WTA Tour Statistical Abstract 2004

Home , Abigail Spears, Akiko Morigami, Alice Canepa, Alina Jidkova, Angela Haynes, Angelika Bachmann

Contents Introduction ...... 4 Wins Over Top Players...... 78 2004 In Review: The Top Players...... 5 Matches against the (Final) Top Twenty ...... 78 Won/Lost based on Rankings at the Time of Match...79 The Final Top Thirty ...... 5 Won/Lost based on Final Rankings ...... 80 The Beginning Top Twenty-Five ...... 6 Summary of Changes, Beginning to End of 2004...... 6 Statistics Based on Head-to-Head Numbers...... 81 Total Wins over Top Ten Players...... 81 Top Players Analysed...... 7 Winning Percentage against Top Ten Players...... 81 All the Players in the Top Ten in 2004:...... 7 Complete Top Ten under the 1996 Ranking System...... 7 How They Earned Their Points ...... 82 Ranking Fluctuation ...... 8 Fraction of Points Earned in Slams...... 83 Highest Ranking of 2004 ...... 11 Quality Versus Round Points ...... 84 Top Players Sorted by Median Ranking...... 12 Percentage of Points Earned on Each Surface...... 86 Short Summary: The Top Eighty ...... 13 Consistency ...... 88 The Top 200, in Numerical Order ...... 15 Standard Deviation of Scores by Tournament ...... 88 The Top 200, in Alphabetical Order ...... 16 Fraction of Points Earned in Biggest Win ...... 89 Tournament Results...... 17 Early-Round Losses ...... 90 Summary of Results for Top Players ...... 17 Frequency of Opening Round Losses...... 91 Tournament Winners ...... 40 Frequency of Early Round Losses ...... 92 Tournament Winners by Date (High-Tier Events) ...... 40 Worst Losses...... 93 Tournament Winners by Type (High-Tier Events) .....41 Best and Worst “Worst Losses”...... 100 Winners at Smaller Tournaments (Tier III, IV, V) ...... 42 Winning and Losing Streaks...... 101 Winners, Finalists at $50K and Larger Challengers ..43 List of Longest Winning Streaks...... 101 Cheap Thrills and Tough Bills ...... 44 Individual Winning and Losing Streaks...... 102 Number of Tournament Wins for Highlight Players ...45 Number of Significant Results ...... 105 Fraction of Tournaments Won ...... 47 Points Per Quarter...... 106 Tiers of Tournaments Played and Average Tier ...... 48 Most Consistent over Four Quarters ...... 108 Points Earned Week by Week...... 50 Slam Results ...... 109 Tournament Results, Sorted from Most to Least ...... 51 Surface Rankings ...... 111 Alternate Rankings ...... 52 Hardcourts...... 111 Total Points Ranking (1997 Ranking System)...... 52 Summary of Hardcourt Results...... 111 Points Per Event, Minimum 14 (The Divisor)...... 53 Winning Percentage on Hardcourts ...... 114 Points Per Event, Min. 17 (Modernized Divisor)...... 54 Points Per Tournament on Hardcourts...... 115 Best 14 ...... 55 Best and Worst Results on Hardcourts ...... 116 Slotted Best 18 (ATP Entry Rank) ...... 56 Clay...... 117 Total Wins...... 57 Summary of Clay Results ...... 117 Winning Percentage ...... 58 Winning Percentage on Clay ...... 120 Divisor Rankings, No Slam Bonus ...... 59 Points Per Tournament on Clay...... 121 The “Majors Ranking”...... 60 Best and Worst Results on Clay ...... 122 Total Round Points...... 61 Grass ...... 123 Round Points Per Tournament ...... 62 Summary of Grass Results ...... 123 Quality Points Per Event (“Future Potential”) ...... 63 Winning Percentage on Grass ...... 125 Quality/Round Equalized: 2Q+R Per Tournament.....65 Adjusted Points Per Tournament on Grass...... 127 Consistency-Rewarded Rankings...... 66 Indoors ...... 128 Logarithmic Points Award ...... 66 Summary of Indoor Results...... 128 Worst 14 ...... 67 Winning Percentage Indoors ...... 130 Middle Half...... 68 Points Per Tournament Indoors...... 131 Idealized Ranking Systems ...... 69 Best and Worst Results Indoors ...... 132 Surface-Modified Divisor (Minimum 16) ...... 69 All-Surface Players...... 133 Adjusted Won/Lost...... 71 Success against Strength of Field...... 73 Tournament Wins by Surface ...... 134 Percentage of Possible Points Earned ...... 75 Assorted Statistics ...... 135 Head to Head/ The Busiest Players on the Tour...... 135 Results against Top Players ...... 77 Total Tour Matches Played by Top Players...... 135 Total Tour Events Played by the Top 150...... 136 The Top 20 Head to Head ...... 77

Contents The Strongest Tournaments ...... 138 The Tennis Almanac 2004 Tournament Strength (Results Day by Day)...... 235 Based on the Four Top Players Present ...... 138 WTA Tour History...... 252 The Top Tournaments Based on Top Players Present — Method 1 ...... 140 Who Won What Summary — Singles ...... 252 The Top Tournaments Who Won What Summary — Doubles...... 253 Based on Top Players Present — Method 2 ...... 141 Who Won What — History of Tournaments ...... 254 Strongest Tournaments Won ...... 143 Who Won What Part 1: 1998Ð2003 ...... 254 Strongest Tournament Performances ...... 144 Who Won What Part 2: 1996Ð2002 ...... 255 Who Won What Part 3: 1990Ð1996 ...... 256 Title Defences ...... 145 Who Won What Part 4: 1986Ð1989 ...... 257 Seeds and their Success Rates ...... 145 Who Won What Part 5: 1983Ð1986 ...... 258 Lucky Losers...... 150 Active Leaders in Titles (Singles/Doubles) ...... 259 Bagels...... 151 Recent Singles Winners, Finalists, Semifinalists ...... 260 The Road to Victory...... 156 Career Results for Leading Players ...... 270 Games Lost in Path to Title...... 156 Career Results — Singles...... 270 Quality Points Earned ...... 157 Slam History ...... 290 “Top Players” 2004 ...... 158 Singles Slam Winners, Open Era ...... 290 Statistics About the Tour as a Whole...... 160 Doubles Slam Winners, Open Era ...... 291 The Year of the Injury ...... 161 Singles and Doubles at the Same Slam ...... 292 Doubles ...... 163 Doubles Slams and Partners...... 293 The Final Top 30 in Doubles...... 163 Grand Slams and Career Slams...... 298 The Initial Top 30 in Doubles...... 164 Total Slam Victories, Open Era ...... 300 Doubles Ranking Fluctuation...... 165 Players and Titles ...... 301 The Final Top Fifty in Doubles Analyzed ...... 167 Players with Titles, Year by Year...... 301 Individual Results: The Top Doubles Players/Results. . .168 Most Titles, Year By Year ...... 304 Head-to-Heads — Team Records and Losses ...... 186 Five Or More Titles in a Year...... 305 Teams with the Most Events ...... 195 Surface Sweeps — Singles (Since 1990) ...... 306 Team Results, Sorted By Both Players ...... 196 Career Surface Sweeps/Singles...... 308 Team and Individual Doubles Statistics...... 201 Career Grand Surface Sweep ...... 309 Doubles Winning Percentages for the Top Teams ....201 Year-End Top Players...... 310 Tournament Winning Percentages for Top Teams...202 Year-End Top Eight, Alphabetical, Doubles Winning Percentages for the Top Players ..203 with Years, Since 1975 ...... 310 Doubles Tournament Percentage for Top Players..204 Total Years Ended At Each Rank, Individual Doubles Statistical Leaders ...... 205 Alphabetical, Since 1975...... 312 Top Ten, Most Wins: ...... 205 Strongest Career Rankings Showings...... 314 Top Ten, Matches Per Tournament:...... 205 Total Years in the Top Eight ...... 315 Top Ten, Most Matches Played:...... 205 Doubles Wins & Partners ...... 316 Top Ten, Most Partners...... 205 Winningest Doubles Player, Year By Year, Highest Partner Turnover Rate...... 205 From 1983 ...... 316 Team Doubles Titles, Sorted from Most to Least ...... 206 Titles With Multiple Partners, Individual Doubles Titles, from Most to Least ...... 207 Single Year, Open Era...... 317 Doubles Winners by Date (High-Tier Events)...... 209 Slams With the Most Partners, Open Era...... 317 Doubles Winners by Date (Smaller Events) ...... 210 I Came, I Played ...... 318 Alternate Doubles Rankings...... 211 WTA Main Draw Events Played ...... 319 Rankings under the 1996 Ranking System ...... 212 Comings and Goings: Doubles Points Per Tournament, No Minimum ...... 213 On and Off the Rankings 320 Doubles Points Per Event, Reduced Slam Bias...... 214 Players ranked in 2003 but not in 2004...... 321 Quality Points Per Event (Best Eleven Events)...... 215 Players ranked in 2004 but not in 2003...... 322 Majors Ranking ...... 216 Players ranked in both 2003 and 2004 ...... 324 Combined Singles and Doubles Rankings ...... 218 Index ...... 329 WTA Calendar for 2004 ¥ Events/Results . .220

Introduction Back in the mists of time, before I became a professional writer, I was often amazed at how short were the introductions to scholarly tomes. All that work, and the author didn’t have anything to say about it? Now, I write most days, and it starts to wear a little. I don’t need my daily word fix. So this introduction will be short. This volume is intended to try to give you a picture of the WTA Tour, and the top players, in 2004. In particular, it’s designed to analyse strengths and weaknesses and overall results. Theoretically, this is the task of the WTA rankings — but the rankings are only a single measure; they don’t tell you, for instance, that Paola Suárez is a major force on clay but hardly a threat at all indoors. This even if you accept the rankings as a true measure of who is best — and many don’t so accept them. (I, in fact, am one such.) The goal of the Statistical Abstract is to try to present a fuller picture. This is particularly important this year, or so it seems to me, when there was complete confusion at the top of the rankings. It’s worth remembering that the WTA rankings were created in part to regulate player behaviour, which distracts from their real purpose of assessing results. Of course, no set of statistics can reveal everything. There is, naturally, still some bias — I include the statistics I think meaningful, and ignore those that I regard as relatively meaningless. (And I will tell you what I think the statistics mean, at least in some cases.) Plus there is a limit on how much detail can be provided. All told, 2445 matches were played at the WTA level this year (and some 80 more scheduled which ended in walkovers), in 60 tournaments; 296 different women played at least one WTA match. To cover all that completely is more a task for a database than a printed (well, printable) book. As a result, this document turns its primary attention to exactly fifty singles players, plus doubles players in their section. The singles list includes every player who was ranked #27 or higher at some time during 2004 (the goal being to include every player who was Top 25 at any point, with some margin of error). It also includes past Slam winners, and several other players who have been Top 20 and were attempting to come back from some sort of injury or difficulty. The full list (players marked * were Top 25 at some time in 2004): Daja Bedanova, *Elena Bovina, *Jennifer Capriati, *Kim Clijsters, *Amanda Coetzer, *Eleni Daniilidou, *Lindsay Davenport, *Nathalie Déchy, *Elena Dementieva, *Jelena Dokic, *Silvia Farina Elia, *Amy Frazier, Tatiana Golovin, *Daniela Hantuchova, *Justine Hénin-Hardenne, *Lina Krasnoroutskaya, Anne Kremer, *Svetlana Kuznetsova, *Elena Likhovtseva, Emilie Loit, Iva Majoli, *Magdalena Maleeva, *Conchita Martinez, *Amélie Mauresmo, *Alicia Molik, *Anastasia Myskina, Tatiana Panova, *Nadia Petrova, *Mary Pierce, *Lisa Raymond, *Chanda Rubin, Dinara Safina, *Francesca Schiavone, *Patty Schnyder, *Magui Serna, *Maria Sharapova, *Meghann Shaughnessy, *Anna Smashnova, *Karolina Sprem, Alexandra Stevenson, *Paola Suárez, *Ai Sugiyama, Tamarine Tanasugarn, Sandrine Testud, Iroda Tulyaganova, Maria Vento-Kabchi, *Serena Williams, *Venus Williams, *Fabiola Zuluaga, and *Vera Zvonareva. Jelena Jankovic, the only year-end Top 32 player not in the above list, is also frequently mentioned, but not comprehensively covered (mostly because she played so exhaustingly many events.) Of course, the big question of 2004 was, “Who in the world was #1?” The Statistical Abstract doesn’t give a simple answer to that. In statistics based on results per tournament, Justine Hénin-Hardenne comes out on top, with Serena Williams also doing surprisingly well. If we go by total accomplishments, Lindsay Davenport and Amélie Mauresmo (who played more events but were somewhat less effective when they played) came out on top. On individual surfaces, other players came out high — e.g. Maria Sharapova was obviously the big name on grass. To me, the numbers say that Hénin-Hardenne was the best player of 2004, and probably should be Player of the Year, but that Davenport is a reasonable #1 based on the number of events the WTA expects players to play. If you have other criteria, perhaps you’ll find a statistic here which will help you determine just who was best under those rules. A note on the spelling of names. For most of 2004, Israel’s top player was listed as “Anna Smashnova- Pistolesi.” But she was using “Smashnova” by year-end, and for the most part I have silently corrected her results to that final form. Distributing this Document: This document is made available to all free of charge. Feel free to distribute it, or to cite statistics from it. The only restriction is that you may not sell it. It must be free.

2004 In Review: The Top Players The Final Top Thirty Because we can’t cover every tennis pro, we have to devote our attention to relatively few. For obvious reasons, the WTA’s Top 30 are the most important of those few. The list below summarizes those players. In addition to listing the players, this table shows a few things about them. “Best 17 score” and “Number of Tournaments” are from the WTA, used to calculate their rankings. “Point gap from the preceding” shows how many points a player would need to earn to overtake the player above her. So Kuznetsova, a mere three points behind #4 Sharapova, is a very strong #5, but Schnyder, more than 300 points behind #13 Molik, is a very weak #14. “Began year at” is the player’s ranking twelve months earlier. The final column shows how much her ranking has changed in the interim. Note that a negative number in that column indicates an upward move; smaller numbers are better. So Golovin, e.g., had the biggest upward move of any player in the Top 30: 224 places! Final Player Best 17 Number of Point Gap from Began Net Rank Name Score Tournaments Preceding Year At Change 1Davenport, Lindsay 4760 17 5 -4 2 Mauresmo, Amélie 4546 17 214 4 -2 3 Myskina, Anastasia 4012 19 534 7 -4 4 Sharapova, Maria 3536 20 476 32 -28 5Kuznetsova, Svetlana 3533 22 3 36 -31 6 Dementieva, Elena 3448 22 85 8 -2 7Williams, Serena 3128 12 320 3 4 8 Hénin-Hardenne, Justine 2884 9 244 1 7 9Williams, Venus 2400 16 484 11 -2 10 Capriati, Jennifer 2359 12 41 6 4 11 Zvonareva, Vera 2299 26 60 13 -2 12 Petrova, Nadia 2022 25 277 12 0 13 Molik, Alicia 1970.75 22 51.25 35 -22 14 Schnyder, Patty 1638 23 332.75 23 -9 15 Bovina, Elena 1598 19 40 21 -6 16 Suárez, Paola 1535 19 63 14 2 17 Sugiyama, Ai 1469 24 66 10 7 18 Sprem, Karolina 1451.75 23 17.25 59 -41 19 Schiavone, Francesca 1397 23 54.75 20 -1 20 Farina Elia, Silvia 1334 24 63 24 -4 21 Déchy, Nathalie 1331 24 3 29 -8 22 Clijsters, Kim 1326 6 5 2 20 23 Zuluaga, Fabiola 1296.25 21 29.75 38 -15 24 Likhovtseva, Elena 1270.75 25 25.5 37 -13 25 Maleeva, Magdalena 1179 25 91.75 30 -5 26 Frazier, Amy 1149 18 30 61 -35 27 Golovin, Tatiana 1126.75 15 22.25 251 -224 28 Jankovic, Jelena 1062.75 28 64 85 -57 29 Pierce, Mary 1043 18 19.75 33 -4 30 Raymond, Lisa 1032 19 11 28 2

The Beginning Top Twenty-Five Rank Name 2004 Final Ranking Net Change 1 Hénin-Hardenne, Justine 8 7 2 Clijsters, Kim 22 20 3Williams, Serena 7 4 4 Mauresmo, Amelie 2 -2 5Davenport, Lindsay 1 -4 6 Capriati, Jennifer 10 4 7 Myskina, Anastasia 3 -4 8 Dementieva, Elena 6 -2 9 Rubin, Chanda 53 44 10 Sugiyama, Ai 17 7 11 Williams, Venus 9 -2 12 Petrova, Nadia 12 0 13 Zvonareva, Vera 11 -2 14 Suárez, Paola 16 2 15 Dokic, Jelena 125 110 16 Smashnova-Pistolesi, Anna 32 16 17 Shaughnessy, Meghann 40 23 18 Martinez, Conchita 42 24 19 Hantuchova, Daniela 31 12 20 Schiavone, Francesca 19 -1 21 Bovina, Elena 15 -6 22 Serna, Magui 102 80 23 Schnyder, Patty 14 -9 24 Farina Elia, Silvia 20 -4 25 Coetzer, Amanda 280 (retired) 255 Summary of Changes, Beginning to End of 2004 Ranking Gains: From outside the Top 20 into the Top 20: Sharapova, Kuznetsova, Molik, Schnyder, Bovina, Sprem, Farina Elia (total of 7) From outside the Top 20 into the Top 10: Sharapova, Kuznetsova (total of 2) From the Top 20 into the Top 10: Venus Williams (total of 1) Ranking Losses: Dropping out of the Top 20: Clijsters, Rubin, Dokic, Smashnova, Shaughnessy, Martinez, Hantuchova (total of 7) Dropping out of the Top 10 but remaining in the Top 20: Sugiyama (total of 1) Dropping from the Top 10 to below the Top 20: Clijsters, Rubin (total of 2) Players who were in the Top 10 at beginning and end of the year: Davenport, Mauresmo, Myskina, Dementieva, Serena Williams, Hénin-Hardenne, Capriati (total of 7) Players who were in the Top 20 at the beginning and end of the year: Davenport, Mauresmo, Myskina, Dementieva, Serena Williams, Hénin-Hardenne, Venus Williams, Capriati, Zvonareva, Petrova, Suárez, Sugiyama, Schiavone (total of 13)

Top Players Analysed All the Players in the Top Ten in 2004: The Complete Top Ten Based on WTA (Best 17) Statistics The lists below show all players who have ranked in the Top 10 in 2004, with the highest rank achieved. A total of sixteen players spent time in the Top Ten in 2004, slightly up from the fifteen in 2003, far more than the twelve in 2002, but less than the seventeen in 2001; we had sixteen in 2000 also.

Capriati (5) Mauresmo (1) Suárez (9) Clijsters (2) Myskina (2) Sugiyama (8) Davenport (1) Petrova (6) S. Williams (3) Dementieva (4) Rubin (9) V. Williams (8) Hénin-Hardenne (1) Sharapova (4) Zvonareva (9) Kuznetsova (4)

The following list shows all the players who have occupied a given position in the Top 10: 1. Davenport, Hénin-Hardenne, Mauresmo 2. Clijsters, Davenport, Mauresmo, Myskina 3. Davenport, Hénin-Hardenne, Mauresmo, Myskina, S. Williams 4. Davenport, Dementieva, Hénin-Hardenne, Kuznetsova, Mauresmo, Myskina, Sharapova, S. Williams 5. Capriati, Clijsters, Davenport, Dementieva, Kuznetsova, Myskina 6. Capriati, Davenport, Dementieva, Hénin-Hardenne, Kuznetsova, Myskina, Petrova, Sharapova, S. Williams 7. Capriati, Clijsters, Hénin-Hardenne, Myskina, Petrova, Sharapova, S. Williams 8. Capriati, Dementieva, Hénin-Hardenne, Petrova, Sharapova, Sugiyama, S. Williams, V. Williams 9. Capriati, Dementieva, Kuznetsova, Petrova, Rubin, Sharapova, Suárez, Sugiyama, S. Williams, V. Williams, Zvonareva 10. Capriati, Clijsters, Dementieva, Kuznetsova, Rubin, Sharapova, Sugiyama, S. Williams, V. Williams, Zvonareva The Complete Top Ten under the 1996 Ranking System This list shows all players who would have been in the Top 10 under the 1996 ranking system (total points divided by tournaments, minimum fourteen), with the highest ranking achieved. (For the list of the final Top 10 under this system, see the section on Alternate Rankings.)

Capriati (5) Mauresmo (2) Suárez (10) Clijsters (2) Myskina (4) Sugiyama (9) Davenport (1) Petrova (9) S. Williams (3) Dementieva (8) Rubin (7) V. Williams (6) Hénin-Hardenne (1) Sharapova (6) Zvonareva (10) Kuznetsova (6)

Note that there were sixteen Top Ten players in the WTA rankings, and sixteen under the divisor. Also note that it is the same sixteen players in both lists, though their peak rankings differ somewhat. This is most unusual; historically, there have almost always been differences between the two lists, usually consisting of about 15% of the total players in the two lists.

Ranking Fluctuation The table below shows how highlight players ranked in the course of the year. The season is divided into half-month sections, with players’ rankings listed for the specified days. This is followed by the mean (average), median, and standard deviation (indicating how much a player’s ranking varied during the year. So Golovin, with a standard deviation of 94.0, showed the biggest fluctuation in the course of the year, followed closely by Coetzer and much more distantly by Krasnoroutskaya, while Mauresmo, with standard deviations of only 1.0, showed the least variation, followed by Davenport and Capriati). Two players listed — Monica Seles and Anna Kournikova — did not play in the year, and no statistics are calculated for them; Seles at least hopes to come back in 2005, though both have also discussed retirement. Sandrine Testud was not ranked for the first several months of the year; her numbers are calculated based on the months when she was ranked. This data can of course be graphed. The graph which follows the table shows the bi-monthly numbers for the sixteen players who spent time in the Top Ten (with all rankings above #35 are treated as “36+”) Players are listed by initials, except that Amélie Mauresmo is Ma and Anastasia Myskina My because they have the same initials. The players shown are Jennifer Capriati, Kim Clijsters, Lindsay Davenport, Elena Dementieva, Justine Hénin-Hardenne, Svetlana Kuznetsova, Amélie Mauresmo, Anastasia Myskina, Nadia Petrova, Chanda Rubin, Maria Sharapova, Paola Suárez, Ai Sugiyama, Serena Williams, Venus Williams, and Vera Zvonareva.

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Mean Std. 1151151151151151151151151151 15120 (avg) Median Dev. Bovina 21 24 23 35 28 30 33 30 30 28 25 22 21 22 22 19 19 17 17 19 16 15 23.5 22.0 5.7 Capriati 666556788967777788989107.2 7.01.3 Clijsters 22222222222222255771012224.5 2.04.9 Coetzer 25 30 27 32 49 49 65 77 86 82 91 89 108 121 121 155 186 271 272 276 280 280 126.0 90.0 92.4 Daniilidou 26 22 24 33 34 34 35 26 26 27 27 32 33 33 38 36 33 30 30 34 34 34 31.0 33.0 4.3 Davenport 5554444444455544432211 3.8 4.01.2 Déchy 29 32 28 24 29 28 25 25 25 26 26 27 29 31 28 29 28 25 24 22 22 21 26.5 26.5 2.9 Dementieva 8 8 8 1088869101066666656646 7.1 6.01.7 Dokic 15 15 15 15 15 16 16 18 19 24 23 25 25 26 27 30 38 39 43 44 124 125 33.5 24.5 30.9 Farina Elia 24 23 19 20 14 15 15 15 16 16 16 16 19 19 19 21 21 21 22 20 21 20 18.7 19.0 2.9 Frazier 61 68 57 50 47 47 44 40 39 37 35 33 36 25 25 25 23 23 23 24 27 26 37.0 35.5 13.5 Golovin 355 354 136 91 93 94 76 79 77 65 50 54 39 40 31 31 31 31 29 26 27 86.1 54.0 94.0 Hantuchova 19 18 21 29 35 36 36 41 45 47 50 54 38 35 34 34 32 33 34 35 31 31 34.9 34.5 9.0 Hénin-Hardenne 1111111111111111143368 1.9 1.01.9 Jankovic 85 83 79 71 67 70 72 59 59 51 53 52 46 48 44 41 41 36 36 31 29 28 53.7 51.5 17.7 Kournikova 309 310 311 578 581 584 580 ——————————————— Krasnoroutskay 28 26 25 28 37 37 37 38 37 35 42 44 42 42 42 50 114 109 116 118 138 138 60.1 42.0 39.8 Kuznetsova 35 33 33 27 20 14 14 14 14 12 11999910965555 14.0 10.5 9.5 Likhovtseva 37 38 38 36 41 40 42 45 47 50 43 40 39 37 35 27 24 29 28 25 24 24 35.9 37.5 7.9 Loit 41 46 45 44 42 41 40 33 27 29 33 30 28 34 36 38 37 45 38 40 46 45 38.1 39.0 6.1 Maleeva 30 27 29 21 21 21 22 23 24 22 22 23 24 21 21 22 25 22 21 26 25 25 23.5 22.5 2.7 Martinez 18 16 16 17 19 20 24 24 18 18 21 24 31 36 39 35 36 38 39 42 42 42 28.0 24.0 9.9 Mauresmo 4443333333344332211122 2.8 3.01.0 Molik 36 40 40 34 33 33 30 37 40 40 32 29 26 28 29 24 18 19 20 18 13 13 28.7 29.5 8.8 Myskina 7776755555533453324433 4.6 5.01.5 Petrova 12 12 12 11 12 12 11 76681213121215141313131412 11.5 12.0 2.5 Pierce 33 34 34 37 27 29 29 34 35 34 31 26 23 27 26 28 29 27 26 28 30 29 29.8 29.0 3.7 Raymond 27 28 30 25 26 27 28 27 29 30 29 28 27 30 33 40 30 32 32 27 28 30 29.2 28.5 3.1 Rubin 9 10 109999121213151920242323222429323853 19.3 17.0 11.3 Saﬁna 54 45 48 40 32 32 32 29 31 33 36 31 32 40 41 42 42 48 54 57 45 44 40.4 40.5 8.4 Schiavone 20 21 18 18 22 22 21 20 22 20 19 20 17 18 18 17 17 20 19 21 20 19 19.5 20.0 1.6 Schnyder 23 25 26 16 17 18 18 17 17 17 17 17 16 16 16 16 16 15 15 15 15 14 17.4 16.5 3.2 Seles 60 59 61 109 223 224 224 223 —————————————— Serna 22 19 22 23 25 25 26 28 33 41 40 49 53 52 53 54 77 76 78 94 120 102 50.5 45.0 29.1 Sharapova 32 31 32 26 24 24 23 19 21 19 20 15 15888798774 16.7 17.0 9.1 Shaughnessy 17 20 20 30 30 26 27 39 42 39 38 34 35 29 30 33 35 47 47 47 44 40 34.0 34.5 8.8 Smashnova 16 17 17 19 18 19 19 21 20 21 18 18 18 17 17 20 27 28 27 30 32 32 21.4 19.0 5.3 Sprem 59 56 49 48 38 38 38 32 28 25 28 35 30 20 20 18 20 18 18 17 19 18 30.5 28.0 13.1 Suárez 14 14 14 14 13 13 13 13 15 15 14 11 11 11 13 13 15 16 16 16 18 16 14.0 14.0 1.8 Sugiyama 10998101010101011121312101114131414141717 11.7 11.0 2.5 Tanasugarn 34 35 35 54 53 53 54 54 55 56 55 60 66 50 51 47 52 96 85 59 62 66 56.0 54.0 14.2 Testud —————313 312 309 311 313 310 311 307 310 312 309 310 305 301 302 309 311 309.1 310.0 3.5 Vento-Kabchi 44 42 42 41 43 43 39 36 38 36 34 36 34 32 31 32 34 40 48 51 50 49 39.8 39.5 6.1 S. Williams 333767697771010141411111010987 8.1 7.53.1 V. Williams 11 11 11 13 16 17 17 16 13898815101212121212109 11.9 12.0 2.8 Zuluaga 38 36 36 22 23 23 20 22 23 23 24 21 22 23 24 26 26 26 25 23 23 23 25.1 23.0 5.0 Zvonareva 13 13 13 12 11 11 12 11 11 14 13 14 14 13 15 9 10 11 11 11 11 11 12.0 11.5 1.5

36+ CR CR 35 SK 34 33 SK SK 32 MS MS CR 31 MS 30 29 CR 28 27 SK 26 MS 25 R 24 MS MS CR CR A 23 MS CR CR N K 22 CR KC 21 MS 20 SK MS CR 19 MS MS CR 18 PS 17 VW VW AS AS 16 VW VW PS PS PS PS 15 PS PS CR MS MS VW VZ NP PS 14 PS PS PS PS SK SK SK SK VZ PS VZ VZ SW SW AS NP AS AS AS NP 13 VZ VZ VZ VW PS PS PS PS VW CR VZ AS NP VZ PS PS AS NP NP NP 12 NP NP NP VZ NP NP VZ CR CR SK AS NP AS NP NP VW VW VW VW VW KC NP 11 VW VW VW NP VZ VZ NP VZ VZ AS SK PS PS PS AS SW SW VZ VZ VZ VZ VZ 10 AS CR CR ED AS AS AS AS AS ED ED SW SW AS VW SK VZ SW SW KC VW JC 9 CR AS AS CR CR CR CR SW ED JC VW SK SK SK SK VZ SK MS JC SW JC VW 8 ED ED ED AS ED ED ED JC JC VW NP VW VW MS MS MS JC JC MS JC SW JH 7 My My My SW My SW JC NP SW SW SW JC JC JC JC JC MS KC KC MS MSSW 6 JC JC JC My SW JC SW ED NP NP JC ED ED ED ED ED ED SK ED ED JH ED 5 LD LD LD JC JC My My My My My My LD LD LD My KC KC ED SK SK SK SK 4 Ma Ma Ma LD LD LD LD LD LD LD LD Ma Ma My LD LD LD JH My My ED MS 3 SW SW SW Ma Ma Ma Ma Ma Ma Ma Ma My My Ma Ma My My LD JH JH My My 2 KC KC KC KC KC KC KC KC KC KC KC KC KC KC KC Ma Ma My LD LD Ma Ma 1 JH JH JH JH JH JH JH JH JH JH JH JH JH JH JH JH JH Ma Ma Ma LD LD 115115115115115115115115115115120 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DATE

Highest Ranking of 2004 For the 38 players who spent at least one week of 2004 in the Top 25, plus some other highlight players (shown in italics), the following shows the highest ranking each achieved during the course of the year: Sorted by Name Sorted by Ranking Name Rank Name Rank Bovina 15 Davenport 1 Capriati 5 Hénin-Hardenne 1 Clijsters 2 Mauresmo 1 Coetzer 24 Clijsters 2 Daniilidou 22 Myskina 2 Davenport 1 Williams, Serena 3 Déchy 21 Dementieva 4 Dementieva 4 Kuznetsova 4 Dokic 14 Sharapova 4 Farina Elia 14 Capriati 5 Frazier 22 Petrova 6 Golovin 26 Sugiyama 8 Hantuchova 18 Williams, Venus 8 Hénin-Hardenne 1 Rubin 9 Krasnoroutskaya 25 Suárez 9 Kuznetsova 4 Zvonareva 9 Likhovtseva 23 Molik 13 Loit 27 Dokic 14 Maleeva 19 Farina Elia 14 Martinez 16 Schnyder 14 Mauresmo 1 Bovina 15 Molik 13 Schiavone 15 Myskina 2 Martinez 16 Petrova 6 Smashnova 16 Pierce 23 Shaughnessy 17 Raymond 24 Sprem 17 Rubin 9 Hantuchova 18 Saﬁna 29 Maleeva 19 Schiavone 15 Serna 19 Schnyder 14 Zuluaga 20 Serna 19 Déchy 21 Sharapova 4 Daniilidou 22 Shaughnessy 17 Frazier 22 Smashnova 16 Likhovtseva 23 Sprem 17 Pierce 23 Stevenson 79 Coetzer 24 Suárez 9 Raymond 24 Sugiyama 8 Krasnoroutskaya 25 Tanasugarn 35 Golovin 26 Vento-Kabchi 26 Vento-Kabchi 26 Williams, Serena 3 Loit 27 Williams, Venus 8 Saﬁna 29 Zuluaga 20 Tanasugarn 35 Zvonareva 9 Stevenson 79

Top Players Sorted by Median Ranking This table lists our highlight players in order of their median ranking — that is, the ranking they spent as much of the year above as below. This indicates their typical standing in the course of the year. It should be noted that this figure takes 2003 and 2004 results equally into account, since rankings at the beginning of the year were based entirely on 2003 results, while 2004 results were the sole influence by the end of the year. Median Rank Player Hénin-Hardenne 1.0 Clijsters 2.0 Mauresmo 3.0 Davenport 4.0 Myskina 5.0 Dementieva 6.0 Capriati 7.0 Williams, Serena 7.5 Kuznetsova 10.5 Sugiyama 11.0 Zvonareva 11.5 Petrova 12.0 Williams, Venus 12.0 Suárez 14.0 Schnyder 16.5 Rubin 17.0 Sharapova 17.0 Farina Elia 19.0 Smashnova 19.0 Schiavone 20.0 Bovina 22.0 Maleeva 22.5 Zuluaga 23.0 Martinez 24.0 Dokic 24.5 Déchy 26.5 Sprem 28.0 Raymond 28.5 Pierce 29.0 Molik 29.5 Daniilidou 33.0 Hantuchova 34.5 Shaughnessy 34.5 Frazier 35.5 Likhovtseva 37.5 Loit 39.0 Vento-Kabchi 39.5 Saﬁna 40.5 Krasnoroutskaya 42.0 Serna 45.0 Jankovic 51.5 Golovin 54.0 Tanasugarn 54.0 Coetzer 90.0

Short Summary: The Top Eighty The following table shows the entire WTA Top Eighty, with brief summary of results. In the table, Final Rank is a player’s year-end ranking (based on the November 16, 2004 rankings), Player is of course the player, Score is her Best 17 point total, # of Trn is the number of tournaments she played (including Challengers), Best Rank is her highest ranking during the year 2004, Won/Lost is won/lost record (in the notes to this field, Wi=Withdrawal, WO=walkover. So Mauresmo, for instance, won 59 matches, lost eleven, received two walkovers, and withdrew once). Note that this figure includes only WTA main draws. Many players will have losses in wins and losses in qualifying and/or Challengers; the highest-ranked of these was Molik (for qualifying) and Benesova (for Challengers). Titles is the list of titles the player won, if any. We list the names (sometimes abbreviated), then the number of titles in parentheses. So Myskina line, e.g., reads Doha, RolandG, Mosc (3). This means Myskina won three titles — Doha, Roland Garros, and Moscow. Challenger wins are not listed. Players marked * are “highlight” players studied extensively below. Final # of Best Rank Player Name Score Trn Rank Won/Lost Titles 1 Davenport, Lindsay* 4760 17 1 63Ð9(+1Wi,1WO) Pan Pacific, Amelia Island, Stanford, Los Angeles, San Diego, Cincinnati, Filderstadt (7) 2 Mauresmo, Amélie* 4546 17 1 59Ð11(+1Wi,2WO) Berlin, Rome, Canadian Open, Linz, Philadelphia (5) 3 Myskina, Anastasia* 4012 19 2 48Ð17(+1Wi,1WO) Doha, RolandG, Moscow (3) 4 Sharapova, Maria* 3536 20 4 55Ð15 (+ 1 Wi) Birmingham, Wimbledon Japan Open, Seoul, LA Championships (5) 5 Kuznetsova, Svetlana* 3533 22 4 57Ð20 Eastbrne, USOpen, Bali (3) 6 Dementieva, Elena* 3448 22 4 39Ð23 (+1 WO) Hasselt (1) 7 Williams, Serena* 3128 12 3 39Ð9 (+2 Wi) Miami, Beijing (2) 8 Hénin-Hardenne, Justine* 2884 9 1 35Ð4 (+1 WO) Sydney, Australian Open, Dubai, Indian Wells, Olympics (5) 9 Williams, Venus* 2400 16 8 42Ð12 (+2 Wi) Charleston, Warsaw (2) 10 Capriati, Jennifer* 2359 12 5 29Ð12 11 Zvonareva, Vera* 2299 26 9 52Ð27 (+2 WO) Memphis (1) 12 Petrova, Nadia* 2022 25 6 40Ð25 13 Molik, Alicia* 1970.75 22 13 42Ð19 Stockh, Zürich, Luxemb (3) 14 Schnyder, Patty* 1638 23 14 33Ð23 (+2 Wi) 15 Bovina, Elena* 1598 19 15 37Ð17 (+1 Wi) New Haven (1) 16 Suárez, Paola* 1535 19 9 37Ð18 (+1 WO) Canberra (1) 17 Sugiyama, Ai* 1469 24 8 33Ð23 Gold Coast (1) 18 Sprem, Karolina* 1451.75 23 17 31Ð23 (+1 WO) 19 Schiavone, Francesca* 1397 23 15 35Ð23 20 Farina Elia, Silvia* 1334 24 14 42Ð24 21 Déchy, Nathalie* 1331 24 21 32Ð23 (+1 Wi) 22 Clijsters, Kim* 1326 6 2 18Ð2 (+2 Wi) Paris, Antwerp (2) 23 Zuluaga, Fabiola* 1296.25 21 20 28Ð20 (+1 WO) Bogota (1) 24 Likhovtseva, Elena* 1270.75 25 23 25Ð24 (+1 WO) Forest Hills (1) 25 Maleeva, Magdalena* 1179 25 19 27Ð25 (+1 WO) 26 Frazier, Amy* 1149 18 22 35Ð17 Hobart (1) 27 Golovin, Tatiana* 1126.75 15 26 29Ð16(+1Wi,1WO) 28 Jankovic, Jelena 1062.75 28 28 27Ð26 Bogota (1) 29 Pierce, Mary* 1043 18 23 25Ð17 ’s-Hertogenbosch (1) 30 Raymond, Lisa* 1032 19 24 20Ð19 31 Hantuchova, Daniela* 971 25 18 24Ð24(+1Wi,1WO) 32 Smashnova, Anna* 932 25 16 29Ð24 Vienna (1)

33 Dulko, Gisela 908 23 31 25Ð20 34 Daniilidou, Eleni* 907.25 22 22 23Ð19 (+1 Wi) Auckland (1) 35 Kostanic, Jelena 836 27 32 22Ð26 36 Benesova, Iveta 818.87 32 36 35Ð20 Acapulco (1) 37 Asagoe, Shinobu 813.75 23 36 19Ð22 38 Pennetta, Flavia 811.5 27 37 30Ð22 Sopot (1) 39 Medina Garrigues, Anabel 803.25 26 39 25Ð23 Palermo (1) 40 Shaughnessy, Meghann* 785 22 17 20Ð22 41 Bartoli, Marion 765.5 27 38 26Ð21 (+2 Wi) 42 Martinez, Conchita* 761 17 16 26Ð26 (+1 WO) 43 Camerin, Maria Elena 760.25 24 41 22Ð20 44 Safina, Dinara* 756.75 20 29 20Ð19 45 Loit, Emilie* 748.75 23 27 29Ð19 (+1Wi) Casablanca, Estoril (2) 46 Koukalova, Klara 714.87 26 45 24Ð23 (+2 WO) 47 Marrero, Marta 700.75 31 47 21Ð21 48 Brandi, Kristina 674 23 41 23Ð21 49 Vento-Kabchi, Maria* 673.62 28 26 19Ð27 50 Washington, Mashona 653.25 24 50 13Ð12 51 Pratt, Nicole 650 24 37 21Ð21 (+1 Wi) Hyderabad (1) 52 Sanchez Lorenzo, Maria 649 26 33 22Ð26 53 Rubin, Chanda* 641 11 9 17Ð10(+1Wi,1WO) 54 Chladkova, Denisa 629.25 23 41 21Ð20 55 Jidkova, Alina 621 32 55 16Ð22 56 Strycova, Barbora 617 22 55 14Ð19 57 Sucha, Martina 595.5 28 56 20Ð19 Quebec City (1) 58 Garbin, Tathiana 583.25 25 52 12Ð19 59 Craybas, Jill 565.5 27 52 12Ð21 60 Razzano, Virginie 561 23 57 6Ð8 (+1 WO) 61 Schaul, Claudine 555.37 29 41 13Ð21 Strasbourg (1) 62 Randriantefy, Dally 554.75 28 59 7Ð10 63 Douchevina, Vera 545.5 18 60 12Ð16 64 Ruano Pascual, Virginia 518 21 51 12Ð16 65 Stosur, Samantha 516.75 29 65 17Ð17 66 Tanasugarn, Tamarine* 515.75 26 32 19Ð25 67 Zheng Jie 512.25 26 48 10Ð18 68 Morigami, Akiko 508 25 51 16Ð23 69 Perry, Shenay 506.5 21 69 9Ð14 70 Parra Santonja, Arantxa 504.75 28 52 16Ð26 71 Weingärtner, Marlene 502.75 20 45 13Ð16 (+1 Wi) 72 Irvin, Marissa 502.75 25 69 7Ð13 73 Peng Shuai 502.25 25 68 5Ð4 74 Domachowska, Marta 497.75 21 70 12Ð7 75 Grönefeld, Anna-Lena 495.25 30 67 7Ð15 76 Granville, Laura 490.5 24 43 16Ð19 (+1 WO) 77 Vaidisova, Nicole 489 11 72 14Ð5 Vancouver, Tashkent (2) 78 Panova, Tatiana* 478.75 23 74 8Ð14 79 Llagostera Vives, Nuria 467.75 27 77 4Ð6 80 Li Na 463 10 80 6Ð1 GuangZhou (1) There are no players ranked below #80 with titles.

The Top 200, in Numerical Order 1 Lindsay Davenport 54 Denisa Chladkova 110 Catalina Castano 162 Yulia Beygelzimer 2 Amélie Mauresmo 55 Alina Jidkova 111 Maria Kirilenko 163 Katerina Bohmova 3 Anastasia Myskina 56 Barbora Strycova 112 Stephanie Cohen- 164 Nathalie Vierin 4 Maria Sharapova 57 Martina Sucha Aloro 165 Emma Laine 5Svetlana Kuznetsova 58 Tathiana Garbin 113 Silvija Talaja 166 Bethanie Mattek 6 Elena Dementieva 59 Jill Craybas 114 Maria Emilia Salerni 167 Mi-Ra Jeon 7 Serena Williams 60 Virginie Razzano 115 Roberta Vinci 168 Li Ting 8 Justine Hénin- 61 Claudine Schaul 116 Kveta Peschke 169 Kirsten Flipkens Hardenne 62 Dally Randriantefy 117 Selima Sfar 170 Liu Nan-Nan 9Venus Williams 63 Vera Douchevina 118 Sun Tiantian 171 Shikha Uberoi 10 Jennifer Capriati 64 Virginia Ruano Pascual 119 Capucine Rousseau 172 Yvonne Meusburger 11 Vera Zvonareva 65 Samantha Stosur 120 Lilia Osterloh 173 Bahia Mouhtassine 12 Nadia Petrova 66 Tamarine Tanasugarn 121 Myriam Casanova 174 Maria Fernanda Alves 13 Alicia Molik 67 Zheng Jie 122 Els Callens 175 Anne Keothavong 14 Patty Schnyder 68 Akiko Morigami 123 Aiko Nakamura 176 Soﬁa Arvidsson 15 Elena Bovina 69 Shenay Perry 124 Ashley Harkleroad 177 Anastasiya Yakimova 16 Paola Suárez 70 Arantxa Parra Santonja 125 Jelena Dokic 178 Hanna Nooni 17 Ai Sugiyama 71 Marlene Weingärtner 126 Alyona Bondarenko 179 Jamea Jackson 18 Karolina Sprem 72 Marissa Irvin 127 Sesil Karatantcheva 180 Natalie Grandin 19 Francesca Schiavone 73 Peng Shuai 128 Kelly McCain 181 Alice Canepa 20 Silvia Farina Elia 74 Marta Domachowska 129 Julia Vakulenko 182 Martina Müller 21 Nathalie Déchy 75 Anna-Lena Grönefeld 130 Tina Pisnik 183 Shahar Peer 22 Kim Clijsters 76 Laura Granville 131 Melinda Czink 184 Maureen Drake 23 Fabiola Zuluaga 77 Nicole Vaidisova 132 Jennifer Hopkins 185 Lucie Safarova 24 Elena Likhovtseva 78 Tatiana Panova 133 Angela Haynes 186 Edina Gallovits 25 Magdalena Maleeva 79 Nuria Llagostera Vives 134 Cara Black 187 Ekaterina Bychkova 26 Amy Frazier 80 Li Na 135 Angelique Widjaja 188 Libuse Prusova 27 Tatiana Golovin 81 Petra Mandula 136 Vilmarie Castellvi 189 Sandra Kloesel 28 Jelena Jankovic 82 Lindsay Lee-Waters 137 Galina Voskoboeva 190 Sunitha Rao 29 Mary Pierce 83 Yuliana Fedak 138 Lina Krasnoroutskaya 191 Åsa Svensson 30 Lisa Raymond 84 Anna Chakvetadze 139 Eva Birnerova 192 Vanessa Henke 31 Daniela Hantuchova 85 Anca Barna 140 Sandra Kleinova 193 Jessica Lehnhoff 32 Anna Smashnova 86 Aniko Kapros 141 Virag Nemeth 194 Kyra Nagy 33 Gisela Dulko 87 Katarina Srebotnik 142 Milagros Sequera 195 Rossana Neffa-de los 34 Eleni Daniilidou 88 Barbara Schett 143 Zuzana Ondraskova Rios 35 Jelena Kostanic 89 Lubomira Kurhajcova 144 Marie-Gayanay 196 Angelika Bachmann 36 Iveta Benesova 90 Tatiana Perebiynis Mikaelian 197 Stephanie Gehrlein 37 Shinobu Asagoe 91 Mara Santangelo 145 Virginie Pichet 198 Stanislava Hrozenska 38 Flavia Pennetta 92 Abigail Spears 146 Delia Sescioreanu 199 Lana Popadic 39 Anabel Medina 93 Stephanie Foretz 147 Marie-Eve Pelletier 200 Chia-Jung Chuang Garrigues 94 Anne Kremer 148 Lenka Nemeckova 40 Meghann Shaughnessy 95 Severine Beltrame 149 Lioudmila 41 Marion Bartoli 96 Evgenia Linetskaya Skavronskaia 42 Conchita Martinez 97 Ana Ivanovic 150 Teryn Ashley 43 Maria Elena Camerin 98 Camille Pin 151 Sybille Bammer 44 Dinara Saﬁna 99 Antonella Serra Zanetti 152 Conchita Martinez 45 Emilie Loit 100 Ludmila Cervanova Granados 46 Klara Koukalova 101 Sanda Mamic 153 Evie Dominikovic 47 Marta Marrero 102 Magui Serna 154 Henrieta Nagyova 48 Kristina Brandi 103 Rita Grande 155 Laura Pous Tio 49 Maria Vento-Kabchi 104 Emmanuelle Gagliardi 156 Paula Garcia 50 Mashona Washington 105 Julia Schruff 157 Mervana Jugic-Salkic 51 Nicole Pratt 106 Michaela Pastikova 158 Rika Fujiwara 52 Maria Sanchez 107 Saori Obata 159 Yuka Yoshida Lorenzo 108 Mariana Diaz-Oliva 160 Elise Tamaela 53 Chanda Rubin 109 Tzipora Obziler 161 Meilen Tu

The Top 200, in Alphabetical Order 174 Maria Fernanda Alves 197 Stephanie Gehrlein 172 Yvonne Meusburger 14 Patty Schnyder 176 Soﬁa Arvidsson 27 Tatiana Golovin 144 Marie-Gayanay 105 Julia Schruff 37 Shinobu Asagoe 103 Rita Grande Mikaelian 142 Milagros Sequera 150 Teryn Ashley 180 Natalie Grandin 13 Alicia Molik 102 Magui Serna 196 Angelika Bachmann 76 Laura Granville 68 Akiko Morigami 99 Antonella Serra Zanetti 151 Sybille Bammer 75 Anna-Lena Grönefeld 173 Bahia Mouhtassine 146 Delia Sescioreanu 85 Anca Barna 31 Daniela Hantuchova 182 Martina Müller 117 Selima Sfar 41 Marion Bartoli 124 Ashley Harkleroad 3 Anastasia Myskina 4 Maria Sharapova 95 Severine Beltrame 133 Angela Haynes 194 Kyra Nagy 40 Meghann Shaughnessy 36 Iveta Benesova 8 Justine Hénin-Hardenne 154 Henrieta Nagyova 149 Lioudmila Skavronskaia 162 Yulia Beygelzimer 192 Vanessa Henke 123 Aiko Nakamura 32 Anna Smashnova 139 Eva Birnerova 132 Jennifer Hopkins 195 Rossana Neffa-de los 92 Abigail Spears 134 Cara Black 198 Stanislava Hrozenska Rios 18 Karolina Sprem 163 Katerina Bohmova 72 Marissa Irvin 148 Lenka Nemeckova 87 Katarina Srebotnik 126 Alyona Bondarenko 97 Ana Ivanovic 141 Virag Nemeth 65 Samantha Stosur 15 Elena Bovina 179 Jamea Jackson 178 Hanna Nooni 56 Barbora Strycova 48 Kristina Brandi 28 Jelena Jankovic 107 Saori Obata 16 Paola Suárez 187 Ekaterina Bychkova 167 Mi-Ra Jeon 109 Tzipora Obziler 57 Martina Sucha 122 Els Callens 55 Alina Jidkova 143 Zuzana Ondraskova 17 Ai Sugiyama 43 Maria Elena Camerin 157 Mervana Jugic-Salkic 120 Lilia Osterloh 118 Sun Tiantian 181 Alice Canepa 86 Aniko Kapros 78 Tatiana Panova 191 Åsa Svensson 10 Jennifer Capriati 127 Sesil Karatantcheva 70 Arantxa Parra Santonja 113 Silvija Talaja 121 Myriam Casanova 175 Anne Keothavong 106 Michaela Pastikova 160 Elise Tamaela 110 Catalina Castano 111 Maria Kirilenko 183 Shahar Peer 66 Tamarine Tanasugarn 136 Vilmarie Castellvi 140 Sandra Kleinova 147 Marie-Eve Pelletier 161 Meilen Tu 100 Ludmila Cervanova 189 Sandra Kloesel 73 Peng Shuai 171 Shikha Uberoi 84 Anna Chakvetadze 35 Jelena Kostanic 38 Flavia Pennetta 77 Nicole Vaidisova 54 Denisa Chladkova 46 Klara Koukalova 90 Tatiana Perebiynis 129 Julia Vakulenko 200 Chia-Jung Chuang 138 Lina Krasnoroutskaya 69 Shenay Perry 49 Maria Vento-Kabchi 22 Kim Clijsters 94 Anne Kremer 116 Kveta Peschke 164 Nathalie Vierin 112 Stephanie Cohen-Aloro 89 Lubomira Kurhajcova 12 Nadia Petrova 115 Roberta Vinci 59 Jill Craybas 5Svetlana Kuznetsova 145 Virginie Pichet 137 Galina Voskoboeva 131 Melinda Czink 165 Emma Laine 29 Mary Pierce 50 Mashona Washington 34 Eleni Daniilidou 82 Lindsay Lee-Waters 98 Camille Pin 71 Marlene Weingärtner 1 Lindsay Davenport 193 Jessica Lehnhoff 130 Tina Pisnik 135 Angelique Widjaja 21 Nathalie Déchy 80 Li Na 199 Lana Popadic 7 Serena Williams 6 Elena Dementieva 168 Li Ting 155 Laura Pous Tio 9Venus Williams 108 Mariana Diaz-Oliva 24 Elena Likhovtseva 51 Nicole Pratt 177 Anastasiya Yakimova 125 Jelena Dokic 96 Evgenia Linetskaya 188 Libuse Prusova 159 Yuka Yoshida 74 Marta Domachowska 170 Liu Nan-Nan 62 Dally Randriantefy 67 Zheng Jie 153 Evie Dominikovic 79 Nuria Llagostera Vives 190 Sunitha Rao 23 Fabiola Zuluaga 63 Vera Douchevina 45 Emilie Loit 30 Lisa Raymond 11 Vera Zvonareva 184 Maureen Drake 25 Magdalena Maleeva 60 Virginie Razzano 33 Gisela Dulko 101 Sanda Mamic 119 Capucine Rousseau 20 Silvia Farina Elia 81 Petra Mandula 64 Virginia Ruano Pascual 83 Yuliana Fedak 47 Marta Marrero 53 Chanda Rubin 169 Kirsten Flipkens 42 Conchita Martinez 185 Lucie Safarova 93 Stephanie Foretz 152 Conchita Martinez 44 Dinara Saﬁna 26 Amy Frazier Granados 114 Maria Emilia Salerni 158 Rika Fujiwara 166 Bethanie Mattek 52 Maria Sanchez Lorenzo 104 Emmanuelle Gagliardi 2 Amélie Mauresmo 91 Mara Santangelo 186 Edina Gallovits 128 Kelly McCain 61 Claudine Schaul 58 Tathiana Garbin 39 Anabel Medina 88 Barbara Schett 156 Paula Garcia Garrigues 19 Francesca Schiavone

Tournament Results Summary of Results for Top Players The list below shows all the tournaments the highlight players played in 2004. To explain the data in the table: The numbers in parentheses list, first, the Tier of the tournament, second, how far the player went, and third, the number of wins achieved. This is followed by a list of top players beaten en route, with the player’s rank at the time. For example, the first item in the entry for Elena Bovina reads Sydney (II, 2R/Dementieva [7], 1) — Serna (19) This means that Bovina’s first tournament of 2004 was the Sydney. The “II” means that it was a Tier II event; if a Roman numeral is used, it refers to the tier of the event; the other possibilities are “Slam” for the Grand Slams, “Champ” for the year-end Championships, and a dollar amount, e.g. $50K, for a Challenger. 2R/Dementieva means that Bovina reached the second round, where she was beaten by Elena Dementieva, then ranked #7. The 1 indicates that she won one match prior to that defeat. Players she defeated included Serna (then ranked #19). (Note: only wins over Top 35 players are listed.) If a description is in bold, it means the player won the title. 400/Daja Bedanova Australian Open Qualifying (Slam, Q1R/Gussoni [156], 0) Paris Qualifying (II, Q3R/Medina Garrigues [60], 0+2 in qualifying) St. Paul $50K ($50K, 1R/Obziler [138], 0) Dinan $50K+H ($50K+H, 1R/Vedy [423], 0) Biarritz $25K ($25K, Gubacsi [c. 194], 1R, 0) Gifu $50K ($50K, 1R/J. Kim [302], 0) Fukuoka $50K ($50K, QF/Dabek [274], 2) Karuizawa $25K ($25K, QF/Fujiwara [~232], 2) Prostejov $75K ($75K, 1R/Ondraskova [132], 0) 15/Elena Bovina Sydney (II, 2R/Dementieva [7], 1) — Serna (19) Australian Open (Slam, 2R/Schaul [76], 1) Paris (II, QF/Pierce [37], 2) — Dokic (15) Estoril (IV, 2R/Marrero [95], 1) Warsaw (II, 2R/Schiavone [22], 1) Berlin (I, 2R/Kuznetsova [14], 1) Rome (I, 3R/Zvonareva [14], 2) — Pisnik (32), Schnyder (17) Roland Garros (Slam, 3R/Capriati [6], 2) Eastbourne (II, 2R/Sanchez Lorenzo [55], 1) — Farina Elia (16) Wimbledon (Slam, withdrew from 2R, 1) San Diego (I, R16/S. Williams [14], 2) — Schiavone (18) Canadian Open (I, R16/Mauresmo [3], 2) New Haven (II, Win, 5) — Dementieva (6), Déchy (26) U. S. Open (Slam, 3R/Davenport [4], 2) Hasselt (III, F/Dementieva [6], 4) — Schiavone (19), Clijsters (7) Filderstadt (II, 2R/Kuznetsova [5], 1) Moscow (I, SF/Dementieva [6], 3) — Hantuchova (35), V. Williams (12) Zürich (I, 2R/Dementieva [5], 1) — Schiavone (19) Linz (II, F/Mauresmo [2], 4) — Petrova (13)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 17 10/Jennifer Capriati Dubai (II, 2R/Daniilidou [35], 0) Doha (II, SF/Myskina [7], 2) — Farina Elia (14) Miami (I, 3R/Daniilidou [35], 1) Charleston (I, R16/Mandula [42], 1) Berlin (I, SF/Mauresmo [3], 3) — Sharapova (22), Myskina (5) Rome (I, F/Mauresmo [3], 4) — Suárez (15), Smashnova (21), S. Williams (7/Spec: 2) Roland Garros (Slam, SF/Myskina [5], 5) — Bovina (25), Schiavone (19), S. Williams (7/Spec: 2) Wimbledon (Slam, QF/S. Williams [10], 4) — Déchy (29), Petrova (13) Canadian Open (I, QF/Likhovtseva [39], 2) — Pierce (28) New Haven (II, QF/Déchy [29], 1) — Golovin (31) U. S. Open (Slam, SF/Dementieva [6], 5) — Sugiyama (13), S. Williams (11) Philadelphia (II, QF/Zvonareva [11], 1) 22/Kim Clijsters Australian Open (Slam, F/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 6) — Farina Elia (19), Myskina (7), Schnyder (26) Paris (II, Win, 4) — Farina Elia (20) Antwerp (II, Win, 4) — Maleeva (21), Farina Elia (19) Indian Wells (I, withdrew from 3R, 1) Berlin (I, withdrew from 3R, 1) Hasselt (III, SF/Bovina [17], 2) — Maleeva (21) 280/ Amanda Coetzer Sydney (II, 2R/Myskina [7], 1) — Schnyder (25) Australian Open (Slam, 2R/Saﬁna [48], 1) Acapulco (III, 1R/Marrero [108], 0) RETIRED 34/Eleni Daniilidou Auckland (IV, Win, 5) — Suárez (14) Hobart (V, 1R/Garbin [84], 0) Australian Open (Slam, 3R/Santangelo [129], 2) Paris (II, 1R/Sanchez Lorenzo [45], 0) Antwerp (II, 1R/Benesova [113], 0) Dubai (II, QF/Sugiyama [8], 2) — Pisnik (31), Capriati (5) Indian Wells (I, 2R/Strycova [116], 0) Miami (I, SF/S. Williams [6], 4) — Capriati (7) Charleston (I, 1R/Castano [114], 0) Warsaw (II, 2R/Mauresmo [3], 1) Berlin (I, 2R/V. Williams [11], 1) Roland Garros (Slam, 1R/Weingärtner [94], 0) Birmingham (III, 2R/Morigami [67], 0) [’s-Hertogenbosch (III, withdrew from 1R without it being counted as a tournament but, there being no qualifying at this event, her place was not taken by a Lucky Loser)] Wimbledon (Slam, 1R/Serna [53], 0) Stanford (II, 1R/Vento-Kabchi [32], 0) Los Angeles (II, 2R/S. Williams [16], 1) San Diego (I, 2R/Bovina [22], 1) — Raymond (33) Olympics (Olympics, R16/Myskina [3], 2) — Maleeva (21) U. S. Open (Slam, R16/Asagoe [62], 3) Filderstadt Qualifying (II, Q2R/Panova [84], 0+1 in qualifying) Moscow Qualifying (I, Q2R/Pastikova [141], 0+1 in qualifying) Luxembourg (III, 2R/Peschke [145], 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 18 1/Lindsay Davenport Sydney (II, withdrew from SF, 2) — Zvonareva (13), Dementieva (8) Australian Open (Slam, QF/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 4) — Zvonareva (13) Pan Paciﬁc (I, Win, 4) — Hantuchova (32), Dokic (17), Maleeva (31) Indian Wells (I, F/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 5) — Shaughnessy (26), Déchy (28) Amelia Island (II, Win, 5) — Suárez (14), Petrova (9), Mauresmo (3) Charleston (I, QF/Schnyder [17], 2) Strasbourg (III, F/Schaul [66], 3) — Farina Elia (16) Roland Garros (Slam, R16/Dementieva [10], 3) Wimbledon (Slam, SF/Sharapova [15], 5) — Zvonareva (14), Sprem (30) Stanford (II, Win, 4) — Vento-Kabchi (32), V. Williams (15) Los Angeles (II, Win, 5) — Frazier (23), Petrova (12), V. Williams (13), S. Williams (16) San Diego (I, Win, 5) — Sprem (20), Sugiyama (11), Dementieva (6), Myskina (5) Cincinnati (III, Win, 3+ 1 walkover) — Zvonareva (9) U. S. Open (Slam, SF/Kuznetsova [9], 5) — Bovina (19), V. Williams (12) Filderstadt (II, Win, 4) — Molik (20), Jankovic (35), Myskina (4), Mauresmo (1) Moscow (I, SF/Myskina [4], 2) — Schiavone (21) Los Angeles Champ. (Champ, RR/Myskina [3], 2 wins, 1 loss, did not make SF) — Dementieva (5), S. Williams (8) 21/Nathalie Déchy Gold Coast (III, SF/Petrova [12], 2+ 1 walkover) — Kuznetsova (35) Sydney (II, 2R/Schiavone [21], 1) — Sugiyama (9) Australian Open (Slam, R16/Schnyder [26], 3) Doha (II, QF/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 2) Indian Wells (I, SF/Davenport [4], 4) — Smashnova (19), Zvonareva (11), Zuluaga (23) Miami (I, QF/Petrova [11], 3) Charleston (I, 1R/Sprem [32], 0) Berlin (I, 2R/Smashnova [21], 1) Rome (I, 2R/Mauresmo [3], 1) Roland Garros (Slam, 1R/Foretz [124], 0) Birmingham (III, 2R/Vinci [108], 0) Eastbourne (II, 2R/Zvonareva [14], 1) — Zuluaga (21) Wimbledon (Slam, 3R/Capriati [7], 2) Los Angeles (II, 2R/Schiavone [18], 1) San Diego (I, 1R/Zvonareva [15], 0) Canadian Open (I, 2RSchiavone [17], 1) Olympics (Olympics, 1R/Suárez [15], 0) New Haven (II, F/Bovina [27], 4) — Capriati (8) U. S. Open (Slam, withdrew from 3R, 2) Filderstadt (II, 2R/Myskina [4], 1) — Maleeva (19) Moscow (I, 1R/Zvonareva [11], 0) Zürich (I, 2R/Petrova [13], 1) Linz (II, 2R/Zvonareva [11], 1) Philadelphia (II, 2R/Zvonareva [11], 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 19 6/Elena Dementieva Sydney (II, QF/Davenport [5], 2) — Bovina (24) Australian Open (Slam, 1R/Jankovic [79], 0) Pan Paciﬁc (I, 2R/Panova [250], 0) Paris (II, QF/Golovin [136], 1) Miami (I, F/S. Williams [6], 5) — Sanchez Lorenzo (34), Dokic (16), V. Williams (17/Spec: 3), Petrova (11) Amelia Island (II, 2R/Kostanic [62], 0) Charleston (I, R16/Schnyder [17], 1) Berlin (I, R16/Kuznetsova [14], 1) Rome (I, 2R/Sharapova [19], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, F/Myskina [5], 6) — Smashnova (18), Davenport (4), Mauresmo (3), Suárez (14) Wimbledon (Slam, 1R/Kleinova [129], 0) Los Angeles (II, SF/S. Williams [16], 3) — Rubin (25), Kuznetsova (9) San Diego (I, SF/Davenport [4], 3) — Likhovtseva (35), Frazier (25) Canadian Open (I, 2R/Dulko [43], 0) Olympics (Olympics, 1R/Molik [23], 0) New Haven (II, SF/Bovina [27], 2) U. S. Open (Slam, F/Kuznetsova [9], 5+1 walkover) — Zvonareva (10), Mauresmo (2), Capriati (8) Hasselt (III, Win, 4) — Bovina (17) Filderstadt (II, 1R/Raymond [30], 0) Moscow (I, F/Myskina [4], 4) — Schnyder (15), Kuznetsova (5), Bovina (19) Zürich (I, SF/Sharapova [7], 2) — Bovina (18), Sugiyama (14) Los Angeles Champ. (Champ, RR/Davenport [1], RR/S. Williams [8], RR/Myskina [3]; 0 wins, 3 losses, did not make SF) 125/Jelena Dokic Pan Paciﬁc (I, SF/Davenport [6], 3) Paris (II, 2R/Bovina [35], 0) Dubai (II, 1R/Mandula [40], 0) Doha (II, 2R/Zheng [77], 1) Indian Wells (I, 2R/Leon Garcia [98], 0) Miami (I, R16/Dementieva [8], 1+1 walkover) Amelia Island (II, 1R/Frazier [42], 0) Charleston (I, 2R/Mandula [42], 1) Berlin (I, 1R/Shaughnessy [40], 0) Rome (I, 1R/Camerin [79], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, 1R/Perebiynis [103], 0) Birmingham (III, 2R/Perry [88], 0) Eastbourne (II, 1R/Pisnik [47], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, 1R/Dulko [59], 0) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Déchy [28], 0) Beijing (II, 1R/Tanasugarn [97], 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 20 20/ Silvia Farina Elia Gold Coast (III, 1R/Sprem [58], 0) Canberra (V, F/Suárez [14], 4) Australian Open (Slam, R16/Clijsters [2], 3) Paris (II, QF/Clijsters [2], 2) — Pisnik (31) Antwerp (II, F/Clijsters [2], 4) — Schnyder (16) Doha (II, QF/Capriati [5], 2) Miami (I, 3R/Molik [30], 1) Amelia Island (II, QF/Mauresmo [3], 3) Warsaw (II, QF/Kuznetsova [14], 2) Rome (I, QF/Mauresmo [3], 3) — Sharapova (19) Strasbourg (III, SF/Davenport [4], 3) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Shaughnessy [38], 1) Eastbourne (II, 1R/Bovina [22], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, R16/Mauresmo [4], 3) Los Angeles (II, 1R/Morigami [70], 0) San Diego (I, 1R/Benesova [56], 0) Stockholm (IV, SF/Molik [26], 3) Olympics (Olympics, 2R/Raymond [40], 1) U. S. Open (Slam, 3R/Petrova [14], 2) Hasselt (III, 2R/Chladkova [62], 1) Filderstadt (II, 2R/Raymond [30], 1) — Sprem (18) Moscow (I, 1R/Schiavone [21], 0) Zürich (I, 1R/Molik [20], 0) Luxembourg (III, SF/Molik [14], 3) 26/Amy Frazier Auckland (IV, 2R/Brandi [73], 1) Hobart (V, Win, 5) Australian Open (Slam, 3R/Farina Elia [19], 2) Memphis (III, QF/Sharapova [25], 2) Indian Wells (I, R16/Kuznetsova [14], 2) Miami (I, 2R/Molik [30], 1) Amelia Island (II, 2R/Mandula [44], 1) — Dokic (18) Charleston (I, 2R/Schnyder [17], 1) Vienna (III, SF/Smashnova [20], 3) Roland Garros (Slam, 1R/Camerin [74], 0) Eastbourne (II, 1R/Hantuchova [54], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, R16/Sharapova [15], 3) — Myskina (3) Stanford (II, SF/V. Williams [15], 3) — Schnyder (16) Los Angeles (II, R16/Davenport [5], 2) San Diego (I, QF/Dementieva [6], 3) — Molik (29) Cincinnati (III, SF/Zvonareva [9], 3) U. S. Open (Slam, 3R/Kuznetsova [9], 2) Philadelphia (II, 2R/Petrova [14], 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 21 27/Tatiana Golovin Australian Open (Slam, R16/Raymond [30], 3) — Smashnova (17), Krasnoroutskaya (25) Paris (II, SF/Pierce [37], 2+1 walkover) — Smashnova (19), Dementieva (10) Indian Wells (I, 2R/Suárez [13], 1) Miami (I, R16/Daniilidou [35], 3) — Safina (32) Berlin (I, 1R/Daniilidou [26], 0+2 in qualifying) Rome (I, 2R/Suárez [15], 1+2 in qualifying) Roland Garros (Slam, 1R/Koukalova [79], 0) Birmingham (III, F/Sharapova [15], 5) Wimbledon (Slam, R16/S. Williams [10], 3) — Schiavone (17) Canadian Open (I, QF/Zvonareva [14], 3) — Zuluaga (25) New Haven (II, 2R/Capriati [8], 1) U. S. Open (Slam, 3R/S. Williams [11], 2) Japan Open (II, 2R/Vaidisova [111], 0) Zürich (I, 1R/Ivanovic [156], 0+3 in qualifying) Luxembourg (III, QF/Molik [14], 2) 31/Daniela Hantuchova Sydney (II, 1R/Krasnoroutskaya [26], 0) Australian Open (Slam, 2R/Molik [40], 1) Pan Pacific (I, QF/Davenport [6], 2) — Molik (34), Sharapova (27) Paris (II, withdrew from 2R, 1) Indian Wells (I, 2R/Irvin [142], 0) Miami (I, 3R/V. Williams [17], 1) Warsaw (II, 2R/Smashnova [20], 1) Berlin (I, 1R/Schnyder [16], 0) Rome (I, 1R/Sprem [25], 0) Vienna (III, 2R/Molik [40], 1) Roland Garros (Slam, 1R/Asagoe [52], 0) Birmingham (III, 2R/Golovin [71], 1) Eastbourne (II, F/Kuznetsova [9], 4) — Frazier (33), Sprem (35), Sugiyama (13), Mauresmo (4) Wimbledon (Slam, 3R/Sharapova [15], 1+1 walkover) Los Angeles (II, 2R/Smashnova [17], 1) San Diego (I, 2R/Kuznetsova [9], 1) Canadian Open (I, 2R/Sugiyama [11], 1) Olympics (Olympics, 2R/Schnyder [16], 1) New Haven (II, QF/Raymond [36], 2) U. S. Open (Slam, 3R/Schnyder [16], 2) — Molik (18) Filderstadt (II, 2R/Jankovic [35], 1) Moscow (I, 1R/Bovina [19], 0) Zürich (I, 2R/Sharapova [7], 1) Linz (II, 2R/Sugiyama [16], 1) Quebec City (III, 2R/Gloria [unranked], 0) 8/Justine Hénin-Hardenne Sydney (II, Win, 3+1 walkover) — Martinez (16), Rubin (10), Mauresmo (4) Australian Open (Slam, Win, 7)— Kuznetsova (33), Davenport (5), Clijsters (2) Dubai (II, Win, 4) — Martinez (21), Shaughnessy (30), Kuznetsova (29) Doha (II, SF/Kuznetsova [20], 2) — Déchy (29) Indian Wells (I, Win, 6) — Kuznetsova (14), Myskina (5), Davenport (4) Amelia Island (II, SF/Mauresmo [3], 3) — Safina (32), Martinez (25), Zvonareva (11) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Garbin [86], 1) Olympics (Olympics, Win, 6) — Vento-Kabchi (31), Pierce (28), Myskina (3), Mauresmo (2) U. S. Open (Slam, R16/Petrova [14], 3) — Raymond (30)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 22 138/Lina Krasnoroutskaya Gold Coast (III, 1R/Pratt [52], 0) Sydney (II, 2R/Rubin [10], 1) — Hantuchova (18) Australian Open (Slam, 3R/Golovin [354], 2) Pan Paciﬁc (I, 1R/Callens [85], 0) Dubai (II, 1R/Sugiyama [8], 0) Doha (II, 1R/Farina Elia [14], 0) Miami (I, 2R/Douchevina [99], 0) Amelia Island (II, 1R/Martinez [25], 0) Charleston (I, 2R/Capriati [8], 1) Birmingham (III, 1R/Sequera [85], 0) ’s-Hertogenbosch (III, SF/Pierce [26], 3) Wimbledon (Slam, 1R/Nagyova [91], 0) Canadian Open (I, 1R/Maleeva [23], 0) 94/Anne Kremer Grenoble $10K ($10K, QF/Müller [>150], 2) Ortisei $75K+H ($75K+H, 2R/Kurhajcova [87], 1) Paris Qualifying (II, Q1R/Medina Garrigues [60], 0) Acapulco (II, 1R/Loit [42], 0) Indian Wells (I, 1R/Talaja [101], 0) Miami (I, 2R/Kuznetsova [14], 1) Amelia Island (II, 1R/Pisnik [30], 0) Charleston (I, 1R/Suárez [13], 0) Dothan $75K Qualifying ($75K, Q1R/Krivencheva [268], 0+0 in qualifying) Stockholm $25K ($25K, F/Rodionova [~246], 4) Caserta $25K ($25K, 2R/Peer [287], 1) Prostejov $75K Qualifying ($75K, Q2R/Nemeth [145], 0+1 in qualifying) Birmingham (III, QF/Golovin [71], 3) ’s-Hertogenbosch (III, QF/Pierce [26], 2) Wimbledon (Slam, 3R/Suárez [11], 2) — Zuluaga (22) Stanford Qualifying (II, Q1R/Castellvi [147], 0) Los Angeles Qualifying (II, Q2R/Castellvi [155], made main draw as Lucky Loser, 2R/Davenport [5], 1+1 in qualifying) San Diego Qualifying (II, Q1R/Tanasugarn [51], 0) Canadian Open (I, 1R/Parra Santonja [58], 0 +2 in qualifying) Olympics (Olympics, 1R/Vento-Kabchi [31], 0) U. S. Open Qualifying (Slam, Q2R/S. Uberoi [275], 0+1 in qualifying) Seoul (IV, SF/Sharapova [8], 3) Japan Open Qualifying (III, Q2R/Karatancheva [168], 0+1 in qualifying) Tashkent (IV, 1R/Savchuk [527], 0) Luxembourg (III, 1R/Ivanovic [112], 0) Philadelphia (II, Q3R/Tu [152], made main draw as Lucky Loser, 1R/Kostanic [35], 0+2 in qualifying) Pittsburg $50K ($50K, 1R/Sequera [144], 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 23 5/Svetlana Kuznetsova Gold Coast (III, QF/Déchy [34], 2) — Zvonareva (13) Hobart (V, 1R/Salerni [174], 0) Australian Open (Slam, 3R/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 2) Dubai (II, F/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 4) — Schiavone (17), V. Williams (18/Spec: 3), Sugiyama (8) Doha (II, F/Myskina [7], 4) — Shaughnessy (30), Hénin-Hardenne (1) Indian Wells (I, QF/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 3) — Molik (33) Miami (I, R16/Sprem [38], 2) Warsaw (II, F/V. Williams [13], 3) — Farina Elia (16), Schiavone (22) Berlin (I, QF/Mauresmo [3], 3) — Bovina (28), Dementieva (9) Rome (I, QF/S. Williams [7], 3) — Sugiyama (11) Roland Garros (Slam, R16/Myskina [5], 3) Eastbourne (II, Win, 4) — Zvonareva (14) Wimbledon (Slam, 1R/Razzano [118], 0) Los Angeles (II, QF/Dementieva [6], 2) — Vento-Kabchi (26), Smashnova (17) San Diego (I, R16/Zvonareva [15], 1) — Hantuchova (34) Olympics (Olympics, QF/Mauresmo [2], 3) — Schnyder (16) U. S. Open (Slam, Win, 7) — Frazier (23), Pierce (29), Petrova (14), Davenport (4), Dementieva (6) Bali (III, Win, 4) — Petrova (13) Beijing (II, F/S. Williams [10], 3) — Dulko (34), Sharapova (9) Filderstadt (II, SF/Mauresmo [1], 2) — Bovina (17), Zuluaga (25) Moscow (I, QF/Dementieva [6], 1) Los Angeles Champ. (Champ, RR/Sharapova [6], RR/Mauresmo [2], 1 win, 2 losses, did not make SF) — Zvonareva (11) 24/Elena Likhovtseva Gold Coast (III, 1R/Kuznetsova [35], 0) Hobart (V, 1R/Frazier [68], 0) Australian Open (Slam, 3R/Rubin [10], 2) — Schiavone (18) Pan Paciﬁc (I, 1R/Vento-Kabchi [43], 0) Dubai (II, 1R/Camerin [84], 0) Doha (II, 2R/Myskina [7], 1) Indian Wells (I, 2R/Schett [77], 0) Miami (I, 3R/S. Williams [6], 1) Amelia Island (II, 1R/Farina Elia [15], 0) Warsaw (II, 1R/Maleeva [24], 0) Berlin (I, 2R/Sugiyama [10], 1) — Pierce (34) Rome (I, R16/Schiavone [20], 2) — Loit (29), Myskina (5) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Zuluaga [24], 1) Birmingham (III, 1R/Golovin [71], 0) Eastbourne (II, 2R/Sugiyama [13[, 1+3 in qualifying) — Saﬁna (31) Wimbledon (Slam, 2R/Razzano [118], 1) Stanford (II, 1R/Bartoli [65], 0) Los Angeles (II, R16/V. Williams [13], 2) San Diego (I, R16/Dementieva [6], 2) — Petrova (12) Canadian Open (I, F/Mauresmo [3], 5) — Vento-Kabchi (31), Petrova (15), Schiavone (17), Capriati (7), Myskina (4) Forest Hills (V, Win, 2+1 walkover) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Kirilenko [103], 0) Filderstadt (II, QF/Myskina [4], 2) — Zvonareva (11), Pierce (26) Moscow (I, 2R/Myskina [4], 1) — Zuluaga (23) Linz (II, 2R/Petrova [1], 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 24 45/Emilie Loit Gold Coast (III, 2R/Sugiyama [10], 1) — Tanasugarn (32) Canberra (V, QF/Sprem [56], 2) Australian Open (Slam, 2R/Davenport [5], 1) Paris (II, 1R/Schiavone [18], 0) Antwerp (II, 1R/Callens [72], 0) Bogota (III, SF/Sanchez Lorenzo [43], 3) Acapulco (III, QF/Benesova [99], 2) Indian Wells (I, 2R/Sucha [81], 0) Miami (I, 3R/Petrova [11], 1) Casablanca (V, Win, 5) Estoril (IV, Win, 5) Rome (I, 1R/Likhovtseva [50], 0) Strasbourg (III, SF/Schaul [66], 3) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Zheng [58], 1) Birmingham (III, SF/Golovin [71], 4) [’s-Hertogenbosch (III, withdrew from 1R without it being counted as a tournament but, there being no qualifying at this event, her place was not taken by a Lucky Loser)] Wimbledon (Slam, 1R/Panova [122], 0) San Diego (I, 1R/Martinez [39], 0) Canadian Open (I, 1R/Hantuchova [35], 0) Forest Hills (V, QF/Flipkens [186], 1) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Pierce [29], 0) Bordeaux $75K+H ($75K+H, F/Razzano [113], 4) Filderstadt Qualifying (II, Q1R/Osterloh [126], 0+0 in qualifying) Zürich (I, Q3R/Golovin [29], made main draw as Lucky Loser, 2R/Suárez [16], 0+2 in qualifying) 315/Iva Majoli Bergamo $25K ($25K, F/Safarova [>150], 4) Ortisei $75K+H ($75K+H, 2R/Nemeth [201], 1) Antwerp Qualifying (II, Q1R/Bammer [145], 0) St. Paul $50K ($50K, 1R/Craybas [76], 0) Indian Wells (I, 2R/Molik [33], 1) Miami (I, 1R/Grande [87], 0) Estoril (IV, 1R/Bovina [30], 0) Cagnes Sur Mer $75K ($75K, 2R/Pichet [139], 1) RETIRED

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 25 25/Magdalena Maleeva Gold Coast (III, QF/Sugiyama [10], 2) Sydney (II, 1R/Martinez [16], 0) Australian Open (Slam, 2R/Mandula [39], 1) Pan Paciﬁc (I, F/Davenport [6]., 3+1 walkover) — Raymond (24), Sugiyama (9) Antwerp (II, QF/Clijsters [2], 2) — Pierce (27) Dubai (II, 1R/Barna [57], 0) Indian Wells (I, 2R/Benesova [69], 0) Miami (I, 2R/Jankovic [72], 0) Amelia Island (II, 2R/Sprem [34], 1) Warsaw (II, QF/V. Williams [13], 2) — Schnyder (17) Berlin (I, 1R/Smashnova-Pistolesi [21], 0) Rome (I, 1R/Randriantefy [97], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, R16/Mauresmo [3], 3) Birmingham (III, R16/Tanasugarn [58], 1) Eastbourne (II, QF/Mauresmo [4], 2) — Martinez (24) Wimbledon (Slam, R16/Sprem [30], 3) Canadian Open (I, QF/Myskina [4], 3) — Suárez (13) Olympics (Olympics, 2R/Daniilidou [35], 1) New Haven (II, 1R/Kostanic [40], 0) U. S. Open (Slam, 2R/Haynes [185], 1) Hasselt (III, QF/Clijsters [7], 2) Filderstadt (II, 1R/Déchy [24], 0) Moscow (I, 1R/Douchevina [82], 0) Zürich (I, 1R/Schnyder [15], 0) Luxembourg (III, 1R/Laine [216], 0) 42/Conchita Martinez Gold Coast (III, 2R/Saﬁna [53], 1) Sydney (II, 2R/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 1) — Maleeva (27) Australian Open (Slam, 1R/Brandi [63], 0) Dubai (II, QF/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 2) Doha (II, 1R/Barna [52], 0) Indian Wells (I, QF/Myskina [5], 3) — Raymond (27) Amelia Island (II, R16/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 2) Charleston (I, F/V. Williams [16], 4+1 walkover) — Petrova (7), Schnyder (17) Berlin (I, 1R/Sanchez Lorenzo [42], 0) Rome (I, R16/Mauresmo [3], 2) — Sprem (25) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Dulko [64], 1) Eastbourne (II, 2R/Maleeva [23], 1) — Raymond (28) Wimbledon (Slam, 1R/Sequera [79], 0) Los Angeles (II, 1R/Déchy [32], 0) San Diego (I, R16/Davenport [4], 2) Olympics (Olympics, 1R/Mauresmo [2], 0) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Vento-Kabchi [34], 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 26 2/Amélie Mauresmo Sydney (II, F/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 3) — Shaughnessy (20), Myskina (7), Schiavone (21) Australian Open (Slam, withdrew from QF, 4) Amelia Island (II, F/Davenport [4], 4) — Farina Elia (15), Hénin-Hardenne (1) Warsaw (II, QF/Schiavone [22], 1) — Daniilidou (26) Berlin (I, Win, 4+1 walkover) — Kuznetsova (14), Capriati (8) Rome (I, Win, 5) — Déchy (26), Martinez (18), Farina Elia (16), Zvonareva (14), Capriati (9) Roland Garros (Slam, QF/Dementieva [10], 4) — Maleeva (22) Eastbourne (II, SF/Hantuchova [54], 2) — Maleeva (23) Wimbledon (Slam, SF/S. Williams [10], 5) — Farina Elia (19), Suárez (11) San Diego (I, 2R/Molik [29], 0) Canadian Open (I, Win, 5) — Bovina (20), Sprem (19), Zvonareva (14) Olympics (Olympics, F [Silver]/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 5) — Martinez (33), Rubin (22), Kuznetsova (10), Molik (23) U. S. Open (Slam, QF/Dementieva [6], 4) — Vento-Kabchi (34), Schiavone (17) Filderstadt (II, F/Davenport [2], 3) — Schnyder (15), Raymond (30), Kuznetsova (5) Linz (II, Win, 4) — Sugiyama (16), Jankovic (33), Bovina (19) Philadelphia (II, Win, 3+1 walkover) — V. Williams (10), Zvonareva (11) Los Angeles Champ. (Champ, SF/S. Williams [8], 3 wins, 1 loss) — Zvonareva (11), Kuznetsova (4), Sharapova (6) 13/Alicia Molik Australian Open (Slam, R16/Mauresmo [4], 3) — Hantuchova (21) Pan Paciﬁc (I, 1R/Hantuchova [32], 0) Dubai (II, 2R/V. Williams [18], 1) Doha (II, 1R/Shaughnessy [30], 0) Indian Wells (I, 3R/Kuznetsova [14], 1) Miami (I, R16/Petrova [11], 2) — Farina Elia (15) Amelia Island (II, R16/Davenport [4], 2) Estoril (IV, 1R/Nagyova [102], 0) Rome (I, 1R/Kuznetsova [12], 0) Vienna (III, F/Smashnova-Pistolesi [20], 4) Roland Garros (Slam, 1R/Myskina [5], 0) Birmingham (III, QF/Sharapova [15], 2) Eastbourne (II, 1R/Schiavone [20], 0+3 in qualifying) Wimbledon (Slam, 3R/Tanasugarn [66], 2) San Diego (I, R16/Frazier [25], 2) — Mauresmo (3) Stockholm (IV, Win, 5) — Farina Elia (21) Olympics (Olympics, SF/Mauresmo [2]; won Bronze over Myskina; 5) — Dementieva (6), Sugiyama (13), Myskina (3) U. S. Open (Slam, 2R/Hantuchova [32], 1) Filderstadt (II, 2R/Davenport [2], 1) — Schiavone (22) Zürich (I, Win, 5) — Farina Elia (21), Zvonareva (12), Petrova (13), Schnyder (15), Sharapova (7) Luxembourg (III, Win, 4) — Golovin (28), Farina Elia (23) Philadelphia (II, QF/Sharapova [7], 2) — Jankovic (29)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 27 3/Anastasia Myskina Sydney (II, QF/Mauresmo [4], 2) — Raymond (28), Coetzer (30) Australian Open (Slam, QF/Clijsters [2], 4) — Sharapova (32), Rubin (10) Dubai (II, QF/Shaughnessy [30], 1) — Serna (23) Doha (II, Win, 4) — Capriati (5), Kuznetsova (20) Indian Wells (I, SF/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 4) — Sharapova (24), Martinez (20) Berlin (I, QF/Capriati [8], 1+1 walkover) Rome (I, 2R/Likhovtseva [50], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, Win, 7) — Molik (32), Kuznetsova (11) V. Williams (9/Spec: 3), Capriati (6), Dementieva (10) Wimbledon (Slam, 3R/Frazier [36], 2) San Diego (I, F/Davenport [4], 4) — Rubin (23), Sharapova (8), Zvonareva (15) Canadian Open (I, SF/Likhovtseva [39], 3) — Rubin (24), Maleeva (23) Sopot (III, withdrew from SF, 2) Olympics (Olympics, SF/Hénin-Hardenne [1]; lost Bronze/Molik [23], 4+2 losses) — Daniilidou (35), Schiavone (17) U. S. Open (Slam, 2R/Chakvetadze [175], 1) Bali (III, 2R/Camerin [61], 0) Filderstadt (II, SF/Davenport [2], 2) — Déchy (24), Likhovtseva (27) Moscow (I, Win, 4) — Likhovtseva (25), Zvonareva (11), Davenport (2), Dementieva (6) Philadelphia (II, QF/Petrova [14], 1) Los Angeles Champ. (Champ, RR/S. Williams [8], SF/Sharapova [6], 2 wins, 2 losses) — Davenport (1), Dementieva (5) 78/Tatiana Panova Palm Beach Gardens $50K ($50K, QF/Marrero [109], 2) Auckland Qualifying (IV, Q2R/Tu [152], 0+1 in qualifying) Canberra (V, 1R/Kleinova [85], 0+3 in qualifying) Australian Open (Slam, 1R/Sugiyama [9], 0) Pan Paciﬁc (I, QF/Dokic [17], 2) — Dementieva (8) Memphis (III, 2R/Sharapova [25], 1+3 in qualifying) Bogota Qualifying (III, Q2R/Popadic [235], 0+1 in qualifying) Indian Wells (I, 1R/Leon Garcia [98], 0) Miami (I, 2R/Raymond [28], 1) Charleston (I, 1R/Dokic [18], 0+2 in qualifying) Dothan $75K ($75K, 1R/Linetskaya [199], 0) Rome (I, 1R/Marrero [71], 0+2 in qualifying) Roland Garros Qualifying (Slam, Q2R/Kucova [209], 0+1 in qualifying) Birmingham Qualifying (III, Q1R/Perry [88], 0+0 in qualifying) Wimbledon (Slam, 3R/Davenport [5], 2+2 in qualifying) — Loit (28) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Srebotnik [75], 0) Beijing (II, 2R/Sharapova [9], 1) GuangZhou (III, 2R/Brandi [46], 1) Filderstadt Qualifying (II, Q3R/Osterloh [126], 0+2 in qualifying) — Daniilidou (32) Moscow Qualifying (I, Q1R/Voskoboeva [150], 0+0 in qualifying) Zürich Qualifying (I, Q1R/Golovin [29], 0+0 in qualifying) Linz (II, 1R/Bartoli [40], 0) Philadelphia (II, 1R/Petrova [14], 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 28 12/Nadia Petrova Gold Coast (III, F/Sugiyama [10], 3) — Déchy (34) Australian Open (Slam, 1R/Kapros [80], 0) Indian Wells (I, 3R/Dulko [97], 1) Miami (I, SF/Dementieva [8], 4) — Molik (30), Déchy (25) Amelia Island (II, SF/Davenport [4], 3) — S. Williams (7/Spec: 2) Charleston (I, QF/Martinez [24], 2) Berlin (I, 3R/Suárez [17], 1) Rome (I, 2R/Pennetta [72], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, 3R/Weingärtner [94], 2) Birmingham (III, 2R/Asagoe [38], 0) ’s-Hertogenbosch (III, 2R/Jankovic [52], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, R16/Capriati [7], 3) — Vento-Kabchi (34) Los Angeles (II, QF/Davenport [5], 2) San Diego (I, 1R/Likhovtseva [35], 0) Canadian Open (I, 2R/Likhovtseva [39], 0) Olympics (Olympics, 2R/Pierce [28], 1) New Haven (II, 2R/Raymond [36], 1) U. S. Open (Slam, QF/Kuznetsova [9], 4) — Farina Elia (21), Hénin-Hardenne (1) Bali (III, SF/Kuznetsova [6], 3) Beijing (II, QF/S. Williams [10], 2) Filderstadt (II, 1R/Jankovic [35], 0) Moscow (I, 2R/Schiavone [21], 1) — Suárez (16) Zürich (I, QF/Molik [20], 2) — Raymond (27), Déchy (22) Linz (II, SF/Bovina [19], 2) — Likhovtseva (24) Philadelphia (II, SF/Zvonareva [11], 3) — Frazier (27), Myskina (3) 29/Mary Pierce Paris (II, F/Clijsters [2], 4) — Serna (23), Bovina (35) Antwerp (II, 1R/Maleeva [21], 0) Amelia Island (II, 2R/S. Williams [7], 1) Charleston (I, 1R/Morigami [56], 0) Berlin (I, 1R/Likhovtseva [48], 0) Rome (I, 2R/Sugiyama [11], 1) Roland Garros (Slam, 3R/V. Williams [9], 2) ’s-Hertogenbosch (III, Win, 5) Wimbledon (Slam, 1R/Ruano Pascual [67], 0) San Diego (I, 2R/Dulko [52], 1) Canadian Open (I, R16/Capriati [7], 2) Olympics (Olympics, QF/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 3) — Petrova (14), V. Williams (12) U. S. Open (Slam, R16/Kuznetsova [8], 3) — Sharapova (7) Filderstadt (II, 2R/Likhovtseva [27], 1) — Suárez (16) Moscow (I, 1R/Mamic [120], 0) Zürich (I, 1R/Zuluaga [24], 0) Luxembourg (III, 2R/Randriantefy [69], 1) Quebec City (III, QF/Jidkova [57], 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 29 30/Lisa Raymond Sydney (II, 1R/Myskina [7], 0) Australian Open (Slam, QF/Schnyder [26], 4) — V. Williams (11/Spec: 4) Pan Pacific (I, 1R/Maleeva [31], 0) Memphis (III, F/Zvonareva [12], 3) Indian Wells (I, 3R/Martinez [20], 1) Miami (I, 3R/Schiavone [21], 1) Charleston (I, 1R/Randriantefy [112], 0) Rome (I, 1R/Reeves [92], 0) Vienna (III, 1R/Zheng [63], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Parra Santonja [66], 1) Eastbourne (II, 1R/Martinez [24], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, 2R/Cervanova [87], 1) San Diego (I, 1R/Daniilidou [38], 0) Olympics (Olympics, R16/Molik [23], 2) — Farina Elia (20) New Haven (II, SF/Déchy [29], 3) — Petrova (15), Hantuchova (34) U. S. Open (Slam, 3R/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 2) Filderstadt (II, Q3R/Jankovic [35], made main draw as Lucky Loser, QF/Mauresmo [1], 2+2 in qualifying) — Dementieva (6), Farina Elia (21) Zürich (I, 1R/Petrova [13], 0) Philadelphia (II, 1R/V. Williams [10], 0) 53/Chanda Rubin Sydney (II, QF, Hénin-Hardenne [1], 2) — Krasnoroutskaya (26) Australian Open (Slam, R16/Myskina [7], 3) Pan Pacific (I, withdrew from SF, 2+1 walkover) Vienna (III, 2R/Jidkova [84], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, 1R/Bartoli [84], 0) Los Angeles (II, R16/Dementieva [6], 2) San Diego (I, R16/Myskina [5], 2) — Smashnova (17), Kostanic (32) Canadian Open (I, R16/Myskina [4], 2) Olympics (Olympics, R16/Mauresmo [2], 2) U. S. Open (Slam, 3R/V. Williams [12], 2) Bali (III, 1R/Garbin [59], 0) 44/Dinara Safina Gold Coast (III, QF/Petrova [12], 2) — Martinez (16) Sydney Qualifying (II, Q2R/M. Casanova [100], 0+1 in qualifying) Australian Open (Slam, 3R/Clijsters [2], 2) — Coetzer (27) Paris (II, SF/Clijsters [2], 3+3 in qualifying) — Schnyder (16), Schiavone (18) Antwerp (II, 2R/Koukalova [100], 1) Miami (I, 2R/Golovin [94], 0) Amelia Island (II, 2R/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 1) Berlin (I, 1R/Sharapova [22], 0) Rome (I, 2R/Zvonareva [14], 1) Strasbourg (III, 1R/Sequera [98], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Irvin [104], 1) Eastbourne (II, 1R/Likhovtseva [40], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, 1R/Parra Santonja [63], 0) Sopot (III, 2R/Kurhajcova [79], 1) New Haven (II, 1R/Raymond [36], 0) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Dementieva [6], 0) Beijing (II, 2R/S. Williams [10], 1) GuangZhou (III, QF/Strycova [64], 2) — Dulko (33) Moscow (I, 2R/Davenport [2], 1) Luxembourg (III, F/Molik [14], 4)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 30 19/Francesca Schiavone Gold Coast (III, 1R/Sanchez Lorenzo [50], 0) Sydney (II, SF/Mauresmo [4], 3) — Déchy (32), Smashnova (17) Australian Open (Slam, 2R/Likhovtseva [38], 1) Paris (II, QF/Saﬁna [40], 2) Dubai (II, 1R/Kuznetsova [29], 0) Indian Wells (I, 2R/Brandi [52], 0) Miami (I, R16/V. Williams [17], 2) — Raymond (28) Amelia Island (II, 1R/Parra Santonja [59], 0) Warsaw (II, QF/Kuznetsova [22], 3) — Pisnik (32), Bovina (30), Mauresmo (3) Rome (I, QF/Zvonareva [14], 3) Roland Garros (Slam, R16/Capriati [6], 3) Eastbourne (II, 2R/Pisnik [47], 1) — Molik (29) Wimbledon (Slam, 2R/Golovin [54], 1) Stanford (II, QF/Vento-Kabchi [32], 1) Los Angeles (II, QF/V. Williams [13], 3) — Déchy (32), Sugiyama (10) San Diego (I, 1R/Bovina [22], 0) Canadian Open (I, R16/Likhovtseva [39], 2) — Déchy (27) Olympics (Olympics, QF/Myskina [3], 3) — Zuluaga (27) U. S. Open (Slam, R16/Mauresmo [2], 3) Hasselt (III, QF/Bovina [17], 2) Filderstadt (II, 1R/Molik [20], 0) Moscow (I, QF/Davenport [2], 2) — Farina Elia (20), Petrova (13) Zürich (I, 1R/Bovina [18], 0) 14/Patty Schnyder Gold Coast (III, withdrew from 2R, 1) Sydney (II, 1R/Coetzer [30], 0) Australian Open (Slam, SF/Clijsters [2], 5) — Suárez (14), Déchy (28), Raymond (30) Paris (II, 2R/Saﬁna [40], 0) Antwerp (II, QF/Farina Elia [19], 1) Amelia Island (II, R16/Zvonareva [11], 2) Charleston (I, SF/Martinez [24], 4) — Dementieva (6), Davenport (4) Warsaw (II, 2R/Maleeva [24], 1) Berlin (I, withdrew from 3R, 2) Rome (I, 2R/Bovina [28], 1) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Asagoe [52], 1) Birmingham (III, SF/Sharapova [15], 3) ’s-Hertogenbosch (III, 2R/Medina Garrigues [58], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, 2R/Gagliardi [115], 1) Stanford (II, QF/Frazier [25], 1) Los Angeles (II, 2R/Kostanic [37], 1) San Diego (I, 1R/Harkleroad [109], 0) Olympics (Olympics, R16/Kuznetsova [10], 2) U. S. Open (Slam, R16/S. Williams [11], 3) — Hantuchova (32) Filderstadt (II, 2R/Mauresmo [1], 1) Moscow (I, 1R/Dementieva [6], 0) Zürich (I, SF/Molik [20], 3) — Maleeva (25), Zuluaga (24), Suárez (16) Linz (II, 1R/Jankovic [33], 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 31 102/Magui Serna Gold Coast (III, QF/Stosur [163], 2) Sydney (II, 1R/Bovina [24], 0) Australian Open (Slam, 1R/Santangelo [129], 0) Paris (II, 2R/Pierce [37], 1) Antwerp (II, 1R/Koukalova [100], 0) Dubai (II, 2R/Myskina [7], 1) Doha (II, 1R/Testud [unranked], 0) Indian Wells (I, 2R/Karatancheva [282], 0) Miami (I, 3R/Suárez [13], 1) Rome (I, 1R/Smashnova [21], 0) Vienna (III, QF/Smashnova [20], 2) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Zvonareva [13], 1) Birmingham (III, 1R/Kremer [322], 0) Eastbourne (II, 1R/Sanchez Lorenzo [55], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, 3R/S. Williams [10], 2) — Daniilidou (33) Olympics (Olympics, 1R/Myskina [3], 0) New Haven (II, 1R/Déchy [29], 0) U. S. Open (Slam, 2R/Capriati [8], 1) Filderstadt Qualifying (II, Q1R/Kostanic [36], 0 + 0 in qualifying) Moscow Qualifying (I, Q1R/Domachowska [83], 0+0 in qualifying) Zürich Qualifying (I, Q1R/Kostanic [36], 0+0 in qualifying) Linz Qualifying (II, Q2R/Lee-Waters [84], 0+1 in qualifying) 4/Maria Sharapova Australian Open (Slam, 3R/Myskina [7], 2) Pan Paciﬁc (I, 2R/Hantuchova [32], 1) Memphis (III, SF/Zvonareva [12], 3) Indian Wells (I, R16/Myskina [5], 2) Miami (I, R16/S. Williams [6], 2) — Smashnova (19) Berlin (I, R16/Capriati [8], 2) — Saﬁna (31), Mandula (33) Rome (I, R16/Farina Elia [16], 2) — Dementieva (10) Roland Garros (Slam, QF/Suárez [14], 4) — Zvonareva (13) Birmingham (III, Win, 5) — Molik (32), Schnyder (20) Wimbledon (Slam, Win, 7) — Sugiyama (12), Davenport (5), S. Williams (10/Spec: 1) San Diego (I, QF/Myskina [5], 2) Canadian Open (I, R16/Zvonareva [14], 1) New Haven (II, 2R/Washington [81], 0) U. S. Open (Slam, 3R/Pierce [29], 2) Beijing (II, SF/Kuznetsova [5], 2) Seoul (IV, Win, 5) Japan Open (III, Win, 4) Zürich (I, F/Molik [20], 3) — Hantuchova (35), V. Williams (11), Dementieva (5) Philadelphia (II, withdrew from SF, 2) — Kostanic (35), Molik (13) Los Angeles Champ. (Champ, RR/Mauresmo [2], Won, 4 wins, 1 loss) — Kuznetsova (4), Zvonareva (11), Myskina (3), S. Williams (8)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 32 40/Meghann Shaughnessy Gold Coast (III, 1R/Stosur [163], 0) Sydney (II, 2R/Mauresmo [4], 1) Australian Open (Slam, 1R/Pratt [52], 0) Dubai (II, SF/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 3) — Myskina (7) Doha (II, QF/Kuznetsova [20], 2) — Molik (33), Sugiyama (10) Indian Wells (I, R16/Davenport [4], 2) Miami (I, 2R/Brandi [48], 0) Amelia Island (II, 1R/Pierce [29], 0) Berlin (I, 2R/Sprem [29], 1) — Dokic (23) Rome (I, 2R/Farina Elia [16], 1) Strasbourg (III, 1R/Vakulenko [77], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, 3R/Maleeva [22], 2) — Farina Elia (16) Wimbledon (Slam, 3R/Sprem [30], 2) Stanford (II, 1R/Irvin [98], 0) Los Angeles (II, 1R/Jankovic [49], 0) San Diego (I, 1R/Asagoe [69], 0) New Haven (II, 1R/Washington [81], 0) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Bartoli [50], 0) Japan Open (III, 1R/Fedossova [448], 0) Tashkent (IV, SF/Vaidisova [103], 3) Linz (II, QF/Petrova [13], 2) — Sprem (18) Philadelphia (II, 2R/Capriati [9], 1) 32/Anna Smashnova Auckland (IV, 2R/Harkleroad [55], 1) Sydney (II, QF/Schiavone [21], 2) Australian Open (Slam, 2R/Golovin [354], 1) Paris (II, 1R/Golovin [136], 0) Antwerp (II, 1R/Sprem [45], 0) Indian Wells (I, 3R/Déchy [28], 1) Miami (I, 3R/Sharapova [23], 1) Amelia Island (II, 2R/Strycova [82], 1) Charleston (I, R16/Zvonareva [11], 2) Warsaw (II, QF/Zvonareva [11], 2) Berlin (I, 3R/V. Williams [11], 2) — Maleeva (20), Déchy (25) Rome (I, QF/Capriati [9], 3) Vienna (III, Win, 4) Roland Garros (Slam, 3R/Dementieva [10], 2) Eastbourne (II, 1R/Sprem [35], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, 1R/Srebotnik [68], 0) Stanford (II, QF/V. Williams [15], 2) Los Angeles (II, R16/Kuznetsova [9], 2) — Hantuchova (35) San Diego (I, 1R/Rubin [23], 0) Stockholm (IV, 2R/Kleinova [103], 1) Sopot (III, 2RDomachowska [140], 0) Olympics (Olympics, 1R/Garbin [64], 0) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Asagoe [62], 0) Filderstadt (II, 2R/Zuluaga [25], 1) — Sugiyama (14) Moscow (I, 1R/Sprem [17], 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 33 18/Karolina Sprem Gold Coast (III, 2R/Stosur [163], 1) — Farina Elia (23) Canberra (V, SF/Suárez [14], 3) Australian Open (Slam, 1R/Krasnoroutskaya [25], 0) Paris (II, 2R/Schiavone [18], 1+3 in qualifying) Antwerp (II, SF/Farina Elia [19], 3) — Smashnova (20) Indian Wells (I, 2R/Stosur [114], 0) Miami (I, QF/Daniilidou [35], 3) — Kuznetsova (14) Amelia Island (II, R16/S. Williams [7], 2) — Maleeva (23) Charleston (I, 2R/Randriantefy [112], 1) — Déchy (25) Berlin (I, SF/V. Williams [11], 3+1 walkover) — Zuluaga (24) Rome (I, 2R/Martinez [18], 1) Roland Garros (Slam, 1R/M. Casanova [93], 0) Eastbourne (II, 2R/Hantuchova [54], 1) — Smashnova (18) Wimbledon (Slam, QF/Davenport [5], 4) — V. Williams (8/Spec: 3), Shaughnessy (35), Maleeva (24) San Diego (I, 2R/Davenport [4], 1) Canadian Open (I, QF/Mauresmo [3], 3) — Sugiyama (11) Olympics (Olympics, R16/Sugiyama [13], 2) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Kostanic [40], 0) Hasselt (III, 2R/Camerin [45], 1) Filderstadt (II, 1R/Farina Elia [21], 0) Moscow (I, 2R/Zvonareva [11], 1) — Smashnova (30) Zürich (I, 1R/V. Williams [12], 0) Linz (II, 1R/Shaughnessy [44], 0) 282/Alexandra Stevenson Gold Coast Qualifying (III, Q2R/Sun [128], 0+1 in qualifying) Sydney Qualifying (II, Q1R/Cargill [110], 0+0 in qualifying) Australian Open (Slam, 1R/Bartoli [59], 0) Paris (II, 1R/Farina Elia [20], 0) Antwerp (II, 1R/Vakulenko [73], 0+3 in qualifying) Dubai Qualifying (II, Q1R/Grönefeld [107], 0+0 in qualifying) Indian Wells (I, 1R/Karatancheva [282], 0) Miami (I, 1R/Koukalova [91], 0) Amelia Island Qualifying (II, Q2R/Strycova [82], 0+1 in qualifying) Charleston (I, 1R/Pratt [49], 0) Surbiton $25K ($25K, QF/Chakvetadze [222], 2) Birmingham Qualifying (III, Q1R/Spears [154], 0+0 in qualifying) Wimbledon Qualifying (Slam, Q3R/Birnerova [116], 0+2 in qualifying) Stanford Qualifying (II, Q2R/Jackson [213], 0+1 in qualifying) Los Angeles Qualifying (II, Q1R/Osterloh [225], 0+0 in qualifying) New Haven Qualifying (II, Q1R/Stosur [95], 0+0 in qualifying) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Ruano Pascual [70], 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 34 16/Paola Suárez Auckland (IV, SF/Daniilidou [30], 3) Canberra (V, Win, 4+1 walkover) — Farina Elia (23) Australian Open (Slam, 3R/Schnyder [26], 2) Indian Wells (I, 3R/Schett [77], 1) Miami (I, R16/Craybas [73], 2) — Serna (26) Amelia Island (II, QF/Davenport [4], 3) — Sugiyama (10) Charleston (I, 2R/Jidkova [107], 1) Berlin (I, QF/V. Williams [11], 3) — Petrova (6) Rome (I, 3R/Capriati [9], 2) — Zuluaga (23) Roland Garros (Slam, SF/Dementieva [10], 5) — Sharapova (20) Wimbledon (Slam, QF/Mauresmo [4], 4) San Diego (I, 2R/Bartoli [63], 1) Canadian Open (I, R16/Maleeva [23], 1) Olympics (Olympics, 2R/Zuluaga [27], 1) — Déchy (29) U. S. Open (Slam, 3R/Asagoe [62], 2) Filderstadt (II, 1R/Pierce [26], 0) Moscow (I, 1R/Petrova [13], 0) Zürich (I, QF/Schnyder [15], 2) Luxembourg (III, 1R/Medina Garrigues [46], 0) 17/Ai Sugiyama Gold Coast (III, Win, 4) — Maleeva (28), Petrova (12) Sydney (II, 1R/Déchy [32], 0) Australian Open (Slam, 2R/Obata [56], 1) Pan Paciﬁc (I, QF/Maleeva [31], 1) Dubai (II, SF/Kuznetsova [29], 2) — Daniilidou (35) Doha (II, 2R/Shaughnessy [30], 0) Miami (I, 2R/Vento-Kabchi [39], 0) Amelia Island (II, R16/Suárez [14], 1) Berlin (I, R16/Zuluaga [24], 1) Rome (I, R16/Kuznetsova [12], 1) — Pierce (34) Strasbourg (III, QF/Schaul [66], 1) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Ruano Pascual [90], 1) Eastbourne (II, QF/Hantuchova [54], 1) Wimbledon (Slam, QF/Sharapova [15], 4) Los Angeles (II, R16/Schiavone [18], 1) San Diego (I, QF/Davenport [4], 2) Canadian Open (I, R16/Sprem [19], 1) — Hantuchova (35) Olympics (Olympics, QF/Molik [23], 3) — Sprem (18) U. S. Open (Slam, R16/Capriati [8], 3) Bali (III, 1R/Nakamura [165], 0) Filderstadt (II, 1R/Smashnova [31], 0) Moscow (I, 1R/Pastikova [141], 0) Zürich (I, QF/Dementieva[5], 2) Linz (II, QF/Mauresmo [2], 2) — Hantuchova (30)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 35 66/Tamarine Tanasugarn Gold Coast (III, 1R/Loit [43], 0) Canberra (V, 2R/Pennetta [77], 1) Australian Open (Slam, 1R/Granville [54], 0) Pan Paciﬁc (I, 1R/Husarova [166], 0) Hyderabad (IV, SF/Kirilenko [148], 3) Dubai (II, 1R/Sfar [151], 0) Indian Wells (I, 1R/Granville [54], 0) Miami (I, 2R/Hantuchova [36], 1) Amelia Island (II, 1R/Saﬁna [32], 0) Charleston (I, 1R/Ashley [121], 0) Strasbourg (III, 1R/Strycova [76], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, 1R/V. Williams [9], 0) Birmingham (III, QF/Loit [36], 3) — Maleeva (21) Eastbourne (II, Q2R/Baltacha [343], 0+1 in qualifying) Wimbledon (Slam, R16/Sugiyama [12], 3) — Molik (26) Los Angeles (II, 1R/Bartoli [62], 0) San Diego Qualifying (I, Q2R/Irvin [85], made main draw as Lucky Loser, 1R/Dulko [52], 0+1 in qualifying) Canadian Open (I, 2R/Mauresmo [3], 1) Olympics (Olympics, 1R/Widjaja [151], 0) New Haven (II, 1R/Schaul [51], 0) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Dulko [39], 0) Beijing (II, 2R/Medina Garrigues [48], 1) GuangZhou (III, QF/Sucha [91], 2) Japan Open (III, SF/Sharapova [10], 3) Tashkent (IV, 1R/Linetskaya [106], 0) Quebec City (III, 2R/Kurhajcova [8], 1) 311/Sandrine Testud Ortisei $75K+H ($75K+H, QF/Nemeth [201], 2) Paris (II, 1R/Hantuchova [29], 0) Doha (II, 2R/Déchy [29], 1) — Serna (25) Cagnes Sur Mer $75K ($75K, 1R/Grönefeld [98], 0) Berlin (I, 1R/Zuluaga [24], 0) Rome (I, 1R/Sanchez Lorenzo [38], 0) Strasbourg (III, 1R/Loit [32], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, 1R/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 0) Palermo (V, 1R/Cervanova [81], 0) Stockholm Qualifying (IV, Q1R/Marosi [262], 0) Olympics (Olympics, 1R/Farina Elia [20], 0) —/Iroda Tulyaganova Tashkent (IV, 2R/Ant. Serra Zanetti [98], 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 36 49/Maria Vento-Kabchi Auckland (V, 1R/Black [51], 0) Hobart (V, 2R/Camerin [97], 1) Australian Open (Slam, 1R/Czink [77], 0) Pan Paciﬁc (I, 2R/Davenport [6], 1) Paris (II, 1R/Sprem [48], 0) Dubai (II, 1R/Molik [34], 0) Doha (II, 2R/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 1) Indian Wells (I, 3R/Myskina [5], 1) Miami (I, 3R/Sprem [38], 2) — Sugiyama (10) Amelia Island (II, 1R/Morigami [57], 0) Rome (I, 2R/Capriati [9], 1) Vienna (III, 2R/Weingärtner [108], 1) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Casanova [93], 1) Birmingham (III, 1R/Ruano Pascual [69], 0) Eastbourne (II, 2R/Kuznetsova [9], 1) Wimbledon (Slam, 2R/Petrova [13], 1) Stanford (II, SF/Davenport [5], 3) — Daniilidou (33), Schiavone (18) Los Angeles (II, 2R/Kuznetsova [9], 1) San Diego (I, 1R/Osterloh [186], 0) Canadian Open (I, 1R/Likhovtseva [39], 0) Olympics (Olympics, 2R/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 1) U. S. Open (Slam, 3R/Mauresmo [2], 2) Bali (III, 1R/Cho [313], 0) Beijing (II, 2R/Dulko [34], 1) GuangZhou (III, 1R/Zheng [59], 0) Zürich Qualifying (I, Q2R/Mikaelian [175], 0+1 in qualifying) Linz (II, 1R/Sugiyama [16], 0) Philadelphia (II, 1R/Jankovic [29], 0) 7/Serena Williams Miami (I, Win, 6) — Sharapova (23), Daniilidou (35), Dementieva (8) Amelia Island (II, QF/Petrova [9], 2) — Pierce (29), Sprem (34) Charleston (I, withdrew from R16, 1) Rome (I, SF/Capriati [9], 3) — Kuznetsova (12) Roland Garros (Slam, QF/Capriati [6], 4) Wimbledon (Slam, F/Sharapova [15], 6) — Capriati (7), Mauresmo (4) Los Angeles (II, F/Davenport [5], 4) — Daniilidou (33), Zvonareva (14), Dementieva (6) San Diego (I, withdrew from QF, 2) — Bovina (22) U. S. Open (Slam, QF/Capriati [8], 4) — Golovin (31), Schynder (16) Beijing (II, Win, 4) — Petrova (13), Zvonareva (11), Kuznetsova (5) Linz (II, 2R/Jidkova [73], 0) Los Angeles Champ. (Champ, RR/Davenport [1], F/Sharapova [6], 3 wins, 2 losses) — Myskina (3), Dementieva (5), Mauresmo (2)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 37 9/Venus Williams Australian Open (Slam, 3R/Raymond [30], 2) Pan Paciﬁc (I, withdrew from QF, 1) Dubai (II, QF/Kuznetsova [29], 1) — Molik (34) Miami (I, QF/Dementieva [8], 3) — Schiavone (21) Charleston (I, Win, 5) — Zvonareva (11), Martinez (24) Warsaw (II, Win, 4) — Zuluaga (23), Maleeva (24), Zvonareva (11), Kuznetsova (14) Berlin (I, withdrew from F, 4) — Daniilidou (26), Smashnova (21), Suárez (17), Sprem (29) Roland Garros (Slam, QF/Myskina [5], 4) — Pierce (31), Zuluaga (24) Wimbledon (Slam, 2R/Sprem [30], 1) Stanford (II, F/Davenport [5], 3) — Smashnova (17), Frazier (25) Los Angeles (II, SF/Davenport [5], 3) — Schiavone (18) Olympics (Olympics, R16/Pierce [28], 2) U. S. Open (Slam, R16/Davenport [4], 3) — Rubin (22) Moscow (I, QF/Bovina [19], 2) Zürich (I, QF/Sharapova [7], 2) — Sprem (17) Philadelphia (II, QF/Mauresmo [2], 2) — Raymond (28) 23/Fabiola Zuluaga Hobart (V, QF/Asagoe [49], 2) Australian Open (Slam, SF/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 4+1 walkover) Bogota (III, Win, 4) Indian Wells (I, QF/Déchy [28], 3) Miami (I, 2R/Perry [127], 0) Charleston (I, 1R/Mikaelian [85], 0) Warsaw (II, 2R/V. Williams [13], 1) Berlin (I, QF/Sprem [29], 3) — Zvonareva (12), Sugiyama (10) Rome (I, 1R/Suárez [1], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, R16/V. Williams [9], 3) Eastbourne (II, 1R/Déchy [27], 0) Wimbledon (Slam. 1R/Kremer [181], 0) Los Angeles (II, 1R/Barna [56], 0) San Diego (I, 1R/Bartoli [63], 0) Canadian Open (I, 2R/Golovin [38], 1) Olympics (Olympics, R16/Schiavone [17], 2) — Suárez (15) U. S. Open (Slam, 3R/Zvonareva [10], 2) Filderstadt (II, QF/Kuznetsova [5], 2+ 3 in qualifying) — Smashnova (31) Moscow (I, 1R/Likhovtseva [25], 0) Zürich (I, 2R/Schnyder [15], 1) — Pierce (28) Linz (II, 1R/Domachowska [79], 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 38 11/Vera Zvonareva Gold Coast (III, 2R/Kuznetsova [35], 1) Sydney (II, 2R/Davenport [5], 1) Australian Open (Slam, R16/Davenport [5], 3) Memphis (III, Win, 4) — Sharapova (25), Raymond (24) Indian Wells (I, R16/Déchy [28], 2) Miami (I, 3R/Craybas [73], 1) Amelia Island (II, QF/Hénin-Hardenne [1], 2) — Pisnik (30), Schnyder (17) Charleston (I, QF/V. Williams [16], 2) — Smashnova (21) Warsaw (II, SF/V. Williams [13], 2) — Smashnova (20) Berlin (I, 2R/Zuluaga [24], 1) Rome (I, SF/Mauresmo [3], 3) — Saﬁna (33), Bovina (28), Schiavone (20) Roland Garros (Slam, 3R/Sharapova [20], 2) Eastbourne (II, SF/Kuznetsova [9], 2) — Déchy (27) Wimbledon (Slam, R16/Davenport [5], 3) Los Angeles (II, QF/S. Williams [16], 1+1 walkover) San Diego (I, SF/Myskina [5], 3+1 walkover) — Déchy (28), Kuznetsova (9) Canadian Open (I, S/Mauresmo [3], 4) — Sharapova (8) Cincinnati (III, F/Davenport [4], 3) — Frazier (24) U. S. Open (Slam, R16/Dementieva [6], 3) — Zuluaga (26) Beijing (II, SF/S. Williams [10], 2) Filderstadt (II, 1R/Likhovtseva [27], 0) Moscow (I, QF/Myskina [4], 2) — Déchy (22), Sprem (17) Zürich (I, 2R/Molik [20], 0) Linz (II, QF/Jankovic [33], 1) — Déchy (22) Philadelphia (II, F/Mauresmo [2], 4) — Déchy (22), Capriati (9), Petrova (14) Los Angeles Champ. (Champ, RR/Kuznetsova [4], RR/Mauresmo [2], RR/Sharapova [6], 0 wins, 3 losses, did not make SF)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 39 Tournament Winners Tournament Winners by Date (High-Tier Events) The following list shows the winner of all important (Tier II or higher) tournaments, in the order the events occurred: Tournament Tier Winner Sydney II Hénin-Hardenne Australian Open Slam Hénin-Hardenne Tokyo (Pan Paciﬁc) I Davenport Paris II Clijsters Antwerp II Clijsters Dubai II Hénin-Hardenne Doha II Myskina Indian Wells I Hénin-Hardenne Miami I S. Williams Amelia Island II Davenport Charleston I V. Williams Warsaw II V. Williams Berlin I Mauresmo Rome I Mauresmo Roland Garros Slam Myskina Eastbourne II Kuznetsova Wimbledon Slam Sharapova Stanford II Davenport Los Angeles II Davenport San Diego I Davenport Canadian Open (Montreal) I Mauresmo Olympics Olym Hénin-Hardenne New Haven II Bovina U.S. Open Slam Kuznetsova Beijing II S. Williams Filderstadt II Davenport Moscow I Myskina Zürich I Molik Linz II Mauresmo Philadelphia II Mauresmo Los Angeles Championships Champ Sharapova

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 40 Tournament Winners by Tournament Type (High-Tier Events) The following list shows winners of the top-tier events by tier. Within the tiers, events are sorted by date. SLAMS Event Winner Australian Open Hénin-Hardenne Roland Garros Myskina Wimbledon Sharapova U.S. Open Kuznetsova YEAR-END CHAMPIONSHIP Event Winner Los Angeles Championships Sharapova TIER I Event Winner Pan Paciﬁc (Tokyo) Davenport Indian Wells Hénin-Hardenne Miami S. Williams Charleston V. Williams German Open (Berlin) Mauresmo Italian Open (Rome) Mauresmo San Diego Davenport Canadian Open Mauresmo Moscow Myskina Zürich Molik TIER II Event Winner Sydney Hénin-Hardenne Paris Clijsters Antwerp Clijsters Dubai Hénin-Hardenne Doha Myskina Amelia Island Davenport Warsaw V. Williams Eastbourne Kuznetsova Stanford Davenport Los Angeles Davenport New Haven Bovina Beijing S. Williams Filderstadt Davenport Linz Mauresmo Philadelphia Mauresmo OLYMPICS Olympics Hénin-Hardenne

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 41 Winners at Smaller Tournaments (Tier III, IV, V) Tournament Winner Tier Same Week As Gold Coast Sugiyama III Auckland (IV) Auckland Daniilidou IV Gold Coast (III) Canberra Suárez V Sydney (II), Hobart (V) Hobart Frazier V Sydney (II), Canberra (V) Hyderabad Pratt IV Antwerp (II), Memphis (III) Memphis Zvonareva III Antwerp (II), Hyderabad (IV) Bogota Zuluaga III Dubai (II) Acapulco Benesova III Doha (II) Casablanca Loit V Amelia Island (II) Estoril Loit IV Charleston (I) Budapest Jankovic V Warsaw (II) Vienna Smashnova III Strasbourg (III) Strasbourg Schaul III Vienna (III) Birmingham Sharapova III ’s-Hertogenbosch Pierce III Eastbourne (II) Palermo Medina Garrigues V Los Angeles (II) Stockholm Molik IV Canadian Open (I) Sopot Pennetta III (Olympics Opening), Vancouver Vancouver Vaidisova V (Olympics Opening), Sopot Cincinnati Davenport IV Olympics Forest Hills Likhovtseva V New Haven Bali Kuznetsova III+ Hasselt Dementieva III Guangzhou, Seoul GuangZhou Li Na III Hasselt, Seoul Seoul Sharapova IV Hasselt, Guangzhou Japan Open Sharapova III Filderstadt (II) Tashkent Vaidisova IV Moscow (I) Luxembourg Molik III+ Linz (II) Quebec City Sucha III Philadelphia (II)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 42 Winners and Finalists at $50K and Larger Challengers Showing date, tier, and final score (since November 11, 2003, when the 2003 Tour year ended) Nov. 16, 2003: Eugene, OR, USA $50K — Sofia Arvidsson (4) def. Tara Snyder (3) 6–4 6–4 Dec. 7, 2003: Palm Beach Gardens, FL, USA $50K — Lindsay Lee-Waters def. Marta Marrero 6-3 6–3 Dec. 7, 2003: Changsha, China $50K — Peng Shuai def. Zheng Jie (1) 1–6 6–2 6–1 Dec. 14, 2003: Shen Zhen, China $50K — Sesil Karatancheva (Q) def. Zheng Jie (1) 7–5 1–6 6–3 Feb. 1. 2004: Waikoloa, HA, USA $50K — Melinda Czink def. Maria Emilia Salerni 7–6(8–6) 6–2 Feb. 8, 2004: Ortisei, Italy $75K+H — Iveta Benesova def. Virag Nemeth 6–3 6–1 Feb. 15, 2004: Midland, MI, USA $75K+H — Jill Craybas (2) def. Nicole Vaidisova (WC) 6–2 6–4 Feb. 19, 2004: Saint Paul, MN, USA $50K — Abigail Spears (Q) def. Jill Craybas (2) 6–3 6–4 March 21, 2004: Orange, CA, USA $50K — Yulia Beygelzimer def. Evgenia Linetskaya (Q) 6-3 2-6 6-2 March 28, 2004: St. Petersburg, Russia $50K — Anastasia Yakimova (LL) def. Emma Laine 3–6 6-–2 6–1 April 11, 2004: Dinan, France $50K+H — Timea Bacsinszky def. Tzipora Obziler (8) 6-2 6-1 April 25, 2004: Dothan, AL, USA $75K — Shuai Peng def. Eugenia Linetskaya 6–2 6–1 May 2, 2004: Cagnes Sur Mer, France $75K — Severine Beltrame (5) def. Anna-Lena Grönefeld (2) 6–4 6–4 May 2, 2004: Gifu, Japan $50K — Ana Ivanovic (Q) def. Mi-Ra Jeon (8) 6–4 2–6 7–5 May 9, 2004: Fukuoka, Japan $50K — Ana Ivanovic (Q) def. Jarmila Gajdosova 6–2 6–7(4–7) 7–6(7–4) May 9, 2004: Raleigh, North Carolina $50K — Marissa Irvin (3) def. Mashona Washington (4) 6–3 6–3 May 16, 2004: Charlottesville, North Carolina $50K — Marissa Irvin (2) def. Jamea Jackson (Q) 6–3 7–6(7–5) May 16, 2004: Saint-Gaudens, France $50K — Maria Kirilenko (4) def. Stephanie Foretz 7–6(7–2) 6–3 June 6, 2004: Prostejov, Czech Republic $75K — Shuai Peng def. Zuzana Ondraskova 6–1 6–3 June 13, 2004: Marseille, France $50K+H — Anabel Medina Garrigues (2) def. Lubomira Kurhajcova (1) 5-7 6Ð3 6Ð3 June 13, 2004: Beijing, China $50K — Li Na def. Suchanan Viratprasert (2) 6–2 6–4 July 4, 2004: Orbetello, Italy $75K — Catalina Castano (6) def. Alyona Bondarenko 2–6 6–2 6–3 July 4, 2004: Los Gatos, CA, USA $50K — Ludmila Skavronskaia (7) def. Maureen Drake (4) 7–6(7–0) 6–0 July 11, 2004: Cuneo, Italy $50K+H — Flavia Pennetta (1) def. Alice Canepa (Q) 6–4 6–1 July 18, 2004: Vittel, France $50K — Nuria Llagostera Vives def. Lubomira Bacheva 6–2 6–4 July 25, 2004: Innsbruck, Austria $50K — Kirsten Flipkens (Q) def. Michaela Pastikova 6-2 6-3 July 25, 2004: Schenectady, NY, USA $50K — Bethanie Mattek def. Maureen Drake (7) 6-3 6-1 August 1, 2004: Modena, Italy $75K — Anna-Lena Grönefeld def. Selima Sfar (Q) 6–2 6–4 August 1, 2004: Lexington, KY, USA $50K — Camille Pin (5) def. Mi-Ra Jeon 7–5 6–3 August 8, 2004: Louisville, KY, USA $50K — Aiko Nakamura def. Vilmarie Castellvi (4) 6–4 6–2 August 8, 2004: Rimini, ITA $50K — Yuliana Fedak (2) def. Katerina Bohmova 6–4 6–3 August 22, 2004: Bronx, NY, USA $50K — Eugenia Linetskaya (5) def. Nuria Llagostera Vives (2) 4–6 6–3 6–4 September 12, 2004: Denain, France $75K+H — Anna-Lena Grönefeld (2/WC) def. Dally Randriantefy (3) 6–3 6–2 September 12, 2004: Fano, Italy $50K — Ana Ivanovic def. Delia Sescioreanu (8) 6–2 6–4 September 19, 2004: Bordeaux, France $75K+H — Virginie Razzano def. Emilie Loit (1) 7–5 2–6 6–2 September 26, 2004: Albuquerque, NM, USA $75K — Marissa Irvin (1) def. Stephanie Dubois 6–1 4–6 6–4 September 26, 2004: Biella, Italy $50K+H — Kveta Peschke def. Virginie Razzano (4) 6–1 6–1 September 26, 2004: Jounieh, Lebanon $50K+H — Nuria Llagostera Vives (1) def. Lourdes Dominguez Lino 2Ð6 6Ð0 6Ð4 September 26, 2004: Batumi, Georgia $50K — Ana Ivanovic (3) def. Anna Chakvetadze (1) 6–3 6–3 October 3, 2004: Troy, AL, USA $50K — Shenay Perry (2) def. Maria Emilia Salerni 6-2 6-2 October 10, 2004: Girona, Spain $75K+H — Marta Marrero (1) def. Dally Randriantefy (2) 3–6 7–6(8–6) 6–0 October 17, 2004: Ashburn, VA, USA $50K — Laura Granville (1) def. Lucie Safarova 6– 6–2 October 24, 2004: St. Rafael, France $50K — Barbora Strycova (1) def. Stephanie Cohen-Aloro 6–1 6–2 October 24, 2004: Cary, NY, USA $50K — Shenay Perry (3) def. Kelly McCain (6) 4–6 6–4 7–5 October 31, 2004: Shenzhen, China $50K I — Li Na (3) def. Sun Tiantian (4) 6–3 4–6 6–2 November 7, 2004: Shenzhen, China $50K II — Peng Shuai (2) def. Zheng Jie (1) 3–6 6–1 6–3 November 15, 2004: Pittsburg, PA, USA $50K — Shenay Perry (2) def. Sofia Arvidsson 6–2 6–1

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 43 Cheap Thrills and Tough Bills: Titles against Weak and Strong Opposition It’s one thing to win a title. It’s another to win a title against major opposition. The lists below classify tournament wins based on the level of opposition the winner faced (note: for brevity, titles are listed only once. So a player who won without facing a Top Fifteen player also obviously won without facing a Top Ten player, etc.): Won Title Beating at Least Two Top Ten Players (Total of 12): Sydney: Hénin-Hardenne Australian Open: Hénin-Hardenne Indian Wells: Hénin-Hardenne Amelia Island: Davenport Roland Garros: Myskina Wimbledon: Sharapova San Diego: Davenport Olympics: Hénin-Hardenne U. S. Open: Kuznetsova Filderstadt: Davenport Moscow: Myskina Los Angeles Champ: Sharapova Won Title Beating One Top Ten Player (Total of 10): Doha: Myskina Miami: S. Williams Berlin: Mauresmo Rome: Mauresmo Strasbourg: Schaul Cincinnati: Davenport New Haven: Bovina Beijing: S. Williams Zürich: Molik Philadelphia: Mauresmo Won Title Without Facing a Top Ten Player (Total of 9): Gold Coast: Sugiyama (Top Opponent: Petrova/#12) Auckland: Daniilidou (Top Opponent: Suárez/#14) Charleston: V. Williams (Top Opponent: Zvonareva/#11) Warsaw: V. Williams (Top Opponent: Zvonareva/#11) Eastbourne: Kuznetsova (Top Opponent: Zvonareva/#14) Stanford: Davenport (Top Opponent: V. Williams/#15) Los Angeles: Davenport (Top Opponent: Petrova/#12) Canadian Open: Mauresmo (Top Opponent: Zvonareva/#14) Bali: Kuznetsova (Top Opponent: Petrova/#13) Won Title Without Facing a Top Fifteen Player (Total of 6): Pan Pacific: Davenport (Top Opponent: Dokic/#17) Paris: Clijsters (Top Opponent: Farina Elia/#20) Antwerp: Clijsters (Top Opponent: Farina Elia/#19) Birmingham: Sharapova (Top Opponent: Schnyder/#20) Hasselt: Dementieva (Top Opponent: Bovina/#17) Linz: Mauresmo (Top Opponent: Sugiyama/#16) Won Title Without Facing a Top Twenty Player (Total of 5): Canberra: Suárez (Top Opponent: Farina Elia/#23) Memphis: Zvonareva (Top Opponent: Raymond/#24) Dubai: Hénin-Hardenne (Top Opponent: Martinez/#21) Stockholm: Molik (Top Opponent: Farina Elia/#21) Luxembourg: Molik (Top Opponent: Farina Elia/#23) Won Title Without Facing a Top Thirty Player (Total of 8): Hobart: Frazier (Top Opponent: Likhovtseva/#38) Bogota: Zuluaga (Top Opponent: Sanchez Lorenzo/#43) Acapulco: Benesova (Top Opponent: Loit/#42) Vienna: Smashnova (Top Opponent: Frazier/#38) ’s-Hertogenbosch: Pierce (Top Opponent: Krasnoroutskaya/#44) Forest Hills: Likhovtseva (Top Opponent: Benesova/#47) GuangZhou: Li Na (Top Opponent: Jankovic/#36) Tashkent: Vaidisova (Top Opponent: Shaughnessy/#47) Won Title Without Facing a Top Fifty Player (Total of 10): Hyderabad: Pratt (Top Opponent: Bartoli/#53) Casablanca: Loit (Top Opponent: Cervanova/#72) Estoril: Loit (Top Opponent: Benesova/#60) Budapest: Jankovic (Top Opponent: Sucha/#69) Palermo: Medina Garrigues (Top Opponent: Chladkova/#63) Sopot: Pennetta (Top Opponent: Koukalova/#71) Vancouver: Vaidisova (Top Opponent: Sequera/#74) Seoul: Sharapova (Top Opponent: Stosur/#81) Japan Open: Sharapova (Top Opponent: Washington/#61) Quebec City: Sucha (Top Opponent: Schaul/#63)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 44 Number of Tournament Wins for Highlight Players The following table shows tournament wins by the highlight players. Tournaments are categorized as major (Tier II or higher) or minor (Tier III or lower). The tournaments are listed, with their tier, on the next line. Highlight players with no titles were (those marked * ended the year in the Top 25): Daja Bedanova, Jennifer Capriati*, Amanda Coetzer, Nathalie Déchy*, Jelena Dokic, Silvia Farina Elia*, Tatiana Golovin, Daniela Hantuchova, Lina Krasnoroutskaya, Anne Kremer, Iva Majoli, Magdalena Maleeva*, Conchita Martinez, Tatiana Panova, Nadia Petrova*, Lisa Raymond, Chanda Rubin, Dinara Safina, Francesca Schiavone*, Patty Schnyder*, Magui Serna, Meghann Shaughnessy, Karolina Sprem*, Alexandra Stevenson, Tamarine Tanasugarn, Sandrine Testud, Iroda Tulyaganova, and Maria Vento-Kabchi. Non-highlight players with titles were: Iveta Benesova (Acapulco), Jelena Jankovic (Budapest), Anabel Medina Garrigues (Palermo), Li Na (Guangzhou), Flavia Pennetta (Sopot), Nicole Pratt (Hyderabad), Claudine Schaul (Strasbourg), Martina Sucha (Quebec City), and Nicole Vaidisova (Vancouver, Tashkent). Vaidisova and Loit were the only players with multiple titles to end up outside the Top 25. Every player who won a Tier II or higher ended the year in the Top 25.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 45 Rank Name Major Wins Minor Wins Total Wins 15 Bovina 1 1 New Haven (II) 22 Clijsters 2 2 Paris (II), Antwerp (II) 34 Daniilidou 1 1 Auckland (IV) 1 Davenport 6 1 7 Pan Paciﬁc (I), Amelia Island (II), Stanford (II), Los Angeles (II), San Diego (I), Cincinnati (III), Filderstadt (II) 6 Dementieva 1 1 Hasselt (III) 26 Frazier 1 1 Hobart (V) 8 Hénin-Hardenne 5 5 Sydney (II), Australian Open (Slam), Dubai (II), Indian Wells (I), Olympics (Oly) 5 Kuznetsova 2 1 3 Eastbourne (II), U. S. Open (Slam), Bali (III) 24 Likhovtseva 1 1 Forest Hills (V) 45 Loit 2 2 Casablanca (V), Estoril (IV) 2 Mauresmo 5 5 Berlin (I), Rome (I), Canadian Open (I), Linz (II), Philadelphia (II) 13 Molik 1 2 5 Stockholm (IV), Zürich (I), Luxembourg (III) 3 Myskina 3 3 Doha (II), Roland Garros (Slam), Moscow (I) 29 Pierce 1 1 ’s-Hertogenbosch (III) 4 Sharapova 2 3 5 Birmingham (III), Wimbledon (Slam), Seoul (V), Japan Open (III), Los Angeles Championships (Champ) 32 Smashnova 1 1 Vienna (III) 16 Suárez 1 1 Canberra (V) 17 Sugiyama 1 1 Gold Coast (III) 7 S. Williams 2 2 Miami (I), Beijing (II) 9 V. Williams 2 2 Charleston (I), Warsaw (II) 23 Zuluaga 1 1 Bogota (III) 11 Zvonareva 1 1 Memphis (III)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 46 Fraction of Tournaments Won Sorted in descending order of percent won. Includes all Top Thirty players, plus all players with WTA titles. Note that Challenger titles do not count as titles but do count as events (e.g. Benesova won Ortisei; this is not counted as a title, but does count toward her event total). WTA Rank Player Tournaments Played Tournaments Won Percent Won 8 Hénin-Hardenne, Justine 9 5 55.6% 1Davenport, Lindsay 17 7 41.2% 22 Clijsters, Kim 6 2 33.3% 2 Mauresmo, Amélie 17 5 29.4% 4 Sharapova, Maria 20 5 25.0% 77 Vaidisova, Nicole 11 2 18.2% 7Williams, Serena 12 2 16.7% 3 Myskina, Anastasia 19 3 15.8% 13 Molik, Alicia 22 3 13.6% 5Kuznetsova, Svetlana 22 3 13.6% 9Williams, Venus 16 2 12.5% 80 Li Na 10 1 10.0% 45 Loit, Emilie 23 2 8.7% 29 Pierce, Mary 18 1 5.6% 26 Frazier, Amy 18 1 5.6% 16 Suárez, Paola 19 1 5.3% 15 Bovina, Elena 19 1 5.3% 23 Zuluaga, Fabiola 21 1 4.8% 34 Daniilidou, Eleni 22 1 4.5% 6 Dementieva, Elena 22 1 4.5% 51 Pratt, Nicole 24 1 4.2% 17 Sugiyama, Ai 24 1 4.2% 32 Smashnova, Anna 25 1 4.0% 24 Likhovtseva, Elena 25 1 4.0% 39 Medina Garrigues, Anabel 26 1 3.8% 11 Zvonareva, Vera 26 1 3.8% 38 Pennetta, Flavia 27 1 3.7% 57 Sucha, Martina 28 1 3.6% 28 Jankovic, Jelena 28 1 3.6% 61 Schaul, Claudine 29 1 3.4% 36 Benesova, Iveta 32 1 3.1% 30 Raymond, Lisa 19 0 0% 27 Golovin, Tatiana 15 0 0% 25 Maleeva, Magdalena 25 0 0% 21 Déchy, Nathalie 24 0 0% 20 Farina Elia, Silvia 24 0 0% 19 Schiavone, Francesca 23 0 0% 18 Sprem, Karolina 23 0 0% 14 Schnyder, Patty 23 0 0% 12 Petrova, Nadia 25 0 0% 10 Capriati, Jennifer 12 0 0%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 47 Tiers of Tournaments Played and Average Tier The goal of this statistic is to determine just how “rich” each player’s schedule was, expressed as a number correlating with the tier. The Slams and the Los Angeles Championships are treated mathematically as “Tier 0,” the Olympics as Tier II, and Challengers as “Tier 8.” That is, in taking the mean (average), we assign 0 points for playing a Slam or the Championships, 1 point for a Tier I, 2 for a Tier II, etc. The lower the mean and median strength, the tougher one’s schedule.) In each category, we list the number of events the player played at that level, and then the percentage of her total she played at that level. So Bovina, for instance, played four Slams, and nineteen total events, so the four Slams are 21% of the events she played this year. The mean is, of course, the “average” Tier of tournament played, based on the above formula; the median is the middle tournament — i.e. as many stronger as weaker. In context, the latter statistic doesn’t mean much; effectively all top players have their median tournament somewhere around the Tier I/Tier II divide. Looking at the results on the next page, we see that the Top Five in terms of strongest (highest average tier) schedules were Serena Williams (the second year in a row she’s had the richest schedule on the Tour), Capriati (#3 in 2003 and #1 in 2002), Venus Williams (#2 last year), Mauresmo, and Dementieva. The weakest schedules were played by Kremer, Testud, Loit, Panova, and Tanasugarn, three of whom were coming back from injury and none of whom were top players; the weakest schedule for a top player was Farina Elia’s. Overall, except for the Williams Sisters and Capriati, there weren’t many absurd schedules played. If we wish to look at the “typical” player, based on the listed players, we find that she played 18.3% of her events at Slams, .9% at the Championships, 30.3% at the Tier I events, 33.5% at the Tier II level, 11.7% at the Tier III level, 2.0% at the Tier IV level, 1.9% at the Tier V level, and 1.4% at the Challenger level. The table below shows how many events would be “expected” of a player with 6, 8, 10, 12, events, etc. Note that, once we get to 26 events, players are “expected” to play five Slams, which is obviously impossible; players’ schedules inevitably get weaker as they play more events. Events Expected Expected Expected Expected Expected Expected Expected Expected Played: Slams Champ Tier I Tier II Tier III Tier IV Tier V Challeng 6 10221000 8 10231000 10 20331000 12 20441000 14 30452000 16 30552000 18 30562000 20 40672000 22 40773000 24 40783000 26 50893100 28 50893110 We can, incidentally, determine who has the most and least deviant schedules on this basis. (The method used, for those who care, is RMS distance: Square root of the sum of the squares of the fraction of events played at each tier divided by the average fraction of events played at each tier.) By this standard, the most deviant schedule, unsurprisingly, was turned in by Hénin-Hardenne (who didn’t have much choice), followed by Kremer, Suárez (that one surprised me. But she’s too weak in Tier II events), Loit, and Testud. The players with the most typical schedules were Sugiyama, Daniilidou, Maleeva, Myskina (who was the most typical of all in 2003) and Zvonareva. But enough of this. The actual data follows:

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 48 Slams Champ Tier I Tier II Tier III Tier IV Tier V Chall Total Mean Median Bovina 4 (21%) 6 (32%) 7 (37%) 1 (5%) 1 (5%) 19 1.42 I Capriati 3 (25%) 5 (42%) 4 (33%) 12 1.08 I Clijsters 1 (17%) 2 (33%) 2 (33%) 1 (17%) 6 1.50 I/II Daniilidou 4 (18%) 6 (27%) 8 (36%) 2 (9%) 1 (5%) 1 (5%) 22 1.68 II Davenport 4 (24%) 1 (6%) 5 (29%) 5 (29%) 2 (12%) 17 1.24 I Déchy 4 (17%) 9 (38%) 9 (38%) 2 (8%) 24 1.38 I Dementieva 4 (18%) 1 (5%) 9 (41%) 7 (32%) 1 (5%) 22 1.18 I Dokic 3 (19%) 6 (38%) 6 (38%) 1 (6%) 16 1.31 I Farina Elia 4 (17%) 5 (21%) 9 (38%) 4 (17%) 1 (4%) 1 (4%) 24 1.83 II Frazier 4 (22%) 4 (22%) 5 (28%) 3 (17%) 1 (6%) 1 (6%) 18 1.78 II Golovin 4 (27%) 6 (40%) 3 (20%) 2 (13%) 15 1.20 I Hantuchova 4 (16%) 9 (36%) 9 (36%) 3 (12%) 25 1.44 I Hénin-Hardenne 3 (33%) 1 (11%) 5 (56%) 9 1.22 II Krasnoroutskaya 2 (15%) 4 (31%) 4 (31%) 3 (23%) 13 1.62 II Kremer 2 (7%) 4 (15%) 8 (30%) 4 (15%) 2 (7%) 7 (26%) 27 3.56 II Kuznetsova 4 (18%) 1 (5%) 6 (27%) 8 (36%) 2 (9%) 1 (5%) 22 1.50 I/II Likhovtseva 4 (16%) 8 (32%) 9 (36%) 2 (8%) 2 (8%) 25 1.68 II Loit 4 (17%) 6 (26%) 3 (13%) 5 (22%) 1 (4%) 3 (13%) 1 (4%) 23 2.35 II Maleeva 4 (16%) 8 (32%) 9 (36%) 4 (16%) 25 1.52 II Martinez 4 (24%) 5 (29%) 7 (41%) 1 (6%) 17 1.29 I Mauresmo 4 (24%) 1 (6%) 4 (24%) 8 (47%) 17 1.18 I Molik 4 (18%) 6 (27%) 7 (32%) 3 (14%) 2 (9%) 22 1.68 II Myskina 4 (21%) 1 (5%) 6 (32%) 6 (32%) 2 (11%) 19 1.26 I Panova 4 (17%) 7 (30%) 4 (17%) 4 (17%) 1 (4%) 1 (4%) 2 (9%) 23 2.26 II Petrova 4 (16%) 9 (36%) 8 (32%) 4 (16%) 25 1.48 I Pierce 3 (17%) 7 (39%) 5 (28%) 3 (17%) 18 1.44 I Raymond 4 (21%) 7 (37%) 6 (32%) 2 (11%) 19 1.32 I Rubin 3 (27%) 3 (27%) 3 (27%) 2 (18%) 11 1.36 I Saﬁna 4 (20%) 4 (20%) 7 (35%) 5 (25%) 20 1.65 II Schiavone 4 (17%) 7 (30%) 10 (43%) 2 (9%) 23 1.43 II Schnyder 4 (17%) 6 (26%) 10 (43%) 3 (13%) 23 1.52 II Serna 4 (18%) 5 (23%) 10 (45%) 3 (14%) 22 1.55 II Sharapova 4 (20%) 1 (5%) 8 (40%) 3 (15%) 3 (15%) 1 (5%) 20 1.35 I Shaughnessy 4 (18%) 5 (23%) 9 (41%) 3 (14%) 1 (5%) 22 1.64 II Smashnova 4 (16%) 7 (28%) 10 (40%) 2 (8%) 2 (8%) 25 1.64 II Sprem 4 (17%) 9 (39%) 7 (30%) 2 (9%) 1 (4%) 23 1.48 I Stevenson 3 (18%) 3 (18%) 8 (47%) 2 (12%) 1 (6%) 17 1.94 II Suárez 4 (21%) 9 (47%) 3 (16%) 1 (5%) 1 (5%) 1 (5%) 19 1.42 I Sugiyama 4 (17%) 8 (33%) 9 (38%) 3 (13%) 24 1.46 I/II Tanasugarn 4 (15%) 6 (23%) 7 (27%) 6 (23%) 2 (8%) 1 (4%) 26 1.96 II Testud 1 (9%) 2 (18%) 3 (27%) 1 (9%) 1 (9%) 1 (9%) 2 (18%) 11 3.27 II Vento-Kabchi 4 (14%) 7 (25%) 11 (39%) 4 (14%) 2 (7%) 28 1.82 II Williams, Serena 3 (25%) 1 (8%) 4 (33%) 4 (33%) 12 1.00 I Williams, Venus 4 (25%) 6 (38%) 6 (38%) 16 1.13 I Zuluaga 4 (19%) 9 (43%) 6 (29%) 1 (5%) 1 (5%) 21 1.38 I Zvonareva 4 (15%) 1 (4%) 9 (35%) 9 (35%) 3 (12%) 26 1.38 I

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 49 Points Earned Week by Week The following table shows the week-by-week point totals earned by the Top Twenty (which of course also shows when they will have to defend next year). Results due to winning events are bold. B C D D F H K M M M P S S S S S S S V Z O A A E A É U A O Y E C C H P U U V V P V M R N Z U L S T H H A R A G W W O I R E E I I N R I K R I N R E R I I I N N I N N N N E E K I O A Y A M E Y L L A week A A P T A T S N V V D P Z A L L R of T O I S M A A O E O M I I E 1/10/04 175 116 1 20 39 59 182 20 1/16/04 48 166 76 76 328 1 226 79 130 1 64 123 1 35 2/1/04 40 270 2 130 958 68 216 148 302 240446 72 2 68 36 84 122 2/8/04 363 1 1 44 79 85 2/15/04 92 53 68 69 1 66.75 2/22/04 200 57 71 129 174 2/29/04 1 250 277 35 72 1 121 64 3/7/04 124 67 113 264 1 282 1 3/21/04 270 477 110 30 210 32 1 50 1 32 57 4/4/04 32 380 32 53 90 198 68 78 130 68 1 428 122 32 4/11/04 353 1 71 161 284 41 177 1 37 50 104 27 79 87 4/18/04 14 52 93 50 1 87 247 48 26 44 374 102 5/2/04 33 59 199 64 184 27 311 113 5/9/04 27 210 46 137 394 85 52 56 72 172 134 52 286 29 5/16/04 80 353 1 116 128 451 1 1 1 99 35 89 35 69 57 184 188 5/23/04 136 71 117 38 6/6/04 72 542 122 842 48 34 106 256 2 1086 68 114 52 250 2 378 48 210 274 80 6/13/04 42 181172 6/19/04 60 1 258 113 27.75 1401 48 59 111 7/4/04 36 284 424 2 122 2 440 72 92 136 48 48 1022 386 190 206 704 40 134 7/18/04 282 59 59 187 7/25/04 396 156 187 60 111 18 35 238 125 57 8/1/04 75 461 183 1571 118 315 11185 33 33 91 108 203 8/8/04 52 94 1 51 401 136 189 159 50 120 52 57 198 8/15/04 78 8/22/04 175 1 21 435 107 286 280 150 24 86 52 46 35 101 39 116 8/28/04 273 64 106 27 1 9/12/04 88 544 456 806 76 128 1016 254 40 40 432 118 148 92 2 68 138 278 154 136 9/19/04 194 1 90 1 9/26/04 197 59 102 323 102 10/3/04 154 163 20 38 112 26 10/10/04 37 413 1 52 145 254 52 137 1139137 111 1 10/17/04 193 166 322 177 476 77 133 1 57 1 187121 10/24/04 65 193 1 471 113 1 216 310 1 95 95 100 1 10/31/04 200 74 272 199 121 1 1 1 74 1 72 11/7/04 59 283 72 51 177 138 68 240 11/15/04 214 67 156 351 368 684 531 67

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 50 Tournament Results (Points Earned), Sorted from Most to Least The table below sorts the results for the Top Twenty from most points per tournament to least. Thus, the row labelled “1” lists each player’s best result, the row “2” lists the next-best, and so on. The seventeenth tournament (the last to count toward the WTA rankings) is highlighted. T B C D D F H K M M M P S S S S S S S V Z o O A A E A É U A O Y E C C H P U U V u V P V M R N Z U L S T H H A R A G W W O r I R E E I I N R I K R I N R E R I I I N n N I N N N N E E K I O A Y A M E Y L L A A A P T A T S N V V D P Z A L L R # T O I S M A A O E O M I I E 1 273 544 461 842 200 958 1016 451 471 1086 432 184 446 1022 386 378 206 704 374 240 2 200 542 456 806 130 477 277 440 280 476 198 133 247 684 172 190 182 531 311 203 3 193 353 424 380 122 435 264 401 199 368 177 130 216 310 130 134 138 428 286 198 4 154 284 413 322 116 328 258 394 148 315 177 118 148 250 129 123 121 323 274 188 5 92 210 396 193 76 250 199 351 136 302 136 114 81 172 120 104 101 278 187 174 688124 363 183 76 161 197 286 118 282 121 111 59 138 66.75 95 95 238 154 136 78094 353 163 74 128 194 284 117 210 116 99 57 137 64 69 91 210 125 134 87564 282 156 71 113 156 283 90 189 113 86 56 112 57 68 79 184 122 122 97259 270 106 71 34 145 272 72 150 90 69 52 102 50 68 74 108 100 121 10 65 52 270 76 68 137 256 72 137 87 68 52 92 48 68 59 79 87 116 11 60 32 214 67 67 128 254 52 92 77 59 48 89 48 59 57 44 85 113 12 52 1 175 53 59 110 254 42 85 68 59 39 85 46 52 57 1 84 111 13 48 166 50 52 107 226 41 79 60 48 37 78 39 35 52 68 102 14 40 166 46 51 106 216 40 78 59 40 35 72 35 33 48 64 102 15 37 136 2 48 87 113 35 72 52 40 27 72 33 32 38 40 87 16 36 122 2 32 77 64 30 51 32 38 20 71 26 26 36 39 80 17 33 93 1 21 75 1 27.75 40 27 1 18 50 2 1 35 72 18 27 1 20 68 21241150 2 1 27 67 19 14 1 157 1121144 2 1 1 57 20 1 1 53 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 57 21 1 121 111 1 1 35 22 1 111 111 1 1 32 23 1 111 1 1 29 24 1 1 1 20 25 1 1 26 1

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 51 Alternate Rankings There is nothing magic about the WTA’s Best 17 rankings; they emphasize a certain sort of results. Alternate rankings simply slice the data other ways. A typical way would be to use some of the WTA’s earlier ranking systems, such as “Best Infinity”: This system adds up the total points from all the tournaments a player played, whether the number of events be 6 (for Kim Clijsters) or 26 (for Vera Zvonareva). It is essentially the system used by the WTA in 1997, except for differences in the point table. Total Points Ranking (1997 Ranking System) Total Points Rank Player Total Tournaments WTA Rank 1 Davenport 4760 17 1 2 Mauresmo 4546 17 2 3 Myskina 4014 19 3 4 Kuznetsova 3714 22 5 5 Sharapova 3631 20 4 6 Dementieva 3453 22 6 7 S. Williams 3128 12 7 8 Hénin-Hardenne 2884 9 8 9 Zvonareva 2598 26 11 10 V. Williams 2400 16 9 11 Capriati 2359 12 10 12 Petrova 2054 25 12 13 Molik 1976.75 22 13 14 Schnyder 1644 23 14 15 Bovina 1639 19 15 16 Suárez 1537 19 16 17 Sugiyama 1502 24 17 18 Sprem 1459.75 23 18 19 Schiavone 1403 23 19 20 Déchy 1362 24 21 21 Farina Elia 1360 24 20 22 Clijsters 1326 6 22 23 Zuluaga 1300.25 21 23 24 Likhovtseva 1278.75 25 24 25 Maleeva 1187 25 25 Frazier 1150 18 26 Golovin 1126.75 15 27 Pierce 1044 18 29 Raymond 1034 19 30 Hantuchova 990 25 31 Smashnova 941 25 32 Daniilidou 912.25 22 34 Shaughnessy 790 22 40 Martinez 761 17 42 Saﬁna 759.75 20 44 Best 17 usually not differ much from Total Points, but there are some noticeable differences this year: We have a change at the #4, there Svetlana Kuznetsova passes Maria Sharapova, plus Vera Zvonareva boots Jennifer Capriati out of the Top Ten.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 52 If Best 17 and Total Score rankings are almost identical (since both are additive rankings), the same is not true when either is compared with the WTA’s 1996 ranking system, Points per Tournament (minimum 14). Here the rankings are completely different. Scores are rounded to the nearest tenth of a point. Points Per Tournament, Minimum 14 (1996 Ranking System: “The Divisor”) 1996 Ranking Name Total Points Tournaments Score WTA Rank 1Davenport 4760 17 280.0 1 2 Mauresmo 4546 17 267.4 2 3 S. Williams 3128 12 223.4 7 4 Myskina 4014 19 211.3 3 5 Hénin-Hardenne 2884 9 206.0 8 6 Sharapova 3631 20 181.6 4 7Kuznetsova 3714 22 168.8 5 8 Capriati 2359 12 168.5 10 9 Dementieva 3453 22 157.0 6 10 V. Williams 2400 16 150.0 9 11 Zvonareva 2598 26 99.9 11 12 Clijsters 1326 6 94.7 22 13 Molik 1976.75 22 89.9 13 14 Bovina 1639 19 86.3 15 15 Petrova 2054 25 82.2 12 16 Suárez 1537 19 80.9 16 17 Golovin 1126.75 15 75.1 27 18 Schnyder 1644 23 71.5 14 19 Frazier 1150 18 63.9 26 20 Sprem 1459.75 23 63.5 18 21 Sugiyama 1502 24 62.6 17 22 Zuluaga 1300.25 21 61.9 23 23 Schiavone 1403 23 61.0 19 24 Pierce 1044 18 58.0 29 25 Déchy 1362 24 56.8 21 Farina Elia 1360 24 56.7 20 Raymond 1034 19 54.4 30 Likhovtseva 1278.75 25 51.2 24 Maleeva 1187 25 47.5 25 Rubin 641 11 45.8 53 Martinez 761 17 44.8 42 Daniilidou 912.25 22 41.5 34 Hantuchova 990 25 39.6 31 Saﬁna 759.75 20 38.0 44 Smashnova 941 25 37.6 32 Shaughnessy 790 22 35.9 40 Loit 754.75 23 32.8 45 Vento-Kabchi 684.62 28 24.5 49 Most years, this ranking produces big changes; there have been years (e.g. 1998, 2001) when it changed the top ranking, and it consistently changes the Top Ten. This time, the Top Two stay unchanged, and the same ten players end in the Top Ten — but note Serena Williams climbing to #3, and Justine Hénin-Hardenne rising to #5. But Maria Sharapova and Elena Dementieva see their rankings fall by half. Farther down, big climbers are Clijsters, Golovin, and Frazier, while Farina Elia, Likhovtseva, and Maleeva take hits.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 53 But the old divisor has a problem: Players these days are expected to play at least 17 events (both by the ranking system and the Gold Exempt rules) — meaning they must play more weak events. The Williams Sisters, even when healthy, ignored this, but most others tried to play at least seventeen events. We should, at minimum, adjust the divisor accordingly. So we produce the “modern divisor”: same as the above, but with a minimum divisor of 17, not 14. Points Per Tournament, Minimum 17 (“Modernized Divisor”) ModDiv Rank Name Total Points Tournaments Score WTA Rank 1Davenport 4760 17 280.0 1 2 Mauresmo 4546 17 267.4 2 3 Myskina 4014 19 211.3 3 4 S. Williams 3128 12 184.0 7 5 Sharapova 3631 20 181.6 4 6 Hénin-Hardenne 2884 9 169.6 8 7Kuznetsova 3714 22 168.8 5 8 Dementieva 3453 22 157.0 6 9V. Williams 2400 16 141.2 9 10 Capriati 2359 12 138.8 10 11 Zvonareva 2598 26 99.9 11 12 Molik 1976.75 22 89.9 13 13 Bovina 1639 19 86.3 15 14 Petrova 2054 25 82.2 12 15 Suárez 1537 19 80.9 16 16 Clijsters 1326 6 78.0 22 17 Schnyder 1644 23 71.5 14 18 Golovin 1126.75 15 66.3 27 19 Frazier 1150 18 63.9 26 20 Sprem 1459.75 23 63.5 18 21 Sugiyama 1502 24 62.6 17 22 Zuluaga 1300.25 21 61.9 23 23 Schiavone 1403 23 61.0 19 24 Pierce 1044 18 58.0 29 25 Déchy 1362 24 56.8 21 26 Farina Elia 1360 24 56.7 20 27 Raymond 1034 19 54.4 30 28 Likhovtseva 1278.75 25 51.2 24 29 Maleeva 1187 25 47.5 25 30 Martinez 761 17 44.8 42 31 Daniilidou 912.25 22 41.5 34 32 Hantuchova 990 25 39.6 31 Saﬁna 759.75 20 38.0 44 Rubin 641 11 37.7 53 Smashnova 941 25 37.6 32 Shaughnessy 790 22 35.9 40 Loit 754.75 23 32.8 45 Vento-Kabchi 684.62 28 24.5 49 Panova 484.75 23 21.1 78 This ranking typically resembles the preceding except that injured players lose ground. So it is here; note, e.g. that Serena Williams falls from #3 under the minimum-14 divisor to #4 under this system.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 54 Best 14 The WTA uses the “Best 17” ranking system — totalling the points earned in the seventeen tournaments where one earned the most points. For most of the Nineties, the ATP uses the related “Best 14” system — the total points earned in one’s best fourteen events. If applied to the WTA, the result would be as follows: Best 14 Rank Name Best 14 Total WTA Rank 1Davenport 4409 1 2 Mauresmo 4368 2 3 Myskina 3849 3 4 Dementieva 3443 6 5 Sharapova 3343 4 6Kuznetsova 3294 5 7Williams, Serena 3128 7 8 Hénin-Hardenne 2884 8 9 Capriati 2359 10 10 Williams, Venus 2321 9 11 Zvonareva 2060 11 12 Petrova 1911 12 13 Molik 1878 13 14 Schnyder 1573 14 15 Bovina 1492 15 16 Suárez 1476 16 17 Sprem 1390.75 18 18 Sugiyama 1360 17 19 Clijsters 1326 22 20 Schiavone 1318 19 21 Zuluaga 1293.25 23 22 Déchy 1242 21 23 Likhovtseva 1240.75 24 24 Farina Elia 1233 20 25 Maleeva 1176 25 Golovin 1125.75 27 Frazier 1107 26 Pierce 1040 29 Raymond 1029 30 Jankovic 983 28 Hantuchova 908 31 Daniilidou 903.25 34 Smashnova 898 32 Shaughnessy 782 40 Martinez 758 42 Saﬁna 752.75 44 Loit 743.75 45 Vento-Kabchi 649 49 Theoretically, this isn’t very different from Best 17, but the effects have differed over time. In 2003, Best 14 and Best 17 produced the same Top Eight — but in 2001, the difference affected the #1 ranking; Jennifer Capriati rather than Lindsay Davenport would have been on top. This year we’re in the middle; the ﬁrst change is at #4, with Dementieva moving ahead of Sharapova and Kuznetsova. This is the ultimate problem with best-however-many rankings: If the number of events is high, it rewards players who play a lot; if the number is low; it rewards a few big results over consistency.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 55 Slotted Best 18 (ATP Entry Rank) This is the men’s “ranking” system. I put “ranking” in quotes because of several complications — the most notable being the discontinuity (top players are expected to play Masters Series events, while lower-ranked players need not). It’s very hard to rank on this system if players aren’t playing to it. But anyway.... The ATP system counts a player’s results in Slams, Masters Series (equivalent to the WTA’s Tier I events), and five other events, plus the year-end Championships if qualified. In the table, “Slam Points, LA Champ Points, Tier I Points” refer to what the players earned at those “Required” events; “Optional Points” are what the players earned in their five best other events (Note: The WTA has ten, not nine, Tier I events. We’ll count all ten). The last column, “Required Events,” counts how many “required: events players played. If the players followed the ATP rules, the number should be 14. Note that no player played all 14. Slotted WTA Player Slam LA Champ Tier I Optional Total Required Rank Rank Name Points Points Points Points Slotted Pts Events 11Davenport 1272 214 1353 1619 4458 9 22Mauresmo 1166 351 1247 1379 4143 8 33Myskina 1520 368 1276 726 3890 10 44Sharapova 1436 684 778 661 3559 12 56Dementieva 1652 67 1177 554 3450 13 67S. Williams 1192 531 764 641 3128 7 75Kuznetsova 1192 156 562 1195 3105 10 88Hénin-Hardenne 1120 0 477 1287 2884 4 99V. Williams 552 0 1054 755 2361 10 10 10 Capriati 1370 0 741 248 2359 8 11 11 Zvonareva 472 67 931 754 2224 13 12 12 Petrova 638 0 562 681 1881 13 13 13 Molik 262 0 711 804 1777 10 14 14 Schnyder 694 0 556 288 1538 10 15 16 Suárez 704 0 510 322 1536 13 16 15 Bovina 236 0 492 779 1507 10 17 17 Sugiyama 428 0 433 537 1398 12 18 18 Sprem 392 0 597 357.75 1346.75 13 19 22 Clijsters 662 0 75 589 1326 3 20 23 Zuluaga 556 0 352 389.25 1297.25 13 21 19 Schiavone 320 0 362 580 1262 11 22 24 Likhovtseva 192 0 712 340.75 1244.75 12 23 21 Déchy 300 0 467 459 1226 13 24 27 Golovin 432 0 333.75 361 1126.75 10 25 25 Maleeva 384 0 416 310 1110 12 30 Raymond 516 0 71 444 1031 11 26 Frazier 402 0 206 423 1031 8 20 Farina Elia 376 0 151 492 1019 9 29 Pierce 298 0 132 569 999 10 31 Hantuchova 216 0 259 410 885 13 34 Daniilidou 202 0 287.75 391 880.75 10 32 Smashnova 132 0 301 407 840 11 42 Martinez 46 0 514 198 758 9 Because it is so very different, the effects of this ranking system vary from year to year. In 2002 and 2003, its effects were minimal. In 2001, however, seven of the top ten positions would have changes hands, including the #1 ranking. This year, the effects are intermediate: Same Top 4, but Kuznetsova falls to #7.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 56 Total Wins The list below shows how the top players fared in terms of wins (I also show losses for balance). The reason this deviates so far from the rankings, apart from the top two, is that some of these players (e.g. Jankovic) played large numbers of low-tier (Tier III-V) tournaments and qualifying rounds. Since they faced low-level opposition, their wins do not count as much toward the rankings. Others were unwilling or unable to play many tournaments. Though their winning percentage was high (witness Serena Williams), their total wins were relatively low. Where two players have the same number of wins, I list the player with fewer losses first. Note: As elsewhere, this list includes only official tour wins; non-point-bearing events (e.g. Fed Cup) are excluded. Walkovers are not calculated as wins or losses. The list is not comprehensive; it omits player who spent their time primarily in Challengers (e.g. Ana Ivanovic, who had dozens of Challenger wins this year but had only three WTA main draw wins). Only the Top 30 plus highlight players have been examined. Finally, the numbers here may not match those in the section on the Top Eighty. That section listed only main draw wins; this includes Challenger and Qualifying results as well. Rank Player Wins Losses WTA Rank 1Davenport 63 9 1 2 Mauresmo 59 11 2 3Kuznetsova 57 20 5 4 Sharapova 55 15 4 5Zvonareva 52 27 11 6 Myskina 48 17 3 7 Molik 45 19 13 8Williams, Venus 42 12 9 8Farina Elia 42 24 20 10 Petrova 40 25 12 11 Williams, Serena 39 9 7 11 Dementieva 39 23 6 13 Bovina 38 17 15 14 Suárez 37 18 16 15 Jankovic 36 27 28 16 Hénin-Hardenne 35 4 8 16 Frazier 35 17 26 16 Loit 35 22 45 16 Schiavone 35 23 19 20 Sprem 34 23 18 21 Golovin 33 15 27 21 Schnyder 33 21 14 21 Sugiyama 33 23 17 24 Déchy 32 23 21 25 Zuluaga 31 20 23 26 Capriati 29 12 10 27 Likhovtseva 28 24 24 27 Smashnova 28 24 32 29 Maleeva 27 25 25 30 Pierce 25 17 29 30 Daniilidou 25 21 34 32 Safina 24 20 44 32 Hantuchova 24 24 31 34 Raymond 22 20 30 35 Shaughnessy 20 22 40 36 Martinez 19 17 42 37 Clijsters 18 2 22 38 Rubin 17 10 53

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 57 Winning Percentage Based on the data on wins above, we can also calculate these players’ win percentages. The presence of Kim Clijsters at the top is an artifact, since she withdrew from two events. It’s little surprise that Justine Hénin- Hardenne is next. The demotions are more surprising: Anastasia Myskina down to #9, Vera Zvonareva #16, Elena Dementieva #19, Karolina Sprem #25. But this almost always happens with this statistic. Rank Name Wins Losses Win% WTA Rank 1 Clijsters 18 2 90.0% 22 2 Hénin-Hardenne 35 4 89.7% 8 3Davenport 63 9 87.5% 1 4 Mauresmo 59 11 84.3% 2 5Williams, Serena 39 9 81.3% 7 6 Sharapova 55 15 78.6% 4 7Williams, Venus 42 12 77.8% 9 8Kuznetsova 57 20 74.0% 5 9 Myskina 48 17 73.8% 3 10 Capriati 29 12 70.7% 10 11 Molik 45 19 70.3% 13 12 Bovina 38 17 69.1% 15 13 Golovin 33 15 68.8% 27 14 Frazier 35 17 67.3% 26 15 Suárez 37 18 67.3% 16 16 Zvonareva 52 27 65.8% 11 17 Farina Elia 42 24 63.6% 20 18 Rubin 17 10 63.0% 53 19 Dementieva 39 23 62.9% 6 20 Petrova 40 25 61.5% 12 21 Loit 35 22 61.4% 45 22 Schnyder 33 21 61.1% 14 23 Zuluaga 31 20 60.8% 23 24 Schiavone 35 23 60.3% 19 25 Sprem 34 23 59.6% 18 Pierce 25 17 59.5% 29 Sugiyama 33 23 58.9% 17 Déchy 32 23 58.2% 21 Jankovic 36 27 57.1% 28 Saﬁna 24 20 54.5% 44 Daniilidou 25 21 54.3% 34 Likhovtseva 28 24 53.8% 24 Smashnova 28 24 53.8% 32 Martinez 19 17 52.8% 42 Raymond 22 20 52.4% 30 Maleeva 27 25 51.9% 25 Hantuchova 24 24 50.0% 31 Shaughnessy 20 22 47.6% 40 Coetzer 2 3 40% 280 Serna 12 21 36.4% 102 Krasnoroutskaya 7 13 35% 138 Dokic 6 16 27.3% 125

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 58 Divisor Rankings, No Slam Bonus In terms of strength of field, the Slams are no stronger than the Los Angeles Championships or San Diego — or even Filderstadt. But the Slams award double points — at Filderstadt, you earn 225 points for winning the tournament, and 100 points for beating the #1 player, while at a Slam, it’s 650 and 200 points, respectively. The following table calculates divisor rankings if this Slam Bonus (or Slam Bias, as some call it) is eliminated. Surfaces being what they are, I maintain that this is proper: Does winning Roland Garros really tell you three as much about who is going to win Zürich as does winning Filderstadt? As usual with our per-tournament rankings, this system promotes Serena and Hénin-Hardenne while demoting Russians. Rank Player Points Tournaments Score WTA Rank 1Davenport 4124 17 242.6 1 2 Mauresmo 3963 17 233.1 2 3Williams, Serena 2532 12 180.9 7 4 Myskina 3254 19 171.3 3 5 Hénin-Hardenne 2324 9 166.0 8 6 Sharapova 2913 20 145.7 4 7Kuznetsova 3118 22 141.7 5 8Williams, Venus 2124 16 132.8 9 9 Capriati 1674 12 119.6 10 10 Dementieva 2627 22 119.4 6 11 Zvonareva 2362 26 90.8 11 12 Molik 1845.75 22 83.9 13 13 Bovina 1521 19 80.1 15 14 Clijsters 995 6 71.1 22 15 Petrova 1735 25 69.4 12 16 Suárez 1185 19 62.4 16 17 Golovin 910.75 15 60.7 27 18 Schnyder 1297 23 56.4 14 19 Sprem 1263.75 23 54.9 18 20 Schiavone 1243 23 54.0 19 21 Sugiyama 1288 24 53.7 17 22 Frazier 949 18 52.7 26 23 Déchy 1212 24 50.5 21 24 Pierce 895 18 49.7 29 25 Farina Elia 1172 24 48.8 20 Zuluaga 1022.25 21 48.7 23 Likhovtseva 1182.75 25 47.3 24 Martinez 738 17 43.4 42 Raymond 776 19 40.8 30 Maleeva 995 25 39.8 25 Rubin 532 11 38.0 53 Daniilidou 811.25 22 36.9 34 Hantuchova 882 25 35.3 31 Smashnova 875 25 35.0 32 Saﬁna 690.75 20 34.5 44 Shaughnessy 687 22 31.2 40 Dokic 278 16 17.4 125 Krasnoroutskaya 207 13 14.8 138 Serna 273 22 12.4 102

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 59 The “Majors Ranking” It is an unfortunate fact that tennis uses the word “major” as a synonym for “Slam.” It’s unfortunate because it leaves us with no good word for “the best events.” The Slams are, of course, among the strongest events on the tour — but there are usually at least half a dozen other events which are quite competitive in terms of field strength. And many of them aren’t even Tier I events; the Tier II tournaments at Sydney and Filderstadt have traditionally been stronger than the average Tier I. Which gives us the basis for another ranking, the “Majors Ranking.” We take the ten best events, and count results only in those events. In 2004, our list is Sydney, Australian Open, Miami, Rome, Roland Garros, Wimbledon, San Diego, U. S. Open, Filderstadt, and the Los Angeles Championships. (The list does vary from year to year;, as described below) Since all these events are strong, we don’t need quality points. And early losses are worthless. We’ll count only semifinals and better: 1 point for a semifinal, 3 for a final, 5 for a win. By definition, no more than forty players can earn majors points in a year, and in practice fifteen is about normal. It will be evident that the “Majors Ranking” is not useful as an overall ranking system — but it is a good measure of the accomplishments we might count toward Player of the Year. The list of players with at least one Majors point is as follows (I also show the Majors points earned at each event): Major WTA Major Syd- AO Miam Rome RG Wim SD USO Fild LA Rank Rank Player Points ney Cham 11Davenport 13 1 1515 12Mauresmo 13 3 5 1 3 1 37S. Williams 12 5 1 3 3 46Dementieva 10 3 3 1 3 48Hénin-Harde 10 5 5 43Myskina 10 5 3 1 1 44Sharapova 10 5 5 85Kuznetsova 6 5 1 910Capriati 5 3 1 1 10 22 Clijsters 3 3 11 11 Zvonareva 2 1 1 12 34 Daniilidou 1 1 12 12 Petrova 1 1 12 19 Schiavone 1 1 12 14 Schnyder 1 1 12 16 Suárez 1 1 12 23 Zuluaga 1 1 This is a total of seventeen players; which is at the high end of the typical range; their scores, however, are stunningly low. (We might add that, if we replace Miami, which was very weak this year, with the Olympics, Mauresmo is #1 with 16 points and Hénin-Hardenne #2 with 15; Davenport falls to #3). In 2003, we had fourteen players: Kim Clijsters (32 points), Justine Hénin- Hardenne (22), Serena Williams (15), Venus Williams (8), Amélie Mauresmo (6), Jennifer Capriati (5), Lindsay Davenport (5), and the rest with 1 each: Bovina, Kuznetsova, Panova, Petrova, Pierce, Rubin, Sugiyama. In 2002, we had ﬁfteen players: Serena Williams of course led with 29 points, then Venus Williams (16), Clijsters (13), Capriati (11), Hingis (8), Hénin (4), Dokic (3), Hantuchova (3), Mauresmo (3), Shaughnessy (3), Davenport (2), Seles (2), Dementieva (1), C. Fernandez (1), and Kournikova (1). In 2001, when Indian Wells replaced Rome, we had only thirteen Majors point-scorers, despite which the leaders had lower totals: Venus Williams (22), Capriati (15), Davenport (14), Hingis (14), Serena (13), Clijsters, Hénin, Seles, Testud, Dementieva, Martinez, and Mauresmo. In 2000, we must add Philadelphia (substituting for Filderstadt, which in 2000 had its ﬁeld depleted by the Olympics) and the Canadian Open for Indian Wells. We had sixteen players that year; The rankings were: Hingis (24), Davenport (22), Venus (15), Seles (7), Martinez, Mauresmo, Pierce, Serena, Kournikova, Dementieva, Sanchez-Vicario, Capriati, Dokic, Frazier, Tauziat, Testud. In 1999, Filderstadt substitutes for the Canadian Open, and we again had sixteen players: Hingis (31), Davenport (23), Venus (11), Graf (10), Serena (8), Mauresmo, Pierce, Seles, Tauziat, Coetzer, Huber, Lucic, Sanchez-Vicario, Schett, Stevenson, Testud. Since I started compiling this statistic, the highest score has been the 32 points by Clijsters in 2003 (yes, the year she didn’t win any Slams — but won everything else). Prior to that, the biggest score I can guarantee is Martina Hingis’s 43 points in 1997. No doubt players like Graf in 1988 and 1989 scored higher, but I don’t have the tournament strength data to prove it.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 60 Total Round Points Consists of the total round points which a player has earned in tournaments in the last year. Note: All a player’s tournaments are included here, not just her Best 17. In general, a player who does better in this ranking than in the WTA rankings is one who is failing to beat top players, and is attaining ranking by proceeding through easy matches. A player who stands lower in this ranking than the WTA ranking is one who perhaps has bad losses but who also probably has beaten a number of higher-ranked players. We include this because the ATP, in its folly, has ceased to reckon points for quality. Rank Name Total Rnd Pts WTA Rank 1Davenport 3093 1 2 Mauresmo 3026 2 3 Myskina 2587 3 4 Sharapova 2519 4 5Kuznetsova 2441 5 6 Dementieva 2175 6 7Williams, Serena 2079 7 8 Hénin-Hardenne 1911 8 9Zvonareva 1840 11 10 Williams, Venus 1708 9 11 Capriati 1423 10 12 Petrova 1282 12 13 Molik 1215.75 13 14 Sugiyama 1121 17 15 Suárez 1118 16 16 Bovina 1086 15 17 Schnyder 1085 14 18 Farina Elia 995 20 19 Clijsters 971 22 20 Zuluaga 938.25 23 21 Déchy 937 21 22 Schiavone 928 19 23 Sprem 856.75 18 24 Maleeva 797 25 25 Likhovtseva 766.75 24 Frazier 750 26 Hantuchova 696 31 Golovin 683.75 27 Smashnova 673 32 Pierce 656 29 Jankovic 623.75 28 Raymond 609 30 Daniilidou 599.25 34 Loit 590.75 45 Martinez 557 42 Saﬁna 513.75 44 Shaughnessy 499 40 Vento-Kabchi 487.62 49 Rubin 477 53 Tanasugarn 366.75 66

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 61 Round Points Per Tournament This ranking measures, in effect, how far a player typically advanced in a tournament, regardless of opposition. Rank Name Rnd Pts per Trn WTA Rank 1 Hénin-Hardenne 212.3 8 2Davenport 181.9 1 3 Mauresmo 178.0 2 4Williams, Serena 173.3 7 5 Clijsters 161.8 22 6 Myskina 136.2 3 7 Sharapova 126.0 4 8 Capriati 118.6 10 9Kuznetsova 111.0 5 10 Williams, Venus 106.8 9 11 Dementieva 98.9 6 12 Zvonareva 70.8 11 13 Suárez 58.8 16 14 Bovina 57.2 15 15 Molik 55.3 13 16 Petrova 51.3 12 17 Schnyder 47.2 14 18 Sugiyama 46.7 17 19 Golovin 45.6 27 20 Zuluaga 44.7 23 21 Rubin 43.4 53 22 Frazier 41.7 26 23 Farina Elia 41.5 20 24 Schiavone 40.3 19 25 Déchy 39.0 21 Sprem 37.3 18 Pierce 36.4 29 Martinez 32.8 42 Raymond 32.1 30 Maleeva 31.9 25 If, here as elsewhere, we require a minimum of 14 events, we get significant changes in the Top Ten: Rank Name Rnd Pts per Trn WTA Rank 1Davenport 181.9 1 2 Mauresmo 178.0 2 3Williams, Serena 148.5 7 4 Hénin-Hardenne 136.5 8 5 Myskina 136.2 3 6 Sharapova 126.0 4 7Kuznetsova 111.0 5 8Williams, Venus 106.8 9 9 Capriati 101.6 10 10 Dementieva 98.9 6

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 62 Quality Points Per Tournament (“Future Potential Ranking”) The reverse of the above, this ranking calculates the difficulty of the opposition a player has overcome. For players outside the Top Six, it is a good measure of how they stack up against other players, and how likely they are to produce upsets. For the Top Six, it is less meaningful, because the varying levels of quality point awards for the top players (that is, the fact that a win over #1 is worth more than a win over #4) obscures their results. Overall, the Quality Points per Tournament ranking serves best as an indicator of players with lots of room to grow. For 2002, e.g., it “predicted” Daniela Hantuchova, though, to be fair, in 2003 it “predicted” Myriam Casanova. But it redeemed itself last year by picking Maria Sharapova. Interestingly, other than Tatiana Golovin, this year’s list seems to imply that there won’t be too many big surprises next year; looking at Top 200 players whose quality rankings are at far better than their WTA rankings, a large number are injury cases: Hénin-Hardenne, Serena, Capriati, Clijsters, Rubin, Krasnoroutskaya; also Kveta Peschke (WTA #116, Quality Per Tournament #48) or known upset artists (Ruano Pascual, Li Na, Weingärtner); the only notable showings among young players are Golovin, Sesil Karatancheva (WTA #127; QPT #35), Anna Chakvetadze (WTA #84, QPT #39 — but that’s all due to her freak win over Myskina), Nicole Vaidisova (WTA #77, QPT #41), Ana Ivanovic (WTA #97, QPT #55), and maybe Maria Emilia Salerni (WTA #114, QPT #62). We also find players who look to be in trouble, of course. No fewer than four of the Top Ten have QPT- to-WTA rankings of at least 1.5 (i.e. their QPT rankings are half again higher than their WTA rankings); these players must be considered vulnerable to a severe drop. The four are Davenport, Myskina, Kuznetsova, and Sharapova — the last three all extremely dependent on their Slam wins; if they can’t defend, they will fall hard. The only other Top 30 player with such weak quality numbers is Ai Sugiyama.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 63 Rank Name Quality Pts Tournaments Quality per Trn WTA Rank 1 Hénin-Hardenne 973 9 108.1 8 2Davenport 1667 17 98.1 1 3 Mauresmo 1520 17 89.4 2 4Williams, Serena 1049 12 87.4 7 5 Capriati 936 12 78.0 10 6 Myskina 1427 19 75.1 3 7 Clijsters 355 6 59.2 22 8 Dementieva 1278 22 58.1 6 9Kuznetsova 1273 22 57.9 5 10 Sharapova 1112 20 55.6 4 11 Williams, Venus 692 16 43.3 9 12 Molik 761 22 34.6 13 13 Petrova 772 25 30.9 12 14 Golovin 443 15 29.5 27 15 Zvonareva 758 26 29.2 11 16 Bovina 553 19 29.1 15 17 Sprem 603 23 26.2 18 18 Schnyder 559 23 24.3 14 19 Raymond 425 19 22.4 30 20 Frazier 400 18 22.2 26 21 Suárez 419 19 22.1 16 22 Pierce 388 18 21.6 29 23 Schiavone 475 23 20.7 19 24 Likhovtseva 512 25 20.5 24 25 Déchy 425 24 17.7 21 26 Zuluaga 362 21 17.2 23 27 Jankovic 453 28 16.2 28 28 Sugiyama 381 24 15.9 17 29 Maleeva 390 25 15.6 25 30 Farina Elia 365 24 15.2 20 Rubin 164 11 14.9 53 Daniilidou 313 22 14.2 34 Shaughnessy 291 22 13.2 40 Saﬁna 246 20 12.3 44 Martinez 204 17 12.0 42 Hantuchova 294 25 11.8 31 Smashnova 268 25 10.7 32 Tulyaganova 10 1 10 — Panova 178 23 7.7 78 Loit 164 23 7.1 45 Vento-Kabchi 197 28 7.0 49 Tanasugarn 158 26 6.1 66 Krasnoroutskaya 77 13 5.9 138 Kremer 128 27 4.7 94 Serna 85 22 3.9 102 Testud 27 11 2.5 311 Dokic 36 16 2.3 125

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 64 Quality/Round Points Equalized: 2Q+R Per Tournament Calculated by doubling total quality points, adding round points, and dividing the sum by tournaments. The effect of this is to make, very roughly, half of the typical player’s points come from quality and half from round points. This is, in the author’s opinion, about the best way to assess players’ actual performances based solely on WTA ranking data with no manipulation based on winning percentage or surface balance. Rank Name 2Q+R per Trn WTA Rank 1 Hénin-Hardenne 428.6 8 2Davenport 378.1 1 3 Mauresmo 356.8 2 4Williams, Serena 348.1 7 5 Myskina 286.4 3 6 Clijsters 280.2 22 7 Capriati 274.6 10 8 Sharapova 237.2 4 9Kuznetsova 226.7 5 10 Dementieva 215.0 6 11 Williams, Venus 193.3 9 12 Zvonareva 129.1 11 13 Molik 124.4 13 14 Bovina 115.4 15 15 Petrova 113.0 12 16 Golovin 104.7 27 17 Suárez 102.9 16 18 Schnyder 95.8 14 19 Sprem 89.7 18 20 Frazier 86.1 26 21 Schiavone 81.7 19 22 Pierce 79.6 29 23 Zuluaga 79.2 23 24 Sugiyama 78.5 17 25 Raymond 76.8 30 26 Déchy 74.5 21 27 Rubin 73.2 53 28 Farina Elia 71.9 20 29 Likhovtseva 71.6 24 30 Maleeva 63.1 25 Martinez 56.8 42 Daniilidou 55.7 34 Jankovic 54.6 28 Hantuchova 51.4 31 Saﬁna 50.3 44 Shaughnessy 49.1 40 Smashnova 48.4 32 Coetzer 40.0 280 Tulyaganova 32.0 — Krasnoroutskaya 25.0 138 Serna 20.3 102 Dokic 19.8 125

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 65 Consistency-Rewarded Rankings Logarithmic Points Award The WTA’s Best 17 ranking cares nothing for consistency — your best results count, and nothing else. The old WTA divisor ranking took consistency more into account — but big results (e.g. from Slams) still biased the result. The Consistency-Rewarded Rankings give the greatest reward to consistent players. Under this system, it’s better to make two semifinals than to win one event and lose first round in another (the reverse is true under the WTA rankings, even though reaching two semifinals requires at least as many wins). If good results help, bad results hurt. The method is as follows: One takes the natural log — in mathematical terms, ln() — of each weekly score, takes the arithmetic mean (i.e. divide by the number of events), then take the antilog, ex or exp(x). Under this system, a player who is absolutely consistent, producing the same score at every event, will get the same score as under the divisor. A less-consistent player will get a lower score — the less consistent, the lower the score. A consistency-punishing ranking is, of course, also possible — but is functionally equivalent to just ranking players according to their single highest score. Ranking Player Consistency Score WTA Rank 1Davenport 250.7 1 2 Hénin-Hardenne 221.6 8 3 Mauresmo 186.5 2 4Williams, Serena 138.4 7 5 Clijsters 130.2 22 6Williams, Venus 119.3 9 7 Sharapova 96.0 4 8 Myskina 93.8 3 9 Capriati 93.6 10 10 Kuznetsova 91.7 5 11 Bovina 65.9 15 12 Zvonareva 64.0 11 13 Golovin 40.7 27 14 Suárez 37.4 16 15 Frazier 37.2 26 16 Molik 31.1 13 17 Dementieva 26.4 6 18 Petrova 25.7 12 19 Sugiyama 24.4 17 20 Rubin 23.6 53 21 Farina Elia 22.7 20 22 Déchy 22.2 21 23 Schnyder 21.3 14 24 Schiavone 20.7 19 25 Sprem 20.6 18 Pierce 16.7 29 Hantuchova 14.7 31 Zuluaga 13.0 23 Smashnova 12.6 32 Likhovtseva 12.4 24 Probably the most noteworthy thing this year is where Dementieva ends up — #17! Myskina and Sharapova and Sprem also take big hits; Golovin and Frazier and Rubin climb quite spectacularly.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 66 Worst 14 A simpler, though less accurate, way of measuring consistency is to simply take a player’s worst fourteen results. Instead of paying off on good results at the top, this pays off on a lack of bad results. We look only at a subset of the Highlight Players. This is offered mostly for demonstration purposes, but I would ask the real question, why is Best 14/Best 17 any better than Worst 14/17? Neither one counts all results! Worst 14 Rank Player Score WTA Rank 1Davenport 3419 1 2 Mauresmo 3254 2 3Williams, Serena 3128 7 4 Hénin-Hardenne 2884 8 5 Capriati 2359 10 6Williams, Venus 1715 9 7 Myskina 1467 3 8 Clijsters 1326 22 9Kuznetsova 1153 5 10 Sharapova 1055 4 11 Golovin 936.75 27 12 Zvonareva 742 11 13 Bovina 727 15 14 Rubin 641 53 15 Suárez 608 16 16 Frazier 568 26 17 Molik 417.75 13 18 Dementieva 408 6 19 Pierce 361 29 20 Schiavone 359 19 21 Sugiyama 356 17 22 Farina Elia 356 20 23 Petrova 330 12 24 Martinez 308 42 25 Sprem 285 18 Schnyder 282 14 Déchy 281 21 Krasnoroutskaya 248 138 Zuluaga 242 23 Raymond 240 30 Saﬁna 189 44 Hantuchova 170 31 Loit 153.75 45 Likhovtseva 136 24 Smashnova 119 32 The real problem with this system, of course, is that it encourages underplaying; Serena comes out ahead of Myskina because she gets to count all of her best events while Myskina loses her best five. We could control for this — e.g. by taking events off the top, perhaps one event for every two events a player is short of 17 — but this is just a demonstration; you can do it if you want.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 67 Middle Half Another variation on the theme of consistency is to count half your results — but not the best half, the middle half. So if you play twelve events, we count the middle six, omitting the best three and the worst three. If your number of events is not divisible by four, we adjust appropriately. So, e.g., if you have seventeen events, half of that is 8.5. We take the seven middle events (i. e. #6-#12), and 75% of the two around that (i.e. #5 and #13). Applying this formula, we get the following: Middle Half Rank Player Score # of Tourns % of pts in mid half WTA Rank 1Davenport 2348.5 17 49% 1 2 Mauresmo 2321.75 17 51% 2 3 Myskina 1395.5 19 35% 3 4Kuznetsova 1383 22 37% 5 5Williams, Serena 1341 12 43% 7 6Zvonareva 1245.5 26 48% 11 7 Hénin-Hardenne 1161.25 9 40% 8 8 Sharapova 977 20 27% 4 9Williams, Venus 944 16 39% 9 10 Capriati 835 12 35% 10 11 Dementieva 813 22 24% 6 12 Petrova 777.5 25 38% 12 13 Molik 663.875 22 34% 13 14 Sugiyama 653 24 43% 17 15 Schiavone 635 23 45% 19 16 Farina Elia 634 24 47% 20 17 Bovina 612.25 19 37% 15 18 Suárez 581 19 38% 16 19 Déchy 527 24 39% 21 20 Golovin 498.75 15 44% 27 21 Clijsters 485.5 6 37% 22 22 Frazier 468.5 18 41% 26 23 Sprem 465.1875 23 32% 18 24 Schnyder 456 23 28% 14 25 Zuluaga 392.5 21 30% 23 Smashnova 369 25 39% 32 Likhovtseva 367.0625 25 29% 24 Hantuchova 330.5 25 33% 31 Pierce 314.5 18 30% 29 Maleeva 313.75 25 26% 25 Rubin 291.5 11 45% 53 Raymond 255.25 19 25% 30 Saﬁna 230 20 30% 44 Martinez 229.25 17 30% 42 Shaughnessy 222 22 28% 40 Daniilidou 197.25 22 22% 34 Serna 88 22 24% 102 Krasnoroutskaya 33 13 13% 138 Dokic 11 16 4% 125 As a measure of consistency, the higher the percentage in the middle half, the more consistent. So this measure makes Mauresmo the most consistent, followed by Davenport, Zvonareva, and Farina Elia.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 68 Idealized Ranking Systems Idealized Rankings/Proposal 1: Surface-Modified Divisor (Minimum 16) In examining the various ranking systems used (and not used) by the Tours, one notices that each has strengths and weaknesses. The current ATP Tour system has the advantage of enforcing surface balance, but it generally ignores smaller tournaments and has no reward for beating top players. The WTA Tour system has the advantage of encouraging players to play regularly (any good result is likely to increase a player’s ranking total) but encourages overplaying, has no surface balance, and renders losses meaningless. Based on consideration, it seems to me that the following are the key features of an ideal ranking system: 1. Both wins and losses should count. 2. There should be strong rewards for quality; winning a tournament with a weak field should have relatively little value 3. There should be a minimum required number of tournaments, and incentives for playing more than the minimum should be reduced (to prevent injury) but not eliminated 4. Surfaces should be balanced — players should not be allowed to “clean up” by playing more than half their events on a particular surface. 5. The Slam Bias should be reduced (slightly) relative to the stronger tournaments such as Miami. I’ll outline three proposals. The first is closest to the current WTA system: ¥ The system is point-and-divisor based: You earn a certain number of points, and divide them by a number of tournaments. This is probably not the best mathematical model, but it is (relatively) simple. ¥ The minimum divisor should be 16 (in doubles, perhaps 12). This is larger than the divisor of 14 the WTA used in 1996, but smaller than the Best 18 used from 1998 to 2000 or the Best 17 used since 2001. ¥ The Slam Bonus should be reduced from 2 to 1.5 ¥ Quality points should be multiplied by 1.5 (Note that this, combined with the preceding point, means that quality points at Slams will be multiplied by 2.5.) ¥ The current WTA Round Point table may be retained ¥ Players should play at least a certain percentage of their events on all four surfaces: 35% on hardcourts, 14% indoors, 17% on clay, 5% on grass. (This is based on a simple calculation: I took the Top 30, found the percent they played on each surface, sorted the list for each surface, and took the percentage for player #27, rounding to the nearest percent.) This is a total of 71% of one’s schedule accounted for; the other 29% may be played on any surface. If, however, you fail to play the minimum on any given surface, your divisor will be adjusted accordingly. Example: A player plays sixteen events, but only two on clay, or 12.5%. She was supposed to play 17% on clay, meaning she should have played at least three clay events. The difference, one, is added to her divisor; she is treated as if she had played seventeen events. Note: A player cannot be penalized more than two tournaments per surface (only one for grass). ¥ If a player plays beyond the minimum of sixteen, her divisor is reduced by one third of a tournament for each additional tournament played. So, e.g., if she play seventeen tournaments, her divisor is 16.67; if she plays 19, it is 18, etc. ¥ Injured players who miss at least four months are exempt from balance requirements; their ranking is based simply on their points and number of tournaments The result of this calculation are given below. The first column, “Rank,” is the rank under this system. “Player” is self-explanatory. “# of Tourn” is the number of events the player actually played. “Qual Pts,” “Round Pts,” and “Slam Pts” are actual quality points, round points, points in Slams. Surface is events played on each surface — marked * if below the minimum “Penalty Tourns” is the number of extra events assessed for surface imbalance. “Adjust. points” is the adjusted points total — round points plus 1.5xquality points minus one fourth of Slam Points. “Adjust. # Tourn” is the adjusted tournaments played — number of actual tournaments plus penalty tournaments minus bonus tournaments. Score is what you get when you divide Adjusted Points by Adjusted # of Tournaments — the basis of the ranking. WTA Rnk is the player’s WTA rank. Hence:

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 69 Surface-Modified Divisor (Minimum 16) Ranking Table Rank Player # of Qual Round Slam Surface Penalty Adjust. Adjust. Score WTA Tourn Pts Pts Pts C/G/H/I Tourns Points # Tourn Rnk 1 Hénin-Hardenne 9 973 1911 1120 2/0/7/0 0 3090.5 9 343.4 8 2Davenport 17 1667 3093 1272 4/1/8/4 0 5275.5 16.7 316.5 1 3 Mauresmo 17 1520 3026 1166 5/2/6/4 0 5014.5 16.7 300.9 2 4Williams, Serena 12 1049 2079 1192 4/1/5/2* 1 3354.5 13 258.0 7 5 Myskina 19 1427 2587 1520 4/1/10/4 0 4347.5 18 241.5 3 6 Clijsters 6 355 971 662 1/0/2/3 0 1338 6 223.0 22 7Kuznetsova 22 1273 2441 1192 4/2/13/3 0 4052.5 20 202.6 5 8 Sharapova 20 1112 2519 1436 3*/2/10/5 1 3828 19.7 194.6 4 9 Capriati 12 936 1423 1370 4/1/6/1* 1 2484.5 13 191.1 10 10 Dementieva 22 1278 2175 1652 5/1*/9/7 1 3679 21 175.2 6 11 Williams, Venus 16 692 1708 552 4/1/7/4 0 2608 16 163.0 9 12 Zvonareva 26 758 1840 472 6/2/11/7 0 2859 22.7 126.1 11 13 Molik 22 761 1215.75 262 5/3/9/5 0 2291.75 20 114.6 13 14 Petrova 25 772 1282 638 5/3/12/5 0 2280.5 22 103.7 12 15 Bovina 19 553 1086 236 5/2/6*/6 1 1856.5 19 97.7 15 16 Suárez 19 419 1118 704 5/1/9/4 0 1570.5 18 87.2 16 17 Schnyder 23 559 1085 694 6/3/8/6 0 1750 20.7 84.7 14 18 Golovin 15 443 683.75 432 3/2/7/3 0 1240.25 15 82.7 27 19 Sprem 23 603 856.75 392 5/2/9/7 0 1663.25 20.7 80.5 18 20 Schiavone 23 475 928 320 4/2/12/5 0 1560.5 20.7 75.5 19 21 Sugiyama 24 381 1121 428 5/2/12/5 0 1585.5 21.3 74.3 17 22 Déchy 24 425 937 300 4/3/12/5 0 1499.5 21.3 70.3 21 23 Zuluaga 21 362 938.25 556 6/2/9/4 0 1342.25 19.3 69.4 23 24 Frazier 18 400 750 402 4/2/10/2* 1 1249.5 18.3 68.2 26 25 Farina Elia 24 365 995 376 5/2/10/7 0 1448.5 21.3 67.9 20 26 Likhovtseva 25 512 766.75 192 5/3/13/4 0 1486.75 22 67.6 24 27 Raymond 19 425 609 516 4/2/8/5 0 1117.5 18 62.1 30 28 Rubin 11 164 477 218 1/1/8/1 0 668.5 11 60.8 53 29 Pierce 18 388 656 298 5/2/4*/7 2 1163.5 19.3 60.2 29 30 Maleeva 25 390 797 384 5/3/10/7 0 1286 22 58.5 25 Jankovic 28 453 623.75 162 5/3/15/5 0 1262.75 24 52.6 28 Daniilidou 22 313 599.25 202 4/2/11/5 0 1018.25 20 50.9 34 Hantuchova 25 294 696 216 5/3/10/7 0 1083 22 49.2 31 Martinez 17 204 557 46 5/2/10/0* 2 851.5 18.7 45.6 42 Saﬁna 20 246 513.75 138 6/2/8/4 0 848.25 18.7 45.4 44 Smashnova 25 268 673 132 8/2/11/4* 1 1042 23 45.3 32 Shaughnessy 22 291 499 206 5/1/14/2* 1 884 21 42.1 40 Loit 23 164 590.75 84 8/2/9/4 0 815.75 20.7 39.5 45 Coetzer 3 31 58 40 1/0/2/0 0 94.5 3 31.5 280 Vento-Kabchi 28 197 487.62 170 4*/3/16/5 1 740.62 25 29.6 49 Tulyaganova 1 10 12 0 0/0/1/0 0 27 1 27.0 — Panova 23 178 306.75 154.5 5/2/9/7 0 535.125 20.7 25.9 78 Tanasugarn 26 158 366.75 138 4*/3/17/2* 3 569.25 25.7 22.2 66 Krasnoroutskaya 13 77 171 82 2/3/7/1 0 266 13 20.5 138 Dokic 16 36 245 6 5/3/6/2 0 297.5 16 18.6 125 Kremer 27 128 265 126.5 7/3/11/6 0 425.375 23.3 18.2 94

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 70 Idealized Rankings/Proposal 2 — Adjusted Won/Lost The previous ranking system was based on the current WTA point table. Many of our other proposals have also been based on this. But there is nothing magic about the WTA points table — as witness the fact that it gets changed almost every year. We could also use a won/lost system. Except — a player who plays weak events may earn a much higher winning percentage than a better player who plays stronger events. Henrieta Nagyova has nine career titles because she plays a lot of Tier IV tournaments. Anna Kournikova had none, in part, because in her heyday she played mostly Tier II and up. Kournikova was the better player (even in 2003, with Kournikova in her final decline, she beat Nagyova 6Ð 1 6–2), but the Russian doesn’t have the titles, or the winning percentage, to prove it. So if we are to base our system on winning percentage, we must somehow adjust for tournament strength. And we also need to account for wins over top players. And we need to encourage players to play more, within reason. We can do all that. To accomplish the first, we simply diddle with the values of wins: If we define a win at a Tier I or Tier II as being “one standard win,” then a win at a Slam might be 1.1 SWs (for this purpose, we’ll count the year-end championship as a Slam), and a win at a Tier III only 0.8, and a win at a Tier IV or V a mere 0.6. To account for wins over top players, we assign bonus wins. In our system, a top four player gets you an extra .6 wins. Beating a player ranked #5-#10 is worth .4. Beating #11-#20 gets you .2. And a win over #21- #35 is worth .1. To encourage players to play more, we do two things: First, we require you to play sixteen events, and add losses until you do (except for injured players; as it turned out, in 2004, every highlight player with fewer than 16 events was either injured or under age restrictions, so we didn’t apply any penalty losses). And second — and this is the key part — we reduce losses exponentially. Instead of calculating raw wins and losses, we take losses to the .8 power. What this means is that if two players have the same winning percentage, but one has played more, the one who has played more will have a slightly higher adjusted winning percentage. Not much — losses still count! But enough to make it worth playing more if it doesn’t drag your results down. Note: Withdrawals and walkovers do not count as wins or losses. We calculate only a limited list of players, because this ranking is work and would require significant reprogramming by the WTA staff to use as “the” ranking system. In assessing the results, we ask that you remember: This system isn’t designed to look anything like the WTA rankings; it’s a completely different way of looking at the data. You should not look at the results but rather the method. If you approve of the method, then be open to the results. If you don’t accept the method — well, we are generally as surprised by the results as you are. The columns in the table are as follows: Rnk: Player’s rank under this system. Player Name: Just what it says. #Trn: The number of tournaments the player played. Slam W, L: Wins and losses in Slams. Tier I/II W, L: Wins and losses in Tier I and Tier II tournaments. Tier III W, L: Wins and losses in Tier III events. Tier IV+ W, L: Wins and losses in Tier IV, V, and Challenger events. Adj. Wins: Adjusted winning total based on the formula above (i.e. a Slam win counts as 1.1, etc.) Bon Wins: Bonus wins as a result of victories over top players. Pen Loss: Penalty losses assessed for not playing the full 16 events. Tot Wins: Total wins as calculated, i.e. Adjusted wins plus Bonus Wins. Adj Los: Adjusted losses as calculated, i.e. total actual losses plus penalty losses raised to the .8 power. Adj Wi%: Adjusted winning percentage: Tot Wins divided by the quantity total wins plus adj. losses, expressed as a percent. Note, however, that this is not a true percentage; while the minimum is zero, the bonus wins man it’s not directly based on won/lost — though the maximum value does not exceed 100%. And so, without further ado, the actual numbers:

Rnk Player # Slam TierI/II Tier III TierIV+ Bonus Wins Adj Bon Tot Pen Adj Adj WTA Name Trn WL WL WL WL ≤4 ≤10 ≤20 ≤35 Wins Wins Wins Loss Loss Wi% Rank 1 Hénin-Hard 9 11 2 24 2 5 3 3 10 36.1 5.8 41.9 0 3.0 107.1 8 2Davenport 17 19 5 38361 3 715963.7 8.5 72.2 0 5.8 103.9 1 3 Mauresmo 17 20 4 39 7 2 7 17 11 61.0 8.5 69.5 0 6.8 102.5 2 4Williams, S 12 17 5 22 4 355740.7 5.5 46.2 0 5.8 99.4 7 5 Clijsters 6 6 1 10021 013318.2 1.3 19.5 0 1.7 97.8 22 6 Myskina 19 16 5 30 11 2 1 2 8 6 13 49.2 6.9 56.1 0 9.6 95.3 3 7 Sharapova 20 19 4 19 10 12150257552.5 5.1 57.6 0 8.7 94.1 4 8Kuznetsova 22 13 5 38 136101 1 5121057.1 6.0 63.1 0 11.0 92.7 5 9Williams, V 16 10 4 32 8 0 0 7 13 43.0 2.7 45.7 0 7.3 90.9 9 10 Capriati 12 14 3 15 9 036630.4 3.0 33.4 0 7.3 88.6 10 11 Dementieva 22 11 7 24 16 4 0 3 4 10 5 39.3 5.9 45.2 0 12.3 87.6 6 12 Molik 22 6 4 24 12 10251225741.6 3.7 45.3 0 10.5 86.9 13 13 Bovina 19 7 3 26 124111029337.5 2.9 40.4 0 9.6 85.7 15 14 Zvonareva 26 11 7 33 18 8 2 0 3 5 13 51.5 3.5 55.0 0 14.0 84.0 11 15 Golovin 15 8 4 18873 013332.4 1.3 33.7 0 8.7 81.9 27 16 Suárez 19 13 4 17 120171021435.5 1.4 36.9 0 10.1 80.9 16 17 Petrova 25 9 4 25 17 6 4 211939.7 2.7 42.4 0 13.1 80.3 12 18 Frazier 18 7 4 1498361102131.7 1.1 32.8 0 9.6 79.3 26 19 Schiavone 23 8 4 25 17 2 2 113835.4 2.4 37.8 0 12.3 79.3 19 20 Schnyder 23 10 4 19 15 4 2 112533.2 1.9 35.1 0 11.4 78.7 14 21 Sprem 23 4 4 25 162231014732.8 1.9 34.7 0 12.3 77.0 18 22 Farina Elia 24 9 4 19 147472003138.7 0.7 39.4 0 12.7 76.6 20 23 Déchy 24 7 3 23 18 2 2 023332.3 1.7 34.0 0 12.3 76.3 21 24 Likhovtseva 25 4 4 22 170221125627.6 3.0 30.6 0 12.7 75.9 24 25 Zuluaga 21 9 4 16 154021012230.3 1.0 31.3 0 11.0 75.8 23 Rubin 11 5 3 12502 001217.5 0.4 17.9 0 6.3 75.2 53 Pierce 18 5 3 13 12 7 2 013224.1 1.2 25.3 0 9.6 75,0 29 Sugiyama 24 9 4 19 17 5 2 002532.9 0.9 33.8 0 12.3 74.8 17 Jankovic 28 2 4 25 174650014433.4 1.6 35.0 0 14.0 73.9 28 Daniilidou 22 5 4 14 141251021323.3 1.3 24.6 0 11.4 70.8 34 Raymond 19 8 4 11 14 3 2 013222.2 1.2 23.4 0 11.0 70.5 30 Loit 2324711135132000127.4 0.1 27.5 0 11.9 70.1 45 Maleeva 25 8 4 14 17 5 4 012326.8 1.1 27.9 0 13.1 69.9 25 Martinez 17 1 4 17 12 1 1 011418.9 1.0 19.9 0 9.6 69.7 42 Saﬁna 20 3 4 12 11 9 5 003222.5 0.8 23.3 0 11.0 69.6 44 Smashnova 25 3 4 19 174122002226.7 0.6 27.3 0 12.7 69.3 32 Hantuchova 25 4 4 18 17 2 3 102424.0 1.4 25.4 0 12.7 69.2 31 Shaughnessy 22 4 4 13 140331022219.2 1.4 20.6 0 11.9 66.3 40 Serna 224441443 000111.6 0.1 11.7 0 11.4 50.8 102 Coetzer 3111101 00012.10.12.202.448.8 280 Krasnorouts 13222833 00106.60.26.807.847.3 138

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 72 Idealized Rankings/Proposal 3 — Success against Strength of Field One of the big problems with the WTA rankings is the fact that the large majority of points awarded are round points, and round points don’t in any way reflect the strength of the field. Surely winning in a tough field should be worth more than winning in a weak field! The ideal approach to this is something like the ELO rankings used in chess, which takes into account the exact opponents you face. But this system is both complex and hard to explain. We can at least produce a bastardized version. We’ll just measure success, in a primitive way, against strength of field, based on the Modified TSI data on page 141. We will combine this with a variant on the WTA points table. In the WTA system, whatever the value of a tournament, you earn 70% of that number of points for reaching the final, 45% for reaching the semifinal, 25% for reaching the quarterfinal, etc. So at a Slam, where the winner earns 650 points, the finalist gets 650x.70=455 points (which the WTA managed to round to 456). A semifinalist earns 650x.45=292.5 points (rounded to 292). Etc. So what we will do is this. We will take the Modified TSI of each event, then multiply based on the round reached, using this table derived from the WTA’s: Win 1.00 Round of 16 .14 Qualifier (add to above) .04 Final .70 Round of 32 .09 Qualifying final .02 Semifinal .45 Round of 64 .05 Qualifying second round .01 Quarterfinal .25 Opening round loss, any level .0 We then add up the results, divide by the number of tournaments, and, well see what comes out. For example, Kim Clijsters played six events this year: Australian Open F, Paris W, Antwerp W, Indian Wells R32, Berlin R16, Hasselt SF. The Australian Open had a MTSI of 95% (.95), and Clijsters made the final. So she gets .95 times .7, or .67. Paris had a MTSI of 40, and Clijsters won, so she gets 40 times 1.00, or 40. And so forth. We add all these up, then divide by the number of tournaments. In the case of Clijsters, that’s 164.1 divided by 6, or 27.4. As for where that puts her — well, see below. Note: Some tournaments have a MTSI below 10%; a number have a MTSI of 0. We are putting a “floor” of 10% on the MTSI values, so that all tournaments are worth something. At the year-end Championships, we arbitrarily assign a value of .20 for each win. An Olympic bronze is worth .56. We study only the WTA’s final Top 25.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 73 Rank Player Score WTA Rank 1 Hénin-Hardenne 52.3 8 2 Myskina 43.4 3 3 Mauresmo 43.1 2 4 Davenport 36.0 1 5 Williams, Serena 29.8 7 6 Clijsters 27.3 22 7 Kuznetsova 22.4 5 8 Capriati 22.1 10 9 Sharapova 21.5 4 10 Williams, Venus 19.9 9 11 Dementieva 17.0 6 12 Zvonareva 12.7 11 13 Bovina 11.5 15 14 Petrova 10.8 12 15 Suárez 10.3 16 16 Molik 9.4 13 17 Sugiyama 9.3 17 18 Schiavone 8.5 19 19 Déchy 8.1 21 20 Zuluaga 7.8 23 21 Farina Elia 7.5 20 22 Sprem 7.4 18 23 Schnyder 7.2 14 24 Likhovtseva 6.3 24 25 Maleeva 5.5 25 The previous three rankings are all based on different calculation methods, so it is arguable that their consensus is a still better ranking. If we take the three, take the median standing, and sort of this basis, we get this list (which includes every player who is Top 12 in any of the three rankings): Player Surf-Mod Div Adj Won-Lost Strength of Field Average Median Hénin-Hardenne 1 1 1 1 1 Davenport 2 2 4 2.7 2 Mauresmo 3 3 3 3 3 Williams, Serena 4 4 5 4.3 4 Myskina 5 6 2 4.3 5 Clijsters 6 5 6 5.7 6 Kuznetsova 7 8 7 7.3 7 Sharapova 8 7 9 8 8 Capriati 9 10 8 9 9 Williams, Venus 11 9 10 10 10 Dementieva 10 11 11 10.7 11 Zvonareva 12 14 12 12.7 12 Molik 13 12 16 13.7 13

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 74 Percentage of Possible Points Earned Tournaments differ in their “richness.” A win at a Slam, for instance, is worth twice as much as a win in an equivalent round of a Tier I. A player who plays mostly “rich” tournaments, such as Slams and Tier I events, will therefore earn more points than a player who has the same number of wins in lesser tournaments. We can control for this by comparing a player’s actual score with the expected results at given tournaments. For these purposes, we must find expected values for each type of tournaments. I estimate as follows: ¥ Slam: 1000 (650 round points + 350 quality points = 7 rounds * 25 pts/round *2 slam bonus) ¥ Los Angeles Championship: 735 (485 round points + 200 qual points = 5 rounds * 50 pts/round) ¥ 96 draw [Tier I] — Miami, Indian Wells: 505 (325 round points + 180 qual points = 6 rounds * 30 pts/round) ¥ 56-Draw Tier I (=Charleston, Berlin, Rome, Canadian Open): 450 (300 round points + 150 qual points = 5 rounds * 30 pts/round) ¥ 28-Draw Tier I (=Pan Pacific, Zürich, Moscow): 428 (300 round points + 128 qual points = 4 rounds * 32 pts/round) ¥ Tier II: 327 (195 round points + 132 qual points = 4 rounds * 33 pts/round) [includes Olympics] ¥ Tier III: 208 (120 round points + 88 qual points = 4 rounds * 22 pts/round) ¥ Tier IV: 155 (95 round points for Tier IV + 60 qual points = 5 rounds * 12 pts/round) ¥ Tier V: 120 (80 round points for Tier V + 50 qual points = 5 rounds * 8 pts/round) ¥ Challenger: 60 points (very approximate, since Challengers vary, but it hardly matters) Note that the above point totals are approximations, based on the examination of several tournament fields, and is what one could typically expect to earn at such an event. Actual tournament winners will not earn this precise amount; the Tier II events in particular vary widely. It is, of course, possible to calculate the maximum number of points a player could earn for any given tournament — but this is actually an unfair gauge, because chances are that a particular player will not play all her highest-round opponents. And this is not under the player’s own control. Based on these numbers, we can calculate an approximate figure for the number of points a player could have earned based on her schedule. This is the “Possible Points” field. The “Actual Points” is what the player actually earned in these events (note that this does not match a player’s WTA ranking total, because all events count). The column after that, “Percent,” shows the percent of her possible points a player earned. The final column, “average richness,” is simply the possible points divided by the number of tournaments. This shows how strong a player’s schedule is. Serena Williams, for instance, played only twelve tournaments — but they included three Slams, which are obviously “rich,” so she played the richest schedule of any player. Also having scheduled with “richness” figures in excess of 550 are Hénin-Hardenne and Capriati; such strong schedules probably should not be allowed. The key figure, though, is “percent” — this is the calculation which shows how well a player lived up to expectations. In this category, Hénin-Hardenne is the leader at 56% — but that’s not at all impressive; last year, Serena Williams was at 84% earned, and she had 86% in 2002; Hénin-Hardenne herself was at 72% in 2003. It shows you how bad a year Serena had that she earned only 45% this year, behind Davenport (the only other player over 50%), Mauresmo, and Clijsters, with Myskina the only other player over 40% but no fewer than 11 players over 25%. It’s interesting to note how “democratic” this has all become; in 2003, we had three players over 60% (Serena, 84%; Hénin-Hardenne, 72%; Clijsters, 68%), but only one other over 40% (Venus, 53%) and a total of 7 players over 25%. In 2002, we had two players over 60% (Serena, 86%, Venus, 62%), five over 40%, and nine over 25%; in 2001, we have two players over 60% (Venus, 65%; Davenport, 63%); six over 40%, and ten over 25%; in 2000, Venus had 80%, Hingis 68%, five players exceeded 40%, and seven were over 25%.

For additional alternate ranking schemes, see Statistics/Rankings Based on Head-to-Head Numbers.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 75 Player Slam LA Tr I Tr I 56 Tr I 28 Tier Tier Tier Tier Chall Possibl Actual Percent Avg Chm 96 dr draw draw II III IV V Points Points Richn Hénin-Hardenn 3 1 5 5140 2884 56.1% 571.1 Davenport 4 112252 9047 4760 52.6% 532.2 Mauresmo 4 1 4 8 9151 4546 49.7% 538.3 Clijsters 1 1 1 2 1 2817 1326 47.1% 469.5 Williams, S 3 1 1 3 4 6898 3128 45.3% 574.8 Myskina 4 114162 9846 4014 40.8% 518.2 Sharapova 4 1242331 10161 3631 35.7% 508.1 Capriati 3 1 4 4 6613 2359 35.7% 551.1 Kuznetsova 4 123182 1 10675 3714 34.8% 485.2 Dementieva 4 115371 11271 3453 30.6% 512.3 Williams, V 4 1236 8651 2400 27.7% 540.7 Zvonareva 4 125293 12418 2598 20.9% 477.6 Molik 4 222732 9989 1976.75 19.8% 454.0 Petrova 4 25284 11564 2054 17.8% 462.6 Bovina 4 4 2 7 1 1 9308 1639 17.6% 489.9 Suárez 4 2523111 9580 1537 16.0% 504.2 Schnyder 4 4 2 10 3 10550 1644 15.6% 458.7 Golovin 4 23123 8066 1126.75 14.0% 537.7 Frazier 4 2 2 5311 8444 1150 13.6% 469.1 Sugiyama 4 14393 11156 1502 13.5% 464.8 Sprem 4 25272 1 10941 1459.75 13.3% 475.7 Farina Elia 4 1229411 10311 1360 13.2% 429.6 Schiavone 4 2 3 2 10 2 10902 1403 12.9% 474.0 Zuluaga 4 25261 1 10406 1300.25 12.5% 495.5 Pierce 3 5 2 5 3 8365 1044 12.5% 464.7 Déchy 4 25292 11475 1362 11.9% 478.1 Likhovtseva 4 24292 211145 1278.75 11.5% 445.8 Rubin 3 2 1 3 2 5725 641 11.2% 520.5 Raymond 4 23262 9594 1034 10.8% 504.9 Maleeva 4 23394 11419 1187 10.4% 456.8 Jankovic 4 2 4 11 6 1 11775 1076.75 9.1% 420.5 Daniilidou 4 2318211 10095 912.25 9.0% 458.9 Martinez 4 1 4 7 1 8802 761 8.6% 517.8 Hantuchova 4 24393 11661 990 8.5% 466.4 Smashnova 4 2 4 1 10 2 2 11234 941 8.4% 449.4 Saﬁna 4 12175 9162 759.75 8.3% 458.1 Loit 4 231351319384 754.75 8.0% 408.0 Shaughnessy 4 2 3 9 3 1 10082 790 7.8% 458.3 Coetzer 1 1 1 1535 89 5.8% 511.7 Vento-Kabchi 4 2 3 2 11411 11920 684.62 5.7% 425.7 Panova 4 223441129729 484.75 5.0% 423.0 Kremer 2 2 3 6 5 2 7 8092 393 4.9% 299.7 Krasnoroutskay 2 12143 5765 248 4.3% 443.5 Majoli 2 1 1 4 1732 74 4.3% 216.5 Serna 4 2 1 2 10 3 10210 361 3.5% 464.1 Dokic 3 23161 7958 281 3.5% 497.4

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 76 Head to Head/Results against Top Players The Top 20 Head to Head The table below shows how the Top 20 fared against each other in 2004. For completeness, more players are shown on the vertical axis, although only the Top 20 can be listed across the top for space reasons. Reading the Table: For space reasons, the names of the Top 20 players have been abbreviated in the column headings. Scores are meant to be read across the rows. So, e.g., if you look down the column headed DEMENTI(eva) and the row labelled Bovina, you will see the notation “1-4.” This means that Dementieva and Bovina played five times (1+4=5), with Bovina winning one and Dementieva four. B C D D F H K M M M P S S S S S S S V Z O A A E A É U A O Y E C C H P U U V V P V M R N Z U L S T H H A R A G W W O I R E E I I N R I K R I N R E R I I I N N I N N N N E E K I O A Y A M E Y L L A A A P T A T S N V V D P Z A L L R T O I S M A A O E O M I I E Bovina 0-1 0-1 1-4 1-0 0-0 0-2 0-2 0-0 0-0 1-0 3-1 1-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-1 1-0 0-1 Capriati 1-0 0-0 0-1 1-0 0-0 0-0 0-2 0-0 1-2 1-0 1-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 1-0 1-0 3-1 0-0 0-1 Clijsters 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 3-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 Davenport 1-0 0-0 2-1 1-0 0-2 0-1 2-0 2-0 2-2 2-0 1-0 0-1 0-1 2-0 1-0 1-0 1-0 3-0 4-0 Déchy 0-1 1-1 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-1 1-0 0-1 0-0 0-1 0-3 0-3 0-1 0-0 0-1 0-1 1-0 0-0 0-0 1-5 Dementieva 4-1 1-0 1-3 0-0 0-0 2-2 2-0 0-1 0-3 1-0 0-0 1-1 0-2 0-0 1-0 1-0 0-3 1-0 1-0 Farina Elia 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-3 0-4 0-0 0-1 0-1 1-0 1-0 2-1 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 Frazier 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-2 0-0 1-1 1-0 0-1 1-0 0-0 0-2 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-1 Golovin 0-0 0-1 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-2 0-0 0-2 0-0 0-1 Hantuchova 0-1 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-2 1-0 2-2 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-3 0-2 1-1 0-0 1-2 0-0 0-1 0-0 Hénin-Hardenne 0-0 0-0 2-0 0-0 0-0 3-1 2-1 0-0 2-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 Kuznetsova 2-0 0-0 1-0 2-2 1-0 1-3 0-4 2-0 0-2 2-0 2-0 1-0 1-1 0-1 0-0 2-0 0-2 1-1 3-1 Likhovtseva 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-1 0-1 0-0 2-3 2-1 2-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-2 0-1 0-1 1-0 Maleeva 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-2 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 1-1 0-0 0-2 1-0 1-1 0-0 0-1 0-0 Mauresmo 2-0 2-0 0-2 0-2 3-0 1-2 4-0 2-1 1-0 0-0 2-1 1-0 1-0 1-0 1-0 1-0 0-2 1-0 4-0 Molik 0-0 0-0 0-2 1-0 4-0 0-0 0-2 1-2 0-1 1-1 1-1 1-0 1-2 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-1 1-0 Myskina 0-0 2-1 2-2 3-0 0-0 0-2 2-0 0-1 1-0 0-1 1-0 0-0 3-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-1 1-0 2-0 Petrova 0-1 0-1 0-2 0-1 1-0 1-0 0-2 0-0 1-1 1-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 1-1 0-1 1-1 0-0 0-1 Pierce 1-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 1-0 0-1 0-1 1-1 0-0 Raymond 0-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 2-0 0-1 0- 0-1 0-1 0-1 1-1 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 1-1 0-1 Schiavone 1-3 0-1 0-1 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-2 1-2 1-1 0-1 1-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-2 0-1 Schnyder 0-1 0-0 1-0 1-1 0-1 0-0 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 2-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-1 Sharapova 0-0 0-1 1-0 2-0 0-1 0-0 1-1 0-1 2-1 1-3 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-1 1-0 2-1 1-0 2-2 Smashnova 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-1 0-3 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-2 0-2 Sprem 0-0 0-0 0-2 0-0 1-2 0-0 1-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-1 1-1 0-1 1-2 0-1 Suárez 0-0 0-1 0-1 0-1 1-0 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 1-1 0-0 0-2 1-0 1-0 1-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 Sugiyama 0-0 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-2 0-1 0-1 0-0 1-0 0-1 0-0 0-1 1-1 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 Williams, Serena 1-0 1-3 0-1 3-0 0-0 0-0 2-0 2-0 0-0 1-0 1-1 0-0 1-0 1-2 1-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 2-0 Williams, Venus 0-1 0-0 0-3 0-1 0-0 0-0 1-1 0-1 1-0 0-1 0-0 2-0 0-0 0-1 2-1 1-0 0-0 0-0 2-0 Zuluaga 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-1 1-1 1-0 0-0 0-2 1-1 Zvonareva 1-0 1-0 0-4 0-1 0-0 0-1 1-3 0-4 0-1 0-2 1-0 1-0 1-0 2-2 1-0 0-0 0-0 0-2 0-2

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 77 Wins Over Top Players Matches Played/Won against the (Final) Top Twenty This table summarizes how players did against the players who would constitute the final Top Twenty. (Note that, for the players ranked in the Top Twenty, the total number of opponents they could face is 19.) The final column,% of wins against Top 20, calculates the fraction of a player’s wins earned against the Top Twenty — a measure of the difficulty one faced to earn those wins.We note with interest that the leader in this category Mauresmo at 46%, then Dementieva and Serena (41%) and Davenport (just under 40%); Golovin and Sugiyama are last. Mauresmo and Davenport played the most different Top 20 opponents (18); Mauresmo beat the most different opponents (15). Distinct Distinct Distinct Top 20 Top 20 Top 20 Total Total Total % of wins Player WTA Opponents Players Players Top 20 Top 20 Wins, all against Name Rank Played Beaten Lost To Victories Losses opponents Top 20 Bovina 15 12688133821.1% Capriati 10 12 9 5 11 7 29 37.9% Clijsters 22 532521827.8% Davenport 1 18 14 6 25 8 63 39.7% Déchy 21 14 4 12 4 20 32 12.5% Dementieva 6 15 11 8 16 16 39 41.0% Farina Elia 20 12 3 10 4 15 42 9.5% Frazier 26 1139311358.6% Golovin 27 82628336.1% Hantuchova 31 10495152420.8% Hénin-Hardenne 8 6 5 3 10 3 35 28.6% Kuznetsova 5 17 13 9 21 17 57 36.8% Likhovtseva 24 12 5 10 8 13 28 28.6% Maleeva 25 837392711.1% Mauresmo 2 18 15 6 27 10 59 45.8% Molik 13 13 9 8 12 12 45 26.7% Myskina 3 13 9 7 17 9 48 35.4% Petrova 12 14 6 11 6 13 40 15.0% Pierce 29 1056562520.0% Raymond 30 1149592222.7% Schiavone 19 13797143520.0% Schnyder 14 1139493312.1% Sharapova 4 14 10 9 14 12 55 25.5% Smashnova 32 1028212287.1% Sprem 18 10494123411.8% Suárez 16 1157583713.5% Sugiyama 17 11 2 10 2 11 33 6.1% Williams, Serena 7 12 11 4 16 7 39 41.0% Williams, Venus 9 12689104221.4% Zuluaga 23 93839319.7% Zvonareva 11 16 8 10 9 22 52 17.3%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 78 Won/Lost Versus the Top Players (Based on Rankings at the Time of the Match) The following table shows each player’s won/lost record against the Top 10, against the Second 10 (#11- #20), and against the Top 20 as a whole, based on the rankings at the time. (The next previous table gives statistics based on the final Top 20.) The player with the best record in each category is shown in bold. WTA Player Overall Against Top 10 Against #11-#20 Against Top 20 Non-Top20 Rank Name WLWL%WL% WL % WL % 1Davenport 63 9 10 6 62.5% 15 2 88.2% 25 8 75.8% 38 1 97.4% 2 Mauresmo 59 11 9 6 60.0% 17 2 89.5% 26 8 76.5% 33 3 91.7% 3 Myskina 48 17 10 9 52.6% 6 1 85.7% 16 10 61.5% 32 7 82.1% 4 Sharapova 55 15 7 7 50.0% 7 5 58.3% 14 12 53.8% 41 3 93.2% 5Kuznetsova 57 20 6 13 31.6% 12 3 80.0% 18 16 52.9% 39 4 90.7% 6 Dementieva 39 23 8 10 44.4% 10 3 76.9% 18 13 58.1% 21 10 67.7% 7Williams, Serena 39 9 8 6 57.1% 5 1 83.3% 13 7 65.0% 26 2 92.9% 8 Hénin-Hardenne 35 4 8 1 88.9% 3260.0% 11 3 78.6% 24 1 96.0% 9Williams, Venus 42 12 0 7 0% 7 1 87.5% 7 8 46.7% 35 4 89.7% 10 Capriati 29 12 3 6 33.3% 6 1 85.7% 9 7 56.3% 20 5 80.0% 11 Zvonareva 52 27 3 16 15.8% 5 5 50.0% 8 21 27.6% 44 6 88.0% 12 Petrova 40 25 3 8 27.3% 1 4 20.0% 4 12 25.0% 36 13 73.5% 13 Molik 45 19 3 6 33.3% 5 7 41.7% 8 13 38.1% 37 6 86.0% 14 Schnyder 33 21 2 4 33.3% 2 5 28.6% 4 9 30.8% 29 12 70.7% 15 Bovina 38 17 2 9 18.2% 9 3 75.0% 11 12 47.8% 27 5 84.4% 16 Suárez 37 18 2 4 33.3% 1 3 25.0% 3 7 30.0% 34 11 75.6% 17 Sugiyama 33 23 0 4 0% 2 5 28.6% 2 9 18.2% 31 14 68.9% 18 Sprem 34 23 1 4 20.0% 4 4 50.0% 5 8 38.5% 29 15 65.9% 19 Schiavone 35 23 2 5 28.6% 3 7 30.0% 5 12 29.4% 30 11 73.2% 20 Farina Elia 42 24 0 8 0% 3 5 37.5% 3 13 18.8% 39 11 78.0% 21 Déchy 32 23 2 5 28.6% 3 11 21.4% 5 16 23.8% 27 7 79.4% 22 Clijsters 18 2 1 1 50.0% 3 1 75.0% 4 2 66.7% 14 0 100% 23 Zuluaga 31 20 1 4 20.0% 2 4 33.3% 3 8 27.3% 28 12 70.0% 24 Likhovtseva 28 24 3 8 27.3% 5 5 50.0% 8 13 38.1% 20 11 64.5% 25 Maleeva 27 25 1 7 12.5% 2 3 40.0% 3 10 23.1% 24 15 61.5% 26 Frazier 35 17 1 4 20.0% 2 7 22.2% 3 11 21.4% 32 6 84.2% 27 Golovin 33 15 1 2 33.3% 3 6 33.3% 4 8 33.3% 29 7 80.6% 28 Jankovic 36 27 1 6 14.3% 4 4 50.0% 5 10 33.3% 31 17 64.6% 29 Pierce 25 17 1 6 14.3% 3 1 75.0% 4 7 36.4% 21 10 67.7% 30 Raymond 22 20 1 4 20.0% 3 3 50.0% 4 7 36.4% 18 13 58.1% 31 Hantuchova 24 24 1 4 20.0% 2 6 25.0% 3 10 23.1% 21 14 60.0% 32 Smashnova 28 24 0 3 0% 2 5 28.6% 2 8 20.0% 26 16 61.9% 34 Daniilidou 25 21 2 4 33.3% 1 2 33.3% 3 6 33.3% 22 15 59.5% 40 Shaughnessy 20 22 2 4 33.3% 2 3 40.0% 4 7 36.4% 16 15 51.6% 42 Martinez 19 17 1 7 12.5% 1 1 50.0% 2 8 20.0% 17 9 65.4% 44 Saﬁna 24 20 0 6 0% 3 3 50.0% 3 9 25.0% 21 11 65.6% 45 Loit 35 22 0 2 0% 0 3 0% 0 5 0% 35 17 67.3% 53 Rubin 17 10 0 6 0% 1 1 50.0% 1 7 12.5% 16 3 84.2% 102 Serna 12 21 0 4 0% 0 3 0% 0 7 0% 12 14 46.2% 125 Dokic 6 16 0 2 0% 0 0 — 0 2 0% 6 14 30.0% 138 Krasnoroutskaya 7 13 0 3 0% 1 1 50.0% 1 4 2.00% 6 9 40.0% 280 Coetzer 2 3 0 1 0% 0 0 — 0 1 0% 2 2 50.0%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 79 Won/Lost Versus the Top Players (Based on Final Rankings) The following table shows each player’s won/lost record against the Top 10, against the Second 10 (#11- #20), and against the Top 20 as a whole, based on final rankings. Note: This is not the same as the players’ wins over Top 10/Top 20 players, given in the previous table. What is shown here is the player’s record against the women who ended the year in the Top 10/Top 20. At the time of the matches, some of these women will not have been at their final ranks. On the other hand, it could be argued that this is a better measure of success against top players — a player who ends 2004 at #4 (e.g. Sharapova) had a better 2004 than a player who began the year at #9 but ended it outside the Top Fifty (Rubin), and a win against the player with the higher final rank should therefore mean more. The player with the best record in each category is shown in bold. WTA Player Overall W/L Against Top 10 Against #11-#20 Against Top 20 Non-Top20 Rank Name WLWL%WL% WL % WL % 15 Bovina 38 17 2 11 15.4% 6 2 75.0% 8 13 38.1% 30 4 88.2% 10 Capriati 29 12 5 6 45.5% 6 1 85.7% 11 7 61.1% 18 5 78.3% 22 Clijsters 18 2 1 1 50.0% 4 1 80.0% 5 2 71.4% 13 0 100% 1Davenport 63 9 10 7 58.8% 15 1 93.8% 25 8 75.8% 38 1 97.4% 21 Déchy 32 23 2 5 28.6% 2 15 11.8% 4 20 16.7% 28 3 90.3% 6 Dementieva 39 23 7 13 35.0% 9 3 75.0% 16 16 50.0% 23 7 76.7% 20 Farina Elia 42 24 1 6 14.3% 3 9 25.0% 4 15 21.1% 38 9 80.9% 26 Frazier 35 17 1 7 12.5% 2 4 33.3% 3 11 21.4% 32 6 84.2% 27 Golovin 33 15 1 4 20.0% 1 4 20.0% 2 8 20.0% 31 7 81.6% 31 Hantuchova 24 24 1 6 14.3% 4 9 30.8% 5 15 25.0% 19 9 67.9% 8 Hénin-Hardenne 35 4 9 2 81.8% 1150.0% 10 3 76.9% 25 1 96.2% 28 Jankovic 36 27 1 7 12.5% 4 7 36.4% 5 14 26.3% 31 13 70.5% 5Kuznetsova 57 20 6 15 28.6% 15 2 88.2% 21 17 55.3% 36 3 92.3% 24 Likhovtseva 28 24 3 8 27.3% 5 5 50.0% 8 13 38.1% 20 11 64.5% 25 Maleeva 27 25 0 5 0% 3 4 42.9% 3 9 25.0% 24 16 60.0% 2 Mauresmo 59 11 10 8 55.6% 17 2 89.5% 27 10 73.0% 32 1 97.0% 13 Molik 45 19 3 10 23.1% 9 2 81.8% 12 12 50.0% 33 7 82.5% 3 Myskina 48 17 13 8 61.9% 4 1 80.0% 17 9 65.4% 31 8 79.5% 12 Petrova 40 25 3 7 30.0% 3 6 33.3% 6 13 31.6% 34 12 73.9% 29 Pierce 25 17 2 5 28.6% 3 1 75.0% 5 6 45.5% 20 11 64.5% 30 Raymond 22 20 2 4 33.3% 3 5 37.5% 5 9 35.7% 17 11 60.7% 19 Schiavone 35 23 1 9 10.0% 6 5 54.5% 7 14 33.3% 28 9 75.7% 14 Schnyder 33 21 2 5 28.6% 2 4 33.3% 4 9 30.8% 29 12 70.7% 4 Sharapova 55 15 8 7 53.3% 6 5 54.5% 14 12 53.8% 41 3 93.2% 32 Smashnova 28 24 0 6 0% 2 6 25.0% 2 12 14.3% 26 12 68.4% 18 Sprem 34 23 2 6 25.0% 2 6 25.0% 4 12 25.0% 30 11 73.2% 16 Suárez 37 18 1 5 16.7% 4 3 57.1% 5 8 38.5% 32 10 76.2% 17 Sugiyama 33 23 0 7 0% 2 4 33.3% 2 11 15.4% 31 12 72.1% 7Williams, Serena 39 9 10 6 62.5% 6 1 85.7% 16 7 69.6% 23 2 92.0% 9Williams, Venus 42 12 1 8 11.1% 8 2 80.0% 9 10 47.4% 33 2 94.3% 23 Zuluaga 31 20 0 4 0% 3 5 37.5% 3 9 25.0% 28 11 71.8% 11 Zvonareva 52 27 4 21 16.0% 5 1 83.3% 9 22 29.0% 43 5 89.6%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 80 Statistics/Rankings Based on Head-to-Head Numbers Based on these numbers, we can offer a number of statistics/rankings. For instance: Total Wins over Top Ten Players

Based on the Top Ten at the Time: Based on the Final Top Ten: 1T. Davenport (10) 1. Myskina (13) 1T. Myskina (10) 2T. Davenport (10) 3. Mauresmo (9) 2T. Mauresmo (10) 4T. Dementieva (8) 2T. S. Williams (10) 4T. Hénin-Hardenne (8) 5. Hénin-Hardenne (9) 4T. S. Williams (8) 6. Sharapova (8) 7. Sharapova (7) 7. Dementieva (7) 8. Kuznetsova (6) 8. Kuznetsova (6) 9T. Capriati (3) 9. Capriati (5) 9T. Likhovtseva (3) 10. Zvonareva (4) 9T. Molik (3) 9T. Petrova (3) 9T. Zvonareva (3)

Winning Percentage against Top Ten Players (Minimum eight matches)

Based on the Top Ten at the Time: Based on the Final Top Ten: 1. Hénin-Hardenne (88.9%) 1. Hénin-Hardenne (81.8%) 2. Davenport (62.5%) 2. S. Williams (62.5%) 3. Mauresmo (60%) 3. Myskina (61.9%) 4. S. Williams (57.1%) 4. Davenport (58.5%) 5. Myskina (52.6%) 5. Mauresmo (55.6%) 6. Sharapova (50.0%) 6. Sharapova (53.3%) 7. Dementieva (44.4%) 7. Capriati (45.5%) 8T. Capriati (33.3%) 8. Dementieva (35%) 8T. Molik (33.3%) 9. Petrova (30.0%) 10. Kuznetsova (31.6%) 10. Kuznetsova (28.6%)

For additional information about winning percentages, see Winning Percentage against Non-Top-20 Players.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 81 How They Earned Their Points The following tables evaluate the manner in which players earn points, breaking them up, e.g., by points earned on each surface, points earned from quality versus round points, points earned in Slams.... In assessing the first table, Fraction of Points Earned in Slams, note that the Top 25 collectively earned 58516.5 points in 2004 (total actual points; the total of their Best 17 scores is of course somewhat lower), slightly more than the 58028.25 points in 2003; it is effectively equal to the 58524.25 points in 2002 and only slightly up from 57459 points in 2001. (But, given the point inflation on the WTA, this actually means that they decreased their fraction of total points earned from 2001 to 2004.). Of the points earned in 2004, 19088, or 32.6%, were earned at Slams — down from the 33.5% earned at Slams in 2003 but up from the 30.9% in 2002 and much higher than the 28.6% in 2001 before the Great Slam Point Bloat. The mean of the fraction of points earned in the Slams in 2004 is 32.0% (that is, this is the average of the players’ fractions). The median is Sugiyama’s 28.5%. The extremes are Molik’s minimum of 13% and Capriati’s maximum of 58% (actually a relatively small range of values; in 2003, Dementieva and Smashnova/ Pistolesi scored a minimum of 10% while Venus Williams earned an astonishing 74% of her points at Slams). The next table is Quality Versus Round Points. Generally speaking, the higher the fraction of points one earns from quality, the better one is at pulling off “upsets.” This is especially true of lower-ranked players — top-ranked players have fewer opportunities to earn quality points. For Comparison: The Top 25, as noted above, earned an actual total of 58516.5 points in 2004. 19617 of these, or 33.5%, came from quality. This represents an ongoing decline: in 2003, 34.8% of the top players’ points came from quality; in 2002, it was 35.1%, and 35.4% in 2001. The median quality percentage for the Top 25 is higher Hénin-Hardenne’s 33.7%; the mean is 33.1%. Rather improbably, given her results against top players, the player who earned the highest fraction of her points from quality was Sprem (41.3%); the lowest fraction, by a significant margin, was Sugiyama’s 24.4%. Looking at the whole Top 50, though, the worst fraction from quality is Emilie Loit’s 21.9%; Jelena Jankovic has the best quality ratio at 42.6%, followed by Shinobu Asagoe at 42.2%. Looking at the whole Top 200, the player with the worst ratio is none other than Jelena Dokic (12.8%); Tathiana Garbin, with an amazing 58.12%, benefits astonishingly from her luck in facing Justine Hénin-at Roland Garros; more than half her quality points (and just over a third of her total points) are from that one match. The final table, Percentage of Points Earned on Each Surface, assesses surface balance. The first four numbers in this table (% on hard, clay, grass, indoor) should be fairly self-explanatory: They represent the fraction of each player’s points that she earned on the particular surface. The last column, RMS, is perhaps less clear. This is an attempt to assess a player’s balance. RMS, for Root Mean Square, measures the player’s distance from the mean. The smaller the RMS value, the more “typical” a player is. Thus, Serena Williams, with a value of 0.08, is our most balanced player this year (oddly, the result of a very unbalanced schedule: She played more on clay, which is her worst surface, than usual, and it balanced out); Ai Sugiyama and Mary Pierce were next; the most balanced player to play a full schedule was Lindsay Davenport. The least balanced player in the list is Emilie Loit, followed by Anna Smashnova, Amanda Coetzer, and Conchita Martinez; the worst balance for a Top 25 player was Venus Williams. For Reference: For the Top 25 as a whole, 45.8% of all points were earned on hardcourts (a significant and disturbing increase from 41.1% in 2003), 22.7% on clay, 10.1% on grass, and 21.4% indoors.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 82 Fraction of Points Earned in Slams WTA Player Total Points Earned % of Points Points Earned % Not Earned in Rank Name Points in Slams in Slams outside Slams Slams 1Davenport 4760 1272 26.7% 3488 73.3% 2 Mauresmo 4546 1164 25.6% 3382 74.4% 3 Myskina 4014 1520 37.9% 2494 62.1% 4 Sharapova 3631 1436 39.5% 2195 60.5% 5Kuznetsova 3714 1192 32.1% 2522 67.9% 6 Dementieva 3453 1652 47.8% 1801 52.2% 7Williams, Serena 3128 1192 38.1% 1936 61.9% 8 Hénin-Hardenne 2884 1120 38.8% 1764 61.2% 9Williams, Venus 2400 552 23.0% 1848 77.0% 10 Capriati 2359 1368 58%.0 991 42.0% 11 Zvonareva 2598 472 18.2% 2126 81.8% 12 Petrova 2054 636 31.0% 1418 69.0% 13 Molik 1976.75 262 13.3% 1714.75 86.7% 14 Schnyder 1644 692 42.1% 952 57.9% 15 Bovina 1639 236 14.4% 1403 85.6% 16 Suárez 1537 704 45.8% 833 54.2% 17 Sugiyama 1502 428 28.5% 1074 71.5% 18 Sprem 1459.75 392 26.9% 1067.75 73.1% 19 Schiavone 1403 320 22.8% 1083 77.2% 20 Farina Elia 1360 376 27.6% 984 72.4% 21 Déchy 1362 300 22.0% 1062 78.0% 22 Clijsters 1326 660 49.8% 666 50.2% 23 Zuluaga 1300.25 556 42.8% 744.25 57.2% 24 Likhovtseva 1278.75 192 15.0% 1086.75 85.0% 25 Maleeva 1187 384 32.4% 803 67.6% 26 Frazier 1150 400 34.8% 750 65.2% 27 Golovin 1126.75 432 38.3% 694.75 61.7% 28 Jankovic 1076.75 160 14.9% 916.75 85.1% 29 Pierce 1044 296 28.4% 748 71.6% 30 Raymond 1034 516 49.9% 518 50.1% 31 Hantuchova 990 216 21.8% 774 78.2% 32 Smashnova 941 132 14.0% 809 86.0% 34 Daniilidou 912.25 200 21.9% 712.25 78.1% 40 Shaughnessy 790 204 25.8% 586 74.2% 42 Martinez 761 44 5.8% 717 94.2% 44 Saﬁna 759.75 136 17.9% 623.75 82.1% 45 Loit 754.75 84 11.1% 670.75 88.9% 49 Vento-Kabchi 684.62 168 24.5% 516.62 75.5% 53 Rubin 641 216 33.7% 425 66.3% 66 Tanasugarn 524.75 136 25.9% 388.75 74.1% 78 Panova 484.75 130.5 26.9% 354.25 73.1% 94 Kremer 393 114.5 29.1% 278.5 70.9% 102 Serna 361 176 48.8% 185 51.2% 125 Dokic 281 4 1.4% 277 98.6% 138 Krasnoroutskaya 248 80 32.3% 168 67.7% 280 Coetzer 89 40 44.9% 49 55.1%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 83 Quality Versus Round Points WTA Player Total Round Quality % of Points % of Points from Rank Name Points Points Points from Quality Round Pts 1Davenport 4760 3093 1667 35.0% 65.0% 2 Mauresmo 4546 3026 1520 33.4% 66.6% 3 Myskina 4014 2587 1427 35.6% 64.4% 4 Sharapova 3631 2519 1112 30.6% 69.4% 5Kuznetsova 3714 2441 1273 34.3% 65.7% 6 Dementieva 3453 2175 1278 37.0% 63.0% 7Williams, Serena 3128 2079 1049 33.5% 66.5% 8 Hénin-Hardenne 2884 1911 973 33.7% 66.3% 9Williams, Venus 2400 1708 692 28.8% 71.2% 10 Capriati 2359 1423 936 39.7% 60.3% 11 Zvonareva 2598 1840 758 29.2% 70.8% 12 Petrova 2054 1282 772 37.6% 62.4% 13 Molik 1976.75 1215.75 761 38.5% 61.5% 14 Schnyder 1644 1085 559 34.0% 66.0% 15 Bovina 1639 1086 553 33.7% 66.3% 16 Suárez 1537 1118 419 27.3% 72.7% 17 Sugiyama 1502 1121 381 25.4% 74.6% 18 Sprem 1459.75 856.75 603 41.3% 58.7% 19 Schiavone 1403 928 475 33.9% 66.1% 20 Farina Elia 1360 995 365 26.8% 73.2% 21 Déchy 1362 937 425 31.2% 68.8% 22 Clijsters 1326 971 355 26.8% 73.2% 23 Zuluaga 1300.25 938.25 362 27.8% 72.2% 24 Likhovtseva 1278.75 766.75 512 40.0% 60.0% 25 Maleeva 1187 797 390 32.9% 67.1% 26 Frazier 1150 750 400 34.8% 65.2% 27 Golovin 1126.75 683.75 443 39.3% 60.7% 28 Jankovic 1076.75 623.75 453 42.1% 57.9% 29 Pierce 1044 656 388 37.2% 62.8% 30 Raymond 1034 609 425 41.1% 58.9% 31 Hantuchova 990 696 294 29.7% 70.3% 32 Smashnova 941 673 268 28.5% 71.5% 34 Daniilidou 912.25 599.25 313 34.3% 65.7% 40 Shaughnessy 790 499 291 36.8% 63.2% 42 Martinez 761 557 204 26.8% 73.2% 44 Saﬁna 759.75 513.75 246 32.4% 67.6% 45 Loit 754.75 590.75 164 21.7% 78.3% 49 Vento-Kabchi 684.62 487.62 197 28.8% 71.2% 53 Rubin 641 477 164 25.6% 74.4% 66 Tanasugarn 524.75 366.75 158 30.1% 69.9% 78 Panova 484.75 306.75 178 36.7% 63.3% 94 Kremer 393 265 128 32.6% 67.4% 102 Serna 361 276 85 23.5% 76.5% 125 Dokic 281 245 36 12.8% 87.2% 138 Krasnoroutskaya 248 171 77 31.0% 69.0% 400 Bedanova 46.25 29.25 17 36.8% 63.2%

Asagoe/#37 42 58 Bovina/#15 34 66 Capriati/#10 40 60 Clijsters/#22 27 73 Daniilidou/#34 34 66 Davenport/#1 35 65 Déchy/#21 31 69 Dementieva/#6 37 63 Dokic/#125 13 87 Dulko/#33 35 65 Farina Elia/#20 27 73 Frazier/#26 35 65 Golovin/#27 39 61 Hantuchova/#31 30 70 Hénin-Hardenne/#8 34 66 Jankovic/#28 42 58 Kostanic/#35 33 67 Krasnoroutskaya/#138 31 69 Kremer/#94 33 67 Kuznetsova/#5 34 66 Likhovtseva/#24 40 60 Loit/#45 22 78 Maleeva/#25 33 67 Martinez/#42 27 73 Mauresmo/#2 33 67 Molik/#13 38 62

Player Name Myskina/#3 36 64 Panova/#78 37 63 Petrova/#12 38 62 Pierce/#29 37 63 Raymond/#30 41 59 Rubin/#53 26 74 Safina/#44 32 68 Schiavone/#19 34 66 Schnyder/#14 34 66 Serna/#102 24 76 Sharapova/#4 31 69 Shaughnessy/#40 37 63 Smashnova/#32 28 72 Sprem/#18 41 59 Suarez/#16 27 73 Sugiyama/#17 25 75 Tanasugarn/#66 30 70 Testud/#311 35 65 Vento-Kabchi/#49 29 71 Williams, Serena/#7 34 66 Williams, Venus/#9 29 71 Zuluaga/#23 28 72 Zvonareva/#11 29 71 0102030405060708090100 Percent From Quality/Round Points

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 85 Percentage of Points Earned on Each Surface The first six columns in this table should be self-explanatory. The last column, RMS, attempts to assess a player’s balance. RMS, for Root Mean Square, measures the player’s distance from the mean. The smaller the RMS value, the more “typical” a player is. For addition information, see the introduction to this section. WTA Rank Player % Hard % Clay % Grass % Indr RMS 15 Bovina 35.1% 13.8% 5.9% 45.2% 0.21 10 Capriati 36.4% 49.0% 12.0% 2.5% 0.49 22 Clijsters 52.1% 3.5% 0% 44.4% 0.29 34 Daniilidou 87.8% 7.1% 0.3% 4.7% 0.49 1Davenport 52.0% 14.8% 8.9% 24.3% 0.15 21 Déchy 72.8% 5.2% 10.4% 11.6% 0.33 6 Dementieva 49.6% 27.2% 0.1% 23.2% 0.27 125 Dokic 33.8% 11.4% 1.4% 53.4% 0.25 20 Farina Elia 33.5% 26.8% 9.0% 30.6% 0.24 26 Frazier 61.7% 12.1% 20.3% 6.0% 0.18 27 Golovin 46.7% 6.6% 24.5% 22.3% 0.17 31 Hantuchova 36.1% 6.0% 33.5% 24.4% 0.24 8 Hénin-Hardenne 93.2% 6.8% 0% 0% 0.54 138 Krasnoroutskaya 53.6% 14.5% 31.5% 0.4% 0.15 5Kuznetsova 67.5% 15.3% 7.0% 10.2% 0.26 24 Likhovtseva 61.1% 14.8% 8.7% 15.5% 0.21 45 Loit 21.5% 64.3% 10.5% 3.8% 0.73 25 Maleeva 25.9% 20.9% 20.1% 33.2% 0.23 42 Martinez 37.6% 56.9% 5.5% 0% 0.60 2 Mauresmo 30.4% 31.9% 12.2% 25.5% 0.29 13 Molik 44.4% 8.2% 7.2% 40.2% 0.20 3 Myskina 40.9% 31.1% 2.3% 25.7% 0.29 78 Panova 19.7% 12.3% 27.6% 40.3% 0.29 12 Petrova 50.7% 18.7% 6.7% 23.8% 0.17 29 Pierce 43.0% 13.7% 14.0% 29.3% 0.11 30 Raymond 67.4% 4.9% 5.1% 22.5% 0.32 53 Rubin 76.0% 0.2% 0.3% 23.6% 0.43 44 Saﬁna 33.6% 15.0% 0.4% 51.0% 0.25 19 Schiavone 48.1% 28.4% 6.3% 17.2% 0.23 14 Schnyder 45.3% 27.6% 7.9% 19.2% 0.22 102 Serna 37.7% 24.9% 25.5% 11.9% 0.17 4 Sharapova 21.5% 11.3% 32.9% 34.3% 0.30 40 Shaughnessy 50.6% 27.7% 8.6% 13.0% 0.22 32 Smashnova 33.4% 59.2% 0.3% 7.1% 0.66 18 Sprem 29.9% 21.0% 29.7% 19.3% 0.21 16 Suárez 35.0% 46.3% 12.4% 6.4% 0.45 17 Sugiyama 50.9% 14.8% 17.6% 16.6% 0.10 66 Tanasugarn 56.4% 1.0% 39.1% 3.6% 0.31 311 Testud 65.4% 9.2% 0% 25.5% 0.31 49 Vento-Kabchi 65.0% 14.3% 11.4% 9.3% 0.22 7Williams, Serena 44.0% 16.5% 22.5% 17.0% 0.08 9Williams, Venus 32.3% 51.9% 1.7% 14.2% 0.56 23 Zuluaga 50.6% 36.1% 0.2% 13.1% 0.36 11 Zvonareva 41.5% 23.1% 9.4% 26.0% 0.17

Percent 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Bovina 35 14 6 45 Capriati 36 49 12 3 Clijsters 52 3 0 44 Daniilidou 88 7 05 Davenport 52 15 9 24 Déchy 73 5 10 12 Dementieva 50 27 0 23 Dokic 34 11 1 53 Farina Elia 34 27 9 31 Frazier 62 12 20 6 Golovin 47 7 24 22 Hantuchova 36 6 34 24 Hénin-Hardenne 93 7 0 Kremer 33 9 52 6 Kuznetsova 67 15 7 10 Likhovtseva 61 15 9 15 Loit 21 64 10 4 Maleeva 26 21 20 33 Martinez 38 57 6 0 Mauresmo 30 32 12 26 Molik 44 8 7 40 Myskina 41 31 2 26 Panova 20 12 28 40

Players Petrova 51 19 7 24 Pierce 43 14 14 29 Raymond 67 5 5 23 Rubin 76 0 24 Safina 34 15 0 51 Schiavone 48 28 6 17 Schnyder 45 28 8 19 Serna 38 25 25 12 Sharapova 21 11 33 34 Shaughnessy 51 28 9 13 Smashnova 33 59 0 7 Sprem 30 21 30 19 Suarez 35 46 12 6 Sugiyama 51 15 18 17 Tanasugarn 56 1 39 4 Testud 65 9 0 25 Vento-Kabchi 65 14 11 9 S. Williams 44 17 23 17 V. Williams 32 52 2 14 Zuluaga 51 36 0 13 Zvonareva 41 23 9 26

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 87 Consistency We often speak of a player’s “consistency,” but the term does not really have a clear definition. We can offer some models, however. Standard Deviation of Scores by Tournament One measure of a player’s consistency is the standard deviation of a player’s results over the tournaments she plays. The following list expresses a player’s consistency by dividing the standard deviation of her score by the mean score. In mathematical parlance, if the player’s scores are s1, s2, … sn, then the number given here is given by the formula (shown here in two forms):

STDDEV(s1, s2, … sn) s(s1, s2, … sn) ------MEAN(s1, s2, … sn) m(s1, s2, … sn)

Thus (for the mathematicians out there), this is not actually the standard deviation; it has been normalized by dividing by the mean. Note: This is not a ranking system, either; it is a measure of consistency. A player who loses in the second round of every tournament is more consistent (consistently bad) than a player who wins half of her tournaments and loses early in the other half — but the player who wins the tournaments will have, and probably deserve, a higher ranking. In the list below, the lower the score, the more consistent the player is. I have not “ranked” the players, lest this be confused with a ranking scheme, but they are listed in order from most to least consistent by the “standard deviation” measure. In other words, Lindsay Davenport (who after all reached the semifinals of every tournament she played except one and had no first round losses at all) was the most consistent, while Jelena Dokic was the least consistent of these players. Davenport 0.45 Myskina 1.18 Mauresmo 0.46 Kuznetsova 1.21 Zvonareva 0.64 Molik 1.24 Williams, Venus 0.70 Saﬁna 1.27 Golovin 0.80 Vento-Kabchi 1.27 Williams, Serena 0.80 Shaughnessy 1.28 Bovina 0.80 Zuluaga 1.32 Rubin 0.87 Sprem 1.34 Schiavone 0.87 Sharapova 1.36 Hénin-Hardenne 0.88 Hantuchova 1.37 Farina Elia 0.88 Maleeva 1.42 Frazier 0.89 Daniilidou 1.42 Sugiyama 0.91 Serna 1.43 Capriati 0.98 Schnyder 1.46 Smashnova 1.06 Raymond 1.52 Loit 1.06 Martinez 1.53 Déchy 1.06 Dementieva 1.53 Clijsters 1.07 Likhovtseva 1.54 Suárez 1.08 Krasnoroutskaya 1.58 Petrova 1.16 Dokic 2.19 Pierce 1.17

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 88 Fraction of Points Earned in Biggest Win In general, the lower this number, the more consistent a player has been, as she did not use one freak result to significantly change her result. The table shows the point value of the player’s biggest win, what percentage of her (total) points this represents, what her score would have been without this win, where she would have stood in the rankings without that win, and what the win was. Players who would have retained their rankings even without their biggest wins are marked in bold. Note: A “big win” does not constitute the result that took a player deepest into a tournament, but the result worth the most points. WTA Player Best 17 Big Win Big Win Score W/O Resulting Big Win Rank Name Amount Percent Big Win Ranking 15 Bovina 1598 273 17.1% 1352 20 New Haven W 10 Capriati 2359 544 23.1% 1815 14 U. S. Open SF 22 Clijsters 1326 662 49.9% 664 50 Australian Open F 34 Daniilidou 907.25 211 23.3% 697.25 48 Miami SF 1Davenport 4760 461 9.7% 4299 3 San Diego W 21 Déchy 1331 229 17.2% 1126 28 Indian Wells SF 6 Dementieva 3448 842 24.4% 2607 9 Roland Garros F 125 Dokic 281 149 53.0% 132 232 Pan Pacific SF 20 Farina Elia 1334 200 15.0% 1154 26 Antwerp F 26 Frazier 1149 232 20.2% 918 33 Wimbledon R16 27 Golovin 1126.75 190 16.9% 936.75 32 Australian Open R16 31 Hantuchova 971 257 26.5% 725 46 Eastbourne F 8 Hénin-Hardenne 2884 958 33.2% 1926 14 Australian Open W 28 Jankovic 1062.75 162 15.0% 902.75 35 Linz SF 5Kuznetsova 3533 1016 28.8% 2585 9 U. S. Open W 24 Likhovtseva 1270.75 381 30.0% 890.75 35 Canadian Open F 45 Loit 748.75 123 16.4% 626.75 55 Estoril W 25 Maleeva 1179 286 24.3% 894 35 Pan Pacific F 42 Martinez 761 282 37.1% 479 78 Charleston F 2 Mauresmo 4546 451 9.9% 4095 2 Rome W 13 Molik 1970.75 471 23.9% 1501.75 17 Zürich W 3 Myskina 4012 1086 27.1% 2927 8 Roland Garros W 12 Petrova 2022 432 21.4% 1614 15 U. S. Open QF 29 Pierce 1043 212 20.3% 832 36 U. S. Open R16 30 Raymond 1032 336 32.6% 697 48 Australian Open QF 53 Rubin 641 151 23.6% 490 77 Pan Pacific SF 44 Safina 756.75 181.75 24.0% 576 59 Paris SF 19 Schiavone 1397 184 13.2% 1214 25 Warsaw SF 14 Schnyder 1638 446 27.2% 1193 25 Australian Open SF 102 Serna 356 90 25.3% 267 132 Wimbledon 3R 4 Sharapova 3536 1022 28.9% 2564 9 U. S. Open W 40 Shaughnessy 785 149 19.0% 637 54 Dubai SF 32 Smashnova 932 154 16.5% 780 41 Vienna W 18 Sprem 1451.75 386 26.6% 1067.75 28 Wimbledon QF 16 Suárez 1535 378 24.6% 1158 26 Roland Garros SF 17 Sugiyama 1469 206 14.0% 1290 24 Wimbledon QF 49 Vento-Kabchi 673.62 134 19.9% 540.62 64 Stanford SF 7Williams, Serena 3128 704 22.5% 2424 9 Wimbledon F 9Williams, Venus 2400 374 15.6% 2026 12 Charleston W 23 Zuluaga 1296.25 332 25.6% 965.25 32 Australian Open SF 11 Zvonareva 2299 240 10.4% 2126 12 Philadelphia F

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 89 Early-Round Losses Another way of measuring consistency is how rarely one suffers early-round losses. The following table shows how many first- round (correctly, opening-round) losses each player had, followed by other early-round losses (defined, arbitrarily, as cases where the player earned 50 or fewer point or a round robin loss at Los Angeles). Note: Players who go 0Ð3 at the Los Angeles Championships are not included as first-round losses but as early losses and noted in the “other early losses” column; this is partly because they are against such tough players but mostly because even a player who loses all her matches earns 67 points. Name WTA Rank Tournaments 1R Losses Other Early Losses Bovina 15 19 0 7 Capriati 10 12 1 1 Clijsters 22602 Daniilidou 34 22 9 7 Davenport 1 17 0 0 Déchy 21 24 6 8 Dementieva 6 22 8 3 Dokic 125 16 12 2 Farina Elia 20 24 6 4 Frazier 26 18 2 7 Golovin 27 15 2 4 Hantuchova 31 25 7 13 Hénin-Hardenne 8901 Jankovic 28 28 10 10 Krasnoroutskaya 138 13 9 2 Kuznetsova 5 22 2 0 Likhovtseva 24 25 10 7 Loit 45 23 8 8 Maleeva 25 25 11 6 Martinez 42 17 7 5 Mauresmo 2 17 1 0 Molik 13 22 5 6 Myskina 3 19 2 1 Petrova 12 25 7 3 Pierce 29 18 6 5 Raymond 30 19 9 3 Rubin 53 11 3 3 Safina 44 20 7 9 Schiavone 19 23 7 4 Schnyder 14 23 6 7 Serna 102 22 13 8 Sharapova 4 20 1 3 Shaughnessy 40 22 11 5 Smashnova 32 25 9 7 Sprem 18 23 7 8 Suárez 16 19 3 4 Sugiyama 17 24 6 5 Vento-Kabchi 49 28 12 12 Williams, Serena 7 12 1 1 Williams, Venus 9 16 0 2 Zuluaga 23 21 9 3 Zvonareva 11 26 2 5

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 90 From the above we can compile a lists of first-round and early-round losses. Note that a lower number is better. The rate of losses lets you know which players suffered losses in the highest fraction of her events. Frequency of Opening Round Losses Opening Round Losses Opening Round Loss Rate Player Name First Round Losses Player Name 1R Losses 1R Loss Rate Bovina 0 Bovina 0 0% Clijsters 0 Clijsters 0 0% Davenport 0 Davenport 0 0% Hénin-Hardenne 0 Hénin-Hardenne 0 0% Williams, Venus 0 Williams, Venus 0 0% Capriati 1 Sharapova 1 5% Mauresmo 1 Mauresmo 1 6% Sharapova 1 Zvonareva 2 8% Williams, Serena 1 Capriati 1 8% Frazier 2 Williams, Serena 1 8% Golovin 2 Kuznetsova 2 9% Kuznetsova 2 Myskina 2 11% Myskina 2 Frazier 2 11% Zvonareva 2 Golovin 2 13% Rubin 3 Suárez 3 16% Suárez 3 Molik 5 23% Molik 5 Déchy 6 25% Déchy 6 Farina Elia 6 25% Farina Elia 6 Sugiyama 6 25% Pierce 6 Schnyder 6 26% Schnyder 6 Rubin 3 27% Sugiyama 6 Hantuchova 7 28% Hantuchova 7 Petrova 7 28% Martinez 7 Schiavone 7 30% Petrova 7 Sprem 7 30% Saﬁna 7 Pierce 6 33% Schiavone 7 Loit 8 35% Sprem 7 Saﬁna 7 35% Dementieva 8 Jankovic 10 36% Loit 8 Smashnova 9 36% Daniilidou 9 Dementieva 8 36% Krasnoroutskaya 9 Likhovtseva 10 40% Raymond 9 Daniilidou 9 41% Smashnova 9 Martinez 7 41% Zuluaga 9 Zuluaga 9 43% Jankovic 10 Vento-Kabchi 12 43% Likhovtseva 10 Maleeva 11 44% Maleeva 11 Raymond 9 47% Shaughnessy 11 Shaughnessy 11 50% Dokic 12 Serna 13 59% Vento-Kabchi 12 Krasnoroutskaya 9 69% Serna 13 Dokic 12 75%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 91 Frequency of Early Round Losses Note that, for this calculation, we total first round and other early round losses. Early Round Losses Early Round Loss Rate Player Name Early Round Losses Player Name Early L Early Loss% Davenport 0 Davenport 0 0% Hénin-Hardenne 1 Mauresmo 1 6% Mauresmo 1 Kuznetsova 2 9% Capriati 2 Hénin-Hardenne 1 11% Clijsters 2 Williams, Venus 2 13% Kuznetsova 2 Myskina 3 16% Williams, Serena 2 Capriati 2 17% Williams, Venus 2 Williams, Serena 2 17% Myskina 3 Sharapova 4 20% Sharapova 4 Zvonareva 7 27% Golovin 6 Clijsters 2 33% Rubin 6 Bovina 7 37% Bovina 7 Suárez 7 37% Suárez 7 Golovin 6 40% Zvonareva 7 Petrova 10 40% Frazier 9 Farina Elia 10 42% Farina Elia 10 Sugiyama 11 46% Petrova 10 Schiavone 11 48% Dementieva 11 Frazier 9 50% Krasnoroutskaya 11 Dementieva 11 50% Molik 11 Molik 11 50% Pierce 11 Rubin 6 55% Schiavone 11 Schnyder 13 57% Sugiyama 11 Zuluaga 12 57% Martinez 12 Déchy 14 58% Raymond 12 Pierce 11 61% Zuluaga 12 Raymond 12 63% Schnyder 13 Smashnova 16 64% Déchy 14 Sprem 15 65% Dokic 14 Likhovtseva 17 68% Sprem 15 Maleeva 17 68% Daniilidou 16 Loit 16 70% Loit 16 Martinez 12 71% Saﬁna 16 Jankovic 20 71% Shaughnessy 16 Daniilidou 16 73% Smashnova 16 Shaughnessy 16 73% Likhovtseva 17 Saﬁna 16 80% Maleeva 17 Hantuchova 20 80% Hantuchova 20 Krasnoroutskaya 11 85% Jankovic 20 Vento-Kabchi 24 86% Serna 21 Dokic 14 88% Vento-Kabchi 24 Serna 21 95%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 92 Worst Losses The tables below list the “worst” losses suffered by a player, based on the player’s rank at the time of the loss. Losses are listed in decreasing order of severity. Player WTA Rank Losses to players outside Top 50 Losses to players outside Top 20 Bedanova 400 Vedy (423) — Dinan $50K+H J. Kim (302) — Gifu $50K Dabek (274) — Fukuoka $50K Fujiwara (~232) — Karuizawa $25K Gubacsi (c. 194) — Biarritz $25K Gussoni (156) — Australian Open Qualifying Obziler (138) — St. Paul $50K Ondraskova (132) — Prostejov $75K Medina Garrigues (60) — Paris Qualifying Bovina 15 Marrero (95) — Estoril Pierce (37) — Paris Schaul (76) — Australian Open Schiavone (22) — Warsaw Sanchez Lorenzo (55) — Eastbourne Capriati 10 Mandula (42) — Charleston Likhovtseva (39) — Canadian Open Daniilidou (35) — Dubai Daniilidou (35) — Miami Déchy (29) — New Haven Clijsters 22 Coetzer 280 Marrero (108) — Acapulco Saﬁna (48) — Australian Open Daniilidou 34 Peschke (145) — Luxembourg Sanchez Lorenzo (45) — Paris Pastikova (141) — Moscow Qualifying Vento-Kabchi (32) — Stanford Santangelo (129) — Australian Open Bovina (22) — San Diego Strycova (116) — Indian Wells Castano (114) — Charleston Benesova (113) — Antwerp Weingärtner (94) — Roland Garros Garbin (84) — Hobart Panova (84) — Filderstadt Qualifying Morigami (67) — Birmingham Asagoe (62) — U. S. Open Serna (53) — Wimbledon Davenport 1 Schaul (66) — Strasbourg Déchy 21 Foretz (124) — Roland Garros Sprem (32) — Charleston Vinci (108) — Birmingham Bovina (27) — New Haven Schnyder (26) — Australian Open Schiavone (21) — Sydney Smashnova (21) — Berlin Dementieva 6 Panova (250) — Pan Paciﬁc Dulko (43) — Canadian Open Golovin (136) — Paris Raymond (30) — Filderstadt Kleinova (129) — Wimbledon Bovina (27) — New Haven Jankovic (79) — Australian Open Molik (23) — Olympics Kostanic (62) — Amelia Island Dokic 25 Perebiynis (103) — Roland Garros Pisnik (47) — Eastbourne Leon Garcia (98) — Indian Wells Frazier (42) — Amelia Island Tanasugarn (97) — Beijing Mandula (42) Ð Charleston Perry (88) — Birmingham Mandula (40) — Dubai Camerin (79) — Rome Shaughnessy (40) — Berlin Zheng (77) — Doha Bovina (35) — Paris Dulko (59) — Wimbledon Déchy (28) — U. S. Open

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 93 Farina Elia 20 Morigami (70) — Los Angeles Raymond (40) — Olympics Chladkova (62) — Hasselt Shaughnessy (38) — Roland Garros Sprem (58) — Gold Coast Molik (30) — Miami Benesova (56) — San Diego Raymond (30) — Filderstadt Molik (26) — Stockholm Bovina (22) — Eastbourne Schiavone (21) — Moscow Frazier 26 Camerin (74) — Roland Garros Mandula (44) — Amelia Island Brandi (73) — Auckland Molik (30) — Miami Hantuchova (54) — Eastbourne Sharapova (25) — Memphis Golovin 27 Ivanovic (156) — Zürich Pierce (37) — Paris Vaidisova (111) — Japan Open Daniilidou (35) — Miami Koukalova (79) — Roland Garros Raymond (30) — Australian Open Daniilidou (26) — Berlin Hantuchova 31 Gloria (unranked) — Quebec City Molik (40) — Australian Open Irvin (142) — Indian Wells Molik (40) — Vienna Golovin (71) — Birmingham Raymond (36) — New Haven Asagoe (52) — Roland Garros Jankovic (35) — Filderstadt Krasnoroutskaya (26) — Sydney Sprem (25) — Rome Hénin-Harde 9 Garbin (86) — Roland Garros Krasnoroutsk 138 Golovin (354) — Australian Open Pierce (26) — ’s-Hertogenbosch Douchevina (99) — Miami Martinez (25) — Amelia Island Nagyova (91) — Wimbledon Maleeva (23) — Canadian Open Callens (85) — Pan Paciﬁc Sequera (85) — Birmingham Pratt (52) — Gold Coast Kremer 94 Savchuk (527) — Tashkent Loit (42) — Acapulco Peer (287) — Caserta $25K Kostanic (35) — Philadelphia S. Uberoi (275) — U. S. Open Qualifying Vento-Kabchi (31) — Olympics Krivencheva (268) — Dothan $75K Qual. Pisnik (30) — Amelia Island Rodionova [~246] — Stockholm $25K Pierce (26) — ’s-Hertogenbosch Müller [>150] — Grenoble $10K Karatancheva (168) — Japan Open Qual. Castellvi (155) — Los Angeles Qualifying Tu (152) — Philadelphia Qualifying Castellvi (147) — Stanford Qualifying Nemeth (145) — Prostejov $75K Qual. Sequera (144) — Pittsburg $50K Ivanovic (112) — Luxembourg Talaja (101) — Indian Wells Kurhajcova (87) — Ortisei $75K+H Golovin (71) — Birmingham Medina Garrigues (60) — Paris Qualifying Parra Santonja (58) — Canadian Open Tanasugarn (51) — San Diego Qualifying Kuznetsova 5 Salerni (174) — Hobart Sprem (38) — Miami Razzano (118) — Wimbledon Déchy (34) — Gold Coast Likhovtseva 24 Razzano (118) — Wimbledon Vento-Kabchi (43) — Pan Paciﬁc Kirilenko (103) — U. S. Open Kuznetsova (35) — Gold Coast Camerin (84) — Dubai Maleeva (24) — Warsaw Schett (77) — Indian Wells Zuluaga (24) — Roland Garros Golovin (71) — Birmingham Frazier (68) — Hobart Bartoli (65) — Stanford

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 94 Loit 45 Flipkens (186) — Forest Hills Likhovtseva (50) — Rome Osterloh (126) — Filderstadt Qualifying Sanchez Lorenzo (43) — Bogota Panova (122) — Wimbledon Martinez (39) — San Diego Razzano (113) — Bordeaux $75K+H Hantuchova (35) — Canadian Open Benesova (99) — Acapulco Pierce (29) — U. S. Open Sucha (81) — Indian Wells Golovin (29) — Zürich Qualifying Callens (72) — Antwerp Golovin (71) — Birmingham Schaul (66) — Strasbourg Zheng (58) — Roland Garros Sprem (56) — Canberra Majoli 315 Safarova (>200) — Bergamo $25K Molik (33) — Indian Wells Nemeth (201) — Ortisei $75K+H Bovina (30) — Estoril Bammer (145) — Antwerp Qualifying Pichet (139) — Cagnes Sur Mer $75K Grande (87) — Miami Craybas (76) — St. Paul $50K Maleeva 42 Laine (216) — Luxembourg Kostanic (40) — New Haven Haynes (185) — U. S. Open Mandula (39) — Australian Open Randriantefy (97) — Rome Daniilidou (35) — Olympics Douchevina (82) — Moscow Sprem (34) — Amelia Island Jankovic (72) — Miami Sprem (30) — Wimbledon Benesova (69) — Indian Wells Déchy (24) — Filderstadt Tanasugarn (58) — Birmingham Smashnova (21) — Berlin Barna (57) — Dubai Martinez Sequera (79) — Wimbledon Sanchez Lorenzo (42) — Berlin Dulko (64) — Roland Garros Vento-Kabchi (34) — U. S. Open Brandi (63) — Australian Open Déchy (32) — Los Angeles Saﬁna (53) — Gold Coast Maleeva (23) — Eastbourne Barna (52) — Doha Mauresmo 2 Hantuchova (54) — Eastbourne Molik (29) — San Diego Schiavone (22) — Warsaw Molik 13 Nagyova (102) — Estoril Hantuchova (32) — Pan Paciﬁc Tanasugarn (66) — Wimbledon Hantuchova (32) — U. S. Open Shaughnessy (30) — Doha Frazier (25) — San Diego Myskina 3 Chakvetadze (175) — U. S. Open Likhovtseva (50) — Rome Camerin (61) — Bali Likhovtseva (39) — Canadian Open Frazier (36) — Wimbledon Shaughnessy (30) — Dubai Molik (23) — Olympics Panova 78 Popadic (235) — Bogota Qualifying Brandi (46) — GuangZhou Kucova (209) — Roland Garros Qualifying Bartoli (40) — Linz Linetskaya (199) — Dothan $75K Golovin (29) — Zürich Qualifying Tu (152) — Auckland Qualifying Raymond (28) — Miami Voskoboeva (150) — Moscow Qualifying Sharapova (25) — Memphis Osterloh (126) — Filderstadt Qualifying Marrero (109) — Palm Beach Gardens $50K Leon Garcia (98) — Indian Wells Perry (88) — Birmingham Kleinova (85) — Canberra Srebotnik (75) — U. S. Open Marrero (71) — Rome

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 95 Petrova 12 Dulko (97) — Indian Wells Likhovtseva (39) — Canadian Open Weingärter (94) — Roland Garros Asagoe (38) — Birmingham Kapros (80) — Australian Open Raymond (36) — New Haven Pennetta (72) — Rome Jankovic (35) — Filderstadt Jankovic (52) — ’s-Hertogenbosch Likhovtseva (35) — San Diego Pierce (28) — Olympics Martinez (24) — Charleston Schiavone (21) — Moscow Pierce 29 Mamic (120) — Moscow Likhovtseva (48) — Berlin Randriantefy (69) — Luxembourg Likhovtseva (27) — Filderstadt Ruano Pascual (67) — Wimbledon Zuluaga (24) — Zürich Jidkova (57) — Quebec City Maleeva (21) — Antwerp Morigami (56) — Charleston Dulko (52) — San Diego Raymond 30 Randriantefy (112) — Charleston Daniilidou (38) — San Diego Reeves (92) — Rome Jankovic (36) — Filderstadt Qualifying Cervanova (87) — Wimbledon Maleeva (31) — Pan Pacific Parra Santonja (66) — Roland Garros Déchy (29) — New Haven Zheng (63) — Vienna Schnyder (26) — Australian Open Martinez (24) — Eastbourne Molik (23) — Olympics Schiavone (21) — Miami Rubin 53 Jidkova (84) — Vienna Bartoli (84) — Wimbledon Garbin (59) — Bali Safina 44 Irvin (104) — Roland Garros Likhovtseva (40) — Eastbourne M. Casanova (100) — Sydney Qualifying Raymond (36) — New Haven Koukalova (100) — Antwerp Sharapova (22) — Berlin Sequera (98) — Strasbourg Golovin (94) — Miami Kurhajcova (79) — Sopot Strycova (64) — GuangZhou Parra Santonja (63) — Wimbledon Schiavone 19 Parra (59) — Amelia Island Sanchez Lorenzo (50) — Gold Coast Golovin (54) — Wimbledon Pisnik (47) — Eastbourne Brandi (52) — Indian Wells Safina (40) — Paris Likhovtseva (39) — Canadian Open Likhovtseva (38) — Australian Open Vento-Kabchi (32) — Stanford Kuznetsova (29) — Dubai Bovina (22) — San Diego Schnyder 14 Gagliardi (115) — Wimbledon Safina (40) — Paris Harkleroad (109) — San Diego Kostanic (37) — Los Angeles Medina Garrigues (58) — ’s-Hertogenbosch Jankovic (33) — Linz Asagoe (52) — Roland Garros Coetzer (30) — Sydney Kostanic (27) — Los Angeles Bovina (28) — Rome Frazier (25) — Stanford Martinez (24) — Charleston Maleeva (24) — Warsaw

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 96 Serna 102 Testud (—) — Doha Pierce (37) — Paris Kremer (322) — Birmingham Kostanic (36) — Filderstadt Qualifying Karatancheva (282) — Indian Wells Kostanic (36) — Moscow Qualifying Stosur (163) — Gold Coast Déchy (29) — New Haven Santangelo (129) — Australian Open Bovina (24) — Sydney Koukalova (100) — Antwerp Smashnova-Pistolesi (21) — Rome Lee-Waters (84) — Linz Qualifying Domachowska (83) — Moscow Qualifying Sanchez Lorenzo (55) — Eastbourne Sharapova 4 Washington (81) — New Haven Hantuchova (32) — Pan Paciﬁc Pierce (29) — U. S. Open Shaughnessy 40 Fedossova (448) — Japan Open Bartoli (50) — U. S. Open Stosur (163) — Gold Coast Jankovic (49) — Los Angeles Vaidisova (103) — Tashkent Brandi (48) — Miami Irvin (98) — Stanford Sprem (30) — Wimbledon Washington (81) — New Haven Pierce (29) — Amelia Island Vakulenko (77) — Strasbourg Sprem (29) — Berlin Asagoe (69) — San Diego Maleeva (22) — Roland Garros Pratt (52) — Australian Open Smashnova 32 Golovin (354) — Australian Open Sprem (45) — Antwerp Domachowska (140) — Sopot Sprem (35) — Eastbourne Golovin (136) — Paris Déchy (28) — Indian Wells Kleinova (103) — Stockholm Zuluaga (25) — Filderstadt Strycova (82) — Amelia Island Sharapova (23) — Miami Srebotnik (68) — Wimbledon Rubin (23) — San Diego Garbin (64) — Olympics Schiavone (21) — Sydney Asagoe (62) — U. S. Open Harkleroad (55) — Auckland Sprem 18 Stosur (163) — Gold Coast Camerin (45) — Hasselt Stosur (114) — Indian Wells Shaughnessy (44) — Linz Randriantefy (112) — Charleston Kostanic (40) — U. S. Open M. Casanova (93) — Roland Garros Daniilidou (35) — Miami Hantuchova (54) — Eastbourne Krasnoroutskaya (25) — Australian Open Farina Elia (21) — Filderstadt Stevenson 282 Karatancheva (282) — Indian Wells Pratt (49) — Charleston Osterloh (225) — Los Angeles Qualifying Chakvetadze (222) — Surbiton $25K Jackson (213) — Stanford Qualifying Spears (154) — Birmingham Qualifying Sun (128) — Gold Coast Qualifying Birnerova (116) — Wimbledon Qualifying Cargill (110) — Sydney Qualifying Grönefeld (107) — Dubai Qualifying Stosur (95) — New Haven Qualifying Koukalova (91) — Miami Strycova (82) — Amelia Island Qualifying Vakulenko (73) — Antwerp Ruano Pascual (70) — U. S. Open Bartoli (59) — Australian Open Suárez 16 Jidkova (107) — Charleston Medina Garrigues (46) — Luxembourg Schett (77) — Indian Wells Daniilidou (30) — Gold Coast Craybas (73) — Miami Zuluaga (27) — Olympics Bartoli (63) — San Diego Schnyder (26) — Australian Open Asagoe (62) — U. S. Open Pierce (26) — Filderstadt Maleeva (23) — Canadian Open

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 97 Sugiyama 17 Nakamura (165) — Bali Vento-Kabchi (39) — Miami Pastikova (141) — Moscow Déchy (32) — Sydney Ruano Pascual (90) — Roland Garros Maleeva (31) — Pan Pacific Schaul (66) — Strasbourg Smashnova (31) — Filderstadt Obata (56) — Australian Open Shaughnessy (30) — Doha Hantuchova (54) — Eastbourne Kuznetsova (29) — Dubai Zuluaga (24) — Berlin Molik (23) — Olympics Tanasugarn 66 Baltacha (343) — Eastbourne Qualifying Medina Garrigues (48) — Beijing Husarova (166) — Pan Pacific Loit (43) — Gold Coast Sfar (151) — Dubai Dulko (39) — U. S. Open Widjaja (151) — Olympics Hantuchova (36) — Miami Kirilenko (148) — Hyderabad Loit (36) — Birmingham Ashley (121) — Charleston Safina (32) — Amelia Island Linetskaya (106) — Tashkent Sucha (91) — GuangZhou Kurhajcova (85) — Quebec City Irvin (85) — San Diego Qualifying Pennetta (77) — Canberra Strycova (76) — Strasbourg Bartoli (62) — Los Angeles Granville (54) — Australian Open Granville (54) — Indian Wells Dulko (52) — San Diego Schaul (51) — New Haven Testud 311 Marosi (262) — Stockholm Qualifying Sanchez Lorenzo (38) — Rome Nemeth (201) — Ortisei $75K+H Loit (32) — Strasbourg Grönefeld (98) — Cagnes Sur Mer $75K Hantuchova (29) — Paris Cervanova (81) — Palermo Déchy (29) — Doha Zuluaga (24) — Berlin Tulyaganova — Ant. Serra Zanetti (98) — Tashkent Vento-Kabchi 49 Cho (313) — Bali Sprem (48) — Paris Osterloh (186) — San Diego Likhovtseva (39) — Canadian Open Mikaelian (175) — Zürich Qualifying Sprem (38) — Miami Weingärtner (108) — Vienna Molik (34) — Dubai Camerin (97) — Hobart Dulko (34) — Beijing Casanova (93) — Roland Garros Jankovic (29) — Philadelphia Czink (77) — Australian Open Ruano Pascual (69) — Birmingham Zheng (59) — GuangZhou Morigami (57) — Amelia Island Black (51) — Auckland Williams, S. 7 Jidkova (73) — Linz Williams, V. 9 Raymond (30) — Australian Open Sprem (30) — Wimbledon Kuznetsova (29) — Dubai Pierce (28) — Olympics Zuluaga 23 Kremer (181) — Wimbledon Asagoe (49) — Hobart Perry (127) — Miami Golovin (38) — Canadian Open Mikaelian (85) — Charleston Sprem (29) — Berlin Domachowska (79) — Linz Déchy (28) — Indian Wells Bartoli (63) — San Diego Déchy (27) — Eastbourne Barna (56) — Los Angeles Likhovtseva (25) — Moscow

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 98 Zvonareva 11 Craybas (73) — Miami Kuznetsova (35) — Gold Coast Jankovic (33) — Linz Déchy (28) — Indian Wells Likhovtseva (27) — Filderstadt Zuluaga (24) — Berlin

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 99 Best and Worst “Worst Losses” In the tables on the following page, the list on the left shows, in order based on badness of loss, the worst single loss for our highlight players based on the ranking at the time (the same figure used in the previous table). Both the opponent’s ranking at the time and her final ranking are shown. The column on the right ranks losses based on the opponent’s final ranking. Players in bold had their worst at-the-time and year-end losses to different players. Worst Losses Based on Rankings at the Time Worst Losses Based on Year-End Rankings Serna: Testud (then: unranked/ended: 311) Kremer: Krivencheva (then: 268/ended: 408) Hantuchova: Gloria (then: unranked/ended: 341) Hantuchova: Gloria (then: unranked/ended: 341) Kremer: Savchuk (then: 527/ended: 279) Shaughnessy: Fedossova (then: 448/ended: 313) Shaughnessy: Fedossova (then: 448/ended: 313) Serna: Testud (then: unranked/ended: 311) Smashnova: Golovin (then: 354/ended: 27) Testud: Marosi (then: 262/ended: 299) Krasnoroutskaya: Golovin (then: 354/ended: 27) Schnyder: Coetzer (then: 30/ended: 280) Tanasugarn: Baltacha (then: 343/ended: 202) Stevenson: Cargill (then: 110/ended: 240) Vento-Kabchi: Cho (then: 313/ended: 207) Dokic: Leon Garcia (then: 98/ended: 214) Stevenson: Karatancheva (then: 282/ended: 127) Tanasugarn: Husarova (then: 166/ended: 213) Testud: Marosi (then: 262/ended: 299) Vento-Kabchi: Cho (then: 313/ended: 207) Dementieva: Panova (then: 250/ended: 78) Raymond: Reeves (then: 92/ended: 203) Maleeva: Laine (then: 216/ended: 165) Maleeva: Laine (then: 216/ended: 165) Zuluaga: Kremer (then: 181/ended: 94) Molik: Nagyova (then: 102/ended: 154) Myskina: Chakvetadze (then: 175/ended: 84) Krasnoroutskaya: Nagyova (then: 91/ended: 154) Kuznetsova: Salerni (then: 174/ended: 114) Zuluaga: Mikaelian (then: 85/ended: 144) Sugiyama: Nakamura (then: 165/ended: 123) Martinez: Sequera (then: 79/ended: 142) Sprem: Stosur (then: 163/ended: 65) Safina: Sequera (then: 98/ended: 142) Golovin: Ivanovic (then: 156/ended: 97) Dementieva: Kleinova (then: 129/ended: 140) Jankovic: Li Na (then: 145/ended: 80) Smashnova: Kleinova (then: 103/ended: 140) Daniilidou: Peschke (then: 145/ended: 116) Jankovic: Krasnoroutskaya (then: 44/ended: 138) Déchy: Foretz (then: 124/ended: 93) Sprem: Krasnoroutskaya (then: 25/ended: 138) Pierce: Mamic (then: 120/ended: 101) Schiavone: Pisnik (then: 47/ended: 130) Likhovtseva: Razzano (then: 118/ended: 60) Sugiyama: Nakamura (then: 165/ended: 123) Schnyder: Gagliardi (then: 115/ended: 104) Daniilidou: Peschke (then: 145/ended: 116) Raymond: Randriantefy (then: 112/ended: 62) Déchy: Vinci (then: 108/ended: 115) Suárez: Jidkova (then: 107/ended: 55) Kuznetsova: Salerni (then: 174/ended: 114) Safina: Irvin (then: 104/ended: 72) Likhovtseva: Kirilenko (then: 103/ended: 111) Dokic: Perebiynis (then: 103/ended: 90) Pierce: Mamic (then: 120/ended: 101) Molik: Nagyova (then: 102/ended: 154) Golovin: Ivanovic (then: 156/ended: 97) Petrova: Dulko (then: 97/ended: 33) Suárez: Schett (then: 77/ended: 88) Bovina: Marrero (then: 95/ended: 47) Petrova: Kapros (then: 80/ended: 86) Hénin-Hardenne: Garbin (then: 86/ended: 58) Myskina: Chakvetadze (then: 175/ended: 84) Rubin: Jidkova (then: 84/ended: 55) Capriati: Mandula (then: 42/ended: 81) Sharapova: Washington (then: 81/ended: 50) Frazier: Mandula (then: 44/ended: 81) Martinez: Sequera (then: 79/ended: 142) Farina Elia: Morigami (then: 70/ended: 68) Frazier: Camerin (then: 74/ended: 43) Davenport: Schaul (then: 66/ended: 61) Zvonareva: Craybas (then: 73/ended: 59) Bovina: Schaul (then: 76/ended: 61) Williams, Serena: Jidkova (then: 73/ended: 55) Zvonareva: Craybas (then: 73/ended: 59) Farina Elia: Morigami (then: 70/ended: 68) Rubin: Garbin (then: 59/ended: 58) Davenport: Schaul (then: 66/ended: 61) Hénin-Hardenne: Garbin (then: 86/ended: 58) Schiavone: Parra (then: 59/ended: 70) Williams, Serena: Jidkova (then: 73/ended: 55) Mauresmo: Hantuchova (then: 54/ended: 31) Sharapova: Washington (then: 81/ended: 50) Capriati: Mandula (then: 42/ended: 81) Mauresmo: Hantuchova (then: 54/ended: 31) Williams, Venus: Raymond (then: 30/ended: 30) [or Sprem: Williams, Venus: Raymond (then: 30/ended: 30) 30/18] Clijsters: Bovina (then: 17/ended: 15) Clijsters: Bovina (then: 17/ended: 15)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 100 Winning and Losing Streaks List of Longest Winning Streaks The following list shows all winning streaks of ten or more matches, in descending order, including the tournaments involved and the surfaces on which they were achieved. Number Player Tournaments and Results Surfaces of Wins 22 Davenport Stanford W (4), Los Angeles W (5), San Diego W Hard (5), Cincinnati W (3), U. S. Open SF (5) 16 Hénin-Hardenne Sydney W (3)1, Australian Open W (7), Dubai W Hard (4), Doha SF (2) [15] Clijsters [Luxembourg 2003 W (4), Los Angeles Champs Indoor, Hard 2003 W (5)2], Australian Open F (6) 15 S. Williams [Wimbledon 2003 W (7)], Miami 2004 W (6), Grass, Hard, Clay Amelia Island QF (2) 14 Sharapova Birmingham (5), Wimbledon (7), San Diego QF (2) Grass, Hard 14 Kuznetsova U. S. Open (7), Bali (4), Beijing F (3) Hard 13(15)3 V. Williams Charleston W (5), Warsaw W (4), Berlin F (4) Clay 13 Mauresmo Berlin W (4), Rome W (5), Roland Garros QF (4) Clay 12 Sharapova Seoul W (5), Japan Open W (4), Zürich F (3) Hard, Indoor 11 Molik Zürich W (5), Luxembourg W (4), Philadelphia QF Indoor (2) 10(11)4 Loit Casablanca W (5), Estoril W (5) Clay 10 Mauresmo Canadian Open W (5), Olympics F (5) Hard 10 Mauresmo Linz W (4), Philadelphia W (3), Los Angeles SF (3) Indoor 1. Hénin-Hardenne had a walkover at Sydney 2. The string Clijsters began in 2003 was interrupted by an injury withdrawal at Hopman Cup, which is not an ofﬁcial WTA event. 3. In addition to her WTA wins, Venus won two Fed Cup matches between Charleston and Warsaw 4. In addition to her WTA wins, Loit had one Fed Cup win

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 101 Individual Winning and Losing Streaks, Sorted by Player The following table records a player’s longest winning and losing streaks, as well as tabulating all winning streaks of ten or more matches and all losing streaks of three or more matches. Players with 10-match win streaks are shown in bold; those with 3+ match losing streaks in italics. Longest Longest Streaks Streaks Events in Longest Win Events in Longest Loss Streak Player Win Loss of 10+ of 3+ Streak Name Rank Streak Streak Wins Losses Bedanova 400 2 5 0 1 Fukuoka $50K QF or Paris Paris Q3R, St. Paul $50K 1R, Dinan Q3R $50K+H 1R, Biarritz $25K 1R, Gifu $50K 1R Bovina 15 7 1 0 0 New Haven W, U. S. Open (no losing streaks) 3R Capriati 10 5 2 0 0 Roland Garros SF or U. S. Los Angeles Champ 2003 SF, Dubai 2R Open SF Clijsters 22 91 1 00Paris W, Antwerp W, Indian (no losing streaks) Wells 3R (see footnote) Coetzer 280 1 2 0 0 Sydney 2R or Australian Australian Open 2R, Acapulco 1R; Open 2R retired Daniilidou 34 5 5 0 2 Auckland W Berlin 2R, Roland Garros 1R, Birmingham 1R, [’s-Hertogenbosch 1R withdrawal], Wimbledon 1R, Stanford 1R Davenport 1 22 1 1 0 Stanford W, Los Angeles (no losing streaks) W, San Diego W, Cincinnati W, U. S. Open SF Déchy 21 4 3 0 1 Indian Wells SF or New Rome 2R, Roland Garros 1R, Haven F Birmingham 1R Dementieva 6 6 4 0 3 Roland Garros F Zürich SF, Los Angeles RR, RR, RR Dokic 125 3 9 0 2 Pan Paciﬁc SF Charleston 2R, Berlin 1R, Rome 1R, Roland Garros 1R, Birmingham 1R, Eastbourne 1R, Wimbledon 1R, U. S. Open 1R, Beijing 1R Farina Elia 20 4 32 02Canberra F Wimbledon R16, Los Angeles 1R, San Diego 1R or Filderstadt 2R, Moscow 1R, Zürich 1R Frazier 26 7 3 0 1 Hobart W, Australian Open Vienna SF, Roland Garros 1R, 3R Eastbourne 1R Golovin 27 5 2 0 0 Birmingham F Rome 2R, Roland Garros 1R or U. S. Open 3R, Japan Open 1R Hantuchova 31 4 33 01Eastbourne F Warsaw 2R, Berlin 1R, Rome 1R Hénin- 8161 10Sydney W, Australian (no losing streaks) Hardenne Open W, Dubai W, Doha SF Krasnorouts 138 3 6 0 2 ’s-Hertogenbosch SF Australian Open 3R, Pan Paciﬁc 1R, Dubai 1R, Doha 1R, Miami 1R, Amelia Island 1R Kremer 94 4 4 0 3 Stockholm $25K F Ortisei $75K+H 2R, Paris Q1R, Acapulco 1R, Indian Wells 1R or Miami 2R, Amelia Island 1R, Charleston 1R, Dothan $75K Q1R Kuznetsova 5 14 2 1 0 U. S. Open W, Bali W, Gold Coast QF, Hobart 1R Beijing SF

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 102 Likhovtseva 24 5 34 02Canadian Open F Australian Open 3R, Pan Pacific 1R, Dubai 1R or Miami 3R, Amelia Island 1R, Warsaw 1R Loit 45 10 4 1 2 Casablanca W, Estoril W Birmingham SF, Wimbledon 1R, San Diego 1R, Canadian Open 1R Majoli 315 4 3 0 2 Bergamo $25K F Ortisei $75K+H 2R, Antwerp Q1R, St. Paul $50K 1R or Indian Wells 2R, Miami 1R, Estoril 1R Maleeva 25 3 5 0 3 Pan Pacific F or Roland Hasselt QF, Filderstadt 1R, Moscow 1R, Garros R16 or Wimbledon Zürich 1R, Luxembourg 1R R16 or Canadian Open QF Martinez 42 4 3 0 2 Charleston F Eastbourne 2R, Wimbledon 1R, Los Angeles 1R or San Diego R16, Olympics 1R, U. S. Open 1R Mauresmo 2 13 2 3 0 Berlin W, Rome W, Roland Wimbledon SF, San Diego 2R Garros QF Molik 13 11 3 1 1 Zürich W, Luxembourg W, Amelia Island R16, Estoril 1R, Rome 1R Philadelphia QF Myskina 3 9 2 0 0 Roland Garros W, Berlin QF, Rome 3R or U. S. Open 2R, Wimbledon 3R Bali 1R Panova 78 4 5 0 1 Memphis 2R as Q or Filderstadt Q3R, Moscow Q1R, Zürich Wimbledon 3R as Q Q1R, Linz 1R, Philadelphia 1R Petrova 12 4 3 0 2 Miami SF or U. S. Open QF Roland Garros 3R, Birmingham 2R, ’s- Hertogenbosch 2R or Los Angeles QF, San Diego 1R, Canadian Open 2R Pierce 29 5 3 0 2 ’s-Hertogenbosch W Amelia Island 2R, Charleston 1R, Berlin 1R or Filderstadt 2R, Moscow 1R, Zürich 1R Raymond 30 4 4 0 2 Australian Open QF Miami 3R, Charleston 1R, Rome 1R, Vienna 1R Rubin 53 3 [2/3]5 00Australian Open R16 Vienna 1R, Wimbledon 1R (see footnote) Safina 44 6 3 0 2 Paris SF as qualifier Roland Garros 2R, Eastbourne 1R, Wimbledon 1R or Sopot 2R, New Haven 1R, U. S. Open 1R Schiavone 19 3 3 0 1 (won 3 matches at 7 different Paris QF, Dubai 1R, Indian Wells 2R events) Schnyder 14 5 2 0 0 Australian Open SF (lost two straight 6 times) Serna 102 2 4 0 6 Gold Coast QF or U. S. Open 2R, Filderstadt Q1R, Moscow Wimbledon 3R Q1R, Zürich Q1R Sharapova 4 14 2 2 0 Birmingham W, Canadian Open R16, New Haven 2R Wimbledon W, San Diego SF Shaughnessy 40 3 7 0 2 Dubai SF or Tashkent SF Wimbledon 3R, Stanford 1R, Los Angeles 1R, San Diego 1R, New Haven 1R, U. S. Open 1R, Japan Open 1R Smashnova 32 6 4 0 3 Vienna W, Roland Garros 3R Stockholm 2R, Sopot 2R, Olympics 1R, U. S. Open 1R Sprem 18 4 3 0 1 Wimbledon QF or Paris 2R Moscow 2R, Zürich 1R, Linz 1R as qualifier Stevenson 282 3 4 0 3 Antwerp 1R as qualifier Antwerp 1R, Dubai Q1R, Indian Wells 1R, Miami 1R or Stanford Q2R, Los Angeles Q1R, New Haven Q1R, U. S. Open 1R

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 103 Suárez 16 6 3 0 1 Canberra W, Australian U. S. Open 3R, Filderstadt 1R, Moscow Open 3R 1R Sugiyama 17 4 4 0 2 Gold Coast W or Wimbledon U. S. Open R16, Bali 1R, Filderstadt 1R, QF Moscow 1R Tanasugarn 66 3 5 0 4 Hyderabad SF or Miami 2R, Amelia Island 1R, Charleston Birmingham QF or 1R, Strasbourg 1R, Roland Garros 1R Wimbledon R15 or Japan Open QF Testud 311 2 9 1 Ortisei $75K+H QF Doha 2R, Cagnes Sur Mer $75K 1R, Berlin 1R, Rome 1R, Strasbourg 1R, Roland Garros 1R, Palermo 1R, Stockholm Q1R, Olympics 1R Vento- 49 3 3 0 3 Stanford SF Pan Pacific 2R, Paris 1R, Dubai 1R or Kabchi Los Angeles 2R, San Diego 1R, Canadian Open 1R or Zürich Q2R, Linz 1R, Philadelphia 1R Williams, S 7 86 1 00Miami W, Amelia Island QF (no losing streaks) Williams, V 9 13 1 1 0 Charleston W, Warsaw W, (no losing streaks) Berlin F Zuluaga 23 7 5 0 2 Bogota W, Indian Wells QF Roland Garros R16, Eastbourne 1R, Wimbledon 1R, Los Angeles 1R, San Diego 1R Zvonareva 11 6 4 0 1 Memphis W, Indian Wells Philadelphia F, Los Angeles RR, RR, RR R16 1. Clijsters had a15 match winning streak at Luxembourg 2003 (4 wins), Los Angeles Championships 2003 (5 wins), and the 2004 Australian Open final (6 wins). This streak, however, was interrupted by an injury withdrawal at Hopman Cup (not a WTA event), and most of the wins were in 2003 anyway. Her longest win streak of 2004 is the one listed here. In addition, Clijsters withdrew from both Indian Wells and Berlin before making the Hasselt semifinal. Thus she had twelve straight wins without a loss — but with two withdrawals in the interim. 2. Farina Elia ended 2003 with a three match losing streak (Filderstadt 2R, Zürich 1R, Linz 1R), which combined with her opening round loss at Gold Coast 2004 gave her a four match losing streak. 3. Hantuchova ended 2003 with a three match losing streak (Filderstadt 2R, Zürich 1R, Linz 1R), which combined with her opening round loss at Sydney 2004 gave her a four match losing streak 4. Likhovtseva ended 2003 with a three match losing streak (Zürich Q3R, Linz 1R, Philadelphia 1R), which combined with opening round losses at Gold Coast and Hobart gave her a five match losing streak. 5. Rubin withdrew from the Pan Pacific, then lost at Vienna and Wimbledon on her return from injury. Thus she had only two consecutive losses (a figure she matches at the U. S. Open 3R followed by the Bali 1R), but went three tournaments without a title 6. Miami was Serena’s first event of 2004, and her last event of 2003 was Wimbledon, which she won, so in total she won 15 straight matches, seven in 2003 and eight in 2004

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 104 Number of Significant Results For our purposes, define a “significant result” as one which earns a player at least 100 points. The following table shows the number of significant results for top players. So, e.g., the figure in the “100+ Points” column is the number of the player’s events in which she earned 100+ points; similarly in the “200+ Points” column. We note that Davenport leads in both percent and number of 100+ results (16/17), followed by Mauresmo (15/17); Mauresmo leads in 200+ results (14/17); Davenport has the most 400+ results; Hénin-Hardenne leads in percent of 400+ results (3/9); Serena is second (3/12), Davenport third. Player Name WTA Events Events w/ Events w/ Events w/ % with % with Rank Played 100+ Pts 200+ Pts 400+ Pts 100+ points 200+ points Bovina 15 1942021%11% Capriati 10 1265250%42% Clijsters 22633150%50% Daniilidou 34 2241018%5% Davenport 1 17 16 11 4 94% 65% Déchy 21 2432013%8% Dementieva 6 2294241%18% Dokic 125 161006%0% Farina Elia 20 2441017%4% Frazier 26 1841022%6% Golovin 27 1550033%0% Hantuchova 31 2531012%4% Hénin-Hardenne 8985389%56% Jankovic 28 2840014%0% Kuznetsova 5 22 14 4 1 64% 18% Likhovtseva 24 2551020%4% Loit 45 232009%0% Maleeva 25 2541016%4% Martinez 42 1721012%6% Mauresmo 2 17 15 14 3 88% 82% Molik 13 2272132%9% Myskina 3 19 10 7 2 53% 37% Petrova 12 2581132%4% Pierce 29 1841022%6% Raymond 30 1941021%5% Rubin 53 1120018%0% Safina 44 2020010%0% Schiavone 19 2360026%0% Schnyder 14 2343117%13% Serna 102 220000%0% Sharapova 4 2094245%20% Shaughnessy 40 2230014%0% Smashnova 32 251004%0% Sprem 18 2351022%4% Suárez 16 1951026%5% Sugiyama 17 2451021%4% Vento-Kabchi 49 281004%0% Williams, Serena 7 1297375%58% Williams, Venus 9 1695056%31% Zuluaga 23 2161029%5% Zvonareva 11 26 14 2 0 54% 8%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 105 Points Per Quarter For those who want trends, we can also determine how well players did in each part of the year. In the lists which follow, quarters are reckoned based on when a tournament ends. So, e.g., Wimbledon began in June but ended in July; its points are counted toward the July total. Players are ranked in order of points per tournament. A player in italics is one with too few tournaments in the quarter for the result to be considered meaningful. Experience shows that there is almost always a big gap, somewhere around #11 or #12, in points per tournament scores in each quarter (note, e.g., the gap between Suárez and Hénin-Hardenne in the second quarter); I’ve generally listed enough players to show the gap. First Quarter (Constituting the period from the beginning of the year to Indian Wells) Rank Player Points Tournaments Per Tournament 1 Hénin-Hardenne 2126 5 425.2 2 Clijsters 1192 4 298.0 3Davenport 1069 4 267.3 4 Mauresmo 442 2 221.0 5 Myskina 945 5 189.0 6 Zuluaga 599 4 149.8 7Kuznetsova 795 6 132.5 8 Golovin 370 3 123.3 9 Rubin 347 3 115.7 10 Déchy 556 5 111.2 11 Schnyder 525 5 105.0 12 Raymond 475 5 95.0 Second Quarter (Constituting the period from Miami to Eastbourne) Rank Player Points Tournaments Per Tournament 1 Myskina 1172 3 390.7 2Williams, Venus 1367 5 273.4 3 Mauresmo 1562 6 260.3 4 Capriati 1189 5 237.8 5 Dementieva 1320 6 220.0 6Williams, Serena 945 5 189.0 7Davenport 704 4 176.0 8Kuznetsova 881 6 146.8 9 Sharapova 661 5 132.2 10 Suárez 779 6 129.8 11 Hénin-Hardenne 195 2 97.5

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 106 Third Quarter (Constituting the period from Wimbledon to Beijing) Rank Player Points Tournaments Per Tournament 1Davenport 2194 6 365.7 2Williams, Serena 1651 5 330.2 3 Hénin-Hardenne 563 2 281.5 4 Mauresmo 1382 5 276.4 5 Capriati 986 4 246.5 6Kuznetsova 1660 7 237.1 7 Sharapova 1352 6 225.3 8 Dementieva 1255 7 179.3 9Zvonareva 946 7 135.1 10 Molik 646 5 129.2 11 Myskina 865 7 123.6 12 Sprem 587 5 117.4 13 Williams, Venus 545 5 109.0 Fourth Quarter (Constituting the period from Hasselt to the Los Angeles Championships.) Rank Player Points Tournaments Per Tournament 1 Mauresmo 1160 4 290.0 2 Sharapova 1381 5 276.2 3Williams, Serena 532 2 266.0 4Davenport 793 3 264.3 5 Myskina 1032 4 258.0 6 Molik 794 4 198.5 7 Dementieva 746 5 149.2 8Bovina 649 5 129.8 9Kuznetsova 378 3 126.0 10 Petrova 489 5 97.8 11 Clijsters 88 1 88.0 12 Williams, Venus 255 3 85.0 13 Zvonareva 502 6 83.7 14 Saﬁna 222 3 74.0

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 107 Most Consistent over Four Quarters The data in the previous section allows us to calculate another consistency ranking, based on who had the best results from quarter to quarter. All told, 24 different players ended in the Top Bunch in at least one quarter, though only four (Davenport, Kuznetsova, Mauresmo, and Myskina) made it in all four quarters (a fairly typical number; there were six last year, but only four in 2002; Davenport and Mauresmo are the only players to have managed it in both 2003 and 2004). In the list below, I have added up the player’s per- quarter score for each of the four quarters. Lowest is best, i.e. most consistent. Players not in the quarterly list in any given quarter are assigned an arbitrary value of 15 (meaning, obviously, that the maximum possible score is 60), but a player must make the list for at least one quarter to be listed. Injuries being what they are, this is a long way from perfect., but it is at least indicative. Last year, this was nearly identical to the WTA rankings; we note that it is quite different this year, though we have the same Top Three. Consistency Rank Name WTA Rank Consistency Score 1 Mauresmo 2 12 2Davenport 1 15 3 Myskina 3 22 4Williams, Serena 7 26 5 Hénin-Hardenne 8 30 5Kuznetsova 5 30 7 Sharapova 4 33 8 Dementieva 6 35 9 Capriati 10 39 10 Williams, Venus 9 42 11 Clijsters 22 43 12 Molik 13 46 13 Zuluaga 23 51 14 Zvonareva 11 52 15 Bovina 15 53 15 Golovin 27 53 17 Rubin 53 54 18 Déchy 21 55 18 Petrova 12 55 18 Suárez 16 55 21 Schnyder 14 56 22 Raymond 30 57 22 Sprem 18 57 24 Saﬁna 44 59

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 108 Slam Results From the standpoint of difficulty, the Slams are overrated. Slam results, e.g., are worth twice as much as the results of Tier I events, even though Tier I events are played in a shorter time against a tougher field (to win Rome, a player must win five or six matches in seven days, with every opponent probably in the Top Fifty; to win Roland Garros requires seven matches in no less than twelve days, with probably at least two opponents outside the Top Fifty). Still, they are the events people remember, and so deserve some separate consideration. The following summarizes the top players’ slam results. The column, “Total Opponent Rank” adds up the rankings of one’s opponents. The next column divides this by the number of matches played. The lower this number, the tougher the average opponent was (note: Players ranked outside the Top 100 have been calculated as “100”). It is not properly a scheme for ranking; it simply calculated how tough, overall, the players’ draw was. Because there is so much data here, we obviously need some analysis. The most wins in Slams were posted by Davenport and Mauresmo, with 17 each (unusually low numbers; Hénin-Hardenne had 24 in 2003, and Clijsters 22; Serena Williams had 19, and even Nadia Petrova 17. In 2002, Venus Williams had 22, Serena 21, and Capriati 20; in 2001, Capriati had 24, Venus 19, Serena 18; in 2000, Hingis had 20, Davenport 19, Venus 18). Third place this year went to Sharapova with 15 wins; Capriati, Myskina, and Serena were next with 14; Suárez had 13; Kuznetsova 12; Dementieva, Hénin-Hardenne, and Zvonareva had 11 (recall that Dementieva had one walkover and two first round losses, which is how she could have two Slam finals and only 11 wins). The lowest win total for a Top 20 player was Sprem’s four; Jankovic’s two was the lowest for a Top 30 player. In terms of winning percentage, ironically, Kim Clijsters leads at 86%; Mauresmo and Hénin-Hardenne follow at 85% (recall that Mauresmo had a withdrawal, which is why she leads Davenport). Among players who played all four Slams to a completion, Sharapova is first at 83%. Next are Capriati, Myskina, and Serena at 82%, Davenport at 81%, Kuznetsova at 80%, and no one else over 80%. The lowest percentage for a Top 20 player was Sprem’s 50%; Jankovic, at 33%, had the worst record for a Top 30 player. In terms of points per Slam, Clijsters again is on top, at 662; Capriati follows at 457. Dementieva has the best score of players who played all four Slams, at 413; Serena is fourth at 397, Myskina fifth at 380, then Hénin-Hardenne at 373, Sharapova at 359, Davenport at 318, Kuznetsova at 298, Mauresmo at 291. Just as with almost everything else, we see a decline in Top Ten wins this year; last year, Hénin- Hardenne had seven and Serena six, but our leader this year is Dementieva with five, followed by Myskina with four; nobody else had more than two. In terms of average opponents, we can’t see much that is revealing. Testud of course had the toughest possible schedule: One Slam, in which she played the world’s #1. Dementieva was second in toughness-of- schedule; Shinobu Asagoe, ironically, was third. Clijsters was next. Among Top 30 players who played more than one Slam, Sprem is next after Dementieva, then Capriati, then Pierce, then Myskina. The softest schedule for a Top 30 player was Suárez’s; no wonder she managed to earn so many wins!

Player WTA Rnk Slam W/L Winning% Slam Pts Slams Pts/Slam Vs. Top 10 Tot Opp. Rnk Per Opp. Asagoe 37 7Ð4 64% 484 4 121 0-2 350 31.8 Bovina 15 6Ð3 67% 236 4 59 0-2 593 65.9 Capriati 10 14Ð3 82% 1370 3 456.7 1-3 700 41.2 Clijsters 22 6Ð1 86% 662 1 662 1-1 244 34.9 Daniilidou 34 5Ð4 56% 202 4 50.5 0-0 707 78.6 Davenport 1 17Ð4 81% 1272 4 318 0-3 1003 47.8 Déchy 21 7Ð3 70% 300 4 75 0-1 594 59.4 Dementieva 6 11Ð4 73% 1652 4 413 5-2 446 29.7 Dokic 125 0Ð3 0% 6 3 2 0-0 187 62.3 Farina Elia 20 9Ð4 69% 376 4 94 0-2 756 58.2 Frazier 26 6Ð4 60% 402 4 100.5 1-1 581 58.1 Golovin 27 8Ð4 67% 432 4 108 0-1 570 47.5 Hantuchova 31 4Ð4 50% 216 4 54 0-0 433 54.1 Hénin-Hardenne 8 11Ð2 85% 1120 3 373.3 2-1 806 62.0 Jankovic 28 2Ð4 33% 162 4 40.5 1-1 286 47.7 Kuznetsova 5 12Ð3 80% 1192 4 298 2-2 813 54.2 Likhovtseva 24 4Ð4 50% 192 4 48 0-1 525 65.6 Loit 45 2Ð4 33% 84 4 21 0-1 391 65.2 Maleeva 25 8Ð4 67% 384 4 96 0-1 649 54.1 Martinez 42 1Ð4 20% 46 4 11.5 0-0 261 52.2 Mauresmo 2 17Ð3 85% 1166 4 291.5 0-3 1018 50.9 Molik 13 6Ð4 60% 262 4 65.5 0-2 585 58.5 Myskina 3 14Ð3 82% 1520 4 380 4-1 741 43.6 Panova 78 6Ð4 60% 154.5 4 38.6 0-2 617 61.7 Petrova 12 9Ð4 69% 638 4 159.5 1-2 767 59.0 Pierce 29 5Ð3 63% 298 3 99.3 1-2 340 42.5 Raymond 30 8Ð4 67% 516 4 129 0-1 657 54.8 Rubin 53 5Ð3 63% 218 3 72.7 0-1 431 53.9 Saﬁna 44 3Ð4 43% 138 4 34.5 0-2 391 55.9 Schiavone 19 8Ð4 67% 320 4 80 0-2 806 67.2 Schnyder 14 10Ð4 71% 694 4 173.5 0-1 674 48.1 Serna 102 4Ð4 50% 176 4 44 0-2 426 53.3 Sharapova 4 15Ð3 83% 1436 4 359 2-1 950 52.8 Shaughnessy 40 4Ð4 50% 206 4 51.5 0-0 448 56.0 Smashnova 32 3Ð4 43% 132 4 33 0-1 444 63.4 Sprem 18 4Ð4 50% 392 4 98 1-1 302 37.8 Stevenson 282 2Ð3 40% 29 3 9.7 0-0 429 85.8 Suárez 16 13Ð4 76% 704 4 176 0-2 1197 70.4 Sugiyama 17 9Ð4 69% 428 4 107 0-1 830 63.8 Testud 311 0Ð1 0% 2 1 2 0-1 1 1.0 Vento-Kabchi 49 4Ð4 50% 170 4 42.5 0-1 484 60.5 Williams, Serena 7 14Ð3 82% 1192 3 397.3 2-2 819 48.2 Williams, Venus 9 10Ð4 71% 552 4 138 0-2 649 46.4 Zuluaga 23 8Ð4 67% 556 4 139 0-3 745 62.1 Zvonareva 11 11Ð4 73% 472 4 118 0-3 791 52.7

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 110 Surface Rankings Most of our ratings to this point have been “overall” ratings, regardless of surface. However, players do most definitely have preferred surfaces. We may therefore compute “surface rankings.” The following tables show how the highlight players did on each surface. Some other players have been added when their results warrant it. Results are listed in order of points per tournament on each surface. It is effectively certain that some players outside the Top 25 have exceeded some of the lower Top 25 players on certain surfaces (especially grass — Asagoe is a fine example of this; she would probably be Top 15 if all events were suddenly put on grass). I have noted these players where I have been aware of them, but have not checked this for all players.

Hardcourts Summary of Hardcourt Results The following lists the top players, the tournaments they played on hardcourts, the points earned on the surface, their record and winning percentage. The list is in alphabetical order. Player Won/Lost Vs. Tournaments Played Total Pts/ Name (Percent) Top 10 # of Tourn Bedanova 0Ð1 (0%) 0Ð0 Australian Open Qualifying (2) 2/1 Bovina 13Ð5 1Ð3 Sydney (48), Australian Open (40), San Diego (75), Canadian Open 576/6 (72.2%) (52), New Haven (273), U. S. Open (88) Capriati 11Ð6 0Ð2 Dubai (1), Doha (124), Miami (32), Canadian Open (94), New Haven 859/6 (64.7%) (64), U. S. Open (544) Clijsters 7Ð1 (87.5%) 1Ð1 Australian Open (662), Indian Wells (29) 691/2 Coetzer 2Ð2 (50.0%) 0Ð1 Sydney (48), Australian Open (40) 88/2 Daniilidou 20Ð11 2Ð3 Auckland (156), Hobart (1), Australian Open (76), Dubai (114), Indian 801/11 (64.5%) Wells (1), Miami (211), Stanford (1), Los Angeles (18), San Diego (40), Olympics (61), U. S. Open (122) Davenport 33Ð3 4Ð3 Sydney (166), Australian Open (270), Indian Wells (270), Stanford 2476/8 1 (91.7%) (282) , Los Angeles (396), San Diego (461), Cincinnati (175), U. S. Open (456) Déchy 23Ð11 2Ð2 Gold Coast (80), Sydney (68), Australian Open (126), Doha (53), 992/12 (67.6%) Indian Wells (229), Miami (95), Los Angeles (24), San Diego (1), Canadian Open (29), Olympics (1), New Haven (206), U. S. Open (80) Dementieva 20Ð9 4Ð4 Sydney (76), Australian Open (2), Miami (380), Los Angeles (156), 1711/9 (69.0%) San Diego (183), Canadian Open (1), Olympics (1), New Haven (106), U. S. Open (806) Dokic 2Ð6 (25.0%) 0Ð1 Dubai (1), Doha (35), Indian Wells (1), Miami (55), U. S. Open (2), 95/6 Shanghai (1) Farina Elia 16Ð10 0Ð2 Gold Coast (1), Canberra (76), Australian Open (130), Doha (67), 456/10 (61.5%) Miami (32), Los Angeles (1), San Diego (1), Stockholm (51), Olympics (21), U. S. Open (76) Frazier 24Ð9 0Ð4 Auckland (16), Hobart (114), Australian Open (88), Indian Wells (53), 709/10 (72.7%) Miami (24), Stanford (132), Los Angeles (33), San Diego (104), Cincinnati (65), U. S. Open (80) Golovin 13Ð7 0Ð1 Australian Open (190), Indian Wells (26), Miami (76), Canadian Open 526/7 (65.0%) (116), New Haven (29), U. S. Open (88), Japan Open (1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 111 Hantuchova 10Ð10 0Ð1 Sydney (1), Australian Open (40), Indian Wells (1), Miami (36), Los 357/10 (50.0%) Angeles (18), San Diego (29), Canadian Open (35), Olympics (30), New Haven (57), U. S. Open (110) Hénin-Hard 31Ð2 8Ð0 Sydney (328), Australian Open (958), Dubai (250)), Doha (113), Indian 2689/7 (93.9%) Wells (477), Olympics (435), U. S. Open (128) Krasnorout 3Ð7 (30.0%) 0Ð2 Gold Coast (1), Sydney (48), Australian Open (80), Dubai (1), Doha 133/7 (1), Miami (1), Canadian Open (1) Kremer 10Ð12 0Ð2 Indian Wells (1), Miami (18), Stanford Qualifying (1), Los Angeles 130.25/11 (45.5%) (18), San Diego Qualifying (1), Canadian Open (13.5), Olympics (1), U. S. Open Qualifying (16.5), Seoul (55), Japan Open Qualifying (4.25), Tashkent (1) Kuznetsova 37Ð11 5Ð7 Gold Coast (75), Hobart (1), Australian Open (68), Dubai (277), Doha 2506/13 (77.1%) (264), Indian Wells (110), Miami (53), Los Angeles (87), San Diego (57), Olympics (107), U. S. Open (1016), Bali (194), Shanghai (197) Likhovtsev 15Ð12 2Ð5 Gold Coast (1), Hobart (1), Australian Open (110), Dubai (1), Doha 781/13 (55.6%) (29), Indian Wells (1), Miami (32), Stanford (1), Los Angeles (37), San Diego (85), Canadian Open (381), Forest Hills (100), U. S. Open (2) Loit 6Ð9 (40.0%) 0Ð2 Gold Coast (31), Canberra (28), Australian Open (40), Indian Wells (1), 162/9 Miami (30), San Diego (1), Canadian Open (1), Forest Hills (28), U. S. Open (2) Majoli 1Ð2 (33.3%) 0Ð0 Indian Wells (24), Miami (1) 25/2 Maleeva 8Ð10 0Ð2 Gold Coast (50), Sydney (1), Australian Open (48), Dubai (1), Indian 307/10 (44.4%) Wells (1), Miami (1), Canadian Open (124), Olympics (28), New Haven (1), U. S. Open (52) Martinez 9Ð10 0Ð5 Gold Coast (18), Sydney (40), Australian Open (2), Dubai (57)), Doha 286/10 (47.4%) (1), Indian Wells (104), Los Angeles (1), San Diego (60), Olympics (1), U. S. Open (2) Mauresmo 21Ð4 2Ð3 Sydney (226), Australian Open (216), San Diego (1), Canadian Open 1384/6 (84.0%) (401), Olympics (286), U. S. Open (254) Molik 20Ð8 3Ð2 Australian Open (148), Dubai (35), Doha (1), Indian Wells (30), Miami 878/9 (71.4%) (90), San Diego (118), Stockholm (136), Olympics (280), U. S. Open (40) Myskina 27Ð10 2Ð5 Sydney (79), Australian Open (302), Dubai (72)), Doha (282), Indian 1640/10 (73.0%) Wells (210), San Diego (315), Canadian Open (189), Olympics (150), U. S. Open (40), Bali (1) Panova 7Ð8 (46.7%) 0Ð1 Auckland Qualifying (6), Canberra (8.5), Australian Open (2), Indian 95.5/8 Wells (1), Miami (24), U. S. Open (2), Beijing (33), GuangZhou (19) Petrova 21Ð12 1Ð6 Gold Coast (116), Australian Open (2), Indian Wells (32), Miami (198), 1042/12 (63.6%) Los Angeles (60), San Diego (1), Canadian Open (1), Olympics (24), New Haven (27), U. S. Open (432), Bali (90), Shanghai (59) Pierce 9Ð4 (69.2%) 1Ð3 San Diego (35), Canadian Open (60), Olympics (142), U. S. Open 449/4 (212) Raymond 13Ð8 0Ð2 Sydney (1), Australian Open (336), Indian Wells (36), Miami (30), San 697/8 (61.9%) Diego (1), Olympics (65), New Haven (148), U. S. Open (80) Rubin 15Ð8 0Ð6 Sydney (64), Australian Open (132), Los Angeles (37), San Diego (80), 487/8 (65.2%) Canadian Open (47), Olympics (42), U. S. Open (84), Bali (1) Saﬁna 8Ð8 (50.0%) 0Ð3 Gold Coast (73), Sydney Qualifying (8), Australian Open (94), Miami 255/8 (1), New Haven (1), U. S. Open (2), Shanghai (27), GuangZhou (49) Schiavone 18Ð12 1Ð3 Gold Coast (1), Sydney (130), Australian Open (40), Dubai (1), Indian 675/12 (60.0%) Wells (1), Miami (68), Stanford (59), Los Angeles (111), San Diego (1), Canadian Open (59), Olympics (86), U. S. Open (118)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 112 Schnyder 13Ð7 0Ð2 Gold Coast (20), Sydney (1), Australian Open (446), Stanford (59), Los 745/8 (65.0%) Angeles (18), San Diego (1), Olympics (52), U. S. Open (148) Serna 5Ð10 0Ð3 Gold Coast (35), Sydney (1), Australian Open (2), Dubai (29), Doha 136/10 (33.3%) (1), Indian Wells (1), Miami (29), Olympics (1), New Haven (1), U. S. Open (36) Sharapova 22Ð8 0Ð5 Australian Open (72), Indian Wells (50), Miami (78), San Diego (85), 779/10 (73.3%) Canadian Open (50), New Haven (1), U. S. Open (92), Shanghai (102). Seoul (112), Japan Open (137) Shaughness 11Ð14 2Ð3 Gold Coast (1), Sydney (26), Australian Open (2), Dubai (149), Doha 400/14 (44.0%) (107), Indian Wells (61), Miami (1), Stanford (1), Los Angeles (1), San Diego (1), New Haven (1), U. S. Open (2), Japan Open (1), Tashkent (46) Smashnova 11Ð11 0Ð1 Auckland (16), Sydney (63), Australian Open (48), Indian Wells (28), 314/11 (50.0%) Miami (32), Stanford (59), Los Angeles (48), San Diego (1), Stockholm (16), Olympics (1), U. S. Open (2) Sprem 13Ð9 0Ð2 Gold Coast (39), Canberra (64), Australian Open (2), Indian Wells (1), 437/9 (59.1%) Miami (130), San Diego (33), Canadian Open (120), Olympics (46), U. S. Open (2) Stevenson 2Ð10 0Ð0 Gold Coast Qualifying (4.25), Sydney Qualifying (1), Australian Open 19.25/10 (16.7%) (2), Dubai Qualifying (1), Indian Wells (1), Miami (1), Stanford Qualifying (5), Los Angeles Qualifying (1), New Haven Qualifying (1), U. S. Open (2) Suárez 17Ð8 0Ð0 Auckland (59), Canberra (123), Australian Open (68), Indian Wells 538/9 (68.0%) (32), Miami (68), San Diego (33), Canadian Open (52), Olympics (35), U. S. Open (68) Sugiyama 18Ð11 0Ð2 Gold Coast (182), Sydney (1), Australian Open (36), Dubai (121)), 765/12 (62.1%) Doha (1), Miami (1), Los Angeles (35), San Diego (91), Canadian Open (57), Olympics (101), U. S. Open (138), Bali (1) Tanasugarn 13Ð18 0Ð2 Gold Coast (1), Canberra (14), Australian Open (2), Hyderabad (50), 295.75/17 (41.9%) Dubai (1), Indian Wells (1), Miami (20), Los Angeles (1), San Diego (7.75), Canadian Open (33), Olympics (1), New Haven (1), U. S. Open (2), Beijing (35), GuangZhou (48), Japan Open (77), Tashkent (1) Testud 1Ð4 (20.0%) 0Ð0 Doha (48), Stockholm Qualifying (1), Olympics (1) 50/3 Tulyaganov 1Ð1 (50.0%) 0Ð0 Tashkent (22) 22/1 Vento- 13Ð16 1Ð6 Auckland (1), Hobart (14), Australian Open (2), Dubai (1), Doha (27), 445/16 Kabchi (44.8%) Indian Wells (30), Miami (73), Stanford (134), Los Angeles (22), San Diego (1), Canadian Open (1), Olympics (22), U. S. Open (80), Bali (1), Shanghai (35). GuangZhou (1) S. Williams 20Ð2 3Ð2 Miami (428), Los Angeles (238), San Diego (108), U. S. Open (278), 1375/5 (90.9%) Shanghai (323) V. Williams 17Ð7 0Ð4 Australian Open (84), Dubai (64), Miami (122), Stanford (187), Los 775/7 (70.8%) Angeles (125), Olympics (39), U. S. Open (154) Zuluaga 14Ð9 0Ð2 Hobart (28), Australian Open (332), Indian Wells (101), Miami (1), Los 658/9 (60.9%) Angeles (1), San Diego (1), Canadian Open (35), Olympics (79), U. S. Open (80) Zvonareva 24Ð11 2Ð7 Gold Coast (20), Sydney (35), Australian Open (122), Indian Wells 1078/11 (68.6%) (57), Miami (32), Los Angeles (57), San Diego (203), Canadian Open (198), Cincinnati (116), U. S. Open (136), Shanghai (102) 1. The WTA initially published Davenport’s score as 251. At some point they altered one of her scores to increase it by 31 points. There was no correction published; it appears to have been this score.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 113 Winning Percentage on Hardcourts Where two players have equal winning percentages, the player with the higher number of hardcourt wins is listed ﬁrst. Rank Player Won Lost Winning% WTA Rank 1 Hénin-Hardenne 31 2 93.9% 8 2Davenport 33 3 91.7% 1 3Williams, Serena 20 2 90.9% 7 4 Clijsters 7 1 87.5% 22 5 Mauresmo 21 4 84.0% 2 6Kuznetsova 37 11 77.1% 5 7 Sharapova 22 8 73.3% 4 8 Myskina 27 10 73.0% 3 9 Frazier 24 9 72.7% 26 10 Bovina 13 5 72.2% 15 11 Molik 20 8 71.4% 13 12 Williams, Venus 17 7 70.8% 9 13 Pierce 9 4 69.2% 29 14 Dementieva 20 9 69.0% 6 15 Zvonareva 24 11 68.6% 11 16 Suárez 17 8 68.0% 16 17 Déchy 23 11 67.6% 21 18 Rubin 15 8 65.2% 53 19T Golovin 13 7 65.0% 27 19T Schnyder 13 7 65.0% 14 21 Capriati 11 6 64.7% 10 22 Daniilidou 20 11 64.5% 34 23 Petrova 21 12 63.6% 12 24 Sugiyama 18 11 62.1% 17 25 Raymond 13 8 61.9% 30 Farina Elia 16 10 61.5% 20 Zuluaga 14 9 60.9% 23 Schiavone 18 12 60.0% 19 Sprem 13 9 59.1% 18 Likhovtseva 15 12 55.6% 24 Smashnova 11 11 50.0% 32 Hantuchova 10 10 50.0% 31 Saﬁna 8 8 50.0% 44 Martinez 9 10 47.4% 42 Panova 7 8 46.7% 78 Kremer 10 12 45.5% 94 Vento-Kabchi 13 16 44.8% 49 Maleeva 8 10 44.4% 25 Shaughnessy 11 14 44.0% 40 Tanasugarn 13 18 41.9% 66 Loit 6 9 40.0% 45 Serna 5 10 33.3% 102 Krasnoroutskaya 3 7 30.0% 138 Dokic 2 6 25.0% 125 Testud 1 4 20.0% 311

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 114 Points Per Tournament on Hardcourts Hard Rank Player Name Hard Points Tourn on Hard Points/Tourn WTA Rank 1 Hénin-Hardenne 2689.00 7 384.1 8 2 Clijsters 691.00 2 345.5 22 3Davenport 2476.00 8 309.5 1 4Williams, Serena 1375.00 5 275.0 7 5 Mauresmo 1384.00 6 230.7 2 6Kuznetsova 2506.00 13 192.8 5 7 Dementieva 1711.00 9 190.1 6 8 Myskina 1640.00 10 164.0 3 9 Capriati 859.00 6 143.2 10 10 Pierce 449.00 4 112.3 29 11 Williams, Venus 775.00 7 110.7 9 12 Zvonareva 1078.00 11 98.0 11 13 Molik 878.00 9 97.6 13 14 Bovina 576.00 6 96.0 15 15 Schnyder 745.00 8 93.1 14 16 Raymond 697.00 8 87.1 30 17 Petrova 1042.00 12 86.8 12 18 Déchy 992.00 12 82.7 21 19 Sharapova 779.00 10 77.9 4 20 Golovin 526.00 7 75.1 27 21 Zuluaga 658.00 9 73.1 23 22 Daniilidou 801.00 11 72.8 34 23 Frazier 709.00 10 70.9 26 24 Sugiyama 765.00 12 63.8 17 25 Rubin 487.00 8 60.9 53 Likhovtseva 781.00 13 60.1 24 Suárez 538.00 9 59.8 16 Schiavone 675.00 12 56.3 19 Sprem 437.00 9 48.6 18 Farina Elia 456.00 10 45.6 20 Hantuchova 357.00 10 35.7 31 Saﬁna 255.00 8 31.9 44 Maleeva 307.00 10 30.7 25 Martinez 286.00 10 28.6 42 Shaughnessy 400.00 14 28.6 40 Smashnova 314.00 11 28.5 32 Vento-Kabchi 445.00 16 27.8 49 Krasnoroutskaya 133.00 7 19.0 138 Loit 162.00 9 18.0 45 Tanasugarn 295.75 17 17.4 66 Testud 50.00 3 16.7 311 Dokic 95.00 6 15.8 125 Serna 136.00 10 13.6 102 Panova 95.50 8 11.9 78 Kremer 130.25 11 11.8 94 Stevenson 19.25 10 1.9 282

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 115 Best and Worst Results on Hardcourts The following tables list a player’s best and worst results on this surface. Of these, the worst result may be the better measure of ability — a player who avoids bad losses is at least more consistent than one with a mixture of good and bad results. Best Result Worst Result 1 Kuznetsova (1016) 1 Davenport (166) 2 Hénin-Hardenne (958) 2 Hénin-Hardenne (113) 3 Dementieva (806) 3 Williams, Serena (108) 4 Clijsters (662) 4 Bovina (40) 5 Capriati (544) 5 Coetzer (40) 6 Davenport (461) 6 Williams, Venus (39) 7 Schnyder (446) 7 Pierce (35) 8 Petrova (432) 8 Suárez (32) 9 Williams, Serena (428) 9 Clijsters (29) 10 Mauresmo (401) 10 Tulyaganova (22) 11 Likhovtseva (381) 11 Frazier (16) 12 Raymond (336) 13 Zuluaga (332) All other highlight players, including 14 Myskina (315) Bedanova, Capriati, Daniilidou, Déchy, 15 Molik (280) Dementieva, Dokic, Farina Elia, Golovin, 16 Bovina (273) Hantuchova, Krasnoroutskaya, Kremer, 17 Déchy (229) Kuznetsova, Likhovtseva, Loit, Majoli, 18 Pierce (212) Maleeva, Martinez, Mauresmo, Molik, 19 Daniilidou (211) Myskina, Panova, Petrova, Raymond, 20 Zvonareva (203) Rubin, Safina, Schiavone, Schnyder, Serna, 21 Golovin (190) Sharapova, Shaughnessy, Smashnova, Williams, Venus (187) Sprem, Stevenson, Sugiyama, Tanasugarn, Sugiyama (182) Testud, Vento-Kabchi, Zuluaga, Zvonareva, Shaughnessy (149) had at least one opening-round loss on Sharapova (137) hardcourts. Vento-Kabchi (134) Frazier (132) Rubin (132) Farina Elia, Schiavone, Sprem (130) Maleeva (124) Suárez (123) Hantuchova (110) Martinez (104) Safina (94) Krasnoroutskaya (80) Tanasugarn (77) Smashnova (63) Dokic, Kremer (55) Coetzer, Testud (48) Loit (40) Serna (36) Panova (33) Majoli (24) Tulyaganova (22) Stevenson (5) Bedanova (2)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 116 Clay Summary of Clay Results The following lists the top players, the tournaments they played on clay, the points earned on the surface, their record and winning percentage. The list is in alphabetical order. Player Won/Lost Vs. Tournaments Played Total Pts/ Name (Percent) Top 10 # of Tourn Bedanova 0Ð4 (0%) 0Ð0 Dinan $50K+H (1), Biarritz $25K (1),Prostejov $75K (1) 3/3 Benesova 19Ð8 (70.4%) 0Ð2 Acapulco (161.25), Casablanca (1), Estoril (85), Budapest (52), Rome 361/9 (9.75), Vienna (1), Roland Garros (2), Prostejov $75K (7), Sopot (42) Bovina 7Ð5 (58.3%) 0Ð1 Estoril (14), Warsaw (33), Berlin (27), Rome (80), Roland Garros (72) 226/5 Capriati 13Ð4 (76.5%) 3Ð3 Charleston (52), Berlin (210), Rome (353), Roland Garros (542) 1157/4 Clijsters 1Ð0 (100%) 0Ð0 Berlin (46) 46/1 Coetzer 0Ð1 (0%) 0Ð0 Acapulco (1) 1/1 Daniilidou 2Ð4 (33.3%) 0Ð2 Charleston (1), Warsaw (33), Berlin (29), Roland Garros (2) 65/4 Davenport 13Ð3 (81.3%) 2Ð1 Amelia Island (353), Charleston (93), Strasbourg (136), Roland 704/4 Garros (122) Déchy 2Ð4 (33.3%) 0Ð1 Charleston (1), Berlin (33), Rome (35), Roland Garros (2) 71/4 Dementieva 8Ð5 (61.5%) 2Ð1 Amelia Island (1), Charleston (50), Berlin (46), Rome (1), Roland 940/5 Garros (842) Dokic 1Ð5 (16.7%) 0Ð0 Amelia Island (1), Charleston (27), Berlin (1), Rome (1), Roland 32/5 Garros (2) Farina Elia 12Ð5 (70.6%) 0Ð3 Amelia Island (71), Warsaw (59), Rome (116), Strasbourg (71), 365/5 Roland Garros (48) Frazier 5Ð4 (55.6%) 0Ð0 Amelia Island (37), Charleston (25), Vienna (75), Roland Garros (2) 139/4 Golovin 5Ð3 (62.5%) 0Ð0 Berlin (16.5), Rome (55.5), Roland Garros (2) 74/3 Hantuchova 2Ð5 (28.6%) 0Ð0 Warsaw (35), Berlin (1), Rome (1), Vienna (20), Roland Garros (2) 59/5 Hénin-Hard 4Ð2 (66.7%) 0Ð1 Amelia Island (161), Roland Garros (34) 195/2 Jankovic 6Ð4 (60.0%) 0Ð1 Amelia Island (1), Charleston (33), Budapest (106), Rome (1), Roland 143/5 Garros (2) Koukalova 14Ð10 0Ð0 Acapulco (1), Casablanca (49), Estoril (36), Budapest (1), Rome 315.5/10 (58.3%) (16.5), Vienna (24), Roland Garros (48), Prostejov $75K (1), Palermo (26), Sopot (113) Krasnorouts 1Ð2 (33.3%) 0Ð1 Amelia Island (1), Charleston (35) 36/2 Kremer 6Ð7 (46.2%) 0Ð0 Acapulco (1), Amelia Island (1), Charleston (1), Dothan $75K 33.5/7 Qualifying (1), Stockholm $25K (23.5), Prostejov $75K+Caserta $25K (6) Kuznetsova 12Ð4 (75.0%) 1Ð3 Warsaw (199), Berlin (137), Rome (128), Roland Garros (106) 570/4 Likhovtseva 4Ð5 (44.4%) 1Ð1 Amelia Island (1), Warsaw (1), Berlin (40), Rome (107), Roland 189/5 Garros (40) Loit 23Ð6 (79.3%) 0Ð0 Bogota (62), Acapulco (32), Casablanca (101), Estoril (123), Rome 485/8 (1), Strasbourg (64), Roland Garros (40), Bordeaux $75K+H (62) Majoli 1Ð2 (33.3%) 0Ð0 Estoril (1), Cagnes Sur Mer $75K (9) 10/2 Maleeva 6Ð5 (54.5%) 0Ð1 Amelia Island (18), Warsaw (82), Berlin (1), Rome (1), Roland Garros 248/5 (146) Mandula 9Ð5 (64.3%) 1Ð1 Amelia Island (45), Charleston (149), Budapest (23), Berlin (33), 286/5 Roland Garros (36)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 117 Martinez 9Ð5 (64.3%) 1Ð2 Amelia Island (43), Charleston (282), Berlin (1), Rome (67), Roland 433/5 Garros (40) Mauresmo 18Ð3 (85.7%) 3Ð2 Amelia Island (284), Warsaw (64), Berlin (394), Rome (451), Roland 1449/5 Garros (256) Medina 17Ð8 (68.0%) 0Ð2 Bogota (20), Amelia Island (22), Charleston (33), Warsaw (1), Berlin 333.5/10 Garrigues (18.5), Strasbourg (20), Roland Garros (48), Marseille $50K+H (62), Palermo (108), Sopot (1) Molik 6Ð4 (60.0%) 0Ð2 Amelia Island (41), Estoril (1), Rome (1), Vienna (117), Roland 162/5 Garros (2) Myskina 10Ð2 (83.3%) 3Ð1 Berlin (85), Rome (1), Roland Garros (1086), Sopot (78) 1250/4 Panova 6Ð5 (54.5%) 0Ð0 Bogota Qualifying (3.25), Charleston (16.5), Dothan $75K (1), Rome 59.75/5 (22.5), Roland Garros Qualifying (16.5) Pennetta 26Ð9 (74.3%) 1Ð0 Bogota (1), Acapulco (108), Casablanca (12), Estoril (13), Budapest 584.75/11 (52.5), Rome (95), Vienna Qualifying (3.25), Roland Garros (2), Cuneo $50K+H (55), Palermo (80), Sopot (163) Petrova 8Ð5 (61.5%) 1Ð1 Amelia Island (177), Charleston (87), Berlin (52), Rome (1), Roland 385/5 Garros (68) Pierce 4Ð5 (44.4%) 0Ð2 Amelia Island (24), Charleston (1), Berlin (1), Rome (33), Roland 143/5 Garros (84) Raymond 1Ð4 (20.0%) 0Ð0 Charleston (1), Rome (1), Vienna (1), Roland Garros (48) 51/4 Rubin 0Ð1 (0%) 0Ð0 Vienna (1) 1/1 Saﬁna 4Ð6 (40.0%) 0Ð1 Amelia Island (22), Berlin (1), Rome (29), Strasbourg (1), Roland 114/6 Garros (40), Sopot (21) Sanchez 9Ð8 (52.9%) 0Ð2 Bogota (97), Acapulco (69), Charleston (1), Warsaw (1), Berlin (48), 279/8 Lorenzo Rome (26), Strasbourg (1), Roland Garros (36) Schaul 6Ð4 (60.0%) 1Ð0 Amelia Island (1), Charleston (1), Rome Qualifying (5.75), 252.75/5 Strasbourg (243), Roland Garros (2) Schiavone 9Ð4 (69.2%) 1Ð1 Amelia Island (1), Warsaw (184), Rome (99), Roland Garros (114) 398/4 Schnyder 11Ð5 (68.8%) 2Ð0 Amelia Island (37), Charleston (247), Warsaw (27), Berlin (56), Rome 454/6 (35), Roland Garros (52) Serna 3Ð3 (50.0%) 0Ð0 Rome (1), Vienna (41), Roland Garros (48) 90/3 Sharapova 8Ð3 (72.7%) 1Ð1 Berlin (72), Rome (89), Roland Garros (250) 411/3 Shaughness 4Ð5 (44.4%) 0Ð0 Amelia Island (1), Berlin (48), Rome (35), Strasbourg (1), Roland 219/5 Garros (134) Smashnova 16Ð7 (69.6%) 0Ð2 Amelia Island (16), Charleston (54), Warsaw (67), Berlin (88), Rome 557/8 (97), Vienna (154), Roland Garros (80), Sopot (1) Sprem 7Ð5 (58.3%) 0Ð1 Amelia Island (50), Charleston (48), Berlin (172), Rome (35), Roland 307/5 Garros (2) Stevenson 1Ð2 (33.3%) 0Ð0 Amelia Island Qualifying (8), Charleston (1) 9/2 Suárez 14Ð5 (73.7%) 2Ð2 Amelia Island (104), Charleston (26), Berlin (134), Rome (69), 711/5 Roland Garros (378) Sugiyama 5Ð5 (50.0%) 0Ð0 Amelia Island (27), Berlin (52), Rome (57), Strasbourg (38), Roland 222/5 Garros (48) Tanasugarn 0Ð4 (0%) 0Ð1 Amelia Island (1), Charleston (1), Strasbourg (1), Roland Garros (2) 5/4 Testud 0Ð6 (0%) 0Ð1 Cagnes Sur Mer $75K (1), Berlin (1), Rome (1), Strasbourg (1), 7/6 Roland Garros (2), Palermo (1) Vento- 3Ð4 (42.9%) 0Ð1 Amelia Island (1), Rome (33), Vienna (24), Roland Garros (40) 98/4 Kabchi S. Williams 10Ð3 (76.9%) 0Ð3 Amelia Island (79), Charleston (44), Rome (184), Roland Garros 517/4 (210)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 118 V. Williams 17Ð1 (94.4%) 0Ð1 Charleston (374), Warsaw (311), Berlin (286), Roland Garros (274) 1245/4 Zuluaga 11Ð5 (68.8%) 1Ð1 Bogota (138), Charleston (1), Warsaw (33), Berlin (154), Rome (1), 469/6 Roland Garros (142) Zvonareva 12Ð6 (66.7%) 0Ð2 Amelia Island (87), Charleston (102), Warsaw (113), Berlin (29), 599/6 Rome (188), Roland Garros (80)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 119 Winning Percentage on Clay Rank Player Wins Losses Winning% WTA Rank (1) Clijsters 1 0 100.0% 22 1Williams, Venus 17 1 94.4% 9 2 Mauresmo 18 3 85.7% 2 3 Myskina 10 2 83.3% 3 4Davenport 13 3 81.3% 1 5 Loit 23 6 79.3% 45 6Williams, Serena 10 3 76.9% 7 7 Capriati 13 4 76.5% 10 8Kuznetsova 12 4 75.0% 5 9 Pennetta 26 9 74.3% 38 10 Suárez 14 5 73.7% 16 11 Sharapova 8 3 72.7% 4 12 Farina Elia 12 5 70.6% 20 13 Benesova 19 8 70.4% 36 14 Smashnova 16 7 69.6% 32 15 Schiavone 9 4 69.2% 19 16T Schnyder 11 5 68.8% 14 16T Zuluaga 11 5 68.8% 23 18 Medina Garrigues 17 8 68.0% 39 19 Zvonareva 12 6 66.7% 11 20 Hénin-Hardenne 4 2 66.7% 8 Mandula 9 5 64.3% 81 Martinez 9 5 64.3% 42 Golovin 5 3 62.5% 27 Dementieva 8 5 61.5% 6 Petrova 8 5 61.5% 12 Jankovic 6 4 60.0% 28 Molik 6 4 60.0% 13 Schaul 6 4 60.0% 61 Koukalova 14 10 58.3% 46 Bovina 7 5 58.3% 15 Sprem 7 5 58.3% 18 Frazier 5 4 55.6% 26 Maleeva 6 5 54.5% 25 Sanchez Lorenzo 9 8 52.9% 52 Sugiyama 5 5 50.0% 17 Serna 3 3 50.0% 102 Likhovtseva 4 5 44.4% 24 Pierce 4 5 44.4% 29 Daniilidou 2 4 33.3% 34 Déchy 2 4 33.3% 21 Krasnoroutskaya 1 2 33.3% 138 Majoli 1 2 33.3% 315 Hantuchova 2 5 28.6% 31 Raymond 1 4 20.0% 30 Dokic 1 5 16.7% 125 Rubin 0 1 0.0% 53

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 120 Points Per Tournament on Clay Clay Rank Player Name Clay Points Tourn on Clay Points/Tourn WTA Rank 1 Myskina 1250.00 4 312.5 3 2Williams, Venus 1245.00 4 311.3 9 3 Mauresmo 1449.00 5 289.8 2 4 Capriati 1157.00 4 289.3 10 5 Dementieva 940.00 5 188.0 6 6Davenport 704.00 4 176.0 1 7Kuznetsova 570.00 4 142.5 5 8 Suárez 711.00 5 142.2 16 9 Sharapova 411.00 3 137.0 4 10 Williams, Serena 517.00 4 129.3 7 11 Zvonareva 599.00 6 99.8 11 12 Schiavone 398.00 4 99.5 19 13 Hénin-Hardenne 195.00 2 97.5 8 14 Martinez 433.00 5 86.6 42 15 Zuluaga 469.00 6 78.2 23 16 Petrova 385.00 5 77.0 12 17 Schnyder 454.00 6 75.7 14 18 Farina Elia 365.00 5 73.0 20 19 Smashnova 557.00 8 69.6 32 20 Sprem 307.00 5 61.4 18 Loit 485.00 8 60.6 45 Mandula 286.00 5 57.2 81 Pennetta 584.75 11 53.2 38 Schaul 252.75 5 50.6 61 Maleeva 248.00 5 49.6 25 Clijsters 46.00 1 46.0 22 Bovina 226.00 5 45.2 15 Sugiyama 222.00 5 44.4 17 Benesova 361.00 9 40.1 36 Likhovtseva 189.00 5 37.8 24 Sanchez Lorenzo 279.00 8 34.9 52 Frazier 139.00 4 34.8 26 Medina Garrigues 333.50 10 33.4 39 Molik 162.00 5 32.4 13 Koukalova 315.50 10 31.6 46 Serna 90.00 3 30.0 102 Jankovic 143.00 5 28.6 28 Pierce 143.00 5 28.6 29 Golovin 74.00 3 24.7 27 Krasnoroutskaya 36.00 2 18.0 138 Déchy 71.00 4 17.8 21 Daniilidou 65.00 4 16.3 34 Raymond 51.00 4 12.8 30 Hantuchova 59.00 5 11.8 31 Dokic 32.00 5 6.4 125 Majoli 10.00 2 5.0 315 Rubin 1.00 1 1.0 53

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 121 Best and Worst Results on Clay The following tables list a player’s best and worst results on this surface. Of these, the worst result may be the better measure of ability — a player who avoids bad losses is more consistent than one with a mixture of good and bad. Best Result Worst Result 1 Myskina (1086) 1 Williams, Venus (274) 2 Dementieva (842) 2 Kuznetsova (106) 3 Capriati (542) 3 Davenport (93) 4 Mauresmo (451) 4 Sharapova (72) 5 Suárez (378) 5 Mauresmo (64) 6 Williams, Venus (374) 6 Capriati (52) 7 Davenport (353) 7 Farina Elia (48) 8 Martinez (282) 8 Clijsters (46) 9 Sharapova (250) 9 Williams, Serena (44) 10 Schnyder (247) 10 Hénin-Hardenne (34) 11 Schaul (243) 11 Zvonareva (29) 12 Williams, Serena (210) 12 Schnyder (27) 13 Kuznetsova (199) 13 Sugiyama (27) 14 Zvonareva (188) 14 Suárez (26) 15 Schiavone (184) 15 Mandula (23) 16 Petrova (177) 16 Bovina (14) 17 Sprem (172) 18 Pennetta (163) All other players examined, including Bedanova, 19 Benesova (161.25) Benesova, Coetzer, Daniilidou, Déchy, 20 Hénin-Hardenne (161) Dementieva, Dokic, Frazier, Golovin, Smashnova, Zuluaga (154) Hantuchova, Jankovic, Koukalova, Mandula (149) Krasnoroutskaya, Kremer, Likhovtseva, Loit, Maleeva (146) Majoli, Maleeva, Martinez, Medina Garrigues, Shaughnessy (134) Molik, Myskina, Panova, Pennetta, Petrova, Loit (123) Pierce, Raymond, Rubin, Safina, Sanchez Lorenzo, Molik (117) Schaul, Schiavone, Serna, Shaughnessy, Farina Elia (116) Smashnova, Sprem, Stevenson, Tanasugarn, Koukalova (113) Testud, Vento-Kabchi, and Zuluaga, had at least Medina Garrigues (108) one first-round loss on clay. Likhovtseva (107) Jankovic (106) Sanchez Lorenzo (97) Pierce (84) Bovina (80) Frazier (75) Sugiyama (57) Golovin (55.5) Raymond, Serna (48) Clijsters (46) Safina, Vento-Kabchi (40) Déchy, Hantuchova, Krasnoroutskaya (35) Daniilidou (33) Dokic (27) Kremer (23.5) Panova (22.5) Majoli (9) Stevenson (8) Tanasugarn, Testud (2) Bedanova, Coetzer. Rubin (1) WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 122 Grass Summary of Grass Results The following lists the top players, the tournaments they played on grass, the points earned on the surface, their record and winning percentage. Several players with success at grass Challengers (Ivanovic, Obata) are listed despite a lack of Tour success. The list is in alphabetical order. Player Won/Lost Vs. Tournaments Played Tot Pts/ Name (Percent) Top 10 # of Tourn Bedanova 2Ð2 (50.0%) 0Ð0 Gifu $50K (1), Fukuoka $50K (11.5) 12.5/2 Bovina 2Ð1 (66.7%) 0Ð0 Eastbourne (60), Wimbledon (36) 96/2 Capriati 4Ð1 (80.0%) 0Ð1 Wimbledon (284) 284/1 Clijsters — — — — Coetzer — — Retired without playing grass — Daniilidou 0Ð2 (0%) 0Ð0 Birmingham (1), Wimbledon (2) 3/2 Davenport 5Ð1 (83.3%) 0Ð0 Wimbledon (424) 424/1 Déchy 3Ð2 (60.0%) 0Ð1 Birmingham (1), Eastbourne (48), Wimbledon (92) 141/3 Dementieva 0Ð1 (0%) 0Ð0 Wimbledon (2) 2/1 Dokic 0Ð3 (0%) 0Ð0 Birmingham (1), Eastbourne (1), Wimbledon (2) 4/3 Farina Elia 3Ð2 (60.0%) 0Ð1 Eastbourne (1), Wimbledon (122) 123/2 Frazier 3Ð2 (60.0%) 1Ð0 Eastbourne (1), Wimbledon (232) 233/2 Golovin 8Ð2 (80.0%) 0Ð1 Birmingham (124), Wimbledon (152) 276/2 Hantuchova 6Ð3 (66.7%) 1Ð1 Birmingham (11), Eastbourne (257), Wimbledon (64) 332/3 Hénin-Hard — — — — Ivanovic 16Ð1 0Ð1 Gifu (~49.5), Fukuoka (56.5), Birmingham (1) 107/3 (94.1%) Koukalova 4Ð2 (66.7%) 0Ð0 ’s-Hertogenbosch (101), Wimbledon (52) 153/2 Krasnorouts 3Ð3 (50.0%) 0Ð0 Birmingham (1), ’s-Hertogenbosch (75), Wimbledon 78/3 (2) Kremer 7Ð3 (70.0%) 0Ð0 Birmingham (48), ’s-Hertogenbosch (46), Wimbledon 204/3 (110) Kuznetsova 4Ð1 (80.0%) 0Ð0 Eastbourne (258), Wimbledon (2) 260/2 Likhovtseva 5Ð3 (62.5%) 0Ð0 Birmingham (1), Eastbourne (69.75), Wimbledon (40) 110.75/3 Loit 4Ð2 (66.7%) 0Ð0 Birmingham (77), Wimbledon (2) 79/2 Majoli — — Retired without playing grass — Maleeva 6Ð3 (66.7%) 0Ð1 Birmingham (26), Eastbourne (74), Wimbledon (138) 238/3 Martinez 1Ð2 (33.3%) 0Ð0 Eastbourne (40), Wimbledon (2) 42/2 Mauresmo 7Ð2 (77.8%) 0Ð1 Eastbourne (113), Wimbledon (440) 553/2 Molik 7Ð3 (70.0%) 0Ð0 Birmingham (42), Eastbourne (27.75), Wimbledon 141.75/3 (72) Morigami 10Ð4 0Ð0 Fukuoka $50K (12.5), Surbiton$25K (34), Birming- 100.5/5 (71.4%) ham (35), ’s-Hertogenbosch (17), Wimbledon (2) Myskina 2Ð1 (66.7%) 0Ð0 Wimbledon (92) 92/1 Panova 5Ð2 (71.4%) 0Ð1 Birmingham Qualifying (1), Wimbledon (134) 134/2

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 123 Petrova 3Ð3 (50.0%) 0Ð1 Birmingham (1), ’s-Hertogenbosch (1), Wimbledon 138/3 (136) Pierce 5Ð1 (83.3%) 0Ð0 ’s-Hertogenbosch (144), Wimbledon (2) 146/2 Raymond 1Ð2 (33.3%) 0Ð0 Eastbourne (1), Wimbledon (52) 53/2 Rubin 0Ð1 (0%) 0Ð0 Wimbledon (2) 2/1 Saﬁna 0Ð2 (0%) 0Ð0 Eastbourne (1), Wimbledon (2) 3/2 Schiavone 2Ð2 (50.0%) 0Ð0 Eastbourne (40), Wimbledon (48) 88/2 Schnyder 4Ð3 (57.1%) 0Ð0 Birmingham (81), ’s-Hertogenbosch (1), Wimbledon 130/3 (48) Serna 2Ð3 (40.0%) 0Ð1 Birmingham (1), Eastbourne (1), Wimbledon (90) 92/3 Sharapova 12Ð0 2Ð0 Birmingham (172), Wimbledon (1022) 1194/2 (100%) Shaughnessy 2Ð1 (66.7%) 0Ð0 Wimbledon (68) 68/1 Smashnova 0Ð2 (0%) 0Ð0 Eastbourne (1), Wimbledon (2) 3/2 Sprem 5Ð2 (71.4%) 1Ð1 Eastbourne (48), Wimbledon (386) 434/2 Stevenson 4Ð3 (57.1%) 0Ð0 Surbiton (11), Birmingham Qualifying (1), Wimbledon 37/3 Qualifying (25) Suárez 4Ð1 (80.0%) 0Ð1 Wimbledon (190) 190/1 Sugiyama 5Ð2 (71.4%) 0Ð0 Eastbourne (59), Wimbledon (206) 265/2 Tanasugarn 7Ð3 (70.0%) 0Ð0 Birmingham (65), Eastbourne Qualifying (8), 205/3 Wimbledon (132) Testud — — — — Vento- 2Ð3 (40.0%) 0Ð1 Birmingham (1), Eastbourne (29), Wimbledon (48) 78/3 Kabchi S. Williams 6Ð1 (85.7%) 2Ð0 Wimbledon (704) 704/1 V. Williams 1Ð1 (50.0%) 0Ð0 Wimbledon (40) 40/1 Zuluaga 0Ð2 (0%) 0Ð0 Eastbourne (1), Wimbledon (2) 3/2 Zvonareva 5Ð2 (71.4%) 0Ð2 Eastbourne (111), Wimbledon (134) 245/2

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 124 Winning Percentage on Grass Rank Player Wins Losses Winning% WTA Rank 1 Sharapova 12 0 100.0% 4 2Ivanovic 16 1 94.1% 97 3Williams, Serena 6 1 85.7% 7 4T Davenport 5 1 83.3% 1 4T Pierce 5 1 83.3% 29 6T Kuznetsova 4 1 80.0% 5 6T Capriati 4 1 80.0% 10 6T Suárez 4 1 80.0% 16 6T Golovin 8 2 80.0% 27 10 Mauresmo 7 2 77.8% 2 11T Zvonareva 5 2 71.4% 11 11T Sugiyama 5 2 71.4% 17 11T Sprem 5 2 71.4% 18 11T Panova 5 2 71.4% 78 11T Morigami 10 4 71.4% 68 16T Molik 7 3 70.0% 13 16T Tanasugarn 7 3 70.0% 66 16T Kremer 7 3 70.0% 94 19T Myskina 2 1 66.7% 3 19T Bovina 2 1 66.7% 15 19T Shaughnessy 2 1 66.7% 40 Loit 4 2 66.7% 45 Koukalova 4 2 66.7% 46 Maleeva 6 3 66.7% 25 Hantuchova 6 3 66.7% 31 Likhovtseva 5 3 62.5% 24 Farina Elia 3 2 60.0% 20 Déchy 3 2 60.0% 21 Frazier 3 2 60.0% 26 Schnyder 4 3 57.1% 14 Stevenson 4 3 57.1% 282 V. Williams 1 1 50.0% 9 Schiavone 2 2 50.0% 19 Bedanova 2 2 50.0% 400 Petrova 3 3 50.0% 12 Krasnoroutskaya 3 3 50.0% 138 Vento-Kabchi 2 3 40.0% 49 Serna 2 3 40.0% 102 Raymond 1 2 33.3% 30 Martinez 1 2 33.3% 42 Dementieva 0 1 0.0% 6 Zuluaga 0 2 0.0% 23 Smashnova 0 2 0.0% 32 Daniilidou 0 2 0.0% 34 Saﬁna 0 2 0.0% 44 Rubin 0 1 0.0% 53 Dokic 0 3 0.0% 125

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 125 Points Per Tournament on Grass Grass Rank Player Name Grass Points Tourn on Grass Points/ Tourn WTA Rank 1Williams, Serena 704.00 1 704.0 7 2 Sharapova 1194.00 2 597.0 4 3Davenport 424.00 1 424.0 1 4 Capriati 284.00 1 284.0 10 5 Mauresmo 553.00 2 276.5 2 6 Sprem 434.00 2 217.0 18 7 Suárez 190.00 1 190.0 16 8 Golovin 276.00 2 138.0 27 9 Sugiyama 265.00 2 132.5 17 10 Kuznetsova 260.00 2 130.0 5 11 Zvonareva 245.00 2 122.5 11 12 Frazier 233.00 2 116.5 26 13 Hantuchova 332.00 3 110.7 31 14 Myskina 92.00 1 92.0 3 15 Maleeva 238.00 3 79.3 25 16 Koukalova 153.00 2 76.5 46 17 Pierce 146.00 2 73.0 29 18 Tanasugarn 205.00 3 68.3 66 19T Kremer 204.00 3 68.0 94 19T Shaughnessy 68.00 1 68.0 40 Panova 134.00 2 67.0 78 Farina Elia 123.00 2 61.5 20 Bovina 96.00 2 48.0 15 Molik 141.75 3 47.3 13 Déchy 141.00 3 47.0 21 Petrova 138.00 3 46.0 12 Schiavone 88.00 2 44.0 19 Schnyder 130.00 3 43.3 14 Williams, Venus 40.00 1 40.0 9 Loit 79.00 2 39.5 45 Likhovtseva 110.75 3 36.9 24 Ivanovic 107.00 3 35.7 97 Serna 92.00 3 30.7 102 Raymond 53.00 2 26.5 30 Krasnoroutskaya 78.00 3 26.0 138 Vento-Kabchi 78.00 3 26.0 49 Martinez 42.00 2 21.0 42 Morigami 100.50 5 20.1 68 Stevenson 37.00 3 12.3 282 Bedanova 12.50 2 6.3 400 Dementieva 2.00 1 2.0 6 Rubin 2.00 1 2.0 53 Daniilidou 3.00 2 1.5 34 Saﬁna 3.00 2 1.5 44 Smashnova 3.00 2 1.5 32 Zuluaga 3.00 2 1.5 23 Dokic 4.00 3 1.3 125

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 126 Adjusted Points Per Tournament on Grass A blatant difficulty with grass is that so many players play only Wimbledon. This seriously biases their per-tournament results, because Slams are so point-heavy. A player who wins Eastbourne and reaches the Wimbledon semifinal will probably wind up with a lower divisor score than a player who plays only Wimbledon and reaches the semifinal. Yet surely the first player has at least as much right to be considered a top grass player! Or take this year’s results by Maria Sharapova and Serena Williams. Sharapova won two grass tournaments; Serena had one final. But because Wimbledon is so much bigger than Birmingham, Serena averaged more points per event. To attempt to compensate for this, we produce an adjusted grass ranking, setting a minimum divisor of 1.7. This reduces the bias for those who play only Wimbledon, while still making it more important than other grass results. Using this adjusted ranking gives us the following: Grass Rank Player Name Grass Pts Adj. Grass Trn Adj Points/Tourn WTA Rank 1 Sharapova 1194.00 2 597.0 4 2Williams, Serena 704.00 1 414.1 7 3 Mauresmo 553.00 2 276.5 2 4Davenport 424.00 1 249.4 1 5 Sprem 434.00 2 217.0 18 6 Capriati 284.00 1 167.1 10 7 Golovin 276.00 2 138.0 27 8 Sugiyama 265.00 2 132.5 17 9Kuznetsova 260.00 2 130.0 5 10 Zvonareva 245.00 2 122.5 11 11 Frazier 233.00 2 116.5 26 12 Suárez 190.00 1 111.8 16 13 Hantuchova 332.00 3 110.7 31 14 Maleeva 238.00 3 79.3 25 15 Koukalova 153.00 2 76.5 46 16 Pierce 146.00 2 73.0 29 17 Tanasugarn 205.00 3 68.3 66 18 Kremer 204.00 3 68.0 94 19 Panova 134.00 2 67.0 78 20 Farina Elia 123.00 2 61.5 20 Myskina 92.00 1 54.1 3 Bovina 96.00 2 48.0 15 Molik 141.75 3 47.3 13 Déchy 141.00 3 47.0 21 Petrova 138.00 3 46.0 12 Schiavone 88.00 2 44.0 19 Schnyder 130.00 3 43.3 14 Shaughnessy 68.00 1 40.0 40 Loit 79.00 2 39.5 45 Likhovtseva 110.75 3 36.9 24 Ivanovic 107.00 3 35.7 97 Serna 92.00 3 30.7 102 Raymond 53.00 2 26.5 30 Krasnoroutskaya 78.00 3 26.0 138 Vento-Kabchi 78.00 3 26.0 49 Williams, Venus 40.00 1 23.5 9 Martinez 42.00 2 21.0 42 Morigami 100.50 5 20.1 68 Stevenson 37.00 3 12.3 282 Bedanova 12.50 2 6.3 400

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 127 Indoors Summary of Indoor Results The following lists the top players, the tournaments they played indoors, the points earned on the surface, their record and winning percentage. The list is in alphabetical order. Player Won/Lost Vs. Tournaments Played Total Pts/ Name (Percentage) Top 10 # of Tourn Bedanova 2Ð3 (40.0%) 0Ð0 Paris Qualifying (18.75), Saint Paul $50K (1), Karuizawa $25K 28.75/3 (9) Bovina 15Ð6 (71.4%) 1Ð5 Paris (92), Hasselt (154), Filderstadt (37), Moscow (193), Zürich 741/6 (65), Linz (200) Capriati 1Ð1 (50.0%) 0Ð0 Philadelphia (59) 59/1 Clijsters 10Ð1 (90.9%) 0Ð0 Paris (248), Antwerp (253), Hasselt (88) 589/3 Coetzer — — Retired without playing indoors — Daniilidou 3Ð5 (37.5%) 0Ð0 Paris (1), Antwerp (1), Filderstadt Qualifying (8.5), Moscow 43.25/5 Qualifying (5.75), Luxembourg (27) Davenport 12Ð2 (85.7%) 4Ð2 Pan Pacific (363), Filderstadt (413), Moscow (166), Los Angeles 1156/4 Championships (214) Déchy 4Ð5 (44.4%) 0Ð1 Filderstadt (52), Moscow (1), Zürich (43), Linz (35), Philadelphia 158/5 (27) Dementieva 11Ð8 (57.9%) 1Ð5 Pan Pacific (1), Paris (53), Hasselt (163), Filderstadt (1), Moscow 800/7 (322), Zürich (193), Los Angeles Championships (67) Dokic 3Ð2 (60.0%) 0Ð1 Pan Pacific (149), Paris (1) 150/2 Farina Elia 11Ð7 (61.1%) 0Ð2 Paris (68), Antwerp (200), Hasselt (20), Filderstadt (52), Moscow 416/7 (1), Zürich (1), Luxembourg (74) Frazier 3Ð2 (60.0%) 0Ð0 Memphis (36), Philadelphia (33) 69/2 Golovin 7Ð3 (70.0%) 1Ð0 Paris (154), Zürich (43.75), Luxembourg (53) 250.75/3 Hantuchova 6Ð6 (50.0%) 0Ð2 Pan Pacific (105), Paris (25), Filderstadt (31), Moscow (1), Zürich 242/7 (50), Linz (29), Quebec City (1) Hénin-Hard — — — — Krasnorout 0Ð1 (0%) 0Ð0 Pan Pacific (1) 1/1 Kremer 5Ð6 (45.5%) 0Ð0 Grenoble $10K (2.5), Ortisei $75K+H (10), Paris Qualifying (1), 25.25/6 Luxembourg (1), Philadelphia (9.75), Pittsburg (1) Kuznetsova 4Ð4 (50.0%) 0Ð4 Filderstadt (145), Moscow (77), Los Angeles Championships 378/3 (156) Likhovtseva 4Ð5 (50.0%) 0Ð2 Pan Pacific (1), Filderstadt (105), Moscow (65), Linz (27) 198/4 Loit 2Ð5 (28.6%) 0Ð0 Paris (1), Antwerp (1), Filderstadt Qualifying (1), Zürich 28.75/4 Qualifying(25.75) Majoli 4Ð3 (57.1%) 0Ð0 Bergamo $25K (22), Ortisei $75K+H (16), Antwerp Qualifying 39/4 (1), Saint Paul $50K (1)1 Maleeva 7Ð7 (50%) 1Ð3 Pan Pacific (286), Antwerp (68), Hasselt (36), Filderstadt (1), 394/7 Moscow (1), Zürich (1), Luxembourg (1) Martinez — — — — Mauresmo 13Ð2 (86.7%) 4Ð2 Filderstadt (254), Linz (272), Philadelphia (283), Los Angeles 1160/4 Championships (351) Molik 12Ð3 (80.0%) 1Ð2 Pan Pacific (1), Filderstadt (52), Zürich (471), Luxembourg (199), 795/5 Philadelphia (72) Myskina 9Ð4 (69.2%) 4Ð3 Filderstadt (137), Moscow (476), Philadelphia (51),, Los Angeles 1032/4 Championships (368)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 128 Panova 8Ð7 (53.3%) 1Ð0 Palm Beach Gardens $50K 2003 (12.5), Pan Pacific (122), 195.5/8 Memphis (32.25), Filderstadt Qualifying (24.75), Moscow Qualifying (1), Zürich Qualifying (1), Linz (1), Philadelphia (1) Petrova 8Ð5 (61.5%) 1Ð0 Filderstadt (1), Moscow (77), Zürich (113), Linz (121), 489/5 Philadelphia (177) Pierce 7Ð7 (50.0%) 0Ð1 Paris (185), Antwerp (1), Filderstadt (64), Moscow (1), Zürich (1), 306/7 Luxembourg (20), Quebec City (34) Raymond 7Ð6 (53.8%) 1Ð1 Pan Pacific (1), Memphis (101), Filderstadt (129), Zürich (1), 233/5 Philadelphia (1) Rubin 2Ð0 (100%) 0Ð0 Pan Pacific (151) 151/1 Safina 12Ð4 (75.0%) 0Ð2 Paris (181.75), Antwerp (33), Moscow (46), Luxembourg (127) 387.75/4 Schiavone 6Ð5 (54.5%) 0Ð1 Paris (69), Hasselt (38), Filderstadt (1), Moscow (133), Zürich (1) 242/5 Schnyder 5Ð6 (45.5%) 0Ð2 Paris (1), Antwerp (57), Filderstadt (39), Moscow (1), Zürich 315/6 (216), Linz (1) Serna 2Ð6 (25.0%) 0Ð0 Paris (35), Antwerp (1), Filderstadt Qualifying (1), Moscow 43/6 Qualifying (1), Zürich Qualifying (1), Linz Qualifying (4) Sharapova 13Ð4 (76.5%) 4Ð1 Pan Pacific (44), Memphis (71), Zürich (310), Philadelphia (138), 1247/5 Los Angeles Championships (684) Shaughness 3Ð2 (60.0%) 0Ð1 Linz (74), Philadelphia (29) 103/2 Smashnova 1Ð4 (20.0%) 0Ð0 Paris (1), Antwerp (1), Filderstadt (64), Moscow (1) 67/4 Sprem 6Ð7 (46.2%) 0Ð0 Paris (66.75), Antwerp (129), Hasselt (26), Filderstadt (1), 281.75/7 Moscow (57), Zürich (1), Linz (1) Stevenson 3Ð2 (60.0%) 0Ð0 Paris (1), Antwerp (22.75) 23.75/2 Suárez 2Ð4 (33.3%) 0Ð0 Filderstadt (1), Moscow (1), Zürich (95), Luxembourg (1) 98/4 Sugiyama 5Ð5 (50.0%) 0Ð2 Pan Pacific (79), Filderstadt (1), Moscow (1), Zürich (95), Linz 250/5 (74) Tanasugarn 1Ð2 (33.3%) 0Ð0 Pan Pacific (1), Quebec City (18) 19/2 Testud 2Ð2 (50.0%) 0Ð0 Ortisei $75K+H (18.5), Paris (1) 19.5/2 Vento- 2Ð5 (28.6%) 0Ð1 Pan Pacific (52), Paris (1), Zürich Qualifying (8.62), Linz (1), 63.62/5 Kabchi Philadelphia (1) S. Williams 3Ð3 (50.0%) 3Ð2 Linz (1), Los Angeles Championships (531) 532/2 V. Williams 7Ð3 (70.0%) 0Ð2 Pan Pacific (85), Moscow (87), Zürich (100), Philadelphia (68) 340/4 Zuluaga 6Ð4 (60.0%) 0Ð1 Filderstadt (111.25), Moscow (1), Zürich (57), Linz (1) 170.25/4 Zvonareva 11Ð8 (57.9%) 1Ð5 Memphis (174), Filderstadt (1), Moscow (121), Zürich (1), Linz 676/7 (72), Philadelphia (240), Los Angeles Championships (67) 1. Totalling the points awarded to Majoli week by week, they add up to 75, but the WTA gave her a final total of only 74. These numbers cannot be reconciled; they reduced her score at one of her Challengers by one point. It appears it was either Bergamo or Ortisei, but I can’t prove it. The per-tournament numbers here reflect what she was originally awarded; the total has been reduced by one.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 129 Winning Percentage Indoors Where two players have equal winning percentages, the player with the higher number of wins indoors is listed first. Rank Player Wins Losses Win% WTA Rank [1] Rubin 2 0 100.0% 53 1 Clijsters 10 1 90.9% 22 2 Mauresmo 13 2 86.7% 2 3Davenport 12 2 85.7% 1 4 Molik 12 3 80.0% 13 5 Sharapova 13 4 76.5% 4 6 Saﬁna 12 4 75.0% 44 7Bovina 15 6 71.4% 15 8T Golovin 7 3 70.0% 27 8T Williams, Venus 7 3 70.0% 9 10 Myskina 9 4 69.2% 3 11 Petrova 8 5 61.5% 12 12 Farina Elia 11 7 61.1% 20 13T Zuluaga 6 4 60.0% 23 13T Dokic 3 2 60.0% 125 13T Frazier 3 2 60.0% 26 13T Shaughnessy 3 2 60.0% 40 13T Stevenson 3 2 60.0% 282 18 Dementieva 11 8 57.9% 6 19 Zvonareva 11 8 57.9% 11 20 Majoli 4 3 57.1% 315 Schiavone 6 5 54.5% 19 Raymond 7 6 53.8% 30 Panova 8 7 53.3% 78 Maleeva 7 7 50.0% 25 Pierce 7 7 50.0% 29 Hantuchova 6 6 50.0% 31 Sugiyama 5 5 50.0% 17 Kuznetsova 4 4 50.0% 5 Likhovtseva 4 5 50.0% 24 Williams, Serena 3 3 50.0% 7 Testud 2 2 50.0% 311 Capriati 1 1 50.0% 10 Sprem 6 7 46.2% 18 Kremer 5 6 45.5% 94 Schnyder 5 6 45.5% 14 Déchy 4 5 44.4% 21 Daniilidou 3 5 37.5% 34 Suárez 2 4 33.3% 16 Loit 2 5 28.6% 45 Serna 2 6 25.0% 102 Smashnova 1 4 20.0% 32 Krasnoroutskaya 0 1 0.0% 138 Hénin-Hardenne — — — 8 Martinez ———42

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 130 Points Per Tournament Indoors Indoor Rank Player Name Surface Pts Tourn indoor Points/Tourn WTA Rank 1 Mauresmo 1160 4 290.0 2 2Davenport 1156 4 289.0 1 3Williams, Serena 532 2 266.0 7 4 Myskina 1032 4 258.0 3 5 Sharapova 1247 5 249.4 4 6 Clijsters 589 3 196.3 22 7 Molik 795 5 159.0 13 8 Rubin 151 1 151.0 53 9Kuznetsova 378 3 126.0 5 10 Bovina 741 6 123.5 15 11 Dementieva 800 7 114.3 6 12 Petrova 489 5 97.8 12 13 Saﬁna 387.75 4 96.9 44 14 Zvonareva 676 7 96.6 11 15 Williams, Venus 340 4 85.0 9 16 Golovin 250.75 3 83.6 27 17 Dokic 150 2 75.0 125 18 Farina Elia 416 7 59.4 20 19 Capriati 59 1 59.0 10 20 Maleeva 394 7 56.3 25 Schnyder 315 6 52.5 14 Shaughnessy 103 2 51.5 40 Sugiyama 250 5 50.0 17 Likhovtseva 198 4 49.5 24 Schiavone 242 5 48.4 19 Raymond 233 5 46.6 30 Pierce 306 7 43.7 29 Zuluaga 170.25 4 42.6 23 Sprem 281.75 7 40.3 18 Hantuchova 242 7 34.6 31 Frazier 69 2 34.5 26 Déchy 158 5 31.6 21 Suárez 98 4 24.5 16 Panova 195.5 8 24.4 78 Smashnova 67 4 16.8 32 Vento-Kabchi 63.62 5 12.7 49 Stevenson 23.75 2 11.9 282 Majoli 39 4 9.8 315 Testud 19.5 2 9.8 311 Bedanova 28.75 3 9.6 400 Daniilidou 43.25 5 8.7 34 Loit 28.75 4 7.2 45 Serna 43 6 7.2 102 Kremer 25.25 6 4.2 94 Hénin-Hardenne — — — 8 Martinez ———42

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 131 Best and Worst Results Indoors The following tables list a player’s best and worst results on this surface. Of these, the worst result may be the better measure of ability — a player who avoids bad losses is at least more consistent than one with a mixture of good and bad results. Best Result Worst Result 1 Sharapova (684) 1 Mauresmo (254) 2 Williams, Serena (531) 2 Davenport (166) 3 Myskina (476) 3 Rubin (151) 4 Molik (471) 4 Clijsters (88) 5 Davenport (413) 5 Kuznetsova (77) 6 Mauresmo (351) 6 Williams, Venus (68) 7 Dementieva (322) 7 Capriati (59) 8 Maleeva (286) 8 Myskina (51) 9 Clijsters (253) 9 Sharapova (44) 10 Zvonareva (240) 10 Golovin (43.75) 11 Schnyder (216) 11 Bovina (37) 12 Bovina, Farina Elia (200) 12 Frazier, Safina (33) 14 Pierce (185) 14 Shaughnessy (29) 15 Safina (181.75) 16 Petrova (177) All other players examined, including 17 Kuznetsova (156) Bedanova, Daniilidou, Déchy, Dementieva, 18 Golovin (154) Dokic, Farina Elia, Hantuchova, 19 Rubin (151) Krasnoroutskaya, Kremer, Likhovtseva, 20 Dokic (149) Loit, Majoli, Maleeva, Molik, Panova, Schiavone (133) Petrova, Pierce, Raymond, Schiavone, Raymond (129) Schnyder, Serna, Smashnova, Sprem, Sprem (129) Stevenson, Suárez, Sugiyama, Tanasugarn, Panova (122) Testud, Vento-Kabchi, Serena Williams, Zuluaga (111.25) Zuluaga, and Zvonareva, had at least one Hantuchova, Likhovtseva (105) opening-round loss indoors. Not playing Williams, Venus (100) indoors were Justine Hénin-Hardenne, Suárez, Sugiyama (95) Conchita Martinez, and Amanda Coetzer Shaughnessy (74) (retired) Smashnova (64) Capriati (59) Déchy, Vento-Kabchi (52) Frazier (36) Serna (35) Daniilidou (27) Loit (25.75) Stevenson (22.75) Majoli (22) Bedanova (18.75) Testud (18.5) Tanasugarn (18) Kremer (10) Krasnoroutskaya (1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 132 All-Surface Players The above us to produce a sort of a pseudo-ranking for “best all-surface player.” For this we add up a player’s ranking on all four surfaces based on points per tournament. (Note: Because of the shortness of the grass season, grass scores have been divided in half, rounding down, and a maximum value of 9 has been used. For all other surfaces, a maximum of 16 has been used. Also, the adjusted grass scores have been used) Note that this is not a measure of who is better on all surfaces; it measures who has been an all-surface player this year. Players with the maximum score of 57 have not been listed. It should be noted that any score in excess of about 50 is likely to indicate a single-surface specialist; even a score in the 30Ð40 range may indicate a specialist if the player is a two-surface specialist and very good on those surfaces. Rank Player Surface Score WTA Rank 1 Mauresmo 11 2 2Davenport 13 1 3Williams, Serena 21 7 4 Myskina 22 3 5Kuznetsova 27 5 6Williams, Venus 29 9 7 Sharapova 31 4 8T Capriati 32 10 8T Dementieva 32 6 10 Clijsters 33 22 11 Hénin-Hardenne 39 8 12 Zvonareva 42 11 13 Molik 45 13 14 Suárez 46 16 15 Bovina 49 15 15 Rubin 49 53 Pierce 50 29 Sprem 51 18 Golovin 52 27 Petrova 53 12 Schiavone 53 19 Frazier 54 26 Saﬁna 54 44 Hantuchova 55 31 Maleeva 55 25 Martinez 55 42 Koukalova 56 46 Schnyder 56 14 Zuluaga 56 23

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 133 Tournament Wins by Surface Here are the number of tournaments each player won on the various surfaces. As elsewhere, tournaments are divided into Major (Tier II and up; note that this does not mean “Slam,” which is how some use the term) and Minor (Tier III and below). The final column lists the number of surfaces on which a player won tournaments. WTA Player Hard Clay Grass Indoor Won Rank Name Major Minor Major Minor Major Minor Major Minor On 15 Bovina 100000001 22 Clijsters 000000201 34 Daniilidou 010000001 1Davenport 201000313 6 Dementieva 000000011 26 Frazier 010000001 8 Hénin-Hardenne 500000001 5Kuznetsova 110010002 24 Likhovtseva 010000001 45 Loit 000200001 2 Mauresmo 102000203 13 Molik 010000112 3 Myskina 101000103 29 Pierce 000001001 4 Sharapova 020011013 32 Smashnova 000100001 16 Suárez 010000001 17 Sugiyama 010000001 7Williams, Serena 200000001 9Williams, Venus 002000001 23 Zuluaga 000100001 11 Zvonareva 000000011 Highlight players with no titles: Bedanova, Capriati, Coetzer, Déchy, Dokic, Farina Elia, Golovin, Hantuchova, Krasnoroutskaya, Kremer, Majoli, Maleeva, Martinez, Panova, Petrova, Raymond, Rubin, Safina, Schiavone, Schnyder, Serna, Shaughnessy, Sprem, Stevenson, Tanasugarn, Testud, Tulyaganova, and Vento-Kabchi.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 134 Assorted Statistics The Busiest Players on the Tour Total Tour Matches Played by Top Players The following table shows how the Top 35, and certain other busy players, ranked in total matches played. Note that this does not correlate closely with ranking or with tournaments played; Davenport is near the top of the list of matches played because she plays relatively little but wins a lot; Zvonareva is #3 because she wins fairly often and plays a reasonably heavy schedule, and Benesova is #1 because she wins a little and plays a ton. Historically, this is not entirely typical. In 2002, the Top 25 player with the most matches was Jelena Dokic, with 79, followed by Anastasia Myskina, with 77 — two players who, at the time, had absurd schedules and moderate success. Thus, 2002 was like this year. In 2003, that changed, with the biggest totals scored not by the insane overplayers (the top play-everything-in-sight player was Elena Dementieva, #3 in the matches list, who played 27 events in 2003). Rather, our top two in matches played that year were the top two players, Clijsters and Hénin- Hardenne. That was the first time since 2000 (when #1 Martina Hingis led the Tour with 87 matches) that the top player in matches was Top Two in the rankings. This year, though, we’re back to busy players topping the list: Zvonareva leads the Top 25 in matches, then Kuznetsova, and WTA #1 Davenport is third. Looking at the history, there appears to be no general pattern — except that, when there is no dominant player, as this year, the play- everything-that-moves types tend do dominate in matches played. Note: The “ordinal” in the list below represents where the player stands in the overall list of the 50 players checked. The number in [] represents where a Top 25 player stands among the Top 25 in matches played — e.g. Zvonareva is tied for #2 in the main list, but she leads Top 25 players, so her Ordinal reads 2T [1], meaning #2 overall, #1 among the Top 25. Matches WTA Matches WTA Ordinal Player Played Rank Ordinal Player Played Rank 1 Benesova 84 36 [14T] Déchy 55 21 2T Marrero 79 47 [14T] Suárez 55 16 2T [1] Zvonareva 79 11 [17T] Schnyder 54 14 4 [2] Kuznetsova 77 5 [17T] Williams, Venus 54 9 5 Jidkova 75 55 Frazier 52 26 6 Stosur 74 65 [19T] Likhovtseva 52 24 7 [3] Davenport 72 1 [19T] Maleeva 52 25 8T Grönefeld 70 75 Smashnova 52 32 8T [4T] Mauresmo 70 2 [21] Zuluaga 51 23 8T [4T] Sharapova 70 4 Golovin 48 27 11 [6] Farina Elia 66 20 Hantuchova 48 31 12T [7T] Myskina 65 3 [22] Williams, Serena 48 7 12T Pennetta 65 38 Daniilidou 46 34 12T [7T] Petrova 65 12 Saﬁna 44 44 15T Dulko 64 33 Pierce 42 29 15T [9] Molik 64 13 Raymond 42 30 17 Jankovic 63 28 Shaughnessy 42 40 18 [10] Dementieva 62 6 [23] Capriati 41 10 19 Kostanic 60 35 [24] Hénin-Hardenne 39 8 20 [11] Schiavone 58 19 Martinez 36 42 Loit 57 45 Serna 33 102 [12] Sprem 57 18 Rubin 27 53 Bartoli 56 41 Dokic 22 125 [13] Sugiyama 56 17 [25] Clijsters 20 22 [14T] Bovina 55 15 Krasnoroutskaya 20 138

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 135 Total Tour Events Played by the Top 150 The table on the next page sorts the Top 150 (as of November 16, 2004) based on events played in the past year. All players who have played that many events are listed, along with their rankings (in parentheses). Top 25 players are shown in bold.The second column shows how many players played each number of events. All told, the Top 150 played 3419 events in 2004. This is a sharp decline: they played 3568 events in 2003, 3540 events in 2002, 3434 events in 2001. Clearly, the injury problem is starting to get to everyone; that’s a decline of almost exactly one event per player. The maximum events played has also gone down: 32 events this year. Five players played more than that last year, including two (Grandin and Vakulenko) who had 34 events. In 2002, Ansley Cargill and Lubomira Kurhajcova had 34 events; in 2002, Alina Jidkova reached that figure. The busiest player in the Top 50 this year is Marrero, with 31 events; that’s actually up from the 30 events Dokic and Pisnik played last year. But, of course, Marrero this year was the only Top 50 player with more than 28 events; three players exceeded that total last year. The most typical result is also down in 2004; last year, 26 was the most popular, played by 14 players; this year, the most popular number is 25, played by, again, 14 players.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 136 Events # to Players Play 32 5 Benesova (36), Czink (131), Diaz-Oliva (108), Jidkova (55), Kleinova (140) 31 5 Birnerova (139), Kurhajcova (89), Marrero (47), Pin (98), Sfar (117) 30 3 Fedak (83), Grönefeld (75), Schruff (105) 29 6 Barna (85), Bondarenko (126), Castellvi (136), Foretz (93), Schaul (61), Stosur (65) 28 12 Beltrame (95), Castano (110), Cohen-Aloro (112), Hopkins (132), Jankovic (28), Nakamura (123), Parra Santonja (70), Pelletier (147), Randriantefy (62), Sucha (57), Vento-Kabchi (49), Voskoboeva (137) 27 11 Bartoli (41), Black (134), Craybas (59), Kostanic (35), Kremer (94), Llagostera Vives (79), McCain (128), Ondraskova (143), Pennetta (38), Rousseau (119), Skavronskaia (149) 26 12 Callens (122), Koukalova (46), Medina Garrigues (39), Nemeckova (148), Nemeth (141), Pichet (145), Sanchez Lorenzo (52), Ant. Serra Zanetti (99), Spears (92), Tanasugarn (66), Zheng (67), Zvonareva (11) 25 14 Cervanova (100), Garbin (58), Hantuchova (31), Haynes (133), Irvin (72), Likhovtseva (24), Maleeva (25), Morigami (68), Pastikova (106), Peng (73), Petrova (12), Pisnik (130), Smashnova (32), Vakulenko (129) 24 11 Camerin (43), Déchy (21), Farina Elia (20), Gagliardi (104), Grande (103), Granville (76), Lee-Waters (82), Pratt (51), Srebotnik (87), Sugiyama (17), Washington (50) 23 10 Asagoe (37), Brandi (48), Chladkova (54), Dulko (33), Loit (45), Panova (78), Razzano (60), Schiavone (19), Schnyder (14), Sprem (18) 22 9 Daniilidou (34), Dementieva (6), Kuznetsova (5), Molik (13), Obata (107), Osterloh (120), Serna (102), Shaughnessy (40), Strycova (56) 21 9 Ashley (150), Domachowska (74), Mikaelian (144), Perry (69), Ruano Pascual (64), Santangelo (91), Schett (88), Talaja (113), Zuluaga (23) 20 8 Perebiynis (90), Saﬁna (44), Sequera (142), Sescioreanu (146), Sharapova (4), Sun (118), Vinci (115), Weingärtner (71) 19 4 Bovina (15), Myskina (3), Raymond (30), Suárez (16) 18 5 Douchevina (63), Frazier (26), Mamic (101), Mandula (81), Pierce (29) 17 4 Davenport (1), Martinez (42), Mauresmo (2), Obziler (109) 16 5 Chakvetadze (84), Dokic (125), Kapros (86), Linetskaya (96), Venus Williams (9) 15 2 Golovin (27), Harkleroad (124) 14 1 Kirilenko (111) 13 1 Krasnoroutskaya (138) 12 4 Capriati (10), M. Casanova (121), Serena Williams (7), Widjaja (135) 11 3 Ivanovic (97), Rubin (53), Vaidisova (77) 10 3 Li Na (80), Peschke (116), Salerni (114) 91 Hénin-Hardenne (8) 71 Karatantcheva (127) 61 Clijsters (22)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 137 The Strongest Tournaments Theoretically, all tournaments of the same tier are of equal difficulty. In reality, it’s not even close. Tournaments like Filderstadt and San Diego (before it expanded to a 48-draw) are so strong that, in some years, Top Ten players can go unseeded, while Eastbourne 2002 didn’t feature a single Top Five player. In general, we can assume that all Slams and the year-end Championships are at maximum strength; with minor exceptions, everyone who can play will play. This is not true of Tier I and Tier II tournaments (other than Miami). Experience shows that, overall, certain tournaments are guaranteed to be strong: the Slams, the Championships, Miami, Sydney, San Diego, Filderstadt. Those are the “Super Nine” of the WTA Tour, consistently strong from year to year (compare the Majors rankings above). It’s much harder to decide which tournaments are next. There is no simple way of “rating” tournaments; it is not a statistic the WTA calculates. The sections below offer three proposals, each with advantages and disadvantages (the latter derived both from the systems themselves and from the fact that they are based on WTA rankings). Tournament Strength Based on the Four Top Players Present Proposal #1: This is a two-part ranking, strength and depth. For the strength, take the total rankings of the top four players present. Add to this the scores of the top two present. (That is, count the top two twice and the #3 and #4 players once.) This gives an indication of just how tough things are when “the going gets tough”: it shows what you can expect to be up against in the semifinal and final rounds. For example, the top four players at Gold Coast in 2004 were Sugiyama, ranked #10; Petrova, ranked #12; Zvonareva, #13; and Shaughnessy, #17. So the total “value” of this tournament is 10+10+12+12+13+17=74. The lower this number (the minimum value is 13), the stronger the event. To calculate the depth, we look at the seeds #1-#3 and seeds #6Ð#8 (or, correctly, the top three players and the players whose rankings would entitle them to the last three seeds based on the current rankings; for events with more than 32 players, use seeds #14Ð#16). Sum the values for the bottom three, subtract the sum of the value for the top three, and divide by three (six if there are more than eight seeds). The smaller the result, the deeper the tournament, as the difference between top and bottom seeds is smallest. Again taking Gold Coast, the top seeds were ranked 10, 12, and 13; the bottom three seeds were ranked #20, #21, and #25. So the depth of Gold Coast is defined by [(20+21+25)-(10+12+13)]/3 = (66-35)/3 = 31/3 = 10.3333.... Based on that, we rate the tournaments on the Tour as follows (sorted by strength). Note: Tournaments below Tier II shown in italics.Where two events are of equal difficulty, the one with the greater depth is listed first but are ranked equal. The general coherence of the WTA’s Tier system is shown by the fact that only three Tier III events (Bali, Hasselt, and Gold Coast) are ranked above the lowest Tier II (Paris). We throw in Filderstadt Qualifying for fun. Rank Tier Tournament Strength Score Depth Score Winner 1T Chmp Los Angeles Championships 13 5.3 Sharapova 1T Slam U. S. Open 13 7.0 Kuznetsova 3T Slam Australian Open 15 7.8 Hénin-Hardenne 3T Olymp Olympics 15 9.5 Hénin-Hardenne 3T I Indian Wells 15 10.8 Hénin-Hardenne 6 II Filderstadt 16 10.3 Davenport 7 Slam Roland Garros 17 7.2 Myskina 8 I Amelia Island 18 10.2 Davenport 9 Slam Wimbledon 19 14.0 Sharapova 10 I Berlin 21 8.8 Mauresmo 11 II Sydney 22 7.3 Hénin-Hardenne 12 I Moscow 23 9.1 Myskina 13 I San Diego 25 7.5 Davenport 14 II Philadelphia 26 8.7 Mauresmo 15T I Canadian Open 27 10.5 Mauresmo 15T II Dubai 27 14.0 Hénin-Hardenne 17T I Rome 29 7.7 Mauresmo 17T II Doha 29 13.7 Myskina

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 138 19 II Antwerp 31 17.0 Clijsters 20 I Charleston 35 10.2 V. Williams 21 II Los Angeles 41 9.2 Davenport 22 III Bali 43 30.0 Kuznetsova 23 I Miami 44 7.0 S. Williams 24 II Linz 46 10.3 Mauresmo 25T I Zürich 47 7.3 Molik 25T IPan Paciﬁc 47 14.31 Davenport 25T II Beijing 47 31.7 S. Williams 28 II New Haven 49 21.7 Bovina 29 II Eastbourne 53 11.0 Kuznetsova 30 II Warsaw 55 10.7 V. Williams 31 III Hasselt 61 16.0 Dementieva 32 II Stanford 73 16.7 Davenport 33 III Gold Coast 74 10.3 Sugiyama 34 II Paris 75 14.7 Clijsters 35 III Strasbourg 82 25.0 Schaul 36T III Birmingham 95 14.7 Sharapova 36T III Cincinnati 95 50.3 Davenport 38 III Luxembourg 110 16.0 Molik 39 III ’s-Hertogenbosch 114 23.0 Pierce 40 III Sopot 130 49.0 Pennetta 41 III Vienna 131 20.7 Smashnova 42 IV Auckland 136 26.7 Daniilidou 43 III Memphis 143 33.3 Zvonareva 44 V Canberra 148 26.0 Suárez 45 IV Stockholm 156 46.7 Molik 46 III Japan Open 167 23.3 Sharapova [47] —Filderstadt Qualifying 177 13.3 — 47 V Hobart 184 16.0 Frazier 48 IV Seoul 213 45.3 Sharapova 49 III Quebec City 214 27.7 Sucha 50 IV Estoril 218 31.3 Loit 51T III GuangZhou 219 13.0 Li Na 51T VForest Hills 219 14.0 Likhovtseva 53 III Bogota 229 25.0 Zuluaga 54 III Acapulco 253 18 Benesova 55 V Budapest 268 16.0 Jankovic 56 IV Tashkent 278 31.0 Vaidisova 57 IV Hyderabad 297 33.0 Pratt 58 V Casablanca 337 16.3 Loit 59 VPalermo 365 20.0 Medina Garrigues 60 VVancouver 419 23.3 Vaidisova 1. Score based on a ranking of #14 for Venus Williams, who however was seeded #1 based on her special ranking. Her presence surely means the tournament was stronger than this score — except that she withdrew. As did Chanda Rubin. We won’t even bother noting withdrawals after this; there were just too many of them.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 139 The Top Tournaments Based on Top Players Present — Method 1 Proposal #2: The following table assesses tournaments based on the top players who play. It starts with tournaments played by the #1 player, and lists the number of other Top Ten players present. Then it lists tournaments headlined by #2, etc. Only tournaments from Tier II up are listed. The difficulty with this system is that a tournament with (say) four Top Ten players headed by the #5 player might be considered stronger than a tournament with only one Top Ten player, but that one player being #2. Frankly, it’s a rather weak way of rating tournaments (is Antwerp, with only one Top Ten players but that one being #2 in the world, really stronger than Wimbledon, which had eight though it lacked #1 and #2?) but it makes it easy to look up who was at the top of the field. Trn Tournament Top Player # of Top Player Ranks of Missing Top 10 Winner Rank Present Top 10 Missing Players 1 Los Angeles Ch #1/Davenport 7 #7/Hénin-Hard #7, #9, #10 Sharapova 2 U. S. Open #1/Hénin-Har 9 #5/Clijsters #5; all other Top 50 players present Kuznetsova 3 Olympics #1/Hénin-Har 5 #4/Davenport #4, #5, #7, #8, #9 Hénin-Hard 4 Filderstadt #1/Mauresmo 5 #3/Hénin-Hard #3, #7, #8, #9, #10 Davenport 5 Australian Opn #1/Hénin-Ha 8 #3/SWilliams #3, #6 Hénin-Hard 6 Indian Wells #1/Hénin-Ha 4 #3/Mauresmo #3, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10 Hénin-Hard 7 Roland Garros #1/Hénin-Ha 9 #2/Clijsters #2 Myskina 8 Amelia Island #1/Hénin-Ha 7 #2/Clijsters #2, #5, #8 Davenport 9 Sydney #1/Hénin-Ha 7 #2/Clijsters #2, #3, #6 Hénin-Hard 10 Dubai #1/Hénin-Ha 4 #2/Clijsters #2, #3, #4, #6, #9, #10 Hénin-Hard 11 Doha #1/Hénin-Ha 4 #2/Clijsters #2, #3, #4, #6, #8, #9 Myskina 12 Berlin #2/Clijsters 7 #1/Hénin-Hard #1, #4, #7 Mauresmo 13 Philadelphia #2/Mauresmo 5 #1/Davenport #1, #4, #5, #6, #8 Mauresmo 14 Moscow #2/Davenport 4 #1/Mauresmo #1, #3, #7, #8, #9, #10 Myskina 15 Linz #2/Mauresmo 2 #1/Davenport #1, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #10 Mauresmo 16 Paris #2/Clijsters 2 #1/Hénin-Hard #1, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9 Clijsters 17 Antwerp #2/Clijsters 1 #3/Hénin-Hard #1, #3Ð#15 Clijsters 18 Wimbledon #3/Myskina 8 #1/Hénin-Hard #1, #2 Sharapova 19 San Diego #3/Mauresmo 6 #1/Hénin-Hard #1, #2, #7, #10 Davenport 20 Canadian Open #3/Mauresmo 5 #1/Hénin-Hard #1, #2, #5, #9, #10 Mauresmo 21 Rome #3/Mauresmo 6 #1/Hénin-Hard #1, #2, #4, #8 Mauresmo 22 Warsaw #3/Mauresmo 1 #1/Hénin-Hard #1, #2, #4-#10 V. Williams 23 Charleston #4/Davenport 5 #1/Hénin-Hard #1, #2, #3, #5, #10 V. Williams 24 Eastbourne #4/Mauresmo 2 #1/Hénin-Hard #1, #2, #3, #5, #6, #7, #8, #10 Kuznetsova 25 Los Angeles #5/Davenport 4 #1/Hénin-Hard #1, #2, #3, #4, #7, #8 Davenport 26 Zürich #5/Dementiev 2 #1/Davenport #1, #2, #3, #4, #6, #8, #9, #10 Molik 27 Beijing #5/Kuznetsov 3 #1/Mauresmo #1, #2, #3, #4, #6, #7, #8, #10 S. Williams 28 Stanford #5/Davenport 1 #1/Hénin-Hard #1, #2, #3, #4, #5Ð#14 Davenport 29 Miami #6/SWilliams 4 #1/Henin-Hard #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #9 S. Williams 30 New Haven #6/Dementiev 3 #1/Hénin-Hard #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #9, #10 Bovina 31 Pan Paciﬁc #6/Davenport 4 #1/Hénin-Hard #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #7 [#10 WD] Davenport

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 140 The Top Tournaments Based on Top Players Present — Method 2 Proposal #3: This method combines the above with the “Tournament Strength Index” proposed by Geert Calliauw. The Tournament Strength Index calculates the total quality points available for the top eight seeds, and calculates this as a fraction of the possible quality points if all of the Top Eight played. My modified version uses the same calculation, but counts only Top 25 players. (This is a change from 2002, when only Top Ten players counted; the purpose is to allow us to assess the sorts of events with only a handful of top players.) Recall that the #1 player is worth 100 quality points, #2 is worth 75, #3 66, #4 55, #5 50, and players #6-#10 are worth 43. Players below #10 are counted at a discounted rate: 15 points for those ranked #11-#16, 10 for those ranked #17Ð#25. Thus the percentage listed below is the total quality points divided by the sum of the values for the Top Eight, 475. As with the “Strength and Depth” measure, tournaments below Tier II are shown in italics.. Tourn Rank Tournament Top 8 Adj. Qual Pts Percentage Score Winner 1 U. S. Open 468 98.5% Kuznetsova 2 Australian Open 452 95.2% Hénin-Hardenne 3 Los Angeles Cham 447 94.1% Sharapova 4 Roland Garros 443 93.3% Myskina 5 Amelia Island 408 85.9% Davenport 6 Sydney 392 82.5% Hénin-Hardenne 7 Wimbledon 386 81.3% Sharapova 8 Berlin 378 79.6% Mauresmo 9 Olympics 372 78.3% Hénin-Hardenne 10 Filderstadt 368 77.5% Davenport 11 Indian Wells 340 71.6% Hénin-Hardenne 12 San Diego 330 69.5% Davenport 13 Rome 318 66.9% Mauresmo 14 Philadelphia 315 66.3% Mauresmo 15 Canadian Open 295 62.1% Mauresmo 16 Doha 286 60.2% Myskina 17 Moscow 283 59.6% Myskina 18 Dubai 281 59.2% Hénin-Hardenne 19 Charleston 272 57.3% V. Williams 20 Los Angeles 239 50.3% Davenport 21 Miami 232 48.8% S. Williams 22 Pan Paciﬁc 222 46.7%1 Davenport 23 Linz 198 41.7% Mauresmo 24 Paris 188 39.6% Clijsters 25 Zürich 183 38.5% Molik 26 Eastbourne 173 36.4% Kuznetsova 27 Beijing 166 34.9% S. Williams 28 Bali 158 33.3% Kuznetsova 29 Warsaw 156 32.8% V. Williams 30 New Haven 154 32.4% Bovina 31 Hasselt 136 28.6% Dementieva 32 Antwerp 130 27.4% Clijsters

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 141 33 Gold Coast 128 26.9% Sugiyama 34 Stanford 110 23.2% Davenport 35 Cincinnati 108 22.7% Davenport 36 Strasbourg 85 17.9% Schaul 37 Sopot 76 16.0% Pennetta 38 Birmingham 60 12.6% Sharapova 39 Luxembourg 45 9.5% Molik 40T Japan Open 43 9.1% Sharapova 40T Seoul 43 9.1% Sharapova 42 Memphis 35 7.4% Zvonareva 43T ’s-Hertogenbosch 25 5.3% Pierce 43T Auckland 25 5.3% Daniilidou 43T Canberra 25 5.3% Suárez 43T Vienna 25 5.3% Smashnova 47 Stockholm 20 4.2% Molik 48T Bogota 10 2.1% Zuluaga 48T Hobart 10 2.1% Frazier 50T Acapulco 0 0% Benesova 50T Budapest 0 0% Jankovic 50T Casablanca 0 0% Loit 50T Estoril 0 0% Loit 50T Forest Hills 0 0% Likhovtseva 50T GuangZhou 0 0% Li Na 50T Hyderabad 0 0% Pratt 50T Palermo 0 0% Medina Garrigues 50T Quebec City 0 0 Sucha 50T Tashkent 0 0% Vaidisova 50T Vancouver 0 0% Vaidisova 1. Score based on the presence of both Chanda Rubin (#10) and Venus Williams (#14) in the draw — both of whom, however, withdrew. Take them out and the score falls to 164/34.5%

Overall, these three systems agree fairly closely: If we look at the Top Ten events under each ranking, we find that no fewer than seven tournaments are Top Ten under all three: Amelia Island, Australian Open, Filderstadt, Los Angeles Championships, Olympics, Roland Garros, and the U. S. Open. In addition, Berlin, Sydney, Indian Wells, and Wimbledon are Top Ten in two lists each; Dubai, curiously, is our other tournament in a Top Ten list. Assessing the weakest tournaments is harder, but we note that the last six under the “Strength and Depth” ranking — Budapest, Tashkent, Hyderabad, Casablanca, Palermo, and Vancouver — also stand at the bottom of the Modified TSI list above. (We also note that, as usual, the weakest events are isolated geographically and in terms of time zones.)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 142 Strongest Tournaments Won Based on the data in the previous table (modified TSI), we can also list the players in terms of strength of strongest tournament won: Ranking Player Tournament Score Tournament Kuznetsova 98.5 U. S. Open Hénin-Hardenne 95.2 Australian Open Sharapova 94.1 Los Angeles Championships Myskina 93.3 Roland Garros Davenport 85.9 Amelia Island Mauresmo 79.6 Berlin V. Williams 57.3 Charleston S. Williams 48.8 Miami Clijsters 39.6 Paris Molik 38.5 Zürich Bovina 32.4 New Haven Dementieva 28.6 Hasselt Sugiyama 26.9 Gold Coast Schaul 17.9 Strasbourg Pennetta 16.0 Sopot Zvonareva 7.4 Memphis Daniilidou 5.3 Auckland Suárez 5.3 Canberra Pierce 5.3 ’s-Hertogenbosch Smashnova 5.3 Vienna Molik 4.2 Stockholm Frazier 2.1 Hobart Zuluaga 2.1 Bogota Pratt 0 Hyderabad Benesova 0 Acapulco Loit 0 Casablanca, Estoril Jankovic 0 Budapest Medina Garrigues 0 Palermo Vaidisova 0 Vancouver, Tashkent Likhovtseva 0 Forest Hills Li Na 0 GuangZhou Sucha 0 Quebec City

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 143 Strongest Tournament Performances The list below shows the biggest performances (highest number of points earned) in 2004. Every result of more than 350 points is listed. Ordinal Score Player Event 1086 Myskina Roland Garros W 1022 Sharapova Wimbledon W 1016 Kuznetsova U. S. Open W 958 Hénin-Hardenne Australian Open W 842 Dementieva Roland Garros F 806 Dementieva U. S. Open F 704 S. Williams Wimbledon F 684 Sharapova Los Angeles Championships W 662 Clijsters Australian Open F 544 Capriati U. S. Open SF 542 Capriati Roland Garros SF 531 S. Williams Los Angeles Championships F 476 Myskina Moscow W 471 Molik Zürich W 461 Davenport San Diego W 456 Davenport U. S. Open SF 451 Mauresmo Rome W 447 Hénin-Hardenne Indian Wells W 446 Schnyder Australian Open SF 440 Mauresmo Wimbledon SF 435 Hénin-Hardenne Olympics W 432 Petrova U. S. Open QF 428 S. Williams Miami W 424 Davenport Wimbledon SF 413 Davenport Filderstadt W 401 Mauresmo Canadian Open W 396 Davenport Los Angeles W1 394 Mauresmo Berlin W 385 Sprem Wimbledon QF 381 Likhovtseva Canadian Open F 380 Dementieva Miami F 378 Suárez Roland Garros SF 374 V. Williams Charleston W 368 Myskina Los Angeles Championships SF 363 Davenport Pan Pacific W 353 Davenport Amelia Island W 353 Capriati Rome F 351 Mauresmo Los Angeles Championships SF All told, 17 players earned a 350 point result, with 38 total big results; last year, a mere 13 players combined to post 35 350+ point results, with fully half of them (18) being earned by Clijsters and Hénin-Hardenne. This year, Davenport led the field with a mere seven 350+ results (her biggest being a mere 461); Mauresmo was second with five (biggest being 351); no one else had more than three.

1. I believe this score by Davenport to be formally incorrect — but it’s what the WTA used.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 144 Title Defences The following list shows all instances of a defending a title in 2004 (total of nine; there were twelve (!) in 2003, six in 2002; seven in 2001) Title Defended By Auckland Daniilidou Pan Pacific Davenport Dubai Hénin-Hardenne Bogota Zuluaga Doha Myskina Miami S. Williams Japan Open Sharapova Moscow Myskina Philadelphia Mauresmo

Seeds and their Success Rates The following tables summarize how successful seeded players are at holding their seeds. (It will be observed that seeding is much more accurate at the stronger tournaments.) In the tables which follow, the heading “reached seeded round” refers to the number of seeds who made it to the round in which seeds are expected to face seeds (e.g. the Round of 32 at the Slams, or the quarterfinals at a 28-draw tournament which has only eight seeds). The column “held seed” refers to players who not only reach the seeded round but reach the level expected for their seeding — so, e.g., seeds #5-#8 are expected to reach the quarterfinal; seeds #3 and #4 should reach the semifinal; #2 should reach the final, and #1 should win. If a player goes beyond her seeding, of course, she is regarded as having held her seed.

Slams (+ Los Angeles Championships, Olympics) Tournament Seeds Reached Held Seed % Reached % Held Seed Seeded Round Seeded Round Australian Open 32 181 15 56% 47% Roland Garros 312 183 12 58% 39% Wimbledon 32 164 14 50% 44% U. S. Open 32 255 20 78% 63% Olympics 16 10 8/96 63% (50%) Los Angeles Champ 47 2150% 25% Total 147 898 70 [71] 61% (48%) 1. If we take only the top sixteen seeds, a mere seven (44%) made the Round of Sixteen; six (38%) held seed 2. #15 Chanda Rubin withdrew after play began and was replaced by a Lucky Loser 3. If we take only the top sixteen seeds (in this case, fifteen), nine, or 60%, made the Round of Sixteen; five, or 33%, held seed 4. If we take only the top sixteen seeds, ten, or 63%, made the Round of 16; nine, or 56%, held seed 5. If we take only the top sixteen seeds, thirteen, or 81%, reached the Round of Sixteen; ten, or 63%, held seed 6. If we count only the round reached, 9 of 16 seeds held. However, #3 Anastasia Myskina lost in the semifinal and then lost the bronze medal; on her seeding, she should have won it. Thus only 8 of 16 seeds achieved their expected result or better 7. Counting, of course, only the four players who had benefit of seeding, even though the WTA put pseudo-seed numbers by each player’s name. 8. If we take only the top 16 seeds at the Slams, the numbers are: 83 seeds; 51 of 83 (61%) reached the Round of 16 (or, in the case of the Championships, the semifinal); 39, or 47%, held seed

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 145 Tier I Tournaments Tournament Seeds Reached Held Seed % Reached % Held Seed Seeded Round Seeded Round Pan Paciﬁc 71 6486% 57% Indian Wells 32 182 13 56% 41% Miami 313 234 18 74% 58% Charleston 155 10 5 67% 33% Berlin 16 13 8 81% 50% Rome 16 11 9 69% 56% San Diego 156 8653% 40% Canadian Open 16 13 8 81% 50% Moscow 77 6586% 71% Zürich 78 6586% 71% Total 162 1149 81 70% 50% 1. #6 seed Nadia Petrova withdrew after play began and was replaced by a Lucky Loser. Two other seeds — Venus Williams and Chanda Rubin — withdrew after playing matches. Rubin had held seed; Venus had not. 2. If we count only the top 16 seeds (actually 15, since #5 Chanda Rubin withdrew and was replaced by #33 Amy Frazier), 8, or 53%, reached the Round of 16 (one, Kim Clijsters, withdrew); 7, or 47%, held seed 3. #3 seed Anastasia Myskina withdrew after play began and was replaced by a Lucky Loser 4. If we count only the top 16 seeds (actually 15, because of Myskina’s withdrawal), 8, or 53%, reached the Round of 16; 7, or 47%, held seed 5. #1 seed Justine Hénin-Hardenne withdrew after play began and was replaced by a Lucky Loser. 6. #11 seed Venus Williams withdrew after play began and was replaced by a Lucky Loser 7. #1 seed Amélie Mauresmo withdrew as play began and was replaced by a Lucky Loser 8. #1 seed Amélie Mauresmo withdrew after play began and was replaced by a Lucky Loser 9. If we count only the top 16(15) seeds at Miami and Charleston, we have 129 seeds, of whom 89, or 69%, made the seeded round; 64, or just barely less than 50%, held seed.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 146 Tier II Tournaments Tournament Seeds Reached Held Seed % Reached % Held Seed Seeded Round Seeded Round Sydney 71 6686% 86% Paris 8 4 3 50% 38% Antwerp 62 4367% 50% Dubai 8 5 3 63% 38% Doha 8 4 2 50% 25% Amelia Island 16 11 8 69% 50% Warsaw 8 7 6 88% 75% Eastbourne 8 5 3 63% 38% Stanford 8 7 4 88% 50% Los Angeles 16 123 9 75% 56% New Haven 74 4257% 29% Beijing 8 7 7 88% 88% Filderstadt 8 4 3 50% 37% Linz 8 5 4 63% 50% Philadelphia 8 8 6 100% 75% Total 132 93 69 70% 52% 1. #2 seed Kim Clijsters withdrew after play began and was replaced by a Lucky Loser 2. #1 seed Justine Hénin-Hardenne and #4 Elena Dementieva withdrew after play began and were replaced by Lucky Losers. Two other seeds withdrew before play began. 3. Note that #8 seed Vera Zvonareva did not actually play to reach the seeded round; she had a ﬁrst round bye and then a walkover. 4. #1 seed Lindsay Davenport withdrew after play began and was replaced by a Lucky Loser

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 147 Tier III Tournaments Tournament Seeds Reached Held Seed % Reached % Held Seed Seeded Round Seeded Round Gold Coast 8 3 3 38% 38% Memphis 8 6 6 75% 75% Bogota 8 4 4 50% 50% Acapulco 8 2 1 25% 13% Strasbourg 8 4 2 50% 25% Vienna 8 5 5 63% 63% Birmingham 16 6 4 38% 25% ’s-Hertogenbosch 61 3350% 50% Sopot 8 5 4 63% 50% Cincinnati 8 5 5 63% 63% Bali 8 3 3 38% 38% Hasselt 8 5 4 63% 50% GuangZhou 8 1 1 13% 13% Japan Open 8 2 2 25% 25% Luxembourg 8 3 3 38% 38% Quebec City 8 1 0 13% 0% Total 134 58 50 43% 37% 1. #4 seed Daniilidou and #5 Loit both withdrew with injuries after the draw was made and, there being no qualifying draw, their spots were left vacant; seeds were not promoted

Tier IV Tournaments Tournament Seeds Reached Held Seed % Reached % Held Seed Seeded Round Seeded Round Auckland 8 3 2 38% 25% Hyderabad 8 5 4 63% 50% Estoril 8 4 3 50% 37% Stockholm 8 3 2 38% 25% Seoul 8 2 2 25% 25% Tashkent 8 5 3 63% 38% Total 48 22 16 46% 33%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 148 Tier V Tournaments Tournament Seeds Reached Held Seed % Reached % Held Seed Seeded Round Seeded Round Canberra 8 4 4 50% 50% Hobart 8 3 2 38% 25% Casablanca 8 4 4 50% 50% Budapest 8 4 2 50% 25% Palermo 8 6 5 75% 63% Vancouver 8 5 4 63% 50% Forest Hills 41 22 2 50% 50% Total 52 28 23 54% 44.2% 1. Forest Hills is a 16-draw (actually 15-draw) $65K event 2. Note, however, that Elena Likhovtseva, the #1 seed, was given a first round bye and then received a walkover. Thus she reached the seeded round (semifinal) without playing a match. In fairness, she won the tournament — but she had to play only two matches to do it, and her final opponent had to play twice that many.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 149 Lucky Losers All told, there were 67 instances of Lucky Losers making WTA main draws in 2004 (an average of just more than 1.1 per tournament), up from 62 in 2003. Highlight players who were Lucky Losers were: Kremer (Los Angeles, lost 2R of main draw; Philadelphia, lost 1R of main draw) Loit (Zürich, lost 1R of main draw) Raymond (Filderstadt; made QF) Tanasugarn (San Diego; lost 1R of main draw) Interestingly, Lucky Losers often came in bunches — that is, if a player managed to be a Lucky Loser once, she might well manage it more than once. No fewer than four players (Foretz, Lee-Waters, Pastikova, Vakulenko) managed it three times! The complete list of multiple Lucky Losers: Iveta Benesova (Hobart, Indian Wells; won 2 main draw matches as Lucky Loser) Eva Birnerova (Indian Wells, Roland Garros; won 1 main draw match) Stephanie Foretz (Antwerp, Budapest, Cincinnati; no main draw wins) Edina Gallovits (Bogota, Budapest; no main draw wins) Alina Jidkova (Pan Pacific, Charleston; won 2 main draw matches) Kremer (Los Angeles, Philadelphia; won 1 main draw match) Lindsay Lee-Waters (Australian Open, Canadian Open, Linz; won 1 main draw match) Martina Müller (Stockholm, Sopot; no main draw wins) Arantxa Parra Santonja (Paris, Antwerp; won 1 main draw match) Michaela Pastikova (Casablanca, Sopot, Hasselt; won 1 main draw match) Claudine Schaul (Paris, Moscow; no main draw wins) Julia Vakulenko (Pan Pacific, Antwerp, Berlin; won 1 main draw match) One-time Lucky Losers were: Antonella Serra Zanetti (Cincinnati), Ekaterina Bychkova (Tashkent), Denisa Chladkova (Sydney), Stephanie Cohen-Aloro (Birmingham), Marta Domachowska (Linz), Gisela Dulko (Miami), Ryoko Fuda (Tashkent), Rika Fujiwara (Seoul), Rita Grande (Canadian Open), Marissa Irvin (New Haven), Klaudia Jans (Sopot), Aniko Kapros (Dubai), Katerina Bondarenko (Sopot), Sandra Kleinova (Miami), Jelena Kostanic (Zürich), Nuria Llagostera Vives (U. S. Open), Emilie Loit (Zürich), Conchita Martinez Granados (Canberra), Antonia Matic (Tashkent), Myriam Casanova (Antwerp), Yvonne Meusburger (Budapest), Lenko Nemeckova (Warsaw), Dominika Nociarova (Budapest), Tzipora Obziler (Roland Garros), Flavia Pennetta (Zürich), Shenay Perr (Charleston), Camille Pin (U. S. Open), Libuse Prusova (Sopot), Lisa Raymond (Filderstadt), Samantha Reeves (Charleston), Capucine Rousseau (Hasselt), Miho Saeki (Seoul), Mara Santangelo (Amelia Island), Julia Schruff (Acapulco), Milagros Sequera (Amelia Island), Katarina Srebotnik (Berlin), Tamarine Tanasugarn (San Diego), Mashona Washington (Stanford), Angelique Widjaja (Doha). These 67 Lucky Losers compiled an overall record of 30-67 in main draw matches. No Lucky Loser managed more than two main draw wins in an event; players to win two were Benesova (Indian Wells), Casanova (Antwerp), Dulko (Miami), Jidkova (Charleston), Raymond (Filderstadt), and Washington (Stanford). The most impressive result by a Lucky Loser was certainly Raymond’s; she beat Farina Elia and Dementieva at Filderstadt. Other Lucky Losers with Top 25 wins: Jidkova over Suárez at Charleston, Benesova over Maleeva at Indian Wells, Domachowska over Zuluaga at Linz. If we look at tournaments with the most Lucky Losers, the numbers were as follows: 5 — Sopot 4 — Antwerp, Budapest 3 — Charleston, Tashkent, Zürich 2 — Amelia Island, Berlin, Canadian Open, Cincinnati, Hasselt, Indian Wells, Linz, Miami, Pan Pacific, Paris, Roland Garros, Seoul, U. S. Open 1 — Acapulco, Australian Open, Birmingham, Bogota, Canberra, Casablanca, Doha, Dubai, Filderstadt, Hobart, Los Angeles, Moscow, New Haven, Philadelphia, San Diego, Stanford, Stockholm, Sydney, Warsaw

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 150 Bagels The following chart lists the bagels (6-0 sets) experienced or inflicted by top players (WTA matches only). The “bagel” set is shown in bold. Double bagels are shown in bold for the entire line. Player Bagels inflicted Bagels experienced Bedanova Bovina Paris: def. Dokic 2Ð6 7Ð6 6Ð0 Berlin: lost to Kuznetsova 2Ð6 0Ð6 Rome: def. Pisnik 6Ð3 1Ð6 6Ð0 Rome: lost to Zvonareva 3Ð6 0Ð6 Eastbourne: def. Farina Elia 7Ð5 6Ð0 Hasselt: lost to Dementieva 6Ð0 0Ð6 4Ð6 New Haven: def. Chladkova 6Ð0 7Ð5 Zürich: lost to Dementieva 5Ð7 6Ð3 0Ð6 U. S. Open: def. Marrero 6Ð3 6Ð0 Linz: lost to Mauresmo 2Ð6 0Ð6 Hasselt: lost to Dementieva 6Ð0 0Ð6 4Ð6 Capriati Miami: def. Koukalova 6Ð0 6Ð1 Berlin: lost to Mauresmo 2Ð6 0Ð6 U. S. Open: def. Serna 6Ð0 6Ð2 U. S. Open: lost to Dementieva 0Ð6 6Ð2 6Ð7 U. S. Open: def. Douchevina 6Ð0 6Ð7 6Ð3 Philadelphia: lost to Zvonareva 0Ð6 1Ð6 Clijsters Australian Open: def. Camerin 6Ð0 6Ð0 Paris: def. Sanchez Lorenzo 6Ð1 6Ð0 Antwerp: def. Farina Elia 6Ð3 6Ð0 Coetzer Sydney: def. Schnyder 4Ð6 6Ð3 6Ð0 Sydney: lost to Myskina 3Ð6 0Ð6 Daniilidou Australian Open: def. Black 3Ð6 6Ð0 6Ð1 San Diego: def. Raymond 7Ð5 6Ð0 Davenport Australian Open: def. Loit 6Ð3 3Ð6 6Ð0 Strasbourg: lost to Schaul 6Ð2 0Ð6 3Ð6 Australian Open: def. Granville 6Ð4 6Ð0 Pan Pacific: def. Dokic 6–1 6Ð0 Indian Wells: def. Santangelo 6Ð0 6Ð0 Indian Wells: def. Stosur 6Ð0 6Ð3 Strasbourg: def. Srebotnik 6Ð0 6Ð1 Strasbourg: def. Farina Elia 6Ð2 6Ð0 Wimbledon: def. Brandi 6Ð0 1Ð0, retired San Diego: def. Sprem 6Ð4 6Ð0 U. S. Open: def. Kurhajcova 6Ð4 6Ð0 Filderstadt: def. Molik 6Ð1 6Ð0 Los Angeles Champ: def. Dementieva 6Ð0 6Ð1 Déchy Australian Open: def. Obziler 6Ð3 6Ð0 Sydney: lost to Schiavone 0Ð6 4Ð6 New Haven: def. Morigami 6Ð0 3Ð6 6Ð2 Birmingham: lost to Vinci 0Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð7 New Haven: def. Raymond 6Ð4 6Ð0 Moscow: lost to Zvonareva 0Ð6 2Ð6 U. S. Open: def. Dokic 3Ð6 6Ð0 7Ð5 Philadelphia: def. Pisnik 6Ð3 6Ð0 Dementieva Sydney: def. Cargill 6Ð0 0Ð6 6-3 Sydney: def. Cargill 6Ð0 0Ð6 6-3 Roland Garros: def. Suárez 6Ð0 7Ð5 Roland Garros: def. Smashnova 0Ð6 7Ð6 0Ð1, ret. U. S. Open: def. Capriati 6Ð0 2Ð6 7Ð6 Olympics: lost to Molik 6Ð4 0Ð6 3Ð6 Hasselt: def. Bovina 0Ð6 6Ð0 6Ð4 Hasselt: def. Bovina 0Ð6 6Ð0 6Ð4 Zürich: def. Bovina 7Ð5 3Ð6 6Ð0 Filderstadt: lost to Raymond 0Ð6 5Ð7 Moscow: lost to Myskina 5Ð7 0Ð6 Los Angeles Champ: lost to Davenport 0Ð6 1Ð6 Dokic Charleston: def. Panova 6Ð0 5Ð7 7Ð5 Pan Pacific: lost to Davenport 1Ð6 0Ð6 Paris: lost to Bovina 6Ð4 6Ð7 0Ð6 Doha: def. Pratt 0Ð6 6Ð3 6Ð4 Berlin: lost to Shaughnessy 0Ð6 3Ð6 U. S. Open: lost to Déchy 6Ð3 0Ð6 5Ð7 Beijing: lost to Tanasugarn 3Ð6 0Ð6

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 151 Farina Elia Paris: def. Pisnik 6Ð0 6Ð4 Antwerp: lost to Clijsters 3Ð6 0Ð6 Antwerp: def. Sanchez Lorenzo 6Ð3 6Ð0 Strasbourg: lost to Davenport 2Ð6 0Ð6 Rome: def. Sharapova 7Ð6 6Ð0 Eastbourne: lost to Bovina 5Ð7 0Ð6 Strasbourg: def. Medina Garrigues 6Ð0 3Ð6 6Ð4 Hasselt: lost to Chladkova 0Ð6 2Ð6 Strasbourg: def. Sequera 4Ð6 6Ð0 6Ð2 Filderstadt: lost to Raymond 7Ð6 6Ð7 0Ð6 Roland Garros: def. Jankovic 4Ð6 6Ð0 6Ð2 Wimbledon: def. Peng 6Ð0 6Ð4 Olympics: def. Testud 6Ð2 6Ð0 Luxembourg: def. Pisnik 6Ð4 6Ð0 Frazier Auckland: def. Mikaelian 3Ð6 6Ð2 6Ð0 Indian Wells: lost to Kuznetsova 0Ð6 3Ð6 Australian Open: def. Brandi 2Ð6 6Ð0 7Ð5 San Diego: def. Harkleroad 6Ð2 6Ð0 Golovin Australian Open: def. Mikaelian 6Ð0 4Ð1, retired Australian Open: lost to Raymond 2Ð6 0Ð6 Birmingham: def. Hantuchova 6Ð0 3Ð1, retired Paris: lost to Pierce 4Ð6 0Ð6 Birmingham: def. Asagoe 6Ð4 6Ð0 Wimbledon: def. Schiavone 6Ð1 6Ð0 Zürich Qualifying: def. Loit 6Ð0 6Ð3 Hantuchova Miami: def. Tanasugarn 7Ð6 3Ð6 6Ð0 [Hopman Cup: lost to Mandula 0Ð6 6Ð7] Birmingham: lost to Golovin 0Ð6 1Ð3, retired Hénin-Hard Australian Open: def. Lukaszewicz 6Ð0 6Ð0 Dubai: def. Martinez 6Ð1 6Ð0 Olympics: def. Pratt 6Ð1 6Ð0 Krasnoroutsk Miami: lost to Douchevina 0Ð6 5Ð7 Birmingham: lost to Sequera 6Ð3 3Ð6 0Ð6 Kremer Los Angeles: def. Granville 6Ð3 5Ð7 6Ð0 Wimbledon: lost to Suárez 1–6 6–4 0Ð6 Seoul: def. Fujiwara 7Ð6 6Ð0 Seoul: lost to Sharapova 0Ð6 2Ð6 Kuznetsova Dubai: def. Sugiyama 6Ð0 7Ð5 Rome: lost to S. Williams 5Ð7 0Ð6 Indian Wells: def. Frazier 6Ð0 6Ð3 Warsaw: def. Douchevina 6Ð0 6Ð1 Berlin: def. Bovina 6Ð2 6Ð0 Rome: def. Marrero 6Ð0 6Ð4 Roland Garros: def. Bacheva 6Ð0 7Ð6 Los Angeles: def. Smashnova 6Ð3 6Ð0 U. S. Open: def. Karatancheva 6Ð2 6Ð0 Likhovtseva Forest Hills: def. Medina Garrigues 3Ð6 6Ð0 6Ð1 Dubai: lost to Camerin 7Ð5 1Ð6 0Ð6 Canadian Open: def. Vento-Kabchi 0Ð6 6Ð3 6Ð2 Canadian Open: lost to Mauresmo 1Ð6 0Ð6 Filderstadt: def. Pierce 0Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð3 Filderstadt: lost to Myskina 6Ð4 0Ð6 2Ð6 Moscow: lost to Myskina 6Ð2 1Ð6 0Ð6 Loit Canberra: def. C. Fernandez 6Ð4 6Ð0 Australian Open: lost to Davenport 3Ð6 6Ð3 0Ð6 Estoril: def. Cervanova 6Ð2 6Ð0 Bogota: def. Dominguez Lino 7Ð6 0Ð6 6Ð4 Zürich Qualifying: lost to Golovin 0Ð6 3Ð6 Maleeva Australian Open: def. Reeves 6Ð1 6Ð0 Sydney: lost to Martinez 0Ð6 0Ð6 Birmingham: lost to Tanasugarn 6Ð0 4Ð6 2Ð6 Warsaw: lost to V. Williams 6Ð1 6Ð0 Hasselt: def. Callens 6Ð0 6Ð1 Martinez Sydney: def. Maleeva 6Ð0 6Ð0 Dubai: lost to Hénin-Hardenne 1–6 0Ð6 Indian Wells: def. Craybas 6Ð0 6Ð3 Charleston: def. Sun 6Ð1 6Ð0 [Fed Cup: def. Gagliardi 2Ð6 6Ð1 6Ð0] Eastbourne: def. Raymond 2Ð6 6Ð2 6Ð0 U. S. Open: lost to Vento-Kabchi 6Ð0 2Ð6 3Ð6

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 152 Mauresmo Australian Open: def. Chuang 6Ð1 6Ð0 Australian Open: def. Cervanova 6Ð0 6Ð2 Amelia Island: def. Morigami 6Ð0 6Ð3 Berlin: def. Capriati 6Ð2 6Ð0 Roland Garros: def. Medina Garrigues 6Ð0 4Ð6 6Ð1 Wimbledon: def. Suárez 6Ð0 5Ð7 6Ð1 Canadian Open: def. Likhovtseva 6Ð1 6Ð0 Olympics: def. Camerin 6Ð0 6Ð1 U. S. Open: def. Vento-Kabchi 6Ð2 6Ð0 Linz: def. Domachowska 6Ð4 6Ð0 Linz: def. Bovina 6Ð2 6Ð0 Los Angeles Champ: def. Zvonareva 6Ð1 6Ð0 Molik Amelia Island: def. Jankovic 6Ð0 6Ð0 Filderstadt: lost to Davenport 1Ð6 0Ð6 Olympics: def. Dementieva 4Ð6 6Ð0 6Ð3 U. S. Open: def. Cohen-Aloro 6Ð0 6Ð2 Myskina Sydney: def. Coetzer 6Ð3 6Ð0 Roland Garros: def. Strycova 6Ð0 6Ð4 [Fed Cup: def. Gussoni 6Ð3 6Ð0] Canadian Open: def. Parra Santonja 6Ð0 6Ð4 Canadian Open: def. Rubin 6Ð4 6Ð0 Olympics: def. Serna 6Ð0 6Ð1 U. S. Open: def. Cervanova 6Ð1 6Ð0 Filderstadt: def. Likhovtseva 4Ð6 6Ð0 6Ð2 Moscow: def. Likhovtseva 2Ð6 6Ð1 6Ð0 Moscow: def. Zvonareva 4Ð6 6Ð0 7Ð5 Moscow: def. Dementieva 7Ð5 6Ð0 Panova Beijing: def. Pisnik 6Ð0, retired Charleston: lost to Dokic 0Ð6 7Ð5 5Ð7 GuangZhou: def. Bratchikova 3Ð6 6Ð0 6Ð3 GuangZhou: lost to Brandi 0Ð6 1Ð6 Philadelphia: lost to Petrova 2Ð6 0Ð6 Petrova Amelia Island: def. Sequera 6Ð1 6Ð0 Roland Garros: def. Fedak 6Ð0 6Ð1 U. S. Open: def. Zheng 6Ð0 6Ð1 Moscow: lost to Schiavone 6Ð0 3Ð6 4Ð6 Philadelphia: def. Panova 6Ð2 6Ð0 Pierce Paris: def. Golovin 6Ð4 6Ð0 U. S. Open: def. Ruano Pascual 6Ð0 6Ð1 Filderstadt: lost to Likhovtseva 6Ð0 4Ð6 3Ð6 Moscow: lost to Mamic 0Ð6 4Ð6 Luxembourg: def. Gullickson 6Ð0 7Ð5 Raymond Australian Open: def. Golovin 6Ð2 6Ð0 Roland Garros: def. Kurhajcova 0Ð6 7Ð5 6Ð3 Memphis: def. Lee-Waters 6Ð0 4Ð6 6Ð1 Roland Garros: lost to Parra Santonja 4Ð6 0Ð6 Memphis: def. Granville 6Ð3 6Ð0 Eastbourne: lost to Martinez 6Ð3 2Ð6 0-6 Filderstadt: def. Dementieva 6Ð0 7Ð5 San Diego: lost to Daniilidou 5Ð7 0Ð6 Filderstadt: def. Farina Elia 6Ð7 7Ð6 6Ð0 New Haven: lost to Déchy 4Ð6 0Ð6 Rubin Pan Paciﬁc: def. Grande 6–3 6Ð0 Canadian Open: lost to Myskina 4Ð6 0Ð6 San Diego: def. Smashnova 6Ð0 6Ð3 Olympics: def. Stosur 6Ð2 6Ð7 6Ð0 Saﬁna Luxembourg: def. Ant. Serra Zanetti 6Ð4 6Ð0 Wimbledon: lost to Parra Santonja 0Ð6 0Ð2, retired Schiavone Sydney: def. Déchy 6Ð0 6Ð4 Amelia Island: lost to Parra 6Ð1 6Ð7 0Ð6 [Fed Cup: def. Strycova 5Ð7 6Ð1 6Ð0] Wimbledon: lost to Golovin 1Ð6 0Ð6 Warsaw: def. Pisnik 6Ð3 6Ð0 Los Angeles: def. Sugiyama 6Ð3 0Ð6 7Ð6 Los Angeles: def. Perry 6Ð0 6Ð3 Moscow: def. Petrova 0Ð6 6Ð3 6Ð4 Hasselt: def. Santangelo 6Ð2 6Ð0 Hasselt: def. Llagostera Vives 6Ð1 6Ð0

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 153 Schnyder Gold Coast: def. Jankovic 6Ð4 6Ð0 Sydney: lost to Coetzer 6Ð4 3Ð6 0Ð6 Amelia Island: def. Mikaelian 6Ð1 6Ð0 U. S. Open: def. Vinci 7Ð6 6Ð0 Seles Serna Gold Coast: def. Kapros 2Ð6 6Ð0 6-4 Vienna: lost to Smashnova 1Ð6 0Ð6 Vienna: def. Barna 6Ð1 6Ð0 Wimbledon: lost to S. Williams 4Ð6 0Ð6 Linz Qualifying: def. Klaffner 6Ð0 6Ð1 Olympics: lost to Myskina 0Ð6 1Ð6 U. S. Open: lost to Capriati 6Ð0 6Ð2 Sharapova Miami: def. Asagoe 6Ð2 3Ð6 6Ð0 Rome: lost to Farina Elia 6Ð7 0Ð6 Roland Garros: def. Schwartz 6Ð3 6Ð0 Roland Garros: def. Grande 6Ð2 6Ð0 Wimbledon: def. Keothavong 6Ð4 6Ð0 San Diego: def. Dulko 6Ð0 6Ð1 U. S. Open: def. Jankovic 6Ð0 6Ð7 6Ð1 Seoul: def. Kremer 6Ð0 6Ð2 Japan Open: def. Washington 6Ð0 6Ð1 Shaughness Berlin: def. Dokic 6Ð0 6Ð3 Smashnova Indian Wells: def. Kleybanova 6Ð4 6Ð0 Charleston: def. Brandi 0Ð6 6Ð1 6Ð2 Amelia Island: def. Hopkins 6Ð0 6Ð0 Charleston: lost to Zvonareva 0Ð6 6Ð3 3Ð6 [Fed Cup Zonal: def. Kanepi 6Ð0 6Ð0] Stanford: def. Jackson 6Ð1 0Ð6 7Ð6 Vienna: def. Koukalova 6Ð0 6Ð1 Stanford: lost to V. Williams 0Ð6 3Ð6 Vienna: def. Serna 6Ð1 6Ð0 Los Angeles: lost to Kuznetsova 3Ð6 0Ð6 Roland Garros: lost to Dementieva 6Ð0 6Ð7 1Ð0, ret. San Diego: lost to Rubin 0Ð6 3Ð6 Stockholm: lost to Kleinova 0Ð6, retired Sprem Canberra: def. Mandula 6Ð4 6Ð0 San Diego: lost to Davenport 4Ð6 0Ð6 Miami: def. Vento-Kabchi 4Ð6 6Ð3 6Ð0 [Fed Cup: def. Flipkens 6Ð2 6Ð0] Stevenson Surbiton $25: def. Koryttseva 7Ð5 6Ð0 Miami: lost to Koukalova 7Ð5 5Ð7 0Ð6 Stanford Qualifying: lost to Jackson 7Ð6 0Ð6 1Ð3, ret. Suárez [Fed Cup: def. Morigami 6Ð4 6Ð0] Roland Garros: lost to Dementieva 0Ð6 5Ð7 Wimbledon: def. Kremer 6Ð1 4Ð6 6Ð0 Wimbledon: lost to Mauresmo 0Ð6 7Ð5 1Ð6 Wimbledon: def. Grande 4Ð6 6Ð0 6Ð2 San Diego: lost to Bartoli 3Ð6 0Ð6 Sugiyama Los Angeles: lost to Schiavone 3Ð6 6Ð0 6Ð7 Dubai: lost to Kuznetsova 0Ð6 5Ð7 Linz: def. Vento-Kabchi 6Ð0 6Ð0 Tanasugarn Hyderabad: def. Kulikovskaya 6Ð4 6Ð0 Miami: lost to Hantuchova 6Ð7 3Ð6 0Ð6 [Fed Cup Zonal: def. Chakravarthi 6Ð0 6Ð1] Birmingham: def. Maleeva 0Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð2 Wimbledon: def. Grönefeld 6–2 6Ð0 San Diego Qualifying: lost to Irvin 7Ð5 0Ð6 5Ð7 Beijing: def. Dokic 6Ð3 6Ð0 Tashkent: lost to Linetskaya 4Ð6 6Ð4 0Ð6 Japan Open: def. Asagoe 6Ð0 6Ð4 Testud Ortisei $75K+H: def. Roesch 6Ð0 6Ð1 Ortisei $75K+H: lost to Nemeth 0Ð6 3Ð6 Olympics: lost to Farina Elia 2Ð6 0Ð6 Tulyaganova Vento-Kabchi Miami: def. Pin 2Ð6 7Ð6 6Ð0 Miami: lost to Sprem 6Ð4 3Ð6 0Ð6 Vienna: def. Czink 4Ð6 6Ð0 6Ð2 U. S. Open: def. Martinez 0Ð6 6Ð2 6Ð3 Wimbledon: def. Sucha 6Ð1 6Ð0 U. S. Open: lost to Mauresmo 2Ð6 0Ð6 Canadian Open: lost to Likhovtseva 6Ð0 3Ð6 2Ð6 GuangZhou: lost to Zheng 2Ð6 0Ð6 Linz: lost to Sugiyama 0Ð6 0Ð6

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 154 S. Williams Miami: def. Marrero 6Ð1 6Ð0 Miami: def. Craybas 6Ð0 6Ð1 Charleston: def. McCain 6Ð1 6Ð0 Rome: def. Kuznetsova 7Ð5 6Ð0 Roland Garros: def. Talaja 6Ð0 6Ð4 Wimbledon: def. Foretz 6Ð0 6Ð4 Wimbledon: def. Serna 6Ð4 6Ð0 Los Angeles: def. Parra Santonja 6Ð0 6Ð3 V. Williams Warsaw: def. Zuluaga 4Ð6 6Ð2 6Ð0 Warsaw: def. Maleeva 6Ð1 6Ð0 Wimbledon: def. Mikaelian 6Ð3 6-0 Stanford: def. Smashnova 6Ð0 6Ð3 Olympics: def. Matevzic 6Ð0 6Ð0 Moscow: def. Douchevina 6Ð0 6Ð4 Zuluaga Bogota: def. A. Bondarenko 6Ð0 6Ð0 Warsaw: lost to V. Williams 6Ð4 2Ð6 0Ð6 Bogota: def. Castano 6Ð3 6Ð0 Filderstadt Qualifying: def. Callens 6Ð0 7Ð5 Filderstadt: def. Weingärtner 6–0 6–0 Zvonareva Indian Wells: def. Schaul 6Ð2 6Ð0 Bogota: def. Kurhajcova 6Ð2 0Ð6 7Ð6 Charleston: def. Beltrame 6Ð4 6Ð0 Moscow: lost to Myskina 6Ð4 0Ð6 5Ð7 Charleston: def. Smashnova-Pistolesi 6Ð0 3Ð6 6Ð3 Los Angeles Champ: lost to Mauresmo 1Ð6 0Ð6 Rome: def. Bovina 6Ð3 6Ð0 Roland Garros: def. Kucova 6Ð0 6Ð2 Eastbourne: def. Sanchez Lorenzo 6Ð3 6Ð0 [Fed Cup: def. Diaz-Oliva 6Ð3 6Ð0] San Diego: def. Sanchez Lorenzo 6Ð0 6Ð3 Moscow: def. Déchy 6Ð0 6Ð2 Philadelphia: def. Capriati 6Ð0 6Ð1

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 155 The Road to Victory Sometimes earning a title is easy; sometimes it’s a long struggle. The following statistics offer perspectives on what a player had to do to earn a title (Tier II or higher). Games Lost in Path to Title The following table assesses the winner’s path to victory by calculating the number of games lost on the way to the title. Since, however, some tournaments have more rounds than others, this is divided by the number of matches played to get games per match. (Note: for these purposes, a tiebreak counts as a game). The lower the number of games per match, the better the player performed. Event Tier Winner Games Lost Matches Played Games/Match Sydney II Hénin-Hardenne 26 3 8.7 Australian Open Slam Hénin-Hardenne 43 7 6.1 Tokyo (Pan Pacific) I Davenport 13 4 3.3 Paris II Clijsters 20 4 5.0 Antwerp II Clijsters 19 4 4.8 Dubai II Hénin-Hardenne 22 4 5.5 Doha II Myskina 33 4 8.3 Indian Wells I Hénin-Hardenne 30 6 5.0 Miami I S. Williams 29 6 4.8 Amelia Island II Davenport 40 5 8.0 Charleston I V. Williams 39 5 7.8 Warsaw II V. Williams 19 4 4.8 Berlin I Mauresmo 19 4 4.8 Rome I Mauresmo 46 5 9.2 Roland Garros Slam Myskina 56 7 8.0 Eastbourne II Kuznetsova 48 4 12.0 Wimbledon Slam Sharapova 51 7 7.3 Stanford II Davenport 37 4 9.3 Los Angeles II Davenport 24 51 4.8 San Diego I Davenport 19 5 3.8 Canadian Open I Mauresmo 43 5 8.6 Olympics Olymp Hénin-Hardenne 43 6 7.2 New Haven II Bovina 30 5 6.0 U.S. Open Slam Kuznetsova 56 7 8.0 Beijing II S. Williams 36 42 9.0 Filderstadt II Davenport 18 43 4.5 Moscow I Myskina 33 4 8.3 Zürich I Molik 45 5 9.0 Linz II Mauresmo 22 4 5.5 Philadelphia II Mauresmo 27 3 9.0 Los Angeles Cham Champ Sharapova 49 5 9.8 1. Properly closer to 4.5; Venus Williams retired trailing 5–7 0–2 in the semifinal. 2. Properly closer to 3.5; Nadia Petrova retired trailing 6-2 4-1 in the semifinal 3. Properly 3.5, or even less; Amélie Mauresmo retired from the final trailing 6–2, and Davenport’s first opponent, Alicia Molik, was also injured.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 156 Quality Points Earned The following table assesses the winner’s path to victory by calculating the strength of her opponents, as measured by quality points. Since some tournaments have more rounds than others, this is divided by the number of matches played. (Note: It should be kept in mind that there are more quality points available to lower-ranked players than to higher-ranked players.) Quality Matches Points Event Tier Winner Points Played per Match Sydney II Hénin-Hardenne 133 3 44.3 Australian Open Slam Hénin-Hardenne 308 7 44.01 Tokyo (Pan Pacific) I Davenport 63 4 15.8 Paris II Clijsters 53 4 13.3 Antwerp II Clijsters 58 4 14.5 Dubai II Hénin-Hardenne 55 4 13.8 Doha II Myskina 87 4 21.8 Indian Wells I Hénin-Hardenne 152 6 25.3 Miami I S. Williams 103 6 17.2 Amelia Island II Davenport 158 5 31.6 Charleston I V. Williams 74 5 14.8 Warsaw II V. Williams 116 4 29.0 Berlin I Mauresmo 94 4 23.5 Rome I Mauresmo 151 5 30.2 Roland Garros Slam Myskina 436 7 62.31 Eastbourne II Kuznetsova 63 4 15.8 Wimbledon Slam Sharapova 372 7 53.11 Stanford II Davenport 87 4 21.82 Los Angeles II Davenport 201 5 40.22 San Diego I Davenport 161 5 32.2 Canadian Open I Mauresmo 101 5 20.2 Olympics Olymp Hénin-Hardenne 187 6 31.2 New Haven II Bovina 78 5 15.6 U.S. Open Slam Kuznetsova 366 7 52.31 Beijing II S. Williams 128 4 32.0 Filderstadt II Davenport 193 4 48.3 Moscow I Myskina 176 4 44.0 Zürich I Molik 171 5 34.2 Linz II Mauresmo 77 4 19.3 Philadelphia II Mauresmo 88 3 29.3 Los Angeles Cham Champ Sharapova 199 53 39.8 1 Note that Slam quality points are doubled, giving artificially high values — except in Melbourne, where Hénin-Hardenne faced absurdly low-ranked players 2. Davenport’s score at Stanford and San Diego are irreconcilable. The WTA initially gave Davenport 251 points for Stanford (i.e. 56 quality points, based on a ranking of #15 for Venus Williams), but 201 quality points at Los Angeles (based on a protected ranking for both Williams Sisters). It appears they later corrected the Stanford figure to 286. 3. Note that Sharapova lost one of these matches.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 157 “Top Players” 2004 Early in 2000, the challenge was issued to define what constitutes a “Top Player.” After some discussion, those involved decided that a “Top Player” was one who met two of the following three criteria: 1. Has reached at least one Grand Slam semifinal in the last three years. 2. Has, during one of the last three years, defeated at least five Top Ten players during a single year. 3. Has, during the last three years, won at least one tournament of Tier II or higher. The following table shows how well current players have done against these goals. The column labelled “Total Ach[ieved]” lists the total number of accomplishments met — i.e. it totals Slam semifinals, Tier II or higher titles, and increments of five Top Ten players defeated (i.e. if you beat five Top Ten players in a year, it adds one to your total; beat ten and you add two, etc. Remainders do not carry; if you beat eight in one year and seven in another, that counts as two, not three.) Note that the table below includes only players with at least one Accomplishment over the past three years. The very shortness of the list shows how hard it is to come up with two accomplishments! Player 2002 2002 2002 2003 2003 2003 2004 2004 2004 2004 2002Ð Slam Top 10 Tier II+ Slam Top 10 Tier II+ Slam Top 10 Tier II+ Total 2004 SF Wins Titles SF Wins Titles SF Wins Titles Ach. Ach. Bovina 01003002111 Capriati 27115123029 Clijsters 1 12 3 4 21 7112324 Davenport 14015121061014 Dementieva 01009228035 C.Fernandez 11000000001 Hantuchova 05100001002 Hénin-Hard 1524168185726 Hingis 1 4 2 — — — — — — — 3 Kuznetsova 00000016244 Majoli 01100000001 Maleeva 04101001001 Mauresmo 262082195715 Molik 00000003111 Myskina 0510321103610 Petrova 01014003001 Rubin 04204100003 Schnyder 06102012013 Seles 140010————1 Sharapova 00000017244 Stevenson 05000000001 Suárez 00001012011 Sugiyama 01004200002 S. Williams 3 17 8 3 10 4162629 V. Williams 3 16 6261002218 Zuluaga 00000011011

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 158 From the above table, we can list players in order of “accomplishments.” Remember that this list is compiled over three years. Serena Williams, e.g., was not the most accomplished player of 2004 (Davenport has that distinction, though her ten accomplishments this year would have placed her fourth in 2003), nor the most accomplished of 2003 (that honour is a tie between Clijsters and Hénin-Hardenne, who had 15 accomplishments each), but over the three year span, she has been the most accomplished. We note that, of the 2004 year-end Top 25, six, or roughly one-fourth, have no accomplishments at all: Zvonareva, Sprem, Schiavone, Farina Elia, Déchy, Likhovtseva (as we said, this is a tough criterion). Another six have only one accomplishment. Petrova, Molik, Bovina, Suárez, Zuluaga, Maleeva.

Top Players: Player Accomplishments S. Williams 29 Hénin-Hardenne 26 Clijsters 24 V. Williams 18 Mauresmo 15 Davenport 14 Myskina 10 Capriati 9 Dementieva 5 Kuznetsova 4 Sharapova 4 Hingis* 3 Rubin 3 Schnyder 3 Hantuchova 2 Sugiyama 2 Bovina 1 C. Fernandez 1 Majoli* 1 Maleeva 1 Molik 1 Petrova 1 Seles* 1 Stevenson 1 Suárez 1 Zuluaga 1

* Retired or inactive player who nonetheless has residual accomplishments.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 159 Statistics About the Tour as a Whole Total number of ranked players, as of November 16, 2004: 1256 (1214 in 2001, 1253 in 2002, 1113 in 2003) Most singles events played by a Top 100 player: 32/Iveta Benesova, Alina Jidkova (32/Jidkova in 2002, 34/Vakulenko in 2003) Fewest events played by a Top 100 player: 6/Kim Clijsters (9/Davenport, M. Casanova in 2002, 6/V. Williams in 2003) Median number of events played by a Top 100 player: 23.5 (23 in 2001, 24.5 in 2002, 24 in 2003) Number of Top 100 players playing 25 or more events: 41 (41 in 2001, 50 in 2002, 39 in 2003) Number of Top 100 players playing 30 or more events: 7 (6 in 2001, 8 in 2002, 9 in 2003) Most events played by any player: 34/Nathalie Vierin (39/ Tameishi in 2002, 37/ Krivencheva in 2003). Median number of events played by all players: 9 (11 in 2001 and 2002, 10 in 2003) Number of players playing 25 or more events: 124 (117 in 2001, 153 in 2002, 121 in 2003) Number of players playing 30 or more events: 24 (14 in 2001, 26 in 2002, 25 in 2003) Most points earned in any event: 1086/Myskina, Roland Garros (1056 in 2002, 1156 in 2003) Most titles for any player: 7/Davenport (8/S. Williams in 2002, 9/Clijsters in 2003) Most Tour victories: 63/Davenport (62/V. Williams in 2002, 86/Clijsters in 2003) Total Tournaments played in 2004: 60 including Olympics (59 in 2003, 64 in 2002, 63 in 2001) Total players with Tour singles titles in 2004: 31 (30 in 2003, 37 in 2002, 30 in 2001) Total players with multiple singles titles in 2004: 12 (11 in 2003, 12 in 2002, 14 in 2001) Total players with Tier II or higher titles in 2004: 11 (11 in 2003, 13 in 2002, 8 in 2001) Most WTA singles matches played: 79/Zvonareva (79/Dokic in 2002, 98/Clijsters in 2003) Most doubles matches played: 78/Likhovtseva (84/Suárez in 2002, 77/Navratilova in 2003) Most combined singles and doubles matches played: 136/Kuznetsova (136/Suárez in 2002, 149/Clijsters in 2003) Total Main Draw Matches Played, All Players (omits walkovers, withdrawals, byes): 2445 (2554 in 2002, 2384 in 2003) Total players with at least 2000 points: 12 (11 in 2003, 10 in 2002, 11 in 2001) Total players with at least 1000 points: 30 (31 in 2003, 32 in 2002, 24 in 2001) Total players with at least 500 points: 73 (72 in 2003, 75 in 2002, 72 in 2001) Total players with at least 200 points: 167 (158 in 2003, 158 in 2002, 153 in 2001) Total players with at least 100 points: 263 (241 in 2003, 253 in 2002, 241 in 2001) Total players with at least 50 points: 388 (361 in 2003, 351 in 2002, (340 in 2001) Total players with at least 20 points: 582 (558 in 2003, 567 in 2002, (552 in 2001) Total players with at least 10 points: 799 (726 in 2003, 769 in 2002, 753 in 2001) Total ranked players with 1.0 or fewer points: 10 (6 in 2003, 11 in 2002, 8 in 2001) Total players with .75 points: 4 (2 in 2003, 5 in 2002; 3 in 2001) Highest (year-end) score in a 17th Tournament: 68/Kuznetsova (170Clijsters in 2003, 59/Hénin in 2002; record to this point: 215/Hingis, week of February 26, 2001) Total points “in the system” (sum of the Best 17 scores of all ranked players): 155255.06 (150539.45 in 2003, 152702.61 in 2002). The Top 25 have 57723.5 of these, or 37.2%.

1. How can there be a .45 and a .6, prior to 2004 when the WTA started awarding eighths of points? The WTA made a mistake, that’s how. In 2003, #164 Evgenia Kulikovskaya had 190.45 points; in 2002, Alexandra Srndovic, #498, was shown with 25.1 points.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 160 The Year of the Injury When the WTA went to the additive (“Best N”) ranking system, it did so against the wishes of the top players. They didn’t want to have to play the extra tournaments needed to succeed under Best N. They were right. It took a while, but injuries to top players have become routine. 2000 was the first “year of the injury.” The WTA responded by lowering the minimum from Best 18 to Best 17. This, predictably, didn’t help — it didn’t reduce the incentive to overplay, just the reward. The following list attempts to tabulate top players’ injuries in 2004, with their effects. It lists the player, her assorted injuries, the events she missed in consequence, and the effect on her ranking. The list is necessarily somewhat imprecise. The WTA lists withdrawals, on a rather sporadic basis, and the reasons — but some of these are highly questionable. The ultimate example is Serena Williams, who got “sick” twice and had three separate knee incidents — and that doesn’t even include her stomach problems at the year-end Championships. (That’s not to deny that Serena had knee problems; she did, and obviously she would have liked to play the Olympics and such. But she certainly scheduled some of her relapses, and especially her several bouts of flu, conveniently.) Nor is Serena the only one; Paola Suárez withdrew from Warsaw and Vienna with back problems — but played Rome and Berlin, and won matches at each. Is it coincidence that she played the big, comfortable events and skipped the small? Similarly, Jelena Dokic was skipping events at the end of the year due to an “elbow problem” — but she had been skipping them earlier for personal reasons. The list below doesn’t include either of those injuries. It omits all “rest and recovery” withdrawals as well, and most single-week injuries unless we’ve seen the player hobbling or the like. You’ll have to judge the rest.

Player Injury Events Missed Entirely Retired or played w/injury Start/End Rnk Bovina foot Antwerp, Miami, Amelia Island Paris (ranking rose) Capriati back Sydney, Australian Open (ranking rose) Capriati ? San Diego, [Olympics] Canadian Open 7/8 Clijsters ankle Sydney (Hopman Cup), Australian — Open Clijsters wrist Miami, Rome, Roland Garros, ’s-Hertogenbosch, Indian Wells, Berlin, Hasselt 2/22 Wimbledon, Stanford, San Diego, Los Angeles, Canadian Open, U. S. Open, Filderstadt, Zürich, Luxembourg Daniilidou Achilles ten- ’s-Hertogenbosch Birmingham 30/33 don Daniilidou leg Bali, Beijing, Guangzhou 30/34 Davenport shoulder Sydney — Davenport knee Roland Garros 4/5 Davenport wrist New Haven — Davenport ﬂu Zürich Moscow — Déchy leg Paris, Antwerp 24/26 Déchy ? Hasselt U. S. Open (ranking rose) Dementieva shoulder Antwerp, Indian Wells (ranking rose) Hantuchova illness Paris 29/35 Hénin-Hard illness Antwerp — Hénin- cytomegalo- Charleston, Berlin, Rome, ’s-Hertogenbosch, Amelia Island, Roland 1/8 Hardenne virus Wimbledon, San Diego, Canadian Open, Filderstadt, Garros, Olympics, U. S. Zürich, Los Angeles Championships Open Krasnorout wrist Vancouver, Cincinnati, U. S. Open, Moscow, Zürich 113/1421 Loit leg Budapest, Rome, Berlin 27/32 Loit ? ’s-Hertogenbosch (ranking rose)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 161 Loit leg Luxembourg Zürich 39/45 Mauresmo Back Paris, Doha, Indian Wells, Miami Australian Open — Mauresmo Back, thigh, Wimbledon —2 hand Mauresmo thigh Moscow, Zürich Filderstadt 1/2 Molik thigh Moscow Filderstadt 18/20 Myskina toe Miami, Warsaw — Myskina toe Wimbledon 3/4 Myskina flu Linz — Panova foot San Diego, Vancouver, Cincinnati — Petrova hip Pan Pacific, Dubai, Doha Gold Coast, Australian Open 11/12 Petrova ankle Beijing — Pierce ? Australian Open 34/36 Rubin knee Indian Wells, Miami, Berlin, Rome, Roland Garros, Pan Pacific, Vienna 10/20 Eastbourne Rubin knee Filderstadt, Moscow, Zürich 24/53 Safina back Los Angeles, San Diego, Canadian Open, Stockholm — Schiavone toe Antwerp 15/17 Schnyder toe Indian Wells Antwerp 16/28 Seles foot (events in 2003 plus) all events in 2004 (unranked) Serna shoulder Estoril, Warsaw, Budapest, Berlin 26/41 Serna shoulder Stanford, Los Angeles, San Diego, Canadian Open, 50/65 Sopot Sharapova shoulder Zürich, Philadelphia3 (ranking rose) Smashnova hamstring Stockholm, Sopot, Olympics 17/25 Tanasugarn knee Dubai — Testud abdomen Paris — Testud foot U. S. Open and all events after4 — Tulyaganov elbow All events except Tashkent Tashkent (unranked) S. Williams knee (events in 2003 plus) Australian Open, Paris [1]/6 S. Williams flu Doha — S. Williams knee Amelia Island, Charleston — S. Williams knee Canadian Open, Olympics, New Haven, Filderstadt, San Diego 10/11 Zürich S. Williams sickness Philadelphia Linz — S. Williams abdomen Los Angeles Champ. — V. Williams leg Paris, Antwerp Pan Pacific 13/18 V. Williams ankle Berlin — V.Williams wrist San Diego Los Angeles 10/12 Zuluaga back Rome — 1. Technically Krasnoroutskaya fell from #50 to #142, but that was calendar shift; she had failed to defend points at the Canadian Open, and knew she would be falling out of the Top 100, even though the fall did not take place until a week after her injury. I have given the numbers based on the ranking she knew she would have. We should add that her problems arose long before the withdrawals listed here; as a whole, she lost probably over 100 ranking spots due to health problems. 2. Although Mauresmo’s Wimbledon injury didn’t officially cost her — she was #3 at the time, and returned at #3 — we would note that, had she had the points for winning the match she was playing, she would likely have ended 2004 at #1.... 3. Sharapova was certainly injured at Zürich, but it’s interesting to note that she had already booked a plane to Los Angeles before withdrawing from Philadelphia. And she won Los Angeles. 4. The WTA officially listed Testud as hurt. We note, though, that she scheduled events so as to use up her last injury protec- tion at the Olympics — which she played — and then didn’t play another event all year. Nor did she ever fly to any place farther from France than Doha.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 162 Doubles Analysing doubles is more complex than singles, because of the existence of temporary teams and because some players play doubles much more often than others — though the women are approaching the men’s state of having singles and doubles specialists. Only one player (Svetlana Kuznetsova) is Top Ten in both singles and doubles, and though Alicia Molik, Anastasia Myskina, Nadia Petrova, Patty Schnyder, Paola Suárez, Ai Sugiyama, and Vera Zvonareva are Top Twenty in both, many of them appear to be temporary aberrations. (It’s fascinating to note that every player who ended this year in the Top 14 was in the doubles Top 25 last year, but below that, we have six straight one-time singles specialists.) Still, doubles is so complex that the following section only sketches the state of the game. The Final Top 30 in Doubles Doubles Player 2003 Year-End 2004 Year-End Ranking Doubles Ranking Singles Ranking 1Virginia Ruano Pascual 2 64 2Paola Suárez 1 16 3 Cara Black 9 134 4 Rennae Stubbs 10 — 5 Elena Likhovtseva 11 24 6Meghann Shaughnessy 25 40 7 Nadia Petrova 13 12 8Svetlana Kuznetsova 8 5 9 Ai Sugiyama 3 17 10 Lisa Raymond 5 30 11 Liezel Huber 12 — 12 Martina Navratilova 6 376 13 Janette Husarova 19 213 14 Conchita Martinez 21 42 15 Vera Zvonareva 73 11 16 Anastasia Myskina 71 3 17 Alicia Molik 36 13 18 Patty Schnyder 40 14 19 Barbara Schett 37 88 20 Tamarine Tanasugarn 61 66 21 Maria Vento-Kabchi 17 49 22 Emmanuelle Gagliardi 26 104 23 Nicole Pratt 31 51 24 Corina Morariu 156 — 25 Roberta Vinci 100 115 26 Shinobu Asagoe 44 37 27 Elena Dementieva 24 6 28 Sun Tiantian 48 118 29 Li Ting 48 168 30 Dinara Saﬁna 144 44

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 163 The Initial Top 30 in Doubles Doubles Player 2003 Singles Final Doubles Rank Rank Rank 1Paola Suárez 14 2 2Virginia Ruano Pascual 55 1 3 Ai Sugiyama 10 9 4 Kim Clijsters 2 — 5 Lisa Raymond 28 10 6 Martina Navratilova — 12 7Svetlana Kuznetsova 36 8 8 Lindsay Davenport 5 44 9 Cara Black 52 3 10 Rennae Stubbs — 4 11 Elena Likhovtseva 37 5 12 Liezel Huber 765 11 13 Nadia Petrova 12 7 14 Magdalena Maleeva 30 51 15 Emilie Loit 41 31 16 Petra Mandula 40 41 17 Maria Vento-Kabchi 44 21 18 Angelique Widjaja 95 72 19 Janette Husarova 125 13 20 Marion Bartoli 57 37 21 Conchita Martinez 18 14 22 Elena Bovina 21 68 23 Lina Krasnoroutskaya 27 99 24 Elena Dementieva 8 27 25 Meghann Shaughnessy 17 6 26 Emmanuelle Gagliardi 56 22 27 Jelena Dokic 15 896 28 Daniela Hantuchova 19 62 29 Els Callens 74 45 30 Mary Pierce 33 86

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 164 Doubles Ranking Fluctuation The table below is similar to the Ranking Fluctuation Table for singles, except that rankings are recorded monthly rather than twice monthly. All players who were in the Top 25 at any time during the year, and those who ended the year in the Top 30, are listed, with the exception of players who were retired and did not play, along with a handful of other players (e.g. Morariu) who had had solid past results or who came close to the Top 25. This includes every player to win a Tier I or higher; the only Tier II winner not included is Elena Daniilidou, who won Stanford with Nicole Pratt but peaked at #37 and ended the year at #46. As with the equivalent table for singles, the month-by-month ranking numbers are followed by statistics about the players’ rankings: mean (average), median, and standard deviation (indicating how much a player’s ranking varied during the year. So Dokic, with a standard deviation of 355.9, showed the biggest fluctuation in the course of the year, while Ruano Pascual and Suarez, with a standard deviations of 0.5, showed the least variation). For purposes of these calculations, players who were unranked for part of the year (Sanchez-Vicario, Rubin, Clijsters) are omitted. Recall that the mean is the “average” ranking, the median the ranking which one is as often above as below, and the standard deviation is the measure of volatility. The top ten based on average ranking were 1. Suárez (1.4), 2. Ruano Pascual (1.6), 3. Kuznetsova (4.9), 4. Sugiyama (5.6), 5. Likhovtseva (6.3), 6. Black (6.5), 7. Navratilova (7.8), 8. Raymond (9.2), 9. Stubbs (9.5), 10. Petrova (9.8). It is a testament to the year Ruano Pascual and Suárez had that they lead all comers by such a wide margin (in the rankings, anyway; the gap in skill is less evident, given the numbers posted by Petrova/Shaughnessy at all events except the Slams). The top ten in terms of median ranking are 1. Suárez (1.0), 2. Ruano Pascual (2.0), 3. Sugiyama (4.0), 4. Kuznetsova (4.5), 5. Likhovtseva (5.5), 6. Navratilova (7.0), 7. Black (7.5), 8. Petrova (8.0), 9. Shaughnessy (9.0), 10. Raymond (9.5). The players who had the least ranking volatility (lowest standard deviation) were Suárez, Ruano Pascual, Huber, Kuznetsova, and Navratilova; the most volatility was shown by Dokic (Top 30 to start the year but didn’t win a doubles match), Morariu (just coming back at the start of the year), Vinci, Krasnoroutskaya (hurt), and Safina.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 165 Player Jan 1 Feb 1 Mar 1 Apr 1 May1 Jun 1 Jul 1 Aug1 Sep 1 Oct 1 Nov 1 Nov20 Mean Median StDev Asagoe 44 37 37 35 61 64 60 64 37 35 27 26 43.9 37.0 14.4 Bartoli 20 20 21 19 20 19 18 16 15 27 37 37 22.4 20.0 7.4 Black 9 9788910435336.57.52.7 Bovina 22 19 30 36 46 40 51 48 61 91 67 68 48.3 47.0 21.0 Callens 29 27 19 21 22 26 31 30 35 43 49 45 31.4 29.5 9.8 Casanova 46 37 26 26 23 20 20 20 23 49 57 58 33.8 26.0 14.9 Clijsters 4 4445511214247——— —— Davenport 8 8 10 11 15 16 19 38 53 52 44 44 26.5 17.5 18.1 Dementieva 24 29 24 25 32 29 35 57 63 34 28 27 33.9 29.0 12.8 Dokic 27 26 29 44 53 83 114 130 240 789 885 896 276.3 98.5 355.9 Farina Elia 45 44 38 40 42 31 30 33 32 28 42 43 37.3 39.0 6.1 Gagliardi 26 24 34 34 35 39 41 39 31 22 22 22 30.8 32.5 7.3 Hantuchova 28 25 27 27 30 35 66 63 58 74 63 62 46.5 46.5 19.1 L. Huber 12 12 11 10 13 15 15 12 12 12 11 11 12.2 12.0 1.5 Husarova 19 22 15 13 14 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 14.5 13.0 2.9 Krasnoroutskaya 23 28 25 23 24 24 36 62 75 96 99 99 51.2 32.0 32.7 Kuznetsova 7 7554433445 84.94.51.6 Li 48 50 41 38 29 25 26 32 27 26 26 29 33.1 29.0 9.0 Likhovtseva 11 11966645534 56.35.52.7 Loit 15 16 20 20 21 21 32 23 24 37 31 31 24.3 22.0 6.9 Maleeva 14 14 13 14 17 23 22 27 43 61 52 51 29.3 22.5 17.6 Mandula 16 15 22 24 28 33 40 45 38 42 41 41 32.1 35.5 10.7 Martinez, C. 21 23 18 16 18 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 16.2 14.0 3.2 Molik 36 34 35 30 25 28 23 22 22 23 21 17 26.3 24.0 6.2 Morariu 156 104 58 37 34 34 37 36 45 44 30 24 53.3 37.0 38.5 Myskina 71 69 76 53 56 56 36 33 20 19 16 16 43.4 44.5 22.8 Navratilova 6 667786691110127.87.02.2 Petrova 13 13 14 15 10777888 79.88.03.1 Pratt 31 30 28 28 31 30 24 18 18 21 23 23 25.4 26.0 4.9 Raymond 5 589911911111012109.29.52.2 Ruano Pascual 2 2222221111 11.62.00.5 Rubin 34 35 45 46 45 57 125 117 124 — — — — — — Saﬁna 146 98 62 75 73 68 54 59 50 40 29 30 65.3 60.5 32.1 Sanchez-Vicario — —————198139151112113112— — — Schett 37 38 32 31 36 32 44 34 29 18 18 19 30.7 32.0 8.4 Schnyder 40 43 45 47 39 48 46 31 26 17 17 18 34.8 39.5 12.3 Serna 32 32 31 29 26 38 27 25 30 29 47 48 32.8 30.5 7.6 Shaughnessy 25 21 23 22 12 1088677 612.9 9.0 7.5 Stubbs 10 10 12 12 11 12 129796 49.510.0 2.6 Suárez 1 1111112222 21.41.00.5 Sugiyama 3 33333510106995.64.03.1 Sun 48 51 42 39 27 22 25 28 25 24 24 28 31.9 27.5 10.2 Tanasugarn 61 54 43 45 38 37 34 26 17 15 19 20 34.1 35.5 15.0 Vento-Kabchi 17 17 17 19 19 18 17 15 19 25 20 21 18.7 18.5 2.6 Vinci 100 126 83 65 64 58 29 24 21 20 25 25 53.3 43.5 35.5 Widjaja 18 18 16 17 16 17 16 17 28 53 61 72 29.1 17.5 20.5 V./S. Williams — —————————— — — — — Zvonareva 75 74 66 48 33 27 21 19 16 16 15 15 35.4 24.0 23.9

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 166 The Final Top Fifty in Doubles as of November 16, 2004 Final Best 11 # of Best Worst Jan. 1 Rank Player Name Score Trn Rank Rank Rank Titles (name, number of titles, # of finals) 1 Virginia Ruano Pascual 4549 18 1 2 2 AusO, IndW, Charle, RolG, USO, Lux (6+7F) 2 Paola Suárez 4549 17 1 2 1 AusO, IndW, Charle, RolG, USO, Lux (6+5F) 3 Cara Black 3447 22 3 10 9 Syd, PanP, Ant, Wim, SanD, Fild, Zür (7+2F) 4 Rennae Stubbs 3335 19 4 14 10 Syd, PanP, Wim, SanD, Fild, Zür (6+2F) 5 Elena Likhovtseva 3256 22 3 11 11 Gold Coast, Doha, Linz (3+8F) 6 Meghann Shaughnessy 3214 18 6 27 24 Mia,AmI,Ber,Rom,LosA,NwH,LACh (7+1F) 7 Nadia Petrova 3181 16 7 15 13 Mia,AmI,Ber,Rom,LosA,NwH,LACh (7+0F) 8 Svetlana Kuznetsova 3130 15 3 8 7 Gold Coast, Doha (2+8F) 9 Ai Sugiyama 2374 18 3 10 3 Canadian Open, Bali (2+1F) 10 Lisa Raymond 2170 17 5 12 5 Vienna, Philadelphia (2+2F) 11 Liezel Huber 2119 24 10 15 12 Hyderabad (1 title+4 finals) 12 Martina Navratilova 1970 16 6 12 6 Vienna (1 title+2 finals) 13 Janette Husarova 1927 18 13 22 19 Dubai, Estoril, Linz (3 titles+2 finals) 14 Conchita Martinez 1691 14 13 23 21 Dubai (1 title+4 finals) 15 Vera Zvonareva 1503 21 15 78 75 Moscow (1 title+1 final) 16 Anastasia Myskina 1479 14 16 76 71 Bali, Moscow (2 titles+0 finals) 17 Alicia Molik 1372 17 17 43 36 Eastbrne,Stockhlm,Philadal (3 titles+1 final) 18 Patty Schnyder 1326 16 17 59 40 Paris (1 title+1 final) 19 Barbara Schett 1284 20 15 61 37 Paris , Budapest, Stockholm (3 titles+1 final) 20 Tamarine Tanasugarn 1183 16 15 61 61 [1 final: Canadian Open] 21 Maria Vento-Kabchi 1131 23 15 32 17 [1 final: Beijing] 22 Emmanuelle Gagliardi 1114 21 22 45 25 Estoril, Beijing (2 titles+2 finals) 23 Nicole Pratt 1084 19 18 41 31 Stanford (1 title+0 finals) 24 Corina Morariu 1073 11 24 154 154 [1 final: Philadelphia] 25 Roberta Vinci 1047 11 20 126 100 26 Shinobu Asagoe 1038 22 26 65 44 Hobart, Canadian Open, Japan Open (3+0 F) 27 Elena Dementieva 1037 13 23 63 23 28 Sun Tiantian 1028 21 18 51 48 Olympics, GuangZhou, 2 Chall (2 titles+1 F) 29 Li Ting 990 19 19 50 48 Olympics, GuangZhou, 2 Chall (2 titles+1 F) 30 Dinara Safina 977 14 28 171 146 Beijing (1 title+1 final) 31 Emilie Loit 921 14 15 39 15 Casablanca (1 title+0 finals) 32 Jelena Kostanic 920 21 30 62 62 Auckland, Canberra (2 titles+1 final) 33 Lisa McShea 890 23 33 95 85 Acapulco,Strasbourg,’s-Hert, 1 Chall (3+2 F) 34 Gisela Dulko 881 22 34 94 94 [Waikoloa $50K] (0 titles+2 finals) 35 Milagros Sequera 878 19 33 70 56 Acapulco,Strasbourg,’s-Hert, 1 Chall (3+1 F) 36 Marlene Weingärtner 875 14 36 148 148 Cincinnati (1 title+1 final) 37 Marion Bartoli 872 17 15 39 20 Casablanca (1 title+1 final) 38 Zheng Jie 869 22 32 72 72 [Shenzhen $50K I] (0 titles+0 finals) 39 Yan Zi 869 21 33 72 72 [Shenzhen $50K I] (0 titles+0 finals) 40 Francesca Schiavone 854.5 17 28 77 77 Warsaw (1 title+1 final) 41 Petra Mandula 823 16 15 50 16 Budapest (1 title+0 finals) 42 Janet Lee 806.5 21 36 71 52 43 Silvia Farina Elia 804.5 15 26 49 45 Warsaw (1 title+1 final) 44 Lindsay Davenport 795 7 8 53 8 45 Els Callens 777.5 23 19 49 29 Antwerp (1 title+4 finals) 46 Eleni Daniilidou 761 18 37 67 63 Stanford (1 title+1 final) 47 Anna-Lena Grönefeld 740 16 27 261? 261 [Denain $75K+H] (0 titles+4 finals) 48 Magui Serna 730 21 25 48 32 Eastbourne (1 title+0 finals) 49 Katarina Srebotnik 692 20 36 63 38 Japan Open (1 title+2 finals) 50 Caroline Dhenin 662.5 21 49 78 78 [1 final: Canberra]

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 167 Individual Results: The Top Doubles Players/Results This table is generally equivalent to the table of results in the section on singles, save that the format is somewhat simplified. (Also note that the number of events is what the WTA counted — it does not include the Olympics.) The list shows each tournament the player played and the partner with whom she played. This is followed, in parenthesis, by the tier of the tournament, a notation showing how far the player advanced, and the number of wins her team had to reach that point. For the players each team lost to, see the after this, “Head-to-Heads — Team Records and Losses.” Rank # of Player Results Events 26 22 Asagoe Auckland w/Yoshida (IV, 1R, 0) Hobart w/Okamoto (V, Win, 4) Australian Open w/Obata (Slam, 2R, 1) Pan Paciﬁc w/Tu (I, 1R, 0) Acapulco w/Osterloh (III, 1R, 0) Indian Wells w/Jidkova (I, 1R, 0) Miami w/Lee (I, 2R, 1) Amelia Island w/Sun (II, 1R, 0) Charleston w/Washington (I, 2R, 1) Roland Garros w/Fujiwara (Slam, 3R, 2) Birmingham w/Callens (III, 1R, 0) Eastbourne w/Callens (II, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Fujiwara (Slam, 2R, 1) Los Angeles w/Sugiyama (II, 1R, 0) San Diego w/Sugiyama (I, 1R, 0) Canadian Open w/Sugiyama (I, Win, 5) Olympics w/Sugiyama (Olympics, SF/lost Bronze, 3+2 losses) U. S. Open w/Fujiwara (Slam, 1R, 0) Beijing w/Fujiwara (II, QF, 1) Seoul w/Srebotnik (IV, QF, 1) Japan Open w/Srebotnik (III, Win, 4) Zürich w/Srebotnik (I, 1R, 0) Luxembourg w/Schaul (III, QF, 1) 37 17 Bartoli Auckland w/Granville (IV, QF, 1) Australian Open w/Casanova (Slam, R16, 2) Hyderabad w/Obata (IV, 1R, 0) Acapulco w/Loit (III, SF, 2) Indian Wells w/Loit (I, QF, 2) Casablanca w/Loit (V, Win, 4) Rome w/Tu (I, 1R, 0) Strasbourg w/Huber (III, QF, 1) Roland Garros w/Loit (Slam, 2R, 1) Eastbourne w/Casanova (II, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Loit (Slam, QF, 3) Los Angeles w/Kostanic (II, QF, 1) San Diego w/Hantuchova (I, 2R, 1) Cincinnati w/Beltrame (III, Bartoli withdrew from QF, 1) U. S. Open w/Casanova (Slam, 1R, 0) Tashkent w/Santangelo (IV, F, 3) Linz w/Hantuchova (II, QF, 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 168 322Black Sydney w/Stubbs (II, Win, 4) Australian Open w/Stubbs (Slam, 1R, 0) Pan Paciﬁc w/Stubbs (I, Win, 4) Antwerp w/Callens (II, Win, 4) Indian Wells w/Stubbs (I, 2R, 1) Miami w/Stubbs (I, 1R, 0) Amelia Island w/Stubbs (II, 1R, 0) Charleston w/Stubbs (I, SF, 2) Berlin w/L. Huber (I, QF, 1) Rome w/Callens (I, 1R, 0) Vienna w/Stubbs (III, F, 2+1 walkover) Roland Garros w/Stubbs (Slam, 3R, 2) Eastbourne w/Stubbs (II, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Stubbs (Slam, Win, 6) Los Angeles w/Stubbs (II, 1R, 0) San Diego w/Stubbs (I, Win, 4) New Haven w/Stubbs (II, SF, 2) U. S. Open w/Stubbs (Slam, 3R, 2) Filderstadt w/Stubbs (II, Win, 4) Zürich w/Stubbs (I, Win, 4) Philadelphia w/Stubbs (II, SF, 2) Los Angeles Champs w/Stubbs (Champ, F, 1) 68 7 Bovina Sydney w/Martinez (II, SF, 2) Warsaw w/Chladkova (II, QF, 1) Berlin w/Chladkova (I, 1R, 0) Rome w/Déchy (I, QF, 2) Eastbourne w/Pratt (II, SF, 2) San Diego w/Déchy (I, 1R, 0) [U. S. Open w/Déchy (Slam) — DID NOT PLAY] Moscow w/Petrova (I, SF, 2) 45 23 Callens Gold Coast w/Cohen-Aloro (III, 1R, 0) Hobart w/Schett (V, F, 2+1 bye) Australian Open w/Hantuchova (Slam, 1R, 0) Pan Paciﬁc w/Hantuchova (I, 1R, 0) Antwerp w/Black (II, Win, 4) Doha w/Dhenin (II, 1R, 0) Indian Wells w/Tu (I, 1R, 0) Miami w/Tu (I, 1R, 0) Casablanca w/Srebotnik (V, F, 3) Estoril w/Svensson (IV, QF, 1) Berlin w/Mandula (I, withdrew from QF, 1) Rome w/Black (I, 1R, 0) Roland Garros w/Tu (Slam, 2R, 1) Birmingham w/Asagoe (III, 1R, 0) Eastbourne w/Asagoe (II, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Mandula (Slam, 3R, 2) Canadian Open w/Krasnoroutskaya (I, 1R, 0) Vancouver w/Grönefeld (V, F, 3) New Haven w/Gagliardi (II, QF, 1) U. S. Open w/Mandula (Slam, 1R, 0) Filderstadt w/Svensson (II, 1R, 0) Quebec City w/Stosur (III, F, 3) Pittsburg $50K w/Stosur ($50K, F, 3)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 169 58 11 Casanova Gold Coast w/Husarova (III, Husarova withdrew from QF, 1) Sydney w/Schnyder (II, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/Bartoli (Slam, R16, 2) Antwerp w/Daniilidou (II, F, 3) Miami w/Loit (I, 1R, 0) Amelia Island w/Molik (II, F, 3) Vienna w/Müller (III, 1R, 0) Roland Garros w/Wartusch (Slam, 2R, 1) Eastbourne w/Bartoli (II, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Pratt (Slam, 2R, 1) Olympics w/Schnyder (Olympics, 2R, 1) U. S. Open w/Bartoli (Slam, 1R, 0) —1Clijsters, Kim Antwerp w/E. Clijsters (II, QF, 1) 44 7 Davenport Sydney w/Morariu (II, SF, 2) Australian Open w/Morariu (Slam, 3R, 2) Pan Pacific w/Morariu (I, SF, 2) Indian Wells w/Morariu (I, SF, 3) Amelia Island w/Morariu (II, 1R, 0) Filderstadt w/Morariu (II, QF, 1) Moscow w/Morariu (I, QF, 1) 27 13 Dementieva Sydney w/Krasnoroutskaya (II, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/Krasnoroutskaya (Slam, 2R, 1) Pan Pacific w/Krasnoroutskaya (I, 1R, 0) Paris w/Chladkova (II, QF, 1) Miami w/Krasnoroutskaya (I, 2R, 1) Charleston w/Sprem (I, 2R, 1) Berlin w/Sprem (I, 1R, 0) Rome w/Pratt (I, QF, 2) Roland Garros w/Chladkova (Slam, 3R, 2) Los Angeles w/Zvonareva (II, 1R, 0) San Diego w/Myskina (I, QF, 1+1 walkover) Olympics w/Myskina (Olympics, 1R, 0) U. S. Open w/Sugiyama (Slam, Dementieva withdrew from SF, 4) Moscow w/Sugiyama (I, SF, 2) 896 3 Dokic Pan Pacific w/Husarova (I, 1R, 0) Miami w/Safina (I, 1R, 0) Beijing w/Jankovic (II, 1R, 0) 43 15 Farina Elia Gold Coast w/Schiavone (III, QF, 1) Australian Open w/Schiavone (Slam, 1R, 0) Paris w/Schiavone (II, F, 2+1 walkover) Doha w/Santangelo (II, 1R, 0) Miami w/Schiavone (I, 2R, 1) Amelia Island w/Schiavone (II, 2R, 1) Warsaw w/Schiavone (II, Win, 4) Rome w/Schiavone (I, 1R, 0) Roland Garros w/Schiavone (Slam, QF, 3) Eastbourne w/Schiavone (II, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Schiavone (Slam, withdrew from 2R, 1) Los Angeles w/Schiavone (II, 1R, 0) San Diego w/Schiavone (I, 1R, 0) Olympics w/Schiavone (Olympics, 2R, 1) U. S. Open w/Schiavone (Slam, 2R, 1) Filderstadt w/Schiavone (II, 1R, 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 170 22 21 Gagliardi Auckland w/Medina Garrigues (IV, 1R, 0) Canberra w/Mandula (V, SF, 2) Australian Open w/Vinci (Slam, QF, 3) Acapulco w/Wartusch (III, SF, 2) Indian Wells w/Mandula (I, 1R, 0) Miami w/Mandula (I, 2R, 1) Estoril w/Husarova (IV, Win, 4) Berlin w/Ani (I, 2R, 1) Rome w/Ani (I, QF, 2) Roland Garros w/Ani (Slam, 1R, 0) Birmingham w/Vinci (III, SF, 1+1 walkover) Wimbledon w/Vinci (Slam, 3R, 2) Palermo w/Ani (V, QF, 1) Stockholm w/Grönefeld (IV, F, 3) Cincinnati w/Grönefeld (III, F, 3) New Haven w/Callens (II, QF, 1) U. S. Open w/Grönefeld (Slam, 2R, 1) Beijing w/Safina (II, Win, 4) Japan Open w/Castano (III, 1R, 0) Zürich w/Grönefeld (I, 1R, 0) Linz w/Chladkova (II, 1R, 0) 62 20 Hantuchova Sydney w/Maleeva (II, QF, 1) Australian Open w/Callens (Slam, 1R, 0) Pan Pacific w/Callens (I, 1R, 0) Paris w/Daniilidou (II, 1R, 0) Indian Wells w/Schett (I, 1R, 0) Miami w/Morariu (I, 1R, 0) Warsaw w/Pisnik (II, 1R, 0) Berlin w/Safina (I, 1R, 0) Rome w/Safina (I, 2R, 1) Roland Garros w/Safina (Slam, 2R, 1) Birmingham w/Déchy (III, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Déchy (Slam, 2R, 1) Los Angeles w/Rubin (II, QF, 1) San Diego w/Bartoli (I, 2R, 1) Olympics w/Husarova (Olympics, 1R, 0) New Haven w/Safina (II, QF, 1) U. S. Open w/Safina (Slam, 1R, 0) Filderstadt w/Sanchez-Vicario (II, 1R, 0) Moscow w/Schnyder (I, 1R, 0) Zürich w/Maleeva (I, QF, 1) Linz w/Bartoli (II, QF, 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 171 11 24 Huber, Liezel Gold Coast w/Maleeva (III, F, 2+1 walkover) Sydney w/Sugiyama (II, QF, 1) Australian Open w/Sugiyama (Slam, SF, 4) Pan Pacific w/Sugiyama (I, QF, 1) Hyderabad w/Mirza (IV, Win, 4) Dubai w/Sugiyama (II, QF, 1) Doha w/Sugiyama (II, SF, 2) Indian Wells w/Maleeva (I, 2R, 1) Miami w/Sugiyama (I, QF, 2) Amelia Island w/Navratilova (II, 1R, 0) Charleston w/Morariu (I, QF, 1) Berlin w/Black (I, QF, 1) Rome w/Sugiyama (I, 2R, 0) Strasbourg w/Bartoli (III, QF, 1) Roland Garros w/Sugiyama (Slam, 1R, 0) Birmingham w/Perebiynis (III, 1R, 0) Eastbourne w/Sugiyama (II, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Sugiyama (Slam, F, 5) San Diego w/Daniilidou (I, QF, 1) Canadian Open w/Tanasugarn (I, F, 3) U. S. Open w/Tanasugarn (Slam, QF, 3) Zürich w/Loit (I, Loit withdrew from QF, 1) Linz w/Sugiyama (II, QF, 1) Philadelphia w/Morariu (II, F, 2+1 walkover) 13 18 Husarova Gold Coast w/M. Casanova (III, Husarova withdrew from QF, 1) Australian Open w/Safina (Slam, QF, 3) Pan Pacific w/Dokic (I, 1R, 0) Antwerp w/Ani (II, withdrew from QF, 1) Dubai w/Martinez (II, Win, 4) Doha w/Martinez (II, F, 3) Indian Wells w/Martinez (I, QF, 2) Estoril w/Gagliardi (IV, Win, 4) Berlin w/Martinez (I, F, 4) Rome w/Martinez (I, SF, 3) Roland Garros w/Martinez (Slam, QF, 3) Eastbourne w/Martinez (II, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Martinez (Slam, 3R, 2) Olympics w/Hantuchova (Olympics, 1R, 0) U. S. Open w/Martinez (Slam, QF, 3) Filderstadt w/Likhovtseva (II, SF, 2) Moscow w/Maleeva (I, QF, 1) Zürich w/Molik (I, SF, 2) Linz w/Likhovtseva (II, Win, 4) 99 11 Krasnoroutskaya Gold Coast w/Zvonareva (III, 1R, 0) Sydney w/Dementieva (II, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/Dementieva (Slam, 2R, 1) Pan Pacific w/Dementieva (I, 1R, 0) Dubai w/Myskina (II, 1R, 0) Doha w/Myskina (II, SF, 2) Miami w/Dementieva (I, 2R, 1) Amelia Island w/Zvonareva (II, SF, 2) Charleston w/Zvonareva (I. QF, 2) ’s-Hertogenbosch w/Barna (III, 1R, 0) Canadian Open w/Callens (I, 1R, 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 172 815Kuznetsova Gold Coast w/Likhovtseva (III, Win, 4) Australian Open w/Likhovtseva (Slam, F, 5) Dubai w/Likhovtseva (II, F, 3) Doha w/Likhovtseva (II, Win, 4) Indian Wells w/Likhovtseva (I, F, 4) Miami w/Likhovtseva (I, F, 4) Berlin w/Likhovtseva (I, 2R, 0) Roland Garros w/Likhovtseva (Slam, F, 5) Eastbourne w/Likhovtseva (II, F, 3) Wimbledon w/Likhovtseva (Slam, QF, 3) Los Angeles w/Likhovtseva (II, QF, 1) Olympics w/Likhovtseva (Olympics, 2R, 1) U. S. Open w/Likhovtseva (Slam, F, 5) Bali w/Sanchez-Vicario (III, F, 3) Moscow w/Likhovtseva (I, 1R, 0) Los Angeles Champs w/Likhovtseva (Champ, SF, 0) 29 19 Li Ting Changsha $50K 2003 w/Sun ($50K, Win, 4) ShenZhen $50K 2003 w/Sun ($50K, Win, 4) Gold Coast w/Sun (III, 1R, 0) Hobart w/Zheng (V, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/Sun (Slam, 3R, 2) Hyderabad w/Sun (IV, F, 2+1 walkover) Dubai w/Sun (II, 1R, 0) Doha w/Sun (II, QF, 1) Miami w/Sun (I, SF, 3) Berlin w/Sun (I, 1R, 0) Rome w/Sun (I, SF, 3) Vienna w/Sun (III, SF, 2) Roland Garros w/Sun (Slam, 2R, 1) Birmingham w/Sun (III, 1R, 0) Eastbourne w/Sun (II, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Sun (Slam, 1R, 0) Olympics w/Sun (Olympics, Win, 5) Beijing w/Sun (II, SF, 2) GuangZhou w/Sun (III, Win, 4) Shenzhen $50K I w/Li ($50K, QF, 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 173 522Likhovtseva Gold Coast w/Kuznetsova (III, Win, 4) Australian Open w/Kuznetsova (Slam, F, 5) Pan Paciﬁc w/Maleeva (I, F, 3) Dubai w/Kuznetsova (II, F, 3) Doha w/Kuznetsova (II, Win, 4) Indian Wells w/Kuznetsova (I, F, 4) Miami w/Kuznetsova (I, F, 4) Amelia Island w/Martinez (II, 1R, 0) Warsaw w/Zvonareva (II, SF, 2) Berlin w/Kuznetsova (I, 2R, 0) Rome w/Myskina (I, QF, 2) Roland Garros w/Kuznetsova (Slam, F, 5) Eastbourne w/Kuznetsova (II, F, 3) Wimbledon w/Kuznetsova (Slam, QF, 3) Los Angeles w/Kuznetsova (II, QF, 1) San Diego w/Zvonareva (I, SF, 2) Canadian Open w/Zvonareva (I, QF, 1) Olympics w/Kuznetsova (Olympics, 2R, 1) U. S. Open w/Kuznetsova (Slam, F, 5) Filderstadt w/Husarova (II, SF, 2) Moscow w/Kuznetsova (I, 1R, 0) Linz w/Husarova (II, Win, 4) Los Angeles Champs w/Kuznetsova (Champ, SF, 0) 31 14 Loit Gold Coast w/Pratt (III, SF, 2) Canberra w/Cohen-Aloro (V, withdrew from SF, 1+1 walkover) Australian Open w/Pratt (Slam, 2R, 1) Paris w/Mandula (II, 1R, 0) Antwerp w/Mandula (II, SF, 2) Acapulco w/Bartoli (III, SF, 2) Indian Wells w/Bartoli (I, QF, 2) Miami w/Casanova (I, 1R, 0) Casablanca w/Bartoli (V, Win, 4) Roland Garros w/Bartoli (Slam, 2R, 1) Wimbledon w/Bartoli (Slam, QF, 3) San Diego w/Pratt (I, 2R, 0) U. S. Open w/Pratt (Slam, 3R, 2) Zürich w/Huber (II, Loit withdrew from QF, 1) 51 10 Maleeva Gold Coast w/L. Huber (III, F, 2+1 walkover) Sydney w/Hantuchova (II, QF, 1) Australian Open w/Martinez (Slam, 3R, 2) Pan Paciﬁc w/Likhovtseva (I, F, 3) Indian Wells w/L. Huber (I, 2R, 1) Miami w/Srebotnik (I, 1R, 0) Roland Garros w/Jeyaseelan (Slam, 1R, 0) Eastbourne w/Talaja (II, 1R, 0) Moscow w/Husarova (I, QF, 1) Zürich w/Hantuchova (I, QF, 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 174 41 16 Mandula Canberra w/Gagliardi (V, SF, 2) Australian Open w/Wartusch (Slam, R16, 2) Paris w/Loit (II, 1R, 0) Antwerp w/Loit (II, SF, 2) Dubai w/Schett (II, withdrew from QF, 1) Indian Wells w/Gagliardi (I, 1R, 0) Miami w/Gagliardi (I, 2R, 1) Amelia Island w/Tu (II, QF, 1) Budapest w/Schett (V, Win, 4) Berlin w/Callens (I, withdrew from QF, 1) Roland Garros w/Tatarkova (Slam, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Callens (Slam, 3R, 2) Stanford w/Schnyder (II, SF, 2) Los Angeles w/Garbin (II, QF, 1) San Diego w/Schett (I, QF, 2) Olympics w/Nagy (Olympics, 1R, 0) U. S. Open w/Callens (Slam, 1R, 0) 14 14 Martinez, C. Sydney w/Bovina (II, SF, 2) Australian Open w/Maleeva (Slam, 3R, 2) Dubai w/Husarova (II, Win, 4) Doha w/Husarova (II, F, 3) Indian Wells w/Husarova (I, QF, 2) Amelia Island w/Likhovtseva (II, 1R, 0) Berlin w/Husarova (I, F, 4) Rome w/Husarova (I, SF, 3) Roland Garros w/Husarova (Slam, QF, 3) Eastbourne w/Husarova (II, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Husarova (Slam, 3R, 2) Los Angeles w/Ruano Pascual (II, F, 3) San Diego w/Frazier (I, 2R, 1) Olympics w/Ruano Pascual (Olympics, F, 4) U. S. Open w/Husarova (Slam, QF, 3) 17 17 Molik Dubai w/Serna (II, 1R, 0) Doha w/Serna (II, 1R, 0) Indian Wells w/Serna (I, 2R, 1) Miami w/Serna (I, QF, 2) Amelia Island w/Casanova (II, F, 3) Rome w/Serna (I, 1R, 0) Vienna w/Serna (III, 1R, 0) Roland Garros w/Serna (Slam, 1R, 0) Birmingham w/Serna (III, QF/Serna withdrew, 1) Eastbourne w/Serna (II, Win, 4) Wimbledon w/Serna (Slam, 2R, 1) Stockholm w/Schett (IV, Win, 4) Olympics w/Stubbs (Olympics, QF, 2) New Haven w/Serna (II, SF, 2) U. S. Open w/Serna (Slam, 1R, 0) Filderstadt w/Sugiyama (II; QF/Molik withdrew, 1) Zürich w/Husarova (I, SF, 2) Philadelphia w/Raymond (II, Win, 4)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 175 24 11 Morariu Sydney w/Davenport (II, SF, 2) Australian Open w/Davenport (Slam, 3R, 2) Pan Paciﬁc w/Davenport (I, SF, 2) Indian Wells w/Davenport (I, SF, 3) Miami w/Hantuchova (I, 1R, 0) Amelia Island w/Davenport (II, 1R, 0) Charleston w/L. Huber (I, QF, 1) U. S. Open w/McShea (Slam, 2R, 1) Filderstadt w/Davenport (II, QF, 1) Moscow w/Davenport (I, QF, 1) Philadelphia w/Huber (II, F, 2+1 walkover) 16 14 Myskina Sydney w/Zvonareva (II, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/Zvonareva (Slam, 1R, 0) Dubai w/Krasnoroutskaya (II, 1R, 0) Doha w/Krasnoroutskaya (II, SF, 2) Indian Wells w/Zvonareva (I, SF, 3) Berlin w/Zvonareva (I, SF, 3) Rome w/Likhovtseva (I, QF, 2) Roland Garros w/Zvonareva (Slam, R16, 2) Wimbledon w/Zvonareva (Slam, withdrew from 2R, 1) San Diego w/Dementieva (I, QF, 1+1 walkover) Olympics w/Dementieva (Olympics, 1R, 0) [U. S. Open w/Zvonareva (Slam) — DID NOT PLAY] Bali w/Sugiyama (III, Win, 3+1 walkover) Filderstadt w/Zvonareva (II, QF, 1) Moscow w/Zvonareva (I, Win, 4) Philadelphia w/Zvonareva (II, Myskina withdrew from SF, 2) 12 16 Navratilova Sydney w/Raymond (II, QF, 1) Australian Open w/Raymond (Slam, 2R, 1) Pan Paciﬁc w/Raymond (I, SF, 2) Indian Wells w/Raymond (I, 2R, 1) Miami w/Raymond (I, SF, 3) Amelia Island w/Huber (II, 1R, 0) Charleston w/Raymond (I, F, 3) Rome w/Raymond (I, 2R, 0) Vienna w/Raymond (III, Win, 4) Roland Garros w/Raymond (Slam, SF, 4) Eastbourne w/Raymond (II, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Raymond (Slam, SF, 4) San Diego w/Raymond (I, SF, 2) Stockholm w/Tatarkova (IV, 1R, 0) Olympics w/Raymond (Olympics, QF, 1+1 walkover) New Haven w/Raymond (II, F, 3) U. S. Open w/Raymond (Slam, QF, 3)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 176 716Petrova Gold Coast w/Shaughnessy (III, QF, 1) Australian Open w/Shaughnessy (Slam, 3R, 2) Indian Wells w/Shaughnessy (I, QF, 1+1 walkover) Miami w/Shaughnessy (I, Win, 4+1 walkover) Amelia Island w/Shaughnessy (II, Win, 4) Berlin w/Shaughnessy (I, Win, 4) Rome w/Shaughnessy (I, Win, 4) Roland Garros w/Shaughnessy (Slam, QF, 3) Wimbledon w/Shaughnessy (Slam, QF, 3) Los Angeles w/Shaughnessy (II, Win, 4) [San Diego w/Shaughnessy (I) — DID NOT PLAY but the WTA awarded 1 point anyway because they earned a ﬁrst round bye] New Haven w/Shaughnessy (II, Win, 4) U. S. Open w/Shaughnessy (Slam, 2R, 1) Moscow w/Bovina (I, SF, 2) Zürich w/Shaughnessy (I, QF, 1) Los Angeles Champs w/Shaughnessy (Champ, Win, 2) 86 7 Pierce Berlin w/Sanchez-Vicario (I, QF, 2) Rome w/Sanchez-Vicario (I, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Golovin (Slam, 3R, 2) San Diego w/Mauresmo (I, 2R, 1) Canadian Open w/Mauresmo (I, SF, 3) Olympics w/Mauresmo (Olympics, Mauresmo withdrew from 2R, 1) Filderstadt w/Raymond (II, 1R, 0) Zürich w/Raymond (I, 1R, 0) 23 19 Pratt Gold Coast w/Loit (III, SF, 2) Sydney w/Dragomir Ilie (II, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/Loit (Slam, 2R, 1) Hyderabad w/Tanasugarn (IV, 1R, 0) Dubai w/Cohen-Aloro (II, QF, 1) Charleston w/Schnyder (I, SF, 3) Berlin w/Sharapova (I, QF, 2) Rome w/Dementieva (I, QF, 2) Vienna w/Wheeler (III, SF, 2) Roland Garros w/Wheeler (Slam, 1R, 0) Eastbourne w/Bovina (II, SF, 2) Wimbledon w/Casanova (Slam, 2R, 1) Stanford w/Daniilidou (II, Win, 4) Los Angeles w/Daniilidou (II, 1R, 0) San Diego w/Loit (I, 2R, 0) Olympics w/Stosur (Olympics, 1R, 0) U. S. Open w/Loit (Slam, 3R, 2) Bali w/Garbin (III, SF, 2) Beijing w/Tanasugarn (II, SF, 2) GuangZhou w/Tanasugarn (III, QF, 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 177 10 17 Raymond Sydney w/Navratilova (II, QF, 1) Australian Open w/Navratilova (Slam, 2R, 1) Pan Pacific w/Navratilova (I, SF, 2) Indian Wells w/Navratilova (I, 2R, 1) Miami w/Navratilova (I, SF, 3) Charleston w/Navratilova (I, F, 3) Rome w/Navratilova (I, 2R, 0) Vienna w/Navratilova (III, Win, 4) Roland Garros w/Navratilova (Slam, SF, 4) Eastbourne w/Navratilova (II, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Navratilova (Slam, SF, 4) San Diego w/Navratilova (I, SF, 2) Olympics w/Navratilova (Olympics, QF, 1+1 walkover) New Haven w/Navratilova (II, F, 3) U. S. Open w/Navratilova (Slam, QF, 3) Filderstadt w/Pierce (II, 1R, 0) Zürich w/Srebotnik (I, 1R, 0) Philadelphia w/Molik (II, Win, 4) 118Ruano Pascual Auckland w/Suárez (IV, F, 3) Australian Open w/Suárez (Slam, Win, 6) Indian Wells w/Suárez (I, Win, 4+1 walkover) Miami w/Suárez (I, QF, 2) Amelia Island w/Suárez (II, SF, 2) Charleston w/Suárez (I, Win, 4) Berlin w/Suárez (I, SF, 2) Rome w/Suárez (I, F, 3) Roland Garros w/Suárez (Slam, Win, 6) Wimbledon w/Suárez (Slam, SF, 4) Los Angeles w/Martinez (II, F, 3) San Diego w/Suárez (I, F, 3) Canadian Open w/Suárez (I, SF, 2) Olympics w/Martinez (Olympics, F, 4) U. S. Open w/Suárez (Slam, Win, 5+1 walkover) Moscow w/Suárez (I, F, 3) Zürich w/Suárez (I, F, 3) Luxembourg w/Suárez (III, Win, 4) Los Angeles Champs w/Suárez (Champ, SF, 0) —1Rubin Los Angeles w/Hantuchova (II, QF, 1) Olympics w/V. Williams (Olympics, 1R, 0) 30 14 Safina Sydney w/Shaughnessy (II, F, 3) Australian Open w/Husarova (Slam, QF, 3) Paris w/Bedanova (II, QF, 1) Miami w/Dokic (I, 1R, 0) Berlin w/Hantuchova (I, 1R, 0) Rome w/Hantuchova (I, 2R, 1) Roland Garros w/Hantuchova (Slam, 2R, 1) Eastbourne w/Zvonareva (II, 1R, 0) New Haven w/Hantuchova (II, QF, 1) U. S. Open w/Hantuchova (Slam, 1R, 0) Beijing w/Gagliardi (II, Win, 4) GuangZhou w/Strycova (III, Safina withdrew from SF, 1+1 walkover) Moscow w/Rodionova (I, QF, 1) Luxembourg w/Kirilenko (III, 1R, 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 178 112 7 Sanchez-Vicario Berlin w/Pierce (I, QF, 2) Rome w/Pierce (I, 1R, 0) Roland Garros w/Medina Garrigues (Slam, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Medina Garrigues (Slam, 1R, 0) Palermo w/Medina Garrigues (V, Win, 4) Olympics w/Medina Garrigues (Olympics, 1R, 0) Bali w/Kuznetsova (III, F, 3) Filderstadt w/Hantuchova (II, 1R, 0) 19 20 Schett Hobart w/Callens (V, F, 2+1 bye) Australian Open w/Schnyder (Slam, 2R, 1) Paris w/Schnyder (II, Win, 4) Dubai w/Mandula (II, Mandula withdrew from QF, 1) Indian Wells w/Hantuchova (I, 1R, 0) Miami w/Dhenin (I, 1R, 0) Estoril w/Wartusch (IV, QF, 1) Budapest w/Mandula (V, Win, 4) Berlin w/Schnyder (I, 1R, 0) Rome w/Tarabini (I, 2R, 1) Roland Garros w/Schnyder (Slam, 3R, 2) ’s-Hertogenbosch w/Schnyder (III, SF, 2) Wimbledon w/Schnyder (Slam, R16, 2) Los Angeles w/Schnyder (II, SF, 2) San Diego w/Mandula (I, QF, 2) Stockholm w/Molik (IV, Win, 4) U. S. Open w/Schnyder (Slam, SF, 4) Filderstadt w/Schnyder (II, 1R, 0) Zürich w/Schnyder (I, 1R, 0) Linz w/Wartusch (II, SF, 2) 40 17 Schiavone Gold Coast w/Farina Elia (III, QF, 1) Sydney w/Serna (II, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/Farina Elia (Slam, 1R, 0) Paris w/Farina Elia (II, F, 2+1 walkover) Dubai w/Dhenin (II, QF, 1) Indian Wells w/Grande (I, 1R, 0) Miami w/Farina Elia (I, 2R, 1) Amelia Island w/Farina Elia (II, 2R, 1) Warsaw w/Farina Elia (II, Win, 4) Rome w/Farina Elia (I, 1R, 0) Roland Garros w/Farina Elia (Slam, QF, 3) Eastbourne w/Farina Elia (II, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Farina Elia (Slam, withdrew from 2R, 1) Los Angeles w/Farina Elia (II, 1R, 0) San Diego w/Farina Elia (I, 1R, 0) Olympics w/Farina Elia (Olympics, 2R, 1) U. S. Open w/Farina Elia (Slam, 2R, 1) Filderstadt w/Farina Elia (II, 1R, 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 179 18 16 Schnyder Sydney w/Casanova (II, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/Schett (Slam, 2R, 1) Paris w/Schett (II, Win, 4) Charleston w/Pratt (I, SF, 3) Berlin w/Schett (I, 1R, 0) Roland Garros w/Schett (Slam, 3R, 2) Birmingham w/Grande (III, 1R, 0) ’s-Hertogenbosch w/Schett (III, SF, 2) Wimbledon w/Schett (Slam, R16, 2) Stanford w/Mandula (II, SF, 2) Los Angeles w/Schett (II, SF, 2) Olympics w/Casanova (Olympics, 2R, 1) U. S. Open w/Schett (Slam, SF, 4) Filderstadt w/Schett (II, 1R, 0) Moscow w/Hantuchova (I, 1R, 0) Zürich w/Schett (I, 1R, 0) Linz w/Déchy (II, F, 3) 48 21 Serna Gold Coast w/Bedanova (III, 1R, 0) Sydney w/Schiavone (II, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/Cohen-Aloro (Slam, 1R, 0) Paris w/Vento-Kabchi (II, SF, 2) Antwerp w/Parra Santonja (II, 1R, 0) Dubai w/Molik (II, 1R, 0) Doha w/Molik (II, 1R, 0) Indian Wells w/Molik (I, 2R, 1) Miami w/Molik (I, QF, 2) Rome w/Molik (I, 1R, 0) Vienna w/Molik (III, 1R, 0) Roland Garros w/Molik (Slam, 1R, 0) Birmingham w/Molik (III, Serna withdrew from QF, 1) Eastbourne w/Molik (II, Win, 4) Wimbledon w/Molik (Slam, 2R, 1) New Haven w/Molik (II, SF, 2) U. S. Open w/Molik (Slam, 1R, 0) Filderstadt w/Perebiynis (II, 1R, 0) Moscow w/Perebiynis (I, 1R, 0) Zürich w/Medina Garrigues (I, 1R, 0) Linz w/Vento-Kabchi (II, 1R, 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 180 618Shaughnessy Gold Coast w/Petrova (III, QF, 1) Sydney w/ Safina (II, F, 3) Australian Open w/Petrova (Slam, 3R, 2) Dubai w/Vinci (II, SF, 2) Indian Wells w/Petrova (I, QF, 1+1 walkover) Miami w/Petrova (I, Win, 4+1 walkover) Amelia Island w/Petrova (II, Win, 4) Berlin w/Petrova (I, Win, 4) Rome w/Petrova (I, Win, 4) Roland Garros w/Petrova (Slam, QF, 3) Wimbledon w/Petrova (Slam, QF, 3) Los Angeles w/Petrova (II, Win, 4) [San Diego w/Petrova (I) — DID NOT PLAY but the WTA awarded 1 point anyway because they earned a first round bye] New Haven w/Petrova (II, Win, 4) U. S. Open w/Petrova (Slam, 2R, 1) Tashkent w/Grönefeld (IV, SF/Grönefeld withdrew, 2) Zürich w/Petrova (I, QF, 1) Los Angeles Champs w/Petrova (Champ, Win, 2) 419Stubbs Sydney w/Black (II, Win, 4) Australian Open w/Black (Slam, 1R, 0) Pan Pacific w/Black (I, Win, 4) Indian Wells w/Black (I, 2R, 1) Miami w/Black (I, 1R, 0) Amelia Island w/Black (II, 1R, 0) Charleston w/Black (I, SF, 2) Vienna w/Black (III, F, 2+1 walkover) Roland Garros w/Black (Slam, 3R, 2) Eastbourne w/Black (II, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Black (Slam, Win, 6) Los Angeles w/Black (II, 1R, 0) San Diego w/Black (I, Win, 4) Olympics w/Molik (Olympics, QF, 2) New Haven w/Black (II, SF, 2) U. S. Open w/Black (Slam, 3R, 2) Filderstadt w/Black (II, Win, 4) Zürich w/Black (I, Win, 4) Philadelphia w/Black (II, SF, 2) Los Angeles Champs w/Black (Champ, F, 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 181 217Suárez Auckland w/Ruano Pascual (IV, F, 3) Australian Open w/Ruano Pascual (Slam, Win, 6) Indian Wells w/Ruano Pascual (I, Win, 4+1 walkover) Miami w/Ruano Pascual (I, QF, 2) Amelia Island w/Ruano Pascual (II, SF, 2) Charleston w/Ruano Pascual (I, Win, 4) Berlin w/Ruano Pascual (I, SF, 2) Rome w/Ruano Pascual (I, F, 3) Roland Garros w/Ruano Pascual (Slam, Win, 6) Wimbledon w/Ruano Pascual (Slam, SF, 4) San Diego w/Ruano Pascual (I, F, 3) Canadian Open w/Ruano Pascual (I, SF, 2) Olympics w/Tarabini (Olympics, SF/won Bronze, 4) U. S. Open w/Ruano Pascual (Slam, Win, 5+1 walkover) Moscow w/Ruano Pascual (I, F, 3) Zürich w/Ruano Pascual (I, F, 3) Luxembourg w/Ruano Pascual (III, Win, 4) Los Angeles Champs w/Ruano Pascual (Champ, SF, 0) 918Sugiyama Sydney w/Huber (II, QF, 1) Australian Open w/Huber (Slam, SF, 4) Pan Paciﬁc w/Huber (I, QF, 1) Dubai w/Huber (II, QF, 1) Doha w/Huber (II, SF, 2) Miami w/Huber (I, QF, 2) Rome w/Huber (I, 2R, 0) Roland Garros w/Huber (Slam, 1R, 0) Eastbourne w/Huber (II, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Huber (Slam, F, 5) Los Angeles w/Asagoe (II, 1R, 0) San Diego w/Asagoe (I, 1R, 0) Canadian Open w/Asagoe (I, Win, 5) Olympics w/Asagoe (Olympics, SF/lost Bronze, 3+2 losses) U. S. Open w/Dementieva (Slam, SF/Dementieva withdrew, 4) Bali w/Myskina (III, Win, 3+1 walkover) Filderstadt w/Molik (II; QF/Molik withdrew, 1) Moscow w/Dementieva (I, SF, 2) Linz w/Huber (II, QF, 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 182 38 21 Sun Changsha $50K 2003 w/Li ($50K, Win, 4) ShenZhen $50K 2003 w/Li ($50K, Win, 4) Gold Coast w/Li (III, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/Li (Slam, 3R, 2) Hyderabad w/Li (IV, F, 2+1 walkover) Dubai w/Li (II, 1R, 0) Doha w/Li (II, QF, 1) Miami w/Li (I, SF, 3) Amelia Island w/Asagoe (II, 1R, 0) Charleston w/Tu (I, QF, 2) Berlin w/Li (I, 1R, 0) Rome w/Li (I, SF, 3) Vienna w/Li (III, SF, 2) Roland Garros w/Li (Slam, 2R, 1) Birmingham w/Li (III, 1R, 0) Eastbourne w/Li (II, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Li (Slam, 1R, 0) Olympics w/Li (Olympics, Win, 5) Beijing w/Li (II, SF, 2) GuangZhou w/Li (III, Win, 4) ShenZhen $50K I w/Hao ($50K, SF, 2) ShenZhen $50K II w/Hao ($50K, 1R, 0) 20 16 Tanasugarn Gold Coast w/Tatarkova (III, SF, 2) Australian Open w/Sharapova (Slam, 2R, 1) Pan Paciﬁc w/Prakusya (I, QF, 1+2 in qualifying) Hyderabad w/Pratt (IV, 1R, 0) Miami w/Sharapova (I, 1R, 0) Charleston w/J. Lee (I, QF, 2) Strasbourg w/Nagyova (III, QF, 1) Roland Garros w/Grande (Slam, 2R, 1) Wimbledon w/Prakusya (Slam, 2R, 1) Los Angeles w/Vento-Kabchi (II, SF, 2) San Diego w/Vento-Kabchi (I, 2R, 0) Canadian Open w/L. Huber (I, F, 3) U. S. Open w/L. Huber (Slam. QF, 3) Beijing w/Pratt (II, SF, 2) GuangZhou w/Pratt (III, QF, 1) Quebec City w/Schaul (III, QF, 1) 61 7 Testud Ortisei $75K+H w/Vinci ($75K+1, 1R, 0) Doha w/Vinci (II, QF, 1) Berlin w/Vinci (I, 2R, 1) Rome w/Vinci (I, 2R, 1) Strasbourg w/Cohen-Aloro (III, QF, 1) Roland Garros w/Vinci (Slam, SF, 4) Stockholm w/Vinci (IV, QF/Vinci withdrew, 1) Olympics w/Déchy (Olympics, QF, 2)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 183 21 23 Vento-Kabchi Auckland w/Tu (IV, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/Widjaja (Slam, QF, 3) Pan Paciﬁc w/Widjaja (I, QF, 1) Paris w/Serna (II, SF, 2) Dubai w/Widjaja (II, 1R, 0) Doha w/Widjaja (II, 1R, 0) Indian Wells Qualifying w/Liggan (I, Q3R, 0+2 in qualifying; although this was a WTA result, Vento-Kabchi did not earn points for it nor was it counted on her record as a tournament) Miami w/Daniilidou (I, 2R, 1) Amelia Island w/Daniilidou (II, 1R, 0) Rome w/Grande (I, 1R, 0) Roland Garros w/Widjaja (Slam, 1R, 0) Birmingham w/Widjaja (III, 1R, 0) Eastbourne w/Perebiynis (II, SF, 2) Wimbledon w/Widjaja (Slam, QF, 3) Stanford w/Tu (II, QF, 1) Los Angeles w/Tanasugarn (II, SF, 2) San Diego w/Tanasugarn (I, 2R, 0) Canadian Open w/Widjaja (I, 2R, 0) U. S. Open w/Widjaja (Slam, 1R, 0) Bali w/Widjaja (III, QF, 1) Beijing w/Dulko (II, F, 3) GuangZhou w/Dulko (III, QF/Dulko withdrew, 1) Zürich w/Krizan (I, 1R, 0) Linz w/Serna (II, 1R, 0) 25 11 Vinci Australian Open w/Gagliardi (Slam, QF, 3) Ortisei $75K+H w/Testud ($75K+1, 1R, 0) Dubai w/Shaughnessy (II, SF, 2) Doha w/Testud (II, QF, 1) Berlin w/Testud (I, 2R, 1) Rome w/Testud (I, 2R, 1) Roland Garros w/Testud (Slam, SF, 4) Birmingham w/Gagliardi (III, SF, 1+1 walkover) Wimbledon w/Gagliardi (Slam, 3R, 2) Stockholm w/Testud (IV, QF/Vinci withdrew, 1) Olympics w/Garbin (Olympics, 2R, 1) U. S. Open w/Beltrame (Slam, 1R, 0) 72 11 Widjaja Australian Open w/Vento-Kabchi (Slam, QF, 3) Pan Paciﬁc w/Vento-Kabchi (I, QF, 1) Hyderabad w/Prakusya (IV, QF, 1) Dubai w/Vento-Kabchi (II, 1R, 0) Doha w/Vento-Kabchi (II, 1R, 0) Roland Garros w/Vento-Kabchi (Slam, 1R, 0) Birmingham w/Vento-Kabchi (III, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Vento-Kabchi (Slam, QF, 3) Canadian Open w/Vento-Kabchi (I, 2R, 0) Olympics w/Prakusya (Olympics, 1R, 0) U. S. Open w/Vento-Kabchi (Slam, 1R, 0) Bali w/Vento-Kabchi (III, QF, 1) —0Williams, V. Olympics w/Rubin (Olympics, 1R, 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 184 15 21 Zvonareva Gold Coast w/Krasnoroutskaya (III, 1R, 0) Sydney w/Myskina (II, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/Myskina (Slam, 1R, 0) Memphis w/Sharapova (III, F, 3) Indian Wells w/Myskina (I, SF, 3) Miami w/Kirilenko (I, 1R, 0) Amelia Island w/Krasnoroutskaya (II, SF, 2) Charleston w/Krasnoroutskaya (I, QF, 2) Warsaw w/Likhovtseva (II, SF, 2) Berlin w/Myskina (I, SF, 3) Roland Garros w/Myskina (Slam, 3R, 2) Eastbourne w/Saﬁna (II, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Myskina (Slam, 2R/Myskina withdrew, 1) Los Angeles w/Dementieva (II, 1R, 0) San Diego w/Likhovtseva (I, SF, 2) Canadian Open w/Likhovtseva (I, QF, 1) [U. S. Open w/Myskina (Slam) — DID NOT PLAY] Beijing w/ Sharapova (II, 1R, 0) Filderstadt w/Myskina (II, QF, 1) Moscow w/Myskina (I, Win, 4) Linz w/Sprem (II, 1R, 0) Philadelphia w/Myskina (II, Myskina withdrew from SF, 2)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 185 Head-to-Heads — Team Records and Losses Head-to-head records in doubles don’t mean much. It’s a much bigger achievement to beat Shinobu Asagoe when she plays with Ai Sugiyama than when she plays with Saori Obata. As a result, no attempt is made to compile head- to-heads for doubles. Rather, the following lists show the opponents to whom the top doubles teams have lost this year. The first line of each section shows, in bold, the names the doubles team. This is followed by a summary of their results: Events played together, titles won, won/lost record, perhaps comments about withdrawals or Challenger results. The opponents who beat them, and the event at which this occurred, follow. Regular teams (defined somewhat arbitrarily as those with five or more events together) are shown in plain text; all others in italics.

Ani/Gagliardi Asagoe/Sugiyama [4 events, 0 titles, 4Ð4 record] [4 events, 1 title, 8Ð4 record] Yan/Zheng (Berlin) Martinez/Ruano Pascual (Los Angeles) Petrova/Shaughnessy (Rome) Mauresmo/Pierce (San Diego) Petrova/Shaughnessy (Roland Garros) WON Canadian Open Medina Garrigues/Sanchez Vicario (Palermo) Martinez/Ruano Pascual+Suárez/Tarabini (Olympics) Ani/Husarova Asagoe/Sun [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record+1 withdrawal] [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] WITHDREW from Antwerp Déchy/Mauresmo (Amelia Island) Asagoe/Callens Asagoe/Tu [2 events, 0 titles, 0Ð2 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Daniilidou/Srebotnik (Birmingham) L. Huber/Sugiyama (Pan Paciﬁc) Bovina/Pratt (Eastbourne) Asagoe/Washington Asagoe/Fujiwara [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] [4 events, 0 titles, 4Ð4 record] Pratt/Schnyder (Charleston) Farina Elia/Schiavone (Roland Garros) Asagoe/Yoshida Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Wimbledon) [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Jugic-Salkic/Voskoboeva (U. S. Open) Jidkova/Morigami (Auckland) Gagliardi/Saﬁna (Beijing) Barna/Krasnoroutskaya Asagoe/Jidkova [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Kostanic/Schaul (’s-Hertogenbosch) Navratilova/Raymond (Indian Wells) Bartoli/Beltrame Asagoe/Lee [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record, 1 withdrawal] [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] WITHDREW from Cincinnati Navratilova/Raymond (Miami) Bartoli/Casanova Asagoe/Obata [3 events, 0 titles, 3Ð3 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] Huber/Sugiyama (Australian Open) Li/Sun (Australian Open) Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (Eastbourne) Asagoe/Osterloh Cargill/Miyagi (U. S. Open) [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Bartoli/Granville Dragomir Ilie/Perebiynis (Acapulco) [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] Asagoe/Okamoto Jugic-Salkic/Kostanic (Auckland) [1 event, 1 title, 4Ð0 record] Bartoli/Hantuchova WON Hobart [2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record] Asagoe/Schaul Black/Stubbs (San Diego) [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] Schett/Wartusch (Linz) Grönefeld/Medina Garrigues (Luxembourg) Bartoli/Huber Asagoe/Srebotnik [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] [3 events, 1 title, 5Ð2 record] Beltrame/Pin (Strasbourg) Domachowska/Ant. Serra Zanetti (Seoul) Bartoli/Kostanic WON Japan Open [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] Black/Stubbs (Zürich) Martinez/Ruano Pascual (Los Angeles)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 186 Bartoli/Loit Bovina/Chladkova [5 events, 1 title, 12Ð4 record] [2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record] Blahotova/G. Navratilova (Acapulco) Dulko/Tarabini (Warsaw) Myskina/Zvonareva (Indian Wells) Callens/Mandula (Berlin) WON Casablanca Bovina/Déchy Stewart/Stosur (Roland Garros) [2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record] Navratilova/Raymond (Wimbledon) Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Rome) Bartoli/Obata Dementieva/Myskina (San Diego) [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] [WITHDREW from U. S. Open without playing] Kirilenko/Kulikovskaya (Hyderabad) Bovina/Martinez Bartoli/Santangelo [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record] Safina/Shaughnessy (Sydney) Serra Zanetti/Serra Zanetti (Tashkent) Bovina/Petrova Bartoli/Tu [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Myskina/Zvonareva (Moscow) Hantuchova/Safina (Rome) Bovina/Pratt Bedanova/Safina [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] Molik/Serna (Eastbourne) Farina Elia/Schiavone (Paris) Callens/Cohen-Aloro Bedanova/Serna [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] L. Huber/Maleeva (Gold Coast) Petrova/Shaughnessy (Gold Coast) Callens/Dhenin Beltrame/Vinci [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Yan/Zheng (Doha) Kostanic/Schaul (U. S. Open) Callens/Gagliardi Black/Callens [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] [2 events, 1 title, 4Ð1 record] Molik/Serna (New Haven) WON Antwerp Callens/Grönefeld Peschke/Rittner (Rome) [1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record] Black/Huber Mattek/Spears (Vancouver) [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] Callens/Hantuchova Myskina/Zvonareva (Berlin) [2 events, 0 titles, 0Ð2 record] Black/Stubbs Husarova/Safina (Australian Open) [19 events, 6 titles, 41Ð13 record+1 walkover] Davenport/Morariu (Pan Pacific) WON Sydney Callens/Krasnoroutskaya Yan/Zheng (Australian Open) [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] WON Pan Pacific Alves/Senoglu (Canadian Open) Davenport/Morariu (Indian Wells) Molik/Serna (Miami) Callens/Mandula Mandula/Tu (Amelia Island) [3 events, 0 titles, 3Ð2 record+1 withdrawal] Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Charleston) WITHDREW from Berlin Navratilova/Raymond (Vienna) Petrova/Shaughnessy (Wimbledon) Testud/Vinci (Roland Garros) Craybas/Weingärtner (U. S. Open) Perebiynis/Vento-Kabchi (Eastbourne) Callens/Schett WON Wimbledon [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] Hantuchova/Rubin (Los Angeles) Asagoe/Okamoto (Hobart) WON San Diego Navratilova/Raymond (New Haven) Callens/Srebotnik Dementieva/Sugiyama (U. S. Open) [1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record] WON Filderstadt Bartoli/Loit (Casablanca) WON Zürich Molik/Raymond (Philadelphia) Petrova/Shaughnessy (Los Angeles Championships)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 187 Callens/Stosur Clijsters/Clijsters [1 WTA event+1 Challenger, 0 titles, 3Ð1 WTA [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] record, 3Ð1 Challenger record] Loit/Mandula (Antwerp) Gullickson/Salerni (Quebec City) Cohen-Aloro/Loit Ashley/Granville (Pittsburg $50K) [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record+1 walkover, 1 Callens/Svensson withdrawal] [2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record] WITHDREW from Canberra Gagliardi/Husarova (Estoril) Cohen-Aloro/Pratt Husarova/Likhovtseva (Filderstadt) [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] Callens/Tu Kostanic/Nagyova (Dubai) [3 events, 0 titles, 1Ð3 record] Cohen-Aloro/Serna Davenport/Morariu (Indian Wells) [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Asagoe/Lee (Miami) Huber/Sugiyama (Australian Open) Chladkova/Dementieva (Roland Garros) Cohen-Aloro/Testud Casanova/Daniilidou [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record] Krizan/Srebotnik (Strasbourg) Black/Callens (Antwerp) Daniilidou/Hantuchova Casanova/Husarova [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record+1 withdrawal] Dhenin/Talaja (Paris) WITHDREW from Gold Coast Daniilidou/Huber Casanova/Loit [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Navratilova/Raymond (San Diego) Gagliardi/Mandula (Miami) Daniilidou/Pratt Casanova/Molik [2 events, 1 title, 4Ð1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record] WON Stanford Petrova/Shaughnessy (Amelia Island) Tanasugarn/Vento-Kabchi (Los Angeles) Casanova/Müller Daniilidou/Vento-Kabchi [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] [2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record] Pratt/Wheeler (Vienna) Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Miami) Casanova/Pratt Petrova/Shaughnessy (Amelia Island) [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] Davenport/Morariu Yan/Zheng (Wimbledon) [7 events, 0 titles, 11Ð7 record] Casanova/Schnyder Black/Stubbs (Sydney) [2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record] Ani/Prusova (Australian Open) Davenport/Morariu (Sydney) Likhovtseva/Maleeva (Pan Paciﬁc) Yan/Zheng (Olympics) Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Indian Wells) Casanova/Wartusch Casanova/Molik (Amelia Island) [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] Black/Stubbs (Filderstadt) Dulko/Tarabini (Roland Garros) Dementieva/Sugiyama (Moscow) Castano/Gagliardi Déchy/Hantuchova [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] [2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record] Takemura/Yonemura (Japan Open) Yan/Zheng (Birmingham) Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (Wimbledon) Chladkova/Dementieva [2 events, 0 titles, 3Ð2 record] Déchy/Schnyder Schett/Schnyder (Paris) [1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record] Petrova/Shaughnessy (Roland Garros) Husarova/Likhovtseva (Linz) Chladkova/Gagliardi Déchy/Testud [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] Husarova/Likhovtseva (Linz) Suárez/Tarabini (Olympics)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 188 Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya Farina Elia/Schiavone [4 events, 0 titles, 2Ð4 record] [15 events, 1 title, 15Ð13 record, 1 withdrawal] Bovina/Martinez (Sydney) Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (Gold Coast) Gagliardi/Vinci (Australian Open) Bartoli/Casanova (Australian Open) Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja (Pan Pacific) Schett/Schnyder (Paris) Li/Sun (Miami) Molik/Serna (Miami) Dementieva/Myskina Casanova/Molik (Amelia Island) [2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record+1 walkover] WON Warsaw Likhovtseva/Zvonareva (San Diego) Testud/Vinci (Rome) Asagoe/Sugiyama (Olympics) Testud/Vinci (Roland Garros) Huber/Sugiyama (Eastbourne) Dementieva/Pratt WITHDREW from Wimbledon [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] Bartoli/Kostanic (Los Angeles) Husarova/Martinez (Rome) Frazier/Martinez (San Diego) Dementieva/Sprem Li/Sun (Olympics) [2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record] Grande/Pennetta (U. S. Open) Sun/Tu (Charleston) Molik/Sugiyama (Filderstadt) Peschke/Rittner (Berlin) Frazier/Martinez Dementieva/Sugiyama [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] [2 events, 0 titles, 6Ð1 record+1 withdrawal] Likhovtseva/Zvonareva (San Diego) WITHDREW from U. S. Open Gagliardi/Grönefeld Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Moscow) [4 events, 0 titles, 7Ð4 record] Dementieva/Zvonareva Molik/Schett (Stockholm) [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Craybas/Weingärtner (Cincinnati) Petrova/Shaughnessy (Los Angeles) Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (U. S. Open) Petrova/Shaughnessy (Zürich) Dhenin/Schett [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Gagliardi/Husarova Dulko/Grande (Miami) [1 event, 1 title, 4Ð0 record] WON Estoril Dhenin/Schiavone [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] Gagliardi/Mandula Husarova/Martinez (Dubai) [3 events, 0 titles, 3Ð3 record] Kostanic/Schaul (Canberra) Dokic/Jankovic Perebiynis/Talaja (Indian Wells) [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Yan/Zheng (Miami) Peng/Xie (Beijing) Gagliardi/Medina Garrigues Dokic/Husarova [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Auckland) Prakusya/Tanasugarn (Pan Pacific) Gagliardi/Safina Dokic/Safina [1 event, 1 title, 4Ð0 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] WON Beijing Dragomir Ilie/Reeves (Miami) Gagliardi/Vinci Dragomir Ilie/Pratt [3 events, 0 titles, 6Ð3 record+1 walkover] [1 event, 0 title, 0Ð1 record] Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Australian Open) Navratilova/Raymond (Sydney) Kirilenko/Sharapova (Birmingham) Dulko/Vento-Kabchi Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (Wimbledon) [2 events, 0 titles, 4Ð1 record+1 withdrawal] Gagliardi/Wartusch Gagliardi/Safina (Beijing) [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] WITHDREW from GuangZhou McShea/Sequera (Acapulco) Farina Elia/Santangelo Garbin/Mandula [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (Doha) Petrova/Shaughnessy (Los Angeles)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 189 Garbin/Pratt Hantuchova/Schett [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Kuznetsova/Sanchez-Vicario (Bali) Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (Indian Wells) Garbin/Vinci Hantuchova/Schnyder [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Martinez/Ruano Pascual (Olympics) Myskina/Zvonareva (Moscow) Golovin/Pierce Hao/Sun [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] [0 WTA events, 2 Challengers; 0 titles, 2Ð2 Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja (Wimbledon) Challenger record] Grande/Schiavone Chuang/Hsieh (Shenzhen $50K I) [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Yan/Zheng (Shenzhen $50K II) Molik/Serna (Indian Wells) L. Huber/Loit Grande/Schnyder [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record+1 withdrawal] [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] WITHDREW from Zürich Krizan/Tu (Birmingham) L. Huber/Maleeva Grande/Tanasugarn [2 events, 0 titles, 3Ð2 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (Gold Coast) Myskina/Zvonareva (Roland Garros) Perebiynis/Talaja (Indian Wells) Grande/Vento-Kabchi L. Huber/Mirza [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] [1 event, 1 title, 4Ð0 record] Dulko/Sharapova (Rome) WON Hyderabad Grönefeld/Shaughnessy L. Huber/Morariu [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð0 record+1 withdrawal] [2 events, 0 titles, 3Ð2 record+1 walkover] WITHDREW from Tashkent Pratt/Schnyder (Charleston) Molik/Raymond (Philadelphia) Hantuchova/Husarova [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] L. Huber/Navratilova Casanova/Schnyder (Olympics) [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Farina Elia/Schiavone (Amelia Island) Hantuchova/Maleeva [2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record] L. Huber/Perebiynis Bovina/Martinez (Sydney) [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Black/Stubbs (Zürich) Gagliardi/Vinci (Birmingham) Hantuchova/Morariu L. Huber/Sugiyama [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] [11 events, 0 titles, 18Ð11 record+1 walkover] Daniilidou/Vento-Kabchi (Miami) Safina/Shaughnessy (Sydney) Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Australian Open) Hantuchova/Pisnik Davenport/Morariu (Pan Pacific) [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Shaughnessy/Vinci (Dubai) Dulko/Tarabini (Warsaw) Husarova/Martinez (Doha) Hantuchova/Rubin Li/Sun (Miami) [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] Dementieva/Pratt (Rome) Schett/Schnyder (Los Angeles) Asagoe/Fujiwara (Roland Garros) Bovina/Pratt (Eastbourne) Hantuchova/Safina Black/Stubbs (Wimbledon) [5 events, 0 titles, 3Ð5 record] Déchy/Schnyder (Linz) Stewart/Stosur (Berlin) Ani/Gagliardi (Rome) L. Huber/Tanasugarn Craybas/Weingärtner (Roland Garros) [2 events, 0 titles, 6Ð2 record] Petrova/Shaughnessy (New Haven) Asagoe/Sugiyama (Canadian Open) Ruano Pascual/Suárez (U. S. Open) Dementieva/Sugiyama (U. S. Open) Hantuchova/Sanchez-Vicario [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Myskina/Zvonareva (Filderstadt)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 190 Husarova/Likhovtseva Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva [2 events, 1 title, 6Ð1 record] [15 events, 2 titles, 42Ð13 record] Grönefeld/Schruff (Filderstadt) WON Gold Coast WON Linz Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Australian Open) Husarova/Maleeva Husarova/Martinez (Dubai) [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] WON Doha Myskina/Zvonareva (Moscow) Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Indian Wells) Petrova/Shaughnessy (Miami) Husarova/Martinez Pierce/Sanchez-Vicario (Berlin) [9 events, 1 title, 24Ð8 record] Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Roland Garros) WON Dubai Molik/Serna (Eastbourne) Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (Dubai) Huber/Sugiyama (Wimbledon) Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (Indian Wells) Tanasugarn/Vento-Kabchi (Los Angeles) Petrova/Shaughnessy (Berlin) Déchy/Testud (Olympics) Petrova/Shaughnessy (Rome) Ruano Pascual/Suárez (U. S. Open) Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Roland Garros) Bovina/Petrova (Moscow) Molik/Serna (Eastbourne) Petrova/Shaughnessy (Los Angeles Champ.) Bartoli/Loit (Wimbledon) Ruano Pascual/Suárez (U. S. Open) Kuznetsova/Sanchez-Vicario [1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record] Husarova/Molik Myskina/Sugiyama (Bali) [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Zürich) J. Lee/Tanasugarn [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] Husarova/Safina Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Charleston) [1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record] L. Huber/Sugiyama (Australian Open) Li/Li [0 WTA event, 1 Challenger; 0 titles; 1Ð1 record in Jeyaseelan/Maleeva Challengers] [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Chuang/Hsieh (Shenzhen $50K I) Cargill/Miyagi (Roland Garros) Li/Sun Kirilenko/Safina [16 WTA events+2 Challengers, [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] 2 WTA+2 Challenger titles, 25Ð14 WTA record+ Asagoe/Schaul (Luxembourg) 1 walkover, 8Ð0 Challenger record] Kirilenko/Zvonareva WON Changsha $50K 2003 [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] WON ShenZhen $50K 2003 Huber/Sugiyama (Miami) Casanova/Husarova (Gold Coast) Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Australian Open) Krasnoroutskaya/Myskina Huber/Mirza (Hyderabad) [2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record] Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (Dubai) Sugiyama/Huber (Dubai) Husarova/Martinez (Doha) Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (Doha) Petrova/Shaughnessy (Miami) Krasnoroutskaya/Zvonareva Myskina/Zvonareva (Berlin) [3 events, 0 titles, 4Ð3 record] Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Rome) Tanasugarn/Tatarkova (Gold Coast) Navratilova/Raymond (Vienna) Casanova/Molik (Amelia Island) Testud/Vinci (Roland Garros) Black/Stubbs (Charleston) Kirilenko/Sharapova (Birmingham) Perebiynis/Vento-Kabchi (Eastbourne) Krizan/Vento-Kabchi Dominikovic/Rodionova (Wimbledon) [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] WON Olympics Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Zürich) Gagliardi/Safina (Beijing) WON GuangZhou Li/Zheng [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Asagoe/Okamoto (Hobart)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 191 Liggan/Vento-Kabchi Mandula/Tu [0 main draw, 1 qualifying event; 2Ð1 in qualifying] [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] Chladkova/Kurhajcova (Indian Wells Qualifying) Krasnoroutskaya/Zvonareva (Amelia Island) Likhovtseva/Maleeva Mandula/Wartusch [1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] Black/Stubbs (Pan Paciﬁc) Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja (Australian Open) Likhovtseva/Martinez Martinez/Ruano Pascual [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] [2 events, 0 titles, 7Ð2 record] Kostanic/Perebiynis (Amelia Island) Petrova/Shaughnessy (Los Angeles) Likhovtseva/Myskina Li/Sun (Olympics) [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] Mauresmo/Pierce Li/Sun (Rome) [3 events, 0 titles, 5Ð2 record+1 withdrawal] Likhovtseva/Zvonareva Daniilidou/Huber (San Diego) [3 events, 0 titles, 5Ð3 record] Asagoe/Sugiyama (Canadian Open) Dulko/Tarabini (Warsaw) WITHDREW from Olympics Ruano Pascual/Suárez (San Diego) McShea/Morariu Asagoe/Sugiyama (Canadian Open) [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] Loit/Mandula Ruano Pascual/Suárez (U. S. Open) [2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record] Medina Garrigues/Sanchez-Vicario Farina Elia/Schiavone (Paris) [4 events, 1 title, 4Ð3 record] Casanova/Daniilidou (Antwerp) Testud/Vinci (Roland Garros) Loit/Pratt Husarova/Martinez (Wimbledon) [4 events, 0 titles, 5Ð4 record] WON Palermo Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (Gold Coast) Suárez/Tarabini (Olympics) Reeves/Ad. Serra Zanetti (Australian Open) Medina Garrigues/Serna Mandula/Schett (San Diego) [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Huber/Tanasugarn (U. S. Open) Déchy/Golovin (Zürich) Maleeva/Martinez Molik/Raymond [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] [1 event, 1 title, 4Ð0 record] Husarova/Saﬁna (Australian Open) WON Philadelphia Maleeva/Srebotnik Molik/Schett [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] [1 event, 1 title, 4Ð0 record] Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Miami) WON Stockholm Maleeva/Talaja Molik/Serna [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] [12 events, 1 title, 11Ð10 record+1 withdrawal] Black/Stubbs (Eastbourne) Mandula/Schett (Dubai) Mandula/Nagy Li/Sun (Doha) [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Petrova/Shaughnessy (Indian Wells) Martinez/Ruano Pascual (Olympics) Navratilova/Raymond (Miami) Serra Zanetti/Serra Zanetti (Rome) Mandula/Schett Yan/Zheng (Vienna) [3 events, 1 title, 7Ð1 record+1 withdrawal] Mattek/Spears (Roland Garros) WITHDREW from Dubai WITHDREW from Birmingham WON Budapest WON Eastbourne Black/Stubbs (San Diego) Golovin/Pierce (Wimbledon) Mandula/Schnyder Petrova/Shaughnessy (New Haven) [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] Camerin/Sequera (U. S. Open) Daniilidou/Pratt (Stanford) Molik/Stubbs Mandula/Tatarkova [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Li/Sun (Olympics) Camerin/Jidkova (Roland Garros) Molik/Sugiyama [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record+1 withdrawal] WITHDREW from Filderstadt

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 192 Myskina/Sugiyama Petrova/Shaughnessy [1 event, 1 title, 3Ð0 record+1 walkover] [14 events, 7 titles, 38Ð7 record+2 walkovers] WON Bali Tanasugarn/Tatarkova (Gold Coast) Myskina/Zvonareva Gagliardi/Vinci (Australian Open) [9 events, 1 title, 16Ð6 record+2 withdrawals] Davenport/Morariu (Indian Wells) Krizan/Srebotnik (Sydney) WON Miami Svensson/Tu (Australian Open) WON Amelia Island Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (Indian Wells) WON Berlin Husarova/Martinez (Berlin) WON Rome Husarova/Martinez (Roland Garros) Navratilova/Raymond (Roland Garros) WITHDREW from Wimbledon Black/Stubbs (Wimbledon) [WITHDREW from U. S. Open without playing] WON Los Angeles Grönefeld/Schruff (Filderstadt) [WITHDREW from San Diego without playing; WON Moscow the WTA gave them 1 point anyway] WITHDREW from Philadelphia WON New Haven Lee/Peng (U. S. Open) Nagyova/Tanasugarn Husarova/Molik (Zürich) [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] WON Los Angeles Championships Dhenin/Parra Santonja (Strasbourg) Pierce/Raymond Navratilova/Tatarkova [2 events, 0 titles, 0Ð2 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Black/Stubbs (Filderstadt) Camerin/Pennetta (Stockholm) Hantuchova/Maleeva (Zürich) Navratilova/Raymond Pierce/Sanchez-Vicario [15 events, 1 title, 33Ð14 record+1 walkover] [2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record] Davenport/Morariu (Sydney) Husarova/Martinez (Berlin) Davenport/Morariu (Australian Open) Dementieva/Pratt (Rome) Black/Stubbs (Pan Pacific) Myskina/Zvonareva (Indian Wells) Prakusya/Tanasugarn Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (Miami) [2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record+2 qualifying wins] Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Charleston) Likhovtseva/Maleeva (Pan Pacific) Likhovtseva/Myskina (Rome) Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja (Wimbledon) WON Vienna Prakusya/Widjaja Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (Roland Garros) [2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record] Molik/Serna (Eastbourne) Huber/Mirza (Hyderabad) Huber/Sugiyama (Wimbledon) Kostanic/Sprem (Olympics) Black/Stubbs (San Diego) Pratt/Schnyder Asagoe/Sugiyama (Olympics) [1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record] Petrova/Shaughnessy (New Haven) Navratilova/Raymond (Charleston) Svetlana/Kuznetsova (U. S. Open) Pratt/Sharapova Parra Santonja/Serna [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Berlin) Black/Callens (Antwerp) Pratt/Stosur Perebiynis/Serna [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] [2 events, 0 titles, 0Ð2 record] Garbin/Vinci (Olympics) Dhenin/Weingärtner (Filderstadt) Rodionova/Safina (Moscow) Pratt/Tanasugarn [3 events, 0 titles, 3Ð3 record] Perebiynis/Vento-Kabchi Beygelzimer/Poutchek (Hyderabad) [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] Dulko/Vento-Kabchi (Beijing) Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva Yang/Yu (GuangZhou) Pratt/Wheeler [2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record] Black/Stubbs (Vienna) Black/Stubbs (Roland Garros)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 193 Rodionova/Safina Schett/Tarabini [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Moscow) Li/Sun (Rome) Ruano Pascual/Suárez Schett/Wartusch [17 events, 6 titles, 56Ð11 record+2 walkovers] [2 events, 0 titles, 3Ð2 record] Jugic-Salkic/Kostanic (Auckland) Nagy/Ad. Serra Zanetti (Estoril) WON Australian Open Husarova/Likhovtseva (Linz) WON Indian Wells Schiavone/Serna Petrova/Shaughnessy (Miami) [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Petrova/Shaughnessy (Amelia Island) Huber/Sugiyama (Sydney) WON Charleston Petrova/Shaughnessy (Berlin) Serna/Vento-Kabchi Petrova/Shaughnessy (Rome) [2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record] WON Roland Garros Schett/Schnyder (Paris) Black/Stubbs (Wimbledon) Benesova/Birnerova (Linz) Black/Stubbs (San Diego) Sharapova/Tanasugarn Huber/Sugiyama (Canadian Open) [2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record] WON U. S. Open Petrova/Shaughnessy (Australian Open) Myskina/Zvonareva (Moscow) Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (Miami) Black/Stubbs (Zürich) WON Luxembourg Sharapova/Zvonareva Black/Stubbs (Los Angeles Champ.) [2 events, 0 titles, 3Ð2 record] Svensson/Tu (Memphis) Rubin/V. Williams Asagoe/Fujiwara (Beijing) [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Li/Sun (Olympics) Shaughnessy/Vinci [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] Safina/Shaughnessy Husarova/Martinez (Dubai) [1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record] Black/Stubbs (Sydney) Sprem/Zvonareva [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Safina/Strycova Krizan/Srebotnik (Linz) [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record+1 walkover, 1 withdrawal] Suárez/Tarabini WITHDREW from GuangZhou [1 event, 0 titles, 4Ð1 record] Li/Sun (Olympics) Safina/Zvonareva [1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record] Sun/Tu Bartoli/Casanova (Eastbourne) [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] Navratilova/Raymond (Charleston) Schaul/Tanasugarn [1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record] Tanasugarn/Tatarkova Arvidsson/Liggan (Quebec City) [1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record] Huber/Maleeva (Gold Coast) Schett/Schnyder [10 events, 1 title, 17Ð9 record] Tanasugarn/Vento-Kabchi Ani/Prusova (Australian Open) [2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record] WON Paris Martinez/Ruano Pascual (Los Angeles) Yan/Zheng (Berlin) Craybas/Marrero (San Diego) Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Roland Garros) Testud/Vinci Kostanic/Schaul (’s-Hertogenbosch) [5 WTA events, 1 Challenger, 0 titles, 8Ð4 WTA Black/Stubbs (Wimbledon) record+1 withdrawal, 0Ð1 Challenger record] Petrova/Shaughnessy (Los Angeles) Geznenge/Voskoboeva (Ortisei $75K+H) Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (U. S. Open) Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (Doha) Grönefeld/Schruff (Filderstadt) Black/Huber (Berlin) Huber/Loit (Zürich) Petrova/Shaughnessy (Rome) Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Roland Garros) WITHDREW from Stockholm

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 194 Tu/Vento-Kabchi Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja [2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record] [10 events, 0 titles, 8Ð10 record] Dulko/Garbin (Auckland) Ani/Prusova (Australian Open) Benesova/Schaul (Stanford) Black/Stubbs (Pan Paciﬁc) Kostanic/Nagyova (Dubai) Krasnoroutskaya/Myskina (Doha) Hantuchova/Saﬁna (Roland Garros) Panova/Tatarkova (Birmingham) Ruano Pascual/Suárez (Wimbledon) Mauresmo/Pierce (Canadian Open) Dhenin/Talaja (U. S. Open) Kuznetsova/Sanchez-Vicario (Bali)

Teams with the Most Events The following list shows all teams with a final Top Thirty player to play at least four events together. Team Tournaments Black/Stubbs 19 Ruano Pascual/Suárez 17 Li/Sun 16 Farina Elia/Schiavone 15 Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva 15 Navratilova/Raymond 15 Petrova/Shaughnessy 14 Molik/Serna 12 L. Huber/Sugiyama 11 Schett/Schnyder 10 Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja 10 Husarova/Martinez 9 Myskina/Zvonareva 9 Davenport/Morariu 7 Testud/Vinci 6 Bartoli/Loit 5 Hantuchova/Safina 5 Ani/Gagliardi 4 Asagoe/Fujiwara 4 Asagoe/Sugiyama 4 Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya 4 Gagliardi/Grönefeld 4 Loit/Pratt 4 Medina Garrigues/Sanchez-Vicario 4

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 195 Team Results, Sorted By Both Players To facilitate finding the results for any particular team, the following list shows results for every team containing a highlight player, sorted by both highlight players (e.g. results for Petrova and Shaughnessy are listed under both Petrova [P] and Shaughnessy [S]). Please note that results have been simplified — withdrawals and walkovers omitted, Challengers and WTA events combined, etc.; for full details on a player’s activity, consult her entries above. This list exists primarily as a back reference: You can look up all the partners of any player, in alphabetical order. A Callens/Gagliardi: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Callens/Grönefeld: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) Ani/Gagliardi: 4 events, 0 titles, 4Ð4 record (50%) Callens/Hantuchova: 2 events, 0 titles, 0Ð2 record (0%) Ani/Husarova: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record (100%) Callens/Krasnoroutskaya: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Asagoe/Callens: 2 events, 0 titles, 0Ð2 record (0%) Callens/Mandula: 3 events, 0 titles, 3Ð2 record (60%) Asagoe/Fujiwara: 4 events, 0 titles, 4Ð4 record (50%) Callens/Schett: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Asagoe/Jidkova: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Callens/Srebotnik: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) Asagoe/Lee: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Callens/Stosur: 2 events, 0 titles, 6Ð2 record (75%) Asagoe/Obata: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Callens/Svensson: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record (33%) Asagoe/Okamoto: 1 event, 1 title, 4Ð0 record (100%) Callens/Tu: 3 events, 0 titles, 1Ð3 record (25%) Asagoe/Osterloh: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Bartoli/Casanova: 3 events, 0 titles, 3Ð3 record (50%) Asagoe/Schaul: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Casanova/Daniilidou: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) Asagoe/Srebotnik: 3 events, 1 title, 5Ð2 record (71%) Casanova/Husarova: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record (100%) Asagoe/Sugiyama: 4 events, 1 title, 8Ð4 record (67%) Casanova/Loit: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Asagoe/Sun: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Casanova/Molik: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) Asagoe/Tu: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Casanova/Müller: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Asagoe/Washington: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Casanova/Pratt: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Asagoe/Yoshida: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Casanova/Schnyder: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record (33%) B Casanova/Wartusch: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Castano/Gagliardi: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Barna/Krasnoroutskaya: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Bovina/Chladkova: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record (33%) Bartoli/Beltrame: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record (100%) Chladkova/Dementieva: 2 events, 0 titles, 3Ð2 record Bartoli/Casanova: 3 events, 0 titles, 3Ð3 record (50%) (60%) Bartoli/Granville: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Chladkova/Gagliardi: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Bartoli/Hantuchova: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record (50%) Clijsters/Clijsters: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Bartoli/Huber: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Callens/Cohen-Aloro: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Bartoli/Kostanic: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Cohen-Aloro/Loit: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record (100%) Bartoli/Loit: 5 events, 1 title, 12Ð4 record (75%) Cohen-Aloro/Pratt: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Bartoli/Obata: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Cohen-Aloro/Serna: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Bartoli/Santangelo: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) Cohen-Aloro/Testud: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Bartoli/Tu: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Bedanova/Saﬁna: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) D Bedanova/Serna: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Casanova/Daniilidou: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) Bartoli/Beltrame: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record (100%) Daniilidou/Hantuchova: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Beltrame/Vinci: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Daniilidou/Huber: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Black/Callens: 2 events, 1 title, 4Ð1 record (80%) Daniilidou/Pratt: 2 events, 1 title, 4Ð1 record (80%) Black/Huber: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Daniilidou/Vento-Kabchi: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record Black/Stubbs: 19 events, 6 titles, 41Ð13 record (76%) (33%) Bovina/Chladkova: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record (33%) Davenport/Morariu: 7 events, 0 titles, 11Ð7 record (61%) Bovina/Déchy: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record (50%) Bovina/Déchy: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record (50%) Bovina/Martinez: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Déchy/Hantuchova: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record (33%) Bovina/Petrova: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Déchy/Schnyder: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) Bovina/Pratt: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Déchy/Testud: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) C Chladkova/Dementieva: 2 events, 0 titles, 3Ð2 record (60%) Asagoe/Callens: 2 events, 0 titles, 0Ð2 record (0%) Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya: 4 events, 0 titles, 2Ð4 record Black/Callens: 2 events, 1 title, 4Ð1 record (80%) (33%) Callens/Cohen-Aloro: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Callens/Dhenin: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 196 Dementieva/Myskina: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record (33%) Hantuchova/Rubin: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Dementieva/Pratt: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Hantuchova/Safina: 5 events, 0 titles, 3Ð5 record (38%) Dementieva/Sprem: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record (33%) Hantuchova/Sanchez-Vicario: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record Dementieva/Sugiyama: 2 events, 0 titles, 6Ð1 record (86%) (0%) Dementieva/Zvonareva: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Hantuchova/Schett: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Callens/Dhenin: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Hantuchova/Schnyder: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Dhenin/Schett: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Hao/Sun: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record (50%) Dhenin/Schiavone: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Bartoli/Huber: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Dokic/Husarova: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Black/Huber: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Dokic/Jankovic: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Daniilidou/Huber: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Dokic/Safina: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Huber/Loit: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record (100%) Dragomir-Ilie/Pratt: 1 event, 0 title, 0Ð1 record (0%) Huber/Maleeva: 2 events, 0 titles, 3Ð2 record (60%) Dulko/Vento-Kabchi: 2 events, 0 titles, 4Ð1 record (80%) Huber/Mirza: 1 event, 1 title, 4Ð0 record (100%) Huber/Morariu: 2 events, 0 titles, 3Ð2 record (60%) F Huber/Navratilova: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Farina Elia/Santangelo: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Huber/Perebiynis: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Farina Elia/Schiavone: 15 events, 1 title, 15Ð13 record Huber/Sugiyama: 11 events, 0 titles, 18Ð11 record (62%) (54%) Huber/Tanasugarn: 2 events, 0 titles, 6Ð2 record (75%) Frazier/Martinez: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Ani/Husarova: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record (100%) Asagoe/Fujiwara: 4 events, 0 titles, 4Ð4 record (50%) Casanova/Husarova: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record (100%) Dokic/Husarova: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) G Gagliardi/Husarova: 1 event, 1 title, 4Ð0 record (100%) Ani/Gagliardi: 4 events, 0 titles, 4Ð4 record (50%) Hantuchova/Husarova: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Callens/Gagliardi: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Husarova/Likhovtseva: 2 events, 1 title, 6Ð1 record (86%) Castano/Gagliardi: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Husarova/Maleeva: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Chladkova/Gagliardi: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Husarova/Martinez: 9 events, 1 title, 24Ð8 record (75%) Gagliardi/Grönefeld: 4 events, 0 titles, 7Ð4 record (64%) Husarova/Molik: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Gagliardi/Husarova: 1 event, 1 title, 4Ð0 record (100%) Husarova/Safina: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) Gagliardi/Mandula: 3 events, 0 titles, 3Ð3 record (50%) Gagliardi/Medina Garrigues: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record J (0%) Dokic/Jankovic: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Gagliardi/Safina: 1 event, 1 title, 4Ð0 record (100%) Jeyaseelan/Maleeva: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Gagliardi/Vinci: 3 events, 0 titles, 6Ð3 record (67%) Asagoe/Jidkova: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Gagliardi/Wartusch: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Garbin/Mandula: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) K Garbin/Pratt: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Kirilenko/Safina: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Garbin/Vinci: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Kirilenko/Zvonareva: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Golovin/Pierce: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Bartoli/Kostanic: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Grande/Schiavone: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Barna/Krasnoroutskaya: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Grande/Schnyder: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Callens/Krasnoroutskaya: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Grande/Tanasugarn: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya: 4 events, 0 titles, 2Ð4 record Grande/Vento-Kabchi: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) (33%) Bartoli/Granville: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Krasnoroutskaya/Myskina: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record Callens/Grönefeld: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) (50%) Gagliardi/Grönefeld: 4 events, 0 titles, 7Ð4 record (64%) Krasnoroutskaya/Zvonareva: 3 events, 0 titles, 4Ð3 record Grönefeld/Shaughnessy: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð0 record (57%) (100%) Krizan/Vento-Kabchi: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva: 15 events, 2 titles, 42Ð13 record H (76%) Bartoli/Hantuchova: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record (50%) Kuznetsova/Sanchez-Vicario: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record Callens/Hantuchova: 2 events, 0 titles, 0Ð2 record (0%) (75%) Daniilidou/Hantuchova: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Déchy/Hantuchova: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record (33%) L Hantuchova/Husarova: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Asagoe/Lee: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Hantuchova/Maleeva: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record (50%) J. Lee/Tanasugarn: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Hantuchova/Morariu: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Li/Li: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Hantuchova/Pisnik: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Li/Sun: 18 events, 4 titles, 33Ð14 record (70%)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 197 Li/Zheng: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Molik/Sugiyama: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record (100%) Liggan/Vento-Kabchi: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Davenport/Morariu: 7 events, 0 titles, 11Ð7 record (61%) Husarova/Likhovtseva: 2 events, 1 title, 6Ð1 record (86%) Hantuchova/Morariu: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva: 15 events, 2 titles, 42Ð13 record Huber/Morariu: 2 events, 0 titles, 3Ð2 record (60%) (76%) McShea/Morariu: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Likhovtseva/Maleeva: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) Casanova/Müller: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Likhovtseva/Martinez: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Dementieva/Myskina: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record (33%) Likhovtseva/Myskina: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Krasnoroutskaya/Myskina: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record Likhovtseva/Zvonareva: 3 events, 0 titles, 5Ð3 record (50%) (63%) Likhovtseva/Myskina: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Bartoli/Loit: 5 events, 1 title, 12Ð4 record (75%) Myskina/Sugiyama: 1 event, 1 title, 3Ð0 record (100%) Casanova/Loit: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Myskina/Zvonareva: 9 events, 1 title, 16Ð6 record (73%) Cohen-Aloro/Loit: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record (100%) Huber/Loit: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record (100%) N Loit/Mandula: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record (50%) Mandula/Nagy: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Loit/Pratt: 4 events, 0 titles, 5Ð4 record (56%) Nagyova/Tanasugarn: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Huber/Navratilova: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) M Navratilova/Raymond: 15 events, 1 title, 33Ð14 record Hantuchova/Maleeva: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record (50%) (70%) Huber/Maleeva: 2 events, 0 titles, 3Ð2 record (60%) Navratilova/Tatarkova: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Husarova/Maleeva: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Jeyaseelan/Maleeva: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) O Likhovtseva/Maleeva: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) Asagoe/Obata: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Maleeva/Martinez: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Bartoli/Obata: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Maleeva/Srebotnik: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Asagoe/Okamoto: 1 event, 1 title, 4Ð0 record (100%) Maleeva/Talaja: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Asagoe/Osterloh: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Callens/Mandula: 3 events, 0 titles, 3Ð2 record (60%) Gagliardi/Mandula: 3 events, 0 titles, 3Ð3 record (50%) P Garbin/Mandula: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Parra Santonja/Serna: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Loit/Mandula: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record (50%) Huber/Perebiynis: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Mandula/Nagy: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Perebiynis/Serna: 2 events, 0 titles, 0Ð2 record (0%) Mandula/Schett: 3 events, 1 title, 7Ð1 record (88%) Perebiynis/Vento-Kabchi: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record Mandula/Schnyder: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) (67%) Mandula/Tatarkova: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Bovina/Petrova: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Mandula/Tu: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Petrova/Shaughnessy: 14 events, 7 titles, 38Ð7 record Mandula/Wartusch: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) (84%) Bovina/Martinez: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Golovin/Pierce: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Frazier/Martinez: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Mauresmo/Pierce: 3 events, 0 titles, 5Ð2 record (71%) Husarova/Martinez: 9 events, 1 title, 24Ð8 record (75%) Pierce/Raymond: 2 events, 0 titles, 0Ð2 record (0%) Likhovtseva/Martinez: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Pierce/Sanchez-Vicario: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record Maleeva/Martinez: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) (50%) Martinez/Ruano Pascual: 2 events, 0 titles, 7Ð2 record Hantuchova/Pisnik: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) (78%) Prakusya/Tanasugarn: 2 events, 0 titles, 4Ð2 record (67%) Mauresmo/Pierce: 3 events, 0 titles, 5Ð2 record (71%) Prakusya/Widjaja: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record (33%) McShea/Morariu: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Bovina/Pratt: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Gagliardi/Medina Garrigues: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record Casanova/Pratt: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) (0%) Cohen-Aloro/Pratt: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Medina Garrigues/Sanchez-Vicario: 4 events, 1 title, 4Ð3 Daniilidou/Pratt: 2 events, 1 title, 4Ð1 record (80%) record (57%) Dementieva/Pratt: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Medina Garrigues/Serna: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Dragomir-Ilie/Pratt: 1 event, 0 title, 0Ð1 record (0%) Huber/Mirza: 1 event, 1 title, 4Ð0 record (100%) Garbin/Pratt: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Casanova/Molik: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) Loit/Pratt: 4 events, 0 titles, 5Ð4 record (56%) Husarova/Molik: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Pratt/Schnyder: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) Molik/Raymond: 1 event, 1 title, 4Ð0 record (100%) Pratt/Sharapova: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Molik/Schett: 1 event, 1 title, 4Ð0 record (100%) Pratt/Stosur: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Molik/Serna: 12 events, 1 title, 11Ð10 record (52%) Pratt/Tanasugarn: 3 events, 0 titles, 3Ð3 record (50%) Molik/Stubbs: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Pratt/Wheeler: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record (50%)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 198 R Bedanova/Serna: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Cohen-Aloro/Serna: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Molik/Raymond: 1 event, 1 title, 4Ð0 record (100%) Medina Garrigues/Serna: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Navratilova/Raymond: 15 events, 1 title, 33Ð14 record Molik/Serna: 12 events, 1 title, 11Ð10 record (52%) (70%) Parra Santonja/Serna: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Pierce/Raymond: 2 events, 0 titles, 0Ð2 record (0%) Perebiynis/Serna: 2 events, 0 titles, 0Ð2 record (0%) Rodionova/Safina: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Schiavone/Serna: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Martinez/Ruano Pascual: 2 events, 0 titles, 7Ð2 record Serna/Vento-Kabchi: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record (50%) (78%) Pratt/Sharapova: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Ruano Pascual/Suárez: 17 events, 6 titles, 56Ð11 record Sharapova/Tanasugarn: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record (33%) (84%) Sharapova/Zvonareva: 2 events, 0 titles, 3Ð2 record (60%) Hantuchova/Rubin: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Grönefeld/Shaughnessy: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð0 record Rubin/V. Williams: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) (100%) S Petrova/Shaughnessy: 14 events, 7 titles, 38Ð7 record (84%) Bedanova/Safina: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Safina/Shaughnessy: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) Dokic/Safina: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Shaughnessy/Vinci: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Gagliardi/Safina: 1 event, 1 title, 4Ð0 record (100%) Dementieva/Sprem: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record (33%) Hantuchova/Safina: 5 events, 0 titles, 3Ð5 record (38%) Sprem/Zvonareva: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Husarova/Safina: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) Asagoe/Srebotnik: 3 events, 1 title, 5Ð2 record (71%) Kirilenko/Safina: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Callens/Srebotnik: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) Rodionova/Safina: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Maleeva/Srebotnik: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Safina/Shaughnessy: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) Callens/Stosur: 2 events, 0 titles, 6Ð2 record (75%) Safina/Strycova: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record (100%) Pratt/Stosur: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Safina/Zvonareva: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Safina/Strycova: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record (100%) Hantuchova/Sanchez-Vicario: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record Black/Stubbs: 19 events, 6 titles, 41Ð13 record (76%) (0%) Molik/Stubbs: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Kuznetsova/Sanchez-Vicario: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record Ruano Pascual/Suárez: 17 events, 6 titles, 56Ð11 record (75%) (84%) Medina Garrigues/Sanchez-Vicario: 4 events, 1 title, 4Ð3 Suárez/Tarabini: 1 event, 0 titles, 4Ð1 record (80%) record (57%) Asagoe/Sugiyama: 4 events, 1 title, 8Ð4 record (67%) Pierce/Sanchez-Vicario: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record Dementieva/Sugiyama: 2 events, 0 titles, 6Ð1 record (86%) (50%) Huber/Sugiyama: 11 events, 0 titles, 18Ð11 record (62%) Bartoli/Santangelo: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) Molik/Sugiyama: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð0 record (100%) Farina Elia/Santangelo: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Myskina/Sugiyama: 1 event, 1 title, 3Ð0 record (100%) Asagoe/Schaul: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Asagoe/Sun: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Schaul/Tanasugarn: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Hao/Sun: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record (50%) Callens/Schett: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Li/Sun: 18 events, 4 titles, 33Ð14 record (70%) Dhenin/Schett: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Sun/Tu: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Hantuchova/Schett: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Callens/Svensson: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record (33%) Mandula/Schett: 3 events, 1 title, 7Ð1 record (88%) Molik/Schett: 1 event, 1 title, 4Ð0 record (100%) T Schett/Schnyder: 10 events, 1 title, 17Ð9 record (65%) Maleeva/Talaja: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Schett/Tarabini: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Grande/Tanasugarn: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Schett/Wartusch: 2 events, 0 titles, 3Ð2 record (60%) Huber/Tanasugarn: 2 events, 0 titles, 6Ð2 record (75%) Dhenin/Schiavone: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) J. Lee/Tanasugarn: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Farina Elia/Schiavone: 15 events, 1 title, 15Ð13 record Nagyova/Tanasugarn: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) (54%) Prakusya/Tanasugarn: 2 events, 0 titles, 4Ð2 record (67%) Grande/Schiavone: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Pratt/Tanasugarn: 3 events, 0 titles, 3Ð3 record (50%) Schiavone/Serna: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Schaul/Tanasugarn: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Casanova/Schnyder: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record (33%) Sharapova/Tanasugarn: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record (33%) Déchy/Schnyder: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) Tanasugarn/Tatarkova: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Grande/Schnyder: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Tanasugarn/Vento-Kabchi: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record Hantuchova/Schnyder: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) (50%) Mandula/Schnyder: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Schett/Tarabini: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Pratt/Schnyder: 1 event, 0 titles, 3Ð1 record (75%) Suárez/Tarabini: 1 event, 0 titles, 4Ð1 record (80%) Schett/Schnyder: 10 events, 1 title, 17Ð9 record (65%) Mandula/Tatarkova: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 199 Navratilova/Tatarkova: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Shaughnessy/Vinci: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Tanasugarn/Tatarkova: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Testud/Vinci: 6 events, 0 titles, 8Ð5 record (62%) Cohen-Aloro/Testud: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Déchy/Testud: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) W Testud/Vinci: 6 events, 0 titles, 8Ð5 record (62%) Casanova/Wartusch: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Asagoe/Tu: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Gagliardi/Wartusch: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Bartoli/Tu: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Mandula/Wartusch: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Callens/Tu: 3 events, 0 titles, 1Ð3 record (25%) Schett/Wartusch: 2 events, 0 titles, 3Ð2 record (60%) Mandula/Tu: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Asagoe/Washington: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Sun/Tu: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Pratt/Wheeler: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record (50%) Tu/Vento-Kabchi: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record (33%) Prakusya/Widjaja: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record (33%) Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja: 10 events, 0 titles, 8Ð10 record V (44%) Daniilidou/Vento-Kabchi: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record Rubin/V. Williams: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) (33%) Dulko/Vento-Kabchi: 2 events, 0 titles, 4Ð1 record (80%) Y Grande/Vento-Kabchi: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Asagoe/Yoshida: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Krizan/Vento-Kabchi: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Liggan/Vento-Kabchi: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record (67%) Z Perebiynis/Vento-Kabchi: 1 event, 0 titles, 2Ð1 record Li/Zheng: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) (67%) Dementieva/Zvonareva: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Serna/Vento-Kabchi: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record (50%) Kirilenko/Zvonareva: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Tanasugarn/Vento-Kabchi: 2 events, 0 titles, 2Ð2 record Krasnoroutskaya/Zvonareva: 3 events, 0 titles, 4Ð3 record (50%) (57%) Tu/Vento-Kabchi: 2 events, 0 titles, 1Ð2 record (33%) Likhovtseva/Zvonareva: 3 events, 0 titles, 5Ð3 record Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja: 10 events, 0 titles, 8Ð10 record (63%) (44%) Myskina/Zvonareva: 9 events, 1 title, 16Ð6 record (73%) Beltrame/Vinci: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Saﬁna/Zvonareva: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%) Gagliardi/Vinci: 3 events, 0 titles, 6Ð3 record (67%) Sharapova/Zvonareva: 2 events, 0 titles, 3Ð2 record (60%) Garbin/Vinci: 1 event, 0 titles, 1Ð1 record (50%) Sprem/Zvonareva: 1 event, 0 titles, 0Ð1 record (0%)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 200 Team and Individual Doubles Statistics Doubles Winning Percentages for the Top Teams (All teams include at least one Top Thirty/Highlight player. Minimum three tournaments; sorted in descending order by winning percentage) Tourn Tourn Tourn Team Won/Lost Win% Played Won Win% Mandula/Schett 7Ð1 87.5% 3 1 33.3% Petrova/Shaughnessy 38Ð7 84.4% 14 7 50.0% Ruano Pascual/Suárez 56Ð11 83.6% 17 6 35.3% Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva 42Ð13 76.4% 15 2 13.3% Black/Stubbs 41Ð13 75.9% 19 6 31.6% Husarova/Martinez 24Ð8 75.0% 9 1 11.1% Bartoli/Loit 12Ð4 75.0% 5 1 20.0% Myskina/Zvonareva 16Ð6 72.7% 9 1 11.1% Asagoe/Srebotnik 5Ð2 71.4% 3 1 33.3% Mauresmo/Pierce 5Ð2 71.4% 3 0 0.0% Li/Sun 33Ð14 70.2% 18 4 22.2% Navratilova/Raymond 33Ð14 70.2% 15 1 6.7% Asagoe/Sugiyama 8Ð4 66.7% 4 1 25.0% Gagliardi/Vinci 6Ð3 66.7% 3 0 0.0% Schett/Schnyder 17Ð9 65.4% 10 1 10.0% Gagliardi/Grönefeld 7Ð4 63.6% 4 0 0.0% Likhovtseva/Zvonareva 5Ð3 62.5% 3 0 0.0% L. Huber/Sugiyama 18Ð11 62.1% 11 0 0.0% Testud/Vinci 8Ð5 61.5% 6 0 0.0% Davenport/Morariu 11Ð7 61.1% 7 0 0.0% Callens/Mandula 3Ð2 60.0% 3 0 0.0% Medina Garrigues/Sanchez-Vicario 4Ð3 57.1% 4 1 25.0% Krasnoroutskaya/Zvonareva 4Ð3 57.1% 3 0 0.0% Loit/Pratt 5Ð4 55.6% 4 0 0.0% Farina Elia/Schiavone 15Ð13 53.6% 15 1 6.7% Molik/Serna 11Ð10 52.4% 12 1 8.3% Ani/Gagliardi 4Ð4 50.0% 4 0 0.0% Asagoe/Fujiwara 4Ð4 50.0% 4 0 0.0% Bartoli/Casanova 3Ð3 50.0% 3 0 0.0% Gagliardi/Mandula 3Ð3 50.0% 3 0 0.0% Pratt/Tanasugarn 3Ð3 50.0% 3 0 0.0% Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja 8Ð10 44.4% 10 0 0.0% Hantuchova/Safina 3Ð5 37.5% 5 0 0.0% Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya 2Ð4 33.3% 4 0 0.0% Callens/Tu 1Ð3 25.0% 3 0 0.0% NOTE: Mandula/Schett withdrew from one of their events, and probably should not top this list; the top five, in real terms, should be 1. Petrova/Shaughnessy, 2. Ruano Pascual/Suárez, 3. Kuznetsova/ Likhovtseva, 4. Black/Stubbs, 5. Husarova/Martinez. Amazingly enough, the top four teams on this list are the four that qualified for the year-end Championships. For once, the sytem actually worked....

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 201 Tournament Winning Percentages for the Top Teams As above, each team must include a highlight player, and each team must have at least three events. Team Events Wins Winning% Petrova/Shaughnessy 14 7 50.0% Ruano Pascual/Suárez 17 6 35.3% Asagoe/Srebotnik 3 1 33.3% Mandula/Schett 3 1 33.3% Black/Stubbs 19 6 31.6% Asagoe/Sugiyama 4 1 25.0% Medina Garrigues/Sanchez-Vicario 4 1 25.0% Li/Sun 18 4 22.2% Bartoli/Loit 5 1 20.0% Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva 15 2 13.3% Husarova/Martinez 9 1 11.1% Myskina/Zvonareva 9 1 11.1% Schett/Schnyder 10 1 10.0% Molik/Serna 12 1 8.3% Farina Elia/Schiavone 15 1 6.7% Navratilova/Raymond 15 1 6.7% Ani/Gagliardi 4 0 0.0% Asagoe/Fujiwara 4 0 0.0% Bartoli/Casanova 3 0 0.0% Callens/Mandula 3 0 0.0% Callens/Tu 3 0 0.0% Davenport/Morariu 7 0 0.0% Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya 4 0 0.0% Gagliardi/Grönefeld 4 0 0.0% Gagliardi/Mandula 3 0 0.0% Gagliardi/Vinci 3 0 0.0% Hantuchova/Saﬁna 5 0 0.0% Krasnoroutskaya/Zvonareva 3 0 0.0% L. Huber/Sugiyama 11 0 0.0% Likhovtseva/Zvonareva 3 0 0.0% Loit/Pratt 4 0 0.0% Mauresmo/Pierce 3 0 0.0% Pratt/Tanasugarn 3 0 0.0% Testud/Vinci 6 0 0.0% Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja 10 0 0.0%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 202 Doubles Winning Percentages for the Top Players Player WTA Rank # of Partners Won-Lost Winning% Suárez 2 2 60-12 83.3% Shaughnessy 6 4 45-9 83.3% Petrova 7 2 40-8 83.3% Ruano Pascual 1 2 63-13 82.9% Kuznetsova 8 2 45-14 76.3% Stubbs 4 2 43-14 75.4% Black 3 3 46-15 75.4% Husarova 13 10 42-14 75.0% Likhovtseva 5 6 58-20 74.4% Martinez 14 6 36-14 72.0% Raymond 10 3 37-16 69.8% Sugiyama 9 5 36-16 69.2% Myskina 16 5 24-11 68.6% Schett 19 8 34-16 68.0% Li 29 3 34-16 68.0% Molik 17 7 27-13 67.5% Navratilova 12 3 33-16 67.3% Sun 38 4 37-18 67.3% Loit 31 6 21-11 65.6% Huber 11 11 38-22 63.3% Gagliardi 22 11 31-19 62.0% Schnyder 18 7 26-16 61.9% Bartoli 37 10 24-15 61.5% Davenport 44 1 11-7 61.1% Testud 61 3 11-7 61.1% Zvonareva 15 8 28-18 60.9% Vinci 25 5 17-11 60.7% Mandula 41 10 21-14 60.0% Tanasugarn 20 10 23-16 59.0% Pratt 23 13 27-19 58.7% Morariu 24 4 15-11 57.7% Saﬁna 30 10 16-12 57.1% Bovina 68 5 9-7 56.3% Sanchez-Vicario 112 4 9-7 56.3% Asagoe 26 14 25-21 54.3% Casanova 58 9 13-11 54.2% Dementieva 27 7 15-13 53.6% Callens 45 14 24-21 53.3% Maleeva 51 8 11-10 52.4% Farina Elia 43 2 15-14 51.7% Schiavone 40 4 16-16 50.0% Vento-Kabchi 21 10 22-23 48.9% Widjaja 72 2 10-12 45.5% Krasnoroutskaya 99 5 8-11 42.1% Serna 48 8 13-19 40.6% Hantuchova 62 13 9-21 30.0% V. Williams — 1 0-1 0.0%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 203 Doubles Tournament Winning Percentage for the Top Players Player Rank # of Partners Events Titles Title Win% Petrova 7 2 15 7 46.7% Shaughnessy 6 4 17 7 41.2% Suárez 2 2 18 6 33.3% Black 3 3 22 7 31.8% Ruano Pascual 1 2 19 6 31.6% Stubbs 4 2 20 6 30.0% Li 29 3 20 4 20.0% Sun 38 4 22 4 18.2% Molik 17 7 18 3 16.7% Husarova 13 10 19 3 15.8% Schett 19 8 20 3 15.0% Myskina 16 5 15 2 13.3% Asagoe 26 14 23 3 13.0% Likhovtseva 5 6 23 3 13.0% Kuznetsova 8 2 16 2 12.5% Sanchez-Vicario 11248112.5% Raymond 10 3 18 2 11.1% Sugiyama 9 5 19 2 10.5% Gagliardi 22 11 21 2 9.5% Loit 31 6 14 1 7.1% Saﬁna 30 10 14 1 7.1% Martinez 14 6 15 1 6.7% Farina Elia 43 2 16 1 6.3% Bartoli 37 10 17 1 5.9% Mandula 41 10 17 1 5.9% Navratilova 12 3 17 1 5.9% Schnyder 18 7 17 1 5.9% Schiavone 40 4 18 1 5.6% Pratt 23 13 20 1 5.0% Zvonareva 15 8 21 1 4.8% Serna 48 8 21 1 4.8% Callens 45 14 23 1 4.3% Huber 11 11 24 1 4.2% Bovina 685700.0% Casanova 58 9 12 0 0.0% Davenport 441700.0% Dementieva 27 7 14 0 0.0% Dokic 8963300.0% Hantuchova 62 13 21 0 0.0% Krasnoroutskaya 99 5 11 0 0.0% Maleeva 51 8 10 0 0.0% Morariu 24 4 11 0 0.0% Tanasugarn 20 10 16 0 0.0% V. Williams —1100.0% Vento-Kabchi 21 10 24 0 0.0% Vinci 25 5 12 0 0.0% Widjaja 72 2 12 0 0.0%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 204 Individual Doubles Statistical Leaders Top Ten, Most Wins: Top Ten, Most Partners 1. Virginia Ruano Pascual (63) (of the highlight players): 2. Paola Suárez (60) 1 Asagoe (14) 3. Elena Likhovtseva (58) 1 Callens (14) 4. Cara Black (46) 3 Hantuchova (13) 5T.Meghann Shaughnessy 3 Pratt (13) Svetlana Kuznetsova (45) 5 Gagliardi (11) 7. Rennae Stubbs (43) 5 Huber (11) 8. Janette Husarova (42) 7 Bartoli (10) 9. Nadia Petrova (40) 7 Husarova (10) 10. Liezel Huber (38) 7 Mandula (10) 7 Safina (10) Top Ten, Matches Per Tournament: 7 Tanasugarn (10) 1 Suárez (4.0) 7 Vento-Kabchi (10) 1 Ruano Pascual (4.0) 3 Kuznetsova (3.7) Highlight players with only one partner: 4 Likhovtseva (3.4) Clijsters (1 event, with Elke Clijsters) 5 Martinez (3.3) Davenport (7 events, with Morariu) 6 Petrova (3.2) Venus Williams (1 event, with Rubin) 7 Shaughnessy (3.2) 8 Husarova (2.9) Highest Partner Turnover Rate 9 Raymond (2.9) (# of Partners divided by # of Events — 10 Navratilova (2.9) minimum 3 events) 1 Dokic (1.0) Top Ten, Most Matches Played: 2 Maleeva (0.80) 1 Likhovtseva (78) 3 Casanova (0.75) 2 Ruano Pascual (76) 4 Bovina (0.71) 3 Suárez (72) 4 Safina (0.71) 4 Black (61) 6 Pratt (0.65) 5 Huber (60) 7 Tanasugarn (0.63) 6 Kuznetsova (59) 8 Hantuchova (0.62) 7 Stubbs (57) 9 Asagoe (0.61) 8 Husarova (56) 9 Callens (0.61) 9 Sun (55) 10 Shaughnessy (54)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 205 Team Doubles Titles, Sorted from Most to Least Although the only teams listed are those with WTA titles, their titles at $50K and larger Challengers are also shown. Team Titles Won (Tier) # of Titles Petrova/Shaughnessy Miami (I), Amelia Island (II), Berlin (I), Rome (I), Los Angeles (II), 7 New Haven (II), Los Angeles Championships (Champ) Ruano Pascual/Suárez Australian Open (Slam), Indian Wells (I), Charleston (I), Roland 6 Garros (Slam), U. S. Open (Slam), Luxembourg (III) Black/Stubbs Sydney (II), Pan Paciﬁc (I), Wimbledon (Slam), San Diego (I), 6 Filderstadt (II), Zürich (I) McShea/Sequera Acapulco (III), Dothan $75K, Strasbourg (III), ’s-Hertogenbosch (III) 3+1 Chall Li/Sun Changsha $50K ’03, ShenZhen $50K ’03, Olympics (Olympics), 2+2 Chall GuangZhou (III) Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva Gold Coast (III), Doha (II) 2 Cho/Jeon Gifu $50K, Seoul (IV) 1+1 Chall Asagoe/Sugiyama Canadian Open (I) 1 Myskina/Zvonareva Moscow (I) 1 Black/Callens Antwerp (II) 1 Daniilidou/Pratt Stanford (II) 1 Farina Elia/Schiavone Warsaw (II) 1 Gagliardi/Saﬁna Beijing (II) 1 Husarova/Likhovtseva Linz (II) 1 Husarova/Martinez Dubai (II) 1 Molik/Raymond Philadelphia (II) 1 Molik/Serna Eastbourne (II) 1 Schett/Schnyder Paris (II) 1 Asagoe/Srebotnik Japan Open (III) 1 Craybas/Weingärtner Cincinnati (III) 1 Gullickson/Salerni Quebec City (III) 1 Kirilenko//Sharapova Birmingham (III) 1 Llagostera Vives/Marrero Sopot (III) 1 Myskina/Sugiyama Bali (III) 1 Navratilova/Raymond Vienna (III) 1 Russell/Santangelo Hasselt (III) 1 Schwartz/Woehr Bogota (III) 1 Svensson/Tu Memphis (III) 1 Gagliardi/Husarova Estoril (IV) 1 Huber/Mirza Hyderabad (IV) 1 Jugic-Salkic/Kostanic Auckland (IV) 1 Molik/Schett Stockholm (IV) 1 Serra Zanetti/Serra Zanetti Tashkent (IV) 1 Asagoe/Okamoto Hobart (V) 1 Bartoli/Loit Casablanca (V) 1 Kostanic/Schaul Canberra (V) 1 Mandula/Schett Budapest (V) 1 Mattek/Spears Vancouver (V) 1 Medina Garrigues/Sanchez-Vic Palermo (V) 1

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 206 Individual Doubles Titles, Sorted from Most to Least Note: Only players with WTA doubles titles are listed, but their titles at $50K and larger Challengers are included in the list. Player Titles Won (Tier) # of Titles Black Sydney (II), Pan Pacific (I), Antwerp (II), Wimbledon (Slam), San 7 Diego (I), Filderstadt (II), Zürich (I) Petrova Miami (I), Amelia Island (II), Berlin (I), Rome (I), Los Angeles (II), 7 New Haven (II), Los Angeles Championships (Champ) Shaughnessy Miami (I), Amelia Island (II), Berlin (I), Rome (I), Los Angeles (II), 7 New Haven (II), Los Angeles Championships (Champ) Ruano Pascual Australian Open (Slam), Indian Wells (I), Charleston (I), Roland 6 Garros (Slam), U. S. Open (Slam), Luxembourg (III) Stubbs Sydney (II), Pan Pacific (I), Wimbledon (Slam), San Diego (I), 6 Filderstadt (II), Zürich (I) Suárez Australian Open (Slam), Indian Wells (I), Charleston (I), Roland 6 Garros (Slam), U. S. Open (Slam), Luxembourg (III) McShea Acapulco (III), Dothan $75K, Strasbourg (III), ’s-Hertogenbosch (III) 3+1 Chall Sequera Acapulco (III), Dothan $75K, Strasbourg (III), ’s-Hertogenbosch (III) 3+1 Chall Asagoe Hobart (V), Canadian Open (I), Japan Open (III) 3 Husarova Dubai (II), Estoril (IV), Linz (II) 3 Likhovtseva Gold Coast (III), Doha (II), Linz (II) 3 Molik Eastbourne (II), Stockholm (IV), Philadelphia (II) 3 Schett Paris (II), Budapest (V), Stockholm (IV) 3 Li Ting Changsha $50K 2003, ShenZhen $50K 2003, Olympics (Olympics), 2+2 Chall GuangZhou (III) Sun Changsha $50K 2003, ShenZhen $50K 2003, Olympics (Olympics), 2+2 Chall GuangZhou (III) Gagliardi Estoril (IV), Beijing (II) 2 Kostanic Auckland (IV), Canberra (V) 2 Kuznetsova Gold Coast (III), Doha (II) 2 Myskina Bali (III), Moscow (I) 2 Raymond Vienna (III), Philadelphia (II) 2 Sugiyama Canadian Open (I), Bali (III) 2 Cho Gifu $50K, Seoul (IV) 1+1 Chall Gullickson Albuquerque $75K, Quebec City (III) 1+1 Chall Jeon Gifu $50K, Seoul (IV) 1+1 Chall Spears Orange $50K, Vancouver (V) 1+1 Chall Svensson Midland $75K+H, Memphis (III) 1+1 Chall Bartoli Casablanca (V) 1 Callens Antwerp (II) 1 Craybas Cincinnati (III) 1 Daniilidou Stanford (II) 1 Farina Elia Warsaw (II) 1

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 207 Huber, Liezel Hyderabad 1 Jugic-Salkic Auckland (IV) 1 Kirilenko Birmingham (III) 1 Llagostera Vives Sopot (III) 1 Loit Casablanca (V) 1 Mandula Budapest (V) 1 Marrero Sopot (III) 1 Martinez Dubai (II) 1 Mattek Vancouver (V) 1 Medina Garrigues Palermo (V) 1 Mirza Hyderabad (IV) 1 Navratilova Vienna (III) 1 Okamoto Hobart (V) 1 Pratt Stanford (II) 1 Russell Hasselt (III) 1 Safina Beijing (II) 1 Salerni Quebec City (III) 1 Sanchez-Vicario Palermo (V) 1 Santangelo Hasselt (III) 1 Schaul Canberra (V) 1 Schiavone Warsaw (II) 1 Schnyder Paris (II) 1 Schwartz Bogota (III) 1 Serna Eastbourne (II) 1 Serra Zanetti, Adriana Tashkent (IV) 1 Serra Zanetti, Antonella Tashkent (IV) 1 Sharapova Birmingham (III) 1 Srebotnik Japan Open (III) 1 Tu Memphis (III) 1 Weingärtner Cincinnati (III) 1 Woehr Bogota (III) 1 Zvonareva Moscow (I) 1

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 208 Doubles Tournament Winners by Date (High-Tier Events) Players shown in bold also won the singles at these tournaments. Only Tier II and higher events are shown. Tournament Tier Winner Sydney II Black/Stubbs Australian Open Slam Ruano Pascual/Suárez Tokyo (Pan Paciﬁc) I Black/Stubbs Paris II Schett/Schnyder Antwerp II Black/Callens Dubai II Husarova/Martinez Doha II Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva Indian Wells I Ruano Pascual/Suárez Miami I Petrova/Shaughnessy Amelia Island II Petrova/Shaughnessy Charleston I Ruano Pascual/Suárez Warsaw II Farina Elia/Schiavone Berlin I Petrova/Shaughnessy Rome I Petrova/Shaughnessy Roland Garros Slam Ruano Pascual/Suárez Eastbourne II Molik/Serna Wimbledon Slam Black/Stubbs Stanford II Daniilidou/Pratt Los Angeles II Petrova/Shaughnessy San Diego I Black/Stubbs Canadian Open I Asagoe/Sugiyama Olympics Olympics Li/Sun New Haven II Petrova/Shaughnessy U.S. Open Slam Ruano Pascual/Suárez Beijing II Gagliardi/Saﬁna Filderstadt II Black/Stubbs Moscow I Myskina/Zvonareva Zürich I Black/Stubbs Linz II Husarova/Likhovtseva Philadelphia II Molik/Raymond Los Angeles Champ Champ Petrova/Shaughnessy

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 209 Doubles Tournament Winners by Date (Smaller Events) List includes all Tier III, IV, and V events, plus Challengers of the $50K or higher level. Players shown in bold won both singles and doubles at the event listed. 2003 Date Event Tier Winners Date Event Tier Winners 7/4 Orbetello $75K Bondarenko/Fokina 11/16 Eugene $50K Ashley/Perry 7/4 Los Gatos $50K Arvidsson/Senoglu 12/7 Palm Beach Ga$50K Czink/E. Krauth 7/11 Cuneo $50K+H Gallovits/Gubacsi 12/7 Changsha $50K Li/Sun 7/18 Vittel $50K Beltrame/Cohen-Aloro 12/14 Shen Zhen $50K Li/Sun 7/25 Palermo V Medina Garrigues/ Sanchez-Vicario 2004 7/25 Innsbruck $50K Bondarenko/Fokina Date Event Tier Winners 7/25 Schenectady $50K Dell’acqua/Sewell 8/1 Modena $75K G. Navratilova/Pastikova 1/11 Gold Coast III Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva 8/1 Lexington $50K Curran/Grandin 1/11 Auckland IV Jugic-Salkic/Kostanic 8/8 Stockholm IV Molik/Schett 1/16 Hobart V Asagoe/Okamoto 8/8 Rimini $50K Fedak/Koryettseva 1/17 Canberra V Kostanic/Schaul 8/8 Louisville $50K Ditty/Gallovits 2/1 Waikoloa $50K Dulko/Tarabini 8/15 Sopot III Llagostera Vives/Marrero 2/8 Ortisei $75K+H Blahotova/G. Navratilova 8/15 Vancouver V Mattek/Spears 2/15 Midland $75K+H Arvidsson/Svensson 8/22 Cincinnati III Craybas/Weingärtner 2/22 Memphis III Svensson/Tu 8/22 Bronx $50K N. Li/N. Liu 2/22 Hyderabad IV Huber/Mirza 8/29 Forest Hills (V) NO DOUBLES 2/29 Bogota III Schwartz/Woehr 9/12 Denain $75K+H Fedak/Grönefeld 2/29 Saint Paul $50K L. Baker/Lubiani 9/12 Fano $50K Sescioreanu/Vanc 3/7 Acapulco III McShea/Sequera 9/19 Bali III Myskina/Sugiyama 3/21 Orange, CA $50K Hopkins/Spears 9/19 Bordeaux $75K+H Cohen-Aloro/Sfar 3/28 St. Petersburg $50K Goloviznina/Kulikovskaya 9/26 Albuquerque $75K Drake/Gullickson 4/11 Casablanca V Bartoli/Loit 9/26 Biella $50K+H Krauth/Müller 4/11 Dinan $50K+H Jurak/Voskoboeva 9/26 Jounieh $50K+H Cetkovska/Sromova 4/18 Estoril IV Gagliardi/Husarova 9/26 Batumi $50K Bondarenko/Fokina 4/25 Dothan $75K McShea/Sequera 10/3 Hasselt III Russell/Santangelo 5/2 Budapest V Mandula/Schett 10/3 GuangZhou III Li/Sun 5/2 Cagnes Sur Mer$75K Bacheva/Birnerova 10/3 Seoul IV Cho/Jeon 5/2 Gifu $50K Cho/Jeon 10/3 Troy $50K Ashley/Granville 5/9 Fukuoka $50K Fujiwara/Obata 10/10 Japan Open III Asagoe/Srebotnik 5/9 Raleigh $50K Cargill/Wheeler 10/10 Girona $75K+H Krauth/Woehr 5/16 Charlottesville$50K Krauth/Lehnhoff 10/17 Tashkent IV Serra Zanetti/Serra Zanetti 5/16 Saint-Gaudens$50K Dragomir Ilie/Vanc 10/17 Ashburn $50K McCain/Schlukebir 5/22 Strasbourg III McShea/Sequera 10/24 St. Rafael $50K Cohen-Aloro/Sfar 5/22 Vienna III Navratilova/Raymond 10/24 Cary $50K Dragomir Ilie/Reeves 6/6 Prostejov $75K Prusova/Strycova 10/31 Luxembourg III Ruano Pascual/Suárez 6/13 Birmingham III Kirilenko/Sharapova 10/31 Shenzhen I $50K Yan/Zheng 6/13 Marseille $50K+H Peer/Vesnina 11/7 Quebec City III Gullickson/Salerni 6/13 Beijing $50 Chuang/Prakusya 11/7 Shenzhen II $50K Fujiwara/Tatarkova 6/20 ’s-HertogenboschIII McShea/Sequera 11/15 Pittsburg $50K Ashley/Granville

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 210 Alternate Doubles Rankings For explanations of the first two rankings, see the equivalent section in singles, which include similar alternate rankings. There are several reasons why we compute fewer alternate rankings for doubles. The most notable reason is that quality points are far less important in doubles, constituting roughly 20% of a typical player’s total, rather than nearly 40% as in singles (observe the astonishing fact, e.g., that Virginia Ruano Pascual and Paola Suárez earned exactly the same scores for winning the Australian Open, Roland Garros, and the U. S. Open — 786 points each time. This is at least 200 points less than a singles winner would earn, and the difference is all quality points; the fact that the numbers are the same each time is a testament to the fact that the highest possible ranking for a doubles team is #3, and most end up ranked in the #121-#250 or #251- #500 brackets). We calculate the divisor ranking because it’s the simplest per-tournament ranking available; we calculate the divisor with no minimum because, in recent years, the best doubles players — Hingis, Davenport, Kournikova, Morariu, the Williams Sisters — didn’t play full schedules. Hingis and Kournikova of course did not play in 2004, and the Williams Sisters played only one event between them. Injury obviously played a part in that — though, in the case of the Williams Sisters, the real problem is that doubles isn’t the first thing on their minds. (Even assuming that tennis is). But we’d still like to have the fairest overall ranking. Note: In what has become a WTA doubles tradition (it happened with Marion Bartoli last year), the WTA’s year-end total points for Tamarine Tanasugarn are 75 points more than they gave her week by week. Presumably they adjusted her total somewhere. I have no idea where. The totals below reflect the adjuested total, though I don’t know the week in which the points were awarded. I can only hope it didn’t happen with anyone else in such a way that I can’t detect it.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 211 Rankings under the 1996 Ranking System (Divisor, Minimum 14) 1996 Rank Player Points Tournaments Score WTA Rank 1 Suárez 5241 17 308.3 2 2 Ruano Pascual 5402 18 300.1 1 3Kuznetsova 3297 15 219.8 8 4 Petrova 3442 16 215.1 7 5 Shaughnessy 3616 18 200.9 6 6 Stubbs 3618 19 190.4 4 7 Likhovtseva 4118 22 187.2 5 8 Black 3898 22 177.2 3 9 Sugiyama 2534 18 140.8 9 10 Raymond 2323 17 136.6 10 11 Navratilova 2072 16 129.5 12 12 Husarova 2273 18 126.3 13 13 Martinez 1743 14 124.5 14 14 Huber 2565 24 106.9 11 15 Myskina 1483 14 105.9 16 16 Schnyder 1331 16 83.2 18 17 Molik 1380 17 81.2 17 18 Tanasugarn 1258 16 78.6 20 19 Zvonareva 1629 21 77.6 15 20 Morariu 1073 11 76.6 24 Vinci 1047 11 74.8 25 Dementieva 1039 13 74.2 27 Schett 1471 20 73.6 19 Saﬁna 980 14 70.0 30 Loit 924 14 66.0 31 Pratt 1232 19 64.8 23 Weingärtner 878 14 62.7 36 Gagliardi 1274 21 60.7 22 Davenport 795 7 56.8 44 Bartoli 965 17 56.8 37 Kostanic 1173 21 55.9 32 Mandula 867 16 54.2 41 Farina Elia 808.5 15 53.9 43 Li Ting 1007.5 19 53.0 29 Sun 1090.5 21 51.9 28 Schiavone 860.5 17 50.6 40 Dulko 1100.5 22 50.0 34 Vento-Kabchi 1145 23 49.8 21 Sequera 923.5 19 48.6 35 Asagoe 1055.25 22 48.0 26 Maleeva 662 10 47.3 51 McShea 1010 23 43.9 33 Testud 579 7 41.4 61 Bovina 531 7 37.9 68 Serna 740 21 35.2 48 Callens 791.5 23 34.4 45 Hantuchova 567 20 28.4 62

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 212 Doubles Points Per Tournament, No Minimum Divisor Divisor Rank Player Points Tournaments Score WTA Rank 1 Suárez 5241 17 308.3 2 2 Ruano Pascual 5402 18 300.1 1 3Kuznetsova 3297 15 219.8 8 4 Petrova 3442 16 215.1 7 5 Shaughnessy 3616 18 200.9 6 6 Stubbs 3618 19 190.4 4 7 Likhovtseva 4118 22 187.2 5 8 Black 3898 22 177.2 3 9 Sugiyama 2534 18 140.8 9 10 Raymond 2323 17 136.6 10 11 Navratilova 2072 16 129.5 12 12 Husarova 2273 18 126.3 13 13 Martinez 1743 14 124.5 14 14 Davenport 795 7 113.6 44 15 Huber 2565 24 106.9 11 16 Myskina 1483 14 105.9 16 17 Morariu 1073 11 97.5 24 18 Vinci 1047 11 95.2 25 19 Schnyder 1331 16 83.2 18 20 Testud 579 7 82.7 61 Molik 1380 17 81.2 17 Dementieva 1039 13 79.9 27 Tanasugarn 1258 16 78.6 20 Zvonareva 1629 21 77.6 15 Bovina 531 7 75.9 68 Schett 1471 20 73.6 19 Saﬁna 980 14 70.0 30 Maleeva 662 10 66.2 51 Loit 924 14 66.0 31 Pratt 1232 19 64.8 23 Weingärtner 878 14 62.7 36 Pierce 436 7 62.3 86 Gagliardi 1274 21 60.7 22 Bartoli 965 17 56.8 37 Kostanic 1173 21 55.9 32 Mandula 867 16 54.2 41 Farina Elia 808.5 15 53.9 43 Li 1007.5 19 53.0 29 Sun 1090.5 21 51.9 28 Schiavone 860.5 17 50.6 40 Dulko 1100.5 22 50.0 34 Vento-Kabchi 1145 23 49.8 21 Sequera 923.5 19 48.6 35 Asagoe 1055.25 22 48.0 26 Sanchez-Vicario 326 7 46.6 112 McShea 1010 23 43.9 33 Krasnoroutskaya 389 11 35.4 99

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 213 Doubles Points Per Tournament, Reduced Slam Bias I already alluded above to the problem of minimal doubles quality points. This, combined with the extreme premium that Best 11 places on having a few big results, means that doubles has a much stronger Slam Bias than does singles. To compensate for this, let’s take a per-tournament score while reducing Slam points by a third (which still makes them a third bigger than the biggest Tier I events). Adj. Rank Player Points Slam Pts Events Adj. Pts/Trn WTA Rank 1 Suárez 5241 2690 17 255.5 2 2 Ruano Pascual 5402 2690 18 250.3 1 3 Petrova 3442 526 16 204.2 7 4 Shaughnessy 3616 526 18 191.1 6 5Kuznetsova 3297 1716 15 181.7 8 6 Stubbs 3618 1110 19 170.9 4 7 Likhovtseva 4118 1716 22 161.2 5 8 Black 3898 1110 22 160.4 3 9 Raymond 2323 906 17 118.9 10 10 Sugiyama 2534 1370 18 115.4 9 11 Husarova 2273 660 18 114.1 13 12 Martinez 1743 552 14 111.4 14 13 Navratilova 2072 906 16 110.6 12 14 Davenport 795 168 7 105.6 44 15 Myskina 1483 160 14 102.1 16 16 Huber 2565 1148 24 90.9 11 17 Morariu 1073 228 11 90.6 24 18 Molik 1380 122 17 78.8 17 19 Bovina 531 0 7 75.9 68 20 Zvonareva 1629 160 21 75.0 15 Vinci 1047 684 11 74.5 25 Schnyder 1331 562 16 71.5 18 Tanasugarn 1258 374 16 70.8 20 Dementieva 1039 582 13 65.0 27 Testud 579 374 7 64.9 61 Schett 1471 562 20 64.2 19 Saﬁna 980 290 14 63.1 30 Maleeva 662 96 10 63.0 51 Pratt 1232 218 19 61.0 23 Loit 924 414 14 56.1 31 Gagliardi 1274 370 21 54.8 22 Li 1007.5 164 19 50.1 29 Mandula 867 202 16 50.0 41 Bartoli 965 362 17 49.7 37 Sun 1090.5 164 21 49.3 28 Farina Elia 808.5 296 15 47.3 43 Sanchez-Vicario 326 4 7 46.4 112 Vento-Kabchi 1145 368 23 44.4 21 Asagoe 1055.25 266 22 43.9 26 Serna 740 64 21 34.2 48 Krasnoroutskaya 389 60 11 33.5 99 Callens 791.5 162 23 32.1 45 Hantuchova 567 146 20 25.9 62

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 214 Quality Points Per Event (Best Eleven Events) We said above that quality points don’t mean much in doubles, and they don’t. And it’s very hard to calculate quality numbers. But we’ll give it a try. What we will do is take the quality points from the player’s best eleven (as supplied by the WTA), and then divide by an adjusted number of tournaments. If the player in fact has 11 or fewer events, we’ll just divide by 11. If the player has more than eleven, we’ll subtract half an event for each event over 11, and divide by that. Doing that gives this somewhat surprising list (note Petrova and Shaughnessy on top — no real surprise there — but Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva out of the Top 8).: Qual Rank Player Best 11 Q Pts Events Score WTA Rank 1 Petrova 637 16 47.2 7 2 Shaughnessy 670 18 46.2 6 3 Suárez 624 17 44.6 2 4 Ruano Pascual 624 18 43.0 1 5 Stubbs 627 19 41.8 4 6 Black 632 22 38.3 3 7Davenport 205 7 29.3 44 8 Sugiyama 406 18 28.0 9 9Kuznetsova 337 15 25.9 8 10 Huber 363 24 20.7 11 11 Raymond 290 17 20.7 10 12 Morariu 214 11 19.5 24 13 Likhovtseva 315 22 19.1 5 14 Molik 260 17 18.6 17 15 Vinci 200 11 18.2 25 16 Myskina 226 14 18.1 16 17 Navratilova 236 16 17.5 12 18 Husarova 240 18 16.6 13 19 Martinez 204 14 16.3 14 20 Tanasugarn 213 16 15.8 20 Dementieva 176 13 14.7 27 Testud 99 7 14.1 61 Bovina 94 7 13.4 68 Pierce 91 7 13.0 86 Zvonareva 198 21 12.4 15 Saﬁna 154 14 12.3 30 Kostanic 162 21 10.1 32 Vento-Kabchi 170 23 10 21 Sanchez-Vicario 62 7 8.9 112 Serna 140 21 8.8 48 Asagoe 139 22 8.4 26 Gagliardi 134 21 8.4 22 Li 114 19 7.6 29 Schnyder 99 16 7.3 18 Pratt 106 19 7.1 23 Sun 112 21 7.0 28 Loit 87 14 7.0 31 Bartoli 92 17 6.6 37 Mandula 78 16 5.8 41 Hantuchova 87 20 5.6 62

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 215 Majors Ranking In the singles section, we defined the ten WTA “Majors” (tournaments effectively all the top players play): Sydney, Australian Open, Ericsson, Rome, Roland Garros, Wimbledon, San Diego, U. S. Open, Filderstadt, and the year-end Championships. We can apply the same “majors ranking” in doubles: Five points for a title at these events, three for a final, one for a semifinal. If we do this, we can rank both teams and individuals. To put this in perspective, Martina Hingis’s Grand Slam year of 1998 earned her 36 points — 26 with Novotna, 5 with Lucic, 5 with Sukova. In 2003, the co-leaders were Kim Clijsters and Ai Sugiyama, with 23 points earned together; in 2002, it was Paola Suárez, with 25 points (21 with Virginia Ruano Pascual and four with others). The 2001 leader was Lisa Raymond, with 28 points (22 with Rennae Stubbs and six with others). We start with the team rankings:

Doubles Team Majors Rankings 22 teams managed at least one Major showing. The following table shows both the team ranking and the results in the various events. Tournament Rank Team Total Syd AO Mia Ro RG Wim SD USO Fild Chm 1T Black/Stubbs 23 5 5 5 5 3 1T Ruano Pascual/Suárez 23 5 35135 1 3 Petrova/Shaughnessy 15 5 5 5 4Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva 13 3 3 3 3 1 5T Huber/Sugiyama 4 1 3 5T Navratilova/Raymond 4 1 1 1 1 7T Grönefeld/Schruff 3 3 7T Saﬁna/Shaughnessy 3 3 9 Li/Sun 2 1 1 10T Ani/Prusova 1 1 10T Bovina/Martinez 1 1 10T Davenport/Morariu 1 1 10T Dementieva/Sugiyama 1 1 10T Dhenin/Weingärtner 1 1 10T Husarova/Likhovtseva 1 1 10T Husarova/Martinez 1 1 10T Likhovtseva/Zvonareva 1 1 10T Schett/Schnyder 1 1 10T Testud/Vinci 1 1

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 216 Individual Majors Rankings 33 individual players managed at least one Major showing. The following table shows both the player’s ranking and her results in the various events. We note with amazement the four-way tie at the top. Tournament Rank Player Total Syd AO Eric Ro RG Wim SD USO Fild Chm 1T Black 23 5 5 5 5 3 1T Ruano Pascual 23 5 35135 1 1T Stubbs 23 5 5 5 5 3 1T Suárez 23 5 35135 1 5 Shaughnessy 18 3 5 5 5 6T Likhovtseva 15 3 3 3 1311 6T Petrova 15 5 5 5 8Kuznetsova 13 3 3 3 3 1 9 Sugiyama 5 1 3 1 10T Huber, Liezel 4 1 3 10T Navratilova 4 1 1 1 1 10T Raymond 4 1 1 1 1 13T Grönefeld 3 3 13T Saﬁna 3 3 13T Schruff 3 3 16T Husarova 2 1 1 16T Li 2 1 1 16T Martinez 2 1 1 16T Sun 2 1 1 20T Ani 1 1 20T Bovina 1 1 20T Davenport 1 1 20T Dementieva 1 1 20T Dhenin 1 1 20T Morariu 1 1 20T Prusova 1 1 20T Schett 1 1 20T Schnyder 1 1 20T Testud 1 1 20T Vinci 1 1 20T Weingärtner 1 1 20T Zvonareva 1 1

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 217 Combined Singles and Doubles Rankings A total of 53 players are in the Top 100 in both singles and doubles (a steep decline from the 60 in 2003, though only slightly lower than the 55 in 2002; in any case, it is much down from 67 such players in 2001; we also note that only one player — Svetlana Kuznetsova — is Top Ten in both. Only four players — Kuznetsova, Paola Suárez, Anastasia Myskina, and Nadia Petrova — have combined rankings under 20). The following list rankings them according to their combined singles and doubles rankings; in the case of ties, the player with the higher singles ranking is listed first. Combined Player Singles Doubles Combined ordinal Rank Rank Total 1Kuznetsova 8 5 13 2 Suárez 2 16 18 3 Myskina 16 3 19 3 Petrova 7 12 19 5 Sugiyama 9 17 26 5Zvonareva 15 11 26 7 Likhovtseva 5 24 29 8 Molik 17 13 30 9 Schnyder 18 14 32 10 Dementieva 27 6 33 11 Raymond 10 30 40 12 Davenport 44 1 45 13 Shaughnessy 6 40 46 14 Martinez 14 42 56 15 Schiavone 40 19 59 16 Asagoe 26 37 63 16 Farina Elia 43 20 63 18 Ruano Pascual 1 64 65 19 Dulko 34 33 67 19 Kostanic 32 35 67 21 Vento-Kabchi 21 49 70 22 Pratt 23 51 74 22 Saﬁna 30 44 74 24 Loit 31 45 76 24 Maleeva 51 25 76 26 Bartoli 37 41 78 27 Daniilidou 46 34 80 28 Bovina 68 15 83 29 Tanasugarn 20 66 86 30 Sharapova 83 4 87 31 Hantuchova 62 31 93 32 Benesova 63 36 99 32 Déchy 78 21 99 34 Zheng 38 67 105

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 218 35 Marrero 60 47 107 35 Schett 19 88 107 35 Weingärtner 36 71 107 38 Pierce 86 29 115 39 Craybas 57 59 116 40 Medina Garrigues 79 39 118 40 Stosur 53 65 118 Grönefeld 47 75 122 Mandula 41 81 122 Schaul 71 61 132 Srebotnik 49 87 136 Pennetta 100 38 138 Garbin 81 58 139 Granville 64 76 140 Camerin 98 43 141 Peng 85 73 158 Spears 88 92 180 Santangelo 90 91 181 Perebiynis 96 90 186

The following Top 30 singles players are not in the Top 100 in doubles: Amélie Mauresmo (#138 in doubles, with three events), Serena Williams (unranked), Justine Hénin-Hardenne (unranked), Venus Williams (unranked), Jennifer Capriati (unranked), Karolina Sprem (#368), Kim Clijsters (unranked, after being #1 in doubles last year!), Fabiola Zuluaga (#187), Amy Frazier (#306), Tatiana Golovin (#120), Jelena Jankovic (#293). That’s a total of eleven Top 30 singles players below #100 in doubles — up from only three in 2001; there were nine in 2002 and seven in 2003.

The following Top 30 doubles players are not in the Top 100 in singles: Cara Black (#134 in singles), Rennae Stubbs (unranked), Liezel Huber (unranked), Martina Navratilova (#376), Janette Husarova (#213), Emmanuelle Gagliardi (#104), Corina Morariu (unranked), Roberta Vinci (#115), Sun Tiantian (#118), and Li Ting (#168). This total of ten is sharply up from only four last year, but it’s not far off the average: there were nine such doubles specialists in 2002, eight in 2001. And several of these didn’t miss by much, and a number of them have been Top Fifty within the last few years.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 219 WTA Calendar for 2004 ¥ Events and Results The list below summarized the results of all Tour events in 2003. Tournaments are arranged by dates. The first item for each tournament lists the location, the surface, and the Tier. The next line gives the score of the singles final. This the names of the two semifinalists follow, then a list of seeds, with rankings and results. For tournaments below Tier II, only the top two seeds are mentioned. For tournaments of Tier II and higher, four seeds are listed if the event has a 28-draw; otherwise, the top eight seeds are mentioned. This is followed by a list of noteworthy upsets, and then by significant historical facts about the event. January 5-11 Gold Coast ¥ Hard ¥ Tier III Auckland, New Zealand ¥ Hard ¥ Tier V Ai Sugiyama (1) def. Nadia Petrova (2) 1Ð6 6Ð1 6-4 Eleni Daniilidou (3) def. Ashley Harkleroad 6-3 6-2 Semifinalists: Nathalie Déchy, Samantha Stosur Semifinalists: Paola Suárez, Marion Bartoli #1 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#10; WON) #1 seed: Paola Suárez (#14; lost SF) #2 seed: Nadia Petrova (#12; lost F) #2 seed: Anna Smashnova-Pistolesi (#16; lost 2R) Doubles champions: Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva Doubles champions: Jugic-Salkic/Kostanic Major Upsets: Sanchez Lorenzo (#50) def. Schiavone (#20); Major Upsets: Garbin (#87) def. Granville (#46); Sprem (#58) def. Farina Elia (#23); Stosur (#163) def. Harkleroad (#55) def. Smashnova-Pistolesi (#18); Shaughnessy (#17); Kapros (#90) def. Pisnik (#29); Pratt Tu (#152) def. Weingärtner (#45); Jugic-Salkic/ (#52) def. Krasnoroutskaya (#27); Kuznetsova (#35) def. Kostanic def. Ruano Pascual/Suárez Zvonareva (#13), Safina (#53) def. Martinez (#16), Stosur Historical Significance: Daniilidou posts her first- (#163) def. Sprem (#58); Stosur (#163) def. Serna (#21) ever title defence; Harkleroad reaches her first Historical Significance: If Petrova hadn’t hurt herself, she final; Ruano Pascual and Suárez lost the final to… might have had her first title. But she did hurt herself. uh.... January 11Ð17 Sydney, Australia ¥ Hard ¥ Tier II Canberra, Aust. ¥ Hard ¥ Tier V Hobart, Aust. ¥ Hard ¥ Tier V Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1) def. Paola Suárez (2) def. Amy Frazier def. Amélie Mauresmo (3) 6–4 6–4 Silvia Farina Elia (3) Shinobu Asagoe (6) 6-3 6Ð3 Semifinalists: Lindsay Davenport, Francesca 3Ð6 6Ð4 7Ð6(7Ð5) Semifinalists: Kristina Brandi, Schiavone Semifinalists: Julia Vakulenko, Maria Emilia Salerni #1 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#1; WON) Karolina Sprem #1 seed: Eleni Daniilidou (#22; #2 seed: NONE1 #2 seed:2 Paola Suárez (#14; lost 1R) #3 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#4; lost F) WON) #2 seed: Svetlana Kuznetsova #4 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#5; withdrew #3 seed: Silvia Farina Elia (#23; (#33; lost 1R) from SF) lost F) Doubles champions: Doubles champions: Black/Stubbs Doubles champions: Asagoe/Okamoto Major Upsets: Déchy (#32) def. Sugiyama Kostanic/Schaul Major Upsets: Garbin (#84) def. (#9); Davenport/Morariu def. Navratilova/ Major Upsets: Pennetta (#77) def. Daniilidou; Salerni (#174) def. Raymond; Safina/Shaughnessy def. Huber/ Tanasugarn (#35) Kuznetsova (#33); Frazier (#68) Sugiyama; Safina/Shaughnessy def. Historical Significance: First non- def. Likhovtseva (#38); Salerni Bovina/Martinez clay title for Suárez; Kostanic (#174) def. Barna (#47) Historical Significance: First title Hénin- has now won both the doubles Historical Significance: Title #7 Hardenne has won as #1 events she’s played this year. for Frazier — but her first since 1999 1. #2 seed Kim Clijsters withdrew after play began and was replaced by a Lucky Loser 2. #1 seed Nadia Petrova withdrew and seeds were promoted

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 220 January 19ÐFebruary 1 Australian Open ¥ Hard ¥ Slam Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1) def. Kim Clijsters (2) 6–3 4–6 6–3 Semifinalists: Patty Schnyder, Fabiola Zuluaga #1 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#1; WON) #5 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#5; lost QF) #2 seed: Kim Clijsters (#2; lost F) #6 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#7; lost QF) #3 seed: Venus Williams (#11; lost 3R) #7 seed: Elena Dementieva (#8; lost 1R) #4 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#4; WITHDREW from QF) #8 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#9; lost 2R) Doubles champions: Ruano Pascual/Suárez Major Upsets: Jankovic (#79) def. Dementieva (#8); Kapros (#80) def. Petrova (#12); Santangelo (#129) def. Serna (#22); Pratt (#52) def. Shaughnessy (#20); Fedak (#209) def. Pisnik (#31); Granville (#54) def. Tanasugarn (#35); Brandi (#63) def. Martinez (#16); Schaul (#76) def. Bovina (#23); Molik (#40) def. Hantuchova (#21); Obata (#56) def. Sugiyama (#9); Golovin (#354) def. Smashnova-Pistolesi (#17); Likhovtseva (#38) def. Schiavone (#18); Safina (#48) def. Coetzer (#27); Yan/Zheng def. Black/Stubbs; Santangelo (#129) def. Daniilidou (#24); Raymond (#30) def. V. Williams (#11); Schnyder (#26) def. Suárez (#14); Golovin (#354) def. Krasnoroutskaya (#25); Reeves/Ad. Serra Zanetti def. Loit/Pratt; Davenport/Morariu def. Navratilova/Raymond; Ani/Prusova def. Davenport/Morariu; Gagliardi/Vinci def. Petrova/Shaughnessy; Husarova/Safina def. Maleeva/Martinez; Ani/ Prusova def. Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja Historical Significance: Ruano Pascual and Suárez win their fifth Slam, but their first Australian Open; the singles final went the way of all all-Belgian finals, with Hénin-Hardenne winning her third Slam and first Australian Open February 2Ð8 Pan Paciﬁc Open, Tokyo ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier I Lindsay Davenport (2) d. Magdalena Maleeva 6Ð4 6Ð1 Semifinalists: Jelena Dokic, Chanda Rubin (withdrew) #1 seed: Venus Williams (#14¥Spec:#4; withdrew from QF) #3 seed: Elena Dementieva (#8; lost 2R) #2 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#6; WON) #4 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#9; lost QF) Doubles champions: Black/Stubbs Major Upsets: Callens (#85) def. Krasnoroutskaya (#28); Husarova (#166) def. Tanasugarn (#46); Panova (#250) def. Dementieva (#8); Maleeva (#31) def. Sugiyama (#9) Historical Significance: Davenport wins her fourth Pan Pacific, and Stubbs wins it for the fourth straight year with her third different partner — but the real news may be the fact that three seeds (#6 Petrova, #1 Venus Williams, and #5 Rubin) all withdrew after play began, the latter two after winning matches. February 9Ð15 Paris, France ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier II Kim Clijsters (1) d. Mary Pierce 6Ð2 6Ð1 Semifinalists: Dinara Safina, Tatiana Golovin #1 seed: Kim Clijsters (#1; WON) #3 seed: Patty Schnyder (#16; lost 2R) #2 seed: Elena Dementieva (#10; lost QF) #4 seed: Jelena Dokic (#15; lost 2R) Doubles champions: Schett/Schnyder Major Upsets: Golovin (#136) def. Smashnova-Pistolesi (#19); Farina Elia/Schiavone def. Loit/Mandula; Safina (#40) def. Schnyder (#16); Bovina (#35) def. Dokic (#15); Pierce (#37) def. Serna (#23); Safina (#40) def. Schiavone (#18); Golovin (#136) def. Dementieva (#10) Historical Significance: Clijsters finally wins her first title of the year.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 221 February 16Ð21 Antwerp, BEL ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier II Memphis, USA ¥ Hyderabad, India Kim Clijsters (2) def. Silvia Farina Elia (8) Indoor ¥ Tier III ¥ Hard ¥ Tier IV 6Ð3 6Ð0 Vera Zvonareva (1) def. Lisa Nicole Pratt (4) d. Semifinalists: Karolina Sprem, Myriam Raymond (2) 4Ð6 6Ð4 7Ð5 Maria Kirilenko 7Ð6(7Ð3) 6Ð1 Casanova Semifinalists: Maria Sharapova, Semifinalists: Marion Bartoli, #1 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#1; Laura Granville Tamarine Tanasugarn WITHDREW) #1 seed: Vera Zvonareva (#12; #1 seed: Saori Obata (#39; lost 1R) #2 seed: Kim Clijsters (#2) WON) #2 seed: Marion Bartoli (#53; lost #4 seed:1 Elena Dementieva (#10; #2 seed: Lisa Raymond (#24; lost SF) WITHDREW) F) Doubles champions: Huber/Mirza #5 seed: Patty Schnyder (#16; lost QF) Doubles champions: Svensson/Tu Major Upsets: Yoshida (#134) def. Doubles champions: Black/Callens Major Upsets: Dulko (#98) def. Obata (#39); Kirilenko (#148) Major Upsets: Sprem (#45) def. Smashnova- Harkleroad (#47) def. Tanasugarn (#54) Pistolesi (#20); Koukalova (#100) def. Historical Significance: Historical Significance: First Serna (#23); Benesova (#113) def. Zvonareva breaks Raymond’s career title for Pratt; Mirza Daniilidou (#36); Koukalova (#100) def. two-year dominance at this event becomes the first Indian woman Safina (#31); Casanova (#104) def. Pisnik and wins her first indoor title with a WTA title. (#33) Historical Significance: Second straight title for Clijsters is her first in Belgium. Stunningly, it will also be her last of 2004 1. #3 seed Venus Williams withdrew after the draw was made (as did #6 Francesca Schiavone and three other players) and seeds were promoted. After the event began, Dementieva and Hénin-Hardenne withdrew and were replaced by Lucky Losers February 23-29 Dubai, UAR ¥ Hard ¥ Tier II Bogota, Columbia ¥ Clay ¥ Tier III Justine Henin-Hardenne (1) d. Svetlana Kuznetsova 7Ð6(7Ð3) 6Ð3 Fabiola Zuluaga (1) d. Maria Sanchez Semifinalists: Meghann Shaughnessy, Ai Sugiyama Lorenzo (2) 3Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð2 #1 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#1; WON) Semifinalists: Emilie Loit, Lobomira #2 seed: Venus Williams (#18¥Spec: #3; lost QF) Kurhajcova #3 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#5; lost 2R) #1 seed: Fabiola Zuluaga (#25) #4 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#7; lost QF) #2 seed: Maria Sanchez Lorenzo Doubles champions: Husarova/Martinez (#43) Major Upsets: Kuznetsova (#29) def. Schiavone (#17); Barna (#57) def. Doubles champions: Schwartz/Woehr Maleeva (#20); Mandula (#40) def. Dokic (#15); Sfar (#151) def. Major Upsets: Marrero (#109) def. Tanasugarn (#53); Kostanic/Nagyova def. Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja; Harkleroad (#47) Daniilidou (#35) def. Capriati (#5); Kuznetsova (#29) def. V. Williams Historical Significance: That’s three (#18); Shaughnessy (#30) def. Myskina (#7); Shaughnessy/Vinci def. straight for Zuluaga at Bogota Huber/Sugiyama; Kuznetsova (#29) def. Sugiyama (#8) Historical Significance: Third title of the year for Hénin-Hardenne, and first title defence; Kuznetsova reaches her first Tier II final

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 222 March 1Ð7 Doha, Qatar ¥ Hard ¥ Tier II Acapulco, Mexico ¥ Clay ¥ Tier III Anastasia Myskina (3) d. Svetlana Kuznetsova 4Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð4 Iveta Benesova (Q) d. Flavia Pennetta 7Ð6(7Ð5) 6Ð4 Semifinalists: Justine Hénin-Hardenne, Jennifer Capriati Semifinalists: Marta Marrero, Maria Sanchez #1 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#1; lost SF) Lorenzo #2 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#5; lost SF) #1 seed: Amanda Coetzer (#49; lost 2R) #3 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#7; WON) #2 seed: Shinobu Asagoe (#48; lost 2R) #4 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#10; lost 2R) Doubles champions: McShea/Sequera Doubles champions: Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva Major Upsets: Marrero (#108) def. Coetzer (#49); Major Upsets: Testud (NR) def. Serna (#25); Barna (#52) def. Vaidisova (#264) def. Asagoe (#48); Benesova Martinez (#19); Shaughnessy (#30) def. Sugiyama (#10); (#99) def. Bartoli (#50); Benesova (#99) def. Loit Zheng (#77) def. Dokic (#15); Kuznetsova (#20) def. (#42); Blahotova/G. Navratilova def. Bartoli/Loit; Hénin-Hardenne (#1) McShea/Sequera def. Gagliardi/Wartusch; Pennetta Historical Significance: Myskina posts her first-ever title (#100) def. Sanchez Lorenzo (#36) defence and hits #5; Kuznetsova is Top 15; Hénin- Historical Significance: First career title for Hardenne’s first loss of the year Benesova; it also proves to be the last career event for Coetzer, though she will not retire for some months March 10Ð21 Indian Wells, California, USA ¥ Hard ¥ Tier I Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1) d. Lindsay Davenport (3) 6–1 6–4 Semifinalists: Anastasia Myskina, Nathalie Déchy #1 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#1; WON) #5 seed: NONE1 #2 seed: Kim Clijsters (#2; WITHDREW from 3R) #6 seed: Vera Zvonareva (#11; lost 4R) #3 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#4; lost F) #7 seed: Nadia Petrova (#12; lost 3R) #4 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#5; lost SF) #8 seed: Paola Suárez (#13; lost 3R) Doubles champions: Ruano Pascual/Suárez Major Upsets: Golovin (#91) def. Asagoe (#48); Leon Garcia (#98) def. Dokic (#16); Brandi (#52) def. Schiavone (#22); Talaja (#101) def. Pisnik (#31); Irvin (#142) def. Hantuchova (#36); Dulko (#97) def. Sanchez Lorenzo (#35); Stosur (#114) def. Sprem (#38); Benesova (#69) def. Maleeva (#21); Karatancheva (#282) def. Serna (#25); Strycova (#116) def. Daniilidou (#34); Schett (#77) def. Likhovtseva (#40); Sucha (#81) def. Loit (#41); Marrero (#95) def. Black (#46); Perebiynis/Talaja def. Huber/Maleeva; Dulko (#97) def. Petrova (#12); Schett (#77) def. Suárez (#13); Myskina/Zvonareva def. Navratilova/Raymond; Déchy (#28) def. Zvonareva (#11) Historical Significance: Davenport blows another final as Hénin-Hardenne wins her fourth title of the year. Kim Clijsters makes the first of the withdrawals that will ruin her year. 1. #5 seed Chanda Rubin withdrew after the draw was made and #33 seed Amy Frazier replaced her.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 223 March 23ÐApril 4 Miami ¥ Hard ¥ Tier I Serena Williams (1) d. Elena Dementieva (5) 6Ð1 6Ð1 Semifinalists: Eleni Daniilidou, Nadia Petrova #1 seed: Serena Williams (#6/Spec: 1; WON) #5 seed: Elena Dementieva (#8; lost F) #2 seed: Venus Williams (#17/Spec: 3; lost QF) #6 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#10; lost 2R) #3 seed: NONE1 #7 seed: Vera Zvonareva (#12; lost 3R) #4 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#7; lost 3R) #8 seed: Nadia Petrova (#11; lost SF) Doubles champions: Petrova/Shaughnessy Major Upsets: Dragomir Ilie (#446) def. Ondraskova (#98); Vento-Kabchi (#39) def. Sugiyama (#10); Jankovic (#72) def. Maleeva (#22); Kapros (#52) def. Pisnik (#31); Golovin (#94) def. Safina (#32); Craybas (#73) def. Mandula (#43); Perry (#127) def. Zuluaga (#20); Brandi (#48) def. Shaughnessy (#27); Douchevina (#99) def. Krasnoroutskaya (#37); Daniilidou (#35) def. Capriati (#7); Craybas (#73) def. Zvonareva (#12); Molik (#30) def. Farina Elia (#15); Craybas (#73) def. Suárez (#13); Sprem (#38) def. Kuznetsova (#14); Molik/Serna def. Black/ Stubbs; Li/Sun def. Huber/Sugiyama; Petrova/Shaughnessy def. Ruano Pascual/Suárez; Petrova/Shaughnessy def. Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva Historical Significance: Serena, playing her first event since Wimbledon, still wins (admittedly in an pitiful field). 1. #3 seed Anastasia Myskina withdrew after play began and was replaced by a Lucky Loser April 5Ð11 Amelia Island, USA ¥ (Green) Clay ¥ Tier II Casablanca, Morocco ¥ Clay ¥ Lindsay Davenport (4) d. Amélie Mauresmo (3) 6–4 6–4 Tier V Semifinalists: Justine Hénin-Hardenne, Nadia Petrova Emilie Loit (1) d. Ludmila Cervanova #1 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#1; lost SF) (4) 6Ð2 6Ð2 #2 seed: Serena Williams (#7; lost QF) Semifinalists: Rita Grande, Klara #3 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#3; lost F) Koukalova #4 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#4; WON) #1 seed: Emilie Loit (#40) #5 seed: Elena Dementieva (#6; lost 2R) #2 seed: Marion Bartoli (#70; lost #6 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#10; lost 3R) 1R)1 #7 seed: Nadia Petrova (#9; lost SF) Doubles champions: Bartoli/Loit #8 seed: Vera Zvonareva (#11; lost QF) Major Upsets: Marrero (#102) def. Doubles champions: Petrova/Shaughnessy Benesova (#61) Major Upsets: Parra (#59) def. Schiavone (#20); Frazier (#42) def. Dokic Historical Significance: First title (#18); Mandula/Tu def. Black/Stubbs; Kostanic/Perebiynis def. (singles or doubles) for Bartoli; first Likhovtseva/Martinez; Kostanic (#62) def. Dementieva (#6), Strycova singles title for Loit (#82) def. Smashnova-Pistolesi (#21); Farina Elia/Schiavone def. Huber/ Navratilova; Petrova/Shaughnessy def. Ruano Pascual/Suárez Historical Significance: Hénin-Hardenne suffers her second loss of the year (to Mauresmo); Davenport wins first clay title in almost five years (and first clay Tier II since she won Amelia Island in 1997); Petrova/Shaughnessy win second straight doubles title 1. This is an extreme instance of the effects of calendar shift. The #2-ranked player at Casablanca was actually Iveta Benesova, #61, who ended up seeded #5 and stuck in Loit’s quarter. Bartoli, at #70, was only the #5 player in the ﬁeld.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 224 April 12Ð18 Charleston, USA ¥ (Green) Clay ¥ Tier I Estoril, Portugal ¥ Clay ¥ Tier IV Venus Williams (4) def. Conchita Martinez (16) 2Ð6 6Ð2 6Ð1 Emilie Loit (3) def. Iveta Benesova Semifinalists: Jelena Kostanic, Patty Schnyder (6) 7Ð5 7Ð6(7Ð1) #1 seed: NONE1 Semifinalists: Marta Marrero, #2 seed: Serena Williams (#9/Spec: 2; WITHDREW from 3R) Stephanie Cohen-Aloro #4 seed: Venus Williams (#16/Spec: 3; WON) #1 seed: Elena Bovina (#30; lost 2R) #5 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#4; lost QF) #2 seed: Alicia Molik (#37; lost 1R) #6 seed: Elena Dementieva (#6; lost 3R) Doubles champions: Gagliardi/ #7 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#8; lost 3R) Husarova #8 seed: Nadia Petrova (#7; lost QF) Major Upsets: Nagyova (#102) def. #9 seed: Vera Zvonareva (#11; lost QF) Molik; Marrero (#95) def. Bovina Doubles champions: Ruano Pascual/Suárez (#30) Major Upsets: Randriantefy (#112) def. Raymond (#27); Ashley (#121) def. Historical Significance:.First title Tanasugarn (#54); Mikaelian (#85) def. Zuluaga (#22); Castano (#114) def. (singles or doubles) for Gagliardi; Daniilidou (#26); Morigami (#59) def. Pierce (#34); Jidkova (#107) def. Loit wins second straight title Asagoe (#48); Jidkova (#107) def. Suárez (#13); Mandula (#42) def. Dokic (#18); Randriantefy (#112) def. Sprem (#32); Schnyder (#17) def. Dementieva ($6); Mandula (#42) def. Capriati (#8); Schnyder (#17) def. Davenport (#4); Martinez (#24) def. Petrova (#7) Historical Significance: After more than a year, Venus finally wins another title — her first green clay Tier I 1. #3 seed Amélie Mauresmo withdrew and seeds were promoted; #1 seed Justine Hénin-Hardenne withdrew after play began and was replaced by a Lucky Loser (#3 seed Serena Williams also withdrew, but after playing a match) April 26ÐMay 2 Warsaw, Poland ¥ Clay ¥ Tier II Budapest, Hungary ¥ Clay ¥ Tier V Venus Williams (2) def. Svetlana Kuznetsova (4) 6Ð1 6Ð4 Jelena Jankovic (8) d. Semifinalists: Vera Zvonareva, Francesca Schiavone Martina Sucha 7Ð6(7Ð4) 6Ð3 #1 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#3; lost QF) Semifinalists: Flavia Pennetta, Iveta Benesova #2 seed: Venus Williams (#13; WON) #1 seed: NONE1 #3 seed: Vera Zvonareva (#11; lost SF) #2 seed: Petra Mandula (#34; lost QF) #4 seed: Svetlana Kuznetsova (#14; lost F) Doubles champions: Mandula/Schett Doubles champions: Farina Elia/Schett Major Upsets: Sucha (#69) def. Mandula (#34) Major Upsets: Schiavone (#22) def. Mauresmo (#3); Dulko/Tarabini Historical Significance:. First career title for def. Likhovtseva/Zvonareva Jankovic Historical Significance:.Venus wins the tournament where she was injured a year ago. 1. #1 seed Emilie Loit withdrew and there was partial seed promotion: She was replaced by #9 seed Melinda Czink

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 225 May 3Ð9 Berlin, Germany ¥ Clay ¥ Tier I Amélie Mauresmo (2) def. Venus Williams (3), WALKOVER Semifinalists: Karolina Sprem, Jennifer Capriati #1 seed: Kim Clijsters (#2; WITHDREW from 3R) #5 seed: Nadia Petrova (#6; lost 3R) #2 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#3; WON) #6 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#8; lost SF) #3 seed: Venus Williams (#11; WITHDREW from F) #7 seed: Elena Dementieva (#9; lost 3R) #4 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#4; lost QF) #8 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#10; lost 3R) Doubles champions: Petrova/Shaughnessy Major Upsets: Sanchez Lorenzo (#42) def. Martinez (#18); Shaughnessy (#40) def. Dokic (#23); Suárez (#17) def. Petrova (#6); Zuluaga (#24) def. Sugiyama (#10); Capriati (#8) def. Myskina (#5); Pierce/Sanchez-Vicario def. Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva; Myskina/Zvonareva def. Black/Huber; Petrova/Shaughnessy def. Ruano Pascual/Suárez Historical Significance: Mauresmo’s first title this year breaks a 13-match winning streak for Venus May 10Ð16 Rome, Italy ¥ Clay ¥ Tier I Amélie Mauresmo (2) d. Jennifer Capriati (5) 3–6 6–3 7–6(8–6) Semifinalists: Serena Williams, Vera Zvonareva #1 seed: Serena Williams (#7; lost SF) #5 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#9; lost F) #2 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#3; WON) #6 seed: Elena Dementieva (#10; lost 2R) #3 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#5; lost 2R) #7 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#11; lost 3R) #4 seed: Nadia Petrova (#6; lost 2R) #8 seed: Vera Zvonareva (#14; lost SF) Doubles champions: Petrova/Shaughnessy Major Upsets: Randriantefy (#97) def. Maleeva (#22); Reeves (#92) def. Raymond (#30); Camerin (#79) def. Dokic (#24); Likhovtseva (#50) def. Loit (#29); Sharapova (#19) def. Dementieva (#10); Likhovtseva (#50) def. Myskina (#5); Pennetta (#72) def. Petrova (#6); Bovina (#28) def. Schnyder (#17); Peshke/Rittner def. Black/Callens; Dementieva/Pratt def. Huber/Sugiyama; Likhovtseva/Myskina def. Navratilova/Raymond; Petrova/Shaughnessy def. Ruano Pascual/Suárez Historical Significance: Mauresmo wins her second straight tournament; Petrova/Shaughnessy their fourth straight. May 17Ð23 Vienna, Austria ¥ Clay ¥ Tier III Strasbourg, France ¥ Clay ¥ Tier III Anna Smashnova (2) def. Alicia Molik (6) 6Ð2 3Ð6 6Ð3 Claudine Schaul def. Lindsay Davenport (1) 2Ð6 6Ð0 6Ð3 Semifinalists: Jelena Kostanic, Amy Frazier Semifinalists: Silvia Farina Elia, Emilie Loit #1 seed: Chanda Rubin (#14; lost 2R) #1 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#4) #2 seed: Anna Smashnova-Pistolesi (#20) #2 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#13; lost QF) Doubles champions: Navratilova/Raymond Doubles champions: McShea/Sequera Major Upsets: Zheng (#63) def. Raymond (#29); Jidkova Major Upsets: Beltrame (#94) def. Sanchez Lorenzo (#84) def. Rubin (#14); Weingärtner (#108) def. Vento- (#35); Sequera (#98) def. Safina (#33); Vakulenko Kabchi (#34) (#77) def. Shaughnessy (#37); Schaul (#66) def. Pisnik Historical Significance: Smashnova still hasn’t won a (#36); Schaul (#66) def. Sugiyama (#13); Beltrame/Pin Tier II, but she’s never lost a final, either; Navratilova/ def. Bartoli/Huber; Schaul (#66) def. Loit (#32); Schaul Raymond earn their first title of the year (it will end up (#66) def. Davenport (#4) being their only title). Historical Significance: Schaul beats four seeds to earn her first career title

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 226 May 24-June 6 French Open/Roland Garros ¥ Clay ¥ Slam Anastasia Myskina (6) def. Elena Dementieva (9) 6Ð1 6Ð2 Semifinalists: Paola Suárez, Jennifer Capriati #1 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#1; lost 2R) #5 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#4; lost R16) #2 seed: Serena Williams (#7/Spec: #2; lost QF) #6 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#5; WON) #3 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#3; lost QF) #7 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#6; lost SF) #4 seed: Venus Williams (#9/Spec: #3; lost QF) #8 seed: Nadia Petrova (#8; lost 3R) Doubles champions: Ruano Pascual/Suárez Major Upsets: Perebiynis (#103) def. Dokic (#23); Weingärtner (#94) def. Daniilidou (#27); Camerin (#74) def. Frazier (#35); Casanova (#93) def. Sprem (#28); Razzano (#120) def. Brandi (#45); Foretz (#124) def. Déchy (#26); Garbin (#86) def. Hénin-Hardenne (#1); Shaughnessy (#38) def. Farina Elia (#16); Parra Santonja (#66) def. Raymond (#29); Zheng (#58) def. Loit (#33); Irvin (#104) def. Safina (#36); Asagoe/Fujiwara def. Huber/ Sugiyama; Ruano Pascual (#90) def. Sugiyama (#12); Asagoe (#52) def. Schnyder (#17); Dulko (#64) def. Martinez (#21); Chladkova (#70) def. Mandula (#30); Weingärtner (#94) def. Petrova (#8); Stewart/Stosur def. Bartoli/Loit; Testud/Vinci def. Li/Sun; Dementieva (#10) def. Davenport (#4); Testud/Vinci def. Black/Stubbs; Testud/Vinci def. Farina Elia/Schiavone Historical Significance: First Slam title for Myskina puts her at #3 in the world; Ruano Pascual/Suárez win third straight Slam and sixth overall June 7Ð13 Birmingham, England ¥ Grass ¥ Tier III Maria Sharapova (3) d. Tatiana Golovin 4-6 6Ð2 6Ð1 Semifinalists: Patty Schnyder, Emilie Loit #1 seed: Nadia Petrova (#12; lost 2R) #2 seed: Patty Schnyder (#20; lost SF) Doubles champions: Kirilenko/Sharapova Major Upsets: McCain (#144) def. Pisnik (#46); Kremer (#322) def. Serna (#50); Mikaelian (#106) def. Zheng (#49); Sequera (#85) def. Krasnoroutskaya (#45); Ruano Pascual (#69) def. Vento-Kabchi (#33); Panova/Tatarkova def. Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja; Asagoe (#38) def. Petrova (#12); Perry (#88) def. Dokic (#24); Vinci (#108) def. Déchy (#29); Morigami (#67) def. Daniilidou (#30); Tanasugarn (#58) def. Maleeva (#21); Golovin (#71) def. Asagoe (#38); Golovin (#71) def. Loit (#36) Historical Significance: Sharapova’s third Tier III title, on her third surface June 14-20 Eastbourne, England ¥ Grass ¥ Tier II ’s-Hertogenbosch, Netherlands ¥ Svetlana Kuznetsova (2) def. Grass ¥ Tier III Daniela Hantuchova (WC) 2Ð6 7Ð6(7Ð2) 6Ð4 Mary Pierce (3) def. Semifinalists: Amélie Mauresmo, Vera Zvonareva Klara Koukalova 7Ð6(8Ð6) 6Ð2 #1 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#4; lost SF) Semifinalists: Lina Krasnoroutskaya, #2 seed: Svetlana Kuznetsova (#9; WON) Anabel Medina Garrigues #3 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#13; lost QF) #1 seed: Nadia Petrova (#12; lost 2R) #4 seed: Vera Zvonareva (#14; lost SF) #2 seed: Patty Schnyder (#17; lost 2R) Doubles champions: Molik/Serna Doubles champions: McShea/Sequera Major Upsets: Sprem (#35) def. Smashnova (#18); Pisnik (#47) def. Major Upsets: Jankovic (#52) def. Dokic (#25); Hantuchova (#54) def. Frazier (#33); Hantuchova (#54) Petrova (#12); Medina Garrigues (#58) def. Sprem (#35); Pisnik (#47) def. Schiavone (#20); Sanchez Lorenzo def. Schnyder (#17) (#55) def. Bovina (#22); Hantuchova (#54) def. Sugiyama (#13); Molik/ Historical Significance: First grass title Serna def. Navratilova/Raymond; Bovina/Pratt def. Huber/Sugiyama; for Pierce, and first title since Roland Perebiynis/Vento-Kabchi def. Black/Stubbs; Hantuchova (#54) def. Garros 2000 Mauresmo (#4); Molik/Serna def. Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva Historical Significance: Kuznetsova wins her first grass title and first Tier II title; Molik wins her first doubles title

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 227 June 21-July 4 Wimbledon ¥ Grass ¥ Slam Maria Sharapova (13) d. Serena Williams (1) 6Ð1 6Ð4 Semifinalists: Lindsay Davenport, Amélie Mauresmo #1 seed: Serena Williams (#10/Spec: #2; lost F) #5 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#5; lost SF) #2 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#3; lost 3R) #6 seed: Elena Dementieva (#6; lost 1R) #3 seed: Venus Williams (#8/Spec: 3; lost 2R) #7 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#7; lost QF) #4 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#4; lost SF) #8 seed: Svetlana Kuznetsova (#9; lost 1R) Doubles champions: Black/Stubbs Major Upsets: Dulko (#59) def. Dokic (#25); Srebotnik (#68) def. Smashnova (#18); Panova (#122) def. Loit (#28); Kleinova (#129) def. Dementieva (#6); Razzano (#118) def. Kuznetsova (#9); Bartoli (#84) def. Rubin (#20); Serna (#53) def. Daniilidou (#33); Llagostera Vives (#142) def. Mandula (#40); Kremer (#181) def. Zuluaga (#22); Sequera (#79) def. Martinez (#31); Ruano Pascual (#67) def. Pierce (#23); Nagyova (#91) def. Krasnoroutskaya (#42); Parra Santonja (#63) def. Safina (#32); Sprem (#30) def. V. Williams (#8); Gagliardi (#115) def. Schnyder (#16); Golovin (#54) def. Schiavone (#17); Cervanova (#87) def. Raymond (27); Frazier (#36) def. Myskina (3); Tanasugarn (#66) def. Molik (#26); Rodionova/Dominative def. Li/Sun; Sharapova (#15) def. Davenport (#5); Sharapova (#15) def. S. Williams (#10); Black/Stubbs def. Ruano Pascual/Suarez Historical Significance: Sharapova wins her first Slam and hits the Top Ten; Ruano Pascual/Suárez don’t earn the Grand Slam as Black wins Slam #1 (she would go on to win the mixed as well, playing one women’s and two mixed matches on the final Sunday and winning all three) July 12-18 Stanford, California ¥ Hard ¥ Tier II Lindsay Davenport (2) def. Venus Williams (1) 7Ð6(7Ð4) 5Ð7 7Ð6(7Ð4) Semifinalists: #1 seed: Venus Williams (#15; lost F) #3 seed: Patty Schnyder (#16; lost QF) #2 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#5; WON) #4 seed: Francesca Schiavone (#18; lost QF) Doubles champions: Daniilidou/Pratt Major Upsets: Irvin (#98) def. Shaughnessy (#29); Frazier (#25) def. Schnyder (#16); Vento-Kabchi (#32) def. Schiavone (#18) Historical Significance: Davenport breaks a six-match losing streak to Venus to win her third title of the year. July 19Ð25 Los Angeles ¥ Hard ¥ Tier II Palermo, Italy ¥ Clay ¥ Tier V Lindsay Davenport (3) def. Serena Williams (1) 6Ð1 6Ð3 Anabel Medina Garrigues (2) def. Flavia Semifinalists: Elena Dementieva, Venus Williams Pennetta (5) 6Ð4 6Ð4 #1 seed: Serena Williams (#16; lost F) Semifinalists: Katarina Srebotnik, Denisa #2 seed: Venus Williams (#13; lost SF) Chladkova #3 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#5; WON) #1 seed: Klara Koukalova (#58’ lost QF) #4 seed: Elena Dementieva (#6; lost SF) #2 seed: Anabel Medina Garrigues (#59; #5 seed: Svetlana Kuznetsova (#9; lost QF) WON) #6 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#10; lost R16) Doubles champions: Medina Garrigues/ #7 seed: Nadia Petrova (#12; lost QF) Sanchez-Vicario #8 seed: Vera Zvonareva (#14; lost QF) Major Upsets: Doubles champions: Petrova/Shaughnessy Historical Significance: Medina Garrigues Major Upsets: Morigami (#70) def. Farina Elia (#19); Barna (#56) def. wins her second career singles title (both at Zuluaga (#24); Jankovic (#49) def. Shaughnessy (#30); Hantuchova/ Palermo), and wins singles and doubles at Rubin def. Black/Stubbs; Kostanic (#37) def. Schnyder (#15); the same event; first doubles title for Schiavone (#18) def. Sugiyama (#10); Tanasugarn/Vento-Kabchi Sanchez-Vicario in her comeback def. Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva Historical Significance: Davenport wins back-to-back titles for the first time since late 2001

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 228 July 26-August 1 San Diego, California ¥ Hard ¥ Tier I Lindsay Davenport (4) def. Anastasia Myskina (3) 6Ð1 6Ð1 Semifinalists: Elena Dementieva, Vera Zvonareva #1 seed: Serena Williams (#14; WITHDREW from QF) #5 seed: Elena Dementieva (#6; lost SF) #2 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#3; lost 2R) #6 seed: Maria Sharapova (#8; lost QF) #3 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#5; lost F) #7 seed: Svetlana Kuznetsova (#9; lost R16) #4 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#4; WON) #8 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#11; lost QF) Doubles champions: Black/Stubbs Major Upsets: Benesova (#56) def. Farina Elia (#19); Harkleroad (#109) def. Schnyder (#16); Likhovtseva (#35) def. Petrova (#12); Asagoe (#69) def. Shaughnessy (#30); Molik (#29) def. Mauresmo (#3); Dulko (#52) def. Pierce (#26); Zvonareva (#15) def. Kuznetsova (#9) Historical Significance: Davenport extends her winning streak to 14, takes the #2 ranking, and wins all three West Coast events for the second time in her career. August 2Ð8 Canadian Open/Montreal ¥ Hard ¥ Tier I Stockholm, Sweden ¥ Hard ¥ Tier IV Amélie Mauresmo (2) def. Elena Likhovtseva 6–1 6–0 Alicia Molik (3) def. Tatiana Perebiynis Semifinalists: Anastasia Myskina, Vera Zvonareva 6Ð1 6Ð1 #2 seed:1 Amélie Mauresmo (#3) Semifinalists: Silvia Farina Elia, Sandra #3 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#4; lost SF) Kleinova #4 seed: Elena Dementieva (#6; lost 2R) #1 seed: Anna Smashnova (#17; lost 2R) #5 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#7; lost QF) #2 seed: Silvia Farina Elia (#21; lost SF) #6 seed: Maria Sharapova (#8; lost R16) Doubles champions: Molik/Schett #7 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#11; lost R16) Major Upsets: Kleinova (#103) def. #8 seed: Nadia Petrova (#15; lost 2R) Smashnova (#17) #9 seed: Paola Suárez (#13; lost R16) Historical Significance: Molik’s second Doubles champions: Asagoe/Sugiyama career title puts her in the Top 25; she Major Upsets: Dulko (#43) def. Dementieva (#6); Likhovtseva (#39) def. wins singles and doubles at the same Petrova (#15); Golovin (#38) def. Zuluaga (#25); Maleeva (#23) def. event for the first time; first final for Suárez (#13); Likhovtseva (#39) def. Schiavone (#17); Zvonareva Perebiynis (#14) def. Sharapova (#8); Sprem (#19) def. Sugiyama (#11); Mauresmo/Pierce def. Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja; Likhovtseva (#39) def. Capriati (7); Likhovtseva (#39) def. Myskina (#4); Huber/Tanasugarn def. Ruano Pascual/Suárez Historical Significance: Mauresmo’s third title of the year moves her up to #2 in the world, with an eye on #1 1. #1 seed Serena Williams withdrew from the Canadian Open and seeds were promoted

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 229 August 15Ð21 August 9Ð15 Olympics Sopot, POL ¥ Clay ¥ Tier III Vancouver, CAN ¥ Hard ¥ Athens, Greece Flavia Pennetta (9) d. Klara Tier V Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1) d. Amélie Koukalova (11) 7Ð5 3Ð6 6Ð3 Nicole Vaidisova (Q) d. Mauresmo (2) 6Ð3 6Ð3 Semifinalists: Anastasia Myskina, Laura Granville (4) Bronze Medalist: Alicia Molik Marta Domachowska 2Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð2 Other Semifinalist: Anastasia Myskina #1 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#3; Semifinalists: Camille Pin, #1 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#1; WON) WITHDREW from QF) Alina Jidkova #2 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#2; lost F) #2 seed: Anna Smashnova (#20; lost #1 seed: Marion Bartoli #3 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#3; lost SF) 2R) (#56; lost 2R) #4 seed: Elena Dementieva (#6; lost 1R) Doubles champions: Llagostera #2 seed: Milagros Sequera #5 seed: Svetlana Kuznetsova (#10; lost QF) Vives/Marrero (#74; lost QF) #6 seed: Venus Williams (#12; lost R16) Major Upsets: Cervanova (#86) def. Doubles champions: #7 seed: Paola Suárez (#15; lost 2R) Medina Garrigues (#48); Mattek/Spears #8 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#14; lost QF) Domachowska (#140) def. Major Upsets: — Doubles champions: Li/Sun Smashnova (#20); Kurhajcova Historical Significance: First Major Upsets: Molik (#23) def. Dementieva (#79) def. Safina (#42) career title for Vaidisova (#6); Garbin (#64) def. Smashnova (#19); Historical Significance: First career (in her third main draw); Zuluaga (#27) def. Suárez (#15); Pierce title for all the champions first final for Granville (#28) def. Petrova (#14); Raymond (#40) August 16Ð22 def Farina Elia (#20); Daniilidou (#35) def. Cincinnati, USA ¥ Hard ¥ Tier III Maleeva (#21); Pierce (#28) def. V. Lindsay Davenport (1) d. Vera Zvonareva (2) 6Ð3 6Ð2 Williams (#12); Déchy/Testud def. Semifinalists: Marion Bartoli, Amy Frazier Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva; Molik (#23) def. #1 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#4) Sugiyama (#13); Molik (#23) def. Myskina #2 seed: Vera Zvonareva (#9) (#3) Doubles champions: Craybas/Weingärtner Historical Significance: Hénin-Hardenne Major Upsets: — comes back strong from sickness to retain Historical Significance: Davenport’s fourth straight title #1 ranking and earn her last title of 2004; Molik hits Top 20; Li/Sun win biggest title but earn no points August 22Ð28 New Haven, Connecticut ¥ Hard ¥ Tier II Forest Hills, NY ¥ Hard ¥ Tier V Elena Bovina (7) def. Nathalie Déchy (8) 6–2 2–6 7–5 (15 draw) Semifinalists: Elena Dementieva, Lisa Raymond Elena Likhovtseva (1) def. Iveta Benesova #1 seed: NONE1 (4) 6Ð2 6Ð2 #2 seed: Elena Dementieva (#6; lost SF) Semifinalists: Anabel Medina Garrigues, #3 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#8; lost QF) Kirsten Flipkens #4 seed: Maria Sharapova (#7; lost 2R) #1 seed: Elena Likhovtseva (#26) Doubles champions: Petrova/Shaughnessy #2 seed: Emilie Loit (#38; lost QF) Major Upsets: Kostanic (#40) def. Maleeva (#23); Washington (#81) Doubles champions: NO DOUBLES def. Shaughnessy (#33); Washington (#81) def. Sharapova (7); PLAYED Raymond (#36) def. Petrova (#15); Déchy (#29) def. Capriati (#8); Major Upsets: Flipkens (#186) def. Camerin Bovina (#27) def. Dementieva (#6) (#67); Flipkens (#186) def. Loit (#38) Historical Significance: Bovina wins her first Tier II title; Petrova/ Historical Significance: Likhovtseva wins Shaughnessy take home their sixth title of the year her first title since Gold Coast 1997 1. #1 seed Lindsay Davenport withdrew after play began and was replaced by a Lucky Loser

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 230 August 30- September 12 U. S. Open ¥ Hard ¥ Slam Svetlana Kuznetsova (9) def. Elena Dementieva (6) 6Ð3 7Ð5 Semifinalists: Lindsay Davenport, Jennifer Capriati #1 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#1; lost R16) #5 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#4; lost SF) #2 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#2; lost QF) #6 seed: Elena Dementieva (#6; lost F) #3 seed: Serena Williams (#11/Spec: 2; lost QF) #7 seed: Maria Sharapova (#7; lost 3R) #4 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#3; lost 2R) #8 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#8; lost SF) Doubles champions: Ruano Pascual/Suárez Major Upsets: Kostanic (#40) def. Sprem (#20); Kirilenko (#103) def. Likhovtseva (#24); Asagoe (#62) def. Smashnova (#27); Haynes (#185) def. Maleeva (#25); Chakvetadze (#175) def. Myskina (#3); Cargill/Miyagi def. Bartoli/Casanova; Dhenin/Talaja def. Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja; Camerin/Sequera def. Molik/Serna; Craybas/ Weingärtner def. Callens/Mandula; Lee/Peng def. Petrova/Shaughnessy; Asagoe (#62) def. Suárez (#15); Pierce (#29) def. Sharapova (#7); Asagoe (#62) def. Daniilidou (#33); Petrova (#14) def. Hénin-Hardenne (#1); Dementieva/Sugiyama def. Black/Stubbs; Kuznetsova (#9) def. Davenport (#4) Historical Significance: Hénin-Hardenne loses the #1 ranking; Mauresmo becomes #1 without a Slam final; Kuznetsova wins her first Slam; Ruano Pascual/Suárez earn third straight USO (first team ever to do so) September 13Ð19 Bali, Indonesia ¥ Hard ¥ Tier III Svetlana Kuznetsova (2) d. Marlene Weingärtner 6–1 6–4 Semifinalists: Nadia Petrova, Maria Elena Camerin #1 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#2; lost 2R) #3 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#14; lost 1R) #2 seed: Svetlana Kuznetsova (#6; WON) #4 seed: Nadia Petrova (#13; lost SF) Doubles champions: Myskina/Sugiyama Major Upsets: Cho (#313) def. Vento-Kabchi (#40); Nakamura (#165) def. Sugiyama (#14); Garbin (#59) def. Rubin (#24); Widjaja (#144) def. Jankovic (#36); Camerin (#61) def. Myskina (#2); Camerin (#61) def. Dulko (#35) Historical Significance: Kuznetsova’s second straight title puts her in the Top Five; Weingärtner makes first final; Myskina earns first doubles title September 20Ð26 Beijing, China ¥ Hard ¥ Tier II Serena Williams (1) d. Svetlana Kuznetsova (2) 4Ð6 7Ð5 6Ð4 Semifinalists: Maria Sharapova, Vera Zvonareva #1 seed: Serena Williams (#1/Spec: 2; WON) #3 seed: Maria Sharapova (#8; lost SF) #2 seed: Svetlana Kuznetsova (#5; lost F) #4 seed: Vera Zvonareva (#11; lost SF) Doubles champions: Gagliardi/Safina Major Upsets: Tanasugarn (#97) def. Dokic (#43); N. Li (#193) def. Pratt (#49); Gagliardi (#106) def. Brandi (#44)’ S. Williams (#10) def. Kuznetsova (#5) Historical Significance: Serena wins her second title of the year to end Kuznetsova’s winning streak; first career doubles title for Safina, and first Tier II for Gagliardi

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 231 September 27ÐOctober 3 Hasselt, Belgium ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier III GuangZhou, China ¥ Hard ¥ Tier III Seoul, Korea ¥ Hard ¥ Tier IV Elena Dementieva (1) def. Elena Bovina Li Na (Q) def. Martina Sucha 6Ð3 6Ð4 Maria Sharapova (1) def. Marta (3) 0Ð6 6Ð0 6Ð4 Semifinalists: Barbora Strycova, Li Ting Domachowska 6Ð1 6Ð1 Semifinalists: Maria Elena Camerin, #1 seed: Gisela Dulko (#33; lost 2R) Semifinalists: Anne Kremer, Kim Clijsters #2 seed: Jelena Jankovic (#36; lost 2R) Abigail Spears #1 seed: Elena Dementieva (#6) Doubles champions: Li/Sun #1 seed: Maria Sharapova (#8; #2 seed: Kim Clijsters (#7; lost SF) Major Upsets: Li Na (#145) def. WON) Doubles champions: Russell/Santangelo Jankovic (#36); Safina (#54) def. #2 seed: Shinobu Asagoe (#42; Major Upsets: Ruano Pascual (#61) def. Dulko (#33); Tanasugarn (#85) def. lost 2R) Kostanic (#35); Chladkova (#62) def. Pennetta (#40); Peng (#92) def. Bartoli Doubles champions: Cho/Jeon Farina Elia (#22); Camerin (#45) def. (#41); Li Ting (#222) def. Pratt (#49); Major Upsets: Spears (#128) def. Sprem (#18); Bovina (#17) def. Li Na (#145) def. Brandi (#46); Yang/ Asagoe (#42) Clijsters (#7) Yu def. Pratt/Tanasugarn Historical Significance: Historical Significance: First title of Historical Significance: First singles Sharapova wins her first 2004 for Dementieva; first titles for title for any Chinese player; Li hits Challenger, er, third title of the the doubles winners; Clijsters tries a Top 100 year; first title for the Korean comeback but won’t play again in doubles winners 2004 October 4Ð10 Filderstadt, Germany ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier II Japan Open/Tokyo ¥ Hard ¥ Tier III Lindsay Davenport (2) def. Amélie Mauresmo (1) 6–2, retired Maria Sharapova (1) d. Mashona Semifinalists: Anastasia Myskina, Svetlana Kuznetsova Washington 6Ð0 6Ð1 #1 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#1; lost F) Semifinalists: Tamarine Tanasugarn, #2 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#2; WON) Klara Koukalova #3 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#4; lost SF) #1 seed: Maria Sharapova (#10; WON) #4 seed: Svetlana Kuznetsova (#5; lost SF) #2 seed: Tatiana Golovin (#29; lost 2R) Doubles champions: Black/Stubbs Doubles champions: Asagoe/Srebotnik Major Upsets: Panova (#84) def. Daniilidou (#32); Osterloh (#126) def. Major Upsets: Tanasugarn (#76) def. Loit (#39); Gehrlein (#200) def. Benesova (#37); Smashnova (#31) def. Asagoe (#43); Fedossova (#448) def. Sugiyama (#14); Likhovtseva (#27) def. Zvonareva (#11), Pierce (#26) Shaughnessy (#46); Linetskaya (#114) def. Suárez (#16); Grönefeld/Schruff def. Schett/Schnyder; Raymond def. Pratt (#48); Vaidisova (#111) def. (#30) def. Dementieva (#6); Jankovic (#35) def. Petrova (#13); Golovin (#29) Grönefeld/Schruff def. Myskina/Zvonareva, Grönefeld/Schruff def. Historical Significance: First title Husarova/Likhovtseva defence for Sharapova Historical Significance: Davenport moves to within 15 points of #1

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 232 October 11Ð17 Moscow, Russia ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier I Tashkent ¥ Hard ¥ Tier IV Anastasia Myskina (3) def. Elena Dementieva (2) 7Ð5 6Ð0 Nicole Vaidisova def. Virginie Razzano (9) 5Ð7 Semifinalists: Elena Bovina, Lindsay Davenport 6Ð3 6Ð2 #1 seed: NONE1 Semifinalists: Anca Barna, Meghann #2 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#2; lost SF) Shaughnessy #3 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#4; WON) #1 seed: Marion Bartoli (#38; lost 1R) #4 seed: Svetlana Kuznetsova (#5; lost QF) #2 seed: Meghann Shaughnessy (#47; lost SF) Doubles champions: Myskina/Zvonareva Doubles champions: Serra Zanetti/Serra Zanetti Major Upsets: Douchevina (#82) def. Maleeva (#26); Pastikova Major Upsets: Tulyaganova (NR) def. Bartoli (#141) def. Sugiyama (#14); Mamic (#120) def. Pierce (#28); (#38); Razzano (#80) def. Marrero (#49); Schiavone (#21) def. Petrova (#13); Bovina (#19) def. V. Vaidisova (#103) def. Shaughnessy (#47) Williams (#12); Myskina (#4) def. Davenport (#2) Historical Significance: Second career title for Historical Significance: Myskina defends Moscow; Zvonareva Vaidisova puts her in the Top 100; wins first doubles title; Davenport regains the #1 ranking despite Tulyaganova tries to come back but will not not winning the title play again until after the WTA season ends 1. #1 seed Amélie Mauresmo withdrew after play began and was replaced by a Lucky Loser. October 18Ð24 Zürich, Switzerland ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier I Alicia Molik d. Maria Sharapova (4) 4Ð6 6Ð2 6Ð3 Semifinalists: Elena Dementieva, Patty Schnyder #1 seed:1 NONE #4 seed: Maria Sharapova (#7) #3 seed:2 Elena Dementieva (#5; lost SF) #6 seed:2 Vera Zvonareva (#11; lost 2R) Doubles champions: Black/Stubbs Major Upsets: Ivanovic (#156) def. Golovin (#29); Molik (#20) def. Zvonareva (#12); Husarova/Molik def. Petrova/ Shaughnessy; Molik (#20) def. Petrova (#13); Molik (#20) def. Sharapova (#7) Historical Significance: Molik wins her first Tier I title (and Sharapova suffers her first loss in a final); Black/Stubbs once again deny Ruano Pascual/Suárez an indoor title 1. #1 seed Amélie Mauresmo withdrew after play began and was replaced by a Lucky Loser 1. #2 seed Lindsay Davenport and #5 Serena Williams withdrew after the draw was made and seeds were promoted October 25Ð31 Linz, Austria ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier II Luxembourg ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier III Amélie Mauresmo (1) d. Elena Bovina (9) 6–2 6–0 Alicia Molik (2) d. Dinara Safina 6Ð3 6Ð4 Semifinalists: Nadia Petrova, Jelena Jankovic Semifinalists: Silvia Farina Elia, Anabel #1 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#2; WON) Medina Garrigues #3 seed:1 Serena Williams (#9; lost 2R) #1 seed: Paola Suárez (#17; lost 2R) #4 seed: Vera Zvonareva (#11; lost QF) #2 seed: Alicia Molik (#14; WON) #5 seed: Nadia Petrova (#13; lost SF) Doubles champions: Ruano Pascual/Suárez Doubles champions: Husarova/Likhovtseva Major Upsets: Laine (#216) def. Maleeva (#25); Major Upsets: Shaughnessy (#44) def. Sprem (#18); Schruff (#121) Randriantefy (#69) def. Pierce (#29); def. Koukalova (#45); Domachowska (#79) def. Zuluaga (#21); Ivanovic (#112) def. Asagoe (#39); Medina Jankovic (#33) def. Schnyder (#15); Jidkova (#73) def. S. Garrigues (#46) def. Suárez (#17); Peschke Williams (#9); Jankovic (#33) def. Zvonareva (#11) (#146) def. Daniilidou (#34) Historical Significance: Fourth title of 2004 for Mauresmo keeps Historical Significance: Second straight title for alive her faint year-end #1 hopes Molik, and third of the year 1. #2 seed Anastasia Myskina withdrew from Linz and seeds were promoted

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 233 November 1Ð7 Philadelphia, USA ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier II Quebec City, Canada ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier III Amélie Mauresmo (1) d. Vera Zvonareva (6) 3–6 6–2 6–2 Martina Sucha d. Abigail Spears (Q) 7Ð5 3Ð6 6Ð2 Semifinalists: Maria Sharapova, Nadia Petrova Semifinalists: Alina Jidkova, Maria Emilia Salerni #1 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#2) #1 seed: Mary Pierce (#30; lost QF) #2 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#3; lost QF) #2 seed: Daniela Hantuchova (#31; lost 2R) #3 seed: Maria Sharapova (#7l WITHDREW from SF) Doubles champions: Gullickson/Salerni #4 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#9; lost QF) Major Upsets: Gloria (unranked) def. Hantuchova Doubles champions: Molik/Raymond (#31); Arvidsson/Liggan def. Schaul/Tanasugarn; Major Upsets: Petrova (#14) def. Myskina (#3); Molik/ Jidkova (#57) def. Pierce (#30); Gullickson/Salerni Raymond def. Black/Stubbs def. Callens/Stosur Historical Significance: Mauresmo moves closer to year-end Historical Significance: Second singles title for Sucha, #1, Zvonareva hits first Tier II final and qualifies for first and doubles title for Salerni; first title of any kind for year-end Championships; Molik wins third doubles title Gullickson; first final for Spears November 8Ð15 Los Angeles Championships ¥ Indoor ¥ Championship Maria Sharapova def. Serena Williams 4Ð6 6Ð2 6Ð4 Semifinalists: Amélie Mauresmo, Anastasia Myskina #1 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#1; 2-1 in RR) #5 player: Elena Dementieva (#5; 0-3 in RR) #2 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#2; 3-0 in RR; lost SF) #6 player: Maria Sharapova (#5; 2-1 in RR; WON) #3 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#3; 2-1 in RR; lost SF) #7 player: Serena Williams (#8; 2-1 in RR; lost F) #4 seed: Svetlana Kuznetsova (#4; 1-2 in RR) #8 player: Vera Zvonareva (#11; 0-3 in RR) Doubles champions: Petrova/Shaughnessy Historical Significance: Sharapova wins the second-biggest title of her career, and hits a career high #4; Petrova/ Shaughnessy win their biggest title yet — and their seventh of the year, leading the tour (Cara Black also had seven, with two different partners)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 234 The Tennis Almanac 2004 A day-by-day account of what are, in the editor’s opinion, the most significant match(es) of each day of the year. Note that the comments, apart from later proofreading, are what I said at the time. January 3 — Gold Coast Qualifying 2R: Sun Tiantian def. Alexandra Stevenson (4) 7–6(7–3) 6–3 Stevenson did win her qualifying opener against Janette Husarova, but it took three sets; it looks like she isn’t yet all the way back from her troubles of last fall. January 4 — Gold Coast 1R: Svetlana Kuznetsova def. Elena Likhovtseva 6–4 6–1 They’re ranked almost the same (Kuznetsova is #35, Likhovtseva #37), and they’re doubles partners this week, but it didn’t make for much of a match. January 5 — Gold Coast 1R: Samantha Stosur (WC) def. Meghann Shaughnessy (4) 7-6(7–3) 6–3 Stosur pulls off her annual upset, costing Shaughnessy her chance for a Top 16 seed in Melbourne. January 6 — Gold Coast 1R: Nicole Pratt def. Lina Krasnoroutskaya 6–7(6–8) 6–1 7–5 Pratt kills Krasnoroutskaya’s hopes of a Top 25 Melbourne seed, and may keep her from the Top 25. January 7 — Gold Coast 2R: Svetlana Kuznetsova def. Vera Zvonareva (3) 1–6 6-3 6–2 Kuznetsova looks more and more like she’s over her slump; she will play Nathalie Déchy (who advanced when Patty Schnyder was unable to play) for the last Australian Open seed. January 8 — Auckland 2R: Ashley Harkleroad def. Anna Smashnova-Pistolesi (2) 7–6(9–7) 6–2 Harkleroad won two matches on this day, with this being the first; it put her in the Top 50 and cost Pistolesi her chance for a Top 16 ranking when it came time to seed the Australian Open January 9 — Auckland SF: Eleni Daniilidou (3) def. Paola Suárez (1) 7–6(15–13) 6–4 A day after playing two singles and one doubles match, Daniilidou puts herself in the Top 25 and reaches her second straight Auckland final. January 10 — Auckland F DOUBLES: Jugic-Salkic/Kostanic def. Ruano Pascual/Suárez (1) 7–6(8–6) 3–6 6–1 And what does that result say about the world’s top team in the new year? January 11 — Sydney Qualifying Final: Åsa Svensson def. Ruxandra Dragomir Ilie 6–7(5-7) 6–3 6–4 Some long-injured player had to win this.... January 12 — Sydney 1R: Conchita Martinez def. Magdalena Maleeva 6–0 6-0 Who would have thought the first double bagel of the year would afflict a Top 30 player? And Maleeva was healthy; she went on to play and win in doubles. January 13 — Sydney 1R: Lina Krasnoroutskaya def. Daniela Hantuchova 6–2 6–2 Hantuchova continues to look like a corpse, and will probably leave the Top 30 after Melbourne. January 14 — Sydney 1R: Nathalie Déchy def. Ai Sugiyama (8) 6-2 6–3 Quite a letdown for Sugiyama after winning a title last week; she lost in doubles also. Déchy returns to the Top 30 with the win. January 15 — Sydney SF DOUBLES — Black/Stubbs (3) def. Davenport/Morariu 2–6 3–0 Good as it is to see a top player playing doubles, Davenport hurt her shoulder, and she’d had her leg treated in her first singles match. Just how much more can she take? [In fact, she withdrew from the singles semifinal.] January 16 — Hobart F: Amy Frazier def. Shinobu Asagoe (6) 6–3 6–3 It’s been four years and nine months since her last one, but Frazier finally wins title #7 January 17 — Sydney F: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1) def. Amélie Mauresmo (3) 6–4 6–4 It would have been more interesting if Mauresmo hadn’t had to play her semifinal the same day as the final, but this gives Hénin-Hardenne her first title as #1 — and her first big Rebound Ace title. January 19 — Australian Open 1R: Nicole Pratt def. Meghann Shaughnessy (17) 6–4 5–7 6-4 This will drop Shaughnessy out of the Top 20 — very probably out of the Top 25. January 20 — Australian Open 1R: Kim Clijsters (2) def. Marlene Weingärtner 6-3 6-2 It appears Clijsters [who withdrew from Sydney] is fine — and that means Weingärtner will be dropping 20 or so ranking spots.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 235 January 21 — Australian Open 2R: Alicia Molik def. Daniela Hantuchova (15) 6–4 6–3 This may be the blow that drops Hantuchova out of the Top 30. It’s going to be close. January 22 — Australian Open 2R: Silvia Farina Elia (19) def. Virginia Ruano Pascual 5-7 6–4 6–4 Not an upset, but it’s going to drop Ruano Pascual, last year’s quarterfinalist, fifteen or more spots. January 23 — Australian Open 3R: Mara Santangelo (Q) def. Eleni Daniilidou (19) 6–4 5–7 6–3 Not much to say, except Daniilidou seems messed up again and Santangelo is Top 100. January 24 — Australian Open 3R: Lisa Raymond (25) def. Venus Williams (3) 6–4 7–6(7–5) Venus finally looked like a player who hadn’t played in six months. She’ll fall to no better than #14 — though it doesn’t matter given her protected ranking. January 25 — Australian Open 3R DOUBLES: Ani/Prusova def. Davenport/Morariu 7–5 5–7 6–3 One day after beating #2 seeds Navratilova and Raymond, this happens to Davenport/Morariu January 26 — Australian Open 4R: Anastasia Myskina (6) def. Chanda Rubin (9) 6–7(3–7) 6–2 6–2 Myskina clinches at least the #7 ranking, with a chance for higher; Rubin stays #10. January 27 — Australian Open QF: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1) def. Lindsay Davenport (5) 7–5 6–3 And this after Davenport led 4-0! It drops Davenport from #5 to no better than #6 — and after that collapse, we’d say she deserves it. January 28 — Australian Open QF: Kim Clijsters (2) def. Anastasia Myskina (2) 6–2 7–6(11–9) Australian Open SF DOUBLES: Ruano Pascual/Suárez (1) def. Huber/Sugiyama (3) 6Ð4 7Ð6(7Ð5) Clijsters, despite losing four games to start the second set because of her bad ankle, makes her fifth straight Slam semifinal; Sugiyama loses her chance to take the #1 doubles ranking January 29 — Australian Open SF: Kim Clijsters (2) def. Patty Schnyder (22) 6–2 7–6(7–2) Schnyder hits the Top 15, but it’s Clijsters who will once again have to try to beat Justine Hénin- Hardenne in a Slam final. January 30 — Australian Open F DOUBLES: Ruano Pascual/Suárez (1) def. Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (4) 6Ð4 6Ð3 Still no luck at Slams for Kuznetsova and Likhovtseva; it’s Slam #5 for Ruano Pascual and Suárez January 31 — Australian Open F: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1) def. Kim Clijsters (2) 6–3 4–6 6–3 What else did you expect once the two Belgians made the final? February 3 — Pan Pacific 1R: Magdalena Maleeva def. Lisa Raymond 4–6 6–2 6–3 Could Maleeva finally be getting over her slump? This will put her back in the Top 30. February 4 — Pan Pacific 1R: Janette Husarova (Q) def. Tamarine Tanasugarn 7–6(10–8) 6–1 Pan Pacific 2R: Daniela Hantuchova (8) def. Maria Sharapova 7Ð6(8Ð6) 6Ð1 Tanasugarn falls out of the Top 50, but Hantuchova wins back-to-back matches for the first time since the U. S. Open February 5 — Pan Pacific 2R: Tatiana Panova def. Elena Dementieva (3) 7-6(7-5) 6-3 Panova, her ranking down to #250, gains almost 150 places and costs Dementieva the #8 spot. February 6 — Pan Pacific QF: Magdalena Maleeva def. Ai Sugiyama (4) 6–1 6–1 Sugiyama blows another chance to reach #8, but Maleeva is Top 25 again February 7 — Pan Pacific SF DOUBLES: Likhovtseva/Maleeva (4) def. Davenport/Morariu (WC) 4Ð6 6Ð3 6Ð4 On a day when only one singles match was played (Davenport blew away Dokic 6Ð1 6Ð0), Davenport and Morariu continued their eerie pattern: Two wins, one over a high-seeded team, then a loss to a weaker team. They’ve done it in all three of their tournaments this year. February 8 — Pan Pacific F: Lindsay Davenport (2) d. Magdalena Maleeva 6–4 6–1 A year after her last title, Davenport finally wins another event. Though her quality point total is pitiful; she didn’t play a Top 16 player. It’s been at least four years since that last happened at a Tier I. February 9 — Paris Qualifying F: Anabel Medina Garrigues (5) def. Daja Bedanova (WC) 6–4 6–4 All right, Bedanova lost. At least she won two matches to get this far.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 236 February 10 — Paris 1R: Tatiana Golovin (WC) def. Anna Smashnova-Pistolesi (6) 1Ð6 7Ð5 3Ð1 Retired (Muscle Cramping) Smashnova-Pistolesi was up 6–1 5–3 40–15 and serving — and couldn’t finish it off. Golovin has four wins this year — and two over them over Smashnova-Pistolesi February 11 — Paris 1R: Daniela Hantuchova def. Sandrine Testud 5–3, retired (abdominal strain) Not much of a comeback — for either player — but it’s a start.... February 12 — Paris 2R: Elena Bovina def. Jelena Dokic (4) 4–6 7–6(7–5) 6–0 Bovina puts herself back in the Top 30 as Dokic perhaps pays for playing Tokyo and Paris both. February 13 — Paris QF: Tatiana Golovin (WC) def. Elena Dementieva (2) 6–4 6–4 Is this more evidence of Golovin’s talent — or of Dementieva’s big slump? (Golovin, after all, would lose 6Ð4 6Ð0 to Pierce on Saturday) February 14 — Paris SF: Kim Clijsters (1) def. Dinara Safina (Q) 6–1 6–1 Safina ends up just outside the Top 30 as Clijsters looks ready to win her first title of 2004. February 15 — Paris F: Kim Clijsters (1) def. Mary Pierce 6–2 6–1 Not much of a match, but at least Clijsters has her first title of the year. February 16 — Memphis 1R: Tatiana Panova (Q) def. Rita Grande 6–7(2–7) 6–4 6–1 Panova continues to look as if she’s healthy and eager again. February 17 — Antwerp 1R: Karolina Sprem def. Anna Smashnova-Pistolesi (7) 6–1 7–5 Sprem continues to climb as Smashnova-Pistolesi posts a fairly typical indoor performance. February 18 — Antwerp 2R: Klara Koukalova (Q) def. Dinara Safina 6–4 7–6(7–2) Koukalova, who had never won an indoor match in a WTA main draw, keeps an injured Safina out of the Top 30. February 19 — Antwerp QF DOUBLES: Loit/Mandula (2) def. E. Clijsters/K. Clijsters 6–2 6–2 Three tournaments this week, and absolutely no surprises. So we thought we’d record the debut — and fairly rapid demise — of the Clijsters duo. [This will be the last match the two will ever play, since Elke Clijsters retired later in 2004, and the two matches only doubles contests for Kim Clijsters all year.] February 20 — Antwerp QF: Silvia Farina Elia (8) def. Patty Schnyder (5) 7–6(8–6) 1–0, retired That’s five Antwerp seeds lost to injury or illness (in Schnyder’s case, a right thigh strain). For Farina Elia, it translates into the #15 ranking. February 21 — Hyderabad F: Nicole Pratt (4) def. Maria Kirilenko 7–6(7–3) 6–1 Memphis F: Vera Zvonareva (1) def. Lisa Raymond (2) 3Ð6 6Ð4 7Ð5 And this after Raymond led 5–2 in the final set. As for Hyderabad, it’s the first title for veteran Pratt. February 22 — Antwerp F: Kim Clijsters (2) def. Silvia Farina Elia (8) 6–3 6–0 For the second straight week, Clijsters wins a Tier III with Tier II prize money. [It will prove to be her last title of an injury-plagued year; doctors will need weeks to figure out what should have been a relatively routine wrist problem, and Clijsters will spend months in a brace.] February 23 — Dubai 1R: Svetlana Kuznetsova def. Francesca Schiavone (7) 6–4 6–4 This loss may cost Schiavone her Top 25 spot — and puts Kuznetsova probably one win from the Top 25. February 24 — Dubai 1R: Petra Mandula def. Jelena Dokic (6) 6–1 6–2 After seeming to get over her funk at the end of last year, Dokic seems to be back in it. February 25 — Dubai 2R: Eleni Daniilidou (WC) def. Jennifer Capriati (3) 6–4 7–6(7–2) Capriati’s first match of 2004 is hardly a success. February 26 — Dubai QF: Svetlana Kuznetsova def. Venus Williams (2) 6–2 6–3 Kuznetsova moves in on the Top 20 as Venus suffers another ugly loss. February 27 — Dubai SF: Svetlana Kuznetsova def. Ai Sugiyama (5) 6–0 7–5 Kuznetsova reaches the biggest singles final of her career and puts herself in the Top 20. February 28 — Dubai F: Justine Henin-Hardenne (1) d. Svetlana Kuznetsova 7–6(7–3) 6–3 Kuznetsova loses her first Tier II final, giving Hénin-Hardenne her tour-leading third title of 2004.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 237 February 29 — Bogota F: Fabiola Zuluaga (1) def. Maria Sanchez Lorenzo (2) 3–6 6–4 6–2 That’s three straight Bogota titles for Zuluaga. Maybe they should name the event after her. March 1 — Doha 1R: Sandrine Testud def. Magui Serna (8) 6–3 6–2 It’s only her third event back, but already Testud has a Top 25 win. [It will prove her only good win of the year.] March 2 — Doha 1R: Anca Barna def. Conchita Martinez (7) 4–6 6–4 6–2 It doesn’t mean much (Martinez falls from #19 to #20), but it was the day’s only surprise. March 3 — Doha 2R: Zheng Jie def. Jelena Dokic (6) 6–4 6–1 Dokic struggles again as Zheng scores the first Top 25 win, and first Tier II quarterfinal, of her career March 4 — Doha QF: Jennifer Capriati (2) def. Silvia Farina Elia (5) 7–6 (8–6) 6–1 Capriati scores her first significant win of 2004. March 5 — Doha SF: Svetlana Kuznetsova def. Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1) 6–2 4–6 6–3 Kuznetsova hits the Top 15 and ends Hénin-Hardenne’s undefeated streak. March 6 — Doha F: Anastasia Myskina (3) def. Svetlana Kuznetsova 4–6 6–4 6–4 With her first-ever title defence, Myskina hits the Top Five; Kuznetsova reaches #14 — both career highs March 7 — Acapulco F: Iveta Benesova (Q) d. Flavia Pennetta 7–6(7–5) 6–4 Benesova wins her first career title and approaches a career high March 10 — Indian Wells 1R: Tatiana Golovin (WC) def. Shinobu Asagoe 6–1 4–6 6–3 And so the only Top 50 player not seeded at this unusually weak 96-draw is out in the first round — and maybe out of the Top 50. March 11 — Indian Wells 1R DOUBLES: Davenport/Morariu def. Callens/Tu 6–2 4–6 6–2 A tough win over a tough team moves Morariu within one win of the Top 50 March 12 — Indian Wells 2R: Marissa Irvin (Q) def. Daniela Hantuchova (24) 6–4 6–7(5–7) 7–6(7–3) At this rate, Hantuchova may stop coming back to the site of her first title; she loses to a qualifier ranked #142. March 13 — Indian Wells 2R: Iveta Benesova (LL) def. Magdalena Maleeva (13) 7–5 6–4 Six seeds were upsets on this Saturday (to go with eight in Friday’s action, meaning that 14 of 32 lost their opening matches!), but Maleeva was the top player to fall. Benesova has won 11 of her last 12 matches, and will hit a career high. March 14 — Indian Wells 3R: Gisela Dulko (Q) def. Nadia Petrova (7) 6–3 6–3 This probably says more about Petrova’s injuries than about Dulko, but Petrova becomes the first of the Top Eight seeds to lose (as opposed to Rubin and Clijsters, who withdrew) March 15 — Indian Wells 3R: Barbara Schett def. Paola Suárez (8) 6–3 6–4 Could Schett actually be coming back to life? [No. In fact, at this time she was less than a year from retirement.] March 16 — Indian Wells 4R: Nathalie Déchy (19) def. Vera Zvonareva (6) 2–6 6–2 6–2 Déchy puts herself in the Top 25 and blocks Zvonareva’s quest for the Top Ten March 17 — Indian Wells QF: Nathalie Déchy (19) def. Fabiola Zuluaga (15) 7–6(7–1) 6–3 Indian Wells Doubles QF: Davenport/Morariu def. Petrova/Shaughnessy (7) 7Ð5 5Ð7 6Ð1 Déchy beats her third straight seed to become the one surprise quarterfinalist; Davenport/Morariu finally break their jinx about matches after big wins. March 18 — Indian Wells QF: Anastasia Myskina (4) def. Conchita Martinez (11) 7–6(7–2) 2–6 6–3 Martinez falls out of the Top 20 as Myskina keeps her hopes for #4 alive. March 19 — Indian Wells SF: Lindsay Davenport (3) def. Nathalie Déchy (19) 6–2 7–6(7–4) Indian Wells SF: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1) def. Anastasia Myskina (4) 6–1 6–1 Déchy had Davenport scared, at the end, but Davenport managed some amazing serving to save things; that, combined with Myskina’s loss, clinches her #4 ranking.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 238 March 20 — Indian Wells F DOUBLES: Ruano Pascual/Suárez (1) def. Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (2) 6Ð1 6Ð2 Where, oh where, is the team that can make Ruano Pascual and Suárez regret playing one-forward- one-back? March 21 — Indian Wells F: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1) def. Lindsay Davenport (3) 6–1 6–4 Look what happened to Davenport in the final. Again. March 24 — Miami 1R: Shinobu Asagoe def. Katarina Srebotnik 6–1 7–6(7–5) Not a very fun comeback for Srebotnik. March 25 — Miami 1R: Viktoriya Kutuzova (WC) def. Marissa Irvin (WC) 6–3 6–4 On a day when rain washed out more than half the matches, Kutuzova wins her first WTA match in over half a year. March 26 — Miami 2R: Maria Vento-Kabchi def. Ai Sugiyama (6) 6–1 7–5 Vento-Kabchi was the top unseeded player in the draw, but Sugiyama has now lost three straight. She missed Indian Wells for unspecified “personal reasons.” It’s starting to look like dreadful reasons.... March 27 — Miami 2R: Kristina Brandi def. Meghann Shaughnessy (19) 7–5 4–6 7–5 In a match that lasted over two and a half hours, Brandi knocks Shaughnessy out of the Top 30. March 28 — Miami 3R: Jill Craybas def. Vera Zvonareva (7) 6–2 3–6 6–3 Jennifer Capriati also lost on this day, to Daniilidou, but this is the biggie: Zvonareva again fails to hit the Top Ten (and, henceforth, has to defend points, so it gets harder), meaning that Nadia Petrova is in March 29 — Miami 4R: Karolina Sprem (29) def. Svetlana Kuznetsova (10) 3–6 7–5 6–4 Kuznetsova, probably tired after her incredible month, blows match points in the second as Sprem makes her first Tier I quarterfinal. March 30 — Miami 1R DOUBLES: Ruano Pascual/Suárez (1) def. Maleeva/Srebotnik 6–3 6–2 Defending champion Maleeva, minus Liezel Huber, loses first round and falls out of the Top 15. March 31 — Miami QF: Elena Dementieva (5) def. Venus Williams (2) 6–3 5–7 7–6(7–3) It was too ugly to bear repeating, but Dementieva will hit a career high of #6 or #7; Venus’s title drought continues April 1 — Miami SF: Elena Dementieva (5) def. Nadia Petrova (8) 6–4 6–2 This seemed to be mostly about nerves. But both Russians reach career highs: #6 and #9 respectively. April 2 — Miami QF DOUBLES: Petrova/Shaughnessy (6) def. Ruano Pascual/Suárez (1) 6–3 3–6 6–3 The top seeds suffer only their second loss of the year. [It won’t be their last loss to Petrova/ Shaughnessy.] April 3 — Miami F: Serena Williams (1) def. Elena Dementieva (5) 6–1 6–1 It was a pitiful final to a too-weak-to-be-a-Tier-I tournament, but it earns Serena the title in her first event since Wimbledon 2003. April 4 — Miami F DOUBLES: Petrova/Shaughnessy (6) def. Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (2) 6–2 6–3 Petrova hits the top ten as she and Shaughnessy earn their best-ever doubles titles April 5 — Amelia Island 1R: Dinara Safina def. Tamarine Tanasugarn 6–1 6–3 This may finally be the win that puts Safina in the Top 30. April 6 — Amelia Island 1R: Amy Frazier def. Jelena Dokic (11) 6–4 7–5 Clay isn’t Frazier’s surface, but Dokic is back in can’t-do-anything-right mode.... April 7 — Amelia Island 2R: Amélie Mauresmo (3) def. Akiko Morigami 6–0 6–3 A pretty good return for Mauresmo after two months out with a back injury April 8 — Amelia Island 3R: Paola Suárez (9) def. Ai Sugiyama (6) 7–5 7–6(10–8) No surprise, this, but it was the only upset on a day when seven Top 15 players made the Amelia Island quarterfinal and the eighth was rained out. April 9 — Amelia Island QF: Nadia Petrova (7) def. Serena Williams (2) 6–2 6–3 Serena said she had a sore knee. She still loses her #7 ranking, and Petrova gains it for a career high.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 239 April 10 — Amelia Island SF: Amélie Mauresmo (3) def. Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1) 6–7(4–7) 7–5 6–3 A sick Hénin-Hardenne suffers only her second loss of 2004 [the disease turns out to be cytomegalovirus, and it will ruin the rest of her year]. April 11 — Amelia Island F: Lindsay Davenport (4) d. Amélie Mauresmo (3) 6–4 6–4 Davenport wins her second title of the year, and her first clay title in five years. April 12 — Charleston 1R: Karolina Sprem def. Nathalie Déchy (15) 6–4 6–4 Sprem finally reaches the Top 30 April 13 — Estoril 1R: Elena Bovina (1) def. Iva Majoli (WC) 6–4 6–2 Beating Iva Majoli these days is about as much of an accomplishment as winning an election where your announced opponent is Joseph Stalin, but at least Bovina is playing again. [Unlike Majoli; this will prove to be her last WTA match. She would make one more Challenger appearance, then retire.] April 14 — Charleston 2R: Alina Jidkova (LL) def. Paola Suárez (10) 4-6 6-4 6-3 Talk about an improbable setting for the biggest win of Jidkova’s career! April 15 — Charleston 3R: Petra Mandula def. Jennifer Capriati (7) 7–6(7–3) 3–6 7–5 Charleston 3R: Patty Schnyder (11) def. Elena Dementieva (6) 6Ð3 6Ð1 Schnyder knocks Dementieva down to #9, while Mandula makes herself a likely Roland Garros seed. April 16 — Charleston QF: Venus Williams (4) def. Vera Zvonareva (9) 6–3 6–4 Charleston QF: Patty Schnyder (11) def. Lindsay Davenport (5) 6Ð3 6Ð2 Charleston QF: Conchita Martinez (16) def. Nadia Petrova (8) 6Ð3 6Ð1 Charleston QF: Jelena Kostanic def. Petra Mandula 7Ð6(7Ð4) 6Ð2 How can you pick just one? Kostanic hits the Top 50; Venus finally plays a fairly decent match; Zvonareva chokes away another chance to hit the Top Ten; Davenport again fails to win a clay title; Petrova chokes again, and Martinez is again Top Twenty. April 17 — Charleston SF: Venus Williams (4) def. Jelena Kostanic 6–4 6–1 Venus probably should have lost that first set, but instead has her first final of the year. April 18 — Charleston F: Venus Williams (4) def. Conchita Martinez (16) 2–6 6–2 6–1 Venus finally breaks her title drought with a solid clay-court match. April 26 — Warsaw Qualifying F: Kveta Peschke def. Antonella Serra Zanetti 6–4 6–1 Nobody said anything about it, but this is the return of the former Kveta Hrdlickova. April 27 — Warsaw 1R: Daniela Hantuchova def. Maria Sanchez Lorenzo 6–7(3–7) 6–3 6–3 Hantuchova beats someone ranked above her for the first time since the Pan Pacific April 28 — Warsaw 1R: Silvia Farina Elia def. Denisa Chladkova 6–4 6–1 Farina Elia, just back from sickness, was still strong enough to knock Chladkova out of the Top 60. April 29 — Warsaw 1R DOUBLES: Dulko/Tarabini def. Hantuchova/Pisnik (WC) 6–2 6–7(1–7) 6–1 Hantuchova has one doubles win this year, at Sydney, and now loses her seventh straight match to a weak team. Who says she’s getting over her problems? April 30 — Warsaw QF: Francesca Schiavone (9) def. Amelie Mauresmo (1) 3–6 7–6(7–2) 6–1 Schiavone scores her best career win, and probably costs Mauresmo the #4 Roland Garros seed (Mauresmo remains #3 for the moment, but she has a lot to defend in the next two weeks). May 1 — Warsaw SF: Venus Williams (2) def.Vera Zvonareva (3) 6–3 6–2 Another week, another chance for Zvonareva to enter the Top Ten, another botch for the Russian. May 2 — Warsaw F: Venus Williams (2) def. Svetlana Kuznetsova (4) 6–1 6–4 Venus puts herself on the verge of the Top Ten with her ninth straight WTA win (11 counting Fed Cup). May 3 — Berlin 1R DOUBLES: Pierce/Sanchez-Vicario (WC) def. Garbin/Jidkova 6–4 3–6 6–4 Sanchez-Vicario plays the first match of her comeback, and Pierce her first doubles match of the year, and they win despite all the rust. May 4 — Berlin 1R: Elena Likhovtseva def. Mary Pierce 6–6(3–7) 7–5 7–6(7–3) Likhovtseva, who needed to win to stay Top 50, does win — barely.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 240 May 5 — Berlin 2R: Fabiola Zuluaga def. Vera Zvonareva (9) 6–1 6–7(2–7) 6–1 This pretty well ends Zvonareva’s Top Ten quest; she falls to #14 and to #5 Russian singles player. May 6 — Berlin 3R: Fabiola Zuluaga def. Ai Sugiyama (8) 7–6(7–4) 3–6 6–4 On a day when Kim Clijsters again withdrew with wrist problems, Zuluaga keeps up her hot form and knocks Sugiyama out of the Top 20. May 7 — Berlin QF: Jennifer Capriati (6) def. Anastasia Myskina (4) 6–3 6–2 Berlin 2R DOUBLES: Pierce/Sanchez-Vicario (WC) def. Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (2) 2Ð6 7Ð6(7Ð3) 6Ð4 Myskina loses a shot at the Top 4 as Capriati picks up her first genuine win over a Top 5 player in almost two years; Pierce and Sanchez-Vicario hand the Russian doubles team their first opening-round loss of the year (they had reached at least the final of their six previous events). May 8 — Berlin SF DOUBLES: Petrova/Shaughnessy (4) def. Ruano Pascual/Suárez (1) 6–1 6–2 For the third time in the last three tournaments they’ve played, Petrova/Shaughnessy beat the world’s top pair. Two of the wins have been on clay. Since Auckland, the top two have won every match they’ve played except against Petrova/Shaughnessy, who now have eleven straight match wins. May 9 — Berlin F: Amélie Mauresmo (2) def. Venus Williams (3), WALKOVER Berlin F DOUBLES: Petrova/Shaughnessy (4) def. Husarova/Martinez (5) 6Ð2 2Ð6 6Ð1 Mauresmo wins her first title of the year and clinches the #3 Roland Garros seed as Venus’s winning streak ends at 13 WTA matches and 15 overall; Petrova/Shaughnessy win their third straight title and twelfth straight match. May 10 — Rome 1R: Elena Bovina def. Tina Pisnik 6–3 1–6 6–0 Pisnik becomes the first candidate for a seed at Roland Garros to lose; she will fall below #36, and is out of the seed contest May 11 — Rome 1R: Elena Likhovtseva def. Emilie Loit 4–6 6–3 7–6(7–3) Loit’s winning streak of ten WTA matches is ended — just barely — and she falls out of the Top 30. May 12 — Rome 2R: Elena Likhovtseva def. Anastasia Myskina (3) 7–5 1–6 6–3 Myskina loses another chance to move above #5 as Likhovtseva starts to resurrect a brutal year. May 13 — Rome 3R: Svetlana Kuznetsova (9) def. Ai Sugiyama (7) 6–4 3–6 7–6(7–4) Kuznetsova wins a battle for the #11 ranking May 14 — Rome QF DOUBLES: Petrova/Shaughnessy (4) def. Ani/Gagliardi 6–1 6–3 Petrova and Shaughnessy extend their winning streak to 14 as Shaughnessy enters the doubles Top Ten; they will go on to win their fourth straight title on Sunday. May 15 — Rome SF: Jennifer Capriati (5) def. Serena Williams (1) 6–4 6–4 Capriati returns to #6 and breaks an eight-match losing streak to Serena May 16 — Rome F: Amélie Mauresmo (2) def. Jennifer Capriati (5) 3–6 6–3 7–6(8–6) That’s two straight titles, and nine straight wins, for Mauresmo May 17 — Strasbourg 1R: Severine Beltrame def. Maria Sanchez Lorenzo (7) 6–7(6–8) 6–4 6–1 Beltrame drops last year’s Madrid finalist out of the Top 40. May 18 — Strasbourg 1R: Milagros Sequera (Q) def. Dinara Safina (6) 2–6 6–2 7–5 Safina continues to be allergic to the Top 30. May 19 — Vienna 2R: Alina Jidkova (Q) def. Chanda Rubin (1) 7-6(7-2) 6-7(3-7) 6-4 Rubin’s comeback after injury ends in an opening-round loss as Alina Jidkova earns her second Top Fifteen win of the clay season — and of her career. May 20 — Strasbourg QF: Silvia Farina Elia (3) def. Milagros Sequera (Q) 4–6 6–0 6–2 Farina Elia wins her seventeenth straight Strasbourg match and sets up a meeting with Lindsay Davenport. May 21 — Strasbourg SF: Lindsay Davenport (1) def. Silvia Farina Elia (3) 6–2 6–0 Davenport ends Farina Elia’s three-year winning streak at Strasbourg.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 241 May 22 — Strasbourg F: Claudine Schaul def. Lindsay Davenport (1) 2–6 6–0 6–3 Schaul hits the Top 50 for the first time, wins her first career title — and hands Davenport her worst loss in over a year. May 24 — Roland Garros 1R: Ashley Harkleroad def. Mariana Diaz-Oliva 6–2 6–1 Harkleroad makes one last attempt to stay Top 100. May 25 — Roland Garros 1R: Shinobu Asagoe def. Daniela Hantuchova 6–1 6–3 Hantuchova’s slump finally drops her out of the Top 50 May 26 — Roland Garros 2R: Tathiana Garbin def. Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1) 7–5 6–4 Roland Garros 1R DOUBLES: Asagoe/Fujiwara def. Huber/Sugiyama (3) 6Ð1 1Ð6 6Ð3 In one day, the defending singles champion, and the only defending doubles champion to play, lose May 27 — Roland Garros 1R DOUBLES: Testud/Vinci def. Medina Garrigues/Sanchez-Vicario (WC) 2Ð6 6Ð3 7Ð5 Sanchez-Vicario had won every Slam in doubles except Roland Garros. That won’t be changing. May 28 — Roland Garros 3R: Marlene Weingärtner def. Nadia Petrova (8) 6–3 6–2 Roland Garros 3R: Maria Sharapova (18) def. Vera Zvonareva (10) 6Ð3 7Ð6(7Ð3) Disasters hit two Russians who had big results at Roland Garros last year. Petrova falls out of the Top Ten; Zvonareva will drop to no better than #14 May 29 — Roland Garros 2R DOUBLES: Petrova/Shaughnessy (4) def. Camerin/Jidkova 6–0 6–0 On a day when the singles saw no upsets, and the doubles only one minor paper upset, the #4 seeds run their winning streak to 18 straight with one of their most thorough wins. May 30 — Roland Garros 4R: Elena Dementieva (9) def. Lindsay Davenport (4) 6–1 6–3 Davenport’s knee acts up again, costing her still another chance for her first big red clay title; it may also cost her the #4 ranking. May 31 — Roland Garros 3R DOUBLES: Testud/Vinci def. Black/Stubbs (6) 6–4 2–6 6–4 Testud is struggling in singles, but it looks as if she’s back in doubles. June 1 — Roland Garros QF: Jennifer Capriati (7) def. Serena Williams (2) 6–3 2–6 6–3 Roland Garros QF: Elena Dementieva (9) def. Amélie Mauresmo (3) 6–4 6–3 Roland Garros QF: Anastasia Myskina (5) def. Venus Williams (4) 6Ð3 6Ð4 Roland Garros QF: Paola Suárez (14) def. Maria Sharapova (18) 6–1 6–3 What a day! Suárez hits the Top Ten, Serena falls out, Mauresmo blows another French Open, and Myskina makes her first Slam semifinal. June 2 — Roland Garros QF DOUBLES: Navratilova/Raymond (5) def. Petrova/Shaughnessy (4) 7Ð6(7Ð5) 6Ð3 And so Petrova/Shaughnessy see their winning streak end at 19, and fall short of the Top 5. [It isn’t clear yet, but by year-end it will be obvious that they have a Slam Allergy.] June 3 — Roland Garros SF: Elena Dementieva (9) def. Paola Suárez (14) 6–0 7–5 Roland Garros SF: Anastasia Myskina (6) def. Jennifer Capriati (7) 6Ð2 6Ð2 We have two first-time finalists, both from Russia, both at career highs: Myskina #3, Dementieva at least #6. June 4 — Roland Garros SF DOUBLES: Ruano Pascual/Suárez (1) def. Testud/Vinci 6–0 6–1 Ruano Pascual and Suárez make their ninth straight Slam final, but Testud’s comeback is still impressive. June 5 — Roland Garros F: Anastasia Myskina (6) def. Elena Dementieva (9) 6–1 6–2 It was really, really ugly, but Myskina has her first Slam title. June 6 — Roland Garros F DOUBLES: Ruano Pascual/Suárez (1) def. Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (2) 6Ð0 6Ð3 It wasn’t much of a show, but it wins Ruano Pascual and Suárez their sixth Slam, and third straight. Kuznetsova has lost the last three Slam finals — two with Likhovtseva, one with Navratilova.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 242 June 7 — Birmingham 1R: Anne Kremer def. Magui Serna (12) 6–2 6–2 Kremer posts her first Top 50 win in a year and a half. June 8 — Birmingham 1R: Virginia Ruano Pascual def. Maria Vento-Kabchi (10) 6–2 6–3 On a day when Kim Clijsters had surgery and Justine Hénin-Hardenne withdrew from Wimbledon, Vento-Kabchi loses her chance for a Wimbledon seed June 9 — Birmingham 2R: Shinobu Asagoe def. Nadia Petrova (1) 6–4 2–6 6–4 Petrova loses a chance at a return to the Top Ten as Asagoe keeps her Top 40 hopes alive and continues her great grass results. June 10 — Birmingham 3R: Tamarine Tanasugarn def. Magdalena Maleeva (4) 0–6 6–4 6–2 Tanasugarn finally looks like her old grass self as she knocks off the defending champion. June 11 — Birmingham QF: Patty Schnyder (2) def. Saori Obata 6–3 6–4 With Obata out, the Wimbledon seed list is complete — barring more withdrawals June 12 — Birmingham SF: Tatiana Golovin def. Emilie Loit (9) 6–3 5–7 7–5 A week after her first (mixed doubles) Slam title, Golovin is in her first real final. June 13 — Birmingham F: Maria Sharapova (3) def. Tatiana Golovin 4–6 6–2 6–1 Sharapova takes home her first title of the year. June 14 — Eastbourne 1R: Karolina Sprem def. Anna Smashnova-Pistolesi (6) 6–2 6–4 After falling out of the Top 30 last week, Sprem moves close to a return June 15 — Eastbourne 1R: Elena Bovina def. Silvia Farina Elia (5) 7–5 6–0 Farina Elia, who made the semifinal last year, will drop from #16 to no better than #19 June 16 — Eastbourne 2R: Magdalena Maleeva (8) def. Conchita Martinez 3–6 7–5 6–4 Martinez, last year’s finalist, drops out of the Top 30 June 17 — Eastbourne QF: Daniela Hantuchova (WC) def. Ai Sugiyama (3) 6–1 7–6(9–7) Hantuchova, looking truly alive again, reaches her first semifinal since Antwerp 2003 and puts herself back in the Top 50 June 18 — Eastbourne SF: Daniela Hantuchova (WC) def. Amélie Mauresmo (1) 4-6 6-4 6-4 And now Hantuchova is back in the Top 40. She also has only her second Top Five win, and her first final in more than a year and a half. June 19 — Eastbourne F: Svetlana Kuznetsova (2) def. Daniela Hantuchova (WC) 2–6 7–6(7–2) 6–4 Kuznetsova finally wins a Tier II title. June 21 — Wimbledon 1R: Martina Navratilova (WC) def. Catalina Castano 6–0 6–1 Not only does Navratilova finally win a main draw singles match, she wins convincingly, earning a rematch with Gisela Dulko, who beat her at Roland Garros. [Navratilova would lose that match, but it was surprisingly close.] June 22 — Wimbledon 1R: Virginie Razzano (Q) def. Svetlana Kuznetsova (8) 7–6(7–4) 3–6 6–4 And, as quickly as that, Kuznetsova’s winning streak ends — and so too, perhaps, end her Top 8 chances. June 23 — ALL MATCHES RAINED OUT June 24 — Wimbledon 2R: Karolina Sprem def. Venus Williams (3) 7–6(7–5) 7–6(8–6) In the infamous Blown Call match (the umpire awarded Sprem a point she didn’t play in the second set tiebreak), Sprem records her first Top Ten win and drops Venus from the Top Ten; Sprem also breaks the American’s string of four consecutive Wimbledon finals. June 25 — Wimbledon 3R: Amy Frazier def. Anastasia Myskina (2) 4–6 6–4 6–4 Myskina’s winning streak ends at nine; she is likely to lose her #3 ranking June 26 — ALL MATCHES RAINED OUT June 27 — Wimbledon 3R: Karolina Sprem def. Meghann Shaughnessy (32) 7–6(7–5) 7–6(7–2) One more win, and Sprem is Top 20 June 28 — Wimbledon 4R: Karolina Sprem def. Magdalena Maleeva (21) 6–4 6–4 And Sprem gets that win she needs to reach the Top 20.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 243 June 29 — Wimbledon 4R: Amélie Mauresmo (4) def. Silvia Farina Elia (14) 7–5 6–3 Mauresmo puts herself back at #3 in the world, with chances for #2. June 30 — Wimbledon QF: Serena Williams (1) def. Jennifer Capriati (7) 6–1 6–1 In a match you didn’t want to record, Serena assures that she will at least stay Top 20 next week. July 1 — Wimbledon SF: Maria Sharapova (13) def. Lindsay Davenport (5) 2–6 7–6(7–5) 6–1 Wimbledon SF: Serena Williams (1) def. Amélie Mauresmo (4) 6–7(4–7) 7–5 6–4 Wimbledon QF DOUBLES: Huber/Sugiyama (5) def. Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva 7Ð6(7Ð0) 6Ð3 Kuznetsova’s streak of three Slam doubles finals ends; Mauresmo’s bad back costs her a Slam final; Sharapova hits the Top Ten as Davenport loses perhaps her last chance for a Slam title. July 2 — ALL MATCHES RAINED OUT July 3 — Wimbledon F: Maria Sharapova (13) def. Serena Williams (1) 6–1 6–4 Wimbledon SF DOUBLES: Black/Stubbs (6) def. Ruano Pascual/Suárez (1) 7–6(9–7) 4–6 6–4 Black and Stubbs end the hopes for a Grand Slam by Ruano Pascual/Suárez; Sharapova takes home her first-ever Slam and ends Serena’s 19-match Wimbledon winning streak. Serena falls all the way to #14 — her lowest ranking since March 1999 July 4 — Wimbledon F DOUBLES: Black/Stubbs (6) def. Huber/Sugiyama (5) 6–3 7–6(7–5) Black wins her first-ever Slam — and Huber fails to win hers. Black also won the mixed doubles July 10 — Stanford QUALIFYING 1R: Vilmarie Castellvi (8) def. Anne Kremer 6–3 7–5 After a great grass season, Kremer rediscovers reality July 11 — Stanford QUALIFYING 2R: Jamea Jackson def. Alexandra Stevenson (4) 6Ð7(3Ð7) 6Ð0 3Ð1, retired And the injuries continue for Stevenson.... July 12 — Stanford 1R: Maria Vento-Kabchi (8) def. Eleni Daniilidou 6–3 6–7(6–8) 7–6(8–6) Vento-Kabchi reaches the Top 30 for the first time as Daniilidou’s losing streak reaches five. July 13 — Stanford 1R: Marissa Irvin (Q) def. Meghann Shaughnessy (7) 6–3 6–1 Irvin puts Shaughnessy’s Top 30 ranking in some danger on a day when relatively little happened. July 14 — Stanford 2R: Maria Vento-Kabchi (8) def. Anca Barna 6–2 6–2 Vento-Kabchi clinches a career high — probably #27. July 15 — Stanford 2R: Patty Schnyder (3) def. Nicole Pratt 6–3 6–2 On a day completely devoid of excitement, Schnyder’s win earns her enough points to assure that Serena Williams will fall out of the Top 15 next week. July 16 — Stanford QF: Maria Vento-Kabchi (8) def. Francesca Schiavone (4) 6–4 6–1 Vento-Kabchi firmly establishes herself in the Top 30 — a career high by about five places... July 17 — Stanford SF: Lindsay Davenport (2) def. Maria Vento-Kabchi (8) 6–3 6–2 ...but Vento-Kabchi won’t make the Top 25 just yet.... July 18 — Stanford F: Lindsay Davenport (2) def. Venus Williams (1) 7–6(7–4) 5–7 7–6(7–4) Davenport shakes off her six-match losing streak to Venus and takes over the #1 Race spot. July 19 — Los Angeles 1R: Nathalie Déchy def. Conchita Martinez 6–4 6–4 Déchy will probably return to the Top 30 — and Martinez certainly won’t. July 20 — Palermo 1R: Ludmila Cervanova (8) def. Sandrine Testud (WC) 6–4 7–6(7–2) How much longer does Testud keep trying to come back, anyway? [Answer: Until the Olympics.] July 21 — Los Angeles 2R: Jelena Kostanic def. Patty Schnyder (9) 6–1 7–6(7–5) Kostanic knocks Schnyder out of the Top 15 and herself makes a run for the Top 20. July 22 — Los Angeles QF DOUBLES: Martinez/Ruano Pascual (3) def. Bartoli/Kostanic 7Ð6(7Ð5) 7Ð4 Virginia Ruano Pascual, who has played #2 to Paola Suárez’s #1 for most of two years, finally should take the top spot. July 23 — Los Angeles QF: Venus Williams (2) def. Francesca Schiavone (11) 7–5 6–1 Venus puts herself back in the Top Ten, booting Ai Sugiyama

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 244 July 24 — Palermo F DOUBLES: Medina Garrigues/Sanchez-Vicario def. Kurhajcova/Nagyova (3) 6Ð3 7Ð6(7Ð4) It’s a thoroughly feeble event, but after winning only two matches in four previous events, Sanchez- Vicario has her first doubles title in two years. July 25 — Los Angeles F: Lindsay Davenport (3) def. Serena Williams (1) 6–1 6–3 Davenport regains the #4 ranking and earns her fourth title of the year. July 26 — San Diego 1R: Ashley Harkleroad def. Patty Schnyder (13) 6–4 3–6 7–5 Harkleroad at last wins another good match and returns to the Top 100. July 27 — San Diego 1R: Elena Likhovtseva def. Nadia Petrova (10) 6–4 1–6 6–4 Petrova continues to stumble and falls from #12 to #15. July 28 — San Diego 2R: Alicia Molik def. Amélie Mauresmo (2) 7–5 3–6 6–3 Molik scores the win of her life — and potentially costs Mauresmo the #2 ranking. [It’s the start of an amazing second half that will put her in the Top 15.] July 29 — San Diego 3R: Ai Sugiyama (8) def. Marion Bartoli (Q) 6–3 6–2 This result guaranteed that Venus Williams would drop out of the Top Ten. When Serena Williams won later in the day, it meant that Venus would fall to no better than #12. July 30 — San Diego QF: Anastasia Myskina (3) def. Maria Sharapova (6) 7–5 6–2 Maria Sharapova came in with a 14-match winning streak, but that may mean less than it appears to She won 12 on grass — then lost on hardcourt to the first Top 50 player she faced July 31 — San Diego SF: Lindsay Davenport (4) def. Elena Dementieva (5) 6–2 6–4 San Diego SF: Anastasia Myskina (3) def. Vera Zvonareva (12) 6Ð2 6Ð7(4Ð7) 7Ð6(17Ð15) Davenport moves past Amélie Mauresmo in the rankings, and (by winning the longest third set tiebreak in WTA history) Myskina overtakes Kim Clijsters; Clijsters will fall to #5, and Davenport will play Myskina in the San Diego final for the #2 ranking. August 1 — San Diego F: Lindsay Davenport (4) def. Anastasia Myskina (3) 6–1 6–1 A tired Myskina can’t do a thing against Davenport, who wins her third straight title (equalling the accomplishment she had in 1998 which took her eventually to #1). Davenport has 14 straight wins, and moves up to #2 in the world. And #1 in the Race by a wide margin. August 2 — Canadian Open 1R: Magdalena Maleeva (13) def. Lina Krasnoroutskaya 7Ð6(7Ð4) 3Ð6 6Ð4 When the points from the 2003 Canadian Open come off, Krasnoroutskaya will fall out of the Top 100. August 3 — Canadian Open 2R: Amélie Mauresmo (2) def. Tamarine Tanasugarn 6–4 1–6 6–2 It was an ugly win for Mauresmo — but she still moves ahead of Lindsay Davenport in the rankings. August 4 — Canadian Open 2R: Elena Likhovtseva def. Nadia Petrova (8) 6–4 6–7(6–8) 7–5 Where have we seen this before? (For the answer, see July 27) August 5 — Canadian Open R16: Vera Zvonareva (14) def. Maria Sharapova (6) 4–6 6–4 6–4 Zvonareva finally makes the Top Ten. August 6 — Canadian Open QF: Elena Likhovtseva def. Jennifer Capriati (5) 6–2 7–5 Likhovtseva continues an amazing week with only her second Top Ten win of 2004; the victory puts her firmly back in the Top 30. August 7 — Canadian Open SF: Elena Likhovtseva def. Anastasia Myskina (3) 6–3 5–7 6–4 Likhovtseva, who a few months ago was hovering around #50, puts herself on the verge of the Top 25 with her second win over Myskina this year August 8 — Canadian Open F: Amélie Mauresmo (2) def. Elena Likhovtseva 6–1 6–0 Mauresmo, who clinched the #2 ranking when Likhovtseva beat Myskina the day before, finds herself close to taking the #1 ranking August 9 — Sopot 1R: Ludmila Cervanova def. Anabel Medina Garrigues (4) 6–3 6–1 Only four Top 50 players are in action this week — assuming they all play — and this knocks off one.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 245 August 10 — Sopot 1R: Dinara Safina (3) def. Michaela Pastikova (LL) 6–4 6–4 Safina, who threatened the Top 30 earlier this year but developed a bad back, is finally playing again. August 11 — Sopot 2R: Marta Domachowska (WC) def. Anna Smashnova (2) 7–6(7–4) 6–1 Last week, Smashnova (whose marriage is on the rocks) withdrew with tendonitis. This week, she seems to have made herself a sacrificial victim as Domachowska earns her first Top Fifty win. August 12 — Vancouver 2R: Camille Pin def. Marion Bartoli (1) 6–3 5–7 6–2 Pin eliminates the only Top 70 player at Vancouver and makes her first WTA quarterfinal August 13 — Sopot SF: Klara Koukalova (11) def. Anastasia Myskina (1) walkover An all-day rain on Friday causes Myskina to withdraw — killing her chances of reaching #1 at the Olympics. August 14 — Sopot F: Flavia Pennetta (9) def. Klara Koukalova (11) 7–5 3–6 6–3 Pennetta had to play two matches this day, and Koukalova only one — but unlike Koukalova, Pennetta hadn’t lost four finals without winning a title; in her first career final, she takes home the title and a Top 50 ranking. August 15 — Vancouver F: Nicole Vaidisova (Q) def. Laura Granville (4) 2–6 6–4 6–2 Playing in only her third WTA main draw, Vaidisova earns her first title. August 16 — Olympics 1R: Alicia Molik def. Elena Dementieva (4) 4–6 6–0 6–3 Olympics 1R DOUBLES: Li/Sun (6) def. Rubin/V. Williams 7Ð5 1Ð6 6Ð3 For the second time in three tournaments, Molik beats a Top Ten player (and she won the other tournament), bringing her close to the Top 20; meanwhile, Venus plays and loses her first-ever women’s doubles match not with Serena — and to a team with a four match losing streak. August 17 — Olympics 2R: Lisa Raymond def. Silvia Farina Elia (14) 6–1 6–2 Raymond, who wasn’t even supposed to play singles, posts her first Top 20 win since beating Venus Williams at the Australian Open August 18 — Olympics R16: Mary Pierce def. Venus Williams (6) 6–4 6–4 Olympics R16: Alicia Molik def. Lisa Raymond 6Ð4 6Ð4 Olympics 2R DOUBLES: Déchy/Testud def. Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (1) 2Ð6 7Ð6(7Ð5) 6Ð3 The defending champion is the day’s worst upset, and again falls short of the Top Ten; Molik hits the Top 20; the top doubles seeds again fail to win a big event. August 19 — Olympics QF: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1) def. Mary Pierce 6–4 6–4 Hénin-Hardenne guarantees that she will stay #1 — at least through the U. S. Open August 20 — Olympics SF: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1) def. Anastasia Myskina (3) 7–5 5–7 8–6 The motto of the match, in which Myskina blew a huge third set lead, was, “No, please, I’m too nervous, you win it” — but it earns Hénin-Hardenne a medal and means that Myskina stays stuck at #3. August 21 — Olympics F: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1) def. Amélie Mauresmo (2) 6–3 6–3 Hénin-Hardenne proves she’s back and gives herself a real chance to stay #1 after the U. S. Open August 22 — Cincinnati F: Lindsay Davenport (1) def. Vera Zvonareva (2) 6–3 6–2 In an event completely and utterly devoid of surprises, Davenport wins her seventeenth straight match and fourth straight title Only to withdraw from New Haven with wrist tendonitis.... August 23 — New Haven 1R: Jelena Kostanic def. Magdalena Maleeva (6) 3–6 6–4 6–4 No return to the Top 20 for Maleeva this week.... August 24 — New Haven 2R: Mashona Washington (WC) def. Maria Sharapova (4) 6–3 2–6 6–2 Sharapova, still struggling away from grass, suffers her worst loss of the year as Washington scores the best win of her career. August 25 — New Haven 2R: Lisa Raymond def. Nadia Petrova (5) 3–6 6–4 6–4 Raymond picks up her best win since beating Venus Williams at the Australian Open, and will play Daniela Hantuchova for a place in the Top 30.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 246 August 26 — New Haven QF: Nathalie Déchy (8) def. Jennifer Capriati (3) 6–4 7–5 Capriati continues to find new and original ways to not win tournaments August 27 — New Haven SF: Elena Bovina (7) def. Elena Dementieva (2) 6–1 6–1 New Haven SF: Nathalie Déchy (8) def. Lisa Raymond (WC) 6–4 6–0 Déchy and Bovina both overcome injuries (neck and back, respectively) to reach their first-ever Tier II finals. Bovina also hits the Top 20. August 28 — New Haven F: Elena Bovina (7) def. Nathalie Déchy (8) 6–2 2–6 7–5 Bovina takes that first Tier II title in a match that was perhaps one bad decision from going to Déchy. August 30 — U. S. Open 1R: Marion Bartoli def. Meghann Shaughnessy (32) 6–4 6–4 Not much of an upset, given Shaughnessy’s recent singles form — but it will drop the American from the Top 40. August 31 — U. S. Open 1R: Maria Kirilenko def. Elena Likhovtseva (25) 7–6(7–3) 6–3 Likhovtseva three days before had won her first title in seven years — but her winning streak ended at two matches! September 1 — U. S. Open 2R: Angola Haynes (WC) def. Magdalena Maleeva (22) 6–2 6–3 Haynes, with only one prior WTA win in ten tries, hits the jackpot. September 2 — U. S. Open 2R: Anna Chakvetadze (Q) def. Anastasia Myskina (4) 7–6(7–3) 6–3 Myskina plays her worst match of the year against Chakvetadze, who had only one prior WTA win; the loss knocks Myskina out of the contest for #1 — for this fortnight, and probably this year. September 3 — U. S. Open 2R DOUBLES: Lee/Peng def. Petrova/Shaughnessy (4) 4–6 6–1 6–4 Petrova/Shaughnessy once again show their nerves; they have almost as many titles as Slam match wins! September 4 — U. S. Open 3R: Shinobu Asagoe def. Paola Suárez (13) 6–4 6–4 U. S. Open 3R: Mary Pierce (27) def. Maria Sharapova (7) 4Ð6 6Ð2 6Ð3 Asagoe puts herself back in the Top 50, and drops Suárez out of the Top 15, while Pierce gives Maria Sharapova yet another lesson in hardcourts. September 5 — U. S. Open 4R: Elena Dementieva (6) def. Vera Zvonareva (10) 1–6 6–4 6–3 Dementieva hits the Top Five, and drops Zvonareva out of the Top Ten September 6 — U. S. Open 4R: Nadia Petrova (14) def. Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1) 6–3 6–2 A sloppy match costs Hénin-Hardenne the #1 ranking, probably for the rest of the year at least. [The Belgian in fact won’t play again in 2004, and ends the year at #8.] September 7 — U. S. Open QF: Elena Dementieva (6) def. Amélie Mauresmo (2) 4–6 6–4 7–6(7–1) U. S. Open QF: Jennifer Capriati (8) def. Serena Williams (3) 2Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð4 Two matches, two results that shouldn’t have happened: Dementieva could hardly move and was sick to her stomach, but Mauresmo — who was playing to clinch the #1 ranking — played like a fool and lost her chance. As for Serena, she had so many questionable calls go against her that there were claims of match-fixing; she said herself that she was “robbed.” Not a good day for anyone.... September 8 — U. S. Open QF: Svetlana Kuznetsova (9) def. Nadia Petrova (14) 7–6(7–4) 6–3 On a day when rain nearly halted play, Kuznetsova achieves her first Slam singles semifinal. September 9 — U. S. Open SF DOUBLES: Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (2) def. Schett/Schnyder (12) 6Ð4 6Ð2 Kuznetsova reaches her fourth final in the last five Slams, and Likhovtseva her third in the last four. What are the odds that they’ll finally win one? September 10 — U. S. Open SF: Svetlana Kuznetsova (9) def. Lindsay Davenport (5) 1–6 6–2 6–4 U. S. Open SF: Elena Dementieva (6) def. Jennifer Capriati (8) 6Ð0 2Ð6 7Ð6(7Ð5) In a bizarre semifinal, Capriati can’t finish off an injured Dementieva — but the real news comes as Davenport loses to Kuznetsova, ending the American’s 22 match winning streak and giving us an all- Russian final. It also means that Amélie Mauresmo is the new WTA #1 — and she has achieved it without making a Slam final! Former #1 Justine Hénin-Hardenne falls all the way to #4.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 247 September 11 — U. S. Open F: Svetlana Kuznetsova (9) def. Elena Dementieva (6) 6–3 7–5 In a surprisingly easy final, Kuznetsova earns her first Slam and, of course, a career high. We’ve had four different Slam winners this year, three of them Russian and all three first-time winners — the first time since 1978 that we’ve had three first-time winners in one year. September 12 — U. S. Open F DOUBLES: Ruano Pascual/Suárez (1) def. Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (2) 6Ð4 7Ð5 For the third time this year, Ruano Pascual and Suárez beat the Russians in a Slam final. It’s the seventh Slam for the pair, and they become the first team ever to win three straight Opens. September 13 — Bali 1R: Kristina Brandi def. Saori Obata 6–1 6–2 Last year’s semifinalist goes splat. The points were already off, but still.... September 14 — Bali 1R: Yoon Jeong Cho def. Maria Vento-Kabchi (6) 7–5 6–1 Vento-Kabchi’s slump continues; she will be dropping out of the Top 40 September 15 — Bali 1R: Tathiana Garbin def. Chanda Rubin (5) 6–1 6–4 On a day when three seeds (#3 Sugiyama, #5 Rubin, and #8 Jankovic) were upset, Rubin, who was defending points from the 2003 Shanghai final, suffers most; she will fall from #24 to barely above #30. September 16 — Bali 2R: Maria Elena Camerin def. Anastasia Myskina (1) 6–3 1–6 6–2 Camerin hits the Top 50 for the first time as Myskina continues to play far below herself September 17 — Bali QF: Maria Elena Camerin def. Gisela Dulko (7) 3–6 6–3 6–2 Camerin keeps Dulko out of the Top 30. September 18 — Bali SF: Svetlana Kuznetsova (2) def. Nadia Petrova (4) 6–7(1–7) 6–1 6–2 Kuznetsova hits the Top Five while once again killing Petrova’s chances for a singles title. September 19 — Bali F: Svetlana Kuznetsova (2) def. Marlene Weingärtner 6–1 6–4 Bali F DOUBLES: Myskina/Sugiyama (1) def. Kuznetsova/Sanchez-Vicario 6Ð3 7Ð5 Kuznetsova wins her eleventh straight match, but for the second week in a row, can’t win the doubles final; Myskina earns her first-ever doubles title September 20 — Beijing 1R: Maria Vento-Kabchi def. Flavia Pennetta 7–6(7–5) 6–4 Vento-Kabchi, who had 142 points to defend, earns enough that she should stay Top 50. September 21 — Beijing 1R: Tamarine Tanasugarn def. Jelena Dokic (8) 6–3 6–0 Dokic loses her ninth straight match. At the rate she’s going, she’ll end the year around #100. [In fact this was her last match of 2004, and she ended up well below #100.] September 22 — Beijing 2R: Gisela Dulko (6) def. Maria Vento-Kabchi 6–4 6–4 Dulko takes another step toward the Top 50 while dropping Vento-Kabchi to probably #48. September 23 — Beijing 2R: Svetlana Kuznetsova (2) def. Li Na (Q) 6–3 6–7(6–8) 7–6(7–3) On a day devoid of upsets, Kuznetsova saves match points to run her winning streak to 12. September 24 — Beijing QF: Serena Williams (1) def. Nadia Petrova (5) 6–2 4–1, retired (left ankle) Beijing QF: Maria Sharapova (3) def. Jelena Jankovic (7) 5Ð2, retired (right ankle) Just what sort of chewing gum do they makes these courts out of, anyway? September 25 — Beijing SF DOUBLES: Gagliardi/Safina def. Li/Sun (2) 4–6 6–1 6–0 Beijing F MIXED DOUBLES: Philipps/Gagliardi (2) def. Gimelstob/Craybas 6Ð1 6Ð2 Quite a day for Gagliardi: She reaches her first Tier II doubles final of the year, ends the seven match winning streak of the Olympic champions (Li/Sun missed the U. S. Open), and becomes the first player this millennium to win a mixed doubles title not at a Slam. September 26 — Beijing F: Serena Williams (1) def. Svetlana Kuznetsova (2) 4–6 7–5 6–4 Serena wins her first title in half a year, ending Kuznetsova’s 14 match winning streak. September 27 — GuangZhou 1R: Li Ting def. Aniko Kapros 6–1 6–1 Kapros was finalist a year ago at the Japan Open; this will drop her some dozens of places. September 28 — Seoul 1R: Anne Kremer def. Lubomira Kurhajcova (6) 4–6 6–1 6–3 It was a truly dull day; this at least brings Kremer a bit closer to the Top 100.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 248 September 29 — Hasselt 2R: Kim Clijsters (2) def. Iveta Benesova 7–6(7–3) 6–2 It wasn’t much of a match — but look who’s back! September 30 — Hasselt 2R: Maria Elena Camerin def. Karolina Sprem (4) 6–4 6–4 Sprem still can’t solve indoor surfaces.... October 1 — Hasselt QF: Kim Clijsters (2) def. Magdalena Maleeva (7) 6–3 6–4 Definitely looks like she’s back.... October 2 — Hasselt SF: Elena Bovina (3) def. Kim Clijsters (2) 6–4 2–2, retired (wrist) Or maybe not.... [This would be the last match of the year for Clijsters.] October 3 — Hasselt F: Elena Dementieva (1) def. Elena Bovina (3) 0–6 6–0 6–4 It was at least as wacky as the scoreline, but Dementieva finally wins her first title of the year. October 4 — Filderstadt 1R: Anna Smashnova def. Ai Sugiyama (8) 6–3 7–6(7–3) Smashnova wins her first indoor match of the year and, by so doing, returns to the Top 30 October 5 — Filderstadt 1R: Nathalie Déchy (WC) def. Magdalena Maleeva 4–6 6–3 6–3 Déchy bounces Maleeva out of the Top 20 — maybe out of the Top 25. October 6 — Filderstadt 2R: Jelena Jankovic (Q) def. Nadia Petrova (7) 6–4 3–6 7–6(7–3) How tough was Filderstadt? So tough that all four seeds in first round action lost. This was the last of those four upsets, and it kills Petrova’s Top Ten hopes while taking Jankovic close to the Top 30. October 7 — Filderstadt 2R: Elena Likhovtseva def. Mary Pierce 0–6 6–4 6–3 Likhovtseva is on the verge of the Top 25, but Pierce, who had semifinalist points to defend, will barely stay Top 30. October 8 — Filderstadt QF DOUBLES: Black/Stubbs (1) def. Davenport/Morariu 6–2 6–4 Davenport, playing her first doubles event since Amelia Island, doesn’t stick around very long. October 9 — Filderstadt SF: Amélie Mauresmo (1) def. Svetlana Kuznetsova (4) 7–5 6–4 Mauresmo earns enough points to guarantee that she will stay #1. Barely. For another week. October 10 — Filderstadt F: Lindsay Davenport (2) def. Amélie Mauresmo (1) 6–2, retired A left adductor strain costs Mauresmo any chance for the Filderstadt title — and almost guarantees Davenport the year-end #1. The American will probably take the #1 ranking at Moscow. [She did.] October 11 — Moscow 1R DOUBLES: Bovina/Petrova def. Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva (2) 2–6 6–3 6–2 On a day when the real news came off-court, with Amélie Mauresmo withdrawing from Moscow and almost certainly losing the #1 ranking, it looks as if Svetlana Kuznetsova’s decisions about her doubles future are getting more complicated: She and Elena Likhovtseva just keep struggling. October 12 — Tashkent 1R: Iroda Tulyaganova (WC) def. Marion Bartoli (1) 6–4 6–4 For once, could someone have waited long enough to come back from injury? It’s a nice return for Tulyaganova after more than a year off. [It turns out it wasn’t long enough; Tulyaganova lost her next match, and missed the rest of the season.] October 13 — Moscow 2R: Francesca Schiavone def. Nadia Petrova (8) 0–6 6–3 6–4 No doubt at all about it now: Schiavone is back in the Top 20. October 14 — Moscow 2R: Lindsay Davenport (2) def. Dinara Safina 6–4 6–2 Utterly routine — but it puts Davenport back at #1 for the first time since early 2002. And she is just about certain to stay there until some time next year. October 15 — Moscow QF: Elena Bovina def. Venus Williams (7) 6–3 6–2 Behold the effects of carpet.... October 16 — Moscow SF: Anastasia Myskina (3) def. Lindsay Davenport (2) 6–4 7–6 (7–1) For the second time this year, we have a player who can reach #1 but can’t win the tournament, or even reach the final, at the event where she earns it.... October 17 — Moscow F: Anastasia Myskina (3) def. Elena Dementieva (5) 7–5 6–0 Myskina wins her third title of the year and improves her chances of being the year-end #2. October 18 — Zürich 1R: Daniela Hantuchova def. Vera Douchevina (WC) 6–1 6–4 Hantuchova almost certainly puts herself back in the Top 30.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 249 October 19 — Zürich 1R: Venus Williams (7) def. Karolina Sprem 6–2 6–2 This may have been a Wimbledon rematch, but the result, given the indoor surface, was no surprise. Still, it brings Venus another stop closer to a return to the Top Ten. October 20 — Zürich 1R: Ana Ivanovic (Q) def. Tatiana Golovin (Q) 7–5 6–7(2–7) 7–6(7–3) After great Challenger results, and lousy WTA results, Ivanovic earns her first WTA win by beating another hot young prospect. October 21 — Zürich 2R: Elena Dementieva (3) def. Elena Bovina 7–5 3–6 6–0 Dementieva beats Bovina for the third time in the last four weeks, and moves to within one win of #4. October 22 — Zürich QF: Maria Sharapova (4) def. Venus Williams (7) 6–3 6–4 The ugliness gets uglier for Venus. October 23 — Zürich SF: Alicia Molik def. Patty Schnyder (10) 4–6 6–1 6–4 Molik hits a career high of #16 and beats her seventh Top 15 player since Wimbledon. Only Davenport has more Top 15 wins in that time. October 24 — Zürich F: Alicia Molik def. Maria Sharapova (4) 4–6 6–2 6–3 Molik wins her first Tier I title and hits a career high of #14. October 25 — Luxembourg 1R: Ana Ivanovic def. Anne Kremer (WC) 6–3 6–1 Hardly big news these days, given Kremer’s troubles, but another step forward for Ivanovic. October 26 — Luxembourg 1R: Emma Laine (Q) def. Magdalena Maleeva (4) 5–7 6–4 6–3 Maleeva has lost five straight matches, but this is the worst: Laine had no WTA wins and was ranked #216 based on 18 events. October 27 — Linz 2R: Alina Jidkova (Q) def. Serena Williams (3) 7–6(7–5) 6–2 Serena suffers her first loss since 2000 to a player ranked below #30; Jidkova earns the biggest win of her dozen year career and hits a career high. October 28 — Luxembourg 2R: Anabel Medina Garrigues def. Paola Suárez (1) 3–6 6–3 6–4 Suárez again proves her indoor incompetence as Medina Garrigues hits a career high. October 29 — Linz QF: Jelena Jankovic def. Vera Zvonareva (4) 6–4 6–4 Jankovic hits the Top 30 and hurts Zvonareva’s year-end chances, allowing Serena Williams to qualify — and, hence, to pull out of Philadelphia. October 30 — Luxembourg SF: Alicia Molik (2) def. Silvia Farina Elia (3) 6–2 6–2 Molik wins her eighth straight match. One more and she reaches #13 (and probably year-end #12). (She would, in fact, win the final against Dinara Safina the next day.) October 31 — Linz F: Amélie Mauresmo (1) def. Elena Bovina (9) 6–2 6–0 Mauresmo wins title #4 of the year, and improves her (admittedly faint) chances of being year-end #1. November 1 — Philadelphia 1R: Vera Zvonareva (6) def. Sybille Bammer (Q) 6–4 3–6 7–6(7–5) Zvonareva remains in the hunt for a Championships spot — but wow was that close.... November 2 — Philadelphia 1R: Venus Williams (6) def. Lisa Raymond 6–2 6–1 No close match for the Championships contender this time: Venus has the Race lead; Raymond may end the year below the Top 30. November 3 — Quebec City 2R: Melanie Gloria (Q) def. Daniela Hantuchova (2) 6–3 2–6 6–1 Hantuchova’s troubles clearly aren’t entirely over; she loses to an unranked Canadian qualifier who had never played a WTA match before and had 1.75 points from her last two Challengers. November 4 — Philadelphia 2R: Venus Williams (6) def. Yuliana Fedak 6–4 2–6 7–6(7–4) All eight seeds made the Philadelphia quarterfinal, but Venus — who needed this win to make the year- end championships, and still needs more — came closest to a stunning defeat.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 250 November 5 — Philadelphia QF: Amélie Mauresmo (1) def. Venus Williams (5) 7–5 5–7 6–1 Philadelphia QF: Vera Zvonareva (6) def. Jennifer Capriati (4) 6Ð0 6Ð1 Philadelphia QF: Nadia Petrova (7) def. Anastasia Myskina (2) 6Ð3 4Ð6 6Ð4 The first two of these settled the Year-End Championships roster: Zvonareva will qualify, not Capriati or Venus. The third determined that Myskina would have no chance at the year-end #1; it’s Davenport or, just possibly, Mauresmo. November 6 — Philadelphia SF: Vera Zvonareva (6) def. Nadia Petrova (7) 6–3 7–6(7–2) Watchers say that Zvonareva seems to have found a new resolve. Let’s hope it lasts.... November 7 — Philadelphia F: Amélie Mauresmo (1) def. Vera Zvonareva (6) 3–6 6–2 6–2 Mauresmo wins back-to-back titles, and scores her first title defence; she’s nearly sure to end the year at #2, and her chances for #1 are improving. November 10 — Los Angeles Champ: Lindsay Davenport (1) def. Elena Dementieva 6–0 6–1 It wasn’t quite as routine as it looks — Davenport’s last service game lasted 18 deuces — but it takes the American another step toward the year-end #1. November 11 — Los Angeles Champ: Amélie Mauresmo (2) def. Vera Zvonareva 6–1 6–0 One Day 1, Davenport posed the challenge; on day 2, Mauresmo answers. November 12 — Los Angeles Champ: Anastasia Myskina (3) def. Lindsay Davenport (1) 7–6(7–5) 6–4 Los Angeles Champ: Amélie Mauresmo (2) def. Svetlana Kuznetsova (4) 6–3 6–2 Mauresmo is in the semifinal; Davenport has to beat Serena Williams in straight sets to get there. The race for #1 is suddenly looking very interesting.... November 13 — Los Angeles Champ: Lindsay Davenport (1) def. Serena Williams 3–6 7–5 6–1 Amélie Mauresmo (2) def. Maria Sharapova 7–5 6–4 Anastasia Myskina (3) def. Elena Dementieva 6Ð3 6Ð3 Davenport, Serena, and Myskina are all 2Ð1 in their group, but Davenport loses the tiebreak and is through for the year. Mauresmo, the only player undefeated in the Round Robin, advances and will be #1 if she wins Los Angeles.... November 14 — Los Angeles SF: Serena Williams def. Amélie Mauresmo (2) 4–6 7–6(7–2) 6–4 Los Angeles SF DOUBLES: Black/Stubbs def. Ruano Pascual/Suárez (1) 7–6(9–7) 6–4 ...but of course Mauresmo can’t win big matches (she had twelve break points in the third set and converted none). So Lindsay Davenport ends the year at #1. So do Ruano Pascual/Suárez, but no thanks to their results on fast courts.... [Petrova/Shaughnessy will go on to win the doubles; they end the year with seven titles, leading the tour. They can win anything except Slams....] November 15 — Los Angeles F: Maria Sharapova def. Serena Williams 4–6 6–2 6–4 Sharapova faced injured opponents in both the semifinal and the final, but she still earns the title, the cash — and a career-best #4 ranking.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 251 WTA Tour History Who Won What Summary — Singles The following list shows all active Tier II or higher titles and lists which of the top players have won them. The ﬁgures in the boxes show how many times the player has won each event and the year of her earliest win (e.g. by the Australian Open, in the column for Capriati, we see 2/01 — Capriati has won the Australian Open twice times, starting in 2001). Looking at this list can give a measure both of a player’s success (Davenport, e.g., has a lot of titles) and her weaknesses (but Davenport has big holes in the clay season) The players listed are the Top Ten, plus the major players of recent years — plus Hingis, because, if she comes back, I don’t want to have to redo her, and she is a good basis for comparison as the most well-rounded player since Graf. Event Capri Clijst Daven Deme Hénin Hingi Kuzne Marti Maure Myski Pierce Seles Shara SWill VWill Sydney 1/93 1/03 1/99 1/04 3/97 1/00 1/96 Australian 2/01 1/00 1/04 3/97 1/95 4/91 1/03 Pan Paciﬁc 4/98 4/97 Paris 1/04 1/97 1/01 1/98 2/99 1/02 Antwerp 1/04 2/02 Dubai 2/03 1/01 1/02 1/02 Doha 1/04 Indian Wel 1/03 2/97 1/04 1/98 1/92 2/99 Miami 2/97 2/90 3/02 3/98 Amelia Isl 2/97 1/03 1/95 1/01 1/98 2/99 1/02 Charleston 1/01 1/03 2/97 2/94 1/00 1/04 Warsaw 1/03 1/04 Berlin 2/02 1/99 2/98 2/01 1/90 Rome 1/03 1/98 4/93 1/04 1/97 2/90 1/02 1/99 Roland G 1/01 1/03 1/04 1/00 3/90 1/02 Eastbourne 1/01 1/04 1/96 Wimbledon 1/99 1/97 1/94 1/04 2/02 2/00 Stanford 2/01 3/98 2/96 2/90 2/00 Los Angeles 1/03 4/96 1/95 3/90 2/99 San Diego 2/91 2/98 1/03 2/97 1/95 3/00 Canadian O 1/91 1/03 2/99 2/02 4/95 1/01 New Haven 1/03 1/97 4/99 U.S. Open 1/98 1/03 1/97 1/04 2/91 2/99 2/00 Beijing 1/04 Filderstadt 2/02 2/01 4/96 1/93 Moscow 1/00 2/03 1/98 Zürich 3/97 1/03 1/00 1/99 Linz 2/00 1/02 1/04 1/99 Philadelphia 2/99 1/97 1/93 2/03 1/91 Champions 2/02 1/99 2/98 3/90 1/04 1/01 Different 7917112202910391521213 events won Total Tier 9/9 12/15 33/36 1/2 14/14 36/38 2/2 14/20 13/14 4/6 9/10 32/47 2/2 19/23 24/26 II+ wins (active/total) Past Tier IIs: Clijsters — Hamburg (1/02), Leipzig (2/00); Davenport — Chicago (1/97), Princess Cup (1/99), Scottsdale (1/01); Dementieva — Shanghai (1/03); Hingis — Hamburg (2/98); Martinez — Barcelona (1/91), Hamburg (1/95), Houston (1/93), Stratton Mountain (2/93), Tampa (1/89); Mauresmo — Nice (1/01); Myskina — Bahia (1/02), Leipzig (1/03); Pierce — Princess Cup (1/95); Seles — Bahia (1/01), Barcelona (1/92), Chicago (1/93), Essen (1/92), Houston (3/89), Milan (1/91), Princess Cup (5/91), San Antonio (1/90), Tampa (1/90); S. Williams — Hannover (1/00), Princess Cup (2/00), Scottsdale (1/02), Leipzig (1/ 02); V. Williams — Hamburg (2/99). N.B.: Myskina won Doha ’03, Rubin Linz ’97, Martinez Paris ’90; none was then Tier II.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 252 Who Won What Summary — Doubles The equivalent of the preceding, but for doubles. It’s harder to pick these players, as there are more doubles winners out there. I finally chose to list the Top Twelve excluding Navratilova (the WTA doesn’t publish the data to do this right), meaning Black, Liezel Huber, Kuznetsova, Likhovtseva, Petrova, Raymond, Ruano Pascual, Shaughnessy, Stubbs, Suárez, and Sugiyama — plus Serena Williams as the other active player with the Career Slam (Venus has an identical record except that she didn’t win Leipzig 2002), as well as Davenport, Hingis, and Sanchez-Vicario as the other most successful players of recent years. The final lines of the table differ slightly from the singles table. The line “Events won” lists the distinct active Tier II titles each player has won. Serena, for instance, has won seven titles at these 30 events — but she has two Wimbledons and two Australian Opens, so she has only five distinct titles. The next line, “To 2000,” lists each player’s titles at all Tier II+ events in the years leading up to 2000 (inclusive). We then show her total for the 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, and the grand total. Note that the total may be higher than the total titles listed, since some players will have titles at no-longer-extant tournaments (e.g. Hingis has 36 total doubles titles, but only 33 show up in the list; she also won Hamburg 1995, 2002, and Leipzig 1997, which are no longer played). Tournament Black Daven Hingi LHub Kuzne Likho Petro Raym Ruano Sanch Shaug Stubb Suare Sugiy SWill Sydney 1/04 2/95 1/98 1/99 1/02 3/91 2/02 3/99 Australian O 4/97 1/00 1/04 3/92 1/00 1/04 2/01 Pan Pacific 1/04 2/97 2/98 2/01 1/92 4/01 Paris 1/98 Antwerp 1/04 1/03 Dubai 1/03 Doha 1/04 1/04 Indian Wells 6/94 1/99 4/94 1/04 2/93 1/04 1/01 Miami 2/98 1/03 1/04 1/02 5/92 1/04 1/02 1/00 Amelia Islan 2/97 1/04 1/03 6/90 1/04 Charleston 1/97 1/99 2/01 3/00 4/90 2/01 3/00 Warsaw 1/03 Berlin 2/97 1/04 1/03 1/00 2/01 1/03 Rome 1/01 1/99 1/03 1/01 1/04 1/00 2/98 2/93 1/04 1/00 2/98 Roland Gar 1/96 2/98 3/01 3/01 1/03 1/99 Eastbourne 1/03 1/99 3/01 2/95 2/01 1/00 Wimbledon 1/04 1/99 2/96 1/01 1/95 2/01 1/03 2/00 Stanford 1/03 5/94 1/97 2/02 1/94 1/02 Los Angeles 1/96 1/98 1/04 2/92 1/04 1/03 San Diego 2/01 2/98 1/97 1/01 1/00 2/94 2/00 1/03 Canadian O 2/98 1/03 1/02 2/94 1/92 1/02 1/04 New Haven 1/01 1/01 1/04 1/99 1/03 1/02 1/04 1/99 1/03 1/00 U.S. Open 1/97 1/98 1/01 3/02 2/93 1/01 3/02 1/00 1/99 Beijing Filderstadt 1/04 3/98 2/97 3/01 2/92 2/03 Moscow 1/01 1/03 1/99 1/97 1/03 1/99 1/00 Zürich 1/04 1/01 3/96 2/99 1/97 2/99 1/03 1/98 Linz 1/03 1/04 2/01 1/03 Philadelphia 1/00 1/98 5/96 3/96 1/98 Championsh 3/96 2/990 1/04 1/01 1/03 2/92 1/04 1/01 1/03 Events won 10 15 21 348919102082010155 To 2000 0 28 33 0040162560152115 2001 521105191117111 2002 012010195308502 2003 1 3 — 340165—13581 2004 7 0 — 012915076510 Totals 13 34 36 4 6 11 12 41 18 60 9 39 18 21 9

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 253 Who Won What — History of Tournaments The following tables list players who won the equivalent of Tier II and higher events. Some tournaments (e.g. Warsaw and Shanghai before 2003, Doha before 2004) were not Tier II events for this entire period; these winners are shown in italics Who Won What Part 1: 1998Ð2003 Tournament 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 Sydney Hénin-Hardenne Clijsters Hingis Hingis Mauresmo Davenport Australian Open Hénin-Hardenne S. Williams Capriati Capriati Davenport Hingis Pan Paciﬁc Davenport Davenport Hingis Davenport Hingis Hingis Paris Clijsters S. Williams V. Williams Mauresmo Tauziat S. Williams Antwerp Clijsters V. Williams V. Williams Nice Mauresmo Hannover (Essen) S. Williams Novotna Dubai Hénin-Hardenne Hénin-Hardenne Mauresmo Hingis Doha Myskina Myskina Seles Hingis Scottsdale Sugiyama S. Williams Davenport rained out Indian Wells Hénin-Hardenne Clijsters Hantuchova S. Williams Davenport S. Williams Miami/Key Biscay S. Williams S. Williams S. Williams V. Williams Hingis V. Williams Amelia Island Davenport Dementieva V. Williams Mauresmo Seles Seles Charleston1 V. Williams Hénin-Hardenne Majoli Capriati Pierce Hingis Warsaw V. Williams Mauresmo Bovina Nagyova Torrens Valero Hamburg Clijsters V. Williams Hingis V. Williams Berlin Mauresmo Hénin-Hardenne Hénin Mauresmo Martinez Hingis Rome Mauresmo Clijsters S. Williams Dokic Seles V. Williams Roland Garros Myskina Hénin-Hardenne S. Williams Capriati Pierce Graf Eastbourne Kuznetsova Rubin Rubin Davenport Halard-D Zvereva Wimbledon Sharapova S. Williams S. Williams V. Williams V. Williams Davenport Stanford Davenport Clijsters V. Williams Clijsters V. Williams Davenport Los Angeles Davenport Clijsters Rubin Davenport S. Williams S. Williams San Diego Davenport Hénin-Hardenne V. Williams V. Williams V. Williams Hingis Canadian Open Mauresmo Hénin-Hardenne Mauresmo S. Williams Hingis Hingis Olympics2 Hénin-Hardenne New Haven Bovina Capriati V. Williams V. Williams V. Williams V. Williams U.S. Open Kuznetsova Hénin-Hardenne S. Williams V. Williams V. Williams S. Williams Bahia Myskina Seles Beijing3 S. Williams Dementieva Smashnova Seles Shaughnessy Princess Cup S. Williams Dokic S. Williams Davenport Leipzig Myskina S. Williams Clijsters Clijsters Tauziat Filderstadt Davenport Clijsters Clijsters Davenport Hingis Hingis Moscow Myskina Myskina Maleeva Dokic Hingis Tauziat Zürich Molik Hénin-Hardenne Schnyder Davenport Hingis V. Williams Linz Mauresmo Sugiyama Hénin Davenport Davenport Pierce Philadelphia Mauresmo Mauresmo Davenport Davenport Championships Sharapova Clijsters Clijsters S. Williams Hingis Davenport 1. Hilton Head until 2001 2. Olympic tennis events were held in past years, but 2004 was the ﬁrst year they bore points and became a non-exhibition 3. Shanghai until 2004

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 254 Who Won What Part 2: 1996Ð2002 Tournament 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 Sydney Hingis Hingis Mauresmo Davenport Sanchez-V Hingis Seles Australian Open Capriati Capriati Davenport Hingis Hingis Hingis Seles Pan Paciﬁc Hingis Davenport Hingis Hingis Davenport Hingis Majoli Paris V. Williams Mauresmo Tauziat S. Williams Pierce Hingis Halard-D Antwerp V. Williams Nice Mauresmo Hannover (Essen) S. Williams Novotna Schnyder Majoli Majoli Dubai Mauresmo Hingis Scottsdale S. Williams Davenport rained out Indian Wells Hantuchova S. Williams Davenport S. Williams Hingis Davenport Graf Miami/Key Biscay S. Williams V. Williams Hingis V. Williams V. Williams Hingis Graf Amelia Island V. Williams Mauresmo Seles Seles Pierce Davenport Spirlea Charleston1 Majoli Capriati Pierce Hingis Coetzer Hingis Sanchez-V Hamburg Clijsters V. Williams Hingis V. Williams Hingis Majoli Sanchez-V Berlin Hénin Mauresmo Martinez Hingis Martinez M. Fernandez Graf Rome S. Williams Dokic Seles V. Williams Hingis Pierce Martinez Roland Garros S. Williams Capriati Pierce Graf Sanchez-V Majoli Graf Eastbourne Rubin Davenport Halard-D Zvereva Novotna rained out Seles Wimbledon S. Williams V. Williams V. Williams Davenport Novotna Hingis Graf Stanford V. Williams Clijsters V. Williams Davenport Davenport Hingis Hingis San Diego V. Williams V. Williams V. Williams Hingis Davenport Hingis Date Los Angeles Rubin Davenport S. Williams S. Williams Davenport Seles Davenport Canadian Open Mauresmo S. Williams Hingis Hingis Seles Seles Seles New Haven2 V. Williams V. Williams V. Williams V. Williams Graf Davenport U.S. Open S. Williams V. Williams V. Williams S. Williams Davenport Hingis Graf Bahia Myskina Seles Princess Cup S. Williams Dokic S. Williams Davenport Seles Seles Seles Surabaya3 Wang Leipzig S. Williams Clijsters Clijsters Tauziat Graf Novotna Huber Moscow Maleeva Dokic Hingis Tauziat Pierce Novotna Martinez Filderstadt Clijsters Davenport Hingis Hingis Testud Hingis Hingis Zürich Schnyder Davenport Hingis V. Williams Davenport Davenport Novotna Linz Hénin Davenport Davenport Pierce Novotna Rubin Appelmans Chicago Davenport Novotna Philadelphia Davenport Davenport Graf Hingis Novotna Championships Clijsters S. Williams Hingis Davenport Hingis Novotna Graf 1. Hilton Head until 2001 2. Tournament held in Atlanta in 1997 3. The WTA lists Surabaya as a Tier II in 1996. The ﬁeld does not back this up

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 255 Who Won What Part 3: 1990Ð1996 Order of events is (approximately) as in 1995. Tournament Winner In 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 Sydney Seles Sabatini Date Capriati Sabatini Novotna Zvereva Australian Open Seles Pierce Graf Seles Seles Seles Graf Pan Paciﬁc Majoli Date Graf Navratilova Sabatini Sabatini Graf Paris1 Halard-D Graf Navratilova Navratilova Essen Majoli Novotna Medvedeva Seles Indian Wells2 Graf M. Fernandez Graf M. Fernandez Seles Navratilova Navratilova Delray Beach3 Graf Graf Graf Graf Sabatini Sabatini Lipton Graf Graf Graf Sanchez-V Sanchez-V Seles Seles San Antonio Navratilova Graf Seles Houston Graf Hack Martinez Seles Seles KMaleeva Hilton Head Sanchez-V Martinez Martinez Graf Sabatini Sabatini Navratilova Amelia Island Spirlea Martinez Sanchez-V Sanchez-V Sabatini Sabatini Graf Tampa Seles Barcelona Sanchez-V Sanchez-V Sanchez-V Seles Martinez Sanchez-V Hamburg Sanchez-V Martinez Sanchez-V Sanchez-V Graf Graf Graf Rome Martinez Martinez Martinez Martinez Sabatini Sabatini Seles Berlin Graf Sanchez-V Graf Graf Graf Graf Seles Roland Garros Graf Graf Sanchez-V Graf Seles Seles Seles Eastbourne Seles Tauziat McGrath Navratilova McNeil Navratilova Navratilova Wimbledon Graf Graf Martinez Graf Graf Graf Navratilova Stratton Mtn Martinez Martinez Newport Sanchez-V Canadian Open Seles Seles Sanchez-V Graf Sanchez-V Capriati Graf Los Angeles4 Davenport Martinez Frazier Navratilova Navratilova Seles Seles San Diego Date Martinez Graf Graf Capriati Capriati Graf Washington, DC Sanchez-V Navratilova U.S. Open Graf Graf Sanchez-V Graf Seles Seles Sabatini Princess/Nicherei Seles Pierce Sanchez-V Coetzer Seles Seles MFernandez Leipzig Huber Huber Novotna Graf Graf Graf Graf Milan Seles Filderstadt Hingis Majoli Huber Pierce Navratilova Huber MFernandez Surabaya5 Wang Zürich Novotna Majoli Maleeva ManMaleeva Graf Graf Graf Brighton M. Fernandez Novotna Novotna Graf Graf Graf Chicago Novotna Maleeva Zvereva Seles Navratilova Navratilova Navratilova Oakland Hingis Maleeva Sanchez-V Navratilova Seles Navratilova Seles New England Graf Philadelphia Novotna Graf Huber Martinez Graf Seles Championships Graf Graf Sabatini Graf Seles Seles Seles 1. There was a tournament in Paris prior to 1993, but it was smaller and at a different time; winners are not recorded here 2. Indian Wells: Palm Springs until 1991 3. Delray Beach: Boca Raton until 1992 4. Sometimes designated “Manhattan Beach” 5. The WTA lists Surabaya as a Tier II in 1996. The ﬁeld does not back this up

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 256 Who Won What Part 4: 1986Ð1989 Order of events is (approximately) as in 1990. A major change in Tier schedule occurred between 1987 and 1988, with very many $150,000 events upgrading in the interim. In 1987, $150,000 was the equivalent of Tier II; in 1988, it was not. I have listed as Tier II events only those $150,000 events which upgraded in 1988 — but marked them in italics for 1987 (not previously). TThe Tour shifted to a Calendar Year system in 1986. Note that this resulted in many events not being played in 1986. Tournament 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 Brisbane Zvereva Sukova Shriver Mandlikova Sydney Zvereva Navratilova Shriver Garrison Australian Open Graf Graf Graf Mandlikova Pan Paciﬁc Graf Navratilova Shriver Sabatini Graf1 Chicago Navratilova Garrison-Jackson Navratilova Navratilova Navratilova Washington, DC Navratilova Graf Navratilova Mandlikova Indian Wells2 Navratilova Maleeva-Fragniere Boca Raton Sabatini Graf Sabatini Graf Lipton Seles Sabatini Graf Graf Houston KMaleeva Seles Evert Evert Evert San Antonio Seles Graf Graf Hilton Head Navratilova Graf Navratilova Graf Graf Amelia Island Graf Sabatini Navratilova Graf Graf Tampa Seles Martinez Evert Evert Hamburg Graf Graf Graf Graf Rome Seles Sabatini Sabatini Graf Berlin Seles Graf Graf Graf Graf Roland Garros Seles Sanchez-Vicario Graf Graf Evert Eastbourne Navratilova Navratilova Navratilova Sukova Navratilova Wimbledon Navratilova Graf Graf Navratilova Navratilova Newport Sanchez-Vicario Garrison McNeil Shriver Shriver Canadian Open Graf Navratilova Sabatini Shriver Sukova San Diego Graf Graf Rehe Reggi Cincinnati Potter Los Angeles3 Seles Navratilova Evert Graf Navratilova Mahwah Graf Graf Man. Maleeva Graf U.S. Open Sabatini Graf Graf Navratilova Navratilova Dallas Navratilova Navratilova Evert Leipzig Graf Princess/Nicherei M. Fernandez New Orleans Evert Evert Navratilova Zürich Graf Graf Shriver Graf Filderstadt M. Fernandez Sabatini Navratilova Navratilova Navratilova Brighton Graf Graf Graf Sabatini Graf Oakland4 Seles Garrison Navratilova Garrison New England Graf Navratilova Navratilova Shriver Navratilova Indianapolis Martinez Graf Championships Seles Graf Sabatini Graf Navratilova 1. Listed by the WTA as a Tier I event but with $50,000 in prize money. Presumably the former is correct 2. Palm Springs in 1989 3. Sometimes designated Manhattan Beach 4. Sometimes designated San Francisco, e.g. in 1987

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 257 Who Won What Part 5: 1983Ð1986 Order of events is (approximately) as in 1985. See footnotes (on the following page), as the tour order was complex at this time; many events moved and the schedule was repeatedly adjusted. Tournament 19861 1985(-1986)2 1984(-1985)3 1983(Ð1984) Palm Beach Gard4 Horvath Evert Boston Mandlikova Hilton Head Graf Evert Evert Navratilova Amelia Island Graf Garrison Navratilova Evert Orlando5 Evert Navratilova Navratilova Navratilova Houston Evert Navratilova Mandlikova Atlanta Shriver Italian Open6 Reggi ManMaleeva Temesvari Johannesburg Evert Sydney Indoors Shriver Berlin Graf Evert Kohde-Kilsch Evert French Open Evert Evert Navratilova Evert Eastbourne Navratilova Navratilova Navratilova Navratilova Wimbledon Navratilova Navratilova Navratilova Navratilova Newport Shriver Evert Navratilova Moulton Indianapolis7 Graf Temesvari ManMaleeva Temesvari Los Angeles Navratilova Kohde-Kilsch Evert Navratilova Canadian Open Sukova Evert Evert Navratilova Mahwah Graf Rinaldi Navratilova Durie U.S. Open Navratilova Mandlikova Navratilova Navratilova Queens Grand Prix8 Bonder Richmond Fairbank Hartford Schaefer Detroit Ruzici Chicago Navratilova Gadusek Shriver New Orleans Navratilova Evert Navratilova Fort Lauderdale9 Navratilova Navratilova Evert Filderstadt10 Navratilova Shriver Lindqvist Navratilova Brighton Graf Evert Hanika Evert Zürich Garrison Garrison Tampa Rehe Torres Navratilova Lions Cup11 Evert ManMaleeva Navratilova Brisbane Navratilova Sukova Shriver Sydney Navratilova Navratilova Durie Australian Open Navratilova Evert Navratilova Pan Paciﬁc Graf12 ManMaleeva Washington, DC Navratilova Navratilova Mandlikova New England Navratilova Navratilova Key Biscayne13 Evert Evert Lipton Evert Navratilova Oakland Evert Mandlikova Mandlikova Princeton14 Navratilova Mandlikova Navratilova Dallas Navratilova Mandlik/Navrat15 Championships Navratilova Navratilova Navratilova Navratilova

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 258 1. Partial year; see note on 1985Ð1986. 2. Until 1986, the Tour used a “tournament year” stretching from roughly March to March. In 1986, it switched to a calendar year form, explaining why many events are omitted (but not shown as unplayed) in 1986 3. The 1984/1985 season was 13 months long, including March 1985 and March 1986. One tournament — Dallas — was therefore played twice in that year, and not at all in the 1983/1984 season. 4. Reduced to a $50,000 tournament in 1985, coupled with a “4-woman special” won by Evert 5. Marco Island in 1986, with reduced prize money and an earlier date 6. The Italian Open was “in exile” 1980-1985, held in Taranto (with a $50,000 prize) in 1985, and in Perugia in 1984 and before (with a more normal $150,000 prize). It was not held in 1986 (not unusual given the realignment) 7. In some years (e.g. 1985), there were two Indianapolis events, perhaps on different surfaces. This is the larger 8. Held in Tokyo. Singles only; no doubles. Featured a third and fourth place playoff as well as winner and runner-up 9. Bonaventure in 1984; Deer Creek in 1983, with reduced prize money 10. Stuttgart until 1985 11. Held in Tokyo. Singles only; no doubles. Featured a third and fourth place playoff as well as winner and runner-up 12. Listed by the WTA as a Tier I event but with $50,000 in prize money. Presumably the former is correct 13. Key Biscayne: Later Boca Raton 14. Held in Livingston in the 1983/1984 season 15. Dallas 1984/1985: Won by Mandlikova in March 1984 and by Navratilova in March 1985 Active Leaders in Titles (Singles/Doubles) Minimum ten titles required to be listed, except that we show all Slam winners of 2004. Players in bold won at least one title in 2004 Singles Doubles Player Titles Player Titles Seles* ...... 53 Navratilova* ...... 174 Davenport*...... 43† Sanchez-Vicario ...... 68 [Hingis*¤...... 40] Stubbs* ...... 48 Martinez*...... 32 Raymond* ...... 44 V. Williams* ...... 29† [Hingis*¤ ...... 36] S. Williams* ...... 24† Suárez* ...... 36 Clijsters...... 21 Davenport* ...... 35 Hénin-Hardenne* ...... 19 Sugiyama*...... 30 Pierce* ...... 16 Ruano Pascual* ...... 29 Mauresmo ...... 15 Likhovtseva ...... 20 Capriati* ...... 13† Black* ...... 19 Maleeva ...... 10 Husarova ...... 18 [Myskina* ...... 9] Kournikova* ...... 16 [Sharapova* ...... 7] Tarabini‡...... 15 [Kuznetsova*...... 5] Clijsters*...... 11 Martinez ...... 10 Morariu*...... 11 Petrova...... 11 Shaughnessy ...... 11 Huber...... 10 Kuznetsova ...... 10 Pierce* ...... 10 Rubin* ...... 10 Schett‡ ...... 10 S. Williams* ...... 10 * Titles include at least one Slam † Excludes Olympics before 2004, Grand Slam Cup ¤ Allegedly retired, but making a comeback ‡ Has announced plans to retire

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 259 Recent Singles Winners, Finalists, Semiﬁnalists The following list shows every player to have reached a WTA semifinal, with listed result, since the beginning of 1999. Titles shown in Highlight. As a good general rule, the longer a player’s entry, the better she is; the higher the fraction of her entry in Highlight, the better she handles pressure (not even close to the same thing).

Appelmans, Sabine — Luxembourg 1999 SF Asagoe, Shinobu — Oklahoma City 2001 SF, Acapulco 2003 SF, Birmingham 2003 F, Hobart 2004 F Bacheva, Lubomira — Estoril 1999 SF Bachmann, Angelika — Tashkent 1999 SF Barna, Anca — Estoril 2002 F, Vienna 2003 SF, Pattaya City 2003 SF, Tashkent 2004 SF Bartoli, Marion — Canberra 2003 SF, Auckland 2004 SF, Hyderabad 2004 SF, Cincinnati 2004 SF Bedanova, Daja — Princess Cup 2000 SF, Bratislava 2000 W, Gold Coast 2002 SF, Eastbourne 2002 SF Beigbeder, Celine — Strasbourg 2001 SF Benesova, Iveta — Bratislava 2002 F, Hobart 2003 SF, Acapulco 2004 W, Estoril 2004 F, Budapest 2004 SF, Forest Hills 2004 F Bes, Eva — Antwerp 2001 SF Black, Cara — Birmingham 1999 SF, Auckland 2000 F, Birmingham 2000 SF, Hobart 2001 SF, Big Island 2002 W Boogert, Kristie — Antwerp 1999 SF, Budapest 2000 F Bovina, Elena — Estoril 2001 F, Estoril 2002 SF, Warsaw 2002 W, Quebec City 2002 W, Gold Coast 2003 SF, Filderstadt 2003 SF, New Haven 2004 W, Hasselt 2004 F, Moscow 2004 SF, Linz 2004 F Brandi, Kristina — ’s-Hertogenbosch 1999 W, ’s-Hertogenbosch 2000 SF, Hobart 2004 SF Callens, Els — Antwerp 1999 SF, Big Island 2002 SF Camerin, Maria Elena — Casablanca 2001 F, Bali 2004 SF, Hasselt 2004 SF Capriati, Jennifer — Strasbourg 1999 W, Quebec City 1999 W, Australian Open 2000 SF, ’s- Hertogenbosch 2000 SF, Luxembourg 2000 W, Zürich 2000 SF, Quebec City 2000 F, Australian Open 2001 W, Oklahoma City 2001 F, Scottsdale 2001 SF, Ericsson 2001 F, Charleston 2001 W, Berlin 2001 W, Roland Garros 2001 W, Wimbledon 2001 SF, Canadian Open 2001 F, New Haven 2001 SF, U. S. Open 2001 SF, Zürich 2001 SF, Australian Open 2002 W, Scottsdale 2002 F, Miami 2002 F, Charleston 2002 SF, Berlin 2002 SF, Rome 2002 SF, Roland Garros 2002 SF, Canadian Open 2002 F, Los Angeles Championships 2002 SF, Dubai 2003 SF, Indian Wells 2003 SF, Miami 2003 F, Amelia Island 2003 SF, Berlin 2003 SF, Eastbourne 2003 SF, Stanford 2003 F, New Haven 2003 W, U. S. Open 2003 SF, WTA Championships 2003 SF, Doha 2004 SF, Berlin 2004 SF, Rome 2004 F, Roland Garros 2004 SF, U. S. Open 2004 SF Casanova, Myriam — Budapest 2002 F, Brussels 2002 W, Antwerp 2004 SF Castano, Catalina — Bogota 2002 SF Cervanova, Ludmila — Bratislava 2001 SF, Casablanca 2003 SF, Budapest 2003 SF, Palermo 2003 SF, Casablanca 2004 F Chladkova, Denisa — Budapest 1999 SF, Strasbourg 1999 SF, Knokke-Heist 1999 F, Pattaya City 1999 SF, Hannover 2000 F, Bratislava 2000 SF, Helsinki 2002 F, Warsaw 2003 SF, Palermo 2004 SF

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 260 Clijsters, Kim — Luxembourg 1999 W, Bratislava 1999 F, Hobart 2000 W, Filderstadt 2000 F, Leipzig 2000 W, Indian Wells 2001 F, Bol 2001 SF, Roland Garros 2001 F, ’s-Hertogenbosch 2001 F, Knokke- Heist 2001 SF, Stanford 2001 W, New Haven 2001 SF, Princess Cup 2001 SF, Leipzig 2001 W, Luxembourg 2001 W, Munich Championships 2001 SF, Sydney 2002 SF, Australian Open 2002 SF, Hamburg 2002 W, Rome 2002 SF, Stanford 2002 F, Princess Cup 2002 F, Leipzig 2002 SF, Filderstadt 2002 W, Luxembourg 2002 W, Los Angeles Championships 2002 W, Sydney 2003 W, Australian Open 2003 SF, Antwerp 2003 F, Scottsdale 2003 F, Indian Wells 2003 W, Miami 2003 SF, Berlin 2003 F, Rome 2003 W, Roland Garros 2003 F, ’s-Hertogenbosch 2003 W, Wimbledon 2003 SF, Stanford 2003 W, San Diego 2003 F, Los Angeles 2003 W, U. S. Open 2003 F, Leipzig 2003 SF, Filderstadt 2003 W, Zürich 2003 SF, Luxembourg 2003 W, WTA Championships 2003 W, Australian Open 2004 F, Paris 2004 W, Antwerp 2004 W, Hasselt 2004 SF Chi, Jane — Japan Open 1999 SF Cho, Yoon Jeong — Pattaya City 2002 F, Auckland 2003 F, Memphis 2003 SF Coetzer, Amanda — Oklahoma City 1999 F, Pan Pacific 1999 F, Eastbourne 1999 SF, Stanford 1999 SF, San Diego 1999 SF, Oklahoma City 2000 SF, Hamburg 2000 SF, Berlin 2000 F, Antwerp 2000 W, New Haven 2000 SF, Acapulco 2001 W, Amelia Island 2001 F, Hamburg 2001 SF, Luxembourg 2001 SF, Moscow 2002 SF, Memphis 2003 F, Acapulco 2003 W Cohen-Aloro, Stephanie — Estoril 2004 SF Courtois, Laurence — Tashkent 1999 F, Antwerp 2000 SF Craybas, Jill — Japan Open 2002 W Daniilidou, Eleni — Budapest 2002 SF, ’s-Hertogenbosch 2002 W, Bahia 2002 F, Auckland 2003 W, Paris 2003 SF, Birmingham 2003 F, Auckland 2004 W, Miami 2004 F Davenport, Lindsay — Sydney 1999 W, Australian Open 1999 SF, Wimbledon 1999 W, Stanford 1999 W, San Diego 1999 SF, Los Angeles 1999 SF, New Haven 1999 F, U. S. Open 1999 SF, Princess Cup 1999 W, Philadelphia 1999 W, Chase Championships 1999 W, Sydney 2000 F, Madrid 1999 W, Australian Open 2000 W, Scottsdale 2000 F (rainout) Indian Wells 2000 W, Ericsson 2000 F, Wimbledon 2000 F, Stanford 2000 F, Los Angeles 2000 F, U. S. Open 2000 F, Zürich 2000 F, Linz 2000 W, Philadelphia 2000 W, Sydney 2001 F, Australian Open 2001 SF, Pan Pacific 2001 W, Scottsdale 2001 W, Eastbourne 2001 W, Wimbledon 2001 SF, Stanford 2001 F, San Diego 2001 SF, Los Angeles 2001 W, New Haven 2001 F, Filderstadt 2001 W, Zürich 2001 W, Linz 2001 W, Munich Championships 2001 F, Stanford 2002 SF, San Diego 2002 SF, Los Angeles 2002 F, New Haven 2002 F, U. S. Open 2002 SF, Moscow 2002 F, Zürich 2002 F, Sydney 2003 F, Pan Pacific 2003 W, Indian Wells 2003 F, Charleston 2003 SF, Amelia Island 2003 F, San Diego 2003 SF, Los Angeles 2003 F, New Haven 2003 F, U. S. Open 2003 SF, Sydney 2004 SF, Pan Pacific 2004 W, Indian Wells 2004 F, Amelia Island 2004 W, Strasbourg 2004 F, Wimbledon 2004 SF, Stanford 2004 W, Los Angeles 2004 W, San Diego 2004 W, Cincinnati 2004 W, U. S. Open 2004 SF, Filderstadt 2004 W, Moscow 2004 SF Dechaume-Balleret, Alexia — Prostejov 1999 SF Déchy, Nathalie — Paris 1999 SF, Bratislava 1999 SF, Gold Coast 2000 SF, Oklahoma City 2000 F, Estoril 2000 F, Strasbourg 2000 SF, Canberra 2001 SF, Scottsdale 2002 SF, Bratislava 2002 SF, Gold Coast 2003 W, Sarasota 2003 SF, Gold Coast 2004 SF, Indian Wells 2004 SF, New Haven 2004 F de Lone, Erica — Kuala Lumpur 1999 F

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 261 Dementieva, Elena — Palermo 1999 SF, Indian Wells 2000 SF, Los Angeles 2000 SF, U. S. Open 2000 SF, [Olympics 2000 Silver], Chase Championships 2000 SF, Acapulco 2001 F, Ericsson 2001 SF, Leipzig 2001 SF, Moscow 2001 F, Acapulco 2002 SF, ’s-Hertogenbosch 2002 F, Filderstadt 2002 SF, Antwerp 2003 SF, Amelia Island 2003 W, Canadian Open 2003 SF, New Haven 2003 SF, Bali 2003 W, Shanghai 2003 W, Moscow 2003 SF, Miami 2004 F, Roland Garros 2004 F, Los Angeles 2004 SF, San Diego 2004 SF, New Haven 2004 SF, U. S. Open 2004 F, Hasselt 2004 W, Moscow 2004 F, Zürich 2004 SF Diaz-Oliva, Mariana — Estoril 1999 SF, Bogota 2001 SF, Bol 2001 F, Palermo 2002 W, Acapulco 2003 F Dokic, Jelena — Wimbledon 2000 SF, [Olympics 2000 SF], Hamburg 2001 SF, Rome 2001 W, ’s- Hertogenbosch 2001 SF, Sopot 2001 SF, Bahia 2001 F, Princess Cup 2001 W, Moscow 2001 W, Zürich 2001 F, Linz 2001 F, Paris 2002 F, Sarasota 2002 W, Amelia Island 2002 SF, Hamburg 2002 SF, Strasbourg 2002 F, Birmingham 2002 W, San Diego 2002 F, Los Angeles 2002 SF, Canadian Open 2002 SF, Bahia 2002 SF, Princess Cup 2002 SF, Warsaw 2003 SF, Zürich 2003 F, Pan Pacific 2004 SF Domachowska, Marta — Sopot 2004 SF, Seoul 2004 F Douchevina, Vera — Helsinki 2003 SF Dragomir Ilie, Ruxandra — Amelia Island 1999 F, Berlin 1999 SF, New Haven 1999 SF, ’s- Hertogenbosch 2000 F, Hobart 2001 SF Drake, Maureen — Cairo 1999 SF Dulko, Gisela — Casablanca 2002 SF Farina Elia, Silvia — Auckland 1999 SF, Prostejov 1999 F, Estoril 2000 SF, Palermo 2000 SF, Gold Coast 2001 F, Porto 2001 SF, Strasbourg 2001 W, Sopot 2001 SF, Moscow 2001 SF, Pan Pacific 2002 SF, Strasbourg 2002 W, Quebec City 2002 SF, Strasbourg 2003 W, Eastbourne 2003 SF, Canberra 2004 F, Antwerp 2004 F, Strasbourg 2004 SF, Stockholm 2004 SF, Luxembourg 2004 SF Fernandez, Clarisa — Roland Garros 2002 SF Fernandez, Mary Joe — Strasbourg 1999 SF Flipkens, Kirsten — Forest Hills 2004 SF Frazier, Amy — Hobart 1999 SF, Japan Open 1999 W, Madrid 1999 W, Stanford 1999 SF, Princess Cup 1999 SF, Quebec City 1999 SF, Hobart 2000 SF, San Diego 2000 SF, Japan Open 2000 F, Quebec City 2000 SF, Hobart 2002 SF, Princess Cup 2002 SF, Hobart 2003 F, Hobart 2004 W, Vienna 2004 SF, Stanford 2004 SF, Cincinnati 2004 SF Gagliardi, Emmanuelle — Cairo 1999 SF, São Paulo 2000 SF, Indian Wells 2002 SF, Auckland 2003 SF, Estoril 2003 SF, Tashkent 2003 SF Garbin, Tathiana — Bogota 2000 F, Estoril 2000 SF, Budapest 2000 W, Bol 2002 SF, Tashkent 2002 SF, Sopot 2002 SF Gersi, Adriana — Portschach 1999 SF, Portschach 2000 SF, Doha 2001 SF, Basel 2001 W Golovin, Tatiana — Paris 2004 SF, Birmingham 2004 F Gorrochategui, Ines — Warsaw 1999 F Graf, Steffi — Sydney 1999 SF, Hannover 1999 SF, Indian Wells 1999 F, Lipton 1999 SF, Roland Garros 1999 W, Wimbledon 1999 F Grahame, Amanda — Canberra 2002 SF Grande, Rita — Hobart 1999 F, Kuala Lumpur 1999 SF, Oklahoma City 2000 SF, Hobart 2001 W, Shanghai 2001 SF, Bratislava 2001 W, Bratislava 2002 SF, Casablanca 2003 W, Casablanca 2004 SF Granville, Laura — Memphis 2003 SF, Quebec City 2003 SF, Memphis 2004 SF, Vancouver 2004 F

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 262 Gubacsi, Zsofia — Casablanca 2001 W, Porto 2002 SF Habsudova, Karina — Portschach 1999 W, Sopot 1999 F, Bratislava 2000 SF Halard-Decugis, Julie — Auckland 1999 W, Hobart 1999 SF, Bol 1999 F, Berlin 1999 F, Birmingham 1999 W, Los Angeles 1999 F, Paris 2000 SF, Eastbourne 2000 W, Princess Cup 2000 F, Japan Open 2000 W Hantuchova, Daniela — Oklahoma City 2001 SF, Birmingham 2001 SF, Indian Wells 2002 W, Eastbourne 2002 SF, Canadian Open 2002 SF, New Haven 2002 SF, Filderstadt 2002 F, Linz 2002 SF, Antwerp 2003 SF, Eastbourne 2004 F Harkleroad, Ashley — Charleston 2003 SF, Strasbourg 2003 SF, Auckland 2004 F Hénin-Hardenne, Justine — Antwerp 1999 W, Gold Coast 2001 W, Canberra 2001 W, Estoril 2001 SF, Berlin 2001 SF, Roland Garros 2001 SF, ’s-Hertogenbosch 2001 W, Wimbledon 2001 F, Big Island 2001 F, Filderstadt 2001 F, Gold Coast 2002 F, Antwerp 2002 SF, Amelia Island 2002 F, Berlin 2002 W, Rome 2002 F, ’s-Hertogenbosch 2002 SF, Wimbledon 2002 SF, Leipzig 2002 SF, Zürich 2002 SF, Linz 2002 W, Sydney 2003 SF, Australian Open 2003 SF, Antwerp 2003 SF, Dubai 2003 W, Charleston 2003 W, Amelia Island 2003 SF, Berlin 2003 W, Roland Garros 2003 W, ’s-Hertogenbosch 2003 F, Wimbledon 2003 SF, San Diego 2003 W, Canadian Open 2003 W, U. S. Open 2003 W, Leipzig 2003 F, Filderstadt 2003 F, Zürich 2003 W, WTA Championships 2003 SF, Sydney 2004 W, Australian Open 2004 W, Dubai 2004 W, Doha 2004 SF, Indian Wells 2004 W, Amelia Island 2004 SF, Olympics 2004 W Hingis, Martina — Sydney 1999 F, Australian Open 1999 W, Pan Pacific 1999 W, Lipton 1999 SF, Hilton Head 1999 W, Rome 1999 SF, Berlin 1999 W, Roland Garros 1999 F, San Diego 1999 W, Los Angeles 1999 SF, Canadian Open 1999 W, U. S. Open 1999 F, Filderstadt 1999 W, Zürich 1999 F, Philadelphia 1999 F, Chase Championships 1999 F, Sydney 2000 SF, Australian Open 2000 F, Pan Pacific 2000 W, Scottsdale 2000 F (rainout), Indian Wells 2000 F, Ericsson 2000 W, Hamburg 2000 W, Berlin 2000 SF, Roland Garros 2000 SF, ’s-Hertogenbosch 2000 W, Los Angeles 2000 SF, Canadian Open 2000 W, U. S. Open 2000 SF, Filderstadt 2000 W, Zürich 2000 W, Moscow 2000 W, Philadelphia 2000 F, Chase Championships 2000 W, Sydney 2001 W, Australian Open 2001 F, Pan Pacific 2001 F, Doha 2001 W, Dubai 2001 W, Indian Wells 2001 SF, Ericsson 2001 SF, Charleston 2001 F, Berlin 2001 SF, Rome 2001 SF, Roland Garros 2001 SF, San Diego 2001 SF, Los Angeles 2001 SF, U. S. Open 2001 SF, Filderstadt 2001 SF, Sydney 2002 W, Australian Open 2002 F, Pan Pacific 2002 W, Scottsdale 2002 SF, Indian Wells 2002 F, Hamburg 2002 SF Hopkins, Jennifer — Warsaw 2000 SF, Hobart 2001 F Hopmans, Amanda — Prostejov 1999 SF, Auckland 2000 SF, Warsaw 2000 F Hrdlickova, Kveta: See Kveta (Hrdlickova) Peschke Hsieh, Su-Wei — Bali 2001 SF Huber, Anke — Filderstadt 1999 SF, Leipzig 1999 SF, Estoril 2000 W, Hamburg 2000 SF, Sopot 2000 W, Paris 2001 F, Nice 2001 SF, Strasbourg 2001 SF, Canadian Open 2001 SF Husarova, Janette — Doha 2002 SF Irvin, Marissa — Big Island 2001 SF Jankovic, Jelena — Budapest 2004 W, Linz 2004 SF Jidkova, Alina — Memphis 2002 SF, Vancouver 2004 SF, Quebec City 2004 SF Kandarr, Jana — Estoril 2001 SF Kapros, Aniko — Budapest 2001 SF, Casablanca 2001 SF, Japan Open 2003 F Kirilenko, Maria — Hyderabad 2004 F

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 263 Kleinova, Sandra — Stockholm 2004 SF Kostanic, Jelena — Antwerp 2000 SF, Vienna 2001 SF, Helsinki 2003 F, Charleston 2004 SF, Vienna 2004 SF Koukalova, Klara — Antwerp 2001 F, Casablanca 2002 F, Sopot 2003 F, Casablanca 2004 SF, ’s- Hertogenbosch 2004 F, Sopot 2004 F, Japan Open 2004 SF Kournikova, Anna — Oklahoma City 1999 SF, Hilton Head 1999 F, Amelia Island 1999 SF, Eastbourne 1999 SF, Sydney 2000 SF, Paris 2000 SF, Scottsdale 2000 SF, Stanford 2000 SF, San Diego 2000 SF, Luxembourg 2000 SF, Moscow 2000 F, Leipzig 2000 SF, Chase Championships 2000 SF, Pan Pacific 2001 SF, Auckland 2002 SF, Pan Pacific 2002 SF, Acapulco 2002 SF, San Diego 2002 SF, Shanghai 2002 F Krasnoroutskaya, Lina — Luxembourg 1999 SF, Pattaya City 2002 SF, Doha 2003 SF, Canadian Open 2003 F, ’s-Hertogenbosch 2004 SF Kremer, Anne — Pattaya City 1999 F, Auckland 2000 W, Eastbourne 2000 SF, Pattaya 2000 W, Budapest 2991 F, Quebec City 2001 SF, Amelia Island 2002 SF, Seoul 2004 SF Kruger, Joanette — Kuala Lumpur 1999 SF, São Paulo 2000 SF, Berlin 2000 SF, Japan Open 2000 SF, Bali 2001 F, Japan Open 2001 SF Kurhajcova, Lubomira — Pattaya City 2003 F, Bogota 2004 SF Kuti Kis, Rita — Estoril 1999 F, Budapest 1999 SF, Bogota 2000 SF, São Paulo 2000 W, Strasbourg 2000 F, Bogota 2001 F Kuznetsova, Svetlana — Casablanca 2002 SF, Helsinki 2002 W, Bali 2002 W, San Diego 2003 SF, Dubai 2004 F, Doha 2004 F, Warsaw 2004 F, Eastbourne 2004 W, U. S. Open 2004 W, Bali 2004 W, Beijing 2004 F, Filderstadt 2004 SF Lamade, Bianka — Tashkent 2001 W Leon Garcia, Gala — São Paulo 1999 SF, Bol 2000 SF, Madrid 2000 W, Sopot 2000 F, Palermo 2001 SF, Knokke-Heist 2001 F, Sopot 2001 F, Princess Cup 2001 SF, Big Island 2002 SF Li Na — GuangZhou 2004 W Li Ting — GuangZhou 2004 SF Likhovtseva, Elena — Hannover 1999 SF, Strasbourg 1999 F, Amelia Island 2000 SF, Leipzig 2000 F, Eastbourne 2001 SF, Hobart 2003 SF, Doha 2003 F, Canadian Open 2004 F, Forest Hills 2004 W Llagostera Vives, Nuria — Acapulco 2001 SF Loit, Emilie — Casablanca 2001 SF, Brussels 2002 SF, Canberra 2003 SF, Acapulco 2003 SF, Bogota 2004 SF, Casablanca 2004 W, Estoril 2004 W, Strasbourg 2004 SF, Birmingham 2004 SF Lucic, Mirjana — Wimbledon 1999 SF Majoli, Iva — Madrid 2000 SF, Kuala Lumpur 2000 F, Quebec City 2001 F, Charleston 2002 W, Bol 2002 F, Sarasota 2003 SF Maleeva, Magdalena — ’s-Hertogenbosch 1999 SF, Pattaya City 1999 W, Luxembourg 2000 F, Pan Pacific 2001 SF, Paris 2001 SF, Nice 2001 F, Budapest 2001 W, Leipzig 2001 F, Linz 2001 SF, Strasbourg 2002 SF, Moscow 2002 W, Luxembourg 2002 F, Birmingham 2003 W, Pan Pacific 2004 F Mandula, Petra — Vienna 2002 SF, Sopot 2003 SF Marrero, Marta — Knokke-Heist 2000 SF, Knokke-Heist 2001 SF, Casablanca 2003 SF, Acapulco 2004 SF, Estoril 2004 SF

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 264 Martinez, Conchita — Amelia Island 1999 SF, Sopot 1999 W, Gold Coast 2000 F, Australian Open 2000 SF, Amelia Island 2000 F, Hilton Head 2000 SF, Berlin 2000 W, Roland Garros 2000 F, Canadian Open 2000 SF, Philadelphia 2000 SF, Sydney 2001 SF, Charleston 2001 SF, Rome 2001 SF, Bali 2002 F, Zürich 2002 SF, Indian Wells 2003 SF, Eastbourne 2003 F, Charleston 2004 F Martinez, Maria Jose — Madrid 2001 SF Martinez Granados, Conchita — Bol 1999 SF, Bol 2003 F Matevzic, Maja — Porto 2002 SF, Bratislava 2002 W Mauresmo, Amélie — Australian Open 1999 F, Paris 1999 F, Rome 1999 SF, Bratislava 1999 W, Linz 1999 SF, Sydney 2000 W, Hannover 2000 SF, Bol 2000 F, Rome 2000 F, Moscow 2000 SF, Sydney 2001 SF, Paris 2001 W, Nice 2001 W, Amelia Island 2001 W, Berlin 2001 W, Rome 2001 F, Paris 2002 SF, Antwerp 2002 SF, Dubai 2002 W, Wimbledon 2002 SF, Canadian Open 2002 W, U. S. Open 2002 SF, Moscow 2002 SF, Filderstadt 2002 SF, Antwerp 2003 F, Dubai 2003 SF, Warsaw 2003 W, Berlin 2003 SF, Rome 2003 F, New Haven 2003 SF, Moscow 2003 F, Philadelphia 2003 W, WTA Championships 2003 F, Sydney 2004 F, Amelia Island 2004 F, Berlin 2004 W, Rome 2004 W, Eastbourne 2004 SF, Wimbledon 2004 SF, Canadian Open 2004 W, Olympics 2004 F, Filderstadt 2004 F, Linz 2004 W, Philadelphia 2004 W, Los Angeles Champ 2004 SF McQuillan, Rachel — Dubai 2001 SF Medina Garrigues, Anabel — Antwerp 2001 SF, Madrid 2001 SF, Palermo 2001 W, Hobart 2002 F, Bogota 2003 F, Palermo 2003 SF, ’s-Hertogenbosch 2004 SF, Palermo 2004 W, Forest Hills 2004 SF, Luxembourg 2004 SF Mikaelian, Marie-Gayanay — Tashkent 2001 SF, Basel 2001 F, Tashkent 2002 W, Quebec City 2002 F, Gold Coast 2003 F Molik, Alicia — Shanghai 2001 SF, Doha 2002 SF, Hobart 2003 W, Sarasota 2003 F, Budapest 2003 F, Vienna 2004 F, Stockholm 2004 W, Olympics 2004 Bronze, Zürich 2004 W, Luxembourg 2004 W Montolio, Angeles — Palermo 1999 F, Budapest 2000 SF, Portschach 2000 SF, Estoril 2001 W, Bol 2001 W, Madrid 2001 F, Porto 2002 W Morariu, Corina — Japan Open 1999 SF, Bol 1999 W, Rome 2000 SF Morigami, Akiko — Hyderabad 2003 SF, Shanghai 2003 SF Müller, Martina — Budapest 2002 W Myskina, Anastasia — Palermo 1999 W, Sopot 2000 SF, Moscow 2001 SF, Birmingham 2002 F. Eastbourne 2002 F, New Haven 2002 SF, Bahia 2002 W, Leipzig 2002 F, Doha 2003 W, Sarasota 2003 W, Leipzig 2003 W, Moscow 2003 W, Philadelphia 2003 F, Doha 2004 W, Indian Wells 2004 SF, Roland Garros 2004 W, San Diego 2004 F, Canadian Open 2004 SF, Sopot 2004 SF, Olympics 2004 SF, Filderstadt 2004 SF, Moscow 2004 W, Los Angeles Champ 2004 SF Nagyova, Henrieta — Prostejov 1999 W, Portschach 1999 SF, Warsaw 2000 W, Palermo 2000 W, Kuala Lumpur 2000 W, Pattaya 2000 SF, Bahia 2001 SF, Pattaya City 2001 F, Warsaw 2002 F, Palermo 2002 SF, Sopot 2002 F, Pattaya City 2003 W Neffa-de los Rios, Rossana — Bahia 2001 SF, Pattaya City 2001 SF Nola, Pavlina (Stoyanova) — Palermo 2000 F, Shanghai 2000 SF Noorlander, Seda — Tashkent 2001 F Novotna, Jana — Pan Pacific 1999 SF, Hannover 1999 W, Hilton Head 1999 SF Obata, Saori — Bali 2003 SF, Tashkent 2003 F Ondraskova, Zuzana — Pattaya 2000 SF

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 265 Oremans, Miriam — ’s-Hertogenbosch 1999 SF, Warsaw 2000 SF, Bratislava 2000 F, Birmingham 2001 F Osterloh, Lilia — Oklahoma City 1999 SF, Canberra 2002 SF Panova, Tatiana — Kuala Lumpur 2000 SF, Pattaya 2000 F, Auckland 2002 F, Sarasota 2002 F, Pattaya City 2002 SF, Sydney 2003 SF Papadaki, Christina — Bogota 1999 F Parra Santonja, Arantxa — Japan Open 2003 SF, Tashkent 2003 SF Pennetta, Flavia — Hyderabad 2003 SF, Acapulco 2004 F, Budapest 2004 SF, Palermo 2004 F, Sopot 2004 W Perebiynis, Tatiana — Stockholm 2004 F Peschke, Kveta Hrdlickova — Bratislava 1999 SF, Leipzig 1999 F, Linz 2000 SF Petrova, Nadia — Amelia Island 2001 SF, Gold Coast 2002 SF, Roland Garros 2003 SF, ’s-Hertogenbosch 2003 SF, Zürich 2003 SF, Linz 2003 F, Philadelphia 2003 SF, Gold Coast 2004 F, Miami 2004 SF, Amelia Island 2004 SF, Bali 2004 SF, Linz 2004 SF, Philadelphia 2004 SF Pierce, Mary — Gold Coast 1999 F, Hamburg 1999 F, Rome 1999 F, Canadian Open 1999 SF, Filderstadt 1999 F, Zürich 1999 SF, Linz 1999 W, Leipzig 1999 SF, Scottsdale 2000 SF, Indian Wells 2000 SF, Hilton Head 2000 W, Roland Garros 2000 W, Canberra 2001 SF, Filderstadt 2003 SF, Quebec City 2003 SF, Paris 2004 F, ’s-Hertogenbosch 2004 Pin, Camille — Vancouver 2004 SF Pisnik, Tina — Warsaw 1999 SF, Tashkent 1999 SF, Bol 2000 W, Luxembourg 2001 SF, ’s- Hertogenbosch 2002 SF, Rome 2003 SF Pitkowski, Sarah — Budapest 1999 W, Bol 1999 SF, Antwerp 1999 F, Linz 1999 SF, Budapest 2000 SF, Tashkent 2000 SF Plischke, Sylvia — Bogota 2000 SF Poutchek, Tatiana — Pattaya City 2001 SF, Budapest 2002 SF, Tashkent 2002 F Pratt, Nicole — Shanghai 2001 F, Hobart 2002 SF, Birmingham 2002 SF, Hyderabad 2004 W Prusova, Libuse — Bol 2002 SF Raymond, Lisa — Moscow 1999 SF, Birmingham 2000 W, Birmingham 2001 SF, Big Island 2001 SF, Luxembourg 2001 F, Memphis 2002 W, Birmingham 2002 SF, Stanford 2002 SF, Big Island 2002 F, Pan Pacific 2003 SF, Memphis 2003 W, Memphis 2004 F, New Haven 2004 SF Razzano, Virginie — Sarasota 2002 SF, Luxembourg 2002 SF, Estoril 2003 SF, Tashkent 2004 F Reeves, Samantha — Bol 2003 SF Rittner, Barbara — Knokke-Heist 1999 SF, Luxembourg 2000 SF, Antwerp 2001 W, ’s-Hertogenbosch 2003 SF Rodionova, Anastasia — Quebec City 2002 SF Ruano Pascual, Virginia — Madrid 2000 SF, Brussels 2002 SF, Tashkent 2003 W Rubin, Chanda — Hobart 1999 W, Indian Wells 1999 SF, Madrid 1999 SF, Quebec City 1999 SF, Hobart 2000 F, Pan Pacific 2000 SF, Eastbourne 2000 SF, Linz 2000 SF, Quebec City 2000 W, Eastbourne 2001 SF, Madrid 2002 F, Eastbourne 2002 W, Los Angeles 2002 W, Linz 2002 SF, Pan Pacific 2003 SF, Miami 2003 SF, Madrid 2003 W, Eastbourne 2003 W, Bali 2003 F, Shanghai 2003 F, Luxembourg 2003 F, Pan Pacific 2004 SF Safina, Dinara — Estoril 2002 SF, Sopot 2002 W, Palermo 2003 W, Paris 2004 SF, Luxembourg 2004 F

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 266 Salerni, Maria Emilia — Hobart 2004 SF, Quebec City 2004 SF Sanchez Lorenzo, Maria — Knokke-Heist 1999 W, Bol 2000 SF, Budapest 2003 SF, Bol 2003 SF, Madrid 2003 F, Bogota 2004 F, Acapulco 2004 SF Sanchez-Vicario, Arantxa — Cairo 1999 W, Hamburg 1999 SF, Berlin 1999 SF, Roland Garros 1999 SF, Gold Coast 2000 SF, Hilton Head 2000 F, Hamburg 2000 F, Roland Garros 2000 SF, Canadian Open 2000 SF, Filderstadt 2000 SF, Porto 2001 W, Amelia Island 2001 SF, Madrid 2001 W, Princess Cup 2001 F, Bali 2001 SF, Brussels 2002 F, Bali 2002 SF Schaul, Claudine — Strasbourg 2004 W Schett, Barbara — Sydney 1999 SF, Auckland 1999 SF, Hamburg 1999 SF, Moscow 1999 F, Portschach 2000 W, Zürich 2000 SF, Doha 2001 SF, Madrid 2003 SF Schiavone, Francesca — Tashkent 2000 F, Auckland 2001 SF, Canberra 2003 F, Stanford 2003 SF, Los Angeles 2003 SF, Sydney 2004 SF, Warsaw 2004 SF Schnyder, Patty — Gold Coast 1999 W, Hilton Head 1999 SF, Portschach 2000 F, Gold Coast 2001 SF, Vienna 2001 F, Pattaya City 2001 W, Antwerp 2002 SF, Charleston 2002 F, Zürich 2002 W, Gold Cost 2003 SF, Sopot 2003 SF, Linz 2003 SF, Australian Open 2004 SF, Charleston 2004 SF, Birmingham 2004 SF, Zürich 2004 SF Schruff, Julia — Estoril 2003 F Seles, Monica — Australian Open 1999 SF, Pan Pacific 1999 SF, Amelia Island 1999, Roland Garros 1999 SF, Canadian Open 1999 F, New Haven 1999 SF, Princess Cup 1999 F, Oklahoma City 2000 W, Ericsson 2000 SF, Amelia Island 2000 W, Hilton Head 2000 SF, Rome 2000 W, Stanford 2000 SF, San Diego 2000 F, New Haven 2000 F, [Olympics 2000 Bronze], Princess Cup 2000 SF, Chase Championships 2000 F, Oklahoma City 2001 W, Scottsdale 2001 SF, Stanford 2001 SF, San Diego 2001 F, Los Angeles 2001 F, Canadian Open 2001 SF, Bahia 2001 W, Japan Open 2001 W, Shanghai 2001 W, Australian Open 2002 SF, Pan Pacific 2002 F, Paris 2002 SF, Doha 2002 W, Dubai 2002 SF, Indian Wells 2002 SF, Miami 2002 SF, Madrid 2002 W, Bahia 2002 SF, Pan Pacific 2003 F, Dubai 2003 F Serra Zanetti, Adriana — Bratislava 2001 SF Serra Zanetti, Antonella — Casablanca 2003 F Sequera, Milagros — Quebec City 2003 F Serna, Magui — Birmingham 1999 SF, Knokke-Heist 2000 SF, Porto 2001 F, Eastbourne 2001 F, Porto 2002 F, Estoril 2002 W, Estoril 2003 W, Budapest 2003 W Sharapova, Maria — Birmingham 2003 SF, Japan Open 2003 W, Luxembourg 2003 SF, Quebec City 2003 W, Memphis 2004 SF, Birmingham 2004 W, Wimbledon 2004 W, Beijing 2004 SF, Seoul 2004 W, Japan Open 2004 W, Zürich 2004 F, Philadelphia 2004 SF, Los Angeles Champ 2004 W Shaughnessy, Meghann — Bogota 1999 SF, Auckland 2000 SF, Shanghai 2000 W, Gold Coast 2001 SF, Scottsdale 2001 F, Hamburg 2001 F, Stanford 2001 SF, Quebec City 2001 W, Sydney 2002 F, Sarasota 2002 SF, Strasbourg 2002 SF, Canberra 2003 W, Scottsdale 2003 SF, Dubai 2004 SF, Tashkent 2004 SF Sidot, Anne-Gaëlle — Canadian Open 1999 SF, Hannover 2000 SF Smashnova, Anna — Tashkent 1999 W, Strasbourg 2000 SF, Palermo 2000 SF, Knokke-Heist 2000 W, Basel 2001 SF, Auckland 2002 W, Canberra 2002 W, Berlin 2002 SF, Vienna 2002 W, Shanghai 2002 W, Auckland 2003 SF, Sopot 2003 W, Helsinki 2003 W, Moscow 2003 SF, Vienna 2004 W Snyder, Tara — Quebec City 1999 SF Spears, Abigail — Seoul 2004 SF, Quebec City 2004 F

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 267 Spirlea, Irina — Gold Coast 1999 SF, Cairo 1999 F Sprem, Karolina — Strasbourg 2003 F, Vienna 2003 F, Helsinki 2003 SF, Canberra 2004 SF, Antwerp 2004 SF, Berlin 2004 SF Srebotnik, Katarina — Estoril 1999 W, Palermo 1999 SF, Pan Pacific 2000 SF, Bogota 2002 F, Acapulco 2002 W, Luxembourg 2002 SF, Bogota 2003 SF, Palermo 2003 F, Palermo 2004 SF Stevenson, Alexandra — Wimbledon 1999 SF, Memphis 2002 F, Linz 2002 F, Scottsdale 2003 SF Stosur, Samantha — Gold Coast 2004 SF Strycova, Barbora — GuangZhou 2004 SF Suárez, Paola — Bogota 1999 SF, Madrid 1999 F, São Paulo 2000 F, Amelia Island 2000 SF, Sopot 2000 SF, Auckland 2001 F, Bogota 2001 W, Acapulco 2001 SF, Vienna 2001 SF, Acapulco 2002 F, Madrid 2002 SF, Palermo 2002 SF, Bogota 2003 SF, Vienna 2003 W, Canadian Open 2003 SF, Auckland 2004 SF, Canberra 2004 W, Roland Garros 2004 SF Sucha, Martina — Quebec City 2001 SF, Bratislava 2002 F, Hobart 2002 W, Helsinki 2002 SF, Budapest 2004 F, GuangZhou 2004 F, Quebec City 2004 W Sugiyama, Ai — Gold Coast 1999 SF, Japan Open 1999 F, Princess Cup 1999 SF, Japan Open 2001 SF, Memphis 2002 SF, Los Angeles 2002 SF, Shanghai 2002 SF, Scottsdale 2003 W, Los Angeles 2003 SF, Shanghai 2003 SF, Linz 2003 W, Philadelphia 2003 SF, Gold Coast 2004 W, Dubai 2004 SF Svensson, Åsa (Carlsson) — Kuala Lumpur 1999 W, Palermo 2001 SF, Bol 2002 W Talaja, Silvija — Warsaw 1999 SF, ’s-Hertogenbosch 1999 F, Portschach 1999 F, Sopot 1999 SF, Knokke-Heist 1999 SF, Pattaya City 1999 SF, Gold Coast 2000 W, Strasbourg 2000 W, Porto 2001 SF, Auckland 2002 SF, Warsaw 2002 SF, Japan Open 2002 F Tanasugarn, Tamarine — Birmingham 2000 F, Japan Open 2000 SF, Shanghai 2000 SF, Kuala Lumpur 2000 SF, Dubai 2001 SF, Japan Open 2001 F, Canberra 2002 F, Doha 2002 F, Japan Open 2002 SF, Hyderabad 2003 W, Pattaya City 2003 SF, Hyderabad 2004 SF, Japan Open 2004 SF Tauziat, Nathalie — Birmingham 1999 F, Eastbourne 1999 F, Zürich 1999 SF, Moscow 1999 W, Leipzig 1999 W, Philadelphia 1999 SF, Chase Championships 1999 SF, Paris 2000 W, Birmingham 2000 SF, New Haven 2000 SF, Filderstadt 2000 SF, Moscow 2000 SF, Leipzig 2000 SF, Philadelphia 2000 SF, Paris 2001 SF, Dubai 2001 F, Strasbourg 2001 SF, Birmingham 2001 W, Los Angeles 2001 SF, Leipzig 2001 SF, Zürich 2001 SF Taylor, Sarah — Bali 2002 SF, Japan Open 2002 SF Testud, Sandrine — Indian Wells 1999 SF, Sopot 1999 SF, Filderstadt 1999 SF, Linz 1999 SF, Pan Pacific 2000 F, Ericsson 2000 SF, Canberra 2001 F, Doha 2001 F, Bol 2001 SF, Big Island 2001 W, Filderstadt 2001 SF, Munich Championships 2001 SF, Dubai 2002 F, Charleston 2002 SF Torrens Valero, Cristina — Budapest 1999 F, Warsaw 1999 W, São Paulo 1999 SF, Antwerp 2000 F, Bogota 2001 SF, Budapest 2001 SF, Tashkent 2001 SF, Palermo 2001 F, Sopot 2001 W, Basel 2001 SF, Bogota 2002 SF Tu, Meilen — Quebec City 2000 SF, Auckland 2001 W Tulyaganova, Iroda — Tashkent 2000 W, Shanghai 2000 F, ’s-Hertogenbosch 2001 SF, Vienna 2001 W, Knokke-Heist 2001 W, Linz 2001 SF, Vienna 2002 F, Hyderabad 2003 F, Madrid 2003 SF Vaidisova, Nicole — Vancouver 2004 W, Tashkent 2004 W Vakulenko, Julia — Canberra 2004 SF Van Roost, Dominique (Monami) — Auckland 1999 F, Paris 1999 SF, Luxembourg 1999 F, Moscow 1999 SF, Eastbourne 2000 F, Knokke-Heist 2000 F

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 268 Vento-Kabchi, Maria — Hobart 2000 SF, Stanford 2003 SF, Bali 2003 SF, Leipzig 2003 SF, Stanford 2004 SF Vinci, Roberta — Tashkent 2002 SF Wartusch, Patricia — São Paulo 1999 F, Bogota 2000 W, Vienna 2002 SF, Casablanca 2002 W, Helsinki 2002 SF, Doha 2003 SF Washington, Mashona — Japan Open 2004 F Weingärtner, Marlene — Auckland 2001 SF, Charleston 2001 SF, Luxembourg 2003 SF, Bali 2004 F Widjaja, Angelique — Bali 2001 W, Shanghai 2002 SF, Pattaya City 2002 W Williams, Serena — Paris 1999 W, Indian Wells 1999 W, Lipton 1999 F, Los Angeles 1999 W, U. S. Open 1999 W, Paris 2000 F, Hannover 2000 W, Wimbledon 2000 SF, Los Angeles 2000 W, Canadian Open 2000 F, Princess Cup 2000 W, Indian Wells 2001 W, Canadian Open 2001 W, U. S. Open 2001 F, Munich Championships 2001 W, Sydney 2002 SF, Scottsdale 2002 W, Miami 2002 W, Berlin 2002 F, Rome 2002 W, Roland Garros 2002 W, Wimbledon 2002 W, U. S. Open 2002 W, Princess Cup 2002 W, Leipzig 2002 W, Los Angeles Championships 2002 F, Australian Open 2003 W, Paris 2003 W, Miami 2003 W, Charleston 2003 F, Rome 2003 SF, Roland Garros 2003 SF, Wimbledon 2003 W, Miami 2004 W, Rome 2004 SF, Wimbledon 2004 F, Los Angeles 2004 F, Beijing 2004 W, Los Angeles Champ 2004 F Williams, Venus — Hannover 1999 F, Oklahoma City 1999 W, Lipton 1999 W, Hamburg 1999 W, Rome 1999 W, Stanford 1999 F, San Diego 1999 F, New Haven 1999 W, U. S. Open 1999 SF, Zürich 1999 W, Philadelphia 1999 SF, Chase Championships 1999 SF, Wimbledon 2000 W, Stanford 2000 W, San Diego 2000 W, New Haven 2000 W, U. S. Open 2000 W, [Olympics 2000 Gold], Linz 2000 F, Australian Open 2001 SF, Nice 2001 SF, Indian Wells 2001 SF, Ericsson 2001 W, Hamburg 2001 W, Wimbledon 2001 W, San Diego 2001 W, New Haven 2001 W, U. S. Open 2001 W, Gold Coast 2002 W, Paris 2002 W, Antwerp 2002 W, Dubai 2002 SF, Miami 2002 SF, Amelia Island 2002 W, Hamburg 2002 F, Roland Garros 2002 F, Wimbledon 2002 F, Stanford 2002 W, San Diego 2002 W, New Haven 2002 W, U. S. Open 2002 F, Los Angeles Championships 2002 SF, Australian Open 2003 F, Antwerp 2003 W, Warsaw 2003 F, Wimbledon 2003 F, Charleston 2004 W, Warsaw 2004 W, Berlin 2004 F, Stanford 2004 F, Los Angeles 2004 SF Yi, Jing-Qian — Tashkent 2000 SF Zheng Jie — Japan Open 2003 SF Zuluaga, Fabiola — Bogota 1999 W, São Paulo 1999 W, Rome 2000 SF, Madrid 2000 F, Bogota 2002 W, Madrid 2002 SF, Bogota 2003 W, Australian Open 2004 SF, Bogota 2004 W Zvereva, Natasha — Eastbourne 1999 W Zvonareva, Vera — Warsaw 2002 SF, Palermo 2002 F, Sopot 2002 SF, Bol 2003 W, Strasbourg 2003 SF, Vienna 2003 SF, Linz 2003 SF, Memphis 2004 W, Warsaw 2004 SF, Rome 2004 SF, Eastbourne 2004 SF, San Diego 2004 SF, Canadian Open 2004 SF, Cincinnati 2004 F, Beijing 2004 SF, Philadelphia 2004 F

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 269 Career Results for Leading Players Career Results — Singles The following tables summarize the performances of certain top singles players, both current and recently retired. The criterion used is that a player must have retired since 1996, and must have, or be projected to have, at least 20 career singles titles. The table then attempts (probably with some inaccuracy) to break out a player’s titles by year, surface, and tier. Tiers have been translated, to the extent possible, to the current Slam-Champ-I-II-III-IV-V system, even though the system has changed dramatically over the years (e.g. events now titled Tier II might have had prizes of $225,000 or $350,000 in the early Nineties; similarly, in the late Eighties the money gap between Tier I and Tier II was only 3:2, compared to the 2:1 ratio of today. The list below does not represent the nomenclature at the time but what appears to me to be the best approximation to the nomenclature of today). Tournaments of Tier II or higher are shown in bold; lesser results in plain text. Slams are in bold coloured type. The year-end championships is also in bold colour as the closest thing to an indoor Slam. Note: Here as elsewhere, events which do not follow WTA admission rules (Olympics prior to 2004, Fed Cup, Hopman Cup, Grand Slam Cup) are not listed. Since some (not all) WTA lists include the Olympics, their totals for Capriati, Davenport, Graf, Venus Williams, etc. may be one or more tournaments higher. Jennifer Capriati Career Titles: Hardcourt: 8; Clay: 3; Grass: 0; Indoor: 2. Total: 13 By Tier: Slams: 3; Championships: 0; Tier I: 1; Tier II: 5; Tier III: 4; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 0 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1990 Puerto Rico (III) 1991 San Diego (II), Canadian Open (II) 1992 San Diego (II) 1993 Sydney (II) 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Strasbourg (III) Quebec City (III) 2000 Luxembourg (III) 2001 Australian Open (Slam) Charleston (I), Roland Garros (Slam) 2002 Australian Open (Slam) 2003 New Haven (II) 2004

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 270 Kim Clijsters Career Titles: Hardcourt: 6; Clay: 2; Grass: 1; Indoor: 12. Total: 21 By Tier: Slams: 0; Championships: 2; Tier I: 2; Tier II: 11; Tier III: 5; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 1 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1999 Luxembourg (III) 2000 Hobart (V) Leipzig (II) 2001 Stanford (II) Leipzig (II), Luxembourg (III) 2002 Hamburg (II) Filderstadt (II), Luxembourg (III), Los Angeles (Champ) 2003 Sydney (II), Indian Wells (I), Rome (I) ’s-Hertogenbosch (III) Filderstadt (II), Luxembourg (III), Stanford (II), Los Angeles (II) Los Angeles (Champ) 2004 Paris (II), Antwerp (II) Lindsay Davenport Career Titles: Hardcourt: 20; Clay: 7; Grass: 2; Indoor: 15. Total: 44 By Tier: Slams: 3; Championships: 1; Tier I: 10; Tier II: 22; Tier III: 8; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 0 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1993 Lucerne (III) 1994 Brisbane (III) Lucerne (III) 1995 Strasbourg (III) 1996 Los Angeles (II) Strasbourg (III) 1997 Indian Wells (I), Atlanta (II) Amelia Island (II) Oklahoma City (III), Zürich (I), Chicago (II) 1998 Stanford (II), San Diego (II), Pan Pacific (I), Zürich (I) Los Angeles (II), US Open (Slam) 1999 Sydney (II), Stanford (II), Madrid (III) Wimbledon (Slam) Philadelphia (II), Chase Princess Cup (II) (Champ) 2000 Australian Open (Slam), Indian Linz (II), Philadelphia (II) Wells (I) 2001 Scottsdale (II), Los Angeles (II) Eastbourne (II) Pan Pacific (I), Filderstadt (II), Zürich (I), Linz (II) 2002 2003 Pan Pacific (I) 2004 Stanford (II), Los Angeles (II), Amelia Island (II) Pan Pacific (I), Filderstadt (II) San Diego (I), Cincinnati (III) Jelena Dokic Career Titles: Hardcourt: 1; Clay: 2; Grass: 1; Indoor: 1. Total: 5 By Tier: Slams: 0; Championships: 0; Tier I: 2; Tier II: 1; Tier III: 1; Tier IV: 1; Tier V: 0 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 2001 Princess Cup (II) Rome (I) Moscow (I) 2002 Sarasota (IV) Birmingham (III) 2003 2004

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 271 Steffi Graf Career Titles: Hardcourt: 36; Clay: 32; Grass: 7; Indoor: 31. Total: 106 By Tier: Slams: 22; Championships: 5; Tier I: 30; Tier II: 48; Tier III: 1 GRAND SLAM 1988 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1986 Mahwah (II) Hilton Head (I), Amelia Pan Pacific (I), Brighton (I), Island (I), Indianapolis (I), Zürich (II) Berlin (II) 1987 Boca Raton (I), Lipton (I), Los Hilton Head (I), Amelia Zürich (II), Virginia Slims Angeles (I) Island (I), Rome (II), Berlin (Champ) (II), Roland Garros (Slam), Hamburg (II) 1988 Australian Open (Slam), San Berlin (I), Roland Garros Wimbledon Brighton (II) Antonio (II), Lipton (I), Mahwah (Slam), Hamburg (II) (Slam) (II), US Open (Slam) 1989 Australian Open (Slam), San Hilton Head (I), Hamburg Wimbledon Washington (I), Zürich (II), Antonio (II), Boca Raton (I), San (II), Berlin (I) (Slam) Brighton (II), Virginia Slims Diego (II), Mahwah (II), U. S. (Champ) Open (Slam) 1990 Australian Open (Slam), Amelia Island (II), Pan Pacific (II), Leipzig (II), Canadian Open (I), San Diego Hamburg (II) Zürich (II), Brighton (II), New (II) England (II) 1991 San Antonio (II) Hamburg (II), Berlin (I) Wimbledon Leipzig (II), Zürich (II), (Slam) Brighton (II) 1992 Boca Raton (I) Hamburg (II), Berlin (I) Wimbledon Leipzig (II), Zürich (II), (Slam) Brighton (II), Philadelphia (II) 1993 Delray Beach (II), San Diego (II), Hilton Head (I), Berlin (I), Wimbledon Leipzig (II), Virginia Slims Canadian Open (I), US Open Roland Garros (Slam) (Slam) (Champ) (Slam) 1994 Australian Open (Slam), Indian Berlin (I) Pan Pacific (I) Wells (II), Delray Beach (II), Lipton (I), San Diego (II) 1995 Delray Beach (II), Lipton (I), US Houston (II), Roland Wimbledon Paris (II), Philadelphia (I), Open (Slam) Garros (Slam) (Slam) New York (Champ) 1996 Indian Wells (II), Lipton (I), US Berlin (I), Roland Garros Wimbledon Chase (Champ) Open (Slam) (Slam) (Slam) 1997 Strasbourg (III) 1998 New Haven (II) Leipzig (II), Philadelphia (II) 1999 Roland Garros (Slam) Justine Hénin-Hardenne Career Titles: Hardcourt: 11; Clay: 5; Grass: 1; Indoor: 2. Total: 19 By Tier: Slams: 3; Championships: 0; Tier I: 6; Tier II: 6; Tier III: 3; Tier IV: 1; Tier V: 0 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1999 Antwerp (IV) 2000 2001 Gold Coast (III), Canberra (III) ’s-Hertogenbosch (III) 2002 Berlin (I) Linz (II) 2003 Dubai (II), San Diego (II), Canadian Open Charleston (I), Berlin (I), Zürich (I) (I), U. S. Open (Slam) Roland Garros (Slam) 2004 Sydney (II), Australian Open (Slam), Dubai (II), Indian Wells (I), Olympics (II)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 272 Martina Hingis Career Titles: Hardcourt: 17; Clay: 6; Grass: 2; Indoor: 15. Total: 40 By Tier: Slams: 5; Championships: 2; Tier I: 15; Tier II: 16; Tier III: 2; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 0 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1996 Filderstadt (II), Oakland (II) 1997 Sydney (II), Australian Open Hilton Head (I) Wimbledon (Slam) Pan Pacific (I), Paris (II), (Slam), Lipton (I), Stanford (II), Filderstadt (II), Philadelphia San Diego (II), US Open (Slam) (II) 1998 Australian Open (Slam), Indian Hamburg (II), Rome Chase (Champ) Wells (I) (I) 1999 Australian Open (Slam), San Hilton Head (I), Pan Pacific (I), Filderstadt Diego (II), Canadian Open (I) Berlin (I) (II) 2000 Ericsson (I), Canadian Open (I) Hamburg (II) ’s-Hertogenbosch (III) Pan Pacific (I), Filderstadt (II), Zürich (I), Moscow (I), Chase (Champ) 2001 Sydney (II), Doha (III), Dubai (II) 2002 Sydney (II) Pan Pacific (I) Conchita Martinez Career Titles: Hardcourt: 8; Clay: 20; Grass: 1; Indoor: 3. Total: 32 By Tier: Slams: 1; Championships: 0; Tier I: 9; Tier II: 9; Tier III: 12; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 1 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1988 Sofia (III) 1989 Wellington (V), Phoenix (III) Tampa (II) 1990 Scottsdale (III) Paris (III) Indianapolis (III) 1991 Barcelona (II), Kitzbühel (III), Paris (III) 1992 Kitzbühel (III) 1993 Brisbane (III), Stratton Houston (II), Rome (I) Philadelphia (I) Mountain (II) 1994 Stratton Mountain (II) Hilton Head (I), Rome (I) Wimbledon (Slam) 1995 San Diego (II), Los Angeles Hilton Head (I), Amelia Island (II) (II), Hamburg (II), Rome (I) 1996 Rome (I) Moscow (III) 1997 1998 Berlin (I), Warsaw (III) 1999 Sopot (III) 2000 Berlin (I) 2001 2002 2003 2004

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 273 Amélie Mauresmo Career Titles: Hardcourt: 5; Clay: 5; Grass: 0; Indoor: 5. Total: 15 By Tier: Slams: 0; Championships: 0; Tier I: 5; Tier II: 9; Tier III: 0; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 1 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1999 Bratislava (V) 2000 Sydney (II) 2001 Amelia Island (II), Berlin (I) Paris (II), Nice (II) 2002 Dubai (II), Canadian Open (I) 2003 Warsaw (II) Philadelphia (II) 2004 Canadian Open (I) Berlin (I), Rome (I) Linz (II), Philadelphia (II) Anastasia Myskina Career Titles: Hardcourt: 3; Clay: 3; Grass: 0; Indoor: 3. Total: 9 By Tier: Slams: 1; Championships: 0; Tier I: 2; Tier II: 3; Tier III: 1; Tier IV: 1; Tier V: 1 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1999 Palermo (V) 2000 2001 2002 Bahia (II) 2003 Doha (III) Sarasota (IV) Leipzig (II), Moscow (I) 2004 Doha (II) Roland Garros (Slam) Moscow (I) Jana Novotna Career Titles: Hardcourt: 3; Clay: 4; Grass: 2; Indoor: 15. Total: 24 By Tier: Slams: 1; Championships: 1; Tier I: 2; Tier II: 11; Tier III: 9; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 0 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1988 Adelaide (III) 1989 Strasbourg (III) 1990 Albuquerque (III) 1991 Sydney (II) Oklahoma City (III) 1992 1993 Osaka (III), Brighton (II) 1994 Leipzig (II), Brighton (II), Essen (II) 1995 Linz (III) 1996 Madrid (III) Zürich (I), Chicago (II), Philadelphia (II) 1997 Madrid (III) Leipzig (II), Moscow (I), Chase (Champ) 1998 Prague (III) Eastbourne (II), Linz (II) Wimbledon (Slam) 1999 Hannover (II)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 274 Mary Pierce Career Titles: Hardcourt: 2; Clay: 7; Grass: 1; Indoor: 6. Total: 16 By Tier: Slams: 2; Championships: 0; Tier I: 3; Tier II: 5; Tier III: 3; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 3 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1991 Palermo (V) 1992 Cesena (V), Palermo (V) Puerto Rico (III) 1993 Filderstadt (II) 1994 1995 Australian Open (Slam), Tokyo/Nicherei (II) 1996 1997 Rome (I) 1998 Amelia Island (II) Paris (II), Moscow (I), Luxembourg (III) 1999 Linz (II) 2000 Hilton Head (I), Roland Garros (Slam) 2001 2002 2003 2004 ’s-Hertogenbosch (III) Gabriela Sabatini Career Titles: Hardcourt: 9; Clay: 11; Grass: 0; Indoor: 7. Total: 27 By Tier: Slams: 1; Championships: 2; Tier I: 11; Tier II: 10; Tier III: 0; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 3 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1985 Japan Open (V) 1986 1987 Pan Pacific (I) Buenos Aires (V) Brighton (II) 1988 Boca Raton (I), Canadian Open (I) Buenos Aires (V), Rome (II) Virginia Slims (Champ) 1989 Lipton (I) Amelia Island (II), Rome (I) Filderstadt (II) 1990 Boca Raton (II), US Open (Slam) 1991 Boca Raton (I) Hilton Head (I), Amelia Island (II), Pan Pacific (II) Rome (I) 1992 Sydney (II) Hilton Head (I), Amelia Island (I), Pan Pacific (II) Rome (I) 1993 1994 Virginia Slims (Champ) 1995 Sydney (II)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 275 Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario Career Titles: Hardcourt: 8; Clay: 19; Grass: 1; Indoor: 1. Total: 29 By Tier: Slams: 4; Championships: 0; Tier I: 6; Tier II: 13; Tier III: 3; Tier IV: 3; Tier V: 0 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1988 Brussels (IV) 1989 Barcelona (IV), Roland Garros (Slam) 1990 Barcelona (III) Newport (II) 1991 Washington, DC (II) 1992 Lipton (I), Canadian Open (I) 1993 Lipton (I) Amelia Island (II), Barcelona (II), Hamburg (II) 1994 Canadian Open (I), US Open Amelia Island (II), Barcelona (II), Oakland (II) (Slam), Tokyo/Nicherei (II) Hamburg (II), Roland Garros (Slam) 1995 Barcelona (II), Berlin (I) 1996 Hilton Head (I), Hamburg (II) 1997 1998 Sydney (II) Roland Garros (Slam) 1999 Cairo (III) 2000 2001 Porto (IV), Madrid (III) 2002 Monica Seles Career Titles: Hardcourt: 27; Clay: 14; Grass: 1; Indoor: 11. Total: 53 By Tier: Slams: 9; Championships: 3; Tier I: 9; Tier II: 26; Tier III: 5; Tier IV: 1; Tier V: 0 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1989 Houston (II) 1990 Lipton (I), San Antonio (II), Los Angeles Tampa (II), Rome (I), Berlin Oakland (II), Virginia (II) (I), Roland Garros (Slam) Slims (Champ) 1991 Australian Open (Slam), Lipton (I), Los Houston (II), Roland Garros Milan (II), Philadelphia Angeles (II), US Open (Slam), Tokyo/ (Slam) (II), Virginia Slims Nicherei (II) (Champ) 1992 Australian Open (Slam), Indian Wells Houston (II), Barcelona (II), Essen (II), Oakland (II), (II), US Open (Slam), Tokyo/Nicherei (II) Roland Garros (Slam) Virginia Slims (Champ) 1993 Australian Open (Slam) Chicago (II) 1994 1995 Canadian Open (I) 1996 Sydney (II), Australian Open (Slam), Eastbourne Canadian Open (I), Tokyo/Nicherei (II) (II) 1997 Los Angeles (II), Canadian Open (I), Princess Cup (II) 1998 Canadian Open (I), Princess Cup (II) 1999 Amelia Island (II) 2000 Amelia Island (II), Rome (I) Oklahoma City (III) 2001 Bahia (II), Japan Open (III), Shanghai (IV) Oklahoma City (III) 2002 Doha (III) Madrid (III) 2003

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 276 Serena Williams Career Titles: Hardcourt: 15; Clay: 2; Grass: 2; Indoor: 5. Total: 24 By Tier: Slams: 6; Championships: 1; Tier I: 7; Tier II: 10; Tier III: 0; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 0 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1999 Indian Wells (I), Los Angeles (II), US Paris (II) Open (Slam) 2000 Los Angeles (II), Princess Cup (II) Hannover (II) 2001 Indian Wells (I), Canadian Open (I) Munich (Champ) 2002 Scottsdale (II). Miami (I). U. S. Open Rome (I), Roland Wimbledon (Slam) Leipzig (II) (Slam), Princess Cup (II) Garros (Slam) 2003 Australian Open (Slam), Miami (I) Wimbledon (Slam) Paris (II) 2004 Miami (I), Beijing (II) Venus Williams Career Titles: Hardcourt: 15; Clay: 6; Grass: 2; Indoor: 6. Total: 29 By Tier: Slams: 4; Championships: 0; Tier I: 6; Tier II: 16; Tier III: 3; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 0 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1998 Lipton (I) Oklahoma City (III) 1999 Lipton (I), New Haven (II) Hamburg (II), Rome (I) Oklahoma City (III), Zürich (I) 2000 Stanford (II), San Diego (II), New Wimbledon (Slam) Haven (II), US Open (Slam) 2001 Ericsson (I), San Diego (II), New Hamburg (II) Wimbledon (Slam) Haven (II), U. S. Open (Slam) 2002 Gold Coast (III), Stanford (II), Amelia Island (II) Paris (II), Antwerp (II) San Diego (II), New Haven (II) 2003 Antwerp (II) 2004 Charleston (I), Warsaw (II)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 277 Career Results — Doubles For inclusion in this list, players must have at least two Slams, and must have, or project to have, at least 25 doubles titles. Other criteria are similar to those for singles. For brevity, partners are listed only by initial in the following tables — e.g. the first item for Serena Williams is Oklahoma City (III/VW). This means Serena won Oklahoma City 1998, a Tier III, with VW=Venus Williams. The list of partners follows the list of results for each player. Players with whom the player won a Slam shown in bold. Note: Martina Navratilova is excluded because I just don’t trust the early WTA data. The surface data for some of the older players may also be inaccurate. Kim Clijsters Career Titles: Hardcourt: 4; Clay: 2; Grass: 1; Indoor: 4. Total: 11 By Tier: Slams: 2; Championships: 0; Tier I: 1; Tier II: 5; Tier III: 1; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 2 Partners with whom has won titles: 5 ¥ Partners with whom has won Slams: 1 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1999 Bratislava (V/LC) 2000 Antwerp (V/SA) 2001 2002 Los Angeles (II/JD) Luxembourg (III/JH) 2003 Sydney (II/AS), Scottsdale (II/AS). Roland G (Slam/AS) Wimbledon (Slam/AS) Antwerp (II/AS), San Diego (II/AS) Zürich (I/AS) 2004 Partners: AS=Ai Sugiyama, JD=Jelena Dokic, JH=Janette Husarova, LC= Laurence Courtois, SA=Sabine Appelmans Lindsay Davenport Career Titles: Hardcourt: 16; Clay: 6; Grass: 2; Indoor: 11. Total: 35 By Tier: Slams: 3; Championships: 3; Tier I: 9; Tier II: 19; Tier III: 1; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 0 Partners with whom has won titles: 7 ¥ Partners with whom has won Slams: 3 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1994 Indian Wells (II/LR) Oakland (II/ASV) 1995 Sydney (II/JN), Indian Wells (II/LR), Strasbourg (III/ Nicherei (II/MJF) MJF) 1996 Sydney (II/MJF), Los Angeles (II/NZ) Roland Garros Oakland (II/MJF), Chase (Slam/MJF) (Champ/MJF) 1997 Indian Wells (I/NZ), Stanford (II/MH), Amelia Island (II/ Pan Paciﬁc (I/NZ) Chase U. S. Open (Slam/JN) JN), Berlin (I/JN) (Champ/JN) 1998 Indian Wells (I/NZ), Stanford (II/NZ), Berlin (I/NZ) Filderstadt (II/NZ), Chase San Diego (II/NZ) (Champ/NZ) 1999 Stanford (II/CM), San Diego (II/CM) Wimbledon (Slam/ Pan Paciﬁc (I/NZ) CM) 2000 Indian Wells (I/CM) 2001 Filderstadt (II/LR), Zürich (I/LR) 2002 Filderstadt (II/LR) 2003 Indian Wells (I/LR) Amelia Island (II/ Eastbourne (II/ LR) LR) 2004 Partners: ASV=Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, CM=Corina Morariu, JN=Jana Novotna, LR=Lisa Raymond, MH=Martina Hingis, MJF=Mary Joe Fernandez, NZ=Natasha Zvereva

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 278 Gigi Fernandez Career Titles: Hardcourt: 25; Clay: 14; Grass: 8; Indoor: 21. Total: 68 By Tier: Slams: 17; Championships: 2; Tier I: 13; Tier II: 26; Tier III: 7; Tier IV: 2; Tier V: 1 Partners with whom has won titles: 11 ¥ Partners with whom has won Slams: 4 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1985 Delray Beach (V/MN), Canadian Washington (III/MN) Open (II/MN), Fort Lauderdale (III/ RW) 1986 1987 Mahwah (III/LM) Newport (III/LM) Piscataway (III/LM) 1988 U. S. Open (Slam/RW) Suntory/Tokyo (IV/RW) 1989 Canadian Open (I/RW), VS Newport (II/LM) Filderstadt (II/RW) Doubles (I/RW), Puerto Rico (IV/ RW) 1990 Los Angeles (II/JN), U. S. Open Hamburg (II/MN) Pan Pacific (II/ES), (Slam/MN) Worcester (II/HS) 1991 Brisbane (III/JN), Light ’n Lively (I/ Roland G (Slam/JN) Chicago (II/JN), Oakland (II/ HS) PF), Indianapolis (III/PF) 1992 U. S. Open (Slam/NZ) Houston (II/PF), Wimbledon (Slam/ Oakland (II/NZ), Roland G (Slam/NZ) NZ) Philadelphia (II/NZ) 1993 Australian Open (Slam/NZ), Hilton Head (I/NZ), Eastbourne (II/ Leipzig (II/NZ), Filderstadt Delray Beach (II/NZ), Light ’n Berlin (I/NZ), Roland NZ), Wimbledon (II/NZ), VSlims (Champ/NZ) Lively (I/NZ), San Diego (II/HS) G (Slam/NZ) (Slam/NZ) 1994 Australian Open (Slam/NZ), Rome (I/NZ), Berlin Eastbourne (II/ Chicago (II/NZ), Filderstadt Miami (I/NZ) (I/NZ), Roland G NZ), Wimbledon (II/NZ), Philadelphia (I/NZ), (Slam/NZ) (Slam/NZ) VSlims (Champ/NZ) 1995 San Diego (II/NZ), Los Angeles (II/ Hamburg (II/MH), Pan Pacific (I/NZ), NZ), U. S. Open (Slam/NZ) Rome (I/NZ), Roland Filderstadt (II/NZ) G (Slam/NZ) 1996 San Diego (II/CM), U. S. Open Pan Pacific (I/NZ) (Slam/NZ) 1997 Sydney (II/ASV) Roland G (Slam/NZ) Wimbledon (Slam/ NZ) Partners: ASV=Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, CM=Conchita Martinez, ES=Elizabeth Smylie, HS=Helena Sukova, JN=Jana Novotna, LM=Lori McNeil, MH=Martina Hingis, MN=Martina Navratilova, NZ=Natasha Zvereva, PF=Patty Fendick, RW=Robin White

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 279 Martina Hingis Career Titles: Hardcourt: 14; Clay: 6; Grass: 3; Indoor: 13. Total: 36 By Tier: Slams: 9; Championships: 2; Tier I: 13; Tier II: 12; Tier III: 0; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 0 Partners with whom has won titles: 12 ¥ Partners with whom has won Slams: 6 GRAND SLAM 1998 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1995 Hamburg (II/GF) 1996 Wimbledon (Slam/ Zürich (I/HS) HS) 1997 Australian Open (Slam/NZ), Hilton Head (I/ Paris (II/JN), Leipzig (II/JN), Stanford (II/LD), San Diego (II/ MJF) Filderstadt (II/ASV), Zürich (I/ ASV) ASV) 1998 Sydney (II/HS), Australian Open Roland G (Slam/ Wimbledon (Slam/ Pan Paciﬁc (I/ML) (Slam/ML), Miami (I/JN), Los JN) JN) Angeles (II/NZ), Canadian Open (I/ JN), U. S. Open (Slam/JN) 1999 Australian Open (Slam/AK), Rome (I/AK) Eastbourne (II/ Chase (Champ/AK) Indian Wells (I/AK), Miami (I/JN) AK) 2000 Canadian Open (I/NT) Roland G (Slam/ Pan Paciﬁc (I/MP), Filderstadt MP) (II/AK), Zürich (I/AK), Philadelphia (II/AK), Chase (Champ/AK) 2001 Moscow (I/AK) 2002 Australian Open (Slam/AK) Hamburg (II/BS) Partners: AK=Anna Kournikova, ASV=Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, BS=Barbara Schett, GF=Gigi Fernandez, HS=Helena Sukova, MP=Mary Pierce, JN=Jana Novotna, LD=Lindsay Davenport, MJF=Mary Joe Fernandez, ML=Mirjana Lucic, NT=Nathalie Tauziat, NZ=Natasha Zvereva Anna Kournikova Career Titles: Hardcourt: 7; Clay: 2; Grass: 1; Indoor: 6. Total: 16 By Tier: Slams: 2; Championships: 2; Tier I: 4; Tier II: 6; Tier III: 1; Tier IV: 1; Tier V: 0 Partners with whom has won titles: 6 ¥ Partners with whom has won Slams: 1 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1998 Princess Cup (II/MS) 1999 Australian Open (Slam/ Rome (I/MH) Eastbourne (II/ Chase (Champ/MH) MH), Indian Wells (I/MH) MH) 2000 Gold Coast (III/JHD) Hamburg (II/NZ) Filderstadt (II/MH), Zürich (I/MH), Philadelphia (II/MH), Chase (Champ/MH) 2001 Sydney (II/BS) Moscow (I/MH) 2002 Australian Open (Slam/ MH), Shanghai (IV/JL) 2003 2004 Partners: BS=Barbara Schett, JHD=Julie Halard-Decugis, JL=Janet Lee, MH=Martina Hingis, MS=Monica Seles, NZ=Natasha Zvereva

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 280 Larisa (Savchenko) Neiland Career Titles: Hardcourt: 21; Clay: 12; Grass: 12; Indoor: 21. Total: 66 By Tier: Slams: 2; Championships: 0; Tier I: 10; Tier II: 28; Tier III: 19; Tier IV: 7; Tier V: 0 Partners with whom has won titles:16 ¥ Partners with whom has won Slams: 16 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1985 Salt Lake City (IV/SP) Seabrook (IV/SP) 1986 New Orleans (III/SP) Little Rock (IV/SP) 1987 Boca Raton (II/SP) Eastbourne (II/SP) Wichita (IV/SP), Oklahoma City (IV/SP) 1988 Birmingham (III/NZ) Indianapolis (IV/NZ) 1989 Amelia Island (II/NZ), Birmingham (III/NZ) Moscow (III/NZ), Roland G (Slam/NZ) Chicago (II/NZ) 1990 Light n Lively (II/NZ) Birmingham (III/NZ), Nashville (III/KJ) Eastbourne (II/NZ) 1991 Auckland (IV/PF), Boca Raton (I/ Hamburg (II/JN), Eastbourne (II/NZ), Philadelphia (II/JN) NZ), Canadian Open (I/NZ), Los Berlin (I/NZ) Wimbledon (Slam/ Angeles (II/NZ), Washington (II/JN) NZ) 1992 Brisbane (III/JN), Boca Raron (I/ Berlin (I/JN) Eastbourne (II/JN) Leipzig (II/JN), NZ), Miami (I/ASV), Light n’ Lively Brighton (II/JN) (II/JN), San Diego (II/JN) 1993 Brisbane (III/CMa), Miami (I/JN), Osaka (III/JN) Canadian Open (I/JN) 1994 Schenectady (III/MM) Amelia Island (II/ Birmingham (III/ZG) Osaka (III/RS), Brighton ASV), Barcelona (II/ (II/MB) ASV) 1995 Barcelona (II/ASV), Paris (II/MM), Moscow Edinburgh (II/M) (III/MM), Leipzig (II/ MM), Brighton (II/MM) 1996 Canadian Open (I/ASV) Berlin (I/MM) Rosmalen (III/BSM) Essen (II/MM), Moscow (III/NM) 1997 Birmingham (III/KA) Luxembourg (III/HS) 1998 1999 Gold Coast (III/CMo), Los Angeles Hamburg (II/ASV) Birmingham (III/ Leipzig (II/MP) (II/ASV) CMo) Partners: ASV=Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, BSM=Brenda Schultz-McCarthy, CMa=Conchita Martinez, CMo=Corina Morariu, JN=Jana Novotna, KA=Katrina Adams, KJ=Kathy Jordan, MB=Manon Bollegraf, MM=Meredith McGrath, MP=Mary Pierce, NM=Natalia Medvedeva, NZ=Natasha Zvereva, PF=Patty Fendick, RS=Rennae Stubbs, SP=Svetlana Parkhomenko, ZG=Zina Garrison Jackson

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 281 Jana Novotna Career Titles: Hardcourt: 35; Clay: 17; Grass: 8; Indoor: 16. Total: 76 By Tier: Slams: 12; Championships: 2; Tier I: 16; Tier II: 36; Tier III: 10; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 0 Partners with whom has won titles: 17 ¥ Partners with whom has won Slams: 5 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1987 San Diego (III/CS) Strasbourg (III/CS), Hamburg (II/CKK) 1988 Canadian Open (I/HS), Mahwah (II/ Rome (II/CS), Oklahoma City (III/CS) HS) Hamburg (II/TSL) 1989 Brisbane (III/HS), Boca Raton (II/HS), Barcelona (III/TSL) Wimbledon (Slam/ Zürich (II/HS) Miami (I/HS) HS) 1990 Brisbane (III/HS), Sydney (II/HS), Roland G (Slam/HS) Wimbledon (Slam/ Australian Open (Slam/HS), Indian HS) Wells (II/HS), Miami (I/HS), Boca Raton (II/HS), Los Angeles (II/GF) 1991 Brisbane (III/GF), Washington (II/LN) Hamburg (II/LN), Chicago (II/GF), Zürich Roland G (Slam/GF) (II/AS), Filderstadt (II/ MN), Philadelphia (II/LN) 1992 Brisbane (III/LN), Light n Lively (II/ Berlin (I/LN) Eastbourne (II/ Leipzig (II/LN), Brighton LN), San Diego (II/LN) LN) (II/LN) 1993 Miami (I/LN), Canadian Open (I/LN) Rome (I/ASV) Osaka (III/LN), Paris (II/ AS) 1994 Delray Beach (II/ASV), Light & Lively Hamburg (II/ASV) (II/ASV), U. S. Open (Slam/ASV), San Diego (II/ASV) 1995 Sydney (II/LD), Australian Open Eastbourne (II/ WTA (Champ/ASV) (Slam/ASV), Miami (I/ASV), Delray ASV), Wimbledon Beach (II/MJF) (Slam/ASV) 1996 Miami (I/ASV) Hilton Head (I/ASV), Eastbourne (II/ Paris (II/KB), Filderstadt Madrid (III/ASV) ASV) (II/NA) 1997 U. S, Open (Slam/LD) Amelia Island (II/ Paris (II/MH), Leipzig (II/ LD), Berlin (I/LD) MH), Chase (Champ/LD) 1998 Miami (I/MH), Canadian Open (I/ Roland G (Slam/MH) Eastbourne (II/ MH), U. S. Open (Slam/MH) MdS), Wimbledon (Slam/MH) 1999 Miami (I/MH), Canadian Open (I/MP) Hilton Head (I/EL) Partners: AS=Andrea Strnadova, ASV=Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, CKK=Claudia Kohde-Kilsch, CS=Catherine Suire, EL=Elena Likhovtseva, GF=Gigi Fernandez, HS=Helena Sukova, KB=Kristie Boogert, LD=Lindsay Davenport, LN=Larisa Neiland, MdS=Mariaan de Swardt, MH=Martina Hingis, MJF=Mary Joe Fernandez, MN=Martina Navratilova, MP=Mary Pierce, NA=Nicole Arendt, TSL=Tine Scheuer-Larsen

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 282 Lisa Raymond Career Titles: Hardcourt: 16; Clay: 6; Grass: 4; Indoor: 18. Total: 44 By Tier: Slams: 3; Championships: 1; Tier I: 11; Tier II: 24; Tier III: 5; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 0 Partners with whom has won titles: 5 ¥ Partners with whom has won Slams: 1 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1993 Nicherei (II/CR) 1994 Indian Wells (II/LD) 1995 Indian Wells (II/LD) 1996 Chicago (II/RS), Philadelphis (II/RS) 1997 Quebec City (III/RS), Philadelphia (II/RS) 1998 Boston (III/RS) Hannover (II/RS) 1999 New Haven (II/RS) Oklahoma City (III/RS), Zürich (I/RS), Moscow (I/RS), Philadelphia (II/RS) 2000 Australian Open (Slam/RS), San Rome (I/RS), Madrid Diego (II/RS) (III/RS) 2001 Scottsdale (II/RS), U. S. Open Charleston (I/RS) Eastbourne (II/RS), Pan Paciﬁc (I/RS), Filderstadt (Slam/RS) Wimbledon (Slam/ (II/LD), Zürich (I/LD), RS) Munich (Champ/RS) 2002 Sydney (II/RS), Scottsdale (II/ Charleston (I/RS) Eastbourne (II/RS) Pan Paciﬁc (I/RS), Filderstadt RS), Indian Wells (I/RS), Miami (II/LD) (I/RS), Stanford (II/RS) 2003 Indian Wells (I/LD), Stanford Amelia Island (II/LD) Eastbourne (II/LD) Filderstadt (II/RS), (II/CB) Philadelphia (II/MN) 2004 Vienna (III/MN) Philadelphia (II/AM) Partners: AM=Alicia Molik, CB=Cara Black, CR=Chanda Rubin, LD=Lindsay Davenport, MN=Martina Navratilova, RS=Rennae Stubbbs Virginia Ruano Pascual Career Titles: Hardcourt: 10; Clay: 17; Grass: 0; Indoor: 2. Total: 29 By Tier: Slams: 7; Championships: 1; Tier I: 8; Tier II: 2; Tier III: 7; Tier IV: 1; Tier V: 3 Partners with whom has won titles: 4 ¥ Partners with whom has won Slams: 1 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1998 Hobart (V/PS) Budapest (V/PS), Rome (I/PS) 1999 Madrid (III/PS) 2000 Hilton Head (I/PS), Sopot (III/PS) 2001 Antwerp (V/EC), Madrid (III/PS), Roland Garros (Slam/PS), Knokke-Heist (IV/MS) 2002 Canadian Open (I/PS), U. S. Open Bogota (III/PS), Acapulco (III/PS), Rome (I/ (Slam/PS), Bahia (II/PS), Bali (III/CB) PS), Roland Garros (Slam/PS) 2003 New Haven (II/PS), U. S. Open (Slam/ Charleston (I/PS), Berlin (I/PS) Los Angeles PS) (Champ/PS) 2004 Australian Open (Slam/PS), Indian Charleston (I/PS), Roland Garros (Slam/PS) Luxembourg Wells (I/PS), U. S. Open (Slam/PS) (III/PS) Partners: CB=Cara Black, EC=Els Callens, MS=Magui Serna, PS=Paola Suárez

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 283 Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario Career Titles: Hardcourt: 25; Clay: 31; Grass: 3; Indoor: 10. Total: 69 (WTA says 68 but lists 69 events) By Tier: Slams: 6; Championships: 2; Tier I: 16; Tier II: 35; Tier III: 6; Tier IV: 2; Tier V: 2 Partners with whom has won titles: 24 ¥ Partners with whom has won Slams: 3 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1986 Athens (IV/IC) 1987 1988 1989 1990 Hilton Head (I/MN), Amelia Island (II/MP), Tampa (II/MP), Barcelona (III/MP) 1991 Sydney (II/HS) Amelia Island (II/HS), Barcelona (II/MN) 1992 Sydney (II/HS), Australian Open Hilton Head (I/NZ), Amelia Pan Paciﬁc (II/HS), (Slam/HS), Miami (I/LN), Los Island (II/NZ), Barcelona (II/ Filderstadt (II/HS) Angeles (II/HS) CM) VSlims (Champ/HS) 1993 U. S. Open (Slam/HS) Barcelona (II/CM), Rome (I/JN) Essen (II/HS) 1994 Delray Beach (II/JN), Light n Hilton Head (I/LM), Amelia Oakland (II/LD) Lively (II/JN), San Diego (II/JN), Island (II/LN), Barcelona (II/ Canadian Open (I/MM), U. S. Open LN), Hamburg (II/JN) (Slam/JN), Nicherei (II/JHD) 1995 Australian Open (Slam/JN), Miami Barcelona (II/LN) Eastbourne (II/ WTA (Champ/JN) (I/JN) JN), Wimbledon (Slam/JN) 1996 Australian Open (Slam/CR), Miami Hilton Head (I/JN), Amelia Eastbourne (II/ (I/JN), Canadian Open (I/LN) Island (II/CR), Hamburg (II/BS), JN) Rome (I/IS), Madrid (III/JN) 1997 Sydney (II/GF), Miami (I/NZ), San Madrid (III/MJF) Filderstadt (II/MH), Diego (II/MH) Zürich (I/MH), Moscow (I/NZ) 1998 1999 Los Angeles (II/LN) Cairo (III/LC), Hamburg (II/LN) 2000 Berlin (I/CM) Leipzig (II/AGS) 2001 Miami (I/NT) 2002 Doha (III/JH), New Haven (II/DH), Amelia Island (II/DH), Sopot (III/ Princess Cup (II/SK) SK), Helsinki (IV/SK) 2003 RETIRED 2004 Palermo (V/AMG) Partners: AGS=Anne-Gaëlle Sidot, AMG=Anabel Medina Garrigues, BS=Brenda Schultz, CM=Conchita Martinez, CR=Chanda Rubin, DH=Daniela Hantuchova, GF=Gigi Fernandez, HS=Helena Sukova, IC=Isabel Cueto, IS=Irina Spirlea, JH=Janette Husarova, JHD=Julie Halard (later Julie Halard-Decugis), JN=Jana Novotna, LC=Laurence Courtois, LM=Lori McNeil, MH=Martina Hingis, MJF=Mary Joe Fernandez, MM=Meredith McGrath, MN=Martina Navratilova, MP=Mercedes Paz, LN=Larisa Nieland, NT=Nathalie Tauziat, NZ=Natasha Zvereva, SK=Svetlana Kuznetsova

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 284 Rennae Stubbs Career Titles: Hardcourt: 16; Clay: 7; Grass: 6; Indoor: 19. Total: 48 By Tier: Slams: 4; Championships: 1; Tier I: 14; Tier II: 20; Tier III: 9; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 0 Partners with whom has won titles: 8 ¥ Partners with whom has won Slams: 1 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1992 Canadian Open (I/LM) Hamburg (II/SG) Birmingham (III/LM) Osaka (III/HS) 1993 Indian Wells (II/HS) Hamburg (II/SG) 1994 Strasbourg (III/LM) Osaka (III/LN) 1995 Birmingham (III/MB) 1996 Chicago (II/LR), Philadelphis (II/LR) 1997 Quebec City (III/LR), Philadelphia (II/LR) 1998 Boston (III/LR) Hannover (II/LR) 1999 New Haven (II/LR) Oklahoma City (III/LR), Zürich (I/LR), Moscow (I/LR), Philadelphia (II/LR) 2000 Australian Open (Slam/LR), Rome (I/LR), San Diego (II/LR) Madrid (III/LR) 2001 Scottsdale (II/LR), U. S. Open Charleston (I/LR) Eastbourne (II/LR), Pan Pacific (I/LR), Munich (Slam/LR) Wimbledon (Slam/LR) (Champ/LR) 2002 Sydney (II/LR), Scottsdale (II/ Charleston (I/LR) Eastbourne (II/LR) Pan Pacific (I/LR) LR), Indian Wells (I/LR), Miami (I/LR), Stanford (II/LR) 2003 Los Angeles (II/MP) Pan Pacific (I/EB), Filderstadt (II/LR) 2004 Sydney (II/CB), San Diego (I/ Wimbledon (Slam/CB) Pan Pacific (I/CB), Filderstadt CB) (II/CB), Zürich (I/CB) Partners: CB=Cara Black, EB=Elena Bovina, HS=Helena Sukova, LM=Lori McNeil, LN=Larisa Neiland, LR=Lisa Raymond, MB=Manon Bollegraf, MP=Mary Pierce, SG=Steffi Graf

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 285 Paola Suárez Career Titles: Hardcourt: 9; Clay: 25; Grass: 0; Indoor: 2. Total: 36 By Tier: Slams: 7; Championships: 1; Tier I: 8; Tier II: 2; Tier III: 10; Tier IV: 2; Tier V: 6 Partners with whom has won titles: 4 ¥ Partners with whom has won Slams: 1 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1996 Bol (V/LM) 1997 1998 Hobart (V/VRP) Bogota (V/JH), Budapest (V/VRP), Bol (V/ LM), Rome (I/VRP), Maria Lankowitz (V/LM) 1999 Madrid (III/VRP), Sopot (III/LM), Sao Paulo (III/LM) 2000 Bogota (IV/LM), Sao Paulo (IV/LM), Hilton Head (I/VRP), Klagenfurt (III/LM), Sopot (III/ VRP) 2001 Madrid (III/VRP), Roland Garros (Slam/ VRP), Vienna (III/PT) 2002 Canadian Open (I/VRP), U. S. Open Bogota (III/VRP), Acapulco (III/VRP), Rome (Slam/VRP), Bahia (II/VRP) (I/VRP), Roland Garros (Slam/VRP) 2003 New Haven (II/VRP), U. S. Open Charleston (I/VRP), Berlin (I/VRP) Los Angeles (Slam/VRP) (Champ/VRP) 2004 Australian Open (Slam/VRP), Indian Charleston (I/VRP), Roland Garros (Slam/ Luxembourg Wells (I/VRP), U. S. Open (Slam/VRP) VRP) (III/VRP) Partners: JH=Janette Husarova, LM=Laura Montalvo, PT=Patricia Tarabini, VRP=Virginia Ruano Pascual Ai Sugiyama Career Titles: Hardcourt: 18; Clay: 2; Grass: 2; Indoor: 8. Total: 30 By Tier: Slams: 3; Championships: 0; Tier I: 5; Tier II: 13; Tier III: 8; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 1 Partners with whom has won titles: 11 ¥ Partners with whom has won Slams: 2 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1994 Japan Open (III/MD) 1995 Hobart (V/KN) 1996 Japan Open (III/KD) 1997 Princess Cup (II/MS) 1998 Gold Coast (III/EL) Luxembourg (III/EL), Leipzig (II/EL), Philadelphia (II/EL) 1999 Sydney (II/EL) Strasbourg (III/EL) 2000 Sydney (II/JHD), Miami (I/JHD), New Eastbourne (II/NT) Moscow (I/JHD) Haven (II/JHD), U. S. Open (Slam/ JHD), Princess Cup (II/JHD) 2001 Canberra (III/NA), Indian Wells (I/NA) 2002 Memphis (III/ET) 2003 Sydney (II/KC), Scottsdale (II/KC), Roland G (Slam/ Wimbledon (Slam/ Antwerp (II/KC), Zürich San Diego (II/KC) KC) KC) (I/KC), Linz (II/LH) 2004 Canadian Open (I/SA), Bali (III/AM) Partners: AM=Anastasia Myskina, EL= Elena Likhovtseva, ET=Elena Tatarkova, JHD=Julie Halard-Decugis, KC=Kim Clijsters, KD=Kimiko Date, KN=Kyoko Nagatsuka, LH=Liezel Huber, MD = Mami Donoshiro, MS=Monica Seles, NA=Nicole Arendt, NT=Nathalie Tauziat, SA=Shinobu Asagoe

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 286 Helena Sukova Career Titles: Hardcourt: 26; Clay: 12; Grass: 5; Indoor: 25. Total: 68 By Tier: Slams: 9; Championships: 1; Tier I: 12; Tier II: 36; Tier III: 10; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 0 Partners with whom has won titles: 21 ¥ Partners with whom has won Slams: 4 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1984 Perugia (II/IB) Sydney (II/CKK) Marco Island (III/HM), Stuttgart (II/CKK) 1985 Los Angeles (I/CKK), U. S. Berlin (II/CKK), Pan Pacific (I/CKK) Open (Slam/CKK) Lugano (III/BG) 1986 Miami (I/PS) Amelia Island (I/CKK), Chicago (II/CKK), Dallas Berlin (II/SG) (II/CKK), Brighton (II/ SG), Hilversum (III/KJ) 1987 Berlin (II/CKK) Wimbledon (Slam/ Bridgestone (I/CKK), CKK) Chicago (II/CKK), Brighton (II/KJ) 1988 San Antonio (II/LM), Pan Pacific (II/PS) Canadian Open (I/JN), Mahwah (II/JN) 1989 Brisbane (III/JN), Boca Raton Wimbledon (Slam/JN) Zürich (II/Novotna) (II/JN), Miami (I/JN) 1990 Brisbane (III/JN), Sydney (II/ Roland G (Slam/JN) Wimbledon (Slam/JN) Brighton (II/NT), JN), Australian Open (Slam/ Worcester (II/GF) JN), Indian Wells (II/JN), Boca Raton (II/JN), Miami (I/JN) 1991 Sydney (II/ASV), Light & Amelia Island (II/ASV) Lively (I/GF) 1992 Sydney (II/ASV), Australian Rome (I/MS) Pan Pacific (II/ASV), Osaka Open (Slam/ASV), Los Angeles (III/RS), Zürich (II/ASV), (II/ASV) Filderstadt (II/ASV), VirginiaS (Champ/ASV) 1993 Indian Wells (II/RS), Stratton Lucerne (III/MJF) Pan Pacific (I/MN), Essen Mountain (II/ES), San Diego (II/ASV) (II/GF), Los Angeles (II/ASV), U. S. Open (Slam/ASV) 1994 1995 Oakland (II/LM), Philadelphia (II/LM) 1996 Karlovy Vary (III/KH) Wimbledon (Slam/MH) Zürich (I/MH) 1997 Strasbourg (III/NZ) Luxembourg (III/LN) 1998 Sydney (II/MH) Partners: ASV=Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, BG=Bonnie Gadusek, CKK=Claudia Kohde-Kilsch, ES=Elizabeth Smylie, GF=Gigi Fernandez, HM=Hana Mandlikova, IB=Iva Budarova, JN=Jana Novotna, KH=Karina Habsudova, KJ=Kathy Jordan, LM=Lori McNeil, LN=Larisa Neiland, MH=Martina Hingis, MJF=Mary Joe Fernandez, MN=Martina Navratilova, MS=Monica Seles, NT=Nathalie Tauziat, NZ=Natasha Zvereva, PS=Pam Shriver, RS=Rennae Stubbs, SG=Steffi Graf

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 287 Serena Williams Career Titles: Hardcourt: 3; Clay: 1; Grass: 2; Indoor: 4. Total: 10 By Tier: Slams: 6; Championships: 0; Tier I: 1; Tier II: 2; Tier III: 1; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 0 Partners with whom has won titles: 2 ¥ Partners with whom has won Slams: 1 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1998 Oklahoma City (III/VW), Zürich (I/VW) 1999 U. S. Open (Slam/VW) Roland G (Slam/VW) Hannover (II/VW) 2000 Wimbledon (Slam/VW) 2001 Australian Open (Slam/VW) 2002 Wimbledon (Slam/VW) Leipzig (II/AS) 2003 Australian Open (Slam/VW) 2004 Partners: AS=Alexandra Stevenson, VW=Venus Williams Venus Williams Career Titles: Hardcourt: 3; Clay: 1; Grass: 2; Indoor: 3. Total: 9 By Tier: Slams: 6; Championships: 0; Tier I: 1; Tier II: 1; Tier III: 1; Tier IV: 0; Tier V: 0 Partners with whom has won titles: 1 ¥ Partners with whom has won Slams: 1 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1998 Oklahoma City (III/SW), Zürich (I/SW) 1999 U. S. Open (Slam/SW) Roland G (Slam/SW) Hannover (II/SW) 2000 Wimbledon (Slam/SW) 2001 Australian Open (Slam/SW) 2002 Wimbledon (Slam/SW) 2003 Australian Open (Slam/SW) 2004 Partners: SW=Serena Williams

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 288 Natasha Zvereva Career Titles: Hardcourt: 24; Clay: 20; Grass: 12; Indoor: 24. Total: 80 By Tier: Slams: 18; Championships: 3; Tier I: 23; Tier II: 29; Tier III: 5; Tier IV: 2; Tier V: 0 Partners with whom has won titles: 12 ¥ Partners with whom has won Slams: 4 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1988 Birmingham (III/LS) Indianapolis (IV/LS) 1989 Amelia Island (II/LN), Birmingham (III/LN) Chicago (II/LN), Roland Garros (Slam/ Moscow (IV/LN) LN) 1990 Light & Lively (II/LN) Birmingham (III/LN), Eastbourne (II/LN) 1991 Boca Raton (I/LN), Canadian Open Hilton Head (I/CKK), Eastbourne (II/LN), Brighton (II/PS) (I/LN), Los Angeles (II/LN), U. S. Berlin (I/LN) Wimbledon (Slam/LN) Open (Slam/PS) 1992 Boca Raton (I/LN), U. S. Open Hilton Head (I/ASV), Wimbledon (Slam/GF) Zürich (II/HS), (Slam/GF) Amelia Island (II/ Oakland (II/GF), ASV), Roland G Philadelphia (II/GF) (Slam/GF) 1993 Australian Open (Slam/GF), Delray Hilton Head (I/GF), Eastboune (II/GF), Leipzig (II/GF), Beach (II/GF), Light ’n Lively (II/ Berlin (I/GF), Roland Wimbledon (Slam/GF) Filderstadt (II/GF), GF) G (Slam/GF) VSlims (Champ/GF) 1994 Australian Open (Slam/GF), Miami Rome (I/GF), Berlin Eastbourne (II/GF), Chicago (II/GF), (I/GF) (I/GF), Roland G Wimbledon (Slam/GF) Filderstadt (II/GF), (Slam/GF) Philadelphia (I/GF), VSlims (Champ/GF) 1995 San Diego (II/GF), Los Angeles (II/ Rome (I/GF) Pan Pacific (I/GF), GF), U. S. Open (Slam/GF) Roland G (Slam/GF) Filderstadt (II/GF) 1996 Los Angeles (II/LD), U. S. Open Pan Pacific (I/GF) (Slam/GF) 1997 Australian Open (Slam/MH), Indian Strasbourg (III/HS), Wimbledon (Slam/GF) Pan Pacific (I/LD), Wells (I/LD), Miami (I/ASV) Roland G (Slam/GF) Moscow (I/ASV) 1998 Indian Wells (I/LD), Stanford (II/ Berlin (I/LD) Filderstadt (II/LD), LD), San Diego (II/LD), Los Angeles Moscow (I/MP), Chase (II/MH) (Champ/LD) 1999 Pan Pacific (I/LD) 2000 Hamburg (II/AK) Hannover (II/ÅC) 2001 2002 Madrid (III/MN) Partners: ÅC=Åsa Carlsson (now Svensson), AK=Anna Kournikova, ASV=Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, CKK=Claudia Kohde- Kilsch, GF=Gigi Fernandez, HS=Helena Sukova, LD=Lindsay Davenport, LN=LS=Larisa (Savchenko) Neiland, MH=Martina Hingis, MN=Martina Navratilova, MP=Mary Pierce, PS=Pam Shriver

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 289 Slam History Singles Slam Winners, Open Era The following list shows, year by year, who won which Slams, and also shows the Open Era Slam Count for each player. (Note that some players, e.g. Court and King, have earlier Slams; these do not appear in the totals. Also, the Australian Open is always counted as the first Slam of the year even when it was actually the last, i.e. 1978-1985.) Multiple Slam winners shown in Bold Australian Open Roland Garros Wimbledon U. S. Open 1968 Richey King (1) Wade (1) 1969 Court (1) Court (2) A. Jones Court (3) 1970 Court (4) Court (5) Court (6) Court (7) 1971 Court (8) Goolagong (1) Goolagong (2) King (2) 1972 Wade (2) King (3) King (4) King (5) 1973 Court (9) Court (10) King (6) Court (11) 1974 Goolagong (3) Evert (1) Evert (2) King (7) 1975 Goolagong (4) Evert (3) King (8) Evert (4) 1976 Goolagong Cawley (5) Barker Evert (5) Evert (6) 1977 Reid Jausovec Wade (3) Evert (7) Goolagong Cawley (6) 1978 O’Neil Ruzici Navratilova (1) Evert (8) 1979 B. Jordan Evert Lloyd (9) Navratilova (2) Austin (1) 1980 Mandlikova (1) Evert Lloyd (10) Goolagong Cawley (7) Evert Lloyd (11) 1981 Navratilova (3) Mandlikova (2) Evert Lloyd (12) Austin (2) 1982 Evert Lloyd (13) Navratilova (4) Navratilova (5) Evert Lloyd (14) 1983 Navratilova (6) Evert Lloyd (15) Navratilova (7) Navratilova (8) 1984 Evert Lloyd (16) Navratilova (9) Navratilova (10) Navratilova (11) 1985 Navratilova (12) Evert Lloyd (17) Navratilova (13) Mandlikova (3) 1986 Evert Lloyd (18) Navratilova (14) Navratilova (15) 1987 Mandlikova (4) Graf (1) Navratilova (16) Navratilova (17) 1988 Graf (2) Graf (3) Graf (4) Graf (5) 1989 Graf (6) Sanchez-Vicario (1) Graf (7) Graf (8) 1990 Graf (9) Seles (1) Navratilova (18) Sabatini 1991 Seles (2) Seles (3) Graf (10) Seles (4) 1992 Seles (5) Seles (6) Graf (11) Seles (7) 1993 Seles (8) Graf (12) Graf (13) Graf (14) 1994 Graf (15) Sanchez-Vicario (2) Martinez Sanchez-Vicario (3) 1995 Pierce (1) Graf (16) Graf (17) Graf (18) 1996 Seles (9) Graf (19) Graf (20) Graf (21) 1997 Hingis (1) Majoli Hingis (2) Hingis (3) 1998 Hingis (4) Sanchez-Vicario (4) Novotna Davenport (1) 1999 Hingis (5) Graf (22) Davenport (2) S. Williams (1) 2000 Davenport (3) Pierce (2) V. Williams (1) V. Williams (2) 2001 Capriati (1) Capriati (2) V. Williams (3) V. Williams (4) 2002 Capriati (3) S. Williams (2) S. Williams (3) S. Williams (4) 2003 S. Williams (5) Hénin-Hardenne (1) S. Williams (6) Hénin-Hardenne (2) 2004 Hénin-Hardenne (3) Myskina Sharapova Kuznetsova

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 290 Doubles Slam Winners, Open Era Australian Open Roland Garros Wimbledon US Open 1968 Durr/A Jones Casals/King Bueno/Court 1969 Court/Tegart Dalton Durr/A Jones Court/Tegart Dalton Durr/Hard 1970 Court/Tegart Dalton Chanfreau/Durr Casals/King Court/Tegart Dalton 1971 Court/Goolagong Cawley Chanfreau/Durr Casals/King Casals/Tegart Dalton 1972 Gourlay/Harris King/Stove King/Stove Durr/Stove 1973 Court/Wade Court/Wade Casals/King Court/Wade 1974 Goolagong Cawley/Michel Evert/Morozova Goolagong/Michel Casals/King 1975 Goolagong Cawley/Michel Evert/Navratilova Kiyomura/Sawamatsu Court/Wade 1976 Goolagong Cawley/Gourlay Bonicelli/Chanfreau Lovera Evert/Navratilova Boshoff/Kloss 1977 Balestrat/Gourlay* Mariskova/Teeguarden Gourlay Cawley/Russell Navratilova/Stove 1978 Nagelsen/Tomanova Jausovec/Ruzici Reid/Turnbull King/Navratilova 1979 Chaloner/Evers Stove/Turnbull King/Navratilova Stove/Turnbull 1980 Navratilova/Nagelsen K Jordan/A Smith K Jordan/A Smith King/Navratilova 1981 K Jordan/A Smith Fairbank/Harford Navratilova/Shriver K Jordan/A Smith 1982 Navratilova/Shriver Navratilova/A Smith Navratilova/Shriver Casals/Turnbull 1983 Navratilova/Shriver Fairbank/Reynolds Navratilova/Shriver Navratilova/Shriver 1984 Navratilova/Shriver Navratilova/Shriver Navratilova/Shriver Navratilova/Shriver 1985 Navratilova/Shriver Navratilova/Shriver K. Jordan/Smylie Kohde-Kilsch/Sukova 1986 Navratilova/Temesvari Navratilova/Shriver Navratilova/Shriver 1987 Navratilova/Shriver Navratilova/Shriver Kohde-Kilsch/Sukova Navratilova/Shriver 1988 Navratilova/Shriver Navratilova/Shriver Graf/Sabatini G Fernandez/White 1989 Navratilova/Shriver Savchenko/Zvereva Novotna/Sukova Mandlikova/Navratilova 1990 Novotna/Sukova Novotna/Sukova Novotna/Sukova G Fernandez/Navratilova 1991 Fendick/MJ Fernandez G Fernandez/Novotna Savchenko Neiland/Zvereva Shriver/Zvereva 1992 Sanchez-Vicario/Sukova G Fernandez/Zvereva G Fernandez/Zvereva G Fernandez/Zvereva 1993 G Fernandez/Zvereva G Fernandez/Zvereva G Fernandez/Zvereva Sanchez-Vicario/Sukova 1994 G Fernandez/Zvereva G Fernandez/Zvereva G Fernandez/Zvereva Novotna/Sanchez-Vicario 1995 Novotna/Sanchez-Vicario G Fernandez/Zvereva Novotna/Sanchez-Vicario G Fernandez/Zvereva 1996 Rubin/Sanchez-Vicario Davenport/ MJ Fernandez Hingis/Sukova G Fernandez/Zvereva 1997 Hingis/Zvereva G Fernandez/Zvereva G Fernandez/Zvereva Davenport/Novotna 1998 Hingis/Lucic Hingis/Novotna Hingis/Novotna Hingis/Novotna 1999 Hingis/Kournikova Williams/Williams Davenport/Morariu Williams/Williams 2000 Raymond/Stubbs Hingis/Pierce Williams/Williams Halard-Decugis/Sugiyama 2001 Williams/Williams Ruano Pascual/Suárez Raymond/Stubbs Raymond/Stubbs 2002 Hingis/Kournikova Ruano Pascual/Suárez Williams/Williams Ruano Pascual/Suárez 2003 Williams/Williams Clijsters/Sugiyama Clijsters/Sugiyama Ruano Pascual/Suárez 2004 Ruano Pascual/Suárez Ruano Pascual/Suárez Black/Stubbs Ruano Pascual/Suárez

* This is the January winner; the “other” Australian Open, in December, had the doubles final rained out

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 291 Singles and Doubles at the Same Slam (Open Era) It’s tough enough to win one part of a Slam. Winning singles and doubles is that much harder. The following list shows, year by year, the players who have won both. The first name in each column is, of course, the player who won both; the second name is her doubles partner. Australian Open Roland Garros Wimbledon US Open 1968 King w/Casals 1969 Court w/Tegart Dalton 1970 Court w/Tegart Dalton Court w/Tegart Dalton 1971 Court w/Goolagong 1972 King w/Stove King w/Stove 1973 Court w/Wade Court w/Wade King w/Casals Court w/Wade 1974 Goolagong w/Michel Evert w/Morozova King w/Casals 1975 Goolagong w/Michel Evert w/Navratilova 1976 Goolagong w/Gourlay Evert w/Navratilova 1977 1978 Ruzici w/Jausovec 1979 Navratilova w/King 1980 1981 1982 Navratilova w/A. Smith Navratilova w/Shriver 1983 Navratilova w/Shriver Navratilova w/Shriver Navratilova w/Shriver 1984 Navratilova w/Shriver Navratilova w/Shriver Navratilova w/Shriver 1985 Navratilova w/Shriver 1986 Navratilova w/Shriver Navratilova w/Shriver 1987 Navratilova w/Shriver 1988 Graf w/Sabatini 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Sanchez-Vicario w/Novot 1995 1996 1997 Hingis w/Zvereva 1998 Hingis w/Lucic Novotna w/Hingis 1999 Hingis w/Kournikova Davenport w/Morariu S. Williams w/Williams 2000 Pierce w/Hingis V. Williams w/Williams 2001 2002 S. Williams w/Williams 2003 S. Williams w/Williams 2004

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 292 Doubles Slams and Partners The following tables show, for most of the major doubles players of the Open Era, the Slams they won and the partners with whom they won them. The emphasis has been placed on “career Slammers” — players who won all four Slams in their doubles careers. Grand Slams are shown in Bold Rosie Casals Australian French Wimbledon USO 1968 King 1969 1970 King 1971 King Tegart Dalton 1972 1973 King 1974 King 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 Turnbull

Margaret Court Australian French Wimbledon USO 1968 Bueno 1969 Tegart Dalton Tegart Dalton 1970 Tegart Dalton Tegart Dalton 1971 Goolagong Cawley 1972 1973 Wade Wade Wade 1974 1975 Wade

Judy Tegart Dalton Australian French Wimbledon USO 1969 Court Court 1970 Court Court 1971 Casals

Francoise Durr Australian French Wimbledon USO 1968 AJones 1969 AJones Hard 1970 Chanfreau 1971 Chanfreau 1972 Stove

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 293 Gigi Fernandez Australian French Wimbledon USO 1988 White 1989 1990 Navratilova 1991 Novotna 1992 Zvereva Zvereva Zvereva 1993 Zvereva Zvereva Zvereva 1994 Zvereva Zvereva Zvereva 1995 Zvereva Zvereva 1996 Zvereva 1997 Zvereva Zvereva

Evonne Goolagong (Cawley) Australian French Wimbledon USO 1971 Court 1972 1973 1974 Michel Michel 1975 Michel 1976 Gourlay

Martina Hingis Australian French Wimbledon USO 1996 Sukova 1997 Zvereva 1998 Lucic Novotna Novotna Novotna 1999 Kournikova 2000 Pierce 2001 2002 Kournikova

Kathy Jordan Australian French Wimbledon USO 1980 A. Smith A. Smith 1981 A. Smith A. Smith 1982 1983 1984 1985 Smylie

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 294 Billie Jean King Australian French Wimbledon USO 1968 Casals 1969 1970 Casals 1971 Casals 1972 Stove Stove 1972 1973 Casals 1974 Casals 1975 1976 1977 1978 Navratilova 1979 Navratilova 1980 Navratilova

Martina Navratilova Australian French Wimbledon USO 1975 Evert 1976 Evert 1977 Stove 1978 King 1979 King 1980 Nagelson King 1981 Shriver 1982 Shriver ASmith Shriver 1983 Shriver Shriver Shriver 1984 Shriver Shriver Shriver Shriver 1985 Shriver Shriver 1986 Temesvari Shriver Shriver 1987 Shriver Shriver Shriver 1988 Shriver Shriver 1989 Shriver Mandlikova 1990 GFernandez

Jana Novotna Australian French Wimbledon USO 1989 Sukova 1990 Sukova Sukova Sukova 1991 1992 GFernandez 1993 1994 Sanchez-Vicario 1995 Sanchez-Vicario Sanchez-Vicario 1996 1997 Davenport 1998 Hingis Hingis Hingis

Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario Australian French Wimbledon USO 1992 Sukova 1993 Sukova 1994 Novotna 1995 Novotna Novotna 1996 Rubin

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 295 Pam Shriver Australian French Wimbledon USO 1981 Navratilova 1982 Navratilova Navratilova 1983 Navratilova Navratilova Navratilova 1984 Navratilova Navratilova Navratilova Navratilova 1985 Navratilova Navratilova 1986 Navratilova Navratilova 1987 Navratilova Navratilova Navratilova 1988 Navratilova Navratilova 1989 Navratilova 1990 1991 Zvereva

Anne Smith Australian French Wimbledon USO 1980 Jordan Jordan 1981 Jordan Jordan 1982 Navratilova

Helena Sukova Australian French Wimbledon USO 1985 Kohde-Kilsch 1986 1987 Kohde-Kilsch 1988 1989 Novotna 1990 Novotna Novotna Novotna 1991 1992 ASV 1993 ASV 1994 1995 1996 Hingis

Wendy Turnbull Australian French Wimbledon USO 1978 Reid 1979 Stove Stove 1980 1981 1982 Casals

Venus or Serena Williams Australian French Wimbledon USO 1999 Williams Williams 2000 Williams 2001 Williams 2002 Williams 2003 Williams

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 296 Natasha Zvereva Australian French Wimbledon USO 1989 Savchenko 1990 1991 Savchenko Neiland Shriver 1992 GFernandez GFernandez GFernandez 1993 GFernandez GFernandez GFernandez 1994 GFernandez GFernandez GFernandez 1995 GFernandez GFernandez 1996 GFernandez 1997 Hingis GFernandez GFernandez

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 297 Grand Slams and Career Slams A “Grand Slam” consists of winning all four Slams in a single year — a rare accomplishment indeed. A “Career Slam” consists of winning all four Slams at some time in one’s career, though not all in one year. The following lists summarize the Career Slams for Women in the Open Era. Grand Slams, Singles, Open Era1 Margaret Court, 1970 Steffi Graf, 19882

Career Slams, Singles, Open Era3 Margaret Court (Grand Slam, 1970) Steffi Graf (Grand Slam, 1988) Chris Evert — Australian Open 1982, 1984 Roland Garros 1974, 1975, 1979, 1980, 1983, 1985, 1986 Wimbledon 1974, 1976, 1981 U. S. Open 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1980, 1982 Martina Navratilova4 — Australian Open 1981, 1983, 1985 Roland Garros 1982, 1984 Wimbledon 1978, 1979, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1990 U. S. Open 1983, 1984, 1986, 1987 Serena Williams5 — Australian Open 2003 Roland Garros 2002 Wimbledon 2002, 2003 U. S. Open 1999, 2002

Grand Slams, Doubles, Open Era, team Martina Navratilova/Pam Shriver, 1984

Grand Slams, Doubles, Open Era, individual6 Martina Navratilova, 1984 (with Pam Shriver) Pam Shriver, 1984 (with Martina Navratilova)7 Martina Hingis, 1998 (with Mirjana Lucic, Australian Open, and Jana Novotna, other 3 Slams)8

Career Slams, Doubles, Open Era, team9 Martina Navratilova/Pam Shriver (20 Slams as a team) Gigi Fernandez/Natasha Zvereva (14 Slams as a team) Kathy Jordan/Anne Smith (4 Slams as a team) Venus Williams/Serena Williams (6 Slams as a team)

1. Maureen Connolly also won a Grand Slam before the Open Era 2. Stefﬁ Graf is the only player, man or woman, to win the singles Grand Slam in the four-surfaces era 3. Maureen Connolly, Doris Hart, and Shirley Fry had Career Slams before the Open Era. Billie Jean King won a Career Slam partly in the Open Era, but her only Australian Open title was pre-Open Era. 4. Martina Navratilova has a non-calendar Grand Slam in 1983Ð1984: Wim 83, USO 83, AO 83, RG 84, Wim 84, USO 84 5. Serena Williams had a non-calendar Grand Slam in 2002Ð2003: RG 02, Wi 02, USO 02, AO 03 6. Maria Bueno also won a Grand Slam in doubles before the Open Era 7. Navratilova and Shriver are the only team to win a Grand Slam together in the Open Era 8. Hingis is the only player to win a multi-partner Grand Slam in the Open Era (Bueno did it before the Open Era) Hingis also has the only doubles Grand Slam in the four-surface era. 9. Margaret Court and Judy Tegart Dalton won a Career Slam as a team, but their only Roland Garros title was before the Open Era

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 298 Career Slams, Doubles, Open Era, with partners, individual1 Martina Navratilova (Grand Slam, 1984) Pam Shriver (Grand Slam, 1984) Martina Hingis (Grand Slam, 1998) Margaret Court — Australian Open 1969, 1970 (Tegart Dalton), 1971 (Goolagong Cawley), 1973 (Wade) Roland Garros 1973 (Wade) Wimbledon 1969 (Tegart Dalton) U.S. Open 1970 (Tegart Dalton) Gigi Fernandez — Australian Open 1993, 1994 (Zvereva) Roland Garros 1991 (Novotna), 1992-1995, 1997 (Zvereva) Wimbledon 1992-1994, 1997 (Zvereva) U.S. Open 1988 (White), 1990 (Navratilova), 1992, 1995, 1996 (Zvereva) Kathy Jordan — Australian Open 1981 (A. Smith) Roland Garros 1980 (A. Smith) Wimbledon 1980 (A. Smith), 1985 (Smylie) U. S. Open 1981 (A. Smith) Jana Novotna — Australian Open 1990 (Sukova), 1995 (Sanchez-Vicario) Roland Garros 1990 (Sukova), 1991 (G. Fernandez), 1998 (Hingis) Wimbledon 1989, 1990 (Sukova), 1995 (Sanchez-Vicario), 1998 (Hingis) U. S. Open 1994 (Sanchez-Vicario), 1997 (Davenport), 1998 (Hingis) Anne Smith — Australian Open 1981 (Jordan) Roland Garros 1980 (Jordan), 1982 (Navratilova) Wimbledon 1980 (Jordan) U. S. Open 1981 (Jordan) Helena Sukova — Australian Open 1990 (Novotna), 1992 (Sanchez-Vicario) Roland Garros 1990 (Novotna) Wimbledon 1987 (Kohde-Kilsch), 1989, 1990 (Novotna), 1996 (Hingis) U. S. Open 1985 (Kohde-Kilsch), 1993 (Sanchez-Vicario) Venus/Serena Williams —Australian Open 2001 (Williams), 2003 (Williams) Roland Garros 1999 (Williams) Wimbledon 2000 (Williams), 2002 (Williams) U. S. Open 1999 (Williams) Natasha Zvereva — Australian Open 1993, 1994 (G. Fernandez), 1997 (Hingis) Roland Garros 1989 (Savchenko), 1992-1995, 1997 (G. Fernandez) Wimbledon 1991 (Savchenko Nieland), 1992-1994, 1997 (G. Fernandez) U.S. Open 1991 (Shriver), 1992, 1995, 1996 (G. Fernandez)

1. Louise Brough, Maria Bueno, Shirley Fry, Doris Hart, and Lesley Turner Bowrey also had Career Slams before the Open Era. Judy Tegart Dalton won a career Slam partly in the Open Era, but her only Roland Garros title was before the Open Era

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 299 Total Slam Victories, Open Era Note that many of these players (e.g. Court, King) also won Slams before the Open Era. These Slams are not counted (e.g. Court had 24 total singles Slams, but 13 were before the Open Era, so she is listed as having 11 Open Era Slam titles) Singles Doubles — Multiple Winners Doubles — One-Time Winners 22 Steffi Graf 31 Martina Navratilova 1 Dianne Balestrat 18 Chris Evert 21 Pam Shriver Cara Black Martina Navratilova 18 Natasha Zvereva Fiorella Bonicelli 11 Margaret Court 17 Gigi Fernandez Delina Boshoff* 9 Monica Seles 12 Jana Novotna Maria Bueno 8 Billie Jean King 10 Margaret Court Judy Chaloner* 7 Evonne Goolagong Cawley Billie Jean King Dianne Evers* 6 Serena Williams 9 Martina Hingis Patty Fendick 5 Martina Hingis Helena Sukova Steffi Graf* 4 Hana Mandlikova 7 Rosie Casals Julie Halard-Decugis Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario Virginia Ruano Pascual Darlene Hard Venus Williams Paola Suárez Tanya Harford 3 Jennifer Capriati 6 Francoise Durr Kerry Harris Lindsay Davenport Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario Mima Jausovic* Justine Hénin-Hardenne Betty Stove Anne Kiyomura* Virginia Wade Serena Williams Ilana Kloss* 2 Tracy Austin Venus Williams Mirjana Lucic Mary Pierce 5 Judy Tegart Dalton Hana Mandlikova 1 Sue Barker Evonne Goolagong Cawley Regina Mariskova* Mima Jausovec Kathy Jordan Corina Morariu Anne Jones Anne Smith Olga Morozova Barbara Jordan 4 Helen Gourlay Cawley Mary Pierce Svetlana Kuznetsova Rennae Stubbs Kerry Melville Reid Iva Majoli Wendy Turnbull Candy Reynolds Conchita Martinez Virginia Wade Chanda Rubin Anastasia Myskina 3 Lindsay Davenport JoAnne Russell Jana Novotna Chris Evert Virginia Ruzici* Chris O’Neil Gail Chanfreau Lovera Gabriela Sabatini* Nancy Richey Peggy Michel Kazuko Sawamatsu* Kerry Melville Reid Lisa Raymond Elizabeth Smylie Virginia Ruzici Ai Sugiyama Pam Teeguarden* Gabriela Sabatini 2 Kim Clijsters Andrea Temesvari Maria Sharapova Rosalyn Fairbank Renata Tomanova Mary Joe Fernandez Robin White Ann Haydon Jones Claudia Kohde-Kilsch * Part of a “One Slam Wonder” Anna Kournikova team, i.e. one where each won Betsy Nagelson only one doubles Slam Larisa Savchenko Neiland

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 300 Players and Titles Players with Titles, Year by Year The following list shows, year by year, all the players with titles in a given year, and the number of titles for each player. (Note: Prior to 1993, the season was considered to start before the beginning of the calendar year, and prior to 1986, multiple years are listed, e.g. 1985/1986. The following lists are based on “Tour Years,” not calendar years, with 1985/1986 listed as “1985,” etc.) 2004 (total of 31 winners, 60 events) — Davenport (7), Hénin-Hardenne (5), Mauresmo (5), Sharapova (5), Kuznetsova (3), Molik (3), Myskina (3), Clijsters (2), Loit (2), Vaidisova (2), S. Williams (2), V. Williams (2), Benesova (1), Bovina (1), Daniilidou (1), Dementieva (1), Frazier (1), Jankovic (1), Li Na (1), Likhovtseva (1), Medina Garrigues (1), Pennetta (1), Pierce (1), Pratt (1), Schaul (1), Smashnova (1), Suárez (1), Sucha (1), Sugiyama (1), Zuluaga (1), Zvonareva (1) 2003 (total of 30 winners, 59 events) — Clijsters (9), Hénin-Hardenne (8), Myskina (4), Serena Williams (4), Dementieva (3), Mauresmo (2), Pistolesi (2), Rubin (2), Serna (2), Sharapova (2), Sugiyama (2), Capriati (1), Coetzer (1), Daniilidou (1), Davenport (1), Déchy (1), Farina Elia (1), Grande (1), Maleeva (1), Molik (1), Nagyova (1), Raymond (1), Ruano Pascual (1), Safina (1), Shaughnessy (1), Suárez (1), Tanasugarn (1), Venus Williams (1), Zuluaga (1), Zvonareva (1) 2002 (total of 37 winners, 64 events) — S. Williams (8), V. Williams (7), Clijsters (4), Smashnova (4), Bovina (2), Dokic (2), Hénin (2), Hingis (2), Kuznetsova (2), Mauresmo (2), Rubin (2), Seles (2), Black (1), Capriati (1), M. Casanova (1), Craybas (1), Daniilidou (1), Diaz-Oliva (1), Farina Elia (1), Hantuchova (1), Majoli (1), Maleeva (1), Matevzic (1), Mikaelian (1), Montolio (1), Müller (1), Myskina (1), Raymond (1), Safina (1), Schnyder (1), Serna (1), Srebotnik (1), Sucha (1), Svensson (1), Wartusch (1), Widjaja (1), Zuluaga (1) 2001 (total of 30 winners, 63 events) — Davenport (7), V. Williams (6), Mauresmo (4), Seles (4), Capriati (3), Clijsters (3), Dokic (3), Hénin (3), Hingis (3), S. Williams (3), Grande (2), Montolio (2), Sanchez- Vicario (2), Tulyaganova (2), Coetzer (1), Farina Elia (1), Gersi (1), Gubacsi (1), Lamade (1), Maleeva (1), Medina Garrigues (1), Rittner (1), Schnyder (1), Shaughnessy (1), Suárez (1), Tauziat (1), Testud (1), Torrens Valero (1), Tu (1), Widjaja (1) 2000 (total of 29 winners, 56 events excluding rain-out at Scottsdale) — Hingis (9), V. Williams (5), Davenport (4), Nagyova (3), Seles (3), S. Williams (3), Clijsters (2), Halard-Decugis (2), Huber (2), Kremer (2), Pierce (2), Talaja (2), Bedanova (1), Capriati (1), Coetzer (1), Garbin (1), Kuti Kis (1), Leon Garcia (1), Martinez (1), Mauresmo (1), Pisnik (1), Raymond (1), Rubin (1), Schett (1), Shaughnessy (1), Smashnova (1), Tauziat (1), Tulyaganova (1), Wartusch (1) 1999 (total of 33 winners, 57 events) — Davenport (7), Hingis (7), V. Williams (6), S. Williams (4), Capriati (2), Halard-Decugis (2), Tauziat (2), Zuluaga (2), Brandi (1), Carlsson (1), Clijsters (1), Frazier (1), Graf (1), Habsudova (1), Hénin (1), Mag. Maleeva (1), Martinez (1), Mauresmo (1), Morariu (1), Myskina (1), Nagyova (1), Novotna (1), Pierce (1), Pitkowski (1), Rubin (1), Sanchez Lorenzo (1), Sanchez-Vicario (1), Schnyder (1), Seles (1), Smashnova (1), Srebotnik (1), Torrens Valero (1), Zvereva (1) 1998 (total of 23 winners, 51 events excluding rain-out at Birmingham) — Davenport (6), Hingis (5), Schnyder (5), Novotna (4), Pierce (4), Graf (3), Halard-Decugis (2), Martinez (2), Nagyova (2), Sanchez-Vicario (2), Seles (2), Sugiyama (2), V. Williams (2), Coetzer (1), de Swardt (1), Hrdlickova (1), Lucic (1), Ruano-Pascual (1), Snyder (1), Spirlea (1), Suárez (1), Testud (1), Van Roost (1) 1997 (total of 25 winners, 50 events excluding rain-out at Eastbourne) — Hingis (12), Davenport (6), Novotna (4), Majoli (3), Seles (3), Coetzer (2), van Roost (2), Dragomir (1), Graf (1), Kruger (1), Likhovtseva (1), Lucic (1), Maruska (1), M. J. Fernandez (1), Nagyova (1), Paulus (1), Pierce (1), Ruano-Pascual (1), Rubin (1), Sawamatsu (1), Schett (1), Schultz-McCarthy (1), Sugiyama (1), Tauziat (1), Testud (1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 301 1996 (total of 25 winners, 50 events) — Graf (7), Seles (5), Novotna (4), Dragomir (3), Huber (3), Date (2), Davenport (2), Halard-Decugis (2), Hingis (2), Majoli (2), Martinez (2), Sanchez-Vicario (2), Wang (2), Appelmans (1), Cacic (1), McGrath (1), Nagyova (1), Paulus (1), Pizzichini (1), Raymond (1), Schett (1), Schultz-M (1), Spirlea (1), Van Roost (1), Wild (1) 1995 (total of 27 winners, 49 events) — Graf (9), Martinez (6), Mag. Maleeva (3), Majoli (2), M. J. Fernandez (2), Paulus (2), Pierce (2), Sanchez-Vicario (2), Schultz (2), Wild (2), Bradtke (1), Date (1), Frazier (1), Garrison Jackson (1), Hack (1), Halard (1), Huber (1), Kruger (1), Meshki (1), Novotna (1), Richterova (1), Sabatini (1), Seles (1), Spirlea (1), Tauziat (1), Wang (1), Wiesner (1) 1994 (total of 29 winners, 55 events) — Sanchez-Vicario (8), Graf (7), Martinez (4), Huber (3), Novotna (3), Appelmans (2), Basuki (2), Date (2), Davenport (2), Mag. Maleeva (2), McGrath (2), Coetzer (1), Endo (1), M. J. Fernandez (1), Frazier (1), Hack (1), Halard (1), Helgeson (1), Kat. Maleeva (1), Maleeva-Fragniere (1), McNeil (1), Navratilova (1), Sabatini (1), Sawamatsu (1), Spirlea (1), Wagner (1), Wang (1), Wiesner (1), Zvereva (1) 1993 (total of 30 winners, 60 events) — Graf (10), Martinez (5), Navratilova (5), Sanchez-Vicario (4), Basuki (2), Bobkova (2), Coetzer (2), Garrison Jackson (2), Maleeva-Fragniere (2), Medvedeva (2), Novotna (2), Seles (2), Wang (2), Wild (2), Capriati (1), Date (1), Davenport (1), M. J. Fernandez (1), Grossi (1), Hack (1), Huber (1), Likhovtseva (1), McNeil (1), Neiland (1), Pierce (1), Provis (1), Reinach (1), Sawamatsu (1), Schultz (1), Tauziat (1) 1992 (total of 30 winners, 57 events) — Seles (10), Graf (8), Sabatini (5), Navratilova (4), Pierce (3), Sanchez-Vicario (2), Sukova (2), Appelmans (1), Basuki (1), Capriati (1), Cecchini (1), Date (1), Frazier (1), Garrison-Jackson (1), Hack (1), Halard (1), Mag. Maleeva (1), Maleeva-Fragniere (1), Martinez (1), McNeil (1), Medvedeva (1), Probst (1), Provis (1), Rittner (1), Schultz (1), Stafford (1), van Lottum (1), White (1), Wiesner (1), Zrubakova (1) 1991 (total of 29 winners, 60 events) — Seles (10), Graf (7), Navratilova (5), Sabatini (5), Maleeva- Fragniere (3), Martinez (3), Appelmans (2), Capriati (2), McNeil (2), Novotna (2), Basuki (1), Cecchini (1), Demongeot (1), G. Fernandez (1), Halard (1), Huber (1), Lindqvist (1), Kat. Maleeva (1), Martinek (1), Meshki (1), Neiland (1), Piccolini (1), Pierce (1), Sanchez-Vicario (1), Schultz (1), Sukova (1), Sviglerova (1), Zardo (1), Zrubakova (1) 1990 (total of 30 winners, 59 events) — Graf (10), Seles (9), Navratilova (6), Martinez (3), M. J. Fernandez (2), Meshki (2), Sabatini (2), Sanchez-Vicario (2), Zvereva (2), Bonsignori (1), Capriati (1), Cecchini (1), Cueto (1), Dahlman (1), Frazier (1), Garrison-Jackson (1), Haumuller (1), Huber (1), Kohde-Kilsch (1), Lindquist (1), K. Maleeva (1), Medvedeva (1), Novotna (1), Paulus (1), Paz (1), Probst (1), Reggi (1), Sawamatsu (1), Tauziat (1), Van Rensburg (1) 1989 (total of 27 winners, 61 events) — Graf (14), Navratilova (8), Sabatini (4), Garrison[-Jackson] (3), Kat. Maleeva (3), Martinez (3), Cueto (1 listed as “Cuerto”) (2), Gildemeister (2), Maleeva-Fragniere (2), Novotna (2), Sanchez-Vicario (2), Bollegraf (1), Cecchini (1), Cordwell (1), Dahlman (1), Fendick (1), Frazier (1), Magers (1), McNeil (1), Meshki (1), Minter (1), Okamoto (1), Quentrec (1), Seles (1), Sukova (1), Wiesner (1), Zrubakova (1) 1988 (total of 28 winners, 62 events) — Graf (10), Navratilova (9), Sabatini (5), Evert (4), Shriver (4), Cecchini (2), Cueto (2), Dias (2), Fendick (2), Maleeva-Fragniere (2), McNeil (2), Rehe (2), Gomer (1), Hetherington (1), Javer (1), Kelesi (1), Kohde-Kilsch (1), Langrova (1), Magers (1), Kat. Maleeva (1), Martinez (1), Minter (1), Paulus (1), Paz (1), Potter (1), Sanchez-Vicario (1), Sloane (1), Wiesner (1) 1987 (total of 24 winners, 54 events) — Graf (11), Evert (5), Navratilova (4), Shriver (4), Mandlilova (3), Sabatini (3), Cecchini (2), Garrison (2), Kat. Maleeva (2), Man. Maleeva[-Fragniere] (2), Minter (2), Sukova (2), Bassett Seguso (1), Cioffi (1), Goles (1), Hakami (1), Horvath (1), Magers (1), Nelson- Dunbar (1), Potter (1), Reggi (1), Rehe (1), Smylie (1), White (1) 1986 (total of 19 winners, 40 events) — Navratilova (9), Graf (7), Evert (3), Gurney (2), McNeil (2), Reggi (2), Shriver (2), Sukova (2), Burgin (1), Cacchini (1), G. Fernandez (1), Garrison (1), Hanika (1), Herr (1), Herreman (1), Huber (1), Hy (1), Kelesi (1), Rinaldi (1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 302 1985 (total of 23 winners, 53 events) — Navratilova (13), Evert (11), Shriver (4), Gadusek (3), Garrison (2), Kat. Maleeva (2), Rehe (2), Cecchini (1), Croft (1), Hobbs (1), Horvath (1), Kohde-Kilsch (1), Man. Maleeva (1), Mandlikova (1), Mesker (1), Potter (1), Reggi (1), Rinaldi (1), Ruzici (1), Sabatini (1), Temesvari (1), Thompson (1), White (1) 1984 (total of 22 winners, 51 events) — Navratilova (15), Evert (7), Man. Maleeva (4), Mandlikova (4), Cecchini (2), Lindqvist (2), Louie Harper (2), Drescher (1), Gadusek (1), Garrison (1), Gildemeister (1), Hamika (1), Horvath (1), Inoue (1), Kohde-Kilsch (1), Paz (1), Russell (1), Shriver (1), Sukova (1), Torres (1), Vermaak (1), White (1) 1983 (total of 25 winners, 49 events excluding rain-out at Lugano) — Navratilova (13), Evert (5), Mandlikova (3), Shriver (3), Temesvari (3), Bonder (2), Durie (2), Daniels (1), Fairbank (1), Gadusek (1), Horvath (1), Inoue (1), King (1), Klitch (1), Leand (1), Lindqvist (1), Moulton (1), Mundel-Reinbold (1), Paradis (1), Russell (1), Ruzici (1), Shaefer (1), Smylie (1), Tanvier (1), Vermaak (1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 303 Most Titles, Year By Year The following list shows the three players with the most titles, year by year, and the number of titles. Year Player with Most Titles #2 in titles #3 in titles 2004 Davenport (7) Hénin-Hardenne (5), Kuznetsova (3), Molik (3), Mauresmo (5), Sharapova (5)1 Myskina (3) 2003 Clijsters (9) Hénin-Hardenne (8) Myskina (4),2 Serena Williams (4) 2002 S. Williams (8) V. Williams (7) Clijsters (4), Smashnova (4)3 2001 Davenport (7) V. Williams (6) Mauresmo (4), Seles (4) 2000 Hingis (9) V. Williams (5) Davenport (4) 1999 Davenport (7), Hingis (7) V. Williams (6) S. Williams (4) 1998 Davenport (6) Hingis (5), Schnyder (5)4 Novotna (4), Pierce (4) 1997 Hingis (12) Davenport (6) Novotna (4) 1996 Graf (7) Seles (5) Novotna (4) 1995 Graf (9) Martinez (6) Mag. Maleeva (3) 1994 Sanchez-Vicario (8) Graf (7) Martinez (4) 1993 Graf (10) Martinez (5), Navratilova (5) Sanchez-Vicario (4) 1992 Seles (10) Graf (8) Sabatini (5) 1991 Seles (10) Graf (7) Navratilova (5), Sabatini (5) 1990 Graf (10) Seles (9) Navratilova (6) 1989 Graf (14) Navratilova (8) Sabatini (4) 1988 Graf (10) Navratilova (9) Sabatini (5) 1987 Graf (11) Evert (5) Navratilova (4), Shriver (4) 1986 Navratilova (14) Graf (7) Evert (3) 1985 Navratilova (13) Evert (11) Shriver (4) 1984 Navratilova (15) Evert (7) Man. Maleeva (4), Mandlikova (4) 1983 Navratilova (13) Evert (5) Mandlikova (3), Shriver (3), Temesvari (3) 1. Of Sharapova’s ﬁve titles, three were below the Tier II level; the other two were above the Tier I level. Sharapova, through the end of 2004, had never won a Tier I or Tier II title — which is even stranger than all the footnotes below. 2. Of Myskina’s four titles, two were below the Tier II level — a rather unusual outcome for someone near the top of the titles list; most top players win most of their titles at large events — e.g. Clijsters won seven of her nine titles at Tier II or better events; Hénin-Hardenne won all eight of hers titles at Tier II or better events 3. As noted above, most players on this list, particularly in recent years, won the majority of their titles at Tier II or higher events. Smashnova 2002 is an exception; all four of her titles were small events. 4. Like Smashnova 2002, Schnyder had mostly small titles: four of her ﬁve were Tier III or lower.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 304 Five Or More Titles in a Year The following table shows all players who have earned five or more WTA Tour titles in a year (from the founding of the Tour in 1971), with the total years with five or more titles Total Years Player Years with 5+ titles with 5+ titles 15 Chris Evert 1973, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87 15 Martina Navratilova 1977, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 88, 89, 90, 91, 93 11 Stefﬁ Graf 1986, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96 6Evonne Goolagong Cawley 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974, 1976, 1978 6 Billie Jean King 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974, 1977 5 Lindsay Davenport 1997, 1998, 1999, 2001, 2004 4 Martina Hingis 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000 4 Monica Seles 1990, 1991, 1992, 1996 4Virginia Wade 1971, 1973, 1974, 1975 4Venus Williams 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 3Tracy Austin 1979, 1980, 1981 3 Margaret Court 1971, 1972, 1973 2 Hana Mandlikova 1980, 1984 2 Justine Hénin-Hardenne 2003, 2004 2 Conchita Martinez 1993, 1995 2 Gabriela Sabatini 1991, 1992 1 Kim Clijsters 2003 1 Francoise Durr 1971 1 Manuela Maleeva-Fragniere 1984 1 Amélie Mauresmo 2004 1 Nancy Richey 1972 1Patty Schnyder 1998 1 Maria Sharapova 2004 1 Serena Williams1 2002 1. The WTA lists Serena as having ﬁve titles in 1999, but one of these was the Grand Slam Cup, which is an exhibition.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 305 Surface Sweeps — Singles (Since 1990) A “surface sweep” consists of winning titles on all four major surfaces (clay, grass, hard, indoor) in a single year. The following list shows all recent instances, with the total titles on each surface and the name of the best title on each surface. Year Player Titles and Surfaces 1990 Martina Navratilova Clay: 1 (Hilton Head), Grass: 2 (Wimbledon), Hard: 2 (Palm Springs), Indoor: 1 (Chicago) 1991 Steffi Graf Clay: 2 (Berlin), Grass: 1 (Wimbledon), Hard: 1 (San Antonio), Indoor: 1 (Zürich) 1992 Steffi Graf Clay: 2 (Berlin), Grass: 1 (Wimbledon), Hard: 1 (Boca Raton), Indoor: 4 (Philadelphia) 1993 Steffi Graf Clay: 3 (Roland Garros), Grass: 1 (Wimbledon), Hard: 4 (U. S. Open), Indoor: 2 (Tour Championships) 1995 Steffi Graf Clay: 2 (Roland Garros), Grass: 1 (Wimbledon), Hard: 3 (U. S. Open), Indoor: 3 (Chase Championships) 1996 Steffi Graf Clay: 2 (Roland Garros), Grass: 1 (Wimbledon), Hard: 3 (U. S. Open), Indoor: 1 (Chase Championships) 1997 Martina Hingis Clay: 1 (Hilton Head), Grass: 1 (Wimbledon), Hard: 6 (Australian Open, U. S. Open), Indoor: 4 (Pan Pacific) 1999 Lindsay Davenport Clay: 1 (Madrid), Grass: 1 (Wimbledon), Hard: 2 (Sydney), Indoor: 3 (Chase Championships) 2000 Martina Hingis Clay: 1 (Hamburg), Grass: 1 (’s-Hertogenbosch), Hard: 2 (Miami), Indoor: 5 (Chase Championships) 2002 Serena Williams Clay: 2 (Roland Garros), Grass: 1 (Wimbledon), Hard: 4 (U. S. Open), Indoor: 1 (Leipzig) 2003 Kim Clijsters Clay: 1 (Rome), Grass: 1 (’s-Hertogenbosch), Hard: 2 (Indian Wells), Indoor: 3 (Los Angeles Championships)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 306 Surface Sweeps — Doubles (Since 1990) Note: Where teams are shown with a surface sweep, titles are listed only for the team — e.g. Raymond in 2001 had seven titles with Stubbs, as shown in the entry, and two more with Davenport, not shown. Year Player/Team Titles and Surfaces 1990 Helena Sukova Clay: 1 (Roland Garros w/Novotna), Grass: 1 (Wimbledon w/Novotna), Hard: 6 (Australian Open w/Novotna), Indoor: 2 (Brighton w/Tauziat) 1991 Larisa Neiland Clay: 2 (Berlin w/Zvereva), Grass: 2 (Wimbledon w/Zvereva), Hard: 5 (Canadian Open w/Zvereva), Indoor: 1 (Philadelphia w/Novotna) 1991 Natasha Zvereva Clay: 2 (Hilton Head w/Kohde-Kilsch), Grass: 2 (Wimbledon w/ Neiland), Hard: 4 (U. S. Open w/Shriver), Indoor: 1 (Brighton w/ Shriver) 1992 G. Fernandez/Zvereva Clay: 2 (Roland Garros), Grass: 1 (Wimbledon), Hard: 1 (U. S. Open), Indoor: 2 (Philadelphia) 1992 Neiland/Novotna Clay: 1 (Berlin), Grass: 1 (Eastbourne), Hard: 3 (San Diego), Indoor: 2 (Brighton) 1992 Rennae Stubbs Clay: 1 (Hamburg w/Graf), Grass: 1 (Birmingham w/McNeil), Hard: 1 (Canadian Open w/McNeil), Indoor: 1 (Osaka w/Sukova) 1993 G. Fernandez/Zvereva Clay: 3 (Roland Garros), Grass: 2 (Wimbledon), Hard: 3 (Australian Open), Indoor: 3 (Tour Championships) 1994 Larisa Neiland Clay: 2 (Amelia Island w/Sanchez-Vicario), Grass: 1 (Birmingham w/ Garrison Jackson), Hard: 1 (Schenectady w/McGrath), Indoor: 2 (Brighton w/Bollegraf) 1994 G. Fernandez/Zvereva Clay: 3 (Roland Garros), Grass: 2 (Wimbledon), Hard: 2 (Australian Open), Indoor: 4 (Tour Championships) 1995 A. Sanchez-Vicario Clay: 1 (Barcelona w/Neiland), Grass: 2 (Wimbledon w/Novotna), Hard: 2 (Australian Open w/Novotna), Indoor: 1 (Chase Championships w/Novotna) 1996 Larisa Neiland Clay: 1 (Berlin w/McGrath), Grass: 1 (Rosmalen w/Schultz- McCarthy), Hard: 1 (Canadian Open w/Sanchez-Vicario), Indoor: 2 (Essen w/McGrath) 1996 Jana Novotna Clay: 2 (Hilton Head w/Sanchez-Vicario), Grass: 1 (Eastbourne w/ Sanchez-Vicario), Hard: 1 (Lipton w/Sanchez-Vicario), Indoor: 2 (Filderstadt w/Arendt) 1996 B. Schultz-McCarthy Clay: 1 (Hamburg w/Sanchez-Vicario), Grass: 1 (Rosmalen w/ Neiland), Hard: 1 (Indian Wells w/Rubin), Indoor: 2 (Oklahoma City w/ Rubin) 1997 Natasha Zvereva Clay: 2 (Roland Garros w/G. Fernandez), Grass: 1 (Wimbledon w/G. Fernandez), Hard: 3 (Australian Open w/Hingis), Indoor: 2 (Pan Pacific w/Davenport) 1998 Martina Hingis Clay: 1 (Roland Garros w/Novotna), Grass: 1 (Wimbledon w/Novotna), Hard: 6 (Australian Open w/Lucic, U.S Open w/Novotna), Indoor: 1 (Pan Pacific w/Lucic) 1999 Hingis/Kournikova Clay: 1 (Rome), Grass: 1 (Eastbourne), Hard: 2 (Australian Open), Indoor: 1 (Chase Championships) 1999 Larisa Neiland Clay: 1 (Hamburg w/Sanchez-V), Grass: 1 (Birmingham w/Morariu), Hard: 2 (Los Angeles/w/ Sanchez-V), Indoor: 1 (Leipzig/ w/Pierce) 2001 Raymond/Stubbs Clay: 1 (Charleston), Grass: 2 (Wimbledon), Hardcourt: 2 (U. S. Open), Indoor: 2 (Munich)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 307 2001 Elena Likhovtseva Clay: 2 (Rome w/Black), Grass: 1 (Birmingham w/Black), Hard: 3 (San Diego w/Black), Indoor: 1 (Leipzig w/Tauziat) 2002 Raymond/Stubbs Clay: 1 (Charleston), Grass: 1 (Eastbourne), Hard: 5 (Miami), Indoor: 1 (Pan Pacific) 2003 Clijsters/Sugiyama Clay: 1 (Roland Garros), Grass: 1 (Wimbledon), Hard: 3 (San Diego), Indoor: 2 (Zürich) 2003 Lisa Raymond Clay: 1 (Amelia Island), Grass: 1 (Eastbourne), Hard: 2 (Indian Wells), Indoor: 2 (Filderstadt)

Career Surface Sweeps/Singles The list below shows all players active in 2002 or after to have won titles on all four surfaces, showing the strongest title on each surface and the year in which she achieved the sweep (i.e. earned her first title on her “last” surface) If a title is marked “etc.” (e.g. Seles is marked “Roland Garros 1990, etc.), this means that she won it several times starting with that year.) The “best” tournament is based on tournament tier. Slam titles are abbreviated. Player Year Best Clay Best Grass Best Hard Best Indoors Clijsters 2003 Rome 2003 ’s-Hertogenbosch Indian Wells 2003 WTA Champ 2002, 2003 etc. Davenport 1999 Amelia Island 1997, Wim 1999 USO 1998, AO 2000 WTA Champ. 1999 etc. Dokic 2002 Rome 2001 Birmingham 2002 Princess Cup 2001 Moscow 2001 Hénin- 2002 Roland Garros 2003 ’s-Hertogenbosch U. S. Open 2003 Linz 2002 Hardenne 2001 Hingis 1997 Hilton Head 1997, Wim 1997 AO 1997, etc. USO WTA Champ 1998, etc.; Rome 1998; 1997 etc. Berlin 1999 Maleeva 2003 Budapest 2001 Birmingham 2003 Pattaya 1999 Zürich 1994, Moscow 2002 Martinez 1994 Rome 1993, etc.; Wim 1994 San Diego 1995 Philadelphia 1993 Hilton Head 1994, etc.; Berlin 1998, etc. Pierce 2004 Roland Garros 2000 ’s-Hertogenbosch Australian Open Moscow 1998 2004 1995 Rubin 2003 Madrid 2003 Eastbourne 2002 Los Angeles 2002 Linz 1997, etc. Seles 1996 RG 1990, etc. Eastbourne 1996 AO 1991, etc.; USO WTA Champ 1990, 1991, etc. etc. S. Williams 2002 RG 2002 Wim 2002, etc. USO 1999, etc. WTA Champ. 2001 V. Williams 2000 Rome 1999 Wim 2000, etc. USO 2000, etc. Zürich 1999

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 308 Career Grand Surface Sweep The Grand Surface Sweep is a higher-order version of the Surface Sweep: It entails a title, Tier I or higher, on all seven major WTA surfaces: Rebound Ace, DecoTurf, Red Clay, Green Clay, Grass, Carpet (including Greenset and Supreme) and Indoor Hardcourts. The WTA established the Tier I event in 1990 (though there were approximate equivalents for about a decade before that). In that period, the events of each type, by surface, were as follows: Rebound Ace: Australian Open DecoTurf: U. S. Open, Miami, Canadian Open, Boca Raton 1991Ð1992, Indian Wells 1997-present, San Diego 2004-present Red Clay: Roland Garros, Rome, Berlin Green Clay: Hilton Head/Charleston Grass: Wimbledon Carpet: WTA Championships 1990-2000, Chicago 1990, Pan Pacific 1993-present, Philadelphia 1993- 1995, Moscow 1997-present Indoor Hard: WTA Championships 2001-present, Zürich 1993-present

From this data, we can compile the (very short) list of Grand Surface Sweepers (this is all-time, since the Australian Open shifted to Rebound Ace; note that the list includes some events from the Slams and “Super Series” before 1990, though those “excess events” include only events which are still active):

1. Steffi Graf Rebound Ace: Australian Open [1988], [1989], 1990, 1994 DecoTurf: U. S. Open [1988], [1989], 1993, 1995, 1996; Miami [1987], [1988], 1994, 1995, 1996; Canadian Open 1990, 1993; Boca Raton 1992 Red Clay: Roland Garros [1987], [1988], 1993, 1995, 1996, 1999; Rome, Berlin [1988], [1989], 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1996 Green Clay: Hilton Head [1986], [1987], [1989], 1993; [Amelia Island 1986, 1987] Grass: Wimbledon [1988], [1989], 1991, 1992, 1993, 1995, 1996 Carpet: WTA Championships [1987], [1989], 1993, 1995, 1996; Pan Paciﬁc [1986], 1994; Philadelphia 1995; Moscow 1997- present Indoor Hard: [Washington 1989]

2. Martina Hingis Rebound Ace: Australian Open 1997, 1998, 1999 DecoTurf: U. S. Open 1997; Miami 1997, 2000; Canadian Open 1999, 2000; Indian Wells 1998 Red Clay: Rome 1998, Berlin 1999 Green Clay: Hilton Head 1997, 1999 Grass: Wimbledon 1997 Carpet: WTA Championships 1998, 2000; Pan Paciﬁc 1997, 1999, 2000, 2002; Moscow 2000 Indoor Hard: Zürich 2000

Lacking Rebound Ace and, apparently, Indoor Hard was Martina Navratilova. (This is largely lack of opportunity.)

Of the top active players, Serena Williams lacks green clay and carpet; Venus Williams lacks Rebound Ace and carpet; Lindsay Davenport lacks green and red clay; Monica Seles lacks grass and indoor hardcourt, Justine Hénin-Hardenne lacks grass and carpet; Kim Clijsters lacks Rebound Ace, green clay, grass, and carpet; Anastasia Myskina lacks Rebound Ace, DecoTurf, green clay, grass, and indoor hardcourt; and Amélie Mauresmo lacks Rebound Ace, green clay, grass, indoor hardcourt, and carpet.

Note that Graf was the only player ever to complete the calendar year Grand Surface Sweep (1989).

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 309 Year-End Top Players Year-End Top Eight, Alphabetical, with Years, Since 1975 The following tables list every player to end a Tour year in the Top Eight since computer rankings began in 1975. The first table, in alphabetical order, lists each year in which the player ended at #1, #2, #3, etc. Player Years was #1 Yrs was #2 Years was #3 Years was #4 Years #5-#8 Austin 1980, 1981 1979 1982 #6-1978 Balestrat #6-1979; #7-1976; #8-1978 Barker #5-1976, 1977 Bunge #7-1983 Capriati 2001 2002 #6-1991, 2003; #7-1992; #8-1990 Casals #6 -1977 Clijsters 2003 2002 #5-2001 Coetzer 1997 Court #6-1975 Date 1995 #8-1996 Davenport 1998, 2001, 2004 1999, 2000 1997 #5-2003; #6-1994 Dementieva #6-2004, #8-2003 Dokic #8-2001 Durie #6-1983 Evert 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1982, 1987, 1988 1980, 1981 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986 Fernandez, M 1990 #6-1992; #7-1993; #8-1991, 1995 Garrison[-J] 1989 #8-1985 Goolagong 1976 1975, 1978 1979 #5-1980 Graf 1987, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992 1986 #6-1985 1990, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996 Hanika #5-1983; #6-1981 Hantuchova #8-2002 Hénin-Harden 2003 #5-2002; #7-2001, #8-2004 Hingis 1997, 1999, 2000 1998 1996, 2001 Huber, Anke #6-1996 Jaeger 1982, 1983 1981 #7-1980 Jausovec #8-1976 King 1975, 1977 #5-1978, 1979; #6-1980 Kohde-Kilsch #5-1985; #7-1986; #8-1984 Kournikova #8-2000 Kuznetsova #5-2004 Majoli #6-1997; #7-1996 Maleeva, K #6-1990 Maleeva, Mag #6-1995 Maleeva, Man #6-1984, 1988; #7-1985; #8-1986, 1987 Mandlikova 1984, 1985 1980, 1986 #5-1981, 1987; #7-1982 Martinez 1995 1994 1993 #5-1996, 2000; #7-1989; #8-1992, 1998 Mauresmo 2004 2003 #6-2002

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 310 Morozova #7-1975 Myskina 2004 #7-2003 Navratilova 1978, 1979, 1982, 1987, 1988, 1989 1977, 1980, 1981, 1975, 1976, 1991 #5-1992; #8-1994 1983, 1984, 1985, 1990, 1993 1986 Novotna 1997 1996, 1998 1994 #6-1993; #7-1991 Pierce #5-1994, 1995, 1999; #7-1997, 1998, 2000 Potter #8-1982 Reid #8-1978 Richey Gunter #8-1975 Sabatini 1989, 1991, 1992 1988 #5-1990, 1993; #6-1987; #7-1994, 1995 Sanchez-Vicari 1993, 1994, 1996 1995 1992, 1998 #5-1989, 1991; #7-1990 Schett #8-1999 Seles 1991, 1992 1990, [1996] 2000 #5-1997; #6-1989, 1998, 1999; #7-2002; #8-1993 Sharapova 2004 Shriver 1983, 1984, 1985, #5-1988; #6-1982, 1986; #7-1981 1987 Spirlea #8-1997 Stove #6-1976; #7-1977 Sukova #5-1986; #7-1984, 1987; #8-1988, 1989 Tauziat #7-1999 Turnbull #5-1982, 1984; #7-1978, 1979; #8-1980, 1981, 1983 Wade 1976 1977, 1978 #5-1975; #8-1979 Williams, S 2002 2003 1999 #6-2000, 2001, #7-2004 Williams, V. 2002 1999, 2000, 2001 #5-1998 Zvereva #7-1988

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 311 Total Years Ended At Each Rank, Alphabetical, Since 1975 Player Years #1 Years #2 Years #3 Years #4 Years #5 Years #6 Years #7 Years #8 Total Austin 2 1 1 1 5 Balestrat 1113 Barker 2 2 Bunge 11 Capriati 1 1 2117 Casals 1 1 Clijsters 1 1 1 3 Coetzer 1 1 Court 1 1 Date 1 1 2 Davenport 3 2 1 1 1 8 Dementieva 1 1 2 Dokic 11 Durie 1 1 Evert 5 7 2 14 Fernandez, M 1 1125 Garrison[-J] 1 1 2 Goolagong 1211 5 Graf 8 2 1 1 12 Hanika 1 1 2 Hantuchova 11 Hénin-Hardenne 1 1 1 1 4 Hingis 3 1 2 6 Huber, Anke 1 1 Jaeger 2 1 1 4 Jausovec 11 King 2 2 1 5 Kohde-Kilsch 1 1 1 3 Kournikova 11 Kuznetsova 1 Majoli 1 1 2 Maleeva, K 1 1 Maleeva, Mag 1 1 Maleeva, Man 2125 Mandlikova 2 2 2 1 7 Martinez 1112 128 Mauresmo 1 1 1 3 Morozova 11 Myskina 1 1 2 Navratilova 73531 120 Novotna 1 2 1 1 1 6 Pierce 3 3 6 Potter 11 Reid 11 Richey Gunter 11 Sabatini 31212 9

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 312 Sanchez-Vicari 3122 1 9 Schett 11 Seles 2 1(2) 1131110(11) Sharapova 1 1 Shriver 4121 8 Spirlea 11 Stove 1 1 2 Sukova 1 2 2 5 Tauziat 11 Turnbull 2 2 3 7 Wade 1 2 1 15 Williams, S 1 1 1 2 1 6 Williams, V. 1 3 1 5 Zvereva 11

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 313 Strongest Career Rankings Showings Based on the above statistics, we can produce a career “ranking of rankings.” In the system below, one point is awarded for a year in which a player ends at #8. Two are awarded for #7, 3 for #6, 4 for #5, 6 for #4, 8 for #3, 12 for #2, and 16 for #1. Note: for purposes of reckoning, Monica Seles is omitted from the rankings for 1995, but is treated as #2 for 1996, with all players below her demoted one position. Ranking Player Score Ranking Player Score 1Navratilova 211 31T Garrison[-Jackson] 7 2Evert 180 31T Hanika 7 3 Graf 163 31T Kohde-Kilsch 7 4Davenport 79 34T Balestrat 6 5 Seles 78 34T Coetzer 6 6 Hingis 70 34T Date 6 7 Sanchez-Vicario 62 37T Sharapova 5 8 Sabatini 45 37T Stove 5 9 Austin 41 39T Dementieva 4 10 Williams, V. 40 39T Kuznetsova 4 11T Goolagong 38 39T Majoli 4 11T Mandlikova 38 42T Casals 3 11T Williams, S 38 42T Court 3 14T Martinez, C. 37 42T Durie 3 14T Novotna 37 42T Maleeva, K 3 16 Shriver 36 42T Maleeva, Magdalena 3 17 King 35 47T Bunge 2 18 Capriati 29 47T Huber 2 19 Wade 25 47T Morozova 2 20 Jaeger 24 47T Tauziat 2 21 Hénin-Hardenne 23 47T Zvereva 2 22 Clijsters 22 52T Dokic 1 23 Pierce 18 52T Hantuchova 1 24 Mauresmo 16 52T Jausovec 1 25 Turnbull 15 52T Kournikova 1 26 Fernandez, M 13 52T Potter 1 27T Maleeva[-Fragniere] 10 52T Reid 1 27T Sukova 10 52T Richey Gunter 1 29T Barker 8 52T Schett 1 29T Myskina 8 52T Spirlea 1

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 314 Total Years in the Top Eight The following table shows the all-time leaders in most years spent in the Top Eight. Player Years Spent in Top Eight Navratilova 20 Evert 14 Graf 12 Seles 11 Sabatini 9 Sanchez-Vicario 9 Davenport 8 Martinez, Conchita 8 Shriver 8 Capriati 7 Mandlikova 7 Turnbull 7 Hingis 6 Novotna 6 Pierce 6 Williams, Serena 6 Austin 5 Fernandez, Mary Joe 5 Goolagong 5 King 5 Maleeva[-Fragniere], Manuela 5 Sukova 5 Wade 5 Williams, Venus 5

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 315 Doubles Wins & Partners Winningest Doubles Player, Year By Year, From 1983 The following list shows the player with the most doubles titles each year, and lists the partners with whom she played and the number of tournaments they won together. Year Player # of titles Partners 1983 Martina Navratilova 11 Shriver (9), Reynolds (2) Pam Shriver 11 Navratilova (9), Evert (1), Potter (1) 1984 Martina Navratilova 13 Shriver (10), G. Fernandez (1), Smylie (1) 1985 Pam Shriver 12 Navratilova (7), Smylie (2), Fairbank (1), Mandlikova (1), Sukova (1) 1986 Martina Navratilova 9 Shriver (7), Temesvari (2) 1987 Martina Navratilova 9 Shriver (7), K. Jordan (1), Sabatini (1) 1988 Martina Navratilova 8 Shriver (5), Casals (1), Kucyzynska (1), McNeil (1) Pam Shriver 8 Navratilova (5), K. Adams (1), Nagelson (1), Sukova (1) 1989 Katrina Adams 8 Garrison (4), McNeil (3), Shriver (1) Pam Shriver 8 Navratilova (4), K. Adams (1), Graf (1), Mandlikova (1), Nagelson (1) 1990 Helena Sukova 10 Novotna (8), G. Fernandez (1), Tauziat (1) 1991 Larisa Neiland 10 Zvereva (6), Novotna (3), Fendick (1) 1992 Arantxa 10 Sukova (6), Zvereva (2), Martinez (1), Neiland (1) Sanchez-Vicario 1993 Gigi Fernandez 12 Zvereva (11), Sukova (1) 1994 Gigi Fernandez 11 Zvereva (11) Arantxa 11 Novotna (5), Neiland (2), Davenport (1), Halard (1), Sanchez-Vicario McGrath (1), McNeil (1), Natasha Zvereva 11 G. Fernandez (11) 1995 Gigi Fernandez 8 Zvereva (7), Hingis (1) 1996 Arantxa 9 Novotna (4), Rubin (2), Neiland (1), Schultz-McCarthy (1), Spirlea (1) Sanchez-Vicario 1997 Martina Hingis 8 Sanchez-Vicario (3), Novotna (2), Davenport (1), M. J. Fernandez (1), Zvereva (1) Natasha Zvereva 8 Davenport (2), G. Fernandez (2), Sanchez-Vicario (2), Hingis (1), Sukova (1) 1998 Martina Hingis 9 Novotna (5), Lucic (2), Sukova (1), Zvereva (1) 1999 Martina Hingis 6 Kournikova (5), Novotna (1) Corina Morariu 6 Davenport (3), Neiland (2), Po (1) 2000 Julie 10 Sugiyama (6), Morariu (2), Kournikova (1), Testud (1) Halard-Decugis 2001 Lisa Raymond 9 Stubbs (7), Davenport (2) 2002 Lisa Raymond 9 Stubbs (8), Davenport (1) 2003 Ai Sugiyama 8 Clijsters (7), Liezel Huber (1) 2004 Cara Black 7 Callens (1), Stubbs (6) Nadia Petrova 7 Shaughnessy (7) Meghann 7 Petrova (7) Shaughnessy

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 316 Titles With Multiple Partners, Single Year, Open Era According to the WTA, only 7 players have won doubles titles with five or more partners in a year in the WTA Era.* The following lists these players, their partners, and the number of titles with each partner.* # of Player Year Partners & Title Count Partners 6 Helena Sukova 1993 Sanchez-Vicario (3), G. Fernandez (1), M. J. Fernandez (1), Navratilova (1), Stubbs (1), Smylie (1) 6 A. Sanchez-Vicario 1994 Novotna (5), Neiland (2), Davenport (1), Halard (1), McGrath (1), McNeil (1), 5Pam Shriver 1989 Navratilova (4), K. Adams (1), Graf (1), Mandlikova (1), Nagelson (1) 5 Mercedes Paz 1989 Bollegraf (1), Goles (1), Scheuer-Larsen (1), Tarabini (1), Wiesner (1) 5 Larisa Neiland 1994 Bollegraf (1), Garrison-Jackson (1), McGrath (1), Sanchez-Vicario (1), Stubbs (1) 5 A. Sanchez-Vicario 1996 Novotna (4), Rubin (2), Neiland (1), Schultz-McCarthy (1), Spirlea (1) 5 Martina Hingis 1997 Sanchez-Vicario (3), Novotna (2), Davenport (1), M. J. Fernandez (1), Zvereva (1) 5 Natasha Zvereva 1997 Davenport (2), G. Fernandez (2), Sanchez-Vicario (2), Hingis (1), Sukova (1) * The WTA list for this statistic is extremely inaccurate — it omits Neiland, gets Sanchez-Vicario’s record wrong, and shows Paz with only four titles in 1989; I discovered her result with Tarabini by accident. This is a corrected list, but may be incomplete. Slams With the Most Partners, Open Era The following list shows all women who have won Slams with four or more partners in the Open Era, listing the partners and the number of Slams with each*. Total Partners Player Partners & Slams 9 Martina Navratilova Shriver (20), King (3), Evert (2), A. Smith (1), G. Fernandez (1) Mandlikova (1), Nagelson (1), Stove (1), Temesvari (1) 6 Martina Hingis Novotna (3), Kournikova (2), Lucic (1), Pierce (1), Sukova (1), Zvereva (1) 5 Jana Novotna Sukova (4), Hingis (3), Sanchez-Vicario (3), Davenport (1), G. Fernandez (1) 4 Natasha Zvereva G. Fernandez (14), Savchenko Neiland (2), Hingis (1), Shriver (1) 4 Gigi Fernandez Zvereva (14), Navratilova (1), Novotna (1), White (1) 4 Margaret Court Tegart Dalton (4), Wade (4), Bueno (1), Goolagong (1) 4 Helena Sukova Novotna (4), Kohde-Kilsch (2), Sanchez-Vicario (2), Hingis (1) 4 Francoise Durr Chanfreau (2), A. Jones (2), Hard (1), Stove (1) 4 Betty Stove King (2), Turnbull (2), Durr (1), Navratilova (1) 4 H. Gourlay Cawley Balestrat (1), Goolagong (1), Harris (1), Russell (1) * Note: Billie Jean King won titles with 5 players, but only three in the Open Era: Casals (5), Navratilova (4), Stove (1). Counting wins before the Open Era, Court won with 7 players: The above plus Ebbern, Reitano, and Turner.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 317 I Came, I Played.... The following is a complete list of every player to play a WTA main draw match in 2004. All told, 296 players had at least one main draw match in 2004 (compared to 287 last year and 301 in 2002). The list shows the players and the number of WTA main draws they played (many of these players had additional Challengers or qualifying). Ivana Abramovic (1), Monique Adamczak (1), Maria Fernanda Alves (1), Akgul Amanmuradova (1), Maret Ani (1), Sofia Arvidsson (6), Shinobu Asagoe (23), Teryn Ashley (9), Lubomira Bacheva (1), Angelika Bachmann (3), Timea Bacsinszky (2), Elena Baltacha (2), Sybille Bammer (4), Adriana Barna (1), Anca Barna (29), Marion Bartoli (25), Daja Bedanova (1), Severine Beltrame (9), Iveta Benesova (25), Yulia Beygelzimer (6), Ankita Bhambri (1), Bea Bielik (1), Eva Birnerova (9), Cara Black (26), Katerina Bohmova (1), Alyona Bondarenko (2), Katarina Bondarenko (2), Elena Bovina (19), Kristina Brandi (21), Nina Bratchikova (1), Ekaterina Bychkova (1), Els Callens (19), Maria Elena Camerin (21), Alice Canepa (1), Jennifer Capriati (12), Ansley Cargill (2), Myriam Casanova (9), Giulia Casoni (1), Catalnia Castano (9), Vilmarie Castellvi (2), Ludmila Cervanova (18), Anna Chakvetadze (3), Denisa Chladkova (23), Yoon Jeong Cho (7), Chia-Jung Chuang (2), Elke Clijsters (1), Kim Clijsters (6), Amanda Coetzer (3), Stephanie Cohen Aloro (19), Jill Craybas (22), Melinda Czink (16), Ayu Fani Damayanti (1), Eleni Daniilidou (23), Lindsay Davenport (17), Nathalie Déchy (24), Casey Dellacqua (2), Elena Dementieva (22), Mariana Diaz-Oliva (11), Jelena Dokic (16), Marta Domachowska (7), Lourdes Dominguez Lino (1), Evie Dominikovic (2), Vera Douchevina (17), Ruxandra Dragomir Ilie (7), Maureen Drake (4), Stephanie Dubois (1), Gisela Dulko (19), Megan Falcon (1), Silvia Farina Elia (24), Yuliana Fedak (6), Youlia Fedossova (1), Sophie Ferguson (1), Clarisa Fernandez (3), Jessica Fernandez (1), Kirsten Flipkens (2), Galina Fokina (1), Stephanie Foretz (10), Amy Frazier (18), Ryoko Fuda (1), Rika Fujiwara (2), Emmanuelle Gagliardi (20), Jarmila Gajdosova (5), Edina Gallovits (3), Tathiana Garbin (23), Paula Garcia (1), Vanina Garcia Sokol (1), Stephanie Gehrlein (3), Melanie Gloria (1), Tatiana Golovin (15), Maria Goloviznina (1), Rita Grande (20), Nathalie Grandin (2), Laura Granville (20), Anna-Lena Grönefeld (17), Zsofia Gubacsi (3), Carly Gullickson (4), Natalia Gussoni (2), Daniela Hantuchova (25), Ashley Harkleroad (13), Angela Haynes (5), Justine Hénin-Hardenne (9), Vanessa Henke (2), Jennifer Hopkins (7), Janette Husarova (11), Marissa Irvin (13), Ana Ivanovic (4), Jamea Jackson (6), Amanda Janes (2), Jelena Jankovic (28), Klaudia Jans (1), Alina Jidkova (23), Mervana Jugic-Salkic (7), Darija Jurak (1), Jana Kandarr (2), Kaia Kanepi (1), Aniko Kapros (16), Sesil Karatancheva (5), Anne Keothavong (4), Jin-Hee Kim (1), So-Jung Kim (1), Maria Kirilenko (10), Jessica Kirkland (2), Magdalena Kiszczynska (1), Sandra Kleinova (14), Andreja Klepac (1), Alisa Kleybanova (2), Elizabeth Kobak (1), Jelena Kostanic (27), Klara Koukalova (24), Michaelia Krajicek (2), Lina Krasnoroutskaya (13), Anne Kremer (20), Zuzana Kucova (1), Evgenia Kulikovskaya (1), Lubomira Kurhajcova (21), Viktoriya Kutuzova (2), Svetlana Kuznetsova (22), Emma Laine (1), Isha Lakhani (1), Lindsay Lee-Waters (17), Gala Leon Garcia (8), Li Na (2), Li Ting (3), Elena Likhovtseva (25), Evgenia Linetskaya (4), Amber Liu (4), Liu Nan-Nan (2), Nuria Llagostera Vives (8), Emilie Loit (23), Olivia Lukaszewicz (1), Caroline Maes (1), Iva Majoli (4), Magdalena Maleeva (25), Sanda Mamic (6), Petra Mandula (18), Eden Marama (1), Melanie Marois (1), Marta Marrero (22), Conchita Martinez (17), Conchita Martinez Granados (8), Maja Matevzic (1), Antonia Matic (2), Bethanie Mattek (3), Amélie Mauresmo (17), Kelly McCain (5), Anabel Medina Garrigues (25), Yvonne Meusburger (3), Marie-Gayanay Mikaelian (19), Sania Mirza (2), Alicia Molik (22), Akika Morigami (23), Bahia Mouhtassine (1), Martina Müller (5), Trudi Musgrave (1), Anastasia Myskina (19), Kyra Nagy (2), Henrieta Nagyova (12), Aiko Nakamura (2), Martina Navratilova (5), Rossana Neffa-de los Rios (3), Lenka Nemeckova (2), Virag Nemeth (1), Dominika Nociarova (1), Hanna Nooni (1), Katie O’Brien (1), Jane O’Donoghue (2), Saori Obata (21), Tzipora Obziler (6), Seiko Okamoto (2), Zuzana Ondraskova (7), Lilia Osterloh (6), Nadejda Ostrovskaya (1), Tatiana Panova (20), Arantxa Parra Santonja (26), Michaelia Pastikova (6), Shahar Peer (3), Marie-Eve Pelletier (5), Peng Shuai (5), Flavia Pennetta (23), Tatiana Perebiynis (16), Shenay Perry (15), Kveta (Hrdlickova) Peshke (4), Nadia Petrova (25), Virginie Pichet (1), Mary Pierce (18), Camille Pin (7), Tina Pisnik (25), Lana Popadic (1), Tatiana Poutchek (2), Nicole Pratt (24), Libuse Prusova (2), Dally Randriantefy (10), Sunitha Rao (1), Lisa Raymond (19), Virginie Razzano (9), Samantha Reeves (13), Barbara Rittner (3), Anastassia Rodionova (1), Angelika Roesch (3), Capucine Rousseau (1), Virginia Ruano Pascual (18), Chanda Rubin (11), Miho Saeki (1), Dinara Safina (20), Maria Emilia Salerni (3), Maria Sanchez Lorenzo (26), Mara Santangelo (14), Olga Savchuk (1), Claudine Schaul (26), Barbara Schett (21), Francesca Schiavone (23), Kristen Schlukebir (1), Caroline Schneider (2), Patty Schnyder (23), Julia Schruff (13), Barbara Schwartz (8), Milagros Sequera (16), Magui Serna (22), Adriana Serra Zanetti (11), Antonella Serra Zanetti (14), Delia Sescioreanu (1), Selima Sfar (3), Maria Sharapova (20), Meghann Shaughnessy (22), Neuza Silva (1), Lioudmila Skavronskaia (3), Anna Smashnova (25), Tara Snyder (6), Abigail Spears (6), Karolina Sprem (23), Katarina Srebotnik (23), Shelley Stephens (1), Alexandra Stevenson (16), Bryanne Stewart (2), Samantha Stosur (20), Barbora Strycova (16), Paola Suárez (19), Martina Sucha (23), Ai Sugiyama (24), Sun Tian Tian (9), Åsa (Carlsson) Svensson (8), Silvija Talaja (14), Tamarine Tanasugarn (26), Elena Tatarkova (2), Sandrine Testud (9), Dessislava Topalova (1), Cristina Torrens Valero (5), Meilen Tu (5), Iroda Tulyaganova (1), Neha Uberoi (1), Shikha Uberoi (2), Nicole Vaidisova (9), Julia Vakulenko (18), Andreea Vanc (1), Maria Vento-Kabchi (28), Elena Vesnina (1), Roberta Vinci (8), Suchanan Viratprasert (1), Galina Voskoboeva (4), Patricia Wartusch (1), Mashona Washington (12), Cindy Watson (1), Emily Webley-Smith (1), Marlene Weingärtner (19), Christina Wheeler (3), Angelique Widjaja (10), Serena Williams (12), Venus Williams (16), Kathrin Woerle (1), Aleksandra Wozniak (1), Anastasia Yakimova (2), Yan Zi (4), Yuka Yoshida (6), Zheng Jie (19), Fabiola Zuluaga (21), Vera Zvonareva (26)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 318 WTA Main Draw Events Played If we wish, we can sort the above list based on events played. The following list shows the players who had the most WTA main draws played: Anca Barna (29), Jelena Jankovic (28), Maria Vento-Kabchi (28), Jelena Kostanic (27), Cara Black (26), Arantxa Parra Santonja (26), Maria Sanchez Lorenzo (26), Claudine Schaul (26), Tamarine Tanasugarn (26), Vera Zvonareva (26), Marion Bartoli (25), Iveta Benesova (25), Daniela Hantuchova (25), Elena Likhovtseva (25), Magdalena Maleeva (25), Anabel Medina Garrigues (25), Nadia Petrova (25), Tina Pisnik (25), Anna Smashnova (25), Nathalie Déchy (24), Silvia Farina Elia (24), Klara Koukalova (24), Nicole Pratt (24), Ai Sugiyama (24), Shinobu Asagoe (23), Denisa Chladkova (23), Eleni Daniilidou (23), Tathiana Garbin (23), Alina Jidkova (23), Emilie Loit (23), Akika Morigami (23), Flavia Pennetta (23), Francesca Schiavone (23), Patty Schnyder (23), Karolina Sprem (23), Katarina Srebotnik (23), Martina Sucha (23), Jill Craybas (22), Elena Dementieva (22), Svetlana Kuznetsova (22), Marta Marrero (22), Alicia Molik (22), Magui Serna (22), Meghann Shaughnessy (22), Kristina Brandi (21), Maria Elena Camerin (21), Lubomira Kurhajcova (21), Saori Obata (21), Barbara Schett (21), Fabiola Zuluaga (21), Emmanuelle Gagliardi (20), Rita Grande (20), Laura Granville (20), Anne Kremer (20), Tatiana Panova (20), Dinara Safina (20), Maria Sharapova (20), Samantha Stosur (20), Elena Bovina (19), Els Callens (19), Stephanie Cohen Aloro (19), Gisela Dulko (19), Marie-Gayanay Mikaelian (19), Anastasia Myskina (19), Lisa Raymond (19), Paola Suárez (19), Marlene Weingärtner (19), Zheng Jie (19), Ludmila Cervanova (18), Amy Frazier (18), Petra Mandula (18), Mary Pierce (18), Virginia Ruano Pascual (18), Julia Vakulenko (18), Lindsay Davenport (17), Vera Douchevina (17), Anna-Lena Grönefeld (17), Lindsay Lee-Waters (17), Conchita Martinez (17), Amélie Mauresmo (17), Melinda Czink (16), Jelena Dokic (16), Aniko Kapros (16), Tatiana Perebiynis (16), Milagros Sequera (16), Alexandra Stevenson (16), Barbora Strycova (16), Venus Williams (16), Tatiana Golovin (15), Shenay Perry (15), Sandra Kleinova (14), Mara Santangelo (14), Antonella Serra Zanetti (14), Silvija Talaja (14), Ashley Harkleroad (13), Marissa Irvin (13), Lina Krasnoroutskaya (13), Samantha Reeves (13), Julia Schruff (13), Jennifer Capriati (12), Henrieta Nagyova (12), Mashona Washington (12), Serena Williams (12), Mariana Diaz-Oliva (11), Janette Husarova (11), Chanda Rubin (11), Adriana Serra Zanetti (11), Stephanie Foretz (10), Maria Kirilenko (10), Dally Randriantefy (10), Angelique Widjaja (10), Teryn Ashley (9), Severine Beltrame (9), Eva Birnerova (9), Myriam Casanova (9), Catalnia Castano (9), Justine Hénin-Hardenne (9), Virginie Razzano (9), Sun Tian Tian (9), Sandrine Testud (9), Nicole Vaidisova (9), Gala Leon Garcia (8), Nuria Llagostera Vives (8), Conchita Martinez Granados (8), Barbara Schwartz (8), Åsa (Carlsson) Svensson (8), Roberta Vinci (8), Yoon Jeong Cho (7), Marta Domachowska (7), Ruxandra Dragomir Ilie (7), Jennifer Hopkins (7), Mervana Jugic-Salkic (7), Zuzana Ondraskova (7), Camille Pin (7), Sofia Arvidsson (6), Yulia Beygelzimer (6), Kim Clijsters (6), Yuliana Fedak (6), Jamea Jackson (6), Sanda Mamic (6), Tzipora Obziler (6), Lilia Osterloh (6), Michaelia Pastikova (6), Tara Snyder (6), Abigail Spears (6), Yuka Yoshida (6), Jarmila Gajdosova (5), Angela Haynes (5), Sesil Karatancheva (5), Kelly McCain (5), Martina Müller (5), Martina Navratilova (5), Marie-Eve Pelletier (5), Peng Shuai (5), Cristina Torrens Valero (5), Meilen Tu (5), Sybille Bammer (4), Maureen Drake (4), Carly Gullickson (4), Ana Ivanovic (4), Anne Keothavong (4), Evgenia Linetskaya (4), Amber Liu (4), Iva Majoli (4), Kveta (Hrdlickova) Peshke (4), Galina Voskoboeva (4), Yan Zi (4), Angelika Bachmann (3), Anna Chakvetadze (3), Amanda Coetzer (3), Clarisa Fernandez (3), Edina Gallovits (3), Stephanie Gehrlein (3), Zsofia Gubacsi (3), Li Ting (3), Bethanie Mattek (3), Yvonne Meusburger (3), Rossana Neffa-de los Rios (3), Shahar Peer (3), Barbara Rittner (3), Angelika Roesch (3), Maria Emilia Salerni (3), Selima Sfar (3), Lioudmila Skavronskaia (3), Christina Wheeler (3), Timea Bacsinszky (2), Elena Baltacha (2), Alyona Bondarenko (2), Katarina Bondarenko (2), Ansley Cargill (2), Vilmarie Castellvi (2), Chia-Jung Chuang (2), Casey Dellacqua (2), Evie Dominikovic (2), Kirsten Flipkens (2), Rika Fujiwara (2), Nathalie Grandin (2), Natalia Gussoni (2), Vanessa Henke (2), Amanda Janes (2), Jana Kandarr (2), Jessica Kirkland (2), Alisa Kleybanova (2), Michaelia Krajicek (2), Viktoriya Kutuzova (2), Li Na (2), Liu Nan-Nan (2), Antonia Matic (2), Sania Mirza (2), Kyra Nagy (2), Aiko Nakamura (2), Lenka Nemeckova (2), Jane O’Donoghue (2), Seiko Okamoto (2), Tatiana Poutchek (2), Libuse Prusova (2), Caroline Schneider (2), Bryanne Stewart (2), Elena Tatarkova (2), Shikha Uberoi (2), Anastasia Yakimova (2), Ivana Abramovic (1), Monique Adamczak (1), Maria Fernanda Alves (1), Akgul Amanmuradova (1), Maret Ani (1), Lubomira Bacheva (1), Adriana Barna (1), Daja Bedanova (1), Ankita Bhambri (1), Bea Bielik (1), Katerina Bohmova (1), Nina Bratchikova (1), Ekaterina Bychkova (1), Alice Canepa (1), Giulia Casoni (1), Elke Clijsters (1), Ayu Fani Damayanti (1), Lourdes Dominguez Lino (1), Stephanie Dubois (1), Megan Falcon (1), Youlia Fedossova (1), Sophie Ferguson (1), Jessica Fernandez (1), Galina Fokina (1), Ryoko Fuda (1), Paula Garcia (1), Vanina Garcia Sokol (1), Melanie Gloria (1), Maria Goloviznina (1), Klaudia Jans (1), Darija Jurak (1), Kaia Kanepi (1), Jin-Hee Kim (1), So-Jung Kim (1), Magdalena Kiszczynska (1), Andreja Klepac (1), Elizabeth Kobak (1), Zuzana Kucova (1), Evgenia Kulikovskaya (1), Emma Laine (1), Isha Lakhani (1), Olivia Lukaszewicz (1), Caroline Maes (1), Eden Marama (1), Melanie Marois (1), Maja Matevzic (1), Bahia Mouhtassine (1), Trudi Musgrave (1), Virag Nemeth (1), Dominika Nociarova (1), Hanna Nooni (1), Katie O’Brien (1), Nadejda Ostrovskaya (1), Virginie Pichet (1), Lana Popadic (1), Sunitha Rao (1), Anastassia Rodionova (1), Capucine Rousseau (1), Miho Saeki (1), Olga Savchuk (1), Kristen Schlukebir (1), Delia Sescioreanu (1), Neuza Silva (1), Shelley Stephens (1), Dessislava Topalova (1), Iroda Tulyaganova (1), Neha Uberoi (1), Andreea Vanc (1), Elena Vesnina (1), Suchanan Viratprasert (1), Patricia Wartusch (1), Cindy Watson (1), Emily Webley-Smith (1), Kathrin Woerle (1), Aleksandra Wozniak (1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 319 Comings and Goings: On and Off the Rankings The following lists compare the ranking tables for 2003 and 2004, noting how many players have been added and subtracted. Note that this is not the same as the number of players who have turned pro or retired. Some players may go off the rankings because of injuries, others may reappear because they have recovered from injuries. And some have changed their names, and so will disappear from one list to reappear on the other (I have corrected some of these, e.g. Anna Pistolesi went to Smashnova-Pistolesi then back to Smashnova. But there are bound to be some low-ranked players I’ve missed). In other cases, the WTA simply changes players’s names, presumably because they were misspelled when first entered in the database (e.g. Anna Tchakvetadze is now spelling her name Chakvetadze) — but the WTA does not issue lists of these changes. So chances are that at least some players slipped past me. But this gives a general overview of how the numbers of ranked players has changed. This year showed an amazing increase in the number of players. We saw a final total of 1256 ranked players — up from only 1113 at the end of 2003. Admittedly it is comparable to the totals before that (we had 1252 in 2002, 1214 in 2001, 1242 in 2000, 1079 in 1999) — but it’s harder to earn a ranking now than in 2002; first round losses at the lowest events no longer carry points. So even as prize money has stayed stagnant, even with the Tour having fewer events than three years ago, the number of players is up. Note that the old WTA rankings lists clipped players’ names at 22 letters, and I have had to maintain this convention (for the most part) to allow comparison of old and new lists. Clipping, if it occurs, takes place in the first names, not the surnames. In a few instances I’ve spotted it and filled out the name, but this is not guaranteed. The first list, of players ranked only in 2003, shows the players in alphabetical order with their 2003 year- end rankings shown in parenthesis. The second list, of players ranked only in 2004, is similar: An alphabetical list, with 2004 final rankings in parenthesis. The final list, of players ranked in both years, is more complicated, as it allows ranking comparison. The list shows each player’s name, her 2004 final ranking, the net change in her ranking from 2003 to 2004, and the percent change. As an example of what we mean, take the first player on the list That’s Ivana Abramovic, and her entry reads

Ivana Abramovic (216, -68, -46%) This means that Abramovic’s year-end 2004 ranking was #216. The fact that the number is negative means that she had fallen down the rankings by 68 places (she ended 2003 at #148). A positive number means the player moved up the rankings; a negative number means she moved down. The third number in the parentheses is her percentage movement — the real indicator of how the player did in the course of the year. Abramovic saw her ranking increase by 46%. Had the number been positive, it would mean that she had improved.

If it matters, the biggest percentage improvements in ranking in 2004 were: Tatiana Golovin, 92.2%; Maria Sharapova, 87.5%; Ana Ivanovic, 86.2%; Svetlana Kuznetsova, 86.1%; and Lindsay Davenport, 80.0%; no other players moved more than 80%. A total of 58 players improved by at least 50% (i.e. cut their rankings in half). The biggest percentage hits were suffered by Amanda Coetzer, 1020%; Kim Clijsters, 1000% (yes, exactly 1000%); Jelena Dokic, 733%; Justine Hénin-Hardenne, 700%; Bianka Lamade, 497%; Chanda Rubin, 489%; Alena Vaskova, 480%; and Lina Krasnoroutskaya, 411%; no one else went up more than 400%. 64 players saw their rankings increase by at least 100% (i.e. their rankings doubled). Most of these losses, of course, were induced by injury; a few, such as Coetzer’s, were the result of retirement.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 320 Players ranked in 2003 but not in 2004, with their 2003 final rankings (Total of 247) Ana Abramovic (951), Lucie Ahl (258), Christine Alford (1038), Elizabeth Alina (1056), Katia Altilia (747), Jessyca Arthur (932), Amanda Augustus (540), Petra Bajerovska (1040), Laura Bao (1029), Michaela Bartlova (750), Caroline Ann Basu (423), Celine Beigbeder (280), Jenny Belobrajdic (986), Daniela Bercek (622), Serena Bergomi (1006), Carina Bjornstrom (819), Valentina Bonacorsi (819), Kristie Boogert (309), Irina Boulykina (294), Svetla Bozicnik (1082), Ivana Bracun (1072), Ajda Brumen (723), Soﬁa Brun (912), Lyndsay Burdette (1006), Asha Burns (1108), Sandra Cacic (376), Bree Calderwood (1104), Marina Cardoso (895), Kristin Cargill (876), Young-Ja Choi (468), Alyssa Cohen (325), Diana Costa (911), Natalia Cretu (1102), Helen Crook (400), Olivia Crouchent (1089), Liz Cruz (844), Mirian Cruz (1043), Veronika Ctvrtnickova (834), Monika Dancevic (760), Rebecca Dandeniya (663), Kristy Dascoli (1022), Katarina Daskovic (329), Michelle Dasso (918), Lynsey Davison (800), Renata De Sanctis (939), Delphine De Winne (456), Whitney Deason (943), Morena Debernardi (1089), Jennifer Debodt (983), Lara Del Saz (1029), Sabrina Diniz (956), Petra Dizdar (528), Virginia Donda (854), Tomoko Doukei (704), Melissa Dowse (954), Yvonne Doyle (430), Nina Egger (619), Helena Ejeson (659), Jennifer Embry (649), Adria Engel (645), Neyssa Etienne (578), Romy Farah (766), Michelle Faucher (935), Laura Figuerola (771), Susanne Filipp (824), Celine Francois (1001), Kirstin Freye (646), Jacqueline Froehlich (587), Alexandra Fusai (1006), Karine Gallet (1043), Julia Gandia (749), Covadonga Garcia Calvo (1043), Natalia Gordeeva (1082), Kim Grant (669), Rebekka Haenle (1056), Caroline Hartmann (818), Maren Haus (1006), Stefanie Hershﬁeld (1079), Tanja Hirschauer (682), Carly Homewood (1072), Amanda Hopmans (489), Liezel Huber (765), Reiko Ino (892), Haruka Inoue (518), Paola Iovino (912), Chisayo Ito (447), Darya Ivanov (831), Mette Iversen (678), Ema Janaskova (524), Sonya Jeyaseelan (314), Wioleta Kaczmarek (1089), Lauren Kalvaria (334), Olga Kalyuzhnaya (230), Jana Kandarr (443), Karina Karner (1056), Amani Khalifa (883), Kim Kilsdonk (550), Eun-Ha Kim (611), Eun-Sook Kim (1040), Kyung-Won Kim (1082), Azusa Konishi (1082), Milica Koprivica (662), Irina Kornienko (978), Alexandra Korotkevich (1089), Anna Kournikova (305), Hanna Krampe (1021), Maria Krasnova (961), Monika Krauze (854), Joannette Kruger (844), Jenny Kuhn (836), Blanka Kumbarova (1006), Anna Lapushchenkova (1089), Gabriela Lastra (209), Elodie Le Bescond (668), Edita Liachoviciute (604), Jamie Lieberman (1006), Jenny Lindstrom (810), Theresa Logar (915), Mirjana Lucic (335), Danielle Lund (1056), Dominika Luzarova (412), Barbora Machovska (1043), Jana Macurova (777), Vittoria Maglio (1024), Marnie Mahler (876), Manisha Malhotra (535), Maria Jose Martinez (348), Andrea Masarykova (883), Maja Matevzic (58), Patricia Mayr (973), Carolyn McGann (1029), Alex McGoodwin (1006), Rachel McQuillan (263), Sabina Mediano (592), Valerie Meise (973), Vanessa Menga (860), Jennifer Miccoli (1071), Meritxell Mimo (923), Adriana Mingireanu (888), Marta Mir Portell (958), Patricia Miro (1006), Michelle Mitchell (869), Nana Miyagi (588), Noha Mohsen (929), Kara Molony-Hussey (647), Joanne Moore (626), Corina Morariu (254), Jana Nejedly (204), Milena Nekvapilova (745), Lindsey Nelson (978), Lenka Novotna (807), Karolina Nowak (883), Christina Obermoser (814), Shivani Oberoi (1079), Alejandra Obregon (1072), Femi Odeyemi Musa (1006), Dragana Ognenovska (864), Ana Cecilia Olivos (1051), Elsa O’Riain (726), Ekaterina Ostapenko (1108), Abiodun Oyegoke (986), Karin Palme (782), Antoaneta Pandjerova (654), Ariela Perez (1056), Angela Mari Piedrahita (868), Betina Pirker (504), Ioana Plesu (784), Alexandra Podkolzina (531), Ilona Poljakova (1104), Julie Pullin (297), Cecilia Quarracino (763), Mariam Ramon Climent (635), Lyndsay Reilly (1023), Patricia Ribeiro (990), Ludmila Richterova (463), Brie Rippner (888), Alejandra Rivero (1024), Florencia Rivolta (788), Shadisha Robinson (461), Marc Rodezno Hernandez (925), Jacquelyn Rosen (693), Anna Rynarzewska (951), Daniela Salomon (618), Olivia Sanchez (304), Ma. Jo Sanchez Alayeto (362), Ma. Pi Sanchez Alayeto (859), Nirupama Sanjeev (521), Carlota Santos (1043), Ina Sartz (814), Wukirasih Sawondari (770), Julia Scaringe (1039), Monica Scartoni (909), Elizabeth Schmidt (766), Syna Schreiber (491), Lotty Seelen (421), Rawya Seif (854), Monica Seles (60), Irina Selyutina (519), Nicole Shabaz (908), Ekaterina Shulaeva (665), Natasa Sijakovic (819), Rosa Maria Sitja (665), Pavlina Slitrova (490), Irina Smirnova (986), Adriana Solarova (794), Anastasia Sourkova (1056), Lydia Steinbach (387), Evgenia Subbotina (878), Utako Suzuki (780), Tereza Svicova (1029), Keiko Tameishi (1082), Gaelle Taton (458), Petra Teller (904), Chattida Thimjapo (718), Catrina Thompson (1029), Christian Thompson (961), Jacqueline Trail (511), Olena Tsutskova (925), Radhika Tulpule (798), Iroda Tulyaganova (50), Rebecca Turner (1100), Courtney Ulery (883), Nami Urabe (864), Suza Van Hartingsveldt (498), Ali Van Horne (1006), Graciela Velez (525), Arthi Venkataraman (1029), Ragini Vimal (915), Gabriela Volekova (427), Visnja Vuletic (1003), Nana Wada (742), Vanessa Webb (155), Nina Wennerstrom (1072), Scarlett Werner (310), Jessica Weyreuter (1003), Monica Wiesener (986), Melanie Wolkersberger (873), Pauline Wong (1072), Dan Xiong (1056), Kanako Yano (935), Marianna Yuferova (566), Carla Zabaleta (888), Anna Zaporozhanova (323), Anna Zarska (385), Tory Zawacki (762), Magdalena Zdenovcova (206), Emma Zuleta (943)

Based on year-end 2003 rankings, the top players to fall off the rankings in 2004 were: 50. Iroda Tulyaganova 58. Maja Matevzic 60. Monica Seles 155. Vanessa Webb 204. Jana Nejedly Note that the top three were all injured and hope to return. No Top 100 players retired, though we lost Anna Kournikova.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 321 Players ranked in 2004 but not in 2003, with their 2004 final rankings (Total of 390) Olakunbi Abass (1240), Nadia Abdala (1090), Fatima Abinu (1138), Sara Abutovic (1183), Miljana Adanko (557), Kasumi Aiko (1154), Ronke Akianbade (1223), Ilge Alpay (1200), Orobosa Amadin (1231), Osaro Amadin (1138), Verena Amesbauer (975), Sanja Ancic (531), Mari Andersson (894), Kristina Andlovic (1183), Mailyne Andrieux (506), Lorena Arias (1115), Emily Arnott (1228), Diana Aroutiounova (1204), Kateryna Avdiyenko (550), Viktoria Azarenka (506), Maria Babich (923), Alesa Bagola (1096), Cecile Baijot (1034), Caroline Bailly (981), Marilyn Baker (1094), Heli Bargil (782), Lauren Barnikow (1060), Martina Bartosova (992), Masha Bayser (1180), Sarah Benad (1249), Alba Berdala Grive (1050), Janet Bergman (703), Astrid Besser (1009), Sanaa Bhambri (605), Anna Bielen-Zarska (377), Branka Bojovic (784), Annalisa Bona (891), Bianca Bonifate (885), Karoline Borgersen (871), Rebeca Bou Nogueiro (1072), Liset Brito (1154), Jenny Broughall (1228), Danielle Brown (1047), Laura Bsoul (1138), Nicole Buitoni (1015), Irina Bulykina (271), Tamara Bunic (965), Yakaterina Burduli (1154), Mihaela Buzarnescu (621), Patrizia Cacciaguerra (919), Tyra Calderwood (1231), Sandra Canrom (1183), Cecilia Cardenas (972), Chloe Carlotti (1204), Kit Carson (1126), Kar Castiblanco Duarte (1154), Celine Cattaneo (926), Kyung Yee Chae (905), Yung-Jan Chan (489), Yi Chen (696), Krushmi Chheda (958), Jeong-A Cho (751), Veronika Chvojkova (459), Sorana Cirstea (893), Raluca Ciulei (1165), Shana Claes (968), Sarah Coles (1060), Laurence Combes (490), Eloisamaria Compostizo (744), Mariana Conde (1090), Belen Corbalan (697), Corina Corduneanu (720), Alize Cornet (861), Vanja Corovic (828), Marina Cossou (1183), Irina Cybina (1026), Stephanie Dalmacio (1012), Ayu Fani Damayanti (1018), Talitha De Groot (933), Claire De Gubernatis (898), Jessie De Vries (955), Sara Del Barrio Aragon (627), Lenka Dlhopolcova (856), Simona Dobra (1096), Ria Doernemann (949), Tomoko Dokei (360), Nan Dong (1231), Suzana Dos Anjos (1204), Ruxandra Dragomir Ilie (259), Ekaterina Dranets (1050), Dorian Driessen (1131), Rui Du (582), Lizaan Du Plessis (596), Ana-Clara Duarte (1038), Julia Dziedzic (931), Jennifer Elie (631), Tamara Encina (678), Minami Endo (1253), Jessica Engels (1019), Carolina Escamilla (1183), Allessandra Esposito (944), Naoko Eto (1240), Anne-Valerie Evain (1253), Dia Evtimova (612), Lara Fakhoury (933), Audra Falk (1096), Sarah Fansler (488), Catarina Ferreira (958), Claire Feuerstein (854), Diane Filip (1223), Lauren Fisher (1101), Lucy Fletcher (868), Anna Floris (680), Yamile Fors (982), Nikola Frankova (1026), Helen Fritche (780), Vanesa Furlanetto (1101), Diana Gae (883), Varvara Galanina (945), Mary Gambale (441), Maria Paulina Gamboa (1240), Ioana Gaspar (869), Gala Gasset (1115), Debora Gbadamosi (1223), Sarah Gbadamosi (1240), Natia Gegia (1172), Anna Gerassimou (611), Celia Gil (808), Marinne Giraud (817), Alexa Glatch (362), Pavlina Glosova (1122), Madalina Gojnea (797), Rochelle Goldthreate (1247), Lucia Gonzales (1154), Carola Gonzalez King (1072), Parul Goswami (858), Julija Gotovskyte (1183), Olga Govortsova (600), Hannah Grady (586), Katie Granson (706), Kristina Grigorian (877), Maria Gugel (844), Laura Haberkorn (1131), Lisa Haegele (1180), Jie Hao (523), Laura Harkness (1240), Danielle Harmsen (980), Nina Henkel (1045), Fernanda Hermenegildo (645), Emily Hewson (419), Julia Hodes (978), Wen-Hsin Hsu (688), Di Hu (1238), Lei Huang (602), I-Hsuan Hwang (1172), Yvette Hyndman (987), Alexandra Iacob (1055), Lauren Imre (1204), Mami Inoue (851), Mitsuko Ise (742), Tara Iyer (797), Suhaila Jad Gomez (739), Klara Jagosova (1032), Adriana Jerabek (1128), Ana Jerman (1072), Chun- Mei Ji (791), Ping Jia (1253), Ia Jikia (758), Michaela Johansson (644), Amanda Johnson (987), Lindsey Jones (1151), Shilpa Joshi (1204), Karolina Jovanovic (820), Anet Kaasik (963), Yoshimi Kakuta (1253), Oksana Kalashnikova (1204), Asimina Kaplani (1038), Tatsiana Kapshai (1042), Veronika Kapshay (661), Maya Kato (807), Biffy Kaufmann (879), Tinatin Kavlashvili (570), Natasha Khan (1179), Olga Khrapkova (1115), Hae-Sung Kim (1154), Vania King (825), Ekaterina Kirianova (579), Carmen Klaschka (665), Urska Klemenc (1101), Andreja Klepac (412), Pooja Kommireddi (1223), Hiroko Komori (767), Agata Komorowska (1138), Galyna Kossyk (1228), Anna Koumantou (942), Michaella Krajicek (429), Danica Krstajic (452), Rati Kumar (1131), Yuko Kurata (1126), Danielle Kypreos (1221), Claire Lablans (1131), Essi Laine (1240), Johanna Larsson (1183), Martina Lautenschlager (819), Lenore Lazaroiu (866), Eun-Jeong Lee (335), Jin-A Lee (551), Ye-Ra Lee (716), Karin-Marlies Lems (1204), Yana Levchenko (914), He Wen Fei Li (1138), Na Li (80), Shan-Shan Li (1034), Andrea Lipovska (1067), Sabine Lisicki (951), Wan-Ting Liu (723), Wei-Juan Liu (603), Marie-Jose Lopez (492), Marian Lopez Terribile (1026), Cheng-Jie Lu (1138), Aleksandra Lukic (1072), Elizabeth Lumpkin (1115), Tetiana Luzhanska (595), Mi Lyoo (558), Sabita Maharaj (1172), Nelly Maillard (1060), Ekaterina Makarova (381), Anne Mall (374), Ana Martin Ramirez (1024), Sousan Massi (1122), Monica Mastan (1026), Alexandra Mayrat (1154), Leonie Mekel (601), Sabri Mendez-Dominguez (769), Marlena Metzinger (1183), Anastasia Michail (1069), Ani Mijacika (1096), Tatia Mikadze (663), Melisa Miranda (1154), Teodora Mircic (776), Katarina Misic (686), Eriko Mizuno (1086), Desislava Mladenova (915), Laura Moares (1183), Florencia Molinero (887), Berta Morata-Flaquer (1087), Megan Moulton-Levy (1122), Nina Munch-Soegaard (1115), Susanna Mussi (982), Wei Na (1037), Junri Namigata (519), Martina Navratilova (376), Martina Nejedly (1101), Yana Nemerowski (1154), Jessica Nguyen (424), Sylwia Niedbalo (952), Liudmila Nikoyan (1005), Petra Novotnikova (460), Eri Nozawa (978), Yanet Nunez (1080), Viky Nunez Fuentes (897), Ellah Nze (1183), Teresa Oberti (975), Tina Obrez (876), Alison Ojeda (987), Ayumi Oka (1020), Raluca-Ioana Olaru (766), Kaori Onishi (800), Alexandra Orasanu (844), Alina Orcholska (1204), Natalia Orlova (936), Ana Gloria Osorio (1000), Tanja Ostertag (762), Alexandra Panova (972), Karishma Patel (940), Eva Pera (1060), Teliana Pereira (936), Anda Perianu (635), Korina Perkovic (794), Vittoria Perugini (1038), Natalia Pervitskaya (915), Kveta Peschke (116), Claire Peterzan (538), Andrea Petkovic (416), Marina Petrovic (843), Lara Picone (848), Alicia Pillay (853), Erika Pineider (965), Nicole Pitts (603), Vendula Plechata (1101), Kateryna Polunina (945), Tea Popaja (1231), Andrea Popovic (734),

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 322 Yulja Pugach (1072), Eleonora Punzo (1069), Agnieszka Radwanska (941), Veronika Raimrova (776), Jelena Rajic (996), Anupama Rajur (1128), Chirashanthi Rajur (1101), Natalia Rakhmanina (1080), Madhura Ranganathan (924), Punam Reddy (572), Irene Rehberger-Bescos (903), Jing Ren (1000), Anastasia Revzina (871), Aravane Rezai (497), Rebekah Rhodes (993), Holly Richards (1183), Birgit Ritschka (928), Jessi Robinson (1093), Shannon Robinson (1204), Evgeniya Rodina (1138), Geraldine Roma (859), Maria-Sol Rotondo (1204), Natalia Rudnouskaya (1060), Magdalena Rybarikova (924), Sonia Sandano (1231), Ana Paula Saviole (1204), Andra Savu (1101), Wukirasih Sawondari (1042), Karin Schlapbach (822), Kelly Schmandt (970), Vivian Segnini (1204), Erika Sema (905), Dina Senkina (1223), Soon-Mi Seo (691), Anamaria Sere (871), Manana Shapakidze (1204), Sophia Shapatava (1101), Yuan-Yuan Shi (1249), Lauren Shumate (1022), Andrea Sieveke (672), Katarzyna Siwosz (998), Ildiko Stadler (936), Carla Suárez Navarro (613), Tomoko Sugano (1221), Shengnan Sun (588), Anna Sydorska (790), Agnes Szatmari (743), Agnes Szavay (378), Nino Szownadze (1204), Erika Takao (676), Minori Takemoto (920), Sarah Tami (1005), Mari Tanaka (998), Natalie Tanevska (902), Elena Tchalova (846), Sandrine Testud (311), Elizabeth Thomas (985), Pichittra Thongdach (909), Carmen Raluca Tibuleac (714), Timna Ticic (862), Antonia Xenia Tout (1183), Aleke Tsoubanos (773), Story Tweedie-Yates (730), Yuko Uchida (1113), Nicole Vaidisova (77), Roxane Vaisemberg (821), Victori Valls-Comamala (1172), Lyutﬁya Velieva (1044), Nadege Vergos (827), Ana Veselinovic (1154), Lorena Villalobos (1069), Michaela Vogel (869), Stefanie Vogele (711), Martine Vosseberg (1183), Diana Vranceanu (699), Julie Ann Welford (1249), Bronwyn Williams (1180), Shuang Wu (1183), Wen-Hao Wu (684), Yukiko Yabe (576), Shu-Jing Yang (475), Soo Mi Yoo (570), Dan Yu (694), Ying Yu (591), Qing Yue (1249), Riza Zalameda (1115), Erika Zanchetta (1128), Masa Zec-Peskiric (498), Jie Zeng (987), Shuai Zhang (901), Yan Zhang (1094), Jia Zhao (1000), Yi-Jing Zhao (656), Jing Zhou (1151), Natasa Zoric (1138), Katarina Zoricic (747), Ana-Maria Zubori (904)

The ﬁve highest-ranked players to come on the rankings in 2003 were: 77. Nicole Vaidisova 90. Li Na 116. Kveta (Hrdlickova) Peschke 259. Ruxandra Dragomir Ilie 271. Irina Bulykina

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 323 Players ranked in both 2003 and 2004 (total of 866) Ivana Abramovic (216, -68, -46%), Marija Abramovic (512, 184, 26%), Bianca Acquistapace (760, 348, 31%), Julia Acs (818, - 14, -2%), Monique Adamczak (336, -65, -24%), Ekaterina Afinogenova (454, 217, 32%), Susanne Aigner (773, -99, -15%), Joanne Akl (799, 174, 18%), Maria Fernanda Alves (174, 45, 21%), Akgul Amanmuradova (359, 46, 11%), Anca Anastasiu (898, -237, -36%), Rosa Maria Andres (278, 5, 2%), Liza Andriyani (599, -27, -5%), Maret Ani (204, -62, -44%), Olena Antypina (352, 215, 38%), Kaori Aoyama (388, 155, 29%), Maki Arai (516, -52, -11%), Melisa Arevalo (909, -352, -63%), Maria Jose Argeri (296, 65, 18%), Maria Arkhipova (540, 190, 26%), Greta Arn (351, -52, -17%), Marcela Arroyo (653, -19, - 3%), Sofia Arvidsson (176, -63, -56%), Shinobu Asagoe (37, 8, 18%), Teryn Ashley (150, -35, -30%), Lata Assudani (1172, - 211, -22%), Sofia Avakova (745, 149, 17%), Cory Ann Avants (264, 10, 4%), Virginie Ayassamy (553, 402, 42%), Martina Babakova (875, -387, -79%), Julia Babilon (423, 633, 60%), Zsuzsanna Babos (707, -225, -47%), Lubomira Bacheva (219, -67, -44%), Angelika Bachmann (196, 20, 9%), Emilie Bacquet (695, 261, 27%), Timea Bacsinszky (247, 208, 46%), Hae-Youm Bae (1055, 49, 4%), Holly Bagshaw (673, 6, 1%), Elisabeth Bahn (731, -107, -17%), Ally Baker (637, -346, -119%), Gabrielle Baker (1009, -549, -119%), Katharine Baker (874, -123, -16%), Leanne Baker (527, -90, -21%), Liana Balaci (314, 140, 31%), Estefania Balda (662, 160, 19%), Alice Balducci (863, -25, -3%), Elisa Balsamo (414, 48, 10%), Elena Baltacha (202, 171, 46%), Sybille Bammer (151, 19, 11%), Olga Barabanschikova (435, -286, -192%), Vasilisa Bardina (446, 366, 45%), Adriana Barna (244, -49, -25%), Anca Barna (85, -37, -77%), Cassandra Barr (705, -22, -3%), Marion Bartoli (41, 16, 28%), Anna Bastrikova (317, 246, 44%), Daja Bedanova (400, -244, -156%), Celine Beermann (794, 99, 11%), Janette Bejlkova (655, 335, 34%), Verena Beller (1183, -897, -314%), Severine Beltrame (95, 52, 35%), Iveta Benesova (36, 104, 74%), Andrea Benitez (403, 451, 53%), Melissa Berry (836, -89, -12%), Yulia Beygelzimer (162, -45, -38%), Ankita Bhambri (440, 282, 39%), Bea Bielik (647, -455, -237%), Raffaella Bindi (472, -53, -13%), Eva Birnerova (139, -29, -26%), Erica Biro (409, 32, 7%), Cara Black (134, -82, -158%), Olga Blahotova (252, -81, -47%), Michelle Blattler (1055, 17, 2%), Stefania Boffa (620, 436, 41%), Natalia Bogdanova (609, 179, 23%), Katerina Bohmova (163, 290, 64%), Alyona Bondarenko (126, 64, 34%), Katerina Bondarenko (333, 21, 6%), Valeria Bondarenko (804, -19, -2%), Krizia Borgarello (649, 86, 12%), Sarah Borwell (417, -68, - 19%), Elena Bovina (15, 6, 29%), Daniela Bracaglia (1113, -174, -19%), Allison Bradshaw (740, -416, -128%), Kristina Brandi (48, 30, 38%), Nina Bratchikova (229, 196, 46%), Lauren Breadmore (326, -62, -23%), Alberta Brianti (331, -31, -10%), Alanna Broderick (725, 265, 27%), Olga Brozda (508, 206, 29%), Diana Brunel (732, -157, -27%), Irina Buryachok (953, -89, -10%), Leslie Butkiewicz (345, 76, 18%), Ekaterina Bychkova (187, 188, 50%), Estrell Cabeza Candela (530, 399, 43%), Marina Caiazzo (487, 84, 15%), Els Callens (122, -48, -65%), Maria Elena Camerin (43, 56, 57%), Alice Canepa (181, 150, 45%), Jennifer Capriati (10, -4, -67%), Fernanda Caputi (715, 149, 17%), Ansley Cargill (240, -137, -133%), Larissa Carvalho (379, 3, 1%), Myriam Casanova (121, -19, -19%), Giulia Casoni (285, -54, -23%), Catalina Castano (110, 23, 17%), Vilmarie Castellvi (136, 106, 44%), Valentina Castro (509, 364, 42%), Cristina Celani (881, 90, 9%), Zuzana Cerna (736, -195, -36%), Ludmila Cervanova (100, -36, -56%), Petra Cetkovska (432, 49, 10%), Margalit Chakhnashvili (626, -209, -50%), Rushmi Chakravarthi (346, 88, 20%), Anna Chakvetadze (84, 290, 78%), Chin-Wei Chan (288, 103, 26%), Kyung-Mi Chang (501, -163, -48%), Daria Chemarda (960, -347, -57%), Yan-Chong Chen (442, 405, 48%), Lauren Cheung (962, -418, -77%), Kildine Chevalier (340, - 112, -49%), Stefania Chieppa (547, -24, -5%), Denisa Chladkova (54, -11, -26%), Yoon Jeong Cho (207, -130, -169%), Jin- Young Choi (534, -61, -13%), Wilawan Choptang (666, -98, -17%), Chia-Jung Chuang (200, 113, 36%), Erika Clarke (532, 167, 24%), Nicole Clerico (542, 150, 22%), Elke Clijsters (648, -217, -50%), Kim Clijsters (22, -20, -1000%), Brenda Coassolo (810, -104, -15%), Tanner Cochran (481, -224, -87%), Amanda Coetzer (280, -255, -1020%), Julia Cohen (669, 99, 13%), Melanie Cohen (608, 83, 12%), Stephanie Cohen-Aloro (112, -47, -72%), Hannah Collin (528, -108, -26%), Isabel Collischonn (749, -325, -77%), Bruna Colosio (476, -61, -15%), Chantal Coombs (955, -498, -109%), Mariana Correa (839, -122, -17%), Joana Cortez (593, -221, -59%), Estefania Craciun (643, 38, 6%), Jorgelina Cravero (461, -153, -50%), Jill Craybas (59, 39, 40%), Dubravka Cupac (420, 162, 28%), Kristina Czafikova (438, 378, 46%), Melinda Czink (131, -48, -58%), Tiffany Dabek (263, -8, -3%), Lisa D’amelio (565, 310, 35%), Eleni Daniilidou (34, -8, -31%), Lindsay Davenport (1, 4, 80%), Eunice David (1183, -503, -74%), Vasilisa Davydova (783, 59, 7%), Surina De Beer (828, -238, -40%), Stefanie De Laet (805, 185, 19%), Magali De Lattre (987, -205, -26%), Nathalie Déchy (21, 8, 28%), Rita Degliesposti (729, -377, -107%), Liga Dekmeijere (445, 63, 12%), Irina Delitz (889, -360, -68%), Casey Dellacqua (301, -26, -9%), Laura Dell’angelo (786, -439, -127%), Servane Delobelle (493, 56, 10%), Elena Dementieva (6, 2, 25%), Emilia Desiderio (968, -167, -21%), Salome Devidze (303, 4, 1%), Shruti Dhawan (741, 18, 2%), Caroline Dhenin (802, -327, -69%), Mariana Diaz-Oliva (108, 80, 43%), Amy Dillingham (943, - 73, -8%), Silvia Disderi (771, -369, -92%), Mireille Dittmann (415, -73, -21%), Julie Ditty (266, 15, 5%), Jelena Dokic (125, - 110, -733%), Marta Domachowska (74, 170, 70%), Lourdes Dominguez Lino (209, 94, 31%), Daniella Dominikovic (500, 467, 48%), Evie Dominikovic (153, -23, -18%), Yan-Hua Dong (866, -43, -5%), Vera Douchevina (63, 45, 42%), Gianna Doz (735, 316, 30%), Maureen Drake (184, -72, -64%), Stephanie Dubois (253, 227, 47%), Nina Duebbers (390, -194, -99%), Gisela Dulko (33, 91, 73%), Amandine Dulon (1138, -873, -329%), Anastasia Dvornikova (1110, -494, -80%), Ekaterina Dzehalevich (293, 147, 33%), Natallia Dziamidzenka (355, 16, 4%), Emmanuelle Edon (304, 109, 26%), Sabrina Eisenberg (722, -169, - 31%), Heidi El Tabakh (658, 75, 10%), Sara Errani (521, 48, 8%), Sophie Erre (1111, -637, -134%), Pilar Escandell (748, -174, -30%), Mariana Esperon (294, 177, 38%), Franziska Etzel (568, 29, 5%), Marcela Evangelista (709, -145, -26%), Megan Falcon

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 324 (370, 501, 58%), Yomna Farid (961, -294, -44%), Silvia Farina Elia (20, 4, 17%), Gulnara Fattakhetdinova (257, 45, 15%), Evelyn Fauth (372, -172, -86%), Yuliana Fedak (83, 131, 61%), Youlia Fedossova (313, 95, 23%), Sophie Ferguson (268, 407, 60%), Clarisa Fernandez (356, -266, -296%), Jessica Fernandez (535, -132, -33%), Eva Fernandez-Brugues (670, 126, 16%), Debbrich Feys (456, -7, -2%), Eva Fislova (212, -84, -66%), Christina Fitz (971, -470, -94%), Kirsten Flipkens (169, 194, 53%), Zsuzsanna Fodor (1101, -459, -71%), Galina Fokina (316, -122, -63%), Anna Foldenyi (562, -250, -80%), Paula Fondevila Castro (638, -77, -14%), Rebecca Fong (770, 332, 30%), Stacia Fonseca (564, 174, 24%), Anna Font (575, -53, -10%), Stephanie Foretz (93, 7, 7%), Marta Fraga (275, 136, 33%), Francesca Frappi (518, 57, 10%), Amy Frazier (26, 35, 57%), Elizabet Freeman-Young (1021, 35, 3%), Ryoko Fuda (321, 83, 21%), Haruka Fujishiro (878, 10, 1%), Rika Fujiwara (158, 57, 27%), Christina Fusano (433, 573, 57%), Giulia Gabba (469, 492, 51%), Emmanuelle Gagliardi (104, -48, -86%), Jarmila Gajdosova (217, -20, -10%), Mariona Gallifa Puigdesens (778, -53, -7%), Edina Gallovits (186, 1, 1%), Elena Gancheva (883, 123, 12%), Quan Gao (543, 93, 15%), Natalia Garbellotto (320, 200, 38%), Tathiana Garbin (58, 26, 31%), Paula Garcia (156, 91, 37%), Vanina Garcia Sokol (211, 68, 24%), Julianna Gates (835, 155, 16%), Giulia Gatto Monticone (666, 337, 34%), Stephanie Gehrlein (197, -31, -19%), Michelle Gerards (237, 153, 39%), Iveta Gerlova (633, -131, -26%), Ilke Gers (646, -254, -65%), Maria Geznenge (329, -95, -41%), Anna Gil Mares (933, -50, -6%), Lara Giltinan (671, 179, 21%), Yael Glitzenshtein (761, -7, -1%), Melanie Gloria (341, 431, 56%), Oana-Elen Golimbioschi (654, -286, -78%), Tatiana Golovin (27, 318, 92%), Maria Goloviznina (270, -19, -8%), Adriana Gonzalez Penas (583, -251, -76%), Raissa Gourevitch (1000, -402, -67%), Sheethal Goutham (963, 63, 6%), Amanda Grahame (1080, -541, -100%), Rita Grande (103, -33, -47%), Natalie Grandin (180, -30, - 20%), Laura Granville (76, -30, -65%), Stephanie Greau (526, 259, 33%), Anna-Lena Groenefeld (75, 45, 38%), Zsoﬁa Gubacsi (201, -2, -1%), Sheila Guerberg (823, -83, -11%), Carly Gullickson (398, -171, -75%), Sandy Gumulya (474, 250, 35%), Natalia Gussoni (205, -47, -30%), Ji-Sun Ha (994, -321, -48%), Melanie Hafner (708, 227, 24%), Stefanie Haidner (371, -134, - 57%), Natsumi Hamamura (397, 445, 53%), Florentina Hanisch (1096, -7, -1%), Daniela Hantuchova (31, -12, -63%), Florence Haring (348, 264, 43%), Ashley Harkleroad (124, -73, -143%), Nadine Hassinger (986, -371, -60%), Anna Hawkins (719, 20, 3%), Angela Haynes (133, 53, 28%), Stephanie Hazlett (502, -156, -45%), Anne-Laure Heitz (436, -48, -12%), Zuzana Hejdova (396, -106, -37%), Justine Hénin-Hardenne (8, -7, -700%), Vanessa Henke (192, 54, 22%), Audrey Hernandez (792, -17, -2%), Jaslyn Hewitt (357, 184, 34%), Shiho Hisamatsu (224, 8, 3%), Andrea Hlavackova (443, 243, 35%), Jana Hlavackova (386, - 160, -71%), Eva-Maria Hoch (560, -23, -4%), Lejla Hodzic (1022, -195, -24%), Andrea Hoﬁnger (1240, -297, -31%), Kika Hogendoorn (1204, -440, -58%), Patricia Holzman (724, 266, 27%), Da Jung Hong (650, -222, -52%), Marielle Hoogland (513, -118, -30%), Jennifer Hopkins (132, 30, 19%), Christiane Hoppmann (728, -214, -42%), Zita Horanyi (922, 51, 5%), Christina Horiatopoulos (554, 245, 31%), Naoko Horikawa (921, -190, -26%), Lucie Hradecka (258, 152, 37%), Eva Hrdinova (245, 405, 62%), Stanislava Hrozenska (198, -5, -3%), Su-Wei Hsieh (426, 227, 35%), Violette Huck (580, 471, 45%), Janette Husarova (213, -88, -70%), Laura-Ramona Husaru (757, -116, -18%), Kelley Hyndman (879, -252, -40%), Iris Ichim (737, 14, 2%), Kumiko Iijima (573, 57, 9%), Mari Inoue (895, -194, -28%), Marissa Irvin (72, 51, 41%), Ivanna Israilova (625, -119, -24%), Ekaterina Ivanova (642, 70, 10%), Ana Ivanovic (97, 608, 86%), Claudia Ivone (702, -143, -26%), Alice Izomor (1072, -66, - 7%), Jamea Jackson (179, 269, 60%), Karina Jacobsgaard (597, -92, -18%), Dragana Jakovljevic (1247, -135, -12%), Claire Jalade (915, -107, -13%), Amanda Janes (239, 56, 19%), Jelena Jankovic (28, 57, 67%), Klaudia Jans (450, 179, 28%), J. Sai Jayalakshmy (578, -51, -10%), Mi-Ra Jeon (167, 66, 28%), Alina Jidkova (55, 42, 43%), Lucia Jimenez (407, 230, 36%), Mathilde Johansson (399, 222, 36%), Sabrina Jolk (389, 9, 2%), Beau Jones (712, 117, 14%), Whitney Jones (896, -66, -8%), Ana Jovanovic (514, -181, -54%), Betina Jozami (617, 53, 8%), Mervana Jugic-Salkic (157, -23, -17%), Diana Julianto (837, - 281, -51%), Yoo-Mi Jung (832, -77, -10%), Darija Jurak (324, -121, -60%), Katarina Kachlikova (291, 256, 47%), Bianca Kamper (886, -341, -63%), Kaia Kanepi (226, -59, -35%), Aniko Kapros (86, 6, 7%), Sesil Karatantcheva (127, 399, 76%), Alexandra Karavaeva (1231, -332, -37%), Claudia Kardys (1131, -735, -186%), Oxana Karyshkova (470, 16, 3%), Shizu Katsumi (566, -30, -6%), Moe Kawatoko (837, -220, -36%), Jodi Kenoyer (682, -87, -15%), Anne Keothavong (175, 2, 1%), Angelique Kerber (375, 58, 13%), Natasha Kersten (888, -39, -5%), Chin Bee Khoo (1050, -707, -206%), Hye-Mi Kim (849, - 3, 0%), Jin-Hee Kim (297, -27, -10%), Ji-Young Kim (953, -156, -20%), Mi-Ok Kim (467, 95, 17%), So Jung Kim (327, 486, 60%), Akiko Kinebuchi (779, -284, -57%), Satomi Kinjo (511, 294, 37%), Nikoleta Kipritidou (726, 98, 12%), Maria Kirilenko (111, 11, 9%), Jessica Kirkland (241, 125, 34%), Magdalena Kiszczynska (484, 149, 24%), Etsuko Kitazaki (833, 85, 9%), Daniela Kix (358, 71, 17%), Sabine Klaschka (255, 82, 24%), Sandra Kleinova (140, -52, -59%), Daniela Klemenschits (763, - 155, -25%), Sandra Klemenschits (479, -98, -26%), Alisa Kleybanova (364, 259, 42%), Sandra Kloesel (189, -21, -13%), Karin Knapp (594, 152, 20%), Beier Ko (353, 2, 1%), Elizabeth Kobak (1000, -169, -20%), Andrea Koch (676, 134, 17%), Arpi Kojian (704, 91, 11%), Natalia Kolat (713, 343, 32%), Annette Kolb (615, -32, -5%), Maria Kondratieva (238, 119, 33%), Raquel Kops-Jones (559, 20, 3%), Mariya Koryttseva (292, -91, -45%), Anna Korzeniak (1045, -146, -16%), Karolina Kosinska (308, 324, 51%), Jelena Kostanic (35, 32, 48%), Alexandra Kostikova (1151, -270, -31%), Irina Kotkina (524, 307, 37%), Klara Koukalova (46, 16, 26%), Ekaterina Kozhokina (494, 66, 12%), Lina Krasnoroutskaya (138, -111, -411%), Dimana Krastevitch (328, -106, -48%), Erica Krauth (284, 22, 7%), Alexandra Kravets (431, -233, -118%), Daniela Krejsova (1038, -113, -12%), Anne Kremer (94, 295, 76%), Lucie Kriegsmannova (1090, -430, -65%), Kavitha Krishnamurthy (693, 208, 23%), Svetlana Krivencheva (408, -190, -87%), Nicole Kriz (515, -71, -16%), Lucija Krzelj (322, -63, -24%), Renata Kucerkova (495, -36, - 8%), Zuzana Kucova (227, -19, -9%), Alla Kudryavtseva (809, 38, 4%), Claudia Kuleszka (753, -25, -3%), Evgenia

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 325 Kulikovskaya (814, -650, -396%), Lubomira Kurhajcova (89, -3, -3%), Iryna Kuryanovich (402, 101, 20%), Imke Kusgen (640, 118, 16%), Darya Kustava (548, 10, 2%), Rita Kuti Kis (236, -62, -36%), Viktoriya Kutuzova (471, -199, -73%), Irina Kuzmina (483, 189, 28%), Svetlana Kuznetsova (5, 31, 86%), Emma Laine (165, 695, 81%), Isha Lakhani (639, -161, -34%), Po-Kuen Lam (907, -252, -38%), Bianka Lamade (1050, -874, -497%), Orawan Lamangthong (947, -154, -19%), Anais Laurendon (563, -281, -100%), Olha Lazarchuk (208, 60, 22%), Janet Lee (305, -145, -91%), Lindsay Lee-Waters (82, 54, 40%), Sophie Lefevre (393, -137, -54%), Jessica Lehnhoff (193, 160, 45%), Nicole Leimbach (486, 365, 43%), Gala Leon Garcia (214, -118, -123%), Varvara Lepchenko (230, 287, 56%), Pascale Leroy (382, 306, 44%), Marta Lesniak (499, 85, 15%), Ting Li (168, 268, 61%), Kelly Liggan (267, -56, -27%), Elena Likhovtseva (24, 13, 35%), Evgenia Linetskaya (96, 125, 57%), Ivana Lisjak (363, -140, - 63%), Veronika Litvinskaya (634, 50, 7%), Amber Liu (590, -338, -134%), Nan-Nan Liu (170, 231, 58%), Nuria Llagostera Vives (79, 60, 43%), Rebecca Llewellyn (622, 166, 21%), Nancy Loefﬂer-Caro (1231, -260, -27%), Emilie Loit (45, -4, -10%), Nudnida Luangnam (806, 119, 13%), Francesca Lubiani (477, -141, -42%), Olivia Lukaszewicz (840, -96, -13%), Vojislava Lukic (652, 24, 4%), Hee Sun Lyoo-Suh (812, 83, 9%), Oxana Lyubtsova (584, 152, 21%), Alice Mackenzie (927, -209, -29%), Caroline Maes (525, -276, -111%), Iva Majoli (315, -184, -140%), Borka Majstorovic (796, -244, -44%), Magdalena Maleeva (25, 5, 17%), Tatjana Malek (552, 99, 15%), Sanda Mamic (101, 128, 56%), Petra Mandula (81, -41, -103%), Melissa Mang (1138, -234, -26%), Geeta Manohar (683, 239, 26%), Eden Marama (383, 113, 23%), Paula Marama (541, 68, 11%), Krystina Marcio (529, 329, 38%), Melanie Marois (361, -123, -52%), Katalin Marosi (299, -127, -74%), Marta Marrero (47, 62, 57%), Conchita Martinez (42, -24, -133%), Conchita Martinez Granados (152, -47, -45%), Sandra Martinovic (466, 133, 22%), Simona Matei (325, 61, 16%), Antonia Matic (243, 55, 18%), Bethanie Mattek (166, -31, -23%), Amelie Mauresmo (2, 2, 50%), Kelly McCain (128, 168, 57%), Lisa McShea (1072, -755, -238%), Anabel Medina Garrigues (39, 32, 45%), Samia Medjahdi (840, 127, 13%), Nicole Melch (624, -69, -12%), Soﬁa Melikishvili (503, 182, 27%), Septi Mende (679, 74, 10%), Stella Menna (1168, -79, -7%), Jolanda Mens (850, -400, -89%), Giulia Meruzzi (660, 81, 11%), Yvonne Meusburger (172, 88, 34%), Matea Mezak (338, 41, 11%), Michaela Michalkova (630, -233, -59%), Ana Migliarini De Leon (536, -97, -22%), Flavia Mignola (394, 186, 32%), Magda Mihalache (256, 66, 20%), Marie-Gayanay Mikaelian (144, -78, -118%), Katie Miles (1200, -290, - 32%), Anna-Maria Miller (863, -148, -21%), Mandy Minella (344, 296, 46%), Sania Mirza (206, 193, 48%), Aurelija Miseviciute (1007, -677, -205%), Alicia Molik (13, 22, 63%), Eszter Molnar (701, -295, -73%), Sylvia Montero (950, -471, - 98%), Milangela Morales (385, 41, 10%), Micaela Moran (726, -175, -32%), Akiko Morigami (68, -5, -8%), Giorgia Mortello (406, 140, 26%), Svetlana Mossiakova (890, -53, -6%), Bahia Mouhtassine (173, 10, 5%), Karla Mraz (1125, -680, -153%), Mariana Muci (975, -159, -19%), Alexandra Müller (422, 198, 32%), Martina Müller (182, 145, 44%), Daniela Munoz (504, 8, 2%), Matilde Munoz (457, 317, 41%), Trudi Musgrave (418, -100, -31%), Anastasia Myskina (3, 4, 57%), Chie Nagano (995, - 114, -13%), Sandhya Nagraj (957, 72, 7%), Kyra Nagy (194, 18, 8%), Henrieta Nagyova (154, -63, -69%), Aiko Nakamura (123, 144, 54%), Ljiljana Nanusevic (859, 47, 5%), Gabriela Navratilova (434, -157, -57%), Rossana Neffa-De Los Rios (195, - 44, -29%), Lenka Nemeckova (148, 36, 20%), Virag Nemeth (141, 98, 41%), Natalie Neri (1178, -488, -71%), Kim Anh Nguyen (768, 10, 1%), Gabriela Niculescu (544, 407, 43%), Monica Niculescu (430, 21, 5%), Dominika Nociarova (228, 20, 8%), Ana Nogueira (447, 250, 36%), Hanna Nooni (178, 114, 39%), Seda Noorlander (309, -165, -115%), Helena Norfeldt (759, 29, 4%), Irena Nossenko (733, -4, -1%), Karen Nugent (545, 162, 23%), Saori Obata (107, -58, -118%), Katie O’Brien (401, 341, 46%), Tzipora Obziler (109, 20, 16%), Jane O’Donoghue (231, 4, 2%), Seiko Okamoto (276, 11, 4%), Hiromi Okazaki (930, 70, 7%), Zuzana Ondraskova (143, -56, -64%), Romina Oprandi (478, 465, 49%), Diana Ospina (342, -89, - 35%), Lilia Osterloh (120, 60, 33%), Nadejda Ostrovskaya (289, -87, -43%), Maika Ozaki (505, -121, -32%), Nika Ozegovic (269, 91, 25%), Pemra Ozgen (915, -213, -30%), Olga Panova (581, 220, 27%), Tatiana Panova (78, 41, 34%), Natalia Papadopoulou (1200, -100, -9%), Pauline Parmentier (261, 232, 47%), Arantxa Parra Santonja (70, -2, -3%), Lourdes Pascual Rodriguez (555, 10, 2%), Michaela Pastikova (106, 32, 23%), Karen Paterson (448, -32, -8%), Martina Pavelec (697, 112, 14%), Nadja Pavic (354, 294, 45%), Biljana Pavlova (932, -97, -12%), Shahar Peer (183, 526, 74%), Marie-Eve Pelletier (147, 44, 23%), Shuai Peng (73, 253, 78%), Maria Penkova (463, 52, 10%), Flavia Pennetta (38, 31, 45%), Tatiana Perebiynis (90, - 10, -13%), Liza Pereira (898, -304, -51%), Shenay Perry (69, 74, 52%), Nandini Perumal (1047, -135, -15%), Stefania Pesce (788, -86, -12%), Jewel Peterson (234, 86, 27%), Klara Petersson (1131, -148, -15%), Nadia Petrova (12, 0, 0%), Elena Petrucciano (1066, -226, -27%), Sonal Phadke (699, -103, -17%), Virginie Pichet (145, 44, 23%), Frederica Piedade (220, 65, 23%), Mary Pierce (29, 4, 12%), Camille Pin (98, 122, 55%), Kate Pinchbeck (574, 396, 41%), Carmen Pinto (1165, -76, -7%), Tzvetana Pironkova (295, 49, 14%), Tina Pisnik (130, -99, -319%), Gloria Pizzichini (606, 333, 35%), Barbara Pocza (444, 158, 26%), Barbara Polidoro (1085, -167, -18%), Alexandra Popa (947, 93, 9%), Lana Popadic (199, 94, 32%), Karla Porter (1199, - 110, -10%), Laura Pous Tio (155, 287, 65%), Tatiana Poutchek (232, -111, -92%), Olga Poutchkova (273, 192, 41%), Anna Powaska (913, 166, 15%), Wynne Prakusya (339, -134, -65%), Nicole Pratt (51, 2, 4%), Tatjana Priachin (520, 360, 41%), Libuse Prusova (188, 25, 12%), Federica Quercia (811, 84, 9%), Sarah Raab (789, 293, 27%), Iciri Rai (765, 264, 26%), Petra Rampre (368, -127, -53%), Dally Randriantefy (62, 39, 39%), Natacha Randriantefy (775, -186, -32%), Preeti Rao (1067, -124, -13%), Sunitha Rao (190, 17, 8%), Lisa Raymond (30, -2, -7%), Virginie Razzano (60, 12, 17%), Alexandra Recio (772, 143, 16%), Arancha Recio (1084, -256, -31%), Samantha Reeves (203, -128, -171%), Nicole Remis (350, -49, -16%), Andrea Remynse (577, 390, 40%), Nicole Rencken (668, -310, -87%), Tania Rice (718, 88, 11%), Claire Ricketts (785, 285, 27%), Sarah Riske (405, 238, 37%), Laura Ritchey-Thomas (709, 234, 25%), Barbara Rittner (233, -115, -97%), Veronica Rizhik (833,

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 326 -419, -101%), Stephanie Rizzi (464, 70, 13%), Deanna Roberts (929, -301, -48%), Laura Rocchi (587, -14, -2%), Anastassia Rodionova (215, -50, -30%), Angelika Roesch (235, -25, -12%), Nuria Roig (300, 310, 51%), Ahsha Rolle (369, 283, 43%), Tiya Rolle (908, 181, 17%), Nadja Roma (1072, 32, 3%), Maya Rosa (1055, -217, -26%), Alicja Rosolska (909, -133, -17%), Capucine Rousseau (119, 154, 56%), Virginia Ruano Pascual (64, -9, -16%), Chanda Rubin (53, -44, -489%), Petra Russegger (428, -88, -26%), Nancy Rustignoli (1015, -278, -38%), Margit Ruutel (319, 288, 47%), Katia Sabate (824, -45, -6%), Miho Saeki (246, 23, 9%), Lucie Safarova (185, 348, 65%), Dinara Saﬁna (44, 10, 19%), Misae Sakai (1111, -61, -6%), Joanna Sakowicz (274, 242, 47%), Ana Salas Lozano (753, -161, -27%), Maria Emilia Salerni (114, 59, 34%), Carolina Salge (1087, - 227, -26%), Florencia Salvadores (659, -54, -9%), Nadejda Samoilo (1032, 50, 5%), Nuria Sanchez Garcia (982, -266, -37%), Maria Sanchez Lorenzo (52, -10, -24%), Raluca Sandu (561, -52, -10%), Mara Santangelo (91, 55, 38%), Valentina Sassi (283, 32, 10%), Olga Savchuk (279, 153, 35%), Yevgenia Savransky (366, 188, 34%), Stephanie Schaer (996, -410, -70%), Claudine Schaul (61, 20, 25%), Chanelle Scheepers (210, 35, 14%), Barbara Schett (88, -9, -11%), Francesca Schiavone (19, 1, 5%), Tina Schiechtl (465, -222, -91%), Nadine Schlotterer (618, 95, 13%), Kristen Schlukebir (249, 17, 6%), Tina Schmassmann (800, - 40, -5%), Jennifer Schmidt (425, 88, 17%), Caroline Schneider (842, -165, -24%), Monika Schneider (607, 103, 15%), Patty Schnyder (14, 9, 39%), Julia Schruff (105, 9, 8%), Barbara Schwartz (310, -125, -68%), Darina Sedenkova (1030, -460, -81%), Nicole Seitenbecher (615, 83, 12%), Samrita Sekar (1115, -388, -53%), Beti Sekulovski (685, -185, -37%), Yurika Sema (585, 171, 23%), Ipek Senoglu (307, 4, 1%), Milagros Sequera (142, -66, -87%), Chrissie Seredni (812, 109, 12%), Magui Serna (102, -80, -364%), Adriana Serra Zanetti (254, -150, -144%), Antonella Serra Zanetti (99, 8, 7%), Delia Sescioreanu (146, 116, 44%), Meta Sevsek (891, 67, 7%), Nicole Sewell (681, -182, -36%), Selima Sfar (117, 46, 28%), Marina Shamayko (567, 205, 27%), Maria Sharapova (4, 28, 88%), Meghann Shaughnessy (40, -23, -135%), Jung-Yoon Shin (1080, -137, -15%), Yaroslava Shvedova (756, -262, -53%), Laura Siegemund (847, -246, -41%), Malgorzata Silka (1138, -237, -26%), Neuza Silva (421, 311, 42%), Marta Simic (1012, 44, 4%), Amandine Singla (632, -282, -81%), Lioudmila Skavronskaia (149, 32, 18%), Kaysie Smashey (462, 68, 13%), Anna Smashnova (32, -16, -100%), Linda Smolenakova (549, 82, 13%), Lenka Snajdrova (692, -353, -104%), Tara Snyder (223, -112, -101%), Michelle Snyman (664, -132, -25%), Leticia Sobral (411, -55, -15%), Ivana Sokac (1011, -68, -7%), Silvia Soler-Espinos (689, 269, 28%), Sheila Solsona Carcasona (1200, -157, -15%), Shan-Shan Song (852, 220, 21%), Aneta Soukup (674, -17, -3%), Melanie South (453, 398, 47%), Danielle Spacek (1065, 47, 4%), Abigail Spears (92, 133, 59%), Veronica Spiegel (517, 97, 16%), Karolina Sprem (18, 41, 69%), Katarina Srebotnik (87, -48, -123%), Diana Srebrovic (826, -550, -199%), Aleksandra Srndovic (623, -138, -28%), Hana Sromova (225, 25, 10%), Lina Stanciute (277, 12, 4%), Danielle Steinberg (721, 257, 26%), Emily Stellato (365, 101, 22%), Shelley Stephens (337, 41, 11%), Alexandra Stevenson (282, -200, -244%), Bryanne Stewart (485, -118, -32%), Elena Stoianova (828, 162, 16%), Dijana Stojic (614, 376, 38%), Sarah Stone (1168, -229, -24%), Samantha Stosur (65, 88, 58%), Barbora Strycova (56, 105, 65%), Paola Suárez (16, -2, -14%), Martina Sucha (57, 32, 36%), Madita Suer (598, 8, 1%), Ai Sugiyama (17, -7, -70%), Valentina Sulpizio (510, 224, 31%), Tiantian Sun (118, 23, 16%), Eun Hee Sung (1047, -64, -7%), Piia Suomalainen (936, 90, 9%), Åsa Svensson (191, 173, 48%), Adriana Szili (546, 141, 21%), Keiko Taguchi (690, 18, 3%), Tomoko Taira (816, -152, -23%), Tomoyo Takagishi (437, 47, 10%), Ayami Takase (262, 156, 37%), Kokoro Takehara (855, -160, -23%), Ryoko Takemura (384, -1, 0%), Silvija Talaja (113, -20, -22%), Elise Tamaela (160, 57, 26%), Shiho Tanaka (803, -147, -22%), Tamarine Tanasugarn (66, -32, -94%), Montinee Tangphong (347, 244, 41%), Elena Tatarkova (260, -134, -106%), Marina Tavares (1131, -42, -4%), Sarah Taylor (556, -397, -250%), Oksana Teplyakova (496, 560, 53%), Valerie Tetreault (1138, -209, -22%), Remi Tezuka (413, -54, -15%), Carla Tiene (330, -2, -1%), Ana Timotic (306, -82, -37%), Lisa Tognetti (468, 109, 19%), Napaporn Tongsalee (298, -14, -5%), Dessislava Topalova (242, 19, 7%), Margot Torre (636, 3, 0%), Cristina Torrens Valero (410, -304, -287%), Melissa Torres (404, 220, 35%), Ana Cecilia Trevino (1168, -261, -29%), Alienor Tricerri (764, 87, 10%), Emilie Trouche (657, 131, 17%), Judit Trunkos (1238, -130, -12%), Katrina Tsang (1031, -263, -34%), Meilen Tu (161, -16, -11%), Jennifer Tuchband (619, 342, 36%), Lenka Tvaroskova (251, 201, 44%), Neha Uberoi (312, 134, 30%), Shikha Uberoi (171, 209, 55%), Vladimira Uhlirova (628, -190, -43%), Nana Urotadze (1015, -120, -13%), Tatsiana Uvarova (334, -98, -42%), Meghaa Vakharia (539, -63, -13%), Julia Vakulenko (129, -56, -77%), Zuzana Valicekova (1024, 19, 2%), Eva Valkova (1050, -72, -7%), Laura Vallverdu (1087, - 155, -17%), Dominique Van Boekel (592, 102, 15%), Tessy Van De Ven (323, -7, -2%), Andrea Van Den Hurk (1172, -795, - 211%), Alana Van Der Vort (857, 66, 7%), Kristen Van Elden (972, -465, -92%), Anousjka Van Exel (265, 56, 17%), Eveline Vanhyfte (373, 34, 8%), Andreea Vanc (482, -300, -165%), Charlene Vanneste (746, 305, 29%), Cora Vasilescu (1034, 17, 2%), Alena Vaskova (737, -610, -480%), Nadejda Vassileva (863, 0, 0%), Aurelie Vedy (349, 148, 30%), Gabriela Velasco Andreu (392, 146, 27%), Archana Venkataraman (629, 15, 2%), Maria Vento-Kabchi (49, -5, -11%), Verdiana Verardi (815, 214, 21%), Courtney Vernon (1165, -109, -10%), Elena Vesnina (286, -8, -3%), Tereza Veverkova (367, 236, 39%), Elena Vianello (687, - 195, -40%), Nathalie Vierin (164, 11, 6%), Varanya Vijuksanaboon (1204, -198, -20%), Elisa Villa (455, 183, 29%), Roberta Vinci (115, 1, 1%), Suchanan Viratprasert (221, 19, 8%), Alexia Virgili (589, 437, 43%), Ivana Visic (793, -316, -66%), Thassha Vitayaviroj (533, 270, 34%), Antonela Voina (439, 44, 9%), Sandra Volk (610, 170, 22%), Renata Voracova (569, -437, -331%), Julia Vorobieva (537, 48, 8%), Galina Voskoboeva (137, 20, 13%), Ana Vrljic (332, 33, 9%), Rita Vukov (675, 331, 33%), Astrid Waernes (451, -110, -32%), I-Ting Wang (828, -341, -70%), Patricia Wartusch (222, -68, -44%), Mashona Washington (50, 128, 72%), Ryoko Watanabe (1164, -163, -16%), Cindy Watson (287, 261, 48%), Vivien Weber (1138, -148, -15%), Emily Webley- Smith (272, 197, 42%), Svenja Weidemann (1012, -111, -12%), Marielle Weihs (781, -60, -8%), Marlene Weingärtner (71, -24,

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 327 -51%), Stefanie Weis (458, 9, 2%), Tiffany Welford (395, 304, 43%), Vanessa Wellauer (651, 189, 23%), Christina Wheeler (302, -133, -79%), Angelique Widjaja (135, -40, -42%), Jenifer Widjaja (391, 119, 23%), Gaelle Widmer (290, 581, 67%), Tara Wigan (787, 174, 18%), Serena Williams (7, -4, -133%), Venus Williams (9, 2, 18%), Sabrina Wist (909, 69, 7%), Jasmin Woehr (480, 101, 17%), Kathrin Woerle (218, 191, 47%), Maria Wolfbrandt (281, 112, 28%), Kirsty Woolley (1008, -182, -22%), Aleksandra Wozniak (491, 387, 44%), Georgette Wright (881, -94, -12%), Yan-Ze Xie (250, 69, 22%), Anastasiya Yakimova (177, 111, 39%), Mayumi Yamamoto (318, 51, 14%), Zi Yan (248, -69, -39%), Alena Yaryshka (1055, -583, -124%), Anne Yelsey (752, 180, 19%), Akiko Yonemura (449, 271, 38%), Tomoko Yonemura (343, 8, 2%), Yuka Yoshida (159, -22, -16%), Meng Yuan (387, 302, 44%), Paula Zabala (717, 40, 5%), Christina Zachariadou (965, -595, -161%), Sandra Zahlavova (380, 278, 42%), Zuzana Zalabska (641, 349, 35%), Dragana Zaric (473, -38, -9%), Maria Paola Zavagli (1204, -604, -101%), Zuzana Zemenova (427, 43, 9%), Anzela Zguna (522, -128, -32%), Yao Zhang (750, 185, 20%), Jie Zheng (67, 27, 29%), Gabriela Ziliotto (1168, -195, -20%), Hilda Zuleta (755, -44, -6%), Fabiola Zuluaga (23, 15, 39%), Vera Zvonareva (11, 2, 15%)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Page 328 Index A Australian Open 22, 40, 41, 44, 138, Benesova, Iveta 14, 42, 43, 44, 45, 141, 145, 156, 157, 178, 182, 209, 117, 135, 137, 139, 143, 160, 222, Acapulco 42, 44, 139, 142, 148, 210, 221, 235, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 223, 224, 225, 229, 230, 232, 238, 223, 238 257, 258 249, 260 Adams, Katrina 316 Berlin 27, 40, 41, 44, 138, 141, 146, Albuquerque $75K 43, 210 B 156, 157, 177, 181, 209, 226, 240, Amelia Island 19, 40, 41, 44, 138, 141, Bacheva, Lubomira 43, 260 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 258 147, 156, 157, 177, 181, 209, 224, Bacheva/Birnerova 210 Bes, Eva 260 239, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, Bachmann, Angelika 260 Beygelzimer, Yulia 43 258 Bacsinszky, Timea 43 Biella $50K+H 43, 210 Ani, Maret 217 Bahia 254, 255 Birmingham 32, 42, 44, 139, 142, 148, Ani/Gagliardi 171, 186, 241 Baker/Lubiani 210 210, 227, 243 Ani/Husarova 172, 186 Balestrat, Dianne 310, 312 Black, Cara 163, 164, 166, 167, 169, Ani/Prusova 216, 221, 236 Balestrat/Gourlay 291 203, 204, 205, 207, 212, 213, 214, Antwerp 18, 40, 41, 44, 139, 141, 147, Bali 24, 42, 44, 139, 141, 148, 176, 215, 217, 223, 253, 259, 260, 316 150, 156, 157, 169, 209, 222, 252, 182, 210, 231, 248 Black/Callens 169, 187, 206, 209, 253, 254, 255 Bammer, Sybille 250 222, 226 Appelmans, Sabine 255, 260 Barcelona 256 Black/Huber 169, 172, 187, 226 Arendt, Nicole 259 Barker, Sue 290, 310, 312 Black/Stubbs 169, 181, 187, 195, 201, Arvidsson, Sofia 43 Barna, Anca 220, 222, 223, 228, 233, 202, 206, 209, 216, 220, 221, 224, Arvidsson/Liggan 234 238, 244, 260 227, 228, 229, 231, 232, 233, 234, Arvidsson/Senoglu 210 Barna/Krasnoroutskaya 172, 186 235, 242, 244, 249, 251, 291 Arvidsson/Svensson 210 Bartoli, Marion 14, 44, 164, 166, 167, Blahotova/G. Navratilova 210, 223 Asagoe, Shinobu 14, 82, 109, 110, 168, 207, 220, 222, 223, 224, 228, Boca Raton 257 163, 166, 167, 168, 205, 207, 220, 230, 232, 233, 245, 246, 247, 249, see also Delray Beach 223, 225, 227, 229, 231, 232, 233, 260 Bogota 38, 42, 44, 139, 142, 145, 148, 235, 238, 239, 242, 243, 247, 260 Bartoli/Beltrame 168, 186 210, 222, 238 Asagoe/Callens 168, 169, 186 Bartoli/Casanova 168, 170, 186, 231 Bohmova, Katerina 43 Asagoe/Fujiwara 168, 186, 227, 242 Bartoli/Granville 168, 186 Bonaventure — see Fort Lauderdale Asagoe/Jidkova 168, 186 Bartoli/Hantuchova 168, 171, 186 Bondarenko, Alyona 43 Asagoe/Lee 168, 186 Bartoli/Huber 168, 172, 186, 226 Bondarenko/Fokina 210 Asagoe/Obata 168, 186 Bartoli/Kostanic 168, 186, 244 Bonicelli/Chanfreau Lovera 291 Asagoe/Okamoto 168, 186, 206, 210, Bartoli/Loit 168, 174, 187, 206, 210, Boogert, Kristie 260 220 223, 224, 227 Bordeaux $75K+H 43, 210 Asagoe/Osterloh 168, 186 Bartoli/Obata 168, 187 Boshoff/Kloss 291 Asagoe/Schaul 168, 186 Bartoli/Santangelo 168, 187 Boston 258 Asagoe/Srebotnik 168, 186, 202, 206, Bartoli/Tu 168, 187 Bovina, Elena 5, 6, 9, 11, 12, 13, 17, 210, 232 Batumi $50K 43, 210 40, 44, 46, 49, 50, 51, 60, 77, 93, Asagoe/Sugiyama 168, 182, 186, 206, Bedanova, Daja 17, 45, 93, 102, 111, 102, 105, 110, 111, 116, 117, 123, 209, 229 117, 123, 128, 151, 236, 260 128, 134, 139, 143, 151, 156, 158, Asagoe/Sun 168, 183, 186 Bedanova/Safina 178, 187 161, 164, 166, 169, 205, 217, 221, Asagoe/Tu 168, 186 Bedanova/Serna 180, 187 225, 226, 227, 230, 232, 233, 237, Asagoe/Washington 168, 186 Beigbeder, Celine 260 240, 241, 243, 247, 249, 250, 254, Asagoe/Yoshida 168, 186 Beijing 37, 40, 41, 44, 139, 141, 147, 260 Ashburn $50K 43, 210 156, 157, 171, 178, 209, 248, 252, Bovina/Chladkova 169, 187 Ashley, Teryn 225 253, 254 Bovina/Déchy 169, 187 Ashley/Granville 210 Beijing $50K 43, 210 Bovina/Martinez 169, 175, 187, 216, Ashley/Perry 210 Beltrame, Severine 43, 226, 241 220 Atlanta 258 see also Bartoli/Beltrame Bovina/Petrova 169, 177, 187, 249 Auckland 18, 42, 44, 139, 142, 145, Beltrame/Cohen-Aloro 210 Bovina/Pratt 169, 177, 187, 227 148, 210, 220, 235 Beltrame/Pin 226 Brandi, Kristina 14, 220, 221, 223, Austin, Tracy 290, 300, 305, 310, 312, Beltrame/Vinci 184, 187 224, 227, 231, 232, 239, 248, 260 314, 315 Brighton 256, 257, 258 Brisbane 257, 258 Bronx $50K 43, 210

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Index Budapest 42, 44, 139, 142, 149, 150, Casanova, Myriam 160, 166, 170, Coetzer, Amanda 6, 9, 11, 12, 18, 45, 175, 179, 210, 225 205, 222, 227, 260 60, 93, 102, 111, 116, 117, 123, 128, Bueno/Court 291 see also Bartoli/Casanova 151, 221, 223, 255, 256, 261, 310, Bulykina, Irina 323 Casanova/Daniilidou 170, 188 312, 320 Bunge, Bettina 310, 312 Casanova/Husarova 170, 172, 188 Cohen-Aloro, Stephanie 43, 225, 261 Casanova/Loit 170, 174, 188 See also Callens/Cohen-Aloro C Casanova/Molik 170, 175, 188 Cohen-Aloro/Loit 188 Cagnes Sur Mer $75K 43, 210 Casanova/Müller 170, 188 Cohen-Aloro/Pratt 174, 177, 188 Callens, Els 164, 166, 167, 169, 205, Casanova/Pratt 170, 177, 188 Cohen-Aloro/Serna 180, 188 207, 221, 260 Casanova/Schnyder 170, 180, 188 Cohen-Aloro/Sfar 210 see also Asagoe/Callens Casanova/Wartusch 188 Cohen-Aloro/Testud 183, 188 see also Black/Callens Castano, Catalina 43, 225, 243, 260 Court, Margaret 290, 293, 298, 299, Callens/Cohen-Aloro 169, 187 Castano/Gagliardi 171, 188 300, 305, 310, 312, 317 Callens/Dhenin 169, 187 Castellvi, Vilmarie 43, 244 see also Bueno/Court Callens/Gagliardi 169, 171, 187 Cervanova, Ludmila 44, 224, 228, Court/Goolagong Cawley 291 Callens/Grönefeld 169, 187 230, 244, 245, 261 Court/Tegart Dalton 291 Callens/Hantuchova 169, 171, 187 Cetkovska/Sromova 210 Court/Wade 291 Callens/Krasnoroutskaya 169, 172, Chakvetadze, Anna 43, 63, 231, 247 Courtois, Laurence 261 187 Chaloner/Evers 291 Craybas, Jill 14, 43, 207, 224, 239, Callens/Mandula 175, 187, 231 Chanfreau Lovera, Gail (Sheriff) 261 Callens/Schett 169, 179, 187 see Bonicelli/Chanfreau Lovera Craybas/Weingärtner 206, 210, 230, Callens/Srebotnik 169, 187 Chanfreau/Durr 291 231 Callens/Stosur 169, 188, 234 Changsha $50K 2003 43, 173, 183, Cuneo $50K+H 43, 210 Callens/Svensson 169, 188 210 Curran/Grandin 210 Callens/Tu 169, 188, 238 Charleston 38, 40, 41, 44, 139, 141, Czink, Melinda 43, 137, 225 Camerin, Maria Elena 14, 226, 227, 146, 150, 156, 157, 178, 182, 209, Czink/E. Krauth 210 230, 231, 248, 249, 260 225, 240, 252, 253, 254, 255 Camerin/Jidkova 242 Charlottesville $50K 43, 210 D Camerin/Sequera 231 Chase Championships 252, 253, 254, Dallas 257, 258 Canadian Open 27, 40, 41, 44, 138, 255, 256 Daniilidou, Eleni 9, 11, 12, 14, 18, 42, 141, 146, 156, 157, 168, 182, 209, Chi, Jane 261 44, 46, 49, 60, 93, 102, 105, 110, 229, 245, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, Chicago 255, 256, 257, 258 111, 117, 123, 128, 134, 139, 143, 257, 258 Chladkova, Denisa 14, 44, 227, 228, 145, 151, 161, 167, 207, 220, 221, Canberra 35, 42, 44, 139, 142, 149, 232, 240, 260 222, 223, 224, 225, 227, 228, 230, 210, 220 see also Bovina/Chladkova 231, 232, 233, 235, 236, 237, 239, Canepa, Alice 43 Chladkova/Dementieva 170, 188 244, 261 Capriati. Jennifer 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, Chladkova/Gagliardi 171, 188 see also Casanova/Daniilidou 18, 45, 48, 49, 50, 51, 53, 60, 62, 64, Cho, Yoon Jeong 207, 231, 248, 261 Daniilidou/Hantuchova 171, 188 65, 67, 70, 74, 76, 77, 82, 93, 102, Cho/Jeon 206, 210, 232 Daniilidou/Huber 172, 188 105, 109, 110, 111, 116, 117, 121, Chuang/Prakusya 210 Daniilidou/Pratt 177, 188, 206, 209, 122, 123, 126, 128, 144, 151, 158, Cincinnati 19, 42, 44, 139, 142, 148, 228 161, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 210, 230, 246, 257 Daniilidou/Vento-Kabchi 184, 188 228, 229, 230, 231, 234, 237, 238, Clijsters, Kim 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 18, Date, Kimiko 255, 256, 310, 312 239, 240, 241, 242, 244, 245, 247, 40, 44, 46, 47, 49, 53, 58, 60, 62, 64, 251, 252, 254, 255, 256, 259, 260, 65, 70, 72, 74, 76, 77, 93, 101, 102, 270, 290, 300, 310, 312, 315 105, 106, 109, 110, 111, 114, 115, Cargill/Miyagi 231 116, 117, 120, 123, 128, 130, 132, Cargill/Wheeler 210 134, 139, 143, 144, 151, 156, 158, Cary $50K 43, 210 160, 161, 164, 166, 170, 220, 221, Casablanca 25, 42, 44, 139, 142, 149, 222, 223, 226, 232, 235, 236, 237, 168, 174, 210, 224 245, 249, 252, 254, 255, 259, 261, Casals, Rosie 293, 300, 310, 312 271, 304, 305, 306, 308, 310, 312, Casals/King 291 320 Casals/Tegart Dalton 291 Clijsters/Clijsters 170, 188, 237 Casals/Turnbull 291 Clijsters/Sugiyama 291, 308

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Index Davenport, Lindsay 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, Denain $75K+H 43, 210 E 13, 19, 40, 42, 44, 46, 47, 49, 50, 51, Detroit 258 Eastbourne 24, 40, 41, 44, 139, 141, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, Dhenin, Caroline 167, 217 147, 156, 157, 175, 180, 209, 227, 64, 65, 67, 68, 70, 72, 74, 76, 77, 79, see also Callens/Dhenin 243, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 81, 88, 93, 101, 102, 105, 106, 107, Dhenin/Schett 179, 189 258 108, 109, 110, 111, 114, 115, 116, Dhenin/Schiavone 179, 189 Ericsson 256, 257 117, 120, 122, 123, 125, 126, 127, Dhenin/Talaja 231 see also Miami 128, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, Dhenin/Weingärtner 216 Essen 254, 255, 256 139, 143, 144, 145, 151, 156, 158, Diaz-Oliva, Mariana 137, 242, 262 Estoril 25, 42, 44, 139, 142, 148, 171, 160, 161, 164, 166, 167, 170, 215, Dinan $50K+H 43, 210 172, 210, 225, 240 217, 220, 221, 223, 224, 225, 226, Ditty/Gallovits 210 Eugene $50K 2003 43, 210 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, Doha 28, 40, 41, 44, 138, 141, 145, Evers, Dianne 234, 236, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 147, 156, 157, 173, 174, 209, 223, see also Chaloner/Evers 244, 245, 246, 247, 249, 251, 252, 238, 252, 253, 254 Evert, Chris 257, 258, 290, 298, 300, 253, 254, 255, 256, 259, 261, 271, Dokic, Jelena 6, 9, 11, 12, 20, 44, 45, 305, 310, 312, 314, 315 278, 290, 300, 304, 305, 306, 308, 49, 60, 82, 88, 93, 102, 105, 110, Evert/Morozova 291 310, 312, 314, 315, 320 111, 117, 123, 128, 151, 160, 164, Evert/Navratilova 291 Davenport/M. J. Fernandez 291 166, 170, 205, 221, 222, 223, 224, Davenport/Morariu 170, 176, 188, 226, 227, 228, 231, 236, 237, 238, F 216, 220, 221, 235, 236, 238, 249, 239, 248, 254, 255, 262, 271, 308, Fairbank/Harford 291 291 310, 312, 320 Fairbank/Reynolds 291 Davenport/Novotna 291 Dokic/Husarova 170, 172, 189 Fano $50K 43, 210 de Lone, Erica 261 Dokic/Jankovic 189 Farina Elia, Silvia 5, 6, 9, 11, 12, 13, Dechaume-Balleret, Alexia 261 Dokic/Safina 170, 178, 189 21, 44, 45, 48, 49, 50, 51, 53, 57, 68, Déchy, Nathalie 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, 19, Domachowska, Marta 14, 230, 232, 77, 94, 102, 105, 110, 111, 117, 123, 45, 49, 77, 93, 102, 105, 110, 111, 233, 246, 262 128, 152, 166, 167, 170, 207, 220, 117, 123, 128, 151, 161, 220, 223, Dominguez Lino, Lourdes 43 222, 224, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 227, 230, 235, 238, 240, 244, 247, Dothan $75K 43, 210 232, 233, 236, 237, 238, 240, 241, 249, 261 Douchevina, Vera 14, 224, 233, 249, 243, 244, 246, 250, 262 see also Bovina/Déchy 262 Farina Elia/Santangelo 170, 189 Déchy/Hantuchova 171, 188 Dragomir Ilie, Ruxandra 224, 235, Farina Elia/Schett 225 Déchy/Mauresmo 188 262, 323 Farina Elia/Schiavone 170, 179, 189, Déchy/Schnyder 180, 188 Dragomir Ilie/Pratt 177, 189 195, 206, 209, 221, 224, 227 Déchy/Testud 230, 246 Dragomir Ilie/Reeves 210 Fedak, Yuliana 43, 221, 250 Déchy/Vinci 183 Dragomir Ilie/Vanc 210 Fedak/Grönefeld 210 Dell’acqua/Sewell 210 Drake, Maureen 43, 262 Fedak/Koryettseva 210 Delray Beach 256 Drake/Gullickson 210 Fedossova, Youlia 232 Dementieva, Elena 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, Dubai 22, 40, 41, 44, 138, 141, 145, Fendick/MJ Fernandez 291 13, 20, 42, 44, 46, 48, 49, 50, 51, 53, 147, 156, 157, 172, 175, 209, 222, Fernandez, Clarisa 60, 158, 262 54, 55, 56, 60, 61, 64, 66, 70, 74, 77, 237, 252, 253, 254, 255 Fernandez, Gigi 279, 294, 298, 299, 81, 93, 102, 105, 108, 109, 110, 111, Dubois, Stephanie 43 300, 307, 316, 317 116, 117, 121, 122, 123, 128, 134, Dulko, Gisela 14, 167, 222, 223, 227, G. Fernandez/Navratilova 291 139, 143, 144, 151, 158, 161, 163, 228, 229, 231, 232, 238, 243, 248, G. Fernandez/White 291 164, 166, 167, 170, 217, 221, 222, 262 G. Fernandez/Zvereva 291, 298, 307 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, Dulko/Tarabini 210, 225, 240 Fernandez, Mary Joe 255, 256, 257, 231, 232, 233, 234, 236, 237, 239, Dulko/Vento-Kabchi 184, 189 262, 310, 312, 315 240, 242, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, Durie, Jo 258, 310, 312 see also Davenport/MJ Fernandez 250, 251, 252, 254, 262, 310, 312 Durr, Françoise 293, 300, 305, 317 see also Fendick/MJ Fernandez see also Chladkova/Dementieva see also Chanfreau/Durr 291 Filderstadt 19, 40, 41, 44, 138, 141, Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya 170, Durr/A Jones 291 147, 156, 157, 169, 181, 209, 231, 172, 189 Durr/Hard 291 232, 249, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, Dementieva/Myskina 170, 176, 189 Durr/Stove 291 257, 258 Dementieva/Pratt 170, 177, 189, 226 Flipkens, Kirsten 43, 230, 262 Dementieva/Sprem 170, 189 Forest Hills 24, 42, 44, 139, 142, 149, Dementieva/Sugiyama 170, 182, 189, 230 216, 231 Foretz, Stephanie 43, 150, 227 Dementieva/Zvonareva 170, 185, 189 Fort Lauderdale 258

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Index Frazier, Amy 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, 21, 42, Goloviznina/Kulikovskaya 210 Hantuchova/Husarova 171, 172, 190 44, 46, 49, 53, 60, 66, 77, 94, 102, Goolagong (Cawley), Evonne 290, Hantuchova/Maleeva 171, 174, 190 105, 110, 111, 117, 123, 128, 134, 294, 300, 305, 310, 312, 315 Hantuchova/Morariu 171, 176, 190 139, 143, 152, 220, 223, 224, 226, see also Court/Goolagong Cawley Hantuchova/Pisnik 171, 190, 240 227, 228, 230, 235, 239, 243, 256, Goolagong Cawley/Gourlay 291 Hantuchova/Rubin 171, 178, 190, 228 262 Gorrochategui, Ines 262 Hantuchova/Safina 171, 178, 190 Frazier/Martinez 175, 189 Gourlay Cawley, Helen 317 Hantuchova/Sanchez-Vicario 171, French Open see also Balestrat/Gourlay 179, 190 see Roland Garros see also Goolagong Cawley/ Hantuchova/Schett 171, 179, 190 Fujiwara, Rika Gourlay Hantuchova/Schnyder 171, 180, 190 see also Asagoe/Fujiwara Gourlay Cawley/Russell 291 Hao/Sun 183, 190 Fujiwara/Obata 210 Gourlay/Harris 291 Harford, Tanya Fujiwara/Tatarkova 210 Graf, Steffi 60, 254, 255, 256, 257, see also Fairbank/Harford Fukuoka $50K 43, 210 258, 262, 272, 290, 298, 300, 304, Harkleroad, Ashley 220, 222, 229, 305, 306, 310, 312, 314, 315 235, 242, 245, 263 G Graf/Sabatini 291 Harris, Kerry Gadusek, Bonnie 258 Grahame, Amanda 262 see also Gourlay/Harris Gagliardi, Emmanuelle 163, 164, 166, Grande, Rita 224, 237, 262 Hartford 258 167, 171, 207, 228, 231, 262 Grande/Schiavone 179, 190 Hasselt 20, 42, 44, 139, 141, 148, 210, see also Ani/Gagliardi Grande/Schnyder 180, 190 232, 249 see also Callens/Gagliardi Grande/Tanasugarn 183, 190 Haynes, Angela 231, 247 see also Castano/Gagliardi Grande/Vento-Kabchi 184, 190 Hénin-Hardenne, Justine 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, see also Chladkova/Gagliardi Granville, Laura 14, 43, 220, 221, 12, 13, 22, 40, 44, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, see also Philipps/Gagliardi 222, 230, 246, 262 51, 53, 54, 55, 56, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, Gagliardi/Grönefeld 171, 189 see also Bartoli/Granville 64, 65, 67, 70, 72, 74, 76, 77, 81, 94, Gagliardi/Husarova 171, 172, 189, Grönefeld, Anna-Lena 14, 43, 135, 101, 102, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 206, 210, 225 167, 217 110, 112, 114, 115, 116, 117, 123, Gagliardi/Mandula 171, 175, 189 see also Callens/Grönefeld 128, 134, 138, 143, 144, 145, 152, Gagliardi/Medina Garrigues 171, 189 see also Gagliardi/Grönefeld 156, 158, 160, 161, 220, 221, 222, Gagliardi/Safina 171, 178, 189, 206, Grönefeld/Schruff 216, 232 223, 224, 227, 230, 231, 235, 236, 209, 231, 248 Grönefeld/Shaughnessy 181, 190 237, 238, 239, 240, 242, 246, 247, Gagliardi/Vinci 171, 184, 189, 221 GuangZhou 42, 44, 139, 142, 148, 252, 254, 255, 259, 263, 272, 290, Gagliardi/Wartusch 171, 189, 223 173, 183, 210, 232, 248 300, 304, 305, 308, 310, 312, 320 Gajdosova, Jarmila 43 Gubacsi, Zsofia 263 Hilton Head 256, 257, 258 Gallovits/Gubacsi 210 Gullickson, Carly 207 Hingis, Martina 60, 158, 160, 252, Garbin, Tathiana 14, 82, 220, 227, Gullickson/Salerni 206, 210, 234 253, 254, 255, 256, 259, 263, 273, 230, 231, 242, 248, 262 280, 290, 294, 298, 299, 300, 304, Garbin/Jidkova 240 H 305, 306, 307, 308, 310, 312, 314, Garbin/Mandula 175, 189 Habsudova, Karina 263 315, 316, 317 Garbin/Pratt 177, 190 Hack, Sabine 256 Hingis/Kournikova 291, 307 Garbin/Vinci 184, 190 Halard-Decugis, Julie 254, 255, 256, Hingis/Lucic 291, 298 Garrison(-Jackson), Zina 257, 258, 263, 316 Hingis/Novotna 291, 298 310, 312 Halard-Decugis/Sugiyama 291 Hingis/Pierce 291 Gehrlein, Stephanie 232 Hamburg 254, 255, 256, 257 Hingis/Sukova 291 Gersi, Adriana 262 Hanika, Sylvia 258, 310, 312 Hingis/Zvereva 291 Gifu $50K 43, 210 Hannover 254, 255 Hobart 21, 42, 44, 139, 142, 149, 168, Gimelstob/Craybas 248 Hantuchova, Daniela 6, 9, 11, 12, 13, 210, 220, 235 Girona $75K+H 43, 210 22, 45, 49, 60, 77, 94, 100, 102, 105, Hopkins, Jennifer 263 Gloria, Melanie 234, 250 110, 112, 117, 123, 128, 152, 158, Hopkins/Spears 210 Gold Coast 35, 42, 44, 139, 142, 148, 161, 164, 166, 171, 205, 221, 223, Hopmans, Amanda 263 173, 174, 210, 220, 235 227, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 240, Houston 256, 257, 258 Golovin, Tatiana 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, 22, 242, 243, 249, 250, 254, 255, 263, Hrdlickova, Kveta 263 45, 49, 53, 63, 66, 77, 94, 102, 105, 310, 312 see Kveta (Hrdlickova) Peschke 110, 111, 117, 123, 128, 152, 221, see also Bartoli/Hantuchova Hsieh, Su-Wei 263 223, 224, 227, 228, 229, 232, 233, see also Callens/Hantuchova Huber, Anke 60, 255, 256, 263, 310, 237, 238, 243, 250, 262, 320 see also Daniilidou/Hantuchova 312 Golovin/Pierce 177, 190 see also Déchy/Hantuchova

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Index Huber, Liezel (Horn) 163, 164, 166, Jeon, Mi-Ra 43, 207 Kournikova, Anna 9, 60, 259, 264, 167, 172, 205, 208, 217, 253, 259 see also Cho/Jeon 280, 307, 310, 312, 321 see also Bartoli/Huber Jeyaseelan/Maleeva 174, 191 see also Hingis/Kournikova 264 see also Black/Huber Jidkova, Alina 14, 135, 137, 160, 225, Krasnoroutskaya, Lina 9, 11, 12, 23, see also Daniilidou/Huber 226, 230, 233, 234, 240, 241, 250, 44, 45, 49, 94, 102, 112, 117, 123, Huber/Loit 172, 174, 190 263 128, 152, 161, 164, 166, 172, 220, Huber/Maleeva 172, 174, 190, 223 see also Asagoe/Jidkova 221, 224, 227, 228, 235, 245, 264, Huber/Mirza 172, 190, 206, 210, 222 see also Camerin/Jidkova 320 Huber/Morariu 172, 176, 190 see also Garbin/Jidkova see also Barna/Krasnoroutskaya Huber/Navratilova 172, 176, 190, 224 Johannesburg 258 see also Callens/Krasnoroutskaya Huber/Perebiynis 172, 190 Jones, Ann 290 see also Dementieva/ Huber/Sugiyama 172, 182, 190, 216, see also Durr/A. Jones Krasnoroutskaya 220, 222, 224, 226, 227, 236, 242, Jordan, Barbara 290 Krasnoroutskaya/Myskina 172, 176, 244 Jordan, Kathy 294, 298, 299, 300 191 Huber/Tanasugarn 172, 183, 190, 229 Jordan, Kathy/Anne Smith 291, 298 Krasnoroutskaya/Zvonareva 172, 185, Husarova, Janette 163, 164, 166, 167, Jordan/Smylie 291 191 172, 203, 205, 207, 217, 221, 236, Jounieh $50K+H 43, 210 Krauth/Lehnhoff 210 259, 263 Jugic-Salkic, Mervana 208 Krauth/Muller 210 see also Ani/Husarova Jugic-Salkic/Kostanic 206, 210, 220, Krauth/Woehr 210 see also Casanova/Husarova 235 Kremer, Anne 23, 45, 48, 49, 94, 100, see also Dokic/Husarova Jurak/Voskoboeva 210 102, 112, 117, 123, 128, 150, 152, see also Gagliardi/Husarova 227, 228, 232, 243, 244, 248, 250, see also Hantuchova/Husarova K 264 Husarova/Likhovtseva 174, 191, 206, Kandarr, Jana 263 Krivencheva, Svetlana 160 209, 216, 232, 233 Kapros, Aniko 220, 221, 224, 248, Krizan/Vento-Kabchi 184, 191 Husarova/Maleeva 172, 174, 191 263 Kruger, Joanette 264 Husarova/Martinez 172, 175, 191, Karatancheva, Sesil 43, 63, 223 Kulikovskaya, Evgenia 160 201, 206, 209, 216, 222, 241 Key Biscayne 258 Kurhajcova, Lubomira 43, 222, 230, Husarova/Molik 172, 175, 191, 233 see also Lipton, Ericsson, Miami 248, 264 Husarova/Safina 172, 178, 191, 221 King, Billie Jean 290, 295, 300, 305, Kurhajcova/Nagyova 245 Hyderabad 42, 44, 139, 142, 148, 172, 310, 312, 315 Kuti Kis, Rita 264 210, 222, 237 see also Casals/King Kutuzova, Viktoriya 239 King/Navratilova 291 Kuznetsova, Svetlana 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, I King/Stove 291 13, 24, 40, 42, 44, 46, 47, 49, 50, 51, Indian Wells 22, 40, 41, 44, 138, 141, Kirilenko, Maria 43, 208, 222, 231, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 68, 146, 156, 157, 178, 182, 209, 223, 237, 247, 263 70, 72, 74, 77, 79, 94, 101, 102, 105, 238, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257 Kirilenko//Sharapova 206 108, 109, 110, 112, 116, 117, 122, Indianapolis 257, 258 Kirilenko/Safina 178, 191 123, 128, 132, 133, 134, 135, 139, Innsbruck $50K 43, 210 Kirilenko/Sharapova 210, 227 143, 144, 152, 156, 158, 160, 163, Irvin, Marissa 14, 43, 223, 227, 228, Kirilenko/Zvonareva 185, 191 164, 166, 167, 173, 203, 205, 207, 238, 239, 244, 263 Kiyomura/Sawamatsu 291 212, 213, 214, 217, 218, 220, 222, Italian Open — see Rome Klagenfurt 226 223, 224, 225, 227, 228, 229, 230, Ivanovic, Ana 43, 63, 123, 125, 233, Kleinova, Sandra 137, 228, 229, 264 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 237, 238, 250, 320 Kloss, Ilana 239, 240, 241, 243, 247, 248, 249, see Boshoff/Kloss 251, 252, 253, 254, 259, 264, 290, J Kohde-Kilsch, Claudia 258, 310, 312 304, 310, 312, 320 Jackson, Jamea 43, 244 Kohde-Kilsch/Sukova 291 Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva 173, 174, Jaeger, Andrea 310, 312 Kostanic, Jelena 14, 167, 207, 224, 191, 195, 201, 206, 209, 210, 216, Jankovic, Jelena 5, 9, 12, 13, 42, 44, 225, 226, 228, 230, 231, 232, 240, 220, 223, 224, 226, 227, 228, 230, 45, 82, 105, 109, 110, 117, 139, 244, 246, 264 236, 239, 241, 242, 244, 246, 247, 143, 221, 224, 225, 227, 228, 231, see also Bartoli/Kostanic 248, 249 232, 233, 248, 249, 250, 263 see also Jugic-Salkic/Kostanic Kuznetsova/Sanchez-Vicario 173, see also Dokic/Jankovic Kostanic/Perebiynis 224 179, 191, 248 Japan Open 32, 42, 44, 139, 142, 145, Kostanic/Schaul 206, 210, 220 148, 168, 210, 232 Koukalova, Klara 14, 44, 117, 123, L Jausovec, Mima 290, 310, 312 222, 224, 227, 228, 230, 232, 233, Laine, Emma 43, 233, 250 Jausovec/Ruzici 291 237, 246, 264 Lamade, Bianka 264, 320

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Index Lee, Janet 167 Loit, Emilie 9, 11, 12, 14, 25, 42, 43, Mandula, Petra 117, 164, 166, 167, see also Asagoe/Lee 44, 46, 48, 49, 82, 95, 101, 103, 105, 175, 208, 222, 224, 225, 227, 228, Lee/Peng 231, 247 110, 112, 117, 120, 123, 128, 134, 237, 240, 264 Lee/Tanasugarn 183, 191 139, 143, 150, 152, 161, 164, 166, see also Callens/Mandula Lee-Waters, Lindsay 43, 150 167, 174, 208, 222, 223, 224, 225, see also Gagliardi/Mandula Leipzig 254, 255, 256, 257 226, 227, 228, 230, 232, 241, 243, see also Garbin/Mandula Leon Garcia, Gala 223, 264 264 see also Loit/Mandula Lexington $50K 43, 210 see also Bartoli/Loit Mandula/Nagy 175, 192 Li Na 14, 42, 43, 44, 45, 47, 139, 143, see also Casanova/Loit Mandula/Schett 175, 179, 192, 201, 232, 248, 264, 323 see also Huber/Loit 202, 206, 210, 225 Li Ting 163, 166, 167, 173, 204, 207, Loit/Mandula 174, 175, 192, 221, 237 Mandula/Schnyder 175, 180, 192 217, 232, 248, 264 Loit/Pratt 174, 177, 192, 221 Mandula/Tatarkova 175, 192 see also Li/Li Los Angeles (Outdoor) 19, 40, 41, 44, Mandula/Tu 175, 192, 224 Li, Na 231 139, 141, 147, 156, 157, 177, 181, Mandula/Wartusch 175, 192 Li/Li 191 209, 228, 244, 252, 253, 254, 255, Mariskova/Teeguarden 291 Li/Liu 210 256, 257, 258 Marrero, Marta 14, 43, 135, 208, 222, Li/Sun 173, 183, 191, 195, 206, 209, Los Angeles Championships 32, 40, 223, 224, 225, 233, 264 210, 216, 224, 227, 228, 230, 232, 41, 44, 138, 141, 145, 156, 157, 177, see also Llagostera Vives/Marrero 246, 248 181, 209, 234, 251 Marseille $50K+H 43, 210 Li/Zheng 173, 191 Los Gatos $50K 43, 210 Martinez, Conchita 6, 9, 11, 12, 14, Liggan/Vento-Kabchi 184, 192 Louisville $50K 43, 210 26, 44, 45, 49, 60, 95, 103, 105, 110, Likhovtseva, Elena 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, Lucic, Mirjana 60, 264 112, 118, 123, 128, 152, 163, 164, 24, 42, 44, 46, 49, 53, 77, 94, 103, see also Hingis/Lucic 166, 167, 175, 205, 208, 217, 220, 105, 110, 112, 117, 123, 128, 134, Luxembourg 27, 42, 44, 139, 142, 221, 223, 225, 226, 227, 228, 235, 139, 143, 144, 152, 160, 163, 164, 148, 178, 182, 210, 233, 250 238, 240, 243, 244, 252, 254, 255, 166, 167, 174, 205, 207, 212, 213, 256, 257, 259, 265, 273, 290, 305, 214, 217, 218, 220, 221, 223, 226, M 308, 310, 312, 315 229, 230, 231, 232, 235, 240, 241, Mahwah 257, 258 see also Bovina/Martinez 245, 247, 249, 253, 259, 264, 308 Majoli, Iva 25, 45, 95, 103, 112, 117, see also Frazier/Martinez see also Husarova/Likhovtseva 123, 128, 158, 240, 254, 255, 256, see also Husarova/Martinez see also Kuznetsova/Likhovtseva 264, 290, 310, 312 see also Likhovtseva/Martinez Likhovtseva/Maleeva 174, 192, 236 Maleeva, Katerina 256, 257, 310, 312 see also Maleeva/Martinez Likhovtseva/Martinez 174, 175, 192, Maleeva, Magdalena 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, Martinez/Ruano Pascual 175, 178, 224 26, 45, 49, 53, 77, 95, 103, 105, 110, 192, 244 Likhovtseva/Myskina 174, 176, 192, 112, 117, 123, 128, 152, 158, 164, Martinez Granados, Conchita 265 226 166, 174, 205, 221, 222, 223, 224, Martinez, Maria Jose 265 Likhovtseva/Zvonareva 174, 185, 226, 227, 229, 230, 231, 233, 235, Matevzic, Maja 265, 321 192, 216, 225 236, 238, 243, 245, 246, 247, 249, Mattek, Bethanie 43, 208 Linetskaya, Eugenia 43 250, 254, 255, 256, 259, 264, 308, Mattek/Spears 206, 210, 230 Linetskaya, Evgenia 43, 232 310, 312 Mauresmo, Amélie 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, Linz 27, 40, 41, 44, 139, 141, 147, see also Hantuchova/Maleeva 13, 27, 40, 44, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 156, 157, 172, 174, 209, 233, 250, see also Huber/Maleeva 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 252, 253, 254, 255 see also Husarova/Maleeva 64, 65, 67, 68, 70, 72, 74, 76, 77, 79, Lions Cup (Tokyo) 258 see also Jeyaseelan/Maleeva 81, 88, 95, 101, 103, 105, 106, 107, Lipton 258 see also Likhovtseva/Maleeva 108, 109, 110, 112, 114, 115, 118, Lipton — See also Miami Maleeva/Martinez 174, 175, 192, 221 120, 121, 122, 123, 126, 127, 128, Livingston — See Princeton Maleeva/Srebotnik 174, 192, 239 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 138, 143, Llagostera Vives, Nuria 14, 43, 208, Maleeva/Talaja 174, 192 144, 145, 153, 156, 158, 162, 220, 228, 264 Maleeva-Fragniere, Manuela 256, 221, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, Llagostera Vives/Marrero 206, 210, 257, 258, 305, 310, 312, 315 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 239, 230 Mamic, Sanda 233 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, Mandlikova, Hana 257, 258, 290, 300, 247, 249, 250, 251, 252, 254, 255, 305, 310, 312, 315 259, 265, 274, 304, 305, 310, 312 Mandlikova/Navratilova 291 Mauresmo/Pierce 177, 192, 229 McCain, Kelly 43, 227 McCain/Schlukebir 210 McGrath, Meredith 256

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Index McNeil, Lori 256, 257 Morozova, Olga 311, 312 Navratilova/Smith 291 McQuillan, Rachel 265 see also Evert/Morozova Navratilova/Stove 291 McShea, Lisa 167, 207 Moscow 28, 40, 41, 44, 138, 141, 145, Navratilova/Tatarkova 176, 193 McShea/Morariu 176, 192 146, 156, 157, 176, 185, 209, 233, Navratilova/Temesvari 291 McShea/Sequera 206, 210, 223, 226, 249, 252, 253, 254, 255 Neffa-de los Rios, Rossana 265 227 Müller, Martina 265 Neiland, Larisa 281, 307, 316, 317 Medina Garrigues, Anabel 14, 43, 44, see also Casanova/Müller see also under Savchenko 45, 118, 139, 143, 208, 227, 228, Munich 252, 253, 254, 255 Neiland/Novotna 307 230, 233, 236, 245, 250, 265 Myskina, Anastasia 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, Neiland/Zvereva 291 see also Gagliard/Medina 13, 28, 40, 44, 46, 47, 49, 50, 51, 53, Nejedly, Jana 321 Garrigues 54, 55, 56, 57, 59, 60, 61, 62, 64, 65, Nemeth, Virag 43 Medina Garrigues/Sanchez-Vicario 66, 68, 70, 72, 74, 76, 77, 79, 81, 95, New England 256, 257, 258 179, 192, 206, 228, 242, 245 103, 105, 106, 108, 109, 110, 112, New Haven 17, 40, 41, 44, 139, 141, Medina Garrigues/Serna 180, 192 118, 120, 121, 122, 123, 128, 131, 147, 156, 157, 177, 181, 209, 230, Medvedeva, Natalia 256 132, 133, 134, 138, 143, 144, 145, 231, 246, 252, 253, 254, 255 Memphis 39, 42, 44, 139, 142, 148, 153, 156, 158, 160, 162, 163, 166, New Orleans 257, 258 210, 222, 237 167, 176, 207, 218, 221, 222, 223, Newport 256, 257, 258 Miami 37, 40, 41, 44, 139, 141, 145, 224, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, Nice 254, 255 146, 156, 157, 177, 181, 209, 224, 232, 233, 234, 236, 238, 241, 242, Nola, Pavlina (Stoyanova) 265 239, 252, 253, 254, 255 243, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 251, Noorlander, Seda 265 Michel, Margaret 252, 254, 255, 274, 290, 304, 311, Novotna, Jana 254, 255, 256, 265, see also Goolagong Cawley/Michel 312 282, 290, 295, 299, 300, 307, 311, Midland $75K+H 43, 210 see also Dementieva/Myskina 312, 315, 317 Mikaelian, Marie-Gayanay 225, 227, see also Krasbnoroutskaya/ see also Davenport/Novotna 265 Myskina see also Hingis/Novotna Milan 256 see also Likhovtseva/Myskina Novotna/Sanchez-Vicario 291 Mirza, Sania 208 Myskina/Sugiyama 182, 193, 206, Novotna/Sukova 291 see also Huber/Mirza 231, 248 Modena $75K 43, 210 Myskina/Zvonareva 176, 185, 193, O Molik, Alicia 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, 27, 40, 206, 209, 223, 226, 232, 233 O’Neil, Chris 290 42, 44, 46, 47, 49, 50, 51, 57, 74, 77, Oakland 258 82, 95, 101, 103, 105, 110, 112, 118, N Oakland — see Stanford 123, 128, 130, 132, 134, 139, 143, Nagelsen, Betsy Obata, Saori 221, 222, 243, 248, 265 144, 153, 156, 158, 162, 163, 166, see also Navratilova/Nagelson see also Asagoe/Obata 167, 175, 207, 218, 221, 224, 225, Nagelsen/Tomanova 291 see also Bartoli/Obata 226, 228, 229, 230, 233, 245, 246, Nagy, Kyra Obziler, Tzipora 43 250, 254, 265, 304 see also Mandula/Nagy Okamoto, Seiko 208 see also Casanova/Molik Nagyova, Henrieta 225, 228, 254, 265 see also Asagoe/Okamoto see also Husarova/Molik see also Kurhajcova/Nagyova Olympics 22, 40, 41, 44, 138, 141, Molik/Raymond 175, 178, 192, 206, Nagyova/Tanasugarn 183, 193 145, 156, 157, 173, 183, 209, 230, 209, 234 Nakamura, Aiko 43, 231 246, 254 Molik/Schett 175, 179, 192, 206, 210, Navratilova, G./Pastikova 210 Ondraskova, Zuzana 43, 224, 265 229 Navratilova, Martina 163, 164, 166, Orange $50K 43, 210 Molik/Serna 175, 180, 192, 206, 209, 167, 176, 208, 217, 243, 256, 257, Orbetello $75K 43, 210 224, 227, 231 258, 259, 290, 295, 298, 299, 300, Oremans, Miriam 266 Molik/Stubbs 175, 181, 192 304, 305, 306, 311, 312, 314, 315, Orlando 258 Molik/Sugiyama 175, 182, 192 316, 317 Ortisei $75K+H 43, 210 Montolio, Angeles 265 see also Evert/Navratilova Osterloh, Lilia 232, 266 Morariu, Corina 163, 166, 167, 176, see also Fernandez/Navratilova see also Asagoe/Osterloh 217, 259, 265, 316 see also Huber/Navratilova see also Davenport/Morariu see also King/Navratilova P see also Hantuchova/Morariu see also Mandlikova/Navratilova Palermo 42, 44, 139, 142, 149, 179, see also Huber/Morariu Navratilova/Nagelsen 291 210, 228, 229, 244 see also McShea/Morariu Navratilova/Raymond 176, 178, 193, Palm Beach Gardens 258 Morigami, Akiko 14, 123, 225, 227, 195, 206, 210, 216, 220, 221, 223, Palm Beach Gardens $50K 2003 43, 228, 239, 265 226, 227, 242 210 Navratilova/Shriver 291, 298

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Index Palm Springs 257 Pierce, Mary 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, 29, 42, R Palm Springs — See also Indian Wells 44, 46, 49, 60, 77, 96, 103, 105, 110, Raleigh $50K 43, 210 Pan Pacific 19, 40, 41, 44, 139, 141, 112, 118, 124, 125, 129, 134, 139, Randriantefy, Dally 14, 43, 225, 226, 145, 146, 156, 157, 169, 181, 209, 143, 153, 162, 164, 177, 221, 225, 233 221, 236, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, Raymond, Lisa 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, 30, 44, 257, 258 234, 237, 240, 246, 247, 249, 252, 45, 49, 77, 96, 103, 105, 110, 112, Panova, Tatiana 14, 28, 45, 48, 49, 60, 254, 255, 256, 259, 266, 275, 290, 118, 124, 129, 150, 153, 163, 164, 95, 103, 110, 112, 118, 123, 129, 300, 308, 311, 312, 315 166, 167, 178, 207, 217, 221, 222, 153, 162, 221, 228, 232, 236, 237, see also Golovin/Pierce 225, 226, 227, 228, 230, 232, 236, 266 see also Hingis/Pierce 237, 246, 247, 250, 253, 259, 266, Panova/Tatarkova 227 see also Mauresmo/Pierce 283, 316 Papadaki, Christina 266 Pierce/Raymond 177, 178, 193 see also Molik/Raymond Paris 18, 40, 41, 44, 139, 141, 147, Pierce/Sanchez-Vicario 177, 179, see also Navratilova/Raymond 156, 157, 179, 180, 209, 221, 236, 193, 226, 240, 241 see also Pierce/Raymond 252, 253, 254, 255, 256 Pin, Camille 43, 230, 246, 266 Raymond/Srebotnik 178 Parra Santonja, Arantxa 14, 224, 227, Pisnik, Tina 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, Raymond/Stubbs 291, 308 228, 266 226, 227, 241, 266 Razzano, Virginie 14, 43, 227, 228, Parra Santonja/Serna 180, 193 see also Hantuchova/Pisnik 233, 243, 266 Pastikova, Michaela 43, 150, 233, 246 Pistolesi, Anna — See Anna Reeves, Samantha 226, 266 Paz, Mercedes 317 Smashnova Reeves/Serra Zanetti, Adriana 221 Peer/Vesnina 210 Pitkowski, Sarah 266 Reggi, Raffaella 257, 258 Peng Shuai 14, 43, 232 Pittsburg $50K 43, 210 Rehe, Stephanie 257, 258 see also Lee/Peng Plischke, Sylvia 266 Reid, Kerry Melville 290, 311, 312 Pennetta, Flavia 14, 42, 43, 44, 45, Portschach — see Vienna Reid/Turnbull 291 118, 139, 143, 220, 223, 225, 226, Potter, Barbara 257, 311, 312 Reynolds, Candy 228, 230, 232, 238, 246, 248, 266 Poutchek, Tatiana 266 see also Fairbank/Reynolds Perebiynis, Tatiana 227, 229, 266 Prakusya/Tanasugarn 183, 193 Richey, Nancy 290, 305, 311, 312 see also Huber/Perebiynis Prakusya/Widjaja 184, 193 Richmond 258 Perebiynis/Serna 180, 193 Pratt, Nicole 14, 42, 44, 45, 139, 143, Rimini $50K 43, 210 Perebiynis/Talaja 223 163, 166, 167, 177, 205, 208, 220, Rinaldi, Kathy 258 Perebiynis/Vento-Kabchi 184, 193, 221, 222, 231, 232, 235, 237, 244, Rittner, Barbara 266 227 266 Rodionova, Anastasia 266 Perry, Shenay 14, 43, 224, 227 see also Bovina/Pratt Rodionova/Dominikovic 228 Peschke, Kveta (Hrdlickova) 43, 63, see also Casanova/Pratt Rodionova/Safina 178, 194 233, 240, 266, 323 see also Cohen-Aloro/Pratt Roland Garros 28, 40, 41, 44, 138, Peshke/Rittner 226 see also Daniilidou/Pratt 141, 145, 156, 157, 178, 182, 209, Petrova, Nadia 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, see also Dementieva/Pratt 227, 242, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 29, 44, 45, 49, 50, 51, 60, 77, 96, see also Dragomir Ilie/Pratt 257, 258 103, 105, 110, 112, 118, 124, 129, see also Garbin/Pratt Rome 27, 40, 41, 44, 138, 141, 146, 144, 153, 158, 162, 163, 164, 166, see also Loit/Pratt 156, 157, 177, 181, 209, 226, 241, 167, 177, 203, 204, 205, 207, 212, Pratt/Schnyder 177, 180, 193 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 258 213, 214, 215, 217, 218, 220, 221, Pratt/Sharapova 177, 193 Ruano Pascual, Virginia 14, 163, 164, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, Pratt/Stosur 177, 193 166, 167, 178, 203, 204, 205, 207, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 238, 239, Pratt/Tanasugarn 177, 183, 193, 232 212, 213, 214, 215, 217, 227, 228, 240, 242, 243, 245, 246, 247, 248, Pratt/Wheeler 177, 193 232, 236, 243, 244, 253, 259, 266, 249, 251, 253, 259, 266, 316 Princess Cup 254, 255, 256, 257 283, 300 see also Bovina/Petrova Princeton 258 see also Martinez/Ruano Pascual Petrova/Shaughnessy 177, 181, 193, Prostejov $75K 43, 210 Ruano Pascual/Suarez 178, 182, 194, 201, 202, 206, 209, 216, 221, 224, Prusova, Libuse 217, 266 195, 201, 202, 206, 209, 210, 216, 226, 228, 230, 231, 233, 234, 238, see also Ani/Prusova 220, 221, 223, 224, 226, 227, 228, 239, 241, 242, 247, 251 Prusova/Strycova 210 229, 231, 233, 235, 236, 239, 241, Philadelphia 27, 40, 41, 44, 138, 141, 242, 244, 248, 251, 291 145, 147, 156, 157, 175, 178, 209, Q 234, 250, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256 Quebec City 42, 44, 139, 142, 148, Philipps/Gagliardi 248 210, 234, 250 Queens Grand Prix (Tokyo) 258

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Index Rubin, Chanda 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 14, 30, Sanchez-Vicario, Arantxa 60, 166, Schnyder, Patty 5, 6, 9, 11, 12, 13, 31, 45, 49, 60, 66, 96, 103, 105, 110, 179, 208, 253, 255, 256, 257, 259, 44, 45, 49, 50, 51, 60, 77, 96, 103, 112, 118, 124, 129, 130, 132, 153, 267, 276, 284, 290, 295, 300, 304, 105, 110, 113, 118, 124, 129, 144, 158, 162, 166, 178, 221, 223, 226, 307, 311, 313, 314, 315, 316, 317 154, 158, 163, 166, 167, 180, 208, 228, 231, 236, 241, 248, 254, 255, see also Hantuchova/Sanchez- 217, 221, 222, 225, 226, 227, 228, 259, 266, 308, 320 Vicario 229, 233, 235, 236, 237, 240, 243, see also Hantuchova/Rubin see also Kuznetsova/Sanchez- 244, 245, 250, 254, 255, 267, 305 Rubin/Sanchez-Vicario 291 Vicario see also Casanova/Schnyder Rubin/V. Williams 178, 184, 194, 246 see also Medina Garrigues/ see also Déchy/Schnyder Russell, Jennifer 208 Sanchez-Vicario see also Grande/Schnyder Russell/Santangelo 206, 210, 232 see also Novotna/Sanchez-Vicario see also Hantuchova/Schnyder Russell, JoAnne see also Pierce/Sanchez-Vicario see also Mandula/Schnyder see also Gourlay Cawley/Russell see also Rubin/Sanchez-Vicario see also Pratt/Schnyder Ruzici, Virginia 258, 290 Sanchez-Vicario/Sukova 291 see also Schett/Schnyder see also Jausovec/Ruzici Santangelo, Mara 208, 221, 236 Schruff, Julia 217, 233, 267 see also Bartoli/Santangelo Schultz-McCarthy, Brenda 307 S see also Farina Elia/Santangelo Schwartz, Barbara 208 Sabatini, Gabriela 256, 257, 275, 290, see also Russell/Santangelo Schwartz/Woehr 206, 210, 222 305, 311, 312, 314, 315 Savchenko, Larisa Scottsdale 254, 255 see also Graf/Sabatini see also Neiland, Larisa Seles, Monica 9, 60, 154, 158, 162, Safarova, Lucie 43 Savchenko/Zvereva 291 252, 254, 255, 256, 257, 259, 267, Safina, Dinara 9, 11, 12, 14, 30, 45, Sawamatsu, Kazuko 276, 290, 300, 304, 305, 308, 311, 49, 96, 103, 105, 110, 112, 118, 124, see Kiyomura/Sawamatsu 313, 314, 315, 321 129, 153, 162, 163, 166, 167, 178, Schaul, Claudine 14, 42, 44, 45, 118, Seoul 32, 42, 44, 139, 142, 148, 210, 205, 208, 217, 220, 221, 222, 224, 139, 143, 208, 221, 226, 242, 267 232, 248 226, 227, 228, 230, 232, 233, 237, see also Asagoe/Schaul Sequera, Milagros 44, 167, 207, 226, 239, 241, 246, 249, 250, 266 see also Kostanic/Schaul 227, 228, 230, 241, 267 see also Bedanova/Safina Schaul/Tanasugarn 183, 194, 234 see also McShea/Sequera see also Dokic/Safina Schenectady $50K 43, 210 Serna, Magui 6, 9, 11, 12, 32, 45, 49, see also Gagliardi/Safina Schett, Barbara 60, 163, 166, 167, 97, 100, 103, 105, 110, 113, 118, see also Hantuchova/Safina 179, 207, 217, 223, 238, 259, 267, 124, 129, 154, 162, 166, 167, 180, see also Husarova/Safina 311, 313 208, 220, 221, 222, 223, 227, 228, see also Kirilenko/Safina see also Callens/Schett 238, 243, 267 see also Rodionova/Safina see also Dhenin/Schett see also Bedanova/Serna Safina/Shaughnessy 178, 181, 194, see also Hantuchova/Schett see also Cohen-Aloro/Serna 216, 220 see also Mandula/Schett see also Medina Garrigues/Serna Safina/Strycova 178, 194 see also Molik/Schett see also Molik/Serna Safina/Zvonareva 178, 185, 194 Schett/Schnyder 179, 180, 194, 206, see also Parra Santonja/Serna Saint Paul $50K 43, 210 209, 216, 221, 232, 247 see also Perebiynis/Serna Saint-Gaudens $50K 43, 210 Schett/Tarabini 179, 194 see also Schiavone/Serna Salerni, Maria Emilia 43, 63, 208, Schett/Wartusch 179, 194 Serna/Vento-Kabchi 180, 184, 194 220, 234, 267 Schiavone 5, 6, 9, 11, 12, 13, 31, 45, Serra Zanetti, Adriana 208, 267 see also Gullickson/Salerni 49, 50, 51, 60, 77, 96, 103, 105, 110, Serra Zanetti, Antonella 208, 240, 267 San Antonio 256, 257 112, 118, 124, 129, 153, 162, 167, Serra Zanetti/Serra Zanetti 206, 210, San Diego 19, 40, 41, 44, 138, 141, 179, 208, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 233 146, 156, 157, 169, 181, 209, 229, 225, 227, 228, 229, 233, 237, 240, Sescioreanu, Delia 43 245, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257 244, 249, 267 Sescioreanu/Vanc 210 Sanchez Lorenzo, Maria 14, 44, 118, see also Dhenin/Schiavone Sfar, Selima 43, 222 220, 222, 223, 226, 227, 238, 240, see also Farina Elia/Schiavone 241, 267 see also Grande/Schiavone Schiavone/Serna 179, 180, 194

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Index Sharapova, Maria 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, Spears, Abigail 43, 207, 232, 234, 267 Suárez, Paola 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 35, 32, 40, 42, 44, 46, 47, 49, 50, 51, 53, see also Mattek/Spears 42, 44, 46, 49, 50, 51, 60, 77, 97, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 65, Spirlea, Irina 255, 256, 268, 311, 313 104, 105, 109, 110, 113, 118, 122, 66, 70, 72, 74, 76, 77, 79, 81, 97, Sprem, Karolina 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, 34, 124, 129, 134, 139, 143, 144, 154, 101, 103, 105, 107, 108, 109, 110, 45, 49, 50, 51, 66, 77, 82, 97, 103, 158, 160, 163, 164, 166, 167, 182, 113, 118, 122, 124, 125, 126, 127, 105, 109, 110, 113, 118, 124, 127, 203, 204, 205, 207, 212, 213, 214, 129, 130, 131, 132, 134, 139, 143, 129, 144, 154, 220, 222, 223, 224, 215, 217, 218, 220, 221, 223, 224, 144, 145, 154, 156, 158, 208, 222, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 231, 233, 225, 226, 227, 229, 230, 231, 232, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 237, 239, 240, 243, 249, 250, 268 233, 235, 238, 239, 240, 242, 247, 233, 234, 236, 242, 243, 244, 245, see also Dementieva/Sprem 250, 253, 259, 268, 286, 300 246, 247, 248, 250, 251, 252, 254, Sprem/Zvonareva 185, 194 see also Ruano Pascual/Suarez 267, 290, 304, 305, 311, 313, 320 Srebotnik, Katarina 167, 208, 228, Suarez/Tarabini 194 See also Kirilenko/Sharapova 239, 268 Sucha, Martina 14, 42, 44, 45, 139, see also Pratt/Sharapova see also Asagoe/Srebotnik 143, 223, 225, 232, 234, 268 Sharapova/Tanasugarn 183, 194 see also Callens/Srebotnik Sugiyama, Ai 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 35, Sharapova/Zvonareva 185, 194 see also Maleeva/Srebotnik 42, 44, 46, 49, 50, 51, 60, 77, 82, 98, Shaughnessy, Meghann 6, 9, 11, 12, see also Raymond/Srebotnik 104, 105, 110, 113, 118, 124, 129, 14, 33, 44, 45, 49, 60, 97, 100, 103, Srndovic, Aleksandra 160 134, 139, 143, 154, 158, 163, 164, 105, 110, 113, 118, 124, 129, 154, St. Petersburg $50K 43, 210 166, 167, 182, 207, 215, 217, 218, 163, 164, 166, 167, 181, 203, 204, St. Rafael $50K 43, 210 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 226, 227, 205, 207, 212, 213, 214, 215, 217, Stanford 19, 40, 41, 44, 139, 142, 147, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 235, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 226, 227, 156, 157, 177, 209, 228, 244, 252, 236, 237, 239, 241, 243, 245, 248, 228, 229, 230, 232, 233, 235, 239, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257 249, 253, 254, 259, 268, 316 243, 244, 247, 253, 254, 259, 267, Stevenson, Alexandra 11, 34, 45, 49, see also Asagoe/Sugiyama 316 60, 97, 103, 110, 113, 118, 124, 129, see also Dementieva/Sugiyama see also Grönefeld/Shaughnessy 154, 158, 235, 244, 268 see also Halard-Decugis/Sugiyama see also Petrova/Shaughnessy Stewart/Stosur 227 see also Huber/Sugiyama see also Safina/Shaughnessy Stockholm 27, 42, 44, 139, 142, 148, see also Molik/Sugiyama Shaughnessy/Vinci 181, 184, 194, 175, 179, 210, 229 see also Myskina/Sugiyama 222 Stosur, Samantha 14, 44, 135, 220, Sukova, Helena 257, 258, 287, 296, ShenZhen $50K 2003 43, 173, 183, 223, 235, 268 299, 300, 307, 311, 313, 315, 316, 210 see also Callens/Stosur 317 Shenzhen $50K I 43, 210 see also Pratt/Stosur see also Hingis/Sukova Shenzhen $50K II 43, 210 Stove, Betty 300, 311, 313, 317 see also Kohde-Kilsch/Sukova ’s-Hertogenbosch 29, 42, 44, 139, see also Durr/Stove see also Novotna/Sukova 142, 148, 210, 227 see also King/Stove see also Sanchez-Vicario/Sukova Shriver, Pam 257, 258, 296, 298, 299, see also Navratilova/Stove Sun Tiantian 43, 163, 166, 167, 183, 300, 311, 313, 315, 316, 317 Stove/Turnbull 291 204, 207, 217, 235 see also Navratilova/Shriver Strasbourg 42, 44, 139, 142, 148, 210, see also Asagoe/Sun Shriver/Zvereva 291 226, 241 see also Hao/Sun Sidot, Anne-Gaëlle 267 Stratton Mtn 256 see also Li/Sun Skavronskaia, Ludmila 43 Strycova, Barbora 14, 43, 223, 224, Sun/Tu 183, 194 Smashnova, Anna (Pistolesi) 6, 9, 11, 232, 268 Surabaya 255 12, 13, 33, 42, 44, 46, 49, 77, 97, see also Safina/Strycova Svensson, Åsa (Carlsson) 207, 235, 100, 103, 105, 110, 113, 118, 124, Stubbs, Rennae 163, 164, 166, 167, 268 129, 134, 139, 143, 154, 162, 220, 181, 203, 204, 205, 207, 212, 213, see also Callens/Svensson 221, 222, 224, 226, 227, 228, 229, 214, 215, 217, 253, 259, 285, 307 Svensson/Tu 206, 210, 222 230, 231, 232, 235, 237, 243, 246, see also Black/Stubbs Sydney 22, 40, 41, 44, 138, 141, 147, 249, 254, 267 see also Molik/Stubbs 156, 157, 169, 181, 209, 220, 235, Smith, Anne 296, 298, 299, 300 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 258 see also Kathy Jordan/Anne Smith Sydney Indoors 258 see also Navratilova/Smith Smylie, Elizabeth T see also Jordan/Smylie Talaja, Silvija 223, 268 Snyder, Tara 43, 267 see also Maleeva/Talaja Sopot 42, 44, 139, 142, 148, 150, 210, Tameishi, Keiko 160 230, 245 Tampa 256, 257, 258

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Index Tanasugarn, Tamarine 9, 11, 12, 14, Tulyaganova, Iroda 36, 45, 98, 113, W 36, 45, 48, 49, 98, 104, 113, 118, 154, 162, 233, 249, 268, 321 Wade, Virginia 290, 300, 305, 311, 124, 129, 150, 154, 162, 163, 166, Turnbull, Wendy 296, 311, 313, 315 313, 315 167, 183, 220, 221, 222, 225, 227, see also Casals/Turnbull see also Court/Wade 228, 231, 232, 236, 239, 243, 245, see also Reid/Turnbull Waikoloa $50K 43, 210 248, 268 see also Stove/Turnbull Wang, Shi-Ting 255, 256 see also Grande/Tanasugarn Warsaw 38, 40, 41, 44, 139, 141, 147, see also Huber/Tanasugarn U 156, 157, 170, 179, 209, 225, 240, see also Lee/Tanasugarn U. S. Open 24, 40, 41, 138, 141, 145, 252, 253, 254 see also Nagyova/Tanasugarn 156, 157, 178, 182, 209, 231, 247, Wartusch, Patricia 269 see also Prakusya/Tanasugarn 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 258 see also Casanova/Wartusch see also Pratt/Tanasugarn 44 see also Gagliardi/Wartusch see also Schaul/Tanasugarn see also Mandula/Wartusch see also Sharapova/Tanasugarn V see also Schett/Wartusch Tanasugarn/Tatarkova 183, 194 Vaidisova, Nicole 14, 42, 43, 44, 45, Washington 256, 257, 258 Tanasugarn/Vento-Kabchi 183, 184, 47, 63, 139, 143, 223, 230, 232, 246, Washington, Mashona 14, 43, 44, 230, 194, 228 268, 323 246, 269 Tarabini, Patricia 259 Vakulenko, Julia 150, 160, 220, 226, see also Asagoe/Washington see also Schett/Tarabini 268 Webb, Vanessa 321 see also Suarez/Tarabini Van Roost, Dominique (Monami) 268 Weingärtner, Marlene 14, 167, 208, Tashkent 42, 44, 139, 142, 148, 150, Vancouver 42, 44, 139, 142, 149, 210, 217, 220, 226, 227, 231, 235, 242, 210, 233, 249 230, 246 248, 269 Tatarkova, Elena Vaskova, Alena 320 see also Craybas/Weingärtner see also Mandula/Tatarkova Vento-Kabchi, Maria 9, 11, 12, 14, 37, Wheeler, Christina see also Navratilova/Tatarkova 45, 49, 98, 104, 105, 110, 113, 118, see also Pratt/Wheeler see also Tanasugarn/Tatarkova 124, 129, 154, 163, 164, 166, 167, White, Robin Tauziat, Nathalie 60, 254, 255, 256, 184, 224, 226, 227, 228, 231, 239, see also Fernandez/White 259, 268, 311, 313 243, 244, 248, 269 Widjaja, Angelique 164, 166, 184, Taylor, Sarah 268 see also Daniilidou/Vento-Kabchi 231, 269 Teeguarden, Pam see also Dulko/Vento-Kabchi see also Prakusya/Widjaja see also Mariskova/Teeguarden see also Grande/Vento-Kabchi see also Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja Tegart Dalton, Judy 293, 300 see also Krizan/Vento-Kabchi Williams, Serena 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, see also Casals/Tegart Dalton see also Liggan/Vento-Kabchi 37, 40, 44, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 53, see also Court/Tegart Dalton see also Perebiynis/Vento-Kabchi 54, 55, 56, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 64, 65, Temesvari, Andrea 258 see also Serna/Vento-Kabchi 67, 68, 70, 72, 74, 75, 76, 77, 81, 98, see also Navratilova/Temesvari see also Tanasugarn/Vento-Kabchi 101, 104, 105, 107, 108, 109, 110, Testud, Sandrine 9, 36, 45, 48, 49, 60, see also Tu/Vento-Kabchi 113, 114, 115, 116, 118, 124, 125, 98, 100, 104, 109, 110, 113, 118, Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja 184, 195, 221, 126, 127, 129, 131, 132, 133, 134, 124, 129, 154, 162, 183, 217, 223, 222, 227, 229, 231 139, 143, 144, 145, 155, 156, 158, 237, 238, 244, 255, 268 Vienna 33, 42, 44, 139, 142, 148, 176, 160, 162, 166, 224, 225, 226, 227, see also Cohen-Aloro/Testud 178, 210, 226, 241 228, 229, 231, 233, 234, 239, 241, see also Déchy/Testud Vierin, Nathalie 160 242, 244, 245, 247, 248, 250, 251, Testud/Vinci 183, 184, 194, 216, 227, Vinci, Roberta 163, 166, 167, 184, 252, 253, 254, 255, 259, 269, 277, 242 217, 227, 269 288, 290, 296, 298, 299, 300, 304, Tomanova, Renata see also Beltrame/Vinci 305, 306, 308, 311, 313, 315 see also Nagelson/Tomanova see also Gagliardi/Vinci Torrens Valero, Cristina 254, 268 see also Garbin/Vinci Troy $50K 43, 210 see also Shaughnessy/Vinci Tu, Meilen 208, 220, 268 see also Testud/Vinci see also Asagoe/Tu Viratprasert, Suchanan 43 see also Bartoli/Tu Virginia Slims Championships 257, see also Callens/Tu 258 see also Mandula/Tu Vittel $50K 43, 210 see also Sun/Tu see also Svensson/Tu Tu/Vento-Kabchi 184, 195

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2004 Robert Waltz Index Williams, Venus 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, Yi, Jing-Qian 269 Zvonareva, Vera 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 38, 40, 44, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 57, Yoshida, Yuka 222 39, 42, 44, 46, 49, 50, 51, 57, 60, 68, 58, 59, 60, 74, 77, 98, 101, 104, 105, see also Asagoe/Yoshida 74, 77, 88, 99, 104, 105, 110, 113, 106, 110, 113, 119, 120, 121, 122, 119, 124, 129, 134, 135, 139, 143, 124, 129, 134, 139, 143, 144, 155, Z 155, 160, 163, 166, 167, 185, 208, 156, 158, 160, 162, 184, 221, 222, Zheng Jie 14, 43, 167, 223, 226, 227, 217, 218, 220, 222, 223, 224, 225, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 230, 233, 238, 269 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 236, 237, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, see also Li/Zheng 233, 234, 235, 237, 238, 239, 240, 244, 245, 246, 249, 250, 251, 252, Zuluaga, Fabiola 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, 38, 241, 242, 245, 246, 247, 250, 251, 254, 255, 259, 269, 277, 288, 290, 42, 44, 46, 49, 60, 77, 98, 104, 105, 269 296, 298, 299, 300, 304, 305, 308, 110, 113, 119, 124, 129, 134, 139, see also Dementieva/Zvonareva 311, 313, 314, 315 143, 145, 155, 158, 162, 221, 222, see also Kirilenko/Zvonareva see also Rubin/V. Williams 224, 225, 226, 228, 229, 230, 233, see also Krasnoroutskaya/ Williams/Williams 291, 298 238, 241, 269 Zvonareva Wimbledon 32, 40, 41, 44, 138, 141, Zürich 27, 40, 41, 44, 139, 141, 146, see also Likhovtseva/Zvonareva 145, 156, 157, 169, 181, 209, 228, 150, 156, 157, 169, 181, 209, 233, see also Myskina/Zvonareva 243, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 249, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, see also Safina/Zvonareva 258 258 see also Sharapova/Zvonareva Woehr, Jasmin 208 Zvereva, Natasha 254, 255, 256, 257, see also Sprem/Zvonareva see also Schwartz/Woehr 269, 289, 297, 298, 299, 300, 307, 311, 313, 316, 317 Y see also Fernandez/Zvereva Yakimova, Anastasia 43 see also Hingis/Zvereva Yan Zi 167 see also Neiland/Zvereva Yan/Zheng 210, 221 see also Savchenko/Zvereva Yang/Yu 232 see also Shriver/Zvereva