[bayarovici]

I am surprised by all these posters in different threads predicting Osaka winning 22+ slams.

I don't know how people think that would be possible with her limited play style. She has a big forehand well suited for baseline ball bashing. She hit out the court opponents in two slams, but with her repetitive play style and lack of variety I think she is going to be exposed and not reach another slam final.

In fact I think this is what has been happening in the last couple of months rather than the shock of Sascha break-up, players have grown accustomed to her style and without improving her game intelligence, net play and with a serve that is nowhere near as effective as peak Serena, I don't see how she has any chance to be the dominant player everyone predicts she will be.

 

[Oladesuo]

You may not be the only one but I do not agree with you.

She is winning another soon enough based on my own perception of her game.

 

[andréss]

She is unidimensional, focusing on the forehand. When she has no serve, she's cooked even by doubles players like Siniakova.

 

[Tennisfan0922]

The problem now is pressure and stress with her success . She still has the game to win slams.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Droog]

It's not entirely implausible, I wouldn't bet on it personally but if she didn't win another slam my reaction would be a mild surprise rather than complete and utter shock. I certainly find it more plausible than her exceeding or even coming close to Serena's slam total, which has actually been predicted by several members here.

 

[Burn]

She'll probably win a few more, but not more than a total of 6. Those 22+ Slams predictions are insane, she's like cow on ice on clay and grass, what those users are thinking, that she'll win all the hard court Slams from now on untill she's in her 30's? Many started to ridicule the influence Sascha had in her game, but i don't think it's a coincidence that so many players upped their games (and serves) under his guidence. I mean, how Wozniaki played and served in Singapore and in Melbourne to a lesser extent after that, was insane for her (pushing) standards, also Vika and now how he managed to pull back together a player that was really falling apart like Mladenovic, even if she failed at this year's French Open. Maybe she'll find another good coach that will help her reach her potential, but there's the tour depth also and she doesn't respond well to pressure, i mean, look what she did in Indian Wells, and please, spare me with the "she cares only for slams" nonsense. IW is a big tournament, her first ever title. We'll see how she deals with the hard court season. Oh, Muguruza's hype on TF after her 2 Slams comes to mind. Where is she now? Winning 10 Slams is huge in today's tennis, 20+ is only a wet dream.

 

[BlueTrees]

Unfortunately she'll probably fluke some more.

 

[Hugues Daniel]

Yes.

 

[EkVraNaamEnVan]

Is she not allowed a post-slam slum like we have seen with many players e.g. Angie & Halep? She may have few more left but definitely not Serena figures. Even if players figure her out, there is bound to be some draw collapsing.

 

[Venus3000]

I do not agree. Having said that I never thought she was going to come anywhere close to 22, she isn't Serena. I don't even see her winning 10 though possible. I think she could win 7 or 8 spread out over the next 10 years or so. Her game will continue to grow. She is only 21.

As far as Sascha go I'm sure he helped her and is a good coach. Having said that I do not believe ii giving coaches too much credit. It's ultimately the players who win or lose.

 

[AlexMA]

While that's obviously a possibility, it also ignores any kind of improvements she might make to her game in the future. She's showed progress since last year and I think she will continue to do so, and as long as she continues to improve her game more chances will come to her and she will take at least a couple of them. So I believe there will be more slams in her future. How many? I have no clue, I don't really do predictions like that because you never know where a player will be in a year, let alone at the end of her career.

 

[BoogieWoogie]

I also think that. She lost Bajin, she is gonna go back to her old ways. The fall cometh!!

 

[goldenlox]

She has a lot of time if she stays healthy. She has to deal with expectations. It will never be as easy as when you dont have expectations, but she is legit great player. She is a top 5 talent.
So I expect her to contend at some majors

 

[Grigor.]

Yes you are.

 

[StephenUK]

I think it is ridiculously premature to say that. Many slam winners go into a lull after first winning a slam and then they come back and win more. Serena did not win another slam for two and a half years after her first US Open win. I think Naomi needs to do catch up on the other surfaces and it is too soon to expect her to win Wimbledon this year either, I think she needs a quarter or a semi there before she can win Wimbledon. Hard courts she would still be favourite in my eyes. I agree that the question mark remains over whether Naomi without Sasha can win slams like Naomi with Sasha could. But I think she will come back in time.

 

[bandabou]

Come on... are you serious? if Osaka NEVER wins another major, that would be like the most underachieving career ever. In fact she should really be at least Maria good by the end of her career.

she isn't winning 22 majors, but something around 5-7 should be the minimum.

 

[Rollo]

Most players would run over grandma and throw it in reverse for Osaka's "one dimensional" game.

She's a kid who is having a tough time adjusting to the weigh of expectations. This early defeat came at what will ALWAYS be the toughest slam for Osaka to win. More variety may or may not come but more slams will. Bank on it.

 

[bayarovici]

Very serious. Nobody in this thread is disputing that she lacks variety, that she isn't as powerful as peak Serena and that her tennis lacks adaptability. People just think that because she is 21 and has 2 slams she'll have the brightest future ahead. Well Ostapenko was 19 when she won a slam, Muguruza was 22 when she won her second. People are not so enthusiastic about them anymore, are they?

 

[volley123]

She's closing fast on 22 and I have no idea what anyone sees in her. Her draws at the 2 slams she won were lucky. She is loosing left and right.

I mean her game is pretty shitty, she can use that big forehand a couple of times per match before she runs out of steam.Her legs are nothing to write home about and she's almost 22 and players her type pretty much peak around this time. So she ain't getting better.

It's already amazing she capitalized on those weak draws with a few top player injured (can you image playing Serena in a final lol...) so at least she has 2 titles so there's that. But her game was and still is shitty that's pretty clear to anyone. I think Keys is going to have a better carrer when all is said and done, they are somewhat similar just that Osaka was way more luckier

 

[Rollo]

Very serious. Nobody in this thread is disputing that she lacks variety, that she isn't as powerful as peak Serena and that her tennis lacks adaptability. People just think that because she is 21 and has 2 slams she'll have the brightest future ahead. Well Ostapenko was 19 when she won a slam, Muguruza was 22 when she won her second. People are not so enthusiastic about them anymore, are they?

My answer to that is I know a multiple slam champ when I see one. I've watched tennis over 40 years now. Baring a serious injury Naomi will win more majors.

Ostsapenko has a serious technical flaw in her serve. If she were smart she would skip the entire circuit after the US Open and retool it. It' a pity players won't do that today in the quest to chase money.

I would still bet on Muguruza to win more majors. She might have any number of bad years and then strike.