PDA

View Full Version : Chakvetadze: My perception of her game


kinglear
Mar 6th, 2007, 02:44 AM
Let me know if you agree. I love tennis, but I don't know everything. For instance, a lot of people say Anna's strokes are flat (which they are), but I see a lot of spin on her loopy forehands. I've noticed that her strokes have a slow, calculated speed to them which mesmerizes me. Her shots are like strobe lights streaming around the court. That's what I see when I watch Anna play.

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y264/bennyhannas/annachakvetadzecruisesinhobartcopy.jpg
Anna Chakvetadze plays a looping forehand

What makes her so impressive?

Most commentators and even other WTA players would describe 20-year-old Top 10’er Anna Chakvetadze as a Russian version of tennis’ most clever player Martina Hingis; mainly because of Anna’s uncanny ability to hit shots at hypnotizing angles. Like Hingis and even Anastasia Myskina, Anna places her shots well. Most tennis players who focus on placement are strategists whose shot selections are well-thought out.

Analysis of her game:

Overall, Anna has flat groundstrokes that occasionally have topspin for a careening lob or a looping forehand. Flat groundstrokes are for the purpose of direct contact between the ball and the court. The flatness of a shot is not only indicated through vision, but there’s a hollow sound when the ball makes contact with the racquet strings. If to compare Anna’s shots to anything, they’re like whirling hooks that kiss each corner of the court. Anna’s game is high-percentage, which accounts for her routinely low amount of unforced errors in her matches. Every shot is a component of a system, in other words, a strategy.

How does her game fair against other players?

Anna has given Maria Sharapova trouble in their various match-ups, most notably at the 2007 Australian Open Quarterfinals, where Anna had a chance to serve for the set but the crucial points were squandered. Anna has proven she can beat Top 10 players, and even Top 5 players, most notably Nadia Petrova who’s frequently psyched out by Anna’s clever game. If Anna doesn’t become tight at crucial points, Anna can beat the best of them.

starin
Mar 6th, 2007, 02:55 AM
Let me know if you agree. I love tennis, but I don't know everything. For instance, a lot of people say Anna's strokes are flat (which they are), but I see a lot of spin on her loopy forehands. I've noticed that her strokes have a slow, calculated speed to them which mesmerizes me. Her shots are like strobe lights streaming around the court. That's what I see when I watch Anna play.

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y264/bennyhannas/annachakvetadzecruisesinhobartcopy.jpg
Anna Chakvetadze plays a looping forehand at 2007 Hobart Tournament

What makes her so impressive?

Most commentators and even other WTA players would describe 20-year-old Top 10’er Anna Chakvetadze as a Russian version of tennis’ most clever player Martina Hingis; mainly because of Anna’s uncanny ability to hit shots at hypnotizing angles. Like Hingis and even Anastasia Myskina, Anna places her shots well. Most tennis players who focus on placement are strategists whose shot selections are well-thought out.

Analysis of her game:

Overall, Anna has flat groundstrokes that occasionally have topspin for a careening lob or a looping forehand. Flat groundstrokes are for the purpose of direct contact between the ball and the court. The flatness of a shot is not only indicated through vision, but there’s a hollow sound when the ball makes contact with the racquet strings. If to compare Anna’s shots to anything, they’re like whirling hooks that kiss each corner of the court. Anna’s game is high-percentage, which accounts for her routinely low amount of unforced errors in her matches. Every shot is a component of a system, in other words, a strategy.

How does her game fair against other players?

Anna has given Maria Sharapova trouble in their various match-ups, most notably at the 2007 Australian Open Quarterfinals, where Anna had a chance to serve for the set but the crucial points were squandered. Anna has proven she can beat Top 10 players, and even Top 5 players, most notably Nadia Petrova who’s frequently psyched out by Anna’s clever game. If Anna doesn’t become tight at crucial points, Anna can beat the best of them.

I've never actually seen her play, but interesting analysis. I'm excited to see her game in action. Especially against a power player like say Safarova. I also find her complete dominance of petrova intriguing. But has she beaten any other top players?

KYLIE
Mar 6th, 2007, 03:01 AM
i dont agree that she hits flat shots.

Her shots tend to have a fair amount of loopy ness to them. Ive seen her play before live and i hit hader and flatter. Mind you im a guy, so if she outhit me id be concerned but still she has great angles for a girl. Thats what makes her special. That and her passing shots. Shes not powerfull tho.

tenn_ace
Mar 6th, 2007, 03:07 AM
Schnyder, Jankovic, Ivanovic, Safina, Dementieva, Golovin, Myskina, Stevenson

kinglear
Mar 6th, 2007, 03:07 AM
I've never actually seen her play, but interesting analysis. I'm excited to see her game in action. Especially against a power player like say Safarova. I also find her complete dominance of petrova intriguing. But has she beaten any other top players?

Me too. :confused: Anna's beat Myskina in 2004, Elena Dementieva last year. She had her chances of beating Sharapova at this year's Australian Open. :rolleyes:

starin
Mar 6th, 2007, 03:34 AM
Schnyder, Jankovic, Ivanovic, Safina, Dementieva, Golovin, Myskina, Stevenson

Stevenson!! :lol: :lol: I said top players.

J/P

tennisbear7
Mar 6th, 2007, 05:55 AM
I think that Anna has a very good game.

But she can be overpowered, I think. Her serve and forehand are pretty weak shots, though her forehand can be used to set points up. I'm pretty mystified as to why she couldn't put drive volleys away at AO, in particular against Sharapova. Was it her shoulder?

goldenlox
Mar 6th, 2007, 10:53 AM
I don't buy that she dominates Nadia. Too bad they're in different halves at IW.
When Nadia is healthy and rested, they haven't faced.

kinglear
Mar 6th, 2007, 12:03 PM
I think that Anna has a very good game.

But she can be overpowered, I think. Her serve and forehand are pretty weak shots, though her forehand can be used to set points up. I'm pretty mystified as to why she couldn't put drive volleys away at AO, in particular against Sharapova. Was it her shoulder?

I think it was her shoulder. Even though I understand why when she had the chance to put a couple balls away, she hit it right back to Sharapova. Maybe she was nervous and a bit tired from the heat. I wonder if Anna and Sharapova have ever played indoors.

John.
Mar 6th, 2007, 12:08 PM
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y264/bennyhannas/annachakvetadzecruisesinhobartcopy.jpg
[FONT="Century Gothic"]Anna Chakvetadze plays a looping forehand at 2007 Hobart Tournament



This picture was taken at Miami, not Hobart ;)

I like Anna's game. I don't think her shots are flat though

kinglear
Mar 6th, 2007, 05:18 PM
This picture was taken at Miami, not Hobart ;)

I like Anna's game. I don't think her shots are flat though

Oh really?! :lol: wow thanks. ;)

Tennisation
Mar 6th, 2007, 05:19 PM
i find her boring

petra martinnen
Mar 6th, 2007, 05:40 PM
Anna's trump is heart and mind! Huge! Chakvetadze has a truly fierce competitive desire that raises her beyond just strokes. You get the feeling with this gal that it is life and death on court. Only top champions have this intangible plus. Yes, Anna is a special player.

woosey
Mar 6th, 2007, 05:46 PM
i was excited to see her play at the australian open because of all the talk. but i was completely unimpressed watching her against pova.

she looked confused, not very bright, and not very determined.

still not sure why people think she's so great.

Meteor Shower
Mar 6th, 2007, 05:49 PM
Anna is a hard-hitter just like any youngter for me. When I'll see her dropshot and go to the net more than one time in a match then we'll talk about Hingis and Myskina.

like Elena D and unlike Hingis and Myskina, when she got her opponent barely reaching the ball she doesn't come to the net to finish it.

She does have the potential though, she hit better angles than almost everyone I've seen! but she doesn't seem willing to add more parts to her game.. every time when I see her its the same.

dangerjenny
Mar 6th, 2007, 06:13 PM
I have to agree,i think her forehand and her serve needs improvement,and also she has to learn to step up on the big points,i don't think she does that well.

kinglear
Mar 6th, 2007, 06:32 PM
Anna is a hard-hitter just like any youngter for me. When I'll see her dropshot and go to the net more than one time in a match then we'll talk about Hingis and Myskina.

True, Anna has the elegant baseline game, but she doesn't come to net much. When Anna played Henin at '06 Wimbledon, I thought Anna played well, despite the 6-3, 6-3 score. I think that was the score.

she has to learn to step up on the big points,i don't think she does that well.

And I agree that she didn't play the big points well in her AO QF against Sharapova, but then again, look at how well she played the big points at the '06 Kremlin Cup. She was down 40-0 in some games and she ended up winning the games. But at the Slams, she needs to especially play the big points better. Especially against players like Sharapova. Truthfully speaking, Sharapova is a different league mentally compared to Petrova. Petrova's more likely to go nuts. :rolleyes:

Uranus
Mar 6th, 2007, 06:50 PM
I was never really impressed by her game, don't know that makes her so popular either.

She has a nice game with some variety even if it's still very flat. She can do nice things with her racket.
I was more impressed by Zvonareva (in 2003-4) who reached top 10 for a very short time, actually.

lolas
Mar 6th, 2007, 06:55 PM
I was never really impressed by her game, don't know that makes her so popular either.

She has a nice game with some variety even if it's still very flat. She can do nice things with her racket.
I was more impressed by Zvonareva (in 2003-4) who reached top 10 for a very short time, actually.
I agree, I feel she's overrated. Reminds me of Zvonareva, good game but no slam material.

AnnaK_4ever
Mar 6th, 2007, 07:06 PM
Over the last 6 months Chakvetadze scored more top-10 wins than Zvonareva did during her whole career :lol:
Anna is much better player than Vera. She may be not Slam material but unlike Zvonareva she really fights against the game elite. And she has already won the title Vera can only dream of.

Uranus
Mar 6th, 2007, 07:15 PM
Actually I don't think she can match with the Belgians, and Maria was pretty bad in AO QF (so was Anna) and still won in 2.
Anna has mental advantage vs. Petrova, strange Nadia can't beat her, she always meets girls who play alike :confused:

But I'm no hater and I wish her to go far. She won't be the first that I believe she doesn't deserve such a high rank.

Maybe my opinion on Zvonareva is a little biaised because I love her (still, she produced incredible matches like the ones with Myskina in San Diego final and also when she downed Venus in RG :drool: )

Bruno71
Mar 7th, 2007, 05:16 AM
Some points that were brought up in this thread...

Anna has guile, shotmaking ability, and some power. Yes, some. More than Hingis. I wish people would stop thinking of her as some little girl with weak groundstrokes, because she can hit the ball sometimes too.

Mainly she's dominated Petrova because Petrova was not match-fit last summer. I see a more even head to head in the future of those two.

A lot of people saw Anna for the first time playing Sharapova at the AO. This was far from her best match, and of course it was far from Maria's too. That's why it was even close at all. Anna still has some mental work to do.

With the proper focus, training, and advice, I could certainly see Anna winning major titles in the future.

Wayn77
Mar 7th, 2007, 05:22 AM
Far from the finished article, Anna's game is very cute tactically. Using her placement and accuracy to explore any opposition weaknesses - and exploiting them continuously and ruthlessly. Her smartness is underrated.

afterall
Mar 7th, 2007, 06:35 AM
I think she has a nice game tactically, pleasure to watch due to the low amount of UEs. Likes to construct the points rather than bash away. Works fine against the lower ranked players but she needs lots of physical improvement and more fire on her forehand if she wants to match it with the top players.

She is indeed a bad match for Petrova because Petrova is not exactly the aggressor and ends up getting outsmarted from the baseline. Having seen their match in Antwerp I have to say that Petrova played well below her normal level. Her 1st serve was ~45% and had a high number of UEs.

PLP
Mar 7th, 2007, 07:34 AM
Anna! :worship:

I lover her and her game. & Yes, She has more power than Hingis, though she uses/sees the court much like Martina, without the amazing touch, though she has some.

I disagree that she isn't slam material.
Maybe not this year, but I think she will definitely win some! :)

goldenlox
Mar 7th, 2007, 10:47 AM
Anna in Indian Wells California

http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/2475/annachakjb9.jpg

andrewbroad
Mar 7th, 2007, 07:59 PM
It's great to read people analysing Anna's game at last, but:

her groundstrokes are slow? No - she has flairsome power.
her forehand is weak? No - she has a wonderful ability to generate angles on her forehand, and anything central to her forehand gets hammered!
her serve is weak? Okay, she's no Goran Ivanišević, but she does hit a lot of aces and one-two punches!The competition to win a Grand Slam singles-title is very strong and muscular, but at Anna's age, and the rate she's improving, I wouldn't put it past her.

--
Dr. Andrew Broad
http://geocities.com/andrewbroad/ (http://geocities.com/andrewbroad/)
http://geocities.com/andrewbroad/tennis/ (http://geocities.com/andrewbroad/tennis/)
http://geocities.com/andrewbroad/tennis/chakv/ (http://geocities.com/andrewbroad/tennis/chakv/)

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Anna_Chakvetadze/ (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Anna_Chakvetadze/)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jeldani/ (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jeldani/)

kinglear
Mar 7th, 2007, 08:54 PM
It's great to read people analysing Anna's game at last, but:

her groundstrokes are slow? No - she has flairsome power.
her forehand is weak? No - she has a wonderful ability to generate angles on her forehand, and anything central to her forehand gets hammered!
her serve is weak? Okay, she's no Goran Ivanišević, but she does hit a lot of aces and one-two punches!The competition to win a Grand Slam singles-title is very strong and muscular, but at Anna's age, and the rate she's improving, I wouldn't put it past her.

Anna's groundstrokes aren't always really slow, but compared to the rapid-fire shots of someone like Lena D or Serena, her strokes are slower-paced. Lena D has more of "flairsome power." ;) And I agree that her forehand is her best shot. Her forehand is what she uses to create all of her looping spins. I guess people see different things. :)

Bruno71
Mar 7th, 2007, 10:30 PM
Anna's groundstrokes aren't always really slow, but compared to the rapid-fire shots of someone like Lena D or Serena, her strokes are slower-paced.

Good point. But I think I'd take Anna's style over most of the power players (maybe barring Serena, Venus & Maria) for one important reason. Most of the players with the flat powerful strokes (read, wild) tend to hit way too many UFE's along with their winners. So on a bad day a Dementieva or Vaidisova will be all over the place and lose, and on a good day she'll overpower her opponent.

Anna (and Hingis to a degree too) has the capability to hit powerful flat shots but chooses not to much of the time as a tactic. This is why she's so successful against most players. On the other hand, she really could be more aggressive sometimes, as in her match against Maria at the AO.

Justine & sometimes Amelie are the perfect examples of players with well-rounded games who can also play the aggressor...Anna needs to model herself after those two in the future and mix up her shots more.

kinglear
Mar 7th, 2007, 11:26 PM
Good point. But I think I'd take Anna's style over most of the power players (maybe barring Serena, Venus & Maria) for one important reason. Most of the players with the flat powerful strokes (read, wild) tend to hit way too many UFE's along with their winners. So on a bad day a Dementieva or Vaidisova will be all over the place and lose, and on a good day she'll overpower her opponent.

Anna (and Hingis to a degree too) has the capability to hit powerful flat shots but chooses not to much of the time as a tactic. This is why she's so successful against most players. On the other hand, she really could be more aggressive sometimes, as in her match against Maria at the AO.

Justine & sometimes Amelie are the perfect examples of players with well-rounded games who can also play the aggressor...Anna needs to model herself after those two in the future and mix up her shots more.

I agree with everything you wrote. Anna showed a lot of aggression against Petrova at the Kremlin Cup final. She was hitting powerful returns, and she was hitting them pretty hard. You could hear the crush of the ball. I think Anna could have won her match at the AO if it hadn't been for her shoulder. DAMN shoulder! She's had trouble with that shoulder before. I hope it doesn't flair up again. :(

Tennace
Mar 8th, 2007, 12:27 AM
I havent seen her enough to know much about her game but...

It seems like she doesnt really have any weaknesses, but no main strengths to break down. It also seems like she makes players hit all different types of shots and shots players hate hitting. She seems to lace the ball well too.