So you made a statement confirming your ignorance, were disproven, and now you're doubling down? Good to know.
Ha, what? Do you have some sort of an issue? Do you need to go and speak to someone? Perhaps buy a dictionary and learn the meaning of the word "ignorance"?
Yep. Instead of admitting he was wrong about Raducanu defeating no top 20 players at the USO, he just dismisses those defeats as not meaningful. In other words, robyrolfo is not using reason to choose. He's just choosing his reasons. Raducanu can't have played well to win the USO despite not dropping a set and contrary to his assertions, actually defeating top 20 players, because Raducanu sucks and all confirmation bias has to support that conclusion. If she plays well, it's a fluke.
Yeah, see above and learn to read. No, really, go back and read my post (which isn't edited, BTW). There is a big caveat in there because, yeah, I really don't care enough about Raducanu's fluke run to remember all the details.
And yes, she obviously played pretty well (despite the super easy draw), as it was some fluke run of form. A bigger fluke than Ostapenko, because at least she didn't drop like a complete stone out of the top 200...
Raducanu wins the toss and elects to have Iga serve first. It looks like a poor decision as Iga hits some great first serves and goes up 40-0, but then Raducanu hits winner after winner to win the next 5 points and break Swiatek in the first service game.
Yes, hype her up after a single game. And you wonder why people like me need to bring people like you back to reality.
But that's the point with the WTA there will be players like Sakkari and Bencic playing a high level and then they suddenly flop deeper into the draw. That just highlights the mental aspects of the game. Fernandez was not as much of an unknown but she was certainly a shock finalist like Raducanu.
If you take the AO this year, Yastremska made the SF after coming through qualies. Raducanu won 2 more matches than that (SF and F are far bigger challenges mentally, obviously) but for me it just shows how you can be so dialled in at a major after qualies if you have the natural talent and serious belief in yourself. Both will have known the pressure on their opponents to take advantage of playing a qualifier to progress and ended up exploiting that.
Exactly. The WTA is full of solid players that can't handle pressure, and so they get deeper into draws and then give matches away completely. And you could see that both Raducanu and Fernandez's opponents were getting totally frazzled by the idea of having their big opportunities crushed by way lower ranked players.
Was always going to be very difficult for Raducanu to beat Swiatek on her favourite surface, but she put in a solid effort. 95% of Iga's opponents tend to roll over when they lose a tight 1st set against her but Raducanu made her work for the win. Swiatek was just clutch and upped her intensity when the biggest moments arrived.
Raducanu should take a lot of heart from the last week. 5 matches in 8 days against the likes of Garcia, Noskova and Swiatek and a 4-1 record on supposedly her weakest surface is a great effort. If she can carry that into the rest of 2023, she'll comfortably be back in the top 50 by the end of the year.
Ugly match for the most part, but Kostyuk surprised me. I thought she'd crumble towards the end, but held firm and out-willed Gauff, which is no easy feat.
Ha, what? So it's all "solid" and positive for Emma, but ugly for everyone else? Please, Emma got steamrolled. If Iga had played just slightly less sloppy, it would have been even more one-sided.
Also, let's not forget that Raducanu shouldn't have even been in this tournament in the first place. Her wildcard was a gift to her marketing team.
Kostyuk always struggles to close out matches, and she has plenty of mental baggage from her AO match against Gauff (which she should have won as well). Gauff is just proof that the WTA is insanely weak right now.