TennisForum.com - View Single Post - Danish Delight - Caroline Wozniacki thread - vol 5

View Single Post

Old Oct 9th, 2012, 05:18 PM   #4364
country flag Burisleif
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 8,200
Burisleif has a reputation beyond repute Burisleif has a reputation beyond repute Burisleif has a reputation beyond repute Burisleif has a reputation beyond repute Burisleif has a reputation beyond repute Burisleif has a reputation beyond repute Burisleif has a reputation beyond repute Burisleif has a reputation beyond repute Burisleif has a reputation beyond repute Burisleif has a reputation beyond repute Burisleif has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Danish Delight - Caroline Wozniacki thread - vol 5

I'm probably taking your post out of context, so I apologies if I am. You make some interesting points but there are a few holes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bruce goose View Post
A couple highly-flawed arguments I've been seeing:
1.Because Caro didn't get overpowered very often,that somehow proves that it was nearly impossible to do;quite frankly,that's absurd b--lshit! It's true that she was/is talented,and that made it DIFFICULT for BB opponents,but it was FAR from 'nearly impossible'.It didn't happen that much in part because of Caro's skill...and also b/c BBs,by their nature,tend to be erratic,impatient and inconsistent.The problem was when they WEREN'T exhibiting those negative traits,Caroline had no recourse or way to counterattack.
I think you're underestimating the form and moral driven element of a defensive strategy. It requires extreme confidence and focus to pull off, and much more so than a simpler BB game. Further the way you phrase the bold part is suggestive of control being with the BB, which isn't quite true. Attack means very little if it isn't effective, and in a defensive strategy the key is to rendering your opponents attack ineffective. It's as much about denying a normally winning strategy from your opponent, and tactically forcing them to try approaches beyond their usual comfort zone. Typically that involves feeding variety of weight and length and denying their game with basic placement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bruce goose View Post
2.To paraphrase,Petra was so flawless the day she destroyed Caroline that she would have beaten ANYone the same way....More B--lshit!People here are trying to rationalize Caro's helplessness by pretending that Petra was some unstoppable cyborg,as if a mere mortal were fighting hand-to-hand with the Terminator character.Now I'M a Petra fan who celebrates her successes,but it's ridiculous to assert that she would've won with the same scoreline vs. Graf,Henin,Court,Evert or one of the WS.Not only would the match have been closer,PETRA MIGHT NOT HAVE WON,PERIOD!These greats I listed knew how to use a power-hitter's pace against her,and it's no wild speculation that one of them could have demoralized Petra by withstanding her best shots and counterattacking.Caro simply lacked the capability to do that
If we are talking about wimbledon? Lack of traction and thus court speed to get balls back, combined with great placement and low bounces, will beat Caroline. As for the other comparisons, they are all very subjective, but I think it would be wrong to over estimate other opponents chances that day, especially Nav and Co. The pace of the ball has radically changed. Truth is nobody knows, and since the balls and courts have changed yet again since that day, nobody ever will. I was a huge fan of the old girls, and unfortunately the game has changed beyond recognition to a less entertaining form where sadly the old skill sets are largely irrelevant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bruce goose View Post
3.The final B.S.: Because it didn't happen too frequently,there was an almost flukish element to the wipeouts vs. BBs,so it didn't require any adjustments.Comparing those losses to,let's say,Serena's loss to Razzano,is a poor analogy.Serena lost largely b/c she just didn't play very well that day(and we'll give Razzano credit for playing decently,too);it WASN'T due to any specific flaw in her style of play.It's asinine to suggest that Caroline shouldn't have worked on her inability to counterattack merely b/c she wasn't exploited that much.Compare her style to a car that's easy to rob....like many Nissans,for example.The reality that they are easy to steal is an unavoidable,negative aspect of those cars;if you're fortunate enough that you NEVER have to park in an area where car theft is common or a risk,THAT'S GREAT!...but that does nothing to change the truth that the car likely WILL get stolen if you DO have to park in an urban area or any place where theft is more common.It's a design flaw in the car,and it doesn't disappear or diminish one iota just because you were lucky enough to NOT get the car stolen over,say,a 6-month period.
Caroline's game has always been in adjustment. evolving, changing, and some of your examples should reflect the specific changes made prior to the losses. Caroline's strategy also changes from match to match, and in match. You lay out a strategy and some times it's wrong and gets exposed. That's different to a loss while having a working strategy but you hit that mental wall and panic, and again different to a loss with a strategy thats hamstrung by a technical (equipment) or physical fault (injury). I'm not sure why you suggest Caroline wasn't able to counter attack? She had one of the best disguised killer BH's out there, second to only to Kim at its peak.

Btw. Car analogies never work, and considering most theft is now with the owners keys also moot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bruce goose View Post
In closing,I'll agree again with everyone who asserts that Caroline's defensive level has dropped off...and that she shouldn't have neglected her defensive prowess just to get more aggressive.That was poor training/preparation on her part.However,I'm not going to play Revisionist History and pretend that the old flaws didn't exist merely because her remedy was so poorly implemented.There's no reason WHATSOEVER to suggest that,w/o tweaking in a few needed elements,Caroline would've broken thru at a Slam any more than Dinara did.In fact,Caro had LESS success than Dinara at Slams despite being a more mentally stable character...and,of course,I'm referring to Caro's peak period with the previous style of play
I have seen elements of her old defence recently. Her physique is much lighter and faster than it was for a long time while doing (probably too much) boxer training. She needs court speed and strokes she can trust to play her game. I think Caroline could have broken through, but it didn't work out that way and the pressure to do so just rises with attempts. She had a similar "wall" at PM's that once she finally did break through, she went on a rampant streak of winning them. Her confidence obviously plays a huge part in her game, and she will need strokes that she has 100% confidence in to take the step back to the top for another try.

I can't really comment on Dinara, except that she has a lot of explaining to do.

PM me if you you reply incase I miss it Bruce
I hardly ever visit this whinge palace anymore.

Back on topic, bitch away cave dwellers...
__________________
"In time we hate that which we often fear." WS
“Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something.” Plato
Burisleif is offline View My Blog!