PDA

View Full Version : Who will have a more successful career - Wozniacki or Azarenka?


2009
Feb 9th, 2010, 10:17 AM
I'm totally running with the Caro/Vika craze atm... :lol:

I'm pretty sure there's already been a thread about which one is the better player, but I want to know who you guys think will actually be more successful at retirement. I ask this as there have been many talented players who have failed to reach their potential, or otherwise 'lucky' grand slam winners etc etc etc..

I'm defining singles success as grand slam titles, career titles, career high ranking/weeks at #1 (if any, although it seems probable at some stage)... and whatever else you define success as. Thus, it's arguable that Wozniacki has had the more successful career so far... but what about in the long run?

Beny
Feb 9th, 2010, 10:21 AM
I think Wozniacki. She has a better head and she can still improve loads. When she gains more power she will be dominating

Navratil
Feb 9th, 2010, 10:37 AM
Wozniacki already passed her peak and will never reach another Grand-Slam-semi. Azarenka needs to learn to close out matches. Her game is a little bit onesided but she will break into Top 3 like Wozniacki did.

But you got to admit that Wozniacki was pretty lucky with the draw at last year's US-Open! ;-)

Chrissie-fan
Feb 9th, 2010, 11:01 AM
But you got to admit that Wozniacki was pretty lucky with the draw at last year's US-Open! ;-)
I don't know. If we are to believe all the hate threads we have here on a daily basis when it comes to Caro she's such an awful player that no draw should be easy for her. In fact, since everyone else is supposed to be better she caused an upset in each round. Those other players were the ones who had an easy draw and they blew it by losing to Caro. So, congrats to Wozniacki for beating six better players in a row. :worship:

As for the poll, I'm sure that fans will vote for their favorite player (I'm no different) and most of the others will vote for Azarenka because they don't like Wozniacki. Whether that's really their honest opinion about who will have the more successful career is open to question. It's more a matter of who they want to have the more successful career than who they think will have the more successful career.

Corswandt
Feb 9th, 2010, 11:09 AM
Who will have a more successful career - Wozniacki or Azarenka?

Wozniacki, undoubtedly. :yawn:

Valanga
Feb 9th, 2010, 11:12 AM
Azarenka.

young_gunner913
Feb 9th, 2010, 11:28 AM
I think Azerenka. She has a better game and she's more aggressive. You cant wait for an opponent to give you oppertunities like Caro does, Vika makes oppertunities. If she get a few things straightened out, she could possibly even be a slam winner in the future.

doktor
Feb 9th, 2010, 11:34 AM
i think vika... she just seems to have more weapons (disregarding that serve)... i would like to see her hit a little flatter and through the court more, and maybe clean up the forehand technique... like the volleys though...

BuTtErFrEnA
Feb 9th, 2010, 11:35 AM
vika may be more "aggressive", but caro has the better head atm :shrug: and again, winning one set doesn't mean vika can win big matches until she actually does win them...

eta: it's probably easier to improve your game than your head...and caro has shown then when she does play aggressive (like she did against vika at yec) that she can beat even vika

Slutiana
Feb 9th, 2010, 11:35 AM
In all honesty, although I'm beginning to warm to Vika I just don't think either of them are as good as people are making them out to be. On one hand Caroline is simply too passive and just doesn't have enough skill or power to actually 'win' something without an incredible draw.

And then Vika who is more of an aggressive Zvonareva. As aggressive as she is, she herself can be bullied by bigger hitters. However she is consistently aggressive which counts for a lot right now so Vika it is!

AnnaK_4ever
Feb 9th, 2010, 11:41 AM
Wozniacki. Unless Azarenka stops pretending to be a hardhitter and buys herself a somewhat potent first serve.

Langers
Feb 9th, 2010, 11:43 AM
Azarenka easily.

Vaidisova Ruled
Feb 9th, 2010, 11:50 AM
I don't know. If we are to believe all the hate threads we have here on a daily basis when it comes to Caro she's such an awful player that no draw should be easy for her. In fact, since everyone else is supposed to be better she caused an upset in each round. Those other players were the ones who had an easy draw and they blew it by losing to Caro. So, congrats to Wozniacki for beating six better players in a row. :worship:


Wow :eek:
That was great! You should write this in some Caro hate thread. A "hater" will have trouble to find an answer to that

Dave.
Feb 9th, 2010, 11:53 AM
vika may be more "aggressive", but caro has the better head atm :shrug: and again, winning one set doesn't mean vika can win big matches until she actually does win them...


and Car can? Playing Safina and Serenax2 in your first 3 GS QF's is not the same as playing Oudin in your only GS QF. I'd say so far Vika has done better in the slams. Plus her biggest title far exceeds anything Caro has won. So for all her "better head" and "consistency", Caro has still managed to be the more inconsistent and ineffective of the two in the biggest matches.


And aside from all that, Vika already has 2 grand slams. :angel: I think her doubles will be a huge help whenever this comparison is brought up in the coming years.

Shvedbarilescu
Feb 9th, 2010, 11:55 AM
Too early to say. I wouldn't be surprised either way.

AnnaK_4ever
Feb 9th, 2010, 11:58 AM
I don't know. If we are to believe all the hate threads we have here on a daily basis when it comes to Caro she's such an awful player that no draw should be easy for her. In fact, since everyone else is supposed to be better she caused an upset in each round. Those other players were the ones who had an easy draw and they blew it by losing to Caro. So, congrats to Wozniacki for beating six better players in a row. :worship:

As for the poll, I'm sure that fans will vote for their favorite player (I'm no different) and most of the others will vote for Azarenka because they don't like Wozniacki. Whether that's really their honest opinion about who will have the more successful career is open to question. It's more a matter of who they want to have the more successful career than who they think will have the more successful career.

Stop speaking for others, ok?

Who has ever said Wozniacki's tennis is not efficient against lower ranked scrubs? Who has ever said her tennis can't frustrate UE machines like Kuznetsova?

Dave.
Feb 9th, 2010, 12:00 PM
As for the poll, I'm sure that fans will vote for their favorite player (I'm no different) and most of the others will vote for Azarenka because they don't like Wozniacki. Whether that's really their honest opinion about who will have the more successful career is open to question. It's more a matter of who they want to have the more successful career than who they think will have the more successful career.

As if Azarenka is any more liked on here. :lol:

BuTtErFrEnA
Feb 9th, 2010, 12:08 PM
and Car can? Playing Safina and Serenax2 in your first 3 GS QF's is not the same as playing Oudin in your only GS QF. I'd say so far Vika has done better in the slams. Plus her biggest title far exceeds anything Caro has won. So for all her "better head" and "consistency", Caro has still managed to be the more inconsistent and ineffective of the two in the biggest matches.


And aside from all that, Vika already has 2 grand slams. :angel: I think her doubles will be a huge help whenever this comparison is brought up in the coming years.

so all of a sudden it's ever so difficult to play those 2?? i thought last year proved she would have beaten serena had she not had to retire with dizziness? :confused: and guess what caro still had to go out there and win more than one set in her qf to advance...vika is no more consistent than caro in big matches: if i win a set and lose and she loses in straight sets it's still a loss...

vika has a miami* :shrug: doesn't tell me that when the pressure gets going like it did at RG, wimbledon, YEC, AO that she will win :shrug: i've seen players win the first big title but have worse careers than another so it means nothing to me

Eduardo Oliveira
Feb 9th, 2010, 12:13 PM
Vika :yeah:
more agressive

pwayne
Feb 9th, 2010, 12:16 PM
On court - Victoria
Off court - Caroline

Dave.
Feb 9th, 2010, 12:20 PM
so all of a sudden it's ever so difficult to play those 2?? i thought last year proved she would have beaten serena had she not had to retire with dizziness? :confused: and guess what caro still had to go out there and win more than one set in her qf to advance...vika is no more consistent than caro in big matches: if i win a set and lose and she loses in straight sets it's still a loss...

vika has a miami* :shrug: doesn't tell me that when the pressure gets going like it did at RG, wimbledon, YEC, AO that she will win :shrug: i've seen players win the first big title but have worse careers than another so it means nothing to me

You might not think Serena is a formidable opponent (although you go around telling others off if they say she isn't :scratch:) but I always have, especially on grass. And even if I didn't think that, she's still better than Oudin.

Vika is more consistent in the slams. And outside of the slams in the biggest finals they've played, Vika won hers, Caro lost.

Caro may have a US Open Final* but that doesn't tell me that when the pressure gets going like it did at RG, wimbledon, YEC, AO that she will win. :shrug: Victoria handled the pressure better at all three of those slams.

Volcana
Feb 9th, 2010, 12:25 PM
caro has the better headWhat exactly is meant by ' a better head'? These are two players trying to do very different things. It's like saying Conchita Martinez had a better head than Venus Williams. Conchi certainly tossed a lot more different things at her opponent, and was far less prone to go down in flames while refusing to change what she was attempting. But that's also a by product of success. Venus doesn't change because if she executes successfully she usually wins.

Azarenka won Miami because she didn't change. Wozniacki loses to almost anybody who plays well, no matter what she tries. Rybarikova, Cirstea, Lisicki, Vesnina, Martinez Sanchez.... It's one thing if you're a player who makes their living on offense. When those players are off, it's a bad day. When you make your living as a retriever, losses like that shouldn't happen. When Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario was 19 years old, she didn't lose to players outside the top fifty. She didn't lose to players outside the top fifteen.

BuTtErFrEnA
Feb 9th, 2010, 12:33 PM
You might not think Serena is a formidable opponent (although you go around telling others off if they say she isn't :scratch:) but I always have, especially on grass. And even if I didn't think that, she's still better than Oudin.

Vika is more consistent in the slams. And outside of the slams in the biggest finals they've played, Vika won hers, Caro lost.

Caro may have a US Open Final* but that doesn't tell me that when the pressure gets going like it did at RG, wimbledon, YEC, AO that she will win. :shrug: Victoria handled the pressure better at all three of those slams.

serena is formidable...i'm just going by what was propagated here last year because she won a set off serena that it meant she was "the true #1" "she would have beaten serena for sure" etc...so obviously she isn't THAT formidable to posters here who think winning one set automatically means the match is hers :shrug:

if that is what it is then SURE she has handled the pressure better...but when they both went h-2-h, 2-all with a 2-1 adv. to caro on what is vika's better surface doesn't tell me she's better than caro or that she will have a better career than her...US Open AND YEC where the pressure is on caro leads vika 2-0 :shrug:

BuTtErFrEnA
Feb 9th, 2010, 12:36 PM
What exactly is meant by ' a better head'? These are two players trying to do very different things. It's like saying Conchita Martinez had a better head than Venus Williams. Conchi certainly tossed a lot more different things at her opponent, and was far less prone to go down in flames while refusing to change what she was attempting. But that's also a by product of success. Venus doesn't change because if she executes successfully she usually wins.

Azarenka won Miami because she didn't change. Wozniacki loses to almost anybody who plays well, no matter what she tries. Rybarikova, Cirstea, Lisicki, Vesnina, Martinez Sanchez.... It's one thing if you're a player who makes their living on offense. When those players are off, it's a bad day. When you make your living as a retriever, losses like that shouldn't happen. When Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario was 19 years old, she didn't lose to players outside the top fifty. She didn't lose to players outside the top fifteen.

i'm talking about mentality...:shrug: and imo caro has shown she has a better mentality than vika....

and let's not kid ourselves...caro and vika both have the ability to be blown off the court but any aggressive player on a good day...vika doesn't play this super aggressive , all powerful game that some here, and MJF seem to keep saying...

Renalicious
Feb 9th, 2010, 01:03 PM
I think Wozniacki. When you see a list of past major slam champions they are all very mentally tough - Serena, Justine, Steffi, Monica... Of course there's a possibility that neither player will prove to be legendary or even close, but If I had to pick one, it'd be Caroline. She just seems like she knows 'how to win' more than Vika right now.

Slutiana
Feb 9th, 2010, 01:13 PM
and Car can? Playing Safina and Serenax2 in your first 3 GS QF's is not the same as playing Oudin in your only GS QF. I'd say so far Vika has done better in the slams. Plus her biggest title far exceeds anything Caro has won. So for all her "better head" and "consistency", Caro has still managed to be the more inconsistent and ineffective of the two in the biggest matches.


And aside from all that, Vika already has 2 grand slams. :angel: I think her doubles will be a huge help whenever this comparison is brought up in the coming years.
Only you. :hysteric:

You're right though. Vika knows her way around the net and so she has a lot more room to improve.
What exactly is meant by ' a better head'? These are two players trying to do very different things. It's like saying Conchita Martinez had a better head than Venus Williams. Conchi certainly tossed a lot more different things at her opponent, and was far less prone to go down in flames while refusing to change what she was attempting. But that's also a by product of success. Venus doesn't change because if she executes successfully she usually wins.

Azarenka won Miami because she didn't change. Wozniacki loses to almost anybody who plays well, no matter what she tries. Rybarikova, Cirstea, Lisicki, Vesnina, Martinez Sanchez.... It's one thing if you're a player who makes their living on offense. When those players are off, it's a bad day. When you make your living as a retriever, losses like that shouldn't happen. When Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario was 19 years old, she didn't lose to players outside the top fifty. She didn't lose to players outside the top fifteen.
Well said. 100% right.
I think Wozniacki. When you see a list of past major slam champions they are all very mentally tough - Serena, Justine, Steffi, Monica... Of course there's a possibility that neither player will prove to be legendary or even close, but If I had to pick one, it'd be Caroline. She just seems like she knows 'how to win' more than Vika right now.
She doesn't know how to win against the best players though. And that list also has something else in common. WEAPONS.

sammy01
Feb 9th, 2010, 01:21 PM
caro will have the steadier career, vika will have the more up and down, with probably greater highs, but lower lows.

mboyle
Feb 9th, 2010, 01:25 PM
I think Wozniacki. She has a better head and she can still improve loads. When she gains more power she will be dominating

Give me an example of a player who developed more power after age 18. Don't say Henin. Her backhand was already naturally a weapon. Power isn't easily learned.

Nikkiri
Feb 9th, 2010, 01:27 PM
Azarenka.

Shvedbarilescu
Feb 9th, 2010, 01:30 PM
Give me an example of a player who developed more power after age 18. Don't say Henin. Her backhand was already naturally a weapon. Power isn't easily learned.

Safina.

mboyle
Feb 9th, 2010, 01:30 PM
To answer the question, I'm not sure if either will ever win a slam. Azarenka has some whack job coach who tells her to hit her first serve like a second serve. Her ground game is pretty but she's not going to beat Williams x2, Belgium x2 or Sharapova (the real one) in a slam when they are playing well, and one of those five is going to be playing well at the slams for the next couple of years. Once Williams/Belgium leave, you have people like Robson coming up. I shouldn't have to explain why Caro isn't going to win a grand slam, but she might at least get to number one.

mboyle
Feb 9th, 2010, 01:31 PM
Safina.

Safina has always had tremendous power. She developed consistency.

sammy01
Feb 9th, 2010, 01:33 PM
Safina.

lol safina always had power, her improvement came from way better fitness and movement and adding huge amounts of topspin that made her better at controling her big shots. it also made her ideal for clay.

Shvedbarilescu
Feb 9th, 2010, 01:38 PM
Yeah she always hit the ball pretty hard but I do believe it isn't just consistancy that she added. I'm quite sure as she got stronger her pace of shot increased as well.

Volcana
Feb 9th, 2010, 01:46 PM
i'm talking about mentality...:shrug: and imo caro has shown she has a better mentality than vika....I'm not sure what you mean by 'mentality'. Better decision -making? Positive attitude? Keeping her composure? What? If you mean emotionally, I disagree with you. You can be almost anything out there and be successful. Venus is mostly impassive. Serena, as the world saw, can lose her mind. Jennifer Capriati could be a train wreck. Martina Hingis was happy-go-lucky. TOB gets the Great Stone Face.

Monzanator
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:00 PM
Wozniacki.

She's much stronger mentally. As for Azarenka every now and again a serious meltdown is waiting around the corner. Her loss to Serena in AO was a classic example.

btw, the Wozniacki haters are well in numbers judging by the poll results. Shame it doesn't reflect the reality one bit :lol:

Volcana
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:12 PM
and let's not kid ourselves...caro and vika both have the ability to be blown off the court but any aggressive player on a good day...The difference is that Wozniacki loses to BAD players. (My use of the term 'bad' being relative. Any top hundred player is a world class player.)


The ranking system, in it's current form, gives an illusion of Wozniacki's accomplishments. They're good, but not like she's even close to the third best player in the world. First of all, without quality points, that US Open final looks stronger than it was. She only beat one top twenty player. The other thign is that she plays a lot, so you don't see the worst third of her results reflected in her ranking. Take it from the beginning of 2009, and look at ALL the losses by both these players.

Wozniacki

__76 VESNINA ........... L 6-3 0-6 6-3
__02 SERENA ............ L 6-7 6-3 7-6
_187 DOKIC ............. L 3-6 6-1 6-2
__51 RYBARIKOVA ........ L 6-4 6-1
__14 AZARENKA .......... L 6-1 6-3
__06 ZVONAREVA ......... L 6-4 6-2
__08 KUZNETSOVA ........ L 6-4 6-7 6-1
__63 LISICKI ........... L 6-2 6-4
__13 BARTOLI ........... L 7-6 6-4
__09 AZARENKA .......... L 6-2 6-2
__01 SAFINA ............ L 6-2 6-4
__41 CIRSTEA ........... L 7-6 7-5
__41 LISICKI ........... L 6-4 6-4
__54 MARTINEZ SANCHEZ .. L 7-5 6-4
__28 CIRSTEA ........... L 1-6 6-4 7-6
__04 DEMENTIEVA ........ L 6-2 6-1
__25 ZHENG ............. L 7-5 6-3
9999 CLIJSTERS ......... L 7-5 6-3
__35 WOZNIAK ........... L 5-0 RET
__38 MARTINEZ SANCHEZ .. L 6-7 7-6 6-0
__15 STOSUR ............ L 6-0 4-6 6-4
_864 KREMER ............ L 5-7 0-5 RET
__02 SERENA ............ L 6-4 0-1 RET
2010 ---------------------------------
__17 LI ................ L 2-6 6-3 6-2
__17 LI ................ L 6-4 6-3

Azarenka

__02 SERENA ............ L 3-6 4-2 RET
__06 ZVONAREVA ......... L 6-3 6-3
__34 DULKO ............. L 6-4 6-3
__08 KUZNETSOVA ........ L 6-2 6-4
__38 SZAVAY ............ L 4-6 6-2 6-2
__01 SAFINA ............ L 1-6 6-4 6-2
__02 SERENA ............ L 6-2 6-3
__61 SHARAPOVA ......... L 6-7 6-4 6-2
__05 JANKOVIC .......... L 7-5 7-6
__un CLIJSTERS ......... L 7-5 4-6 6-1
__28 SCHIAVONE ......... L 4-6 6-2 6-2
__16 LI ................ L 7-6 4-6 7-6
__15 SHARAPOVA ......... L 6-3 6-7 7-5
__04 WOZNIACKI ......... L 1-6 6-4 7-5
2010 ---------------------------------
__05 DEMENTIEVA ........ L 6-3 6-1
__01 SERENA ............ L 4-6 7-6 6-2

If you ignore Sharapova and Clijsters losses, as those being cases of losses to former slam winners coming back from injury, look at what's left. Wozniacki has six looses to players outside the top 50, another two to players outside the top 40, and another two to players outside the the 30. Azarenka has no losses to players outside the top 40, and only two to players outside the 30.

I do think Wozniacki gets dumped on unfairly by people who don't like her style of play, but to say she's accomplished more than Azarenka is, to an extent, a product of not looking at the details of their respective careers. Azarenka is actually the more consistent player, and has actually won a major tournament, though not a slam.

Slutiana
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:28 PM
The difference is that Wozniacki loses to BAD players. (My use of the term 'bad' being relative. Any top hundred player is a world class player.)


The ranking system, in it's current form, gives an illusion of Wozniacki's accomplishments. They're good, but not like she's even close to the third best player in the world. First of all, without quality points, that US Open final looks stronger than it was. She only beat one top twenty player. The other thign is that she plays a lot, so you don't see the worst third of her results reflected in her ranking. Take it from the beginning of 2009, and look at ALL the losses by both these players.

Wozniacki

__76 VESNINA ........... L 6-3 0-6 6-3
__02 SERENA ............ L 6-7 6-3 7-6
_187 DOKIC ............. L 3-6 6-1 6-2
__51 RYBARIKOVA ........ L 6-4 6-1
__14 AZARENKA .......... L 6-1 6-3
__06 ZVONAREVA ......... L 6-4 6-2
__08 KUZNETSOVA ........ L 6-4 6-7 6-1
__63 LISICKI ........... L 6-2 6-4
__13 BARTOLI ........... L 7-6 6-4
__09 AZARENKA .......... L 6-2 6-2
__01 SAFINA ............ L 6-2 6-4
__41 CIRSTEA ........... L 7-6 7-5
__41 LISICKI ........... L 6-4 6-4
__54 MARTINEZ SANCHEZ .. L 7-5 6-4
__28 CIRSTEA ........... L 1-6 6-4 7-6
__04 DEMENTIEVA ........ L 6-2 6-1
__25 ZHENG ............. L 7-5 6-3
9999 CLIJSTERS ......... L 7-5 6-3
__35 WOZNIAK ........... L 5-0 RET
__38 MARTINEZ SANCHEZ .. L 6-7 7-6 6-0
__15 STOSUR ............ L 6-0 4-6 6-4
_864 KREMER ............ L 5-7 0-5 RET
__02 SERENA ............ L 6-4 0-1 RET
2010 ---------------------------------
__17 LI ................ L 2-6 6-3 6-2
__17 LI ................ L 6-4 6-3

Azarenka

__02 SERENA ............ L 3-6 4-2 RET
__06 ZVONAREVA ......... L 6-3 6-3
__34 DULKO ............. L 6-4 6-3
__08 KUZNETSOVA ........ L 6-2 6-4
__38 SZAVAY ............ L 4-6 6-2 6-2
__01 SAFINA ............ L 1-6 6-4 6-2
__02 SERENA ............ L 6-2 6-3
__61 SHARAPOVA ......... L 6-7 6-4 6-2
__05 JANKOVIC .......... L 7-5 7-6
__un CLIJSTERS ......... L 7-5 4-6 6-1
__28 SCHIAVONE ......... L 4-6 6-2 6-2
__16 LI ................ L 7-6 4-6 7-6
__15 SHARAPOVA ......... L 6-3 6-7 7-5
__04 WOZNIACKI ......... L 1-6 6-4 7-5
2010 ---------------------------------
__05 DEMENTIEVA ........ L 6-3 6-1
__01 SERENA ............ L 4-6 7-6 6-2

If you ignore Sharapova and Clijsters losses, as those being cases of losses to former slam winners coming back from injury, look at what's left. Wozniacki has six looses to players outside the top 50, another two to players outside the top 40, and another two to players outside the the 30. Azarenka has no losses to players outside the top 40, and only two to players outside the 30.

I do think Wozniacki gets dumped on unfairly by people who don't like her style of play, but to say she's accomplished more than Azarenka is, to an extent, a product of not looking at the details of their respective careers. Azarenka is actually the more consistent player, and has actually won a major tournament, though not a slam.

Wow. :eek: The one thing I always thought about Wozniacki is that the 'bad' players would just be too hit-and-miss for Wozniacki to lose to however well they're playing. But I guess that makes sense and underlines the fact that when a player playing well comes up against Wozniacki, irrespective of their rank, often they're just too good for her. Especially with ALL of those straight setters. :eek:

Otlichno
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:36 PM
I think it all really matters how future tennis with no Williams Sisters is played. Because the both of them have quite a few years a head of them AND there games are opposite, so is there mental fortitude. Azarenka without her choking and bad attitude on court would be a much bigger force to be reckoned with (she already is to be honest), Wozniacki may not have the most fan-pleasing game but it gets the job done. I quite frankly think all this pusher talk is :bs:.

iPatty
Feb 9th, 2010, 02:55 PM
Safina.

Safina hit the ball harder when she was 18 than she does now.

Beat
Feb 9th, 2010, 03:00 PM
people in here will hate it, but it will be wozniacki.

Shvedbarilescu
Feb 9th, 2010, 03:04 PM
Safina hit the ball harder when she was 18 than she does now.

Perhaps you are right. I have to say though the times I saw her earlier in her career I never came away thinking she hit that hard. But maybe I just didn't see enough of her.

iPatty
Feb 9th, 2010, 03:17 PM
Perhaps you are right. I have to say though the times I saw her earlier in her career I never came away thinking she hit that hard. But maybe I just didn't see enough of her.

I watched her in 2006 at Charleston against Henin and she definitely hit the hell out of the ball, more so than she did now. The only difference of course is that she had absolutely no gameplan and very little topspin. I'd say the biggest difference between pre and post-Berlin '08 would be her footwork, topspin, and consistency in her serve (strange as that sounds).

Lulu.
Feb 9th, 2010, 03:30 PM
Hard to say but I think Azarenka will.

Slamniacki
Feb 9th, 2010, 03:33 PM
Woznirenka?:scratch:

Volcana
Feb 9th, 2010, 03:42 PM
underlines the fact that when a player playing well comes up against Wozniacki, irrespective of their rank, often they're just too good for her. Especially with ALL of those straight setters. :eek:In fairness, Wozniacki had half a dozen wins over top ten players in 2009. That's too many to say they were all having bad days. (And that includes Kuznetsova, and Dementieva twice. Not marginal top ten players. Real top ten players.)


Wozniacki makes very good, if conservative, decisions on court. She's like Jennifer Capriati. Without the power. But that's a big 'without'.

.

fish_wilson
Feb 9th, 2010, 03:46 PM
when "azarenka zone" becomes a more consistent feature of her play, victoria will blow them all away, caroline will become a young mother at the age of 22 and never play tennis again.

Otlichno
Feb 9th, 2010, 04:04 PM
caroline will become a young mother at the age of 22 and never play tennis again.

:spit:

SoClose
Feb 9th, 2010, 04:12 PM
Azarenka for sure.

SIN DIOS NI LEY
Feb 9th, 2010, 04:30 PM
Azarenka and it's not even close

OsloErik
Feb 9th, 2010, 05:49 PM
Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if they end with nearly identical careers, simply taking different paths to get there.

At the moment, you have to believe Wozniacki will have a steadier ranking history, a more consistent record at the slams, and greater all-court success, but Azarenka has an explosive quality on hardcourts and the will to take matches. She doesn't have the patience to take matches yet, but she's definitely getting closer and closer to being a real champion.

To be honest, though, Wozniacki's development has really impressed me. I would simply not have pegged her for a future top 5 player when she was a junior. She had a game that looked like it portended junior success and senior mediocrity. She's done a great deal to add a few things to her game (particularly the serve, which I am really fond of) and seems to have a limitless work-ethic. Azarenka has a similar work ethic, but I find myself wondering what she can truly add to her game.

I'm going with Wozniacki, but it's not going to be by much.

TheAllan
Feb 9th, 2010, 05:51 PM
The difference is that Wozniacki loses to BAD players. (My use of the term 'bad' being relative. Any top hundred player is a world class player.)


The ranking system, in it's current form, gives an illusion of Wozniacki's accomplishments. They're good, but not like she's even close to the third best player in the world. First of all, without quality points, that US Open final looks stronger than it was. She only beat one top twenty player. The other thign is that she plays a lot, so you don't see the worst third of her results reflected in her ranking. Take it from the beginning of 2009, and look at ALL the losses by both these players.

Wozniacki

__76 VESNINA ........... L 6-3 0-6 6-3
__02 SERENA ............ L 6-7 6-3 7-6
_187 DOKIC ............. L 3-6 6-1 6-2
__51 RYBARIKOVA ........ L 6-4 6-1
__14 AZARENKA .......... L 6-1 6-3
__06 ZVONAREVA ......... L 6-4 6-2
__08 KUZNETSOVA ........ L 6-4 6-7 6-1
__63 LISICKI ........... L 6-2 6-4
__13 BARTOLI ........... L 7-6 6-4
__09 AZARENKA .......... L 6-2 6-2
__01 SAFINA ............ L 6-2 6-4
__41 CIRSTEA ........... L 7-6 7-5
__41 LISICKI ........... L 6-4 6-4
__54 MARTINEZ SANCHEZ .. L 7-5 6-4
__28 CIRSTEA ........... L 1-6 6-4 7-6
__04 DEMENTIEVA ........ L 6-2 6-1
__25 ZHENG ............. L 7-5 6-3
9999 CLIJSTERS ......... L 7-5 6-3
__35 WOZNIAK ........... L 5-0 RET
__38 MARTINEZ SANCHEZ .. L 6-7 7-6 6-0
__15 STOSUR ............ L 6-0 4-6 6-4
_864 KREMER ............ L 5-7 0-5 RET
__02 SERENA ............ L 6-4 0-1 RET
2010 ---------------------------------
__17 LI ................ L 2-6 6-3 6-2
__17 LI ................ L 6-4 6-3

I agree with your contention that Azarenka is remarkably stable - in fact you could go further and argue that she stacks up well against most other players in the top 10. I don't think your head-to-head comparison of losses between these two is that telling, though.

While it's true that Wozniacki has had some bad losses for a player who is now #3, you have to factor in that more tournaments is virtually guaranteed to mean more losses. And she has 8 more tournaments than Azarenka. Some of the losses almost inevitably has to be against lower-ranked opposition. But of course it's just as much about the wins as it is about the losses - which I think is why this approach is somewhat one-sided. Take for instance the defeat to Martinez Sanchez. Certainly not a great result if you take it out of context, but she did defeat Arvidsson, Kvitova, Kirilenko, and Pennetta to even play that match.

I don't know why you included the Kremer match as it doesn't really say much about anything - other than the fact that Wozniacki had a more important tournament the week after. Aleksandra Wozniak might have won the match in Tokyo without the retirement, but she has lost on all other occasions (even if it has been close in some of them). So to use her as an example of Wozniacki's consistency against lower-ranked opponents isn't illustrative either.

Her Slam results have been far from stellar, though. Losing to Rybarikova in Pattaya is not that big a deal in the greater scheme of things. It's her Slam losses to Dokic, Cirstea, and Lisicki that raise more concerns. Though, it can be said that the 2009 Australian Open is now irrelevant, and that she did avenge the defeat to Cirstea at the US Open if we want to read some progress into her path.

As for the US Open draw, I don't think it was that unusual. She beat a Slam holder and a Wickmayer who is now seen in a much different light than she was at that time. It's true that she benefitted from Oudin's upsets, but she still had to do what Sharapova, Dementieva, and Petrova failed to do. Maybe she could have beaten a Dementieva in a QF, maybe she couldn't. I don't think it would have made a world of difference if she had done so. Whether she "deserves" to be ranked third or not is a different matter. I don't think there's that much between the players from 2-7, and you don't need to change many results to rearrange then. It will probably be like this until the Belgians arrive. If they arrive.

Break My Rapture
Feb 9th, 2010, 05:53 PM
Azarenka.

vika may be more "aggressive", but caro has the better head atm :shrug: and again, winning one set doesn't mean vika can win big matches until she actually does win them...

eta: it's probably easier to improve your game than your head...and caro has shown then when she does play aggressive (like she did against vika at yec) that she can beat even vika
But isn't winning one set better than winning not a single one, let's say against Sharapova or Serena Williams? Vika has beaten both of them so far and took 2 sets from Sharapova in their last 2 meetings and 1 against Serena at the AO. Caro hasn't done really well against the top players.

Slutati
Feb 9th, 2010, 05:55 PM
I actually think Wozniacki will. Just cuz Vika is such a mental patient.

Temperenka
Feb 10th, 2010, 12:29 AM
Azarenka has the game to hang with players like Serena. If she can get it together mentally, I'd say her easily.

Wozniacki will be a steady player though..

trufanjay
Feb 10th, 2010, 12:59 AM
Probably Azarenka. She has done better in grand slams so far. Their H2H against each other is 2-2.

They are both very talented players.

Slampova
Feb 10th, 2010, 01:36 AM
Azarenka ;)

PlayByPlay
Feb 10th, 2010, 02:04 AM
I would say Azarenka

AnomyBC
Feb 10th, 2010, 05:57 AM
Probably Azarenka. She has done better in grand slams so far. Their H2H against each other is 2-2.

They are both very talented players.

How has Vika done better in the slams so far? Caro got to a Final and Vika hasn't even gotten to a Semi yet. Also, if you count Fed Cup, Caro actually leads the head-to-head 3-2. Caro also has a better career win-loss ratio than Vika and, as we all know, a higher ranking as well. And that's despite the fact that she's a year younger. Caro pretty much wins across the board :shrug:

OsloErik
Feb 10th, 2010, 06:14 AM
But isn't winning one set better than winning not a single one, let's say against Sharapova or Serena Williams? Vika has beaten both of them so far and took 2 sets from Sharapova in their last 2 meetings and 1 against Serena at the AO. Caro hasn't done really well against the top players.

I suppose the counter to this argument is: why is beating Serena a pre-requisite to a good career in five years? If anyone really thinks that Serena and Sharapova will be major forces in five years, I can't have a serious conversation with them. Serena's a remarkable player, first ballot hall-of-famer, probably top 5 open era, but she's not going to be around forever. And Sharapova's barely around NOW, let alone in five years.

I'm also curious what Azarenka has actually done against the mid-top players of the past two or three years. What's her record against Kuznetsova, Safina, Dementieva, and Jankovic, for example? It seems taken for granted that Azarenka has superior wins against top players, but looking at the five players who've been in the top 10 for the past two years pretty much constantly, and looking at Wozniacki and Azarenka's respective records against them, it's not that cut-and-dried.

Wozniacki
vs. Serena, 0-2 (1 set to 4)
vs. Kuznetsova, 2-2 (5 sets to 5)
vs. Dementieva, 2-3 (5 sets to 7)
vs. Jankovic, 0-3 (2 sets to 6)
vs. Safina, 0-1 (0 sets to 2)

Azarenka
vs. Serena, 1-4 (4 sets to 7)
vs. Kuznetsova, 1-4 (3 sets to 9)
vs. Dementieva, 1-3 (2 sets to 7)
vs. Jankovic, 2-3 (5 sets to 6)
vs. Safina, 1-4 (4 sets to 9)

Frankly, I have trouble seeing the evidence that Azarenka has vastly superior wins. Serena is the obvious big scalp, Sharapova somewhat so...but other than that, not a lot separates them. Azarenka has the more impressive record against the top, but she's also got a full year more experience on the tour, and the wins aren't soooo much better as to raise my eyebrows.

Inger67
Feb 10th, 2010, 07:02 AM
Wozniacki is by far my favorite player out of the two, but honestly I think Azarenka will amount to more. I think Azarenka can be a multiple GS winner.

The ONLY thing is if Caro can be more aggressive not only on her BH side but also her FH and serve, then I think Caro will easily eclipse Azarenka :)

gc-spurs
Feb 10th, 2010, 10:32 AM
Pushniacki. I like Azarenka's game better, but Caro's got a good head. Though I wouldn't be surprised, like someone said, if they had similar careers.

pollison
Feb 10th, 2010, 10:58 AM
Undoubtedly Azarenkas got a whole lot more weapons but not a brain cell to use them.
That being said her tennis in the first set against Serena in the QF was amazing!
She's got a lot of talent and she just needs to use it...
...Wozniacki is kinda Hingis without the brains, sure she is clever but has no exceptional court skills as well as no weapons.
Look at her game, she has never seriously threatened the good players at the big events-Azarenka has therefore

AZARENKA IS BETTER

Beny
Feb 10th, 2010, 11:31 AM
Give me an example of a player who developed more power after age 18. Don't say Henin. Her backhand was already naturally a weapon. Power isn't easily learned.

Dont know exactly how old Pierce then was, but she has tremendously developed her serve. She used to serve a lot softer. Then she got a huge serve. She defo gained power.

Others, hmm.. maybe Bartoli or Jankovic. Jankovic tries to hit harder than before. She got some muscles at the end of 08.

I think Stosur is gaining power all the time. She is stronger and stronger. She hits harder than some years ago.

sammy01
Feb 10th, 2010, 11:35 AM
Dont know exactly how old Pierce then was, but she has tremendously developed her serve. She used to serve a lot softer. Then she got a huge serve. She defo gained power.

Others, hmm.. maybe Bartoli or Jankovic. Jankovic tries to hit harder than before. She got some muscles at the end of 08.

I think Stosur is gaining power all the time. She is stronger and stronger. She hits harder than some years ago.

pierce went through the age of massive advances in rackets and string, anyone who was playing in the early 90's and still playing well into the 2000's game got more powerful, especially on serve.

BuTtErFrEnA
Feb 10th, 2010, 12:34 PM
I suppose the counter to this argument is: why is beating Serena a pre-requisite to a good career in five years? If anyone really thinks that Serena and Sharapova will be major forces in five years, I can't have a serious conversation with them. Serena's a remarkable player, first ballot hall-of-famer, probably top 5 open era, but she's not going to be around forever. And Sharapova's barely around NOW, let alone in five years.

I'm also curious what Azarenka has actually done against the mid-top players of the past two or three years. What's her record against Kuznetsova, Safina, Dementieva, and Jankovic, for example? It seems taken for granted that Azarenka has superior wins against top players, but looking at the five players who've been in the top 10 for the past two years pretty much constantly, and looking at Wozniacki and Azarenka's respective records against them, it's not that cut-and-dried.

Wozniacki
vs. Serena, 0-2 (1 set to 4)
vs. Kuznetsova, 2-2 (5 sets to 5)
vs. Dementieva, 2-3 (5 sets to 7)
vs. Jankovic, 0-3 (2 sets to 6)
vs. Safina, 0-1 (0 sets to 2)

Azarenka
vs. Serena, 1-4 (4 sets to 7)
vs. Kuznetsova, 1-4 (3 sets to 9)
vs. Dementieva, 1-3 (2 sets to 7)
vs. Jankovic, 2-3 (5 sets to 6)
vs. Safina, 1-4 (4 sets to 9)

Frankly, I have trouble seeing the evidence that Azarenka has vastly superior wins. Serena is the obvious big scalp, Sharapova somewhat so...but other than that, not a lot separates them. Azarenka has the more impressive record against the top, but she's also got a full year more experience on the tour, and the wins aren't soooo much better as to raise my eyebrows.

this....although i'll just say it again...one set won and still losing the match isn't better than no sets won (unless you're in rr play which it isn't)...a whole lot of people have taken sets off serena and look at where there careers are...

then again i must remember people here are basing this off caro = pusher vika = power player :rolleyes:

Dandy_Warhol
Feb 10th, 2010, 01:07 PM
i think Wozniacki will have a more consistent and steady career unless Azarenka fixes her loose screws. either way, i wouldn't be surprised if they end up with similar careers.


as for off-court career success potential, Wozniacki has a big promise to be a great actress:hearts:
case in point:
http://i49.tinypic.com/5l5mdf.jpg

DS.Fan.
Feb 10th, 2010, 02:47 PM
I don't like both them,but I belive Vik will have a very successful career:cool:

Chakvenus
Feb 10th, 2010, 02:58 PM
Vika, i pray.
i despise Caroline.

freeandlonely
Feb 10th, 2010, 09:47 PM
I believe it will be Azarenka cuz she is more aggressive, one day she stops choking/making errors, she can be huge(maybe that day will never come, but there is chance). Wozniacki, base on her style, her achievement will be solid while also limitive.

AcesHigh
Feb 10th, 2010, 09:49 PM
i think Wozniacki will have a more consistent and steady career unless Azarenka fixes her loose screws. either way, i wouldn't be surprised if they end up with similar careers.


as for off-court career success potential, Wozniacki has a big promise to be a great actress:hearts:
case in point:
http://i49.tinypic.com/5l5mdf.jpg

:sobbing: this has me dying.

danieln1
Feb 10th, 2010, 09:50 PM
So far CARO: slam final + better ranking + more titles...

I think caro will have a better career, because Azarenka´s mental side is more fragile

Volcana
Feb 11th, 2010, 06:14 AM
I think caro will have a better career, because Azarenka´s mental side is more fragileWhy does that matter? Jennifer Capriati. Jon McEnroe. Jimmy Connors. Evonne Goolagong.

You can be a great players and have the emotional control and mental focus of an active volcana. Or the average college student on acid. Ilie Nastase. Goran Ivanišević. Hana Mandlikova.

As near as I can tell, people are faulting Azarenka for actually showing emotion during matches.

IT DOES NOT MATTER.
Serena Williams 2009 Wimbledon.
Serena Williams 2009 US Open.
Serena Williams 2010 Australian Open.
Players can exhibit a total inability to control their emoions in some situations, and yet be extremely successful.

Cookie Power
Feb 11th, 2010, 10:52 AM
If Azarenka doesn't win a slam then she will have underachieved.

If Wozniacki does win a slam it would be a miracle.

Szavay #1
Feb 11th, 2010, 11:16 AM
i love them both but i voted for vika.

caro :hug:

2009
Feb 11th, 2010, 03:08 PM
Why does that matter? Jennifer Capriati. Jon McEnroe. Jimmy Connors. Evonne Goolagong.

You can be a great players and have the emotional control and mental focus of an active volcana. Or the average college student on acid. Ilie Nastase. Goran Ivanišević. Hana Mandlikova.

As near as I can tell, people are faulting Azarenka for actually showing emotion during matches.

IT DOES NOT MATTER.
Serena Williams 2009 Wimbledon.
Serena Williams 2009 US Open.
Serena Williams 2010 Australian Open.
Players can exhibit a total inability to control their emoions in some situations, and yet be extremely successful.

Lol, did u mean volcano?!

Volcana
Feb 11th, 2010, 03:13 PM
For posters who's memories go back fifteen years, how, in a practical sense, was Wozniacki's game that different from Amanda Coetzer (http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Amanda+Coetzer&search_type=&aq=f), who, if memory serves, also rose to #3 in the world?

I'm not talking about the mechanics of their shots so much as the placement of them.

There's plenty of video of Coetzer on YouTube.

Volcana
Feb 11th, 2010, 03:15 PM
Lol, did u mean volcano?!oops

OsloErik
Feb 11th, 2010, 07:30 PM
For posters who's memories go back fifteen years, how, in a practical sense, was Wozniacki's game that different from Amanda Coetzer (http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Amanda+Coetzer&search_type=&aq=f), who, if memory serves, also rose to #3 in the world?

I'm not talking about the mechanics of their shots so much as the placement of them.

There's plenty of video of Coetzer on YouTube.

Good call, although I'd add this caveat: Coetzer never had a particularly imposing serve. Wozniacki has a much better serve than most players with similar styles of play. Not top 5 on tour, but surely among the better serves in the top 20. I'd rate Serena, Kuznetsova, Venus, Stosur, Wickmayer, and Petrova higher, and Azarenka roughly the same.

The other thing is Coetzer had a very brief time in the top 5, and did so at a later age, and largely as a function of really hard work. I don't believe she cracked the top 10 until she was 24, she was in the top 5 for all of about 6 months when she was 26, and spent most of her 20s as a top 20 player. I have trouble imagining this as Wozniacki's only stint in the top 10, partially because she's made it at a young age, and partially because she's very steady and seems durable.

I don't mean to belittle Coetzer's career or game, but she was the right woman at the right time. Graf was on the decline (Coetzer's best years and her wins against Graf were during the "what happened to Graf's movement" years and the Hingis era), the only other similar-caliber retriever (ASV) was faltering at that time (from 1994-1996, ASV made the finals at 12/16 slams, whereas from 1997-1999, she made the finals of just 1/16, semifinals of just 3/16), and a lot of also-rans made their marks. There was a power vacuum.

As a contrast, Wozniacki is thriving, even without many big wins (yet), during an era with a very dominant #1 player still winning at 3/4 slams, the resurgence of two former world #1 players, and a very deep group of 22-24 year old slam finalist/semifinalist (and occassional champion) players. The crop of u21 players may be underwhelming, but she's done a very good job positioning herself as their breakout player, and I have trouble picturing a player making her name off of consistency fading the way Coetzer did, especially with Wozniacki's caliber serve.

I've gone on far longer than this post requires :lol:.

PineappleBoy
Feb 12th, 2010, 05:08 AM
Of Course Vika..

Midnight_Robber
Feb 12th, 2010, 07:34 AM
It seems kind of pointless to refer to emotional players like Serena or McEnroe. Despite the drama both have a heap of sheer natural talent to see them through even when they were emotionally all over the show. (I'm not saying that Azarenka is untalented but I don't think her talent is quite on that level.) Being emotional means nothing in itself - it's the effect that it has on the player

There's no problem with Vika being emotional per se. The problem is that her tennis doesn't improve with her outburts. Sure, I've seen Serena derailed by emotion at times, but sometimes it's a release of pent-up emotion that actually helps her game. She can also calm herself when she needs. (i.e. against Vika in the 2nd set) Vika by contrast seems to get sidetracked and loses focus whenever she gets angry, rather than getting fired up or inspired to bring her best tennis. And it goes further than that. The key thing about the Serenas and Johnny Macs is that their ire doesn't just stay on the court if they lose. They absolutely hate to lose and it burns. They're the type of players who go for vengeance. Vika brats out on court, but she's sunny as Pollyanna and quite good-natured once it's all over, so it all seems unproductive in the end. :shrug:

Anyway, while I agree that it's probably harder to overhaul your mentality than the mechanics of your game I'll still think Vika is more likely to have more significant wins in the long haul, if a more erratic career. It's all up in the air with Caroline. If some of the younger big hitters start playing with consistency and rise through the ranks then I think her career will be curtailed. If things continue with the veterans holding it together and the early-twenties brigade continuing to flounder, she might do very well indeed.

Tenis Srbija
Feb 12th, 2010, 07:46 AM
I say Azarenka. Has more potential with her powerfull groundstrokes. Plus, more people would come to see her smashing the ball, than Wozniacki's smart game...

miss_molik
Feb 12th, 2010, 10:32 AM
I voted azarenka :)

Chrissie-fan
Feb 12th, 2010, 11:01 AM
It seems kind of pointless to refer to emotional players like Serena or McEnroe.
Especially since it has a different effect on different players. Serena, McEnroe, Connors and Capriati always seem(ed) to play better when they got angry. McEnroe often sought conflict on purpose because he needed it to get his adrenaline going. The above mentionned players often produced their best when they played in anger. But the difference is that when these players got emotional it had a "I'll show you!" effect on them, whereas for many other players it only means that they get down on themselves. They wallow in self-pity and it inevitably undermines their game. So the answer to the question of whether it's a good thing to get emotional while playing tennis is different for each player.

LoLex
Feb 12th, 2010, 01:07 PM
I don't know. Voted for Wozniacki. She's better mentally.

miffedmax
Feb 12th, 2010, 03:38 PM
They're both in the LOB. So I am going to sit, catlike and inscrutable, atop my fence and not come down on either side until I'm damn good and ready.

Dodoboy.
Oct 24th, 2010, 08:42 PM
Funny this :)

marvelcomics
Oct 24th, 2010, 08:46 PM
Wozniacki of course. Azarenka is 21 and never reach GS semis and can not break top 5!!
Wozniacki reached 2009 USO final and last USO semis, furthermore she is no.1!!! Wozniacki will be much more successful career...

terceira
Oct 24th, 2010, 09:10 PM
I think Azarenka, she has a better game

Mr.Sharapova
Oct 24th, 2010, 09:10 PM
I would much better have the game of Azarenka at the moment than the Wozniacki one.

goldenlox
Oct 24th, 2010, 09:12 PM
Right now Caro looks both physically and mentally tougher.
But they both have a decade ahead of them if they stay healthy.

Vartan
Oct 24th, 2010, 09:13 PM
Bansheerenka.

Welcome1
Oct 24th, 2010, 09:27 PM
I just wonder why powerbackhand started both these threads again?)

DragonFlame
Oct 24th, 2010, 09:27 PM
Wozniacki.

doni1212
Jan 28th, 2012, 10:03 AM
Looks like 104 of us are right so far...:oh:

justineheninfan
Jan 28th, 2012, 10:28 AM
Considering Wozniacki will never win a slam, Azarenka has already surpassed her whole career.

Jajaloo
Jan 28th, 2012, 11:00 AM
Even the umpire, KerriLyn Cramer got that umpires slam trophy today :lol: 1 more than KaroLine Wozniacki!

Monzanator
Jan 28th, 2012, 11:01 AM
Counterpunchers are not winning Slams since eight years, the last one being Myskina. In terms of GS, Azarenka will be superior, but overall Wozniacki will amass more titles IMO.

WozTakesAll
Jan 28th, 2012, 11:01 AM
Considering Wozniacki will never win a slam, Azarenka has already surpassed her whole career.

Vika turned pro 2 years before Caro.
Vika is 1 year older then Caro.

So maybe give it 1-2 years, and if Caro hasnt won a slam by then, you might begin to be right. Untill then, its just hating.

romismak
Jan 28th, 2012, 11:05 AM
Already Vika has the edge thanks to slam, she will be No.1 too-is so what CAro has edge in? nothing, numbe of weeks? with the WTA ranking system probably nobody will say this is what makes Caro greater. Assuming than CAro won´t win slam in her career i would say Vika will be greater, but i can be wrong.

sammy01
Jan 28th, 2012, 11:38 AM
caro will have the steadier career, vika will have the more up and down, with probably greater highs, but lower lows.

sob i wasn't thinking winning a slam as the high, i blame myself for vika winning a slam. :sad:

justineheninfan
Jan 28th, 2012, 11:42 AM
Vika turned pro 2 years before Caro.
Vika is 1 year older then Caro.

So maybe give it 1-2 years, and if Caro hasnt won a slam by then, you might begin to be right. Untill then, its just hating.

Woz was a very early bloomer who has stopped improving and began regressing since last May. Her career has already peaked. Azarenka is coming into her own and only getting better, and now with her Australian Open and Miami titles has already achieved more. The end.

Matt01
Jan 28th, 2012, 12:29 PM
Already Vika has the edge thanks to slam, she will be No.1 too-is so what CAro has edge in? nothing, numbe of weeks? with the WTA ranking system probably nobody will say this is what makes Caro greater. Assuming than CAro won´t win slam in her career i would say Vika will be greater, but i can be wrong.


Weeks at #1, YE #1, number of tournment wins...these are all relevant achievements.

romismak
Jan 28th, 2012, 12:39 PM
Weeks at #1, YE #1, number of tournment wins...these are all relevant achievements.

Of course it is relevant and it is important when we are comparing those 2, but my point was that what else CAro has for having the edge here-number of weeks and YE yes, but Vika is-will be No.1 so don´t know if those weeks are enough to be more than slam title. Simply as that if Vika won´t be No.1 Caro has the No.1 advantage , then it is No.1 vs slam, riht now it is No.1 weeks vs No.1 and slam, and i think most people will say slam at already being No.1 is good enough-better than many weeks-YEC No.1. Tournaments overall i don´t would count.. Caro has few good like Premier 5-Mandatory, but mostly her titles are from small events.

Monzanator
Jan 28th, 2012, 12:40 PM
Weeks at #1, YE #1, number of tournment wins...these are all relevant achievements.

You should know better that even if she'd won 35 titles in two years, she'd still be called useless by majority of GM :lol:

laurie
Jan 28th, 2012, 12:40 PM
I'm starting to feel sorry from Wozniacki, I think people need to lay off her for a while, just let her get it together and judge her at the end of 2012.

Matt01
Jan 28th, 2012, 12:58 PM
Of course it is relevant and it is important when we are comparing those 2, but my point was that what else CAro has for having the edge here-number of weeks and YE yes, but Vika is-will be No.1 so don´t know if those weeks are enough to be more than slam title. Simply as that if Vika won´t be No.1 Caro has the No.1 advantage , then it is No.1 vs slam, riht now it is No.1 weeks vs No.1 and slam, and i think most people will say slam at already being No.1 is good enough-better than many weeks-YEC No.1. Tournaments overall i don´t would count.. Caro has few good like Premier 5-Mandatory, but mostly her titles are from small events.


Okay, but it doesn't really matter how many weeks at #1 or what other achievements she has because for most people: Slam win > anything else.

As for the bolded part: Depends on what you mean by small: 12 of her 18 tournament wins are Tier II/Premier or above.

Critique
Jan 28th, 2012, 01:05 PM
Slam win is the single biggest accomplishment in tennis.

romismak
Jan 28th, 2012, 01:59 PM
Okay, but it doesn't really matter how many weeks at #1 or what other achievements she has because for most people: Slam win > anything else.

As for the bolded part: Depends on what you mean by small: 12 of her 18 tournament wins are Tier II/Premier or above.

i mean overall, how i sad she won few big events, but overall number titles is not so important in same cases. For example if you have player with 40 titles and another with 10- but the second one has slam it is better than have many ,,small events,, Caro has few Premier 5-Mandatory, but generally you got the feeling when she is playing top player she will loose.

Break My Rapture
Jan 28th, 2012, 02:11 PM
Haters and doubters. :lol:

http://i580.photobucket.com/albums/ss246/Pietaar/vika6.gif