Tennis Forum banner

Best win?

  • Ostapenko at 2018 US Open

    Votes: 0 0.0%
1 - 20 of 92 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,774 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Not a lot to choose from, though. :eek:h:

2017 US Open: def. (2) Halep 6-4, 4-6, 6-3
-An in-form Halep who had played well throughout the USOS.

2018 Rome: def. (6) Ostapenko 6-7, 6-4, 7-5
-QF of a Tier I and a marathon, but who hasn't beaten Ostapenko in 2018-2019?

2018 Roland Garros: def. (6) Pliskova 6-2, 6-1

2018 US Open: def. (10) Ostapenko 6-3, 6-2

2019 Australian Open: def. (3) Wozniacki 6-4, 4-6, 6-3
-defending "champion." Grudge match as well
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,490 Posts
This thread was clearly started just to hate on her again. :eek:h:

But I'm gonna do best/most important wins for all three (Serena, Azarenka, Maria) since coming back:

Serena: Pliskova at US Open...girl beat her before at USO '16 and unlike Simona at the AO actually believed that she could beat Serena.
Azarenka: Kerber at Monterrey...girl didn't carry any of the momentum/positive things she had from Miami '18 for over a year and this was the first big win she had since then and she was able to carry that win into some kind of decent-ish form lately. (Has she been amazing since beating Kerber? No. But has she been losing to players outside of the top 30 since then? Also no...now watch her lose to Harmony Tan tomorrow. :hysteric: )
Sharapova: Definitely Halep at the US Open 2017. She needed a big scalp and she hadn't had one just yet, plus she needed to prove to herself that she still had what it takes. Beating Simona there helped her do that.

Honestly, looking at it, and I'm a Serena stan, Serena's had the least really big scalps out of all three of them yet she's the highest ranked. :eek:h: Can't blame her, though, at least girl can actually take advantage of draws and not lose to Siegemund or Parmentier. :hysteric:

However, the most satisfying was to watch her snatch Wozniacki. Ugh I was LIVING for that. :drool:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,607 Posts
Honestly, looking at it, and I'm a Serena stan, Serena's had the least really big scalps out of all three of them yet she's the highest ranked. :eek:h: Can't blame her, though, at least girl can actually take advantage of draws and not lose to Siegemund or Parmentier. :hysteric:
can't really overlook that Serena's comeback has been shorter, she's hardly played outside slams and made 3 slam finals. Sharapova and Azarenka have what 1 slam QF between them over a much high number of slams. i get the thread is about best wins though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,490 Posts
can't really overlook that Serena's comeback has been shorter, she's hardly played outside slams and made 3 slam finals. Sharapova and Azarenka have what 1 slam QF between them over a much high number of slams. i get the thread is about best wins though.
Serena's comeback is obviously the most successful lol but I can't deny that she has the least amount of big wins out of all the three. Again, can't blame ha because at least she's not losing to random basics at slams. (I mean, you could argue Kenin, but Kenin isn't Siegemund off clay, Parmentier and Diatchenko.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,140 Posts
^All those 3 players have lost a lot of the intimidation factor they used to have (perhaps Serena slightly less so) - players just don't fear them the way they maybe did in the past...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,876 Posts
A Sharapova-fan told me a few days ago that winning Tianjin is pretty close to winning a slam (a real one, not Bogota or Baku), so I guess it's her final win there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38,323 Posts
Quality-wise it was probably Halep but importance-wise I would say beating defending champion Wozniacki at the AO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,253 Posts
Not a lot to choose from, though. :eek:h:

2017 US Open: def. (2) Halep 6-4, 4-6, 6-3
-An in-form Halep who had played well throughout the USOS.

2018 Rome: def. (6) Ostapenko 6-7, 6-4, 7-5
-QF of a Tier I and a marathon, but who hasn't beaten Ostapenko in 2018-2019?

2018 Roland Garros: def. (6) Pliskova 6-2, 6-1

2018 US Open: def. (10) Ostapenko 6-3, 6-2

2019 Australian Open: def. (3) Wozniacki 6-4, 4-6, 6-3
-defending "champion." Grudge match as well

2017 US Open R128: Sharapova-Halep: 64 46 63
Sharapova: SET1:+1.50, SET2, SET3:+1.44
____Halep: SET1:+1.10, SET2, SET3:+0.89


2018 F Open R032: Sharapova-Ka Pliskova: 62 61
__Sharapova: SET1:+1.13, SET2:+1.86
Ka.Pliskova: SET1:+0.00, SET2:+0.00


2018 US Open R032: Sharapova-Ostapenko: 63 62
Sharapova: SET1:+0.56, SET2:+0.63
Ostapenko: SET1:-0.67, SET2:+0.50


2019 AOpen R032: Sharapova-Wozniacki: 64 46 63
Sharapova: SET1:+1.50, SET2, SET3:+1.33
Wozniacki: SET1:+0.60, SET2, SET3:+0.67
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,876 Posts
2017 US Open R128: Sharapova-Halep: 64 46 63
Sharapova: SET1:+1.50, SET2, SET3:+1.44
____Halep: SET1:+1.10, SET2, SET3:+0.89


2018 F Open R032: Sharapova-Ka Pliskova: 62 61
__Sharapova: SET1:+1.13, SET2:+1.86
Ka.Pliskova: SET1:+0.00, SET2:+0.00


2018 US Open R032: Sharapova-Ostapenko: 63 62
Sharapova: SET1:+0.56, SET2:+0.63
Ostapenko: SET1:-0.67, SET2:+0.50


2019 AOpen R032: Sharapova-Wozniacki: 64 46 63
Sharapova: SET1:+1.50, SET2, SET3:+1.33
Wozniacki: SET1:+0.60, SET2, SET3:+0.67
The question is: what is her best win since coming back? Not everything is about AM, you know?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
926 Posts
This thread was clearly started just to hate on her again. :eek:h:

But I'm gonna do best/most important wins for all three (Serena, Azarenka, Maria) since coming back:

Serena: Pliskova at US Open...girl beat her before at USO '16 and unlike Simona at the AO actually believed that she could beat Serena.
Azarenka: Kerber at Monterrey...girl didn't carry any of the momentum/positive things she had from Miami '18 for over a year and this was the first big win she had since then and she was able to carry that win into some kind of decent-ish form lately. (Has she been amazing since beating Kerber? No. But has she been losing to players outside of the top 30 since then? Also no...now watch her lose to Harmony Tan tomorrow. :hysteric: )
Sharapova: Definitely Halep at the US Open 2017. She needed a big scalp and she hadn't had one just yet, plus she needed to prove to herself that she still had what it takes. Beating Simona there helped her do that.

Honestly, looking at it, and I'm a Serena stan, Serena's had the least really big scalps out of all three of them yet she's the highest ranked. :eek:h: Can't blame her, though, at least girl can actually take advantage of draws and not lose to Siegemund or Parmentier. :hysteric:

However, the most satisfying was to watch her snatch Wozniacki. Ugh I was LIVING for that. :drool:
Serena's best win was over Halep in Melbourne this year. Halep was #1 in the world at the time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,774 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
2017 US Open R128: Sharapova-Halep: 64 46 63
Sharapova: SET1:+1.50, SET2, SET3:+1.44
____Halep: SET1:+1.10, SET2, SET3:+0.89


2018 F Open R032: Sharapova-Ka Pliskova: 62 61
__Sharapova: SET1:+1.13, SET2:+1.86
Ka.Pliskova: SET1:+0.00, SET2:+0.00


2018 US Open R032: Sharapova-Ostapenko: 63 62
Sharapova: SET1:+0.56, SET2:+0.63
Ostapenko: SET1:-0.67, SET2:+0.50


2019 AOpen R032: Sharapova-Wozniacki: 64 46 63
Sharapova: SET1:+1.50, SET2, SET3:+1.33
Wozniacki: SET1:+0.60, SET2, SET3:+0.67
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,253 Posts
The question is: what is her best win since coming back? Not everything is about AM, you know?
Her "best win" is OBVIOUSLY the one over Halep, you know?

And the highest quality match among the mentioned ones is happens to be the same. That's why I showed the numbers, you know?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,876 Posts
Her "best win" is OBVIOUSLY the one over Halep, you know?

And the highest quality match among the mentioned ones is happens to be the same. That's why I showed the numbers, you know?
That's just your opinion. Some people may have a different one. I think her win over Woz was more impressive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,253 Posts
That's just your opinion. Some people may have a different one. I think her win over Woz was more impressive.
Of course you may have whatever opinion you want.
But some people may think that defeating an opponent who played stronger is a better win. (I can think of the Wozniacki match as "better win", only because it was an R32 match in a major, not only R128.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,876 Posts
Of course you may have whatever opinion you want.
But some people may think that defeating an opponent who played stronger is a better win. (I can think of the Wozniacki match as "better win", only because it was an R32 match in a major, not only R128.)
Who played better is also very subjective, some may think it was Halep, others, may think it was Wozniacki.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,253 Posts
Who played better is also very subjective, some may think it was Halep, others, may think it was Wozniacki.
If there are hundred people around, they might have hundred different subjective opinions. The data I gave are more objective, and that's the point in them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,876 Posts
If there are hundred people around, they might have hundred different subjective opinions. The data I gave are more objective, and that's the point in them.
Sorry, I'm not familiar with this data, what does it tell us exactly? You made me curious by just Posting the numbers without further explanation. Is it about ballbashing (I know that AM stands for aggressive margin)?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,253 Posts
Sorry, I'm not familiar with this data, what does it tell us exactly? You made me curious by just Posting the numbers without further explanation. Is it about ballbashing (I know that AM stands for aggressive margin)?
Yes, the AM stands for the "Aggressive Margin" and the /game stands for the /game normalization.

The AM/game data tells us what is the balance of a given player, how many points she produced for herself (with Winners and Forcing Errors on her opponent), and to her opponent (with Unforced Errors) in an average game.
AM= "winners in the wider sense" - "unforced errors"

Of course a good player is expected to produce more points to herself than to her opponent (positive AM). But a typical player around No.100 usually plays around 0 (zero) AM/game level. The Top 10 players are usually playing around +1.00 AM/game level, that means that they produce 1 (one) more winner (and "almost winner") than Unforced Error PER GAME, in large average. If a player can produce 2 more winners and almost winners than unforced errors on average per game (AM/game= +2.00), that usually corresponds to No.3 playing level. It is rather rare that BOTH girls are playing at higher than +2.00 AM/game level at the same time, but when it happens, it suggests a VERY HIGH QUALITY MATCH.

The TF GM people usually try to use the simple W-UE difference to describe the quality of the matches, when they use the "winners" in the narrow sense, meaning only the CLEAR WINNERS, when the opponent cannot touch the ball. But this calculation is FAULTY, because those aggressive balls that can be touched but cannot be well returned are not only the same good as the clear winners, but in certain cases they are even better! So, these points should be added to the winners. This is the correction that the AM makes to the simple W-UE difference, and then gets a better than 95% predicting efficiency of the matches not involving tiebreaks.
 
1 - 20 of 92 Posts
Top