Barring a seismic upset, of Roland Garros proportions, I probably won't be posting anything until the middle of next week.
Until then here's ten storylines to chew over, each of which I think could do with a more thorough examination.
Will the Slamless be 'enSlammed'?
Enough.
This debate has got to stop. The insults, the trash talk, while entertaining, do nothing to inspire love for, and enamour others to, our sport.
Me too. I've got to stop.
And something that'll help us stop is if one of the WTA's three most 'deserving' causes, Dinara, Elena or Jelena, get in on the act and put things 'right'.
It won't change my opinion and the perception of most sound and able minded people that this is a weak era. The tennis from which has an almost inbred, sterile, factory farmed feel to it.
But it'll be one less charge to level against the WTA.
The question's not if, but how much of the show will Kimmie or Pova steal?
Most or all of those sound and able minded people I mentioned in the last paragraph are appreciating, at least on some level, the comeback show these two have managed to put on.
It goes without saying that their presence will, rightly or wrongly, draw some or all of the limelight away from the top players.
Good luck to them.
I just hope it's for all the right reasons, and that Pova in particular is able to better upon that 2nd round outing at Wimbledon. Her performances outside of that have been as good as might reasonably be expected. I still sometimes grit my teeth as she steps up to serve though. Which is maybe an overreaction considering the problems Dinara, Ana and Elena continue to have with their own.
Will Federer cruise to #16 with consummate ease?
If his last two matches, and the absolute peach of a draw he's been given are anything to go by, you'd have to think that his run to the semis is all but certain.
The only credible threats in his section of the draw happen not to be threats at all. But rather the other founding members of his 'eight-and-oh' club. In fact Nikolay now has a newly convened 'twelve-and-oh' society under his control.
Things should liven up in the semis when, if all goes to plan rather than to pot, he'll run in to one of Djoko or A-Rod. Based on recent form I'd say it's Andy that presents the greater threat.
Will Murray survive the first week?
Just which high-ranking ATP/USTA official did Muzz snub?
Was it 'FootballGate' all over again? Did he go on record as saying he'd support anyone playing the New York Giants?
Did he suggest that he'd be cheering for anyone playing A-Rod?
Then why has he been shafted in the way he has?
After his opener against Gulbis, he has a likely third round meeting with Karlovic to look forward to.
After which he'll most likely play one of Stan Wawrinka or Marin Cilic, followed by a QF showdown with del Potro.
Assuming he gets that far, which at this point I'm not at all certain about.
Nice.
Is Jelena really back?
I'd like to think so. Except I'd be more convinced if she puts in a good showing at the venue where she normally does so well. I've learnt to treat Flushing as a kind of Testing Ground for her, a barometer into her form.
I've missed the flowing (and supposedly less muscle-clad) movement, and those fluid double handers down the line.
Yes I'm afraid Serbian Dramedy alone will not suffice. It hasn't lost it's appeal, but you need the tennis to back it up. Although she clearly hasn't gone the way Nole has, who lost his Dramedy and most or all of his intensity along with it. Maybe that dramedy is a hidden talent I've yet to learn to fully appreciate, and should really be giving it it's dues.
Maybe that, or her win in Cincy, will help spur her on.
Nole-Ana Well-Wishers Unite..
I dunno whether it's the traditional underdog supporter in me or the way in which both their worlds suddenly seem so unspectacular and devoid of any worthy attention.
Both I imagine. Rooting for the underdog is just about the only thing that trumps my love of Roger's game or Rafa's personality. And ok, Nole's the #4 player right now, but he's the undisputed underdog within that big-four clique.
So let this be the event in which Ana makes a convincing showing well into the second week, and Nole makes at least the final.
At this point both those propositions seem a little far-fetched. But what's a Slam without a frenzied bout of sentimental underdog support?
Does Zeljko need some new material?
I deem it both proper and befitting to call time on whatever approach Zeljko has been taking with Dinara. That 'go with your strengths' strategy may have worked it's wonders in her rise to the top. But this is now a turning point. And she should respond in kind by turning with it.
Things are only going to get tougher with the obscene amount of points she has to defend.
Let's start with that serve. Just don't go getting all abbreviated on me.
Is Vika really the best of the rest?
She makes a strong case. Her Slam results are impressive. And in Miami she's won a mandatory Premier event.
Not the description you might reasonably apply to her closest competitor, her-right-honourable-Wozness, who seems to prefer making finals she doesn't win.
I don't believe she did that much wrong in that loss she suffered to Serena at Wimby this year.
It seems her rage fuels her intensity, much in the way Jelena and Nole's Dramedian-Stand-Up Shows fuel theirs: It can be the making or the discombobulation of them.
So I'm gonna lobby for it's stay. Tasteless though it is.
Like I said in my last post, Womens tennis is all about executing plan A better than everyone else. And like Clijsters, Vika happens to be quite good at doing that.
RIP James Blake? RIP Marat Safin?
It's becoming very difficult to predict anything hopeful for either of these two, and almost painful to watch most of their matches lately. So I plan to do very little of either this time round. Ok maybe I will watch every Marat match after all.
Marat seems intent on retiring, and -- dare I say it -- it now almost seems right for him to do so, given that by his own admittance, he has so little love left for the game. It also makes sense to look for a worthy last swansong during the indoor season rather than here at the Open.
I wish them both well. I just want the pain to stop.
Someone make it go away.
RIP French Tennis?
All change. This is where I'm getting off. The end of the line. The last straw. My camel's heaved it's last, his back's officially broke.
Both my French bandwagons now stand wrecked in my drive, tyres slashed and paintwork scratched. I did that last bit myself.
French tennis is all about style over substance. And French Style no longer trumps anything for me.
I reserve my last dregs of support for Gasquet, still battling the doping authorities, the once proud owner of my favourite single handed backhand in the game; itself now trumped by more substantial and significantly less stylish strokes like Robin Soderling's discuss-throwing forehand.
Showing posts with label Zeljko Krajan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Zeljko Krajan. Show all posts
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Consistency, Quality and other Slovenian Strawmen
I've been propping up Dinara's cause with what looks like insolent bias over the months, but must admit her decision to play Slovenia this week really grates my cheese. Thank goodness it wasn't a clay court event.
I can only assume she did it as some kind of a confidence booster.
It really does make the job of deflecting those daggers Serena and the rest of the 'real number one' posse seem intent on sending her way, rather difficult.
Especially when you hear of Zeljko's own attempts.
Serena's flunking all the high school maths papers in the world wouldn't change the fact that she, along with anyone with an opinion on tennis, is right to draw attention to the apparent paradox Dinara's ranking presents.
But the bigger problem with Zeljko's line of defence, if that indeed is what it is, is that it's a bit like saying, "Yeeeaaah she'll only ever be a 'consistent' breed of player (and what a disease that is), what of it?".
What of it?
Well it's not very motivating for one thing. Embracing her fate as the 'Consistentina' of the tour (to Nikolay's 'Constantine'), also undermines Dinara's credibility as a top ten player, let alone a world #1.
It's true that everyone already knows that Dinara is not (and probably won't ever be) the player that either of the Williamses are.
But that's neither here nor there. I'm not going to bore you again with what I think the debate is about.
There is of course some merit to Zeljko's assertion that Serena doesn't play enough events outside of the Slams. Trouble is, with this futile little Slovenian venture of her's, there's probably now rather more to the observation that Dinara plays too many of them.
Not to mention how difficult she's found it to ensure that it's her mentally bolstered self, and not that self-confessed chicken, that takes to court when she does make those Slam finals. A more worrying situation when you consider that not all of them were opposite Serena.
I don't have a problem with those that question Dinara's ranking, provided they're prepared to acknowledge (preferably in the same breath) that this debate wouldn't even be a debate, if Serena played and won more at the Premier level.
I just don't know which I hate more: that people will now 'strawman' the discussion about her ranking by ridiculing her Slovenian win over a field of tier three players; or that she gave them reason to ridicule by supplying them with that Slovenian strawman.
This piece at Tennis Talk Anyone mentions a lot of what I find questionable.
I can only assume she did it as some kind of a confidence booster.
It really does make the job of deflecting those daggers Serena and the rest of the 'real number one' posse seem intent on sending her way, rather difficult.
Especially when you hear of Zeljko's own attempts.
"If she [Serena] thinks she can only play 4 tournaments a year & will be #1 in the world she is wrong and has problems with mathematics."
-- @dinaupdates via Twitter
Serena's flunking all the high school maths papers in the world wouldn't change the fact that she, along with anyone with an opinion on tennis, is right to draw attention to the apparent paradox Dinara's ranking presents.
But the bigger problem with Zeljko's line of defence, if that indeed is what it is, is that it's a bit like saying, "Yeeeaaah she'll only ever be a 'consistent' breed of player (and what a disease that is), what of it?".
What of it?
Well it's not very motivating for one thing. Embracing her fate as the 'Consistentina' of the tour (to Nikolay's 'Constantine'), also undermines Dinara's credibility as a top ten player, let alone a world #1.
It's true that everyone already knows that Dinara is not (and probably won't ever be) the player that either of the Williamses are.
But that's neither here nor there. I'm not going to bore you again with what I think the debate is about.
There is of course some merit to Zeljko's assertion that Serena doesn't play enough events outside of the Slams. Trouble is, with this futile little Slovenian venture of her's, there's probably now rather more to the observation that Dinara plays too many of them.
Not to mention how difficult she's found it to ensure that it's her mentally bolstered self, and not that self-confessed chicken, that takes to court when she does make those Slam finals. A more worrying situation when you consider that not all of them were opposite Serena.
I don't have a problem with those that question Dinara's ranking, provided they're prepared to acknowledge (preferably in the same breath) that this debate wouldn't even be a debate, if Serena played and won more at the Premier level.
I just don't know which I hate more: that people will now 'strawman' the discussion about her ranking by ridiculing her Slovenian win over a field of tier three players; or that she gave them reason to ridicule by supplying them with that Slovenian strawman.
Labels:
Dinara Safina,
Serena Williams,
Slovenia Open,
Zeljko Krajan
Saturday, June 6, 2009
'Two'-Slam-Wonder...
Today was always going to be a tricky one for me.
It was on the face of it a win-win situation: My #1 pick for the event, with her best chance yet of ridding herself of that 'real #1" baggage. Versus a lady I've made no efforts to conceal my admiration for since the inception of this blog, the most naturally gifted player IMO since the departure of Henin, who'd been in what I now hope will be the last trough of her tennis career since winning her first Slam at the US Open in 2004.
Unfortunately this could also be viewed as a lose-lose situation - for either of these two to go out would have been heartbreaking, and as pleased as I am that Sveta has finally got the 'one-Slam-wonder' monkey off her back, my heart tonight goes out to Dinara Safina.
She's got no one but herself to blame of course, but to come unstuck in three Slam finals (two of which she had a good chance of winning) within the space of 12 months must make her feel very low indeed.
She looked a little shaky from the outset, but didn't make that bad a start - just not as smooth and controlled as Sveta. Her serve however really let her down today, and her game began to unravel rapidly from early on in the second set, in a way from which she never really recovered.
The most painful image of the final has got to be the sight of Dinara staring desperately towards Zeljko, her eyes almost imploring him to tell her what to do. But props are due to Zeljko, ever the consummate professional, doing nothing more than nodding his head in support - how many coaches would be out of their seats, issuing those dodgy hand signals to their charge in their moment of crisis?
Can we now all agree what a BIG mistake on court coaching has been, and consign it to that intergalactic trashcan found in the same pocket of the multiverse that Roger Federer lost that five setter to Tommy Haas in?
As Justine Henin once said (who never once used the facility even though it was available to her), if you can't use the facility at the Slams, then what's the point of getting used to it outside of them?
Hope Dinara's not too downcast. She might remember that she didn't stumble upon the world #1 ranking by accident. Arguments about her style of play and 'quantity over quality' are largely redundant, as they may be applied to this comparatively weak generation as a whole: she's at least as deserving of a Slam as Ivanovic was.
She may not be more talented than her opponent on the other side of the net today, but it's surely only a matter of time, is it not, before she bags one of these things herself?
And in Zeljko she seems to have found the perfect partnership to make that dream a reality. For tonight, dust yourself off and go find Marat. Shoot some pool or watch some feel-good movies with him. I think he's still in town.
But major props, hearty congrats and a specially animated mention must go to Sveta. The final itself was insignificant. The greater victory comes in the journey she's taken to get to this point. I knew that kick serve and effortless shotmaking were too good to waste away!
Some say the first Slam came too quickly for her - the woman that came through on Chatrier today was a different person to that immature, braced teenager that stormed to victory five years ago.
And the maturity showed, in the calm, controlled way in which she went about the match , the way she didn't wildly celebrate when Safina served that ghastly double fault at Championship point (didn't even smile in fact) , through to the understated and dignified way she delivered her victory speech, demonstrating to me that she may finally be coming to terms with her own worth.
She'll still have her wobbles of course. I daresay she wouldn't be Sveta if she didn't. I just hope they now come in the form of the odd set dropped here and there (she played her share of three setters here), rather than those inexplicable lapses that caused her to mentally check out of entire matches in the past.
Couldn't have happened to a nicer person.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



