WTA Tour Statistical Abstract 2003

Home , Adriana Serra Zanetti, Akiko Morigami, Alexandra Stevenson, Alina Jidkova, Anastasia Myskina, Anca Barna

Contents Introduction 4 Head to Head/Results against Top Players . .68 2003 In Review: The Top Players ...... 5 The Top 20 Head to Head ...... 68 The Final Top Thirty...... 5 Wins Over Top Players ...... 69 The Beginning Top Twenty-Five ...... 6 Matches Played/Won against the Top Twenty...... 69 Summary of Changes, Beginning to End of 2003 ...... 6 Won/Lost Versus the Top Players Top Players Analysed ...... 7 (Based on Rankings at the Time of the Match) ...... 70 The Complete Top Ten Based on WTA Statistics...... 7 Won/Lost Versus the Top Players The Complete Top Ten under the 1996 Ranking System.7 (Based on Final Rankings)...... 71 Ranking Fluctuation...... 8 Statistics Based on Head-to-Head Numbers . . .72 Highest Ranking of 2003 ...... 10 Total Wins over Top Ten Players...... 72 Top Players Sorted by Median Ranking...... 11 Winning Percentage against Top Ten Players...... 72 Short Summary: The Top Eighty...... 12 How They Earned Their Points ...... 73 The Top 200, in Numerical Order ...... 14 Fraction of Points Earned in Slams ...... 74 The Top 200, in Alphabetical Order...... 15 Quality Versus Round Points ...... 75 Tournament Results...... 16 Percentage of Points Earned on Each Surface...... 77 Summary of Results for Top Players ...... 16 Consistency ...... 79 Standard Deviation of Scores by Tournament...... 79 Tournament Winners ...... 32 Tournament Winners by Date (High-Tier Events) ...... 32 Early-Round Losses ...... 80 Tournament Winners by Type (High-Tier Events...... 33 Frequency of Opening Round Losses ...... 81 Winners at Smaller Tournaments (Tier III, IV, V) ...... 34 Frequency of Early Round Losses...... 82 Winners and Finalists at $50K and Larger Challengers .35 Worst Losses ...... 83 Titles against Weak and Strong Opposition ...... 36 Best and Worst “Worst Losses” ...... 88 Number of Tournament Wins for Top 25 Players ...... 37 Fraction of Points Earned in Biggest Win . . . . .90 Fraction of Tournaments Won...... 38 Tiers of Tournaments Played and Average Tier...... 39 Winning and Losing Streaks ...... 91 Points Earned Week by Week ...... 41 List of Longest Winning Streaks...... 91 Tournament Results (Points Earned), Most to Least ...... 42 Individual Winning and Losing Streaks, by Player...... 91 Alternate Rankings ...... 43 Number of Significant Results...... 94 Total Points Ranking (1997 Ranking System) ...... 43 Points Per Quarter ...... 95 Points Per Tournament, Minimum 14 (“The Divisor”) ..44 Most Consistent over Four Quarters ...... 97 Points Per, Minimum 17 (“Modernized Divisor”)...... 45 Slam Results ...... 98 Best 14 ...... 46 Slotted Best 18 (ATP Entry Rank) ...... 47 Surface Rankings ...... 100 Total Wins...... 48 Hardcourts ...... 100 Winning Percentag...... 50 Summary of Hardcourt Results ...... 100 Divisor Rankings, No Slam Bonus...... 52 Winning Percentage on Hardcourts...... 103 The “Majors Ranking”...... 53 Points Per Tournament on Hardcourts ...... 104 Total Round Points ...... 54 Best and Worst Results on Hardcourts...... 105 Round Points Per Tournament...... 55 Clay ...... 106 Quality Points Per Tournament (“Future Potential”)...... 56 Summary of Clay Results...... 106 Quality/Round Points Equalized...... 57 Winning Percentage on Clay...... 108 Consistency-Rewarded Rankings ...... 58 Points Per Tournament on Clay...... 109 Logarithmic Points Award...... 58 Best and Worst Results on Clay ...... 110 Worst 14...... 59 Grass...... 111 Middle Half...... 60 Summary of Grass Results ...... 111 Idealized Ranking Systems ...... 61 Winning Percentage on Grass ...... 113 ISurface-Modified Divisor (Minimum 16)...... 61 Adjusted Points Per Tournament on Grass...... 115 Idealized Rankings/Proposal 2 — Adjusted Won/Lost ..63 Adjusted Winning Percentage, No Bonuses...... 65 Percentage of Possible Points Earned...... 66

Contents Indoors ...... 116 Alternate Doubles Rankings ...... 194 Summary of Indoor Results ...... 116 Rankings under the 1996 Ranking System...... 195 Winning Percentage Indoors...... 118 Points Per Tournament, No Minimum Divisor ...... 196 Points Per Tournament Indoors ...... 119 Majors Ranking ...... 197 Best and Worst Results Indoors...... 120 Combined Singles and Doubles Rankings . . . .199 All-Surface Players ...... 121 WTA Calendar for 2003 ¥ Events/Results . .201 Tournament Wins by Surface ...... 122 The Tennis Almanac 2003 ...... 216 Assorted Statistics ...... 123 WTA Tour History...... 233 The Busiest Players on the Tour ...... 123 Who Won What Summary — Singles ...... 233 Total Tour Matches Played by Top Players...... 123 Who Won What Summary — Doubles...... 234 Total Tour Events Played by the Top 150 ...... 125 Who Won What — History of Tournaments . .235 The Strongest Tournaments ...... 126 Active Leaders in Titles (Singles/Doubles) 240 Tournament Strength Based on Four Top Players...... 126 Detailed Analysis — Career Tournaments for The Top Tournaments Based on Top Players (I)...... 128 Davenport, Hingis, Seles, Williams...... 241 The Top Tournaments Based on Top Players (II) ...... 129 Career Results for Leading Players ...... 242 Strongest Tournaments Won ...... 131 Career Results — Singles...... 242 Strongest Tournament Performances...... 132 Slam History...... 262 Title Defences ...... 133 Singles Slam Winners, Open Era ...... 262 Seeds and their Success Rates ...... 134 Doubles Slam Winners, Open Era...... 263 Lucky Losers...... 138 Singles and Doubles at the Same Slam (Open Era) .....264 Doubles Slams and Partners ...... 265 Bagels...... 139 Grand Slams and Career Slams ...... 270 The Road to Victory...... 143 Total Slam Victories, Open Era ...... 272 Games Lost in Path to Title ...... 143 Players and Titles ...... 273 Quality Points Earned ...... 144 Players with Titles, Year by Year ...... 273 “Top Players” 2003 ...... 145 Most Titles, Year By Year ...... 275 Statistics About the Tour as a Whole...... 147 Five Or More Titles in a Year ...... 276 Surface Sweeps — Singles (Since 1990) ...... 277 The Year of the Injury ...... 148 Career Surface Sweeps/Singles ...... 279 Doubles ...... 149 Career Grand Surface Sweep...... 280 The Final Top 30 in Doubles ...... 149 Year-End Top Players ...... 281 The Initial Top 30 in Doubles...... 150 Year-End Top Eight, Alphabetical, Doubles Ranking Fluctuation ...... 151 with Years, Since 1975 ...... 281 The Final Top Fifty in Double...... 153 Total Years Ended At Each Rank, .Individual Results: The Top Doubles Players154 Alphabetical, Since 1975 ...... 283 Head-to-Heads — Team Records and Losses .171 Strongest Career Rankings Showings ...... 285 Teams with the Most Events...... 181 Total Years in the Top Eight ...... 286 Team Results, Sorted By Both Players...... 182 Doubles Wins & Partners...... 287 Team and Individual Doubles Statistics...... 186 Winningest Doubles Player, From 1983 ...... 287 Doubles Winning Percentages for the Top Teams ...... 186 Titles With Multiple Partners, Single Year ...... 288 Doubles Winning Percentages for the Top Players ...... 187 Slams With the Most Partners, Open Era...... 288 Individual Doubles Statistical Leaders ...... 188 I Came, I Played ...... 289 Team Doubles Titles, Most to Least ...... 189 WTA Main Draw Events Played...... 290 Individual Doubles Titles, Most to Least. . . . .190 Comings and Goings: Doubles Tournament Winners by Date ...... 192 On and Off the Rankings ...... 291 Players ranked in 2002 but not in 2003...... 292 Players ranked in 2003 but not in 2002...... 294 Players ranked in both 2002 and 2003 ...... 295 Index ...... 300

Introduction I’ve always been amazed to look at huge scholarly volumes, such as concordances, filled with hundreds or thousands of pages of facts and representing hundreds or thousands of hours of work and yet without any real introduction. After doing all that work, you’d think the author would want to tell us all why. And yet, here I am trying to convince you of the significance of this Statistical Abstract, and I find I have relatively little to say. Nonetheless, I think this Statistical Abstract serves a useful function. In team sports, it’s easy to learn what you need to learn about the teams: You look at the standings. As long as they play a sufficient and balanced schedule (as, say, baseball and basketball do, though American Football does not), the standings tell you who is best and who needs work. Tennis isn’t like that. Players play different numbers of events, and they play different levels of events; a 5-0 record at an event means a lot more if it’s at Filderstadt (where your every opponent is Top 25) than if it’s a low-level Challenger. And even if two players were to play all the same events — which they won’t — they won’t play the same opponents. And tournaments come in all sorts of grades and tiers; they also are played on a variety of different surfaces; a player who is great on clay may well be quite uncomfortable indoors; one who is good at singles may be bad at doubles; one who can demolish the competition in Tier V events may be overmatched at the Tier II level. It’s a very complicated world. Hence this Statistical Abstract. It can’t cover everything, of course. But we can look at the top players (mostly the final Top 30, with other players who achieved Top 25 status during the year, plus a handful of others such as Mary Pierce and Daja Bedanova and Anna Kournikova, who didn’t but who had solid enough histories that one might hope they could do it again if healthy). We look at their rankings, their overall results, the players they faced, and so forth. We also look at the state of the sport: Which tournaments are strong, which are weak, which feature the most top players. And, of course, we look at doubles, a subject almost forgotten these days. At times this can give a very different perspective. The “alternate rankings,” for instance, give us a look at the strongest players in various categories. I’d expected either Serena Williams or Justine Hénin- Hardenne to win all of these, depending mostly on whether the statistic set a minimum number of events or not. It didn’t turn out that way. In several categories, such as those based on wins over top players and in results at the ten biggest events, Kim Clijsters comes out on top (in fact, Clijsters has the biggest Majors result posted in the last four years). Obviously Clijsters had real trouble in pressure matches. But the numbers say clearly that her game was good enough for #1; the problem lay elsewhere. On the whole, if I were asked to vote the #1 singles player of the year, I guess I would have to list the players in the WTA order: Justine Hénin-Hardenne #1, then Clijsters, then Serena Williams. The doubles PoY list, though, wouldnot follow the rankings; I’d say Ai Sugiyama #1, Clijsters #2, and Martina Navratilova #3. And that, at least arguably, makes Clijsters the true all-around Player of the Year. Revealing things like that is one of the major purposes of the Abstract (the other being to record useful facts about the 2003 season, and also about the seasons before that). The WTA rankings, for instance, present only the most elementary picture of players’ results; even if you agree with the method (and, speaking as a mathematician, I find it utterly perverse, since it counts wins but ignores losses), it’s just a number. There is more to be said, and you can find at least some of that additional information here. Please note that this document is based on “Tour Year 2003,” which ended with the year-end championships in the second week of November. No Tour events were played after that time, but Challengers were. These have not been included in the data in this document. I have, of course, tried very hard to assure that this information is accurate, and have applied various cross-checks on it where possible. But I can only do so much, particularly given the shortness of the tennis off-season as well as the more than occasional errors produced by the WTA. Therefore I can offer no guarantees of the accuracy of this information. You’re getting it free; how much can you expect? I still hope it will be useful. Robert B. Waltz December 2003

2003 In Review: The Top Players The Final Top Thirty These are the players we’ll be talking about most. For purposes of reference, here are the Final 2003 Top 30 as determined by the WTA rankings. Final Player Best 17 Number of Point Gap from Began Net Rank Name Score Tournaments Preceding Year At Change 1 Hénin-Hardenne, Justine 6628 18 5 +4 2 Clijsters, Kim 6553 21 75 4 +2 3Williams, Serena 3916 7 2637 1 -2 4Mauresmo, Amelie 3194 17 722 6 +2 5Davenport, Lindsay 2990 16 204 12 +7 6 Capriati, Jennifer 2766 18 224 3 -3 7Myskina, Anastasia 2581 24 185 11 +4 8 Dementieva, Elena 2383 27 198 19 +11 9 Rubin, Chanda 2328 21 55 13 +4 10 Sugiyama, Ai 2235 26 93 24 +14 11 Williams, Venus 2211 6 24 2 -9 12 Petrova, Nadia 1994.25 23 216.75 112 +100 13 Zvonareva, Vera 1808 23 186.25 45 +32 14 Suarez, Paola 1526 24 282 27 +13 15 Dokic, Jelena 1405 30 121 9 -6 16 Smashnova-Pistolesi, Anna1 1353 23 52 16 0 17 Shaughnessy, Meghann 1350 24 3 30 +13 18 Martinez, Conchita 1316 21 34 34 +16 19 Hantuchova, Daniela 1271 23 45 8 -11 20 Schiavone, Francesca 1265 23 6 41 +21 21 Bovina, Elena 1250 22 15 26 +5 22 Serna, Magui 1196 27 54 50 +28 23 Schnyder, Patty 1180 23 16 15 -8 24 Farina Elia, Silvia 1151.75 26 28.25 17 -7 25 Coetzer, Amanda 1139 20 12.75 21 -4 26 Daniilidou, Eleni 1136.75 26 2.25 22 -4 27 Krasnoroutskaya, Lina 1128.75 222 8 175 +148 28 Raymond, Lisa 1111 19 17.75 29 +1 29 Déchy, Nathalie 1095 19 16 20 -9 30 Maleeva, Magdalena 1064 22 31 14 -16 1. The former Anna Smashnova took the married name “Pistolesi” at the end of 2002, and then switched it to “Smashnova- Pistolesi” after her last tournament of 2003. Because most of our data was compiled before she re-changed her name, and because “Pistolesi” was the name she used during all her tournaments, she will generally be referred to as “Pistolesi” in this Statistical Abstract. 2. Includes 20.5 points from a Challenger played in late 2002.

The Beginning Top Twenty-Five Rank Name 2002 Final Ranking Net Change 1Williams, Serena 3 -2 2Williams, Venus 11 -9 3 Capriati, Jennifer 6 -3 4 Clijsters, Kim 2 +2 5 Hénin-Hardenne, Justine 1 +4 6Mauresmo, Amélie 4 +2 7 Seles, Monica 60 -53 8 Hantuchova, Daniela 19 -11 9 Dokic, Jelena 15 -6 10 Hingis, Martina retired/unranked — 11 Myskina, Anastasia 7 +4 12 Davenport, Lindsay 5 +7 13 Rubin, Chanda 9 +4 14 Maleeva, Magdalena 30 -16 15 Schnyder, Patty 23 -8 16 Pistolesi, Anna 18 0 17 Farina Elia, Silvia 24 -7 18 Stevenson, Alexandra 82 -64 19 Dementieva, Elena 8 +11 20 Déchy, Nathalie 29 -9 21 Coetzer, Amanda 25 -4 22 Daniilidou, Eleni 26 -4 23 Panova, Tatiana 119 -96 24 Sugiyama, Ai 10 +14 25 Kremer, Anne 389 -364 Summary of Changes, Beginning to End of 2003 Ranking Gains: From outside the Top 20 into the Top 20: Petrova, Martinez, Schiavone, Shaughnessy, Suarez, Sugiyama, Zvonareva (total of 7) From outside the Top 20 into the Top 10: Sugiyama (total of 1) From the Top 20 into the Top 10: Davenport, Dementieva, Myskina, Rubin (total of 4) Ranking Losses: Dropping out of the Top 20: Déchy, Farina Elia, Hingis (retired), Maleeva, Schnyder, Seles, Stevenson (total of 7) Dropping out of the Top 10 but remaining in the Top 20: Dokic, Hantuchova, V.Williams (total of 3) Dropping from the Top 10 to below the Top 20: Hingis (retired), Seles (total of 2) Players who were in the Top 10 at beginning and end of the year: Capriati, Clijsters, Hénin-Hardenne, Mauresmo, S.Williams (total of 5) Players who were in the Top 20 at the beginning and end of the year: Capriati, Clijsters, Dementieva, Davenport, Dokic, Hantuchova, Hénin-Hardenne, Mauresmo, Myskina, Pistolesi, Rubin, S.Williams, V. Williams (total of 13)

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

Capriati (3) Hantuchova (5) Rubin (7) Clijsters (1) Hénin-Hardenne (1) Seles (7) Davenport (4) Hingis (10) Sugiyama (10) Dementieva (8) Mauresmo (4) S. Williams (1) Dokic (8) Myskina (7) V. Williams (2)

The following list shows all the players who have occupied a given position in the Top 10: 1. Hénin-Hardenne, Clijsters, S. Williams 2. Clijsters, Hénin-Hardenne, S. Williams, V. Williams 3. Capriati, Clijsters, Hénin-Hardenne, S. Williams, V. Williams 4. Clijsters, Davenport, Hénin-Hardenne, Mauresmo, V. Williams 5. Capriati, Davenport, Hénin-Hardenne, Hantuchova, Mauresmo, V. Williams 6. Capriati, Davenport, Hantuchova, Mauresmo, V. Williams 7. Capriati, Davenport, Mauresmo, Myskina, Rubin, Seles, V. Williams 8. Capriati, Davenport, Dementieva, Dokic, Hantuchova, Mauresmo, Myskina, Rubin 9. Dementieva, Dokic, Hantuchova, Myskina, Rubin, Seles 10. Davenport, Dokic, Hantuchova, Hingis, Myskina, Rubin, Seles, Sugiyama 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 (3) Hingis (7) Seles (4) Clijsters (2) Mauresmo (3) Sugiyama (10) Davenport (3) Myskina (9) S. Williams (1) Dementieva (9) Petrova (10) V. Williams (2) Hantuchova (9) Rubin (8) Zvonareva (10) Hénin-Hardenne (1)

Note that, although there were fifteen Top Ten players in the WTA rankings, and sixteen under the divisor, we don’t find fifteen players in common to both lists. Dokic was Top Ten only in the WTA rankings; Petrova and Zvonareva made the Top Ten only under the divisor.

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 Kremer, with a standard deviation of 102.7, showed the biggest ﬂuctuation in the course of the year, while Mauresmo, with standard deviations of 0.8, showed the least variation). Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Mean Std. 1151151151151151151151151151 15115 (avg) Median Dev. Bedanova 37 41 39 37 44 48 47 44 44 44 44 46 66 68 74 81 88 152 153 154 154 156 75.5 47.5 45.7 Bovina 26 23 17 17 17 17 16 18 16 20 20 22 22 21 22 21 18 29 32 26 21 21 21.0 21.0 4.2 Capriati 3367566667787777755556 6.0 6.01.3 Clijsters 4433333222222221111112 2.1 2.00.9 Coetzer 21 22 23 23 20 19 18 16 18 17 17 16 15 15 15 14 16 19 18 23 27 25 19.0 18.0 3.6 Daniilidou 22 20 19 16 16 15 15 15 15 14 14 14 21 22 21 25 26 32 29 29 28 26 20.6 20.5 5.8 Davenport 12 10 108785555655554444445 5.9 5.02.3 Déchy 20 18 20 19 19 22 22 22 23 24 23 24 23 23 23 24 24 24 23 27 29 29 23.0 23.0 2.9 Dementieva 19 19 22 18 18 20 21 21 13 13 13 15 16 17 16 15 1188888 14.9 15.5 4.8 Dokic 9 9 8 10 9 9 10 11 10 10 11 11 12 12 12 17 23 22 26 25 14 15 13.4 11.0 5.6 Farina Elia 17 16 15 20 21 21 23 23 24 25 27 30 25 20 20 20 20 20 22 21 24 24 21.7 21.0 3.5 C. Fernandez 31 29 29 29 28 27 26 26 27 28 28 62 62 65 63 68 77 82 91 90 89 90 52.1 46.5 26.2 Hantuchova 8855659999999998 91214151819 9.7 9.0 3.8 Hénin-Hardenne 5544444444433333322221 3.3 3.51.0 Hingis 10 11 18 31 30 35 77 79 78 106 103 102 101 101 100 103 174 ————— 74.1 79.0 44.8 Kournikova 35 42 36 54 58 67 66 67 67 70 79 77 77 77 89 135 146 221 224 302 302 305 118.0 77.0 90.7 Krasnoroutskay 160 139 129 96 61 60 59 57 54 53 48 44 44 41 42 38 28 27 27 28 26 27 58.5 46.0 38.2 Kremer 25 26 26 32 35 33 45 59 58 59 71 79 119 136 166 209 207 206 211 307 — 389 119.0 71.0 102.7 Kuznetsova 43 45 48 48 42 41 36 38 36 41 37 35 34 30 29 27 29 28 35 33 35 36 36.6 36.0 6.2 Majoli 32 30 34 33 33 31 32 30 52 62 63 65 68 80 77 78 91 119 116 129 129 131 68.9 64.0 36.5 Maleeva 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 16 13 11 13 13 11 12 11 11 19 23 30 14.7 14.0 4.4 Martinez 34 37 40 38 31 30 25 25 25 27 22 17 13 14 14 12 13 13 16 13 17 18 22.5 20.0 9.2 Mauresmo 6676877776566666677774 6.4 6.00.8 Myskina 11 12 11 11 11 11 11 10 11 11 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10997 10.2 10.0 1.0 Panova 23 24 24 22 23 26 28 32 31 33 35 38 36 43 44 47 48 53 58 86 103 119 44.4 35.5 26.3 Petrova 112 148 111 110 112 110 109 101 95 88 76 29 27 25 24 22 19 15 13 14 12 12 62.9 52.5 46.6 Pierce 52 50 50 47 48 44 44 36 42 42 47 82 86 76 73 69 64 49 49 32 36 33 52.3 48.5 15.7 Pistolesi 16 17 16 15 15 16 20 20 21 23 25 25 26 27 26 23 17 21 21 16 16 16 19.9 20.0 4.1 Raymond 29 28 30 21 22 23 24 24 22 21 24 23 24 26 30 28 30 31 28 30 30 28 26.2 27.0 3.4 Rubin 13 13 12 12 12 12888887888989910109 9.5 9.01.9 Schiavone 41 35 38 41 38 37 35 35 34 31 32 37 37 32 28 26 32 26 25 22 20 20 31.9 33.0 6.4 Schnyder 15 15 13 13 13 13 13 13 20 19 18 21 19 19 19 18 22 23 20 18 22 23 17.7 18.5 3.6 Seles 7799101012121212121818242529314646474660 22.8 15.0 16.2 Serna 50 47 52 46 50 47 42 46 40 36 36 27 29 29 31 31 27 25 24 24 25 22 35.7 33.5 10.2 Shaughnessy 30 33 27 27 27 24 19 19 19 18 19 19 20 18 18 19 21 17 19 20 19 17 21.3 19.0 4.5 Stevenson 18 21 21 24 26 25 27 27 26 26 26 26 28 28 27 30 33 33 31 39 83 82 32.1 27.0 16.9 Suarez 27 27 25 25 24 28 29 28 29 30 31 51 35 31 32 32 25 18 17 17 15 14 26.8 27.5 8.0 Sugiyama 24 25 28 26 25 18 17 17 17 16 15 12 14 11 11 13 15 14 12 11 11 10 16.5 15.0 5.6 Tanasugarn 28 32 31 28 34 32 31 33 32 35 33 36 31 36 39 37 39 30 30 31 33 34 33.0 32.5 3.1 S. Williams 1111111111111112233333 1.5 1.00.9 V. Williams 222222233334444556666114.0 3.52.2 Zvonareva 45 43 43 40 41 39 33 29 28 22 21 20 17 16 17 16 14 16 15 12 13 13 25.1 20.5 11.8

The above data can of course be graphed. The graph below shows the bi-monthly numbers for the ﬁfteen players who spent time in the Top Ten (with all rankings above #32 are treated as “32”) 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, Jelena Dokic, Daniela Hantuchova, Justine Hénin-Hardenne, Martina Hingis, Amélie Mauresmo, Anastasia Myskina, Chanda Rubin, Monica Seles, Ai Sugiyama, Serena Williams, and Venus Williams

32 MHMHMHMHMHMHMHMHMHMHMHMHMSMSMSMSMS MH MS 30 MH MS R 28 AS A N K 26 AS JD I AS AS MS JD N 24 AS MS G JD 22 ED JD ED ED 20 ED ED ED DH 18 MH ED ED AS MSMS DH AS AS AS ED JD 16 AS ED ED AS ED ED AS DH JD 14 AS ASDH JD CRCR ED ED ED AS 12 LDMyCRCRCRCRMSMSMSMSMS AS JD JD JD DH AS MyMH MyMyMyMyMy JDMyMy JD JD AS AS ED AS ASVW 10 MH LD LD JDMSMS JDMy JD JDMyMyMyMyMyMyMyMyMyCRCR AS JD JDMSMS JD JDDHDHDHDHDHDHDHDHDHCRDHCRCRMyMyCR 8 DHDH JD LDMa LDCRCRCRCRCR JCCRCRCRDHCR ED ED ED ED ED MSMSMa JC LDMaMaMaMa JC JCCR JC JC JC JC JCMaMaMaMaMy 6 MaMa JCMaDH JC JC JC JCMa LDMaMaMaMaMaMaVWVWVWVW JC JH JHDHDH JCDH LD LD LD LDMa LD LD LD LDVWVW JC JC JC JC LD 4 KCKC JH JH JH JH JH JH JH JH JHVWVWVWVW LD LD LD LD LD LDMa JC JCKCKCKCKCKCVWVWVWVW JH JH JH JH JH JHSWSWSWSWSW 2 VWVWVWVWVWVWVWKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCSWSW JH JH JH JHKC SWSWSWSWSWSWSWSWSWSWSWSWSWSWSWKCKCKCKCKCKC JH 0 DATE 1 15 1 15 1 15 1 15 1 15 1 15 1 15 1 15 1 15 1 15 1 15 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov

Highest Ranking of 2003 For the 34 players who spent at least one week of 2003 in the Top 25, plus our 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 Bedanova 37 Clijsters 1 Bovina 16 Hénin-Hardenne 1 Capriati 3 Williams, Serena 1 Clijsters 1 Williams, Venus 2 Coetzer 14 Capriati 3 Daniilidou 14 Davenport 4 Davenport 4 Mauresmo 4 Déchy 18 Hantuchova 5 Dementieva 8 Myskina 7 Dokic 8 Rubin 7 Farina Elia 17 Seles 7 Fernandez, Clarisa 26 Dementieva 8 Hantuchova 5 Dokic 8 Hénin-Hardenne 1 Hingis 10 Hingis 10 Sugiyama 10 Kournikova 35 Maleeva 11 Krasnoroutskaya 26 Martinez 12 Kremer 25 Petrova 12 Kuznetsova 26 Zvonareva 12 Majoli 29 Schnyder 13 Maleeva 11 Coetzer 14 Martinez 12 Daniilidou 14 Mauresmo 4 Suarez 14 Myskina 7 Pistolesi 15 Panova 22 Bovina 16 Petrova 12 Farina Elia 17 Pierce 32 Shaughnessy 17 Pistolesi 15 Déchy 18 Raymond 21 Stevenson 18 Rubin 7 Schiavone 20 Schett 38 Raymond 21 Schiavone 20 Panova 22 Schnyder 13 Serna 22 Seles 7 Kremer 25 Serna 22 Fernandez, Clarisa 26 Shaughnessy 17 Krasnoroutskaya 26 Stevenson 18 Kuznetsova 26 Suarez 14 Tanasugarn 28 Sugiyama 10 Majoli 29 Tanasugarn 28 Pierce 32 Tulyaganova 33 Tulyaganova 33 Williams, Serena 1 Kournikova 35 Williams, Venus 2 Bedanova 37 Zvonareva 12 Schett 38

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 2002 and 2003 results equally into account, since rankings at the beginning of the year were based entirely on 2002 results, while 2003 results were the sole influence by the end of the year. Median Rank Player 1.0 S. Williams 2.0 Clijsters 3.5 Hénin-Hardenne 3.5 V. Williams 5.0 Davenport 6.0 Capriati 6.0 Mauresmo 9.0 Hantuchova 9.0 Rubin 10.0 Myskina 11.0 Dokic 14.0 Maleeva 15.0 Seles 15.0 Sugiyama 15.5 Dementieva 18.0 Coetzer 18.5 Schnyder 19.0 Shaughnessy 20.0 Martinez 20.0 Pistolesi 20.5 Daniilidou 20.5 Zvonareva 21.0 Bovina 21.0 Farina Elia 23.0 Déchy 27.0 Raymond 27.0 Stevenson 27.5 Suarez 32.5 Tanasugarn 33.0 Schiavone 33.5 Serna 35.5 Panova 36.0 Kuznetsova 46.0 Krasnoroutskay 46.5 C. Fernandez 47.5 Bedanova 48.5 Pierce 52.5 Petrova 64.0 Majoli 71.0 Kremer 77.0 Kournikova

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 11, 2003 rankings), Player is of course the player, Score is her Best 17 point total, # ofTrn is the number of tournaments she played (including Challengers), Best Rank is her highest ranking during the year 2003, Won/Lost is won/lost record (in the notes to this field, Wi=Withdrawal, WO=walkover. So Hénin-Hardenne, for instance, won 72 matches, lost eleven, received one walkover, and did not withdraw from any). 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 Petrova (for qualifying results) and Krasnoroutskaya (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 Mauresmo’s line, e.g., reads Warsaw, Philadelphia (2). This means Mauresmo won two titles — Warsaw and Philadelphia. Players marked * are “highlight” players studied extensively below. Final # of Best Rank Player Name Score Trn Rank Won/Lost Titles 1 Justine Hénin-Hardenne* 6628 18 1 72-11 (+1 WO) Dubai, Charleston, Berlin Roland Garros, SanDiego, CanadO, USOpen, Zurich (8) 2 Kim Clijsters* 6553 21 1 86-12 Sydney, Indian Wells, Rome ’s-Hertog, Stanford, Los Angeles, Filderstadt, Luxemb, LAChamp (9) 3 Serena Williams* 3916 7 1 36-3 AusO, Paris, Miami,Wimb (4) 4 Amélie Mauresmo* 3194 17 4 45-16 (+1 Wi) Warsaw, Philadelphia (2) 5 Lindsay Davenport* 2990 16 4 47-15 (+1 WO) Pan Pacific (1) 6 Jennifer Capriati* 2766 18 3 42-18 New Haven (1) 7 Anastasia Myskina* 2581 24 7 42-21 Doha, Saraso, Leipz, Mosc (4) 8 Elena Dementieva* 2383 27 8 47-25 Amelia Isl., Bali, Shanghai (3) 9 Chanda Rubin* 2328 21 7 43-20 Madrid, Eastbourne (2) 10 Ai Sugiyama* 2235 26 10 44-25 Scottsdale, Linz (2) 11 Venus Williams* 2211 6 2 24-5 Antwerp (1) 12 Nadia Petrova* 1994.25 23 12 36-20 13 Vera Zvonareva* 1808 23 12 45-22 Bol (1) 14 Paola Suarez* 1526 24 14 37-22 Vienna (1) 15 Jelena Dokic* 1405 30 8 28-30 16 Anna Pistolesi* 1353 23 15 37-21 Sopot, Helsinki (2) 17 Meghann Shaughnessy* 1350 24 17 32-22 (+1Wi) Canberra (1) 18 Conchita Martinez* 1316 21 12 29-21 19 Daniela Hantuchova* 1271 23 5 26-23 20 Francesca Schiavone* 1265 23 20 32-23 21 Elena Bovina* 1250 22 16 25-22 22 Magui Serna* 1196 27 22 37-23 Estoril, Budapest (2) 23 Patty Schnyder* 1180 23 13 26-23 (+2 WO) 24 Silvia Farina Elia* 1151.75 26 17 25-25 Strasbourg (1) 25 Amanda Coetzer* 1139 20 14 27-19 Acapulco (1) 26 Eleni Daniilidou* 1136.75 26 14 32-24 Auckland (1) 27 Lina Krasnoroutskaya* 1128.75 22 26 22-19 28 Lisa Raymond* 1111 19 21 25-18 Memphis (1) 29 Nathalie Déchy* 1095 19 18 31-17 (+1 Wi) Gold Coast (1) 30 Magdalena Maleeva* 1064 22 11 27-21 Birmingham (1) 31 Tina Pisnik 1036.5 30 30 23-26 (+1 Wi) 32 Maria Sharapova 1024.25 16 31 24-12 Japan Open, Quebec City (2) 33 Mary Pierce* 969 17 32 23-17

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 12 34 Tamarine Tanasugarn* 957.75 24 28 28-23 Hyderabad (1) 35 Alicia Molik 933 21 33 25-16 Hobart (1) 36 Svetlana Kuznetsova* 927 18 26 22-16 37 Elena Likhovtseva 879.5 28 29 26-26 38 Fabiola Zuluaga 848.75 21 35 21-17 Bogota (1) 39 Katarina Srebotnik 840.5 24 30 25-24 40 Petra Mandula 815.75 21 40 22-16 (+1 Wi) 41 Emilie Loit 776.5 27 40 23-24 42 Maria Sanchez Lorenzo 770 26 39 22-18 43 Denisa Chladkova 764.75 23 31 20-19 44 Maria Vento-Kabchi 763 22 44 15-8 45 Shinobu Asagoe 750.75 17 38 19-15 46 Laura Granville 723.5 28 28 26-23 47 Marlene Weingärtner 722.5 23 47 16-15 (+1WO) 48 Anca Barna 720.75 29 48 24-25 49 Saori Obata 714 25 49 18-17 50 Iroda Tulyaganova 711 17 33 23-17 51 Ashley Harkleroad 699.25 18 39 14-14 52 Cara Black 690.5 26 40 18-25 53 Nicole Pratt 682.25 24 44 17-23 54 Dinara Safina 657.75 16 50 18-15 Palermo (1) 55 Virginia Ruano Pascual 653 18 38 19-17 Tashkent (1) 56 Emmanuelle Gagliardi 634.25 26 56 25-23 57 Marion Bartoli 630 28 45 19-21 (+1 WO) 58 Maja Matevzic 618.75 26 38 19-18 (+1 Wi) 59 Karolina Sprem 611.25 20 59 11-8 (+1 WO) 60 Monica Seles* 599 7 7 10-7 61 Amy Frazier 575.75 17 38 12-13 (+2 WO) 62 Klara Koukalova 569 28 61 14-19 63 Akiko Morigami 562.75 24 60 11-14 64 Ludmila Cervanova 561.5 24 64 19-14 (+1 WO) 65 Stephanie Cohen-Aloro 556 28 61 11-15 66 Marie-Gayane Mikaelian 548 21 33 17-19 67 Jelena Kostanic 532.75 26 67 16-20 68 Arantxa Parra 529.25 30 68 10-11 69 Flavia Pennetta 521 26 55 18-20 70 Rita Grande 513 29 46 14-25 Casablanca (1) 71 Anabel Medina Garrigues 507 24 71 13-12 72 Virginie Razzano 505 23 54 15-20 73 Julia Vakulenko 489 34 73 4-8 74 Els Callens 485.75 25 63 13-19 75 Samantha Reeves 485.5 27 75 8-10 76 Milagros Sequera 483.25 21 76 6-8 77 Yoon Jeong Cho 481.5 21 45 15-18 78 Kristina Brandi 479.5 23 77 0-1 79 Barbara Schett* 473.5 25 38 15-24 80 Tatiana Perebiynis 472.5 24 79 7-9 (+1Wi)

The only player below #80 with a WTA title is Henrietta Nagyova (Pattaya City)

1 Justine Hénin-Hardenne 54 Dinara Safina 105 Conchita Martinez 158 Natalia Gussoni 2 Kim Clijsters 55 Virginia Ruano Pascual Granados 159 Sarah Taylor 3 Serena Williams 56 Emmanuelle Gagliardi 106 Cristina Torrens Valero 160 Janet Lee 4 Amélie Mauresmo 57 Marion Bartoli 107 Antonella Serra Zanetti 161 Barbora Strycova 5 Lindsay Davenport 58 Maja Matevzic 108 Vera Douchevina 162 Jennifer Hopkins 6 Jennifer Capriati 59 Karolina Sprem 109 Marta Marrero 163 Selima Sfar 7 Anastasia Myskina 60 Monica Seles 110 Eva Birnerova 164 Evgenia Kulikovskaya 8 Elena Dementieva 61 Amy Frazier 111 Tara Snyder 165 Anastassia Rodionova 9 Chanda Rubin 62 Klara Koukalova 112 Maureen Drake 166 Stephanie Gehrlein 10 Ai Sugiyama 63 Akiko Morigami 113 Sofia Arvidsson 167 Kaia Kanepi 11 Venus Williams 64 Ludmila Cervanova 114 Julia Schruff 168 Sandra Kloesel 12 Nadia Petrova 65 Stephanie Cohen-Aloro 115 Teryn Ashley 169 Christina Wheeler 13 Vera Zvonareva 66 Marie-Gayane 116 Roberta Vinci 170 Sybille Bammer 14 Paola Suarez Mikaelian 117 Yulia Beygelzimer 171 Olga Blahotova 15 Jelena Dokic 67 Jelena Kostanic 118 Barbara Rittner 172 Katalin Marosi 16 Anna Smashnova- 68 Arantxa Parra 119 Tatiana Panova 173 Ma. Emilia Salerni Pistolesi 69 Flavia Pennetta 120 Anna-Lena Grönefeld 174 Rita Kuti Kis 17 Meghann Shaughnessy 70 Rita Grande 121 Tatiana Poutchek 175 Nathalie Vierin 18 Conchita Martinez 71 Anabel Medina 122 Maria Kirilenko 176 Bianka Lamade 19 Daniela Hantuchova Garrigues 123 Marissa Irvin 177 Anne Keothavong 20 Francesca Schiavone 72 Virginie Razzano 124 Gisela Dulko 178 Mashona Washington 21 Elena Bovina 73 Julia Vakulenko 125 Janette Husarova 179 Zi Yan 22 Magui Serna 74 Els Callens 126 Elena Tatarkova 180 Lilia Osterloh 23 Patty Schnyder 75 Samantha Reeves 127 Alena Vaskova 181 Lioudmila Skavronskaia 24 Silvia Farina Elia 76 Milagros Sequera 128 Eva Fislova 182 Andreea Vanc 25 Amanda Coetzer 77 Yoon Jeong Cho 129 Tzipora Obziler 183 Bahia Mouhtassine 26 Eleni Daniilidou 78 Kristina Brandi 130 Evie Dominikovic 184 Lenka Nemeckova 27 Lina Krasnoroutskaya 79 Barbara Schett 131 Iva Majoli 185 Barbara Schwartz 28 Lisa Raymond 80 Tatiana Perebiynis 132 Renata Voracova 186 Angela Haynes 29 Nathalie Déchy 81 Claudine Schaul 133 Catalina Castano 187 Edina Gallovits 30 Magdalena Maleeva 82 Alexandra Stevenson 134 Mervana Jugic-Salkic 188 Mariana Diaz-Oliva 31 Tina Pisnik 83 Melinda Czink 135 Bethanie Mattek 189 Virginie Pichet 32 Maria Sharapova 84 Tathiana Garbin 136 Lindsay Lee-Waters 190 Alyona Bondarenko 33 Mary Pierce 85 Jelena Jankovic 137 Yuka Yoshida 191 Marie-Eve Pelletier 34 Tamarine Tanasugarn 86 Lubomira Kurhajcova 138 Michaela Pastikova 192 Bea Bielik 35 Alicia Molik 87 Zuzana Ondraskova 139 Nuria Llagostera Vives 193 Stanislava Hrozenska 36 Svetlana Kuznetsova 88 Sandra Kleinova 140 Iveta Benesova 194 Galina Fokina 37 Elena Likhovtseva 89 Martina Sucha 141 Tian Tian Sun 195 Adriana Barna 38 Fabiola Zuluaga 90 Clarisa Fernandez 142 Maret Ani 196 Nina Duebbers 39 Katarina Srebotnik 91 Henrieta Nagyova 143 Shenay Perry 197 Jarmila Gajdosova 40 Petra Mandula 92 Aniko Kapros 144 Seda Noorlander 198 Alexandra Kravets 41 Emilie Loit 93 Silvija Talaja 145 Meilen Tu 199 Zsofia Gubacsi 42 Maria Sanchez Lorenzo 94 Jie Zheng 146 Mara Santangelo 200 Evelyn Fauth 43 Denisa Chladkova 95 Angelique Widjaja 147 Severine Beltrame 44 Maria Vento-Kabchi 96 Gala Leon Garcia 148 Ivana Abramovic 45 Shinobu Asagoe 97 Alina Jidkova 149 Olga Barabanschikova 46 Laura Granville 98 Jill Craybas 150 Natalie Grandin 47 Marlene Weingärtner 99 Maria Elena Camerin 151 Ross Neffa-de los Rios 48 Anca Barna 100 Stephanie Foretz 152 Lubomira Bacheva 49 Saori Obata 101 Dally Randriantefy 153 Samantha Stosur 50 Iroda Tulyaganova 102 Myriam Casanova 154 Patricia Wartusch 51 Ashley Harkleroad 103 Ansley Cargill 155 Vanessa Webb 52 Cara Black 104 Adriana Serra Zanetti 156 Daja Bedanova 53 Nicole Pratt 157 Galina Voskoboeva

148 Ivana Abramovic 61 Amy Frazier 135 Bethanie Mattek 107 Antonella Serra Zanetti 142 Maret Ani 56 Emmanuelle Gagliardi 4 Amélie Mauresmo 163 Selima Sfar 113 Sofia Arvidsson 197 Jarmila Gajdosova 71 Anabel Medina 32 Maria Sharapova 45 Shinobu Asagoe 187 Edina Gallovits Garrigues 17 Meghann Shaughnessy 115 Teryn Ashley 84 Tathiana Garbin 66 Marie-Gayane 181 Lioudmila 152 Lubomira Bacheva 166 Stephanie Gehrlein Mikaelian Skavronskaia 170 Sybille Bammer 70 Rita Grande 35 Alicia Molik 16 Anna Smashnova- 149 Olga Barabanschikova 150 Natalie Grandin 63 Akiko Morigami Pistolesi 195 Adriana Barna 46 Laura Granville 183 Bahia Mouhtassine 111 Tara Snyder 48 Anca Barna 120 Anna-Lena Grönefeld 7 Anastasia Myskina 59 Karolina Sprem 57 Marion Bartoli 199 Zsofia Gubacsi 91 Henrieta Nagyova 39 Katarina Srebotnik 156 Daja Bedanova 158 Natalia Gussoni 151 Ross Neffa-de los Rios 82 Alexandra Stevenson 147 Severine Beltrame 19 Daniela Hantuchova 184 Lenka Nemeckova 153 Samantha Stosur 140 Iveta Benesova 51 Ashley Harkleroad 144 Seda Noorlander 161 Barbora Strycova 117 Yulia Beygelzimer 186 Angela Haynes 49 Saori Obata 14 Paola Suarez 192 Bea Bielik 1 Justine Hénin- 129 Tzipora Obziler 89 Martina Sucha 110 Eva Birnerova Hardenne 87 Zuzana Ondraskova 10 Ai Sugiyama 52 Cara Black 162 Jennifer Hopkins 180 Lilia Osterloh 141 Tian Tian Sun 171 Olga Blahotova 193 Stanislava Hrozenska 119 Tatiana Panova 93 Silvija Talaja 190 Alyona Bondarenko 125 Janette Husarova 68 Arantxa Parra 34 Tamarine Tanasugarn 21 Elena Bovina 123 Marissa Irvin 138 Michaela Pastikova 126 Elena Tatarkova 78 Kristina Brandi 85 Jelena Jankovic 191 Marie-Eve Pelletier 159 Sarah Taylor 74 Els Callens 97 Alina Jidkova 69 Flavia Pennetta 106 Cristina Torrens Valero 99 Maria Elena Camerin 134 Mervana Jugic-Salkic 80 Tatiana Perebiynis 145 Meilen Tu 6 Jennifer Capriati 167 Kaia Kanepi 143 Shenay Perry 50 Iroda Tulyaganova 103 Ansley Cargill 92 Aniko Kapros 12 Nadia Petrova 73 Julia Vakulenko 102 Myriam Casanova 177 Anne Keothavong 189 Virginie Pichet 182 Andreea Vanc 133 Catalina Castano 122 Maria Kirilenko 33 Mary Pierce 127 Alena Vaskova 64 Ludmila Cervanova 88 Sandra Kleinova 31 Tina Pisnik 44 Maria Vento-Kabchi 43 Denisa Chladkova 168 Sandra Kloesel 121 Tatiana Poutchek 175 Nathalie Vierin 77 Yoon Jeong Cho 67 Jelena Kostanic 53 Nicole Pratt 116 Roberta Vinci 2 Kim Clijsters 62 Klara Koukalova 101 Dally Randriantefy 132 Renata Voracova 25 Amanda Coetzer 27 Lina Krasnoroutskaya 28 Lisa Raymond 157 Galina Voskoboeva 65 Stephanie Cohen- 198 Alexandra Kravets 72 Virginie Razzano 154 Patricia Wartusch Aloro 164 Evgenia Kulikovskaya 75 Samantha Reeves 178 Mashona Washington 98 Jill Craybas 86 Lubomira Kurhajcova 118 Barbara Rittner 155 Vanessa Webb 83 Melinda Czink 174 Rita Kuti Kis 165 Anastassia Rodionova 47 Marlene Weingärtner 26 Eleni Daniilidou 36 Svetlana Kuznetsova 55 Virginia Ruano Pascual 169 Christina Wheeler 5 Lindsay Davenport 176 Bianka Lamade 9 Chanda Rubin 95 Angelique Widjaja 29 Nathalie Déchy 160 Janet Lee 54 Dinara Safina 3 Serena Williams 8 Elena Dementieva 136 Lindsay Lee-Waters 173 Ma. Emilia Salerni 11 Venus Williams 188 Mariana Diaz-Oliva 96 Gala Leon Garcia 42 Maria Sanchez 179 Zi Yan 15 Jelena Dokic 37 Elena Likhovtseva Lorenzo 137 Yuka Yoshida 130 Evie Dominikovic 139 Nuria Llagostera Vives 146 Mara Santangelo 94 Jie Zheng 108 Vera Douchevina 41 Emilie Loit 81 Claudine Schaul 38 Fabiola Zuluaga 112 Maureen Drake 131 Iva Majoli 79 Barbara Schett 13 Vera Zvonareva 196 Nina Duebbers 30 Magdalena Maleeva 20 Francesca Schiavone 124 Gisela Dulko 40 Petra Mandula 23 Patty Schnyder 24 Silvia Farina Elia 172 Katalin Marosi 114 Julia Schruff 200 Evelyn Fauth 109 Marta Marrero 185 Barbara Schwartz 90 Clarisa Fernandez 18 Conchita Martinez 60 Monica Seles 128 Eva Fislova 105 Conchita Martinez 76 Milagros Sequera 194 Galina Fokina Granados 22 Magui Serna 100 Stephanie Foretz 58 Maja Matevzic 104 Adriana Serra Zanetti

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 15 Tournament Results Summary of Results for Top Players The list below shows all the tournaments the highlight players played in 2003. 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 second item in the entry for Elena Bovina reads Sydney (II, 2R/Barabanschikova [184], 1) — Myskina (11) This means that Bovina’s second tournament of 2003 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/Barabanschikova means that Bedanova reached the second round, where she was beaten by Olga Barabanschikova, then ranked #184. The 1 indicates that she won one match prior to that defeat. Players she defeated included Myskina (then ranked #11). (Note: only wins over Top 35 players are listed.) If a description is in bold, it means the player won the title. 156 — Daja Bedanova 21/Elena Bovina Canberra (V, 1R/Widjaja [74], 0) Gold Coast (III, SF/Déchy [20], 3) Australian Open (Slam, 2R/Déchy [18], 1) Sydney (II, 2R/Barabanschikova [184], 1) — Myskina (11) Pan Paciﬁc Qualifying (I, Q2R/Krasnoroutskaya [129], 0+1 in Australian Open (Slam, R16/Shaughnessy [33], 3) — qualifying) Maleeva (14) Paris (II, 1R/Serna [51], 0) Pan Paciﬁc (I, 2R/Krasnoroutskaya [129], 1) — Pistolesi (16) Antwerp (II, 1R/Matevzic [51], 0) Scottsdale (II, 1R/Schiavone [38], 0) Scottsdale (II, 1R/Shaughnessy [27], 0) Indian Wells (I, 4R/Davenport [7], 2) Indian Wells (I, 2R/Davenport [7], 1) Miami (I, 2R/Tulyaganova [45], 0) Miami (I, 2R/Granville [34], 1) Charleston (I, 2R/Harkleroad [101], 0) Sarasota (IV, 1R/Mikaelian [38], 0) Strasbourg (III, 1R/Matevzic [47], 0) Charleston (I, 2R/Davenport [5], 1) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Grande [56], 1) Amelia Island (II, 1R/Mikaelian [37], 0) Birmingham (III, 2R/Asagoe [103], 0) Berlin (I, 1R/Hénin-Hardenne [4], 1) Eastbourne (II, 1R/Tanasugarn [33], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, 1R/Morariu [313], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, 2R/Sharapova [91], 1) Birmingham (III, 1R/Vento-Kabchi [137], 0) San Diego (II, R16/Kuznetsova [29], 1) Eastbourne Qualifying (II, lost in 1R of qualifying/Morigami Los Angeles (II, 2R/Suarez [32], 0) [90], 0) Canadian Open (I, QF/Hénin-Hardenne [3], 3) — Coetzer Wimbledon (Slam, 2R/Déchy [23], 1) (14) Canadian Open Qualifying (I, Q2R/ Washington [150], 0+0 in New Haven (II, 2R/Capriati [7], 1) qualifying) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Cervanova [73], 0) New Haven Qualifying (II, Q1R/Barna [66], 0+0 in Moscow (I, QF/Pistolesi [21], 2) — Schnyder (20), Capriati qualifying) (5) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Camerin [92], 0) Filderstadt (II, SF/Hénin-Hardenne [2], 3) — Myskina (9), Davenport (4) Zurich (I, QF/Petrova [14], 2) — Suarez (17) Linz (II, 2R/Myskina [9], 1) — Schiavone (22)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 16 6/Jennifer Capriati 2/Kim Clijsters Sydney (II, 2R/Panova [27], 0) Sydney (II, Win, 4) — Schnyder (15), Rubin (13), Hénin- Australian Open (Slam, 1R/Weingärtner [90], 0) Hardenne (5), Davenport (12) Dubai (II, SF/Hénin-Hardenne [4], 2) — Martinez (35) Australian Open (Slam, SF/S. Williams [1], 5) — Coetzer Indian Wells (I, SF/Davenport [7], 4) — Dementieva (20) (22), Myskina (12) Miami (I, F/S. Williams [1], 5) — Granville (34), Antwerp (II, F/V. Williams [2], 3) — Schnyder (13), Hénin- Shaughnessy (22), Rubin (10) Hardenne (4) Amelia Island (II, SF/Davenport [5], 3) — Suarez (28), Scottsdale (II, F/Sugiyama [25], 3) — Shaughnessy (27) Raymond (24) Indian Wells (I, Win, 6) — Déchy (22), Rubin (12), Berlin (I, SF/Clijsters [3], 3) — Schiavone (34), Déchy (23), Martinez (30), Davenport (7) Likhovtseva (30) Miami (I, SF/S. Williams [1], 4) — Suarez (29), Pistolesi (20), Rome (I, QF/Mauresmo [6], 2) Dokic (9) Roland Garros (Slam, R16/Petrova [76], 3) Berlin (I, F/Hénin-Hardenne [4], 4) — Hantuchova (9), Eastbourne (II, SF/Rubin [7], 2) — Déchy (23) Capriati (7) Wimbledon (Slam, QF/S. Williams [1], 4) — Myskina (10) Rome (I, Win, 5) — Myskina (11), Sugiyama (16), Stanford (II, F/Clijsters [2], 3) — Raymond (26) Mauresmo (6) San Diego (II, 2R/Likhovtseva [51], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, F/Hénin-Hardenne [4], 6) — Suarez New Haven (II, Win, 4) — Bovina (17), Pistolesi (22), (31), Maleeva (16), Martinez (22) Mauresmo (6), Davenport (4) ’s-Hertogenbosch (III, Win, 4) — Hénin-Hardenne (3) U. S. Open (Slam, SF/Hénin-Hardenne [3], 5) — Dementieva Wimbledon (Slam, SF/V. Williams [4], 5) — Sugiyama (14), (11), Schiavone (32) Farina Elia (25) Moscow (I, 1R/Bovina [32], 0) Stanford (II, Win , 4) — Schiavone (32), Capriati (7) Filderstadt (II, 2R/Pierce [48], 0) San Diego (II, F/Hénin-Hardenne [3], 4) — Raymond (30), Los Angeles Championships (Champ, RR/Hénin-Hardenne Davenport (5) [2], SF/Clijsters [1], 2 wins+2 losses) — Sugiyama (11), Los Angeles (II, Win, 5) — Kuznetsova (26), Schiavone Myskina (8) (30), Davenport (4) Canadian Open (I, R16/Krasnoroutskaya [38], 1) — Schiavone (26) U. S. Open (Slam, F/Hénin-Hardenne [3], 6) — Kuznetsova (29), Shaughnessy (21), Mauresmo (7), Davenport (4) Leipzig (II, SF/Myskina [10], 2) — Dokic (26), Schnyder (23) Filderstadt (II, Win, 4) — Hantuchova (13), Mauresmo (7), Hénin-Hardenne (2) Zurich (I, SF/Dokic [25], 2) — Pisnik (35) Luxembourg (III, Win, 4) — Rubin (10) Los Angeles Championships (Champ, Win, 5 wins+0 losses) — Dementieva (9), Rubin (10), Mauresmo (6), Capriati (5), Mauresmo (6)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 17 25/ Amanda Coetzer 26/Eleni Daniilidou Sydney (II, QF/Hénin-Hardenne [5], 2) — Sugiyama (24), Auckland (IV, Win, 5) — Suarez (27) Maleeva (14) Sydney (II, 1R/Raymond [30], 0) Australian Open (Slam, R16/Clijsters [4], 3) — Pistolesi (17) Australian Open (Slam, R16/S. Williams [1], 3) — Déchy Pan Paciﬁc (I, 1R/Srebotnik [32], 0) (18) Memphis (III, F/Raymond [21], 4) Paris (II, SF/S. Williams [1], 3) — Stevenson (24), Dokic (10) Acapulco (III, Win, 4) Dubai (II, 2R/Martinez [35], 1) Indian Wells (I, QF/Martinez [30], 3) — Raymond (23), Scottsdale (II, QF/Sugiyama [25], 2) Hantuchova (5) Indian Wells (I, 3R/Shaughnessy [24], 1) Miami (I, 2R/Weingärtner [99], 0) Miami (I, 3R/Weingärtner [99], 1) Charleston (I, 3R/Pierce [43], 2) — Granville (34) Warsaw (II, 2R/Schiavone [34], 1) Amelia Island (II, 3R/Dementieva [21], 1) — Zvonareva (29) Berlin (I, 3R/Zvonareva [25], 2) Rome (I, 2R/Déchy [24], 1) Rome (I, 2R/Kuznetsova [41], 1) Roland Garros (Slam, 1R/Srebotnik [40], 0) Strasbourg (III, 1R/Krasnoroutskaya [53], 0) Eastbourne (II, 2R/Martinez [19], 1) — Myskina (10) Roland Garros (Slam, 3R/Schnyder [18], 2) Wimbledon (Slam, 2R/Schiavone [37], 1) Birmingham (III, SF/Maleeva [13], 3) San Diego (II, 2R/Petrova [24], 0) Eastbourne (II, 1R/Pistolesi [26], 0) Los Angeles (II, QF/Davenport [4], 2) — Shaughnessy (19) Wimbledon (Slam, 2R/Pierce [86], 1) Canadian Open (I, R16/Bovina [21], 1) Stanford (II, 2R/Schiavone [32], 1) U. S. Open (Slam, 3R/Petrova [19], 2) San Diego (II, 2R/Hénin-Hardenne [3], 1) Moscow (I, 1R/Zvonareva [15], 0) Los Angeles (II, 2R/Pratt [70], 0) Filderstadt (II, 1R/Farina Elia [22], 0) Canadian Open (I, 1R/Krasnoroutskaya [38], 0) Zurich (I, 1R/Pisnik [35], 0) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/M. Casanova [72], 0) Leipzig (II, 1R/Farina Elia [22], 0) Moscow (I, QF/Myskina [10], 2) — Shaughnessy (19) Filderstadt Qualifying (II, Q3R/M. Casanova [81], 0+2 in qualifying) Zurich (I, 1R/Schnyder [18], 0) Luxembourg (III, QF/Weingärtner [62], 2) 5/Lindsay Davenport 29/Nathalie Déchy Sydney (II, F/Clijsters [4], 4) — Raymond (30), Hantuchova Gold Coast (III, Win, 4) — Bovina (26) (8), Panova (27) Canberra (V, 1R/Weingärter [98], 0) Australian Open (Slam, R16/Hénin-Hardenne [5], 3) — Australian Open (Slam, 3R/Daniilidou [20], 2) Panova (24) Paris (II, 1R/Sugiyama [26], 0) Pan Paciﬁc (I, Win, 4) — Majoli (34), Tanasugarn (31), Antwerp (II, QF/Hantuchova [5], 2) — Husarova (34) Raymond (30), Seles (9) Scottsdale (II, QF/Stevenson [26], 2) Scottsdale (II, 2R/Sugiyama [25], 0) Indian Wells (I, R16/Clijsters [3], 2) — Farina Elia (21) Indian Wells (I,F/Clijsters [3], 4+1 walkover) — Likhovtseva Miami (I, 3R/Dokic [9], 1) (29), Bovina (17), Capriati (6) Sarasota (IV, SF/Myskina [11], 3) Miami (I, 4R/Bartoli [87], 2) Charleston (I, 3R/Hénin-Hardenne [4], 2) Charleston (I, SF/S. Williams [1], 3) — C. Fernandez (26), Amelia Island (II, 3R/Seles [12], 1) Zvonareva (33) Berlin (I, 3R/Capriati [7], 2) — Fernandez (28) Amelia Island (II, F/Dementieva [21], 4) — Schnyder (13), Rome (I, R16/S. Williams [1], 2) — Coetzer (17) Capriati (6) Roland Garros (Slam, 3R/Davenport [6], 2) Roland Garros (Slam, R16/Martinez [22], 3) — Tulyaganova Birmingham (III, 2R/Sharapova [125], 0) (34), Déchy (23) Eastbourne (II, QF/Capriati [8], 2) — Shaughnessy (20), Eastbourne (II, 2R/Farina Elia [28], 0) Sugiyama (13) Wimbledon (Slam, QF/V. Williams [4], 4) Wimbledon (Slam, 3R/Sugiyama [14], 2) San Diego (II, SF/Clijsters [2], 3) — Rubin (8) Canadian Open (I, 2R/Zuluaga [35], 1) Los Angeles (II, F/Clijsters [2], 4) — Suarez (32), Coetzer U. S. Open (Slam, withdrew from 2R, 1) (14), Sugiyama (12) New Haven (II, F/Capriati [7], 3) — Dokic (23), Serna (32), Dementieva (12) U. S. Open (Slam, SF/Clijsters [1], 5) — Petrova (19), Suarez (25) Filderstadt (II, QF/Bovina [31], 1) — Sugiyama (11)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 18 8/Elena Dementieva 15/Jelena Dokic Sydney (II, 1R/Rubin [13], 0) Pan Pacific (I, QF/Raymond [30], 1) Australian Open (Slam, 1R/Schwartz [141], 0) Paris (II, QF/Daniilidou [18], 1) Pan Pacific (I, QF/Rubin [12], 2) — Shaughnessy (27) Antwerp (II, 1R/Sugiyama [26], 0) Paris (II, SF/Mauresmo [7], 3) — Hantuchova (5) Scottsdale (II, 2R/Shaughnessy [27], 0) Acapulco (III, 2R/Asagoe [90], 0) Indian Wells (I, 2R/Rittner [87], 0) Indian Wells (I, R16/Capriati [6], 2) Miami (I, QF/Clijsters [3], 3) — Déchy (23) Miami (I, 2R/Pratt [53], 0) Sarasota (IV, 1R/Suarez [29], 0) Sarasota (IV, QF/Myskina [11], 2) Charleston (I, QF/S. Williams [1], 2) — Dementieva (21) Charleston (I, 3R/Dokic [11], 2) — Majoli (29) Amelia Island (II, R16/Raymond [24], 1) Amelia Island (II, Win, 5) — Coetzer (16), Hantuchova Warsaw (II, SF/Mauresmo [7], 2) (9), Hénin-Hardenne (4), Davenport (5) Berlin (I, R16/Tulyaganova [41], 1) Berlin (I, 1R/Safina [68], 0) Rome (I, 1R/Martinez [27], 0) Strasbourg (III, 1R/Loit [45], 0) Strasbourg (III, 2R/Sprem [163], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, 1R/Sanchez Lorenzo [60], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Pisnik [54], 1) Birmingham (III, QF/Sharapova [125], 2) Vienna (III, QF/Suarez [51], 1) ’s-Hertogenbosch (III, QF/Petrova [30], 2) Eastbourne (II, 1R/Obata [89], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, R16/S. Williams [1], 3) Wimbledon (Slam, 3R/Sharapova [91], 2) San Diego (II, R16/Hénin-Hardenne [3], 1) — Schiavone (28) Stanford (II, QF/Vento-Kabchi [132], 1) — Stevenson (28) Los Angeles (II, 2R/Ruano Pascual [64], 0) San Diego (II, R16/Rubin [8], 1) — Serna (31) Canadian Open (I, SF/Hénin-Hardenne [3], 4) — Myskina Los Angeles (II, 2R/Kuznetsova [26], 0) (10), Mauresmo (6) Canadian Open (I, R16/Zvonareva [16], 1) New Haven (II, SF/Davenport [4], 3) — Farina Elia (21), New Haven (II, 2R/Davenport [4], 1) — Shaughnessy (18) Martinez (13) U. S. Open (Slam, 2R/Pierce [64], 1) U. S. Open (Slam, R16/Capriati [7], 3) Bali (III, 1R/Garbin [100], 0) Bali (III, Win, 4) — Tanasugarn (32), Rubin (10) Shanghai (II, 2R/Safina [66], 1) Shanghai (II, Win, 4) — Sugiyama (14), Rubin (9) Leipzig (II, 2R/Clijsters [1], 1) Moscow (I, SF/Mauresmo [7], 2) — Schiavone (25) Moscow (I, 1R/Stevenson [31], 0) Filderstadt (II, QF/Hénin-Hardenne [2], 2) — Petrova (15), Filderstadt (II, 1R/Maleeva [21], 0) Farina Elia (22) Zurich (I, F/Hénin-Hardenne [2], 4) — Rubin (10), Schnyder Zurich (I, 2R/Petrova [14], 0) (18), Clijsters (1) Los Angeles Championships (Champ, RR/Clijsters [1], RR/ Linz (II, QF/Sugiyama [11], 2) — Hantuchova (17) Mauresmo [6], 1 win+2 losses) — Rubin (10)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 19 24/ Silvia Farina Elia 90/Clarisa Fernandez Sydney (II, 1R/Maleeva [14], 0) Auckland (IV, 2R/Cho [83], 1) Australian Open (Slam, 2R/Pratt [54], 1) Canberra (V, 2R/Pennetta [95], 1) Pan Paciﬁc (I, 2R/Tanasugarn [31], 1) Australian Open (Slam, 3R/Myskina [12], 2) Paris (II, 1R/Grande [63], 0) Pan Paciﬁc (I, 1R/Tanasugarn [31], 0) Memphis (III, QF/Granville [41], 1) Hyderabad (IV, 1R/Morigami [133], 0) Scottsdale (II, 2R/Schiavone [38], 1) Indian Wells (I, 1R/Serna [47], 0) Indian Wells (I, 3R/Déchy [22], 1) Miami (I, 3R/Mauresmo [7], 1) Miami (I, 2R/Srebotnik [39], 0) Sarasota (IV, QF/Molik [71], 2) — Pistolesi (20) Bol (III, 2R/Talaja [96], 0) Charleston (I, 3R/Davenport [5], 2) Berlin (I, 1R/Serna [38], 0) Amelia Island (II, withdrew from 3R, 1) Rome (I, 1R/Maleeva [15], 0) Berlin (I, 1R/Déchy [23], 0) Strasbourg (III, Win, 5) — Myskina (11) Rome (I, 1R/Pennetta [66], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, 3R/V. Williams [3], 2) Madrid (III, QF/Schett [57], 2) Vienna (III, QF/Barna [71], 2) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Schett [51], 1) Eastbourne (II, SF/Martinez [19], 3) — Davenport (5), Vienna (III, 2R/Barna [71], 1) Maleeva (12) Eastbourne (II, 1R/Farina Elia [28], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, QF/Clijsters [2], 4) — Rubin (8), Suarez Wimbledon (Slam, 1R/Zuluaga [43], 0) (35) Sopot (III, 1R/Pennetta [61], 0) San Diego (II, 2R/Krasnoroutskaya [42], 0) Helsinki (IV, 1R/Czink [107], 0) Los Angeles (II, R16/Kuznetsova [26], 1) New Haven Qualifying (II, Q2R/Pisnik [49], 0+1 in Canadian Open (I, 1R/Srebotnik [43], 0) qualifying) New Haven (II, Q2R/M. Casanova [86]; Lucky Loser; lost in U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Czink [93], 0) 1R/Dementieva [12], 0+2 in qualifying) U. S. Open (Slam, 2R/Pratt [57], 1) Leipzig (II, 2R/Vento-Kabchi [58], 1) — Daniilidou (30) Moscow (I, 1R/Serna [24], 0) Filderstadt (II, 2R/Dementieva [8], 1) — Coetzer (23) Zurich (I, 1R/Pistolesi [16], 0) Linz (II, 1R/Krasnoroutskaya [26], 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 20 19/Daniela Hantuchova 1/Justine Hénin-Hardenne Sydney (II, QF/Davenport [12], 1) — Tanasugarn (29) Sydney (II, SF/Clijsters [4], 2) — Husarova (33), Coetzer (22) Australian Open (Slam, QF/V. Williams [2], 4) — Schnyder Australian Open (Slam, SF/V. Williams [2], 5) — Srebotnik (15) (34), Davenport (10) Paris (II, QF/Dementieva [20], 1) Antwerp (II, SF/Clijsters [3], 2) — Sugiyama (26) Antwerp (II, SF/V. Williams [2], 2) — Déchy (19) Dubai (II, Win, 4) — Myskina (10), Capriati (6), Seles (11) Indian Wells (I, R16/Coetzer [19], 2) Miami (I, QF/Rubin [10], 3) — Tanasugarn (33) Miami (I, 2R/Molik [89], 0) Charleston (I, Win, 5) — Déchy (22), S. Williams (1) Charleston (I, QF/Harkleroad [101], 2) — Panova (32) Amelia Island (II, SF/Dementieva [21], 2+1 walkover) — Amelia Island (II, QF/Dementieva [21], 2) — Stevenson (27) Seles (12) Warsaw (II, 2R/Zuluaga [69], 0) Berlin (I, Win, 5) — Schnyder (21), Zvonareva (25), Berlin (I, QF/Clijsters [3], 2) Mauresmo (6), Clijsters (3) Rome (I, R16/Martinez [27], 1) Roland Garros (Slam, Win, 7) — Schnyder (18), Rubin Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Harkleroad [52], 1) (8), S. Williams (1), Clijsters (2) Eastbourne (II, QF/Martinez [19], 1) — Stevenson (27) ’s-Hertogenbosch (III, F/Clijsters [2], 3) — Petrova (30) Wimbledon (Slam, 2R/Asagoe [81], 1) Wimbledon (Slam, SF/S. Williams [1], 5) — Kuznetsova (34) Stanford (II, 2R/Frazier [46], 0) San Diego (II, Win, 5) — Daniilidou (21), Dementieva (16), San Diego (II, R16/Petrova [24], 1) Petrova (24), Kuznetsova (29), Clijsters (2) Canadian Open (I, R16/Suarez [32], 1) Canadian Open (I, Win, 5) — Petrova (22), Bovina (21), New Haven (II, 2R/Black [52], 0) Dementieva (15) U. S. Open (Slam, 3R/Tanasugarn [39], 2) U. S. Open (Slam, Win, 7) — Myskina (10), Capriati (7), Leipzig (II, 2R/Schnyder [21], 1) — Kuznetsova (28) Clijsters (1) Filderstadt (II, 2R/Clijsters [1], 1) — Raymond (29) Leipzig (II, F/Myskina [10], 3) Zurich (I, 1R/Suarez [17], 0) Filderstadt (II, F/Clijsters [1], 3) — Martinez (14), Linz (II, 1R/Dokic [14], 0) Dementieva (8), Bovina (31) Zurich (I, Win, 4) — Pistolesi (16), Zvonareva (12), Petrova (14), Dokic (25) Los Angeles Championships (Champ, RR/Sugiyama [11], SF/ Mauresmo [6], 2 wins+2 losses) — Myskina (8), Capriati (5) 305/Anna Kournikova 27/Lina Krasnoroutskaya Sydney (II, 1R/Husarova [33], 0) Boynton Beach $75K 2002 ($75K, QF/Mouhtassine [167], 2) Australian Open (Slam, 2R/Hénin-Hardenne [5], 1) Gold Coast (III, 2R/Shaughnessy [30], 1+3 in qualifying) Miami (I, 1R/Saﬁna [63], 0) Australian Open Qualifying (Slam, Q3R/Hrozenska [160], Sarasota (IV, 1R/Majoli [32], 0) 0+2 in qualifying) Charleston (I, 1R/Martinez [25], 0) Pan Paciﬁc (I, QF/Seles [9], 2+3 in qualifying) — Bovina (17) Sea Island ($25K, withdrew from SF, 3) Doha (III, SF/Likhovtseva [36], 3) — Seles (9) Charlottesville ($25K, 1R/Colosio [384], 0) Dubai (II, QF/Mauresmo [7], 2) — Schnyder (13) Sarasota (IV, 1R/Pistolesi [20], 0+3 in qualifying) Charleston (I, 1R/Craybas [67], 0) Amelia Island (II, 2R/Dementieva [21], 1) — Panova (32) Rome (I, 2R/Mauresmo [6], 1) Strasbourg (III, 2R/Bartoli [61], 1) — Daniilidou (14) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Mauresmo [5], 1) ’s-Hertogenbosch (III, 1R/Tulyaganova [41], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, 2R/Myskina [10], 1) San Diego (II, R16/Davenport [5], 2) — Farina Elia (20) Los Angeles (II, 1R/Kutuzova [451], 0) Canadian Open (I, F/Hénin-Hardenne [3], 5) — Daniilidou (25), Clijsters (1), Suarez (32) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Barna [65], 0) Leipzig (II, 2R/Myskina [10], 1) Moscow (I, 1R/Schiavone [25], 0) Filderstadt Qualifying (II, Q2R/M. Casanova [81], 0+1 in qualifying) Linz (II, 2R/Petrova [13], 1) — Farina Elia (21)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 21 389/Anne Kremer 36/Svetlana Kuznetsova Auckland (IV, 1R/Harkleroad [113], 0) Gold Coast (III, 1R/Bovina [26], 0) Australian Open (Slam, 2R/Dominikovic [115], 1) Australian Open (Slam, 1R/V. Williams [2], 0) Poitiers $50K Challenger ($50K, 1R/Tatarkova [145], 0) Doha (III, 2R/Safina [69], 1) Dubai (II, 2R/Capriati [6], 1) — Majoli (33) Indian Wells (I, 3R/Zvonareva [39], 2) — Myskina (11) Miami (I, 2R/Dokic [9], 1) Berlin (I, 2R/Schnyder [21], 1) Rome (I, R16/Myskina [11], 2) — Daniilidou (14) Roland Garros (Slam, 1R/Shaughnessy [19], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, QF/Hénin-Hardenne [3], 4) San Diego (II, SF/Hénin-Hardenne [3], 4) — Bovina (22) Los Angeles (II, QF/Clijsters [2], 3) — Serna (31), Dokic (15), Farina Elia (20) Canadian Open (I, 1R/Suarez [32], 0) U. S. Open (Slam, 3R/Clijsters [1], 2) Leipzig (II, 1R/Hantuchova [13], 0) Moscow (I, 2R/Pistolesi [21], 1) Filderstadt Qualifying (II, Q3R/Raymond [29], 0+2 in qualifying) Zurich Qualifying (I, Q3R/Molik [40], 0+2 in qualifying) 131/Iva Majoli 30/Magdalena Maleeva Gold Coast (III, 1R/Mikaelian [44], 0) Sydney (II, 2R/Coetzer [22], 1) — Farina Elia (16) Sydney Qualifying (II, lost in 2RQ/Morigami [141], 0+1 in Australian Open (Slam, 3R/Bovina [23], 2) qualifying) Pan Pacific (I, 2R/Raymond [30], 1) Australian Open (Slam, 1R/Torrens Valero [80], 0) Doha (III, QF/Likhovtseva [36], 2) Pan Pacific (I, 2R/Davenport [10], 1) — Stevenson (21) Dubai (II, 2R/Tulyaganova [52], 1) Dubai (II, 1R/Kuznetsova [47], 0) Indian Wells (I, 3R/Sugiyama [18], 1) Indian Wells (I, 2R/Zvonareva [39], 0) Miami (I, 3R/Shaughnessy [22], 1) Miami (I, 2R/Pennetta [67], 0) Warsaw (II, 1R/Parra [161], 0) Sarasota (IV, SF/Molik [71], 3) — Suarez (29) Berlin (I, 1R/Chladkova [35], 0) Charleston (I, 2R/Dementieva [21], 1) Rome (I, 2R/Pisnik [65], 1) — Farina Elia (25) Budapest (V, withdrew from 2R, 1) Roland Garros (Slam, R16/Clijsters [2], 3) Warsaw (II, 1R/Chladkova [39], 0) Birmingham (III, Win, 5) — Daniilidou (14) Berlin (I, 1R/Shaughnessy [19], 0) Eastbourne (II, QF/Farina Elia [28], 2) — Raymond (24), Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Granville [30], 1) Likhovtseva (32) Vienna (III, 1R/Fislova [133], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, 2R/Suarez [35], 1) Wimbledon (Slam, 1R/Rubin [8], 0) San Diego (II, R16/Likhovtseva [51], 1) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Likhovtseva [36], 0) Los Angeles (II, QF/Sugiyama [12], 2) Poitiers $50K Challenger ($50K, 1R/Birnerova [111], 0) Canadian Open (I, 2R/Serna [31], 0) New Haven (II, 2R/Serna [32], 1) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Asagoe [55], 0) Leipzig (II, 2R/Kleinova [115], 0) Moscow (I, IR/Safina [54], 0) Filderstadt (II, QF/Pierce [48], 2) — Dokic (25), Rubin (10)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 22 18/Conchita Martinez 4/Amélie Mauresmo Sydney (II, 1R/Barabanschikova [184], 0) Paris (II, F/S. Williams [1], 3) — Sugiyama (26), Dementieva Australian Open (Slam, 1R/Stosur [244], 0) (20) Doha (III, QF/Krasnoroutskaya [96], 2) Dubai (II, SF/Seles [11], 2) Dubai (II, QF/Capriati [6], 2) — Daniilidou (16) Indian Wells (I, withdrew from QF, 3) — Tanasugarn (32) Indian Wells (I, SF/Clijsters [3], 4) — Coetzer (19) Miami (I, R16/Rubin [10], 2) — C. Fernandez (28) Sarasota (IV, 2R/Molik [71], 1) — Sugiyama (17) Warsaw (II, Win, 4) — Pistolesi (21), Dokic (10), V. Charleston (I, 3R/S. Williams [1], 2) Williams (3) Berlin (I, 1R/Weingärtner [79], 0) Berlin (I, SF/Henin-Hardenne [4], 3) — Pistolesi (20) Rome (I, QF/S. Williams [1], 3) — Dokic (10), Hantuchova Rome (I, F/Clijsters [2], 4) — Pistolesi (23), Capriati (7), S. (9) Williams (1) Madrid (III, 1R/Black [66], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, QF/S. Williams [1], 4) Roland Garros (Slam, QF/Clijsters [2], 4) — Davenport (6) ’s-Hertogenbosch (III, 2R/Rittner [102], 1) Eastbourne (II, F/Rubin [7], 4) — Schiavone (35), Coetzer Canadian Open (I, QF/Dementieva [15], 2) — Zuluaga (35) (17), Hantuchova (9), Farina Elia (28) New Haven (II, SF/Capriati [7], 2) — Sugiyama (16) Wimbledon (Slam, 3R/Myskina [10], 2) U. S. Open (Slam, QF/Clijsters [1], 4) San Diego (II, 2R/Pierce [73], 0) Moscow (I, F/Myskina [10], 3) — Stevenson (31), Zvonareva Los Angeles (II, R16/Pratt [70], 1) (15), Dementieva (8) New Haven (II, 2R/Dementieva [12], 1) Filderstadt (II, QF/Clijsters [1], 2) — Shaughnessy (19), U. S. Open (Slam, 2R/Molik [44], 1) Schnyder (18) Bali (III, 2R/Vento-Kabchi [72], 1) Zurich (I, 2R/Schnyder [18], 0) Shanghai (II, 2R/Morigami [78], 0) Philadelphia (II, Win, 4) — Raymond (30), Sugiyama (11), Filderstadt (II, 2R/Hénin-Hardenne [2], 1) Myskina (9) Zurich (I, 1R/Frazier [75], 0) Los Angeles Championships (Champ, RR/Rubin [10], RR/ Clijsters [1], F/Clijsters [1], 2 wins+3 losses) — Dementieva (9), Hénin-Hardenne (2) 7/Anastasia Myskina 119/Tatiana Panova Sydney (II, 1R/Bovina [23], 0) Auckland (IV, 1R/Zvonareva [45], 0) Australian Open (Slam, QF/Clijsters [4], 4) — C. Fernandez Sydney (II, SF/Davenport [12], 3) — Capriati (3) (29), Rubin (13) Australian Open (Slam, 3R/Davenport [10], 2) Doha (III, Win, 4) Pan Paciﬁc (I, 1R/Cohen Aloro [166], 0) Dubai (II, QF/Hénin-Hardenne [4], 2) — Tanasugarn (32) Dubai (II, 1R/Schiavone [40], 0) Indian Wells (I, 2R/Kuznetsova [41], 0) Scottsdale (II, 1R/Black [57], 0) Miami (I, 2R/Taylor [85], 0) Indian Wells (I, 2R/Gaglardi [65], 0) Sarasota (IV, Win, 5) — Dementieva (21), Déchy (22) Miami (I, 3R/S. Williams [1], 1) Charleston (I, 2R/Pierce [43], 0) Sarasota (IV, 1R/Tulyaganova [43], 0) Berlin (I, 2R/Zvonareva [25], 0) Charleston (I, 2R/Hantuchova [9], 1) Rome (I, QF/Clijsters [2], 2) Amelia Island (II, 1R/Krasnoroutskaya [57], 0) Strasbourg (III, QF/Farina Elia [26], 1) Warsaw (II, 1R/Kleinova [135], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Mandula [75], 1) Berlin (I, 1R/Pistolesi [20], 0) Eastbourne (II, 1R/Coetzer [17], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, R16/Capriati [7], 3) — Martinez (13) Sopot (III, QF/Mandula [52], 1) Canadian Open (I, R16/Dementieva [15], 1) New Haven (II, 1R/Pistolesi [22], 0) U. S. Open (Slam, QF/Hénin-Hardenne [3], 4) Leipzig (II, Win, 4) — Krasnoroutskaya (27), Petrova (15), Clijsters (1), Hénin-Hardenne (2) Moscow (I, Win, 4) — Serna (24), Daniilidou (29), Pistolesi (21), Mauresmo (7) Filderstadt (II, 2R/Bovina [31], 1) — Stevenson (30) Linz (II, QF/Schnyder [28], 1) — Bovina (23) Philadelphia (II, F/Mauresmo [7], 3) — Petrova (12) Los Angeles Championships (Champ, RR/Hénin-Hardenne [2], RR/Capriati [5], 1 win +2 losses) — Sugiyama (11)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 23 12/Nadia Petrova 33/Mary Pierce Gold Coast (III, 2R/Bovina [26], 1+3 in qualifying) Auckland (IV, 2R/Suarez [27], 1) Australian Open (Slam, 3R/Schnyder [15], 2) — Sugiyama Australian Open (Slam, 2R/Rubin [13], 1) (25) Pan Paciﬁc (I, 1R/Farina Elia [15], 0) Pan Paciﬁc (I, 1R/Krasnoroutskaya [129], 0) Hyderabad (IV, QF/Pennetta [97], 2) Indian Wells Qualifying (I, Q2R/Kulikovskaya [102], 0+1 in Doha (III, 2R/Myskina [11], 1) qualifying) Sarasota (IV, 2R/Dementieva [21], 1) Miami Qualifying (I, Q2R/Marrero [92], 0+1 in qualifying) Charleston (I, QF/Hénin-Hardenne [4], 3) — Myskina (10), Sarasota (IV, 2R/Myskina [11], 1+3 in qualifying) — Coetzer (18) Likhovtseva (30) Berlin (I, 1R/Ruano Pascual [39], 0) Amelia Island Qualifying (II, Q2R/Morigami [104], 0+1 in Roland Garros (Slam, 1R/C. Fernandez [28], 0) qualifying) Wimbledon (Slam, 4R/Hénin-Hardenne [3], 3) — Daniilidou Berlin (I, 2R/Daniilidou [15], 1) (21), Raymond (23) Rome (I, R16/Capriati [7], 2) — Seles (12) San Diego (II, R16/Raymond [30], 2) — Martinez (14) Roland Garros (Slam, SF/Clijsters [2], 5) — Seles (12), Los Angeles (II, 1R/Tanasugarn [39], 0) Capriati (7), Zvonareva (22) Canadian Open (I, 2R/Suarez [32], 1) ’s-Hertogenbosch (III, SF/Hénin-Hardenne [3], 3) — U. S. Open (Slam, R16/Myskina [10], 3) — Dokic (23) Dementieva (15) Filderstadt (II, SF/Clijsters [1], 3) — Capriati (5), Maleeva Wimbledon (Slam, 3R/V. Williams [4], 2) (21) Stanford (II, 1R/Vento-Kabchi [132], 0) Zurich (I, 1R/Srebotnik [37], 0) San Diego (II, QF/Hénin-Hardenne [3], 3) — Mikaelian (34), Quebec City (III, SF/Sequera [91], 2) Coetzer (15), Hantuchova (9) Los Angeles (II, 2R/Sharapova [56], 0) Canadian Open (I, R16/Hénin-Hardenne [3], 2) U. S. Open (Slam, R16/Davenport [4], 3) — Coetzer (16) Leipzig (II, QF/Myskina [10], 2) Moscow (I, 1R/Pistolesi [21], 0) Filderstadt (II, 1R/Dementieva [8], 0) Zurich (I, SF/Hénin-Hardenne [2], 3) — Dementieva (8), Bovina (26) Linz (II, F/Sugiyama [11], 3) — Krasnoroutskaya (26), Suarez (15), Schnyder (28) Philadelphia (II, SF/Myskina [9], 3) — Rubin (10)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 24 16/Anna (Smashnova)-Pistolesi 28/Lisa Raymond Auckland (IV, SF/Cho [83], 3) Sydney (II,2R/Davenport [12], 1+3 in qualifying) — Australian Open (Slam, 3R/Coetzer [22], 2) Daniilidou (21) Pan Pacific (I, 1R/Bovina [17], 0) Australian Open (Slam, 2R/Barna [69], 1) Paris (II, 1R/Cohen Aloro [121], 0) Pan Pacific (I, SF/Davenport [10], 3) — Suarez (25), Maleeva Indian Wells (I, 2R/Black [56], 0) (14), Dokic (8) Miami (I, R16/Clijsters [3], 2) — Raymond (25) Memphis (III, Win, 4) — Coetzer (23) Sarasota (IV, 2R/C. Fernandez [26], 1) Scottsdale (II, 1R/Razzano [60], 0) Charleston (I, 2R/Suarez [27], 1) Indian Wells (I, 3R/Coetzer [19], 1) Warsaw (II, QF/Mauresmo [7], 2) Miami (I, 3R/Pistoesi [20], 1) Berlin (I, R16/Mauresmo [6], 2) — Panova (31) Amelia Island (II, QF/Capriati [6], 2) — Dokic (11) Rome (I, R16/Mauresmo [6], 2) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Pennetta [65], 1) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Serna [36], 0) Birmingham (III, 3R/Tanasugarn [36], 1) Vienna (III, 2R/Sprem [97], 1) Eastbourne (II, 1R/Maleeva [12], 0) Eastbourne (II, QF/Rubin [7], 2) — Daniilidou (14) Wimbledon (Slam, 3R/Piece [86], 2) Wimbledon (Slam, 1R/Reeves [109], 0) Stanford (II, QF/Capriati [7], 2) Sopot (III, Win, 5) — Schnyder (19) San Diego (II, QF/Clijsters [2], 3) — Sugiyama (11) Helsinki (IV, Win, 5) New Haven (II, 1R/Sugiyama [16], 0) New Haven (II, QF/Capriati [7], 2) — Myskina (8), U. S. Open (Slam, 2R/Czink [93], 1) Zvonareva (14) Moscow (I, 1R/Douchevina [123], 0) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Schaul [100], 0) Filderstadt (II, 1R/Hantuchova [13], 0+3 in qualifying) — Moscow (I, SF/Myskina [10], 3) — Petrova (13), Kuznetsova Kuznetsova (34) (35), Bovina (32) Philadelphia (II, QF/Mauresmo [7], 2) — Zvonareva (13) Filderstadt (II, 1R/Sugiyama [11], 0) Zurich (I, 2R/Hénin-Hardenne [2], 1) — Farina Elia (21) Linz (II, QF/Zvonareva [12], 2) 9/Chanda Rubin 79/Barbara Schett Sydney (II, QF/Clijsters [4], 2) — Dementieva (20), Gold Coast (III, QF/Déchy [20], 2) Stevenson (18) Hobart (V, 2R/Asagoes [94], 1) Australian Open (Slam, R16/Myskina [11], 3) Australian Open (Slam, 1R/Coetzer [22], 0) Pan Pacific (I, SF/Seles [9], 2) — Srebotnik (32), Dementieva Paris (II, 1R/M. Casanova ]53], 0) (22) Scottsdale (II, 1R/Granville [37], 0) Scottsdale (II, 2R/Granville [37], 1) Indian Wells (I, 1R/Cohen Aloro [103], 0) Indian Wells (I, QF/Clijsters [3], 3) — Sugiyama (18) Miami (I, 1R/Molik [89], 0) Miami (I, SF/Capriati [5], 4) — Mauresmo (7), Hénin- Sarasota (IV, 1R/Molik [71], 0) Hardenne (4) Charleston (I, 1R/Suarez [27], 0) Berlin (I, 2R/Serna [38], 0) Warsaw (II, 1R/Pistolesi [21], 0) Rome (I, 2R/Loit [52], 0) Berlin (I, 2R/Hantuchova [9], 1) — Granville (33) Madrid (III, Win, 4) — Suarez (30) Rome (I, 2R/Schnyder [19], 1) Roland Garros (Slam, QF/Hénin-Hardenne [4], 4) — Madrid (III, SF/Sanchez Lorenzo [84], 3) — C. Fernandez Granville (30) (28) Eastbourne (II, Win, 4) — Tanasugarn (33), Pistolesi (26), Roland Garros (Slam, 3R/S. Williams [1], 2) — C. Fernandez Capriati (8), Martinez (19) (28) Wimbledon (Slam, 3R/Farina Elia [25], 2) Vienna (III, 1R/Pistolesi [25], 0) San Diego (II, QF/Davenport [5], 2) — Dokic (12) Wimbledon (Slam, 2R/Martinez [13], 1) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Vento-Kabchi [84], 0) San Diego (II, 1R/Raymond [30], 0) Bali (III, F/Dementieva [9], 3) Los Angeles (II, 2R/Davenport [4], 1) Shanghai (II, F/Dementieva [8], 3) Canadian Open (I, 1R/Zvonareva [16], 0) Filderstadt (II, 2R/Maleeva [21], 1) — Zvonareva (12) U. S. Open (Slam, 2R/Coetzer [16], 1) Zurich (I, 1R/Dokic [25], 0) Bali (III, 2R/Obata [68], 1) Luxembourg (III, F/Clijsters [2], 3) Shanghai (II, 2R/Rubin [9], 1) Philadelphia (II, QF/Petrova [12], 1) Leipzig (II, 1R/Grönefeld [133], 0) Los Angeles Championships (Champ, RR/Clijsters [1], RR/ Filderstadt Qualifying (II, Q2R/Raymond [29], 0+1 in Dementieva [9], 1 win+2 losses) — Mauresmo (6) qualifying) Linz (II, 1R/Mandula [41], 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 25 20/Francesca Schiavone 23/Patty Schnyder Gold Coast (III, 2R/Schnyder [15], 1) Gold Coast (III, SF/Mikaelian [44], 1+1 walkover) Canberra (V, F/Shaughnessy [28], 4) Sydney (II, 2R/Clijsters [4], 1) — Suarez (26) Australian Open (Slam, 1R/Barna [69], 0) Australian Open (Slam, R16/Hantuchova [8], 3) Doha (III, 1R/Kuznetsova [48], 0) Paris (II, 1R/Pisnik [61], 0) Dubai (II, 2R/Seles [11], 1) — Panova (22) Antwerp (II, QF/Clijsters [3], 2) Scottsdale (II, QF/Shaughnessy [27], 2) — Bovina (17), Dubai (II, 2R/Krasnoroutskaya [72], 1) Farina Elia (21) Indian Wells (I, 2R/Widaja [63], 0) Indian Wells (I, 3R/Clijsters [3], 1) Sarasota (IV, 1R/Cargill [113], 0) Miami (I, 2R/S. Williams [1], 1) Charleston (I, 2R/Zvonareva [33], 0) Warsaw (II, QF/V. Williams [3], 2) — Daniilidou (15) Amelia Island (II, QF/Davenport [5], 2) — Shaughnessy (19) Berlin (I, 2R/Capriati [7], 1) Bol (III, 2R/Leon Garcia [137], 0) Rome (I, 1R/Matevic [48], 0) Berlin (I, 3R/Hénin-Hardenne [4], 2) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Vakulenko [134], 1) Rome (I, R16/Sugiyama [16], 1) Eastbourne (II, 1R/Martinez [19], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, R16/Hénin-Hardenne [4], 3) — Wimbledon (Slam, 3R/Asagoe [81], 2) — Coetzer (15) Daniilidou (14) Palermo (V, QF/Saﬁna [64], 2) Wimbledon (Slam, 1R/Mandula [57], 0) Stanford (II, SF/Clijsters [2], 3) — Daniilidou (22) Sopot (III, SF/Pistolesi [26], 1+1 walkover) San Diego (II, 2R/Dementieva [16], 1) Helsinki (IV, 1R/Talaja [76], 0) Los Angeles (II, SF/Clijsters [2], 3) U. S. Open (Slam, 2R/Tanasugarn [39], 1) Canadian Open (I, 2R/Clijsters [1], 1) Leipzig (II, QF/Clijsters [1], 2) — Likhovtseva (35), U. S. Open (Slam, QF/Capriati [7], 4) — Sugiyama (15) Hantuchova (13) Leipzig (II, 1R/Kleinova [115], 0) Moscow (I, 1R/Bovina [32], 0) Moscow (I, QF/Dementieva [8], 2) — Krasnoroutskaya (27) Filderstadt (II, 2R/Mauresmo [7], 1) Linz (II, 1R/Bovina [23], 0) Zurich (I, QF/Dokic [25], 2) — Daniilidou (29), Mauresmo (7) Linz (II, SF/Petrova [13], 3) — Myskina (9)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 26 60/Monica Seles 22/Magui Serna Australian Open (Slam, 2R/Koukalova [113], 1) Canberra (V, QF/Shaughnessy [28], 2) Pan Paciﬁc (I, F/Davenport [10], 3) — Sugiyama (28), Rubin Australian Open (Slam, 2R/C. Fernandez [29], 1) (12) Paris (II, QF/Mauresmo [7], 2) Doha (III, 2R/Krasnoroutskaya [96], 0) Antwerp (II, 1R/Roesch [76], 0) Dubai (II, F/Hénin-Hardenne [4], 3) — Mauresmo (7) Acapulco (III, 1R/Vaskova [155], 0) Amelia Island (II, QF/Hénin-Hardenne [4], 2) — Déchy (22) Indian Wells (I, R16/Mauresmo [8], 3) — C. Fernandez (27) Rome (I, 2R/Petrova [88], 1) Miami (I, 1R/Asagoe [71], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, 1R/Petrova [76], 0) Estoril (IV, Win, 5) Budapest (V, Win, 5) Warsaw (II, QF/Dokic [10], 2) Berlin (I, R16/Likhovtseva [30], 2) — Farina Elia (24), Rubin (8) Rome (I, 2R/Hantuchova [9], 1) — Likhovtseva (29) Madrid (III, 2R/Sanchez Lorenzo [84], 1) Roland Garros (Slam, R16/Mauresmo [5], 3) — Pistolesi (25) Eastbourne Qualifying (II, lost in Q1R/Janes [505], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, 2R/Matevzic [40], 1) Palermo (V, 2R/Cervanova [85], 1) San Diego (II, 2R/Dokic [12], 1) — Granville (33) Los Angeles (II, 1R/Kuznetsova [26], 0) Canadian Open (I, R16/Srebotnik [43], 2) — Maleeva (11) New Haven (II, QF/Davenport [4], 2) — Maleeva (11) U. S. Open (Slam, 2R/Sanchez Lorenzo [53], 1) Leipzig (II, 1R/Chladkova [45], 0) Moscow (I, 2R/Myskina [10], 1) — Farina Elia (22) Filderstadt Qualifying (II, lost in Q1R/Pisnik [38], 0) Zurich Qualifying (I, lost in Q3R/Pisnik [35]; Lucky Loser, lost in 1R/Sugiyama [11], 0+2 in qualifying) Linz (II, 2R/Suarez [15], 1) — Likhovtseva (32)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 27 17/Meghann Shaughnessy 82/Alexandra Stevenson Gold Coast (III, QF [withdrew], 2) Sydney (II, 2R/Rubin [13], 1) Canberra (V, Win, 5) Australian Open (Slam, 2R/Chladkova [62], 1) Australian Open (Slam, QF/S. Williams [1], 4) — Bovina (23) Pan Paciﬁc (I, 1R/Majoli [34], 0) Pan Paciﬁc (I, 1R/Dementieva [22], 0) Paris (II, 1R/Daniilidou [18], 0) Scottsdale (II, SF/Clijsters [3], 3) — Dokic (9) Antwerp (II, 1R/Razzano [67], 0) Indian Wells (I, R16/Zvonareva [39], 2) — Daniilidou (15) Memphis (III, 2R/Obata [121], 1) Miami (I, QF/Capriati [5], 3) — Maleeva (14), V. Williams (2) Scottsdale (II, SF/Sugiyama [25], 3) — Déchy (19) Charleston (I, 3R/Harkleroad [101], 2) — Likhovtseva (30) Indian Wells (I, 2R/Ruano Pascual [46], 0) Amelia Island (II, 3R/Schnyder [13], 1) Miami (I, 2R/Sanchez Lorenzo [93], 0) Berlin (I, 2R/Zuluaga [52], 1) Charleston (I, 1R/Ruano Pascual [42], 0) Rome (I, 1R/Granville [34], 0) Amelia Island (II, R16/Hantuchova [9], 1) Roland Garros (Slam, 3R/Sugiyama [15], 2) Rome (I, 1R/Zuluaga [45], 0) Eastbourne (II, 1R/Déchy [23], 0) Madrid (III, 2R/Gagliardi [72], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, 1R/Kapros [204], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, 1R/Randriantefy [83], 0) Stanford (II, 2R/Mikaelian [37], 1) Birmingham (III, 2R/Razzano [66], 0) San Diego (II, 2R/Bartoli [50], 0) Eastbourne (II, 2R/Hantuchova [9], 1) Los Angeles (II, R16/Coetzer [14], 1) Wimbledon (Slam, 1R/Loit [48], 0) New Haven (II, 1R/Dokic [23], 0) Stanford (II, 2R/Dokic [12], 1) U. S. Open (Slam, R16/Clijsters [1], 3) — Zvonareva (14) Los Angeles (II, 2R/Kutuzova [451], 0) Leipzig (II, 1R/Callens [103], 0) U. S. Open (Slam, 1R/Loit [49], 0) Moscow (I, 1R/Daniilidou [29], 0) Leipzig (II, 2R/Callens [103], 1) Filderstadt (II, 1R/Mauresmo [7], 0) Moscow (I, 2R/Mauresmo [7], 1) — Dokic (26) Zurich (I, 1R/Zvonareva [12], 0) Filderstadt (II, 1R/Myskina [9], 0) Philadelphia (II, QF/Sugiyama [11], 2) Zurich (I, 2R/Dokic [25], 1) Linz (II, 1R/Pisnik [30], 0) Philadelphia (II, 2R/Rubin [10], 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 28 14/Paola Suarez 10/Ai Sugiyama Auckland (IV, QF/Daniilidou [22], 2) Gold Coast (III, 1R/Sanchez Lorenzo [111], 0) Sydney (II, 1R/Schnyder [15], 0) Sydney (II, 1R/Coetzer [22], 0) Australian Open (Slam, 3R/Pratt [54], 2) Australian Open (Slam, 2R/Petrova [148], 1) Pan Paciﬁc (I, 1R/Raymond [30], 0) Pan Paciﬁc (I, 2R/Seles [9], 1) Bogota (III, SF/Zuluaga [73], 2) Paris (II, 2R/Mauresmo [7], 1) — Déchy (19) Acapulco (III, 1R/Diaz-Oliva [104], 0) Antwerp (II, QF/Henin-Hardenne [4], 2) — Dokic (10) Indian Wells (I, 2R/Reeves [111], 0) Scottsdale (II, Win, 5) — Davenport (7), Daniilidou (16), Miami (I, 3R/Clijsters [3], 1) Stevenson (26), Clijsters (3) Sarasota (IV, QF/Majoli [32], 2) — Dokic (10) Indian Wells (I, R16/Rubin [12], 2) — Maleeva (14) Charleston (I, 3R/Zvonareva [33], 2) — Pistolesi (20) Miami (I, 3R/Taylor [85], 1) Amelia Island (II, 3R/Capriati [6], 1) — Likhovtseva (31) Sarasota (IV, 1R/Martinez [25], 0) Berlin (I, 1R/Zuluaga [52], 0) Berlin (I, 1R/Mikaelian [36], 0) Rome (I, 1R/Sugiyama [16], 0) Rome (I, SF/Clijsters [2], 4) — Suarez (30), Schnyder (19) Madrid (III, QF/Rubin [8], 2) Roland Garros (Slam, R16/S. Williams [1], 3) — Roland Garros (Slam, 3R/Clijsters [2], 2) Shaughnessy (19) Vienna (III, Win, 5) — Dokic (11) Eastbourne (II, 2R/Déchy [23], 1) Wimbledon (Slam, R16/Farina Elia [25], 3) — Maleeva (11) Wimbledon (Slam, 4R/Clijsters [2], 3) — Déchy (23) San Diego (II, 1R/Pisnik [47], 0) San Diego (II, 2R/Raymond [30], 0) Los Angeles (II, R16/Davenport [4], 2) — Bovina (21) Los Angeles (II, SF/Davenport [4], 3) — Maleeva (11) Canadian Open (I, SF/Krasnoroutskaya [38], 4) — New Haven (II, QF/Mauresmo [6], 2) — Raymond (29) Kuznetsova (27), Hantuchova (8), Zvonareva (16) U. S. Open (Slam, R16/Schiavone [29], 3) U. S. Open (Slam, QF/Davenport [4], 4) Shanghai (II, SF/Dementieva [8], 2) Filderstadt Qualifying (II, Q1R/Callens [84], 0) Japan Open (III, QF/Kapros [128], 1) Zurich (I, 2R/Bovina [26], 1) — Hantuchova (15) Filderstadt (II, 2R/Davenport [4], 1) — Pistolesi (16) Linz (II, QF/Petrova [13], 2) — Serna (24) Zurich (I, 2R/Pisnik [35], 1) — Serna (24) Linz (II, Win, 4) — Pisnik (30), Dokic (14), Zvonareva (12), Petrova (13) Philadelphia (II, SF/Mauresmo [7], 2) — Shaughnessy (19) Los Angeles Championships (Champ, RR/Capriati [5], RR/ Myskina [8], 1 win+2 losses) — Hénin-Hardenne (2)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 29 34/Tamarine Tanasugarn 50/Iroda Tulyaganova Gold Coast (III, 1R/Garbin [71], 0) Canberra (V, 1R/Martinez Granados [99], 0) Sydney (II, 2R/Hantuchova [8], 1) Australian Open (Slam, 2R/Davenport [10], 1) Australian Open (Slam, 3R/S. Williams [1], 2) Hyderabad (IV, F/Tanasugarn [32], 4) Pan Paciﬁc (I, QF/Davenport [10], 2) — C. Fernandez (29), Doha (III, 2R/Likhovtseva [36], 1) Farina Elia (15) Dubai (II, QF/Seles [11], 2) — Maleeva (14) Hyderabad (IV, Win, 5) Indian Wells (I, 1R/Asagoe [76], 0) Doha (III, 1R/Vento-Kabchi [171], 0) Miami (I, R16/S. Williams [1], 3) — Bovina (16) Dubai (II, 2R/Myskina [10], 1) Sarasota (IV, 2R/Majoli [32], 1) — Panova (28) Indian Wells (I, 3R/Mauresmo [8], 1) Charleston (I, 1R/Demenieva [21], 0) Miami (I, 3R/Hénin-Hardenne [4], 1) Amelia Island (II, 1R/Barna [62], 0) Sarasota (IV, 2R/Cargill [113], 1) Berlin (I, QF/Mauresmo [6], 3) — Dokic (11) Charleston (I, 1R/Randriantefy [95], 0) Rome (I, 1R/Coetzer [17], 0) Roland Garros (Slam, 1R/Zuluaga [46], 0) Madrid (III, SF/Rubin [8], 3) Birmingham (III, QF/Daniilidou [14], 3) — Raymond (23) Roland Garros (Slam, 2R/Davenport [6], 1) Eastbourne (II, 2R/Rubin [7], 1) — Bovina (22) ’s-Hertogenbosch (III, QF/Rittner [102], 2) Wimbledon (Slam, 1R/Morigami [90], 0) Wimbledon (Slam, 3R/Zvonareva [17], 2) San Diego (II, 1R/Pratt [70], 0) Sopot (III, 1R/Kostanic [116], 0) Los Angeles (II, 2R/Schiavone [30], 1) Canadian Open (I, 1R/Déchy [24], 0) New Haven (II, 1R/Maleeva [11], 0+3 in qualifying) U. S. Open (Slam, R16/Mauresmo [6], 3) — Schnyder (22), Hantuchova (9) Bali (III, QF/Dementieva [9], 2) Japan Open (III, 2R/Zheng [122], 0) Luxembourg (III, 2R/Barna [58], 1) Pattaya City (V, SF/Nagyova [119], 3) 3/Serena Williams 11/Venus Williams Australian Open (Slam, Win, 7) — Tanasugarn (32), Australian Open (Slam, F/S. Williams [1], 6) — Hantuchova Daniilidou (20), Shaughnessy (33), Clijsters (4), V. (8), Hénin-Hardenne (5) Williams (2) Antwerp (II, Win, 4) — Hantuchova (5), Clijsters (3) Paris (II, Win, 4) — Husarova (35), Daniilidou (18), Miami (I, R16/Shaughnessy [22], 2) Mauresmo (7) Warsaw (II, F/Mauresmo [7], 3) — Schiavone (34) Miami (I, Win, 6) — Schiavone (35), Panova (24), Clijsters Roland Garros (Slam, R16/Zvonareva [21], 3) — Farina Elia (3), Capriati (5) (27) Charleston (I, F/Hénin-Hardenne [4], 4) — Martinez (25), Wimbledon (Slam, F/V. Williams [1], 6) — Petrova (27), Dokic (11), Davenport (5) Zvonareva (17), Davenport (5), Clijsters (2) Rome (I, SF/Mauresmo [6], 3) — Déchy (24), Martinez (27) Roland Garros (Slam, SF/Hénin-Hardenne [4], 5) — Sugiyama (15), Mauresmo (5) Wimbledon (Slam, Win, 7) — Granville (30), Dementieva (16), Capriati (7), Hénin-Hardenne (3). V. Williams (4)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 30 13/Vera Zvonareva Auckland (V, QF/Cho [83], 2) — Panova (23) Hobart (V, QF/Molik [96], 2) Australian Open (Slam, 1R/Bovina [23], 0) Memphis (III, 2R/Cho [62], 1) Scottsdale (II, 1R/Daniilidou [16], 0) Indian Wells (I, QF/Capriati [6], 4) — Majoli (31), Shaughnessy (24) Miami (I, 1R/Chladkova [43], 0) Charleston (I, QF/Davenport [5], 3) — Schnyder (13), Suarez (27) Amelia Island (II, 2R/Coetzer [16], 1) — Granville (34) Bol (III, Win, 5) Berlin (I, QF/Hénin-Hardenne [4], 3) — Myskina (10), Daniilidou (15) Strasbourg (III, SF/Sprem [163], 3) Roland Garros (Slam, QF/Petrova [76], 4) — V. Williams (3) Vienna (III, QF/Sprem [97], 2) Wimbledon (Slam, R16/V. Williams [4], 3) Canadian Open (I, QF/Suarez [32], 3) — Dokic (17) New Haven (II, 2R/Pistolesi [22], 1) U. S. Open (Slam, 3R/Shaughnessy [21], 2) Moscow (I, QF/Mauresmo [7], 2) — Coetzer (18) Filderstadt (II, 1R/Rubin [10], 0) Zurich (I, QF/Hénin-Hardenne [2], 2) — Shaughnessy (20) Linz (II, SF/Sugiyama [11], 2) — Pistolesi (16) Philadelphia (II, 1R/Raymond [30], 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 31 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 Clijsters Australian Open Slam S. Williams Tokyo (Pan Paciﬁc) I Davenport Paris II S. Williams Antwerp II V. Williams Dubai II Hénin-Hardenne Scottsdale II Sugiyama Indian Wells I Clijsters Miami I S. Williams Charleston I Hénin-Hardenne Amelia Island II Dementieva Warsaw II Mauresmo Berlin I Hénin-Hardenne Rome I Clijsters Roland Garros Slam Hénin-Hardenne Eastbourne II Rubin Wimbledon Slam S. Williams Stanford II Clijsters San Diego II Hénin-Hardenne Los Angeles II Clijsters Canadian Open I Hénin-Hardenne New Haven II Capriati U.S. Open Slam Hénin-Hardenne Shanghai II Dementieva Leipzig II Myskina Moscow I Myskina Filderstadt II Clijsters Zurich I Hénin-Hardenne Linz II Sugiyama Philadelphia II Mauresmo Los Angeles Championships Champ Clijsters

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 32 Tournament Winners by Tournament Type (High-Tier Events) The following list shows winners of the top-tier tournaments sorted by tier. Within the tiers, tournaments are sorted by date. SLAMS Event Winner Australian Open S. Williams Roland Garros Hénin-Hardenne Wimbledon S. Williams U.S. Open Hénin-Hardenne YEAR-END CHAMPIONSHIP Event Winner Los Angeles Championships Clijsters TIER I Event Winner Pan Paciﬁc (Tokyo) Davenport Indian Wells Clijsters Ericsson (Miami) S. Williams Charleston Hénin-Hardenne German Open (Berlin) Hénin-Hardenne Italian Open (Rome) Clijsters Canadian Open Hénin-Hardenne Moscow Myskina Zurich Henin-Hardenne TIER II Event Winner Sydney Clijsters Paris S. Williams Antwerp V. Williams Dubai Hénin-Hardenne Scottsdale Sugiyama Amelia Island Dementieva Warsaw Mauresmo Eastbourne Rubin Stanford Clijsters San Diego Hénin-Hardenne Los Angeles Clijsters New Haven Capriati Shanghai Dementieva Leipzig Myskina Filderstadt Clijsters Linz Sugiyama Philadelphia Mauresmo

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 33 Winners at Smaller Tournaments (Tier III, IV, V) Tournament Winner Tier Same Week As Gold Coast Déchy III Auckland (IV) Auckland Daniilidou IV Gold Coast (III) Canberra Shaughnessy V Sydney (II), Hobart (V) Hobart Molik V Sydney (II), Canberra (V) Hyderabad Tanasugarn Paris (II) Doha Myskina III Antwerp (II) Memphis Raymond III Dubai (II), Bogota (III) Bogota Zuluaga III Dubai (II), Memphis (III) Acapulco Coetzer III Scottsdale (II) Sarasota Myskina IV Casablanca (V) Casablanca Grande V Sarasota (IV) Estoril Serna IV Charleston (I) Budapest Serna V Amelia Island (II) Bol Zvonareva II Warsaw (II) Madrid Rubin III Strasbourg (III) Strasbourg Farina Elia III Madrid (III) Birmingham Maleeva III Vienna (III) Vienna Suarez III Birmingham (III) ’s-Hertogenbosch Clijsters III Eastbourne (II) Palermo Saﬁna V Sopot Pistolesi III+ San Diego (II) Helsinki Pistolesi IV Los Angeles (II) Bali Dementieva III+ Japan Open Sharapova III Moscow (I) Tashkent Ruano Pascual IV Filderstadt (II) Luxembourg Clijsters III+ Linz (II) Quebec City Sharapova III Philadelphia (II) Pattaya City Nagyova V Los Angeles (Champ)

Nov. 10, 2002: Pittsburg, PA, USA $50K — Maria Elena Camerin def. Maria Sharapova 7–6(7–4) 6–2 Nov. 17, 2002: Eugene, OR, USA $50K — Marisa Irvin (2) def. Evgenia Kulikovskaya (6) 7–5 6–0 Dec 12, 2002: Boynton Beach, FL, USA $75K — Julia Vakulenko def. Bethanie Mattek (Q) 6–4 6–0 Jan. 26, 2003: Fullerton, CA, USA $50K — Bethanie Mattek def. Seda Noorlander 6–4 3–6 6–4 Feb. 2, 2003: Ortisei, ITA $50K — Mara Santangelo def. Sofia Arvidsson 2–6 6–2 6–2 Feb. 9, 2003: Midland, MI, USA $75K — Bianka Lamade (Q) def. Laura Granville (1) 6–3 1–6 6–4 Mar. 2, 2003: Saint Paul, MN, USA $50K — Shenay Perry (WC) def. Maria Vento-Kabchi 6–2 6–4 Mar. 16, 2003: Mesa, AZ, USA $50K — Maureen Drake vs. Wynne Prakusya, rained out Apr. 13, 2003: Dinan, FRA $50K+H — Eva Birnerova def. Zuzana Ondraskova (3) 1–6 6–2 6–3 Apr. 27, 2003: Dothan, AL, USA $75K — Akiko Morigami (6) def. Milagros Sequera (5) 6–3 6–4 May 4, 2003 — Gifu, JAP $50K — Shinobu Asagoe def. Saori Obata 6-4 6-1 May 4, 2003 — Cagnes-Sur-Mer, FRA $75K — Stephanie Cohen-Aloro (4) def. Yulia Beygelzimer 6–4 6Ð3 May 11, 2003 — Fukuoka, JAP $50K — Saori Obata (1) def. Maria Elena Camerin (2) 2-6 6–3 6–3 May 11, 2003 — Saint-Gaudens, FRA $75K — Tatiana Perebiynis def. Renata Voracova 6-1 6–4 Jun. 15, 2003 — Marseilles, FRA $50K+H — Arantxa Parra (4) def. Claudine Schaul (3) 6–2 6–1 Jul 6, 2003 — Orbetello, ITA $50K+H — Lubomira Kurhajcova (8) def. Cristina Torrens Valero 7–5 6–1 Jul. 6, 2003 — Los Gatos, CA, USA $50K — Shenay Perry (4) def. Amber Liu (WC) 6-0 7–5 Jul 13, 2003: Vittel, FRA $50K — Eva Birnerova def. Tatiana Poutchek (5) 6–4 6–4 Jul. 20, 2003: Modena, ITA $50K+H — Melinda Czink def. Tian Tian Sun (LL) 6–3 6–3 Jul. 20, 2003: Oyster Bay, NY, USA $50K — Anna-Lena Grönefeld def. Bethanie Mattek (7) 6–3 6–0 Jul. 27, 2003: Innsbruck, AUT $50K — Vera Douchevina (Q) def. Melinda Czink 7–6 (7-4) 6–2 Jul. 27, 2003: Lexington, KY, USA $50K — Miho Saeki def. Salome Devidze (Q) 6–2 4–6 7–5 Aug. 3, 2003: Louisville, KY, USA $50K — Kristina Brandi def. Shenay Perry 3–6 6–4 6–4 Aug. 10, 2003: Cuneo, ITA $50K+H — Tathiana Garbin (6/WC) def. Lubomira Bacheva 6-3 6-1 Aug. 17, 2003: Bronx, NY, USA $50K — Jie Zheng def. Maria Kirilenko (Q) 4–6 6-4 6-4 Sep. 7, 2003: Fano, ITA $50K — Cristina Torrens Valero (7) def. Catalina Castano 6–3 5–7 6–3 Sep. 14, 2003: Denain, FRA $75K— Anabel Medina Garrigues def. Gala Leon Garcia 6–4 6–0 Sep. 21, 2003: Bordeaux, FRA $75K+H — Zuzana Ondraskova def. Anabel Medina Garrigues 6–7(4–7) 6Ð4 6Ð3 Sep. 21, 2003: Columbus, OH, USA $50K — Teryn Ashley def. Tara Snyder 6–3 6–1 Sep. 28, 2003: Batumi, GEO $75K — Elena Tatarkova def. Eugenia Linetskaya (Q) 1–6 6–4 6–3 Sep. 28, 2003: Albuquerque, NM, USA $75K — Kristina Brandi (5) def. Milagros Sequera (3) 6–2 6–2 Sep. 28, 2003: Biella, ITA $50K+H — Henrieta Nagyova def. Zsofia Gubacsi (Q) 6–3 6–1 Oct. 5, 2003: Girona, ESP $50K+H — Julia Vakulenko (3) def. Barbora Strycova 7–5 2–0, retired Oct. 5, 2003: Troy, ALA, USA $50K — Kristina Brandi (3) def. Maria Elena Camerin (1) 7–6(9–7) 6–3 Oct. 12, 2003: Juarez, MEX $50K — Natalia Gussoni (5) def. Erica Krauth 6–4 6–3 oct. 12, 2003: Latina, ITA $50K — Roberta Vinci def. Galina Voskoboeva 6–3 6–4 Oct. 19, 2003: Dubai, UAR $75K+H — Jelena Jankovic def. Henrieta Nagyova 6–2 7-5 Oct. 19, 2003: Sedona, AZ, USA $50K — Samantha Reeves (2) def. Kristina Brandi (1) 7–5 1–6 6–4 Oct. 26, 2003: Paducah, KY, USA $50K — Jennifer Hopkins def. Tara Snyder (6) 6-3 6-4 Nov. 2, 2003: Poitiers, France $50K — Karolina Sprem (2) def. Roberta Vinci 6–4 7-5 Nov. 9, 2003: Pittsburg, PA, USA $50K — Teryn Ashley def. Meilen Tu 1-6 6-3 6-3

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 35 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 15): Australian Open: S. Williams Antwerp: V. Williams Dubai: Hénin-Hardenne Scottsdale: Sugiyama Miami: S. Williams Amelia Island: Dementieva Warsaw: Mauresmo Berlin: Hénin-Hardenne Roland Garros: Hénin-Hardenne Wimbledon: S. Williams New Haven: Capriati U. S. Open: Hénin-Hardenne Leipzig: Myskina Filderstadt: Clijsters Los Angeles Champs: Clijsters Won Title Beating One Top Ten Player (Total of 16): Sydney: Clijsters Pan Pacific: Davenport Paris: S. Williams Indian Wells: Clijsters Charleston: Hénin-Hardenne Rome: Clijsters Eastbourne: Rubin ’s-Hertogenbosch: Clijsters Stanford: Clijsters San Diego: Hénin-Hardenne Los Angeles: Clijsters Bali: Dementieva Shanghai: Dementieva Moscow: Myskina Luxembourg: Clijsters Philadelphia: Mauresmo Won Title Without Facing a Top Ten Player (Total of 6): Strasbourg: Farina Elia (Top Opponent: Myskina/#11) Vienna: Suarez (Top Opponent: Dokic/#11) Birmingham: Maleeva (Top Opponent: Daniilidou/#14) Canadian Open: Hénin-Hardenne (Top Opponent: Dementieva/#15) Zurich: Hénin-Hardenne (Top Opponent: Zvonareva/#12) Linz: Sugiyama (Top Opponent: Zvonareva/#12) Won Title Without Facing a Top Fifteen Player (Total of 1): Sopot: Pistolesi (Top Opponent: Schnyder/#19) Won Title Without Facing a Top Twenty Player (Total of 6): Gold Coast: Déchy (Top Opponent: Bovina/#26) Auckland: Daniilidou (Top Opponent: Suarez/#27) Memphis: Raymond (Top Opponent: Coetzer/#23) Bogota: Zuluaga (Top Opponent: Suarez/#26) Sarasota: Myskina (Top Opponent: Dementieva/#21) Madrid: Rubin (Top Opponent: Suarez/#30 Won Title Without Facing a Top Thirty Player (Total of 5): Hobart: Molik (Top Opponent: Srebotnik/#35) Canberra: Shaughnessy (Top Opponent: Schiavone/#40) Doha: Myskina (Top Opponent: Likhovtseva/#36) Palermo: Safina (Top Opponent: Schiavone/#34) Pattaya City: Nagyova (Top Opponent: Tanasugarn/#34) Won Title Without Facing a Top Fifty Player (Total of 10): Hyderabad: Tanasugarn (Top Opponent: Tulyaganova/#57) Acapulco: Coetzer (Top Opponent: Loit/#54) Casablanca: Grande (Top Opponent: Marrero/#85) Estoril: Serna (Top Opponent: Razzano/#65) Budapest: Serna (Top Opponent: Molik/#54) Bol: Zvonareva (Top Opponent: Cervanova/#85) Helsinki: Pistolesi (Top Opponent: Sprem/#67) Japan Open: Sharapova (Top Opponent: Morigami/#64) Tashkent: Ruano Pascual (Top Opponent: Obata/#60) Quebec City: Sharapova (Top Opponent: Granville/#53)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 36 Number of Tournament Wins for Top 25 Players The following table shows tournament wins by the Top 25. Tournaments are categorized as major (Tier II or higher) or minor (Tier III or lower). The tournaments are listed, with their level, on the next line. Rank Name Major Wins Minor Wins Total Wins 6 Capriati 1 1 New Haven (II) 2 Clijsters 7 2 9 Sydney (II), Indian Wells (I), Rome (I), ’s-Hertogenbosch (III), Stanford (II), Los Angeles (II), Filderstadt (II), Luxembourg (III), Los Angeles Championships (Champ) 25 Coetzer 1 1 Acapulco (III) 5 Davenport 1 1 Pan Paciﬁc (I) 8 Dementieva 2 1 3 Amelia Island (II), Bali (III), Shanghai (II) 24 Farina Elia 1 1 Strasbourg (III) 2 Hénin-Hardenne 8 8 Dubai (II), Charleston (I), Berlin (I), Roland Garros (Slam), San Diego (II), Canadian Open (I), U. S. Open (Slam), Zurich (I) 4 Mauresmo 2 2 Warsaw (II), Philadelphia (II) 7 Myskina 2 2 4 Doha (III), Sarasota (IV), Leipzig (II), Moscow (I) 16 Pistolesi 2 2 Sopot (III), Helsinki (IV) 9 Rubin 1 1 2 Madrid (III), Eastbourne (II) 22 Serna 2 2 Estoril (IV), Budapest (V) 17 Shaughnessy 1 1 Canberra (V) 14 Suarez 1 1 Vienna (III) 10 Sugiyama 2 2 Scottsdale (II), Linz (II) 3 S. Williams 4 4 Australian Open (Slam), Paris (II), Miami (I), Wimbledon (Slam) 11 V. Williams 1 1 Antwerp (II) 13 Zvonareva 1 1 Bol (III) Seven year-end Top 25 players did not win any WTA events in 2003: Bovina, Dokic, Hantuchova, Martinez, Petrova, Schiavone, Schnyder (there were five title-less Top 25 players in 2001 and eight in 2002). Other highlight players without titles were Bedanova, C. Fernandez, Kournikova, Krasnoroutskaya, Kremer, Kuznetsova, Majoli, Panova, Pierce, Schett, Seles, Stevenson, and Tulyaganova; highlight players below #25 with titles were Daniilidou (Auckland/IV), Déchy (Gold Coast/III), Maleeva (Birmingham/III)), Raymond (Memphis/III), and Tanasugarn (Hyderabad/IV)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 37 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. Sharapova won Sea Island; this is not counted as a title, but does count toward her event total). WTA Rank Player Tournaments Won Tournaments Played Percent Won 3 Serena Williams 4 7 57% 1 Justine Hénin-Hardenne 8 18 44% 2 Kim Clijsters 9 21 43% 7 Anastasia Myskina 4 24 17% 11 Venus Williams 1 6 17% 32 Maria Sharapova 2 16 13% 4 Amélie Mauresmo 2 17 12% 8 Elena Dementieva 3 27 11% 9 Chanda Rubin 2 21 10% 16 Anna Pistolesi 2 23 9% 10 Ai Sugiyama 2 26 8% 22 Magui Serna 2 27 7% 5 Lindsay Davenport 1 16 6% 54 Dinara Saﬁna 1 16 6% 6 Jennifer Capriati 1 18 6% 55 Virginia Ruano Pascual 1 18 6% 28 Lisa Raymond 1 19 5% 29 Nathalie Déchy 1 19 5% 25 Amanda Coetzer 1 20 5% 35 Alicia Molik 1 21 5% 38 Fabiola Zuluaga 1 21 5% 30 Magdalena Maleeva 1 22 5% 91 Henrieta Nagyova 1 22 5% 13 Vera Zvonareva 1 23 4% 14 Paola Suarez 1 24 4% 17 Meghann Shaughnessy 1 24 4% 34 Tamarine Tanasugarn 1 24 4% 24 Silvia Farina Elia 1 26 4% 26 Eleni Daniilidou 1 26 4% 70 Rita Grande 1 29 3% 12 Nadia Petrova 0 23 0% 15 Jelena Dokic 0 30 0% 18 Conchita Martinez 0 21 0% 19 Daniela Hantuchova 0 23 0% 20 Francesca Schiavone 0 23 0% 21 Elena Bovina 0 22 0% 23 Patty Schnyder 0 23 0% 27 Lina Krasnoroutskaya 0 22 0%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 38 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,” 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 Bedanova, for instance, played four Slams, and nineteen total events, so the four events represent 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, Venus Williams (both injured for much of this year, but who always play absurdly rich schedules anyway), Capriati (who last year was #1 in richness-of-schedule), Hénin- Hardenne, and Davenport. The weakest schedules were played by Kremer, Kournikova (those both influenced by injury), Tulyaganova, Tanasugarn, and Majoli; if we look only at year-end Top 25 players, those with the weakest schedules were Serna, Zvonareva, Schiavone, Schnyder, and Suarez. Overall, except for the Williams Sisters and perhaps Capriati and Tanasugarn, there weren’t many absurd schedules played. If we wish to look at the “typical” player, based on the highlight players, we find that she played 19.7% of her events at Slams, .9% at the Championships, 28.9% at the Tier I events, 32.6% at the Tier II level, 9.9% at the Tier III level, 4.8% at the Tier IV level, 1.6% at the Tier V level, and 1.7% 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 24 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 20231000 10 20331000 12 20341100 14 30451100 16 30552100 18 40562100 20 40672100 22 40672100 24 50782100 26 50883100 28 60893100 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 Kremer (who didn’t have much choice), followed by Venus, Serena, Tulyaganova, and Hantuchova (that one surprised me. But she’s too heavy on Tier II events). The players with the most typical schedules were Myskina (who, except for the Championships, had deviations of less than one part in thirty for all tiers), Schnyder, Bedanova, Rubin, and Bovina. But enough of this. The actual data follows:

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 39 Slams Champ Tier I Tier II Tier III Tier IV Tier V Chall Total Mean Median Bedanova 4 (21%) 0 (0%) 6 (32%) 6 (32%) 1 (5%) 1 (5%) 1 (5%) 0 (0%) 19 1.58 I Bovina 4 (18%) 0 (0%) 7 (32%) 8 (36%) 3 (14%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 22 1.45 I/II Capriati 4 (22%) 1 (6%) 5 (28%) 8 (44%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 18 1.17 I Clijsters 4 (19%) 1 (5%) 6 (29%) 8 (38%) 2 (10%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 21 1.33 I Coetzer 4 (20%) 0 (0%) 8 (40%) 6 (30%) 2 (10%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 20 1.30 I Daniilidou 4 (15%) 0 (0%) 7 (27%) 11 (42%) 3 (12%) 1 (4%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 26 1.62 II Davenport 4 (25%) 0 (0%) 4 (25%) 8 (50%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 16 1.25 I/II Déchy 4 (21%) 0 (0%) 6 (32%) 5 (26%) 2 (11%) 1 (5%) 1 (5%) 0 (0%) 19 1.63 I Dementieva 4 (15%) 1 (4%) 8 (30%) 8 (30%) 5 (19%) 1 (4%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 27 1.59 II Dokic 3 (10%) 0 (0%) 9 (30%) 14 (47%) 3 (10%) 1 (3%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 30 1.67 II Farina Elia 4 (15%) 0 (0%) 8 (31%) 10 (38%) 4 (15%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 26 1.54 II Fernandez, Clarisa 4 (19%) 0 (0%) 6 (29%) 3 (14%) 3 (14%) 4 (19%) 1 (5%) 0 (0%) 21 2.00 II Hantuchova 4 (17%) 0 (0%) 7 (30%) 12 (52%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 23 1.35 II Hénin-Hardenne 4 (22%) 1 (6%) 5 (28%) 7 (39%) 1 (6%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 18 1.22 I Kournikova 1 (14%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 1 (14%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 7 3.43 II Krasnoroutskaya 4 (18%) 0 (0%) 5 (23%) 7 (32%) 4 (18%) 1 (5%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 22 1.95 II Kremer 1 (33%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 3 4.00 IV Kuznetsova 4 (22%) 0 (0%) 7 (39%) 5 (28%) 2 (11%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 18 1.28 I Majoli 4 (24%) 0 (0%) 5 (29%) 3 (18%) 2 (12%) 1 (6%) 1 (6%) 1 (6%) 17 2.00 I Maleeva 4 (18%) 0 (0%) 7 (32%) 9 (41%) 2 (9%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 22 1.41 I/II Martinez 4 (19%) 0 (0%) 5 (24%) 8 (38%) 3 (14%) 1 (5%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 21 1.62 II Mauresmo 2 (12%) 1 (6%) 7 (41%) 6 (35%) 1 (6%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 17 1.29 I Myskina 4 (17%) 1 (4%) 7 (29%) 8 (33%) 3 (13%) 1 (4%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 24 1.50 I/II Panova 1 (8%) 0 (0%) 5 (38%) 5 (38%) 0 (0%) 2 (15%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 13 1.77 II Petrova 4 (17%) 0 (0%) 8 (35%) 8 (35%) 2 (9%) 1 (4%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 23 1.48 I Pierce 4 (24%) 0 (0%) 5 (29%) 3 (18%) 2 (12%) 3 (18%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 17 1.71 I Pistolesi 4 (17%) 0 (0%) 8 (35%) 6 (26%) 2 (9%) 3 (13%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 23 1.65 I Raymond 4 (21%) 0 (0%) 4 (21%) 9 (47%) 2 (11%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 19 1.47 II Rubin 4 (19%) 1 (5%) 6 (29%) 7 (33%) 3 (14%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 21 1.38 I Schett 4 (16%) 0 (0%) 6 (24%) 9 (36%) 4 (16%) 1 (4%) 1 (4%) 0 (0%) 25 1.80 II Schiavone 4 (17%) 0 (0%) 6 (26%) 9 (39%) 2 (9%) 0 (0%) 2 (9%) 0 (0%) 23 1.74 II Schnyder 4 (17%) 0 (0%) 6 (26%) 8 (35%) 3 (13%) 2 (9%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 23 1.70 II Seles 2 (29%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 2 (29%) 1 (14%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 1.29 I Serna 4 (15%) 0 (0%) 7 (26%) 10 (37%) 2 (7%) 1 (4%) 3 (11%) 0 (0%) 27 1.93 II Shaughnessy 4 (17%) 0 (0%) 8 (33%) 10 (42%) 1 (4%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 0 (0%) 24 1.50 I/II Stevenson 4 (15%) 0 (0%) 7 (27%) 12 (46%) 3 (12%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 26 1.54 II Suarez 4 (17%) 0 (0%) 8 (33%) 6 (25%) 4 (17%) 2 (8%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 24 1.67 I/II Sugiyama 4 (15%) 1 (4%) 6 (23%) 12 (46%) 2 (8%) 1 (4%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 26 1.54 II Tanasugarn 4 (17%) 0 (0%) 5 (21%) 6 (25%) 6 (25%) 2 (8%) 1 (4%) 0 (0%) 24 2.00 II Tulyaganova 3 (18%) 0 (0%) 5 (29%) 2 (12%) 4 (24%) 2 (12%) 1 (6%) 0 (0%) 17 2.00 II Williams, Serena 3 (43%) 0 (0%) 3 (43%) 1 (14%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 0.71 I Williams, Venus 3 (50%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 2 (33%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 0.83 [Champ] Zvonareva 4 (17%) 0 (0%) 7 (30%) 6 (26%) 4 (17%) 0 (0%) 2 (9%) 0 (0%) 23 1.78 II

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 40 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. C C D D D H H M M M P P R S S S S S V Z A L A E O A É A A Y E I U C H U U V P I V M K N N R U S T S B H A A G W W O R J E E I T I T R K R T I I U R I I I N I S N N C U N I E I O O N A G E Y L L A week A T P T C N S N V L V H Z A L L R of T E O I H E M A A E O N M I I E 1/05/03 39.25 63 20 40 34 1 55 1/11/03 1 350 220 1 64 126 11 95 80 116 1 1 28 1/25/03 2 432 156 2 268 460 2 282 110 92 118 2 228 80 48 1048 702 2 2/2/03 363 86 77 11162 1146 2/9/03 156 57 57 183 1 48 284 2/16/03 235 1 119 105 36 152 1 96 327 2/23/03 113 324 92 100 72 48 61 18 3/2/03 170111 33 95 151 1 358 1 3/16/03 193 459 319 59 163 189 116 1 6.25 1 112 29 88 1 82 133 3/30/03 315 235 57 1 118 1 101 64 1 8.25 76 255 24 195 36 36 493 57 1 4/6/03 42 1 35 161 42.5 20 75 1 4/13/03 164 63 100 92 420 50 1 31 57 69 305 127 4/20/03 136 229 386 33 68 127 6 35 40 29 5/4/03 119 1 354 71 100 183 131 5/11/03 177 295 1 42 87 440 1 161 1 27 61 1 25 31 1 1 157 5/18/03 83 402 148 159 367 89 77 48 1 111178 170 5/24/03 1 1 131 150 48 79 6/8/03 110 646 174 2 40 40 1156 288 238 48 510 36 232 36 84 62 160 506 136 334 6/15/05 40 38 26 175 67 6/22/03 121 208 1 48 1 64 114 233 24 1 106 88 291 1 1 27 7/5/03 292 440 206 110 76 48 370 80 188 80 2 88 130 2 184 144 1110 806 126 7/13/03 23 7/27/03 162 264 64 1 1 129 29 8/3/03 1 237 162 44 44 39 391 139148 188 100 23111 8/10/03 298 230 1 1 27 1 117 114 35 58 128 8/17/03 57 235 50 46 401 100 50 58 29 236 108 8/23/03 339 210 154 48 1 29 127 1 127 1 68 29 9/7/03 424 750 408 122 48 84 1074 40 218 210 18422268 196 214 130 80 9/14/03 213 1 23 129 9/21/03 291 27 1 157 98 9/28/03 126 29 40 159 420 61 11 10/5/03 1 151 1 286 379 1 189 92 1 32 94 10/12/03 1 383 90 113 144247 31 101 44 1164 1164 1 10/19/03 149 1 369 1 403 11 192 61 1 17361 100 10/26/03 212 82 1 72 202 59 125 1 80 315 131 11/2/03 296 188 143 53 61 115 1 11/10/03 296 707 110 311 458 156 164 142

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 41 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 C C D D D H H M M M P P R S S S S S V Z o A L A E O A É A A Y E I U C H U U V u P I V M K N N R U S T S B H A A G W W O r R J E E I T I T R K R T I I U R I I I N n I S N N C U N I E I O O N A G E Y L L A A T P T C N S N V L V H Z A L L R # T E O I H E M A A E O N M I I E 1 424 750 408 386 369 268 1156 288 458 420 510 189 291 268 228 236 358 1110 806 334 2 339 707 363 291 119 119 1074 233 367 379 202 188 255 130 196 214 315 1048 702 157 3 315 646 319 235 118 92 460 189 354 282 192 127 232 129 195 184 178 506 327 133 4 296 459 230 213 100 87 440 159 296 210 184 117 164 114 151 175 160 493 183 131 5 292 440 229 156 82 84 420 92 286 188 148 92 162 100 116 80 144 305 136 131 6 193 432 220 154 77 68 403 80 238 188 143 88 157 95 88 80 142 284 57 127 7 177 402 210 151 76 64 401 50 218 161 110 76 150 92 84 75 130 170 126 8 162 383 206 122 64 64 391 40 183 156 106 71 129 80 61 73 128 108 9 136 350 174 113 57 63 370 36 161 152 80 63 125 48 57 69 115 100 10 121 298 164 110 50 57 324 35 127 89 77 61 118 36 40 62 98 94 11 113 295 162 110 48 48 311 31 116 72 61 61 112 29 35 61 96 80 12 110 264 156 86 48 48 247 29 101 72 58 59 100 29 35 58 82 79 13 83 237 90 63 44 46 159 27 100 50 42.5 48 95 25 31 48 68 67 14 2 235 57 59 42 44 127 23 100 48 39.25 36 88 24 29 40 64 55 15 1 235 1 48 40 40 126 2 64 44 27 31 64 23 2 36 61 29 16 1 212 1 44 38 40 114 124398.25 26 53 23 1 34 48 29 17 1 208 42 33 39 105 1 1 31 6.25 20 33 20 1 1 48 28 18 1 170 40 29 1 101 1162221146 18 19 149 2 27 1 1112111136 2 20 126 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 32 1 21 57 1 11 1111111127 1 22 1 11 1 11 1111 1 23 1 11 1 11 1111 1 24 1 1 1 111 25 1 1 1 26 1 1 1 27 1 1 28 1 29 1 30 1

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 42 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 17”: This system adds up the total points from all the tournaments a player played, whether the number of events be 7 (for Serena Williams) or 30 (for Jelena Dokic or Tina Pisnik). It is essentially the system used by the WTA in 1997, except for minor differences in the point table. Total Points Ranking (1997 Ranking System) Total Points Rank Player Total Tournaments WTA Rank 1 Clijsters 7055 21 2 2 Hénin-Hardenne 6729 18 1 3 Williams, Serena 3916 7 3 4 Mauresmo 3194 17 4 5 Davenport 2990 16 5 6 Capriati 2767 18 6 7 Myskina 2588 24 7 8 Dementieva 2434 27 8 9 Sugiyama 2381 26 10 10 Rubin 2333 21 9 11 Williams, Venus 2211 6 11 12 Petrova 2005.25 23 12 13 Zvonareva 1832 23 13 14 Suarez 1533 24 14 15 Dokic 1472 30 15 16 Pistolesi 1361 23 16 17 Shaughnessy 1357 24 17 18 Martinez 1320 21 18 19 Hantuchova 1277 23 19 20 Schiavone 1272 23 20 21 Serna 1257.25 27 22 22 Bovina 1255 22 21 23 Schnyder 1186 23 23 24 Daniilidou 1168.75 26 26 25 Farina Elia 1160.75 26 24 26 Coetzer 1142 20 25 27 Krasnoroutskaya 1134.75 22 27 28 Raymond 1113 19 28 29 Déchy 1097 19 29 30 Maleeva 1069 22 30 31 Pisnik 1055.5 30 31 32 Sharapova 1024.25 16 32 33 Pierce 969 17 33 34 Tanasugarn 965.75 24 34 35 Molik 937 21 35 Best 17 usually not differ much from Total Points, but it does this year: Note that we have a change at the very top, there Kim Clijsters overtakes Justine Hénin-Hardenne. But we don’t see another change until #9.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 43 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 1 Hénin-Hardenne 6729 18 373.8 1 2 Clijsters 7055 21 336.0 2 3Williams, Serena 3916 7 279.7 3 4Mauresmo 3194 17 187.9 4 5Davenport 2990 16 186.9 5 6Williams, Venus 2211 6 157.9 11 7 Capriati 2767 18 153.7 6 8 Rubin 2333 21 111.1 9 9Myskina 2588 24 107.8 7 10 Sugiyama 2381 26 91.6 10 11 Dementieva 2434 27 90.1 8 12 Petrova 2005.25 23 87.2 12 13 Zvonareva 1832 23 79.7 13 14 Sharapova 1024.25 16 64.0 32 15 Suarez 1533 24 63.9 14 16 Martinez 1320 21 62.9 18 17 Pistolesi 1361 23 59.2 16 18 Raymond 1113 19 58.6 28 19 Déchy 1097 19 57.7 29 20 Coetzer 1142 20 57.1 25 21 Bovina 1255 22 57.0 21 22 Pierce 969 17 57.0 33 23 Shaughnessy 1357 24 56.5 17 24 Hantuchova 1277 23 55.5 19 25 Schiavone 1272 23 55.3 20 26 Krasnoroutskaya 1134.75 22 51.6 27 27 Schnyder 1186 23 51.6 23 28 Kuznetsova 928 18 51.6 36 29 Dokic 1472 30 49.1 15 30 Maleeva 1069 22 48.6 30 31 Serna 1257.25 27 46.6 22 32 Daniilidou 1168.75 26 45.0 26 Farina Elia 1160.75 26 44.6 24 Molik 937 21 44.6 35 Seles 599 7 42.8 60 Tulyaganova 711 17 41.8 50 Zuluaga 852.75 21 40.6 38 Tanasugarn 965.75 24 40.2 34 Most years, this ranking produces major changes; there have been years (e.g. 1998, 2001) when it changed the top ranking, and it consistently changes the Top Ten. This time, surprisingly, we see no changes in the Top Five. But we do see a big change in the Top Ten as Venus Williams moves up to #6, bouncing Elena Dementieva down to #11. We also see that Monica Seles, #60 in the WTA rankings, is around #35. But perhaps the biggest shock is at #14. Notice where Maria Sharapova stands!

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 44 But ththe old divisor has a problem: Players these days are expected to play at least 17 events — meaning they must play more weak events. The Williams Sisters blatantly ignore this, but most others try 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 1 Hénin-Hardenne 6729 18 373.8 1 2 Clijsters 7055 21 336.0 2 3Williams, Serena 3916 7 230.4 3 4Mauresmo 3194 17 187.9 4 5Davenport 2990 16 175.9 5 6 Capriati 2767 18 153.7 6 7Williams, Venus 2211 6 130.1 11 8 Rubin 2333 21 111.1 9 9Myskina 2588 24 107.8 7 10 Sugiyama 2381 26 91.6 10 11 Dementieva 2434 27 90.1 8 12 Petrova 2005.25 23 87.2 12 13 Zvonareva 1832 23 79.7 13 14 Suarez 1533 24 63.9 14 15 Martinez 1320 21 62.9 18 16 Sharapova 1024.25 16 60.3 32 17 Pistolesi 1361 23 59.2 16 18 Raymond 1113 19 58.6 28 19 Déchy 1097 19 57.7 29 20 Coetzer 1142 20 57.1 25 21 Bovina 1255 22 57.0 21 22 Pierce 969 17 57.0 33 23 Shaughnessy 1357 24 56.5 17 24 Hantuchova 1277 23 55.5 19 25 Schiavone 1272 23 55.3 20 26 Krasnoroutskaya 1134.75 22 51.6 27 27 Schnyder 1186 23 51.6 23 28 Kuznetsova 928 18 51.6 36 29 Dokic 1472 30 49.1 15 30 Maleeva 1069 22 48.6 30 31 Serna 1257.25 27 46.6 22 32 Daniilidou 1168.75 26 45.0 26 Farina Elia 1160.75 26 44.6 24 Molik 937 21 44.6 35 Tulyaganova 711 17 41.8 50 Zuluaga 852.75 21 40.6 38 Tanasugarn 965.75 24 40.2 34 Mandula 819.75 21 39.0 40 Srebotnik 847.5 24 35.3 39 Seles 599 7 35.2 60 This ranking typically resembles the preceding except that injured players lose ground. So it is here; note, e.g. that Venus Williams falls from #6 under the minimum-14 divisor to #7 here.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 45 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 1 Hénin-Hardenne 6283 1 2 Clijsters 5898 2 3Williams, Serena 3916 3 4Mauresmo 3105 4 5Davenport 2988 5 6 Capriati 2763 6 7Myskina 2467 7 8 Dementieva 2249 8 9Williams, V 2211 11 10 Rubin 2178 9 11 Sugiyama 2078 10 12 Petrova 1952.75 12 13 Zvonareva 1722 13 14 Suarez 1455 14 15 Shaughnessy 1346 17 16 Martinez 1312 18 17 Dokic 1294 15 18 Pistolesi 1276 16 19 Bovina 1246 21 20 Schiavone 1199 20 21 Hantuchova 1152 19 22 Schnyder 1144 23 23 Farina Elia 1138 24 24 Coetzer 1136 25 25 Serna 1099 22 26 Raymond 1089 28 27 Krasnoroutskaya 1088.25 27 28 Daniilidou 1059 26 29 Déchy 1035 29 30 Sharapova 1021.25 32 Maleeva 998 30 Pisnik 980.75 31 Pierce 966 33 Molik 928 35 Kuznetsova 923 36 Tanasugarn 921.75 34 Seles 599 60 Stevenson 458 82 Panova 296 119 Overall, this isn’t very different from Best 17; the first change is at #9. This contrasts with 2001, where the difference between Best 14 and Best 17 changed the #1 ranking: Capriati overtook Davenport for the #1 ranking. This is the ultimate problem with best-however-many rankings: If the number of events is high, it rewarsd players who play a lot; if the number is low; it rewards a few big results over consistency.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 46 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 slotted system counts a player’s results in Slams, Masters Series (the equivalent of the WTA’s Tier I events), and five other events, plus the year-end Championships if one qualifies. In the table below, “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 best other events. Slotted WTA Player Slam LA Champ Tier I Optional Total Rank Rank Name Points Points Points Points Slotted Pts 11Hénin-Hardenne 3060 311 1765 1248 6384 22Clijsters 2268 707 1597 1532 6104 33Williams, Serena 2664 0 968 284 3916 44Mauresmo 456 458 1095 1061 3070 55Davenport 944 0 903 1051 2898 66Capriati 828 296 769 871 2764 77Myskina 728 156 522 993 2399 811Williams, Venus 1644 0 57 510 2211 98Dementieva 236 110 597 1200 2143 10 10 Sugiyama 482 142 404 1014 2042 11 9 Rubin 440 164 532 852 1988 12 12 Petrova 884 0 370.5 660 1914.5 13 13 Zvonareva 542 0 720 463 1725 14 14 Suarez 540 0 418 449 1407 15 15 Dokic 164 0 759 370 1293 16 17 Shaughnessy 510 0 375 403 1288 17 18 Martinez 410 0 400 427 1237 18 21 Bovina 284 0 502 429 1215 19 16 Pistolesi 132 0 468 591 1191 20 20 Schiavone 436 0 200 518 1154 21 19 Hantuchova 440 0 338 372 1150 22 22 Serna 296 0 387.25 437 1120.25 23 25 Coetzer 278 0 308 514 1100 24 29 Déchy 276 0 327 464 1067 25 24 FarinaEli 458 0 86 498 1042 26 Daniilidou 282 0 247 495 1024 23 Schnyder 320 0 232 463 1015 27 Krasnoroutskaya 113 0 527 353 993 28 Raymond 196 0 288 499.75 983.75 33 Pierce 388 0 177 367 932 36 Kuznetsova 310 0 276.25 339.75 926 30 Maleeva 260 0 155 507 922 34 Tanasugarn 314 0 191 313 818 60 Seles 42 0 278 279 599

Because it is so very different, the effects of this ranking system vary from year to year. This year and last, its effects were minimal. In 2001, however, seven of the top ten positions would have changes hands, including the #1 ranking.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 47 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. Zvonareva, Petrova) played large numbers of low-tier (Tier III-V) tournaments and qualifying rounds. Since they faced low-level opposition, their wins, quite properly, do not count as much toward the rankings. Others simply 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; exhibitions and non-point-bearing tournaments (e.g. Fed Cup) are excluded. Also, walkovers are not calculated as wins or losses. It should be noted, too, that this list is not formally comprehensive; it omits player who spent their time primarily in Challengers (e.g. Karolina Sprem, who had something like 30 Challenger wins this year but had only 16 WTA main draw wins plus some wins in qualifying). Only the Top 35 plus highlight players have been examined to compile this list. Finally, observe that 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 As a final footnote, we must mention the curiosity of Alicia Molik. She is listed by the WTA as having won the Gifu Challenger this year. This appears to be by confusion with 2001, when she did win it. Molik did not receive points for that event. The list below shows what I calculate must have been her record, based on actual results, in order to earn the points she earned.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 48 Rank Name Wins Losses WTA Rank 1 Clijsters 86 12 2 2 Hénin-Hardenne 72 11 1 3T Davenport 47 15 5 3T Dementieva 47 25 8 5T Mauresmo 45 16 4 5T Zvonareva 45 22 13 5T Petrova 45 23 12 8 Sugiyama 44 25 10 9 Rubin 43 20 9 10T Capriati 42 18 6 10T Myskina 42 21 7 12T Molik (see note above) 39 20 36 12T Serna 39 26 22 14 Sharapova 38 13 32 15T Pistolesi 37 21 16 15T Suarez 37 23 14 15T Pisnik 37 29 31 18T Williams, Serena 36 3 3 18T Krasnoroutskaya 36 22 27 20 Daniilidou 34 25 26 21T Shaughnessy 32 22 17 21T Schiavone 32 23 20 23T Déchy 31 17 29 23T Raymond 31 18 28 23T Tanasugarn 31 23 34 26T Martinez 29 21 18 26T Likhovtseva 29 28 37 28 Dokic 28 30 15 29T Coetzer 27 19 25 29T Maleeva 27 21 30 29T Farina Elia 27 26 24 Kuznetsova 26 18 36 Hantuchova 26 23 19 Schnyder 26 23 23 Bovina 25 22 21 Williams, Venus 24 5 11 Pierce 23 17 33 Tulyaganova 23 17 50 Schett 16 25 79 Fernandez, Clarisa 15 20 90 Stevenson 13 26 82 Seles 10 7 60 Majoli 8 16 131 Panova 7 13 119 Bedanova 7 19 156 Kournikova 4 6 305 Kremer 1 3 389

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 49 Winning Percentage Based on the data on wins above, we can also calculate these players’ win percentages. This of course shows Serena Williams as #1 — hardly a surprise. It’s perhaps a little more startling to find Venus Williams at #4, since she won only one title — but she tended to go deep at the few tournaments she played. Bigger surprises come at #6 (Sharapova, though that is largely the result of Challenger and qualifying wins; she probably won’t get that many cheap wins next year, and even her titles were both Tier III events) and #13 (Molik). We also see Monica Seles at #24 — though the surprise there is that she isn’t higher. We do note some high- ranked players with rather miserable percentages: Daniela Hantuchova is Top 20 according to the WTA but no better than #35 in win percentage, while Jelena Dokic is Top 15 but has a losing record.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 50 Rank Name Wins Losses Win% WTA Rank 1Williams, Serena 36 3 92.3% 3 2 Clijsters 86 12 87.8% 2 3 Hénin-Hardenne 72 11 86.7% 1 4Williams, Venus 24 5 82.8% 11 5Davenport 47 15 75.8% 5 6 Sharapova 38 13 74.5% 32 7Mauresmo 45 16 73.8% 4 8 Capriati 42 18 70.0% 6 9 Rubin 43 20 68.3% 9 10 Zvonareva 45 22 67.2% 13 11 Myskina 42 21 66.7% 7 12 Petrova 45 23 66.2% 12 13 Molik 39 20 66.1% 36 14 Dementieva 47 25 65.3% 8 15 Déchy 31 17 64.6% 29 16 Pistolesi 37 21 63.8% 16 17 Sugiyama 44 25 63.8% 10 18 Raymond 31 18 63.3% 28 19 Krasnoroutskaya 36 22 62.1% 27 20 Suarez 37 23 61.7% 14 21 Serna 39 26 60.0% 22 22 Shaughnessy 32 22 59.3% 17 23 Kuznetsova 26 18 59.1% 36 24 Seles 10 7 58.8% 60 25 Coetzer 27 19 58.7% 25 Schiavone 32 23 58.2% 20 Martinez 29 21 58.0% 18 Daniilidou 34 25 57.6% 26 Tulyaganova 23 17 57.5% 50 Pierce 23 17 57.5% 33 Tanasugarn 31 23 57.4% 34 Maleeva 27 21 56.3% 30 Pisnik 37 29 56.1% 31 Bovina 25 22 53.2% 21 Hantuchova 26 23 53.1% 19 Schnyder 26 23 53.1% 23 Farina Elia 27 26 50.9% 24 Likhovtseva 29 28 50.9% 37 Dokic 28 30 48.3% 15 Fernandez, Clarisa 15 20 42.9% 90 Kournikova 4 6 40.0% 305 Schett 16 25 39.0% 79 Panova 7 13 35.0% 119 Stevenson 13 26 33.3% 82 Majoli 8 16 33.3% 131 Bedanova 7 19 26.9% 156 Kremer 1 3 25.0% 389

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 51 Divisor Rankings, No Slam Bonus In terms of strength of field, the Slams are no stronger than Miami or the Los Angeles Championships — or even San Diego. But the Slams award double points — at Miami, you earn 325 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 Zurich as does winning Filderstadt? We note that, as so often this year, the Top Five are the same as the WTA’s, but Venus is back in the Top Ten. Rank Player Points Tournaments Score WTA Rank 1 Hénin-Hardenne 5199 18 288.8 1 2 Clijsters 5921 21 282.0 2 3Williams, Serena 2584 7 184.6 3 4Mauresmo 2966 17 174.5 4 5Davenport 2518 16 157.4 5 6 Capriati 2353 18 130.7 6 7 Rubin 2113 21 100.6 9 8Williams, Venus 1389 6 99.2 11 9Myskina 2224 24 92.7 7 10 Dementieva 2316 27 85.8 8 11 Sugiyama 2140 26 82.3 10 12 Petrova 1563.25 23 68.0 12 13 Zvonareva 1561 23 67.9 13 14 Pistolesi 1295 23 56.3 16 15 Raymond 1015 19 53.4 28 16 Martinez 1115 21 53.1 18 17 Sharapova 847.25 16 53.0 32 18 Suarez 1263 24 52.6 14 19 Bovina 1113 22 50.6 21 20 Déchy 959 19 50.5 29 21 Coetzer 1003 20 50.2 25 22 Krasnoroutskaya 1078.25 22 49.0 27 23 Dokic 1390 30 46.3 15 24 Hantuchova 1057 23 46.0 19 25 Shaughnessy 1102 24 45.9 17 26 Schiavone 1054 23 45.8 20 27 Pierce 775 17 45.6 33 28 Schnyder 1026 23 44.6 23 29 Kuznetsova 773 18 42.9 36 30 Maleeva 939 22 42.7 30 Seles 578 7 41.3 60 Serna 1109.25 27 41.1 22 Daniilidou 1027.75 26 39.5 26 Molik 817 21 38.9 35 Tulyaganova 630 17 37.1 50 Farina Elia 931.75 26 35.8 24 Zuluaga 734.75 21 35.0 38 Tanasugarn 808.75 24 33.7 34 Pisnik 937.5 30 31.3 31

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 52 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 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, San Diego, 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 2003, 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 we don’t care about early losses. 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 (we also show the Majors points earned at each event): Major WTA Major Syd- AO Eric Rome RG Wim SD USO Fild LA Rank Rank Player Points ney Cham 12Clijsters 32 5115313355 21Hénin-Hard 22 1 1 515531 33S. Williams 15 5 5 5 411V. Williams 8 3 1 1 3 54Mauresmo 6 3 3 6T 6 Capriati 5 3 1 1 6T 5 Davenport 5 3 1 1 8T 21 Bovina 1 1 8T 36 Kuznetsova 1 1 8T 119 Panova 1 1 8T 12 Petrova 1 1 8T 33 Pierce 1 1 8T 9 Rubin 1 1 8T 10 Sugiyama 1 1 This is a total of fourteen players; which is at the lower end of the typical range. 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. It is fascinating to note that Kim Clijsters, criticised for her lack of big results in 2003, has the highest Majors total recorded since I invented the statistic! Though, to put this in perspective, Martina Hingis earned 43 points in 1997,

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 53 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 1 Clijsters 4672 2 2 Hénin-Hardenne 4363 1 3Williams, Serena 2429 3 4Mauresmo 2175 4 5Davenport 2010 5 6 Capriati 1931 6 7Myskina 1701 7 8 Rubin 1650 9 9 Dementieva 1548 8 10 Sugiyama 1508 10 11 Williams, Venus 1396 11 12 Petrova 1167.25 12 13 Zvonareva 1163 13 14 Dokic 1028 15 15 Suarez 963 14 16 Hantuchova 918 19 17 Pistolesi 915 16 18 Martinez 837 18 19 Schiavone 830 20 20 Shaughnessy 828 17 21 Serna 807.25 22 22 Schnyder 801 23 23 Daniilidou 798.75 26 24 Déchy 750 29 25 Farina Elia 737.75 24 Raymond 724 28 Coetzer 723 25 Bovina 717 21 Maleeva 709 30 Krasnoroutskaya 670.75 27 Sharapova 651.25 32 Pisnik 612.5 31 Tanasugarn 610.75 34 Srebotnik 587.5 39 Likhovtseva 584.5 37

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 54 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 1Williams, Serena 347.0 3 2 Hénin-Hardenne 242.4 1 3Williams, Venus 232.7 11 4 Clijsters 222.5 2 5Mauresmo 127.9 4 6Davenport 125.6 5 7 Capriati 107.3 6 8 Rubin 78.6 9 9Myskina 70.9 7 10 Seles 62.4 60 11 Sugiyama 58.0 10 12 Dementieva 57.3 8 13 Petrova 50.8 12 14 Zvonareva 50.6 13 15 Sharapova 40.7 32 16 Suarez 40.1 14 17 Hantuchova 39.9 19 18 Martinez 39.9 18 19 Pistolesi 39.8 16 20 Déchy 39.5 29 21 Raymond 38.1 28 22 Coetzer 36.2 25 23 Schiavone 36.1 20 24 Schnyder 34.8 23 25 Shaughnessy 34.5 17 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 1 Hénin-Hardenne 242.4 1 2 Clijsters 222.5 2 3Williams, Serena 173.5 3 4Mauresmo 127.9 4 5Davenport 125.6 5 6 Capriati 107.3 6 7Williams, Venus 99.7 11 8 Rubin 78.6 9 9Myskina 70.9 7 10 Sugiyama 58.0 10

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 55 Quality Points Per Tournament (“Future Potential Ranking”) The reverse of the above, this 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. In 2002, this “predicted” Daniela Hantuchova, though, to be fair, in 2003 it “predicted” Myriam Casanova. This year, apart from known quantities Seles and Pierce, Maria Sharapova is our one to watch. Rank Name Quality Pts Tournaments Quality per Trn WTA Rank 1Williams, Serena 1487 7 212.4 3 2Williams, Venus 815 6 135.8 11 3 Hénin-Hardenne 2366 18 131.4 1 4 Clijsters 2383 21 113.5 2 5Davenport 980 16 61.3 5 6Mauresmo 1019 17 59.9 4 7 Capriati 836 18 46.4 6 8Myskina 887 24 37.0 7 9 Petrova 838 23 36.4 12 10 Sugiyama 873 26 33.6 10 11 Dementieva 886 27 32.8 8 12 Rubin 683 21 32.5 9 13 Zvonareva 669 23 29.1 13 14 Bovina 538 22 24.5 21 15 Pierce 410 17 24.1 33 16 Suarez 570 24 23.8 14 17 Sharapova 373 16 23.3 32 18 Seles 162 7 23.1 60 19 Martinez 483 21 23.0 18 20 Shaughnessy 529 24 22.0 17 21 Krasnoroutskaya 464 22 21.1 27 22 Coetzer 419 20 21.0 25 23 Raymond 389 19 20.5 28 24 Pistolesi 446 23 19.4 16 25 Kuznetsova 349 18 19.4 36 26 Schiavone 442 23 19.2 20 27 Molik 401 21 19.1 35 28 Asagoe 323 17 19.0 45 29 Déchy 347 19 18.3 29 30 Harkleroad 306 18 17.0 51 31 Serna 450 27 16.7 22 32 Schnyder 385 23 16.7 23 33 Maleeva 360 22 16.4 30 34 Farina Elia 423 26 16.3 24 35 Mandula 330 21 15.7 40 36 Hantuchova 359 23 15.6 19 37 Zuluaga 313 21 14.9 38 38 Tanasugarn 355 24 14.8 34 39 Pisnik 443 30 14.8 31 40 Dokic 444 30 14.8 15 Tulyaganova 242 17 14.2 50 Daniilidou 370 26 14.2 26

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 56 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 1Williams, Serena 771.9 3 2 Hénin-Hardenne 505.3 1 3Williams, Venus 504.3 11 4 Clijsters 449.4 2 5Davenport 248.1 5 6Mauresmo 247.8 4 7 Capriati 200.2 6 8Myskina 144.8 7 9 Rubin 143.6 9 10 Sugiyama 125.2 10 11 Petrova 123.6 12 12 Dementieva 123.0 8 13 Zvonareva 108.7 13 14 Seles 108.7 60 15 Suarez 87.6 14 16 Sharapova 87.3 32 17 Martinez 85.9 18 18 Bovina 81.5 21 19 Pierce 81.1 33 20 Raymond 79.1 28 21 Shaughnessy 78.6 17 22 Pistolesi 78.6 16 23 Coetzer 78.1 25 24 Déchy 76.0 29 25 Schiavone 74.5 20 26 Krasnoroutskaya 72.7 27 27 Hantuchova 71.1 19 28 Kuznetsova 70.9 36 29 Schnyder 68.3 23 30 Maleeva 65.0 30 31 Dokic 63.9 15 32 Molik 63.7 35 33 Serna 63.2 22 34 Asagoe 63.2 45 35 Farina Elia 60.9 24 Daniilidou 59.2 26 Tulyaganova 56.1 50 Harkleroad 55.9 51 Zuluaga 55.5 38 Tanasugarn 55.0 34 Mandula 54.8 40 Pisnik 50.0 31

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 57 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 1Williams, Serena 458.7 3 2 Hénin-Hardenne 288.3 1 3 Clijsters 286.3 2 4Williams, Venus 253.0 11 5Mauresmo 118.4 4 6Davenport 99.2 5 7 Rubin 49.8 9 8 Capriati 45.6 6 9 Sugiyama 37.5 10 10 Déchy 32.2 29 11 Zvonareva 31.9 13 12 Myskina 28.4 7 13 Seles 26.9 60 14 Petrova 25.7 12 15 Raymond 25.3 28 16 Dementieva 23.8 8 17 Pistolesi 23.5 16 18 Hantuchova 21.8 19 19 Schiavone 19.8 20 20 Maleeva 19.5 30 21 Kuznetsova 19.3 36 22 Krasnoroutskaya 18.9 27 23 Serna 18.7 22 24 Suarez 18.3 14 25 Pierce 17.8 33 Serena’s and Venus’s scores would, of course, fall dramatically if we required a minimum of 14 events; Serena would end up at #18 (remember, this punishes bad results, and a “did not play” is the worst possible result in this context), with Venus around #30. I don’t even know where Seles would end up.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 58 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. This is a very complex ranking to calculate, and we looked only at the Highlight Players. For this reason, I will only list the top 30 under this system, which I offer mostly for demonstration purposes. (Though 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 1Williams, Serena 3916 3 2 Hénin-Hardenne 3599 1 3 Clijsters 3219 2 4Davenport 2219 5 5Williams, Venus 2211 11 6Mauresmo 2015 4 7 Capriati 1393 6 8 Rubin 922 9 9 Seles 599 60 10 Déchy 581 29 11 Zvonareva 485 13 12 Raymond 455 28 13 Pierce 443 33 14 Sugiyama 435 10 15 Coetzer 374 25 16 Hantuchova 368 19 17 Kuznetsova 368 36 18 Myskina 363 7 19 Pistolesi 350 16 20 Petrova 330.25 12 21 Maleeva 304 30 22 Panova 296 119 23 Suarez 285 14 24 Bovina 268 21 25 Schnyder 255 23 26 Dementieva 244 8 27 Krasnoroutskaya 239.75 27 28 Martinez 229 18 29 Schiavone 216 20 30 Serna 196.25 22 The real problem with this sytem, of course, is that it encourages underplaying; Serena comes out ahead of Hénin- Hardenne because she gets to count all of her best events while Hénin-Hardenne loses her best four. As a proposed solution, for every three events a player is short of fourteen (rounding high), we will subtract one event. So Serena, with seven events, loses her best three. (We’d subtract more if it weren’t for injuries.) Under that system. the Top Fifteen are: 1. Hénin-Hardenne (3599), 2. Clijsters (3219), 3. Davenport (2219), 4. Mauresmo (2015), 5. Capriati (1393), 6. Serena Williams (1252), 7. Rubin (922), 8. Déchy (581), 9. Zvonareva (485), 10. Raymond (455), 11. Pierce (443), 12. Sugiyama (435), 13. Venus Williams (376), 14. Coetzer (374), 15. Kuznetsova (368)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 59 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 Top 30: Middle Half Rank Player Score WTA Rank 1 Clijsters 3182.0 2 2 Hénin-Hardenne 2871.0 1 3Williams, Serena 1637.0 3 4Davenport 1521.0 5 5Mauresmo 1433.5 4 6 Capriati 1192.5 6 7 Rubin 1138.5 9 8 Sugiyama 971.0 10 9Williams, Venus 929.0 11 10 Myskina 915.0 7 11 Dementieva 879.0 8 12 Zvonareva 831.3 13 13 Petrova 652.5 12 14 Pistolesi 574.5 16 15 Hantuchova 570.3 19 16 Suarez 558.0 14 17 Déchy 545.0 29 18 Serna 535.5 22 19 Dokic 491.5 15 20 Schnyder 463.3 23 21 Raymond 457.5 28 22 Schiavone 453.3 20 23 Coetzer 445.0 25 24 Maleeva 439.5 30 25 Bovina 434.0 21 26 Daniilidou 407.8 26 27 Shaughnessy 377.0 17 28 Krasnoroutskaya 352.0 27 29 Martinez 333.8 18 30 Kuznetsova 310.5 36 Tanasugarn 308.8 34 Farina Elia 287.3 24 Pierce 275.5 33 Seles 203.0 60 Fernandez 129.5 90

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 60 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 two proposals. The first is closer 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: 31% on hardcourts, 16% indoors, 18% on clay, 6% 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 18% 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 you play 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, assuming they played enough events when they played (which all players except the Williams Sisters did; they still suffer penalties) The result of this calculation are given below. The first column, “Rank,” is the rank under this system. “Player” is self-esplanatory. “# 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. “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 — either 16 (if you played only sixteen events) or the number of 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 61 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 18 2366 4363 3060 4/2/7/5 0 7147 17.3 412.3 1 2Williams, Serena 7 1487 2429 2664 3/1/2/1 3 (Inj.) 3993.5 10 399.4 3 3 Clijsters 21 2383 4672 2268 3/2/10/6 1 7679.5 19.3 397.2 2 4Williams, Venus 6 815 1396 1644 2/1/2/1 3 (Inj.) 2207.5 9 245.3 11 5Mauresmo 17 1019 2175 456 4/1/6/6 0 3589.5 16.7 215.4 4 6Davenport 16 980 2010 944 3/2/9/2 0 (Inj.) 3244 16 202.8 5 7 Capriati 18 836 1931 828 4/2/9/3 0 2978 17.3 171.8 6 8Myskina 24 887 1701 728 7/2/9/6 0 2849.5 21.3 133.6 7 9 Rubin 21 683 1650 440 4/2/9/6 0 2564.5 19.3 132.6 9 10 Dementieva 27 886 1548 236 7/3/11/6 0 2818 23.3 120.8 8 11 Sugiyama 26 873 1508 482 4/2/12/8 1 2697 22.7 119 10 12 Petrova 23 838 1167.25 884 5/2/9/7 0 2203.3 20.7 106.6 12 13 Zvonareva 23 669 1163 542 7/1/9/6 1 2031 20.7 98.3 13 14 Seles 7 162 437 42 3/0/3/1 0 (Inj.) 669.5 7 95.6 60 15 Suarez 24 570 963 540 10/1/9/4 1 1683 21.3 78.9 14 16 Martinez 21 483 837 410 6/2/11/2 1 1459 19.3 75.5 18 17 Pistolesi 23 446 915 132 9/2/6/6 1 1551 20.7 75 16 18 Bovina 22 538 717 284 3/3/11/5 1 1453 20 72.6 21 19 Sharapova 16 373 651.25 354 3/2/8/3 0 1122.3 16 70.1 32 20 Shaughnessy 24 529 828 510 5/2/11/6 0 1494 21.3 70 17 21 Raymond 19 389 724 196 2/3/9/5 1 1258.5 18 69.9 28 22 Coetzer 20 419 723 278 5/2/8/5 0 1282 18.7 68.7 25 23 Schiavone 23 442 830 436 5/2/13/3 1 1384 20.7 67 20 24 Krasnoroutskaya 22 464 670.75 113 6/2/9/5 0 1338.5 20 66.9 27 25 Déchy 19 347 750 276 6/3/8/2 1 1201.5 18 66.7 29 26 Dokic 30 444 1028 164 9/2/11/8 0 1653 25.3 65.2 15 27 Hantuchova 23 359 918 440 6/2/9/6 0 1346.5 20.7 65.2 19 28 Pierce 17 410 559 388 4/1/8/4 0 1077 16.7 64.6 33 29 Schnyder 23 385 801 320 9/1/6/7 2 1298.5 20.7 62.8 23 30 Serna 27 450 807.25 296 9/2/9/7 0 1408.3 23.3 60.4 22 31 Maleeva 22 360 709 260 4/3/11/4 0 1184 20 59.2 30 32 Kuznetsova 18 349 579 310 3/1/10/4 1 1025 17.3 59.1 36 33 Daniilidou 26 370 798.75 282 5/3/12/6 0 1283.3 22.7 56.6 26 34 Molik 21 401 536 240 4/2/11/4 0 1077.5 19.3 55.7 35 35 Farina Elia 26 423 737.75 458 6/2/10/8 0 1257.8 22.7 55.5 24 Tanasugarn 24 355 610.75 314 3/3/16/2 2 1064.8 21.3 49.9 34 Zuluaga 21 313 539.75 236 8/1/8/4 1 950.3 19.3 49.2 38 Asagoe 17 323 427.75 338 2/4/10/1 0 (Inj.) 827.8 17 48.7 45 Pisnik 30 443 612.5 236 8/3/11/8 0 1218 25.3 48.1 31 Tulyaganova 17 242 469 162 8/2/7/0 0 (Inj.) 791.5 17 46.6 50 Panova 13 92 204 68 5/0/7/1 0 (Inj.) 325 13 25 119 Schett 25 144 337.5 176 8/1/12/4 1 509.5 22 23.2 79 Stevenson 26 90 380 42 5/3/8/10 1 504.5 22.7 22.3 82 Majoli 17 86 164 58 7/1/7/2 1 278.5 16.7 16.7 131 Kremer 3 8 34 40 0/0/2/1 0 (Inj.) 36 3 12 389 Bedanova 19 47 161.25 88 5/3/8/3 0 (Inj.) 209.8 18 11.7 156

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 62 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 has none, in part, because in her heyday she played mostly Tier II and up. Kournikova was the better player, but she 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 .8, and a win at a Tier IV or V a mere .6. Qualifying results are demoted one level (i.e. a win at Tier I qualifying is treated as a Tier III main draw win, a win at Tier III qualifying is treated as Tier IV, etc.) 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). 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: We will count withdrawals as losses in this system, but walkovers do not count as wins. 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 were as surprised by the results as you were. 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 abova (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 Clijsters 21 27 4 51880 516121887.1 13.6 100.7 0 11.4 89.8 2 2 Hénin-Harde 18 26 4 43631 61091774.0 11.1 85.1 0 10.1 89.4 1 3Williams, Se 7 19 1 17 2 555937.9 6.9 44.8 3 6.3 87.7 3 4Davenport 16 15 4 32 11 0 5 7 15 48.5 4.9 53.4 0 9.2 85.3 5 5Mauresmo 17 10 5 34 11 1 1 357845.8 6.0 51.8 0 9.6 84.3 4 6Williams, Ve 6 15392 241325.5 3.3 28.8 3 5.8 83.2 11 7 Capriati 18 14 6 28 12 1 4 4 12 43.4 4.2 47.6 0 10.1 82.5 6 8 Rubin 21 10 6 23 12 10 2 136742.0 3.7 45.7 0 11.4 80.0 9 9 Petrova 23 12 4 19 138660046742.2 3.5 45.7 0 12.3 78.8 12 10 Sugiyama 26 11 6 32 161201 2 211644.9 4.8 49.7 0 13.6 78.6 10 11 Sharapova 16 4 4 10 6 20241002432.8 0.8 33.6 0 9.2 78.5 32 12 Zvonareva 23 9 4 21 13 11342116542.1 2.7 44.8 0 12.3 78.5 13 13 Dementieva 27 7 6 30 148421184745.3 5.3 50.6 0 14.0 78.4 8 14 Myskina 24 13 6 18 1362502151040.1 3.6 43.7 0 12.7 77.5 7 15 Raymond 19 5 4 15 13 11 1 014329.3 1.5 30.8 0 10.5 74.5 29 16 Déchy 19 7 4 17 114132003429.7 1.0 30.7 0 10.5 74.4 29 17 Suarez 24 11 4 13 139442024434.7 2.0 36.7 0 12.7 74.3 14 18 Krasnoroutsk 22 2 3 17 129582114431.2 2.2 33.4 0 11.9 73.8 27 19 Pistolesi 23 2 4 19 137292014532.2 1.7 33.9 0 12.3 73.4 16 20 Martinez 21 7 4 18 133311044228.7 2.6 31.3 0 11.4 73.3 18 21 Kuznetsova 18 6 4 15 10 5 4 004325.6 1.1 26.7 0 10.1 72.6 36 22 Coetzer 20 6 4 13 14 8 1 113426.0 2.0 28.0 0 11.0 71.8 25 23 Schiavone 23 7 4 18 151262004430.1 1.2 31.3 0 12.3 71.8 20 24 Serna 27 6 4 18 15 2 5 13 2012734.0 1.5 35.5 0 14.0 71.8 22 25 Shaughnessy 24 9 4 16 182150113230.5 1.8 32.3 0 12.7 71.8 17 Pierce 1774983243112421.5 1.8 23.3 0 9.6 70.7 33 Daniilidou 26 6 4 16 177450012231.2 1.0 32.2 0 13.6 70.4 26 Bovina 22 5 4 17 15 3 3 126124.9 2.7 27.6 0 11.9 70.0 21 Maleeva 226414 1671 012426.2 1.2 27.4 0 11.9 69.8 30 Seles 7129401 011210.1 0.8 10.9 0 4.7 69.7 60 Schnyder 23 7 4 17 142302023326.3 1.7 28.0 0 12.3 69.5 23 Hantuchova 23 8 4 18 19 002626.8 1.0 27.8 0 12.3 69.4 19 Tanasugarn 24548119692011426.1 1.0 27.1 0 12.7 68.1 34 Farina Elia 2684918104 022325.8 1.5 27.3 0 13.6 66.8 24 Dokic 30 4 3 23 231301103428.2 1.6 29.8 0 15.2 66.2 15 Panova 1321510 0210007.20.67.807.850.1 119 Stevenson 26 1 4 11 19 1 3 001112.9 0.3 13.2 0 13.6 49.3 82 Bedanova 192448150200007.007.0010.5 39.9 156 Majoli 171427134300016.30.16.409.639.9 131 Kournikova 71103 3300002.902.904.737.9 305 Kremer 3 1 1 0 200001.101.102.431.4 389

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 64 Adjusted Winning Percentage, No Bonuses Some may object, in the above table, to the application of bonus wins, or to the reduction of losses. We can still calculate this ranking without that factor — strict wins and losses, adjusted for tournament strength. This produces a somewhat different list (note e.g. that Venus Williams has risen from #6 under the preceding to #5 here), kinder to players who didn’t play a lot (because it eliminates the benefit of playing more, and also eliminates bonus wins — which a player who plays a lot has more chance to earn): Rank Player # Slam TierI/II Tier III TierIV+ Adj Pen Tot Adj WTA Name Trn WL WL WL WL Wins Loss Loss Wi% Rank 1 Clijsters 21 27 4 51880 87.1 0 21 80.6% 2 2 Hénin-Hardenne 18 26 4 43631 74.0 0 18 80.4% 1 3Williams, Serena 7 19 1 17 2 37.9 3 10 79.1% 3 4Davenport 16 15 4 32 11 48.5 0 16 75.2% 5 5Williams, Venus 6 15392 25.5 3 9 73.9% 11 6Mauresmo 17 10 5 34 11 1 1 45.8 0 17 72.9% 4 7 Capriati 18 14 6 28 12 43.4 0 18 70.7% 6 8 Sharapova 16 4 4 10 6 2024132.8 0 16 67.2% 32 9 Rubin 21 10 6 23 12 10 2 4.02 0 21 66.7% 9 10 Petrova 23 12 4 19 13866042.2 0 23 64.7% 12 11 Zvonareva 23 9 4 21 13 1134242.1 0 23 64.7% 13 12 Sugiyama 26 11 6 32 16120144.9 0 26 63.3% 10 13 Dementieva 27 7 6 30 14842145.3 0 27 62.7% 8 14 Myskina 24 13 6 18 13625040.1 0 24 62.6% 7 15 Déchy 19 7 4 17 11413229.7 0 19 61.0% 29 16 Raymond 19 5 4 15 13 11 1 29.3 0 19 60.7% 29 17 Suarez 24 11 4 13 13944234.7 0 24 59.1% 14 18 Seles 7129401 10.1 0 7 59.1% 60 19 Kuznetsova 18 6 4 15 10 5 4 25.6 0 18 58.7% 36 20 Krasnoroutskaya 22 2 3 17 12958231.2 0 22 58.6% 27 21 Pistolesi 23 2 4 19 13729232.2 0 23 58.3% 16 22 Martinez 21 7 4 18 13331128.7 0 21 57.7% 18 23 Schiavone 23 7 4 18 15126230.1 0 23 56.7% 20 24 Coetzer 20 6 4 13 14 8 1 26.0 0 20 56.5% 25 25 Shaughnessy 24 9 4 16 18215030.5 0 24 56.0% 17 Pierce 177498324321.5 0 17 55.8% 33 Serna 27 6 4 18 15 2 5 13 2 34.0 0 27 55.7% 22 Daniilidou 26 6 4 16 17745031.2 0 26 54.5% 26 Maleeva 22 6 4 14 16 7 1 26.2 0 22 54.4% 30 Hantuchova 23 8 4 18 19 26.8 0 23 53.8% 19 Schnyder 23 7 4 17 14230226.3 0 23 53.3% 23 Bovina 22 5 4 17 15 3 3 24.9 0 22 53.1% 21 Tanasugarn 2454811969226.1 0 24 52.1% 34 Farina Elia 2684918104 25.8 0 26 49.8% 24 Dokic 30 4 3 23 23130128.2 0 30 48.5% 15 Panova 1321510 027.201335.6% 119 Stevenson 26 1 4 11 19 1 3 12.9 0 26 33.2% 82 Kournikova 71103 332.90 729.3% 305 Majoli 17142713436.301727.0% 131 Bedanova 19244815027.001926.9% 156 Kremer 3 1 1 0 2 1.1 0 3 26.8% 389

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 65 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 if one wins each level of tournament. For these purposes, we must define values for each of the various tournament types. For this exercise, I have used the following values: ¥ 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): 425 (275 round points + 150 qual points = 5 rounds * 30 pts/round) ¥ 28-Draw Tier I (=Pan Pacific, Zurich, Moscow): 403 (275 round points + 128 qual points = 4 rounds * 32 pts/round) ¥ Tier II: 327 (195 round points + 132 qual points = 4 rounds * 33 pts/round) ¥ 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. 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. Venus Williams, for instance, played only six tournaments — but they included three Slams, which are obviously “rich,” so she played the richest schedule of any player. Serena Williams played few, but very high-tier, events. This gave her the opportunity to earn a lot of points in a relatively small number of tournaments. We note that both Williams Sisters have totals over 600 — an impossibly high figure; anyone over 525 should probably be sanctioned. The key figure, though, is “percent” — this is the calculation which shows how well a player lived up to expectations. In this category, Serena is the leader, with over 83% earned — but that’s down from 85% last year. But even 83% is simply astonishing. She’s followed by the usual suspects: Hénin-Hardenne, Clijsters, Venus, Mauresmo, Davenport, with Hénin-Hardenne just over 70% and Clijsters not much below. That’s an interesting change from last year, when only two players (Venus, Serena) were over 60%, and Venus barely topped that figure. No other player topped 50% in 2002; Davenport, Capriati, and Hingis exceeded 40%. In 2001, Davenport and Venus were over 60%; Capriati was over 50%; Serena, Hingis, and Seles were over 40%. There were nine players over 25% last year (Serena, Venus, Davenport, Capriati, Hingis, Seles, Mauresmo, Clijsters, Hénin); note that we have only seven this year, but it’s the same seven, less the retired Hingis and the often-injured Seles. For additional alternate ranking schemes, see Statistics/Rankings Based on Head-to-Head Numbers.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 66 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 Williams, Sere 3 1 2 1 4682 3916 83.6% 669 Hénin-Hardenn 4 113171 9415 6729 71.5% 523 Clijsters 4 123182 10455 7055 67.5% 498 Williams, Venu 3 1 2 4159 2211 53.2% 693 Mauresmo 2 123261 7996 3194 39.9% 470 Davenport 4 2118 8454 2990 35.4% 528 Capriati 4 12218 9614 2767 28.8% 534 Myskina 4 1241831 11243 2588 23.0% 468 Rubin 4 122273 10314 2333 22.6% 491 Dementieva 4 1233851 12040 2434 20.2% 446 Sugiyama 4 12221221 11896 2381 20.0% 458 Petrova 4 233821 10681 2005.25 18.8% 464 Zvonareva 4 23264 2 10125 1832 18.1% 440 Seles 2 1121 4063 599 14.7% 580 Suarez 4 242642 10620 1533 14.4% 443 Martinez 4 131831 9578 1320 13.8% 456 Sharapova 4 2 2 2 4 2 7466 1024.25 13.7% 467 Pistolesi 4 233623 10337 1361 13.2% 449 Schiavone 4 2319202 10287 1272 12.4% 447 Shaughnessy 4 2 3 3 10 1 1 11092 1357 12.2% 462 Pierce 4 3 2 3 2 3 7943 969 12.2% 467 Bovina 4 22383 10309 1255 12.2% 469 Déchy 4 2 4 5211 9036 1097 12.1% 476 Raymond 4 2 2 9 2 9175 1113 12.1% 483 Krasnoroutskay 4 3 2 7 4 1 1 9417 1134.75 12.1% 428 Dokic 3 2 4 3 14 3 1 12276 1472 12.0% 409 Schnyder 4 132832 10136 1186 11.7% 441 Hantuchova 4 2 4 1 12 11037 1277 11.6% 480 Coetzer 4 23362 9872 1142 11.6% 494 Serna 4 2 3 2 10213 11292 1257.25 11.1% 418 Asagoe 4 2 1 241127316 750.75 10.3% 430 Maleeva 4 23292 10450 1069 10.2% 475 Daniilidou 4 2 3 2 11 3 1 11467 1168.75 10.2% 441 Kuznetsova 4 23252 9142 928 10.2% 508 Farina Elia 4 2 3 3 10 4 11596 1160.75 10.0% 446 Tulyaganova 3 2 3 2421 7201 711 9.9% 424 Tanasugarn 4 2216621 9903 965.75 9.8% 413 Panova 1 2215 2 5208 296 5.7% 401 Fernandez, C. 4 2313341 9033 412 4.6% 430 Stevenson 4 2 2 3 12 3 11617 470 4.0% 447 Kremer 1 1 1 1215 42 3.5% 405 Majoli 4 221321117995 250 3.1% 470 Kournikova 1 1 1 1 1 2 2532 67.5 2.7% 362 Bedanova 4 2316111 9133 208.25 2.3% 481

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 67 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 2002. 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 DAVENPO(rt) and the row labelled Capriati, you will see the notation “1-2.” This means that Davenport and Capriati played three times (1+2=3), with Capriati winning one and Davenport two. C C D D D H H M M M P P R S S S S S V Z A L A E O A É A A Y E I U C H U U V P I V M K N N R U S T S B H A A G W W O R J E E I T I T R K R T I I U R I I I N I S N N C U N I E I O O N A G E Y L L A A T P T C N S N V L V H Z A L L R T E O I H E M A A E O N M I I E Bovina 1-1 0-0 1-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-2 0-0 0-0 1-1 1-1 1-1 0-0 1-1 0-1 1-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 Capriati 0-3 1-2 2-0 0-0 0-0 0-3 1-0 1-1 2-0 1-1 1-0 1-1 2-0 1-0 1-0 1-0 0-2 0-0 1-0 Clijsters 3-0 5-0 1-0 2-1 2-0 4-4 2-0 5-0 2-1 1-0 1-0 4-0 4-0 2-0 2-0 2-1 0-2 0-2 0-0 Coetzer 0-0 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-0 1-0 0-1 0-2 0-0 1-0 0-2 1-0 0-0 0-1 1-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 1-1 Daniilidou 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-1 1-0 0-1 0-0 0-2 1-1 1-1 0-1 0-2 0-0 1-1 Davenport 2-1 0-5 1-1 1-0 1-0 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 2-0 2-1 0-1 0-1 1-0 Dementieva 0-2 0-1 1-1 0-1 2-0 1-3 1-0 1-3 1-1 1-2 0-0 3-2 2-0 1-0 0-0 1-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 Dokic 0-0 1-2 0-1 1-0 1-0 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 1-1 0-0 1-1 0-2 0-2 0-1 0-0 0-1 Farina Elia 0-0 0-1 1-0 0-2 0-0 0-0 0-0 1-1 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 Hantuchova 0-0 0-2 0-1 0-2 0-1 0-0 0-2 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-2 0-0 0-0 0-2 0-0 Hénin-Hardenne 3-0 4-4 1-0 3-1 1-0 0-0 1-0 1-1 3-1 4-0 1-0 1-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 1-1 2-1 0-1 2-0 Krasnoroutskaya 0-0 1-0 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-1 1-0 0-3 0-2 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-1 0-1 1-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 Maleeva 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-1 0-1 2-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 Martinez 0-1 0-2 1-0 0-1 1-0 2-0 0-1 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-1 1-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-2 0-0 0-0 Mauresmo 1-1 0-5 0-0 3-1 1-0 0-0 1-1 0-0 1-1 0-0 3-0 0-2 0-0 1-0 0-0 3-0 1-2 1-0 1-0 Myskina 0-2 1-2 0-0 1-1 0-0 0-0 1-3 1-0 1-1 3-0 1-1 1-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 0-1 Petrova 1-1 0-1 0-1 2-1 0-0 1-0 0-4 0-0 0-0 0-3 0-1 1-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 1-1 0-0 0-1 1-0 Pierce 1-0 0-1 0-0 0-1 1-0 0-0 0-2 1-0 0-0 1-2 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-2 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 Pistolesi 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-3 1-1 1-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-0 1-1 Raymond 0-2 0-1 0-2 0-0 2-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 1-1 0-0 0-0 1-0 Rubin 1-1 0-4 0-1 2-3 1-1 0-0 1-1 1-0 2-0 0-1 0-1 1-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 Schiavone 0-2 0-4 0-0 0-2 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-2 0-0 1-0 0-1 0-1 0-0 Schnyder 0-0 0-3 0-1 0-0 0-1 1-1 0-2 0-0 1-1 1-0 1-1 0-1 0-0 1-0 1-0 1-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-1 Seles 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-2 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-2 0-0 1-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 Serna 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-2 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-3 0-1 0-0 1-0 1-0 0-0 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 Shaughnessy 0-1 0-2 0-0 0-1 1-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 2-0 0-0 0-2 0-1 1-0 1-2 Suarez 0-1 0-2 0-2 0-0 2-0 2-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-1 1-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 1-1 Sugiyama 0-1 1-2 1-2 0-1 2-0 0-0 1-1 0-1 0-3 0-1 1-1 1-0 0-1 0-1 2-0 1-0 0-1 0-0 1-0 Williams, Serena 2-0 2-0 1-0 1-0 1-0 0-0 1-2 2-0 2-1 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 1-0 0-0 1-0 2-0 0-0 Williams, Venus 0-0 2-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 2-0 1-0 0-0 0-1 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-2 1-1 Zvonareva 0-1 0-0 0-1 0-0 1-0 0-0 0-2 0-0 0-1 1-0 0-1 1-1 0-1 0-0 2-1 1-1 0-1 0-0 1-1

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 68 Wins Over Top Players Matches Played/Won against the (Final) Top Twenty This table summarizes how players did against the players who would consistitute 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 is not Serena (47.2%) but Clijsters (48.8%), with Serena second and Seles third at 40%. Hénin-Hardenne is fourth, Capriati fifth, Mauresmo sixth, Venus seventh, Bovina (!) eighth, and Hantuchova , who never beat a final Top 20 player, dead last. 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 21 10898102532.0% Capriati 6 16 13 7 16 13 42 38.1% Clijsters 2 18 16 6 42 11 86 48.8% Coetzer 25 13686102722.2% Daniilidou 26 12 5 10 5 12 34 14.7% Davenport 5 14 9 8 12 12 47 25.5% Dementieva 8 15 11 10 15 17 47 31.9% Dokic 15 13 5 11 5 14 28 17.9% Farina Elia 24 854552718.5% Hantuchova 19 808013260% Hénin-Hardenne 1 15 14 8 28 11 72 38.9% Krasnoroutskaya 27 1239312368.3% Maleeva 30 633432714.8% Martinez 18 1257692920.7% Mauresmo 4 13 11 7 17 13 45 37.8% Myskina 7 11 9 7 11 11 42 26.2% Petrova 12 13798144517.8% Pierce 33 946492317.4% Pistolesi 16 1039311378.1% Raymond 28 937493112.9% Rubin 9 14 10 8 12 13 43 27.9% Schiavone 20 817113323.1% Schnyder 23 14 7 10 7 13 26 26.9% Seles 60 743451040.0% Serna 22 1028211395.1% Shaughnessy 17 10485113215.6% Suarez 14 1047693716.2% Sugiyama 10 17 9 12 11 16 44 25.0% Williams, Serena 3 12 12 2 17 3 36 47.2% Williams, Venus 11 1074952437.5% Zvonareva 13 13 6 11 7 12 45 15.6%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 69 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 % 21 Bovina 25 22 3 5 37.5 6 2 75.0 9 7 56.3 16 15 51.6 6 Capriati 42 18 5 12 29.4 40100 91242.9 33 6 84.6 2 Clijsters 86 12 21 9 70.0 12 0 100 33 9 78.6 53 3 94.6 25 Coetzer 27 19 2 3 40.0 3 3 50.0 5 6 45.5 22 13 62.9 26 Daniilidou 34 25 1 4 20.0 2 3 40.0 3 7 30.0 31 18 63.3 5Davenport 47 15 5 9 35.7 70100 12 9 57.1 35 6 85.4 29 Déchy 31 17 0 8 0 3 4 42.9 3 12 20.0 28 5 84.8 8 Dementieva 47 25 9 11 45.0 4 5 44.4 13 16 44.8 34 9 79.1 15 Dokic 28 30 2 7 22.2 3 3 50.0 5 10 33.3 23 20 53.5 24 Farina Elia 27 26 2 3 40.0 2 5 28.6 4 8 33.3 23 18 56.1 19 Hantuchova 26 23 0 4 0 2 6 25.0 2 10 16.7 24 13 64.9 1 Hénin-Hardenn 72 11 17 9 65.4 9 1 90.0 26 10 72.2 46 1 97.9 27 Krasnoroutskay 36 22 2 8 20.0 3 2 60.0 5 10 33.3 31 12 72.1 30 Maleeva 27 21 1 1 50.0 1 2 33.3 2 3 40.0 25 18 58.1 18 Martinez 29 21 4 8 33.3 4 1 80.0 8 9 47.1 21 12 63.6 4Mauresmo 45 16 8 12 40.0 7 3 70.0 15 15 50.0 30 1 96.8 7Myskina 42 21 3 8 27.3 5 2 71.4 8 10 44.4 34 11 75.6 12 Petrova 45 23 4 11 26.7 5 4 55.6 9 15 37.5 36 8 81.8 33 Pierce 23 17 2 4 33.3 2 3 40.0 4 7 36.4 19 10 65.5 16 Pistolesi 37 21 1 8 11.1 4 3 57.1 5 11 31.3 32 10 76.2 28 Raymond 31 18 1 5 16.7 4 6 40.0 5 11 31.3 26 7 78.8 9 Rubin 43 20 4 11 26.7 6 2 75.0 10 13 43.5 33 7 82.5 20 Schiavone 32 23 0 9 0 4 4 50.0 4 13 23.5 28 10 73.7 23 Schnyder 26 23 2 8 20.0 3 2 60.0 5 10 33.3 21 13 61.8 60 Seles 10 7 1 3 25.0 10100 2340.0 8 4 66.7 22 Serna 39 26 1 7 12.5 2 3 40.0 3 10 23.1 36 16 69.2 17 Shaughnessy 32 22 2 5 28.6 3 5 37.5 5 10 33.3 27 12 69.2 14 Suarez 37 23 2 6 25.0 5 3 62.5 7 9 43.8 30 14 68.2 10 Sugiyama 44 25 4 13 23.5 11 1 91.7 15 14 51.7 29 11 72.5 3Williams, Seren 36 3 10 3 76.9 50100 15 3 83.3 21 0 100 11 Williams, Venus 24 5 6 3 66.7 10100 7370.0 17 2 89.5 13 Zvonareva 45 22 2 7 22.2 6 3 66.7 8 10 44.4 37 12 75.5

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 70 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 2003 at #2 (e.g. Clijsters) had a better 2003 than a player who began the year at #2 but ended it outside the Top Ten (Venus Williams), 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 % 21 Bovina 25 22 3 5 37.5 5 5 50.0 8 10 44.4 17 12 58.6 6 Capriati 42 18 8 12 40.0 8 1 88.9 16 13 55.2 26 5 83.9 2 Clijsters 86 12 26 8 76.5 16 3 84.2 42 11 79.2 44 1 97.8 25 Coetzer 27 19 2 4 33.3 4 6 40.0 6 10 37.5 21 9 70.0 26 Daniilidou 34 25 0 5 0 5 7 41.7 5 12 29.4 29 13 69.0 5Davenport 47 15 6 10 37.5 6 2 75.0 12 12 50.0 35 3 92.1 8 Dementieva 47 25 8 14 36.4 7 3 70.0 15 17 46.9 32 8 80.0 15 Dokic 28 30 3 9 25.0 2 5 28.6 5 14 26.3 23 16 59.0 24 Farina Elia 27 26 3 3 50.0 2 2 50.0 5 5 50.0 22 21 51.2 19 Hantuchova 26 23 0 5 0 0 8 0 0 13 0 26 10 72.2 1 Hénin-Hardenne 72 11 19 10 65.5 9 1 90.0 28 11 71.8 44 0 100 27 Krasnoroutskay 36 22 1 8 11.1 2 4 33.3 3 12 20.0 33 10 76.7 30 Maleeva 27 21 3 1 75.0 1 2 33.3 4 3 57.1 23 18 56.1 18 Martinez 29 21 2 9 18.2 4 0 100 6 9 40.0 23 12 65.7 4Mauresmo 45 16 10 13 43.5 7 0 100 17 13 56.7 28 3 90.3 7Myskina 42 21 6 9 40.0 5 2 71.4 11 11 50.0 31 10 75.6 12 Petrova 45 23 5 12 29.4 3 2 60.0 8 14 36.4 37 9 80.4 33 Pierce 23 17 2 7 22.2 2 2 50.0 4 9 30.8 19 8 70.4 16 Pistolesi 37 21 1 9 10.0 2 2 50.0 3 11 21.4 34 10 77.3 28 Raymond 31 18 1 7 12.5 3 2 60.0 4 9 30.8 27 9 75.0 9 Rubin 43 20 7 11 38.9 5 2 71.4 12 13 48.0 31 7 81.6 20 Schiavone 32 23 1 9 10.0 0 4 0 1 13 7.1 31 10 75.6 23 Schnyder 26 23 2 8 20.0 5 5 50.0 7 13 35.0 19 10 65.5 60 Seles 10 7 3 3 50.0 1 2 33.3 4 5 44.4 6 2 75.0 22 Serna 39 26 1 6 14.3 1 5 16.7 2 11 15.4 37 15 71.2 17 Shaughnessy 32 22 0 8 0 5 3 62.5 5 11 31.3 27 11 71.1 14 Suarez 37 23 0 7 0 6 2 75.0 6 9 40.0 31 14 68.9 10 Sugiyama 44 25 3 13 18.8 8 3 72.7 11 16 40.7 33 9 78.6 3Williams, Seren 36 3 10 3 76.9 7 0 100 17 3 85.0 19 0 100 11 Williams, Venus 24 5 4 3 57.1 5 2 71.4 9 5 64.3 15 0 100 13 Zvonareva 45 22 1 7 12.5 6 5 54.5 7 12 36.8 38 10 79.2

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 71 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: 1. Clijsters (21) 1. Cllijsters (26) 2. Hénin-Hardenne (17) 2. Hénin-Hardenne (19) 3. S. Williams (10) 3T. Mauresmo, S. Williams (10) 4. Dementieva (9) 5T. Capriati , Dementieva (8) 5. Mauresmo (8) 7. Rubin (7) 6. V. Williams (6) 8T. Davenport, Myskina (6) 7T. Capriati, Davenport (5) 10. Petrova (5) 9T. Martinez, Petrova, Rubin, Sugiyama (4) 11. V. Williams (4)

Winning Percentage against Top Ten Players (Minimum six matches, with players having fewer than ten matches against Top Ten players noted)

Based on the Top Ten at the Time: Based on the Final Top Ten: 1. S. Williams (76.9%) 1. S. Williams (76.9%) 2. Clijsters (70.0%) 2. Clijsters (76.5%) 3. V. Williams (66.7% [9 matches]) 3. Hénin-Hardenne (75.0%) 4. Hénin-Hardenne (65.4%) 4. V. Williams (57.1% [7 matches]) 5. Dementieva (45.0%) 5T. Farina Elia (50% [6 matches]) 6. Mauresmo (40.0%) 5T. Seles (50.0% [6 matches]) 7. Bovina (37.5% [8 matches]) 7. Mauresmo (43.5%) 8. Davenport (35.7%) 8T. Capriati (40.0%) 9. Martinez (33.3%) 8T. Myskina (40.0%) 10. Pierce (33.3% [6 matches]) 10. Rubin (38.9%) 11. Capriati (29.4%) 11T. Davenport (37.5%) 11T. Bovina (37.5% [8 matches])

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

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 72 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 58028.25 points (total actual points; the total of their Best 17 scores is of course somewhat lower) in 2003; this is down very slightly 58524.25 points in 2002 and only slightly up from 57459 points in 2001. Given the point inflation on the WTA, this actually means that they decreased their fraction of total points earned in both 2002 and 2003. Of the points earned in 2003, 19444, or 33.5%, were earned at Slams — up dramatically from 18110, or 30.9%, earned at Slams in 2002 and 16402, or 28.6%, in 2001 (the latter rise showing the effect of the Slam point inflation). The mean of the fraction of points earned in the Slams in 2003 is 31.1% (that is, this is the average of the players’ fractions). The median is Capriati’s 29.9%. The extremes are Dementieva’s and Pistolesi’s minimum of 9.7% and Venus Williams’s maximum of 74.4%. 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 58028.25 points. 20210 of these, or 34.8%, came from quality, down from 35.1% in 2002 (this may be due to the extremely limited schedules played by so many of the top players) and down even more from 35.4% in 2001 (that shift is probably due to round point inflation). The median quality percentage for the Top 25 is higher: Magui Serna had 35.8% of her points from quality. the arithmetic mean (average) is 35.1%. Bovina’s 42.9% leads Top 25 players, slightly ahead of Petrova’s 41.8% and well ahead of Shaughnessy’s 39.0%; Hantuchova’s 28.1% is the worst, followed by Rubin (29.3%) and Capriati (30.2%). At least two top-50-or-nearly players had higher ratios than Bovina, though: Ashley Harkleroad earned 43.7% of her points from quality, and Shinobu Asagoe had 43.0%. Hantuchova’s 28.1%, however, is a legitimate lower bound; the only significant player to play a full schedule with a lower quality ratio was Alexandra Stevenson (19.2%); Monica Seles was at 27.1%. 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, Daniela Hantuchova, improbably enough, is the most balanced with a score of .02, followed by Justine Hénin- Hardenne, who was the most successfully balanced, and Elena Dementieva. Anne Kremer, not surprisingly given her schedule, is least balanced, with Silvia Farina Elia the least balanced player in the Top 25. For Reference: For the Top 25 as a whole, 41.1% of all points were earned on hardcourts, 25.2% on clay, 11.3% on grass, and 22.5% indoors (this represents a slight shift toward clay and away from hardcourt from last year — though the shift is small enough that it may well represent simply the injuries to the Williams Sisters. Grass and indoors were hardly affected at all).

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 73 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 45 Asagoe 750.75 338 45.0% 412.75 55.0% 156 Bedanova 208.25 88 42.3% 120.25 57.7% 21 Bovina 1255 284 22.6% 971 77.4% 6 Capriati 2767 828 29.9% 1939 70.1% 2 Clijsters 7055 2268 32.1% 4787 67.9% 25 Coetzer 1142 278 24.3% 864 75.7% 26 Daniilidou 1168.75 282 24.1% 886.75 75.9% 5Davenport 2990 944 31.6% 2046 68.4% 29 Déchy 1097 276 25.2% 821 74.8% 8 Dementieva 2434 236 9.7% 2198 90.3% 15 Dokic 1472 164 11.1% 1308 88.9% 24 Farina Elia 1160.75 458 39.5% 702.75 60.5% 90 Fernandez, C. 412 134 32.5% 278 67.5% 19 Hantuchova 1277 440 34.5% 837 65.5% 1 Hénin-Hardenne 6729 3060 45.5% 3669 54.5% 305 Kournikova 67.5 48 71.1% 19.5 28.9% 27 Krasnoroutskaya 1134.75 113 10.0% 1021.75 90.0% 389 Kremer 42 40 95.2% 2 4.8% 36 Kuznetsova 928 310 33.4% 618 66.6% 131 Majoli 250 58 23.2% 192 76.8% 30 Maleeva 1069 260 24.3% 809 75.7% 18 Martinez 1320 410 31.1% 910 68.9% 4Mauresmo 3194 456 14.3% 2738 85.7% 7Myskina 2588 728 28.1% 1860 71.9% 119 Panova 296 68 23.0% 228 77.0% 12 Petrova 2005.25 884 44.1% 1121.25 55.9% 33 Pierce 969 388 40.0% 581 60.0% 16 Pistolesi 1361 132 9.7% 1229 90.3% 28 Raymond 1113 196 17.6% 917 82.4% 9 Rubin 2333 440 18.9% 1893 81.1% 79 Schett 481.5 176 36.6% 305.5 63.4% 20 Schiavone 1272 436 34.3% 836 65.7% 23 Schnyder 1186 320 27.0% 866 73.0% 60 Seles 599 42 7.0% 557 93.0% 22 Serna 1257.25 296 23.5% 961.25 76.5% 32 Sharapova 1024.25 354 34.6% 670.25 65.4% 17 Shaughnessy 1357 510 37.6% 847 62.4% 39 Srebotnik 847.5 234 27.6% 613.5 72.4% 82 Stevenson 470 42 8.9% 428 91.1% 14 Suarez 1533 540 35.2% 993 64.8% 10 Sugiyama 2381 482 20.2% 1899 79.8% 34 Tanasugarn 965.75 314 32.5% 651.75 67.5% 50 Tulyaganova 711 162 22.8% 549 77.2% 3Williams, S 3916 2664 68.0% 1252 32.0% 11 Williams, V 2211 1644 74.4% 567 25.6% 13 Zvonareva 1832 542 29.6% 1290 70.4%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 74 Quality Versus Round Points WTA Player Total Round Quality % of Points % of Points from Rank Name Points Points Points from Quality Round Pts 45 Asagoe 750.75 427.75 323 43.0% 57.0% 21 Bovina 1255 717 538 42.9% 57.1% 6 Capriati 2767 1931 836 30.2% 69.8% 2 Clijsters 7055 4672 2383 33.8% 66.2% 25 Coetzer 1142 723 419 36.7% 63.3% 26 Daniilidou 1168.75 798.75 370 31.7% 68.3% 5Davenport 2990 2010 980 32.8% 67.2% 29 Déchy 1097 750 347 31.6% 68.4% 8 Dementieva 2434 1548 886 36.4% 63.6% 15 Dokic 1472 1028 444 30.2% 69.8% 24 Farina Elia 1160.75 737.75 423 36.4% 63.6% 19 Hantuchova 1277 918 359 28.1% 71.9% 51 Harkleroad 700.25 394.25 306 43.7% 56.3% 1 Hénin-Hardenne 6729 4363 2366 35.2% 64.8% 305 Kournikova 67.5 48.5 19 28.1% 71.9% 27 Krasnoroutskaya 1134.75 670.75 464 40.9% 59.1% 36 Kuznetsova 928 579 349 37.6% 62.4% 37 Likhovtseva 892.5 584.5 308 34.5% 65.5% 131 Majoli 250 164 86 34.4% 65.6% 30 Maleeva 1069 709 360 33.7% 66.3% 40 Mandula 819.75 489.75 330 40.3% 59.7% 18 Martinez 1320 837 483 36.6% 63.4% 4Mauresmo 3194 2175 1019 31.9% 68.1% 35 Molik 937 536 401 42.8% 57.2% 7Myskina 2588 1701 887 34.3% 65.7% 119 Panova 296 204 92 31.1% 68.9% 12 Petrova 2005.25 1167.25 838 41.8% 58.2% 33 Pierce 969 559 410 42.3% 57.7% 31 Pisnik 1055.5 612.5 443 42.0% 58.0% 16 Pistolesi 1361 915 446 32.8% 67.2% 28 Raymond 1113 724 389 35.0% 65.0% 9 Rubin 2333 1650 683 29.3% 70.7% 79 Schett 481.5 337.5 144 29.9% 70.1% 20 Schiavone 1272 830 442 34.7% 65.3% 23 Schnyder 1186 801 385 32.5% 67.5% 60 Seles 599 437 162 27.0% 73.0% 22 Serna 1257.25 807.25 450 35.8% 64.2% 32 Sharapova 1024.25 651.25 373 36.4% 63.6% 17 Shaughnessy 1357 828 529 39.0% 61.0% 82 Stevenson 470 380 90 19.1% 80.9% 14 Suarez 1533 963 570 37.2% 62.8% 10 Sugiyama 2381 1508 873 36.7% 63.3% 34 Tanasugarn 965.75 610.75 355 36.8% 63.2% 3Williams, S 3916 2429 1487 38.0% 62.0% 11 Williams, V 2211 1396 815 36.9% 63.1% 13 Zvonareva 1832 1163 669 36.5% 63.5%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 75 The above can easily be graphed: QUALITY ROUND Asagoe 43 57 Bovina 43 57 Capriati 30 70 Clijsters 34 66 Coetzer 37 63 Daniilidou 32 68 Davenport 33 67 Déchy 32 68 Dementieva 36 64 Dokic 30 70 Farina Elia 36 64 Hantuchova 28 72 Harkleroad 44 56 Hénin-Hardenne 35 65 Kournikova 28 72 Krasnoroutskaya 41 59 Kuznetsova 38 62 Likhovtseva 34 66 Majoli 34 66 Maleeva 34 66 Mandula 40 60 Martinez 37 63 Mauresmo 32 68 Molik 43 57 Myskina 34 66 Panova 31 69 Petrova 42 58 Pierce 42 58 Pisnik 42 58 Pistolesi 33 67 Raymond 35 65 Rubin 29 71 Schett 30 70 Schiavone 35 65 Schnyder 32 68 Seles 27 73 Serna 36 64 Sharapova 36 64 Shaughnessy 39 61 Stevenson 19 81 Suarez 37 63 Sugiyama 37 63 Tanasugarn 37 63 Williams, S 38 62 Williams, V 37 63 Zvonareva 36 64

0 20 40 60 80 100

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 76 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 156 Bedanova 49.0% 28.3% 18.2% 4.4% 0.18 21 Bovina 47.6% 2.9% 4.0% 45.6% 0.35 6 Capriati 56.0% 18.3% 14.9% 10.8% 0.16 2 Clijsters 46.1% 19.0% 9.2% 25.7% 0.09 25 Coetzer 55.1% 25.0% 9.5% 10.4% 0.14 26 Daniilidou 45.1% 15.7% 9.9% 29.3% 0.14 5Davenport 59.0% 19.0% 6.9% 15.2% 0.17 29 Déchy 44.1% 31.9% 17.9% 6.1% 0.17 8 Dementieva 46.1% 20.4% 8.1% 25.3% 0.08 15 Dokic 27.4% 25.5% 5.2% 41.9% 0.29 24 Farina Elia 16.5% 26.5% 41.6% 15.3% 0.42 90 Fernandez, C. 37.4% 61.7% 0.7% 0.2% 0.43 19 Hantuchova 44.4% 26.3% 8.8% 20.5% 0.02 1 Hénin-Hardenne 42.8% 31.8% 7.2% 18.2% 0.08 305 Kournikova 74.1% 25.9% 0% 0% 0.37 27 Krasnoroutskaya 62.4% 15.3% 3.1% 19.3% 0.22 389 Kremer 97.6% 0% 0% 2.4% 0.62 36 Kuznetsova 54.4% 12.5% 23.1% 10.0% 0.22 131 Majoli 6.4% 68% 0.8% 24.8% 0.58 30 Maleeva 39.2% 16.7% 28.7% 15.4% 0.21 18 Martinez 33.4% 40.5% 23.7% 2.4% 0.29 4Mauresmo 22.7% 35.1% 0.8% 41.5% 0.34 7Myskina 29.8% 14.3% 7.3% 48.6% 0.35 119 Panova 89.2% 10.5% 0% 0.3% 0.52 12 Petrova 27.7% 33.0% 9.3% 30.0% 0.22 33 Pierce 38.0% 17.3% 19.6% 25.1% 0.15 16 Pistolesi 26.5% 43.9% 6.6% 22.9% 0.27 28 Raymond 33.5% 11.3% 9.1% 46.1% 0.32 9 Rubin 42.9% 16.5% 16.2% 24.4% 0.12 79 Schett 36.8% 51.7% 8.3% 3.2% 0.32 20 Schiavone 67.8% 14.5% 10.3% 7.4% 0.28 23 Schnyder 24.2% 36.1% 0.2% 39.5% 0.32 60 Seles 39.9% 19.2% 0% 40.9% 0.25 22 Serna 32.5% 48.9% 4.2% 14.3% 0.28 17 Shaughnessy 79.6% 15.3% 0.2% 4.9% 0.40 82 Stevenson 46.8% 8.1% 6.4% 38.7% 0.26 14 Suarez 43.1% 34.8% 12% 10.1% 0.13 10 Sugiyama 41.3% 14.3% 7.2% 37.3% 0.22 34 Tanasugarn 72.6% 1.8% 11.3% 14.4% 0.37 50 Tulyaganova 45.1% 37.7% 17.2% 0% 0.24 3Williams, Serena 39.4% 25.1% 28.3% 7.3% 0.22 11 Williams, Venus 34.3% 14.4% 36.5% 14.8% 0.30 13 Zvonareva 23.9% 50.4% 6.9% 18.8% 0.33

Bedanova 49 28 18 4 Bovina 48 3 4 46 Capriati 56 18 15 11 Clijsters 46 19 9 26 Coetzer 55 25 10 10 Daniilidou 45 16 10 29 Davenport 59 19 7 15 Déchy 44 32 18 6 Dementieva 46 20 8 25 Dokic 27 26 5 42 Farina Elia 16 26 42 15 Fernandez, C. 37 62 10 Hantuchova 44 26 9 20 Hénin-Hardenne 43 32 7 18 Kournikova 74 26 00 rasnoroutskaya 62 15 3 19 Kremer 98 002 Kuznetsova 54 12 23 10 Majoli 6 68 1 25 Maleeva 39 17 29 15 Martinez 33 40 24 2 Mauresmo 23 35 1 42 Myskina 30 14 7 49 Panova 89 10 00 Petrova 28 33 9 30 Pierce 38 17 20 25 Pistolesi 26 44 7 23 Raymond 34 11 9 46 Rubin 43 16 16 24 Schett 37 52 8 3 Schiavone 68 14 10 7 Schnyder 24 36 0 40 Seles 40 19 0 41 Serna 32 49 4 14 Shaughnessy 80 15 0 5 Stevenson 47 8 6 39 Suarez 43 35 12 10 Sugiyama 41 14 7 37 Tanasugarn 73 2 11 14 Tulyaganova 45 38 17 Williams, Serena 39 25 28 7 Williams, Venus 34 14 36 15 Zvonareva 24 50 7 19

Hard Clay Grass Indoor

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 78 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; 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, Kim Clijsters (who after all reached the semifinals of every tournament she played except one) was the most consistent, while Tatiana Panova (whose results were badly skewed by injury) was the least consistent. Clijsters 0.56 Dementieva 1.11 Davenport 0.62 Bovina 1.11 Williams, Serena 0.67 Kuznetsova 1.12 Mauresmo 0.69 Myskina 1.12 Déchy 0.69 Seles 1.14 Rubin 0.75 Schiavone 1.16 Hénin-Hardenne 0.80 Fernandez 1.17 Williams, Venus 0.85 Pierce 1.18 Capriati 0.87 Shaughnessy 1.25 Serna 0.91 Petrova 1.31 Pistolesi 0.94 Martinez 1.33 Maleeva 0.95 Tanasugarn 1.33 Zvonareva 0.96 Dokic 1.44 Raymond 0.97 Stevenson 1.50 Sugiyama 0.98 Krasnoroutskaya 1.52 Coetzer 0.98 Farina Elia 1.60 Schnyder 1.00 Majoli 1.66 Hantuchova 1.03 Kournikova 1.83 Daniilidou 1.09 Panova 2.01 Suarez 1.10

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 79 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 playes 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: Round robin losses 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 Bedanova 156 19 11 7 Bovina 21 22 8 5 Capriati 6 18 5 1 [1 at Los Angeles] Clijsters 2 21 0 0 Coetzer 25 20 7 4 Daniilidou 26 26 8 10 Davenport 5 16 2 0 Déchy 29 19 3 4 Dementieva 8 27 9 6 [2 at Los Angeles] Dokic 15 30 11 10 Farina Elia 24 26 11 10 Fernandez, C. 90 21 10 9 Hantuchova 19 23 6 7 Hénin-Hardenne 1 18 0 1 [1 at Los Angeles] Krasnoroutskaya 27 22 5 11 Kuznetsova 36 18 5 7 Majoli 131 17 11 3 Maleeva 30 22 6 9 Martinez 18 21 7 8 Mauresmo 4 17 1 3 [2 at Los Angeles] Molik 35 21 8 5 Myskina 7 24 7 7 [2 at Los Angeles] Panova 119 13 9 2 Petrova 12 23 5 6 Pierce 33 17 5 6 Pisnik 31 30 11 12 Pistolesi 16 23 6 5 Raymond 28 19 4 7 Rubin 9 21 4 3 [2 at Los Angeles] Schiavone 20 23 6 9 Schnyder 23 23 8 5 Seles 60 7 2 2 Serna 22 27 7 9 Sharapova 32 16 4 5 Shaughnessy 17 24 10 5 Stevenson 82 26 15 9 Suarez 14 24 8 4 Sugiyama 10 26 5 8 [2 at Los Angeles] Tanasugarn 34 24 8 11 Williams, Serena 3 7 0 0 Williams, Venus 11 6 0 0 Zvonareva 13 23 5 4

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 80 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 Clijsters 0 Clijsters 0 0% Hénin-Hardenne 0 Hénin-Hardenne 0 0% Williams, Serena 0 Williams, S 0 0% Williams, Venus 0 Williams, V 0 0% Mauresmo 1 Mauresmo 1 5.9% Davenport 2 Davenport 2 12.5% Seles 2 Déchy 3 15.8% Déchy 3 Mandula 4 19.0% Mandula 4 Rubin 4 19.0% Raymond 4 Sugiyama 5 19.2% Rubin 4 Raymond 4 21.1% Capriati 5 Petrova 5 21.7% Krasnoroutskaya 5 Zvonareva 5 21.7% Kuznetsova 5 Krasnoroutskaya 5 22.7% Petrova 5 Sharapova 4 25.0% Pierce 5 Serna 7 25.9% Sugiyama 5 Hantuchova 6 26.1% Zvonareva 5 Pistolesi 6 26.1% Hantuchova 6 Schiavone 6 26.1% Maleeva 6 Maleeva 6 27.3% Pistolesi 6 Capriati 5 27.8% Schiavone 6 Kuznetsova 5 27.8% Tulyaganova 6 Zuluaga 6 28.6% Coetzer 7 Seles 2 28.6% Martinez 7 Myskina 7 29.2% Myskina 7 Srebotnik 7 29.2% Serna 7 Asagoe 5 29.4% Bovina 8 Pierce 5 29.4% Daniilidou 8 Daniilidou 8 30.8% Schnyder 8 Dementieva 9 33.3% Suarez 8 Suarez 8 33.3% Tanasugarn 8 Tanasugarn 8 33.3% Dementieva 9 Martinez 7 33.3% Panova 9 Schnyder 8 34.8% Fernandez, C. 10 Coetzer 7 35.0% Shaughnessy 10 Tulyaganova 6 35.3% Bedanova 11 Bovina 8 36.4% Dokic 11 Dokic 11 36.7% Farina Elia 11 Shaughnessy 10 41.7% Majoli 11 Farina Elia 11 42.3% Stevenson 15 Stevenson 15 57.8%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 81 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 % Clijsters 0 Clijsters 0 0% Williams, Serena 0 Williams, S 0 0% Williams, Venus 0 Williams, V 0 0% Hénin-Hardenne 1 Hénin-Hardenne 1 5.6% Davenport 2 Davenport 2 12.5% Mauresmo 4 Mauresmo 4 23.5% Seles 4 Rubin 7 33.3% Capriati 6 Capriati 6 33.3% Déchy 7 Déchy 7 36.8% Rubin 7 Zvonareva 9 39.1% Sharapova 9 Petrova 11 47.8% Zvonareva 9 Pistolesi 11 47.8% Coetzer 11 Sugiyama 13 50.0% Panova 11 Suarez 12 50.0% Petrova 11 Coetzer 11 55.0% Pierce 11 Dementieva 15 55.6% Pistolesi 11 Sharapova 9 56.3% Raymond 11 Hantuchova 13 56.5% Kuznetsova 12 Schnyder 13 56.5% Suarez 12 Seles 4 57.1% Bovina 13 Raymond 11 57.9% Hantuchova 13 Myskina 14 58.3% Schnyder 13 Bovina 13 59.1% Sugiyama 13 Serna 16 59.3% Majoli 14 Shaughnessy 15 62.5% Myskina 14 Pierce 11 64.7% Zuluaga 14 Schiavone 15 65.2% Dementieva 15 Kuznetsova 12 66.7% Maleeva 15 Maleeva 15 68.2% Martinez 15 Daniilidou 18 69.2% Schiavone 15 Dokic 21 70.0% Shaughnessy 15 Martinez 15 71.4% Krasnoroutskaya 16 Krasnoroutskaya 16 72.7% Serna 16 Harkleroad 14 77.8% Bedanova 18 Tanasugarn 19 79.2% Daniilidou 18 Farina Elia 21 80.8% Fernandez, C. 19 Likhovtseva 23 82.1% Tanasugarn 19 Majoli 14 82.4% Dokic 21 Panova 11 84.6% Farina Elia 21 Schett 23 92.0% Schett 23 Stevenson 24 92.3% Stevenson 24 Bedanova 18 94.7%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 82 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 156 Morariu (313) — Roland Garros Mikaelian (38) — Sarasota Washington (150) — Canadian Open Qual. Mikaelian (37) — Amelia Island Vento-Kabchi (137) — Birmingham Granville (34) — Miami Krasnoroutskaya (129) — Pan Pacific Qual. Shaughnessy (27) — Scottsdale Camerin (92) — U. S. Open Déchy (23) — Wimbledon Morigami (90) — Eastbourne Qualifying Widjaja (74) — Canberra Barna (66) — New Haven Qualifying Serna (51) — Paris Matevzic (51) — Antwerp Bovina 21 Barabanschikova (184) — Sydney Matevzic (47) — Strasbourg Krasnoroutskaya (129) — Pan Pacific Tulyaganova (45) — Miami Asagoe (103) — Birmingham Schiavone (38) — Scottsdale Harkleroad (101) — Charleston Shaughnessy (33) — Australian Open Cervanova (73) — U. S. Open Tanasugarn (33) — Eastbourne Grande (56) — Roland Garros Suarez (32) — Los Angeles Kuznetsova (29) — San Diego Pistolesi (21) — Moscow Capriati 6 Weingärtner (90) — Australian Open Pierce (48) — Filderstadt Petrova (76) — Roland Garros Bovina (32) — Moscow Likhovtseva (51) — San Diego Panova (27) — Sydney Clijsters 2 Krasnoroutskaya (38) — Canadian Open Sugiyama (25) — Scottsdale Dokic (25) — Zurich Coetzer 25 Weingärtner (99) — Miami Pierce (43) — Charleston Srebotnik (40) — Roland Garros Schiavone (37) — Wimbledon Pisnik (35) — Zurich Srebotnik (32) — Pan Pacific Martinez (30) — Indian Wells Déchy (24) — Rome Petrova (24) — San Diego Farina Elia (22) — Filderstadt Raymond (21) — Memphis Dementieva (21) — Amelia Island Bovina (21) — Canadian Open Daniilidou 26 Weingärtner (99) — Miami Kuznetsova (41) — Rome Pierce (86) — Wimbledon Krasnoroutskaya (38) — Canadian Open M. Casanova (81) — Filderstadt Qualifying Martinez (35) — Dubai M. Casanova (72) — U. S. Open Schiavone (34) — Warsaw Pratt (70) — Los Angeles Schiavone (32) — Stanfor Weingärtner (62) — Luxembourg Raymond (30) — Sydney Krasnoroutskaya (53) — Strasbourg Pistolesi (26) — Eastbourne Sugiyama (25) — Scottsdale Zvonareva (25) — Berlin Shaughnessy (24) — Indian Wells Farina Elia (22) — Leipzig

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 83 Davenport 5 Bartoli (87) — Miami Bovina (31) — Filderstadt Farina Elia (28) — Eastbourne Sugiyama (25) — Scottsdale Martinez (22) — Roland Garros Dementieva (21) — Amelia Island Déchy 29 Sharapova (125) — Birmingham Zuluaga (35) — Canadian Open Weingärtner (98) — Canberra Sugiyama (26) — Paris Stevenson (26) — Scottsdale Dementieva 8 Schwartz (141) — Australian Open Loit (45) — Strasbourg Sharapova (125) — Birmingham Petrova (30) — ’s-Hertogenbosch Asagoe (90) — Acapulco Safina (68) — Berlin Ruano Pascual (64) — Los Angeles Sanchez Lorenzo (60) — Roland Garros Pratt (53) — Miami Dokic 15 Sprem (163) — Strasbourg Tulyaganova (41) — Berlin Vento-Kabchi (132) — Stanford Stevenson (31) — Moscow Garbin (100) — Bali Raymond (30) — Pan Pacific Sharapova (91) — Wimbledon Suarez (29) — Sarasota Obata (89) — Eastbourne Shaughnessy (27) — Scottsdale Rittner (87) — Indian Wells Martinez (27) — Rome Safina (66) — Shanghai Sugiyama (26) — Antwerp Pierce (64) — U. S. Open Kuznetsova (26) — Los Angeles Pisnik (54) — Roland Garros Raymond (24) — Amelia Island Suarez (51) — Vienna Maleeva (21) — Filderstadt Farina Elia 24 Talaja (96) — Bol Srebotnik (43) — Canadian Open M. Casanova (86) — New Haven Qualifying Krasnoroutskaya (42) — San Diego Barna (71) — Vienna Granville (41) — Memphis Grande (63) — Paris Srebotnik (39) — Miami Vento-Kabchi (58) — Leipzig Schiavone (38) — Scottsdale Pratt (57) — U. S. Open Serna (38) — Berlin Pratt (54) — Australian Open Tanasugarn (31) — Pan Pacific Kuznetsova (26) — Los Angeles Krasnoroutskaya (26) — Linz Serna (24) — Moscow Déchy (22) — Indian Wells C. Fernandez 90 Morigami (133) — Hyderabad Pisnik (49) — New Haven Qualifying Czink (107) — Helsinki Serna (47) — Indian Wells Pennetta (95) — Canberra Zuluaga (43) — Wimbledon Czink (93) — U. S. Open Tanasugarn (31) — Pan Pacific Cho (83) — Auckland Farina Elia (28) — Eastbourne Molik (71) — Sarasota Déchy (23) — Berlin Barna (71) — Vienna Pennetta (66) — Rome Pennetta (61) — Sopot Schett (57) — Madrid Schett (51) — Roland Garros Hantuchova 19 Harkleroad (101) — Charleston Frazier (46) — Stanford Molik (89) — Miami Tanasugarn (39) — U. S. Open Asagoe (81) — Wimbledon Suarez (32) — Canadian Open Zuluaga (69) — Warsaw Martinez (27) — Rome Harkleroad (52) — Roland Garros Petrova (24) — San Diego Black (52) — New Haven Dementieva (21) — Amelia Island Schnyder (21) — Leipzig Hénin-Harde 1 Dementieva (21) — Amelia Island

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 84 Kournikova 305 Colosio (384) — Charlottsville $25K Husarova (33) — Sydney Safina (63) — Miami Majoli (32) — Sarasota Martinez (25) — Charleston Krasnoroutsk 27 Kutuzova (451) — Los Angeles Tulyaganova (41) — ’s-Hertogenbosch Mouhtassine (167) — Boynton Beach $75K Likhovtseva (36) — Doha Hrozenska (160) — Australian Open Qualif. Shaughnessy (30) — Gold Coast Casanova (81) — Filderstadt Qualifying Schiavone (25) — Moscow Barna (65) — U. S. Open Dementieva (21) — Amelia Island Bartoli (61) — Strasbourg Craybas (57) — Charleston Kremer 380 Tatarkova (145) — Poitiers $50K Dominikovic (115) — Australian Open Harkleroad (113) — Auckland Kuznetsova 36 Safina (69) — Doha Molik (40) — Zurich Qualifying Zvonareva (39) — Indian Wells Suarez (32) — Canadian Open Raymond (29) — Filderstadt Qualifying Bovina (26) — Gold Coast Schnyder (21) — Berlin Pistolesi (21) — Moscow Majoli 131 Morigami (141) — Sydney Qualifying Kuznetsova (47) — Dubai Fislova (133) — Vienna Mikaelian (44) — Gold Coast Birnerova (111) — Poitiers $50K Zvonareva (39) — Indian Wells Torrens Valero (80) — Ausralian Open Chladkova (39) — Warsaw Molik (71) — Sarasota Likhovtseva (36) — U. S. Open Pennetta (67) — Miami Granville (30) — Roland Garros Dementieva (21) — Charleston Maleeva 30 Parra (161) — Warsaw Pierce (48) — Filderstadt Kleinova (115) — Leipzig Likhovtseva (36) — Doha Pisnik (65) — Rome Chladkova (35) — Berlin Asagoe (55) — U. S. Open Suarez (35) — Wimbledon Safina (54) — Moscow Serna (32) — New Haven Tulyaganova (52) — Dubai Serna (31) — Canadian Open Likhovtseva (51) — San Diego Raymond (30) — Pan Pacific Farina Elia (28) — Eastbourne Bovina (23) — Australian Open Coetzer (22) — Sydney Shaughnessy (22) — Miami Martinez 18 Stosur (244) — Australian Open Molik (44) — U. S. Open Barabanschikova (184) — Sydney Krasnoroutskaya (96) — Doha Weingärtner (79) — Berlin Morigami (78) — Shanghai Frazier (75) — Zurich Pierce (73) — San Diego Vento-Kabchi (72) — Bali Molik (71) — Sarasota Pratt (70) — Los Angeles Black (66) — Madrid Mauresmo 4 Rittner (102) — ’s-Hertogenbosch

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 85 Myskina 7 Taylor (85) — Miami Pierce (43) — Charleston Mandula (75) — Roland Garros Kuznetsova (41) — Indian Wells Mandula (32) — Sopot Bovina (31) — Filderstadt Schnyder (28) — Linz Farina Elia (26) — Strasbourg Zvonareva (25) — Berlin Bovina (23) — Sydney Pistolesi (22) — New Haven Panova 119 Cohen Aloro (166) — Pan Paciﬁc Zvonareva (45) — Auckland Kleinova (135) — Warsaw Tulyaganova (43) — Sarasota Gagliardi (65) — Indian Wells Schiavone (40) — Dubai Black (57) — Scottsdale Krasnoroutskaya (57) — Amelia Island Petrova 12 Vento-Kabchi (132) — Stanford Bovina (26) — Gold Coast Krasnoroutskaya (129) — Pan Paciﬁc Pistolesi (21) — Moscow Kulikovskaya (102) — Indian Wells Qual. Morigami (104) — Amelia Island Qualifying Marrero (92) — Miami Qualifying Sharapova (56) — Los Angeles Pierce 33 Pennetta (97) — Hyderabad Ruano Pascual (39) — Berlin Sequera (91) — Quebec City Tanasugarn (39) — Los Angeles Srebotnik (37) — Zurich Suarez (32) — Canadian Open Raymond (30) — San Diego C. Fernandez (28) — Roland Garros Suarez (27) — Auckland Dementieva (21) — Sarasota Pistolesi 16 Cohen Aloro (121) — Paris Serna (36) — Roland Garros Reeves (109) — Wimbledon Suarez (27) — Charleston Schaul (100) — U. S. Open C. Fernandez (26) — Sarasota Sprem (97) — Vienna Coetzer (22) — Australian Open Cho (83) — Auckland Black (56) — Indian Wells Raymond 28 Douchevina (123) — Moscow Tanasugarn (36) — Birmingham Czink (93) — U. S. Open Pierce (86) — Wimbledon Barna (69) — Australian Open Pennetta (65) — Roland Garros Razzano (60) — Scottsdale Rubin 9 Vento-Kabchi (84) — U. S. Open Serna (38) — Berlin Loit (52) — Rome Granville (37) — Scottsdale Farina Elia (25) — Wimbledon Dokic (25) — Zurich Maleeva (21) — Filderstadt Schett 79 Grönefeld (133) — Leipzig Mandula (41) — Linz Cohen Aloro (103) — Indian Wells Granville (37) — Scottsdale Asagoe (94) — Hobart Raymond (30) — San Diego Molik (89) — Miami Raymond (29) — Filderstadt Qualifying Sanchez Lorenzo (84) — Madrid Suarez (27) — Charleston Molik (71) — Sarasota Pistolesi (25) — Vienna Obata (68) — Bali Coetzer (22) — Australian Open Casanova (53) — Paris Pistolesi (21) — Warsaw

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 86 Schiavone 20 Vakulenko (134) — Roland Garros Kuznetsova (48) — Doha Kleinova (115) — Leipzig Matevzic (48) — Rome Asagoe [81] — Wimbledon Shaughnessy (28) — Canberra Barna (69) — Australian Open Shaughnessy (27) — Scottsdale Safina [64) — Palermo Bovina (23) — Linz Schnyder 23 Leon Garcia (137) — Bol Mikaelian (44) — Gold Coast Cargill (113) — Sarasota Tanasugarn (39) — U. S. Open Talaja (76) — Helsinki Zvonareva (33) — Charleston Krasnoroutskaya (72) — Dubai Bovina (32) — Moscow Widjaja (63) — Indian Wells Pistolesi (26) — Sopot Pisnik (61) — Paris Dokic (25) — Zurich Mandula (57) — Wimbledon Seles 60 Koukalova (113) — Australian Open Krasnoroutskaya (96) — Doha Petrova (88) — Rome Petrova (76) — Roland Garros Serna 22 Janes (505) — Eastbourne Qualifying Chladkova (45) — Leipzig Vaskova (155) — Acapulco Srebotnik (43) — Canadian Open Cervanova (85) — Palermo Matevzic (40) — Wimbledon Sanchez Lorenzo (84) — Madrid Pisnik (38) — Filderstadt Qualifying Roesch (76) — Antwerp Pisnik (35) — Zurich Qualifying Asagoe (71) — Miami Likhovtseva (30) — Berlin Sanchez Lorenzo (53) — U. S. Open C. Fernandez (29) — Australian Open Shaughnessy (28) — Canberra Kuznetsova (26) — Los Angeles Shaughnessy 17 Kapros (204) — Wimbledon Zvonareva (39) — Indian Wells Callens (103) — Leipzig Mikaelian (37) — Stanford Harkleroad (101) — Charleston Granville (34) — Rome Zuluaga (52) — Berlin Daniilidou (29) — Moscow Bartoli (50) — San Diego Déchy (23) — Eastbourne Dokic (23) — New Haven Dementieva (22) — Pan Pacific Stevenson 82 Kutuzova (451) — Los Angeles Loit (49) — U. S. Open Obata (121) — Memphis Loit (48) — Wimbledon Callens (103) — Leipzig Ruano Pascual (46) — Indian Wells Sanchez Lorenzo (93) — Miami Zuluaga (45) — Rome Randriatefy (83) — Roland Garros Ruano Pascual (42) — Charleston Gagliardi (72) — Madrid Majoli (34) — Pan Pacific Razzano (67) — Antwerp Pisnik (30) — Linz Razzano (66) — Birmingham Sugiyama (25) — Scottsdale Chladkova (62) — Australian Open Dokic (25) — Zurich Suarez 14 Reeves (111) — Indian Wells Pisnik (47) — San Diego Diaz-Oliva (104) — Acapulco Krasnoroutskaya (38) — Canadian Open Callens (84) — Filderstadt Qualifying Zvonareva (33) — Charleston Zuluaga (73) — Bogota Majoli (32) — Sarasota Pratt (54) — Australian Open Raymond (30) — Pan Pacific Zuluaga (52) — Berlin Bovina (26) — Zurich Farina Elia (25) — Wimbledon Daniilidou (22) — Auckland Sugiyama 10 Petrova (148) — Australian Open Mikaelian (36) — Berlin Kapros (128) — Japan Open Pisnik (35) — Zurich Sanchez Lorenzo (111) — Gold Coast Schiavone (32) — U. S. Open Taylor (85) — Miami Raymond (30) — San Diego Martinez (25) — Sarasota Déchy (23) — Eastbourne Coetzer (22) — Sydney

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 87 Tanasugarn 34 Vento-Kabchi (171) — Doha Zuluaga (46) — Roland Garros Zheng (122) — Japan Open Schiavone (30) — Los Angeles Nagyova (119) — Pattaya City Déchy (24) — Canadian Open Cargill (113) — Sarasota Randriantefy (95) — Charleston Morigami (90) — Wimbledon Garbin (71) — Gold Coast Pratt (70) — San Diego Barna (58) — Luxembourg Tulyaganova 50 Kostanic (116) — Sopot Likhovtseva (36) — Doha Rittner (102) — ’s-Hertogenbosch Tanasugarn (32) — Hyderabad Martinez Granados (99) — Canberra Majoli (32) — Sarasota Asagoe (76) — Indian Wells Dementieva (21) — Charleston Barna (62) — Amelia Island Williams, S. 3 Williams, V. 11 Shaughnessy (22) — Miami Zvonareva (21) — Roland Garros Zvonareva 13 Sprem (163) — Strasbourg Chladkova (43) — Miami Sprem (97) — Vienna Suarez (32) — Canadian Open Molik (96) — Hobart Raymond (30) — Philadelphia Cho (83) — Auckland Bovina (23) — Australian Open Petrova (76) — Roland Garros Pistolesi (22) — New Haven Cho (62) — Memphis Shaugnessy (21) — U. S. Open

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.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 88 Worst Losses Based on Rankings at the Time Worst Losses Based on Year-End Rankings Serna: Janes (then #505/ended #295) Kournikova: Colosio/#415 Krasnoroutskaya: Kutuzova (then #451/ended #272) Serna: Janes/#295 Stevenson: Kutuzova (then #451/ended #272) Krasnoroutskaya: Kutuzova/#272 Kournikova: Colosio (then #384/ended #415) Stevenson: Kutuzova/#272 Bedanova: Morariu (then #313/ended #254) Bedanova: Morariu/#254 Martinez: Stosur (then #244/ended #153) Suarez: Diaz-Oliva/#188 (then #104) Shaughnessy: Kapros (then #204/ended #92) Dementieva: Schwartz/#185 Bovina: Bovina (then #184/ended #149) Petrova: Kulikovskaya/#164 (then #102) Tanasugarn: Vento-Kabchi (then #171/ended #44) Myskina: Taylor/#159 (then #85) Panova: Cohen Aloro (then #166/ended #65) Sugiyama: Taylor/#159 (then #85) Dokic: Sprem (then #163/ended #59) Martinez: Stosur/#153 Zvonareva: Sprem (then #163/ended #59) Bovina: Barabanschikova/#149 Maleeva: Parra (then #161/ended #68) Tulyaganova: Majoli/#131 (then #32) Sugiyama: Petrova (then #148/ended #12) Kremer: Dominikovic/#130 (then #115) Kremer: Tatarkova (then #145/ended #126) Majoli: Fislova/#128 (then #133) Dementieva: Schwartz (then #141/ended #185) Schett: Grönefeld/#120 Majoli: Morigami (then #141/ended #63) Capriati: Panova/#119 (then #27) Schnyder: Leon Garcia (then #137/ended #96) Mauresmo: Rittner/#118 (then #102) Schiavone: Vakulenko (then #134/ended #73) Dokic: Rittner/#118 (then #87) C. Fernandez: Morigami (then #133/ended #63) Raymond: Douchevina/#108 Schett: Grönefeld (then #133/ended #120) Schnyder: Cargill/#103 (then #113) Petrova: Vento-Kabchi (then #132/ended #44) Tanasugarn: Cargill/#103 (then #113) Déchy: Sharapova (then #124/ended #32) Daniilidou: M. Casanova/#102 (then #72, #81) Raymond: Douchevina (then #123/ended #108) Farina Elia: Talaja/#93 Pistolesi: Cohen Aloro (then #121/ended #65) Shaughnessy: Kapros/#92 Tulyaganova: Kostanic (then #116/ended #67) Pierce: C. Fernandez/#90 (then #28) Seles: Koukalova (then #113/ended #62) Pistolesi: C. Fernandez/#90 (then #26) Suarez: Reeves (then #111//ended #75) Panova: Kleinova/#88 (then #135) Mauresmo: Rittner (then #102/ended #118) Maleeva: Kleinova/#88 (then #115) Hantuchova: Harkleroad (then #101/ended #51) Schiavone: Kleinova/#88 (then #115) Coetzer: Weingärtner (then #99/ended #47) C. Fernandez: Czink/#83 (then #107, #93) Daniilidou: Weingärtner (then #99/ended #47) Déchy: Stevenson/#82 (then #26) Pierce: Pennetta (then #97/ended #69) Zvonareva: Cho/#77 (then #83, #62) Farina Elia: Talaja (then #96/ended #93) Seles: Koukalova/#62 Capriati: Weingärtner (then #90/ended #47) Rubin: Seles/#60 (then #9) Davenport: Bartoli (then #87/ended #57) Hantuchova: Black/#52 (then #52) Myskina: Taylor (then #85/ended #59) Davenport: Bartoli/#57 Rubin: Vento-Kabchi (then #84/ended #44) Kuznetsova: Safina/#54 Kuznetsova: Safina (then #69/ended #54) Coetzer: Weingärtner/#47 Clijsters: Krasnoroutskaya (then #38/ended #27) Clijsters: Krasnoroutskaya/#27 V. Williams: Shaughnessy (then #22/ended #17) V. Williams: Shaughnessy/#17 Hénin-Hardenne: Dementieva (then #21/ended #8) Hénin-Hardenne: V. Williams/#11 S. Williams: Mauresmo (then #6/ended #4) S. Williams: Mauresmo/#4

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 89 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 italics. 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 156 Bedanova 206.25 48 23.3% 159.25 188 Australian Open 2R 21 Bovina 1250 207 16.6% 1044 31 Filderstadt SF 6 Capriati 2766 424 15.3% 2343 9 U. S. Open SF 2 Clijsters 6553 750 11.4% 5973 2 U. S. Open F 25 Coetzer 1139 162 14.2% 978 33 Indian Wells QF 26 Daniilidou 1136.75 164 14.4% 995.75 33 Australian Open R16 5Davenport 2990 408 13.6% 2582 6 U. S. Open SF 29 Déchy 1095 165 15.1% 931 36 Gold Coast W 8 Dementieva 2383 386 16.2% 2037 12 Amelia Island W 15 Dokic 1405 369 26.3% 1065 30 Zurich F 24 Farina Elia 1151.75 302 26.2% 850.75 38 Wimbledon QF 90 Fernandez, C. 408 78 19.1% 331 107 Australian Open 3R 19 Hantuchova 1271 268 21.1% 1004 33 Australian Open QF 1 Hénin-Hardenne 6628 1156 17.4% 5573 2 Roland Garros W 27 Krasnoroutskaya 1128.75 366 32.4% 764.75 43 Canadian Open F 36 Kuznetsova 927 214 23.1% 714 49 Wimbledon QF 131 Majoli 250 76 30.4% 174 174 Sarasot SF 30 Maleeva 1064 172 16.2% 893 37 Birmingham W 18 Martinez 1316 288 21.9% 1029 32 Roland Garros QF 4Mauresmo 3194 458 14.3% 2736 7 LA Championships F 7Myskina 2581 420 16.3% 2162 12 Leipzig W 119 Panova 296 160 54.1% 136 207 Sydney SF 12 Petrova 1994.25 510 25.6% 1490.25 15 Roland Garros SF 33 Pierce 969 190 19.6% 779 41 Wimbledon R16 16 Pistolesi 1353 189 14.0% 1166 24 Moscow SF 28 Raymond 1111 225 20.3% 887 37 Pan Pacific SF 9 Rubin 2328 291 12.5% 2039 12 Eastbourne W 79 Schett 473.5 94 19.9% 380.5 97 Roland Garros 3R 20 Schiavone 1265 268 21.2% 999 33 U. S. Open QF 23 Schnyder 1180 172 14.6% 1009 33 Roland Garros R16 60 Seles 599 245 40.9% 354 102 Pan Pacific F 22 Serna 1196 156 13.0% 1060.25 31 Roland Garros R16 32 Sharapova 1024.25 226 22.1% 798.25 41 Wimbledon R16 17 Shaughnessy 1350 228 16.9% 1123 28 Australian Open QF 82 Stevenson 461 123 26.7% 339 106 Scottsdale SF 14 Suarez 1526 236 15.5% 1291 19 Canadian Open SF 10 Sugiyama 2235 358 16.0% 1923 13 Scottsdale W 34 Tanasugarn 957.75 238 24.8% 721.75 48 U. S. Open R16 3Williams, S 3916 1110 28.3% 2806 6 Wimbledon W 11 Williams, V 2211 806 36.5% 1405 15 Wimbledon F 13 Zvonareva 1808 334 18.5% 1492 15 Roland Garros QF

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 90 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 21 S. Williams Australian Open W (7), Paris W (4), Miami W (6), Hard, Indoor, Clay Charleston F (4) 20 Hénin-Hardenne San Diego W (5), Canadian Open W (5). U. S. Open Hard, Indoor W (7), Leipzig F (3)1 (17) Clijsters Luxembourg W (4), Los Angeles Championships W Indoor, Hard (4), Sydney W (4)2, Australian Open SF (5) 15 Hénin-Hardenne Berlin W (5), Roland Garros W (7), ’s-Hertogen- Clay, Grass bosch F (3) 12 Serna Estoril W (5), Budapest W (5), Warsaw QF (2) Clay 12 Pistolesi Sopot W (5), Helsinki W (5), New Haven QF(2) Clay, Hard 11 Clijsters Rome W (5), Roland Garros F (6) Clay 10 Clijsters Indian Wells W (6), Miami SF (4) Hard 10 Dementieva Bali W (4), Shanghai W (4), Moscow SF (2) Hard, Indoor 1. Hénin-Hardenne also won two Fed Cup matches, causing the WTA to list her as having a 22-match streak 2. Clijsters’s winning streak is in WTA matches only; she suffered a loss in Hopman Cup 2003, meaning that her streak could be said to have ended at ten (eight in 2002 and two in 2003), and restarted with the 4 wins at Sydney

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 156 1 4 0 3 (won 1 match seven times) PanP Q 2R, Paris 1R, Antwerp 1R, Scottsdale 1R or Berlin 2R, Roland Garros 1R, Birmingham 1R, Eastbourne Q 1r or Wimbledon 2R, Canadian Open Q 1R, New Haven Q 1R, U. S. Open 1R Bovina 21 3 4 0 2 Gold Coast SF or Australian Indian Wells R16, Miami 2R, Charleston Open R16 or Canadian 2R, Strasbourg 1R Open QF or Filderstadt SF Capriati 6 9 3 0 [2]1 New Haven W, USO SF [LA Champs 2002 SF, Sydney 2R, Australian Open 1R] or USO SF, Moscow 1R, Filderstadt 1R Clijsters 2 17/112 1 [3] 0 (see footnote) (no losing streaks) Coetzer 25 7 4 0 1 Acapulco W, Indian Wells U. S. Open 3R, Moscow 1R, Filderstadt QF 1R, Zurich 1R Daniilidou 26 5 5 0 1 Auckland W San Diego 2R, Los Angeles 2R, Canadian Open 1R, U. S. Open 1R, Leipzig 1R Davenport 5 5 2 0 0 U. S. Open SF Roland Garros R16, Eastbourne 2R

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 91 Déchy 29 5 2 0 0 Gold Coast W Australian Open 2R, Paris 1R or Roland Garros 2R, Birmingham 2R Dementieva 8 10 3/43 1 2/3 Bali W, Shanghai W, (see footnote) Moscow SF Dokic 15 4 4 0 3 Zurich F Paris QF, Antwerp 1R, Scottsdale 1R, Indian Wells 1R Farina Elia 24 7 5 0 2 Strasbourg W, Roland Indian Wells 3R, Miami 2R, Bol 2R, Garros 3R Berlin 1R, Rome 1R Fernandez,C 90 2 5 0 3 (won 2 matches 4 times) Vienna 2R, Eastbourne 1R, Wimbledon 1R, Sopot 1R, Helsinki 1R Hantuchova 19 4 3 0 1 Australian Open QF Filderstadt 2R, Zurich 1R, Linz 1R Hénin- 120 1 (2)4 2 San Diego W, Canadian (no losing streaks) Hardenne Open W, U. S. Open W, Leipzig F Kournikova 305 3 4 0 1 Sea Island $25K SF Australian Open 2R, Maimi 1R, Sarasota 1R, Charleston 1R Krasnorouts 27 5 2 0 0 Canadian Open F (lost back-to-back matches 5 times) Kremer 389 1 1 0 0 Australian Open 2R Australian Open 2003 2R, Poitier $50K 1R5 Kuznetsova 36 4 3 0 [1] Wimbledon QF or San Japan Open 2002 2R, Gold Coast 2003 Diego SF 1R, Australian Open 1R Majoli 131 3 5 0 26 Sarasota SF Roland Garros 2R, Vienna 1R, Wimbledon 1R, U. S. Open 1R, Poitiers $50K 1R Maleeva 30 7 4 0 2 Birmingham W, Eastbourne New Haven 2R, U. S. Open 1R, Leipzig QF 1R, Moscow 1R Martinez 18 4 4 0 1 Indian Wells SF or Roland Zurich 2002 SF, Linz 2002 1R, Sydney Garros R16 2003 1R, Australian Open 2003 1R Mauresmo 4 7 2 0 0 Warsaw W, Berlin SF Filderstadt QF, Zurich 1R Myskina 7 9 3 0 1/27 Leipzig W, Moscow W, Dubai QF, Indian Wells 2R, Miami 2R Filderstadt 2R Panova 119 3 5 0 2 Sydney SF Australian Open 3R, Pan Pacific 1R, Dubai 1R, Scottsdale 1R, Indian Wells 1R Petrova 12 5 3 0 1 Roland Garros SF Leipzig QF, Moscow 1R, Filderstadt 1R Pierce 33 3 3 0 1 (won 3 matches 4 times) Charleston QF, Berlin 1R, Roland Garros 1R Pistolesi 16 12 4 1 1 Sopot W, Helsinki W, New Australian Open 2R, Pan Pacific 1R, Haven QF Paris 1R, Indian Wells 2R Raymond 28 4 2 0 0 Memphis W (lost back-to-back matches 3 times) Rubin 9 8 3 0 1 Madrid W, Rolnad Garros Miami SF, Berlin 2R, Rome 2R QF Schett 79 3 9 0 1 Madrid SF Hobart 2R, Australian Open 1R, Paris 1R, Scottsdale 1R, Indian Wells 1R, Miami 1R, Sarasota 1R, Charleston 1R, Warsaw 1R Schiavone 20 4 3 0 1 Canberra F or U. S. Open Canberra F, Australian Open 1R, Doha QF 1R Schnyder 23 3 4 0 1 Australian Open R16 or Dubai 2R, Indian Wells 2R, Sarasota 1R, Roland Garros R16 or Linz Charleston 2R SF Seles 60 3 2 0 0 Pan Pacific F or Dubai F Pan Pacific F, Doha 2R or Rome 2R, Roland Garros 1R

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 92 Serna 22 12 3 1 1 Estoril W, Budapest W, Paris QF, Antwerp 1R, Acapulco 1R Warsaw QF Shaughnessy 17 9 5 0 2 Canberra W, Australian U. S. Open R16, Leipzig 1R, Moscow 1R, Open QF Filderstadt 1R, Zurich 1R Stevenson 82 3 5 0 4 Scottsdale SF Amelia Island R16, Rome 1R, Madrid 1R, Roland Garros 1R, Birmingham 1R Suarez 14 8 3 0 2 Vienna W, Wimbledon R16 Bogota SF, Acapulco 1R, Indian Wells 1R or Amelia Island R16, Berlin 1R, Rome 1R Sugiyama 10 7 (5)/38 0 2/3 Scottsdale W, Indian Wells Miami 3R, Sarasota 1R, Berlin 1R R16 Tanasugarn 34 5 3 0 2 Hyderabad W Sarasota 2R, Charleston1R, Roland Garros 1R or Eastbourne 1R, Wimbledon 1R, San Diego 1R Tulyaganova 50 4 3 0 1 Hyderabad F Sarasota 2R, Charleston 1R, Amelia Island 1R Williams, S 3 21 1 1 0 Australian Open W, Paris (no losing streaks) W, Miami W, Charleston F Williams, V 11 6 1 0 0 Australian Open F or (no losing streaks) Antwerp W, Miami R16 or Wimbledon F Zvonareva 13 8 2 0 0 Bol W, Berlin QF (lost back-to-back matches 5 times) 1. Jennifer Capriati had two losing streaks of three matches, but one streak began in 2002: Los Angeles Championships2002 SF, Sydney 2R, Australian Open 1R. The listing here shows her three match losing streak of events in 2003.. 2. Kim Clijsters won 17 straight WTA matches at Luxembourg 2002, Los Angeles Championships 2002, Sydney 2003, Australian Open 2003, but between the Los Angeles win and the Sydney win, she suffered a loss at Hopman Cup. If this is excluded, her longest winning streak of 2003 is the 11 straight wins she posted at Rome and Roland Garros; she also had a ten match strigh at Indian Wells and Miami 3. Elena Dementieva’s longest losing streak of events in 2003 is Berlin 1R, Strasbourg 1R, Roland Garros 1R (following her win at Amelia Island, so that’s only three losses), but she had a four-match losing streak starting in 2002: Linz 2002 2R, Los Angeles Championships 2002 1R, Sydney 2003 1R, Australian Open 1R. She also lost four straight matches at the end of the year: Filderstadt QF, Zurich 1R, Los Angeles Round Robin 1, Los Angeles Round Robin 2 — but of course this is only three events. 4. Justine Hénin-Hardenne did not suffer a single first-round loss in 2003; she did, however, lose back-to-back matches at the Los Angeles championships. Having qualified for the Los Angeles semifinal by winning her first two matches, she proceeded to lose to Ai Sugiyama in her final Round Robin match and then lost to Amélie Mauresmo in the semifinal. 5. Anne Kremer came into 2002 with a loss at the Luxembourg 2R, so she formally had two 2-match losing streaks: The one listed, plus Luxembourg 2002 2R, Auckland 2003 1R 6. In addition to losing streaks of 4 matches and 5 matches, Majoli also had a streak of 3 non-wins: Withdrew from Budapest 2R, lost Warsaw 1R, lost Berlin 1R 7. In addition to the three-match losing streak shown, Anastasia Myskina had a three-match streak starting in 2002: Linz 2R, Los Angeles 2002 Championships 1R, Sydney 2003 1R 8. Ai Sugiyama, in addition to the three-match losing streak shown, had a five match streak starting in 2002: Japan Open 2002 QF, Zurich 2002 1R, Linz 2002 1R, Gold Coast 2003 1R, Sydney 2003 1R. She also had a three-match losing streak at Philadelphia SF, Los Angeles Round Robin 1, Los Angeles Round Robin 2 — but of course this is only two events.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 93 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 earned by highlight players. So, e.g., the figure in the “100+ Points” column is the number of the player’s tournaments in which she earned 100+ points; similarly in the “200+ Points” column.). We note that Hénin-Hardenne matches Serena Williams in having 100% of results exceeding 100 points, with Clijsters third, then Venus and Mauresmo. 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 21 2252022.7% 9.1% Capriati 6 18 12 5 1 66.7% 27.8% Clijsters 2 21 20 17 7 95.2% 81% Coetzer 25 2050025%0% Daniilidou 26 2640015.4% 0% Davenport 5 16 12 8 1 75% 50% Déchy 29 1920010.5% 0% Dementieva 8 27 11 4 0 40.7% 14.8% Dokic 15 3041013.3% 3.3% Farina Elia 24 262107.7% 3.8% Fernandez, C. 90 210000%0% Hantuchova 19 232108.7% 4.3% Hénin-Hardenne 1 18 18 12 7 100% 66.7% Krasnoroutskaya 27 2231013.6% 4.5% Kuznetsova 36 1831016.7% 5.6% Majoli 131 170000%0% Maleeva 30 2230013.6% 0% Martinez 18 2142019%9.5% Mauresmo 4 17 14 7 1 82.4% 41.2% Myskina 7 2494137.5% 16.7% Panova 119 131007.7% 0% Petrova 12 2383134.8% 13% Pierce 33 1740023.5% 0% Pistolesi 16 2340017.4% 0% Raymond 28 1931015.8% 5.3% Rubin 9 21 12 3 0 57.1% 14.3% Schett 79 250000%0% Schiavone 20 2351021.7% 4.3% Schnyder 23 2340017.4% 0% Seles 60721028.6% 14.3% Serna 22 2740014.8% 0% Sharapova 32 1641025%6.3% Shaughnessy 17 2451020.8% 4.2% Stevenson 82 261003.8% 0% Suarez 14 2442016.7% 8.3% Sugiyama 10 2692034.6% 7.7% Tanasugarn 34 2431012.5% 4.2% Tulyaganova 50 171005.9% 0% Williams, Serena 37764100% 85.7% Williams, Venus 11653283.3% 50% Zvonareva 13 2391039.1% 4.3%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 94 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; I’ve generally listed enough players to show the gap. First Quarter (Constituting the period from the beginning of the year to Miami) Rank Player Points Tournaments Per Tournament 1 S. Williams 1825 3 608.3 2V. Williams 1086 3 362.0 3 Clijsters 1881 6 313.5 4 Hénin-Hardenne 1116 5 223.2 5Davenport 1116 6 186.0 6 Rubin 775 6 129.2 7 Capriati 624 5 124.8 8 Seles 484 4 121.0 9 Shaughnessy 819 7 117.0 10 Mauresmo 463 4 115.8 11 Coetzer 694 7 99.1 12 Hantuchova 572 6 95.3 13 Myskina 509 6 84.8 Second Quarter (Constituting the period from Sarasota/Casablanca to Eastbourne) Rank Player Points Tournaments Per Tournament 1 Hénin-Hardenne 2257 5 451.4 2 Clijsters 1551 4 387.8 3 S. Williams 981 3 327.0 4Mauresmo 1144 5 228.8 5V. Williams 319 2 159.5 6Davenport 568 4 142.0 7 Rubin 675 5 135.0 8Zvonareva 924 7 132.0 9 Petrova 768.5 6 128.1 10 Capriati 627 5 125.4 11 Martinez 767 7 109.6 12 Serna 601 8 75.1

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 95 Third Quarter (Constituting the period from Wimbledon to Leipzig; minimum 2 events required to be counted in the rankings) Rank Player Points Tournaments Per Tournament (1) S. Williams 1110 1 1110.0 (2) V. Williams 806 1 806.0 1 Hénin-Hardenne 2395 5 479.0 2 Clijsters 2172 7 310.3 3 Capriati 1218 5 243.6 4Davenport 1216 5 243.2 5Myskina 908 6 151.3 6Mauresmo 445 3 148.3 7 Dementieva 1170 8 146.3 8 Suarez 693 5 138.6 9 Rubin 476 5 95.2 10 Sugiyama 569 6 94.8 11 Kuznetsova 562 6 93.7

Fourth Quarter (Constituting the period from Moscow to the Los Angeles Championships and Pattaya City.) Rank Player Points Tournaments Per Tournament 1 Clijsters 1451 4 362.8 2 Hénin-Hardenne 961 3 320.3 3Mauresmo 1142 5 228.4 4Myskina 839 5 167.8 5Bovina 499 4 124.8 6 Sugiyama 729 6 121.5 7 Dokic 453 4 113.3 8 Petrova 539 5 107.8 9 Capriati 298 3 99.3 10 Dementieva 375 4 93.8 11 Davenport 90 1 90 12 Rubin 407 5 81.4 13 Pierce 242 3 80.7

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 96 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 Twelve in at least one quarter, though only six (Clijsters, Hénin-Hardenne, Mauresmo, Davenport, Capriati, and Rubin) made it in all four quarters (actually a rather high figure; only four players managed it last year). 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 Top 14 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 Top 12 at least once to be listed. Injuries being what they are, this is a long way from perfect; it was particularly problematic (as usual) for the Williams Sisters. More in desperation than anything else, I assigned them arbitrary scores of 3 (Serena) and 5 (Venus) for the third quarter, during which they played only Wimbledon; they of course get no fourth quarter points. We note with interest that, for the Top Five at least, this is effectively identical to the WTA rankings (yes, Clijsters and Hénin-Hardenne are tied for #1 — but they’re nearly tied in the rankings, too). Consistency Rank Name WTA Rank Consistency Score 1 Clijsters 2 8 1 Hénin-Hardenne 1 8 3Williams, Serena 3 22 4Mauresmo 4 23 5Davenport 5 26 6Williams, Venus 11 27 7 Capriati 6 29 8 Rubin 9 34 9Myskina 7 37 10 Sugiyama 10 46 11 Dementieva 8 47 11 Petrova 12 47 13 Bovina 21 50 14 Dokic 15 52 15 Seles 60 53 15 Suarez 14 53 15 Zvonareva 13 53 18 Shaughnessy 17 54 19 Coetzer 25 56 19 Kuznetsova 36 56 19 Martinez 18 56 22 Hantuchova 19 57 22 Serna 22 57 24 Pierce 32 58

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 97 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 Hénin-Hardenne (24), followed by Clijsters (22), Serena (19), Petrova (17), Davenport and Venus (15), Capriati and Myskina (12), and Suarez (11); no one else exceeded ten Slam wins. In terms of winning percentage, though, Serena leads with 95%, followed by 92% for Hénin-Hardenne, 85% for Clijsters, 83% for Venus, 81% for Petrova, and 80% for Mauresmo; no one else reached 880% (Davenport was at 79%, Capriati and Myskina at 75%). The lowest number of wins at a Slam for a Top Thirty player was Krasnoroutskaya’s 2, followed by Pistolesi’s 3. The lowest for a Top Ten player was Dementieva’s 6. In terms of points per Slam, it’s the same old Usual Suspects: Serena, then Hénin-Hardenne, then Clijsters well back, followed closely by Venus, then Davenport, Mauresmo, and Petrova with averages less than half of Venus’s. Looking at Top Ten wins and losses, Hénin-Hardcenne had the most (7), followed by Serena (6) and Venus (4); much is revealed about Clijsters by her overall record of 2Ð4 against Top Ten players in Slams — and yet even that represents more wins over Top Ten players than were scored by any other highlight player. In terms of winning percentage against the Top Ten, ignoring players such as Harkleroad who faced only one Top Ten player and beat her, Serena’s 6-1 record is best, followed by Hénin-Hardenne’s 7–2 and Venus’s 4–2. In terms of average opponents, we can’t see much that is revealing. Serena had it the toughest (average of 30), but the next few names aren’t exactly the players we’d have expected: Petrova had it next (34), then Kournikova, Sharapova, and Molik effectively tied at 36 (meaning they might be ranked much higher had they had easier draws), then Venus. We note that Hénin-Hardenne, despite two Slam semifinals and two titles (meaning that she had to face a lot of high-ranked players in late rounds), was a mere #12 on the difficulty list; she clearly had a lot of luck of the draw and fortunate upsets on her side! Note: Harkleroad’s Points Earned include points earned in Australian Open qualiyfing (hence the non- even number of points), as do Krasnoroutskaya’s and Sharapova’s, but their won/lost do not count toward their totals.

Player WTA Rnk Slam W/L Winning % Slam Pts Slams Pts/Slam Vs. Top 10 Tot Opp. Rnk Per Opp. Asagoe 45 5-4 55.6% 338 4 84.5 1-1 414 46 Bedanova 156 2-4 33.3% 88 4 22 0-0 405 68 Bovina 21 5-4 55.6% 284 4 71 0-0 532 59 Capriati 6 12-4 75.0% 828 4 207 1-3 912 57 Clijsters 2 22-4 84.6% 2268 4 567 2-4 1136 44 Coetzer 25 6-4 60.0% 278 4 69.5 0-1 502 50 Daniilidou 26 6-4 60.0% 282 4 70.5 0-1 562 56 Davenport 5 15-4 78.9% 944 4 236 0-3 945 50 Déchy 29 7-3 70.0% 276 4 69 0-1 603 60 Dementieva 8 6-4 60.0% 236 4 59 0-2 693 69 Dokic 15 4-3 57.1% 164 3 54.7 0-0 519 74 Farina Elia 24 8-4 66.7% 458 4 114.5 1-2 665 55 Fernandez, C. 90 3-4 42.9% 134 4 33.5 0-0 393 56 Hantuchova 19 8-4 66.7% 440 4 110 0-1 718 60 Harkleroad 51 3-3 50.0% 204.5 3 68.2 1-0 339 57 Hénin-Hardenne 1 24-2 92.3% 3060 4 765 7-2 1160 45 Kournikova 305 1-1 50.0% 48 1 48 0-1 72 36 Krasnoroutskaya 27 2-3 40.0% 113 3 37.7 0-2 241 48 Kremer 389 1-1 50.0% 40 1 40 0-0 200 100 Kuznetsova 36 6-4 60.0% 310 4 77.5 0-3 512 51 Majoli 131 1-4 20.0% 58 4 14.5 0-1 203 41 Maleeva 30 6-4 60.0% 260 4 65 0-1 539 54 Martinez 18 7-4 63.6% 410 4 102.5 1-2 626 57 Mauresmo 4 8-2 80.0% 456 2 228 0-2 463 46 Molik 35 4-4 50.0% 240 4 60 0-1 288 36 Myskina 7 12-4 75.0% 728 4 182 0-3 734 46 Panova 119 2-1 66.7% 68 1 68 0-1 187 62 Petrova 12 17-4 81.0% 884 4 221 1-2 704 34 Pierce 33 7-4 63.6% 388 4 97 0-2 455 41 Pisnik 31 4-4 50.0% 236 4 59 0-0 406 51 Pistolesi 16 3-4 42.9% 132 4 33 0-0 481 69 Raymond 28 5-4 55.6% 196 4 49 0-0 745 83 Rubin 9 9-4 69.2% 440 4 110 0-1 743 57 Schett 79 4-4 50.0% 176 4 44 0-1 345 43 Schiavone 20 7-4 63.6% 436 4 109 0-1 724 66 Schnyder 23 7-4 63.6% 320 4 80 0-2 690 63 Seles 60 1-2 33.3% 42 2 21 0-0 276 92 Serna 22 6-4 60.0% 296 4 74 0-1 485 49 Sharapova 32 4-3 57.1% 354 3 118 0-1 254 36 Shaughnessy 17 9-4 69.2% 510 4 127.5 0-2 669 51 Stevenson 82 1-4 20.0% 42 4 10.5 0-0 342 68 Suarez 14 11-4 73.3% 540 4 135 0-2 876 58 Sugiyama 10 10-4 71.4% 482 4 120.5 0-3 885 63 Tanasugarn 34 5-4 55.6% 314 4 78.5 1-2 433 48 Tulyaganova 50 4-3 57.1% 162 3 54 0-2 342 49 Williams, Serena 3 19-1 95.0% 2664 3 888 6-1 596 30 Williams, Venua 11 15-3 83.3% 1644 3 548 4-2 726 40 Zvonareva 13 9-4 69.2% 542 4 135.5 1-1 718 55

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 99 Surface Rankings Most 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 3-8 (27%) 0-1 Canberra (1), Australian Open (48), Scottsdale (1), Indian Wells (24), 102/8 Miami (24), Canadian Open Qualifying (1), New Haven Qualifying (1), U. S. Open (2) Bovina 14-11 (56%) 0-3 Gold Coast (77), Sydney (60), Australian Open (200), Scottsdale (1), 597/11 Indian Wells (57), Miami (1), San Diego (37), Los Angeles (1), Canadian Open (126), New Haven (35), U. S. Open (2) Capriati 23-8 (74%) 3-5 Sydney (1), Australian Open (2), Dubai (113), Indian Wells (193), 1550/9 Miami (315), Stanford (162), San Diego (1), New Haven (339), U. S. Open (424) Clijsters 42-6 (88%) 8-4 Sydney (350), Australian Open (432), Scottsdale (170), Indian Wells 3252/10 (459), Miami (235), Stanford (264), San Diego (237), Los Angeles (298), Canadian Open (57), U. S. Open (750) Coetzer 13-8 (62%) 1-3 Sydney (107), Australian Open (160), Indian Wells (162), Miami (1), 629/8 San Diego (1), Los Angeles (76), Canadian Open (46), U. S. Open (76) Daniilidou 15-11 (58%) 0-2 Auckland (134), Sydney (1), Australian Open (164), Dubai (27), 527/12 Scottsdale (67), Indian Wells (36), Miami (36), Stanford (35), San Diego (23), Los Angeles (1), Canadian Open (1), U. S. Open (2) Davenport 28-9 (76%) 3-7 Sydney (220), Australian Open (156), Scottsdale (1), Indian Wells 1763/9 (319), Miami (57), San Diego (162), Los Angeles (230), New Haven (210), U. S. Open (408) Déchy 13-6 (68%) 0-2 Gold Coast (165), Canberra (1), Australian Open (84), Scottsdale (59), 484/8 Indian Wells (72), Miami (32), Canadian Open (35), U. S. Open (36) Dementieva 21-9 (70%) 4-5 Sydney (1), Australian Open (2), Indian Wells (59), Miami (1), San 1123/11 Diego (44), Los Angeles (1), Canadian Open (235), New Haven (154), U. S. Open (122), Bali (213), Shanghai (291) Dokic 9-11 (45%) 0-3 Scottsdale (1), Indian Wells (1), Miami (118), Stanford (64), San Diego 403/11 (44), Los Angeles (1), Canadian Open (50), New Haven (48), U. S. Open (48), Bali (1), Shanghai (27) Farina Elia 7-11 (39%) 0-0 Sydney (1), Australian Open (40), Scottsdale (35), Indian Wells (32), 191.75/10 Miami (1), San Diego (1), Los Angeles (33), Canadian Open (1), New Haven (11.75), U. S. Open (36)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 100 Fernandez, 6-8 (43%) 0-1 Auckland (14), Canberra (14), Australian Open (78), Hyderabad (1), 154/8 Clarisa Indian Wells (1), Miami (32), New Haven Qualifying (12), U. S. Open (2) Hantuchova 11-9 (55%) 0-1 Sydney (64), Australian Open (268), Indian Wells (63), Miami (1), 567/9 Stanford (1), San Diego (39), Canadian Open (46), New Haven (1), U. S. Open (84) Hénin-Hard 31-3 (91%) 7-3 Sydney (126), Australian Open (460), Dubai (324), Miami (101), San 2877/7 Diego (391), Canadian Open (401), U. S. Open (1074) Kournikova 1-3 (25%) 0-1 Sydney (1), Australian Open (48), Miami (1) 50/3 Krasnorout 20-9 (69%) 2-3 Boynton Beach $75K 2002 (20.5), Gold Coast (35.25), Australian 707.75/9 Open Qualifying (29), Doha (110), Dubai (88), San Diego (56), Los Angeles (1), Canadian Open (366), U. S. Open (2) Kremer 1-2 (33%) 0-0 Auckland (1), Australian Open (40) 41/2 Kuznetsova 14-10 (58%) 0-6 Gold Coast (1), Australian Open (2), Doha (26), Dubai (40), Indian 505/10 Wells (63), Miami (26), San Diego (132), Los Angeles (122), Canadian Open (1), U. S. Open (92) Majoli 1-7 (13%) 0-0 Gold Coast (1), Sydney Qualifying (8), Australian Open (2), Dubai (1), 16/7 Indian Wells (1), Miami (1), U. S. Open (2) Maleeva 12-11 (52%) 0-0 Sydney (60), Australian Open (80), Doha (38), Dubai (33), Indian 419/11 Wells (32), Miami (32), San Diego (39), Los Angeles (67), Canadian Open (1), New Haven (35), U. S. Open (2) Martinez 12-11 (52%) 0-2 Sydney (1), Australian Open (2), Doha (36), Dubai (92), Indian Wells 441/11 (189), San Diego (1), Los Angeles (27), New Haven (29), U. S. Open (40), Bali (23), Shanghai (1) Mauresmo 15-5 (75%) 0-3 Dubai (100), Indian Wells (116), Miami (64), Canadian Open (100), 725/6 New Haven (127), U. S. Open (218) Myskina 15-8 (65%) 0-3 Sydney (1), Australian Open (282), Doha (152), Dubai (72), Indian 770/9 Wells (1), Miami (1), Canadian Open (50), New Haven (1), U. S. Open (210) Panova 6-7 (46%) 1-2 Auckland (1), Sydney (160), Australian Open (68), Dubai (1), 264/7 Scottsdale (1), Indian Wells (1), Miami (32) Petrova 16-9 (64%) 1-3 Gold Coast (39.25), Australian Open (110), Indian Wells qualifying 555.75/9 (6.25), Miami qualifying (8.25), Stanford (1), San Diego (148), Los Angeles (1), Canadian Open (58), U. S. Open (184) Pierce 11-8 (58%) 0-1 Auckland (16), Australian Open (40), Hyderabad (30), Doha (24), San 368/8 Diego (72), Los Angeles (1), Canadian Open (29), U. S. Open (156) Pistolesi 9-6 (60%) 1-2 Auckland (63), Australian Open (92), Indian Wells (1), Miami (76), 361/6 New Haven (127), U. S. Open (2) Raymond 13-9 (59%) 0-2 Sydney (66.75), Australian Open (40), Scottsdale (1), Indian Wells 372.75/9 (32), Miami (30), Stanford (60), San Diego (106), New Haven (1), U. S. Open (36) Rubin 21-9 (70%) 2-6 Sydney (95), Australian Open (118), Scottsdale (33), Indian Wells 1001/9 (112), Miami (255), San Diego (100), U. S. Open (2), Bali (129), Shanghai (157) Schett 7-12 (37%) 0-2 Gold Coast (46), Hobart (10), Australian Open (2), Scottsdale (1), 177/12 Indian Wells (1), Miami (1), San Diego (1), Los Angeles (24), Canadian Open (1), U. S. Open (40), Bali (23), Shanghai (27) Schiavone 22-13 (63%) 0-6 Gold Coast (20), Canberra (80), Australian Open (2), Doha (1), Dubai 862/13 (48), Scottsdale (95), Indian Wells (29), Miami (24), Stanford (129), San Diego (23), Los Angeles (114), Canadian Open (29), U. S. Open (268) Schnyder 7-6 (54%) 0-2 Gold Coast (65), Sydney (40), Australian Open (110), Dubai (35), 287/6 Indian Wells (1), U. S. Open (36)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 101 Seles 4-3 (57%) 1-2 Australian Open (40), Doha (1), Dubai (198) 239/3 Serna 12-9 (57%) 0-2 Canberra (32), Australian Open (40), Indian Wells (76), Miami (1), 409/9 San Diego (30), Los Angeles (1), Canadian Open (87), New Haven (94), U. S. Open (48) Shaughness 24-9 (73%) 2-4 Gold Coast (40), Canberra (116), Australian Open (228), Scottsdale 1080/11 (151), Indian Wells (88), Miami (195), Stanford (29), San Diego (1), Los Angeles (35), New Haven (1), U. S. Open (196) Stevenson 6-8 (43%) 0-0 Sydney (29), Australian Open (36), Scottsdale (123), Indian Wells (1), 220/8 Miami (1), Stanford (27), Los Angeles (1), U. S. Open (2) Suarez 15-9 (63%) 1-3 Auckland (34), Sydney (1), Australian Open (80), Indian Wells (1), 661/9 Miami (36), San Diego (1), Los Angeles (58), Canadian Open (236), U. S. Open (214) Sugiyama 20-11 (65%) 2-3 Gold Coast (1), Sydney (1), Australian Open (48), Scottsdale (358), 983/12 Indian Wells (82), Miami (36), San Diego (1), Los Angeles (128), New Haven (68), U. S. Open (130), Shanghai (98), Japan Open (32) Tanasugarn 23-15 (61%) 1-6 Gold Coast (1), Sydney (29), Australian Open (72), Hyderabad (114), 700.75/16 Doha (1), Dubai (33), Indian Wells (32), Miami (38), San Diego (1), Los Angeles (22), Canadian Open (1), New Haven (25.75), U. S. Open (238), Bali (49), Japan Open (1), Pattaya City (43) Tulyaganov 11-7 (61%) 0-2 Canberra (1), Australian Open (48), Hyderabad (75), Doha (20), Dubai 321/7 (86), Indian Wells (1), Miami (90) S. Williams 13-0 (100%) 4-0 Australian Open (1048), Miami (493) 1541/2 V. Williams 8-2 (80%) 2-1 Australian Open (702), Miami (57) 759/2 Zvonareva 14-9 (61%) 0-1 Auckland (55), Hobart (28), Australian Open (2), Scottsdale (1), Indian 437/9 Wells (133), Miami (1), Canadian Open (108), New Haven (29), U. S. Open (80)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 102 Winning Percentage on Hardcourts Where two players have equal winning percentages, the player with the higher number of hardcourt wins is listed first. Where this fails, the player with the higher WTA rank is first, but this does not break ties Rank Player Won Lost Winning% WTA Rank 1Williams, Serena 13 0 100.0% 3 2 Hénin-Hardenne 31 3 91.2% 1 3 Clijsters 42 6 87.5% 2 4Williams, Venus 8 2 80.0% 11 5Davenport 28 9 75.7% 5 6Mauresmo 15 5 75.0% 4 7 Capriati 23 8 74.2% 6 8 Shaughnessy 24 9 72.7% 17 9T Dementieva 21 9 70.0% 8 9T Rubin 21 9 70.0% 9 11 Krasnoroutskaya 20 9 69.0% 27 12 Déchy 13 6 68.4% 29 13 Myskina 15 8 65.2% 7 14 Sugiyama 20 11 64.5% 10 15 Petrova 16 9 64.0% 12 16 Schiavone 22 13 62.9% 20 17 Suarez 15 9 62.5% 14 18 Coetzer 13 8 61.9% 25 19 Tulyaganova 11 7 61.1% 50 20 Zvonareva 14 9 60.9% 13 Tanasugarn 23 15 60.5% 34 Pistolesi 9 6 60.0% 16 Raymond 13 9 59.1% 28 Kuznetsova 14 10 58.3% 36 Pierce 11 8 57.9% 33 Daniilidou 15 11 57.7% 26 Serna 12 9 57.1% 22 Seles 4 3 57.1% 60 Bovina 14 11 56.0% 21 Hantuchova 11 9 55.0% 19 Schnyder 7 6 53.8% 23 Martinez 12 11 52.2% 18 Maleeva 12 11 52.2% 30 Panova 6 7 46.2% 119 Dokic 9 11 45.0% 15 Stevenson 6 8 42.9% 82 Fernandez, Clarisa 6 8 42.9% 90 Farina Elia 7 11 38.9% 24 Schett 7 12 36.8% 79 Kremer 1 2 33.3% 389 Bedanova 3 8 27.3% 156 Kournikova 1 3 25.0% 305 Majoli 1 7 12.5% 131

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 103 Points Per Tournament on Hardcourts Hard Rank Player Name Hard Points Tourn on Hard Points/Tourn WTA Rank 1Williams, Serena 1541 2 770.5 3 2 Hénin-Hardenne 2877 7 411.0 1 3Williams, Venus 759 2 379.5 11 4 Clijsters 3252 10 325.2 2 5Davenport 1763 9 195.9 5 6 Capriati 1550 9 172.2 6 7Mauresmo 725 6 120.8 4 8 Rubin 1001 9 111.2 9 9 Dementieva 1123 11 102.1 8 10 Shaughnessy 1080 11 98.2 17 11 Myskina 770 9 85.6 7 12 Sugiyama 983 12 81.9 10 13 Seles 239 3 79.7 60 14 Krasnoroutskaya 707.75 9 78.6 27 15 Coetzer 629 8 78.6 25 16 Suarez 661 9 73.4 14 17 Schiavone 862 13 66.3 20 18 Hantuchova 567 9 63.0 19 19 Petrova 555.75 9 61.8 12 20 Déchy 484 8 60.5 29 21 Pistolesi 361 6 60.2 16 22 Bovina 597 11 54.3 21 23 Kuznetsova 505 10 50.5 36 24 Zvonareva 437 9 48.6 13 25 Schnyder 287 6 47.8 23 26 Pierce 368 8 46.0 33 27 Tulyaganova 321 7 45.9 50 28 Serna 409 9 45.4 22 29 Daniilidou 527 12 43.9 26 30 Tanasugarn 700.75 16 43.8 34 Raymond 372.75 9 41.4 28 Martinez 441 11 40.1 18 Maleeva 419 11 38.1 30 Panova 264 7 37.7 119 Dokic 403 11 36.6 15 Stevenson 220 8 27.5 82 Kremer 41 2 20.5 389 Fernandez, Clarisa 154 8 19.3 90 Farina Elia 191.75 10 19.2 24 Kournikova 50 3 16.7 305 Schett 177 12 14.8 79 Bedanova 102 8 12.8 156 Majoli 16 7 2.3 131

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 104 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 Hénin-Hardenne (1074) 1 S. Williams (493) 2 S. Williams (1048) 2 Hénin-Hardenne (101) 3 Clijsters (750) 3Mauresmo (64) 4 V. Williams (702) 4T Clijsters (57) 5 Capriati (424) 4T V. Williams (57) 6 Davenport (408) [6 Rubin (2)] 7 Krasnoroutskaya (366) All other Top 30 and highlight players, 8 Sugiyama (358) including Bedanova, Bovina, Capriati, 9 Dementieva (291) Coetzer, Daniilidou, Davenport, Déchy, 10 Myskina (282) Dementieva, Dokic, Farina Elia, 11 Hantuchova, Schiavone (268) C. Fernandez, Hantuchova, Kournikova, 13 Rubin (255) Krasnoroutskaya, Kremer, Kuznetsova, 14 Tanasugarm (238) Majoli, Maleeva, Martinez, Myskina, 15 Suarez (236) Panova, Petrova, Pierce, Pistolesi, 16 Shaughnessy (228) Raymond, Schett, Schiavone, Schnyder, 17 Mauresmo (218) Seles, Serna, Shaughnessy, Stevenson, 18 Bovina (200) Suarez, Sugiyama, Tanasugarn, 19 Martinez (189) Tulyaganova, and Zvonareva had at 20 Petrova (184) least one opening-round loss on Déchy (165) hardcourts. Daniilidou (164) Coetzer, Panova (160) Pierce (156) Zvonareva (133) Kuznetsova (132) Pistolesi (127) Stevenson (123) Dokic (118) Schnyder (110) Raymond (106) Serna (94) Tulyaganova (90) Maleeva (80) C. Fernandez (78) Bedanova, Kournikova (48) Schett (46) Farina Elia, Kremer, Seles (40) Majoli (8)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 105 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 2-5 (29%) 0-2 Sarasota (1), Charleston (31), Amelia Island (1), Berlin (24), Roland 59/5 Garros (2) Bovina 1-3 (25%) 0-0 Charleston (1), Strasbourg (1), Roland Garros (34) 36/3 Capriati 11-4 (73%) 0-3 Amelia Island (136), Berlin (177), Rome (83), Roland Garros (110) 506/4 Clijsters 15-2 (88%) 3-2 Berlin (295), Rome (402), Roland Garros (646) 1343/3 Coetzer 8-4 (67%) 0-0 Acapulco (148), Charleston (63), Amelia Island (40), Rome (33), 286/5 Roland Garros (2) Daniilidou 6-5 (55%) 0-0 Warsaw (31), Berlin (44), Rome (27), Strasbourg (1), Roland Garros 183/5 (80) Davenport 10-3 (77%) 1-1 Charleston (164), Amelia Island (229), Roland Garros (174) 567/3 Déchy 12-6 (67%) 0-4 Sarasota (67), Charleston (56), Amelia Island (27), Berlin (63), Rome 350/6 (69), Roland Garros (68) Dementieva 9-6 (60%) 3-0 Acapulco (1), Sarasota (42), Charleston (63), Amelia Island (386), 496/7 Berlin (1), Strasbourg (1), Roland Garros (2) Dokic 8-9 (47%) 0-2 Sarasota (1), Charleston (100), Amelia Island (33), Warsaw (119), 375/9 Berlin (42), Rome (1), Strasbourg (1), Roland Garros (40), Vienna (38) Farina Elia 9-5 (64%) 0-1 Bol (1), Berlin (1), Rome (1), Strasbourg (183), Roland Garros (80), 308/6 Vienna (42) Fernandez, 9-9 (50%) 0-1 Sarasota (51), Charleston (46), Amelia Island (33), Berlin (1), Rome 254/10 C. (1), Madrid (42), Roland Garros (52), Vienna (26), Sopot (1), Helsinki (1) Hantuchova 8-6 (57%) 0-1 Charleston (92), Amelia Island (68), Warsaw (1), Berlin (87), Rome 336/6 (48), Roland Garros (40) Harkleroad 11-5 (69%) 2-1 Charleston (233), Rome (15.5), Strasbourg (88), Roland Garros (150), 487.5/5 Vienna (1) Hénin-Hard 19-1 (95%) 6-0 Charleston (420), Amelia Island (127), Berlin (440), Roland Garros 2143/4 (1156) Kournikova 3-3 (50%) 0-0 Sarasota (1), Charleston (1), Sea Island $25K (14.5), Charleston $25K 17.5/4 (1) Krasnorouts 7-6 (54%) 0-3 Sarasota (13.5), Charleston (1), Amelia Island (29), Rome (31), 173.5/6 Strasbourg (51), Roland Garros (48) Kremer #VALUE! 0-0 — 0/0 Kuznetsova 3-3 (50%) 0-0 Berlin (31), Rome (83), Roland Garros (2) 116/3 Majoli 6-6 (50%) 0-0 Sarasota (76), Charleston (27), Budapest (12), Warsaw (1), Berlin (1), 170/7 Roland Garros (52), Vienna (1) Maleeva 4-4 (50%) 0-1 Warsaw (1), Berlin (1), Rome (46), Roland Garros (130) 178/4 Martinez 10-6 (63%) 3-3 Sarasota (35), Charleston (50), Berlin (1), Rome (159), Madrid (1), 534/6 Roland Garros (288) Mauresmo 15-3 (83%) 4-3 Warsaw (354), Berlin (161), Rome (367), Roland Garros (238) 1120/4 Molik 11-4 (73%) 0-0 Sarasota (141.5), Budapest (69), Madrid (1), Roland Garros (2) 213.5/4 Myskina 10-6 (63%) 0-1 Sarasota (161), Charleston (1), Berlin (1), Rome (89), Strasbourg 370/7 (31), Roland Garros (48), Sopot (39)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 106 Panova 1-5 (17%) 0-1 Sarasota (1), Charleston (27), Amelia Island (1), Warsaw (1), Berlin 31/5 (1) Petrova 13-5 (72%) 1-2 Sarasota (42.5), Amelia Island Qualifying (6), Berlin (27), Rome (77), 662.5/5 Roland Garros (510) Pierce 4-4 (50%) 1-1 Sarasota (20), Charleston (145), Berlin (1), Roland Garros (2) 168/4 Pistolesi 20-7 (74%) 0-3 Sarasota (20), Charleston (31), Warsaw (71), Berlin (61), Rome (48), 598/9 Roland Garros (36), Vienna (26), Sopot (188), Helsinki (117) Raymond 3-2 (60%) 0-1 Amelia Island (86), Roland Garros (40) 126/2 Rubin 8-3 (73%) 0-1 Berlin (1), Rome (1), Madrid (150), Roland Garros (232) 384/4 Schett 7-8 (47%) 0-2 Sarasota (1), Charleston (1), Warsaw (1), Berlin (38), Rome (27), 249/8 Madrid (86), Roland Garros (94), Vienna (1) Schiavone 6-5 (55%) 0-2 Warsaw (100), Berlin (25), Rome (1), Roland Garros (36), Palermo 185/5 (23) Schnyder 9-9 (50%) 0-3 Sarasota (1), Charleston (1), Amelia Island (80), Bol (1), Berlin (56), 428/9 Rome (46), Roland Garros (172), Sopot (70), Helsinki (1) Seles 3-3 (50%) 0-1 Amelia Island (80), Rome (33), Roland Garros (2) 115/3 Serna 20-7 (74%) 1-3 Acapulco (1), Estoril (115), Bogota (102), Warsaw (65), Berlin (104), 615/9 Rome (38), Madrid (20), Roland Garros (156), Palermo (14) Shaughness 6-5 (55%) 0-0 Charleston (57), Amelia Island (35), Berlin (31), Rome (1), Roland 208/5 Garros (84) Stevenson 1-5 (17%) 0-1 Charleston (1), Amelia Island (33), Rome (1), Madrid (1), Roland 38/5 Garros (2) Suarez 16-9 (64%) 1-3 Bogota (61), Acapulco (1), Sarasota (75), Charleston (69), Amelia 533/10 Island (40), Berlin (1), Rome (1), Madrid (48), Roland Garros (62), Vienna (175) Sugiyama 7-4 (64%) 0-2 Sarasota (1), Berlin (1), Rome (178), Roland Garros (160) 340/4 Tanasugarn 1-3 (25%) 0-0 Sarasota (14), Charleston (1), Roland Garros (2) 17/3 Tulyaganov 8-8 (50%) 0-3 Sarasota (27), Charleston (1), Amelia Island (1), Berlin (116), Rome 268/8 (1), Madrid (81), Roland Garros (40), Sopot (1) S. Williams 12-3 (80%) 2-3 Charleston (305), Rome (170), Roland Garros (506) 981/3 V. Williams 6-2 (75%) 0-1 Warsaw (183), Roland Garros (136) 319/2 Zuluaga 17-6 (74%) 1-3 Bogota (143), Acapulco (1), Warsaw (99), Berlin (89.5), Rome (55.5), 518/7 Madrid (24), Roland Garros (106) Zvonareva 21-6 (78%) 2-2 Charleston (127), Amelia Island (29), Bol (131), Berlin (157), 924/7 Strasbourg (79), Roland Garros (334), Vienna (67)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 107 Winning Percentage on Clay Rank Player Wins Losses Winning% WTA Rank 1 Hénin-Hardenne 19 1 95.0% 1 2 Clijsters 15 2 88.2% 2 3Mauresmo 15 3 83.3% 4 4Williams, Serena 12 3 80.0% 3 5Zvonareva 21 6 77.8% 13 6Davenport 10 3 76.9% 5 7Williams, Venus 6 2 75.0% 11 8 Pistolesi 20 7 74.1% 16 8 Serna 20 7 74.1% 22 10 Zuluaga 17 6 73.9% 38 11 Capriati 11 4 73.3% 6 11 Molik 11 4 73.3% 35 13 Rubin 8 3 72.7% 9 14 Petrova 13 5 72.2% 12 15 Harkleroad 11 5 68.8% 51 16 Déchy 12 6 66.7% 29 17 Coetzer 8 4 66.7% 25 18 Farina Elia 9 5 64.3% 24 19 Suarez 16 9 64.0% 14 20 Sugiyama 7 4 63.6% 10 Myskina 10 6 62.5% 7 Martinez 10 6 62.5% 18 Dementieva 9 6 60.0% 8 Raymond 3 2 60.0% 28 Hantuchova 8 6 57.1% 19 Shaughnessy 6 5 54.5% 17 Schiavone 6 5 54.5% 20 Daniilidou 6 5 54.5% 26 Krasnoroutskaya 7 6 53.8% 27 Schnyder 9 9 50.0% 23 Fernandez, Clarisa 9 9 50.0% 90 Tulyaganova 8 8 50.0% 50 Majoli 6 6 50.0% 131 Maleeva 4 4 50.0% 30 Pierce 4 4 50.0% 33 Kuznetsova 3 3 50.0% 36 Seles 3 3 50.0% 60 Kournikova 3 3 50.0% 305 Dokic 8 9 47.1% 15 Schett 7 8 46.7% 79 Bedanova 2 5 28.6% 156 Bovina 1 3 25.0% 21 Tanasugarn 1 3 25.0% 34 Stevenson 1 5 16.7% 82 Panova 1 5 16.7% 119 Kremer 0 0 — 389

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 108 Points Per Tournament on Clay Clay Rank Player Name Clay Points Tourn on Clay Points/Tourn WTA Rank 1 Hénin-Hardenne 2143 4 535.8 1 2 Clijsters 1343 3 447.7 2 3Williams, Serena 981 3 327.0 3 4Mauresmo 1120 4 280.0 4 5Davenport 567 3 189.0 5 6Williams, Venus 319 2 159.5 11 7 Petrova 662.5 5 132.5 12 8Zvonareva 924 7 132.0 13 9 Capriati 506 4 126.5 6 10 Harkleroad 487.5 5 97.5 51 11 Rubin 384 4 96.0 9 12 Martinez 534 6 89.0 18 13 Sugiyama 340 4 85.0 10 14 Zuluaga 518 7 74.0 38 15 Dementieva 496 7 70.9 8 16 Serna 615 9 68.3 22 17 Pistolesi 598 9 66.4 16 18 Raymond 126 2 63.0 28 19 Déchy 350 6 58.3 29 20 Coetzer 286 5 57.2 25 Hantuchova 336 6 56.0 19 Molik 213.5 4 53.4 35 Suarez 533 10 53.3 14 Myskina 370 7 52.9 7 Farina Elia 308 6 51.3 24 Schnyder 428 9 47.6 23 Maleeva 178 4 44.5 30 Pierce 168 4 42.0 33 Dokic 375 9 41.7 15 Shaughnessy 208 5 41.6 17 Kuznetsova 116 3 38.7 36 Seles 115 3 38.3 60 Schiavone 185 5 37.0 20 Daniilidou 183 5 36.6 26 Tulyaganova 268 8 33.5 50 Schett 249 8 31.1 79 Krasnoroutskaya 173.5 6 28.9 27 Fernandez, Clarisa 254 10 25.4 90 Majoli 170 7 24.3 131 Bovina 36 3 12.0 21 Bedanova 59 5 11.8 156 Stevenson 38 5 7.6 82 Panova 31 5 6.2 119 Tanasugarn 17 3 5.7 34 Kournikova 17.5 4 4.4 305 Kremer 0 0 — 389

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 109 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 at least more consistent than one with a mixture of good and bad results. Best Result Worst Result 1. Hénin-Hardenne (1156) 1 Clijsters (295) 2. Clijsters (646) 2. S. Williams (170) 3. Petrova (510) 3. Davenport (164) 4. S. Williams (506) 4. Mauresmo (161) 5. Dementieva (386) 5. V. Williams (136 — 2 events only) 6. Mauresmo (367) 6. Hénin-Hardenne (127) 7. Zvonareva (334) 7. Capriati (83) 8. Martinez (288) 8. Raymond (40 — 2 events only) 9. Harkleroad (233) 9. Zvonareva (29) 10. Rubin (232) 10. Déchy (27) 11. Davenport (229) 11. Pistolesi (20) 12. Pistolesi (188) 12. Petrova (6) 13. Farina Elia, V. Williams (183) [13. Coetzer, Kuznetsova, Seles (2)] 15. Sugiyama (178) 16. Capriati (177) All other Top 30 and highlight players, 17. Suarez (175) includingBedanova, Bovina, Daniilidou, 18. Schnyder (172) Dementieva, Dokic, Farina Elia, C. 19. Myskina (161) Fernandez, Hantuchova, Harkleroad, 20. Serna (156) Kournikova, Krasnoroutskaya, Majoli, Coetzer (148) Maleeva, Martinez, Molik, Myskina, Pierce (145) Panova, Pierce, Rubin, Schett, Schia- Zuluaga (143) vone, Schnyder, Serna, Shaughnessy, Molik (141.5) Stevenson, Suarez, Sugiyama, Tanasug- Maleeva (130) arn. Tulyaganova, and Zuluaga had at Dokic (119) least one ﬁrst-round loss on clay. Tulyaganova (116) Schiavone (100) Schett (94) Hantuchova (92) Raymond (86) Shaughnessy (84) Kuznetsova (83) Daniilidou, Seles (80) Majoli (76) Déchy (69) C. Fernandez (52) Krasnoroutskaya (51) Bovina (34) Stevenson (33) Bedanova (31) Panove (27) Kournikova (14.5) Tanasugarn (14)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 110 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. In addition, some players who have played “grass-intensive” schedules (Obata) are listed even if they haven’t won all that much. (I have required them to play at least one WTA main draw match; this eliminates, e.g. Surbiton winner Kristina Brandi) The list is in alphabetical order. Player Won/Lost Vs. Tournaments Played Tot Pts/ Name (Percent) Top 10 # of Tourn Asagoe 13-3 (81%) 1-1 Gifu $50K (46), Surbiton $25K (1), Birmingham 371/4 (124), Wimbledon (200) Bedanova 1-3 (25%) 0-0 Birmingham (1), Eastbourne Qualifying (1), 38/3 Wimbledon (36) Bovina 1-3 (25%) 0-0 Birmingham (1), Eastbourne (1), Wimbledon (48) 50/3 Capriati 6-2 (75%) 1-2 Eastbourne (121), Wimbledon (292) 413/2 Clijsters 9-1 (90%) 1-1 ’s-Hertogenbosch (208), Wimbledon (440) 648/2 Coetzer 2-2 (50%) 1-0 Eastbourne (68), Wimbledon (40) 108/2 Daniilidou 4-3 (57%) 0-0 Birmingham (79), Eastbourne (1), Wimbledon (36) 116/3 Davenport 4-2 (67%) 0-1 Eastbourne (1), Wimbledon (206) 207/2 Déchy 4-3 (57%) 0-1 Birmingham (1), Eastbourne (107), Wimbledon (88) 196/3 Dementieva 7-3 (70%) 0-1 Birmingham (40), ’s-Hertogenbosch (48), Wimbledon 198/3 (110) Dokic 2-2 (50%) 0-0 Eastbourne (1), Wimbledon (76) 77/2 Farina Elia 7-2 (78%) 2-1 Eastbourne (181), Wimbledon (302) 483/2 Fernandez, C 0-2 (0%) 0-0 Eastbourne (1), Wimbledon (2) 3/2 Hantuchova 2-2 (50%) 0-0 Eastbourne (64), Wimbledon (48) 112/2 Hénin-Hard 8-2 (80%) 0-2 ’s-Hertogenbosch (114), Wimbledon (370) 484/2 Kournikova 0-0 (—) 0-0 — 0/0 Krasnorouts 1-2 (33%) 0-1 ’s-Hertogenbosch (1), Wimbledon (34) 35/2 Kremer 0-0 (0%) 0-0 — 0/0 Kuznetsova 4-1 (80%) 0-0 Wimbledon (214) 214/1 Majoli 0-1 (0%) 0-1 Wimbledon (2) 2/1 Maleeva 8-2 (80%) 0-0 Birmingham (172), Eastbourne (87), Wimbledon (48) 307/3 Martinez 6-2 (75%) 1-2 Eastbourne (233), Wimbledon (80) 313/2 Mauresmo 1-1 (50%) 0-0 ’s-Hertogenbosch (24) 24/1 Myskina 3-2 (60%) 0-1 Eastbourne (1), Wimbledon (188) 189/2 Obata 13-5 (72%) 0-0 Gifu $50K (33.5), Fukuoka $50K (44), Surbiton $25K 176.25/6 (1), Birmingham (1), Eastbourne (94.75), Wimbledon (2) Panova 0-0 (—) 0-0 — 0/0 Petrova 5-2 (71%) 0-2 ’s-Hertogenbosch (106), Wimbledon (80) 186/2 Pierce 3-1 (75%) 0-1 Wimbledon (190) 190/1 Pistolesi 2-2 (50%) 0-1 Eastbourne (88), Wimbledon (2) 90/2

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 111 Raymond 3-3 (50%) 0-0 Birmingham (20), Eastbourne (1), Wimbledon (80) 101/3 Rubin 6-1 (86%) 1-0 Eastbourne (291), Wimbledon (88) 379/2 Schett 1-1 (50%) 0-0 Wimbledon (40) 40/1 Schiavone 2-2 (50%) 0-0 Eastbourne (1), Wimbledon (130) 131/2 Schnyder 0-1 (0%) 0-0 Wimbledon (2) 2/1 Seles 0-0 (—) 0-0 — 0/0 Serna 1-2 (33%) 0-0 Eastbourne Qualifying (1), Wimbledon (52) 53/2 Sharapova 9-2 (82%) 0-0 Birmingham (138.75), Wimbledon (226) 364.75/2 Shaughnessy 0-2 (0%) 0-0 Eastbourne (1), Wimbledon (2) 3/2 Stevenson 1-3 (25%) 0-1 Birmingham (1), Eastbourne (27), Wimbledon (2) 30/3 Suarez 3-1 (75%) 0-0 Wimbledon (184) 184/1 Sugiyama 4-2 (67%) 0-1 Eastbourne (27), Wimbledon (144) 171/2 Tanasugarn 4-3 (57%) 0-1 Birmingham (59), Eastbourne (48), Wimbledon (2) 109/3 Tulyaganova 4-2 (67%) 0-0 ’s-Hertogenbosch (48), Wimbledon (74) 122/2 S. Williams 7-0 (100%) 3-0 Wimbledon (1110) 1110/1 V. Williams 6-1 (86%) 2-1 Wimbledon (806) 806/1 Zvonareva 3-1 (75%) 0-1 Wimbledon (126) 126/1

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 112 Winning Percentage on Grass Rank Player Wins Losses Winning% WTA Rank 1Williams, Serena 7 0 100.0% 3 2 Clijsters 9 1 90.0% 2 3 Rubin 6 1 85.7% 9 3Williams, Venus 6 1 85.7% 11 5 Sharapova 9 2 81.8% 32 6 Asagoe 13 3 81.3% 45 7 Hénin-Hardenne 8 2 80.0% 1 7Maleeva 8 2 80.0% 30 9Kuznetsova 4 1 80.0% 36 10 Farina Elia 7 2 77.8% 24 11 Capriati 6 2 75.0% 6 11 Martinez 6 2 75.0% 18 13 Zvonareva 3 1 75.0% 13 13 Suarez 3 1 75.0% 14 13 Pierce 3 1 75.0% 33 16 Obata 13 5 72.2% 0 17 Petrova 5 2 71.4% 12 18 Dementieva 7 3 70.0% 8 19 Davenport 4 2 66.7% 5 19 Sugiyama 4 2 66.7% 10 19 Tulyaganova 4 2 66.7% 50 Myskina 3 2 60.0% 7 Daniilidou 4 3 57.1% 26 Déchy 4 3 57.1% 29 Tanasugarn 4 3 57.1% 34 Raymond 3 3 50.0% 28 Dokic 2 2 50.0% 15 Pistolesi 2 2 50.0% 16 Hantuchova 2 2 50.0% 19 Schiavone 2 2 50.0% 20 Coetzer 2 2 50.0% 25 Mauresmo 1 1 50.0% 4 Schett 1 1 50.0% 79 Serna 1 2 33.3% 22 Krasnoroutskaya 1 2 33.3% 27 Bovina 1 3 25.0% 21 Stevenson 1 3 25.0% 82 Bedanova 1 3 25.0% 156 Shaughnessy 0 2 0.0% 17 Fernandez, Clarisa 0 2 0.0% 90 Schnyder 0 1 0.0% 23 Majoli 0 1 0.0% 131 Seles 0 0 — 60 Panova 0 0 — 119 Kournikova 0 0 — 305 Kremer 0 0 — 389

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 113 Points Per Tournament on Grass Grass Rank Player Name Grass Points Tourn on Grass Points/ Tourn WTA Rank 1Williams, Serena 1110 1 1110.0 3 2Williams, Venus 806 1 806.0 11 3 Clijsters 648 2 324.0 2 4 Hénin-Hardenne 484 2 242.0 1 5Farina Elia 483 2 241.5 24 6Kuznetsova 214 1 214.0 36 7 Capriati 413 2 206.5 6 8 Pierce 190 1 190.0 33 9 Rubin 379 2 189.5 9 10 Suarez 184 1 184.0 14 11 Sharapova 364.75 2 182.4 32 12 Martinez 313 2 156.5 18 13 Zvonareva 126 1 126.0 13 14 Davenport 207 2 103.5 5 15 Maleeva 307 3 102.3 30 16 Myskina 189 2 94.5 7 17 Petrova 186 2 93.0 12 18 Asagoe 371 4 92.8 45 19 Sugiyama 171 2 85.5 10 20 Dementieva 198 3 66.0 8 Schiavone 131 2 65.5 20 Déchy 196 3 65.3 29 Tulyaganova 122 2 61.0 50 Hantuchova 112 2 56.0 19 Coetzer 108 2 54.0 25 Pistolesi 90 2 45.0 16 Schett 40 1 40.0 79 Daniilidou 116 3 38.7 26 Dokic 77 2 38.5 15 Tanasugarn 109 3 36.3 34 Raymond 101 3 33.7 28 Obata 176.25 6 29.4 49 Serna 53 2 26.5 22 Mauresmo 24 1 24.0 4 Krasnoroutskaya 35 2 17.5 27 Bovina 50 3 16.7 21 Bedanova 38 3 12.7 156 Stevenson 30 3 10.0 82 Schnyder 2 1 2.0 23 Majoli 2 1 2.0 131 Shaughnessy 3 2 1.5 17 Fernandez, Clarisa 3 2 1.5 90 Seles 0 0 — 60 Panova 0 0 — 119 Kremer 0 0 — 389 Kournikova 0 0 — 305

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 114 Adjusted Points Per Tournament on Grass A blatant difficulty with grass is that so many players play only Wimbledon. This seriously biases their 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 (this happened in 2001: Davenport won Eastbourne and reached the Wimbledon semifinal, while Capriati reached the Wimbledon semifinal without playing any other grass events. Capriati had the better per-event score. Indeed, Capriati outscored Justine Hénin, who reached the Wimbledon final and won ’s-Hertogenbosch!). Yet surely the first player has at least as much right to be considered a top grass player! 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 1Williams, Serena 1110 1 652.9 3 2Williams, Venus 806 1 474.1 11 3 Clijsters 648 2 324.0 2 4 Hénin-Hardenne 484 2 242.0 1 5Farina Elia 483 2 241.5 24 6 Capriati 413 2 206.5 6 7 Rubin 379 2 189.5 9 8 Sharapova 364.75 2 182.4 32 9Martinez 313 2 156.5 18 10 Kuznetsova 214 1 125.9 36 11 Pierce 190 1 111.8 33 12 Suarez 184 1 108.2 14 13 Davenport 207 2 103.5 5 14 Maleeva 307 3 102.3 30 15 Myskina 189 2 94.5 7 16 Petrova 186 2 93.0 12 17 Asagoe 371 4 92.8 45 18 Sugiyama 171 2 85.5 10 19 Zvonareva 126 1 74.1 13 20 Dementieva 198 3 66.0 8 Schiavone 131 2 65.5 20 Déchy 196 3 65.3 29 Tulyaganova 122 2 61.0 50 Hantuchova 112 2 56.0 19 Coetzer 108 2 54.0 25 Pistolesi 90 2 45.0 16 Daniilidou 116 3 38.7 26 Dokic 77 2 38.5 15 Tanasugarn 109 3 36.3 34 Raymond 101 3 33.7 28 Obata 176.25 6 29.4 49 Serna 53 2 26.5 22 Schett 40 1 23.5 79 Krasnoroutskaya 35 2 17.5 27 Bovina 50 3 16.7 21 Mauresmo 24 1 14.1 4

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 115 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 1-3 (25%) 0-0 Pan Pacific Qualifying (7.25), Paris (1), Antwerp (1) 9.25/3 Bovina 9-5 (64%) 3-2 Pan Pacific (73), Moscow (142), Filderstadt (207), Zurich (102), 572/5 Linz (48) Capriati 2-4 (33%) 1-2 Moscow (1), Filderstadt (1), Los Angeles Championships (296) 298/3 Clijsters 20-3 (87%) 9-2 Antwerp (235), Leipzig (126), Filderstadt (383), Zurich (149), 1812/6 Luxembourg (212), Los Angeles Championships (707) Coetzer 4-5 (44%) 0-0 Pan Pacific (1), Memphis (115), Moscow (1), Filderstadt (1), 119/5 Zurich (1) Daniilidou 9-6 (60%) 1-2 Paris (162), Leipzig (1), Moscow (102), Filderstadt Qualifying 342.75/6 (23.75), Zurich (1), Luxembourg (53) Davenport 5-1 (83%) 1-0 Pan Pacific (363), Filderstadt (90) 453/2 Déchy 2-2 (50%) 0-1 Paris (1), Antwerp (66) 67/2 Dementieva 10-7 (59%) 2-5 Pan Pacific (86), Paris (156), Moscow (151), Filderstadt (113), 617/6 Zurich (1), Los Angeles Championships (110) Dokic 9-8 (53%) 2-2 Pan Pacific (77), Paris (57), Antwerp (1), Leipzig (29), Moscow 617/8 (1), Filderstadt (1), Zurich (369), Linz (82) Farina Elia 4-8 (33%) 0-1 Pan Pacific (48), Paris (1), Memphis (34), Leipzig (40), Moscow 178/8 (1), Filderstadt (52), Zurich (1), Linz (1) Fernandez, 0-1 (0%) 0-0 Pan Pacific (1) 1/1 C. Hantuchova 5-6 (45%) 0-2 Paris (57), Antwerp (119), Leipzig (40), Filderstadt (44), Zurich 262/6 (1), Linz (1) Hénin-Hard 14-5 (74%) 3-5 Antwerp (105), Leipzig (159), Filderstadt (247), Zurich (403), Los 1225/5 Angeles Championships (311) Kournikova 0-0 (—%) 0-1 — 0/0 Krasnorout 8-5 (62%) 0-2 Pan Pacific (128), Leipzig (35), Moscow (1), Filderstadt 218.5/5 Qualifying (6.5), Linz (48) Kremer 0-1 (0%) 0-0 Poitiers $50K (1) 1/1 Kuznetsova 5-4 (56%) 0-0 Leipzig (1), Moscow (46), Filderstadt Qualifying (19.75), Zurich 93/4 Qualifying (26.25) Majoli 1-2 (33%) 0-1 Pan Pacific (61), Poitiers $50K (1) 62/2 Maleeva 3-4 (43%) 1-0 Pan Pacific (42), Leipzig (1), Moscow (1), Filderstadt (121) 165/4 Martinez 1-2 (33%) 0-1 Filderstadt (31), Zurich (1) 32/2 Mauresmo 14-7 (67%) 4-6 Paris (183), Moscow (286), Filderstadt (101), Zurich (1), 1325/6 Philadelphia (296), Los Angeles Championships (458) Myskina 14-5 (74%) 3-3 Leipzig (420), Moscow (379), Filderstadt (44), Linz (72), 1259/6 Philadelphia (188), Los Angeles Championships (156) Panova 0-1 (0%) 0-0 Pan Pacific (1) 1/1 Petrova 11-7 (61%) 2-4 Pan Pacific (1), Leipzig (61), Moscow (1), Filderstadt (1), Zurich 601/7 (192), Linz (202), Philadelphia (143) Pierce 5-4 (56%) 1-1 Pan Pacific (1), Filderstadt (180), Zurich (1), Quebec City (61) 243/4

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 116 Pistolesi 6-6 (50%) 0-2 Pan Pacific (1), Paris (1), Moscow (189), Filderstadt (1), Zurich 312/6 (61), Linz (59) Raymond 12-4 (75%) 1-1 Pan Pacific (225), Memphis (153), Moscow (1), Filderstadt 513.25/5 (46.25), Philadelphia (88) Rubin 8-7 (53%) 1-4 Pan Pacific (162), Filderstadt (64), Zurich (1), Luxembourg (125), 569/6 Philadelphia (53), Los Angeles Championships (164) Schett 1-4 (20%) 0-0 Paris (1), Leipzig (1), Filderstadt Qualifying (12.5), Linz (1) 15.5/4 Schiavone 2-3 (40%) 0-1 Leipzig (1), Moscow (92), Linz (1) 94/3 Schnyder 10-7 (59%) 2-3 Paris (1), Antwerp (59), Leipzig (99), Moscow (1), Filderstadt 469/7 (33), Zurich (127), Linz (149) Seles 3-1 (75%) 0-1 Pan Pacific (245) 245/1 Serna 6-8 (43%) 0-1 Paris (61), Antwerp (1), Leipzig (1), Moscow (61), Filderstadt 180.25/7 Qualifying (1), Zurich (20.25), Linz (35) Shaughness 2-6 (25%) 0-1 Pan Pacific (1), Leipzig (1), Moscow (1), Filderstadt (1), Zurich 66/6 (1), Philadelphia (61) Stevenson 5-10 (33%) 0-3 Pan Pacific (1), Paris (1), Antwerp (1), Memphis (18), Leipzig 182/10 (35), Moscow (53), Filderstadt (1), Zurich (42), Linz (1), Philadelphia (29) Suarez 3-4 (43%) 0-0 Pan Pacific (1), Filderstadt Qualifying (1), Zurich (73), Linz (80) 155/4 Sugiyama 13-8 (62%) 2-7 Pan Pacific (46), Paris (48), Antwerp (96), Filderstadt (64), Zurich 887/8 (61), Linz (315), Philadelphia (115), Los Angeles Championships (142) Tanasugarn 3-2 (60%) 0-2 Pan Pacific (119), Luxembourg (20) 139/2 Tulyaganov 0-0 (—%) 0-0 — 0/0 S. Williams 4-0 (100%) 1-0 Paris (284) 284/1 V. Williams 4-0 (100%) 2-0 Antwerp (327) 327/1 Zvonareva 7-6 (54%) 0-3 Memphis (18), Moscow (94), Filderstadt (1), Zurich (100), Linz 345/6 (131), Philadelphia (1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 117 Winning Percentage Indoors Where two players have equal winning percentages, the player with the higher number of wins indoors is listed first. Where this fails, the player with the higher WTA rank is listed first. Minimum two events. Rank Player Wins Losses Win% WTA Rank [1] Williams, Serena 4 0 100% 3 [1] Williams, Venus 4 0 100% 11 1 Clijsters 20 3 87.0% 2 2Davenport 5 1 83.3% 5 3 Raymond 12 4 75.0% 28 4 Seles 3 1 75.0% 60 5 Hénin-Hardenne 14 5 73.7% 1 5Myskina 14 5 73.7% 7 7Mauresmo 14 7 66.7% 4 8Bovina 9 5 64.3% 21 9 Sugiyama 13 8 61.9% 10 10 Krasnoroutskaya 8 5 61.5% 27 11 Petrova 11 7 61.1% 12 12 Daniilidou 9 6 60.0% 26 13 Tanasugarn 3 2 60.0% 34 14 Dementieva 10 7 58.8% 8 14 Schnyder 10 7 58.8% 23 16 Pierce 5 4 55.6% 33 16 Kuznetsova 5 4 55.6% 36 18 Zvonareva 7 6 53.8% 13 19 Rubin 8 7 53.3% 9 20 Dokic 9 8 52.9% 15 Pistolesi 6 6 50.0% 16 Déchy 2 2 50.0% 29 Hantuchova 5 6 45.5% 19 Coetzer 4 5 44.4% 25 Serna 6 8 42.9% 22 Suarez 3 4 42.9% 14 Maleeva 3 4 42.9% 30 Schiavone 2 3 40.0% 20 Stevenson 5 10 33.3% 82 Farina Elia 4 8 33.3% 24 Capriati 2 4 33.3% 6 Martinez 1 2 33.3% 18 Majoli 1 2 33.3% 131 Shaughnessy 2 6 25.0% 17 Bedanova 1 3 25.0% 156 Schett 1 4 20.0% 79 Tulyaganova 0 0 0% 50 Fernandez, Clarisa 0 1 0% 90 Panova 0 1 0% 119 Kremer 0 1 0% 389 Kournikova 0 0 — 305

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 118 Points Per Tournament Indoors Indoor Rank Player Name Surface Pts Tourn indoor Points/Tourn WTA Rank 1Williams, Venus 327 1 327 11 2 Clijsters 1812 6 302 2 3Williams, Serena 284 1 284 3 4 Seles 245 1 245 60 4 Hénin-Hardenne 1225 5 245 1 6Davenport 453 2 226.5 5 7Mauresmo 1325 6 220.8 4 8Myskina 1259 6 209.8 7 9Bovina 572 5 114.4 21 10 Sugiyama 887 8 110.9 10 11 Dementieva 617 6 102.8 8 12 Raymond 513.25 5 102.7 28 13 Capriati 298 3 99.3 6 14 Rubin 569 6 94.8 9 15 Petrova 601 7 85.9 12 16 Dokic 617 8 77.1 15 17 Tanasugarn 139 2 69.5 34 18 Schnyder 469 7 67 23 19 Pierce 243 4 60.8 33 20 Zvonareva 345 6 57.5 13 Daniilidou 342.75 6 57.1 26 Pistolesi 312 6 52 16 Krasnoroutskaya 218.5 5 43.7 27 Hantuchova 262 6 43.7 19 Maleeva 165 4 41.3 30 Suarez 155 4 38.8 14 Déchy 67 2 33.5 29 Schiavone 94 3 31.3 20 Majoli 62 2 31 131 Serna 180.25 7 25.8 22 Coetzer 119 5 23.8 25 Kuznetsova 93 4 23.3 36 Farina Elia 178 8 22.3 24 Stevenson 182 10 18.2 82 Martinez 32 2 16 18 Shaughnessy 66 6 11 17 Schett 15.5 4 3.9 79 Bedanova 9.25 3 3.1 156 Panova 1 1 1 119 Kremer 1 1 1 389 Fernandez, Clarisa 1 1 1 90 Tulyaganova 0 0 0 50 Kournikova 0 0 0 305

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 119 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 Clijsters (707) 1V. Williams (327 — one event only) 2. Mauresmo (458) 2. S. Williams (284 — one event only) 3. Hénin-Hardenne (403) 3. Seles (245 — one event only) 4. Myskina (379) 4. Clijsters (126) 5. Dokic (369) 5. Hénin-Hardenne (105) 6. Davenport (363) 6. Davenport (90) 7. V. Williams (327) 7. Bovina (48) 8. Sugiyama (315) 8. Sugiyama (46) 9. Capriati (296) 9. Myskina (44) 10. S. Williams (284) 10. Tanasugarn (20) 11. Seles (245) 12. Raymond (225) All other Top 30 and highlight players, 13. Bovina (207) including Bedanova, Capriati, Coetzer, 14. Petrova (202) Daniilidou, Déchy, Dementieva, Dokic, 15. Pistolesi (189) Farina Elia, C. Fernandez, Hantu- 16. Pierce (180) chova,Krasnoroutskaya, Kremer, 17. Daniilidou, Rubin (162) Kuznetsova, Majoli, Maleeva, Martinez, 19. Dementieva (156) Mauresmo, Panova, Petrova, Pierce, 20. Schnyder (149) Pistolesi, Raymond, Rubin, Schett, Schi- Zvonareva (131) avone, Schnyder, Serna, Shaughnessy, Krasnoroutskaya (128) Stevenson, Suarez, and Zvonareva had Maleeva (121) at least one opening-round loss indoors. Hantuchova, Tanasugarn (119) Not playing indoors were Anna Kournik- Coetzer (115) ova and Iroda Tulyaganova Schiavone (92) Suarez (80) Déchy (66) Majoli, Serna, Shaughnessy (61) Stevenson (53) Farina Elia (52) Kuznetsova (46) Martinez (31) Schett (12.5) Bedanova (7.25) C. Fernandez, Kremer, Panova (1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 120 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 up, 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. (We should note that, while this statistic has had meaning in the past, injuries make it a little less meaningful at this time — e.g. Mauresmo was hurt by being unable to play Wimbledon; Davenport may have suffered for not playing much indoors. Ironically, the Williams Sisters probably benefitted from being injured.) 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 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 1Williams, Serena 9 3 2 Hénin-Hardenne 10 1 2 Clijsters 10 2 4Williams, Venus 13 11 5Davenport 24 5 6Mauresmo 26 4 7Farina Elia 29 24 8 Capriati 34 6 9 Rubin 39 9 10 Seles 42 60 11 Myskina 43 7 12 Dementieva 45 8 13 Zvonareva 46 13 14 Sugiyama 47 10 15 Serna 49 22 15 Pistolesi 49 16 Bovina 50 21 Zuluaga 51 38 Shaughnessy 51 17 Sharapova 53 32 Raymond 53 28 Martinez 53 18 Pierce 54 33 Petrova 54 12 Kuznetsova 54 36 Suarez 55 14 Krasnoroutskaya 55 27 Maleeva 56 30 Harkleroad 56 51 Coetzer 56 25

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 121 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 6 Capriati 1 1 2 Clijsters 4 1 1214 25 Coetzer 1 1 26 Daniilidou 1 1 5Davenport 1 1 29 Déchy 1 1 8 Dementieva 1 1 1 2 24 Farina Elia 1 1 1 Hénin-Hardenne 4 3 1 3 30 Maleeva 1 1 4Mauresmo 1 1 2 7Myskina 1 1 2 3 16 Pistolesi 2 1 28 Raymond 1 1 9 Rubin 1 1 2 22 Serna 2 1 17 Shaughnessy 1 1 14 Suarez 1 1 10 Sugiyama 1 1 2 34 Tanasugarn 1 1 3Williams, Serena 2 1 1 3 11 Williams, Venus 1 1 13 Zvonareva 1 1 Highlight players with no titles: Petrova, Dokic, Martinez, Hantuchova, Schiavone, Bovina, Schnyder, Krasnoroutskaya, Pierce, Kuznetsova, Tulyaganova, Seles, Schett, Stevenson, C. Fernandez, Panova, Majoli, Bedanova, Kournikova, Kremer Other players with titles: Grande (Casablanca/Clay/III), Molik (Hobart/Hard/V), Nagyova (Pattaya City/ Hard/V), Safina (Palermo/Clay/V), Sharapova (Japan Open/Hard/III; Quebec City/Indoor/III), Zuluaga (Bogota/Clay/III)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 122 Assorted Statistics The Busiest Players on the Tour Total Tour Matches Played by Top Players The following table shows how the Top 25, and certain other busy players, ranked in total matches played. Note that this does not correlate closely with ranking or with tournaments played; Hénin-Hardenne is near the top of the list of matches played because she plays relatively little but wins a lot; Dementieva is #3 and Sugiyama #4 because they play moderately heavy schedules and win fairly regularly, and Pisnik is Top Ten because she wins only a little but plays a ton. We note an interesting change in this regard. Last year, the player with the most matches was Jelena Dokic, with 79, followed by Anastasia Myskina, with 77 — two players with absurd schedules and moderate success. This year, the maximum number of matches has risen dramatically (to the highest number in three years), and is scored not by the insane overplayers (the top play-everything-in-sight player was Elena Dementieva, #3 in this list, who played 27 events in 2003). Rather, our top two in matches played were our top two players, Clijsters and Hénin-Hardenne. This breaks a three-year trend of busy players leading the list; the last time one of the Top Two in the WTA rankings stood higher than #4 in matches played was 2000, when Martina Hingis was the WTA #1 and her 87 matches played led the tour by far (Anna Kournikova was second, with a mere 73). It’s not clear if this is a trend, but it’s certainly a change. The final columns show how a player did against her schedule. “Possible matches” is the number of matches the player scheduled (that is, the number she would have played had she won every match leading up to the final. So a Slam would represent seven possible matches — or ten, if a player were in Slam qualifying — a Tier I between four and seven, depending on the event and whether one is seeded or not, a Tier V would represent five possible matches, etc.) The “% of possible” shows what fraction of these matches the player actually played. As a rule of thumb, a player who played 70% of her matches or more (Serena, Clijsters, Hénin-Hardenne, Venus, Mauresmo, Davenport) is Top Five material; 60% (Capriati) says Top Ten; 50% (Rubin, Zvonareva, Myskina, Petrova, Dementieva) should assure a Top 15 spot over a full schedule. If you wish to see the players ordered based on % of matches played, the list is: Serena Williams (95%), Clijsters (92%), Hénin-Hardenne (92%), Venus Williams (83%), Davenport (73%), Mauresmo (73%), Capriati (65%), Rubin (57%), Zvonareva (52%), Myskina (51%), Dementieva (50%), Petrova (50%), Sugiyama (49%), Sharapova (49%), Seles (47%), Molik (45%), Pistolesi (45%), Déchy (44%), Raymond (44%), Suarez (43%), Tulyaganova (43%), Martinez (42%), Krasnoroutskaya (42%), Schiavone (42%), Hantuchova (42%), Coetzer (42%), Pierce (41%), Shaughnessy (41%), Serna (41%), Daniilidou (40%), Schnyder (40%), Tanasugarn (39%), Maleeva (39%), Kuznetsova (39%), Zuluaga (39%), Bovina (39%), Dokic (38%), Farina Elia (37%), Pisnik (35%), Likhovtseva (34%), Panova (29%), Clarisa Fernandez (29%), Schett (28%), Stevenson (27%), Kournikova (25%), Majoli (24%), Kremer (24%), Bedanova (21%)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 123 Ordinal Player WTA Rank Matches Played Possible Matches % of possible 1 Clijsters 2 98 106 92% 2 Hénin-Hardenne 1 83 90 92% 3 Dementieva 8 72 143 50% 4 Sugiyama 10 69 140 49% 5 Petrova 12 68 136 50% 6Zvonareva 13 67 130 52% 7 Pisnik 31 66 187 35% 8 Serna 22 65 158 41% 9Myskina 7 63 124 51% 9 Rubin 9 63 110 57% 11 Davenport 5 62 85 73% 12 Mauresmo 4 61 84 73% 13 Capriati 6 60 93 65% 13 Suarez 14 60 138 43% 15 Daniilidou 26 59 146 40% 15 Molik 35 59 130 45% 17 Dokic 15 58 151 38% 17 Pistolesi 16 58 128 45% 17 Krasnoroutskaya 27 58 137 42% 20 Likhovtseva 37 57 169 34% Schiavone 20 55 130 42% Shaughnessy 17 54 131 41% Tanasugarn 34 54 138 39% Farina Elia 24 53 145 37% Sharapova 32 51 104 49% Martinez 18 50 118 42% Hantuchova 19 49 117 42% Schnyder 23 49 123 40% Raymond 28 49 111 44% Zuluaga 38 49 127 39% Déchy 29 48 108 44% Maleeva 30 48 123 39% Bovina 21 47 122 39% Coetzer 25 46 110 42% Kuznetsova 36 44 113 39% Schett 79 41 146 28% Pierce 33 40 97 41% Tulyaganova 50 40 94 43% Williams, Serena 3 39 41 95% Stevenson 82 39 143 27% Fernandez, Clarisa 90 35 122 29% Williams, Venus 11 29 35 83% Bedanova 156 26 122 21% Majoli 131 24 100 24% Panova 119 20 69 29% Seles 60 17 36 47% Kournikova 305 10 40 25% Kremer 389 4 17 24%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 124 Total Tour Events Played by the Top 150 The following table sorts the Top 150 (as of November 11, 2003) 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. Events # to Play Players 34 2 Grandin (150), Vakulenko (73) 33 3 Cargill (103), Lee-Waters (136), Ad. Serra Zanetti (104) 32 1 Kurhajcova (86) 31 5 Abramovic (148), Benesova (140), Craybas (98), Jidkova (97), Voracova (132) 30 7 Czink (83), Dokic (15), Fislova (128), Parra (68), Pisnik (31), Ant. Serra Zanetti (107), Sucha (89) 29 6 Barna (48), Beltrame (147), Grande (70), Martinez Granados (105), Poutchek (121), Zheng (94) 28 11 Bartoli (57), Camerin (99), Cohen-Aloro (65), Granville (46), Irvin (123), Kleinova (88), Koukalova (62), Likhovtseva (37), Llagostera Vives (139), Schaul (81), Torrens Valero (106) 27 9 Dementieva (8), Loit (41), Noorlander (144), Randriantefy (101), Reeves (75), Serna (22), Sny- der (111), Talaja (93), Tu (145) 26 14 Arvidsson (113), Black (52), Daniilidou (26), Dominikovic (130), Farina Elia (24), Foretz (100), Gagliardi (56), Kostanic (67), Matevzic (58), Pennetta (69), Sanchez Lorenzo (42), Santangelo (146), Stevenson (82), Sugiyama (10) 25 9 Ashley (115), Beygelzimer (117), Callens (74), Drake (112), Mattek (135), Obata (49), Schett (79), Tatarkova (126), Vinci (116) 24 17 Barabanschikova (149), Birnerova (110), Cervanova (64), Jankovic (85), Medina Garrigues (71), Morigami (63), Myskina (7), Ondraskova (87), Perebiynis (80), Pratt (53), Schruff (114), Shaughnessy (17), Srebotnik (39), Suarez (14), Tanasugarn (34), Vaskova (127), Widjaja (95) 23 14 Brandi (78), Chladkova (43), Hantuchova (19), Pastikova (138), Perry (143), Petrova (12), Raz- zano (72), Schiavone (20), Schnyder (23), Smashnova-Pistolesi (16), Sun (141), Weingärtner (47), Yoshida (137), Zvonareva (13) 22 9 Bovina (21), Dulko (124), Garbin (84), Grönefeld (120), Krasnoroutskaya (27), Maleeva (30), Nagyova (91), Obziler (129), Vento-Kabchi (44) 21 12 Ani (142), Cho (77), Clijsters (2), C. Fernandez (90), Mandula (40), Marrero (109), C. Martinez (18), Mikaelian (66), Molik (35), Rubin (9), Sequera (76), Zuluaga (38) 20 4 Coetzer (25), Kapros (92), Leon Garcia (96), Sprem (59) 19 3 Castano (133), Dechy (29), Raymond (28) 18 9 Capriati (6), M. Casanova (102), Harkleroad (51), Henin-Hardenne (1), Husarova (125), Jugic- Salkic (134), Kuznetsova (36), Rittner (118), Ruano Pascual (55) 17 6 Asagoe (45), Frazier (61), Majoli (131), Mauresmo (4), Pierce (33), Tulyaganova (50) 16 4 Davenport (5), Kirilenko (122), Saﬁna (54), Sharapova (32) 13 1 Panova (119) 12 1 Douchevina (108) 72 Seles (60), S. Williams (3) 61 V. Williams (11) All told, the Top 150 played 3568 events in 2003, up slightly from 3540 events in 2002, and dramatically from 3434 events in 2001. This even though the most typical result has gone down (the most popular number of events last year was 25, played by 18 players; this year, it’s 24). For the third straight year, the maximum was the same, at 34; last year, Ansley Cargill and Lubomira Kurhajcova reached that figure; the year before that, Alina Jidkova led the Top 150 with 34 events. After two years in which Tatiana Panova led the Top 50 with 31 events, thought, the Top 50 has a new leader: Jelena Dokic and Tina Pisnik, each with 30.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 125 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 the sort of statistic the WTA calculates. The sections below offer three proposals, each with strengths and weaknesses (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 strenth, 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. (So, for example, the top four players at Sydney in 2001 were Hingis, ranked #1; Davenport, ranked #2; Seles, ranked #4; and Martinez, ranked #5. So the total “value” of this tournament is 1+1+2+2+4+5=15.) The lower this number (the minimum possible value is 13), the stronger the tournament 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). Sum the values for the bottom three, then subtract the sum of the value for the top three, and divide by three. The smaller this number, the deeper the tournament, as the difference between top and bottom seeds is smallest. Again taking Sydney 2001, the top seeds were ranked 1, 2, and 4; the bottom three seeds were ranked #8, #12, and #14. So the depth of Sydney is defined by [(8+12+14)-(1+2+4)]/3 = (34-7)/3 = 27/3 = 9. 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 tournaments are of equal difficulty, the one with the greater depth is listed first (but they are ranked equal). The general coherence of the WTA’s Tier system is shown by the fact that only two Tier III events (’s-Hertogenbosch, which is of course “home” for Clijsters and Hénin- Hardenne, and Strasbourg) are ranked above the lowest Tier II. Rank Tier Tournament Strength Score Depth Score Winner 1 Slam Roland Garros 13 6.5 Hénin-Hardenne 1 Slam Wimbledon 13 7.0 S. Williams 1 I+ Miami 13 7.0 S. Williams 1 Slam Australian Open 13 8.0 S. Williams 5 II Filderstadt 15 6.7 Clijsters 6 Cham Los Angeles Champ 17 7.3 Clijsters 7 Slam U. S. Open 18 14.3 Hénin-Hardenne 8 I Rome 19 8.3 Clijsters 8 II Antwerp 19 15.7 V. Williams 10 I Zurich 21 8.7 Hénin-Hardenne 11 II+ San Diego 22 8.8 Hénin-Hardenne 11 I Canadian Open 22 10.0 Hénin-Hardenne 13 I Charleston 24 11.3 Hénin-Hardenne

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 126 14 I Berlin 27 8.5 Hénin-Hardenne 14 II Sydney 27 9.0 Clijsters 14 II Leipzig 27 13.3 Myskina 17 I+ Indian Wells 29 7.2 Clijsters 17 II Paris 29 12.3 S. Williams 19 III ’s-Hertogenbosch 31 34.7 Clijsters 20 II Amelia Island 33 10.0 Dementieva 21 II Los Angeles 35 4.7 Clijsters 21 II New Haven 35 6.3 Capriati 23 II Dubai 37 8.7 Hénin-Hardenne 24 III Strasbourg 39 14.3 Farina Elia 24 II+ Warsaw 39 15.7 Mauresmo 24 II Stanford 39 18.3 Clijsters 27 II Eastbourne 41 5.3 Rubin 27 II Scottsdale 41 12.7 Sugiyama 29 IMoscow 42 8.7 Myskina 30 II Philadelphia 53 12.0 Mairesmo 31 IPan Paciﬁc 56 7.0 Davenport 32 II Shanghai 61 29.7 Dementieva 33 II Linz 65 5.3 Sugiyama 34 IV Sarasota 72 11.3 Myskina 34 III+ Bali 72 33.7 Dementieva 36 III Doha 82 30.0 Myskina 37 III Luxembourg 83 25.3 Clijsters 38 III Birmingham 91 17.5 Maleeva 39 III Vienna 117 24 Suarez 40 III+ Sopot 118 32.3 Pistolesi 41 III Madrid 119 18.0 Rubin 42 III Gold Coast 120 14.3 Déchy 43 IV Auckland 124 13.0 Daniilidou 44 III Memphis 129 29.3 Raymond 45 III Acapulco 132 38.0 Coetzer 46 III Japan Open 159 31.7 Sharapova 47 V Canberra 161 19.3 Shaughnessy 47 III Bol 161 41.0 Zvonareva 49 IV Helsinki 163 37.7 Pistolesi 50 VPalermo 195 25 Saﬁna 51 IV Hyderabad 205 37.0 Tanasugarn 52 VHobart 233 13.3 Molik 53 III Quebec City 241 30.7 Sharapova 54 III Bogota 253 52.7 Zuluaga 55 V Budapest 261 30.7 Serna 56 IV Estoril 282 28.7 Serna 57 VPattaya City 291 32.3 Nagyova 58 IV Tashkent 335 23 Ruano Pascual 59 V Casablanca 358 16.0 Grande

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 127 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 Leipzig, with three Top Ten players but those two including the world’s #1 and #2, really stronger than Berlin, which had seven 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 Roland Garros #1/SWilliams 10 (#35/Panova) — Hénin-Har 2Miami #1/SWilliams 10 #12/Seles — S. Williams 3Wimbledon #1/SWilliams 9 #6/Mauresmo #6; next missing #18, #36 S. Williams 4 Australian Opn #1/SWilliams 8 #6/Mauresmo #6, #9 S. Williams 5 Filderstadt #1/Clijsters 8 #3/SWilliams #3, #6 Clijsters 6 Los Angeles Ch #1/Clijsters 7 #3/SWilliams #3, #4, #7 Clijsters 7 Rome #1/SWilliams 7 #3/VWilliams #3, #4, #5 Clijsters 8 Zurich #1/Clijsters 5 #3/SWilliams #3, #4, #5, #6, #9 Hénin-Har 9 Leipzig #1/Clijsters 3 #3/SWilliams #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9 Myskina 10 U. S. Open #1/Clijsters 8 #2/SWilliams #2, #5 Hénin-Har 11 Canadian Open #1/Clijsters 5 #2/SWilliams #2, #4, #5, #7, #9 Hénin-Har 12 Charleston #1/SWilliams 5 #2/VWilliams #2, #3, #6, #7, #8 Hénin-Har 13 Paris #1/SWilliams 4 #2/VWilliams #2, #3, #4, #6, #8, #9 S. Williams 14 Antwerp #2/VWilliams 5 #1/SWilliams #1, #6, #7, #8, #9 V. Williams 15 San Diego #2/Clijsters 6 #1/SWilliams #1, #4, #6, #10 Hénin-Har 16 Los Angeles #2/Clijsters 2 #1/SWilliams #1, #3, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10 Clijsters 17 Stanford #2/Clijsters 3 #1/SWilliams #1, #3, #4, #5, #6, #8, #10 Clijsters 18 Sydney #3/Capriati 4 #1/SWilliams #1, #2, #6, #7, #9, #10 Clijsters 19 Berlin #3/Clijsters 7 #1/SWilliams #1, #2, #5 Hénin-Har 20 Indian Wells #3/Clijsters 6 #1/SWilliams #1, #2, #4, #6 Clijsters 21 Warsaw #3/VWilliams 4 #1/SWilliams #1, #2, #4, #5, #6, #8 Mauresmo 22 Scottsdale #3/Clijsters 4 #1/SWilliams #1, #2, #4, #5, #6, #8, #10 Sugiyama 23 Amelia Island #4/Hénin-H 4 #1/SWilliams #1, #2, #3, #7, #8, #10 Dementieva 24 New Haven #4/Davenport 5 #1/Clijsters #1, #2, #3, #5, #9 Capriati 25 Dubai #4/Hénin-H 4 #1/SWilliams #1, #2, #3, #5, #8, #9 Hénin-Har 26 Eastbourne #5/Davenport 5 #1/SWilliams #1, #2, #3, #4, #6 Rubin 27 Moscow #5/Capriati 4 #1/Clijsters #1, #2, #3, #4, #6, #9 Myskina 28 Philadelphia #7/Mauresmo 3 #1/Clijsters #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #8 Mauresmo 29 Shanghai #8/Dementiev 2 #1/Clijsters #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #10 Dementieva 30 Pan Paciﬁc #8/Dokic 3 #1/SWilliams #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7 Davenport 31 Linz #9/Myskina 1 #1/Hénin-Har #1Ð#8, #10 Sugiyama

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 128 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 Australian Open 475 100% S. Williams 1 Miami 475 100% S. Williams 1 Roland Garros 475 100% Hénin-Hardenne 1 Wimbledon 475 100% S. Williams 5 Filderstadt 452 95.2% Clijsters 6 U. S. Open 436 91.8% Hénin-Hardenne 7 Los Angeles Cham 412 86.7% Clijsters 8 Rome 405 85.3% Clijsters 9 Berlin 351 73.9% Hénin-Hardenne 10 San Diego 350 73.7% Hénin-Hardenne 11 Zurich 349 73.5% Hénin-Hardenne 12 Canadian Open 340 71.6% Hénin-Hardenne 13 Charleston 336 70.7% Hénin-Hardenne 14 Antwerp 324 68.2% V. Williams 15 Indian Wells 318 66.9% Clijsters 16 Paris 286 60.2% S. Williams 17 Leipzig 283 59.6% Myskina 18 Sydney 274 57.7% Clijsters 19 New Haven 272 57.3% Capriati 20 Eastbourne 267 56.2% Rubin 21 Amelia Island 251 52.8% Dementieva 22 Dubai 244 51.4% Hénin-Hardenne 23 Warsaw 235 49.5% Mauresmo 24 Moscow 234 49.3% Myskina 25 Los Angeles 220 46.3% Clijsters 26 Scottsdale 212 44.6% Sugiyama 27 Stanford 206 43.4% Clijsters 28 ’s-Hertogenbosch 199 41.9% Clijsters 28 Pan Paciﬁc 199 41.9% Davenport 30 Philadelphia 184 38.7% Mauresmo 31 Linz 143 30.1% Sugiyama 32 Shanghai 126 26.5% Dementieva

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 129 33 Sarasota 123 25.9% Myskina 34 Luxembourg 118 24.8% Clijsters 35 Bali 111 23.4% Dementieva 36 Strasbourg 108 22.7% Farina Elia 37 Doha 83 17.5% Myskina 38 Birmingham 75 15.8% Maleeva 39 Madrid 53 11.2% Rubin 39 Sopot 53 11.2% Pistolesi 41 Auckland 45 9.5% Daniilidou 42 Memphis 40 8.4% Raymond 43 Gold Coast 35 7.4% Déchy 43 Vienna 35 7.4% Suarez 45 Acapulco 30 6.3% Coetzer 46 Bol 20 4.2% Zvonareva 46 Helsinki 20 4.2% Pistolesi 48 Japan Open 15 3.2% Sharapova 49 Canberra 10 2.1% Shaughnessy 50 Bogota 0 0% Zuluaga 50 Budapest 0 0% Serna 50 Casablanca 0 0% Grande 50 Estoril 0 0% Serna 50 Hobart 0 0% Molik 50 Hyderabad 0 0% Tanasugarn 50 Palermo 0 0% Saﬁna 50 Pattaya City 0 0% Nagyova 50 Quebec City 0 0% Sharapova 50 Tashkent 0 0% Ruano Pascual

Overall, these three systems agree fairly closely: If we look at the Top Ten events under each ranking, we find that no fewer than eight tournaments are Top Ten under all three: Australian Open, Filderstadt, Los Angeles Championships, Miami, Roland Garros, Rome, U. S. Open, and Wimbledon — all eight of which, naturally, we include among our ten “major events” for each year. Other tournaments which are Top Ten in one list or another but not in all are Antwerp, Berlin, Leipzig, San Diego, and Zurich. Assessing the weakest tournaments is harder, but we note that the last three under the “Strength and Depth” ranking — Pattaya City, Tashkent, and Casablanca — 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 130 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 1 S. Williams 100.0 Australian Open, Miami, Wimbledon 1 Hénin-Hardenne 100.0 Roland Garros 3 Clijsters 95.2 Filderstadt 4 V. Williams 68.2 Antwerp 5Myskina 59.6 Leipzig 6 Capriati 57.3 New Haven 7 Rubin 56.2 Eastbourne 8 Dementieva 52.8 Amelia Island 9Mauresmo 49.5 Warsaw 10 Sugiyama 44.6 Scottsdale 11 Davenport 41.9 Pan Pacific 12 Farina Elia 22.7 Strasbourg 13 Maleeva 15.8 Birmingham 14 Pistolesi 11.2 Sopot 15 Daniilidou 9.5 Auckland 16 Raymond 8.4 Memphis 17 Déchy 7.4 Gold Coast 18 Suarez 7.4 Vienna 19 Coetzer 6.3 Acapulco 20 Zvonareva 4.2 Bol 21 Sharapova 3.2 Japan Open 22 Shaughnessy 2.1 Canberra Molik 0 Hobart Tanasugarn 0 Hyderabad Zuluaga 0 Bogota Grande 0 Casablanca Serna 0 Estoril, Budapest Safina 0 Palermo Ruano Pascual 0 Tashkent Nagyova 0 Pattaya City

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 131 Strongest Tournament Performances The list below shows the biggest performances (highest number of points earned) in 2003. Every result of more than 350 points is listed. Ordinal Score Player Event 1 1156 Hénin-Hardenne Roland Garros W 2 1110 S. Williams Wimbledon W 3 1074 Hénin-Hardenne U. S. Open W 4 1040 S. Williams Australian Open W 5 806 V. Williams Wimbledon F 6 750 Clijsters U. S. Open F 7 707 Clijsters Los Angeles Championships W 8 702 V. Williams Australian Open F 9 646 Clijsters Roland Garros F 10 510 Petrova Roland Garros SF 11 506 S. Williams Roland Garros SF 12 493 S. Williams Miami W 13 460 Hénin-Hardenne Australian Open SF 14 458 Mauresmo Los Angeles Championships F 15T 440 Hénin-Hardenne Berlin W 15T 440 Clijsters Wimbledon SF 17 459 Clijsters Indian Wells W 18 432 Clijsters Australian Open SF 19 424 Capriati U. S. Open SF 20T 420 Hénin-Hardenne Charleston W 20T 420 Myskina Leipzig W 22 408 Davenport U. S. Open SF 23 403 Hénin-Hardenne Zurich W 24 402 Clijsters Rome W 25 401 Hénin-Hardenne Canadian Open W 26 391 Hénin-Hardenne San Diego W 27 386 Dementieva Amelia Island W 28 383 Clijsters Filderstadt W 29 379 Myskina Moscow W 30 370 Hénin-Hardenne Wimbledon SF 31 369 Dokic Zurich F 32 366 Krasnoroutskaya Canadian Open F 33 363 Davenport Pan Pacific W 34 358 Sugiyama Scottsdale W 35 354 Mauresmo Warsaw W 36 350 Clijsters Sydney W

All told, thirteen (and only thirteen) players earned a 350 point result, with fully half of them (18 of 36) being earned by Clijsters and Hénin-Hardenne. The list, with the number of 350+ point results, is Clijsters (9), Hénin-Hardenne (9), S. Williams (4), Davenport (2), Mauresmo (2), Myskina (2), V. Williams (2), Capriati (1), Dementieva (1), Dokic (1), Krasnoroutskaya (1), Petrova (1), Sugiyama (1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 132 Title Defences The following list shows all instances of a defending a title in 2003 (total of twelve, which is astonishing; there were six in 2002; seven in 2001)

Title Defended By Antwerp V. Williams Memphis Raymond Bogota Zuluaga Miami S. Williams Estoril Serna Berlin Hénin-Hardenne Strasbourg Farina Elia Eastbourne Rubin Wimbledon S. Williams Filderstadt Clijsters Luxembourg Clijsters Los Angeles Championships Clijsters

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 133 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) Tournament Seeds Reached Held Seed % Reached % Held Seed Seeded Round Seeded Round Australian Open 32 211 18 66% 56% Roland Garros 32 192 14 59% 44% Wimbledon 32 193 17 59% 53% U. S. Open 324 165 12 50% 38% Los Angeles Champ 4 4 3 100% 75% Total 132 79 64 60% 48% 1. If we take only the top 16 seeds, 12 of 16, or 75%, reached the seeded round (round of 32); nine, or 56%, reached the Round of Sixteen; nine, or 56%, held seed 2. If we take only the top 16 seeds, 10 of 16, or 63%, reached the seeded round (round of 32); all 10 of these reached the Round of Sixteen; 6, or 38%, held seed 3. If we take only the top 16 seeds (actually only 15), 12, or 80%, made the seeded round (round of 32);10 (67%) made the Round of Sixteen; nine, or 56%, held seed 4. The U. S. Open, in its blatant and unsuccessful attempt to help Jennifer Capriati, did not replace #4 seed Venus Williams when she withdrew. This in effect made Capriati the #4 seed. We treat her as such, and Ai Sugiyama as the de facto #6 seed. Capriati held her revised seed; Sugiyama did not. 5. If we take only the top 16 seeds (actually only 15), 11, or 73%, made the seeded round (round of 32); 8 (53%) made the Round of Sixteen; 7 (47%) held seed Tier I Tournaments Tournament Seeds Reached Held Seed % Reached % Held Seed Seeded Round Seeded Round Pan Paciﬁc 8 5 3 63% 38% Indian Wells 32 211 17 66% 53% Miami 312 223 16 71% 52% Charleston 16 11 10 69% 63% Berlin 16 10 8 63% 50% Rome 16 9 7 56% 44% Canadian Open 16 11 5 69% 31% Moscow 8 4 4 50% 50% Zurich 8 3 2 38% 25% Total 151 96 72 64% 48% 1. If we take only the top 16 seeds, 10, or 63%, reached the Round of 16; 8, or 50%, held seed. 2. #10 seed Monica Seles withdrew and was replaced by a Lucky Loser 3. If we take only the top 16 seeds (actually, only 15 at Miami), 10 (67%) reached the Round of 16; 6, or 40%, held seed

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 134 Tier II Tournaments Tournament Seeds Reached Held Seed % Reached % Held Seed Seeded Round Seeded Round Sydney 8 5 4 63% 50% Paris 8 5 3 63% 38% Antwerp 8 6 6 75% 75% Dubai 8 5 4 63% 50% Scottsdale 71 3 32 43% 43% Amelia Island 153 15 10 100% 67% Warsaw 8 4 3 50% 38% Eastbourne 8 4 3 50% 38% Stanford 8 4 3 50% 38% San Diego 154 9 85 60% 53% Los Angeles 156 9860% 53% New Haven 8 4 2 50% 25% Shanghai 8 4 4 50% 50% Leipzig 8 4 3 50% 38% Filderstadt 8 5 4 63% 50% Linz 8 7 6 88% 75% Philadelphia 8 6 5 75% 63% Total 156 99 79 64% 51% 1. #1 seed Serena Williams withdrew and was replaced by a Lucky Loser 2. Formally, that is; #2 seed Clijsters, who in the absence of Serena Williams would have been expected to win, lost the ﬁnal 3. #13 seed Conchita Martinez withdrew and was replaces by a Lucky Loser 4. #1 Serena Williams withdrew and was replaced by a Lucky Loser 5. At San Diego, as at Scottsdale, this is only formally correct; #2 seed Clijsters, who in the absence of Serena was the clear favorite, lost the ﬁnal (and, with it, a guarantee of the #1 ranking) 6. #3 seed Chanda Rubin withdrew and was replaced by a Lucky Loser

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 135 Tier III Tournaments Tournament Seeds Reached Held Seed % Reached % Held Seed Seeded Round Seeded Round Gold Coast 8 5 4 63% 50% Doha 8 5 4 63% 50% Memphis 71 4357% 43% Bogota 8 5 3 63% 38% Acapulco 8 2 2 25% 25% Bol 8 1 1 13% 13% Madrid 8 4 3 50% 38% Strasbourg 8 3 2 38% 25% Birmingham 16 8 5 50% 31% Vienna 8 6 3 75% 38% ’s-Hertogenbosch 8 5 4 63% 50% Sopot 8 6 4 75% 50% Bali 8 3 2 38% 25% Japan Open 8 2 1 25% 13% Luxembourg 8 5 4 63% 50% Quebec City 8 4 2 50% 25% Total 135 68 47 50% 35% 1. #7 seed Emilie Loit withdrew and was replaced by a Lucky Loser

Tier IV Tournaments Tournament Seeds Reached Held Seed % Reached % Held Seed Seeded Round Seeded Round Auckland 8 3 2 38% 25% Hyderabad 8 4 3 50% 38% Sarasota 8 3 3 38% 38% Estoril 8 2 2 25% 25% Helsinki 8 3 2 38% 25% Tashkent 8 5 4 63% 50% Total 48 20 16 42% 33%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 136 Tier V Tournaments Tournament Seeds Reached Held Seed % Reached % Held Seed Seeded Round Seeded Round Canberra 8 3 3 38% 38% Hobart 8 4 4 50% 50% Casablanca 8 2 1 25% 13% Budapest 8 2 2 25% 25% Palermo 8 4 3 50% 38% Pattaya City 61 4267% 33% Total 46 19 15 41% 33% 1. #3 seed Marlene Weingärtner and #6 Flavia Pennetta were replaced by Lucky Losers — as were three unseeded players

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 137 Lucky Losers All told, there were 62 instances of Lucky Losers making WTA main draws in 2003 (an average of just more than one per tournament). Highlight players who were Lucky Losers were: Silvia Farina Elia — New Haven (lost 1R of main draw) Magui Serna — Zurich (lost 1R of main draw) Interestingly, Lucky Losers often came in bunches — that is, if a player managed Lucky Loserhood once, she was likely to have it happen more than once. The most extreme Lucky Loser was Katalin Marosi, who managed it three time (Budapest, Warsaw, Helsinki), and even won a main draw match at Budapest. Other multiple Lucky Losers: Maria Elena Camerin (Casablanca, Roland Garros; won 1 main draw match) Gisela Dulko (Estoril, Birmingham; won 2 main draw matches) Tathiana Garbin (Charleston, Berlin; won 1 main draw match) Alina Jidkova (Amelia Island, Stanford; won 1 main draw match) Saori Obata (San Diego, New Haven; won 0 main draw matches) Arantxa Parra (Wimbledon, Bali; won 1 main draw match) Adriana Serra Zanetti (Birmingham, U. S. Open; won 1 main draw match) Vanessa Webb (Memphis, Birmingham; won 0 main draw matches) Marlene Weingärtner (Canberra, Amelia Island; won 3 main draw matches) One-time Lucky Loser were: Maki Arai (Pattaya City), Olga Blahotova (Bol), Els Callens (Berlin), Caralina Castano (Madrid), Jill Craybas (Shanghai), Evie Dominikovic (Miami), Maureen Drake (Charleston), Stephanie Foretz (Scottsdale), Maria Goloviznina (Memphis), Anna-Lena Grönefeld (Philadelphia), Angela Haynes (Philadelphia), Janette Husarova (Canadian Open), Jin-Hee Kim (Japan Open), Sandra Kleinova (Estoril), Lubomira Kurhajcova (Sydney), Janet Lee (Philadelphia), Emilie Loit (Rome), Marta Marrero (Helsinki), Seda Noorlander (Wimbledon), Tatiana Perebiynis (New Haven), Wynne Prakusya (Birmingham), Nicole Pratt (San Diego), Libuse Prusova (Sopot), Samantha Reeves (Roland Garros), Maria Emelia Salerni (Casablanca), Claudine Schaul (Antwerp), Tina Schiechtl (Pattaya), Julia Schruff (Palermo), Sandra Klemenschits (Pattaya), Lydia Steinbach (Pattaya), Tian Tian Sun (Hyderabad), Elena Tatarkova (Estoril), Pichittra Thongdach (Pattaya), Meilen Tu (San Diego), Julia Vakulenko (Stanford), Andreea Vanc (Budapest), Renata Voracova (Warsaw), Angelique Widjaja (Los Angeles), and Zi Yan (Japan Open). These 62 Lucky Losers compiled an overall record of 25-62 in main draw matches. No Lucky Loser compiled more than two main draw wins in a tournament; players who managed that were Dulko (Estoril), Loit (Rome), Weingärtner (Canberra), and Yan (Japan Open). If we look at tournaments with the most Lucky Losers, the records were as follows: 5 — Pattaya City 4 — Birmingham 3— Estoril, New Haven, Philadelphia, San Diego 2 — Amelia Island, Berlin, Budapest, Casablanca, Charleston, Helsinki, Japan Open, Memphis, Roland Garros, Stanford, Warsaw, Wimbledon 1 — Antwerp, Bali, Bol, Canadian Open, Canberra, Hyderabad, Los Angeles, Madrid, Miami, Palermo, Rome, Scottsdale, Shanghai, Sopot, Sydney, U. S. Open, Zurich

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 138 Bagels The following chart lists the bagels (6-0 sets) experienced or inflicted by top players (WTA matches only; Iroda Tulyaganova, e.g., had a Hopman Cup bagel which is not shown, and Venus Williams, Anastasia Myskina, Kim Clijsters, and Chanda Rubin had Fed Cup bagels which are omitted. It is also possible that some players had qualifying or Challenger bagels I have not shown; this is based on the scores the WTA releases each day). The “bagel” set is shown in bold. Double bagels are shown in bold for the entire line. Player Bagels inﬂicted Bagels experienced Bedanova Charleston: lost to Davenport 1Ð6 0Ð6 U. S. Open: lost to Camerin 4Ð6 0Ð6 Bovina Indian Wells: def. Reeves 6Ð1 6Ð0 Capriati Miami: def. Granville 7Ð6 6Ð0 Los Angeles Champ: lost to Clijsters 6Ð4 3Ð6 0Ð6 Miami: def. Taylor 6Ð1 6Ð0 Amelia Island: def. Raymond 6Ð2 6Ð0 Roland Garros: def. Bartoli 6Ð3 6Ð0 U. S. Open: def. Torrens Valero 6Ð0 6Ð1 Clijsters Australian Open: def. Mandula 6Ð0 6Ð0 Roland Garros: def. Maleeva 0Ð6 6Ð2 6Ð1 Miami: def. Dokic 6Ð2 6Ð0 Roland Garros: lost to Hénin-Hardenne 0Ð6 4Ð6 Berlin: def. Hantuchova 6Ð0 6Ð3 Rome: def. Ruano Pascual 6Ð1 6Ð0 Rome: def. Black 6Ð0 6Ð3 Rome: def. Mauresmo 3Ð6 7Ð6 6Ð0 Roland Garros: def. Frazier 6Ð2 6Ð0 Wimbledon: def. Neffa-de los Rios 6Ð0 6Ð0 Wimbledon: def. Farina Elia 5Ð7 6Ð0 6Ð1 Stanford: def. Mikaelian 4Ð6 6Ð0 6Ð1 San Diego: def. Ruano Pascual 6Ð2 6Ð0 Filderstadt: def. Pierce 7Ð6 6Ð0 Luxembourg: def. Sharapova 6Ð0 6Ð3 Los Angeles Champ: def. Capriati 4Ð6 6Ð3 6Ð0 Los Angeles Champ: def. Mauresmo 6Ð2 6-0 Coetzer Australian Open: def Pistolesi 6Ð0 6Ð2 Charleston: lost to Pierce 3Ð6 6Ð1 0Ð6 Indian Wells: def. Raymond 6Ð0 6Ð3 U. S. Open: lost to Petrova 0Ð6 1Ð6 Amelia Island: def. Zvonareva 7Ð5 4Ð6 6Ð0 Zurich: lost to Pisnik 3Ð6 0-6 Rome: def. Tulyaganova 2Ð6 6Ð3 6Ð0 U. S. Open: def. Lastra 6Ð0 6Ð2 Daniilidou Auckland: def. Müller 6–3 6Ð0 Paris: lost to S. Williams 2-6 0Ð6 Paris: def. Foretz 6Ð0 6Ð4 Canadian Open: lost to Krasnoroutskaya 0Ð6 6Ð3 5Ð7 Roland Garros: def. Garbin 6Ð0 4Ð6 6Ð2 Moscow: lost to Myskina 3Ð6 0Ð6 Davenport Indian Wells: def. Likhovtseva 6Ð3 6Ð0 Miami: lost to Bartoli 0Ð6, retired Charleston: def. Bedanova 6Ð1 6Ð0 Amelia Island: def. Pratt 6Ð1 6Ð0 Roland Garros: def. Prakusya 6Ð2 6Ð0 San Diego: def. Krasnoroutskaya 6Ð0 7Ð6 New Haven: def. Serna 6Ð0 7Ð5 U. S. Open: def. Callens 6Ð1 6Ð0 U. S. Open: def. Czink 6Ð0 6Ð2 U. S. Open: def. Petrova 6Ð0 6Ð7 6-2 U. S. Open: def. Suarez 6Ð4 6Ð0 Déchy Antwerp: def. Husarova 1Ð6 6Ð3 6Ð0 Rome: lost to S. Williams 3Ð6 0Ð6 Scottsdale: def. Lucic 3Ð6 6Ð1 6Ð0 Berlin: def. C. Fernandez 6Ð0 6Ð4

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 139 Dementieva Amelia Island: def. Hantuchova 6Ð0 6Ð1 Paris: lost to Mauresmo 0Ð6 0Ð6 New Haven: def. Martinez 4Ð6 6Ð2 6Ð0 Filderstadt: lost to Hénin-Hardenne 5-7 0-6 U. S. Open: def. Perebiynis 5Ð7 6Ð4 6Ð0 Filderstadt: def. Farina Elia 6Ð0 2Ð1, retired Dokic Zurich: def. Schnyder 6Ð0 6-3 Miami: lost to Clijsters 2Ð6 0Ð6 Filderstadt: lost to Maleeva 5Ð7 0Ð6 Zurich: lost to Hénin-Hardenne 0Ð6 4Ð6 Farina Elia Pan Pacific: def. Pierce 3–6 6–1 6Ð0 Sydney: lost to Maleeva 6Ð3 5Ð7 0Ð6 Indian Wells: def. Jidkova 6Ð4 6Ð0 Wimbledon: lost to Clijsters 7Ð5 0Ð6 1Ð6 Roland Garros: def. Martinez Granados 6Ð0 6Ð4 New Haven Qualifying: lost to M. Casanova 0Ð6 1Ð6 Filderstadt: lost to Dementieva 0Ð6 1Ð2, retired Hantuchova Roland Garros: def. Jidkova 2Ð6 6Ð0 6Ð1 Miami: lost to Molik 6Ð2 5Ð7 0Ð6 Wimbledon: lost to Asagoe 6Ð0 4Ð6 10Ð12 Amelia Island: lost to Dementieva 0Ð6 1Ð6 U. S. Open: def. Vakulenko 6Ð0 7Ð6 Berlin: lost to Clijsters 0Ð6 3Ð6 Canadian Open: lost to Suarez 2Ð6 0Ð6 Hénin-Hard Sydney: def. Husarova 6Ð1 6Ð0 Australian Open: def. Kournikova 6Ð0 6Ð1 Australian Open: def. Srebotnik 6Ð2 6Ð0 Miami: def. Tanasugarn 6Ð2 6Ð0 Amelia Island: def. Randriantefy 6Ð3 6Ð0 Roland Garros: def. Clijsters 6Ð0 6Ð4 San Diego: def. Petrova 6Ð0 6Ð2 Canadian Open: def. Krasnoroutskaya 6Ð1 6Ð0 U. S. Open: def. Safina 6Ð0 6Ð3 Leipzig: def. Vento-Kabchi 6Ð0 6Ð3 Filderstadt: def. Martinez 6Ð0 7Ð6 Filderstadt: def. Dementieva 7Ð5 6Ð0 Zurich: def. Dokic 6Ð0 6Ð4 Kournikova Australian Open: lost to Hénin-Hardenne 0Ð6 1Ð6 Krasnoroutsk Pan Pacific Qualifying: def. Taylor 6Ð0 6Ð3 ’s-Hertogenbosch: lost to Tulyaganova 3Ð6 0Ð6 Dubai: def. Ad. Serra Zanetti 6Ð3 6Ð0 San Diego: lost to Davenport 0Ð6 6Ð7 Canadian Open: def. Daniilidou 6Ð0 3Ð6 7Ð5 Canadian Open: lost to Hénin-Hardenne 1–6 0Ð6 U. S. Open: lost to Barna 1Ð6 6Ð0 3Ð6 Moscow: lost to Schiavone 2Ð6 6Ð0 6Ð4 Kremer Auckland: lost to Harkleroad 3Ð6 0Ð6 Kuznetsova Indian Wells: def. Kirkland 6Ð3 6Ð0 Moscow: lost to Pistolesi 6Ð7 0Ð6 Majoli Sarasota: def. Tulyaganova 5Ð7 6Ð0 7Ð5 Vienna: lost to Fislova 0Ð6 1Ð6 Roland Garros: def. Cho 4Ð6 7Ð5 6Ð0 Wimbledon: lost to Rubin 3-6 0Ð6 Maleeva Sydney: def. Farina Elia 3Ð6 7Ð5 6Ð0 Roland Garros: lost to Clijsters 6Ð0 2Ð6 1Ð6 Wimbledon: def. Barna 6Ð0 6Ð1 Los Angeles: def. Ruano Pascual 6Ð0 6Ð3 Filderstadt: def. Dokic 7Ð5 6Ð0 Martinez Doha: def. Ahl 6Ð0 6-2 Indian Wells: def. Rittner 0Ð6 6Ð3 6Ð3 New Haven: lost to Dementieva 6Ð4 2Ð6 0Ð6 Shanghai: lost to Morigami 5Ð7 0Ð6 Filderstadt: lost to Hénin-Hardenne 0Ð6 6Ð7 Mauresmo Paris: def. Dementieva 6Ð0 6Ð0 Miami: lost to Rubin 0Ð6 2Ð6 Indian Wells: def. M. Casanova 6Ð4 6Ð0 Rome: lost to Clijsters 6Ð3 6Ð7 0Ð6 Miami: def. C. Fernandez 6Ð2 6Ð0 ’s-Hertogenbosch: lost to Rittner 7Ð6 0Ð6 5Ð7 Warsaw: def. Voracova 2Ð6 6Ð2 6Ð0 Los Angeles Championships: lost to Clijsters 2Ð6 0Ð6 Warsaw: def. V. Williams 6Ð7 6Ð0 3Ð0, retired Rome: def. Pistolesi 6Ð0 6Ð3 U. S. Open: def. Widjaja 6Ð0 6Ð2 Philadelphia: def. Myskina 5Ð7 6Ð0 6Ð2

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 140 Myskina Australian Open: def. Gagliardi 5Ð7 6Ð2 6Ð0 Filderstadt: def. Stevenson 0Ð6 6-1 4Ð0, retired Sarasota: def. Loit 6Ð0 6Ð3 Philadelphia: lost to Mauresmo 7Ð5 0Ð6 2-6 Moscow: def. Daniilidou 6Ð3 6Ð0 Moscow: def. Pistolesi 6Ð2 6Ð0 Panova Pan Pacific: lost to Cohen Aloro 0Ð6 3Ð6 Dubai: lost to Schiavone 6Ð4 6Ð0 Scottsdale: lost to Black 6Ð0 7Ð6 Petrova Roland Garros: def. Seles 6-4 6Ð0 San Diego: lost to Hénin-Hardenne 0Ð6 2Ð6 ’s-Hertogenbosch: def. Cohen-Aloro 4Ð6 6Ð2 6Ð0 U. S. Open: lost to Davenport 0Ð6 7Ð6 2Ð6 Canadian Open: def. Weingärtner 6–0 6–0 Filderstadt: def. Stevenson 0Ð6 6-1 4Ð0, retired U. S. Open: def. Castano 6Ð4 6Ð0 U. S. Open: def. Coetzer 6Ð0 6Ð1 Philadelphia: def. Frazier 6Ð4 6-0 Pierce Australian Open: lost to Rubin 6Ð0 4Ð6 2Ð6 Pan Pacific: lost to Farina Elia 6Ð3 1Ð6 6Ð0 Charleston: def. Coetzer 6Ð3 1Ð6 6Ð0 Hyderabad: def. Zheng 6Ð3 0Ð6 6Ð3 Wimbledon: def. Cargill 6Ð0 6Ð0 Filderstadt: lost to Clijsters 6Ð7 0-6 Filderstadt: def. Black 6-2 6Ð0 Zurich: lost to Srebotnik 0Ð6 0Ð2, retired Quebec City: lost to Sequera 4Ð6 0-6 Pistolesi Warsaw: def. Craybas 6Ð0 7Ð5 Australian Open: lost to Coetzer 0Ð6 2Ð6 Rome: def. Tatarkova 6Ð0 6Ð4 Rome: lost to Mauresmo 0Ð6 3Ð6 Sopot: def. Koukalova 6Ð2 6Ð0 Eastbourne: lost to Rubin 1Ð6 0Ð6 Helsinki: def. Cervanova 6Ð3 6Ð0 New Haven: def. Zvonareva 0Ð6 7Ð6 6Ð2 Helsinki: def. Kostanic 4Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð0 Moscow: lost to Myskina 2Ð6 0Ð6 Moscow: def. Kuznetsova 7Ð6 6Ð0 Raymond Wimbledon: def. Weingärtner 6–3 6Ð0 Indian Wells: lost to Coetzer 0Ð6 3Ð6 San Diego: def. Sugiyama 6Ð0 2Ð6 6Ð4 Amelia Island: lost to Capriati 2Ð6 0Ð6 Rubin Pan Pacific: def. Srebotnik 6–4 6Ð0 Australian Open: def Pierce 0Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð2 Miami: def. Mauresmo 6Ð0 6Ð2 Indian Wells: def. Sugiyama 0Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð4 Madrid: def. Tulyaganova 6Ð0 6Ð4 Eastbourne: def. Tanasugarn 6Ð0 6Ð3 Eastbourne: def. Pistolesi 6Ð1 6Ð0 Wimbledon: def. Majoli 6Ð3 6Ð0 San Diego: def. Pisnik 7Ð5 6Ð0 Shanghai: def. Morigami 6Ð0 5Ð7 6Ð3 Schiavone Dubai: def. Panova 6Ð4 6-0 Palermo: def. Yan 0Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð3 Los Angeles: def. Tanasugarn 5Ð7 6Ð3 6Ð0 Los Angeles: def. Grande 6Ð3 6Ð0 Moscow: def. Krasnoroutskaya 2Ð6 6Ð0 6Ð4 Schnyder Antwerp: def. Chladkova 7Ð5 6Ð0 Zurich: lost to Dokic 0Ð6 3-6 Rome: def. Schett 6Ð0 6Ð2 Roland Garros: def. Pichet 6Ð1 6Ð0 Seles Australian Open: def. Kurhajcova 6Ð0 6Ð1 Roland Garros: lost to Petrove 4Ð6 0Ð6 Serna Estoril: def. Mandula 7Ð5 6Ð0 New Haven: def. Pisnik 0Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð2 Rome: def. Likhovtseva 4Ð6 6Ð2 6Ð0 New Haven: lost to Davenport 0Ð6 5Ð7 Shaughness Zurich: lost to Zvonareva 0-6 6Ð4 6Ð7 Stevenson Scottsdale: def. Forestz 6Ð3 6Ð0 Filderstadt: lost to Myskina 6Ð0 1Ð6 0Ð4, retired Suarez Auckland: def. Camerin 6Ð1 6Ð0 Bogota: lost to Zuluaga 0Ð6 7-5 3-6 Australian Open: def. Garbin 6Ð0 3Ð0, retired U. S. Open: lost to Davenport 4Ð6 0Ð6 Miami: def. Black 6Ð1 6Ð0 Sarasota: def. Matevzic 3Ð6 6Ð2 6Ð0 Roland Garros: def. Gallovits 6Ð1 6Ð0 Canadian Open: def. Hantuchova 6Ð2 6Ð0 U. S. Open: def. Sequera 6Ð1 6Ð0

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 141 Sugiyama Indian Wells: lost to Rubin 6Ð0 4Ð6 4Ð6 San Diego: lost to Raymond 0Ð6 6Ð2 4Ð6 Rome: def. Saﬁna 6Ð0 2Ð6 6Ð4 Roland Garros: def. Kleinova 7Ð5 6Ð0 U. S. Open: def. Martinez Granados 6Ð1 6Ð0 Tanasugarn Australian Open: def. Drake 6Ð0 6Ð2 Miami: lost to Hénin-Hardenne 2–6 0Ð6 Indian Wells: def. Asagoe 6Ð2 6Ð0 Roland Garros: lost to Zuluaga 0Ð6 2Ð6 U. S. Open: def. Grande 6Ð0 7Ð5 Eastbourne: lost to Rubin 0Ð6 3Ð6 Bali: def. Pratt 6Ð0 6Ð0 Los Angeles: lost to Schiavone 7Ð5 3Ð6 0Ð6 Pattaya: def. Gers 3Ð6 6Ð2 6Ð0 Tulyaganova Hyderabad: def. Obziler 4Ð6 6Ð2 6Ð0 Miami: lost to S. Williams 0Ð6 4Ð6 ’s-Hertogenbosch: def. Krasnoroutskaya 6Ð2 6Ð0 Sarasota: lost to Majoli 7Ð5 0Ð6 5Ð7 Amelia Island: lost to Barna 0Ð6 5Ð7 Rome: lost to Coetzer 6Ð2 3Ð6 0Ð6 Madrid: lost to Rubin 0Ð6 4Ð6 S. Williams Australian Open: def. Callens 6Ð4 6Ð0 Paris: def. Casanova 6Ð0 6Ð4 Paris: def. Daniilidou 6Ð2 6Ð0 Miami: def. Tulyaganova 6Ð0 6Ð4 Charleston: def. Randriantefy 6Ð3 6Ð0 Rome: def. Déchy 6Ð3 6Ð0 Roland Garros: def. Schett 6Ð0 6Ð0 V. Williams Australian Open: def. Cargill 6Ð3 6Ð0 Warsaw: lost to Mauresmo 7-6 0Ð6 0Ð3, retired Zvonareva Hobart: def. Taylor 6Ð2 6Ð0 Amelia Island: lost to Coetzer 5Ð7 6Ð4 0Ð6 Bol: def. Dizdar 6Ð0 6Ð3 Strasbourg: def. Razzano 6Ð0 6Ð4 Strasbourg: def. Pisnik 6Ð0 6Ð1 Wimbledon: def. Dominikovic 6Ð0 6Ð2 New Haven: def. Taylor 6Ð2 6Ð0 New Haven: lost to Pistolesi 6Ð0 6Ð7 2Ð6 Zurich: def. Shaughnessy 6-0 4Ð6 7-6

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 142 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 Clijsters 19 4 4.8 Australian Open Slam S. Williams 62 7 8.9 Tokyo (Pan Paciﬁc) I Davenport 40 4 10.0 Paris II S. Williams 17 4 4.3 Antwerp II V. Williams 18 4 4.5 Dubai II Hénin-Hardenne 49 4 12.3 Scottsdale II Sugiyama 59 5 11.8 Indian Wells I Clijsters 44 6 7.3 Miami I S. Williams 33 6 5.5 Charleston I Hénin-Hardenne 40 5 8.0 Amelia Island II Dementieva 45 5 9.0 Warsaw II Mauresmo 34 4 8.5 Berlin I Hénin-Hardenne 44 5 8.8 Rome I Clijsters 25 5 5.0 Roland Garros Slam Hénin-Hardenne 47 7 6.7 Eastbourne II Rubin 32 4 8.0 Wimbledon Slam S. Williams 50 7 7.1 Stanford II Clijsters 26 4 6.5 San Diego II Hénin-Hardenne 30 5 6.0 Los Angeles II Clijsters 34 5 6.8 Canadian Open I Hénin-Hardenne 34 5 6.8 New Haven II Capriati 31 4 7.81 U.S. Open Slam Hénin-Hardenne 45 7 6.4 Shanghai II Dementieva 38 4 9.5 Leipzig II Myskina 37 4 9.3 Moscow I Myskina 15 4 3.8 Filderstadt II Clijsters 28 4 7.0 Zurich I Hénin-Hardenne 25 4 6.3 Linz II Sugiyama 44 4 11.0 Philadelphia II Mauresmo 42 4 10.5 Los Angeles Cham Champ Clijsters 37 5 7.4 1. Two of Capriati’s four matches ended in retirements; in effect she played about three and a half matches, which works out to 8.9 games per match.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 143 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 Clijsters 155 4 38.8 Australian Open Slam S. Williams 398 7 56.91 Tokyo (Pan Paciﬁc) I Davenport 88 4 22.0 Paris II S. Williams 89 4 22.3 Antwerp II V. Williams 132 4 33.0 Dubai II Hénin-Hardenne 129 4 32.3 Scottsdale II Sugiyama 163 5 32.6 Indian Wells I Clijsters 134 6 22.3 Miami I S. Williams 168 6 28.0 Charleston I Hénin-Hardenne 145 5 29.0 Amelia Island II Dementieva 191 5 38.2 Warsaw II Mauresmo 134 4 33.5 Berlin I Hénin-Hardenne 165 5 33.0 Rome I Clijsters 127 5 25.4 Roland Garros Slam Hénin-Hardenne 506 7 72.31 Eastbourne II Rubin 96 4 24.0 Wimbledon Slam S. Williams 460 7 65.71 Stanford II Clijsters 69 7 17.3 San Diego II Hénin-Hardenne 171 5 34.2 Los Angeles II Clisters 103 5 20.6 Canadian Open I Hénin-Hardenne 101 5 20.2 New Haven II Capriati 144 4 36.02 U.S. Open Slam Hénin-Hardenne 424 7 60.61 Shanghai II Dementieva 96 4 24.0 Leipzig II Myskina 225 4 56.3 Moscow I Myskina 104 4 26.0 Filderstadt II Clijsters 163 4 40.8 Zurich I Hénin-Hardenne 128 4 32.0 Linz II Sugiyama 120 4 30.0 Philadelphia II Mauresmo 101 4 25.3 Los Angeles Cham Champ Clijsters 222 5 44.4 1 Note that Slam quality points are doubled, giving artiﬁcially high values 2 It should probably be noted that Capriati earned two-thirds of her points in matches where her opponent retired.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 144 “Top Players” 2003 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.) Player 2001 2001 2001 2002 2002 2002 2003 2003 2003 2003 2001Ð Slam Top 10 Tier II+ Slam Top 10 Tier II+ Slam Top 10 Tier II+ Total 2003 SF Wins Titles SF Wins Titles SF Wins Titles Ach. Ach. Bovina 00001003000 Capriati 4 10 3271151316 Clijsters 132112342171524 Coetzer 00001002000 Daniilidou 00002001000 Davenport 2 17 7140151316 Déchy 00001000000 Dementieva 02001009233 Dokic 03304002003 Farina Elia 02001001000 C.Fernandez 00011000001 Hantuchova 01005100002 Hénin-Hard 23015241681521 Hingis 372142————9 Krasnorouts 00000002000 Kuznetsova 00000000000 Majoli 00001100001 Maleeva 02004101001 Martinez 00001004000 Mauresmo 084262082313 Myskina 00005103224 Petrova 00001014011 Pierce 00000002000 Pistolesi 00003001000 Raymond 00001001000 Rubin 00004204113 Schiavone 01000000000 Schnyder 01006102002 Seles 05114001003 Shaughness 04002002000

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 145 Stevenson 00005000001 Sugiyama 01001004222 S. Williams 17341783104929 V. Williams 3 14 6 3 16 6261327 Zvonareva 00000002000 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 2003 (that honor is a tie between Clijsters and Hénin-Hardenne), but over the three year span, she has been the most accomplished. The difficulty of even a single accomplishment is shown by the fact that nearly a third of the Top 25 (eight all told: Bovina, Coetzer, Farina Elia, Martinez, Pistolesi, Schiavone, Shaughnessy, Zvonareva) have no accomplishments in the past three years combined, and only eight players have managed as many as five in that whole time. (We note with interest that everyone with five has at least nine, and every one except Hingis, who played only about one and a half years of the past three, has a dozen or more; clearly, if you’ve got it, you’ve got it; if you don’t, you don’t.) Top Players: Player Accomplishments S. Williams 29 V. Williams 27 Clijsters 24 Hénin-Hardenne 21 Capriati 16 Davenport 16 Mauresmo 13 Hingis* 9 Myskina 4 Dementieva 3 Dokic 3 Rubin 3 Seles 3 Hantuchova 2 Schnyder 2 Sugiyama 2 C.Fernandez 1 Majoli 1 Maleeva 1 Petrova 1 Stevenson 1

* Retired or inactive player who nonetheless has residual accomplishments.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 146 Statistics About the Tour as a Whole Total number of ranked players, as of November 11, 2003: 1113 (1214 in 2001, 1253 in 2002)1 Most singles events played by a Top 100 player: 34/Julia Vakulenko (32/Jidkova in 2002) Fewest events played by a Top 100 player: 6/Venus Williams (9/Davenport, M. Casanova in 2002) Median number of events played by a Top 100 player: 24 (23 in 2001, 24.5 in 2002) Number of Top 100 players playing 25 or more events: 39 (41 in 2001, 50 in 2002) Number of Top 100 players playing 30 or more events: 9 (6 in 2001, 8 in 2002) Most events played by any player: 37/Svetlana Krivencheva (39/Keiko Tameishi in 2002). Runner-up: 34/ Julia Vakulenko, Natalie Grandin Median number of events played by all players: 10 (11 in 2001 and 2002) Number of players playing 25 or more events: 121 (117 in 2001, 153 in 2002) Number of players playing 30 or more events: 25 (14 in 2001, 26 in 2002) Most points earned in any event: 1156/Justine Hénin-Hardenne/Roland Garros (1056 in 2002) Most titles for any player: 9/Kim Clijsters (8/S. Williams in 2002) Most Tour victories: 86/Kim Clijsters (62/V. Williams in 2002) Total Tournaments played in 2003: 59 (64 in 2002, 63 in 2001) Total players with Tour singles titles in 2003: 30 (37 in 2002, 30 in 2001) Total players with multiple singles titles in 2002: 11 (12 in 2002, 14 in 2001) Total players with Tier II or higher titles in 2002: 11 (13 in 2002, 8 in 2001) Most singles matches played: 98/Clijsters (79/Dokic in 2002) Most doubles matches played: 77/Navratilova (84/Suarez in 2002) Most combined singles & doubles matches played: 149/Clijsters (136/Suarez in 2002) Total Main Draw Matches Played (omits walkovers, withdrawals, byes): 2384 (2554 in 2002)2 Total players with at least 2000 points: 11 (10 in 2002, 11 in 2001) Total players with at least 1000 points: 31 (32 in 2002, 24 in 2001) Total players with at least 500 points: 72 (75 in 2002, 72 in 2001) Total players with at least 200 points: 158 (158 in 2002, 153 in 2001) Total players with at least 100 points: 241 (253 in 2002, 241 in 2001) Total players with at least 50 points: 361 (351 in 2002, (340 in 2001) Total players with at least 20 points: 558 (567 in 2002, (552 in 2001) Total players with at least 10 points: 726 (769 in 2002, 753 in 2001) Total ranked players with 1.0 or fewer points: 6 (11 in 2002, 8 in 2001) Total players with .75 points: 2 (5 in 2002; 3 in 2001) Highest (year-end) score in a 17th Tournament : 170/Clijsters (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): 150539.45 (152702.63 in 2002). The Top 25 have 56990 of these, or 37.9%.

1. Due to a change in the rankings rules for $10K Challengers, a number of players who would have been ranked in the past were not ranked in 2003. The sharp decline in the number of ranked players is due to this change. 2. This decline is due to the loss of half a dozen small tournaments from the schedule. 3. How can there be a .45 and a .6? 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 147 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 2003, with their effects. It lists the player, her assorted injuries, the events she missed in consequence (a somewhat uncertain list, based on past schedules) and the effect on her ranking Player Injury Events Missed Entirely Withdrew or played w/injury Start/End Rnk Capriati Eye surgery Pan Pacific Sydney, Australian Open 3/6 Capriati shoulder Los Angeles, Canadian Open, Shanghai (?) San Diego — Clijsters ankle Leipzig 1/2 Davenport hamstring Madrid Miami — Davenport foot Stanford, Moscow, Zurich, Philadelphia, Los Angeles Wimbledon, San Diego, Los 4/5 Championships Angeles, New Haven, U. S. Open, Filderstadt Déchy wrist Moscow, Filderstadt, Zurich, Linz U. S. Open 24/29 Dementieva “illness” Linz, Philadelphia 8/9 Farina Elia ? Filderstadt — Hénin-Hard knee tend. Rome — Hénin-Hard exhaustion Linz Zurich 1/2 Kournikova back+thigh Pan Pacific, Antwerp, Memphis, Acapulco, Indian Australian Open, Charleston 42/305 WellsAmelia Island, Dothan $75K, Roland Garros, $25K, Sea Island $25K Birmingham, Eastbourne, Wimbledon, Stanford, San Diego, Los Angeles, Canadian Open, U. S. Open, Shanghai, Filderstadt, Zurich, Philadelphia Kremer wrist (all events from Australian Open until November) 25/unranked Martinez ? Amelia Island — Mauresmo knee (events in 2002 plus) Sydney, Australian Open 6/7 Mauresmo Wimbledon — Myskina illness Sopot — Panova first called Roland Garros, Wimbledon, Stanford, San Diego, Los 35/119 “illness”; no Angeles, Canadian Open, New Haven, U. S. Open, update Shanghai, Leipzig, Moscow Pierce ? Indian Wells — Pierce thigh Filderstadt, Zurich 32/36 Rubin shoulder Los Angeles, Canadian Open U. S. Open 8/10 Seles ankle Australian Open 7/10 Seles foot Indian Wells, Miami, Charleston 10/12 Seles foot Wimbledon, San Diego, Los Angeles, Canadian Open, Rome, Roland Garros 12/60 U. S. Open, Shanghai Shaughness ankle sprain Gold Coast — Stevenson back+ Filderstadt, Zurich, Linz, 30/83 pneumonia Philadelphia Sugiyama finger Japan Open — S. Williams tendonitis Scottsdale — S. Williams knee Stanford, San Diego, Los Angeles, U. S. Open, Linz, 1/3 Philadelphia, Los Angeles Championships V. Williams abdomen Rome?, Stanford?, Canadian Open, U. S. Open, Warsaw, Roland Garros, 3/11 Moscow, Filderstadt, Philadelphia, Los Angeles Chmp Wimbledon

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 148 Doubles Analysing doubles is much more complex than singles, because of the complications of different teams — and also because some players play doubles much more often than others — though, ironically, that was less of a factor this year than usual; the Williams Sisters didn’t play much doubles, but they also played less singles than usual; Martina Hingis is retired; that leads Lindsay Davenport as our top part-time doubles player. Still, the disparity is such that the following section only sketches the state of doubles. The Final Top 30 in Doubles Doubles Player 2002 Year-End 2003 Year-End Ranking Doubles Ranking Singles Ranking 1Paola Suarez 1 14 2Virginia Ruano Pascual 2 55 3 Ai Sugiyama 12 10 4 Kim Clijsters 24 1 5 Lisa Raymond 3 28 6Martina Navratilova 72 — 7Svetlana Kuznetsova 45 36 8 Lindsay Davenport — 5 9 Cara Black 9 52 10 Rennae Stubbs 4 — 11 Elena Likhovtseva 10 37 12 Liezel Huber 18 765 13 Nadia Petrova 21 12 14 Magdalena Maleeva 54 30 15 Emilie Loit 67 41 16 Petra Mandula 40 40 17 Maria Vento-Kabchi 60 44 18 Angelique Widjaja 82 95 19 Janette Husarova 5 125 20 Marion Bartoli 282 57 21 Conchita Martinez 16 18 22 Elena Bovina 27 21 23 Lina Krasnoroutskaya 160 27 24 Elena Dementieva 6 8 25 Meghann Shaughnessy 17 17 26 Emmanuelle Gagliardi 83 56 27 Jelena Dokic 14 15 28 Daniela Hantuchova 8 19 29 Els Callens 34 74 30 Mary Pierce 222 33

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 149 The Initial Top 30 in Doubles Doubles Player 2002 Singles Final Doubles Rank Rank Rank 1 Suarez, Paola 27 1 2 Ruano Pascual, Virginia 65 2 3 Raymond, Lisa 29 5 4 Stubbs, Rennae — 10 5 Husarova, Janette 33 19 6 Dementieva, Elena 19 24 7 Sanchez-Vicario, Arantxa 53 — 8 Hantuchova, Daniela 8 28 9 Black, Cara 56 9 10 Likhovtseva, Elena 42 11 11 Kournikova, Anna 35 176 12 Sugiyama, Ai 24 3 13 Fujiwara, Rika 185 128 14 Dokic, Jelena 9 27 15 Hingis, Martina 10 — 16 Martinez, Conchita 34 21 17 Shaughnessy, Meghann 30 25 18 Huber, Liezel 220 12 19 Arendt, Nicole — 314 20 Po-Messerli, Kimberly — — 21 Petrova, Nadia 111 13 22 Lee, Janet 205 54 23 Pratt, Nicole 49 31 24 Clijsters, Kim 4 4 25 Williams, Serena 1 — 26 Schett, Barbara 40 37 27 Bovina, Elena 26 22 28 Prakusya, Wynne 104 59 29 Asagoe, Shinobu 97 44 30 Krizan, Tina — 43 30 Srebotnik, Katarina 36 38

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 150 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 (Hingis, Sanchez-Vicario), along with a handful of other players (e.g. Morariu) who had had solid past results or who came close to the Top 25. 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 Arendt, with a standard deviation of 85.3, showed the biggest fluctuation in the course of the year, while Ruano Pascual, with a standard deviations of 0, showed the least variation). For purposes of these calculations, players who were unranked for part of the year (Davenport, Serena Williams) are assumed to have had a ranking of 175 during that part of the year. Note: Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, ranked #7 at the end of 2002, retired at the end of that year but was still ranked until January 27; Kimberly Po-Messerli, #20 at year-end, also retired but was allowed to simply drop off the rankings two weeks after the U. S. Open (she is retained on the list because she remained high- ranked until fairly late in the year); Martina Hingis, #15 at year-end, did not formally retire but did not play and fell off the rankings after Miami (she was #15 on January 1, #74 on February and March 1, unranked thereafter) Venus Williams, despite winning the Australian Open, was not ranked at any time during 2003, and so is omitted from the list.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 151 Player Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Nov Mean Median Std.Dev 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 15 Arendt 19 28 30 47 48 47 81 91 137 157 164 314 96.9 64.5 85.2 Asagoe 29 41 40 30 26 29 39 36 38 36 43 44 35.9 37.0 6.0 Bartoli 256 175 123 93 86 68 60 54 49 27 21 20 86.0 64.0 69.9 Black 9889 9 999910998.99.00.5 Bovina 27 20 16 22 23 25 23 20 18 16 23 22 21.3 22.0 3.4 Callens 34 35 49 53 53 44 46 46 32 32 29 29 40.2 39.5 9.2 Clijsters 24 14 12 8 8 6441324 7.55.06.5 Davenport — 52 35 15 12 1288668828.8 10.0 48.1 Déchy 36 27 36 35 32 35 27 27 27 28 35 35 31.7 33.5 4.1 Dementieva 6667 5 87781215249.37.05.4 Dokic 14 12 13 13 14 15 13 12 16 17 26 27 16.0 14.0 5.1 Fujiwara 13 13 14 16 18 20 31 31 50 55 66 128 37.9 25.5 33.6 Gagliardi 83 46 43 39 36 31 24 24 25 29 25 26 35.9 30.0 16.7 Hantuchova 8 11 11 12 16 21 16 17 30 25 27 28 18.5 16.5 7.5 L. Huber 18 22 23 21 20 13 19 16 17 15 12 12 17.3 17.5 3.8 Husarova 5554 3 4557913197.05.04.7 Kournikova 11 19 22 29 28 30 28 70 72 135 181 176 66.8 29.5 62.4 Krasnoroutskaya 145 >150 114 111 77 64 49 28 26 24 24 23 71.7 56.5 53.0 Krizan 30 39 34 37 37 33 32 37 40 34 37 43 36.1 37.0 3.7 Kuznetsova 45 25 20 18 17 16 14 13 1187716.8 15.0 10.4 Lee 22 24 21 31 31 34 33 33 34 43 48 54 34.0 33.0 10.0 Likhovtseva 10 9 9 10 10 10 10 11 12 11 10 11 10.3 10.0 0.9 Loit 68 45 32 27 30 23 21 19 19 20 17 15 28.0 22.0 15.1 Maleeva 54 60 97 48 46 27 25 25 20 19 16 14 37.6 26.0 24.5 Mandula 40 15 19 17 15 17 20 15 15 18 18 16 18.8 17.0 6.9 Martinez, C. 16 16 18 20 21 28 25 29 28 23 22 21 22.3 21.5 4.5 Morariu 78 82 79 79 76 76 73 72 81 144 154 156 95.8 79.0 33.7 Navratilova 72 44 29 23 22 18 18 14 1376622.7 18.0 18.9 Petrova 21 18 17 14 13 14 11 10 10 13 14 13 14.0 13.5 3.3 Pierce 223 107 91 91 91 90 65 75 33 31 28 30 79.6 82.5 53.7 Po-Messerli 20 21 26 34 34 36 50 66 89 — — — 75.1 43.0 63.3 Prakusya 28 26 25 33 35 37 36 39 42 44 50 59 37.8 36.5 10.0 Pratt 23 29 28 25 29 26 38 38 39 38 36 31 31.7 30.0 5.8 Raymond 3333 4 3665555 4.34.51.2 Ruano Pascual 2222 2 2223442 2.42.00.8 Rubin 32 23 24 24 25 24 17 26 31 30 34 34 27.0 25.5 5.2 Schett 26 30 27 26 27 46 35 43 45 40 39 37 35.1 36.0 7.7 Shaughnessy 17 17 15 19 19 19 22 21 22 41 30 25 22.3 20.0 7.1 Srebotnik 30 39 31 36 33 32 30 32 35 33 32 38 33.4 32.5 3.0 Stubbs 4446 7 71518 14 14 11 10 9.5 8.5 4.9 Suarez 1111 1 1114231 1.51.01.0 Sugiyama 12775 6 5332113 4.64.03.1 Vento-Kabchi 60 47 44 45 42 38 41 30 24 21 19 17 35.7 39.5 13.4 Wartusch 37 31 33 28 24 22 29 23 23 26 33 33 28.5 28.5 4.9 Widjaja 82 83 65 65 71 74 70 48 29 22 20 18 53.9 65.0 25.1 S. Williams 25 10 10 11 11 11 12 22 21 — — — 54.8 16.5 72.6

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 152 The Final Top Fifty in Doubles As of November 11, 2003 Final Best 11 # of Best Worst Jan. 1 Rank Player Name Score Trn Rank Rank Rank Titles 1 Paola Suarez 4281 21 1 4 1 Charlest, Berlin, NewHav, USO, LAChmp (5) 2Virginia Ruano Pascual 4281 18 1 4 2 Charlest, Berlin, NewHav, USO, LAChmp (5) 3Ai Sugiyama 4166 22 1 12 12 Syd, Ant, Scot, RolG, Wim, SanD, Zur, Linz (8) 4Kim Clijsters 4137 13 1 24 24 Syd, Ant, Scot, RolG, Wim, SanD, Zur (7) 5 Lisa Raymond 2868 16 3 6 3 IndiW, AmeliaI, Eastb, Stanf, Fild, Phila (6) 6Martina Navratilova 2728 24 6 72 72 GoldC, Dub, Sara, Rome, CanO, Leip, Phila (7) 7 Svetlana Kuznetsova 2560 17 7 45 45 GoldC, Dub, Rome, CanO, Leip (5) 8 Lindsay Davenport 2403 12 6 — — Indian Wells, Amelia Island, Eastbourne (3) 9Cara Black 2092 26 8 10 9 Hobart, Stanford (2) 10 Rennae Stubbs 1903 20 4 18 4 Pan Pacific, Los Angeles, Filderstadt (3) 11 Elena Likhovtseva 1894 27 9 12 10 Hobart, Hyderabad (2) 12 Liezel Huber 1872 21 12 26 18 Miami, Sarasota, Warsaw, Madrid, Linz (5) 13 Nadia Petrova 1762 21 9 22 21 Moscow (1) 14 Magdalena Maleeva 1523 20 14 112 54 Miami, Warsaw (2) 15 Emilie Loit 1471 23 15 68 68 Canberra, Acapulco, Shanghai (3) 16 Petra Mandula 1451 19 13 41 40 Estoril, Budapest, Bol (3) 17 Maria Vento-Kabchi 1392 24 17 61 60 Bali (1) 18 Angelique Widjaja 1391 24 18 96 82 Bali (1) 19 Janette Husarova 1341 17 3 19 5 20 Marion Bartoli 1326 25 20 >250 256 21 Conchita Martinez 1296 13 15 29 16 22 Elena Bovina 1274 11 14 27 27 Pan Pacific (1) 23 Lina Krasnoroutskaya 1148 18 23 145 145 ’s-Hertogenbosch (1) 24 Elena Dementieva 1144 18 5 24 6 ’s-Hertogenbosch (1) 25 Meghann Shaughnessy 1125 20 15 42 17 Moscow (1) 26 Emmanuelle Gagliardi 1113 23 24 86 83 27 Jelena Dokic 1112 21 12 27 14 28 Daniela Hantuchova 1106 19 8 30 8 29 Els Callens 1083 22 29 57 34 Birmingham (1) 30 Mary Pierce 1055 10 28 >200 223 Los Angeles (1) 31 Nicole Pratt 1000.75 23 23 62 23 Shanghai (1) 32 Magui Serna 972 24 31 70 38 33 Patricia Wartusch 958 19 22 38 37 Estoril, Bol (2) 34 Chanda Rubin 943 12 17 35 32 35 Nathalie Déchy 918 12 26 37 36 36 Alicia Molik 910.5 17 36 138 104 37 Barbara Schett 905 25 25 46 26 Paris (1) 38 Katarina Srebotnik 886 21 30 39 30 Bogota (1) 39 Nana Miyagi 861 20 34 59 58 ( Euge ’02 $50K, Fuku $50K, Surb $25K) 40 Patty Schnyder 850 18 35 58 56 Paris (1) 41 Meilen Tu 838 21 34 60 39 Birmingham (1) 42 Maja Matevzic 832.5 23 34 81 73 Strasbourg (1) 43 Tina Krizan 829 21 30 43 30 44 Shinobu Asagoe 824 15 25 45 29 (Surbiton $25K) 45 Silvia Farina Elia 783 20 41 62 41 46 Myriam Casanova 765 9 41 >175 186 47 Elena Tatarkova 754 21 47 67 61 Budapest, Helsinki, Bat $75K (2+1 Challenger) 48 Ting Li 704.5 25 48 >250 262 Vienna, Quebec, Pattaya (3+2 Challengers) 48 Tian Tian Sun 704.5 25 48 >176 188 Vienna, Quebec, Pattaya (3+2 Challengers) 50 Rita Grande 702 22 46 65 50

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 153 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. 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 314 3 Arendt Roland Garros w/Dominikovic (Slam, 2R, 1) Birmingham w/Perebiynis (III, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Dominikovic (Slam, 1R, 0) 44 15 Asagoe Australian Open w/Miyagi (Slam, 2R, 1) Memphis w/Miyagi (III, 1R, 0) Acapulco w/Liggan (III, QF, 1) Indian Wells w/Miyagi (I, 2R, 1) Miami w/Miyagi (I, F, 4) Sarasota w/Miyagi (IV, F, 2+1 walkover) Gifu $50K w/Miyagi ($50K, F, 3) Roland Garros w/Miyagi (Slam, 2R, 1) Surbiton $25K w/Miyagi ($25K, Win, 4) Birmingham w/Miyagi (III, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Miyagi (Slam, R16, 2) Los Angeles w/Sugiyama (II, 1R, 0) Canadian Open w/Miyagi (I, 2R, 1) U. S. Open w/Miyagi (Slam, 2R, 1) Japan Open w/Miyagi (III, QF, 1) 20 25 Bartoli Deauville $25K w/Schneider ($25K, 1R, 0) Boynton Beach $75K w/Alves ($75K, SF, 2) Canberra w/Foretz (V, QF, 1+1 [pro set] in qualifying) Australian Open w/Sharapova (Slam, 2R, 1) Paris w/Cohen-Aloro (II, F, 3) Scottsdale w/Cohen-Aloro (II, SF, 2) Sarasota w/Dominikovic (IV, QF, 1) Charleston w/Dominikovic (I, 1R, 0) Amelia Island Qualifying w/Dominikovic (II, withdrew from 1R, 0+2 in qualifying) Berlin w/Irvin (I, 1R, 0) Rome w/Matevzic (I, QF, 2) Strasbourg w/Dhenin (III, QF, 1) Roland Garros w/M. Casanova (Slam, 2R, 1) Surbiton $25K w/Granville ($25K, SF, 2) ’s-Hertogenbosch w/Cohen-Aloro (III, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Casanova (Slam, 2R, 1) Stanford w/Jidkova (II, QF, 1) Los Angeles w/Loit (II, 1R, 0) Canadian Open w/Bedanova (I, 1R, 0) New Haven w/Casanova (II, SF, 2) U. S. Open w/Casanova (Slam, SF, 4) Leipzig w/Dokic (II, SF, 2) Filderstadt w/Casanova (II, SF [Casanova withdrew], 2) Linz w/Farina Elia (II, F, 2+1 walkover) Quebec City w/Sharapova (III, QF, 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 154 926Black Auckland w/Likhovtseva (IV, F, 3) Hobart w/Likhovtseva (V, Win, 4) Australian Open w/Likhovtseva (Slam, R16, 2) Pan Paciﬁc w/Likhovtseva (I, QF, 1) Doha w/Likhovtseva (III, SF, 2) Dubai w/Likhovtseva (II, F, 3) Scottsdale w/L. Huber (II, 1R, 0) Indian Wells w/Likhovtseva (I, QF, 2) Miami w/Likhovtseva (I, 2R, 1) Charleston w/Likhovtseva (I, QF, 1) Amelia Island w/Likhovtseva (II, QF, 1) Rome w/Likhovtseva (I, 2R, 0) Roland Garros w/Likhovtseva (Slam, SF, 4) Wimbledon w/Likhovtseva (Slam, R16, 2) Stanford w/Raymond (II, Win, 4) San Diego w/Likhovtseva (II, SF, 2) Los Angeles w/Likovtseva (II, SF, 2) Canadian Open w/Likhovtseva (I, 2R, 0) New Haven w/Morariu (II, 1R, 0) U. S. Open w/Likhovtseva (Slam, SF, 4) Shanghai w/Molik (II, 1R, 0) Moscow w/Likhovtseva (I, SF, 2) Filderstadt w/Navratilova (II, F, 3) Zurich w/L. Huber (I, SF, 2) Philadelphia w/Stubbs (II, F, 3) Los Angeles Championships w/Likhovtseva (Champ, 1R, 0) 22 11 Bovina Australian Open w/Hénin-Hardenne (Slam, withdrew from R16, 2) Pan Paciﬁc w/Stubbs (I, Win, 4) Indian Wells w/Stubbs (I, QF, 2) Miami w/Stubbs (I, 1R, 0) Charleston w/Stubbs (I, QF, 2) Strasbourg w/Stubbs (III, QF, 1) Roland Garros w/Molik (Slam, QF, 2+1 walkover) Eastbourne w/Déchy (II, QF, 1) Los Angeles w/Callens (II, F, 3) U. S. Open w/Stubbs (Slam, QF, 3) Filderstadt w/Callens (II, QF, 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 155 29 22 Callens Gold Coast w/Fujiwara (III, QF, 1) Hobart w/Svensson (V, SF, 2) Australian Open w/Fujiwara (Slam, 1R, 0) Pan Paciﬁc w/Fujiwara (I, 1R, 0) Indian Wells w/Svensson (I, 2R, 1) Miami w/Svensson (I, 2R, 1) Sarasota w/Loit (IV, SF, 2) Charleston w/L. Huber (I, 1R, 0) Amelia Island w/Navratilova (II, QF, 1) Berlin w/Majoli (I, 1R, 0) Rome w/Loit (I, SF, 3) Roland Garros w/Tu (Slam, 2R, 1) Birmingham w/Tu (III, Win, 4) ’s-Hertogenbosch w/Loit (III, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Tu (Slam, 2R, 1) Los Angeles w/Bovina (II, F, 3) Canadian Open w/Tu (I, 1R, 0) New Haven w/Widjaja (II, SF, 2) U. S. Open w/Tu (Slam, 3R, 2) Leipzig w/Husarova (II, QF, 1) Filderstadt w/Bovina (II, QF, 1) Quebec City w/Tu (II, F, 3) 423Clijsters Sydney w/Sugiyama (II, Win, 4) Australian Open w/Sugiyama (Slam, QF, 3) Antwerp w/Sugiyama (II, Win, 4) Scottsdale w/Sugiyama (II, Win, 4) Indian Wells w/Sugiyama (I, F, 4) Miami w/Sugiyama (I, QF, 2) Berlin w/Sugiyama (I, F, 3) Roland Garros w/Sugiyama (Slam, Win, 6) Wimbledon w/Sugiyama (Slam, Win, 6) San Diego w/Sugiyama (II, Win, 4) U. S. Open w/Sugiyama (Slam, withdrew from 2R, 1) Zurich w/Sugiyama (I, Win, 4) Los Angeles Championships w/Sugiyama (Champ, F, 1) 812Davenport Sydney w/Raymond (II, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/Raymond (Slam, SF, 4) Pan Paciﬁc w/Raymond (I, F, 3) Scottsdale w/Raymond (II, F, 3) Indian Wells w/Raymond (I, Win, 5) Miami w/Raymond (I, withdrew from 2R, 1) Charleston w/Shaughnessy (I, QF, 2) Amelia Island w/Raymond (II, Win, 4) Roland Garros w/Raymond (Slam, 3R [Davenport withdrew], 2) Eastbourne w/Raymond (II, Win, 4) Wimbledon w/Raymond (Slam, SF, 4) San Diego w/Raymond (II, F, 3)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 156 35 12 Déchy Gold Coast w/Loit (III, F, 2+1 walkover) Australian Open w/Loit (Slam, 3R, 2) Paris w/Loit (II, SF, 2) Antwerp w/Loit (II, F, 3) Indian Wells w/Loit (I, 1R, 0) Miami w/Loit (I, 2R, 1) Berlin w/Loit (I, QF, 2) Roland Garros w/Loit (Slam, QF, 2) Birmingham w/Loit (III, 1R, 0) Eastbourne w/Bovina (II, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Loit (Slam, R16, 2) New Haven w/Loit (II, 1R, 0) 24 18 Dementieva Sydney w/Husarova (II, SF, 2) Australian Open w/Husarova (Slam, 2R, 1) Pan Pacific w/Farina Elia (I, 1R, 0) Indian Wells w/Grande (I, QF, 1+1 walkover) Miami w/Kournikova (I, 1R, 0) Sarasota w/Krasnoroutskaya (IV, 1R, 0) Charleston w/Krasnoroutskaya (I, SF, 3) Amelia Island w/Krasnoroutskaya (II, 1R, 0) Roland Garros w/Krasnoroutskaya (Slam, 2R, 1) Birmingham w/Gagliardi (III, 1R, 0) ’s-Hertogenbosch w/Krasnoroutskaya (III, Win, 4) Wimbledon w/Krasnoroutskaya (Slam, SF, 4) San Diego w/Krasnoroutskaya (II, 1R, 0) Los Angeles w/Krasnoroutskaya (II, QF, 1) Canadian Open w/Krasnoroutskaya (I, QF, 2) U. S. Open w/Krasnoroutskaya (Slam, R16, 2) Moscow w/Krasnoroutskaya (I, 1R, 0) Zurich w/Zvonareva (I, 1R, 0) 27 21 Dokic Pan Pacific w/Petrova (I, QF, 1) Antwerp w/Bedanova (II, SF, 2) Scottsdale w/Bedanova (II, 1R, 0) Indian Wells w/Petrova (I, SF, 3) Miami w/Petrova (I, 2R, 1) Sarasota w/Petrova (IV, Petrova withdrew from QF, 1) Charleston w/Hantuchova (I, 2R, 0) Amelia Island w/Stubbs (II, QF, 1) Berlin w/Petrova (I, QF, 1) Rome w/Petrova (I, F, 3) Roland Garros w/Petrova (Slam, 3R, 2) Eastbourne w/Stubbs (II, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Petrova (Slam, 2R, 1) San Diego w/Shaughnessy (II, 1R, 0) Canadian Open w/Morariu (I, QF, 2) U. S. Open w/Morariu (Slam, 1R, 0) Bali w/Harkleroad (III, 1R, 0) Leipzig w/Bartoli (II, SF, 2) Moscow w/Safina (I, 1R, 0) Filderstadt w/Matevzic (II, 1R, 0) Zurich w/Srebotnik (I, QF, 0+1 walkover)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 157 128 13 Fujiwara Gold Coast w/Callens (III, QF, 1) Australian Open w/Callens (Slam, 1R, 0) Pan Paciﬁc w/Callens (I, 1R, 0) Sarasota w/Hopkins (IV, 1R, 0) Charleston w/Panova (I, 1R, 0) Gifu $50K w/Obata ($50K, Win, 4) Fukuoka $50K w/Obata ($50K, F, 3) Roland Garros w/Saﬁna (Slam, 1R, 0) Birmingham w/Vinci (III, SF, 2) Wimbledon w/Obata (Slam, 1R, 0) Modena $50K+H w/Musgrave ($50K+H, F, 2+1 walkover) U. S. Open w/Obata (Slam, 1R, 0) Japan Open w/Gagliardi (III, QF [Fujiwara withdrew], 1) 26 23 Gagliardi Auckland w/Nagyova (IV, 1R, 0) Hobart w/Grande (V, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/Mandula (Slam, SF, 4) Doha w/Maleeva (III, 1R, 0) Dubai w/Grant (II, 1R, 0) Acapulco w/Harkleroad (III, 1R, 0) Indian Wells w/Mandula (I, QF, 2) Miami w/Mandula (I, 1R, 0) Estoril w/Ani (IV, F, 3) Bol w/Schnyder (III, SF, 2) Rome w/Mandula (I, QF, 2) Madrid w/Tarabini (III, 1R, 0) Roland Garros w/Schnyder (Slam, 3R, 2) Birmingham w/Dementieva (III, 1R, 0) Eastbourne w/Shaughnessy (II, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Shaughnessy (Slam, 2R, 1) New Haven w/Shaughnessy (II, 1R, 0) U. S. Open w/Shaughessy (Slam, 1R, 0) Bali w/Schett (III, 1R, 0) Shanghai w/Rubin (II, SF, 2) Japan Open w/Fujiwara (III, QF [Fujiwara withdrew], 1) Tashkent w/Widjaja (IV, QF, 1) Luxembourg w/Rittner (III, 1R, 0) 28 19 Hantuchova Sydney w/Farina Elia (II, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/Shaughnessy (Slam, QF, 2+1 walkover) Paris w/Sugiyama (II, 1R, 0) Indian Wells w/Shaughnessy (I, 1R, 0) Miami w/Shaughnessy (I, 1R, 0) Charleston w/Dokic (I, 2R, 0) Amelia Island w/Bedanova (II, 1R, 0) Berlin w/Rubin (I, QF, 2) Rome w/Rubin (I, 2R, 1) Roland Garros w/Rubin (Slam, SF, 4) Eastbourne w/Rubin (II, SF, 1+1 walkover) Wimbledon w/Rubin (Slam, 2R, 1) Stanford w/Capriati (II, QF, 1) San Diego w/Rubin (II, 1R, 0) Canadian Open w/Husarova (I, QF, 1) U. S. Open w/Rubin (Slam, R16, 2) Leipzig w/Schett (II, QF, 1) Filderstadt w/Rittner (II, 1R, 0) Linz w/Serna (II, QF, 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 158 12 21 Huber, Liezel Scottsdale w/Black (II, 1R, 0) Indian Wells w/C. Martinez (I, 2R, 1) Miami w/Maleeva (I, Win, 5) Sarasota w/Navratilova (IV, Win, 4) Charleston w/Callens (I, 1R, 0) Warsaw w/Maleeva (II, Win, 4) Berlin w/Maleeva (I, SF, 3) Rome w/Maleeva (I, QF, 2) Madrid w/Craybas (III, W, 4) Roland Garros w/Maleeva (Slam, 1R, 0) Birmingham w/Maleeva (III, 1R, 0) Eastbourne w/Maleeva (II, QF [Maleeva withdrew], 1) Wimbledon w/Maleeva (Slam, R16, 2) San Diego w/Maleeva (II, QF, 1) Canadian Open w/Maleeva (I, SF, 3) New Haven w/Maleeva (II, QF, 1) U. S. Open w/Maleeva (Slam, QF, 3) Filderstadt w/Maleeva (II, QF, 1) Zurich w/Black (I, SF, 2) Linz w/Sugiyama (II, Win, 4) Philadelphia w/Sugiyama (II, SF, 2) 19 17 Husarova Sydney w/Dementieva (II, SF, 2) Australian Open w/Dementieva (Slam, 2R, 1) Paris w/Bedanova (II, QF, 1) Scottsdale w/Schett (II, 1R, 0) Indian Wells w/Kuznetsova (I, 2R/Husarova withdrew, 1) Charleston w/Martinez (I, F, 3) Berlin w/Likhovtseva (I, SF, 2) Rome w/Schnyder (I, 1R, 0) Roland Garros w/Schett (Slam, QF, 3) Vienna w/Majoli (III, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Martinez (Slam, QF, 3) San Diego w/Martinez (II, QF, 1) Los Angeles w/Martinez (II, 1R, 0) Canadian Open w/Hantuchova (I, QF, 1) U. S. Open w/Martinez (Slam, QF, 3) Leipzig w/Callens (II, QF, 1) Moscow w/Schnyder (I, QF, 1) 176 3 Kournikova Sydney w/Rubin (II, QF, 1) Australian Open w/Rubin (Slam, 3R, 2) Miami w/Dementieva (I, 1R, 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 159 23 18 Krasnoroutskaya Boynton Beach 2002 $75K w/Jidkova ($75K, F, 3) Gold Coast w/Petrova (III, QF [Petrova withdrew], 1) Australian Open w/Panova (Slam, 1R, 0) Pan Paciﬁc w/Panova (I, 1R, 0) Doha w/Pratt (III, 1R, 0) Dubai w/Pratt (II, SF, 2) Sarasota w/Dementieva (IV, 1R, 0) Charleston w/Dementieva (I, SF, 3) Amelia Island w/Dementieva (II, 1R, 0) Strasbourg w/Zvonareva (III, SF, 2) Roland Garros w/Dementieva (Slam, 2R, 1) ’s-Hertogenbosch w/Dementieva (III, Win, 4) Wimbledon w/Dementieva (Slam, SF, 4) San Diego w/Dementieva (II, 1R, 0) Los Angeles w/Dementieva (II, QF, 1) Canadian Open w/Dementieva (I, QF, 2) U. S. Open w/Dementieva (Slam, R16, 2) Moscow w/Dementieva (I, 1R, 0) 43 21 Krizan Auckland w/Srebotnik (IV, QF, 1) Australian Open w/Srebotnik (Slam, 1R, 0) Pan Paciﬁc w/Srebotnik (I, SF, 2) Bogota w/Perebiynis (III, F, 3) Acapulco w/Srebotnik (III, F, 3) Indian Wells w/Srebotnik (I, 1R, 0) Miami w/Srebotnik (I, 1R, 0) Warsaw w/Srebotnik (II, QF, 1) Berlin w/Srebotnik (I, 1R, 0) Rome w/Srebotnik (I, SF, 3) Roland Garros w/Srebotnik (Slam, 2R, 1) ’s-Hertogenbosch w/Srebotnik (III, SF, 2) Wimbledon w/Srebotnik (Slam, 2R, 1) San Diego w/Tu (II, 1R, 0) Los Angeles w/Schett (II, 1R, 0) Canadian Open w/Srebotnik (I, 2R, 1) New Haven w/Srebotnik (II, 1R, 0) U. S. Open w/Srebotnik (Slam, 3R, 2) Leipzig w/Perebiynis (II, 1R, 0) Japan Open w/Srebotnik (III, QF, 1) Luxembourg w/Srebotnik (III, QF, 1) 717Kuznetsova Gold Coast w/Navratilova (III, Win, 3+1 walkover) Australian Open w/Navratilova (Slam, 3R, 2) Doha w/Navratilova (III, QF, 1) Dubai w/Navratilova (II, Win, 4) Indian Wells w/Husarova (I, 2R/Husarova withdrew, 1) Miami w/Navratilova (I, SF, 3) Berlin w/Navratilova (I, QF, 2) Rome w/Navratilova (I, Win, 5) Roland Garros w/Navratilova (Slam, 3R, 2) Wimbledon w/Navratilova (Slam, QF, 3) San Diego w/Navratilova (II, QF, 1) Los Angeles w/Navratilova (II, SF, 2) Canadian Open w/Navratilova (I, Win, 4) U. S. Open w/Navratilova (Slam, F, 5) Leipzig w/Navratilova (II, Win, 4) Moscow w/Navratilova (I, SF, 2) Los Angeles Championships w/Navratilova (Champ, 1R, 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 160 54 22 Lee Australian Open w/Prakusya (Slam, 2R, 1) Pan Paciﬁc w/Prakusya (I, QF, 1) Doha w/Prakusya (III, Win, 4) Dubai w/Prakusya (III, QF, 1) St. Paul $50K w/Pelletier ($50K, 1R, 0) Indian Wells w/Prakusya (I, 1R, 0) Miami w/Prakusya (I, 2R, 1) Dothan $75K w/Cargill ($75K, 1R, 0) Rome w/Prakusya (I, 2R, 1) Roland Garros w/Prakusya (Slam, 1R, 0) Surbiton $25K w/Prakusya ($25K, 1R, 0) Birmingham w/Prakusya (III, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Prakusya (Slam, 2R, 1) Oyster Bay $50K w/Lee-Waters ($50K, QF, 1) Lexington $50K w/Lehnhoff ($50K, Win, 4) Los Angeles w/Tu (II, QF, 1) Canadian Open w/Prakusya (I, 1R, 0) U. S. Open w/Prakusya (Slam, 1R, 0) Shanghai w/Morariu (II, QF, 1) Japan Open w/Widjaja (III, QF, 1) Philadelphia w/Weingärtner (II, QF, 1) Pittsburg $50K w/Frazier ($50K, Win, 4) 11 27 Likhovtseva Auckland w/Black (IV, F, 3) Hobart w/Black (V, Win, 4) Australian Open w/Black (Slam, R16, 2) Pan Paciﬁc w/Black (I, QF, 1) Hyderabad w/Tulyaganova (IV, Win, 4) Doha w/Black (III, SF, 2) Dubai w/Black (II, F, 3) Indian Wells w/Black (I, QF, 2) Miami w/Black (I, 2R, 1) Charleston w/Black (I, QF, 1) Amelia Island w/Black (II, QF, 1) Berlin w/Husarova (I, SF, 2) Rome w/Black (I, 2R, 0) Strasbourg w/Myskina (III, QF, 1) Roland Garros w/Black (Slam, SF, 4) Eastbourne w/Sugiyama (II, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Black (Slam, R16, 2) San Diego w/Black (II, SF, 2) Los Angeles w/Black (II, SF, 2) Canadian Open w/Black (I, 2R, 0) U. S. Open w/Black (Slam, SF, 4) Leipzig w/Petrova (II, F, 3) Moscow w/Black (I, SF, 2) Zurich w/Martinez (I, QF, 1) Linz w/Petrova (II, Petrova withdrew from SF, 2) Philadelphia w/Zvonareva (II, QF, 1) Los Angeles Championships w/Black (Champ, 1R, 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 161 15 23 Loit Gold Coast w/Déchy (III, F, 2+1 walkover) Canberra w/Garbin (V, Win, 4) Australian Open w/Déchy (Slam, 3R, 2) Paris w/Déchy (II, SF, 2) Antwerp w/Déchy (II, F, 3) Acapulco w/Svensson (III, Win, 4) Indian Wells w/Déchy (I, 1R, 0) Miami w/Déchy (I, 2R, 1) Sarasota w/Callens (IV, SF, 2) Berlin w/Déchy (I, QF, 2) Rome w/Callens (I, SF, 3) Roland Garros w/Déchy (Slam, QF, 2) Birmingham w/Déchy (III, 1R, 0) ’s-Hertogenbosch w/Callens (III, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Déchy (Slam, R16, 2) Los Angeles w/Bartoli (II, 1R, 0) Canadian Open w/Pratt (I, QF, 2) New Haven w/Déchy (II, 1R, 0) U. S. Open w/Schiavone (Slam, 2R, 1) Bali w/Pratt (III, F, 3) Shanghai w/Pratt (II, Win 4) Zurich w/Pratt (I, 1R, 0) Luxembourg w/Pratt (III, QF, 1) 14 20 Maleeva Australian Open w/Majoli (Slam, 1R, 0) Pan Paciﬁc w/Bedanova (I, 1R, 0) Doha w/Gagliardi (III, 1R, 0) Dubai w/Musgrave (II, QF, 1) Miami wL. Huber (I, Win, 5) Warsaw w/L. Huber (II, Win, 4) Berlin w/L. Huber (I, SF, 3) Rome w/L. Huber (I, QF, 2) Roland Garros w/L. Huber (Slam, 1R, 0) Birmingham w/L. Huber (III, 1R, 0) Eastbourne w/L. Huber (II, QF [Maleeva withdrew], 1) Wimbledon w/L. Huber (Slam, R16, 2) San Diego w/L. Huber (II, QF, 1) Los Angeles w/Widjaja (II, 1R, 0) Canadian Open w/L. Huber (I, SF, 3) New Haven w/L. Huber (II, QF, 1) U. S. Open w/L. Huber (Slam, QF, 3) Leipzig w/Schnyder (II, QF, 1) Moscow w/Jeyaseelan (I, 1R, 0) Filderstadt w/L. Huber (II, QF, 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 162 16 19 Mandula Hobart w/Rittner (V, SF, 2) Australian Open w/Gagliardi (Slam, SF, 4) Doha w/Wartusch (III, SF, 2) Dubai w/Wartusch (II, 1R, 0) Acapulco w/Wartusch (III, F, 3) Indian Wells w/Gagliardi (I, QF, 2) Miami w/Gagliardi (I, 1R, 0) Estoril w/Wartusch (IV, Win, 4) Budapest w/Tatarkova (V, Win, 4) Bol w/Wartusch (III, Win, 4) Rome w/Gagliardi (I, QF, 2) Roland Garros w/Wartusch (Slam, 3R, 2) Vienna w/Wartusch (III, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Wartusch (Slam, QF, 3) Sopot w/Wartusch (III, 1R, 0) Helsinki w/Wartusch (IV, QF [Wartusch withdrew], 1) U. S. Open w/Wartusch (Slam, R16, 2) Shanghai w/Schett (II, 1R, 0) Tashkent w/Wartusch (IV, QF, 1) 21 13 Martinez, C. Sydney w/Stubbs (II, F, 3) Australian Open w/Petrova (Slam, QF, 3) Indian Wells w/L. Huber (I, 2R, 1) Charleston w/Husarova (I, F, 3) Berlin w/Tulyaganova (I, 2R, 1) Roland Garros w/Shaughnessy (Slam, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Husarova (Slam, QF, 3) San Diego w/Husarova (II, QF, 1) Los Angeles w/Husarova (II, 1R, 0) U. S. Open w/Husarova (Slam, QF, 3) Shanghai w/Widjaja (II, SF, 2) Filderstadt w/Suarez (II, QF, 1) Zurich w/Likhovtseva (I, QF, 1) 156 9 Morariu Rome w/Tatarkova (I, 1R, 0) Strasbourg w/Daniilidou (III, 1R, 0) Roland Garros w/Stubbs (Slam, 1R, 0) Birmingham w/Stubbs (III, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Stubbs (Slam, 1R, 0) Canadian Open w/Dokic (I, QF, 2) New Haven w/Black (II, 1R, 0) U. S. Open w/Dokic (Slam, 1R, 0) Shanghai w/J. Lee (II, QF, 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 163 624Navratilova Gold Coast w/Kuznetsova (III, Win, 3+1 walkover) Sydney w/Stevenson (II, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/Kuznetsova (Slam, 3R, 2) Doha w/Kuznetsova (III, QF, 1) Dubai w/Kuznetsova (II, Win, 4) Miami w/Kuznetsova (I, SF, 3) Sarasota w/L. Huber (IV, Win, 4) Charleston w/Molik (I, QF, 2) Amelia Island w/Callens (II, QF, 1) Berlin w/Kuznetsova (I, QF, 2) Rome w/Kuznetsova (I, Win, 5) Roland Garros w/Kuznetsova (Slam, 3R, 2) Birmingham w/Molik (III, F, 3) Eastbourne w/Molik (II, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Kuznetsova (Slam, QF, 3) San Diego w/Kuznetsova (II, QF, 1) Los Angeles w/Kuznetsova (II, SF, 2) Canadian Open w/Kuznetsova (I, Win, 4) U. S. Open w/Kuznetsova (Slam, F, 5) Leipzig w/Kuznetsova (II, Win, 4) Moscow w/Kuznetsova (I, SF, 2) Filderstadt w/Black (II, F, 3) Philadelphia w/Raymond (II, Win, 4) Los Angeles Championships w/Kuznetsova (Champ, 1R, 0) 13 21 Petrova Gold Coast w/Krasnoroutskaya (III, QF/withdrew, 1) Australian Open w/Martinez (Slam, QF, 3) Pan Paciﬁc w/Dokic (I, QF, 1) Indian Wells w/Dokic (I, SF, 3) Miami w/Dokic (I, 2R, 1) Sarasota w/Dokic (IV, Petrova withdrew from QF, 1) Charleston w/Garbin (I, 2R, 1) Berlin w/Dokic (I, QF, 1) Rome w/Dokic (I, F, 3) Roland Garros w/Dokic (Slam, 3R, 2) ’s-Hertogenbosch w/Pierce (III, F, 3) Wimbledon w/Dokic (Slam, 2R, 1) San Diego w/Srebotnik (II, 1R, 0) Los Angeles w/Srebotnik (II, QF, 1) Canadian Open w/Pierce (I, SF, 3) U. S. Open w/Pierce (Slam, R16, 2) Leipzig w/Likhovtseva (II, F, 3) Moscow w/Shaughnessy (I, Win, 4) Filderstadt w/Shaughnessy (II, SF, 2) Zurich w/Shaughnessy (I, 1R, 0) Linz w/Likhovtseva (II, Petrova withdrew from SF, 2) 30 10 Pierce Auckland w/Suarez (III, QF, 1) Australian Open w/Stubbs (Slam, QF, 3) Hyderabad w/Mirza (IV, QF, 1) Doha w/Tulyaganova (III, QF, 1) ’s-Hertogenbosch w/Petrova (III, F, 3) San Diego w/Stubbs (II, QF, 1) Los Angeles w/Stubbs (II, Win, 4) Canadian Open w/Petrova (I, SF, 3) U. S. Open w/Petrova (Slam, R16, 2) Filderstadt w/Mauresmo (II, 1R, 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 164 59 16 Prakusya Australian Open w/J. Lee (Slam, 2R, 1) Pan Paciﬁc w/Lee (I, QF, 1) Hyderabad w/Widjaja (IV, 1R, 0) Doha w/Lee (III, Win, 4) Dubai w/Lee (III, QF, 1) Indian Wells w/Lee (I, 1R, 0) Miami w/Lee (I, 2R, 1) Rome w/Lee (I, 2R, 1) Roland Garros w/Lee (Slam, 1R, 0) Surbiton $25K w/Lee ($25K, 1R, 0) Birmingham w/Lee (III, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Lee (Slam, 2R, 1) Canadian Open w/Lee (I, 1R, 0) U. S. Open w/Lee (Slam, 1R, 0) Bali w/Tanasugarn (III, SF, 2) Pattaya w/Widjaja (V, F, 3) 31 23 Pratt Gold Coast w/Svensson (III, 1R, 0) Sydney w/Hénin-Hardenne (II, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/M. Casanova (Slam, 1R, 0) Paris w/Daniilidou (II, QF, 1) Doha w/Krasnoroutskaya (III, 1R, 0) Dubai w/Krasnoroutskaya (II, SF, 2) Miami w/Rittner (I, SF, 3) Charleston w/C. Fernandez (I, 1R, 0) Amelia Island w/Garbin (II, 1R, 0) Bol w/Rittner (III, SF, 2) Madrid w/C. Fernandez (III, SF, 2) Roland Garros w/Rittner (Slam, 1R, 0) Birmingham w/Daniilidou (III, 1R, 0) ’s-Hertogenbosch w/Tulyaganova (III, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Tulyaganova (Slam, 1R, 0) Los Angeles w/Serna (II, 1R, 0+2 in qualifying) Canadian Open w/Loit (I, QF, 2) U. S. Open w/Rittner (Slam, 1R, 0) Bali w/Loit (III, F, 3) Shanghai w/Loit (II, Win, 4) Zurich w/Loit (I, 1R, 0) Luxembourg w/Loit (III, QF, 1) Philadelphia w/Shaughnessy (II, SF, 2) 516Raymond Sydney w/Davenport (II, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/Davenport (Slam, SF, 4) Pan Paciﬁc w/Davenport (I, F, 3) Scottsdale w/Davenport (II, F, 3) Indian Wells w/Davenport (I, Win, 5) Miami w/Davenport (I, withdrew from 2R, 1) Amelia Island w/Davenport (II, Win, 4) Roland Garros w/Davenport (Slam, 3R [Davenport withdrew], 2) Eastbourne w/Davenport (II, Win, 4) Wimbledon w/Davenport (Slam, SF, 4) Stanford w/Black (II, Win, 4) San Diego w/Davenport (II, F, 3) U. S. Open w/Sharapova (Slam, 2R, 1) Filderstadt w/Stubbs (II, Win, 3+1 walkover) Zurich w/Stubbs (I, QF, 1) Philadelphia w/Navratilova (II, Win, 4)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 165 218Ruano Pascual Canberra w/Serna (V, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/Suarez (Slam, F, 4+1 walkover) Indian Wells w/Suarez (I, SF, 3) Miami w/Suarez (I, QF, 2) Charleston w/Suarez (I, Win, 4) Amelia Island w/Suarez (II, F, 3) Berlin w/Suarez (I, Win, 4) Rome w/Suarez (I, QF, 1) Roland Garros w/Suarez (Slam, F, 5) ’s-Hertogenbosch w/Suarez (III, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Suarez (Slam, F, 5) San Diego w/Suarez (II, SF, 2) Los Angeles w/Suarez (II, QF, 1) Canadian Open w/Suarez (I, 2R, 0) New Haven w/Suarez (II, Win, 4) U. S. Open w/Suarez (Slam, Win, 6) Zurich w/Suarez (I, F, 3) Los Angeles Championships w/Suarez (Champ, Win, 2) 34 12 Rubin Sydney w/Kournikova (II, QF, 1) Australian Open w/Kournikova (Slam, 3R, 2) Miami w/Schett (I, 1R, 0) Berlin w/Hantuchova (I, QF, 2) Rome w/Hantuchova (I, 2R, 1) Roland Garros w/Hantuchova (Slam, SF, 4) Eastbourne w/Hantuchova (II, SF, 1+1 walkover) Wimbledon w/Hantuchova (Slam, 2R, 1) San Diegp w/Hantuchova (II, 1R, 0) Los Angeles w/Daniilidou (II, 1R, 0) U. S. Open w/Hantuchova (Slam, R16, 2) Shanghai w/Gagliardi (II, SF, 2) 37 25 Schett Gold Coast w/Schnyder (III, SF, 2) Hobart w/Wartusch (V, F, 3) Australian Open w/Wartusch (Slam, 1R, 0) Paris w/Schnyder (II, Win, 4) Scottsdale w/Husarova (II, 1R, 0) Indian Wells w/Wartusch (I, 2R, 1) Miami w/Rubin (I, 1R, 0) Sarasota w/Schnyder (IV, SF, 2) Charleston w/Schnyder (I, 1R, 0) Berlin w/Schnyder (I, 1R, 0) Rome w/Wartusch (I, 1R, 0) Madrid w/Wartusch (III, QF, 1) Roland Garros w/Husarova (Slam, QF, 3) Vienna w/Grande (III, SF, 2) Wimbledon w/Schnyder (Slam, 1R, 0) San Diego w/Farina Elia (II, 1R, 0+2 in qualifying) Los Angeles w/Krizan (II, 1R, 0) Canadian Open w/Zuluaga (I, 2R, 1) U. S. Open w/Schnyder (Slam, 2R, 1) Bali w/Gagliardi (III, 1R, 0) Shanghai w/Mandula (II, 1R, 0) Leipzig w/Hantuchova (II, QF, 1) Filderstadt w/Schnyder (II, QF, 1) Zurich w/Schnyder (I, 1R, 0) Linz w/Schnyder (II, 1R, 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 166 25 20 Shaughnessy Gold Coast w/Sugiyama (III, QF [Shaughnessy withdrew], 1) Australian Open w/Hantuchova (Slam, QF, 2+1 walkover) Pan Paciﬁc w/Sugiyama (I, SF, 2) Scottsdale w/Stubbs (II, SF, 2) Indian Wells w/Hantuchova (I, 1R, 0) Miami w/Hantuchova (I, 1R, 0) Charleston w/Davenport (I, QF, 2) Berlin w/Grönefeld (I, 1R, 0) Roland Garros w/Martinez (Slam, 1R, 0) Eastbourne w/Gagliardi (II, 1R, 0) Wimbledon w/Gagliardi (Slam, 2R, 1) Stanford w/Stubbs (II, QF, 1) San Diego w/Dokic (II, 1R, 0) New Haven w/Gagliardi (II, 1R, 0) U. S. Open w/Gagliardi (Slam, 1R, 0) Leipzig w/Serna (II, 1R, 0) Moscow w/Petrova (I, Win, 4) Filderstadt w/Petrova (II, SF, 2) Zurich w/Petrova (I, 1R, 0) Philadelphia w/Pratt (II, SF, 2) 38 21 Srebotnik Auckland w/Krizan (IV, QF, 1) Australian Open w/Krizan (Slam, 1R, 0) Pan Paciﬁc w/Krizan (I, SF, 2) Bogota w/Svensson (III, Win, 4) Acapulco w/Krizan (III, F, 3) Indian Wells w/Krizan (I, 1R, 0) Miami w/Krizan (I, 1R, 0) Warsaw w/Krizan (II, QF, 1) Berlin w/Krizan (I, 1R, 0) Rome w/Krizan (I, SF, 3) Roland Garros w/Krizan (Slam, 2R, 1) ’s-Hertogenbosch w/Krizan (III, SF, 2) Wimbledon w/Krizan (Slam, 2R, 1) San Diego w/Petrova (II, 1R, 0) Los Angeles w/Petrova (II, QF, 1) Canadian Open w/Krizan (I, 2R, 1) New Haven w/Krizan (II, 1R, 0) U. S. Open w/Krizan (Slam, 3R, 2) Japan Open w/Krizan (III, QF, 1) Zurich w/Dokic (I, QF, 0+1 walkover) Luxembourg w/Krizan (III, QF, 1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 167 10 20 Stubbs Sydney w/Martinez (II, F, 3) Australian Open w/Pierce (Slam, QF, 3) Pan Paciﬁc w/Bovina (I, Win, 4) Scottsdale w/Shaughnessy (II, SF, 2) Indian Wells w/Bovina (I, QF, 2) Miami w/Bovina (I, 1R, 0) Charleston w/Bovina (I, QF, 2) Amelia Island w/Dokic (II, QF, 1) Strasbourg w/Bovina (III, QF, 1) Roland Garros w/Morariu (Slam, 1R, 0) Birmingham w/Morariu (III, 1R, 0) Eastbourne w/Dokic (II, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Morariu (Slam, 1R, 0) Stanford w/Shaughnessy (II, QF, 1) San Diego w/Pierce (II, QF, 1) Los Angeles w/Pierce (II, Win, 4) U. S. Open w/Bovina (Slam, QF, 3) Filderstadt w/Raymond (II, Win, 3+1 walkover) Zurich w/Raymond (I, QF, 1) Philadelphia w/Black (II, F, 3) 121Suarez Auckland w/Pierce (III, QF, 1) Australian Open w/Ruano Pascual (Slam, F, 4+1 walkover) Bogota w/Zuluaga (III, SF, 2) Indian Wells w/Ruano Pascual (I, SF, 3) Miami w/Ruano Pascual (I, QF, 2) Charleston w/Ruano Pascual (I, Win, 4) Amelia Island w/Ruano Pascual (II, F, 3) Berlin w/Ruano Pascual (I, Win, 4) Rome w/Ruano Pascual (I, QF, 1) Madrid w/Cravero (III, SF [Cravero withdrew], 2) Roland Garros w/Ruano Pascual (Slam, F, 5) ’s-Hertogenbosch w/Ruano Pascual (III, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Ruano Pascual (Slam, F, 5) San Diego w/Ruano Pascual (II, SF, 2) Los Angeles w/Ruano Pascual (II, QF, 1) Canadian Open w/Ruano Pascual (I, 2R, 0) New Haven w/Ruano Pascual (II, Win, 4) U. S. Open w/Ruano Pascual (Slam, Win, 6) Filderstadt w/Martinez (II, QF, 1) Zurich w/Ruano Pascual (I, F, 3) Los Angeles Championships w/Ruano Pascual (Champ, Win, 2)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 168 322Sugiyama Gold Coast w/Shaughnessy (III, QF [Shaughnessy withdrew], 1) Sydney w/Clijsters (II, Win, 4) Australian Open w/Clijsters (Slam, QF, 3) Pan Paciﬁc w/Shaughnessy (I, SF, 2) Paris w/Hantuchova (II, 1R, 0) Antwerp w/Clijsters (II, Win, 4) Scottsdale w/Clijsters (II, Win, 4) Indian Wells w/Clijsters (I, F, 4) Miami w/Clijsters (I, QF, 2) Sarasota w/Morigami (IV, 1R, 0) Berlin w/Clijsters (I, F, 3) Roland Garros w/Clijsters (Slam, Win, 6) Eastbourne w/Likhovtseva (II, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Clijsters (Slam, Win, 6) San Diego w/Clijsters (II, Win, 4) Los Angeles w/Asagoe (II, 1R, 0) U. S. Open w/Clijsters (Slam, withdrew from 2R, 1) Shanghai w/Tanasugarn (II, F, 3) Zurich w/Clijsters (I, Win, 4) Linz w/L. Huber (II, Win, 4) Philadelphia w/L. Huber (II, SF, 2) Los Angeles Championships w/Clijsters (Champ, F, 1) 397 3 Tauziat Paris w/Fusai (II, 1R, 0) Strasbourg w/Cohen-Aloro (III, QF, 1) Roland Garros w/Cohen-Aloro (Slam, 1R, 0) 17 24 Vento-Kabchi Eugene 2002 $50K w/Dulko ($50K, QF, 1) Gold Coast w/Rittner (III, 1R, 0) Australian Open w/Rittner (Slam, 3R, 2) Pan Paciﬁc w/Grande (I, QF, 1) Hyderabad w. C. Fernandez (IV, 1R, 0) Doha w/Widjaja (III, F, 3) Dubai w/Widjaja (II, SF, 2) Indian Wells w/Rittner (I, 1R, 0) Miami w/Widjaja (I, 1R, 0) Sarasota w/Jidkova ((IV, 1R, 0) Charleston w/Tu (I, 2R, 1) Amelia Island w/Tu (II, SF, 2) Saint-Gaudens $75K w/Jeyaseelan ($75K, SF, 2) Rome w/Widjaja (I, 1R, 0) Roland Garros w/Widjaja (Slam, 2R, 1) Birmingham w/Widjaja (III, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Widjaja (Slam, QF, 3) Stanford w/Grant (II, 1R, 0) San Diego w/Widjaja (II, 1R, 0) Canadian Open w/Widjaja (I, F, 4) U. S. Open w/Widjaja (Slam, QF, 3) Bali w/Widjaja (III, Win, 4) Leipzig w/Rittner (II, 1R, 0) Moscow w/Daniilidou (I, 1R, 0)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 169 33 19 Wartusch Auckland w/Daniilidou (IV, 1R, 0) Hobart w/Schett (V, F, 3) Australian Open w/Schett (Slam, 1R, 0) Doha w/Mandula (III, SF, 2) Dubai w/Mandula (II, 1R, 0) Acapulco w/Mandula (III, F, 3) Indian Wells w/Schett (I, 2R, 1) Casablanca w/Grande (V, 1R, 0) Estoril w/Mandula (IV, Win, 4) Bol w/Mandula (III, Win, 4) Rome w/Schett (I, 1R, 0) Madrid w/Schett (III, QF, 1) Roland Garros w/Mandula (Slam, 3R, 2) Vienna w/Mandula (III, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Mandula (Slam, QF, 3) Sopot w/Mandula (III, 1R, 0) Helsinki w/Mandula (IV, QF [Wartusch withdrew], 1) U. S. Open w/Mandula (Slam, R16, 2) Tashkent w/Mandula (IV, QF, 1) 18 24 Widjaja Canberra w/C. Fernandez (V, QF, 1) Australian Open w/Liggan (Slam, 1R, 0) Pan Paciﬁc w/Selyutina (I, 1R, 0) Hyderabad w/Prakusya (IV, 1R, 0) Doha w/Vento-Kabchi (III, F, 3) Dubai w/Vento-Kabchi (II, SF, 2) Indian Wells w/Tarabini (I, 1R, 0) Miami w/Vento-Kabchi (I, 1R, 0) Rome w/Vento-Kabchi (I, 1R, 0) Madrid w/Grande (III, F, 3) Roland Garros w/Vento-Kabchi (Slam, 2R, 1) Birmingham w/Vento-Kabchi (III, QF, 1) ’s-Hertogenbosch w/Grande (III, QF, 1) Wimbledon w/Vento-Kabchi (Slam, QF, 3) San Diego w/Vento-Kabchi (II, 1R, 0) Los Angeles w/Maleeva (II, 1R, 0) Canadian Open w/Vento-Kabchi (I, F, 4) New Haven w/Callens (II, SF, 2) U. S. Open w/Vento-Kabchi (Slam, QF, 3) Bali w/Vento-Kabchi (III, Win, 4) Shanghai w/Martinez (II, SF, 2) Japan Open w/Lee (III, QF, 1) Tashkent w/Gagliardi (IV, QF, 1) Pattaya w/Prakusya (V, F, 3) —2Williams, S. Australian Open w/V. Williams (Slam, Win, 6) Wimbledon w/V. Williams (Slam, R16, 2) —2Williams, V. Australian Open w/S. Williams (Slam, Win, 6) Wimbledon w/S. Williams (Slam, R16, 2)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 170 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 Magdalena Maleeva when she plays with Liezel Huber than when she plays with Daja Bedanova. 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 six or more events together) are shown in plain text; all others in italics

Alves/Bartoli Bartoli/Casanova [1 Challenger, 0 titles, 2-1 Challenger record] [5 events, 0 titles, 10-4 record] Marosi/Reeves (Boynton Beach $75K 2002) Dokic/Petrova (Roland Garros) Husarova/Martinez (Wimbledon) Ani/Gagliardi Molik/Serna (New Haven) [1 event, 0 titles, 3-1 record] Kuznetsova/Navratilova (U. S. Open) Mandula/Wartusch (Estoril) Bartoli/Cohen-Aloro Arendt/Dominikovic [3 events, 0 titles, 5-3 record] [2 events, 0 titles, 1-2 record] Schett/Schnyder (Paris) Matevzic/Nagyova (Roland Garros) Clijsters/Sugiyama (Scottsdale) Mandula/Wartusch (Wimbledon) Krizan/Srebotnik (’s-Hertogenbosch)

Arendt/Perebiynis Bartoli/Dhenin [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Lee/Prakusya (Birmingham) Krasnoroutskaya/Zvonareva (Strasbourg)

Asagoe/Liggan Bartoli/Dominikovic [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] [3 events, 0 titles, 1-2 record + 2 qualifying wins] Krizan/Srebotnik (Acapulco) Callens/Loit (Sarasota) Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya (Charleston) Asagoe/Miyagi [11 WTA+2 Challenger events, 1 Challenger title, Bartoli/Dokic 15-11 WTA +7-1 Challenger record] [1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 record] Kournikova/Rubin (Australian Open) Kuznetsova/Navratilova (Leipzig) Pelletier/Washington (Memphis) Black/Likhovtseva (Indian Wells) Bartoli/Farina Elia L. Huber/Maleeva (Miami) [1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 record] L. Huber/Navratilova (Sarasota) L. Huber/Sugiyama (Linz) Fujiwara/Obata (Gifu $50K) Bovina/Molik (Roland Garros) Bartoli/Foretz Fujiwara/Vinci (Birmingham) [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record +1 qualifying win] Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Wimbledon) Kulikovskaya/Poutchek (Canberra) L. Huber/Maleeva (Canadian Open) Matevzic/Nagyova (U. S. Open) Bartoli/Granville Yan/Zheng (Japan Open) [1 Challenger, 0 titles, 2-1 Challenger record] Mattek/Osterloh (Surbiton $25K) Asagoe/Sugiyama [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Bartoli/Irvin Black/Likhovtseva (Los Angeles) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Kuznetsova/Navratilova (Berlin) Bartoli/Bedanova [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Dokic/Morariu (Canadian Open)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 171 Bartoli/Jidkova Black/Likhovtseva [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] [19 events, 1 title, 36-18 record] Cho/Schiavone (Stanford) Ashley/Spears (Auckland) Pierce/Stubbs (Australian Open) Bartoli/Loit Davenport/Raymond (Pan Paciﬁc) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja (Doha) Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Los Angeles) Kuznetsova/Navratilova (Dubai) Davenport/Raymond (Indian Wells) Bartoli/Matevzic Pratt/Rittner (Miami) [1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 record] Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya (Charleston) Krizan/Srebotnik (Rome) Morigami/Jidkova (Amelia Island) L. Huber/Maleeva (Rome) Bartoli/Schneider Clijsters/Sugiyama (Roland Garros) [1 Challenger, 0 titles, 0-1 Challenger record] Mandula/Wartusch (Wimbledon) Beygelzimer/Voracova (Deauville $25K 2002) Clijsters/Sugiyama (San Diego) Bovina/Callens (Los Angeles) Bartoli/Sharapova Petrova/Pierce (Canadian Open) [2 events, 0 titles, 2-2 record] Ruano Pascual/Suarez (U. S. Open) Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Australian Open) Petrova/Shaughnessy (Moscow) Li/Sun (Quebec City) Clijsters/Sugiyama (Los Angeles Championships)

Bedanova/Dokic Black/Molik [2 events, 0 titles, 2-2 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Clijsters/Sugiyama (Antwerp) Morigami/Saﬁna (Shanghai) Bartoli/Cohen Aloro (Scottsdale) Black/Morariu Bedanova/Hantuchova [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Bedanova/Reeves (New Haven) Black/Likhovtseva (Amelia Island) Black/Navratilova Bedanova/Husarova [1 event, 0 titles, 3-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Raymond/Stubbs (Filderstadt) Schett/Schnyder (Paris) Black/Raymond Bedanova/Maleeva [1 event, 1 title, 4-0 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Grande/Vento-Kabchi (Pan Paciﬁc) Black/Stubbs [1 event, 0 titles, 3-1 record] Black/L. Huber Navratilova/Raymond (Philadelphia) [2 events, 0 titles, 2-2 record] Davenport/Raymond (Scottsdale) Bovina/Callens Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Zurich) [2 events, 0 titles, 4-2 record] Pierce/Stubbs (Los Angeles) Black/Navratilova (Filderstadt)

Bovina/Déchy [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Davenport/Raymond (Eastbourne)

Bovina/Hénin-Hardenne [1 event, 0 titles, 2-0 record]

Bovina/Molik [1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 record] Hantuchova/Rubin (Roland Garros)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 172 Bovina/Stubbs Cargill/Lee [6 events, 1 title, 12-5 record] [1 Challenger, 0 titles, 0-1 record in Challengers] Dokic/Petrova (Indian Wells) Camerin/Casoni (Dothan $75K) Reeves/Sequera (Miami) Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Charleston) Casanova/Pratt Granville/Kostanic (Strasbourg) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Ruano Pascual/Suarez (U. S. Open) Navratilova/Kuznetsova (Australian Open)

Callens/Fujiwara Clijsters/Sugiyama [3 events, 0 titles, 1-3 record] [13 events, 7 titles, 46-5 record] Matevzic/Vinci (Gold Coast) Williams/Williams (Australian Open) Rittner/Vento-Kabchi (Australian Open) Davenport/Raymond (Indian Wells) Krizan/Srebotnik (Pan Paciﬁc) L. Huber/Maleeva (Miami) Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Berlin) Callens/L. Huber Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Los Angeles Championships) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Bedanova/Tulyaganova (Charleston) Cohen Aloro/Tauziat [2 events, 0 titles, 1-2 record] Callens/Husarova McShea/Selyutina (Strasbourg) [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Clijsters/Sugiyama (Roland Garros) Daniilidou/Grande (Leipzig) Cravero/Suarez Callens/Loit [1 event, 0 titles, 2-0 record] [3 events, 0 titles, 5-3 record] L. Huber/Navratilova (Sarasota) Craybas/Huber Kuznetsova/Navratilova (Rome) [1 event, 1 title, 4-0 record] Jidkova/Rittner (’s-Hertogenbosch) Daniilidou/Morariu Callens/Majoli [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Tauziat/Cohen Aloro (Strasbourg) Kostanic/Marosi (Berlin) Daniilidou/Pratt Callens/Navratilova [2 events, 0 titles, 1-2 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Boogert/Serna (Paris) Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Amelia Island) Musgrave/Tatarkova (Birmingham)

Callens/Svensson Daniilidou/Rubin [3 events, 0 titles, 4-3 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Schett/Wartusch (Hobart) Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya (Los Angeles) Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Indian Wells) Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Miami) Daniilidou/Vento-Kabchi [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Callens/Tu Husarova/Schnyder (Moscow) [6 events, 1 title, 11-5 record] Daniilidou/Grande (Roland Garros) Daniilidou/Wartusch Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya (Wimbledon) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja (Canadian Open) Pierce/Suarez (Auckland) Ruano Pascual/Suarez (U. S. Open) T. Li/Sun (Quebec City) Davenport/Raymond [11 events, 3 titles, 33-6 record] Callens/Widjaja Kournikova/Rubin (Sydney) [1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 record] Williams/Williams (Australian Open) Ruano Pascual/Suarez (New Haven) Bovina/Stubbs (Pan Paciﬁc) Clijsters/Sugiyama (Scottsdale) Capriati/Hantuchova Clijsters/Sugiyama (Wimbledon) [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Clijsters/Sugiyama (San Diego) Black/Raymond (Stanford)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 173 Davenport/Shaughnessy Dokic/Hantuchova [1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Husarova/Martinez (Charleston) Harkleroad/Washington (Charleston)

Déchy/Loit Dokic/Harkleroad [11 events, 0 titles, 16-11 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Kuznetsova/Navratilova (Gold Coast) Prakusya/Tanasugarn Hantuchova/Shaughnessy (Australian Open) Schett/Schnyder (Paris) Dokic/Matevzic Clijsters/Sugiyama (Antwerp) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Bovina/Stubbs (Indian Wells) Schett/Schnyder (Filderstadt) Clijsters/Sugiyama (Miami) Clijsters/Sugiyama (Berlin) Dokic/Morariu Black/Likhovtseva (Roland Garros) [2 events, 0 titles, 2-2 record] Navratilova/Molik (Birmingham) Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja (Canadian Open) Davenport/Raymond (Wimbledon) Clijsters/Sugiyama (U. S. Open) Bartoli/Casanva (New Haven) Dokic/Petrova Dementieva/Farina Elia [8 events, 0 titles, 13-7 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Krizan/Srebotnik (Pan Pacific) Dokic/Petrova (Pan Pacific) Davenport/Raymond (Indian Wells) Farina Elia/Garbin (Miami) Dementieva/Gagliardi L. Huber/Maleeva (Berlin) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Kuznetsova/Navratilova (Rome) Fujiwara/Vinci (Birmingham) Husarova/Schett (Roland Garros) Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja (Wimbledon) Dementieva/Grande [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Dokic/Safina Clijsters/Sugiyama (Indian Wells) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Black/Likhovtseva (Moscow) Dementieva/Husarova [2 events, 0 titles, 3-2 record] Dokic/Shaughnessy Clijsters/Sugiyama (Sydney) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Gagliardi/Mandula (Australian Open) Black/Likhovtseva (San Diego)

Dementieva/Kournikova Dokic/Srebotnik [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Jeyaseelan/Tu (Miami) Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Zurich)

Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya Dokic/Stubbs [11 events, 1 title, 17-10 record] [2 events, 0 titles, 2-2 record] Bartoli/Dominikovic (Sarasota) Tu/Vento-Kabchi (Amelia Island) Husarova/Martinez (Charleston) Foretz/Ant. Serra-Zanetti (Eastbourne) Tu/Vento-Kabchi (Amelia Island) Clijsters/Sugiyama (Roland Garros) Dulko/Vento-Kabchi Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Wimbledon) [1 Challenger, 0 titles, 1-1 record in Challengers] Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Wimbledon) Drake/Reeves (Eugene 2002 $50K) Black/Likhovtseva (Los Angeles) Petrova/Pierce (Canadian Open) Farina Elia/Hantuchova Bartoli/Casanova (U. S. Open) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Myskina/Zvonareva (Moscow) Panova/Reeves (Sydney)

Dementieva/Zvonareva Farina Elia/Schett [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1+2 qualifying wins] Black/L. Huber (Zurich) Kuznetsova/Navratilova (San Diego)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 174 C. Fernandez/Pratt Gagliardi/Grant [2 events, 0 titles, 2-2 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Tarabini/Vis (Charleston) Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja (Dubai) Grande/Widjaja (Madrid) Gagliardi/Harkleroad C. Fernandez/Vento-Kabchi [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Serna/Zuluaga (Acapulco) Pennetta/Vanc (Hyderabad) Gagliardi/Maleeva C. Fernandez/Widjaja [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja (Doha) Garbin/Loit (Canberra) Gagliardi/Mandula Frazier/Lee [4 events, 0 titles, 8-4 record] [1 Challenger, 1 Challenger titles, 4-0 record in Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Australian Open) Challengers] Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Indian Wells) Davenport/Raymond (Miami) Fujiwara/Gagliardi Dokic/Petrova (Rome) [1 event, 0 titles, 1-0 record] Gagliardi/Nagyova Fujiwara/Hopkins [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Black/Likhovtseva (Auckland) Dokic/Petrova (Sarasota) Gagliardi/Rittner Fujiwara/Musgrave [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 record in Challengers] Fokina/Koryttseva (Luxembourg) Li/Sun (Modena $50K+H) Gagliardi/Rubin Fujiwara/Obata [1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 record] [2 WTA+2 Challenger events, 1 Challenger title, 0-2 Loit/Pratt (Shanghai) WTA +7-1 in Challenger record] Dekmeijere/Miyagi (Fukuoka $50K) Gagliardi/Schett Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Wimbledon) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Ruano Pascual/Suarez (U. S. Open) Liggan/Parra (Bali)

Fujiwara/Panova Gagliardi/Schnyder [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] [2 events, 0 titles, 4-2 record] Garbin/Petrova (Charleston) Mandula/Wartusch (Bol) Black/Likhovtseva (Roland Garros) Fujiwara/Saﬁna [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Gagliardi/Shaughnessy Déchy/Loit (Roland Garros) [4 events, 0 titles, 1-4 record] Capriati/Serna (Eastbourne) Fujiwara/Vinci Sequera/Washington (Wimbledon) [1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 record] Farina Elia/Garbin (New Haven) Molik/Navratilova (Birmingham) Bovina/Casanova (U. S. Open)

Fusai/Tauziat Gagliardi/Tarabini [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Daniilidou/Pratt (Paris) Craybas/L. Huber (Madrid)

Gagliardi/Grande Gagliardi/Widjaja [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Frazier/Schmidt (Hobart) T. Li/Sun (Tashkent)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 175 Garbin/Loit Hantuchova/Serna [1 event, 1 title, 4-0 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Benesova/Pastikova (Linz) Garbin/Petrova [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Hantuchova/Shaughnessy Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya (Charleston) [3 events, 0 titles, 2-3 record] Gagliardi/Mandula (Australian Open) Garbin/Pratt Gagliardi/Mandula (Indian Wells) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Asagoe/Miyagi (Miami) Reeves/Sequera (Amelia Island) Hantuchova/Sugiyama Grande/Schett [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 record] Daniilidou/Pratt (Paris) Li/Sun (Vienna) Hénin-Hardenne/Pratt Grande/Vento-Kabchi [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Dementieva/Husarova (Sydney) Shaughnessy/Sugiyama (Pan Paciﬁc) L. Huber/Maleeva Grande/Wartusch [13 events, 2 titles, 26-10 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Berlin) Dragomir Ilie/Talaja (Casablanca) Kuznetsova/Navratilova (Rome) Farina Elia/Garbin (Roland Garros) Grande/Widjaja Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja (Birmingham) [2 events, 0 titles, 4-2 record] Husarova/Martinez (Wimbledon) Craybas/L. Huber (Madrid) Davenport/Raymond (San Diego) Rittner/Jidkova (’s-Hertogenbosch) Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja (Canadian Open) Molik/Serna (New Haven) Grant/Vento-Kabchi Kuznetsova/Navratilova (U. S. Open) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Petrova/Shaughnessy (Filderstadt) Black/Raymond (Stanford) L. Huber/Navratilova Grönefeld/Shaughnessy [1 event, 1 title, 4-0 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Dhenin/Neffa-de los Rios (Berlin) L. Huber/C. Martinez [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Hantuchova/Husarova Bovina/Stubbs (Indian Wells) [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] L. Huber/Maleeva (Canadian Open) L. Huber/Sugiyama [2 events, 1 title, 6-1 record] Hantuchova/Rittner Black/Stubbs (Philadelphia) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] L. Huber/Maleeva (Filderstadt) Husarova/Kuznetsova [1 event, 0 titles, 1-0 record] Hantuchova/Rubin [7 events, 0 titles, 11-7 record] Husarova/Likhovtseva Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Berlin) [1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 record] Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Rome) Clijsters/Sugiyama (Berlin) Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Roland Garros) Davenport/Raymond (Eastbourne) Husarova/Majoli Bedanova/Voracova (Wimbledon) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Pierce/Stubbs (San Diego) Grant/Neffa-de los Rios (Vienna) Husarova/Martinez (U. S. Open)

Hantuchova/Schett [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Kuznetsova/Navratilova (Leipzig)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 176 Husarova/Martinez Krizan/Perebiynis [5 events, 0 titles, 10-5 record] [2 events, 0 titles, 3-2 record] Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Charleston) Srebotnik/Svensson (Bogota) Davenport/Raymond (Wimbledon) Likhovtseva/Petrova (Leipzig) Ruano Pascual/Suarez (San Diego) Bovina/Callens (Los Angeles) Krizan/Schett Black/Likhovtseva (U. S. Open) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Kuznetsova/Navratilova (Los Angeles) Husarova/Schett [2 events, 0 titles, 3-2 record] Krizan/Srebotnik Jidkova/Kulikovskaya (Scottsdale) [17 events, 0 titles, 19-17 record] Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Roland Garros) Ashley/Spears (Auckland) McQuillan/Tu (Australian Open) Husarova/Schnyder Davenport/Raymond (Pan Paciﬁc) [2 events, 0 titles, 1-2 record] Loit/Svensson (Acapulco) Tarabini/Vis (Rome) Davenport/Raymond (Indian Wells) Petrova/Shaughnessy (Moscow) Black/Likhovtseva (Miami) Daniilidou/Schiavone (Warsaw) Jeyaseelan/Maleeva Martinez/Tulyaganova (Berlin) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Dokic/Petrova (Rome) Kuznetsova/Navratilova (Moscow) Majoli/Tulyaganova (Roland Garros) Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya (’s-Hertogenbosch) Jeyaseelan/Vento-Kabchi Asagoe/Miyagi (Wimbledon) [1 Challenger, 0 titles, 2-1 record in Challengers] Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja (Canadian Open) Poutchek/Rodionova (Saint-Gaudens $75K) Ruano Pascual/Suarez (New Haven) Black/Likhovtseva (U. S. Open) Jidkova/Krasnoroutskaya Sharapova/Tanasugarn (Japan Open) [1 Challenger, 0 titles, 3-1 record in Challengers] Sharapova/Tanasugarn (Luzembourg) Marosi/Reeves (Boynton Beach 2002 $75K) Krizan/Tu Jidkova/Vento-Kabchi [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] L. Huber/Maleeva (San Diego) Asagoe/Miyagi (Sarasota) Kuznetsova/Navratilova Kournikova/Rubin [16 events, 5 titles, 43-11 record] [2 events, 0 titles, 3-2 record] Williams/Williams (Australian Open) Coetzer/Steck (Sydney) Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja (Doha) Martinez/Petrova (Australian Open) L. Huber/Maleeva (Miami) Husarova/Likhovtseva (Berlin) Krasnoroutskaya/Panova Hantuchova/Rubin (Roland Garros) [2 events, 0 titles, 0-2 record] Clijsters/Sugiyama (Wimbledon) Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Australian Open) Black/Likhovtseva (San Diego) Lee/Prakusya (Pan Paciﬁc) Pierce/Stubbs (Los Angeles) Ruano Pascual/Suarez (U. S. Open) Krasnoroutskaya/Petrova Myskina/Zvonareva (Moscow) [1 event, 0 titles, 1-0 record] Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Los Angeles Championships)

Krasnoroutskaya/Pratt Lee/Lee-Waters [2 events, 0 titles, 2-2 record] [1 Challenger, 0 titles, 1-1 record in Challengers] Black/Likhovtseva (Doha) Cargill/Liggan (Oyster Bay $50K) Black/Likhovtseva (Dubai) Lee/Lehnhoff Krasnoroutskaya/Zvonareva [1 Challenger, 1 Challenger title, 4-0 record in [1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 record] Challengers] Granville/Kostanic (Strasbourg)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 177 Lee/Morariu Likhovtseva/Tulyaganova [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] [1 event, 1 title, 4-0 record] Sugiyama/Tanasugarn (Shanghai) Likhovtseva/Zvonareva Lee/Pelletier [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] [1 Challenger, 0 titles, 0-1 record in Challengers] L. Huber/Sugiyama (Philadelphia) Dekmeijere/Lamade (St. Paul $50K) Loit/Pratt Lee/Prakusya [ 5 events, 1 title, 10-4 record] [12 WTA+1 Challenger events, 1 WTA title, 11-11 Kuznestova/Navratilova (Canadian Open) WTA record +0-1 record in Challengers] Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja (Bali) Déchy/Loit (Australian Open) Perebiynis/Talaja (Zurich) Bovina/Stubbs (Pan Paciﬁc) Barna/Medina Garrigues (Luxembourg) Krasnoroutskaya/Pratt (Dubai) Black/Likhovtseva (Indian Wells) Loit/Schiavone Asagoe/Miyago (Miami) [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Kuznetsova/Navratilova (Rome) Black/Likhovtseva (U. S. Open) Callens/Tu (Roland Garros) Mattek/Osterloh (Surbiton $25K) Loit/Svensson Navratilova/Molik (Birmingham) [1 event, 1 title, 4-0 record] Granville/Stevenson (Wimbledon) Vakulento/Washington (Canadian Open) Majoli/Maleeva Callens/Tu (U. S. Open) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Lee/Prakusya (Australian Open) Lee/Tu [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Maleeva/Musgrave Bovina/Callens (Los Angeles) [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Navratilova/Kuznetsova (Dubai) Lee/Weingärtner [1 events, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Maleeva/Schnyder Pratt/Shaughnessy (Philadelphia) [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Bartoli/Dokic (Leipzig) Lee/Widjaja [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Maleeva/Widjaja Cargill/Harkleroad (Japan Open) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Lee/Tu (Los Angeles) Liggan/Widjaja [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Mandula/Rittner Bovina/Hénin-Hardenne (Australian Open) [1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 record] Black/Likhovtseva (Hobart) Likhovtseva/Martinez [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Mandula/Schett Clijsters/Sugiyama (Zurich) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] J. Lee/Morariu (Shanghai) Likhovtseva/Myskina [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Mandula/Tatarkova Jeyaseelan/Matevzic (Strasbourg) [1 event, 1 title, 4-0 record]

Likhovtseva/Petrova [2 events, 0 titles, 5-1 record] Kuznetsova/Navratilova (Leipzig)

Likhovtseva/Sugiyama [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Capriati/Serna (Eastbourne)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 178 Mandula/Wartusch Morariu/Tatarkova [12 events, 2 titles, 23-9 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Lee/Prakusya (Doha) Kuznetsova/Navratilova (Rome) Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja (Dubai) Loit/Svensson (Acapulco) Morigami/Sugiyama Déchy/Loit (Roland Garros) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Yan/Zheng (Vienna) Garbin/Matevzic (Sarasota) Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Wimbledon) C. Fernandez/Kulikovskaya (Sopot) Navratilova/Raymond L. Huber/Maleeva (U. S. Open) [1 event, 1 title, 4-0 record] Kustava/Tatarova (Tashkent) Navratilova/Stevenson Martinez/Petrova [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 3-1 record] M. Casanova/Dominikovic (Sydney) Ruano Pascual/Suarez (Australian Open) Petrova/Pierce Martinez/Shaughnessy [3 events, 0 titles, 8-3 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya (’s-Hertogenbosch) Matevzic/Nagyova (Roland Garros) Navratilova/Kuznetsova (Canadian Open) Bovina/Stubbs (U. S. Open) Martinez/Stubbs [1 event, 0 titles, 3-1 record] Petrova/Shaughnessy Clijsters/Sugiyama (Sydney) [3 events, 1 titles, 6-2 record] Black/Navratilova (Filderstadt) Martinez/Suarez Clijsters/Sugiyama (Zurich) [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Bartoli/Casanova (Filderstadt) Petrova/Srebotnik [2 events, 0 titles, 1-2 record] Martinez/Tulyaganova Husarova/Martinez (San Diego) [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Kuznetsova/Navratilova (Los Angeles) L. Huber/Maleeva (Berlin) Pierce/Stubbs Martinez/Widjaja [3 events, 1 title, 8-2 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 record] Davenport/Raymond (Australian Open) Sugiyama/Tanasugarn (Shanghai) Clijsters/Sugiyama (San Diego)

Mauresmo/Pierce Pierce/Suarez [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Black/Navratilova Jidkova/Panova (Auckland)

Mirza/Pierce Pierce/Tulyaganova [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Likhovtseva/Tulyaganova Black/Likhovtseva (Doha)

Molik/Navratilova Prakusya/Tanasugarn [3 events, 0 titles, 5-3 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 record] Harkleroad/Washington (Charleston) Loit/Pratt (Bali) Callens/Tu (Birmingham) Bovina/Déchy (Eastbourne) Prakusya/Widjaja [2 events, 0 titles, 3-2 record] Morariu/Stubbs Musgrave/Tanasugarn (Hyderabad) [3 events, 0 titles, 0-3 record] T. Li/Sun (Pattaya City) Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya (Roland Garros) Callens/Tu (Birmingham) Williams/Williams (Wimbledon)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 179 Pratt/Rittner Rubin/Schett [4 events, 0 titles, 5-4 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Asagoe/Miyagi (Miami) Déchy/Loit (Miami) Gagliardi/Schnyder (Bol) Black/Likhovtseva (Roland Garros) Schett/Schnyder Schett/Schnyder (U. S. Open) [10 events, 1 title, 10-9 record] Kuznetsova/Navratilova (Gold Coast) Pratt/Serna Asagoe/Miyagi (Sarasota) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record+2 qualifying wins] Myskina/Selyutina (Charleston) Petrova/Srebotnik (Los Angeles) Hantuchova/Rubin (Berlin) Crook/Hawkins (Wimbledon) Pratt/Shaughnessy L. Huber/Maleeva (U. S. Open) [1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 record] Raymond/Stubbs (Filderstadt) Navratilova/Raymond (Philadelphia) Raymond/Stubbs (Zurich) Bartoli/Farina Elia (Linz) Pratt/Svensson [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Schett/Wartusch Krasnoroutskaya/Petrova (Gold Coast) [5 events, 0 titles, 5-5 record] Black/Likhovtseva (Hobart) Pratt/Tulyaganova Hopkins/Kostanic (Australian Open) [2 events, 0 titles, 0-2 record] Gagliardi/Mandula (Indian Wells) Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya (’s-Hertogenbosch) Bartoli/Matevzic (Rome) Bartoli/M. Casanova (Wimbledon) C. Fernandez/Pratt (Madrid)

Raymond/Sharapova Schett/Zuluaga [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 record] Kuznetsova/Navratilova (U. S. Open) Loit/Pratt (Canadian Open)

Raymond/Stubbs Selyutina/Widjaja [2 events, 1 titles, 4-1 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Molik/Serna (Zurich) Davenport/Raymond (Pan Paciﬁc)

Rittner/Vento-Kabchi Serna/Shaughnessy [4 events, 0 titles, 2-4 record] [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Matevzic/Vinci (Gold Coast) Bartoli/Dokic (Leipzig) Davenport/Raymond (Australian Open) Myskina/Saﬁna (Indian Wells) Shaughnessy/Stubbs Hantuchova/Schett (Leipzig) [2 events, 0 titles, 3-2 record] Davenport/Raymond (Scottsdale) Ruano Pascual/Serna Ashley/Spears (Stanford) [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] Kostanic/Matevzic (Canberra) Shaughnessy/Sugiyama [2 events, 0 titles, 3-1 record] Ruano Pascual/Suarez Bovina/Stubbs (Pan Paciﬁc) [17 events, 5 titles, 50-12 record] Williams/Williams (Australian Open) Srebotnik/Svensson Clijsters/Sugiyama (Indian Wells) [1 event, 1 title, 4-0 record] Kuznetsova/Navratilova (Miami) Davenport/Raymond (Amelia Island) Suarez/Zuluaga Callens/Loit (Rome) [1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 record] Clijsters/Sugiyama (Roland Garros) Krizan/Perebiynis (Bogota) Petrova/Pierce (’s-Hertogenbosch) Clijsters/Sugiyama (Wimbledon) Sugiyama/Tanasugarn Davenport/Raymond (San Diego) [1 event, 0 titles, 3-1 record] Pierce/Stubbs (Los Angeles) Loit/Pratt (Shanghai) Dokic/Morariu (Canadian Open) Clijsters/Sugiyama (Zurich)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 180 Tarabini/Widjaja Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja [1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 record] [11 events, 1 title, 21-10 record] Husarova/Kuznetsova (Indian Wells) Lee/Prakusya (Doha) Kuznetsova/Navratilova (Dubai) Tu/Vento-Kabchi Huber/Maleeva (Miami) [2 events, 0 titles, 3-2 record] Gagliardi/Mandula (Rome) Husarova/Martinez (Charleston) Farina Elia/Garbin (Roland Garros) Davenport/Raymond (Amelia Island) Musgrave/Tatarkova (Birmingham) Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya (Wimbledon) Clijsters/Sugiyama (San Diego) Navratilova/Kuznetsova (Canadian Open) Bartoli/Casanova (U. S. Open)

Williams/Williams [2 events, 1 title, 8-1 record] Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya (Wimbledon)

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/Likhovtseva 19 Krizan/Srebotnik 17 Ruano Pascual/Suarez 17 Kuznetsova/Navratilova 16 Asagoe/Miyagi 13 Clijsters/Sugiyama 13 Huber/Maleeva 13 Lee/Prakusya 13 Mandula/Wartusch 12 Davenport/Raymond 11 Déchy/Loit 11 Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya 11 Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja 11 Schett/Schnyder 10 Dokic/Petrova 8 Hantuchova/Rubin 7 Bovina/Stubbs 6 Callens/Tu 6 Bartoli/Casanova 5 Husarova/Martinez 5 Loit/Pratt 5 Schett/Wartusch 5 Fujiwara/Obata 4 Gagliardi/Mandula 4 Gagliardi/Shaughnessy 4 Pratt/Rittner 4 Rittner/Vento-Kabchi 4

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 181 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 Clijsters/Sugiyama are listed under both Clijsters and Sugiyama) A Bovina/Déchy, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Arendt/Dominikovic, 2 events, 0 titles, 1-2 (33%) record Déchy/Loit, 11 events, 0 titles, 16-11 (59%) record Arendt/Perebiynis, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Dementieva/Farina Elia, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Asagoe/Liggan, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Dementieva/Gagliardi, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Asagoe/Miyagi, 13 events, 1 title, 22-12 (65%) record Dementieva/Grande, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Asagoe/Sugiyama, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Dementieva/Husarova, 2 events, 0 titles, 3-2 (60%) record Dementieva/Kournikova, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record B Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya, 11 events, 1 title, 17-10 (63%) Alves/Bartoli, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record record Bartoli/Bedanova, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Dementieva/Zvonareva, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Bartoli/Casanova, 5 events, 0 titles, 10-4 (71%) record Bartoli/Dokic, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Bartoli/Cohen-Aloro, 3 events, 0 titles, 5-3 (63%) record Bedanova/Dokic, 2 events, 0 titles, 2-2 (50%) record Bartoli/Dhenin, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Dokic/Hantuchova, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Bartoli/Dokic, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Dokic/Harkleroad, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Bartoli/Dominikovic, 3 events, 0 titles, 3-2 (60%) record Dokic/Matevzic, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Bartoli/Farina Elia, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Dokic/Morariu, 2 events, 0 titles, 2-2 (50%) record Bartoli/Foretz, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Dokic/Petrova, 8 events, 0 titles, 13-7 (65%) record Bartoli/Granville, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Dokic/Saﬁna, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Bartoli/Irvin, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Dokic/Shaughnessy, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Bartoli/Jidkova, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Dokic/Srebotnik, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Bartoli/Loit, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Dokic/Stubbs, 2 events, 0 titles, 2-2 (50%) record Bartoli/Matevzic, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Bartoli/Schneider, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record F Bartoli/Sharapova, 2 events, 0 titles, 2-2 (50%) record Callens/Fujiwara, 3 events, 0 titles, 1-3 (25%) record Black/Huber, 2 events, 0 titles, 2-2 (50%) record Fujiwara/Gagliardi, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-0 (100%) record Black/Likhovtseva, 19 events, 1 title, 36-18 (67%) record Fujiwara/Hopkins, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Black/Molik, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Fujiwara/Musgrave, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Black/Morariu, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Fujiwara/Obata, 4 events, 1 title, 7-3 (70%) record Black/Navratilova, 1 event, 0 titles, 3-1 (75%) record Fujiwara/Panova, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Black/Raymond, 1 event, 1 title, 4-0 (100%) record Fujiwara/Saﬁna, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Black/Stubbs, 1 event, 0 titles, 3-1 (75%) record Fujiwara/Vinci, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Bovina/Callens, 2 events, 0 titles, 4-2 (67%) record G Bovina/Déchy, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Ani/Gagliardi, 1 event, 0 titles, 3-1 (75%) record Bovina/Hénin-Hardenne, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-0 (100%) record Dementieva/Gagliardi, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Bovina/Molik, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Fujiwara/Gagliardi, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-0 (100%) record Bovina/Stubbs, 6 events, 1 title, 12-5 (71%) record Gagliardi/Grande, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record C Gagliardi/Grant, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Bovina/Callens, 2 events, 0 titles, 4-2 (67%) record Gagliardi/Harkleroad, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Callens/Fujiwara, 3 events, 0 titles, 1-3 (25%) record Gagliardi/Maleeva, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Callens/Huber, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Gagliardi/Mandula, 4 events, 0 titles, 8-4 (67%) record Callens/Husarova, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Gagliardi/Nagyova, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Callens/Loit, 3 events, 0 titles, 5-3 (63%) record Gagliardi/Rittner, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Callens/Majoli, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Gagliardi/Rubin, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Callens/Navratilova, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Gagliardi/Schett, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Callens/Svensson, 3 events, 0 titles, 4-3 (57%) record Gagliardi/Schnyder, 2 events, 0 titles, 4-2 (67%) record Callens/Tu, 6 events, 1 title, 11-5 (69%) record Gagliardi/Shaughnessy, 4 events, 0 titles, 1-4 (20%) record Callens/Widjaja, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Gagliardi/Tarabini, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Clijsters/Sugiyama, 13 events, 7 titles, 46-5 (90%) record Gagliardi/Widjaja, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record D H Davenport/Raymond, 11 events, 3 titles, 33-6 (85%) record Bedanova/Hantuchova, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Davenport/Shaughnessy, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Capriati/Hantuchova, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 182 Dokic/Hantuchova, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Husarova/Likhovtseva, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Farina Elia/Hantuchova, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Likhovtseva/Martinez, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Hantuchova/Husarova, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Likhovtseva/Myskina, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Hantuchova/Rittner, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Likhovtseva/Petrova, 2 events, 0 titles, 5-1 (83%) record Hantuchova/Rubin, 7 events, 0 titles, 11-7 (61%) record Likhovtseva/Sugiyama, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Hantuchova/Schett, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Likhovtseva/Tulyaganova, 1 event, 1 title, 4-0 (100%) record Hantuchova/Serna, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Likhovtseva/Zvonareva, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Hantuchova/Shaughnessy, 3 events, 0 titles, 2-3 (40%) record Bartoli/Loit, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Hantuchova/Sugiyama, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Callens/Loit, 3 events, 0 titles, 5-3 (63%) record Black/Huber, 2 events, 0 titles, 2-2 (50%) record Déchy/Loit, 11 events, 0 titles, 16-11 (59%) record Callens/Huber, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Garbin/Loit, 1 event, 1 title, 4-0 (100%) record Craybas/Huber, 1 event, 1 title, 4-0 (100%) record Loit/Pratt, 5 events, 1 title, 10-4 (71%) record Huber/Maleeva, 13 events, 2 titles, 26-10 (72%) record Loit/Schiavone, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Huber/Martinez, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Loit/Svensson, 1 event, 1 title, 4-0 (100%) record Huber/Navratilova, 1 event, 1 title, 4-0 (100%) record Huber/Sugiyama, 2 events, 1 title, 6-1 (86%) record M Bedanova/Husarova, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Bedanova/Maleeva, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Callens/Husarova, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Gagliardi/Maleeva, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Dementieva/Husarova, 2 events, 0 titles, 3-2 (60%) record Huber/Maleeva, 13 events, 2 titles, 26-10 (72%) record Hantuchova/Husarova, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Jeyaseelan/Maleeva, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Husarova/Kuznetsova, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-0 (100%) record Majoli/Maleeva, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Husarova/Likhovtseva, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Maleeva/Musgrave, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Husarova/Majoli, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Maleeva/Schnyder, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Husarova/Martinez, 5 events, 0 titles, 10-5 (67%) record Maleeva/Widjaja, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Husarova/Schett, 2 events, 0 titles, 3-2 (60%) record Gagliardi/Mandula, 4 events, 0 titles, 8-4 (67%) record Husarova/Schnyder, 2 events, 0 titles, 1-2 (33%) record Mandula/Rittner, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Mandula/Schett, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record K Mandula/Tatarkova, 1 event, 1 title, 4-0 (100%) record Dementieva/Kournikova, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Mandula/Wartusch, 12 events, 2 titles, 23-9 (72%) record Kournikova/Rubin, 2 events, 0 titles, 3-2 (60%) record Huber/Martinez, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya, 11 events, 1 title, 17-10 (63%) Husarova/Martinez, 5 events, 0 titles, 10-5 (67%) record record Likhovtseva/Martinez, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Jidkova/Krasnoroutskaya, 1 event, 0 titles, 3-1 (75%) record Martinez/Petrova, 1 event, 0 titles, 3-1 (75%) record Krasnoroutskaya/Panova, 2 events, 0 titles, 0-2 (0%) record Martinez/Shaughnessy, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Krasnoroutskaya/Petrova, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-0 (100%) record Martinez/Stubbs, 1 event, 0 titles, 3-1 (75%) record Krasnoroutskaya/Pratt, 2 events, 0 titles, 2-2 (50%) record Martinez/Suarez, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Krasnoroutskaya/Zvonareva, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Martinez/Tulyaganova, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Krizan/Perebiynis, 2 events, 0 titles, 3-2 (60%) record Martinez/Widjaja, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Krizan/Schett, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Black/Morariu, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Krizan/Srebotnik, 17 events, 0 titles, 19-17 (53%) record Daniilidou/Morariu, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Krizan/Tu, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Dokic/Morariu, 2 events, 0 titles, 2-2 (50%) record Husarova/Kuznetsova, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-0 (100%) record Lee/Morariu, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Kuznetsova/Navratilova, 16 events, 5 titles, 43-11 (80%) Morariu/Stubbs, 3 events, 0 titles, 0-3 (0%) record record Morariu/Tatarkova, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record L N Cargill/Lee, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Black/Navratilova, 1 event, 0 titles, 3-1 (75%) record Frazier/Lee, 1 event, 1 title, 4-0 (100%) record Callens/Navratilova, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Lee/Lee-Waters, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Huber/Navratilova, 1 event, 1 title, 4-0 (100%) record Lee/Lehnhoff, 1 event, 1 title, 4-0 (100%) record Kuznetsova/Navratilova, 16 events, 5 titles, 43-11 (80%) Lee/Morariu, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record record Lee/Pelletier, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Molik/Navratilova, 3 events, 0 titles, 5-3 (63%) record Lee/Prakusya, 13 events, 1 title, 11-12 (48%) record Navratilova/Raymond, 1 event, 1 title, 4-0 (100%) record Lee/Tu, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Navratilova/Stevenson, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Lee/Weingärtner, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Lee/Widjaja, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record P Black/Likhovtseva, 19 events, 1 title, 36-18 (67%) record Dokic/Petrova, 8 events, 0 titles, 13-7 (65%) record Garbin/Petrova, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 183 Krasnoroutskaya/Petrova, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-0 (100%) record Grönefeld/Shaughnessy, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Likhovtseva/Petrova, 2 events, 0 titles, 5-1 (83%) record Hantuchova/Shaughnessy, 3 events, 0 titles, 2-3 (40%) record Martinez/Petrova, 1 event, 0 titles, 3-1 (75%) record Martinez/Shaughnessy, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Petrova/Pierce, 3 events, 0 titles, 8-3 (73%) record Petrova/Shaughnessy, 3 events, 1 title, 6-2 (75%) record Petrova/Shaughnessy, 3 events, 1 title, 6-2 (75%) record Pratt/Shaughnessy, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Petrova/Srebotnik, 2 events, 0 titles, 1-2 (33%) record Serna/Shaughnessy, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Mauresmo/Pierce, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Shaughnessy/Stubbs, 2 events, 0 titles, 3-2 (60%) record Mirza/Pierce, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Shaughnessy/Sugiyama, 2 events, 0 titles, 3-1 (75%) record Petrova/Pierce, 3 events, 0 titles, 8-3 (73%) record Dokic/Srebotnik, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Pierce/Stubbs, 3 events, 1 title, 8-2 (80%) record Krizan/Srebotnik, 17 events, 0 titles, 19-17 (53%) record Pierce/Suarez, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Petrova/Srebotnik, 2 events, 0 titles, 1-2 (33%) record Pierce/Tulyaganova, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Srebotnik/Svensson, 1 event, 1 title, 4-0 (100%) record Lee/Prakusya, 13 events, 1 title, 11-12 (48%) record Black/Stubbs, 1 event, 0 titles, 3-1 (75%) record Prakusya/Tanasugarn, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Bovina/Stubbs, 6 events, 1 title, 12-5 (71%) record Prakusya/Widjaja, 2 events, 0 titles, 3-2 (60%) record Dokic/Stubbs, 2 events, 0 titles, 2-2 (50%) record Casanova/Pratt, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Martinez/Stubbs, 1 event, 0 titles, 3-1 (75%) record Daniilidou/Pratt, 2 events, 0 titles, 1-2 (33%) record Morariu/Stubbs, 3 events, 0 titles, 0-3 (0%) record Fernandez/Pratt, 2 events, 0 titles, 2-2 (50%) record Pierce/Stubbs, 3 events, 1 title, 8-2 (80%) record Garbin/Pratt, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Raymond/Stubbs, 2 events, 1 title, 4-1 (80%) record Hénin-Hardenne/Pratt, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Shaughnessy/Stubbs, 2 events, 0 titles, 3-2 (60%) record Krasnoroutskaya/Pratt, 2 events, 0 titles, 2-2 (50%) record Cravero/Suarez, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-0 (100%) record Loit/Pratt, 5 events, 1 title, 10-4 (71%) record Martinez/Suarez, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Pratt/Rittner, 4 events, 0 titles, 5-4 (56%) record Pierce/Suarez, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Pratt/Serna, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Ruano Pascual/Suarez, 17 events, 5 titles, 50-12 (81%) record Pratt/Shaughnessy, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Suarez/Zuluaga, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Pratt/Svensson, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Asagoe/Sugiyama, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Pratt/Tulyaganova, 2 events, 0 titles, 0-2 (0%) record Clijsters/Sugiyama, 13 events, 7 titles, 46-5 (90%) record Hantuchova/Sugiyama, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record R Huber/Sugiyama, 2 events, 1 title, 6-1 (86%) record Black/Raymond, 1 event, 1 title, 4-0 (100%) record Likhovtseva/Sugiyama, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Davenport/Raymond, 11 events, 3 titles, 33-6 (85%) record Morigami/Sugiyama, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Navratilova/Raymond, 1 event, 1 title, 4-0 (100%) record Shaughnessy/Sugiyama, 2 events, 0 titles, 3-1 (75%) record Raymond/Sharapova, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Sugiyama/Tanasugarn, 1 event, 0 titles, 3-1 (75%) record Raymond/Stubbs, 2 events, 1 title, 4-1 (80%) record Ruano Pascual/Serna, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record T Ruano Pascual/Suarez, 17 events, 5 titles, 50-12 (81%) record Cohen Aloro/Tauziat, 2 events, 0 titles, 1-2 (33%) record Daniilidou/Rubin, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Fusai/Tauziat, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Gagliardi/Rubin, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Hantuchova/Rubin, 7 events, 0 titles, 11-7 (61%) record V Kournikova/Rubin, 2 events, 0 titles, 3-2 (60%) record Daniilidou/Vento-Kabchi, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Rubin/Schett, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Dulko/Vento-Kabchi, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Fernandez/Vento-Kabchi, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record S Grande/Vento-Kabchi, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Farina Elia/Schett, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Grant/Vento-Kabchi, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Gagliardi/Schett, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Jeyaseelan/Vento-Kabchi, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Grande/Schett, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Jidkova/Vento-Kabchi, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Hantuchova/Schett, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Rittner/Vento-Kabchi, 4 events, 0 titles, 2-4 (33%) record Husarova/Schett, 2 events, 0 titles, 3-2 (60%) record Tu/Vento-Kabchi, 2 events, 0 titles, 3-2 (60%) record Krizan/Schett, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja, 11 events, 1 title, 21-10 (68%) record Mandula/Schett, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Rubin/Schett, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record W Schett/Schnyder, 10 events, 1 title, 10-9 (53%) record Daniilidou/Wartusch, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Schett/Wartusch, 5 events, 0 titles, 5-5 (50%) record Grande/Wartusch, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Schett/Zuluaga, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Mandula/Wartusch, 12 events, 2 titles, 23-9 (72%) record Davenport/Shaughnessy, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Schett/Wartusch, 5 events, 0 titles, 5-5 (50%) record Dokic/Shaughnessy, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Callens/Widjaja, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record Gagliardi/Shaughnessy, 4 events, 0 titles, 1-4 (20%) record Fernandez/Widjaja, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Gagliardi/Widjaja, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 184 Grande/Widjaja, 2 events, 0 titles, 4-2 (67%) record Selyutina/Widjaja, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Lee/Widjaja, 1 event, 0 titles, 1-1 (50%) record Tarabini/Widjaja, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Liggan/Widjaja, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja, 11 events, 1 title, 21-10 (68%) record Maleeva/Widjaja, 1 event, 0 titles, 0-1 (0%) record WilliamsS/WilliamsV, 2 events, 1 title, 8-1 (89%) record Martinez/Widjaja, 1 event, 0 titles, 2-1 (67%) record WilliamsS/WilliamsV, 2 events, 1 title, 8-1 (89%) record Prakusya/Widjaja, 2 events, 0 titles, 3-2 (60%) record

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 185 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, except for the Williams Sisters; sorted in descending order by winning percentage) Tourn Tourn Tourn Team Won/Lost Win % Played Won Win % Clijsters/Sugiyama 46-5 90.2% 13 7 53.8% Williams/Williams 8-1 88.9% 2 1 50.0% Davenport/Raymond 33-6 84.6% 11 3 27.3% Ruano Pascual/Suarez 50-12 80.6% 17 5 29.4% Pierce/Stubbs 8-2 80.0% 3 1 33.3% Kuznetsova/Navratilova 43-11 79.6% 16 5 31.3% Petrova/Shaughnessy 6-2 75.0% 3 1 33.3% Petrova/Pierce 8-3 72.7% 3 0 0% Huber/Maleeva 26-10 72.2% 13 2 15.4% Mandula/Wartusch 23-9 71.9% 12 2 16.7% Bartoli/Casanova 10-4 71.4% 5 0 0% Loit/Pratt 10-4 71.4% 5 1 20.0% Bovina/Stubbs 12-5 70.6% 6 1 16.7% Fujiwara/Obata 7-3 70.0% 4 1 25.0% Callens/Tu 11-5 68.8% 6 1 16.7% Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja 21-10 67.7% 11 1 9.1% Black/Likhovtseva 36-18 66.7% 19 1 5.3% Gagliardi/Mandula 8-4 66.7% 4 0 0% Husarova/Martinez 10-5 66.7% 5 0 0% Dokic/Petrova 13-7 65.0% 8 0 0% Asagoe/Miyagi 22-12 64.7% 13 1 7.7% Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya 17-10 63.0% 11 1 9.1% Bartoli/Cohen-Aloro 5-3 62.5% 3 0 0% Callens/Loit 5-3 62.5% 3 0 0% Molik/Navratilova 5-3 62.5% 3 0 0% Hantuchova/Rubin 11-7 61.1% 7 0 0% Bartoli/Dominikovic 3-2 60.0% 3 0 0% Déchy/Loit 16-11 59.3% 11 0 0% Callens/Svensson 4-3 57.1% 3 0 0% Pratt/Rittner 5-4 55.6% 4 0 0% Krizan/Srebotnik 19-17 52.8% 17 0 0% Schett/Schnyder 10-9 52.6% 10 1 10.0% Schett/Wartusch 5-5 50.0% 5 0 0% Lee/Prakusya 11-12 47.8% 13 1 7.7% Hantuchova/Shaughnessy 2-3 40.0% 3 0 0% Rittner/Vento-Kabchi 2-4 33.3% 4 0 0% Callens/Fujiwara 1-3 25.0% 3 0 0% Gagliardi/Shaughnessy 1-4 20.0% 4 0 0% Morariu/Stubbs 0-3 0% 3 0 0%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 186 Doubles Winning Percentages for the Top Players, Alphabetical Player WTA # of Won/Lost Winning Tournaments Tournaments Tournament Rank Partners Percentage Played Won Win% Arendt 314 2 1-3 25.0% 3 0 0% Asagoe 44 3 23-14 62.2% 15 1 6.7% Bartoli 20 16 34-23 59.6% 25 0 0% Black 9 7 48-24 66.7% 26 2 7.7% Bovina 22 5 21-9 70.0% 11 1 9.1% Callens 29 10 29-21 58.0% 22 1 4.5% Clijsters 4 1 46-5 90.2% 13 7 53.8% Davenport 8 2 35-7 83.3% 12 3 25% Déchy 35 2 17-12 58.6% 12 0 0% Dementieva 24 7 21-17 55.3% 18 1 5.6% Dokic 27 11 21-20 51.2% 21 0 0% Fujiwara 128 8 13-11 54.2% 13 1 7.7% Gagliardi 26 16 20-22 47.6% 23 0 0% Hantuchova 28 11 17-19 47.2% 19 0 0% Huber 12 7 43-15 74.1% 21 5 23.8% Husarova 19 10 23-16 59.0% 17 0 0% Kournikova 176 2 3-3 50.0% 3 0 0% Krasnoroutskaya 23 6 25-16 61.0% 18 1 5.6% Krizan 43 4 22-21 51.2% 21 0 0% Kuznetsova 7 2 44-11 80.0% 17 5 29.4% Lee 54 10 24-19 55.8% 22 3 13.6% Likhovtseva 11 8 51-24 68.0% 27 2 7.4% Loit 15 7 40-20 66.7% 23 3 13% Maleeva 14 8 28-17 62.2% 20 2 10% Mandula 16 5 37-15 71.2% 19 3 15.8% Martinez 21 9 22-13 62.9% 13 0 0% Morariu 156 6 3-9 25.0% 9 0 0% Navratilova 6 7 60-17 77.9% 24 7 29.2% Petrova 13 8 38-17 69.1% 21 1 4.8% Pierce 30 6 19-9 67.9% 10 1 10% Prakusya 59 3 16-15 51.6% 16 1 6.3% Pratt 31 12 24-22 52.2% 23 1 4.3% Raymond 5 5 46-8 85.2% 16 6 37.5% Ruano Pascual 2 2 50-13 79.4% 18 5 27.8% Rubin 34 5 16-12 57.1% 12 0 0% Schett 37 11 24-24 50.0% 25 1 4% Shaughnessy 25 11 19-18 51.4% 20 1 5% Srebotnik 38 4 24-20 54.5% 21 1 4.8% Stubbs 10 8 35-17 67.3% 20 3 15% Suarez 1 5 56-15 78.9% 21 5 23.8% Sugiyama 3 8 59-12 83.1% 22 8 36.4% Tauziat 397 2 1-3 25.0% 3 0 0% Vento-Kabchi 17 10 30-23 56.6% 24 1 4.2% Wartusch 33 4 28-16 63.6% 19 2 10.5% Widjaja 18 12 35-23 60.3% 24 1 4.2% Williams, S. or V. — 1 8-1 88.9% 2 1 50%

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 187 Individual Doubles Statistical Leaders Top Five, Most Wins: 1. Martina Navratilova (60) 2. Ai Sugiyama (59) 3. Paola Suarez (56) 4. Elena Likhovtseva (51) 5. Virginia Ruano Pascual (50)

Top Fifteen, Winning %: 1. Kim Clijsters (90.2%) [2. Serena Williams/Venus Williams, 89.9%, but in only two events, both Slams] 2. Lisa Raymond (85.2%) 3. Lindsay Davenport (83.3%) 4. Ai Sugiyama (83.1%) 5. Svetlana Kuznetsova (80.0%) 6. Virginia Ruano Pascual (79.4%) 7. Paola Suarez (78.9%) 8. Martina Navratilova (77.9%) 9. Liezel Huber (74.1%) 10. Petra Mandula (71.2%) 11. Elena Bovina (70.0%) 12. Nadia Petrova (69.1%) 13. Elena Likhovtseva (68.0%) 14. Mary Pierce (67.9%) 15. Rennae Stubbs (67.3%)

Top Five, Tournament Winning %: 1. Kim Clijsters (53.9%) [2. Serena Williams/Venus Williams, 50.0%, but in only two events] 2. Lisa Raymond (37.5%) 3. Ai Sugiyama (36.4%) 4. Svetlana Kuznetsova (29.4%) 5. Martina Navratilova (29.2%)

Top Five, Most Matches Played: 1. Martina Navratilova (77) 2. Elena Likhovtseva (75) 3. Cara Black (72) 4T. Paola Suarez (71) 4T. Ai Sugiyama (71)

Top Five, Most Partners (of the highlight players): 1T. Marion Bartoli, Emmanuelle Gagliardi (16) 3T. Nicole Pratt, Angelique Widjaja (12) 5T. Jelena Dokic, Daniela Hantuchova (11), Barbara Schett (11), Meghann Shaughnessy (11)

Highlight players with only one partner: Kim Clijsters, Serena Williams, Venus Williams

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 188 Team Doubles Titles, Sorted from Most to Least Note: 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 Clijsters/Sugiyama Sydney (II), Antwerp (II), Scottsdale (II), Roland Garros (Slam), 7 Wimbledon (Slam), San Diego (II), Zurich (I) Ruano Pascual/Suarez Charleston (I), Berlin (I), New Haven (II), U. S. Open (Slam), Los 5 Angeles Championships (Chanp) Kuznetsova/Navratilova Gold Coast (III), Dubai (II), Rome (I), Canadian Open (I), Leipzig (II) 5 Davenport/Raymond Indian Wells (I), Amelia Island (II), Eastbourne (III) 3 Li/Sun St. Paul $50K, Vienna (III), Modena $50K, Quebec City (III), Pattaya 3 City (V) Huber/Maleeva Miami (I), Warsaw (II) 2 Sharapova/Tanasugarn Japan Open (III), Luxembourg (III) 2 Mandula/Wartusch Estoril (IV), Bol (III) 2 Williams/Williams Australian Open (Slam) 1 Bovina/Stubbs Pan Paciﬁc (I) 1 Petrova/Shaughnessy Moscow (I) 1 Raymond/Stubbs Filderstadt (II) 1 Black/Raymond Stanford (II) 1 Huber/Sugiyama Linz (II) 1 Loit/Pratt Shanghai (II) 1 Navratilova/Raymond Philadelphia (II) 1 Pierce/Stubbs Los Angeles (II) 1 Schett/Schnyder Paris (II) 1 Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja Bali (III) 1 Callens/Tu Birmingham (III) 1 Craybas/L. Huber Madrid (III) 1 Dementieva/Krasnoroustkaya ’s-Hertogenbosch (III) 1 Jeyaseelan/Matevzic Strasbourg (III) 1 Lee/Prakusya Doha (III) 1 Loit/Svensson Acapulco (III) 1 Morigami/Obata Memphis (III) 1 Perebiynis/Talaja Sopot (III) 1 Srebotnik/Svensson Bogota (III) 1 Beygelzimer/Poutchek Vittel $50K, Bronx $50K, Tashkent (IV) 1 Ashley/Spears Auckland (IV), Midland $75K 1 Huber/Navratilova Sarasota (IV) 1 Kulikovskaya/Tatarkova Helsinki (IV) 1 Likhovtseva/Tulyaganova Hyderabad (IV) 1 Ad. Serra Zanetti/Stellato Palermo (V) 1 Black/Likhovtseva Hobart (V) 1 Dulko/Salerni Casablanca (V) 1 Garbin/Loit Canberra (V) 1 Mandula/Tatarkova Budapest (V) 1

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 189 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 Sugiyama Sydney (II), Antwerp (II), Scottsdale (II), Roland Garros (Slam), 8 Wimbledon (Slam), San Diego (II), Zurich (I), Linz (II) Clijsters Sydney (II), Antwerp (II), Scottsdale (II), Roland Garros (Slam), 7 Wimbledon (Slam), San Diego (II), Zurich (I) Navratilova Gold Coast (III), Dubai (II), Sarasota (IV), Rome (I), Canadian Open (I), 7 Leipzig (II), Philadelphia (II) Raymond Indian Wells (I), Amelia Island (II), Eastbourne (II), Stanford (II), 6 Filderstadt (II), Philadelphia (II) Ruano Pascual Charleston (I), Berlin (I), New Haven (II), U. S. Open (Slam), Los Angeles 5 Championships (Champ) Suarez Charleston (I), Berlin (I), New Haven (II), U. S. Open (Slam), Los Angeles 5 Championships (Champ) Huber, L. Miami (I), Sarasota (IV), Warsaw (II), Madrid (III), Linz (II) 5 Kuznetsova Gold Coast (III), Dubai (II), Rome (I), Canadian Open (I), Leipzig (II) 5 Davenport Indian Wells (I), Amelia Island (II), Eastbourne (II) 3 Stubbs Pan Paciﬁc (I), Los Angeles (II), Filderstadt (II) 3 Loit Canberra (V), Acapulco (III), Shanghai (II) 3 Li, T. St. Paul $50K, Vienna (III), Modena $50K, Quebec City (III), Pattaya City 3 (V) Sun St. Paul $50K, Vienna (III), Modena $50K, Quebec City (III), Pattaya City 3 (V) Mandula Estoril (IV), Budapest (V), Bol (III) 3 Maleeva Miami (I), Warsaw (II) 2 Black Hobart (V), Stanford (II) 2 Sharapova Japan Open (III), Luxembourg (III) 2 Svensson Bogota (III), Acapulco (III) 2 Tanasugarn Japan Open (III), Luxembourg (III) 2 Wartusch Estoril (IV), Bol (III) 2 Tatarkova Budapest (V), Helsinki (IV), Batumi $75K 2 Likhovtseva Hobart (V), Hyderabad (IV) 2 Williams, S. Australian Open (Slam) 1 Williams, V. Australian Open (Slam) 1 Bovina Pan Paciﬁc (I) 1 Petrova Moscow (I) 1 Shaughnessy Moscow (I) 1 Pierce Los Angeles (II) 1 Pratt Shanghai (II) 1 Schett Paris (II) 1 Schnyder Paris (II) 1

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 190 Lee Doha (III), Lexington $50K, Pittsburg $50K 1 Perebiynis Saint-Gaudens $75K, Sopot (III) 1 Obata Memphis (III), Gifu $50K 1 Callens Birmingham (III) 1 Craybas Madrid (III) 1 Dementieva ’s-Hertogenbosch (III) 1 Jeyaseelan Strasbourg (III) 1 Krasnoroutskaya ’s-Hertogenbosch (III) 1 Matevzic Strasbourg (III) 1 Morigami Memphis (III) 1 Prakusya Doha (III) 1 Srebotnik Bogota (III) 1 Talaja Sopot (III) 1 Tu Birmingham (III) 1 Vento-Kabchi Bali (III) 1 Widjaja Bali (III) 1 Ashley Auckland (IV), Midland $75K, Columbus $50K 1 Beygelzimer Vittel $50K, Bronx $50K, Tashkent (IV) 1 Kulikovskaya Saint-Gaudens $75K, Helsinki (IV) 1 Poutchek Vittel $50K, Bronx $50K, Tashkent (IV) 1 Spears Auckland (IV), Midland $75K 1 Tulyaganova Hyderabad (IV) 1 Dulko Casablanca (V) 1 Garbin Canberra (V) 1 Salerni Casablanca (V) 1 Serra Zan., Ad. Palermo (V) 1 Stellato Palermo (V) 1

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 191 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 Clijsters/Sugiyama Australian Open Slam S. Williams/V. Williams Tokyo (Pan Paciﬁc) I Bovina/Stubbs Paris II Schett/Schnyder Antwerp II Clijsters/Sugiyama Dubai II Kuznetsova/Navratilova Scottsdale II Clijsters/Sugiyama Indian Wells I Davenport/Raymond Miami I L. Huber/Maleeva Charleston I Ruano Pascual/Suarez Amelia Island II Davenport/Raymond Warsaw II L. Huber/Maleeva Berlin I Ruano Pascual/Suarez Rome I Kuznetsova/Navratilova Roland Garros Slam Clijsters/Sugiyama Eastbourne II Davenport/Raymond Wimbledon Slam Clijsters/Sugiyama Stanford II Black/Raymond San Diego II Clijsters/Sugiyama Los Angeles II Pierce/Stubbs Canadian Open I Kuznetsova/Navratilova New Haven II Ruano Pascual/Suarez U.S. Open Slam Ruano Pascual/Suarez Shanghai II Loit/Pratt Leipzig II Kuznetsova/Navratilova Moscow I Petrova/Shaughnessy Filderstadt II Raymond/Stubbs Zurich I Clijsters/Sugiyama Linz II L. Huber/Sugiyama Philadelphia II Navratilova/Raymond Los Angeles Champ Champ Ruano Pascual/Suarez

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 192 Doubles Tournament Winners by Date (Smaller Events) List includes all Tier III, IV, and V events, plus Challengers of the $50K or higher level. 2002 Date Event Tier Winners Date Event Tier Winners 7/6 Orbetello $50K+H Yan/Zheng 11/17 Eugene $50K Miyagi/Sequera 7/13 Palermo V Ad. Serra Zanetti/Stellato 12/8 Boynton Beach$75K Marosi/Reeves 7/13 Vittel $50K Beygelzimer/Poutchek 7/20 Modena $50K+H Li/Sun 2003 7/20 Oyster Bay $50K Embry/Lehnhoff Date Event Tier Winners 7/27 Innsbruck $50K Nagy/Wolfbrandt 7/27 Lexington $50K Lee/Lehnhoff 1/4 Gold Coast III Kuznetsova/Navratilova 8/3 Sopot III Perebiynis/Talaja 1/4 Auckland IV Ashley/Spears 8/3 Louisville $50K Ditty/McShea 1/10 Canberra V Garbin/Loit 8/10 Helsinki IV Kulikovskaya/Tatarkova 1/10 Hobart V Black/Likhovtseva 8/10 Cuneo $50K+H Jugic-Salkic/Jurak 1/26 Fullerton $50K Schmidt/Van Exel 8/17 Bronx $50K Beygelzimer/Poutchek 2/2 Ortisei $50K Henke/Schaul 9/7 Fano $50K Casoni/Martinez Granados 2/9 Hyderabad IV Likhovtseva/Tulyaganova 9/14 Bali III Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja 2/9 Midland $75K Ashley/Spears 9/14 Denain $75K Santangelo/Ant. Serra Zanetti 2/17 Doha III Lee/Prakusya 9/21 Bordeaux $75K+H Ani/Prusova 2/23 Memphis III Morigami/Obata 9/21 Columbus $50K Ashley/A. Baker 2/23 Bogota III Srebotnik/Svensson 9/28 Batumi $75K Kustava/Tatarkova 3/2 Acapulco III Loit/Svensson 9/28 Albuquerque $75K Reeves/Sequera 3/2 St. Paul $50K Li/Sun 9/28 Biella $50K+H Kurhajcova/Prusova 3/16 Mesa $50K (final not played) 10/5 Japan Open III Sharapova/Tanasugarn 4/7 Casablanca V Dulko/Salerni 10/5 Girona $50K+H 4/13 Estoril IV Mandula/Wartusch M. J. Martinez/Martinez Granados 4/13 Dinan $50K+H G. Navratilova/Pastikova 10/5 Troy $50K Mattek/Perry 4/20 Budapest V Mandula/Tatarkova 10/12 Tashkent IV Beygelzimer/Pouchek 4/27 Dothan $75K Sequera/Wheeler 10/12 Juarez $50K 5/4 Bol III Mandula/Wartusch Dominguez Lino/Llagostera Vives 5/4 Cagnes-Sur-Mer$75K Douchevina/Voskoboeva 10/12 Latina $50K Santangelo/Vinci 5/4 Gifu $50K Fujiwara/Obata 10/19 Dubai $75K+H Gubacsi/Nagy 5/11 Saint-Gaudens$75K Kulikovskaya/Perebiynis 10/19 Sedona $50K Yan/Zheng 5/11 Fukuoka $50K Dekmeijere/Miyagi 10/26 Luxembourg III Sharapova/Tanasugarn 5/24 Madrid III Craybas/Huber 10/26 Paducah $50K Yan/Zheng 5/24 Strasbourg III Jeyaseelan/Matevzic 11/2 Quebec City III Li/Sun 6/16 Birmingham III Callens/Tu 11/2 Poitiers $50K Dhenin/Lamade 6/16 Vienna III Li/Sun 11/9 Pattaya City V Li/Sun 6/16 Marseilles $50K+H Fedak/Fokina 11/9 Pittsburg $50K Frazier/Lee 6/22 ’s-Hertogenbosch III Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 193 Alternate Doubles Rankings For explanations of these rankings, see the equivalent section in singles. Because quality points are far less important in doubles (constituting roughly 20% of a player’s total, rather than nearly 40% as in singles), we calculate only the 1996 rankings and points per tournament. The calculation of the latter is required because, in recent years, the best doubles players — Hingis, Davenport, Kournikova, Morariu, the Williams Sisters — didn’t play full schedules. Hingis, of course, no longer matters. In the other five cases, injury of course played a part — 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). With Hingis gone, the Williams Sisters no longer have any real competition for the title of “best active doubles team”; the points per tournament with no minimum reflects it — though it is not really a fair assessment of their ability; since they play only Slams, their score is artificially inflated. Put them on a normal schedule, and looking at their results this year and in the past, they would probably end up with a per-tournament score of about 280 (which would make them #2, trailing Clijsters but ahead of everyone else). But Clijsters would probably have a lower point total in that case (since the Sisters would have grabbed some of her points). It’s possible that they would have been #1 in doubles. But we’ll never know unless they start playing more, will we? This calculation also moves Kournikova up to an at-least-respectable ranking; it will be most interesting to see where she ends up in 2004. Can she play? She won’t be as good without Hingis as she was with — but her Hingis-less numbers still say she just might be Top Ten on her own. Note: the totallpoints for Marion Bartoli may be slightly off, since she was ranked so low at the start of the year, it has been impossible for me to determine her exact quality points. The error should not exceed five points, meaning that it should not affect her standings in the following lists.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 194 Rankings under the 1996 Ranking System (Divisor, Minimum 14) 1996 Rank Player Points Tournaments Score WTA Rank 1 Clijsters, Kim 4291 13 306.5 4 2 Ruano Pascual, Virginia 4664 18 259.1 2 3 Suarez, Paola 4865 21 231.7 1 4 Sugiyama, Ai 4952 22 225.1 3 5Davenport, Lindsay 2962 12 211.6 8 6 Raymond, Lisa 3153 16 197.1 5 7Kuznetsova, Svetlana 2962 17 174.2 7 8Navratilova, Martina 3973.5 24 165.6 6 9 Black, Cara 2863 26 110.1 9 10 Huber, Liezel 2238 21 106.6 12 11 Likhovtseva, Elena 2863 27 106.0 11 12 Stubbs, Rennae 2105 20 105.3 10 13 Petrova, Nadia 2182 21 103.9 13 14 Martinez, Conchita 1299 13 92.8 21 15 Bovina, Elena 1274 11 91.0 22 16 Husarova, Janette 1443 17 84.9 19 17 Mandula, Petra 1577 19 83.0 16 18 Maleeva, Magdalena 1633 20 81.7 14 19 Loit, Emilie 1827 23 79.4 15 20 Pierce, Mary 1055 10 75.4 30 21 Rubin, Chanda 944 12 67.4 34 22 Williams, Serena/Venus 938 2 67.0 — 23 Dechy, Nathalie 919 12 65.6 35 24 Widjaja, Angelique 1571 24 65.5 18 25 Krasnoroutskaya, Lina 1155 18 64.2 23 Dementieva, Elena 1151 18 63.9 24 Bartoli, Marion 1551 25 62.0 20 Vento-kabchi, Maria 1476 24 61.5 17 Callens, Els 1303 22 59.2 29 Asagoe, Shinobu 883.5 15 58.9 44 Hantuchova, Daniela 1114 19 58.6 28 Shaughnessy, Meghann 1135 20 56.8 25 Dokic, Jelena 1150 21 54.8 27 Wartusch, Patricia 1017 19 53.5 33 Gagliardi, Emmanuelle 1126 23 49.0 26 Srebotnik, Katarina 989 21 47.1 38 Pratt, Nicole 1016.75 23 44.2 31 Krizan, Tina 894 21 42.6 43 Prakusya, Wynne 636 16 39.8 59 Schett, Barbara 962 25 38.5 37 Lee, Janet 791.5 22 36.0 54 Fujiwara, Rika 257 13 18.4 128 Morariu, Corina 194 9 13.9 156 Kournikova, Anna 152 3 10.9 176 Arendt, Nicole 59 3 4.2 314

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 195 Doubles Points Per Tournament, No Minimum Divisor Divisor Rank Player Points Tournaments Score WTA Rank 1Williams, Serena/Venus 938 2 469 — 2 Clijsters, Kim 4291 13 330.1 4 3 Ruano Pascual, Virginia 4664 18 259.1 2 4Davenport, Lindsay 2962 12 246.8 8 5 Suarez, Paola 4865 21 231.7 1 6 Sugiyama, Ai 4952 22 225.1 3 7 Raymond, Lisa 3153 16 197.1 5 8Kuznetsova, Svetlana 2962 17 174.2 7 9Navratilova, Martina 3973.5 24 165.6 6 10 Bovina, Elena 1274 11 115.8 22 11 Black, Cara 2863 26 110.1 9 12 Huber, Liezel 2238 21 106.6 12 13 Likhovtseva, Elena 2863 27 106.0 11 14 Pierce, Mary 1055 10 105.5 30 15 Stubbs, Rennae 2105 20 105.3 10 16 Petrova, Nadia 2182 21 103.9 13 17 Martinez, Conchita 1299 13 99.9 21 18 Husarova, Janette 1443 17 84.9 19 19 Mandula, Petra 1577 19 83.0 16 20 Maleeva, Magdalena 1633 20 81.7 14 21 Loit, Emilie 1827 23 79.4 15 22 Rubin, Chanda 944 12 78.7 34 23 Dechy, Nathalie 919 12 76.6 35 24 Widjaja, Angelique 1571 24 65.5 18 25 Krasnoroutskaya, Lina 1155 18 64.2 23 Dementieva, Elena 1151 18 63.9 24 Bartoli, Marion 1551 25 62.0 20 Vento-kabchi, Maria 1476 24 61.5 17 Callens, Els 1303 22 59.2 29 Asagoe, Shinobu 883.5 15 58.9 44 Hantuchova, Daniela 1114 19 58.6 28 Shaughnessy, Meghann 1135 20 56.8 25 Dokic, Jelena 1150 21 54.8 27 Wartusch, Patricia 1017 19 53.5 33 Kournikova, Anna 152 3 50.7 176 Gagliardi, Emmanuelle 1126 23 49.0 26 Srebotnik, Katarina 989 21 47.1 38 Pratt, Nicole 1016.75 23 44.2 31 Krizan, Tina 894 21 42.6 43 Prakusya, Wynne 636 16 39.8 59 Schett, Barbara 962 25 38.5 37 Lee, Janet 791.5 22 36.0 54 Morariu, Corina 194 9 21.6 156 Fujiwara, Rika 257 13 19.8 128 Arendt, Nicole 59 3 19.7 314

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 196 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 Munich. 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. 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 Eric Ro RG Wim SD USO Fild Chm 1 Clijsters/Sugiyama* 23 5 5 5 5 3 2 Ruano Pascual/Suarez* 20 3 3315 5 3Kuznetsova/Navratilova* 10 1 5 3 1 4Davenport/Raymond(*) 5 1 1 3 4 Huber/Maleeva 5 5 4Williams/Williams 5 5 7 Black/Likhovtseva(*) 4 1 1 1 1 8 Asagoe/Miyagi 3 3 8 Black/Navratilova 3 3 8 Dokic/Petrova 3 3 8Martinez/Stubbs 3 3 12 Bartoli/Casanova 2 1 1 13 Callens/Loit 1 1 13 Coetzer/Steck 1 1 13 Dementieva/Husarova 1 1 13 Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya 1 1 13 Gagliardi/Mandula 1 1 13 Hantuchova/Rubin 1 1 13 Krizan/Srebotnik 1 1 13 Petrova/Shaughnessy 1 1 13 Pratt/Rittner 1 1 13 Raymond/Stubbs 1 1 * Team which qualified for Los Angeles. (Black/Lihovtseva qualified as alternates, replacing Davenport/ Raymond)

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 2002, the leader was Paola Suarez, 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).

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 197 Individual Majors Rankings 38 individual players managed at least one Major showing (up from 33 in 2002). The following table shows both the player’s ranking and her results in the various events. Tournament Rank Player Total Syd AO Eric Ro RG Wim SD USO Fild Chm 1T Clijsters 23 5 5 5 5 3 1T Sugiyama 23 5 5 5 5 3 3T Ruano Pascual 20 3 3315 5 3T Suarez 20 3 3315 5 5Navratilova 13 1 5 3 3 1 6T Kuznetsova 10 1 5 3 1 6T Raymond 10 1 1 3 5 8 Stubbs 8 3 5 9 Black 7 1 1131 10T Davenport 5 1 1 3 10T Huber, L. 5 5 10T Maleeva 5 5 10T Williams, Serena 5 5 10T Williams, Venus 5 5 15T Likhovtseva 4 1 1 1 1 15T Petrova 4 3 1 17T Asagoe 3 3 17T Dokic 3 3 17T Martinez 3 3 17T Miyagi 3 3 21T Bartoli 2 1 1 21T Casanova 2 1 1 21T Dementieva 2 1 1 24T Callens 1 1 24T Coetzer 1 1 24T Gagliardi 1 1 24T Hantuchova 1 1 24T Husarova 1 1 24T Krasnoroutskaya 1 1 24T Krizan 1 1 24T Loit 1 1 24T Mandula 1 1 24T Pratt 1 1 24T Rittner 1 1 24T Rubin 1 1 24T Shaughnessy 1 1 24T Srebotnik 1 1 24T Steck 1 1

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 198 Combined Singles and Doubles Rankings A total of 60 players are in the Top 100 in both singles and doubles (slightly more than the 55 in 2002, but still muchdown from 67 such players in 2001; we also note that only one of the Top Four in singles — Kim Clijsters — is Top 100 in doubles). 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 1 Clijsters, Kim 2 4 6 2Davenport, Lindsay 5 8 13 2 Sugiyama, Ai 10 3 13 4 Suarez, Paola 14 1 15 5 Petrova, Nadia 12 13 25 6 Dementieva, Elena 8 24 32 7 Raymond, Lisa 28 5 33 8Martinez, Conchita 18 21 39 9 Dokic, Jelena 15 27 42 9 Shaughnessy, Meghann 17 25 42 11 Rubin, Chanda 9 34 43 11 Bovina, Elena 21 22 43 11 Kuznetsova, Svetlana 36 7 43 14 Maleeva, Magdalena 30 14 44 15 Hantuchova, Daniela 19 28 47 16 Likhovtseva, Elena 37 11 48 17 Krasnoroutskaya, Lina 27 23 50 18 Serna, Magui 22 32 54 19 Mandula, Petra 40 16 56 19 Loit, Emilie 41 15 56 21 Ruano Pascual, Virginia 55 2 57 22 Vento-Kabchi, Maria 44 17 61 22 Black, Cara 52 9 61 24 Schnyder, Patty 23 40 63 24 Pierce, Mary 33 30 63 26 Dechy, Nathalie 29 35 64 27 Farina Elia, Silvia 24 45 69 28 Molik, Alicia 35 36 71 29 Srebotnik, Katarina 39 38 77 29 Bartoli, Marion 57 20 77 31 Myskina, Anastasia 7 71 78 32 Gagliardi, Emmanuelle 56 26 82 33 Pratt, Nicole 53 31 84 34 Zvonareva, Vera 13 73 86 35 Daniilidou, Eleni 26 63 89 35 Asagoe, Shinobu 45 44 89

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 199 37 Tanasugarn, Tamarine 34 61 95 38 Schiavone, Francesca 20 77 97 39 Matevzic, Maja 58 42 100 40 Callens, Els 74 29 103 Sharapova, Maria 32 79 111 Widjaja, Angelique 95 18 113 Schett, Barbara 79 37 116 Grande, Rita 70 50 120 Kostanic, Jelena 67 62 129 Sequera, Milagros 76 53 129 Reeves, Samantha 75 56 131 Granville, Laura 46 88 134 Tulyaganova, Iroda 50 85 135 Perebiynis, Tatiana 80 55 135 Garbin, Tathiana 84 51 135 Harkleroad, Ashley 51 86 137 Cohen-aloro, Stephanie 65 80 145 Nagyova, Henrieta 91 58 149 Jidkova, Alina 97 52 149 Morigami, Akiko 63 90 153 Talaja, Silvija 93 67 160 Zheng, Jie 94 74 168 Stevenson, Alexandra 82 95 177 Craybas, Jill 98 84 182

The following Top 30 singles players are not in the Top 100 in doubles: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (unranked in doubles), Serena Williams (unranked), Amélie Mauresmo (unranked), Jennifer Capriati (unranked), Venus Williams (unranked), Anna Smashnova-Pistolesi (unranked), and Amanda Coetzer (#138). That’s a total of seven Top 30 singles players below #100 in doubles — up from only three in 2001; there were nine in 2002. Even more noteworthy is the fact that six of the Top 30 are completely unranked in doubles (meaning that they played fewer than three events); last year, only four of the Top 30 were unranked.

The following Top 30 doubles players are not in the Top 100 in singles: Martina Navratilova (unranked in singles), Rennae Stubbs (unranked), Liezel Huber (#765), Janette Husarova (#125). This number, fascinatingly, has declined sharply; there were nine such doubles specialists in 2002, eight in 2001. And even of these four, Husarova was Top 50 in singles in 2002, and might yet return if she can stay healthy.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 200 WTA Calendar for 2003 ¥ 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. December 30, 2002ÐJanuary 4 Gold Coast ¥ Hard ¥ Tier III Auckland, New Zealand ¥ Hard ¥ Tier V Nathalie Déchy (2) d. Marie-Gaianeh Mikaelian 6–3 3– Eleni Daniilidou (2) d. Yoon Jeong Cho 6Ð4 4Ð6 7Ð6(7Ð2) 6 6Ð3 Semifinalists: Anna Pistolesi, Emmanuelle Gagliardi Semifinalists: Patty Schnyder, Elena Bovina #1 seed: Anna Pistolesi (#16) #1 seed: Patty Schnyder (#15; lost SF) #2 seed: Eleni Daniilidou (#22) #2 seed: Nathalie Déchy (#20; Won) Doubles champions: Ashley/Spears Doubles champions: Kuznetsova/Navratilova Major Upsets: Zvonareva (#45) def. Panova (#23); Major Upsets: Sanchez Lorenzo (#111) def. Sugiyama Harkleroad (#113) def. Kremer (#25); Black (#56) def. (#24); Garbin (#71) def. Tanasugarn (#28; Mikaelian Husarova (#33); Craybas (#54) def. Srebotnik (#33); Cho (#44) def. Schnyder (#15) (#83) def. Fernandez (#31); Cho (#83) def. Zvonareva Historical Significance: Déchy’s first singles title; #167 (#45); Cho (#83) def. Pistolesi (#16); Ashley/Spears def. in doubles for Navratilova Black/Likhovtseva Historical Significance: Title #2 for Daniilidou Jan. 5Ð10 Sydney, Australia ¥ Hard ¥ Tier II Canberra, Aust. ¥ Hard ¥ Tier V Hobart, Aust. ¥ Hard ¥ Tier V Kim Clijsters (2) d. Lindsay Davenport (6) Meghann Shaughnessy (2) d. Alicia Molik d. Amy Frazier 6Ð 6Ð4 6Ð3 Francesca Schiavone 6Ð1 6Ð1 2 4Ð6 6Ð4 Semifinalists: Tatiana Panova, Justine Semifinalists: Marion Bartoli, Emilie Semifinalists: Elena Hénin-Hardenne Loit Likhovtseva, Iveta Benesova #1 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#3; lost 2R) #1 seed: Nathalie Déchy (#19; lost 1R) #1 seed: Katarina Srebotnik #2 seed: Kim Clijsters (#4; Won) #2 seed: Meghann Shaughnessy (#28; (#35) #3 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#5; lost Won) #2 seed: Amy Frazier (#42; lost SF) Doubles champions: Garbin/Loit F) #4 seed: Daniela Hantuchova (#8; lost QF) Major Upsets: Ad. Serra Zanetti (#60) Doubles champions: Black/ Doubles champions: Clijsters/Sugiyama def. Mikaelian (#36); Widjaja (#74) Likhovtseva Major Upsets: Barabanschikova (#185) def. def. Bedanova (#41); Weingärtner Major Upsets: Roesch (#81) Martinez (#34); Bovina (#23) def. (#98) def. Déchy (#19); Kostanic/ def. Grande (#47); Molik Myskina (#11); Panova (#27) def. Matevzic def. Ruano Pascual/Serna; (#96) def. Srebotnik (#35); Capriati (#3); Barabanschikova (#184) Pennetta (#9) def. C. Fernandez Asagoe (#94) def. Schett def. Bovina (#23); Coetzer (#22) def. (#31); Bartoli (#105) def. Granville (#39); Molik )#96) def. Maleeva (#14) (#46) Zvonareva (#45) Historical Significance: Two titles in one Historical Significance: Is Historical Significance: First week for Clijsters as Davenport blows Shaughnessy finally back on track? career title for Molik another final

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 201 Jan. 13Ð26 Australian Open ¥ Hard ¥ Slam Serena Williams (1) d. Venus Williams (2) 7Ð6(7Ð4) 3Ð6 6Ð4 Semifinalists: Kim Clijsters, Justine Hénin-Hardenne #1 seed: Serena Williams (#1; Won) #5 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#5; lost SF) #2 seed: Venus Williams (#2; lost F) #6 seed: Monica Seles (#7; lost 2R) #3 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#3; lost 1R) #7 seed: Daniela Hantuchova (#8; lost QF) #4 seed: Kim Clijsters (#4; lost SF) #8 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#12; lost QF) Doubles champions: Williams/Williams Major Upsets: Weingärtner (#90) def. Capriati (#3); Stosur (#244) def. Martinez (#37); Barna (#69) def. Schiavone (#35); Schwartz (#141) def. Dementieva (#19); Torrens Valero (#80) def. Majoli (#30); Jidkova (#101) def. Granville (#46); Gagliardi (#60) def. Mikaelian (#36); Chladkova (#62) def. Stevenson (#21); Dominikovic (#115) def. Kremer (#26); Ruano Pascual (#63) def. Husarova (#31); Petrova (#148) def. Sugiyama (#25); Pratt (#54) def. Farina Elia (#16); Barna (#69) def. Raymond (#28); Koukalova (#113) def. Seles (#7); Pratt (#54) def. Suarez (#27); Gagliardi/Mandula def. Dementieva/Husarova; Pierce/Stubbs def. Black/Likhovtseva; Gagliardi/Mandula def. Hantuchova/Shaughnessy Historical Significance: Serena completes the “Serena Slam,” beating Venus in all four of the last Slam finals; also wins the doubles. Jan. 27-Feb. 2 Pan Paciﬁc Open, Tokyo ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier I Lindsay Davenport (3) def. Monica Seles (1) 6Ð7(6Ð8) 6Ð1 6Ð2 Semifinalists: Lisa Raymond, Chanda Rubin #1 seed: Monica Seles (#9; lost F) #3 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#10; Won) #2 seed: Jelena Dokic (#8; lost QF) #4 seed: Chanda Rubin (#12; lost SF) Doubles champions: Bovina/Stubbs Major Upsets: Cohen Aloro (#166) def. Panova (#24); Majoli (#34) def. Stevenson (#21); Raymond (#30) def. Maleeva (#14); Tanasugarn (#31) def. Farina Elia (#15); Krasnoroutskaya (#129) def. Bovina (#17); Raymond (#30) def. Dokic (#8); Krizan/Srebotnik def. Dokic/Petrova Historical Significance: Davenport finally wins her first post-injury title. It will prove to be her only title of 2003. Feb. 3-9 Paris, France ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier II Hyderabad, India ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier IV Serena Williams (1) def. Amélie Mauresmo (3) 6–3 6–2 Tamarine Tanasugarn (2) d. Iroda Tulyaganova (5) Semifinalists: Eleni Daniilidou, Elena Dementieva 6Ð4 6Ð4 #1 seed: Serena Williams (#1; Won) Semifinalists: Akiko Morigami, Flavia Pennetta #2 seed: Daniela Hantuchova (#5; lost QF) #1 seed: Clarisa Fernandez (#29; lost 1R) #3 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#7; lost F) #2 seed: Tamarine Tanasugarn (#32; Won) #4 seed: Jelena Dokic (#10; lost QF) Doubles champions: Likhovtseva/Tulyaganova Doubles champions: Schett/Schnyder Major Upsets: Morigami (#133) def. Fernandez Major Upsets: Cohen Aloro (#121) def. Pistolesi (#15); (#28); Obziler (#134) def. Likhovtseva (#36); Daniilidou/Pratt def. Hantuchova/Sugiyama; Pisnik (#61) def. Pennetta (#97) def. Pierce (#39) Schnyder (#13); Grande (#63) def. Farina Elia (#17); Historical Significance: Tanasugarn’s first career Dementieva (#20) def. Hantuchova (#5); Daniilidou (#18) def. title Dokic (#10) Historical Significance: Serena is now 11Ð0 in 2003.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 202 Feb. 10-16 Antwerp, Belgium ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier II Doha, Qatar ¥ Hard ¥ Tier III Venus Williams (1) d. Kim Clijsters (2) 6Ð2 6Ð4 Anastasia Myskina (2) def. Semifinalists: Justine Hénin-Hardenne, Daniela Elena Likhovtseva (5) 6Ð1 6Ð3 Hantuchova Semifinalists: Lina Krasnoroutskaya, Patricia Wartusch #1 seed: V. Williams (#2; Won) #1 seed: Seles (#9; lost 2R) #2 seed: Clijsters (#3; lost F) #2 seed: Myskina (#11; Won) #3 seed: Hénin-Hardenne (#4; lost SF) Doubles champions: Lee/Prakusya #4 seed: Hantuchova (#5; lost SF) Major Upsets: Vento-Kabchi (#171) def. Tanasugarn Doubles champions: Clijsters/Sugiyama (#28); Krasnoroutskaya (#96) def. Seles (#9); Major Upsets: Sugiyama (#26) def. Dokic (#10); Likhovtseva (#36) def. Maleeva (#14); Razzano (#67) def. Stevenson (#24) Krasnoroutskaya (#96) def. Martinez (#38); Vento- Historical Significance: Venus’s first title since New Kabchi/Widjaja def. Black/Likhovtseva Haven (!) will prove to be her last of the year; Clijsters/ Historical Significance: Myskina’s third career title puts Sugiyama have two titles in three events. her in the Top Ten for the first time. Feb. 17-23 Dubai, UAR ¥ Hard ¥ Tier II Memphis, USA ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier III Bogota, Columbia ¥ Clay ¥ Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1) d. Lisa Raymond (2) d. Tier III Monica Seles (4) 4Ð6 7Ð6(7Ð4) 7Ð5 Amanda Coetzer (3) 6-3 6-2 Fabiola Zuluaga def. Anabel Semifinalists: Jennifer Capriati, Amélie Semifinalists: Laura Granville, Yoon Medina Garrigues 6Ð3 6Ð2 Mauresmo Jeong Cho Semifinalists: Paula Suarez, #1 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#4; Won) #1 seed: Silvia Farina Elia (#20; lost Katarina Srebotnik #2 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#7; lost SF) QF) #1 seed: Paola Suarez (#26; #3 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#6; lost SF) #2 seed: Lisa Raymond (#21; Won) lost SF) #4 seed: Monica Seles (#11; lost F) Doubles champions: Morigami/Obata #2 seed: Katarina Srebotnik Doubles champions: Kuznetsova/Navratilova Major Upsets: Pelletier/Washington (#30; lost SF) Major Upsets: Schiavone (#40) def. Panova def. (1) Asagoe/Miyagi; Obata Doubles champions: (#22); Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja def. (2) (#121) def. Stevenson (#24); Srebotnik/Svensson Mandula/Wartusch; Krasnoroutskaya (#72) Granville (#41) def. Farina Elia Major Upsets: Zuluaga (#73) def. Schnyder (#13); Tulyaganova (#52) (#20) def. Suarez (#26); Medina def. Maleeva (#14); Martinez (#35) def. Historical Significance: Raymond Garrigues (#528) def. Daniilidou (#16) defends a title for the first time in Srebotnik (#30) Historical Significance: Hénin’s first Tier II her career. Historical Significance: on hardcourts, and her first title of the year. Zuluaga seems finally to be recovering from her injury

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 203 Feb. 24-Mar. 2 Scottsdale, Arizona ¥ Hard ¥ Tier II Acapulco, Mexico ¥ Clay ¥ Tier III Ai Sugiyama d. Kim Clijsters (2) 3Ð6 7Ð5 6Ð4 Amanda Coetzer (2) def. Mariana Diaz- Semifinalists: Meghann Shaughnessy, Alexandra Stevenson Oliva 7Ð5 6Ð3 #1 seed: Serena Williams (#1; WITHDREW) Semifinalists: Emilie Loit, Shinobu Asagoe #2 seed: Kim Clijsters (#3; lost F) #1 seed: Elena Dementieva (#18; lost 2R) #3 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#7; lost 2R) #2 seed: Amanda Coetzer (#20; WON) #4 seed: Jelena Dokic (#9; lost 2R) Doubles champions: Loit/Svensson Doubles champions: Clijsters/Sugiyama Major Upsets: Vaskova (#155) def. Serna Major Upsets: Schiavone (#37) def. Bovina (#17); Razzano (#60) def. (#50); Asagoe (#90) def. Dementieva Raymond (#22); Black (#57) def. Panova (#23); Sugiyama (#25) def. (#18); Diaz-Oliva (#104) def. Suarez Davenport (#7); Shaughnessy (#27) def. Dokic (#9); Granville (#37) (#24); Mandula (#82) def. Srebotnik (#32) def. Rubin (#12); Schiavone (#38) def. Farina Elia (#21); Sugiyama Historical Significance: Coetzer’s first title (#25) def. Daniilidou (#16); Jidkova/Koukikovskaya def. Husarova/ in two years Schett; Sugiyama (#25) def. Clijsters (#3) Historical Significance: Sugiyama wins four matches on the final Sunday of the event to earn both singles and doubles titles — her first ever Tier II singles title Mar. 5-16 Indian Wells, California, USA ¥ Hard ¥ Tier I Kim Clijsters (1) d. Lindsay Davenport (4) 6Ð4 7Ð5 Semifinalists: Conchita Martinez, Jennifer Capriati #1 seed: Kim Clijsters (#3; Won) #5 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#8; WITHDREW from QF) #2 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#6; lost SF) #6 seed: Jelena Dokic (#9; lost 2R) #3 seed: Daniela Hantuchova (#5; lost 4R) #7 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#11; lost 2R) #4 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#7; lost F) #8 seed: Chanda Rubin (#12; lost QF) Doubles champions: Davenport/Raymond Major Upsets: Cohen Aloro (#103) def. Schett (#50); Asagoe (#76) def. Tulyaganova (#42); Bartoli (#96) def. Nagyova (#64); Kuznetsova (#41) def. Myskina (#11); Widjaja (#63) def. Schnyder (#13); Reeves (#111) def. Suarez (#28); Ruano Pascual (#46) def. Stevenson (#25); Serna (#47) def. Fernandez (#27); Kostanic (#99) def. Husarova (#43); Black (#56) def. Pistolesi (#16); Gagliardi (#65) def. Panova (#26; Rittner (#87) def. Dokic (#9); Shaughnessy (#24) def. Daniilidou (#15); Zvonareva (#39) def. Shaughnessy (#24); Coetzer (#19) def. Hantuchova (#5); Martinez (#30) def. Coetzer (#19) Historical Significance: Clijsters is looking more and more like the player to beat, having won Filderstadt, the Los Angeles Championships, Sydney, and Indian Wells among others

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 204 Mar. 20Ð30 Miami ¥ Hard ¥ Tier I Serena Williams (1) d. Jennifer Capriati (6) 4Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð1 Semifinalists: Kim Clijsters, Chanda Rubin #1 seed: Serena Williams (#1; Won) #5 seed: Daniela Hantuchova (#8; lost 2R) #2 seed: Venus Williams (#2; lost 4R) #6 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#5; lost F) #3 seed: Kim Clijsters (#3; lost SF) #7 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#6; lost 4R) #4 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#4; lost QF) #8 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#7; lost 4R) Doubles champions: L. Huber/Maleeva Major Upsets: Asagoe (#71) def. Serna (#42); Molik (#89) def. Hantuchova (#8); Tulyaganova (#45) def. Bovina (#16); Pratt (#53) def. Dementieva (#19); Sanchez Lorenzo (#93) def. Stevenson (#27); Pennetta (#67) def. Majoli (#31); Taylor (#85) def. Myskina (#11); Weingärtner (#99) def. Coetzer (#17); Srebotnik (#39) def. Farina Elia (#21); Gagliardi (#86) def. Mikaelian (#36); Molik (#89) def. Likhovtseva (#30); Weingärtner (#99) def. Daniilidou (#15); Taylor (#85) def. Sugiyama (#18); Shaughnessy (#22) def. Maleeva (#14); Reeves/Sequera def. Bovina/ Stubbs; Shaughnessy (#22) def. V. Williams (#2); Bartoli (#87) def. Davenport (#6); Jeyaseelan/Tu def. Dementieva/Kournikova; Pratt/Rittner def. Black/Likhovtseva; Rubin (#10) def. Hénin-Hardenne (#4); Kuznetsova/Navratilova def. Ruano Pascual/Suarez Historical Significance: Serena still hasn’t lost a match this year — and Capriati still hasn’t won a tournament. Mar. 31ÐApril 6 Sarasota, USA ¥ Clay ¥ Tier IV Casablanca, Morocco ¥ Clay ¥ Tier V Anastasia Myskina (2) d. Alicia Molik (Q) 6Ð4 6Ð1 Rita Grande (2) def. Antonella Serra Zanetti Semifinalists: Nathalie Déchy, Iva Majoli 6Ð2 4Ð6 6Ð1 #1 seed: Jelena Dokic (#10; lost 1R) Semifinalists: Marta Marrero, Ludmila #2 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#11; Won) Cervanova Doubles champions: L. Huber/Navratilova #1 seed: Virginie Razzano (#56; lost 1R) Major Upsets: Cargill (#113) def. Schnyder (#13); Suarez (#29) def. #2 seed: Rita Grande (#60; Won) Dokic; Tulyaganova (#43) def. Panova (#28); Petrova (#109) def. Doubles champions: Dulko/Salerni Likhovtseva (#30); Cargill (#113) def. Tanasugarn (#31); Molik Major Upsets: Neffa-de los Rios (#103) def. (#71) def. Martinez (#25); Molik (#71) def. C. Fernandez (#26); Razzano (#56) Molik (#71) def. Majoli (#32) Historical Significance: Grande ends her Historical Significance: Myskina puts herself back in the Top Ten year-long slump as Serra Zanetta loses her with her second title of the year; Huber has back-to-back doubles first final titles; Navratilova wins title #3 of the year and is Top 20 in doubles

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 205 Apr. 7Ð13 Charleston, USA ¥ (Green) Clay ¥ Tier I Estoril, Portugal ¥ Clay ¥ Tier IV Justine Hénin-Hardenne (2) d. Serena Williams (1) 6–3 6–4 Magui Serna (2) d. Julia Schruff (Q) 6Ð4 6Ð1 Semifinalists: Lindsay Davenport, Ashley Harkleroad Semifinalists: Virginie Razzano, #1 seed: Serena Williams (#1; lost F) Emmanuelle Gagliardi #2 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#4; Won) #1 seed: Katarina Srebotnik (#38; lost 2R) #3 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#5; lost SF) #2 seed: Magui Serna (#46; Won) #5 seed: Daniela Hantuchova (#9; lost QF)1 Doubles champions: Mandula/Wartusch #6 seed: Jelena Dokic (#11; lost QF) Major Upsets: Schruff (#235) def. Srebotnik #7 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#10; lost 2R) (#38) #8 seed: Patty Schnyder (#13; lost 2R) Historical Significance: Serna posts her first #9 seed: Elena Bovina (#16; lost 2R) title defence as Schruff posts her first final Doubles champions: Ruano Pascual/Suarez (and her first WTA main draw; she had Major Upsets: Randriantefy (#95) def. Tanasugarn (#31); Ruano lost in qualifying 15 times before this) Pascual (#42) def. Stevenson (#28); Zvonareva (#33) def. Schnyder (#13); Harkleroad (#101) def. Bovina (#16); Pierce (#43) def. Myskina (#10); Pierce (#43) def. Coetzer (#18); Harkleroad (#101) def. Shaughnessy (#19); Harkleroad/Washington def. Dokic/ Hantuchova; Harkleroad (#101) def. Hantuchova (#9) Historical Significance: The Serena Streak finally ends at 21 matches; the return to clay puts some life into Ruano Pascual and Suarez. 1. #4 seed Jennifer Capriati withdrew with strep throat and seeds were promoted Apr. 14Ð20 Amelia Island, USA ¥ (Green) Clay ¥ Tier II Budapest, Hungary ¥ Clay ¥ Tier V Elena Dementieva (10) d. Lindsay Davenport (2) 4Ð6 7Ð5 6Ð3 Magui Serna (2) def. Alicia Molik (3) 3Ð6 7Ð5 Semifinalists: Justine Hénin-Hardenne, Jennifer Capriati 6Ð4 #1 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#4; lost SF) Semifinalists: Ludmila Cervanova, Maria #2 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#5; lost F) Sanchez Lorenzo #3 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#6; lost SF) #1 seed: Iva Majoli (#30; withdrew from 2R) #4 seed: Daniela Hantuchova (#9; lost QF) #2 seed: Magui Serna (#46; Won) Doubles champions: Davenport/Raymond Doubles champions: Mandula/Tatarkova Major Upsets: Vakulenko (#125) def. Frazier (#43); Raymond (#24) Major Upsets: Gajdosova (#472) def. Razzano def. Dokic (#11); Tu/Vento-Kabchi def. Dokic/Stubbs; Morigami/ (#55) Jidkova def. Black/Likhovtseva; Dementieva (#21) def. Historical Significance: Serna takes home her Hantuchova (#9); Dementieva (#21) def. Hénin-Hardenne (4); second straight title; Molik makes her second Dementieva (#21) def. Davenport (#5) straight final; Mandula wins her second Historical Significance: Dementieva finally earns her first career straight doubles title singles title

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 206 April 28-May 4 Warsaw, Poland ¥ Clay ¥ Tier II Bol, Croatia ¥ Clay ¥ Tier III Amélie Mauresmo (2) d. Venus Williams (1) Vera Zvonareva (3) d. Conchita 6Ð7(6Ð8) 6Ð0 3Ð0, Retired Martinez Granados 6Ð1 6Ð3 Semifinalists: Denisa Chladkova, Jelena Dokic Semifinalists: Samantha Reeves, Maria Sanchez #1 seed: Venus Williams (#3; lost F) Lorenzo #2 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#7; Won) #1 seed: Patty Schnyder (#20; lost 2R) #3 seed: Daniela Hantuchova (#9; lost 2R) #2 seed: Silvia Farina Elia (#24; lost 2R) #4 seed: Jelena Dokic (#10; lost SF) Doubles champions: Mandula/Wartusch Doubles champions: L. Huber/Maleeva Major Upsets: Garbin (#86) def. Grande (#48); Major Upsets: Parra (#161) def. Maleeva (#14); Kleinova Martinez Granados (#88) def. Pratt (#45); Talaja (#135) def. Panova (#31); Zuluaga (#69) def. Hantuchova (#96) def. Farina Elia (#24); Leon Garcia (#137) (#9); Schiavone (#34) def. Daniilidou (#16) def. Schnyder (#20) Historical Significance: Mauresmo scores her first-ever win Historical Significance: First career title for over Venus and first title of 2003 Zvonareva puts her in the Top 25; Mandula wins her third doubles title in three weeks May 5Ð11 Berlin, Germany ¥ Clay ¥ Tier I Justine Hénin-Hardenne (3) def. Kim Clijsters (1) 6–4 4–6 7–5 Semifinalists: Jennifer Capriati, Amélie Mauresmo #1 seed: Kim Clijsters (#3; lost F) #6 seed: Chanda Rubin (#8; lost 2R) #3 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#4; Won)1 #7 seed: Daniela Hantuchova (#9; lost QF) #4 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#7; lost SF) #8 seed: Jelena Dokic (#11; lost 3R) #5 seed:Amélie Mauresmo (#6; lost SF) #9 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#10; lost 2R) Doubles champions: Ruano Pascual/Suarez Major Upsets: Safina (#68) def. Dementieva (#13); Mikaelian (#36) def. Sugiyama (#17); Schett (#55) def. Granville (#33); Serna (#38) def. Farina Elia (#24); Chladkova (#35) def. Maleeva (#14); Weingärtner (#79) def. Martinez (#26); Zuluaga (#52) def. Suarez (#29); Serna (#38) def. Rubin (#8); Zvonareva (#25) def. Myskina (#10); Zuluaga (#52); def. Shaughnessy (#19); Tulyaganova (#41) def. Dokic (#11); Zvonareva (#25) def. Daniilidou (#15); L. Huber/Maleeva def. Dokic/Petrova Historical Significance: Hénin-Hardenne wins her third career Tier I — and has won both clay Tier I events this year. 1. #2 seed Venus Williams withdrew and seeds were promoted May 12Ð18 Rome, Italy ¥ Clay ¥ Tier I Kim Clijsters (2) d. Amélie Mauresmo (4) 3–6 7–6(7–3) 6–0 Semifinalists: Serena Williams, Ai Sugiyama #1 seed: Serena Williams (#1; lost SF) #5 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#7; lost QF) #2 seed: Kim Clijsters (#2; Won) #6 seed: Chanda Rubin (#8; lost 2R) #3 seed; Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#4/WITHDREW) #7 seed: Daniela Hantuchova (#9; lost 3R) #4 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#6; lost F) #8 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#11; lost QF) Doubles champions: Kuznetsova/Navratilova Major Upsets: Martinez (#27) def. Dokic (#10); Granville (#34) def. Shaughnessy (#18); Zuluaga (#45) def. Stevenson (#26); Loit (#52) def. Rubin (#8); Petrova (#88) def. Seles (#12); Pisnik (#65) def. Maleeva (#15); Kuznetsova (#41) def. Daniilidou (#14); Black (#79) def. Granville (#34); L. Huber/Maleeva def. Black/ Likhovtseva; Martinez (#27) def. Hantuchova (#9); Callens/Loit def. Ruano Pascual/Suarez; Mauresmo (#6) def. S. Williams (#1) Historical Significance: Title #3 of the year for Clijsters opens the possibility of gaining #1; Navratilova wins the biggest title of her comeback.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 207 May 19Ð24 Madrid, Spain ¥ Clay ¥ Tier III Strasbourg, France ¥ Clay ¥ Tier III Chanda Rubin (1) d. Maria Sanchez Lorenzo (WC) 6Ð4 Silvia Farina Elia (7) d. Karolina Sprem (Q) 6Ð3 4Ð6 6Ð4 5Ð7 6Ð4 Semifinalists: Vera Zvonareva, Ashkley Harkleroad Semifinalists: Barbara Schett, Iroda Tulyaganova #1 seed: Jelena Dokic (#10; lost 1R) #1 seed: Chanda Rubin (#8) #2 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#11; lost QF) #2 seed: Alexandra Stevenson (#27; lost 2R) Doubles champions: Jeyaseelan/Matevzic Doubles champions: Craybas/L. Huber Major Upsets: Krasnoroutskaya (#53) def. Daniilidou Major Upsets: Black (#66) def. Martinez (#24); (#14); Matevzic (#47) def. Bovina (#20); Loit (#45) Koukalova (#66) def. Ruano Pascual (#43); Gagliardi def. Dementieva (#13); Sprem (#163) def. Dokic (#10); (#72) def. Stevenson (#27); Sanchez Lorenzo (#84) def. Harkleroad (#58) def. Likhovtseva (#29); Farina Elia Serna (#33); Schett (#57) def. C. Fernandez (#28) (#26) def. Myskina (#11); Sprem (#163) def. Matevzic Historical Significance: Rubin’s sixth career title gives (#47); Sprem (#163) def. Zvonareva (#22) her the surface sweep; Craybas wins her first doubles Historical Significance: Farina Elia makes it three title straight at Strasbourg; Sprem makes her first final May 27-June 9 French Open/Roland Garros ¥ Clay ¥ Slam Justine Hénin-Hardenne (4) def. Kim Clijsters (2) 6–0 6–4 Semifinalists: Serena Williams, Nadia Petrova #1 seed: Serena Williams (#1; lost SF) #5 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#5; lost QF) #2 seed: Kim Clijsters (#2; lost F) #6 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#6; lost 4R) #3 seed: Venus Williams (#3; lost 4R) #7 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#7; lost 4R) #4 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#4; Won) #8 seed: Chanda Rubin (#8; lost QF) Doubles champions: Clijsters/Sugiyama Major Upsets: Randriantefy (#83) def. Stevenson (#26); Loit (#45) def. Likhovtseva (#29); Petrova (#76) def. Seles (#12); Sanchez Lorenzo (#60) def. Dementieva (#13); Srebotnik (#40) def. Coetzer (#17); Morariu (#313) def. Bedanova (#44); Harkleroad (#52) def. Hantuchova (#9); Mandula (#75) def. Myskina (#10); Pennetta (#65) def. Raymond (#21); Schett (#51) def. C. Fernandez (#28); Farina Elia/Garbin def. L. Huber/Maleeva; Matevzic/ Nagyova def. Martinez/Shaughnessy; Pisnik (#54) def. Dokic (#11); Grande (#56) def. Bovina (#20); Zvonareva (#21) def. V. Williams (#3); Martinez (#22) def. Davenport (#6); Petrova (#76) def. Capriati (#7); Petrova (#76) def. Zvonareva (#21); Hénin-Hardenne (#4) def. S. Williams (#1) Historical Significance: Hénin-Hardenne wins her first Slam (and the first slam in four years not won by a power player). In doubles, Clijsters wins her first Slam and Sugiyama her second as the Ruano Pascual/Suarez lose their first match at Roland Garros since — well, since the last time Martina Hingis played the French Open in 2000. Just another token of the change in the game of doubles.... June 10-16 Birmingham, England ¥ Grass ¥ Tier III Vienna, Austria ¥ Clay ¥ Tier III Magdalena Maleeva (3) d. Shinobu Asagoe 6-1 6-4 Paola Suarez (6) def. Karolina Sprem (Q) 7Ð Semifinalists: Eleni Daniilidou, Maria Sharapova 6(7Ð0) 2Ð6 6Ð4 #1 seed: Elena Dementieva (#15; lost QF) Semifinalists: Anca Barna, Vera Zvonareva #2 seed: Eleni Daniilidou (#14; lost SF) #1 seed: Jelena Dokic (#11; lost QF) Doubles champions: Callens/Tu #2 seed: Vera Zvonareva (#20; lost SF) Major Upsets: Vinci (#149) def. Molik (#56); Vento-Kabchi (#137) Doubles champions: T. Li/Sun def. Bedanova (#46); Asagoe (#103) def. Bovina (#46); Major Upsets: Sprem (#97) def. Pistolesi (#25); Sharapova (#125) def. Déchy (#24); Razzano (#66) def. Suarez (#51) def. Dokic (#11); Barna (#71) Stevenson (#26); Foretz (#89) def. Likhovtseva (#31); Perebiynis def. Farina Elia (#30); Sprem (#97) def. (#86) def. Granville (#28); Sharapova (#125) def. Mikaelian Chladkova (#32); Yan/Zheng def. Mandula/ (#34); Sharapova (#125) def. Dementieva (#15) Wartusch; Srem (#97) def. Zvonareva (#20) Historical Significance: Maleeva’s tenth career title, and her first on Historical Significance: Suarez moves back into grass, earns her the career surface sweep the Top 40 and wins her first title in two years

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 208 June 16Ð22 Eastbourne, England ¥ Grass ¥ Tier II ’s-Hertogenbosch, Netherlands ¥ Chanda Rubin (2) def. Conchita Martinez 6Ð4 3Ð6 6Ð4 Grass ¥ Tier III Semifinalists: Silvia Farina Elia, Jennifer Capriati Kim Clijsters (1) def. Justine Hénin-Hardenne (2) 6– #1 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#5; lost 2R) 7(4Ð7) 3Ð0, Retired (Left Wrist Sprain) #2 seed: Chanda Rubin (#7; Won) Semifinalists:Barbara Rittner, Nadia Petrova #3 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#8; lost SF) #1 seed: Kim Clijsters (#2; Won) #4 seed: Daniela Hantuchova (#9; lost QF) #2 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#3; lost F) Doubles champions: Davenport/Raymond #3 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#6; lost 2R) Major Upsets: Janes (#505) def. Serna (#25); Obata (#99) def. #4 seed: Elena Dementieva (#15; lost QF) Granville (#29); Coetzer (#17) def. Myskina (#11); Obata Doubles champions: Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya (#89) def. Dokic (#11); Pistolesi (#26) def. Daniilidou Major Upsets: Weingärtner (#65) def. Harkleroad (#14); Farina Elia (#28) def. Davenport (#5); Déchy (#23) (#39); Rittner (#102) def. Mauresmo (#6); Petrova def. Sugiyama (#13); Martinez (#19) def. Hantuchova (#9); (#30) def. Dementieva (#15); Petrova/Pierce def. Farina Elia (#28) def. Maleeva (#12); Capriati/Serna def. Ruano Pascual/Suarez Likhovtseva/Sugiyama; Foretz/Ant. Serra-Zanetti def. Historical Significance: Clijsters snaps Hénin’s Dokic/Stubbs winning streak at fifteen and completes the career Historical Significance: Rubin defends her title and extends surface sweep; Krasnoroutskaya wins her first her streak here to nine matches doubles title June 23-July 6 Wimbledon ¥ Grass ¥ Slam Serena Williams (1) d. Venus Williams (4) 4Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð2 Semifinalists: Kim Clijsters, Justine Hénin-Hardenne #1 seed: Serena Williams (#1) #5 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#5; lost QF) #2 seed: Kim Clijsters (#2; lost SF) #6 seed: NONE1 #3 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#3; lost SF) #7 seed: Chanda Rubin (#8; lost 3R) #4 seed: Venus Williams (#4) #8 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#7; lost QF) Doubles champions: Clijsters/Sugiyama Major Upsets: Mandula (#57) def. Schnyder (#19); Reeves (#109) def. Pistolesi (#26); Kapros (#204) def. Shaughnessy (#20); Loit (#48) def. Stevenson (#28); Morigami (#90) def. Tanasugarn (#31); Sharapova (#91) def. Harkleroad (#39); Asagoe (#81) def. Hantuchova (#9); Suarez (#35) def. Maleeva (#11); Schiavone (#37) def. Coetzer (#15); Black (#59) def. Chladkova (#32); Pierce (#86) def. Daniilidou (#21); Sharapova (#91) def. Bovina (#22); Molik (#54) def. Likhovtseva (#33); Farina Elia (#25) def. Rubin (#8); Asagoe (#81) def. Schiavone (#37); Sharapova (#91) def. Dokic (#12); Pierce (#86) def. Raymond (#24); Mandula/Wartusch def. Black/Likhovtseva; Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya def. Williams/Williams 6Ð3 3Ð6 7Ð5; V. Williams (#4) def. Clijsters (#2) Historical Significance: Serena wins singles Slam #6 in a brutally ugly final marked by Venus’s injury (Clijsters should have beaten her in the semifinal, but choked); Clijsters and Sugyama win their second straight doubles Slam. 1 Amélie Mauresmo withdrew after the draw was complete but well before play began, but seeds were not promoted. July 7Ð13 Palermo, Italy ¥ Clay ¥ Tier V Dinara Safina (9) def. Katarina Srebotnik (4) 6Ð3 6Ð4 Semifinalists: Ludmila Cervanova, Anabel Medina Garrigues #1 seed: Magui Serna (#29; lost 2R) #2 seed: Denisa Chladkova (#32; lost 2R) Doubles champions: Ad. Serra Zanetti/Stellato Major Upsets: Cervanova (#85) def. Serna (#29); Medina Garrigues (#139) def. Chladkova (#32); Safina (#64) def. Schiavone (#34), Safina (#64) def. Srebotnik (#39) Historical Significance: Career title #2 for Safina puts her at a career high

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 209 July 21Ð27 Stanford, California ¥ Hard ¥ Tier II Kim Clijsters (2) def. Jennifer Capriati (3) 4Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð2 Semifinalists: Maria Vento-Kabchi, Francesca Schiavone #2 seed: Kim Clijsters (#2; Won)1 #4 seed: Daniela Hantuchova (#9; lost 2R) #3 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#7; lost F) #5 seed: Jelena Dokic (#12; lost QF) Doubles champions: Black/Raymond Major Upsets: Bartoli (#56) def. Granville (#33); Vento-Kabchi (#132) def. Petrova (#25); Haynes (#308) def. Grande; Frazier (#46) def. Hantuchova (#9); Mikaelian (#37) def. Shaughnessy (#18); Ashley/Spears def. Shaughnessy/Stubbs; Vento-Kabchi (#132) def. Dokic (#12) Historical Significance: Clijsters wins title #5 of the year, and extends Capriati’s drought 1. #1 seed Serena Williams withdrew after the draw was made and seeds were promoted July 28-Aug. 3 San Diego, California ¥ Hard ¥ Tier II+ Sopot, Poland ¥ Clay ¥ Tier III Justine Hénin-Hardenne (3) d. Kim Clijsters 3–6 6–2 6-3 Anna Pistolesi (3) def. Semifinalists: Lindsay Davenport, Svetlana Kuznetsova Klara Koukalova 6Ð2 6Ð0 #1 seed: Serena Williams (#1; WITHDREW) Semifinalists: Patty Schnyder, #2 seed: Kim Clijsters (#2; lost F) Petra Mandula #3 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#3; WON) #1 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#10; lost QF) #4 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#5; lost SF) #2 seed: Patty Schnyder (#19; lost SF) #5 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#7; lost 2R) Doubles champions: Perebiynis/Talaja #6 seed: Chanda Rubin (#8; lost QF) Major Upsets: Cohen-Aloro (#66) def. #7 seed: Daniela Hantuchova (#9; lost 3R) Chladkova (#35); Kostanic (#116) def. #8 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#11; lost 2R) Tulyaganova (#48); Mandula (#52) def. Doubles champions: Clijsters/Sugiyama Myskina (#10) Major Upsets: Pratt (#70) def. Tanasugarn (#39); Bartoli (#50) def. Historical Significance: Pistolesi wins her Shaughnessy (#18); Likhovtseva (#51) def. Capriati (#7); Petrova seventh career title. She’s never lost a (#24) def. Coetzer (#15); Krasnoroutskaya (#42) def. Farina Elia final (of course, she’s never played a (#20); Raymond (#30) def. Sugiyama (#11); Pierce (#73) def. final at a high-tier event) Martinez (#14); Petrova (#24) def. Hantuchova (#9); Likhovtseva (#51) def. Maleeva (#11) Historical Significance: Clijsters posts her fourth Big Choke of the year, and blows the final, costing her a guaranteed #1 singles ranking — but does gain the #1 doubles ranking, though only for a week

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 210 August 4Ð10 Los Angeles ¥ Hard ¥ Tier II Helsinki, Finland ¥ Clay ¥ Tier IV Kim Clijsters (1) def. Lindsay Davenport (1) 6Ð1 3Ð6 6Ð1 Anna Pistolesi (2) def. Jelena Kostanic (Q) Semifinalists: Francesca Schiavone, Ai Sugiyama 4Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð0 #1 seed: Kim Clijsters (#2; WON) Semifinalists: Vera Douchevina, Karolina #2 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#4; lost F) Sprem #3 seed: Chanda Rubin (#8; WITHDREW) #1 seed: Patty Schnyder (#17; lost 1R) #4 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#12; lost SF) #2 seed: Anna Pistolesi (#25) #5 seed: Jelena Dokic (#15; lost 2R) Doubles champions: Kulikovskaya/ #6 seed: Magdalena Maleeva (#11; lost QF) Tatarkova #7 seed: Conchita Martinez (#13; lost 2R) Major Upsets: Talaja (#76) def. Schnyder #8 seed: Amanda Coetzer (#14; lost QF) (#17); Douchevina (#182) def. Doubles champions: Pierce/Stubbs Chladkova (#35) Major Upsets: Kutuzova (#451) def. Krasnoroutskaya (#41); Sharapova Historical Significance: Pistolesi wins her (#56) def. Petrova (#23); Kuznetsova (#26) def. Dokic (#15); Ruano tenth match in a row, and is now 8-0 in Pascual (#64) def. Dementieva (#16); Pratt (#70) def. Daniilidou career finals (all at Tier III or smaller (#22); Kutuzova (#451) def. Stevenson (#29); Pratt (#70) def. events, of course) Martinez (#13); Pierce/Stubbs def. Ruano Pascual/Suarez Historical Significance: Clijsters, who is lucky enough to face Lindsay Davenport in the final, finally takes the #1 ranking; Sugiyama back to #1 in doubles August 11Ð17 Canadian Open/Toronto ¥ Hard ¥ Tier I Justine Hénin-Hardenne (2) def. Lina Krasnoroutskaya 6–1 6–0 Semifinalists: Paola Suarez, Elena Dementieva #1 seed: Kim Clijsters (#1; lost R16) #5 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#10; lost R16) #2 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#3; Won) #6 seed: Magdalena Maleeva (#11; lost 2R) #3 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#6; lost QF) #7 seed: Amanda Coetzer (#14; lost R16) #4 seed: Daniela Hantuchova (#8; lost R16) #8 seed: Jelena Dokic (#17; lost R16) Doubles champions: Kuznetsova/Navratilova Major Upsets: Srebotnik (#43) def. Farina Elia (#20); Ruano Pascual (#58) def. Granville (#33); Krasnoroutskaya (#38) def. Daniilidou (#25); Serna (#31) def. Maleeva (#11); Dokic/Morariu def. Ruano Pascual/Suarez; Krasnoroutskaya (#38) def. Clijsters (#1); Suarez (#32) def. Hantuchova (#8); Dementieva (#15) def. Myskina (#10); Bovina (#21) def. Coetzer (#14); Suarez (#32) def. Zvonareva (#16), Dementieva (#15) def. Mauresmo (#6) Historical Significance: Hénin-Hardenne extends her hardcourt winning streak to ten and starts to move in on #2 — and even #1 August 17Ð23 New Haven, Connecticut ¥ Hard ¥ Tier II Jennifer Capriati (3) def. Lindsay Davenport (1) 6Ð2 4Ð0, retired Semifinalists: Elena Dementieva, Amélie Mauresmo #1 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#4; lost F) #3 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#7; Won) #2 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#6; lost SF) #4 seed: Daniela Hantuchova (#10; lost 2R) Doubles champions: Ruano Pascual/Suarez Major Upsets: M. Casanova (#86) def. Farina Elia (#21); Pistolesi (#22) def. Myskina (#8); M. Casanova (#86) def. Granville (#37); Pistolesi (#22) def. Zvonareva (#14); Black (#52) def. Hantuchova (#10); Serna (#32) def. Maleeva (#11); Molik/Serna def. L. Huber/Maleeva Historical Significance: Helped by retirements by Amélie Mauresmo in the semifinal and Lindsay Davenport in the final, Capriati wins her first title since the 2002 Australian Open. Ruano Pascual and Suarez also win their first non- clay event of the year.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 211 August 26- September 8 U. S. Open ¥ Hard ¥ Slam Justine Hénin-Hardenne (2) f. Kim Clijsters (1) 7–5 6–1 Semifinalists: Lindsay Davenport, Jennifer Capriati #1 seed: Kim Clijsters (#1; lost F) #5 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#6l lost QF) #2 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#3; Won) #6 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#7; lost SF) #3 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#4; lost SF) #7 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#10; lost QF) #4 seed: NONE1 #8 seed: Chanda Rubin (#8; lost 1R) Doubles champions: Ruano Pascual/Suarez Major Upsets: Barna (#65) def. Krasnoroutskaya (#28); M. Casanova (#72) def. Daniilidou (#26); Vento-Kabchi (#84) def. Rubin (#8); Asagoe (#55) def. Maleeva (#12); Cervanova (#73) def. Bovina (#18); Schaul (#100) def. Pistolesi (#17); Loit (#49) def. Stevenson (#33); Molik (#44) def. Martinez (#13); Tanasugarn (#39) def. Schnyder (#22), Czink (#93) def. Raymond (#30); Pratt (#57) def. Farina Elia (#20); Pierce (#64) def. Dokic (#22); Sanchez Lorenzo (#53) def. Serna (#27); Obata (#75) def. Mikaelian (#35); Bartoli/Casanova def. Gagliardi/Shaughnessy; Tanasugarn (#39) def. Hantuchova (#9); Bartoli/Casanova def. Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya Historical Significance: Clijsters collapses again in an attempt to win a Slam; Hénin-Hardenne wins Slam #2 of the year and of her career after winning an unbelievable three-set semifinal win over Capriati; Martina Navratilova can’t quite win another Slam as Ruano Pascual and Suarez break their four-match losing streak in Slam finals 1. In a clear violation of WTA rules, #4 seed Venus Williams withdrew three days before the Open began, but seeds were not promoted; instead, Katarina Srebotnik was inserted into Venus’s spot as the #33 seed, meaning that #6 seed Jennifer Capriati would not have to face a Top Ten player or seed on her way to the semiﬁnal. September 8Ð14 Bali, Indonesia ¥ Hard ¥ Tier III Elena Dementieva (2) d. Chanda Rubin (1) 6Ð2 6Ð1 Semifinalists: Saori Obata, Maria Vento-Kabchi #1 seed: Chanda Rubin (#10; lost F) #2 seed: Elena Dementieva (#9; Won) Doubles champions: Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja Major Upsets: Garbin (#100) def. Dokic (#21); Abramovic (#177) def. Loit (#41); Vento-Kabchi (#77) def. Martinez (#13) Historical Significance: Title #2 for Dementieva moves her back to #8. September 15Ð21 Shanghai, China ¥ Hard ¥ Tier II Elena Dementieva (1) d. Chanda Rubin (2) 6Ð3 7Ð6(8Ð6) Semifinalists: Ai Sugiyama, Akiko Morigami #1 seed: Elena Dementieva (#8; Won) #3 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#14; lost SF) #2 seed: Chanda Rubin (#9; lost F) #4 seed: Conchita Martinez (#13; lost 2R) Doubles champions: Loit/Pratt Major Upsets: Morigami (#78) def. Martinez (#13); Safina (#66) def. Dokic (#22); Morigami (#78) def. Molik (#36) Historical Significance: Dementieva wins a tournament for the second straight week and is on the best winning streak of her career; Emilie Loit continues her impressive doubles results, winning her third title of the year with her third different partner.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 212 September 22Ð28 Leipzig, Germany ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier II Anastasia Myskina (3) d. Justine Hénin-Hardenne (2) 3–6 6–3 6–3 Semifinalists: Kim Clijsters, Maria Vento-Kabchi #1 seed: Kim Clijsters (#1; lost SF) Anastasia Myskina (#10; Won) #2 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#2; lost F) Magdalena Maleeva (#11; lost 2R) Doubles champions: Kuznetova/Navratilova Major Upsets: Chladkova (#45) def. Serna (#24); Callens (#103) def. Shaughnessy (#17); Kleinova (#115) def. Schiavone; Kleinova (#115) def. Maleeva (#11); Vento-Kabchi (#58) def. Farina Elia (#22); Schnyder (#21) def. Hantuchova (#13); Callens (#103) def. Stevenson (#32); Myskina (#10) def. Clijsters (#1); Myskina (#10) def. Hénin-Hardenne (#2) Historical Significance: Myskina scores wins over the Top Two in her best-ever title; Navratilova wins title #6 of 2003. September 29ÐOctober 5 Moscow, Russia ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier I Japan Open/Tokyo ¥ Hard ¥ Tier III Anastasia Myskina (4) def. Amélie Mauresmo (2) 6-2 6-4 Maria Sharapova (5) def. Aniko Kapros 2-6 Semifinalists: Elena Dementieva, Anna Pistolesi 6-2 7-6(7-5) #1 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#5; lost 2R) Semifinalists: Jie Zheng, Arantxa Parra #2 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#7; lost F) #1 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#12; lost QF) #3 seed: Elena Dementieva (#8; lost SF) #2 seed: Tamarine Tanasugarn (#30; lost #4 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#10; Won) 2R) Doubles champions: Petrova/Shaughnessy Doubles champions: Sharapova/Tanasugarn Major Upsets: Douchevina (#123) def. Raymond (#28); Safina (#54) Major Upsets: Parra (#89) def. Asagoe def. Maleeva (#11), Daniilidou (#29) def. Shaughnessy (#19), (#39); Schaul (#83) def. Srebotnik (#36); Bovina (#32) def. Schnyder (#20); Bovina (#32) def. Capriati (#5); Zheng (#122) def. Tanasugarn (#30); Pistolesi (#21) def. Petrova (#13); Myskina/Zvonareva def. Kapros (#128) def. Sugiyama (#12) Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya; Myskina/Zvonareva def. Historical Significance: Saturday brought Kuznetsova/Navratilova Sharapova her first doubles title, Sunday, Historical Significance: Myskina wins back-to-back tournaments — she added her first singles title and her first Tier I October 6Ð12 Filderstadt, Germany ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier II Tashkent, Uzbekistan ¥ Hard ¥ Tier IV Kim Clijsters (1) d. Justine Hénin-Hardenne 5–7 6–4 6–2 Virginia Ruano Pascual (4) def. Saori Obata Semifinalists: Elena Bovina, Mary Pierce (3) 6-2 7-6(7-2) #1 seed: Kim Clijsters (#1; Won) Semifinalists: Arantxa Parra, Emmanuelle #2 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#2; lost F) Gagliardi #3 seed: Lindsay Davenport (#4; lost QF) #1 seed: Petra Mandula (#43; lost 2R) #4 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#5; lost 2R) #2 seed: Emmanuelle Gagliardi (#59; lost Doubles champions: Raymond/Stubbs SF) Major Upsets: Callens (#84) def. Suarez (#17); Pisnik (#38) def. Serna Doubles champions: Beygelzimer/Poutchek (#24); Casanova (#81) def. Krasnoroutskaya (#27); Casanova (#81) Major Upsets: Parra (#79) def. Mandula def. Daniilidou (#28); Pierce (#48) def. Capriati (#5); Maleeva (#21) (#43); Kustava/Tatarkova def. Mandula/ def. Rubin (#10); Bovina (#31) def. Myskina (#9); Bartoli/Casanova Wartusch def. Martinez/Suarez; Bovina (#31) def. Davenport (4); Pierce (#48) Historical Significance: Ruano Pascual’s def. Maleeva (#21) first title in five years; Obata’s first-ever Historical Significance: Clijsters holds onto #1 — barely; Raymond final and Stubbs reunite — temporarily.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 213 October 13Ð19 Zurich, Switzerland ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier I Justine Hénin-Hardenne (2) d. Jelena Dokic 6–0 6–4 Semifinalists: Kim Clijsters, Nadia Petrova #1 seed: Kim Clijsters (#1); lost SF #3 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#7; lost 2R) #2 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#2; Won) #4 seed: Elena Dementieva (#8; lost 2R) Doubles champions: Clijsters/Sugiyama Major Upsets: Frazier (#75) def. Likhovtseva (#36); Pisnik (#35) def. Coetzer (#23); Dokic (#25) def. Rubin (#10); Frazier (#75) def. Martinez (#13); Petrova (#14) def. Dementieva (#8); Schnyder (#18) def. Mauresmo (#7); Pisnik (#35) def. Sugiyama (#11); Bovina (#26) def. Suarez (#17); Molik/Serna def. Raymond/Stubbs; Dokic (#25) def. Clijsters (#1) Historical Significance: Hénin-Hardenne takes the #1 ranking, if only for a week; Sugiyama and Clijsters retain the top doubles rankings. October 20-26 Linz, Austria ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier II Luxembourg ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier III Ai Sugiyama (2) d. Nadia Petrova (4) 7Ð5 6Ð4 Kim Clijsters (1) d. Chanda Rubin (2) 6Ð2 7Ð5 Semifinalists: Patty Schnyder, Vera Zvonareva Semifinalists: Maria Sharapova, Marlene Weingärtner #1 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#9; lost QF) #1 seed: Kim Clijsters (#2; won) #2 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#11; Won) #2 seed: Chanda Rubin (#10; lost F) #3 seed: Vera Zvonareva (#12; lost SF) Doubles champions: Sharapova/Tanasugarn #4 seed: Nadia Petrova (#13; lost F) Major Upsets: Sequera (#95) def. Srebotnik (#32); Doubles champions: L. Huber/Sugiyama Barna (#58) def. Tanasugarn (#34); Fokina/ Major Upsets: Benesova/Pastikova def. Hantuchova/Serna; Koryttseva def. Gagliardi/Rittner; Barna/Medina Schnyder (#28) def. Myskina (#9) Garrigues def. Loit/Pratt; Weingärtner (#62) def. Historical Significance: Sugiyama, for the second time this Daniilidou (#28) year, wins both singles and doubles at an event; she also Historical Significance: Title #8 for Clijsters this year, moves up to #10 (de facto #8) in the WTA Race and final #14; she returns to #1 October 27-November 2 Philadelphia, USA ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier II Quebec City, Canada ¥ Indoor ¥ Tier III Amélie Mauresmo (2) def. Anastasia Myskina (3) 5–7 6–0 Maria Sharapova (2) def. Milagros Sequera 6-2, 6Ð2 retired Semifinalists: Ai Sugiyama, Nadia Petrova Semifinalists: Mary Pierce, Laura Granville #21 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#7; Won) #1 seed: Mary Pierce (#36; lost SF) #3 seed: Anastasia Myskina (#9; lost F) #2 seed: Maria Sharapova (#32; Won) #4 seed: Chanda Rubin (#10; lost QF) Doubles champions: T. Li/Sun #5 seed: Ai Sugiyama (#11; lost SF) Major Upsets: Sequera (#91) def. Bartoli (#56); Doubles champions: Navratilova/Raymond Sequera (#91) def. Pierce (#36) Major Upsets: Raymond (#30) def. Zvonareva (#13) Historical Significance: Sequera’s first final ends in Historical Significance: Mauresmo’s second title of the year an ankle fracture, giving Sharapova her second title 1. #1 seed Venus Williams withdrew and seeds were promoted

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 214 November 4Ð11 Los Angeles Championships ¥ Indoor ¥ Championship Pattaya City, Thailand ¥ Hard ¥ Tier V Kim Clijsters def. Amélie Mauresmo 6–2 6–0 Henrieta Nagyova d. Lubomira Kurhajcova 6-4 6-2 Semifinalists: Justine Hénin-Hardenne, Jennifer Capriati Semifinalists: Tamarine Tanasugarn, Anca Barna #1 seed: Kim Clijsters (#1; Won) #1 seed: Tamarine Tanasugarn (#34; lost SF) #2 seed: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (#2; lost SF) #2 seed: Saori Obata (#52; lost QF) #3 seed: Jennifer Capriati (#5; lost SF) Doubles champions: T. Li/Sun #4 seed: Amélie Mauresmo (#6; lost F) Major Upsets: Nagyova (#119) def. Cervanova (#65); Doubles champions: Ruano Pascual/Suarez Kurhajcova (#101) def. Obata (#52); Nagyova (#119) Major Upsets: Sugiyama (#11) def. Hénin-Hardenne (#2), def. Tanasugarn (#34); Kurhajcova (#119) def. Barna Mauresmo (#6) def. Hénin-Hardenne (#2), Ruano (#54) Pascual/Suarez def. Clijsters/Sugiyama Historical Significance:Nagyova finally ends her three- Historical Significance: In the WTA’s first Round Robin year title drought; Li and Sun win their third doubles championships, Hénin-Hardenne earns the year-end #1, titles of the year — and second in two weeks, on two but Clijsters wins her second straight Championships and different surfaces on two different continents! ninth title of the year. She and Ai Sugiyama lose the doubles final, though, letting Ruano Pascual and Suarez nab the year-end top rankings.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 215 The Tennis Almanac 2003 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. December 29, 2002: Gold Coast Qualifying F — Nadia Petrova (8) def. Tatiana Poutchek (4) 6–1 6–0 Last year, Petrova made the semifinal at Gold Coast before hurting herself. Could she do it again? December 30, 2002: Auckland 1R — Vera Zvonareva def. Tatiana Panova (3) 6–4 6–1 Panova’s time in the Top 25 ends even before 2002 does. December 31, 2002: Gold Coast 1R — Lina Krasnoroutskaya (Q) def. Fabiola Zuluaga 6–3 6–1 Gold Coast 1R — Nadia Petrova (Q) def. Barbara Rittner 6–3 1–6 6–3 Last year’s Russian injury victims both seem intent on coming back strong. January 1, 2003: Gold Coast 2R — (4) Elena Bovina def. Nadia Petrova (Q) 5–7 6–3 6–3 Not this again: Petrova at least managed to play through her match this year, but was injured even so, and had to withdraw from the doubles. January 2: Gold Coast QF — Patty Schnyder (1) def. Meghann Shaughnessy (6), walkover With just one week left before her Sydney final (her last really good result), Shaughnessy is out with a left ankle sprain. January 3: Auckland SF — Yoon Jeong Cho def. Anna Pistolesi (1) 7–6(7–2) 2–2, retired Cho’s third straight upset (over a heat-exhausted Pistolesi) gives her a final and a career high; Pistolesi sees her career-high #16 ranking start to drop. January 4: Gold Coast F DOUBLES — Kuznetsova/Navratilova def. Déchy/Loit 6–4 6–4 Career doubles title #167 for Navratilova ties her singles record. January 5: Canberra 1R — Laura Granville (7) def. Dinara Safina 6–1 3–6 6–1 Granville continues her slow but steady progress at the expense of a more-hyped player January 6: Sydney 1R DOUBLES — (4) Kournikova/Rubin def. Davenport/Raymond 6–4 4–6 6–3 The Davenport/Raymond reunion gets off to an unspectacular start. January 7: Sydney 2R — Tatiana Panova def. Jennifer Capriati (1) 4–6 6–4 7–5 For the third straight year, Capriati loses in the Sydney second round. (It’s the second straight year she’s lost her opener to a non-Top 25 player). Does that mean she’ll win a third Australian Open? January 8: Sydney 2R — Chanda Rubin (7) def. Alexandra Stevenson 6–1 6–3 And so Stevenson drops out of the Top 20 — at least for two week s — putting Eleni Daniilidou in (for that same two weeks). January 9: Sydney QF — Lindsay Davenport (6) def. Daniela Hantuchova (4) 6–4 3–6 7–6(7–3) It ended on a double-fault, but it puts Davenport at #11, and after she beats Tatiana Panova in the semifinal, she’ll be #10. January 10: Hobart F: Alicia Molik def. Amy Frazier (2) 6Ð2 4Ð6 6Ð4 Frazier seems to be rediscovering her form, but it’s Molik who wins — her first WTA title. January 11: Sydney F: Kim Clijsters (2) def. Lindsay Davenport (6) 6Ð4 6Ð3 Clijsters’s win streak stretches to 12 in WTA matches (excluding Hopman Cup, where she lost) as Davenport blows another final. January 13: Australian Open 1R — Marlene Weingärtner def. Jennifer Capriati (3) 2–6 7–6(8–6) 6–4 A monumental collapse from 6Ð2 3Ð0 costs the defending champion her title and drops her to #5. January 14: Australian Open 1R — Barbara Schwartz def. Elena Dementieva (17) 5–7 6–4 6–2 Dementieva may well be on her way out of the Top 20. January 15: Australian Open 2R — Nadia Petrova def. Ai Sugiyama (21) 6–4 6–4 Petrova isn’t back in the Top 100 (quite) — but it looks like it won’t be long. January 16: Australian Open 2R — Klara Koukalova (Q) def. Monica Seles (6) 6–7(6–8) 7–5 6–3 Seles injured herself in the second game, and it cost her the match and the #7 ranking. January 17: Australian Open 3R — Gagliardi/Mandula def. Dementieva/Husarova (3) 6–2 3–6 6–0 In a word: Huh? Did someone hurt herself? (Later answer — no, but Dementieva/Husarova are done.)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 216 January 18: Australian Open 3R — Amanda Coetzer (19) def. Anna Pistolesi (14) 6–0 6–2 Let there be no doubt as to who remains Top Munchkin on the WTA Tour.... January 19: Australian Open 4R — Justine Hénin-Hardenne (5) Lindsay Davenport (9) 7–5 5–7 9–7 Australian Open 4R — Daniela Hantuchova (7) def. Patty Schnyder (12) 7–5 6–3 The first is A Tale of Two Chokers: Hénin led 7-5 3-0, and blew it, then Davenport let it slip away. The second puts Hantuchova at a career-high #5. January 20: Australian Open 3R DOUBLES — Pierce/Stubbs def. Black/Likhovtseva (4) 6–3 2–6 6–1 The bottom-heavy draw gets bottom-heavier as the top-ranked pair in the top half loses (the #1 seeds in the top half were Williams/Williams, who needed a wildcard even to get into the main draw but were seeded first by Grand Slam Fiat). January 21: Australian Open QF DOUBLES — Gagliardi/Mandula def. Hantuchova/Shaughnessy (5) 6Ð4 6Ð2 Australian Open QF DOUBLES — Davenport/Raymond (6) def. Pierce/Stubbs 6–1 7–5 The grudge match (?) between Raymond and Stubbs goes to Raymond, while Gagliardi and Mandula come close to knocking Hantuchova out of the Top Ten in doubles. January 22: Australian Open QF — Kim Clijsters (4) def. Anastasia Myskina (8) 6–2 6–4 A dull day on the women’s side blocks Myskina from the Top Ten. January 23: Australian Open SF — Serena Williams (1) def. Kim Clijsters (4) 4–6 6–3 7–5 Clijsters was up 5-1 in the third set, and look what happened. January 24: Australian Open F DOUBLES — Williams/Williams (1) def. Ruano Pascual/Suarez (2) 4Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð3 Williams/Williams didn’t earn the #1 seed, but they justified it anyway. January 25: Australian Open F — Serena Williams (1) def. Venus Williams (2) 7–6(7–4) 3–6 6–4 The “Serena Slam” becomes a reality. January 28: Pan Pacific 1R — Silvia Farina Elia (6) def. Mary Pierce (WC) 3–6 6–1 6–0 Pierce has her second meltdown of the year (earlier, she lost a match to Rubin in which she won the first set 6Ð0). And she has only two wins. Not a good start.... January 29: Pan Pacific 1R — Iva Majoli def. Alexandra Stevenson 6–3 6–3 Majoli posts her first Top 30 win since New Haven as Stevenson blows a chance to make the Top 20. January 30: Pan Pacific 2R — Lina Krasnoroutskaya (Q) def. Elena Bovina 6–7(10–12) 7–6(9–7) 6–2 Krasnoroutskaya saves two match points to get back into the Top 100. January 31: Pan Pacific QF — Lisa Raymond def. (2) Jelena Dokic 6–4 6–2 Dokic’s game experiences its usual January Thaw (or January meltdown) as Raymond approaches the Top 20. February 1: Pan Pacific SF — Lindsay Davenport (3) def. Lisa Raymond 3–6 6–1 6–4 Davenport beats her doubles partner to get another shot at a title. She will play Monica Seles, with the winner moving up to #8. February 2: Pan Pacific F — Lindsay Davenport (3) def. Monica Seles (1) 6–7(6–8) 6–1 6–2 For Davenport, it’s her first title in over a year. For Seles, it’s been nearly three since her last Tier I. February 3: Paris 1R — Stephanie Cohen Aloro (WC) def. (7) Anna Pistolesi 6–3 6–2 Cohen Aloro, #166 ten days ago, pulls off her second big upset (she beat Panova at the Pan Pacific) and moves close to the Top 100. February 4: Paris 1R — Rita Grande def. (6) Silvia Farina Elia 6–3 1–6 7–5 Grande has seemed down and out lately, but with this result she puts Farina Elia’s Top 20 ranking in jeopardy. February 5: Hyderabad 2R — Iroda Tulyaganova (5) def. Saori Obata 7–5 6–3 Tulyaganova earns her first back-to-back wins since Vienna last year. February 6: Paris 2R — Amélie Mauresmo (3) def. Ai Sugiyama 7–5 6–2 Mauresmo doesn’t show much rust in her first match since Filderstadt.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 217 February 7: Paris QF — Eleni Daniilidou (8) def. Jelena Dokic (4) 6–1 6–3 Elena Dementieva def. Daniela Hantuchova (2) 7Ð5 6Ð2 Dementieva has her best win in a year and a half while ending Hantuchova’s short-term hopes of moving up; Daniilidou scores one of her biggest wins and her first indoor semifinal. February 8: Hyderabad F — Tamarine Tanasugarn (2) def. Iroda Tulyaganova (5) 6–4 6–4 A year ago, Tanasugarn was working on a spot in the Top 20. This year, she’s not that close — but she does win her first career title. February 9: Paris F — Serena Williams (1) def. Amélie Mauresmo (3) 6–3 6–2 Another week, another title for Serena. February 10: Antwerp 1R — Maja Matevzic def. Daja Bedanova 6-3 6-3 Bedanova has only one main draw win this year; this loss will drop her out of the Top 40, and things are only getting worse. February 11: Antwerp 1R — Ai Sugiyama def. (6) Jelena Dokic 7–5 5–7 6–3 Sugiyama collects the scalp of another struggling power player. February 12: Doha 2R — Lina Krasnoroutskaya (WC) def. Monica Seles (1) 7–5 7–5 Krasnoroutskaya shows she’s back — and knocks Seles to #10. If not lower. February 13: Antwerp 2R — Ai Sugiyama def. Angelika Roesch 6–1 6–1 It wasn’t much of a match, but it puts Sugiyama back in the Top 25. February 14: Doha QF — Elena Likhovtseva (5) def. Magdalena Maleeva (3) 6-4 6-2 Could Likhovtseva finally be breaking out of her slump? February 15: Doha SF — Elena Likhovtseva (5) def. Lina Krasnoroutskaya (WC) 6–4 6–3 Not only does Likhovtseva earn her first singles final since Leipzig 2000, she also puts herself back in the Top 30. February 16: Doha F — Anastasia Myskina (2) def. Elena Likhovtseva (5) 6–3 6–1 Myskina finally breaks into the Top Ten February 17: Dubai 1R — Lina Krasnoroutskaya def. Adriana Serra Zanetti 6–3 6–0 Not a major win (Serra Zanetti is below #100) — but it’s another step in Krasnoroutskaya’s comeback. February 18 — Bogota 1R: Ivana Abramovic (Q) def. Cristina Torrens Valero (3) 7-5 2-6 6-3 Torrens Valero’s troubles continue; this may drop her out of the Top 80. February 19 — Dubai 2R: Iroda Tulyaganova def. Magdalena Maleeva (7) 7–6(7–2) 7–5 Tulyaganova’s recent comeback returns her to the Top Fifty. February 20 — Memphis QF: Laura Granville (6) def. Silvia Farina Elia (1) 2–6 7–6(8–6) 6–4 Farina Elia isn’t having much fun this year, and her loss puts Granville in the Top 40 for the first time. February 21 — Dubai SF: Monica Seles (4) def. Amélie Mauresmo 6–3 2–2, Retired Mauresmo’s inability to stay healthy drops her to #8 in the world. February 22 — Dubai F: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1) def. Monica Seles (4) 4–6 7–6(7–4) 7–5 Hénin-Hardenne finally wins a DecoTurf title — and a fairly solid one. February 23 — Bogota F: Fabiola Zuluaga (4) def. Anabel Medina Garrigues 6–3 6–2 Good news all around: Zuluaga defends her title, and Medina Garrigues climbs 305 places in the rankings February 24 — Scottsdale 1R: Francesca Schiavone def. Elena Bovina (7) 6–1 6–4 Bovina had a fine hardcourt summerlast year, but she is having trouble getting started this year. February 25 — Acapulco 1R DOUBLES: Krizan/Srebotnik (2) def. Kruger/M. J. Martinez 2Ð6 6Ð2 6Ð2 Not really much of a result, but interesting; last week Krizan and Srebotnik played separately for the first time in over a year, but here they are together again. February 26 — Acapulco 2R: Shinobu Asagoe def. Elena Dementieva (1) 5–7 6–3 6–3 Asagoe is looking like her old self. Dementieva is looking like — well, like her simple game has been solved. Maybe this loss was the one that would fire her up to fix things. (See Amelia Island.)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 218 February 27 — Scottsdale 2R: Ai Sugiyama def. Lindsay Davenport (3) 7–6(7–5) 4–6 6–3 On a truly wild day on which Serena Williams withdrew and Jelena Dokic and Chanda Rubin were upset, this has to be the biggest surprise February 28 — Scottsdale QF: Ai Sugiyama def. (6) Eleni Daniilidou (6) 7–5 7–5 Having to play two singles matches in one day doubtless did not help Daniilidou. But she still hits a career high of #15. Sugiyama, #25 coming in, is up to #22 — and if she can win her semifinal against Alexandra Stevenson, she’ll be Top 20. March 1 — Scottsdale SF DOUBLES: Raymond/Davenport def. Shaughnessy/Stubbs 7–5 6–2 In their first meeting this year, in Tokyo, Stubbs beat Raymond. Now Raymond returns the favour. March 2 — Scottsdale SF: Ai Sugiyama def. Alexandra Stevenson 6–7(2–7) 6–2 7–6(9–7) Scottsdale F: Ai Sugiyama def. Kim Clijsters (2) 3Ð6 7Ð5 6Ð4 Scottsdale SF DOUBLES: Clijsters/Sugiyama (2) def. Bartoli/Cohen Aloro 7Ð5 6Ð0 Scottsdale F DOUBLES: Clijsters/Sugiyama (2) def. Davenport/Raymond 6Ð1 6Ð4 In what is surely the most amazing day of tennis recorded in recent memory, Sugiyama plays four matches, wins them all, takes home her first-ever Tier II title, and hits the Top Twenty. Plus she and Clijsters now have three doubles titles this year. March 5 — Indian Wells 1R: Stephanie Cohen Aloro (WC) def. Barbara Schett 4–6 6–1 6–3 Cohen Aloro hits the Top 100 as Schett’s slump continues March 6 — Indian Wells 2R: Svetlana Kuznetsova def. Anastasia Myskina (7) 6–4 6–7(7–9) 6–3 An all-Russian battle puts Kuznetsova in the Top Forty and may cost Myskina a shot at the Top Ten. March 7 — Indian Wells 2R: Barbara Rittner def. Jelena Dokic (6) 6–1 5–7 6–3 Indian Wells 2R: Cara Black def. Anna Pistolesi (11) 7Ð6(7Ð3) 6Ð3 It looks more and more like people have solved Dokic (not hard to do) — but it’s Pistolesi who is on the verge of falling out of the Top 20. March 8 — Indian Wells 3R: Vera Zvonareva def. Svetlana Kuznetsova 3–6 7–6(7–5) 6–4 On a dull day almost completely devoid of surprises, Zvonareva overcomes her slowcourt prejudice to surprise her fellow Most Impressive Newcomer candidate. March 9 — Indian Wells 3R: Ai Sugiyama (21) def. Magdalena Maleeva (10) 6–4 6–3 That makes it seven straight wins for Sugiyama. March 10 — Indian Wells R16: Vera Zvonareva def. Meghann Shaughnessy (23) 6–3 4–6 6–2 And Shaughnessy started the year so well! This was pure and simple inconsistency. March 11 — Indian Wells R16: Amanda Coetzer (16) def. Daniela Hantuchova (3) 6–4 6–4 Indian Wells R16: Chanda Rubin (8) def. Ai Sugiyama (21) 0Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð4 Coetzer’s continued hot streak means that Daniela Hantuchova will fall to no better than #8, while Chanda Rubin will finally hit the Top Ten as she stops Ai Sugiyama’s seven match winning streak. March 12 — Indian Wells QF: Lindsay Davenport (4) def. Amélie Mauresmo (5), Walkover Indian Wells SF DOUBLES: Clijsters/Sugiyama (3) def. Ruano Pascual/Suarez (1) 6Ð1 1Ð1, retired (Suarez/Flu) Indian Wells Flu, which cancelled or shortened half a dozen men’s matches, messes up all but one women’s match also. March 13 — Indian Wells QF: Conchita Martinez (26) def. Amanda Coetzer (16) 6–2 6–1 Two comeback players trying to catch up with today’s game. Coetzer had looked better lately, but Martinez had history on her side, having dominated their previous matches. March 14 — Indian Wells SF: Lindsay Davenport (4) def. Jennifer Capriati (2) 6–4 4–6 6–4 The top contenders for third-best American showed how close that contest is. March 16 — Indian Wells F: Kim Clijsters (1) d. Lindsay Davenport (4) 6–4 7–5 Ho-hum. Another event, another Clijsters win over Davenport. It gives Clijsters her first Tier I title. March 19 — Miami 1R: Alicia Molik def. Barbara Schett 6–7(5–7) 6–2 7–6(7–3) Molik’s return to action hands Schett her sixth straight loss and drops the Austrian out of the Top Fifty.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 219 March 20 — Miami 1R: Dinara Safina def. Anna Kournikova 6–1 6–4 Kournikova is back, but her serve made its usual post-injury disappearance — eight double faults in the first set! March 21 — Miami 2R: Alicia Molik def. (5) Daniela Hantuchova 2–6 7–5 6–0 It’s only Molik’s second match back, but even so, she records her first-ever Top Ten win after saving match points. Hantuchova really needs to look at what is going on.... March 22 — Miami 2R: Sarah Taylor (WC) def. Anastasia Myskina (11) 7–5 6–4 The worst loss of Myskina’s year is the best win of Taylor’s career, and removes the last significant Russian from the draw. March 23 — Miami 3R: Marlene Weingärtner (Q) def. Eleni Daniilidou (15) 7–6(8–6) 6–3 Miami 3R: Sarah Taylor (WC) def. Ai Sugiyama (17) 2Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð3 Miami 3R: Alicia Molik def. Elena Likhovtseva (28) 7-6(9-7) 6-3 We have no fewer than four players ranked below #80 in the Round of Sixteen (these three plus Marion Bartoli), and these three have all pulled off two upsets! March 24 — Miami 4R: Meghann Shaughnessy (23) def. Venus Williams (2) 7–6(7–2) 6–1 Shaughnessy is now guaranteed a return to the Top 20 — and suddenly Kim Clijsters looks almost sure to become #2 this spring. It could even happen at Miami if Clijsters wins the event. March 25 — Miami 2R DOUBLES: Asagoe/Miyagi def. Hantuchova/Shaughnessy (4) 6–2 6–1 Not a formal upset — but look at the score and ask, what is wrong with Hantuchova? March 26 — Miami QF: Chanda Rubin (10) def. Justine Hénin-Hardenne (4) 6–3 6–2 Miami QF DOUBLES: Kuznetsova/Navratilova def. Ruano Pascual/Suarez (1) 7Ð6(9Ð7) 6Ð7(5Ð7) 6Ð3 Rubin is up to #8, and Navratilova may yet get back to the Top 20 in doubles. March 27 — Miami SF: Serena Williams (1) def. Kim Clijsters (3) 6–4 6–2 On a day when almost all play was stopped by rain, Serena temporarily ends Clijsters’s run at #2. March 28 — Miami SF: Jennifer Capriati (6) def. Chanda Rubin (12) 6–2 6–4 Capriati reaches her third straight Miami final and gives herself a shot at remaining #5. March 29 — Miami F: Serena Williams (1) def. Jennifer Capriati (6) 4–6 6–4 6–1 Same old, same old; Serena still undefeated, Capriati still unable to win titles. March 30 — Miami F DOUBLES: L. Huber/Maleeva def. Asagoe/Miyagi 6–4 3–6 7–5 And so Maleeva, who is almost entirely a singles player, wins the biggest event of her life — in doubles! March 31 — Sarasota 1R: Ansley Cargill (WC) def. Patty Schnyder (3) 6–4 2–6 6–4 Looks like Schnyder may be back in Slump Mode. April 1 — Sarasota 1R: Paola Suarez def. Jelena Dokic (1) 6–2 6–3 Sarasota 1R: Iroda Tulyaganova def. Tatiana Panova (8) 6Ð3 7Ð5 Both last year’s winner and last year’s finalist are out on the same day, and both may pay: Panova will fall out of the Top 30, and Dokic may lose her #10 spot to Anastasia Myskina April 2 — Sarasota 2R: Ansley Cargill (WC) def. Tamarine Tanasugarn 6-1 4-6 6-4 Thanks to Tanasugarn’s clay weakness, Cargill has her first WTA quarterfinal — and a Top 100 ranking. April 3 — Sarasota 2R: Alicia Molik (Q) def. Conchita Martinez 6–2 6–1 I didn’t think Molik could extend her hot streak to clay — but she has. April 4 — Sarasota QF: Alicia Molik (Q) def. Clarisa Fernandez 6–3 4–3, retired And still Molik marches on.... April 5 — Casablanca F: Rita Grande (2) def. Antonella Serra Zanetti 6–2 4–6 6–1 A breakthrough for both finalists: Serra Zanetti finally reaches a final, and Grande at last looks like she might be recovering her 2001 form. April 6 — Sarasota F: Anastasia Myskina (2) def. Alicia Molik (Q) 6–4 6–1 Myskina is Top Ten again — and this time it’s likely to last a while.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 220 April 7 — Charleston 1R: Dally Randriantefy (Q) def. Tamarine Tanasugarn 6–1 7–5 Tanasugarn’s clay troubles give Randriantefy her first win of the year to bring her close to a career high. April 8 — Charleston 2R: Vera Zvonareva def. Patty Schnyder (8) 6–2 4–6 6–4 Zvonareva is getting close to the Top 30, and Schnyder may be out of the Top 20 when Charleston 2002 comes off. April 9 — Charleston 3R: Elena Dementieva (13) def. Iva Majoli 3–6 7–5 6–1 It wasn’t the day’s biggest upset (that came when #101 Ashley Harkleroad beat #16 Elena Bovina); indeed, it wasn’t an upset at all — but it will hit defending champ Majoli good and hard in the rankings. April 10 — Charleston 2R: Mary Pierce def. Anastasia Myskina (7) 6–4 1–6 6–2 Charleston 3R: Mary Pierce def. Amanda Coetzer (10) 6Ð3 1Ð6 6Ð0 With the rains finally relenting (well, almost), it was a day for wild results: Harkleroad pulled off her second big upset as she beat Meghann Shaughnessy; Vera Zvonareva hit the Top 30 with a win over Paola Suarez — and then this. Pierce finished the first match (resumed from the day before at 2–0 for Pierce in the final set), and then won another three-setter to put herself firmly back in the Top 40. April 11 — Charleston QF: Ashley Harkleroad (WC) def. Daniela Hantuchova (WC) 6–2 6–1 Yes, Hantuchova had played three matches the day before, but this is ridiculous. Harkleroad’s first Top Ten win should put her in the Top Sixty. April 12 — Charleston SF: Serena Williams (1) def. Lindsay Davenport (3) 6–1 7–5 If someone is going to finally beat Serena, she’s going to have to put up a better effort than Davenport did for most of this match! April 13 — Charleston F: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (2) def. Serena Williams (1) 6–3 6–4 Not only does Hénin-Hardenne win her second title of the year, and the second Tier I of her career, but she ends Serena’s winning streak at 21. April 14 — Amelia Island 1R: Julia Vakulenko (Q) def. Amy Frazier 6–2 6–4 Frazier hadn’t played since the Australian Open due to an injury — and it showed. April 15 — Budapest 1R: Iveta Benesova def. Martina Müller 6–2 4–6 6–2 It’s no big surprise that Müller lost, but the defending champion’s ouster will cost her her Top 100 ranking. April 16 — Charleston 2R: Monica Seles (6) def. Anca Barna 2–6 7–6(7–5) 6–3 Seles, plagued by a stiff neck as well as the effects of her foot injury, was unimpresssive, but she’s back. April 17 — Budapest 2R: Jelena Jankovic (Q) def. Iva Majoli (1), walkover And so Majoli leaves the Top Fifty without even a whimper of a match. April 18 — Charleston QF: Lindsay Davenport (2) def. Patty Schnyder (7) 6–1 6–1 In one of the best displays of power and accuracy I’ve ever seen, Davenport kicks Schnyder out of the Top Fifteen. April 19 — Charleston SF: Elena Dementieva (10) def. Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1) 3–6 6–4 7–5 Not only does Dementieva stop Hénin-Hardenne’s winning streak at eight (plus a walkover) and reach another final, she also puts herself in the Top Fifteen. April 20 — Charleston F: Elena Dementieva (10) def. Lindsay Davenport (2) 4–6 7–5 6–3 Dementieva overcomes nerves and her serve to win her first career title. April 28 — Warsaw 1R: Anna Pistolesi (7) def. Barbara Schett 6–4 6–2 That’s nine straight losses for Schett. April 29 — Warsaw 1R: Arantxa Parra (Q) def. Magdalena Maleeva (5) 6-7(0-7) 6-4 6-1 Parra scores her first WTA win as Maleeva suffers her worst loss of the year. April 30 — Warsaw 1R: Denisa Chladkova def. Iva Majoli 6–1 6–4 And so Majoli fails to defend her last decent result of 2002. May 1 — Bol 2R: Gala Leon Garcia (Q) def. Patty Schnyder (1) 7–6(7–4) 6–4 Leon Garcia, ranked #137, knocks Schnyder out of the Top Twenty

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 221 May 2 — Warsaw QF: Jelena Dokic (4) def. Magui Serna 7–5 6–2 No real surprise, but it ends Serna’s winning streak at twelve (fourteen counting Fed Cup). May 3 — Bol F DOUBLES: Mandula/Wartusch (1) def. Gagliardi/Schnyder (2) 6–3 6–2 That’s twelve straight matches, and three straight titles, for Mandula May 4 — Warsaw F: Amélie Mauresmo (2) def. Venus Williams (1) 6–7(6–8) 6–0 3–0, retired Not only does Mauresmo beat Venus for the first time, she threatens Venus’s #2 Roland Garros seed. May 5 — Berlin 1R: Dinara Safina (Q) def. (10) Elena Dementieva 2–6 6–2 1–0, Retired Dementieva was the top player who had to play in the first round, and ended up with a left foot strain. A crummy way to celebrate her first WTA match since winning her first title. May 6 — Berlin 2R: Denisa Chladkova def. (11) Magdalena Maleeva 6–7(1–7) 6–1 6–4 Maleeva’s struggles continue as Chladkova hits a career high. May 7 — Berlin 2R: Vera Zvonareva def. Anastasia Myskina (9) 6–1 6–2 For the fourth time in six weeks, Jelena Dokic and Anastasia Myskina swap the #10 ranking, with Dokic gaining it back as a result of this Myskina loss. May 8 — Berlin 3R: Iroda Tulyaganova def. Jelena Dokic (8) 4–6 6–2 7–6(7–0) Once Myskina fell, could Dokic be far behind? The win puts Tulyaganova back in the Top 40. May 9 — Berlin QF DOUBLES: L. Huber/Maleeva def. (4) Dokic/Petrova 6–4 7–5 Are Huber and Maleeva ever going to lose? Talk about a team that’s more than the sum of its parts. May 10 — Berlin SF: Kim Clijsters (1) def. Jennifer Capriati (4) 6–4 6–7(2–7) 6–4 Clijsters came uncomfortably close to muffing it, blowing four match points in the second set, and seeming to be losing control in the third, but turned it around to again move up to #2 in the rankings. May 11 — Berlin F: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (3) def. Kim Clijsters (1) 6–4 4–6 7–5 Hénin-Hardenne defends the best title of her career, and Clijsters will have to wait another week to know if she will be the #2 seed at Roland Garros. May 12 — Rome 1R: Laura Granville def. Meghann Shaughnessy (15) 7–5 6–3 Granville earns herself a Roland Garros seed — and costs Kim Clijsters enough potential quality points that she may end up the #2 French Open seed. May 13 — Rome 2R: Emilie Loit (LL) def. (6) Chanda Rubin 6–2 1–6 6–3 Loit breaks into the Top Fifty for the first time; Rubin still hasn’t won a match on clay this year. May 14 — Rome 2R: Nadia Petrova def. Monica Seles (10) 6–3 4–1, retired (Left Foot Injury) Here we go again — reports are that this foot injury may be the one that ends Seles’s career May 15 — Rome 3R: Conchita Martinez def. Daniela Hantuchova (7) 6–3 6–3 Rome 3R: Ai Sugiyama (13) def. Patty Schnyder (17) 6Ð2 6Ð1 Hantuchova crashes again, meaning she won’t get the #8 Roland Garros seed, but Sugiyama continues her strange success at Rome and earns the #16 seed. May 16 — Rome QF: Callens/Loit def. Ruano Pascual/Suarez (1) 7–5 6–0 It’s been a while since Els Callens has looked like a top doubles player. This will help a lot. May 17 — Rome SF: Amélie Mauresmo (4) def. Serena Williams (1) 1–6 6–5 6–3 Rome SF: Kim Clijsters (2) def. Ai Sugiyama (13) 6Ð3 6Ð2 Mauresmo rises to #5 and, by becoming the only player to beat both Williameses this year, ensures that Serena will go into Roland Garros without a clay title this year; Clijsters clinches the #2 French Open seed, meaning that Serena might have to face her sister in the semifinal. Not a good Williams day.... May 18 — Rome F: Kim Clijsters (2) def. Amélie Mauresmo (4) 3–6 7–6(7–3) 6–0 After collapsing in the Berlin final, and being two points from defeat this time, Clijsters puts things together. She now finds herself with a shot at the #1 ranking at Wimbledon May 19 — Madrid 1R: Barbara Schett def. Rita Grande 6–3 6–2 Schett has won matches for two weeks straight. It’s been a while. May 20 — Strasbourg 1R: Maja Matevzic def. (5) Elena Bovina 6–3 6–4 Matevzic spoils Bovina’s comeback and reaches a career high.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 222 May 21 — Strasbourg 2R: Karolina Sprem (Q) def. Jelena Dokic (1) 7–5 1–6 6–3 Dokic loses to a player ranked #163, and once again falls out of the Top Ten. May 22 — Strasbourg QF: Silvia Farina Elia (7) def. Anastasia Myskina (2) 6–2 6–3 Will Farina Elia ever lose at Strasbourg? Will Myskina ever really make a move on Dokic? May 23 — Strasbourg SF: Karolina Sprem (Q) def. Vera Zvonareva (6) 3–6 6–3 6–4 Sprem, playing her first WTA main draw, makes the final and keeps Zvonareva from the Top 20. May 24 — Strasbourg F: Silvia Farina Elia (7) def. Karolina Sprem (Q) 6-3 4-6 6-4 Madrid F: Chanda Rubin (1) def. Maria Sanchez Lorenzo (WC) 6-4 5-7 6-4 Rubin completes the surface sweep, and Farina Elia threepeats at Strasbourg. A pretty historic week for one with two Tier III events.... May 26 — Roland Garros 1R: Clarisa Fernandez (28) def. Mary Pierce 6–2 6–3 Fernandez keeps her hopes of staying in the Top 50 alive, but Pierce will fall below #80. May 27 — Roland Garros 1R: Nadia Petrova def. Monica Seles (12) 6–4 6–0 You have to wonder how much longer Monica Seles can keep playing on that foot. May 28 — Roland Garros 2R: Ashley Harkleroad def. Daniela Hantuchova (9) 7–6(7–2) 4–6 9–7 Roland Garros 2R: Barbara Schett def. Clarisa Fernandez (28) 6Ð4 5Ð7 6Ð1 Schett returns to the Top 50, and Harkleroad threatens the Top 40, as Fernandez plummets to around #60 and Hantuchova manages another bad loss. May 29 — Roland Garros 1R DOUBLES: Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya def. Morariu/Stubbs 6Ð1 7Ð6(7Ð2) Last year’s finalist (Stubbs) loses in the first round and will likely fall out of the Top Ten. May 30 — Roland Garros 3R: Ai Sugiyama (16) def. Meghann Shaughnessy (18) 6–1 6–4 On a day almost completely without upsets, Sugiyama clinches a career high. May 31 — Roland Garros 3R: Kim Clijsters (2) def. Paola Suarez (30) 6–2 6–1 It wasn’t much of a match, but it drops Suarez to no better than #50. June 1 — Roland Garros 4R: Vera Zvonareva (22) def. Venus Williams (3) 2–6 6–2 6–4 Roland Garros 4R: Conchita Martinez (24) def. Lindsay Davenport (6) 6Ð4 2Ð0, retired Roland Garros 4R: Nadia Petrova def. Jennifer Capriati (7) 6Ð3 4Ð6 6Ð3 After six days in which the top seeds generally weren’t even threatened (all eight of the top seeds made the fourth round), things suddenly start jumping. Venus may lose the #3 ranking; Capriati will lost the #7 spot, and Martinez and Zvonareva are in the Top 20. June 2 — Roland Garros 3R DOUBLES: Bovina/Molik def. Davenport/Raymond (3) walkover Davenport’s latest injury will cost Raymond the #3 doubles ranking; she may fall as low as #6. June 3 — Roland Garros QF: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (4) def. Chanda Rubin (8) 6–3 6–2 Hénin-Hardenne’s win moves her to a career-high #3 and drops Venus Williams to #4. June 4 — Roland Garros QF DOUBLES: Ruano Pascual/Suarez (1) def. Husarova/Schett (11) 6Ð1 6Ð3 That’s sixteens straight Roland Garros wins for the top seeds. June 5 — Roland Garros SF: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (4) def. Serena Williams (1) 6–2 4–6 7–5 Not only do we have two Belgians, and two non-Williamses, in the finals (Kim Clijsters beat Nadia Petrova to make the final also), but suddenly Serena’s #1 ranking is in actual danger. June 6 — Roland Garros SF DOUBLES: Ruano Pascual/Suarez (1) def. Hantuchova/Rubin (9) 6Ð2 7Ð6(7Ð5) Make it seventeen straight for Ruano Pascual/Suarez at Roland Garros. June 7 — Roland Garros F: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (4) def. Kim Clijsters (2) 6–0 6–4 Showing no nerves at all, while Clijsters played like a club player, Hénin-Hardenne wins her first Slam and ends a streak of seventeen straight Slam titles for big hitters.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 223 June 8 — Roland Garros F DOUBLES: Clijsters/Sugiyama (2) def. Ruano Pascual/Suarez (1) 6Ð7(5Ð7) 6Ð2 9Ð7 Clijsters does a fine job of making up for the singles final, winning her first doubles Slam. She also moves up to #4 in the world in doubles, with Sugiyama #3 — and they’ll have a chance for the top spot at Wimbledon. June 9 — Birmingham 1R: Els Callens def. Nicole Pratt (15) 6–3 6–2 Last year’s semifinalist will lose about a dozen ranking spots. June 10 — Birmingham 2R: Shinobu Asagoe def. Elena Bovina (4) 6–3 6–3 Asagoe returns to the Top 100 as Bovina’s post-injury struggles continue. June 11 — Vienna 2R: Karolina Sprem (Q) def. Anna Pistolesi (3) 6–4 3–6 7–5 Sprem’s win over the defending champion will drop Pistolesi out of the Top 25. June 12 — Birmingham 3R: Tamarine Tanasugarn (10) def. Lisa Raymond (6) 6–2 6–2 A rerun of the 2000 final reverses the outcome of that final. June 13 — Birmingham QF: Maria Sharapova (Q) def. Elena Dementieva (1) 2–6 7–6(7–4) 6–2 Sharapova, who earlier beat Déchy and Mikaelian, posts her best win yet, hits the Top 100, reaches her first WTA semifinal, and leaves Dementieva ranked no better than #15. June 14 — Vienna F: Paola Suarez (6) def. Karolina Sprem (Q) 7–6(7–0) 2–6 6–4 Deja vu: At Strasbourg, Sprem qualified for a clay Tier III, beat a seed early on, beat Vera Zvonareva in the semifinal, and lost a three set final. Spooky. June 15 — Birmingham F: Magdalena Maleeva (3) def. Shinobu Asagoe 6–1 6–4 Maleeva’s tenth career title earns her the #12 Wimbledon seed and the surface sweep; Asagoe loses her first career final — but at least she got there; counting the Gifu Challenger, that’s ten straight grass wins. June 16 — Eastbourne 1R: Silvia Farina Elia def. Clarisa Fernandez 6–2 6–1 Reality continues to pound at Fernadez. June 17 — Eastbourne 1R: Anna Pistolesi def. Eleni Daniilidou 6–2 7–6(7–2) A rare Pistolesi grass win costs Daniilidou her Top 20 ranking June 18 — Eastbourne 2R: Silvia Farina Elia def. Lindsay Davenport (1) 6–4 3–6 7–6(7–3) ’s-Hertogenbosch 2R: Barbara Rittner (Alt) def. Amélie Mauresmo (3) 6–7(1–7) 6–0 7–5 Wind, injury, and indifference cost Davenport, but she’ll keep her #5 ranking as Mauresmo suffers her worst loss in more than three years. June 19 — ’s-Hertogenbosch QF DOUBLES: Petrova/Pierce def. Ruano Pascual/Suarez (1) 6–4 6–4 Huh? It was a crummy day for top doubles seeds (#1 Likhovtseva/Sugiyama also lost, to Capriati/ Serna, at Eastbourne) — but this is hard to believe. June 20 — Eastbourne SF: Chanda Rubin (2) def. Jennifer Capriati (3) 2–6 7–6(7–5) 6–2 Rubin saves two match points to extend her winning streak at Eastbourne to eight. June 21 — ’s-Hertogenbosch F: Kim Clijsters (1) def. Justine Hénin-Hardenne (2) 6–7(4–7) 3–0, Retired (Left Wrist Sprain) It wasn’t much of a final, but it stops Hénin’s streak at fifteen, gives Clijsters the career surface sweep, and improves the odds of her gaining the #1 ranking. June 23 — Wimbledon 1R: Chanda Rubin (7) def. Iva Majoli 6–3 6–0 Rubin’s run reaches five matches as she dumps Majoli below #75. June 24 — Wimbledon 1R: Akiko Morigami def. Tamarine Tanasugarn (32) 6–4 6–3 Tanasugarn’s five-year streak of making Wimbledon fourth rounds ends; she may fall below #35. June 25 — Wimbledon 2R: Shinobu Asagoe def. Daniela Hantuchova (9) 0–6 6–4 12–10 By the end, Hantuchova had tears in her eyes. The audience probably was checking its blood pressure. Asagoe will gain nearly 20 ranking spots, but Hantuchova has a lot to think about. June 26 — Wimbledon 2R: Alicia Molik def. Elena Likhovtseva (31) 6–3 6–4 And so Molik goes back into the Top Fifty, and Likhovtseva goes out.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 224 June 27 — Wimbledon 3R: Silvia Farina Elia (27) def. Chanda Rubin (7) 7–6(8–6) 6–3 A fine match by Farina Elia, and a few ill-timed mistakes by Rubin, and we lose our first high seed. June 28 — Wimbledon 2R DOUBLES: Bedanova/Voracova def. Hantuchova/Rubin (9) 6Ð7(4Ð7) 6Ð1 6Ð3 Yet another long-match collapse by Hantuchova is going to cost Rubin dearly in the doubles rankings. June 30 — Wimbledon 3R DOUBLES: Mandula/Wartusch (12) def. Black/Likhovtseva (5) 3Ð6 7Ð6(8Ð6) 6Ð2 This upset will cost at least Likhovtseva, and possibly Black also, her Top 10 doubles ranking. July 1 — Wimbledon 3R DOUBLES: Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya (15) def. Williams/Williams (3) 6Ð3 3Ð6 7Ð5 Unbeatable? Hah. All right, Venus and Serena haven’t lost since 2001 — but it’s only their third tournament in that time. It will drop Serena out of the doubles Top 20 (Venus remains unranked) July 2 — Wimbledon QF DOUBLES: Ruano Pascual/Suarez (1) def. Mandula/Wartusch (12) 6Ð2 7Ð6(7Ð5) This doesn’t quite guarantee that Ruano Pascual and Suarez will stay #1, but it comes close. July 3 — Wimbledon SF: Venus Williams (4) def. Kim Clijsters (2) 4–6 6–3 6–1 Another Clijsters meltdown — Venus was injured and hardly able to play — means Serena Williams will stay #1. July 4 — Wimbledon SF DOUBLES: Ruano Pascual/Suarez (1) def. Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya (15) 3Ð6 6Ð1 6Ð2 The sixth straight Slam final for Ruano Pascual and Suarez ensures that Suarez will stay #1 — for now. July 5 — Wimbledon F: Serena Williams (1) def. Venus Williams (4) 4–6 6–4 6–2 With Venus injured, it was about as ugly as it could get — but Serena wins Slam #6. July 6 — Wimbledon F DOUBLES: Clijsters/Sugiyama (2) def. Ruano Pascual/Suarez (1) 6Ð4 6Ð4 It was ugly, especially for a grass doubles match, but it gives Clijsters and Sugiyama their second straight Slam, and will probably cost Ruano Pascual and Suarez the top rankings in the near future. July 7 — Palermo 1R: Ludmila Cervanova def. Rossan Neffa-de Los Rios 6–4 6–2 The struggles continue for de Los Rios, who will end the year far below #100. July 8 — Palermo 1R: Henrieta Nagyova def. Gala Leon Garcia 4–6 7–5 6–1 It’s true: Nagyova won a match! July 9 — Palermo 2R: Ludmila Cervanova def. (1) Magui Serna 6–3 6–1 Clearly Magui Serna still suffers from Serna-itis. July 10 — Palermo 2R: Henrieta Nagyova def. (7) Emilie Loit 6–3 6–2 Two in a row for Nagyova. It’s only the second time this year. July 11 — Palermo QF: Dinara Safina (9) def. Francesca Schiavone (3) 6–3 6–2 Safina obviously had one of her better days, and by so doing, significantly hurts Schiavone’s chances of earning a U. S. Open seed. July 12 — Palermo SF: Katarina Srebotnik (4) def. Anabel Medina Garrigues 6–3 6–2 So much for Medina Garrigues’s latest comeback attempt July 13 — Palermo F: Dinara Safina (9) def. Katarina Srebotnik (4) 6–3 6–4 Safina wins title #2 and hits a career high July 21 — Stanford 1R: Marion Bartoli def. Laura Granville 6–4 4–6 6–3 Granville remains in her sophomore slump, but Bartoli may hit the Top 50. July 22 — Stanford 1R: Maria Vento-Kabchi (Q) def. Nadia Petrova (8) 6–1 7–6(7–4) When Petrova wins, she wins big. When she loses... well, suffice it to say that this is her fourth loss this year to a player ranked below #100. July 23 — Stanford 2R: Amy Frazier def. Daniela Hantuchova (4) 6–2 6–4 Frazier’s California magic strikes again; this may put her back in the Top 40.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 225 July 24 — Stanford QF DOUBLES: Ashley/Spears def. Shaughnessy/Stubbs (2) 6–4 6–2 Teryn Ashley earlier lost her first WTA main draw singles match (to Stevenson), but she does pick up a nice doubles win. July 25 — Stanford QF: Maria Vento-Kabchi (Q) def. Jelena Dokic (5) 6–4 6–3 Jelena Dokic has six straight losses to non-Top Fifty players — but this is arguably the worst. July 26 — Stanford SF: Jennifer Capriati (3) def. Maria Vento-Kabchi (Q) 6-4 6-4 Vento-Kabchi is back in the Top 100, but it’s Capriati who is in her first final since Miami. July 27 — Stanford F: Kim Clijsters (2) def. Jennifer Capriati (3) 4–6 6–4 6–2 Capriati might have made the final, but she did what she always does any more: Lose. July 28 — San Diego 1R: Magui Serna def. Laura Granville 6–3 6–3 More Sophomore Slump for Granville. July 29 — San Diego 2R: Marion Bartoli def. (14) Meghann Shaughnessy 3–6 7–6(7–5) 7–5 Shaughnessy continues to slump as Bartoli firmly entrenches herself in the Top 50. July 30 — San Diego 2R: Lisa Raymond def. Ai Sugiyama (8) 6–0 2–6 6–4 Sugiyama loses a chance to hit the Top Ten. July 31 — Sopot QF: Petra Mandula (8) def. Anastasia Myskina (1) 6-4 3-0 Retired (Illness) Illness was the story of the day at Sopot; three of four matches ended with a player unable to finish. This was the biggest upset, and cost Myskina a chance to move above #10. August 1 — San Diego QF: Lindsay Davenport (4) def. Chanda Rubin (6) 6–3 6–3 Davenport passes Venus Williams to regain the #4 ranking. And, with the announcement that Serena Williams needs knee surgery and will miss the U. S. Open (and so lose the #1 ranking), Davenport might just be able to take advantage of that situation. August 2 — San Diego SF: Kim Clijsters (2) def. Lindsay Davenport (4) 6–3 6–3 One more win, and Clijsters guarantees herself the #1 ranking after San Diego. August 3 — San Diego F: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (3) d. Kim Clijsters (2) 3–6 6–2 6-3 San Diego F DOUBLES: Clijsters/Sugiyama (2) def. Davenport/Raymond (3) 6Ð4 7Ð5 Clijsters once again melts down in the singles final, costing her a guaranteed #1 ranking — but does gain the #1 spot in doubles. August 4 — Los Angeles 1R: Tamarine Tanasugarn def. Mary Pierce (WC) 7–6(7–2) 6–3 Tanasugarn stays Top Forty (probably); Pierce stays inconsistent. August 5 — Los Angeles 2R: Maria Sharapova def. Nadia Petrova (14) 6–2 2–6 7–5 Sharapova sets out to prove her grass season was no fluke. August 6 — Los Angeles 1R DOUBLES: Black/Likhovtseva (2) def. Asagoe/Sugiyama 4–6 7–5 6–1 An so the fate of the #1 doubles ranking is entirely in the hands of Virginia Ruano Pascual and Paola Suarez August 7 — Los Angeles 3R: Svetlana Kuznetsova def. Silvia Farina Elia (11) 6–7(4–7) 6–4 7–5 Despite having title points from Helsinki to defend, Kuznetsova won’t fall below #26. August 8 — Los Angeles QF DOUBLES: Pierce/Stubbs (WC) def. Ruano Pascual/Suarez (1) 3Ð6 7Ð6(7Ð4) 6Ð3 And so Virginia Ruano Pascual and Paola Suarez lose their chance at the #1 ranking — probably definitively and finally, given what they have to defend. Ai Sugiyama regains the top spot, and will probably keep it well into 2004. August 9 — Los Angeles SF: Kim Clijsters (1) def. Francesca Schiavone (16) 7–5 6–4 And so Clijsters gets another chance at the #1 ranking. August 10 — Los Angeles F: Kim Clijsters (1) def. Lindsay Davenport (1) 6–1 3–6 6–1 Clijsters finally nabs the #1 ranking — though she tried to blow it in the second set. August 11 — Canadian Open 1R: Virginia Ruano Pascual def. Laura Granville 6–3 6–3 There goes Granville’s chance (barring withdrawals) of a U. S. Open seed.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 226 August 12 — Canadian Open 1R: Paola Suarez def. Svetlana Kuznetsova (16) 6–4 7–6(7–1) The moral seems to be, even kids get tired. Kuznetsova won’t make the Top 25 just yet. August 13 — Canadian Open 2R DOUBLES: Dokic/Morariu def. Ruano Pascual/Suarez (1) 6–3 6–4 Morariu wins her second doubles match of the year. But the key point is — what’s with Ruano Pascual and Suarez? Not only have they lost the top rankings, they’ve collapsed since Wimbledon. August 14 — Canadian Open 3R: Lina Krasnoroutskaya def. Kim Clijsters (1) 1–6 6–4 6-1 Even on a mad day which saw Jelena Dokic fall out of the Top 20 and Daniela Hantuchova get bagelled by Paola Suarez to fall to #10, this result takes the cake. It’s the first time this year Clijsters has lost before the semifinal. Of course, playing 16 matches in 22 days will do that to you. August 15 — Canadian Open QF: Elena Dementieva (9) def. Amélie Mauresmo (3) 3–6 6–4 6–2 Not a good sign for Mauresmo’s chances of defending her U. S. Open semifinal August 16 — Canadian Open SF: Lina Krasnoroutskaya def. Paola Suarez 6–4 4–6 7–5 Whatever has gotten into Krasnoroutskaya, it’s gotten her all the way into the Top 30. August 17 — Canadian Open F: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (2) def. Lina Krasnoroutskaya 6–1 6–0 Hénin-Hardenne could actually threaten the #1 ranking at the U. S. Open.... August 18 — New Haven 1R: Myriam Casanova (Q) def. Laura Granville 6–1 6–1 And so Granville finds herself on the verge of falling out of the Top 50. August 19 — New Haven 2R: Anna Pistolesi def. Vera Zvonareva 0–6 7–6(7–5) 6–2 Pistolesi wins her twelfth straight match and puts herself back in the Top 20. August 20 — New Haven 2R: Magui Serna def. Magdalena Maleeva (6) 7–6(7–4) 6–3 Serna beats Maleeva for the second time in two weeks, breaking into the Top 30 and nearly killing Maleeva’s hopes of hitting the Top Ten this year. August 21 — New Haven QF: Elena Dementieva def. Cara Black (Q) 6–1 6–1 Dementieva is now one win away from the Top Ten August 22 — New Haven SF: Jennifer Capriati (3) def. Amélie Mauresmo (2) 6–3 3–1, Retired/illness It took some unknown bug to make it happen, but Capriati finally reaches another final August 23 — New Haven F: Jennifer Capriati (3) def. Lindsay Davenport (1) 6–2 4–0, retired Davenport will probably have surgery after the U. S. Open — but it still gives Capriati her first title in a year and a half. August 25 — U. S. Open 1R: Maria Vento-Kabchi def. Chanda Rubin (8) 6–4 6–4 U. S. Open 1R: Maria Elena Camerin def. Daja Bedanova 6Ð4 6Ð0 An injured and rusty Rubin becomes the first major Open casualty, and Bedanova’s slump finally drops her out of the Top 100 August 26 — U. S. Open 1R: Ludmila Cervanova def. Elena Bovina (16) 4–6 7–6(7–3) 6–4 Bovina, who earned over 300 points at the Open last year, is likely bound out of the Top 30 August 27 — U. S. Open 2R: Alicia Molik def. Conchita Martinez (12) 7–5 6–4 Molik will hit the Top 40 for the first time. August 28 — U. S. Open 2R: Mary Pierce def. Jelena Dokic (22) 6–2 6–7(5–7) 7–6(7–5) It looks like Pierce really is becoming a force on the Tour again. August 29 — U. S. Open 3R: Tamarine Tanasugarn def. Daniela Hantuchova (9) 6–2 6–4 Another rather sorry showing by Hantuchova will finally cause her to fall out of the Top Ten. August 30 — U. S. Open 2R DOUBLES: Kuznetsova/Navratilova (4) def. Raymond/Sharapova (WC) 6Ð2 6Ð2 This day saw no upsets on the women’s side; indeed, so many had been the earlier upsets that not one seeded singles player faced a seed in the third round. This is perhaps the most interesting match simply because it showed that Maria Sharapova still has some hype to live up to. August 31 — U. S. Open 4R: Paola Suarez (24) def. Elena Likhovtseva 6–2 3–6 7–5 U. S. Open 3R DOUBLES: Bovina/Stubbs (5) def. Petrova/Pierce (10) 6Ð1 7Ð6(7-3) Suarez hits the singles Top Twenty as Petrova falls out of the doubles Top Ten.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 227 September 1 — U. S. Open 4R: Jennifer Capriati (6) def. Elena Dementieva (11) 6–2 7–5 Due to rain, only two matches were completed, neither particularly thrilling. This one was bigger because it drops Venus Williams to (no better than) #6. September 4 — U. S. Open 4R: Francesca Schiavone (29) def. Ai Sugiyama (15) 6–7(5–7) 7–5 6–2 U. S. Open 2R DOUBLES: McShea/Musgrave def. Clijsters/Sugiyama (1) walkover That singles match took four days to complete, and Sugiyama seemed to lose something with each delay, including all six games in the final resumption; the loss means she won’t make the Top Ten. The withdrawal from doubles doesn’t matter to her ranking; she’ll still be #1. But she and Clijsters end their Slam winning streak at 13; no non-calendar Slam for them. September 5 — U. S. Open SF: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (2) def. Jennifer Capriati (6) 4Ð6 7Ð5 7Ð6(7Ð4) And so this year’s four Slams have featured two Williams/Williams finals and two all-Belgian finals (in the other semifinal, Kim Clijsters beat Lindsay Davenport easily). Hénin-Hardenne won’t have much left for the final, though, after a match generally called the year’s best.; Capriati was two points from the final eleven times. September 6 — U. S. Open F: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (2) def. Kim Clijsters (1) 7–5 6–1 It was just plain ugly; Clijsters once again wasn’t up to the task, and so Hénin-Hardenne — despite a three hour match the night before, despite needing IV fluids that night, despite not enough sleep — wins her second Slam of 2003 September 7 — U. S. Open F DOUBLES: Ruano Pascual/Suarez (2) def. Kuznetsova/Navratilova (4) 6Ð2 6Ð3 It was short and not very pretty, but it ends a year-long Slam drought for Ruano Pascual and Suarez September 8 — Bali Qualifying F DOUBLES: Yayuk Basuki/Diana Julianto (WC) def. Ivana Abramovic/Seiko Okamoto (1) 1Ð6 6Ð4 6Ð3 It doesn’t mean anything, but it’s interesting to see Basuki again, isn’t it? (Though Basuki/Julianto would lose badly the next day against no one in particular.) September 9 — Bali 1R: Tathiana Garbin def. Jelena Dokic (4) 7–5 6–3 So much for the idea that Dokic was getting things together. September 10 — Bali 2R: Chanda Rubin (1) def. Maria Sanchez Lorenzo 6–2 6–2 A very dull day sees Chanda Rubin get back in form after several rather bad weeks. September 11 — Bali 2R: Maria Vento-Kabchi def. Conchita Martinez (3) 6–1 6–3 At the rate she’s going, Vento-Kabchi will be back in the Top Fifty by year-end. (Later footnote: Believe it; she ended 2003 ranked #44, having started they year at #172.) September 12 — Bali QF: Saori Obata def. Angelique Widjaja 4–6 7–5 6–1 Let’s hope this isn’t another choker developing: Widjaja served for the match at 5–4 in the second. September 13 — Bali F DOUBLES: Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja (1) def. Loit/Pratt (2) 7–5 6–2 It was a dull day in singles, with the top two seeds in the final — but one of the losing semifinalists was Vento-Kabchi, and she made up for it with her third career doubles title (it’s #2 for Widjaja) September 14 — Bali F: Elena Dementieva (2) def. Chanda Rubin (1) 6–2 6–1 Dementieva finally wins a title without facing Lindsay Davenport. She also moves up to #8. September 15 — Shanghai 1R: Ashley Harkleroad def. Cara Black (8) 6–1 6–4 It wasn’t even an upset, actually; Harkleroad came in ranked #51 and Black #56. But it’s probably the match everyone watched on a day when nothing whatsoever happened.... September 16 — Shanghai 1R DOUBLES: J. Lee/Morariu def. Mandula/Schett (3) 7Ð6(7Ð4) 6Ð7(8Ð10) 6Ð3 It’s not much of an upset, the way Schett has been playing lately, but it’s nice to see Morariu win. September 17 — Shanghai 2R: Dinara Safina def. Jelena Dokic (5) 6–1 6–4 And so Dokic finally falls out of the Top 25.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 228 September 18 — Shanghai 2R: Maria Sharapova def. Maria Sanchez Lorenzo 4–6 6–3 6–4 Sharapova hits the Top 50 for the first time. September 19 — Shanghai QF: Ai Sugiyama (3) def. Dinara Safina 6–4 7–6(9–7) One more win and Sugiyama is Top Ten. (But she wouldn’t get it; she lost to Elena Dementieva in three sets in the semifinal) September 20 — Shanghai SF DOUBLES: Loit/Pratt def. Gagliardi/Rubin (4) 3–6 6–4 6–3 For the second straight week, Loit/Pratt are in a final (which they would go on to win). What does this say about the future of Déchy/Loit? September 21 — Shanghai F: Elena Dementieva (1) def. Chanda Rubin (2) 6–3 7–6(8–6) Dementieva is up to eight straight wins — the longest streak of her career. September 22 — Leipzig 1R: Daniela Hantuchova (5) def. Svetlana Kuznetsova 7–5 6–2 Hantuchova finally posts a good win — and Kuznetsova falls out of the Top 30. September 23 — Leipzig 1R: Els Callens (Q) def. Meghann Shaughnessy (7) 7–6(7–4) 7–6(7–4) Callens puts herself firmly back in the Top 100, but Shaughnessy will fall to #19 or lower. September 24 — Leipzig 2R: Sandra Kleinova (Q) def. Magdalena Maleeva (4) 6–4 6–4 Maleeva still may make the Top Ten this week — but her odds of staying there don’t look good. September 25 — Leipzig 2R: Els Callens (Q) def. Alexandra Stevenson 6–4 4–6 6–2 Callens had watched her ranking fall all the way to #103. This will help a lot. September 26 — Leipzig QF: AnastasiaMyskina (3) def. Nadia Petrova (6) 6–7(5–7) 6–1 6–1 In a match where nerves were probably the real winner, Petrova blows her chance to make the Top 10. September 27 — Leipzig SF: Anastasia Myskina (3) def. Kim Clijsters (1) 5–7 4–4, retired Helped immensely by Kim Clijsters and her “I Can Slide on Concrete” attitude, Myskina saves her Top 10 ranking. September 28 — Leipzig F: Anastasia Myskina (3) def. Justine Hénin-Hardenne (2) 3–6 6–3 6–3 Myskina probably shouldn’t have been here, but she definitely took advantage. September 29 — Moscow 1R: Vera Zvonareva (7) def. Amanda Coetzer 4–6 6–1 6–2 Zvonareva may hit a career high, and she certainly knocks Coetzer out of the Top 20. September 30 — Moscow 1R: Dinara Safina (WC) def. Magdalena Maleeva (5) 6–4 3–6 7–5 Safina scores the best win of her career and drops Maleeva to no better than #20. October 1 — Moscow 2R: Elena Bovina def. Jennifer Capriati (1/WC) 4–6 6–4 7–6(7–3) Almost makes you wonder why Capriati came.... October 2 — Japan Open QF: Arantxa Parra def. Jill Craybas 3–6 6–4 6–2 It was a wild day in Tokyo, where only one seed (#5 Maria Sharapova) is still in the draw; #1 Ai Sugiyama was injured and #2 Tamarine Tanasugarn fell to #122 Jie Zheng. But this is probably the toughest loss; Craybas was defending champion and will end up just barely above #100. October 3 — Moscow SF DOUBLES: Myskina/Zvonareva (WC) def. Kuznetsova/Navratilova (1) 6Ð7(8Ð10) 6Ð2 6Ð4 This ends a six-match winning streak for the top seeds. October 4 — Moscow SF: Amélie Mauresmo (2) def. Elena Dementieva (3) 6–4 6–1 Had Dementieva won this, she would have been #6 in the world. As it is, her ten-match winning streak ends and she has to settle for #8 while Mauresmo is in the final trying to knock Venus Williams out of the #6 spot. October 5 — Moscow F: Anastasia Myskina (4) def. Amélie Mauresmo (2) 6–2 6–4 Myskina earns back-to-back titles and picks up her first-ever Tier I win. October 6 — Filderstadt Qualifying Final: Myriam Casanova def. Eleni Daniilidou (5) 6–3 4–6 6–4 Casanova, who has almost 160 points to defend, saves enough to ensure her Top 100 ranking. October 7 — Filderstadt 1R: Daniela Hantuchova def. Lisa Raymond (Q) 6–3 6–4 Hantuchova, with 200 points to defend, keeps her hopes of staying in the Top 15 alive.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 229 October 8 — Filderstadt 1R: Anastasia Myskina (8) def. Alexandra Stevenson 0–6 6–1 4–0, Retired Myskina wins her ninth straight match, despite admitted exhaustion, when Stevenson’s back acts up; Stevenson will fall from #30 to barely above #40. October 9 — Filderstadt 2R: Kim Clijsters (1) def. Daniela Hantuchova 6–1 6–1 Last year’s finalist Hantuchova will stay Top 15, barely, but very possibly for only one more week. October 10 — Filderstadt QF: Elena Bovina def. Lindsay Davenport (3) 6–3 6–2 Davenort evidently still isn’t right (she finally gave in and had her foot surgery five days later) — and Bovina is close to a return to the Top 25. October 11 — Filderstadt SF: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (2) def. Elena Bovina 6–2 6–4 Filderstadt SF: Kim Clijsters (1) def. Mary Pierce (WC) 7Ð6(7Ð2) 6-0 And so Clijsters and Hénin-Hardenne meet once again, with the winner to be #1. Be glad you aren’t the Clijsters psychotherapist.... October 12 — Filderstadt F: Kim Clijsters (1) def. Justine Hénin-Hardenne (2) 5–7 6–4 6–2 And so Clijsters does retain the #1 spot — at least for now. October 13 — Zurich 1R: Amy Frazier (Q) def. Conchita Martinez 4–6 6–4 6–1 Frazier, it seems, has one last comeback in her; she drops Martinez out of the Top 15. October 14 — Zurich 1R: Paola Suarez def. (8) Daniela Hantuchova 7–6(7–2) 7–5 Suarez once again works her mastery on a hard-hitting slow player. She’ll hit the Top 15 as a result; Hantuchova will fall to #16, her worst ranking this year. October 15 — Zurich 2R: Jelena Dokic def. Alexandra Stevenson 4–6 7–5 6–1 And so Stevenson falls out of the Top 40; she may fall below #50 next week. October 16 — Zurich 2R: Patty Schnyder def. Amélie Mauresmo (3) 6–2 6–2 Not only was Schnyder very impressive, but she guarantees that she will stay Top 30. And that Mauresmo, once again, will fail to pass Venus Williams to grab the #6 ranking. October 17 — Zurich QF: Jelena Dokic def. Patty Schnyder 6-0 6–3 Dokic puts herself back in the Top 20 as Schnyder falls below #25. Dokic also scores her first bagel over a year. Bigger news, though, came off-court, as Justine Hénin-Hardenne withdrew from Linz, meaning that even if she wins Zurich and gains the #1 ranking, she will lose it a week later. In addition, Lisa Raymond and Rennae Stubbs lost the first match of their reunion, losing in three to Molik/Serna. October 18 — Zurich SF: Jelena Dokic def. Kim Clijsters (1) 1–6 6–3 6–4 Dokic loudly announced her return by reaching her first final of the year, putting herself in the Top 15 — and giving Justine Hénin-Hardenne an opportunity to take the #1 ranking against someone other than Clijsters. October 19 — Zurich F: Justine Hénin-Hardenne (2) def. Jelena Dokic 6-0 6–4 Finally, after some months of waiting, Hénin-Hardenne grabs the #1 ranking — though she will lose it next week. October 20 — Luxembourg 1R: Milagros Sequera def. Katarina Srebotnik (6) 7–5 6–3 Srebotnik last week rose to #32. This may cause her to fall below #40. October 21 — Linz 1R: Jelena Dokic def. Daniela Hantuchova (5) 6-4 6–1 It won’t affect the rankings much, but it’s pretty clear who is and isn’t out of her slump. October 22 — Linz 1R: Tina Pisnik def. Alexandra Stevenson 6–2 6–3 And so Stevenson falls probably below #80, and with the fastcourt season nearly over.... October 23 — Linz 2R: Ai Sugiyama (2) def. Tina Pisnik 6-3 7–5 This may have been the dullest day in the history of women’s tennis: Seven seeds up, seven seeds through; I hardly had to update the Abstract. This match at least keeps Sugiyama’s Championships hopes alive and drops Pisnik out of the Top 30 spot she held for one week. October 24 — Linz QF: Patty Schnyder (8) def. Anastasia Myskina (1) 6–1 6–1 Schnyder returns to the Top 25 and keeps Myskina from quite clinching for the Championships

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 230 October 25 — Linz SF: Ai Sugiyama (2) def. Vera Zvonareva (3) 6-3 3–6 6–4 Linz SF: Nadia Petrova (4) def. Patty Schnyder (8) 6Ð2 6-2 The Race remains hot, with Sugiyama having the chance to pass Chanda Rubin if she wins this final (and Rubin loses). Petrova, meanwhile, has a chance at a title, and passes Zvonareva in the Race. October 26 — Linz F: Ai Sugiyama (2) def. Nadia Petrova (4) 7–5 6–4 Sugiyama wins her second title of the year, and takes a slight lead in the race for the final Championships spot. Ocrober 27 — Philadelphia 1R DOUBLES: Navratilova/Raymond (1) def. Bachman/Kloesel 6–3 6–2 No surprise, but it’s our first look at what may be next year’s U. S. Olympic team October 28 — Philadelphia 1R: Lisa Raymond def. Vera Zvonareva (6) 6–2 2–6 6–2 And so Zvonareva’s (already very faint) hopes of making the Championships end. October 29 — Philadelphia 2R: Chanda Rubin (4) def. Alexandra Stevenson 6–2 6–4 Rubin raises the Championships stakes; this moves her back ahead of Ai Sugiyama, who hasn’t yet played her opening match. Stevenson, who is suffering from pneumonia, ends the year below #80. October 30 — Philadelphia 2R: Ai Sugiyama (5) def. Tathiana Garbin 6-4 6–7(3-7) 6-3 Now Sugiyama is ahead of Rubin in the Race again. All will be settled Friday. October 31 — Philadelphia QF: Nadia Petrova (7) def. Chanda Rubin (2) 7-6(7-5) 7–5 Petrova drops Rubin out of the year-end Championships; barring further withdrawals, the list will be Hénin-Hardenne, Clijsters, Capriati, Mauresmo, Dementiava, Myskina, Venus Williams, Sugiyama. (Of course, Venus Williams did withdraw, letting Rubinin.) November 1 — Philadelphia SF: Amélie Mauresmo (2) def. Ai Sugiyama (5) 3-6 7–6(8–6) 7-5 Sugiyama had a 5Ð1 lead in the second, but lost it, and her six match winning streak, and her shot at the Top Ten. She’ll have another chance in Los Angeles, though. November 2 — Philadelphia F: Amélie Mauresmo (2) def. Anastasia Myskina (3) 5-7 6–0 6–2 Mauresmo moves up to #6 and wins her second title of the year November 3 — Pattaya City 1R: Henrieta Nagyova def. Ludmila Cervanova (5) 6–2 7–6(7–5) An actual sign of life from Nagyova? November 4 — Pattaya City 1R: Tamarine Tanasugarn (1) def. Ilke Gers (Q) 3–6 6–2 6–0 Can Tanasugarn finally win Pattaya? This wasn’t the prettiest start. November 5 — Los Angeles Championships RR: Kim Clijsters def. Elena Dementieva 6–2 6–2 Clijsters gets off to a good start in her last stand to defend the #1 ranking. November 6 — Los Angeles Championships RR: Kim Clijsters def. Chanda Rubin 6–4 6–4 Clijsters becomes the first player to qualify for the semifinal, again keeping her #1 hopes alive. November 7 — Los Angeles Championships RR: Justine Hénin-Hardenne def. Jennifer Capriati 6Ð2 6Ð1 Capriati looked like she didn’t even want to be there, but no matter; Hénin-Hardenne (who the day before thought herself almost too sick to play) won, earning her way to the semifinal and clinching the year-end #1 ranking. November 8 — Los Angeles Championships RR: Ai Sugiyama def. Justine Hénin-Hardenne 6-2 6–4 With the Belgian already having clinched a semifinal spot, perhaps she lost some intensity. The loss doesn’t hurt her — but it gives Sugiyama her best-ever win, and puts her in the Top Ten, with Venus Williams falling to #11. November 9 — Pattaya City F: Henrieta Nagyova def. Lubomira Kurhajcova 6–4 6-1 Nagyova breaks her three-year title drought and puts herself back in the Top 100.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 231 November 10 — Los Angeles Championships F: Kim Clijsters def. Amélie Mauresmo 6–2 6-0 It wasn’t much of a final, but Mauresmo reaches a year-end ranking of #4. Clijsters ends the year at #2, but wins her second straight Championships. Though she blew the chance to win both singles and doubles; she and Ai Sugiyama fell to Ruano Pascual and Suarez, letting the latter two earn the year- end #2 and #1 rankings for the second straight year — a rather amazing result, given their complete lack of indoor previous indoor titles.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 232 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 Marti Maure Myski Pierce Rubin Sugiy Seles SWill VWill Sydney 1/93 1/03 1/99 3/97 1/00 1/96 Australian 2/01 1/00 3/97 1/95 4/91 1/03 Pan Pacific 3/98 4/97 Paris 1/97 1/01 1/98 2/99 1/02 Antwerp 2/02 Dubai 1/03 1/01 1/02 1/02 Scottsdale 1/01 1/03 1/02 Indian Wel 1/03 2/97 1/98 1/92 2/99 Miami 2/97 2/90 2/02 3/98 Charleston 1/01 1/03 2/97 2/94 1/00 Amelia Isl 1/97 1/03 1/95 1/01 1/98 2/99 1/02 Warsaw 1/03 Berlin 2/02 1/99 2/98 1/01 1/90 Rome 1/03 1/98 4/93 1/97 2/90 1/02 1/99 Roland G 1/01 1/03 1/00 3/90 1/02 Eastbourne 1/01 2/02 1/96 Wimbledon 1/99 1/97 1/94 2/02 2/00 Stanford 2/01 2/98 2/96 2/90 2/00 San Diego 2/91 1/98 1/03 2/97 1/95 3/00 Los Angeles 1/03 3/96 1/95 1/02 3/90 2/99 Canadian O 1/91 1/03 2/99 1/02 4/95 1/01 New Haven 1/03 1/97 4/99 U.S. Open 1/98 1/03 1/97 2/91 2/99 2/00 Shanghai 1/03 Leipzig 2/00 1/03 1/02 Moscow 1/00 1/03 1/98 Filderstadt 2/02 1/01 4/96 1/93 Zurich 3/97 1/03 1/00 1/99 Linz 2/00 1/02 1/99 1/03 Philadelphia 2/99 1/97 1/93 1/03 1/91 Champions 2/02 1/99 2/98 3/90 1/01 Different 78182920982922151312 events won Total Tier 9/9 12/13 28/30 2/2 10/10 36/38 14/20 8/9 2/3 9/10 3/3 2/2 32/47 19/22 22/24 II+ wins (active/total) Past Tier IIs: Clijsters — Hamburg (1/02); Davenport — Chicago (1/97), Princess Cup (1/99); Hingis — Hamburg (2/98); Mauresmo — Nice (1/01); Martinez — Barcelona (1/91), Hamburg (1/95), Houston (1/93), Stratton Mountain (2/93), Tampa (1/ 89); Myskina — Bahia (1/02); 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); V. Williams — Hamburg (2/99). N.B.: Rubin won Linz 1997, Martinez Paris 1990; neither was then Tier II. WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 233 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, Clijsters, Davenport, Liezel Huber, Kuznetsova, Likhovtseva, Raymond, Ruano Pascual, Stubbs, Suarez, and Sugiyama — plus Serena Williams as the other active player with the Career Slam (Venus has an exactly identical record except that she didn’t win Leipzig 2002), Anna Kournikova as a past #1 with two Slams who is still active, and Hingis and Sanchez-Vicario as the 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 eight titles at these 31 events — but she has two Wimbledons and two Australian Opens, so she has only six distinct titles. The next line, “To 2000,” lists each player’s titles at these Tier II+ events in the years leading up to 2000 (inclusive), and the number after the / is her total Tier II+ titles whether the events still exist or not. We then show her total for the 2001, 2002, 2003, and the grand total. Tournament Black Clijste Daven Hingi LHub Kourn Kuzne Likho Raym Ruano Sanch Stubb Suare Sugiy SWill Sydney 1/03 2/95 1/98 1/01 1/99 1/02 3/91 1/02 3/99 Australian O 4/97 2/99 1/00 3/92 1/00 2/01 Pan Pacific 2/97 2/98 2/01 1/92 3/01 Paris 1/98 Antwerp 1/03 1/03 Dubai 1/03 Scottsdale 1/03 2/01 2/01 1/03 Indian Wells 6/94 1/99 1/99 4/94 2/93 1/01 Miami 2/98 1/03 1/02 5/92 1/02 1/00 Charleston 1/97 1/99 2/01 2/00 4/90 2/01 2/00 Amelia Islan 2/97 1/03 6/90 Warsaw 1/03 Berlin 2/97 1/03 1/00 1/03 Rome 1/01 1/99 1/99 1/03 1/01 1/00 2/98 2/93 1/00 2/98 Roland Gar 1/03 1/96 2/98 2/01 2/01 1/03 1/99 Eastbourne 1/03 1/99 1/99 3/01 2/95 2/01 1/00 Wimbledon 1/03 1/99 2/96 1/01 1/95 1/01 1/03 2/00 Stanford 1/03 5/94 1/97 2/02 1/94 1/02 San Diego 1/01 1/03 2/98 1/97 1/01 1/00 2/94 1/00 1/03 Los Angeles 1/02 1/96 1/98 2/92 1/03 Canadian O 2/98 1/03 1/02 2/94 1/92 1/02 New Haven 1/01 1/01 1/99 1/03 1/02 1/99 1/03 1/00 U.S. Open 1/97 1/98 1/01 2/02 2/93 1/01 2/02 1/00 1/99 Shanghai Leipzig 1/97 1/03 2/98 1/00 1/98 1/02 Moscow 1/01 1/01 1/99 1/97 1/99 1/00 Filderstadt 3/98 2/97 1/00 3/01 2/92 1/03 Zurich 1/03 1/01 3/96 1/00 2/99 1/97 1/99 1/03 1/98 Linz 1/03 1/03 Philadelphia 1/00 1/00 1/98 4/96 3/96 1/98 Championsh 3/96 2/990 2/99 1/01 1/03 2/92 1/01 1/03 Events won 4 7 15 22 3 10 4 7 20 8 21 21 8 16 6 To 2000 0/0 0/0 26/28 32/33 0/0 9/11 0/0 4/4 11/16 2/2 42/56 11/15 2/2 9/11 4/5 2001 3/5 0/0 2/2 1/1 0/1 2/2 0/0 4/5 9/9 1/1 1/1 7/7 1/1 1/1 1/1 2002 0/0 1/1 1/1 1/2 0/0 1/1 0/1 0/0 9/9 5/5 2/3 8/8 5/5 0/0 2/2 2003 1 7 3 — 304065—3581 Totals 4/6 7/8 32/34 35/37 3/4 12/14 4/5 8/9 35/40 13/13 45/60 29/33 13/13 18/20 8/9

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 234 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) were not Tier II events for this entire period; these winners are shown in italics Who Won What Part 1: 1998Ð2003 Tournament 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 Sydney Clijsters Hingis Hingis Mauresmo Davenport Sanchez-V Australian Open S. Williams Capriati Capriati Davenport Hingis Hingis Pan Paciﬁc Davenport Hingis Davenport Hingis Hingis Davenport Paris S. Williams V. Williams Mauresmo Tauziat S. Williams Pierce Antwerp V. Williams V. Williams Nice Mauresmo Hannover (Essen) S. Williams Novotna Schnyder Dubai Hénin-Hardenne Mauresmo Hingis Scottsdale Sugiyama S. Williams Davenport rained out Indian Wells Clijsters Hantuchova S. Williams Davenport S. Williams Hingis Miami/Key Biscay S. Williams S. Williams V. Williams Hingis V. Williams V. Williams Charleston1 Hénin-Hardenne Majoli Capriati Pierce Hingis Coetzer Amelia Island Dementieva V. Williams Mauresmo Seles Seles Pierce Warsaw Mauresmo Bovina Nagyova Torrens Valero Martinez Hamburg Clijsters V. Williams Hingis V. Williams Hingis Berlin Hénin-Hardenne Hénin Mauresmo Martinez Hingis Martinez Rome Clijsters S. Williams Dokic Seles V. Williams Hingis Roland Garros Hénin-Hardenne S. Williams Capriati Pierce Graf Sanchez-V Eastbourne Rubin Rubin Davenport Halard-D Zvereva Novotna Wimbledon S. Williams S. Williams V. Williams V. Williams Davenport Novotna Stanford Clijsters V. Williams Clijsters V. Williams Davenport Davenport San Diego Hénin-Hardenne V. Williams V. Williams V. Williams Hingis Davenport Los Angeles Clijsters Rubin Davenport S. Williams S. Williams Davenport Canadian Open Hénin-Hardenne Mauresmo S. Williams Hingis Hingis Seles New Haven2 Capriati V. Williams V. Williams V. Williams V. Williams Graf U.S. Open Hénin-Hardenne S. Williams V. Williams V. Williams S. Williams Davenport Bahia Myskina Seles Shanghai Dementieva Smashnova Seles Shaughnessy Princess Cup S. Williams Dokic S. Williams Davenport Seles Leipzig Myskina S. Williams Clijsters Clijsters Tauziat Graf Moscow Myskina Maleeva Dokic Hingis Tauziat Pierce Filderstadt Clijsters Clijsters Davenport Hingis Hingis Testud Zurich Hénin-Hardenne Schnyder Davenport Hingis V. Williams Davenport Linz Sugiyama Hénin Davenport Davenport Pierce Novotna Philadelphia Mauresmo Davenport Davenport Graf Championships Clijsters Clijsters S. Williams Hingis Davenport Hingis 1. Hilton Head until 2001 2. Tournament held in Atlanta in 1997

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 235 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 Zurich 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 236 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 Martinez 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 Dallas 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 Zurich 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 237 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 Zurich 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 238 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 Zurich 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 239 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. Players in bold won at least one title in 2002 Singles Doubles Player Titles Player Titles Seles* ...... 53 Navratilova* ...... 173 [Hingis*¤...... 40] Stubbs* ...... 42 Davenport*...... 37† Raymond* ...... 42 Martinez*...... 32 [Hingis*¤ ...... 36] V. Williams* ...... 27† Davenport* ...... 35 S. Williams* ...... 22† Suarez* ...... 30 Clijsters...... 19 Sugiyama*...... 28 Pierce*...... 15 Ruano Pascual* ...... 23 Hénin-Hardenne* ...... 14 Tauziat‡ ...... 25 Capriati* ...... 13† Likhovtseva ...... 17 Maleeva ...... 10 Kournikova* ...... 16 Mauresmo ...... 10 Arendt...... 16 Tarabini...... 15 Husarova...... 15 Black ...... 12 Fusai** ...... 12 Clijsters* ...... 11 Morariu*...... 11 Pierce* ...... 10 Rubin* ...... 10 S. Williams* ...... 10 * Titles include at least one Slam † Excludes Olympics, Grand Slam Cup § Allegedly retired. We’ll see. ‡ Retired, but played three events in 2003 ** Probably retired, since she hasn’t been adding events lately, but no official WTA announcement

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 240 Detailed Analysis — Career Tournaments for Davenport, Hingis, Seles, Williams It’s one thing to win tournaments. It’s another to win a “spectrum” of tournaments — on all surfaces, in all countries. The following list shows all the major events currently played on the tour, and lists the years in which the top players won each. Tournament Tier Won by Davenport Won by Hingis Won by Seles By S. Williams By V. Williams Sydney II 1999 1997, 2001, 2002 1996 Australian Opn Slam 2000 1997, 1998, 1999 1991Ð93, 1996 2003 Pan Paciﬁc I 1998, 2001, 2003 1997, ’99, ’00, ’02 Paris II 1997 1999, 2003 2002 Antwerp II 2002, 2003 Dubai II 2001 Scottsdale II 2001 2002 Indian Wells I 1997, 2000 1998 1992 1999, 2001 Miami I 1997, 2000 1990, 1991 2002, 2003 1998, 1999, 2001 Amelia Island II 1997 1999, 2000 2002 Warsaw II Hilton Head I 1997, 1999 Hamburg II 1998, 2000 1999, 2001 Berlin I 1999 1990 Rome I 1998 1990 2002 1999 Roland Garros Slam 1990Ð92 2002 Eastbourne II 2001 1996 Wimbledon Slam 1999 1997 2002, 2003 2000, 2001 Stanford II 1998, 1999 1996, 1997 1990, 1992 2000, 2002 San Diego II 1998 1997, 1999 2000, 2001, 2002 Los Angeles II 1996, 1998, 2001 1990, 1991, 1997 1999, 2000 Canadian Open I 1999, 2000 1995Ð1998 2001 New Haven II 1997 1990 1999, ’00, ’01, ’02 U.S. Open Slam 1998 1997 1991, 1992 1999, 2002 2000, 2001 Shanghai II Filderstadt II 2001 1996–97, ’99, ’00 Zurich I 1997, 1998, 2001 2000 1999 Linz II 2000, 2001 Moscow I 2000 Leipzig II 2002 Philadelphia II 1999, 2000 1997 1991 Yr-end Champ Chmp 1999 1998, 2000 1990Ð92 2001 Total distinct events 18 21 16 13 12 Events won 2+ times 71196 8 Notes: Events which are no longer played are not included in this list. Davenport also won Chicago (II) in 1997; this was the last year that event was played; she also won the discontinued Princess Cup in 1999. The Atlanta event was won by Davenport in 1997; it moved to New Haven in 1998. She has won several Tier III events: Lucerne 1993, Brisbane 1994, Lucerne 1994, Strasbourg 1995, Oklahoma City 1997, Madrid 1999. Hingis won Hamburg (discontinued) twice (1998, 2000), plus two Tier III titles (’s-Hertogenbosch 2000; Doha 2001). Venus Williams Hamburg in 1999 and 2001; she also wonTier III events at Oklahoma City in 1998, 1999 and Gold Coast in 2002. Monica Seles won the Princess Cup (discontinued) in 1991, 1992, 1996, 1997, 1998; Bahia (discontinued) in 2001; Chicago (discontinued) in 1993; Essen (discontinued), Houston (discontinued), and Barcelona (discontinued) in 1992; Houston (discontinued), Milan (discontinued), and Tampa (discontinued) in 1991; and Houston (discontinued) in 1989. Seles won the U. S. Hardcourts (later Atlanta, later New Haven) in 1990 when it was in San Antonio. Seles has won many small events in recent years: In 2001, Oklahoma City (III), Japan Open (III), and Shanghai (IV); in 2002, Doha (III) and Madrid (III); in 2002, she added Doha (III) and Madrid (III). Expired titles for Serena Williams are Hannover 2000 (the last year it was played) and the Princess Cup 2000, 2002 (the latter its ﬁnal year on the calendar).

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 241 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 moneygap 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. Note: Here as elsewhere, events which do not follow WTA admission rules (Olympics, 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) Kim Clijsters Career Titles: Hardcourt: 6; Clay: 2; Grass: 1; Indoor: 10. Total: 10 By Tier: Slams: 0; Championships: 2; Tier I: 2; Tier II: 9; 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)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 242 Lindsay Davenport Career Titles: Hardcourt: 16; Clay: 6; Grass: 2; Indoor: 13. Total: 37 By Tier: Slams: 3; Championships: 1; Tier I: 8; Tier II: 18; Tier III: 7; 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), Zurich (I), Chicago (II) 1998 Stanford (II), San Diego (II), Pan Pacific (I), Zurich (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), Zurich (I), Linz (II) 2002 2003 Pan Pacific (I) 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

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 243 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 Year Hardcourt Clay Grass Indoors 1986 Mahwah (II) Hilton Head (I), Amelia Pan Pacific (I), Brighton (I), Island (I), Indianapolis (I), Zurich (II) Berlin (II) 1987 Boca Raton (I), Lipton (I), Los Hilton Head (I), Amelia Zurich (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), Zurich (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) Zurich (II), Brighton (II), New (II) England (II) 1991 San Antonio (II) Hamburg (II), Berlin (I) Wimbledon Leipzig (II), Zurich (II), (Slam) Brighton (II) 1992 Boca Raton (I) Hamburg (II), Berlin (I) Wimbledon Leipzig (II), Zurich (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: 6; Clay: 5; Grass: 1; Indoor: 2. Total: 14 By Tier: Slams: 2; Championships: 0; Tier I: 5; Tier II: 3; 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 Charleston (I), Berlin (I), Zurich (I) Open (I), U. S. Open (Slam) Roland Garros (Slam)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 244 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), Zurich (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

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 245 Amélie Mauresmo Career Titles: Hardcourt: 4; Clay: 3; Grass: 0; Indoor: 3. Total: 10 By Tier: Slams: 0; Championships: 0; Tier I: 2; Tier II: 7; 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) Anastasia Myskina Career Titles: Hardcourt: 2; Clay: 2; Grass: 0; Indoor: 2. Total: 6 By Tier: Slams: 0; Championships: 0; Tier I: 1; Tier II: 2; 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) 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) Zurich (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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 246 Mary Pierce Career Titles: Hardcourt: 2; Clay: 7; Grass: 0; Indoor: 6. Total: 15 By Tier: Slams: 2; Championships: 0; Tier I: 3; Tier II: 5; Tier III: 2; 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 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 247 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 248 Serena Williams Career Titles: Hardcourt: 13; Clay: 2; Grass: 2; Indoor: 5. Total: 22 By Tier: Slams: 6; Championships: 1; Tier I: 6; Tier II: 9; 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) Venus Williams Career Titles: Hardcourt: 15; Clay: 4; Grass: 2; Indoor: 6. Total: 27 By Tier: Slams: 4; Championships: 0; Tier I: 5; Tier II: 15; 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), Zurich (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)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 249 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) Zurich (I/AS) 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), Zurich (I/LR) 2002 Filderstadt (II/LR) 2003 Indian Wells (I/LR) Amelia Island (II/ Eastbourne (II/ LR) LR) 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 250 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 251 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/ Zurich (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), Zurich (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), Zurich (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), Zurich (I/MH), Philadelphia (II/MH), Chase (Champ/MH) 2001 Sydney (II/BS) Moscow (I/MH) 2002 Australian Open (Slam/ MH), Shanghai (IV/JL) 2003 Partners: BS=Barbara Schett, JHD=Julie Halard-Decugis, JL=Janet Lee, MH=Martina Hingis, MS=Monica Seles, NZ=Natasha Zvereva

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 252 Larisa (Savchenko) Neiland Career Titles: Hardcourt: 21; Clay: 12; Grass: 11; Indoor: 21. Total: 65 By Tier: Slams: 2; Championships: 0; Tier I: 10; Tier II: 28; Tier III: 18; 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) Leipzig (II/MP) (II/ASV) 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 253 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/ Zurich (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), Zurich 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 254 Lisa Raymond Career Titles: Hardcourt: 16; Clay: 5; Grass: 4; Indoor: 17. Total: 42 By Tier: Slams: 3; Championships: 1; Tier I: 11; Tier II: 23; Tier III: 4; 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), Zurich (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), Zurich (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) Partners: CB=Cara Black, CR=Chanda Rubin, LD=Lindsay Davenport, MN=Martina Navratilova, RS=Rennae Stubbbs Virginia Ruano Pascual Career Titles: Hardcourt: 7; Clay: 15; Grass: 0; Indoor: 1. Total: 23 By Tier: Slams: 4; Championships: 1; Tier I: 6; Tier II: 2; Tier III: 6; 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) Partners: CB=Cara Black, EC=Els Callens, MS=Magui Serna, PS=Paola Suarez

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 255 Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario Career Titles: Hardcourt: 25; Clay: 29; Grass: 3; Indoor: 10. Total: 67 By Tier: Slams: 6; Championships: 2; Tier I: 16; Tier II: 35; Tier III: 6; Tier IV: 2;Tier V: 0 Partners with whom has won titles: 23 ¥ 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) Zurich (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) Partners: AGS=Anne-Gaëlle Sidot, 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 256 Rennae Stubbs Career Titles: Hardcourt: 14; Clay: 7; Grass: 5; Indoor: 16. Total: 42 By Tier: Slams: 3; Championships: 1; Tier I: 11; Tier II: 18; 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), Zurich (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/ (Champ/LR) 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) Partners: EB=Elena Bovina, HS=Helena Sukova, LM=Lori McNeil, LN=Larisa Neiland, LR=Lisa Raymond, MB=Manon Bollegraf, MP=Mary Pierce, SG=Steffi Graf Paola Suarez Career Titles: Hardcourt: 6; Clay: 23; Grass: 0; Indoor: 1. Total: 30 By Tier: Slams: 4; Championships: 1; Tier I: 6; Tier II: 2; Tier III: 9; 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) Partners: JH=Janette Husarova, LM=Laura Montalvo, PT=Patricia Tarabini, VRP=Virginia Ruano Pascual

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 257 Ai Sugiyama Career Titles: Hardcourt: 16; Clay: 2; Grass: 2; Indoor: 8. Total: 28 By Tier: Slams: 3; Championships: 0; Tier I: 4; Tier II: 13; Tier III: 7; 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), Zurich San Diego (II/KC) KC) KC) (I/KC), Linz (II/LH) Partners: 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

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 258 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) Zurich (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), Zurich (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) Zurich (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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 259 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), Zurich (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) 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), Zurich (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) Partners: SW=Serena Williams

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 260 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) Zurich (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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 261 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)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 262 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/Suarez Raymond/Stubbs Raymond/Stubbs 2002 Hingis/Kournikova Ruano Pascual/Suarez Williams/Williams Ruano Pascual/Suarez 2003 Williams/Williams Clijsters/Sugiyama Clijsters/Sugiyama Ruano Pascual/Suarez

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

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 263 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

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 264 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 265 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 266 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 267 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 268 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 269 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 270 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 271 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 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 Fiorella Bonicelli Martina Navratilova 18 Natasha Zvereva Delina Boshoff* 11 Margaret Court 17 Gigi Fernandez Maria Bueno 9Monica Seles 12 Jana Novotna Judy Chaloner* 8 Billie Jean King 10 Margaret Court Dianne Evers* 7 Evonne Goolagong Cawley Billie Jean King Patty Fendick 6 Serena Williams 9Martina Hingis Steffi Graf* 5Martina Hingis Helena Sukova Julie Halard-Decugis 4 Hana Mandlikova 7 Rosie Casals Darlene Hard Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario 6 Francoise Durr Tanya Harford Venus Williams Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario Kerry Harris 3 Jennifer Capriati Betty Stove Mima Jausovic* Lindsay Davenport Serena Williams Anne Kiyomura* Virginia Wade Venus Williams Ilana Kloss* 2 Tracy Austin 5 Judy Tegart Dalton Mirjana Lucic Justine Hénin-Hardenne Evonne Goolagong Cawley Hana Mandlikova Mary Pierce Kathy Jordan Regina Mariskova* 1 Sue Barker Anne Smith Corina Morariu Mima Jausovec 4 Helen Gourlay Cawley Olga Morozova Anne Jones Virginia Ruano Pascual Mary Pierce Barbara Jordan Paola Suarez Kerry Melville Reid Iva Majoli Wendy Turnbull Candy Reynolds Conchita Martinez Virginia Wade Chanda Rubin Jana Novotna 3 Lindsay Davenport JoAnne Russell Chris O’Neil Chris Evert Virginia Ruzici* Nancy Richey Gail Chanfreau Lovera Gabriela Sabatini* Kerry Melville Reid Peggy Michel Kazuko Sawamatsu* Virginia Ruzici Lisa Raymond Elizabeth Smylie Gabriella Sabatini Rennae Stubbs Pam Teeguarden* Ai Sugiyama Andrea Temesvari 2 Kim Clijsters Renata Tomanova Rosalyn Fairbank Robin White Mary Joe Fernandez Ann Haydon Jones * Part of a “One Slam Wonder” Claudia Kohde-Kilsch team, i.e. one where each won Anna Kournikova only one doubles Slam Betsy Nagelsen Larisa Savchenko Neiland

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 272 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.) 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), Suarez (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), Suarez (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), Suarez (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) 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)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 273 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) 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)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 274 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)

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 2003 Clijsters (9) Hénin-Hardenne (8) Myskina (4),1 Serena Williams (4) 2002 S. Williams (8) V. Williams (7) Clijsters (4), Smashnova (4)2 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)3 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 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 2. 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. 3. Like Smashnova 2002, Schnyder had mostly small titles: four of her ﬁve were Tier III or lower.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 275 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 4 Lindsay Davenport 1997, 1998, 1999, 2001 4Martina Hingis 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000 4Monica Seles 1990, 1991, 1992, 1996 4Virginia Wade 1971, 1973, 1974, 1975 4Venus Williams 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 3Tracy Austin 1979, 1980, 1981 3Margaret Court 1971, 1972, 1973 2 Hana Mandlikova 1980, 1984 2 Conchita Martinez 1993, 1995 2 Gabriela Sabatini 1991, 1992 1 Kim Clijsters 2003 1 Francoise Durr 1971 1 Justine Hénin-Hardenne 2003 1Manuela Maleeva-Fragniere 1984 1 Nancy Richey 1972 1Patty Schnyder 1998 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 276 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 (Zurich) 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 277 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/Scultz-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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 278 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 (Zurich) 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 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 Zurich 1994, Moscow 2002 Martinez 1994 Rome 1993, etc.; Wim 1994 San Diego 1995 Philadelphia 1993 Hilton Head 1994, etc.; Berlin 1998, etc. 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. Zurich 1999

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 279 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 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, Zurich 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: Zurich 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, green clay, and carpet; Lindsay Davenport lacks green and red clay; Monica Seles lacks grass and indoor hardcourt.

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

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 280 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 1999, 2000 1997 #5-2003; #6-1994 Dementieva #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 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 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 2003 #6-2002 Morozova #7-1975

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 281 Myskina #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 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 Williams, V. 2002 1999, 2000, 2001 #5-1998 Zvereva #7-1988

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 282 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 2 2 1 1 1 7 Dementieva 11 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 3 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 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 2 Morozova 11 Myskina 11 Navratilova 73531 120 Novotna 1 2 1 1 1 6 Pierce 3 3 6 Potter 11 Reid 11 Richey Gunter 11 Sabatini 31212 9 Sanchez-Vicari 3122 1 9

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 283 Schett 11 Seles 2 1(2) 1131110(11) 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 5 Williams, V. 1 3 1 5 Zvereva 11

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 284 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 30T Garrison[-Jackson] 7 2Evert 180 30T Hanika 7 3 Graf 163 30T Kohde-Kilsch 7 4 Seles 78 33T Balestrat 6 5Davenport 71 33T Coetzer 6 6 Hingis 70 33T Date 6 7 Sanchez-Vicario 62 36 Stove 5 8 Sabatini 45 37 Majoli 4 9 Austin 41 38T Casals 3 10 Williams, V. 40 38T Court 3 11T Goolagong 38 38T Durie 3 11T Mandlikova 38 38T Maleeva, K 3 13T Martinez, C. 37 38T Maleeva, Magdalena 3 13T Novotna 37 43T Bunge 2 15T Shriver 36 43T Huber 2 15T Williams, S 36 43T Morozova 2 17 King 35 43T Myskina 2 18 Capriati 29 43T Tauziat 2 19 Wade 25 43T Zvereva 2 20 Jaeger 24 49T Dementieva 1 21T Clijsters 22 49T Dokic 1 21T Hénin 22 49T Hantuchova 1 23 Pierce 18 49T Jausovec 1 24 Turnbull 15 49T Kournikova 1 25 Fernandez, M 13 49T Potter 1 26T Maleeva[-Fragniere] 10 49T Reid 1 26T Sukova 10 49T Richey Gunter 1 28 Mauresmo 9 49T Schett 1 29 Barker 8 49T Spirlea 1

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 285 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 Martinez, Conchita 8 Shriver 8 Capriati 7 Davenport 7 Mandlikova 7 Turnbull 7 Hingis 6 Novotna 6 Pierce 6 Austin 5 Fernandez, Mary Joe 5 Goolagong 5 King 5 Maleeva[-Fragniere], Manuela 5 Sukova 5 Wade 5 Williams, Serena 5 Williams, Venus 5

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 286 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 9Novotna (4), Rubin (2), Neiland (1), Schultz-McCarthy (1), Sanchez-Vicario Spirlea (1) 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)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 287 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) 5Mercedes 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) 5Martina 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 9Martina Navratilova Shriver (20), King (3), Evert (2), A. Smith (1), G. Fernandez (1) Mandlikova (1), Nagelson (1), Stove (1), Temesvari (1) 6Martina 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) 4Margaret 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 ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 288 I Came, I Played.... The following is a complete list of every player to play a WTA Main Draw match in 2002. All told, 287 players had at least one match of main draw experience (compared to 301 last year, the decline probably being due to the reduced number of tournaments). The list shows the players and the number of WTA main draws they played (note that most of these players played additional Challengers or qualifying events). Ivana Abramovic (4), Lucie Ahl (3), Akgul Amanmuradova (1), Maret Ani (2), Maki Arai (1), Greta Arn (2), Sofia Arvidsson (3), Shinobu Asagoe (15), Teryn Ashley (3), Lubomira Bacheva (1), Angelika Bachmann (1), Ally Baker (1), Leanne Baker (1), Elena Baltacha (3), Sybille Bammer (2), Olga Barababschikova (2), Anca Barna (25), Adriana Barna (1), Marion Bartoli (21), Daja Bedanova (15), Celine Beigbeder (2), Severine Beltrame (1), Iveta Benesova (19), Yulia Beygelzimer (4), Bea Bielik (3), Eva Birnerova (3), Cara Black (25), Olga Blahotova (1), Alyona Bondarenko (2), Katarina Bondarenko (2), Kristie Boogert (1), Elena Bovina (22), Kristina Brandi (1), Sandra Cacic (2), Els Callens (19), Maria Elena Camerin (8), Jennifer Capriati (18), Ansley Cargill (9), Myriam Casanova (16), Catalino Castano (3), Ludmilla Cervanova (14), Denisa Chladkova (19), Yoon Jeong Cho (18), Elke Clijsters (3), Kim Clijsters (21), Tanner Cochran (1), Amanda Coetzer (20), Stephanie Cohen-Aloro (15), Jill Craybas (22), Melinda Czink (3), Eleni Daniilidou (25), Lindsay Davenport (16), Rossana Neffa-de los Rios (15), Nathalie Déchy (19), Casey Dellacqua (1), Elena Dementieva (27), Mariana Diaz-Oliva (4), Petra Dizdar (1), Jelena Dokic (30), Marta Domachowska (3), Lourdes Dominguez Lino (1), Evie Dominikovic (9), Vera Douchevina (4), Ruxandra Dragomir (Ilie) (2), Maureen Drake (8), Gisella Dulko (7), Amandine Dulon (1), Eva Dyrberg (1), Romy Farah (1), Silvia Farina Elia (26), Evelyn Fauth (2), Yuliana Fedak (2), Clarisa Fernandez (20), Eva Fislova (7), Kirsten Flipkens (2), Stephanie Foretz (15), Amy Frazier (13), Ryoko Fuda (1), Rika Fujiwara (1), Emmanuelle Gagliardi (23), Jarmila Gajdosova (1), Edina Gallovits (1), Tathiana Garbin (17), Paula Garcia (2), Stephanie Gehrlein (2), Ilke Gers (1), Tatiana Golovin (4), Maria Goloviznina (2), Amanda Grahame (1), Rita Grande (26), Laura Granville (23), Anna-Lena Grönefeld (6), Zsofia Gubacsi (2), Carly Gullickson (4), Natalia Gussoni (1), Daniela Hantuchova (23), Ashley Harkleroad (14), Angela Haynes (5), Justine Hénin-Hardenne (18), Vanessa Henke (1), Jana Hlavackova (1), Jennifer Hopkins (2), Stanislava Hrozenska (2), Janette Husarova (16), Marissa Irvin (11), Ivanna Isroilova (1), Jamea Jackson (1), Amanda Janes (1), Jelena Jankovic (9), Mi-Ra Jeon (2), Sonya Jeyaseelan (1), Alina Jidkova (13), Darija Jurak (1), Olga Kalyuzhnaya (1), Jana Kandarr (1), Aniko Kapros (5), Anne Keothavong (2), Jin-Hee Kim (1), Maria Kirilenko (5), Jessica Kirkland (1), Sandra Kleinova (7), Sandra Klemenschits (1), Beier Ko (1), Leslie Koffi (1), Jelena Kostanic (20), Klara Koukalova (19), Evgenia Kulikovskaya (12), Anna Kournikova (5), Michaella Krajicek (1), Lina Krasnoroutskaya (19), Anne Kremer (2), Joannette Kruger (5), Lubomira Kurhajcova (8), Rita Kuti Kis (3), Viktoriya Kutuzova (1), Svetlana Kuznetsova (16), Emma Laine (1), Bianka Lamade (2), Gabriela Lastra (1), Anais Laurendon (1), Lindsay Lee- Waters (6), Janet Lee (3), Sophie Lefevre (1), Gala Leon Garcia (9), Ting Li (1), Kelly Liggan (1), Elena Likhovtseva (26), Ivana Lisjak (1), Amber Liu (2), Nuria Llagostera Vives (2), Theresa Logar (1), Emilie Loit (24), Mirjana Lucic (2), Iva Majoli (15), Magdalena Maleeva (22), Manisha Malhotra (1), Petra Mandula (17), Melanie Marois (3), Katalin Marosi (5), Marta Marrero (13), Conchita Martinez (21), Conchita Martinez Granados (13), Maja Matevzic (19), Bethanie Mattek (5), Amélie Mauresmo (17), Rachel McQuillan (1), Anabel Medina Garrigues (12), Ana Lucia Migliarini de Leon (1), Marie-Gaianeh Mikaelian (19), Sania Mirza (1), Alicia Molik (17), Corina Morariu (6), Akiko Morigami (14), Bahia Mouhtassine (2), Martina Müller (11), Anastasia Myskina (24), Henrieta Nagyova (18), Virag Nemeth (1), Seda Noorlander (1), Jane O’Donoghue (2), Saori Obata (17), Tzipora Obziler (3), Seiko Okamoto (1), Zuzana Ondraskova (7), Diana Ospina (1), Lilia Osterloh (2), Maika Ozaki (1), Tatiana Panova (13), Arantxa Parra (11), Marie-Eve Pelletier (4), Shuai Peng (2), Flavia Pennetta (20), Tatiana Perebiynis (10), Shenay Perry (4), Nadia Petrova (20), Virginie Pichet (1), Frederica Piedade (1), Mary Pierce (17), Camille Pin (2), Tina Pisnik (27), Anna Smashnova-Pistolesi (23), Tatiana Poutchek (11), Wynne Prakusya (6), Nicole Pratt (23), Libuse Prusova (4), Julie Pullin (1), Dally Randriantefy (10), Lisa Raymond (19), Virginie Razzano (20), Samantha Reeves (10), Barbara Rittner (14), Shadisha Robinson (1), Anastassia Rodionova (8), Angelika Roesch (15), Virginia Ruano Pascual (18), Chanda Rubin (21), Miho Saeki (2), Dinara Safina (16), Joanna Sakowicz (2), Maria Emelia Salerni (6), Maria Antonia Sanchez Lorenzo (18), Mara Santangelo (2), Claudine Schaul (8), Chanelle Scheepers (1), Barbara Schett (24), Francesca Schiavone (23), Tina Schiechtl (1), Patty Schnyder (23), Julia Schruff (5), Barbara Schwartz (1), Monica Seles (7), Milagros Sequera (8), Magui Serna (25), Adriana Serra Zanetti (15), Antonella Serra Zanetti (20), Selima Sfar (3), Maria Sharapova (14), Meghann Shaughnessy (24), Lioudmila Skavronskaia (1), Tara Snyder (4), Abigail Spears (1), Karolina Sprem (8), Katarina Srebotnik (24), Lydia Steinbach (1), Shelley Stephens (1), Alexandra Stevenson (26), Bryanne Stewart (1), Samantha Stosur (4), Barbora Strycova (1), Paola Suarez (23), Martina Sucha (15), Ai Sugiyama (26), Tian Tian Sun (7), Åsa (Carlsson) Svensson (7), Adriana Szili (1), Silvija Talaja (21), Elise Tamaela (1), Tamarine Tanasugarn (24), Elena Tatarkova (4), Sarah Taylor (14), Pichittra Thongdach (1), Napaporn Tongsalee (1), Cristina Torrens Valero (17), Melissa Torres (1), Meilen Tu (14), Iroda Tulyaganova (17), Julia Vakulenko (8), Andreea Vanc (2), Alena Vaskova (2), Maria Vento-Kabchi (8), Roberta Vinci (2), Renata Voracova (5), Patricia Wartusch (17), Mashona Washington (5), Cindy Watson (1), Vanessa Webb (3), Marlene Weingärtner (15), Tiffany Welford (1), Christina Wheeler (1), Angelique Widjaja (21), Serena Williams (7), Venus Williams (6), Zi Yan (3), Yuka Yoshida (2), Jie Zheng (8), Fabiola Zuluaga (18), Vera Zvonareva (23)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 289 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: Jelena Dokic (30), Elena Dementieva (27), Tina Pisnik (27), Silvia Farina Elia (26), Rita Grande (26), Elena Likhovtseva (26), Alexandra Stevenson (26), Ai Sugiyama (26), Anca Barna (25), Cara Black (25), Eleni Daniilidou (25), Magui Serna (25), Emilie Loit (24), Anastasia Myskina (24), Barbara Schett (24), Meghann Shaughnessy (24), Katarina Srebotnik (24), Tamarine Tanasugarn (24), Emmanuelle Gagliardi (23), Laura Granville (23), Daniela Hantuchova (23), Nicole Pratt (23), Francesca Schiavone (23), Patty Schnyder (23), Anna Smashnova-Pistolesi (23), Paola Suarez (23), Vera Zvonareva (23), Elena Bovina (22), Jill Craybas (22), Magdalena Maleeva (22), Marion Bartoli (21), Kim Clijsters (21), Conchita Martinez (21), Chanda Rubin (21), Silvija Talaja (21), Angelique Widjaja (21), Amanda Coetzer (20), Clarisa Fernandez (20), Jelena Kostanic (20), Flavia Pennetta (20), Nadia Petrova (20), Virginie Razzano (20), Antonella Serra Zanetti (20), Iveta Benesova (19), Els Callens (19), Denisa Chladkova (19), Nathalie Déchy (19), Klara Koukalova (19), Lina Krasnoroutskaya (19), Maja Matevzic (19), Marie- Gaianeh Mikaelian (19), Lisa Raymond (19), Jennifer Capriati (18), Yoon Jeong Cho (18), Justine Hénin-Hardenne (18), Henrieta Nagyova (18), Virginia Ruano Pascual (18), Maria Sanchez Lorenzo (18), Fabiola Zuluaga (18), Tathiana Garbin (17), Petra Mandula (17), Amélie Mauresmo (17), Alicia Molik (17), Saori Obata (17), Mary Pierce (17), Cristina Torrens Valero (17), Iroda Tulyaganova (17), Patricia Wartusch (17), Myriam Casanova (16), Lindsay Davenport (16), Janette Husarova (16), Svetlana Kuznetsova (16), Dinara Safina (16), Shinobu Asagoe (15), Daja Bedanova (15), Stephanie Cohen-Aloro (15), Stephanie Foretz (15), Iva Majoli (15), Rossana Neffa-de los Rios (15), Angelika Roesch (15), Adriana Serra Zanetti (15), Martina Sucha (15), Marlene Weingärtner (15), Ludmilla Cervanova (14), Ashley Harkleroad (14), Akiko Morigami (14), Barbara Rittner (14), Maria Sharapova (14), Sarah Taylor (14), Meilen Tu (14), Amy Frazier (13), Alina Jidkova (13), Marta Marrero (13), Conchita Martinez Granados (13), Tatiana Panova (13), Evgenia Kulikovskaya (12), Anabel Medina Garrigues (12), Marissa Irvin (11), Martina Müller (11), Arantxa Parra (11), Tatiana Poutchek (11), Tatiana Perebiynis (10), Dally Randriantefy (10), Samantha Reeves (10), Ansley Cargill (9), Evie Dominikovic (9), Jelena Jankovic (9), Gala Leon Garcia (9), Maria Elena Camerin (8), Maureen Drake (8), Lubomira Kurhajcova (8), Anastassia Rodionova (8), Claudine Schaul (8), Milagros Sequera (8), Karolina Sprem (8), Julia Vakulenko (8), Maria Vento-Kabchi (8), Jie Zheng (8), Gisella Dulko (7), Eva Fislova (7), Sandra Kleinova (7), Zuzana Ondraskova (7), Monica Seles (7), Tian Tian Sun (7), Åsa (Carlsson) Svensson (7), Serena Williams (7), Anna-Lena Grönefeld (6), Lindsay Lee-Waters (6), Corina Morariu (6), Wynne Prakusya (6), Maria Emilia Salerni (6), Venus Williams (6), Angela Haynes (5), Aniko Kapros (5), Maria Kirilenko (5), Anna Kournikova (5), Joannette Kruger (5), Katalin Marosi (5), Bethanie Mattek (5), Julia Schruff (5), Renata Voracova (5), Mashona Washington (5), Ivana Abramovic (4), Yulia Beygelzimer (4), Mariana Diaz-Oliva (4), Vera Douchevina (4), Tatiana Golovin (4), Carly Gullickson (4), Marie-Eve Pelletier (4), Shenay Perry (4), Libuse Prusova (4), Tara Snyder (4), Samantha Stosur (4), Elena Tatarkova (4), Lucie Ahl (3), Sofia Arvidsson (3), Teryn Ashley (3), Elena Baltacha (3), Bea Bielik (3), Eva Birnerova (3), Catalino Castano (3), Elke Clijsters (3), Melinda Czink (3), Marta Domachowska (3), Rita Kuti Kis (3), Janet Lee (3), Melanie Marois (3), Tzipora Obziler (3), Selima Sfar (3), Vanessa Webb (3), Zi Yan (3), Maret Ani (2), Greta Arn (2), Sybille Bammer (2), Olga Barababschikova (2), Celine Beigbeder (2), Alyona Bondarenko (2), Katarina Bondarenko (2), Sandra Cacic (2), Ruxandra Dragomir Ilie (2), Evelyn Fauth (2), Yuliana Fedak (2), Kirsten Flipkens (2), Paula Garcia (2), Stephanie Gehrlein (2), Maria Goloviznina (2), Zsofia Gubacsi (2), Jennifer Hopkins (2), Stanislava Hrozenska (2), Mi-Ra Jeon (2), Anne Keothavong (2), Anne Kremer (2), Bianka Lamade (2), Amber Liu (2), Nuria Llagostera Vives (2), Mirjana Lucic (2), Bahia Mouhtassine (2), Jane O’Donoghue (2), Lilia Osterloh (2), Shuai Peng (2), Camille Pin (2), Miho Saeki (2), Joanna Sakowicz (2), Mara Santangelo (2), Andreea Vanc (2), Alena Vaskova (2), Roberta Vinci (2), Yuka Yoshida (2), Akgul Amanmuradova (1), Maki Arai (1), Lubomira Bacheva (1), Angelika Bachmann (1), Ally Baker (1), Leanne Baker (1), Adriana Barna (1), Severine Beltrame (1), Olga Blahotova (1), Kristie Boogert (1), Kristina Brandi (1), Tanner Cochran (1), Casey Dellacqua (1), Petra Dizdar (1), Lourdes Dominguez Lino (1), Amandine Dulon (1), Eva Dyrberg (1), Romy Farah (1), Ryoko Fuda (1), Rika Fujiwara (1), Jarmila Gajdosova (1), Edina Gallovits (1), Ilke Gers (1), Amanda Grahame (1), Natalia Gussoni (1), Vanessa Henke (1), Jana Hlavackova (1), Ivanna Isroilova (1), Jamea Jackson (1), Amanda Janes (1), Sonya Jeyaseelan (1), Darija Jurak (1), Olga Kalyuzhnaya (1), Jana Kandarr (1), Jin- Hee Kim (1), Jessica Kirkland (1), Sandra Klemenschits (1), Beier Ko (1), Leslie Koffi (1), Michaella Krajicek (1), Viktoriya Kutuzova (1), Emma Laine (1), Gabriela Lastra (1), Anais Laurendon (1), Sophie Lefevre (1), Ting Li (1), Kelly Liggan (1), Ivana Lisjak (1), Theresa Logar (1), Manisha Malhotra (1), Rachel McQuillan (1), Ana Lucia Migliarini de Leon (1), Sania Mirza (1), Virag Nemeth (1), Seda Noorlander (1), Seiko Okamoto (1), Diana Ospina (1), Maika Ozaki (1), Virginie Pichet (1), Frederica Piedade (1), Julie Pullin (1), Shadisha Robinson (1), Chanelle Scheepers (1), Tina Schiechtl (1), Barbara Schwartz (1), Lioudmila Skavronskaia (1), Abigail Spears (1), Lydia Steinbach (1), Shelley Stephens (1), Bryanne Stewart (1), Barbora Strycova (1), Adriana Szili (1), Elise Tamaela (1), Pichittra Thongdach (1), Napaporn Tongsalee (1), Melissa Torres (1), Cindy Watson (1), Tiffany Welford (1), Christina Wheeler (1)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 290 Comings and Goings: On and Off the Rankings The following lists compare the ranking tables for 2002 and 2003, 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. Smashnova became Smashnova-Pistolsei. 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 — 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 ended a long trend toward more and more ranked players; because fewer points are awarded at the lowest level of Challengers. At the end of 2003, there were only 1113 ranked players — the lowest total since 1999, when there were 1079 ranked players. In 2000 there were 1242, an increase of 15% over the year before. But in 2001 the number fell again, to 1214. In 2002, the total rose again, to 1253. 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. The first list, of players ranked only in 2002, shows the players in alphabetical order with their 2002 year- end rankings shown in parenthesis. The second list, of players ranked only in 2003, is similar: An alphabetical list, with 2003 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 2003 final ranking, the net change in her ranking from 2002 to 2003, 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 (148, 204, 58%) This means that Abramovic’s year-end 2003 ranking was #148. What’s more, she improved her ranking 204 spots from the end of 2002 to the end of 2003 (she had ended 2002 ranked #352). 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 cut her ranking by 58% — a nice healthy upward movement. If the number is negative, that means the player’s ranking increased (worsened) by the percentage shown.

If it matters, the biggest percentage improvements in ranking in 2003 were: Nadia Petrova, 89%; Lina Krasnoroutskaya, 85%; Maria Sharapova, 83%; and Justine Hénin-Hardenne, 80%; no others better than 80%. The biggest percentage hits were suffered by Anne Kremer, -1456% (!); Anna Kournikova, (-771%; Monica Seles, -757%; Brie Rippner, -488%; Venus Williams, -450%; Tatiana Panova, -417%; and Alexandra Fusai, -413%; no one else went up more than 400%. Most of these losses, of course, were induced by injury.

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 291 Players ranked in 2002 but not in 2003, with their 2002 final rankings (Total of 378) Evghenia Ablovatchi (592), Monica Acosta (1012), Gaelle Adda (1045), Linda Akkerman (1203), Inga Albers (1052), Tracy Almeda-Singian (687), Daniela Alvarez (794), Michal Amir (938), Mari Andersson (1020), Laurence Andretto (207), Jody Anglin (881), Marina Aniutin (949), Saras Arasu (962), Czarina Mae Arevalo (1236), Severine Arpajou (895), Miyako Ataka (1061), Magy Aziz (1161), Livia Azzi (777), Alesa Bagola (1203), Marilyn Baker (784), Giulia Baldoni (731), Katrina Bandere (856), Heli Bargil (703), Alice Barnes (1105), Jorgelina Barrera (677), Adriana Basaric (497), Yvette Basting (1119), Silvana Bauer (776), Anastassia Belova (1161), Olivia Beltrame (1027), Sana Ben Salah (1161), Whitney Benik (543), Susi Bensch (932), Segolene Berger (649), Audrey Bergot (1105), Marina Bernshtein (883), Eva Bes (164), Fernanda Bini (1105), Kathleen Blaszak (877), Annabel Blow (933), Maria Boboedova (1045), Olga Borisova (1119), Alice Botto (1092), Sandrine Bouilleau (851), Maria Eugenia Brito (669), Giorgia Buchanan (1128), Yakaterina Burduli (969), Mia Buric (407), Angela Cardoso (954), Deborak Carmassi (1221), Daniela Casanova (650), Leslie Cavanaugh (1105), Ana Cetnik (1119), Kyung Yee Chae (780), Hsiao-Han Chao (834), Courtenay Chapman (524), Jane Chi (254), Eugenia Chialvo (1203), Yang-Jin Chung (773), Daniella Cohen (1138), Julie Coin (732), Caitlin Collins (1045), Mariana Conde (1188), Celeste Contin (387), Annica Cooper (1030), Juliana Cordero (1034), Avel Romaly Coronado (969), Kim Coventry (1159), Luisa Cowper (772), Bianca Cremer (617), Claire Curran (1142), Dewonder Davis (1135), Inge De Geest (959), Candice De La Torre (496), Erika De Lone (160), Kun Deng (1005), Larissa Deschamps (1161), Aurore Desert (724), Vanessa Devesa (1039), Jana Deylova (912), Giovanna Di Lauro (1062), Dominika Dieskova (1070), Lenka Dlhopolcova (416), Sylwia Domanska (1236), Rui Du (849), Camille Dubois (1203), Bianca-Mihael Dulgheru (1203), Alena Dvornikova (1105), Eva Dyrberg (102), Natalia Egorova (1223), Annabel Ellwood (1027), Megan Emmett (993), Eva Erbova (613), Anna Erikson (823), Feriel Esseghir (442), Jennifer Fiers (829), Francesca Flavell (1188), Anna Floris (382), Yamile Fors (892), Lolita Frangulyan (733), Rita Freitas (1188), Brandi Freudenberg (962), Lisa Fritz (659), Mariko Fritz-Krockow (1223), Sevvy Gallios (1155), Gemma Gallo Gomez (618), Chen-Chen Gao (949), Martha Garzon-Elkins (1088), Ioana Gaspar (978), Sophie Georges (557), Melanie Gerbasi (1154), Adriana Gersi (351), Lea Ghirardi (413), Michelle Giang (1010), Andrea Glass (241), Mireia Gol Alamo (1054), Ainhoa Goni (252), Cristelle Grier (707), Michelle Grobby (1203), Magdalena Grzybowska (394), Paula Guerrero (1197), Debby Haak (1243), Meryem Haddad (1023), Samantha Hammond (1080), Jie Hao (686), Chun-Yan He (868), Laura Heckler (1138), Silvia Hegedis (689), Ines Heise (1089), Frances Hendry (1016), Tina Hergold (308), Andrea Hermansen (847), Dee Dee Herring (896), Martina Hingis (10), Rika Hiraki (574), Alex Hirsch (1223), Klara Hladka (1223), Kveta Hrdlickova (145), Lei Huang (1243), Tiziana Iezza (1124), Habiba Ifrakh (1138), Nelly Iglesias Vazquez (1220), Dragana Ilic (1040), Elisa Innocenti (1013), Maiko Inoue (597), Karine Ionesco (730), Kazusa Ito (949), Kristina Jarkenstedt (1016), Adriana Jerabek (501), Chun-Mei Ji (1070), Dragica Joksimovic (695), La Shawnn Jones (1023), Thamara Jonkman (1045), Sanja Jukic (962), Mariana Junqueira (864), Kim Kambic (563), Tara Kanbargimath (1236), Asimina Kaplani (981), Claudia Kardys (436), Tinatin Kavlashvili (889), Alexandra Kichoutkin (1161), Eun-Kyung Kim (1128), Yumiko Kitamura (480), Daniela Kochetkova (1243), Renata Kolbovic (285), Hiroko Komori (1092), Caroline Korsawe (615), Breda Kovac (1118), Marijana Kovacevic (547), Kristina Kraszewski (790), Vanesa Krauth (678), Eva Krejcova (289), Camilla Kremer (412), Barbara Krzesinska (1223), Gabrielle Kucerova (943), Magdalena Kucerova (645), Renata Kucerova (668), Maria Kunova (594), Jeannine Kuratli (1197), Katherine Laidler (1013), Magalie Lamarre (927), Charlotta Larsson (890), Marina Lazarovska (978), An-Na Lee (934), Eun-Jeong Lee (741), Joo-Hee Lee (1070), Zuzana Lesenarova (926), Dan Li (1065), Na Li (277), Alexandria Liles (803), Dan-Feng Liu (1183), Jing-Jing Liu (605), Wei-Juan Liu (571), Salome Llaguno (883), Susi Lohrmann (1087), Jennie Loow (860), Marie-Jose Lopez (1045), Marian Lopez Terribile (1188), Nicole Ludwig (1178), Stephanie Mabry (1138), Dorottya Magas (1008), Suzana Maksovic (1249), Ruxandra Marin (596), Sharon Marin (839), Zora Mark (1135), Emily Marker (734), Magdalena Marszalek (812), Eva Martincova (260), Monica Mastan (593), Diane Matias (793), Joanne Mayne (1188), Donna Mc Intyre (1221), Jennifer McGafﬁgan (973), Katie McGlennen (1119), Holly McKee (1203), Kirsty McRae (1196), Melissa Middleton (510), Neda Mihneva (813), Dina Milosevic (762), Juanas Miras Navarro (1128), Isabella Mitterlehner (749), Giorgia Mondani (491), Angeles Montolio (133), Elsa Morel (287), Marinet Morgan (1243), Irina Mourachkintseva (1080), Leonn Muller V. Moppes (774), Danijela Murselovic (1203), Kamini Murugaboopathy (1034), Wei Na (1161), Sandra Nacuk (522), Chiaki Nakajima (767), Alison Nash (911), Andrea Nathan (822), Anna Eugenia Nefedova (819), Mhari Neish (1183), Yana Nemirowski (1065), Lioudmila Nikoian (1054), Nina Nittinger (738), Pavlina Nola (320), Candela Novoa (949), Petra Novotnikova (1105), Edith Nunes (833), Yanet Nunez (760), Tracey O'Connor (545), Eun-Mi Oh (1142), Daniela Olivera (414), Gemma Olle (758), Carolina Olmo (1128), Miriam Oremans (124), Ana Gloria Osorio (1105), Maja Palaversic Coopersmith (248), Jelena Pandzic (401), Holly Parkinson (634), Alena Paulenkova (887), Maria Pavlidou (631), Ingrid Peltier (1092), Nicole Pitts (976), Sylvia Plischke (376), Tihana Pochobradsky (508), Anna Pogosova (1203), Elena Poliakova (1080), Lenka Potocarova (1236), Monica Poveda (1249), Ariela Primo (880), Eleonora Punzo (1197), Veronika Raimrova (834), Ana Milena Ramirez (1005), Rebecca Rankin (946), Prariyawan Ratanakrong (523), Nicoleta Ratiu (995), Celine Regnier (1023), Karolina Rejniak (1223), Azra Resic (1223), Jodie Richardson (1249), Gisela Riera (585), Carolina Rodriguez (947), Mabel Rodriguez (1128), Rochelle Rosenﬁeld (520), Desiree Roset Torres (1223), Julie Rotondi (1034), Eveline Rusdianto (1203), Claudia Salgues (1183), Mariela Salinas (658), Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario (53), Katie Schlukebir (552), Syna Schmidle (358), Miriam Schnitzer (697),

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 292 Pascale Schnitzer (1203), Tanja Schugt (709), Marija Serdarusic (1236), Eva Sestakova (845), Medini Sharma (984), Sakiko Shimizu (1203), Mi-Ran Shin (990), Peng Shuai (359), Tadeja Sibila-Mojzer (1197), Anne-Gaëlle Sidot (242), Fernanda Silva (1177), Kelly Simkin (1197), Katarzyna Siwosz (806), Brooke Skeen (878), Julia Smith (825), Sarka Snorova (1161), Anna Spivakovsky (981), Patricia Starzyk (1062), Jessica Steck (361), Anouk Sterk (509), Katarzyna Straczy (517), Claudia Strauss (1142), Martina Strussova (1016), Tomoko Sugano (1105), Michelle Summerside (638), Sheng-Nan Sun (1031), Nina Suvak (1155), Ekaterina Sysoeva (206), Lan Lan Tai (1161), Natalie Tanevska (1203), Regina Temez (526), Katerina Teplizki (1070), Ma. Alessandra Termini (1249), Sandrine Testud (38), Caroline Tidemand (915), Sanja Todorovic (1092), Magdalena Tokarska (908), Keiko Tokuda (922), Cristina Tonelli (921), Ka-Po Tong (369), Radoslava Topalova (954), Marta Torres Torres (1223), Cindy Tow (862), Virginia Trifonova (751), Susanne Trik (503), Catherine Turinsky (1040), Sachie Umehara (584), Julia Ustyuzhanina (1142), Erika Valdes (881), Patty Van Acker (331), Daphne Van De Zande (639), Krist Van Den Tillaart (1052), Miroslava Vavrinec (917), Nadege Vergos (1183), Masa Vesenjak (1124), Urska Vesenjak (572), Ilona Vichnevskaya (539), Helga Vieira (858), Catalina Villegas (1142), Rachel Viollet (379), Vuletic Visnja (992), Mirela Vladulescu (722), Charlotte Wallace (1178), Julie Ann Welford (1223), Tzu-Ting Weng (588), Anna White (1065), Susanne Wild (646), Sarah Witten (935), Kati Wolner (783), Lorna Woodroffe (405), Wen-Hao Wu (984), Natalia Yakimovich (1161), Ling Yan (1070), Shu-Jing Yang (868), Lan Yao (912), Jia Bao Yin (1203), Annabel Youthed (747), Viviana Yrureta (1161), Dan Yu (868), Ying Yu (471), Qing Yue (1124), Riza Zalameda (909), Maria Letizia Zavagli (1223), Yan Zhang (1183), Jenny Zika (905), Efrat Zlotikman (1142), Alexandra Zotta (1013), Agnese Zucchini (1188), Ana Maria Zuleta (1034), Ivana Zupa (630)

Based on year-end 2002 rankings, the top ten players to fall off the rankings in 2003 were” 10. Martina Hingis 38. Sandrine Testud 53. Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario 102. Eva Dyrberg 124. Miriam Oremans 133. Angeles Montolio 145. Kveta Hrdlickova 160. Erika De Lone 164. Eva Bes 206. Ekaterina Sysoeva

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 293 Players ranked in 2003 but not in 2002, with their 2003 final rankings (Total of 238) Ana Abramovic (951), Marija Abramovic (696), Bianca Acquistapace (1108), Julia Acs (804), Elizabeth Alina (1056), Maria Arkhipova (730), Jessyca Arthur (932), Lata Assudani (961), Sofia Avakova (894), Virginie Ayassamy (955), Timea Bacsinszky (455), Hae-Youm Bae (1104), Holly Bagshaw (679), Estefania Balda (822), Alice Balducci (838), Vasilissa Bardina (812), Celine Beermann (893), Janette Bejlkova (990), Verena Beller (286), Andrea Benitez (854), Erica Biro (441), Carina Bjornstrom (819), Michelle Blattler (1072), Stefania Boffa (1056), Krizia Borgarello (735), Daniela Bracaglia (939), Alanna Broderick (990), Sofia Brun (912), Lyndsay Burdette (1006), Asha Burns (1108), Irina Buryachok (864), Estrell Cabeza Candela (929), Kristin Cargill (876), Vilmarie Castellvi (242), Valentina Castro (873), Julia Cohen (768), Melanie Cohen (691), Stefania Craciun (681), Natalia Cretu (1102), Dubravka Cupac (582), Kristina Czafikova (816), Lisa D'amelio (875), Eunice David (680), Lynsey Davison (800), Vasilisa Davydova (842), Stefanie De Laet (990), Magali De Lattre (782), Renata De Sanctis (939), Morena Debernardi (1089), Jennifer Debodt (983), Daniella Dominikovic (967), Virginia Donda (854), Yulia Fedossova (408), Sophie Ferguson (675), Elizabet Freeman-Young (1056), Christina Fusano (1006), Jarmila Gajdosova (197), Karine Gallet (1043), Quan Gao (636), Natalia Garbellotto (520), Covadonga Garcia Calvo (1043), Julianna Gates (990), Melanie Gloria (772), Natalia Gordeeva (1082), Sandy Gumulya (724), Rebekka Haenle (1056), Melanie Hafner (935), Florentina Hanisch (1089), Florence Haring (612), Caroline Hartmann (818), Nadine Hassinger (615), Maren Haus (1006), Andrea Hlavackova (686), Lejla Hodzic (827), Andrea Hofinger (943), Patricia Holzman (990), Zita Horanyi (973), Lucie Hradecka (410), Eva Hrdinova (650), Violette Huck (1051), Reiko Ino (892), Paola Iovino (912), Ana Ivanovic (705), Mette Iversen (678), Alice Izomor (1006), Jamea Jackson (448), Dragana Jakovljevic (1112), Beau Jones (829), Whitney Jones (830), Betina Jozami (670), Sesil Karatancheva (526), Alexandra Karavaeva (899), Claudia Kardys (396), Moe Kawatoko (617), Jodi Kenoyer (595), Angelique Kerber (433), Hye-Mi Kim (846), Kyung-Won Kim (1082), Magdalena Kiszczynska (633), Alisa Kleybanova (623), Karin Knapp (746), Natalia Kolat (1056), Azusa Konishi (1082), Raquel Kops-Jones (579), Anna Korzeniak (899), Karolina Kosinska (632), Maria Krasnova (961), Alla Kudryavtseva (847), Imke Kusgen (758), Viktoriya Kutuzova (272), Irina Kuzmina (672), Isha Lakhani (478), Orawan Lamangthong (793), Anna Lapushchenkova (1089), Marta Lesniak (584), Jamie Lieberman (1006), Theresa Logar (915), Nudnida Luangnam (925), Olivia Lukaszewicz (744), Vojislava Lukic (676), Danielle Lund (1056), Oxana Lyubtsova (736), Tatjana Malek (651), Melissa Mang (904), Eden Marama (496), Paula Marama (609), Krysty Marcio (858), Patricia Mayr (973), Carolyn Mc Gann (1029), Samia Medjahdi (967), Valerie Meise (973), Sophia Melikishvili (685), Septi Mende (753), Stella Menna (1089), Matea Mezak (379), Flavia Mignola (580), Katie Miles (910), Anna Miller (715), Adriana Mingireanu (888), Patricia Miro (1006), Michelle Mitchell (869), Mariana Muci (816), Alexandra Mueller (620), Matilde Munoz (774), Sandhya Nagraj (1029), Lindsey Nelson (978), Christina Obermoser (814), Shivani Oberoi (1079), Ana Cecilia Olivos (1051), Abiodun Oyegoke (986), Olga Panova (801), Pauline Parmentier (493), Shuai Peng (326), Nandini Perumal (912), Angela Mari Piedrahita (868), Kate Pinchbeck (970), Betina Pirker (504), Alexandra Podkolzina (531), Karla Porter (1089), Laura Pous Tio (442), Anna Powaska (1079), Tatiana Priachin (880), Iciri Rai (1029), Alexandra Recio (915), Arancha Recio (828), Andrea Remynse (967), Patricia Ribeiro (990), Tania Rice (806), Ludmila Richterova (463), Claire Ricketts (1070), Sarah Riske (643), Marc Rodezno Hernandez (925), Tiya Rolle (1089), Nadja Roma (1104), Maya Rosa (838), Anna Rynarzewska (951), Lucie Safarova (533), Nadejda Samoilo (1082), Nirupama Sanjeev (521), Olga Savchuk (432), Julia Scaringe (1039), Syna Schreiber (491), Rawya Seif (854), Yurika Sema (756), Marina Shamayko (772), Jung-Yoon Shin (943), Yaroslava Shvedova (494), Kaysie Smashey (530), Michelle Snyman (532), Silvia Soler-Espinos (958), Shei Solsona Carcasona (1043), Anastasia Sourkova (1056), Danielle Spacek (1112), Elena Stoianova (990), Dijana Stojic (990), Piia Suomalainen (1026), Tereza Svicova (1029), Marina Tavares (1089), Petra Teller (904), Oksana Teplyakova (1056), Valerie Tetreault (929), Catrina Thompson (1029), Christian Thompson (961), Judit Trunkos (1108), Katrina Tsang (768), Olena Tsutskova (925), Jennifer Tuchband (961), Rebecca Turner (1100), Courtney Ulery (883), Zuzana Valicekova (1043), Eva Valkova (978), Laura Vallverdu (932), Kristen Van Elden (507), Ali Van Horne (1006), Charlene Vanneste (1051), Graciela Velez (525), Courtney Vernon (1056), Elena Vesnina (278), Tereza Veverkova (603), Varanya Vijuksanaboon (1006), Elisa Villa (638), Ragini Vimal (915), Rita Vukov (1006), Visnja Vuletic (1003), Ryoko Watanabe (1001), Vivien Weber (990), Marielle Weihs (721), Jenifer Widjaja (510), Gaelle Widmer (871), Monica Wiesener (986), Tara Wigan (961), Sabrina Wist (978), Melanie Wolkersberger (873), Kirsty Woolley (826), Dan Xiong (1056), Anastasia Yakimova (288), Mayumi Yamamoto (369), Zuzana Zalabska (990)

The ﬁve highest-ranked players to come on the rankings in 2003 were” 197. Jarmila Gajdosova 242. Vilmarie Castellvi 272. Viktoriya Kutuzova 278. Elena Vesnina 286. Verena Beller

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 294 Players ranked in both 2002 and 2003 (total of 875) Ivana Abramovic (148, 204, 58%), Monique Adamczak (271, 583, 68%), Ekaterina Aﬁnogenova (671, -107, -19%), Lucie Ahl (258, -55, -27%), Susanne Aigner (674, 62, 8%), Joanne Akl (973, -112, -13%), Christine Alford (1038, -77, -8%), Katia Altilia (747, -157, -27%), Maria Fernanda Alves (219, 75, 26%), Akgul Amanmuradova (405, 411, 50%), Anca Anastasiu (661, 536, 45%), Rosa Maria Andres (283, 128, 31%), Liza Andriyani (572, -31, -6%), Maret Ani (142, 39, 22%), Olena Antypina (567, -183, -48%), Kaori Aoyama (543, -202, -59%), Maki Arai (464, 183, 28%), Melisa Arevalo (557, -229, -70%), Maria Jose Argeri (361, 195, 35%), Greta Arn (299, -208, -229%), Marcela Arroyo (634, 361, 36%), Soﬁa Arvidsson (113, 54, 32%), Shinobu Asagoe (45, 52, 54%), Teryn Ashley (115, 80, 41%), Amanda Augustus (540, -4, -1%), Cory Ann Avants (274, 86, 24%), Martina Babakova (488, 1, 0%), Julia Babilon (1056, 86, 8%), Zsuzsanna Babos (482, 222, 32%), Lubomira Bacheva (152, 6, 4%), Angelika Bachmann (216, -18, -9%), Emilie Bacquet (956, 17, 2%), Elisabeth Bahn (624, -46, -8%), Petra Bajerovska (1040, -20, -2%), Ally Baker (291, 22, 7%), Gabrielle Baker (460, 194, 30%), Katharine Baker (751, 485, 39%), Leanne Baker (437, -70, -19%), Liana Balaci (454, 29, 6%), Elisa Balsamo (462, 97, 17%), Elena Baltacha (373, -216, -138%), Sybille Bammer (170, 6, 3%), Laura Bao (1029, -495, -93%), Olga Barabanschikova (149, 30, 17%), Adriana Barna (195, 81, 29%), Anca Barna (48, 14, 23%), Cassandra Barr (683, 219, 24%), Michaela Bartlova (750, 194, 21%), Marion Bartoli (57, 49, 46%), Anna Bastrikova (563, -249, -79%), Caroline Ann Basu (423, 41, 9%), Daja Bedanova (156, -119, -322%), Celine Beigbeder (280, -134, -92%), Jenny Belobrajdic (986, -680, -222%), Severine Beltrame (147, 91, 38%), Iveta Benesova (140, -59, -73%), Daniela Bercek (622, 74, 11%), Serena Bergomi (1006, 99, 9%), Melissa Berry (747, -33, -5%), Yulia Beygelzimer (117, 48, 29%), Ankita Bhambri (722, 47, 6%), Bea Bielik (192, 52, 21%), Raffaella Bindi (419, 130, 24%), Eva Birnerova (110, 105, 49%), Cara Black (52, 4, 7%), Olga Blahotova (171, 61, 26%), Natalia Bogdanova (788, -49, -7%), Katerina Bohmova (453, 336, 43%), Valentina Bonacorsi (819, -58, -8%), Alyona Bondarenko (190, 1, 1%), Katerina Bondarenko (354, 459, 56%), Valeria Bondarenko (785, -128, -19%), Kristie Boogert (309, -169, -121%), Sarah Borwell (349, 395, 53%), Irina Boulykina (294, 143, 33%), Elena Bovina (21, 5, 19%), Svetla Bozicnik (1082, -183, -20%), Ivana Bracun (1072, -465, -77%), Allison Bradshaw (324, -65, -25%), Kristina Brandi (78, 111, 59%), Nina Bratchikova (425, 26, 6%), Lauren Breadmore (264, 169, 39%), Alberta Brianti (300, 86, 22%), Olga Brozda (714, 130, 15%), Ajda Brumen (723, 134, 16%), Diana Brunel (575, 130, 18%), Leslie Butkiewicz (421, -29, -7%), Ekaterina Bychkova (375, 433, 54%), Sandra Cacic (376, -51, -16%), Marina Caiazzo (571, -186, -48%), Bree Calderwood (1104, -197, -22%), Els Callens (74, -7, -10%), Maria Elena Camerin (99, 24, 20%), Alice Canepa (331, 361, 52%), Jennifer Capriati (6, -3, -100%), Fernanda Caputi (864, -23, -3%), Marina Cardoso (895, -86, -11%), Ansley Cargill (103, 22, 18%), Larissa Carvalho (382, 147, 28%), Myriam Casanova (102, -48, -89%), Giulia Casoni (231, 111, 32%), Catalina Castano (133, 68, 34%), Cristina Celani (971, 94, 9%), Zuzana Cerna (541, 48, 8%), Ludmila Cervanova (64, 43, 40%), Petra Cetkovska (481, -228, -90%), Margalit Chakhnashvili (417, -168, -67%), Rushmi Chakravarthi (434, -44, -11%), Chin-Wei Chan (391, 414, 51%), Kyung-Mi Chang (338, -22, -7%), Daria Chemarda (613, 327, 35%), Yan- Chong Chen (847, 176, 17%), Lauren Cheung (544, 22, 4%), Kildine Chevalier (228, 316, 58%), Stefania Chieppa (523, 178, 25%), Denisa Chladkova (43, 20, 32%), Yoon Jeong Cho (77, 7, 8%), Jin-Young Choi (473, 85, 15%), Young-Ja Choi (468, -79, -20%), Wilawan Choptang (568, 210, 27%), Chia-Jung Chuang (313, 156, 33%), Erika Clarke (699, -62, -10%), Nicole Clerico (692, 210, 23%), Elke Clijsters (431, 244, 36%), Kim Clijsters (2, 2, 50%), Brenda Coassolo (706, 53, 7%), Tanner Cochran (257, 9, 3%), Amanda Coetzer (25, -4, -19%), Alyssa Cohen (325, 25, 7%), Stephanie Cohen-Aloro (65, 105, 62%), Hannah Collin (420, -96, -30%), Isabel Collischonn (424, 118, 22%), Bruna Colosio (415, 10, 2%), Chantal Coombs (457, 164, 26%), Mariana Correa (717, -39, -6%), Joana Cortez (372, 81, 18%), Diana Costa (911, -184, -25%), Jorgelina Cravero (308, -45, -17%), Jill Craybas (98, -41, -72%), Helen Crook (400, -47, -13%), Olivia Crouchent (1089, -399, -58%), Liz Cruz (844, 226, 21%), Mirian Cruz (1043, -10, -1%), Veronika Ctvrtnickova (834, -211, -34%), Melinda Czink (83, 95, 53%), Tiffany Dabek (255, -43, -20%), Monika Dancevic (760, 229, 23%), Rebecca Dandeniya (663, 379, 36%), Eleni Daniilidou (26, -4, -18%), Kristy Dascoli (1022, -358, -54%), Katarina Daskovic (329, -78, -31%), Michelle Dasso (918, -383, -72%), Lindsay Davenport (5, 7, 58%), Surina De Beer (590, 352, 37%), Delphine De Winne (456, 406, 47%), Whitney Deason (943, -70, -8%), Nathalie Déchy (29, -9, -45%), Rita Degliesposti (352, 3, 1%), Liga Dekmeijere (508, -220, -76%), Lara Del Saz (1029, 113, 10%), Irina Delitz (529, 19, 3%), Laura Dell'angelo (347, -42, -14%), Casey Dellacqua (275, 183, 40%), Servane Delobelle (549, 586, 52%), Elena Dementieva (8, 11, 58%), Emilia Desiderio (801, -119, -17%), Salome Devidze (307, 92, 23%), Shruti Dhawan (759, 143, 16%), Caroline Dhenin (475, -30, -7%), Mariana Diaz-Oliva (188, -99, -111%), Amy Dillingham (870, -3, 0%), Sabrina Diniz (956, -26, -3%), Silvia Disderi (402, -4, -1%), Mireille Dittmann (342, -96, -39%), Julie Ditty (281, 140, 33%), Petra Dizdar (528, 84, 14%), Jelena Dokic (15, -6, -67%), Marta Domachowska (244, 112, 31%), Lourdes Dominguez Lino (303, 117, 28%), Evie Dominikovic (130, -11, -9%), Yan-Hua Dong (823, -58, -8%), Vera Douchevina (108, 386, 78%), Tomoko Doukei (704, 87, 11%), Melissa Dowse (954, -633, -197%), Yvonne Doyle (430, -90, -26%), Gianna Doz (1051, -272, -35%), Maureen Drake (112, -16, -17%), Stephanie Dubois (480, 145, 23%), Nina Duebbers (196, 4, 2%), Gisela Dulko (124, 28, 18%), Amandine Dulon (265, -34, -15%), Anastasia Dvornikova (616, 105, 15%), Ekaterina Dzehalevich (440, 302, 41%), Natallia Dziamidzenka (371, 144, 28%), Emmanuelle Edon (413, 13, 3%), Nina Egger (619, 162, 21%), Sabrina Eisenberg (553, -90, -19%), Helena Ejeson (659, -169, -34%), Heidi El Tabakh (733, 272, 27%), Jennifer Embry (649, -177, -37%), Adria Engel (645, -60, -10%), Sara Errani (569, 173, 23%), Sophie Erre (474, -152, -47%), Pilar Escandell (574, 151, 21%),

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 295 Mariana Esperon (471, 549, 54%), Neyssa Etienne (578, -131, -29%), Franziska Etzel (597, 91, 13%), Marcela Evangelista (564, -10, -2%), Megan Falcon (871, 234, 21%), Romy Farah (766, -228, -42%), Yomna Farid (667, 101, 13%), Silvia Farina Elia (24, -7, -41%), Gulnar Fattakhetdinova (302, 10, 3%), Michelle Faucher (935, -428, -84%), Evelyn Fauth (200, -31, -18%), Yuliana Fedak (214, -22, -11%), Clarisa Fernandez (90, -59, -190%), Jessica Fernandez (403, -46, -13%), Eva Fernandez- Brugues (796, -90, -13%), Debbrich Feys (449, 439, 49%), Laura Figuerola (771, -194, -34%), Susanne Filipp (824, -25, -3%), Eva Fislova (128, 13, 9%), Christina Fitz (501, -157, -46%), Kirsten Flipkens (363, 197, 35%), Zsuzsanna Fodor (642, 189, 23%), Galina Fokina (194, 16, 8%), Anna Foldenyi (312, 440, 59%), Paula Fondevila Castro (561, 138, 20%), Rebecca Fong (1102, 76, 6%), Stacia Fonseca (738, 440, 37%), Anna Font (522, 106, 17%), Stephanie Foretz (100, -21, -27%), Marta Fraga (411, -33, -9%), Celine Francois (1001, -110, -12%), Francesca Frappi (575, 92, 14%), Amy Frazier (61, -22, -56%), Kirstin Freye (646, -109, -20%), Jacqueline Froehlich (587, -5, -1%), Ryoko Fuda (404, 229, 36%), Haruka Fujishiro (888, 96, 10%), Rika Fujiwara (215, -30, -16%), Alexandra Fusai (1006, -810, -413%), Giulia Gabba (961, 40, 4%), Emmanuelle Gagliardi (56, 5, 8%), Mar Gallifa Puigdesens (725, -315, -77%), Edina Gallovits (187, 17, 8%), Elena Gancheva (1006, 86, 8%), Julia Gandia (749, -88, -13%), Tathiana Garbin (84, -12, -17%), Paula Garcia (247, 14, 5%), Vanina Garcia Sokol (279, 191, 41%), Giulia Gatto Monticone (1003, 96, 9%), Stephanie Gehrlein (166, 125, 43%), Michelle Gerards (390, 71, 15%), Iveta Gerlova (502, -25, -5%), Ilke Gers (392, 87, 18%), Maria Geznenge (234, -13, -6%), Anna Gil Mares (883, 305, 26%), Lara Giltinan (850, 305, 26%), Yael Glitzenshtein (754, -112, -17%), Oana-Elen Golimbioschi (368, 3, 1%), Tatiana Golovin (345, 30, 8%), Maria Goloviznina (251, -104, -71%), Adriana Gonzalez Penas (332, 199, 37%), Raissa Gourevitch (598, -71, -13%), Sheethal Goutham (1026, -352, -52%), Amanda Grahame (539, -378, -235%), Rita Grande (70, -24, -52%), Natalie Grandin (150, 122, 45%), Kim Grant (669, 21, 3%), Laura Granville (46, 1, 2%), Stephanie Greau (785, 253, 24%), Anna-Lena Grönefeld (120, 441, 79%), Zsoﬁa Gubacsi (199, -77, -63%), Sheila Guerberg (740, 384, 34%), Carly Gullickson (227, 491, 68%), Natalia Gussoni (158, 61, 28%), Ji-Sun Ha (673, 397, 37%), Stefanie Haidner (237, 100, 30%), Natsumi Hamamura (842, 228, 21%), Daniela Hantuchova (19, -11, -137%), Ashley Harkleroad (51, 64, 56%), Anna Hawkins (739, -56, -8%), Angela Haynes (186, 665, 78%), Stephanie Hazlett (346, 497, 59%), Anne-Laure Heitz (388, -117, -43%), Zuzana Hejdova (290, -51, -21%), Justine Hénin-Hardenne (1, 4, 80%), Vanessa Henke (246, -66, -37%), Audrey Hernandez (775, -90, -13%), Stefanie Hershﬁeld (1079, -181, -20%), Jaslyn Hewitt (541, -171, -46%), Tanja Hirschauer (682, -31, -5%), Shiho Hisamatsu (232, 103, 31%), Jana Hlavackova (226, 67, 23%), Eva Hoch (537, 335, 38%), Kika Hogendoorn (764, 202, 21%), Carly Homewood (1072, -401, -60%), Da-Jung Hong (428, 233, 35%), Marielle Hoogland (395, -111, -39%), Jennifer Hopkins (162, -23, -17%), Amanda Hopmans (489, -208, -74%), Christiane Hoppmann (514, 51, 9%), Christin Horiatopoulos (799, -453, -131%), Naoko Horikawa (731, -12, -2%), Stanislava Hrozenska (193, -31, -19%), Su-Wei Hsieh (653, -391, -149%), Liezel Huber (765, -545, -248%), Janette Husarova (125, -92, -279%), Laura-Ramona Husaru (641, 156, 20%), Kelley Hyndman (627, 84, 12%), Iris Ichim (751, 329, 30%), Kumiko Iijima (630, -117, -23%), Haruka Inoue (518, -112, -28%), Mari Inoue (701, 247, 26%), Marissa Irvin (123, -38, -45%), Ivanna Isroilova (506, 655, 56%), Chisayo Ito (447, -67, -18%), Darya Ivanov (831, -96, -13%), Ekaterina Ivanova (712, -18, -3%), Claudia Ivone (559, -127, -29%), Karina Jacobsgaard (505, 75, 13%), Claire Jalade (808, 234, 22%), Ema Janaskova (524, -76, -17%), Amanda Janes (295, 515, 64%), Jelena Jankovic (85, 109, 56%), Klaudia Jans (629, 69, 10%), J. Sai Jayalakshmy (527, -43, -9%), Mi-Ra Jeon (233, -96, -70%), Sonya Jeyaseelan (314, 198, 39%), Alina Jidkova (97, -10, -11%), Lucia Jimenez (637, 344, 35%), Mathilde Johansson (621, -107, -21%), Sabrina Jolk (398, 10, 2%), Ana Jovanovic (333, 85, 20%), Mervana Jugic-Salkic (134, 304, 69%), Diana Julianto (556, 338, 38%), Yoo-Mi Jung (755, 45, 6%), Darija Jurak (203, 200, 50%), Katarina Kachlikova (547, 44, 7%), Wioleta Kaczmarek (1089, 39, 3%), Lauren Kalvaria (334, 100, 23%), Olga Kalyuzhnaya (230, 15, 6%), Bianca Kamper (545, 74, 12%), Jana Kandarr (443, -313, -241%), Kaia Kanepi (167, 116, 41%), Aniko Kapros (92, 13, 12%), Karina Karner (1056, -220, -26%), Oxana Karyshkova (486, -270, -125%), Shizu Katsumi (536, 31, 5%), Anne Keothavong (177, 56, 24%), Natasha Kersten (849, 394, 32%), Amani Khalifa (883, 29, 3%), Chin Bee Khoo (343, 271, 44%), Kim Kilsdonk (550, 245, 31%), Eun-Ha Kim (611, -275, -82%), Eun-Sook Kim (1040, -283, -37%), Ji- Young Kim (797, 245, 24%), Jin-Hee Kim (270, 28, 9%), Mi-Ok Kim (562, 209, 27%), So-Jung Kim (813, 182, 18%), Akiko Kinebuchi (495, -54, -12%), Satomi Kinjo (805, -428, -114%), Nikoleta Kipritidou (824, 281, 25%), Maria Kirilenko (122, 295, 71%), Jessica Kirkland (366, 739, 67%), Etsuko Kitazaki (918, 66, 7%), Daniela Kix (429, 39, 8%), Sabine Klaschka (337, -97, -40%), Sandra Kleinova (88, 48, 35%), Daniela Klemenschits (608, -127, -26%), Sandra Klemenschits (381, 95, 20%), Sandra Kloesel (168, -25, -17%), Beier Ko (355, 130, 27%), Elizabeth Kobak (831, 223, 21%), Andrea Koch (810, 150, 16%), Arpi Kojian (795, -40, -5%), Annette Kolb (583, 228, 28%), Maria Kondratieva (357, -77, -27%), Milica Koprivica (662, -162, -32%), Irina Kornienko (978, 210, 18%), Alexandra Korotkevich (1089, -343, -46%), Mariya Koryttseva (201, 264, 57%), Jelena Kostanic (67, 4, 6%), Alexandra Kostikova (881, -64, -8%), Irina Kotkina (831, -78, -10%), Klara Koukalova (62, 58, 48%), Anna Kournikova (305, -270, -771%), Ekaterina Kozhokina (560, -169, -43%), Hanna Krampe (1021, -543, -114%), Lina Krasnoroutskaya (27, 148, 85%), Dimana Krastevitch (222, 244, 52%), Erica Krauth (306, 121, 28%), Monika Krauze (854, 307, 26%), Alexandra Kravets (198, 57, 22%), Daniela Krejsova (925, 180, 16%), Anne Kremer (389, -364, -1456%), Lucie Kriegsmannova (660, 63, 9%), Kavitha Krishnamurthy (901, 179, 17%), Svetlana Krivencheva (218, -1, 0%), Nicole Kriz (444, 124, 22%), Joannette Kruger (844, -395, -88%), Lucija Krzelj (259, 365, 58%), Renata Kucerkova (459, 451, 50%), Zuzana Kucova (208, 10, 5%), Jenny Kuhn (836, 88, 10%), Claudia Kuleszka (728, -269, -59%), Evgenia Kulikovskaya (164, -52, -46%), Blanka Kumbarova (1006, -325, -48%), Lubomira Kurhajcova (86, 23, 21%), Iryna Kuryanovich (503, 262, 34%),

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 296 Daria Kustava (558, -170, -44%), Rita Kuti Kis (174, -6, -4%), Svetlana Kuznetsova (36, 7, 16%), Emma Laine (860, -18, -2%), Po-Kuen Lam (655, 434, 40%), Bianka Lamade (176, 47, 21%), Gabriela Lastra (209, 91, 30%), Anais Laurendon (282, 137, 33%), Olha Lazarchuk (268, 192, 42%), Elodie Le Bescond (668, -338, -102%), Janet Lee (160, 45, 22%), Lindsay Lee-Waters (136, -15, -12%), Sophie Lefevre (256, 63, 20%), Jessica Lehnhoff (353, -79, -29%), Nicole Leimbach (851, 248, 23%), Gala Leon Garcia (96, 33, 26%), Varvara Lepchenko (517, 89, 15%), Pascale Leroy (688, 240, 26%), Ting Li (436, 371, 46%), Edita Liachoviciute (604, 67, 10%), Kelly Liggan (211, 2, 1%), Elena Likhovtseva (37, 5, 12%), Jenny Lindstrom (810, -248, -44%), Eugenia Linetskaya (221, 516, 70%), Ivana Lisjak (223, 216, 49%), Veronika Litvinskaya (684, 396, 37%), Amber Liu (252, 163, 39%), Nan-Nan Liu (401, -104, -35%), Nuria Llagostera Vives (139, 54, 28%), Rebecca Llewellyn (788, 188, 19%), Nancy Loefﬂer-Caro (971, 4, 0%), Emilie Loit (41, 17, 29%), Francesca Lubiani (336, -125, -59%), Mirjana Lucic (335, -133, -66%), Dominika Luzarova (412, -133, -48%), Heesun Lyoo-Suh (895, 20, 2%), Barbora Machovska (1043, -35, -3%), Alice Mackenzie (718, 298, 29%), Jana Macurova (777, -261, -51%), Caroline Maes (249, 1, 0%), Vittoria Maglio (1024, -295, -40%), Marnie Mahler (876, -207, -31%), Iva Majoli (131, -99, -309%), Borka Majstorovic (552, -106, -24%), Magdalena Maleeva (30, -16, -114%), Manisha Malhotra (535, -170, -47%), Sanda Mamic (229, 321, 58%), Petra Mandula (40, 50, 56%), Geeta Manohar (922, -102, -12%), Melanie Marois (238, 91, 28%), Katalin Marosi (172, -24, -16%), Marta Marrero (109, -23, -27%), Conchita Martinez (18, 16, 47%), Maria Jose Martinez (348, -70, -25%), Conc Martinez Granados (105, -11, -12%), Sandra Martinovic (599, 255, 30%), Andrea Masarykova (883, -248, -39%), Simona Matei (386, 298, 44%), Maja Matevzic (58, -7, -14%), Antonia Matic (298, 208, 41%), Bethanie Mattek (135, 135, 50%), Amélie Mauresmo (4, 2, 33%), Kelly Mc Cain (296, 42, 12%), Alex McGoodwin (1006, -148, -17%), Rachel McQuillan (263, -55, -26%), Lisa McShea (317, 10, 3%), Sabina Mediano (592, 2, 0%), Anabe Medina Garrigues (71, 45, 39%), Nicole Melch (555, -4, -1%), Vanessa Menga (860, -432, -101%), Jolanda Mens (450, -149, -50%), Giulia Meruzzi (741, -301, -68%), Yvonne Meusburger (260, 87, 25%), Jennifer Miccoli (1071, -76, -8%), Michaela Michalkova (397, 508, 56%), Ana Migliarini De Leon (439, -46, -12%), Magda Mihalache (322, 40, 11%), Marie-Gayane Mikaelian (66, -22, -50%), Meritxell Mimo (923, -340, -58%), Mandy Minella (640, 233, 27%), Marta Mir Portell (958, -307, -47%), Sania Mirza (399, 438, 52%), Aurelija Miseviciute (330, 225, 41%), Nana Miyagi (588, -321, -120%), Noha Mohsen (929, 170, 15%), Alicia Molik (35, 65, 65%), Eszter Molnar (406, -103, -34%), Kara Molony- Hussey (647, 65, 9%), Sylvia Montero (479, 532, 53%), Joanne Moore (626, -176, -39%), Milangela Morales (426, 49, 10%), Micaela Moran (551, 78, 12%), Corina Morariu (254, 146, 37%), Akiko Morigami (63, 71, 53%), Giorgia Mortello (546, -150, -38%), Svetlana Mossiakova (837, -41, -5%), Bahia Mouhtassine (183, -34, -23%), Karla Mraz (445, 59, 12%), Martina Muller (327, -257, -367%), Daniela Munoz (512, 190, 27%), Trudi Musgrave (318, -36, -13%), Anastasia Myskina (7, 4, 36%), Chie Nagano (881, 164, 16%), Kyra Nagy (212, 17, 7%), Henrieta Nagyova (91, -32, -54%), Aiko Nakamura (267, 43, 14%), Ljiljana Nanusevic (906, -144, -19%), Gabriela Navratilova (277, 27, 9%), Ross Neffa-De Los Rios (151, -63, -72%), Jana Nejedly (204, 32, 14%), Milena Nekvapilova (745, -17, -2%), Lenka Nemeckova (184, 3, 2%), Virag Nemeth (239, 223, 48%), Natalie Neri (690, 95, 12%), Kim Anh Nguyen (778, 141, 15%), Gabriela Niculescu (951, 3, 0%), Monica Niculescu (451, 424, 48%), Dominika Nociarova (248, 135, 35%), Ana Nogueira (697, -57, -9%), Hanna Nooni (292, 213, 42%), Seda Noorlander (144, 11, 7%), Helena Norfeldt (788, -113, -17%), Irena Nossenko (729, -125, -21%), Lenka Novotna (807, -340, -73%), Karolina Nowak (883, 295, 25%), Karen Nugent (707, 421, 37%), Katie O'Brien (742, -49, -7%), Jane O'Donoghue (235, 60, 20%), Elsa O'Riain (726, -329, -83%), Saori Obata (49, 59, 55%), Alejandra Obregon (1072, 131, 11%), Tzipora Obziler (129, 61, 32%), Femi Odeyemi Musa (1006, 48, 5%), Dragana Ognenovska (864, 295, 25%), Seiko Okamoto (287, 22, 7%), Hiromi Okazaki (1000, -134, -15%), Zuzana Ondraskova (87, 41, 32%), Romina Oprandi (943, -139, -17%), Diana Ospina (253, 204, 45%), Ekaterina Ostapenko (1108, -308, -38%), Lilia Osterloh (180, -24, -15%), Nadejda Ostrovskaya (202, -25, -14%), Maika Ozaki (384, 134, 26%), Nika Ozegovic (360, 415, 54%), Pemra Ozgen (702, 397, 36%), Karin Palme (782, -236, -43%), Antoaneta Pandjerova (654, -364, -126%), Tatiana Panova (119, -96, -417%), Natalia Papadopoulou (1100, 103, 9%), Arantxa Parra (68, 116, 63%), Lour Pascual Rodriguez (565, 372, 40%), Michaela Pastikova (138, 92, 40%), Karen Paterson (416, 292, 41%), Martina Pavelec (809, 414, 34%), Nadja Pavic (648, -72, -12%), Biljana Pavlova (835, -260, -45%), Shahar Peer (709, 123, 15%), Marie-Eve Pelletier (191, -32, -20%), Maria Penkova (515, 105, 17%), Flavia Pennetta (69, 26, 27%), Tatiana Perebiynis (80, 34, 30%), Liza Pereira (594, 407, 41%), Ariela Perez (1056, -78, -8%), Shenay Perry (143, 125, 47%), Stefania Pesce (702, 363, 34%), Jewel Peterson (320, 577, 64%), Klara Petersson (983, 172, 15%), Nadia Petrova (12, 99, 89%), Elena Petrucciano (840, 222, 21%), Sonal Phadke (596, 31, 5%), Virginie Pichet (189, 69, 27%), Frederica Piedade (285, 83, 23%), Mary Pierce (33, 19, 37%), Camille Pin (220, -85, -63%), Carmen Pinto (1089, 154, 12%), Tzvetana Pironkova (344, 209, 38%), Tina Pisnik (31, 17, 35%), Gloria Pizzichini (939, -683, -267%), Ioana Plesu (784, 42, 5%), Barbara Pocza (602, 425, 41%), Barbara Polidoro (918, 152, 14%), Ilona Poljakova (1104, -316, -40%), Alexandra Popa (1040, -68, -7%), Lana Popadic (293, 41, 12%), Tatiana Poutchek (121, -22, -22%), Olga Poutchkova (465, 283, 38%), Wynne Prakusya (205, -101, -97%), Nicole Pratt (53, -4, -8%), Libuse Prusova (213, -110, -107%), Julie Pullin (297, -100, -51%), Cecilia Quarracino (763, 83, 10%), Federica Quercia (895, 98, 10%), Sarah Raab (1082, -114, -12%), Mariam Ramon Climent (635, -292, -85%), Petra Rampre (241, 189, 44%), Dally Randriantefy (101, -8, -9%), Natacha Randriantefy (589, -244, -71%), Preeti Rao (943, 111, 11%), Sunitha Rao (207, 27, 12%), Lisa Raymond (28, 1, 3%), Virginie Razzano (72, 4, 5%), Samantha Reeves (75, 26, 26%), Lyndsay Reilly (1023, -357, -54%), Nicole Remis (301, 194, 39%), Nicole Rencken (358, -41, -13%), Brie Rippner (888, -737, -488%), Laura Ritchey-Thomas (943, 111, 11%), Barbara Rittner (118, -52, -79%), Alejandra Rivero (1024, -383, -60%), Florencia Rivolta (788, 65, 8%),

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 297 Veronica Rizhik (414, 218, 34%), Stephanie Rizzi (534, -277, -108%), Deanna Roberts (628, -205, -48%), Shadisha Robinson (461, 147, 24%), Laura Rocchi (573, 275, 32%), Anastassia Rodionova (165, -48, -41%), Angelika Roesch (210, -130, -162%), Nuria Roig (610, 356, 37%), Ahsha Rolle (652, 169, 21%), Jacquelyn Rosen (693, -163, -31%), Alicja Rosolska (776, -51, -7%), Capucine Rousseau (273, 76, 22%), Virginia Ruano Pascual (55, 10, 15%), Chanda Rubin (9, 4, 31%), Petra Russegger (340, -65, -24%), Nancy Rustignoli (737, 362, 33%), Margit Ruutel (607, 56, 8%), Katia Sabate (779, 212, 21%), Miho Saeki (269, -70, -35%), Dinara Saﬁna (54, 14, 21%), Misae Sakai (1050, -5, 0%), Joanna Sakowicz (516, -252, -95%), Ana Salas (592, 44, 7%), Ma. Emilia Salerni (173, -46, -36%), Carolina Salge (860, 282, 25%), Daniela Salomon (618, -86, -16%), Florencia Salvadores (605, 145, 19%), Olivia Sanchez (304, 62, 17%), Ma. Jo Sanchez Alayeto (362, 11, 3%), Ma. Pi Sanchez Alayeto (859, -61, -8%), Nuria Sanchez Garcia (716, 224, 24%), Maria Sanchez Lorenzo (42, 68, 62%), Raluca Sandu (509, -146, -40%), Mara Santangelo (146, 27, 16%), Carlota Santos (1043, 118, 10%), Ina Sartz (814, 135, 14%), Valentina Sassi (315, -68, -28%), Yevgenia Savransky (554, -222, -67%), Wukirasih Sawondari (770, -92, -14%), Monica Scartoni (909, -306, -51%), Stephanie Schaer (586, -5, -1%), Claudine Schaul (81, 51, 39%), Chanelle Scheepers (245, -19, -8%), Barbara Schett (79, -39, -98%), Francesca Schiavone (20, 21, 51%), Tina Schiechtl (243, 131, 35%), Nadine Schlotterer (713, 32, 4%), Kristen Schlukebir (266, 57, 18%), Tina Schmassmann (760, 89, 10%), Elizabeth Schmidt (766, -312, -69%), Jennifer Schmidt (513, -25, -5%), Caroline Schneider (677, -79, -13%), Monika Schneider (710, -191, -37%), Patty Schnyder (23, -8, -53%), Julia Schruff (114, 123, 52%), Barbara Schwartz (185, -59, -47%), Darina Sedenkova (570, 294, 34%), Lotty Seelen (421, 152, 27%), Nicole Seitenbecher (698, -119, -21%), Samrita Sekar (727, 268, 27%), Beti Sekulovski (500, -204, -69%), Monica Seles (60, -53, -757%), Irina Selyutina (519, -331, -176%), Ipek Senoglu (311, 259, 45%), Milagros Sequera (76, 42, 36%), Chrissie Seredni (921, 41, 4%), Magui Serna (22, 28, 56%), Adriana Serra Zanetti (104, -44, -73%), Antonella Serra Zanetti (107, -15, -16%), Delia Sescioreanu (262, 181, 41%), Meta Sevsek (958, 184, 16%), Nicole Sewell (499, -95, -24%), Selima Sfar (163, -25, -18%), Nicole Shabaz (908, 234, 20%), Maria Sharapova (32, 154, 83%), Meghann Shaughnessy (17, 13, 43%), Ekaterina Shulaeva (665, 496, 43%), Laura Siegemund (601, 634, 51%), Natasa Sijakovic (819, 135, 14%), Malgorzata Silka (901, 191, 17%), Neuza Silva (732, -22, -3%), Marta Simic (1056, -157, -17%), Amandine Singla (350, 366, 51%), Rosa Maria Sitja (665, -241, -57%), Lioudmila Skavronskaia (181, 88, 33%), Pavlina Slitrova (490, 435, 47%), An Smashnova-Pistolesi (16, 0, 0%), Irina Smirnova (986, -50, -5%), Linda Smolenakova (631, -32, -5%), Lenka Snajdrova (339, 148, 30%), Tara Snyder (111, 60, 35%), Leticia Sobral (356, 96, 21%), Ivana Sokac (943, 176, 16%), Adriana Solarova (794, -54, -7%), Shan-Shan Song (1072, 70, 6%), Aneta Soukup-Zahalka (657, -48, -8%), Melanie South (851, 80, 9%), Abigail Spears (225, 86, 28%), Veronica Spiegel (614, 269, 30%), Karolina Sprem (59, 214, 78%), Katarina Srebotnik (39, -3, -8%), Diana Srebrovic (276, 252, 48%), Aleksandra Srndovic (485, 13, 3%), Hana Sromova (250, 98, 28%), Lina Stanciute (289, 529, 65%), Lydia Steinbach (387, -33, -9%), Danielle Steinberg (978, -79, -9%), Emily Stellato (466, -10, -2%), Shelley Stephens (378, -52, -16%), Alexandra Stevenson (82, -64, -356%), Bryanne Stewart (367, -193, -111%), Sarah Stone (939, -296, -46%), Samantha Stosur (153, 112, 42%), Barbora Strycova (161, 61, 27%), Paola Suarez (14, 13, 48%), Evgenia Subbotina (878, -225, -34%), Martina Sucha (89, -25, -39%), Madita Suer (606, -120, -25%), Ai Sugiyama (10, 14, 58%), Valentina Sulpizio (734, 48, 6%), Tian Tian Sun (141, 87, 38%), Eun Hee Sung (983, 220, 18%), Utako Suzuki (780, 35, 4%), Åsa Svensson (364, -287, -373%), Adriana Szili (687, -213, -45%), Keiko Taguchi (708, -52, -8%), Tomoko Taira (664, 56, 8%), Tomoyo Takagishi (484, 517, 52%), Ayami Takase (418, -126, -43%), Kokoro Takehara (695, 306, 31%), Ryoko Takemura (383, 128, 25%), Silvija Talaja (93, -18, -24%), Elise Tamaela (217, 814, 79%), Keiko Tameishi (1082, -456, -73%), Shiho Tanaka (656, 230, 26%), Tamarine Tanasugarn (34, -6, -21%), Montinee Tangphong (591, 285, 33%), Elena Tatarkova (126, 40, 24%), Gaelle Taton (458, 63, 12%), Sarah Taylor (159, -76, -92%), Anna Tchakvetadze (374, 382, 51%), Remi Tezuka (359, 13, 3%), Chattida Thimjapo (718, -58, -9%), Carla Tiene (328, -10, -3%), Ana Timotic (224, 140, 38%), Lisa Tognetti (577, 138, 19%), Napaporn Tongsalee (284, 218, 43%), Dessislava Topalova (261, -34, -15%), Margot Torre (639, -38, -6%), Cristin Torrens Valero (106, -28, -36%), Melissa Torres (624, -309, -98%), Jacqueline Trail (511, -225, -79%), Ana Cecilia Trevino (907, -68, -8%), Alienor Tricerri (851, -240, -39%), Emilie Trouche (788, 42, 5%), Meilen Tu (145, -72, -99%), Radhika Tulpule (798, -133, -20%), Iroda Tulyaganova (50, 5, 9%), Lenka Tvaroskova (452, -17, -4%), Neha Uberoi (446, 341, 43%), Shikha Uberoi (380, 374, 50%), Vladimira Uhlirova (438, 279, 39%), Nami Urabe (864, -38, -5%), Nana Urotadze (895, -93, -12%), Tatsiana Uvarova (236, 219, 48%), Megha Vakharia (476, 293, 38%), Julia Vakulenko (73, 136, 65%), Dominique Van Boekel (694, 386, 36%), Tessy Van De Ven (316, 166, 34%), Andrea Van Den Hurk (377, 116, 24%), Alana Van Der Vort (923, -621, -206%), Anousjka Van Exel (321, -107, -50%), Suza Van Hartingsveldt (498, 89, 15%), Evelyne Van Hyfte (407, 472, 54%), Andreea Vanc (182, -38, -26%), Cora Vasilescu (1051, 110, 9%), Alena Vaskova (127, 27, 18%), Nadejda Vassileva (863, 65, 7%), Aurelie Vedy (497, -53, -12%), Gabriel Velasco Andreu (538, 248, 32%), Archana Venkataraman (644, 351, 35%), Arthi Venkataraman (1029, 207, 17%), Maria Vento-Kabchi (44, 109, 71%), Verdiana Verardi (1029, -85, -9%), Elena Vianello (492, 155, 24%), Nathalie Vierin (175, -12, -7%), Roberta Vinci (116, 66, 36%), Suchanan Viratprasert (240, 233, 49%), Alexia Virgili (1026, -203, -25%), Ivana Visic (477, 63, 12%), Thassha Vitayaviroj (803, 89, 10%), Antonela Voina (483, -88, -22%), Gabriela Volekova (427, 4, 1%), Sandra Volk (780, -67, -9%), Renata Voracova (132, -1, -1%), Julia Vorobieva (585, 504, 46%), Galina Voskoboeva (157, 245, 61%), Ana Vrljic (365, 127, 26%), Nana Wada (742, -98, -15%), Astrid Waernes (341, 281, 45%), I-Ting Wang (487, 123, 20%), Patricia Wartusch (154, -72, -88%), Mashona Washington (178, -65, -58%), Cindy Watson (548, -406, -286%), Vanessa Webb (155, -5, -3%), Emily Webley-Smith (469, 204, 30%), Svenja Weidemann (901, -201, -29%), Marlene Weingärtner (47, 51, 52%),

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 298 Stefanie Weis (467, -128, -38%), Tiffany Welford (699, -99, -17%), Vanessa Wellauer (840, 252, 23%), Nina Wennerstrom (1072, 177, 14%), Scarlett Werner (310, 99, 24%), Jessica Weyreuter (1003, -65, -7%), Christina Wheeler (169, 3, 2%), Angelique Widjaja (95, -26, -38%), Serena Williams (3, -2, -200%), Venus Williams (11, -9, -450%), Jasmin Woehr (581, -274, -89%), Kathrin Woerle (409, -76, -23%), Maria Wolfbrandt (393, -169, -75%), Pauline Wong (1072, -118, -12%), Aleksandra Wozniak (878, -309, -54%), Georgette Wright (787, 184, 19%), Yan-Ze Xie (319, 62, 16%), Zi Yan (179, 120, 40%), Kanako Yano (935, 135, 13%), Alena Yaryshka (472, 27, 5%), Anne Yelsey (932, -104, -13%), Akiko Yonemura (720, 148, 17%), Tomoko Yonemura (351, 78, 18%), Yuka Yoshida (137, 88, 39%), Meng Yuan (689, 295, 30%), Marianna Yuferova (566, 50, 8%), Paula Zabala (757, 81, 10%), Carla Zabaleta (888, 273, 24%), Christina Zachariadou (370, 163, 31%), Sandra Zahlavova (658, 264, 29%), Anna Zaporozhanova (323, 469, 59%), Dragana Zaric (435, -192, -79%), Anna Zarska (385, 37, 9%), Maria Paola Zavagli (600, 2, 0%), Tory Zawacki (762, -107, -16%), Magdalena Zdenovcova (206, 29, 12%), Zuzana Zemenova (470, 55, 10%), Anzela Zguna (394, 370, 48%), Yao Zhang (935, -17, -2%), Jie Zheng (94, 89, 49%), Gabriela Ziliotto (973, -53, -6%), Emma Zuleta (943, 111, 11%), Hilda Zuleta (711, 388, 35%), Fabiola Zuluaga (38, 36, 49%), Vera Zvonareva (13, 32, 71%)

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Page 299 Index A Bartoli, Marion 13, 152, 153, 154, 188, Black/Raymond 155, 172, 189, 192, 198, 201, 204, 205, 210, 214, 220, 210 Abramovic, Ivana 212, 218 226 Black/Stubbs 155, 172 Abramovic/Okamoto 228 Bartoli, Marion — See also Alves/ Boca Raton 238 Acapulco 18, 34, 127, 136, 162, 193, Bartoli Boca Raton — see also Delray Beach 204, 218 Bartoli/Bedanova 171 Bogota 34, 127, 136, 167, 193, 203, 218 Adams, Katrina 287 Bartoli/Casanova 154, 171, 197, 212, Bol 31, 34, 127, 136, 163, 170, 193, Albuquerque $75K 35, 193 213 207, 222 Alves/Bartoli 154, 171 Bartoli/Cohen-Aloro 154, 171, 219 Bonaventure — See Fort Lauderdale Amelia Island 19, 32, 33, 127, 135, 143, Bartoli/Dhenin 154, 171 Bonicelli/Chanfreau Lovera 263 144, 156, 165, 192, 206, 233, 234, Bartoli/Dokic 154, 171 Bordeaux $75K+H 35, 193 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 241 Bartoli/Dominikovic 154, 171 Boshoff/Kloss 263 Ani/Gagliardi 158, 171 Bartoli/Farina Elia 171 Boston 239 Ani/Prusova 193 Bartoli/Foretz 154, 171 Bovina, Elena 5, 8, 10, 12, 16, 37, 38, Antwerp 30, 32, 33, 126, 135, 143, 144, Bartoli/Granville 154, 171 39, 40, 49, 53, 68, 69, 70, 71, 73, 83, 156, 169, 192, 203, 218, 233, 234, Bartoli/Irvin 154, 171 96, 100, 106, 111, 116, 139, 145, 235, 236, 241 Bartoli/Jidkova 154, 172 150, 152, 153, 155, 188, 190, 201, Appelmans, Sabine 236 Bartoli/Loit 154, 172 202, 204, 205, 206, 208, 209, 211, Arendt, Nicole 150, 152, 154, 240 Bartoli/Matevzic 154, 172 212, 213, 214, 216, 217, 218, 221, Arendt/Dominikovic 154, 171 Bartoli/Schneider 154, 172 223, 224, 227, 229, 230, 235 Arendt/Perebiynis 154 Bartoli/Sharapova 172 Bovina/Callens 155, 172 Arvidsson, Soﬁa 35 Basuki/Julianto 228 Bovina/Déchy 155 Asagoe, Shinobu 13, 35, 73, 111, 113, Batumi $75K 35, 193 Bovina/Hénin-Hardenne 155, 172 150, 152, 153, 154, 198, 201, 204, Bedanova, Daja 2, 8, 10, 16, 37, 39, 40, Bovina/Molik 155, 172, 223 205, 208, 209, 212, 213, 219, 224, 49, 83, 89, 100, 106, 111, 116, 139, Bovina/Stubbs 155, 173, 189, 192, 202, 225 201, 208, 218, 227 205, 228 Asagoe/Liggan 154, 171 Bedanova, Daja — See also Bartoli/ Boynton Beach $75K 35, 193 Asagoe/Miyagi 154, 171, 197, 203, 220 Bedanova Brandi, Kristina 13, 35, 111 Asagoe/Sugiyama 154, 171, 226 Bedanova/Dokic 157, 172 Brighton 237, 238, 239 Ashley, Teryn 35, 191 Bedanova/Hantuchova 158, 172 Brisbane 238, 239 Ashley/Baker, Ally 193 Bedanova/Husarova 159, 172 Bronx $50K 35, 193 Ashley/Spears 189, 193, 201, 210, 226 Bedanova/Maleeva 162, 172 Budapest 27, 34, 127, 137, 163, 193, Atlanta 239, 241 Bedanova/Voracova 225 206, 221 Auckland 18, 34, 127, 136, 193, 201, Benesova, Iveta 201, 221 Bueno/Court 263 216 Benesova/Pastikova 214 Bunge, Bettina 281, 283 Austin, Tracy 262, 276, 281, 283, 285, Berlin 21, 32, 33, 127, 134, 143, 144, 286 166, 168, 192, 207, 222, 233, 234, C Australian Open 30, 32, 33, 126, 134, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 241 Cagnes-Sur-Mer $75K 35, 193 143, 144, 170, 192, 202, 216, 233, Beygelzimer, Yulia 35, 191 Callens, Els 13, 152, 153, 156, 191, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 241 Beygelzimer/Poutchek 189, 193, 213 198, 213, 222, 224, 229 B Biella $50K+H 35, 193 Callens, Els — See also Bovina/Callens Birmingham 22, 34, 127, 136, 138, 156, Callens/Fujiwara 156, 173 Bacheva, Lubomira 35 193, 208, 224 Callens/Huber 156, 173 Bachman/Kloesel 231 Birnerova, Eva 35 Callens/Husarova 156, 173 Bahia 235, 236, 241 Black, Cara 13, 150, 152, 153, 155, 188, Callens/Loit 156, 173, 197, 207, 222 Balestrat, Dianne 281, 283 190, 198, 201, 204, 207, 208, 209, Callens/Majoli 156, 173 Balestrat/Gourlay 263 211, 219, 227, 229, 234, 240 Callens/Navratilova 156, 173 Bali 19, 34, 127, 136, 169, 170, 193, Black/Huber 155, 172 Callens/Sugiyama 156 212, 228 Black/Likhovtseva 155, 172, 189, 193, Callens/Svensson 156, 173 Barabanschikova, Olga 201 197, 201, 202, 203, 205, 206, 207, Callens/Tu 173, 189, 193, 208 Barcelona 237, 241 209, 217, 225, 226 Callens/Widjaja 156, 173 Barker, Sue 262, 281, 283 Black/Molik 155, 172 Camerin, Maria Elena 35, 138, 227 Barna, Anca 13, 202, 208, 212, 214, Black/Morariu 155, 172 215, 221 Black/Navratilova 172, 197 Barna/Medina Garrigues 214

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Index Canadian Open 21, 32, 33, 126, 134, Clijsters, Kim 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 17, Daniilidou/Pratt 165, 173, 202 143, 144, 160, 164, 192, 211, 227, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38, 40, 41, 42, 43, Daniilidou/Rubin 166, 173 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 44, 45, 46, 47, 49, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, Daniilidou/Vento-Kabchi 169, 173 241 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 62, 64, 65, 66, 67, Daniilidou/Wartusch 170, 173 Canberra 28, 34, 127, 137, 162, 193, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 81, 82, 83, 89, 91, Date, Kimiko 236, 237, 281, 283 201, 216 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 100, 103, 104, Davenport, Lindsay 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, Capriati, Jennifer 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 17, 105, 106, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113, 18, 32, 33, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 32, 33, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 49, 114, 116, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 49, 51, 52, 53, 54, 53, 59, 66, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 83, 123, 127, 131, 132, 133, 139, 143, 55, 56, 57, 59, 60, 64, 65, 66, 68, 69, 96, 97, 98, 100, 105, 106, 111, 116, 145, 146, 147, 148, 150, 152, 153, 70, 71, 82, 84, 95, 97, 98, 100, 103, 127, 131, 132, 139, 143, 145, 146, 156, 188, 190, 195, 196, 198, 199, 104, 106, 109, 111, 116, 118, 121, 148, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 207, 208, 127, 131, 132, 139, 143, 145, 146, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 147, 148, 152, 153, 156, 188, 190, 215, 216, 219, 220, 222, 223, 224, 216, 217, 219, 220, 222, 223, 224, 195, 196, 198, 199, 202, 204, 205, 226, 227, 228, 229, 231, 233, 235, 225, 226, 227, 228, 230, 231, 232, 206, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 236, 237, 240, 242, 262, 272, 281, 233, 234, 235, 236, 240, 242, 275, 216, 217, 219, 220, 221, 223, 224, 283, 286 276, 277, 279, 281, 283 226, 227, 228, 230, 233, 234, 235, Capriati/Hantuchova 158, 173 Clijsters/Sugiyama 173, 186, 189, 192, 236, 237, 240, 241, 243, 250, 262, Capriati/Serna 209, 224 197, 201, 203, 204, 208, 209, 210, 272, 275, 276, 277, 279, 281, 283, Cargill, Ansley 205, 220 214, 215, 219, 224, 225, 226, 228, 285, 286 Cargill/Lee 161, 173 232, 263, 279 Davenport/M. J. Fernandez 263 Casablanca 34, 127, 137, 193, 205, 221 Coetzer, Amanda 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 34, Davenport/Morariu 263 Casals, Rosie 265, 272, 281, 283 36, 37, 38, 40, 49, 53, 68, 69, 70, 71, Davenport/Novotna 263 Casals/King 263 83, 89, 100, 106, 111, 116, 127, 131, Davenport/Raymond 156, 173, 186, Casals/Tegart Dalton 263 139, 145, 198, 201, 203, 204, 205, 189, 192, 197, 204, 206, 209, 216, Casals/Turnbull 263 206, 208, 209, 210, 211, 214, 217, 217, 219, 223, 226 Casanova, Myriam 147, 153, 198, 211, 219, 221, 229, 235, 236, 237, 281, Davenport/Shaughnessy 156, 174 212, 213, 227, 230 283 Déchy, Nathalie 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 34, Casanova, Myriam — See also Bartoli/ Coetzer/Steck 197 36, 37, 38, 40, 49, 70, 84, 100, 106, Casanova Cohen-Aloro, Stephanie 13, 35, 202, 111, 116, 127, 131, 139, 145, 148, Casanova/Pratt 165, 173 204, 210, 217, 219 152, 153, 157, 201, 208, 209 Casoni/Martinez Granados 193 Cohen-Aloro, Stephanie — See also Déchy, Nathalie — See also Bovina/ Castano, Catalina 35 Bartoli/Cohen-Aloro Déchy Cervanova, Ludmila 13, 205, 206, 209, Cohen-Aloro/Tauziat 169, 173 Déchy/Loit 157, 174, 216 212, 215, 225, 227, 231 Columbus $50K 35, 193 Dekmeijere/Miyagi 193 Chaloner/Evers 263 Court, Margaret 262, 265, 270, 271, Delray Beach 237 Chanfreau Lovera, Gail (Sheriff) — See 272, 276, 281, 283, 288 Dementieva, Elena 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 19, also Bonicelli/Chanfreau Lovera Court, Margaret — See also Bueno/ 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38, 40, 41, 42, 44, Chanfreau/Durr 263 Court 49, 53, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 84, 91, Charleston 21, 32, 33, 126, 134, 143, Court/Goolagong Cawley 263 92, 100, 106, 110, 111, 116, 122, 144, 166, 168, 192, 206, 221, 233, Court/Tegart Dalton 263 123, 127, 131, 132, 140, 143, 145, 234, 235, 236 Court/Wade 263 148, 150, 152, 153, 157, 191, 198, Chase Championships 233, 234, 235, Cravero/Suarez 168, 173 202, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 236, 237, 241 Craybas, Jill 191, 201, 229 211, 212, 213, 214, 216, 218, 219, Chicago 236, 237, 238, 239, 241 Craybas/Huber 159, 173, 189, 193, 208 221, 222, 224, 227, 228, 229, 230, Chladkova, Denisa 13, 202, 207, 208, Cuneo $50K+H 35, 193 231, 233, 235, 281, 283 209, 210, 211, 213, 222 Czink, Melinda 35, 212 Dementieva/Farina Elia 157, 174 Cho, Yoon Jeong 13, 201, 203, 216 Dementieva/Gagliardi 157, 174 Cincinnati 238 D Dementieva/Grande 174 Dallas 237, 238, 239 Dementieva/Husarova 174, 197, 202, Daniilidou, Eleni 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 34, 217 36, 37, 38, 40, 49, 68, 69, 70, 71, 83, Dementieva/Kournikova 157, 174, 205 100, 106, 111, 116, 127, 131, 139, Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya 157, 174, 145, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 207, 189, 193, 197, 209, 212, 213, 223, 208, 209, 211, 212, 213, 214, 216, 225 218, 219, 220, 224, 230 Dementieva/Zvonareva 157, 174 Daniilidou/Morariu 163, 173 Denain $75K 35, 193

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Index Detroit 239 E Filderstadt 17, 32, 33, 126, 135, 143, Devidze, Salome 35 144, 165, 168, 192, 212, 213, 230, Eastbourne 25, 32, 33, 127, 135, 143, Dhenin, Caroline — See also Bartoli/ 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 144, 156, 165, 192, 209, 224, 233, Dhenin 241 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 241 Dhenin/Lamade 193 Fokina/Koryttseva 214 Embry/Lehnhoff 193 Diaz-Oliva, Mariana 204 Foretz, Stephanie 208 Ericsson 33, 237, 238 Dinan $50K+H 35, 193 Foretz, Stephanie — See also Bartoli/ Ericsson — See also Miami Ditty/McShea 193 Foretz Essen 235, 236, 237, 241 Doha 23, 34, 127, 136, 161, 165, 193, Foretz/Ant. Serra Zanetti 209 Estoril 27, 34, 127, 136, 163, 170, 193, 203, 218 Foretz/Sharapova 154 206 Dokic, Jelena 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 19, 37, Fort Lauderdale 239 Eugene $50K 35, 193 38, 40, 41, 42, 49, 50, 53, 68, 69, 70, Frazier, Amy 13, 53, 201, 206, 210, Evers, Dianne — See also Chaloner/ 71, 84, 100, 106, 111, 116, 120, 132, 214, 216, 221, 226, 230, 237 Evers 140, 145, 147, 150, 152, 153, 157, Frazier/Lee 161, 175, 193 Evert, Chris 238, 239, 262, 270, 272, 188, 198, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, French Open — See Roland Garros 276, 281, 283, 285, 286 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 214, Fujiwara, Rika 150, 152, 158 Evert/Morozova 263 217, 218, 219, 220, 222, 223, 226, Fujiwara, Rika — See also Callens/ Evert/Navratilova 263 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 235, 236, Fujiwara F 243, 279, 281, 283 Fujiwara/Gagliardi 158, 175 Fairbank/Harford 263 Dokic, Jelena — See also Bartoli/Dokic Fujiwara/Hopkins 158, 175 Fairbank/Reynolds 263 Dokic, Jelena — See also Bedanova/ Fujiwara/Musgrave 158, 175 Fano $50K 35, 193 Dokic Fujiwara/Obata 158, 175, 193 Farina 5, 153, 211 Dokic/Hantuchova 157, 174, 206 Fujiwara/Panova 158, 175 Farina Elia, Silvia 6, 8, 10, 12, 20, 34, Dokic/Harkleroad 157, 174 Fujiwara/Saﬁna 158, 175 36, 37, 38, 40, 49, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, Dokic/Matevzic 157, 174 Fujiwara/Vinci 158, 175 73, 84, 100, 106, 111, 114, 116, 127, Dokic/Morariu 157, 174, 211, 227 Fukuoka $50K 35, 193 131, 133, 138, 140, 145, 148, 202, Dokic/Petrova 157, 174, 197, 202, 207, Fullerton $50K 35, 193 203, 204, 205, 207, 208, 209, 210, 222 Fusai, Alexandra 240, 291 211, 212, 213, 217, 218, 223, 224, Dokic/Saﬁna 157, 174 Fusai/Tauziat 169, 175 225 Dokic/Shaughnessy 157, 174 Farina Elia, Silvia — See also Dokic/Srebotnik 157 G Dementieva/Farina Elia Dokic/Strebotnik 174 Gadusek, Bonnie 239 Farina Elia/Garbin 208 Dokic/Stubbs 157, 174, 206, 209 Gagliardi, Emmanuelle 13, 152, 153, Farina Elia/Hantuchova 158, 174 Dominguez Lino/Llagostera Vives 193 158, 188, 198, 201, 202, 204, 205, Farina Elia/Schett 166, 174 Dominikovic, Evie 202 206, 208, 213 Fedak/Fokina 193 Dominikovic, Evie — See also Arendt/ Gagliardi, Emmanuelle — See also Ani/ Fendick/MJ Fernandez 263 Dominikovic Gagliardi Fernandez, Clarisa 8, 10, 20, 37, 40, 49, Dominikovic, Evie — See also Bartoli/ Gagliardi, Emmanuelle — See also 53, 84, 101, 106, 111, 116, 145, 201, Dominikovic Dementieva/Gagliard 202, 204, 205, 208, 220, 223, 224 Dothan $75K 35, 193 Gagliardi, Emmanuelle — See also Clarisa Fernandez/Pratt 165, 175 Douchevina, Vera 35, 211, 213 Fujiwara/Gagliardi Clarisa Fernandez/Vento-Kabchi 169, Douchevina/Voskoboeva 193 Gagliardi/Grande 158, 175 175 Drake, Maureen 35 Gagliardi/Grant 158, 175 Clarisa Fernandez/Widjaja 170, 175 Dubai 21, 32, 33, 127, 135, 143, 144, Gagliardi/Harkleroad 158, 175 Fernandez, Gigi 251, 266, 270, 271, 160, 164, 192, 203, 218, 233, 234, Gagliardi/Maleeva 158, 175 272, 278, 287, 288 235, 236, 241 Gagliardi/Mandula 158, 175, 197, 202, Gigi Fernandez/Navratilova 263 Dubai $75K+H 35, 193 217 Gigi Fernandez/White 263 Dulko, Gisela 138, 191 Gagliardi/Nagyova 175 Gigi Fernandez/Zvereva 263, 270, 278 Dulko/Salerni 189, 193, 205 Gagliardi/Rittner 158, 175, 214 Fernandez, Mary Joe 236, 237, 238, Dulko/Vento-Kabchi 169, 174 Gagliardi/Rubin 158, 175, 229 281, 283, 286 Durie, Jo 239, 281, 283 Gagliardi/Schett 158, 175 Fernandez, Mary Joe — See also Durr, Françoise 265, 272, 276, 288 Gagliardi/Schnyder 158, 175, 222 Davenport/MJ Fernandez Durr, Françoise — See also Chanfreau/ Gagliardi/Shaughnessy 158, 175, 212 Fernandez, Mary Joe — See also Durr 263 Gagliardi/Tarabini 158, 175 Fendick/MJ Fernandez Durr/A Jones 263 Gagliardi/Widjaja 158, 175 Durr/Hard 263 Gajdosova, Jarmila 206 Durr/Stove 263

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Index Garbin, Tathiana 35, 138, 191, 201, 207, Hamburg 235, 236, 237, 238, 241 Hénin-Hardenne, Justine 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 212, 228, 231 Hanika, Sylvia 239, 281, 283 10, 12, 21, 32, 33, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, Garbin/Loit 162, 176, 189, 193, 201 Hannover 235, 236 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 49, 51, 52, Garbin/Petrova 164, 176 Hantuchova, Daniela 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 62, 64, Garbin/Pratt 165, 176 21, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 49, 50, 53, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 81, Garrison(-Jackson), Zina 238, 239, 281, 68, 69, 70, 71, 73, 84, 101, 106, 111, 82, 84, 89, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 283 116, 140, 145, 150, 152, 153, 158, 101, 103, 104, 105, 106, 108, 109, Gers, Ilke 231 188, 198, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 110, 111, 113, 114, 116, 118, 119, Gifu $50K 35, 193 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 120, 121, 122, 123, 127, 131, 132, Girona $50K+H 35, 193 213, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 133, 140, 143, 145, 146, 147, 148, Gold Coast 18, 34, 127, 136, 160, 164, 222, 223, 225, 226, 227, 229, 230, 201, 202, 203, 205, 206, 207, 208, 193, 201, 216 231, 235, 236, 281, 283 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, Goolagong (Cawley), Evonne 262, 266, Hantuchova, Daniela — See also 217, 218, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 272, 276, 281, 283, 286 Bedanova/Hantuchova 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, Goolagong (Cawley), Evonne — See Hantuchova, Daniela — See also 233, 235, 236, 240, 244, 262, 275, also Court/Goolagong Cawley Capriati/Hantuchova 276, 279, 281, 283, 291 Goolagong Cawley/Gourlay 263 Hantuchova, Daniela — See also Dokic/ Hénin-Hardenne, Justine — See also Gourlay (Cawley), Helen — See also Hantuchova Bovina/Hénin-Hardenne Balestrat/Gourlay Hantuchova/Husarova 158 Hénin-Hardenne/Pratt 165, 176 Gourlay Cawley, Helen 288 Hantuchova/Rittner 158, 176 Henke/Schaul 193 Gourlay Cawley/Russell 263 Hantuchova/Rubin 158, 176, 197, 224, Hilton Head 237, 238, 239, 241 Gourlay, Helen — See also Goolagong 225 Hingis, Martina 6, 7, 8, 10, 53, 66, 145, Cawley/Gourlay Hantuchova/Schett 158, 176 146, 147, 150, 151, 233, 234, 235, Gourlay/Harris 263 Hantuchova/Serna 158, 176, 214 236, 237, 240, 241, 245, 252, 262, Graf, Stefﬁ 53, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, Hantuchova/Shaughnessy 158, 176, 266, 270, 271, 272, 275, 276, 277, 244, 262, 270, 272, 275, 276, 277, 202, 217, 220 278, 279, 281, 283, 285, 286, 287, 281, 283, 285, 286 Hantuchova/Sugiyama 158, 176, 202 288 Graf/Sabatini 263 Harford, Tanya — See also Fairbank/ Hingis/Kournikova 263, 278 Grande, Rita 13, 34, 36, 38, 127, 131, Harford Hingis/Lucic 263, 270 153, 201, 202, 205, 207, 208, 210, Harkleroad, Ashley 13, 73, 106, 201, Hingis/Novotna 263, 270 217, 221, 223 206, 208, 209, 221, 223, 229 Hingis/Pierce 263 Grande, Rita — See also Dementieva/ Harkleroad, Ashley — See also Dokic/ Hingis/Sukova 263 Grande Harkleroad Hingis/Zvereva 263 Grande, Rita — See also Gagliardi/ Harkleroad, Ashley — See also Hobart 34, 127, 137, 155, 161, 193, Grande Gagliardi/Harkleroad 201, 216 Grande/Schett 166, 176 Harkleroad/Washington 206 Hopkins, Jennifer 35 Grande/Vento-Kabchi 169, 176 Harris, Kerry — See also Gourlay/ Hopkins, Jennifer — See also Fujiwara/ Grande/Wartusch 170, 176 Harris Callens Grande/Widjaja 170, 176 Hartford 239 Houston 237, 238, 239, 241 Grandin, Natalie 147 Haynes, Angela 210 Huber, Anke 53, 236, 237, 281, 283 Grant, Kim — See also Gagliardi/Grant Helsinki 25, 34, 127, 136, 193, 211 Huber, Liezel (Horn) 150, 152, 153, Grant/Vento-Kabchi 169, 176 Hénin, Justine — See Justine Hénin- 159, 188, 190, 198, 234 Granville, Laura 13, 35, 201, 202, 203, Hardenne Huber, Liezel — See also Black/Huber 204, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 214, Huber, Liezel — See also Callens/ 216, 218, 222, 226, 227 Huber Granville, Laura — See also Bartoli/ Huber, Liezel — See also Craybas/ Granville Huber Grönefeld, Anna-Lena 35 Huber/Maleeva 159, 176, 189, 192, 197, Grönefeld/Shaughnessy 167, 176 205, 207, 208, 211, 220, 222 Gubacsi, Zsoﬁa 35 Huber/Martinez 159, 176 Gubacsi/Nagy 193 Huber/Navratilova 159, 176, 189, 205 Gussoni, Natalia 35 Huber/Sugiyama 159, 176, 189, 192, 214 H Husarova, Janette 150, 152, 153, 159, Hack, Sabine 237 198, 201, 202, 204, 240 Halard-Decugis 235, 236, 237, 287 Husarova, Janette — See also Halard-Decugis/Sugiyama 263 Bedanove/Husarova

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Index Husarova, Janette — See also Callens/ Key Biscayne — See also Lipton, Kulikovskaya/Tatarkova 189, 193, 211 Tu Ericsson, Miami Kurhajcova, Lubomira 35, 215, 232 Husarova, Janette — See also King, Billie Jean 262, 267, 272, 276, Kurhajcova/Prusova 193 Hantuchova/Husarova 281, 283, 286 Kustava/Tatarkova 193, 213 Husarova, Janette — See also King, Billie Jean — See also Casals/ Kutuzova, Viktoriya 211 Dementieva/Husarova King Kuznetova/Navratilova 213 Husarova/Kuznetsova 159, 176 King/Navratilova 263 Kuznetsova, Svetlana 8, 10, 13, 22, 37, Husarova/Likhovtseva 159, 176 King/Stove 263 40, 49, 53, 85, 89, 101, 106, 111, Husarova/Majoli 159, 176 Kirilenko, Maria 35 116, 140, 145, 152, 153, 160, 188, Husarova/Martinez 159, 177 Kiyomura/Sawamatsu 263 190, 198, 204, 207, 210, 211, 219, Husarova/Schett 159, 177, 204, 223 Klagenfurt 208 226, 227, 229, 234 Husarova/Schnyder 159, 177 Kleinova, Sandra 207, 213, 229 Kuznetsova, Svetlana — See also Hyderabad 30, 34, 127, 136, 161, 193, Kloss, Ilana — See also Boshoff/Kloss Husarova/Kuznetsova 202, 217 Kohde-Kilsch, Claudia 239, 281, 283 Kuznetsova/Navratilova 160, 177, 186, Kohde-Kilsch/Sukova 263 189, 192, 193, 197, 201, 203, 205, I Koryttseva, Mariya — See Fokina/ 207, 211, 213, 216, 220, 228, 229 Indian Wells 17, 32, 33, 127, 134, 143, Koryttseva 144, 156, 165, 192, 204, 219, 233, Kostanic, Jelena 13, 204, 210, 211 L 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 241 Kostanic/Matevzic 201 Lamade, Bianka 35 Indianapolis 238, 239 Koukalova, Klara 13, 202, 208, 210, Latina $50K 35, 193 Innsbruck $50K 35, 193 216 Lee, Janet 150, 152, 161, 191 Irvin, Marisa 35 Kournikova, Anna 8, 10, 21, 37, 39, 40, Lee, Janet — See also Cargill/Lee Irvin, Marissa — See also Bartoli/Irvin 49, 53, 85, 89, 98, 101, 106, 111, Lee, Janet — See also Frazier/Lee Italian Open — see Rome 116, 140, 148, 150, 152, 159, 194, Lee/Lee-Waters 161, 177 220, 234, 240, 252, 278, 281, 283, Lee/Lehnhoff 161, 177, 193 J 291 Lee/Morariu 161, 178, 229 Jaeger, Andrea 281, 283 Kournikova, Anna — See also Lee/Pelletier 161, 178 Janes, Amanda 209 Dementieva/Kournikova Lee/Prakusya 165, 178, 189, 193, 203 Jankovic, Jelena 35, 221 Kournikova/Rubin 177, 216 Lee/Tu 161, 178 Japan Open 34, 127, 136, 193, 213, 229 Krasnoroutskaya, Lina 5, 8, 10, 12, 21, Lee/Weingärtner 161, 178 Jausovec, Mima 262, 281, 283 37, 38, 40, 49, 68, 69, 70, 71, 85, 89, Lee/Widjaja 161, 178 Jausovec/Ruzici 263 101, 106, 111, 116, 132, 140, 145, Lee-Waters, Lindsay — See also Lee/ Jeyaseelan, Sonya 191 152, 153, 160, 191, 198, 202, 203, Lee-Waters Jeyaseelan/Maleeva 162, 177 208, 210, 211, 212, 213, 216, 217, Lehnhoff, Jessica — See also Lee/ Jeyaseelan/Matevzic 189, 193, 208 218, 227, 291 Lehnhoff Jeyaseelan/Tu 205 Krasnoroutskaya, Lina — See also Leipzig 23, 32, 33, 127, 135, 143, 144, Jeyaseelan/Vento-Kabchi 169, 177 Dementieva/Krasnoroutskaya 160, 164, 192, 213, 229, 233, 234, Jidkova, Alina 138, 147, 202 Krasnoroutskaya, Lina — See also 235, 236, 237, 238, 241 Jidkova, Alina — See also Bartoli/ Jidkova/Krasnoroutskaya Leon Garcia, Gala 35, 207, 222, 225 Jidkova Krasnoroutskaya/Panova 160, 177 Lexington $50K 35, 161, 193 Jidkova/Krasnoroutskaya 160, 177 Krasnoroutskaya/Petrova 160, 177 Li, Ting 153, 190 Jidkova/Kulikovskaya 204 Krasnoroutskaya/Pratt 160, 177 Li/Sun 189, 193, 208, 214, 215 Jidkova/Vento-Kabchi 169, 177 Krasnoroutskaya/Zvonareva 160, 177 Liggan, Kelly — See also Asagoe/ Johannesburg 239 Krauth, Erica 35 Liggan Jones, Ann 262 Kremer, Anne 6, 8, 10, 22, 37, 39, 40, Liggan/Widjaja 170, 178 Jones, Ann — See also Durr/A. Jones 49, 73, 85, 101, 106, 111, 116, 140, Likhovtseva, Elena 13, 49, 150, 152, Jordan, Barbara 262 148, 201, 202, 291 153, 161, 188, 190, 198, 201, 202, Jordan, Kathy 266, 270, 271, 272 Krivencheva, Svetlana 147 203, 205, 208, 209, 210, 214, 218, Jordan, Kathy/Anne Smith 263, 270 Krizan, Tina 150, 152, 153, 160, 198 220, 225, 228, 234, 240, 279 Jordan/Smylie 263 Krizan/Perebiynis 160, 177 Likhovtseva, Elena — See also Black/ Juarez $50K 35, 193 Krizan/Schett 160, 177 Likhovtseva Jugic-Salkic/Jurak 193 Krizan/Srebotnik 160, 177, 197, 202, Likhovtseva, Elena — See also 218 Husarova/Likhovtseva K Krizan/Tu 160, 177 Likhovtseva/Martinez 161, 178 Kapros, Aniko 209, 213 Kruger/M. J. Martinez 218 Likhovtseva/Myskina 161, 178 Key Biscayne 239 Kulikovskaya, Evgenia 35, 191 Likhovtseva/Petrova 161, 178 Kulikovskaya/Perebiynis 193

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Index Likhovtseva/Sugiyama 161, 178, 209, Maleeva, Magdalena 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 22, Martinez, Conchita — See also 224 34, 36, 37, 38, 40, 49, 68, 69, 70, 71, Likhovtseva/Martinez Likhovtseva/Tulyaganova 161, 178, 85, 101, 106, 111, 116, 127, 131, Martinez/Petrova 163, 179 189, 193, 202 140, 145, 152, 153, 162, 190, 198, Martinez/Shaughnessy 179, 208 Likhovtseva/Zvonareva 161, 178 201, 202, 203, 205, 207, 208, 209, Martinez/Stubbs 163, 179, 197 Linetskaya, Eugenia 35 210, 211, 212, 213, 218, 219, 220, Martinez/Suarez 163, 179, 213 Linz 29, 32, 33, 127, 135, 143, 144, 222, 224, 227, 229, 235, 236, 237, Martinez/Tulyaganova 163, 179 159, 169, 192, 214, 231, 233, 234, 240, 279, 281, 283 Martinez/Widjaja 163, 179 235, 236, 241 Maleeva, Magdalena — See also Martinez, Maria Jose/Martinez Lions Cup (Tokyo) 239 Bedanova/Maleeva Granados 193 Lipton 239 Maleeva, Magdalena — See also Martinez Granados, Conchita 207 Lipton — See also Miami Gagliardi/Maleeva Matevzic, Maja 13, 153, 191, 208, 218, Liu, Amber 35 Maleeva, Magdalena — See also Huber/ 223 Livingston — See Princeton Maleeva Matevzic, Maja — See also Bartoli/ Loit, Emilie 13, 152, 153, 162, 190, Maleeva, Magdalena — See also Matevzic 198, 201, 204, 207, 208, 209, 212, Jeyaseelan/Maleeva Matevzic, Maja — See also Dokic/ 222, 225 Maleeva, Magdalena — See also Matevzic Loit, Emilie — See also Bartoli/Loit Majoli/Maleeva Matevzic/Nagyova 208 Loit, Emilie — See also Callens/Loit Maleeva/Musgrave 162, 178 Mattek, Bethanie 35 Loit, Emilie — See also Déchy/Loit Maleeva/Schnyder 162, 178 Mattek/Perry 193 Loit, Emilie — See also Garbin/Loit Maleeva/Widjaja 162, 178 Mauresmo, Amélie 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 23, Loit/Pratt 162, 178, 189, 192, 212, 214, Maleeva-Fragniere, Manuela 237, 238, 32, 33, 36, 37, 38, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 228, 229 239, 276, 281, 283, 286 45, 46, 47, 49, 52, 53, 54, 55, 58, 59, Loit/Schiavone 162, 178 Mandlikova, Hana 238, 239, 262, 272, 60, 62, 64, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, Loit/Svensson 162, 178, 189, 193, 204 276, 281, 283, 286 81, 85, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 101, 105, Los Angeles 17, 32, 33, 127, 135, 143, Mandlikova/Navratilova 263 106, 108, 109, 111, 116, 120, 122, 144, 164, 168, 192, 211, 226, 233, Mandula, Petra 13, 152, 153, 163, 188, 127, 131, 132, 140, 143, 145, 146, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 241 190, 198, 204, 208, 209, 210, 213, 148, 202, 203, 204, 205, 207, 208, Los Angeles Championships 17, 32, 33, 226 209, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 218, 126, 143, 144, 166, 168, 192, 215, Mandula, Petra — See also Gagliardi/ 222, 223, 224, 227, 230, 231, 232, 231 Mandula 233, 235, 236, 240, 246, 281, 283 Los Gatos $50K 35 Mandula/Rittner 163, 178 Mauresmo/Pierce 164, 179 Louisville $50K 35, 193 Mandula/Schett 163, 178, 229 McGrath, Meredith 237 Lucic, Mirjana 53 Mandula/Tatarkova 163, 178, 189, 193, McNeil, Lori 237, 238 Lucic, Mirjana — See also Hingis/ 206 McShea/Musgrave 228 Lucic Mandula/Wartusch 163, 179, 189, 193, Medina Garrigues, Anabel 13, 35, 203, Luxembourg 17, 34, 127, 136, 193, 214, 203, 206, 207, 208, 209, 213, 222, 209, 218, 225 230 225 Medvedeva, Natalia 237 Mariskova/Teeguarden 263 Memphis 25, 34, 127, 136, 193, 203, M Marosi, Katalin 138 218 Madrid 25, 34, 127, 136, 159, 193, 208, Marosi/Reeves 193 Mesa $50K 35, 193 223 Marrero, Marta 205 Miami 30, 32, 126, 134, 143, 144, 159, Mahwah 238, 239 Marseilles $50K+H 35, 193 162, 192, 205, 220, 233, 234, 235, Majoli, Iva 8, 10, 22, 37, 39, 40, 49, 85, Martinez, Conchita 5, 8, 10, 12, 23, 37, 236, 241 101, 106, 111, 116, 140, 145, 202, 38, 40, 41, 42, 49, 53, 68, 69, 70, 71, Michel, Margaret — See also 205, 206, 217, 221, 222, 224, 235, 85, 101, 106, 111, 116, 140, 145, Goolagong Cawley/Michel 236, 237, 262, 281, 283 148, 150, 152, 153, 163, 198, 201, Midland $75K 35, 193 Majoli, Iva — See also Callens/Majoli 202, 203, 204, 205, 207, 208, 209, Mikaelian, Marie-Gayaneh 13, 201, Majoli, Iva — See also Husarova/ 210, 211, 212, 214, 219, 220, 222, 202, 205, 207, 208, 210, 212 Majoli 223, 227, 228, 230, 233, 235, 236, Milan 237, 241 Majoli/Maleeva 162, 178 237, 238, 240, 245, 262, 276, 279, Mirza/Pierce 164, 179 281, 283, 286 Miyagi, Nana 153, 198 Maleeva, Katerina 237, 238, 281, 283 Martinez, Conchita — See also Huber/ Miyagi, Nana — See also Asagoe/ Martinez Miyagi Martinez, Conchita — See also Miyagi/Sequera 193 Husarova/Martinez Modena $50K+H 35, 193

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Index Molik, Alicia 13, 34, 36, 38, 49, 50, 98, Nagyova, Henrieta 13, 34, 35, 36, 38, O 106, 127, 131, 153, 201, 205, 206, 127, 131, 204, 215, 225, 231, 232, O’Neil, Chris 262 208, 209, 212, 216, 220, 221, 225, 235 Oakland 239 227 Nagyova, Henrieta — See also Oakland — see Stanford Molik, Alicia — See also Black/Molik Gagliardi/Nagyova Obata, Saori 13, 35, 111, 138, 191, 203, Molik, Alicia — See also Bovina/Molik Navratilova, Gabriela/Pastikova 193 209, 212, 213, 215, 217, 228 Molik/Navratilova 164, 179 Navratilova, Martina 4, 147, 152, 153, Obata, Saori — See also Fujiwara/ Molik/Serna 211, 214, 230 164, 188, 190, 198, 237, 238, 239, Obata Morariu, Corina 152, 163, 208, 240, 240, 262, 267, 270, 271, 272, 275, Obziler, Tzipora 202 287 276, 277, 282, 283, 285, 286, 287, Ondraskova, Zuzana 35 Morariu, Corina — See also Black/ 288 Orbetello $50K+H 35, 193 Morariu Navratilova, Martina — See also Evert/ Orlando 239 Morariu, Corina — See also Daniilidou/ Navratilova Ortisei $50K 35, 193 Morariu Navratilova, Martina — See also Oyster Bay $50K 35, 193 Morariu, Corina — See also Dokic/ Fernandez/Navratilova Morariu Navratilova, Martina — See also King/ P Morariu, Corina — See also Lee/ Navratilova Paducah $50K 35, 193 Morariu Navratilova, Martina — See also Palermo 34, 127, 137, 193, 209, 225 Morariu/Stubbs 163, 179, 223 Mandlikova/Navratilova Palm Beach Gardens 239 Morariu/Tatarkova 163, 179 Navratilova, Martina — See also Palm Springs 238 Morigami, Akiko 13, 35, 191, 202, 209, Callens/Navratilova Palm Springs — See Indian Wells 212, 225 Navratilova, Martina — See also Huber/ Pan Paciﬁc 18, 32, 33, 127, 134, 143, Morigami/Jidkova 206 Navratilova 144, 155, 168, 192, 202, 217, 233, Morigami/Obata 189, 193, 203 Navratilova, Martina — See also 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 241 Morigami/Sugiyama 169, 179 Kuznetsova/Navratilova Panova, Tatiana 6, 8, 10, 23, 37, 40, 49, Morozova, Olga 281, 283 Navratilova, Martina — See also Molik/ 53, 86, 101, 107, 111, 116, 141, 148, Morozova, Olga — See also Evert/ Navratilova 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 207, 216, Morozova Navratilova/Nagelsen 263 220, 291 Moscow 23, 32, 33, 127, 134, 143, 144, Navratilova/Raymond 164, 179, 189, Panova, Tatiana — See also Fujiwara/ 164, 167, 192, 213, 229, 233, 234, 192, 214, 231 Panova 235, 236, 241 Navratilova/Shriver 263, 270 Panova, Tatiana — See also Müller, Martina 221 Navratilova/Smith 263 Krasnoroutskaya/Panova Munich 233, 234, 235, 236 Navratilova/Stevenson 164, 179 Paris 30, 32, 33, 127, 135, 143, 144, Musgrave, Trudi — See also Fujiwara/ Navratilova/Stove 263 166, 192, 202, 217, 233, 234, 235, Musgrave Navratilova/Temesvari 263 236, 237, 241 Musgrave, Trudi — See also Maleeva/ Neffa-de Los Rios, Rossana 205, 225 Parra, Arantxa 13, 35, 138, 207, 213, Musgrava Neiland, Larisa 253, 278, 287, 288 222, 229 Myskina, Anastasia 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, Neiland, Larisa — See also under Pastikova, Michaela — see Benesova/ 23, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, Savchenko Pastikova 42, 49, 68, 69, 70, 71, 86, 96, 98, Neiland/Novotna 278 Pattaya City 34, 127, 137, 138, 193, 101, 106, 111, 116, 120, 122, 127, Neiland/Zvereva 263 215, 231 131, 132, 141, 143, 145, 148, 201, New England 237, 238, 239 Paz, Mercedes 288 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, New Haven 17, 32, 33, 127, 135, 143, Pelletier, Marie-Eve — See also Lee/ 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 217, 144, 166, 168, 192, 211, 227, 233, Pelletier 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 226, 234, 235, 236, 241 Pelletier/Washington 203 229, 230, 231, 233, 235, 236, 246, New Orleans 238, 239 Pennetta, Flavia 13, 201, 202, 205, 208 282, 283 Newport 237, 238, 239 Perebiynis, Tatiana 13, 35, 191, 208 Myskina, Anastasia — See also Nice 235, 236 Perebiynis, Tatiana — See also Arendt/ Likhovtseva/Myskina Noorlander, Seda 35 Perebiynis Myskina/Zvonareva 213, 229 Novotna, Jana 235, 236, 237, 254, 267, Perebiynis, Tatiana — See also Krizan/ 271, 272, 278, 282, 283, 286, 288 Perebiynis N Novotna, Jana — See also Davenport/ Perebiynis/Talaja 189, 193, 210 Nagelsen, Betsy — See also Novotna Perry, Shenay 35 Navratilova/Nagelson Novotna, Jana — See also Hingis/ Nagelsen/Tomanova 263 Novotna Nagy/Wolfbrandt 193 Novotna/Sanchez-Vicario 263 Novotna/Sukova 263

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Index Petrova, Nadia 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 24, 37, Prakusya, Wynne — See also Lee/ Reynolds, Candy — See also Fairbank/ 38, 40, 41, 42, 49, 53, 68, 69, 70, 71, Prakusya Reynolds 73, 86, 98, 101, 107, 110, 111, 116, Prakusya/Tanasugarn 165, 179 Richey, Nancy 262, 276, 282, 283 123, 132, 141, 145, 150, 152, 153, Pratt, Nicole 13, 150, 152, 153, 165, Richmond 239 164, 188, 190, 198, 199, 202, 205, 188, 190, 198, 202, 205, 207, 210, Rinaldi, Kathy 239 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 213, 214, 211, 212, 224 Rippner, Brie 291 216, 222, 223, 226, 229, 231, 291 Pratt, Nicole — See also Casanova/Pratt Rittner, Barbara 198, 204, 209, 216, Petrova, Nadia — See also Dokic/ Pratt, Nicole — See also Daniilidou/ 219, 224 Petrova Pratt Rittner, Barbara — See also Gagliardi/ Petrova, Nadia — See also Garbin/ Pratt, Nicole — See also Fernandez/ Rittner Petrova Pratt Rittner, Barbara — See also Petrova, Nadia — See also Pratt, Nicole — See also Hénin- Hantuchova/Rittner Krasnoroutskaya/Petrova Hardenne/Pratt Rittner, Barbara — See also Mandula/ Petrova, Nadia — See also Likhovtseva/ Pratt, Nicole — See also Rittner Petrova Krasnoroutskaya/Pratt Rittner, Barbara — See also Pratt/ Petrova, Nadia — See also Martinez/ Pratt, Nicole — See also Loit/Pratt Rittner Petrova Pratt, Nicole — See also Garbin/Pratt Rittner/Vento-Kabchi 169, 180 Petrova/Pierce 164, 179, 209, 224, 228 Pratt/Rittner 165, 180, 197, 205 Roesch, Angelika 201, 218 Petrova/Shaughnessy 164, 179, 189, Pratt/Serna 165, 180 Roland Garros 21, 32, 33, 126, 134, 192, 197, 213 Pratt/Shaughnessy 165, 180 143, 144, 156, 169, 192, 208, 223, Petrova/Srebotnik 164, 179 Pratt/Svensson 165, 180 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, Philadelphia 23, 32, 33, 127, 135, 143, Pratt/Tulyaganova 165, 180 241 144, 164, 165, 192, 214, 231, 233, Princess Cup 235, 236, 237, 238, 241 Rome 17, 32, 33, 126, 134, 143, 144, 234, 235, 236, 237, 241 Princeton 239 160, 164, 192, 207, 222, 233, 234, Pierce, Mary 8, 10, 12, 24, 37, 40, 49, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 241 53, 56, 68, 69, 70, 71, 86, 101, 107, Q Ruano Pascual, Virginia 13, 34, 36, 38, 111, 116, 141, 145, 148, 152, 153, Quebec City 34, 127, 136, 193, 214 127, 131, 150, 152, 153, 166, 188, 164, 188, 190, 202, 206, 209, 210, Queens Grand Prix (Tokyo) 239 190, 195, 196, 198, 202, 204, 206, 212, 213, 214, 217, 221, 223, 226, 208, 211, 213, 227, 234, 240, 255 227, 230, 233, 235, 236, 237, 240, R Ruano Pascual/Serna 166, 180, 201 247, 262, 282, 283, 286 Randriantefy, Dally 206, 208, 221 Ruano Pascual/Suarez 166, 180, 186, Pierce — See also Hingis/Pierce Raymond, Lisa 5, 8, 10, 12, 25, 34, 36, 189, 192, 197, 205, 206, 207, 209, Pierce, Mary — See also Mauresmo/ 37, 38, 40, 49, 68, 69, 70, 71, 86, 211, 212, 215, 217, 219, 220, 222, Pierce 101, 107, 112, 117, 118, 127, 131, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 232, Pierce, Mary — See also Mirza/Pierce 133, 141, 145, 150, 152, 153, 165, 263 Pierce, Mary — See also Petrova/Pierce 188, 190, 198, 202, 203, 204, 206, Rubin, Chanda 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 25, 32, Pierce/Stubbs 168, 179, 186, 189, 192, 208, 209, 210, 212, 213, 214, 217, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 49, 202, 211, 217, 226 223, 224, 226, 230, 231, 234, 240, 53, 68, 69, 70, 71, 73, 86, 97, 101, Pierce/Suarez 168, 179 255, 287 107, 112, 113, 117, 122, 127, 131, Pierce/Tulyaganova 164, 179 Raymond, Lisa — See also Black/ 133, 141, 143, 145, 148, 152, 153, Pisnik, Tina 12, 49, 202, 207, 208, 213, Raymond 166, 198, 202, 204, 205, 207, 208, 214, 231 Raymond, Lisa — See also Davenport/ 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 216, Pistolesi, Anna (Smashnova) 5, 6, 8, Raymond 219, 220, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 10, 12, 25, 34, 36, 37, 38, 40, 41, 42, Raymond, Lisa — See also Navratilova/ 227, 228, 229, 231, 233, 235, 236, 49, 68, 69, 70, 71, 86, 91, 92, 101, Raymond 240, 279 107, 111, 117, 127, 131, 141, 145, Raymond/Davenport 219 Rubin, Chanda — See also Daniilidou/ 201, 202, 204, 208, 209, 210, 211, Raymond/Sharapova 180, 228 Rubin 212, 213, 216, 217, 219, 221, 224, Raymond/Stubbs 165, 180, 189, 192, Rubin, Chanda — See also Gagliardi/ 227, 235 197, 213, 214, 230, 263, 279 Rubin Pittsburg $50K 35, 161, 193 Razzano, Virginie 13, 203, 204, 205, Rubin, Chanda — See also Hantuchova/ Poitiers $50K 35, 193 206, 208 Rubin Po-Messerli, Kimberly 150, 151, 152 Reeves, Samantha 13, 35, 204, 207, 209 Rubin, Chanda — See also Kournikova/ Portschach — see Vienna Reeves/Sequera 193, 205 Rubin Potter, Barbara 238, 282, 283 Reggi, Raffaella 238, 239 Rubin/Sanchez-Vicario 263 Poutchek, Tatiana 35, 191, 216 Rehe, Stephanie 238, 239 Rubin/Schett 166, 180 Prakusya, Wynne 35, 150, 152, 165, 191 Reid, Kerry Melville 262, 282, 283 Russell, JoAnne — See also Gourlay Reid/Turnbull 263 Cawley/Russell

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Index Ruzici, Virginia 239, 262 Schett, Barbara — See also Krizan/ Serna, Magui 5, 8, 10, 12, 27, 34, 36, Ruzici, Virginia — See also Jausovec/ Schett 37, 38, 39, 40, 49, 68, 69, 70, 71, 87, Ruzici Schett, Barbara — See also Mandula/ 89, 91, 93, 102, 107, 112, 117, 127, Schett 131, 133, 138, 141, 153, 204, 205, S Schett, Barbara — See also Rubin/ 206, 207, 208, 209, 211, 212, 213, Sabatini, Gabriela 237, 238, 247, 262, Schett 222, 225, 226, 227 276, 282, 283, 285, 286 Schett, Barbarba — See also Gagliardi/ Serna, Magui — See also Hantuchova/ Sabatini, Gabriela — See also Graf/ Schett Serna Sabatini Schett/Schnyder 166, 180, 189, 192, Serna, Magui — see also Molik/Serna Saeki, Miho 35 202 Serna, Magui — See also Pratt/Serna Safina, Dinara 13, 34, 36, 38, 127, 131, Schett/Wartusch 166, 180 Serna, Magui — See also Ruano 207, 209, 212, 213, 216, 220, 222, Schett/Zuluaga 166, 180 Pascual/Serna 225, 229 Schiavone, Francesca 5, 8, 10, 12, 26, Serna/Shaughnessy 167, 180 Safina, Dinara — See also Fujiwara/ 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 49, 68, 69, 70, Serra Zanetti, Adriana 138, 191, 201, Safina 71, 87, 101, 107, 112, 117, 141, 145, 218 Safina, Dinara — See also Dokic/Safina 201, 202, 203, 204, 207, 209, 210, Serra Zanetti, Adriana/Stellato 189, Saint Paul $50K 35, 193 211, 213, 218, 225, 227, 228 193, 209 Saint-Gaudens $75K 35, 193 Schiavone, Francesca — See also Loit/ Serra Zanetti, Antonella 205, 221 Salerni, Maria Emilia 191 Schiavone Shanghai 19, 32, 33, 127, 135, 143, 144, San Antonio 237, 238 Schmidt/Van Exel 193 162, 165, 192, 229, 233, 234, 235, San Diego 21, 32, 33, 126, 135, 143, Schneider, Caroline — See also Bartoli/ 241 144, 156, 169, 192, 210, 226, 233, Schneider Sharapova, Maria 12, 34, 35, 36, 38, 44, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 241 Schnyder, Patty 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 26, 37, 49, 50, 56, 98, 112, 113, 127, 131, Sanchez Lorenzo, Maria 13, 201, 205, 38, 39, 40, 49, 68, 69, 70, 71, 87, 190, 208, 209, 211, 213, 214, 224, 206, 207, 208, 212, 223, 228, 229 101, 107, 112, 117, 141, 145, 153, 226, 229, 291 Sanchez-Vicario, Arantxa 53, 150, 151, 190, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, Sharapova, Maria — See also Bartoli/ 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 248, 256, 207, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, Sharapova 262, 267, 272, 275, 278, 282, 283, 216, 217, 220, 221, 222, 230, 231, Sharapova/Tanasugarn 189, 193, 213, 285, 286, 287, 288 235, 236, 276 214 Sanchez-Vicario — See also Novotna/ Schnyder, Patty — See also Gagliardi/ Shaughnessy, Meghann 5, 8, 10, 12, 28, Sanchez-Vicario Schnyder 34, 36, 37, 38, 40, 41, 42, 49, 53, 68, Sanchez-Vicario — See also Rubin/ Schnyder, Patty — See also Husarova/ 69, 70, 71, 73, 87, 102, 107, 112, Sanchez-Vicario Schnyder 117, 127, 131, 141, 145, 148, 150, Sanchez-Vicario/Sukova 263 Schnyder, Patty — See also Maleeva/ 152, 153, 167, 188, 190, 198, 201, Santangelo, Mara 35 Schnyder 204, 205, 206, 207, 209, 210, 213, Santangelo/Serra Zanetti, Antonella 193 Schnyder, Patty — See also Schett/ 216, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 226, Santangelo/Vinci 193 Schnyder 229, 235 Sarasota 23, 34, 127, 136, 159, 164, Schruff, Julia 206 Shaughnessy, Meghann — See also 205, 220 Schultz-McCarthy, Brenda 278 Davenport/Shaughnessy Savchenko, Larisa — See also Neiland, Schwartz, Barbara 202, 216 Shaughnessy, Meghann — See also Larisa 263 Scottsdale 29, 32, 33, 127, 135, 143, Dokic/Shaughnessy Savchenko/Zvereva 263 144, 156, 169, 192, 204, 218, 233, Shaughnessy, Meghann — See also Sawamatsu, Kazuko — See also 234, 235, 236, 241 Gagliardi/Shaughnessy Kiyomura/Sawamatsu Sedona $50K 35, 193 Shaughnessy, Meghann — See also Schaul, Claudine 35, 212, 213 Seles, Monica 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, 27, 37, 40, Grönefeld/Shaughnessy Schett, Barbara 10, 13, 25, 37, 40, 49, 44, 49, 50, 53, 56, 66, 68, 69, 70, 71, Shaughnessy, Meghann — See also 53, 86, 101, 107, 112, 117, 150, 152, 72, 73, 87, 102, 107, 112, 117, 118, Hantuchova/Shaughnessy 153, 166, 188, 190, 201, 204, 207, 119, 141, 145, 148, 202, 203, 207, Shaughnessy, Meghann — See also 208, 219, 220, 221, 223, 282, 284 208, 216, 217, 218, 221, 222, 223, Martinez/Shaughnessy Schett, Barbara — See also Farina Elia/ 233, 235, 236, 237, 238, 240, 241, Shaughnessy, Meghann — See also Schett 248, 262, 272, 275, 276, 279, 282, Petrova/Shaughnessy Schett, Barbara — See also Grande/ 284, 285, 286, 291 Shaughnessy, Meghann — See also Schett Selyutina/Widjaja 170, 180 Pratt/Shaughnessy Schett, Barbara — See also Sequera, Milagros 13, 35, 214, 230 Shaughnessy, Meghann — See also Hantuchova/Schett Sequera/Wheeler 193 Serna/Shaughnessy Schett, Barbara — See also Husarova/ Shaughnessy/Stubbs 180, 210, 219, 226 Schett Shaughnessy/Sugiyama 167, 180

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Index Shaughnesy/Stubbs 167 Strycova, Barbora 35 Sugiyama, Ai — See also Likhovtseva/ ’s-Hertogenbosch 17, 34, 127, 136, 157, Stubbs, Rennae 150, 152, 153, 168, Sugiyama 160, 193, 209, 224 188, 190, 198, 217, 234, 240, 257, Sugiyama, Ai — See also Morigami/ Shriver, Pam 238, 239, 268, 270, 271, 278 Sugiyama 272, 282, 284, 286, 287, 288 Stubbs, Rennae — See also Black/ Sugiyama, Ai — See also Shaughnessy/ Shriver, Pam — See also Navratilova/ Stubbs Sugiyama Shriver Stubbs, Rennae — See also Bovina/ Sugiyama/Tanasugarn 169, 180 Shriver/Zvereva 263 Stubbs Sukova, Helena 238, 239, 259, 268, Smashnova, Anna — See Anna Pistolesi Stubbs, Rennae — See also Dokic/ 271, 272, 278, 282, 284, 286, 287, Smith, Anne 268, 270, 271, 272 Stubbs 288 Smith, Anne — See also Kathy Jordan/ Stubbs, Rennae — See also Martinez/ Sukova, Helena — See also Hingis/ Anne Smith Stubbs Sukova Smith, Anne — See also Navratilova/ Stubbs, Rennae — See also Morariu/ Sukova, Helena — See also Kohde- Smith Stubbs Kilsch/Sukova Smylie, Elizabeth — See also Jordan/ Stubbs, Rennae — See also Pierce/ Sukova, Helena — See also Novotna/ Smylie Stubbs Sukova Snyder, Tara 35 Stubbs, Rennae — See also Raymond/ Sukova, Helena — See also Sanchez- Sopot 25, 34, 127, 136, 193, 210, 226 Stubbs Vicario/Sukova Spears, Abigail 191 Stubbs, Rennae — See also Sun, Tian Tian 35, 153, 190 Spirlea, Irina 236, 282, 284 Shaughnesy/Stubbs Surabaya 236 Sprem, Karolina 13, 35, 208, 211, 223, Suarez, Paola 5, 8, 10, 12, 29, 34, 36, Surbiton $25K 154 224 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 49, 68, 69, 70, Svensson, Åsa — See also Loit/ Srebotnik, Katarina 13, 150, 152, 153, 71, 87, 98, 102, 107, 112, 117, 127, Svensson 167, 191, 198, 201, 203, 204, 205, 131, 141, 147, 150, 152, 153, 168, Svensson, Åsa — See also Pratt/ 206, 208, 209, 211, 212, 213, 214, 188, 190, 195, 196, 198, 199, 202, Svensson 225, 230 203, 204, 205, 207, 208, 209, 211, Svensson, Åsa — See also Srebotnik/ Srebotnik, Katarina — See also Dokic/ 213, 214, 220, 221, 223, 224, 227, Svensson Srebotnik 228, 230, 234, 240, 257 Svensson, Åsa (Carlsson) 190 Srebotnik, Katarina — See also Krizan/ Suarez, Paola — See also Cravero/ Svensson, Åsa — See also Callens/ Srebotnik Suarez Svensson Srebotnik, Katarina — See also Petrova/ Suarez, Paola — See also Martinez/ Sydney 17, 32, 33, 127, 135, 143, 144, Srebotnik Suarez 156, 169, 192, 201, 216, 233, 234, Srebotnik/Svensson 167, 180, 189, 193, Suarez, Paola — See also Pierce/Stubbs 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 241 203 Suarez, Paola — See also Ruano Sydney Indoors 239 Srndovic, Aleksandra 147 Pascual/Suarez Stanford 17, 32, 33, 127, 135, 143, 144, Suarez/Zuluaga 168, 180 T 155, 165, 192, 210, 226, 233, 234, Sugiyama, Ai 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 29, Talaja, Silvia 191, 207, 211 235, 236, 237, 238, 241 32, 33, 36, 37, 38, 40, 41, 42, 49, 53, Tameishi, Keiko 147 Steck, Jessica 198 68, 69, 70, 71, 87, 102, 107, 112, Tampa 237, 238, 239, 241 Stellato, Emily 191 117, 122, 123, 127, 131, 132, 142, Tanasugarn, Tamarine 8, 10, 13, 30, 34, Stevenson, Alexandra 6, 8, 10, 28, 37, 143, 146, 148, 150, 152, 153, 169, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 49, 88, 102, 107, 40, 49, 53, 73, 87, 89, 102, 107, 112, 188, 190, 195, 198, 199, 201, 202, 112, 117, 127, 131, 142, 190, 201, 117, 141, 146, 148, 202, 203, 204, 203, 204, 205, 207, 209, 210, 211, 202, 203, 205, 206, 209, 210, 212, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 211, 212, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 218, 219, 213, 214, 215, 218, 220, 221, 224, 213, 216, 217, 219, 229, 230, 231 220, 222, 223, 226, 228, 229, 231, 225, 226, 227, 229, 231 Stevenson, Alexandra — See also 232, 233, 234, 235, 240, 287 Tanasugarn, Tamarine — See also Navratilova/Stevenson Sugiyama — See also Halard-Decugis/ Prakusya/Tanasugarn Stosur, Samantha 202 Sugiyama Tanasugarn, Tamarine — See also Stove, Betty 272, 282, 284, 288 Sugiyama, Ai — See also Asagoe/ Sugiyama/Tanasugarn Stove, Betty — See also Durr/Stove Sugiyama Tarabini, Patricia 240 Stove, Betty — See also King/Stove Sugiyama, Ai — See also Clijsters/ Tarabini, Patricia — See also Gagliardi/ Stove, Betty — See also Navratilova/ Sugiyama Tarabini Stove Sugiyama, Ai — See also Hantuchova/ Tarabini/Widjaja 170, 181 Stove/Turnbull 263 Sugiyama Tashkent 34, 127, 136, 193, 213 Strasbourg 20, 34, 127, 136, 193, 208, Sugiyama, Ai — See also Huber/ Tatarkova, Elena 35, 153, 190 223 Sugiyama Tatarkova, Elena — see also Kustava/ Stratton Mountain 237 Tatarkova

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Index Tatarkova, Elena — See also Mandula/ V Weingärtner, Marlene — See also Lee/ Tatarkova Weingärtner Vakulenko, Julia 13, 35, 147, 206, 221 Tatarkova, Elena — See also Morariu/ White, Robin — See also Fernandez/ Vaskova, Alena 204 Tatarova White Vento-Kabchi, Maria 13, 35, 152, 153, Tauziat 53, 169, 235, 236, 237, 240, Widjaja, Angelique 152, 153, 170, 188, 169, 191, 203, 208, 210, 212, 213, 282, 284 191, 201, 204, 228 226, 227, 228 Tauziat, Nathalie — See also Cohen- Widjaja, Angelique — See also Callens/ Vento-Kabchi, Maria — See also Aloro/Tauziat Widjaja Daniilidou/Vento-Kabchi Tauziat, Nathalie — See also Fusai/ Widjaja, Angelique — See also Vento-Kabchi, Maria — See also Tauziat Fernandez/Widjaja Dulko/Vento-Kabchi Taylor, Sarah 205, 220 Widjaja, Angelique — See also Vento-Kabchi, Maria — See also Teeguarden, Pam — See also Gagliardi/Widjaja Fernandez/Vento-Kabchi Mariskova/Teeguarden Widjaja, Angelique — See also Grande/ Vento-Kabchi, Maria — See also Tegart Dalton, Judy 265, 272 Widjaja Grande/Vento-Kabchi Tegart Dalton, Judy — See also Casals/ Widjaja, Angelique — See also Lee/ Vento-Kabchi, Maria — See also Grant/ Tegart Dalton Widjaja Vento-Kabchi Tegart Dalton, Judy — See also Court/ Widjaja, Angelique — See also Liggan/ Vento-Kabchi, Maria — See also Tegart Dalton Widjaja Jeyaseelan/Vento-Kabchi Temesvari, Andrea 239 Widjaja, Angelique — See also Vento-Kabchi, Maria — See also Temesvari, Andrea — See also Maleeva/Widjaja Jidkova/Vento-Kabchi Navratilova/Temesvari Widjaja, Angelique — See also Vento-Kabchi, Maria — See also Testud 53, 235, 236 Martinez/Widjaja Rittner/Vento-Kabchi Tomanova, Renata — See also Widjaja, Angelique — See also Vento-Kabchi, Maria — See also Tu/ Nagelson/Tomanova Prakusya/Widjaja Vento-Kabchi Torrens Valero, Cristina 35, 202, 218, Widjaja, Angelique — See also Vento-Kabchi/Widjaja 169, 181, 189, 235 Selyutina/Widjaja 193, 203, 212, 228 Troy $50K 35, 193 Widjaja, Angelique — See also Vienna 29, 34, 127, 136, 193, 208, 224 Tu, Meilen 35, 153, 191 Tarabini/Widjaja Vinci, Roberta 35, 208 Tu, Meilen — See also Callens/Tu Widjaja, Angelique — See also Vento- Vinci, Roberta — See also Fujiwara/ Tu, Meilen — See also Krizan/Tu Kabchi/Widjaja Vinci Tu, Meilen — See also Lee/Tu Williams, Serena 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, Virginia Slims Championships 238, 239 Tu/Vento-Kabchi 169, 181, 206 30, 32, 33, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, Vittel $50K 35, 193 Tulyaganova, Iroda 10, 13, 30, 37, 39, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 49, 51, 52, 53, 54, Voracova, Renata 35 40, 49, 88, 102, 107, 112, 117, 142, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 62, 64, 65, 66, Voskoboeva, Galina 35 191, 202, 203, 204, 205, 207, 208, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 81, 82, 88, 89, 210, 217, 218, 220, 222 W 91, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 102, 103, Tulyaganova, Iroda — See also 104, 105, 107, 108, 109, 110, 112, Wade, Virginia 262, 272, 276, 282, 284, Likhovtseva/Tulyaganova 113, 114, 117, 118, 119, 121, 122, 286 Tulyaganova, Iroda — See also 123, 126, 131, 132, 133, 142, 143, Wade, Virginia — See also Court/Wade Martinez/Tulyaganova 146, 148, 150, 152, 170, 188, 190, Wang, Shi-Ting 236, 237 Tulyaganova, Iroda — See also Pierce/ 194, 196, 198, 202, 204, 205, 206, Warsaw 23, 32, 33, 127, 135, 143, 144, Tulyaganova 207, 208, 209, 210, 217, 218, 219, 159, 162, 192, 207, 221, 233, 234, Tulyaganova, Iroda — See also Pratt/ 220, 221, 222, 223, 225, 233, 234, 235, 241 Tulyaganova 235, 236, 240, 241, 249, 260, 262, Wartusch, Patricia 152, 153, 170, 190, Turnbull, Wendy 268, 282, 284, 286 268, 270, 271, 272, 275, 276, 277, 203 Turnbull, Wendy — See also Casals/ 279, 282, 284, 286 Wartusch, Patricia — See also Turnbull Daniilidou/Wartusch Turnbull, Wendy — See also Reid/ Wartusch, Patricia — See also Grande/ Turnbull Wartusch Turnbull, Wendy — See also Stove/ Wartusch, Patricia — See also Mandula/ Turnbull Wartusch U Wartusch, Patricia — See also Schett/ Wartusch U. S. Open 21, 32, 33, 126, 134, 143, Washington 237, 238, 239 144, 166, 168, 192, 212, 227, 233, Webb, Vanessa 138 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 241 Weingärtner, Marlene 13, 138, 201, 202, 205, 207, 209, 214, 216, 220

WTA Statistical Abstract ©2003 Robert Waltz Index Williams, Venus 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 30, Y Zvereva, Natasha — See also Hingis/ 32, 33, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 44, Zvereva Yan, Zi 138 49, 51, 53, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 62, 65, Zvereva, Natasha — See also Neiland/ Yan/Zheng 193, 208 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 81, 82, Zvereva 88, 89, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 102, 103, Z Zvereva, Natasha — See also 104, 105, 107, 112, 113, 114, 117, Savchenko/Zvereva Zheng, Jie 35, 213, 229 118, 119, 121, 123, 126, 131, 132, Zvereva, Natasha — See also Shriver/ Zuluaga, Fabiola 13, 34, 36, 38, 107, 133, 142, 143, 146, 147, 148, 151, Zvereva 127, 131, 133, 203, 207, 216, 218 170, 188, 190, 194, 196, 198, 202, Zvonareva, Vera 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 31, 34, Zuluaga, Fabiola — See also Schett/ 203, 205, 207, 208, 209, 212, 217, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 49, 68, 69, Zuluaga 220, 222, 223, 225, 228, 230, 233, 70, 71, 88, 102, 107, 108, 112, 117, Zuluaga, Fabiola — See also Suarez/ 235, 236, 240, 241, 249, 260, 262, 127, 131, 142, 146, 201, 204, 206, Zuluaga 268, 270, 271, 272, 275, 276, 279, 207, 208, 211, 214, 216, 219, 221, Zurich 21, 32, 33, 126, 134, 143, 144, 282, 284, 285, 286, 291 222, 223, 224, 227, 229, 231 156, 169, 192, 214, 230, 233, 234, Williams/Williams 181, 186, 189, 192, Zvonareva, Vera — See also 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 241 197, 202, 209, 217, 225, 263, 270 Dementieva/Zvonareva Zvereva, Natasha 235, 236, 237, 238, Wimbledon 30, 32, 33, 126, 134, 143, Zvonareva, Vera — See also 261, 269, 270, 271, 272, 278, 282, 144, 156, 169, 192, 209, 224, 233, Krasnoroutskaya/Zvonareva 284, 287, 288 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 241 Zvonareva, Vera — See also Zvereva, Natasha — See also WTA Championships (Los Angeles) Likhovtseva/Zvonareva Fernandez/Zvereva 134