#SmashTalk: comebacks that flopped

Everything looked so promising when Maria Sharapova, then Petra Kvitova, then Victoria Azarenka all declared their comeback intentions in 2017. Between them, they own nine Grand Slam trophies and are some of the biggest names in women’s tennis.

Unfortunately, for various reasons, they’ve all failed to flourish since returning to the game.

The Tennismash team of Paul Moore, Vivienne Christie and Matt Trollope explain who they think has been the most disappointing, while also discussing what the future could hold for Cincinnati champs Grigor Dimitrov and Garbine Muguruza.

Agree or disagree with our panel? Have your say on Facebook and Twitter using #SmashTalk.

Three of the WTA’s biggest stars – Maria Sharapova, Victoria Azarenka and Petra Kvitova – have all returned to the tour in 2017. Which of them has endured the worst comeback?

Moore: Without a doubt Petra Kvitova. Admittedly, none of them have set the tennis world on fire since making their return. But unlike Maria and Vika, Petra has actually been playing. Yes, she won a title in Birmingham, but her form has been dire since then.

RELATED: Azarenka withdraws from US Open

Christie: I wonder if we’ve come to expect too much in comebacks after Roger Federer’s superhuman return? Among those women, I’d have to say Sharapova is the biggest letdown. Kvitova has at least won a title and Azarenka’s abbreviated return is sadly unrelated to her tennis. I became a big fan of Maria’s resilience when she twice won the French Open after her career-threatening shoulder injury; given the niggling ailments (including a left arm injury?) that forced her withdrawal from recent events, it’s a quality that doesn’t appear to feature in her 2017 comeback. Or at least not yet.

Trollope: Sharapova. I feel it’s simply a triumph for Kvitova to be back on court given what she’s endured, and Azarenka’s body has been through the rigours of childbirth. But Sharapova had almost a year and a half to get fully fit and motivated for her comeback. And she’s fallen surprisingly short. Given she’s right-handed, her ongoing left forearm injury is mystifying, and I certainly could not have predicted she’d be as banged up as she is when her body should be as fresh as ever. And when she has been healthy, her game seems to have lost a little of its physical and mental sting.

After winning the Cincinnati title for his first ATP Masters trophy, is Grigor Dimitrov poised to deliver on his huge promise at the US Open?

Moore: Nope. When Grigor Dimitrov burst onto the scene everyone thought he was the next Roger Federer. He isn’t. There’s no doubt that the Bulgarian is a talented boy, but so is every other player in the Top 20 (or 100, for that matter). He might win a Slam, and he should win plenty more tournaments, but he’s never going to dominate in the way people expected.

RELATED: Dimitrov – the reawakening of Lost Gen?

Christie: I’d love to say yes – there are few players that can bring such x-factor than Grigor on song and his natural talent deserves a Grand Slam reward. But Dimitrov has shown a tendency to build momentum then disappear. After starting his season with two titles and the Australian Open semifinal, he reached only one other quarterfinal before he hit grass. And while Cincinnati was a long-awaited breakthrough, Dimitrov’s highest-ranked opponent was John Isner at No.19. I’m not quite ready to declare him a major champ yet.

Trollope: Dimitrov played fabulous tennis in Cincinnati. But he did it at a tournament missing seven of the world’s top 10 and he didn’t even face a player ranked in the top 15 en route to the title. The Masters crown could free him up mentally – finally, one of those big titles! – but Federer, Nadal and Murray all own him, and I don’t even see beating a fully-firing Zverev at this stage either. And those are the sorts of players he’ll have to go through if he wants to win big at Flushing Meadows.

Is Garbine Muguruza set to dominate the WTA tour after her latest victory in Cincinnati?

Moore: Yes, the Golden Age of Garbi is here. The Spaniard has the game – and now the attitude – to run riot in the women’s game. She knows that she can beat any player, and it looks like she can handle the pressure after winning a Slam. The WTA should be breathing a sigh of relief.

Christie: The signs say yes. Scanning through the Spaniard’s recent record makes for more weightier reading than the same time last year, when her French Open breakthrough was followed by a string of ignominious early losses. Since her stellar win over Venus Williams in the Wimbledon final, Muguruza has reached one quarterfinal, one semifinal and allowed Simona Halep just one game as she claimed the Cincinnati final in 56 minutes. Focus, aggressive and composure have all featured – and most impressive is that Garbi is yet to return to her preferred setting of a Grand Slam stage.

RELATED: how the players rated in Cincinnati

Trollope: She certainly seems the best placed of any of the other women on tour. Her game is loaded with weapons, she can play on all surfaces and she’s at her best on the biggest stages. But inconsistency has riddled her career so far and although she’s shown signs of smoothing those extreme peaks and troughs in form, I think she’s simply a player who will always have to deal with streakiness. And streakiness doesn’t bode well for dominance.

Who will contest the US Open men’s and women’s finals?

Moore: Federer v Cilic, Muguruza v Pliskova.

Christie: Federer v A. Zverev, Muguruza v Wozniacki

Trollope: Federer v Nadal, Svitolina v Venus.