Landscape of Women's Tennis Looks Bleak
July 7th 2008 06:49
I had no strong feelings when Justine Henin retired from professional tennis. I don’t blame her or any other female players of her ilk (such as Kim Clijsters) for doing so. Most players of that calibre have been on the tour from as young an age as 14, whereas the equivalent males rarely get decent results until the age of 18. Hence when a player such as Henin retires just before the age of 26 after nearly 10 good years on tour (she officially turned professional at the beginning of 1999) I say fair enough.
What I am more interested in, are the ramifications of her retirement on the current landscape of female tennis. It was Justine Henin, who almost single-handedly stopped Serena Williams from barging her way back into the number one spot last year, beating her in the quarterfinals of three out of the four grand slams. Williams, who is renowned for only playing a small number of tournaments each year was once able to do so and still retain the number one ranking. A momentum based player; she is generally very hard to beat once getting past the early stages of the tournament and Henin, it seems was the only player who could consistently do so. More importantly, Williams seemed to have generated momentum in a greater sense, in that 2007 was the first year since 2001 in which she had played in all four grand slams.
With Henin now gone and Serena Williams seemingly committed to tennis, one would assume that there is little stopping her (and now possibly her sister Venus) from once again dominating – at least in the grand slams. That being said, with Serena Williams about to turn 27 and her sister Venus already 28 I would not expect them to remain competitive for more than 3 years before inevitably losing form or once again becoming complacent. Thus, the question begs, who else is there?
With the top four players all losing before the quarterfinals of Wimbledon there are now only 720 points separating the top 6 players.
This is an interesting paradigm considering that traditionally one player dominates the women’s tour at any given time. From the 80s onward it was Navaratilova then Graf, Seles, Graf again, then Hingis, the Williams sisters and Henin. Whilst there have been other players in the mix (some of whom have had the number one ranking for a short period and won a few grandslams between them) such as Arantxa Sanchez, Gabriela Sabatini, Mary Pierce, Lindsay Davenport, Jennifer Capriati, Kim Clijsters and Amelie Mauresmo one always felt as if they were not on the same level as the former group.
With the exception of the Williams sisters, the current batch of top players are much the same. Ivanovic is talented but her mental fortitude and ability to handle pressure are clearly suspect. Jankovic is solid but her high ranking is more to do with the amount of tournaments she plays than a super high winning percentage (her male equivalent would be current no. 4 Nikolay Davydenko). Kuzentsova has already chalked up seven years on tour, in which time she has won one grand slam but never fully realised her potential. Dementieva’s serve is still highly suspect and she is prone to crumbling in big matches. Then there is Sharapova; occasionally brilliant, confident, alpha and seemingly with a winner’s mentality, but upon closer inspection her results are very erratic and she has never dominated or held the number one ranking for a significant amount of time.
It would appear as if the next true champion has not yet come to the fore. One wonders who that might be. There is every chance that she will be of Eastern European persuasion, but who? Who is strong enough? Where is this new young gun? Where is the hype?
The hype, it would appear, is still being concentrated on Sharapova and now in particular; Ivanovic – one might argue, for reasons beyond the realms of their ability to play tennis. It is a pity, for on the men’s side we have two of the greatest players seen in a long time in Federer and Nadal. Time it seems, is the answer to the problems in women’s tennis. It looks like we will have to wait for another Graf or Hingis and that the loss of Henin was much greater than it initially appeared.
What I am more interested in, are the ramifications of her retirement on the current landscape of female tennis. It was Justine Henin, who almost single-handedly stopped Serena Williams from barging her way back into the number one spot last year, beating her in the quarterfinals of three out of the four grand slams. Williams, who is renowned for only playing a small number of tournaments each year was once able to do so and still retain the number one ranking. A momentum based player; she is generally very hard to beat once getting past the early stages of the tournament and Henin, it seems was the only player who could consistently do so. More importantly, Williams seemed to have generated momentum in a greater sense, in that 2007 was the first year since 2001 in which she had played in all four grand slams.
With Henin now gone and Serena Williams seemingly committed to tennis, one would assume that there is little stopping her (and now possibly her sister Venus) from once again dominating – at least in the grand slams. That being said, with Serena Williams about to turn 27 and her sister Venus already 28 I would not expect them to remain competitive for more than 3 years before inevitably losing form or once again becoming complacent. Thus, the question begs, who else is there?
With the top four players all losing before the quarterfinals of Wimbledon there are now only 720 points separating the top 6 players.
This is an interesting paradigm considering that traditionally one player dominates the women’s tour at any given time. From the 80s onward it was Navaratilova then Graf, Seles, Graf again, then Hingis, the Williams sisters and Henin. Whilst there have been other players in the mix (some of whom have had the number one ranking for a short period and won a few grandslams between them) such as Arantxa Sanchez, Gabriela Sabatini, Mary Pierce, Lindsay Davenport, Jennifer Capriati, Kim Clijsters and Amelie Mauresmo one always felt as if they were not on the same level as the former group.
With the exception of the Williams sisters, the current batch of top players are much the same. Ivanovic is talented but her mental fortitude and ability to handle pressure are clearly suspect. Jankovic is solid but her high ranking is more to do with the amount of tournaments she plays than a super high winning percentage (her male equivalent would be current no. 4 Nikolay Davydenko). Kuzentsova has already chalked up seven years on tour, in which time she has won one grand slam but never fully realised her potential. Dementieva’s serve is still highly suspect and she is prone to crumbling in big matches. Then there is Sharapova; occasionally brilliant, confident, alpha and seemingly with a winner’s mentality, but upon closer inspection her results are very erratic and she has never dominated or held the number one ranking for a significant amount of time.
It would appear as if the next true champion has not yet come to the fore. One wonders who that might be. There is every chance that she will be of Eastern European persuasion, but who? Who is strong enough? Where is this new young gun? Where is the hype?
The hype, it would appear, is still being concentrated on Sharapova and now in particular; Ivanovic – one might argue, for reasons beyond the realms of their ability to play tennis. It is a pity, for on the men’s side we have two of the greatest players seen in a long time in Federer and Nadal. Time it seems, is the answer to the problems in women’s tennis. It looks like we will have to wait for another Graf or Hingis and that the loss of Henin was much greater than it initially appeared.
| 84 |
| Vote |
Comments (1)
Add Comments
