Rando Thoughts from Wimbledon

1. Watching Alexandra Eala beat Iga Swiatek in straight sets this morning. Between points, Eala walks around like a waitress getting off a 32-hour shift at Waffle House, and I respect it. 

2. Days after Serena Williams' first-round loss, folks are still debating the handshake Serena gave? Which was a perfectly fine handshake. But folks want to know why she didn't say something nice to Maya Joint after the match. And I am sorry, but, like what?? Joint played the whole match with her eyes the size of saucers. Which is fine. She was nervous. And she didn't play her best match. Serena also didn't play her best match. It was not a great match. Is that OK to say? It was sort of difficult to watch! Also, here is a thought experiment. Let's say you are a 20-year-old professional tennis player, and by some miracle, you are drawn into a match with one of the all-time greats of the game. This isn't disputed. So my question is: Wouldn't YOU say something after the match? Like, "*unintelligible*" or "Wow. I can't believe this just happened," or "You're awesome," or "OK, let's never do that again because my nerves are SHOT! Ha!" If you're unhappy with a perfectly normal handshake, why is the onus on Serena? 

3. After this match, Serena mentioned as an aside that she has hurt her knee and although Wimbledon did their level best to accommodate her (rumor has it, offering to postpone she and Venus' match to late September after the U.S. Open), she finally did have to withdraw today. It's a shame, because this was the wildcard I was most interested in. I have been of the opinion that Venus Williams has been on the cusp of winning a match this year and I wondered if she needed Serena there to make it happen. I am probably fantasizing at this point, but I'm staying on my cloud!

4. I think the only thing that could get me remotely interested in the men's draw is ... I mean, I don't know. I'm kind of curious about Felix Auger-Aliassime? Ooh, or Grigor Dimitrov. After last year? You have to root for this guy.

5. If Taylor Townsend and Katerina Sinaikova ever split up as a doubles team, I'll be inconsolable. The ribbon situation brings me an unreasonable amount of optimism that people can still work together towards a common goal without being complete jerks about it. 

6. The women's draw, however. We've got last year's finalists already out of it, along with Elena Rybakina, who has been really struggling to keep her bike on the path this year. The top half of the draw is insane: Naomi Osaka v. Aryna Sabalenka (who is also on the shaky bike team this year, and may need to keep the training wheels for a bit), Karolina Muchova v. Barbora Krejcikova (who is playing pretty well), Jessica Pegula v. Iva Jovic (a true toss-up, I think!) and Belinda Bencic v. Coco Gauff. 

7. Not quite Wimbledon, but there is a former champion who is not in the draw and might not be for several years if tennis' governing body has its way. Marketa Vondrousova has been suspended by the (get this) International Tennis Integrity Association for refusing a drug test. And I just can't anymore. This is insane. We got Jannik Sinner and Iga Swiatek FAILING drug tests and both get a finely curated "suspension" that somehow means neither has to miss a Slam. Like, these "suspensions" were clearly negotiated out! Four years for not taking one?! And truly, Vondrousova's explanation seems reasonable. And also? This idea that surprise testing playing a role in keeping the sport clean is a joke when you consider that there were two players who failed a test and the scales seemed to tip for them because of who they were. I will add that if I were Simona Halep, I would be a menace on the Internet every time something like this happened. An absolute menace. They'd have to ban me from the Twitter.

Coffee at Wimbledon: The Men

I'm sure that nobody but me remembers this, but back in the day, people who won the French Open, or did well at that tournament, used to go into hibernation until just before the summer hardcourt season. The conversation around who had the upper hand from the French to Wimbledon used to feature two entirely different sets of players, and now? Well, things have changed, meaning that Rafael Nadal is as much a contender as Roger Federer. Yet, there are still the specialists. For example, this is the only time of year you hear the name Dustin Brown. Then there are the newbies still trying to prove themselves (not looking at you at all, Alexander Zverev. I wouldn't want you to double fault). So let's dig in (which you should never really do on grass unless you're some kind of barbarian)!

Early Rounds to Watch:
Novak Djokovic v. Phillipp Kohlschrieber: I mean, just because. Rolex has all those great commercials featuring tennis players from the past, and I'm not sure why Kohlschrieber isn't in those commercials because if anyone can tell time and history, it's the guy who's been on tour for 38 years.

Dominic Thiem v. Sam Querrey: What? I mean, what? How are you the No. 5 seed and end up having to play Sam Querrey at Wimbledon in round 1?

Frances Tiafoe v. Fabio Fognini: Fognini's been en fuego lately, but Tiafoe's having a decent year, too. Interested to see how these styles match up.

Rafa Nadal v. Nick Kyrgios: This is a potential second-round match-up and I don't know what to say really, except that they talk about women being moody and unpredictable, and they never once mention Nick Kyrgios.

Who Are Our Quarterfinalists?
Ah, fine. Let's dust off this heavy crystal ball:

I don't understand how you're the top seed and you get a harder draw than the No. 2 seed. I mean, I do, so don't @ me. But man, Federer, barring some wild circumstances, could handle this draw blindfolded up to the quarters. I think Djokovic will get there, too, but there's Gael Monfils, there's Grigor Dimitrov, there's young Canadian Felix Auger-Aliassime (what a name, amirite?) and also Ernests Gulbis, who is another one who will show up when he is good and ready.
Nadal has got a lot going on, too. If he can get past Krygios, there's Denis Shapovalov and Marin Cilic to think about.
Regular readers of this corner of the Internet know that if I pick Isner for anything, it's got to be a virtual lock and impossible to deny, but I still hope against hope I'm wrong here.

Who's Going to Win?
I do think we're looking at a Federer/Djokovic final, with a chance for Zverev in the top half. He really has a good game for grass, but he's got some head things going on, too. I also think there's some space for Thiem. He doesn't get great results on grass (and didn't even bother with warmups this time around, so) but his game also would seem to translate well. Maybe taking a set off Nadal at Roland Garros will lift his confidence?
Anyway, I'm going with Djokovic. He's just been too much for Fed lately. OK, gonna do the same for the women and then find my strawberries. I don't have cream. Is milk an acceptable alternative, or ...