Definitely. Petra’s a lot more naturally gifted. I like them both a lot for different reasons but I always use Sharapova as a reference when people say it’s all about natural talent to make it at the top. Obviously she had some natural talent and her mentality was phenomenal but she wasn’t an overly natural talent as an athlete or tennis player - her forehand technique wasn’t great, her movement was unnatural, her serve was very unreliable and the technique was poor and she had no touch; terrible hands and her volley’s were hopeless.. and look at what she achieved. Incredible

@@crazycatpetera1404what a load of BS…you’re really living up to your name aren’t you! 😂 First of all, Sharapova from 2004 to 2008 was one of the best hitters on Tour and one of the best servers as well. You just have to look at her wins in 2006 US finals and the whole 2008 AO to see that Sharapova is way more talented than Petra. Petra has always been one hit or miss player…she can’t even construct points from the baseline. It’s no surprise she only won Wimbledon because it’s the tournament that doesn’t require you to be this precise with your footwork and you can win rally with one or two shots. Let’s not compare Maria’s 5 majors (2 on clay and 2 on HC) and Wimbledon to Kvitova only 2 Wimbledon.

I agree about the cleaner shots just like Davenport shots were cleaners. But Maria construct points better and has a better footwork. That does make a difference. Not to mention that this Sharapova serve was on fire that tournament.

@@dosensadif6585 agree. It seemed like Kvitova rarely has a game plan. Just blast winners and hope they go in

@@kecleonboi she is a brainless ballbasher…plain and simple and that kind of tennis doesn’t work during all year long. I like Petra but she really lacked consistency in her tennis.