5'7", 130 lbs. is not fat in any way.
Every photo I saw of Lilia, she looked slim.

Yup, he did, my bad. For some reason, the match points he had at the USO in the SF '03 were making me think that was the closest whiff he had of a slam. he's had some other SFs and QFs since then, too, but other than the crazy run he had at the end of '07, I haven't thought of him as much of a threat anymore.

Snicks, please be sure to let Martina N know she's been embarrassing herself all this time, too. She obviously knows nothing about the game either, that simpleton.

I was just wondering what time NBC was not going to broadcast the Women's final live....then looked at the schedule--
They are going to show it live, starting at 6am mtn time. I'll be up! I hope the Ws have an exciting match!

And wouldn't it be cool if later on the doubles was broadcast, but I am asking waaaaayyyy too much. i think the general public would really enjoy watching that.
Good for Venus and Serena in getting to the top in both singles and doubles.

Yeah, and when Serena wins her 11th slam tomorrow, or Venus wins her 8th, Dinara's still going to remain #1 as well.

Two-hander, you're quite the little psychoanalyst, aren't you? First, I'm expressing my obviously unpopular opinions because I'm upset about Novak's loss. Then the Richad Krajicek thing spells out that I have ISSUES. It has been my observation that those who are the quickest to psychoanalyze others are those who have their own mountain of sh*t to deal with but are too weak of character to do so. Think twice about your amateur attempts at psychoanalysis, for you are probably saying far more about yourself than the other person.

Can I back this up to where it all started before this topic flew off the handle? I started out talking about some of the laughable propaganda statements from the WTA over the decades. Such propaganda insults the intelligence of any thinking tennis fan while failing to deal with the problem in any sort of productive way. If anything, such pathetic propaganda serves only to give credence to to the WTA's critics. One of my favorites was in the mid 80's when the head of the WTA at the year-end championships at Madison Square Garden said that the slower pace of play was more enjoyable for tennis fans because most are club players, and they can relate to the women's game better. Funny enough, in the 1990 Roland Garros final, when Steffi and Monica ripped the cover off the ball, that person didn't plead for them to hit softer for fear that they were ruining it for the fans. Now that Serena and Venus often pump in serves in the 120s and Maria's groundstroke winners are routinely clocked at over 100 mph, you don't hear a peep from the WTA that women's tennis is "easier to relate to."

We Americans all claim to be great fans of free speech. But too many are too selective in their fandom; in other words, they are all for it as long as you're saying something they want to hear. But say something they don't want to hear, and they'll do whatever they can to shut you down. There is great shame in being branded a racist, a misogynist, or a bigot of any kind. These selective free speech fans rather disingenuously claim to be all for equality and human rights, but really, they're just trying to shut the other guy down. Mind you, of course there are plenty of times when misogyny must be vehemently attacked, for example, when a Muslim man in Buffalo NY beheaded his wife in an honor killing. I fiercely denounced that deeply misogynist murder in another thread (by the way, LarryC or Two-hander, if you care so much about misogyny, did you denounce it in any way? just wondering). But let's calm down and get real, guys. Richard Krajicek's statements about the general lack of fitness amongst the WTA's top 100, however crass and impolitic, do not constitute misogyny. If you really want free, honest, and open debate, then please think very carefully before leveling accusations of racism, misogyny, or any other form of bigotry.

Krajicek made his comment in the context of the debate over equal prize money. A lot of ATPers won't speak about it for fear of getting shot down in a public relations nightmare, but they resent the equal prize money for women. Maybe not so much at the Slams, because they are all such cash cows. But it's starting to be the case at the ATP tournaments. At first, Miami was the only tour stop that offered equal prize money. Now Indian Wells and Madrid are equal prize money events also. Bear in mind that when the ATP and WTA were individually responsible for prize money at Indian Wells, the ATP drummed up over twice as much as the WTA. The disparity is similar when comparing other Masters 1000 tournaments against WTA Tier 1's (like the Italian Open). This rankles the ATP rank & file (not the top guys because they're making silly money and they know it) because they feel like their paychecks are threatened, and a grand here or five bills there does make a difference to these journeymen. Now, the WTA and tennis fans in general can have an open and honest debate about this, or they can just shoot down any male player who takes a politically incorrect stance. The problem with just shooting a guy down is that the feelings, and therefore the problem, don't go away. Sure, Venus shot down that journalist (god forbid a journalist asks an honest question that's on the minds of many) with surgical expertise, but the discomfort and embarrassment of a woefully weak #1 don't go away.

Let me suggest this to those so intolerant of criticism of the WTA: there must be websites/message boards out there that are devoted to women's tennis. At those sites, surely, you won't have to hear anyone criticize the WTA or women players in any way. Why not stick to those sites? You'll be so much happier. But if you want to hear ideas contrary to your own, then you'll need to toughen up.

By the way, I'm happy for Liliah (she went by "Lilly" at the 2000 USO) Osterloh that she's whipped herself into such terrific shape. That she was ranked #44 when she was so overweight in 2000 but ranked somewhere in the hundreds now that she's in such great shape supports my argument that the women lagged behind the men in their commitment to fitness.

Be my guest, keep writing. I'm not going to reprint this latest missive of yours while replying. As for the Buffalo honor killing so germane to this WTA discussion, I guess in your A+B=C I'm supposed to defend the Muslim guy or excuse the misogyny because he's Muslim? No.

Admit it, you threw the "pigs" word out there to get a response and you got one.

It really messes up the board, too. There were people who used to post all the time here who don't even come by anymore, or rarely do, because of all the negative ranting.

As for issues, yeah I've got them, as do most human beings. Calling women pigs and what that connotes isn't one of them. This conversation is pointless and dull.

Amen.
(By the way, I called a press conference back in February to denounce the Buffalo honor killing, but the damn NYT reporter didn't bother to show up!)

BoSoxRudy, I just looked all over the Internet - twice - and couldn't find ONE reference to Osterloh ever going by anything other than Lilia. An article about Dementieva from the 2000 NYTimes detailing her 3rd set tiebreak win over Osterloh? Lilia. Any of a number of articles about her 1997 NCAA championship? Lilia.

In fact, do your own Google search on "Lily Osterloh" or "Lilly Osterloh" and let us know what you find.

Look, all PR people make laughable statements and ask us to believe them. Only you turn a not-unusual disagreement about whether women's tennis is in a laughable state due to failures by top players into a symposium on honor killing, the liberal media, double standards, blah blah blah.

ANYWAY - hey look! Osterloh is playing the qualies in Sweden this week, and won her match today! GO LIL!!

Well, Irakli Labadze was far more than 40 lbs overweight in 2004 when he reached #42 in the world (higher than Osterloh and more recent). So this "proves" the ATP lags behind the WTA in fitness. Of course, no rational person would make such a generalization based on one player.

Well this has been less than scintillating so far

And poor Maria Bueno stuck sitting next to Billie Jean...she looked like she wanted to hurl herself out of the Royal Box.

BTW, does anybody know why the players no longer curtsey or bow to the Royal Box? I liked that tradition.

Not curtseying was a decision by HRH the Duke of Kent who felt it was not in keeping with the modern era, especially since The Queen considers the curtesy to her to be a matter of individual choice although most women still so it. Perhaps the winner will still do it when presented with the trophy.

This is one of the most boring final tennis matches ever.

This reminds me of their first matches against each other. I've never thought they were fixed but I do think Venus cares too much how Serena feels after the match. Given last year's woe-is-me reaction from Serena, I don't think Venus' heart was ever in this...not wanting to upset little sis again. This is nowhere near the form we've seen from Venus all tournament. Disappointing!

Yeah Venus seemed as bored as the crowd in the stadium and I did.

I think I've suggested this before, but IMO an easy fix for the rankings dilemma would be to provide additional bonus points for multiple slam wins.

Serena was pretty good today but I was very surprised by Venus who had looked so good all week. I wonder what Elena Dementieva was thinking watching this.

It was interesting that Elena appeared to be so upbeat and positive after such a painful loss. I guess it's a glass half-empty/half-full thing and she chose to focus on the quality of her own play rather than the result. If that match had happened five years ago, I think I would have said now she will go forth and win a slam. I always felt that it would be impossible for her to win seven matches in a row with that serve, but it's not so calamitous anymore--now, she's more like Jankovic (last year's edition) with a much bigger forehand. That could be enough game to carry her if everything breaks right, but I doubt she has enough time left for that to happen.

Meh.

Hingis would play about 20 tournaments back then, not a ridiculous amount, but quite a few more than the sisters....and I agree, but it's the "winning a lot of Tier 1 and Tier 2 events" that seems to be the problem. I agree it's not the systems fault that the Williams sisters liked playing just 14 events a year (and oh how the irony continues, now they're playing 16 or 17, and they're ranking went up...ha ha) but do you reward someone who plays well on the smaller stages more often and always falters on the big stages....than someone who performs much better on the bigger stages almost all of the time but plays less of the smaller events?




Fair, but it's assuming that all the problems and exhaustion are purely physical. It isn't just the playing that causes these ladies to burn out. It's a major factor, but when you throw in all the things peripheral to the playing (the travel time and frustrations that go with it, time zone changes and jet lag, press junkets and other marketing commitments, planning and prep for these things as well) and multiply them by the number of tournaments they play, there's a lot more time and baggage (in the form of mental exhaustion) than just the practice and the playing that's wearing these players down.




But that's not the case, and why people seem frustrated. Jankovic, Safina, pre-USO-winning Clijsters and pre-slam Mauresmo, and post-'99-AO Hingis WEREN'T doing the same in the slams as they were the rest of the year, but were still being ranked #1. The #1 ranking-sans-a-slam draws all the attention, but like I showed with Simon, it's a problem on the men's tour as well, it's just that the guys winning their respective slams and being #1 are workhorses, AND consistent...thus the petty cat-fight-war-of-words between the two biggest drama queens in tennis...JJ and the Fed.




I'm not even going to pretend to know what the nuances of the men's ranking system were back then, nor how they did or didn't differ from today, but Borg/Connors isn't a good analogy at all. Both of them won tons of majors, unlike Safina and JJ. Borg also had at least 109 weeks at #1 spanning from '77-'80, but 11 slams wins to back it up. If Borg had eeked out a few more weeks at #1, Jimmy Connors still would have had a huge record-setting # of weeks at #1 that was going to take Lendl and Sampras many years to surpass later on, anyway, even if connors had just a mere 8 slams titles, and 7 other slam finals.

Agreed. What a letdown. I almost let myself think that she was told to let Serena win....thinking back to rumors from a decade ago about that kind of stuff.....

So glad I didn't waste my time waking up for this match.

Love that they both made it, hate watching them play each other.

Of course you dont get the drama when they play each other, but you do get to see some quality tennis being played, and something historic everytime they step on the court. I picked wrong with Venus as winner, Serena was just too good/strong today. The serving was awesome.

I wish the ladies doubles was being televised. I dont give Stosur and Stubbs much of a chance, of course. Interestingly, Rennae is playing her first GS final since 04, great for her to go so far at her age...Oldest woman on the tour I think...

OH SNAP!!

Serena: "Dinara has done really well to get to #1 - she won Rome and Madrid..."

Yeah, definitely bonus points for winning multiple slams. If 4 different women hold the 4 titles, then I don't mind a fifth (more consistent) player being #1. But the way it is now - it don't look good.

No, it don't.

The player who's won 3 of the last 4 slams is #2.

I'm disappointed -- not because Venus lost, but because I also (accidentally) slept through the damn thing. Too much wine on a friend's birthday.

Sounds like the match wasn't on the same level as the one last year, though.

That's rough for Venus, but the sisters have so many titles at this point and Serena's command as the more accomplished player was there before and after the match the same way Venus remains the queen of Wimbledon. Sometimes an easy road to the title bout is a bit of a curse. And nothing shores up a champion's belief like fighting off match points on the way to a final.

I wished Serena hadn't made the "real #1" remark back when she did -- in the sense that she herself didn't deliver during clay season, and it was kind of petty and insecure of her as an accomplished veteran to be hating on a younger player going into a major as favorite for the first time. But ultimately Serena has made her point. Still, the beating that overachieving Dinara got from Venus at Wimbledon wasn't that different from the ones Sharapova tends to get in Roland Garros when she fights to the later rounds.

I just had this gut feeling about Serena winning Wimbledon this year, from the very start of this thread. It's funny watching -- and playing -- tennis how instincts count for so much. I'll never fully learn it, even if I've gotten better at it -- a bit more as a spectator than as a player!

Of course it doesn't hurt that Serena's the "real #1," and that she served like a god the whole tournament. 3 out of 4 of the slams are hers right now. Respect.

Yeah, this match wasn't as competitive as last year's, because Serena went up to her very best level. I don't remember ever seeing her serve this well. She sent 12 aces past Venus, who knows her serve better than anyone else. Venus's level, I thought, was still good enough to beat any other player, but she just couldn't get up to the level of her sister. It certainly didn't help that she served second in the second set, because she was constantly under pressure to hold with Serena serving so well.

Man, and to think if Serena had found away to maintain her lead in the 3rd set versus Kuznetsova at the French, we could be talking about a second Serena slam right now and a great chance for the first calendar year slam since Graf. I say this with the assumption that Anyone vs. Dinara in a slam final = win for Anyone.

Maybe it can be Dinara v. Dementieva in the US Open final this year?

20 tournaments a year was about the same as Davenport and most of the other top players. Yes, the sisters played fewer...but when they're the anomaly it should be stated that they were underranked because they chose to play an abnormally small number of tournaments, not that the other players because they played a normal number of tournaments.

But Dinara doesn't actually play poorly at the slams. She's 22-4 (.846) over the past year, (.846), a lot better than Venus at 14-4, though obviously well below Serena's sterling 25-1. In the rest of the season she's 47-12 (.797). Serena is a mediocre 20-11 outside the majors (.645).

Anyway, it's likely to be a moot point fairly soon because Dinara will have a very hard time matching last summer's hard court results.

If most players don't perform similarly at the majors as they do the rest of the year, take a look at this list of number of points won at majors from Wimbledon 2008 to the French 2009

1. Serena Williams
2. Dinara Safina
3. Svetlana Kuznetsova
4. Elena Dementieva
5. Venus Williams
6. Jelena Jankovic

Note that 3 to 5 were almost all tied. It's not that different from the official rankings is it? Like I said, tripling the value of he slams (a value which means that even Dinara earns 70% of her points there as opposed to 40% now) made only two changes to the order of the top 10.

And the rankings at the top level are much less important than those of the players further down the list whose ability to enter tournaments depends on their ranking. A change in the ranking system means a different group of players gets allowed to play, which is a heck of a lot more important than whether Serena happens to appear at the top of the draw or the bottom. I suppose there's some impact of the potential for the Williams to collide before the finals--but that's only happened once in the last year. But with third round losses at the French and Australia, it's not like Venus has that great a slam record.

Sorana Cirstea was seeded at Wimbledon, despite losing in the first round of 9 of the 13 tournaments she entered so far in 2009, on the strength of her performance at the French. You really don't think she got enough credit from the ranking system? Maybe you think she's more deserving of a high seed than Caroline Wozniacki? Practically all the players who would benefit from increasing the value of the slams would be players with one or two freak results.

And by the way, while Connors won a bunch of slams before Borg got going and after his retirement, it was pretty lean in the years when Borg was on top. I believe there were at least two years where Connors won no majors while Borg one one or two yet was still ranked #1 at the end. I'll admit I'm not really sure how the ranking systems worked back then, but I do know Borg played a very light schedule for his time.

Oh, BPJ--thanks for the bonus points for multiple slams idea. That would actually have the desired effect without distorting the entire ranking system.

As I've said before, the ranking system isn't perfect, but I think its fair and serves its purpose fairly well. I actually maintain a floating point ranking system for fun which I mostly find interesting to monitor whose hot at the moment. Sabine Lisicki is #7 and Virginia Razzano #8 at the moment while Jankovic has slid to #29. But it has its own set of flaws (clearly being way too volatile to reflect the real caliber of the player), as would rankings based on winning percentage, although I've often thought it would be interesting to see a tennis RPI.

The players complain as if they dont know the system. If you play less, you have to be more consistently deep in tourneys- if you play more, not as successful....

Nothing is hidden.... what else can they do to make the system more fair?

Well if you were watching the NBC broadcast this morning, you saw the Williams sisters coming onto the court with their lovely pink and purple bouquets, all ready to start their doubles match. The final against Stubbs and Stosur was bound to be interesting, especially in light of Serena's statement that she wanted to help Venus leave with a trophy.
And then the program ended. MERDE.
The match did end up being very close. ggrrrrrrrrrrrrr

Serena was simply phenomenal. It's pretty rare that a man loses just 8 points on serve in two sets. For a woman, although granted Serena often pumps in the 1st serve @ 120+, it's unheard of. There's a lot to be said about coming into a final match-sharp, which Serena obviously was after being match point down against Elena, whereas Venus didn't even break a sweat against Dinara. But Serena was just way too good today. She would have beaten any woman on tour.

Congrats to both of them for winning the dubs. Didn't Serena have to bounce back from disappointment last year to win the dubs? Nice of Venus to return the favor. If NBC had golf, fine. But with the Williams in the final, you gotta wonder why Tennis Channel didn't try to pick up the broadcast rights last minute. Broadcast rights to a dubs final can't cost all that much, and I bet the ratings would turn out a pleasant surprise.

Great picture of Serena. LMAO

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/ten...tionName=Tennis

NOTE:The pics in The Times link seem to have changed now. It was a picture of Serena in a white t-shirt with the words "Are you looking at my titles" written across her chest.

I love it!

Seeing Federer with his gold 15 on the back of his jacket and Serena's t-shirt (both designed by Nike), it's clear that they both have big egos. But it seems like to be the best, you have to have a big ego. It's funny, though, that Federer demonstrates his arrogance in a high-brow, snooty way, while Serena goes more ghetto, in-your-face (again, that could just be Nike's way of marketing them). Either way I love them both and I'm glad they're still around playing great tennis. I hope they remain a threat for a few more years to come.

NBC did show the second set of the great ladies doubles final, after the Mens showdown! They were probably planning to show the whole thing but the boys went so long in the 5th. Thank god we got to see a bit of Ladies dubs. It was really fun with the opposite styles of the 2 teams and the Aussies gave the sisters all they wanted to handle.

They didn't show the great Stubbs thru the leg shot (you can see it on Youtube) but there was a dark moment when Serena tattoed Stosur smack in the back with a backhand drive. Lots of murmurs through the crowd, but thankfully, they weren't at the wretched French and having to endure the booing and hissing at every uber-aggressive shot they make at an opponent.

So check this out...

If Serena had beaten Dinara at the French and had all four slams in her pocket right now...


She STILL would not be No. 1 !!!!! (I'm pretty sure I got the calculations right).

Congrats to Serena on her fourth grand slam title of the year. She was a double winner in Australia in singles and double, and is a double winner here at Wimbledon again. Once again Serena proves her critics wrong who continue to talk about her conditioning. They didn't think she'd be able to outlast Demented once the third set started and she did. They said that the match would've tired her for the final Saturday and she won in straights, and she had an answer for everything Venus threw at her. Yet once again people continue to look at her body and think that because she doesn't look like Daniela Hantuchova (WHOM SHE BEAT), Vika Azarenka (WHOM SHE BEAT) and Elena Dementieva (WHOM SHE BEAT) that she is overweight and out of shape. No she's not in 2003 shape but you don't have to look a certain way necessarily to be "in shape". She got the job done. She survived match point against Dementieva in a match in which I don't think Elena could play better and a match in which Serena struggled but still one. She slapped Azarenka and those who claimed Serena escaped from the Australian Open when Azarenka had to retire. Then Azarenka won Miami with Serena's leg being wrapped. Well...both were 100% and Serena swatted her away like a fly.

So glad Serena won a third Wimbledon. It just didn't seem right that she had only two of em. But Venus played the better tennis through the fortnight. I think Serena was so hungry for it this year. That loss against the Kooz at the French now has to be looked at as a REAL missed opportunity. I have no doubt that Serena would be going for a calendar grand slam next month when the US Open begins. Oh well. #11 for Ree!!! Maybe I will pull for Venus to win the US Open.

I love people who F*CK political correctness and just tell it like it is. Mind you, the "Swiss finishing school" attitude is for Serena to show deference to Dinara, for Dinara is still well ahead of Serena in the rankings. But yeah, like that's gonna happen. Here are some choice Serena quotes from a Foxsports article about the current rankings:
"My motivation is maybe just to win another Grand Slam and stay No. 2, I guess."
"I think Dinara did a great job to get to No. 1. She won Rome and Madrid," Serena said before rolling her eyes and then laughing.
"I'd rather definitely be No. 2 and hold three Grand Slams in the past year than be No. 1 and not have any."

Serena, you are such a BITCH!!! (and I mean that in the best and nicest way )

So while her sister is frantically trying to do damage control over the embarrassment of a woefully weak #1, Serena just goes out there and pours gasoline on the fire. Bet Venus was LOVIN' that article. No Nobel Peace Prize for you, Serena!!

Where's a good f**king yawn emoticon when you need one.

It's funny that you mention Swiss finishing school Rudy because if it was Federer saying those kinds of things in his real Swiss way you'd be livid.

Serena has a dry sense of humor. Not as funny as Hingis but also not as offensive. I don't see what's so non-P.C. about pointing out the truth. But you're the one with some weird fixation on that stale phrase.

Serena's completely in the right with all of what she's saying, and the quotes -- which come from the post-final presser, not Fox News -- come from getting plentiful support from the questions she was fed. Venus and Serena are a bit of a good cop bad cop sister act that way. It was Venus who really did the dirty work.

It doesn't change my opinion that it was immature of Serena to start grousing about the real #1 back at the start of clay season. But she's delivered. The WTA rankings are absurd.

The most outlandish thing is that Serena plays so much more now than she did back when everyone used to bitch about her not playing enough. And still, even with three majors, a strong run at the French, and that kind of schedule, Dinara is ahead of her. Ridiculous.

Is it Dinara's fault? Other than her inimitable chicken run routines in the late stages of majors, no.

The WTA has had a tool in charge for a long time. Serena and Sharapova would have a lot to talk about on that subject if they ever were friendly.

I Feel Like Throwing Up (Number 1 Ranking)-YouTube

For reals - can we retire the phrase "politically correct" already? It's not 1991 anymore...

How's this? I'll retire the phrase "political correctness" when you stop worshipping at its temple.

DAMN funny youtube link, mdterp. Almost made me laugh as hard as Dinara's ranking.

PS: can I say one eensy-weensy thing about that horribly faux Sampras-Muster analogy? Maybe Sampras would have clobbered Muster by an equally embarrassing score at Wimbledon, but did you forget that Muster WON Roland Garros?? Unlike Dinara who looked a lot more like a qualifier than the number one in the world. Venus can spin this situation like an old 78 record; it remains an EMBARRASSMENT that Dinara is number one.

LOL @ "for reals" I have a friend who said that all the time in high school, and the way he said it was so funny. Sorry...a little reminiscing there.

Some people actually found that youtube funny? Jeez. It was pathetic. A dreary, nasally challenged voice of indeterminate sex attacking Safina - who is not responsible for the ranking system - in that gloating, zenophobic manner which has so alienated the world from the USA in the last couple of decades. So George Bush, doncha know. On which score, could you explain why in this thread we get "Serena" and "Venus" but also "Demented" "the Kooz" "Shriekapova" or "the Colonel"? Andy and James and Mardy, but "the Djoke", "Muzza", "Reeshard[Gasquet]" etc? Oh right, I see: the first lot are Americans, the others are ragheads or whatever.

As much as I like to give Serena a hard time, she's so clearly #1. The Russian ladies have done well to stay competitive and Elena really could have won that semi in a terrific performance, but come on, Serena's holding three of the four majors - she's #1. Everything that I've ever bitched about regarding her lack of play and attitude and fitness have been corrected. She's the best player in the world. Granted, some of the other veterans on tour are woefully frail and fragile in major finals, enough to wonder what the hell is wrong with them...Serena and Venus made their draws look pretty easy except for the semi with Elena...

Bitching about the system is tiresome though since it's been this way for a while and all the players know how it works...the majors already give far more points, etc...we all know that to be #1 officially, you've got to deliver week in and week out even if you're kicking ass at the majors. But no one with any brains really thinks that Safina deserves to be ranked higher than Serena...that's a laugh. I do still think that on most surfaces, Azarenka is going to be one tough customer for even Serena...

The final was a disappointment but I thought it was obvious that Venus's leg was giving her trouble...by the end of the first set, she started pulling up on her serve just as she put pressure on her leg...you could see the disappointment on her face even then...tough luck for sure as she needed to be her brilliant self the whole match in order to win....kudos for getting through the doubles final against a very tough aussie team...

Dinara being #1....in addition to her own improved results in regular tour events, and also her consistent play in majors (good pick-up JC that Dinara has played deep into the majors, thereby earning so many points), another reason is the lingering effect of Justine Henin's abrupt retirement. Likely Justine would have taken more points away from Dinara than from Serena (clay season especially).

Serena not being #1....enough already. To be the best player in the world...you can be without the ranking. To be ranked #1 you have to earn enough points. Serena hasn't. Quit complaining about it, put some of the intensity into the regular events, play like you're #1 even then. If you really want the ranking. If you don't, but want to save your focus and energy for winning the majors, then do so. And get over not being ranked #1.

Would you rather be #1 or the most feared player on the tour? #1 or winner at majors? Of course, you'd like it all. But if you had to choose, which would you choose? Since you're choosing, and clearly choosing majors and championships, then decide if you're satisfied with your choice. A few years into your retirement, I'd say you'll be pleased that you focused on winning majors.