PANTIP.COM : S7858336 [[Kim Possible]] 13 May 2009 ภาพล่าสุดของคิมครับ [เทนนิส/แบดมินตัน]

ความคิดเห็นที่ 17

เอามาแปะเต็มๆ เลยดีกว่า

The Weakest No. 1s in History

Men

5. Yevgeny Kafelnikov: An Olympic gold medal and two Slams is nothing to sneeze at, but Kafelnikov was lucky to squeeze his brief reign in between the dusk of the Sampras-Agassi era and the dawn of the Federer-Nadal golden age.

4. Juan Carlos Ferrero: He won the French Open during a stretch when, it seems, every Spanish player claimed at least one Roland Garros crown. But despite achieving the top ranking in 2003—the same year he won the French and made the final of the U.S. Open—“The Mosquito,” currently ranked No. 100, never established himself as a dominant player.

3. Thomas Muster: By winning 11 clay court titles in 1995, including the French, the Musterminator claimed the top spot in the rankings. The respect of his peers was harder to come by, however. Andre Agassi, for one, said Muster would only be deserving of the ranking when he won a Slam on a surface other than clay.

2. Carlos Moya: If there were a tennis player-card trading, you could probably swap twenty Moyas for one Pete Sampras. The likeable dirtballer was another Roland Garros one-hit wonder.

1. Marcelo Rios: With only one career Slam final (at the 1998 Australian Open, which he lost, 6-2, 6-2, 6-2 to Petr Korda), Rios—also the surliest player in memory—is the weakest men’s No. 1 in history. When Marat Safin is calling you a wasted talent, you know you could have done better.

Women

5. Amelie Mauresmo: Given the (problematic) parity on the WTA Tour, it was almost a given that the talented but inconsistent Frenchwoman would get her turn on the throne. Mauresmo’s first major title came, sadly, as the result of Justine Henin’s retirement from the 2006 Australian Open final; Mauresmo beat Henin in the Wimbledon final later that same year for her second Slam. The notoriously nervous Mauresmo may have been the first No. 1 to lack any discernible killer instinct.

4. Kim Clijsters: The Belgian’s return provides a welcome boost to the lackluster women’s tour, but Clijsters’ pre-retirement resume wasn’t exactly era-defining. With just one victory in five major finals, she was the “nearly” woman of the early noughties.

3. Ana Ivanovic: Four-time French Open champion Justine Henin abruptly retired before that tourney in 2008, clearing the way for Ivanovic’s Roland Garros triumph. (Henin had overwhelmed the Serb in the final the previous year.) With Ivanovic’s victory came the top ranking. But her performances since then have done nothing to assuage the suspicion that she was a No. 1 by default.

2. Jelena Jankovic: At first she reluctantly admitted she “didn’t deserve” the top spot, but after a little WTA stage managing, Jankovic grew into the “world’s No. 1 player” label. With zero Slams and only six titles at the time of her ascendance (she has since won four more), Jankovic seemed rightfully embarrassed to be mentioned in the same breath as Graf, Seles and Navratilova.

1. Dinara Safina: She may have equalled her brother’s best ranking, but without a single Grand Slam, Safina is a much weaker No. 1 than two-time major champion Safin was. It’s hardly her fault, but Safina’s current position is symptomatic of all that’s wrong with the women’s tour.
.
.
.
แจนของผม แย่เลยอ่ะ!
.
.
.
ขอบคุณข้อมูลจาก http://www.tennis.com/features/general/features.aspx?id=172144

และ คุณ jiji-san ครับ

ปล. มาวิจารณ์น้องเฮีย ไปเคลียร์กับเฮียเองนะครับ

จากคุณ : Jesadabodin - [ 14 พ.ค. 52 18:17:17 ]