Wozniacki the Next Great Female Champ?

[OddJack]

great tennis fan you are! can't handle a new generation of players once the old ones quit? At least the women's game has a few potential number 1's, while the men's game has nadal, and a slew of others who are either injured for months or have no mental stability

Heh..you say old generation like Justine is playing with a wooden racket.
What does Woz do that makes her new generation?
I watch tennis and admire players for the way they play, aesthetics of their games. You like Woz for her face or her age that's your choice and I have no problem with that just dont tell me who's a tennis fan or not.

 

[sondraj]

Huh? What doesn't make sense? Your question about 19-year-olds beating top ten players who are multiple years older with multiple years more miles on them? That's my point exactly. As you say, it doesn't make sense. Yet apparently you thought it did make sense when you originally asked the question about 19-year-old Caroline! :shock:

LoL ... I rest my case! :mrgreen:

If you want to rag some more on the WTA, start a thread about it. This thread is about Caroline Wozniacki. Stop spamming and trolling with anti-WTA crap

Your silly, I love how people take one thing and make a whole argument around it. The question was about a 19 year old Caroline being the number 2 player in the world without beating a top tenner. That has nothing to do with her age. You brought up her age. Get it...ok let me break it down more for you

Caroline has made it to the number 2 position in women's tennis without beating her better peers that doesn't make sense. Her age doesn't have anything to do with it.

If your excuse for her is that she needs more time to develop her game to be able to beat them then her ranking should reflect her talent. And right now it doesn't, is that clear enough for you eh

And you really need to rest your case because everything you say about this subject doesn't make sense.

 

[OKUSA]

Heh..you say old generation like Justine is playing with a wooden racket.
What does Woz do that makes her new generation?
I watch tennis and admire players for the way they play, aesthetics of their games. You like Woz for her face or her age that's your choice and I have no problem with that just dont tell me who's a tennis fan or not.

i meant old ones as old champions, i wouldn't consider them old champions yet but in 3-4 years they will be.

new generation doesn't have to do anything different just the next batch of champions. sampras and agassi were the last generation, now it's federer and nadal, etc.

why would a tennis fan stop watching when players quit? if you're a tennis fan you love watching the game not the players imo

i like Wozniacki for her toughness, which is rare in men's or women's tennis today. my favorite player of all-time was Bjorn Borg, I love watching his matches. Wozniacki is similar to Borg in many aspects, she never gives up, and she never let's her emotions get the best of her. She gets outplayed but she never loses a game due to mental instability. I can understand if a lot of people don't like watching her because she doesn't hit winners on every point or go for one, but there's more to tennis than mindless ball bashing and fist pumps. Which is why I do not like watching Del Potro/Tsonga/Berdych/Soderling play, my favorite men's players today to watch are Davydenko and Ferrero

 

[Juges8932]

I hope so. I've become a big fan over the last year and a half. She's definitely been making strides in her game since the US Open alone. I felt she lacked the aggressive/killer instinct to go and get the win rather than trying to wait for the opponent to beat themselves. She's not a killer, yet, but she is certainly becoming more aggressive and I look forward to her progress and hopefully eventual rise to the top and win some slams. I like her personality, looks, and how she's improving and trying to become a well-rounded player. She's already good on defense and if she adds some offensive weapons to her arsenal (Particularly a strong/accurate forehand), she will be even more of a force to be reckoned with and hopefully start dominating folks on the offensive end.

 

[Love Game]

Your silly, I love how people take one thing and make a whole argument around it. The question was about a 19 year old Caroline being the number 2 player in the world without beating a top tenner. That has nothing to do with her age. You brought up her age. Get it...ok let me break it down more for you

Caroline has made it to the number 2 position in women's tennis without beating her better peers that doesn't make sense. Her age doesn't have anything to do with it.

If your excuse for her is that she needs more time to develop her game to be able to beat them then her ranking should reflect her talent. And right now it doesn't, is that clear enough for you eh

And you really need to rest your case because everything you say about this subject doesn't make sense.

FYI ... both the ATP and WTA have the same ranking systems in which he or she who wins the most matches earns the most ranking points, and the ranking levels depend on those points in both the wta and atp.

Do the math. It's the math that determines the rankings.

That's the way it is. Sure, you'd do it differently if you were king of the tennis world .... but until that time ... deal with it. K?

Bottom line: Caroline Wozniacki is world no. 2 because she earned it. All players are treated equally (unfortunately, according to you).

Plain and simple. boo hoo for you.

 

[sondraj]

FYI ... both the ATP and WTA have the same ranking systems in which he or she who wins the most matches earns the most ranking points, and the ranking levels depend on those points in both the wta and atp.

Do the math. It's the math that determines the rankings.

That's the way it is. Sure, you'd do it differently if you were king of the tennis world .... but until that time ... deal with it. K?

Bottom line: Caroline Wozniacki is world no. 2 because she earned it. All players are treated equally (unfortunately, according to you).

Plain and simple. boo hoo for you.

How come it always seems to happen more where wta players make it to the top of the rankings without having to do much I.E Caroline. Don't know, don't care really, I know what I see. And I see that Caroline doesn't have much to offer in the realm of talent and she has managed to get to the top of the game. Now how far will see get IDK. But based on her game it tells me not very far

 

[sondraj]

i meant old ones as old champions, i wouldn't consider them old champions yet but in 3-4 years they will be.

new generation doesn't have to do anything different just the next batch of champions. sampras and agassi were the last generation, now it's federer and nadal, etc.

why would a tennis fan stop watching when players quit? if you're a tennis fan you love watching the game not the players imo

i like Wozniacki for her toughness, which is rare in men's or women's tennis today. my favorite player of all-time was Bjorn Borg, I love watching his matches. Wozniacki is similar to Borg in many aspects, she never gives up, and she never let's her emotions get the best of her. She gets outplayed but she never loses a game due to mental instability. I can understand if a lot of people don't like watching her because she doesn't hit winners on every point or go for one, but there's more to tennis than mindless ball bashing and fist pumps. Which is why I do not like watching Del Potro/Tsonga/Berdych/Soderling play, my favorite men's players today to watch are Davydenko and Ferrero

Serious questions, have you not noticed how extremely loud Caroline is with the fist pumping and come ons when she's playing. People really see what they want about their fav players. Where with all those players you mentioned it doesn't bother me to hear them do it but with Caroline it does, so it's a double standard. And I also love Davydenko and Ferrero for the fact that they don't do it

 

[OKUSA]

hmm, she does do it yes. not that often though. i don't think she did it once at ponte verda this past week, she did though smash her racquet on the ground which was odd (against vesnina), but she came back from a set and a break down to win (vintage caro)

she also screams sometimes when she has an unforced error, i mean she's not exactly silent like IceBorg. but her emotional outbursts are so few and far in between that i don't really remember them (except that racquet smashing, the commentators also commented on it)

 

[devila]

She may be inconsistent, but you don't get disgusted like when you watch Serena & Federer's smug, fake-intellectual propaganda. Serena & Federer get handed free tickets to finals & easy draws in a joke tennis era.

 

[OddJack]

i meant old ones as old champions, i wouldn't consider them old champions yet but in 3-4 years they will be.

new generation doesn't have to do anything different just the next batch of champions. sampras and agassi were the last generation, now it's federer and nadal, etc.

why would a tennis fan stop watching when players quit? if you're a tennis fan you love watching the game not the players imo

i like Wozniacki for her toughness, which is rare in men's or women's tennis today. my favorite player of all-time was Bjorn Borg, I love watching his matches. Wozniacki is similar to Borg in many aspects, she never gives up, and she never let's her emotions get the best of her. She gets outplayed but she never loses a game due to mental instability. I can understand if a lot of people don't like watching her because she doesn't hit winners on every point or go for one, but there's more to tennis than mindless ball bashing and fist pumps. Which is why I do not like watching Del Potro/Tsonga/Berdych/Soderling play, my favorite men's players today to watch are Davydenko and Ferrero

Justine becomes old in 4 years, Woz gets old in 8 years. Everyone gets old.
I just dont consider Justine old genertion she quit because for some reasons but age was not one of them.

People have different taste and watch tennis for different reasons. Whether I am a tennis fan or a player fan is my own preference. There is no reason for you to defend woz and I am not trying to make you like Justine. You like woz? Thats cool. You dont like Justine? that's cool too.

Talking about toughness...I was there when woz played Zheng at IW. She has half the size of woz , maybe, but she fought it to her bones. I enjoy watching her play 3 times over. Wozniaki reminded me of Murray, she screamed COMON and fist plumped every point she won so dont give me that " tennis is not ball bashing and fist pump" story. Everyone around me was admiring Zheng even though she lost a respectful match. Wozniacki is not the toughest on tour.

 

[Polaris]

Caroline Wozniacki seems to be the cream of the crop among all the younger WTA players and her mental command is outstanding. Is she the leader of the next generation of woman's tennis?

No. I like Wozniacki. She is extremely consistent but has no big weapons.

 

[David123]

umm i think she does have the potential. Shes young, she plays beautiful tennis and will succeed.

 

[OKUSA]

Justine becomes old in 4 years, Woz gets old in 8 years. Everyone gets old.
I just dont consider Justine old genertion she quit because for some reasons but age was not one of them.

People have different taste and watch tennis for different reasons. Whether I am a tennis fan or a player fan is my own preference. There is no reason for you to defend woz and I am not trying to make you like Justine. You like woz? Thats cool. You dont like Justine? that's cool too.

Talking about toughness...I was there when woz played Zheng at IW. She has half the size of woz , maybe, but she fought it to her bones. I enjoy watching her play 3 times over. Wozniaki reminded me of Murray, she screamed COMON and fist plumped every point she won so dont give me that " tennis is not ball bashing and fist pump" story. Everyone around me was admiring Zheng even though she lost a respectful match. Wozniacki is not the toughest on tour.

i like Justine, which is why I voted for her to win Roland Garros. I like every player, even if I don't like watching them play I still respect them as professionals. Although I will make fun of Nadal for taking forever between serves, I still like him. The only player I honestly dislike is Serena only because she is crazy.

I watched that IW on TV and I was impressed by both competitors, Zheng for trying even though she was clearly fatigued and Wozniacki for not giving into Zheng's incredible pressure she was putting on her serve. Wozniacki had many returns blown past her but she kept her cool and didn't let it falter her, unlike someone like Sharapova would serve 25 double faults because of it

 

[OddJack]

i like Justine, which is why I voted for her to win Roland Garros. I like every player, even if I don't like watching them play I still respect them as professionals. Although I will make fun of Nadal for taking forever between serves, I still like him. The only player I honestly dislike is Serena only because she is crazy.

I watched that IW on TV and I was impressed by both competitors, Zheng for trying even though she was clearly fatigued and Wozniacki for not giving into Zheng's incredible pressure she was putting on her serve. Wozniacki had many returns blown past her but she kept her cool and didn't let it falter her, unlike someone like Sharapova would serve 25 double faults because of it

I enjoy watching Shara. She is a fighter. Any of the female commentators will tell you that. Navratilova thinks so.
The double faults are new, serve used to be one of her stronger points. It has changed since shoulder surgery.

 

[boredone3456]

I enjoy watching Shara. She is a fighter. Any of the female commentators will tell you that. Navratilova thinks so.
The double faults are new, serve used to be one of her stronger points. It has changed since shoulder surgery.

Her shoulder injury destroyed her serve, her motion and angles just aren't the same anymore. Her game used to be built around it, when it was on she was deadly (2008 Aussie). Granted I don't like her personality all that much, but I hope she figures it out soon, because if she did this could honestly have been her time this last year and a half.

 

[anointedone]

Her shoulder injury destroyed her serve, her motion and angles just aren't the same anymore. Her game used to be built around it, when it was on she was deadly (2008 Aussie). Granted I don't like her personality all that much, but I hope she figures it out soon, because if she did this could honestly have been her time this last year and a half.

I dont think she ever would have dominated. She couldnt have won the French no matter how well she were playing and how bad the clay court field is. Serena is a bad matchup for her, and so Serena does not need to be Serena of 02-03 to regularly beat Maria especialy in the big matches. Maria did well against her at first but Serena figured her out and Maria has had no answers of late when they play. Venus on grass is too good for her. So that doesnt leave much or anything.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

She's still just 19 years old.

Some women already won their 1st slam at 19, so considering how others managed to attle their way to a slam at that age, she's not as green as your post implies.

 

[dlk]

Yeah no big weapons, but combine the vanilla competiton & her consistency, means she'll be a solid player with a slam or two.

 

[davey25]

Some women already won their 1st slam at 19, so considering how others managed to attle their way to a slam at that age, she's not as green as your post implies.

So true. Although Henin won her first slam less than a month before turning 21 and has gone on to win 7 despite a 2 year retirement at 25, so there are exceptions. Navratilova is an even more classic case, winning her first slam at 21, her third slam at 25, then going on to become arguably the greatest women player ever. However those women already had weapons or standout qualities even as teenagers not collecting trophies. Navratilova's enormous talent and athletic ability were in evidence imparticular, but she had alot of personal things to deal with. Defecting to the U.S at a young age, the anger towards her from some circles close to her back home for doing that, having to get used to a whole new life away from family and in a new country, keeping her sexuality closeted for awhile and her parents not being totally accepting of that at first. It really had little to do with talent why it took her so long to mature and get it together. Henin's biggest problem was she was undersized so it took a few more years of rigorous fitness training and getting stronger, and she also wasnt mentally strong enough as a teenager so had to do some major pyschology training to take the next step. Even in her case her signature one handed backhand was already widely recognized. Wozniacki has no real standout weapons though. Just consistency and good retrieving. She could improve of course, but you dont look at her and say that is someone who could win a whole bunch of slams once she gets it together.

 

[boredone3456]

I dont think she ever would have dominated. She couldnt have won the French no matter how well she were playing and how bad the clay court field is. Serena is a bad matchup for her, and so Serena does not need to be Serena of 02-03 to regularly beat Maria especialy in the big matches. Maria did well against her at first but Serena figured her out and Maria has had no answers of late when they play. Venus on grass is too good for her. So that doesnt leave much or anything.

While she may not have been dominating (and no I do not believe she would have what-so-ever), a healthy Maria if she kept up her early 2008 form could have done at least as well as/probably better than Jankovic and Safina did, and I would have rather seen a strong Maria being a regular finalist/semi-finalist than the flukey Safina. She would have definitely had oppurtunities, the 2009 Australian Open Serena got plenty lucky to win, granted Serena may know Maria's game but Maria would not simply roll over and die like Kuzzy, Dementieva and Safina all did. The 2009 French...well I dunno if she would have won, but seeing as Cibulkova and Stosur were semifinalists and Stosur almost beat the eventual champion again, Maria could have done at least as well, seeing as she made the SF in 07. Wimbledon would have been tough last year, true I do not see her winning, but she is better on grass than both Dementieva and Safina, so I find it hard to believe she couldn't have done at least as well. The US Opens of both 2008 and 2009 without the shoulder issue would have both been good chances. Serena played good tennis, and so did Jankovic, and Venus to a degree, but other than that no one else was playing convincingly well. She could have taken out either Dementieva or Safina there, and if healthy probably Jankovic, and maybe even won. Serena did not play all that well in the final as it was. 2009 Would have been a good chance to, Clijsters and Serena if she were healthy would have been her only problems I think, and maybe Woz if Sharapova let her get in her head. But she would have at least been a contender. Not to mention all the non slam titles, the players who could have given her the biggest hassle (mainly the williams), didn't do much anywhere not a slam, she could have definitely won a few decent titles.

 

[phoenicks]

Yeah no big weapons, but combine the vanilla competiton & her consistency, means she'll be a solid player with a slam or two.

Consistency is merely a necessary condition, definitely not a sufficient, she's bound to run into player who doesn't miss as well as firing winner every now and then in the later stage of slam. Checking back into the past winners of slam in recent years when the field is weak., tell me which player pushes her way into a champion???

 

[soyizgood]

Consistency is merely a necessary condition, definitely not a sufficient, she's bound to run into player who doesn't miss as well as firing winner every now and then in the later stage of slam. Checking back into the past winners of slam in recent years when the field is weak., tell me which player pushes her way into a champion???

Even with her consistent play, Wozniacki won a little over 70% of her matches last year. Serena, for all of her injuries and tanking, has a 83% career win percentage.

She's good, but hardly the next great thing. If it wasn't for the fact that many WTA-bashers and Serena haters have been longing (for an eternity) for a successor to Serena, Wozniacki wouldn't be getting so much attention on this board.

IMO no guts = no slams. Until she has the ability to take matters into her hands and can up her game a notch in big moments (0-15 vs active former #1's), she'll be giving her fans hope but little else.

 

[OJ ROD]

Even with her consistent play, Wozniacki won a little over 70% of her matches last year. Serena, for all of her injuries and tanking, has a 83% career win percentage.

She's good, but hardly the next great thing. If it wasn't for the fact that many WTA-bashers and Serena haters have been longing (for an eternity) for a successor to Serena, Wozniacki wouldn't be getting so much attention on this board.

IMO no guts = no slams. Until she has the ability to take matters into her hands and can up her game a notch in big moments (0-15 vs active former #1's), she'll be giving her fans hope but little else.

Henin is a little more than a succesor.

 

[soyizgood]

Henin is a little more than a succesor.

Henin is a rival and could have shared or taken the top, but chose to skip out for a good chunk of her peak years. Henin is only 1 year younger than Serena and given her form it will take her some time to adjust to her new game.

 

[Miami Tiburon]

I hope so , she is very good for the game. Has a wonderful personality and is very gracious with the kids and fans.

 

[pmerk34]

umm i think she does have the potential. Shes young, she plays beautiful tennis and will succeed.

There we go! Most of this board hates woman's tennis yet cannot refrain from posting anyway. Everyone is either a mindless ball basher or ha "no power".

 

[bluetrain4]

She's got a good head, beautiful strokes, more power than she did before, and is very consistent.

It's not that she can't hit winners, it's that she often doesn't when she should. She lets the point go on too long sometimes and that will hurt her against the best players. It even hurt her against someone like Schnyder today.

If she can take control of more points and go for more on some points, while still playing her consistent backboard game on other points, I think she could win a Slam or two. But, I don't see her entering the pantheon of "greats."

It's hard to say. She's got a solid foundation, but she needs just a little "more" of something.

 

[Love Game]

Justine becomes old in 4 years, Woz gets old in 8 years. Everyone gets old.
I just dont consider Justine old genertion she quit because for some reasons but age was not one of them.
. . .

double standard much? :???:
.justine is 27. 27+4 = 31
caroline is 19. 19+8 = 27

 

[Inner Game]

Caroline Wozniacki seems to be the cream of the crop among all the younger WTA players and her mental command is outstanding. Is she the leader of the next generation of woman's tennis?

She better lay off the donuts....if she keeps it up she'll be the next Serena....it just shows you how bad the women's game is....

 

[OddJack]

double standard much? :???:
.justine is 27. 27+4 = 31
caroline is 19. 19+8 = 27

I bet you Woz is not going to last as long as Justine did.

 

[C++ Primer]

boring tenis

 

[Enlightened Coelacanth]

No. I like Wozniacki. She is extremely consistent but has no big weapons.

I wonder if you ever saw Chris Evert or Mats Wilander or Bjorn Borg play?

They based their entire stellar careers on the weapons that Wozniacki already possesses (not that I put her in their company). It's a different age now, but the strengths of Wozniacki (her movement, consistency and mental superiority) still translate to a winning game. But you act as though these things are not huge incredible weapons as is.

I will take Wozniacki, as a player, over someone with "big weapons" (but little else) like Dinara Safina or Anna Ivanovic any day!
Sometimes the tennis "experts" around here can analyze a player to death and not see the tennis forest for the trees.
Caroline Wozniacki has a great deal going for her, as is. Her innate strengths more than compensate for any stroke weaknesses, that can be added as time goes on.

 

[decades]

no venus and serena are. they will be winning slams in their 50s....

 

[hugobosstachini]

I don't get why Caroline gets all the praises... I've read most of the posts and I must agree on some points with Sondraj because effectively Caro's ranking is no way representative of her so said talent. Caro just has the art to profit of a very weak WTA since middle-end 2009 and the injuries of the major players too. Unfortunatly her style of play wich is pushing suits very well the mood in wich the WTA is right now : ball bashing, excess UE and choking. She intellegently lets the players she faces autodestruct to capitalize if that so said player can't wipe her off the court.

The big bones of the WTA Masha, Serena, Kim, Justine and/or Ana aren't where they should actually be in the rankings and/or level of play so people like Caro wisely profits of that and that includes Radwanska !

The compariso Caro/Murray for me is little excessive since Murray has that intelligence of play that Caro doesn't have. Murray changes the rythm slice, short ball, high ball, cross court purposively etc... but in all that just forgets to be aggressive and waits for the opponents errors. Secondly and contrary to Caro Murray HAS the means to hit the ball powerfully and be aggressive but just doesn't seem to want to do that unless against Rafa

Even Caro/Jelena is a worthless comparison since Jelena is soooooo much more intellegent on a court than the Dane that the tactical display of Jelena in IW final made me love her game even more. Jelena barely hits the ball as hard as Serena or Masha but she just ouplayed the pusher and the pusher just didn't seem to have no clue what to do.

Caroline + win + RG ? :shock: I didn't know thoses 3 words could be side by side in a phrase and as Sondraj said Caroline hasn't even firmly beaten a top 10 in a GS unless that headcase of Kuznetsova who doesn't even counnt and the other Caroline bis in 100 000 times worst by the name of Radwanska.
Then second of all Caroline hasn't even won a big event yet in her career so how in the freaking world does she have the ability to win a GS ?

Caroline is sooooo overated commpared to the real (headcased) talents, Vika, Sabine and/or Yanina just pure nonesens... Some say Caro's game will evoluate with time on that no one can tell we'll see but to the question the NGFC is definitively Vika at her very best level she seems unbeatable and can rip anybody of the court but unfortunalty she only, for now, can do that for 1 set and a half, anyway she's not far from beeing great but she really needs to stop headcasing but otherwise she's not far.

 

[davey25]

I wonder if you ever saw Chris Evert or Mats Wilander or Bjorn Borg play?

They based their entire stellar careers on the weapons that Wozniacki already possesses (not that I put her in their company). It's a different age now, but the strengths of Wozniacki (her movement, consistency and mental superiority) still translate to a winning game. But you act as though these things are not huge incredible weapons as is.

I find it completely inaccurate to compare Borg as a male version of Wozniacki. He had a very good serve which became a weapon, he came to the net much more than the supposed all courter Federer does today, and he had precision, fitness, movement, consistency, and mental strength that were all inhuman, not merely excellent.

Even Evert I would disagree on. She hit the ball harder with a wood racquet in the 70s than Wozniacki does today with a graphite. While Wozniacki is very consistent and very smart, she right now still doesnt even come close to prime Evert in either area. The same goes for mental toughness. Wozniacki might be quicker, but Evert's anticipation makes up for it and brings them about on par there. Evert's precision, placements, directional control, and use of angles, were exceptional, clearly superior to Wozniacki. Evert in her prime would potentially struggle alot with the big hitters like a Serena, or even Henin or Venus in A+ form today, but would beat Wozniacki of today quite easily. Even though it would be by virtue of alot of long rallies and long games probably, not Evert blowing Wozniacki off the court with quick winners but simply outclassing her bit by bit overall.

 

[Enlightened Coelacanth]

You must have glossed over the part where I said I was not claiming that Wozniacki was in the class of Evert, Wilander, Borg, etc. Hardly surprising.

But the point remains that Wozniacki wins the same way Evert and Wilander did.
I'm stunned, as the thread creator, that this has gone on so long and created so many negative comments. I don't think it's debatable though that Caroline is the best of the young WTA players as claimed.

 

[davey25]

Evert looked to win matches by hitting winners. She did not look to wait for her opponents to lose matches. Even against the most agressive players like Navratilova and Mandlikova she was looking to hit alot of winners. Yes it wasnt sheer sheer power blasting a winner on the first shot of a rally, but it was looking to create opening for herself then end the point. Wozniacki is looking how to cause her opponents to make errors. That is the biggest difference between the playing style of the two.

Borg also looked to win his matches by hitting alot of winners.

Maybe only Wilander is somewhat similar to Wozniacki in this regard.

 

[soyizgood]

Sanchez-Vicario is a better comparison for Wozniacki. Even then that's a stretch as Sanchez-Vicario was terrific at the net and proved she could beat the top players at any given event. Maybe Conchita Martinez is better to compare Wozniacki with.

Time will time with Wozniacki. But I still stand by my original position that Azarenka will have a better career than any of the 89-91 group.

 

[OKUSA]

Caro still has a lot of time to improve her serve, which she has done. She also has time to improve her net game if they choose to go that route. You guys act as if nobody in the history of tennis improved anything after age 20, and if you aren't winning slams with your current game by 20 then you are hopeless

 

[Enlightened Coelacanth]

Evert looked to win matches by hitting winners. She did not look to wait for her opponents to lose matches. Even against the most agressive players like Navratilova and Mandlikova she was looking to hit alot of winners. Yes it wasnt sheer sheer power blasting a winner on the first shot of a rally, but it was looking to create opening for herself then end the point. Wozniacki is looking how to cause her opponents to make errors. That is the biggest difference between the playing style of the two.

Borg also looked to win his matches by hitting alot of winners.

Maybe only Wilander is somewhat similar to Wozniacki in this regard.

You must have seen a different Chris Evert than I watched for years and years. Evert was extremely patient and just didn't miss much at all.

This is why I rarely post here. Too many experts with too little expertise.

 

[PED]

I will add that in yesterday's match against Schynder, she was back to pushing a bit. It tended to happen more in the 2nd set as Patty pushed her but she froze up hard in the last game and even though she won, the frustration was etched on her face. I was lucky enough to be sitting about 20ft away so I had a good look

The rest of the weekend in charleston should be interesting.

 

[davey25]

You must have seen a different Chris Evert than I watched for years and years. Evert was extremely patient and just didn't miss much at all.

This is why I rarely post here. Too many experts with too little expertise.

I have seen many matches where Evert played Navratilova, Mandlikova, Shriver, and Austin and other than the few matches she was destroyed by a top Martina she always hit alot of winners. In many of her losses vs Martina she hit 40+ winners. She was patient but she was still looking to win points.

 

[OKUSA]

Most of those winners were probably passing shots

 

[davey25]

Most of those winners were probably passing shots

Maybe but if Wozniacki played a serve and volleyer she still wouldnt have nearly that many winners.

 

[OKUSA]

maybe because she never has to face anyone who plays the net. aside from venus and justine nobody on the women's tour even thinks about approaching the net

 

[Enlightened Coelacanth]

Most of those winners were probably passing shots

Precisely. Wozniacki doesn't play anyone who comes to net even a fraction of the amount that Navratilova did. And she likely never will.

Therefore passing shots, lobs, service returns, etc. will all show up as winners for Evert.

But as a rule, she (Evert) won through consistency and placement (as revealed by all her French Open titles) and winners were an absolute secondary thought. Are you sure you ever saw her play with your own two eyes?

I can't explain your comments otherwise.

 

[MotherMarjorie]

I don't think it's debatable though that Caroline is the best of the young WTA players as claimed.

Mother Marjorie thinks anything regarding Wozniacki is debatable, especially those calling her "the next great female Champ" without her having won a major title.

How many others over the past five years have we had similar discussions about whose game never translated into grand slam victory? Dozens. Many of them now are no longer in the top ten and strive for modeling jobs.

Let's keep this discussion real. The only reason Wozniacki is number two in the world is because she plays TONS of tournaments while having mediocre success at the majors. Wozniacki will not be able to "Hingis" her way into grand slam victory. Without a demonstrative weapon that can put the power players of this generation on their heels, she'll always be playing defensively and from behind against those players which will wear her down psychologically during matches. We've seen this happen already. Many times over.

 

[Enlightened Coelacanth]

Mother Marjorie thinks anything regarding Wozniacki is debatable, especially those calling her "the next great female Champ" without her having won a major title.

How many others over the past five years have we had similar discussions about whose game never translated into grand slam victory? Dozens. Many of them now are no longer in the top ten and strive for modeling jobs.

Let's keep this discussion real. The only reason Wozniacki is number two in the world is because she plays TONS of tournaments while having mediocre success at the majors. Wozniacki will not be able to "Hingis" her way into grand slam victory. Without a demonstrative weapon that can put the power players of this generation on their heels, she'll always be playing defensively and from behind against those players which will wear her down psychologically during matches. We've seen this happen already. Many times over.

I've only called Caroline Wozniacki the best of the young upcoming crop of WTA pros and any claims that she is the next big champion among the women is not something I've put out there (though she well could be).

I think also, it's interesting to note that she reached the finals of the US Open at age eighteen, and to read many of the comments I've seen from the "experts" here, you would think she is fortunate to win anything (short of a challenger event in Spokane).

"Pusher", "no weapons", "praying on weak players", etc. Somehow she made the finals in New York against Clijsters.
Some of the more honest here have to admit that she has something going for her.



If you can find a player of her age and experience who has done better, I'd like to hear of her. Otherwise I don't know why this was aimed at me. I merely made an innocent undeniable claim at the start of this thread and am amazed at all the negative comments that have followed (though I guess I shouldn't be at TT).

 

[hugobosstachini]

Mother Marjorie thinks anything regarding Wozniacki is debatable, especially those calling her "the next great female Champ" without her having won a major title.

Let's keep this discussion real. The only reason Wozniacki is number two in the world is because she plays TONS of tournaments while having mediocre success at the majors. Wozniacki will not be able to "Hingis" her way into grand slam victory. Without a demonstrative weapon that can put the power players of this generation on their heels, she'll always be playing defensively and from behind against those players which will wear her down psychologically during matches.

100% true.

 

[egn]

I've only called Caroline Wozniacki the best of the young upcoming crop of WTA pros and any claims that she is the next big champion among the women is not something I've put out there (though she well could be).

I think also, it's interesting to note that she reached the finals of the US Open at age eighteen, and to read many of the comments I've seen from the "experts" here, you would think she is fortunate to win anything (short of a challenger event in Spokane).

"Pusher", "no weapons", "praying on weak players", etc. Somehow she made the finals in New York against Clijsters.
Some of the more honest here have to admit that she has something going for her.

If you can find a player of her age and experience who has done better, I'd like to hear of her. Otherwise I don't know why this was aimed at me. I merely made an innocent undeniable claim at the start of this thread and am amazed at all the negative comments that have followed (though I guess I shouldn't be at TT).

I agree with you she has done the most for her age group but at the same time I disagree on her being the leader of the next generation. What impressive win has she had? Outside of a win in the 4th round against Kuzzy I don't seem to see it yet. Lets be realistic though it is hard to disagree that 2009 US Open was a failure for women's tennis and the actual final was the semifinals or possibly the third round when Venus actually ran Clijsters to three sets. I watched 2009 US Open final and was disgusted with its decline of quality from the semifinal match sure the scoreline was similar but it was obvious Clijsters was doing simply what she needed to win and Woz was letting her do it. I like Woz alot though and I do agree she has a lot of potential however I'm not buying it yet. Frankly neither her or Azarenka are impressing me yet and I don't really want to say either are the next female champ. Last year Azarenka definitely looked like she could do it scoring a huge win over Serena and playing top notch but she flamed out and I'm afraid Woz is going to do the same soon. She can't score up the wins against JJ yet let alone Clijsters, Henin and either of the Williams.

So here is my problem with women's tennis right now the top 10 is not really at all reflective of any of the players and I don't see it coming to a settle anytime soon. Henin and Clijsters are going to show up at some tournaments and tank others just like the Williams do now a days. So basically one tournament looks like it will have a Woz, JJ, Kuzzy, Azarenka final 4 and the next will have a Henin, Clijsters Williams final four yet when the slams roll up we all know which players are going to show up. Its safe bet right now to pick Serena to make at least the quarters of every slam she enters, same for Henin and hell even the early upset of CLijsters it is unreasonable not to pick her as well. Until one of the others girls Woz, Azarenka, Radaswakna (sp?) actually step it up and beat them in a slam I'm just not going to but it. They only seem to get the deep runs when the big names get upsetted or are MIA. They can't bank on them losing early forever cause eventually a new generation will show up and start playing good and if the current doesn't step up and beat the old how can the beat the new.

If we want a quick example look at Indian Wells, Henin and CLijsters showed up a bit rusty after long gaps of no play and both get upset by low ranks. You see Woz and Radaswanka strive and go deep. Just a week or two later at Miami Henin and Clijsters are more sharp and Venus is back in action..who is now in the semis and who is not. Whats the difference though Woz and Radaswanka are not losing to low ranks or being upset they are getting beat by Henin and Williams and not mention Clijsters took out both Azarenka and then Stosour a semifinalist in Indian Wells. It is coming to the point where if they want to win Henin, Clijsters and the Williams Sisters basically just need to come out and play 100 percent.