Wimbledon: The Numbers are a Target

The irony is that as a tennis player, the goal is to play, and win, as much as possible during the year so that when the big tournaments come up, like Wimbledon, you are seeded, and that in theory keeps you from playing the Jannik Sinners of the world in the first round. 

And then, when you get there, some player you scouted by watching them frame their way through a previous match takes you out in the first round on a surface you're pretty sure isn't even for tennis.

I'm talking about Daniil Medvedev, who had this to say about the guy who beat him in the first round of Wimbledon on Monday, thus starting a cascade of seeded players to tumble out of the draw at what has to be a record pace:

From The Athletic: "I was supposed to play him or (Quentin) Halys in Halle. I watched the match. He couldn't play two balls in a row in the court. I was surprised."

Who needs Sinner when you have ... whatever is in the water at Wimbledon right now?

Serena Williams was sort of mocked by everyone (OK, me) when she'd say that the women are playing their best against her. I'm starting to understand what she's saying. Right now, I'm watching Laura Siegemund on the precipice of taking a set off of Aryna Sabalenka. (She just did it.) Sinner himself was moments away from being out of Wimbledon if not for a freak injury sustained by Grigor Dimitrov. 

So the remaining question: Who takes advantage of the void left by the 22 seeds who went home after round one? The fact is that on both sides, the favorites are still there. Sinner is the biggest question mark as he is also coping with injury. But he and Carlos Alcaraz are still on a collision course. Sinner's got a harder path. Ben Shelton is playing some great tennis right now, but does he have the maturity to hold it together for a whole match against Sinner? I'm not 100% sold on that one, but even if Sinner gets through, he'll have Djokovic (probably) to contend with, which is basically like a final to get to a final. 

Although she is down a set, I find it hard to believe Sabalenka won't make it through this match. I think she could manage either Ana Pavlyuchenkova or Amanda Anisimova. The bottom half is ... interesting. The thing is that Iga Swiatek has been having a pretty good year, but has been faltering right around this stage. I really would pick the winner of the Belinda Bencic and Mirra Andreeva match to get to the final. 

And at this point, it's probably just wise to choose anyone without a seed by their name. 

The Terrible Twos

Back in the day, like in the biblical day, terrible meant something a little different than it does now. It meant frightening. 

And if you're Jannik Sinner and Aryna Sabalenka, you are probably quite frightened right now. 

Let's start with Sabalenka and her No. 2, Coco Gauff. Having dispatched French Open's reigning queen Iga Swiatek, it's fair to assume that she may have figured the title was hers. Hell, she had a harder draw too, for the best player in the world, especially compared to Gauff. The problem is that you still have to play the match. Full disclosure: I was out playing tennis and only caught the tail end of the match at first. I saw Sabalenka's comments first before seeing the rest of the match and I thought, "How awful can she have played with a scoreline like that??" Then I saw the match and I was really confused. I mean I know she's not going to forget about that easy volley she netted deep in the first set, but she did win that set, so ... But otherwise, they obviously played a competitive match. So, the comments. Why, though.

Fun fact: I just went to Google Sabalenka's draw and as I typed in her name, the first thing that autopopulated was 'sabalenka sore loser.' Yikeys. Which brings me to the second level to these comments. It is one thing to be hard on yourself in the aftermath of a hard-fought match, but then Sabalenka said that if Iga had played the Coco, Iga would have won. Which is ... like, why?!?? That is petty af and not even based on reality because Coco beat her easily on clay, like, last month. (OK, their head-to-head is a little lopsided on Swiatek's end but still.) Also, bro, how are you going to say out loud that your opponent was framing balls and they were staying in? That is basically saying she got lucky. 

One could argue that when you say things like that, it might be because you're scared. 

Speaking of frightening, I couldn't watch the whole men's match right away on Sunday but was following it online. Not gonna lie, I thought it was going to be a Sinner wipeout. Talk about scary? His form for this whole tournament was absolutely terrifying. He actually had me feeling sorry for Novak Djokovic, which is no easy task. In fact, it would be the first time I've ever felt sorry for him. 

Anyway, Carlos Alcaraz was down two sets before he decided to play some of the best tennis I've ever seen from him. My thing with Alcaraz has been that he has gotten into heavy moments in matches and just lost focus a bit. Even in the deeps of this match, I thought it would happen again. But match point was the perfect example of how he played the whole match. You're trying to win a match in a fifth-set tiebreak, right? So you go to the high-percentage shot, into midcourt, right? No, you scream a winner down the line, which was low-percentage, ballsy and confident! I love the showman Alcaraz, but sometimes I think he gets a bit too much into his options. That final showed that he is capable of locking in and staying there. 

As for Sinner, it was hard to see where he went wrong. It's not like he gave the match away, but he did look a little tired there at the end which is sort of unacceptable after a five-and-a-half-hour match. I kid. It's good to see Sinner get a bit of a scare in him. He probably doesn't feel that way, but

U.S. Open: When You Don't Fill Out a Draw

            I fill out a draw for just about every major, even if I don’t publish it (which is almost never). This time, I didn’t -- believe it or not, I forgot to do it even though I have my two weeks worth of excuses about why I can’t possibly be at work at all these next fourteen days.  

I wasn’t prepared for how freeing it is to watch tennis when you haven’t tried to predict the future. Oh, Carlos Alcaraz lost in the second round? Didn’t see that coming! Oh well. 

I don’t think anyone’s winning money off their original men’s draw this year. 

Seriously, I don’t know if it’s time to worry about Alcaraz yet. That seems silly even to write – he just won Wimbledon. He’s got four majors and he’s what, 21? These flameouts happen to everyone and it’s probably nothing to worry about, given that he’s still so young and that losing to Van De Camps will teach him something. That said, watching him lose last night was perplexing. Not only was he making bad decisions against a guy who was obviously dedicated to attacking the net the whole night, but his concentration seemed very inconsistent. I can’t think of the last time I saw someone down two sets and a break making a great shot and celebrating like he had just brought up match point. If he was going to win, he still had so much work to do. And then he was following that up with making wild errors. It was just odd to see. Sometimes I think he is dangerously close to upsetting the fine balance he has displayed so far of showmanship and tennis guile. I mean, I love the shots and that he is often giving the crowd a match that is worth every dime in watching.  

Orrrr, maybe it’s too much tennis. The day after Alcaraz lost early, it was Novak Djokovic’s turn to lose a four-set match to Alexei Popyrin. Both Djokovic and Alcaraz medalled at the Olympics. Which in the grand scheme might be worth it for them, but the real gift they’ve left is this wide-open men’s draw – a world where Frances Tiafoe has as good a chance as Brandon Nakashima to make the final.  

On to the women. Here’s another “is it time to pull the emergency cord yet” question: What is up with Elena Rybakina? I couldn’t help but notice that she barely made it through her first-round match against someone she shouldn’t have had much issue with. In fact, I’m just going to say it: That was the ugliest pro match I have seen in some time (no offense to Australia’s Destanee Aiava – I mean, sometimes you have a bad day). But whoa, it was bad. It was like reverse tennis – both of them trying to see who could make a mistake first. But then Rybakina withdrew from the tournament. By my count, that’s six tournaments she’s withdrawn from this season.      

Other than Rybakina, the higher seeds of the women’s draw are holding up well for now. But that probably won’t be the case by the end of today. I look at this draw as it is and feel as if Jessica Pegula has a really good chance to make her first Slam final. I’ll be watching Coco Gauff’s match against Emma Navarro pretty closely too. Also, a quick shout-out to Paula Badosa, who has been injury-ridden lately, but is now in the fourth round. By the way, it took me a good year to figure out why, when I watched a Badosa match, I’d find myself chanting “Fair is fair!” after one of her winners. Then it dawned on me.

    

            You might call her match today a “do-or-die" situation. IYKYK  

TWA's Two-Week-Old Wimbledon Wrap

I’m not gonna lie – I was unprepared for Wimbledon this year. As ready as I was for RG, I was that unready for Wimbledon. I turned on the internet and results were rolling in and I was like, what?!?? So, here’s some delayed reactions from Wimbledon, which apparently is over?!?? 

1. That men’s draw. No disrespect, but Novak Djokovic just advanced through the easiest draw known to tenniskind, and that would have been true if Alex de Minaur had not withdrawn due to injury. No offense, Alex. After two weeks of listening to commentators talk about how “fresh” Djokovic was, here’s my counterpoint – if you’re playing in a two-week tournament, you want challenges, you want to see where your game is lacking today and give yourself a chance to fix it. The final at Wimbledon isn’t the time to have to work on that. Meanwhile, Carlos Alcaraz had seeded players from round three – tough ones. Yes, there is such a thing as getting tired out. But Alcaraz had that happy medium – good matches against good players and a good old-fashioned scare that can refocus you (Tiafffffff-) 

2. OK, so the Americans are coming. (-ooooeeeeee!!) That was a tough draw for Frances Tiafoe but taking the world No. 3 to five sets is nothing to be ashamed of. And I also can’t stop wondering about the alternate reality of Madison Keys closing out Jasmine Paolini before she got injured. Ben Shelton taking Jannik Sinner to five. Tommy Paul playing a tough match against Alcaraz. Taylor Fritz taking out Alexander Zverev. Thank you for your service. This week, five of the top 15 women in the world are American.  

https://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/draws/gentlemens-singles/full 

3. This is nothing in the grand scheme of things, but I am admittedly still trying to get over Emma Raducanu ditching Andy Murray at his last Wimbledon, but also wondering what Andy Murray was thinking and what his options were. Apparently, Raducanu has never ever in her professional career played any kind of doubles. Why on earth would he even want to play with some newb at his last chance to win a match at Wimbledon?! Just because she’s British?!?? That’s crazy enough, but for Miss Raducanu to pull a Stefanie Graf on Murray and back out of the tournament so she could concentrate on the singles draw (which didn’t go great). It takes a lot of nerve to do something like that, but she has frankly not earned that behavior – she doesn’t have the gravitas for that kind of diva move. And Andy Murray at Wimbledon is no John McEnroe. (This is a good thing.) 

4. Novak Djokovic is a brat. I’ve never seen a more emotionally stunted champion. It’s almost as if being one of the best tennis players of all time isn’t enough for him. Beyond that, he also needs complete fealty from fans, even when he’s acting like a complete jackwagon. I see politics in this man’s future. 

4a. However, he is right about one thing: https://www.usmagazine.com/entertainment/news/novak-djokovic-says-pickleball-is-making-tennis-endangered/ 

5. Carlos Alcaraz is what tennis needs right now, I guess. This is no shade against him at all. But tennis is always picking at itself, trying to figure out what to change to make the game more exciting. Nothing, I’m saying. The game is fine and great and suspenseful and is full of amazing athletes with compelling stories that the powers that be do nothing with. BUT if we are saying the game needs excitement, a showman, than let me introduce you to Carlos Alcaraz and this ridiculous point he played with a young man who is also somewhat promising and understands showmanship.  

https://x.com/ProCozzo/status/1813139668742926681 

Seriously, help me. I can't stop watching this.

He’s a special one, that’s for sure. The way I was cussing at my TV on Sunday when he lost that 40-0 lead while serving for the match because I knew that giving Djokovic an inch is like giving him a mile? And then the way he recovered to dominate that tiebreak? Woof. 

6. Speaking of almost giving away a match, congrats to Barbora Krejcikova for her second Slam, which, like her first Slam win, came out of nowhere. I didn’t have her beating Danielle Collins, let alone Elena Rybakina. But there she was in the final. And I am always partial to short players kicking up dust so I was rooting for Paolini (aka Pao-Pao in my home during tense matches). I’m not sure if Krejcikova has the consistency to bring this level to every tournament, but her serve during the tournament was ridiculous. Paolini doesn’t have that big a serve, but props to her as well for her advancement through a very difficult draw on a surface that really shouldn’t work for her game.  

7. I’m always down to watch doubles, too, and especially when firecracker Taylor Townsend is in the draw. I'm just leaving this here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r0Z3Zwdjxg&ab_channel=Wimbledon