Originally Posted by bandabou
well she had beaten Maria at Wimbledon too, didn't stop her from losing, no?!
I'm not picking any fights..I think you're very dismissive of Vika, like she's a nobody or something. You DID say that she got some lucky breaks to win last year, right? So just had to call you on that part.
For the rest..well, the ball is in Petra's corner, no? She's the one who has to prove she has got what it takes to enter the winner's circle again.
I don't know why we keep discussing this. But it is your habit, I guess?
What is it you don't understand about "one, several or all"? How am I dismissing Vika there, if Petra only wins one out of three?? That means Vika could have very well won that Australian. So just please stop (not including the fact that if they would have played back then--win or lose, Petra would have been favored). So just relax.
This was all in contrast to Wozniaki in the first place. And I don't even remember how Petra came up (the reason why you're really doing this), but I wasn't even the one to introduce her in the discussion.
My discussing Vika in another post (not the one you initially claimed to argue), was self explanatory and in a much broader historical context, which so many here have already argued and discussed, ad nauseam. It wasn't a slight to anyone
Please, let's not take over the thread. There's nothing else to say.