Capriati if she won the 91 U.S Open

[flutzingitaway]

Most agree that had Capriati beaten Seles in the 91 U.S Open semis which she was 2 points from doing and served for it twice, she would have beaten Navratilova in the final and won this particular U.S Open. That seems likely as Navratilova played a very weak final full of unforced errors, and Capriati had beaten her in straight sets at Wimbledon on grass.

If this happens what happens with Capriati in 92 and 93, and perhaps long term. I forget what her ranking would have been had she won the 91 U.S Open but I figure it would now be #4. This would help her a lot, since if she ends 1991 ranked in the top 4 she is no longer playing big names in the quarters and would go deeper in all big events most likely. Her confidence would also take a boost. However the pressure would probably be even greater, and that is something she had trouble with. She seemed to lose motivation after this loss though, and did not improve at all in 92 and 93, and stayed stuck around 7th in the world. In 93 she was now 17 and clearly stagnant, losing in the quarters of 3 straight slams to Graf in straight sets, and Graf wasn't even in top form in any of those events.

 

[bluetrain4]

I generally don't assume a player would have had the same level of performance against a different opponent. So, I'm not sure how likely it is that Navratilova loses vs. Jen.

That said, Capriati certainly could have beat her and if she did and wins the 1991 US Open, any number of scenarios could have played out. She would have been a very young slam champion who lived up to the hype - the scrutiny gets even more intense and the pressure rises. She played well enough in 1992 and 1993 - making six QFs in 8 Slams and of course beating Graf for Olympic Gold. If she wins the 1991 USO, possibly some of those QFs are better results, maybe another Slam title- due to the confidence of having done it before. On the other hand, could she have done worse due to the added pressure? And of course the big question is whether the rebellion/burnout still happens. I'd say there would be a good chance that it still happens, but you can never know.

 

[Moose Malloy]

91 US Open put her into a real tailspin, on par with Agassi after 95 US Open. I think its a mistake to go by results to judge Capriati in 92. Do a google search, pretty much every article written on her in 92 talked about how miserable she was on and off court. She was basically like, "I hate tennis. And I really hate the press." Nobody I knew(or the media) was surprised she left the tour after 93 USO, it was sort of inevitable, by her behavior in 92, she basically went through the motions for 2 years(I mean there was an article in LA Times in March 92 saying she looked like a case of tennis burnout) Yeah she reached a bunch of QFs, but there was pretty much no depth in women's tennis back then, it wasn't too hard to do that on just talent. 92 Olympics was a shock, but it really paled in comparison to winning a major. I think the 91 USO SF sort of broke her, she was devastated and wasn't ready to regroup like so many greats of the past did after heartbreaking losses.

Capriati beat Martina at 91 W(look at where she stood to return Martina's serve, it was sort of embarrassing for Martina). I think she would have been favored in the USO final with oddsmakers. And the crowd probably would have been on her side, yeah Martina was old, but Capriati was like America's sweetheart for some reason.

 

[bluetrain4]

91 US Open put her into a real tailspin, on par with Agassi after 95 US Open. I think its a mistake to go by results to judge Capriati in 92. Do a google search, pretty much every article written on her in 92 talked about how miserable she was on and off court. She was basically like, "I hate tennis. And I really hate the press." Nobody I knew(or the media) was surprised she left the tour after 93 USO, it was sort of inevitable, by her behavior in 92, she basically went through the motions for 2 years. Yeah she reached a bunch of QFs, but there was pretty much no depth in women's tennis back then, it wasn't too hard to do that on just talent. 92 Olympics was a shock, but it really paled in comparison to winning a major. I think the 91 USO SF sort of broke her, she was devastated and wasn't ready to regroup like so many greats of the past did after heartbreaking losses.

BTW, Capriati beat Martina at 91 W(look at where she stood to return Martina's serve, it was sort of embarrassing for Martina). I think she would have been favored in the USO final with oddsmakers. And the crowd probably would have been on her side, yeah Martina was old, but Capriati was like America's sweetheart for some reason.

But, as Flutz asks, if she wins the 91 USO and therefore isn't "broken," what happens in 1992 and 1993 and beyond? Would she hate the press even more because of the higher level of attention for winning a Slam, or does the joy and confidence of winning a Slam enable her to set her issues with the press aside - at least enough to not be so miserable and possibly play better in 1992 and 1993?

 

[Moose Malloy]

But, as Flutz asks, if she wins the 91 USO and therefore isn't "broken," what happens in 1992 and 1993 and beyond? Would she hate the press even more because of the higher level of attention for winning a Slam, or does the joy and confidence of winning a Slam enable her to set her issues with the press aside - at least enough to not be so miserable and possibly play better in 1992 and 1993?

She seems like a head case(like Agassi) so I doubt she would ever be a dominant player. Probably like peaks and valleys. She was no Seles, mentally or tactically.

 

[flutzingitaway]

But, as Flutz asks, if she wins the 91 USO and therefore isn't "broken," what happens in 1992 and 1993 and beyond? Would she hate the press even more because of the higher level of attention for winning a Slam, or does the joy and confidence of winning a Slam enable her to set her issues with the press aside - at least enough to not be so miserable and possibly play better in 1992 and 1993?

I think the press would be less hard on her since she would have won something big and been the youngest slam winner at 15. That would not only boost her self morale but keep some of the "why are we hyping this kid who hasn't won anything" talk down. Yeah in some ways the pressure could increase, but I imagine in the big picture it would be better for her moving forward.

 

[flutzingitaway]

She seems like a head case(like Agassi) so I doubt she would ever be a dominant player. Probably like peaks and valleys. She was no Seles, mentally or tactically.

Yeah I agree she doesn't even outright dominate regardless. Some predicted her to start dominating when she won 2 slams to start 2001 but that never happened. I don't think she is cut out to be a truly dominant player no matter what.

 

[Mainad]

Yeah I agree she doesn't even outright dominate regardless. Some predicted her to start dominating when she won 2 slams to start 2001 but that never happened. I don't think she is cut out to be a truly dominant player no matter what.

Never had the consistent focus required. Too much bad stuff happening to her off court just kept getting in the way. A great shame for her.

 

[buscemi]

I can't even imagine. Capriati could have won the U.S. Open on her home soil, becoming the youngest Open Era Major champion at 15 years, 5 months, "topping" Seles (16 years, 6 months when she won the 1990 French) by over a year. She would have been even huger than she already was. I kind of think she would have crumbled under that attention, but, who knows, maybe her career really takes off?

 

[flutzingitaway]

I can't even imagine. Capriati could have won the U.S. Open on her home soil, becoming the youngest Open Era Major champion at 15 years, 5 months, "topping" Seles (16 years, 6 months when she won the 1990 French) by over a year. She would have been even huger than she already was. I kind of think she would have crumbled under that attention, but, who knows, maybe her career really takes off?

Papa Capriati would be looking for even more endorsement deals now which wouldn't be a good thing. Then again Capriati could be contented enough living up to the star she was supposed to be, and positive enough now, to handle it somewhat.

I do think part of her wavering interest was not winning a big title, and getting fed up waiting for it. She was built up to be such a star, there was absolutely no way to just mentally cope with being a regular top 10 player which is essentialy what she settled into being.

 

[bluetrain4]

JCap has been sort of a disaster off the tennis court at various times in her life, but her tennis story arc is so compelling. She was a great player, something I like stress for players who aren't top tier ATGs or aren't GOAT candidates. It's easy to forget when they're not the best of their generation - but the Pierces and Sukovas and Martinezes and Capriatis of the world (to name a few) are really good players.

 

[jrepac]

so many 'what ifs?" when it comes to Capriati.....I think the loss in the Henin SF was even more heartbreaking....and the oddball loss at RG to Myskina. You just didn't know which Jen Cap was going to show up on a given day. The gal who could take it to Serena or lose to a journeywoman?

 

[flutzingitaway]

so many 'what ifs?" when it comes to Capriati.....I think the loss in the Henin SF was even more heartbreaking....and the oddball loss at RG to Myskina. You just didn't know which Jen Cap was going to show up on a given day. The gal who could take it to Serena or lose to a journeywoman?

Yeah but the loss to Henin was never going to change her career long range. Her career was nearly over already. Had she won it would make a big difference to her career in that she would win the U.S Open (she probably beats a badly out of form and choking Clijsters in the final) but nothing beyond that.

The 91 U.S Open is totally different in that sense.

 

[jrepac]

Yeah but the loss to Henin was never going to change her career long range. Her career was nearly over already. Had she won it would make a big difference to her career in that she would win the U.S Open (she probably beats a badly out of form and choking Clijsters in the final) but nothing beyond that.

The 91 U.S Open is totally different in that sense.

Oh for sure. I don't doubt that. But aside from '91, I think she missed a few golden opportunities. She was ridiculously talented, but couldn't seem to capitalize when it mattered most. Even then, she got 3 GS and to #1 in the rankings, which is not too bad!

 

[flutzingitaway]

Oh for sure. I don't doubt that. But aside from '91, I think she missed a few golden opportunities. She was ridiculously talented, but couldn't seem to capitalize when it mattered most. Even then, she got 3 GS and to #1 in the rankings, which is not too bad!

Yes I agree, although honestly for someone who won only 14 titles, 3 slams it not bad in another sense. I can't think of anyone who won so few tournaments who won 3 slams. I would say her winning only 14 tournaments was an even bigger shock and sign of underachievement than winning 3 slams. She should have won way more than just 14 tournaments.

Of course not winning the U.S Open atleast once was surprising. Her game was built for there. Just as even in a way Davenport winning it only once is pretty surprising.

 

[Fedinkum]

Nothing would help this poor girl with a shltty sport dad like Stefano. Also, too much early success and expectation placed of this young girl. She was doomed to rebel.

 

[Mainad]

Nothing would help this poor girl with a shltty sport dad like Stefano. Also, too much early success and expectation placed of this young girl. She was doomed to rebel.

Out of interest, is her dad Italian or Italian-American?

 

[Fedinkum]

Out of interest, is her dad Italian or Italian-American?

His dad was born in Italy.

 

[buscemi]

Another interesting hypothetical: What if Capriati were born one year later? In 1993, Capriati lost to Graf at 3/4 Majors and in the Canadian Open final and left the tour in 1994 due to burnout. Of course, in 1994, Graf had her slump/injury. It's not hard to see a pre-burnout Capriati winning at least 1 of the Majors between the 1994 French Open and 1995 Australian Open, which might have changed the trajectory of her career.

 

[flutzingitaway]

Another interesting hypothetical: What if Capriati were born one year later? In 1993, Capriati lost to Graf at 3/4 Majors and in the Canadian Open final and left the tour in 1994 due to burnout. Of course, in 1994, Graf had her slump/injury. It's not hard to see a pre-burnout Capriati winning at least 1 of the Majors between the 1994 French Open and 1995 Australian Open, which might have changed the trajectory of her career.

Yes I think she just got fed up and tired of not winning something big, and that compounded with the media both griping that she had not won something big yet and also losing interest in her she just self combusted and went into full rebel mode. I agree even 93 Capriati wins atleast 1 major between the 94 French and 95 Australian.

 

[jrepac]

Yes I agree, although honestly for someone who won only 14 titles, 3 slams it not bad in another sense. I can't think of anyone who won so few tournaments who won 3 slams. I would say her winning only 14 tournaments was an even bigger shock and sign of underachievement than winning 3 slams. She should have won way more than just 14 tournaments.

Of course not winning the U.S Open atleast once was surprising. Her game was built for there. Just as even in a way Davenport winning it only once is pretty surprising.

Agree with you on all of the above, including Lindsay. It always drove me crazy when she fell short when she was so close to winning,

 

[buscemi]

Yes I agree, although honestly for someone who won only 14 titles, 3 slams it not bad in another sense. I can't think of anyone who won so few tournaments who won 3 slams. I would say her winning only 14 tournaments was an even bigger shock and sign of underachievement than winning 3 slams. She should have won way more than just 14 tournaments.

Of course not winning the U.S Open atleast once was surprising. Her game was built for there. Just as even in a way Davenport winning it only once is pretty surprising.

On the men's side, Kodes won 3 Majors and 9 total titles. Of course, one was the infamous 1973 Wimbledon.

 

[bluetrain4]

Part of the "only 14 tournaments" thing might be that, like Kournikova, maybe she didn't play many lower tier tournaments with weaker fields? Not the entire explanation, but maybe part of it.

 

[flutzingitaway]

Part of the "only 14 tournaments" thing might be that, like Kournikova, maybe she didn't play many lower tier tournaments with weaker fields? Not the entire explanation, but maybe part of it.

Maybe part but even during the stretch she won her career 3 majors from 2001 Australian to 2002 Australian Open she won only 1 other tournament. Despite playing so many Tier 1 and Tier 2s, which are quality events, but someone who wins 3 majors that period should be able to win more than 1 other tournament.