Jimmy Connors The Greatest?

By 'Prestige Score,' Connors Is Tops
FEBRUARY 28, 2011

Monday night's tennis exhibition at Madison Square Garden includes four all-time great players: Pete Sampras, Andre Agassi, John McEnroe and Ivan Lendl. But the best player ever won't be there.

No, we're not talking about Roger Federer. Or Rod Laver. Or Rafael Nadal. Jimmy Connors, the cantankerous American who played top-level tennis until he was 39 years old, is, according to a new study, the greatest of all time. Lendl finished second. In a major upset, Ilie Nastase finished ninth, in front of Bjorn Borg and Boris Becker.

The study, published this month in the scientific journal PLoS ONE, discards traditional methods, such as weeks at No. 1 and Grand Slam titles. Instead, it analyzes all matches played in men's tennis since the beginning of the open era, in 1968, and awards each player a "prestige score" based on matches, especially victories, against quality opponents.

"What's really important is not to win many matches, but to win matches against other good players," says Filippo Radicchi, a statistical physicist at Northwestern University who authored the study.

Connors won 178 quality matches, more than any other player. By Radicchi's measure, Federer has 39 quality victories. Nadal has just 21. However, Radicchi notes that his method favors retired players, because the historical stature of current pros has yet to be determined. "I'll run this algorithm again in 10 years and see if the ranking is still the same," he says.

See the ranking...

While I don't get into arguments of "best ever", I find this statistical analysis intriguing on many levels.

(Thanks, Moose)

Drive By

by Craig Hickman

David Ferrer defended a title. Novak Djokovic, too. Juan Martin del Potro returned to the winner's circle for the first time in his comeback.

Vera Zvonareva toppled the computer's top-ranked player to win her 11th title and Gisela Dulko took a singles title for the first time since 2008.

I don't typically watch any of the events on the calendar this week, finals included. Not even the one in the United States. The timing is all wrong. Not to mention sanctions.

Next up: Davis Cup.

DooBye: A Plea for Perspective

 

Every year sees a variant of the same ol’ same ol' ritual: Shahar arrives under heavily armed guard and remain sequestered at a remote part of the venue from which she only emerges to attend her matches – low key affairs typically hosted on an outside court with one entrance and exit. 




Once she loses, media outlets roundly declare the situation as “deplorable”, (rightly) lament Shahar’s plight, soundly condemn the authorities for inheriting a problem not of their making, and  comfortably pretend that nothing that occurred in the region in the last 60 or so years could possibly have given rise to this state of affairs.

 

I’ve long since given up on the issue ever being tackled honestly.

What makes some of the dialogue particularly grate this time round has been the callous ease with which some call for the tournament to be “canned”.

 

Let’s be clear.

 

I have the greatest of respect for Shahar as a player – her work ethic and determination to fight (losing battles) to the very end and in the very best of spirits embodies, to a large extent, the finest aspects of the sport I love. It was on display when she first broke into the top 20 back in 2006 (often only with a fraction of the talent of some of the other up and comers) and has remained with her ever since.

Like many others, I disagreed with Dubai’s refusal to issue her a visa back in 2009. It was frankly an embarrassment for the sport. Even so, the commentary of the time was notable for the absence of any recognition at all of why such a debacle came to be. And of course there were those that sought refuge (as they always do) in the very tired, very blasé “tennis and politics don’t mix” line. I think you’ll find they’re inextricable dearie.

That said, and in common with many other voices (not merely Arab, but European, American and many of them from inside Israel itself), I strongly disagree with many of her country’s policies.

That’s neither here nor there. It’s not what this post is about and I certainly don’t intend to trivialise what’s likely the most divisive issue of our age by presuming to suggest that mentioning it (in passing) on a tennis blog comes anywhere near to giving it the treatment it so duly deserves – for which, by the way, well-written, well-researched, dedicated blogs already exist.



But I do feel it’s time we stopped pretending that there isn’t another (far more complex) side to this story and that the fallout from events in that region (going back over half a century) either shouldn’t exist, or shouldn’t, at any rate, intrude upon our enjoyment of a tennis tournament.

How very inconsiderate of them. How very inconvenient and tiresome for us.

Is it fair to Shahar? Absolutely not. Is it right that she should remain sequestered away under armed guard whilst being made very aware of other players prancing around in photo shoots you, frankly, wouldn’t want to be seen dead in were you able to move freely? No, of course it isn’t.

And in a perfect world it wouldn’t happen.

The trouble is, we don’t live in Disneyland: far more distressing and tragic compromises have been made in a conflict going back several decades (and counting). Like it or not, legitimate grievances do exist the consequences of which continue to reverberate globally.

Shahar will, at least, be handsomely rewarded for her progress at the event. Try comparing that with someone growing up in the Occupied Territories who can never even conceive of becoming a tennis player, not because they have no tennis infrastructure, but because in some cases they have no infrastructure at all. Or any economy to speak of.

The outrage over her treatment would be more convincing if it was coupled with even a cursory nod at the events and circumstances that have led to such a hostile reception in a country which, after all, has no diplomatic relations with Israel.

Venus and ARod’s “principled” stand would be even more principled if it contained even a hint of recognition that the seeds of the “discrimination and exclusion”, Venus in particular spoke out against, are at the very heart of what’s driving the conflict (many, including ex-President Jimmy Carter have described some of  Israel’s policies towards the Palestinians as a form of ‘apartheid’).

People would probably have screamed it’s not their place to comment and it certainly wouldn’t have changed anything – it would, however, have represented a more nuanced, equitable stance.



So let’s “can” the event then? Clearly that’s the only way forward. Better still, let’s never hold another event in the middle east again (no that doesn’t sound myopic at all).

 

Funny. I thought tennis fans existed worldwide and that the sport as well as the right to enjoy it belonged to everyone – not just those that happen to share aspects of your foreign policy.

I realise not everybody calling for its removal is being this blinkered – trouble is, when you broach an issue as emotive as this with such casual derision, it smacks of precisely that.

A funny and rather beautiful thing happened in Doha a couple of days ago. JJ was drawn to play an Omani WC, Fatma Al-Nabhani. A virtual unknown, Al-Nabhani moved up from the top 1000 to the top 400 last year – her finest moment to date being the doubles QFs of junior Wimby.

JJ won in straights as expected. Though the 19 year old, clearly outclassed and obviously inexperienced (and having lost the first set 6-1) rebounded admirably in the second, showcasing her big serve and the kind of forehand winners off the back foot that JJ can only dream of. All at a moment when it would have been only too easy to fade away.

She still lost it 6-3, but held herself throughout with the kind of calm dignity and composure that still remains beyond many top 20 players. Unsurprisingly, the commentators loved her.

 

We might never see her again (not everybody is destined to “make it” – see Ancic, Mario), but without hosting events in that region, she might never have got that sort of exposure.

In other words, it was good for her, it was good for Oman and it was, I hardly need add, good for all of us to come into contact with a player from a culture we might not be accustomed with and one not, frankly, known for its tennis tradition.

We’re sometimes more cynical than we should be as regards the role of sport as a “unifying force” – it always tends to evoke a wince from me, and its significance is, at any rate, overstated all too often.

But moments like this tend to garner universal approval. As they should.

Aren’t these exactly the kind of values the WTA should be upholding? Isn’t a very large part of its remit to foster the spread of tennis this way? Particularly in countries with little or no tennis heritage.

 

One can only assume (and hope) that those calling for it to be “canned” don’t realise how insular they sound.

Of course $$$’s are involved. When has this ever not been the case?

The situation is what it is: you either rule out ever staging a tournament anywhere in the middle east or you’re forced to make certain compromises – God knows it wouldn’t be the first or the greatest.

It’s one thing to sensibly, objectively and justly debate whether Shahar’s treatment is a compromise too far (don’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen) and entirely another to indulge idle, callous rants that call (effectively) for around 300 million people to never see a tennis event staged in their home nation. If the latter sounds insular, it’s because it is.

Mario Ancic: Tragedy and Destiny

 

I don’t like to use the word ‘tragic’ in the context of tennis. It seems to me to be overused and wholly inappropriate given the world we live in.

 

 

But it’s difficult not to feel a pang of “something” hearing of Mario’s retirement at the age of only 26 – still very much in his prime.

 

We should probably also revisit the word “destiny” – or at least insist on a more comprehensive usage.

The trouble with referring to Fed’s 16 Slams, Rafa’s rise or (further down the scale) Milos’s breakthrough as “destiny” is that, for every Rafa we have an Ivo, a Kohlschreiber or a Seppi who will (very likely) end their days very respectably somewhere in the top 100, with only a handful of titles and no Slams to their name. That too is destiny.

 

And for every Pova, for every Novak, we have players like Haas, Seles, Dokic and of course, Mario – careers ravaged by injury, illness and misfortune.  The dark underbelly of destiny that cruelly maintains that it’s (clearly) not "meant to be" for everyone.



I don’t know anyone with a bad word to say about Mario. He was naturally charismatic (having a “Ralph Macchio” babyface probably helped), but he also dealt admirably well with misfortune by using the downtime imposed upon him by mono to study for and complete a degree in Law. Alas his subsequent back troubles were to prove a battle too far and put paid to any meaningful return to the sport he invested much of his life in.

Most people remember him for what he very nearly achieved at Wimbledon, or for being the last player to beat Fed there before Rafa came and did what he did.

He seemed to me to combine his unique talent with an equally unique and seemingly irresistible boy-next-door look that made him both a fan and media darling throughout his years on tour.

I can’t come up with a better epitaph that embodies all of those qualities than something I heard on twitter – where else? (hat tip @LexiDV):

 

“Mario Ancic. The first player I ever took a day off from work to watch on my tv. He lost :(“.

 

Yep, he was that player.

Memphis: Tennis can never have enough ‘Starsky and Hutch’

 

I didn’t see the match but was happy to see Roddick claim his 30th career title in what (by all accounts) was a thrilling (if somewhat ace-heavy) match – probably more so than it had any right to be.

The alternative result would have seen Milos claim his second consecutive title, which let’s face it would have been pretty crazy too.

Perhaps more so, given that post-Oz it was all about Dolgo having “arrived.” Milos has now comprehensively shat upon his coming-out party and threatens to continue to further cramp his style. You have to admit that’s just as compelling.

I’ll concede the effect maybe lost on me coming in "cold" without the benefit of the 3 primeval sets of tennis that preceded it - but "best MP ever"??

Dubai: The Middle Ground

 

Criticism both for and against Woz has gone from being an idle weekend pursuit to a large part of how you define yourself ideologically

On the far-right you have those Neanderthals for whom any and all of Caro’s victories are evidence of her opponents’ dysfunction and presumably of what poor shape the WTA is in.  The other extreme consists of those sandal-wearing pacifists that have made an art form of forging touchy, defensive tracts even when the circumstances point overwhelmingly (as they did this weekend with Sveta) towards a poor performance on the part of her opponent.

 

The “middle ground” (if it exists at all)  is occupied by other varying shades of apologists and belligerents.

 

I no longer want any part of it.

 

Q. Do you think it’s unfair when people criticize you or when people talk your game and they say, She gets lots of balls back, but she hasn’t got a big weapon? You’ve got to No. 1 in the world. Do you think that’s unfair when you hear people say that?

CAROLINE WOZNIACKI: Um, well, if I don’t have a weapon, then what do the others have? Since I’m No. 1, I must do something right. I think there’re not actually criticizing me. I think the other players should be offended.

She’ll never be your cup of tea if, like me, you enjoy brash, bold, big-hitting tennis. That doesn’t, shouldn’t, mean

 

a) that she hasn’t earnt many (if not all) her wins,

 

b) that we don’t call out, in the strongest possible terms, her (supposedly more experienced, high ranking) opponents for capitulating as badly as they seem to against her, or, for that matter, why she appears to cause them so much trouble – is she clearly not doing something right?

c)  or (worse) that she’s somehow foregone her right to being credited for the type of mental resilience necessary to play the style of tennis that seems to offend people so much. (Hint: it’s the same focus we so enjoy celebrating in Pova and Rafa amongst others – but somehow not hitting the same amount of winners as them means you forgo that right?)

It also doesn’t mean (and this cannot be stated enough) that her style of play has no business at the top of the WTA food chain.

The problem (as I see it) comes when well (or seriously unwell)-meaning peeps try and present being “rocksolid” as an incontrovertible virtue and rationalise EVERYTHING (from tennis results to the origins of the universe) by invoking that great tennis tautology: “a win’s a win”.

 

Yes, a win is indeed a win – but some wins are clearly better (or worse) than others. And being "rocksolid” is infinitely easier to appreciate when it’s not fashioned upon the bedrock of your opponents stupidity. I’m not even going to attempt to understand what lay behind Sveta’s flatulence – let’s just say “it happens”.

 

The most infuriating strain of this thought goes as far as crediting her with talents she clearly doesn’t possess like “nuance”  – I’ve even heard her being compared to Rafa.

 

And that, I’m afraid, is when knives are drawn and plates are broken.

Marseille: Unimpressed

 

In the last four months Sod has won an ATP 250, a 500, a Masters-1000, …..

 

Please to fill in the gap and complete the sequence.

 

I remain, as ever, unimpressed.

 

It’s not just that winning 250s is not any great indicator of form (not, at any rate, a reliable one and certainly not when the number three seed is Mikhail Youzhny). There’s just no sense of trajectory or, dare I say it, narrative in winning one of these things anymore.

 

This is much more Marin-territory, no? –  who seems to be showing his first reliable signs of life in around a year. YES IT’S BEEN THAT LONG.

Confessions

Savannah has the story on the recently-retired former world No. 1 who admitted she, well, cheated on the grandest stages of tennis.

Historic Face Of The Day

Serena Williams holds the Coupe Suzanne Lenglen after defeating her sister Venus Williams at the French Open Tennis Championships on June 8, 2002 at Stade Roland Garros in Paris, France.

::

The only Black woman in the Open Era and the last American to win Roland Garros.

Mario Ancic Retires

Getty

Mario Ancic of Croatia celebrates winning the second set against Bobby Reynolds of the United States during the BNP Paribas Open on March 11, 2010 in Indian Wells, California.

::

Former world number seven Mario Ancic has retired at the age of 26 to become a lawyer after years battling illness and injury.

The big-serving Croatian, who earned the nickname "Super Mario" after reaching the Wimbledon semi-finals in 2004, achieved his career-high ranking in 2006 but has struggled since with the illness mononucleosis as well as back and knee problems.

"I can't stand it any more, I have finished my career," Ancic was quoted as saying by Croatian daily Jutarnji List on Monday.

"I'm forced to quit because nature has decided it's time. My back can't withstand the effort of professional tennis."

Ancic, whose greatest moment came in 2005 when he won the deciding rubber in the Davis Cup final against Slovakia, is due to hold a news conference on Wednesday.

During his lengthy spells out of tennis Ancic, whose father owns a supermarket chain in Croatia, studied for a degree in law at the University of Split which he completed in 2008.

More Than Just A Big Serve

AP

Andy Roddick's scraped elbow is visible as he holds his winner's trophy for the championship match of the Regions Morgan Keegan Championships tennis tournament Sunday, Feb. 20, 2011, in Memphis, Tenn. Roddick outgutted Milos Raonic 7-6 (7), 6-7 (11), 7-5, and made a diving return on the final shot.

::

Will Andy Roddick end 2011 without a title for the first time in 11 years?

That was the question I almost posted as a random thought earlier this week when I finally glanced at the draw of Memphis. Following his unceremonious loss in the fourth round of Melbourne, a loss which the American commentators at ESPN almost seemed happy about, it surely seemed possible. I know there's much tennis to play in 2011, but still.

Something told me to hold my tongue.

For all of my fan-anxious criticism, Andy Roddick is the kind of player that enriches the tapestry of the sport I love. Since Melbourne, the only storyline worth (over)hyping has been the out-of-nowhere fairy tale of the 20-year-old Canadian via Montenegro Milos Raonic who's now the highest ranked Canadian male in tennis history. But the promising young upstart with the huge serve and big forehand lost to the tenacious old veteran with the huge serve and big forehand.

And tenacious he was. Roddick had to rally to defeat a virtual no-name in the first round, overcome the man who defeated him at the US Open last year in the second. In the quarterfinals he needed 7 match points and a dive or two, which drew blood on his right arm, the bruises you see above, to get past his old, tenacious rival Lleyton Hewitt. In the semifinals he broke the serve for the first time in the event of Juan Martin Del Potro, a man he's lost to on US hardcourts all three times they'd played, broke his serve three times. And in his 50th career final, he outgutted the man from Canada via Montenegro he'd never played before, the man the commentators have been hyping as the Next Great Thing (there were times during the encounter where if you didn't see it with your own eyes, you'd have thought Raonic was the only player on the court given all the lip service they gave the big kid) and won a match point for the ages to earn his 30th career title. All the while coughing up his lungs from one of those bad colds going round.

He did it with patience, defense, offense, netplay, backhands down the line, guile, guts, and, yes, big serving.

The match started slowly, mostly all about the serving, but then marched towards its dramatic finish. As both players began to read the other's game, the rallies got longer, the stakes, higher. But no one saw the ending coming. Surely, at 5-6, 30-40 and serving, Raonic, who'd saved all 4 match points he faced on serve in the second set tiebreak, would serve his way out of match point number 5, right?

Raonic struck a great serve out wide, but Roddick got it back with a backhand return. Raonic struck a hard forehand approach down the line that Roddick struck back with a hard backhand down the line. Raonic struck what appeared to be a clean volley winner deep and wide in the open court, but Roddick scrambled to chase it down, didn't look like he'd get there, but dove at the last second with his forehand outstretched and slapped a screaming passing shot winner that Raonic could only watch whiz by. Roddick didn't even seen where the ball landed as he rolled out of the dive. Just like that, the match was over. The commentators had to stop their Raonic hype mid-thought to acknowledge that the match was, indeed, over. About as abrupt an ending as a double fault, but far more fulfilling. Andy looked shocked for minutes after.

AP

AP

Roddick takes a lot of crap from the pundits and fans alike (I'm talking about you, Carter), especially in the United States. But there he is, 28-years-old, going about his business with the weight of a country on his shoulders, because, well, let's face it: whenever he arrives at a Slam anywhere in the world but Paris, he's the only American male who anyone expects to contend for the title. And it's been that way for the greater part of 11 years now.

AP

Hats off to a warrior who has now earned a small place in tennis history alongside his great nemesis for winning at least one singles title in each of those years. No way you achieve that unless your game is more than just a big serve. And his heart is even bigger. As an American, as a fan, I'm proud of Andy Roddick. Very proud. There. I said it.

AP

Under The Radar

Getty

Robin Söderling won his third title of 2011 with a 6-7(8), 6-3, 6-3 victory over Marin Cilic at Open 13 in Marseille.

The Big Swede has lost exactly one match this year.

Memphis Tennis

AP

Andy Roddick of the United States returns a shot to Janko Tipsarevic of Serbia in the Regions Morgan Keegan Championships tennis tournament February 17, 2011.

::

Can't get a feed to work to watch any of the matches at this event. Maybe next year, I'll go down to my father's old stomping ground and check out the tournament live.

Men's Singles - Second Round
[1] A Roddick (USA) d J Tipsarevic (SRB) 61 76(8)
[5] S Querrey (USA) d B Dabul (ARG) 63 76(3)
L Hewitt (AUS) d A Mannarino (FRA) 67(9) 75 60
[Q] M Russell (USA) d F Serra (FRA) 64 64
[WC] J Del Potro (ARG) d I Dodig (CRO) 64 64
[WC] M Raonic (CAN) d R Stepanek (CZE) 64 67(10) 76(1)

Wonder how many match points Raonic had in the second set tiebreak?

Good day at the office for American men.

::

Women's Singles - Quarterfinals
(6) Rebecca Marino (CAN) d. Coco Vandeweghe (USA) 61 76(6)
Evgeniya Rodina (RUS) d. (Q) Heather Watson (GBR) 63 64
Lucie Hradecka (CZE) d. Ksenia Pervak (RUS) 64 63
Magdalena Rybarikova (SVK) d. (Q) Alexa Glatch (USA) 63 62

American women can't even win events at this level.

::

Doubles - Quarterfinals
[1] M Mirnyi (BLR) / D Nestor (CAN) d [WC] R Harrison (USA) / A Roddick (USA) 75 76(5)
[3] M Knowles (BAH) / M Mertinak (SVK) d M Melo (BRA) / B Soares (BRA) 36 63 14-12
[4] E Butorac (USA) / J Rojer (AHO) d J Del Potro (ARG) / R Stepanek (CZE) 64 62
K Anderson (RSA) / A Fisher (AUS) d J Isner (USA) / S Querrey (USA) 62 75

Not a good day for American men's doubles teams.

::

Women's Doubles - Quarterfinals
Pervak/Senoglu (RUS/TUR) d. (1) Voracova/Zahlavova Strycova (CZE/CZE) 60 63
(4) Hlavackova/Hradecka (CZE/CZE) d. (WC) Hampton/Oudin (USA/USA) 61 61

Historic Face Of The Day

Getty

Yannick Noah of France raises his arms in celebration after defeating Mats Wilander in the Men's Singles final match during the French Open Tennis Championship on June 5, 1983 at the Stade Roland Garros Stadium in Paris, France.

::

The only Black man and the last Frenchman to win the French Open.

Shifting Narratives

Delpo on the brink of making his first final since his injury comeback….Dolgo on the verge of winning his first ATP title….with Sod/Tsonga and Petra/Kim still to look forward to. That’s how I left it on Saturday night.

It’s not often I ask for EVERYTHING. I’m usually open to a watering down of at least some of my dreams – such flexibility is an essential coping mechanism for life itself.

 

But then the stakes aren’t usually this high, are they? 

 

Dolgo has “arrived”, now, I would imagine, by anyone’s reckoning  – a first ATP title would have accorded perfectly with his gung-ho, indie, all-court narrative. (Aside: Truly astonishing anyone thought he’d find the nickname ‘Dog’ either cute, funny or a term of endearment – he doesn’t)

 

And I’m guessing friends, fans, frenemies and foe alike are all united in wishing Delpo the best as he makes his precarious comeback – if only (in the case of the latter) so they may feel free to root against him again.

 

Those particular narratives will have to wait.

 

 

1) Soderling over Tsonga 6-3 3-6 6-3

Perhaps the wrong narrative altogether, because I’m afraid the stakes, in this instance, are no longer very high at all.

 

The most visceral, charged narratives often involve those who stand to lose or gain everything - a remote, anachronistic existence in which ‘anything can happen’ and ‘impossible is nothing’. It seems to me we’ve already had the first act of this with Sod upsetting two of the best players ever.

Always great seeing him come through of course – even a piddly 500 event reminds us why he’s here to stay, and defending a title definitely lends itself to a certain truculence which is, by the way, completely in keeping with his narrative and station.

 

The very last thing I want to see, however, is this coming at the expense of bigger and better things – or worse, seeing him get comfortable as the “Andy Murray” of the 500 or even the Masters-1000 level. As good as it is, a title like this should, now, mean less to him than it does to someone like Jo-Wills (his first final in 16 months).

 

There be bigger fish to fry out there Robin. Classical form would now demand that you go fry them.

 

 

 

2) Petra over Kim 64 63.

Voluntary disclosure of rooting interests for 2011: As many as half of my WTA eggs are in Petra’s basket.

Was Kim not at her best? Perhaps. This certainly wasn’t the officially endorsed narrative for the newly crowned world #1 (Update: Neither is Petra’s 76 76 loss to Morita in Dubai earlier today)

What I do know is that Petra’s serve out wide might just be the best shot in women's tennis right now. Unreadable pace. The worst kind.

Oh sure, ‘one win does not a champ make’ and all that, but it’s not just been about the one win has it? This is her second title in 6 weeks which, taken together with her QF run at Oz and SF at Wimbledon last year, simply demands that we take note. (Two Slam fourth rounds in her late teens isn’t too shoddy either)

 

Perhaps most convincingly of all, it’s the way in which she outplayed rather than outlasted Kim. Ask yourself whether the narrative of the timid counterpuncher is nearly as compelling as that of the audacious upstart.

Timely too – with a whole raft of retirements imminent in 2012, I have an opening in my tennis pool. Maybe even a number of them.

 

Yes I’m on board, but don’t think for a minute that the decision has been taken lightly:

 

-- She’s a lefty. Not the philosophical solution to life it’s sometimes made out to be, but the different look does, nevertheless, throw many players (more than you’d think) out of their rigidly defined comfort zones.

 

-- She’s daring and/or unhinged enough to imagine winners where none exist. True that this can sometimes prove counterproductive (if you saw her match against Woz in Beijing last year you’ll know just how counterproductive) – it’s also a necessary mind-set for anyone with an eye on the big stuff.

Put simply, you have to have it within you to be just a little suicidal against the best players. Both classical form and the big occasion demand it. The timid counterpuncher would never even conceive of blitzing the world #1 and winner of the last two Slams in straights.

-- She has all of the big weapons necessary to pull off an upset at the highest of levels unlike say a MJMS, yet remains far more nuanced than a Rezai – both of whom won Premier events last year. Why should we expect any less of Petra?

 

-- Best of all, the braces are a feint echo of Sveta’s 2004 USO run. Detail like this is at least as important as any of the above if you’re in the business of narrative.

Nothing is certain of course (whole matches can turn, have turned, round very fast when she loses focus the way she did after Wimbledon last year), but consider all of the above points my “due diligence”.

 

 

 

3) Confession: I still haven’t seen Milos play

 

I’m hearing the dubious Pete Sampras comparisons. I’m hearing utterly terrifying ice hockey jokes. I’m even hearing some doubts being expressed over the prevailing (overwhelmingly stark) opinion about the future of non-European tennis.

 

Listen carefully and you might even hear the wind carrying the sound of Dancevic cursing into his glass.

I’m yet to see him hit a ball. Laughable I know. But that’s just the way it panned out with timezones being what they are. All of which means I’m not in a position to weigh up any of the above.

I aim to rectify this before he, you know, wins a Slam or something.

 

From what little I have gathered, he seems (in common with Dolgo) to have the makings of an all-courter and is not afraid to have a crack at the ball – both of which bode well for the future. Being 6’5 can’t hurt very much either.

 

If I had it my way, Delpo would have made the final and Dolgo would have won in Brazil. And yet all this talk of “narrative” and “destiny” is of course all utterly preposterous. Smug, self-satisfied spiritualist nonsense – a little too full of its elemental self.

 

What makes one narrative more compelling than any other lies not always in its strict conformance with classical form. But rather in its audacity.

 

And more often than not, the more audacious narratives are forged through what seem like mere random inflections at the time.

 

Like Hantuchova winning her first title since 2007 for instance.

Ask yourself whether Delpos comeback would be nearly as gripping if he won his 2nd event back.

 

Ask yourself whether Sod winning a Slam (should it happen) would be nearly as compelling if he hadn’t pulled off what he pulled off in 2009.

Nestled deeply somewhere in the swinging, conflicted narratives of Dolgo’s floating hair, Petra’s shining braces and Milos’s scrawny 6’5 frame lies a future threatening to be as uplifting as anything we’ve seen.

Don’t let’s forestall it by being that twat sitting directly in front of you that always gets up and starts clapping before the credits have even started rolling.

Face Of The Day

Getty

Jean Gachassin, president of the French tennis federation (FFT) gives a press conference to announce that French Open will remain at Roland Garros on the outskirts of Paris on February 13, 2011 in Paris. Roland Garros, built in 1928, is bursting at the seams and three alternative sites were proposed so that the country's claycourt Grand Slam tournament can grow and expand.

::

And so it is. Roland Garros will remain Roland Garros.

Former world No. 1 and Wimbledon champion Amélie Mauresmo isn't so sure that's a good thing:

"I hope they (the French Federation of Tennis) won't get in trouble by taking this decision," Mauresmo said. "I don't know if the tennis aspect prevailed in that decision. I have some doubts. I clearly said that I was more in favor of a development, of an ambition, that is, to move."

"If you can keep the history of the tournament in a place that is big enough to have the crowd happy, the players happy, night matches perhaps, matches when it's raining, then that's the perfect situation," she said. "If you can keep tradition in these conditions, then it's great. I'm not sure that's the case with Roland Garros."

Me either.

Milos Raonic Wins First Title In San Jose

by Craig Hickman


AP

An historic moment. Milos Raonic becomes the first Canadian man to win an ATP title with his 7-6 (6), 7-6 (5) upset defeat of defending champion Fernando Verdasco at the SAP Open since Greg Rusedski won Seoul in 1995. And he did it in his first final

“It’s been amazing," the 20-year-old, who rises to No. 59 in the rankings today, said after the match. “I came here and had probably my best week. I can’t stop smiling. I’m happy about it and I hope I can keep it going more than six weeks into the full year schedule and see where I am at the end of the year.”

The match was mostly a serve-fest. The rallies that ensued were split pretty evenly by both players. But the turning point of the all-tiebreak affair came when Verdasco led 6-2 in the first set breaker and found a way to lose the next 6 points and the set. I don't recall what happened on the first 3 set points, but at 6-5 and serving in the ad court, Verdasco chose not to hit his swinging serve that had been winning easy points for him all match, choosing to serve up the T instead. Raonic blocked back a timid return short and Verdasco's forehand landed 10 feet wide. When they switched ends at 6-6, you could sense defeat for Verdasco and victory for Raonic.

Still, I always expected the veteran to pull out the match in three sets. Surely, a first-time finalist playing on his 8th tour level event is going to find a way to lose his way and the defending champion would pounce. But that wasn't to be. Raonic kept his composure throughout, didn't let a thing distract him, and on his first match point, struck a service winner out wide to claim victory.

These two are drawn to meet in the first-round of Memphis this week. Imagine that.


AP

Raonic receives a bottle of Canadien maple syrup and a San Jose Sharks jersey after the match.

Robin Söderling Defends Rotterdam

by Craig Hickman


Reuters

For the first time in his career, Robin Robin Söderling defended an ATP title with a 6-3, 3-6, 6-3 victory over Jo-Wilfried Tsonga to win his second ABN AMRO World Tennis Tournament in Rotterdam.

I watched most of the match and the one thing the big Swede continues to do well is return huge serves. Maybe because he's so big himself, he has good reach and can get his racquet on more serves than it seems he should. Maybe his anticipation on the return of serve is hard to see from the angles we see it. Whatever the case, his return of serve may be the most underrated part of his big game.

As for Tsonga, he played with little discipline, as has become his way. Yes, it made sense to go for big first shots to try to take control of the point before his opponent, but trying to strike outrageous winners when completely out of position remains the talented Frenchman's biggest weakness.

Still, it was a good match between two power players in the finals of a relatively big event indicating once more than the power game has not completely lost its, well, power in men's tennis.

On another continent, Nicolas Almagro beat Alexandr Dolgopolov 6-3, 7-6(3) to claim the Brasil Open crown, his eighth career title.

Petra Kvitova Pummels Kim Clijsters To Win Paris Indoors

Getty

Shortly after the Australian Open, I read a journalist say something to the effect that all he could see in Petra Kvitova was a good swinging serve and not much else. In that writer's defense, Petra exited Melbourne with an erratic lackluster performance against Vera Zvonareva. Consistency is not Petra's forte. Not yet, anyway.


Reuters

But after saving a match point in the second round, the young Czech with the Bette Davis eyes blasted her way into the finals of the Open GDF Suez where she waxed Monday's new world No. 1 in straight sets. Beat her like she stole something. Now I see why Petra considers Paris Indoors her favorite tournament. The No. 4 seed struck 10 aces and at least 17 winners off the ground in a 6-4, 6-3 drubbing. An all-court display of power tennis that left the defending one subdued.

Wonder what that writer sees in her now.

Getty

Elsewhere, No. 4 seed Daniela Hantuchova beat No. 8 seed Sara Errani to win the Pattaya Open. Guess it was a good day to be the No. 4 seed on the WTA.

Historic Face Of The Day

Getty

Stacey Martin of the United States makes a double handed return against Monica Seles during their Women's Singles match at the French Open Tennis Championship on 28th May 1989 at the Stade Roland Garros Stadium in Paris, France.

Will Roland Garros Have New Digs?

by Craig Hickman


AP

Paris in Springtime May Not Include the French Open
by Christopher Clarey

IT sounded outlandish at first, like nothing more than a thinly disguised bargaining chip. But the prospect of moving the French Open to the suburbs has gradually developed into a legitimate option, or if you are Mayor Bertrand Delanoe of Paris, a legitimate threat.

The vote to determine the future of the grand slam tennis tournament is scheduled for Sunday, when 180 delegates from the French tennis federation will attempt to decide whether the Open will remain at its current location on the western edge of Paris or move farther afield in 2015 to one of three other sites: Gonesse, Marne-la-Vallee or Versailles.

A two-thirds majority will be required for selection. If that proves impossible Sunday, the plan is to reconvene within three months and vote again with only a simple majority necessary.

For now, Paris and the existing Roland Garros Stadium still look to be the slight favourites, considering the French emphasis on tradition and centralisation, and the prohibitive cost of building elsewhere from scratch. But Versailles has the requisite snob appeal, with its palace within walking distance of the proposed location on a former military base, and either Gonesse or Marne-la-Vallee would allow the federation to own its site outright instead of settling for a long-term lease.

All three alternatives offer huge increases in acreage and elbow room for a tournament that is the smallest of the four grand slams and whose walkways can often seem as crowded as a subway car at rush hour.

Rafael Nadal, a five-time French Open champion who could surpass Bjorn Borg's record for singles titles, has repeatedly made it clear he is against the tournament moving, emphasising that it would lose some of its soul. But Justine Henin, the retired Belgian who won the women's title four times, takes a more nuanced approach. ''I have a hard time imagining Roland Garros anywhere else, but I think it's definitely true that the site needs to grow,'' she says. ''The players and the spectators suffer because it's too small. They have to find a solution.''

Nostalgia has hardly been much of a trump card in grand slam tennis. The US Open left the West Side Tennis Club for a bigger, more soulless site in Flushing Meadows in 1978. The Australian Open was held in other cities before it settled in Melbourne at Kooyong, only to pull up stakes and move to a new facility in Melbourne's city centre in 1988. Even Wimbledon moved from Worple Road to its current grounds in 1922, and has been on a modernisation kick of late that has led to the destruction of multiple show courts, including the atmospheric No.1 Court.

Read the rest...

If they move, they better build a stadium with lights and have night sessions. (Are you listening, Wimbledon?) It's time to bring all the Slams into the 21st century.

Historic Face Of The Day

Source

The only black man to win singles titles at Wimbledon, the US Open, and the Australian Open.

Bold Statements, Propaganda, and New Sponsors

What she said.

Post Melbourne Champions

Ivan Dodig of Croatia poses for photograph with his trophy after beating Michael Berrer of Germany during their PBZ Zagreb Indoors tennis tournament final in Zagreb, on February 6, 2011. Dodig won 6-3, 6-4 to capture his first ATP title.


Getty

Kevin Anderson of South Africa kisses the trophy on February 6, 2011 after winning the final of the South African Open tennis tournament in Johannesburg, beating Somdev Devvarman of India 4-6, 6-3, 6-2.


Reuters

Tommy Robredo of Spain lifted the cup after defeating Santiago Giraldo of Colombia in the men's final match against in the ATP World Tour Movistar Open tennis tournament in Santiago February 6, 2011.

Fed Cup Photos

AP

Petra Kvitova, left, from Czech Republic is embraced by the team's captain Petr Pala, right, as she celebrates after defeating Daniela Hantuchova from Slovakia in their world group first round tennis match in Bratislava, Slovakia, Sunday, Feb. 6, 2011. Kvitova won the match 6-4, 6-2 and gave Czech Republic a decisive 3-0 lead.

Getty

Aleksandra Krunic (L) and Bojana Jovanovski of Serbia celebrate after beating Sharon Fichman and Marie-Eve Pelletier of Canada during their Fed Cup doubles tennis match on February 6, 2011, in Novi Sad, Serbia. Serbia won the tie.


Reuters

US player Bethanie Mattek-Sands returns the ball against Belgian Kim Clijsters during the Fed Cup first round match on February 6, 2011 in Antwerp. Belgium won the tie.



Getty

Russian Svetlana Kuznetsova (L) is congatulated by her former teammate Anastasia Myskina (R) as they celebrate a victory over the French duo of Alize Cornet and Julie Coin during their doubles match of the Fed Cup tennis match in Moscow on February 6, 2011. Russia won the tie.

Historic Face Of The Day

NBCSports

Darlene Hard kisses Althea Gibson after the championship match in 1957 that made Gibson the first African American to win a Wimbledon singles title.

::

Althea Gibson is noted not only for her exceptional abilities as a tennis player, but for breaking the color barrier in the 1950s as the first African American to compete in national and international tennis.
Childhood in Harlem

Althea Gibson was born in Silver, South Carolina, on August 25, 1927. She was the first of Daniel and Anna Washington Gibson's five children. Her parents worked on a cotton farm, but when she was three years old the family moved north to the Harlem area of New York City. Gibson caused a lot of problems as a child and often missed school. Her father was very strict with her on these occasions, but he also taught her to box, a skill that he figured would come in handy in the rough neighborhood the Gibson family lived in.
Tennis success

When Gibson was ten years old, she became involved with the Police Athletic League (PAL) movement known as "play streets." PAL was an attempt to help troubled children establish work habits they would need later in life. In 1940 PAL promoted paddle ball (a game similar to handball except that it is played using a wooden racket) competitions in Harlem. After three summers of playing the game Gibson was so good that the Cosmopolitan Tennis Club sponsored her to learn the game of tennis and proper social behavior.

In 1942 Gibson began winning tournaments sponsored by the American Tennis Association (ATA), the African American version of the United States Lawn Tennis Association (USLTA). In 1944 and 1945 Gibson won the ATA National Junior Championships. In 1946 several politically minded African Americans identified Gibson as having the talent to help break down organized racism (unequal treatment based on race) in the United States. Sponsored by Hubert Eaton and Walter Johnson (1887–1946) and inspired by boxer Sugar Ray Robinson (1921–1989), Gibson was soon winning every event on the ATA schedule. In 1949 she entered A&M University in Tallahassee, Florida, on a tennis scholarship and prepared for the difficult task of breaking the color barrier in tournament tennis.
Breaking the color barrier

The USLTA finally allowed Gibson to play in the 1950 Nationals when four-time U.S. singles and doubles (a two-person team) champion Alice Marble (1913–1990) spoke out on her behalf. Gibson lost her first match of the tournament, but the breakthrough had been made. Over the next several years Gibson worked as a physical education teacher at Lincoln University in Jefferson City, Missouri. She also continued playing tennis and rose up the USLTA rankings (ninth in 1952, seventh in 1953). After a year of touring the world and playing special events for the U.S. State Department, Gibson staged a full-scale assault on the tennis world in 1956. That year she won the French Open in both singles and doubles.

Over the next two years Gibson was the leading women's tennis player in the world. In 1957 and 1958 she won both the Wimbledon and U.S. National singles titles, becoming the first African American to win a Wimbledon singles title. In 1958 she wrote a book about her life called I Always Wanted to Be Somebody. After her 1958 victory at the U.S. Nationals, Gibson retired from tennis and played professional golf. She was elected to the International Tennis Hall of Fame in 1971.

More...

Historic Face Of The Day

Getty

Jim Courier of the United States argues a point with the umpire during his defeat of Andre Agassi 3-6 6-4 2-6 6-1 6-4 in the final to win the Men's Singles title at the French Open Tennis Championship on 9th June 1991 at the Stade Roland Garros Stadium in Paris, France.