[Mr.Sharapova]

Originally Posted by Temperenka

Their careers will probably end with Vika having an edge in the H2H. Numbers will speak for themselves.

Originally Posted by Monzanator

Will they? Garcia Vidagany is better than Clijsters according to your logic. Preach!

Originally Posted by Exordes

How about the other numbers? For instance weeks at No.1.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ranked_players

Vika (age 23): 45 weeks at No.1 ( as of December 31, 2012) and counting...

Maria (age 25): 21 weeks at No.1; her longest time has been 7 weeks in a row in January-March 2007.

Originally Posted by Steven.

and by that logic, wozniacki's peak > azarenka's peak and venus' peak is the 2nd weakest of all former no. 1s right?

got it.

The ownage on these replies

[Natural Joe]

I agree, the comparison with weeks at number one really isn't particularly helpful when it comes to peak vs peak and neither is the H2H imo. That said, I don't see how the H2H between Vidagany and Clijsters can prove a point here since the H2H between Vika and Masha is based on many more matches and therefore much more significant in general (still not necessarily in a peak vs peak discussion, so please don't get me wrong here).

I just don't see the point of discussing the peak of a player who is only 23 years old and still has room for improvement in her game. As I have read in this thread, also Maria fans think it's possible that her peak is still ahead of her, so again, what's the point of this thread (or any similar thread with other players, for that matter)? Unless of course you think it's interesting to discuss and compare the highest standard of play we have seen from either player thus far but in that case I think "peak" is a very misleading term.

[Exordes]

Originally Posted by Steven.

and by that logic, wozniacki's peak > azarenka's peak and venus' peak is the 2nd weakest of all former no. 1s right?

got it.

I didn´t say that weeks at No.1 should be used as the only criteria when we compare players to each other. On the other hand those top 5 players who lead those statistics are: Steffi Graff (377 wks), Martina Navratilova (332 wks), Chris Evert (260 wks), Martina Hingis (209 wks) and Monica Seles (178 wks). Surely it tells something about their careers if head-to-head statistics are not enough? For some players their peak might be same as their highest WTA ranking like No. 20 or winning a big tournament once.

[Monzanator]

Originally Posted by Natural Joe

I agree, the comparison with weeks at number one really isn't particularly helpful when it comes to peak vs peak and neither is the H2H imo. That said, I don't see how the H2H between Vidagany and Clijsters can prove a point here since the H2H between Vika and Masha is based on many more matches and therefore much more significant in general (still not necessarily in a peak vs peak discussion, so please don't get me wrong here).

I just don't see the point of discussing the peak of a player who is only 23 years old and still has room for improvement in her game. As I have read in this thread, also Maria fans think it's possible that her peak is still ahead of her, so again, what's the point of this thread (or any similar thread with other players, for that matter)? Unless of course you think it's interesting to discuss and compare the highest standard of play we have seen from either player thus far but in that case I think "peak" is a very misleading term.

Garcia and Clijsters have only had one match but "1" is also a number no matter how you'd like to see that. Temperenka clearly said that "Numbers will speak for themselves" hence there's no difference whether players had 30 matches or just the one. Garcia won that match and is therefore a better player than Clijsters according to Temperenka's logic. Maths and statistics are very simple to embrace and there isn't any room for speculations and other "buts" and "ifs".

and btw, Sharapova's peak was 2005-06. She's not winning another major (let alone any title) on fast surfaces and with it, you can't say the peak is still ahead of her by any means. We've never seen Peak Sharapova vs Peak Azarenka and never will despite the age proximity.

[Natural Joe]

Originally Posted by Monzanator

Garcia and Clijsters have only had one match but "1" is also a number no matter how you'd like to see that. Temperenka clearly said that "Numbers will speak for themselves" hence there's no difference whether players had 30 matches or just the one. Garcia won that match and is therefore a better player than Clijsters according to Temperenka's logic. Maths and statistics are very simple to embrace and there isn't any room for speculations and other "buts" and "ifs".

OK, point taken.

and btw, Sharapova's peak was 2005-06. She's not winning another major (let alone any title) on fast surfaces and with it, you can't say the peak is still ahead of her by any means. We've never seen Peak Sharapova vs Peak Azarenka and never will despite the age proximity.

That's pretty much the point Jimmie48 made earlier in this thread when he said that Maria's fans think she will never get to her pre-surgery form again. However, dsanders06 replied to him that there was a discussion on Maria's subforum about "how her peak level of play could still potentially be ahead of her". This shows that there are fans who think that we might not have seen Maria's peak yet - potentially of course. At the same time, we might have potentially seen Vika's peak already or she could potentially become an even better player. The thing is, we simply can't see into the future and that's the reason why threads like this one don't make any sense to me.

[Vincey!]

Originally Posted by young_gunner913

We'll never see Peak vs Peak but we have Current vs Current and right now, Current Vika kicks the fucking shit out of Martha whenever she pleases.

Well that's why Vika lost to Sharapova in their last match I guess

Peak Sharapova would destroyed Vika's serve and overpower her and give her nothing to attack she'd probably win in 2 easy sets 6-3 6-2.

[blistering]

Sharapova is steadily coming back to her pre-surgery form, and DRASTICALLY improving her movement and athleticism along the way. She just needs to put all the pieces together.

Regarding the thread, Sharapova is one of the biggest hitters in history, and only Peak Henin, Peak Serena and Peak Venus would be able to beat her. Azarenka will definitely improve in the upcoming seasons but she just doesn't have the devastating power Maria does. So Sharapova takes it in 2 sets. 75 64 or something; let's not forget, Azarenka matches-up very well with Maria and knows exactly how to play her. Wouldn't be a walk in the park.

[Nicolás89]

Originally Posted by Fighterpova

Definitely peak Maria. If 2006 USO Maria played 2012 Vika Maria would win in 2 easy sets. She beat Henin in straights and double bageled Mauresmo and they are a class above Azarenka tennis wise

Peak Maria struggled against Peak Golovin during that tournament though.

[madmax]

the only reason why Vuvurenka leads the H2H against Maria is because for some reason Maria always chooses to play like crap against her (apart from those rare instances this year in Stuttgart and Istanbul). AO final was especially a head scratching performance from her - making brainless errors and inexplicably going flat after taking an early lead in the first set. Tat was truly an embarrassing display of sheer stupidity Either way, peak Maria is just not making silly errors and doublefaulting on key points like she's been doing since that surgery in 08, so Vika's chances become very slim in this matchup on any surface. I'd love to see 08 AO version of Pova vs this years Vuvurenka and see how many games Maria concedes though...

[Vartan]

Originally Posted by M.M

The ownage on these replies

Get owned

[blistering]

Azarenka was very impressive in her 1st slam final after a nervy start but Maria should've won that title. She was still retooling her game. It was exciting to see the vast improvements in that tournament compared to the final stretch of 2011 (Cincinatti included, god knows how she won that). But she completely froze on the occasion. She'd be holding two slams now had she brought the level she showed against Makarova, Kerber or Kvitova in the 1st set.

[faboozadoo15]

You don't think Sharapova will ever win another title on a quick surface? Ever? Don't be ridiculous.

Are the only fast courts on grass these days? Because Sharapova made the Olympic final this year and the Wimbledon final last year-- 2 of her last 3 grass events.

[bandabou]

Originally Posted by faboozadoo15

You don't think Sharapova will ever win another title on a quick surface? Ever? Don't be ridiculous.

Are the only fast courts on grass these days? Because Sharapova made the Olympic final this year and the Wimbledon final last year-- 2 of her last 3 grass events.

And in one she got totally humiliated and in the other she never really made it competitive.

[Vincey!]

Originally Posted by faboozadoo15

You don't think Sharapova will ever win another title on a quick surface? Ever? Don't be ridiculous.

Are the only fast courts on grass these days? Because Sharapova made the Olympic final this year and the Wimbledon final last year-- 2 of her last 3 grass events.

haha yes, that's what I thought too. The only player that did better than Sharapova on grass in the last couple years is Serena.

[Nicolás89]

Originally Posted by madmax

the only reason why Vuvurenka leads the H2H against Maria is because for some reason Maria always chooses to play like crap against her

I cannot.