Originally Posted by chingching
When you see her live, you can see. She doesn't have flair in the way that Federer has flair, but her forehand is definately not machine made. Her backhand may be, but it has such beautiful timing and gets good spin and she always hits it in the middle of the racket. I know what you mean about her being the same as everyone else, but I think she is slightly different in that I think her shot selection is more thought out and she come to net. In terms of technique, I understand your point even more as she has the "ballbasher" footwork and follow throughs but I think despite her forehand looking bland, it has many intricacies to it that would surprise you. She is more than most think
Her technique is not what made me like her though. She reminds me a lot of my sister
Well yeah every human being is unique in some way, even if a player tries to intentionally copy someone else, it never is the same.
I agree her technique is not what makes her stand out, she has other qualities.
Anyways these kind of discussions are much more enjoyable than those lame "my play is better than your player, because she beat this player while yours hasn't" arguments you guys have.
While on the Anett vs Donna argument, none of us has really seen Donna play so we can't compare. But on results, I don't agree with BlueTrees that seniors is the only way to judge.
For example I find Donna's poor performances in juniors quite worrying, because you can argue that the world's best juniors are more talented than journeywomen that are 200/300 in the rankings. And that she struggles with the unpredictable nature of her opponents in juniors.