2019: So Long Hastavista Sayonara Peace-Out and the Like

I'm coming in under the limbo broom -- might ... hit ... send ... before ... midnight ...

via GIPHY

So before I get into the 2019 yearbook, let's take a quick look at the 2018 yearbook, in which I, for the first time, attempted to predict the winners of the majors this year. How did I do?

Who Will Win in 2019? This is a new feature in which I will attempt to predict all the Slam champions right now! Stop laughing. This is hard! OK, here I go:

Australia: Kiki Bertens, Novak Djokovic
French Open: Sloane Stephens, Rafael Nadal
Wimbledon: Aryna Sabalenka, Roger Federer
U.S. Open: Serena Williams (unless she retired because she was pregnant), Djokovic

Hard indeed. In real life:
Australia: Naomi Osaka, Djokovic
French Open: Ash Barty, Nadal
Wimbledon: Simona Halep, Djokovic
U.S. Open: Bianca Andreescu, Nadal

Will I try this again later in this post? Absolutely!

Now, from the top:

Head of the Class: For the men, I'm going with Nadal. It was a minor miracle that he finished the season uninjured (well, for him -- just the one hip injury). But then he messed around and won two majors, the summer and Davis Cup, plus a major final and semifinal showing. I'm not just saying this because of his ass -- he had an awesome season.
The women? Not as easy to choose just one. So I won't! I will say that I look forward to another decade of watching Barty, Halep, Petra Kvitova (please?), Andreescu and Osaka duking it out on court. I'm expecting two decades from the last two. (Do y'all think Pliskova can win a slam? Because I'm thinking no these days ...)

Most Inspiring Player: I have to go with Hsieh Su-wei. For this category, I'm thinking about players who are not loaded with all the standard tools you'd expect for success, and yet. I'm thinking about a player who makes me want to go rent out the ball machine at my courts. That's Hseih for me. She is everything I wish I were as a player -- patient, strategic, able to use a full court, confident. Think I'm kidding? Watch this, then drop and give me 20:



Most Popular: Coco Gauff, and man, I wish it wasn't so. I get it. When you're good, you're good. People talk about the players who are good, the ones who beat Venus Williams in the first round of Wimbledon and then makes a nice run at the Open, where Osaka thrust her into the spotlight after a devastating loss. I'm not blaming Osaka, or anyone else. I just think about Jennifer Capriati and even about how Venus herself was treated when she was Coco's age ... and it makes me anxious. It makes me hope the media have actually learned something, that her family remains vigilant against, well, life. She's 15. I just worry about her. I'm glad she's popular. Really. But I'm anxious over here.

Most Likely to Succeed: I'm going to live on the edge and say Daniil Medvedev. I don't know how tennis' answer to Gumby does it, but damned if he doesn't keep doing it. I thought he was pretty close to success at the U.S. Open final but openly admit I was rooting hard against him. But in 2020? Hard for me to see him come out of it without a major title.

Most Likely to Succeed ... at Something Other than Tennis: Caroline Wozniacki, I guess. Y'all think she's coming back Down Under to wipe the smile off Halep's face again?

Nah, but still. We'll miss Wozniacki retrieving ball after ball after ball, only to win a match and you, the spectator, are sitting there asking yourself how she actually did that. (Just me? OK.)

That Student Who Snoozes Through the School Year, But Aces the Final Exam: I'm sorry, but Djokovic. Please explain how he managed to win that final against Federer at Wimbledon. He almost ended the year at No. 1, and his year overall was, well, scratchy.


Who Will Win in 2020? I ain't scared!
Australia: Andreescu, Medvedev
Roland Garros: Halep, Nadal
Wimbledon: Serena (!), Federer (!!)
U.S. Open: Andreescu, Tsitsipas

Least Likely to Post Regularly in 2020: Yeah, that'd be me. I love tennis and everything about it. I love writing about tennis. This post was going to be short, and then I just got sucked in. But I've been thinking a lot about the goals I want to accomplish next year (tomorrow) and most of it involves getting paid to write. I, uh, do this for free. I know, shocking. But the reality is that I don't have the time or energy to do both well. I'll still post for majors and whenever I have anything else to say. But I'll always be watching. Feel free to hit me up on Facebook and Twitter between posts!

AO'19: The Women

My biggest takeaway is that the Serena/Halep quarter is loaded. But at least Serena can be grateful for the fact that Ekaterina Makarova isn't in her half.

via GIPHY

Anyway, the draw:

Yeah, so I blindly chose Kiki Bertens to win the Australian before the draws came out. Then I filled out the draw and ... I can't see her getting through her half? Sloane Stephens is there. Aliaksandra Sasnovich is there. Angelique Kerber. So we'll see. But clearly I went with Sloane Stephens.
First-round matches:
Simona Halep v. Kaia Kanepi: This seems unfair. What's the point of being the top seed when Kaia "Walking Dead-bandages" Kanepi is the first face you see when you get on court?
Laura Siegemund v. Victoria Azarenka: This should be a good one. I think Azarenka will win, but I wonder if even she believes she's Slam-run ready.
Belinda Bencic v. Denise Siniakova: Ah, Belinda. I'm concerned.
Monica Niculescu v. Amanda Anisimova: Just mentioning because I think this will be fun to watch. Niculescu is fun to watch, but if you played anyone with that skill set in your league, you'd basically accuse her of cheating.
Maria Sakkari v. Jelena Ostapenko: Man. Who knows.
Kirsten Flipkens v. Sasnovitch: Good test for Sasnovich, because Flipkens also has an annoying game.

HOMELAND SLAM: The Women

The draw gods were very kind to tennis fans. I am not sure if the actual players feel the same way, but here we go!

Seeds

1. Simona Halep: The one to beat. And it won't be easy. So good luck, ladies listed below. Here stands one of the most mentally tough players the tour has seen since Serena and Maria. I know a lot has been made of the logjam in her quarter, but what she did this summer turned me into a convert. Her match against Sloane Stephens, and even Kiki Bertens, were just awesome displays of tenacious tennis. When you consider that she was doing two-a-days in her last two tournaments. And all of that extra tennis played could come back and bite her in the form of exhaustion. But I don't think she gets tired, y'all.

2. Caroline Wozniacki: Ever since she won Australia, she's been all over the place. Her first round is against Sam Stosur, and if/when she comes up against Bertens, she's probably going to go to the low end of that "place."

3. Sloane Stephens: I have to admit that I thought that her title here last year was a blip, a lucky bounce here and there. That semi against Venus literally hung on a couple of tough rallies. But Sloane has backed it up with a French Open final appearance and a couple of really strong showings against Halep. I wish she had a real weapon, something that could end a point in under 15 minutes, but here we are.

4. Angelique Kerber: Hey, when's she's not No. 1, she's killing the competition. Her Wimbledon final performance was just stellar. She's got a good draw and I can see her making the semis, easy.

5. Petra Kvitova: She's had a strong summer, but there are some floaters in this draw she needs to look out for -- Aryna Sabalenka and Naomi Osaka.  

6. Caroline Garcia: Garcia has had an up-and-down season, not a lot of consistency. And her first round is against a resurgent Johanna Konta, so that's not great. Then possibly Monica Puig, who beat her last week in Connecticut, and as someone who watched that match, I have no idea how Garcia managed to lose. So not much hope for her here.

7. Elina Svitolina: If this were a tournament that wasn't a major, I'd say, sure. Let's go with Svitolina. But it's a major, so Agz Radwanska will likely be the first and last person Svitolina sees on a tennis court in New York. 

8. Karolina Pliskova: I have concerns. She's got some coaching changes going on -- she just snagged Conchita Martinez, so maybe she can help Pliskova figure out how to win this summer. She's had losses to Sabalenka and Bertens, and even Ekaterina Makarova the last few tournaments, so we will see.

9. Julia Goerges: It's great to see Goerges having great results again and she's in Svitolina's quarter, so maybe things will work out for a run to the quarters? 

10. Jelena Ostapenko: Given her high-risk game, you just have to wait until the match with her. Andrea Petkovic is going to be a tough first round because Petkovic can handle the power, so should be fun!

11. Daria Kasatkina: Gonna have to do a hard pass here.

12. Garbine Muguruza: We just gotta see what kind of mood Muguruza is in right now. If she's in a good mood, this draw is here for her. If she's in a bad mood, Maria Sakkari or Pliskova will be waiting to see her out of Queens.

13. Kiki Bertens: It has a heckuva year for Bertens. I really love her game. The thing that had been missing until this year was the mental toughness. She'd have players in a corner and then she'd blink. Not this year. The way she handled that Halep match in the Rogers Cup final was really impressive. Quarters at the least for her.

14. Madison Keys: On the whole, it's been a pretty meh year for Keys. So I'm not expecting another run to the final from her. 

15. Elise Mertens: Nah.

16: Venus Williams: It's not been a great year for Venus, and if she wants to replicate her semifinal run from last year, she'd have to bypass her sister, Simona Halep, and probably Muguruza and Pliskova. That's just her quarter. I don't know is all I'm saying.

The Stragglers

Serena Williams: Yes, it is completely possible she wins the whole thing. What's more likely, though, is that her lackluster court movement will be exposed early on by some quality opponents -- there are many in her quarter alone -- including her own sister.

Aryna Sabalenka: I still want to know if what she was sniffing during the Fed Cup last year was legal. Whatever it is might have taught her how to volley, because her game is locked and loaded right now. I just watched her win the Connecticut Open and her game is BIG. It's also INCONSISTENT. She is also as MOODY as the average teenager.

Magdalena Rybarikova: She's in Svitolina's quarter and I see her as the main beneficiary when Svitolina flames out for some ridiculous reason.

First Round Matches to Watch

These first round matches could be very consequential to the way this tournament shakes out. Not even hyperbol-ing right now.

Patty Schnyder v. Maria Sharapova: I don't give her more than six games, but you gotta love Patty Schnyder out here talking trash on the Tennis Twitter streets like she never left the game. 

Maybe someone know this, but I think in 18 years I never loose a first round @usopen ...

— Patty Schnyder (@pattyschnyder) August 21, 2018

Simona Halep v. Kaia Kanepi: Picking Halep, but should be entertaining at least.

Venus v. Svetlana Kuznetsova: The sad part is that if Venus gets out of this match, it just gets worse for her.

Sachia Vickery v. Svitolina: Many opportunities for Svitolina flame-outs. This will be just the first.

Johanna Konta v. Caroline Garcia: Konta needs to get her ranking up. Because this is cruel.

Jelena Ostapenko v. Andrea Petkovic: Petkovic has retired that dance by now, right?

Sabalenka v. Danielle Collins: Collins has cooled a bit since the spring, but this still could be entertaining. 

Laura Siegemund v. Naomi Osaka: Fully expecting Osaka to make it through this one, but should be a good match. 

Wozniacki v. Stosur: Sam Stosur won the U.S. Open once. Let that one marinate.

Dustup in Paris: The Women's Preview

About three or four weeks ago, I would have discounted this women's draw as nothing to write home about. But the clay-court season was super interesting. Who knew Maria Sharapova's game would arise from the grave and begin hitting drop shots?! And Elina Svitolina's game, so boring and yet so effective, showed consistent results, even a win against top-seeded Simona Halep. Petra Kvitova's over here winning on clay. Sloane Stephens grinding out some wins, and looking pissed almost the entire time. Also, Serena Williams is playing her first major after maternity leave. Let's get into it:

I've been off the blog for a minute, but I have been watching tennis. So the first thing that's worth noting is just a quick rant about Karolina Pliskova. She got fined some thousands of dollars at the Rome tournament for just straight trashing the match umpire's chair after losing in an upset in the third round. No one's saying how much she was fined, just that it's four figures. I'd like to point out that Serena Williams got fined $82,000 for threatening a linesperson once. With her racquet, yes, but there was no physical contact. Pliskova hit a chair that someone was sitting in. Repeatedly. And maybe it's just me, but the fact that she first reached for the ump's hand, and then hit her chair makes that thing a little more direct. So she should have gotten a tad bit more than a four-figure fine.
But alas. She is our second seed. So that's cool.
Phew. Off my chest. Garbine Muguruza and Svetlana Kuznetsova are playing each other in the first round. How does Muguruza get a worse first-round draw than Serena? Muguruza should make her way through, but I have no idea what's going to happen between Danielle Collins and Caroline Wozniacki. Woz's clay season has not been ideal. Collins hasn't been that much better, but she is having a breakout year, and when you put that against someone coming off her first Slam win, well. Just get the popcorn ready.
Now, Serena. I know everyone is all jacked about her return, myself included. But does Serena have a chance to win this tournament? Her quarter of the draw includes Muguruza, Sharapova and Pliskova, all of whom have been playing on tour regularly. She's in the same half with Halep, with Kerber, with even Elise Bertens. She's probably in the tougher half of the draw. Who wouldn't love to see a new mom come out and muscle her way through this draw, maybe even play Venus in the final again? I guess I'm saying that Wimbledon is right around the corner, fam.

The Official 2017 TWA Yearbook

And here I was, thinking I could wait until after Christmas and still get my last entry of the year in before the start of the 2018 season. But as I write, the first matches of the season have already been contested. So yeah. I'm thinking someone should do something about the lack of an offseason, especially considering we're coming off a season where half of the best men in the world didn't make it through the whole season.
But hey. What do I know. Actually, I know that the pro tennis season was one of the best things about 2017. So let's try and squeeze in a conversation about that before Serena Williams (!) plays her first match since January 2017, when she won the Australian Open while pregnant. Let's go!

Head of the Class: So, this season, the ATP and WTA had to deal with the same quandary -- the sudden loss of their top talent. But the players remaining handled it completely differently, I think. Serena Williams took the rest of the year off to have a baby and the other women spent the rest of the year playing hot potato. "No, you take the top ranking and all the Slams!" "Gah! No, you! Don't touch me!"
But most of these players didn't have anything in terms of experience on Mssrs. Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal. So when Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray were felled by injury this season, Federer and Nadal knew what to do. But they were nice about it -- they split the four Slams evenly among them. So, for the second year in a row, there will be co-heads of the class. But this time, neither are women. Don't @ me.

Most Inspiring Player: This is a toss-up, because there is one guy who claimed wins against Fed and Nadal this season, but came up short in the Slams and in Davis Cup. He also has beaten Djokovic and Nick Kyrgios. Regardless, David Goffin might look like a bag of bones in oversized tennis shorts, but his game said much more. (His player page says he's 5-foot-11. Nah, right?) Next time you feel like you're outsized, out-powered and out-talented, well, you probably are. But before you take the bagel, consider that this year, Goffin shored up his weaknesses to prevail against some of the biggest names in the game. Except Grigor Dimitrov, of all people.
There is also one woman who has shown up quietly to all the Slams this year and made the final of three of them. Due to recent underwhelming results, no one really expected Venus Williams to be a force this season. But there she was, on one half of the court during some the best matches of the year. She did this being older by her opponents by often a decade at least, and sometimes without her best tennis. She never did it with a coach in her ear at every timeout. She's old-school in every way -- except she's not quite ready for the senior tour. And when Venus is on a roll, it's best to let that roll go. Am I right, Jennifer?

Most Popular: Maria Sharapova, of course. She really was the belle of the ball. Never has anyone returned from a drug ban to such pomp, including a tournament holding a spot for her after it had already started until the end of her suspension. I might have noted once or twice how unimpressed I was with how her suspension went down, but fans didn't care. When tournament organizers thought that she might qualify to get into Wimbledon, they sold tickets to those rounds -- and people bought them! (Remember when Sharapova said she'd play anywhere, even a New York City street? Turned out that enthusiasm didn't extend to, like, qualifiers.) So there you go. The people (who aren't me) have spoken. 

Most Likely to Succeed: Garbine Muguruza, like the other women on the WTA Tour, has been unsteady this year, but her run to the Wimbledon title, including her utter domination of the second half of the final match, makes me think she's got a shot at hitting the ground running next year. Whatever her obstacles, they seem to be between the ears. 

Most Likely to Succeed ... at Something Other than Tennis: Martina Hingis, who probably should consider another profession because it would appear she has done just about everything possible in tennis. I'm sure that if she took up MMA boxing, it'd go okay. I guess. She might be slight, but Hingis will cut you.

That Student Who Skates Through the School Year, But Aces the Final Exam: Looking at you, Caroline Wozniacki. She had a solid season, although she came up short in most of the final matches she played. Until September, when she won her first final out of seven tries. And then. She goes to the WTA Finals and beats Venus, who she had never beaten before. 

The Attitudimeter: WTA Finals edition

Live from ... my home office ... a special Attitudimeter, WTA Finals edition! Just the ladies this week:

Who's Up

Caroline Wozniacki

Wozniacki spent this season flirting with greatness. She made eight finals and lost the first six of them. So it shouldn't be a surprise that she was the last one sitting on the top of the heap in Singapore this year. She had it coming. In some ways, she maybe should have been part of the Player of the Year conversation a bit more. But the reason she wasn't was her inability to do anything significant at big tournaments this year. So maybe this is the set-up stage for 2018 for her.

Venus Williams

So there's Venus, down 4-6, 0-5 in the WTA Finals, when she receives a push alert on her phone that she, in fact, is in the middle of a tennis match. Alas, it was soon to late to remedy the situation because she lost the second set 6-4. As any longtime reader of TWA knows, I have something of a soft spot for Venus and part of the reason why is in regards to the way she played the WTA Finals -- in her usual OG style. I watched as every single other player in the draw consulted their coach every possible time. Venus spent the tournament figuring it out by herself. That's why she'll almost always be up on the old 'meter. Unless she throws away another final like Wimbledon. I mean, for Pete's sake, Venus ...

Who's Down

WTA Finals

I take it I'm alone on this, but I'm going in anyway. Why on earth is on-court coaching allowed at a major tournament like Singapore? Incidentally, why are so many women running to their coaches, their daddies, their spiritual mentor -- instead of figuring it out themselves. Half of the on-court coaching I heard was, admittedly, Darren Cahill, who's great. Don't get me wrong. But my god, if he is so great, why can't Halep retain what he has been teaching him? Most of what he said seemed to be aimed at managing her feelings, not her game. I'll say it again. This concept, and the fact that only women are allowed to have it, is an insult.

Elina Svitolina

Yeah, she had a rough tournament, but a bad translation of an interview she did led to a severe raking over of the coals. Svitolina's observation that many people were now in contention for being No. 1 somehow became her saying that Serena Williams used to dominate, but that they were now in a different era, which triggered Serena fans, which led to her taking some online hateration until the website issued a correction. Sadly, it was too late for Svitolina's Twitter mentions.

An era of being over rated...she should win a slam first or take a seat down real fast.

— Ïmmαҫ Reno (@immacReno) October 22, 2017

U.S. Open Time!: Peak Shade and a Cavernous Men's Half

You know me. I am not about gossip or "spilling tea" or anything like that.
OK, who am I kidding? I am loving this Sharapova/Wozniacki/Coach Patrick shade-throwing! I mean, when half of the big-time talent are missing from the last major of the year, you have to find life somewhere!
You know what? Let's start with the men. As previously noted, we have Rafa Nadal and Roger Federer in the same half of the draw, and so far, they are delivering. They're making it a little uncomfortable  on themselves -- watching Federer go into five sets after seemingly gaining control of a match is a bit weird. Probably moreso for him. Nadal's last two matches have been interesting, too. He's had tight first sets with players he would not normally have trouble with -- Taro Daniel and Leonardo Mayer -- but watching him struggle to find that gear, then just go off to the races has been really interesting. And let's not forget that past champion Juan Martin del Potro, up-and-comer Dominic Thiem and ninth-seed David Goffin are still among contenders in the Rafa/Roger half.
Wanna see the bottom half?

One of these guys is going to play for a U.S. Open title. Yep. Yeppers. Uh-huh!
Yeah, this is what happens when Novak Djokovic, Andy Murray, Stan Wawrinka and Milos Raonic can't even show up. No, this is no time to talk about the pro tennis schedule. Don't. Be. Silly. The other thing that happens when you need to schedule matches for a spotlight-short men's draw is that you look in other places. You look at your star attractions. You look for someone who can put butts in seats when Pablo Carreno Busta can't.
You look at Maria Sharapova.
And, yes, this sucks for all the reasons I have previously stated, and many die-hard fans feel the same way. But I think this is why she's getting the plum night session on Ashe every time. No, it's not fair. It's definitely not fair to someone like Caroline Wozniacki, delegated to Court 17 and reportedly deluged by fans after a match she lost because security was nowhere to be found.
Yeah, they were probably at Ashe. Protecting the gold bouillon.
Wozniacki aired her frustrations and said what many have been saying (count among them the organizers at the French Open and Wimbledon, by the way, nbd): Someone coming back from a drug ban shouldn't have the fatted calf laid out for her the second she returns, regardless of whether she's done the time.
And it turns out that Maria Sharapova had something to say about that, which went a little like this:

Sharapova about Wozniacki's comments: All that matters to me that I'm in the fourth round and I'm not sure where she is (📽 US Open/ESPN) pic.twitter.com/NcaBbhnXLc

— Ilya Ryvlin (@ryvlin) September 2, 2017

Whew! I did not know Sharapova had that in her and I'm kinda impressed. Because we know that she knew exactly where Wozniacki was, don't we?
Still, it's worth pointing out that for all of her talk about being willing to play anywhere, including a parking lot in Queens, there has been one place she has not been all that enthusiastic about: The qualifier draw.
Hm.
But in case you thought that would close the book on this chapter, Serena Williams' (who of course had to have her baby during a major) coach Patrick Moratoglou (who seems to really enjoy digging Sharapova) had to get involved, telling a New York newspaper that the best thing for Sharapova is to not have Serena in the draw AND that those with drug bans should have to wait a year before they get a wild card. I'll let him expand:

Man's right.
Very much looking forward to Sharapova's response. Because, yeah, I'm not mature at all.

But Are We, Though?

Here's how I found out Maria Sharapova was getting a wild card into this year's U.S. Open:

Blessed by none other.
Sure, she gets butts into seats. Sure, she's pretty and is actually good at tennis. Guess what else is true? The reason her ranking is so low is because she just had to serve a drug ban! Not only that, but for someone who sure looks like she tried to hide that she was taking meldonium for 10 years, she has been awfully unrepentant about her time in the penalty box! I mean, a wild card at a major?!
Ugh. That's all I have to say about that.
OK.
No, it's not. One of my favorite all-time tennis writers, Jon Wertheim, pointed out that, "Wild cards fly in the face of fairness." He noted that Vicky Duval, the young chipmunk-looking (meant in the nicest way) American who had been fighting lymphoma, has to qualify. That stinks. She's an American and it's the U.S. Open!
Yeah, right, I know. She wasn't likely to win the U.S. Open and maybe Sharapova is more likely to do that. If Maria Sharapova wins the U.S. Open off a wild card because her ranking was too low to get in on her own merits because she had to stay off the court for a year and a half because of a drug ban, then I think I am missing how that's good for tennis.

In other news, Rafael Nadal is going to be the world No. 1 next week. It's 2017.

In even more other news, Caroline Wozniacki lost in another tournament final. 0-6 now, and zero sets won. Zero tiebreakers played. I watched this one -- against Elina Svitolina in Montreal and two things:
1. Svitolina's game is effective and super boring to watch. I don't know how that's possible, but here we are.
2. Wozniacki looked fine throughout the tournament until the final. She's down 1-5 and calls her dad down? (Also she appears to have poached Victoria Azarenka's old hitting partner, who was Serena's old hitting partner -- the ever-mobile Sascha Bajin) Her dad's talking, gesturing wildly. Caroline's nodding. Caroline goes out and loses the next game in about five minutes. This on-court coaching is VERY BENEFICIAL.

Oh, and I almost forgot about Azarenka. Listen, this nonsense her ex is pulling is ... not cool, to say the least. Anyone who didn't want to be a petulant jerk would let his ex and her (presumably) very responsible team go to work out-of-state without making it a court issue.
This sucks for Azarenka. I really thought she was in the relationship clear once she got rid of RedFootBlueFoot Foo. Dang.

There *Might* Be a Theme Here

Did you know that Caroline Wozniacki has been to five WTA Tour finals this year? Not bad. Not bad.
Did you know she hasn't won one of them?
Although Wozniacki has been No. 1 before, recall that she has done this without having won a major. She has been to a couple of finals and come up short there, too.
Five finals in a season without winning one of them? That's nuts. Especially with a lot of the usual suspects on maternity leave or struggling with a return to form. She's lost to Johanna Konta, Karolina Plishkova (x2), Katerina Siniakova and Elina Svitolina. With the exception of Siniakova, all these women are in the top 10 --- and she's not so much snagged one set. Not a tiebreak.
Still. Wozniacki is No. 6 in the world. That's mainly because there's never been a tournament she won't play. "On the moon, you say? OK. I'll give it a shot."

I'm just wondering out loud whether Wozniacki has missed her window to take a major title. What do you guys think?

In other news, Maria Sharapova has pulled out of her last two tournaments with injuries.
And I don't even know why I mention this, because it's completely unrelated, but did you know that one of the benefits of meldonium is physical endurance due to increased blood flow? Oh, also a heart medicine.
Uh-huh.

The Aussie young guns are under fire. First Bernard Tomic admits he's not really feeling tennis right now, and then Nick Kyrgios defaults a match against a guy named Tennys. He didn't even win a game on Thursday in his first-round match against Sandgren, and the crowd was not impressed. He was booed out of the stadium.
I have been a proponent of giving Kyrgios a chance to be young and figure out what he wants. I'm also about tennis-ing with attitude (see top of page). I wonder, though, if these guys might not benefit from some type of ATP mentorship program. I'm serious. You can't tell me all the top pros didn't go through bouts like this. So why do some go on to be Roger Federer, Rafa Nadal, Andy Murray  (who probably could also benefit from some real talk), etc. and others are chronic underachievers with talent and no patience to stick it out? Is it a millennial thing? Or are fans too hard on these players (and they paid good money for tickets -- they have the right), only to find no support in the locker room or close by?
Just a thought.

In defense of variety

I just happened to catch the Agz Radwanda/Caroline Wozniacki match in Tokyo last week and for some reason, I had a delayed reaction to something I've known for a while. It's the lack of variety in the pro tennis game.  It's hard to play the way Radwanska does, which is probably why you don't see too much variety in the game right now. It's especially hard on the body -- every time I see Radwanska play, she's got tape somewhere else on her body. (Once again, this

doesn't really help.)
This isn't rocket science, but it is kind of sad. Think about the young guns, both men and women, who can legitimately say they rely on more than power. Coming up empty, aren't you?
But, for one shining moment, there was Justine Henin. She could match Serena Williams in power, and was a great shotmaker and point plotter. She also didn't last long. There was (is) Martina Hingis, whose guile was enough to drive her opponents crazy -- until they figured out all they had to do was hit through it.
I'm not minimizing their success -- but the actual reign of that success, and the career longevity -- is certainly shorter than power players. It could be that Radwanska is now finding that as well. Even though she was able to win the first set against Wozniacki, she started getting pushed around by Woz, who is something of a tactician on the court as well, but can also flatten out her strokes and seems to be working on her serve.
Seeing the lack of variety is a bad thing for tennis, for the record. It's not because I don't like watching power players, because, like, who doesn't? But it sure does make for boring tennis, watching players do the same thing against each other over and over again.
At least there is still a small place for variety in tennis -- doubles, where Hingis continues to dominate.

U.S. Open 2016: The future is ... now?

Look. Don't play the injury card. Worse yet, tell your coach not to play the injury card. Tell him to not speak of it ever. (OK, maybe for the tell-all at the end of your career) You're out there, aren't you?
I'm not saying Serena Williams wasn't really injured throughout a good chunk of this tournament. Doesn't make much sense to lie about something like that. But that is straight-up whack to bring that up after a huge upset against an inspired Karolina Pliskova (or any other player) who just played her ass off. Just don't. I remember when Justine Henin pulled that nonsense when Amelie Mauresmo beat her to win Wimbledon back in the day, and it was just as weak then. You lost. It's fine, it really is. Just move on. Don't try to asterisk your opponent's win.
OK. Got that off my chest. Let's move on.
One of the most impressive things about Pliskova's win is that she struggled with her nerves and somehow overcame them. It was pretty obvious -- all those double-faults she tossed up at key moments was a good indication. But then she swallowed it and hit her way through it. That type of mental game is the difference between her and someone like Petra Kvitova or Garbine Muguruza. And I kinda think she's going to win the U.S. Open.
That's not shade on Angelique Kerber, who made me revise my opinion of her game a bit. I thought she and Caroline Wozniacki would have a much closer match because neither of them have any big weapons that will win them easy points. What they do both have is stamina and the ability to run down any ball, which they did. But Kerber was able to unfurl that forehand down the line a bit more than Wozniacki did with her backhand (and she waited until she was down in the second set to start busting that out for some reason).
Kerber's the new world No. 1, and most of me still finds that a little fluke-y. (Nope, not a word. Already checked.) But you cannot deny that woman's work ethic. She works her ass off on the tennis court and although I still wonder if she can maintain the top ranking until, say, mid-2017, she does deserve it now.

U.S. Open: One long night

True confession time: Shortly after sending this tweet

I remember nothing else. I wouldn't call it falling asleep as much as losing consciousness, but I did not ride and/or die. I still don't know what happened between Stan Wawrinka and Juan Martin del Potro. No spoilers! Kidding. I'm sure I'll find out momentarily when I check out today's schedule.
What I do remember is watching Serena Williams take out Simona Halep under circumstances we've seen before, and it doesn't always go her way. There she was, cruising, and then suddenly in the second set, she was not cruising. Big ups to Halep for offering a stiff challenge in that set. Now, social media went a little nuts last night after a commentator said Halep smiled too much after winning the second set. It's not the smiling that lost her the match, but she obviously let up off the gas after the second set, as though it was more than she expected just winning a set. That is the head thing I'm talking about. Halep obviously showed she can hang with Serena, physically. Mentally, too, for a set. You need two sets, though.
There was one minor development during the day session. Andy Murray got beat! By Kei Nishikori! The guy I said would win majors, just not now! I believe I might have been mistaken. Still awaiting a block of time to watch this one, so I can't say much but !!
Alrighty. Women's semis tonight. Serena and Karolina Pliskova. Hmmmmm. This is tricky because Pliskova has a great serve. Serena is a pretty good returner, though. Still, Serena is showing that she can dig deep in this tournament, even in tight spots, so I'll give her a 60 percent chance of winning. Pliskova clearly also has balls of steel (see Williams, Venus, fourth round, U.S. Open 2016). I think it'll be a great match.
I'm not gonna call Caroline Wozniacki and Angelique Kerber. Sometimes, you just have to pop some popcorn and watch some tennis and hope they're done by midnight because I'm clearly now an old lady who can't stay up much past the ending of The Tonight Show. Sigh.

The women's journey to gold

OK, so the women's draw actually has people I've heard of in it. I know that a lot of people think that women are the drama queens in tennis, but this might be a good time to point out that they're not the ones dodging the Olympics because of mosquitoes. They pack their deet and move on. Just sayin'.
So (rubbing hands together enthusiastically), let's see our draw possibilities!

That arrow toward the bottom of the draw is the 'Are You Kidding Me?' match of the first round. I mean, how are you supposed to pick a winner between Genie Bouchard and Sloane Stephens? It's like a battle between dashed hopes and low expectations.
But anyway. Obviously, Serena looks to be the favorite in almost every tournament she plays. But. Her second-round match is probably against the reigning drama queen of tennis (unless Jelena Jankovic is around) Alize Cornet. Cornet has had some big-time success against Serena, so this is not a gimme. And she is likely to pitch a fit about something, so definitely should be entertaining.
Other possible matchups of note: Caroline Wozniacki v. Petra Kvitova. I would normally expect a straightforward win by Kvitova, but she's been shaky lately. Wozniacki hasn't been playing either, so who knows? I picked Kvitova, but who knows. Then there's Venus Williams v. Lucie Safarova. This will be a good match and although Venus has been dropping philosophical science and kicking butt, I think this could be tricky for her because Safarova is capable of stringing wins together. She hasn't done it much lately, but as much as Venus has been playing, this could be a situation.
The bottom draw has a ton of possibilities for the finals, but Johanna Konta and Agz Radwanska are my picks for navigating it. Radwanska is likely to advance on guile and in watching Konta against Venus a couple weeks back, she has got a lot of game -- big serve, big groundstrokes, good brain. So we'll see.
The doubles should be good, too. Martina Hingis has Timea Bacsinszky as her partner and they've got a good shot at the semis against Caroline Garcia and Kristine Mdladenovic, two really strong dubs players. Top half: the Williams sisters (as the top seed some sixteen years after they first played in the Olympics, by the way. Crazy) look to have a good chance to advance to see Russians Elena Vesnina and Ekaterina Makarava.