Skip to main content

US Open 2021 Women’s Preview


Ashleigh Barty or Naomi Osaka.  Barty’s title haul and match stats for 2021 make her the clear favourite in New York, with Wimbledon and four other tournament crowns.  Easy picking.  Until you look at Naomi Osaka and realize she’s only lost once at the US Open since 2017, and she hasn’t lost a slam match anywhere since the 2019 Australian.  But she’s been off form lately, and in a weird headspace since she announced she wasn’t doing press at the French.  Will that matter here?

 

First Quarter

Barty’s quarter is filled with some very serious contenders and a few dangerous floaters.  She plays former Open finalist (2010) Vera Zvonareva in her opener.  Zvonareva may be past her prime but can still cause trouble.  Barty has been known to hit flat spots in slams before, throwing in the odd clunker of a match, but those occurrences have become fewer and farther between. She rarely goes off the boil now and even her bad days are good enough to win matches.  And when she’s good, she inspires awe and poetry… flowing around the court, controlling with her serve and big forehand, dicing opponents with the backhand, finishing at the net when necessary, and making winners look high percentage.  She really knows how to work the point to give herself the advantage.

Olympic gold medalist Belinda Bencic (seeded 11) is back on the rise and could win the whole enchilada if she can stay in her best tennis.  Jennifer Brady (13) made semis here last year and was runner-up at the Australian. Is she recovered from her leg injury?  Karolina Muchova (22) was a semi-finalist in Australia, but has struggled for form of late.  Jessica Pegula (23) has jumped a level this year and is especially dangerous on hard courts.  Anett Kontaveit is a finalist this week in Cleveland, Jil Teichmann was a finalist last week in Cincinnati, after taking out Osaka.  And then there’s Iga Swiatek, last year’s French Open champ, seeded 7. She’s been quiet this summer and maybe her game works best on clay, but a deep run would hardly surprise.  Yet Barty is still the class of the field.

Barty d. Swiatek

 

Second Quarter

Bianca Andreescu (6) didn’t play last year’s covid Open, so she’s kind of co-defending champ with last year’s winner Naomi Osaka.  Bianca’s got game, big game and variety, and she also has confidence.  But has that confidence taken a hit as her body continues to betray her? 

Giant killer, Maria Sakkari (17) is nearby but has a tricky opener against talented and youthful Marta Kostyuk.  Petra Kvitova (10) is starting to look like her best days are in the past, but is still young enough at 31 to be a serious contender.  Oddly her monstrous game has never really gelled in New York – maybe the bustle is too distracting.  French Open runner-up Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova (14) is too good to ever count out, but may be resting on her laurels after that scintillating run in Paris. 

Not so, Karolina Pliskova. Pliskova (4) has been in the Rome 1000, Canada 1000, and Wimbledon finals this year but has come up short in each one.  You sense she is close – oh so close to a big victory.  Could it be here?  She was the finalist in 2016 and led Kerber by a break in the third set yet failed to close.  Can she overcome her mental demons?  She’s a form player, and her form is good.

KaPliskova d. Sakkari

 

Third Quarter

Elina Svitolina, the perpetual #5 seed, is freshly married to Gael Monfils and into the final of Chicago this week.  Other than Rome she seems the player whose best game just isn’t quite good enough to overcome the hot streak of a big hitter at a major.  Maybe the stars will align one day.

Astonishingly, Marketa Vondrousova is unseeded.  The Olympic silver medalist and former Roland Garros runner-up receives no benefit from either tournament in the rankings, but she is a dangerous floater.  Simona Halep (12) has dipped below the top 10 for the first time in years, but had been the leading contender for the French and perhaps Wimbledon until she was derailed by a calf injury in late May.  New York has frequently been unkind to her but she did make the semis once. Has she had enough time to re-find form? She has an extremely dangerous first rounder against Camila Giorgi who shocked by taking the 1000 title in Canada.  Giorgi has typically wailed on the ball but her lack of variety made her beatable.  Will the moderation and greater variety she showed in Montreal carry forward to New York?

Angelique Kerber (16) has suddenly re-found form similar to what took her to three slam titles.  She comes in on a 14-2 streak, and, lest we forget, won the title here in 2016.  Her tenacious counter-punching will be a tough out for anyone.  Madison Keys and Sloane Stephens will rematch their 2017 US Open final in the first round.  Both seem very far from four years ago.  And packed into an eight-player grouping with these three is the very young and very talented Coco Gauff (21).  It’s not a matter of ‘if’ but ‘when’ with Gauff.  And if that seems an overused sentiment in tennis, it really feels true for her.  The talent is just so apparent, and she’s still only 17.  She’s got a brutal draw.  She will need to be zoning just to get out of this quarter.  But I wouldn’t put it past her.  Is she ready?

And not to be overlooked is four-time slam champ Naomi Osaka (3).  Naomi has done little to inspire confidence, batting just over .500 since claiming her second Australian Open in February.  Her confidence seemed to shatter over the no-press storm that developed in Paris.  Has enough time passed for her to put that behind her and be fully present for this year’s US Open?  How distant does last year seem, when a confident Osaka had a fresh Black Lives Matter mask ready for each post-match press interview?  She’s not there now.  But I don’t discount her ability to play her way into that form.  At one point she looked a sure bet to become the dominant player of her generation.  Now that looks rather uncertain and Barty is poised to usurp the title.  A deep rivalry between Naomi and Ash would be treat I hope we can look forward to for years to come.

Osaka d. Svitolina

 

Fourth Quarter

This is the quarter that feels the most wide open to me.  Of course surprises could happen in any quarter of this draw – women’s tennis in the last decade has made that clear.  The leading seeds here are Aryna Sabalenka (2) and Barbora Krejcikova (8).  Like Gauff, Sabalenka’s talent is palpable.  Yet somehow Aryna struggles to close.  Her slam record is hardly enviable.  But she crossed the round-of-sixteen rubicon at Wimbledon.  Has her trip to the semis opened the flood gate to future slam triumphs, or will the pressure of deep runs in important tournaments continue to haunt her?

Krejcikova has been the biggest surprise of the year for me.  After bouncing around number 200 in the rankings for 6 or 7 years, she’s suddenly exploded into a slam-winning top-ten player.  It’s completely unexpected.  She has tremendous variety and power – positively Barty-esque.  But I don’t yet sense the poise and confidence that Barty is showing these days.  Krejcikova has a real chance to emerge from this quarter.

Also here is three time US Open finalist, Victoria Azarenka (18).  She doesn’t look to be in last year’s form, but her record in New York is unavoidable. The perplexing Garbine Muguruza (9) has slowly descended from the outstanding form she showed at the start of the year.  Ons Jabeur (20) and Danielle Collins (26) have both been hot this summer and it would be both surprising and not surprising to see either in the US final this year.

Krejcikova d. Sabalenka

 

Semis and Final

Surprisingly, none of the experts I’ve read pick Osaka for the title, although the bookies have her as their second favourite.  There’s a lot that could go wrong for Osaka.  She could easily lose confidence and lose in an early round.  But if instead she gains confidence, anything is possible.  However Barty’s current confidence is palpable and her form is unchallenged by the contenders.

Barty d. KaPliskova

Osaka d. Krejcikova

 

Final:  Barty d. Osaka

 

Expert Picks

Barty:  6 – Drucker, Hammond, Kane, Saanford, (all Tennis.com), Wertheim (Sports Illustrated), Navratilova (WTA)

Krejcikova: 1 – Fitzgerald (Tennis.com)

Sabalenka:  1 – McGrogan (Tennis.com)

KaPliskova:  1 - Tignor (Tennis.com)

 

Bookies (American odds)

Ashleigh Barty +350
Naomi Osaka +450
Aryna Sabalenka +1000
Simona Halep +1200
Bianca Andreescu +1200
Iga Swiatek +1200
Karolina Pliskova +1400
Garbine Muguruza +1600
Cori Gauff +1600
Madison Keys +2000
Elina Svitolina +2000
Barbora Krejcikova +2000
Petra Kvitova +2000
Maria Sakkari +2000
Karolina Muchova +2000
Danielle Collins +2500
Elise Mertens +2500
Victoria Azarenka +2500
Jennifer Brady +2500
Belinda Bencic +2500
Paula Badosa +2800
Anett Kontaveit +3300
Elena Rybakina +3300
Ons Jabeur +3300
Dayana Yastremska +3300
Angelique Kerber +3300
Amanda Anisimova +3300
Johanna Konta +3300
Camila Giorgi +3300
Marketa Vondrousova +3300
Jessica Pegula +3300
Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova +4000
Jil Teichmann +5000
Fiona Ferro +5000
Alison Riske +5000
Sloane Stephens +5000
Petra Martic +5000
Daria Kasatkina +5000

 

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