Nothing I can say will do justice to the distilled quanta of awesome that is this video.
Can we all, instead, simply agree that it “does what it says on the tin”?
(word, big-up, hat-tip and many, many thanks to @andy_murray)
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.
I don’t claim to fully understand why Feli’s match with Fed went to three tie breaks. I only know that its HIGH time we buried many of the utter myths surrounding clay.
As I’ve blathered on about many times before, and as Carlos Moya said again yesterday, the era of surface specialists is OVER (not at all the same as saying that surface specialists won’t continue to exist btw – relics of a bygone age often do).
The vast majority of the more convincing up and comers and, in particular, all of the players at the very top, have the results they do, not because of their proficiency on clay or any other surface, but because of their proficiency at tennis.
Tweaks and adjustments must, of course, be made – but it’s self-evident, I hope, that whilst their respective style may differ, all of Fed, Rafa, Nole, and, indeed, Sod, play the same brand of winning tennis on all surfaces.
To a lesser extent, the same holds true for Murray and Feli – and when they lose on clay, it’s for exactly the same reason they lose anywhere else: mental dysfunction.
The point about Feli is that he has one of the best serves in the business, and, when he’s thinking straight(!), can hit through the court and close out at the net in a way that’s served him so very well on grass: none of that’s suddenly gonna disappear because he’s on clay.
Nor am I surprised to see him pull off a performance that would see him triumph over at least half of the current top 10 (possibly his best clay court match ever). Infrequent sure, but it’s hardly the first time and probably won’t be the last.
Yes that shocking “smash” at 5-2 in the final set tie break will probably return to haunt him, and yes, Federer, clearly vulnerable, only pulled through by the slimmest of margins. And yes, Federer being Federer, it’s probably fair to expect just a little more.
The fact remains, however, that he got through playing at a fraction of his best and will likely benefit from the encounter. It’s not the first time we’ve seen that either.
Let’s get the shirt out the way first coz I think that’s the “easy” part.
Funky, fluoro, eye-scarring fugliness I can deal with (remember this?). Early-80s scribbly, graffiti insignias (normally found on the side of subway trains) do at least have a certain fulsome, nostalgic fuzziness to recommend them.
Both at once? Didn’t think so either…not unless you’re auditioning for a part as an extra in a very poor remake of Electric Boogaloo (it was laughably rubbish the first time round).
Del Potro d. Lopez 67 76 76
The tennis was visceral, austere, overwrought, laugh-out-loud funny, severe-looking, perfectly nonsensical but also tantalisingly brilliant (at times).
It also went on for 3 hours and 20 mins.
The big take out must be that Delpo survived the encounter, as it seems, healthily and with his wrist (and his retinas) intact….had he lost it would have been no different.
It was a tactically-confounded performance that suggested the rustiness we all expected, but was also tinged with the traces of brilliance that once was.
I still don’t think he’ll be responsible for the mass culling of top seeds in the early rounds of the AO that some are geeing themselves up for.
Feli is not a top ten player – I’m not so sure he even qualifies as “2nd-tier” anymore. A top-tenner wouldn’t have given Delpo half as much room to breath, much less do his gangly-brawny thing. Ditto a less-talented stalwart like Daveed Ferrer.
All of which works out in Delpos favour of course – this is exactly the kind of testing, match-play he needs to fill up on ahead of Melbourne.
***
The other comeback isn’t going so well.
Bartoli d. Safina 60 61
After a perfectly commendable three set loss to Wickmayer in Auckland last week, Dinaroshka must have hoped to go at least one better – failing that a single competitive match would have been good.
She cannot have foreseen the two set lockout that Bartoli would impose upon her – evidently no one else did either.
Safina didn’t, by all accounts, play a “bad” match – that would only have been possible had she been allowed to play at all.
Here’s the thing: Marion does that that to people. And she often does it to the best of players.
But it’s when she does it to the best-loved players that the worst form of medieval contempt comes out.
I don’t get it.
From what I can tell she’s a ferociously talented, deliciously idiosyncratic player with oodles of attitude she’s not about to apologise to anyone for.
When she’s on, her strangely effective two-handed strokes are capable of smothering you with eye-wateringly acute-angled passes or simple, flat, uncompromising pace. All while remaining perma-rooted on the baseline.
She’s not a fashionista, she has an academic eccentric for a father, she’s not in the business of cloying, simpering lie-ins with the media, she can appear more aloof, stern and unfriendly on court than is perhaps necessary, and YES, she rubs (some) people up (though mostly her own compatriots) the wrong way.
BIG FREAKIN DEAL.
We’ve turned a blind eye to far worse, far more heinous, garlic-infused episodes of brattiness from so-called rising stars or media-luverlies, who all seem to get a free pass on account of their age, their standing in the game, or poster-girl looks.
Don’t pretend we haven’t been there.
Read More...
(FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP/Getty Images)
Davydenko d. Djokovic 4-6 6-4 7-6
Nothing much you can do.
I have to admit I’d only been keeping a half open eye on Nikolay’s fortunes this week, expecting another valiant but ultimately, ill fated effort. On the evidence of this performance however, this is beginning to shape up like Miami last year, when after a similar spell out in the cold, Niki peaked, laying waste to A-Rod and Rafa en route to his second career Masters title. In the final of which Nadal looked as equally devoid of any answers, as Novak did in that final set tie break today.
The truth is, Niki only knows one (very effective) mode of play, and there’s very little anyone can do (except, you know, that Swiss bloke) when he reaches these heights; you might, however, have expected Novak to fare just a little better given their very similar style of play.
(Photo: AP)
But Novak, has been in something of a transition this year. That’s me being generous. I’ve described his play as exhibiting more grind than should come naturally to him, and recently he’s even been given over to some unbecoming episodes of ‘lurking’. Behind the baseline that is.
You all know who the traditional ‘lurkers' are: Gael, Reeshard, Nadal even. But last time I checked, Novak wasn’t one of them.
Seeing him behind the baseline is a bit like watching Dementieva serving aces on her 2nd serve. Oh wait, it's been that sort of year.
I guess he’s been trying to forge together a more well-rounded tennis product, which is a lofty aim, and deserving of some success. But it’s success which can’t come too soon IMO.
All this uncertainty about his game makes him uniquely vulnerable to someone like Nik, who doesn’t need to think twice about how exactly to best use the sharpest (and only) tool in his box.
That’s not to say Novak didn’t try however; the quality of this match (and that final set tie break in particular) makes up very nicely for my being denied a Rafa-Soderling match up for the second time in two weeks. Yeah, I’m not about to forget that in a hurry – especially now that Nik has just usurped Big Rob’s place in the Race to London, leaving Nando of all people in the eighth position.
“I’m in a final and that’s very important,” Nadal said. “It’s my first final since I’ve been back and that’s a good result for me.”
(tennis.com)
I’m thinking that with it being Nadal’s first final since his return, and with Nik playing as well as he so evidently is, this might be as good as it gets for Rafa.
Having only played two complete matches this week can’t have been of much help either (Ljubicic and Lopez today brought the men’s infirmary-count to nine).
Maybe we should pass on yelling out ‘Break a leg boys’, this week?
Read More...
Posts
All Comments
© Free Blogger Templates Spain by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008
Back to TOP
