by ti-amie Rod Laver Arena
Day session - From 7:00pm EST
Women's Legends Doubles • Round 1
D. Hantuchova/A. Radwanska vs I. Majoli/B. Schett
Day session - Not before 9:00pm EST
Men's Doubles • Semifinals
J. Chardy/F. Martin vs H. Nys/J. Zielinski
Day session - Not before 10:30pm EST
Men's Doubles • Semifinals
R. Hijikata WC/J. Kubler WC vs M. Granollers 8/H. Zeballos 8
Night session - From 3:00am EST
ORIGINAL 9 PRESENTATION
Night session - Not before 3:30am EST
Women's Singles • Semifinals
E. Rybakina 22 vs V. Azarenka 24
Women's Singles • Semifinals
M. Linette vs A. Sabalenka 5
Margaret Court Arena
Day session - From 7:00pm EST
Men's Legends Doubles • Round 1
T. Haas/R. Stepanek vs M. Baghdatis/M. Philippoussis
Junior Girls' Singles • Quarterfinals
A. Korneeva 9 vs T. Valentova 2
Quad Wheelchair Singles • Semifinals
N. Vink 1 vs D. Ramphadi
Quad Wheelchair Singles • Semifinals
D. Wagner vs S. Schroder 2
Kia Arena
Day session - From 7:00pm EST
Men's Wheelchair Singles • Semifinals
A. Hewett 1 vs T. Miki
Women's Wheelchair Singles • Semifinals
J. Griffioen 4 vs Y. Kamiji 2
Men's Wheelchair Doubles • Semifinals
D. Arai/T. Sanada vs A. Hewett 2/G. Reid 2
Women's Wheelchair Doubles • Semifinals
D. De Groot 1/A. Van Koot 1 vs D. Mathewson/L. Shuker
Court 3
Day session - From 7:00pm EST
Junior Boys' Singles • Quarterfinals
A. Blockx 3 vs J. Fonseca 10
Junior Girls' Singles • Quarterfinals
S. Ishii 12 vs A. Ibragimova
Junior Boys' Doubles • Quarterfinals
A. Blockx 1/J. Fonseca 1 vs V. Iakubenko/O. Ojakaar
Junior Girls' Doubles • Quarterfinals
R. Munk Mortensen/K. Sidorova vs S. Ishii 5/E. Koike 5
Junior Boys' Doubles • Semifinals
TBA vs TBA
Junior Girls' Doubles • Semifinals
TBA vs TBA
Court 5
Day session - From 7:00pm EST
Junior Boys' Singles • Quarterfinals
T. Berkieta vs A. Gea 4
Junior Girls' Singles • Quarterfinals
R. Stoiber 13 vs W. Ewald
Junior Boys' Doubles • Quarterfinals
C. Errey WC/M. Schoeman WC vs F. Cina/K. Edengren
Junior Girls' Doubles • Quarterfinals
E. McDonald 1/L. Udvardy 1 vs R. Jamrichova/F. Urgesi
Court 6
Day session - From 7:00pm EST
Junior Boys' Singles • Quarterfinals
L. Tien vs I. Radulov 2
Junior Girls' Singles • Quarterfinals
R. Jamrichova 15 vs M. Andreeva 7
Junior Boys' Doubles • Quarterfinals
L. Tien 7/C. Williams 7 vs R. Tiukaev/T. Zhang
Junior Girls' Doubles • Quarterfinals
C. Mester/S. Zhiyenbayeva vs M. Andreeva 2/A. Korneeva 2
Court 7
Day session - From 7:00pm EST
Men's Wheelchair Singles • Semifinals
T. Oda 3 vs G. Fernandez 2
Women's Wheelchair Singles • Semifinals
D. De Groot 1 vs M. Tanaka
Men's Wheelchair Doubles • Semifinals
M. Scheffers/R. Spaargaren vs A. Cataldo/T. Egberink
Women's Wheelchair Doubles • Semifinals
K. Montjane/M. Tanaka vs Y. Kamiji 2/Z. Zhu 2
Junior Boys' Doubles • Semifinals
TBA vs TBA
Junior Girls' Doubles • Semifinals
TBA vs TBA
Court 8
Day session - From 7:00pm EST
Junior Boys' Singles • Quarterfinals
K. Feldbausch 1 vs Y. Zhou 11
Junior Boys' Doubles • Quarterfinals
A. Frusina/J. Hrazdil vs F. Bondioli/M. Kriznik
Junior Girls' Doubles • Quarterfinals
R. Gilheany WC/S. Webb WC vs H. Kinoshita 4/S. Saito 4
by
Deuce Rinky!!!!!!
Australians Rinky Hijikata and Jason Kubler just won their semi-final doubles match, and are into the Final. They beat the #8 seeds today... Beat the #1 seeded team a few days ago... And they got in as a WildCard team!
I had a nice talk with Rinky and his coach a few years ago when he was a Junior. Both of them were extremely nice.
Australia is known as a really good tennis country - they have produced some great players over the decades - but it's been 25 years since an Australian team won the doubles title at the Aussie Open.
I hope that drought comes to an end this week.
by Deuce 1st set of Rybakina - Azarenka was back & forth the entire set, on their way to a tiebreak.
The tiebreak was sloppy from both players. Rybakina won it in the end 7-4.
by JTContinental Vika had some vintage fight, but she really struggled holding her serve.
by ponchi101 Rybakina explodes into a dance after winning the match. Something that looked a bit like the Cha-cha-cha with a little charleston thrown in.
Nah, coolest winner in the history of this sport. You simply can't tell if she won or lost.
A very fast paced match.
by Suliso I wonder if Rybakina will now challenge Swiatek over the whole year for #1. Assuming of course she does win the title Saturday.
by ponchi101 Don't see her doing much on clay. She is obviously very good on grass, but repeating a slam is very hard. The USO will be like this Aussie.
If she wins on Saturday that is 2 slams of the last four, same as Iga. It would be a fine rivalry.
by
mick1303 ponchi101 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 10:41 am
Don't see her doing much on clay. She is obviously very good on grass, but repeating a slam is very hard. The USO will be like this Aussie.
If she wins on Saturday that is 2 slams of the last four, same as Iga. It would be a fine rivalry.
Rybakina's style is better suited for faster surfaces, while Swiatek's - for slower. But Iga's dominance on slower surfaces is established and with quite a strong basis from her technique, strokes and her whole game. IMO, to assert a dominance on faster surfaces is harder. Which is why I tend to think that Rybakina will unlikely to challenge for #1 spot. There is also a possibility of repeating the last year situation in Wimbledon, and these points again may not count.
by
patrick Deuce wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 5:49 am
Rinky!!!!!!
Australians Rinky Hijikata and Jason Kubler just won their semi-final doubles match, and are into the Final. They beat the #8 seeds today... Beat the #1 seeded team a few days ago... And they got in as a WildCard team!
I had a nice talk with Rinky and his coach a few years ago when he was a Junior. Both of them were extremely nice.
Australia is known as a really good tennis country - they have produced some great players over the decades - but it's been 25 years since an Australian team won the doubles title at the Aussie Open.
I hope that drought comes to an end this week.
Did Kyrgios and Kokkinakis win last year?
by
Fastbackss Deuce wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 5:49 am
.
Australia is known as a really good tennis country - they have produced some great players over the decades - but it's been 25 years since an Australian team won the doubles title at the Aussie Open.
I hope that drought comes to an end this week.
Didn't Kyrgios and Kokkinakis win last year?
As an aside, I am happy ESPN is actually showing tennis despite it being their "morning drive programming" time
by
Deuce patrick wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 11:24 am
Deuce wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 5:49 am
Rinky!!!!!!
Australians Rinky Hijikata and Jason Kubler just won their semi-final doubles match, and are into the Final. They beat the #8 seeds today... Beat the #1 seeded team a few days ago... And they got in as a WildCard team!
I had a nice talk with Rinky and his coach a few years ago when he was a Junior. Both of them were extremely nice.
Australia is known as a really good tennis country - they have produced some great players over the decades - but it's been 25 years since an Australian team won the doubles title at the Aussie Open.
I hope that drought comes to an end this week.
Did Kyrgios and Kokkinakis win last year?
Fastbackss wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 11:25 am
Deuce wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 5:49 am
.
Australia is known as a really good tennis country - they have produced some great players over the decades - but it's been 25 years since an Australian team won the doubles title at the Aussie Open.
I hope that drought comes to an end this week.
Didn't Kyrgios and Kokkinakis win last year?
As an aside, I am happy ESPN is actually showing tennis despite it being their "morning drive programming" time
Uhhh...
Yeah.
I did hear one of the commentators during Rinky and Kubler's doubles match today say that it has been 25 years since an Aussie pair won this home tournament.
Maybe the commentator said that it HAD been 25 year until last year. It sure sounded to me like it was "It HAS been 25 years", though.
Either way, I should have clued in that Kyrgios and Kokkinakis won it last year.
Thanks to both of you for catching that obvious error.
by Deuce I’m more and more impressed with Linette... because she is not impressed with or intimidated by the higher ranked players she’s playing. She just holds steady, playing her (very solid) game... She’s serving well, too.
She started the match by breaking Sabalenka (actually, Sabalenka broke herself again). Sabalenka raced out to a 5-0 lead... in the unforced error count - going down 0-2. Then she came back winning 3 straight games. After that, it was even through the rest of the set to the tiebreak.
It was a very disappointingly one-sided tiebreak, though, after a very even set.
These two have quite different styles - Sabalenka’s loud (literally), powerful, but risky, in-your-face style... and Linette’s steady, consistent, being-an-aggressive-backboard style.
by Fastbackss The tiebreak didn't feel like a "fair" ending after an enjoyable first set.
Sabalenka up 4-1 in the 2nd, serving, seeming to get tight. Will be curious if start of a roller coaster.
Also, again to ESPN, Belarusian flag has been there the whole match.
by skatingfan No drama for Sabalenka today - moved into her first final with some real clear-headed tennis.
by Suliso I think it will be a great final. About 50/50. At the top of their games Sabalenka is better, but she's also more likely to underperform.
by
Deuce An enjoyable match. The 6-2 2nd set score was somewhat deceiving, as most of the games were close.
There's no question that Sabalenka is maturing. I said a couple of years ago that she has the kind of game that can be dominating - but she has obviously been quite fragile psychologically.
I still don't think she'll win this one, though
.
Fastbackss wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 12:12 pm
Also, again to ESPN, Belarusian flag has been there the whole match.
^ I hadn't noticed that until you pointed it out. Thanks. It's interesting.
Better than the curious white flag of 'surrender' that is mostly shown.
If they're not going to show the Russian or Belarusian flags, then the space should be blank. A white flag under the circumstances is rather... inappropriate.
by ashkor87 much as I love Rybakina, I dont think she is going to beat Sabalenka on Saturday.. I will be happy either way, but my bet is on Saba.
by
meganfernandez ashkor87 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 4:40 pm
much as I love Rybakina, I dont think she is going to beat Sabalenka on Saturday.. I will be happy either way, but my bet is on Saba.
I'm keeping the faith with Sabalenka, but I think whoever serves better wins. At one point, quarterfinal think, Rybakina was at 50% unreturned first serves for the tournament. That's nearly unplayable. She is also is super calm but Sabalenka has been holding her nerve.
by
atlpam Deuce wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 12:32 pm
An enjoyable match. The 6-2 2nd set score was somewhat deceiving, as most of the games were close.
There's no question that Sabalenka is maturing. I said a couple of years ago that she has the kind of game that can be dominating - but she has obviously been quite fragile psychologically.
I still don't think she'll win this one, though
.
Fastbackss wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 12:12 pm
Also, again to ESPN, Belarusian flag has been there the whole match.
^ I hadn't noticed that until you pointed it out. Thanks. It's interesting.
Better than the curious white flag of 'surrender' that is mostly shown.
If they're not going to show the Russian or Belarusian flags, then the space should be blank. A white flag under the circumstances is rather... inappropriate.
I noticed they showed the Belarus flag for both Azarenka and Sabalenka. I wonder if Espn will get into hot water for that.
by Fastbackss Took a screencap but had to crop to the below to get it to upload
by ponchi101 I'm with Suliso. A 50/50 match, will come down to who serves better, because both can dominate with their serve.
I was surprised by Rybakina's speed yesterday. She was moving very well, defending on stretched points with ease. Maybe I just caught her on a bad day or the Ostapenko match was so prone to errors I could not see her move. But yesterday she was excellent.
Odd about the flag. We get ESPN here and I am sure that neither Sabalenka not Azarenka had their flag on. Just the white one.
by atlpam The flag was white on all earlier rounds; the semis are the first time they showed it as far as I’m aware.
by Fastbackss ESPN staff probably was baffled that they were showing a match during morning hours and forgot to remove it
by JazzNU Does anyone know who interviewed Aryna after her match? Was that Casey Dellacqua? Because I truly didn't recognize her if so, but running through the possibilities they've gone with in years past, that was my best guess.
by jazzyg Sabalenka should be the huge favorite in the final and will win in a rout if Rybakina does not play better than she did against Azarenka.
The wild card is the serve. Rybakina is hard to break when her 1st serve is on and Sabalenka might get tight on her serve. But once the ball is in play she moves better than Rybakina and is infinitely better on the run.
by
ashkor87 meganfernandez wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 4:46 pm
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 4:40 pm
much as I love Rybakina, I dont think she is going to beat Sabalenka on Saturday.. I will be happy either way, but my bet is on Saba.
I'm keeping the faith with Sabalenka, but I think whoever serves better wins. At one point, quarterfinal think, Rybakina was at 50% unreturned first serves for the tournament. That's nearly unplayable. She is also is super calm but Sabalenka has been holding her nerve.
You had been pulling for Sabalenka for years..finally, she is about to justify your confidence in her! (Mine too). Hope she does it. As she showed against Bencic, she can run anyone off the court so long as she does not self-destruct...only Sabalenka cab actually beat Sabalenka! This time, she seems to have mastered herself...
I watched Rybakina yesterday and she isn't really as zen-like as people say..I thought she was about to burst into tears towards the end of the first set, especially with her coach's antics..ahe should fire him now.
by
Deuce jazzyg wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 10:48 pm
Sabalenka should be the huge favorite in the final and will win in a rout if Rybakina does not play better than she did against Azarenka.
The wild card is the serve. Rybakina is hard to break when her 1st serve is on and Sabalenka might get tight on her serve. But once the ball is in play she moves better than Rybakina and is infinitely better on the run.
I doubt very much that any true tennis people view Sabalenka as 'a huge favourite'.
Given her strong choking tendencies in the past, and the fact that she's never even played a Major Final - let alone won one... plus the fact that Rybakina has won a Major (albeit there should be an asterisk beside it)...
All of the pertinent elements reveal that the pros and cons on both sides are about even.
by Suliso What about IF she doesn't choke and neither does Rybakina?
by jazzyg In that case, 6-4, 6-3 Sabalenka.
by ponchi101 No choking?
I don't see Rybakina choking. I have been joking that she is very, very cool and controlled on court, but it is a silly joke. She IS cool and controlled. She already showed at Wimby that being one set down does not bother her. I am half joking because look at her victory response at Wimbledon; heck, BORG went down on his kneed and threw his racquet aside. Rybakina? Raised her hand, small fist pump, smile. It was a glaring example of "Hey, I had this. Why the nerves?"
Sabalenka. Even on those matches in which she could not get a second serve in, it was not precisely choking. She had no control, but she kept going for her shots (after making a serve).
I don't see them choking. We may be in for one hell of a match, maybe going to three. Most likely going to three.
by
mick1303 Deuce wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 2:09 am
I doubt very much that any true tennis people view Sabalenka as 'a huge favourite'.
Given her strong choking tendencies in the past, and the fact that she's never even played a Major Final - let alone won one... plus the fact that Rybakina has won a Major (albeit there should be an asterisk beside it)...
All of the pertinent elements reveal that the pros and cons on both sides are about even.
If Rybakina's Wimbledon run deserves an asterisk, then Nadal's AO deserves ten. Nobody of Russians/Belorussians was nowhere near the favorite the Djokovic was in Australia. IMO we are mentioning asterisks way too often. Novak's AO is a second case I can justify in Open Era. The first being Steffi's slams and #1 after Monika's stabbing. Nothing else warrants an asterisk. Rybakina's win is legit.
by
ponchi101 mick1303 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 5:55 pm
Deuce wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 2:09 am
I doubt very much that any true tennis people view Sabalenka as 'a huge favourite'.
Given her strong choking tendencies in the past, and the fact that she's never even played a Major Final - let alone won one... plus the fact that Rybakina has won a Major (albeit there should be an asterisk beside it)...
All of the pertinent elements reveal that the pros and cons on both sides are about even.
If Rybakina's Wimbledon run deserves an asterisk, then Nadal's AO deserves ten. Nobody of Russians/Belorussians was nowhere near the favorite the Djokovic was in Australia.
IMO we are mentioning asterisks way too often. Novak's AO is a second case I can justify in Open Era. The first being Steffi's slams and #1 after Monika's stabbing. Nothing else warrants an asterisk. Rybakina's win is legit.
We do. But there are asterisks in the records; they are the history of the game.
Maureen Connelly has an asterisk ("she went for a horse ride")
Rod Laver has an asterisk ("Did not play 5 years of slams, at his peak")
Pancho Gonzalez has an asterisk ("Had to turn pro, to earn a living")
If you are saying we mention them in a negative way, I would side with you. And I agree that Rybakina was legit at Wimby.
by
Deuce Suliso wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 5:28 pm
What about IF she doesn't choke and neither does Rybakina?
I was simply responding to the assertion that Sabalenka "should be the huge favourite". And I mentioned the reasons why I doubt very much that true tennis people would see her as a huge favourite. I feel those reasons are very legitimate.
I'm not saying that she has no chance to win, or that she won't win. I am simply challenging the assertion that she should be considered the 'huge favourite' - because she has a history of choking / beating herself.
I don't really see the point of 'what if' scenarios in situations like this.
by
Deuce mick1303 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 5:55 pm
Deuce wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 2:09 am
I doubt very much that any true tennis people view Sabalenka as 'a huge favourite'.
Given her strong choking tendencies in the past, and the fact that she's never even played a Major Final - let alone won one... plus the fact that Rybakina has won a Major (albeit there should be an asterisk beside it)...
All of the pertinent elements reveal that the pros and cons on both sides are about even.
If Rybakina's Wimbledon run deserves an asterisk, then Nadal's AO deserves ten. Nobody of Russians/Belorussians was nowhere near the favorite the Djokovic was in Australia. IMO we are mentioning asterisks way too often. Novak's AO is a second case I can justify in Open Era. The first being Steffi's slams and #1 after Monika's stabbing. Nothing else warrants an asterisk. Rybakina's win is legit.
I very much disagree, Mick...
I have nothing against Rybakina personally... but when quality players are prevented from playing in a tournament, it's very safe to say that their absence A) affects the outcome of the tournament throughout the tournament, and that B) it weakens the field.
Saying that there should be an asterisk DOES NOT mean that I'm saying that one of the players who was not permitted to play would have won the tournament if they'd been allowed to play.
What it DOES mean is that the draw would very, very likely have played out differently if the banned players had played. And that means that Rybakina's draw would have been different - and likely more difficult.
Of course, no-one can say whether or not Rybakina would have won it without the ban on Russians and Belarusians. But I know, for example, that there are some Sabalenka fans here who would say that she would have had a legitimate shot at it had she been allowed to play.
The same could be said of Kasatkina... Kudermetova... Azarenka... Samsonova... Alexandrova...
At the very least, the draw would have almost certainly played out differently if those players had participated. These players were replaced in the draw by lower ranked players. If the Russian and Belarusian players would have been in the draw, this would have likely affected who Rybakina played...
Definitely an asterisk here - on both the men's and the women's side.
The notable and significant FORCED absences may also be part of the reason why Rybakina herself has said that winning Wimbledon didn't feel like she had just won a Major.
That said, I think that players should have been awarded half the regular points for Wimbledon, rather than no points.
by
mick1303 Deuce wrote: ↑Sat Jan 28, 2023 3:32 am
mick1303 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 5:55 pm
Deuce wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 2:09 am
I doubt very much that any true tennis people view Sabalenka as 'a huge favourite'.
Given her strong choking tendencies in the past, and the fact that she's never even played a Major Final - let alone won one... plus the fact that Rybakina has won a Major (albeit there should be an asterisk beside it)...
All of the pertinent elements reveal that the pros and cons on both sides are about even.
If Rybakina's Wimbledon run deserves an asterisk, then Nadal's AO deserves ten. Nobody of Russians/Belorussians was nowhere near the favorite the Djokovic was in Australia. IMO we are mentioning asterisks way too often. Novak's AO is a second case I can justify in Open Era. The first being Steffi's slams and #1 after Monika's stabbing. Nothing else warrants an asterisk. Rybakina's win is legit.
I very much disagree, Mick...
I have nothing against Rybakina personally... but when quality players are prevented from playing in a tournament, it's very safe to say that their absence A) affects the outcome of the tournament throughout the tournament, and that B) it weakens the field.
Saying that there should be an asterisk DOES NOT mean that I'm saying that one of the players who was not permitted to play would have won the tournament if they'd been allowed to play.
What it DOES mean is that the draw would very, very likely have played out differently if the banned players had played. And that means that Rybakina's draw would have been different - and likely more difficult.
Of course, no-one can say whether or not Rybakina would have won it without the ban on Russians and Belarusians. But I know, for example, that there are some Sabalenka fans here who would say that she would have had a legitimate shot at it had she been allowed to play.
The same could be said of Kasatkina... Kudermetova... Azarenka... Samsonova... Alexandrova...
At the very least, the draw would have almost certainly played out differently if those players had participated. These players were replaced in the draw by lower ranked players. If the Russian and Belarusian players would have been in the draw, this would have likely affected who Rybakina played...
Definitely an asterisk here - on both the men's and the women's side.
The notable and significant FORCED absences may also be part of the reason why Rybakina herself has said that winning Wimbledon didn't feel like she had just won a Major.
That said, I think that players should have been awarded half the regular points for Wimbledon, rather than no points.
Then we'll have to agree to disagree. The combined achievements of the players you mentioned are 50 times less than that of one Novak Djokovic. But you prefer to concentrate on 2022 Wimbledon rather than 2022 AO.
by
meganfernandez ashkor87 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 1:00 am
meganfernandez wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 4:46 pm
ashkor87 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 4:40 pm
much as I love Rybakina, I dont think she is going to beat Sabalenka on Saturday.. I will be happy either way, but my bet is on Saba.
I'm keeping the faith with Sabalenka, but I think whoever serves better wins. At one point, quarterfinal think, Rybakina was at 50% unreturned first serves for the tournament. That's nearly unplayable. She is also is super calm but Sabalenka has been holding her nerve.
You had been pulling for Sabalenka for years..finally, she is about to justify your confidence in her! (Mine too). Hope she does it. As she showed against Bencic, she can run anyone off the court so long as she does not self-destruct...only Sabalenka cab actually beat Sabalenka! This time, she seems to have mastered herself...
I watched Rybakina yesterday and she isn't really as zen-like as people say..I thought she was about to burst into tears towards the end of the first set, especially with her coach's antics..ahe should fire him now.
Hey, I'm glad someone remembered! Thanks! Yeah, I've always said Sabalenka was more likely than not to win some Slams, even throughout last year. Too much game, too much power, too close to the finish line already (before this year) ... and I'm an optimist. I think she have been unfairly defined by a few big-match losses and not her incredible accomplishments. I am so glad she came through AND in super tight circumstances. Now she should have the "choker" monkey off her back for good, at least reputationally.
I just feel so great for her. And she was my pre-tournament pick.
by
Deuce mick1303 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 28, 2023 4:40 pm
Deuce wrote: ↑Sat Jan 28, 2023 3:32 am
mick1303 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 5:55 pm
If Rybakina's Wimbledon run deserves an asterisk, then Nadal's AO deserves ten. Nobody of Russians/Belorussians was nowhere near the favorite the Djokovic was in Australia. IMO we are mentioning asterisks way too often. Novak's AO is a second case I can justify in Open Era. The first being Steffi's slams and #1 after Monika's stabbing. Nothing else warrants an asterisk. Rybakina's win is legit.
I very much disagree, Mick...
I have nothing against Rybakina personally... but when quality players are prevented from playing in a tournament, it's very safe to say that their absence A) affects the outcome of the tournament throughout the tournament, and that B) it weakens the field.
Saying that there should be an asterisk DOES NOT mean that I'm saying that one of the players who was not permitted to play would have won the tournament if they'd been allowed to play.
What it DOES mean is that the draw would very, very likely have played out differently if the banned players had played. And that means that Rybakina's draw would have been different - and likely more difficult.
Of course, no-one can say whether or not Rybakina would have won it without the ban on Russians and Belarusians. But I know, for example, that there are some Sabalenka fans here who would say that she would have had a legitimate shot at it had she been allowed to play.
The same could be said of Kasatkina... Kudermetova... Azarenka... Samsonova... Alexandrova...
At the very least, the draw would have almost certainly played out differently if those players had participated. These players were replaced in the draw by lower ranked players. If the Russian and Belarusian players would have been in the draw, this would have likely affected who Rybakina played...
Definitely an asterisk here - on both the men's and the women's side.
The notable and significant FORCED absences may also be part of the reason why Rybakina herself has said that winning Wimbledon didn't feel like she had just won a Major.
That said, I think that players should have been awarded half the regular points for Wimbledon, rather than no points.
Then we'll have to agree to disagree. The combined achievements of the players you mentioned are 50 times less than that of one Novak Djokovic. But you prefer to concentrate on 2022 Wimbledon rather than 2022 AO.
I never mentioned the 2022 Aussie Open, Mick. I'm referring only to Wimbledon 2022. It's not a competition between the two tournaments to see which one was affected most by the absences. It's apples and oranges - at Wimbledon, SEVERAL PLAYERS COULD NOT PLAY because they were (unjustifiably) banned. At the Aussie Open ONE PLAYER could not play because of a PERSONAL DECISION HE MADE.
Again - it's apples and oranges.
Also, as I said, it's not about who would have WON these two tournaments if all the players in question had played... it's about HOW THE DRAW WOULD HAVE BEEN AFFECTED if they had played. And, obviously, the Wimbledon draw was more affected because of the absence of the banned players - because there were SEVERAL top players who would have been scattered throughout the draw, and -, than the Aussie Open draw was affected because of ONE PERSON'S absence.