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.

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.

 

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.

Miami: News and Views

 

1) Murray has officially parted ways with Corretja and is, one assumes, on the look out for a new coach. “Open to new opportunities”, or however it’s being framed. 


 
Lendl’s name has been in the mix for a few days. Some of the reaction to this has been as outrageous as it is predictable, with SKY viewers yesterday emailing alternatives ranging from JMac to Martina Navratilova to Maclaghan again…

No one explicitly dissed Lendl, but it’s very clear who they DON’T want.

Never mind that none of those other suggestions have put themselves forward.

Never mind that Lendl is an 8 time Slam winning former world #1 who might, you know, know a little something about success on tour.

I’m not saying it struck me as the obvious choice either (both are strong willed, though that might be EXACTLY what Murray needs), but it seems to me it ought at least to be tried before being so routinely dismissed.  Stranger things have happened.

My own somewhat cynical suspicion is that a legacy of dislike continues to pervade Lendl’s public persona – he certainly wasn’t out to win any popularity contests during his career. I’m still waiting to hear why that should have ANY bearing on his suitability as a coach.

Whatever the case, the truth is Muzz very likely represents GB’s best chance of winning a Slam for many years to come. Perhaps even decades. I hardly need to remind you that the next highest ranked Brit is James Ward at #213 – and this is actually better than things have ever been.

To be blunt about it, beggars can’t be choosy. And you could do a LOT worse than Lendl. Let us hope he doesn’t reconsider.

2) A few further things need to be said about Petko’s win over Caro. 


The first is that however well Petko played (and don’t let anyone tell you she didn’t), she simply wasn’t facing the Caro that has dominated the tour outside of the Slams, and that people so enjoy poking fun at.

Anyone that claims otherwise needs to explain away the whopping 52 UFEs from Caro that equates to over a hundred from anyone else. Good luck with that.

The second, is that this is a relatively new experience for Caro and one from which she’ll likely benefit. It brought home in the most stark way imaginable that she might be just as prone as any other top player to a bad day at the office.

I doubt it’ll cause her to substantially alter her game, but if it results in a few new wrinkles it will have been worth the pain.

The third, is that this anguish resulted in the emergence of a new shouty, screechy Caro that I’ve actually become rather fond of.

I doubt she’ll be around very much. Yesterday is likely to remain her finest “big screen” moment – expect her to fade away into a less-distinguished daytime TV career.

And finally, I’m still not a fan of Petko. Not at least in the way some people are. (I’m not wholly convinced by her game either – but there’s still time to improve upon that)

 

I realise that puts me very much in the minority. Fine by me.

I’ll certainly concede that she’s #goodfortennis, though I’ll hope you’ll give me leave not to succumb to the hopeless strain of infatuation that lead to en-masse Petko mini-raves after her win yesterday.

Word soon after was that she’s “bored” of the Petko dance and is looking for a new “thing”.  I was bored of it too – and pretty soon after the initial novelty wore off. She seems to me to be talented enough and charismatic enough to be above gimmicks like that.

And as far as a new “thing” is concerned, here’s a somewhat wacky idea: her new thing could be, you know, not having one.

 

3) Delpo’s 63 62 win over Sod was perhaps the greatest sign yet that he’s steadily progressing towards the top ten if not the top five in the not too distant future. You could infer all of that on the basis of the serve alone. It was also the most beleaguered form of underperformance I’ve seen from Sod in a long time. 


I’ve seen Sod play badly before: I’ve seen him thrown off balance, having trouble with the elements, and leaking UFEs of nearly every shade. I’ve not, however, seen him shank this many balls in a single match – say what you will about him, but that’s just not his style.

At the end of the match the stats showed that both men hit only 18 winners apiece. Two of the heaviest ball strikers of this generation only managed to conjure up 36 winners between them.

That tells me Delpo, despite being in his element, felt he didn’t need to hit many winners. And that Sod simply couldn’t.

None of this is to suggest that Delpo isn’t progressing entirely steadily and appropriately – it just could have been a very different match.

4) Pova’s win over Sam said more to me about where Sam is than it did about Pova.

Like Delpo, Pova got through doing exactly what she needed to, and not an iota more. Why would she?

The serve is still not under control, but really, neither was Sam’s. More worryingly, she wasn’t able to convincingly get Pova off balance the way her game is custom built to. and to which Pova is uniquely vulnerable to.

When she did manage to, it all had a laboured feel to it that speaks to me of a player struggling to cope.

And that kick serve we’re all so fond of musing over? The stats showed that Sam served only marginally better than Pova. That’s not a comparison anyone should be flattered by. 



 

Indian Wells: Whither Stosur?

Anyone that continues to ignore the ignoble immensity of Stosur’s troubles  since the new year began will have their work (spin-doctoring) cut out for them today.

I have (and continue to have ) every sympathy in the world with Del Popcorn/Dinaroshka. But let’s not pretend a large part (maybe all) of both matches didn’t reek.

Dinara served up around 16 doubles with her newly architected service motion – I believe Stosur gifted as many forehand errors. Dolgo, meanwhile, went AWOL for most of the 2nd set. Not just a little rough around the edges then.

Plenty to admire, particularly Dinara’s patience from the back of the court (that’s new) – but you’ve gotta think Kohls-Smiter and Pova will prove sterner respective tests. Or maybe not.

Rally For Relief: As Good As It Gets…

 

 

 

Everything you need to know about Rally for Relief can be found here and here.

 

You can still view the entire event here.

 

For what it’s worth (over $1.8M in flood relief), and if it is at all possible, I liked this even more than Hit for Haiti.

 

It was, perhaps, less well-managed, though there actually seemed to me to be more spontaneity from all players, including those non-limelight types. Needless to say, I loved it and we cannot have enough of this sort of thing.

 

 

Stuff we should already have known:

 

For a girl that is supposedly “out there”, Vika came across as the most demure, camera-shy, and, dare I say it, the cutest of the bunch.

 

Mandy Footy-Tennis pwns Nole Footy-Tennis. Mandy Footy-Tennis blows holes the size of Scotland in Nole Footy-Tennis.

 

Ana-Mandy sex-grunts? Ping-pong, Footy and quarterback throws all in one point? Tennis does all of that and more.

 

Bepa in Sunnies will save the world. Mark my words.

USO: Embrace the Fug.

 

Let me set the record straight about something.

 

Contrary to the impression I might give with the virulent way in which I sometimes actively root against her, I don’t actually hate Kim Clijsters.

 

 

In fact, I don’t have anything against her at all.

 

The reasons I do it, in increasing order of precedence, are:

 

a) I think she had her share of success and Grand Slam glory last year.

 

b) I think she had MORE than her fair share of media adulation that goes along with that glory and, of course, for being “MamaKim”.

 

c) I’ve never been able to warm to her in the way I have to the supremely talented, amateurish tomboy that is Sveta or the crude, dorky, deliciously devastating jellybean that is the Sod.

 

That last one is of prime importance.

 

I like my players to be both glaringly defective and, if possible, insanely talented.

 

When they come through it makes the victory that much sweeter as they’ve overcome a whole host of factors and circumstances not least of which is their own soul. 

 

The common denominator appears to be that most of them have little or no control (or, it seems, interest) over how they choose to present themselves. And perhaps as a result, give more of their natural unrehearsed selves over to you both in triumph and in disaster.

 

Think Marat, think Ivan Llendl – think any current female Italian player.

 

All of which brings me back to Kim. I don’t hold it against her that she doesn’t rile or rage the way some players do. We hardly need be reminded that there’s an ugly side to that too.

 

I’m not even suggesting that her happy, sunny disposition is carefully “manufactured” for media consumption.

 

For all we know, the very measured competence she projects is her modus operandi. It probably was even back in her first career when she was, so often, overcome by the frailty that, to a far lesser degree, still returns to haunt her.

 

 

All the same it was easier to root for her back then – it’s the law of the underdog, I’m afraid.

 

I much preferred the natural grit and intimidatory mechanics of Mary Pierce’s groundies but was right behind Kimmie when she took her first Slam here 5 years back. There seemed to be something vaguely moral about it.

 

The point is, she’s always been far too measured for me to warm up to. Or to even develop an opinion on.

 

On court that sort of singular focus is perhaps her greatest asset. Of court, I’m afraid I don’t much care for it.

 

None of this is her fault - she’s just not built the way those others are.

 

All of which is an incredibly long-winded way of saying that it’s for precisely those reasons that I loved the following pictures of her.

 

 

 

 

Anyone that saw the match (I’m now sorry I didn’t), knows what a train wreck it was.

 

Stosur and Kimmie exchanged nine breaks in ten service games – a total of 16 breaks in all.

 

Clijsters would make 8 DFs and 43 UFEs before serving it out with an ace, 6-4, 5-7, 6-3.

 

Kim’s not pretending she didn’t know this:

 

"After the match, I was like, 'How did I win this?' I didn't feel like I was playing well; Sam is a good player," Clijsters said, "so I was just kind of talking to my coach and fitness coach and just [saying], 'Wow. What just happened? How did I win?"

-- tennis.com

 

 

 

Look at how supremely confident she is in her own fug. How comfortable she is in the skin of her mediocrity.

 

 

 

She’s practically rubbing it in our face.

 

 

 

Did I rock the shithouse or what?

 

Aye, you did sister.

 

And I love you for it.

 

Embrace the fug and I’ll love you more.

USO: “Best Player never to have won a Slam”

 

LIke Roddick, her last chance may have come and gone at last year’s Wimby. She’ll likely retire as the “best player never to win a Slam”. I had to say it.

 

Yet I root for Demmie not in spite of her frailties, but because of them.

 

And as for talent and hard word, well let’s just say you don’t reach 7 semis and a couple of Slam finals by accident – mainly it has to be said on the back of her returning and fitness rather than any inherent guile - that’s somewhat closer to Kolya rather than Nalbie, that other “Best Player never to have won a Slam”.

 

 

I’m not going to go through the match. Demmie would fail to hold four match points before Stosur held one of her own and who now, along with Venus, Sveta, Masha, Bepa and Franny remains my last stand against Woz and Kim.

 

The pictures tell you all you need to know.

 

 

    

 

Most gut-wrenching moment of the past week: Stosur at match point, 6-2 up in the deciding tie break.

 

Demmie had left everything out there and had still pulled up short. 

 

In a thespian moment which might well serve as a tragic metaphor for her career, staring up tearfully to Vera and, one suspects, with an acute sense of awareness of her limitations, she shook her head lightly & mouthed the word "no".

 

It was over.

 

And I fear it is too. :’(

USO: Save it for the judge. Or something.

 

 

 

Much as I’m in favour of this sort of thing (and much as it makes the poor sod on the other side of the net LOATHE you), this is akin to a stand up comic using up all his best gags in a teaser. It also has something of the Christians and the lions about it.

 

A little more quotidian, not to mention a little more restraint, if you please.

 

Meanwhile, a little more abandon and  far more belligerence from Sod would go down nicely too.

 

Five sets in a first round match against a guy making his first appearance at a Slam?

 

Oh I’m sure Haider-Maurer played the match of his career. It’s also true that, since Wimby, Sod’s developed a most worrying tendency to storm through the early parts of a match before allowing his inner, more flatulent self to lose control of the ship.

 

 

Early on yesterday I casually surmised that if any one of Ivanovic, Stosur, LaMonf and Reeshie were to lose their opening round matches, we shouldn’t, in fact, consider it an upset however upsetting it might personally be.

 

All survived. Reeshie and Ana easily, LaMonf and Stosur less convincingly.

 

Quite what this demonstrates – other than that I’m shit at making anti-predictions – I don’t claim to understand. Though the take out as far as Stosur’s concerned appears to be that she should be closing these matches out with significantly less pain.

Ana appeared to be striking the ball well though one competent win against a dithering opponent does not a comeback make. Zheng next.

 

 

 

“…I'd be lying if I didn't say that I enjoyed your company... but the truth is you do bother me enormously”

 

getty

 

Perhaps I’ll never understand why Flavs gets under Sams skin so very much – but she does.

 

“I can return her kick serve. There are few shots that I have that can make her nervous all the time,” Pennetta said. “She’s one of the best servers. I am really comfortable with her ball. I can handle the speed.”
Said Stosur: “She makes a lot of balls and runs everything down. She really makes you work for every point you win. Sometimes that can be a little bit frustrating.”

-- tennis.com

 

The opinion makers have Pennetta’s backhand DtL as well as her ability to “get over the top” of Sam’s big serve as the defining feature of her winning H2H over the Aussie, which is now 3-0 for the loss of….no sets.

 

Probably all true. Though you could likely make that case for anyone that bothers Sam. Flavs does, clearly, have a grip on Sam’s serve, though there’s no reason she should be any more equipped than, say, someone over 6 ft tall, to “get over the top” of it.

 

For my money, Flavs is simply, pound-for-pound, a better player from the back of the court. And it showed.

 

As did Sam’s propensity to overpress or, worse yet, shank in any rally lasting more than 6 strokes.

 

It wasn’t, to be fair to Sam, her best day (Flavs served 8 aces, Sam, none eh?) – and she does have a niggle in her arm that’s been troubling her since before the event. But if someone is doing a good job of returning her serve, be it Flavs, Venus or anyone else, that’s not a good place to be in.

WombleTown: Late Night Revellers and Disorderly Grannies

 

Surprisingly little of note happened on day two, what with the top seeds actually behaving like top seeds.

 

Djokovic d. Rochus 4-6 6-2 3-6 6-4 6-2

 

-- This one finished too late for it to get a mention from me yesterday.

 

When the last ball was struck a few minutes shy of the official 11pm cut-off last night in a match that was officially the latest finish ever in Wimbledon history, Djoko simply went over to the net and shook hands.

 

That’s right. Not sinking to his knees, not kissing the floor. Not even hugging his opponent in that way he’s so fond of.

 

 

Ok so there was some of that.

 

But I like the heart Djoko showed to see this one through. The tennis wasn’t always to write home about, but he squeezed out every last drop of adrenaline and sweat to get the win – not that different actually to what Fed had had to endure several hours earlier.

 

 

Big props to the little man by the way – who’s surely, now,  earnt the right to stop being called “the little man”.

 

The reason for the 11pm watershed? Local authority planning permission.

 

How very British.

 

Someone somewhere must have decided that we didn’t want to be disturbing the neighbours of sleepy SW19 with our late night finishes and Vuvuzela-less revelling.

 

Except sleepy suburbia this ain’t. And if anything, it’s the tennis fangirly grannies that are doing most of the after hours revelling.

 

Kanepi d. Stosur 6-4 6-4

 

-- Certainly the WTF result of the day. Perhaps even the biggest upset of the tournament so far, though surprisingly underreported in terms of it’s significance.

 

I didn’t see the match and Kanepi’s no slouch ; still, with the form she’d been in and everything we’ve been hearing of her all-court prowess, you’d expect her to get through.

 

-- Was the fact that he’s contemplating retirement or James Blake’s bust up with Pam Shriver the bigger story?

Roland Garros: Hearts and Minds.

Your sweaty, clay-covered, yet-still-gleaming Roland Garros Champion for 2010. I defy you not to scream.

Ideologically unsound to root against anyone with as big a heart as that. In my heart-over-head world she’d already won.

Besides, what is the heart but another muscle? One that often trumps it’s distant cousins in the upper arm. Even when those arms belong to Sam Stosur?

Every sane entity on the planet, it seemed, had picked a win for Stosur in three if not two sets of hard fought tennis.

It seemed the rational choice, given that:

a) She had been (until this match) the best performing player of the event. I may have had some reservations over those back to back wins over Henin, Serena and JJ, yet a lesser player would have crumbled.

b) The matchup with Franny suited her to a tee. Sammy’s heavy kicking serve seemed custom built to hurtle over the shorter player who’d likely be reduced to countering it with a single handed backhand out wide…..and high. Right after that she was supposed to be reduced to rubble.

I can understand Franny out-grinding and out-hustling Sammy now and again.

I can even understand her out-foxing her at the net – not quite sure why the sight of Franny volleying immaculately should be the source of such bewilderment anyway.

What flummoxes me is how she managed to out-serve and to out-ace her. 6 to 3 on aces and 76 vs. 71 winning percentage on first serves.

That sort of sh*t’s not meant to happen.

She didn’t have the draw Sammy did, but also a little astounding, is it not, how she only dropped one set in the entire event – in round one on an outside court to Regina Kulikova (who?).

To those that say “choking” is a reductive explanation of what happened to Sammy out there I say this: It is. And I confess I don’t particularly like using that word as it seems to carry too many negative connotations and conjures up images of Dinara Safina double faulting on Championship Point.

Though it’s equally reductive to claim she was hit off court or “outplayed” (second time this week that words got up my nose) by “Fed Cup Franny”.

Besides, even if we agree to use another word, what precise conclusions are we meant to draw from the sight of a former world #1 doubles specialist, a four-time Slam Champion making an absolute hash of an easy putaway at the net?

Not every choke has Dinara Safina written all over it.

We can argue the semantics of choking till kingdom come, but the fact remains that Sammy “seized up”, let’s say, in the little ways on the biggest points: a double fault here, a sprayed forehand there, a drop shot that fades out before reaching the net. And here’s a more worrying one: over half of her first serves sat up comfortably in the middle of the service box.

A real shame - that’s not the Sam Stosur we saw in the last six matches. And none of this, at least, was forced by Franny.

If it sounds like I’m being too harsh on Sammy, it’s because I felt this match should have been “on her racquet” (another phrase I deplore, by the way). Her performances up until this match, indeed her leading win/loss record this season, suggested she should have won it - preferably in straights. In my head-over-heart world she already had.

Parting Shots:

-- Best Roland Garros final in almost a decade. (A)

-- That moment when Dementieva shook hands with Franny signalling her withdrawal. Tragic stuff. That look on Franny’s face? Priceless. (A+)

-- Sam Stosur’s voice quivering during her runners up speech. *sniff* Good news is Sam’s best placed to out-fox those pushers and bashers we love to, well, bash. On all surfaces. (A)

-- Anyone else bowled over by how well Franny and Sammy seem to get on with one another? (A)

-- Biggest disappointment of the tournament: JJ flaming out “at 20%”. What better chance will she have than four semi finalists without an Henin or a Williams Sister in sight? None. (E)

-- Franny’s disembowelling of CazWoz in the quarters. Best match of the event from the standpoint of witnessing the unequivocal truth and triumph of variety over push. (A)

-- Juju/Shaza: Strangely compelling match that suggests the best is yet to come from both. (B)

-- This seasons clay court winners: Henin, MJMS, Rezai and Franny. Henin only features once amongst them. Kimmie, Shaza and the Williamses don’t feature at all. Still think the WTA’s in a bad way? (A)

(Photos: AFP/Getty)

Roland Garros: Heads and Hearts

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Still think she was wrong to retire when she did?

(Photos: AFP/Getty)

Roland Garros: Barn Burner

So…a fine purveyor of the backhand dropshot, a lefty, with three WTA ex girlfriends and still sporting a backwards baseball cap at the age of 29.

A man of many talents, but certainly no Jurgen-Schmergen….

I only saw the closing moments. Melzer came back from 2 sets down for the first time in his career. He only converted four of a staggering twenty-four break points yet was still able to serve it out in five.

Not always the highest quality, but exactly the kind of barn burner the event needed.

I set my bar for “breakthrough” performances very high these days. You have Robin to thank for that. What I suspect we’ve seen here is a long time talent getting a grip on all of his working parts (of which there are many), rather than any kind of breakaway bid for top ten entry.

I still find myself wincing every time I see Djoko serve nowadays. I hadn’t seen a single one of his matches here this year. The one I did see turned out to be his last.

Not a poor clay court season by any stretch of the imagination, but certainly no 2009 (or 2008 for that matter).

…and still the run goes on.

That opening set was full of the kind of crisp ball striking and point construction that makes her such a joy to watch – so inspired in fact that I was a little disappointed she wasn’t able to close it out in two.

You’d think that anyone that beats Henin and Serena back to back in a Slam ought to win the title.

And yet, Serena hasn’t been past the quarters of Roland Garros since 2003 and Henin-isn’t-as-Henin-was (nor does she seem to want to be).

There are those that are deterministically inclined to think of every match Serena plays as being “on her racquet”. It’s an appraisal I find it difficult not to agree with most of the time. Folly, surely, to argue with a record as enduring as hers at Melbourne, Wimby or Flushing.

Her results here, however, speak for themselves too. The surface very evidently inhibits her movement – and I’m not convinced she gets quite the pace she seems to generate so freely everywhere else.

The match may be “on her racquet” elsewhere, but at RG you’ll only see it spend part of it’s time there before jilting her in favour of someone else in the ballroom.

It’s why I feel she wasn’t able to convert on that single match point: you can bet your bottom dollar that wouldn’t have happened at Melbourne.

***

That leaves four ladies in contention (Jakovic closed out Shvedova in straights) – neither of whom have won a Slam.

Frankly, I’m having a little trouble deciding.

Dementieva – So near and yet so far once too often. Continues to be held back by that poor excuse for a serve. “Davydenko of the WTA” or just another consummate choker”? You decide. Few would doubt she’s put in the mileage.

Schiavone – Heart. Variety. Thy name is Franny. You’d be hard pressed to find a more likeable player on tour, or one with as diverse a set of talents.

Jankovic – This time last year she was my pick for the title. It seemed a necessary consequence of her impressive record at Rome. Then muscles happened, Ricardo Sanchez happened and she seemed to lose her way. Good news is that both those things have “unhappened” now and she seems to have reacquired something of her standing as the best mover/defender in the game.

Stosur – To be honest, treated as a package of many working parts, Sammy seems to be executing better than anyone else. I still have my concerns for her over JJ though.

(Photos: AFP/Getty)

Roland Garros: Pulling a Soderling.

Did she “pull a Soderling”? Only in the loosest, colloquial sense of the phrase.

For that analogy to ring completely true, Henin’s run of RG titles would have had to continue unbroken over the last two years, playing roughly the same way.

Or else Nadal would have had to have taken two years off tour to reinvent himself as, I dunno, Novak Djokovic(?) before returning to RG to fall in the fourth round to Fernando Verdasco.

In which case she’d have “pulled a Nando”. Or something.

None of this matters of course. What matters is that Stosur served out that last game, when every soul on earth, every seeker of truth in my twitter feed, was expecting her, counting on her even, to choke.

Which by the way she almost did in handing back a break and double faulting on the first of her two match points.

Don’t lets also forget how she out-varied “the varied one”. Which should surprise precisely no one considering how unvarying Juju’s play supposedly is nowadays.

(Photo: Reuters)

Rome, Stuttgart Round Up…

Apologies for the lack of coverage. There’s a phrase you thought you’d never hear.

The apology is as much to myself as anyone else seeing as how Rome is meant to be my favourite clay court event.

Plenty of happenings this week, both of the Romanic and Germanic variety - no time to luxuriate in any one of them I’m afraid. Well maybe just this one.

Oh yes, we could indulge in a spot of trophy-biting again, but I much prefer Rafa doing his prancing leprechaun thing – don’t you?

Comeback complete….I should say.

With not a damn pachyderm in sight.

I’m sure there was a spanking great final played in Rome today, and congrats to Ferru for making his first Masters final and all that – I just didn’t happen to see very much of it.

As far as I’m concerned the real final took place on this very same arena 24 hours ago.

Up until that point Rafa’s dirt-ridden comeback, however dominant, remained possessed of a certain liminality – one that would seemingly only be removed by his taking down a shotmaker in cold blood.

Mission accomplished, though Ernie ensured there was nothing cold about it.

That’s the sound of pedantic analysis being swept away by a deluge of unbridled optimism.

-- Over in in Stuttgart, Juju picked up her first title of Career 2.0. with a 6-4 2-6 6-1 win over Sam Stosur, who, incidentally, will be world #8 on Monday.

Trouble is it wasn’t terribly convincing. One wonders what the result would have, could have been, had Stosur retained the focus that saw her reach a ten-match clay court streak. Similar levels of shoddiness pervaded JuJu’s route through the entire draw – with forehand-vulgaris putting in the odd, unwelcome appearance.

Difficult to complain very much when someone subdues a field comprised of seven of the world’s top ten players, without playing their best tennis.

One only wonders if such sloppier performances are to be a more regular feature of her second coming.

And whether shaping her entire comeback tour around Wimby, perhaps at the expense of her signature surface, is in fact the best approach.

Allez…I think.

-- At start of the week I confess I rather dissed Ernests Gulbis as “a haircut and a forehand” (after checking with Lendl of course).

Now I’m thinking “a haircut, a forehand and a drop shot too”, and a lot more besides - I’m also positively Samsonesque in my insistence he not clip those locks of his.

Monte Schmonte. Right here’s where the clay court season began. And when one of our most vaunted debutantes elected to announce himself.

***

And now a moments reflection for those no longer with us – or, to be more precise, those running a little thin on presence lately.

1) Biggest of big fish first.

Federer going out early at a Masters event no longer surprises anyone. I’ve long since given up trying to make sense of it. Think of it as the new world order.

Don’t have much time for the weary assumption that he doesn’t accord Masters events the same degree of respect and/or attention (Slams are ostensibly bigger fish, but how precisely does one go about marking down their levels of commitment by the commensurate 1000 ATP points?).

Easier to believe the less forgiving three set format and increased competition of the second half of his reign has something to do with it.

2) Oh Muzza….you almost had me convinced.

For one match only he played the kind of tennis that might have left you thinking, “Crisis? What Crisis?”.

Then of course he ran into Daveed Ferrer, and it was all revealed as a sham.

Not out of the thick of it just yet then, and clay will likely never host his best results, but perhaps some evidence that the Muzzanomic downturn might be shorter lived than initially anticipated.

3) Djoko shouldn’t actually be part of this list, seeing as how I thought he gave a great account of himself – his loss to Dasco certainly bore little resemblance to the haemorrhaging at Monte, and were it not for Ernie and Nadal the very next day, would have been the match of the event.

4) Dinara’s resurfaced. It didn’t last very long. Don’t call her Dina (Dinarik, or Dinarochka’s ok).

(Photos: Getty, Reuters, AFP)

Monte Carlo Fallout.

-- Rafa and Big-Berd have pulled out of Barcelona.

The heavens themselves (much to the chagrin of the Barcelona promoters) could be heard to breath a sigh of relief as Rafa, for the first time in five years, elected to pull out of Barcelona.

“I’m in perfect shape,” Nadal said Tuesday. “I feel very good but I don’t want a repeat of what happened last year. For my tennis to be at the right level, I have to be physically well and that’s my principal objective.”

…

“I’m being as cautious as possible so that I can play the maximum amount possible,” Nadal said. “It wasn’t planned. Tennis isn’t like football, you never know how many games you’re going to have to play.”

-- tennis.com

Perfect shape? Perhaps not, but still exactly the type of tempering of his clay court schedule many of us have been hollering out for. For too long it seems.

Perhaps, with the relatively sodden ten or so months he’s had, and with the eagerness that might foster to get back on dirt, 2010 ought to be an exception. But I’d go as far as saying that missing Monte from next year wouldn’t be the worst decision in the world either. Much like Federer has.

Why, of all people, should Rafa need any more than Rome and Madrid (both mandatory events) to find his feet on clay?

-- Berdych. This year’s Robin Soderling?

Not in terms of inflicting tsunami-like upsets on our generation’s best or narking Rafaelites off so very much - more in terms of late-blooming, suppressing daemons and establishing a more credible and worthy presence at the top of the game. Discuss.

-- Nalbandian out for two events with a hamstring injury. Possible return in Madrid.

Not what you want to hear after witnessing his anatomy-defying “hip” exploits over the past month.

Take solace if you can, however, in noting that it could be worse. Much worse.

Hip surgery remains a career-ender for the most part, ushering in a post-traumatic age where simply remaining competitive begins to make one resemble those foolhardy salmon that hurl themselves the wrong way up a waterfall.

Very often into the jaws of a hungry bear. Guys like Kohlschreiber for example.

I don’t detect anything nearly so grim in Daveed’s case but maybe, like Nadal, there’s something to be said on the benefits of a more staggered comeback.

-- Stosur demolished Bepa 6-0 6-3 to pick up her second career singles title and her first ever on clay.

“This is bigger than Osaka, and to do it here and on clay and be playing well all week and everything is just a great feeling,” Stosur said. “You can’t really compare the two, but this is definitely a bigger event, and I’m very pleased that I was able to play so well.”

-- tennis.com

Darn right it’s bigger than Osaka. Before the great WTA Premier switchover of 2009, Charleston was a tier one event, with an illustrious Champions Roll of Honour (Evert won here eight times) and a well-respected sponsor in Family Circle.

Sammy’s efforts have landed her a #10 ranking.

Much has been made of the dilapidated state of the draw, but only that pedantic analyst would elect not to grossly fanfare about her having largely followed up on her well-publicised intent to target singles – and who knows, maybe pick up a title or two? And I currently have him in a headlock.

She’ll find it considerably tougher going repeating her great run of RG 2009, especially given the way in which the presence of the Belgians might affect things, but she’s as well placed to score a high profile upset as she’s ever been.