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?

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.

Wimbledon: Parting Shots - The rest

» I hate talk of “guards” (and their replacement) almost as much as I do “goats” – and mostly for the reasons Tignor mentions here, which are that people are apt to use the phrase prematurely.

It’s certainly true that, were Rafa to win the FO and Wimbledon next year, and Novak to win, say, Aus again, and Federer (or someone else?) to win the USO, those who called for the changing of the guards would be forced to change them right back again (or at least to admit they were premature).

Even so, I think Tignor overstates his case a little in characterising Novak’s victory this weekend and ascent to world #1 as, “just a big win”. 

2 Slams, 4 Masters titles and only one loss out of a total of fifty matches played since November last year is (as I suspect Mr Tignor knows full well) a little more than “just a big win”.

And you know what? I wouldn’t be surprised if this does turn out to be the changing of the guards. It has to come at some point (duh!).

» The Wimbledon Mic disaster

For a tournament steeped in such history, prestige and, well, privilege, this was confoundingly bad and utterly unforgivable.

The point about a runner-up (whoever they might be) is that they’re usually hankering to get off court as soon as possible.

The very least you might do is to make the various formalities they must undergo as easy to endure and as smooth as possible.

Instead, most of the comments Rafa made to Sue Barker weren’t heard by anyone. When transmission did return, he (understandably irritable) cursorily thanked his team on a mic that was still so glitchy as to make most of what he said unintelligible.

 

» This may very well be the biggest crisis of Rafa’s very decorated career since his injury/parental-divorce-ridden 2009.

It may just be his post-loss state of mind but, nevertheless, I found this quote worrying:

"My experience says this level is not forever. Even for me when I was last year winning three Grand Slams, my level of last year is not forever. Probably the level of Novak of today is not forever."

Not “I must improve” but that “Novak won’t stay that way forever”.

» Rafa a “cheater”, really? Get a grip.

I’ve obviously missed something.

Why is taking a MTO before a tie-break – not mid game, not on his opponent’s serve, not even on a changeover – but before a tie break (a natural cut off point) evidence of questionable moral fibre?

That’s what Rafa did against Delpo and it caused unchecked, unmitigated outrage on my timeline.

As it turned out, nothing much was wrong – but judging from the reaction you’d think some would prefer that there was – perhaps they’d also prefer him to play through injury, in case there really was a problem?

Drawing attention to his quite irritating idiosyncrasies is one thing. The perception hit he now regularly takes makes addressing it of vital importance.

Using them to malign his character in a desperate (and rather insecure) attempt at “bigging up” one’s own fave (especially when that fave is in no need of “bigging up”) is selling yourself very short indeed.

» As if to compound his perception problems even further there was a release-of-information gaffe on Monday when both Neil Harman and tennis.com reported Rafa as having a “hairline fracture” that could have kept him out for “6 weeks”.

The report was killed by Uncle Toni less than 24 hours later who also confirmed that he was still on to play Montreal. Which is it?

» My own feeling is Rafa has very evident PR issues rather than “moral fibre” issues – and, needless to say, he needs to sort them out – specifically as it relates to the management, treatment and announcement of his injuries.

I’ve no time for those accusing him of cheating (its bigoted and unnecessary), but shit like this doesn’t help his cause. I also don’t think playing a Slam shot up full of anaesthetic is the best way to be going about things but that rant’s for another day.




» Whatever progress Pova may have made (and it’s difficult to deny progress has been made if you properly examine her results since IW), and however disciplined, resolute and hungry she undoubtedly remains, its hard not to feel that she’s often treading water just to keep her serve intact.

It may well define the rest of her career – when it breaks down the rest of her game is sure to follow. She knows it. We know it.

Despite all this, we should be very wary of dismissing her chances of winning a Slam altogether. She’s gotten this close twice in the past two months (one of which was on her worst surface): she only played one poor match at RG (SF), and it’s not difficult, I hope, to see Petra handing away her debut Wimbledon final amidst a flurry of UFEs?

The chips will, of course,  need to land the right way up, and if and when the win comes, it will have been in spite of, rather than because of her serve.

Still not quite the same thing as “never”. 

» Kimiko/Venus week one. Match of the tournament. Match of the year?

Like I said, required viewing for WTA girly-girls under the age of 25.



» After 11 months out, Serena (unsurprisingly) hit the ground running and only came undone by a monumental effort on the part of one of the flattest ball strikers in the sport.

Her fourth round exit will see her drop to #175 in the rankings. At least one top seed is due a very bad day at the office in round one of the USO.

» I’ve learnt to expect fluctuations from Venus Williams and it seems six months out hasn’t changed that

The good news is that she still had it in her to go toe-to-toe with Kimiko. The bad news is that she still hasn’t figured out Tsvetana.



» Seriously, I haven’t figured out Tsvetana either. Nobody has.

9 matches won out of the 22 events she played since Wimbledon last year. Just nine. Yet somehow that's enough to make the the semis of Wimbledon going through the world number three and Venus Williams (again and with the exact scoreline) back to back? Someone explain.

» <Insert threadbare pun about Slam-less world number ones here>

For what it’s worth, I still think Caro can win a Major, but like Pova (actually nothing like Pova) a lot of the chips would have to land the right way up. And the Law of Averages says it’s not nearly as inconceivable as is being suggested that they do land the right way up. At least once.

» Was rather hoping for an end to Fed’s 18-month Slam drought, and when Jo-Wilfried went and did what he did and in the way he did, it made me a little sad – we go back a long way, Fed and I.

And I still say he’s been quite unlucky  – every Slam loss dating back to the USO (and Delpo) in 2009 involves a big hitter playing lights-out tennis – with the type of depth and accuracy no one has an answer for. That, or its been Novak (2.0) or Rafa (on clay).

That’s not me being an apologist, it’s just plain fact.

»  I’m still not done blaming everyone and everything

In Murray’s own words, he’s “15-20% behind Rafa” and those other two. Which will make the win that much sweeter when it does come. Perhaps rather foolishly, I still choose to believe it will come.

» Marion

I only wish she hadn’t played that much tennis in week one :(

» Vika

Bad draws, injury, heat stroke, the return of the Williamses and, now, the emergence of Petra. There appear to be an awful lot of reasons why Vika shouldn’t win a Slam and the list is only going to get bigger.


» Don’t normally talk doubles but Jurgen and Iveta winning mixed is one of the highlights of the fortnight for me. Mainly because we got to see Iveta smile.

And pictures of Iveta smiling are, as we all know, collectors items.

» Sabine

Welcome back. And don’t disappear on me again.

» Jo-Wilfried

I can’t hate on you – especially seeing as you were able to win a set off Novak and took him to two breaks in the semis. But I still think you screwed Fed.

» BREAKING: Sam Stosur still can’t win a match on grass. 

» Aside: Alan Rickman would make a quite EXCELLENT umpire. And it’s not just the equally magnificent voice.

» Unnoticed and unsung: Dominika – 4th round or better at every Slam. Take a bow.

Wimbledon: Parting Shots (Petra edition)

I make no apologies for devoting the first half of these ‘Parting Shots’ to Petra. She’s the best thing that’s happened to women's tennis in years.

» Petra Kvitova is the best WTA Grand Slam ingénue since Maria Sharapova and I hasten to add, Svetlana Kuznetsova.


Its been seven years and no one’s even come close.

In some senses she’s no different from a lot of her generation – a huge backswing, a lasso FH, a tall imposing frame, not the greatest looking mover and someone that looks to out power her opponents.

Then there’s all the little things that set her apart, like the ability to slice/volley, the foibles and curious ticks, like that mild look of annoyance she sometimes wears after an UFE – all of which conspire together to make her ‘Petra’.

» All throughout the fortnight comparisons were being made to Mary Pierce. I have to say I couldn’t really see it.

Not at first. And even though I’ve come round a little since, I think there’s a more valuable comparison to be made with Svetlana Kuznetsova.

You’ll see where I’m going with this.

» Petra’s not in the business of getting down on herself.

If she fires off an UFE, she winces a little, may stare pensively at her frame but then moves on. That furrowed look of minor vexation and bemused disappointment she sometimes wears helps keep her focus rather than detracting from it.



» The effortless winners are, like Sveta, the tennis equivalent of “easy listening”.

Sveta has the shortened backswing which I’m not going to pretend I don’t prefer. The easy flamboyance is common to both.

» The flip side of such easy flamboyance is that neither deems it necessary to take any corrective action when things go awry. As they often do.

They simply have too much faith in the quality of their shotmaking to start doing anything differently. I know I wouldn’t either if I were half as gifted.

But when the wobble doesn’t auto-correct, it often costs them matches rather than mere sets, sets rather than mere games, and games rather than mere points.

» Not gonna lie: Her lanky frame can look a little clumsy chasing down balls along the baseline, yet she’s mostly – mysteriously – in position, and is somehow able to maintain the same depth on the run as she does when lining up for a shot on her terms.

That’s them muscles at work. And it gives rise to an athleticism that is completely beyond someone like Pova – although I adore her all the more for it.

» Let me say that again: Petra maintains the same depth on the run as she does when she’s able to line up for a shot on her own terms.

It won her countless rallies in the final as poor Maria simply wasn’t able to keep up. You just don’t see that very often, except maybe from Venus Williams on a good day. New breed of competitor.



» The easy shotmaking is a function of an even easier temperament.

After seven years of tantrums, chokers and cry-babies, I’m unashamedly in awe of it.

» Make no mistake about it, Petra deplores UFEs (I don’t see how you cannot when you’ve seen the excellence you’re capable of).

But she doesn’t erupt in emotion the way Marat or Bepa used to, or silently burn herself out in seething resentment the way…..many others have done.

Neither does she choke as overtly as a Sam Stosur or an Amelie Mauresmo. No, Petra (and Sveta) occupy a quieter middle ground known as ‘Erratica’, which can lead to downright reckless or maddeningly efficient shotmaking.

» Aside: Born 150 or so years ago and Petra would have made a quite EXCELLENT pre-Raphaelite muse.

» And now, for the clincher: both Sveta and Petra wore braces when they first burst on the scene in a maelstrom of dorkish affability.

What do you mean that’s not relevant?

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. 

Wimbledon: Petra ‘Erratica’

This is the future of tennis. And it has 40 Winners (to Vikas 9) and 9 aces (to Vikas 1), etched into it. Love it, or make your peace with it – but find better things to talk about than grunting or yelping or screeching.

Much as I abhor the expression, this match was always going to be won (or lost) on Petras racquet.

The first set took all of 27 minutes – pretty long when you consider Vika was only able to salvage one game out of it.

Petra served it out with three aces: on her racquet, with her racquet, all about her racquet.

And then came an erratic stretch of play which, in my mind, will, ultimately, decide the winner in Saturday’s final – and, indeed, determine how many titles she notches up in the future.

You see, as wonderful as it is that Petra is able to decontextualise herself from a poor spell of play (she hardly ever berates herself), or any single UFE, it also means she takes little or no corrective action. Most of the time it doesn’t seem like she’s alert to anything awry at all.

Her most telling look came at 3-5 down with Vika serving for the 2nd set. The bemused disappointment was simply priceless: it only just seemed to have dawned on her that shunting every ball into the stands wasn’t such a fine idea, or that her little foray into ‘Erratica’ may have cost her the set – perhaps even the match [Ya big talented Silly]

Pova’s no Vika – she hits the ball as hard as anyone out there, and is second to none in gutsing out tight matches when she’s not playing her best. Which she quite clearly isn’t. And that concern over Pova’s form, together with how much erratica Petra brings to bear, is what will probably end up deciding this match.

Berd said Petra could go all the way. He's right. And I think she probably will.

Unforgivably subjective, but if we go on expressions alone, I don’t think there was anyone in the semis that wanted it more. No one, but no one, wears the face of anguish and desire the way she does.

I don’t wanna have to resign myself to seeing Vika go out in a spate of semis now that she's got the ‘quarterenka’ monkey off her back. Ergo, I still believe. :(

Maria Sharapova is back in her first Slam final since 2008.  But if she serves the way she did today, she might lose the entire match quicker than Vika lost the first set. Petra’s my first choice – there’s simply too much dorkish promise –  but I won’t be unhappy if this woman pulls it off.

Only an obnoxious neanderthal will be insensitive to Sabine’s troubles, or ambivalent to her triumphing over them. So I’m gonna to the kind thing and just put the match behind us.

Nothing is to be gained by revisiting the carnage, except to say that Pova really wasn’t playing well enough to win it against better competition, in which I include the Sabine from the early rounds – she didn’t show up.

Of course, if I wanted to be spiteful I could bring up Marion, whom you deprived of a SF spot and who I’m convinced would have given a better account of herself….*continues bitching as editing team effect a fade out*

Wimbledon 2011: Women's Semifinals Preview

by Mad Professah, contributing writer 

Here are my predictions for the women's semifinals at the Wimbledon Championships for 2011. I predicted 4 of 4 women's quarterfinals correctly and 3 of 4 men's quarterfinals correctly. Last year I predicted 2 of 2 women's semifinals correctly.  

Maria Sharapova RUS (5) vs Sabine Lisicki GER . Sharapova appears to be returning to the form that has led her to win 3 major tournaments (2008 Australian Open, 2006 US Open and 2004 Wimbledon) so far after surgery in 2009 really deteriorated her game. Lisicki is a wild card has put on two amazing performances on Wimbledon Centre Court this year, dismissing 2011 French Open champion Li Na in the 3rd round and eliminating 2007 Wimbledon finalist Marion Bartoli in the quarterfinals. With both Williams sisters gone from the tournament (this was Serena's half) this is the most wide open Wimbledon in over a decade. If  you start to match up the two player's games Lisicki has the better serve, while Sharapova has the better return. 

Sharapova has the better second serve, or at least she goes for more, but this also makes it less reliable. Sharapova has 19 aces but also 19 double faults over 5 matches so far. Lisicki has 44 aces and only 13 double faults. Sharapova has a total of 126 winners while Liscki has 157, including an incredible 52 winners in the round before in her 3-set win over Bartoli. Lisicki is probably the better mover but Sharapova is faster than she appears and can do more with the ball when she gets there. Analyzing their groundstrokes you have to give a big advantage to Sharapova, especially on the backhand side, with the forehand side being a bit closer. On grass you have to give the edge to the better server (Lisicki) but all the intangibles (been in this position before, mental toughness) go to Sharapova.I would be delighted if Lisicki wins, but I think it's more likely she will falter than Sharapova will. I was very surprised that Lisicki had to play a 3rd set against Bartoli, after having 3 match points in the second set, but she shook that off to win 6-1. If she gives that opportunity to Sharapova to come back, the Russian will reach her 2nd Wimbledon final. PREDICTION: Who I think will win: Sharapova, Who I want to win: Lisicki.

Victoria Azarenka BLR (4) vs. Petra Kvitova CZE (8). This should be the more interesting match of the two because the higher ranked player is the one with the less experience being in the semifinals of Wimbledon. However, I'm sure in her own mind Azarenka feels like she should have won a major already. Azarenka is like a young Novak Djokovic in that early in his career the Serbian retired in a number of important matches and Azarenka is (in)famous for her withdrawals from multiple matches, especially this year.

They are both incredibly talented players and you totally expect them to win multiple majors. Djokovic has met (and possibly even exceeded) expectations but Azarenka is still waiting for her big breakthrough. If you look at each of the semifinalists' records to this point Azarenka has only had 10 aces to 9 double faults in 5 rounds. Kvitova has had 26 aces to 11 double faults. Interestingly, when you match up their games you see that Kvitova has the better serve and the better ground strokes. Azarenka is by far the better mover and I think the intangibles are pretty even. Kvitova disappointed me when she lost a 2nd set tie-break to Tsevetana "Venus-killer" Pironkova with some bad misses on attempted winners. Then again, like Lisicki, she won the deciding set pretty easily. This second match should be closer than the first semifinal with Kvitova, another left-handed female player born in Czechoslovakia like the great Martina Navratiilova, reaching her first (but probably not her last) Wimbledon final. PREDICTION: Who I think will win: Kvitova, Who I want to win: Kvitova.

Wimbledon: The stuff Slams are made of.

Lisicki d. Bartoli 6-4 6-7 6-1

You just can’t play two 3 setters in week one (one of which goes 9-7 in the third), follow that up with an emotionally-consuming win over one of the greatest players of all time, and then expect to be at your optimal level only 24 hours later.

That’s a big ask for anyone, let alone Marion.

Having played that much, I don’t think I’m reaching when I say that she could have done with the extra days rest – or that it could have been a very different result had she had that rest.

Coulda-shoulda-woulda….this is the stuff Slams are made of.  You might even argue the mental cost associated with pulling off a win over Serena sapped her of more vitality than any number of 3 setters would.

My guess is she knew that only too well – happy, presumably, with beating Serena to stand as her crowning achievement at this event: not only did she not fail to compete, she actually dialled up the fire further still. Until, that is, her legs would carry her no more.

That takes “More balls than all the French men put together”, as someone said on twitter yesterday.

 

And for that, as always, she has my respect.




I don’t know if I quite buy into Sabine as the “deserving cause”, and I’m still not completely reconciled to her having knocked out my fave (*snarl*), but you have no soul if you’re not pleased at her return.

Can she keep it going? Probably. Will it be enough against Pova? I rather doubt it. Certainly not if Pova plays the way she did vs. Domi.

Perhaps sensing the electricity that Domi sometimes brings to bear (see Wozniacki), Pova squashed any pretensions to “competition” Domi might have had within the opening few games. Alas poor munchkin, she never had a chance.




Petra played her worst match of the tournament today. There’s a cost/benefit analysis you might choose to make whenever something like this happens.

On the one hand, she got through and will likely emerge more battle-hardened as a result, which should set her in good stead for the semis.

Trouble is, Petra’s never really fit that mould. She seems to thrive on quick wins based on strutting her very capable stuff. Today’s troublesome encounter is neither “empowering”, nor should it be seen as very much more than a minor irritant. She may very well go down to Vika, or (as I rather suspect) she may knock her out – either way today’s episode will have had little to do with it.

Wimbledon 2011: Women's Quarterfinals Preview

by Mad Professah, contributing writer

Here are my predictions for the women's quarterfinals at the Wimbledon Championships for 2011. Last year I correctly predicted 2 of 4 women's quarterfinals.

Caroline Wozniacki DEN (1) Dominika Cibulkova SVK (24) vs Maria Sharapova RUS (5). For the first time since 2006 Maria Sharapova is in a Wimbledon quarterfinal when there is no possibility of a facing a Williams sister in order to win the title. Her immediate challenge is to defeat a woman who is almost a full foot shorter but who has beaten her the one time they played in a major. Cibulkova embarrassed Sharapova 6-0 6-2 in the quarterfinals of the 2009 French Open. Amazingly, all four of their career meetings have been on clay, and  the two are locked at 2-all, with the shorter player having won the last 2 matches, including one this year. However, Sharapova is much more comfortable on grass than clay. Cibulkova is also coming off one of the best wins of her career by basically blasting the World #1 Caroline Wozniacki off the court with nearly 20 forehand winners in a 1-6 7-6(5) 7-5 victory. The match-up on paper looks like a clear win for Sharapova, but Cibulkova has beaten her before and believes in her game. The question will be if Sharapova believes in her game, especially her (second) serve. PREDICTION: Sharapova in 3 sets.

Sabine Lisicki GER  vs. Serena Williams USA (7) Marion Bartoli FRA (9). Sabine Lisicki had one of the most outstanding performances by a female tennis player this year when she saved 2 match points against #3 seed Li Na (the most successful player at the Grand Slam tournaments this year) to win 3-6 6-4 8-6 in the second round. Lisicki has yet to lose a match on grass this year, having won in Birmingham right before Wimbledon, but she had to write the All-England Lawn Tennis Club in order to get a wildcard to enter the tournament, which was granted. 2007 Wimbledon finalist Marion Bartoli  put on an incredible performance in the 4th round of Wimbledon to dismiss the 2-time defending champion Serena Williams by out-hitting and out-serving the 13-time major champion in two sets 6-3 7-6(6). Bartoli had more aces (10 to 8) than Serena and in most of the rallies was hitting the ball harder and more aggressively. Serena did not play her best, true, but Bartoli won the match more than Serena lost it. Head-to-head Lisicki leads Bartoli 2-1 including a win over the Frenchwoman this year but Bartoli's lone win was on grass at Wimbledon in 2008. Bartoli had 11 aces in the first 3 rounds and 10 in the fourth. I seriously doubt she can play as well two rounds in a row. The German wild-card is a real contender to win the entire tournament. PREDICTION: Lisicki in 2 sets.

Tamira Paszek AUT  vs. Victoria Azarenka BLR (4). The highest remaining seed is the hard-hitting (and ear-splitting) Belarussian who has reached her 5th career grand Slam quarterfinal at this year's Wimbledon but who has never reached a major semifinal. I expect that streak to end on Tuesday. Her opponent, Paszek had an impressive win over 2010 French Open champion Francesca Schiavone in the 3rd round 3-6 6-4 11-9 after nearly four hours of play. Paszek had been long touted as a player to watch about 3 or 4 years ago but injuries got in the way and the 20-year-old is the furthest she has reached in a major since her breakthrough debut year in 2007. Azarenka has the power and mentality to dismiss most players outside of the Top 10. Paszek is not an exception.PREDICTION: Azarenka in 2 sets. 

Petra Kvitova CZE (8) vs. Venus Williams USA (23) Tsvetana Pironkova BUL (32). Pironkova must be Bulgarian for "kryptonite" because there is no other explanation for why the greatest women's grass court player of her generation would lose in two consecutive years to the same player, by the same exact score (6-2 6-3)! Last year Pironkova's stunning win was one round later and she followed it by losing a hideous match against Vera Zvonareva in the semifinals. The player in the other semifinal last year was Petra Kvitova who lost a high-quality affair to eventual champion Serena Williams. This year, Pironkova has to face the hard-hitting, fearless lefty who has the game to defeat anyone on the tour but didn't quite believe in herself enough. This year she has the belief that she can do it, and she can. PREDICTION: Kvitova in 2 sets.