56 minutes ago, ChitHappens said:

The rest of the field can only hope for Naomi injuries.  I can see her dominating 2019 easily!  

 

Indeed. Chris Fowler just mentioned she was the first back-to-back Slam champion on the women’s side in the past eight years other than... Serena. Good company.

 

Her clay/grass games probably need some work to get those French and Wimbledon titles just yet, but how great is it to be No. 1 and still have so much room for improvement, even on hardcourt?

 

 

 

And oh snap, Matt Zemek with the shots fired against Ben Rothenberg (and his anti-Bo5 obsession):

 

 

 

Petra’s emotional runner-up speech:

 

 

Edited January 26, 20196 yr by Faulkner

😂

 

 

No lies told!

I'm glad I don't follow Rothenberg.  At this point, I even find myself avoiding 90% of anything he writes.  I know he wants shorter men's matches to meet/beat his deadline but he's run out of talking points already.

 

As for the women's final, I found it to be pretty entertaining. 

Up until they started playing, I thought it'd be a tossup but I think somewhere in the midst of the 1st set, it just seemed like Naomi was driving the action. Great fight-back in the second by Petra, though but even after she won the 2nd set, I just had the feeling that if put in a winning position again in the 3rd, Osaka would not falter and that's what happened. 

I'm glad the match went to three sets.  Petra didn't give the match away by any means, she made Naomi earn it and it has to be more satisfying to win the #1, rather than get it by process of elimination or by computer "math" and everyone questioning how the player got #1 without having won a major title.

 

It's been fascinating to see Osaka's entry to and rise through the pro-rankings and increased confidence levels.  It will be equally fascinating to see now how she handles the #1 position.

7 hours ago, Faulkner said:

Indeed. Chris Fowler just mentioned she was the first back-to-back Slam champion on the women’s side in the past eight years other than... Serena. Good company.

 

Her clay/grass games probably need some work to get those French and Wimbledon titles just yet, but how great is it to be No. 1 and still have so much room for improvement, even on hardcourt?

 

 

He must've corrected himself, but they kept mentioning Capriati when I watched the playback.  Capriati was 17 years ago.

14 minutes ago, DramatistDreamer said:

I'm glad I don't follow Rothenberg.  At this point, I even find myself avoiding 90% of anything he writes.  I know he wants shorter men's matches to meet/beat his deadline but he's run out of talking points already.

 

As for the women's final, I found it to be pretty entertaining. 

Up until they started playing, I thought it'd be a tossup but I think somewhere in the midst of the 1st set, it just seemed like Naomi was driving the action. Great fight-back in the second by Petra, though but even after she won the 2nd set, I just had the feeling that if put in a winning position again in the 3rd, Osaka would not falter and that's what happened. 

I'm glad the match went to three sets.  Petra didn't give the match away by any means, she made Naomi earn it and it has to be more satisfying to win the #1, rather than get it by process of elimination or by computer "math" and everyone questioning how the player got #1 without having won a major title.

 

It's been fascinating to see Osaka's entry to and rise through the pro-rankings and increased confidence levels.  It will be equally fascinating to see now how she handles the #1 position.

 

 

He must've corrected himself, but they kept mentioning Capriati when I watched the playback.  Capriati was 17 years ago.

Oh no. He just meant winning consecutive slams within the past eight years (Serena, W & USO, 2012 and USO, AO, RG, & W in the second “Serena Slam” and her quest for the CYGS in 2014-15). Naomi broke an eight Slam streak of different individual champs.

Edited January 26, 20196 yr by Faulkner

7 minutes ago, Faulkner said:

Oh no. He just meant winning consecutive slams within the past eight years (Serena, W & USO, 2012 and USO, AO, RG, & W in her quest for the CYGS in 2014-15). Naomi broke an eight Slam streak of different individual champs.

 

Oh, the past 8 years, okay, I see.

2 minutes ago, DramatistDreamer said:

 

Oh, the past 8 years, okay, I see.

Yeah. I just edited my post because I’d forgotten Serena had actually won four in a row in 2014-15. 

28 minutes ago, Faulkner said:

Yeah. I just edited my post because I’d forgotten Serena had actually won four in a row in 2014-15. 

 

Oh, I see where the Capriati stat comes from- it is the last time a first-time GS champ followed up immediately with a second GS title.  Venus did the same in 2000 with Wimbledon/U.S. Open.

Last night's/early morning win proved Osaka's US Open win was no fluke. I was for both ladies but at the end wanted Petra to pull it out. Petra probably played her worse match of the tournament and still had a chance to win. Osaka was controlling most of the points which shocked me. I expected Petra to come out more forceful with angles on shots and serve. She was overhitting a lot. 

Well, here’s a stat!

 

 

I didn’t realize Lorenzo Musetti won the boys’ single championship. It looked like the American Emilio Nava was in total control of that match. But... cool!

 

 

The American should've won. I saw the match and he was the better player even though he lost. It was nice to see a latino from the US in a final. 

I like that TC has the rights to those matches. The wheelchair matches were quite entertaining as well.

This match was BANANAS. The closest thing to gladiatorial spectacle I’ve seen on a tennis court.

 

 

Wow.