Tennis Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
446 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Why does Kiki Bertens fail in Slams?

Since the French Open semifinal in 2016, only a 2018 Wimbledon quarterfinal she achieved... She won Cincy and Madrid, in 2018 and 2019 respectively! Also managed to win random Premiers Charleston and St Petersburg in 2018-2019.

She's currently world's No 5.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,282 Posts
For one thing, she needs to stop vulturing tournaments right before slams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lima isai

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,505 Posts
Because she’s always failed in slams?

The only half decent run was that RG SF that one year.

She’s going to have a better chance in the next year or so because of ranking, down to her to take advantage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,307 Posts
Kiki herself has admitted she can win from anyone but also lose to anyone on a bad day. And that way she is very dependent on 'form of the week' and that week hasn't coincided with many Slams yet.

There also used to be problems with nerves but that is no longer a big issue so that can't be the reason.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115,471 Posts
She's always been mentally soft. I'm not surprised the extra pressure of a major gets to her
I'm more surprised by Svitolina. She had a real chance here
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,143 Posts
Bertens's general path since she first rose in 2016 has been a general cycle of getting good results when people don't expect them her, causing people to develop expectations for her, flopping when their are expectations on her, causing expectations of her to fall, then starting the cycle over getting good results when their aren't expectations on her.

She has had two good slam results. First an SF at RG in 2016, when people did see her as an elite player yet and there were no expectations of her. Since then people have seen her an elite clay courter and RG contender and she has not been able to perform, despite doing well in lead up events.

At Wimbledon last year, she was perceived as a soft seed because she was supposedly clay courter who was not good on grass and she was able to make it to the quarterfinals. Of course, after making the QFs last year and getting to the SFs of Eastbourne this year she was perceived as a contender on grass and there were expectations on her, so she failed.

Her win in Cincinnati last years was also a surprise to most as she was not perceived as an elite player on hard, but after the win that changed and there was talk about her as a contender of the US Open, so naturally she lost early there (and at the AO as well).

This has been a pretty consistent pattern with her for the last three years. We will see if she is able to eventually overcome it, but for now it looks like her only chance to win a slam is to come in on a 5 match losing streak. :eek:h:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,118 Posts
Because she can't win 7 matches in a row.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,762 Posts
She's like Sasha Zverev...

only less girly :eek:h:

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
323 Posts
Bertens's general path since she first rose in 2016 has been a general cycle of getting good results when people don't expect them her, causing people to develop expectations for her, flopping when their are expectations on her, causing expectations of her to fall, then starting the cycle over getting good results when their aren't expectations on her.

She has had two good slam results. First an SF at RG in 2016, when people did see her as an elite player yet and there were no expectations of her. Since then people have seen her an elite clay courter and RG contender and she has not been able to perform, despite doing well in lead up events.

At Wimbledon last year, she was perceived as a soft seed because she was supposedly clay courter who was not good on grass and she was able to make it to the quarterfinals. Of course, after making the QFs last year and getting to the SFs of Eastbourne this year she was perceived as a contender on grass and there were expectations on her, so she failed.

Her win in Cincinnati last years was also a surprise to most as she was not perceived as an elite player on hard, but after the win that changed and there was talk about her as a contender of the US Open, so naturally she lost early there (and at the AO as well).

This has been a pretty consistent pattern with her for the last three years. We will see if she is able to eventually overcome it, but for now it looks like her only chance to win a slam is to come in on a 5 match losing streak. :eek:h:
Of course, very superficially, a final in 's-Hertogenbosch and the semi-final in Eastbourne could lead to expectations that she would do well at Wimbledon. But did you actually watch any of these matches? They were really not that good (except maybe the 's-Hertogenbosch final until she fell at the beginning of the second set and the match against Putintseva in Eastbourne), all against fairly weak opponents (and Sabalenka, who misfired at crucial points). So, even considering her relatively soft draw at Wimbledon, the chances were small that she would repeat her QF from the year before.

So, of course, she has to do better at slams (she will be the first to say that her results in that department have so far been disappointing), but otherwise this year has been quite a good year for her. In Madrid she withstood the pressure of defending her final points by winning the tournament. A second WTA Finals are within reach. And the fight for the number 3 spot is still very much on for the next two months with Halep and Osaka having so many points to defend.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,029 Posts
Kiki herself has admitted she can win from anyone but also lose to anyone on a bad day. And that way she is very dependent on 'form of the week' and that week hasn't coincided with many Slams yet.

There also used to be problems with nerves but that is no longer a big issue so that can't be the reason.
Few years ago she was also mediocre outside of clay, barely winning any WTA MD matches on hard court, but since then she has improved leaps and bounds and won a big WTA tournament on hard court - Cincinnati 2018.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
544 Posts
I don't know enough about Kiki to confidently hope to explain her issue but I have thought about this subject, and I have two thoughts on it:

1. She's generally very attentive and conversational during on-court coaching sessions that I've seen her do. This is great at tour level, because she gets more value out of her coach than other players, but it means that at the slams she loses an advantage she has throughout the rest of the year.
2. She's only actually played four slams as a top 10 player and the one she looked likely to do best in (both in terms of surface and form) saw her forced to retire with illness. Her results excluding that have been poor, but it's still a fairly small sample size and she still has time to adjust.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,746 Posts
Bertens's general path since she first rose in 2016 has been a general cycle of getting good results when people don't expect them her, causing people to develop expectations for her, flopping when their are expectations on her, causing expectations of her to fall, then starting the cycle over getting good results when their aren't expectations on her.

She has had two good slam results. First an SF at RG in 2016, when people did see her as an elite player yet and there were no expectations of her. Since then people have seen her an elite clay courter and RG contender and she has not been able to perform, despite doing well in lead up events.

At Wimbledon last year, she was perceived as a soft seed because she was supposedly clay courter who was not good on grass and she was able to make it to the quarterfinals. Of course, after making the QFs last year and getting to the SFs of Eastbourne this year she was perceived as a contender on grass and there were expectations on her, so she failed.

Her win in Cincinnati last years was also a surprise to most as she was not perceived as an elite player on hard, but after the win that changed and there was talk about her as a contender of the US Open, so naturally she lost early there (and at the AO as well).

This has been a pretty consistent pattern with her for the last three years. We will see if she is able to eventually overcome it, but for now it looks like her only chance to win a slam is to come in on a 5 match losing streak. :eek:h:
Exactly this :yeah:

Her next big run will be when there are low expectations from her, because of bad form or flops in the leadup tournaments. Much like I expected from Svitolina, although you could argue her Wimby SF run was just tremendous luck.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top