Tennis Forum banner
161 - 180 of 261 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,016 Posts
Discussion Starter · #161 ·
While it is random, it is not more random than 2017 and the states show that with a different player having the most titles, finals, player of the year, most prize money, and Year End Number 1. I do think if this year didn't have Barty playing, it could've been worse than 2017 however.

I'd only rank 2021 above 2017 and 2011 when it comes to recent seasons.
I mean at the very top sure I guess . If you wanna look at it that way Barty has had one of the most consistent no 1 season in a long time and no one even came close to grabbing it for her. So from that point of view I get it . But if you look at everything else ...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,075 Posts
Yes, but the point made is that Pegula hasn’t had to make sacrifices to get there. She has access to resources other players could only dream of. And yes we know she’s not the only one so there’s no need to bring other players into the discussion.
But the whole post as a response to someone comparing her to Gauff. And she did have to make sacrifices in the sense that the live of a tennis pro is not an easy one, far from that. Considering she could just have an easy life, it is in a way a bit of a sacrifice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,802 Posts
Thats a bit of a weird point to be brought from a comparison with Gauff, as Cori is an example of privilege in tennis. Wildcards, rule bending to enter a tournament, Mouratoglu academy (supposedly Serena's coach). Also, people love to complain that too much money makes players not interested (which doesn't hold much up to scrutiny), so Pegula should be lauded as she has much more money than she could possibly make from tennis and still is putting a better effort than many girls
Rubbish (meaningless "woulda coulda shoulda" nonsene). Pegula is a former scrub turned late bloomer who is about TEN YEARS older than Coco.

You have not even the remotest clue whether Pegula was prioritizing tennis in the same way as she does now "way back then" or whether she was more inclined to have fun with her billions instead, and that is why she is a late bloomer as she got older and wiser. Which means her trajectory is simply not remotely comparable with any of even the older nextgens, let alone Coco.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,539 Posts
I disagree that this is the worst season of all time. But this Indian Wells is definitely making a case for worst BNP Paribas Open of all time, the round of 16 should be one of the better days of the year and it... has not been.

I think this could be attributed to its spot on the calendar. It could be saved with a Kontaveit/Jabeur vs. Kerber, Azarenka vs. Ostapenko SF line-up, but right now ...
But it was bound to be, given its place in the calendar. Usually the Sunshine Double comes at a time when players are fresh and picking up points there means good seedings in the key points of the season - which runs from the clay season, RG, to Wimbledon to the US Open.

This Indian Wells is more like the China Open or Wuhan - it comes during the deadzone after the USO when most players are jaded, especially the ones with lots of wins during the season. Players like Ash and Aryna who have already qualified for the YEC can't be bothered and so it is really the players who are looking to use it as a springboard to qualify for YEC who are doing well, just like it normally is with the tournaments after the USO.

Players like pre-top 5 Aryna Sabalenka, Caroline Garcia in her glory days and pre-slam Ash Barty are all examples of players who have done well in this phase of the season in the past, ie the exact equivalents of today's Jabeur, Kontaveit, Pegula, Badosa et al, the 11-20 girls.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,141 Posts
No offense to anyone, but I think people who keep going on about how better the WTA is and how players are more complete and well-rounded now are either just being silly or like to disagree for the sake of disagreeing.

When have we seen this level of hard hitting tennis in 2017-2021? Sabalenka and Osaka, the two hard hitters right now, can not produce a level that is anywhere close to this

Or what about crafty and variety tennis? You can’t honestly tell me that Barty and Andreescu have this sort of athleticism and fluidity in their games

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,075 Posts
Rubbish (meaningless "woulda coulda shoulda" nonsene). Pegula is a former scrub turned late bloomer who is about TEN YEARS older than Coco.

You have not even the remotest clue whether Pegula was prioritizing tennis in the same way as she does now "way back then" or whether she was more inclined to have fun with her billions instead, and that is why she is a late bloomer as she got older and wiser. Which means her trajectory is simply not remotely comparable with any of even the older nextgens, let alone Coco.
Did you even read what I said? Maybe you quoted the wrong person, cause what you're saying doesn't really seem to dialogue with what I said
 

·
La nuit je mens
Joined
·
91,513 Posts
Pegula would barely be a top 30 players circa 2000-2005. Maybe not even top 50. Despite that depth nonsense. I mean, Sakkari is already in YEC and a Slam SF despite being some kind of tier II Smashnova-Pistolesi.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,949 Posts
Probably so, this year is so low quality and everyone is such a godawful player like what the shit. The top players from a decade ago would wipe their ass with the current top players. Barty is an exception because she actually has a great game.
You have no clue what you are saying. Having watched tennis closely for over 40 years, the woman's game is of a higher quality and MUCH deeper than ever before. The days of Graf winning 90 matches in a year or Serena 13 tournaments are just physically impossible. I remember when Evert and Martina ruled the roost.....they virtually played every final against each other because there was no one else to challenge them. Where were the players from Russia, Ukraine in those days? ......they did not exist. I don't know why folks don't acknowledge this on here....pining for the "golden era" of woman's tennis. Simply fucking hilarious. @Slayla just puts this shit up to generate a bunch of responses, it is no reflection of reality.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,129 Posts
You have no clue what you are saying. Having watched tennis closely for over 40 years, the woman's game is of a higher quality and MUCH deeper than ever before. The days of Graf winning 90 matches in a year or Serena 13 tournaments are just physically impossible. I remember when Evert and Martina ruled the roost.....they virtually played every final against each other because there was no one else to challenge them. Where were the players from Russia, Ukraine in those days? ......they did not exist. I don't know why folks don't acknowledge this on here....pining for the "golden era" of woman's tennis. Simply fucking hilarious. @Slayla just puts this shit up to generate a bunch of responses, it is no reflection of reality.
You're wrong. I have been following tennis since the 1970s and the Golden Era of women's tennis was in the early 2000s when the Williams sisters, Capriati, Hingis, Seles, Henin, Clijsters, Mauresmo and Davenport were all in the top ten. You had both depth and great champions in those years. In other Eras, you had either great champions that weren't challenged by anyone or depth with everybody beating everybody.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,949 Posts
You're wrong. I have been following tennis since the 1970s and the Golden Era of women's tennis was in the early 2000s when the Williams sisters, Capriati, Hingis, Seles, Henin, Clijsters, Mauresmo and Davenport were all in the top ten. You had both depth and great champions in those years. In other Eras, you had either great champions that weren't challenged by anyone or depth with everybody beating everybody.
Well you are partly right.....that was the beginning of the tennis we see today. They were great players but the depth today is simply higher (and growing) than that time frame as well. I believe no one will ever come close to dominating like Serena has over such an extended time.... which is why she is simply the GOAT.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
183 Posts
You have no clue what you are saying. Having watched tennis closely for over 40 years, the woman's game is of a higher quality and MUCH deeper than ever before. The days of Graf winning 90 matches in a year or Serena 13 tournaments are just physically impossible. I remember when Evert and Martina ruled the roost.....they virtually played every final against each other because there was no one else to challenge them. Where were the players from Russia, Ukraine in those days? ......they did not exist. I don't know why folks don't acknowledge this on here....pining for the "golden era" of woman's tennis. Simply fucking hilarious. @Slayla just puts this shit up to generate a bunch of responses, it is no reflection of reality.
Maybe because Serena is 40. Serena in her prime would practically never lose a match in this field. I don’t know how many times the top 8 seeds don’t even make it to the quarterfinals. It’s only “deep” because the top players are so bad at tennis and don’t stand above the rest of the field at all. An example of a strong field is the top players winning most tourneys but getting upsetted here and there, not completely random players I’ve never heard of winning slams and masters the whole year.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,949 Posts
Maybe because Serena is 40. Serena in her prime would practically never lose a match in this field. I don’t know how many times the top 8 seeds don’t even make it to the quarterfinals. It’s only “deep” because the top players are so bad at tennis and don’t stand above the rest of the field at all. An example of a strong field is the top players winning most tourneys but getting upsetted here and there, not completely random players I’ve never heard of winning slams and masters the whole year.
That is the exact opposite definition of a strong field. The "top" players have to work so much harder to advance in any tournament compared to years ago that they are spent in the later rounds, someone who gets an easy previous match or WO then takes them out. The depth of the filed is a great leveler....that's all I'm saying. So you get great matches in earlier rounds from so called "random" players, because they are simply better players than before.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
183 Posts
That is the exact opposite definition of a strong field. The "top" players have to work so much harder to advance in any tournament compared to years ago that they are spent in the later rounds, someone who gets an easy previous match or WO then takes them out. The depth of the filed is a great leveler....that's all I'm saying. So you get great matches in earlier rounds from so called "random" players, because they are simply better players than before.
The field is deep due to top players being bad at tennis. The quality of the tour right now is cheeks. You can’t really think players like Sabalenka and Svitolina are nearly as good as Li Na, Radwanska, etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,536 Posts
I still think 2013 Serena would be absolutely destroying the Tour in 2021. If Ostapenko can routine Swiatek, well Serena back then was Ostapenko with consistency, and a way better serve. They would be outclassed.

In her best 2010s years she actually underachieved IMO. She was miles better than the rest of the field.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,536 Posts
There's a catch-22 about it because Fernandez showed how much choosing the right shot at the right time and mentality can push you past lots of players. Also what Raducanu was praised about.

Lots players when "on" have a great game and so many matches are decided by just a few points. Only problem is you need to win a lot to hone those skills and gain the confidence in your abilities to do it match after match. That's how Mommy-Serena can come back after pregnancy and reach 4 Slam Finals. She doesn't even have to be that good. Movement, serve and consistency was all a mess, but she selects the exact perfect shots and strategy for each moment.

Fernandez was shown again just next tournament how she's not invincible. Same with Raducanu. Neither even getting to the QF.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
Fine season in all the fast court slams, Barty proving a worthy, consistent No 1 (especially because many said she shouldn’t have remained there in 2020), Jabeur entertaining and soon entering the top 10, Negative Naomi providing off court drama….nah, it’s been a memorable season IMHO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: *Jool*

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
The best thing that can happen to women's tennis in 2022 is Raducanu and Fernandez each winning a slam or another slam final between them.

The problem of women's tennis is the lack of rivalries. Serena v Sharapova era (rivalry or not, it created a special aura around women's tennis for more than a decade) is over and public needs new rivals to talk about.

IMO,perfect 2022 would have both Fernandez and Raducanu in top 10, Osaka back and winning, Ostapenko and Andreescu resurgence, consistent players like Barty, Krejcikova and Sabalenka remaining consistent, and a strong supporting cast inside top 15 Gauff, Badosa, Collins, Tauson... etc.

I smell the end of Halep, Kvitova, Pliskova, Kerber, Azarenka, Svitolina is very near and tour can no longer rely on them. All of them could be very well out of top 20 soon.

The worst thing that could happen next year though, is to have likes of Sabalenka and Sakkari winning slams. No offense but it would add zero value to the game and WTA's popularity, IMO.
I might argue about the odd player in your list, but you’re essentially right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,949 Posts
The field is deep due to top players being bad at tennis. The quality of the tour right now is cheeks. You can’t really think players like Sabalenka and Svitolina are nearly as good as Li Na, Radwanska, etc.
Yes ...I do. you seem to equate multiple winners with mediocrity, and pine for the days when few players won all the tourneys. You seem upset that it's a wide open field, dismissing players not at the very top of the rankings as "scrubs" because they are ranked #35, #47, #62 whatever. This is bull shit......the quality is there further down the pipeline, too bad if you don't like it.....that's reality. If it doesn't look good from a headlines standpoint....too bad. The top seeds still get all the attention....fair enough. In the FITD game on here.....folks who follow tennis picked who they thought would win the tourney. 34 out of 66 picked one of the top 4 seeds. 20 years ago that would have been 60 out of 66. My point being that rankings do not reflect talent....there's just too much of it out there.

So in the future, this trend is only going to continue, so be ready. A high tide raises all boats son, meaning that the players quickly improve by playing high level competition. Why you refuse to accept this is beyond me, as the tennis is better than ever.
 
161 - 180 of 261 Posts
Top