2020 Australian Open - Women's Singles - General Discussion

Who will win AO 2020?


  • Total voters
    70
  • Poll closed .

FakeEmpire

Professional
Jabeur is indeed a shotmaker, but I'm enjoying how Kenin changes the spins and pace in a blink of an eye. I believe Kvitova said she is aggressive, because she adapts her shots so quickly you can't just hit those balls away. There's thought behind it. She just doesn't give you much of a rhythm.
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
Kenin had a breakthrough 2019 so this isn’t too shocking.

Hobart champ
Acapulco runner up
French Open 4R (beating Serena)
Mallorca title
Canadian SF (beating Barty and Svitolina)
Cincy SF (beating Svitolina and Osaka)
USO 3R
Zhengzhou QF
Guangzhou title
Wuhan 3R
Beijing 3R
Got into Shenzhen as an alternate

Won the most improved player of the year
 

FakeEmpire

Professional
Eh eh eh, Kenin has no time to lose by answering to those pedestrian questions!

Sadly, I won't be able to watch Barty-Kvitova or my big boss will kill me for showing up more asleep than her after doing a night shift. Might be a good one.
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
This deservedly could be the final.

Barty v Kvitova.

H2H 4-3 for Petra who won the first 4 meetings, Ash the last 3.

All 7 matches:
2012 French Open 1R
2017 Birmingham Final
2019 Sydney Final
2019 Australian Open QF
2019 Miami QF
2019 Beijing QF
2019 WTA Finals RR match
 
Amanda Coetzer for singles
Amazing, I was looking them up and Cara managed to make more money on tour (over 7 million) than Amanda (over 5 million).
Coetzer was definitely the best singles player of the two, but Cara won so much in doubles that it's questionable who among them is the greatest overall.
I would give Cara the edge, personally.
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
Amazing, I was looking them up and Cara managed to make more money on tour (over 7 million) than Amanda (over 5 million).
Coetzer was definitely the best singles player of the two, but Cara won so much in doubles that it's questionable who among them is the greatest overall.
I would give Cara the edge, personally.
Yeah I guess Coetzer being in the 1990s and Cara winning big doubles titles as recently as the WTA Finals in 2014 ($250,000) helped her money purse.
 
What's your definition of great? Because you might find you're engaging in a tautology.
Well, I obviously chose to define "great" and "legendary" as different categories.
It's not the words used to describe this that really matter, but what you ascribe to them.
In my view, any player who has won a Slam has to at least be considered a great player, since very few players do end up winning majors.
The legend status would necessarily require more majors.
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
Both are very good players and it could go either way of course, but I'm leaning toward Kvitova winning the match.
Of course i think I would’ve gone 50-50 to be honest. These two play some great, tight matches and their form has been similar this tournament.
 

Fedinkum

Legend
Petra really hate the tennis ball this afo...she is murdering her forehand on anything less than short. UEs stats will be interesting today.
 

zvelf

Professional
Well, I obviously chose to define "great" and "legendary" as different categories.
It's not the words used to describe this that really matter, but what you ascribe to them.
In my view, any player who has won a Slam has to at least be considered a great player, since very few players do end up winning majors.
The legend status would necessarily require more majors.
So it is a tautology. You're saying winning a major automatically makes one great. But what about Virginia Ruzici? How can she be considered a great player? Barely anyone remembers her. She won the French Open in a draw full of names even most tennis fans would have a hard time identifying. Ruzici never finished a single year ranked in the top 10. She was 0-23 against Chris Evert while Chris gave her 5 bagels and 12 breadstick sets. She was 0-12 against Martina Navratilova. She was 0-13 against Tracy Austin. Surely to be great, you have to be able to beat other great players once at the very least. Surely to be great, you have to at least have one season in which you're considered a top 10 player?
 

fundrazer

Legend
What's Petra's first serve % so far, sub 50?

Came up with the goods to save bp though. One ball looked maybe a bit long but no call
 

Fedinkum

Legend
What's Petra's first serve % so far, sub 50?

Came up with the goods to save bp though. One ball looked maybe a bit long but no call
She is either a few errors away from losing this set or a few winners away winning it. She is just russian routtling points.
 
So it is a tautology. You're saying winning a major automatically makes one great. But what about Virginia Ruzici? How can she be considered a great player? Barely anyone remembers her. She won the French Open in a draw full of names even most tennis fans would have a hard time identifying. Ruzici never finished a single year ranked in the top 10. She was 0-23 against Chris Evert while Chris gave her 5 bagels and 12 breadstick sets. She was 0-12 against Martina Navratilova. She was 0-13 against Tracy Austin. Surely to be great, you have to be able to beat other great players once at the very least. Surely to be great, you have to at least have one season in which you're considered a top 10 player?
These are only words.
And no, it's not a tautology.
You can use your definition of good, great, amazing, extraordinary, legendary, I don't care.
As long as you explain what you mean by them and how you understand the differences between them and the hierarchy.
You seem to be bizarrely preoccupied with a supposed essence of "great", like it should only mean whatever it is you ascribe to it.
 
Top