Originally Posted by RatedG
Both true. Radwanska (or to a lessor extent Caroline) vs any player who can bash the ball (pure ball bashers a la Georges) tend to be my favorite matchups. A smart, but weaker players vs a dumb player but has all the power in the world. It's no fun to watch two ball bashers or two pushers because both aren't a drag to watch. Either you cringe at every UE or cry when one player fails to put away an easy ball
. Azarenka isn't as exciting because she actually THINKS on court so she makes quick work of Aga, every time.
And although she's a bit overrated on grass (look at the Olympics 2012) hasn't she a junior slam @ Wimbledon? And making the finals isn't a fluke at Wimbledon (well kind of, didn't she beat Kirilenko for a spot in the finals :lol)
Vika doesn't really fall in either category of "ball basher" or "pusher", if you were going to have a spectrum she would would fall pretty near the middle. Aga's problem vs her tends to stem from her poor 2nd serve and she's always on the backfoot in rallies, and can't get out. Once Aga is on the backfoot she doesn't really have the power or way to redirect the ball to get back into the rally. Aga struggles to attack vs Vika. The reason I think it won't change much on grass is because it becomes harder to actually stay in rallies on grass, it's harder to defend. And it's hard to make out Vika as some "grass mug" when she only lost to Serena Williams in the semi's twice last year.
Junior results can be a little funky, eg. Wozniacki won Junior Wimbledon too, but doesn't seem to enjoy the grass at all in the pro ranks. And obviously her final wasn't a fluke, you can only beat who is front of you. It just so happened though that she was the last of the lambs to the slaughter vs Serena.