Tuesday, October 07, 2008

Tennis Talk

by Savannah

Jelena Jankovic is the No. 1 player on the WTA Tour and once again the argument rages as to whether she is worthy. To define the sides in this debate. Does the No. 1 player mean that said player has racked up the most points and is by that measure No. 1? Or does being No. 1 mean that said player has played the best tennis, won at least a major during the last 52-week period, and shown the mental and physical skills in her matches to make them worthy of being called best in the world?

Read Savannah's Tennis Talk


Ismaeel Naar said...

If find it quite absurd that you chose to depict a picture of her holding a glass of beer and commenting as to whether or not she is worthy of her number one ranking i tell everyone this: yes she does. At this rate and time of tennis, it isn't necessary that a grand slam necessarily is better than the one who isn't. Kim Clijsters is an example of probably being the best non-grandslam (before her maiden title at the US open) winner and world number one.

tangerine said...

So what's this I hear about Roger and Mirka shopping for diamond wedding rings? Are they finally going to make it legit after all these years?

MMT said...

The ranking system is absurd, but that's not Jankovic's fault. If she's #1, the results don't lie. Perhaps the WTA should give up some of their clout and allocate points between slams and non-slams in a manner that is commensurate to the varying esteem associated with those categories of competition.

What's she supposed to do, give up her ranking because some people don't like her? It's only happened once on the men's tour that I can remember, but the fact that it's still possible demonstrates the absurdity of the ranking points.

Craig Hickman said...


Say it isn't so.

Savannah said...

I read that too Tangy. Mirka's family is in the jewelry business. I don't think Roger will fork over the money to buy a ring in Dubai when he can get it wholesale.

Maybe they were just looking to see what's out there before ordering.

No offense meant by the picture. It's Oktoberfest in Germany. I doubt she drank it. Too many carbs.

Savannah said...

MMT if you read what I wrote I agree with you. Until or unless the rules are changed she's number one fair and square. That is what the argument is about.

elagio said...

well we can keep debating if she is worthy of being a world #1, but today's win in Moscow and a 3rd title in 15 days in certainly going in her favor. Dementieva herself praised Jelena for her exceptional defense, and she defeated Zvonareva who defeated Safina...I think we should start giving her credit more so than complaining about the WTA rules...

MMT said...

Elagio, I agree with you - she's #1 because she's earned it on the court. The complaints about the ranking system is a separate issue, which I brought up as a counter to the argument that she's not a WORTHY #1.

I still think the rankings don't make a lot of sense, and I would have to cite Jankovic as evidence of this, since she is not among the 4 players who have been ranked #1 while carrying a grand slam title.

But I don't mean to denigrate her in any way, but rather the rankings system. I disagree wholeheartedly with the suggestion that she isn't a worthy #1, because I think they idea is inherently unfair - she can only earn it on the court, and as such she's worthy of the ranking.

But the ranking system on the whole, which awards points in a way that allows for someone who hasn't won a slam to finish the year #1 makes you wonder why there is a disconnect between the esteem of the slams, and the points allocated to other tournaments that don't seem to be valued by anyone as highly as the slams.

It's unfair to Jankovic, but the system really needs to be overhauled such that you'd have to win at least a majority of the Tier 1 events to make up for not winning a slam.