AO 2018 WOMEN'S FINAL: (1) Simona Halep vs (2) C. Wozniacki

[travlerajm]

Wozniacki's view from across the net from mid-second set on:
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b&biw=1870&bih=956&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=YVduWtr9I4TojwPhq4iQDw&q=halep+women's+final+australian+open&oq=halep+women's+final+australian+open&gs_l=psy-ab.3...4188.6881.0.7134.16.16.0.0.0.0.91.827.16.16.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..0.0.0....0.bpCMBgoEmZg#imgrc=GGQ85blArgEywM:

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

Surviving a match point is, generally speaking, clutch, but, IMO, if you survive FIVE match points on the way to a Slam final, 3 of them against a vastly inferior player against whom you shouldn't have gotten into that position in the 1st place, and against whom you had a 15-13 life and death struggle, then you were lucky.

Davis was NOT an inferior opponent, much less vastly inferior, in her match against Halep. Sure she is outside of the top 60, but she had raised her level and was playing one of the best matches of her career. Like Halep, she is tenacious, plays with a lot of heart and is very fit --she is able to run down balls that most players would not get to. Halep OTOH was not quite 100% with her ankle/feet. Nasty sprain the day before in her match against Bouchard. While we have been treated to a more aggressive Halep in the 2nd week at Melbourne, Davis was playing a more aggressive (52 vs 27 winners), higher-risk game than Halep in their 2nd round match.

 

[britam25]

What match did you watch ?!


Just because someone is ranked lower doesnt mean that he is "inferior", if you had watched the match you would know how well Davis played. Federer saved match points against Benneteau in route to Wimbledon 12, the same thing with Mayer for Shanghai 14. Djokovic saved match points against Seppi at RG 12. Wawrinka escaped match points against Evans and after went to beat Del Potro, Nishikori and Djokovic in order to win the title.

So, you don't believe that Davis is an inferior player to Halep? I DID watch that match, I've not seen Davis play before, so, I have no point of reference to how well she played, but, I assume, given that her ranking and that she is 24, that she played well for her level. Of course, I HAVE seen Halep play, many times, and, IMO, she was not playing well for much of the match. I fail to see what the mens' matches you mentioned have to do with Halep's.

 

[britam25]

I was not a particular fan of Wozniacki before this match, but that final earned her my respect because I was impressed by her strategy adjustments at different points in the match. I still maintain that the outcome was never really in doubt from about the halfway point of the second set.

It might not have been easy to tell for the casual observer at that point, because that was when Halep was winning majority of the points; But I believe that Wozniacki sensed the high-percentage-of-victory opportunity and visibly changed her strategy mid-second set when it became obvious that Halep was gassed: she stopped going for the lines to play longer more physically taxing points, playing more margin but still alternating cross-court/down-the-line in the rallies to make Halep cover a lot of ground. Near the end of the second set, when Wozniacki was several points away from possible straight-sets victory, my thought at that point was that it didn't really matter whether Halep dug in and won the second set or not, because there was no chance she would be able to outlast Wozniacki in the third. Even when Halep won 3 games in a row in the middle of the third set to go up 4-3, it reminded me of those horror movies where the mortally wounded killer rises up one last time and staggers around before finally succumbing. Halep was doubling over with hands on her knees after every point. Of course Wozniacki could see that -- she stood tall and ready to return while waiting for Halep to serve, even on points she lost. Credit for Halep for not giving up, but this was not going to be her day.

Halep will clearly win a slam soon. She is very talented, but she has a very different set of talents than Wozniacki, and Wozniacki is a terrible matchup for her. So is Kerber, and she was lucky to survive that one.

Saying that a match was never really in doubt when the player who ultimately won was down a service break at 4-3 is completely, and utterly, ridiculous

 

[travlerajm]

Saying that a match was never really in doubt when the player who ultimately won was down a service break at 4-3 is completely, and utterly, ridiculous

But when the majority of games in the set are service breaks, being up a break at 4-3 is more akin to being on serve.

 

[britam25]

But when the majority of games in the set are service breaks, being up a break at 4-3 is more akin to being on serve.

If a player is up 4-3 ON SERVE in the decisive set, the match is in doubt for the opponent, let alone, if it's a service break. Your statement is ludicrous.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

So, you don't believe that Davis is an inferior player to Halep? I DID watch that match, I've not seen Davis play before, so, I have no point of reference to how well she played, but, I assume, given that her ranking and that she is 24, that she played well for her level. Of course, I HAVE seen Halep play, many times, and, IMO, she was not playing well for much of the match. I fail to see what the mens' matches you mentioned have to do with Halep's.

On average, Davis' playing level is lower than Halep's. But, on a given day, a 2nd tier player (say top 80 in this case) can sometimes play at a high enough level to beat players in the 10. On that day, that player is not what we would call an inferior opponent. We have seen this more than once with Dustin Brown and Rafa Nadal. Have seen this with other top players as well. Sometimes it is the matchup. Other times, the higher level player might not be at the very peak of their game. That is not to say they are necessarily playing poorly -- but it is rare for players to play at their peak all the time.

Note that Davis is currently outside of the top 60 but was inside the top 30 just last year. She wins about 60% of her WTA matches. While someone like Davis can raise their level to compete, on par, with a top 10 player, they usually cannot sustain that level for several rounds in a major tournament. Note also that Halep might have been playing somewhat tentatively. She had the nasty-looking sprain the previous day in her match against Bouchard. Her ankles were taped up and she could have been a bit paranoid about making the ankle issue worse. She was playing a bit more conservatively than she had against Bouchard and against her opponents in the later rounds.

Halep might have been a bit off that day but she was not really playing all that poorly from what I saw. She did have more UEs (39) than winners (27) but she did win 158 points compared to 145 points for Davis. Davis appeared to be playing a more aggressive, higher-risk game than Halep. (She also came to the net quite a bit). Her brand of play paid off quite a few times time but not always. Note that she hit nearly twice as many winners as Halep but she also hit more than 30 more UEs.

 

[FakeEmpire]

Aaaaaaaaand of course this had to happen.
I had pretty much figured it out since the "Fett escape" and the Kerber-Halep semi just confirmed it.

This is tough.
I won't be watching (women's) tennis for a while.
I feel the investment/reward ratio is a little bit unfair at this point, to be honest.
Whatever people say, I think Simona is quite unlucky.
Whenever I think Bartoli has a Wimbledon title (that her opponent just gave her in the final) and Simona has zero (zilch, nada), it just makes me wonder if there's any poetic justice in the world at all.

Of course, I'm trying to look at the big picture (it was a good tournament for her, yadda yadda), but even the fact that Halep lost the #1 spot seems somehow unfair and too tough to handle at the moment. It's almost like the worst thing possible than can ever happen to her at Grand Slam level always tends to happen.

I hope she has a word or two with Clijsters (my favourite player of the last few generations), a similarly nice person who lost her first 4 (!!!) major finals and then went on to win the same amount.

I can't be too optimistic for the future (like most people who are saying "oh, she'll eventually win a Slam") because she always plays close matches and I can never imagine her just cruising to any Slam title, and whenever a match gets tight I just imagine her losing the important points over and over again. I also fear she might be developing a trauma, especially now that she played well enough to win (or at least deserve it) and still lost (agonisingly). Sometimes it feels like there are just too many obstacles to overcome.

However, this has made me more philosophical, in a way.
Of course it hurts, but if you look at it closely, how incredibly human is Simona's story?
We're so used to worship and stories of linear, almost god-like success (Serena and Federer, for instance), and Halep provides another side of the tennis narrative of success.

Success is also a player who tries and tries and tries, and keeps trying.
There's such a huge range of emotions involved in being a Simona fan.
Being her fan is like a pathway to wisdom.

There, there... It could be worse. You could be a Radwanska's fan, dealing with the fact that ship has already sailed. *sobs a little*

Besides,

(The Ostapenko phenomenon can't be permanent)

 

[Gizo]

An incredibly enjoyable women's final to cap off a very enjoyable women's tournament.

Hats off to both ladies.

 

[britam25]

On average, Davis' playing level is lower than Halep's. But, on a given day, a 2nd tier player (say top 80 in this case) can sometimes play at a high enough level to beat players in the 10. On that day, that player is not what we would call an inferior opponent. We have seen this more than once with Dustin Brown and Rafa Nadal. Have seen this with other top players as well. Sometimes it is the matchup. Other times, the higher level player might not be at the very peak of their game. That is not to say they are necessarily playing poorly -- but it is rare for players to play at their peak all the time.

Note that Davis is currently outside of the top 60 but was inside the top 30 just last year. She wins about 60% of her WTA matches. While someone like Davis can raise their level to compete, on par, with a top 10 player, they usually cannot maintain that level for several rounds in a major tournament. Note also that Halep might have been playing somewhat tentatively. She had the nasty-looking sprain the previous day in her match against Bouchard. Her ankles were taped up and she could have been a bit paranoid about making the ankle issue worse. She was playing a bit more conservatively than she had against Bouchard and against her opponents in the later rounds.

Halep might have been a bit off that day but she was not really playing all that poorly from what I saw. She did have more UEs (39) than winners (27) but she did win 158 points compared to 145 points for Davis. Davis appeared to be playing a more aggressive, higher-risk game than Halep. (She also came to the net quite a bit). Her brand of play paid off quite a few times time but not always. Note that she hit nearly twice as many winners as Halep but she also hit more than 30 more UEs.

 

[britam25]

I read once that when Herb Brooks, the coach of the "Miracle on Ice" 1980 Olympic hockey team that upset the Russians, gave his pep talk before that game, he conceded that, normally, if the 2 teams played ten times, the USA would probably win once, but stated that the game they were about to play was that one time, and, indeed it was. OBVIOUSLY Davis' game was good enough to win on that given day, and I never said otherwise. I said, she's a worse, or inferior player to Halep, period-and, you play to a great extent, as well as you're allowed to play, and, IMO, Halep was nowhere near her peak form, and that she was lucky to win-even some of Davis' foot problems were around the time of the match points. When Nadal lost to Rosol, for example, I didn't have the impression that he played poorly, Rosol just played out of his head. I had never seen HIM play either, but Nadal wasn't frequently stinking up the joint the way Halep was-and the way she did in the last 3 games vs Woz.

 

[Harry_Wild]

There, there... It could be worse. You could be a Radwanska's fan, dealing with the fact that ship has already sailed. *sobs a little*

Besides,

(The Ostapenko phenomenon can't be permanent)

Serena Williams will be ready by then for the 2018 FO! Serena be very hungry to win more GS now that RF is pulling close to her GS total!

 

[ihitlikeagirl]

@Atari, I agree with a lot of what you've said above. One thing, Simona hurt her ankle in her first round match against Destanee Aiava.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

I read once that when Herb Brooks, the coach of the "Miracle on Ice" 1980 Olympic hockey team that upset the Russians, gave his pep talk before that game, he conceded that, normally, if the 2 teams played ten times, the USA would probably win once, but stated that the game they were about to play was that one time, and, indeed it was. OBVIOUSLY Davis' game was good enough to win on that given day, and I never said otherwise. I said, she's a worse, or inferior player to Halep, period-and, you play to a great extent, as well as you're allowed to play, and, IMO, Halep was nowhere near her peak form, and that she was lucky to win-even some of Davis' foot problems were around the time of the match points. When Nadal lost to Rosol, for example, I didn't have the impression that he played poorly, Rosol just played out of his head. I had never seen HIM play either, but Nadal wasn't frequently stinking up the joint the way Halep was-and the way she did in the last 3 games vs Woz.

You had said that Halep "survived match points against a vastly inferior player". Our point was, on that day, Davis was not a vastly inferior player.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

Serena Williams will be ready by then for the 2018 FO! Serena be very hungry to win more GS now that RF is pulling close to her GS total!

Not looking forward to Serena rejoining the tour so much. It's been rather refreshing seeing other players get to the finals and win tournaments. Lovin' the variety.

 

[Fintft]

Davis was NOT an inferior opponent, much less vastly inferior, in her match against Halep. Sure she is outside of the top 60, but she had raised her level and was playing one of the best matches of her career. Like Halep, she is tenacious, plays with a lot of heart and is very fit --she is able to run down balls that most players would not get to. Halep OTOH was not quite 100% with her ankle/feet. Nasty sprain the day before in her match against Bouchard. While we have been treated to a more aggressive Halep in the 2nd week at Melbourne, Davis was playing a more aggressive (52 vs 27 winners), higher-risk game than Halep in their 2nd round match.

Halep must have read the book "Play chess as a Tiger" when you try to play consistent against inferior opponents and make it random against higher rated ones.

 

[skyline]

Serena Williams will be ready by then for the 2018 FO! Serena be very hungry to win more GS now that RF is pulling close to her GS total!

Serena isn’t going to be ready to win FO. Halep still has time.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

Serena isn’t going to be ready to win FO. Halep still has time.

Perhaps. We'll have to see. While clay is not her best surface, Serena is often still quite the threat on the dirt. She won it in 2015 was in the final in 2016. Lost to Muguruza in that latter final. Garbine could be a threat at FO even tho she lost in 4R last year. Ostapenko may win RG again in the future but she has been rather erratic since her slam win and I'm not too sure that she is ready to defend her title this year.

And my money says that Halep fares better at RG than Woz.

 

[skyline]

Halep will definitely fare better at RG than Wozniacki, Wozniacki’s never been much for dirt.

I know Serena can win on clay of course, I just don’t think she’ll be ready this year.