PDA

View Full Version : Serena vs Shahar Peer: My take


Volcana
Mar 30th, 2007, 03:39 AM
Serena started out the match trying to hit winners past Peer they same way she did past her slow-footed opponents of the previous two rounds. But Peer's defense proved equal to the challenge. Then, around 4-4 (maybe a little earlier) Serena started looking tentative. Suddenly she was just batting some balls back, letting the rallies get longer. I started getting worried.

But then I realized something. Serena wasn't trying for nearly as many winners, but now she was starting to get them past Peer. That continued through the tie-breaker, and then I realized what i was seeing. Serena was figuring out how to play an opponent who could, effectively, run faster than Serena could hit. Serena began varying pace, hitting a lot more offspeed stuff, letting the rallies be longer.

She got better and better at getting Peer out of position. And, without a glaring change in the level of play for either player, a 7-6 set was followed by a 6-1 set.

NOTE: Serena was sluggish. I do think she may have been looking past Peer. But it certainly helped Serena to play a super-fast opponent before playing Henin.

Zhao
Mar 30th, 2007, 03:42 AM
she cannot afford a slow start against Justine
she has to start blasting right from the start...

BK4ever
Mar 30th, 2007, 03:43 AM
Sometimes Serena can be such a strange person...completely nervous tonight for no reason.

Shahar definitely has the goods, she just needs to make some minors tweak. She needs to me more aggressive and that serve needs alot of work.

supergrunt
Mar 30th, 2007, 03:43 AM
Thank you Nick :rolleyes:

paranr
Mar 30th, 2007, 03:49 AM
Serena started out the match trying to hit winners past Peer they same way she did past her slow-footed opponents of the previous two rounds. But Peer's defense proved equal to the challenge. Then, around 4-4 (maybe a little earlier) Serena started looking tentative. Suddenly she was just batting some balls back, letting the rallies get longer. I started getting worried.

But then I realized something. Serena wasn't trying for nearly as many winners, but now she was starting to get them past Peer. That continued through the tie-breaker, and then I realized what i was seeing. Serena was figuring out how to play an opponent who could, effectively, run faster than Serena could hit. Serena began varying pace, hitting a lot more offspeed stuff, letting the rallies be longer.

She got better and better at getting Peer out of position. And, without a glaring change in the level of play for either player, a 7-6 set was followed by a 6-1 set.

NOTE: Serena was sluggish. I do think she may have been looking past Peer. But it certainly helped Serena to play a super-fast opponent before playing Henin.

what a pile of nonsense.:rolleyes: Peer wa playing against a service-machine in the first set so she couldn't get a single break-point altough she won the mojority of the long rallies from the back. in the second set she went at list 2 levels downward as she realized that she couldn't do anything against this services and it broke her heart.

Volcana
Mar 30th, 2007, 03:54 AM
what a pile of nonsense.:rolleyes: Peer wa playing against a service-machine in the first set so she couldn't get a single break-point altough she won the mojority of the long rallies from the back. in the second set she went at list 2 levels downward as she realized that she couldn't do anything against this services and it broke her heart.Somehow, and I've seen her a couple times, Peer doesn't strike me as the kind of player who an opponent's serve 'break her heart'. She competing to the end, but Serena played smarter tennis, if not better, qualitatively. She stopped trying to hit five, six, seven winners in a row when Peer kept tracking them down, and started looking for another way to win. And she found it.

tennisbum79
Mar 30th, 2007, 03:59 AM
Peer comptes until the hands. That is the kkind of palyer she is.
I do not think Serena "broke her heart"

Vene when she lost againt Venus 6-1 6-1, she was still competing until the end.

paranr
Mar 30th, 2007, 04:04 AM
Somehow, and I've seen her a couple times, Peer doesn't strike me as the kind of player who an opponent's serve 'break her heart'. She competing to the end, but Serena played smarter tennis, if not better, qualitatively. She stopped trying to hit five, six, seven winners in a row when Peer kept tracking them down, and started looking for another way to win. And she found it.

If you think that Peer has kept the same level in the second set as in the first then either you and I haven't seen the same match or that your opinion is biased toward your fave. why don't you be honest and say the truth: Serena didn't have to do anything special in the second set , Peer was deomorilized and lost her confidence and thus her level has sliped.

I am asking for honesty to your self , that's all. have a nice day, I am going to bad, it's early morning in Israel and I haven't slept all night . good night.

tennisbum79
Mar 30th, 2007, 04:09 AM
I am asking for honesty to your self , that's all. have a nice day, I am going to bad, it's early morning in Israel and I haven't slept all night . good night.

I think you need to go to sleep. You sound like you need it.
You're taking your lack of sleep frustration on Peer.

After a good night sleep, you'll appreciate her fighting spirits more.

Love-seles
Mar 30th, 2007, 04:17 AM
Peer obviously was down after losing the 1st set.
she didn't get broken til she lost that set. so she obviously wasn't the same. i love how commentators whine when ever Serena is in a close battle. they never give the other player credit when its a non american hanging with Serena. its becoming a very annoying pattern.

tennisbum79
Mar 30th, 2007, 04:22 AM
Peer obviously was down after losing the 1st set.
she didn't get broken til she lost that set. so she obviously wasn't the same. i love how commentators whine when ever Serena is in a close battle. they never give the other player credit when its a non american hanging with Serena. its becoming a very annoying pattern.
I am sure they do this in other countries as well.

acetoace
Mar 30th, 2007, 04:28 AM
If you think that Peer has kept the same level in the second set as in the first then either you and I haven't seen the same match or that your opinion is biased toward your fave. why don't you be honest and say the truth: Serena didn't have to do anything special in the second set , Peer was deomorilized and lost her confidence and thus her level has sliped.

I am asking for honesty to your self , that's all. have a nice day, I am going to bad, it's early morning in Israel and I haven't slept all night . good night.

You are right; Peer lost confidence. I guess the salient question is why did Peer lost confidence?

Me thinks the answer is because she found that Serena was too good and that her best will not be sufficient to give her the result she was hoping for. Or better still, something more like being demoralised after having realized that Serena is way better and superior. Peer competed well though. She just is not at Serena's level period!!
Could there be any other reason?

partbrit
Mar 30th, 2007, 04:29 AM
This was the worst mental breakdown I've ever seen Shahar have. Frankly, I was shocked. She can get a bit tight, but I've never seen her just go to pieces before. But she's smart, so she'll learn from it.

Between that and Anna's regression to her old immature self, it was a disappointing pair of matches.

Bruno71
Mar 30th, 2007, 04:30 AM
Despite the close first set and Shahar's ability go bother Serena's game, I felt like she was always one or two steps behind. For every great point Shahar played, there was a forehand into the net or something similar not far afterwards. She gave Serena the chance to work around her nerves and the annoying knee problem...she didn't play the part of the aggressor well enough. I'm sure she has the potential to hone her mental skills in the years to come.

Kunal
Mar 30th, 2007, 04:33 AM
the final that we all ave been waiting for

Morrissey
Mar 30th, 2007, 04:35 AM
I thought Serena started out tentative. She did try to blast Peer's serve but wasn't hitting enough winners on Peer's first or second serve. I also noticed as the first set went on Serena got SMARTER. Serena realized that Peer was different then Sharapova and Viadasova. No offence to Maria and Nicole they are not good defensive players. In this match Serena knew Peer is fast and gets a lot of balls back. Peer also was very aggressive at times as well. I always felt Serena was the one dictating play though. Once Serena broke Peer's serve in the second set and got to 3-0 I knew the match was over and she finally found her range. Peer is a good player but there is nothing special or remarkable about her game.

tennisbum79
Mar 30th, 2007, 04:37 AM
Richard coaching advice to Serena before the 2nd set also was a big factor

tennnisfannn
Mar 30th, 2007, 04:39 AM
One could easily wonder why jstine battled so hard against rzzano or was that Dechy and nearly steam rolled a more worhty opponent in anna c. Players match up differently. Perhpas peer will be the capriati in serena's bone.

Morrissey
Mar 30th, 2007, 04:40 AM
Yes Richard talking to Serena was very important. I look at Peer and just find her very unremarkable compared to someone like Viadasova.In Nicole I see a lot of raw talent that just needs polishing. Peer I see a player that has maximized her talent she's a good runner gets a lot of balls back. But once the power players like Serena get into their groove its all over for Peer.

lecciones
Mar 30th, 2007, 04:42 AM
Gratz to serena she is playing the best out there. At least the first set was nice and competitive. Hhope to see MORE out of JH.

tennisbum79
Mar 30th, 2007, 04:44 AM
One could easily wonder why jstine battled so hard against rzzano or was that Dechy and nearly steam rolled a more worhty opponent in anna c. Players match up differently. Perhpas peer will be the capriati in serena's bone.

Very interesting observation.
It looks that way to me too!

Serena says she was nervous.
Was she thinking about Aussie 07 match or because she was now the favorite, not the underdog. And the expectations have now risen for her.

You can see she is a superior player, but she seems tentative and frustrated
at times.

Bruno71
Mar 30th, 2007, 04:46 AM
But once the power players like Serena get into their groove its all over for Peer.


Peer often beats power players...they seem to not like her pace as much as the typical power player's pace. Serena is a power player who can exploit an opponent's weaknesses too, though. That's what sets her apart.

Jakeev
Mar 30th, 2007, 04:52 AM
Serena started out the match trying to hit winners past Peer they same way she did past her slow-footed opponents of the previous two rounds. But Peer's defense proved equal to the challenge. Then, around 4-4 (maybe a little earlier) Serena started looking tentative. Suddenly she was just batting some balls back, letting the rallies get longer. I started getting worried.

But then I realized something. Serena wasn't trying for nearly as many winners, but now she was starting to get them past Peer. That continued through the tie-breaker, and then I realized what i was seeing. Serena was figuring out how to play an opponent who could, effectively, run faster than Serena could hit. Serena began varying pace, hitting a lot more offspeed stuff, letting the rallies be longer.

She got better and better at getting Peer out of position. And, without a glaring change in the level of play for either player, a 7-6 set was followed by a 6-1 set.

NOTE: Serena was sluggish. I do think she may have been looking past Peer. But it certainly helped Serena to play a super-fast opponent before playing Henin.

Someone brought up in another thread that although Serena was dominating matches in 2002, it wasn't like she always cakewalked through her draws.

Serena always has had problems with fast, counterpunching tennis players and tonight was no different.

Considering Justine moves even faster on court than Shahar, mixing things up rather than try go toe to toe with Williams from the baseline just might be a smarter tactic to win the title.

TSequoia01
Mar 30th, 2007, 05:53 AM
That tough lst set was just what the Dr ordered for Serena. Even if Serena had lost the set. She was being too one dimensional, sometimes you have to change up, and glad to see she did. Serena was putting too much pressure on herself to defeat everyone 1 & 1. She realized all she needs to do is play winning tennis whatever the score. If she just plays and try not to live up to any preconcieved expectation, she will defeat Justine. Just let the game come to you lil sis. :cool:

Morrissey
Mar 30th, 2007, 06:44 AM
I just think Peer was lucky to even stay in that first set. Peer won't be a big star she reminds me of that Russian girl from the first match with Henin. There is nothing special about either of their games.

Love-seles
Mar 30th, 2007, 07:27 AM
Peer already is a big star

Orion
Mar 30th, 2007, 08:36 AM
I felt Serena definitely started playing smarter in the second, and that contributed to Peer losing her concentration and quality. Very encouraging from Serena, and Peer proved she can hang with the top, if not all the time.

Orion
Mar 30th, 2007, 08:45 AM
I look at Peer and just find her very unremarkable compared to someone like Viadasova.In Nicole I see a lot of raw talent that just needs polishing. Peer I see a player that has maximized her talent she's a good runner gets a lot of balls back. But once the power players like Serena get into their groove its all over for Peer.

Here's the problem, though: how much more polishing can Vaidisova do? She's always going to have unforced errors, and it's basically a given that no-one can find a way to consistently keep that level of power present AND consistently lower unforced errors. Vaidisova isn't ever going to get much faster. Her serve isn't going to get much better. The one thing that could make her tougher is confidence. The big difference between every shot by Sharapova and every shot by Vaidisova is authority. Sharapova expects to be winning every point. Vaidisova doesn't.

Also, have you watched Peer since last year? She's made huge improvements on both her serve and forehand, and hasn't sacrificed her footspeed to get their. You can say power players beat her when they "get into their groove", but she doesn't often let that happen. She has the kind of game that's very frustrating for big hitters, and is more efficient against angled strikers (Henin and Serena) than most of the girls with different (read: non power-based) games. I'm not saying she's ever going to be an 8 time slam champion, but she's got a better claycourt game than pretty much anyone under 22, with Kuznetsova being the exception, and is more than capable on hardcourts.

It's also worth pointing out that Peer has now pushed Serena further than Vaidisova on two separate occasions at the same tournaments. So whatever she's doing is clearly working better than Vaidisova's game.

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 30th, 2007, 08:57 AM
Serena started out the match trying to hit winners past Peer they same way she did past her slow-footed opponents of the previous two rounds. But Peer's defense proved equal to the challenge. Then, around 4-4 (maybe a little earlier) Serena started looking tentative. Suddenly she was just batting some balls back, letting the rallies get longer. I started getting worried.

But then I realized something. Serena wasn't trying for nearly as many winners, but now she was starting to get them past Peer. That continued through the tie-breaker, and then I realized what i was seeing. Serena was figuring out how to play an opponent who could, effectively, run faster than Serena could hit. Serena began varying pace, hitting a lot more offspeed stuff, letting the rallies be longer.

She got better and better at getting Peer out of position. And, without a glaring change in the level of play for either player, a 7-6 set was followed by a 6-1 set.

NOTE: Serena was sluggish. I do think she may have been looking past Peer. But it certainly helped Serena to play a super-fast opponent before playing Henin.

I don't necessarily agree with your assessment of the first set.

Serena's problem wasn't that Shahar could, in effect, run faster than Serena could hit. Serena's problem was that She was simply missing shots she normally would make, given her recent form, SO SHE GOT TENTATIVE.

When Serena gets tentative she stops playing an agressive all court pressing game, and begins to back off. She stops taking the ball early and becomes VERY conservative. Serena, of course, is amazing enough to win like this- and win BIG, but against a player like Peer who possess Capriati-like court coverage and plays RELATIVELY clean, it becomes a bit of a counter punchers battle with the counter-puncher playing her IDEAL game and Serena playing her PLAN B. I always hated when Serena would get sucked into playing Capriati's game! IMHO, it all begins with Serena's mis-timing and decision to back off and give herself a little longer time to see the ball by taking it later.

In the second set, Serena got back to SERENA'S game, high-wire, high risk tennis. She played cleaner. Peer felt the heat, couldn't stay tough mentally and got rolled. :shrug:

Serena genius is that she doesn't have to beat you playing her native game, but it's generally gonna be tougher for her to win if she's NOT playing her native game.

If you look at the times she dominated J-Cap, she was playing high-wire, high risk tennis. If you look at the times she struggle or lost, she had been lulled into J-Cap's style. Now it's Shahar Peer's style. If Peer ever gets a REAL weapon, she can win a slam.

bandabou
Mar 30th, 2007, 09:26 AM
History has already shown that Serena always struggled against players who defend well..she usually wins those matches, but never easy.

So tomorrow is gonna be a big test for Serena..I think she can give Justine a match, but can't beat her just yet..

Direwolf
Mar 30th, 2007, 09:41 AM
I agree...
her level in the second set with Venus was
different than the second set with Serena...

she seems tired...

shibster
Mar 30th, 2007, 11:25 AM
peer has maxed her talent and nicole has raw talent. for sure....that's why peer can slice and do other things now, while nicole is uncomfortable at the net, had the same problems with serves (despite being taller), only groundies, and can't quite do anything else other than bashing the ball.

oh, i actually forgot, there was a thread that reminded people that peer took more games than sharky and nicole combined. hm........

peer was definitely not at her level in the 2nd set. yes, i definitely think we watched a different match. cos espn was showing the serena-gwbush version, while the rest of the world might have watched it without commentary, or not with the same commentary.

for the record, peer started the 2nd set with lots of wild misses, and her level kept dropping. i dun deny that she is a fighter and fought until the end, but her level is just not the same, because she is shaken in the head and heart.

but anyways, serena is still the best female player on planet earth, until aliens decide to invade earth.

and yes, the score on saturday will be 6-2, 6-3 serena. yes, i've said it.

Volcana
Mar 30th, 2007, 01:18 PM
I am asking for honesty to your self , that's all. have a nice day, I am going to bad, it's early morning in Israel and I haven't slept all night . good night.You asked for honesty, and you got it. It's not my fault you have a lower opinion of Peer than I do.

Volcana
Mar 30th, 2007, 01:19 PM
I am asking for honesty to your self , that's all. have a nice day, I am going to bad, it's early morning in Israel and I haven't slept all night . good night.You asked for honesty, and you got it. It's not my fault you have a lower opinion of Peer than I do.

Bruno71
Mar 30th, 2007, 06:25 PM
In thread after thread, I've noticed there's a large amount of tennis fans (both WTA & ATP) that simply don't understand that power is not everything. They'll continue to call counter-punchers and great defensive players "boring" or "inadequate" in comparison to the likes of a Sharapova or Serena. They don't understand how a player with less power can be considered anything more than second rate, or how they can actually control a power player's error count. My opinion is that this is the extremely NARROW point of view. These folks unfortunately don't understand all the aspects of the game enough to comment with authority. Yet, they'll keep doing it over & over no matter how articulate the arguments are.

ronim1
Mar 30th, 2007, 07:29 PM
If you think that Peer has kept the same level in the second set as in the first then either you and I haven't seen the same match or that your opinion is biased toward your fave. why don't you be honest and say the truth: Serena didn't have to do anything special in the second set , Peer was deomorilized and lost her confidence and thus her level has sliped.

I am asking for honesty to your self , that's all. have a nice day, I am going to bad, it's early morning in Israel and I haven't slept all night . good night.

On what channel did you see tha game?:confused:

frenchie
Mar 30th, 2007, 07:55 PM
In thread after thread, I've noticed there's a large amount of tennis fans (both WTA & ATP) that simply don't understand that power is not everything. They'll continue to call counter-punchers and great defensive players "boring" or "inadequate" in comparison to the likes of a Sharapova or Serena. They don't understand how a player with less power can be considered anything more than second rate, or how they can actually control a power player's error count. My opinion is that this is the extremely NARROW point of view. These folks unfortunately don't understand all the aspects of the game enough to comment with authority. Yet, they'll keep doing it over & over no matter how articulate the arguments are.

:worship: :worship: :worship:

bring on Hingis, Myskina, Chakvetadze, Peer, Schnyder....

Orion
Mar 30th, 2007, 10:21 PM
In thread after thread, I've noticed there's a large amount of tennis fans (both WTA & ATP) that simply don't understand that power is not everything. They'll continue to call counter-punchers and great defensive players "boring" or "inadequate" in comparison to the likes of a Sharapova or Serena. They don't understand how a player with less power can be considered anything more than second rate, or how they can actually control a power player's error count. My opinion is that this is the extremely NARROW point of view. These folks unfortunately don't understand all the aspects of the game enough to comment with authority. Yet, they'll keep doing it over & over no matter how articulate the arguments are.

AMEN :worship:

paranr
Mar 30th, 2007, 10:53 PM
On what channel did you see tha game?:confused: They showed it live on Eurosport site only in Israel.

Denise4925
Mar 30th, 2007, 11:02 PM
I don't necessarily agree with your assessment of the first set.

Serena's problem wasn't that Shahar could, in effect, run faster than Serena could hit. Serena's problem was that She was simply missing shots she normally would make, given her recent form, SO SHE GOT TENTATIVE.

When Serena gets tentative she stops playing an agressive all court pressing game, and begins to back off. She stops taking the ball early and becomes VERY conservative. Serena, of course, is amazing enough to win like this- and win BIG, but against a player like Peer who possess Capriati-like court coverage and plays RELATIVELY clean, it becomes a bit of a counter punchers battle with the counter-puncher playing her IDEAL game and Serena playing her PLAN B. I always hated when Serena would get sucked into playing Capriati's game! IMHO, it all begins with Serena's mis-timing and decision to back off and give herself a little longer time to see the ball by taking it later.

In the second set, Serena got back to SERENA'S game, high-wire, high risk tennis. She played cleaner. Peer felt the heat, couldn't stay tough mentally and got rolled. :shrug:

Serena genius is that she doesn't have to beat you playing her native game, but it's generally gonna be tougher for her to win if she's NOT playing her native game.

If you look at the times she dominated J-Cap, she was playing high-wire, high risk tennis. If you look at the times she struggle or lost, she had been lulled into J-Cap's style. Now it's Shahar Peer's style. If Peer ever gets a REAL weapon, she can win a slam.

OMG 100% agree :worship:

The Jabberwock
Mar 30th, 2007, 11:20 PM
In thread after thread, I've noticed there's a large amount of tennis fans (both WTA & ATP) that simply don't understand that power is not everything. They'll continue to call counter-punchers and great defensive players "boring" or "inadequate" in comparison to the likes of a Sharapova or Serena. They don't understand how a player with less power can be considered anything more than second rate, or how they can actually control a power player's error count. My opinion is that this is the extremely NARROW point of view. These folks unfortunately don't understand all the aspects of the game enough to comment with authority. Yet, they'll keep doing it over & over no matter how articulate the arguments are.

:yeah:

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 30th, 2007, 11:51 PM
OMG 100% agree :worship:
GMTA, Baby!! :kiss:

WtaTour4Ever
Mar 31st, 2007, 02:21 AM
Wait are some of you saying Capriati was a counter puncher?? If so, I'm assuming you would put her with the likes of Clisters? I ask only b/c I never viewed her that way. I always wondered what it was about Capriati that made their matches so tight.

DOUBLEFIST
Mar 31st, 2007, 02:25 AM
Wait are some of you saying Capriati was a counter puncher?? If so, I'm assuming you would put her with the likes of Clisters? I ask only b/c I never viewed her that way. I always wondered what it was about Capriati that made their matches so tight.


While J-Cap often does much more than counter punch. Against Serena she was more counter puncher than anything else.

tennisbum79
Mar 31st, 2007, 02:33 AM
Posted by paranr http://imgsrv2.tennisuniverse.com/wtaworld/images/buttons/blue/viewpost.gif (http://www.wtaworld.com/showthread.php?p=10401599#post10401599)
I am asking for honesty to your self , that's all. have a nice day, I am going to bad, it's early morning in Israel and I haven't slept all night . good night.

You asked for honesty, and you got it. It's not my fault you have a lower opinion of Peer than I do.

I think paranr wants you to use the text or word s/he suggested to answer.
Not your own words.

VS Fan
Mar 31st, 2007, 03:35 AM
Sometimes Serena can be such a strange person...completely nervous tonight for no reason.

Shahar definitely has the goods, she just needs to make some minors tweak. She needs to me more aggressive and that serve needs alot of work.

I did not think that Serena's serve was much of a problem. She faced break points but gave up zero.

I was her return game that was very shaky in the first set, which caused the first set to be settled in a tie-break.

Second set... no problems.

Volcana
Mar 31st, 2007, 05:48 AM
[Posted by paranr]
I am asking for honesty to your self , that's all. have a nice day, I am going to bad, it's early morning in Israel and I haven't slept all night . good night.
I think paranr wants you to use the text or word s/he suggested to answer.
Not your own words.[/quote]
I can't use pananr's words, paranr has a completely wrongheaeded take on that match. That match had three clear phases

a) Serena keeps trying to blast winner past Peer, and they keep coming back

b) At around 4-4 in 1st set, Serena starts trying some off-speed stuff, looking for a different solution. It still an even match, but Serena is no longer supplying pace for Peer.

c) Serena is no longer searching. Peer is now having to produce her pace, and Serena is rallying, waiting for an opening instead of trying to hit winners regardless of where Peer is in the court.

Peer's results dropped because Serena changed how the match was being played. Instead of Serena generating all the offense, she made Peer generate her own offense, really taking the pace off a lot of her own shots. And there started being some openings Serena could hit through.

ronim1
Mar 31st, 2007, 07:38 AM
I read all the post in this thread with great interest.
I wasn't able to watch the game, so I can't comment on it.
Comparing Shahar to Serena is at this stage ridiculous.
Serena is an outstanding player, maybe the best ever seen on a court.
She is in her peak, regarding age, experience and physical strength.
Shahar, as much as I adore her- so non typically Israeli in character- is only growing out being a teenager.
What she knows to do on court is great to watch.
The problem is what she doesn’t know.
Hers serves are not close to being a weapon. Her play is too much one dimensional. The brighter side of this is; that despite her high ranking , ( and I hope ) she will improve on those aspects. I actually saw her slice a few balls against Garbin.:bounce:
If she will improve, I think she may be a match in about two years against the top5 players, including Serena. Serena, her problem is in my opinion her temperament. Like Zvonareva she tends to get too emotionally. That is her only weakness on court.

Meteor Shower
Mar 31st, 2007, 12:00 PM
I can't use pananr's words, paranr has a completely wrongheaeded take on that match. That match had three clear phases

a) Serena keeps trying to blast winner past Peer, and they keep coming back

b) At around 4-4 in 1st set, Serena starts trying some off-speed stuff, looking for a different solution. It still an even match, but Serena is no longer supplying pace for Peer.

c) Serena is no longer searching. Peer is now having to produce her pace, and Serena is rallying, waiting for an opening instead of trying to hit winners regardless of where Peer is in the court.

Peer's results dropped because Serena changed how the match was being played. Instead of Serena generating all the offense, she made Peer generate her own offense, really taking the pace off a lot of her own shots. And there started being some openings Serena could hit through.

Shahar's form dropped because she lost her energy after losing the first set in a tiebreaker and losing the first two points.
You could see her yelling 'shut up already' in hebrew at 6-7 0-1 0-15, at that point I knew it was over. After that point came a stupid mistake and a DF. not surprising.
I don't think Serena did any change of tactic during the match, except serving to Shahar forehand way way more from the middle of the first set, smart move.

BuTtErFrEnA
Mar 31st, 2007, 12:59 PM
the two go hand in hand.....Peer's level dropped because Serena changed her tactics...she didn't do anything outlandish she changed and made Peer create her own pace which in effect is not something she likes to do...the same thing happens with Roddick vs Hewitt...Roddick had all that power but the counter puncher Hewitt was able to use all that to his own benefit....once you don't feed a counter puncher that's also making them go to plan B;)