TENNIS in DEPTH.

Few things in tennis right now are more tiresome than attempts to intellectualize what’s wrong with the Sony Ericsson WTA Tour rankings, and why Serena Williams deserves to be No. 1, not Dinara “I’ve Never Won A Slam” Safina.

Let me simplify this thing for you in terms anyone can understand.

If Serena Williams, who currently trails Safina by 903 points in the rankings, had been able to bury her 8-year-old animus toward Indian Wells and won that tournament this year, she would have been No. 1 going into the U.S. Open.

Of course I agree that winning Indian Wells, which is among the most important tournaments on the WTA schedule, is an “if,” but I don’t think I’d find too many people who would argue that Serena wouldn’t be a strong favorite to win there, and collect the 1,000 points that would more than make up the ranking difference right now between herself and Safina.

There’s a deeper point here. You play the tournaments, you get the points, you move up in the rankings. Is that so difficult to understand. And in this case we’re only talking about one tournament.

Arguments that Safina deserves to be No. 1 because she plays a lot more tournaments that either of the Williams sisters is, incidentally, a bogus argument. Over the last 52 weeks, Safina has played 20 tournaments and Serena 18. Make that 19 had she showed up at Indian Wells.

Certainly, having No. 1 on your resume’ enhances your prestige, but it does a lot more for those who have never been No. 1 than for those who have been there. I recall Steffi Graf being No. 1 for a long time, ducking in and out of the pole position with Monica Seles and Arantxa Sanchez Vicario. When she finally ceded it for good, to Martina Hingis, in 1996, she never whined about who really was No. 1.

Pete Sampras had been No. 1 for 102 weeks when Marcelo Rios slipped in there for four weeks. I don’t recall Pete ever complaining that, “He may be ranked No. 1 but we know who really is No. 1.”

It’s a lot different when you get to No. 1 for the first time, but most players who hold the spot for numerous weeks get a more realistic perspective. Jelena Jankovic, for example, was ecstatic when she reached No. 1 last year following the retirement of Justine Henin — the event that set off this mess in the women’s rankings. It was her “goal” and her “dream” to be No. 1. Good for her. She held on for 17 weeks. But no one believed Jankovic was, at that time, the best player in women’s tennis. You can say the same thing about Safina.

There’s a grand feeling to be called No. 1. But once you get by the cosmetics, there’s no special privilege attached to it over being No. 2. When the Grand Slam draws are made, No. 1 goes on the top line and No. 2 on the bottom. They can’t play each other until the final, no matter who is No. 1 and who is No. 2. They don’t have to play the No. 3 or No. 4 seeds until the semis and there is as much chance that the No. 1 player would have to play the No. 3 as the No. 4 when they get to the final four, since they’re drawn from a hat. So there’s no competitive edge there.

On the other hand, being No. 1 can be an albatross, and you wonder whether it’s beginning to weigh on Safina a bit. She didn’t even look top 10 in her opening match of the Open, a three-set, come-from-behind win over No. 167 Olivia Rogowska of Australia.

The bottom line on all this is that I wouldn’t be writing about this silliness and you wouldn’t be pondering what it all means if Serena had gotten over whatever happened in Indian Wells eight years ago and did what everyone else on this tour, except her sister, does — play all the big tournaments and let the rankings take care of themselves.

Charles Bricker can be reached at bricker@tennisnews.com

Related Posts:

• Ivanovic is thru with ease while Safina is ousted in round 1.
• Dinara Safina accepts a wildcard to the 2010 Pilot Pen.
• Safina wins in Montreal as she starts her climb back up the rankings.

Bookmark It