Talk About Tennis 2.0

6 is a good number for a grand slam event ...3 for a 1000 series maybe

Well, in the end, Sabalenka was everyone's #1 or #2 pick. I rest my case

Well yes this one event. But if we’re limiting it 3 or even 6 then 6 of last 16 weren’t clear.

That would be like if an unknown win the French open and I said we never know who’s going to win ever. I rest my case

There are example of both sides. It’s not just black or white

Picking other makes sense when you don’t have a strong feeling, which often we don’t. This one slam just wasn’t an example of it.

There will always be some GS wins by "other". How often depends on how dominant are or aren't the leading players. History of this sport clearly indicates that. Raducanu was the greatest "other" in history, but some other prominent ones from the last 30 years - Majoli, Pennetta, Costa, Kuerten (the first time), Sharapova (the first time), Rybakina...

Yes, Kuerten was a real bolt from the blue, he had won only a challenger previously! Not sure about the others but remember, Penetta had won Indian Wells already ( I think)..and Rybakina was not really a surprise..Raducanu yes, certainly. Majoli had just won the German open on clay so she was clearly a force on clay already.
Sharapova was already a highly regarded young player, and had won a couple rounds at Wimbledon the previous year, when she was only 16 or something, and won a warm up event even in 2004, so not totally unexpected either..young people have a way of blazing forth like meteors!
But they are not so 'normal' that we should normalize it! You don't see a meteor every day.

Suliso wrote: ↑Sat Jan 28, 2023 3:48 pm There will always be some GS wins by "other". How often depends on how dominant are or aren't the leading players. History of this sport clearly indicates that. Raducanu was the greatest "other" in history, but some other prominent ones from the last 30 years - Majoli, Pennetta, Costa, Kuerten (the first time), Sharapova (the first time), Rybakina...

Becker (although he had won Queens two weeks before), Stich, Gaudio, Gomez, etc.
Roland Garros was the land of OTHER for a few years in the 90's.

ptmcmahon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 28, 2023 3:39 pm Well yes this one event. But if we’re limiting it 3 or even 6 then 6 of last 16 weren’t clear.

That would be like if an unknown win the French open and I said we never know who’s going to win ever. I rest my case

There are example of both sides. It’s not just black or white

Picking other makes sense when you don’t have a strong feeling, which often we don’t. This one slam just wasn’t an example of it.

Krejcikova two years ago. Not only out of the blue, she had won the week prior to RG (Strasbourg), also bucking the trend of players that win the week before a slam never win that slam.

I wouldn’t compare it to seeing a meteor. It’s more like we rolled one die and got a six … and much more frequently lately.

Sampras would've been listed as an "other" the first slam he won as well. Young up and coming players are the main reason there should be an Other category, they might hit a home run sooner than expected. I don't understand why this is a point of contention...

I will add something else. Why do we then take "the field"? What does "the field" mean.
With @JazzNu. Sampras was the 12th seed at his 1990 USO (he was also the 12th seed at his last. A pretty coincidence). Yes, he was promising and people were talking about him. But nobody really expected him to beat Mac AND Lendl at the time. So, indeed, a major "other".
Or field.

So I think we should distinguish between the Becker/Kuerten/ Sharapova and the Costa/,krejcikova cases...in the former, a great champion was winning the first of many, in the latter, it was a one-time thing..I would categorize only the second case as a true 'other,'..a sign of parity, which is the point at issue here. Agree? If Camila Osorio Serrano had won here, it might have been a 'first of many' case!

I think it’s too soon to rule out Krejcikova winning more.

atlpam wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 12:30 am I think it’s too soon to rule out Krejcikova winning more.

Absolutely, considering how she played against Iga in Otrava last fall. She can play with the best of them.

meganfernandez wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 12:42 am

atlpam wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 12:30 am I think it’s too soon to rule out Krejcikova winning more.

Absolutely, considering how she played against Iga in Otrava last fall. She can play with the best of them.

I agree, I love her style anyway.. smooth as silk.. hope she wins a few more!

in the end,Rybakina became too cautious at the end of the third set, just hitting the ball up and down the middle of the court, waiting for the error - Sabalenka took the game into her own hands, hitting angles, changing direction - she played like a champion, Rybakina did not.