70 Wade vs 80 Sanchez

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by kiki, Aug 8, 2014.

  1. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Yes,what an interesting match up¡¡¡ with the surprising 1989 RG champion against the winner of the centennial Wimbledon.ASV is one of the absolute baseline grinders this game has known and, on the other hand, few women have played the classical S&V tennis better than the last great british champion.

    Wade wins indoors and grass 3-0, Sanchez wins 3-0 on clay and 2-1 on hard.If we were comparing 1990´s ASV to Wade it could be different, but since we are not, the british gives the 70´s the lead after 5 ties played.It is 3-2 now for the 70´s.
     
    #1
  2. conway

    conway Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Messages:
    721
    Any version of Sanchez would smoke Wade on clay. Wade would smoke the 80s version of Sanchez on grass. Hard courts and indoors/carpet would be interesting. I could see young Sanchez having the edge on hard courts as I am not sure Wade would have the consistency or willpower to implement her attacking game for a whole match against the resistance Sanchez would put up, except on a really good day. Indoors/carpet I would probably favor Wade slightly.

    Mid 90s Sanchez would probably beat Wade the majority of time, even grass. Wade should in theory beat any Sanchez on grass more often than not, but we all know Sanchez Vicario's mental game is about 10 times stronger than Wade's, and she is about the best defensive player in history, and that would frusterate the heck out of Wade who isn't someone who deals well with having to hit the extra shot or putaway ball. Wade would also be frusterated to death by Sanchez's array of drop shots, lobs, and some junk shots.
     
    #2
  3. BTURNER

    BTURNER Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,545
    Location:
    OREGON
    iF memory serves Sanchez did not do especially well vs the serve/volley style. Martina could not age enough to lose this rivalry, and Novatna had a winning record. Her forehand was the direction to send that approach. She just could not get the pass and return off that wing grooved. It was either too wide, in the net or it did not stay low enough.
     
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2014
    #3
  4. conway

    conway Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Messages:
    721
    Actually that is a good point. I had not thought about that. Even if serve and volleyers were a bad matchup for Sanchez though, I am still not convinced of Wade doing well in this matchup. IMO she just isn't smart enough or good enough in her court sense, is too predictable in her hitting parterns (which King speaks about in depth in her book), and too much of a headcase for someone like Sanchez. None of those things are true of either Navratilova or Novotna, minus the headcase part for Jana. And even though Jana has a winning record vs Sanchez Vicario, you would favor Sanchez everyday if they were to meet at 3 of the 4 slams.

    Wade also was not an all out serve-volleyer and chip and charger like Martina. She stayed back on her serve sometimes, especialy 2nd serves, and did not look to instantly come to net on her opponents serve like Martina did. This would be much more to Sanchez's liking, who would atleast have time each point before having to attempt a pass. Wade also isn't as strong off the ground and from the baseline as Jana, who could atleast hang with the top baseliners in a point and wait for the perfect approach shot.
     
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2014
    #4
  5. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Sanchez abused of her lob.It was a good shot, specially in doubles, but Virgina´s OH is an all time great shot.That would suit her.
     
    #5
  6. suwanee4712

    suwanee4712 Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2007
    Messages:
    923
    This. This is the key.

    I have always thought that Sanchez, for all of her talents and strengths, was the most fortunate player ever in womens tennis. She came along at just the right time with serve and volley tennis becoming extinct, and with the brief rise of the heavy spin retrievers.

    Sanchez struggled mightily with serve and volleyers that were no where near the level of Wade. Her loss to a way past prime Sukova on such a huge occassion as a US Open semi is possibly the worst loss I've ever seen from a second seeded player at a slam. The weird part is that Sukova moonballed almost as much as Sanchez did!

    Lord knows Ginny had her weaknesses, but she was a better player than Novotna, Sukova, McNeil, Savchenko, and Fernandez were.

    You have to give clay to Sanchez, and I'm sure that Aranxta would make the hard court matchup interesting. The rest I would give a firm edge to Wade.
     
    #6
  7. conway

    conway Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Messages:
    721
    TBH I am not sure at all Wade is a better player than Novotna. In fact I kind of doubt it. As things are she is the greater and more accomplished player because of what she achieved, but if you putu both in the same era I dont think she is better or a tougher opponent for most to face. It is easy to just say Wade has 3 majors and Novotna has 1, but Wade played in an era where 3 of the 4 majors were on GRASS. How incredibly fortunate for her. Novotna was playing in an era that was faster than today but already with a 3 week grass season. Imagine how many slams Jana would win in an era with 3 majors on grass during her time, considering she was pretty unlucky to win Wimbledon only once and is clearly the 2nd best grass courter of her own era. Most likely 4 or 5 atleast. Meanwhile in an era of slower surfaces, barely any grass tournaments, and far superior baseliners like Graf, Hingis, Seles, Davenport, Sanchez, Pierce, Capriati, Sabatini, Wade would be very very lucky to win 1 major (and if she did it would be 1 Wimbledon just like Jana). We can see by her record against Evert, or even Goolagong (who wasnt a pure baseliner but played at the baseline often) how well Wade generally did against a top baseliner. I do think in Navratilova's era and Navratilova/Evert dominance that Novotna would be lucky to win even 1 major, but the same is true of Wade, maybe even moreso. Just compare Wade to Jana as players, taking into account their eras and equipment. What is Wade better in? Better serve? Better volleyer? Better ground game? Better mental game? I just don't see it. Jana has anything in her game Wade does, and Wade has all the weaknesses Jana has and is mentally ever weaker for the most part, even if she isn't as prone to quite as bad of chokes (although nearly as bad) but is weaker mentally in other aspects. Wade's only edge I could see is she is probably more comfortable hitting a topspin backhand pass if she has to (marginaly that is, as neither fit the bill here). BTW I would be willing to bet lots of money no way in hell Wade would ever reach world #2 in 1998 which was the start of the deepest womens field in history (1998-2003). Wade only reached #2 once briefly, and that was in 1977, with Court and King retired (though old King came back in late 77), Goolagong taking a pregnancy leave for the year, and the age of Martina Fatrilova. Jana was close to reaching #1 at one point in 1998, something Wade would never have done.

    BTW it is a myth to say Novotna had the edge in head to head matchup with Sanchez, and that any assumption related to Wade can be made from that (not that Wade and Novotna are even that similar as players and style of play, despite both being known as net players). Yes she has 1 more head to head win, but in slams Sanchez was the heavy favorite if they were to play, apart from Wimbledon. If they played at every slam from 1989-1998 Sanchez would probably win 30-32 of the 40 matches, with Jana winning 5-7 at Wimbledon and only the very rare win anywhere else. Yet saying all that I tend to believe Novotna does better against Sanchez than Wade would too. Also saying Sanchez would do well against Wade only on clay and maybe hard courts, well that covers most of the tour not only today, but even already in Sanchez's era, which some of you seem to forget. The days of a predominant grass and carpet tour are so long in the past. So if Sanchez wins all day on clay, and wins often on hard courts, she already wins the hypothetical matchup.

    I do feel funny typing all this as this is almost becoming more of a Novotna vs Wade thread than Wade vs Sanchez.

    I do agree Sanchez Vicario has lots of trouble with a true 100% all out attacker. However that is someone like Navratilova, Billie Jean King, and maybe Margaret Court. People that made her pass immediately and gave her no time to set her bearings. That is not Wade who stayed back half the time on her serve, and rarely even came in off her opponents serve. She spent a fair bit of time at the baseline, biding her time to attack, which would be suicide against Sanchez Vicario when her ground game isn't even as good as Novotna or even Sukova, and as I have already explained there is nothing I see that indicates she did poorly vs Sukova or Novotna, except for Novotna on grass (and to a degree Jana on carpet). Add to that Wade wasn't exactly known for her smart approach shots, which would also be suicide vs Sanchez Vicario, especialy in todays (or more to the points even 90s) slowed conditions. The only record vs Sanchez that would be troubling in this topic as far as how she does vs an attacker is her record vs Navratliova, but Wade is no Navratilova, not in any sense of the word. Anyway every players besides Graf, Evert, and Seles has an awful head to head with Navratilova.

    I also laugh at making such a big deal of Sanchez losing to Sukova at the 93 U.S Open. Yeah it was a bad loss, and a bit of a rare choke from Sanchez and she had the match and should have closed it out in 2 sets, but there have hundreds many worst ones for a top 2 seed (hello Navratilova-Horvath, McNeil-Graf, Hingis-Dokic, Hingis-Ruano Pascual, and Serena Williams-too many people to list just for starters; heck Navratilova-Sukova at the 84 Australian was a much worse loss considering this was peak all conquering Martina vs a then 17 year old nobody).
     
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2014
    #7
  8. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    coming back on topic

    3 clay court
    3 grass
    3 hard
    3 carpet

    come back to earth
     
    #8
  9. conway

    conway Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Messages:
    721
    3 clay court- Sanchez wins all 3 matches and none last more than 45 minutes

    3 grass- I think 95-96 Sanchez (this is a peak only thread after all) would actually win one, loss one, and the 3rd one would be a draw. If Sanchez could push peak Steffi Graf to 7-5 in the 3rd, she sure as heck could compete with mentally weak Wade who won her only Wimbledon through a very subpar Evert, and an otherwise lax draw.

    3 carpet- Wade wins 2 of 3. Sanchez was never that good a carpet player.

    3 hard- Sanchez either wins 2 or 3 of the 3.
     
    #9
  10. BTURNER

    BTURNER Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,545
    Location:
    OREGON
    Clay sanchez wins 3
    grass Wade wins 3
    hard sanchez wins 2 of 3
    carpet wade wins 3
     
    #10

Share This Page