Lack of competition leaves women’s tennis in bad shape
Roar Guru By David Wiseman, 9 Sep 2009 David Wiseman is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- Grand slam, kim clijsters, women's tennis
Russia's Svetlana Kuznetsova sits on the court as she plays Serena Williams of the United States during a Women's singles quarterfinal match at the Australian Open tennis tournament in Melbourne, Australia, Wednesday, Jan. 28, 2009. AP Photo/Dita Alangkara
I’m curious to know how weak the state of women’s tennis is when a player who hasn’t picked up a racquet for two years can stroll through to the quarter-finals of a Grand Slam?
No doubt that Kim Clijsters has an affinity for the US Open – it is the only Grand Slam she ever won – but to make it this far and this easily makes a mockery of the rest of the WTA.
Of the Top 16 women’s seeds, only nine made it past the second round. This is a shocking statistic and a damning indictment of how bad women’s tennis at the top level is.
Dinara Safina demands that everyone recognises her at the world’s number one ranked female player. But why should we?
She was abysmal at the US Open and lost the first set in each of her three matches. She should have been eliminated in the first round, but young Aussie Olivia Rogowska completely lost her nerve.
When it comes to a women’s Grand Slam, if a Williams sister doesn’t win, it comes down to who chokes less.
I have seen ladies finals and semi-finals of a Grand Slam where neither player can hold serve and the first player to do so wins. Is she how it should be? That the winner comes down to who makes fewer double-faults?
Every Grand Slam, the usual suspects of Elene Dementieva, Jelena Jankovic, Daniela Hantuchová Svetlana Kuznetsova, Vera Zvonareva and Victoria Azarenka will find another excuse to bumble and stumble their way out of the tournament, leaving it for some outsider to make it deep.
At the French Open it was Samantha Stosur, at Wimbledon it was Sabine Lisicki, and at the Australian Open it was Jelena Dokic.
Jennifer Capriati also made a comeback and and won the 2001 Australian Open and then two of the next four majors.
Clijsters knows all about this, as she lost the final of the 2001 French Open to Capriati, going down 12-10 in an unforgettable third set.
Could you imagine this happening in men’s tennis?
No way.
A player leaves the game for an extended time and most likely the game is going to leave him far behind. Ok, he might have a good tournament here or there, but he wouldn’t have the unbelievable success that Capriati and Clijsters enjoyed.
Women don’t deserve the same prize money as men.
Playing three sets Vs five sets is just one point, but the more pertinent one is that the depth just isn’t there in the women’s draw.
To win a Grand Slam title, you should have to play the best tennis you can possibly play as opposed to being the one who chokes least.
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- Grand slam, kim clijsters, women's tennis
September 9th 2009 @ 10:48pm
ohtani's jacket said | September 9th 2009 @ 10:48pm | Report comment
The women don’t need to play five sets. A good three set women’s match can be just as dramatic and exciting as a five setter from the men.
Women’s tennis has always been dominated by one or two figures be it Court, Graff, Moody, Evert or Navratilova. In fact, one of the arguments about the Williams sisters is that they haven’t won enough Grand Slams.
September 10th 2009 @ 1:40pm
Hoy said | September 10th 2009 @ 1:40pm | Report comment
Who was it in the women’s tennis who was number one last year or the year before without actually winning anything? That means a lot of runners up prizes, obviously to different winners at each tourny.
I am sick of the next big thing, being a lot hotter looking than they can actually play. It is like Golf. They pull some hot bird, give her all the attention, all the appearance money, and she doesn’t make the cut.
These are two sports where looks outweighs substance apparently.
September 11th 2009 @ 1:32am
ohtani's jacket said | September 11th 2009 @ 1:32am | Report comment
I guess you’re talking about Ivanovic, Jankovic or Safina. Ivanovic and Jankovic traded the World No.1 a few times without winning anything, but it was because the points race was so tight and Ivanovic had to pull out with an injury.
September 11th 2009 @ 12:49pm
Craig said | September 11th 2009 @ 12:49pm | Report comment
Why does Clijsters run make a mockery of the WTA? It’s not as if she’s come back just playing average tennis and thrashing top players in the process – far from it in fact, she’s playing close to the level she was at when she retired where she was already a top player then. It’s not as if she’s well past it age-wise either, she’s 26 and not had to comeback from a career ending injury after a 2 and a bit year break.
And as for your other comment about it being a shocking statistic that only 9 top 20 players made it past the second round as another excuse to bash the WTA, did you not watch Wimbledon then where 19 out of the top 20 WTA seeds all made the third round fulfilling their seeding and the top 4 all reached the semi’s which was more than the can-do-no-wrong ATP. It’s not as if players don’t choke in your beloved ATP tour either when they play Federer in slams, which he invariably ends up winning from positions he shouldn’t (Berdych AO, Acasuso FO, Haas FO, Roddick Wim). It isn’t as if ATP has more than 2 regular winners of slams either unless Fed or Rafa happen to be either not fully fit. in fact the ATP’s even less competitive when it comes to slam winners – 17 of the last 18 have been won by either Federer or Nadal, where as in the WTA in the last 18 the Williams Sisters have won just 7 of those. My word, the ATP is so strong the depth finishes after no.2 in the rankings! I think you need to accept that the WTA’s going through a transitional phase right now since the retirement of Henin like the ATP was from 2001-2003, rather than just kick it whilst it’s down like you have done with this article. When Clijsters is back near the top of the rankings and in full flow, Sharapova returns to full form following her shoulder surgery and the likes of Azarenka, Lisicki and Wozniacki mature then you’l see some great competition at slams for the silverware. I still see the Serena – Dementieva Wimbledon SF as the match of the year and although Dementieva lost she certainly didn’t choke and it was top quality all the way through.
Why should we recognise Safina as the world number 1? simple, yes Safina was abysmal at the US open but have you seen her consistency for the whole year as opposed to say Serena’s who hasn’t won a regular tour title for 18 months and rarely even gets past the quarter finals these days and often loses to no-hopers. Safina although she hasn’t won a major has made 3 slam finals in just over a year and an olympic final plus 7 titles in that time and plenty of deep runs into just about every tournament she’s entered. She supports the tour by playing regular and giving it her best week in week out which is more than can be said for a certain Williams sister, but i suppose you’d prefer to recognise a world number 1 who only tries their best for 8 weeks of the year.
September 13th 2009 @ 7:37pm
ohtani's jacket said | September 13th 2009 @ 7:37pm | Report comment
Well, that was controversial.