Pierce is perhaps most underrated player WTA last 30 years. I love her ability to move the ball from corner to corner keeping her opponent on the run. VG use of angle shots. Of course heavy pace. Good instincts on when to come to net to finish point off.
A very high quality match, nice styles, and technique from both. Very hard hitting Pierce-style, and also clean. Good plays in this match as well. Mauresmo and her nice strong but classic tennis stance and technique. Mary had a lot of memorable watchable matches at that year's US Open.
You'll be hard pressed to find a female player who's cleaner off both wings than Mary Pierce, excellent technique. And of course Amelie's game beautiful all around and very versatile. Two of my fav players
Agreed I think the only better striker of the ball is Lindsay Davenport. Capriati, The William sisters all of the big babes of tennis are great but they hit with more top spin. Mary's shots look more impressive because she hits them so flat, She has very little margin for error. Unfortunately both her and Davenport have terrible movement,They have to be in perfect position or they will spray balls like a garden hose.
really good match!! it is pleasure to watch!!! shame for Mauresmo but Pierce performance was outstanding! I love Mauresmo serve- volley because today this girls doesnt do this anymore!!
Pierce was so good. On a good day, she could beat anyone. She handed terrible losses to players like Graf, Serena, Hingis, Seles, Sanchez-Vicario, Davenport. Of course, on off days, her game was terrible :/
Never having been #1(or even #2) was probably a great gift to Mary’s legacy. It meant her game was appreciated for what it was. The likes of Woz, JJ, Safina and Ivanovic are seen as unworthy of the rank, and therefore their careers are seen as not being good enough for achieving the #1 ranking as opposed to what they actually were. Radwanska on the other hand who had a similar career to all of them is seen in a more positive light. Pierce had a vastly superior career to all of them, but if she’d made it to number 1 I think she’d be seen as lesser.
@@Ineddiblehulk Woz, JJ, Safina, atleast would not be regarded that highly even if they never reached #1. Even their peak levels of play weren't that great to get big recognition. While I think Mary would still get recognition for her amazing peak level, particularly on slow to medium paced courts even if she reached #1. I see your point though.
@@Ineddiblehulk I have to disagree Radwanska is seen in a better light than JJ, Woz, or Ivanovic. Strongly disagree. I don't get that sense at all. Especialy not Ivanovic and Woz who won a slam and reached multiple slam finals in addition to #1. Better light than Safina maybe.
I don't think anyone had an answer to Pierce's power and precision for the majority of this tournament. It wasn't until her injury niggles in the semi finals that she got fully tested by Dementieva, who looked set to win in straight sets. Then of course, Kim cleaned up in the final with Mary looking very out of sorts. It was a real shame, I was routing for Mary to win a final slam before she retired and this would have been perfect considering her form for the majority of the 2 weeks.
And that's because of her crappy movement I don't think she was also very disciplined like the players are now. She's not graceful like Graf, Capriati had the same problem . They were not light on their feet.
Indeed,Mary always applause her opponent great points. She s an angel, wish Amelie had done the same in this match. In L.A.masters finale, all the French tennis staff was in favour of Amelie, such a shame. Mary would have deserved more slams and masters.
Amelie was amazing at the net. Other than that I always felt she was useless against power players. She often just played to their strengths with her high balls.
Plus her forehand became gradually more useless over time. When she first emerged on the tour, she had a heavy topspin forehand but eventually it was nothing more than a defensive rallying shot. Only on grass did she consistently flatten her forehand out.
Bad matchup for Mauresmo on a fast hard court against Pierce in this kind of form. The depth and pace of Pierce's shots takes away the time she needs to set up her strokes, and she had hard time returning Mary's serve. So much of Mauresmo's results came down to her serve, when she served well she could have great results on these fast surfaces. But if she had to hit too many second serves against these big babes like Pierce she could never get on the offensive... Beautiful and aesthetically pleasing style of play though.
Amelie could've played better this match. She centered the ball too much. Essentially, she gave Mary too many points. As powerful as Mary was, there were things Amelie could've done with the variety in her game to alter the outcome of this match.*
I´m looking for Chanda rubin-Sanchez-Vicario match in Australian open 1996 (16-14 in the final set) but it´s impossible to find it...That was a amazing match one of the best in history!!
Gabriella Sabatini That's who she reminds me of exactly. She doesn't have a weapon but she has an all court game with all the shots. Both of them were kind of androgynous very masculine but beautiful at the same time.
