Marion Bartoli is more than just a bundle of quirks

It wasn't something you could immediately explain, but in only a matter of hours following Marion Bartoli's Wimbledon win this Saturday, something about the way this was being processed and sold felt a little off.


As the world sits up and takes note, the only touchpoints offered with which we are to appreciate this oft-neglected, very talented and, yes, quite unique player are her eccentricities.

It's understandable, of course: no other player or lay person I know has that elaborate a training regime, or practices with that amount of intricate elastic attached to her arms and legs, or with balls under her feet - or like this. Nor, assuming that's what's happening, can I blame the media very much for trying to popularise a "lesser-light" to people who only watch tennis for four (or just two) weeks of the year.

But it's also a resolutely blinkered portrayal: whilst her methods are undoubtedly novel, the real reason, I suspect, we are seeing this over-egging of her indie-factor is that she doesn't, for the most part, look like a tennis player. And, well, that presents a quandary.

That probably needs elaboration: what that actually means is, she doesn't conform to "our" expectations - expectations conditioned by years of societal and media-honed iconography of what a female athlete and physicality itself is supposed to look like.

This has led to her being likened to a Rottweiler on air (yes battling players are sometimes described in animalistic terms but ask yourself how desirable this really is and why Sharapova would almost certainly never have that term used about her), having her drive and work ethic explained away as a coming-to-terms of sorts with the idea of never being able to look like Sharapova, and receiving a horribly predictable torrent of insults on Twitter.

People really have a problem with Marion Bartoli winning Wimbledon (and that's before one even approaches the question of asterisks). The only surprise there, sadly, is how unsurprising that is.


Yet even in what appear to be genuine efforts to give her her dues, the adulatory notes inevitably seem to give way to an all too familiar celebration of her quirkiness.

I like this to a point. The use of such a 'hook' seems to me to be a good way to catalyse interest in what is after all a diverse array of vibrant and interesting personalities not normally known to viewers who don't follow this sport year round the way I do.

Even within the ranks of tennisheads you wouldn't count amongst her fans, there exists an appetite to celebrate Marion for being Marion - it just seems ideologically unsound not to. So why on this occasion does it feel lazy, somewhat insipid, and, well, a bit of a cop out?

It's not that here haven't been some perfectly good profiles of her win setting out both the context and history of her journey, warts and all.

Nor am I suggesting that allusions to her quirks aren't in many cases (though clearly not all) benign and affectionate. I hardly need add that no profile can hope to steer completely clear of her oddities. Would we even want to read that?

Perhaps what I find so discomfitting is the credence this may give to the idea that she's only worth talking about because of these peculiarities.

Such treatment would, after all, be entirely at one with the type of banal coverage women's tennis often (some notable exceptions, as always) receives and with which Inverdale's comment - which, incidentally, has actually been trotted out in one form or another by many, well before his use of the word 'looker' this year - almost perfectly coheres.

Whether it's those tiresome 'decibelle' features, 'irreverent' debates about equal prize money, or quite deliberate scorn masquerading as nostalgia for an age of variety, the enduring subtext is this: beyond the glamazons and those too-big-to-ignore (already a problematic stratification), women's tennis is decidedly second tier - and the second tier of that second tier (of which Bartoli is a constituent) is something to be endured, politely exhibited perhaps but not engaged with in any serious sense.

You don't tend, after all, to be quite that denigrating towards a product you're supposed to endorse, value and enjoy.

You might, therefore, say Bartoli hasn't been a staple of the media for a very different, darker sort of non-conformance. Female athletes have always been judged by their looks - often to the total exclusion of their abilities and accolades - and held against an absurdly singular vision of 'body ideal' that our senses are daily trained to further imbibe and aspire to.


I don't presume to understand how Bartoli made sense of all this growing up but there's little doubt she's not about to let such vacuous notions of brand and marketability bother her now - her brushing aside of Inverdale's 'banter' was quite satisfactory in that regard. If, that is, we were ever in any doubt as to how she rolls.

But against that backdrop - and even allowing for a certain wackiness (we're not likely to see her accomplish this feat ever again) - it's difficult to avoid a feeling that someone who wasn't even accorded her own shirt sponsor until late 2011 isn't, at times, being treated as a bit of a sideshow.

That 'The Misfit' - a lovingly endowed moniker by her fans - isn't in the context of that murky place known as 'the world we live in' simply one of many tropes commissioned in order to avoid engaging with women's tennis in a way which should, by now, be axiomatic.

All in all, I'd say that's a bit of a shame considering tennis is one of very few global sports that can boast comparable participation and earnings amongst both genders.

Put simply, the occasion of her winning arguably the biggest title in tennis ought to be the moment for precisely such engagement, whatever else might have gone on to this point.

Especially if you're serious about grabbing the interest of young girls who need role models besides Maria and Serena - who, great as they are, can seem a little larger than life at times.

Far easier to comedify the funny-bouncy-lady who came through what was unarguably 'Wacky Wimbledon'.

***

The above notwithstanding, there's just no getting away from it: in her training methods, the way she plays, and in her dealings with the FFT, Bartoli is the antithesis of formulaic. Most people seem to agree this is no bad thing.

Yet what can sometimes get overlooked is that it's that very strain of determination and stubbornness to go about things precisely as she sees fit, that has (quite unsurprisingly actually) rendered her more relatable than countless other more media-compliant players are allowed (or allow themselves) to get.

Marion catnaps between matches, paints, giggles uncontrollably with her new team, and as far as I can tell, lives and loves life in ways which aren't always that dissimilar to many of us. Yes, there's an incurable oddball at the heart of this, but don't kid yourself we don't see these people all the time.


The kooks are all around us everywhere, all the time. In thrall to no one, and nothing but themselves, doing their bit to add to the entropy of our lives, everyday, little by little - staving off a Meagresville of sobriety, uniformity and compliance.

You know the type. We all do.

She hasn't always got it right. Her episode with the FFT could be construed as the authorities throwing their weight around, or a diabolically stubborn miscalculation on her part depending on whose side you're on. And amongst some, the view is that the decision to appoint a new dad-less team could have come sooner.

But isn't that what we all do when we believe in something?

Nor - and this is equally important - has she chosen to court popularity by cultivating that unbearable air of faux-eccentricity; by going out of her way to provide "quote", sporting ever-more mysterious tattoos, professing ever-more controversial opinions and generally providing the kind of fodder that makes some profile writers drool, but doesn't, in the clear light of day, actually stack up to a whole lot of anything.

Whatever else one might think of her, she's succeeded through discipline, rigour, the courage of her very well documented convictions, and, dare I say it, a terribly old-fashioned love of her craft, without recourse to the kind of swanky sponsorships that we are told are so important.

She's what I imagine an intelligent, articulate person that happens to be prodigiously talented at tennis being themselves actually looks like.

And that's why I'm a fan.

(Pics: Reuters, Julian Finney/Getty, Adam Davy/PA, Bartoli's Twitter Feed)
Read More...

Federer, Nadal XXX and other pre-RG 'State of Play' type stuff

1) I don't like the word "favourite", but the fact is Serena goes into RG several leagues above even her two closest 'rivals' - a term that's beginning to make increasingly less sense even notionally.


I had a sense both Vika and Masha were making modest advancements in their recent encounters with her (and Vika did, of course, earlier this year, score her second win on the hard courts of Doha), but Madrid and Rome (and it would seem clay in general) clearly show otherwise.

Failing an early letdown - she's typically slow off the mark which can prove serious even in cases far less severe than last year's Razzano meltdown - it's difficult, as of now, to see her losing to anyone.

Or, to put it another way, a "disrespectful" top 50 upstart (not necessarily even a "sensation") would appear to have a greater chance of springing an upset in week one than either one of Vika and Masha would of maybe even keeping things competitive in week two.

2) However much Rafa may be the "favourite" (he'll doubtless suggest otherwise), he remains, unlike Serena, vulnerable to his closest rival on clay.

Novak's early losses and the confidence Rafa's sure to accrue in a comeback that now includes 6 wins in 8 consecutive finals (has shot him to the top of the Race, and only really "lacks" a win over Novak), may render even that concern into something less worrying.

His surreal proficiency on his preferred surface was perhaps more evident in the latter stages of Rome than at any other time during his comeback and particularly in that eye-watering first set he played against Berdych. But the fact remains that Novak is the one player with a M1000 win over him on clay this season and the only player I can see staying with him over five sets.

3) I don't know what peculiar metaphysical alchemy takes place when Federer plays Nadal but, on clay at least, it now feels like we're well beyond talk of lefty forehands being viciously spun high into single handed backhands, or of analysis itself.

There's nothing wrong with this 'post-analysis' analysis. It can be immensely liberating. But it means one has to stop floating 7 year old theories like Federer stubbornly refusing to change the size of his racquet as the meaning of life; or the very unique pressure Rafa puts him under to hit big as the primary cause of more and more rash errors which, though somewhat true, mostly feels like a way to avoid confronting reality.



The closest Fed ever got to solving this problem was also in Rome 7 years ago in the final, my personal favourite of their many encounters (even Wimbledon 08). You could describe the two match points he blew then (11:50 in the above clip) as "pressure to hit big/end the point" - that certainly wasn't what I saw this weekend.

Instead, I saw him adrift, spiritually disconnected from proceedings, in a way which transcends talk of shanks, focus and match-ups. Rafa doesn't just possess obvious tactical advantages over him, he seems to embezzle the core of his very soul on a clay court, leaving him a facsimile of the player he only thinks, rather than believes, he should be.

Glass half full: reaches a final and back at #6 in the ATP Race in his second event back. Half empty: not much in the way of serious match practice (Gilles Simon at #17 was his highest ranked opponent prior to the final) and his last pre-RG memory of competition on a clay court will be of another annihilation at the hands of one Rafael Nadal.

He's Roger Federer. He'll make the second week - if for no other reason than that the GS format of 5 sets with a day off in between works to his advantage by allowing him to drop a set now and again whilst continuing to play himself into form (Serena has no such luxury).

Beyond that, I'm just not buying into the pessimism I'm already seeing because, quite simply, none of the problems described above vs. Rafa apply to Djokovic. If Djokovic, or for that matter anyone, beats him, age will certainly factor into it, but it will essentially be about their having played a better match rather than any specific technical incompatibility or uniquely spiritual angst.

There may well be a universe in which Federer defeats Rafa on clay, but it's probably also one in which Ricardo Sanchez runs a Swiss finishing school, and Federer perhaps only possesses a couple of Slams.

4) Somewhat like Federer, Vika lost early in Madrid following an eight week spell away from the game. And somewhat like Federer she then made the final of Rome. And somewhat like him, she appears to remain further than ever from working out the problem posed by her opponent in that final.

Clay clearly isn't her strongest suit, but she hadn't, in all honesty, moved well all week to begin with. Making the final in that suspect form, therefore, has to be construed a positive. And if she can draw on the lessons learnt in her victory over Serena at Doha (many of which are mental and, therefore, surface-independent) we can, at the very least, hope for a more balanced encounter if and when they meet.

5) I'm sure she's improved but it was difficult to gauge just how much better Masha's performance on clay was this year in relation to this time last year.


Her not running into Serena last year (except on blue clay) undoubtedly helped her and thereby set in motion a wave of adulatory reporting that quite rightly made a big deal of her reinvention on the surface.

Running into Serena at this year's Madrid final refocused things, instead, on the great gulf that exists (for whatever reason) between the two in the starkest possible terms.

It's a very different build-up, narratively speaking, to RG and probably derailed any serious appraisal of her game, which may, in some ways, have improved (losing horribly to Serena again doesn't change that).

Take out: Remains, as of now, the second best clay courter out there. May have repeated last year's run during the RG build-ups in Serena's absence (and had she not gotten stricken in Rome with no one quite knows what). The same is probably true of RG itself.

6) I expect some will disagree but I don't find either of Novak's two losses during this clay court spell earth shattering: Berdych crushing the ball that accurately will beat anyone on any day, and a defeat to a rising star like Dimitrov playing the match of his life isn't, if we're honest, something that Fed or Rafa are unfamiliar with (Ernie almost did it again this event) - so it's a mistake in my mind to get too bogged down with questions about form, fitness or the presence of hostile vibrations in the ether.

On the other hand, something definitely happened to Novak in the second half of that Berdych match. And I'm guessing a 2011 Novak (the most optimal version for now) would *probably* have found his way past Dimitrov too. That second point alone means that from Novak's perspective at least, he fell short. And it shouldn't surprise us in the least to find him describing himself as "a different player" in the latter half of the Berdych match, or thinking he has work to do in general - even if we believe (as I think most everyone does) that both Grigor and Tomas earnt those wins.

7) Difficult to understand where Murray is until we learn more about the injury. As of now, all we know is that it's a problem that's been troubling him for around 18 months, and that it seemed to flair up this time last year too. That suggests a certain seriousness, although remember he won everything he did last year, and also made the finals in Aus plus another title in Miami this year with, presumably, a careful regime of managing that same complaint.


It may, of course, be the case that the physical challenges of clay pose a unique risk and, in any case, I prefer to err on the side of caution with complaints like this, but only he and his medical team really know what's going on. I certainly don't believe he should miss RG purely because "that's what Lendl did", even though that would appear to be the sensible choice this year.
Read More...

Oz: Define “upset”

Kanepi,Bepa,….Serena Williams?



Makarova d. Williams 62 63

Not the first time Maka's sprung this shit. Oh sorry, "upset". Won’t be the last either.

Don't mean to suggest Serena wasn't laughably below par (she was) and I won't pretend Maka can hang with either her or the likes of Kim; but if there's a vulnerability to be exploited (as there was today), an upset to be sprung, forged or otherwise effected, Maka will be on it.

She seems to have an incredible knack for that sort of thing. Many don't. Just saying.


(Pics: Getty)

Read More...

D̶o̶n̶'̶t̶ ̶E̶v̶e̶r̶ change: 2012…Why you so 2011?

What might we rightly infer based on all of the 4 days we’ve had of 2012?

1) Ana’s still struggling. [Please don’t change your coach] 

2) Bartoli’s still not shy of almost double bagelling those that are still struggling (no sadz Jarmila, it’s a Marion thing – she did the exactly the same to Safina this time last year). Still, nice reaction.

3) Kim’s still taking three to do what should rightly be done in two.

Rust, yes? She’s played next to nothing since early last year. Except I’m not completely convinced she wouldn’t have found a way of playing three sets anyway.



4) Gael Monfils is still inventing new ways of incorporating muscle (he didn't even know he had) into set-motions it had NO BUSINESS being part of.

5) Sam Stosur is still losing matches she has NO BUSINESS losing. [Can’t see her or Li repeating last year. Happy to be proved wrong]

6) Serena Williams is still getting headlines for all the wrong reasons.

Well that didn’t take long, did it?

For the record, I dislike it intensely when people give her a free pass for indefensible conduct and, even worse, try and depict even the mildest criticism of that indefensible conduct as a uniquely conspiratorial witch hunt.

I’ll continue to dislike it in 2012, because, being honest, I don’t expect it to go away.

I also don’t expect to see the back of its flipside: that (very mainstream) injury cynicism some are ideologically hell-bent on (we’re calling it “karma” now?) – cynicism that persists even in the face of video evidence (2:27), and even when a subsequent MRI scan confirms the injury:






The ‘Free-Passers’ inspire revulsion, which in turn bolsters the repellent views of the Injury Cynics and vice versa.  It’s very obvious the two polarised trends are designed to feed off one another in a deadly embrace from which there can be no escape – my guess is they don’t want to escape.

Sometimes bad conduct is simply bad conduct, which Serena, like many, many before (and I daresay after) her, is neither immune to nor irreproachable for.  Sometimes, dearest trolls, it’s not a conspiracy.

And sometimes, dearest hobgoblins, an injury is just an injury – nothing more, nothing less. Not an occasion to use as a cathartic vehicle to air distaste, vendettas, your very personal dislike (or another word some venture that you’d hope shouldn’t be part of this discussion) of Serena, the way some air their soiled undies.

Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised, then, that this, too, hasn’t changed in 2012. Trolls are still trolls whatever the Gregorian Calendar might have to say about it.

Only Rafa’s unveiling of his new top-heavy frame, and of course Murray’s announcement of  what he hopes will be a game-changing (and perhaps shape-shifting) partnership with Ivan Lendl (Murr-dl?) buck this trend of same-iness, but of course neither count as both were announced in 2011.

Either the tennis season’s pulling one hell of a fast one and intends to unleash a seismic gamechanger later this year (which, being honest, would have to be at least as seismic as Novak or even Petra’s year to count), or the season really will prove to be that trite and that unconvincing…

Read More...

USO: Talk about under the radar.

Just over two years ago a two-time doubles Slam winner declared her intent to focus more on singles. Beyond giving a nod to her very evident talent, I can’t, in all honesty, say how seriously I took that.

I’m taking my time over this one. Because, frankly, it’s as good as Fran’s RG win last year (a match in which Sam played bridesmaid) – perhaps even better considering the class of her legendary opponent.

Though the final was overshadowed by the incident with the umpire and Serena’s subsequent outburst, I choose to remember it for Sam’s composure – quite simply a flawless performance from beginning to end.

Even after the 2nd set debacle when fan, foe and frenemy alike all expected her (rather than Serena) to horribly derail, she mystifyingly kept her cool and served it out using the diverse all court game that has already bagged her a couple of doubles Slam titles.

Whilst it would be disingenuous not to acknowledge that Serena delivered a shocker (only 3/14 first serves in after first few games), it would be even greater folly to let that detract from the sheer quality of Sam’s execution which, quite simply, caught EVERYONE by surprise.

With a blend of serves out wide, crunching winners from the back of the court, Sam moved Serena around more in the opening couple of games than Caro was able to in the entire first set– that’s not a knock on Caro, its a manifest reality.

Besides, not even legends are immune from throwing in the odd stinker of a match now and again (just ask Federer) – its part and parcel of the sport. Serena acknowledged as much afterwards – asterisks are for pussies.

As for the incident, a hindrance rule clearly exists and it’s difficult to argue against its application – even where “application” equals little more than the application of discretion. Henin’s been docked a point for ALLEZ’ing mid point in the past, Bartoli got precisely the same treatment at this very event.




Same umpire, different ruling.

All the above video shows, is that even withstanding the differing rules that may exist across the ITF and WTA – and as with foot faulting – discretion remains part and parcel of the process with which that hindrance rule is applied.

But there the similarity with foot-faulting ends: the 2009 foot-fault didn’t confer a competitive advantage on Serena – specific stipulations even guide officials not to get involved, particularly in the latter stages of a match. No one wants a Slam final decided by an academic dispute.

Making noise mid rally, however, is an actionable violation of the rules – however innocuous the yelp may have been. Even if it didn’t hinder Stosur (and it’s not clear it didn’t), Asderaki was within her rights to either require the point to be replayed or to award the point to the opponent – both are an instance of discretion and that’s precisely what Asderaki showed. She certainly didn’t deserve being called a “hater” or “unattractive on the inside”. All things considered, I’d say she acted with remarkable restraint.

And I don’t buy the theory that Serena’s hostile reaction is a a residual effect of any of the various outlandish controversies she’s had to endure over the years either (and there’ve been a few) – she simply is what she is, flawed, serene and utterly magnificent.

To be perfectly honest, she’s reacted quite admirably to some of those controversies, but this time she was bang out of order. And calling that out ain’t hate – quite the reverse, in fact.

In 2006 a certain French former #1 declared that talk about her nerves (“iconic” for all the wrong reasons) was off limits now that she’d served it out at Wimbledon over one of the best players of the past decade. She reverted back to her delightfully panic-stricken self not soon after.

As with Amelie then, quite frankly, I’d be astonished if this serves as some kind of watershed moment that sees Stosur no longer held hostage by her nerves – those wide-eyed nervous looks and blowing on her hand in between every point are an utterly glorious defence mechanism that form part of her appeal.

 

But as with Amelie then, for one day (and maybe only for one day) she didn’t flinch, not even when controversy, her own predisposition to mid match anxiety attacks, and a now fired up living-legend on the other side of the net demanded she should.

Not gonna let loose ambiguous talk of “class” and “umpire discretion” get in the way of that.

Read More...

USO: Sooper Dooper Saturday.

For all the analysis that you’ll see in the build up to this one, I’m not much convinced anything matters more than their respective form coming into this…which has been sublime.

Both men know how to play on all surfaces. Both rely on a multitude of weapons rather than any single WMD to bring their opponents down. Both have an appetite for victory which is, perhaps, second to none – preferably over each other. 

Sure, Novak might have the slight edge in terms of age and what he’s achieved this year – but how much does that really matter with the day’s rest and both having only dropped a set to get here?

I want five sets. We’ll almost certainly get four.  Broken glass and blood all over the place.

Oh I know he got “medieval” on Roddick’s a*s last night, and I also know how one match like that is sometimes all Rafa needs to light the touch paper. I’m still not much convinced his level of play is quite up there with the rest of the top four – and certainly not comparable with what we’ve seen from Novak and Roger over the past week.

Murray’s made all four Slam semis this year: almost an  academic point now that he’s a regular feature of  the business end of most majors. Even so, that has to count for something, as does the fact that all his wins over Rafa have been on hard courts.

In some ways, an even more loaded match than any of the mens semis.

If Serena plays the way she did in the first set against Vika, Caro will be lucky to get more than a handful of games.

Except that hasn’t quite been the story of the fortnight.

If she plays as loosely as she opened against Ana or Pavlyuchenkova, Caro is well-equipped (perhaps more than anyone) to make her work for it.

What happens from that point on depends largely on Serena’s ability to shorten rallies and keep the UFEs in check. Caro’s only chance lies in doing the precise opposite – if she can move Serena around and lengthen the rallies, she certainly won’t be the first to tire, Serena will.

What will probably take place is something in between those two extremes.

It’s certainly not impossible for Caro to pull through in a tight third set. I think I might even prefer that if only to see her haters squirm. We also need to see an end to the “real number one” debate. I’ve never been one of those that thought the rankings system was at fault – but if she pulls this off, bitchers will continue to bitch and the hatred will be exposed for the vindictive, ideological hoax that it is.

What or who is Angelique Kerber? And since when does Sam Stosur make Slam semis again? On surfaces other than clay?

If you’ve been following the scheduling kerfuffle over the past few days you’ll know that we’re not supposed to be treating either of these two women as serious Slam semi-finalists.

Even now (“Super Saturday”), there’s not a single photo of Stosur in Yahoo’s tennis photostream. Not one. (Hint: The shabby treatment extends further than mere tournament administrators).

I get that the schedulers have had to deal with an insane number of nightmarish factors this time round, including rain delays, a visit by FLOTUS, 911 commemorations and water bubbles appearing on Louis Armstrong. I get that this has sometimes meant those schedulers coming in for an unwarranted shellacking by hot-heads that don’t know or care to understand the competing concerns they face.

I also know straight up disrespect when I see it.

Leaving aside that Sam is a two-time Slam finalist, this might be the one and only time Kerber ever gets to breath the air on Ashe.  These, in short, are the moments players (however lowly) play for and live for – a far cry from a R1 loss to Laura Robson at Wimbledon this year. Heavens knows, she’s earnt the right.

Sam should pull through (you’d think) but heaven hath no fury like a journeywoman scorned.

And boy has she (and Sam) been scorned. Let there be no illusions about that.

 

Read More...

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...

Rogers Cup: ‘Excellence’, it’s a platitude

Novak Djokovic has now won 5 Masters titles this season – that's one less than Murray’s won in his entire lifetime. I’m not going to bother relaying the other stats – we already know them too well.



The reaction to this has been the predictable mix of astonishment at witnessing history unfolding before you, to giving him his due…to a particularly benign form of acceptance which I confess I’m beginning to  find completely uninspiring – the journalism, not the streak.

Winning DC, Aus, and the IW/Miami double was “unbelievable”. Following up with a further two MS titles on clay and, of course, Wimbledon was “unprecedented”.

That we’re still talking about it in exactly the same terms over a month later, just two weeks before the last Slam of the year suggests a certain complaisance.

It’s not that I object to giving Novak, or anyone else, his due. Quite apart from how ridiculous or unfair that would be, it’s simply counterproductive – marking you out as little more than a fruitcake with an enormous ideological chip on your shoulder.

And no, I don’t subscribe to the “dominance is boring” school of thought either – nor am I suggesting complaisance on the part of the players.

But there’s only so many times you can sit through breathless essays on the precise nature of excellence. To be honest, it fosters the kind of environment in which its deemed ok to loose to Novak Djokovic – I don’t think he needs any help on that front.

Forgive, therefore, my taking a slightly different tact.

To be honest, the best assessment I’ve seen came from Jo:

"He plays incredible tennis, but he's not an alien. In fact, what he does is doing everything better than the others. He doesn't hit harder, he doesn't hit the ball earlier. But he's always there. This is tiring when you play against him. He does not have the best return on the tour. But on every return, he returns well, and he's always there. So what does it is his consistency, and he has no weaknesses."

-- tennis.com

No he’s not alien. And that’s probably one of the few times you’ll hear consistency being described, in the current climate, in such glowing terms.

But what I really like about it is how technically astute it is – and how he uses those technical observations in order to find a happy medium between giving Novak his due, and giving TENNIS its due – you really can do both. You really ought to do both.

I’ve yet to see a single tennis writer come up with something as cogent or concise; instead, a player known more for his on court talent and/or fragility took us by surprise in an unrehearsed moment of brilliance.

Not just a pretty face then.

Yeah.

I was one of those who were sceptical of her decision to participate in all three events before the USO, not because I thought she couldn’t win, but because I flinch at the idea of her risking injury.

Once again, it appears she knew what she was doing. Still, I won’t be sorry if she goes out early in Cincy.

The win moves her up to #31 in the rankings which, mishaps, upsets, anomalies and the discovery of actual aliens in the draw notwithstanding, really ought to be enough to secure her a seeding in NY.

Read More...

Rogers Cup: Well it wasn’t for want of trying

On the one hand, I can’t truly say I was especially invested in Vika winning this event. Notwithstanding that I root for her almost without fail in every match she plays, like Andy and Caro, I just can’t see the point of winning at this level anymore.




Williams d. Azarenka 63 63

When you’ve won Miami twice or, as in Andy’s case, six Masters titles, winning the same old Premier events simply allows talking heads to continue to bitch about your Slamless credibility.

That said, yesterdays match was, as it seems most everyone in my timeline agreed, just a little special.

My feeling was that Vika had a chance – Serena had played two three setters to reach here, Azarenka had only lost six games. If Zheng could get a set off Serena, why shouldn’t Vika get two?

BOTH WOMEN came out striking better than anyone had all week: Vika was playing as well as she’s capable of and yet Serena seemed to be (and I’m sure I’m not the only one to notice this) taking the ball that little bit earlier.


 
I’m not sure we can read much more into how the match played out except to say that there’s very few that can maintain the intensity that goes with playing your A-game for that period of time. And even fewer (if any) that can do it against Serena. Vika eventually cracked in the middle of set two – I’m only surprised (and rather proud) she lasted as long as she did.

Let the record, therefore, reflect no blemish, no want of effort from Victoria – she was simply outmatched by a legend. Sure, there were a few service glitches (47% 1st serves in set one), but that was the best I’ve seen Serena time the ball since her return.

No one, as we’ve heard many times since yesterday (and many times over the past decade), can stay with her at that level.

And yet this trivial, uncontroversial statement of fact continues to provoke the kind of hostility I thought we did away with in the pre-Twitter era.

”Unless the women's game loses its inferiority complex where @serenawilliams is concerned, she will win US Open #assimpleasthat

Harman’s a respected commentator – I mostly agree with him. But anyone that saw the match knows how grossly unfair that is. Vika continues to have holes in her game , she may be suffering from many things, but an inferiority complex ain’t one of them. And it certainly wasn’t the problem last night.

Nothing new of course – its the same argument that saw those unwilling (or unable) to give Fed his due when he was winning 3 Slams a year, citing “locker room impotence” in the face of “the aura”. Only, I’m pretty sure Harman wasn’t amongst them back then.

And that’s why this really rankles. Its not that *certain* players haven’t given Fed and/or Serena an easy ride over the years (they have). I don’t even dispute anyone’s right to make that claim even though I think it’s clear that it’s often little more than an ideological hoax – one I didn’t take very seriously then or now.

But it’s only fair to require those professing such a theory to play an even hand, not just against styles of play and/or personalities that don’t “please” you: it may not be his intent, but this simply smacks too much of those antiquated attacks on Serena (and Venus) stemming from an ideological dislike of their, and only their, dominance.

That’s, like, so 2003. 

(Pics: getty)

Read More...

A Statement on the recent events in Canada

Can you guess? Can you guess which country, which tournament cannot, will not, be swayed from “doing its own thing”?

I give up. Everything I said yesterday about explaining or not explaining is gunk. We may as well ask the Cookie Monster for his opinion – you could do a lot worse.

The #newrogerscupslogan hashtag (which you really need to look at if you haven’t already)  is total win, so completely expressing the feelings I might have vented had I been conscious. 

The casualty list of Caro, Murray, Delpo, Rafa and Kim, now extends to Li, Pova, Petra, Fran and Fed, who saw fit to win only a single game in the final set of his loss to Tsonga. The funny thing is I don’t know if we can blame any of them.

I said lightening and/or Jo-Wilfried doesn’t and wouldn’t strike twice. I was wrong. Or, at least, it does in Canada. And I bet if you waited long enough, it would strike again…and again…and again…in the same place, several times over. All against the wonderfully resonant backdrop of the blue screen of death and under a hail of broken light bulbs. For that, apparently, is how Canada rolls.

So now we know.

Either we’re in urgent need of updating our Canadian stereotypes, or this is Canada’s most audacious bid for attention since…..yeah.

Even Serena was to lose a set before bringing down Zheng and, one can only hope, the Antichrist along with her.

You’d think Serena and Novak should now, by rights, sleep walk their way to the title. Except Canada don’t deal in rights. Or wrongs. Or pretty much any type of consciously (or subconsciously) imposed order.

For all I know Roberta Vinci will probably win.

All that’s left is to book passage on the fastest plane, train or camper van out of here and on to Cincy.

And to deliver a standing ovation to the only people who seem to have had the foresight to plan against the chaos before the event even began, and wanted no part of it. I think we can all agree that they were on to something.

Well played Venus Williams….Well played Robin Soderling….Well played Andy Roddick.

Your judgement and various ailments do you credit.

Read More...

Some weeks you get the Milk, Other weeks you get the Vodka

The end of the slump. The 2nd career title. A reminder of his relevance. A reminder of his foolishness. Vodka and Milk. Its all good. And it couldn’t have come too soon.

But it would be a mistake, I think, to expect him to repeat this type of form every week, or every other week, or even every other month. He just ain’t that guy.

Having a breakout week is one thing: he’s more than capable of taking down the biggest names in the game, he may even be capable of stringing together the requisite 7 matches it takes to win a Slam. Hold out for that if you must.

But he ain’t, and won’t likely ever be, about crafting a ranking – top ten or otherwise. That would involve invoking of the ‘C’ word. And, well, whatever else Ernests’ strengths are, CONSISTENCY certainly isn’t one of them. Some weeks you get the milk, but more often than not you get the vodka. You’d think those that liken him to Marat would already know that.

Another thing – as much as I liked this, I’m having difficulty with the necessity some seem to feel of having to “rehab” personalities like Ernests. To do so seems to me to spectacularly miss the point. You think he gives a hoot about what you or I think?

And what makes us think fans or haters will change their view of him even after such elaborate PR surgery?

Those that like talented, chaotic nutjobs given over to recklessness as a form of public service, will continue to appreciate his brand of anarchy, both his vodka and his milk, no matter what.

Those that don’t, will continue to reel in repugnance at the rich kid that can’t be a*sed to make good on his talent, his so-called “sense of entitlement”, no matter what.




If it were any other player beating Masha, Sabine and Marion consecutively, and in straight sets, winning her first title after a year-long outage, more than halving her ranking to #79 in the process, I’d probably take time to gape a little. As it’s Serena I’ll move along and make like there’s nothing to see here.

Still not convinced playing three out of the three events ahead of the USO is the best thing, however. There’s “getting serious” about events outside of Slams and there’s over-compensating.  Am I the only one that thinks that’s, like, a LOT of tennis? Not to mention it opens one up to the risk of injury.

Read More...

Behold Ernie, ‘Creature of the Night’.

    
It’s the eyes – they’re all “in league with Lucifer”. Well that’s one way to get sh*t done.

Not gonna lie – a little scared right now.



Gulbis d. del Potro 6-2 6-4

When he broke his 5 match losing streak with a win over Malisse,  it was a mere curiosity.

When he followed it up it  with a straight sets win, it was a reminder that, whatever else you might think of him, he’s still relevant.

When he dusted off Delpo 2 and 4 last night, it became a “thing”. Oh yeah, I think we can call it that now.

By all accounts (after hours for me), it was a one-sided demolition with Ernie reminding us of why he is indeed a thing, why he’s always been a thing.

I doubt very much that Delpo would have underestimated the threat, but he cannot have expected this.

Here’s hoping this form carries over. Not to rain on anyone’s parade, but this ain’t a Slam (not even a Masters 1000) – Ernie hasn’t been beyond one of those in his last 7 attempts.

*That* particular streak needs to end too. And FAST. Else this ain’t a “thing”. Not even close.




Williams d. Sharapova 6-1 6-3

I know I was meant to have been all “IT’S ON” ever since it was clear these two would meet – I just couldn’t dismiss the possibility of precisely this kind of a letdown.

But I would have preferred it if Pova had simply been tuned – far better to have simply been able to say “too good” rather than imploding the way she has all too often recently.

As it happened, Pova was neither here nor there – she simply looked utterly terrified of Serena (so I’m told).

"I think I’ll need to win a couple of more matches before it becomes a true rivalry," said the fifth-ranked Sharapova, who is now 2-7 against Serena and who hasn’t beaten her since 2004. "It’s not really a rivalry until I win few more matches. She’s experienced enough to know that even if it’s a small or big event you have to go out there and do our job and still go out there and win it."

Not that Serena instilling fear in her opponents should surprise any of us. But it’s a little disappointing when that opponent happens to be one of the best competitors the sport has ever seen – perhaps the only player  left in the WTA with the requisite mental hardware to pose Serena a challenge.

Still, as with Ernie, this ain’t a Slam is it, so what does it matter? Right? Right?

“I decided it’s time to get serious not only at the Slams but every other tournament as well.”

-- Serena Williams

OH.

Sabine next. On paper, this spells all sorts of Boombastic. But then that’s what we said about the Wimbledon semis.

Obligatory Happy Domi pic.

No one else serenading the run she’s been on, so I will.

4th round or better at every Slam. QFs or better at three out of the four.

She plays Marion in the semis in a match custom built to test my loyalties to the nth degree.

Read More...

Stanford: Pretty Sure This Qualifies as #Winning

6-0 6-0 in 47 mins.

And she didn’t face a single break point. Nor did she lose a single point on her first serve. Not one.

“It was me being focused,” Williams said. “I’ve always said if I play my best no one can beat me. Hopefully I can get back to that level.”

Hell, that’s not even a brag (let alone a humblebrag) – more like  a demonstrable law of nature.

Guess that means she’s “back”.

Except we’ve always known that words like that simply don’t feature in Serena’s tennis altereality (neither do “form” and “momentum”). And it bears repeating that Rodionova ain’t even a top 50 player – never has been. But then she ain’t canon fodder either…or, at least, not the type of canon fodder that fails to win even a single game.

So yeah, unsurprisingly surprising. Parrot green ecstasy for her fans. Crisis talks for her “not a fans” and players in her section of the draw. Speaking of which:

“She’s coming back and she’s winning again,” Kirilenko said of Williams. “I need to be focused every minute.”

I’m no Kiri fan, but you have to love how she takes the edge off her imminent destruction with the word “focus”. You can do it with almost anything:

“It’s no longer a question of when but if Murray will win a Slam….he needs to be focused every minute.”

“I’ve spent nearly three unsuccessful years trying to unify Quantum Mechanics with the General Theory of Relativity…..I need to be focused every minute.”

”The worlds biggest economy may default - may not even be able to send out welfare cheques come Tuesday next week…..we have to be focused every minute.”

Assuming Serena doesn’t catastrophically implode between now and Friday, or that “focus” isn’t all its cracked up to be (and it really isn’t, not in itself) Serena will meet Masha in R3.

YES I’ve heard about the “womance” (that is what they’re calling it right?):

“I really like playing Maria and I really admire her and never giving up and developing the confidence that she has… Always just walking around and having so much aplomb, it’s good. I always admired that, it’s really cool.”

…..NO it doesn’t surprise me that two of the greatest competitors this sport has ever seen should have something like mutual admiration.

But then neither do I think there’ll be anything other than cat claws, fire and brimstone on court come Friday. You really do need to focus if you do, and more than just “every minute”.

Read More...

Whatever July might have lacked for on court – it gave, and gave, AND GAVE *off* court.

Howdy all.

As you’ve no doubt already gathered from my little sabbatical, I’m not especially fond of the tennis in July. In fact, I abhor it….especially when it’s on clay.

FACT: July is to the Tennis Calendar what “no-man’s land” is to the serve-volleyer –  the type of place you exile a recently demoted German Masters event when you want to add insult to injury.

And you know what? I think the players agree with me. Well most of them.

Since Newport they seem to be doing anything and everything other than actually plying their trade (that would be tennis). Shaving their head, getting married, staging (slightly tasteless) mock-assassinations, dating (non-tennis) sports stars, amongst other middle-earthy type things.

Whatever works for you tennis. Get whatever’s plaguing you right outta your system, right outta yer hair. Just so long as you’re good to go for August.

I had hoped to ease myself back in. Only I don’t think that’s going to be  possible with the Stanford draw being what it is:

1) Five of the eight seeded players are from my tennis pool.

2) Serena’s in the mix

3) Potential/actual matches: Kimiko/Domi R1, Sabine/Sam R2, Serena/Georges R2, Dani/Pova R2, POVA/SERENA R3,  

The mind doth boggleth….not at all conducive to “easing in” of any sort.

Welcome back tennis.

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: “Disaster Year”

 

"I never cry, with joy, for anything".

Williams d. Rezai 6-3 3-6 6-1

She’s right. I’ve no doubt that she feels deeply, but that’s just not her style.

For what its worth, I didn’t think she needed to demonstrate her “commitment” to her profession to anyone – she could have gone down in straights in the first round and I’d need no assurance on that front.

Even so, the flood of emotions that erupted within seconds of shaking Aravane’s hand at the net caught everyone by surprise, and left no doubt about it whatsoever.

The best part? Aravane (who’s had her own set of troubles in a different kind of “disaster year”) made it a match.

*Slow clap to both women* 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...