Re: Radwanska on Serena's #1 ranking.
Admitting you've got no shot against the opponent's best means nothing. If anything, it makes it more likely the opponent won't bring their best.
Why? It just means that all I need to do is to string together a few shots and you're going to stop believing. It was all over for Radwanska the moment Serena served those 4 aces to tie the match at 2-all in the third set of the Wimbledon final. She didn't win another game, even though some were tight ones.
1.64cm, with a serve like an amateur. And she's top five. What DOES that say about the rest of HER game? (NOT the rest of the tour, about Errani)
Why shouldn't this say anything about the rest of the tour?
But for the COMPETITORS on the board (NOT the .... 'spectators'), if you want a player to use as a role model for maximizing your potential, study Sara Errani. She didn't get here by good looks, or by being 'bigger stronger faster'.
Exactly who did? Last time I checked, no one won a match by having good looks.
A single flow'r he sent me, since we met./All tenderly his messenger he chose;
Deep-hearted, pure, with scented dew still wet - One perfect rose.
I knew the language of the floweret;/'My fragile leaves,' it said, 'his heart enclose.'
Love long has taken for his amulet/One perfect rose.
Why is it no one ever sent me yet/One perfect limousine, do you suppose?
Ah no, it's always just my luck to get/One perfect rose.