2024 U.S. Open - Women's Discussion

[Mark-Touch]

Had she broken in 3rd game of second set, I doubt Pegula comes back from that. But she hit some unexpected errors over there.
She needs to work both on her fitness and her game. While it's a delight when it's working, it's a disaster when it's not working throwing tons of UE. She need. To make some changes so that she can develop a reliable game in which she can stay in rallies and thus win some points

I don't think she will ever change, especially at her age. It's in her DNA.

 

[Mark-Touch]

It's not THAT rare on the women's side. We even had Kenin winning one fairly recently.

Rare?
Never mind Kenin.
How could he have possibly overlooked the American who won last year's U.S. Open?

 

[Pheasant]

Rare?
Never mind Kenin.
How could he have possibly overlooked the American who won last year's U.S. Open?

Stephens
Kenin
Coco
Osaka, who has lived in the U.S. since she was 3 years old and was a citizen here(dual citizenship with Japan) until a few years ago.

I count Osaka. My 100% Japanese blood mother, whose 2nd language was English, counted herself as an American immediately after arriving here, despite the fact that she never set foot in America until she was 25.

 

[ScottleeSV]

What a win for Stojsavljevic in the girl's. I thought Jovic was a near cert to win the tourny after the way she played in the women's event.

 

[Mark-Touch]

Same will apply to this final. Either Sabalenka will keep it together long enough to finish the points off, or she will not. Pegula will really just be a passenger, with no chance of dictating or controlling play.

This!

 

[Mark-Touch]

Congrats to Ostapenko and Kichenok for their doubles win!

 

[Mark-Touch]

I'm not saying it will happen, but if Sab could find a way to lose to Gauff
last year after winning the first set, I wouldn't put it past her to manage to lose to Pegula.

On paper Sab wins easily. In practice, it could be a totally different story.

Like I said last year, I believe once again the title will be in Sab's hands.
It will be her who wins, or her who loses (U.E.'s).

 

[Pheasant]

I'm not saying it will happen, but if Sab could find a way to lose to Gauff
last year after winning the first set, I wouldn't put it past her to manage to lose to Pegula.

On paper Sab wins easily. In practice, it could be a totally different story.

Like I said last year, I believe once again the title will be in Sab's hands.
It will be her who wins, or her who loses (U.E.'s).

Exactly. Sabalenka, when on, is very deadly. However, that USO crowd rattled the heck out of her last year.

She probably learned a lesson from last year. She held steady last night after getting broken while serving for the match. Navarro had battled back to deuce on Sabalenka's serve during her very next service game. But Sabs hit a clutch twisty serve out wide, then screamed in joy. That was it. That serve got her back on track. She completely stopped Navarro's momentum with that serve, then destroyed her in the tiebreaker.

For a moment, I thought that Sabelenka was going to blow that match.

 

[AM75]

Penko is a Slam champion again – AMAZING!

 

[chjtennis]

The current WTA environment features a lot of women trying to "play like men," in the sense that they are trying to hit big from the baseline. But the current WTA environment is also marked by wild inconsistency in performances (Ostapenko could lose first round, make a deep run, or go from goddess to scrub from one round to the next), and players completely losing their ability to play effectively this way in tight situations.

Muchova, Jabeur (when in form), and recently Barty, are all examples that the old style could not only survive, but thrive. Watch some of those old matches, and the best players could do what these modern players are doing, but do it consistently over time, and maintain it in tight spots.

They go for broke to hit big, so are more likely to make errors.

You seem to be argumentative, so I'll be more strict with the use of terms. I said old style, which is styles of Evert's, Sanchez Vicario's, etc. The classic style of the players you mentioned is nothing like the old style of women's tennis. They have different swing, especially on the FH side, and they also serve much bigger than the female players of old days. Those pre-2000s old style certainly cannot compete against the modern style.

Navarro certainly seems to play with modern classic style. She constructs points with variety of shots and comes to the net every now and then. As a player in 2024, she tries to hit hard but not to the extent she loses balance after every shot. Ash Barty also didn't hit weak. Navarro's sliced BH is not bad and she is also decent at the net. If you want Barty type quality, she just is not as good a player. She also throws in drops shots here and there. She constructs points with tactics. Her brand of tennis certainly is not all about power hitting.

 

[chjtennis]

That kind of game may not lead to great results at present. She's nowhere nearly as energetic and forcing the point the way Navratilova and ASV were. Right now, Navarro is not impressive at all.

Navarro's techniques are different from those players of old days, of course. But her techniques seem quite classic to me. She made it to SF of a slam, so I think your assessment on her seems a bit harsh.

 

[robyrolfo]

They go for broke to hit big, so are more likely to make errors.

You seem to be argumentative, so I'll be more strict with the use of terms. I said old style, which is styles of Evert's, Sanchez Vicario's, etc. The classic style of the players you mentioned is nothing like the old style of women's tennis. They have different swing, especially on the FH side, and they also serve much bigger than the female players of old days. Those pre-2000s old style certainly cannot compete against the modern style.

Navarro certainly seems to play with modern classic style. She constructs points with variety of shots and comes to the net every now and then. As a player in 2024, she tries to hit hard but not to the extent she loses balance after every shot. Ash Barty also didn't hit weak. Navarro's sliced BH is not bad and she is also decent at the net. If you want Barty type quality, she just is not as good a player. She also throws in drops shots here and there. She constructs points with tactics. Her brand of tennis certainly is not all about power hitting.

This is a forum for talking about tennis, and one person's back and forth conversation is another person's argument. (How's that for argumentative?)

In all seriousness, though, I do have an axe to grind. I completely disagree with statements like the ones you made in bold. I think some of the pre-2000 players could not only compete against the modern players, I think they could dominate them. Of course the average player from that past era might struggle, but the best players would be fine, and the likes of Graf and Navratilova would simply walk all over these fields. Even Seles would probably bury everyone with her frying pan racquet.

You mentioned modern players serving bigger, but the occasional big serve speed on 1st serve does not make for a more effective serve. Most of the big servers on tour have lousy first serve percentages, and almost all of them have second serves that are weak, and of the "just get it in" variety. Heck, Barty was considered a good server and it wasn't because of power. If you don't think amazing players like Graf and Navratilova could serve well with modern racquets (at least as well as Barty), you are crazy (no you personally, just the expression). Heck, even with their old racquets there were more effective servers than most modern players. Martina wasn't blasting serves, but she was placing them perfectly so that she could be in position to volley the returns away.

Even athletically, some people need to go back and watch the former greats. The game might have seemed slower, because of slower ground strokes, but some of the players weren't slow at all. Graf and Navratilova had just as much raw speed as Gauff, the same strength, and far superior footwork. That alone would allow them to hang with anyone on tour today, but then they were better with their racquets than anyone currently in the WTA, and by a WIDE margin.

 

[chjtennis]

This is a forum for talking about tennis, and one person's back and forth conversation is another person's argument. (How's that for argumentative?)

In all seriousness, though, I do have an axe to grind. I completely disagree with statements like the ones you made in bold. I think some of the pre-2000 players could not only compete against the modern players, I think they could dominate them. Of course the average player from that past era might struggle, but the best players would be fine, and the likes of Graf and Navratilova would simply walk all over these fields. Even Seles would probably bury everyone with her frying pan racquet.

You mentioned modern players serving bigger, but the occasional big serve speed on 1st serve does not make for a more effective serve. Most of the big servers on tour have lousy first serve percentages, and almost all of them have second serves that are weak, and of the "just get it in" variety. Heck, Barty was considered a good server and it wasn't because of power. If you don't think amazing players like Graf and Navratilova could serve well with modern racquets (at least as well as Barty), you are crazy (no you personally, just the expression). Heck, even with their old racquets there were more effective servers than most modern players. Martina wasn't blasting serves, but she was placing them perfectly so that she could be in position to volley the returns away.

Even athletically, some people need to go back and watch the former greats. The game might have seemed slower, because of slower ground strokes, but some of the players weren't slow at all. Graf and Navratilova had just as much raw speed as Gauff, the same strength, and far superior footwork. That alone would allow them to hang with anyone on tour today, but then they were better with their racquets than anyone currently in the WTA, and by a WIDE margin.

The original 'discussion' was on whether old style can compete against modern style, so I guess the baseline assumption is the players from the old days, pre-2000s, would bring the exact same game they played in their times. Do you honestly believe they could compete successfully against modern players in modern style? Navratilova, as great as she is, would be easily passed by the modern players whenever she comes to the net. Graf's BH will be attacked and get broken down like Federer's BH was broken by Nadal on clay. Seles essentially had similar style to modern players, but she would be matched and even overpowered by a lot of modern girls.

If Graf was trained in modern environment, I think she might have done well. Her footwork is indeed beautiful, kind of reminds me of Federer's footwork. Navratilova's might have become a baseliner, but is Navratilova Navratilova without S&V? Seles plays similarly to modern players but would she have been another hard hitting baseliner we already have in abundance? Seles is not a classic player anyway, so maybe that doesn't really matter for the sake of this argument anyway.

 

[tennis24x7]

this girl can play some serious doubles

??

 

[tennis24x7]

Exactly. Sabalenka, when on, is very deadly. However, that USO crowd rattled the heck out of her last year.

She probably learned a lesson from last year. She held steady last night after getting broken while serving for the match. Navarro had battled back to deuce on Sabalenka's serve during her very next service game. But Sabs hit a clutch twisty serve out wide, then screamed in joy. That was it. That serve got her back on track. She completely stopped Navarro's momentum with that serve, then destroyed her in the tiebreaker.

For a moment, I thought that Sabelenka was going to blow that match.

ITs 50-50 for me, I think Pegula might pull this one out if she keeps her nerve.

 

[AM75]

The original 'discussion' was on whether old style can compete against modern style, so I guess the baseline assumption is the players from the old days, pre-2000s, would bring the exact same game they played in their times. Do you honestly believe they could compete successfully against modern players in modern style? Navratilova, as great as she is, would be easily passed by the modern players whenever she comes to the net. Graf's BH will be attacked and get broken down like Federer's BH was broken by Nadal on clay. Seles essentially had similar style to modern players, but she would be matched and even overpowered by a lot of modern girls.

If Graf was trained in modern environment, I think she might have done well. Her footwork is indeed beautiful, kind of reminds me of Federer's footwork. Navratilova's might have become a baseliner, but is Navratilova Navratilova without S&V? Seles plays similarly to modern players but would she have been another hard hitting baseliner we already have in abundance? Seles is not a classic player anyway, so maybe that doesn't really matter for the sake of this argument anyway.

It is a funny discussion.
First, we don’t really know how all those 1980s players would play with the modern equipment. I use 1980s here, because pre-2000 is not correct. Serena and Venus are pre-2000, just to remind you, they won their first slams in the 1990s.
Second, Capriarti, Hingis. Davenport, Seles and Graf would be as successful today as they were back then. There's no doubt about it. I saw a couple of times Hingis and Bencic sparring in Wollerau, and Hingis can hold quite well. Even with 40+ she could play at least doubles on a pro level today, just as Navratilova did till her 50s (and deep in 2000s) and Navratilova could hold pretty well against "new" female and male players.
And then, again, I assume you never watched ITF senior tour, where former second rate pros are playing. Believe me, the only thing that distinct them from today’s pros is their foot speed and often fitness.

 

[Mark-Touch]

Sab rock solid on the overheads.
Her serving ain't too shabby either.

 

[Bill Lobsalot]

Sab rock solid on the overheads.
Her serving ain't too shabby either.

There's a match thread. Crickets in here Mark.

 

[chjtennis]

It is a funny discussion.
First, we don’t really know how all those 1980s players would play with the modern equipment. I use 1980s here, because pre-2000 is not correct. Serena and Venus are pre-2000, just to remind you, they won their first slams in the 1990s.
Second, Capriarti, Hingis. Davenport, Seles and Graf would be as successful today as they were back then. There's no doubt about it. I saw a couple of times Hingis and Bencic sparring in Wollerau, and Hingis can hold quite well. Even with 40+ she could play at least doubles on a pro level today, just as Navratilova did till her 50s (and deep in 2000s) and Navratilova could hold pretty well against "new" female and male players.
And then, again, I assume you never watched ITF senior tour, where former second rate pros are playing. Believe me, the only thing that distinct them from today’s pros is their foot speed and often fitness.

I'm not going to disagree with you completely, I agree some players you mentioned would've done well now, but those are more modern players who set a new trend in women's tennis - Hingis, Capriati, Davenport, Williams sisters - they are the beginning of a new era in women's tennis. Older classic generation ends with Graf, I think, and Graf was great and is actually my favorite female player of all time, but I have to admit her style wouldn't dominate the field today like she did back in her time. Of course, if she was 20 years younger and learned a modern style tennis with two handed BH and all that, it would've been different, but her style was more for her time. Serena's prime was actually in the mid-late 2000s-2010s, so I would call her a modern player.

Never watched senior tour, I admit, but I used to watch a lot more women's tennis back in the days. I don't watch it as much these days to be honest, - too busy with too many things in life - mostly only watch men's tennis.

 

[Mark-Touch]

Congrats Aryna! Well done.
I guessed right in the poll.

Good to see she didn't let her mental demons loose this time.

 

[Mark-Touch]

Ever since Sab dropped her lucrative doubles game in 2021 her singles game really started to shine.
She could still pass Sharapova in slam hauls.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

Sabalenka did it! She is the U.S. Open's 2024 Ladies' Champion!! She is now the winner of three majors, and as always, here's the WTA list of majors winners since 2010 (not named Serena):


Schiavone: FO - 2010

Clijsters: USO 2010 & AO 2011

Li Na: FO 2011 & AO 2014

Kvitova: Wimbledon 2011 & 2014

Stosur: USO 2011

Sharapova: FO 2012 & FO 2014

Azarenka: AO 2012 & 2013

Bartoli: Wimbledon 2013

Pennetta: USO 2015

Kerber: AO 2016, USO 2016 & Wimbledon 2018

Muguruza: FO 2016 & Wimbledon 2017

Ostapenko: FO 2017

Stephens: USO 2017

Wozniacki: AO 2018

Osaka: USO 2018, 2020 & AO 2019 and 2021

Barty: FO 2019, Wimbledon 2021 & A0 2022

Halep: FO 2018 & Wimbledon 2019

Andreescu: 2019 USO

Kenin: AO 2020

Krejčíková: FO 2021, Wimbledon 2024

Raducanu: USO 2021

Świątek: FO 2020 & 2022, 2023, 2024 & USO 2022

Rybakina: Wimbledon 2022

Vondroušová: Wimbledon 2023

Gauff: USO 2023

Sabalenka: AO 2023, 2024 & USO 2024

Pegula threw everything she had at Sabalenka, but she was no match, lacking any serious Plan B to at least serve as a speed-bump to Sabalenka, when the latter pulled from her well of experience. I could not be more pleased with the ladies' side of the USO finals results!

 

[Nostradamus]

??

she's good, perfect partner for Ostepanko. Ostepanko can't volley but crazy good from the baseline so good that she sets up her partner at net who is very good volleyer all the time, perfect partnership

 

[Nostradamus]

Ever since Sab dropped her lucrative doubles game in 2021 her singles game really started to shine.
She could still pass Sharapova in slam hauls.

But i will tell you that this does NOT work in amateur USTA tennis. if you play 2 opponent players with good volleys. Amateur guys just can't hit the ball hard enough to make excellent volleyers with good position at net consistently. Maybe able to do it time to time but not consistently,,, that is why it doesn't work in amateur level

 

[GhostDog]

Sabalenka did it! She is the U.S. Open's 2024 Ladies' Champion!! She is now the winner of three majors, and as always, here's the WTA list of majors winners since 2010 (not named Serena):


Schiavone: FO - 2010

Clijsters: USO 2010 & AO 2011

Li Na: FO 2011 & AO 2014

Kvitova: Wimbledon 2011 & 2014

Stosur: USO 2011

Sharapova: FO 2012 & FO 2014

Azarenka: AO 2012 & 2013

Bartoli: Wimbledon 2013

Pennetta: USO 2015

Kerber: AO 2016, USO 2016 & Wimbledon 2018

Muguruza: FO 2016 & Wimbledon 2017

Ostapenko: FO 2017

Stephens: USO 2017

Wozniacki: AO 2018

Osaka: USO 2018, 2020 & AO 2019 and 2021

Barty: FO 2019, Wimbledon 2021 & A0 2022

Halep: FO 2018 & Wimbledon 2019

Andreescu: 2019 USO

Kenin: AO 2020

Krejčíková: FO 2021, Wimbledon 2024

Raducanu: USO 2021

Świątek: FO 2020 & 2022, 2023, 2024 & USO 2022

Rybakina: Wimbledon 2022

Vondroušová: Wimbledon 2023

Gauff: USO 2023

Sabalenka: AO 2023, 2024 & USO 2024

Pegula threw everything she had at Sabalenka, but she was no match, lacking any serious Plan B to at least serve as a speed-bump to Sabalenka, when the latter pulled from her well of experience. I could not be more pleased with the ladies' side of the USO finals results!

2017, Ostapenko & Stephen's in the same year, I didn't remember they both won slams the same year. Sheesh!

 

[robyrolfo]

And so it goes, congrats to the tiger Sabalenka. She absolute deserved it, as she was the best player in the tournament from round 1 (and I was actually at her round 1 match, which was impressive). Score could have been even more one sided, but she did seem to get in her head at a few points in the match.

I'll just say thank god Pegula didn't win a slam. Really, it would be an insult to the sport to have a player like that winning a slam. We were already deeply insulted by Raducanu, so I'm not sure I could have taken another one...

 

[robyrolfo]

The original 'discussion' was on whether old style can compete against modern style, so I guess the baseline assumption is the players from the old days, pre-2000s, would bring the exact same game they played in their times. Do you honestly believe they could compete successfully against modern players in modern style? Navratilova, as great as she is, would be easily passed by the modern players whenever she comes to the net. Graf's BH will be attacked and get broken down like Federer's BH was broken by Nadal on clay. Seles essentially had similar style to modern players, but she would be matched and even overpowered by a lot of modern girls...

Yes, I absolutely believe that, and I'll tell you why below...

Ibut those are more modern players who set a new trend in women's tennis - Hingis, Capriati, Davenport, Williams sisters - they are the beginning of a new era in women's tennis. Older classic generation ends with Graf, I think, and Graf was great and is actually my favorite female player of all time, but I have to admit her style wouldn't dominate the field today like she did back in her time. Of course, if she was 20 years younger and learned a modern style tennis with two handed BH and all that, it would've been different, but her style was more for her time. Serena's prime was actually in the mid-late 2000s-2010s, so I would call her a modern player.

Look, a lot of these arguments are based on feelings or interpretations, but as @AM75 pointed out, we actually have some hard evidence to go by. First and foremost, people tend to forget (or not know), and maybe you forgot, that Graf actually played both the Williams sisters, and on several occasions. The H2H's are either equal, or slightly in favor of Graf vs Venus (depending on the source), but we can call them equal for arguments sake.

And we know that this was a physically depleted Graf who's body was starting to break down, against young Williams sisters who probably still weren't at peak level. So that probably balances out, no? Anyway, the point is that Graf very much held her own against these two "modern" players. Good old Steffi, with her older style racquet and slice backhands had no problem handing the power of the Williams sisters (because they were already powerful), and the Williams sisters were NOT able to attack and break down Graf's backhand. Not even close.

Also, as @AM75 pointed out, Navratilova was able to keep playing doubles until a ridiculously late age, so we know her net game holds up to modern players and equipment just fine.

For further proof, we can look at comparable modern examples, the most glaring of which is Ash Barty. So where should we begin? How about Ash's backhand? She sliced a lot, and it was a slice that, at best was comparable to Graf's, but in reality wasn't nearly as good. And did players attack and breakdown her backhand? Nope. And before you argue she could fall back on her 2-hander for topspin shots, Barty's regular backhand wasn't remarkable, and certainly not the weapon that Steffi's one hander could be, most notably when she would create amazing angles with it.

How about Ash's forehand? Not a power shot, just consistent and accurate. Something Graf (and others) would have no problem matching. So let's talk about Ash physically: she is short, and while she is indeed athletic, she was nowhere near the sheer athleticism of Graf and Navratilova. Both of them were significantly faster than her, had better footwork, and were taller to boot.

And what is the point? The point is that Ash was #1 in the world, practically playing part time, and probably could have racked up a bunch of slams if she played with the regularity and drive that Graf and Navratilova showed. So...

One last thing, on Martina and playing S&V in the modern game. Again, we have a little bit of evidence to work with. Remember when Taylor Townsend used S&V almost exclusively to make a shock run in the USO a few years ago? Yeah, that's Taylor Townsend, a player that is about 1/5 as athletic as Navratilova, 1/10th as good at volleying, and 1/10th as good at serving. Because yeah, Martina wasn't just rolling her serves in wherever and rushing the net, she was placing them extremely well, something that is basically unheard of in the modern WTA tour. So nobody was going to be passing her with ease. Most of these modern players can't even pass off a sitter of an approach, or a pancake second serve, so they aren't going to pass Martina when the approach is sliced down at their shoelaces and they know Martina is a monster at the net.

 

[Aussie Darcy]