STUTTGART, GERMANY - APRIL 20: Vera Zvonareva of Russia reacts during her second round match against Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova of Russia at the Porsche Tennis Grand Prix at Porsche Arena on April 20, 2011 in Stuttgart, Germany. (Photo by Alex Grimm/Bongarts/Getty Images)
Getty’s caption, not mine.
Bepa ditched Sergei for some guy named “Karen”. Google translate here. No words necessary.
Unlike certain others, and for what I hope are obvious reasons, I haven’t followed Vera’s association with Sergei very closely (not, in any case, with such fascination) – its results, as they pertained to Vera, were wholly satisfactory, and that was good enough for me.
It follows, then, that I know almost nothing about just how technical his input was. It must have been, at least in part – but the bottom line for me is, he seemed to make Vera happy (absolutely no innuendo intended) and from thence, the results seemed to flow.
I know even less about “Karen” – in fact, nothing at all. He may be far more technically astute than Sergei can ever hope to be. But if he doesn’t make Vera happy (again, no innuendo ) it will have all been for nothing.
You don’t need me to enumerate just how far Vera came with Sergei. And I’m still willing to concede the partnership simply ran its course the way Dinara’s did with Zeljko.
Coaching relationships, however, are as much, if not more, about how well its participants respond to one another – operational details play, at best, a modest, subsidiary role.
I’m almost sorry I never got on this train, because unlike so much of what passes for eye-candy nowadays, I totally understand. And now its over.
(Pics: Getty)
Read More...
Cibulkova d. Zvonareva 46 76(4) 64
Players like Domi and Rezai employ a brazenly simplistic hit’n miss formula.
Many people have a problem with this (and not just coz it’s one-dimensional). I don’t.
It’s not conventional. It certainly shouldn’t be taught. And you live, just as you must die, by the sword.
But let us please not pretend it has no place in the game. And let us please not pretend it’s not soul-stirringly hypnotic when they do connect.
Without them, that sort of shameless audacity simply wouldn’t exist. Why would it? It’s idiocy.
Trouble is, if you entirely eliminate that idiocy from the game you remove the only elemental (madcap) force capable of pulling off the most suicidal of wins at the highest of levels – the occasional duffing up of a top five player forces the game to evolve in ways it might not otherwise see. Think of them as the mutants that create sufficient amounts of instability in a population that might otherwise lack for vitality, or worse, go sterile.
At its best you get the kind of apocalyptic run Aravane exhibited at Madrid last year. At its worst she goes down, like she did yesterday, flailing in a fug of her own insolence.
Sharapova d. Rezai 62 62
That’s not at all to say Pova didn’t play a contained, measured and entirely professional match – as good as anything I’ve seen from her in months.
It’s just difficult to know what to make of it and how much stock to place in it (which I totally want to do) without having had the match this was hyped up to be. Dinara next.
I have no idea what chance Domi stands against Wicks (Universal Impudence says she’ll flame out in straights) – players like her aren’t built for longevity, nor do they naturally lend themselves to any extrapolation. I only know that I find it ironic that two of the fiercest ball strikers we have measure in at (or under) 5’5.
Where does that leave so called “Big Babe Tennis”?
(Pics: Getty)
Here we all so wonderfully are at the first post-Oz event of the year that actually amounts to something. I expect electricity, I expect sociopathic levels of belief (and denial), I expect the feeding frenzy that results when those, like myself, with the predictive capacity of mucus, indulge in a little quantum-bracketology of their own. I also expect some very poor trash-talk between Nole and Fed.
Maybe I’m just half a wavelength behind everyone, but it doesn’t quite feel like that just yet.
What it actually feels like is a benign form of stasis in which all the best stories are yet to develop, or haven’t yet acquired the momentum necessary to elicit the type of considered tennis reaction that goes beyond sticking bubble gum in your detractors’ hair, or breaking wind and running away– not that either of those isn’t an entirely sensible way of settling tennis disputes.
I’ve got some strong feelings on why I don’t think winning here would strongly benefit all but a handful of the top players. Woz, for example, is darned either way: Win, and face all those malignant, ‘Slamless’, ranking-related questions again. Lose, and any pretensions she might entertain of being mentioned in the same breath as Clijsters evaporate into thin air.
Muzz occupies a similar role – winning would certainly go a long way to snapping him out of his (now traditional) post-Oz runners-up stupor; and yet he owns 6 of these things already. The lack of that other more crucial “thing” is what’s causing the psychosis.
What would a win really do for Kim or for Fed’s legacy (other than, in his case, dispelling that grim and quite inexplicable fog of “dysfunktion” that’s loomed over him both here and at Miami for the last 4 years)?
Can Rafa really care all that much knowing he can safely look forward to claiming 4, if not 5, out of the 5 clay court events he’ll likely enter this year?
Wish all of them well, but here’s what will really light my fire:
1) Bepa: The best WTA performer right now (and playing as well as she’s ever likely to ) – that single title she’s won at this level (at this venue in fact) is beginning to smack more and more of underperformance.
3) Sveta: see above comments about Bepa’s “underperformance” and then multiply by 50.
4) Delpo: Two consecutive semis and an entirely commendable mickey-mouse title. A Masters title makes the comeback official. Somewhat ludicrously, it would be his first.
5) Any one of a gang of bright (and entirely ruthless) young things like Dolgo, Milos, Petra or even Kanepi to bring about a bloody coup – a killing spree that results in the partial reconfiguration of the rankings and ownership of the tour’s main titles.
I’m entirely serious. I’m not normally one for “next big things”, but it seems to me we’ve faffed around with Grigor and Ernie for long enough – conditions seem ripe as they’ve ever been for something a little different.
And because, they’re worth it. All of them.
Read More...
I didn’t follow any of Dubai this year only finding time to tune into the final.
As such, I don’t have too many opinions. But I do think it bears mentioning that although this is now 3 consecutive titles for Nole in DooBye, this is the first and only of those three in which he’s either displayed the form or met with the opposition consistent with that success.
What’s perhaps more surprising is that it was Fed who’d been the better player all week – Nole termed his win over Berd “his worst performance of the year” – yet it was Nole who was able (in the first set at least) to bring the type of tennis that’s won him Slams (plural).
Does this form, this incredible streak he’s on, make him the best player in the world right now?
Probably. I really don’t see the controversy in stating that.
The fact that he’s the ‘man to beat’ right now must surely be incontrovertible and isn’t (despite troublemakers’ best efforts to stir things up) a slight on anyone. On the other hand, it also says next to nothing about his chances at any of the upcoming Slams or, for that matter, at IW/Miami. Nothing, that is, other than that he must be held up as one of the four or five players with the best shot at winning it.
Some of Bepa’s surprisingly low-key, economic play (often under the type of pressure would have resulted in her inexorable collapse not 16 months ago) was so un-Bepa like, I almost mistook it for someone else.
Just as un-Bepa-like, is the fact that she was able to continue in that vein for the entire week.
Who are you and how did I get here?
Yes Delpo won his first title since his comeback and yes that is a flux capacitor from late 2009.
Also, incidentally, his third consecutive semi final and a rise of 77 places to #89 in the rankings.
Spare a thought, if you can tear yourself away from the Delpo welcome-home party, for Tipsy, who is now 0-3 in ATP finals and the only “titleless” member of the top 100 Serbian stable.
Was I the only one that thought Kim was spectacularly under par in Doha?
And I don’t just mean the double faults, entertaining though they were.
There was simply no continuity to this final however you choose to spin it.
The most frightening demonstration of this was in the way Woz was allowed to claw her way back into the match from a set and 4-1 down – credit to Woz for seeing it through, but it’s something that should never have been allowed to happen.
All the same, kinda difficult to complain when the best player in the world right now (please note the bold font before excommunicating me from your rss reader) caps off the year without playing her best tennis - in a way which, to my mind, puts an end to the question of who the ‘player of the year’ is (see below).
Fact: Caz hit 35 winners in the final – only one less than Kim Clijsters.
Fact: The day before in the semis, she came out all guns blazing.
Fact: Caz hit forehand winners throughout the week.
(In other news, Yvgeny-Unicorn won a pot of gold in a Challenger event held at the other end of the rainbow. Delegates from Mars and Lilliput expressed an interest in hosting similar events in their home nations.)
It wasn’t always pretty, it didn’t always work – but it’s yet more evidence of the growth in her game. And of the awareness of the need for such growth.
Belly-Flop of of the Week.
Bepa’s second set bagel against Caz. I’m almost not in favour of the “keeping-the-emotions-in-check” approach anymore– which, to be fair, got her to where she is today, but has now, one feels, run its course.
Not that she should return to being ‘Crazy-Bepa’.
But I really can’t see there being that much wrong with breaking a racquet or two occasionally (and to then move on, rather than letting it fester in the way she used to before), if that’s what it takes to avert these horrendous beatdowns we still occasionally get.
Some people just aren’t built to “button it up” – and it’s as wrong to expect them to do that, as it is for them to fly off the handle once too often.
Weaka-Vika
I really hope I’m wrong about this, but it seems to me that Vika joins a growing line of upcoming Slam contenders upended by breathing problems, heat and fatigue.
More Demmie.
Not over it. :((
There’s a small chance I may have shed non-virtual tears over this one. ACTUALLY THEY WERE GREAT BIG “MAN” TEARS.
It would probably have been the same for any player (even one I wasn’t as emotionally invested in) if they went so abruptly.
You have to be a very special, well-loved player to warrant and to then carry off a farewell tour – which is why I’m not, in general, a fan of them.
On the other hand, I’m pretty sure I’m not a fan of the emotional whiplash I’ve suffered over the past few days – a direct consequence of being forced to go ‘cold turkey’.
Can we agree on a more manageable, staged withdrawal strategy – a kind of halfway house – for when, say, Venus retires? The way Amelie cautiously signalled her intent a few months before making it official?
Player of the Year?
Has there ever been such intense speculation over this issue before? Probably not.
It’s easy to see why of course: never have such conflicting notions of consistency, quality, Slams and rankings points come to a head so acutely - nor grated against one another so viciously.
It’s as if Serena, Kim and Woz deliberately set out to demonstrate the three prevailing attitudes to the tour that may as well represent the Bolshy left, centre-right and far right of rankings system politics.
Woz is the young wannabe-opinion-maker eager to make a name for herself by being seen with all the right people at all the right parties – only one that hasn’t yet quite learnt the perils of overexposure.
Kim’s the former tree hugging liberal that has seen fit to drop her most provocative opinions as the demands (and comforts) of family life and the pragmatism of tennis-middle-age kick in.
Serena’s the eccentric aristocrat that expects the ‘National Trust’ to foot the bill for an extension to her country house; that is when she’s not shooting down ramblers exercising their right of way on her land.
Can you be player of the year having only made one Slam semi? I don’t think so.
Can you be player of the year having only played six events, all of which took place in it’s first half? Winning two Slams helps your cause as the best player in the world – but that’s not quite the same as ‘player of the year’.
Kim certainly wouldn’t be my centre-right WTA presidential candidate of choice in any other year – but she’s won a Slam, the WTA Championships, a premier mandatory (Miami), a premier 5 (Cincy) and an International event in Brisbane – that’s one event at every WTA tier.
If that doesn’t make you player of this (not especially representative) year, then I’m not sure what does.
Read More...
My loyalties were split 51/49 in Djoko’s favour.
Rafa, playing as he was for a place in history, seemed to me to have more to lose – and a heck of a lot more to gain.
Djoko, playing in his first Slam final since Aus 2008, seemed too talented to have won only one Slam – the consummate underachiever.
Only after it was all over did I realise how glaringly obvious it was.
Inevitable, even.
“Hear that Mr Anderson? That is the sound of inevitability.”
-- Agent Smith, see ‘Matrix, The’
It was inevitable, really, that Rafa would one day complete his box set.
It was inevitable that he’d be driven enough to make the necessary adjustments that would tend toward making this the most natural of conclusions.
It was inevitable that he’d learn to play closer to the baseline and improve his volleying sufficiently to win on grass.
It was inevitable that he’d flatten out his forehand, adding both the pace and depth needed to shorten points on fast hard courts.
It was inevitable that he’d curtail his schedule to give his knees the rest they are now literally crying out for, enabling him to remain effective through to the seasons last Slam – the one they said he couldn’t win.
It was inevitable that his inherently open disposition would lend itself to this degree of reinvention.
So when he unveiled his new-fangled 135mph serve souped up to the point of delirium early on this event, a serve which remained unbroken until the semis, there was an inevitability about that too.
And yet, it is inevitable that this victory will be lauded as one of of “heart”, “spirit”, “determination”,”energy”,“fitness”…..but not sadly of talent, that is surely the precursor to that reinvention.
Inevitable, that essential vitality that drove such improvements would be held against him simply because it doesn’t conform to an exotic strain of tennis neoclassicism that probably doesn’t even exist.
Perhaps knowing all this, it was inevitable that Djoko would sell his own soul to ensure he didn’t go down early in the first set.
Inevitable too, how panic-stricken, desperate and “conflustered” he looked when things didn’t go to plan: someone walking in might have thought he was down a couple of breaks deep in the fourth set.
Inevitable also, how Djoko would bounce back in the second with the type of form he had brought only48 hours earlier, before the timeliest rain delay there ever was, against arguably his greatest ever adversary – he hadn’t come this far just to pull a Bepa now had he?
Inevitable then, that some of this spirit, at least, would carry over into this match and prevent Rafa from converting any more than a measly 6 out of a staggering 26 break points. (Perhaps this was Rafa’s “Roger moment” too – I’m thinking it was all Djoko)
And yet, it was inevitable too, that Rafa would choose 5-4 15-30 down in the third set to return the favour by unveiling three of the biggest serves of his career. Arguably the event’s biggest story.
For sure was a little bit nervous for me, because especially on the 5 4 I have 15 30. So that was a very important moment, and at that moment I did something that I never did: three serves, one ace and two service winners. So that's the big experience for me, and believe me, that's good.
It is, then, inevitable to me that he will, one day, win indoors at the Tennis Masters Cup – the only major title missing from his résumé.
Meanwhile, we will inevitably be drawn to talk of naturally homogenised milk-giving creatures, whilst simultaneously railing against the practice as “pointless”, “vulgar” and “populist”.
…and if he ever finishes up with more Slams than Fed, then…well, that will have been inevitable too.
***
-- “It’s better to burn out than to fade away.” (But it’s even better not to burn out at all)
Back to that match against Fed.
Everyone remembers the gutsy way Djoko saved those two match points.
I’d argue the way he bounced back after losing the 3rd set was just as important, if not more so.
Fed had just broken Djoko’s serve in a way which should also have broken his spirit, with two of his best winners of the match: exactly the kind of timely, intimidating death blows designed to vaporise your morale (and usually your soul) that Fed specialises in - sheer rock and roll.
Anyone not named Rafa, now 2 sets to 1 down and with Fed seemingly in the ascendancy, would have taken it as their cue to fade away .
Djoko picked up from exactly where he had left off – with the same unflinching, gutsy refusal to miss that’s probably the second biggest story of the event.
And that, perhaps more than anything else, captures where this match was won and lost.
Rail against Fed’s passive play, the UFEs, the missed match points if you must…..but if you can’t bring yourself to credit that sort of play I’d argue you’re exactly the kind of “fan” Fed can do without.
-- Feeling bad for Fed, giving credit where it’s due…yes both are possible.
One of the best experiences of the Federer/Djoko match was hearing Fed fans give due recognition to Djoko having won this match rather than Fed having lost it.
I confess I went back and reviewed those match points that Djoko saved and the last couple of games again.
And yes, Fed was passive…..far too passive. And those last two games were a mess.
There were also an astonishingly large number of high quality rallies played under pressure from the back of the court. Almost a shame one guy had to emerge the loser in these rallies – and Djoko simply wasn’t missing.
Only a buffoon would pretend that any match in which Fed dishes up 66 UFEs and barely serves at 50% throughout is his best performance. But only a grumpy, wanton twat would choose to believe that every match Fed plays is “on his racquet” (ghastly expression by the way) or that Fed’s loss had little to do with the relentless nature of Djoko’s returns.
As for the stat of 66 UFEs, well that can be misleading too. There’s a shank that’s hit on the third ball of a rally and there’s one that follows a 36-ball exchange. Both are recorded as UFEs and yet the latter is a breakdown of performance born of the length of the exchange. Elicited if not forced.
The good news is that Fed is prepared to acknowledge all this, even if an irritating element of his fanbase isn’t.
Sure, now looking back I missed a few too many forehands at the very end, but the match won't be decided on winners only. You can also see mistakes, and he pushed me to make those. Credit to him.
…
…it was not like the guy can't play under pressure. He's proven his point, and time and time again. I knew he was gonna be a really tough opponent. The guys who overlooked him don't know anything about tennis, unfortunately.
He also (quite rightly) suggested that a tight match like this wasn’t simply about Djoko making winners or he himself playing his best tennis – not that different, if you remember, from Djoko intimating that a high quality encounter like his would be decided by only a few points.
Still my favourite quote of the event.
-- Liking, Likeability and the Like.
I get that some people will never like Nole. I myself suffer a similar ailment with Kim Clijsters.
You should know that you have my full leave to exercise your right not to like him, or indeed anyone of your choosing.
But let it, at least, now be for personal reasons alone and not for the accusations once levelled against him which simply don’t hold true anymore (many never did).
Gone is the irritating bravado …and in it’s place an unaffected quiet dignity.
Gone are the try-hard ingratiatory theatrics…and in it’s place an easy charm that doesn’t give a fig about whether you like him or not.
The maturity and depth of character he showed in defeat ranks alongside the best I’ve ever seen – perhaps not surprising that Rafa chose to publicly point that out.
Oh, and his tennis is back too. Shame Marian Vajda wasn’t around to see it.
Are we really going to continue to sneer after ringing endorsements from the best two players of the last decade?
The kids grown up. I suggest we do to.
-- Ditto Camp Djoko.
However garish you might have found Srdjans shirt (I personally found it as sweet as it was tacky) they too displayed a quiet dignity in defeat that’s wholly at odds with the whole “Be Quiet” thing from two years back. Fantastic to see.
-- I clearly need no excuses to talk about Rafa’s serve.
The volleying, the slice, the flattening out were more about optimisation and incremental development – the serve seems more akin to a mutant gene. Easily the most improved stroke of 2010.
-- “Ye old faithful”
For all the improvements, nice too, to see Rafa’s old stalwart pass: it’s hit under pressure, from deep behind the baseline, stretched out wide, and on the run.
And you know what else? He never misses it. In my book, that makes it a candidate for the best shot in tennis right now.
-- Idle observation: Rafa’s lost much (though not all) of his boyish charm.
Not that there’s anything wrong with the dignified Spaniard that now stands in his place. It’s time. That is all.
-- From the “Dept. of the Wacky, Wild and Wonderful”.
Wait….did Fed subconsciously lose this match in order to avoid playing Nadal, thereby preventing further damage to that H2H and to his legacy in general?
Leaving aside for the moment how driven a champion Federer is and the slim possibility that he might actually have beaten a Rafa in this form (still a fast hard court people), are we really going to suggest Roger prefers going down to Nole, who – and I’m pretty sure this isn’t from The Twilight Zone – he’s not the best of chums with?
-- The best player in the womens draw won. And it’s hard to hate on that.
Although if you’ve been paying attention you’ll know that I’ve never actually hated on Kim at all. You’ll also know that I’ve broken new ground and that although she may never be a player I like, I won’t be virulently rooting against her either.
You’ve got Bopanna and Qureshi and the good will they generated to thank for that.
She didn’t have it all her own way of course. And I daresay the wobbles we saw against Stosur and Venus will continue to plague her from time to time.
Even so, it’s worth remembering that she beat both Serena and Venus last year and a self-destructive Venus again this time round, so it’s really not fair to suggest that she only won this because of Serena’s absence.
One last thing. And I realise this probably puts me in the tiniest minority imaginable.
I’m not a great fan of the second trophy presentation that takes place whenever she wins one of these things – and you’ve got to think she might win a few more.
The first trophy presentation is what you think it is. The second one is where Jada gets presented to the world.
She’s cute. Too cute for words even (kids often are). You’re a great mum with a healthy work/life balance. We get it.
It was great to see the first time round, perhaps even necessary given she’d packed up her first career to go and have a family.
All the same, I don’t think we need to see that every year. And I’m not sure it’s doing her any favours either. There, I said it.
Bepa….dunno what to say. Which is kinda appropriate coz there plainly wasn’t much of a final to speak of.
And after championing your cause I do feel you at least owe me a hanky to wipe some of that egg dripping down my face.
Still, two consecutive Slam finals ain’t half bad considering who you were up against. Neither is a #4 ranking.
To put it bluntly you were never going to go through a Kim performing at 95%. And performing at 45% yourself it’s surprising it took as long as 59 mins.
Now go and put that #4 ranking to good use.
-- Guilty Pleasures: The Hoofed issue everyone loves to pretend they hate talking about.
So long as Rafa continues to rack up titles there’ll be bleating noises from farmyards up and down the country.
You can choose to partake in it or you can sit back like some stuffy codger railing against popular science.
My own view is that it’s a completely flawed, wholly objectionable undertaking that can, nevertheless, yield a few useful insights.
I’ll try and keep it short.
So that 5-2 H2H? Completely misleading - Rafa has never reached as many hard court Slam finals as Fed reached RG finals – if he did the score might have been very different. That’s just fact.
But you know what the flipside of that argument is?
That had Rafa made more of those hard court finals….he might actually won them. It is possible. Then where would that H2H be?
Perhaps that is a little fanciful, though I suspect that Brad Gilbert and others who now give the nod to Rafa are going on a hunch that, considering what we know about how fast Rafa learns and how well Fed’s game matches up with his, that had they played more hard court Slam matches, Rafa would have won a handful of those too.
Consider the non Slam hard court matches they played during 2005-2007. There was that win he had over Fed in Dubai(2006), that five set war they had in Miami when Fed came back from two sets down (2005) and two other straight sets wins for Fed at the Tennis Masters Cup (2006, 2007).
If we use that to extrapolate a set of fictitious hard court Slam results we might rule 3-1 in Fed’s favour. Still only bringing the total to 6-5 in Rafa’s favour. Only if we skew it 4-1 or 3-0 in Fed’s favour do we finish up even. Which would seem to give Rafa the upper hand.
Complete codswallop of course. Fanciful codswallop. But food for thought nevertheless.
Speaking of fanciful, isn’t it a stretch to suggest he might have beaten Fed at a time when he was losing on hard courts to Youznhy, Blake and Ferrer?
Yes it is. What those losses demonstrate is that Rafa’s game hadn’t at that stage matured sufficiently to translate effectively to hard courts. All at a time, remember, when Fed was in his prime and playing arguably the best tennis of his career (his game now is arguably more complete but he can’t perhaps compete as well with Rafa over five sets now as he might have then).
Also worth noting that Misha and Blake have, wait for it……single handed backhands…….which, contrary to the conventional wisdom that purports single-handed backhands go up in smoke against Rafa, actually suggests Fed might have had the upper hand after all.
Personally, 16 Slams and 23 straight semis (arguably the most impressive stat ever) settles it for me.
Though, and this is important, the opinion that Rafa might already belong in GOAT contention is no longer as ridiculous as it once was…and Brad Gilbert or anyone else ought not to be stomped on for simply expressing it.
(Images: Getty)
Read More...
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...
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...
Ok look, I like Petko too.
And I know that she’s charmed the socks off everyone with her happy-wiggles, her various and wide-ranging video musings, blogging, and quips on her twitter account.
And perhaps last night’s beatdown (coz that’s what it plainly was) was a little too close to the bone.
Personally, I found this a little try-hard, but it’s clear that she’s quirky, bright and a valuable addition to the game.
Pardon me, however, if I’m not quite as torn up.
A top ten WTA player beat up on a top fifty player. Clearly we can’t complain enough about this.
Read More...
When it finally does go down, it’ll be these four ladies contesting the semi finals in Montreal.
Sveta and CazWoz did manage to get a couple of games in (Woz broke) before the rain forced them off again….they used the down time to indulge us with a spot of footy-tennis.
Sveta rocks the world of footy-tennis like no other - with either a tennis or a football (mixed doubles with Muzz?). But a special mention and an A* to Woz for effort who has, for now at least, earnt the dissolution of her “anyone-but-Woz” status.
Being kooky on court with Sveta is a good thing – your efforts have been noted.
Read More...
Posts
All Comments
© Free Blogger Templates Spain by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008
Back to TOP
