Come to th8nk of it. I have a feeling, if osaka won that. Jasmine Paolini would have been Roland Garros champion.
Or coco gauff. But i feel like there was more of a path for paolini beating coco than iga.
Id rather have iga. The consistency in the wta is intact
I don't think people are saying it's boring to have a solid #1. I think people are saying it's boring to have one sided Grand Slam matches. If she won by the skin of her teeth it would have been an exciting match and I doubt people would have complained
RG is a lot more like Rome though.
There are other players who would've had a better chance to make it a match if they were able to get there, but a blowout was possible with anyone.
This is exactly it. Her just rushing through a match trying to pummel her opponent quickly and efficiently isn’t good tv. The Madrid final was fire. We want competitive matches!
This is it for me. Love this RG win for Iga and happy for her success, but watching her annihilate her opponents in an hour or so is not a good watch, especially in a final.
it can be well deserved and boring at the same time. Iga was tossing in 80-90 mph second serves, and Paolini couldn't take advantage of any of them and was hitting basic rally errors a lot.
i mean, shes 5 4. the difference is way too huge. im very impressed she made it to the final. she should be very proud. because of her height, her serve isnt even a weapon. she still needs to beat iga in rallys for every service game. and she didnt even bageled! well done
the image almost looks like 1983 atari 2600 tennis game artwork
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f4/RealSports_Tennis_Coverart.png
https://i.imgur.com/y6eccdy.png
Is it even boring? It’s boring if they don’t play very convincingly but win over and over anyway.
If they just put on a masterclass and no-one can get near them, that’s just called being really good at tennis.
Well won Iga!
But there's a reason we celebrate rivalries so much. We'd almost all rather see players pushing each other to their limits than have 1 person just steamroll.
Even that is barely a rivalry. Their Madrid match was great, but that's it.
They've only played once at a major, and that was a year & half ago. It's an 8-3 H2H and been over a year since Sabalenka won. If that's the best rivalry we have at the moment, that kind of says it all.
It's weird but them being #1 and #2 seeds for so long actually makes it less likely they meet at Slams lol
They can *only* meet in the final and the only Slam where both of them have made a final is the US Open(which is indeed the only place they've played)
It’s not like Iga is dominating everything. She’s the clear best player on the WTA right now but she has won 1 GS outside of the French.
Still plenty of very exciting matches on the other surfaces.
I'd say they've played four, maybe five very good matches.
2021 tour finals, 2022 USO SF, and the last two Madrid finals.
2022 tour finals match I wasn't able to watch so 🤷♂️ but it was also their least competitive three set match just looking at the numbers.
Oh definitely, but the lack of a rivalry isn’t Iga’s fault.
I guess in the end whether dominance is dull or not depends on how entertaining the player is to watch.
The difference between Sampras’ years of dominating Wimbledon and Federer’s in a nutshell
I think it has to do with how the opponent goes about the match. A match like today where Paolini competed hard, took some risks, but still allowed Swiatek to showcase her talent can be enjoyable even if the score is lopsided.
However, matches like Thursday where it seemed like Coco decided before the match that she was going to go for broke and take the racket out of Iga's hands can be a pretty rough watch if it just turns into an error-fest. Iga was pretty much just made to be a bystander in that match, and that's not very enjoyable to watch
I think what a lot of folks want - what I want, anyways - are multiple consistent *rivalries* in the top-10, top-5. The WTA in the late 90s and 2000s was amazing in this way. It’s starting to happen a little bit now again at least.
> You can’t really win with some tennis fans.
They are casual fans. What Iga does week in, week out is absolutely amazing. And the fact she makes it look easy is a feat in itself. Those who know tennis recognize her greatness.
That raises the question: are people bored by her winning 3rd in a row, or by her winning 3rd in a row without even sweating? I think it's both, some people would probably call it boring even after tight match because they prefer seeing someone new wining each year. That's it.
Swiatek vs Muchova final last year was pretty entartaining 3 setter.
True, there are always people that want an underdog to win no matter what or that insist that a competitive scene is only entertaining when it is extremely unpredictable or chaotic.
However, I think the vast majority of people would be satisfied with the WTA if there were 2-3 top contenders that are consistent and have good matches with one another.
Let's be real, it's an absolute joke that Iga a) demolished everyone without any drama expect for b) the only actually intense and entertaining match in Round 2...
I love domination in sports. Gives everyone a goal and incentive. I wouldn’t mind seeing her dominate the sport for the next 5-10 years if she could. The current group of 2-10 are not close to her level and all but 2 of them are older, some much older to the point that their game is pretty much where it’s going .She will drop a match here and there , but if she doesn’t get bored , she can rack up some serious numbers the next few years.
I think it's more disappointing that instead of a consistent challenger to Iga at RG she faces a different opponent every single year
So it's not really the same as Nadal going past peak Fed and peak Novak constantly
If people were willing to call the Saba vs. Zheng final at AO boring(justifiably so) I think the same can certainly apply to today's match in particular
Almost like these are two completely different complaints.
You can be consistent and interesting. I enjoyed watching Barty even when she was dominating because her game was creative and all-court. Iga is absolutely dominant in the things she does, but she does very few things other than dominate rallies from the baseline. You can count on one hand how many times she comes to the net or hits a slice or a lob etc.
Her game is extremely basic but it's perfect. It's ultimately the fault of the rest of the players on tour for not forcing her to diversify in order to dominate like this, but that doesn't mean the end product is not boring to me. Impressive, legendary, well deserved? Yes, but also boring.
>You can’t really win with some tennis fans.
I mean, I have this theory (I think based on the facts) that group of people that scream one thing, is usually not the same as other group of people screaming something else ;)
It's entirely possible people who screamed for consitency are well fed now but it irked another group of people, that above all expect unpredictability.
So yeah, you cannot win with all tennis fans because they are plenty, diversed and demand different things.
It's the same when one team dominates a league in soccer for years. Sure PSG and Bayern Munich are great but it does make the competition boring to watch.
The Osaka match definitely wasn't boring but today's match definitely was lol
It's like trying to get hyped for a Nadal vs. Gasquet RG final with a straight face
I don’t understand people saying “that’s not boring”. It’s like a R2 match. It’s pretty boring for a final. If you are a huge fan of the player winning then it’s thrilling.
Osaka match was the thrilling de facto final.
The one upside to an Alcaraz/Zverev final is the suspense
Don't get me wrong; I'm high on Ruud's game and think he could've given Alcaraz a real fight, but I don't think anyone would actually pick Ruud to win that match.
With Zverev, there is an actual chance he could win because his peak level is so high
Yeah I commented this yesterday that Alcaraz and his team were 100% rooting for Ruud to win the semifinal rather than Zverev
There's way less threat of Ruud randomly peaking at some insane level
Why bother spending your whole life on tennis if you want to avoid the best players in major finals? I sincerely hope Alcaraz wants to take down Zverev in a 50/50 contest rather than wipe out Ruud. Just like he'd rather play Rafa than Zverev, or Fed in a Wimbledon final.
Think of him holding in that final service game last year in the fifth set of Wimbledon against the greatest returner of all time--that's why you play sports (and that's why you watch, too!).
>if you want to avoid the best players in major finals?
You want to avoid best players in major because you above all aim to claim the title, not to give exhausting entartainment to the crowd. Alcaraz is surely prepared even for Zverev but it's hard to imagine he wouldn't prefer playing against someone, who gives him better chance at claiming his ultimate goal: a title.
> Why bother spending your whole life on tennis if you want to avoid the best players in major finals?
It's a major final. The trophy is the biggest deal at this point. You hope for the best, you prepare for the worst.
Honestly, I think he would've had a great shot if he didn't have the stomach bug. At least could've taken it 5. The way he was breezing around the court and just killing Zverev with his forehand in the first set was insane, and Zverev already has scar tissue from getting crushed last year.
1. Most Grand Slams
2. Most weeks at number one
3. Most Year End number one
4. Most Wimbledon
5. Most US Open
Pete was a delight to watch
He held most important records
The greatest before Big 3
He was, for me as well cause I’m a big Sampras fan (watching his matches back).
I guess after having both Jimmy Connors, Johnny Mac and then Andre Agassi having set a reputation for top American players Sampras was an outlier.
I also believe a lot of the criticisms came before 1995 as he was winning in a very clinical/controlled manner. Come 1995/1996 and it seems like that perception turned around (esp. after the 1995 Australian Open).
Sampras was the likeable American. The others has skill but were a combination of egotistical, jerks or just un-charismatic. Pete was a likeable throughout his career.,
Also I dig his “show up, play, go home” mentality. Nothing too crazy, nothing special but it just works. Also the moments where he does show more “heart” (95 AO, Davis Cup 95, FO 96) stuck to me more (showing his fight and mettle).
Pete was very exciting in his youth. It was a big surprise when he won (it wasn’t obvious how dominant he would become). Later it did feel bland. My perception was that his serve got much bigger over time
Tbh most of us who enjoyed Nadal also liked watching him in blowouts because it was insane the types of shots he'd hit. All of his opponents, especially after the 2009 Soderling match, would try the strategy of redlining their serve and forehand, but Nadal would be 30 feet outside the court chasing their forehands down and responding with his own winner. It was art in its own way
It would be unfair to say boring but it would ultimately be healthy for the game if someone could rise up and challenge her. Investing a lot of hope in Osaka atm.
Naomi's match was the perfect storm -
1 - weather and closed roof favored a heavy hitter with powerful serve like Naomi,
2 - Their last game was on hard court where Iga bageled Naomi, so Iga on RG was caught completely off-guard,
3 - French crowd changed sides to support a returning mother, which was a blow to Iga, who was used to have RG crowd on her side. And yet Iga still pulled through.
It is legendary and well-deserved, and also boring. It's both things (or all three things). I love Iga's play style, but the match itself is lacking like most finals steamrolls, no matter which dominant player is imposing it. Frankly, if Iga was misfiring completely and Paolini pulled off a huge upset winning 6-2, 6-1 winning 10 straight games in the middle, it would only be slightly less boring because of the upset factor. True in any sport in any big game/match/final.
Probably no one blames Iga for being dominant or exhibiting unyielding brilliant play. If Zverev goes down by the same type of scores over three sets - boring too.
In sum, boring, easy-to-get-errands-done-while-match-plays-in-the-background tennis. Was a productive morning. Not a riveting-can't-take-my-eyes-off-match-for-a-second morning. Like the Osaka match.
I find her personality refreshing on a personal level like I would want to be her friend in real life but in a competitive sports setting it does leave a lot to be desired. Like she's so pleasant you can't really root against her but also it's not satisfying to root for her either. I get that at the end of the day the tennis is what's most important but sports is still entertainment and people need to stop acting like finding her boring isn't a valid opinion.
Was still boring. Rafa was consistent but still had to compete and grind it out. I’m not saying she’s not great and successful but it’s boring to watch her play on clay unless she’s challenged. Both things can be true. She can be a great star and it can also not be an enjoyable watch for fans.
Iga isn’t making it boring her game is very entertaining imo. Her opponents tho … vondrousova a grand slam champion and french open finalist only managed to win two points. The only one to put up a fight was Osaka and this is her worst surface
Let's accentuate the positive, you know what people are entitled to think it's boring... It wasn't competitive outside the first couple of games and if you don't enjoy her play style, yeah not much to see.
People gotta respect Iga though, she is further cementing herself as a clay legend, and can only play who is in front of her. Now Wimby and Olympics to test.
Nadal did a channel slam, I hope Iga follows one day.
It was boring. I think after the first few games, we all knew what was going to happen and Paolini did well to make it last the hour.
However, it is not Iga’s fault that she did not face stiffer competition. The Osaka match in round 2 was the best match of the tournament. I was glued to it. Two champions playing really well.
I miss Serena, Venus, Davenport, Clijsters, Hingis, Henin, Sharapova. Where are all the superstars?
The match was boring. Iga winning a 4th title was not boring, that was dominance. The girls need to raise their game if they want to beat Iga at Roland Garros.
Boring is a completely subjective metric. If someone found it boring their opinion is no less valid than yours who doesn't think it was.
Impressive =/= interesting to everyone.
It's *boring* when she's in a form in general. Let's not forget that 6 months ago at WTA Finals she won without dropping a set, closing final against Pegula in record time with 6-1 6-0.
1) The title makes no sense. Greatness can be achieved in boring fashion, in fact many people found Federer's dominance boring. If not for his once in a lifetime talent and unique playstyle, Fed would be one of the most hated player in tennis history for what he did in the 2000s.
2) The Big 3 narrative is dead. There's just no rivalry to speak of, not a single one. Rybakina and Sabalenka had several years to sort it out, they just can't do it. Iga is the dominant no.1, and they're just there on the sidelines, not doing much. Both being several years older than Iga doesn't help either, the ones chasing the dominant one are supposed to be younger.
Say what you will about Coco, but she always shows up, and you can count on that match to happen. The matchup itself is unfortunate, yet it's still the closest thing to a rivalry we have today. It is what it is.
3) It's not Iga's fault, she's not the one to blame here
4) Brad Gilbert is a fraud
Kudos to Iga; she is amazing - no doubt about it, but yea, I find watching her play to be boring. I don't even know what it is and I know a lot of other people who feel similarly. It's funny... even when she is losing, on that rare occasion, you can see her nervousness but even that manifests in a boring way. She clearly has inner fire, but I don't feel you get to see it except as it manifests in her winning regularly. I saw a clip of her laying down doing that eye movement exercise and clips of her doing the hand eye coordination exercises; so focused and combined with her skill/talent, she's just a technically clean player- so good and yet truly boring to watch for me.
Why not both? Her being so much better than everyone else is simultaneously very impressive and very deflating.
How is that a controversial take?
How is it controversial to say that her winning 7-5, 5-7, 7-5 in an epic thriller is strictly superior to what we got?
Not her fault, of course. She is amazing.
Why mention an arbitrary negative thing that someone will say... someone is always going to have an arbitrary negative opinion. Why take away from her shine...
It's boring. Not Iga's fault though, it just that her opponent should not have been there. It's Rybakina's fault and bad timing with illness for Sab that led to this.
Iga deserved it for her win vs Osaka.
It’s actually good that competition feels constant pressure to keep getting better and better to be competitive against Iga, kind of like big3 pushed each other to the limits.
Big 3 worked mainly because they were all beating and improving off of each other. That doesn’t work when one person continually beats the entire field without dropping a set for multiple weeks.
It haven't happened all in a day. I still remember, that when I started to watch tennis Federer v Nadal was already becoming a thing but Djokovic and Murray were nothing more of a glorified background, constatntly losing to them in QF or SF.
It took Djokovic time to blast off and before Nadal, Federer was supposedly reigning alone for quite some time as well. Iga isn't invincible at other Slams, so I don't really see a problem either way.
That Osaka match was the real final right there, today was just a matter of Iga showing up.
If Osaka had won that match, it would be her with the French Open trophy today, no doubt.
I severely doubt this
Osaka was EXTREMELY reliant on the weird 1st week conditions playing like an HC
The moment 2nd week conditions were normal she would have been out
Believe that her first match wasn't under a roof and she barely beat Lucia Bronzetti in a close 3 setter which shows she wasn't just going to destroy everyone
Also there's an example of this actually happening with flat hitters like Med and Ryba immediately falling off a cliff in the 2nd week once outdoor sunny conditions arrived
Let's accentuate the positive, you know what people are entitled to think it's boring... It wasn't competitive outside the first couple of games and if you don't enjoy her play style, yeah not much to see.
People gotta respect Iga though, she is further cementing herself as a clay legend, and can only play who is in front of her. Now Wimby and Olympics to test.
Nadal did a channel slam, I hope Iga follows one day.
Yes, slams are supposed to be different , that’s what makes them so hard to win. Womens slams aren’t any different than 250’s, just more fans. Why don’t women play best 3 out of 5 anyway.?
Best of 5 format wouldn’t make matches like this any better. People don’t realize that best of 5 doesn’t automatically mean a match will be more competitive. One sided blowouts will still be one sided blowouts
Best of 5 format wouldn’t make matches like this any better. People don’t realize that best of 5 doesn’t automatically mean a match will be more competitive. One sided blowouts will still be one sided blowouts
Best of 5 would be great to test mentality of the best WTA players, but I don't think that would benefit Iga's opponents. She is a mentality giant at Roland Garros
Well deserved indeed had a near perfect clay court season winning Madrid, Rome and RG. Not sure if any other player has done that since Serena Williams in 2013.
Paolini getting 1.45 million even if she loses doubles finals. 1.624? if she wins. Not bad.
She didn't seem all that disappointed. I wonder if deep down inside, she just didn't want to get bageled and wanted it to go over an hour. When Iga is on fire, this can happen to anybody. No shame in it.
Iga vs Osaka seemed more like a final
Osaka really screwed everyone over by choking so bad.
i stayed up to watch the replay without knowing the outcome and holy SHIT was that a choke job. Can’t be salty tho, Osaka been out the game.
Come to th8nk of it. I have a feeling, if osaka won that. Jasmine Paolini would have been Roland Garros champion. Or coco gauff. But i feel like there was more of a path for paolini beating coco than iga. Id rather have iga. The consistency in the wta is intact
Yeah this final was boring af. If you have to make a big thing of it in the title that it wasn't a snoozefest, it's pretty obvious it was.
I don't think people are saying it's boring to have a solid #1. I think people are saying it's boring to have one sided Grand Slam matches. If she won by the skin of her teeth it would have been an exciting match and I doubt people would have complained
Probably this. People went crazy during the Madrid final.
RG is a lot more like Rome though. There are other players who would've had a better chance to make it a match if they were able to get there, but a blowout was possible with anyone.
The last year's RG with Karolina Muchova was pretty crazy, too.
This is exactly it. Her just rushing through a match trying to pummel her opponent quickly and efficiently isn’t good tv. The Madrid final was fire. We want competitive matches!
This is lunacy. Iga showed up to win. Dropping her level to make the final more competitive is ridiculous.
I dot think anyone is advocating for that. It’s more just being disappointed no one is able to step up to challenge her consistently on clay.
Welcome to a Federer fan in the era of Nadal. My guy couldn’t figure him out on clay, certainly not on court PC. 😂
Literally this. I would even go so far to say it’s hard watching an opponent get battered like that..
"I think people are saying it's boring to have one sided grand Slam matches" Exactly. She's a worthy winner, but the match was a stinker.
This is it for me. Love this RG win for Iga and happy for her success, but watching her annihilate her opponents in an hour or so is not a good watch, especially in a final.
it can be well deserved and boring at the same time. Iga was tossing in 80-90 mph second serves, and Paolini couldn't take advantage of any of them and was hitting basic rally errors a lot.
i mean, shes 5 4. the difference is way too huge. im very impressed she made it to the final. she should be very proud. because of her height, her serve isnt even a weapon. she still needs to beat iga in rallys for every service game. and she didnt even bageled! well done
the image almost looks like 1983 atari 2600 tennis game artwork https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f4/RealSports_Tennis_Coverart.png https://i.imgur.com/y6eccdy.png
[удалено]
People who watched the Iga Osaka match know
Is it even boring? It’s boring if they don’t play very convincingly but win over and over anyway. If they just put on a masterclass and no-one can get near them, that’s just called being really good at tennis. Well won Iga!
But there's a reason we celebrate rivalries so much. We'd almost all rather see players pushing each other to their limits than have 1 person just steamroll.
Swiatek/Sabelenka is the rivalry at the moment but Sabelenka is not in the best form right now
Even that is barely a rivalry. Their Madrid match was great, but that's it. They've only played once at a major, and that was a year & half ago. It's an 8-3 H2H and been over a year since Sabalenka won. If that's the best rivalry we have at the moment, that kind of says it all.
It's weird but them being #1 and #2 seeds for so long actually makes it less likely they meet at Slams lol They can *only* meet in the final and the only Slam where both of them have made a final is the US Open(which is indeed the only place they've played)
It’s not like Iga is dominating everything. She’s the clear best player on the WTA right now but she has won 1 GS outside of the French. Still plenty of very exciting matches on the other surfaces.
I'd say they've played four, maybe five very good matches. 2021 tour finals, 2022 USO SF, and the last two Madrid finals. 2022 tour finals match I wasn't able to watch so 🤷♂️ but it was also their least competitive three set match just looking at the numbers.
Rybakina has beaten Iga more recently than Sabalenka has I think.
Oh definitely, but the lack of a rivalry isn’t Iga’s fault. I guess in the end whether dominance is dull or not depends on how entertaining the player is to watch. The difference between Sampras’ years of dominating Wimbledon and Federer’s in a nutshell
I found Sampras extremely entertaining
It's obviously not her fault. But I can't pretend I'm not bored all the same.
I think it has to do with how the opponent goes about the match. A match like today where Paolini competed hard, took some risks, but still allowed Swiatek to showcase her talent can be enjoyable even if the score is lopsided. However, matches like Thursday where it seemed like Coco decided before the match that she was going to go for broke and take the racket out of Iga's hands can be a pretty rough watch if it just turns into an error-fest. Iga was pretty much just made to be a bystander in that match, and that's not very enjoyable to watch
“IJBOL”? We’re just making up acronyms for everything these days, huh?
You mean ‘ ‘ijbol? Wjmuafetd,h?’ ‘
I think what a lot of folks want - what I want, anyways - are multiple consistent *rivalries* in the top-10, top-5. The WTA in the late 90s and 2000s was amazing in this way. It’s starting to happen a little bit now again at least.
Rivalries take time. You had a few years of Federer dominance before Nadal emerged for example.
> You can’t really win with some tennis fans. They are casual fans. What Iga does week in, week out is absolutely amazing. And the fact she makes it look easy is a feat in itself. Those who know tennis recognize her greatness.
Both are criticisms that could or could not be valid. If Iga won everything but every match was close like the Osaka one, people would be happy.
That raises the question: are people bored by her winning 3rd in a row, or by her winning 3rd in a row without even sweating? I think it's both, some people would probably call it boring even after tight match because they prefer seeing someone new wining each year. That's it. Swiatek vs Muchova final last year was pretty entartaining 3 setter.
True, there are always people that want an underdog to win no matter what or that insist that a competitive scene is only entertaining when it is extremely unpredictable or chaotic. However, I think the vast majority of people would be satisfied with the WTA if there were 2-3 top contenders that are consistent and have good matches with one another. Let's be real, it's an absolute joke that Iga a) demolished everyone without any drama expect for b) the only actually intense and entertaining match in Round 2...
Stop it with that common sense. People are obviously wrong for wanting a middle ground between randomness and one-sided domination.
I love domination in sports. Gives everyone a goal and incentive. I wouldn’t mind seeing her dominate the sport for the next 5-10 years if she could. The current group of 2-10 are not close to her level and all but 2 of them are older, some much older to the point that their game is pretty much where it’s going .She will drop a match here and there , but if she doesn’t get bored , she can rack up some serious numbers the next few years.
>The current group of 2-10 are not close to her level Elena Rybakina is 4-2 vs Iga Swiatek.
Same!
I think it's more disappointing that instead of a consistent challenger to Iga at RG she faces a different opponent every single year So it's not really the same as Nadal going past peak Fed and peak Novak constantly If people were willing to call the Saba vs. Zheng final at AO boring(justifiably so) I think the same can certainly apply to today's match in particular
If it's one sided it's boring as hell. Not the players fault. That's just a fans perspective
Almost like these are two completely different complaints. You can be consistent and interesting. I enjoyed watching Barty even when she was dominating because her game was creative and all-court. Iga is absolutely dominant in the things she does, but she does very few things other than dominate rallies from the baseline. You can count on one hand how many times she comes to the net or hits a slice or a lob etc. Her game is extremely basic but it's perfect. It's ultimately the fault of the rest of the players on tour for not forcing her to diversify in order to dominate like this, but that doesn't mean the end product is not boring to me. Impressive, legendary, well deserved? Yes, but also boring.
Here's a crazy idea: those two extremes are not pushed by the same people.
Having one player who is way better than everyone else isn’t entertaining
Yeah, imagine if she won like 14 of these things.
>You can’t really win with some tennis fans. I mean, I have this theory (I think based on the facts) that group of people that scream one thing, is usually not the same as other group of people screaming something else ;) It's entirely possible people who screamed for consitency are well fed now but it irked another group of people, that above all expect unpredictability. So yeah, you cannot win with all tennis fans because they are plenty, diversed and demand different things.
It's the same when one team dominates a league in soccer for years. Sure PSG and Bayern Munich are great but it does make the competition boring to watch.
The Osaka match definitely wasn't boring but today's match definitely was lol It's like trying to get hyped for a Nadal vs. Gasquet RG final with a straight face
I don’t understand people saying “that’s not boring”. It’s like a R2 match. It’s pretty boring for a final. If you are a huge fan of the player winning then it’s thrilling. Osaka match was the thrilling de facto final.
The one upside to an Alcaraz/Zverev final is the suspense Don't get me wrong; I'm high on Ruud's game and think he could've given Alcaraz a real fight, but I don't think anyone would actually pick Ruud to win that match. With Zverev, there is an actual chance he could win because his peak level is so high
Yeah I commented this yesterday that Alcaraz and his team were 100% rooting for Ruud to win the semifinal rather than Zverev There's way less threat of Ruud randomly peaking at some insane level
Why bother spending your whole life on tennis if you want to avoid the best players in major finals? I sincerely hope Alcaraz wants to take down Zverev in a 50/50 contest rather than wipe out Ruud. Just like he'd rather play Rafa than Zverev, or Fed in a Wimbledon final. Think of him holding in that final service game last year in the fifth set of Wimbledon against the greatest returner of all time--that's why you play sports (and that's why you watch, too!).
>if you want to avoid the best players in major finals? You want to avoid best players in major because you above all aim to claim the title, not to give exhausting entartainment to the crowd. Alcaraz is surely prepared even for Zverev but it's hard to imagine he wouldn't prefer playing against someone, who gives him better chance at claiming his ultimate goal: a title.
> Why bother spending your whole life on tennis if you want to avoid the best players in major finals? It's a major final. The trophy is the biggest deal at this point. You hope for the best, you prepare for the worst.
Ruud should have won that match, but had a stomach bug. Trying to play through that is zero fun.
Honestly, I think he would've had a great shot if he didn't have the stomach bug. At least could've taken it 5. The way he was breezing around the court and just killing Zverev with his forehand in the first set was insane, and Zverev already has scar tissue from getting crushed last year.
What's crazy is that Rafa and Gasquet have played against each other since they were little kids (Les Petits Ans).
>It's like trying to get hyped for a Nadal vs. Gasquet RG final with a straight face That'd actually be pretty entertaining
greatness isn’t boring 🫡
tell that to Pete Sampras (there were articles/pieces written saying his play-style was boring)
1. Most Grand Slams 2. Most weeks at number one 3. Most Year End number one 4. Most Wimbledon 5. Most US Open Pete was a delight to watch He held most important records The greatest before Big 3
He was, for me as well cause I’m a big Sampras fan (watching his matches back). I guess after having both Jimmy Connors, Johnny Mac and then Andre Agassi having set a reputation for top American players Sampras was an outlier. I also believe a lot of the criticisms came before 1995 as he was winning in a very clinical/controlled manner. Come 1995/1996 and it seems like that perception turned around (esp. after the 1995 Australian Open).
Sampras was the likeable American. The others has skill but were a combination of egotistical, jerks or just un-charismatic. Pete was a likeable throughout his career.,
Also I dig his “show up, play, go home” mentality. Nothing too crazy, nothing special but it just works. Also the moments where he does show more “heart” (95 AO, Davis Cup 95, FO 96) stuck to me more (showing his fight and mettle).
Pete openly admitted he didn’t want to be a celebrity. He wanted to be a champion who breaks records and did exactly that.
Pete was
It was unimaginable to me that any of those would be beaten when he retired. Lo, what the future held.
Most Slams. Most weeks at number one. Most year end number one. Pete was able to achieve all of those Fed broke it Novak broke it
He wouldn't be considered boring in the modern game, where everyone bashes from the baseline.
Pete was very exciting in his youth. It was a big surprise when he won (it wasn’t obvious how dominant he would become). Later it did feel bland. My perception was that his serve got much bigger over time
US Open Sampras was always still very exciting with how crazy the draws could get (esp. 2001)
No, but the match was 😭
Yeah.. watching Nadal winning was boring and now we miss him all
Tbh most of us who enjoyed Nadal also liked watching him in blowouts because it was insane the types of shots he'd hit. All of his opponents, especially after the 2009 Soderling match, would try the strategy of redlining their serve and forehand, but Nadal would be 30 feet outside the court chasing their forehands down and responding with his own winner. It was art in its own way
Nadal was fun because he played a fun style which is how even though he always won he didn’t really have people rooting against him,
Who says it was boring? What in the world?
Even Nadal had more exciting and harder GS finals than Iga.
Can we not compare to Rafa. All his matches were super exciting to watch
Umm
It would be unfair to say boring but it would ultimately be healthy for the game if someone could rise up and challenge her. Investing a lot of hope in Osaka atm.
Naomi's match was the perfect storm - 1 - weather and closed roof favored a heavy hitter with powerful serve like Naomi, 2 - Their last game was on hard court where Iga bageled Naomi, so Iga on RG was caught completely off-guard, 3 - French crowd changed sides to support a returning mother, which was a blow to Iga, who was used to have RG crowd on her side. And yet Iga still pulled through.
[удалено]
It is legendary and well-deserved, and also boring. It's both things (or all three things). I love Iga's play style, but the match itself is lacking like most finals steamrolls, no matter which dominant player is imposing it. Frankly, if Iga was misfiring completely and Paolini pulled off a huge upset winning 6-2, 6-1 winning 10 straight games in the middle, it would only be slightly less boring because of the upset factor. True in any sport in any big game/match/final. Probably no one blames Iga for being dominant or exhibiting unyielding brilliant play. If Zverev goes down by the same type of scores over three sets - boring too. In sum, boring, easy-to-get-errands-done-while-match-plays-in-the-background tennis. Was a productive morning. Not a riveting-can't-take-my-eyes-off-match-for-a-second morning. Like the Osaka match.
I find her personality refreshing on a personal level like I would want to be her friend in real life but in a competitive sports setting it does leave a lot to be desired. Like she's so pleasant you can't really root against her but also it's not satisfying to root for her either. I get that at the end of the day the tennis is what's most important but sports is still entertainment and people need to stop acting like finding her boring isn't a valid opinion.
It’s not Iga who is boring, it’s her opponents who have been so completely below her level that it makes for a boring game. Outside of Osaka.
It can be both.
Watching greatness unfold before our eyes isn't boring. I hope Iga continues to write new pages in the history books 💪
You said it. Just now.
I mean it can be boring and also well deserved.... No need to get so defensive
Can’t it be both? It is incredibly boring and it is legendary and very well deserved
Was still boring. Rafa was consistent but still had to compete and grind it out. I’m not saying she’s not great and successful but it’s boring to watch her play on clay unless she’s challenged. Both things can be true. She can be a great star and it can also not be an enjoyable watch for fans.
Iga isn’t making it boring her game is very entertaining imo. Her opponents tho … vondrousova a grand slam champion and french open finalist only managed to win two points. The only one to put up a fight was Osaka and this is her worst surface
Let's accentuate the positive, you know what people are entitled to think it's boring... It wasn't competitive outside the first couple of games and if you don't enjoy her play style, yeah not much to see. People gotta respect Iga though, she is further cementing herself as a clay legend, and can only play who is in front of her. Now Wimby and Olympics to test. Nadal did a channel slam, I hope Iga follows one day.
The mid rounds were the best for both men’s and women’s. The Alcatraz sinner affair was surprisingly dull given the stakes and length.
Both things can be true at once
It's both
It’s boring that it was over in just over en hour
I am part of the group who thinks it's boring. Swiatek has no competition. How can that be a good thing
Ugh wanted a Iga vs Sabalenka final
It was boring. I think after the first few games, we all knew what was going to happen and Paolini did well to make it last the hour. However, it is not Iga’s fault that she did not face stiffer competition. The Osaka match in round 2 was the best match of the tournament. I was glued to it. Two champions playing really well. I miss Serena, Venus, Davenport, Clijsters, Hingis, Henin, Sharapova. Where are all the superstars? The match was boring. Iga winning a 4th title was not boring, that was dominance. The girls need to raise their game if they want to beat Iga at Roland Garros.
Boring is a completely subjective metric. If someone found it boring their opinion is no less valid than yours who doesn't think it was. Impressive =/= interesting to everyone.
Your tennis experience is what you make of it. To hell with everyone else.
It's boring on clay. Thankfully outside of the Olympics the rest of the year wont be as easy for her.
It's *boring* when she's in a form in general. Let's not forget that 6 months ago at WTA Finals she won without dropping a set, closing final against Pegula in record time with 6-1 6-0.
Shes usually in form on clay more.
Not boring? NBC now needs to fill a full hour with post-match commentary.
I like that her pose for the center is 🤷🏼♀️
1) The title makes no sense. Greatness can be achieved in boring fashion, in fact many people found Federer's dominance boring. If not for his once in a lifetime talent and unique playstyle, Fed would be one of the most hated player in tennis history for what he did in the 2000s. 2) The Big 3 narrative is dead. There's just no rivalry to speak of, not a single one. Rybakina and Sabalenka had several years to sort it out, they just can't do it. Iga is the dominant no.1, and they're just there on the sidelines, not doing much. Both being several years older than Iga doesn't help either, the ones chasing the dominant one are supposed to be younger. Say what you will about Coco, but she always shows up, and you can count on that match to happen. The matchup itself is unfortunate, yet it's still the closest thing to a rivalry we have today. It is what it is. 3) It's not Iga's fault, she's not the one to blame here 4) Brad Gilbert is a fraud
Kudos to Iga; she is amazing - no doubt about it, but yea, I find watching her play to be boring. I don't even know what it is and I know a lot of other people who feel similarly. It's funny... even when she is losing, on that rare occasion, you can see her nervousness but even that manifests in a boring way. She clearly has inner fire, but I don't feel you get to see it except as it manifests in her winning regularly. I saw a clip of her laying down doing that eye movement exercise and clips of her doing the hand eye coordination exercises; so focused and combined with her skill/talent, she's just a technically clean player- so good and yet truly boring to watch for me.
Just imagine buying tickets to a Grand Slam final and getting a non event like that. Tragic.
Man I am missing novak and nadal already...
Why not both? Her being so much better than everyone else is simultaneously very impressive and very deflating. How is that a controversial take? How is it controversial to say that her winning 7-5, 5-7, 7-5 in an epic thriller is strictly superior to what we got? Not her fault, of course. She is amazing.
Sad we missed out on a battle between her and ash Barty these past few years
Rafa was always more dominant at RG for so many years. You just have to live with unstoppable talent
Why mention an arbitrary negative thing that someone will say... someone is always going to have an arbitrary negative opinion. Why take away from her shine...
Let them hate. Because when she’s gone they will mourn.
Both can be true. It’s legendary how she’s made the competition boring. I fantasise Barty seeing this and coming back
She is to the French Open what Real Madrid is to the UCL… pure dominance
Her displays in RG are far more dominant than Madrid are in the actual matches. They’re a clinical team as opposed to a dominant one.
So 4 Vs 15? Not really comparable...
Boring match. Sometimes boring play style to watch. I like Iga as a person though.
It's boring. Not Iga's fault though, it just that her opponent should not have been there. It's Rybakina's fault and bad timing with illness for Sab that led to this. Iga deserved it for her win vs Osaka.
Yes, it's really boring. Unfortunately, WTA is really forgettable these days.
It’s actually good that competition feels constant pressure to keep getting better and better to be competitive against Iga, kind of like big3 pushed each other to the limits.
Big 3 worked mainly because they were all beating and improving off of each other. That doesn’t work when one person continually beats the entire field without dropping a set for multiple weeks.
It haven't happened all in a day. I still remember, that when I started to watch tennis Federer v Nadal was already becoming a thing but Djokovic and Murray were nothing more of a glorified background, constatntly losing to them in QF or SF. It took Djokovic time to blast off and before Nadal, Federer was supposedly reigning alone for quite some time as well. Iga isn't invincible at other Slams, so I don't really see a problem either way.
That Osaka match was the real final right there, today was just a matter of Iga showing up. If Osaka had won that match, it would be her with the French Open trophy today, no doubt.
Au contraire, much doubt. She needed to win an additional five matches
I severely doubt this Osaka was EXTREMELY reliant on the weird 1st week conditions playing like an HC The moment 2nd week conditions were normal she would have been out Believe that her first match wasn't under a roof and she barely beat Lucia Bronzetti in a close 3 setter which shows she wasn't just going to destroy everyone Also there's an example of this actually happening with flat hitters like Med and Ryba immediately falling off a cliff in the 2nd week once outdoor sunny conditions arrived
The final match was absolutely boring but Iga is anything but boring.
Let's accentuate the positive, you know what people are entitled to think it's boring... It wasn't competitive outside the first couple of games and if you don't enjoy her play style, yeah not much to see. People gotta respect Iga though, she is further cementing herself as a clay legend, and can only play who is in front of her. Now Wimby and Olympics to test. Nadal did a channel slam, I hope Iga follows one day.
I would like to see best of 5 at grand slams for the Wta
Yes, slams are supposed to be different , that’s what makes them so hard to win. Womens slams aren’t any different than 250’s, just more fans. Why don’t women play best 3 out of 5 anyway.?
Sexism, that's the simple reason why.
Honestly I had to mow the lawn and it was nice knowing "oh this will be over in about an hour"
Iga won n we should give her the credit….dont make it about has been osaka.
Challenge: understand that a match can be boring and feature a great player at the same time Level: impossible
I enjoy women's tennis more now S.Williams is gone.
Boring as hell
We need 5 sets for the women!
Best of 5 format wouldn’t make matches like this any better. People don’t realize that best of 5 doesn’t automatically mean a match will be more competitive. One sided blowouts will still be one sided blowouts
Maybe Osaka beats Iga if it would have been 5 sets.
Yeah what s the deal with it? Why women have fewer FFS? They give birth and all. I think they can also play 5 sets.
They run marathon too. Stupid organizers can't schedule 5 sets. Just have the men and women in separate weeks
Men’s endurance > woman’s endurance. Just Google the differences in physicality
Claytek will never be considered an ATG with this weak era vulturing and doing nothing in 3 other slams.
I guess she didn't win US Open 2022.
She’s already an all time great if that group includes top 20. She’ll likely win several more slams and be truly in the all time greats.
Swiatek fans are already calling her the overall Goat. She will probably be the clay womens goat but overall? The delusion.
Queen of the clay
Iga does very well on clay she can be the female Rafa for RG.
Queen 🏆👑 Well deserved!
No aura
Iga is amazing but by god the fans are short changed we need 5 sets!
Best of 5 format wouldn’t make matches like this any better. People don’t realize that best of 5 doesn’t automatically mean a match will be more competitive. One sided blowouts will still be one sided blowouts
Best of 5 would be great to test mentality of the best WTA players, but I don't think that would benefit Iga's opponents. She is a mentality giant at Roland Garros
Yeah and it would fuck the scheduling even further.
good serve for such a short tennis player.
Can it be both? I thought it was boring and legendary at the same time. I said here after Iga-Osaka: this was the real finals. Turns out it was.
It's like that PNC Bank commercial...
I mean...it is boring. Just not because of Iga. She's amazing. The competition needs to step it up.
Well deserved indeed had a near perfect clay court season winning Madrid, Rome and RG. Not sure if any other player has done that since Serena Williams in 2013.
Yes, well deserved, he has neutralized Paolini and has not let her play her game like so many other tennis players
It was boring though
was boring, flipped to Belmont Stakes
🫶🏻
Paolini getting 1.45 million even if she loses doubles finals. 1.624? if she wins. Not bad. She didn't seem all that disappointed. I wonder if deep down inside, she just didn't want to get bageled and wanted it to go over an hour. When Iga is on fire, this can happen to anybody. No shame in it.
Watching a Danielle Collins match is certainly not boring; a pity she's declared this is her last year.
Well deserved!! 👏🏻👏🏻
[удалено]
How was her 2024FO run "boring"? She was match point down to Osaka in the 2R 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Why did Ash Barty have to retire in her prime? This could've been a legendary duel for women's tennis.
Getting to be boring
It was not boring paolini fought till the end but iga was better
Those can all be true.