Tennis Forum banner

1 - 20 of 119 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
82,671 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,798 Posts
I don't understand how Sharapova is that low.

Six Slam finals (two titles).
14 PM/P5 finals (seven titles).
16 singles titles in total (only three Internationals).
"Five successive seasons inside the top 4".

2012 YEC finalist and 2012 silver medalist.

How is that not above Osaka, Clijsters and Li at the very minimum?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,717 Posts
Of course Azarenka is above Wozniacki. More slam titles, many more deep runs at slams overall, more P5/PM titles, and quite a few weeks at #1 herself. Woz's amount of weeks at #1 and number of titles won legitimately put her above other two-slam winners like Li and Clijsters, but not Azarenka.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,862 Posts
Prior to even watching it, I guess the question is, which one-slam champion from the decade would replace which two-slam champion, and would any two-slam champion be ranked above Kerber.

Of the one-slam champions, Wozniacki is the leader by a huge margin. Two year-end #1 rankings, another slam final, four more semifinals, a few more quarterfinals, and 20-something titles in the decade. Schiavone, Stosur, and Stephens are the only other players to reach a 2nd grand slam final, but none of them reached #1 and all of them remain in single-digits for title wins.

The 'weakest' resume of a two-slam champions this decade is Osaka (only 5 titles, no slam finals, semifinals, or QFs). She obviously is disadvantaged because her career didn't really start until well into the 2nd half of the decade. Conversely, Clijsters results in the decade are also pretty weak, but she only played 8 majors, so winning 25% of them is....significant. And she won the YEC. So I'd put her just ahead of Osaka.

Muguruza's resume is pretty thin considering she's been playing a full-ish calendar since 2013. Li/Na is only marginally better than Muguruza, frankly, with the same title count and slightly better slam results.

The other two-slam champions of the decade are harder to un-bunch.
Halep won slams on different surfaces and won 19 titles and leads the #1 count among these four for the decade, both by weeks and by year-end count.
Azarenka is the only one who defended a slam title, is second to Halep in the #1 weeks count and year-end count, but 'only' won 17 titles and only one of them off of hard courts.
Kvitova never reached #1, but won 26 singles titles in the decade, and her slam-specialty surface has the shortest season.
Sharapova 'only' won 16 titles this decade, but has the better slam results (4 slam finals, 4 slam SFs).

I think I'd go:

1 - Serena (duh)
2 - Kerber (don't feel super strongly about this)
3 - Halep (also don't feel super strongly about this)
4 - Kvitova
5 - Azarenka
6 - Sharapova (but don't really feel strongly about it either)
7 - Wozniacki
8 - Li/Na
9 - Muguruza
10 - Clijsters
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,862 Posts
OK, now having seen it, I see they're penalizing Sharapova, which doesn't bother me, but I don't know how they put Osaka in there in place of Muguruza. Muguruza has reached the SF of a slam as many times as Osaka has reached the 4th round of a slam.

If you want to make the case that Muguruza had more of the decade to achieve the result, that's fine, but that doesn't seem to be mentioned in any of Osaka's accolades.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82,671 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
My list
1. Serena
2. Halep
3. Wozniacki
4. Kerber
5. Sharapova
6. Kvitova
7. Li
8. Azarenka
9. Clijsters
10. Muguruza
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,761 Posts
Victoria had the potential to be 5+ slam winner... it's so depressing seeing her career trajectory
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,862 Posts
Victoria had the potential to be 5+ slam winner... it's so depressing seeing her career trajectory
I dunno, she only won a single title off of hardcourts (a MM on clay) and there are so many players capable of springing an upset on hardcourts. Her power from her heyday doesn't seem especially exceptional today (even at the time, she wasn't the biggest hitter of the new wave, with Kvitova the standout) and she was never an exceptional mover. The comparison was always to Djokovic but Djokovic was a superior mover even in his earlier, fragile days. And her improvements weren't sustainable changes.

I think she could have won another major, maybe two, had she not gotten pregnant just after the IW-Miami double, but 5+ is a stretch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82,671 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Azarenka achieved much more than Kvitova and Kerber
What? Kerber won two slams against Serena in a final..guest could never...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,768 Posts
I dunno, she only won a single title off of hardcourts (a MM on clay) and there are so many players capable of springing an upset on hardcourts. Her power from her heyday doesn't seem especially exceptional today (even at the time, she wasn't the biggest hitter of the new wave, with Kvitova the standout) and she was never an exceptional mover. The comparison was always to Djokovic but Djokovic was a superior mover even in his earlier, fragile days. And her improvements weren't sustainable changes.

I think she could have won another major, maybe two, had she not gotten pregnant just after the IW-Miami double, but 5+ is a stretch.
Vika's game is not about power. She plays an aggressive baseline game but it's more about taking the ball early and moving her opponent around a lot, working the point. Her game is low risk, yet she aims to dictate play. Also, her return game is so strong, she doesn't even need a particularly consistent serve. She actually had quite a high number of DFs, even when she was no1.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,223 Posts
What? Kerber won two slams against Serena in a final..guest could never...
I see your point, but the Serena of ‘16 and ‘18 was much easier to beat in a slam final than the Serena of ‘12 and ‘13. Also, when Azarenka was in her prime she was hardly ever beaten by Angie. Azarenka also has more titles than Angie overall.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
840 Posts
the people has already spoken on this subject:

1. Agnieszka Radwanska, 6 FFPOTY, 5 SOTY, 1 FFMOT, 1 FFGSMOT

2. Simona Halep 2 FFPOTY, 1 SOTY, 1 FFGSMOT
3. Maria Sharapova, 1 FFPOTY, 1FFMOT, 2FFGSMOT, 5FFSM(iconic)
4. Serena Williams, 4FFDTOTY, 1FFMOT
5. Venus Williams, 3FFDTOTY
6. VIctoria Azarenka, 1FFDTOTY, 1FFMOT, 2FFGSMOT
7. Caroline Wozniacki, 1FFDTOTY, 1FFMOT, 2FFSM
8. Angelique Kerber, 1FFMOT, 1FFGSMOT
9. Petra Kvitova, 1FFMOT
10. Garbine Muguruza, 1FFMOT

sounds about right
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,503 Posts
Kerber is the only female player who won more than two slams and all her slams this decade, this should be Kerber´s decade :), but seriously, this list is evidently wrong, Sharapova 10? Li Na included but Mugu not?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,702 Posts
My list:
  1. Serena
  2. Kerber
  3. Azarenka
  4. Sharapova
  5. Halep
  6. Kvitová
  7. Li Na
  8. Clijsters
  9. Wozniacki
  10. Muguruza
And that's the tea.

Muguruza won more titles than Osaka and reached more GS finals/SFs, so makes no sense to include Osaka over her, if we're strictly speaking about achievements this decade.
 
1 - 20 of 119 Posts
Top