US OPEN 2011: Men's Final Preview

Rafael Nadal ESP (2) v Novak Djokovic SRB (1).

by Mad Professah, contributing writer

For the first time since 1995 the #1 and #2 players in the world will be competing in the U.S. Open men's singles championship match. Amazingly, Djokovic and Nadal have competed as #1 and #2 in 5 finals already this year and all five have been won by then-World #2 Djokovic. One of these was in the 2011 Wimbledon final when it was clear that the next day, regardless of the final result, Djokovic would become World #1, and then he emphasized his position by dismissing Nadal in four sets to win his first Wimbledon title and 2nd major of the year.


Now, Djokovic is World #1 and playing in his first grand slam as the #1 seed. The 2010 U.S. Open singles final was between these two players, and Nadal won relatively easily in a 4-set match, delayed by rain to the third Monday of the tournament.

How They Got Here
N. Djokovic d. R. Federer 6-7(7) 4-6 6-3 6-2 7-5. For the second year in a row Djokovic defeated Federer in a U.S. Open semifinal despite being two match points down. Federer served brilliantly and played aggressive tennis for the first two sets and then his play dipped immediately in the 3rd and Djokovic's rose to win that set. Again in the fourth set Federer quickly went down a break and then another break. It's possible that the Swiss player might have been marshalling his forces to play a 5th set, but in my eyes the reason for Djokovic winning the 3rd and 4th sets was a combination of the Serb playing well and Federer playing not so well. Then in the fifth set Federer managed to get a break in the 8th game of the set and served for the match at 5-3, 40-15. On his first match point down Djokovic hit a go-for-broke first-serve forehand return winner smack on the sideline. On the second match point, at 40-30, Federer hit a good body serve which Djokovic barely managed to get back relatively short in the court, Federer skipped forwarded and attempted to hit a cross-court forehand angle winner behind Djokovic but the ball hit the net cord and bounced out of the court. Deuce. Instead of taking his time and realizing the importance of being two points away from one of the biggest wins of the year, Federer played quickly, mangled a backhand into the net and faced breakpoint. He swiped that away with a quick ace. Back to deuce. Unable to buy a first serve at this point, Djokovic was ahead in the point from the beginning and won that point for a second breakpoint. This time Federer double faulted on breakpoint down to hand Djokovic the lead 6-5. The new #1 quickly served out his service game, reaching match point and Federer responded to a good serve with a weak backhand reply which sailed long. Game, set and match. Djokovic is now 63-2 for 2011. Federer will finish 2011 without winning a major title for the first time since 2002.

R. Nadal d. A. Murray 6-4 6-2 3-6 6-2. Although I incorrectly predicted Murray to make his breakthrough and win this match, he again showed why he is not mentally prepared to win a major. In the first two sets Murray seemed content to just play long rallies with Nadal, refusing to be aggressive and cursing like a pirate. He was also giving a running commentary on his own game, radiating negative energy all over the court that Nadal feasted on, growing more aggressive with every wince and yelp the Brit produced. After being down two sets Murray re-focussed, cut down on the negative energy and ran like a gazelle aroundthe court, winning the 3rd set relatively easily. But in the 4th set he fell way behind early and though he made a push at the end, it was too little too late. Murray becomes only the 7th player in history to reach the semifinals or better in all four majors for the year, but he is 0-3 in major finals so far. Nadal is able to reach the U.S. Open final for the second consecutive year.

My Prediction
I incorrectly predicted the result of the women's final, where the underdog Samantha Stosur beat heavily favored Serena Williams to win her first major title (and 3rd tour title overall). I did, however, correctly predicted Djokovic to beat Federer (in 5 sets) in the semifinal. In the final, it is Novak Djokovic who is going for his first U.S. Open and 4th major title over someone who has one 10 major titles and is the defending champion.

Even with five consecutive losses, Nadal still leads the head-to-head match up 16 to 12 but on hard courts Djokovic leads 9-5. It is Novak's best surface and Nadal's worst. Their games match up even worse on hard courts than they do on other surfaces. Djokovic is untroubles by Nadal's vicious topspin forehand to his backhand side and Nadal can be overpowered on his backhand side by Djokovic's forehand. Mentally, Djokovic has the clear edge and he has superior movement on hard courts as well. There's no question that Djokovic is playing better than he played last year, and that Nadal is not. So clearly the match will be closer than last year's final. Nadal has had difficulty winning sets against Djokovic this year, and grown repeatedly hesitant at "dangerous" moments. Djokovic knows he is playing with house money since he just won a match for only the second time in his career being down two-sets-to-love, and he did it against Roger Federer! It will be hard to over-estimate how confident he will be and how much he wants this title to cement his #1 status for the rest of the year, ending the Federer-Nadal duopoloy for good, and marking the beginning of the Djokovic-Nadal-Federer "trivalry."

MadProfessah's pick: Djokovic.

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.

US OPEN 2011: Women's Final Preview

Serena Williams USA (28) v. Samantha Stosur AUS (9). 

by Mad Professah, contributing writer

The 2011 US Open finalists are the two women in the draw with the two best serves in women's tennis. Serena demonstrated the importance of having an effective serve in her 6-2 6-4 drubbing of the now and future World #1 Caroline Wozniacki in a routine semifinal whose result was never in doubt. Serena served 11 aces and hit another 23 winners from all over the court--and she was probably playing at about 80% of her ability. Her "B" game. Wozniacki simply had (and has) no weapons with which to bother Serena and almost no offensive intent or capacity so Serena simply bided her time, broke the 21-year-old Dane at will and was content to serve out the match. When suddenly she played a loose match game at 6-2, 5-3 she calmly broke back easily to reach the final.

Stosur's route to the final was more complicated. She played the unheralded (some would say unknown) Angelique Kerber from Germany, at 6pm on the Grandstand court (capacity 6,000) when the second men's semifinal was still going on on the main stage at Ashe which holds 23,000+. Instead of winning easily, Stosur won a relatively tight 6-3 2-6 6-2 victory. Stosur has had a pretty dramatic tournament overall, playing the longest tiebreak in Grand Slam history in the 4th round (losing it 17-15) against Maria Kirilenko and playing the longest U.S. Open women's match (in terms of games played) against Nadia Petrova in the 2nd round, eventually winning7-6(5) 6-7(5) 7-5 in 3 hours, 16 minutes.

Stosur is the probably the only other player in the draw who is not overwhelmed by Serena's physicality. The Australian 27-year-old has very broad shoulders herself and probably an even better kick-serve than Serena's. However, Stosur has one distinct weakness: her backhand. She can either slice it (not very effectively) or she can hit it with two hands, often not very cleanly or powerfully. Sitting in the stands, literally 15 feet from her in the now-famous tiebreak with Kirilenko I was very surprised how softly the ball came off her racquet on the backhand side. Serena can just pin her into the backhand corner with forehands down the line and it will be a very short day. However, Stosur does possess an excellent topspin inside-out forehand so if her footwork is good she may be able to run around her backhand and hit her powerful forehand but unless she hits a winner against a very fit and fast Serena, Stosur will be off the court and unable to reach the reply. Mentally, since Stosur has been in a major final before (losing badly to Francesa Schiavone in the 2010 French Open final) she should not be overwhelmed today, but she simply does not play finals well, having won only twice in 11 attempts. Serena is playing in her 5th U.S. Open final in 12 appearances, with wins in 1999, 2002 and 2008. We all know what Serena's mental toughness is like.

In the 2011 U.S. Open I have correctly predicted 2 of 4 women's quarterfinals and 2 of 2 women's semifinals. Last year I correctly predicted 2 of 2 women's semifinals and 4 of 4 women's quarterfinals. This year I have also correctly predicted 3 of 4 men's quarterfinals, and 1 of 2 men's semifinals. My prediction for the women's final is that Serena Williams will win her 14th major title, putting her a scan 4 titles away from the all-time greats: Martina Navratilova and Chris Evert (but still behind Steffi Graf's 22).

MadProfessah's pick: Serena Williams.

US OPEN 2011: Women's Semifinals Preview

by Mad Professah, contributing writer

After a rain delay cancelled the scheduled women's quarterfinals matches last night, all four matches were able to be completed today, the women's semifinals are now set.

This year, I correctly predicted 2 of 4 women's quarterfinals. Last year I correctly predicted 2 of 2 women's semifinals and 4 of 4 women's quarterfinals.

These are my predictions for the 2011 women's semifinals, which for the first time will be played Saturday night in prime time, with the women's final on Sunday, and the men's final moved to Monday's day session.

Caroline Wozniacki DEN (1) v. Serena Williams USA (28). This is the match on the women's side everyone has been waiting for. Can the putative #1 player in the world prove her dominance against the fan's #1? As the #28 seed Serena has munched through "higher seeded players" Victoria Azarenka (#4), Ana Ivanovic (#16), and Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova (#17) in the last three rounds. As the #1 seed Wozniacki has dispatched Andrea Petkovic (#10), Svetlana Kuznesova (#15) and unseeded Vania King in the same rounds. Serena and Caroline have met on court twice in their careers (both in 2009), with Serena winning both times.
Wozniacki has only been to one major final, while Serena has won 13 finals and appeared in 3 others, losing to her sister Venus Williams twice (2001 US Open and 2008 Wimbledon) and Maria Sharapova once (2004 Wimbledon). The problem that Wozniacki has is that many people feel that she can be hit off the court. Her game is built around counter-punching, and she (often) plays her best tennis when she is behind in the score. But getting behind on the score against someone as mentally tough as Serena Williams is not the same thing as getting behind the score against 2004 US Open champion Svetlana Kuznetsova. It does show that Wozniacki likes pace and can feed off her opponent's power and use it against them. There is no more powerful a female player than Serena, and she will demonstrate the danger of Wozniacki's strategy to blast past her and reach her fifth US Open final. PREDICTION: Serena.


Angelique Kerber GER v. Samantha Stosur AUS (9). Although I didn't pick either one of these players to reach this point in the tournament, I am delighted to see that Samantha Stosur is in her second major semifinal, with an excellent opportunity to reach her second major final, where hopefully she can acquit herself better than she did in the 2010 Roland Garros final. 

Kerber is the only unseeded player among the semifinalists and since she's ranked around 92 in the world will make more money from this tournament than she made in the last year (or two) on the tour. In other words, Kerber is just happy to be here and will not put up much resistance if the match gets tough. The rap against Stosur is that she's mentally fragile, and the fact that she has played 11 tournament finals and only won 2 of them is evidence of that. However, she impressed a lot of people with her mental fortitude in her match against Maria Kirilenko when she lost the second set 15-17 in the longest women's tiebreaker in grand slam history (blowing 5 match points in the process). Stosur was able to survive the emotional rollercoaster of playing such an intense tiebreaker (where twice she was denied match point wins due to Kirilenko's successful electronic line challenges) to win the deciding set relatively easily 6-3. This new toughness should serve the hard-hitting Australian well in the final on Sunday night. PREDICTION: Stosur.

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.

 

US OPEN 2011: Women's Quarterfinals Preview

Andrew Ong/usopen.org

By MAD PROFESSAH


Caroline Wozniacki DEN (1) v. Andrea Petkovic GER (10). Wozniacki was hand delivered a get-out-of-jail free card from Svetlana Kuznetsova, who was leading 7-6(6) 4-2 40-15 when suddenly the Russian had (another) one of her epic collapses, losing 11 of the next 13 games in a draining 3-hour-plus match. This was something of a repeat of their 2009 US Open 4th round encounter which Wozniacki had won 2-6 7-6 7-6 on her way to only major final. Her opponent Petkovic played a much less dramatic match against talented Spaniard Carlos Suarez Navarro, winning in straight sets 6-1 6-4. If  2-time major champion Sveta couldn't blast "Sunshine" off the court, what chance does Petkorazzi have of winning? Regardless of who wins this match to reach the semifinal, they have almost no chance getting to the final since they are in Serena Williams half of the draw. PREDICTION: Wozniacki.


Serena Williams USA (28) v. Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova RUS (17). The young, talented Russian was finally able to outlast the Iron Woman herself, Francesca Schiavone of Italy, in a 5-7 6-3 6-4 win to reach her second major quarterfinal of the year, claiming revenge for the come-from-behind win Schiavone had eked out during her historic journey to the 2011 French Open final. Unsurprisingly, Serena is the lowest seeded player to be in the final 8, following her straight sets dismissal of #4 seed Victoria Azarenka and #16 seed Ana Ivanovic. It is extremely doubtful the hard-hitting Pavlyuchenkova playing in her 2nd career quarterfinal will be able to make much impact on the hardest-hitting player of her generation playing in her 32nd quarterfinal.The only thing that could stop Serena winning the tournament on Saturday is being hit by a bus. PREDICTION: Williams.


Flavia Pennetta ITA (26) v. Angelique Kerber GER. The mystery quarterfinalists. It's not surprising that two of the quarterfinalists are from Germany, but that one of those German quarterfinalists is Angelique Kerber is stunning. After going through a notable lull after the great Steffi Graf, Germany has had a recent resurgence with Julia Georges, Sabine Lisicki and Andrea Petkovic all having reached the Top 20 in the rankings. However, it is the #4 German player who is in her first major quarterfinal against Italy's #2, Flavia Pennetta. Pennetta relishes her reputation as a giant killer, and eliminated Maria Sharapova from the draw 2 rounds ago. It is an incredible opportunity for the Italian to reach her first major semifinal and perhaps become the second woman from her country ever to reach a major final, and shockingly, the second Italian player this year. PREDICTION: Pennetta.


Vera Zvonareva RUS (2) v. Samantha Stosur AUS (9). This should be the popcorn match of the round. Zvonareva has been in 2 major finals and is now an established hard-court force to be reckoned with, but no-one who has ever had the mental collapses Vera has exhibited can ever really be counted on to play up to their potential level when it counts. In Samantha Stosur she faces an opponent who has beaten her 6 times in a row, but who is also known to wilt under the pressure of an important moment. Stosur has been improving in this category, and battling back to win the third set convincingly after losing the longest women's tie-break in Grand Slam history (15-17) against Maria Kirilenko shows her strengthening mental fortitude. Zvonareva has tasted success on these courts before and that might be the difference in a 3rd set tiebreak. PREDICTION: Zvonareva.

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.

US Open 2011 Preview

Getty



Heavy rain falls on a tennis ball as Hurricane Irene heads up the east coast during previews at USTA Billie Jean King National Tennis Center on August 27, 2011 in New York City.



::



The draws are out, the wind and rain will subside, and tomorrow, in the concrete jungle known as New York, the last Slam of the year will begin.



I tend to find men's tennis more compelling than women's, but for at least the fourth Slam in a row, Rafael Nadal and Andy Murray are in the same half of the draw, while Novak Djokovic and Roger Federer reside in the other half. And while I haven't checked about, I bet the fanged Scot is most pundits pick to win the title.



Yawn.



Two-time defending champion Kim Clijsters is nursing an injury, so most will probably tell you that Serena Williams is the favorite in New York. No big surprise, but I agree. Unless there's a major upset, she'll face Victoria Azarenka in the third round. I'm sure that match will be hyped to the hilt, but I sincerely doubt it will live up to it. From what little tennis I've seen this summer, Serena is on a mission. I don't see anyone in the draw stopping her from claiming her fourth US Open crown and 14th major title. I'm not suggesting it's going to be a run to winner's circle without the loss of a set, but who would be shocked if it were?



As for a few of the rest: Will Juan Martín del Potro find his best form at his favorite tournament? How recovered is Robin Söderling? Are there any Americans other than Serena ready to thrill the home crowd with an appearance on the final weekend? Will the reigning Roland Garros and Wimbledon champions on the women's side get their groove on in Flushing Meadows, or will Li Na and Petra Kvitova have to be satisfied with a lone Slam title this season? Who's going to defeat the top-ranked player on the women's side? Which youngster on either tour has the best chance to steal the show?



I'm ready to find out. Are you?

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.

Serena's Return

Getty



Serena Williams celebrates match point against Samantha Stosur to win her first big title since Wimbledon 2010.



It was her return of serve that broke the match wide open. Particularly, that one forehand that flew by Samantha so fast she could barely see it late in the first set.



I've said all that can be said about the greatness of Serena Williams. But the way she's gone about her business in this particular comeback deserves nothing but respect from lovers and critics alike. Sport has never seen anything like it.



So glad I can bear witness.

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)

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.

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.

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.

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”.

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.

Petra Kvitova, Dangerous

Getty


Getty


Getty

It was her first Grand Slam final. She served out both winning sets to love, serving her first ace of the match on championship point. Her foe was a 3-time Grand Slam champion who won her first championship on the lawns of Wimbledon, blasting an anxious Serena Williams off the court in straight sets.

I fell in love with her the first time I looked into them there eyes. Them Bette Davis eyes. It was Fed Cup. 2007. A tie with the United States in the Czech Republic. It wasn't just that she wiped the floor with Bethanie Mattek-Sands and Alexa Glatch to win both her singles rubbers, it was the look in her eyes while she was doing it. Nevermind her great serve, her hard, flat ground strokes and champion-like reflexes, but there was a calmness and intensity at once that exuded from her eyes that made her dangerous in mine.

I just knew Petra Kvitova would be great. Knew it.

So when Serena drew her in the first round of the 2010 Australian Open, I feared her flawless, undefeated record in Slam first rounds would come to an end. Dangerous. Serena got through that match in a lopsided scoreline that didn't tell the whole truth about the points and games played.

So when Serena had to face her in the semifinal of Wimbledon last year, I figured she might fail to advance to defend her third Wimbledon title. Dangerous. Yesterday, after her 6-3 6-4 victory over Maria Sharapova -- in a match that was all about angles and ground missiles and shrieks and barks and breaks and nerves -- when asked about last year, Petra said she didn't believe she could beat Serena then, but knows she can now.

Dangerous.


AP


Getty

We have crowned a new Grand Slam champion. A young woman who can call both Caroline Wozniacki and Victoria Azarenka, two players hyped to the hilt as future champions, her contemporaries. But Petra has gone about her business without any hype at all. And wouldn't you know it, she has leapfrogged her tennis generation to the Winner's Circle with something other than Hollywood good looks and an adoring press.

It's probably a blessing hardly anyone was looking. The biggest victory in her career to date is her fourth title in 2011. She has won an international (Brisbane, outdoor hard), a premier (Paris Indoors, hard), a premier mandatory (Madrid, outdoor red clay), and a Grand Slam on the lawns at Wimbledon. A woman for all seasons.



Dangerous was the first film for which Bette Davis, the greatest actress of her generation, won an Academy Award. She won another a few years later for her lead role in a film entitled Jezebel. I'm not so sure anyone would consider Petra Kvitova a fallen woman, though she's got plenty of power behind her throne, but if the Academy Awards are to film actors what Wimbledon is to tennis players, I'd bet the farm Petra's got another acceptance speech in her somewhere down the road.


AP

Wimbledon 2011: Women's Final Preview

by Mad Professah, contributing writer 

This year I correctly predicted 3 of 4 men's quarterfinals, 4 of 4 women's quarterfinals, 1 of 2 men's semifinals and 2 of 2 women's semifinals. 

Here are my predictions for the women's final at the Wimbledon Championships for 2011.

Maria Sharapova RUS (5) vs. Petra Kvitova CZE (8). For the first time since 2006 there will not be a Williams playing the final women's match at Wimbledon. Instead we have the now-veteran Maria Sharapova, at 24, seeking her 2nd Wimbledon crown and 4th major title overall. After she broke through as a teenage phenom to win Wimbledon in 2004 by blasting Serena Williams off the court in straight sets many hailed the blonde, blue-eyed Russian as the new Ice Princess of Tennis and her face quickly became the most photographed countenance in all of women's sports, leading to untold riches off the court in the endorsement jackpot. However, since those heady days, Sharapova has only won 3 major titles, like clock work, every even year: 2004 Wimbledon, 2006 U.S. Open and 2008 Australian Open. This put her in the company of past champions like Lindsay Davenport, Jennifer Capriati and Kim Clijsters and not legends of the game like Martina Navratilova, Chris Evert or Serena Williams. Sharapova's metronomic Grand Slam winning pattern was interrupted by an October 2008 shoulder surgery after which she suffered the indignities of failing to get past the Round of 8 in any major for two full calendar years due to intermittent serving difficulties.

However, now it's 2011 and  for the last month or so Sharapova has gotten back to doing what she does best: hitting the bejeezus out of the little yellow ball into the corners of the court followed by an ear-shattering "grunt." She came very close to completing the career slam in Paris but was outlasted by a steadier player, Li Na who went on to win the title.  

Her opponent is a 21-year-old first-time finalist from the Czech Republic, the same age the great Martina Navratilova was when she won her first of 9 Wimbledon singles titles. Whether Petra Kvitova will go on to as storied  a career as her fellow countrywoman is something we can not know now, but the two have a lot of similarities in their games. They both are big-serving lefties, with hard-hitting ground strokes on both wings and a willingness to approach the net. Martina was the consummate serve and volleyer, the dominant strategy of her era, while Kvitova is the epitome of the modern game, able to blast winners from any position in the court.

Sharapova has not dropped a set on her way to the final and hasn't had to play anyone very troublesome along the way, except for wild card Sabine Lisicki. The German had been playing some of the best grass court tennis of the year, dispatching Marion Bartoli (who had dismissed 2-time defending champion Serena Williams) and Li Na in two very exciting matches. The mouthwatering "Mean Girls" quarterfinal with Sharapova and "World #1" Caroline Wozniacki never materialized because Pocket Rocket Dominika Cibulkova dismissed the new It girl in the 4th round and was rewarded by being demolished by Sharapova in the quarterfinals. Hometown favorite Laura Robson was able to ride the crowd's enthusiasm to a first-set tiebreaker in the second round but Sharapova hasn't even faced a set point for the entire tournament.

Kvitova, on the other hand, has had to play 3 tough sets to go through World #5 Victoria Azarenka and had another tight 3-set match with Tsevetana Pironkova, the woman who dismissed Venus Williams, the best female grass-court player of her generation from Wimbledon, in two consecutive years by the same exact score!

Head-to-head the two have played only once with Sharapova winning easily (on clay before Kvitova made her breakthrough by reaching the semifinals of Wimbledon last year). The intangibles definitely favor Sharapova; she has won before, this is her 5th major final, it is Kvitova's first. However, if you look at their style of play you see that Sharapova has had 11 more double faults than aces (32 to 21) while Kvitova has 22 more aces than double faults (35 to 13). Summary: Kvitova's serve is a weapon, while Sharapova's is a liability.  Generally, on grass, the person with the better serve wins, unless the other person has better movement and better returning. Sharapova does have a better return than Kvitova: she will go for a direct winner on both first and second serves. Is Sharapova a better mover than Kvitova? Doubtful, though quite honestly neither of them are superb in this category. All-in-all, Kvitova has the game to win the title, and I believe she will.

MadProfessah's PREDICTION: Kvitova.