Serena Williams Gets Win, Family Revenge in Aussie Semifinals Match
Serena came into the match battle fatigued. Though she had played tremendously well thus far, those last matches took their toll on her—both mentally and physically. But, stepping onto the court, Serena was determined to win. And in winning, she would avenge the loss handed to her sister by the opponent that she would now face—Li Na.
But, Li Na could not be counted out right away. She also had a mission in mind. She had something to prove. She was one of two Chinese women who had made it all the way to the semifinals (Zheng Jie, the other), and she had broken into the top 10, a goal she had set for herself that came earlier than she had anticipated. She could see the finish line — the Australian Open Final and a possible title as a huge bonus.
These two ladies would go head-to-head in this semifinal match to make good on their respective missions.
The first set saw both of them giving it their best as was anticipated—neither was going to let anything just slip away. The set was sent into a tiebreaker. Serena came through with an ace to win the tie breaker and set, 7-6.
The second set saw Serena do what she does best—turn up the game another notch and never look back. Serena reached 5-4 with a double match point, but it would not be as easy as it seemed to close out this set.
Over the course of the remainder of this set, Li Na would save a total of four match points and force another tiebreaker. But, once again, in her signature style, Serena answered the call.
Showing signs of exhaustion (mentally and physically), and very well so after playing for over two hours, Serena mustered everything she had. Li Na tried, but Serena would not be denied. With her 12th ace, Serena secured the win in the tiebreaker, taking the set, 7-6. Serena's final stats included 12 aces, 33 winners, and only two double faults.
And so, Serena will now be playing for her 12th Major title and 5th Australian Open.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?