USO: Week one Round Up

1) “The match that must not be named”

This one was so bad I still have hangover as I write this.



Quite baffling to realise that up until this match I hadn’t seen very much of Robin Haase. I knew he was an edgy, flamboyant talent who’d been sidelined rather a lot by injury. Beyond that I had heard murmurings of his being a head case.

I now want to “unsee” him.

Not that Murray has anything to be proud of. Nothing these two can do will ever live this down.

We don’t need to analyse  sh*t like this unless we’re interested in what happens when the laws of nature and the moral fabric of the universe break down.

What happened in Ashe stays in Ashe.

2) “Donald not-so-Young”

I suspect my perspective on Donald Young’s journey (there’s a euphemism)  is somewhat different to most Americans. I’ve heard of the brattiness, the run-ins with the USTA, the complexities arising from his parental coaching relationship, of course, but it seems the impression left by this simply hasn’t been as affecting as it has for many on the other side of the pond. Only natural.



Most of the time I simply couldn’t care less, figuring he’s either not worth bothering with or will come of age in his own time.

Amongst other things, this meant I was prepared to vouch for his game without having to disentangle myself from the politics and the snark that I guess is part and parcel of following (and being let down by)  a home grown talent – especially one that makes life so difficult for himself. What I don’t understand is snark for the sake of snark, particularly when it comes from those without any such domestic ties.

When he beat Murray earlier this year, he was mostly derided as ‘Donald Duck’. And Murray was ripped on for losing to ‘Donald Duck’. Few seemed to think it might have had anything to do with his game. 

He didn’t follow up. Very few expected him to. Heavens knows if he’ll do it this time  – I’m not completely sold on the “kid grew up” narrative, he may simply have had another good week. Besides, a 32-year old grinder isn’t the strongest competition.

But that defeat of Murray wasn’t a fluke. And neither is what we’ve seen this past week. And if (heaven forbid) he goes on to beat Murray again in R4, that won’t have been a fluke either.


3) “Dearth, not Death”

If you’ve been paying attention recently, you’ll have heard rather a lot on how tennis is supposed to be “dead” in all of the Grand Slam hosting nations, with the exception, I guess, of France. 




I’m not gonna argue with that. That GB, Aus and the US are going through something of a dry spell talent-wise is common knowledge. Most of what you hear about it, however, is little more than blather. The kind of lazy, cliched blather that more usually goes along with talk of grunting, fist-pumping, and the rankings system.

A dearth is not the quite the same as death: of the 4 American WTA teenyboppers making noise this week, only one, Madison Keys, is ranked outside of the top 400 – two  others are ranked in the top 100 (McHale at #55) with Sloane Stephens hovering just outside at #106.

Were they not to have made a splash this week, were you not nerdy enough to know their rankings and were you to have gone on headlines alone, you simply wouldn’t have known that.

4) Venus Williams

By now we will all have heard that Sjogrens Syndrome is a chronic auto-immune disorder in which the white cells attack the body’s own moisture producing glands. Symptoms include debilitating fatigue and joint pain.

We also know that there is no cure.



With a diagnosis as sobering as that, “Get Well Soon” well-wishes can seem woefully inadequate. A quick Wikipedia search will tell you that you don’t always “get well” from something like this – “symptom management” sometimes being the only option.

Venus has been an iconic feature of the tennis landscape for over a decade.

There’ll be hordes of melancholic fans whenever her career comes to end, whether that’s through ill health or it simply running its course.

Worth remembering, however, that we know next to nothing on how acutely she’s affected. Auto immune illnesses usually have a wide range of severity. Let us hope her case is moderate.

The other thing is that “symptom management” is not always as dreadful as it sounds.  True that this can entail coping with, rather than freeing oneself of, a chronic illness – but it’s also true that the effects of that illness may be mitigated by lifestyle adjustment in less severe cases.

The real question is whether that’s sufficient to compete as an elite athlete in the sport she loves. Doubtless many will desire precisely that. But like a certain 22-time Slam Champion says, her first priority must be to regain her health – with or without tennis. No true fan should wish for anything less.


5) Li No and Petra KvitOver

Never have I felt so wrong about being right :(


Anyone that had been following both players this past year knew there would be a certain amount of “decompression” following their respective Slam epiphanies. My own view was that they were unlikely to reach the quarters and would probably end up going out in an unspectacular tussle in some forgotten corner of week one.

Yes they're both hit and miss. Yes they're both still reeling from the after effects of winning a Slam. Still, a first round exit for two top 10 Grand Slam Champs is unacceptable.


6) Serena v Vika – Match of the tournament.

The first set of this was Serena at her uber-intimidating best. As always, she was out to make a statement – Vika was mere collateral damage and barely managed one game.


The second set was likely the best you’ll see over the entire fortnight.

Some of Vika’s returns of serve may well go on to be remembered as the best tennis of her career. As always her fans are left to rue the fact that where others get serendipity, Vika gets…Serena Williams.

Try and think of the first player that came to mind as drawing the short straw when Serena’s #28 seeding was announced…..YEAH.

No, it doesn’t even surprise me anymore.
Read More...

Wimbledon: His name is ‘Bernard’ and other week one curiosities.

Ok look, I can’t promise I’m gonna stop poking fun (not in the short term), but we can’t go on pretending he’s not a serious talent.

And what’s more is, he’s probably the future of Aussie Tennis. If, as an Aussie, such a prospect fills you with mortal fear, you should probably consider switching nationalities, as it may happen sooner than you or I think.

All that stuff about him being an irritant? Probably still true, but there’s still time to “man up”, and here’s a sobering truth: Tennis Australia needs Bernard Tomic, not vice versa.

I’m not saying he’s the “next big thing”. Would never hit you with something as tawdry as that. And of course there’s room for improvement:  I’ve heard criticisms about the movement – Pat Cash went as far as to say he plays “like a junior….like Andy Murray” (one in the same I presume). Tignor has him going “even further into the funky” than, say, someone like Dolgopolov.



But none of this detracts from the eclectic blend of junk and easy flamboyance that seems to serve him so well. Nor from his ability to keep cool under pressure. Nor does the fact that a stomach bug Sod contracted was causing him to break out in a cold sweat, double over in between points (sometimes even having to sit down) and have a well-documented (too well documented) episode of liquid poo – almost certainly causing  him to squander the first set and a half.

Just like Robson against Pova a day earlier, a lesser player wouldn’t have worked their opponent’s “flatulence” so well.

I can’t help feeling a public endorsement from the likes of Hewitt and Rafter would benefit his tattered image (particularly amongst fans). It seems steps have already been taken with both showing up at his matches, and Rafter even being said to provide tactical input.

The efforts to legitimise Bernard begin here. And I’m gonna start by calling him ‘Bernard’. How’d a hobgoblin end up with a name as wholesome as that anyway?



-- Loving what I’ve seen from both the Williamses. Serena seems to be improving every match (that she’s able to win anything at all, is itself remarkable), and Venus seems to have that electricity about her that usually spells trouble for the rest of the draw.

Still, it’s early days and, Kimiko and Aravane aside, they haven’t really been tested. Can still see both of them running into trouble if things get tight. And I’m still leaning to Venus over her sister.



-- Andy Roddick’s best days are behind him. His last best crack at winning here (and surely any Slam) came and went in 2009 under a flurry of 50 aces and only 4 double faults.

We all know this. But for some reason, we’ve begun pretending that Feli making 57 winners and only 7 UFEs wouldn’t have had exactly the same result against any number of top ten players – perhaps only excluding the top three.

That’s no reason to act like he should quit or, in even poorer taste , to goad him into doing so (as one reporter seemed intent on) – perhaps I expect too much.

That said, if the fire’s gone, it ain’t gonna spontaneously re-combust. Let him decide – and give him room to do so.

Aside:  I will never say ‘Deliciano’. Not ever.  In any case, I much prefer Rafter’s invention, ‘Felix’.



-- No one’s talking about Shuai Peng. That’s probably a good thing. Her R16 match against Pova will answer a lot of questions about both women.

-- In contrast, everyone’s talking about Delpo – mostly in terms of how he WILL go down to Rafa. That seems the likeliest outcome – but I still insist that an upset isn’t anywhere near the “long shot” being suggested. Not by a long shot.

-- Didn’t follow the Gimelstob/Feli bust up very much. It’s the kind of episode that holds very little interest for me and tends to bring out the worst in even the most respected commentators.

The man is very obviously a twat – which probably accounts for his position on the ATP Board of Directors.

Read More...

WombleTown: All Hail, The ‘Anti-Lasso’

Day 1: Fran/Dokic…Day 2: Serena/Aravane…..Day 3: Venus/Kimiko....

We’re only just underway, but this is not the first time the women have outperformed the men in terms of the quality they’ve brought to bear.

It’s also no fluke, in my opinion, that four of the above-mentioned women that brought that quality to bear, are aged 29 and over.

I’ve marvelled at Kimiko’s shortened backswing for almost as long as I’ve lamented at the super-swiped lassoed forehand that sadly, now, forms the staple of the womens (and much of the mens) tour – the amount of pace she generates seems inconsistent with the laws of physics.




But today, she went to town with it in a way which even I didn’t think was possible – and left Venus, the assembled count of 15,000 people, and many more around the world, breathless and confused. It’s like the anti-Lasso.

Every groundie, each and every volley, seemed precision-engineered to keep Venus off balance – which she did for around 80% of the match.

And not just once, she was able to put a 120mph Venus first serve away, down the line, for a winner. That would be Venus serving, on grass…..INDOORS. Again, no fluke.

Kimiko's shot selection should be required viewing for every WTA player under the age of 25. And if they refuse to watch, they should be banned from playing tennis – at least until they’re prepared to properly abbreviate their obscenely lassoed backswing which I consider to be nothing less than the scourge of civilisation.

As for Venus, you’ll hear a lot on how she “did what champions do”. There is some truth in that – there always is – but its also true that she was mere games away from going out. Kimiko was simply that good, and talk of “champions” simply obscures that very relevant fact – and that’s coming from a fan of Venus.

Even so, it is, of course, a credit to Venus that she was able to emerge from this intact. Her serve didn’t break down and she seemed to move increasingly freely as the match progressed. It can only bode well for her.

Whether or not this turns out to be ‘match of the year’, its right up there with the Australian Open match between Franny and Sveta – but I doubt you’ll see a better set of tennis all year than the opener.

Hats off ladies.

*2nd slow clap in two days* Read More...

WombleTown: Day one Drive By.

Williams d. Amanmuradova 6-3 6-1

I won’t pretend I don’t have an opinion on it, but lets just say I’ve made my peace with the dress. I almost don’t care what she’s wearing, provided she makes the second week.

As intimidating as she was today – 23 winners, 7 aces and just 5 UFEs – I can’t help thinking back on how thoroughly she butchered Ana in Eastbourne less than a week ago, before going down to Dani on the back of some pretty shoddy play only 24 hours later.

The worst bit is I’ve seen it happen before that too. And not following a 6 month outage either. Kimiko next.

Oh wait, this was meant to be a positive post. 

Murray d. Gimeno-Traver 4-6 6-3 6-0 6-0

Ok look, I’m glad he dug himself out of trouble, and I’m even glad he gave the crowd and assembled Brit press something to get hormonal about.

But that scoreline says less about his play than it does about Gimeno-Traver throwing in the towel, which he did somewhere towards the end of the 2nd set.

Schiavone d. Dokic 6-4 1-6 6-3

Fran got through this but it wasn’t easy. And I’m glad it wasn’t. It gave Cesca the tune-up she needed, and, well, its always a pleasure to see Jelena put up a fight and play to her capabilities.

The match had to be stopped for rain – which meant waiting the customary 40 minutes as the roof was shut and the aircon and humidity were got just right. When it reconvened, it did so in a peculiar atmosphere of tinted refrigerator lighting and indoor-echo. Whatever this was, it wasn’t grass court tennis – and that’s before you even consider the very many players that consider the grass (both here and at Queens) to be actually playing slower than the clay of RG. Ljubicic’s words (amongst others) not mine.




One more thing. At some point we’re gonna need to stop treating Jelena like Mother Theresa every time she plays, what is after all, just a tennis match.

I sympathise with her as much as anyone else, but not only is this ‘saintliness’ a gross caricature, it’s downright patronising, and I daresay she’d prefer actual support over such clumsy “sympathy”.

Read More...

The Eagle Has Landed

The last time Serena played Eastbourne (1998) she went out in the quarters to Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario. Twas a different era.

This time she’d “only” been out for 11 months. It still felt too long.

S. Williams d. Pironkova 1-6, 6-3, 6-4

It was scrappy, it was inelegant, it was ingenious, it was utterly terrifying.

But at the end of it she’d  won her first match in 11 months. And, just like her sister the day before, it took all of three sets.

She might just as easily have taken Tsvetana in straights or herself be taken down in much the same way. It was anyone’s guess. And most felt more comfortable not guessing at all.

In the end, neither, or something closer to both those eventualities, was what came to pass.

The lack of competitive matchplay was only too evident in a torrid first set that quickly saw her go 5-0 down.

But from the fifth game onwards (and notably after what seemed a conscious decision to take some pace off the ball) a transformation began to take place.

It wasn’t immediate, and at first its only observable effect was that she was staying longer in rallies and gingerly constructing the type of short angles that seemed born as much of compromise than anything else.

Whatever it was, it gave her the leverage she needed, as more and more winners began dropping on the right side of the lines, and by the end of it, the “best server in the game” seemed as fluid as ever.

It wasn’t “vintage Serena” (except only sporadically), but then neither was it the unsavoury fiasco some were fearful of.

In other words, she acquitted herself rather well – far better than any of us had the right to expect given the nature and length of her absence.  Bepa or Heather Watson await in round two.

Reluctant as I am to stultify the post with premature and sordid talk of how she may or may not fare at Wimbledon, her appetite for winning was only too evident. 

If you take only that, and nothing else, away from this match, it spells IMPOSSIBLY BAD NEWS for everyone else.

Factor in a sister that’s won more Wimbledon titles than any other active player and…

Read More...

Oz: ‘PSOAS’ OFF.

 

 

 

 

There’ll be no R4 face-off between Venus and Pova. I know at least a few of us were looking forward to that.

 

Venus pulled out after only one game with “a complicated tear in the psoas muscle”. Petko advances to meet Pova in R4.

 

People booed.

 

“Tennis fans forking out for RL tickets deserve better!”

 

Wrong.

 

A 9-time Slam champion that hasn't retired since 1994 deserves better.

 

And of course I’m assuming you go to work sick or with a debilitating (career-ending) injury? Why ever would you be judging otherwise?

Read More...

USO: A Proliferation of good.

 

First there was this.

 

 

 

 

I’m known for pulling squinty, wincey faces whenever I hear of sport and world peace being mentioned in the same sentence.

 

It’s not clear what exactly two blokes hitting balls together can do to draw attention away from problems that in some cases go back over half a century, but I doubt there was a dry eye in the house when Bopanna and Qureshi made their runners up speeches.

 

Qureshi’s words, in particular, struck a note, in my opinion, precisely because he chose not to recite some dull platitude about world peace.

 

Choosing instead to articulate a far more grounded and I’d say far more relevant sentiment of the silent majority of his country.

 

Well played boys.

 

Then there was this.

 

 

Look, I’m really happy that people have finally discovered Bepa and I’d be a lot more charmed by their assessment of her as an “intelligent”, “articulate” and “underrated” player if they weren’t the same people hoping, praying for another “Crazy Bepa” meltdown during the match.

 

She broke the strings of all four racquets in her bag and had to continue with a spare handed to her from the stands….’cept the meltdown never came.

 

And it’s put her in second consecutive Slam final.

 

 

 

 

Caz….I bear you no ill will. There’ll be no schadenfreude street festival here today.

 

Personally I had you reaching the final before going down to Clijsters or even an on-song Vee.

 

But in some ways Bepa serves as an even greater vindication of all my objections.

 

There’s a reason the Serena’s and the Kim’s (and I daresay the tours more potent shotmakers once they find their range) will always have their way with you.

 

There’s a reason you’ve had to play two seasons worth of tennis in one to maintain your top five ranking. As JJ found, you can only continue to do that until the age of about 22 before your immune system goes on an extended sabbatical with the faeries.

 

Put simply you need more than one string to your bow. You need to do more than just push – or else you’ll be shoved. Fortunately, you already know this.

 

And then, of course, there was this.

 

     

 

By this point there was such a proliferation of good will in the air that I was actually finding it difficult to root against Kim.

 

You read right. I’ll still be rooting for Bepa – but a Kimmie victory will no longer leave me feeling cheated.

 

I was also sensing the need for some kind of wistful karmic payback: Enter Venus Williams.

 

It was a crumbly, disjointed, unconvincing performance from both women.

 

Kim’s veneer of focus and confidence is just that – a facade. I'll be very surprised if she storms through the final the  way everyone thinks she will.

 

Vee  stormed through the first set and then totally blew a 2nd set breaker – she would never recover.

 

What’s more is she may never again have such a great stab at an ungrassy Slam again. And it hurts.

Read More...

USO: Prudence.

 

 

I may as well say it.

 

I’m not at all comfortable with V’s chances against Kimmie.

 

 

They both underwent necessary detox in their last round. The less said about that the better.

 

Though you get the feeling that despite that wobble, Kim’s now clean and that it’s business as usual.

 

V? Not so much.

 

Her form’s actually been pretty good throughout the event, though still might rightly be described in the way the Cleggster wants to persuade us to think of the UK economic recovery: “choppy and uneven”.

 

So in that spirit of economic prudence, let me now declare an eleventh-hour outside interest.

 

This.

 

 

Actually, it’s more about spreading one’s risk more evenly as I haven’t actually given up on V, but still, let’s will THIS into existence too.

Read More...

WombleTown: The Answer to Life, The Universe and Everything is….82. Apparently.

 

 

Yesterday the 82nd ranked Lu downed the ARod in five. Today the 82nd ranked Pironkova downed five time champ and world #2 Venus Williams for a place in the semis.

 

If the numbers really have it, then I’d say the number is 82.

 

I’m sure I’m the eighty-second-best-in-the-world at something. And I intend spending the rest of the week finding out exactly what. Procrastination probably. Which means I’ll likely never know.

 

AP

 

I know I’m meant to say horrible things about V and the remainder of her career and yeah, for someone of her calibre, it was a truly shocking display.

 

But here’s my difficulty. During the match, constant references were being made to the “fine display of tennis” Pironkova was putting on, without truly emphasising how far off base Venus was.

 

Pironkova deserves every possible accolade coming to her and likely many others that aren’t. Like Lu yesterday, never once did Tsveta flinch from taking her opportunities, never once did she appear overawed by the enormity of the occasion and never once did she let the aura of either her opponent or Centre Court get in the way.

 

Now the ugly side of things: 29 UFEs from V (a number only kept that low because of how quickly it was all over) and being taken to break point in every one of her service games in set two.

 

“I just didn’t get enough balls in today,” said Williams. “I let it spiral and didn’t get any balls in. I had a lot of opportunities, a lot of short balls and I seemed to hit each one out.

“If there was a shot to miss, I think I missed it. … I didn’t bring my best tennis today.”

 

And now back to the problematic side of things.

 

After the match was over there was the usual sustained bout of hand wringing over how poorly V played, with some suggesting she might never win another Major again and some even calling for her retirement.

 

Somewhere amongst the chaotic deluge of Schadenfreude and opinionated misinformation lies a rational sentiment trying to fight it’s way out. So far I haven’t been able to find it.

 

Getty

 

Venus either played a shockingly poor match which then, like it or not, simply has to have a bearing on your assessment of Pironkova’s very deserved victory.

 

Or, she simply had a bad day (like many other top seeds at this event) against an unflinching, unwavering up-and-comer who knew the value of taking her chances - in which case we shouldn’t be calling for either her retirement or for her head.

 

So which is it? You sure as sh*t can’t have it both ways.

 

***

 

Yet again, the Belgian performance leaves me with many questions, a certain amount of confusion and some concern.

 

PA

 

When Kimmie’s on (and to be fair she usually is) she can sweep through the opposition and beat the Williamses back-to-back en route to winning a Slam.

 

When she’s not (and there’s been a fair few of those moments too), she can fall in a flat 6-0, 6-1 defeat to Petrova and look desperately ineffective against Bepa - both of whom being players she should beat.

 

I was backing Bepa. I have my reasons (too much talent, not always in control - fan for life).

 

But if I’m being honest, Bepa simply kept her nerve and went through the motions after dropping the first set. Much in the way Kimmie went through hers against Henin yesterday.

 

All this leaves us with Serena/Kvitova and Bepa/Pironkova as our Wimbledon semi-finalists for 2010. 

 

If you were the 82nd best bookie in the world you’d have had a pretty decent shot at calling that.

Read More...

Why that’s an outrage!

 

 

-- Roger Federer seeded #1 at Wimbledon.

 

Scandalous I know. Why anyone in their right mind would want to confer a #1 seeding on a guy that’s won 6 of the last 7 titles here and had a complete stranglehold on the #1 ranking during that time is beyond me.

 

Never underestimate the audacious logic espoused by Neanderthals in sufficiently high numbers.

 

By the amount of hot air this issue has generated you’d almost think that Fed had received a bye to the final.

 

For better or worse, Wimby has for many years now, chosen to distinguish itself through use of a seeding formula that rewards grass court prowess.

 

You can, indeed,  argue that seedings for a surface that exposes the utter uniformity of the majority of hard court players and the unique adaptive ability of a select few, should, in some way, reflect that distinction - a distinction I’d be prepared to extend to clay.

 

You can argue that Venus Williams ought to be seeded #1.

 

You can even argue that Nikolay Davydenko should be seeded outside of the top 50.

 

Of course you can choose to bin all of that, and argue, instead, that it’d be perfectly valid for Wimbledon to simply mirror the rankings the way the other Slams do.

 

And that’d be fine too.

 

Once you choose to go with the formula, however, continuing to argue in favour of your favourite player on the basis of a H2H begins to make you look petty, paltry and confused.

 

Verdict: There’s clutching at straws and there’s clutching at toothpicks. Not an outrage.

 

-- #342 ranked Brit, James Ward went out of the QFs of Eastbourne today

 

To reach that point he put out both Feli and Scheuttler. Back to back.

 

You’d think such an audacious feat on home turf would be enough to earn him a wildcard at Wimbledon.

 

The LTA’s top 250 cut off point (for affording WCs) and an illness at the end of last year that saw him drop out of that range (a position he’d previously held for 18 months) means you’d be wrong.

 

All of which has put us in the slightly laughable position of not having a single English player in the Wimbledon draw - a historical first, though hardly the kind of history to aspire for.

 

I understand the LTA are focused on “creating an environment where more British players aren't just in the first round because of a wild card, but on merit…”.

 

I also understand their position is a little “damned if you do damned if you don’t”.

 

How often, after all, have we seen them burnt at the stake for a spate of first round losses from “undeserving” Brits that were afforded WCs?

 

I don’t, however, understand the sheer lack of imagination that sees The-Powers-That-Be doggedly stick to “policy” and artificial cut off points at the expense of a fine BRITISH run of form.

 

What precise “metric” do you need to tell you that a Brit getting to, say, the third round of Wimbledon would represent a fine thing for British Tennis?

 

Verdict: Not simply an outrage. A scandal.

 

-- Thomas Muster. Comeback. 42. No really.

 

Verdict: Not an outrage. Simply outrageous. And yet I’m keen to see how this plays out.

 

-- SUI(24) d. ESP(2) 1-0

 

 

The equivalent of say Stan Wawrinka knocking out Rafael Nadal.

 

Verdict: Outrageous. On every imaginable level. And some unimaginable ones too. And yet I believe it would have played out rather differently on clay.

Read More...

Madrid: Old Flames and ‘Churchillean’ Tennis.

The victory pose is, at least, novel. The result, anything but.

Nadal d. Federer 6-4 7-6

There is some tennis being played this week. Just don’t expect me to go acknowledging it’s existence.

For the next four or five days, I’m afraid, Tennis is not being served in these’ere parts. I might cobble together a RG preview. Then again I might elect not to step out of my hastily constructed tennis decompression unit until the first ball has been struck in Phillipe Chatrier.

To tell you the truth, I didn’t know what to expect going into the first “Naderer” final in twelve months, and even now, nearly two days after it’s completion, I’m still not sure what to make of it.

The only certainties were that:

a) Nadal ought to come through (though perhaps being stretched to three sets), and that,

b) I didn’t want to hear any pissant excuses about Madrid’s “high altitude” from Rafaelites, or “insufficient clay court matches” from the Federnation in the event of either man pulling up short.

Before I get accused of sitting on the fence (as I have once already in the past 72 hrs), let me declare where my loyalties lie. Sitting on a fence, as you might imagine, is an uncomfortable business.

I don’t go in much for the argument that says order is somehow served by Rafa winning RG and Federer retaining Wimby ever year – to me the odd chaotic interlude is the healthiest sign yet of a vibrant and, more importantly, COMPETITIVE tennis economy.

No I’m afraid my reasons for backing Rafa to win RG this year have much more in common with fluffy white kittens and children’s television.

To put it bluntly, he needs this win the way Federer needed Wimby last year.

We’ve all been acutely aware of his return to form (even though we might differ on the exact minutiae of when it took place), but that return would fall palpably short of “coming full circle” if Rafa went out early to say, ‘Dasco Sizzlehands’.

Consider that my line in the dirt - “on this subject I have nothing more to say, no other apology to offer.”

***

It’s no secret that in the immediate aftermath of Sunday's final, I was feeling slightly short changed.

The entire match had the air of two old flames meeting up for drinks and salted snacks – a tete-a-tete neither had sought – before deciding they still couldn’t stand one other.

The first set was full of the unease and neurotic defensiveness that must necessarily surround the first few moments of any such meeting.

“You still take yours strong I see…”

“Still taking coffee with your sugar, I see…”

*awkward silence*

Rafa was a little late out of the blocks, but Federer’s grip on an early break proved as tenuous as everything else. When Rafa broke decisively at 4-3 he appeared to have defaulted into a groove that still fell painfully short of the form we’d come to associate with him over the past month.

“Still pitching those, curve balls to my backhand then?”

“Made our peace with the drop shot finally have we?”

*frenzied stirring of coffee*

Federer’s backhand was, of course, Rafa’s front line of attack (no surprises there) – the usual frenetic assault, which I thought it withstood well given the circumstances. Most of what I saw from Fed in this match, in fact, though perhaps not as convincing as his containment of Ernie, or disembowelling of Stan Wawrinka, does at least appear to suggest a certain contentment with the tenor of his game ahead of RG.

It was with some irony then, that I viewed Rafa seal the first set off one of Federer’s finest backhand returns of the match. A deep angled cross court that forced Rafa on his back foot, scrambling to regain his balance. Quite what possessed Fed to then bull rush the net – having already been passed there a number of times – remains mostly a mystery.

We were, by this point, past the initial awkward exchanges, and well beyond the demands of social decorum. Suddenly, all the usual grievances about un-emptied garbage and hair blockages in the the sink became that much easier to air – every tic, every foible, once so endearing, now very publicly subject to the most unforgiving scrutiny.

“Never liked those slurping sounds you make when you drink….”

*shank*

“Wasn’t crazy about the way you’d always end up laughing at your own jokes which, by the way, weren’t even that funny.”

*unconverted break point*

What made it compelling, however, was that it wasn’t a wholly sordid business. More a kind of impasse between two former allies, each unwilling to yield even an inch of their hard earnt moral high ground, though neither that intent on turning the screw on their old buddy either.

When Federer finally shanked a ball sky high clean-missed on match point – off a bad bounce I hasten to add – it seemed as though the issue had been forced.

Yet the point-by-point intensity of the affair left me feeling I’d sat through four competitive sets rather than two erratic ones.

Fed served nine aces and no double faults. Both served a very healthy 67+ percent of first serves in.

Both also served up around 30 UFEs a piece and neither was able to convert on more than 4 out of the staggering 11 break point opportunities they were each presented with.

Unflattering perhaps, but hardly worthy of the scandal that comes of airing one’s dirty linen in public.

***

Stuff-you-should-already-be-aware-of-that-I-only-mention-for-the-sake-of-completeness:

-- Nadal back to world #2

-- First male in history to win all three Clay Masters Titles in the same year (what took you so long?),

-- Holder of most overall Masters Titles (‘18’ emblazoned boxers Nike?), and the unquestioned favourite for RG.

“We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender,…”

-- Winston Churchill, WWII

Henin, MJMS, Rezai: three different styles of play,three unseeded champions for three Premier events. No words.

To say Aravane Rezai is one-dimensional is to rather miss the point of her appeal.

She belongs to the same tennis tradition as Sabine Lisicki – who you’ll remember, picked up Charleston last year playing a similarly Churchillean style of tennis.

Rezai herself has now been compared to Monica Seles more often than I care to remember.

The trouble with players like Rezai is that there always exists the possibility of them getting bipolar on you: don’t miss and the world’s your oyster, though if your groundies begin to go south, they almost always take the match with them.

For a brief spell, it seemed as though the same was about to happen to Rezai in the second set. It didn’t. I’d like to believe this wasn’t simply a result of being in the zone, though as with everything else, only time will tell.

What I’m not about to do is grumble that she’s got no plan B to fall back on. Aravane, Big Rob and to a lesser extent Sabine, belong to a different order of species: it’s about as appropriate to juxtapose their supposed “limitations” alongside the variety of Henin as it is to compare a Chimpanzee with a Blue Whale.

It’s not often you get to see Venus (and I’m guessing Henin) out hit.

(Photos: Getty)

Read More...

Rome: The Great Leggings Crisis.

I love it when the players wear leggings. And while we’re on the topic - sleeves rock too.

It lends itself to a cosier, organic world view of the sport in which we, mere mortals, get to believe we’re not that far removed from it’s elite.

Venus of course, with her willowy frame, takes things to another level. The sixties, jewel heists, Audrey Hepburn – that sort of thing.

Fair enough? Good. Coz everything’s changed.

When Dementcha took to court in both sleeves and leggings yesterday, I may have been mildly amused, but was veering more towards wondering why I’d only seen her try it out once before – it seemed to sit well with both her athleticism, and more pragmatic, image-is-not-quite-everything approach to tennis.

We all know what happened there.

Ana followed that up with a 6-2 7-5 win over Nadia today. A quite heinous first set from Petrova, but let me unmask the real culprit: Baby-blue (sleeved) worn over suitably sleek black leggings.

# DA-DAH-DAAAAH!

Picking apart JJ’s 6-0 6-1 demolition of Venus today, two things seem to stick out.

The first is JJ’s impeccable performance. Not especially surprising given she’d been playing well all week. On the other hand, I’ve not seen this level from her since 2007 or thereabouts.

The second involves more of those black leggings - teal sleeves over black leggings to be precise. And not even the fact that she wore it so well, would prevent Venus from being engulfed in it’s fury.

Serena, Jelena, Ana and MJMS left standing. Neither wore leggings of any sort. Just saying.

No longer surprised at Bepa’s first round exit. She’s got a rather lot to answer for don’t you think?

(Photo: AP)

Read More...

Miami: Cringe.

Perhaps the only valuable observation after the debacle that was this final came from Serena on her twitter feed.

serenajwilliams @venuseswilliams is such a champ if I were playing I would have cracked 5 rackets by now!!Wow she's to be admired and I can learn from her!!

She had been following Venus’s matches courtside all week long – I almost wish she did crack something from the sidelines.

Venus was taped up quite heavily – though how much that had to do with what transpired on court remains up for debate – my own feeling is it was simply one of those days.

It’s not as if this just crept up on us either: I barely managed to suppress the urge to cringe when I kept hearing of how her match against Bartoli was amongst her best performances of the week. Really?

Set two certainly, but it seems to me there were very many apparent holes in Venus’s game during the opener and that Bartoli played it with such a telling lack of conviction, it somehow seemed apt when she served four double faults in a single game.

Clijsters d. Williams 6-2 6-1

Kimmie deserves full credit for seeing things through against a struggling opponent, a win that will see her enter the top ten on Monday. Congratulations – it was only a matter of time.

Though I hope you’ll understand why I can’t claim to have seen her either “crush” or “thrash” Venus – it seems to me V already did that to herself.

Oh there'll be cringing alright.

(Photo: Reuters)

Read More...

Miami: Hand-Me-Downs and French Effervescence

V. Williams d. Hantuchova 1-6 7-5 6-4

A match in which we saw the worst (set one) and (in the second half of the final set) the best of Venus Williams.

The match reports I’ve read suggest V turned it around in set two – well of course she did, else she wouldn’t have won it silly.

Don’t let’s pretend however that she applied (or was even capable of applying) the stranglehold until well into the business end of that final set. Before that it was spotty and at times potty, to say the least.

Dani seems to have effected something of a turnaround since the last time I saw her – and that was quite a long time ago. I didn’t enjoy watching her when she was a top tenner: neither a herd of wild horses nor a string of more demure Shetland Ponies will likely induce me now.

Still, she did manage to impress me a little with what she achieved out there – trouble is, you get the feeling what was achieved was likely on the back of some horrendous hand-me-downs from Venus and a Krajan-like spell Mr Cahill tried to cast on Dani during the changeover.

In vain, as it turned out.

Venus up one set against Aggy as we speak – give me one good reason why this should not be over in straights. I can give you three.

Federer d. Serra 76 76

Not a great day at the office for TMF either.

It wasn’t quite Long-Shanks, though not all of those forehands were what you’d call clean strikes, and the serving was really quite sketchy.

His focus however was also compromised by a Frenchman with a disposition so effervescent it made you want to crack open the bubbly.

Serra was quite simply the antithesis of everything I find objectionable about French tennis on a bad day (of which there are many) with his uncompromising intent to remain rooted on the baseline and let rip even in the face of an all-encompassing adversity- not that different actually from Simon Greul.

Que Serra Serra?

***

Clijsters d. Azarenka 6-4 6-0

A letdown.

That said, it surprises me not that Kimmie won. She seems to me to be uniquely placed to expose Vika’s poor movement and inability to play big budget tennis without the one commodity Kimmie seemed adamant to deprive her of – time.

Henin d. Zvonareva 6-1 6-4

The match that would appear to suggest that IW really was a blip.

Photos: Getty

Read More...

Miami: Ladies Preview

1st Quarter

(Photo by Chris McGrath/Getty Images)

Contenders	Kuzzie, Bartoli, Wickmayer, Li Na
Upsets waiting to happen	Kuzzie out to Szavay (R3)
Needs to happen	Bartoli v Kuzzie (R4)
Sympathy Vote	None at all. No one. Not the least bit emotionally invested in this quarter. Yes it really has come to that Kuzzie.

Bit of a sticky one this. In some senses, whoever comes through this quarter will be something of a surprise. That’s not a good thing.

2nd Quarter

(Photo by Chris McGrath/Getty Images)

Contenders	Venus, Petrova, Penetta, A-Rad
Upsets waiting to happen	Ana out to Bammer (R2)
Needs to happen	Penetta v Lisicki (R3), Venus v Penetta (QF)
Sympathy Vote	Ana.

Blow this one Ana and you’ll be playing qualies. It’s as simple and every bit as bad as that.

3rd Quarter

(Photo by Chris McGrath/Getty Images)

Contenders	JJ, Zheng, Stosur, Clijsters,Peer, Vika
Upsets waiting to happen	Stosur out to Navarro (R2), Clijsters out to Peer (R3), Vika out to MJMS (R3)
Needs to happen	Clijsters v Vika (R4)
Sympathy Vote	I’m still on the JJ train – at least until she consolidates on IW

What are the odds that JJ falls flat on her face at the Fifth Slam less than a week after winning that other Fifth Slam? I don’t wanna know.

Also not liking the pressure Vika must be feeling to defend all those points.

4th Quarter

(Photo by Chris McGrath/Getty Images)

Contenders	Demmie, Henin, Kleybs, Bepa, Franny, Caz-Woz
Upsets waiting to happen	Demmie could TOTALLY go out to Henin (R2) who thereafter goes out to Cibulkova, Bepa out to Kleybanova (R3), Woz out to Kirilenko (R3)
Needs to happen	Bepa v Demmie (R4)
Sympathy Vote	Bepa, just coz she lost shed loads of points at IW

That early match up between Demmie and Henin could prove (as it did in Oz) to be the match of the year. Or you know, it might not.

Kleybanova currently in the midst of an ‘Isner moment’. Heads may roll.

Read More...