Charting Petra Kvitova’s success and other ‘Voodoo Economics’

I suppose we can say Petra’s back. Her demolition of Dani was the best match I’ve seen her play since Wimbledon, and the rest of her week wasn’t half bad either. 




Trouble is, ideas about form and consistency never really resonate very much with players like her. I daresay they’re not meant to.

I’ve heard her being compared to a number of players – Mary Pearce, elements of both of the Williamses, and even Juan Martin del Potro.

All those analogies have some truth to them but she seems to me to have more in common with someone she neither looks like nor plays like. Svetlana Kuznetsova.

Neither has the the sense or it seems the desire to control their seemingly unending (surface-neutral) talent – they simply don’t come equipped with the requisite hardware. Neither seems very fussed when things go awry, as they often do. Both are hard-wired to keep on doing what they do, however gloriously stupid – corrective action, it seems, is for pussies….and for those silly people concerned about winning matches.

It’s this unrestrained yet frustratingly laid-back approach that can either lead to the most frightening (and in Sveta’s case the most symphonic) beatdowns you’ll likely ever see, or simply days where neither would last even a few games on the Challenger tour.




And it’s for this reason Sveta has two rather than five or six Slams. The truth is, at this point, I can’t see Petra’s career trajectory being all that different – she’s definitely no week-in-week-out type, but you just know she’ll pull off something utterly astonishing when all the working parts of her mental apparatus (of which there are many) synchronise.

Since I recounted her win at Wimbledon, precious little appears to have changed, except maybe, for one thing.

That look of mild annoyance she sometimes exhibits after an UFE  is still there. It’s her modus operandi – her way of dealing with errors. It doesn’t last very long and she’s generally ready to move on almost immediately. No need to linger in negativity the way some do. Exactly the way it should be. Except when things go wrong. Which is when ‘moving on immediately’ becomes precisely the wrong play. You rob yourself of time to reconsider. Valuable time in which she needs to reconsider.

But in Linz I saw more than mild annoyance. There was a lot of stopping and starting and staring, perhaps even some flouncing. She appeared almost to be have been coached to take stock, to take a moment to really see and to really feel the error of her ways. Or, to put it another way “to go to the naughty zone and think about what you’ve done”.

It worked. This time. Particularly in the way she was able to stop herself from going completely haywire against JJ – you got a sense, at times, she was headed for precisely that. You also got a sense that ploughing through recklessly the way she normally does would have hastened her demise.

But there’ll still be days when she’ll have more success ploughing through in exactly that way – for that too is her modus operandi, it’s written right into her DNA. And that will have been ok too.



There’s no universal recipe for success. It simply doesn’t exist. Don’t buy the dope being peddled by those pretending it does.

Individual success is dependent on an unruly and an unholy blend of factors including your own temperament, your opponent, the type of day they’re having, the type of day you’re having,  surface, conditions, the matchup,  sheer luck and the colour of your socks. It’s not a stretch to think of it all as a type of Voodoo. You hire coaches (perhaps we should think of them as tennis shamans)  to get a handle on all that volatile shit.

And some days there’ll simply be no rational explanation for why exactly you won a match. It just happens. Most players are simply happy to put it behind them. Yet scores of commentators will be professing confident sounding theories on exactly what you did right and why you should keep at it. Just like they do in the stock market. Voodoo Economics.

Trouble is, if you lose using those same tactics, they’ll suddenly all be construed as mistakes, miscalculations and mayhem. Also just like the stock market. And just like ARod said they always do.

The truth is, Petra, like many alongside her, is simply learning to navigate that treacherous balance of guile, pace, steel and hard work. Learning to apply just the right amount of each at just the right time. Knowing when to hold back is just as important, and a lot of times you’re simply winning ugly.

If there is a deep, mystical truth in any of this, perhaps it’s this: no two players’ experience can every be the same because no two players are the same. Ergo, no two players’ journey should be the same. Everyone has their own bag of tricks they’ve been endowed with and you’ve just got to figure it for yourself.

You won’t always win. But someone will always be ready to explain why you didn’t.

Read More...

I’m not that into you….just yet.

 

Not my favourite person Benny.

 

There’s steely focus and there’s just plain rude. But a little of more of this and I might get on board.

 

 

 

Benesova d. Jankovic 7-6 (7-3) 6-3

 

Nothing shoddy about her straight sets dismissal of JJ, who, now just two weeks away from the USO, has some real thinking to do.

 

 

 

"I didn't feel like a top-five player out there," said Jankovic, who lost to Serena Williams at the 2008 US Open in her only Grand Slam final appearance.

"My game hasn't been at the top level for the last couple of tournaments."

…

"I really wanted to play matches here, and at the last tournament, but I didn't do that and now I haven't played many matches before the US Open," she added.

"I'll just try my best over there, and hopefully I'll be better."

-- BBC

 

Hopefully. Though “famous last words” and all that…

 

More Benny. On a trial basis for now.

 

 

Read More...

Crying Wolf

 

getty

Kleybanova d. Jankovic 7-5 6-2

 

“I had some fear moving because I was afraid I would twist it again,” Jankovic said. “I’m not confident where I have to move side to side and play an intense match. I had a chances in the first set but then I got a little tired. I need to get in shape again.”

 

And this is what Kleybs had to say:

 

“She’s always a great runner and a winner against someone else isn’t always a winner against her,” said Kleybanova, who is now 3-2 against Jankovic but dropped two contests to her earlier this year. “But if I’m playing my best, my ball is fast enough to make winners against her. She was actually moving pretty well today.”

 

Yeah, Kleybs’ ball is fast enough to make winners against anyone, even when not playing her best.

 

As for JJ, I dunno.

 

Losing a 4-1 lead in the first set?

 

She did roll her ankle and hadn’t played on it in two weeks.

 

I’m actually inclined to cut her some slack this time round.

 

JJ wouldn’t be JJ if she didn’t cry wolf now and then. And now. And then.

 

And we all know how that story ends.

Read More...

Roland Garros: Heads and Hearts

I love it when the bikers goggles come out. No prisoners, as they say.

Within the past week she’s beaten the undisputed best two players of the past decade. Now another former #1 and arguably the best defender in the game has succumbed to her charms.

A Slam final. Consider the possibilities. I’m sure most of you already have.

Having the slightest of difficulty, however, with the idea currently doing the rounds that she’s “unplayable” in this sort of form….other than that, she deserves all the success she’s getting for being able to execute under some very trying circumstances,...and it’s all good.

Both Serena and Venus can be, and very often are, unplayable. Roger and Rafa have been known to throw in the odd unplayable zinger en route to any one of their very many Slam victories – it’s not usually lost on any of us when they do. Big Rob, I’m sure most would agree, was nothing short of unplayable two nights back.

Sammy, however, is simply executing a wonderfully varied game-plan born of her very distinctive bag of tricks. No one in the women’s game has much experience of dealing with either the kick or pace she generates on serve, and to be honest, no one out there’s executing as well as her.

What she perhaps deserves more praise for is the way in which she seems to be closing out matches in moments she might previously have been relied upon to wilt. And for that I really do salute her.

Never underestimate the power of good execution. But it’s usually playable.

“…I just I don't know what happened, but I just you know, she was the better player.
I mean, she did what she had to do. You know, she played her game. I wasn't even 20% of my ability, so that shows. When we played in Indian Wells and I was, you know, on my game, I was playing aggressively, I returned well. I won in two easy sets.
Today I was just I wasn't like myself. I don't even know who that was on the court.”

That’s the look of a bored eight year old with their face pressed up against a steaming window pane anxious to get out and play. Or, as in this case, off court.

It’s not often I take her self berating, seemingly ungracious pressers that seriously. But I confess I didn’t know who that was either. And 20% is way too kind.

I had thought that with that win in IW, these performances were mostly behind us. A Slam Semi – with not an Henin or a Williams Sister in sight. That’s what you blew today.

She made a Slam final too. After playing only a set of tennis.

Franny played Sammy last year in round one of this very event. Now the two are what they call Slam Contenders.

My head says Sammy. My heart says Franny. Game, Set and Match Heart.

43 Slams without a single retirement. And suddenly she’s Medusa? Get real.

And whilst getting real, consider precisely whose interests would be served by her further tearing the calf muscles that were causing her “shooting pains” throughout the match.

Consider, also, whose interests would be served by her fighting her way to a Slam final (were that even possible) in which she’s either unable to give her all -- resulting in another one of those duff WTA finals -- or worse, forced to withdraw.

Still think she was wrong to retire when she did?

(Photos: AFP/Getty)

Read More...

Rome: Govt. Health Warning - Serve-Volley may induce Identity Crises in certain players.

“Is this how Rafa sprawls his legs – can someone help me out here please?”

“I AM Rafa!”

“SHE ain’t Rafa!”

“I should be Rafa – I am NOT Justine people. Would never do that to you”

“Heinz keeps telling me I’m Rafa.”

“I’M SPARTICUS!”

“Even Rafa doesn’t think I’m Rafa.”

If anyone has further information on the events of the past week – please get in touch.

Here’s what seems to have happened.

-- Ana Ivanovic re-emerged on the scene rebranded as a more considered and confident force – but also bolstered by a Russian-Eastern-European Alliance intent on propping up her cause and assimilating her back in the game. One by one they folded either by design or through injury, poor form or sheer want of decorum . The Alliance had evidently not accounted for MJMS. No one had accounted for Nick Clegg either.

-- Whilst the world was still getting to grips with the idea that a Spanish serve-volleying lefty might actually have a shot at the title – Jelena and Serena put on an exhibition of their own.

Only not the one everyone was after.

-- There were some positives (JJs return to form up until that point was nothing short of inspiring), mitigating factors (Serena’s return from knee injury on her least effective surface after an outage of over three months) and even the tennis wasn’t wholly bad.

-- I just couldn’t stand it, that’s all. JJ played a shocker of a first set, Serena followed with two of her own, which, incidentally, it seemed as though JJ had only pulled through because she’d clung on to her sanity the way I’d barely managed to cling on to dear life itself.

I’m aware that certain twitterati out there thought of this in ‘epic’ terms. That word’s most readily bandied about in an effort at deceiving you into thinking that bloat somehow equates with substance.

An error-strewn mess that got so protracted it actually caused time to stand still – the way it sometimes does when you’re stuck in the tube – sardine-tinned in temperatures exceeding 30 degrees C , with only your warped sensory perception and neighbour’s nostril hair for company – I’ve been there.

So when this happened, it somehow seemed both weirdly apt and oddly satisfying.

For anyone currently domiciled on Pluto, the gist of the explanation proffered up by Serena to JJ at the net was: “…would never cheat you like that…don’t think I would do that…I’m not Justine”.

The “that” in question being this.

Oh Serena - let bygones be…present, alive and kicking thankyouverymuch.

-- Having been to hell and back, JJ might have hoped for an easier ride in the final. It was certainly shorter, and not nearly as hellish. Unless that is you consider drop shotting one’s opponents until their ears bleed viable on-court conduct.

Serve-Volley’s only half the story.

The thing about MJMS is she didn’t simply look to defeat her opponents. Most of the time she seemed to be having a party bear-baiting them, before tying them up in all sorts of knots they didn’t even know existed – her style of play doesn’t simply contrast that of most baseliners, it seems to grate.

I’ll have two please.

-- Time also for people to get off their very high horses over this little caper. Not what you would call her finest moment, though lest we forget – coz some folks clearly have – Gonzo was embroiled in a very similar scandal not two years ago. Don’t remember half as many dagger eyes being directed his way.

From what I can tell MJMS is not Gonzo. She’s also been kind enough to confirm that she too, “would never treat anyone like that”.

-- On a related note, how long before we get to see MJMS and Feli-Lopez play mixed doubles together? All sorts of lefty serve-volley mayhem waiting to happen.

-- On a completely unrelated note – coz silly me, that’s what I thought Americans were to red clay – what on earth are Sammy Querrey and Jonny Isner doing jazzing it up in Serbia? Further proof you should never let the haters stop you from doing your (very lofty) thang.

-- At the start of last week, I found myself wondering whether Federer entering Estoril was even a good idea. An early loss at a 250 event – not unlikely under the circumstances – could prove devastating coming so soon after Rome, and would seem to imply that a certain tipping point had been reached.

Has it?

A slap in the face to the Daveed Ferrers of this world, who were kept out of the top ten for all those years only for him to punk out against…Albert Montanes?

A respectable player in his own right, but hardly a Kolya or a Nole, whom Fed lost to in Doha and Basel recently, both also 250 events.

For now, I’m electing to keep schtum on the topic of thresholds and tipping points, unless and until I see that Slam semi-final streak go *snap*. That really would be a tipping point.

(Photos: AFP, Reuters, AP)

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: 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...

Indian Wells: Don’t EVER “Colour me Surprised”

(Photo by Jeff Gross/Getty Images)

-- Please don’t tell me you saw this one coming. Please don’t reverse-engineer/retrofit your analyses of the last 5 days to make it sound like you “liked the look” of Ljubicic all week (I still find myself liking the look of Ernie, doesn’t mean that Delray Beach won’t remain his crowning achievement for a very long time). And please, please don’t “colour me surprised”. DON’T EVER “colour me surprised”.

-- If you really did see this coming (and aren’t currently under the tutelage of the Mad Hatter), I can only assume you have already made your fortune as the tipsters’ tipster, and are at this moment reading this comfortably ensconced in your newly acquired $190,000/square metre 2nd floor apartment in Avenue Princess Grace, Monaco - all forms of tennis speculation now mostly behind you.

-- Anyone that defeats Djoko, Nadal and A-Rod consecutively and as convincingly as Ljuby did, deserves the title more than either of those three and certainly more than anyone else. I’d like to see Ljuby replicate this form at the Slams, except they are indeed “different animals”. Just like the man said they were.

-- I made much of what Rafa and Soderling had to gain by winning here, but it occurs to me that the most patently radical measure of “worthiness” the least loaded definition of “deserving”, simply involves winning 7 matches in a row – beating three top tenners enroute (two of which are top four) further underlines said worthiness.

-- Roddick played an exceptionally clean and, I would say, tactically mature first set – only to be unceremoniously upstaged in a tie break. Ljuby was the better server with Roddick seemingly the more confident from the baseline.

-- Both appeared more vulnerable in set two. Roddick could probably have taken more chances: there was clearly a sense that Ljuby would have fared less well without that monster of a serve of his. Except he wasn’t without it.

-- At the risk of sounding like a broken record, Ljuby ’s Serve was a rock: the significance of this cannot be emphasised enough. Without it, I suspect he would have been broken at least once in set two.

I might be wrong about this, and it’s certainly true that a third set may have gone either way, but I don’t think Ljuby looked particularly fit or able to go at it tooth and nail for another hour – it’s as well he served it out when he did. Which of course he almost didn’t.

-- It wasn’t all about the serve though – Ljuby had had real purpose behind those smooth, rolling groundies of his all week.

-- The backhand is of course, a thing of beauty. Ljuby takes special pride in dispatching high bouncing single handed backhands, which he does better than just about anyone else in the game – his height and uncomplicated, repeatable motion inevitably play their part in bringing that about. Should we be that surprised he coped with Rafa’s forehand to that wing rather betterer than Federer might have?

-- Some of his forehand winners were also right up there with anything we saw from Big Rob. No really. And yes I am still in mourning after that semi final loss.

-- If anything, I’d say he looked rather less confident at the net than he had all week. Somewhat easier now, to be able to relive that very Golden Ljuby-Mario Davis Cup partnership from 5 years ago, no?

(Photo by Jeff Gross/Getty Images)

-- First off, what’s with the kryptonite-like trophies that the winner can’t even lift, much less pose with (a hastily constructed plinth was eventually arranged)? Ljuby -- all 6’4” of him -- probably only managed it after a clean-and-jerk.

-- Why the lengthy, droning monologue plugging BNP Paribas (at least three times in every sentence) that would have seen Dr Seuss scrambling for cover?

And if we really must (economic climate being what it is, BNP Paribas does represent quite a conquest), how about we get that out of the way before summoning up the Champion for their trophy? Instead of making her hang around awkwardly like a ball girl, I mean.

-- I don’t intend to philosophise very much about whether JJ is ‘back’ or not. Well, maybe just a little then.

My antennae were fully attuned after her fourth round clash with Errani (a player not as obviously endearing as her compatriots Franny and Flavlova maybe, but just as compelling).

She seemed a little displaced in her subsequent matches electing to do as little as possible to get through.

The final saw a return to a level of play not that far removed from late 2007.

-- JJ’s movement and defensive skills are well known. What’s less frequently a feature of any commentary surrounding her, is the incredible knack she has of playing the right shot at the right time, the length she gets on her DHB in particular and how uniquely adept she is at moving her opponent around (and off balance).

-- Her well-publicised lack of a knockout blow (or one which packs any meaningful weight) is a matter of public record. But it also means she sometimes gets unfairly cast as a ‘pusher’.

-- Let there be no mistake about this: unless she’s playing truly awful (which she has been all too frequently over the last year), JJ does go for her winners – just not as early as some of her colleagues. The fact that they lack bite, does not turn her into a pusher. Or at least that’s the way I see it until I’m swept away by the next revisionists’ reawakening.

-- Wozniacki played poorly, perhaps not a patch on any of her performances this week. But not only did I expect JJ to out manoeuvre her – I loved that she out manoevred her.

-- This was a textbook case of the headgirl beating up on the young fledgling – and tossing her head whilst doing so. Not at her opponent, but almost in surprise at how effortless and painless it can all be when it comes so naturally. By which I mean there were smiles to be had. Plenty of smiles.

-- Woz did make a few half-hearted, desperate attempts at reeling off some winners (you can generally count her total winners over the course of a match on one hand) – but really, never was the need to break out of her comfort zone more amply demonstrated.

We actually got a sneak preview of the carnage that was to follow in the semis against Aggy – a match made completely unwatchable by the proclivity of both players to refrain from anything that might be construed as “stepping out a little”.

-- Whilst it’s true Caz-Woz has plenty of time to develop that elusive WMD, it’s also true that any player worth their salt (and with more sting on their groundies) wouldn’t have given her half as much time on court. Noteworthy too I think, that both here and at the US Open last year she didn’t face a single elite gunslinger.

If she is to be considered a contender against the likes of the Williamses, Clijsters and Henin, she’ll need to locate those WMDs sooner rather than later. I say she’s not looking hard enough. Or in the right place.

Read More...

Indian Wells: “Didn’t see HIM coming”

(Photo by Jeff Gross/Getty Images)

If there is to be anything more surprising than the upsets we’ve seen this week, it’s surely the way Big Rob keeps slipping under everyone’s radar.

I don’t get it (not least because he doesn’t seem like someone that adept at “slipping under” anything).

The ripples generated by his win over Rafa last year were so forceful they actually crossed over into other sports - there can be no pleading ignorance on the grounds you “didn’t see him coming”.

Form? Straight sets win over all his opponents, sometimes in the most devastating way imaginable (c.f. Jo-Wilfried). Ok, so you could say the same about A-Rod (there’s not been that many tongues wagging about him either), except he didn’t have to play Korolev, Lopez and Tsonga.

I’m not ready to make anyone my pick this year (it’s been that sort of event) though you could do a lot worse.

Murray will need to be at his most tactically astute and put shed-loads of first serves in to even get a look in.

***

It may not be the line up you expected, but the fact remains: all four womens semi finalists are top ten players (or very soon will be).

Jankovic – Puzzling. Her match against Errani, despite the high UFE count, was amongst the best of the week, featuring movement and shot selection not seen from her in well over a year.

Not half as convinced with her performance against Kleybanova – who only showed up for a couple of games midway through set two. Shame – it’ll do wonders for JJ’s confidence to win this thing, but she’s not going to get away with the same mistake twice.

Radwanska – Equally puzzling. She actually seemed to match Bartoli’s pace – which is a day I never thought I’d live to see, but reverted back to her unique brand of slight-framed tomfoolery against a Dementieva who, to be frank, wasn’t at the races.

Wozniacki – Nothing Woz does ever comes close to inspiring me much – that doesn’t mean it’s not effective. She’s never willing to step out of her comfort zone – I don’t actually know that that there's that much to step out to. With the four remaining semifinalists however, she might not need to.

Stosur – I quite like what Stosur brings to the WTA, though I haven’t been much impressed this time round. She’ll be a top tenner on Monday, though is playing a shocker against JJ as we speak.

Read More...

Indian Wells: Ladies Preview

A couple of days too late, but here it is.

1st Quarter

Contenders: Clijsters, Kuzzie and Jankovic, Penetta, Kleybanova

‘Upsets’ waiting to happen: Jankovic goes down to Peer/Penetta in R16, Kuzzie downed by Szavay R3

Needs to happen: Penetta v Clijsters QF

Good things for: Jankovic. I’ll say no more.

(Photo: Harry How/Getty Images)

Dunno why, but despite Kuzzie’s presence and Jankovic’s assumed underdog status, I’m not the least bit invested in this quarter.

Maybe I’m worried Kimmie will clean up without so much as a peep from the competition.

Then again I’ve never seen Penetta give anything other than her very best, and emit rose-tinged smilies while doing it.

Jankovic has it all to do.

2nd Quarter

Contenders: Vika, Ivanovic(???), Zvonareva, Stosur and Wickmayer

‘Upsets’ waiting to happen: Safarova/Oudin down Wickmayer R2/R3, Ivanovic loses her opener

Needs to happen: Zvonareva v Azarenka QF

Good things for: Ana Ivanovic.

(Photo: AP)

There’s certainly plenty of ‘belief’ present here in the guise of Vika, Bepa and Oudin, for each of whom winning seems a birthright.

Maybe Heinz and Ana can infuse some of that into whatever regime they’re following.

But really, I see this one as Vika’s for the taking.

Her main malady over the last year has after all, been the presence of the Williamses. Though look out for stiff competition from Bepa – which really could turn out to be the match of the event.

3rd Quarter

Contenders: A-Rad(???), Bartoli, Schiavone, Dementieva, Henin

Upsets waiting to happen: Bartoli downs Henin R4 (As in Wimby 07)

Needs to happen: Demmie v Henin QF

Good things for: Anne Keothavong, at her first tier one back from a teary-eyed, injury blighted 2009

(Photo: Harry How/Getty Images)

For any player not given a bye to round two, this is, for all intents and purposes, a Slam: seven (potential) three setters. In the desert. With opponents like Demmie and a ton of young blood bouncing around on the other side of the net.

Which means Henin’s fitness will be a key consideration if she doesn’t manage to keep her opening few rounds as short as poss (great start by the way).

Henin or Demmie really should get through this, though look out for Demmie v Franny and Henin v Bartoli, both in R4.

4th Quarter

Contenders: Li Na, Zheng Jie, Shaza, Caz-Woz, Petrova

‘Upsets’ waiting to happen: Too many - Kirilenko downs Caz-Woz, Bondarenko downs Petrova, Medina-Garrigues downs Li Na and Zheng Jie downs Shaza, all in R3

Needs to happen: Cirstea v Shaza

Good things for: Shaza.

(Photo by Harry How/Getty Images)

Really hope Caz-Woz lives up to her #2 seeding.

I can totally see Shaza making the quarters. Then again I can totally see her returning to service purgatory and crashing out to Zheng Jie or Cirstea.

Read More...

Melbourne: Days 4 & 5 – “Shock Infested” Swamps

So it all happened out there yesterday.

It was hot, it was muggy and some of the play looked to have been extricated from a swamp.

Petrova d. Clijsters 6-0, 6-1

A shocker, but perhaps also something of required reality check. Cupcake Kim she’s most certainly no more, but even the most ardent of her fans would concede she’s not immune to the odd bad day at the office.

Perhaps more interesting was the the way she dealt with it in the presser:

"It sucks," she said. "I was completely off. She was good but I made all the mistakes and she didn't really have to do much. She served really well and was aggressive in the rallies, but that's because I let her play. It sucks that it has to happen at this stage of this tournament. If it happens in another tournament, then you can say: 'OK, it's not a big deal, just keep working hard.' Matches like this happen maybe once a year.

"You just try to stay calm because there were points where I really wanted to break my racket into pieces, but that's not going to help either, so you really just try to stay positive. At some points I was just happy I was hitting a ball in. That's how bad it was."

The Guardian

Yowza, Yowza, Yowza!

Kimmie 2.0 has very much arrived – with not a cupcake in sight.

She’s picked up on court largely where she left off after her first Slam, but it’s off court that the real transformation has taken place.

Kimmie 2.0 is a darker, more edgy figure, with a more Hingis-like, caustic world view of her opponents. She's also more comfortable using words like ‘suck’.

The rest of the year suddenly got more interesting.

Bondarenko d. Jankovic 6-2 6-3

First things first.

What on earth is going on with Jelena’s serve?

There seems to be a viral marketing campaign currently doing the rounds in women’s locker rooms, that like any properly constructed sales pitch, is disturbingly effective in signing up consumers for stuff they don’t need.

Jelena’s first serve was a liability………back in 2007.

It was never going to assume B-52 proportions but since then I did think she successfully fashioned it into something more competent, something she might use to do more with than simply start the point.

I’d put up a clip except I had my first run-in with Tennis Australia who insisted I take down those two Henin clips from my last post (You know you’ve arrived on YouTube when that happens for the first time, though whether a 50 second tennis clip actually infringes copyright or should come under what most would consider ‘fair use’ remains open for debate).

For now I’ll attempt to describe it as best I can.

From the peacock-like head cocking, to the bending of the knees to an angle so acute, you’d think she needs the type of knee protection Moto Rally GP drivers are routinely issued with.

The pay off for such excessive re-architecting? Darned if I can see it.

She may even have regressed.

As for the rest of her game, it’s not entirely in tatters – but a visit to the drapers wouldn’t go amiss.

What little rhythm she did manage to create, was quickly quashed by Bondarenko who I’m sure has come on leaps and bounds since the last time I saw her.

Sign me up as a fan.

Kuznetsova d. Kerber 3-6 7-5 6-4

Sveta left it all out on court in round two. It was smooth, it was dreamy and as always when she’s on song, so cruel it was cute – Pavlyuchenkova didn’t know what had hit her, with no idea how to respond even once she did.

I was even deluded into believing she might have taken that next vital step up to becoming comfortable in her skin as a two time Slam Champion.

She must have left it all out on court – because last night, there was nothing left.

She made Kerber look as good as she did, by letting loose a total of 43 UFEs (peanuts compared to Shaza’s first round outage, I know) – shoot anyone that tries to convince you otherwise.

This one should have been over in 1:25, instead it lasted over two hours.

Maybe starting after the Nadal match at 12am had something to do with it.

Champions sometimes have a stinker in the first week – but are conditioned into putting it behind them and playing their subsequent matches with such panache, you sometimes think they were undergoing necessary detox.

I’d like to think it’s that way with Sveta – except I’ve been wrong so many times.

Safina d. Baltacha 6-1 6-2

Brits have been busy celebrating the first time two women have reached the second round of a Slam outside of Wimbledon since 1992.

But Dinara poured hot tar over all of that yesterday - just like she has been in all her matches so far.

The difference in class was all too evident.

I’m rather liking the look of Safina’s groundies since the beginning of the event.

That serve however...

Henin d. Kleybanova 3-6 6-4 6-2

Justine dropped a set and has picked up a leg inflammation – no doubt from all those hours spent 'comparing notes' with Elena on court – could she be the next big story with a flat ending?

Nadal d. Kohlschreiber 6-4 6-2 2-6 7-5

Oh the unqualified joy of seeing the ‘Declinist’ position on Rafa’s game, being sequestered in it’s proper place.

I have no idea whether or not Rafa will go all the way – at this point I’d say that’s not all that likely, nor for that matter as important as the question of whether his play resembles something like that of Pre Wimby 2009: It does.

If there’s one thing Kohlschreiber deals in, it’s BIG-UPSET tennis.

This might just have gone the same way as his match with A-Rod did two years back, if Phillip didn’t run out of gas somewhere near the beginning of the fourth set.

We were all waiting to see Rafa go up against credible opposition, and Phillip might just have been the tonic with which to put a seal on Rafa’s revival.

The confidence very evident in the way he shunted back a once-in-a-career wide angled backhand winner that was so far out of court he had to go round the net post.

Yeah that’s what comes of not being able to post up YouTube clips anymore. Boo.

Cilic d. Wawrinka 4-6 6-4 6-3 6-2

This one had five set bruiser written all over it.

I didn’t get to see it – but it’s kind of the result I expected.

Stanislas has been all at sea since Wimbledon last year, a period that’s coincided rather nicely with Marin’s upward march.

Marin is “the new Delpo” according to some – a view I would almost share were it not for the fact that their styles of play are a little like oil and water.

But there’s no doubting Marin is the best placed to have a Delpo like breakthrough year.

Somewhat befitting then, he should be playing “Mr Breakthroughs-are-so-2009” himself, in the next round.

A match that could go either way if you believe there’s anything behind that wrist injury Delpo came into the event with.

***

I didn’t catch very much of the action from day four.

I’ll try and be quick.

Davydenko d. Marchenko 6-3 6-3 6-0

Kolya’s the man of moment right now, and something tells me this is different from the surge Nalbie experienced at the end of 2007. One that was promptly extinguished in Oz the following year (nice to have you back Daveed, almost).

I’m still not confident of him going all the way, but Davy looks awfully close to embracing at least some of the attention that goes along with taking out the best two players on the planet at consecutive events; he definitely has a different look about him this year – one that was in full show yesterday against poor old Marchenko , who to his credit didn’t play a poor match.

The top ten is sometimes a dark, murky place; full of untold misery for any hapless intruder unfortunate enough to blunder into the wrong party (remember Fed performing live vivisection on Delpo last year?), and Davy is currently it’s arch-executioner.

I do so want him to go all the way, but will for now be content with the knowledge that seeing him face off against Fed in the quarters might turn out to be every bit as good as the Rafa/Sod encounter we won’t now get to see.

Federer d. Hanescu 6-2 6-3 6-2

Normal service ‘resumptionalised’. For the time being.

Djokovic d. Chiudinelli 3-6 6-1 6-1 6-3

Having not seen any of Djoko’s matches so far, I’m not entirely sure where he is (yeah, that old chestnut). I’d like to think he’s been bolstered by that win in Paris last year.

Until I see him face off against Tsonga, Haas or Youzhny, who all lurk menacingly in his quarter of the draw however, I can’t be completely certain of that.

Not crazy about the “Hell’s Angel meets Kung-Fu Fighting” edition Sergio Tacchini have kitted him out with either. Though it’s far more preferable to the incoherent slather of colour Murray’s been daubed with. Especially beneath those ‘pits’.

V. Williams d. Bammer 6-2 7-5

This time last year I was highly optimistic of Queen V’s chances of fixing that gaping hole on her CV, by winning her first Slam on a blue surface since the early Noughties.

This year I saw nothing leading into the event that would suggest that’s even a remote possibility.

Dulko d. Ivanovic 6-7 7-5 6-4

It’s becoming difficult to avoid at least considering the possibility that Ana’s set to go the same way as Vaidisova, and understanding the root of her problems sometimes feels like a niche Philosophy.

I’m not about to embark on either.

There were some good signs in her play, but not very many, and more disturbingly an action that almost suggests she’s made her peace with wonky service tosses – they seem to have fused themselves into her game so stealthily, she’s now more inclined to adapt to an errant ball toss than she is to continue to try and work it out of her game.

Read More...