One Slam Wonders vs. Slam-less #1s

[Correspondent Kiu]

This ought to be a good subject to talk about!

Within WTA we have ladies which have enjoyed great success, such as winning grand Slam events, like Schiavone, Ivanovic and Li Na...We also have a couple who became #1 without even winning a Slam like Wozniacki and Jankovic(wow! Serbia has one of each!).
Some Tennis critics may argue that these players are not as worthy as the ones that have more than one slam and been #1 but don't tell that to those thousands of players out there who have not done either.... I will not get into the retired ladies, they are not that important in this discussion.

Put yourself in Shahar Peer's shoes or even better, one of my old favourites, Aravanne Rezai.
Or anyone you think of...
If you were a player and you had a choice between being a Slam-less #1 or one slam wonder, which would you choose?

Tell me about it.

 

[jhar26]

For me it would depend. If I could have a slam title and a career at or near the top besides that I'd prefer the slam title. If the slam title would be just an isolated incident in an otherwise average career I'd rather be number one.

 

[Kieran]

I think most kids grow up dreaming of winning a slam, and the instant gratification and satisfaction from winning that Championship Point at one of the slams would be something everybody craves, whereas the ignominy of being #1 without a coronation would be something that almost devalues or discredits your great achievement.

So slam, si! No slam, non!

 

[Front242]

It's all about the slams in tennis. Definitely better to have won a single slam than been number #1 for consistency year round but never winning when it counts.

 

[tented]

I think most kids grow up dreaming of winning a slam, and the instant gratification and satisfaction from winning that Championship Point at one of the slams would be something everybody craves ...

And probably also associate as a de facto aspect of becoming No. 1.

 

[Correspondent Kiu]

I like Woz and JJ so I am arguing against.
It takes a good 6 months to even become #1 versus the 2 weeks a player needs to stay hot to win a slam.

 

[jhar26]

I like Woz and JJ so I am arguing against.
It takes a good 6 months to even become #1 versus the 2 weeks a player needs to stay hot to win a slam.

Same here. I also voted for the "slamless #1" option because I know that the "one slam wonder" option will win the popular vote and because getting to number one is a much underrated achievement in tennis, especially womens tennis. But as I said, if I'm totally honest than for me there are a lot of ifs and buts involved. To make it simple, I would rather have the career of Sabatini than Wozniacki, but I would rather have the career of Wozniacki than O'Neil.

 

[shawnbm]

I would take the major--it is what all players play for. It can never be taken away from you, whilst number one will come and go. Generally speaking, though, it is unusual for a player to win a slam and NOT be one of the top players on tour. First one that comes to mind is ... well, I am drawing a blank at the moment.

 

[Correspondent Kiu]

There has been only 21 ladies that EVER made it into #1 ranking during WTA's entire open era.3 of those ladies are slam-less.2 are still active.
Top names on this list includes Graff, Navaritilova and Evert.

I can count at least 5 slam-less wonders, and a 2 slam wonder(Svetlana who has never been better than #2)! So it must be easier to win a slam or two than make #1, most of the one slam wonders have never been #1

I do understand the prestige of winning a slam, look at Li Na, she has never been better than #5, she is one of the most inconsistant players on the tour but winning one Slam brought her huge million dollar endorsements from Nike and Mercedes-Benz and the cover ot TIME magazine, no mention of her huge popularity in China.

None of this kicked in for her until she won that Slam although she was Chinese #1 for a while.

 

[tossip]

Na li has a good agent in Max,same with pova and Roger.These things are arranged by agents to promote their players,same with Radwanksa on the sexiest list,everybody knows the Aga is not sexy nor Vika.These things are arranged by agents to give their charges publicity.I understand Na li because she is one amongst billions of asians.Vika and Aga sexy is just laughable..

 

[kskate2]

Have to go w/ the one slam. One slam would qualify you for the HOF. The same cannot be said for just being #1.

 

[colleen66]

I would rather be a one-slam wonder than a slam-less #1. Firstly, the slam opens many endorsement opportunities and puts you on the A-list and red carpet at Hollywood venues. Secondly, when a female player becomes #1 without winning a slam, she is almost vilified in the press. That fact is harped upon over and over again as the press seems to try to "shame" the player for daring to be #1 without a slam to back it up. Who needs that drama? Lastly, there are no championship parades for former #1's during the 4 Open events; however the former slam winners are always invited to wave to the crowds and sit in the good seats

 

[Hoergren]

Not surprisingly I voted for my babe Caroline because I think keeping first place for 67 weeks is a major thing (get it ) and being that has made her to the celebrity she is - of course together with her interest in another sport she's done another major step up in peoples mind. I would really like to see her win a major once in the future, but shouldn't she do that - well. By the way have a look at young Caroline and her dreams in the footage in the pix thread - quite interesting for those who doesn't know her, so go have a look.

 

[Correspondent Kiu]

I think most would take a slam because it's even harder to become #1
But who wouldn't dream of being #1?

Even Serena admitted that it was important being#1 after she achieved it again, she was saying otherwise beforehand.

 

[jhar26]

I think most would take a slam because it's even harder to become #1
But who wouldn't dream of being #1?

Even Serena admitted that it was important being#1 after she achieved it again, she was saying otherwise beforehand.

Same for Maria. She said that it didn't matter before she got there, but she was almost in tears when she regained it. It's more important than they want to admit before they get there, even in their own minds.

But there really is no right or wrong answer when it comes to the poll. A slam win is a peak achievement, so to speak, while number one is a consistency achievement. Both are milestones in the careers of anyone who can add them to their resume.

 

[Sundaymorningguy]

Well, it was great seeing Serena get choked up about reaching number 1 again. I hope she can find a way to keep it for the rest of the year and really expand on her weeks at number 1 she is about 40 some weeks behind Monica Seles for number 5 position which is doable if she can keep number 1.

 

[jhar26]

Well, it was great seeing Serena get choked up about reaching number 1 again. I hope she can find a way to keep it for the rest of the year and really expand on her weeks at number 1 she is about 40 some weeks behind Monica Seles for number 5 position which is doable if she can keep number 1.

Well, she can now widen the gap because Sharapova has a truckload of points to defend in the claycourt season while Serena can definitely improve on her FO result of 2012. From Wimbledon onwards the shoe is on the other foot of course.

 

[Sundaymorningguy]

Yeah, I think Wimbledon she is 95% likely to repeat as her game just clicks on that surface. The US Open is where I think it will get dicey as I look at her as 60-70% likely to repeat there. She stands to retain number 1 as long as she at least makes the semis or better of Wimbledon and US Open, and she can pick up points in Beijing, Cincy too. The French is where she needs to do well to gain a massive amount of points to cushion in case she doesn't win/perform well in the last two majors again. The good thing is if she is feeling it she can add more to help gain points in the fall and try to fight to keep number 1 if need be.

 

[Calvy]

I'd go with a slam. Fact is, there is no "wall of champions" for slamless number 1's. Players such as Woz, Jelena and Dinara are not getting invited to the roll call of champions that all of the slams have now and then.

Ask athlete, regarding any sport, except Lee Westwood, what would you rather have, a number 1 ranking or your sports biggest champion(s).

Ask Michelle Kwan, would she trade all those year of being ranked first in her sport, whether she'd give it up for that illusive Olympic Gold Medal. Ask Patrick Ewing, whether he's happier the Knicks finished with the best record, or whether he'd prefer to have won the NBA championship. Ask Dementieva had she accomplished one more thing in her career, would it have been number 1 or winning a major.

Someone wrote slams are easier to win that becoming number 1. Duh, of course they're easier to win, they're played four times a year.

Fact is, players like Iva Majoli, Sabatini, Li, Schiavone, Kvitova, O'neil, Jausovic, Ruzuci, Barker, Jordan and Martinez names will forever sitting on a wall with the greatest that ever played.

Anyone remember Marcelo Rios?

 

[Correspondent Kiu]

Welcome Calvy!