The big 3

[toshiroh]

On the old forum, I made a thread asking if the WTA would have a big three like the men. Many people on the forum insisted that we wouldn't and many people didn't like the idea.

Well, fast forward a year and we have a clear and decisive big three. Serena Williams, Maria Sharapova, and Victoria Azarenka. How do you know we have a big three? Well, the answer is simple, no other player outside of these three women have won a title when all three are entered in a tournament. They swept the majors last year, the olympics, and already this year they have cemented their dominance with Serena Williams obviously leading the pack.

Do you think there is room for a big four, and if so, who do you think can fill that spot. As for that question, I have to go with Petra or Li Na... that is... if either of them can build some mental fortitude.

 

[Front242]

I think it's safe to say it's big 1 plus 2 others who are in a much lesser category as Serena owns Azarenka and Sharapova but when it comes to playing the field naturally they're the best 3 players, just that against Serena neither really have much of a shot at all if she plays well.

 

[toshiroh]

I think it's safe to say it's big 1 plus 2 others who are in a much lesser category as Serena owns Azarenka and Sharapova but when it comes to playing the field naturally they're the best 3 players, just that against Serena neither really have much of a shot at all if she plays well.

True, but it's more about the big three being so far ahead of the pack. And Vika did squeak out a win in Doha, albeit barely and to a sick Serena... but a win is a win.

 

[tossip]

its big one and her deputies...

 

[Calvy]

I think it's safe to say it's big 1 plus 2 others who are in a much lesser category as Serena owns Azarenka and Sharapova but when it comes to playing the field naturally they're the best 3 players, just that against Serena neither really have much of a shot at all if she plays well.

I agree, when one of the "big three" is 12-1 within the last 13 months against the other two, makes for a difficult argument their actually is a "big three."

 

[toshiroh]

I don't see how there is an argument for it not being a big three. Sharapova won Indian wells and Stuttgart, Vika- Doha and Melbourne... Serena-Madrid, Rome, Brisbane, Miami, Charleston.

The big three isn't about their dominance over each other, but their dominance over the tour, which clearly in any given tournament if either one of them are entered, they are most likely to win it

 

[Correspondent Kiu]

I think it's safe to say it's big 1 plus 2 others who are in a much lesser category as Serena owns Azarenka and Sharapova but when it comes to playing the field naturally they're the best 3 players, just that against Serena neither really have much of a shot at all if she plays well.

I agree, when one of the "big three" is 12-1 within the last 13 months against the other two, makes for a difficult argument their actually is a "big three."

Tell us the record of the other 2

 

[Calvy]

I think it's safe to say it's big 1 plus 2 others who are in a much lesser category as Serena owns Azarenka and Sharapova but when it comes to playing the field naturally they're the best 3 players, just that against Serena neither really have much of a shot at all if she plays well.

I agree, when one of the "big three" is 12-1 within the last 13 months against the other two, makes for a difficult argument their actually is a "big three."

Tell us the record of the other 2

Well, one has won 5 tournaments (one slam) in the last 13 months and the other has also won 5 tournaments (one slam) in the last 5 months. Compare that to the BIG ONE who has won 12 tournaments (2 slams, 1 Olympic gold) in the last 13 months.

Get where I'm going here?

 

[Correspondent Kiu]

Yes Calvy but we also have to consider the rest of the field.
If one takes Masha losses against Serena away, she is pretty darn good against the rest of the field. Her only other loss this year came against Li Na. Vika may be not as much but also good. They almost always beat the lower ranked players.
They are the top 3 for a reason.
As a matter of fact, that's one of Serena's weakness, she always beats the top girls but then gets upset by no name players. Although this year, she has been splendid with only 1 loss coming against Vika.

 

[Calvy]

Yes Calvy but we also have to consider the rest of the field.
If one takes Masha losses against Serena away, she is pretty darn good against the rest of the field. Her only other loss this year came against Li Na. Vika may be not as much but also good. They almost always beat the lower ranked players.
They are the top 3 for a reason.
As a matter of fact, that's one of Serena's weakness, she always beats the top girls but then gets upset by no name players. Although this year, she has been splendid with only 1 loss coming against Vika.

I get what you're writing, but, you can't take away the fact that one player is 12-1 against the other two "members" of the "big three."

It's not a true "big three" when the other two can't beat the "big one." "Big Three" implies there is some parity amongst those three, but, that doesn't exist. The fact that the "other two" best chance of winning an event is if the "big one" is also in that event, is a an early loss by the "big one," which negates that there really is a "big three," in women's tennis.

The thing that makes the men "big four" is, they actually beat one another on a consistent basis. Novak beats Murray, Murray beat Novak, Fed beats Murray, Murray beats Fed, Nadal beats Murray, Murray beats Nadal, Nadal beat Fed, Fed beats Nadal....oops, no he doesn't.

You kind of get my meaning?

 

[tented]

Yes Calvy but we also have to consider the rest of the field.
If one takes Masha losses against Serena away, she is pretty darn good against the rest of the field. Her only other loss this year came against Li Na. Vika may be not as much but also good. They almost always beat the lower ranked players.
They are the top 3 for a reason.
As a matter of fact, that's one of Serena's weakness, she always beats the top girls but then gets upset by no name players. Although this year, she has been splendid with only 1 loss coming against Vika.

I get what you're writing, but, you can't take away the fact that one player is 12-1 against the other two "members" of the "big three."

It's not a true "big three" when the other two can't beat the "big one." "Big Three" implies there is some parity amongst those three, but, that doesn't exist. The fact that the "other two" best chance of winning an event is if the "big one" is also in that event, is a an early loss by the "big one," which negates that there really is a "big three," in women's tennis.

The thing that makes the men "big four" is, they actually beat one another on a consistent basis. Novak beats Murray, Murray beat Novak, Fed beats Murray, Murray beats Fed, Nadal beats Murray, Murray beats Nadal, Nadal beat Fed, Fed beats Nadal....oops, no he doesn't.

You kind of get my meaning?

You're both right, really. I agree that there is a Big Three, which consists of the names mentioned, but I also agree that it's an odd group because one is dominant over the entire field, including the two others in the Big Three, whereas the other two are only dominant over the rest of the field.

So, yeah, the WTA Big Three is real, but it is very different from the ATP's Big Four.

 

[colleen66]

If all three are entered in the same tournament, with almost 100% certainty 1 or 2 of them will end up in the final. I believe that there is a big "3" when you compare Serena, Maria and Vika against the rest of the field. Based on that criteria, the WTA has a big "3" just like the guys (I'm not so sure about the men having a big "4", lol.

 

[drm025]

I think it's safe to say it's big 1 plus 2 others who are in a much lesser category as Serena owns Azarenka and Sharapova but when it comes to playing the field naturally they're the best 3 players, just that against Serena neither really have much of a shot at all if she plays well.

I agree, when one of the "big three" is 12-1 within the last 13 months against the other two, makes for a difficult argument their actually is a "big three."

Tell us the record of the other 2

Since the start of 2012:

Serena is (6-1) against Azarenka and (6-0) against Sharapova: (12-1)

Azarenka is (1-6) against Serena and (4-2) against Sharapova: (5-8)

Sharapova is (0-6) against Serena and (2-4) against Azarenka: (2-10)

 

[jhar26]

If all three are entered in the same tournament, with almost 100% certainty 1 or 2 of them will end up in the final. I believe that there is a big "3" when you compare Serena, Maria and Vika against the rest of the field. Based on that criteria, the WTA has a big "3" just like the guys (I'm not so sure about the men having a big "4", lol.

The men DO have a big 4. Those four guys win all the majors, Olympics, YEC's and virtually all of the masters 1000 events. They are light years ahead of everyone else. It's almost impossible for anyone else to win a title of any great significance because those four are just too good.

But the situation on the womens side is not that different. Serena, Maria and Vika dominate in almost similar fashion and they have truly seperated themselves from the rest of the pack. But I think that on the womens side someone like a Li Na, Radwanska or Kvitova has a slightly better chance of winning even a major than the likes of Ferrer, delPotro, Berdych or Tsonga have now on the mens side because of the best of three set format which makes upsets a bigger posssibility than best of five.

 

[Correspondent Kiu]

Since the start of 2012:

Serena is (6-1) against Azarenka and (6-0) against Sharapova: (12-1)

Azarenka is (1-6) against Serena and (4-2) against Sharapova: (5-8)

Sharapova is (0-6) against Serena and (2-4) against Azarenka: (2-10)

Thanks for your reply, I kinda meant the record of the other 2 against the rest of the field.

Now, since you brought up these numbers I have to include complete record for all 3
Since the start of 2012:
Serena is 97-8
Masha is 92-15
Vika is 92-13

---

Do you think there is room for a big four, and if so, who do you think can fill that spot. As for that question, I have to go with Petra or Li Na... that is... if either of them can build some mental fortitude.

Back to the OP original question, which everyone failed to answer.
The way the race is shaping up, Sara seems poised to overtake Aggie in the rankings.
Petra has been slipping so much, I doubt she will get back into top 5 anytime soon.
Li Na is 31 years old, it looks downhill for her from here on, she has been terrible this clay season and pretty much after her Final showing in Aussie.

 

[colleen66]

If all three are entered in the same tournament, with almost 100% certainty 1 or 2 of them will end up in the final. I believe that there is a big "3" when you compare Serena, Maria and Vika against the rest of the field. Based on that criteria, the WTA has a big "3" just like the guys (I'm not so sure about the men having a big "4", lol.

The men DO have a big 4. Those four guys win all the majors, Olympics, YEC's and virtually all of the masters 1000 events. They are light years ahead of everyone else. It's almost impossible for anyone else to win a title of any great significance because those four are just too good.

But the situation on the womens side is not that different. Serena, Maria and Vika dominate in almost similar fashion and they have truly seperated themselves from the rest of the pack. But I think that on the womens side someone like a Li Na, Radwanska or Kvitova has a slightly better chance of winning even a major than the likes of Ferrer, delPotro, Berdych or Tsonga have now on the mens side because of the best of three set format which makes upsets a bigger posssibility than best of five.

Delpo has won a slam and he has a bronze medal at the Olympics. Murray's winning percentage is 76% compared to 71% for Delpo. While Murray leads Delpo with 26 titles to 14, Delpo has had major surgery and has missed significant time due to injuries. Each only has one slam, and while I am a Murray fan I just do do believe that he is light-years ahead of Delpo and I also do not believe that he is in the same league as Novack, Roger or Nadal. Maybe he is part of the big 3.5, lol.

 

[Calvy]

Since the start of 2012:

Serena is (6-1) against Azarenka and (6-0) against Sharapova: (12-1)

Azarenka is (1-6) against Serena and (4-2) against Sharapova: (5-8)

Sharapova is (0-6) against Serena and (2-4) against Azarenka: (2-10)

Thanks for your reply, I kinda meant the record of the other 2 against the rest of the field.

Now, since you brought up these numbers I have to include complete record for all 3
Since the start of 2012:
Serena is 97-8
Masha is 92-15
Vika is 92-13

---

Do you think there is room for a big four, and if so, who do you think can fill that spot. As for that question, I have to go with Petra or Li Na... that is... if either of them can build some mental fortitude.

Back to the OP original question, which everyone failed to answer.
The way the race is shaping up, Sara seems poised to overtake Aggie in the rankings.
Petra has been slipping so much, I doubt she will get back into top 5 anytime soon.
Li Na is 31 years old, it looks downhill for her from here on, she has been terrible this clay season and pretty much after her Final showing in Aussie.

---

HUH???

Li had two bad weeks during the clay season and she's on the downside.

She made the quarters in Miami and lost a competitive match to Serena, and she made the finals of Stuttgart, losing to Sharapova.

Aside from Madrid and Rome, she's had a solid year.

 

[Correspondent Kiu]

21-6 record, a couple of finals and a lousy 125 point title, injured for a couple of months and now can't get to the round of 16.
Hardly a solid year IMO. descent year for sure, but not too solid.
As a matter of fact, other than the top 3, IMHO, only Sara Errani has shown improvement this year, all the other ladies in the top 10 are slipping.
But it not over, we have over half the year left.
Calvy,Who do you think could join the top 3?

 

[jhar26]

Since the start of 2012:

Serena is (6-1) against Azarenka and (6-0) against Sharapova: (12-1)

Azarenka is (1-6) against Serena and (4-2) against Sharapova: (5-8)

Sharapova is (0-6) against Serena and (2-4) against Azarenka: (2-10)

Thanks for your reply, I kinda meant the record of the other 2 against the rest of the field.

Now, since you brought up these numbers I have to include complete record for all 3
Since the start of 2012:
Serena is 97-8
Masha is 92-15
Vika is 92-13

---

Do you think there is room for a big four, and if so, who do you think can fill that spot. As for that question, I have to go with Petra or Li Na... that is... if either of them can build some mental fortitude.

Back to the OP original question, which everyone failed to answer.
The way the race is shaping up, Sara seems poised to overtake Aggie in the rankings.
Petra has been slipping so much, I doubt she will get back into top 5 anytime soon.
Li Na is 31 years old, it looks downhill for her from here on, she has been terrible this clay season and pretty much after her Final showing in Aussie.

---

HUH???

Li had two bad weeks during the clay season and she's on the downside.

She made the quarters in Miami and lost a competitive match to Serena, and she made the finals of Stuttgart, losing to Sharapova.

Aside from Madrid and Rome, she's had a solid year.

---

I agree. But you know how it goes. When you're 25 and you had two bad weeks you had two bad weeks. When you're 31 and you had two bad weeks it's "the end of your career." But this is really not that unusual for Li who's always been a up and down player. If anything, she's become a bit more consistent (by her standards) since Rodriguez joined team Li.

---

21-6 record, a couple of finals and a lousy 125 point title, injured for a couple of months and now can't get to the round of 16.
Hardly a solid year IMO. descent year for sure, but not too solid.
As a matter of fact, other than the top 3, IMHO, only Sara Errani has shown improvement this year, all the other ladies in the top 10 are slipping.
But it not over, we have over half the year left.
Calvy,Who do you think could join the top 3?

I'm not Calvy, but in my opinion it has to be Kvitova if she straightens herself out. The potential is there. It's a matter of is she willing to work for it, get fit and clean up her game. If the answer is "yes" she'll be the fourth member of a big four. If the answer is "no" she'll be (and is now) reduced to the role of dangerous outsider - the girl that can occassionally cause an upset on those rare days when she sees the ball as big as a football and blows her opponent off the court. But that Kvitova also has many days when her game looks more like baseball than tennis.