Remember Anna Kournikova?

Come on, of course you do.

Kournikova was the women's tennis star famous not for her sports skills but, rather, her modelling acumen.

Not that there's anything wrong with that but it's interesting to note that Kournikova's greatest success on the international tennis circuit was to make the semi-finals of Wimbledon in 1997 and be ranked world number eight in 2000.

That was it.

However, she did make a number one spot in 2002 – in men's magazine FHM's list of 100 Sexist Women In The World.

So hooray for that.

Kournikova is currently in "semi-retirement" which apparently means she no longer plays competitively but does turn up for charity events and uses her profile for good – and advertising.

How then, the Women's Tennis Association must have welcomed the arrival of Maria Sharapova.

Sharapova, still just 21, has looks and glamour but, unlike Kournikova, can actually play.

Hooray for that.

Sharapova has three Grand Slam titles in her bag as well as over $12 million in career earnings just from playing – nicely topped off by a similar amount in endorsement deals.

Sharapova isn't at this year's Australian Open, instead deciding to allow a shoulder injury more time to rehabilitate.

So, again, the WTA has quietly celebrated Ana Ivanovic's triumph at last year's French Open and organisers of the Australian Open have been thankful the Serbian made it to Melbourne.

Like Sharapova, Ivanovic can play, even if recent injuries marred the second half of her 2008. She also has looks and personality that invite big dollar sponsors.

An unfortunate problem for women's tennis is that, as Kournikova demonstrated during her career, you don't have to be a great player to be the sport's most well-known.

But Ivanovic and Sharapova are star material and that's something tennis administrators are all too aware of.

How else to explain a profile on the Australian Open official website that references the colour of the dress Ivanovic wore in her opening game (and, yes, the article was written by a woman)?

Another complication for women's tennis is that you don't have to have won a major tournament to given the number one world ranking.

Case in point: current number one Jelena Jankovic. Number of titles: zero.

Credibility ranking: um, zero.

The Los Angeles Times considers it has a solution.

Start the ranking at Number Two. Number one goes to the player who "looks the part".

Then again, that will start all different kinds of arguments.


:: For those that know about these things, follow me on Twitter here