Sorry - you've totally lost me on that. Petra played Sharapova at 2011 Wimbledon not Caro. I have no idea what you are trying to say here.
You really don't understand where I am coming from? OK, let me try again. We were talking about Caroline at her peak and her odds of winning a slam. It's tough to define exactly what her peak was but I think it is reasonable to consider her time as number one as her peak so that means circa 2010 U.S. Open (technically she wasn't yet number one but her hot streak started before then) through till the end of 2011. I looked at the players she would have faced had she made the final and came to the conclusion that in three of her potential finals (2010 U.S. Open [she would have faced Kim], 2011 Australian Open [Kim again] and 2011 Wimbledon [she would have faced Petra]) she had very little chance of winning. Sure, it is possible that she could have won any or all finals but the three mentioned above I believe to be the least likely. Specifically regarding 2011 Wimbledon, Caroline was on Maria's half of the draw so had Caroline made the final she would have played Petra. I don't see what is confusing about what I typed. I was using that as an example of a final that I believe would have been extremely tough for Caroline to have won. Even if she had somehow found a way to beat Sabine in the semis (which I think is very unlikely) would she have managed to defeat Petra on grass?
But you do insult her - or her achievements anyway - whether you meant to or not. You are saying in effect that it's no big deal because her draw was as easy as it gets.
As your quotes prove I never typed the words "luckiest draw ever." Still, if you are playing Melanie Oudin in the quarters and Yanina Wickmayer in the semis that is about as easy as it gets to make the final of a grand slam. That is an opinion but I believe it is an opinion that most objective people would agree with. Just contrast it with who Kim faced in the quarters (Na Li) and semis (Serena Williams).
Yes - very much against the odds. Ranking, grand slam winner and just watch the match. I was thriilled that "David" beat "Goliath"
Currently Caroline is ranked sixth and Na Li is ranked eighth. So in that scenario is Caroline Goliath and Na David and would it be equally shocking for Na to beat Caroline? Of course not. Was Caroline the better player in the two and a half months leading up to the U.S. Open? Her results say that she was. Sure, Svetlana won the French Open that year but look at her results over the course of the entire year, she was very up and down. This was hardly comparable to Bartoli ending Azarenka's streak this year. It was two players that were fairly evenly matched. I just think you are wildly exaggerating the difference between the two players. Absolutely, at that point Svetlana was the better player and Caroline defeating her was a mild upset but as an example it was hardly as shocking as what happened to Na Li and Petra Kvitova at the U.S. Open last year.
That's just even worse that you harp on about Caro's USO 2009 USO draw as "easy" but you may consider not saying anything about an "easier" draw Serena and Sharapova had (playing no top ten / top 19 players or slam winners) because they have previously won a slam. Talk about rooting for Goliath agains David
. Criticise a player before they won a slam but consider giving a free pass to a player once they win a slam. Shoulsd be the other way round.
Again, you missed my point. Both Serena and Maria have won slams by defeating top players so it undercuts any arguments about them having "easy" draws. How can you criticise them for having an "easy" draw when in the past they both won slams getting through "tough" draws? To criticise them for not doing something in the present that they have done in the past seems a bit silly. They are both multiple slam winners and Caroline has yet to win a slam so I don't think it makes sense to compare them to her. It would make more sense to compare Caroline to other top players that never won a slam (Dementieva, Jankovic, Safina).
Anyway - the actual question I posed wasn't whether you would. It was "what do you think the reaction would be in her forum as a fan" if you criticised Shaerapova for not winning a slam since her comeback saying she wouldn't win another even though she had as easy as it gets draw at Wimby 2011. And what reaction as a Serena fan do you think you'd get saying all her slams post 2003 were easy because she didn't have Justine in the draw and that the Wimby 2010 draw was as easy as it gets.
Again, this is a different scenario than Caroline. Since Wimbledon Maria made another slam final. The Justine question is just silly. You beat the players you need to beat to win a slam. As far as Serena's "easy" 2010 Wimbledon draw again, there is a difference. She took advantage of it and won. I know a lot of people disagree but when you look at the slams where Caroline was seeded first (from 2010 U.S. Open to the 2012 Australian Open) she had six chances to make a final as the top seed and failed all six times. She had tremendous success over that stretch but for some reason she was unable to have that level of success at the slams. I think it is perfectly fair and valid to ask why and to criticise her for that. With the number one ranking come great expectations. People expect you to be the best and at the slams as number one Caroline was never better than third best.
To specifically answer your question I think the response would be that "Maria has now made two slam finals in the last year and she has three slams, why are you harping on about a single draw in a single slam?"
Regarding Serena I expect it would be something like "she is the most accomplished player of her generation and has beaten every top player she faced, what are you going on about you silly little man?"
Again, I don't think it would make sense to make those arguments about those players when they have already proven that they are capable of winning multiple slams. To date Caroline has not proven that she is capable of the same thing.