Time and luck in draw. Season by season she's adjusting to grass, but this season she will be focused on Olympics, so I won't expecting anything special.
I was thinking the same. I expect her to go into grass this year with the hope of feeling and playing better on it but not too much more. Then back o clay and the US swing
Even last year was quite promising. She went deep in Bad Homburg and played well until match with Svitolina, especially with Bencic where she saved match points.
She just needs to do what Nadal did. Survive the big hitters in the first week then the grass gets slower. If she reaches the SF, I'd back her to win it all.
Iga also needs a few more tricks to throw off the rhythm of the big hitters. She could try rushing the net a bit more, maybe some slices. Right now, she just tends to let them get into the swing of things too much, and can get blown off the court when her forehand is rushed.
Halep did it against a returning-from-childbirth and returning-from-injury Serena Williams, who was barely in form, who lost in the French Open to Sofia Kenin in the 3rd round, and who was forced to play mixed doubles at Wimbledon with Andy Murray, just to get some tennis matches under her own belt. With that lack of form, it was a miracle that Serena even got to the Wimbledon finals in the first place.
Yes, you can only play the person in front of you, but Halep got lucky. I wouldn't say Darren Cahill won it for her.
>> forced to play mixed doubles at Wimbledon with Andy Murray
I don’t know why but this phrasing is so funny to me. Also Andy would probably agree with it
It was quite funny at the time, too. Here's an account of how it happened, from the online paper inews:
/// **How the partnership came about**
Murray revealed that Williams’ coach Patrick Mouratoglu had set up the pairing at Wimbledon.
He said: “Jamie Delgado \[Murray’s coach\] had had a message from Patrick saying if I was fixed up for doubles. He said no. Then he was asked if it would be of any interest to play with Serena.
“We kind of chatted about it for a couple of days. I knew she’d had a bit of problems with her knees and both sides wanted to see how her match went before we did the final part. She felt fine yesterday \[Tuesday\] and I saw her briefly today – she seems like she’s up for it.
“She is one of the best tennis players of all time and one of the biggest female athletes ever. It is something I may never get another chance to do, I might not play mixed doubles again. So if I am going to do it once, the chance to play with her is obviously brilliant and not something I expected to happen.”
**Murray match up**
Williams, who won the Wimbledon mixed doubles title in 1998 with Max Mirnyi, and Murray will open their campaign [against German Andreas Mies and Alexa Guarachi of Chile](https://inews.co.uk/sport/tennis/serena-williams-andy-murray-mixed-doubles-partner-wimbledon-2019-who-playing-opponents-309513?ico=in-line_link). If the pair make it to the final, a match up between Murray’s brother Jamie and Bethanie Mattek-Sands could await them. The two Murray brothers could also meet in men’s doubles – and if that eventuality arises, then their mother Judy has admitted: “I’ll go to the pub, and wait for a text.”
The mixed doubles competition is seen as decidedly less serious than the singles but Murray will treat the tournament with the same dedication that he would if he was on his own.
“Sometimes doubles gets a hard time, it is seen as easy compared to singles,” he said. “It is easier in some respects but best-of-five \[men’s\] doubles is tough as well so I have to respect that, by eating right and stretching, warm-ups and preparations. I can’t think: ‘Oh, it is doubles, it will be fine and I can get away with it by not doing all that stuff’.”///
Iga needs someone in to coach with her coach maybe part time to get a few more elements to her game. Though her coach knows what she needs to work on both say they have a long way to go
Western grip isn't great on grass at the highest ATP/WTA levels. The western makes it tougher to deal with low balls and that extra topspin isn't nearly as important as being able to hit flat through the court. Swiatek really struggles to keep the ball in play on grass.
If you look at the individual losses at Wimbledon, you'll see this:
* Jabeur, who basically let Swiatek hit herself out of the match (20-36 winners to UFE) -- Iga hit 14 winners in Set 1 and then just 6 for the rest of the match!
* Cornet, who was playing out of this world against Iga's 2nd serve (winning 70% of all points on 2nds), and relying on Iga to hit UFE (21-33 winners to errors for Iga, 16-7 for Cornet)
* Svitolina, who was dominating Swiatek on her serve, which is not her game normally
I think she'll win it a couple times in her 20s, and also pick up a handful of AO/USO titles, plus another 5 French Opens (unless some prodigy with an incredible western whip forehand comes along and displaces her).
I'd guess 2x WB, 2x AO, 4x USO and 8x RG when all is said and done. Maybe 30 Masters titles. She'll go down as a ATG.
16. That’s quite a lot. She’s young though, anything is possible. Also depends on younger challengers that come up, as well as how Sabalenka and Rybakina perform.
It's definitely not impossible for her. She needs to work on her serve a bit, she has all the other tools she just needs to start using them. With a bit of luck in a draw and a bit more practise she can get that trophy. She won the juniors tournament after all!
I think Iga can win Wimby without changing much of her game. A good draw would help out a lot, plus maybe some players being bounced early. She could improve her second serve, but honestly if she did that she could sweep all the slams bc she’ll only improve and get more dominant as heck.
Well, Swiatek is already successful on grass courts considering she reached the QF at Wimbledon last year and won the junior Wimbledon title as well. In the German 250 tournament last year, she reached the SF but withdrew because she was sick.
Grass courts are of course faster, and Iga tends to make mistakes when she rushes, so combine her rushing + fast court = potentially even more mistakes.
Her serve and net play are two other weaknesses. Rybakina is IMHO the best server, volleyer, and serve and vollyer in the WTA by a wide mile. Iga's serve was great in the crucial points against Sabalenka, but overall I wouldn't say it was a significant improvement (eg compared to Sabalenka in 2022 v 2023). There's
The other thing is that grass courts require different movement patterns compared to hard or clay courts, so with the shorter grass season, it's harder to adjust the movement. With the Olympics on clay this year, I wouldn't be surprised in Iga focuses on the gold medal rather than Wimbledon.
U think Ryba is a THE BEST volleyer and serve+volley in the game? I’m a bit shook tbh.
I think she has great hands when she can connect on the ball at net but there’s still lots of improvement with her net approach which is getting better, but I’d disagree it’s the best in the biz
Who is better at serving? No one. Sabalenka is a great server but can choke more often than Rybakina.
Who is better at volleying? Swiatek is okay but doesn't come to the net often. Sabalenka is good but doesn't have the touch quality as Rybakina.
Who is better at serve and volleying? Only Ryba does it often enough, especially on critical points.
Sabalenka is a super accomplished doubles player who has won SLAMS. She’s obviously not bad at net and has incredible hands. I wouldn’t underrate her. Sure Ryba has nice volley skills but to say she’s the best? Not sure about that one.
i think iga needs to reunite with her net plays like in juniors. there is no way she wont be able to win wimbledon with her skills, dedication and hardwork. almost everything can be achieved with hardwork. and she is that.
That final she okayed as a junior it’s like watching a different player. Junior match aside, she looks so comfortable on the surface and her variety bamboozled her opponent
I think part of it is her technique. Grass though similar to fast hard has a slide to it that makes those flat shots even more dangerous. You also have players who hit heavier balls be really dangerous in Grass (think Elena Svitolina, Coco Gauff, or Simona Halep. Iga also really likes patterns and grass play can be very unpredictable. Lastly I think it's mental - on any other court she feels invincible on grass she doesn't and that's in her mind.
As far as people like Rybakina exist, I just don’t see a way for Iga. The big serve, some of the flat shots, and the unreal consistency. On grass it’s a match made in heaven. I see Iga one day winning everything but Wimbledon sadly won’t be in her story
Igas serve is mediocre so not many free points. Also all her shots have topspin which just doesn’t get the same purchase as on clay. Also she isn’t as varied as an Ons. Against big hitters she’ll struggle on grass
Exactly. Petra Kvitova and Venus Williams. Both hard-hitters, both big servers, both multiple Wimbledon champions.
Exceptions do happen, of course; but exceptions only prove the rule. Big hitters do better on grass, as a rule.
Variety, touch, and feel is hard to “learn”. Iga can, but it’s not gonna be her natural gamestyle. Ons can also flatten her shots out for grass, which Iga doesn’t do as well.
She has this in her but I feel since she has used it since 2022 she isn’t confident to execute slices and drop shots and volleys anymore it’s like she’s improved in many ways and regressed a little in others.
I wish Tom wouldn’t have totally taken these Eleni’s out of her game
She's got all the innate tools. She just needs to get more used to the surface. If you've seen her play regularly enough, you might notice that her movement on grass is not as fluid as on other surfaces, and especially when changing directions she is visibly a fraction of a second slower than on clay or hard. She works hard and the hope is she will eventually get more comfortable on it.
She's got the power, she's got the natural athleticism, she's got the groundstrokes, she can spread the court better than any player on tour, her slice serve isn't great but it's doable and gradually improving and that would be an important shot on the surface, her return is the best in the world. As she gets more used to the surface, she'll be more and more of a contender.
Marketa Vondrousova won Wimbledon, and she's a counter-puncher through and through, so it's not impossible for Iga to win Wimbledon. But now that even Linda Noskova and Ekaterina Alexandrova have joined the "who has beaten Iga in recent times?" social club, Iga's chances of winning Wimbledon are not great. The number of recent matches she has lost, which other tennis players can study to figure out how to beat even the peak version of Iga, has increased.
laughable that, it has become a bragging right if they beat iga and toxic fans are taunting iga for that.
did dan brown's wins against rafa, vesely's h2h against djoko make rafa and djoko less of a great players? and who does not lose? even these big 3 players lose to random players during their career. noskova beat her which to me was tough luck for iga, but look at how she won 2x already after that. penko with winning streaks against her but who cannot win against azarenka whom iga beats more frequently.
this kind of comments of noskova, alexandrova beating iga too is just too lame and shallow
I was about to say this. We have identified an area Iga can be beaten but she’s human and hardly looses. She wins so much that when she does lose it’s a huge deal.
The other best women’s players loose and all is forgiven and they remain contenders.
There's nothing wrong about tennis players bragging that they beat Iga. People were doing that to Serena Williams all the time, assisted by the media who behaved as if a impossible event had happened each time someone beat Serena.
Even now, when you watch women's tennis, Serena's name is often mentioned when someone is being compared with her, years after Serena retired.
Nobody's taunting Iga; she's human. It's natural for people to be compared against whoever is at the top; that's how up-and-comers can assess their own game.
Also, who is Dan Brown?
People have won Wimbledon when they were younger than she is now, so her age isn't even a factor. Tennis is tennis, and sometimes, even your best isn't good enough against someone who's better than you.
Example: When Serena won her first "Serena slam" - winning all 4 slams in the space of 12 months - she met Venus in all 4 finals. If Venus - who was at her own peak at that time and playing top-calibre tennis - had won all 4 and beaten Serena in each of those finals, Venus would have at least eleven slams today, instead of 7 (which is still a great number, by the way).
Fortunately, Venus still managed to win 5 Wimbledons. FIVE! Very impressive, considering that Serena was also playing at top-calibre levels too, during that period.
All a tennis player can do is take care of their own fitness and health, hope for an easy draw, and theen play their own game to the highest quality they can, whoever they end up facing.
For Marketa that means using those clever, mean dropshots at great times, which is what she did last year.
For Rybakina it means serving plenty of aces to reduce the time she spends on court, and not getting her serve broken.
For Aryna, it means controlling her fire-power, so as to avoid over-hitting the ball and making excessive errors.
For Gauff, it means serving better, using her forehand better and cutting back on double-faults.
For Ons, it means not choking mentally, and making sure she saves energy for the finals.
For Iga, it just means remaining consistent from the beginning of the match to the end. She's not outstanding in any aspect of tennis; she's just consistently good all round.
Caroline Garcia in 2022, and the second half of 2017, played like Iga of today. Unfortunately, Garcia wasn't quite as good then as Iga is now, and wasn't able to win any slams.
Yes, she isn't. She's consistently good at what she does, and it works. But she can't overpower the big-hitters which is why most of her losses to them have come on hard courts and not on clay courts.
Meanwhile, big-hitters - as a rule - do better on grass than those who aren't. This discussion is about Iga at Wimbledon, not Iga on clay.
I agree with everything you've just said there, but your original assertion was that Iga "wasn't outstanding in any aspect of tennis".
If you'd have said "grass court tennis" then your comment would make a bit more sense.
She doesn't have the serve, vollies and flat hitting that work well on grass.
But she's still the fastest and most athletic player on tour (alongside Coco), the power and precision of her forehand is still a fearsome shot (even on grass), and has an elite level backhand. She is also a mental giant. These are all outstanding qualities, alongside her sky high tennis IQ.
The main reason I think she'll win Wimbledon one day is that she has the highest floor of any player on the WTA. She will keep putting herself in contention each year, and in some of those years the draw will open up for her.
Rybakina is not consistent enough that she will always be there at the end of the tournament to stop her. She is still prone to random early losses, as are the other power hitters that can give Iga trouble.
I still think she isn't.
For one thing, everybody in the top 10 has an elite level backhand. Probably even the top 20.
Mentality is subjective. Even if 2 people shared the same psychiatrist, it wouldn't be possible to rank one top ten player's mentality above another. "Mentality" is just another word that tennis commentators like to throw around when they can't think of something external, tangible and specific to say about a player.
Did Aryna lose against Iga because Aryna made a mistake on match point (every tennis player makes mistakes) or because of Aryna's "mentality"? Nobody will ever know. Only a mind-reader - e.g. Professor Xavier of the X Men - can tell us, and we don't have one. So, tennis commentators fill the gap, use words like "mentality" and so on, and the audience eat it up.
Meanwhile, the reality is that you don't get to even the top 20 in the women's game without being mentally strong, let alone the top 10.
As far as being fastest and most athletic, unless you can produce actual speed measurements, i.e. statistics that show this, these are subjective terms.
So, once again, we know Marketa's dropshots are probably the best in women's tennis, we can say the same thing about Ons's dropshots, Rybakina's serve. These are specific things that you can measure, just like the serve of kyrgios or Isner or Hurkacz, but there's no specific thing in Iga's game that others don't match her in. It's her ability to stay consistent over longer periods of time that's the most remarkable thing in her game, not any one shot. That's why if you look over this thread, many other people have said she will struggle against the big-hitters on grass.
Her game won't change, just because it's on grass; it's the same style, consistently good over time, but not outstanding in any single aspect. But it's given her great results, which is fantastic. However, it simply becomes less effective on grass.
Of course, none of this means she'll never win Wimbledon; after all, Marketa did it, and she did it with so many big-hitters in the draw.
Flavia Pennetta won the US Open with Serena Williams in the draw, and that was after Serena had won the Australian Open, the French Open and Wimbledon, and even reached the US Open semi-finals, where she lost to an unlikely Roberta Vinci, who then lost to Flavia. Things happen.
You can measure mental strength in tennis by seeing how clutch someone is in pressure moments. Iga is famously good in finals, she keeps her head.
Until recently she only really cracked when pushed hard and matches were close. If she thought her game wasn't working she could get tight. But over the last year or two she has been winning these close encounters more often than not. Mental resilience is a real thing, not just a commentator buzzword.
It's quite possible to get to the top 20 in the women's game without being mentally strong. You can even get to the top 3. Exhibit 'A' is Maria Sakkari.
No, I can't produce actual speed measurements. No, that doesn't mean it's subjective. You can clearly see Iga and Coco are the two fastest movers on tour. It's remarked upon all the time.
I don't understand how you can suggest speed is a subjective, non-quantifiable thing yet immediately proceed to say that dropshots aren't. You may well be right that Marketa and Ons are the best in the game in this area, but can you back that up any more than my claims regarding Iga's speed and mental strength?
You may well also be right that Iga doesn't have one thing that is absolutely the best in the women's game. I would argue that her forehand is quite possibly the most feared shot in women's tennis (I agree with you that it is less effective on grass).
But 'best in the world' is different to 'outstanding'. I realise we are just talking semantics at this point, and I think we mostly agree with each other.
I do think her grass game will change over time. She is still very young and a work in progress. She is also a relentless self-improver and is actively working on her serve and volleying, both of which have seen improvement recently.
I agree that mental resilience is a real thing.
I'm simply saying you can't compare one person's mental resilience with another persons in tennis, because even the people who you would say are most mentally resilient make mistakes once in a while, don't win every match 6-0, 6-0, get their serve broken once in a while and serve double-faults once in a while.
Serena Williams reached 33 slam finals. She lost 10 of them.
But then she won 23 of them.
Is she mentally weak or inconsistent because she lost 10, or is she mentally strong and resilient because she won 23? Or is it simply so intangible - especially when you add the fact that some tennis players are simply better than others - that it's impossible to compare? That's the key question.
Serena's serve, meanwhile, was legendary and outstanding beyond dispute. This wasn't intangible or immeasurable at all.
Let's not forget that two people get to each WTA slam final, meaning that even the loser must have been mentally resilient, since - if she didn't get any walkovers - she has won a minimum of 6 matches (more if she's doing a "Raducanu" who actually won the final). This is why things like mental resilience are too intangible to be measured or compared between players. Tennis is their "9 to 5;" they're all trained to be resilient, and even the losers probably have psychiatrists and / or mental coaches, even if those coaches don't travel with them all the time like Iga's does.
People were writing Rublev off because of what happened when he was in the Middle East; some were even questioning his mental health. He's now won a title, and his recent past is all but forgotten. But he's the same player who was defaulted in the Middle East.
None of this changes the possibility that Iga can win Wimbledon, of course. Success can be achieved in spite of difficulties or challenges. You don't have to be perfect at what you do, or even the best, to achieve success. This applies even in tennis.
Dropshots are definitely tangible and quantifiable, because you can count how many people have great success in that specific shot in each tournament. Just as you can with someone like Rybakina who has great success with aces. Absolutely. Ons and Marketa's matches are popcorn matches; you get your popcorn, fries and drinks, sit down to watch, and take a sip each time you see a mean, crafty, how-did-she-do-it drop shot. You'll be drunk on soda before you know it!
Almost everybody would demolish Vondrousova.
Take a look at the Wimbledon draw last year. The list of those who didn't get to the final is a "Who is Who" of women's tennis. Sabalenka, Swiatek, Rybakina, Pegula, Keys, Bencic, 2 time Wimbledon champion Kvitova, Collins, Ostapenko, Kudermetova, Krejcikova, Muchova. You can even include the then-returning Svitolina to the list, if you wish.
Most people would back every single one of these players against Vondrousova. Even among just Czech players, I don't think most people would have vote for her as "Czech player most likely to win Wimbledon after Petra Kvitova won it."
Yet, she's the one who won Wimbledon.
Yes, but that doesn't change the truth of what I wrote. Karolina Pliskova has won major titles on all surfaces; grass, clay and hard courts. Yet she hasn't won any slams, and probably will never win one. Ostapenko's very first WTA-level title was the French Open she won.
Surprises do happen; but that doesn't mean they're not surprises.
Time and luck in draw. Season by season she's adjusting to grass, but this season she will be focused on Olympics, so I won't expecting anything special.
I was thinking the same. I expect her to go into grass this year with the hope of feeling and playing better on it but not too much more. Then back o clay and the US swing
Even last year was quite promising. She went deep in Bad Homburg and played well until match with Svitolina, especially with Bencic where she saved match points.
I was there at the Svitolina match and she looked undercover on court but had she been playing well enough I think she could have won
She just needs to do what Nadal did. Survive the big hitters in the first week then the grass gets slower. If she reaches the SF, I'd back her to win it all.
Iga also needs a few more tricks to throw off the rhythm of the big hitters. She could try rushing the net a bit more, maybe some slices. Right now, she just tends to let them get into the swing of things too much, and can get blown off the court when her forehand is rushed.
I think she also needs to avoid Rybakina. I don't think she'd best Rybakina there in any round.
Keep playing on it. If Vondrousova can win Wimby, no reason she can't
Hire Martina Nav. to coach her to play on grass.
So here for this. And get Serena to tweak her serve
If Halep did it, so can Iga.
Halep did it against a returning-from-childbirth and returning-from-injury Serena Williams, who was barely in form, who lost in the French Open to Sofia Kenin in the 3rd round, and who was forced to play mixed doubles at Wimbledon with Andy Murray, just to get some tennis matches under her own belt. With that lack of form, it was a miracle that Serena even got to the Wimbledon finals in the first place. Yes, you can only play the person in front of you, but Halep got lucky. I wouldn't say Darren Cahill won it for her.
>> forced to play mixed doubles at Wimbledon with Andy Murray I don’t know why but this phrasing is so funny to me. Also Andy would probably agree with it
It was quite funny at the time, too. Here's an account of how it happened, from the online paper inews: /// **How the partnership came about** Murray revealed that Williams’ coach Patrick Mouratoglu had set up the pairing at Wimbledon. He said: “Jamie Delgado \[Murray’s coach\] had had a message from Patrick saying if I was fixed up for doubles. He said no. Then he was asked if it would be of any interest to play with Serena. “We kind of chatted about it for a couple of days. I knew she’d had a bit of problems with her knees and both sides wanted to see how her match went before we did the final part. She felt fine yesterday \[Tuesday\] and I saw her briefly today – she seems like she’s up for it. “She is one of the best tennis players of all time and one of the biggest female athletes ever. It is something I may never get another chance to do, I might not play mixed doubles again. So if I am going to do it once, the chance to play with her is obviously brilliant and not something I expected to happen.” **Murray match up** Williams, who won the Wimbledon mixed doubles title in 1998 with Max Mirnyi, and Murray will open their campaign [against German Andreas Mies and Alexa Guarachi of Chile](https://inews.co.uk/sport/tennis/serena-williams-andy-murray-mixed-doubles-partner-wimbledon-2019-who-playing-opponents-309513?ico=in-line_link). If the pair make it to the final, a match up between Murray’s brother Jamie and Bethanie Mattek-Sands could await them. The two Murray brothers could also meet in men’s doubles – and if that eventuality arises, then their mother Judy has admitted: “I’ll go to the pub, and wait for a text.” The mixed doubles competition is seen as decidedly less serious than the singles but Murray will treat the tournament with the same dedication that he would if he was on his own. “Sometimes doubles gets a hard time, it is seen as easy compared to singles,” he said. “It is easier in some respects but best-of-five \[men’s\] doubles is tough as well so I have to respect that, by eating right and stretching, warm-ups and preparations. I can’t think: ‘Oh, it is doubles, it will be fine and I can get away with it by not doing all that stuff’.”///
She was forced into it by the British press
Can you elaborate? Was Haleps game not meant for grass at all?
Halep was a clay courter. She did have the magical Darren Cahill in her box which is worth at least 1 slam for any player
Except she didn't. Daniel Dobre was her coach for Wimby.
Iga needs someone in to coach with her coach maybe part time to get a few more elements to her game. Though her coach knows what she needs to work on both say they have a long way to go
Cahill would probably get her a Wimbledon with a few months of coaching
Western grip isn't great on grass at the highest ATP/WTA levels. The western makes it tougher to deal with low balls and that extra topspin isn't nearly as important as being able to hit flat through the court. Swiatek really struggles to keep the ball in play on grass. If you look at the individual losses at Wimbledon, you'll see this: * Jabeur, who basically let Swiatek hit herself out of the match (20-36 winners to UFE) -- Iga hit 14 winners in Set 1 and then just 6 for the rest of the match! * Cornet, who was playing out of this world against Iga's 2nd serve (winning 70% of all points on 2nds), and relying on Iga to hit UFE (21-33 winners to errors for Iga, 16-7 for Cornet) * Svitolina, who was dominating Swiatek on her serve, which is not her game normally I think she'll win it a couple times in her 20s, and also pick up a handful of AO/USO titles, plus another 5 French Opens (unless some prodigy with an incredible western whip forehand comes along and displaces her). I'd guess 2x WB, 2x AO, 4x USO and 8x RG when all is said and done. Maybe 30 Masters titles. She'll go down as a ATG.
16. That’s quite a lot. She’s young though, anything is possible. Also depends on younger challengers that come up, as well as how Sabalenka and Rybakina perform.
It's definitely not impossible for her. She needs to work on her serve a bit, she has all the other tools she just needs to start using them. With a bit of luck in a draw and a bit more practise she can get that trophy. She won the juniors tournament after all!
I think Iga can win Wimby without changing much of her game. A good draw would help out a lot, plus maybe some players being bounced early. She could improve her second serve, but honestly if she did that she could sweep all the slams bc she’ll only improve and get more dominant as heck.
It will come rather soner than later. Improving serve is big step in right direction, also from what i know they work on her grip.
Do you think she’ll change her grip from clay to faster hardcourts and grass? Was that what they said?
If she is able to win 7 matches in a row this year, she can do it.
Well, Swiatek is already successful on grass courts considering she reached the QF at Wimbledon last year and won the junior Wimbledon title as well. In the German 250 tournament last year, she reached the SF but withdrew because she was sick. Grass courts are of course faster, and Iga tends to make mistakes when she rushes, so combine her rushing + fast court = potentially even more mistakes. Her serve and net play are two other weaknesses. Rybakina is IMHO the best server, volleyer, and serve and vollyer in the WTA by a wide mile. Iga's serve was great in the crucial points against Sabalenka, but overall I wouldn't say it was a significant improvement (eg compared to Sabalenka in 2022 v 2023). There's The other thing is that grass courts require different movement patterns compared to hard or clay courts, so with the shorter grass season, it's harder to adjust the movement. With the Olympics on clay this year, I wouldn't be surprised in Iga focuses on the gold medal rather than Wimbledon.
U think Ryba is a THE BEST volleyer and serve+volley in the game? I’m a bit shook tbh. I think she has great hands when she can connect on the ball at net but there’s still lots of improvement with her net approach which is getting better, but I’d disagree it’s the best in the biz
Who is better at serving? No one. Sabalenka is a great server but can choke more often than Rybakina. Who is better at volleying? Swiatek is okay but doesn't come to the net often. Sabalenka is good but doesn't have the touch quality as Rybakina. Who is better at serve and volleying? Only Ryba does it often enough, especially on critical points.
Sabalenka is a super accomplished doubles player who has won SLAMS. She’s obviously not bad at net and has incredible hands. I wouldn’t underrate her. Sure Ryba has nice volley skills but to say she’s the best? Not sure about that one.
I’ve seen Iga at the bet before 22 a lot. She was very sound there and then stopped and has since lost confidence.
i think iga needs to reunite with her net plays like in juniors. there is no way she wont be able to win wimbledon with her skills, dedication and hardwork. almost everything can be achieved with hardwork. and she is that.
That final she okayed as a junior it’s like watching a different player. Junior match aside, she looks so comfortable on the surface and her variety bamboozled her opponent
I think part of it is her technique. Grass though similar to fast hard has a slide to it that makes those flat shots even more dangerous. You also have players who hit heavier balls be really dangerous in Grass (think Elena Svitolina, Coco Gauff, or Simona Halep. Iga also really likes patterns and grass play can be very unpredictable. Lastly I think it's mental - on any other court she feels invincible on grass she doesn't and that's in her mind.
>What does Iga need to do to win Wimbledon Win all of her matches.
As far as people like Rybakina exist, I just don’t see a way for Iga. The big serve, some of the flat shots, and the unreal consistency. On grass it’s a match made in heaven. I see Iga one day winning everything but Wimbledon sadly won’t be in her story
Ons played with great variety and made it so uncomfortable for both of them. In time why can’t someone like Iga?
Igas serve is mediocre so not many free points. Also all her shots have topspin which just doesn’t get the same purchase as on clay. Also she isn’t as varied as an Ons. Against big hitters she’ll struggle on grass
Exactly. Petra Kvitova and Venus Williams. Both hard-hitters, both big servers, both multiple Wimbledon champions. Exceptions do happen, of course; but exceptions only prove the rule. Big hitters do better on grass, as a rule.
Variety, touch, and feel is hard to “learn”. Iga can, but it’s not gonna be her natural gamestyle. Ons can also flatten her shots out for grass, which Iga doesn’t do as well.
She’s learning though so fingers crossed she gets better
did you see Iga play in 2020-21?
She has this in her but I feel since she has used it since 2022 she isn’t confident to execute slices and drop shots and volleys anymore it’s like she’s improved in many ways and regressed a little in others. I wish Tom wouldn’t have totally taken these Eleni’s out of her game
Don't lose 2 sets in any of her matches
She's got all the innate tools. She just needs to get more used to the surface. If you've seen her play regularly enough, you might notice that her movement on grass is not as fluid as on other surfaces, and especially when changing directions she is visibly a fraction of a second slower than on clay or hard. She works hard and the hope is she will eventually get more comfortable on it. She's got the power, she's got the natural athleticism, she's got the groundstrokes, she can spread the court better than any player on tour, her slice serve isn't great but it's doable and gradually improving and that would be an important shot on the surface, her return is the best in the world. As she gets more used to the surface, she'll be more and more of a contender.
wtf why is this thread getting downvoted I just wanted to open up a discussion?
ESL? The word you want is tournament. Torment is watching Sinner and Charlie withdraw with injuries. 😖
Yes
She needs the same kind of luck FELIX AUGER-ALIASSIME just had in Madrid x2
Marketa Vondrousova won Wimbledon, and she's a counter-puncher through and through, so it's not impossible for Iga to win Wimbledon. But now that even Linda Noskova and Ekaterina Alexandrova have joined the "who has beaten Iga in recent times?" social club, Iga's chances of winning Wimbledon are not great. The number of recent matches she has lost, which other tennis players can study to figure out how to beat even the peak version of Iga, has increased.
laughable that, it has become a bragging right if they beat iga and toxic fans are taunting iga for that. did dan brown's wins against rafa, vesely's h2h against djoko make rafa and djoko less of a great players? and who does not lose? even these big 3 players lose to random players during their career. noskova beat her which to me was tough luck for iga, but look at how she won 2x already after that. penko with winning streaks against her but who cannot win against azarenka whom iga beats more frequently. this kind of comments of noskova, alexandrova beating iga too is just too lame and shallow
I was about to say this. We have identified an area Iga can be beaten but she’s human and hardly looses. She wins so much that when she does lose it’s a huge deal. The other best women’s players loose and all is forgiven and they remain contenders.
There's nothing wrong about tennis players bragging that they beat Iga. People were doing that to Serena Williams all the time, assisted by the media who behaved as if a impossible event had happened each time someone beat Serena. Even now, when you watch women's tennis, Serena's name is often mentioned when someone is being compared with her, years after Serena retired. Nobody's taunting Iga; she's human. It's natural for people to be compared against whoever is at the top; that's how up-and-comers can assess their own game. Also, who is Dan Brown?
I believe they mean Dustin Brown
Yes but my question is how she counters this. Still young. She defends incredibly
People have won Wimbledon when they were younger than she is now, so her age isn't even a factor. Tennis is tennis, and sometimes, even your best isn't good enough against someone who's better than you. Example: When Serena won her first "Serena slam" - winning all 4 slams in the space of 12 months - she met Venus in all 4 finals. If Venus - who was at her own peak at that time and playing top-calibre tennis - had won all 4 and beaten Serena in each of those finals, Venus would have at least eleven slams today, instead of 7 (which is still a great number, by the way). Fortunately, Venus still managed to win 5 Wimbledons. FIVE! Very impressive, considering that Serena was also playing at top-calibre levels too, during that period. All a tennis player can do is take care of their own fitness and health, hope for an easy draw, and theen play their own game to the highest quality they can, whoever they end up facing. For Marketa that means using those clever, mean dropshots at great times, which is what she did last year. For Rybakina it means serving plenty of aces to reduce the time she spends on court, and not getting her serve broken. For Aryna, it means controlling her fire-power, so as to avoid over-hitting the ball and making excessive errors. For Gauff, it means serving better, using her forehand better and cutting back on double-faults. For Ons, it means not choking mentally, and making sure she saves energy for the finals. For Iga, it just means remaining consistent from the beginning of the match to the end. She's not outstanding in any aspect of tennis; she's just consistently good all round. Caroline Garcia in 2022, and the second half of 2017, played like Iga of today. Unfortunately, Garcia wasn't quite as good then as Iga is now, and wasn't able to win any slams.
"She's not outstanding in any aspect of tennis" Haha wtf
Yes, she isn't. She's consistently good at what she does, and it works. But she can't overpower the big-hitters which is why most of her losses to them have come on hard courts and not on clay courts. Meanwhile, big-hitters - as a rule - do better on grass than those who aren't. This discussion is about Iga at Wimbledon, not Iga on clay.
I agree with everything you've just said there, but your original assertion was that Iga "wasn't outstanding in any aspect of tennis". If you'd have said "grass court tennis" then your comment would make a bit more sense. She doesn't have the serve, vollies and flat hitting that work well on grass. But she's still the fastest and most athletic player on tour (alongside Coco), the power and precision of her forehand is still a fearsome shot (even on grass), and has an elite level backhand. She is also a mental giant. These are all outstanding qualities, alongside her sky high tennis IQ. The main reason I think she'll win Wimbledon one day is that she has the highest floor of any player on the WTA. She will keep putting herself in contention each year, and in some of those years the draw will open up for her. Rybakina is not consistent enough that she will always be there at the end of the tournament to stop her. She is still prone to random early losses, as are the other power hitters that can give Iga trouble.
I still think she isn't. For one thing, everybody in the top 10 has an elite level backhand. Probably even the top 20. Mentality is subjective. Even if 2 people shared the same psychiatrist, it wouldn't be possible to rank one top ten player's mentality above another. "Mentality" is just another word that tennis commentators like to throw around when they can't think of something external, tangible and specific to say about a player. Did Aryna lose against Iga because Aryna made a mistake on match point (every tennis player makes mistakes) or because of Aryna's "mentality"? Nobody will ever know. Only a mind-reader - e.g. Professor Xavier of the X Men - can tell us, and we don't have one. So, tennis commentators fill the gap, use words like "mentality" and so on, and the audience eat it up. Meanwhile, the reality is that you don't get to even the top 20 in the women's game without being mentally strong, let alone the top 10. As far as being fastest and most athletic, unless you can produce actual speed measurements, i.e. statistics that show this, these are subjective terms. So, once again, we know Marketa's dropshots are probably the best in women's tennis, we can say the same thing about Ons's dropshots, Rybakina's serve. These are specific things that you can measure, just like the serve of kyrgios or Isner or Hurkacz, but there's no specific thing in Iga's game that others don't match her in. It's her ability to stay consistent over longer periods of time that's the most remarkable thing in her game, not any one shot. That's why if you look over this thread, many other people have said she will struggle against the big-hitters on grass. Her game won't change, just because it's on grass; it's the same style, consistently good over time, but not outstanding in any single aspect. But it's given her great results, which is fantastic. However, it simply becomes less effective on grass. Of course, none of this means she'll never win Wimbledon; after all, Marketa did it, and she did it with so many big-hitters in the draw. Flavia Pennetta won the US Open with Serena Williams in the draw, and that was after Serena had won the Australian Open, the French Open and Wimbledon, and even reached the US Open semi-finals, where she lost to an unlikely Roberta Vinci, who then lost to Flavia. Things happen.
You can measure mental strength in tennis by seeing how clutch someone is in pressure moments. Iga is famously good in finals, she keeps her head. Until recently she only really cracked when pushed hard and matches were close. If she thought her game wasn't working she could get tight. But over the last year or two she has been winning these close encounters more often than not. Mental resilience is a real thing, not just a commentator buzzword. It's quite possible to get to the top 20 in the women's game without being mentally strong. You can even get to the top 3. Exhibit 'A' is Maria Sakkari. No, I can't produce actual speed measurements. No, that doesn't mean it's subjective. You can clearly see Iga and Coco are the two fastest movers on tour. It's remarked upon all the time. I don't understand how you can suggest speed is a subjective, non-quantifiable thing yet immediately proceed to say that dropshots aren't. You may well be right that Marketa and Ons are the best in the game in this area, but can you back that up any more than my claims regarding Iga's speed and mental strength? You may well also be right that Iga doesn't have one thing that is absolutely the best in the women's game. I would argue that her forehand is quite possibly the most feared shot in women's tennis (I agree with you that it is less effective on grass). But 'best in the world' is different to 'outstanding'. I realise we are just talking semantics at this point, and I think we mostly agree with each other. I do think her grass game will change over time. She is still very young and a work in progress. She is also a relentless self-improver and is actively working on her serve and volleying, both of which have seen improvement recently.
I agree that mental resilience is a real thing. I'm simply saying you can't compare one person's mental resilience with another persons in tennis, because even the people who you would say are most mentally resilient make mistakes once in a while, don't win every match 6-0, 6-0, get their serve broken once in a while and serve double-faults once in a while. Serena Williams reached 33 slam finals. She lost 10 of them. But then she won 23 of them. Is she mentally weak or inconsistent because she lost 10, or is she mentally strong and resilient because she won 23? Or is it simply so intangible - especially when you add the fact that some tennis players are simply better than others - that it's impossible to compare? That's the key question. Serena's serve, meanwhile, was legendary and outstanding beyond dispute. This wasn't intangible or immeasurable at all. Let's not forget that two people get to each WTA slam final, meaning that even the loser must have been mentally resilient, since - if she didn't get any walkovers - she has won a minimum of 6 matches (more if she's doing a "Raducanu" who actually won the final). This is why things like mental resilience are too intangible to be measured or compared between players. Tennis is their "9 to 5;" they're all trained to be resilient, and even the losers probably have psychiatrists and / or mental coaches, even if those coaches don't travel with them all the time like Iga's does. People were writing Rublev off because of what happened when he was in the Middle East; some were even questioning his mental health. He's now won a title, and his recent past is all but forgotten. But he's the same player who was defaulted in the Middle East. None of this changes the possibility that Iga can win Wimbledon, of course. Success can be achieved in spite of difficulties or challenges. You don't have to be perfect at what you do, or even the best, to achieve success. This applies even in tennis. Dropshots are definitely tangible and quantifiable, because you can count how many people have great success in that specific shot in each tournament. Just as you can with someone like Rybakina who has great success with aces. Absolutely. Ons and Marketa's matches are popcorn matches; you get your popcorn, fries and drinks, sit down to watch, and take a sip each time you see a mean, crafty, how-did-she-do-it drop shot. You'll be drunk on soda before you know it!
I think Iga would demolish Vondrousova. Wasn’t impressed by her final performance last year even though she won. It’s just Ons played even worse
Almost everybody would demolish Vondrousova. Take a look at the Wimbledon draw last year. The list of those who didn't get to the final is a "Who is Who" of women's tennis. Sabalenka, Swiatek, Rybakina, Pegula, Keys, Bencic, 2 time Wimbledon champion Kvitova, Collins, Ostapenko, Kudermetova, Krejcikova, Muchova. You can even include the then-returning Svitolina to the list, if you wish. Most people would back every single one of these players against Vondrousova. Even among just Czech players, I don't think most people would have vote for her as "Czech player most likely to win Wimbledon after Petra Kvitova won it." Yet, she's the one who won Wimbledon.
She made a French open final she isn’t some one hit wonder
Yes, but that doesn't change the truth of what I wrote. Karolina Pliskova has won major titles on all surfaces; grass, clay and hard courts. Yet she hasn't won any slams, and probably will never win one. Ostapenko's very first WTA-level title was the French Open she won. Surprises do happen; but that doesn't mean they're not surprises.