View Single Post
Old 10-20-2012, 09:44 PM   #52
abmk
G.O.A.T.
 
abmk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: India
Posts: 14,799
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NadalAgassi View Post
LOL at the end of 2003 EVERYONE considered Serena as still being the best player, and in fact Venus as 2nd best. Henin was now considered the best on clay, that is it. Henin did deserve the #1 ranking since both she and Serena won 2 slams, and Henin played a whole year, but if you think she was considered "best player" at years end you are delusional, just as you are delusional on so many things. All through the U.S Open the commentators repeatedly mentioned "Venus and Serena, the 2 best players in the World missing." Until Henin beat Serena or Venus on any non clay surface, something she had NEVER done in her career to that point, nobody was going to consider her the best.
so now the criteria is henin has to beat serena/venus on a non-clay surface ? lol !

venus didn't win a single major in 2003 .... she was NOT the no2 player in 2003, not even close ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by NadalAgassi View Post
Serena until she was forced to miss the rest of the year with injury after Wimbledon had been clearly the best on hard courts and clearly the best on grass, Henin came nowhere close, and in fact Serena was much closer to her on clay than Henin was to Serena on either other surface. Based on that she was still clearly the best player in the World with no argument for Henin, the #1 ranking for Henin yes, but that doesnt always equate to best player.
you need to play to be considered the best player ...henin was #1 player for 2003 ... fact .....

Quote:
Originally Posted by NadalAgassi View Post
Mauresmo was considered the best player at the end of 2006 since she won 2 slams to Henin's 1 and beat Henin in the finals of both. Henin arguably deserved the #1 ranking, but Mauresmo was considered the top player of the year.

So just like I said the only year Henin was considered the best was 2007. Hingis was considered the best player in 1997, 1998, 1999.
This despite that the field in 1998 and 1999 was much better than 2004, 2005, and 2006, all which Henin failed to claim stake as the best player in the World.
henin was no 1 in 2006 .....

Quote:
Originally Posted by NadalAgassi View Post
I have no idea whatsoever how Davenport ever ended 1998 at #1 since Hingis had better slam results- Australian Open winner, French Open semis, Wimbledon semis, U.S Open runner up vs Australian Open semis, French Open semis, Wimbledon quarters, U.S Open Champion, performed better all year across various surfaces by far (Davenport had the best year on hard courts), and won the WTA Championships over Davenport as well. Davenport managed to win only 1 more tournament (6 to 5) which clearly does not compensate for her inferior big event performance. Davenport's results at the end of 1998 in no way indicated her as the best player over Hingis overall, despite her #1 ranking.
davenport reached more finals , won more matches ( similar win loss % ) and one more title ...

funny how you argue for hingis' 98, which was inferior to henin's 2006 , let alone henin's 2003 .....
abmk is offline   Reply With Quote