Tennis Forum banner

1 - 20 of 76 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,296 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
This isn't about results but about game.

At their very best levels of play, who is the weakest ever No.1 and who is the strongest player to never reach No.1? And please have reason for any inclusion.

For No.1s id say:

-Wozniacki: purely because at her best, there's still over a dozen players that can beat her. And of all the no.1s best VS best, i think she'd come out losing most times.
-Safina: because she was very surface reliant, and outside of red clay she rarely had a those convincing beatdown/routings of other top players....

Non No.1s is harder:
-Kvitova: because she has the ability to beat anyone( and for most, utterly destroy). The serve, forehand, backhand, feel and angles are levels above the field when at her best.
-Pierce: her peak was pretty similar to Kvitova, in that she could take the game out of your hands, but her movement was worse and she didn't have the hands/feel but ultimately she was deadly. She was able to go through entire fields ( with top players) and barely lose games.
-Dementieva: even without a serve she was able to hang in with any and everybody- so that says a lot about her game.
-Austin: this is a throwback, but she was able to beat two of the GOAT players and make them look bad at times in Evert and Navratilova( winning record against both). She had no fear and had compete control over her game.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
450 Posts
Austin was No. 1 for couple of weeks. Pierce is definitly the strongest non-No.1-players. Right before Kvitova. Weakest No. 1 is Wozniacki.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PLP

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,871 Posts
Jankovic or Wozniacki for me

And of course PEAK PIERCE!!! Honorable mention to Kvitova though!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
114,481 Posts
Weakest #1 - Kerber. She could barely win a match. Then Pliskova, Muguruza. Wozniacki won about 6-8 titles as #1, and maybe more coming
Strongest non #1 Sveta, Pierce, Kvitova on grass
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,619 Posts
Weakest No.1 - Pliskova (is there any doubt?)
As this is about game and not achievements, I think a case can be made for both Pliskova and Wozniacki.

Peak Pliskova's serve could be hard to break. The fact that she has a weapon, for me, gives her an edge. Whereas Woz can still be handled by aggressive players with great net game. Plus if you manage to hammer her FH enough, her peak becomes irrelevant because even at her best she will still give you short balls off that wing eventually and not hurt you much in the process.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
114,481 Posts
I forgot Ivanovic. She also couldnt handle it.
Kerber was the worst to me, a different player with #1 next to her name. It changed her mentally until well after she lost #1.
Then Pliskova, Ivanovic and Muguruza were close. But they all lost it quick so its hard to really separate. I guss Ivanovic was better than Pliskova and Muguruza because she was also dealing with being a new slam winner
 
  • Like
Reactions: ElusiveChanteuse

·
Team WTAworld, Senior Member
Joined
·
17,089 Posts
Li Na definitely one of the strongest non-no.1. She sure could've been a no.1 surprised she wasn't mentioned yet.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
177 Posts
Wozniacki at her best literally just fed all your peasant girls bagels at the WTA finals. Maybe choose of those since we're talking at their best.

lol at Azarenka fans trying to be smart here. Literally who at this point.

This is just a bait thread for people who still have sand in their v ... over Grand Slam Champion Caroline Wozniacki.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,795 Posts
Li Na definitely one of the strongest non-no.1. She sure could've been a no.1 surprised she wasn't mentioned yet.
The only downside I suppose is her consistency and mental fortitude wasn't always up there, she could lose to anyone on a given day, hence her resume is a bit patchy when it comes to overall title haul but she could also destroy her opposition seamlessly. However her peak level if you wish to talk about her game, was tremendous, especially in Australia and is certainly one of the best all round. She only really lost to Clijsters in AO twice due to experience/nerves.

Gave Mary Pierce a double bagel after dropping opening set at USO in 2006 as well and demolished Radwanska in Canada/Cincinnati in 2012 for the loss of no more than five games in two matches, probably preventing her from reaching no.1. Her AO matches against Sharapova and Makarova some of the best tennis I've seen from her, when she literally strangles her opponent with well placed and timed hitting. Even Pennetta looked like a scrub playing her at AO, I was surprised how Li dispatched her some easily considering she beat Kerber in R16 (only to flop to her at Indian Wells :lol:). Also won't forget that Bouchard SF, even if it was a bit messy midway, a nice way to send a message :drool:, probably one of the first true beatings before it became popular on the main tour. Also played a very nice clean match against Serena at AO2010 SF, made two tiebreaks though Serena was absolutely firing. That run (where she also beat Wozniacki, Azarenka and Venus Williams) was probably what would spark her to make a surge in coming years. People really awe about Ostapenko nowadays but Li was one of the few who could hit winners from about anywhere at her best without needing to overpress. Only regret is she didn't add Rodriguez to her team earlier. Had she learnt to try using the net more she would have certainly achieved more, that really sharpened her overall game from 2013-14, incidentally peak HC Li?

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,615 Posts
As this is about game and not achievements, I think a case can be made for both Pliskova and Wozniacki.

Peak Pliskova's serve could be hard to break. The fact that she has a weapon, for me, gives her an edge. Whereas Woz can still be handled by aggressive players with great net game. Plus if you manage to hammer her FH enough, her peak becomes irrelevant because even at her best she will still give you short balls off that wing eventually and not hurt you much in the process.
Who are these people?
 

·
Team WTAworld, Senior Member
Joined
·
17,089 Posts
The only downside I suppose is her consistency and mental fortitude wasn't always up there, she could lose to anyone on a given day, hence her resume is a bit patchy when it comes to overall title haul but she could also destroy her opposition seamlessly. However her peak level if you wish to talk about her game, was tremendous, especially in Australia and is certainly one of the best all round. She only really lost to Clijsters in AO twice due to experience/nerves.

Gave Mary Pierce a double bagel after dropping opening set at USO in 2006 as well and demolished Radwanska in Canada/Cincinnati in 2012 for the loss of no more than five games in two matches, probably preventing her from reaching no.1. Her AO matches against Sharapova and Makarova some of the best tennis I've seen from her, when she literally strangles her opponent with well placed and timed hitting. Even Pennetta looked like a scrub playing her at AO, I was surprised how Li dispatched her some easily considering she beat Kerber in R16 (only to flop to her at Indian Wells :lol:). Also won't forget that Bouchard SF, even if it was a bit messy midway, a nice way to send a message :drool:, probably one of the first true beatings before it became popular on the main tour. Also played a very nice clean match against Serena at AO2010 SF, made two tiebreaks though Serena was absolutely firing. That run (where she also beat Wozniacki, Azarenka and Venus Williams) was probably what would spark her to make a surge in coming years. People really awe about Ostapenko nowadays but Li was one of the few who could hit winners from about anywhere at her best without needing to overpress. Only regret is she didn't add Rodriguez to her team earlier. Had she learnt to try using the net more she would have certainly achieved more, that really sharpened her overall game from 2013-14, incidentally peak HC Li?
Li was unlucky her career had such a bad start due to the chinese tennisfederation. Its the biggest influance that stopped her real potential. Otherwise she would've accomplished far more. Based on talent there are few players that can keep up with her. At her peak there are not many people that can hit with her. I'm willing to say her best ever shape was better then an azarenka or sharapova. She was incredibly unlucky to fall in that AO final cause she should have won multiple AO titles.
I would say she is a better all surface player then a kvitova/azarenka/wozniacki and a few others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matmagix

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,296 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
weakest #1 is Ka.Pliskova, strongest non #1 is Lena.

This is not even a subjective opinion, especially the 2nd part
I would say Pliskova is the weakest. She has a good serve but still hasn't completely developed her potential or the rest of her game really. Mentally fragile, doesn't have the list of accomplishments the others have, and she played terribly when she actually got to #1. At leasts Dinara at her peak had some variety.

Pierce is by far the strongest non #1. She has the results, the titles, and the longevity (her career basically spans 3 incredibly tough eras). Making 6 slam finals over the course of 10 years and winning two of them is no accident. I would actually say her movement is a lot stronger than Kvitova's too. Especially in some of those mid 90s clay court matches (her jumping tweener is still iconic). At her peak she could beat basically any top player.
Weakest #1 - Kerber. She could barely win a match. Then Pliskova, Muguruza. Wozniacki won about 6-8 titles as #1, and maybe more coming
Strongest non #1 Sveta, Pierce, Kvitova on grass
I forgot Ivanovic. She also couldnt handle it.
Kerber was the worst to me, a different player with #1 next to her name. It changed her mentally until well after she lost #1.
Then Pliskova, Ivanovic and Muguruza were close. But they all lost it quick so its hard to really separate. I guss Ivanovic was better than Pliskova and Muguruza because she was also dealing with being a new slam winner
Pliskova "weakest" #1 to date but has time to change that. Sabatini best non #1. Peak Pierce couldn't deliver consistently enough though her highs were fabulous.
I see several people didn't correctly read my OP.....this IS NOT about their results when they were No.1, it's about their overall level of play at their peak. I will assume most people thought that when including Pliskova because there's no way she'd have been mentioned otherwise. At peak, her serve is arguably second only to Serena and her ground game is lethal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,071 Posts
Pierce is so overhyped! Yes, she could beat most of the players when she was at her peak, but the thing is that she was at that level in two or three tournaments per year. She was extremely inconsistent and, at times, a nightmare to watch just like Kvitova.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,071 Posts
I think Kuznetsova, Dementieva, Li, Na Novotna and Sabatini are the strongest non N1.

The weakest number one is Safina.
 
1 - 20 of 76 Posts
Top