Photo taken from ITF website
I guess everybody has heard about the WTA tournament in Russia, which has taken place during these days and that consecrated Anastasia Potapova and even more Olga Danilovic as, not only future, but also today’s stars.
The final between the two was basically a draw, even if Danilovic eventually won. Though, Potapova had a couple of chances to take a 5-1 lead in the first set; had Anastasia converted them, she would have secured a set which, instead, Anastasia lost by 7-5; by contrast, Danilovic had a match point on 5-4 in the second set (on which she double faulted), which was eventually won by the Russian by 7-1 in a tie-break that Olga didn’t really play. Finally, Potapova had a 4-3 40-0 lead in the third set: she was broken back due to a miss on a very easy smash and a double fault. Both of the girls thus had their chances to win and, if draw existed in tennis, that would have been the most fair result. Anyway, the final score was 7-5 6-7 6-4 in favour of Danilovic.
Danilovic is the first player born in 2000 to win a WTA event and, curiously enough, she is also the first player to win a WTA event as lucky loser, as the Serbian lost by Spanish Paula Badosa Gilbert in three sets in the last round of the qualifications. Though, to reach the final she has beaten very strong players as Kanepi, Schmieldova, Sasnovic and, in particular Julia Georges (the latter by a convincing 6-3 6-3). Potapova, instead, to reach the final, overcame Kristyna Pliskova, Viktorjia Tomova, Valentyna Ivaknenko and Tamara Zidansek.
Honestly speaking, I found the match between the two not particularly entertaining: Potapova and Danilovic play similar tennis; both of them are pure baseliners and rely a lot on rhythm and power. The result was that the match always followed the same pattern, as both players just tried to overpower the opponent, not looking for anything different than power-tennis. Not the most two exciting two hours of my life.
Even if, as said, the match between the two was very close, I preferred Danilovic overall and, at least currently, I find her to own more convincing tennis than Potapova (even if one match is not enough to deliver a complete judgement). The biggest difference I found between the two is in the serve: Both Danilovic’s first and second serves are more effective. She hits first serves between 15 and 20 km faster than the Russian and she finds better angles with it, also being able to spoil well her lefty lift. Many times she was able to open the court hitting lifts and close with a forehand, executing typical V-schemes. Even if Danilovic hit quite a few double faults I also like her second serve, which seems to me to bounce particularly high and to often be quite deep and not easy to attack. I am sure that the 8 or 9 double faults she hit (which is not such an awful figure, anyway) will decrease with time. I found Potapova’s serve, instead, quite disappointing. She mostly hit it central, the first serve is not outstandingly fast whilst the second is short and too tender: countless times Danilovic was able to hit winning returns against Anastasia’s second serves. The finals stats shown a difference between winners which was around 30: I am sure that such huge gap between the two was mostly due to the numbers of winning returns hit by the Serbian.
Another feature of Danilovic’s game that Potapova seems to miss in Potapova’s are drop shots. The Serbian didn’t rely so much on such weapon as she hit no more than 4 or 5 of them, all with her backhand; though, all were well executed, except for one. Potapova, instead, has never tried this solution. From the baseline the two seem to me fairly equal: Danilovic is maybe a bit more powerful and hit a few more winners; Potapova is, instead, more consistent. Overall, I wouldn’t say a player has prevailed in that part of the game. Maybe a feature that Danilovic owns is a particular ability to hit winners also whilst defending and being under pressure, whilst I do not remember any such solutions from Anastasia. By contrast, most of the longer rallies were won by the Russian who is indeed less faulty and, even if a bit less powerful, managed to control many rallies due to the depth of her shots.
Many commentators have highlighted that this match between the two could be a future slam’s final. I agree with this statement: indeed both girls are very strong. Though, I do not find the game of any of the two to be as complete as Kostyuk’s or Swiatek’s and not even of Anisimova’s, who I find more solid: thus, I still think that the latter three players are currently the best of their generation.
Speaking about Swiatek, she continued to play well after her Wimbledon’s win, as she reached the semi in an 80k in Prague. Iga has beaten in the process a good player as Paolini by 6-2 6-1 and a very good player as Barthel by 6-2 6-3. I suppose that at that stage her craziness shown up again, as it was also stated by a Polish friend of mine who saw the match: in the semifinals, which was the rematch of the final Iga played in a 15k held in Bergamo one year ago against Mertina di Giuseppe, Iga won 6-1 the first set, then she disappeared and lost 6-0 the second and eventually lost the third in the tie-break. Anyway, a further very good result in the pro tour by Iga, who is now close to the first 200 players.
Finally, a couple of weeks ago I went to Turin to see the final of a 25k: my favourite Kaja Juvan was playing against Rumanian Rosca. Kaja played terribly bad and lost 6-1 6-1. Nevertheless, it’s the 4th final reached by the Slovenian in the last couple of months, now she ranks her too within the top 250. All these players are indeed fulfilling the expectations they built up during their wonderful junior career.
