Well this is the first time I'm posting a topic ..so plz do not mind any offences..

Looking back at the way Hingis has fought back her way to the top 10 and now Serena winning the AO and barging her way into top 20,I think this shows a poor top 20 in the WTA.
With due respects to Serena and Hingis who are superb Tennis players,it has not been very difficult for either of them to break into the top...Barring JH, and Amelie who have an all round game,most of the players at the top are either not consistent or are just not 'into the game'..probably Jankovic and Vaidisova though not in the class of JH are slowly making a mark in the game but looking at the top 20 of the ATP,a man like Safin though not consistent has found it very difficult to break into the top 20 a la Hewitt who is finding it increasingly difficult to maintain his position in the top 20 amidst talented youngsters with super playing styles of their own as Murray,Gasquet ,Baghdatis and Monfils(I may have missed others).Does this show that our top 20 in the WTA are just not good enough?May be not but then look at the ATP too....

Hence my post The Joke Top 10.....

Interesting post lalitha! :)

I don't have time to post a detailed response here, but there are a few here who know a lot about the women's game and should provide some interesting reponses.

The quick response that I can give is that in 2005/06 Roger Federer was coming back from injury, almost won the y/e master's and then won AO whilst wearing an ankle brace and not playing his best tennis. It's the old question 'is the top player just too good, or are the rest just not meeting the standards that the spectators exepct (that are probably raised by watching the likes of Fed, Williams etc)?' And also Sharapova has been accused of not having a plan b in the final.. as was A-Rod in the semi against Roger.. So perhaps more parallels between the ATP and WTA than first spring to mind? :shrug:

I agree petalp, you've summed it up nicely.

Considering how Serena lost to Bammer the previous week I would find it difficult to argue the top 20 was weak, or indeed the top 50. The upsets in women's tournaments are getting more and more frequent. Steffi Graf's loss to Lori McNeil in the 1st round of Wimbledon in 1994 was the first indication of this "increased resistance" in the first week of slams, to my mind.

The fact that one of the greatest champions in the history of tennis was able to come back using sheer will power and playing herself into form is not at all an indication of a weak top 20. Simply how far Serena is above the rest of the field.

Also Hingis has had a very tough rise to the top and was defeated nearly 20 times last year; many times by people outside of the top 20. She has had to work very hard to get back where she is. Just as hard as the likes of Davydenko et al have to get to their positions. Also Nicole Vaidisova despite two Grand Slam semis to her current ranking has struggled to become a permanent member of the top ten and has only just regained her place there...for how long? All these things are indicative to me of an ever increasing top 10/20 in strength and depth.

You can't condemn the entire top 20 as "weak" purely on account of 7 well played match by Serena. Serena had been out of the top 20 for over a year now and has only just broken back in. I wouldn't say it has been easy for her at all. It was bloody hard for her to slug it out to win the AO. I think calling that rankings jump easy would demean her achievement.

Also Im not sure what to make of the consistency thing, as plenty of people on both tours are inconsistent and then you have your Davydenkos and Petrova's of both tours who are work horses and earn their positions by being extreemely consistent.

And to be honest re: Safin it's more that he's not in the top 20 because he plays woefully most of the time, rather than the ATP top 20 is SO strong.


:)

It is easier to comeback from injury or a layoff and play 3 set matches instead of 5 set matches.....

I don't mean to jinx serena...but we are yet to see if she has the enduring motivation to want to keep reaching for the top... she won aussie for yetunde..her half sis....that is a big plus motivation to focus on....

Hingis...Hingis has some nagging flaws in her game....not really flaws per say...but her all round game though clever is not powerful enough to carry her to the top and maintain that status. much like Kim, that venom to finish off an opponent clinically, is often lacking... The aussie open is a big example....Sharapova made similar mistakes as she did against Serena as with Kim, ...but Serena punished her for it.

Their game styles always allows them to recover from injuries..but it will take several tournaments to get to the top... Fortunately, their easy styles affords them longevity to play several tourneys..

FED....plays well all round and equally.... , aggressively........... whenever necessary, plays hard to kill off opponents....it is true for the men's game in general. The work rate is harder.

Personally, it is great to win slams and a few tier I tourneys and get to number....
than win many tier I and Tier II to get the points.

The great thing about Serena's win is not even her climb back up the rankings... It is overcoming the layoff... the fat insults from media and fans alike....and simply keeping it together to win in such a convincing manner against the current number 1.

You would agree that if it had been a 7-5, 7-5 score line it wouldn't have been much of a hooray... possibly Dav or even justine might have given her a harder time....

Think about Nadals' winning run on clay.....in the morden era, you would think that someone will have beaten him in one of those many matches...but such things happen.... hopefully a time will come when the wta top 10 is full justines and venus and Grafs etc...really classy tough bunch. Will be good for spectators anyway....

Hingis and Serena are simply better, its that simple. They have 13 slams between them, and having time off through injury does not mean they lose their tennis know how

I dunno as much as I love Martina and think she is great, she seems to lose all the time now to Amelie, Maria, Justine, Kim and even Dementieva. She is good but the other power players in the top 10 are just too good for her. :(
Serena of course is different! :bow: Can't see any of the other players really being able to beat her if she plays like she did against The Cheat in the final at the Oz Open. Justine might beat her on clay and maybe Venus on top form on grass and hard courts! :)

I agree Chokie, but if Hingis can go from zero to top ten and maintain that, i think it is unfair to say she is only there because the rest of the WTA dont know how to play. And Serena never won the AO through luck, at times she reminded me of a soldier defending her country. She had purpose, intent, loyalty and love in her eyes, and maybe thats what IS missing from the game

Though Martina and Serena have 13 opens b/w them,it must be remembered that Martina got most of her slams when the older generation was fading away...that's what doesn't appeal Martina much to me except her disguised drop shots and other 'intelligent' shots......Hmm but Serena is a true blue champ.. no doubts about that.A fighter to the core!! :)

Agreed lalitha, nice to have you around :)

I like your avatar btw :D

Couldnt the same be said about Steffi? In her most proflific years, Evert Navratilova etc. Were on the wane, the difference being Steffi could still compete with the new breed. Would Martina have won more slams had she not retired, who knows? Probably would have had a shot at RG and USO in 2004 though roflmao

martina watching RG 04 in 3 smilies...

:yikes:

:doh:

:bs:

Hey thanks SerenaW19