Skip to main content

State of Tennis - Women - 15 Jul 2011

I suppose I am not the casual observer who wants clearly defined lines of hierarchy and dominant champions.  I'm absolutely loving the unpredictability and depth of the game at the top.  It really feels like there are about 15 women who could win a GS title - it's incredibly invigorating to watch and speculate on.

Clijsters, Serena, and Venus certainly have the talent to dominate.  But they are all aging, prone to injury and distractions, and playing light schedules.  I suspect that Serena has one more year of dominance - probably next year, before our enjoyment of her will revert to the occasional.  Clijsters will likely rise up and grab another slam or two, but I do not look for any consistent pattern from her.  Venus, unfortunately, has aged enough that she will probably not be able to rise to the top at a slam through the thick layer of talented contenders also vying to get there.

A notch below this group are Li and Schiavone.  Again they are old enough that I do not expect them to win more than another GS title between them, and that to Li - ok, maybe two.  A very talented duo, but on the wrong side of father time...

Sharapova clearly has some gas left in the tank.  It appeared to me in the Wimbledon final that she was in control once the rallies got going.  She seemed to me to be playing better off the ground than Kvitova. However her serve is a liability.  I'm not sure if she will be able to correct it.  I wonder if fear of reinjury prevents her from adopting a more consistent motion.  I also think the grass favoured Kvitova's lunges and stabs more than Sharapova's consistent hard hitting.  Perhaps on a hard court the balance will tip the other way (at least for now).

Kvitova is the big "what if" for me in women's tennis right now.  She's clearly talented.  She's also young enough that her best tennis should be ahead of her.  But we don't know if she will develop the consistency to thrive at the top or become more than a poacher of the odd GS title.  Is she really better than all the other top women (age 26 or less, say)?  Will she be more in the mold of Graf or Kuznetsova, to pick two extremes?  I lean more toward Kuznetsova - well maybe Clijsters-like is a better compromise.

Speaking of consistency at the top, Wozniacki has certainly proven she has staying power at #1.  But the pressure of "when will you win a slam" is clearly getting to her.  She looked spooked at the middle majors this year.  I suspect this year's US Open will be a watershed for her.  If she doesn't do well, at least semis maybe better, she will likely be psychologically scarred and fall from #1 and everyone's "favourites" list for slam titles.  It might actually be the best thing for her to be #2 or 3 for awhile - take the pressure off and let her refocus on playing instead of winning a trophy.  Hopefully she doesn't go the way of Safina.

The question is who would take the #1 ranking away from her?  As I said above, I think Serena has a good chance by mid-next year or so, or possibly Clijsters.  With both of these, playing enough to get points will be an issue.  Li could also manage it with a strong hardcourt and fall season, and Sharapova is putting together the kind of consistent results that could see her rise to the top of the heap.  Kvitova may get there one day, but I doubt it will be much before 2013.

Azarenka is another puzzle.  Is she talented enough to win a GS title or rank #1.  I always thought so, but I'm starting to have my doubts.  Getting through to the SF at Wimbledon was long overdue in a slam.  If she takes as long to break through to the next level, she may be 30 before she actually wins one.  Again, I see her more as a poacher of the odd GS title - and I expect it will be in the next year or two, than I see her becoming a consistent champion.

Zvonareva is still ranked #3.  It seems almost miraculous.  She appears to be trending downward.  If she has any chance at all of avoiding Dementieva's slamless fate, she will need to rally herself and make another push for the top.  She's losing momentum right now and I suspect it will be at least a year, maybe two, before she will be pushing upward again.  Actually I don't expect she will have another chance as good as the ones she had last summer.

Oddly, I think Bartoli may yet pull a rabbit out of the hat.  She goes her own way, and, to a point, that often yields success.  She probably has 3 or 4 good chances left at Wimbledon.

Stosur, Kuznetsova, Jankovic, and Ivanovic can still cause trouble for anyone, but I'd be betting they will not seriously threaten the bastille again.  Still, it's great to have them in the mix, and they MIGHT win, anywhere.

The youth brigade of Petkovic, Goerges, Pavlyuchenkova, Wickmayer, Lisicki, and Cibulkova really are amazing for the sport right now.  They have the talent to cause an upset, taking down anyone, anywhere.  However, I really do not expect any of them to be top tier, perhaps wrongly.  Maybe Lisicki will be a slam champion one day.  I see them threatening but not overcoming at the top.  But they are great for the game.

For the immediate future, I think Sharapova, Serena, and Clijsters are most likely to wrest #1 away from Wozniacki.  In the slightly longer term, Sharapova and Kvitova could rise above the pack as the top two to beat, possibly harried by Azarenka and Wozniacki, or maybe even Lisicki.  All of these should be eligible for GS titles.

A fascinating time indeed...

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