Maria Sharapova vs Lindsay Davenport 2004 Wimbledon Semifinal Highlights. If you like my highlights please consider making a donation to my paypal www.paypal.me/... really grateful for whatever you can give during these covid hit times.
It was in this match that everyone first saw the great Sharapova. Half of the match was for Davenport, and Sharapova had practically no chance. But then Sharapova turned the match and won.
Watching and getting to know for the first time also about this incredible comeback match in the semis to also win it all in the end the day she says goodbye. You will be thoroughly missed Maria. Best of life.
I went to work after the first set of this match. I was super excited to see Davenport in the Wimbledon final and my brother told me the results when I got home before I could look them up. This is another match Davenport should be kicking herself for. I think if Davenport pulled this match out I actually do think she would have had the belief to pull off 3-4 majors from 2004 Wimbledon to 2006 Australian.
Davenport has nothing to kick herself about regarding this match - she played as well as she could, Sharapova is just a better and greater player at the end of the day
Everytime I watch this match and many others that davenport played so well it just makes me so mad that she hadn't won more slams during her career. Nobody could put the ball away like lindsay could.
This was the real problem with davenport. Not only in this match but in many matches, unable to close it out when she was absolutely on top. Look at the scores at 5.06, davenport should have won from there. Same year Even at the US Open in the semifinals against svetlana kuznetsova, she was leading like that but somehow found a way to lose that match. The next year 2005 saw her losing to Williams sisters in the Australian open and in the Wimbledon finals after winning the first set.
Ikr. It’s like Maria totally forgot how to play on grass after winning the title that year. Especially after being so good on clay, she started hitting with so much spin and being so passive on grass, which is ofc not ideal at all. The only time when she played acceptable grass court tennis was at 2012 Olympics imo.
I think as she got older she doesnt move as well as she did back in the days, thats why clay suits her more now, she has time to strike the ball, unlike the fast grass court (she cannot be defensive on this surface)
@@HaiTran-ny6gi I think she was a great grass player until her shoulder injury, 2005-2007 she always lost in the semis to other amazing players... after her shoulder injury she hasn't been so great in grass, with only 2011, 2012 and maybe 2015 standing out
after Wimbledon 2004 ... Serena made a promise that she will not be beaten by Sharapova again ... she won games on grass just not the championship but runner ups
where are the maria haters talking about how she needs “drugs” to play well? maria’s best was 2004-2006 and she wasn’t taking meldonium for most of that time but i guess the haters just forgot about those years 🙄
no one is denying that she played well during her peak time...but the meldonium tarnishes her reputation. and sharapova said herself that she has taken the drug since 2006. so, by your logic, her drug-free "best" tennis was 2004-2005 (not 2004-2006). maybe the haters forgot about 2004-2005 lol
@@j0mamathan mhmmm, but it wasn’t illegal until 2016 so they can’t say she was doping since ‘06. That’s just a ridiculous claim. If it actually gave significant performance enhancement then it would’ve been banned a long long time ago
@@jboww2121 You are right. I stand corrected. In 2006 she was using a legal performance enhancing drug (not illegal). So from 2004-2005 she was great and in 2006 she was great, while using completely legal performance enhancing drugs. Got it lol
@@j0mamathan “100. The Panel wishes to emphasize that based on the evidence, the Player did not endeavour to mask or hide her use of Mildronate and was in fact open about it to many in her entourage and based on a doctor's recommendation, that she took the substance with the good faith belief that it was appropriate and compliant with the relevant rules and her anti-doping obligations, as it was over a long period of her career, and that she was not clearly informed by the relevant anti-doping authorities of the change in the rules. After its de novo review here, the Panel has determined it does not agree with many of the conclusions of the Tribunal, except as otherwise specifically indicated herein. 101. Finally, the Panel wishes to point out that the case it heard, and the award it renders, was not about an athlete who cheated. It was only about the degree of fault that can be imputed to a player for her failure to make sure that the substance contained in a product she had been legally taking over a long period, and for most of the time on the basis of a doctor's prescription, remained in compliance with the TADP and WADC. No question of intent to violate the TADP or WADC was before this Panel: under no circumstances, therefore, can the Player be considered to be an "intentional doper".“ Court of Arbitration for Sport (“CAS”), January 26, 2016
@@fedvvvv You are right. I stand corrected. In 2006 she was using a legal performance enhancing drug (not illegal). So from 2004-2005 she was great and in 2006 she was great, while using completely legal performance enhancing drugs. Got it lol
I agree. Despite her lack of "movement, Davenport has enough game to beat to top players and I didn't understand why she wasn't at the net more often against speedier players. Other players may have faster feet, but not better hands. Mental strength, self-belief, strategy, and bad luck made the difference in big matches.
@@hood_psychologist Davenport had nice volleys but I think her height and shitty movement prevented her from coming to the net in an effective way more often.
I think ultimately with Lindsay, regardless of her movement, it was always the x factor of believing in herself-she had self doubt in critical moments and that’s what was the difference between the three slams she won and the 5-8 slams she could have won. Had she had a stronger belief like Seles, Serena or even Maria and said fuck bitches when she needed to, she would have overcome her movement. 😆
ACES, BREAK POINT, SET POINT, MATCH POINT, CHAMPIONSHIP POINT, DEUCE, DOUBLE BREAK POINT, ADVANTAGE, SOFT HANDS, BACK END SHOT, CLEAN SHOT, STRAIGHT SHOT, FORE HAND SHOT, GAME POINT, SET POINT AND MANY MORE....
Would be funny to see them team up and play a doubles match against the 2 "bad boys of tennis" - McEnroe and Connors, both of whom are 5'9. Daveport and Sharapova would tower over them lol ;-)
Maria wasn't fully grown yet in this match, which explains her better movement around the court. If she stayed 183 cm, like she was in this match at 17, she would have ended up with many more slams to her name
Lluvia de bendiciones🤩 Marina Sharapova🎉 felicidades desdes niña fuiste excelente hasta a hora👏 esperamos te regreso si Dios quiere tú está en excelente condiciones para volver❤ y olvidar los malos recuerdos🌹 siempre brillará con luz propia que Dios te proteja y recuerda que le tiran piedras a árboles que dan frutos😘 te queremos y tu padre que nunca te dejó sola bendiciones para Ambos❤❤❤❤😘🇩🇴
One of half a dozen entirely winnable matches in entirely winnable tournaments that Davenport lost in her career. She had this match and I suspect would have beaten Serena in the final as she beat her a few weeks later in Los Angeles. But Lindsay lacked grit when the going got tough. It was the difference for her between 7 or 8 slams and 3.
nevertheless most of female (or may be and male as well) have best career period in young even "teen" age. Remember so many examples. Hingis, Capriati, Sharapova, Ivanovic, Azarenka, The body cannot be always in that perfect young shape form.
Meldonium is legal to use prior to 2015 ban...it's not the same as the other enhancement drugs. Maria is one of the best tennis player of all time, add to that the being the highest paid(endorsement and prize money)and most attractive....Haters gonna hate.
Sharapova barely grunted here like ya there was some here and there but like this was the quietest i’ve ever heard from her (other than exhibitions of course)
No, i'm pretty sure she grunted even younger. I remember her being on spanish tv news. It was a match against Ashley Hackleroad and it was on the news because of her grunting
Davenport should have won more GS if she had nice mentality. Sharapova might have played nice tennis then but still not be good enough to beat vintage Lindsay. There were some painful loses coming after early leads against some of very best like Serena or Venus. Her tennis was very outstanding in any generations. Such a pity.................
Какая чушь. Дэвенпорт выиграла максимум титулов. Больше выиграть в то время было просто нереально из-за сумасшедшей конкуренции плеяды великих игроков, а не из-за ее слабой ментальности. Серена, находящаяся в лучшей форме своей жизни, в самом расцвете сил смогла в той ситуации выиграть 7 титулов, а за последующие годы в преклонном возрасте еще 16. Кляйстерс выиграла только один титул, а после возращения , особо не напрягаясь, смогла выиграть еще 3.
So everytime Sharapova did a great shot, "She was lucky", "Lindsay gave a short slice", etc. People just doubted her ability and when she finally wins Wimbledon, shut the hell out of everybody.
You guys still accusing MaSha to be drug addict when you know for a fact that t'was an honest mistake and prescribed by her doctor. Move on, Guys. Insecurity kills.
Jamby Shake Actually she was caught taking a banned performance enhancing drug, which by the way she kept hidden from her team. She was given notice in multiple ways, letters, emails etc that the drug was on the banned list, she then claimed that she was taking it for a medical reason which could not be verified by the appropriate doctors. She acquired the drug from Russia and not by a doctor in the States, very suspicious! It is irrelevant whether she took it innocently or not, an athlete is ultimately responsible for what they put in their bodies. She’s a cheat and all she got was a slap on the wrist!
Debra Harris The drug is legal in Russia. It has never been approved by the FDA in the States (very different than not being legal). The fact of the matter is, not one single medical study shows that meldonium is a true, performance enhancing agent. Yes, lots of Russian athletes used it, but to what effect? Even the manufacturer has clearly stated that they don't see how it could have performance enhancing effects for athletes. Slap on the wrist? I hardly call 15 months suspension a slap on the wrist. If the drug was truly such a performance enhancing agent, they would have banned it many years prior as they have known of its existence and usage for many years.
senorgato70 That is completely irrelevant, it was a banned substance and by the way the reason why it was even looked at was because of the high volume of Russian athletes were taking it. If there is enough evidence to prove that the drug isn’t performance enhancing then athletes, their reps or whoever should lobby for it to taken off the list, until then it is believed to be performance enhancing drug. Once again it doesn’t matter if she didn’t know that was banned, she should have known!
It was a slap on the wrist, she initially got three years and there was no justification for that to have been reduced to 15months, she got away with a harsher ban because of who she is and what she is!
"She's beautiful to watch. She's beautiful to look at but her game is improving match by match". Er, her game is the only thing you should be commenting on, John. Surprising how only 15 years ago a 45 yr-old man objectifying a 17 yr-old girl was acceptable.
Watching sharapova in her teenage days was a treat for eyes.sexiest girl ever in history of tennis.I think she intimidated lesbian players and commentors also
CALON ISTRI👰 KU....... MARIA SHARAPOVA.... BIG SEXY RULES...... 🥰😍🥰🥰🥰😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍🥰😍🥰🥰🥰😍😍😍😍😍😍😍🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰😍😍😍🥰🥰🥰😍😍😍😍🥰🥰😍😍😍🥰😍😍😍😍😍🥰🥰🥰😍😍😍😍😍🥰😍😍😍😍😍🥰🥰🥰🥰😍😍😍😍😍😍🥰😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍🥰😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍🥰🥰🥰🥰😍😍😍😍😍😍😍🥰😍😍😍😍😍😍😍🥰😍😍😍😍😍😍🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰😍😍🥰
Очевидно Уильямс ждала в финале именно что Давенпорт но к досаде трансгендера Серены в финале турнира в 2004 года на Уимблдоне её поставила Мария Шарапова перед фактом никогда Серене не стать абсолютной чемпионкой и вот из-за это, она и зла на Марию за то сама же Серена не стала абсолютной думаю из-за этого и пошли всяческие козни от Серены. Опять же если брать её сестру то Венус осталась в том что она женщина в отличии от Серены. Просто достаточно вспомнить как Венус провела матч против Марии и там, было ясно видно что Венус провела матч так чтобы назло её сестре Серене. И Венус женщина а Серена нет!. Серене нужно, прекратить быть к своей, сестре с позиции эгоцентричности. Венус никогда с арбитрами матчей не конфликтовала в отличии от Серены.
For me, from 2006 onwards she became rich lost that focus and belief and became too sure of herself, then she started taking that drug which she used to her advantage. She ended up being this desperate smug player which I found insufferable.
@@Onmysheet nice try loser: “100. The Panel wishes to emphasize that based on the evidence, the Player did not endeavour to mask or hide her use of Mildronate and was in fact open about it to many in her entourage and based on a doctor's recommendation, that she took the substance with the good faith belief that it was appropriate and compliant with the relevant rules and her anti-doping obligations, as it was over a long period of her career, and that she was not clearly informed by the relevant anti-doping authorities of the change in the rules. After its de novo review here, the Panel has determined it does not agree with many of the conclusions of the Tribunal, except as otherwise specifically indicated herein. 101. Finally, the Panel wishes to point out that the case it heard, and the award it renders, was not about an athlete who cheated. It was only about the degree of fault that can be imputed to a player for her failure to make sure that the substance contained in a product she had been legally taking over a long period, and for most of the time on the basis of a doctor's prescription, remained in compliance with the TADP and WADC. No question of intent to violate the TADP or WADC was before this Panel: under no circumstances, therefore, can the Player be considered to be an "intentional doper".“ Court of Arbitration for Sport (“CAS”), January 26, 2016
Nice try loser: “100. The Panel wishes to emphasize that based on the evidence, the Player did not endeavour to mask or hide her use of Mildronate and was in fact open about it to many in her entourage and based on a doctor's recommendation, that she took the substance with the good faith belief that it was appropriate and compliant with the relevant rules and her anti-doping obligations, as it was over a long period of her career, and that she was not clearly informed by the relevant anti-doping authorities of the change in the rules. After its de novo review here, the Panel has determined it does not agree with many of the conclusions of the Tribunal, except as otherwise specifically indicated herein. 101. Finally, the Panel wishes to point out that the case it heard, and the award it renders, was not about an athlete who cheated. It was only about the degree of fault that can be imputed to a player for her failure to make sure that the substance contained in a product she had been legally taking over a long period, and for most of the time on the basis of a doctor's prescription, remained in compliance with the TADP and WADC. No question of intent to violate the TADP or WADC was before this Panel: under no circumstances, therefore, can the Player be considered to be an "intentional doper".“ Court of Arbitration for Sport (“CAS”), January 26, 2016
Nice try loser: “100. The Panel wishes to emphasize that based on the evidence, the Player did not endeavour to mask or hide her use of Mildronate and was in fact open about it to many in her entourage and based on a doctor's recommendation, that she took the substance with the good faith belief that it was appropriate and compliant with the relevant rules and her anti-doping obligations, as it was over a long period of her career, and that she was not clearly informed by the relevant anti-doping authorities of the change in the rules. After its de novo review here, the Panel has determined it does not agree with many of the conclusions of the Tribunal, except as otherwise specifically indicated herein. 101. Finally, the Panel wishes to point out that the case it heard, and the award it renders, was not about an athlete who cheated. It was only about the degree of fault that can be imputed to a player for her failure to make sure that the substance contained in a product she had been legally taking over a long period, and for most of the time on the basis of a doctor's prescription, remained in compliance with the TADP and WADC. No question of intent to violate the TADP or WADC was before this Panel: under no circumstances, therefore, can the Player be considered to be an "intentional doper".“ Court of Arbitration for Sport (“CAS”), January 26, 2016
@@fedvvvv The only loser is Sharapova. She proved that again and again on the court. When was the last time she won anything or gets past the 2 round? LOL! Without PED, she's consistently getting crushed on the court.
“100. The Panel wishes to emphasize that based on the evidence, the Player did not endeavour to mask or hide her use of Mildronate and was in fact open about it to many in her entourage and based on a doctor's recommendation, that she took the substance with the good faith belief that it was appropriate and compliant with the relevant rules and her anti-doping obligations, as it was over a long period of her career, and that she was not clearly informed by the relevant anti-doping authorities of the change in the rules. After its de novo review here, the Panel has determined it does not agree with many of the conclusions of the Tribunal, except as otherwise specifically indicated herein. 101. Finally, the Panel wishes to point out that the case it heard, and the award it renders, was not about an athlete who cheated. It was only about the degree of fault that can be imputed to a player for her failure to make sure that the substance contained in a product she had been legally taking over a long period, and for most of the time on the basis of a doctor's prescription, remained in compliance with the TADP and WADC. No question of intent to violate the TADP or WADC was before this Panel: under no circumstances, therefore, can the Player be considered to be an "intentional doper".“ Court of Arbitration for Sport (“CAS”), January 26, 2016
Nice try loser: “100. The Panel wishes to emphasize that based on the evidence, the Player did not endeavour to mask or hide her use of Mildronate and was in fact open about it to many in her entourage and based on a doctor's recommendation, that she took the substance with the good faith belief that it was appropriate and compliant with the relevant rules and her anti-doping obligations, as it was over a long period of her career, and that she was not clearly informed by the relevant anti-doping authorities of the change in the rules. After its de novo review here, the Panel has determined it does not agree with many of the conclusions of the Tribunal, except as otherwise specifically indicated herein. 101. Finally, the Panel wishes to point out that the case it heard, and the award it renders, was not about an athlete who cheated. It was only about the degree of fault that can be imputed to a player for her failure to make sure that the substance contained in a product she had been legally taking over a long period, and for most of the time on the basis of a doctor's prescription, remained in compliance with the TADP and WADC. No question of intent to violate the TADP or WADC was before this Panel: under no circumstances, therefore, can the Player be considered to be an "intentional doper".“ Court of Arbitration for Sport (“CAS”), January 26, 2016
