Iga Swiatek Slam Count - what's your prediction?

How many Slams in total will Swiatek win during her career?

  • Total voters
    99
  • Poll closed .
D

Deleted member 629564

Guest
After RG20 and RG22 she's just grabbed her 3rd trophy in New York.
It makes her perfect score 3/3 100% in the Slam finals.

At the age 21 (born in May 2001) Iga's timeline looks as follows
H2pMuiF.png

Assuming no injuries there will be 34 GS attempts more (9 AO, 9 RG, 8 WIM, 8 USO) before her 30th birthday in 2031.

How will she end up?
Poll closes shortly before 2023 AO.
 
I feel she kind of has ups and downs too often so I don't think she will be consistent enough to reach double digits, so somewhere between 5 and 9 GS is my guess.
 
The Wimbledon will remain problematic slam for her for many more seasons, not just this one! Grass as a surface in general! However i can totally see her winning multiple slams at both hard court majors at some point, likely her tally will be even bigger at AO, than at USO when all said and done, because it helps her game better! As for French Open i can see no less than at least 5 in the future, maybe even she has potential to even break female's record there, which is Evert's 7 titles!...
...my prediction is something like: 2 USO, 3 AO and 5 French Opens, so exactly ten! That is conservative prediction, i think she can do more than that at French Open, ranging from 6 to 9...but hey i'll stick to just 5 just to be safe in case someone bumps this many years later hehe...i just don't think she'll be winning french opens as regularly as Nadal does and i don't think she will be winning a lot of them beyond 30 years of age too, she will have serious challenge in face of Jabeur and Sakkari for quite some time now, with younger generation players likely to catch up too...
 
Djokodalerer31 said:
The Wimbledon will remain problematic slam for her for many more seasons, not just this one! Grass as a surface in general! However i can totally see her winning multiple slams at both hard court majors at some point, likely her tally will be even bigger at AO, than at USO when all said and done, because it helps her game better! As for French Open i can see no less than at least 5 in the future, maybe even she has potential to even break female's record there, which is Evert's 7 titles!...
...my prediction is something like: 2 USO, 3 AO and 5 French Opens, so exactly ten! That is conservative prediction, i think she can do more than that at French Open, ranging from 6 to 9...but hey i'll stick to just 5 just to be safe in case someone bumps this many years later hehe...i just don't think she'll be winning french opens as regularly as Nadal does and i don't think she will be winning a lot of them beyond 30 years of age too, she will have serious challenge in face of Jabeur and Sakkari for quite some time now, with younger generation players likely to catch up too...
Click to expand...
I predict, like Nadal, she'll get better on grass and will win Wimbledon at some point.
 
Djokodalerer31 said:
The Wimbledon will remain problematic slam for her for many more seasons, not just this one! Grass as a surface in general! However i can totally see her winning multiple slams at both hard court majors at some point, likely her tally will be even bigger at AO, than at USO when all said and done, because it helps her game better! As for French Open i can see no less than at least 5 in the future, maybe even she has potential to even break female's record there, which is Evert's 7 titles!...
...my prediction is something like: 2 USO, 3 AO and 5 French Opens, so exactly ten! That is conservative prediction, i think she can do more than that at French Open, ranging from 6 to 9...but hey i'll stick to just 5 just to be safe in case someone bumps this many years later hehe...i just don't think she'll be winning french opens as regularly as Nadal does and i don't think she will be winning a lot of them beyond 30 years of age too, she will have serious challenge in face of Jabeur and Sakkari for quite some time now, with younger generation players likely to catch up too...
Click to expand...
Lol, she won Wimbledon at juniors. and made one 4R she will win the GS
 
Many people,don’t consider Margaret court the goat just because she won 24 slams. And even if you take slams as the sole criteria how could a tie lead to the undisputed goat?
 
I would say 3-5 RGs where she is 100% favourite.
Probably 1 or 2 AOs which should suit her better than USO.
Maybe 1 more USO.
Means in total 8-11.
 
Hoi Polloi said:
Iga would turn around, destroy her racquet on the attacker‘s head, apply some band aid and continue to play.
Joke aside, she would play again after two months. She is no snowflake.
Click to expand...
Kidding aside, I posted just to show how unfair is to compare, or project, with Seles. Those were very unusual and tragic circumstances.
 
Between 5 and 8.
Not every era has to have a 10+ winner, and anything between 5 and 8 is a great career (I mean, it's Hingis, Sharapova, Henin and Venus we're talking about here).
 
I think she has a lot on her racquet and could get 6 or so GS's. However, I also think the overall level of competition doesn't allow for such clear winners anymore, so there are no foregone conclusions in any match. Getting similar with the ATP, but with Alcaraz and Sinner being the X factor.
 
juanparty said:
Lol, she won Wimbledon at juniors. and made one 4R she will win the GS
Click to expand...

And? Winning anything in juniors never guarantees a repeat performance at the main level. For one example, there was Edberg, who won the 1983 Grand Slam in juniors, but for all of his talent and versatility (considerably more than Swiatek), he was never going to repeat that feat in his adult career.

Kralingen said:
GOAT incoming if she avoids injuries
Click to expand...

She might win another 4 -5 majors, but she lacks the ability to be a GOAT player.
 
THUNDERVOLLEY said:
And? Winning anything in juniors never guarantees a repeat performance at the main level. For one example, there was Edberg, who won the 1983 Grand Slam in juniors, but for all of his talent and versatility (considerably more than Swiatek), he was never going to repeat that feat in his adult career.
Click to expand...

She made 4R, people talk like she was 1rounder at wimbledon
 
2023 will be an important season for her.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
THUNDERVOLLEY said:
And? Winning anything in juniors never guarantees a repeat performance at the main level. For one example, there was Edberg, who won the 1983 Grand Slam in juniors, but for all of his talent and versatility (considerably more than Swiatek), he was never going to repeat that feat in his adult career.



She might win another 4 -5 majors, but she lacks the ability to be a GOAT player.
Click to expand...
Why pick on Edberg? At least he won 6 adult slams and made finals at all 4, unlike Monfils (denied a junior CYGS at USO), who has won zero, zilch, nada, nil, goose eggs adult slams and, again ZERO slam finals?
 
stringertom said:
Why pick on Edberg? At least he won 6 adult slams and made finals at all 4, unlike Monfils (denied a junior CYGS at USO), who has won zero, zilch, nada, nil, goose eggs adult slams and, again ZERO slam finals?
Click to expand...

Its not "picking on" Edberg, but pointing out that a player who had a historic juniors career (Edberg) did not have that transfer to the pro career, hence the reference to Swiatek's junior career being no marker for future success.
 
THUNDERVOLLEY said:
Its not "picking on" Edberg, but pointing out that a player who had a historic juniors career (Edberg) did not have that transfer to the pro career, hence the reference to Swiatek's junior career being no marker for future success.
Click to expand...
Obviously you think Edberg is the more accurate barometer of the unreliability of junior success leading to adult progress. I simply offered the more relevant example. Six slams as an adult disproves your theory.
 
Right now her combination of movement, ballstriking, and court sense is far above anyone else in the world. She's setting a new standard for women's tennis as we speak, particularly as a mover, and only Zheng Qinwen and Coco Gauff come close to her athletically.

Maybe more than anything, I'm impressed by her ability to win tournaments without having her best stuff. She won this year's US Open playing what I'd consider her B- game. Being able to "win ugly" against slam-contending players at the business end of big tournaments is an ability that very few players in the history of tennis possess, and I believe Swiatek has it.

So, against my better judgment, I'm gonna aim high here. I'm all-in on Iga. I believe she wants to be one of the all-time greats and will continue putting in the work over time to evolve her game and remain dominant against multiple generations of players. I'll say she'll win 16-19 slams.
 
She's not better than Henin IMO, so she will have a Henin-Venus like career, 8-9 slams, however we never know the future, athletes play longer now so she could go from 10-15 as well. Beyond that is impossible.
 
rick kerr said:
She's not better than Henin IMO, so she will have a Henin-Venus like career, 8-9 slams, however we never know the future, athletes play longer now so she could go from 10-15 as well. Beyond that is impossible.
Click to expand...
The main problem here is, Henin should have won many more, at least in theory. Plus injuries, early retirement etc. Also Henin had tougher competition. Maybe 1-4 rounds back then were much easier than now but from QF the level was much higher than now.
 
I think Swiatek is slightly overrated, thanks in part to the lack of solid competition in the WTA right now. I mean, Raducanu won a slam for Pete's sake. I see Henin and even Venus being mentioned, and honestly I think both of them in their prime would handle her easily.

Yes, she looks good when everything is clicking, but she is still insanely weak mentally. You would have thought some success would calm her down, but I see no improvement in that area. She is just fortunate to be playing other players that are similarly weak mentally (Jabeur is a perfect example).

daggerman said:
Right now her combination of movement, ballstriking, and court sense is far above anyone else in the world. She's setting a new standard for women's tennis as we speak, particularly as a mover, and only Zheng Qinwen and Coco Gauff come close to her athletically.

Maybe more than anything, I'm impressed by her ability to win tournaments without having her best stuff. She won this year's US Open playing what I'd consider her B- game. Being able to "win ugly" against slam-contending players at the business end of big tournaments is an ability that very few players in the history of tennis possess, and I believe Swiatek has it.
Click to expand...

Athletically, there are plenty of others that are just as good, if not better. Giorgi, Sakkari, Sabalenka, Collins, Cornet, Putintseva, Kostyuk... They don't have the same game that she does (most days), but just athletically they are equal or better.

As for winning without her best stuff, that's because she hasn't faced anyone with their own best stuff. There is a dearth of consistent top talent in the WTA right now, and she is taking advantage of it. As I said above, if she were playing a few years ago against players like Venus, forget it. And I won't even mention the greats like Graff and Navratilova that would just school her.
 
robyrolfo said:
Athletically, there are plenty of others that are just as good, if not better. Giorgi, Sakkari, Sabalenka, Collins, Cornet, Putintseva, Kostyuk... They don't have the same game that she does (most days), but just athletically they are equal or better.
Click to expand...

You're just naming players who are athletic. None of these players are as athletic as Swiatek. Giorgi and Sakkari are twitchy but relatively stiff athletes (Giorgi more so than Sakkari). They're also on the small side. Sabalenka and Collins are much slower and less fluid than Swiatek. Cornet and Putintseva aren't nearly as strong, fast, or fluid. Hell, Kudermetova is a better athlete than most of the ones you named.

Kostyuk is the only player you listed who's arguably in the conversation. She's very explosive and pretty fluid. I considered mentioning her, but ultimately I don't believe her progress in the rankings merited it. When I said Zheng and Coco were the only two who were in Swiatek's league athletically, I was implicitly filtering out players who aren't currently on a good trajectory tennis-wise. It doesn't matter if Kostyuk is a fantastic athlete if she can't stay in the top 50.
 
bluetrain4 said:
She'll cool off after a quick start like Hingis and ultimately stop winning Slams, even if still contending. 5-7.
Click to expand...

Burnout is always a possibility for young athletes, but I think Hingis and Swiatek are polar opposite cases. Hingis' body couldn't hold up as the sport became increasingly physical. Swiatek, on the other hand, is the one setting the standard for physicality.
 
stringertom said:
Obviously you think Edberg is the more accurate barometer of the unreliability of junior success leading to adult progress. I simply offered the more relevant example. Six slams as an adult disproves your theory.
Click to expand...

As i've said before, Edberg is a solid example of juniors success not translating into matching pro success--which those wildly overrating Swiatek's majors future based on juniors achievements are doing. Edberg did something historic as a junior. That did not translate into matching pro success by any stretch of the imagination, so the same should be projected to an even less successful juniors career for Swiatek, instead of the highly questionable fantasies some are creating about her.


robyrolfo said:
I think Swiatek is slightly overrated, thanks in part to the lack of solid competition in the WTA right now. I mean, Raducanu won a slam for Pete's sake. I see Henin and even Venus being mentioned, and honestly I think both of them in their prime would handle her easily.
Click to expand...

Venus at Wimbledon overall would face no trouble from the likes of Swiatek. 2000 - 2001 Venus at Wimbledon and U.S. Open would wipe the courts with Swiatek in straight sets, as there's not a part of Swiatek's game that would stand up Venus'.
 
THUNDERVOLLEY said:
As i've said before, Edberg is a solid example of juniors success not translating into matching pro success--which those wildly overrating Swiatek's majors future based on juniors achievements are doing. Edberg did something historic as a junior. That did not translate into matching pro success by any stretch of the imagination, so the same should be projected to an even less successful juniors career for Swiatek, instead of the highly questionable fantasies some are creating about her.




Venus at Wimbledon overall would face no trouble from the likes of Swiatek. 2000 - 2001 Venus at Wimbledon and U.S. Open would wipe the courts with Swiatek in straight sets, as there's not a part of Swiatek's game that would stand up Venus'.
Click to expand...
Venus had big troubles with Tauziat and Hingis who both had no weapons so I think you’re glorifying Venus shape. I’m not saying she would lose to Iga but you’re talking like she bagelled and breadsticked all of her opponents.
Plus the courts were much faster those days which is not the case now.
In general such comparisons don’t make too much sense for me.
 
Sampras-Bruguera 1993 said:
She'll challenge Graf/Serena/Court record for sure as there really aren't many great players around to stop her. Very good chance to be GOAT. She aint the best but will probably be the greatest
Click to expand...
A new great player could be a year away at any time. Maybe Gauff develops a forehand. We don't know what the Noskovas and Fruhvirtovas will do in two years time. I feel she has a great chance to wrack up high single digits, but beyond that is a lot of luck and circumstances.
 
daggerman said:
You're just naming players who are athletic. None of these players are as athletic as Swiatek. Giorgi and Sakkari are twitchy but relatively stiff athletes (Giorgi more so than Sakkari). They're also on the small side. Sabalenka and Collins are much slower and less fluid than Swiatek. Cornet and Putintseva aren't nearly as strong, fast, or fluid. Hell, Kudermetova is a better athlete than most of the ones you named.

Kostyuk is the only player you listed who's arguably in the conversation. She's very explosive and pretty fluid. I considered mentioning her, but ultimately I don't believe her progress in the rankings merited it. When I said Zheng and Coco were the only two who were in Swiatek's league athletically, I was implicitly filtering out players who aren't currently on a good trajectory tennis-wise. It doesn't matter if Kostyuk is a fantastic athlete if she can't stay in the top 50.
Click to expand...

First off, I said we were only talking about athleticism, not their overall game, since you claimed only two players come close to her athletically.

And while there is some debate about what ultimately makes someone more athletic than someone else, your definition seems to be limited to speed (Gauff) or something (since neither Zheng nor Swiatek are particularly fast compared to other players). But if we do stick to speed, you can put Iga on a track to run 100m, 200m, 400m against those players I named, and Giorgi, Sabalenka, Sakkari and Kostyuk would blow her away (and I was only picking a few). Meanwhile the likes of Cornet and Putintseva have much more endurance/stamina than Iga does.

Now if we take a more rounded approach to athleticism, and start to consider strength and power, it looks even worse for Swiatek. I mean, have you ever even looked at her closely? She's actually somewhat scrawny. You can't even make out her calf muscles or arm muscles when in motion. Have her compete in a decathlon against those other players, and they will again beat her with ease.

Lastly, did you really imply that Giorgi is a "stiff athlete"? Have you ever seen her play? She is one of the quickest, most agile and well balanced players on the tour. She also hits incredibly hard for her size (another sign of being a good athlete) as she is surprising strong. Giorgi's issues are mainly in her head, as she just doesn't really care that much about reaching a higher level.
 
robyrolfo said:
And while there is some debate about what ultimately makes someone more athletic than someone else, your definition seems to be limited to speed (Gauff) or something (since neither Zheng nor Swiatek are particularly fast compared to other players).
Click to expand...

Huh? Zheng and Swiatek are fast as f*ck... Maybe you should watch them more closely next time.

Also, thinking I'm only talking about speed because I mentioned Coco Gauff is questionable at best. But I'll refrain from saying what I really want to say here.
 
Last edited:
I think the win streak took a toll on her. I don't see her as someone who plays past her late 20s, she seems to be a quieter personality susceptible to burnout. She'll pick up more majors, but I'd be surprised if she surpassed Venus.

Then again, she's only 21, so even if she retires before 30, that's a lot of time, and there are still no clear favorites to win majors in the WTA.
 
daggerman said:
Huh? Zheng and Swiatek are fast as f*ck... Maybe you should watch them more closely next time.

Also, thinking I'm only talking about speed because I mentioned Coco Gauff is questionable at best. But I'll refrain from saying what I really want to say here.
Click to expand...

Oh, pray tell, what do you really want to say here? I'd love to know. Yes, I mentioned Gauff and speed because that's her main attribute in terms of her athleticism. She is fast, pretty quick off the mark, and fairly agile. She isn't particularly strong at this time. So what? I mentioned at least 5 other players that I think are fast. So what does that mean to you, huh?

And you are the one that needs to watch more closely if you think Swiatek and Zheng are particularly fast on the WTA tour. They are super average in that regard.
 
When someone you don't like wins a tournament or a series of tournaments, then he/she is doing it against easy competition. If it's someone you like, then he/she did it against the best competition of all time.

It's probably the same with your tournaments. If the guy/gal who never paid you back wins a tournament, then he/she did it against all beginners. If you win a tournament, then you won your level against the best players at your level who came to one place from all over the world.
 
puppybutts said:
I think the win streak took a toll on her. I don't see her as someone who plays past her late 20s, she seems to be a quieter personality susceptible to burnout. She'll pick up more majors, but I'd be surprised if she surpassed Venus.

Then again, she's only 21, so even if she retires before 30, that's a lot of time, and there are still no clear favorites to win majors in the WTA.
Click to expand...
She wanted to reitre before her RG 2020 title so it's possible.
But I cannot agree there are better/faster movers on tour. She is the best mover out there.
 
The people on the pro tour didn't just wake up one day and decide to play tennis and ended up on the pro tour. They worked very hard to get to where they are. They are the best in the world, out of billions of people, the top 100 or so best tennis players are competing to be #1. And you can't even beat the guy or gal that is one level above you, he/she destroys you with better pace, better placement, better serves, better volleying, better movement. Stop it with the, the competition is so weak. Back in X era, the competition was way better, stop it.
 
fox said:
But I cannot agree there are better/faster movers on tour. She is the best mover out there.
Click to expand...

Where is this idea coming from? Are you guys watching a lot of WTA matches, or only late rounds of tournaments? There are numerous players that are as fast, if not faster than her. Ditto her overall movement. It is good, and among the best on the tour right now, but she isn't head and shoulders superior to everyone else, and she doesn't hold up when compared to some of the greats.
 
robyrolfo said:
Where is this idea coming from? Are you guys watching a lot of WTA matches, or only late rounds of tournaments? There are numerous players that are as fast, if not faster than her. Ditto her overall movement. It is good, and among the best on the tour right now, but she isn't head and shoulders superior to everyone else, and she doesn't hold up when compared to some of the greats.
Click to expand...
You said Giorgi is the fastest, most agile, well balanced player. You really want to get into any kind of discussion? :-D Not to even mention her reallies last max 5 hits with her with a 75% risk level so where exactly she needs to run and be well balanced?
I understand she is hot but cmon.
Also Gauff? Please watch any Swiatek Gauff match and the difference in movement and speed of the two.
 
The womens game is unpredictable these days with no exceptions. Want the ultimate evidence? Not even the unseeded player winning a US Open, but Barty retiring out of nowhere as the clear #1, having just won her 3rd slam, and some predicting anywhere from 5-12 slams for her depending who you talk to. Or Osaka basically being retired, not long ago having won her 4th slam at quite a young age, and being predicted by many/most as a future double digit slam winner.

That said I am very hesitant to make any prediction. I would guess a low end of 6 slams considering she is by far the best on clay for the forseeable future and is proving capable on other surfaces, to a high end of 12 given how terrible the womens field is today, if she keeps developing and everything goes right. Really who knows though.
 
I didn't say Giorgi was the fastest, most agile and well balanced on the tour, just one of the fastest... But yeah, perhaps even the top in those specific categories. And your counter-argument is that her rallies aren't long because she plays high risk tennis? What does that have to do with it? What do her looks have to do with it? Show some respect and actually pay attention to the way she plays and moves sometimes. She is a phenomenal athlete.

And are you seriously saying Swiatek is faster than Gauff? As in outright speed? Are you kidding? 50m, 100m, 200m, 400m... pick a distance, have Swiatek run against Gauff, and Swiatek will be nowhere close. Gauff's success thus far has been 99% about her athleticism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top