PDA

View Full Version : Do you think that Clijsters is a bad match-up for Stosur?


rimon
Dec 21st, 2011, 09:33 AM
I am confused. Despite the 5-0 H-2-H, some people said that they don't see Clijsters as a tough match-up for Stosur. I think that she is, in fact, even more than anyone else, including Sharapova, Azarenka, Venus, Kvitova and Pennetta.

borrowedheaven
Dec 21st, 2011, 10:41 AM
Clijsters is an excellent returner and she can force Stosur into backhand rallies, so she neutralises Sam's two biggest weapons. However, Kim can have trouble with her rhythm because of the top spin, being not tall enough to hit them down.

doomsday
Dec 21st, 2011, 10:50 AM
No, not really, on clay I think Stosur would win but you can see Stosur losing pretty badly against Sharapova, Venus on clay they are really the worst matchup for her.

sammy01
Dec 21st, 2011, 11:02 AM
Kim is a horror match up for most players because she can always rely on her movement to bail her out (much like serena can rely on the serve). even if stosur plays well to hit through a player like kim needs great strokes from both sides (FH and BH) as kim can neutralise a rally she looks like she should lose more than any current player.

kim is one of the best at exploiting weaknesses in players and stosur still has several weaknesses.

The Dawntreader
Dec 21st, 2011, 11:07 AM
Any player who can competently pin Stosur into the BH corner will be a bad-match up. It's not a horror match-up necessarily, it's just the standard bad match-up for Stosur.

Miss Atomic Bomb
Dec 21st, 2011, 11:07 AM
Its a bad matchup because of Kim's return and her BH CC which can pin stosur in the BH corner. Stosur gave Kim quite a scare last year at USO, and it would be interesting to watch them on clay when Stosur is in sort of form.

SilverPersian
Dec 21st, 2011, 11:45 AM
From watching a couple of highlights videos between them, I'd say the following things make Kim difficult for Sam:
-she seems quite good at attacking slice backhands, meaning that Sam can't neutralise rallies by throwing up some "junk"
-she moves very quickly, making it difficult for Sam to get the ball away from her
-she has good end range strength, meaning that she can still hit reasonably aggressively when taken out wide
-she uses her BTL well to exploit Sam's tendency to float over to the Ad court to hit off-forehands
-she returns serve well, meaning Sam doesn't get control of the point from the get go
-she has a level of aggressive intensity that Sam hasn't quite matched whenever they've played

All these things aren't to say that Sam "can't" beat Kim - she probably should have done so at USO10 - but it will be a struggle.

@danieln1
Dec 21st, 2011, 12:50 PM
If Stosur doesn´t throw mugfests like in that US Open in 2010, she should have no trouble with Kimberly. She did beat the current greatest player in the biggest stadium in the world, so beating Kimberly should be no dificult IF she playes like she did in that US Open final, her peak

moby
Dec 21st, 2011, 12:51 PM
She's not a bad match-up. They met 3 times, all in 2010, since Sam became a top player, and the matches were fairly close. Of course Kim won those matches - she's just a better player than Sam, especially in 2010 when she was arguably the best player on hard courts. Not to mention that Kim was in decent form in those matches too (she went on to win the title after each of those matches)

Linguae^
Dec 21st, 2011, 01:38 PM
Totally.

mauresmofan
Dec 21st, 2011, 02:01 PM
Kim would be used to the spin Sam generates due to her years competing against Amélie and also when Sam hits that hard top spin forhand she hits it primarily cross court playing it directly into Kim's big weapon, her forehand. Also the slice from Sam really isn't up to much especially given all Kim's years of playing Henin and dealing with her slice backhand so basically everything Sam has in her arsenal Kim's seen it and dealt with it before apart from Sam's kick serve which is extremely good. All said and done it depends on how they play on the day and as Sam prooved in the US Open she can beat anyone on her day.

Sombrerero loco
Dec 21st, 2011, 08:16 PM
she is a bad match up for whoever

Sammo
Dec 21st, 2011, 09:19 PM
Its a bad matchup because of Kim's return and her BH CC which can pin stosur in the BH corner. Stosur gave Kim quite a scare last year at USO, and it would be interesting to watch them on clay when Stosur is in sort of form.

RG 2011 Clijsters vs RG 2010 Stosur would be a thrashing :shrug:

atominside
Dec 21st, 2011, 09:30 PM
RG 2011 Clijsters vs RG 2010 Stosur would be a thrashing :shrug:

unrelated. clijsters shouldnt have played rg 2011. she was wayyyyyyyyyyyyy rusty.

ExtremespeedX
Dec 22nd, 2011, 02:10 AM
Stosur should be a nightmare match up for the Belgian pusher - however she was too weak mentally in all of their matches and choked. I will favor the new, more mentally stronger Sam in their next match, I think.

justineheninfan
Dec 22nd, 2011, 02:31 AM
I dont see evidence of the bad matchup to date. Clijsters is clearly the better player on all but clay, and they havent played on clay since Sam became a top player. The results went as expected. Sam's U.S Open title and performance in the final was outstanding, but her overall hard court record is still light years behind someone like Kim, and all their matches were well before that anyway.

Smitten
Dec 22nd, 2011, 02:36 AM
Too much angle from Clijsters.

justineheninfan
Dec 22nd, 2011, 02:39 AM
If Kim stars pawning Sam even on clay the way Maria and Azarenka do, then we can officialy say she is a very bad matchup for Stosur.

mauresmofan
Dec 22nd, 2011, 02:40 AM
RG 2011 Clijsters vs RG 2010 Stosur would be a thrashing :shrug:

Kim was clearly way way way off form and shouldn't have played - Clijsters at 10% = round 2

ExtremespeedX
Dec 22nd, 2011, 02:42 AM
Kim was clearly way way way off form and shouldn't have played - Clijsters at 10% = round 2

I thought she was at 2.74% at most. 10% Clijsters is more than enough to win at least 2 slams per year.

dsanders06
Dec 22nd, 2011, 02:49 AM
Clijsters is an excellent returner and she can force Stosur into backhand rallies, so she neutralises Sam's two biggest weapons. However, Kim can have trouble with her rhythm because of the top spin, being not tall enough to hit them down.

This is the crucial thing - Kim's at her best when she's getting rhythm and consistent pace from her opponent, which Stosur doesn't give you with the forehands bouncing above Kim's hitting zone and junk off the backhand. It's why Mauresmo had Kim's number in their last meetings.

Kim at her best would win because she's simply a better player, but anything less than her best and it has potential to be an extremely tricky match-up for her.

everythingtaboo
Dec 22nd, 2011, 03:10 AM
Stosur should be a nightmare match up for the Belgian pusher - however she was too weak mentally in all of their matches and choked. I will favor the new, more mentally stronger Sam in their next match, I think.

Pusher? Do you even understand tennis? :help:

Ryan
Dec 22nd, 2011, 03:12 AM
Its a bad matchup because of Kim's return and her BH CC which can pin stosur in the BH corner. Stosur gave Kim quite a scare last year at USO, and it would be interesting to watch them on clay when Stosur is in sort of form.


All this.

ExtremespeedX
Dec 22nd, 2011, 03:18 AM
Pusher? Do you even understand tennis? :help:

The core of her game is pushing.

rimon
Dec 22nd, 2011, 04:35 AM
If Kim stars pawning Sam even on clay the way Maria and Azarenka do, then we can officialy say she is a very bad matchup for Stosur.

When has Azarenka "pawned" Sam on clay?

rimon
Dec 22nd, 2011, 04:36 AM
She's not a bad match-up. They met 3 times, all in 2010, since Sam became a top player, and the matches were fairly close. Of course Kim won those matches - she's just a better player than Sam, especially in 2010 when she was arguably the best player on hard courts. Not to mention that Kim was in decent form in those matches too (she went on to win the title after each of those matches)

Did you even read the OP? It's 5-0.

Theodoropen
Dec 22nd, 2011, 05:30 AM
Did you even read the OP? It's 5-0.

I'm pretty sure Moby is referring specifically to the period "since Sam become a top player."

She's not a bad match-up. They met 3 times, all in 2010, since Sam became a top player, and the matches were fairly close. Of course Kim won those matches - she's just a better player than Sam, especially in 2010 when she was arguably the best player on hard courts. Not to mention that Kim was in decent form in those matches too (she went on to win the title after each of those matches)


They also had a very tight first set at their last meeting, the YEC semis. The second set, not so much...but Sam currently has more fighting spirit and ability to turn things around (or at least force a third set) than she did before, even in 2010.

everythingtaboo
Dec 22nd, 2011, 05:36 AM
The core of her game is pushing.

I would describe her more as a counter-puncher than a pusher. There is a big difference between the two.

Theodoropen
Dec 22nd, 2011, 05:49 AM
I would describe her more as a counter-puncher than a pusher. There is a big difference between the two.

This.

Kim is so much more than your standard pusher. You could maybe argue that she's a grinder - quite different from a pusher IMO, although some probably disagree with me on that.

starin
Dec 22nd, 2011, 05:49 AM
How she matches up with Stosur is irrelevant because she is just flat out a better player.

bandabou
Dec 22nd, 2011, 07:06 AM
Kim's the better player and of course some of her strengths neutralize Sam's...Kim has a great backhand that she loves to go CC and of course is an excellent returner too.

rimon
Dec 22nd, 2011, 08:44 AM
This.

Kim is so much more than your standard pusher. You could maybe argue that she's a grinder - quite different from a pusher IMO, although some probably disagree with me on that.

I agree with you both.

Kim and Hingis are counter-punchers.
Radwanska and Wozniacki are pushers.
ASV drifted between the two.

rimon
Dec 22nd, 2011, 08:48 AM
Kim's the better player and of course some of her strengths neutralize Sam's...Kim has a great backhand that she loves to go CC and of course is an excellent returner too.

I agree with this, and what everyone else said too. Kim's CC play just breaks down Sam's backhand, and she just can't run around backhands like she can against others. Also, Kim is a great and consistent returner.

It makes perfect sense to me why Kim is a bad match-up for Sam, as well as Venus, Kvitova, Sharapova and Azarenka. The one that really confuses/amazes me is Pennetta, though.

borrowedheaven
Dec 22nd, 2011, 08:51 AM
I don't even think Kim is a counterpuncher. Counterpunchers rely on the pace of the opponent, Kim is more than comfortable generating her own pace. Kim's game is not about responding to the shots of the opponents, she likes to construct her own point. But, when forced in that position, she makes a good counterpuncher with her movement and ability to redirect pace.

dsanders06
Dec 22nd, 2011, 04:37 PM
I don't even think Kim is a counterpuncher. Counterpunchers rely on the pace of the opponent, Kim is more than comfortable generating her own pace. Kim's game is not about responding to the shots of the opponents, she likes to construct her own point. But, when forced in that position, she makes a good counterpuncher with her movement and ability to redirect pace.

Not really. Kim becomes way too error-prone when she has to generate her own pace, particularly on the forehand side. That's why she's been so bad on clay since her comeback, because she has to generate more of her own pace and often her forehand in particular falls apart. Obviously she wasn't in good form heading into RG this year, but even so, she would never have lost to Arantxa Rus on hardcourts no matter what her form. Even in her first career, contrary to popular belief, Kim was NEVER that great on clay (she played horribly to get to the final of RG in 2001, and had a cakewalk in 2003), her A-game wasn't effective on clay then either, but the difference then was she willing to totally strip her game back and just chase every ball and conservatively bring them back into court if necessary... which she isn't really willing to do anymore, because it would risk injury. Grass isn't very good for her either, because the bounce is too low for her to consistently hit smoothly and maintain the pace from the opponent's shot. That's why the US Open courts are perfect for her, because they have a nice bounce and they're fast enough for her to be able to absorb the opponent's pace and be able to redirect it and go for ambitious placement without actually being ambitious with her stroke production.

Matt01
Dec 22nd, 2011, 04:41 PM
I agree with you both.

Kim and Hingis are counter-punchers.
Radwanska and Wozniacki are pushers.
ASV drifted between the two.


Clijsters isn't a pusher and neither are ASV, Radwanska or Woz.

bobito
Dec 22nd, 2011, 04:52 PM
I don't think the H2H reflects a bad match-up so much, more that Kim was a far better player. That may have changed though. Sam appears to have improved a lot and Kim, we'll have to wait and see.

dsanders06
Dec 22nd, 2011, 04:54 PM
Clijsters isn't a pusher and neither are ASV, Radwanska or Woz.

But ASV and Woz are certainly pure defensive grinders, whereas Kim is a counter-puncher (I would class Radwanska as a counter-puncher too, albeit a very different type than Kim).

Welcome1
Dec 22nd, 2011, 04:55 PM
Kim is a bad match-up for anyone

Smitten
Dec 22nd, 2011, 05:47 PM
But ASV and Woz are certainly pure defensive grinders, whereas Kim is a counter-puncher (I would class Radwanska as a counter-puncher too, albeit a very different type than Kim).

No. I agree with the fact Sanchez-Vicario drifted between the two.

Arantxa could be very attacking (Wimbledon final, '00 RG QF against Venus, Olympics against Venus, various other matches against local) and she could also just moonball endlessly and do nothing.

sammy01
Dec 22nd, 2011, 06:30 PM
No. I agree with the fact Sanchez-Vicario drifted between the two.

Arantxa could be very attacking (Wimbledon final, '00 RG QF against Venus, Olympics against Venus, various other matches against local) and she could also just moonball endlessly and do nothing.

that is why ASV is a multi slam winner, she knew she had to step it up at times and couldn't rely on the game that beat 95% of the other girls on tour, she was also talented enough to do this.