Skip to main content

The Women - 19 July 2012


And now...

The Women – 19 July 2012

Love her or hate her, you can’t ignore Serena Williams.  Her Wimbledon victory two weeks ago emphasized that she is far from over-the-hill.  She is a force.  If she makes up her mind to win a title, can any woman stand in her way?  Even in her shocking loss to Virginie Razzano at the French Open, it seemed less about Razzano – who, granted, gave a brave and gutsy performance – and more about what was going on in Ms. Williams’ head (witness 47 unforced errors).

If Serena loses, it’s because she beats herself, or she’s injured, or she’s not tournament tough.  It can sound like a list of excuses, but it’s not.  When was the last time an in-form Serena lost (not on clay)?  When’s the last time she was really beaten?  Maybe the 2008 Wimbledon final when she lost to sister Venus... or maybe in the Henin days of 2007 when Henin beat her in the QF of Roland Garros, Wimbledon, and the US Open?  That’s five years ago.

But can anyone of the current crop of players actually take down Serena?  I had hopes for Petra Kvitova.  She has a huge go-for-broke game and maybe the 2011 Wimbledon version of Kvitova might have been up for the task, but the 2012 edition has proven a bit unreliable.  What about Samantha Stosur at last year’s US Open?  Whether or not Serena was in-form  or not might be debated by the die-hards, but overall making it to a slam final is probably an indication of reasonable form.  So yes Stosur actually beat Serena, but it’s not something I’m expecting her to do again anytime soon.  Sam has not shown the consistency to beat anyone regularly.

Olympics

Unfortunately, I expect the women’s version of the tennis Olympics to be pretty much a rehash of Wimbledon... if Serena wants this title – and she has never won an Olympic gold in singles (but has two in doubles with Venus) she will take it.  It may not be quite as effortless as some of her past wins.  She’s on the cusp of 31 years, afterall.  But on grass, she has to be the favourite.  A more difficult question might be who will face her in the final? 

Agnieszka Radwanska is a reasonable bet to repeat her Wimbledon finalist result, but I doubt she should be more favoured than Maria Sharapova, or Victoria Azarenaka, or maybe Sabine Lisicki.  The pack is not exactly nipping at Serena’s heals – especially on grass.  The fight will be for the silver medal.  Kvitova, Kerber, and Bartoli could have something to say about it.  It will be interesting to see if an extra 2 weeks on grass will help players adjust.

US Open

But moving from the greens to the blue cement of the North American hardcourt season the field equalizes a bit.  There are 6 active players who have won the US title:  Serena (1999, 2002, 2008), Kim Clijsters (2005, 2009, 2010), Venus (2000, 2001), Svetlana Kuznetsova (2004), Sharapova (2006), and Stosur (2011).  It’s also interesting that the last 7 slam tournaments have had 7 different winners.  If an 8th name is added to that list at the US Open, it will be only the second time there have been 8 different winners in 2 years (1937-38).  Such parity has not been common in women’s tennis.

Kim Clijsters has apparently claimed she will retire (again) after this year’s USO.  Given her lack of play this year and her forgettable results, it would be tempting to write her off as chanceless in New York.  Except for 2009.  After a 2 ½ year break followed by two middling warm-up events, Clijsters shocked the world by seizing the Open title, dismantling a storming (“shove this ball down your throat”) Serena in the semi-finals.  Kim’s done it before, can she do it again?  I have my doubts.  They centre around Kim’s state of mind.  In 2009, she was coming out of nowhere with nothing to lose.  She was coming back – the future looked limitless.  Now, 3 years later, she’s retiring – this is her last chance – she has everything to lose – and the future, tenniswise, looks finite.  I expect all of that will translate into maybe a decent 4th round showing, and not much more.  (Watch her prove me wrong!)

The logical pick for Flushing Meadows would seem to be Serena.  She’s 34-3 on the year.  That’s right, only 3 losses. They came to Razzano, Makarova, and Wozniacki.  Decent players to be sure.  Wozniacki perhaps is the only elite player of that group, or maybe, “was” the only elite player.  She has been plain awful this year, batting 22-13, with no titles.  This from a woman who led the title count for the last 2 years, finishing computer #1 in both.

So Serena’s losses seem to come at unexpected times to unexpected players.  It’s possible she’ll crash out in New York.  Whether or not she does may depend on how hungry she is.  With a Wimbledon title and maybe an Olympic medal around her neck, Serena might start to show her disinterested side again.  She certainly has the talent to win the US Open. She’s clearly the woman to beat.  Will that be enough to keep her focussed?

Maria Sharapova has been having a pretty good year too.  Runner-up spots in Australia, Indian Wells, and Miami were a great start and she followed it up with titles at Stuttgart, Madrid, and Roland Garros – arguably the best record of the year, to date.  She hiccupped at Wimbledon, although the woman who beat her, Sabine Lisicki, is a fine grass court player.  With more time to accustom to the grass, I think Sharapova is among those who could benefit most for the Olympics.  But hard courts have been her perennial strength.  And she will want to redeem her shocking 3R USO exit last year.  If Serena is the least bit iffy on effort, Sharapova may be the favourite for the title.

And what of Victoria Azarenka?  She stormed from the blocks at the start of the year winning the first 4 tournaments she played, including her first slam title at the Australian.  She’s cooled a little since then, but with the return to summer hardcourts, there’s no reason her hard, flat game and new-found consistency shouldn’t translate into more titles.  Will it be enough for the big stage in New York?  History would certainly say “no”.  Victoria has never been past the 4th round at the US Open and even that result came in 2007.  There must be something about the grounds or the courts that throw her off – it’s shockingly bad for someone of her ranking.  On the other hand, maybe she’s ripe for a NY breakthrough.  Li Na had never been past 4R at the French before she won it.  Maybe Victoria can do the same.

Speaking of Li, she has largely faded from the radar this year dropping to 11th in the WTA rankings.  Her best showings have been finalist slots at Sydney and Rome.  At USO her previous best is QF in 2009.  Weighing heavily is her lack of a big result this year, making it seem unlikely she will do anything noteworthy at the US Open.  She does not seem in the mental latitude of triumph.

Sam Stosur, as well, has been middling since her triumph last year in New York.  Her best showings have been the final in Doha and SF at Roland Garros.  Her record at the USO is comprised of four 1R losses, two 2R, one QF and one title.  Not exactly confidence-inspiring for bettors.  All that said, she has not looked awful this year and is still at #5 in the WTA rankings.  Another QF at Flushing is a reasonable expectation.

Petra Kvitova was the darling of the media and bookies at the start of the year.  She was named “Player of the Year” for 2011 by both the WTA and the ITF, and honoured with lowest odds by the bookies for the Australian Open.  All this without ever achieving the #1 computer ranking.  But she was cast aside almost instantaneously when Azarenka squealed to the top in Australia.  Kvitova has fared decently at the slams this year, going SF-SF-QF.  However, those have been the highlights of an otherwise dismal year. 

Remarkably, both she and Wozniacki, who shared credit for most titles in 2011 at 6 each, have not won a title between them in 2012.  Hard court is probably Kvitova’s weakest surface, although it is doubtful she will do as badly as last year’s 1R loss at the US Open. 

I would give Kvitova second billing at the Olympics (behind Serena) if she had showed even a glimmer of promise this year, but instead Sharapova and Azarenka look more likely for that spot.  In New York, Kvitova looks like a reasonable bet for QF at best.

Aggie Radwanska seems at her best on grass, but like Azarenka, has never been past 4R at USO, losing in 2R the last 3 years.  But it was after USO 2011 that the new Radwanska was born.  A year ago she had won a total of 4 titles in her career.  In the last year she has added another six.  Surely she must do better at this year’s US Open than last.  I doubt that she will contend for the title, but she will probably be among the top 5 or so among the bookies favourites.  Semi-final would not be surprising, but I think QF is more likely.

Caroline Wozniacki has been to the SF or better at Flushing the last three years.  It is far and away her best slam.  She has been slumping badly this year for a woman ranked yearend #1 the last two years.  I will be watching to see if she can turn in some decent hard court results this summer.  Despite her current #8 ranking, on a surface that favours her while seemingly hurting so many of her top rivals, she will be my pick for SF or better.

Two other players deserve mention in my mind:  Sara Errani and Dominika Cibulkova.  Errani exploded into recognition with her final round showing at Roland Garros, but she had been giving notice all year that she had jumped a level.  She made QF at the Australian Open and then followed it up with three 280 point titles.  The big splash she made in Paris is bound to be followed by a some recovery time.  Her 3R at Wimbledon is about what I expect from her at the Olympics and US Open.

Dominika Cibulkova may seem an odd choice for attention but she has shown she can take down just about any name when she’s on.  She has victories over Azarenka, Sharapova, Wozniacki, and Venus Williams.  She made QF at USO in 2010.  She won’t be taken lightly by opponents.  She has not shown the consistency to be counted a favourite at a slam, but at a number 14 ranking, and with her history of big wins she will make opponents apprehensive.

The Germans

What to make of the wave of excellent German players currently sweeping over women’s tennis?  Certainly none compare to the exalted Steffi Graf.  But it is unexpected to have 4 or 5 women from the same country (not Russia or the US) contending for the top 10.

Angelique Kerber is the highest ranked at #7.  Her surprising Wimbledon run to the semi-finals backed up what seemed a total fluke last year when she made the US Open semis ranked 92 in the world.  In the last four slam events she has won 16 matches, a total tied with Serena and bested only by Azarenka with 17 wins and Sharapova with 18.  Kerber is 24 years old and this seems late for a breakthrough to the top echelon.  Given the unpredictability of women’s tennis in the last few years (Schiavone, Li, Stosur) I’m not willing to rule out a slam breakthrough, but realistically, I’m betting we’ve just seen Kerber’s peak.  I expect no better than 4R at USO from her.

Sabine Lisicki is another story.  She has had 3 solid years at Wimbledon, QF-SF-QF, and could be a real threat at the Olympics.  At the US Open she made 4R last year.  I’ll be looking to see if she is still improving on hard courts.  How she fares this summer in the US could be telling for her future.

Andrea Petkovic burst into consciousness last year with 3 slam QF showings.  But she has been plagued by injury and it is troubling to see this young talent sidelined in her prime years.  She hasn’t played since April, so even if she does come back she likely won’t be ready to do much damage till next year.  All the best to her in her recovery.

Julia Goerges may not threaten at a slam, but Mona Barthel, ranked 41, might.  She’s just turned 22 and has the big hitting game that will make top players nervous if she happens to be connecting.  I have not seen enough success from her to feel she is a threat for a deep run at a slam, but taking out a big seed in a slam would not surprise.

Summary

I’m looking for Serena to do well at the Olympics.  The US Open is a cipher for me.  No one looks ready to win it.  I count Serena, Azarenka, and Sharapova to be in the most dangerous form.  Maybe Wozniacki will finally rise up or Clijsters will charge again at her most successful slam.  With hesitation I predict Sharapova over Azarenka in the final.  If one of those can do it, they should finish the year at #1 on the computer, but to my mind the “real #1” will be Serena.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Case for Rod Laver as GOAT - 25 Dec 2010

The Case for Rod Laver Two grand slams.   When one considers the near impossibility of winning a calendar year grand slam in this day and age, the thought of one player winning two boggles the mind.   It’s difficult enough to win the career slam – only 7 men have ever done it and only 4 in the Open era.   Winning a non-calendar slam is even more difficult and many great players have won three in a row and fallen just short:   like Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, and Pete Sampras. So Rod Laver should be an open and shut case for the greatest of all time.   But it’s not that simple.   His first grand slam is really negligible and doesn’t count.   It was an amateur slam won in an era when the best players were professionals.   Especially in the 1960’s the pros were gaining more and more credibility.   The sheer number of pros was increasing as more and more tournaments began to be established for pro players.   Laver was by no means considered the best player of 1962 and some experts didn’t

2016 Wimbledon Women's Preview

Wimbledon 2016 –Women’s Preview What does Garbine Muguruza’s victory at Roland Garros mean for tennis? Will she be able to play at a high level for Wimbledon?  Is she a legitimate contender for Serena Williams’ role as #1?  Is Serena done winning majors, or is she just ‘resting’? Muguruza’s victory at Roland Garros was surprising but not a complete shock.  Beforehand, she was deemed fourth-most likely by the bookies to take the tournament, pegged at 10:1 odds.  Anytime we welcome a new slam champion to the fold is a cause for celebration... especially a young one like Garbine, only 22.  She displaces Petra Kvitova as the last-born person to win a slam. Muguruza is one of 11 active players to have won a singles major:  Serena, Venus, Sharapova, Azarenka, Kvitova, Kuznetsova, Ivanovic, Kerber, Schiavone, and Stosur.   (There would be four more if it were not for the retirements in the last four years of Li, Bartoli, Clijsters, and Pennetta.)  These 11 players are probabl

The Case for Bjorn Borg as GOAT

The case for Bjorn Borg   The case for Bjorn Borg as GOAT will always be interesting because the last half or third of his career didn’t happen.   But what he accomplished in the short time he played was remarkable.     He became the youngest man ever to win a grand slam title (to that time) when he did it within days of his 18 th birthday at the French Open in 1974.   No man has won more pro matches, titles, or grand slams by age 24 than he did.   He also has the best match winning percentage at the slams, with Nadal and Federer a distant 2 nd and 3 rd .   In addition to 5 consecutive Wimbledon titles, he only ever lost twice at the French Open, winning there 6 times, 4 times consecutively, and 3 times consecutively he followed up his French victory with the Wimbledon title 4 weeks later – the French-Wimbledon double.   No one else has done that.     His head to head record is top notch.   In the pool of all men who have won a grand slam title in the open