Was Sanchez Vicario a great big match player really?

[conway]

One thing about Sanchez Vicario that is often said is that she was an overachiever, she got the most out of her abilities through amazing fight and mental toughness. While overall I agree this is true, one funny thing is looking back at her career is that she in fact probably wasnt that great a big match player. First off she is 4-8 in slam finals. Now that isnt bad actually, as she was usually playing someone like Graf or Seles (or even Pierce, who obviously if in the final was in form) who can easily overpower her. However breaking her down in more detail, looking over the years and how she played in big matches:

1989- did great this year. Huge upset over Graf in the French final which denied Graf the historic double grand slam. Played well in losing to Graf at Wimbledon, and in taking Sabatini to 3 sets at the U.S Open.

1990- not a very good year in general so not many big matches. Only 1 in was U.S Open semis vs Graf where she kind of played a sucky match, but was also overwhelmed by a very in form Graf.

1991- poor performance in the Australian Open semis when favored (and coming off a convincing win/minor upset over Gaby in the quarters) she got crushed by Jana on a slow hard court. Big win in the French semis vs Graf but as Graf was literally a no show for the match, hard to put much into it. Rather weak performance vs Seles in the final, especialy in blowing a 4-1 2nd set lead with a bunch of forehand errors. Had a chance to close Navratilova in 2 sets in their U.S Open contest, and ended up losing in 3. Not good overall.

1992- lost French Open semis to Graf after winning first set 6-0. Graf found her game and probably was winning anyway, but poor performance by Sanchez in final 2 sets. U.S Open final vs Seles was a very weak effort after her great summer and first ever win over Monica in the Canadian Open final. The only good tennis she played in either set was after getting down 5-1, otherwise a parade of forehand errors and double faults (along with being outplayed by a very good Seles). Overall again not good.

1993- This was the worst of all as she was the world #2 and had an excellent overall year with 6 titles. This is the one more than any other year in her career she dissapointed miserably in the big matches. Got drilled off the court by Mary Joe Fernandez in the French Open semis. Had an awesome chance of winning the event having had a great clay season and winning 2 tournament finals over Graf (1 on clay, 1 on hard courts). Wimbledon. U.S Open semis lost to a past her prime Sukova, after being firmly in control of the match through a set and a half. Seemed to tire physically and mentally which was very strange for her. Graf despite winning 3 slams was not in top form this year at all (ironically played much better in both 94 and 92 winning only 1 in each), and again Sanchez would have loved to get to the final to play her and would have had a real shot (and done better than Sukova I am pretty sure). WTA Championship final and Australian Open semis lost to Graf, but not bad performances or losses, but no big wins either. Overall very bad.

1994- This was both her best year and her best year for big match performances, even if her performance in the Australian Open final vs Graf was pretty bad and dissapointing.

1995- Played a pretty weak Australian Open final vs Pierce. Pierce wasnt even on fire in the final like she had been most of the event, but Sanchez Vicario made 30 unforced errors in only 2 relatively short sets of tennis, something inexcusable with her playing style vs a bigger hitter. Not a great performance in the French final vs Graf, and lost the final set 6-0. Classic Wimbledon final vs Graf, and an amazing peformance even in defeat. U.S Open managed to blow a huge lead in losing to Mary Joe Fernandeze in round of 16, and lose a match she won many more points and all the stats favored her. Overall not that good.

1996- Lost that epic to Rubin in Australia, and Rubin would go on to have Seles beat in the 3rd set in the semis but choke and lose. French Open final vs Graf was a commendable effort and an all time great match, but she lost after serving for it twice, and played some of her worst games of the match in the 2 games she served for it (3 unforced errors in both games). Lost convincingly to on fire Graf at Wimbledon. Lost to 15 year old Hingis at the U.S Open where she played an awful 1st set, and ended up losing after having put herself in a potential winning spot in the 3rd. Overall not that good, similar to 95.

After 96 she was past her prime, despite her Roland Garros title in 98, so I wont bother. I guess you could do a breakdown of 98, in which case it would be overall pretty good (as far as her big match performance).

Overall I wouldnt say she was a great big match player through her career though.

 

[bluetrain4]

It's not really a characterization I've ever heard about ASV. Yes, I've hard that she was a tireless worker, a game competitor, and that she squeezed the most out of her ability But, I've never consistently heard that she was necessarily a great big match player.

In my opinion, she was "fine." Often at a talent/weapon disadvantage she sometimes performed awesomely, sometimes was middle of the road, and sometimes was below average in the biggest matches.

 

[saigonbond 2.0]

She was the epitome of a grinder who would outrun and wear girls down. Didn't have much in the way of weapons but was damn fast. I hated that ball holder thing she wore on her waist.

 

[CEvertFan]

I wouldn't say she was just a grinder. She was an all court player, ranked #1 in both singles and doubles, and had a very good backhand and could volley too. Her forehand could be off at times and she could get overpowered if the power player was playing well. That said, her tireless retrieving and her "never give up" attitude were the cornerstones of her game.

Best match I ever saw her play was the 95 Wimbledon final against Graf - hell of a match and she really played so well that day. I know Graf never liked playing Arantxa - it would drive her nuts to have balls come back that she thought would be winners. Steffi liked short points whenever possible.


I always thought the ball holder was a more practical solution than sticking the ball under the skirt or holding onto the 2nd ball like Graf used to do.

 

[conway]

Sanchez seemed to play in beast mode vs Graf that she never played at vs anyone else. Had she played against everyone like she did against Graf she would have around 8 slams and have almost even records vs Seles, Navratilova, and Hingis rather than lopsided losing ones. I don't know what it was about Graf that inspired her beyond anyone else she played.

Lets face it, even those people who believe prime Navratilova and prime Seles were better than Graf, nobody would say old Navratilova and post stabbing Seles were as good as Graf, or Martina Hingis was as good as Graf, yet even all those players have MUCH better records vs Sanchez than Graf does. That is another reason I laugh at the people who are dismissive of Sanchez as competition for Graf, as they forget that she is a much tougher opponent for Graf than her overall record and ability (which is still considerable) would ever suggest. For Graf she is like playing a 15 slam winner, even if vs everyone else she is a slightly overachieving 4 slam winner caliber player. Heck at 2 of the 4 slams she was a much tougher opponent for Graf than Seles, at 1 of the 4 about the same (Roland Garros), and only easier at 1 of the 4. The same way Austin for Evert was much more than a 2 slam winner opponent, but of course she only lasted about 2 years rather than 12 like Sanchez.

 

[bluetrain4]

I wouldn't say she was just a grinder. She was an all court player, ranked #1 in both singles and doubles, and had a very good backhand and could volley too. Her forehand could be off at times and she could get overpowered if the power player was playing well. That said, her tireless retrieving and her "never give up" attitude were the cornerstones of her game.

Best match I ever saw her play was the 95 Wimbledon final against Graf - hell of a match and she really played so well that day. I know Graf never liked playing Arantxa - it would drive her nuts to have balls come back that she thought would be winners. Steffi liked short points whenever possible.


I always thought the ball holder was a more practical solution than sticking the ball under the skirt or holding onto the 2nd ball like Graf used to do.

Interestingly, Seles never seemed particularly bothered by ASV. That's what I love about tennis - the matchups, the nuance. A casual observer might think that Seles and Graf, both being powerful baseliners would have the exact same reaction to ASV. But, for some reason, ASV could, at times, get under Graf's skin a little more than under Seles'.

Clearly, both Graf and Seles, on paper, dominated the matchup. Graf leads 28-8, Seles leads 20-3. But, generally Seles didn't care that ASV could retrieve balls all day long. I guess she liked the ball ASV has feeding her and had confidence that she could put the ball away after so many shots, even if it required more shots than against other players. I'm not saying that Graf was always completely frustrated by ASV, not at all. Just that in certain circumstances she could be frustrated in a way that largely Seles avoided.

That said, the one true "frustrating" moment ASV provided for Seles was probably the 1998 French Open final, which ASV won in 3 sets after Seles won the middle set 6-0. That was really a great chance for Seles to win another Slam, as she had finally beaten Hingis after losing a bunch of times, and had an opponent who she had nearly always beaten in the final. [Note: This was also during the phase when Seles went from OS frame to Super OS. I always thought it looked comical. Good memories. Lol.]

 

[bluetrain4]

Sort of off topic. I didn't know ASV was 2-18:shock: against Hingis. Talk about a chess match. I guess Hingis did everything just a little better. And, ASV probably liked feeding off the pace of the bigger hitters.

 

[morten]

She was the epitome of a grinder who would outrun and wear girls down. Didn't have much in the way of weapons but was damn fast. I hated that ball holder thing she wore on her waist.

I agree.. Also about the ball holder..

 

[conway]

I don't agree Hingis did everything better than Sanchez. Sanchez was easily faster (even if prime Hingis moved quite well, and was aided further by the best anticipation on tour at the time), and an overall greater defender (even if Hingis is also an excellent one). Sanchez is also mentally tougher and more of a fighter. I would say Fernandez is more like a poor womens Hingis who is weaker in everyway than Sanchez.

Still Hingis was an awful matchup for Sanchez since she was just as steady, probably moreso, and overall Sanchez couldn't outrally her, outmaneuver her, and certainly not overpower her (Hingis in fact hit the ball harder by quite a bit, despite that neither was rated a huge hitter). Hingis wasn't offensively dominant enough to allow Sanchez to play heroic defense or counterpunch off her effectively. Often Sanchez just looked lost and confused when playing Martina.

Sanchez was also past her prime in nearly every match she played against Hingis. They played only 2 matches in 96, and the rest were all after that. Sachez's prime was really 89-96, and Hingis's 97-2000. So it wasn't really a fair fight unlike Sanchez-Seles were Seles owned her despite they were true contemporaries.

 

[suwanee4712]

I've never considered Sanchez a great big match player. But you don't accomplish what she did without rising to some big occasions. Plus she won some pressure packed Fed Cup matches as well as doubles matches.

The one thing that hurts her when considering this designation is that she rarely controlled the outcome vs. the players abover her in these situations. She was good at giving her opponents chances to miss and sometimes they missed just enough.

 

[bluetrain4]

I don't agree Hingis did everything better than Sanchez. Sanchez was easily faster (even if prime Hingis moved quite well, and was aided further by the best anticipation on tour at the time), and an overall greater defender (even if Hingis is also an excellent one). Sanchez is also mentally tougher and more of a fighter. I would say Fernandez is more like a poor womens Hingis who is weaker in everyway than Sanchez.

Still Hingis was an awful matchup for Sanchez since she was just as steady, probably moreso, and overall Sanchez couldn't outrally her, outmaneuver her, and certainly not overpower her (Hingis in fact hit the ball harder by quite a bit, despite that neither was rated a huge hitter). Hingis wasn't offensively dominant enough to allow Sanchez to play heroic defense or counterpunch off her effectively. Often Sanchez just looked lost and confused when playing Martina.

Sanchez was also past her prime in nearly every match she played against Hingis. They played only 2 matches in 96, and the rest were all after that. Sachez's prime was really 89-96, and Hingis's 97-2000. So it wasn't really a fair fight unlike Sanchez-Seles were Seles owned her despite they were true contemporaries.

I disagree. I can dismiss wins or losses if the player is very young, like first year on tour, or very old, in the absolute twilight of their career. But, otherwise the match results are legit. TWers always try to dismiss wins or loses because an opponent wasn't in their absolute prime, or even if they are in their prime, but were "off" or something on particular day. It's ridiculous.

We're only supposed to gauge careers and rivalries based on "primes"? Would ASV tell herself that she didn't lose to Hingis all those times. I doubt it. And, one of ASV's wins was relatively late in the rivalry, suggesting that it wasn't her non-prime status that was making her lose all those times.
During ASV's "non-prime" (post 1996 according to you) she was still winning non-slam tournaments, still making Slam QFs and SFs and even won the 1998 French Open. This is hardly the resume of someone for whom wins against should be overlooked. Sure, if she was noticeably not fit, losing first or second round in every tournament, then maybe I would not think too much of Hingis' wins during that time period. But, that's not the case.

 

[BTURNER]

Another odd problem Sanchez had, was that she had a lot of weapons up at the net ( thus that incredible doubles ranking and majors), but none to get her up there. Not enough power from either the ground or the serve to really penetrate, except sometimes that flattish two-hander backhand. Her slice was floaty and that forehand was relatively weak. You really did not see a lot of approaches from her in most matches and it wasn't from cowardice. Against that field, an approach really needed to be very effective to avoid a kamikaze charge. She was often driven too far back by power hitters to take much advantage of short balls as well. Those great instincts at net were mostly irrelevant. A lot of people don't even realize her net play was good enough to win those majors..

 

[bluetrain4]

Another odd problem Sanchez had, was that she had a lot of weapons up at the net ( thus that incredible doubles ranking and majors), but none to get her up there. Not enough power from either the ground or the serve to really penetrate, except sometimes that flattish two-hander backhand. Her slice was floaty and that forehand was relatively weak. You really did not see a lot of approaches from her in most matches.

You'd think at least she would have come in more on some low, biting slices if she didn't have the power groundies to follow in.

She was sort of an enigma. She played plenty of matches were her guile, fight, variety, counter-punching, retrieving made her great and the matches against top players were fantastic - some wins and some close losses. Other times she looked defenseless even though she kept on retrieving balls.

 

[BTURNER]

You'd think at least she would have come in more on some low, biting slices if she didn't have the power groundies to follow in.

She was sort of an enigma. She played plenty of matches were her guile, fight, variety, counter-punching, retrieving made her great and the matches against top players were fantastic - some wins and some close losses. Other times she looked defenseless even though she kept on retrieving balls.

I did not see a lot of 'low bite' on that one handed slice of hers. It was a good mix-up, and worked when she was pulled wide, but it was nothing we might confuse with Novatna's, Graf's or even Hingis. It was a soft slice, without much of the power Navratilova or so many others could employ. It might have worked on grass, but clay or hard courts?

 

[bluetrain4]

I did not see a lot of 'low bite' on that one handed slice of hers. It was a good mix-up, and worked when she was pulled wide, but it was nothing we might confuse with Novatna's, Graf's or even Hingis. It was a soft slice, without much of the power Navratilova or so many others could employ. It might have worked on grass, but clay or hard courts?

I didn't really think about the quality of her slice before posting. I guess i figured she could hit it a bit harder and less floaty if she wanted. But, if she didn't have that stroke (at least a semi-penetrating slice) then there really wasn't much for her to come in behind.

 

[4sound]

ASV was a smart player & a great competitor. She had to be because of her size. She was a control/counter puncher. None of the top players ever took her for granted.

People talk about how she didn't have power but that was never the game she strived to develop.

 

[Djokovic2011]

I disagree. I can dismiss wins or losses if the player is very young, like first year on tour, or very old, in the absolute twilight of their career. But, otherwise the match results are legit. TWers always try to dismiss wins or loses because an opponent wasn't in their absolute prime, or even if they are in their prime, but were "off" or something on particular day. It's ridiculous.

We're only supposed to gauge careers and rivalries based on "primes"? Would ASV tell herself that she didn't lose to Hingis all those times. I doubt it. And, one of ASV's wins was relatively late in the rivalry, suggesting that it wasn't her non-prime status that was making her lose all those times.
During ASV's "non-prime" (post 1996 according to you) she was still winning non-slam tournaments, still making Slam QFs and SFs and even won the 1998 French Open. This is hardly the resume of someone for whom wins against should be overlooked. Sure, if she was noticeably not fit, losing first or second round in every tournament, then maybe I would not think too much of Hingis' wins during that time period. But, that's not the case.

+1. Great post.

 

[comeback]

Since i was a Graf fan, i never liked Arantxa and her fist pumping mother..Also the way she would call balls out for the lineman..her fist pumping antics weren't that common back then. But beating Graf in 2 GS finals then Seles and Pierce, 4 other finals and 6 GS doubles, 4 Mixed and 5 Fed Cups is an amazing record for a short defensive player like her..Too bad she had those troubles with accusing her parents' of stealing her money,,What ever happened to that case?

 

[Mustard]

Aranxta Sanchez Vicario was persistent in fighting and not being easy for her opponents to shake off, hence the nickname of the "Barcelona Bumblebee". Her smallish size, and growing up with tennis playing brothers (Emilio and Javier), no doubt brought out this competitiveness.

Her rivalry with Seles is one-sided on paper. However, I have seen many of their matches, and they were all very tough toe-to-toe slugfests. Seles would win most of them, but they were never easy because ASV just wouldn't be demoralised at any time. You wouldn't know this by just looking at their head-to-head record.

 

[mhkeuns]

She was an over-achiever like... Michael Chang. They both had solid game..., but their best attributes were their quickness and tenaciousness. Didn't like either one of them but grew appreciation for their dedication. Probably idolized Mats Wilander growing up... Who knows

 

[PDJ]

Slightly off-topic, but I always found it interesting that ASV nearly always guessed where her opponent wd hit her smash- I've lost count of how many points I saw her win because of her ability to second guess.
For the record, I liked her spirit, but her endless line challenges at RG were a tad tiresome. Still she's no Kerber, Henin et al who allowed decisions to go their way when clearly this wasn't the case. Unsporting and unworthy of subsequent respect.