How does Radwanska wins over and over again????

[santoro]

I wonder how Radwanska manages it to go so far in bigger tournaments.
IMO she doesnt have anything special in her game- except not making many ue's and being very efficient (on big points).
I don't understand how she got so far in Wimbledon, Miami (win).. got #2
I think i 've seen more than 20 players at the Wta playing better then her- having better groundstrokes, being much more entertaining to watch.
I just dont get it....
Some people compare her to Hingis, however IMO Hingis had much better groundstrokes and overall played better tennis.

 

[-RF-]

I wonder how Radwanska manages it to go so far in bigger tournaments.
IMO she doesnt have anything special in her game- except not making many ue's and being very efficient (on big points).
I don't understand how she got so far in Wimbledon, Miami (win).. got #2
I think i 've seen more than 20 players at the Wta playing better then her- having better groundstrokes, being much more entertaining to watch.
I just dont get it....
Some people compare her to Hingis, however IMO Hingis had much better groundstrokes and overall played better tennis.

 

[santoro]

I wonder how Radwanska manages it to go so far in bigger tournaments.
IMO she doesnt have anything special in her game- except not making many ue's and being very efficient (on big points).
I don't understand how she got so far in Wimbledon, Miami (win).. got #2
I think i 've seen more than 20 players at the Wta playing better then her- having better groundstrokes, being much more entertaining to watch.
I just dont get it....
Some people compare her to Hingis, however IMO Hingis had much better groundstrokes and overall played better tennis.

I think at top level players should be able to show s.g more than just not producing unforced errors, playing like a pusher.
if you are #2 IMO you should be able to hit some winners and nice groundstrokes. Many say that Rad doesnt have anough power to heat enough winners- Henin IMO was the same size as Rad but hit much more winners.
It was enjoyable to watch..
I also don't think that Rad is the best defender or the craftiest player on tour- however it might be just my opinion.

 

[Sim]

I think at top level players should be able to show s.g more than just not producing unforced errors, playing like a pusher.
if you are #2 IMO you should be able to hit some winners and nice groundstrokes. Many say that Rad doesnt have anough power to heat enough winners- Henin IMO was the same size as Rad but hit much more winners.
It was enjoyable to watch..
I also don't think that Rad is the best defender or the craftiest player on tour- however it might be just my opinion.

I definitely think she's one of the best in those 2 departments. Radwanska is not a winner machine as you said. She has no power or big serve to get cheap points, so she has to beat players by moving them around the court.

Her play reminds me a lot of Hingis, but these days a power game can just plow through a style like Radwanska's. (as evidenced by first set of Wimbledon final when Serena was playing decently)

 

[Bender]

The WTA is too courteous.

They're so classy that they insist on each other to win first.

Radwanska is too classless to take a hint so actually takes those chances.

Serena even more classless so she wins everything.

 

[santoro]

I definitely think she's one of the best in those 2 departments. Radwanska is not a winner machine as you said. She has no power or big serve to get cheap points, so she has to beat players by moving them around the court.

I find e.g Kerber .. being better in defense

 

[santoro]

The WTA is too courteous.

They're so classy that they insist on each other to win first.

Radwanska is too classless to take a hint so actually takes those chances.

Serena even more classless so she wins everything.

however, sometimes I think Radwanska wins just because she is mentally so strong, and the others choke.
Radwanska is the type of player who would notice every psychological weakness and take advantage of it. (like in final of Wimbledon)
It's more psychological war then tennis game IMO.

 

[Torres]

Pushing and mixing it up obviously gets you quite far in tournaments.

Until you meet somebody who is more talented and can also actually hit the ball.....

 

[santoro]

when looking up the web I maybe found the right answer:

"Anyone who calls Aga a pusher knows nothing about tennis. It takes a tremendous amount of skill to pull off some of the shots she plays. There is a difference between not liking someone's style and denying they have talent."

It might be true that I don't like her style of play, that's why I don't appreciate her skills and achievements. Although I am Polish and should be a fan of her I really can't stand her style of tennis winning..

Ok, probably I found the answer to my question I posted when opening the thread..

 

[santoro]

Lol some Polish tennis expert (Fibak : former no 10)
claiming Aga being more talented than Higgins, Henin and Cluisters


brainwashed?

 

[purge]

shes one of the most consistent players in a highly inconsistent WTA field. i guess thats why

 

[santoro]

shes one of the most consistent players in a highly inconsistent WTA field. i guess thats why

Yes, i think that's one of the points

 

[ACE of Hearts]

I said the same thing when Serena was beating her.It seems like she wins on guile and her opponents making errors.

 

[santoro]

I thought it would be kind of embaressement to WTA (& to the major tournaments) if she won that final..
however it's not up to me to judge it- probably there have been worse title winners than her over the years..
and as I said before I may critisize her because I don't like her style of game..

 

[single_handed_champion]

Well, she does not really use her variety offensively. The dropshots, slices etc happen when she is trying to hang in when missiles are being fired at her. I also notice that when she gets a short ball because of redirecting balls/hitting them deep, she does not go for a better angle or depth but often just puts the ball back. That is the sort of thing she should incorporate in her game.

 

[Mainad]

I wonder how Radwanska manages it to go so far in bigger tournaments.
IMO she doesnt have anything special in her game- except not making many ue's and being very efficient (on big points).
I don't understand how she got so far in Wimbledon, Miami (win).. got #2
I think i 've seen more than 20 players at the Wta playing better then her- having better groundstrokes, being much more entertaining to watch.
I just dont get it....
Some people compare her to Hingis, however IMO Hingis had much better groundstrokes and overall played better tennis.

She's a clever player who makes the most out of her abilities. She doesn't have any big weapons but she uses what she has to maximum effect. She is a great defender and knows where, when and how to place the ball to take it out of her opponent's comfort zone. She uses her brain and great defensive skills to outplay most of her opponents. She does encounter problems when she comes up against some really focussed big hitters but even against the power queen, Serena Williams, she was able to hold her own for long stretches of their match and take a set off her in the final when everyone assumed Serena would just blow her away. IMO she is a thorougly consistent and deserving #3 on the WTA tour.

 

[Backhandz]

I think similarly to Hingis, while not having major power, both Radwanska and Hingis always made the right shot at the right time.

She's always putting the ball where it needs to be and it's always based on her opponents positioning. It's interesting to watch the points that Serena lost against her, sometimes I kept thinking "why isn't Serena killing her here?". It's because Radwanska was constantly changing the rhythm and putting the ball where it was at Serena's disadvantage. I find it interesting to watch.

 

[Marius_Hancu]

She's v. intelligent, moves great, great hands, great shot placement
BTW, I wouldn't have said the above about her 2 years ago
but she's convinced me lately

 

[santoro]

I think similarly to Hingis, while not having major power, both Radwanska and Hingis always made the right shot at the right time.

She's always putting the ball where it needs to be and it's always based on her opponents positioning. It's interesting to watch the points that Serena lost against her, sometimes I kept thinking "why isn't Serena killing her here?". It's because Radwanska was constantly changing the rhythm and putting the ball where it was at Serena's disadvantage. I find it interesting to watch.

I agree with you that they had the same strategy IMO Hingis was playing more offensive/aggressive though.

 

[Rjtennis]

You can mostly chalk up her run at Wimby to a very easy road to the final. The only tough opponent she faced was Kerber who was clearly nervous and not playing well. Kerber has the denfensive skills of Aggie and can hit the ball harder, but it wasnt showing that day. Serena got nervous and choked away a set, but It was clear throughout that Aggie wasnt going to win that match. The first and third sets were pretty much beatdowns.

Aggie is a solid defensive player who is having a career year. She doesnt have the talent or power to keep this up year after year. She has to grind out nearly every point she plays and that takes it toll physically and mentally. She does have some variety, but come on...its not like she looks like a female version of Fed out there.

 

[Rjtennis]

You can mostly chalk up her run at Wimby to a very easy road to the final. The only tough opponent she faced was Kerber who was clearly nervous and not playing like herself. Kerber has the denfensive skills of Aggie and can hit the ball harder, but it wasnt showig that day.

Aggie is a solid defensive player who is having a career year. She doesnt have the talent or power to keep this up year after year. She has to grind out nearly every point she plays and that takes it toll physically and mentally. She does have some variety, but come on...its not like she looks like a female version of Fed out there.

 

[santoro]

You can mostly chalk up her run at Wimby to a very easy road to the final. The only tough opponent she faced was Kerber who was clearly nervous and not playing like herself. Kerber has the denfensive skills of Aggie and can hit the ball harder, but it wasnt showig that day.

Aggie is a solid defensive player who is having a career year. She doesnt have the talent or power to keep this up year after year. She has to grind out nearly every point she plays and that takes it toll physically and mentally. She does have some variety, but come on...its not like she looks like a female version of Fed out there.

I 100% agree with you on that

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

I think similarly to Hingis, while not having major power, both Radwanska and Hingis always made the right shot at the right time..

Hold on a second--if that was entirely true, Radwanska would have executed that enough to win that final (there was no way she was going to long haul that), and Hingis would have won more majors, instead of running away from the game.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

Aggie is a solid defensive player who is having a career year. She doesnt have the talent or power to keep this up year after year.

Pretty much Zvonereva's 2010 run to two majors finals, never to see that level of play again.

I do think Radwanska will do better with actual majors victories, but spaced out over the years.

 

[tistrapukcipeht]

Obviously she has to be a good player with talent, she has great control and anticipation, reads the game well and has all the fundamentals developed well therefore having great consistency and patience.

That's exactly what she does, as she wasn't gifted with power she works with whatever she has and has done an excellent job.

Despite of all I can't stand her.

 

[Mick]

i think Radwanska is great. in our world, she's like a 3.5 who can beat 4.0 and 4.5 even though they got much better techniques/weapons.

 

[SLD76]

I wonder how Radwanska manages it to go so far in bigger tournaments.
IMO she doesnt have anything special in her game- except not making many ue's and being very efficient (on big points).
I don't understand how she got so far in Wimbledon, Miami (win).. got #2
I think i 've seen more than 20 players at the Wta playing better then her- having better groundstrokes, being much more entertaining to watch.
I just dont get it....
Some people compare her to Hingis, however IMO Hingis had much better groundstrokes and overall played better tennis.

Radwanska wins because....

1) movement
2) consistency
3) variety, she can frustrate power players with precise placement and spin

4) (and most importantly) for the most part, she can handle pace. her problem is that if she doesnt precisely place the ball, and let the power gals set up and tee off, that she gets blown off the court. she wins by wrong footing and forcing power players to hit from awkward positions.

5) confidence, belief and all court game.

IMo, results aside, she is an upgrade over Hingis..hingis may have been a better tactician..but she could hardly deal with the pace of the ball bashers.

 

[Magnetite]

I like her game, but the WTA is still a mess.

 

[jmverdugo]

being the last one putting the ball in play usually helps a lot ...

 

[t135]

Apparently, she understands how to play the game, compete and win. Consistently. Great role model. I love watching her play.

Reminds me of another era of tennis before the ball bashers arrived.

 

[santoro]

For some people, it is impossible to understand that a tennis player can be in the top 10 (actually #2) for many years without huge serve, strong ground strokes and exceptional athleticism. Maybe it’s because they do not want or cannot understand that there are naturally gifted players who cannot be created with 30+ hours a week of tennis, fitness and millions of dollars of investment. To play like Agnieszka Radwanska or Martina Hingis, you have to have been kissed by a tennis god when you were born. Radwanska is gifted smart player, she can destroy any strategy of almost any players.

Only a few players like Williams, Sharapova and Azarenka have positive balance against Agnieszka Radwanska. What does all this mean for good coaches who teach smart junior players? You are not supposed to be tall and strong to be in top if you are smart and consistent player. I posted a several articles about Radwanska, please find time to read them. http://www.tennisconsult.com/

Interesting article(s) on your side about her. Thanks guys for answering to my thread. Of course I was reading about her that she is playing crafty that she has good hands, plays well strategedly, defence well. However it was kind of hard for me to see the talent in her game. Maybe because I am not used to watch this kind of tennis.
Although I liked the way Hingis was playing, her strokes, tactics it is hard for me to enjoy Radwanska's game. I don't know why but ok.

 

[pmerk34]

I like her game, but the WTA is still a mess.

When wasn't it? 1998-2007?

 

[santoro]

You can mostly chalk up her run at Wimby to a very easy road to the final. The only tough opponent she faced was Kerber who was clearly nervous and not playing like herself. Kerber has the denfensive skills of Aggie and can hit the ball harder, but it wasnt showig that day.

Aggie is a solid defensive player who is having a career year. She doesnt have the talent or power to keep this up year after year. She has to grind out nearly every point she plays and that takes it toll physically and mentally. She does have some variety, but come on...its not like she looks like a female version of Fed out there.

Radwanska before breaking far into top 10 has struggled more then 3 years being #10 or just above. She struggled with opponents like Schiavone, Zwonareva, Ivanovic, Jankovic, Shvedova and so on, who she found finally a way to win again.
It was not untill the end of 2011 (when she broke up with her father as a trianer on tour) that she started her career run somehow. - maybe just a bit of lucky coincidence.. whatever.

 

[Backhandz]

To play like Agnieszka Radwanska or Martina Hingis, you have to have been kissed by a tennis god when you were born. Radwanska is gifted smart player, she can destroy any strategy of almost any players./QUOTE]

Totally agree with this point, this was pointed on by various commentators during Wimbledon as well, she makes power players play on her terms. She dictates by neutralizing her opponents power or just redirects it back at them by holding tight to the baseline and taking shots early.

No one else can hit shots like her.

 

[NadalAgassi]

Since she doesnt make mistakes. Tennis matches are lost more through errors than won by winners, especialy on the womens side these days. She also has developed the capacity to hit winners. Just look at her stats in her Wimbledon matches.

 

[santoro]

Since she doesnt make mistakes. Tennis matches are lost more through errors than won by winners, especialy on the womens side these days. She also has developed the capacity to hit winners. Just look at her stats in her Wimbledon matches.

Rad vs Will
winners
13 vs 58
ue
14 vs 36

ok she hit 13 winners in 3 s, it happens, not that often though.
when looking at ue's she' s looking very good in every match- that's her strong side which i didn't negate- that's all her game about being consistant - letting others produce the "ue's" or let's say forcing others into producing errors.

 

[santoro]

Rad vs Will
winners
13 vs 58
ue
14 vs 36

ok she hit 13 winners in 3 s, it happens, not that often though.
when looking at ue's she' s looking very good in every match- that's her strong side which i didn't negate- that's all her game about being consistant - letting others produce the "ue's" or let's say forcing others into producing errors.

sounds bit stupid so I stay by pushing others to produce ue's

 

[klu375]

Why she wins?
1. She is one of the best competitors in WTA. She is never too high or too low. Just like all tennis psychologists recommend. Never beats herself. This alone is 60% of success in women's tennis.
2. She has outstanding anticipation skills. Next time watch when she starts running for the ball. Often before the ball was hit.
3. She adjusts as the match goes on. The Serena's serves that she could not return in the first set she started returning in the second set.
4. Her strokes are not pretty and all different. But this create problems for her opponents, especially for players like Serena who do not like making small steps around the ball. Agi's shots are mostly outside of hitting zone of her opponents . They have to deal with high balls, flat balls, short balls, low balls and have to hit multiple winners to win a single point. This is annoying.
5. And she has slice, drop shot and net game that many do not have. Although her execution is usually ugly these shots are quite effective.
6. Lately she greatly improved her first serve (although nowhere to be found during most of the Serena's match)
She was clearly sick during the final and grass does reward hitters and not runners. She will beat Serena on hard courts when she is 100%

 

[tennisconsultcom]

Why she wins?
1. She is one of the best competitors in WTA. She is never too high or too low. Just like all tennis psychologists recommend. Never beats herself. This alone is 60% of success in women's tennis.
2. She has outstanding anticipation skills. Next time watch when she starts running for the ball. Often before the ball was hit.
3. She adjusts as the match goes on. The Serena's serves that she could not return in the first set she started returning in the second set.
4. Her strokes are not pretty and all different. But this create problems for her opponents, especially for players like Serena who do not like making small steps around the ball. Agi's shots are mostly outside of hitting zone of her opponents . They have to deal with high balls, flat balls, short balls, low balls and have to hit multiple winners to win a single point. This is annoying.
5. And she has slice, drop shot and net game that many do not have. Although her execution is usually ugly these shots are quite effective.
6. Lately she greatly improved her first serve (although nowhere to be found during most of the Serena's match)
She was clearly sick during the final and grass does reward hitters and not runners. She will beat Serena on hard courts when she is 100%

Very good observations.

 

[NadalAgassi]

Rad vs Will
winners
13 vs 58
ue
14 vs 36

ok she hit 13 winners in 3 s, it happens, not that often though.
when looking at ue's she' s looking very good in every match- that's her strong side which i didn't negate- that's all her game about being consistant - letting others produce the "ue's" or let's say forcing others into producing errors.

That is vs Serena. Almost nobody can hit many winners vs Serena. Azarenka played out of her mind in the semis and still only hit 14 and she is supposably a "big hitter". Look at her stats vs Kirilenko, she had over 30 winners and many more winners than errors. Poor Kirilenko hit over 50 winners, more than double her errors, and still lost. Look at the stats of her other matches. Watch some tapes of her playing at this years Wimbledon. She is making things happen, not just waiting for mistakes.

 

[santoro]

That is vs Serena. Almost nobody can hit many winners vs Serena. Azarenka played out of her mind in the semis and still only hit 14 and she is supposably a "big hitter". Look at her stats vs Kirilenko, she had over 30 winners and many more winners than errors. Poor Kirilenko hit over 50 winners, more than double her errors, and still lost. Look at the stats of her other matches. Watch some tapes of her playing at this years Wimbledon. She is making things happen, not just waiting for mistakes.

Rad vs Kerber
win 20 vs 26
ue 6 vs 14
ok, surprisingly quite a lot winners, Kerber in this match was very nervous, underperformed a bit IMO. Although it's not easy to hit winners against great defensive skills of Kerber- so you're right there.

Rad vs Kirilenko
win 36 vs 52
ues 22 vs 30
IMO Kirilenko was clearly dominating the third set utntill the rain interruption at 5:5- Rad almost nothing doing for the game in 3rd set..ok 36 win's is amazing for her.

Rad vs Giorgi
win 11 vs 28
ues 6 vs 30
Ok I can understand her playing defensively against ue-prawn Giorgi

Rad vs Watson
win 8 vs 13
ue's 6 vs 19
8 winners is not a fortune.

Rad vs Vesnina
win 16 vs 16
ue's 0 vs 18


Rad vs Rybarikova
win 18 vs 14
ue's
16 vs 18

Only match where she had more win's was against Rybarikova. However i kinda admit she's improved in this department.