Originally Posted by THUNDERVOLLEY
They won a major. Wozniacki did not. Wozniacki loses.
What significant advantage does Wozniacki have over the majors winners you cite?
Beats me. Wozniacki wasnt even a semi legitimate slamless number 1 by being super consistent and strong while not winning a slam for a long period the way Hingis, Davenport, Clijsters, Mauresmo were (during the time Hingis and Davenport spent at number 1 long after their slam days were forever over, and while Clijsters and Mauresmo were there years before their first slam). Contrary to the myth of some she wasnt even that consistent during her time at number 1, didnt do that good a job winning even small events (her highest tournament title count in a year is 5), didnt even produce many reasonably good slam results, and overall had sucky results and was only number 1 due to a combination of a ridiculous ranking system and the worst ever WTA in 2010 and 2011.
Majoli will be remembered for denying Hingis the Calendar Slam and one of the best clay courters on the planet in the 2nd half of the 90s, culminating in her spectacular RG triumph. Schiavone will be remembered for unlikely late career heroics, especialy at RG with a title and a great attempt that just fell short at a defense (finals) and winning with classic old school tactics at a time that had almost seemed extinct. Myskina will be remembered as the first ever Russian to win a slam, and shredding her way through a difficult draw the last 3 rounds barely losing games. Wozniacki will be remembered as the all time joke number 1, rivalled only perhaps by Safina and Jankovic, in that farce number 1 WTA era.