Tennis Forum banner

Who would have won a hypothetical AO 2018 final between Wozniacki and Kerber?

  • Caroline Wozniacki

    Votes: 16 38.1%
  • Angie Kerber

    Votes: 26 61.9%
21 - 40 of 64 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,874 Posts
I think she would have beaten Wozniaki but she overplayed the previous weeks and had a tough draw in AO, anyway, winning AO18 doesn´t mean automatically she would have 4 slams now, I don´t know if her motivation would has been as good in that year´s Wimbledon as it was
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,826 Posts
how does a tired angie handle peak wozniacki CC loopy forehands to her backhand? don't think i watched many of their matches besides stuttgart 15 and doha 18, and the infamous IW match
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,124 Posts
I would never pick Wozniacki in a hypothetical match with almost all the top players simply because if the other player plays their best, they should win most of the time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
948 Posts
For threads like these it should be created a new section in 'General Topics': "Alternative history of tennis".
There are many more finals that might have had a different ending (and/or a different winning player).
I'll say that if Simona would have played the 2018 AO final against Elise Mertens (instead of Wozniacki) she would have won the match in two sets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,015 Posts
Is that why 2 of her 3 slam finals have been close 3 setters that she was close to losing ? Let's calm down on the hype.
She's been in 4 slam finals, won 3 of them, and lost to a servebot version of Serena in 2 tight sets in the fourth. The two tight three-setters were against Serena (needs no introduction) and Pliskova (#1 at the time who had beaten her 2 weeks prior). Angie fought tooth and nail in those matches. That's why I say she is no joke. It's not that she's unbeatable in slam finals, but she is really going to fight until her last breath and make you give everything you have.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,491 Posts
For threads like these it should be created a new section in 'General Topics': "Alternative history of tennis".
There are many more finals that might have had a different ending (and/or a different winning player).
I'll say that if Simona would have played the 2018 AO final against Elise Mertens (instead of Wozniacki) she would have won the match in two sets.
The difference is that Kerber has a MP in her SF.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,015 Posts
Wozniacki was playing some of the best tennis of her career having just won the YEC and went 2-0 against Kerber in 2018, so that's a strange supposition. Also not buying that one of the tour's fittest players was "ruined" by a singular 3-set match on her otherwise easy path to the semis - especially as you point out that she thrashed Keys in the quarters after the match that was meant to ruin her. Her opponent Halep spent more hours on court on her way to playing Kerber - especially a very draining match against Lauren Davis where every point was so physical. I saw Kerber's match against Halep and she was switched on, but Halep was the more aggressive player (as she always is against Kerber) whose greater risks paid off late in the match.
It's actually not strange. Angie usually won their important matches and had an 8-5 h2h record against her when this match was played. Angie was on fire in the beginning of 2018, and Wozniacki was not. What happened afterwards is not relevant to this specific topic.

I didn't say she was ruined "only" by that, so I'm not sure if you read my post or just read what you wanted to read. She had read the final of the Hopman Cup, won Sydney, and then had to get through that super hyped Sharapova match before she played imho the toughest physical match of her life against an on-fire Hsieh. Yes, she had enough energy left to beat her pigeon Keys (who baseballs so much that Angie doesn't have to peak), but she ran out of gas. Just watch the SF again and see Angie struggling to move her legs in the first 5 games and almost falling over at one point in the third set in the middle of a point. I can find you the footage if you'd like. You are rewriting history by saying she was "switched on". Go watch that match again and say that again. I don't understand why you would deny a player the "privilege" of obviously being tired after all that.

And just because Angie was exhausted, that doesn't mean that Simona wasn't! We are not discussing Simona here, so you're bringing up irrelevant things. Yes, Simona was probably quite tired as well, and if I recall correctly she hurt her ankle in R1. None of that has any relevance to this topic though, so I don't understand. You're choosing to focus all of this on the Halep match when the topic is about a final against Wozniacki.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
948 Posts
The difference is that Kerber has a MP in her SF.
So? In their match, into the 2nd set, Wozniacki faced 2 set points that Mertens had before the tie-break [6-3, 7-6]. If Mertens would had won one of those two Set Points, it would have been a deciding set and a possible different ending.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,465 Posts
She's been in 4 slam finals, won 3 of them, and lost to a servebot version of Serena in 2 tight sets in the fourth. The two tight three-setters were against Serena (needs no introduction) and Pliskova (#1 at the time who had beaten her 2 weeks prior). Angie fought tooth and nail in those matches. That's why I say she is no joke. It's not that she's unbeatable in slam finals, but she is really going to fight until her last breath and make you give everything you have.
I already knew what you were going to say, before you even said it. How many slam finals she's won, means nothing when youre considering the CONTEXT of each match. Lmao at Serena being a "servebot". Love how you always say youre such a big fan of Serena, yet here you are, quick to demean her as a "servebot" in defense of Kerber.

The point remains, Kerber in finals is not some lock in to win them, when 2 of the 3 she nearly lost and the 3rd was against a returning Serena who was overweight and rusty. It's not like in any final soon as Angie is there, she's dismissing her opponents with ease, which is inevitably what youre implying when you say "In finals she's no joke". How Kerber is in slam finals, is still up in the air, since she hasn't been in many to begin with. Serena, Graf, Evert, Navratilova didn't develop the aura they have in slams and finals overall based on one or 3 finals, it was based on their overall career. Even in her "grand" year of 2016, she was in numerous finals over all, and failed in all but 3 I believe, getting straight setted in most.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
She's been in 4 slam finals, won 3 of them, and lost to a servebot version of Serena in 2 tight sets in the fourth. The two tight three-setters were against Serena (needs no introduction) and Pliskova (#1 at the time who had beaten her 2 weeks prior). Angie fought tooth and nail in those matches. That's why I say she is no joke. It's not that she's unbeatable in slam finals, but she is really going to fight until her last breath and make you give everything you have.
Pliskova wasn't #1 at the time Kerber beat her in that USO final.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,015 Posts
I already knew what you were going to say, before you even said it. How many slam finals she's won, means nothing when youre considering the CONTEXT of each match. Lmao at Serena being a "servebot". Love how you always say youre such a big fan of Serena, yet here you are, quick to demean her as a "servebot" in defense of Kerber.
What the hell???

Serena was a servebot in the 2016 W final. Go and rewatch the match. She killed it on serve. How is this "defending" Kerber? I don't understandddddddddddddddddd lol

The point remains, Kerber in finals is not some lock in to win them, when 2 of the 3 she nearly lost and the 3rd was against a returning Serena who was overweight and rusty. It's not like in any final soon as Angie is there, she's dismissing her opponents with ease, which is inevitably what youre implying when you say "In finals she's no joke". How Kerber is in slam finals, is still up in the air, since she hasn't been in many to begin with. Serena, Graf, Evert, Navratilova didn't develop the aura they have in slams and finals overall based on one or 3 finals, it was based on their overall career. Even in her "grand" year of 2016, she was in numerous finals over all, and failed in all but 3 I believe, getting straight setted in most.
I never used the word lock. This is all in your imagination. I said she was "no joke".

This entire paragraph is a waste of time because it's an emotional response to something you imagined me saying.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,015 Posts
Pliskova wasn't #1 at the time Kerber beat her in that USO final.
Oops, you're right. She prevented Angie from getting to #1 in Cinci and then took it herself the next year. Sorry lol
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,874 Posts
I never used the word lock. This is all in your imagination. I said she was "no joke".

This entire paragraph is a waste of time because it's an emotional response to something you imagined me saying
.
As per usual. ROFLMAO 🤣 🤣
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,874 Posts
I already knew what you were going to say, before you even said it. How many slam finals she's won, means nothing when youre considering the CONTEXT of each match. Lmao at Serena being a "servebot". Love how you always say youre such a big fan of Serena, yet here you are, quick to demean her as a "servebot" in defense of Kerber.

The point remains, Kerber in finals is not some lock in to win them, when 2 of the 3 she nearly lost and the 3rd was against a returning Serena who was overweight and rusty. It's not like in any final soon as Angie is there, she's dismissing her opponents with ease, which is inevitably what youre implying when you say "In finals she's no joke". How Kerber is in slam finals, is still up in the air, since she hasn't been in many to begin with. Serena, Graf, Evert, Navratilova didn't develop the aura they have in slams and finals overall based on one or 3 finals, it was based on their overall career. Even in her "grand" year of 2016, she was in numerous finals over all, and failed in all but 3 I believe, getting straight setted in most.
The fact that she nearly lost but eventually beat two peaking players in a slam final giving a formidable battle makes her mentally even tougher.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,465 Posts
What the hell???

Serena was a servebot in the 2016 W final. Go and rewatch the match. She killed it on serve. How is this "defending" Kerber? I don't understandddddddddddddddddd lol



I never used the word lock. This is all in your imagination. I said she was "no joke".

This entire paragraph is a waste of time because it's an emotional response to something you imagined me saying.
I know that match very well, and no Serena wasn't a serve bot, She served better and more consistent, than their final in the AUS Open, where she hit 10 doubles, but by no means was she a serve bot, she only serve 65% of her 1st serves in(winning 88%). Serena won that match because she was more consistent and patient off the ground with 26 winners(thats without the 13 aces), and by coming to net(she won 16 out of 22). But I already had this discussion with you here... Angie Kerber, from here? same thread you referred to that Serena as playing at her best to beat Kerber.

Lmao it's my "imagination" now, when that's literally what you implied and said. You said Kerber was no joke, especially at the AUS Open. The question is about if Kerber would have beaten Wozniacki in the final, not "challenged" as you back tracked and said, so the phrase "no joke" takes on a whole new meaning, it's not exactly rocket science. Just stand in your truth.

I'm not even emotional, so miss me with the low Iq psychology analysis. Stick to the topic, instead of trying to either divert or dismiss my response. Either know how to debate, or step aside. I responded to what I saw, just like youre doing right now. Gtfoh Lmao
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,015 Posts
I know that match very well, and no Serena wasn't a serve bot, She served better and more consistent, than their final in the AUS Open, where she hit 10 doubles, but by no means was she a serve bot, she only serve 65% of her 1st serves in(winning 88%). Serena won that match because she was more consistent and patient off the ground with 26 winners(thats without the 13 aces), and by coming to net(she won 16 out of 22). But I already had this discussion with you here... Angie Kerber, from here? same thread you referred to that Serena as playing at her best to beat Kerber.

Lmao it's my "imagination" now, when that's literally what you implied and said. You said Kerber was no joke, especially at the AUS Open. The question is about if Kerber would have beaten Wozniacki in the final, not "challenged" as you back tracked and said, so the phrase "no joke" takes on a whole new meaning, it's not exactly rocket science. Just stand in your truth.

I'm not even emotional, so miss me with the low Iq psychology analysis. Stick to the topic, instead of trying to either divert or dismiss my response. Either know how to debate, or step aside. I responded to what I saw, just like youre doing right now. Gtfoh Lmao
Fun fact: it is impossible to "literally" imply something.

Your entire emotional and overly aggressive response is based on your insinuations that I "implied" Kerber was a lock in slam finals, which I a) never said, and b) said nothing that remotely resembles that. "No joke" is not the same as a lock.

You are getting far too aggressive and off-topic. The fact that I'm not "debating" what you imagine me saying doesn't mean that I don't know how to debate. It means that I don't want to debate an imaginary topic on a view that I don't hold. What am I supposed to do here to satisfy your demands - provide evidence to support a point that I have already said that I don't believe in just because you imagine me believing in it? No thanks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ed Hominan
21 - 40 of 64 Posts
Top