Serena Williams: Why 2012 Player of the Year Won't Suffer Major Downfall in 2013
Scott Barbour/Getty Images
Some professional athletes come off of great seasons and lose a little bit of what they had the year before. Serena Williams is not one of those athletes.
According to tennis.com, Serena has won 35 of her last 36 matches and just won her first title of 2013 at the Brisbane International. Serena is playing ridiculous tennis, winning the last two majors, her first singles gold medal at the 2012 Olympics and the 2012 WTA Championships.
To add to her impressive 2012 campaign, she won the most WTA singles titles of the season with seven and won the doubles gold medal at the Summer Olympics.
Talk about having a year.
She even found time for a little karaoke after winning at Brisbane.
Even Serena knows that she’s playing well. Telling Matt Cronin of tennis.com:
I feel like right now I’m playing some of my best tennis.
While Serena has been playing incredibly well, she still has a lot to play for. With the Australian Open coming up, Serena will be looking to exact revenge on the field after making an early exit last year against Ekaterina Makarova. As Williams goes after her sixth Aussie Open title, she’ll have a chip on her shoulder, which spells bad news for the rest of the field.
Serena will also be chasing the ever-elusive French Open title that she hasn’t been able to snag for 11 years, and with one of the best clay-court players in the history of women’s tennis out of the game in Justine Henin, Serena will have a great chance to make it happen during the clay-court season.
Everything is coming together for Serena in some sort of perfect tennis storm. She’s coming off of an amazing 2012 season but still has a few titles and tournaments to go after, along with the added incentive of avenging last year's losses.
With so much to play for and so much momentum, Williams will be nearly impossible to stop in 2013.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?