Emma Raducanu: 1 GS Wonder?

R. Schweikart

Professional
Don’t you think we are overhyping Raducanu way to early? Like you said, she just won the US Open, so give her some time, lol! She had a much easier draw than Laylah. IMO, not taking anything away from Raducanu, Laylah is the real US Open champ as she beat several giants, but that’s my opinion.
Leylah didn't beat any giant.
Osaka is a walking bye for every top player currently.
Kerber is over the hill, only #16 of #17.
Svitolina and Sabakenka are two of those faceless East Europeans who are always there but never win something important.
 

USMC-615

Rookie
Claiming Leylah as the moral victor, questioning Raducanu's credentials, picture of an Ice Hockey player in the profile (looks like a Montreal Canadiens top to me)... Ladies and gentleman we have a Canadian!
Now that's some detective work right there... :laughing:
 

mikej

Hall of Fame
We have seen a lot of 1 slam wonders on the WTA. Will Emma be the next Ostapenko, or will she be a multi slam champion? Awaiting your comments!
will absolutely win another slam, probably several

people have to remember that Ostapenko was a statistical anomaly - winning a GS while consistently having far more UEs than her opponents - lightning was always unlikely to strike twice with the amount of winners required to win with that style

Radanacu is going to be much harder to game-plan, and won’t often go down meekly in a flurry of anger and UEs like Ostapenko does
 

Dolgopolov85

G.O.A.T.
will absolutely win another slam, probably several

people have to remember that Ostapenko was a statistical anomaly - winning a GS while consistently having far more UEs than her opponents - lightning was always unlikely to strike twice with the amount of winners required to win with that style

Radanacu is going to be much harder to game-plan, and won’t often go down meekly in a flurry of anger and UEs like Ostapenko does
It's entirely possible that Raducanu will win just one slam. BUT the reason wouldn't be that she plays just like Ostapenko (aka flash in the pan). It's why I posted that video of top 10 points from the USO (not necessarily the ones I would have chosen). Raducanu has wonderful feel, is a solid volleyer, has a much better serve than Ostapenko and, overall, is a very organised player. Pretty much the antithesis of Ostapenko. Ostapenko threw the kitchen sink at her opponents and hoped it would succeed. Raducanu plays with plenty of margin so the fact that she is still able to keep winning points makes her more dangerous than Ostapenko in so many ways.
 

Mark-Touch

Hall of Fame
We have seen a lot of 1 slam wonders on the WTA. Will Emma be the next Ostapenko, or will she be a multi slam champion? Awaiting your comments!
The OP'er has now seen the error of his ways.
He's drastically edited his OP and is crawling away with his tail between his legs. :)
 

dtl_lover

Rookie
Ostapenko is the only player who I feel like saying she fluked the slam. Other than Penko, the other players who have won slams in last couple of years are still very young (Iga is 20, Bianca is 21, Kenin is 22)...it's stupid to already write them off as one slam wonders. Iga for example is very good on clay but still needs to develop her game on HC, Grass. Bianca has been injured for like 18 months since she won slam. Kenin has been having injuries and off-court issues but anyways, I never saw Kenin as someone with high ceiling. She is a gritty player who can stay in top25 for a long time and win 1-2 majors.
 

liriel

Semi-Pro
Too late.TTW already proclaimed her GOAT judging by the sheer number of threads about her.
I know I should not read it but with freedom of speech I call Emma the most overhyped player ever. She also helps her case by using every single opportunity - I see her in Vogue, MET gala and so on! I feel like I'll breath a sigh of relief. Now I get why some don't like Fed. Hype as well. (I love Fed though and he proved to be one of the greatest).
 

rUDin 21

Professional
I know I should not read it but with freedom of speech I call Emma the most overhyped player ever. She also helps her case by using every single opportunity - I see her in Vogue, MET gala and so on! I feel like I'll breath a sigh of relief. Now I get why some don't like Fed. Hype as well. (I love Fed though and he proved to be one of the greatest).
She's good. She's promising and proved herself already on the biggest stage,but good GOD people are so quick to overhype her.
I find that amazingly stupid tbh, although her being British is telling why she's getting that treatment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tin

fed1

Professional
She's good. She's promising and proved herself already on the biggest stage,but good GOD people are so quick to overhype her.
I find that amazingly stupid tbh, although her being British is telling why she's getting that treatment.
Interested to hear how you feel about the level of hype Coco Gauff has received??
 

Dolgopolov85

G.O.A.T.
Interested to hear how you feel about the level of hype Coco Gauff has received??
Don't you know that making MAIN DRAW OF W AT 15 is more hype worthy than winning a slam at 18? Like even if Emma had won a CYGS at 18, they would still say BUT COCO MADE MAIN DRAW. The hype train will only die down when it so transpires that Coco is older than Emma when she wins her first slam.
 

ryushen21

Legend
I think it's fairer to evaluate her in terms of potential at this moment. And in that aspect, Emma has huge potential. Breaking into the top 25 is going to afford her more opportunities and funds to acquire greater resources and invest in her future success. Therefore, the potential for her to be a multiple-slam winner is absolutely there. And if she continues to progress, develop, and not squander the opportunity she's earned herself, there's no reason she should be a staple at the top of the women's game.
 

liriel

Semi-Pro
She's good. She's promising and proved herself already on the biggest stage,but good GOD people are so quick to overhype her.
I find that amazingly stupid tbh, although her being British is telling why she's getting that treatment.
She also got lucky it wasn't AO or RG. The right place perfect time.
One slam and "the best ever" comments. I feel like the hype has to die and she isn't a heavy favourite. I'd put her somewhere in the middle.
 

fed1

Professional
Everybody seems to forget about Sloane Stephens as the ultimate one slam wonder. It was also one of the worst slam finals ever, Keys somehow morphed into a 3.5 USTA league player right in front of our eyes.
Ostapenko takes a little bit of heat for her one slam but her career hasn’t fallen off a cliff like Stephens.
 

Dolgopolov85

G.O.A.T.
Everybody seems to forget about Sloane Stephens as the ultimate one slam wonder. It was also one of the worst slam finals ever, Keys somehow morphed into a 3.5 USTA league player right in front of our eyes.
Ostapenko takes a little bit of heat for her one slam but her career hasn’t fallen off a cliff like Stephens.
Well, Stephens did reach a slam final again at RG where she lost to Halep. People also don't mention Stephens because she broke through not by winning a slam but by beating Serena at AO. After that, she had already been written off and had slumped in the rankings when she enjoyed a resurgence to win US Open. But I don't think people believed this would lead to a string of slams.
 

Dolgopolov85

G.O.A.T.
She also got lucky it wasn't AO or RG. The right place perfect time.
One slam and "the best ever" comments. I feel like the hype has to die and she isn't a heavy favourite. I'd put her somewhere in the middle.
AO actually plays a tad faster than USO these days. I give that USO was fast after a long time this year but AO was plenty fast too. I don't think AO will hugely disadvantage her. RG likely will not be to her liking but we'll find out soon enough.
 

Wander

Hall of Fame
A better comparison would be Iga as ostapenko didn’t exactly dominate her opponents. She went through 3 setters and was a set and a break down against halep in the final. Moreover ostapenko played wild that tournaments hitting lines all over the court and it worked, Emma was playing a bit more consistent and safe.

I’d say both her and Iga will need some time to adjust on the tour but are definitely not one slam wonders.
Even Iga is not a completely valid comparison because Iga had been playing on the tour already for over a year with decent results, giving her a ranking of 54 before the 2020 French Open.

Iga has done okay since her RG victory in the grand scheme, but her results this year have settled into a level of a pretty typical #5 to #10 ranked player. Consistent, but unspectacular. Of course a big step up from someone like Ostapenko who very obviously doesn't have the game to be a consistent performer, but still, there are now some doubts over whether Iga will add to that Slam count either after all. Maybe an another RG at some point?

With Raducanu, I don't want to get too much on board of the hype train, but at the same time, I just have a feeling that maybe she can do things that none of these recent new winners could.

Statistically speaking maybe I should expect to be wrong on that. But I don't know. Her improvement has been so rapid that it makes me think that maybe she's just better than the others.
 
Last edited:

mtommer

Hall of Fame
She had a much easier draw than Laylah.
I'm not sure this is a decent point to bring up when it comes to Emma's win as she played how many more matches than the other contenders due to coming up through qualies? I will be curious if she is able to maintain her quality of play as her career progresses.
 

Vilgan

New User
I feel like a lot of people are especially excited about Raducanu because she's very attractive. Imo, she can become a top player and accrue a lot of slams, but that also depends on where she goes from here. If she stays focused, trains, gets better, etc then she'll be a force. But I can easily see a world in which a lot of her focus is taken up in MET gala extra stuff and she doesn't ever win another.
 

R. Schweikart

Professional
Everybody seems to forget about Sloane Stephens as the ultimate one slam wonder. It was also one of the worst slam finals ever, Keys somehow morphed into a 3.5 USTA league player right in front of our eyes.
Ostapenko takes a little bit of heat for her one slam but her career hasn’t fallen off a cliff like Stephens.
Stephens was, what, 24 years old when she won the USO.
 

Bud

Bionic Poster
Winning the USO as a qualifier - especially at 18yo - is an insane accomplishment. She didn't lose a single set and no sets went to a tiebreaker. The talent this girl possesses is off the charts. I predict she'll win multiple slam titles unless something catastrophic happens to her body or health.
 

Dolgopolov85

G.O.A.T.
Even Iga is not a completely valid comparison because Iga had been playing on the tour already for over a year with decent results, giving her a ranking of 54 before the 2020 French Open.

Iga has done okay since her RG victory in the grand scheme, but her results this year have settled into a level of a pretty typical #5 to #10 ranked player. Consistent, but unspectacular. Of course a big step up from someone like Ostapenko who very obviously doesn't have the game to be a consistent performer, but still, there are now some doubts over whether Iga will add to that Slam count either after all. Maybe an another RG at some point?

With Raducanu, I don't want to get too much on board of the hype train, but at the same time, I just have a feeling that maybe she can do things that none of these recent new winners could.

Statistically speaking maybe I should expect to be wrong on that. But I don't know. Her improvement has been so rapid that it makes me think that maybe she's just better than the others.
Iga's forehand dominant game is essentially a clay vehicle and while it might yield slams elsewhere, she's most likely to win another or more at RG. Because, otherwise, technically she isn't doing a whole lot that's different from the rest of the crowd.

All year this year, myself and other Iga fans have been complaining about how often she gets late or just stuck and this is because her hitting arm frequently gets close to the body. With that style, players try to delay contact to get maximum power and sometimes it can get too much and makes their forehand inconsistent (happened to Kerber in 2017).

Raducanu's whole game is built on taking it early and it's not just a tactical choice but her technique is built to facilitate that. That's why she's harder to solve than Iga. And that's also why a straight set run through USO is more impressive than at RG. The entire tour is comfortable on hard courts, so if you can still gallop so far ahead of the field, that says a lot.

Still, we will see what the tour has to say about it at Australian Open. When they are no longer taken aback and dazed by her style, they might think more clearly and find areas to attack.
 

Tommy Haas

Hall of Fame
Iga's forehand dominant game is essentially a clay vehicle and while it might yield slams elsewhere, she's most likely to win another or more at RG. Because, otherwise, technically she isn't doing a whole lot that's different from the rest of the crowd.

All year this year, myself and other Iga fans have been complaining about how often she gets late or just stuck and this is because her hitting arm frequently gets close to the body. With that style, players try to delay contact to get maximum power and sometimes it can get too much and makes their forehand inconsistent (happened to Kerber in 2017).

Raducanu's whole game is built on taking it early and it's not just a tactical choice but her technique is built to facilitate that. That's why she's harder to solve than Iga. And that's also why a straight set run through USO is more impressive than at RG. The entire tour is comfortable on hard courts, so if you can still gallop so far ahead of the field, that says a lot.

Still, we will see what the tour has to say about it at Australian Open. When they are no longer taken aback and dazed by her style, they might think more clearly and find areas to attack.
Women hit with their arms close to their bodies because they don't have the arm strength like men. Federer hits his with arms extended, elbows locked, and out in front, but that requires an earlier commitment, better timing, and arm strength.

Women hitting with their arm closer to their body uses more of the core strength and hip rotation for power. I'm no coach nor even very technical, but I think that's why there's a difference between the two styles.
 

Dolgopolov85

G.O.A.T.
Women hit with their arms close to their bodies because they don't have the arm strength like men. Federer hits his with arms extended, elbows locked, and out in front, but that requires an earlier commitment, better timing, and arm strength.

Women hitting with their arm closer to their body uses more of the core strength and hip rotation for power. I'm no coach nor even very technical, but I think that's why there's a difference between the two styles.
But Raducanu doesn't look exceptionally strong relative to her peers and she has visibly more extension on the forehand and backhand as well as a wider base at contact. I get that USO played fast this time but if it was really a liability for women to extend their arms, the court pace advantage wouldn't account for Raducanu winning so easily.

I am not a particularly strong guy and pretty short too. In my experience, the power source for the forehand is lower body rotation anyway. You don't need extraordinary arm strength for it. We can discuss natural differences between men and women all day but I don't work out and don't have any musculature to show off in my biceps.

I entirely agree, however, that it takes a lot of commitment and timing to hit like that (hence why Raducanu's technique also enables her to hit so early). So I put it down to lazy coaching to appease restless parents and kids. It takes more time to work on that kind of forehand so coaches let the girls work on what is easier to learn. You can't do that with boys because they will get exposed by the others using extension as they go up in level. But with most women using that chicken wing forehand, youngsters breaking into the game get away with it. But I am not at all convinced there is an anatomic disadvantage for women in using extension. The argument earlier used to be only short, stocky women are able to make the ATP forehand work for themselves. But Raducanu doesn't fit that description. Sure, hers isn't a 100% ATP forehand but has many important elements of it and is definitely not a arm-close-to-body forehand.

Combine extension with big strides and a low base and suddenly it's much easier to cover court as well. Which is what we saw, again, from Raducanu.
 

gadge

Professional
Even Iga is not a completely valid comparison because Iga had been playing on the tour already for over a year with decent results, giving her a ranking of 54 before the 2020 French Open.

Iga has done okay since her RG victory in the grand scheme, but her results this year have settled into a level of a pretty typical #5 to #10 ranked player. Consistent, but unspectacular. Of course a big step up from someone like Ostapenko who very obviously doesn't have the game to be a consistent performer, but still, there are now some doubts over whether Iga will add to that Slam count either after all. Maybe an another RG at some point?

With Raducanu, I don't want to get too much on board of the hype train, but at the same time, I just have a feeling that maybe she can do things that none of these recent new winners could.

Statistically speaking maybe I should expect to be wrong on that. But I don't know. Her improvement has been so rapid that it makes me think that maybe she's just better than the others.
I drew the similarity to iga based on the fact that both appeared out of nowhere to blow the draw apart (Iga dished out a bagel/breadstick in every match).

I’m not getting on Emma hype, just because she won the USO comfortably and looked solid before I see more of her in the upcoming events. One thing’s for sure she’s not an ostapenko. She’ll be a solid top 5 top 10 players but whether she’ll dominate the tour and win multiple slams is yet to be seen.
 

tsp_207

Rookie
Yes she's done. Too busy dressing up for met gala and modelling to actually focus on tennis. She'll have a target on her back and other players will come up with strategies to beat her. One slam wonder for sure.
 

Dolgopolov85

G.O.A.T.
LMAO, she has already resumed training. Gave herself just a week's break after a staggering achievement, all told.

This thread could end up competing with the Cincinnati one for GOAT thread.
 

boredone3456

G.O.A.T.
Oh for pity sake. People complain that teenagers never do anything, now one wins a final against another teen and we are already hypothesizing she will be just a 1 slam wonder. Then if she doesn't win another immediately everyone will say she is a joke. If she manages to win another soon the question will be how the weak the rest of the field is that allowed her to do it. Why should she even bother playing? Clearly no matter what she is in a no win situation
 

liriel

Semi-Pro
But Raducanu doesn't look exceptionally strong relative to her peers and she has visibly more extension on the forehand and backhand as well as a wider base at contact. I get that USO played fast this time but if it was really a liability for women to extend their arms, the court pace advantage wouldn't account for Raducanu winning so easily.

I am not a particularly strong guy and pretty short too. In my experience, the power source for the forehand is lower body rotation anyway. You don't need extraordinary arm strength for it. We can discuss natural differences between men and women all day but I don't work out and don't have any musculature to show off in my biceps.

I entirely agree, however, that it takes a lot of commitment and timing to hit like that (hence why Raducanu's technique also enables her to hit so early). So I put it down to lazy coaching to appease restless parents and kids. It takes more time to work on that kind of forehand so coaches let the girls work on what is easier to learn. You can't do that with boys because they will get exposed by the others using extension as they go up in level. But with most women using that chicken wing forehand, youngsters breaking into the game get away with it. But I am not at all convinced there is an anatomic disadvantage for women in using extension. The argument earlier used to be only short, stocky women are able to make the ATP forehand work for themselves. But Raducanu doesn't fit that description. Sure, hers isn't a 100% ATP forehand but has many important elements of it and is definitely not a arm-close-to-body forehand.

Combine extension with big strides and a low base and suddenly it's much easier to cover court as well. Which is what we saw, again, from Raducanu.
Good point. They don't teach kids to rotate your lower body properly and people use the arm too much. So for a long time I was looking for a power-giving racquet. I'm a perfect case of the chicken forehand it's always too close to my body. Blame my couch(es).
Edit: I'm still a bit salty that when WTA was in trouble Radwanska never won a slam. She won "the best shots of the week" but not a slam. She deserved on. Oh well..
 

Dolgopolov85

G.O.A.T.
Good point. They don't teach kids to rotate your lower body properly and people use the arm too much. So for a long time I was looking for a power-giving racquet. I'm a perfect case of the chicken forehand it's always too close to my body. Blame my couch(es).
Edit: I'm still a bit salty that when WTA was in trouble Radwanska never won a slam. She won "the best shots of the week" but not a slam. She deserved on. Oh well..
Yeah, I am almost the opposite. I find it harder with really powerful racquets like APD/Pure Drive. I need racquets where I can keep swinging out without worrying about overhitting. And because I am not strong, I am not comfortable with super heavy racquets. So I usually play with light but only moderately stiff racquets. Light enough to swing fast and flex enough to not give me too much power.
 

liriel

Semi-Pro
Yeah, I am almost the opposite. I find it harder with really powerful racquets like APD/Pure Drive. I need racquets where I can keep swinging out without worrying about overhitting. And because I am not strong, I am not comfortable with super heavy racquets. So I usually play with light but only moderately stiff racquets. Light enough to swing fast and flex enough to not give me too much power.
I totally see your point. Pure Drive is too harsh on my body but I'd have trouble to give it enough spin to not overhit. (I often hit too flat)
 
Don’t you think we are overhyping Raducanu way to early? Like you said, she just won the US Open, so give her some time, lol! She had a much easier draw than Laylah. IMO, not taking anything away from Raducanu, Laylah is the real US Open champ as she beat several giants, but that’s my opinion.
Please.. Emma destroyed her in the final

Emma had to qualify. 10 matches and didnt lose a set. Its a big,big achievement,
 

Ruark

Professional
We've often speculated what it would be like on the WTA tour after Serena faded. Well, now we're seeing it.

How do you think Emma would do against Serena? Not today's Serena, of course, but the Serena of 4 or 5 years ago?
 

Dolgopolov85

G.O.A.T.
We've often speculated what it would be like on the WTA tour after Serena faded. Well, now we're seeing it.

How do you think Emma would do against Serena? Not today's Serena, of course, but the Serena of 4 or 5 years ago?
Say peak Serena of 2012? Emma would be rekt is my provisional assessment. Until I see how she goes about returning 120 mph serves. If she were to face an in form Osaka/Sabalenka/Barty sometime in the future, we could use that to speculate about how she would return Serena's serve (albeit peak Serena was serving even better than any of these three and by a good distance). If she can still put the ball back in deep, we have a contest. Otherwise Serena would easily win her service games and put pressure on Emma's.
 

Dolgopolov85

G.O.A.T.
Please.. Emma destroyed her in the final

Emma had to qualify. 10 matches and didnt lose a set. Its a big,big achievement,
Forget about Leylah, but we have not seen Emma play against Osaka, Sabalenka, Barty, etc. There are still a lot of unknowns. Maybe if she does play Indian Wells and doesn't appear to be still in celebratory mode after USO, we will get a better look. IW will also give a better idea of her chances at the Masters as opposed to slams. Both HC slams are playing almost the fastest they have ever, at least combined. So we can't judge how she would fare at IW, Miami or Montreal off AO or USO the way they play as of now.
 
Top