Showing posts with label Jelena Ostapenko. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jelena Ostapenko. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 09, 2026

French Open '26: Hot Enough For Ya?

Well, I don't know about you amateurs, but the French Open has turned out exactly the way I expected it to -- the world 114 competing for the women's title while the guy who I guess can win a Slam only when the rest of the field has been decimated. So that's good, I guess! 

Look, I have thoughts, so let's just go:


is the title of this section. 

So some members of the black delegation on the pro tour got together at the beginning of the French Open for a private dinner, hosted by Naomi Osaka and Taylor Townsend. And of course nonblack folks had something to say, along the lines of this brilliant tweet:



Where to start. I'll start with why I went to a historically black college (Hampton, baby, the real HU!). It's not because diversity is a problem for me. It's that being a black person in a majority white world can be hard. Ask any person of color who has worked in corporate America. When I was coming up, there were all types of narratives about black people -- we go to prison, we don't have baby daddies, we're on crack cocaine, gangsta rap. Believe it or not, it's annoying to have that nonsense following you.

The people who tweet about being left out when they were never even on the invite list suffer from a lack of imagination, I fear. It seems they have never walked into a room and immediately understood there was no one there who looked like them, and that if they were going to stay in that room, they would simply have to deal with it. And they were going to stay. And so of course, they've never understood the relief you feel when finally you see others who look like you, partly because they stayed in the room. Still, though. You're in the room but not always part of it, and sometimes it's nice to hang out with your people, so you can finally just relax before it's back to the grind. 

And yet there seems to be this actual confusion about gatherings like this. It is due, I think, to this privilege on the part of those who have never really been left out, have always been centered. And so of course, why can't they come to the dinner? 

Mostly because no one invited you. Maybe get reservations at the Masters golf tournament. 


Mirra Andreeva Wins the French Open

It goes without saying that Mirra Andreeva is a special player and winning the French is likely just the beginning for her. The thing that struck me during the post-match celebration was the press conference with her coach, Conchita Martinez. I realized that it was the first time in all my time watching tennis, that a woman coach was being celebrated for a Slam win. 

When I was first getting into tennis, Martinez was just getting out, and she didn't look like anything great to my untrained eye. She wasn't flashy like the Williams sisters or the big hitters who began to occupy the top 10. But as I began to understand the game better, I saw her genius, how she moved the ball around, crafted a point. She took her skills and built a great career. One slam, yes, but 43 other titles, five Fed Cups, a regular in the top 10 for almost a decade. I mean.

I'm giving Andreeva (or the people around her) props for not just hiring some dude to coach her. And I hope more women step up to coach. Martina Hingis? Kim Clijsters (apparently coaching Katie Volynets, a name that has to have been manufactured, right?)? Steffi Graf? 


'Nuanced:' You Keep Using that Word. I Do Not Think You Know What it Means

All weekend, I saw Alexander Zverev's French Open run as one that is complex and nuanced. That's because it's divided the tennis community on whether it should be celebrated, but the cause for the divide isn't nuanced at all. 

Here is what I understand to be true. Zverev has been credibly accused of hitting two former girlfriends, to the point of leaving marks. The evidence of one of these rows can be seen on camera because it was during one of these tournaments. A reporter wrote about this and has faced more consequences somehow. The ATP looked at the case and ruled that they couldn't come to any conclusions. The mother of Zverev's child took him to court and before the trial could finish, he opted to settle and pay her.  So far, not complicated. 

Zverev also happened to be a really good tennis player and on Sunday, he won his first Slam. Lots of fans aren't happy about this because lots of signs point to him being an abuser who has never faced consequences, even though he's never been found guilty as the result of any investigation. This is fairly straightforward too. 

There's nothing nuanced here and the only reason it could even look that way is that we play in our own faces all the time now. We've (in the U.S.) got a president who says one thing and does another and winks. Some people see the evidence of the lie, and choose to focus on something else, like the economy. Oops, like immigration. Oops. Affordability. D'oh! The simplest conclusion is that 1+1=2, but some people are like, "What if it's actually three?" as if that makes them an abstract thinker who can think outside the box. Yo, sometimes the box is there for a reason.

It's simple to determine whether you think that Zverev is worthy of your support. You can see the evidence of his character. Some people see that evidence and decide that this is just a conversation about tennis, and he really deserved that Slam. He played well! He did. 

And I don't support him. This is super not nuanced.


Quick Hits

I turned on the mens double final over the weekend and was like, "OK, still with Marcel Granollers and Horacio Zeballos? These guys have to be older than even me!" First of all, they're not, and second of all, these 40-year-old dudes just won the French Open again. Wild ...

It's crazy how some women's doubles teams seem to be in flux. Jelena Ostapenko is always playing with someone different. I thought Gabrielle Dabrowski and Erin Routliffe would play together forever, but they split up this year, too. Hsieh Su-wei is out there looking for a regular partner again. But it looks like  Townsend and Katerina Siniakova have figured out that if something works, let it cook, as the kids say. They dropped exactly one set during their run to the French Open title. 

Saturday, May 29, 2021

French Open 2021: The Women

 

So, I had a lot of fun filling out the women's draw. Here it is -- and a legend! 




Legend

*: How are we getting this match in the first round?! 

(sad-face emoji): I don't know. Given Venus' recent results, not seeing this year being that breakthrough into the second round against a seeded player. Sigh.

!: OK, yes, Sofia Kenin is ranked fourth, but is having a bit of a rough time of it. She gets Jelena Ostapenko in the first round? Where she gets an opportunity to develop a rhythm as the match continues, no doubt. Yikes!

Plus, Azarenka vs. Kuznetsova right out the gate?! 

(squiggly-face emoji): Kaia Kanepi and a seeded player in the first round. LOL

Monday, July 15, 2019

Coffee at Wimbledon: We're Gonna Need More Coffee

My favorite form of delusionary thinking is believing that I will simply do housework while I am watching tennis. I can play Pokemon (?) with the kids, work on a writing project. Every year, four times a year, I say this to myself. And every year, the Monday after a Slam, I wake up with sore knees and I can't figure out why. Oh, I realize. It's because I've spent the last three days on them willing somebody to do something, be it Serena, or Roger, or Rafa, or Barbora.
Whoo-whee, where to start. Of course with

Serena Williams
I don't want to harp at the lackluster performance from Serena in the final. I do want to point out that Simona Halep earned that like a mofo.

via GIPHY

She ran down everything and did not give up, did not make mistakes, did not blink. Obviously, Halep knew what she needed to do to win, and it's not often your plan goes ... well, according to plan.
Having said all of that, one thing that seemed obvious from that final was that Serena did not really expect someone to fetch every ball she hit. She wasn't match-tough, and the women she played before Halep did not have the speed, accuracy or quick recognition of an attack opportunity. Serena's played long, grinding matches before and won them. She just didn't have it at this time and she got outplayed at every turn.
Two takeaways from this for me: I really hope she gets a different coach and I am still hoping that Amelie Mauresmo gets the call. She needs more women on her team. Yes, Patrick Mouratoglou did a great job with her, but they can't be on the same page with some of the stuff he says. It's a new season for her, and to take that extra step, maybe it's time for a change. Now seems good!
Second takeway: This doom-and-gloom nonsense about how motherhood has permanently limited Serena. She might never win again! OK, slow down. She had a baby and then came back to advance to Slam finals almost immediately. That's a big deal and there aren't a lot of people showing that kind of consistency right now.
Should she play more? I guess that's a good question, but when I can advance to a Grand Slam final with no warmup, I would feel more comfortable asking that question of a Serena Williams.

The Men's Final
Bahmahgawd was that a match. I don't know what to say beyond that. Well, there's one thing. Novak Djokovic is a fine player. Very good. On Sunday, he won his 16th major, his fifth Wimbledon title. He won it playing the guy who will maybe go down as the greatest men's tennis player of all time (Djokovic is still young) in Roger Federer, who has eight Wimbledon titles. And yet that crowd was pretty firmly pro-Roger. And I was pretty pro-Roger, and I had literally no skin in this game (Dammit, Rafa). My kids were watching with me and they were rooting for Djokovic. Their reasons were better than mine: his name sounds cool and they've seen funny clips of him on YouTube. My reason is just like, I just don't know. When he won, my first thought was, "Crap." I'm sorry! It was. And hearing Djokovic present himself as a potential inspiration, like Federer, made me wince on his behalf. He knows he doesn't get the love of a Rafa and Roger, and that might be a misfortune of timing. If he had a solid decade to himself with his backstory, heck, he would be on every cereal box -- not just Wheaties. But he is not, and he is painfully aware of this and I'm sad that he is. That reaction from the crowd when he said that was also weak.
Also, I think it's safe to say that Djokovic was a lot more fun to like when he had some personality, as he did in those YouTube videos my kids have seen. But he wasn't winning majors then, not at this clip. Is there a correlation? If you clown around too much, does it cause a lack of focus? Roger and Rafa don't imitate other players, but they win slams and they have the love of a crowd. Novak doesn't. I think he needs a foil. A previously unengaged foil. Someone young and able to meet him toe-to-toe. I'm thinking of an Alexander Zverev. Maybe Milos Raonic. Someone who the crowd can feel comfortable about getting behind Djokovic. Yeah, so Novak's problem is coming up with legends. That's what I'm getting at. It's not the worst problem to have, but you don't unlock beloved status like that, either.
Also, less groveling. That would be a better look, too.


Barbora Strycova
BARBORA STRYCOVA BARBORA STRYCOVA BARBORA STRYCOVA



I know I've shared this before, but no one deserved this fine Wimbledon run like she did. She's just automatic in doubles and watching her play is an exercise in grit and court intelligence I loved in Kim Clijsters and Li Na. I just -- man. Because of Strycova, I watched Wimbledon to the very end of the tournament today. Have you ever done that? They like, make an announcement and everything. Very dignified. But back to Strycova. She's just great. OK, that's it.
(Also Su-wei Hsieh is great.)

Is Jelena Ostapenko Going to Have to Paralyze a Bitch?




Yes, she and Robert Lindstedt made the mixed doubles final but I've got five bucks saying he never plays with her again.

The Men's Doubles Final

How do you get hit by an overhead on a bounce in the face while you're at the baseline and have it cause injury? How are you then the same person and get hit later in the neck by the same person? And then how do you, again, the same person -- Nicolas Mahut -- then get a ball straight in the business sack in the very same game? And then how do you then lose a match in five sets? Everyone feels bad about the Mahut/John Isner match, but you know what they say about adding insult to injury? This feels like a very illustrative version of that.

Plus also
And I had missed this previously: Johanna Konta being the first Brit to stand up to British press for trash behavior:



This is why they can't have nice things. Exactly why.
New rule for tennis pressers at Wimbledon: I want a camera on the person asking stupid questions because they need to be known and I personally would like to know if they have even ever held a tennis racquet before.

Thursday, July 12, 2018

Wimbledon for Breakfast: Today Was a Day

I'm just sitting here watching the Rafa Nadal/Juan Martin del Potro replay and I'm told that apparently that isn't the end of the tournament? That there are ... more matches tomorrow?
Crazier still, I'm told that some woman had a chance to grab at least one of Rafa's butt cheeks and ... did not do that?!




None of them made a grab. That's control I know I don't have.

Yes, yes. Today was a day. Roger Federer going out to Kevin Anderson. Kevin Anderson. Here's all I had to say about that one earlier:




My boy Milos Raonic losing to definitely-not-my-boy John Isner. (Refer to my post about why I will be busting out the rosaries for Anderson on Friday.)
But first, we have some semifinals tomorrow, for the ladies. Who. Do. We. Got.

Jelena Ostapenko v. Angelique Kerber: I've been watching Kerber's matches and not been overly thrilled by her play. What she's doing is scrapping -- playing awesome defense and if you can run down shots that are supposed to be winners, that is probably going to help. I only saw Ostapenko's most recent match against Dominika Cibulkova -- an alleged slugfest, you'll recall. It was not. Ostapenko was out there hitting balls with little wisps of smoke trailing from them and Cibulkova watched them pass. I'm concerned for Kerber should she consider a net approach. Don't do it, girl. I would give Ostapenko the edge, and I would go even further and suggest that whoever wins will win the whole tournament.
What? you say? But what about the other match? You have

Serena Williams v. Julia Goerges: (Germany, holla!) There aren't a lot of players out there who propel themselves through match after match, though far from their perfect form, but Serena is doing it again. She was moving horribly in the early rounds and has only cleaned that up a bit. Her serve and her stationary groundstrokes are keeping her alive. Which has been enough. Goerges has been having quite a year and thus far had no mobility issues. Betting against Serena at Wimbledon is hard, so I won't. I don't have the money to bet. But I will say I see a three-setter and I could see it not going Serena's way. But if it did? If she ended up against Kerber or Ostapenko -- two players who are in form and less intimidated by Serena? It would take a miracle.
And we all know they don't happen at Wimbledon. Sarcastic h/t to Kevin Anderson.