One Slam Wonders vs. Slam-less #1s

[jhar26]

Chris O'Neill had an abysmal career record, but, ya I rather my career highlight be that of a slam winner than that of number 1 without a slam. Also, you can not call O'Neill a fraudelent slam champion, than one can refer to Caroline as a fraudelent number 1. Remember she only got there because Serena got injured and Kim played a abbreviate schedule.

The thing about slamless # 1, you don't even have to make a slam final during that tenure, whereas with a one slam wonder, you've reached the apex of your sport.

And the debate wasn't about who was the best on a particular surface, but, what would u rather have accomplished.

Just for the record, Henin wasn't playing (retired) when Ivanovic won her French, so, an argument can be made she was the best clay courter at the time.

Exactly. You are making my point for me. Britbox insinuated that Woziacki was a fraudelent #1 - that is, that's how he would feel about it if he were in her place. The basis for that was that Serena and Clijsters were the real best players of their time and that in their absence Wozniacki was #1. Which brings me to Jausovec, Ruzici and Barker. They all won the FO when Evert didn't compete. Ivanovic won when Henin didn't compete. Yet they are not considered fraudelent slam champions for winning a FO hen the best player isn't around, but Wozniacki would be a fraudelent #1 for being #1 when Serena is not around. :dodgy:

And when O'Neil won her AO it's prestige was at the most comparable to that of a premier or tier II these days. If people really rather would be Chris O'Neil than a slamless #1 it's better to have four tournaments per year and an off season of ten months, because everything other than a slam is just a glorified exho.

 

[blueberry]

[/quote]They're the goals they thought about, and obsessed over, as kids. They saw the athletes receiving Gold Medals and lifting trophies. They did not see them receiving awards for being ranked No. 1.
[/quote]

Actually, they do give award to the players that reached no.1 in WTA ranking.

 

[Correspondent Kiu]

...., because everything other than a slam is just a glorified exho.

May be in the average sport fan's eyes, but we are Tennis fans, we know better.
Right?

:sleepy:

 

[Calvy]

...., because everything other than a slam is just a glorified exho.

May be in the average sport fan's eyes, but we are Tennis fans, we know better.
Right?

:sleepy:

Right, and as a fan, you know, and I know and every fan knows, the objective is to win a slam.

Also, I read someone stated that "one slam wonders" more or less were just having a career tournament or got extremely home for two weeks, whereas becoming number 1 is a show of consistency.

Interesting, all of the present "one slam wonders" have made multiple slam finals, with the noted exception of Kvitova. Whereas two of the three recent slamless number 1 have made the final of a slam only once, and both times it was before they became number 1.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

winning majors is where its it..if you want to be a groovy cat..(and that's a fact).

would good goran / bad goran swap his major title at Wimbledon so he could upgrade his highest world rank of no2 up to no 1 ???,,I'll wager not.mr m rios might think he is the man having been world no1 rank but he didn't win a major..it just looks like its the wrong way round..

its also way wozniaki gets so much grief (plus the fact she is a giggly attention seeking oaf)..but at least she did not go to the toilet out of a hotel balcony over passers-by like Mr Rios did.

 

[jhar26]

winning majors is where its it..if you want to be a groovy cat..(and that's a fact).

would good goran / bad goran swap his major title at Wimbledon so he could upgrade his highest world rank of no2 up to no 1 ???,,I'll wager not.mr m rios might think he is the man having been world no1 rank but he didn't win a major..it just looks like its the wrong way round..

its also way wozniaki gets so much grief (plus the fact she is a giggly attention seeking oaf)..but at least she did not go to the toilet out of a hotel balcony over passers-by like Mr Rios did.

I had hoped that this forum would be one where players wouldn't be insulted or called names since there are already (too) many of those. But I guess that's too much to expect.

Wozniacki doesn't (didn't?) get so much grief because she has never won a slam but because of her game. [/b]Compare it with another slamless number one like Jankovic and you'll have to admit that Jelena doesn't get nearly as much crap as Woz. When you checked out the level of hate on the various forums and social media when she was #1 you could have been excused for thinking that this girl had murdered the girl/boyfriends of those posters or something. I've never had a high opinion of human nature to begin with, but in 2009-2011 it became clear to me that the number of Gunter Parsche like fruitcakes out there is much higher than I had thought.

All that aside, yes of course. Winning a major IS the ultimate achievement in tennis. I'm not saying that it isn't. All I'm saying is that not every one slam wonder has automatically had a better career than every slamless #1. Yes, I would rather be Goran Ivanisevic than Marcelo Rios. But I would rather be Marcelo Rios than, say, Gaston Gaudio because even without the slam title Rios has had the better career of the two.

 

[Calvy]

winning majors is where its it..if you want to be a groovy cat..(and that's a fact).

would good goran / bad goran swap his major title at Wimbledon so he could upgrade his highest world rank of no2 up to no 1 ???,,I'll wager not.mr m rios might think he is the man having been world no1 rank but he didn't win a major..it just looks like its the wrong way round..

its also way wozniaki gets so much grief (plus the fact she is a giggly attention seeking oaf)..but at least she did not go to the toilet out of a hotel balcony over passers-by like Mr Rios did.

I had hoped that this forum would be one where players wouldn't be insulted or called names since there are already (too) many of those. But I guess that's too much to expect.

Wozniacki doesn't (didn't?) get so much grief because she has never won a slam but because of her game. [/b]Compare it with another slamless number one like Jankovic and you'll have to admit that Jelena doesn't get nearly as much crap as Woz. When you checked out the level of hate on the various forums and social media when she was #1 you could have been excused for thinking that this girl had murdered the girl/boyfriends of those posters or something. I've never had a high opinion of human nature to begin with, but in 2009-2011 it became clear to me that the number of Gunter Parsche like fruitcakes out there is much higher than I had thought.

All that aside, yes of course. Winning a major IS the ultimate achievement in tennis. I'm not saying that it isn't. All I'm saying is that not every one slam wonder has automatically had a better career than every slamless #1. Yes, I would rather be Goran Ivanisevic than Marcelo Rios. But I would rather be Marcelo Rios than, say, Gaston Gaudio because even without the slam title Rios has had the better career of the two.

No, Wozniacki got a LOT grief for her lack of a slam during her tenure at the "top" but also for not even making a final during that period. Should she be made out to be a villain, or consistently criticize, of course not. But, if you're the number 1 player for a year and half and you can't even muster a final appearance in a major, you have to expect some negative press and complaints from fan. As far as Jelena not getting the same vitriol that Caroline received, fact is Jelena was number 1 for all of 2 months, whereas Caroline was for, again, a year and a a half, big difference. But, I'd argue Safina received even more critical press and from fellow players (Serena) than Caroline did, and Dinara reached a final of a major during her run at the top spot.

Now, I'd rather be Gaston Gaudio over Rios anyday. Again, a slam totally trumps number 1. Gaudio won 8 tournaments, where Rios won 18, but Gaston has that one biggie, the French!

 

[jhar26]

No, Wozniacki got a LOT grief for her lack of a slam during her tenure at the "top" but also for not even making a final during that period. Should she be made out to be a villain, or consistently criticize, of course not. But, if you're the number 1 player for a year and half and you can't even muster a final appearance in a major, you have to expect some negative press and complaints from fan. As far as Jelena not getting the same vitriol that Caroline received, fact is Jelena was number 1 for all of 2 months, whereas Caroline was for, again, a year and a a half, big difference. But, I'd argue Safina received even more critical press and from fellow players (Serena) than Caroline did, and Dinara reached a final of a major during her run at the top spot.

Caro got a lot of grief for not reaching a slam final, but in her case the negative comments went way beyond that. In the social media and on tennis forums posters got on her case for absolutely everything, including waking up in the morning and breathing. Real psycho stuff. On the biggest forum for womens tennis (you know the one) posters were saying things like "she should be stabbed to death" and posting gifs of a girl being raped with the comment that it should be Woz instead of her. And these weren't just isolated incidents. It went on 24/7 for just about the whole of 2009-20011. It left me with a very bad taste in my mouth, and although none of you guys over here are responsible for any of that of course, I will never forgive them for that, and I especially will never forgive the mods of said forum for letting it go on and on and on for years without doing anything about it. Forgive me for wanting to get that off my chest although it has nothing to do with the discussion we're having here.

Now, I'd rather be Gaston Gaudio over Rios anyday. Again, a slam totally trumps number 1. Gaudio won 8 tournaments, where Rios won 18, but Gaston has that one biggie, the French!

It doesn't even have anything to do with Rios being a number one as such. Even if his career high ranking had been number two or three with the same results I would still have preferred to have his career. But no problem - you'll be Gaudio and I'll be Rios. That way we're both happy.

 

[Kieran]

But no problem - you'll be Gaudio and I'll be Rios. That way we're both happy.

Except that Rios was never happy. I saw what you done there...

 

[Calvy]

But no problem - you'll be Gaudio and I'll be Rios. That way we're both happy.

Except that Rios was never happy. I saw what you done there...

Exactly! I'd rather take a French Open and a great disposition anyday.

 

[jhar26]

But no problem - you'll be Gaudio and I'll be Rios. That way we're both happy.

Except that Rios was never happy. I saw what you done there...

Exactly! I'd rather take a French Open and a great disposition anyday.

Well, Connors and McEnroe had eight and seven slams respectively and they never looked happy either.

 

[Calvy]

But no problem - you'll be Gaudio and I'll be Rios. That way we're both happy.

Except that Rios was never happy. I saw what you done there...

Exactly! I'd rather take a French Open and a great disposition anyday.

Well, Connors and McEnroe had eight and seven slams respectively and they never looked happy either.

There is a difference from looking unhappy and being unhappy.

Remember, Rios antics extended off court! Players just didn't like him due to his depressive and nasty disposition.

Never heard anything like that related to Connors and Mac.

 

[Correspondent Kiu]

OK!

We are way off subject now!
Connors and Mac?
Rios??

Most sport fans don't even know Rios!
Can we keep the conversation to the current crop?
Jelena Jankovic, Caroline Wozniacki, Francesca Schiavonne, Li Na, Petra Kvitova, Sam Stosur and Ana Ivanovic.
May be we can skip Ana since she has been a one slam wonder and #1
But those names should be the scope of conversation....

Now, the question I asked initially was:
If you are Tamarine Tanasugarn of Thailand, a pro for almost two decades of tour duty, 4 titles to her name and never been even in the top 20...
Would Tamarine like to achive what Franny did or what JJ and Caro did?

I give you people something else to think about.
What's the chance of another player reaching #1 for 67 weeks without a slam?

 

[Calvy]

OK!

We are way off subject now!
Connors and Mac?
Rios??

Most sport fans don't even know Rios!
Can we keep the conversation to the current crop?
Jelena Jankovic, Caroline Wozniacki, Francesca Schiavonne, Li Na, Petra Kvitova, Sam Stosur and Ana Ivanovic.
May be we can skip Ana since she has been a one slam wonder and #1
But those names should be the scope of conversation....

Now, the question I asked initially was:
If you are Tamarine Tanasugarn of Thailand, a pro for almost two decades of tour duty, 4 titles to her name and never been even in the top 20...
Would Tamarine like to achive what Franny did or what JJ and Caro did?

I give you people something else to think about.
What's the chance of another player reaching #1 for 67 weeks without a slam?

Actually, Rios is relevant as a reference in the context of the question of the original post.

As far as another player doing what Caroline, I hope never. I can not think of any other sport where this has happened. A player ranked at the top of the sport for such a long period, yet, never winning any of the sports biggest championships.

I made reference to Michelle Kwan in a past comment, but, even she won her sports World Championships several times.

 

[Correspondent Kiu]

I would not underestimate Caro's achivements when she was #1, at the height of her #1 reign, she was sitting on 10255 points, that's not much less than what Serena had when she took over the #1 spot with her two slams, an Olympic gold and a Year-end-Championship...

I think the fact that she did it without a slam is remarkable by itself, the fact that no one will be able to do it again makes it more so.

Would Franny change her FO open 2010 with Caro's 14 titles while she was #1?

 

[jhar26]

As far as another player doing what Caroline, I hope never. I can not think of any other sport where this has happened. A player ranked at the top of the sport for such a long period, yet, never winning any of the sports biggest championships.

Golf perhaps? They have had slamless number ones, but they never made as big a fuzz about it as in tennis. That's what Frew McMillan once said in his commentary on Eurosport anyway. I wouldn't know because I only occasionally watch golf.

But anyway, the criticism of Woz was unfair in that, say, Zvonareva never got a lot of grief for being a slamless #2. One could be excused for thinking that being a slamless #2 is the bigger achievement. It's also unfair in that I'm sure she tried to win slams but didn't. So what was she supposed to do? Start losing on purpose at other events so that someone else would take over? I think the whole thing got beyond ridiculous. Winning slams and being number one are completely different achievements. To win a slam you have to win a slam. To get to number one you need to collect more ranking points than anyone else over a twelve month period. If other players - slamless or not, had a problem with Caro being the number one ranked player the solution to their problem was simple: get more points. And in a time when the two best players (Serena and Clijsters) were often missing in action and the slam winners struggled for many months following their moment of glory one could make a good case for Caro as #1. If anyone else among the then active players had been ranked number one it would have been just as controversial - no, it would have been MORE controversial. So in a way they must all be relieved that it was Caro who was the one that got all those mudpies thrown in her direction and not them.

 

[Calvy]

I would not underestimate Caro's achivements when she was #1, at the height of her #1 reign, she was sitting on 10255 points, that's not much less than what Serena had when she took over the #1 spot with her two slams, an Olympic gold and a Year-end-Championship...

I think the fact that she did it without a slam is remarkable by itself, the fact that no one will be able to do it again makes it more so.

Would Franny change her FO open 2010 with Caro's 14 titles while she was #1?

Not knocking Caroline, but, take my advice, don't compare Caroline's peak year to Serena's 2012, you're doing no favors.

One gets into the HOF on one year alone and the only does not.

I'd bet my life Franny would choose that French anyday over what Caroline's won.

---

As far as another player doing what Caroline, I hope never. I can not think of any other sport where this has happened. A player ranked at the top of the sport for such a long period, yet, never winning any of the sports biggest championships.

Golf perhaps? They have had slamless number ones, but they never made as big a fuzz about it as in tennis. That's what Frew McMillan once said in his commentary on Eurosport anyway. I wouldn't know because I only occasionally watch golf.

Actually, not true, look up the criticism Lee Westwood took.

 

[Omair]

I would take the Slam, because well it makes people remember you. You get instant recognition and Slam is what every player plays for. and yes, it is tough to get to the top spot since it needs you to be consistent for a very long time and no one is willing to recognise the hard work and the dedication put in by the player in reaching the top spot. Winning a Slam is not everything, but this is what media has made of it. Having said that, I too would take on the one Slam

 

[kskate2]

No, Wozniacki got a LOT grief for her lack of a slam during her tenure at the "top" but also for not even making a final during that period. Should she be made out to be a villain, or consistently criticize, of course not. But, if you're the number 1 player for a year and half and you can't even muster a final appearance in a major, you have to expect some negative press and complaints from fan. As far as Jelena not getting the same vitriol that Caroline received, fact is Jelena was number 1 for all of 2 months, whereas Caroline was for, again, a year and a a half, big difference. But, I'd argue Safina received even more critical press and from fellow players (Serena) than Caroline did, and Dinara reached a final of a major during her run at the top spot.

Caro got a lot of grief for not reaching a slam final, but in her case the negative comments went way beyond that. In the social media and on tennis forums posters got on her case for absolutely everything, including waking up in the morning and breathing. Real psycho stuff. On the biggest forum for womens tennis (you know the one) posters were saying things like "she should be stabbed to death" and posting gifs of a girl being raped with the comment that it should be Woz instead of her. And these weren't just isolated incidents. It went on 24/7 for just about the whole of 2009-20011. It left me with a very bad taste in my mouth, and although none of you guys over here are responsible for any of that of course, I will never forgive them for that, and I especially will never forgive the mods of said forum for letting it go on and on and on for years without doing anything about it. Forgive me for wanting to get that off my chest although it has nothing to do with the discussion we're having here.

Now, I'd rather be Gaston Gaudio over Rios anyday. Again, a slam totally trumps number 1. Gaudio won 8 tournaments, where Rios won 18, but Gaston has that one biggie, the French!

It doesn't even have anything to do with Rios being a number one as such. Even if his career high ranking had been number two or three with the same results I would still have preferred to have his career. But no problem - you'll be Gaudio and I'll be Rios. That way we're both happy.

To be fair Jhar, Caro took a lot of grief during that time because she had not defeated any of the top power players (Serena, Venus and Kim to name a few). She had a couple of chances against Serena at USO 2011 and against Kim at the tour championships. I seem to only remember her beating one power hitter during that time (Masha, USO 2010). She had other opportunities to get to slam finals and came up short (USO 2010 & 2011, AO 2011 & 2012). For that she took alot of heat and rightfully so.

 

[jhar26]

To be fair Jhar, Caro took a lot of grief during that time because she had not defeated any of the top power players (Serena, Venus and Kim to name a few). She had a couple of chances against Serena at USO 2011 and against Kim at the tour championships. I seem to only remember her beating one power hitter during that time (Masha, USO 2010). She had other opportunities to get to slam finals and came up short (USO 2010 & 2011, AO 2011 & 2012). For that she took alot of heat and rightfully so.

Well, the players you mention are just better players than Caroline. That's just the way it is. But it's not Caro's fault that Serena and Kim were injured during much of the time that she was #1. They don't cancel the ranking list whenever a great player is injured and/or only plays a limited schedule, and inevitably someone other than Serena or Kim had to be #1 during that time. Wozniacki was a #1 the majority didn't like (ok, they hated her guts), but I don't think that the alternatives would have been any less controversial. Zvonareva who was the sometime #2 at that time? She has never won a slam either. Li Na? Great player but I don't remember her hitting a ball over the net and between the lines for six months after she won the FO. Stosur? Huge and long slump after she won the USO. Azarenka? Had a worse slam record than Caro at the time. Kvitova? Huge slump after Wimbledon although one could have made a strong case for her when at the end of 2011 she added the YEC to her resumé. But by then Caro's reign was almost over. But during much, in fact during almost Woz' entire reign as the #1 ranked player there wasn't anyone which everyone would have accepted as "the real" #1. Perhaps the majority, and if not at least a very loud minority at the time agreed that it shouldn't be Caro, but if you had asked them who it should be instead you probably would have gotten three or four (or more) different answers. So in a way the rest of the top five or six players at the time should be grateful to Caro that she was the #1 so that it was she who got mudpies thrown in her direction 24/7 instead of them.