BBC Home

Explore the BBC

Articles/ all comments

These 24 comments are related to an article called:

Number One Or A Slam?

Page 1 of 1

posted Oct 7, 2010

In the womens game there is less difference between slams and other events as all are played over 3 sets. In fact some say slams may be a little easier as the players get a day of rest between each match.
-----------
that's a fair enough point but with the mental aspect of tennis being so important, winning a major is the most difficult thing. It's always going to be more important

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 7, 2010

Although she lost the only two matches she has played against Serena Williams the last match was close and in the first it looks like someone retired.
........

First meeting was in Sydney early last year. Caro had 3MP (I think it was), but couldn't convert.

Second meet was in YEC 09. Caro lost 6-4 in 1st set and ret. at 1-0 up in 2nd.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 8, 2010

Slam....any day...number one is second best....ideally both, though :)

| complain about this comment

comment by Tindi (U14447034)

posted Oct 8, 2010

If she is good enough to win any other tournment she enters, then she should be able to win GS.
For her sake i hope she does and soon, bcoz the longer it takes the more the pressure increases. Look at Safina.

| complain about this comment

comment by sam (U13856375)

posted Oct 8, 2010

This anology for some reason came to mind.

Number One/Slam Title v Course Work/Final Exam

Hand in all your homework on time, neat colouring, exellent spelling, read all the text books get an A. Then along comes someone who's dog eats their homework, has lost their pencil case, giggles at the the back of class..... does some last minute revision and gets an A*

Life can be unfair and its a myth that hard work always gets rewards.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 8, 2010

Number one: hard work & consistency
Slam: Talent

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 8, 2010

Multi slams.

One would be a start.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 8, 2010

Put it this way, Schiavone's demolition of Stosur at the French Open would be forever immortalised. Wozniacki won't if she never wins a slam.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 8, 2010

Wozzy's just dispatched Ana in two sets after world-class tennis.

Unfortunately she wretched her left knee in 2 set at 4:2. How serious her injury is not known yet.

Why BBC hasn't wrote anything yet about this match which ended more than half an hour ago is a big, is a big, big question!!

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 8, 2010

BBC just did it!

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 8, 2010

Remember she lost that match in Doha after she'd battled through that match against Zvonareva, in which she collapsed and could hardly walk! I'd really fancy her to beat Serena soon.

Anyway, Grand Slam >>> No. 1, any day.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 8, 2010

There is a massive difference between slams and other tournaments.

1: The exepectations are greater at slams. More media coverage, more pressure and more scrutiny.

2. The field is much larger at slams. Played over 7 rounds and all the top players all alwayd there. Greather depth and talent pool.

To suggest that there is little difference between slam and other tournament is rather absurd!

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 8, 2010

It's gonna be difficult to Caro to break the duck and win her first slam. Am not saying she wont ever, but once she win wins her first, then maybe more will flow in! Her difficult task now is to live up the expectations of a true world number one, performing under pressure on the big stage matches which are the grand slams. Serena has done that very well over the years and lets see what Caro can do with that Mantle.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 8, 2010

Number one: hard work & consistency
Slam: Talent
............

This is complete and utter BS. To become #1, you need to win best of 3 set tournaments against the best players in the world.

To win a slam, you need to win best of 3 set tournaments against the best players in the world.

You may even argue, the 'rest' day allowed for in a slam makes it comparatively easier than playing back-to-back matches at big Premier events.

| complain about this comment

comment by sam (U13856375)

posted Oct 8, 2010

To suggest that there is little difference between slam and other tournament is rather absurd!

---

Not sure if that comment was aimed at me but I will respond anyway...

Didn't say there was "little difference" between slams and other events just that for women there was less difference. Of course 7 rounds, with all the top players and most of all the extra pressure will always make it more difficult. For the men playing 5 sets a slam is a whole different thing.... not many players can beat Nadal or Federer over 5 sets.

| complain about this comment

comment by MTF (U14113301)

posted Oct 8, 2010

"This anology for some reason came to mind.
Number One/Slam Title v Course Work/Final Exam"

GREAT analogy, VMP!

I personally think that being recognised as the best in the world at any sport is a huge achievement. That said, I also think we can get carried away with the rankings system in tennis. It's important because it stops the best players bumping into each other too early on in tournaments but, beyond that, I believe most players tend to look at their trophy haul more than their ranking. I always feel a tad sorry for players who get tagged with the "highest ranked player who hasn't won a title yet" label. I think this currently might be Dominika Cibulkova, or if not right now it's definitely an ominous distinction she's been awarded in the past. Last year she reached the Semis at the FO and reached no.12 in the world, so knocking on the door of the top-10. Yet every article couldn't resist mentioning how she was yet to win any WTA title.

Ranking is important... but getting that first title is a monkey all players are keen to get off their back. I imagine being a no.1-ranked player without a GS title is little different from the way a top-20 player without any title feels. But I honestly don't imagine Wozniaki is concerned at this stage -- perhaps Safina and Jankovic but not C-Woz as she's still so young and improving every tournament. If she's still slamless in 3 years' time, I'm sure the gremlins will begin to creep into her mind but right now she's just enjoying the moment, which she fully deserves.

| complain about this comment

comment by Gimi (U14406911)

posted Oct 8, 2010

In the womens game there is less difference between slams and other events as all are played over 3 sets. In fact some say slams may be a little easier as the players get a day of rest between each match.
==========================================

Grandslam (especially Wim)is the best tennis tournament that every player dreams to win it. In Soccer, playing for caring cup and European champions (or world cup) league should then be same too, cos the playing time is the same.

If it was the same, why did players like Dinara, Zvonareva melt down in the finals of Grnad slams?

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 8, 2010

If it was the same, why did players like Dinara, Zvonareva melt down in the finals of Grnad slams?
............

Mental. The rules of tennis are the same. The players are the same. Its still 3 set matches.

But in media and some fans minds, slams are the be all, end all important tournaments and the prize money and ranking points are rather good!

Why do sometimes good footie team perform poorly in a FA cup or a World cup final. It happens in sport. Its not unique to womens tennis.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 8, 2010

Slam over number 1 imo!

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 8, 2010

Saying that Major Women's Singles tournaments are easier than WTA Tournaments because the players have days off between matches is invalid, because it's the same for both players in each match.

In fact, there's always one round in a Major before which all or half the remaining women don't get a day off, since the Women's Singles final is always on a Saturday. At Wimbledon, it's the quarter-finals for all competitors. At the Australian and French Opens, it's the semi-finals for that half of the draw for which the quarter-finals are played on the second Wednesday. At the US Open, it's the final for both finalists.

The bottom line is that the Majors are the most difficult and prestigious four tournaments on the tennis-calendar for both genders, because everyone wants to win them so much, and all the top players will stop at nothing in their attempts to do so (barring certain French Open Men's Singles champions who don't bother showing up for Wimbledon).

The rankings are just numbers. Reaching the number-one ranking can never match the thrill of holding aloft a Major trophy.

| complain about this comment

comment by bobito (U14150246)

posted Oct 9, 2010

"This is complete and utter BS. To become #1, you need to win best of 3 set tournaments against the best players in the world."

Really? You might want to check because I believe Miss Wozniacki has managed it without doing this. She hasn't beaten a top 5 player in a year and a half. Her wins have all come either at small tournaments with no other top players in the draw or when the likes of Serena, Justine and Kim have been injured.

It is worth noting that Wozniacki’s tally of 6930 ranking points is dwarfed by the 9610 Dinara Safina compiled to become number 1 or the 9076 Serena Williams had at the end of last year.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 9, 2010

Do you really expect people to agree with Wozniacki's ranking?

If by some fluke chance, Andy Murray gets to no 1 ranking by winning all masters event and no slams, do you truly believe he is the world number 1?

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 10, 2010

It could be some players save themselves for the slams and dont give as much attention to other tournaments .
That way they lower injury possibilities etc.
Sometimes I feel they dont give their best at lesser events.
Points awarded for winning all events are fair and open to all under same circumstances.
Beating team Williams is not an easy task , usually one may beat one but not both in any given tournament.
Young players also need money and dont have a cushion of earnings or endorsements to buffer them.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 19, 2010

Winning a slam is totally different from the other tournaments. The slams always have the best available players playing. Plus knowing the world is watching plus arenas are much bigger and crowded adds pressure. Being number one is good but winning a glam slam add status forever!

| complain about this comment

Page 1 of 1

HINTS & TIPS

Deleting comments

You are in charge of your own space - if you see an offensive comment, you can delete it

Reasonable debate is allowed - please don't delete a comment just because you don't agree with it

If you are not sure, or feel a comment warrants further attention, you can refer it to a moderator instead