[muddysquirrel]

Angie was playing without her biggest weapon today just like Serena was in Rio. I hope she recovers for Singapore.
Movement- leg injury
Serve- shoulder injury

None cares about those Asian swing vulture tournaments anyway. People who have done well during the year and won bigger titles usually always fade by that time of year and vultures get their share. Why is Petra doing so well now? Because she pretty much flopped most of the year and has energy to spare at the moment.

[FBF]

Originally posted by simmnfierzig

I've been following Angie since she wasn't top 100 and lost 10 first rounds in a row or something. Of course she's not the most talented girl, but she works extremely hard and it's insane what she achieved this year.
She will not let down. Obviously a Petra or yeah a Puig too will always be a big problem for her if they are on. They just have more weapons than she does.

But 10 titles in 24 finals isn't bad?!

And um yeah Serena is still close in points cause she's from another planet. Wtf. Probably should be happy you put both in the same sentence.
What's more important is the #3. Halep is more than 4000 points behind Angie in 2016 points. So yeah insane year.

It's dreadful.
Serena is 71-20
Venus 49-31
Radwanska 19-7
Ivanovic 15-8
Wozniacki 24-17
Kvitova 18-6
Halep 14-8

so yeah Kerber 10-14 is pretty bad

Kerber literally played well for 6 weeks, Halep is 3296 points behind. Kerber won 5300 from Wimbledon, US Open and AO alone. She won 2597 points outside of slams, she played 14 tournaments outside of slams, averaging 185 points/tournaments. Serena 1670 points outside of slams, she played 3 tournaments outside of slams, averaging 556 points. Halep 3499 points outside of slams, she played 12 tournaments outside of slams, averaging 291 points/tournament.

How can you net get how fluky Kerber's year has been

[FBF]

Originally posted by simmnfierzig

And yeah prior to this year she was always in big and great matches, but basically always lost them, but that never was a mental problem. It was a playing style problem.
Her being a wall that brings back everything has brought her into the top 10, but this year she made changes to attack some more and it paid off. She won quite a lot of those big matches this year while going for winners in big moments and not just pushing the ball back.

But I really hope she cuts back on her schedule for next season. It's just too many tournaments if you go far in them and it was a bit much on her body.

Girl she's fine, she has 7 1R/2R losses (and reached 3R in Wuhan because she had a bye) this year only

[muddysquirrel]

Nothing flukey about Angie's year. She clearly had her priorities set right for 2016. Did incredibly well in 4/5 of the biggest tournaments. That is no fluke. Halep's, Aga's of that WTA can collect those other tournaments if they can. And stay Slamless.

[simmnfierzig]

Originally posted by FBF

Girl she's fine, she has 7 1R/2R losses (and reached 3R in Wuhan because she had a bye) this year only

She was never close to 100% from Melbourne up until Wimbledon basically and now she's injured again. No she's not fine.

And having 8 early losses and still have the most wins on tour is a clear sign that you play too much

[simmnfierzig]

And the average win loss in finals is obviously 50%. So 10-14 is really not that bad.

And it depends what you define as "fluky". Do I expect 2 more slam titles next season? Hell no. Do I expect her to still be #1 in 12 months? Hell no.

If she finishes 2017 top 3 and wins 2 premier titles it would be a very successful season.
If she finishes #8 or something and wins no big titles I would be disappointed.

[FBF]

Originally posted by simmnfierzig

And the average win loss in finals is obviously 50%. So 10-14 is really not that bad.

And it depends what you define as "fluky". Do I expect 2 more slam titles next season? Hell no. Do I expect her to still be #1 in 12 months? Hell no.

If she finishes 2017 top 3 and wins 2 premier titles it would be a very successful season.
If she finishes #8 or something and wins no big titles I would be disappointed.

Well that's pretty much the definition of fluke no ?

[simmnfierzig]

Originally posted by FBF

Well that's pretty much the definition of fluke no ?

No. She absolutely earned those 2 slams this year.
Are the Petra Wimbledon titles flukes to you? Is everyone with 1-3 slams a fluke?

She's not on a level to win slams every year, but that's totally fine. Very few players are.

[FBF]

Originally posted by simmnfierzig

No. She absolutely earned those 2 slams this year.
Are the Petra Wimbledon titles flukes to you? Is everyone with 1-3 slams a fluke?

She's not on a level to win slams every year, but that's totally fine. Very few players are.

No Petra's wimbledon are not flukes, because we both know she can win it again, and most likely will at some point in her career. And yes most players with 1-3 slams are fluke, Bartoli (kinda debatable since she already made a final and had good results on grass throughout her career), Kuznetsova (debatable for her Roland Garros since she has a strong record on clay, USO is 100% fluke though), Puig's Olympic. Let's be real.

EDIT :

Kerber's history at AO

Win, 1R 2015, 4R 2014, 4R 2013, 3R 2012, 1R 2011, 3R 2010, 1R 2009, 2R 2008

Kerber's history at the USO

Win, 3R 2015, 3R 2014, 4R 2013, 4R 2012, SF 2011, 1R 2010, 2R 2009, 1R 2007

Kvitova's history at Wimbledon

2R, 3R 2015, Win 2014, QF 2013, QF 2012, Win 2011, SF 2010, 1R 2009, 1R 2008

So Petra was a serious threat for 5 years straight, kinda unsure what you were trying to prove with that comparison

[simmnfierzig]

So 4R is and QF is a serious threat. That makes no sense, but okay. If you say so.


But obviously Petra had the better career than Angie so far, but I also strongly disagree on Angie or Sveta being flukes. Sveta had an amazing career and 2 slams seems rather low for her tbh and we will see if Angie will win more. She absolutely could.
(What the hell has Puig to do with this. Olympics are extremely irrelevant)

Vika is obvously no fluke.
Pennetta is kinda a fluke.
Schiavone is no fluke.
Stosur is no fluke.
Mauresmo is no fluke.
Muguruza is kinda a fluke so far.
Li is no fluke.
Ivanovic is no fluke.

[FBF]

Originally posted by simmnfierzig

So 4R is and QF is a serious threat. That makes no sense, but okay. If you say so.


But obviously Petra had the better career than Angie so far, but I also strongly disagree on Angie or Sveta being flukes. Sveta had an amazing career and 2 slams seems rather low for her tbh and we will see if Angie will win more. She absolutely could.
(What the hell has Puig to do with this. Olympics are extremely irrelevant)

Vika is obvously no fluke.
Pennetta is kinda a fluke.
Schiavone is no fluke.
Stosur is no fluke.
Mauresmo is no fluke.
Muguruza is kinda a fluke so far.
Li is no fluke.
Ivanovic is no fluke.

Girl it's context : SF-Win-QF-QF-Win is a much stronger run than SF-4R-4R-3R-3R like... if Schiavone is not a fluke and Pennetta is "kinda" a fluke to you, then I kinda understand your view on Kerber

[simmnfierzig]

Well I just don't think you need to have an amazing career to rightfully win 1 slam

[Kworb]

Radwanska

[sychung4650]

The top three contenders for Wimbledon next year are Kerber, Radwanska, and Maria.

[Slamless]

Just coming to remind y'all:

Aga > Simona

[Bro]

Daddy Andy please snatch the #1 ranking from Nole

[Energy]

Originally posted by Slamless

Just coming to remind y'all:

Aga > Simona

Who doesn't know this nnn

[FBF]

Yet again very dominating from World Number One in Hong Kong, proving yet again it's totally not a fluke year that she had, and she actually has the level of a World Number One

JJ slaying Asia, what's new I know she'll lose to Woz, but she truly needs the point can Caro flop ?

[geddymonster]

Mladenovic finally putting her singles potential to good use. I've still got to root for my girl Caro, though.

[ReachOut]

Yas Caro


Rena not going to Singapore, get that tournament pigeons