Title is a title. Point. Look at Wimby 2013 and 2014 winners - very easy runs, honestly said. Such things can happen and one has to be prepared just like Li was, particularly after 2 final losses before.
Money wise, Li's was worth more. I see Li beat Bencic, so if you reversed their draws, and Kerber played Bencic, Li played Serena, not a good thing for either.
I remember a thread about $$, I said Kerber was a $20M player & people argued with me. Never make that much, no endorsements
Every good player should make $20M
Bencic should make $100M
Li's run was a lot more difficult than people give her credit for. I've went through player by player starting in the 3R and explained why, but in short, while she didn't technically play a top 20 player, almost everyone that she played was in an upswing, playing above their ranking, peaking (safarova match), and in about a year they were mostly top 10 players.
This. In a few years' time, people will look at the names Li beat and they will think it was a tough draw of accomplished players. Most of them played slam finals.
Kerber had two fantastic wins over Vika and Serena. But if you look at all the opponents, Li actually faced a higher caliber of opponents, if you consider what they have achieved in theri careers so far, rather then their ranking. For example, Pennetta later won a slam, Safarova and Makarova went into the top 10. Bencic/Konjuh could be future slam champions.
Li's win was important for the sport, and it was as the favorite late in the tournament, which is a whole different ballgame than being under the radar
Baseless comment and I find it ridiculous. Angie had much tougher QF and F opponents. Big difference between facing Serena in a slam final and Pome. Also I don't know why you said 2015 Kerber. 2015 Kerber was good but clearly not as good as 2016 Kerber in terms of mental strength, self-belief and aggressiveness. Therefore, current Kerber is the best Kerber and I'm sure she would have a chance with Na's draw. All in all, both fully deserved their slams so this thread is stupid.
happy to give angie her credit, including important wins h2h over 2 ranked players, no matter how how they actually performed, as every time a plyer steps on court they can play as well or poorly as they like come to think of it, that's the epitome of sport.
li na beat a stream of ranked players, including some who beat better ranked players ...but in tennis, I think it's fair that credit for winning against the opponents in front of them is considered.
Li Na was consistent at the AO through the years, could easily have won 3 AO titles, can't compare Angie's one time run to Li's consistency over years!
The only times a slam title has been worth less than another slam title is a long time ago when FO and AO were worth less than W and USO and most players who were not Australian skipped AO and you had players skipping FO.
Only in this Alice in Wonderland forum does anyone think on the lines of the OP and the title. And I'm 100% certain that Kerber and Li - the players in the thread title who actually won these slams - don't think anything like the OP does at all.
Winning slam by one player = winning slam by other player. :shrug:
Who cares that some players were absent/injured or in better/ worse form. The player who is the best among everybody in the draw, winning all 7 matches, is the slam champion like other slam champions.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Tennis Forum
33.4M posts
98.7K members
Since 2001
A forum community dedicated to Tennis players and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about players, gear, matches, scores, guidelines, and more!