View Single Post
Old 10-20-2012, 09:54 PM   #53
Posts: n/a

Originally Posted by abmk View Post
so now the criteria is henin has to beat serena/venus on a non-clay surface ? lol !
Considering Serena had won 5 of the last 6 majors, and Venus had been runner up in 5 of the last 6, did Henin need to beat one of them off of clay, Serena especialy, to be considered better, hell yeah. This is not a Federer vs Nadal case where Nadal usually beats Federer but Federer wins almost every non clay major in his prime, which is what you use to mock when people mention Nadal being missing from draws when Federer won (even events like Wimbledon 09 which Nadal was favored to win had he played). Henin had won NOTHING major off clay prior to the Williams both going down with injury, nada, zilch. Serena had won everything off clay (along with the 02 French to boot) with Venus the other finalist each time, in the last year and half, and this along with Henin producing 0 wins over either off of clay over either in her career to that point. So until Henin won a non clay major with Serena atleast in the draw she had proven nothing as far as being best player. Honestly you are in a fantasy World if you honestly believe Serena was not still considered the best player in the World at the end of 2003. Every expert said she was.

henin was #1 player for 2003 ... fact .....
I did not dispute her being #1. I said she was not considered the best player. Have you been too busy worshipping Federer you havent followed the WTA for 15 years?? Well if so stick to mens tennis and dont even bother getting involved in something you know squat about. Anyone who has actually followed the WTA knows one simple rule, the #1 ranking does not automaticaly = best player. Did you consider Wozniacki the best player in 2010 and 2011, Safina in 2009, Davenport in 2004 and 2005.

Note I also did not say Hingis was the best player in 2000 even though she spent almost every week at #1 and ended the year #1. Note I did not say Hingis was the best player in 2001 since she spent almost the whole year there.

henin was no 1 in 2006 .....
Indeed she was but again Mauresmo won 2 slams to Henin's 1, and beat Henin in the finals of both. Thus Mauresmo = 2006 best player in World, regardless of ranking.

davenport reached more finals , won more matches ( similar win loss % ) and one more title ...
Those are not enough to overcome weaker slam performances and the WTA Championships. Only a much better record in smaller tournaments or tier 1 type events would do that.

funny how you argue for hingis' 98, which was inferior to henin's 2006 , let alone henin's 2003 .....
I am comparing Hingis's 1998 to other players in 1998 and Henin's 2003 and 2006 to other players those years. In what bizarre World does Hingis's 1998 compared to Henin's 2006 show whether Hingis was the best in 1998 and whether Henin was the best in 2006.

Last edited by NadalAgassi; 10-20-2012 at 09:59 PM.
  Reply With Quote