AO 2013 - Quarterfinals - Serena Williams v. Sloane Stephens

[TennisFan436]

LOL @ people predicting an Azarenka sweep. The same Azarenka that:

1. Hates the heat
2. Almost lost to Jamie Hampton
3. Almost lost to Kuznetsova


Can't wait for tonight!

[Relinquis]

Monfils and Tsonga are French, so i wouldn't expect people to feel the same way about them as the Williams sisters. Race politics are different outside of the US than they are in the US. The US has a peculiar political culture related to race due to it's origin as a nation of colonisers/settlers, history of slavery and the various waves of emigration.

The Williams sisters have kept American tennis relevant. Americans should be thankful for them both, but particularly Serena, for that. Sloane Stephens will hopefully do the same in the future.

Why the hate? Do you really want your country to be as irrelevant for women's tennis as it currently is on the mens side?

[BlewByU]

Originally Posted by Relinquis

Do you really want your country to be as irrelevant for women's tennis as it currently is on the mens side?

With due respect, this is the wrong question.

The real relevent question is:
"Do we really want a castle if it were founded upon beach sand?"

imho, the answer is "NO".

Better to start anew with solid secure foundation.
Even if it may take a while longer...

Of course we are already beginning to feel that Stephens will be part of latter efforts.

. . . . .

[tudwell]

Originally Posted by Soianka

It would be almost impossible to "overrate" Serena.

She is heads and shoulders over EVERYONE ELSE in a very deep field of tough, strong, fit players.

There is no one on tour who can touch her when she is playing even remotely well.

So? Week-in, week-out consistency is a huge part of a player's legacy. If she can't keep up her consistency and her fitness, then her losses are deserved. I'll admit she's the one to beat and should probably be ranked number one to reflect that, but it's no one's fault but her own that she doesn't actually have the number one ranking. And regardless, the second half of last year was her best playing in years. That's hardly the consistency I would expect from the greatest women's player of all time. The reality is that she has far less slams, far less Masters, and far less time at number one compared to true GOAT candidates like Steffi Graf. Serena has two year-end number one finishes, and arguably one more year (2012) when she should have finished number one. That's still not even half as many as Graf had. I'm glad to see Serena's actually taking the sport seriously at the moment and really seems focused in a way that she hasn't been for some time, but that doesn't change the fact that some people on this forum vastly overrate her legacy.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by THUNDERVOLLEY

Pay attention: I'm not the one using it as an excuse--another Amercan (Blake) did use that, and in his era, he is right: not one of the American's of the Blake/Roddick/Fish generation or the Isner/Querry generation has met ultimate success at Wimbledon--meaning won the even (and no, Roddick lucking his way to a finals is not winning. In fact, his lone majors win was where? The hardcourts of the USO) . That is what Blake referred to, so again, you are incorrect.

You cannot be serious. Roddick making it to 3 Wimbledon finals and taking Federer, the greatest grass court player of all time, to 16-14 in the 5th set means that Roddick sucks on grass? I think the only grass must be the one that you're smoking!

Originally Posted by THUNDERVOLLEY

If you make excuses why a surface is not to your liking, or you avoid the event altogether, then you will not even consider such an opportunity, because for that kind of player, it is not realistic.

Oh, really? So if you told James Blake that the Wimbledon committee will allow him to skip the first 6 rounds and allow him to play in the Wimbledon final, you're saying that he's going to turn that offer down? Not in a million years! Not even a clay court specialist like Sergi Bruguera would turn that offer down.

[Soianka]

Originally Posted by tudwell

So? Week-in, week-out consistency is a huge part of a player's legacy. If she can't keep up her consistency and her fitness, then her losses are deserved. I'll admit she's the one to beat and should probably be ranked number one to reflect that, but it's no one's fault but her own that she doesn't actually have the number one ranking. And regardless, the second half of last year was her best playing in years. That's hardly the consistency I would expect from the greatest women's player of all time. The reality is that she has far less slams, far less Masters, and far less time at number one compared to true GOAT candidates like Steffi Graf. Serena has two year-end number one finishes, and arguably one more year (2012) when she should have finished number one. That's still not even half as many as Graf had. I'm glad to see Serena's actually taking the sport seriously at the moment and really seems focused in a way that she hasn't been for some time, but that doesn't change the fact that some people on this forum vastly overrate her legacy.

Yes, her 2 whole losses in the last 8 months.

Even Chris Evert and Martina N recognize how weak their eras (and Steffi's) were compared to the depth of Women's tennis today.

You can say whatever you want, but the bottomline is Serena is nothing short of phenomenal.

[TennisFan436]

Serena will be back and apparently she isn't going anywhere anytime soon (did you see her press conference?). Another 5 years in the game at least...

[Towser83]

I can't believe what comments get removed here sometimes..

[TMF]

Originally Posted by Towser83

I can't believe what comments get removed here sometimes..

It happen frequently for threads that are involve with Serena.

[Soianka]

Originally Posted by TennisFan436

Serena will be back and apparently she isn't going anywhere anytime soon (did you see her press conference?). Another 5 years in the game at least...

I don't know about 5 years but she's got another 24-36 months at least of dominating, I think.

Plenty of time to surpass 18 singles grand slams.

[tudwell]

Originally Posted by Soianka

Yes, her 2 whole losses in the last 8 months.

Even Chris Evert and Martina N recognize how weak their eras (and Steffi's) were compared to the depth of Women's tennis today.

You can say whatever you want, but the bottomline is Serena is nothing short of phenomenal.

I agree she's phenomenal, but that doesn't make her "undoubtedly" the greatest of all time.

[rainingaces]

Originally Posted by Towser83

I can't believe what comments get removed here sometimes..

Careful unless you want to get banned again.

[Towser83]

Originally Posted by rainingaces

Careful unless you want to get banned again.

What I just said is ban worthy? Can you even say the word "ban"?

[Ripper014]

Originally Posted by Soianka

Yes, her 2 whole losses in the last 8 months.

Even Chris Evert and Martina N recognize how weak their eras (and Steffi's) were compared to the depth of Women's tennis today.

You can say whatever you want, but the bottomline is Serena is nothing short of phenomenal.

I would argue your point. You can only judge the strength of the field by their peers. I grew up in the 70's, Chris, Martina and Steffi dominated in their era's against their peers. This just goes to show how much better they were against them day in and day out.

Give Serena a 65 sq in wooden racket on a slow clay court and I would still probably take Chris over her even with Serena's advanced training methods of today.

The reason today' fields are deeper is because there are few that can stand heads and shoulders above the rest.

And as great as everyone likes to say Serena is... how many French Open titles does she have..? And I would imagine she would not have that one if the surfaces of all 4 majors played like they did back in the 70's and 80's before they homogenized them. That rings true for a lot of players that have the career grand slam including one Andre Agassi.

[TERRASTAR18]

Originally Posted by tudwell

So? Week-in, week-out consistency is a huge part of a player's legacy. If she can't keep up her consistency and her fitness, then her losses are deserved. I'll admit she's the one to beat and should probably be ranked number one to reflect that, but it's no one's fault but her own that she doesn't actually have the number one ranking. And regardless, the second half of last year was her best playing in years. That's hardly the consistency I would expect from the greatest women's player of all time. The reality is that she has far less slams, far less Masters, and far less time at number one compared to true GOAT candidates like Steffi Graf. Serena has two year-end number one finishes, and arguably one more year (2012) when she should have finished number one. That's still not even half as many as Graf had. I'm glad to see Serena's actually taking the sport seriously at the moment and really seems focused in a way that she hasn't been for some time, but that doesn't change the fact that some people on this forum vastly overrate her legacy.

well it's easy for graf who played 2/3 of the different disiplines of tennis. some goat, especially when her biggest rival was taken out....oh to have such luxuries.

[TERRASTAR18]

Originally Posted by Prisoner of Birth

Because she loses to nobodies?

sloane is a top 20 player on thne rise...

[TERRASTAR18]

Originally Posted by BlewByU

Well summed up sir, very well summed up!

It was known for long long time that Serena is not a complete all-around player.
Serena was good at bullying other opponents who, for some mysterious reasons, all tried to play Serena with Serena's own game which Serena happens to be quite good at.

A truly skilled all-courter would have tamed Serena.
Henin was such a player.
Heck, even Zheng shows us how to handle this incomplete bully.
Its just that skilled all-court players seem out of fashion these days.

Will Stephens develop into 2hbh all-court player who will grace tennis court, entertaining us the very thirsty crowd, for years to come?
Looks that way and certainly hope so.
I am beginning to believe in women's tennis now,,,

Bravo, Stephens. Bravo!
My warmest regards for you darling.
Also my highest regards for your parents who brought you up this magnificent way!
I am sooooooooooo happy for you now.



. . . . .

yet she had a losing record against serena...

[TERRASTAR18]

Originally Posted by Masayoshi

Yes! Way to take out the most unserene Serena, Sloane!

Just watched the replay and was surprised and pleased before starting that the video length was 2:35. Knew that it had to be going 3, but thought for sure Sloane would choke it Almagro-style.

Serena's such a little baby. Notice all the little drama she pulls whenever things don't go her way. The medical timeout at just the crucial moment, right before Sloane serves for the set (which worked, as Sloane completely faltered there). Then the destruction of the racket in the third. And all the dramatic little pauses and self-pitying out there. UGH.

Honestly, Serena seemed like the 19-year old out there, while Sloane seemed like the cool, 31-year old professional.

I love how Sloane said she might put a poster of herself on her wall to replace the poster of Serena. LOL. I bet Serena's fuming about that comment.

The only player I actively root against in either men or women's game goes down to a 19 year old with virtually no big match experience. Awesome!

I think Stephens has the game to be a multiple slam winner - she's remarkably well put together for a 19-year old, and her mental lapses in this match and earlier rounds are things that will get better with experience. Give her 4 years - she'll have at least one by then, maybe more.

Vika will still probably take her in the semis, though.

maybe you should watch the whole match before making idiotic comments.

[Prisoner of Birth]

Originally Posted by TERRASTAR18

sloane is a top 20 player on thne rise...

What about the French Open last year?

[Soianka]

Originally Posted by Ripper014

I would argue your point. You can only judge the strength of the field by their peers. I grew up in the 70's, Chris, Martina and Steffi dominated in their era's against their peers. This just goes to show how much better they were against them day in and day out.

Give Serena a 65 sq in wooden racket on a slow clay court and I would still probably take Chris over her even with Serena's advanced training methods of today.

The reason today' fields are deeper is because there are few that can stand heads and shoulders above the rest.

And as great as everyone likes to say Serena is... how many French Open titles does she have..? And I would imagine she would not have that one if the surfaces of all 4 majors played like they did back in the 70's and 80's before they homogenized them. That rings true for a lot of players that have the career grand slam including one Andre Agassi.

There was much less depth in women's tennis in the 70's and 80's. Go look at some of the old draws. The early round matches were all cakewalks..not because Graf, Evert, and Navratilova were so great but rather because most everyone else was not.

You had overweight, out of shape, non-athletes in the top 100 of the WTA.

These days, the game is at a completely different level with very talented, fit and athletic players throughout the top 100 and below.

You may not want to believe it but Evert, Shriver and Navratilova have said so themselves.