Week 34 - ITF ($15K) - Caslano, Switzerland Clay

AliBlahBlah · All-time great

Week 34 - ITF ($15K) - Caslano, Switzerland Clay

SuperT · Futures level

Whilst there's plenty here to agree with ABB, I feel that to say "Fran should have either won or given better account" is extremely harsh. Regardless of anything Sandy has or hasn't done in the past, or may or may not do in the future, she has clearly had an extraordinary successful week here, and for Fran to lose to someone whilst on such a great run surely should not be seen as a reason to criticise her. She just lost a match against a player in great form.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

I don't agree AliB. And I don't think it is fair to say that Fran should have won or done better, unless you were there or know the situation more firsthand. As mentioned before, Fran was second seed. The fifth seed also lost against Sandy, with exactly the same score as Fran. Sandy then beat the third seed, about Fran's ranking level, 6-2 6-2. It wasn't a fluke.

Also, with a lot of experience of European league tennis, the one thing that practically never happens is that people play badly for team competitions. Some play a lot better than normal (and give surprising results) and some don't play quite as well as they hope (normal). But to greatly underperform, or not care, is unheard of.
So, unless you have any info otherwise, it is statistically extremely unlikely that Conny played badly.
The point is that if the player does not want to play (because they are distracted by the US Open) then they do not play. It's easy. There are plenty of replacements. It's common.
With the atmosphere of team tennis (like the Davis Cup), with the team and the club behind you, and the coach on your back at every changeover, it is just not possible that Conny was there, going, 'what the heck, got the US Open coming up, who cares', as you imply. It's practically defamation. As such, again, unless you have specific info otherwise, she was beaten (soundly) fair and square by Sandy.

And, if you knew Sandy, you'd know why I said (and the newspapers said) she is a ringer. It's not a normal situation. You can look at the stats, as you did, but they don't give the whole picture. Which I tried to add but you don't want to accept. Not that it matters, it's just one competition and has no bearing on Fran, in the same way it had no bearing on the other seeds mentioned. Of course, it also doesn't mean that Marti will necessarily make huge jumps - she almost certainly won't - that's part of the story. But the story and the results are coherent.

Add: crossed with SuperT with a similar take re Fran's result

-- Edited by Coup Droit on Sunday 26th of August 2018 10:44:45 AM

AliBlahBlah · All-time great

Remove the emotion of the attachement we all have with Francesca, take it in the abstract, and look at it again:
Against a WR973 26 year old that has played regularly over 12 years, and whose CH is her current ranking of 973, who in those 12 years had never previously defeated a player any higher than WR512 in a MD professioanl match, and who lost withing the last month to WR1189 in QR2 of another $15K - the WR455, one week of her CH ranking, #2 seed, playing on her favourite surface, who had won a $15K Clay title in the last month - - - should have won, or at least have given better account than a 1 & 1 defeat.

What is at all controversial or unfair about that?

Players in all sports given the looming big deal in their career, actively, protect themselves. Football players heading towards a World Cup pull out of tackles a little sooner, or don't chase the ball as hard for fear of injury, managers in all sports rest players before big events, big tennis players clear their schedules in the week(s) before Slams etc etc etc.
Conny played, she certainly wanted to give best effort, and did, but that looming big deal affects everyone, her best effort would not be as it would be otherwise unencumbered with the hope and ambition of the USO niggling away.

Polysport phenomenons occur from time to time. I remember when they tried to tell me Michael Jordan could have been a great baseball player, or that Lendl would have been a top 10 golfer, or that Usain Bolt would have been leading scorer in la Liga. None of them, despite trying, could prove anything like that claim. Deion Sanders & Bo Jackson were both very good, world-class, at both American Football & Baseball, and proved it.

Again, though, read through Marti's career summary that I abstracted above.

That's not anything that you can prove. It seems a personal attachment to, and knowledge of, the very interesting story for this player is making people make claims for which no evidence can be bought to substantiate it, except, that they know they story better, and you have to trust them that the twelve years of Marti's career are entirely unrepresentative of her, and only the last one week, in isolation is the 'true' story.
That stretches my credulity.

She's probably better than her results, hundreds of place better. But, you have to prove it.
I remember Bobby Charlton telling a story a long time ago about a young apprentice back in his playing days, who he called the best player he'd ever seen, who was simply impossibly good on the training ground, and Charlton and all his contenporaries thought he would be a big star player. That apprentice though very sadly froze completely in front of a crowd; couldn't perform on match days, overawed and terrified by the audience, and, in the days before there were mental coaches to help with such things, he was eventually dropped, and drifted out of the game. He had the talent to be a world beater, but for one reason, he didn't make it. I really wish I could find the name for this story, but I'm coming up empty, if any United fans (which I'm not) know the name, please do share it, it's driving me mad!

Marti, similarly, might have world-beating potential, but has never shown it. Her snowboard career was not great either. So, rather than shyness and stagefright, her weaknes might be, a lack of application, focus, or professionalism. Fine, but that all means that she hasn't shown this magical potential to this point.

Unless I've missed something in her extensive and long-running past career?
I'll certainly be keeping a close eye on her result from now on though!

AliBlahBlah · All-time great

Tangent: I love when posting a comment like the above, I hit the 'Post Quick Reply' button to do it. Quick, huh?

indiana · Tennis legend

Whether Sandy has just had a wonderful one-off week that she is incapable of reproducing or is certainly capable of producing but does not for many reasons ( and I knew nothing of her history ) it does seem clear she had a great week. I tend to think that if you've got it in you you've got it in you to repeat ( and such weeks don't just happen from nowhere, some other being for the week ). Yes, others have great one-off weeks, weeks of their lives, but there are very probably reasons to explore as to why these are not repeated re application or whatever.

Or have we here simply a collection of seeds that should have won or given a better account ?

AliBlahBlah · All-time great

Yes, agreed, she had a great week. Nothing in her playing record in it's entirety or immediate past, even the last few events, could lead one to say that was coming, or that it will necessarily happen again.
And, yes, given the cold hard facts, as laid out above, all those players would have been expected to win or give better account against a player so described.
They did not, and so, that equals a great week for the player that did that. Perhaps it's a Damascene conversion for Marti, and the scales have fallen from her eyes. You still could not justify the position of expecting her to win any of her matches in that week, and making her favourite to do so, based on the gacts of her record.

The exception is not the rule; if it were, the rule would be, "Well, I know they're WR973, a 26 year old that has played regularly over 12 years, and whose CH is her current ranking of 973, and who in those 12 years has never previously defeated a player any higher than WR512 in a MD professional match, and who lost within the last month to WR1189 in QR2 of another $15K, but I, the world #1, undefeated for the last 12 months, golden calendar grand slam champion am defeinitely the underdog for my match against her, because: she might be trying this time. Trying! Run a-shrieking!!!"

Facetiousness becomes none, so I'll desist.