Raducanu's Draw Revisited?

Strength of Raducanu's 2021 USO Draw?

  • Fair.

    Votes: 20 33.9%
  • Easier than generally speaking.

    Votes: 15 25.4%
  • Soft.

    Votes: 12 20.3%
  • Gift.

    Votes: 12 20.3%

  • Total voters
    59

BGod

Legend
Wanted the dust to settle a bit before asking this as I did for Leylah.

But Raducanu's draw wasn't just a low ranked affair with #11, #17 the only seeds faced, but facing player's coming off more taxing matches than her own.

First 3 rounds are self explanatory, LL, Zhang and Tormo fringe Top 50 players with last time Zhang made it past 3rd round of a HC Slam was 2016 AO but was the strongest opponent.

R16: Gets Rogers after perhaps her career best victory in a 3 setter against Barty (3rd set being intense)
QF: Bencic having a 2 set war with Swiatek meanwhile Raducanu had a breeze, Bencic clearly makes a lot of mistakes, did win Olympic Gold and do well in Cincinnati, call it fatigue, best result at a Slam since 2019 USO.
SF: Sakkari faced Kvitova, then a grueling match against Andreescu, then Pliskova, maybe it was her legs or maybe she has nerve issues getting so deep again but wasn't anywhere near the striking like in the Andreescu match

And of course the final, getting a low ranked but ascending player who fought in four consecutive 3 set matches against #2, 3, 5 and former #1 but seeded 16th Kerber.

I'd call it one of the softest draws in memory which makes sense for a qualifier to win it.
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
I echoed something similar a few days ago.
She played an amazing fortnight and didn’t drop a set. She did have a very good draw not facing any top 10 players or slam champions but to be ranked #150 in the world at her US Open debut and to win the title? Huge.
It's probably the best slam draw since Barty's at the 2019 French Open (in hindsight, Barty's draw actually looks a bit more difficult when you consider she faced Kenin, Pegula and Vondrousova but they of course weren't a slam champ (Kenin) slam SFist (Pegula) and Olympic silver medalist (Vondrousova) then.
 

Moose Malloy

G.O.A.T.
all this is pretty much negated by the fact that this was only the 4th tour level event of her career. Nottingham, Wimbledon, San Jose(where she lost to Zhang, much more significant info than whatever Zhang's record in majors is) and the USO

The idea that it made sense for anyone with as little tour experience as her to run through this draw, weak or not, without losing a set(or even playing a TB) is crazy. Only all time greats and Swiatek have won majors without losing a set. This is someone who had to qualify for an ITF event in August. Was ranked 338 in June. And this is somehow an easy draw, right.

I think the only matches where she was favored with oddsmakers was her 1st round, 4th round, and the final.
 

Kralingen

Hall of Fame
Sakkari is 6th in the race this year, and Bencic won Olympic gold. That's not nothing. However watching those matches though both were far from their best in the match. So maybe it is just very soft.

I won't go as far as to say gift though, considering she had to play quallies. She got the gifts of avoiding Barty and Sabalenka, (massive gifts, obviously) but neither player looked strong at the US Open. It's not like Fernandez or Rogers didn't deserve those upsets, they were the better players on the day.

Takes nothing away from Emma's level or achievements though - I thought she fully deserved the win and played dominant tennis in every round. It was far from just an easy draw that allowed her to win in such dominant fashion.
 

optic yellow

New User
I echoed something similar a few days ago.


It's probably the best slam draw since Barty's at the 2019 French Open (in hindsight, Barty's draw actually looks a bit more difficult when you consider she faced Kenin, Pegula and Vondrousova but they of course weren't a slam champ (Kenin) slam SFist (Pegula) and Olympic silver medalist (Vondrousova) then.
So the consensus is she got an easy draw but also played like she deserved her victory?
 

BGod

Legend
all this is pretty much negated by the fact that this was only the 4th tour level event of her career. Nottingham, Wimbledon, San Jose(where she lost to Zhang, much more significant info than whatever Zhang's record in majors is) and the USO

The idea that it made sense for anyone with as little tour experience as her to run through this draw, weak or not, without losing a set(or even playing a TB) is crazy. Only all time greats and Swiatek have won majors without losing a set. This is someone who had to qualify for an ITF event in August. Was ranked 338 in June. And this is somehow an easy draw, right.

I think the only matches where she was favored with oddsmakers was her 1st round, 4th round, and the final.
Look, nobody is saying it was an easy draw for a player of Raducanu's ranking or experience, just in the general sense.

You bring up Swiatek who also had one of the easiest draws I can remember. Faced Qualifier in both QF-SF matches and WC Bouchard in 3rd round but got Halep and Kenin so those two matches greatly elevated the final tally but even so she followed that up with R16 this year and it might well be her only Slam or even Slam Final.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
Radacanu got an easy draw and now they are talking, hyperbolically, of a billion dollar career. I should be so lucky ... lucky lucky lucky.
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
So the consensus is she got an easy draw but also played like she deserved her victory?
Well yes, you can only play who's on the other end of the net. Lord knows other players in the draw had great looking draws but couldn't take advantage but Emma could. I mean had Barty not lost to Rogers she would have faced Raducanu in the 4R and then likely looked set for the title but she lost to Rogers so :notworthy:
 

mwym

Semi-Pro
But obviously - both Raducanu and Medvrdev got soft draws AND did their part - perfectly.

Soft(er) draw is neither their achievement nor fault. That is the way it is intended to work and it works.

On average, draw favors no one. On average. Average is rather simple word.
 
Pretty tough draw for a qualifier, easy draw for a slam winner. Had Fernandez won, it would have been a tough draw period. The fact that Fernandez lost not in three but straight sets to Raducanu suggests, though, that the latter may not have needed the easy draw as much as we think.
 

terribleIVAN

Hall of Fame
You can only beat whose in front of you.

But i think it's a perfectly point to make.

You have to ask yourself if Raducanu wins the tournament if she and Fernandez were switched in the draw. In my view it's not so sure she would have won: 40 Yes -60 No
 

MS_07

Rookie
Wanted the dust to settle a bit before asking this as I did for Leylah.
But Raducanu's draw wasn't just a low ranked affair with #11, #17 the only seeds faced, but facing player's coming off more taxing matches than her own. First 3 rounds are self explanatory, LL, Zhang and Tormo fringe Top 50 players with last time Zhang made it past 3rd round of a HC Slam was 2016 AO but was the strongest opponent. R16: Gets Rogers after perhaps her career best victory in a 3 setter against Barty (3rd set being intense) QF: Bencic having a 2 set war with Swiatek meanwhile Raducanu had a breeze, Bencic clearly makes a lot of mistakes, did win Olympic Gold and do well in Cincinnati, call it fatigue, best result at a Slam since 2019 USO.SF: Sakkari faced Kvitova, then a grueling match against Andreescu, then Pliskova, maybe it was her legs or maybe she has nerve issues getting so deep again but wasn't anywhere near the striking like in the Andreescu match.And of course the final, getting a low ranked but ascending player who fought in four consecutive 3 set matches against #2, 3, 5 and former #1 but seeded 16th Kerber. I'd call it one of the softest draws in memory which makes sense for a qualifier to win it.


What was her projected path again ? :unsure::unsure:
 

BGod

Legend
You can only beat whose in front of you.

But i think it's a perfectly point to make.

You have to ask yourself if Raducanu wins the tournament if she and Fernandez were switched in the draw. In my view it's not so sure she would have won: 40 Yes -60 No
Oh I think she would have beat Osaka and maybe Kerber but not Svitolina/Sabalenko combo.

What was her projected path again ? :unsure::unsure:
Easy two rounds then Muchova in the 3rd, Barty in the 4th, Swiatek in QF, Pliskova/Andreescu in SF and either Sabalenka or Svitolina. I am discounting Osaka of course as I don't think her head was in it at all.
 

Chanwan

G.O.A.T.
Look, nobody is saying it was an easy draw for a player of Raducanu's ranking or experience, just in the general sense.

You bring up Swiatek who also had one of the easiest draws I can remember. Faced Qualifier in both QF-SF matches and WC Bouchard in 3rd round but got Halep and Kenin so those two matches greatly elevated the final tally but even so she followed that up with R16 this year and it might well be her only Slam or even Slam Final.
Or she might go on to win multiple slams. You are awfully quick to judge a career
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
There is one qualification for the qualifier and that is that tennis has been interrupted by covid so she may have had a direct entry in normal times.

Sure, the draw opened up for her, but she still had to take the opportunity.

The astonishing achievement is a qualifier winning, regardless of the draw.
 

dumb-person

Rookie
Look, nobody is saying it was an easy draw for a player of Raducanu's ranking or experience, just in the general sense.

You bring up Swiatek who also had one of the easiest draws I can remember. Faced Qualifier in both QF-SF matches and WC Bouchard in 3rd round but got Halep and Kenin so those two matches greatly elevated the final tally but even so she followed that up with R16 this year and it might well be her only Slam or even Slam Final.
Swiatek will win couple of French Opens at very least. She is indercibly gifted on clay. You forgot about playing first round against Vondrousova who was top16 seed and defending finalist back then. Swiatek draw was tougher than Barty RG, Raducanu USO or Krejcikova RG.
 

canta_Brian

Professional
Wanted the dust to settle a bit before asking this as I did for Leylah.

But Raducanu's draw wasn't just a low ranked affair with #11, #17 the only seeds faced, but facing player's coming off more taxing matches than her own.

First 3 rounds are self explanatory, LL, Zhang and Tormo fringe Top 50 players with last time Zhang made it past 3rd round of a HC Slam was 2016 AO but was the strongest opponent.

R16: Gets Rogers after perhaps her career best victory in a 3 setter against Barty (3rd set being intense)
QF: Bencic having a 2 set war with Swiatek meanwhile Raducanu had a breeze, Bencic clearly makes a lot of mistakes, did win Olympic Gold and do well in Cincinnati, call it fatigue, best result at a Slam since 2019 USO.
SF: Sakkari faced Kvitova, then a grueling match against Andreescu, then Pliskova, maybe it was her legs or maybe she has nerve issues getting so deep again but wasn't anywhere near the striking like in the Andreescu match

And of course the final, getting a low ranked but ascending player who fought in four consecutive 3 set matches against #2, 3, 5 and former #1 but seeded 16th Kerber.

I'd call it one of the softest draws in memory which makes sense for a qualifier to win it.
Revisionist idiocy at its finest.

She had played three matches before the draw started. Fringe 50 players don’t have to do this.

“Bencic having a 2 set war… Raducanu had a breeze”

Maybe Raducanu would have breezed past Swiatek? Maybe she had a breeze because she played better.

If you play well matches tend to be won in straight sets. 20 sets in a row for Raducanu.

Final thing. She is the first player, man or woman, to win a slam as a qualifier. Unless you are saying that never in the history of tennis has anyone had such an easy draw, I suggest you stop with this rubbish.
 

Chanwan

G.O.A.T.
Wanted the dust to settle a bit before asking this as I did for Leylah.

But Raducanu's draw wasn't just a low ranked affair with #11, #17 the only seeds faced, but facing player's coming off more taxing matches than her own.

First 3 rounds are self explanatory, LL, Zhang and Tormo fringe Top 50 players with last time Zhang made it past 3rd round of a HC Slam was 2016 AO but was the strongest opponent.

R16: Gets Rogers after perhaps her career best victory in a 3 setter against Barty (3rd set being intense)
QF: Bencic having a 2 set war with Swiatek meanwhile Raducanu had a breeze, Bencic clearly makes a lot of mistakes, did win Olympic Gold and do well in Cincinnati, call it fatigue, best result at a Slam since 2019 USO.
SF: Sakkari faced Kvitova, then a grueling match against Andreescu, then Pliskova, maybe it was her legs or maybe she has nerve issues getting so deep again but wasn't anywhere near the striking like in the Andreescu match

And of course the final, getting a low ranked but ascending player who fought in four consecutive 3 set matches against #2, 3, 5 and former #1 but seeded 16th Kerber.

I'd call it one of the softest draws in memory which makes sense for a qualifier to win it.
You do realize that these players are professional athletes right? And that endurance wise, women can compete pretty well with men (i.e. women would be able to play best of 5 as well if need be).

What you call a 2 set war with Swiatek was a 2 hour and 7 minutes long match, before Bencic had approx. 48 hours of rest before her next match. That's much less than any standard WTA Premier tournament.
At the Olympics, she played 3 days in a row, before having one day off (approx 48 hours) before the final. That went alright, didn't it?

Sakkari played a long match vs. Andreescu on Monday, true, but a 81 minutes match vs. Pliskova on Wednesday in the QF. If she was fatigued, why wouldn't it show in the QF, 2 days after her 3,5 hour match, rather than in the semi, 24 hours after her 81 minutes match (filled with short rallies even). Also, she's a monster of an athlete.
The way you frame it, it seems as if you've already decided on your conclusion: "This was the softest draw in recent memory" and then try and make everything else fit with that narrative as best you can.

As for the final, sure. Fatigue might def. have played a role there, but Leilay had one of the most impressive runs through a draw in a recent memory, so that's understandable.

I think the questions, you should be asking are:

  • Was the quafier Radu's run impressive as f*** regardless of whom she met and how well they played/she let them play in her 20 sets demolition job? I'd answer that with a hell yeah.
  • Does Radu have an influence on how well Bencic/Sakkari/Fernandez play? Again, that's a pretty clear yes from me
Was the draw somewhat on the soft side? Sure, there's an argument for that. But does it really matter, when she's the first tennis player, man or woman, to go through the qualies and win a slam tournament in the entire Open era? Not at all imo.
Also, matches against "fringe top-50 players" aren't exactly gimmies, when you're 150th in the world, was ranked 338th 3 months ago and lost to one of those fringe players less than a month ago on the same surface.

You're right that neither Bencic, Sakkari or Fernandex played their match of the tournament vs. Raducanu (and in some cases, perhaps even far from it). Be it due to nerves, fatigue, Radu's play or a combination of 2 or all 3. But isn't it impressive that a qualifier handles the occasion better than an Olympic gold medalist, a veteran like Sakkari and a Fernandez who had been so mentally impressive throughout the tournament? Again, that's a hell yeah for me.
At the very least, it's part of what it takes to win a tennis tournament: That you play your best, when your best is needed and don't get progressively worse, the higher the stakes/the deeper you are in the tournament.
Revisionist idiocy at its finest.

She had played three matches before the draw started. Fringe 50 players don’t have to do this.

“Bencic having a 2 set war… Raducanu had a breeze”

Maybe Raducanu would have breezed past Swiatek? Maybe she had a breeze because she played better.

If you play well matches tend to be won in straight sets. 20 sets in a row for Raducanu.

Final thing. She is the first player, man or woman, to win a slam as a qualifier. Unless you are saying that never in the history of tennis has anyone had such an easy draw, I suggest you stop with this rubbish.
Didn't see your comment before posting, but I obviously agree. Well said.

Well yes, you can only play who's on the other end of the net. Lord knows other players in the draw had great looking draws but couldn't take advantage but Emma could. I mean had Barty not lost to Rogers she would have faced Raducanu in the 4R and then likely looked set for the title but she lost to Rogers so :notworthy:
Or she would have lost to Radu like the rest of the draw did (coming from a Barty fan). We can't know. Radu played and beat the players who played well enough to get to her in pretty convincing fashion.
 
Last edited:

Wurm

Semi-Pro
Or she might go on to win multiple slams. You are awfully quick to judge a career
"BGod
Legend - From Toronto, Canada"

I think he's still somewhere in the stage of processing the loss that is treading water in Egypt's biggest river :X3:

It's far too early to know where either of these young women will end up but it's not like either of them pulled an Ostapenko and redlined a high risk game to success, they both looked to be playing within reasonable limits which suggests a very bright future for them both. They've just lost themselves a year or two of making their way to the top of the game somewhat under the radar and have just painted great big targets on their backs for the rest of the tour to take aim at but between those two and a handful of others I'd say the future of women's tennis is looking pretty healthy, and mercifully free of excess screeching.
 

Chanwan

G.O.A.T.
all this is pretty much negated by the fact that this was only the 4th tour level event of her career. Nottingham, Wimbledon, San Jose(where she lost to Zhang, much more significant info than whatever Zhang's record in majors is) and the USO

The idea that it made sense for anyone with as little tour experience as her to run through this draw, weak or not, without losing a set(or even playing a TB) is crazy. Only all time greats and Swiatek have won majors without losing a set. This is someone who had to qualify for an ITF event in August. Was ranked 338 in June. And this is somehow an easy draw, right.

I think the only matches where she was favored with oddsmakers was her 1st round, 4th round, and the final.
Great points

"BGod
Legend - From Toronto, Canada"

I think he's still somewhere in the stage of processing the loss that is treading water in Egypt's biggest river :X3:

It's far too early to know where either of these young women will end up but it's not like either of them pulled an Ostapenko and redlined a high risk game to success, they both looked to be playing within reasonable limits which suggests a very bright future for them both. They've just lost themselves a year or two of making their way to the top of the game somewhat under the radar and have just painted great big targets on their backs for the rest of the tour to take aim at but between those two and a handful of others I'd say the future of women's tennis is looking pretty healthy, and mercifully free of excess screeching.
Precisely, I think both Radu, Swiatek and most likely Fernandez as well have what it takes to become mainstakes at the fun end of the rankings and a lot of tournaments. But contrary to BGod (best God??), I'm not making any definitive claims on how their future will unfold, but I agree that the future of women's tennis look very healthy indeed.
 

Arak

Hall of Fame
In any case, the WTA is full of great talent at the moment, and for any of the finalists to repeat their achievement would be a very difficult task. I like Raducanu and I hope to see her play in advanced stages of tournaments but let’s not forget that the competition is fierce.
 

ConnorH

New User
She got luck.

But, she beat the opponents who beat all the top seeds (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7). You don't see this often, and never say again she just got luck.
 

R. Schweikart

Semi-Pro
Wanted the dust to settle a bit before asking this as I did for Leylah.

But Raducanu's draw wasn't just a low ranked affair with #11, #17 the only seeds faced, but facing player's coming off more taxing matches than her own.
...
I'd call it one of the softest draws in memory which makes sense for a qualifier to win it.
That's why no one of her opponents won more than 7 games.
The top 5 ranked players might have stretched her into a long set or even a tie break now and then. I don't anymore taking a set from her, though.
 
I'd call it one of the softest draws in memory which makes sense for a qualifier to win it.
FACT:

Emma Raducanu conformed to the rules of tennis and to the Tournament Schedule she was presented with given her player ranking going into the US Open event.

She could only play and defeat who she was presented with. She did so and won the Tournament.

She followed the same process that all Tennis players must follow in Professional Tennis in order to successfully win a Tournament.

Any other commentary on her progress or the progress of any other player is subjective and opinion.

BTW ... She is a US Open Champion now ... none of us here are!
 

STRONGSTYLE

Rookie
Barty went out to Rogers, who Raducanu demolished, she also went in the 2nd round at RG and also lost to Sorribes Tormo, who Raducanu destroyed, at Olympics. Let's not act like she's some wall that players have to overcome. Because of bo3 in slams, women's tennis is crapshoot most of the time, Raducanu held it together the best and won.
 

Ruark

Professional
Radacanu got an easy draw and now they are talking, hyperbolically, of a billion dollar career. I should be so lucky ... lucky lucky lucky.
Remember they do the draw before they play. Given that at that moment she was an unknown 150-ranked nobody, I wouldn't expect them to pay much attention to who she played against.
 

TennisFan3

G.O.A.T.
She got a CUPCAKE. Super Lucky. I don't remember a WEAKER draw EVER. That is why she won the UsOpen.

I mean it's a great story and all - but luck runs out. Watch her not making even the final weekend in ALL slams in 2021.
As she gets older she will improve and then maybe she can win another slam.
 

RaulRamirez

Legend
TTW: Where "weak draws", "weak eras", "vulturing" and "mugs" are bandied about all the time.

So, we get a beautiful, poised, classy, 18-year-old on the tour -- who plays quietly, fearlessly and with amazing intelligence and, again, class. In her second major - and fourth (?)-ever tourney -- she wins her three qualies and then blitzes the field, not even dropping a set. And then, again, handles it with the utmost grace.

No, that couldn't have been the case. We have to find reasons to denigrate such an amazing accomplishment -- and pollute such a breath of fresh air.

Can't we just enjoy it?!
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
Soft draw but it's hard for me to say the stars definitively aligned for her when she smashed all opponents in straight sets without reaching a tie-break.

But the tour have had a real good look at her now so I don't envision any more such domination for a while.
 

Tennisgods

Hall of Fame
Look, nobody is saying it was an easy draw for a player of Raducanu's ranking or experience, just in the general sense.

You bring up Swiatek who also had one of the easiest draws I can remember. Faced Qualifier in both QF-SF matches and WC Bouchard in 3rd round but got Halep and Kenin so those two matches greatly elevated the final tally but even so she followed that up with R16 this year and it might well be her only Slam or even Slam Final.
I still think you’re missing the point. It was an easy draw on paper; for her opponents!!! Had one of them made the final and won the cup, maybe then you can talk about the draw. But she was what, number 150?

Ok, it wasn’t littered with top players, but this is the WTA in 2021, there is hardly any consistency in that thing, we all know that.

I really wouldn’t waste the time you’re wasting looking at her draw, but your choice! :)
 
Top