a great player winning majors; for those on the other side of the issue, there were (and remain) torrential floods' worth of poor reasons why she did not live up to the hype, the motives for said hype, or her lightning-fast fall from the top.
....yet some hold on to the hope that such a player can make a comeback.
Dinara reminds me of Angela, just not the same age.
The only difference here is that the WTA has fewer mandatory events. But it isn't by that much. You still have the 4 Slams and the Premier Mandatory events, and a couple of Premier 5s that are all in there for the top players.
The men's tour has a few more 'Masters' -- that's really the only significant difference -- and the mens tour also allows two more events(18 to 16).
So for the women:
9 major events + 7 minor(oversimplified, but basically)
13 major events + 5 minor
You could change the womens structure to be exactly like the mens and it wouldn't make a significant difference in the rankings, because the 'problem' is that the women who win majors in recent years tend to miss a lot of the other events.
I'm also totally against the 'quality points' thing and I'm glad it's gone. You can only beat the players in front of you, and it penalizes a player if a top seed that is in their path gets upset, because now they don't have a chance to get those points.
#1 means you've achieved the most, not necessarily are the best. It's important to distinguish between those two concepts.
Separate names with a comma.