Talk About Tennis 2.0

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 2:49 am Special circumstances make things different.
Emma should be very well aware of her physical limitations. Knowing them, she should have made provisions for reaching 4R and being in the mixed tournament.
Not classless, but Murray deserved a bit better. He could have partnered with other players, had he known this.

I think it cuts both ways - Murray could have partnered with other players if he was serious about winning mixed doubles (assuming he could find a serious doubles player who was willing to partner with him - since serious doubles players actually want to win the tournament). Raducanu was picked because of her star power - because this pairing was about giving the British fans a chance to clap for Andy one more time, not about a serious title run.

I don't care if the wrist thing is a completely BS excuse, she did right thing. This Wimbledon run could be career-defining (re-defining?) for her, and this is what singles players do when they have a real chance to go deep at a slam. She doesn't owe Murray a damn thing in this whole business, and she certainly can't be expected to be his PR sidekick for an extended goodbye celebration at the expense of her own career and future. As for the British fans, she owes them nothing in this regard either. They're really hard on their players (remember what they put Henman through?). Had she played and then were she to lose the next round, the press would have criticized her for not being serious enough about her own career. She was in an impossible situation really, I wouldn't be suprised if she had reservations from the start, but felt she couldn't possibly say no to Sir Andy in the first place (can you imagine the backlash if she turned him down?)

The classiest thing for Andy to do right now would be to fully support her decision. He's the single greatest advocate for women the men's game has ever had, a perfect way to put a period on his career would be champion Raducanu's decision to put her own career ahead of propping him up in "exhibition" mixed doubles.

mick1303 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 10:01 am

Suliso wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 8:18 am

mick1303 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 06, 2024 8:25 pm Come on now. She is FAR from clay court specialist. Slam on HC, YEC on HC, out of 10 (!!!) masters - 6 on HC and 4 on clay.

She's a dominant power on clay, a top 3 on hard and outside the top 20 on grass. Don't you think that's fair?

And talking about great champions Osaka is the same. Not in the top 10 on grass and clay (results wise at least).

I do not agree with "top 3 on hard". In my estimate she is clearly #1 on hard as well. Swiatek has a record on hard 138-38 (78.4%)
You probably had Sabalenka and Osaka as other two?
Sabalenka has a record 194-79(71.04%). Osaka has 140-66(67.96%). The gap is so significant that for me she is clearly above those two.
I ran a weighted ranking comparison for WTA 2020-2024 (for hardcourts only). What stood out for me is that Swiatek won over 28% of the tournaments she enteres. Sabalenka won 14%. Yes, Osaka has 4 slams. But this is a distant past now...

BTW, concerning CURRENT form- I was assuming we all were going with Coco as the current other top 3 hard court player. I mean, LOL, for all I know, Coco has a 10-74 HC lifetme record. But, making the current US Open winner and most recent Aussie SF.....IMO, Naomi still has a long way to go to be considered anywhere near the top in any category.

Osaka belongs only historically. I was thinking Swiatek, Sabalenka, Gauff and Rybakina (in no particular oder) as a class above the rest on hard right now.

Suliso wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 4:33 pm Osaka belongs only historically. I was thinking Swiatek, Sabalenka, Gauff and Rybakina (in no particular oder) as a class above the rest on hard right now.

Sabalenka has 6 big titles on hard, 5 if you exclude Zhuhai. Swiatek has 8, Rybakina has only one, Coco has 2. And Sabalenka is 4 years older than Swiatek. Nope, not the same level. Swiatek is clearly separated herself.