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%
41 - 60 of 64 Posts

Registered
Joined
3,481 Posts
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.
Fun fact: I dont care, you know/knew what I meant, when I said it. Moving on.

All youre doing, by calling my response "Too Aggressive" is still trying, key word TRYING to undermine my response. Instead of discussing the topic at hand. I havent attacked you at all, yet youre considering my responses to be "emotional" and "aggressive" yet youre the one steadily PERSONALLY coming for me. Make that, make sense.

So are you going to talk tennis/topic at hand, or just continue to give low budget psycho-analysis ?

Youre literally on a forum, within a discussion, about an imaginary topic. Lmao
 

Registered
Joined
931 Posts
No one can stop Wozniacki to win AO2018.
Even Fett or anybody.
It was her time to shine.

AO2018 final between Woz and Angie was

 

Registered
Joined
1,202 Posts
meh very over hypotheticals. Of course Angie could have won but she was on her last legs against Halep so most likely wouldn't have given Wozniacki was serving great and getting everything back in that tournament.
 

Registered
Joined
237 Posts
meh very over hypotheticals. Of course Angie could have won but she was on her last legs against Halep so most likely wouldn't have given Wozniacki was serving great and getting everything back in that tournament.
If Kerber played Halep in the Final she could've won but they met in a semi
 

Registered
Joined
1,316 Posts
Hypothetically yes she could've, but she probably would've been exhausted and lost so I try not to think about it. Especially since she won Wimbledon later in the year making this AO less painful.
 

Registered
Joined
601 Posts
Discussion Starter #47
meh very over hypotheticals. Of course Angie could have won but she was on her last legs against Halep so most likely wouldn't have given Wozniacki was serving great and getting everything back in that tournament.
There's nothing wrong with looking back on history and imagining what could have been. I'm sure all of us on this forum have done that a few time in our lives.
 

Registered
Joined
4,192 Posts
I always thought the 2018 AO would be the most heartbreaking moment of Angie's career (yes, worse than the Olympics), but in hindsight it was a blessing - it made her hungrier for clay and Wimbledon.
That's interesting. Since the Hopman Cup I kind of in a way always knew, as always knew is possible in the WTA, that she'd win Wimbledon that year. I know, it's not the most obvious result, but I've never been so sure of something that big in women's tennis for quite a while. So the AO defeat didn't feel that bad.
 

Registered
Joined
1,136 Posts
Who cares? Halep was much better than Kerber but was dealing with injury and exhaustion. This is how Angie kept coming back, because Halep was dominating the points.

Halep deserved the tournament, then Kerber. This is right. Wozniacki played at Singapore very well.
 

Registered
Joined
2,712 Posts
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.
The 8-5 record isn't that important cos:
1) it's not like it's an 8-0 record
2) Wozniacki went on to have the better year and beat Kerber twice
3) H2H's turn around very quickly, like Federer in his mid-30's suddenly beating Nadal 6 times consecutively, and 7 times in 8 matches, having been down as much as 23-10 to Nadal at a point.

Regardless of late runs at the Hopman Cup (often a low-intensity event) and Sydney, again it's unconvincing that one of the tour's fittest players was ruined by such a run. If that run is enough to "ruin" Kerber, maybe women truly are physically incapable of playing 5-set tennis. Spare a thought for when Nadal would sweep entire clay seasons and still win Roland Garros, or when each of the Big 3 have swept the US Open Series undefeated. I don't know why you're talking of "super hyped" match against Sharapova. What's the relevance of the hype. Sharapova was absolutely garbage and Kerber won with ease in an hour. This is supposed to be part of what "ruined" her? I did watch the Halep-Kerber match and didn't detect what you're talking about. Both players were exhausted late in the match playing a very physical match in hot conditions, but there was nothing odd about Kerber early on. It's not irrelevant to bring up Halep's or Wozniacki's excuses for tiredness when pointing out any Kerber claims should be irrelevant. It's the business end of a slam and except you're Serena who often moves through draws with ease, you're going to be tired and mentally strained and carrying physical niggles and even injuries at that stage. It shouldn't even be brought up when excusing late tournament defeats cos it comes with the territory.
 

Registered
Joined
5,029 Posts
The 8-5 record isn't that important cos:
1) it's not like it's an 8-0 record
2) Wozniacki went on to have the better year and beat Kerber twice
3) H2H's turn around very quickly, like Federer in his mid-30's suddenly beating Nadal 6 times consecutively, and 7 times in 8 matches, having been down as much as 23-10 to Nadal at a point.
You do realise Angelique got to the RG QF, won Wmbledon and finished the year #2, right? How did Caroline have the better year?

Regardless of late runs at the Hopman Cup (often a low-intensity event) and Sydney, again it's unconvincing that one of the tour's fittest players was ruined by such a run. If that run is enough to "ruin" Kerber, maybe women truly are physically incapable of playing 5-set tennis. Spare a thought for when Nadal would sweep entire clay seasons and still win Roland Garros, or when each of the Big 3 have swept the US Open Series undefeated. I don't know why you're talking of "super hyped" match against Sharapova. What's the relevance of the hype. Sharapova was absolutely garbage and Kerber won with ease in an hour. This is supposed to be part of what "ruined" her? I did watch the Halep-Kerber match and didn't detect what you're talking about. Both players were exhausted late in the match playing a very physical match in hot conditions, but there was nothing odd about Kerber early on. It's not irrelevant to bring up Halep's or Wozniacki's excuses for tiredness when pointing out any Kerber claims should be irrelevant. It's the business end of a slam and except you're Serena who often moves through draws with ease, you're going to be tired and mentally strained and carrying physical niggles and even injuries at that stage. It shouldn't even be brought up when excusing late tournament defeats cos it comes with the territory.
If you watch that match and tell me the first set was "nothing odd", I really guess we aren't watching the same sport.

I didn't "excuse" anything. Seriously...tf?

We are talking about who would win a hypothetical matchup between Caroline and Angelique in the AO F and explaining why we hold each view.

It's starting to feel like every time I post on TF you just come and try to argue to the contrary, even when it involves bringing in side arguments about related topics like the Halep SF match.
 

Registered
Joined
31,683 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.
What is so strange about it when this is literally what you posted on the day of the SF?

Kerber for me was a sure bet to beat Wozniacki. Halep doesn't match up very well with Wozniacki. Would be utterly disgusting for Wozniacki to win this tournament.
I guess hindsight bias plays a bigger role here. Yes, Wozniacki won their next two matches but how telling is that really? They played two weeks after the final in Doha and Woz came there with all her new gained confidence as a slam champion and World No. 1. The second match Kerber had a match point that Woz saved after a long rally. One bad bounce in that rally and suddenly Angie's chances drastically increase for a hypothetical match in January?

I'm definitely not saying Angie would've won, I'm not really believing it myself after having seen how tired she was from playing four weeks non-stop after a very intense and grueling off-season preparation. Just find it strange you're ruling it out completely.
 

Banned
Joined
2,731 Posts
Wozniacki 100%.

Kerber is great at playing heaviy hitters but she has trouble with players with good movement and defense. Her game evolved alongside the big babe tennis. That's why she loses to Sloane, lost to Halep, lost to Andreescu and come to think of it, loses to Azarenka (who has great movement and net skills). She would have lost the final for sure.
 

Registered
Joined
2,712 Posts
You do realise Angelique got to the RG QF, won Wmbledon and finished the year #2, right? How did Caroline have the better year?
Fair enough. Still lost twice to Wozniacki in 2018 though.

If you watch that match and tell me the first set was "nothing odd", I really guess we aren't watching the same sport.

I didn't "excuse" anything. Seriously...tf?

We are talking about who would win a hypothetical matchup between Caroline and Angelique in the AO F and explaining why we hold each view.

It's starting to feel like every time I post on TF you just come and try to argue to the contrary, even when it involves bringing in side arguments about related topics like the Halep SF match.
If by "odd" you mean she started poorly, sure. She was out of sorts. If you mean this was because she was somehow out on her feet, then I disagree. I didn't think she looked much different at the start against Halep than she did in the first set against Hsieh. She was playing the Halep match after a demolition of Keys with all-but-one of her 5 matches in straight sets, with rest days inbetween matches. Considering she almost beat Halep deep in the 3rd set of a very gruelling, physical match, I don't believe she was exhausted in the 1st set.
I'm aware of what we're talking about. I'm pointing out that the result of a Wozniacki-Kerber match wouldn't have been decided by Kerber being ruined by her exertions in a good run of form.

Implying I'm just being contrarian for the sake of it is making it out like I have some personal grievance against you or something. I disagreed with your comment and in the spirit of a sports discussion forum, stated my disagreement. It's not personal and I'm not sure why you would imply it is.
 

Registered
Joined
2,712 Posts
What is so strange about it when this is literally what you posted on the day of the SF?
That was a jinxing comment cos I had an intense dislike of Wozniacki and was a big fan of Halep. I thought Halep was more likely to fold against Wozniacki than Kerber would. As it happened, Halep played really well and gave everything but Wozniacki was impressively resilient. I don't believe Kerber in hindsight would have won for the simple reason I don't believe she would have played any better than Halep did in that final.
 

Registered
Joined
201 Posts
Of course, she could have won. She had the experience of winning those big matches and the mental edge in the H2H at that point in time.

It would have also been a harder opponent, on paper, than Halep.

Whether she would have or not is a different story...
 

Banned
Joined
7,874 Posts
That was a jinxing comment cos I had an intense dislike of Wozniacki and was a big fan of Halep. I thought Halep was more likely to fold against Wozniacki than Kerber would. As it happened, Halep played really well and gave everything but Wozniacki was impressively resilient. I don't believe Kerber in hindsight would have won for the simple reason I don't believe she would have played any better than Halep did in that final.
LOL!!!!! 馃ぃ 馃ぃ
 

Registered
Joined
3,252 Posts
I've seen like 3 Halep-Kerber matches, including that Australian Open, and always found Halep the aggressor. It's the same dynamic when Halep plays Wozniacki or Svitolina (2 players she often lost to) and she can't hit through them and they outmaneuver her. It's not just a question of who hit more winners. You can hit more winners than your opponent while counter-punching. That's extremely common if you watch Djokovic's matches for example. It's about the tactical approach and offensive mindset.
I'm not sure which of these other 9 matches are the 2 you are referring to, but I would guess you watched something like Cincinnati or Singapore in 2016 where Simona was much more aggressive, but self-destructed.

However, it鈥檚 absolutely fair to say that there were AT LEAST 3 matches where Angie was the more aggressive player overall, especially in their Fed Cup match on clay and in general on grass where Angie's flat shots are much more effective and not as easy to defend for Simona with her topspin-gamestyle. Halep's shots don't bother Kerber as much there, because they don't bounce as high and Kerber is also much more willing to pull the trigger (FTDL) when a good opportunity arises. I recommend you watch some highlights of these matches 馃槈

Admittedly, Simona usually plays with more consistent depth and 鈥渟eems鈥 to be in control of many rallies, but that does not automatically equal a high level of aggression. She does not have the huge consistent killer shot - except the occasional BDTL - when both players are in kinda neutral position.

In the end, it's up to oneself how to define aggressiveness. Imo, dictating the rallies without going for the big winner until the field has really opened up can be just as aggressive as counterpunching where you wait for the right opportunity to go all in "out of the blue". I don't think that there is much between Angie and Simona in this regard taking ALL of their matches into account. As I said, the total W/UE stats in their H2H are a good reflection in this case.

Wozniacki and Svitolina don鈥檛 have the offensive qualities that Simona and Angie have. Simona has ALWAYS outwinnered Woz - often by a big margin - for a reason (even when she lost 0-6 2-6 :lol: ) Caroline鈥檚 insane defensive skills usually drove her crazy though which is why she produced so many more errors in their matches. One must also admit that Elina played some matches where she was at least as aggressive as Simona. Not Wimbledon 2019 of course :lol:
 

Registered
Joined
7,674 Posts
I am not really sure about this picture of a totally exhausted Kerber that was going to fold like a cheap tent. A Grand Slam final is a totally different scenario, and Kerber had already won two, while Woz had lost her two previous finals. It's hypotheticals, like the thread itself, but I am sure Kerber is the one who would have handled the situation better and raised her level. Halep might have been tired in the final, but she was also very negative, and I think that's the main reason why she lost the match when she was in a very good position to win it.


Wozniacki 100%.

Kerber is great at playing heaviy hitters but she has trouble with players with good movement and defense. Her game evolved alongside the big babe tennis. That's why she loses to Sloane, lost to Halep, lost to Andreescu and come to think of it, loses to Azarenka (who has great movement and net skills). She would have lost the final for sure.
Vika has not great movement, and the reasons why Kerber loses to Stephens are Stephens' heavy top spin and high bouncing CC shots, especially off her FH side, which take Kerber out of the court and have nothing to do with the reasons she loses to Azarenka, who is a totally different kind of player from Stephens or Andreescu. And the thing about her tennis evolving with "big babe tennis" is nonsense. It's actually players that could play with controlled agression and finish points at the net, like Azarenka or Muguruza who have given Kerber some of the biggest trouble.
 

Registered
Joined
1,818 Posts
Wozniacki had three advantages going into the AO final.

(1) She was playing a tired opponent.

(2) She was playing an opponent who had never won a grand slam final.

(3) She was playing an opponent who had leads in grand slam finals and lost.

With Kerber, the only advantage was number one. I would put my money on Angie.

Everything had to break just right for Wozniacki to get over the line.

An imploding Jana Fett; an unranked, weak semifinal opponent (Mertens); and a tired and negative Simona Halep in the final.
One of the dumbest & most ignorant posts I've seen on this platform. Stay pressed, darling
 
41 - 60 of 64 Posts
Top