Tennis Forum banner

41 - 58 of 58 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
843 Posts
I’ve always thought Giorgi could do this with a new coach who taught her a little consistency.
I would go along with this. She came so close to beating Serena Williams in the quarter-final at Wimbledon in 2018 (and probably should have), and her semi-final opponent would have been Julia Goerges, who had never beaten Giorgi to that time. The final against Kerber would, of course, have been a different story. Even though Angie has beaten Camila all five times that they've met, they've all been good matches, and I think that Wimbledon final would have been another close one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
996 Posts
when she reaches her twenties, one player who could is coco gauff.

i personally don't think she will be a major player in her teens,( i don't think she's capable of winning 7 matches in a row at the moment) but she's already beaten top tenners, and i would assume in time, injury permitting, she should be a solid top ten player.
i can see her making runs fairly deep at slams, without getting to a final for a number of years, but not have success in those events until later in her career.

aryna is another one. she's basically done nothing in slams so far in her career, but she is very capable of running hot and demolishing everyone in her path. i think she showed at doha before the virus hit, what she is capable of.
i could see her winning a few slams later in her career.

of course nothing is certain at the moment, this potentially long extended break may effect players in different ways, some in a good way, some in a bad way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,716 Posts
Discussion Starter #43
Myskina was the first player to do this. She was a perennial top ten player who was not known for winning big titles. She had the hardest draw at the 2004 French Open and overcame it to win the slam.
Wait, what? Nastia is nowhere near an apt comparison. She was 22 when she won the French. She reached the top 10 for the first time the year before.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,911 Posts
I actually thought of Vekic, too. If she can steady her ship and get into the top 10 for like 2-3 years where she's establishing a solid career and then maturing into a slam winner and #1? It's not totally outside the realm of possibility.
It's not but Vekic was making WTA finals at 16 and has basically been in the Top 100 or thereabouts since she was 17. At that age, Kerber was slinging it out on ITFs.

Qiang Wang?

She was an ITF player till 2015 and only entered top 50 in 2017 at the age of 25. Of course shes slumping now, but she can trouble anyone when she cares.
You think Wang is gonna win a Slam?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,336 Posts
But in 2012, the last year with a group ot top players performing consistently well, Kerber was already a threat. I think by the grass season she was the player with the most wins of the year, and she beat everyone, Petra, Pova, Serena, Li (only time, but she beat her), Clijsters, Venus. And she pushed Azarenka very close in their matches, so it's not like she is someone that suddenly appeared out of nowhere at 27 and started winning GS. She made the USO SF at 23, was top 5 in 2012. She's never been a journey woman. I agree with Bertens, and maybe Konta too, but some of the players mentioned here are hard to figure out why are being brought up. And Giorgi ? You never know, but how does she even remotely fits the Kerber mold ? so far she's been a wild basher with no ability whatsoever to adapt to any opponent or read matches. She's never been a threat except in one of her 4-5 random matches per season when she's not hitting the stands.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
833 Posts
It's not but Vekic was making WTA finals at 16 and has basically been in the Top 100 or thereabouts since she was 17. At that age, Kerber was slinging it out on ITFs.



You think Wang is gonna win a Slam?
Well that is kinda the point... we try to predict the unpredictable here
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,809 Posts
Johanna Konta will not win a slam because of the knee problem she has had for the last 15 months. She was in trouble in her last match against Bouzkova having played 5 matches in a week..Kiki Bertens has only 1 semi final and 1 quarter final in Grand Slams. This is worse than Konta with 6 and doesn't match Kerber at the same stage of her career. As for Camila Giorgi she's just up for the outstanding performance now and again. There was the Serena match in 2018. Back in 2013 when Marion Bartoli won Wimbledon she said there was only 2 matches she played that she felt could have gone either way. One being the 3rd round match against Giorgi. The other was the quarter final against Sloane Stephens..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,716 Posts
Discussion Starter #51
Im just saying her career is taking a similar route to Kerber.
But hey, why not, anything can happen on WTA tour.
I can see this if Qiang can build a couple of years in the top 10. I think the idea that a player today isn't a multiple slam contender is actually a fit for this convo. Remember, even though Angie reached 2 SFs in a four-slam stretch in 2012/13, no one really championed that she'd win ONE slam until she actually did it.

Johanna Konta will not win a slam because of the knee problem she has had for the last 15 months. She was in trouble in her last match against Bouzkova having played 5 matches in a week..Kiki Bertens has only 1 semi final and 1 quarter final in Grand Slams. This is worse than Konta with 6 and doesn't match Kerber at the same stage of her career. As for Camila Giorgi she's just up for the outstanding performance now and again. There was the Serena match in 2018. Back in 2013 when Marion Bartoli won Wimbledon she said there was only 2 matches she played that she felt could have gone either way. One being the 3rd round match against Giorgi. The other was the quarter final against Sloane Stephens..
Jesus, it's not just about what they've achieved at the slams at similar points of their careers. Bertens' narrative is a close to Angie's as you're going to find among the current crop of players. What she hasn't achieved at the slams, she's certainly done at the tour-level events. She's got 10 titles including a couple of Tier Is. Angie won 7 titles before winning Australia and has yet to win a Tier I. In terms of the narrative around their (pre-slam) careers, it couldn't be clearer. The timing of achievements might not line up, but parallels are clear—even if it's unlikely to happen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,911 Posts
I can see this if Qiang can build a couple of years in the top 10. I think the idea that a player today isn't a multiple slam contender is actually a fit for this convo. Remember, even though Angie reached 2 SFs in a four-slam stretch in 2012/13, no one really championed that she'd win ONE slam until she actually did it.
That is true but also, Kerber was far more present on tour compared to many of the players bandied about in this thread. In 2015, Kerber was sent out of 3 Slams in R3 by Muguruza and Azarenka (elite players who were either 2x GS winners at the time or went on to become one). She lost all those matches in 3 sets. Kerber's issue was that she played these amazing, lengthy matches against tough opposition at Slams and always came up short mentally. Then all of a sudden, she didn't. Meanwhile, other players are consistently losing early to scrubs at Slams.

I don't think it's hard to win 2 slams in this era, but I feel you're more likely to win them early in your career than take the Kerber route of a late bloomer (Vika, Kvitova, Muguruza, Osaka all reached 2 slams before they turned 25—I think Kenin will follow too). Even someone like Bertens makes no sense as a Kerber comparison bc she's only made 2 GS QFs in her whole career. She also doesn't make sense as a comparison to Bartoli or Pennetta because Bartoli had made a Slam F previously, and Pennetta had made the QF os USO five of the six times she played there before she won it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,809 Posts
I can see this if Qiang can build a couple of years in the top 10. I think the idea that a player today isn't a multiple slam contender is actually a fit for this convo. Remember, even though Angie reached 2 SFs in a four-slam stretch in 2012/13, no one really championed that she'd win ONE slam until she actually did it.



Jesus, it's not just about what they've achieved at the slams at similar points of their careers. Bertens' narrative is a close to Angie's as you're going to find among the current crop of players. What she hasn't achieved at the slams, she's certainly done at the tour-level events. She's got 10 titles including a couple of Tier Is. Angie won 7 titles before winning Australia and has yet to win a Tier I. In terms of the narrative around their (pre-slam) careers, it couldn't be clearer. The timing of achievements might not line up, but parallels are clear—even if it's unlikely to happen.
Well Bertens may have the more tier 1's but she'll never get a Grand Slam like Kerber. And neither will Jo Konta for that matter. Bertens is now 28 and a quarter years old and has 1 Grand Slam semi final and 1 Grand Slam quarter final whereas at a similar age Kerber had one Grand Slam and 2 quarter finals and 2 semi finals. There might be more parallels with Svitolina but I think Svitolina has the better career at the age of 25 and a half years than Kerber.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,983 Posts
Of the current players, Bertens is the closest comparison I can think of even if she's 'bloomed' a little later than Kerber did. Also comparable due to the physical transformation she went through before breaking through that kind of mirrors the one Kerber did (at the suggestion of Petkovic, if I remember correctly).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,539 Posts
That is true but also, Kerber was far more present on tour compared to many of the players bandied about in this thread. In 2015, Kerber was sent out of 3 Slams in R3 by Muguruza and Azarenka (elite players who were either 2x GS winners at the time or went on to become one). She lost all those matches in 3 sets. Kerber's issue was that she played these amazing, lengthy matches against tough opposition at Slams and always came up short mentally. Then all of a sudden, she didn't. Meanwhile, other players are consistently losing early to scrubs at Slams.

I don't think it's hard to win 2 slams in this era, but I feel you're more likely to win them early in your career than take the Kerber route of a late bloomer (Vika, Kvitova, Muguruza, Osaka all reached 2 slams before they turned 25—I think Kenin will follow too). Even someone like Bertens makes no sense as a Kerber comparison bc she's only made 2 GS QFs in her whole career. She also doesn't make sense as a comparison to Bartoli or Pennetta because Bartoli had made a Slam F previously, and Pennetta had made the QF os USO five of the six times she played there before she won it.
Yup, every player has her own path. There is just no perfect example, one can easily open a thread like this with Halep


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,716 Posts
Discussion Starter #57
That is true but also, Kerber was far more present on tour compared to many of the players bandied about in this thread. In 2015, Kerber was sent out of 3 Slams in R3 by Muguruza and Azarenka (elite players who were either 2x GS winners at the time or went on to become one). She lost all those matches in 3 sets. Kerber's issue was that she played these amazing, lengthy matches against tough opposition at Slams and always came up short mentally. Then all of a sudden, she didn't. Meanwhile, other players are consistently losing early to scrubs at Slams.

I don't think it's hard to win 2 slams in this era, but I feel you're more likely to win them early in your career than take the Kerber route of a late bloomer (Vika, Kvitova, Muguruza, Osaka all reached 2 slams before they turned 25—I think Kenin will follow too). Even someone like Bertens makes no sense as a Kerber comparison bc she's only made 2 GS QFs in her whole career. She also doesn't make sense as a comparison to Bartoli or Pennetta because Bartoli had made a Slam F previously, and Pennetta had made the QF os USO five of the six times she played there before she won it.
I think what makes Bertens relevant in this specific convo is that she's actually won other big titles: Cincy and Madrid. Personally, I think those wins make her a contender in the same way as making a slam QF might.

Obviously, there are many players who go on to win a slam (surprising many in the process), but I think what we can all agree on is that Angie came out of nowhere to suddenly become a player we're considering in the top 20 of history. I think that's what makes her career unique. Before 2016, she was considered this tough, talented player who drags you into exciting, entertaining matches. But #1 and three-slam champion? No one thought that.

I know someone else brought up Halep here, but I think by the time she won her slam, we were all begging her, too. In 2013, when she had that amazing year, she was 22-23, that's not a surprising time to make your mark on the tour. Obviously, the major difference is the expectation. She all expected Simona to bag a slam. No on had that expectation on Angie.
 
41 - 58 of 58 Posts
Top