First, let's take into account the exceptional characteristics of Kimiko. [8-|]
Beyond the obvious, players are confounded by "Dated" [;)] play. This is why it's not entirely an empty exercise to fantasize matches between Federer & Borg or Laver. Hey, Navratilova, duh. Very occasionally, players of the past return & blow away the best of the present with technique/style the new generation has not mastered. The conceit of the young--"Euw, we don't need THAT, that's OLD..." [:P] That's in any venue. Sh!t, in political life I ran acts that had moss on 'em, and they'd lap it right up.
Philli, you write: "(Masha) couldn't cope with those low balls that she was returning. Moving off her slamming spot, right or left, she had to duck down to get underneath those returns with were barely clearing the net." Obviously, neither could Dani. Presumably, a fit player with powerful legs who easily returns from a crouch could. And Elena in fact did beat Kimiko at Stanford--but it wasn't easy 3-6 6-3 6-4. Still, you may be right that fitness is an issue.
But I still suspect we're all in error by seeking pat, generalized solutions. I really believe problems have to be addressed specifically. Any player can get put off when she can't break the cycle that's doing the damage. We see it all the time, inclusive of thrown-away third sets. Maria is not in any exclusive club there. It's especially acute with her because she's previously been able to overcome and come back from like 1-5 repeatedly.
I think, if you review a number of recent Sharapova matches, you're gonna see that cycle of net ball-DF-long ball in losses to various opponents--not just Kimiko. The QUESTION is, WHY does that cycle repeat? I'll repost my observation fo further reflection.
[quote user="paul_pipkin"]
I would get to the bottom of a PATTERN clearly visible in the loss to Kimiko (once I got to see it when TennisTv.com showed the TBS replay of the first set & the second half of the third.) Masha lost this match at three critical points:
1st set, level 5-5, 11th game: Maria nets a ball, then DFs, then errors long. Kimiko meets the opportunity with good returns & point construction to break. That was the tilting point of what had been a close set.
3rd set, 6th game: Maria ahead & serving 3-2 40-40, THEN: DF, long ball, another DF, another long ball & Kimiko breaks to level 3-3.
3rd set, 8th game: Maria up 30-15, THEN: net ball, DF, long ball & Kimiko breaks to 3-5. A netted return & a couple of wide errors & that was that. (There were other errors, yeah: wide balls & wild returns, but those were more diffused & didn't lose the match--this above really stood out.)
See the pattern associating specific errors with the DFs? At critical junctures, her double faults tend to follow net balls--and tend to be followed by a long ball.
[/quote]
"That's the way the world works... right now." --Maria Sharapova at 17