Okay, time for a new thread. Decided to create a new one cuz I wanted to finish the number 1 discussion we had going on.

Vincent, the thing is, a number 1 means that you are truly better than everyone else. Can we really say that Davenport is better than Serena, Venus, Kim, and Justine? I certainly can't say that. Davenport will never win another slam. She simply does not have the stamina and the game to do so. She hits the ball hard but there are other players who hits almost as hard as she does. These other players are better fighters, mentally stronger, and faster than she is. Quite frankly, I'd say she belongs in the 5-6 range with Sharapova. I just think that the number 1 ranking is a joke. I understand that on paper she's had the best result this year because of the two slam finals, but she has not even won a tier 1 event in the last 52 weeks. The ranking is based on the last 52 weeks, so it's from last year's today's date till this year's today's date. In that time span, Lindsay has won like 3 titles, and they're all tier 2s. Is that a number 1 player for ya? At least when Hingis was number 1 without a slam, she reached not just slam finals but won like 10 titles and had 5-6 tier 1s. Same with Clijsters. Davenport reached two slam finals with she had to face Dechy in one semi and Mauresmo in the other. Sharapova faced Serena and Venus. Look at who Davenport lost to in both finals. Had Davenport faced Serena and Venus in the semis and Sharapova faced Mauresmo and Dechy, it would have been Sharapova who would be the one in two finals. But I'm not arguing who is better between Sharapova and Davenport, because I think they are both merely beneficiaries of the big four being injured and rusty. Quite frankly, I doubt either will win the Open, but I'd give Sharapova a better chance because she is a better fighter and has a stronger will. Watching Davenport's pathetic display in the Aus Open final where a few missed shots caused her to lose the next like 9 games proved to me that she will never win another slam. I'm not saying that there are better alternatives to the "number 1" spot than Davenport. I'm merely saying that that number 1 spot means nothing, and I think both you and I know that. The belgians and the Williams when it matters are the best. Justine and Kim are set to play later today. I don't think it's fair for you to say that Justine can't win the Open, because she is a past champion. It is true that she has yet to beat Venus and Serena off clay, but they have never played each other on HC where both are playing their best. If they played now on HC, I'd say Justine wins it because she is just in better condition.
My picks for the Open:

1. Henin-hardenne
2. Clijsters (even if Clijsters wins today, I'd still put her behind Justine because we all know about Clijsters at slam finals)
BIG GAP
3. Venus/Serena/Maria - to me, they all have the same chance of winning because they are all rusty and all have not played much since Wimbledon. They all have the games and mentality to win, but are they in good enough shape, injury free, and rust free?
4. Mauresmo/Davenport/Another Russian. That's right, I think that Davenport has the same chance as Mauresmo. Both have great games, but mentally they just can't string together 3-4 straight victories over top players.

Sorry if this is too long a post.

Well, your logic is very twisted in my opinion. If you are reasoning that the number one player is truly better than everyone else, than I'd say Serena is the number one player.

But she clearly isn't. But she is clearly better than Justine, Kim, Lindsay, Maria, and Venus.

But just because she is better than them in vacuum, doesn't mean she's done enough to be considered the world's number one.

It surely isn't Justine, who can ONLY beat Serena on clay, while Serena has beaten Justine on Clay, grass, and hardcourts.

As of right now, there is no denying that Kim Clijster (who laid the gauntlet on Justine today). She also moves to the top of the Porsche Championship Race, and is everyone's favorite to win her first slam.

Your love for Justine is kinda blinding you. Today should have been a wake up call!

If you are talking about who should be ranked number one right now, I'd say Lindsay or Kim. If we are talking about who is the best of all active players, clearly it's Serena with Justine in a distant second.

Lol, differing opinions I guess. It's all good. I just don't see how Davenport deserves number 1. She reaches two slam finals and all of a sudden she is the best player in the world? She's had a year that is equivalent to Elena Dementieva's year last year. Should Dementieva have been number 1? Davenport has won no tier 1 titles, only two tier two titles, and stretching back to this time last year, only 3 titles total. I don't see that as number 1. Justine, Kim, and Maria all have more titles than she does. And Justine and Kim have played much less tennis than she has in the past 52 weeks too.

As for the Toronto match today, it was obvious that Justine was flat from the beginning. Plus I will agree with you that Kim Clijsters is playing the best tennis by far of anyone else on the tour. So with that said, yes, Clijsters is probably the fave to win, but I doubt she will. Who knows, I can be wrong, but I don't think that she will win the Open because as if she didn't have enough pressure in the past, now she is the favorite too. That's even more added pressure. She will fold like she has so many times before. And if Justine and Serena were to play right now on HC, I'd still pick Justine to win. Serena is rusty like hell and no way would Justine lose to Serena. But again, I agree that Serena is a better hardcourt player overall than Justine and that overall, active player-wise, she is the best.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Hingie,

It really is quite a debate about who truly is the number one player on the WTA. But there is no such confusion on the ATP - Roger Federer is by far the best player there and proved it again this past weekend. He clearly was in a lot of trouble against upstart Robby Ginepri on Saturday but found a way to win. And then of course, he continued his dominance over Roddick in the Final.

He is most definitely the overwhelming favorite going into the US Open. As for the women, I think you have to consider Clijsters a threat. She's definitely playing great but until she gets over her nerves in Finals, I can't be confident to pick her.

Kim has never really had a problem winning tournaments outside of the majors. She's won 27 titles in her career, which is more than Serena, Justine, Jennifer, etc. have won. She's the best player on tour in tournaments other than majors, and she's nearly owned Justine in matches other than major finals. Let's see what Kim does at the Open, though.

Roger is clearly #1, but Nadal is pretty close. He's won three Masters Series events as well as a major and is definitely a threat to win the Open (a win there would make him #1 in my book). I would love to see Nadal or Andy take the Open title.

Hingie - Who should be #1 for the women, though? Serena and Venus have each won a major this year, but they haven't won any other titles. Justine has won 4 titles, but all of them were on clay. Linday has made the finals of 2 majors and won titles on different surfaces. Kim has won the most titles and matches of anyone on tour. Maria has been the most consistent on all surfaces, making at least the QF of all 3 majors and having several good results in Tier 1 events. Even if it's weird to have the top 4 be players without a major, it makes sense to me right now since the players holding majors haven't done much else - even when they play.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: <jenglisbe>,

Yea, I know that there really are no better alternatives to the number 1 spot. I'm basically arguing that there are no true number 1's in tennis. I think that in today's game, everyone is capable of beating anyone and that no one truly deserves the number 1. And since someone has to have the number 1 title, it's basically meaningless.

As for the men, Federer is just amazing. What is more amazing is that he and Nadal are the only winners of the masters series events. That to me is incredible. But the thing about Nadal is that he hasn't done anything in the other majors, whereas Federer has reached the semis of both other ones. I think that Federer will repeat at the Open, but I would love nothing more than to see a Federer-Nadal final. That would be incredible.

quote:

Originally posted by Hingie:
What is more amazing is that he and Nadal are the only winners of the masters series events. That to me is incredible. But the thing about Nadal is that he hasn't done anything in the other majors, whereas Federer has reached the semis of both other ones. I think that Federer will repeat at the Open, but I would love nothing more than to see a Federer-Nadal final. That would be incredible.

Obviously at this point Federer is more versatile, but Nadal is catching up quickly. Didn't he play a long match with Hewitt at this year's Australian Open? Since then he made the finals in Miami (where he nearly beat Roger) and won in Canada. He's definitely one of the best hard court players out there now, and he'll do much better at the U.S. Open than he did in Australia and England.

quote:

Originally posted by Hingie:
. But the thing about Nadal is that he hasn't done anything in the other majors, whereas Federer has reached the semis of both other ones.

Remember, Nadal is only 19. His game is developing right now, and with time, I think he will become Federer's main threat. Nadal is improving on the hard courts, winning his first hard-court tourney a couple of weeks ago. Nadal will evolve into a solid player on the hard courts and with time, he will be a force at Wimbledon once he adapts to the grass surfaces.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: JerryS,

I agree that Nadal is improving. It will be an amazing rivalry that's for sure. I think hardcourts will ultimately decide who is the better player. On clay we know Nadal is superior, but on grass it's obviously Federer by a mile. But it does seem like he has the game to bother Federer (2-1 record, almost 3-0). I wonder if Fed will learn to play against Nadal like he has so many others.

quote:

Roger is clearly #1, but Nadal is pretty close. He's won three Masters Series events as well as a major and is definitely a threat to win the Open (a win there would make him #1 in my book). I would love to see Nadal or Andy take the Open title.

Nadal has had a great year but again, he can't really be compared to Roger yet. Roger has been a force in all the major whereas Nadal at only one. His nine titles this year have come on different surfaces whereas 8 of Nadal's 9 have come on his best surface - clay. And Roger wasn't half-bad on clay.

Nadal is only 19 so I expect alot from him in the future. The US Open will be a great test for him. He won a hard-court tournament against the great Agassi but until he dominates his rivals consistently like Federer does...he can't be considered Number 1 whether he wins the US Open or not.

Don't get me wrong though, I think Nadal is a talent and am excited to see how he does at the US Open.

I also think that if Nadal somehow manage to win the US Open, he'd be the undisputed #1 in the world, ESPECIALLY if he beats Roger in the final.

Anyone else see the U.S Open draw? Omg, is that top half loaded. Bottom half is predictable. Lindsay's got the easiest draw to reach the semis. Henin-hardenne or Mauresmo should be her opponent there.
But on the top half, man. Sharapova, should she get by the tough greek Eleni Danilido(I have no idea how to spell her f-ing last name) should be safe to get to the semis. That is unless reigning U.S Open Champ Kuznetsova decides to play to her 2004 again.
The second quarter is where it is absolutely unpredictable. Williams vs. Williams fourth round encounter. Boy, that's a tough one to call. Venus looks to be the safer pick though. But then there's also Clijsters. The winner of the Williams match should face Kim, who is playing the best of anyone right now. But if there's anyone in the game who can beat Kim, it's the Williams. They've had her number in the past and for some reason just seem to play well against her. This U.S Open should be a fun one, if the top players show up ready. If they show up half-assed fit and injured, then it will make for some error-filled matches.

The Mens draw seems more equal than the womens draw with Federer/Hewitt/Safin in the top half and Nadal/Roddick/Agassi in the bottom half. Roddick seems to have a particularly tough draw I think - he would play red-hot Ginepri in the second round! Anyway, I'm sure Agassi would love another shot at Nadal...and if it happens, I would personally love to see Roddick/Nadal. As for the top half...Hewitt and Safin will probably meet to see who plays Federer.

I think the women's draw is pretty even. You have Sharapova, Clijsters, and the Williams sisters in one half, and Henin-Hardenne, Pierce, Mauresmo, and Davenport in the other half. If anyone outside of those 8 win, it would be a shock, and they are split 4 and 4. The quarter with Clijsters and the Williams sisters is obviously the toughest, though.

Federer has an easy road to the SF or even final outside of Ferrero in the 3rd round, and Roddick has a hellacious draw (Ginepri in round 2!).

My Predictions - Men's Draw

4th Round

Federer def. Ferrero
Davydenko def. Nalbandian
Dent def. Ferrer
Safin def Monfils
Lopez def. Puerta
Roddick def. Gasquet
Agassi def. Yozhny
Blake def. Johansson

Early upsets - Dent def. Hewitt, Blake def. Nadal

Quarterfinals

Federer def. Davydenko
Safin def. Dent
Roddick def. Lopez
Agassi def. Blake

Semifinals

Federer def. Safin
Agassi def. Roddick

Finals

Federer def. Agassi

Women's Draw

Fourth Round

Sharapova def. Safina
Petrova def. Kuznetsova
Clijsters def. Bovina
S. Williams def. V Williams
Henin-Hardenne def. Pierce
Mauresmo def. Myskina
Dementieva def. Schnyder
Davenport def. Golovin

Quartefinals

Sharapova def. Petrova
S. Williams def. Clijsters
Mauresmo def. Henin-Hardenne
Davenport def. Dementieva

Semifinals

S. Williams def. Sharapova
Davenport def. Mauresmo

Finals

S. Williams def. Davenport

Don't know if there are other Monica fans here, but here's a great picture of her at the Candian Open last week honoring the 10 year anniversary of her comeback.

Monica

quote:

Originally posted by Vincent:
Finals

Federer def. Agassi

I thought you said you and JCF decided he would win the Open?

quote:

Originally posted by jenglisbe:

quote:

Originally posted by Vincent:
Finals

Federer def. Agassi

I thought you said you and JCF decided he would win the Open?

Yeah, but Ferrero decided on his own to rest instead of work his way into form. His decision, not mine. It really was hard for me to pick Federer over Ferrero though. Because I thought if there match at Wimbledon would have been on a hardcourt, Ferrero would have won. And if Federer comes out flat like he did his last tournament, I give Ferrero a shot. Definitely not discounting Ferrero. It was only the year before last the Andy was giving the US Open title over Ferrero. (Yes, it was given, he didn't win it)

Early Scores

WOMEN'S

S. Williams (#8) def. Y. Chan 6-1, 6-3

A. Sugiyama (#30) def. A. Bondarenko 5-7, 6-4, 6-3

A. Ivanovic(#18) def. L. Lee-Waters 7-6(5), 6-3

K. Clijsters(#4) def. M Muller 6-1, 6-2

N. Petrova(#9) def. E. Birnerova 6-4, 6-4

F. Schiavone(#25) def. J. Kostanic 6-2, 7-5


MEN'S

B. Baker def. G. Gaudio(#8) 7-6 (9), 6-2, 6-4

N. Massu def. J. Gambill 7-6 (4), 6-2, 6-3

I. Ljubicic (#18) d. T. Summerer 6-3, 7-6(4), 6-3