Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by samprasvsfederer123, Mar 27, 2010.
who was better ?
who was the better player?
who do u think...why?
post some stats......do some prework dude
henin for sure, she has more grand slams (singles) to date, she is more of an agressive player, hingis doesnt have the same fire power, but uses more of a tactical game, id say hingis has a prettier overall game, henin is more winning. singles henin, doubles hingis
Historically, Henin will be known as the better singles player. Hingis definitely the better doubles player.
hingis was hotter.
I think Hingis was more talented and had more potential to be a greater player. She became #1 at 16, winning so many slams, setting all these youngest ever records. Yeah the field was sort of weak at first but it still isnt easy to do those things so young. At age 15 she was already challenging the great Steffi Graf's dominance in the latter part of 1996.
Contrast that to Henin who made headlines by winning 1 of her first ever tournaments entered in 1999 at only 16 I believe but then took awhile to start making her mark again. She didnt even become a contender for #1 until she was 20 or 21. The only time from a forecast to the future Henin has not lived up to is in late 2007 when many were projecting her to overtake Serena as the greatest player of this generation then she retired for awhile and now almost surely wont as she is too far behind now. However other than that she has mostly surpassed all expectations ever had of her. She was never projected to be a dominant player who would win many slams when she was coming up. Even when she was on top there was usually predictions she would be overhauled soon. Contrast that to Hingis who as a teenager people were predicting could maybe become the greatest ever, or would atleast win 15 slams. It took a long time into her slam drought for the expectations to be tempered.
Hingis blew many opportunities to win additional majors. She should have won the 99 French Open final vs Graf. She maybe should have won the 2000 U.S Open title where she on the whole outplayed Venus in the semis but a blown overhead cost her the match, and then would have had an erratic and out of sorts Davenport in the final. She absolutely should have won the 2001 and 2002 Australian Open titles, especialy 2002, where she badly underperformed in the final both times vs Capriati of all people, and in 2002 choked to boot. I thought of adding another one of her French Opens where she was upset but I do think she was genuinely outplayed by Majoli in 97, Seles in 1998, Pierce in 2000, and Capriati in 2001 (the only time Capriati beat a good Hingis in a slam IMO). I also dont think she ever a really great clay or grass courter who should have won multiple Wimbledons or French Opens, the 97 Wimbledon was fine for her, as would just 1 French Open but she should have won atleast 1.
Henin has won alot of French Opens vs mostly limited clay court competition. So she beat Serena twice, her pigeon Clijsters who is a good clay court a couple times, a past her prime Pierce once, Kunzetsova a couple times. A few decent opponents but on the whole not much. Despite remaining a contender and one of the favorites for a long time at all the slams she has managed to win only 3 other slams, and not a Wimbledon. In 2006 she reached all 4 slam finals and did not have to face a Williams sister, yet still could only win 1 (surprise which one that was), losing to much less accomplished great players like Sharapova and Mauresmo in each of the other 3.
Henin did probably face tougher competition than Hingis but it is not as clear as some think. Hingis's competition got increasingly tougher after her dominant year in 97, while Henin's competition has inadvertenly been injured or out of form as she herself has been.
Henin is probably the greater player but I think it is Hingis who had more potential, but not the work ethic, determination, or steely competitive nerve of Henin to capatilize.
Separate names with a comma.