Originally Posted by Excelscior
That wasn't my point and you missed the essence of what I/we were stating (not surprised). But since you brought it up: The Australian Open was very close, and many thought that Petra should have one that match; even Sharapova fans said that (unless you forgotten).
Now once again, you totally missed the point of our prior conversation. I'm wasn't arguing 'coulda, woulda, shoulda, almost or how'. Nope! I accounted for what you said above, by basically stating 'if Petra didn't play or had gotten past Sharapova or Serena in the French, Australian and Wibledon, she could have very well won ANY or all three of them'. She certainly would have been favored if she would have gotten past them and advanced to the next round/s. That's the key, important take away.
This is in stark contrast to Caro's case, where she had only went that far in one (The US Open). And even if she would have gotten past Serena, she still wouldn't have been favored. That was the ultimate point/what I was really stating (Caro didn't compete. And Caro wouldn't have been favored, even if she got past Serena)!!!
It was more a Caro, Petra (and their respective games, in winning Grand Slam), offensive tennis discussion, to back up and follow up another poster. You were lurking, looking for too much, it appears.
I didn't miss the point..but you were dissing Vika a bit too much imo. When you said she was lucky, etc, etc..when she beat the same sharapova that Petra couldn't beat at the Oz open.
Vika vs Petra? Would've been a good match..no certainty for either player. At RG and Wimbledon? That I give you..Petra would've been the favorite.
About Caro..her game as it is now, leaves her too much into the opponent's hands, so..you might be right on that one too.