Russia Blog: Beauty Before Tennis

by Kim Zigfeld (a/k/a La Russophobe)

You may not be a tennis fan, but even if you are not you may recall so-called “Russian” Maria Sharpova's pledge not to be "another Kournikova" selling her body for soft porn profit while her game, and the game’s reputation, goes into the tank. From the photos to follow you can see how reliable this Russian's word is...

Russian female tennis players had an impressive year in 2004. Five of the eight slots in grand slam event finals were filled by Russians, and three of the four slams were won by Russians. In addition to Wimbledon, Russia’s Maria Sharapova also won the season-ending WTA Tour Championship title, making 2004 the best year by far for Russian tennis and Sharapova Russia’s apparent golden girl.

But if we look below the surface, we see a different picture entirely, especially as far as Sharapova is concerned. In 2005 and so far in 2006, no Russian has even reached a grand slam final, much less prevailed there, making 2004 seem very much like the fluke some commentators saw it as at the time.

As for Sharapova, first of all, it is questionable whether it is even appropriate to refer to her as “Russian.” She left the country as a small child, speaks English on the court, lives in Florida, spends virtually no time in Russia, has consistently refused to play for the national team and donates almost none of her vast fortune to the relief of Russian poverty.

Sharapova has claimed that she “needs” to live in the USA for her tennis, but that is an absurd fantasy. Svetlana Kuznetsova lives in St. Petersburg, and won the U.S. Open (and she recently thrashed Sharapova handily in a major tournament). Anastasia Myskina lives in Moscow, and won the French Open. Elena Dementieva lives in Moscow, and was a finalist in 2004 at both the French and U.S. Opens. What Sharapova “needs” is the glamour and money found in the American market place.

The next factor to be considered is luck. The only reason, for instance, that Sharapova reached the finals at Wimbledon in 2004 is that a sudden downpour interrupted her semi-finals match with Lindsey Davenport, not once but several times, while Davenport was in the midst of pulverizing Sharapova, who’d barely managed to win a single game. After the sequence of rain delays, the aging Davenport lost focus and physical edge while the youthful Sharapova rebounded. Wimbledon is planning to erect a roofed stadium to avoid problems like this in the future.

Indeed, Sharapova seems to lead a charmed existence. How else to explain her miraculous ability to travel from Siberia to the world renown Bolletari tennis academy in Florida, while so many wait so long for U.S. visas, where she was able to study tennis at the highest level for free. Reviewing Sharapova’s tournament victories, it’s amazing how often she has been able to reach and win a final without having had to play a top-five opponent, as was the case in her most recent tournament victory, the Pacific Life Open at Indian Wells, California. In 2005, she was 3-3 against top five opponents, winning just three tournaments in 15 tries, and in only one of those three wins did she have to face a top-five player; in one of her other three tournaments wins, she did not even have to face a player in the world's top fifteen.

Then, quality of play must be considered. A person even casually familiar with tennis who compares the 2005 Wimbledon final between Davenport and Venus Williams, to the 2004 final where Sharapova prevailed against the other Williams sister, Serena, cannot but be struck by the dramatic difference in the quality of play and watchability of the two matches, one scintillating and the other a yawner. A serious fan would be very hard-pressed to name a single match where Sharapova produced truly compelling, championship-caliber tennis against a highly-ranked opponent. For every significant win against a credible opponent, there are two calamitous disasters against also-rans. Maria plays with an entirely one-dimensional baseline power game bereft of shotmaking, and her unforced errors are regularly twice as many as her winners. In other words, she’s Ivan Lendl light.

Finally, there is the character issue. When she broke onto the tour, Sharapova promised that she would not be “another Kournikova” and would focus on only tennis, not soft porn. So it was rather surprising to see Maria appear in a cheesecake spread in the most recent Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue. Time and again, Sharapova has proved unable to handle long, demanding three-set matches, and she has repeatedly been blown off the court by higher-ranked opponents, several times registering the infamous “bagel” or “double bagel” in which she wins not a single game. One might attribute this to Sharapova’s youth, expecting her to improve with age like a fine wine, but there is no evidence of that so far and she has repeatedly implied she may not be in it for the long haul anyway; apparently, Sharapova thinks there’s much more to her than tennis (which wouldn’t be hard to believe).

But the most damning evidence of Maria’s flawed character came at her most recent tournament, the so-called “fifth major” at the Nasdaq-100 event in Miami. In her semi-final match with fellow Russian expatriate Tatiana Golovin, Sharapova had a dominant position against the much lower ranked player in the second set after winning the first, and then once again imploded. Golovin reeled off game after game and denied Sharapova four match points whereupon, as Golovin stood to serve out the set, Sharapova suddenly decided she needed a bathroom break, unheard of in tennis etiquette on an opponent’s serve. Despite her pathetic gamesmanship, which drew caustic boos from the audience, Golovin closed Sharapova out in the second set.

But the worst was yet to come. In the tightly fought third set, Golovin sustained a horrific injury to her ankle that ultimately forced her to withdraw. As she stood on the court writhing in pain with tears of agony flowing from her eyes, Sharapova stood callously at the other end of the court taking no notice. Later, Sharapova would claim, bizarrely, that she had no idea Golovin had been injured, eerily reminiscent of Bill Clinton’s claim that, while he smoked marijuana, he did not inhale. The audience was not fooled, and booed Sharapova off the court after her “victory” when Golovin resigned. When questioned about the disapproval from the crowd, Sharapova said she had no idea why they were booing her.

It seemed, though, that the world was on to Sharapova’s weak game long before the match started, since the Miami centercourt stadium was half empty despite Sharapova’s alleged sex appeal and drawing power. With so many flaws in her game, real tennis fans realized long ago that she’s simply not worth watching, incapable of producing the thrilling pyrotechnics of a true champion.

In other words, eerily like Russia itself, Sharapova is a triumph of form over substance, a grand illusion. Just as Russia hides behind its oil and gas revenues, Sharapova hides behind her looks, which are ordinary by model standards but superlative by professional athletic standards. Behind these facades, though, there is a crumbling edifice built on shifting, uncertain foundations that will not endure the test of time. Just like the former USSR, when faced with unpleasant reality Sharapova chooses to stick her pretty head into the sand and deny everything. And we all know how far the USSR got with that attitude.

Comments

A real Russian would say that this is feminist hatred of beautiful women. I see nothing wrong with an attractive person making money for being attractive. And these photos are very far from "soft-core" porn.

It could be much worse. She could be like Martina Navratilova.

Posted by: W. Shedd | April 18, 2006 4:00 PM

Completely pointless. No arguments whatsoever. She is just one of the top tennis players, like many others lives in the US, like many others has good pictures...

What was the point? That she cannot play? Or should not have good pictures published?

Posted by: A | April 18, 2006 8:55 PM

I cannot help but note a distinct similarity between the stirring antics of Kim Zigfeld in this forum and that of a certain Kim Betty in the Moscow Times forum, who was recently banned from there for abusive conduct:

http://forum.moscowtimes.ru/viewtopic.php?t=208

A similar irascible prose style and a peculiar obsession with Maria Sharapova's choice of clothing. I guess you can't keep a good troll down...

Posted by: Peter | April 19, 2006 3:20 AM

I have rarely read an article so much full of gross mistakes and pointless remarks.
One example: the 2005 Wimbledon final was between Davenport and Venus Williams, not Serena.
If you want to write about tennis, at least make sure you get the facts right.

Posted by: A. Buttons | April 19, 2006 4:54 AM

This is completely assinine, if she were slumping, losing to lower ranked opponents or not playing at all I would understand, but she is a consistent Quarterfinalist, and a top five player who just won Indian Wells a month ago, so can the fem-nazi BS.

Posted by: Peter | April 19, 2006 7:18 AM

correction: VENUS Williams was in the 2005 wimbledon final, not SERENA Williams.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 19, 2006 10:09 AM

The spirit of this article is dead-on even if all the facts aren't. I watched Maria at the NASDAQ 100 Open in Miami, and while she has a lot of potential to clean up her act regarding sportsmanship, she didn't make any progress in Miami.

Posted by: Marie | April 19, 2006 10:47 AM

For record's sake, I posted the first comment, but not the second. Perhaps I should go by the name of Peter. Or Petya as my Russian friends know me...

Posted by: Peter | April 19, 2006 10:53 AM

This is quite possibly the stupidest thing I have read on Sharapova yet (and I have read a lot of stupid things).

Then again, what else would you expect from a self proclaimed "russophobe" writing in a blog ran by the creationist freaks (a.k.a the Discovery Institute)?

Posted by: ponzu | April 19, 2006 11:08 AM

I enjoyed this article. BTW, it was Venus not Serena in the 2005 Wimbledon final. There is something foul about Maria. When she first came on the scene when she won Wimby, there was something not right about her. She is a very consistent player, against lower rate opponents. Whenever she runs into a top player, especially recently, she buckles. She has yet to win big again or dominate as suggested by the so called professional tennis analysts. She is young, so I'll give her more time. But at the moment, she is overrated. Maybe when the top players retire or go away, may she be successful against a weaker field. And her looks are very ordinary just above athletic standard.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 19, 2006 11:27 AM

Sorry about a rude initial post, I realize it's not a good idea to introduce oneself in a moderated blog by getting personal about the writer's abilities or political/religious affiliation (is there a difference anymore?)

I would not have said anything if it was just a blog. A blog is a perfect medium for the type of articles such as yours, i.e., uneducated opinions fueled by personal animosity towards a country and a person. That's what blogs were made for.

However, your article was inexplicably picked up by Google News, which means that I read it, as did or will many others.

I apologize if my reaction came off as a little strong. I still think you are a terrible writer, who does not have adequate understanding of the subject and substitutes ideology and regurgitated factoids from other publicatiosn for substance. But I wish I had said it nicer.

Here's to the freedom of speech - your right to write and mine - to comment.

Posted by: ponzu | April 19, 2006 11:43 AM

Kim,
I have looked at your blog, and very silly it is too. Fancy someone going around calling themselves a Russophobe and devoting almost every single hour God sends dredging up material up to support this eccentric intolerance for a country and its people.

As for the matter raised by the current post, Sharapova is an attractive and skilled tennis player who has committed the apparently unforgivable act of losing against players less talented than herself. Well, if that doesn't prove that Russians as a race are degenerate, two-faced lunatics, I don't know what does! How didn't I see it before?

Posted by: Petya | April 19, 2006 3:25 PM

I always knew Sharapova was a . Look at her pictures here: http://www.kp.ru/daily/23693/52151/

They tell it all!

Posted by: Natasha R. | April 19, 2006 5:26 PM

As per the second guessing of Maria Sharapova's Russian heritage: Would anyone second guess the self proclaimed (by a friend of mine) Jewish identity of my American born friend who eats pork and has never been to Israel? Her parents fled the Nazis. Her grandfather was a rabbi.

Kim Zigfeld continues to apply some really hypocritically flawed standards towards Russians.

Someone here mentioned a link to a MT forum participant (I boycott that venue to protest that site's political bias). I recollect a certain Oliver Bronsen, who was known to a number of Russia watchers when it came to spamming in boxes with anti-Russian propaganda.

This Oliver Bronsen person had a thing for Russian tennis players as well. I cite this JRL submission of mine which was posted at my blog http://averko.blogspot.com on August 30, 2005:

The below reply of mine wasn't posted by Johnson's Russia List. I received three replies to it, with all of them being positive. I have a habit of mass e-mailing to Russia watchers abroad my JRL submissions which don't get posted.

Re: T-ball and B-Ball (re: Tennis, Sharapova, Baseball) From Oliver Bronsen JRL #9232, Aug. 25, 2005 http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/9232-17.cfm

Oliver Bronsen takes issue with Maria Sharapova being rated the top female tennis player. Sharapova, Vogue Magazine and the Russian Tennis Federation didn't set the standards for rating the top player. As per those standards, Sharapova clearly qualifies for number one rating based on the number of tournaments played so far this season, relative to her results when matched against other players. A player winning two matches and then not finishing in the top ten in other tournaments or not playing in as many tournaments as Sharapova isn't worthy for top ranking.

Mr. Bronsen makes a snide remark that Sharapova's number one ranking is on par with Vladimir Putin somehow manipulating an otherwise undeserving Russia into the G-8. Actually, Russia was in the G-8 prior to Putin's presidency. As for Russia's G-8 membership, one can ask why Italy and Canada are in that organization of supposedly leading world economies?

Contrary to Mr. Bronsen - Sharapova is very much a Russian who acknowledges herself as such. Unlike some past and present players on the tour, the number one rated Russian chooses to be listed as representing the country of her birth (there's a top rated "French" player who is Russian born and another "French" player who is American born). During the period of Russia's bid to host the 2012 Summer Olympics - Sharapova accepted the role of the lead Russian athlete used to promote that now failed bid.

Mr. Bronsen suggests that Sharapova gets more coverage than others because of her good looks. In supporting this contention, he appears to make reference to another Russian player Anastasia Myskhina. Myskhina is quite attractive in her own right. Tennis experts universally agree that Sharapova is the more talented of the two.

Mr. Bronsen openly questions why the families of the Russian Little League team were denied visas to see their kids play in Williamsport. Perhaps there's a growing authoritarian and anti-Russian streak permeating in the US. Just look at the shameful display of journalism ABC News NightLine displayed in its Chechen separatist friendly feature with terrorist Shamil Basayev. As I noted in a recent article at intelligent.ru (Behind the ABC-Russian Government Dispute http://english.intelligent.ru/cgi-bin/loadtext.pl?id=6353&file=articles/text_e0072.htm ),
NightLine was far more accommodating to the Soviet view during the Cold War when compared to how it mutes out post Soviet mainstream Russian views (instead preferring the likes of Masha Gessen and Pavel Felgenhauer).
***********
As a followup to that rejected JRL submission, I received an email today from Dave Johnson asking for a contribution to JRL. Here's my reply:

JRL could do a better job at promoting itself by being more considerate to submissions from competent analysts seeking a full time gig in the field.

Such a stance then creates an environment of more individuals being in a better position to donate in addition to feeling a sense of gratitude to JRL.

Julian Evans and some (I stress some) other JRL regulars aren't my intellectual superiors. Along with some others (I respect the confidential emails I receive), I know that I'm not the only one feeling this way.

Stop what amounts to a combination of cronyism and political bias and the situation will improve in an all around way.

Mike Averko

Posted by: Michael Averko | April 19, 2006 5:41 PM

Dear Readers,

It's me, the creator and the manager of this blog. Please notice, that I mostly disagree with Kim's opinions, but when someone submits a well-written article on the subject that I don't have a better knowledge about - I post it.

Also, Kim has been leaving millions of comments on this blog, and I wanted to give her a chance to "speak out loud" and be judged by the readers. And judge you did!

Right now I'm on a business trip in Colorado and I'll be very busy until the next Tuesday. HOWEVER, we will be posting new articles; this time our own.

Charlie Ganske edits and approves the comments. Due to their high volume, not all of them appear right away. Again, please try to use appropriate language and be respectful towards each other.

The mission of this blog is to report unreported and miss-reported news about Russia (which we do), give knowledgeable commentary (which we do as well), and spark discussions (which Kim and Mike Averko are successfully doing as well).

Please keep on reading the blog. The upcoming major articles will be on:
- the state of media and its control in Russia,
- Khodorkovsky's life in Siberia, and
- true story of the dishonest Russian, Ukrainian and Jewish immigrants-"refugees" in the USA (should be very controversial and stunning).

Enjoy!

Best,
Yuri

Posted by: Yuri Mamchur | April 19, 2006 10:20 PM

Thank you for the clarification, Yuri. I don't think that "when someone submits a well-written article on the subject that I don't have a better knowledge about - I post it" is a sound editorial policy. In this case, the author does not know much more about tennis than you do, but unlike you, she does not even know it.

Posted by: ponzu | April 19, 2006 11:00 PM

RE JRL censorship, forget not its banning of eXile.ru. While no doubt foul-mouthed, it has pretty good analyses and has provided english language information I have not seen elsewhere.

For example, the Orange Ukranian Minister for Energy asking Russia to renegotiate the energy contract which frankly stunned the Russians as Ukraine already had an extremely favorable long-term deal...

Posted by: Aleks | April 20, 2006 10:30 AM

Kim,

Your interest in Sharapova is also documented in the Moscow Times forums, is it not?
It is not a change of subject anyway. Berating Sharapova for her wealth would be equivalent to the Williams sisters not giving away their life's earnings to the victims of the Katrina hurricane. The issue at hand is that you are perversely bent on construing any and every last single thing Russian as an affront to human decency. You may enjoy it, no doubt, but why pretend that your exclusive design is not to insult Russia.
Incidentally, a "troll" in Internet lexicon is not the mythical hairy beast you may be thinking of, but a person who posts provocative material to create conflict. It was exactly that type of behaviour that saw you barred from the Moscow Times forum, and you have now decided to reprise that method here.

Posted by: Petya | April 20, 2006 11:12 AM

u really hate her dont u??
I agree that weall must have a opnion, but yours was very rude. If u wanna talk about dont deserve to win tournies, why u said nothing about Mauresmo, that won a GRAND SLAM with 2 W.O. from 2 of the greatest players. Besides, Maria lost in Auzie and Dubai final for JUSTINE HENIN-HARDENE, former #1, auzie open finalist, she's low ranked cause she was out for a while, but I dont see any issues about losing for her. MAria is the only player that reach at least the quarters of her last 8 slams. Thast quiet a great thing. Yes Maria has still a lot to do, but she's trying. Besides u forget to tell that Maria defeated a great Martina Hingis and Elena Dementieva (runner up at RG and USO) that had won TOKYO and defeated Justine on the semis.

tenis is lucky also swettie, Roger Federer played awfull and won the Miami final with lucky ball on net. Thats tennis, players have bad and good days, if u dont want that to happen dont watch it.

Mostly every sport is needs lucky

Posted by: Nat | April 20, 2006 3:10 PM

Aleks

So as to not take away too much from the Sharapova piece, I will try to be brief in replying to your point made here.

JRL no longer bans eXile material. These two mentioned sources are a mixed bag.

The JRL editor impresses as a moody person (eXile editor Mark Ames described him as "squeamish"), who peridically censors certain individuals to go along with his harboring of some not so Russia friendly views. One case in point being his stated (at another venue which stupidly released a private email exchange, thereby making it a matter of record) belief that Peter Lavelle's internet Panel of Experts is a bit too much on the Russocentric side and saying in the same passage that The Washington Post, Anders Aslund and Masha Gessen are credible enough sources.

I'm currently being censored by DJ because of my openly stated opposition to his manner. Others support me in private in a scared kind of a way (private emails sent to me are confidential).

This isn't indicative of a healthy environment.

Feel free to contact me on the particulars. My contact info. is at my recent Russia Blog article on Yulia Tymoshenko.

Posted by: Michael Averko | April 20, 2006 4:39 PM

Let's see if we can bring something rational to your irrational point of views.

1) I made no declaration about who a real Russian is and you presume far, far too much.

2) What promise was broken? You mean her statements that she will put tennis before beauty? You haven't demonstrated even one clear example of this. She has posed for some photos and is a spokesperson for products. The Williams Sisters have certainly outscored her a hundredfold in this category. But I suppose when they sell products or pose for photographs fully clothes, they present a strong image for young black women? Again, I see no promise broken as Maria Sharapova is competing in a sport at a level the vast majority of people can not touch.

3) Telling her country women it is ok to sell your body. This sounds like a reiteration of your statement above, just slightly reworded. Both female and male tennis players have been using their looks and their "bodies" to sell products since the 1970s (at least). I don't see any connection with Sharapove posing fully clothed, wearing as much or more clothing as she wears while playing tennis ... and prostitution or some other social ill related to "selling of your body". If you feel modeling is inherently evil, that is your personal problem. Almost no one in the world will agree with you.

4) According to ESPN, Maria Sharapova is ranked #3 in Women's tennis in the world. http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/rankings?sport=WOMRANK

Let's presume that you are right though, and say she is over-rated. Maybe she is really only the 10th or 12th best player in the world.

That is still GREAT! Of the literally millions of tennis players in the world, to even be ranked puts you into the company of the elite! To be a higly ranked tennis player is certainly greatness. If you can only define greatness by consistently winning women tennis events, then we would have to go back to the steroid days of Navratilova. (And yes I know she denies using steroids in those pre-testing years, but she also admits to taking lots of stuff that trainers gave her that she didnt know what was in it. Sounds like Barry Bonds to me)

5) And somehow in your mind, this all connects back to Putin as an evil KGB man, abolishment of press freedoms, neo-nazi killing of foreign students, dwindling population, the end of all Russians, Russian women being maltreated and beaten by drunken Russian men, and global warming. Oh wait, you didn't credit her with global warming, strike that.

And I guess the opposite is also true then, if Sharapova becomes a perennial tennis champion, then Putin will melt away like the wicked witch of the west, Russia will adopt the US constitution, neo-facists will drop their swastikas and clubs and begin singing kumbayah, Russians will all decide to have 3 or 4 or more babies, and Russian men will stop drinking and abusing women.

That is quite a heavy burden for that one woman to carry, no wonder she is slacking off! ;-)

So it seems your argument is, she is posing for photographs (which is clearly EVIL in your world view) and her tennis game isn't the absolute best in the world and because of this she is a liar and a fake. Sorry, not very convincing.

Posted by: W. Shedd | April 20, 2006 11:30 PM

And oh yes, she likely is Kim Betty who was banned due to similar language and tactics. I say this as her middle name is apparently Elizabeth (or so sayeth the Google).

Posted by: W. Shedd | April 20, 2006 11:34 PM

I was at first mad at Russia Blog for posting Kim's anti-Russian material.

In allowing for Petya, Mishka and others to respond, Russia Blog provided a great service.

Posted by: Zhana Klimova | April 21, 2006 12:57 PM

Cut the charade Kim, Oliver or whatever your name is.

All can see the absurdity of what "Oliver Bronsen" said in the cited JRL post. Your combination of mixing faulty opinion of sports with a perhaps even more faulty opinion of politics.

In said JRL post, "Bronsen" overlooks why Sharapova was at the time rated number one while engaging in bogus observations that touched on Russia being in the G-8 and the war in Chechnya.

I'm also reminded of when the Russia Profile forum first got going and how Peter Lavelle was unfairly harsh with me in comparison to Oliver Bronsen, who displayed the same manner as Kim Betty and Kim Zigfeld.

Are you denying not being those three?

You sent me an email with the Kim Betty name and the Bronsen tact matches the style of your comments here.

Posted by: Michael Averko | April 21, 2006 9:06 PM

Man! I am a Maria Sharapova fan, so I am utterly appalled and insulted by these comments. About her getting booed off the court, Serena Williams experienced the same thing at that tournament. Are you saying she's not a champion? And another thing, Maria IS posing in magazines and IS advertising her many sponsorships, but she does it in the manner of Tiger Woods. By that I mean she takes a couple of weeks off to do all her extra stuff, off the tennis court. I don't think I would see you disputing about Tiger Woods. And I agree with someone who earlier said that this is the game of tennis. You win some against top players and you lose some. In Miami Justine and Clijsters BOTH lost to MUCH lower ranked players. And I just have to say for you to continue to watch Maria and see how her career shall flourish. And THAT I can promise you!

Posted by: Anonymous | April 22, 2006 12:32 PM

Correction: Sharapova has been #1 in the world for 6 or 7 weeks. Mauresmo has been #1 for about 8 or 9, and until she regained the top ranking in March, she was behind Sharapova (albeit only slightly) in terms of #1 longevity.

Frankly, I don't care whether or not you dislike Sharapova. But at least get your facts right. It's not as though the WTA website has a super hi-tech website that requires a guarded password for entry.

In regards to her not donating anything to Russian charity, she donated thePorsche that she won at the '04 Championships to the victims of the Russian school tragedy of that year. And let's not forget that while Kuznetsova may have "thrashed" her in the Miami final, Sharapova has also beaten her in two other occasions.

Posted by: Mell | April 22, 2006 1:48 PM

Mell:

Trolls are known for not getting facts right.

Like saying that I said that Maria was fully clothed in a picture when I never commented about how she was clothed in the displayed photo shoots.

As for her/his points:

- The JRL editor has been recorded on line for stating a "Mike Averko disease" in addition to having made a not so smooth attempt at ridiculing me before an email subscription list numbering at least 20.

- I don't see too many people here rejecting my ideas. That seems to be reserved for Zigfeld/Betty/Bronsen.

Zigfeld/Betty/Bronsen ducked my question asking her/him to confirm the obvious. The three mentioned being the same person.

Zhana is right for complementing Russia Blog for outing this individual.

Posted by: Michael Averko | April 22, 2006 3:36 PM

i think this article is a complete joke, the person writing it is looking from one view and that is a view of hatred towards sharapova, the incident with the golovin match was not as the writer told, but only the writers view of the event which i find to be very calious towards sharapova. another thing is the writer has failed to mentionthat sharapova is still very young in tennis years and is no where near her peak, and if the writer had watched any of her recent matches hed know that sharapova is improving her game. this includes notable improvements in her movement and variety of game. i think the writer doesnt like sharapova gives her no credit, were credit is due, and i believe knows very little about the state of womens tennis from reading this article. people should ignore this article!

Posted by: margaret | April 22, 2006 4:13 PM

I've never read such complete and utter rubbish in all my life. To claim that Masha isn't amongst the top players ( granted she isn't the VERY best yet ) is total "bullshine", bad players do not win even 1 Grand Slam. What's next, Valentino Rossi can't ride a bike to save his life and he's not a real Italian?

Posted by: Phil | April 23, 2006 1:22 AM

dude.. seriously..

Get a Life

Posted by: just me | April 23, 2006 5:15 AM

Dear Kim,

Unfortunately I have to say that I cannot take you seriously. Yes, I see how hard you are trying to protect your point but… It is not only that you didn’t really care about the facts and just took your own view as an objective information… It is just what you are trying to say is that childish way of saying “… and your Sharapova is stupid.”

I have no problems of taking any other article on this blog seriously and have a discussion… Because… People are having thought through arguments and not that yours – everything is bad. I hate it and Sharapova is liar. That is pointless. I am sorry. I am not going to argue with you because… someone who wants to see the dirt will always find it.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 23, 2006 5:22 PM

What a load of rubbish

Posted by: Rob | April 24, 2006 1:48 AM

From Kim:

"Now that Mike has chosen to bring up the participation of Sharapova in the failed bid of Russia to win the Olympics, it is only fitting to examine this topic, which I had avoided, further.

Why did Russia choose someone to represent the bid who never spends time in Russia, who lives in Florida in the United States?

Did Russia ever stop to think that the Olympic Commitee might see this as rather shallow, even be offended by it, and might then think the entire bid meaningless?

Did Russia ever think about what it owes to players like Myskina who spend all their time in Russia?

Is it not possible that Sharapova HURT the bid rather than helped it, and made Russia look shallow and superficial in the process?

Would it not have been better to use Myskina in a failed bid than Sharapova in a successful one?

And, after all, Sharapova did NOT succeed."

My reply:

How many non-Israeli born Israelis greatly contribute to the Jewish state?

Sharapova was born in Russia and considers herself as such.

She's globally more popular than Myskhina.

It makes perfect sense for Russia to uytilze Sharapova in the described marketing.

Posted by: Michael Averko | April 24, 2006 3:50 PM

As for who should best represent a country, let's keep in mind former NSA Zbigniew Brzezinski, who wasn't American born.

We've some big time hypocrisy here.

Posted by: Michael Averko | April 24, 2006 4:11 PM

Mike! Stop it already and get to new material.

Zigfeld has been toasted.

Posted by: Andrew Waller | April 24, 2006 8:01 PM

Ok, lets start with you jealousy of maria sharapova, she has a great game and is always in every match, she can beat any top ranked player she faces. There have been numerous occasions where she played a hell of a match, such as the wimbledon semi final against Davenport, and again against Venus. Then the 2006 Aussie Open semi against Justine. Also the 2005 Aussie Semi against Serena. Sharapova has never denied the crowd of a thrilling match, even if she didnt win, she was going down swinging. Second, so wut if she has endorsements, Steffi Graf, Both Williams Sisters, Martina Hingis, and Monica Seles all have endorsements and are some of the greatest names in sports history. Away from the tennis court, she lives a life, not a life filled with forehands and serves, she does have other interests, she is a person, not a tennis ball that is devoted to spending her life until she dies on a tennis court. If your going to write about an athlete, keep your opinions to yourself and remain objective, or dont write anything at all.

Posted by: Steven Demitry | May 6, 2006 11:17 AM

Maria Sharapova isn't humble. Before her win at Wimbledon, she does not complain, does not make her opponents wait at service line. She has changed totally since the win. I was disgusted at how she regularly "pumped" her fist at every winner. Is it really that necessary to fist pump? I've seen a lot of better players who does not celebrate at every winner and only fist pump when it's a great play. She is too much!

Posted by: J L | July 2, 2006 12:55 AM

what do you have to say now that she won the us open?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/tennis/specials/us_open/2006/09/09/sharapova.title.ap/index.html

Posted by: Alex Permit | September 9, 2006 7:20 PM

GET A LIFE!!! MARIA ONE OF THE BEST FAMALE PLAYER NOW A DAYS.. SO PLESE LEAVE HER ALONE.... DON'T SPEAK OF HER IN THAT TONE... SHE IS JUST A BEAUTIFUL TENNIS PLAYER. BESIDES, SHE REPRESENTS RUSSIA EVERY WHERE...

MARIA ROCKS!!!!

Posted by: LOLA | September 12, 2006 5:36 PM

Cheers from Napa Valley to Maria Sharapova!

Posted by: Napa Valley Spa Guy | September 23, 2006 12:20 PM

Rediculous arguement.

Maria has just won the US Open and is currently #3 in the WTA Rankings.

The majority of negative comments are due to her quality endorsements which she deserves as she is one of the most beautiful young women in the world.

As far as not supporting poverty in Russia, Maria has a Foundation which supports the development of children throughout the world.

People have the right to freedom of speech but must research their subject matter before posting.

Thankyou

Posted by: Huffy | October 18, 2006 7:57 AM

this is ridiculous!
maria is one of the best tennis players in the world!
she is very talented!
this is just none sense!
dont say such stuff about her!

Posted by: fatima | October 29, 2006 11:17 AM

awesome

Posted by: Anonymous | November 28, 2006 8:28 AM

Good site. Thanks!

Posted by: Mike Stranger | March 11, 2007 10:32 PM

te amo y love you

Posted by: nicolas natalicchio | September 27, 2007 4:41 PM

what a load of insolent bigoted tripe.. get a life

Posted by: jon | January 5, 2008 8:27 PM

MARIA IS A HOT GIRL

Posted by: MUHAMMAD IMRAN | June 9, 2008 5:21 AM

http://gruppovoj-s.daysy.ru >�� http://porno-video337.daysy.ru >�� http://kino-halyav.daysy.ru >c�� http://nod32-3-kly.daysy.ru >�� http://filmzmue-uz.daysy.ru >�� gta ��