Tennis Forum banner

1 - 20 of 42 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
658 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I don't know too much about her but I was wondering whether her wimbledon 1999 result was a fluke or is she just an unlucky player who was skilled but injuries hampered her tennis career?

Also what are her chances of getting back into the top 20?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,126 Posts
Qual 1 A Stevenson(1) - S Cacic 6-3 7-5
Qual 2 A Stevenson(1) - A Ellwood 6-3 6-4
Qual 3 A Stevenson(1) - H Inoue 6-1 6-4
1 A Stevenson-Q - A Frazier 6-1 3-6 6-3
2 A Stevenson-Q - O Barabanschikova 6-2 6-7(3) 6-3
3 A Stevenson-Q - J Halard-Decugis(11) 6-3 6-3
4 A Stevenson-Q - L Raymond 2-6 7-6(8) 6-1
QF A Stevenson-Q - J Dokic-Q 6-3 1-6 6-3
SF L Davenport(3) - A Stevenson-Q 6-1 6-1


I don't think it was a fluke because while she struggled
nearly two years after, things got better towards the
end of 01'. 02' was definitely her best year ending the
year at 18.

Since, injury has hampered her and it's been a struggle for her
to get back into shape. She looked very well physically in 06'.




If she can get into better shape, she does
have the game IMO to get back atleast into
the top 30.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,786 Posts
21 tries at Grand Slams: 1 semifinal, 4 second round finishes, 16 first round losses.
Go figure.
 
Joined
·
22,716 Posts
Qual 1 A Stevenson(1) - S Cacic 6-3 7-5
Qual 2 A Stevenson(1) - A Ellwood 6-3 6-4
Qual 3 A Stevenson(1) - H Inoue 6-1 6-4
1 A Stevenson-Q - A Frazier 6-1 3-6 6-3
2 A Stevenson-Q - O Barabanschikova 6-2 6-7(3) 6-3
3 A Stevenson-Q - J Halard-Decugis(11) 6-3 6-3
4 A Stevenson-Q - L Raymond 2-6 7-6(8) 6-1
QF A Stevenson-Q - J Dokic-Q 6-3 1-6 6-3
SF L Davenport(3) - A Stevenson-Q 6-1 6-1
:drool:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
14,999 Posts
I don't know too much about her but I was wondering whether her wimbledon 1999 result was a fluke or is she just an unlucky player who was skilled but injuries hampered her tennis career?

Also what are her chances of getting back into the top 20?
no chance in hell. WTA must be in a seriously stage if her retirementfest leads her back to top 20 :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,058 Posts
no it wasn't a fluke. she got a kind draw there's no deny - especially given that Dokic took out all the top seeds in the draw and then was buggered by the time she got to Stevenson. But still she played great tennis and has she's beaten Capriati when she was highly ranked and for a while there a top 20ish player. She got too much attention over her father and her annoying mother's antics (and of course her own antics) and then it got to her.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
337 Posts
Alex, a fluke? Let's look at the evidence. Although reputed to be a very sweet girl, she is currently a bottom feeder in tennis. It is difficult to see flukes since the WTA water gets very murky once you get past the top 50. Flukes are said to be voracious predators and feed on smaller fishes. Flukes are flatten on one side allowing them to be well hidden as bottom dwellers. The very large flukes, such as Alex, are called doormats. Like all doormats Alex is probably fun to play as she is not currently a threat to beat the better players or break into the top 100. What is great about Alex is her good looks and her personality, her delusions of greatness notwithstanding. Yes, Alex's wimbledon run was a fluke and Alex is a flake, albiet a very sweet flake, IMHO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,451 Posts
Of course, she had an easy draw. Playing another qualifier in a Grand Slam quarter-final. :tape:
 

·
Team WTAworld, Senior Member
Joined
·
15,169 Posts
Alex :eek:
 

·
King
Joined
·
28,854 Posts
She was more talented than some people give her credit for but getting to the semi's of Wimbledon was a bit of a fluke considering how badly she's done in other slams
 

·
La Divina Assoluta
Joined
·
11,309 Posts
She was more talented than some people give her credit for but getting to the semi's of Wimbledon was a bit of a fluke considering how badly she's done in other slams
she was indeed quite talented. She beat Capriati 6-1 6-1 in linz 2002 and beat Myskina a round earlier......
 

·
The only girl in the world.
Joined
·
20,969 Posts
She was in the semis of Wimbledon? Gosh I didn't know :eek: Lol really, I'd prefer not to know that fact :help:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,400 Posts
of course it was a fluke. i mean since then she hasnt even managed that number of consecutive matches without retiring
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,789 Posts
Well, I don't think it's a fluke because honestly her draw was really easy and I'm not surprised she beat the players she did to get there. She also did really well in '02 so it's possible given the right draw she could have gone far in another major.

Although, if she had a different draw, she probably would never have made the semifinals of Wimbledon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,419 Posts
No it was not a fluke. You don't make the semifinals of a slam after playing three rounds of qualifying and 5 matches in the main draw on luck alone. Granted she didn't have a difficult draw, but she did win all of the matches needed to reach the semifinals.

Maybe if she received a series of walkovers and retirements from her opponents, it would've been considered a fluke.
 
1 - 20 of 42 Posts
Top