French Open in 2020: I Know, I Know

My enthusiasm well for pro tennis is back at sub-zero, so.

Part of this is because I'm watching this Venus Williams/Anna Schmeidlova match, a match in which Venus started out 4-2 up. Now she's a set down and also a break. Venus still has game and it's too bad that she's not connecting at the right times. I mean, she could still come back, but she's 1-7 this year. Not that records mean much in a year like this.

There are a few fans scattered in the stands and their scattered applause is a sight better than the piped noise at the U.S. Open and other sporting events. There's something to be said for silence, especially in tennis. You can hear the way the ball is hitting the strings, the sheer effort from the athletes. Music and piped noise was always a bad idea and needs to go. Even small crowds are better, but they don't capture the suspense of that second match point Venus just saved. And if the regular French crowd had been there to watch Venus argue this line call with the umpire, they'd be raining boos on her. So, again, maybe this is good.

Welp, Venus just lost. The Carolina Garcia/Anett Kontaveit match has a lot more people in it. Kei Nishikori is back in action. Victoria Azarenka's continuing her run. I'm trying here. Give me a few days? 

U.S. Open in Coronavision: OK, So, It Wasn't Bad

Before this tournament began, I questioned the wisdom of holding this tournament in one of the few countries that do not yet have this pandemic under control. I wasn't sure if I'd watch it with the same vigor as I would in normal times and I wasn't convinced it would last the full two weeks, especially with the early hullabaloo with Benoit Paire.
My willingness to watch started slowly, even with Venus Williams losing at the first hurdle (I mean, gurl). But as the draw shook out, there were some great match-ups and before I knew it, I was in -- checking scoreboards at work, firing up the laptop at home (including once eschewing a writer's group Zoom call that I still kinda feel guilty about) and genuinely entertained by the few late-night matches this tournament had to offer.
I wondered, and still do, what this tournament would have looked like with the full and capable cast -- Nadal, Halep, Andreescu, Federer. I thought that whoever won would have an asterisk next to their name. I don't think that's true now and it was actually unfair to suggest this.
Those who sat this one out did it for good reason and those who chose to negotiate the risks to play the U.S. Open did it for good reason. These decisions really are reflective of what we're all navigating every day, right? We're trying to protect ourselves and our loved ones and trying to be responsible and also trying not to go insane in our living quarters. That good reason looks different to all of us and nowhere was that more clear than the draws we got at the U.S. Open. This is as true-to-life a scenario we'll see in professional tennis, where even millionaires are left making the same choices as you and me -- do I go back to work? How? Is it safe? Is everyone else being safe? It's kind of wild when you think about it.
Anyway, sorry. About the tennis. It was good! It was great for young Americans. I once saw Shelby Rogers play live at a Fed Cup match (warning: if you're missing crowds, don't click this link) and I was underwhelmed. Well, she has completely revamped her game, cracking the hell out of her groundstrokes and mixing up her shots. I always thought her forehand swing looked a little funky, but as with any tennis swing, you do it long enough and it will begin to work for you. I actually missed that she'd beaten Serena Williams this summer already as well. And there was Jennifer Brady who seemed to me to always be on the precipice of a breakthrough in Slams. I mean, she beat the sauce out of Angelique Kerber and I was really concerned for Naomi Osaka during their semifinal for a minute.
That Victoria Azarenka v. Serena match? Did not see that result coming, but this is 2020 and we can say that about everything at this point. Seriously, that was some great tennis, and I'm not 100 percent convinced it was an injury to Serena that lost her that match. I really think she's got a mental block around this 24th slam title. Because I didn't think Azarenka did anything much different to turn the match around -- Serena gave an inch and Azarenka took a mile. It's not like she doesn't remember how to win.
(MINI RANT COMING) I would like everyone to stop talking about women who are mothers playing each other now, please, NOW. Neither of these amazing athletes referenced about, and not Tsvetana Pironkova, either. I have never heard any commentator on any channel anywhere ever say that a Federer vs. Djokovic match was a battle of the dads. And I wouldn't care. Listen, I'm a mother. I get that we do it all. This isn't news. We are not gathered around our computer screens to observe them giving out tips for diaper rash. They are there to work and we are watching them work. So stop it. Just NO MORE (end of MINI RANT)
Whew. I feel better. Anyway, Naomi Osaka is the bomb and is still socially super awkward and I love it. I know I just mentioned Serena giving an inch, and I think the same happened with Azarenka in the final against Osaka, but the difference in the final was that Osaka's level went way up. Azarenka didn't tank, she just leveled out. She wasn't this solid when she won the U.S. Open in 2018 and she was never even really in trouble in that final. She has matured and what I personally am waiting for is to see her at her best against Bianca Andreescu at hers because that rivalry is the future of women's tennis and it's going to be amaze-balls.
Speaking of the future of tennis and why that phrase is overused, let's move on to the men's final, in which one of the participants, Alexander Zverev, noted that it would be a great match because it would be a showdown of the two best players in the world.



So Zverev has a history of his mouth writing checks that he can't cash. But. He came out on Sunday and quickly took two sets off Dominic Thiem, who I was rooting for, but I wasn't feeling invested. (I mean, if we're speaking freely, it has been a while since I've seen a legitimate ass on a white guy. Thiem's ass is, like, solid.) The thing is, I was watching and thinking, what is Zverev really doing here that is so special? I felt like I've seen Thiem play that well, and even better, before. Sure, a lot of it can be the heaviness of the moment -- both were playing for their first major title. Well, that question got answered when Thiem came back and forced a fifth set.
OK, so, if you're a tennis player or are playing league tennis, this fifth set might have been particularly gratifying. You know how you start decelerating through your shots as you approach the end of a close match? How your legs stop moving and you're mentally shouting at yourself to come on, just get the second serve anywhere, anywhere in the box? That was the fifth set of the men's final and it's just good to know that even when you become a professional, you are still prone to figuring out how to finish a match with your racquet wrapped around your neck. So, in that sense, knowing that anyone can and will choke makes me feel better in general.
But really, Thiem did come back and earned that win. He got a lot of help from Zverev, but he did it. And I did not expect to feel bad for Zverev, but when he gave his speech, I may have teared up.
Having said all of this, yes, this is a nice preview of the future of men's tennis and once both of them have mastered their nerves, we'll be in for treats. However, I could not believe my ears listening to commentators actually talking about the future being now and openly asking if this is the beginning of a shift. Hi. Two-thirds of the most dominant men in tennis right now did not play this tournament. When they do play tournaments, they usually win them. One of those men won this same tournament last year! What? No, it's not a shift yet. It'll be a shift when Rafa Nadal, Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic are legitimately standing in their way of a Slam -- and they bypass them. Just to clear that up because there appears to have been some amnesia happening.
OK, so that was more than I expected to have to say. It was good. I'm glad the players who came were able to bring back some semblance of normalcy to their lives. (Except for Kristina Mladenovic. Is she ... still sheltered in place?)

U.S. Open in Coronavision: Did Not See This Coming

I should have known my lack of enthusiasm wouldn't last during the U.S. Open. There's always something coming down the pike that sucks you in. I'm not sure which storyline is the most intriguing, so please, help me decide.

It's Like, a Pandemic

Obviously, it was risky to continue on with the Open given the circumstances, and it was too risky for the likes of Rafa Nadal, Ash Barty, Simona Halep and Bianca Andreescu and a bunch of others. Maybe they saw something others didn't. Like this situation with Benoit Paire testing positive for coronavirus shortly before play was to begin. These tennis players had been together in a bubble already for two weeks, playing the Cincinnati tournament in New York just as a precaution. Of course, the new problem with someone suddenly testing positive is figuring out who they've been in contact with. 

So here's, in a nutshell, what happened: Kristina Mladenovic was determined to have close contact with Paire, and although she was allowed to play singles, she and her doubles partner Timea Babos -- the top-ranked team -- were pulled from the draw and Mladenovic was made to quarantine. It is worth noting that Babos left the country before anyone could tell her she had to quarantine in place. Adrian Mannarino, also shown to be exposed to Paire, was allowed to play his match the day before Mladenovic was taken out of the doubles draw. Daniil Medvedev is still in this tournament and was shown to have been exposed to Paire. So I don't get it. But this New York Times story lays it out pretty well. 

It would seem, then, that there is some inconsistence in how these decisions are made and when. Apparently, the USTA worked with NYC and state health officials before working with the county in which the players are staying. And then, the other day, I read that the French Open is wanting to have a similar player bubble AND spectators in the stands. So yeah. Should go GREAT.

Conspiracy Theory Tennis Twitter

Novak Djokovic had one job. And it was a pretty easy one, because (and I am not trying to be rude) there were zero Grand Slam winners in the top five seeds of this tournament. All he had to do was go out there and be Novak Djokovic against players who definitely are not him. And then he hit a lineswoman in the throat with an errant ball struck in frustration. 

I mean, that expression? That's most tennis fans about Novak Djokovic, who talks constantly of wanting to be liked, but then creates a super-spreader tour event and then tried to talk his way out of consequences by saying, "hey, she didn't go to the hospital ..."

He did apologize. This is true, and it was a full apology. He accepted his punishment and left. But then tennis' version of Q-Anon decided that this incident needed further examination. Some theorized that the lineswoman hit the deck intentionally and overreacted to get Djokovic in trouble. Have you ever been hit in the throat without having the opportunity to protect yourself from impact? Me neither, but it probably hurts. What can I say? Twitter is a cesspool.

Also disappointing were some commentators suggesting that the problem was the presence of linespeople in the first place, because they aren't on all courts. 

Had to be Brad Gilbert.

How to Talk About Racism

The shooting of Jacob Blake may have rendered our lawmakers into a malaise, but at least athletes had something to say about it. This is a crazy thing to be typing, by the way. It's not normal to understand, as we all do, that something is deeply wrong with policing in America and to do nothing about it, especially when you are among the people who can do something about it. 

When the Milwaukee Bucks said, "aw, hell naw, Karen" and refused to play until someone did something, it started an unbelievable cascade of players sitting in protest, from men's and women's basketball, to BASEball (emphasis mine, because, like, what?), to tennis. In the bubble, Naomi Osaka refused to play her semifinal, prompting the entire Cincinnati tournament to pause. 

Osaka showed up to the U.S. Open with the goal of highlighting the stories of black people who died at the hands of police, or people playing police, as was the case with Trayvon Martin. She did this by displaying their names on her mask. Where her mouth is. And of course, what she's doing is just powerful, but it's clear that some white people don't know how to talk about it. During her match against Shelby Rogers, Chris Evert noted that perhaps Osaka's renewed resolve in highlighting racial injustice was translating into her game. This made my head hurt for a moment, but then at least Cliff Drysdale immediately said, "I don't know about that," and the swelling went down. Then after Osaka won, she had a post-match interview with Rennae Stubbs, who is an astute observer of the game. After some talk about the game, she noted, in a rather light and casual tone, that she had incorrectly guessed which name would be highlighted on Osaka's mask on this night, like she had missed a question in JEOPARDY! during a bar's game's night, and I don't remember what happened next, because my head came off my body in an explosion. This isn't a game. These are dead black people who didn't have to die and my god, woman, ask about the person if you want to do this right! Gah!

I stayed with the match long enough for another interview with Osaka, who was presented with a video of Martin's mother and Ahmaud Arbery's dad thanking her for using her platform to highlight their children, and just like that, I was bawling. It was a beautiful moment and opened the door for a conversation about why she was doing what she was doing.

That's when I had a mini-revelation (well, after I roasted Stubbs and Evert on Twitter). This is literally new for a lot of white people. They are only now coming to understand what it's like to be black in America. Sure, you can ask why this is new to people and that's a different and longer conversation, but there are many who really don't know how to have this conversation. They want to help, and learn, and grow, and they have empathy for others. But when it comes to talking about race and racism, it can get awkward, I think. And sometimes, they'll say the wrong thing because they don't know how to say something substantial, or what's acceptable or they're nervous about saying the wrong thing. And then they imply that taking a stand against racism is good for a tennis game, or they maybe don't want to ignore the mask on your face but aren't sure how to address it. I'm just saying that we've (I've) gotta show some grace here, I think. There's going to be a lot of stumbling and fumbling around white people talking about racism and yeah, it's past time they did it. They're obviously not going to get it right. 

But at least they're not ignoring the issue. Which is better than our own government.